The URL can be used to link to this page

Apx D-1_Geotechnical Investigation Report Appendix D-1 Geotechnical Investigation Report Appendix D-1 Geotechnical Investigation Report Kimley»Horn GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 1515 WALNUT AVENUE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA Prepared for LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORPORATION 1156 NORTH MOUNTAIN AVENUE UPLAND, CALIFORNIA 91786 Prepared by LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC. 2600 MICHELSON DRIVE, SUITE 400 IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92612 Project Number CLA.0014030001 Issue Date: June 25, 2025 4/Leighton a verdantas company GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 1515 WALNUT AVENUE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA Prepared for | EIS MANAGEMENT CORPORATION 1156 NORTH MOUNTAIN AVENUE UPLAND, CALIFORNIA 91786 Prepared by LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC. 2600 MICHELSON DRIVE, SUITE 400 IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92612 Project Number CLA.0014030001 Issue Date: June 25, 2025 June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 Lewis Management Corporation 1156 North Mountain Avenue Upland, California 91786 Attention: Mr. Glen Crosby Vice President, Regional Planned Communities Subject: Geotechnical Investigation Report Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Avenue City of Rosemead, California Per your request and authorization, Leighton Consulting, Inc. (Leighton) is pleased to present this geotechnical exploration report for the proposed residential development, located at 1515 Walnut Avenue in the City of Rosemead, California. Review of the development concept plan Rosemead Condos 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, by Kimley Horn and Associates, dated April 4, 2025 indicates the overall 9± acre site is proposed for 191 tandem 3-story multifamily units with garages and uncovered parking, play fields and pool and spa. No subterranean structures are currently planned. Based on our exploration, the proposed project is considered feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. Geotechnical recommendations with respect to site grading and foundation design are presented in this report. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. If you have any questions or if we can be of further service, please contact the undersigned. Respectfully submitted, LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC. Joe Roe, PG, CEG Sr. Principal, Geologist 1 949.681.4263 jroe@verdantas.com Luis Perez-Milicua, PE Associate Engineer 1 909.527.8777 Lperez-milicua@verdantas.com Distribution: (1) Addressee v Leig hton Leighton Consulting, Inc. a verdantas company June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 Lewis Management Corporation 1156 North Mountain Avenue Upland, California 91786 Attention: Mr. Glen Crosby Vice President, Regional Planned Communities Subject: Geotechnical Investigation Report Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Avenue City of Rosemead, California Per your request and authorization, Leighton Consulting, Inc. (Leighton) is pleased to present this geotechnical exploration report for the proposed residential development, located at 1515 Walnut Avenue in the City of Rosemead, California. Review of the development concept plan Rosemead Condos 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, by Kimley Horn and Associates, dated April 4, 2025 indicates the overall 9+ acre site is proposed for 191 tandem 3-story multifamily units with garages and uncovered parking, play fields and pool and spa. No subterranean structures are currently planned. Based on our exploration, the proposed project is considered feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. Geotechnical recommendations with respect to site grading and foundation design are presented in this report. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. If you have any questions or if we can be of further service, please contact the undersigned. Respectfully submitted, LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC. Luis Perez-Milicu=; Associate Engineer 1.909.527.8777 Lperez-milicua@verdantas.com Distribution: (1) Addressee 2600 Michelson Drive | Suite 400, Irvine, CA 92612 T: 949.250.1421 www.leightongroup.com Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 i TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Site Description and Proposed Development ............................................ 1 1.2 Purpose and Scope of Exploration ............................................................ 1 2.0 GEOTECHNICAL FINDINGS ............................................................................... 5 2.1 Geologic Setting ........................................................................................ 5 2.1.1 Geologic Structure .......................................................................... 6 2.2 Subsurface Soil Conditions ........................................................................ 7 2.2.1 Expansive Soil................................................................................. 8 2.2.2 Soil Corrosivity ................................................................................ 8 2.2.3 Collapse/Compressibility Potential ................................................ 10 2.3 Groundwater ............................................................................................ 10 2.4 Percolation Testing Results ..................................................................... 10 3.0 GEOLOGIC/SEISMIC HAZARDS ...................................................................... 12 3.1 Surface Fault Rupture .............................................................................. 12 3.2 Seismicity and Ground Shaking ............................................................... 13 3.3 Secondary Seismic Hazards .................................................................... 15 3.3.1 Liquefaction Potential .................................................................... 15 3.3.2 Seismically-Induced Settlement .................................................... 15 3.3.3 Seismically-Induced Landslides .................................................... 17 3.4 Flooding Hazards ..................................................................................... 17 4.0 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................................... 18 4.1 Earthwork ................................................................................................. 18 4.1.1 Site Preparation ............................................................................ 18 4.1.2 Earthwork Observation and Testing .............................................. 19 4.1.3 Fill Placement and Compaction..................................................... 19 4.1.4 Reuse of Concrete and Asphalt in Fill ........................................... 20 4.1.5 Temporary Excavations ................................................................ 20 4.1.6 Trench Backfill............................................................................... 21 4.1.7 Corrosion Protection Measures ..................................................... 22 4.1.8 Shallow Foundation Systems ........................................................ 22 Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development June 25, 2025 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA Project No. CLA.0014030001 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION... oo ccccccrrrrrrrrsrrrrs sess ssessss ss sss sass sess sss sss ss sss ssssssssssssssssssnsssnnsssnnss 1 1.1 Site Description and Proposed Development ...............ccccooiiiiiiiiiiiiinieenen, 1 1.2 Purpose and Scope of Exploration ...............ccooiiiiiiiii eee 1 2.0 GEOTECHNICALFINDINGS.......... ooeeeeeeeememmmmmmmmmnnnnnnnnnnnsnnn sssnnnsnnnsesnnnnnnnnnes 5 2.1 Geologic Setting .....ccuuiiieiiee eee eens 5 2.1.1 Geologic Structure...........comeeeeeee eee eee eee eee 6 2.2 Subsurface Soil ConditioNS..........ooeeiiiiiiiiiee eee 7 2.2.1 EXpanSiVe SOil..........ooeuiiiiiiie ieee een 8 2.2.2 SOIl COITOSIVILY .....coeeeeeieeeeeeee eee eect e eee e eens 8 2.2.3 Collapse/Compressibility Potential.....................ooooriiiiiiien. 10 P20CTR © 10 10] To 11.1= (= 10 2.4 Percolation Testing RESUS ..........cooormmiiiiii eee 10 3.0 GEOLOGIC/SEISMIC HAZARDS ............oeeeeeeceeeeeeeeressss essess ssssns ssnne sn nes sn nens sens 12 3.1 Surface Fault RUptUre.............coioiie eee eeeeeeeeene 12 3.2 Seismicity and Ground ShakKing..........ccc.ceoimiiiiiiiiiiiccce reece 13 3.3 Secondary Seismic Hazards...........ccocoomuiiiiiiiicii ieee 15 3.3.1 Liquefaction Potential................oooomiii eee 15 3.3.2 Seismically-Induced Settlement ...............cccooriiiiiiii 15 3.3.3 Seismically-Induced Landslides ............cccccooeriimiiiiiiiiiiciiieeeeees 17 CT:SN[oTTo [Tao lnP= = o JSS 17 40 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS .......coiimmmmmecceeeeeeeeeeeeee cece nme18 4.1 = {1 EE 18 4.1.1 Site Preparation ..........coooooeniiiiiiiiie ieee cece eee eee 18 4.1.2 Earthwork Observation and Testing..........ccccuceeiiiiiiiiiiiiiiinceeeeeee. 19 4.1.3 Fill Placement and Compaction............cccooerrmiiiiiieicciieieeeccceeeee 19 4.1.4 Reuse of Concrete and Asphaltin Fill ..............ccciiiiiiennn. 20 4.1.5 Temporary Excavations ...........cc.ccoiiiiiiiiiiiieicci eee eee 20 4.1.6 Trench Backfill...eee eeeeee 21 4.1.7 Corrosion Protection Measures..............cooiiiiiieireeiieeeceeeeeeeeeeeees 22 4.1.8 Shallow Foundation Systems............c...coiiimiiiiiiiiiiciceeeeeee, 22 4 Leighton a verdantas company Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 ii Section Page 4.2 Shallow Foundations................................................................................ 23 4.2.1 Post Tension Foundation Design Parameters ............................... 23 4.2.2 Minimum Embedment of Width ..................................................... 24 4.2.3 Allowable Bearing ......................................................................... 24 4.2.4 Lateral Load Resistance ............................................................... 24 4.2.5 Increase in Bearing and Friction – Short Duration Loads .............. 25 4.2.6 Settlement Estimates .................................................................... 25 4.3 Slab-On-Grade ........................................................................................ 26 4.4 Lateral Earth Pressures ........................................................................... 27 4.4.1 Sliding and Overturning ................................................................. 28 4.4.2 Drainage ....................................................................................... 28 4.5 Pavement Design .................................................................................... 29 4.5.1 Base Course ................................................................................. 29 4.5.2 Asphalt Concrete ........................................................................... 30 4.5.3 Portland Cement Concrete Paving ................................................ 30 4.6 Excavations ............................................................................................. 31 4.7 Geotechnical Services During Construction ............................................. 32 5.0 LIMITATIONS ..................................................................................................... 33 6.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................... 34 LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Important Information About Your Geotechnical Engineering Report Rear of Text Figure 1 – Site Location Map Rear of Text Figure 2 – Exploration Location Map Rear of Text Figure 3 – Regional Geology Map Rear of Text Figure 4 – Historical Seismicity and Regional Faulting Map Rear of Text Figure 5 – Seismic Hazard Map Rear of Text Figure 6 – Flood Hazard Map Rear of Text Figure 7 – Retaining Wall Backfill and Subdrain Detail Rear of Text Appendix A – Field Exploration Logs Appendix B – Laboratory Test Results Appendix C – Percolation Test Results Appendix D – Seismic Analysis Appendix E – General Earthwork and Grading Recommendations Appendix F – Field Density Test for Fault Trench Backfill Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development June 25, 2025 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA Project No. CLA.0014030001 Section Page 4.2 Shallow Foundations...eee eee eee 23 4.21 Post Tension Foundation Design Parameters.................c............. 23 4.2.2 Minimum Embedment of Width... 24 4.2.3 Allowable Bearing ..........couuuooiiiiiiiiieeeei eee 24 4.2.4 Lateral Load Resistance...........ccoooooiiiiiiiiiiiiiii eee 24 4.2.5 Increase in Bearing and Friction — Short Duration Loads.............. 25 4.2.6 Settlement Estimates ....... coco eee 25 4.3 Slab-On-Grade.........ooooiiiee eee eee eee 26 4.4 Lateral Earth Pressures...eeeeee eee 27 4.4.1 Sliding and Overturning...........ccouuooiieieicciieee cece eee cece eee eee 28 EI = {4 P= To [= 28 45 Pavement Design .......coooeiiiiiiiiie eee eee eee 29 TT I = T= TT 0 oH]= 29 4.5.2 AsphaltConcrete.........coooooeniiiiiiii eee 30 4.5.3 Portland Cement Concrete Paving............ccoeuceiiiiiiciiiiriicccere, 30 ZSCIN = Co7= \V 2 io] 1 31 4.7 Geotechnical Services During Construction.............c.ccoouieiiiiiiiiiiiinenenn.n. 32 5.0 LIMITATIONS...ccmermmmr seers sree eresreer nennnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnennns 33 6.0 REFERENCES......... reece cece r ree ese n snes enn n sens ns nnn nnn nnn sn nnnsnnnnnnns 34 LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Important Information About Your Geotechnical Engineering Report Rear of Text Figure 1 — Site Location Map Rear of Text Figure 2 — Exploration Location Map Rear of Text Figure 3 — Regional Geology Map Rear of Text Figure 4 — Historical Seismicity and Regional Faulting Map Rear of Text Figure 5 — Seismic Hazard Map Rear of Text Figure 6 — Flood Hazard Map Rear of Text Figure 7 — Retaining Wall Backfill and Subdrain Detail Rear of Text Appendix A — Field Exploration Logs Appendix B — Laboratory Test Results Appendix C — Percolation Test Results Appendix D — Seismic Analysis Appendix E — General Earthwork and Grading Recommendations Appendix F — Field Density Test for Fault Trench Backfill 4 Leighton ; a verdantas company Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Site Description and Proposed Development The site is currently occupied by a 4-story office building on the east and an associated parking lot on the west. Drive aisles on the property are present to the north, south and east. Walnut Grove Avenue is present to the east, residential development to west and commercial office development to the north and south. Review of historical aerial imagery indicates the site was vacant in 1948. A small creek drained east west across the center of the property. Between 1948 and 1980 the site remained mostly vacant, although several small structures appear present in the north portion of the site. By 1987, the existing office building had been constructed. Based on review of the plan Walnut Grove Conceptual Site Plan, prepared by Woodley Architectural Group Nc., dated April 23, 2025, Scale 1”=40’, we understand the 9.28 acre site is planned (subject to change) for 191 Type V, 3- story residential units with garages, play field and pool and spa all at grade. Access to the development will be provided along the east side at two locations fronting Walnut Grove Avenue. Ancillary improvements to include drainage, utility infrastructure, hardscape, landscape drive aisles and uncovered parking areas. No formal grading or structural plans were available for review at this time. 1.2 Purpose and Scope of Exploration The purpose of our geotechnical study is to provide site-specific information regarding potential geotechnical constraints, subsurface soil stratigraphy, and groundwater conditions that underlie the site. This data will be used to provide preliminary geotechnical recommendations for design of foundations, floor slab, parking lot pavement, and earthwork construction. The project is located within an area mapped by the State of California as being susceptible to liquefaction (El Monte Quadrangle), which includes an Alquist Priolo fault Hazard Assessment Zone (AP Zone) requiring fault studies to be provided. A fault hazard study has been prepared under sperate cover (Leighton 2024a). Applicable geotechnical exploration data from the fault study was used in preparation of this report. Fault hazard report met with approval from the City (ECI, 2024). Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development June 25, 2025 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA Project No. CLA.0014030001 1.0 INTRODUCTION 11 Site Description and Proposed Development The site is currently occupied by a 4-story office building on the east and an associated parking lot on the west. Drive aisles on the property are present to the north, south and east. Walnut Grove Avenue is present to the east, residential development to west and commercial office development to the north and south. Review of historical aerial imagery indicates the site was vacant in 1948. A small creek drained east west across the center of the property. Between 1948 and 1980 the site remained mostly vacant, although several small structures appear present in the north portion of the site. By 1987, the existing office building had been constructed. Based on review of the plan Walnut Grove Conceptual Site Plan, prepared by Woodley Architectural Group Nc., dated April 23, 2025, Scale 1’=40’, we understand the 9.28 acre site is planned (subject to change) for 191 Type V, 3- story residential units with garages, play field and pool and spa all at grade. Access to the development will be provided along the east side at two locations fronting Walnut Grove Avenue. Ancillary improvements to include drainage, utility infrastructure, hardscape, landscape drive aisles and uncovered parking areas. No formal grading or structural plans were available for review at this time. 1.2 Purpose and Scope of Exploration The purpose of our geotechnical study is to provide site-specific information regarding potential geotechnical constraints, subsurface soil stratigraphy, and groundwater conditions that underlie the site. This data will be used to provide preliminary geotechnical recommendations for design of foundations, floor slab, parking lot pavement, and earthwork construction. The project is located within an area mapped by the State of California as being susceptible to liquefaction (El Monte Quadrangle), which includes an Alquist Priolo fault Hazard Assessment Zone (AP Zone) requiring fault studies to be provided. A fault hazard study has been prepared under sperate cover (Leighton 2024a). Applicable geotechnical exploration data from the fault study was used in preparation of this report. Fault hazard report met with approval from the City (ECI, 2024). 4 Leighton | a verdantas company Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 2 The scope of our geotechnical exploration included the following tasks: Background Review – A background review of readily available, relevant geotechnical and geological literature pertinent to the project site (See References). Prior to the field exploration, the locations of our exploratory hollow stem auger borings and Cone Penetration Test (CPT) soundings were marked and Underground Service Alert (USA) notified for utility clearance. Field Exploration – Our field exploration was performed on April 22 and 23, 2024 and included advancement of four (4) hollow-stem auger borings (designated LB-1 through LB-4), drilled to depths between 30 to 50 feet below existing ground surface (bgs). The logs of these borings are presented in Appendix A, Field Exploration Logs. In addition, forty-eight (48) cone penetrometer test (CPT) soundings (designated CPT-1 through CPT-48) were advanced to an approximate depth of 50 feet bgs (Leighton, 2024a). The CPTs were located along a northeast to roughly east-west oriented transect roughly perpendicular to the average strike of the inferred location of Whittier Fault Zone (approximately N39°W to N47°W) at this location. Both bulk and relatively undisturbed drive samples were obtained from the hollow stem auger borings during drilling and delivered to our laboratory for geotechnical testing. Relatively undisturbed samples were collected at vertical intervals of 2.5 to 5 feet using a Modified California Ring sampler conducted in accordance with ASTM Test Method D 3550. Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) were also performed within the hollow-stem auger test borings in accordance with ASTM Test Method D 1586. The samplers were driven for a total penetration of 18 inches, unless encountering practical refusal, using a 140-pound automatic hammer falling freely for 30 inches. The number of blows per 6 inches of penetration was recorded on the boring logs. The borings were logged in the field by a geologist from our technical staff under the direct supervision of a Certified Engineering Geologist (CEG). Each soil sample collected was reviewed and described in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) ASTM D2487 standards. The samples were sealed and packaged for transportation to our laboratory in Irvine, California. After completion of drilling, the borings were backfilled with soils generated during the exploration. The boring and CPT logs are presented in Appendix A, Field Exploration Logs. The approximate locations of the explorations are shown on Figure 2, Exploration Location Map. Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development June 25, 2025 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA Project No. CLA.0014030001 The scope of our geotechnical exploration included the following tasks: Background Review — A background review of readily available, relevant geotechnical and geological literature pertinent to the project site (See References). Prior to the field exploration, the locations of our exploratory hollow stem auger borings and Cone Penetration Test (CPT) soundings were marked and Underground Service Alert (USA) notified for utility clearance. Field Exploration — Our field exploration was performed on April 22 and 23, 2024 and included advancement of four (4) hollow-stem auger borings (designated LB-1 through LB-4), drilled to depths between 30 to 50 feet below existing ground surface (bgs). The logs of these borings are presented in Appendix A, Field Exploration Logs. In addition, forty-eight (48) cone penetrometer test (CPT) soundings (designated CPT-1 through CPT-48) were advanced to an approximate depth of 50 feet bgs (Leighton, 2024a). The CPTs were located along a northeast to roughly east-west oriented transect roughly perpendicular to the average strike of the inferred location of Whittier Fault Zone (approximately N39°W to N47°W) at this location. Both bulk and relatively undisturbed drive samples were obtained from the hollow stem auger borings during drilling and delivered to our laboratory for geotechnical testing. Relatively undisturbed samples were collected at vertical intervals of 2.5 to 5 feet using a Modified California Ring sampler conducted in accordance with ASTM Test Method D 3550. Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) were also performed within the hollow-stem auger test borings in accordance with ASTM Test Method D 1586. The samplers were driven for a total penetration of 18 inches, unless encountering practical refusal, using a 140-pound automatic hammer falling freely for 30 inches. The number of blows per 6 inches of penetration was recorded on the boring logs. The borings were logged in the field by a geologist from our technical staff under the direct supervision of a Certified Engineering Geologist (CEG). Each soil sample collected was reviewed and described in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) ASTM D2487 standards. The samples were sealed and packaged for transportation to our laboratory in Irvine, California. After completion of drilling, the borings were backfilled with soils generated during the exploration. The boring and CPT logs are presented in Appendix A, Field Exploration Logs. The approximate locations of the explorations are shown on Figure 2, Exploration Location Map. 4 Leighton ) a verdantas company Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 3 Shear Wave Velocity - Shear wave velocities were profiled at 5-foot intervals to a depth of 40 feet bgs in CPT-4 (Figure 2) to estimate average S-wave velocities of the upper 30 meters (Vs30). The average shear wave velocity recorded onsite is approximately 1,028 feet per second (ft/sec). Assuming similar readings from the last readings projected to a depth of 100 feet, the average shear wave in the top 100 feet would be 1,003 ft/sec. The shear wave velocity report is included in Appendix A. Based on collected velocities and in accordance with the 2022 California Building Code, the soils at this site are classified as Seismic Site Class D. Laboratory Testing –Geotechnical laboratory tests were conducted on selected bulk and undisturbed soil samples obtained from our borings and fault trenches. This laboratory testing program was designed to evaluate geotechnical (physical) characteristics of site soil. A description of geotechnical laboratory test-procedures and results are presented in Appendix B, Laboratory Test Results. The following laboratory tests were performed: ˗ In-situ Moisture Content and Dry Density (ASTM D2216 and ASTM D2937); ˗ Percent Passing No. 200 Sieve (ASTM D 1140); ˗ Expansion Index (ASTM D 4829; ˗ Atterberg Limits (ASTM D 4318) ˗ Modified Proctor Compaction (ASTM D1557) ˗ Direct Shear (ASTM D3080); ˗ R-Value Testing (DOT CA 301); and ˗ Corrosion and Resistivity Testing (sulfate, chloride and pH), DOT CA Test 417, 422 and 643 Results of moisture and density determinations are presented within the boring logs, see Appendix A. The results of laboratory testing are presented in Appendix B. Percolation Testing – In-situ percolation testing was performed in general accordance with the falling head method described in the County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works (LACDPW) Guidelines for Design, Investigation, and Reporting Low Impact Development Stormwater Infiltration document (LACDPW, 2014). During our exploration, Borings LB-1 and LB-2 were converted for use as a temporary percolation test wells upon completion of drilling and sampling. Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development June 25, 2025 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA Project No. CLA.0014030001 » Shear Wave Velocity - Shear wave velocities were profiled at 5-foot intervals to a depth of 40 feet bgs in CPT-4 (Figure 2) to estimate average S-wave velocities of the upper 30 meters (Vsso). The average shear wave velocity recorded onsite is approximately 1,028 feet per second (ft/sec). Assuming similar readings from the last readings projected to a depth of 100 feet, the average shear wave in the top 100 feet would be 1,003 ft/sec. The shear wave velocity report is included in Appendix A. Based on collected velocities and in accordance with the 2022 California Building Code, the soils at this site are classified as Seismic Site Class D. = [aboratory Testing —Geotechnical laboratory tests were conducted on selected bulk and undisturbed soil samples obtained from our borings and fault trenches. This laboratory testing program was designed to evaluate geotechnical (physical) characteristics of site soil. A description of geotechnical laboratory test-procedures and results are presented in Appendix B, Laboratory Test Results. The following laboratory tests were performed: - In-situ Moisture Content and Dry Density (ASTM D2216 and ASTM D2937); - Percent Passing No. 200 Sieve (ASTM D 1140); - Expansion Index (ASTM D 4829; - Atterberg Limits (ASTM D 4318) - Modified Proctor Compaction (ASTM D1557) - Direct Shear (ASTM D3080); - R-Value Testing (DOT CA 301); and - Corrosion and Resistivity Testing (sulfate, chloride and pH), DOT CA Test 417, 422 and 643 Results of moisture and density determinations are presented within the boring logs, see Appendix A. The results of laboratory testing are presented in Appendix B. =» Percolation Testing — In-situ percolation testing was performed in general accordance with the falling head method described in the County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works (LACDPW) Guidelines for Design, Investigation, and Reporting Low Impact Development Stormwater Infiltration document (LACDPW, 2014). During our exploration, Borings LB-1 and LB-2 were converted for use as a temporary percolation test wells upon completion of drilling and sampling. 4 Leighton . a verdantas company Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 4 The test boring locations are depicted on Figure 2. Refer to the discussion presented in Section 2.4 and the infiltration test data provided in Appendix C – Percolation Test Results. Engineering Analysis – Geotechnical analysis was performed on the collected data to develop conclusions and preliminary recommendations for design and construction presented in this report. Report Preparation - This geotechnical report presents our findings, conclusions, and preliminary recommendations. It should be noted that the recommendations in this report are subject to the limitations presented in Section 6.0. An information sheet prepared by GBA (the Geoprofessional Business Association) is also included at the rear of the text. We recommend that all individuals using this report read the limitations along with the attached document. Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development June 25, 2025 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA Project No. CLA.0014030001 The test boring locations are depicted on Figure 2. Refer to the discussion presented in Section 2.4 and the infiltration test data provided in Appendix C — Percolation Test Results. » Engineering Analysis — Geotechnical analysis was performed on the collected data to develop conclusions and preliminary recommendations for design and construction presented in this report. » Report Preparation - This geotechnical report presents our findings, conclusions, and preliminary recommendations. It should be noted that the recommendations in this report are subject to the limitations presented in Section 6.0. An information sheet prepared by GBA (the Geoprofessional Business Association) is also included at the rear of the text. We recommend that all individuals using this report read the limitations along with the attached document. 4 Leighton . a verdantas company Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 5 2.0 GEOTECHNICAL FINDINGS 2.1 Geologic Setting The proposed development lies within the western portion of the San Gabriel Valley, an east-trending, sediment-filled structural trough adjacent to the southern flank of the San Gabriel Mountains. The San Gabriel Valley is an almost enclosed basin drained by the Rio Hondo and San Gabriel Rivers and begins approximately at San Gabriel Canyon Road in Azusa and extends south to Whittier Narrows, a low point between the Puente Hills and Montebello Hills, which forms the southern boundary of the San Gabriel Valley. Sediments within the Valley include about 6000 feet of marine and non-marine sedimentary rocks of Quaternary age (Yerkes, et al 1965). The Montebello Hills lie at the southern boundary of the site and are characterized as an east-west band of low hills within the oil producing Los Angeles basin. These elevated areas are separated by Whittier Narrows, a gap through which the Rio Hondo and San Gabriel rivers pass through. The Rio Hondo River lies less than a ½ mile east of the site. Published geologic maps indicate the site is underlain by Quaternary age young alluvial fan deposits (Dibblee, 1999; Yerkes and Campbell, 2005; Figure 3, Regional Geology Map). These deposits typically consist of varying amounts of silt, sand, and gravel layers (Yerkes et al, 1965), see Figure 3. The Regional Index Map above is based on 1938 aerial imagery, showing the approximate mapped fault location (red dashes), the Walmart Property (larger yellow box) where the Alhambra Wash fault was first investigated, and the Subject Property (smaller yellow box), location for this investigation. Fault trace is approximate (USGS, 2017). Whittier Narrows Site San Gabriel Valley SCE Site Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development June 25, 2025 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA Project No. CLA.0014030001 2.1 2.0 GEOTECHNICAL FINDINGS Geologic Setting The proposed development lies within the western portion of the San Gabriel Valley, an east-trending, sediment-filled structural trough adjacent to the southern flank of the San Gabriel Mountains. The San Gabriel Valley is an almost enclosed basin drained by the Rio Hondo and San Gabriel Rivers and begins approximately at San Gabriel Canyon Road in Azusa and extends south to Whittier Narrows, a low point between the Puente Hills and Montebello Hills, which forms the southern boundary of the San Gabriel Valley. Sediments within the Valley include about 6000 feet of marine and non-marine sedimentary rocks of Quaternary age (Yerkes, et al 1965). The Montebello Hills lie at the southern boundary of the site and are characterized as an east-west band of low hills within the oil producing Los Angeles basin. These elevated areas are separated by Whittier Narrows, a gap through which the Rio Hondo and San Gabriel rivers pass through. The Rio Hondo River lies less than a 72 mile east of the site. Published geologic maps indicate the site is underlain by Quaternary age young alluvial fan deposits (Dibblee, 1999; Yerkes and Campbell, 2005; Figure 3, Regional Geology Map). These deposits typically consist of varying amounts of silt, sand, and gravel layers (Yerkes et al, 1965), see Figure 3. The Regional Index Map above is based on 1938 aerial imagery, showing the approximate mapped fault location (red dashes), the Walmart Property (larger yellow box) where the Alhambra Wash fault was first investigated, and the Subject Property (smaller yellow box), location for this investigation. Fault trace is approximate (USGS, 2017). > 4 Leighton ; a verdantas company Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 6 2.1.1 Geologic Structure The tectonic regime of Miocene extensional system in southern California and the site area was very different from the compressional regime active today. Major changes relate to a transition of the North American tectonic plate boundary from subduction to a translational style of motion. This change resulted in formation of the San Andreas Fault system. Since middle- to late-Miocene time over the past 16 million years, the site area was subjected to first extensional and then compressional forces (Bjorklund, 2003). The north-south oriented extensional forces were active between 14 and 8 million years ago producing large depositional grabens and local volcanism. Miocene and older rocks were uplifted along the Whittier Fault by as much as 4.5 kilometers since cessation of extension at about 7 to 8 million years ago and the onset of north south crustal compression associated with the San Andreas transform fault system, which, produced about 50 kilometers of shortening across the Los Angeles Basin (Bjorkland, 2003). In the mid to late Miocene under the extensional regime, the Proto-Whittier Fault began development as a normal fault with a right lateral component. Over the past 8 million years during the Plio-Pleistocene in this area of the Los Angeles Basin, the stress regime changed and the overall motion changed to that of convergence allowing the right lateral strike slip faults of the Peninsular Ranges (San Andreas, Newport Inglewood, San Jacinto Whittier-Elsinore) and the east-west trending left lateral oblique slip faults of the Western Transverse ranges (Santa Monica, Hollywood, Raymond and Sierra Madre) and related faults to mature. Whittier Fault: The Whittier fault is the northwestward extension of the Elsinore fault-Glen Ivy Segment. The Whittier fault is considered a strike slip fault along most of its length with a component of vertical thrust, is approximately 40 km (25 miles) long, and extends from the Whittier Narrows section of the San Gabriel River southeastward to the Santa Ana River where it is concealed beneath the alluvium. The Whittier fault separates the Montebello Hills on the south from the alluvial floodplain of the Rio Hondo and San Gabriel Rivers north of the fault. In the area of the Santa Ana River, based on offset of stream terrace deposits (Gath, 1992 and 1995; Rockwell et al., 1988 and 1990), the Whittier fault is considered to have a slip rate of approximately 2 to 3 mm/year. The estimated maximum earthquake to occur along the Whittier fault segment is 6.8 Mw (Petersen et al., 1996). Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development June 25, 2025 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA Project No. CLA.0014030001 2.1.1 Geologic Structure The tectonic regime of Miocene extensional system in southern California and the site area was very different from the compressional regime active today. Major changes relate to a transition of the North American tectonic plate boundary from subduction to a translational style of motion. This change resulted in formation of the San Andreas Fault system. Since middle- to late-Miocene time over the past 16 million years, the site area was subjected to first extensional and then compressional forces (Bjorklund, 2003). The north-south oriented extensional forces were active between 14 and 8 million years ago producing large depositional grabens and local volcanism. Miocene and older rocks were uplifted along the Whittier Fault by as much as 4.5 kilometers since cessation of extension at about 7 to 8 million years ago and the onset of north south crustal compression associated with the San Andreas transform fault system, which, produced about 50 kilometers of shortening across the Los Angeles Basin (Bjorkland, 2003). In the mid to late Miocene under the extensional regime, the Proto-Whittier Fault began development as a normal fault with a right lateral component. Over the past 8 million years during the Plio-Pleistocene in this area of the Los Angeles Basin, the stress regime changed and the overall motion changed to that of convergence allowing the right lateral strike slip faults of the Peninsular Ranges (San Andreas, Newport Inglewood, San Jacinto Whittier-Elsinore) and the east-west trending left lateral oblique slip faults of the Western Transverse ranges (Santa Monica, Hollywood, Raymond and Sierra Madre) and related faults to mature. Whittier Fault: The Whittier fault is the northwestward extension of the Elsinore fault-Glen Ivy Segment. The Whittier fault is considered a strike slip fault along most of its length with a component of vertical thrust, is approximately 40 km (25 miles) long, and extends from the Whittier Narrows section of the San Gabriel River southeastward to the Santa Ana River where it is concealed beneath the alluvium. The Whittier fault separates the Montebello Hills on the south from the alluvial floodplain of the Rio Hondo and San Gabriel Rivers north of the fault. In the area of the Santa Ana River, based on offset of stream terrace deposits (Gath, 1992 and 1995; Rockwell et al., 1988 and 1990), the Whittier fault is considered to have a slip rate of approximately 2 to 3 mm/year. The estimated maximum earthquake to occur along the Whittier fault segment is 6.8 Mw (Petersen et al., 1996). 4 Leighton ‘ a verdantas company Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 7 2.2 Subsurface Soil Conditions As encountered within our exploratory borings and from fault trench logging (Leighton 2024a), in general, the site is underlain at the surface by undocumented artificial fill deposits, below which are in-situ alluvial fan deposits of Quaternary age ranging from Holocene to Pleistocene age mudflows and fluvial deposits further defined as overbank or floodplain to main channel deposits of coarse sands and gravels. Artificial Fill, undocumented: (Afu) - The artificial fill soil forms a mantle ranging from 6 to 7 feet thick on average thickening to approximately 14 feet locally at northeast end of Fault Trench FT-2 (Leighton 2024a). This material is characterized as dark grey to black, moist Sandy Clay (CL) and Clayey Sand (SC), abundant fine to coarse gravels, various manmade debris (wood, asphalt, brick), material varies by lift. The fill may be absent or thicker in unexplored areas of the property and under the building footprint. Most fill appears locally derived from onsite material. However, in Fault Tench FT-2 a small deposit of fill appears to be derived from the 1938 flood. For purposes of this report, all fill, with exception of documented and tested fault trench backfill (Appendix F), encountered onsite and anticipated in future explorations is considered undocumented and unsuitable for support of new improvements in its current condition. Holocene to Pleistocene Age Alluvial Fan Deposits: (Qa to Qoa) – Holocene age alluvial fan deposits consisting of debris/mudflows to overbank deposits with channels. Debris Flow/Mudflow: Sandy Clay with gravel, strong brown, fine sand, fine subrounded granitic/metagranitic gravels, scattered coarse gravels, overall massive, chaotic assemblage, clay films, translocated clay bridging grains, significant decrease in gravel and sand content and size with depth. Many vertical features (up to 12-inches+ long) filled with yellow-brown silt to very fine sand, potential root casts. Overbank Deposits: Silty Clay (ML-CL) with sand, greenish grey, blocky structure, well-developed soil, clay films on pediment faces, significant organic content, desiccation cracks when dry. Channel Deposits: Laminated to thinly bedded Sand (SP to SP-SMg), orangish brown, predominantly fine sand, cross bedded, scattered fine gravels. Thin thalweg lenses of fine to coarse sand, some with fine subrounded gravels. Heavy iron oxide staining, translocated clay, few black-stained beds, appear charred. Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development June 25, 2025 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA Project No. CLA.0014030001 2.2 Subsurface Soil Conditions As encountered within our exploratory borings and from fault trench logging (Leighton 2024a), in general, the site is underlain at the surface by undocumented artificial fill deposits, below which are in-situ alluvial fan deposits of Quaternary age ranging from Holocene to Pleistocene age mudflows and fluvial deposits further defined as overbank or floodplain to main channel deposits of coarse sands and gravels. Artificial Fill, undocumented: (Afu) - The artificial fill soil forms a mantle ranging from 6 to 7 feet thick on average thickening to approximately 14 feet locally at northeast end of Fault Trench FT-2 (Leighton 2024a). This material is characterized as dark grey to black, moist Sandy Clay (CL) and Clayey Sand (SC), abundant fine to coarse gravels, various manmade debris (wood, asphalt, brick), material varies by lift. The fill may be absent or thicker in unexplored areas of the property and under the building footprint. Most fill appears locally derived from onsite material. However, in Fault Tench FT-2 a small deposit of fill appears to be derived from the 1938 flood. For purposes of this report, all fill, with exception of documented and tested fault trench backfill (Appendix F), encountered onsite and anticipated in future explorations is considered undocumented and unsuitable for support of new improvements in its current condition. Holocene to Pleistocene Age Alluvial Fan Deposits: (Qa to Qoa) — Holocene age alluvial fan deposits consisting of debris/mudflows to overbank deposits with channels. Debris Flow/Mudflow: Sandy Clay with gravel, strong brown, fine sand, fine subrounded granitic/metagranitic gravels, scattered coarse gravels, overall massive, chaotic assemblage, clay films, translocated clay bridging grains, significant decrease in gravel and sand content and size with depth. Many vertical features (up to 12-inches+ long) filled with yellow-brown silt to very fine sand, potential root casts. Overbank Deposits: Silty Clay (ML-CL) with sand, greenish grey, blocky structure, well-developed soil, clay films on pediment faces, significant organic content, desiccation cracks when dry. Channel Deposits: Laminated to thinly bedded Sand (SP to SP-SMg), orangish brown, predominantly fine sand, cross bedded, scattered fine gravels. Thin thalweg lenses of fine to coarse sand, some with fine subrounded gravels. Heavy iron oxide staining, translocated clay, few black-stained beds, appear charred. 4 Leighton , a verdantas company Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 8 Descriptions of encountered subsurface soils are presented in our boring logs (Appendix A). Pertinent engineering properties of these soils are described in the subsections below. 2.2.1 Expansive Soil Expansion Index (EI) testing of representative bulk samples collected from boring LB-1 within the upper 5 feet and from a stockpile of soil from Trench FT-2 indicates an expansion index (EI) of 15 and 30, respectively, corresponding to a very low to low potential for expansion. Given the clayey nature of the near surface soils expansion potential is anticipated to vary, and for purposes of this report, the expansion properties of the soil below within the foundation zone should be considered as low (EI=21 to 50). Additional testing of soils upon completion of grading should be performed to confirm the results of the initial testing. Geotechnical laboratory testing results are presented in Appendix B. 2.2.2 Soil Corrosivity Corrosion: In general, soil resistivity, which is a measure of how easily electrical current flows through soils, is the most influential factor for ferrous corrosivity. Based on findings of studies presented in the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) STP 1013 titled “Effects of Soil Characteristics on Corrosion” (February, 1989), an approximate relationship between soil resistivity and soil corrosiveness was developed as shown in Table 1A below. Table 1A - Soil Corrosivity as a Function of Resistivity Soil Resistivity (ohm-cm) Classification of Soil Corrosiveness 0 to 900 Very severe corrosion 900 to 2,300 Severely corrosive 2,300 to 5,000 Moderately corrosive 5,000 to 10,000 Mildly corrosive 10,000 to >100,000 Very mildly corrosive Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development June 25, 2025 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA Project No. CLA.0014030001 Descriptions of encountered subsurface soils are presented in our boring logs (Appendix A). Pertinent engineering properties of these soils are described in the subsections below. 2.21 2.2.2 Expansive Soil Expansion Index (El) testing of representative bulk samples collected from boring LB-1 within the upper 5 feet and from a stockpile of soil from Trench FT-2 indicates an expansion index (El) of 15 and 30, respectively, corresponding to a very low to low potential for expansion. Given the clayey nature of the near surface soils expansion potential is anticipated to vary, and for purposes of this report, the expansion properties of the soil below within the foundation zone should be considered as low (El=21 to 50). Additional testing of soils upon completion of grading should be performed to confirm the results of the initial testing. Geotechnical laboratory testing results are presented in Appendix B. Soil Corrosivity Corrosion: In general, soil resistivity, which is a measure of how easily electrical current flows through soils, is the most influential factor for ferrous corrosivity. Based on findings of studies presented in the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) STP 1013 titled “Effects of Soil Characteristics on Corrosion” (February, 1989), an approximate relationship between soil resistivity and soil corrosiveness was developed as shown in Table 1A below. Table 1A - Soil Corrosivity as a Function of Resistivity Soil Resistivity Classification of (ohm-cm) Soil Corrosiveness 0 to 900 Very severe corrosion 900 to 2,300 Severely corrosive 2,300 to 5,000 Moderately corrosive 5,000 to 10,000 Mildly corrosive 10,000 to >100,000 Very mildly corrosive 4 Leighton A a verdantas company Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 9 Sulfate Exposure: Sulfate ions in the soil can lower the soil resistivity and can be highly aggressive to Portland cement concrete by combining chemically with certain constituents of the concrete, principally tricalcium aluminate. This reaction is accompanied by expansion and eventual disruption of the concrete matrix. A potentially high sulfate content could also cause corrosion of reinforcing steel in concrete. Section 1904A of the 2022 California Building Code (CBC) defers to the American Concrete Institute’s (ACI’s) ACI 318 for concrete durability requirements. Table 19.3.1.1 of ACI 318 lists “Exposure categories and classes,” including sulfate exposure as follows: Table 1B - Sulfate Concentration and Exposure Soluble Sulfate in Water (parts-per-million) Water-Soluble Sulfate (SO4) in soil (percentage by weight) ACI 318-14 Sulfate Class 0-150 0.00 - 0.10 S0 (negligible) 150-1,500 0.10 - 0.20 S1 (moderate*) 1,500-10,000 0.20 - 2.00 S2 (severe) >10,000 >2.00 S3 (very severe) *or seawater A representative composite, near surface (0-5 feet) bulk soil sample collected from LB-2 and stockpile from fault trench FT-2 (Figure 2) were tested to evaluate corrosion potential. The chemical analysis test results for the onsite soil from our geotechnical exploration are included in Appendix B of this report and are summarized below. Table 2 - Corrosivity Test Results Test Parameter Test Results General Classification of Hazard LB-2 0-5’/FT-2 Stockpile Water-Soluble Sulfate- SO4 in Soil (ppm) 148/82 Negligible sulfate exposure to buried concrete Water-Soluble Chloride in Soil (ppm) 100/40 Non-corrosive to buried concrete (per Caltrans Specifications) pH 8.11/8.20 Mildly alkaline Minimum Resistivity (saturated, ohm-cm) 2,200/2,199 Severely to Moderately Corrosive to buried ferrous pipes Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development June 25, 2025 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA Project No. CLA.0014030001 Sulfate Exposure: Sulfate ions in the soil can lower the soil resistivity and can be highly aggressive to Portland cement concrete by combining chemically with certain constituents of the concrete, principally tricalcium aluminate. This reaction is accompanied by expansion and eventual disruption of the concrete matrix. A potentially high sulfate content could also cause corrosion of reinforcing steel in concrete. Section 1904A of the 2022 California Building Code (CBC) defers to the American Concrete Institute’s (ACI's) ACI 318 for concrete durability requirements. Table 19.3.1.1 of ACI 318 lists “Exposure categories and classes,” including sulfate exposure as follows: Table 1B - Sulfate Concentration and Exposure Water-Soluble Sulfate (SO4)Soluble Sulfate in Water ACI 318-14 Sulfatein soil (percentage by(parts-per-million) weight) Class 0-150 0.00 - 0.10 SO (negligible) 150-1,500 0.10-0.20 S1 (moderate*) 1,500-10,000 0.20 - 2.00 S2 (severe) >10,000 >2.00 S3 (very severe) *or seawater A representative composite, near surface (0-5 feet) bulk soil sample collected from LB-2 and stockpile from fault trench FT-2 (Figure 2) were tested to evaluate corrosion potential. The chemical analysis test results for the onsite soil from our geotechnical exploration are included in Appendix B of this report and are summarized below. Table 2 - Corrosivity Test Results Test Results Test Parameter LB-2 0-5°/FT-2 General Classification of Hazard Stockpile Water-Soluble Sulfate- 148/82 Negligible sulfate exposure to buried S04 in Soil (ppm) concrete Water-Soluble Chloride Non-corrosive to buried concrete (per : 100/40 ain Soil (ppm) Caltrans Specifications) pH 8.11/8.20 Mildly alkaline Minimum Resistivity 2.200/2,199 Severely to Moderately Corrosive to (saturated, ohm-cm) buried ferrous pipes 4 Leighton 0 a verdantas company Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 10 Additional corrosion testing is recommended upon completion of grading to confirm the sulfate concentrations in support of foundation design. 2.2.3 Collapse/Compressibility Potential Although not available at this time, the structural loads for the planned anticipated wood-framed residential development are anticipated to be relatively light. Laboratory test results of representative soil samples collected from the site suggest the onsite soils exhibit low compressibility characteristics within the anticipated static load range of similar structures. The hydroconsolidation potential of the site soil is also considered low. 2.3 Groundwater Groundwater was encountered during our field exploration in Boring LB-1 located in the southeastern portion of the project site at approximately 41 feet bgs (Figure 2). Based on the currently proposed residential development scheme, groundwater is not expected to pose a constraint during construction. According to groundwater information obtained through the California Geological Survey (CGS) and presented in the Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the El Monte Quadrangle (CGS, 1998), the historically shallowest groundwater depth in the vicinity of the project site is approximately 20 feet bgs. However, based on review of the Seismic Hazard Zone Report (CGS, 1998), the historically shallowest groundwater levels were based primarily from the groundwater levels between 1904 and 1944. The groundwater levels to the north of the Whittier Narrows area (in the vicinity of the project site) between 1960 and 1997 are indicated to be generally 30 to 50 feet deeper than they were in the first half of the century (CGS, 1998). Based on review of groundwater level data available from the Main San Gabriel Basin Watermaster between 1996 and 2000, the groundwater levels at the site were greater than 40 feet bgs between this time period. Based on our review and field conditions, a groundwater depth of 40 feet was considered in the analyses for the site. 2.4 Percolation Testing Results Borings LB-1 and LB-2 (Figure 2) were converted to temporary percolation test wells upon completion of drilling and sampling. The test was performed between depths of 20 to 30 feet bgs in both borings. The infiltration rate was calculated by dividing the rate of discharge by the infiltration surface area, or flow area. The Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development June 25, 2025 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA Project No. CLA.0014030001 2.3 24 Additional corrosion testing is recommended upon completion of grading to confirm the sulfate concentrations in support of foundation design. 2.2.3 Collapse/Compressibility Potential Although not available at this time, the structural loads for the planned anticipated wood-framed residential development are anticipated to be relatively light. Laboratory test results of representative soil samples collected from the site suggest the onsite soils exhibit low compressibility characteristics within the anticipated static load range of similar structures. The hydroconsolidation potential of the site soil is also considered low. Groundwater Groundwater was encountered during our field exploration in Boring LB-1 located in the southeastern portion of the project site at approximately 41 feet bgs (Figure 2). Based on the currently proposed residential development scheme, groundwater is not expected to pose a constraint during construction. According to groundwater information obtained through the California Geological Survey (CGS) and presented in the Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the El Monte Quadrangle (CGS, 1998), the historically shallowest groundwater depth in the vicinity of the project site is approximately 20 feet bgs. However, based on review of the Seismic Hazard Zone Report (CGS, 1998), the historically shallowest groundwater levels were based primarily from the groundwater levels between 1904 and 1944. The groundwater levels to the north of the Whittier Narrows area (in the vicinity of the project site) between 1960 and 1997 are indicated to be generally 30 to 50 feet deeper than they were in the first half of the century (CGS, 1998). Based on review of groundwater level data available from the Main San Gabriel Basin Watermaster between 1996 and 2000, the groundwater levels at the site were greater than 40 feet bgs between this time period. Based on our review and field conditions, a groundwater depth of 40 feet was considered in the analyses for the site. Percolation Testing Results Borings LB-1 and LB-2 (Figure 2) were converted to temporary percolation test wells upon completion of drilling and sampling. The test was performed between depths of 20 to 30 feet bgs in both borings. The infiltration rate was calculated by dividing the rate of discharge by the infiltration surface area, or flow area. The 4 Leighton © a verdantas company Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 11 volume of discharge was calculated by adding the total volume of water that dropped within the PVC pipe and within the annulus, and incorporating a porosity reduction factor to account for the material installed in the annulus. The flow area was based on the average water height within the slotted pipe section of the test well. Based on the methodology, the calculated infiltration rate (at this location and within this vertical zone) was approximately 0.27 inches/hour in one location (without application of any reduction factor of safety) and negligible in the other. After applying the appropriate reduction factors, the design infiltration rate would be less than the infiltration rate of 0.3 inch per hour for direct infiltration per the current County’s standard. Therefore, direct infiltration within the test zone (i.e., 20 to 30 feet below ground surface) is not feasible and not recommended. Infiltration test data is provided in Appendix C, Percolation Test Results. Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development June 25, 2025 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA Project No. CLA.0014030001 volume of discharge was calculated by adding the total volume of water that dropped within the PVC pipe and within the annulus, and incorporating a porosity reduction factor to account for the material installed in the annulus. The flow area was based on the average water height within the slotted pipe section of the test well. Based on the methodology, the calculated infiltration rate (at this location and within this vertical zone) was approximately 0.27 inches/hour in one location (without application of any reduction factor of safety) and negligible in the other. After applying the appropriate reduction factors, the design infiltration rate would be less than the infiltration rate of 0.3 inch per hour for direct infiltration per the current County’s standard. Therefore, direct infiltration within the test zone (i.e., 20 to 30 feet below ground surface) is not feasible and not recommended. Infiltration test data is provided in Appendix C, Percolation Test Results. 4 Leighton ” a verdantas company Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 12 3.0 GEOLOGIC/SEISMIC HAZARDS Potential geologic and seismic hazards in southern California generally include surface faulting, seismic shaking, landslides, liquefaction, seismically-induced settlement, lateral spreading, seismically-induced landslides, seiches and flooding. The following sections discuss these hazards and their potential impact(s) at the project site. 3.1 Surface Fault Rupture The California Geological Survey (CGS, 1991) established earthquake fault zones which encompass this site, see inset photo to right showing approximate site boundary. Seismic hazards mapped by the State requiring investigations prior to development permits are earthquake fault and liquefaction hazard zones (yellow and green shaded areas). Fault zones interpreted along the Whittier system were based on review of aerial photographs and observation of lineaments combined with topographic escarpments thought to be a result of faulting. Fault investigations have been performed by others (Gath et al., 1994; SCE, 1999; Hushmand and Associates, 2002, and PML, 2008) on properties north of this site to determine if lineaments and topographic irregularities are caused by active faulting along one or more strands of the Whittier fault. As a result of several of these investigations (Gath et al., 1994 and Hushmand and Associates 2002), setbacks from active Holocene-age strands were recommended and established. Our review of available in-house literature indicates that active faults have been mapped across the site, and the site is located within a designated Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone (CGS, 1991c; Figure 5, Historical Seismicity and Regional Faulting Map). Therefore, a surface fault rupture hazard evaluation was prepared under separate cover (Leighton, 2024a), see Figure 2 for exploration data conducted in support of the fault study. Based on the results of the fault hazard study (Leighton, 2024a), it is our opinion that the subject site is free of Holocene-active faults per the current State definition and no setbacks are required. However, due to utility conflicts in the field, the El Monte Quadrangle, CGS 2017 Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development June 25, 2025 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA Project No. CLA.0014030001 3.0 GEOLOGIC/SEISMIC HAZARDS Potential geologic and seismic hazards in southern California generally include surface faulting, seismic shaking, landslides, liquefaction, seismically-induced settlement, lateral spreading, seismically-induced landslides, seiches and flooding. The following sections discuss these hazards and their potential impact(s) at the project site. 3.1 Surface Fault Rupture The California Geological Survey (CGS, 1991) established earthquake fault zones which encompass this site, see inset photo to right showing approximate site boundary. Seismic hazards mapped by the State requiring investigations prior to development permits are earthquake fault and liquefaction hazard zones (yellow and |" | green shaded areas). Fault zones Mm; " INS interpreted along the Whittier system were 1 3 \ \ based on review of aerial photographs and p= ' El Monte Quadrahg coda? Jo observation of lineaments combined with topographic escarpments thought to be a result of faulting. Fault investigations have been performed by others (Gath et al.,, 1994; SCE, 1999; Hushmand and Associates, 2002, and PML, 2008) on properties north of this site to determine if lineaments and topographic irregularities are caused by active faulting along one or more strands of the Whittier fault. As a result of several of these investigations (Gath et al., 1994 and Hushmand and Associates 2002), setbacks from active Holocene-age strands were recommended and established. fom.== Our review of available in-house literature indicates that active faults have been mapped across the site, and the site is located within a designated Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone (CGS, 1991c; Figure 5, Historical Seismicity and Regional Faulting Map). Therefore, a surface fault rupture hazard evaluation was prepared under separate cover (Leighton, 2024a), see Figure 2 for exploration data conducted in support of the fault study. Based on the results of the fault hazard study (Leighton, 2024a), it is our opinion that the subject site is free of Holocene-active faults per the current State definition and no setbacks are required. However, due to utility conflicts in the field, the 4 Leighton " a verdantas company Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 13 extreme southwest and northeast corners of the site could not be evaluated during this exploration. Because these areas cannot be confirmed as free of Holocene active faulting, 15-foot no build zones from the limits of exploration should be considered in planning and design. These zones may be allowable for construction should additional exploration(s) or excavation during construction show these areas are free of Holocene active faulting. 3.2 Seismicity and Ground Shaking Based on current understanding of local faulting, the principal seismic hazard that could affect the site is ground shaking resulting from an earthquake occurring along several major active or potentially active faults in southern California. The project should be designed in accordance with applicable current building codes and standards utilizing appropriate seismic design parameters intended to reduce seismic risk as defined by California Geological Survey (CGS) Chapter 2 of Special Publication 117A (CGS, 2008). The following are seismic design parameters for new structures based on the 2022 California Building Code (CBC). The map-based seismic parameters presented were obtained from United States Geological Survey in accordance with American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Publication ASCE 7-16 and the 2022 CBC, Chapter 16A. We assume that the proposed buildings will have a period of 0.5 second or less. As such, Site Class F is not required, and Site Class may be determined in accordance with ASCE 7-16 Section 20.3. If the building period is greater than 0.5 second, site class should be reevaluated. Based on our evaluation of subsurface data, we have selected Site Class D. A summary of Site Class evaluation is included in Appendix D. Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development June 25, 2025 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA Project No. CLA.0014030001 extreme southwest and northeast corners of the site could not be evaluated during this exploration. Because these areas cannot be confirmed as free of Holocene active faulting, 15-foot no build zones from the limits of exploration should be considered in planning and design. These zones may be allowable for construction should additional exploration(s) or excavation during construction show these areas are free of Holocene active faulting. 3.2 Seismicity and Ground Shaking Based on current understanding of local faulting, the principal seismic hazard that could affect the site is ground shaking resulting from an earthquake occurring along several major active or potentially active faults in southern California. The project should be designed in accordance with applicable current building codes and standards utilizing appropriate seismic design parameters intended to reduce seismic risk as defined by California Geological Survey (CGS) Chapter 2 of Special Publication 117A (CGS, 2008). The following are seismic design parameters for new structures based on the 2022 California Building Code (CBC). The map-based seismic parameters presented were obtained from United States Geological Survey in accordance with American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Publication ASCE 7-16 and the 2022 CBC, Chapter 16A. We assume that the proposed buildings will have a period of 0.5 second or less. As such, Site Class F is not required, and Site Class may be determined in accordance with ASCE 7-16 Section 20.3. If the building period is greater than 0.5 second, site class should be reevaluated. Based on our evaluation of subsurface data, we have selected Site Class D. A summary of Site Class evaluation is included in Appendix D. 4 Leighton a a verdantas company Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 14 Table 3 - 2022 CBC Seismic Design Parameters 2022CBC Parameters (CBC or ASCE 7-16 reference) Value 2022 CBC Site Latitude and Longitude (degrees): 34.0472, -118.0830 Site Class Definition (1613.2.2, ASCE 7-16 Ch 20) D** Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2s Period (1613.2.1), Ss 1.905 g Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration at 1s Period (161A.2.1), S1 0.685 g Short Period Site Coefficient at 0.2s Period (T1613.2.3(1)), Fa 1.000 Long Period Site Coefficient at 1s Period (T1613.2.3(2)), Fv 1.700* Adjusted Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2s Period (1613.2.3), SMS 1.905 g Adjusted Spectral Response Acceleration at 1s Period (1613.2.3), SM1 1.165* g Design Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2s Period (1613.2.4), SDS 1.270 g Design Spectral Response Acceleration at 1s Period (1613.2.4), SD1 0.776* g Mapped MCEG peak ground acceleration (11.8.3.2, Fig 22-9 to 13), PGA 0.822 g Site Coefficient for Mapped MCEG PGA (11.8.3.2), FPGA 1.100 Peak Ground Acceleration, mod w/ site effects (1803A.5.12; 11.8.3.2), PGAM 0.904 g * See Section 11.4.8 of ASCE 7-16. A site-specific ground motion hazard analysis in accordance with Section 21.2 of ASCE 7-16 is required for this site. Per Supplement 3 to ASCE 7-16, a site-specific ground motion hazard analysis is not required where the value of the parameters SM1 and SD1 in the table are increased by 50%. ** Site Class D, and all of the resulting parameters in this table, may only be used for structures without seismic isolation or seismic damping systems. Based on ASCE 7-16 Equation 11.8-1, the FPGA is 1.1, the PGA is 0.822g, and the PGAM is 0.904g. As an added check, PGA and hazard deaggregation were also estimated using the United States Geological Survey’s (USGS) 2008 Interactive Deaggregations utility. The results of this analysis indicate that the predominant modal earthquake has a PGA of 0.84g with a magnitude of approximately 6.5 (MW) at a distance on the order of 6.5 kilometers for the Maximum Considered Earthquake (2% probability of exceedance in 50 years); 2/3 of this value is 0.56g. Deaggregation results are included in Appendix D. Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development June 25, 2025 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA Project No. CLA.0014030001 Table 3 - 2022 CBC Seismic Design Parameters 2022CBC Parameters (CBC or ASCE 7-16 reference) | Value2022 CBC Site Latitude and Longitude (degrees): 34.0472, -118.0830 Site Class Definition (1613.2.2, ASCE 7-16 Ch 20) D** Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2s Period (1613.2.1), Ss 1.906 ¢g Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration at 1s Period (161A.2.1), Sy 0.685 g Short Period Site Coefficient at 0.2s Period (T1613.2.3(1)), Fa 1.000 Long Period Site Coefficient at 1s Period (T1613.2.3(2)), Fv 1.700* Adjusted Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2s Period (1613.2.3), Sus 1.906 ¢g Adjusted Spectral Response Acceleration at 1s Period (1613.2.3), Sus 1.165" g Design Spectral Response Acceleration at 0.2s Period (1613.2.4), Sps 1.270 ¢g Design Spectral Response Acceleration at 1s Period (1613.2.4), Sps 0.776" g Mapped MCEg peak ground acceleration (11.8.3.2, Fig 22-9 to 13), PGA 0.822 g Site Coefficient for Mapped MCEs PGA (11.8.3.2), Frca 1.100 Peak Ground Acceleration, mod w/ site effects (1803A.5.12; 11.8.3.2), PGAu 0.904 g * See Section 11.4.8 of ASCE 7-16. A site-specific ground motion hazard analysis in accordance with Section 21.2 of ASCE 7-16 is required for this site. Per Supplement 3 to ASCE 7-16, a site-specific ground motion hazard analysis is not required where the value of the parameters SM, and SD; in the table are increased by 50%. ** Site Class D, and all of the resulting parameters in this table, may only be used for structures without seismic isolation or seismic damping systems. Based on ASCE 7-16 Equation 11.8-1, the Fpca is 1.1, the PGA is 0.822¢g, and the PGAwm is 0.904g. As an added check, PGA and hazard deaggregation were also estimated using the United States Geological Survey's (USGS) 2008 Interactive Deaggregations utility. The results of this analysis indicate that the predominant modal earthquake has a PGA of 0.849 with a magnitude of approximately 6.5 (Mw) at a distance on the order of 6.5 kilometers for the Maximum Considered Earthquake (2% probability of exceedance in 50 years); 2/3 of this value is 0.569. Deaggregation results are included in Appendix D. 4 Leighton " a verdantas company Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 15 3.3 Secondary Seismic Hazards In general, potential secondary seismic hazards affecting property development in southern California, could include soil liquefaction, seismically-induced settlement, seismically-induced landsliding, and earthquake induced flooding. These potential secondary seismic hazards are discussed below. 3.3.1 Liquefaction Potential Liquefaction is the loss of soil strength or stiffness due to increasing pore- water pressure during severe ground shaking. Liquefaction is associated primarily with loose (low density), saturated, fine- to medium-grained, cohesionless soils. As shown on the State of California Seismic Hazard Zones Map for the El Monte Quadrangle (CGS, 1999), this site is located within an area that has been identified by the State of California as being potentially susceptible to liquefaction (Figure 5, Seismic Hazard Map). The site is predominately underlain by sands with interbedded silts and clays. Based on analysis of the data from CPT’s (Appendix A and D) using the peak ground acceleration of 0.91g and an assumed groundwater depth of 40 feet, and the procedures by Tokimatsu and Seed (1986), some small liquefiable layers were identified at depths below 40 feet. However, the liquefaction potential index is low and the potentially liquefiable layers were identified at depths where surface manifestations of liquefaction at the ground surface is not a concern. The potential for liquefaction and surface manifestations at this site is considered low. Results or our liquefaction analysis is included in Appendix D. 3.3.2 Seismically-Induced Settlement Seismically-induced settlement consists of dry dynamic settlement (above groundwater) and liquefaction-induced settlement (below groundwater). These settlements occur primarily within loose to moderately dense sandy soil due to reduction in volume during and shortly after an earthquake event Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development June 25, 2025 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA Project No. CLA.0014030001 3.3 Secondary Seismic Hazards In general, potential secondary seismic hazards affecting property development in southern California, could include soil liquefaction, seismically-induced settlement, seismically-induced landsliding, and earthquake induced flooding. These potential secondary seismic hazards are discussed below. 3.3.1 Liquefaction Potential Liquefaction is the loss of soil strength or stiffness due to increasing pore- water pressure during severe ground shaking. Liquefaction is associated primarily with loose (low density), saturated, fine- to medium-grained, cohesionless soils. As shown on the State of California Seismic Hazard Zones Map for the El Monte Quadrangle (CGS, 1999), this site is located within an area that has been identified by the State of California as being potentially susceptible to liquefaction (Figure 5, Seismic Hazard Map). The site is predominately underlain by sands with interbedded silts and clays. Based on analysis of the data from CPT’s (Appendix A and D) using the peak ground acceleration of 0.91g and an assumed groundwater depth of 40 feet, and the procedures by Tokimatsu and Seed (1986), some small liquefiable layers were identified at depths below 40 feet. However, the liquefaction potential index is low and the potentially liquefiable layers were identified at depths where surface manifestations of liquefaction at the ground surface is not a concern. The potential for liquefaction and surface manifestations at this site is considered low. Results or our liquefaction analysis is included in Appendix D. 3.3.2 Seismically-Induced Settlement Seismically-induced settlement consists of dry dynamic settlement (above groundwater) and liquefaction-induced settlement (below groundwater). These settlements occur primarily within loose to moderately dense sandy soil due to reduction in volume during and shortly after an earthquake event 4 Leighton " a verdantas company Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 16 We have performed analyses to estimate the potential for seismically induced settlement, using the method of Tokimatsu and Seed, and based on Recommended Procedures For Implementation of DMG Special Publication 117 Guidelines for Analyzing and Mitigating Liquefaction Hazard in California, Martin and Lew (1999) for the boring data, and procedures by Robertson for the CPT data. Based on our analysis, and after our recommendations for building overexcavation and recompaction is accomplished, up to approximately 3.2 inches of potential total seismic settlement is estimated within the building footprint based on the data from the hollow-stem auger borings, and up to 1 inch based on data from the CPTs. The hollow-stem auger boring seismic settlement analysis is considered to be conservative due to the lack of continuous data reading; therefore, we estimate seismic settlement at this site based on the CPT sounding data which results in a potential seismic settlement of 1 inch. Results of our seismic settlement analysis is presented in Appendix D. If the potential differential settlement is estimated as half of the total seismic settlement over a horizontal distance of 30 feet, this would result in a maximum 0.5 inch differential settlement in 30 feet, or angular distortion of 0.0014L. This would be within the tolerance of Other Multistory Structures (wood-framed) for Risk Category I or II. The structural engineer should determine Structure Type and Risk Category and evaluate whether the differential settlement estimates described above are tolerable. A copy of ASCE 7-16 Table 12.13-3 is provided as follows for reference. Table 12.13-3 Differential Settlement Threshold Structure Type Risk Category I or II III IV Single-story structures with concrete or masonry wall systems 0.0075L 0.005L 0.002L Other single-story structures 0.015L 0.010L 0.002L Multistory structures with concrete or masonry wall systems 0.005L 0.003L 0.002L Other multistory structures 0.010L 0.006L 0.002L Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development June 25, 2025 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA Project No. CLA.0014030001 We have performed analyses to estimate the potential for seismically induced settlement, using the method of Tokimatsu and Seed, and based on Recommended Procedures For Implementation of DMG Special Publication 117 Guidelines for Analyzing and Mitigating Liquefaction Hazard in California, Martin and Lew (1999) for the boring data, and procedures by Robertson for the CPT data. Based on our analysis, and after our recommendations for building overexcavation and recompaction is accomplished, up to approximately 3.2 inches of potential total seismic settlement is estimated within the building footprint based on the data from the hollow-stem auger borings, and up to 1 inch based on data from the CPTs. The hollow-stem auger boring seismic settlement analysis is considered to be conservative due to the lack of continuous data reading; therefore, we estimate seismic settlement at this site based on the CPT sounding data which results in a potential seismic settlement of 1 inch. Results of our seismic settlement analysis is presented in Appendix D. If the potential differential settlement is estimated as half of the total seismic settlement over a horizontal distance of 30 feet, this would result in a maximum 0.5 inch differential settlement in 30 feet, or angular distortion of 0.0014L. This would be within the tolerance of Other Multistory Structures (wood-framed) for Risk Category | or Ill. The structural engineer should determine Structure Type and Risk Category and evaluate whether the differential settlement estimates described above are tolerable. A copy of ASCE 7-16 Table 12.13-3 is provided as follows for reference. Table 12.13-3 Differential Settlement Threshold Risk Category lorll 1] IvStructure Type Single-story structures with concrete or masonry wall systems Other single-story structures 0.015L 0.010L 0.002L Multistory structures with concrete or masonry wall systems Other multistory structures 0.010L 0.006L 0.002L 0.0075L 0.005L 0.002L 0.005L 0.003L 0.002L 4 Leighton ° a verdantas company Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 17 3.3.3 Seismically-Induced Landslides Significant slopes are not located on or near the site. Based on the State of California Seismic Hazard Zones Map for the El Monte Quadrangle (CGS, 1999), the site is not located within an area that has been identified by the State of California as being potentially susceptible to seismically- induced landslides (Figure 5, Seismic Hazard Map). 3.4 Flooding Hazards According to a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood insurance rate map (FEMA, 2008), the site is not located within a flood zone (Figure 6, Flood Hazard Map). Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development June 25, 2025 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA Project No. CLA.0014030001 3.3.3 Seismically-Induced Landslides Significant slopes are not located on or near the site. Based on the State of California Seismic Hazard Zones Map for the El Monte Quadrangle (CGS, 1999), the site is not located within an area that has been identified by the State of California as being potentially susceptible to seismically- induced landslides (Figure 5, Seismic Hazard Map). 3.4 Flooding Hazards According to a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood insurance rate map (FEMA, 2008), the site is not located within a flood zone (Figure 6, Flood Hazard Map). 4 Leighton - a verdantas company Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 18 4.0 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS The following recommendations have been developed based on the exhibited engineering properties of the onsite soils and their anticipated behavior during and after construction. Recommendations are specifically provided for design of foundations, seismic design considerations, floor slabs, retaining structures, paving, and grading. The proposed residential structures may be supported on post tension foundation systems established on engineered fill. Leighton should review the grading plan, foundation plans and specifications when they are available to verify that the recommendations presented in this report have been properly interpreted and incorporated. 4.1 Earthwork Project earthwork is expected to include complete demolition/removal of the existing building, surface pavements, landscaping, utilities and complete overexcavation and recompaction of any remaining undocumented fill soils below new improvement footprints as described in the following subsections. 4.1.1 Site Preparation Prior to construction, areas of proposed residential development should be cleared of any existing improvements (demolition of structures, concrete pads and asphalt) and properly disposed of offsite. Efforts should be made to locate, remove and/or reroute any existing utility lines where interfering with proposed remedial grading. Any resulting cavities should be properly backfilled and compacted. After the areas are cleared, the soils should be carefully observed to confirm that all potentially unsuitable deposits have been removed. An average of approximately 7 feet and up to 14 feet of undocumented fill was encountered. Undocumented fill is considered to be unsuitable to support new structures and therefore must be excavated and replaced within proposed building pad areas. For the proposed building structure, we recommend that existing undocumented fill be completely overexcavated; existing soils be overexcavated to a minimum depth of 7 feet below existing grade, with removals extending deeper to remove undocumented fill if encountered. Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development June 25, 2025 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA Project No. CLA.0014030001 4.0 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS The following recommendations have been developed based on the exhibited engineering properties of the onsite soils and their anticipated behavior during and after construction. Recommendations are specifically provided for design of foundations, seismic design considerations, floor slabs, retaining structures, paving, and grading. The proposed residential structures may be supported on post tension foundation systems established on engineered fill. Leighton should review the grading plan, foundation plans and specifications when they are available to verify that the recommendations presented in this report have been properly interpreted and incorporated. 41 Earthwork Project earthwork is expected to include complete demolition/removal of the existing building, surface pavements, landscaping, utilities and complete overexcavation and recompaction of any remaining undocumented fill soils below new improvement footprints as described in the following subsections. 4.1.1 Site Preparation Prior to construction, areas of proposed residential development should be cleared of any existing improvements (demolition of structures, concrete pads and asphalt) and properly disposed of offsite. Efforts should be made to locate, remove and/or reroute any existing utility lines where interfering with proposed remedial grading. Any resulting cavities should be properly backfilled and compacted. After the areas are cleared, the soils should be carefully observed to confirm that all potentially unsuitable deposits have been removed. An average of approximately 7 feet and up to 14 feet of undocumented fill was encountered. Undocumented fill is considered to be unsuitable to support new structures and therefore must be excavated and replaced within proposed building pad areas. For the proposed building structure, we recommend that existing undocumented fill be completely overexcavated; existing soils be overexcavated to a minimum depth of 7 feet below existing grade, with removals extending deeper to remove undocumented fill if encountered. 4 Leighton " a verdantas company Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 19 4.1.2 Earthwork Observation and Testing Leighton should observe and test all grading and earthwork, to check that the site is properly prepared, the selected fill materials are satisfactory, and that placement and compaction of fills has been performed in accordance with our recommendations and the project specifications. Sufficient notification to us prior to earthwork is essential. Project plans and specifications should incorporate recommendations contained in the text of this report. Variations in site conditions are possible and may be encountered during construction. To confirm correlation between soil data obtained during our field and laboratory testing and actual subsurface conditions encountered during construction, and to observe conformance with approved plans and specifications, it is essential that the geotechnical engineer of record be retained to perform continuous or intermittent review during earthwork, excavation and foundation construction phases. 4.1.3 Fill Placement and Compaction Onsite soils free of organics, debris and oversized material (greater-than 6 inches in largest dimension) are suitable for use as compacted structural fill. All fill soil should be placed in thin, loose lifts, moisture-conditioned, as necessary, to 2 percent above optimum moisture content and compacted to a minimum 92% relative compaction as determined by ASTM D 1557 standard test method (modified Proctor compaction curve) within building footprints. Aggregate base for pavement sections should be compacted to a minimum of 95% relative compaction. At least the upper 12 inches of the exposed soils in roadways and access drives, parking lots and (concrete – paver) flatwork areas, should be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction based on ASTM Test Method D 1557. Fill Materials: The onsite soils, less any deleterious material or organic matter, can be used in required fills. Cobbles or slaty clasts larger than 6 inches in largest diameter should not be used in the fill. Any required imported material should consist of relatively non-expansive soils with a very low Expansion Index (EI<20). All proposed imported materials should be approved by the geotechnical engineer of record prior to being placed at the site. Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development June 25, 2025 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA Project No. CLA.0014030001 41.2 41.3 Earthwork Observation and Testing Leighton should observe and test all grading and earthwork, to check that the site is properly prepared, the selected fill materials are satisfactory, and that placement and compaction of fills has been performed in accordance with our recommendations and the project specifications. Sufficient notification to us prior to earthwork is essential. Project plans and specifications should incorporate recommendations contained in the text of this report. Variations in site conditions are possible and may be encountered during construction. To confirm correlation between soil data obtained during our field and laboratory testing and actual subsurface conditions encountered during construction, and to observe conformance with approved plans and specifications, it is essential that the geotechnical engineer of record be retained to perform continuous or intermittent review during earthwork, excavation and foundation construction phases. Fill Placement and Compaction Onsite soils free of organics, debris and oversized material (greater-than 6 inches in largest dimension) are suitable for use as compacted structural fill. All fill soil should be placed in thin, loose lifts, moisture-conditioned, as necessary, to 2 percent above optimum moisture content and compacted to a minimum 92% relative compaction as determined by ASTM D 1557 standard test method (modified Proctor compaction curve) within building footprints. Aggregate base for pavement sections should be compacted to a minimum of 95% relative compaction. At least the upper 12 inches of the exposed soils in roadways and access drives, parking lots and (concrete — paver) flatwork areas, should be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction based on ASTM Test Method D 1557. Fill Materials: The onsite soils, less any deleterious material or organic matter, can be used in required fills. Cobbles or slaty clasts larger than 6 inches in largest diameter should not be used in the fill. Any required imported material should consist of relatively non-expansive soils with a very low Expansion Index (EI<20). All proposed imported materials should be approved by the geotechnical engineer of record prior to being placed at the site. 4 Leighton " a verdantas company Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 20 Surface Drainage: Water should not be allowed to pond or accumulate anywhere except in detention basins. Pad drainage should be designed to collect and direct surface water away from structures to approved drainage facilities. Hardscape drains should be installed and drain to storm water disposal systems. Drainage patterns approved at the time of fine grading should be maintained throughout the life of proposed structures. Irrigation and/or percolation should not be allowed for at least 10 feet horizontally around buildings. 4.1.4 Reuse of Concrete and Asphalt in Fill Pulverized demolition concrete free of rebar and other materials and demolished asphalt pavement can be pulverized to particles no-larger-than (≤) 3-inches and mixed with site soils for use in compacted fill. Blended pulverized concrete and asphalt should be mixed with at least 25% soils by weight. Such materials must be free of and segregated from any hazardous materials and/or organic material of any kind. 4.1.5 Temporary Excavations All temporary excavations, including utility trenches, retaining wall excavations, and other excavations should be performed in accordance with project plans, specifications and all State of California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (CalOSHA) requirements. No surcharge loads should be permitted within a horizontal distance equal to the height of cut or 5 feet, whichever is greater from the top of the slope, unless the cut is shored appropriately. Excavations that extend below an imaginary plane inclined at 45 degrees below the edge of any adjacent existing site foundations should be properly shored to maintain support of these structures. Temporary excavations should be treated in accordance with CalOSHA excavation regulations. The sides of excavations should be shored or sloped accordingly. CalOSHA allows the sides of unbraced excavations, up to a maximum height of 20 feet, to be cut to a ¾:1 (horizontal:vertical) slope for Type A soils, 1:1 for Type B soils, and 1½:1 for Type C soils. The onsite soils within the proposed structural depths generally conform to CalOSHA Type C soils. CalOSHA regulations are applicable in areas with no restriction of surrounding ground deformations. Shoring should be Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development June 25, 2025 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA Project No. CLA.0014030001 Surface Drainage: Water should not be allowed to pond or accumulate anywhere except in detention basins. Pad drainage should be designed to collect and direct surface water away from structures to approved drainage facilities. Hardscape drains should be installed and drain to storm water disposal systems. Drainage patterns approved at the time of fine grading should be maintained throughout the life of proposed structures. Irrigation and/or percolation should not be allowed for at least 10 feet horizontally around buildings. 4.1.4 Reuse of Concrete and Asphalt in Fill Pulverized demolition concrete free of rebar and other materials and demolished asphalt pavement can be pulverized to particles no-larger-than (<) 3-inches and mixed with site soils for use in compacted fill. Blended pulverized concrete and asphalt should be mixed with at least 25% soils by weight. Such materials must be free of and segregated from any hazardous materials and/or organic material of any kind. 41.5 Temporary Excavations All temporary excavations, including utility trenches, retaining wall excavations, and other excavations should be performed in accordance with project plans, specifications and all State of California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (CalOSHA) requirements. No surcharge loads should be permitted within a horizontal distance equal to the height of cut or 5 feet, whichever is greater from the top of the slope, unless the cut is shored appropriately. Excavations that extend below an imaginary plane inclined at 45 degrees below the edge of any adjacent existing site foundations should be properly shored to maintain support of these structures. Temporary excavations should be treated in accordance with CalOSHA excavation regulations. The sides of excavations should be shored or sloped accordingly. CalOSHA allows the sides of unbraced excavations, up to a maximum height of 20 feet, to be cut to a 32:1 (horizontal:vertical) slope for Type A soils, 1:1 for Type B soils, and 17:1 for Type C soils. The onsite soils within the proposed structural depths generally conform to CalOSHA Type C soils. CalOSHA regulations are applicable in areas with no restriction of surrounding ground deformations. Shoring should be 4 Leighton 20 a verdantas company Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 21 designed for areas with deformation restrictions. The soil type should be verified or revised based on geotechnical observation and testing during construction, as soil classifications may vary over short horizontal distances. Heavy construction loads, such as those resulting from stockpiles and heavy machinery, should be kept a minimum distance equivalent to the excavation height or 5 feet, whichever is greater, from the excavation unless the excavation is shored and these surcharges are considered in the design of the shoring system. 4.1.6 Trench Backfill Pipeline trenches should be backfilled with compacted fill in accordance with this report, and applicable Standard Specifications For Public Works Construction (Greenbook), current edition standards. Backfill in and above the pipe zone should be as follows: Pipe Zone: Any proposed pipe should be placed on properly placed bedding materials. Pipe bedding should extend to a depth in accordance to the pipe manufacturer’s specification. The pipe bedding should extend to least 1 foot over the top of the conduit. The bedding material may consist of compacted free-draining sand, gravel, or crushed rock. If sand is used, the sand should have a sand equivalent greater than 30. As an alternate, the pipe bedding zone can be backfilled with Controlled Low Strength Material (CLSM) consisting of at least one sack of Portland cement per cubic-yard of sand, conforming to Section 201-6 of the current edition of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (Greenbook). CLSM bedding should be placed to 1 foot over the top of the conduit, and vibrated. CLSM should not be jetted. Over Pipe Zone: Above the pipe zone, trenches can be backfilled with excavated on-site soils free of debris, organic and oversized material larger than 3 inches in largest dimension. As an option, the whole trench can be backfilled with one-sack CLSM, the same as presented above for the pipe bedding zone. Native soil backfill over the pipe-bedding zone should be placed in thin lifts, moisture conditioned, as necessary, and mechanically compacted using a minimum standard of 92% relative compaction relative to the ASTM D 1557 laboratory maximum dry density within building footprints. The upper 12-inches under hardscape, Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development June 25, 2025 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA Project No. CLA.0014030001 designed for areas with deformation restrictions. The soil type should be verified or revised based on geotechnical observation and testing during construction, as soil classifications may vary over short horizontal distances. Heavy construction loads, such as those resulting from stockpiles and heavy machinery, should be kept a minimum distance equivalent to the excavation height or 5 feet, whichever is greater, from the excavation unless the excavation is shored and these surcharges are considered in the design of the shoring system. 4.1.6 Trench Backfill Pipeline trenches should be backfilled with compacted fill in accordance with this report, and applicable Standard Specifications For Public Works Construction (Greenbook), current edition standards. Backfill in and above the pipe zone should be as follows: =» Pipe Zone: Any proposed pipe should be placed on properly placed bedding materials. Pipe bedding should extend to a depth in accordance to the pipe manufacturer's specification. The pipe bedding should extend to least 1 foot over the top of the conduit. The bedding material may consist of compacted free-draining sand, gravel, or crushed rock. If sand is used, the sand should have a sand equivalent greater than 30. As an alternate, the pipe bedding zone can be backfilled with Controlled Low Strength Material (CLSM) consisting of at least one sack of Portland cement per cubic-yard of sand, conforming to Section 201-6 of the current edition of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (Greenbook). CLSM bedding should be placed to 1 foot over the top of the conduit, and vibrated. CLSM should not be jetted. » Over Pipe Zone: Above the pipe zone, trenches can be backfilled with excavated on-site soils free of debris, organic and oversized material larger than 3 inches in largest dimension. As an option, the whole trench can be backfilled with one-sack CLSM, the same as presented above for the pipe bedding zone. Native soil backfill over the pipe-bedding zone should be placed in thin lifts, moisture conditioned, as necessary, and mechanically compacted using a minimum standard of 92% relative compaction relative to the ASTM D 1557 laboratory maximum dry density within building footprints. The upper 12-inches under hardscape, 4 Leighton 21 a verdantas company Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 22 parking, paver etc. should be compacted to 95% relative compaction. Backfill above the pipe zone should not be jetted. In any case, the backfill above the pipe zone (bedding) should be observed and tested by Leighton. 4.1.7 Corrosion Protection Measures Water-soluble sulfates in the soil can react adversely with concrete. As referenced in the 2022 California Building Code (CBC), Section 1904A, concrete subject to exposure to sulfates shall comply with requirements set forth in ACI 318. Based on laboratory testing results (Appendix B) of the onsite soils from subsurface explorations, concrete structures in contact with the onsite soil will likely have “negligible” exposure (Exposure Class S0) to water-soluble sulfates in the soil. Therefore, common Type II Portland cement may be used for concrete construction in contact with site soils. Subgrade soil should be tested for water-soluble sulfate content prior to final design of the concrete structures once grading is complete. Import fill soil should be geotechnically tested for corrosivity and sulfate attack before imported to the site. Further testing of imported soils should include analytical testing for chemicals of concern prior to import and acceptance. Based on corrosivity test results, the onsite soil is considered moderately corrosive to ferrous metals. Therefore, ferrous pipe buried in moist to wet site earth materials should be avoided by using high-density polyethylene (HDPE), polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and/or other non-ferrous pipe when possible. Ferrous pipe can also be protected by polyethylene bags, tap or coatings, di-electric fittings or other means to separate the pipe from on-site soils. 4.1.8 Shallow Foundation Systems Onsite soils exposed at pad grade for proposed building structures are anticipated to exhibit “low” expansive potential. Based on the proposed development and encountered soil conditions, we recommend that the proposed structures be constructed using stiffened post-tension foundation system designed in accordance with the California Building Code (CBC). Overexcavation and recompaction of the footing subgrade soil should be performed as detailed in Section 4.1.1. Post-tension foundation recommendations are provided in the following section. Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development June 25, 2025 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA Project No. CLA.0014030001 parking, paver etc. should be compacted to 95% relative compaction. Backfill above the pipe zone should not be jetted. In any case, the backfill above the pipe zone (bedding) should be observed and tested by Leighton. 4.1.7 Corrosion Protection Measures Water-soluble sulfates in the soil can react adversely with concrete. As referenced in the 2022 California Building Code (CBC), Section 1904A, concrete subject to exposure to sulfates shall comply with requirements set forth in ACI 318. Based on laboratory testing results (Appendix B) of the onsite soils from subsurface explorations, concrete structures in contact with the onsite soil will likely have “negligible” exposure (Exposure Class S0) to water-soluble sulfates in the soil. Therefore, common Type II Portland cement may be used for concrete construction in contact with site soils. Subgrade soil should be tested for water-soluble sulfate content prior to final design of the concrete structures once grading is complete. Import fill soil should be geotechnically tested for corrosivity and sulfate attack before imported to the site. Further testing of imported soils should include analytical testing for chemicals of concern prior to import and acceptance. Based on corrosivity test results, the onsite soil is considered moderately corrosive to ferrous metals. Therefore, ferrous pipe buried in moist to wet site earth materials should be avoided by using high-density polyethylene (HDPE), polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and/or other non-ferrous pipe when possible. Ferrous pipe can also be protected by polyethylene bags, tap or coatings, di-electric fittings or other means to separate the pipe from on-site soils. 4.1.8 Shallow Foundation Systems Onsite soils exposed at pad grade for proposed building structures are anticipated to exhibit “low” expansive potential. Based on the proposed development and encountered soil conditions, we recommend that the proposed structures be constructed using stiffened post-tension foundation system designed in accordance with the California Building Code (CBC). Overexcavation and recompaction of the footing subgrade soil should be performed as detailed in Section 4.1.1. Post-tension foundation recommendations are provided in the following section. 4 Leighton 2 a verdantas company Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 23 4.2 Shallow Foundations Onsite soils exposed at pad grade for proposed building structures are anticipated to exhibit “low” expansive potential. Based on the proposed development and encountered soil conditions, we recommend that the proposed structures be constructed using stiffened post-tension foundation system designed in accordance with the California Building Code (CBC). Overexcavation and recompaction of the footing subgrade soil should be performed as described in the previous section. Post-tension foundation recommendations are provided in the following sections. 4.2.1 Post Tension Foundation Design Parameters Post-tensioned foundations should be designed by a qualified structural engineer in accordance with the 2022 CBC using the minimum geotechnical parameters provided below for soils with a “low” expansion potential. While we do not expect this value to change, expansion index (EI) should be confirmed upon completion of grading. Table 4 - Post-Tension Foundation Design Parameters Post-tensioned Foundation Design Recommendations Edge Moisture Variation, em Center Lift 9.0 feet Edge Lift 5.0 feet Differential Swell Ym Center Lift 0.5 inch Edge Lift 0.7 inch Modulus of Subgrade Reaction 150 pci The recommended slab design parameters are based on the Post- Tensioning Institute Design of Post-Tensioned Slabs-on Ground, 3rd Edition with 2008 supplement (PTI DC10.1-08). The structural engineer should also design the post-tensioned slabs with adequate stiffness to minimize potential cracking in the slabs. To provide more uniform moisture in the subgrade, the top 18 inches of the prepared subgrade should be pre-saturated to a minimum 2% above optimum moisture prior to placement of concrete. Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development June 25, 2025 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA Project No. CLA.0014030001 4.2 Shallow Foundations Onsite soils exposed at pad grade for proposed building structures are anticipated to exhibit “low” expansive potential. Based on the proposed development and encountered soil conditions, we recommend that the proposed structures be constructed using stiffened post-tension foundation system designed in accordance with the California Building Code (CBC). Overexcavation and recompaction of the footing subgrade soil should be performed as described in the previous section. Post-tension foundation recommendations are provided in the following sections. 4.2.1 Post Tension Foundation Design Parameters Post-tensioned foundations should be designed by a qualified structural engineer in accordance with the 2022 CBC using the minimum geotechnical parameters provided below for soils with a “low” expansion potential. While we do not expect this value to change, expansion index (El) should be confirmed upon completion of grading. Table 4 - Post-Tension Foundation Design Parameters Post-tensioned Foundation Design Recommendations Edge Moisture Variation, en, | Center Lift 9.0 feet Edge Lift 5.0 feet Differential Swell Yr, Center Lift 0.5 inch Edge Lift 0.7 inch Modulus of Subgrade Reaction 150 pci The recommended slab design parameters are based on the Post- Tensioning Institute Design of Post-Tensioned Slabs-on Ground, 3rd Edition with 2008 supplement (PTI DC10.1-08). The structural engineer should also design the post-tensioned slabs with adequate stiffness to minimize potential cracking in the slabs. To provide more uniform moisture in the subgrade, the top 18 inches of the prepared subgrade should be pre-saturated to a minimum 2% above optimum moisture prior to placement of concrete. 4 Leighton 2 a verdantas company Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 24 The Post-Tensioning Institute (PTI) has recommended the following guidelines: Initial landscaping should be done on all sides adjacent to the foundation. Positive drainage away from the foundation should be implemented and maintained. Irrigation watering should be done in a uniform manner as equally as possible on all sides of the foundation to maintain constant soil moisture content. Ponding of irrigation or rainfall water adjacent to the foundation slab can cause differential soil moisture levels potentially leading to differential movements. Planting trees closer to the structure than a distance equal to one-half the mature height of the tree could allow the root system to enter under the foundation. The root system could alter the soil moisture content within the soil and cause soil shrinkage, which may lead to differential movements of the foundation. A landscape architect should be consulted and made aware of these recommendations. 4.2.2 Minimum Embedment of Width The exterior perimeter footings should have a minimum embedment of 18 inches, with a minimum width of 12 inches for strip footings and 24 inches for isolated footings. Interior footings may have a minimum embedment of 12 inches below grade. 4.2.3 Allowable Bearing An allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 pounds-per-square-foot (psf) may be used for the proposed building. This allowable bearing pressures are for total dead load and sustained live loads. Footing reinforcement should be designed by the structural engineer. 4.2.4 Lateral Load Resistance Soil resistance available to withstand lateral loads on a shallow foundation is a function of the frictional resistance along the base of the footing and the passive resistance that may develop as the face of the structure tends to move into the soil. The frictional resistance between the base of the Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development June 25, 2025 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA Project No. CLA.0014030001 4.2.2 423 42.4 The Post-Tensioning Institute (PTI) has recommended the following guidelines: = |nitial landscaping should be done on all sides adjacent to the foundation. Positive drainage away from the foundation should be implemented and maintained. = [rrigation watering should be done in a uniform manner as equally as possible on all sides of the foundation to maintain constant soil moisture content. Ponding of irrigation or rainfall water adjacent to the foundation slab can cause differential soil moisture levels potentially leading to differential movements. =» Planting trees closer to the structure than a distance equal to one-half the mature height of the tree could allow the root system to enter under the foundation. The root system could alter the soil moisture content within the soil and cause soil shrinkage, which may lead to differential movements of the foundation. A landscape architect should be consulted and made aware of these recommendations. Minimum Embedment of Width The exterior perimeter footings should have a minimum embedment of 18 inches, with a minimum width of 12 inches for strip footings and 24 inches for isolated footings. Interior footings may have a minimum embedment of 12 inches below grade. Allowable Bearing An allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 pounds-per-square-foot (psf) may be used for the proposed building. This allowable bearing pressures are for total dead load and sustained live loads. Footing reinforcement should be designed by the structural engineer. Lateral Load Resistance Soil resistance available to withstand lateral loads on a shallow foundation is a function of the frictional resistance along the base of the footing and the passive resistance that may develop as the face of the structure tends to move into the soil. The frictional resistance between the base of the 4 Leighton ” a verdantas company Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 25 foundation and the subgrade soil may be computed using an allowable coefficient of friction of 0.30. The passive resistance may be computed using an allowable (factor of safety of 1.5 applied) equivalent fluid pressure of 220 pounds per cubic foot (pcf), assuming there is constant contact between the footing and undisturbed soil. Friction and passive pressure may be combined without reduction, provided it is acceptable that the footings move laterally sufficiently to develop passive pressure (approximately ¼ inch); otherwise, friction alone should be assumed. 4.2.5 Increase in Bearing and Friction – Short Duration Loads For the case of short term loading (seismic and wind loading), an increase of 1/3 would apply to the bearing pressure and friction values. The ultimate bearing pressure is assumed to be roughly three times the allowable bearing pressure. However, this ultimate pressure only considers structural failure/collapse (life safety) and not structural damage or significant cosmetic damage. Excessive settlement is anticipated to occur well before the ultimate bearing pressure is attained. 4.2.6 Settlement Estimates The recommended overexcavation, relative compaction and allowable bearing pressure are based on a total allowable, post construction settlement of 1 inch. Differential settlement due to static loading is estimated at approximately ½ inch over a horizontal distance of 30 feet between or along similarly loaded footings. Since settlement is a function of footing sustained load, size and contact bearing pressure, differential settlement can be expected between adjacent columns or walls where a large differential loading condition exists. Differential seismically induced settlement was estimated to be less than ½ inch over a horizontal distance of 30 feet. Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development June 25, 2025 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA Project No. CLA.0014030001 4.2.5 4.2.6 foundation and the subgrade soil may be computed using an allowable coefficient of friction of 0.30. The passive resistance may be computed using an allowable (factor of safety of 1.5 applied) equivalent fluid pressure of 220 pounds per cubic foot (pcf), assuming there is constant contact between the footing and undisturbed soil. Friction and passive pressure may be combined without reduction, provided it is acceptable that the footings move laterally sufficiently to develop passive pressure (approximately Vz inch); otherwise, friction alone should be assumed. Increase in Bearing and Friction — Short Duration Loads For the case of short term loading (seismic and wind loading), an increase of 1/3 would apply to the bearing pressure and friction values. The ultimate bearing pressure is assumed to be roughly three times the allowable bearing pressure. However, this ultimate pressure only considers structural failure/collapse (life safety) and not structural damage or significant cosmetic damage. Excessive settlement is anticipated to occur well before the ultimate bearing pressure is attained. Settlement Estimates The recommended overexcavation, relative compaction and allowable bearing pressure are based on a total allowable, post construction settlement of 1 inch. Differential settlement due to static loading is estimated at approximately V2 inch over a horizontal distance of 30 feet between or along similarly loaded footings. Since settlement is a function of footing sustained load, size and contact bearing pressure, differential settlement can be expected between adjacent columns or walls where a large differential loading condition exists. Differential seismically induced settlement was estimated to be less than “2 inch over a horizontal distance of 30 feet. 4 Leighton 2s a verdantas company Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 26 4.3 Slab-On-Grade Concrete slabs-on-grade should be designed by the structural engineer in accordance with 2022 CBC requirements for soils with a low expansion potential. More stringent requirements may be required by the structural engineer and/or architect; however, slabs-on-grade should have the following minimum recommended components: Subgrade: The near-surface soils are characterized as sandy clay to clayey sand, are low expansive and will shrink and swell with changes in the moisture content. Slab-on-grade subgrade soil should be moisture conditioned to 2% over optimum moisture content, to a minimum depth of 18 inches within building footprints and compacted to 92% of the modified proctor (ASTM D 1557) laboratory maximum density prior to placing either a moisture barrier, steel and/or concrete. Expansion testing should be performed upon completion of grading to verify expansive properties of onsite soil. Moisture Barrier: A moisture barrier consisting of at least 15-mil-thick Stego- wrap vapor barriers (see: http://www.stegoindustries.com/products/stego_wrap_vapor_barrier.php ), or equivalent, should then be placed below slabs where moisture-sensitive floor coverings or equipment will be placed. Reinforced Concrete: A conventionally reinforced concrete slab-on-grade with a thickness of at least 5 inches within the building footprint and 5-inches for exterior SOG be placed in pedestrian areas without heavy loads. Reinforcing steel should be designed by the structural engineer, but as a minimum should be No. 3 rebar placed at 18 inches on-center, each direction (perpendicularly), mid-depth in the slab. A modulus of subgrade reaction (k) as a linear spring constant, of 75 pounds-per-square-inch per inch deflection (pci) can be used for design of heavily loaded slabs-on-grade, assuming a linear response up to deflections on the order of ¾ inch. Minor cracking of concrete after curing due to expansion, drying and shrinkage is normal and will occur. However, cracking is often aggravated by a high water-to-cement ratio, high concrete temperature at the time of placement, small nominal aggregate size, and rapid moisture loss due to hot, dry, and/or windy weather conditions during placement and curing. Cracking due to temperature and moisture fluctuations can also be expected. The use of low- slump concrete or low water/cement ratios can reduce the potential for shrinkage cracking. Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development June 25, 2025 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA Project No. CLA.0014030001 4.3 Slab-On-Grade Concrete slabs-on-grade should be designed by the structural engineer in accordance with 2022 CBC requirements for soils with a low expansion potential. More stringent requirements may be required by the structural engineer and/or architect; however, slabs-on-grade should have the following minimum recommended components: Subgrade: The near-surface soils are characterized as sandy clay to clayey sand, are low expansive and will shrink and swell with changes in the moisture content. Slab-on-grade subgrade soil should be moisture conditioned to 2% over optimum moisture content, to a minimum depth of 18 inches within building footprints and compacted to 92% of the modified proctor (ASTM D 1557) laboratory maximum density prior to placing either a moisture barrier, steel and/or concrete. Expansion testing should be performed upon completion of grading to verify expansive properties of onsite soil. Moisture Barrier: A moisture barrier consisting of at least 15-mil-thick Stego- wrap vapor barriers (see: http://www.stegoindustries.com/products/steqo_wrap_vapor_barrier.php ), or equivalent, should then be placed below slabs where moisture-sensitive floor coverings or equipment will be placed. Reinforced Concrete: A conventionally reinforced concrete slab-on-grade with a thickness of at least 5 inches within the building footprint and 5-inches for exterior SOG be placed in pedestrian areas without heavy loads. Reinforcing steel should be designed by the structural engineer, but as a minimum should be No. 3 rebar placed at 18 inches on-center, each direction (perpendicularly), mid-depth in the slab. A modulus of subgrade reaction (k) as a linear spring constant, of 75 pounds-per-square-inch per inch deflection (pci) can be used for design of heavily loaded slabs-on-grade, assuming a linear response up to deflections on the order of 3 inch. Minor cracking of concrete after curing due to expansion, drying and shrinkage is normal and will occur. However, cracking is often aggravated by a high water-to-cement ratio, high concrete temperature at the time of placement, small nominal aggregate size, and rapid moisture loss due to hot, dry, and/or windy weather conditions during placement and curing. Cracking due to temperature and moisture fluctuations can also be expected. The use of low- slump concrete or low water/cement ratios can reduce the potential for shrinkage cracking. 4 Leighton 26 a verdantas company Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 27 4.4 Lateral Earth Pressures Recommended lateral earth pressures are provided as equivalent fluid unit weights, in psf/ft. or pcf. These values do not contain an appreciable factor of safety, so the structural engineer should apply the applicable factors of safety and/or load factors during design. On-site soils may be suitable to be used as retaining wall backfill due to its low expansion potential (Appendix B), however, field and laboratory verification are recommended before use. Site soils can be variable in composition and expansive characteristics, See Section 2.2. Should site soil be desired for reuse behind retaining walls the material should be tested to ensure Expansion potential is less than 20 (EI<20). Recommended lateral earth pressures for retaining walls backfilled with sandy soils with drained conditions as shown on Figure 7 are as follows: Table 5 - Retaining Wall Design Earth Pressures Retaining Wall Condition (Level Backfill) Equivalent Fluid Pressure (pounds-per-cubic-foot)* Active (cantilever) 45 At-Rest (braced) 65 Passive Resistance (compacted fill) 220 Seismic Increment (add to active pressure) 38 *Only for level and drained properly compacted backfill Walls that are free to rotate or deflect may be designed using active earth pressure. For walls that are fixed against rotation, the at-rest pressure should be used. For seismic condition, the pressure should be distributed as an inverted triangular distribution and the dynamic thrust should be applied at a height of 0.6H above the base of the wall. Retaining Wall Surcharges: In addition to the above lateral forces due to retained earth, surcharge due to above grade loads on the wall backfill, such as existing building foundations, should be considered in design of retaining walls. Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development June 25, 2025 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA Project No. CLA.0014030001 44 Lateral Earth Pressures Recommended lateral earth pressures are provided as equivalent fluid unit weights, in psf/ft. or pcf. These values do not contain an appreciable factor of safety, so the structural engineer should apply the applicable factors of safety and/or load factors during design. On-site soils may be suitable to be used as retaining wall backfill due to its low expansion potential (Appendix B), however, field and laboratory verification are recommended before use. Site soils can be variable in composition and expansive characteristics, See Section 2.2. Should site soil be desired for reuse behind retaining walls the material should be tested to ensure Expansion potential is less than 20 (EI<20). Recommended lateral earth pressures for retaining walls backfilled with sandy soils with drained conditions as shown on Figure 7 are as follows: Table 5 - Retaining Wall Design Earth Pressures Equivalent Fluid Pressure (pounds-per-cubic-foot)* Retaining Wall Condition (Level Backfill) Active (cantilever) 45 At-Rest (braced) 65 Passive Resistance (compacted fill) 220 Seismic Increment (add to active pressure) 38 *Only for level and drained properly compacted backfill Walls that are free to rotate or deflect may be designed using active earth pressure. For walls that are fixed against rotation, the at-rest pressure should be used. For seismic condition, the pressure should be distributed as an inverted triangular distribution and the dynamic thrust should be applied at a height of 0.6H above the base of the wall. Retaining Wall Surcharges: In addition to the above lateral forces due to retained earth, surcharge due to above grade loads on the wall backfill, such as existing building foundations, should be considered in design of retaining walls. 4 Leighton . a verdantas company Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 28 Vertical surcharge loads behind a retaining wall on or in backfill within a 1:1 (horizontal:vertical) plane projection up and out from the retaining wall toe, should be considered as lateral and vertical surcharge. Unrestrained (cantilever) retaining walls should be designed to resist one-third of these surcharge loads applied as a uniform horizontal pressure on the wall. Braced walls should also be designed to resist an additional uniform horizontal-pressure equivalent to one-half of uniform vertical surcharge loads. Consideration should be given to underpinning existing structures to remain in this zone, to reduce surcharge loads on the wall and to reduce the potential for inducing damaging settlement within these existing buildings, due to soil movement within the wall influence zone. In areas where autos and pickup trucks will drive, we suggest assuming a uniform vertical surcharge of 300 psf, which would result in active and at-rest horizontal surcharges of 100 psf and 150 psf, respectively. This should be doubled in areas of heavy construction traffic (such as concrete trucks, heavy equipment delivery- trucks, etc.). If crane outrigger loads or other point load sources are applied as wall surcharge, this will require additional analyses based on load source and location relative to the wall. 4.4.1 Sliding and Overturning Total depth of retained earth for design of walls and for uplift resistance, should be measured as the vertical height of the stem below the ground surface at the wall face for stem design, or measured at the heel of the footing for overturning and sliding. A soil unit weight of 120 pcf may be assumed for calculating the actual weight of the soil over the wall footing, if drained, or 60 pcf if submerged, for properly compacted backfill. 4.4.2 Drainage Adequate drainage may be provided by a subdrain system positioned behind the walls. Typically, this system consists of a 4-inch minimum diameter perforated pipe placed near the base of the wall (perforations placed downward). The pipe should be bedded and backfilled with pervious backfill material described in Section 300-3.5.2 of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (Green Book), current edition. This pervious backfill should extend at least 2 feet out from the wall and to within 2 feet of the outside finished grade. Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development June 25, 2025 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA Project No. CLA.0014030001 Vertical surcharge loads behind a retaining wall on or in backfill within a 1:1 (horizontal:vertical) plane projection up and out from the retaining wall toe, should be considered as lateral and vertical surcharge. Unrestrained (cantilever) retaining walls should be designed to resist one-third of these surcharge loads applied as a uniform horizontal pressure on the wall. Braced walls should also be designed to resist an additional uniform horizontal-pressure equivalent to one-half of uniform vertical surcharge loads. Consideration should be given to underpinning existing structures to remain in this zone, to reduce surcharge loads on the wall and to reduce the potential for inducing damaging settlement within these existing buildings, due to soil movement within the wall influence zone. In areas where autos and pickup trucks will drive, we suggest assuming a uniform vertical surcharge of 300 psf, which would result in active and at-rest horizontal surcharges of 100 psf and 150 psf, respectively. This should be doubled in areas of heavy construction traffic (such as concrete trucks, heavy equipment delivery- trucks, etc.). If crane outrigger loads or other point load sources are applied as wall surcharge, this will require additional analyses based on load source and location relative to the wall. 4.4.1 Sliding and Overturning Total depth of retained earth for design of walls and for uplift resistance, should be measured as the vertical height of the stem below the ground surface at the wall face for stem design, or measured at the heel of the footing for overturning and sliding. A soil unit weight of 120 pcf may be assumed for calculating the actual weight of the soil over the wall footing, if drained, or 60 pcf if submerged, for properly compacted backfill. 4.4.2 Drainage Adequate drainage may be provided by a subdrain system positioned behind the walls. Typically, this system consists of a 4-inch minimum diameter perforated pipe placed near the base of the wall (perforations placed downward). The pipe should be bedded and backfilled with pervious backfill material described in Section 300-3.5.2 of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (Green Book), current edition. This pervious backfill should extend at least 2 feet out from the wall and to within 2 feet of the outside finished grade. 4 Leighton 28 a verdantas company Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 29 This pervious backfill and pipe should be wrapped in filter fabric, such as Mirafi 140N or equivalent, placed as described in Section 300-8.1 of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (Green Book). The subdrain outlet should be connected to a free-draining outlet or sump. Miradrain, Geotech Drainage Panels, or Enkadrain drainage geocomposites, or similar, may be used for wall drainage as an alternative to the Class 2 Permeable Material or drain rock backfill, particularly where horizontal space is limited adjacent to shoring (where walls are cast against shoring). These drainage panels should be connected to the perforated drainpipe at the base of the wall 4.5 Pavement Design To provide support for paving, the subgrade soils should be prepared as recommended in Section 4.1, Grading. Compaction of the subgrade, including trench backfills, to at least 92 to 95 percent as recommended and achieving a firm, hard and unyielding surface will be important for paving support. The upper 12- inches of pavement subgrade should be compacted to 95% relative compaction. The preparation of the paving area subgrade should be performed immediately prior to placement of the base course. Proper drainage of the paved areas should be provided since this will reduce moisture infiltration into the subgrade and increase the life of the paving. 4.5.1 Base Course The base course for both asphalt concrete and Portland Cement Concrete paving should meet the specifications for Class 2 Aggregate Base as defined in Section 26 of the latest edition of the State of California, Department of Transportation, and Standard Specifications. Alternatively, the base course could meet the specifications for untreated base as defined in Section 200-2 of the latest edition of Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (Greenbook). Crushed Miscellaneous Base (CMB) may be used for the base course provided the geotechnical consultant evaluates and tests it before delivery to the site. Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development June 25, 2025 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA Project No. CLA.0014030001 4.5 This pervious backfill and pipe should be wrapped in filter fabric, such as Mirafi 140N or equivalent, placed as described in Section 300-8.1 of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (Green Book). The subdrain outlet should be connected to a free-draining outlet or sump. Miradrain, Geotech Drainage Panels, or Enkadrain drainage geocomposites, or similar, may be used for wall drainage as an alternative to the Class 2 Permeable Material or drain rock backfill, particularly where horizontal space is limited adjacent to shoring (where walls are cast against shoring). These drainage panels should be connected to the perforated drainpipe at the base of the wall Pavement Design To provide support for paving, the subgrade soils should be prepared as recommended in Section 4.1, Grading. Compaction of the subgrade, including trench backfills, to at least 92 to 95 percent as recommended and achieving a firm, hard and unyielding surface will be important for paving support. The upper 12- inches of pavement subgrade should be compacted to 95% relative compaction. The preparation of the paving area subgrade should be performed immediately prior to placement of the base course. Proper drainage of the paved areas should be provided since this will reduce moisture infiltration into the subgrade and increase the life of the paving. 4.5.1 Base Course The base course for both asphalt concrete and Portland Cement Concrete paving should meet the specifications for Class 2 Aggregate Base as defined in Section 26 of the latest edition of the State of California, Department of Transportation, and Standard Specifications. Alternatively, the base course could meet the specifications for untreated base as defined in Section 200-2 of the latest edition of Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (Greenbook). Crushed Miscellaneous Base (CMB) may be used for the base course provided the geotechnical consultant evaluates and tests it before delivery to the site. 4 Leighton 2 a verdantas company Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 30 4.5.2 Asphalt Concrete The required asphalt paving and base thicknesses will depend on the expected wheel loads and volume of traffic (Traffic Index or TI). Assuming that the paving subgrade will consist of the onsite or comparable soils with an R-value of at least 50 (see test result in Appendix B) compacted to at least 92 percent relative compaction based on ASTM Test Method D 1557 below 12-inches and 95% relative compaction in the upper 12 inches, the minimum recommended paving thicknesses are presented in the following table: Table 6 – Flexible Pavement Design Traffic Index Asphalt Concrete (inches) Base Course (inches) 5 3.0 4.0 6 3.5 4.0 7 4.0 4.5 The asphalt paving sections were determined using the Caltrans design method. We can determine the recommended paving and base course thicknesses for other Traffic Indices if required. Clays were identified in some of the borings additional R Value testing should be performed during grading or near completion to confirm the sections presented above. 4.5.3 Portland Cement Concrete Paving Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) paving and walks supported on clayey onsite soils should be underlain by at least 18 inches of engineered fill consisting of relatively non-expansive (EI < 30) soils. We have assumed that such a subgrade will have an R-value of at least 50, which will need to be verified during grading. Onsite soils are anticipated to have an EI=15 to 30, therefore, we expect that relatively non-expansive (EI<30) may not need to be imported for PCC paving. PCC paving sections were determined in accordance with procedures developed by the Portland Cement Association. Concrete paving sections for a range of Traffic Indices are presented in the table below. Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development June 25, 2025 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA Project No. CLA.0014030001 4.5.2 Asphalt Concrete The required asphalt paving and base thicknesses will depend on the expected wheel loads and volume of traffic (Traffic Index or Tl). Assuming that the paving subgrade will consist of the onsite or comparable soils with an R-value of at least 50 (see test result in Appendix B) compacted to at least 92 percent relative compaction based on ASTM Test Method D 1557 below 12-inches and 95% relative compaction in the upper 12 inches, the minimum recommended paving thicknesses are presented in the following table: Table 6 — Flexible Pavement Design . Asphalt Concrete Base CourseTraffic Index ] .(inches) (inches) 5 3.0 4.0 6 3.5 4.0 7 4.0 4.5 The asphalt paving sections were determined using the Caltrans design method. We can determine the recommended paving and base course thicknesses for other Traffic Indices if required. Clays were identified in some of the borings additional R Value testing should be performed during grading or near completion to confirm the sections presented above. 4.5.3 Portland Cement Concrete Paving Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) paving and walks supported on clayey onsite soils should be underlain by at least 18 inches of engineered fill consisting of relatively non-expansive (El < 30) soils. We have assumed that such a subgrade will have an R-value of at least 50, which will need to be verified during grading. Onsite soils are anticipated to have an EI=15 to 30, therefore, we expect that relatively non-expansive (EI<30) may not need to be imported for PCC paving. PCC paving sections were determined in accordance with procedures developed by the Portland Cement Association. Concrete paving sections for a range of Traffic Indices are presented in the table below. 4 Leighton 2 a verdantas company Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 31 We have assumed that the PCC will have a compressive strength ' cf of at least 4,000 pounds per square inch (psi). Table 7 – Rigid Pavement Design Traffic Index Portland Cement Concrete (inches) 5 5.0 7 6.5 The paving should be provided with expansion joints at regular intervals no more than 15 feet in each direction. Load transfer devices, such as dowels or keys, are recommended at joints in the paving to reduce possible offsets. The paving sections in the above table have been developed based on the strength of unreinforced concrete. Steel reinforcing may be added to the paving to reduce cracking and to prolong the life of the paving. 4.6 Excavations Based on our field observations, caving of cohesionless strata and loose fill soils will likely be encountered in unshored excavations. To protect workers entering excavations, excavations should be performed in accordance with OSHA and Cal- OSHA requirements, and the current edition of the California Construction Safety Orders, see: http://www.dir.ca.gov/title8/sb4a6.html Contractors should be advised that fill soils should be considered Type C soils as defined in the California Construction Safety Orders. As indicated in Table B-1 of Article 6, Section 1541.1, Appendix B, of the California Construction Safety Orders, excavations less-than (<) 20 feet deep within Type C soils should be sloped back no steeper than 1½:1 (horizontal:vertical), where workers are to enter the excavation. This may be impractical near adjacent existing utilities and structures; so shoring may be required depending on trench depth and locations. Stiff undisturbed native clays will stand steeper. During construction, soil conditions should be regularly evaluated to verify that conditions are as anticipated. The contractor is responsible for providing the "competent person" required by OSHA standards to evaluate soil conditions. Close coordination between the competent person and Leighton Consulting, Inc. should be maintained to facilitate construction while providing safe excavations. Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development June 25, 2025 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA Project No. CLA.0014030001 4.6 We have assumed that the PCC will have a compressive strength (7.) of at least 4,000 pounds per square inch (psi). Table 7 — Rigid Pavement Design Traffic Index Portland Cement Concrete (inches) 5 5.0 7 6.5 The paving should be provided with expansion joints at regular intervals no more than 15 feet in each direction. Load transfer devices, such as dowels or keys, are recommended at joints in the paving to reduce possible offsets. The paving sections in the above table have been developed based on the strength of unreinforced concrete. Steel reinforcing may be added to the paving to reduce cracking and to prolong the life of the paving. Excavations Based on our field observations, caving of cohesionless strata and loose fill soils will likely be encountered in unshored excavations. To protect workers entering excavations, excavations should be performed in accordance with OSHA and Cal- OSHA requirements, and the current edition of the California Construction Safety Orders, see: http://www.dir.ca.gov/title8/sb4a6.html Contractors should be advised that fill soils should be considered Type C soils as defined in the California Construction Safety Orders. As indicated in Table B-1 of Article 6, Section 1541.1, Appendix B, of the California Construction Safety Orders, excavations less-than (<) 20 feet deep within Type C soils should be sloped back no steeper than 12:1 (horizontal:vertical), where workers are to enter the excavation. This may be impractical near adjacent existing utilities and structures; so shoring may be required depending on trench depth and locations. Stiff undisturbed native clays will stand steeper. During construction, soil conditions should be regularly evaluated to verify that conditions are as anticipated. The contractor is responsible for providing the "competent person” required by OSHA standards to evaluate soil conditions. Close coordination between the competent person and Leighton Consulting, Inc. should be maintained to facilitate construction while providing safe excavations. 4 Leighton a a verdantas company Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 32 4.7 Geotechnical Services During Construction Our geotechnical recommendations are contingent upon Leighton providing geotechnical observation and testing services during earthwork and foundation construction. There is a potential for encountering deeper undocumented fill, underground obstructions or otherwise unacceptable existing soils between or beyond our boring locations. We are unaware of any existing fill placement documentation for this site with the exception of the fault trench backfill (Appendix F). Therefore, inconsistent existing fill materials may be encountered during construction, possibly requiring revised geotechnical recommendations. Our geotechnical recommendations provided in this report are based on information available at the time the report was prepared and may change as plans are developed. Leighton should review site grading and foundation plans when available, to comment further on geotechnical aspects of this project and check to see general conformance of final project plans to recommendations presented in this report. Leighton should be retained to provide geotechnical observation and testing during excavation and all phases of earthwork. Our conclusions and recommendations should be reviewed and verified by us during construction and revised accordingly if geotechnical conditions encountered vary from our findings and interpretations. Geotechnical observation and testing should be provided: During all excavation, During compaction of all fill materials, After excavation of all footings and prior to placement of concrete, During utility trench backfilling and compaction, During pavement subgrade and base preparation, and/or If and when any unusual geotechnical conditions are encountered. Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development June 25, 2025 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA Project No. CLA.0014030001 4.7 Geotechnical Services During Construction Our geotechnical recommendations are contingent upon Leighton providing geotechnical observation and testing services during earthwork and foundation construction. There is a potential for encountering deeper undocumented fill, underground obstructions or otherwise unacceptable existing soils between or beyond our boring locations. We are unaware of any existing fill placement documentation for this site with the exception of the fault trench backfill (Appendix F). Therefore, inconsistent existing fill materials may be encountered during construction, possibly requiring revised geotechnical recommendations. Our geotechnical recommendations provided in this report are based on information available at the time the report was prepared and may change as plans are developed. Leighton should review site grading and foundation plans when available, to comment further on geotechnical aspects of this project and check to see general conformance of final project plans to recommendations presented in this report. Leighton should be retained to provide geotechnical observation and testing during excavation and all phases of earthwork. Our conclusions and recommendations should be reviewed and verified by us during construction and revised accordingly if geotechnical conditions encountered vary from our findings and interpretations. Geotechnical observation and testing should be provided: = During all excavation, = During compaction of all fill materials, = After excavation of all footings and prior to placement of concrete, = During utility trench backfilling and compaction, =» During pavement subgrade and base preparation, and/or = |f and when any unusual geotechnical conditions are encountered. 4 Leighton 2 a verdantas company Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 33 5.0 LIMITATIONS This report was prepared using the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable geotechnical consultants practicing in this or similar localities. The findings, conclusion, and recommendations included in this report are considered preliminary and are subject to verification. We do not make any warranty, either expressed or implied. Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development June 25, 2025 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA Project No. CLA.0014030001 5.0 LIMITATIONS This report was prepared using the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable geotechnical consultants practicing in this or similar localities. The findings, conclusion, and recommendations included in this report are considered preliminary and are subject to verification. We do not make any warranty, either expressed or implied. 4 Leighton 3 a verdantas company Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 34 6.0 REFERENCES Bjorklund, T., 2003, The Whittier Fault Trend: Cross Sections, Structure Maps, and Well Tops in the Major Oil Producing Area of the Northeastern Los Angeles Basin, Search and Discovery, Article #10038. Bryant, W.A., compiler, 2017, Fault number 356, East Montebello fault, in Quaternary Fault and fold database of the United States: U.S. Geological Survey website, Earthquake Hazards Program | U.S. Geological Survey (usgs.gov). Bullard, T.F., and Lettis, W.R., 1993, Quaternary Fold Deformation Associated with Blind Thrust Faulting, Los Angeles Basin, California, Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 98, n. B5, p. 8349-8369. California Building Standards Commission, 2022, 2022 California Building Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2, Volume 2 of 2, California Department of Water Resources (DWR), 1966, Planned Utilization of Ground Water Basins, San Gabriel Valley, Bulletin No. 104-2, Appendix A: Geohydrology, 229p. , 2015, Water Data Library, groundwater well data, accessed August 12, http://wdl.water.ca.gov. California Geological Survey (CGS; previously known as the California Division of Mines and Geology), 1991a, Fault Evaluation Report FER-22, Fault Evaluation Report FER-222, Whittier Fault Zone, Los Angeles and Orange Counties California, by Jerome A. Treiman, dated February 1, 1991. , 1991b, Fault Evaluation Report FER-227, Part of the Raymond Fault on the El Monte Quadrangle, Los Angeles County, California by Jerome A. Treiman, dated February 5, 1991. _____, 1991c, State of California Special Studies Zone, El Monte Quadrangle, Effective November 1, 1991, map scale 1:24,000. , 1998, Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the El Monte 7.5 Minute Quadrangle, Los Angeles County, California, Seismic Hazard Zone Report 024. _____, 1999, Seismic Hazard Zones El Monte Quadrangle, Official Map, Released March 25, 1999, http://www.quake.ca.gov/gmaps/WH/regulatorymaps.htm Scale 1:24,000. _____, 2017, Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation El Monte 7.5 Minute Series Quadrangle, California Geological Survey. Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development June 25, 2025 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA Project No. CLA.0014030001 6.0 REFERENCES Bjorklund, T., 2003, The Whittier Fault Trend: Cross Sections, Structure Maps, and Well Tops in the Major Oil Producing Area of the Northeastern Los Angeles Basin, Search and Discovery, Article #10038. Bryant, W.A., compiler, 2017, Fault number 356, East Montebello fault, in Quaternary Fault and fold database of the United States: U.S. Geological Survey website, Earthquake Hazards Program | U.S. Geological Survey (usgs.gov). Bullard, T.F., and Lettis, W.R., 1993, Quaternary Fold Deformation Associated with Blind Thrust Faulting, Los Angeles Basin, California, Journal of Geophysical Research, v.98, n. B5, p. 8349-8369. California Building Standards Commission, 2022, 2022 California Building Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2, Volume 2 of 2, California Department of Water Resources (DWR), 1966, Planned Utilization of Ground Water Basins, San Gabriel Valley, Bulletin No. 104-2, Appendix A: Geohydrology, 229p. , 2015, Water Data Library, groundwater well data, accessed August 12, http://wdl.water.ca.gov. California Geological Survey (CGS; previously known as the California Division of Mines and Geology), 1991a, Fault Evaluation Report FER-22, Fault Evaluation Report FER-222, Whittier Fault Zone, Los Angeles and Orange Counties California, by Jerome A. Treiman, dated February 1, 1991. , 1991b, Fault Evaluation Report FER-227, Part of the Raymond Fault on the El Monte Quadrangle, Los Angeles County, California by Jerome A. Treiman, dated February 5, 1991. , 1991c, State of California Special Studies Zone, El Monte Quadrangle, Effective November 1, 1991, map scale 1:24,000. , 1998, Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the El Monte 7.5 Minute Quadrangle, Los Angeles County, California, Seismic Hazard Zone Report 024. , 1999, Seismic Hazard Zones El Monte Quadrangle, Official Map, Released March 25, 1999, http://www.quake.ca.gov/gmaps/WH/regulatorymaps.htm Scale 1:24,000. , 2017, Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation El Monte 7.5 Minute Series Quadrangle, California Geological Survey. 4 Leighton ” a verdantas company Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 35 County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works Geotechnical and Materials Engineering Division, 2014, Guidelines for Design, Investigation, and Reporting Low Impact Development Stormwater Infiltration, dated December 31, 2014. Davis, T.L., J. Namson, and R.F. Yerkes,1989, A Cross Section of the Los Angeles Area: Seismically Active Fold and Trust Belt, the 1987 Whittier Narrows Earthquake and Earthquake Hazard, Journal of Geophysical Research 94, 9644-9644. Dibblee, Jr., T.W., 1999, Geologic Map of the El Monte and Baldwin Park Quadrangles, Los Angeles County, California, Dibblee Geological Foundation Map DF-69, Santa Barbara, California, map scale 1:24 000. Earth Consultants International, 2024, City of Rosemead 2nd Geological Report Review, ECI Project No. 4404-01, dated September 29, 2024 Ehlig, P.L., K. Bishop, J. McKeown, 1999, Alquist Priolo Special Study of the Alhambra Wash Fault Southern California Edison GO-5 Parcel, City of Rosemead, CA. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), 2008, interactive web site https://hazards.fema.gov/femaportal/wps/portal/. Gath, E.M., Gonzalez, T., Drumm, P.L., and Buchiarelli, P., A, 1994, Paleoseismic Investigation at the Northern Terminus of the Whittier Fault Zone in the Whittier Narrows Area, Rosemead, California: A Technical Report to the Southern California Earthquake Center. Hart, E.W. and Bryant, W.A., Interim Revision 2007, Fault Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act with Index to Earthquake Fault Zones Maps: California Geological Survey, Special Publications 42, 42p. Hauksson, E., and Jones, L.M., 1989, The 1987 Whittier Narrows Earthquake Sequence in Los Angeles, Southern California: Seismological and Tectonic Analysis: Journal of Geophysical Research, Volume 94, No. B7, pp. 9569-9589. Hauksson, E., 1990, Earthquakes, Faulting, and Stress in the Los Angeles Basin: Journal of Geophysical Research, Volume 95, No. B10, pp. 15,365-15,394. Hushmand and Associates, 2002, Surface Fault Rupture Investigation Southern California Edison Go-5 Parcel, City of Rosemead, Los Angeles County, California, October 21, 2002. Leighton Consulting, Inc., 2023, Phase 1 Phase 2 Cost Estimate for a Geologic Fault Hazard Assessment of the Whittier Fault Zone at 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue City of Rosemead, California, dated July 12, 2023. Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development June 25, 2025 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA Project No. CLA.0014030001 County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works Geotechnical and Materials Engineering Division, 2014, Guidelines for Design, Investigation, and Reporting Low Impact Development Stormwater Infiltration, dated December 31, 2014. Davis, T.L., J. Namson, and R.F. Yerkes,1989, A Cross Section of the Los Angeles Area: Seismically Active Fold and Trust Belt, the 1987 Whittier Narrows Earthquake and Earthquake Hazard, Journal of Geophysical Research 94, 9644-9644. Dibblee, Jr., T.W., 1999, Geologic Map of the El Monte and Baldwin Park Quadrangles, Los Angeles County, California, Dibblee Geological Foundation Map DF-69, Santa Barbara, California, map scale 1:24 000. Earth Consultants International, 2024, City of Rosemead 2"! Geological Report Review, ECI Project No. 4404-01, dated September 29, 2024 Ehlig, P.L., K. Bishop, J. McKeown, 1999, Alquist Priolo Special Study of the Alhambra Wash Fault Southern California Edison GO-5 Parcel, City of Rosemead, CA. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), 2008, interactive web site https://hazards.fema.gov/femaportal/wps/portal/. Gath, E.M., Gonzalez, T., Drumm, P.L., and Buchiarelli, P., A, 1994, Paleoseismic Investigation at the Northern Terminus of the Whittier Fault Zone in the Whittier Narrows Area, Rosemead, California: A Technical Report to the Southern California Earthquake Center. Hart, EW. and Bryant, W.A., Interim Revision 2007, Fault Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act with Index to Earthquake Fault Zones Maps: California Geological Survey, Special Publications 42, 42p. Hauksson, E., and Jones, L.M., 1989, The 1987 Whittier Narrows Earthquake Sequence in Los Angeles, Southern California: Seismological and Tectonic Analysis: Journal of Geophysical Research, Volume 94, No. B7, pp. 9569-9589. Hauksson, E., 1990, Earthquakes, Faulting, and Stress in the Los Angeles Basin: Journal of Geophysical Research, Volume 95, No. B10, pp. 15,365-15,394. Hushmand and Associates, 2002, Surface Fault Rupture Investigation Southern California Edison Go-5 Parcel, City of Rosemead, Los Angeles County, California, October 21, 2002. Leighton Consulting, Inc., 2023, Phase 1 Phase 2 Cost Estimate for a Geologic Fault Hazard Assessment of the Whittier Fault Zone at 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue City of Rosemead, California, dated July 12, 2023. 4 Leighton 2s a verdantas company Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 36 _____, 2024a, Fault Rupture Hazard Investigation Proposed Multifamily Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead, Los Angeles County, California, Project No. 14030.001, revised date September 27, 2024 _____, 2024b, Response to City of Rosemead geological report review 155 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead, Los Angeles County, California, dated September 27, 2024 Leighton & Associates, Inc., 2015, Geotechnical Exploration Report, Proposed Residential Development, 17 Acre Site Northeast and Southwest of Intersection Between Chico Avenue and Fern Street, City of South El Monte, California, dated August 28, 2015; Leighton Project No. 11079.001. Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, 2013, Manual for Preparation of Geotechnical Reports, dated July 1, 2013. Main San Gabriel Basin Watermaster (MSGBW), Technical Information, Downloadable GIS Data, http://www.watermaster.org/techinfo.html Nationwide Environmental Title Research, LLC (NETR), 2024, Historic Aerials by NETR Online, website: http://www.historicaerials.com/aerials. Oskin, M., Sieh, K., Rockwell, T., Miller, G., Guptill, P., Curtis, M., McArdle, S., and Elliot, P., 2000, Active Parasitic Folds on the Elysian Park Anticline: Implications for Seismic Hazard in Central Los Angeles, California: Geological Society of America, Volume 112, No. 5, pp. 693-707. PML, 2008, Limited Fault Exploration Report Buildings A and B, 1717 Walnut Grove Avenue, Rosemead, California, Pacific Material Laboratory, August 27, 2008. Public Works Standards, Inc., 2021, The “Greenbook”, Standard and Specifications for Public Works Constructions, 2021 Edition. State Water Resources Control Board, 2024 Geotracker, environmental database, http://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/ SCE, 1999, Alquist Priolo Study Go-5 Parcel City of Rosemead, California, Southern California Edison Company Geotechnical Group, November 1, 1999. Treiman, J.A., 1991, Fault Evaluation Report FER-222, Whittier Fault Zone, Los Angeles and Orange Counties California, dated February 1, 1991. United States Geological Survey (USGS), 1966, Photorevised 1981, El Monte Quadrangle, California – Los Angeles County, 7.5 Minute Series (Topographic Series), Scale 1:24,000. Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development June 25, 2025 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA Project No. CLA.0014030001 , 2024a, Fault Rupture Hazard Investigation Proposed Multifamily Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead, Los Angeles County, California, Project No. 14030.001, revised date September 27, 2024 , 2024b, Response to City of Rosemead geological report review 155 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead, Los Angeles County, California, dated September 27, 2024 Leighton & Associates, Inc., 2015, Geotechnical Exploration Report, Proposed Residential Development, 17 Acre Site Northeast and Southwest of Intersection Between Chico Avenue and Fern Street, City of South El Monte, California, dated August 28, 2015; Leighton Project No. 11079.001. Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, 2013, Manual for Preparation of Geotechnical Reports, dated July 1, 2013. Main San Gabriel Basin Watermaster (MSGBW), Technical Information, Downloadable GIS Data, http://www.watermaster.org/techinfo.html Nationwide Environmental Title Research, LLC (NETR), 2024, Historic Aerials by NETR Online, website: http://www.historicaerials.com/aerials. Oskin, M., Sieh, K., Rockwell, T., Miller, G., Guptill, P., Curtis, M., McArdle, S., and Elliot, P., 2000, Active Parasitic Folds on the Elysian Park Anticline: Implications for Seismic Hazard in Central Los Angeles, California: Geological Society of America, Volume 112, No. 5, pp. 693-707. PML, 2008, Limited Fault Exploration Report Buildings A and B, 1717 Walnut Grove Avenue, Rosemead, California, Pacific Material Laboratory, August 27, 2008. Public Works Standards, Inc., 2021, The “Greenbook”, Standard and Specifications for Public Works Constructions, 2021 Edition. State Water Resources Control Board, 2024 Geotracker, environmental database, http://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/ SCE, 1999, Alquist Priolo Study Go-5 Parcel City of Rosemead, California, Southern California Edison Company Geotechnical Group, November 1, 1999. Treiman, J.A., 1991, Fault Evaluation Report FER-222, Whittier Fault Zone, Los Angeles and Orange Counties California, dated February 1, 1991. United States Geological Survey (USGS), 1966, Photorevised 1981, El Monte Quadrangle, California — Los Angeles County, 7.5 Minute Series (Topographic Series), Scale 1:24,000. 4 Leighton 2% a verdantas company Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA June 25, 2025 Project No. CLA.0014030001 37 Yerkes, R.F., and Campbell, R.H., 2005, Preliminary Geologic Map of the Los Angeles 30’ x 60’ Quadrangle, Southern California, United States Geological Survey: Open- File Report 2005-1019, Version 1.0, map scale 1:100,000. Yerkes, R.F., McCulloh, T.H., Schoellhamer, J.E. and Vedder, J.G., 1965, Geology of the Los Angeles Basin, California -- An Introduction: U. S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 420-A, 57 p. Geotechnical Feasibility Report, Proposed Residential Development June 25, 2025 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead CA Project No. CLA.0014030001 Yerkes, R.F., and Campbell, R.H., 2005, Preliminary Geologic Map of the Los Angeles 30’ x 60’ Quadrangle, Southern California, United States Geological Survey: Open- File Report 2005-1019, Version 1.0, map scale 1:100,000. Yerkes, R.F., McCulloh, T.H., Schoellhamer, J.E. and Vedder, J.G., 1965, Geology of the Los Angeles Basin, California -- An Introduction: U. S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 420-A, 57 p. 4 Leighton a verdantas company 37 FIGURES FIGURES ³ 0 2,000 4,000 Feet Scale:1 " = 2,000 ' Project: 14030.001 Eng/Geol: JEH/JAR Map Saved as J:\Drafting\14030\001\Maps\14030-001_F01_SLM_2024-06-07.mxd on 6/6/2024 4:36:27 PM Author: KVM (btran) Date: June 2024 SITE LOCATION MAP 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead, California Approximate Site Location FIGURE 1 Reference: © 2024 Microsoft Corporation ©2024 Maxar ©CNES (2024) Distribution Airbus ead] Approximateovata ¥ Site Location 2,000 Feet Project: 14030.001 |Eng/Geol: JEH/JAR FIGURE 1 Scale:1"=2,000"' Date: June 2024 Reference: © 2024 Microsoft Corporation © 1 51 0 Wal nut Grove Avenue 4, Leig hto Nn2024 Maxar ©CNES (2024) Distribution Airbus Rosemead, California Map Saved as J:\Drafting\14030\001\Maps\14030-001_F01_SLM_2024-06-07.mxd on 6/6/2024 4:36:27 PM Author: KVM (btran) LB-3 TD 30’ No GW LB-2 LP-2 TD 30’ No GW Perc Test @20-30’ LB-1 LP-1 TD 50’ No GW Perc Test @20-30’ LB-4 TD 30’ No GW Exploration Location Map: Showing fault trench locations FT-1 thru FT-4, Cone Penetrometer Test (CPT’s), MASW Shear Wave Lines ML-1 thru ML-5 and Hollow Stem Auger Borings LB-1 through LB-4. Percolation locations LP-1 and LP-2 noted with test depth Project No. 14030.001 2 : GW c Test @20-30 EXPLANATION Oa Cone PenetrationTesting Location ®.3 Continuous Core Boring Location m— MASW GeophysicalSuney Location | Geophysical Anomaly l/ Geological Trench Fault Traces _——— AP-Fault ——— USGSFault Database Basemap Source: Google Earth (2024) N [1] 50 10M} feet A Projection: UTM Zone 11N LB-1 LP-1 TD 50°No GW Exploration Location Map: Showing fault trench locations FT-1 thru FT-4, Cone Penetrometer Test (CPT’s), MASW Shear Wave Lines ML-1 thru ML-5 and Hollow Stem Auger Borings LB-1 through LB-4. Percolation locations LP-1 and LP-2 noted with test depth Rerc Test @20-30°4 Leighton Project No. 14030.001 Figure 2 Scale: Reference: Geologic Compilation of Quaternary SurficialDeposits in Southern California, Los Angeles Quadrangleby Bedrossian, July 2012 1 " = 2,000 ' Project: 14030.001 Eng/Geol: JEH/JAR Map Saved as J:\Drafting\14030\001\Maps\14030-001_F02_RGM_2024-06-07.mxd on 6/6/2024 4:58:02 PM Author: KVM (btran) Date: June 2024 REGIONAL GEOLOGY MAP Approximate Site Location 1515 Walnut Grove AvenueRosemead, California FIGURE 3 ³ 0 2,000 4,000 Feet Geologic Units Qyf Young Alluvial Fan Deposits Qya Young Alluvial Fan Deposits Qof Old Alluvial Fan Deposits Tss Coarse-grained Tertiaryage formaitons 0 2,000 4,000 ey Feet Approximate Site Location y—— ~ = 2NL by | [| a 1AJ yr] rr= [ g — rad ~7 - a 4 F) | — \ \ 1 | —1® rg . 7| = Aa 1 | ] Is \ : FE, , . y \g PR \ pon a. CS Na a A 1 Geologic Units Qyf Young Alluvial Fan Deposits Pa Qya Qof Young Alluvial Fan Deposits Old Alluvial Fan Deposits Tss Coarse-grained Tertiary age formaitons Project: 14030.001 Eng/Geol: JEH/JAR Scale:1"=2,000"'Date: June 2024 Reference: Geologic Compilation of Quatemary SurficialDeposits in Southem Califomia, Los Angeles Quadrangleby Bedrossian, July 2012 REGIONAL GEOLOGY MAP 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead, California FIGURE 3 Y//Leighton Map Saved as J:\Drafting\14030\001\Maps\14030-001_F02_RGM_2024-06-07.mxd on 6/6/2024 4:58:02 PM Author: KVM (btran) ³ 0 5 10 Miles Scale:1 " = 5 miles Project: 14030.001 Eng/Geol: JEH/JAR Map Saved as J:\Drafting\14030\001\Maps\14030-001_F03_RFHSM_2024-06-07.mxd on 6/6/2024 4:38:48 PM Author: KVM (btran) Date: June 2024 REGIONAL FAULT AND HISTORIC SEISMICITY MAP 1515 Walnut Grove AvenueRosemead, California Approximate Site Location Basemap Reference: © 2024 Microsoft CorporationEarthstar Geographics SIO © 2024 TomTomSeismicity Data Reference: maps.conservation.ca.gov LEGEND Fault activity Recency of Movement Historic (<200 years) Holocene (<11,700 years) Late Quaternary (last 700,000 years) Quaternary (<1.6M years) Historical Earthquakes (≥M3.5) !3.5 - 3.99 !4.0 - 4.99 !5.0 - 5.99 !6.0 - 6.99 FIGURE 4 0 5 10 I —Miles Project: 14030.001 Eng/Geol: JEH/JAR Scale: 1" =5 miles Date: June 2024 Basemap Reference: © 2024 Microsoft Corporation Earthstar Geographics SIO © 2024 TomTom Seismicity Data Reference: maps.conservation.ca.gov Ad falPEG TTT 5ay; TA A Ta LEGEND Fault activity Historical Earthquakes (2M3.5) REGIONAL FAULT AND HISTORIC SEISMICITY MAP 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead, California Recency of Movement ® 35-399 Historic (<200 years) ® 40-499 Holocene (<11,700 years) ® 50-599 — | ate Quaternary (last 700,000 years) [] 6.0 - 6.99 Quaternary (<1.6M years) FIGURE4 Y//Leighton Map Saved as J:\Drafting\14030\001\Maps\14030-001_F03_RFHSM_2024-06-07.mxd on 6/6/2024 4:38:48 PM Author: KVM (btran) ³ 0 2,000 4,000 Feet Scale:1 " = 2,000 ' Project: 14030.001 Eng/Geol: JEH/JAR Map Saved as J:\Drafting\14030\001\Maps\14030-001_F04_SHM_2024-06-07.mxd on 6/6/2024 4:44:56 PM Author: KVM (btran) Date: June 2024 SEISMIC HAZARD MAP 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead, California Approximate Site Location Reference: FH22 C, San Bernardino N LEGEND Landslide Hazard Zones Liquefaction Hazard Zones FIGURE 5 LEGEND Ie Landslide Hazard Zones Ie Liquefaction Hazard Zones Be t h Av e ar y l “ SraH 51S 1Approximate Site Location 2,000 eV ! C-LS © 2024 Milsresel Cerperalion © 2024 Meer GCHNES (2024) Distilled Feel LEE Alfons OS @ 2024 TomTom Project: 14030.001 |Eng/Geol: JEH/JAR FIGURE 5 Scale:1"=2,000"' Date: June 2024 SEISMIC HAZARD MAP Reference: FH22 C, San Bernardino N 151 3) Walnut Grove Avenue 1, Leig htonRosemead, California Map Saved as J:\Drafting\14030\001\Maps\14030-001_F04_SHM_2024-06-07.mxd on 6/6/2024 4:44:56 PM Author: KVM (btran) ?zE ?zE %&o( !"`$!"`$ !"`$ ?¬E ?zE ³ 0 4,000 8,000 Feet Scale:1 " = 4,000 ' Project: 14030.001 Eng/Geol: JEH/JAR Map Saved as J:\Drafting\14030\001\Maps\14030-001_F05_FHZM_2024-06-07.mxd on 6/6/2024 4:46:55 PM Author: KVM (btran) Date: June 2024 FLOOD HAZARD ZONE MAP Approximate Site Location Reference: Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMENTP, NRCan, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri(Thailand), NGCC, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS UserCommunityFEMA (http://www.fema.gov/index.shtm), DWR (http://www.dwr.ca.gov) 1515 Walnut Grove AvenueRosemead, California FIGURE 6 LEGEND 100-Year Flood Hazard Zone 500-Year Flood Hazard Zone rrr J Ta, :C ey,>’ Ahamtaa ") *, Grand A:eT Neen 3 “Ry ve 100-Year Flood Hazard Zonell ane 3 PM vu ©F) > F-a- >: 4 5f & i¥ Amanat «“ k 3 x [aTEC EE IS25 > /23 a G 1 “rm , | 500-Year Flood Hazard ZoneSte 2 :to bE » 2 3 ow “ 3 Bhmiet Ave E Shorb St a =wd2 veltey Bve E Vatiey Bivo £ valley Bvd Rosemead Steele St £ Vailiey Blvd a % | GuessSL 5 E] ° "Ralph St z E Norwood PI «a “i, I De Adalena St13 3 S$ E Glendon Way Marshall St I Lots Or“ W Saxon Ave It I —_ .ESTy vi Rr pope DN wv NE 17 E Melman Ave 1! © Hellman Ave ° [] >y } $3 core . h £ Tebslar Ave “ <4 « . v > = bd £H EEmerson Ave £2 . 2 Fark g 3 F 4 Ho P— E 2 i = 2: gi nctg Pho32 I zg ¥ 3 Ld g = E Cortada StI] pr gS a FH @ = H- E Garvey Ave = Te Garvey Ave u Garvey € Garvey AveE4 > = a ¢o N s £ « $E Newmark Ave Zz 3 < ’ g § < HH “a$ ] d 1 ° E 3 E Ellictivy | Highclit $1 3 HS H =HE Graves Ave . om 2 Approximate H zy 2 EKingermanst. FJ Logadon ex g f : hdI. PL “ Ave J Site Location sg 5 3 © wid 4 Togo S 3Fok JE Mag, Rush St ERE E ££ gRusnst pp — Ss : © White £ z$ Garvey r~ ’ Fd z Narrow « z/. Reservar [] " - PF SEN Coum : iE 4 > is< [1]. <- 3 «2 g yam oC Ackley, pis Mu,4 [2 oryJ 0, eey2 N L- une . 8,-&? ia 2 oFo% LnBoree™ G,# PB oo Technical tntautels ~~. a 1 Whetrer Marin. v Racmeinn ama Foretand Jy Eon FTI *. hile)=~ - LL “ . Hn] Erm< Ed y ¥F BA& . ‘ ” S& ) = <F ~~ { ™ 4 ereed 3 «©wi, Avgnida 88'S H >z neo 2hn Aggy ~ gd Montebsllo & E Lincuin Ave =wy, & aar, ov, SIUng Ay, * By > Reh 8,000o4,000 Feet WO H N E N Mi Ry /ow =48- WY. 4 Project: 14030.001 | Eng/Geol: JEH/JAR FIGURE 6 Scale:1"=4,000"' Date: June 2024 FLOOD HAZARD ZONE MAP Reference: Sources: Esri, HERE, Gamin, USGS, Intermap, INCREMEN P, NRCan, Esri Japan, MET], Esri China {Hong Kong), Esri Korea, Esri(Thailand), NGCC, {c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User CommunityFEMA (http://www.fema.gov/index.shtm), DWR (http://www.dwr.ca.gov) 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead, California Y//Leighton Map Saved as J:\Drafting\14030\001\Maps\14030-001_F05_FHZM_2024-06-07.mxd on 6/6/2024 4:46:55 PM Author: KVM (btran) RETAINING WALL BACKFILL AND SUBDRAIN DETAIL WITH PROPER SURFACE DRAINAGE SLOPE OR LEVEL CLASS 2 PERMEABLE WEEP HOLE WATERPROOFING (SEE GENERAL NOTES) LEVEL OR SLOPE 12" FILTER MATERIAL NATIVE ¼ TO 1½ INCH SIZE GRAVEL WRAPPED IN FILTER FABRIC LEVEL OR SLOPE WEEP HOLE SLOPE OR LEVEL 12" WITH PROPER SURFACE DRAINAGE 4 INCH DIAMETERPERFORATED PIPE (SEE NOTE 3) FILTER FABRIC OPTION 1: PIPE SURROUNDED WITHCLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL OPTION 2: GRAVEL WRAPPED IN FILTER FABRIC SUBDRAIN OPTIONS AND BACKFILL WHEN NATIVE MATERIAL HAS EXPANSION INDEX OF <50 Sieve Size 1" 3/4" 3/8"No. 4No. 8No. 30 No. 50 No. 200 Percent Passing100 90-100 40-100 25-40 18-335-150-7 0-3 Class 2 Filter Permeable Material GradationPer Caltrans Specifications (SEE NOTE 5) 12" MINIMUM (SEE GRADATION) WATERPROOFING (SEE GENERAL NOTES)(SEE NOTE 4) 12" MINIMUM NATIVE FOR WALLS 6 FEET OR LESS IN HEIGHT (SEE NOTE 5) WHEN NATIVE MATERIAL HAS EXPANSION INDEX OF <50 GENERAL NOTES: * Waterproofing should be provided where moisture nuisance problem through the wall is undesirable. * Water proofing of the walls is not under purview of the geotechnical engineer * All drains should have a gradient of 1 percent minimum *Outlet portion of the subdrain should have a 4-inch diameter solid pipe discharged into a suitable disposal area designed by the project engineer. The subdrain pipe should be accessible for maintenance (rodding) *Other subdrain backfill options are subject to the review by the geotechnical engineer and modification of design parameters. Notes: 1)Sand should have a sand equivalent of 30 or greater and may be densified by water jetting. 2) 1 Cu. ft. per ft. of 1/4- to 1 1/2-inch size gravel wrapped in filter fabric 3) Pipe type should be ASTM D1527 Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene (ABS) SDR35 or ASTM D1785 Polyvinyl Chloride plastic (PVC), Schedule 40, Armco A2000 PVC, or approved equivalent. Pipe should be installed with perforations down. Perforations should be 3/8 inch in diameter placed at the ends of a 120-degree arc in two rows at 3-inch on center (staggered) 4)Filter fabric should be Mirafi 140NC or approved equivalent. 5) Weephole should be 3-inch minimum diameter and provided at 10-foot maximum intervals. If exposure is permitted, weepholes should be located 12 inches above finished grade. If exposure is not permitted such as for a wall adjacent to a sidewalk/curb, a pipe under the sidewalk to be discharged through the curb face or equivalent should be provided. For a basement-type wall, a proper subdrain outlet system should be provided. 6) Retaining wall plans should be reviewed and approved by the geotechnical engineer. 7)Walls over six feet in height are subject to a special review by the geotechnical engineer and modifications to the above requirements. V : \ D R A F T I N G \ T E M P L A T E S \ S T A N D A R D - F I G U R E S \ A L L - S T A N D A R D - F I G U R E S . D W G ( 0 8 - 0 2 - 2 1 9 : 0 7 : 3 5 A M ) P l o t t e d b y : b t r a n FIGURE 7 SUBDRAIN OPTIONS AND BACKFILL WHEN NATIVE MATERIAL HAS EXPANSION INDEX OF <50 OPTION 1: PIPE SURROUNDED WITH CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL OPTION 2: GRAVEL WRAPPED IN FILTER FABRIC WITH PROPER WITH PROPER SURFACE DRAINAGE SURFACE DRAINAGE SLOPE SLOPE OR LEVEL OR LEVEL 12" WATERPROOFING (SEE GENERAL NOTES) ~~—_] Lo WATERPROOFING mE (SEE GENERAL NOTES) FILTER FABRIC aE 12" MINIMUM (SEE NOTE 4) . CLASS 2 PERMEABLE 12" MINIMUM FILTER MATERIALWEEP HOLE WEEP HOLE Va 10 1/2 INCH SIZE GRAVEL (SEE NOTE 5) (SEE GRADATION) (SEE NOTE 5) WRAPPED IN FILTER FABRIC 4 INCH DIAMETER PERFORATED PIPE LEVEL OR (SEE NOTE 3) SLOPE LEVEL OR SLOPE Class 2 Filter Permeable Material Gradation Per Caltrans Specifications Sieve Size Percent Passing1" 100 3/4" 90-100 3/8" 40-100 No. 4 25-40No. 8 18-33No. 30 5-15 No. 50 0-7 No. 200 0-3 GENERAL NOTES: * Waterproofing should be provided where moisture nuisance problem through the wall is undesirable.* Water proofing of the walls is not under purview of the geotechnical engineer* All drains should have a gradient of 1 percent minimum *Qutlet portion of the subdrain should have a 4-inch diameter solid pipe discharged into a suitable disposal area designed by the project engineer. The subdrain pipe should be accessible for maintenance (rodding) *QOther subdrain backfill options are subject to the review by the geotechnical engineer and modification of design parameters. Notes: 1) Sand should have a sand equivalent of 30 or greater and may be densified by water jetting. 2) 1 Cu. ft. per ft. of 1/4- to 1 1/2-inch size gravel wrapped in filter fabric 3) Pipe type should be ASTM D1527 Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene (ABS) SDR35 or ASTM D1785 Polyvinyl Chloride plastic (PVC), Schedule 40, Armco A2000 PVC, or approved equivalent. Pipe should be installed with perforations down. Perforations should be 3/8 inch in diameter placed at the ends of a 120-degree arc in two rows at 3-inch on center (staggered) 4) Filter fabric should be Mirafi 140NC or approved equivalent. 5) Weephole should be 3-inch minimum diameter and provided at 10-foot maximum intervals. If exposure is permitted, weepholes should be located 12 inches above finished grade. If exposure is not permitted such as for a wall adjacent to a sidewalk/curb, a pipe under the sidewalk to be discharged through the curb face or equivalent should be provided. For a basement-type wall, a proper subdrain outlet system should be provided. 6) Retaining wall plans should be reviewed and approved by the geotechnical engineer. 7) Walls over six feet in height are subject to a special review by the geotechnical engineer and modifications to the above requirements. RETAINING WALL BACKFILL AND SUBDRAIN DETAIL FOR WALLS 6 FEET OR LESS IN HEIGHT # Leighton WHEN NATIVE MATERIAL HAS EXPANSION INDEX OF <50 FIGURE 7 VA D R A F T I N G T E M P L A T E S \ S TA N D A R D - FIG U R E S V A L L - S T A N D A R D - F I G U R E S DW G (0 8 - 0 2 - 2 1 9:0 7 : 3 5 A M ) Plo t t e d by : bir a n APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION LOGS APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION LOGS 4//Leighton a verdantas company CL CL sML 112 116 109 115 17 15 19 15 B-1 R-1 R-2 R-3 S-1 R-4 S-2 MD, RV EI -200, AL 4 5 9 4710 3 4 7 357 4 11 17 47 11 @Surface: 5-inch Asphalt over 10-inch Base Artificial fill, undocumented (Afu)@1.25': CLAY, dark brown, moist, few fine sand, medium plasticity @5': Clayey SAND, stiff, dark brown, moist, few gravels, mediumplasticity, slightly oxidized. Quaternary Alluvium (Qa)@7': CLAY, stiff, dark brown, moist, some medium to coarsegravels, few coarse sand, few silt, low to medium plasticity. @10': CLAY, stiff, dark to light brown, moist, fine sand, fewmedium gravel, low to medium plasticity, FeO oxidation, fewcobbles, 66% fines (lab) @15': CLAY, very stiff, dark to light brow, moist, fine to mediumsand, low to medium plasticity, slight MnO oxidation. @20': Sandy SILT, very stiff, light brown to orange brown, moist,heavy FeO oxidation, few cobbles, subangular to subroundedgravels, fine sand, slight Mn oxidation. @25': Sandy SILT, very stiff, light brown, fine sand, FeO oxidationveins, slightly micaceous. Project No. Ground Elevation De p t h Bl o w s El e v a t i o n Pe r 6 I n c h e s Page 1 of 2 At t i t u d e s SAMPLE TYPES: Martini Drilling Inc. Co n t e n t , % Logged By Date Drilled 230 225 220 215 210 205 200 ** * This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. * * * MKD Fe e t S (U . S . C . S . ) Lo g Ty p e o f T e s t s Gr a p h i c pc f 230' BULK SAMPLE CORE SAMPLEGRAB SAMPLERING SAMPLESPLIT SPOON SAMPLETUBE SAMPLE BCGR ST MKD Hollow Stem Auger - 140lb - Autohammer - 30" Drop 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 So i l C l a s s . 4-22-24 SOIL DESCRIPTION Sampled By Drilling Co.Drilling Co. Project Location See Figure 2 - Exploration Location Map Lewis Rosemead Condos 14030.001 Drilling Method 8" Fe e t Hole Diameter Mo i s t u r e Dr y D e n s i t y N This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at thetime of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locationsand may change with time. The description is a simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may begradual. TYPE OF TESTS:-200 ALCN COCRCU % FINES PASSINGATTERBERG LIMITSCONSOLIDATIONCOLLAPSECORROSIONUNDRAINED TRIAXIAL DSEIH MDPP RV DIRECT SHEAR EXPANSION INDEXHYDROMETER MAXIMUM DENSITYPOCKET PENETROMETERR VALUE SASESG UC Sa m p l e N o . SIEVE ANALYSISSAND EQUIVALENTSPECIFIC GRAVITYUNCONFINED COMPRESSIVESTRENGTH GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-1GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-1 Project No. 14030.001 Date Drilled 4-22-24 Project Lewis Rosemead Condos Logged By MKD Drilling Co. Martini Drilling Inc. Hole Diameter 8" Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger - 140lb _- Autohammer - 30" Drop Ground Elevation 230’ Location See Figure 2 - Exploration Location Map Sampled By MKD . [7]c o | al S| 812 |e un SOIL DESCRIPTION $ S.. |. | 2 g 05 | 8_ | So | 84=o | 50 52 3 Kk 22 | 5% 2€ | 8 | This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at the =>0 | of | 3 = = O=| ga |.88 | Og | time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locations 3)° o o = E mn > 2 S ‘0 | and may change with time. The description is a simplification of the 4w < 7) | A OQ | ~~ | actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be >a. gradual. [odS|2301 0 — -p— @Surface: 5-inch Asphalt over 10-inch Base a ZNAL | B-1 CL Artificial fill, undocumented (Afu) MD, RVi. @1.25": CLAY, dark brown, moist, few fine sand, medium plasticity 2251 5 . . . .7 R-1 4 112 17 @5": Clayey SAND, stiff, dark brown, moist, few gravels, medium El7 5 plasticity, slightly oxidized.J ° TTT r2 Y 4 | 16] 15 | cL | Quaternary Allium (Qa |_| 7 @/": CLAY, stiff, dark brown, moist, some medium to coarse10 gravels, few coarse sand, few silt, low to medium plasticity. 220 10— .. . I .R-3 3 109 19 @10": CLAY, stiff, dark to light brown, moist, fine sand, few -200, AL _ 4 medium gravel, low to medium plasticity, FeO oxidation, few7 cobbles, 66% fines (lab) 2151 15— \ . I Ce IS-1 3 @15" CLAY, very stiff, dark to light brow, moist, fine to medium_ 5 sand, low to medium plasticity, slight MnO oxidation.7 21041 20 . a. .R-4 4 115 15 sML | @20" Sandy SILT, very stiff, light brown to orange brown, moist,_ 11 heavy FeO oxidation, few cobbles, subangular to subrounded17 gravels, fine sand, slight Mn oxidation. 205 25— . a. . _—S-2 4 @25" Sandy SILT, very stiff, light brown, fine sand, FeO oxidation_ 7 veins, slightly micaceous. 11 - 30Rip TYPES: TYPE OF TESTS: B BULK SAMPLE -200 % FINES PASSING DS DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANALYSIS C CORE SAMPLE AL ATTERBERG LIMITS El EXPANSION INDEX SE SAND EQUIVALENT G GRAB SAMPLE CN CONSOLIDATION H HYDROMETER SG SPECIFIC GRAVITY verdantas R RING SAMPLE CO COLLAPSE MD MAXIMUM DENSITY UC UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE S SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE CR CORROSION PP POCKET PENETROMETER STRENGTH T TUBE SAMPLE CU UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL RV R VALUE *** This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. * * *Page 1 of 2 SW SM SW-GW sML 107 2R-5 S-3 R-6 S-4 R-7 163750/6" 13 23 43 31 50/3" 5050/5" 18 50/4" @30': Silty SAND, very dense, yellowish brown to tan, moist, fineto coarse sand, trace cobbles, few silt, subrounded tosubangular cobbles. @35': Silty SAND, very dense, orange brown, moist, fine tomedium sand, some subrounded to subangular gravel, FeOoxidation, slightly micaceous, slight MnO oxidation, friable. @40': Gravelly SAND, very dense, tan to light brown, very moist,medium to coarse sand, subrounded to subangular gravel,friable, slightly micaceous, some silt.@40.8': Groundwater encountered. @45': Gravelly SAND, very dense, tan to light brown, wet, mediumto coarse sand, some silt, subrounded to subangular gravel, fewcobbles, slightly micaceous. @50': Sandy SILT, hard, light brown, very moist, fine to mediumsand, micaceous, subrounded to subangular gravel, FeOoxidation. Total Depth 50.83 feet bgsGroundwater encountered during drilling to 40.8 feet.Backfilled boring to 30 feet bgs with soil cuttings and installedtemporary percolation well using 2-inch diameter PVC pipe.Solid pipe from 0-20 feet and 0.020-inch slotted pipe from20-30 feet. No. 3 Monterey SAND placed in annulus from19-30 feet. Upon completion of testing, pipe was removed andboring was backfilled with soil cuttings. Surface patched withcold-mix asphalt. Project No. Ground Elevation De p t h Bl o w s El e v a t i o n Pe r 6 I n c h e s Page 2 of 2 At t i t u d e s SAMPLE TYPES: Martini Drilling Inc. Co n t e n t , % Logged By Date Drilled 200 195 190 185 180 175 170 * * * This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. * * * MKD Fe e t S (U . S . C . S . ) Lo g Ty p e o f T e s t s Gr a p h i c pc f 230' BULK SAMPLE CORE SAMPLEGRAB SAMPLERING SAMPLESPLIT SPOON SAMPLETUBE SAMPLE BCGR ST MKD Hollow Stem Auger - 140lb - Autohammer - 30" Drop 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 So i l C l a s s . 4-22-24 SOIL DESCRIPTION Sampled By Drilling Co.Drilling Co. Project Location See Figure 2 - Exploration Location Map Lewis Rosemead Condos 14030.001 Drilling Method 8" Fe e t Hole Diameter Mo i s t u r e Dr y D e n s i t y N This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locationsand may change with time. The description is a simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may begradual. TYPE OF TESTS:-200 ALCN COCRCU % FINES PASSINGATTERBERG LIMITSCONSOLIDATIONCOLLAPSECORROSIONUNDRAINED TRIAXIAL DSEIH MDPP RV DIRECT SHEAR EXPANSION INDEXHYDROMETER MAXIMUM DENSITYPOCKET PENETROMETERR VALUE SASESG UC Sa m p l e N o . SIEVE ANALYSISSAND EQUIVALENTSPECIFIC GRAVITYUNCONFINED COMPRESSIVESTRENGTH GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-1GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-1 Project No. 14030.001 Date Drilled 4-22-24 Project Lewis Rosemead Condos Logged By MKD Drilling Co. Martini Drilling Inc. Hole Diameter 8" Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger - 140lb _- Autohammer - 30" Drop Ground Elevation 230’ Location See Figure 2 - Exploration Location Map Sampled By MKD . [7]c o | al S| 812 |e un SOIL DESCRIPTION $ S.. |. | 2 g 05 | 8_ | So | 84+o | ¥e | S| B Kk 22 | Ss 2€ | 8 | This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at the =So 0 | 20 = a o= Ql 0g | OF | i ii i i> | on [i = = 0a | =e | Ze | time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locations ©° o 0) = E mn > 2 S ‘0 | and may change with time. The description is a simplification of the 4w < AN | A © | ~~ | actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be >s o gradual. = 2004 30 — - -R-5 16 107 2 SW @30": Silty SAND, very dense, yellowish brown to tan, moist, fine_ 37 to coarse sand, trace cobbles, few silt, subrounded to50/6" subangular cobbles. 195 35 or —S3 13 SM | @35" Silty SAND, very dense, orange brown, moist, fine to _ 23 medium sand, some subrounded to subangular gravel, FeO43 oxidation, slightly micaceous, slight MnO oxidation, friable. 1901 40——— wl . . .v oy R-6 N 31 SW-GW| @40": Gravelly SAND, very dense, tan to light brown, very moist, 2 _ .['y 50/3" medium to coarse sand, subrounded to subangular gravel,- | A [ friable, slightly micaceous, some silt. 4 +® L @40.8": Groundwater encountered.be[y —] - | A [ | 1, «® |RY 1851 45°. By | .. Q S-4 X 50 @45" Gravelly SAND, very dense, tan to light brown, wet, medium|e s BN 50/5" to coarse sand, some silt, subrounded to subangular gravel, few oS [3 cobbles, slightly micaceous. _ eo Ll.H — " 'e — J hg ° 1801 50—-—* ] i . iR-7 18 sML | @50" Sandy SILT, hard, light brown, very moist, fine to medium_ 50/4" sand, micaceous, subrounded to subangular gravel, FeO\ oxidation. /] _ L Total Depth 50.83 feet bgsGroundwater encountered during drilling to 40.8 feet._ L Backfilled boring to 30 feet bgs with soil cuttings and installedtemporary percolation well using 2-inch diameter PVC pipe.1754 55— L Solid pipe from 0-20 feet and 0.020-inch slotted pipe from20-30 feet. No. 3 Monterey SAND placed in annulus from_ L 19-30 feet. Upon completion of testing, pipe was removed andboring was backfilled with soil cuttings. Surface patched with_ L cold-mix asphalt. - 60ir 8 TYPES: TYPE OF TESTS: B BULK SAMPLE -200 % FINES PASSING DS DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANALYSIS C CORE SAMPLE AL ATTERBERG LIMITS El EXPANSION INDEX SE SAND EQUIVALENT G GRAB SAMPLE CN CONSOLIDATION H HYDROMETER SG SPECIFIC GRAVITY verda ntas R RING SAMPLE CO COLLAPSE MD MAXIMUM DENSITY UC UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE S SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE CR CORROSION PP POCKET PENETROMETER STRENGTH T TUBE SAMPLE CU UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL RV R VALUE *** This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. * * *Page 2 of 2 CL-ML CL ML CL CL-ML SW-GW ML 116 115 110 109 15 14 19 18 B-1 R-1 R-2 R-3 S-1 R-4 S-2 CR, -200,AL DS 2 3 7 51012 2 2 5 push12 4 8 12 29 16 @Surface: 5-inch Asphalt over 7-inch Base Artificial fill, undocumented (Afu)@1': sandy CLAY, dark brown, moist, some medium to coarsesand, subrounded to subangular gravels and cobbles. @5': CLAY, medium stiff to stiff, dark brown, moist, some mediumto coarse sand, few rootlets, low plasticity, some silt, 98.9%fines (lab) Quaternary Alluvium (Qa)@7': SILT, hard, light brown, moist, few fine to medium sand, someclay. @10': CLAY with sand, medium stiff, dark brown, moist, somemedium to coarse sand, micaceous, medium plasticity, slightFeO oxidation. @15': CLAY, soft to medium stiff, light brown, moist, some fine tomedium sand, FeO oxidation, some silt, low to mediumplasticity. @20': SILT, very stiff, light brown, moist, MnO and FeO oxidation,few fine to medium sand, few subrounded to subangulargravels, slightly micaceous. @25': Gravelly SAND, dense, light brown, moist, some silt, FeOoxidation, medium to coarse sand, subrounded to subangulargravel.@26': Gravelly SAND, light brown, medium to coarse sand,subrounded to subangular gravel. @27': SILT, stiff, light to dark brown, moist, high FeO and MnOoxidation, low plasticity, some clay, few gravels, micaceous. Project No. Ground Elevation De p t h Bl o w s El e v a t i o n Pe r 6 I n c h e s Page 1 of 2 At t i t u d e s SAMPLE TYPES: Martini Drilling Inc. Co n t e n t , % Logged By Date Drilled 225 220 215 210 205 200 * * * This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. * * * MKD Fe e t S (U . S . C . S . ) Lo g Ty p e o f T e s t s Gr a p h i c pc f 229' BULK SAMPLE CORE SAMPLEGRAB SAMPLERING SAMPLESPLIT SPOON SAMPLETUBE SAMPLE BCGR ST MKD Hollow Stem Auger - 140lb - Autohammer - 30" Drop 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 So i l C l a s s . 4-22-24 SOIL DESCRIPTION Sampled By Drilling Co.Drilling Co. Project Location See Figure 2 - Exploration Location Map Lewis Rosemead Condos 14030.001 Drilling Method 8" Fe e t Hole Diameter Mo i s t u r e Dr y D e n s i t y N This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locationsand may change with time. The description is a simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may begradual. TYPE OF TESTS:-200 ALCN COCRCU % FINES PASSINGATTERBERG LIMITSCONSOLIDATIONCOLLAPSECORROSIONUNDRAINED TRIAXIAL DSEIH MDPP RV DIRECT SHEAR EXPANSION INDEXHYDROMETER MAXIMUM DENSITYPOCKET PENETROMETERR VALUE SASESG UC Sa m p l e N o . SIEVE ANALYSISSAND EQUIVALENTSPECIFIC GRAVITYUNCONFINED COMPRESSIVESTRENGTH GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-2GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-2 Project No. 14030.001 Date Drilled 4-22-24 Project Lewis Rosemead Condos Logged By MKD Drilling Co. Martini Drilling Inc. Hole Diameter 8" Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger - 140lb _- Autohammer - 30" Drop Ground Elevation 229 Location See Figure 2 - Exploration Location Map Sampled By MKD . [7]c o | al S| 812 |e un SOIL DESCRIPTION $ S.. |. | 2 g 05 | 8_ | So | 84=o | 50 52 3 Kk 22 | 5% 2€ | 8 | This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at the =>0 | of | 3 = = O=| ga |.88 | Og | time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locations 3)° o o = E mn > 2 S ‘0 | and may change with time. The description is a simplification of the 4w < 7) | A OQ | ~~ | actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be >s a. gradual. [od 0 — - — @Surface: 5-inch Asphalt over 7-inch Base B-1 CL-ML| Artificial fill, undocumented (Afu)_ @1'": sandy CLAY, dark brown, moist, some medium to coarsesand, subrounded to subangular gravels and cobbles. 225+ — 5— R-1 2 116 15 CL @5'": CLAY, medium stiff to stiff, dark brown, moist, some medium CR, -200, _ 3 to coarse sand, few rootlets, low plasticity, some silt, 98.9% AL7 fines (lab) TTT rz Y 5 | 15] 14 | mL | Quaternary Alluvium (Qa) 7]_ 10 @/": SILT, hard, light brown, moist, few fine to medium sand, some12 clay. 220+ — 10 R-3 2 110 19 CL @10": CLAY with sand, medium stiff, dark brown, moist, some DS _ 2 medium to coarse sand, micaceous, medium plasticity, slight5 FeO oxidation. 215+ — H 15— S-1 push @15" CLAY, soft to medium stiff, light brown, moist, some fine to_ 1 medium sand, FeO oxidation, some silt, low to medium2 plasticity. 210+ — H 20 R-4 4 109 18 | CL-ML| @20" SILT, very stiff, light brown, moist, MnO and FeO oxidation,_ 8 few fine to medium sand, few subrounded to subangular12 gravels, slightly micaceous. 205- — H 25 5 3 S-2 2 SW-GW| @25": Gravelly SAND, dense, light brown, moist, some silt, FeO 1.[' 9 oxidation, medium to coarse sand, subrounded to subangular PS A 16 ravel. [ ¥ I @26": Gravelly SAND, light brown, medium to coarse sand,ML subrounded to subangular gravel. — H @27": SILT, stiff, light to dark brown, moist, high FeO and MnOoxidation, low plasticity, some clay, few gravels, micaceous.200+ — H 0SAMPLE TYPES: TYPE OF TESTS: B BULK SAMPLE -200 % FINES PASSING DS DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANALYSIS C CORE SAMPLE AL ATTERBERG LIMITS El EXPANSION INDEX SE SAND EQUIVALENT G GRAB SAMPLE CN CONSOLIDATION H HYDROMETER SG SPECIFIC GRAVITY verdantas R RING SAMPLE CO COLLAPSE MD MAXIMUM DENSITY UC UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE S$ SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE CR CORROSION PP POCKET PENETROMETER STRENGTH T TUBE SAMPLE CU UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL RV R VALUE *** This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. * * * Page 1 of 2 110 17R-5 878 @30': CLAY with gravel, yellowish brown (lab description) Total Depth 31.5 feet bgsNo groundwater encountered during drilling.Installed temporary percolation well using 2-inch diameter PVCpipe. Solid pipe from 0-20 feet and 0.020-inch slotted pipefrom 20-30 feet. No. 3 Monterey SAND placed in annulus from19-30 feet. Upon completion of testing, pipe was removed andboring was backfilled with soil cuttings. Surface patched withcold-mix asphalt. Project No. Ground Elevation De p t h Bl o w s El e v a t i o n Pe r 6 I n c h e s Page 2 of 2 At t i t u d e s SAMPLE TYPES: Martini Drilling Inc. Co n t e n t , % Logged By Date Drilled 195 190 185 180 175 170 * * * This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. * * * MKD Fe e t S (U . S . C . S . ) Lo g Ty p e o f T e s t s Gr a p h i c pc f 229' BULK SAMPLE CORE SAMPLEGRAB SAMPLERING SAMPLESPLIT SPOON SAMPLETUBE SAMPLE BCGR ST MKD Hollow Stem Auger - 140lb - Autohammer - 30" Drop 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 So i l C l a s s . 4-22-24 SOIL DESCRIPTION Sampled By Drilling Co.Drilling Co. Project Location See Figure 2 - Exploration Location Map Lewis Rosemead Condos 14030.001 Drilling Method 8" Fe e t Hole Diameter Mo i s t u r e Dr y D e n s i t y N This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locationsand may change with time. The description is a simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may begradual. TYPE OF TESTS:-200 ALCN COCRCU % FINES PASSINGATTERBERG LIMITSCONSOLIDATIONCOLLAPSECORROSIONUNDRAINED TRIAXIAL DSEIH MDPP RV DIRECT SHEAR EXPANSION INDEXHYDROMETER MAXIMUM DENSITYPOCKET PENETROMETERR VALUE SASESG UC Sa m p l e N o . SIEVE ANALYSISSAND EQUIVALENTSPECIFIC GRAVITYUNCONFINED COMPRESSIVESTRENGTH GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-2GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-2 Project No. 14030.001 Date Drilled 4-22-24 Project Lewis Rosemead Condos Logged By MKD Drilling Co. Martini Drilling Inc. Hole Diameter 8" Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger - 140lb _- Autohammer - 30" Drop Ground Elevation 229 Location See Figure 2 - Exploration Location Map Sampled By MKD . [7]S 212 | o2| bd SOIL DESCRIPTION I]5 [2] @ = S ‘0 g a0 2 £ = 0 2 d . . _ : . .vo Eo | SO © 2° 22 | Cw 2c Se This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at the =Sg | 2g 2.0 S 23E | 29 | he | OY | 4 - Z : : Ye> | on | = Qo =2== | Qa | .=«= | Z¢ | time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locations ©° o o = E mn > 2 S ‘0 | and may change with time. The description is a simplification of the 4w < AN | A © | ~~ | actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be >o -gradual.S 30 R-5 8 110 17 @30": CLAY with gravel, yellowish brown (lab description)_ 78 _ L Total Depth 31.5 feet bgsNo groundwater encountered during drilling.195 _| L Installed temporary percolation well using 2-inch diameter PVCpipe. Solid pipe from 0-20 feet and 0.020-inch slotted pipe35—| L from 20-30 feet. No. 3 Monterey SAND placed in annulus from19-30 feet. Upon completion of testing, pipe was removed and_ L boring was backfilled with soil cuttings. Surface patched withcold-mix asphalt. 190 — H 40— [I 185- — H 45— H 180+ — H 50 — [I 175- — H 55— H 170 — H 0.SAMPLE TYPES: TYPE OF TESTS:B BULK SAMPLE -200 % FINES PASSING DS DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANALYSISC CORE SAMPLE AL ATTERBERG LIMITS EI EXPANSION INDEX SE SAND EQUIVALENTG GRAB SAMPLE CN CONSOLIDATION H HYDROMETER SG SPECIFIC GRAVITY verd antasR RING SAMPLE CO COLLAPSE MD MAXIMUM DENSITY UC UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVES SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE CR CORROSION PP POCKET PENETROMETER STRENGTH T TUBE SAMPLE CU__UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL _RV_R VALUE *** This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. * * * Page 2 of 2 CL-ML ML CL-ML sCL CL-ML ML 119 106 106 121 11 24 18 11 B-1 R-1 R-2 R-3 S-1 R-4 S-2 -200 11 17 24 5910 3 9 13 224 3 6 12 22 4 @Surface: 5-inch Asphalt over Subgrade (No Base) Artificial fill, undocumented (Afu)@0.5': Clayey SILT, dark brown, moist, fine to medium sand,rootlets, few subrounded to subangular gavel. @5': SILT with sand, hard, dark brown, moist, fine to medium sand,rootlets, few subrounded to subangular gravel. Quaternary Alluvium (Qa)@7': SILT, very stiff, light to dark brown, moist, fine to mediumsand, few gravels, slightly MnO oxidation, glaying. @10': CLAY with sand, very stiff, brown to orangish brown, moist,medium to coarse sand, few gravels, slightly micaceous, somesilt, MnO oxidation. @15': Sandy CLAY, medium stiff to stiff, light brown to orangebrown, moist, MnO oxidation pockets, some subrounded tosubangular gravel, glaying, dark brown pockets of oxidation, finesand, slightly micaceous, 62.8% fines (lab) @20': SILT with sand, stiff to very stiff, dark brown to gray, moist,large pockets of MnO oxidation, dark brown/reddish FeOoxidation, fine to medium sand, low to medium plasticity. @25': SILT, medium stiff to stiff, brown to gray, moist, orange FeOoxidation throughout, MnO oxidation, micaceous, some finesand lenses. Project No. Ground Elevation De p t h Bl o w s El e v a t i o n Pe r 6 I n c h e s Page 1 of 2 At t i t u d e s SAMPLE TYPES: Martini Drilling Inc. Co n t e n t , % Logged By Date Drilled 235 230 225 220 215 210 205 * * * This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. * * * MKD Fe e t S (U . S . C . S . ) Lo g Ty p e o f T e s t s Gr a p h i c pc f 235' BULK SAMPLE CORE SAMPLEGRAB SAMPLERING SAMPLESPLIT SPOON SAMPLETUBE SAMPLE BCGR ST MKD Hollow Stem Auger - 140lb - Autohammer - 30" Drop 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 So i l C l a s s . 4-22-24 SOIL DESCRIPTION Sampled By Drilling Co.Drilling Co. Project Location See Figure 2 - Exploration Location Map Lewis Rosemead Condos 14030.001 Drilling Method 8" Fe e t Hole Diameter Mo i s t u r e Dr y D e n s i t y N This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locationsand may change with time. The description is a simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may begradual. TYPE OF TESTS:-200 ALCN COCRCU % FINES PASSINGATTERBERG LIMITSCONSOLIDATIONCOLLAPSECORROSIONUNDRAINED TRIAXIAL DSEIH MDPP RV DIRECT SHEAR EXPANSION INDEXHYDROMETER MAXIMUM DENSITYPOCKET PENETROMETERR VALUE SASESG UC Sa m p l e N o . SIEVE ANALYSISSAND EQUIVALENTSPECIFIC GRAVITYUNCONFINED COMPRESSIVESTRENGTH GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-3GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-3 Project No. 14030.001 Date Drilled 4-22-24 Project Lewis Rosemead Condos Logged By MKD Drilling Co. Martini Drilling Inc. Hole Diameter 8" Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger - 140lb _- Autohammer - 30" Drop Ground Elevation 235%’ Location See Figure 2 - Exploration Location Map Sampled By MKD . [7]S 812 | 2 d= SOIL DESCRIPTION BbS. |e | € 2 Z | 42] | £5 9g 3 xo | 50 52 3 Kk 22 | 5% 2€ | 8 | This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at the =>0 | of | 3 = = O=| ga |.88 | Og | time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locations 3)° o o = E mn > 2 S ‘0 | and may change with time. The description is a simplification of the 4w < AN | A © | ~~ | actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be >s a. gradual. [od 2351 0 — H @Surface: 5-inch Asphalt over Subgrade (No Base) - Bl CL-ML| Artificial fill, undocumented (Afu)@0.5" Clayey SILT, dark brown, moist, fine to medium sand,— Hi rootlets, few subrounded to subangular gavel. 2301 5 . . — IR-1 11 119 11 ML @5'": SILT with sand, hard, dark brown, moist, fine to medium sand,_ 17 rootlets, few subrounded to subangular gravel.24 TTT rR2 YY 5 | 106 | 24 TcumL|Quaternary Alluvium (Qa) 7] _ 9 @/": SILT, very stiff, light to dark brown, moist, fine to medium10 sand, few gravels, slightly MnO oxidation, glaying. 2251 10 . . . . .R-3 3 106 18 sCL @10" CLAY with sand, very stiff, brown to orangish brown, moist, _ 9 medium to coarse sand, few gravels, slightly micaceous, some 13 silt, MnO oxidation. 2204 15— \ - . AS-1 2 CL-ML| @15'": Sandy CLAY, medium stiff to stiff, light brown to orange -200_ 2 brown, moist, MnO oxidation pockets, some subrounded to4 subangular gravel, glaying, dark brown pockets of oxidation, fine _ L sand, slightly micaceous, 62.8% fines (lab) 2154 20 . ; . . .R-4 3 121 11 @20" SILT with sand, stiff to very stiff, dark brown to gray, moist,_ 6 large pockets of MnO oxidation, dark brown/reddish FeO12 oxidation, fine to medium sand, low to medium plasticity. 2104 25— . i . . .S-2 2 ML @25" SILT, medium stiff to stiff, brown to gray, moist, orange FeO_ 2 oxidation throughout, MnO oxidation, micaceous, some fine4 sand lenses. - 30Rip TYPES: TYPE OF TESTS: B BULK SAMPLE -200 % FINES PASSING DS DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANALYSIS C CORE SAMPLE AL ATTERBERG LIMITS El EXPANSION INDEX SE SAND EQUIVALENT G GRAB SAMPLE CN CONSOLIDATION H HYDROMETER SG SPECIFIC GRAVITY verdantas R RING SAMPLE CO COLLAPSE MD MAXIMUM DENSITY UC UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE S SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE CR CORROSION PP POCKET PENETROMETER STRENGTH T TUBE SAMPLE CU UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL RV R VALUE *** This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. * * * Page 1 of 2 CL-ML117 13R-5 5926 @30': Sandy SILT, very stiff to stiff, light brown to gray moist, thinbands of FeO oxidation, fine to medium sand pockets, slightlymicaceous, some clay. Total Depth 31.5 feet bgsNo groundwater encountered during drilling.Backfilled boring with soil cuttings and surface patched withcold-mix asphalt. Project No. Ground Elevation De p t h Bl o w s El e v a t i o n Pe r 6 I n c h e s Page 2 of 2 At t i t u d e s SAMPLE TYPES: Martini Drilling Inc. Co n t e n t , % Logged By Date Drilled 205 200 195 190 185 180 175 * * * This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. * * * MKD Fe e t S (U . S . C . S . ) Lo g Ty p e o f T e s t s Gr a p h i c pc f 235' BULK SAMPLE CORE SAMPLEGRAB SAMPLERING SAMPLESPLIT SPOON SAMPLETUBE SAMPLE BCGR ST MKD Hollow Stem Auger - 140lb - Autohammer - 30" Drop 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 So i l C l a s s . 4-22-24 SOIL DESCRIPTION Sampled By Drilling Co.Drilling Co. Project Location See Figure 2 - Exploration Location Map Lewis Rosemead Condos 14030.001 Drilling Method 8" Fe e t Hole Diameter Mo i s t u r e Dr y D e n s i t y N This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locationsand may change with time. The description is a simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may begradual. TYPE OF TESTS:-200 ALCN COCRCU % FINES PASSINGATTERBERG LIMITSCONSOLIDATIONCOLLAPSECORROSIONUNDRAINED TRIAXIAL DSEIH MDPP RV DIRECT SHEAR EXPANSION INDEXHYDROMETER MAXIMUM DENSITYPOCKET PENETROMETERR VALUE SASESG UC Sa m p l e N o . SIEVE ANALYSISSAND EQUIVALENTSPECIFIC GRAVITYUNCONFINED COMPRESSIVESTRENGTH GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-3GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-3 Project No. 14030.001 Date Drilled 4-22-24 Project Lewis Rosemead Condos Logged By MKD Drilling Co. Martini Drilling Inc. Hole Diameter 8" Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger - 140lb _- Autohammer - 30" Drop Ground Elevation 235%’ Location See Figure 2 - Exploration Location Map Sampled By MKD . [7]S 212 | o2| bd SOIL DESCRIPTION I]5 ec | 2 | 2 |,2% | 8= Fl = 5 d . . LL . , ,=o 3] 52 3 2° S e rary 2c Se This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at the =>0 | of | 3 = = O=| ga |.88 | Og | time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locations 3)° o o = E mn > 2 S ‘0 | and may change with time. The description is a simplification of the 4w < AN | A © | ~~ | actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be >o -s gradual. 2051 30 - - PIT - -R-5 5 117 13 | CL-ML| @30" Sandy SILT, very stiff to stiff, light brown to gray moist, thin_ 9 bands of FeO oxidation, fine to medium sand pockets, slightly 26 micaceous, some clay. _ L Total Depth 31.5 feet bgsNo groundwater encountered during drilling._ L Backfilled boring with soil cuttings and surface patched withcold-mix asphalt. 2004 35— H 1951 40— H 190 45— H 1851 50— H 180 55— H Rim Brees: TYPE OF TESTS: B BULK SAMPLE -200 % FINES PASSING DS DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANALYSIS C CORE SAMPLE AL ATTERBERG LIMITS El EXPANSION INDEX SE SAND EQUIVALENT G GRAB SAMPLE CN CONSOLIDATION H HYDROMETER SG SPECIFIC GRAVITY verda ntas R RING SAMPLE CO COLLAPSE MD MAXIMUM DENSITY UC UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE S SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE CR CORROSION PP POCKET PENETROMETER STRENGTH T TUBE SAMPLE CU UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL RV R VALUE *** This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. * * * Page 2 of 2 ML SM CL-ML CL ML 119 117 120 10 13 14 12 B-1 R-1 R-2 R-3 S-1 R-4 S-2 8 18 21 71113 7 11 16 469 11 25 32 917 20 @Surface: 5-inch Asphalt over 4.5-inch Base Artificial fill, undocumented (Afu)@0.8': SILT, brown, moist, fine to medium sand, few subroundedto subangular gravels, micaceous, some clay pockets, FeOstaining. @5': Silty SAND, dense, brown, moist, fine to medium sand, somesubrounded to subangular gravels. Quaternary Alluvium (Qa)@7': Sandy CLAY, very stiff, brown, moist, micaceous, slight FeOoxidation, few subrounded to subangular gravels, few MnOstaining. @10': Clayey SILT, very stiff, brown, moist, fine to medium sand,slightly micaceous, few subrounded gravels. @15': CLAY, very stiff, brown to light brown, moist, fine sand, MnOoxidation throughout, low plasticity. @20': Sandy SILT, hard, brown to orange brown, moist, high FeOoxidation, fine to medium sand, few subrounded to subangulargravel, slightly micaceous. @25': SILT, hard, orangish brown, moist, high FeO oxidation, fewclays. Project No. Ground Elevation De p t h Bl o w s El e v a t i o n Pe r 6 I n c h e s Page 1 of 2 At t i t u d e s SAMPLE TYPES: Martini Drilling Inc. Co n t e n t , % Logged By Date Drilled 235 230 225 220 215 210 * * * This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. * * * MKD Fe e t S (U . S . C . S . ) Lo g Ty p e o f T e s t s Gr a p h i c pc f 238' BULK SAMPLE CORE SAMPLEGRAB SAMPLERING SAMPLESPLIT SPOON SAMPLETUBE SAMPLE BCGR ST MKD Hollow Stem Auger - 140lb - Autohammer - 30" Drop 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 So i l C l a s s . 4-22-24 SOIL DESCRIPTION Sampled By Drilling Co.Drilling Co. Project Location See Figure 2 - Exploration Location Map Lewis Rosemead Condos 14030.001 Drilling Method 8" Fe e t Hole Diameter Mo i s t u r e Dr y D e n s i t y N This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locationsand may change with time. The description is a simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may begradual. TYPE OF TESTS:-200 ALCN COCRCU % FINES PASSINGATTERBERG LIMITSCONSOLIDATIONCOLLAPSECORROSIONUNDRAINED TRIAXIAL DSEIH MDPP RV DIRECT SHEAR EXPANSION INDEXHYDROMETER MAXIMUM DENSITYPOCKET PENETROMETERR VALUE SASESG UC Sa m p l e N o . SIEVE ANALYSISSAND EQUIVALENTSPECIFIC GRAVITYUNCONFINED COMPRESSIVESTRENGTH GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-4GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-4 Project No. 14030.001 Date Drilled 4-22-24 Project Lewis Rosemead Condos Logged By MKD Drilling Co. Martini Drilling Inc. Hole Diameter 8" Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger - 140lb _- Autohammer - 30" Drop Ground Elevation 238’ Location See Figure 2 - Exploration Location Map Sampled By MKD . [7]c o | al S| 812 |e un SOIL DESCRIPTION $ S.. |. | 2 g 05 | 8_ | So | 84=o | 50 52 3 Kk 22 | 5% 2€ | 8 | This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at the =>0 | of | 3 = = O=| ga |.88 | Og | time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locations 3)° o o = E mn > 2 S ‘0 | and may change with time. The description is a simplification of the 4w < AN | A OQ | ~~ | actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be >o -gradual.S 0 - @Surface: 5-inch Asphalt over 4.5-inch Base I B-1 ML Artificial fill, undocumented (Afu) @0.8": SILT, brown, moist, fine to medium sand, few subroundedmn to subangular gravels, micaceous, some clay pockets, FeOstaining.235 — 5 R-1 8 10 SM @>5'": Silty SAND, dense, brown, moist, fine to medium sand, some_ 18 subrounded to subangular gravels.21 TT TT r2 TY 7 19 |] 13 TcoMml|Quaternary Alluvium (Qa) 7] 230 _| 11 @/": Sandy CLAY, very stiff, brown, moist, micaceous, slight FeO13 oxidation, few subrounded to subangular gravels, few MnO_ staining. 10 R-3 7 117 14 @10": Clayey SILT, very stiff, brown, moist, fine to medium sand, _ 1" slightly micaceous, few subrounded gravels. 16 225 — H 15 S-1 4 CL @15" CLAY, very stiff, brown to light brown, moist, fine sand, MnO_ 6 oxidation throughout, low plasticity.9 220 — H 20 R-4 11 120 12 ML @20" Sandy SILT, hard, brown to orange brown, moist, high FeO_ 25 oxidation, fine to medium sand, few subrounded to subangular32 gravel, slightly micaceous. 215 — H 25— S-2 9 @25" SILT, hard, orangish brown, moist, high FeO oxidation, few_ 17 clays. 20 210+ — H 0SAMPLE TYPES: TYPE OF TESTS: B BULK SAMPLE -200 % FINES PASSING DS DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANALYSIS C CORE SAMPLE AL ATTERBERG LIMITS El EXPANSION INDEX SE SAND EQUIVALENT G GRAB SAMPLE CN CONSOLIDATION H HYDROMETER SG SPECIFIC GRAVITY verdantas R RING SAMPLE CO COLLAPSE MD MAXIMUM DENSITY UC UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE S SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE CR CORROSION PP POCKET PENETROMETER STRENGTH T TUBE SAMPLE CU UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL RV R VALUE *** This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. * * *Page 1 of 2 CL-MLR-5 111230 @30': Clayey SILT, very stiff, brown to gray, moist, FeO and MnOoxidation, fine sand, slightly micaceous. Total Depth 31.5 feet bgsNo groundwater encountered during drilling.Backfilled boring with soil cuttings and surface patched withcold-mix asphalt. Project No. Ground Elevation De p t h Bl o w s El e v a t i o n Pe r 6 I n c h e s Page 2 of 2 At t i t u d e s SAMPLE TYPES: Martini Drilling Inc. Co n t e n t , % Logged By Date Drilled 205 200 195 190 185 180 * * * This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. * * * MKD Fe e t S (U . S . C . S . ) Lo g Ty p e o f T e s t s Gr a p h i c pc f 238' BULK SAMPLE CORE SAMPLEGRAB SAMPLERING SAMPLESPLIT SPOON SAMPLETUBE SAMPLE BCGR ST MKD Hollow Stem Auger - 140lb - Autohammer - 30" Drop 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 So i l C l a s s . 4-22-24 SOIL DESCRIPTION Sampled By Drilling Co.Drilling Co. Project Location See Figure 2 - Exploration Location Map Lewis Rosemead Condos 14030.001 Drilling Method 8" Fe e t Hole Diameter Mo i s t u r e Dr y D e n s i t y N This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at the time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locationsand may change with time. The description is a simplification of the actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may begradual. TYPE OF TESTS:-200 ALCN COCRCU % FINES PASSINGATTERBERG LIMITSCONSOLIDATIONCOLLAPSECORROSIONUNDRAINED TRIAXIAL DSEIH MDPP RV DIRECT SHEAR EXPANSION INDEXHYDROMETER MAXIMUM DENSITYPOCKET PENETROMETERR VALUE SASESG UC Sa m p l e N o . SIEVE ANALYSISSAND EQUIVALENTSPECIFIC GRAVITYUNCONFINED COMPRESSIVESTRENGTH GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-4GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-4 Project No. 14030.001 Date Drilled 4-22-24 Project Lewis Rosemead Condos Logged By MKD Drilling Co. Martini Drilling Inc. Hole Diameter 8" Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger - 140lb _- Autohammer - 30" Drop Ground Elevation 238’ Location See Figure 2 - Exploration Location Map Sampled By MKD . [1]c ” S 812 | o2°| d= SOIL DESCRIPTION 3o = Q @ = ws | a O17] J] xo | 50 52 3 Kk s2| 5% | 2c S¢5 | This Soil Description applies only to a location of the exploration at the =>0 | of | 3 = = O=| ga |.88 | Og | time of sampling. Subsurface conditions may differ at other locations 3)° o o = E mn > 2 S ‘0 | and may change with time. The description is a simplification of the 4w < nN | A © | ~~ | actual conditions encountered. Transitions between soil types may be >a dual =gradual.S 30 R-5 1" CL-ML| @30'": Clayey SILT, very stiff, brown to gray, moist, FeO and MnO_ 12 oxidation, fine sand, slightly micaceous.30 205- _ L Total Depth 31.5 feet bgsNo groundwater encountered during drilling._ L Backfilled boring with soil cuttings and surface patched withcold-mix asphalt. 35— u 200+ — u 40— [I 195 — u 45— - 190+ — u 50 — [I 185- — u 55— u 180+ — u 80SAMPLE TYPES: TYPE OF TESTS: B BULK SAMPLE -200 % FINES PASSING DS DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANALYSIS C CORE SAMPLE AL ATTERBERG LIMITS El EXPANSION INDEX SE SAND EQUIVALENT G GRAB SAMPLE CN CONSOLIDATION H HYDROMETER SG SPECIFIC GRAVITY verdantas R RING SAMPLE CO COLLAPSE MD MAXIMUM DENSITY UC UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE S SPLIT SPOON SAMPLE CR CORROSION PP POCKET PENETROMETER STRENGTH T TUBE SAMPLE CU UNDRAINED TRIAXIAL RV R VALUE *** This log is a part of a report by Leighton and should not be used as a stand-alone document. * * * Page 2 of 2 SUMMARY OF CONE PENETRATION TEST DATA Prepared by: KEHOE TESTING & ENGINEERING 5415 Industrial Drive Huntington Beach, CA 92649-1518 Office (714) 901-7270 / Fax (714) 901-7289 www.kehoetesting.com Project: Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead, CA January 29 – February 2, 2024 Prepared for: Mr. Joe Roe Leighton Consulting 2600 Michelson Drive, Ste 400 Irvine, CA 92612 Office (800) 253-4567 / Fax (949) 250-1114 SUMMARY OF Cone Penetration TEST DATA Project: Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation 1515 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead, CA January 29 — February 2, 2024 Prepared for: Mr. Joe Roe Leighton Consulting 2600 Michelson Drive, Ste 400 Irvine, CA 92612 Office (800) 253-4567 / Fax (949) 250-1114 Prepared by: KTE KEHOE TESTING & ENGINEERING 5415 Industrial Drive Huntington Beach, CA 92649-1518 Office (714) 901-7270 / Fax (714) 901-7289 www.kehoetesting.com TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.INTRODUCTION 2.SUMMARY OF FIELD WORK 3.FIELD EQUIPMENT & PROCEDURES 4.CONE PENETRATION TEST DATA & INTERPRETATION APPENDIX •CPT Plots •CPT Classification/Soil Behavior Chart •Summary of Shear Wave Velocities •Pore Pressure Dissipation Graphs •CPT Data Files (sent via email) TABLE OF CONTENTS . INTRODUCTION . SUMMARY OF FIELD WORK . FIELD EQUIPMENT & PROCEDURES . CONE PENETRATION TEST DATA & INTERPRETATION APPENDIX CPT Plots CPT Classification/Soil Behavior Chart Summary of Shear Wave Velocities Pore Pressure Dissipation Graphs CPT Data Files (sent via email) SUMMARY OF CONE PENETRATION TEST DATA 1. INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of a Cone Penetration Test (CPT) program carried out for the Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation project located at 1515 Walnut Grove in Rosemead, California. The work was performed by Kehoe Testing & Engineering (KTE) on January 29 – February 2, 2024. The scope of work was performed as directed by Leighton Consulting personnel. 2. SUMMARY OF FIELD WORK The fieldwork consisted of performing CPT soundings at 49 locations to determine the soil lithology. A summary is provided in TABLE 2.1. LOCATION DEPTH OF CPT (ft) COMMENTS/NOTES: CPT-1 42 Refusal CPT-2 40 Refusal CPT-3 41 Refusal CPT-4 40 Refusal CPT-5 40 Refusal CPT-6 40 Refusal CPT-7 39 Refusal CPT-8 40 Refusal CPT-9 40 Refusal CPT-10 39 Refusal CPT-11 38 Refusal CPT-12 39 Refusal CPT-13 39 Refusal CPT-14 40 Refusal CPT-15 39 Refusal CPT-16 39 Refusal CPT-17 39 Refusal CPT-18 41 Refusal CPT-19 40 Refusal CPT-20 41 Refusal CPT-21 43 Refusal SUMMARY OF CoNE PENETRATION TEST DATA 1. INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of a Cone Penetration Test (CPT) program carried out for the Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation project located at 1515 Walnut Grove in Rosemead, California. The work was performed by Kehoe Testing & Engineering (KTE) on January 29 — February 2, 2024. The scope of work was performed as directed by Leighton Consulting personnel. 2. SUMMARY OF FIELD WORK The fieldwork consisted of performing CPT soundings at 49 locations to determine the soil lithology. A summary is provided in TABLE 2.1. DEPTH OF LOCATION CPT (ft) COMMENTS/NOTES: CPT-1 42 Refusal CPT-2 40 Refusal CPT-3 41 Refusal CPT4 40 Refusal CPT-5 40 Refusal CPT-6 40 Refusal CPT-7 39 Refusal CPT-8 40 Refusal CPT-9 40 Refusal CPT-10 39 Refusal CPT-11 38 Refusal CPT-12 39 Refusal CPT-13 39 Refusal CPT-14 40 Refusal CPT-15 39 Refusal CPT-16 39 Refusal CPT-17 39 Refusal CPT-18 41 Refusal CPT-19 40 Refusal CPT-20 41 Refusal CPT-21 43 Refusal LOCATION DEPTH OF CPT (ft) COMMENTS/NOTES: CPT-22 50 CPT-23 50 CPT-24 47 Refusal CPT-25 46 Refusal CPT-26 50 CPT-27 50 CPT-28 50 CPT-29 44 Refusal CPT-30 50 CPT-31 50 CPT-32 43 Refusal CPT-33 50 CPT-34 43 Refusal CPT-35 50 CPT-36 44 Refusal CPT-37 44 Refusal CPT-38 44 Refusal CPT-39 45 Refusal CPT-40 50 CPT-41 50 CPT-42 45 Refusal CPT-43 45 Refusal CPT-44 46 Refusal CPT-45 49 Refusal CPT-46 50 CPT-47 50 CPT-48 50 CPT-49 44 Refusal TABLE 2.1 - Summary of CPT Soundings 3. FIELD EQUIPMENT & PROCEDURES The CPT soundings were carried out by KTE using an integrated electronic cone system manufactured by Vertek. The CPT soundings were performed in accordance with ASTM standards (D5778). The cone penetrometers were pushed using a 30-ton CPT rig. The cone used during the program was a 15 cm^2 cone with a cone net area ratio of 0.83. The following parameters were recorded at approximately 2.5 cm depth intervals: • Cone Resistance (qc) • Inclination • Sleeve Friction (fs) • Penetration Speed • Dynamic Pore Pressure (u) • Pore Pressure Dissipation (at selected depths) At location CPT-10, shear wave measurements were obtained at various depths. The shear wave is generated using an air-actuated hammer, which is located inside the front jack of the CPT rig. The cone has a triaxial geophone, which recorded the shear wave signal generated by the air hammer. DEPTH OF LOCATION CPT (ft) COMMENTS/NOTES: CPT-22 50 CPT-23 50 CPT-24 47 Refusal CPT-25 46 Refusal CPT-26 50 CPT-27 50 CPT-28 50 CPT-29 44 Refusal CPT-30 50 CPT-31 50 CPT-32 43 Refusal CPT-33 50 CPT-34 43 Refusal CPT-35 50 CPT-36 44 Refusal CPT-37 44 Refusal CPT-38 44 Refusal CPT-39 45 Refusal CPT-40 50 CPT-41 50 CPT-42 45 Refusal CPT-43 45 Refusal CPT-44 46 Refusal CPT-45 49 Refusal CPT-46 50 CPT-47 50 CPT-48 50 CPT-49 44 Refusal TABLE 2.1 - Summary of CPT Soundings 3. FIELD EQUIPMENT & PROCEDURES The CPT soundings were carried out by KTE using an integrated electronic cone system manufactured by Vertek. The CPT soundings were performed in accordance with ASTM standards (D5778). The cone penetrometers were pushed using a 30-ton CPT rig. The cone used during the program was a 15 cm”2 cone with a cone net area ratio of 0.83. The following parameters were recorded at approximately 2.5 cm depth intervals: eo Cone Resistance (qc) e Inclination eo Sleeve Friction (fs) eo Penetration Speed eo Dynamic Pore Pressure (u) eo Pore Pressure Dissipation (at selected depths) At location CPT-10, shear wave measurements were obtained at various depths. The shear wave is generated using an air-actuated hammer, which is located inside the front jack of the CPT rig. The cone has a triaxial geophone, which recorded the shear wave signal generated by the air hammer. The above parameters were recorded and viewed in real time using a laptop computer. Data is stored at the KTE office for up to 2 years for future analysis and reference. A complete set of baseline readings was taken prior to each sounding to determine temperature shifts and any zero load offsets. Monitoring base line readings ensures that the cone electronics are operating properly. 4. CONE PENETRATION TEST DATA & INTERPRETATION The Cone Penetration Test data is presented in graphical form in the attached Appendix. These plots were generated using the CPeT-IT program. Penetration depths are referenced to ground surface. The soil behavior type on the CPT plots is derived from the attached CPT SBT plot (Robertson, “Interpretation of Cone Penetration Test…”, 2009) and presents major soil lithologic changes. The stratigraphic interpretation is based on relationships between cone resistance (qc), sleeve friction (fs), and penetration pore pressure (u). The friction ratio (Rf), which is sleeve friction divided by cone resistance, is a calculated parameter that is used along with cone resistance to infer soil behavior type. Generally, cohesive soils (clays) have high friction ratios, low cone resistance and generate excess pore water pressures. Cohesionless soils (sands) have lower friction ratios, high cone bearing and generate little (or negative) excess pore water pressures. The CPT data files have also been provided. These files can be imported in CPeT-IT (software by GeoLogismiki) and other programs to calculate various geotechnical parameters. It should be noted that it is not always possible to clearly identify a soil type based on qc, fs and u. In these situations, experience, judgement and an assessment of the pore pressure data should be used to infer the soil behavior type. If you have any questions regarding this information, please do not hesitate to call our office at (714) 901-7270. Sincerely, KEHOE TESTING & ENGINEERING Steven P. Kehoe President 02/08/24-aga-5515 The above parameters were recorded and viewed in real time using a laptop computer. Data is stored at the KTE office for up to 2 years for future analysis and reference. A complete set of baseline readings was taken prior to each sounding to determine temperature shifts and any zero load offsets. Monitoring base line readings ensures that the cone electronics are operating properly. 4. CONE PENETRATION TEST DATA & INTERPRETATION The Cone Penetration Test data is presented in graphical form in the attached Appendix. These plots were generated using the CPeT-IT program. Penetration depths are referenced to ground surface. The soil behavior type on the CPT plots is derived from the attached CPT SBT plot (Robertson, “Interpretation of Cone Penetration Test...”, 2009) and presents major soil lithologic changes. The stratigraphic interpretation is based on relationships between cone resistance (qc), sleeve friction (fs), and penetration pore pressure (u). The friction ratio (Rf), which is sleeve friction divided by cone resistance, is a calculated parameter that is used along with cone resistance to infer soil behavior type. Generally, cohesive soils (clays) have high friction ratios, low cone resistance and generate excess pore water pressures. Cohesionless soils (sands) have lower friction ratios, high cone bearing and generate little (or negative) excess pore water pressures. The CPT data files have also been provided. These files can be imported in CPeT-IT (software by GeoLogismiki) and other programs to calculate various geotechnical parameters. It should be noted that it is not always possible to clearly identify a soil type based on qc, fs and u. In these situations, experience, judgement and an assessment of the pore pressure data should be used to infer the soil behavior type. If you have any questions regarding this information, please do not hesitate to call our office at (714) 901-7270. Sincerely, KEHOE TESTING & ENGINEERING Steven P. Kehoe President 02/08/24-aga-5515 APPENDIX APPENDIX Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 42.52 ft, Date: 1/29/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-1 Location: Cone resistance HAND AUGER Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction HAND AUGER Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u HAND AUGER Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio HAND AUGER Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type HAND AUGER SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sand Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Sand & silty sand Sand & silty sand Sand Sand & silty sand CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:49:29 AM 1 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt KT Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.comE Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-1 Total depth: 42.52 ft, Date: 1/29/2024 De p t h (f t ) Sleeve frictionCone resistance [or< < 14 14 16 16_— — — =18 18 20 == 20 T——22 22=24 E24 LL Lossmannst==J L 26 i 826 AY3 =2828 re 30 30 ™ 32 ZL 32 iY3 —2 34 34 [~~ 36 Ta 36 38 > 38 Mi] fp 40 40 —F i —42 42 44 44 46 46 48 48 50 50 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) De p t h (f t ) Pore pressure u 10 12 14 Nd 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 A (I Ny 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 -20 -10 © 10 Pressure (psi) 20 ft ) ~~ De p t h Friction ratio 16 18H 20 22 24 TN 26 28 30 32 34 [ 36 \ 38 40 42 a4 46 48 50 1 2 3 4 5 Rf (%) 6 7 8 N oo 0 oO A 14 16 18 20 36 38 40 42 a4 46 48 50 TT Si sands sandy silt Soil Behaviour Type spond I Silly sand & san Silly sand & sang sand-& sand Sahd & si ty sang Seda lyse Hiy-sand-&-sandy-sitt Ae yd stiffs il ery denserstiff spi Sapd & sity sang Sand & silty sand Sapd & sity sang Silty sand & sandy silt Vely-denserstiff spit Sad & silty sang nd & silty sang Sapd & silty sang Moly d [stiff soil Vely densp/stiffspil -Sand-&stity-sam Sapd & silty sang Sapd & siSahd Sad & silty sang ty sang 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:49:29 AM Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 40.04 ft, Date: 1/29/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-2 Location: Cone resistance Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soil Clay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soil Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay Sand & silty sand Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Sand CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:49:30 AM 2 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: KTE Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-2 Total depth: 40.04 ft, Date: 1/29/2024 De p t h (f t ) No © a A 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 Cone resistance <<| 3 { L - Ei... a — [~~ 3S$< — = Pe P— 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 Tip resistance (tsf) De p t h (f t ) oc ow oO o AN nt A - 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 Sleeve frictionE: W 0 2 4 6 8 Friction (tsf) 10 12 De p t h (f t ) Pore pressure u a A N © 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 -20 -10 © 10 Pressure (psi) 20 ft ) ~~ De p t h Friction ratio 12 Th AT 14 16 18 i Th 20 22 24 28 30 32 34 [1 36 38 40 42 a4 46 48 50 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Rf (%) 46 48 50 Soil Behaviour Type Cidy & sly clay Sad & sity sang ly silt y sar ty sang Mely d [stiff sil e/stiff spi 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:49:30 AM Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 41.02 ft, Date: 1/29/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-3 Location: Cone resistance Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soilClay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Sand & silty sand Clay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt ClayVery dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:49:31 AM 3 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt KT Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.comE Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-3 Total depth: 41.02 ft, Date: 1/29/2024 De p t h (f t ) Cone resistance Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Friction ratio0 0 0 0 2 2 = 5 < > 4 4 4 4 i 6 6 6 = 6Z BY8 8 8 8 10 10 D 10 10 x 12 12 3 12 12 ] Pa «14 { 14 7 14 14 16 \ 16 —X 16 16J18 E— 18 18 18 =) =~ - — 20 a 20 20 20 = 22 22 a i 22 22rr 3 = rr24 E24 = E24 E04 p—o L o26 B26 <= a 26 B26 al3 2 2 3 8 228 a 28 = 28 28 30 5 30 a 30 30 F 32 { 32 RC 32 32 2 34 Ma 34 \ 34 34 q 36 36 36 36 F—— -— - 38 38 38 38 — a=ar| — 40 40 40 i 40 42 42 42 42 44 44 44 44 46 46 46 46 48 48 48 48 50 50 50 50 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 -20 -10 © 10 20 01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) Rf (%) 46 48 50 | Tldy & silly clay . Vely densp/stiff spi Soil Behaviour Type Silly sand & sandy silt Sapd & silty sang SiTly sand & sandy silt Vely densp/stiff spil oiloil sand & sandy silt Sad sary sit yAe yd jshiff<y Hi Sad& silty sang Silty sand & sandy silt Sahd & silty sand stiff sil Vely densp/stiff spil Vely den Vely densp/stiff spil Vely dense/stiff spil 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:49:31 AM Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 40.81 ft, Date: 1/29/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-4 Location: Cone resistance Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay ClayClay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soil Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Clay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Sand & silty sand CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:49:32 AM 4 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt KT Project: Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA E Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation CPT-4 Total depth: 40.81 ft, Date: 1/29/2024 De p t h (f t ) No © a A TM "\ NL 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 Cone resistance => ~~ Ld Can :pe b=oo] a ~~ =z= [——) 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 Tip resistance (tsf) De p t h (f t ) nN oc Ww oO A 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 Sleeve friction S(N A \A a 0 10 122 4 6 8 Friction (tsf) De p t h (f t ) Pore pressure u a A N © 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 Pa 42 44 46 48 50 -20 -10 © 10 Pressure (psi) 20 ft ) ~~ De p t h N oc © oO BM 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 a4 46 48 50 Friction ratio —— Id MU A ] === 2 3 4 5 Rf (%) 6 7 8 46 48 50 Soil Behaviour Type i & sandy silt ly den: Clgy & silly clay Cldy & sily clay Vely densp/stiffidsf shioil il Sad & silty sang Clgy & silly clay Vely densp/sliff Vely densp/stiff fsfiffVely den ity sand & sandy silte/stiff oil fat e/stiff spi & sang 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 SBT (Robertson, 2010) 14 16 18 CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:49:32 AM Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 40.11 ft, Date: 1/29/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-5 Location: Cone resistance Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soil Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay Clay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sand Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:49:33 AM 5 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt KT Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.comE De p t h (f t ) Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation CPT-5 Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA Total depth: 40.11 ft, Date: 1/29/2024 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type 0 0 [4] [0] 0= P= a2 2 r 2 2 = 2 ; 4 Cl4 4 TT] 4 4 4 6 — 6 — 6 6 61 ln 8 8 8 8 ym 8{ - oay10 10 10 10 a 10 < o ad Clgy & silly cla12 } 12 ¥; 12 12 12 ory sly cay 14 { 14 14 14 14 Cay 416 Ay 16 < 16 16 ~ N 16 Cigy &sity clay — —— Lr] Vely densge/stiff spil 18 “= 18 => 18 t 18 3 18 Vely densle/sfifsil 20 7 20 Ss 20 N 20 20 a sand & sandy silt— y 2271 22 C 22 22 22 iin in \ in n i24 E24 gee] E24 \ rt 24 E24 5 ~> 5 fo fo Sand& silty sang26 iY B26 5 B26 8 26 B26 y 28 o A 2s ™ A 5s A 5s — A 5s Silly sand8 sandy silt < Vely densp/stiffspil{] . ~ Vely densp/stiffspil 30 30 30 30 fee ——— "Y 30 ‘ely dense/sit spil L .N Sapd & silty sang 32 — 32 L 32 32 32 Silty sand & sandy silt34 — 34 34 34 34 Sapd & silty sang ~ A Sad & silty sang 36 ad 36 36 36 Md 36 ely Gera le] r Vely densp/stiff spil38 —~— 38 38 ~ 38 te 38 ‘ely densg/stiff spi = << Sand & silty sang40 p — 40 — 40 40 40 42 42 42 42 42 44 44 44 44 44 46 46 46 46 46 48 48 48 48 48 50 50 50 50 50 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 -20 -10 © 10 20 01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) Rf (%) SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:49:33 AM 5 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 40.17 ft, Date: 1/29/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-6 Location: Cone resistance Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Clay Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay Clay & silty clay ClaySilty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soilSand CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:49:34 AM 6 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt KT Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.comE De p t h (f t ) Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation CPT-6 Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA Total depth: 40.17 ft, Date: 1/29/2024 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type0 TT 0 4 0 0 0 2 ~ 2 2 2 2[eS—— —_— 4 4 4 ot” 4 —— mm m— 4<< 5 I 6 er 6 ~—] 6 S 6 6rd i | :8 J 8 < 8 8 8 10 } 10 10 10 10 12 J, 12 2 12 12 2 12 14 14 / 14 14 £ 14 16 1 16 16 16 oe 16 18 P= 18 — 18 18 18 & sandy|ossssommst Vely denspi/stiffspil 20 20 20 S 20 = 20 ; re 22 22 b, 22 22 = 22 .— — — — Clay &silly clay| 24 p= E24 > £24 £4 3 E24 [y dense/shiff5[1 ~— Ra ~~ ~~ S ~— L Ken Ne Ken H 26 —— B 26 y- Ba 26 2 26 & 26 Sapd& sily sang [0] [0] [3] [~— [0] Silty sand & sandy silt 28 Fy 0 28 0 28 0 78 0 73 Vely-donsloif si { Vey densf/stiff spil 30 hay = 30 30 30 hi 30 Vely densg/stiffspil 32 32 32 32 —— 32 i> <g hd & silty sang 34 < 34 34 34 ™ 34Li 4 ly dense/stiff spil—_.36 36 -=] 36 36 36 Vely densfe/stiffspil38 = 38 ~~ 38 [a 38 38 Vely densge/stiffspil 4 Vely densp/stiff spil 40 40 40 D 40 40 Sahd 42 42 42 42 42 44 44 44 44 44 46 46 46 46 46 48 48 48 48 48 50 50 50 50 50 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 -20 -10 0 10 20 01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) Rf (%) SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:49:34 AM 6 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 39.05 ft, Date: 1/29/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-7 Location: Cone resistance Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:49:35 AM 7 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com KTE De p t h (f t ) Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation CPT-7 Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA Total depth: 39.05 ft, Date: 1/29/2024 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type ; : hy i ° J ° 0 & sandy silt 2 2 2 2 2 &rsandy-sitt p= — —L | & sandy silt 4 4 3 4 4 2 4 efstiffsoit 6 6 ve 6 6 all 6 & sandy silt 8 8 oS 8 8 8 10 10 S 10 10 ~ 10 Cldy & silly clay 12 12 12 12 12 Clay & silly cla/ Pp Cldy& silly clay 14 14 14 14 14 \ Sl 5 gylL f dy 16 16 16 16 16 ly dense/stiffsoil 18 ab] 18 18 18 18-—hn ]20 ai 20 ns 20 20 20 il 22 Hr 22 22 22 22 y-sand-S-sandy-sitt> — o> p fo — ly dense/stiff 5 Yu Ym Y—24 E24 — E24 24 5 E24 : fe < c c el Sad & silty sand 26 ——— B26 a a 26 B26 — B26[1] rd [] [1] [& [] sand & sandy silt 28 0 28 4 a 2g (al ¥:] N [aR ¥:] Hly-sand-&-sandy-sitt 30 30 oq 30 30 30 /stiff soil ly silt 32 32 a 32 32 32 34 R 34 34 34 NY 34 il 36 36 Ir 36 36 = 36 it - - 38 38 38 38 38 40 40 40 40 40 42 42 42 42 42 44 44 44 44 44 46 46 46 46 46 48 48 48 48 48 50 50 50 50 50 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 -20 -10 0 10 20 01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) Rf (%) SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:49:35 AM 7 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 40.49 ft, Date: 1/29/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-8 Location: Cone resistance Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Clay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clayClay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:49:37 AM 8 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com KTE Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-8 Total depth: 40.49 ft, Date: 1/29/2024 De p t h (f t ) Cone resistance Sleeve friction0- 0 7 2 alll 2 —<4 4 7 $pe6 { 6 ra NI ‘710 \ 10 4 12 / 12 iB 14 14T—p-16 16 y -] 18 1 18 2 20 20 y_] wi 22 22— 24 Ne £24 fe Lo]26 al B26 — 8 =28 —Z— 02g g 30 pi 30 32 = 32= rd34 LS 34 36 os 36 > L-38 38 et | \ = 40 =! 40 42 42 44 44 46 46 48 48 50 50 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) De p t h (f t ) Pore pressure u a A N © LL 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 -20 -10 © 10 Pressure (psi) 20 ft ) ~~ De p t h N oc © oO BM 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 a4 46 48 50 Friction ratio= — 3 1 Jd Fr — > EYTm, ul 2 3 456 7 8 Rf (%) N [= 2 I [= ] 14 16 18 20 36 38 40 42 a4 46 48 50 OC -—- Vely densg/stiff spil WT Vel censeisififive.) J Hoy il Soil Behaviour Type Clgy & silly clay ‘ely dense/stit spil Ve i il Vely densge/stiff spil Clgy Cldv Ssillv clay¥ r¥ 4 [¢] a) & al clay Clgy & silfy clay cl Silty sand & sandy silt Sad & sity sang ly silt y Silt hd & sity sangVely denspelstiff soil Ne Vely densg/stiff spil Sand & silty sang Sitty-sand-8-sandy-sitt Silty sand & sandy silt Vety-denselstiff sil Vely densp/stiffspil Sad & sity sang 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:49:37 AM Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 40.09 ft, Date: 1/29/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-9 Location: Cone resistance Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Sand CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:49:39 AM 9 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt KT Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.comE De p t h (f t ) Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation CPT-9 Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA Total depth: 40.09 ft, Date: 1/29/2024 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type 3 )2124 2 < [ 2 2 4 4 — 4 + 4 16 6 3 6 6 8 8 {~~ 8 8 > 10 ) 10 10 10 r12 12 5 12 12 —— 14 14 2 14 \ 14 16 16 Pm 16 16 —T ~~ |W p<<18 18 18 18 -—u =20 20 20 20 22 —E 7 = 2 22 Lill 24 << £24 3 £24 E24 - ———<r £ 1 £ g hrs26 a 26 Ba 26 8 26Vd o Pp o [0] N 28 LS 02s = 07g 0 28 30 £ 30 30 30+ —— 32 32 =» | 32 32 2 py den ¢ ly dense/stiff sil34 —_ 34 34 34 —1a= I ly dense/stiff 5s d & si36 36 36 36 38 38 38 38 40 = 40 3 40 40 —= 42 42 42 42 42 44 44 44 44 44 46 46 46 46 46 48 48 48 48 48 50 50 50 50 50 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 -20 -10 0 10 20 01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) Rf (%) SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:49:39 AM 9 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 39.24 ft, Date: 1/29/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-10 Location: Cone resistance Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:49:41 AM 10 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt KT Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.comE Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-10 Total depth: 39.24 ft, Date: 1/29/2024 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type De p t h (f t ) 0 0 0 0 0= Vely densp/stiff spil 2 2 ee 2 2 a 2 ‘fely-densefstiff-spit Vely densp/stiff spila < 4 rg a i] 4 4 & fs oe _D y & silly clay 6 [ 6 / 6 6 Sr 6 ly & silly clay 8 i 81 S 8 8 ~ = 8 & sandy silt J10 } 10 1 10 10 10 y-sand-8-sandy-sitt 12 f 12 12 12 12 14 1 14 14 14 16 16 z 16 16 3 16 18 { 18 18 18 3 18 2014 20 <= 20 20 20 — 322 22 = 22 22 22 ~~ p ~~ ~~ Lan) 24 E24 [> E24 Eq E24A—c fr c f c c 26 a 26 a 26 B26 8 26 A 28 a 28 a a 28 & sandy28 << 28 densge/stiff 9N sand & sandy silt30 30 30 30 30 v3silly clay 32 = 32 32 32 5 32 Sand& silty sandST | Pp. Sad & silty sang 34 -] 34 34 34 le 34 Vely denspi/stiff spilpa Vely dengp/stiff spil36 === 36 36 36 36p—" = y ly dense/stiff spil 38 FF 38 = 38 38 38 ahd&-silty-sand y == f -t Vely densplsiift spil 40 40 40 40 40 42 42 42 42 42 44 44 44 44 44 46 46 46 46 46 48 48 48 48 48 50 50 50 50 50 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 -20 -10 0 10 20 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) Rf (%) SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:49:41 AM Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt 10 Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 38.98 ft, Date: 1/29/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-11 Location: Cone resistance Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Clay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay & silty claySilty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:49:43 AM 11 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com KTE De p t h (f t ) Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation CPT-11 Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA Total depth: 38.98 ft, Date: 1/29/2024 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type0 0 0 0 0 q2 2 2 2 == 2uti 54 3 4 4 4 4 6 6 —& 6 6 jd 6 8 8 4 8 8 f 8 2 i] J —El J asily clay 10 10 » 10 f 10 10{ q Cldy & silly clay 12 { 12 < 12 12 —_— 12 Hy Clgy—14 ? 14 14 14 14 oye Clay 16 16 16 16 16 Clay &si( Clay 18 18 18 18 18e A \ 7 /sfiff spil20 20 20 20 20 sampur istiff22 22 22 22 22 Sitrysa 24 E24 Al E24 E24 1 E24 ll A S 5 S bh 5 & sandy silt26 a 26 a 26 B26 8 26> > 5 T > Vely denspi/stiff spil 28 ~ 02s 02g 0 28 02g Vefy denspisiff sil 30 [< 30 a 30 \ 30 S 30 Silly sand & sandy silt Na] | hd & silty sang 32 = 32 32 32 32 c fffsp 34 a 34 34 34 <] 34 f— Pp 36 36 a 36 36 36— =™ = —38 > 38 38 38 rs 38 40 40 40 40 40 42 42 42 42 42 44 44 44 44 44 46 46 46 46 46 48 48 48 48 48 50 50 50 50 50 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 -20 -10 0 10 20 01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) Rf (%) SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:49:43 AM 11 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 39.37 ft, Date: 1/30/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-12 Location: Cone resistance Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Sand & silty sand CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:49:45 AM 12 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com _r E De p t h (f t ) Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation CPT-12 Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA Total depth: 39.37 ft, Date: 1/30/2024 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type0 0 —— 0 0 0< <2 2 2 2 2 4 £, 4 ¢ 4 ki 4 r 4b; a echoyd Silty sand & sandy silt6 7 6 J 6 6 6 Cigy &sity clay 8 \ 8 8 8 3 8 10 y 10 10 10 10 12 Py 12 12 12 =r 12<< ll14 14 14 14 3 14 16 = 16 16 16 16 1819 18 a 18 18 = ol 18 20 20 or 20 20 20= = 22 2 22 S 22 22 22 £ — e Pry Pry24 E24 ~~ E24 rt 24 E24 c fname] c J. c 26 | 8 26 <<] 8 26 5 26 8 26 andyEid bo) bo) Pe bo bo) ly densfe/stiff< y28 <= 0 28 0 28 s 0 28 = 0 23 lydenspstif 30 la 30 30 30 > 30 —= R. $ J ly dense/stiff spil 32 ~~ 32 | 32 32 5 32 ———— -< Sad& silty sang34 34 34 34 — 34 y denspe/stiff spil36 36 =] 36 a 36 - 36 ly denspe/stiff spi 38 38 38 38 = 38 d & silty san= = b hd & sifty sang 40 40 40 40 40 42 42 42 42 42 44 44 44 44 44 46 46 46 46 46 48 48 48 48 48 50 50 50 50 50 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 -20 -10 0 10 20 01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) Rf (%) SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:49:45 AM 12 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 39.78 ft, Date: 1/30/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-13 Location: Cone resistance HAND AUGER Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction HAND AUGER Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u HAND AUGER Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio HAND AUGER Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type HAND AUGER SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soil Clay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Sand & silty sand CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:49:47 AM 13 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com KTE De p t h (f t ) Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation CPT-13 Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA Total depth: 39.78 ft, Date: 1/30/2024 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 4 4 4 v 4 6 6 e 6 r— 6 fsa— Clay8 8 {] 8 3 8 8 10 10 ph) 10 10 10 Cldy 12 12 12 12 4 12 Sy 8 clay 2 b 2) qy 14 14 14 14 - 14 \ b- _— Clgy& silly clay 16 pe 16 SS 16 16 16 va GT 18 18 Sh] 18 18 18 | | Clay& si= a) pe ———— Vely densg/stiff soil 20 20 20 20 = 20 Vory-densp/slif spil— d fr Vey densf/stiff spil 22 , 22 22 22 22 ol fn) jm) fr) jm) Vely densfe/stiff sil24 = E24 Ss E24 Eq E24 L L a ° n N26 & B26 a 26 B26 of 8 26 Silly sand & sandy silt 1 14 14 @ 14 Vely densge/stiff spil28 02s = 07g 0 28 0 2g2 Sapd & sity sang 30 30 2 30 30 Ny 30 i shitTN 2 ral Sad & silty sang32 > 32 7 32 32 32 ahd Sify San 34 € 34 34 34 ™~, 343 ~~ Vely densge/stiff spil p—r36 36 36 36 36 i Sand & silty sang38 38 38 38 38 £] sity saniC ~~ n40 40 40 40 40 42 42 42 42 42 44 44 44 44 44 46 46 46 46 46 48 48 48 48 48 50 50 50 50 50 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 -20 -10 0 10 20 01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) Rf (%) SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:49:47 AM 13 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 40.59 ft, Date: 1/30/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-14 Location: Cone resistance Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Sand & silty sand Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clayClay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clayClay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sandVery dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:49:49 AM 14 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com KTE De p t h (f t ) Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation CPT-14 Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA Total depth: 40.59 ft, Date: 1/30/2024 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type0 0 — 0 0 0= op2 2 2 3 2 2 My sand & sandy silta 4 4 a Pi a Pa 4 Clgy &silly clay d hp Silty sand & sandy silt 6 6 Se 6 6 = 6 8 a 8 B 8 8 - 8 = 10 10 H 10 10 10 \ J Clgy 12 12 = 12 12 12 Cy EST olay i] ( Clay& silly clay14 3 14 14 14 14 c d — Clgy & silly cla16 LS 16 16 16 16 u y pat S S Clay & silly clay 18 ~J 18 18 18 18 Pp / Le Sad & sity sang20 b 20 3 20 z 20 20 eh dees ST - Sad & silty sang22 22 22 22 22p= £ ~~ © £ £24 —r E24 E oq rt 24 LS 24 Vely densie/stispil L S Ken Ne Ken 26 E26 = 26 B56 B 26<T [7 — [0 ] Fy [7] Vely dense/stiff spil 28 o 28 == a 28 ao 28 < o 28 a Sl|ty sanb> : !30 £ 30 S 30 30 30 Silly sand& sandy silt ~~ = Vely densfe/stiff spil 32 =. 32 a 32 32 1 32 ilty-san 34 34 all 34 34 5 34 iff soit I < Sad & silty san36 36 SR 36 36 36 and—2 Vely densp/stiff spil— pp - |38 38 38 38 38 Vety-d oti oil 40 40 = 40 { 40 40 Vely densp/stiffspil 42 42 42 42 42 44 44 44 44 44 46 46 46 46 46 48 48 48 48 48 50 50 50 50 50 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 -20 -10 © 10 20 01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) Rf (%) SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:49:49 AM 14 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 39.51 ft, Date: 1/30/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-15 Location: Cone resistance HAND AUGER Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction HAND AUGER Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u HAND AUGER Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio HAND AUGER Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type HAND AUGER SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay ClayClay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sandVery dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:49:51 AM 15 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com KTE De p t h (f t ) Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation CPT-15 Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA Total depth: 39.51 ft, Date: 1/30/2024 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Friction ratio0 0 0 2 2 2 4 4 4 4 6 3 6 T 6 6 8 nee 8 rd 8 8 8 10 10 1 10 10 Red 10 12 12 N 12 12 12 14 { 14 14 14 14 16 7 16 13 16 : 16 16 - 18 S 18 £ 18 18 18 20 5 20 ™ 20 20 m— 20 22 22 22 22 22 Tl ~~ - ~~ ~~ ~~ 24 fy E24 — N E24 E24 < E24 c — fe c y fe26 << B26 8 26 £26 5 £ 56 > [0 [0] { [0 Z| [028 al 0 2g a 2g J 0 2g > 0 28 30 { 30 . 30 / 30 30 Silty sand& sandy silt 32 32 Lu 32 { 32 | 32 Sahd8 silty sand[=u] hai! pd Vely densfe/stiff spil 34 =" 34 34 34 Pee 34— I] J Vely dense/stiff spil 36 36 36 =] 36 36 :— ] R_ Sad & silty sand < pw. Mahe ck Pr o38 38 38 <q 38 38 Very-dense/stiff-apit 40 40 40 40 40 42 42 42 42 42 44 44 44 44 44 46 46 46 46 46 48 48 48 48 48 50 50 50 50 50 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 -20 -10 0 10 20 01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) Rf (%) SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:49:51 AM 15 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 39.19 ft, Date: 1/30/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-16 Location: Cone resistance Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Clay Clay Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay Clay Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:49:54 AM 16 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com KTE De p t h (f t ) Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation CPT-16 Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA Total depth: 39.19 ft, Date: 1/30/2024 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type0 = 0 [— 0 0 0=] <7] ] : 2 2 2 2 2 & sandy silt 4 = 4 4 4 4 ! e/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt6 1— 6 6 6 6 GHy-&-sily-clay- 8 8 P meni 8 8 AE 8 Sabhd 2 oily cond JY Silty sand & sandy silt 10 10 10 10 10 ( 3y & sly clay12 12 iy 12 12 12 ” 14 14 3 14 14 yy 14 C ; 16 Mw, 16 16 16 16 y sit 18 18 18 18 5 ul 18 dhClgy & silly clay 20 20 20 20 2 20 Try Clgy & sil clay22 22 22 22 22 Shyrn) re) = < re) Cldy &silly cla 24 \ £24 \ £24 E24 £24 ws <a 5 r £ c c ; ;26 E26 5 26 B56 Pp B 26 Silly sand & sandy silt [0] [9] [0 [0] 28 — 0 28 pg 0 28 038 02s \ Sand& silty sand30 ES 30 30 \ 30 30 32 — 32 32 32 32 Vely densp/stiff spil hd &silty sand 34 mse 34 34 34 34~~ a — yy36 36 36 36 36ww 38 - 38 38 - 38 ind 38 Vely densge/stiffspil 40 40 40 40 40 42 42 42 42 42 44 44 44 44 44 46 46 46 46 46 48 48 48 48 a8 50 50 50 50 50 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 20 10 0 10 20 © 1 2 3 4567 8 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) Rf (%) SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:49:54 AM 16 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 39.19 ft, Date: 1/30/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-17 Location: Cone resistance Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type ClayClay Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay ClayClay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:49:56 AM 17 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt KT Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.comE Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation CPT-17 Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA Total depth: 39.19 ft, Date: 1/30/2024 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Friction ratio Soil Behaviour TypeTET TE ;2 2 Pe 2 — 2 d 4 — 4 4 4 + 6 6 6 6 8 ®? 8 <= 8 8 — ofl 3 & sang 10 10 / 10 10 ~ 12 12 \ 12 12 —— 14 14 3 14 14 = 16 y 16 J 16 16 = 18 { 18 C 18 18 nf 204% 20 ; 20 20 — 22 22 ) 22 22 24 E04 £24 £24 s | = =a 26 B26 3 a 26 Be LY @ 2 [0 Q 8 28 = 0 28 — 0 7s 03g & \ Pe30 30 30 30 32 | 32 Fay 32 \ 32 ) hd & silty sand io] — 34 34 34 \ 34 A—~ 9 L |36 —_ 36 = 36 y 36 ly denselstiff 38 . 38 - 38 < 38 y 40 40 40 40 42 42 42 42 42 44 44 44 44 44 46 46 46 46 46 48 48 48 48 48 50 50 50 50 50 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 -20 -10 0 10 20 01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) Rf (%) SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:49:56 AM 17 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 41.34 ft, Date: 1/30/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-18 Location: Cone resistance Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty claySilty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay Clay Clay Clay Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Clay Sand & silty sand Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:49:59 AM 18 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com KTE De p t h (f t ) Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation CPT-18 Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA Total depth: 41.34 ft, Date: 1/30/2024 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type 0 Iles 0 [= 0 0 0 Sify san & sandy silt=2 2 2 ee 2 2 Chay-S-siffy-clarMe —T Silly sand8 Sandy silt4 “S 4 > a 4 L_ 4 sand & sandy silt 6 1—& 6 6 6 os 6 sit 8 5 8 5 8 8 8 JY sand & sandy silt10 10 10 10 = 10{ ]12 } 12 7 12 12 12 14 { 14 / 14 14 14 ol 16 L 16 16 16 16 18 18 18 18 — 18¢ < -= 20 20 20 20 205 ES ~~ 22 22 \ 22 22 22~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ Clgy 24 E24 E24 E24 E24 Eid 8 sily-chay fe )) c fe »-— c Clay26 B26 Ba 26 8 26 8 26 Cldy [0 ~ [0] [0 [0 Clay 28 0 28 a 0 28 0 78 0 og Ga [| - Clay& si 30 30 4 30 30 «7 30 Sad & silty sang- - Clgy32 32 32 32 < 32 Sapdsily san 34 34 34 34 34 Sad & sity sang 36 36 36 36 36 P—] n -38 38 38 38 4 38 Vely denspsiif pil — { ——T — <1} densestspi40 < 40 — 40 I 40 < 40 €y dense/stil Soi 42 42 42 42 42 44 44 44 44 44 46 46 46 46 46 48 48 48 48 48 50 50 50 50 50 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 -20 -10 © 10 20 01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) Rf (%) SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:49:59 AM 18 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 40.17 ft, Date: 1/30/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-19 Location: Cone resistance Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Clay Clay Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:50:01 AM 19 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: KTE Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-19 Total depth: 40.17 ft, Date: 1/30/2024 De p t h (f t ) AN T I NO a A 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 Cone resistance Sleeve friction nN Rax]I \/ TN oc ww oO A 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 De p t h (f t ) 28 lw 30 32 2 Aa PN NA T T A 34 36A 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Tip resistance (tsf)Friction (tsf) De p t h (f t ) Pore pressure u a A N © 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 -20 -10 © 10 Pressure (psi) 20 ft ) ~~ De p t h NS © oc © oO BM 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 a4 46 48 50 Friction ratio 4 = a ~~] == — o — na BaP ym hn Fu 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Rf (%) N [= 2 I 36 38 40 42 a4 46 48 50 Soil Behaviour Type Clay & silly cl 1: Clgy & silly clay y ilyClgy & silly clay & sandy silt & sandy silt & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt ilty sand Silty sand & sandy silt a Si[ty San Vely densge/stiff spi ely dense/suif soil Vely denske/stiff spi 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:50:01 AM Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt 19 Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 41.68 ft, Date: 1/30/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-20 Location: Cone resistance Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Very dense/stiff soil Clay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay Clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:50:04 AM 20 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt KTE Project: Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation CPT-20 Total depth: 41.68 ft, Date: 1/30/2024 De p t h (f t ) Cone resistance NES38 7 10 7 12 14 16 18 20 NA22 24 26 28 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 Tip resistance (tsf) De p t h (f t ) Wa r e nN oc ww oO A TT A 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 Sleeve friction =— \ > [I V 0 2 4 Friction (tsf) 6 8 10 12 De p t h (f t ) Pore pressure u a A N © 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 -20 -10 © 10 Pressure (psi) 20 ft ) ~~ De p t h Friction ratio = 8 10 — 12 I14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 a4 46 48 50 2 3 4 5 Rf (%) 6 7 8 N oo 0 oO A 14 16 18 20 36 38 40 42 a4 46 48 50 Soil Behaviour Type Clgy & silly clay Clgy Silly sand & sandy silt cay & silly clay ity sand & sandy silt Sad & sity sang Vely densp/stiff spil Vely densge/stiff spil 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:50:04 AM Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt 20 Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 43.12 ft, Date: 1/31/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-21 Location: Cone resistance Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clayClay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sand ClayClay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clayClay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:50:07 AM 21 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: KTE Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-21 Total depth: 43.12 ft, Date: 1/31/2024 De p t h (f t ) CM ™ 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 Cone resistance nN )\ V a s h i A J. oc ww oO A P=14 16 18 20 22 24 26 De p t h (f t ) 28 30 32 34 36 [I A N 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 Tip resistance (tsf) Sleeve friction= rN hf Af r ] he pf Mn Ly 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Friction (tsf) De p t h (f t ) Pore pressure u a A N © 12 a2 WI 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 -20 -10 © 10 Pressure (psi) 20 ft ) ~~ De p t h N oc © oO BM 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 a4 46 48 50 Friction ratio R—— ll a CC ~ 12 3 4 5 6 7 8 Rf (%) aH » N [= ] 14 16 18 20 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 Soil Behaviour Type Clgy & silly clay Clgy Clgy & sy clay Clgy Clgy & silly clay hd & silty sang Gaba 8 otSanaaStty San y-sitt Sad & sity sang Silty sand & sandy silt 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:50:07 AM Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt 21 Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 50.20 ft, Date: 1/31/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-22 Location: Cone resistance Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Clay & silty clay ClayClay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clayClay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Sand & silty sand Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Clay Sand & silty sand Clay & silty clay CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:50:10 AM 22 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt KT Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.comE De p t h (f t ) Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation CPT-22 Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA Total depth: 50.20 ft, Date: 1/31/2024 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type0 0 0 — 0 0 -T - gy asily clay 2 2 b 2 2 2 Clay> => Oar &sily clay 4 4 £ 4 f 4 a4 Clay ba Clgy& silly clay 6 4 6 6 6 6 Cldy& silly clay- 3 i 8 8 - 8 8 8 a y & silly clay i AW 5 ~- y silt 10 10 7 10 10 <l| 10 12 12 \N 12 12 12 14 14 J 14 14 ham 14 16 16 \ 16 16 16 18 18 18 18 18 20-4 20 nll 20 20 20 =u >22 d 22 22 22 22J in n in 1 n24 rt 24 E24 rt 24 rt 24 3 5 5 c el cdyssily clay26 5 E26 5 26 B26 8 26 ay o o o - o Cla 8sily cia28 0 28 Q 28 0 28 = 028 ly d ld r Clgy30 - 30 30 30 30 Chly-S-sitty-etay > Sad & silty sangan32 32 = 32 32 32 Cy po Silly sand & sandy silt34 Ly 34 34 34 34 Cidy& silly clay 36 h 36 36 36 Sahd& silty sani36 ~~» p= Sad & sity sang 38 38 S 38 38 = 38 40 ~ 40 Pd 40 40 < 40 Sad-&sifty sam 42 42 4242 1 42 To Silly sand& sandy silt 44 44 >a 44 14 — 44 ity sand 8-sandy-silt 1 q Sand & sifty sang 46 a 46 46 46 Ma 46 :4 ~~ sil sand & sandy silt 48 48 48 gy48 ? 48 kd Sad & silty sand 50 ut 50 50 } 50 —— 50 i Clay& si T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T rT rT 717 T LI T T 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 -20 -10 © 10 20 01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) Rf (%) SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:50:10 AM 22 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 50.20 ft, Date: 1/31/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-23 Location: Cone resistance Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type ClayClay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay ClayClay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:50:13 AM 23 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt KT Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.comE De p t h (f t ) Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation CPT-23 Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA Total depth: 50.20 ft, Date: 1/31/2024 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type 0 TF 0 [0] [0] ——— 0 2 2 2 2 2p= Pt — y silt 4 Fd 4 4 rr 4 4 6 J 6 > 6 2 6 6 hy-sitt 8 8 8 8 8 10 & 10 = 10 10 = 10 Stay-Sesittyclay g < a Clgy& silly clay 12 ; 12 1 12 12 p— 12 ro or wp 14 ; 14 3 14 14 14 Ty 16 } 16 S 16 16 16 Cldy-8-sitiy-clay —— Clay18 18 hd 18 18 18Y - J Cidy&silly clay20 20 3 20 20 — 20 22 IR 22 22 22 22 24 E24 = E24 E24 E24 3 L 2 Ken ~ Ka 26 a8 26 a 26 B26 d 8 26 p 4 [0] o = 3 28 S 02s z 07g 0 28 = 0 2s 30 30 = 30 30 = 30oO y silt 32 32 << 32 32 32 34 34 34 34 34 36 — 36 r 36 36 36 Pied Sad & silty sang 38 38 38 38 38 Sitty-sand-&-sandy-sitt 40 L—1 40 —] 40 a0] 40 Silly sand& sandy silt 42 1 42 42 42 42 Sad & sity sang44 44 — 44 44 44—— {46 46 46 46 46 or ilty san 48 ha 48 48 48 48 & sandy silt 50 4 50 < 50 50 50 i & sandy silt T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T TT T T T T T T T T LE T 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 -20 -10 0 10 20 01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) Rf (%) SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:50:13 AM 23 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 47.92 ft, Date: 1/31/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-24 Location: Cone resistance Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sandClay & silty clay Clay Clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay ClayClay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clayClay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Sand & silty sand Sand & silty sand Clay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:50:16 AM 24 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: KTE Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-24 Total depth: 47.92 ft, Date: 1/31/2024 De p t h (f t ) 4 + 6 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 <] Cone resistance Sleeve frictio nN 0 Sw < > A] oc ww oO A 14 162a 18 20 22 24 ~~ 26 De p t h (f t ) 28 30 32 34 36[= 2 38 40 42 44 46ny 48 50 i. —y = 0 Tip resistance (tsf) 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8Friction (tsf) 10 12 De p t h (f t ) Pore pressure u a A N © 12 im a 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 - 50 -20 -10 © 10 Pressure (psi) 20 NS © oc © oO BM 14 16 18 20 22 ft ) 24 26 De p t h 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 a4 46 48 50 Friction ratio y 2 3 4 5 Rf (%) 6 7 8 Soil Behaviour Type gy & sily clay ayClgy & ily clay Cray iClay & silly clay Clgy ClayClgy & silly clay Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt ly dense/stiff spil amd& y samyly dense/stiff spil 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:50:16 AM Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt 24 Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 46.92 ft, Date: 1/31/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-25 Location: Cone resistance Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clayClay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:50:19 AM 25 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt KT Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.comE Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-25 Total depth: 46.92 ft, Date: 1/31/2024 De p t h (f t ) Cone resistance Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Friction ratio 0 T= 0 5 0 — 2 2 N, 2 2 4 { 4 Y 4 > 4 p6 g 6 S 6 6 i - = 8 i 8 p; 8 8 — 10 10 10 10 r) \ =12 ( 12 { 12 12 14 14 14 14 =\ . =16 7 16 16 16 i 18 a 18 18 18 -20 20 S| 20 20 22 22 22 22z g e24 24 E24 E24 5 5 526 a 26 ; 0 26 8 26 [0 > [1] [7] - —28 0 28 0 8 0 ygES —] E 30 p= 30 30 30 L 32 32 => 32 32 —3 > C 34 34 34 34al EN 36 > 36 =f 36 —§ 36 go peer ~~38 < 38 5 38 38 40 40 i 40 40 hn — 3 42 42 = | 42 4211 L Fal, 44 44 — 44 44 = /46 46 46 { 46 3 48 48 48 48 50 50 50 50 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 -20 -10 0 10 20 01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) Rf (%) N [= 2 I 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 Soil Behaviour Type ly silt ly silt ly silt €[y den S Vely densg/stiff spi spil 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:50:19 AM Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt 25 Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 50.14 ft, Date: 1/31/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-26 Location: Cone resistance HAND AUGER Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction HAND AUGER Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u HAND AUGER Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio HAND AUGER Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type HAND AUGER SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Silty sand & sandy silt Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Sand & silty sand Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soil CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:50:22 AM 26 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com KTE De p t h (f t ) Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation CPT-26 Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA Total depth: 50.14 ft, Date: 1/31/2024 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 his 4 4 4 AMD A 4 6 6 6 61 q <8 ! 8 5 8 8 8 10 10 S 10 10 10 12 12 1 12 12 12 14 14 14 ] 14 14 16 >= 16 pt 16 16 16 ~——18 ] 18 > 18 18 18 20 t 20 § 20 20 = 20 322 3 22 S 22 E 22 ES 22 ~~ ~~ ~~ - ~~ 24 E24 E24 E24 E24 A L Ken Ken .26 8 B26 4 R26 2 26 826 ob say cr o o [] @ Clay & silly cla28 0 28 07g 0 28 0 28 Eid d & — Gy &sily clay30 30 30 30 30 c 32 << 32 < 32 32 32 sy son > ai Sad & silty sand 34 34 34 34 34 Very densprstiff-spit p al ly silt 36 nc? 36 36 36 36—ny q san38 L3 38 38 38 38 ¥ | et] ~> [ed i & sony it 40 — 40 Pa 40 40 =~ 40 i & sandy siltad . .Lr] Bb] —— & sandy silt 42 4 424 42 42 = 42 Silly sand& sandy silt 44 44 Vd 44 44 44 SN \ Sapd & silty sang46 46 — 46 ) 46 46 48 ss 48 — 48 48 = 48 ! itty sand & sandy silt4 hr ( N — | Cldy 8 silly clay |so I a UY 50 50 50 at 50 Vely densk/stiff spil T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T TT T T LINN ILE ELEN ILE RL BLE BL T T 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 -20 -10 0 10 20 01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) Rf (%) SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:50:22 AM 26 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 50.99 ft, Date: 2/1/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-27 Location: Cone resistance Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay Clay Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Sand & silty sand Clay Sand & silty sand Sand Silty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:50:26 AM 27 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt KT Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.comE Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-27 Total depth: 50.99 ft, Date: 2/1/2024 De p t h (f t ) Cone resistance Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Friction ratio0 0 0 0 = - p—2 3 2 2 2 P— I4 - 4 4 4re 6 5 6 6 6 8 7 8 y 8 8 10 v 10 J 10 10 1214 Y 12 4 12 12 14 14 14 145 =16 16 3 16 16 5 — a 18 18 > 18 18 = — 20 \ 20 N 20 20 A 22 22 22 22 . | Eg pS £ =n24 r E24 £24 £4 o oc o En 26 a 26 14 a 26 8 26 =a ZT a 3 ‘28 3 28 S 28 28 C 30 . 30 rd 30 30 = 32 — 32 = 32 32 » 34 34 34 ) 34 » 36 36 36 36 — =r h J f hY 38 38 38 38 Pam KN40 y 40 40 40 r= -r] => 42 42 5 42 42Ss 44 = 44 Pa 44 441 4 46 46 46 | 46 —— " ]48 + 48 48 48—=F Sr n 50 — 50 ct illSO T= i 50 T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T La | T Lm T T T T 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 -20 -10 © 10 20 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) aH » N [= ] 14 16 18 20 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 Soil Behaviour Type Sapd & silty sang Clay & si Silty sand & sandy silt Silly sand & sandy silt Cl Clgy & silly clayiedChay-Sst Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Clawy Cldy 8. silfy clay Cl Clgy Cigy-Srstityctay Clgy Clay & silly clayClay Clgy Clohsand & sandy silt Sapd & sity sang Sapd & sity sang Silly sand & sandy silt fy st |T} ————1— 8 10 12 14 16 18 ertson, 2010)n@—~~po ] 1)15 3 CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:50:26 AM Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt 27 Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 50.20 ft, Date: 1/31/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-28 Location: Cone resistance HAND AUGER Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction HAND AUGER Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u HAND AUGER Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio HAND AUGER Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type HAND AUGER SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay Clay Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Silty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Sand Clay & silty clay CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:50:29 AM 28 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt KT Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.comE De p t h (f t ) Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation CPT-28 Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA Total depth: 50.20 ft, Date: 1/31/2024 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 5 ~ TU 4 4 4 4 4 6 6 6 6 6 Clay & silly clay J < { Silty sand& sang 8 5 8 3 8 8 8 10 | 10 S 10 10 Pi 10 is 3 . EE :14 14” Pd 16 16 ¢ 16 16 Ti 16 18 18 = 18 18 h 18 20 xq 20 NL 20 20 ~N— 20 22 22 J 22 22 22 7 24 E24 J & 24 £74 £4 Tyna sary ot c c c c mo c 26 a 26 8 26 B56 | £ 26 C cla [0] 1] [9] [0 [0 28 0 28 0 28 0 28 028 ol L C Clgy & silly clay30 30 x 30 30 30 32 ay 32 32 32 32 san 8 sandy silt N~— sand & sandy silt 34 nN 34 34 34 nd 34~~ 1 36 g 36 36 36 b 36 prsilt — bY y silt 38 38 38 38 38 Sand-8-sitty-sangPr ae > > Vely densge/stiff spil 40 r 40 = 40 / 40 40 -pa Sad & sity sang 42 42 £7 42 42 & 42= | BY Silty sand & sandy silt 44 ~~ 44 < 44 44 B) 44 46 46 r - 46 | 46 § 46 Sahd 3.silty sand > 48 — 48 e_ 48 48 v. 48 Send< pa I... Clgy& silly clay 50 50 LJ 50 J 50 L- — 50 i T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T LI a T T T rT rr T T LI T T 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 -20 -10 0 10 20 01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) Rf (%) SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:50:29 AM 28 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 44.30 ft, Date: 2/1/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-29 Location: Cone resistance Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type ClaySilty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay Clay Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty claySand & silty sand Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sandSand & silty sand CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:50:32 AM 29 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt KT Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.comE De p t h (f t ) Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation CPT-29 Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA Total depth: 44.30 ft, Date: 2/1/2024 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type0 0 0 0 0p=—2 < 2 c. 2 2 2 4 P 4 4 4 4< 6 ’g 6 > 6 6 6 8 ] 8 y 8 8 —r 8 10 [ 10 \ 10 10 = 10 Shay p 12 12 12 12 > 12pe LIN y silt 14 14 14 14 14 pr § 16 T] 16 q 16 16 Pe — 16 18 18 18 18 = 183 N qa] Cldy&silly clay 20 20 > 20 20 20 ClayLN Clgy 22 3 22 22 22 22 Sitty-sand &-sandy-sitt > oo fo - > Silty sand& sandy silt24 C E24 bd £24 E24 £24 Ul Ee] I 5 fe Fe Clgy & silly cla26 % o 26 << to 26 a 26 0 26 ra oe[7 [9 @ = [7] Cidy——>8 xr 0 78 2 0 23 0 78 — = 0238 Ty & sy clay 30 30 30 30 30 Clay & silly clahY Silly sand& sandy silt 32 ig* 32 >] 32 32 32 y sand 8 sandy silt T — \/c[y denspe/stiff spil 34 5 34 34 34 & 34 — Sil sand B sandySi 36 36 3 36 36 36 38 38 < 38 38 38 Vely densp/stiffspil 40 F— 40 40 40 40a42 42 42 42 42 -— \ & Sad & sity sang 44 44 44 \ 44 a 44 Sapd& silty san 46 46 46 46 46 48 48 48 48 48 50 50 50 50 50 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 -20 -10 0 10 20 01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) Rf (%) SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:50:32 AM 29 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 50.14 ft, Date: 2/2/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-30 Location: Cone resistance HAND AUGER Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction HAND AUGER Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u HAND AUGER Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio HAND AUGER Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type HAND AUGER SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Clay Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:50:36 AM 30 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt KT Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.comE De p t h (f t ) Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation CPT-30 Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA Total depth: 50.14 ft, Date: 2/2/2024 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type 0 0 0 -2 2 2 4 4 4 ITSi6 6 6 Sad & silty sang 8 8 8 Silty sand & sandy silt 10 10 7 10 Cily 12 12 12 [= 12 tg 14 — 14 14 14 14 16 { 16 4 16 16 16 18 18 3 18 18 18 Clgy &silly clay 20 20 20 20 20 Clay~~] NL Silty sand & sandy silt 22 2 22 = 22 22 =, 22 pisfiff sil—e 4 &] } }= I~ jn) nl jn) Silly sand & sandy silt24 E24 € E24 E24 E24 26 5 26 5 26 £ 26 £ 26 Silly sand& sandy silt 0 ld @ { @ @ 128 [a RY: ~ 0 og 0 og 0og Vely densk/stiff spil 30 F. 30 30 S 30 30<< [4 J Vely dense/stiffspil -3 »32 ~~ 32 — 32 32 32ZT 4 ul ~ | Vey densge/stiff spil 34 34 34 34 / 34 ¢ Vely densp/stiffspil36 36 S 36 36 3 36 Past 3 Vely densge/stiff spil 38 p= 38 | 38 ~ 38 ~ 38 Vely densfe/stiff sil 40 I ——— 40 40 40 Eq 40 Vely densk/stiff sil—— — }| meet [oe «< Sand& silty sand42 Ns 42 42 42 = 42 pi a — \ L£] Sapd & silty san44 44 =] 44 44 44 s -— ilty sand & sandy silt— 46 I 46 46 Vely densfe/stiffsoil 46 4 46 Vely densge/stiff spilp= 48 P= 48 = 48 48 48 Vel donee oo— [Jd | = fy densp/stiff spi 50 > 50 50 ne 50+] SOT TTT T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T | LE LE LL T T T T T 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 -20 -10 © 10 20 01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) Rf (%) SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:50:36 AM 30 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 50.15 ft, Date: 2/1/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-31 Location: Cone resistance Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Organic soil Clay & silty clay Clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Clay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soil CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:50:40 AM 31 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com KTE De p t h (f t ) Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation CPT-31 Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA Total depth: 50.15 ft, Date: 2/1/2024 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type 0 TX 0 <= 0 0 0 Onfanic spil 2 2 £ 2 — 2 2 cf i ¢ ¢ 4 bo» Clgy 4 4 ( 4 4 = 4 Ty 6 t 6 L 6 6 =~ 6 Clay& silly clay 8 8 8 8 82 2 -10 / 10 ~ 10 10 10 12 'R 12 74 12 12 12 14 rd 14 4 14 14 14 16 16 f- 16 16 x 16 18 18 ~ 18 18 un 18 20 20 D 20 20 ; 20 22 22 > 22 3 22 u 22 ~~ ~~ ~~ — ~~ 24 E24 E24 £24 = — E24 —1 c ~ c ~26 8 26 3 Bf 26 2 26 8 26[0 p [0] [0 [0 28 02s 07g 0 28 02g 30 < 30 = 30 30 = 30 32 32 a 39 ly dense/stiff sil 32 32ry S 34 7 34 34 34 3 34 Vely densestsi 36 36 36 36 3 36 38 4 38 > 38 38 -_ 38 Silly sand& sandy silt T [ Pd & sang40 40 > 40 40 40 42 = 42 < 42 42 pL 42 A44 44 44 44 eS 44 2 < Sapd & sity sang46 46 = 46 46 1 LS 46g L 48 48 = 48 48 48 ly denspe/stiff spi 50 50 Pe 50 50 50 ——T TT T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T rT rrr rrr r71r T T T T 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 -20 -10 0 10 20 01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) Rf (%) SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:50:40 AM 31 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 43.44 ft, Date: 2/1/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-32 Location: Cone resistance Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay ClayClay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:50:43 AM 32 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt KT Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.comE Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation CPT-32 Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA Total depth: 43.44 ft, Date: 2/1/2024 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Friction ratio Soil Behaviour TypeeS 0 — 0 0 3 0 Cidy3 silly cia 2 — 2 Ma 2 2 2 ahd &>pd TT 3 ‘ )6 ee — 6M 6 6 - 6for"< <=8 8 8 8 8 fl x =10 10 10 10 10 12 wg 12 12 12 12 14 14 Pd 14 14 14 { —16 3 16 5 16 16 i 16 18 iY 18 18 18 18 20 Ii 20 20 20 20 22 22 ed 22 22 22 5S 2 ~N oo fn —_— fre) 241% 24 E24 E24 E24 Kn L - L Ne -y Kena 26 >; Ba 26 =) a 26 8 26 8 26 x @ J > J & sandy silt28 >] 0 2g a 2g 0 2g lt 0 28™ ~~ T vob cords30 = 30 i 30 30 30 Very-densefstiff-spit= | = ly densp/stiffspil 32 i 32 7? 32 32 - 7 32 34 34 2 34 [ 34 34 36 36 nt? 36 36 36J bi { 2d & sang 38 <Q 38 4 38 7 38 > 38 iste 40 { 40 3 40 40 40 & sand 42 ~~ 42 42 3 42 Vely densg/stiffspil -— ) 3 Vely dense/stiff spil 44 44 44 44 46 46 46 46 48 48 48 48 50 50 50 50 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 -20 -10 © 10 20 01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) Rf (%) SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:50:43 AM 32 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 50.15 ft, Date: 2/2/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-33 Location: Cone resistance HAND AUGER Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction HAND AUGER Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u HAND AUGER Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio HAND AUGER Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type HAND AUGER SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Very dense/stiff soil Clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sandClay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:50:47 AM 33 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt KT Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.comE Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation CPT-33 Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA Total depth: 50.15 ft, Date: 2/2/2024 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type0 0 0 2 2 4 4 6 6 Vely densg/stff spil dg Clgy 4 8 8 8 l 10 10 10 Clgy a Clay & silly clay a 12 12 12 Cldy& silly clay 14 14 14 14 Sahd& silty sand‘a rai Clgy& silly clay 16 ] 16 y 16 16 16 Chay-&-Sitly clay Clgy18 | 18 5 18 18 ES —- 18 Cldy& silly clay 20 20 Q 20 20 Cy 20 dl)] > Yd Cldy & silly clay 22 == 22 22 22 22 Clay-&-sity-clay— ~~ < — — Sad & silty sang 24 E24 E24 E24 —.. £24 erly> = —~ Fe i c -] c Silty sand & sandy silta 26 Ba 26 to 26 Ba 26 8 26 hy sand & sandy=2 8 5 % 2 pS 5 i28 28 28 28 28 y-denspls iif spi<F == Y ~~ v 4 I {iff spl30 - 30 a ee 30 30 30 €fy censerstil sol2 << 32 32 32 32 32rel ) 34 34 34 34 34hi! nm 36 J 36 < 36 36 36 Vely dengp/stiff anil 38 , 38 ~~] 38 38 38 x40 40 40 40 40— == { 7 ni 42 L- 42 <5 42 42 > 42 a iL 4 all Sapd & sity sang44 44 TS 4444 — { 44 Vely densp/stiff spil 46 46 46 46 46+ Vely densp/stiff spil 48 = 48 48 48 48 ¢ il _ [ L | | Silly sand & sandy silt50 | 50 50 50 — 50 —— Vely densle/stiff spil TT T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T TT T T | LI ILE LE LE LE I T T 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 -20 -10 0 10 20 01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) Rf (%) SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:50:47 AM 33 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 43.64 ft, Date: 2/1/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-34 Location: Cone resistance Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay ClayClay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty claySilty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Sand & silty sand CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:50:51 AM 34 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com KTE De p t h (f t ) Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation CPT-34 Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA Total depth: 43.64 ft, Date: 2/1/2024 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type 0 0 [———— 0 0 [Uy en en etn ny ToBl aa e/stiff spoil 2 —— 2 a 2 2 HE 2 v sand ird Lo : Cldy& silly clay 4 4 -) 4 4 4 Clay& silly clayi] Cldy& silly clayP=6 6 6 6 6 4 J d os ilty cl8 8 { 8 i 8 id 8 Gay silly clay 10 10 10 10 10{ Cldy\ —12 S 124g 12 12 12 :Pp Clg &silly clay 14 { 14 7] 14 14 14 16 N 16 SL 16 16 | 16 18 18 = 18 C 18 —— 18 20 C 20 rl 20 20 203 >> Vely densge/stiff soil 22 ya 22 “q 22 22 ha 22 Vely dengp/stiff anil r—— & sandy siltp z [X] Fn e e o wih24 << E24 E24 £24 — E24 elif sp L L a . N26 B26 >; Ba 26 8 26 8 26 & sandy silt < 4 14 Q 1d o/stiff spi28 os 0 28 = 0 28 0 28 0 23 & samy sitt << —l b> pistiff spi30 — 30 Pe 30 30 30 TTS < <7 & sandy silt32 iN 32 iy 32 32 32 y 34 = 34 > 34 34 3 34 36 h 36 36 36 36 -2. —38 38 = 38 38 < 38 1 Id40 40 40 40 40~— ) a 42 42 42 42 42ral = <r hd & si 44 == 44 44 J 44 44 46 46 46 46 46 48 48 48 48 48 50 50 50 50 50 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 -20 -10 0 10 20 01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) Rf (%) SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:50:51 AM 34 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 50.14 ft, Date: 2/1/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-35 Location: Cone resistance Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clayClay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soil Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Sand & silty sand Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:50:55 AM 35 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt KT Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.comE De p t h (f t ) Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation CPT-35 Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA Total depth: 50.14 ft, Date: 2/1/2024 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Friction ratio0 0 0 0 |= aE: : : 4 4 == 4 4 6 6 6 6 == 8 8 { 8 8 — 10 10 N 10 10 — 12 < 12 12 12 C 14 <Y 14 14 14 16 » 16 > 16 16 ES —{ < <18 18 =~ 18 18 =r — 20 20 ™ 20 202 2 r=] 22 22 3 22 22In mS oy ry24 E24 — E24 E24 — hs 5 rd 5 £ p— — By Co 26 2 ta 26 a 26 8 26 =F ¥ b [7] 2 [0] [0] <] ill sand y silt 28 <5 0 28 0 28 0 73 ] rely ders i==30 30 30 30 32 ¢ 32 S 32 32 5 34 34 34 34 =] i ly dense/stiff spil 36 ra 36 5) 36 36 38 38 1 38 38 p, 40 40 2 40 40 > 42 3 42 42 42 44 44 > 44 44 RP) 46 ~ 46 nk 46 46 mm | 48 T= 48 48 / 48 50 50 1 50 50 [1]T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 -20 -10 0 10 20 01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) Rf (%) SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:50:55 AM 35 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 44.69 ft, Date: 2/1/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-36 Location: Cone resistance Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Clay Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Clay Clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clayClay Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Clay Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:50:59 AM 36 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com KTE De p t h (f t ) Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation CPT-36 Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA Total depth: 44.69 ft, Date: 2/1/2024 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type0 0 0 0 0| 2 = 2 2 2 2Fd Pp 4 4 3 4 4 4 6 6 7 6 6 6 8 { 8 { 8 8 8 10 L 10 y 10 10 c 10 : 12 12 he 12 12 — 12 y & ily claySc gy ily clay 14 14 = 14 14 14 4 16 — 16 To 16 16 16 18 < 18 = 18 18 18§ - 20 — 20 ~ 20 20 20> 422 < 22 22 22 22<I = a fn ry —3 ry24 => E24 3 E24 E24 E24 iE oc c c densge/stiff spi 2 rl £ 26 ri £ 26 £ 56 pe £ 26 ly dens of oP Vi © 2 Fo) @ 2 @ Vely dense/stiff spil 28 02s 07g 0 28 = 0 238 Very-densplstiffspil 30 : 30 ~ 30 30 3 30 32 3 32 3 32 32 3 32 “ely denserstiff-spit 34 34 ~~ 34 34 34 b Fy = Silly sand & sandy silt 36 36 hi 36 36 3 36 38 38 38 38 38 ly dense/stiff spil 40 40 40 40 40Pa 42 42 42 42 42~ {44 —~— 44 — 44 I 44 44 46 46 46 46 46 48 48 48 48 48 50 50 50 50 50 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 -20 -10 0 10 20 01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) Rf (%) SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:50:59 AM 36 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 44.04 ft, Date: 2/1/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-37 Location: Cone resistance Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:51:03 AM 37 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: KTE Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-37 Total depth: 44.04 ft, Date: 2/1/2024 De p t h (f t ) 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 Cone resistance =Ld nN oc ww oO A 14AT T 16 18 20 22 24 26 De p t h (f t ) 28 30 32 34 \ 1 Fa t Ar 36 38 40AW E 42 44 46 48 50 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 Tip resistance (tsf) Sleeve friction pi [NeyIsp/C 4>3 A 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Friction (tsf) De p t h (f t ) Pore pressure u a A N © r 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 -20 -10 © 10 Pressure (psi) 20 ft ) ~~ De p t h NS © oc © oO BM 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 a4 46 48 50 Friction ratio 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Rf (%) N 46 48 50 Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silly cla Clgy Clgy Clay & silly clay Mely d [stiff spoil I cl cen <p— VE[y GENSEISHT SOy & silly clay hd & sity sangSilly sand & sandy silt Soil Behaviour Type Clgy & silly clay Sapd & silty sand a Vely dense/stif spil /stiff spi ly dense/stiff sil , Vely den spil Vely densp/stiff spil \ely d [stiff spoil Silly sand & sandy silt Vely dense/stiffspilvadense/stiff sil 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:51:03 AM Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt 37 Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 44.96 ft, Date: 2/2/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-38 Location: Cone resistance HAND AUGER Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction HAND AUGER Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u HAND AUGER Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio HAND AUGER Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type HAND AUGER SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Silty sand & sandy silt Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clayClay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Sand & silty sand CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:51:07 AM 38 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com KTE De p t h (f t ) Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation CPT-38 Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA Total depth: 44.96 ft, Date: 2/2/2024 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 4 4 4 4 4 6 6 6 6 — 6{ Id = of8 \ 8 \ 8 8 8 y&sity Thay 10 C 10 10 10 10 12 12 12 12 12 3 14 We 14 14 14 > 14 ahd & san yd ™ i & sandy silt 16 ¢ 16 2 16 16 16 itty sand & sandy sitt 18 18 18 18 18 -4 <$ + Clgy& silly clay 20 20 R 20 20 & 20pN =~ x!22 22 22 22 22 Yery-densefstiff-spit oy fy = ev Vely denspi/stiff spilNSE E24 q E24 © 24 E Vely denselsti SoiS r— £ c — Ke Vely dense/stiff spil26 B 26 J a 26 8 26 a ely densie/stit soil 28 RL a 28 a 28 a 28 LS a Vely densp/stiff spil Z 30 2 30 = 30 30 £ 32 p.. 32 Zz] 32 32 34 S 34 34 34 2] _, Vely densp/stiff spil36 36 36 36 h S38 38 38 38 40 < 40 = 40 40 7 — 42 42 142 —— 42 7] Sapd & sity sang 44 44 2 44 44 Sand-S-sily-sen 46 46 46 46 46 48 48 48 48 48 50 50 50 50 50 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 -20 -10 © 10 20 01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) Rf (%) SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:51:07 AM 38 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 45.43 ft, Date: 2/2/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-39 Location: Cone resistance HAND AUGER Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction HAND AUGER Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u HAND AUGER Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio HAND AUGER Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type HAND AUGER SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soil Clay & silty claySand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Sand CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:51:11 AM 39 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com KTE De p t h (f t ) Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation CPT-39 Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA Total depth: 45.43 ft, Date: 2/2/2024 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type0 0 2 2 4 4 6 6 8 8 10 10 12 12 12 14 14 14 16 16 16 N 16 16 I a J = & sang18 18 18 18 183 N & sang 20 4 20 Pd 20 20 Pa 20 Cidy &silly clay 22 3 22 22 22 22 24 = E 24 3 24 Eg 24 p 3 24 ly dens/stiff spil lL c - c P= clay 26 — B26 8 26 5 26 8 26 ly sangul [0] [0] [0] X Jy e/stiff spil28 Ba 0 28 =| 0 28 0 28 0 28 & samy sit Pa 30 Pe— 30 = 3030 C NS | 30 LE a . onN ~ Vely dense/stiff spil 36 3 36 ILS 36 36 36<T38 38 38 38 38J 40 <= 40 40 40 40 id y. = & sang 42 42 42 7 42 a 42 n 44 44 44 44 o 44 il 46 46 46 46 46 48 48 48 48 48 50 50 50 50 50 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 -20 -10 0 10 20 01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) Rf (%) SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:51:11 AM 39 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 50.14 ft, Date: 1/31/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-40 Location: Cone resistance HAND AUGER Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction HAND AUGER Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u HAND AUGER Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio HAND AUGER Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type HAND AUGER SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Sand Sand & silty sand Sand CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:51:15 AM 40 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt KT Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.comE De p t h (f t ) Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation CPT-40 Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA Total depth: 50.14 ft, Date: 1/31/2024 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type 0 0 0 2 2 2 4 4 4 4 6 6 6 6{ 2 4"7 8 IN 8 8 10 10 10 10 12 12 12 124 12= =r 314 — 14 14 14 14Lu o LY y silt 16 = 16 16 16 16 & sandy silt18 18 18 18 18 & sandy sil 20 20 —— 20 20 20 & sandy silt( — POLS opel clay 22 pl 22 ~3| 22 22 == 22 Cigy-8-sitty-clay— ~~ ~~ = > Cl3 S— 3 3 fo 3 gy 24 — © 24 =24 = 24 = 24 ———————"" VeJy densp/stiffspil5 5 £ 5 Vely densg/stiff spil26 a 26 a 26 a 26 a 26 Very denserstiff sport>| a [0] @ [- [)) | ] ] 28 02s ks 07g 0 28 0 28 Nefy denspisiff sil 7 Pa S| Vey densge/stiff spil30 < 30 SS 30 30 4 30 y Sand & sar yitt Pe rd — Silty sand& sandy silt 34 ar 34 34 34 1 34 Vely-dengi/sifE spit 36 Ne 36 at 36 36 Ed 36> J Vely dense/stiff spil 38 £ 38 38 38 38 20 40 /] 40 40 40 Silty sand & sandy silt I'd Vely densp/stiff spil42 Ne 42 — 42 42 Co 42~~ —"] LAT )44 — 44 =a 44 14 a4 Sahd &silty sand <<] — > Vely densfe/stiff spil— ram16 46 — 46 46 1— 46 Sama8 ~~— a8 48 | 48 L 48 Sad & silty sang . Pd < Sapd50 50 == 50 50 Re EBT T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T | LE LE LL T T T T T 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 -20 -10 © 10 20 01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) Rf (%) SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:51:15 AM 40 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 50.22 ft, Date: 2/2/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-41 Location: Cone resistance HAND AUGER Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction HAND AUGER Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u HAND AUGER Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio HAND AUGER Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type HAND AUGER SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay ClayClay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Sand Sand Sand & silty sand Sand CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:51:20 AM 41 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt KT Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.comE Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation CPT-41 Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA Total depth: 50.22 ft, Date: 2/2/2024 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 4 4 4 4 4 6 13 6 ’ 6 f 6 6 ol 8 8 \ 8 8 ~ 8 CRY Sy Cay 10 10 Y 10 : 10 Pan 10 Thy 12 12 12 3 12 12J - [oF clayo — ;Po wn Cl clay14 3 14 14 14 14 Tidy & silly clay 16 1 ¥ 16 16 16 16 oH cay~ p I :(aml 1 ~—] - Casi clay18 N 18 EN 18 3 18 18 Cldy & silly clay 20 20 20 20 20q 4 2 | fn fm — fm Vely denspi/stiffspil24 £24 R £24 E24 | Ey, — hy i r——4 £ £ c c —— e/stiff spoil a 26 a 26 0 26 8 26 a = B26 ity Sand sandy sitx g @ — g —— iff spi78 [aT 0 7g Li 0 7g < 0g Vely dense/stiff spil 30 S 30 30 30 30Nd] 32 = 32 ain 32 32 32 34 34 ~< 34 34 < 34x < 236 = 36 3 36 36 36 Sy SESS Sa 38 38 38 38 3 38 40 S 40 = 40 / 40 Vi 40 42 ¢ 42 <7] 42 / 42 hL 42 44 ~~ 44 44 44 44Tx SY Sad & silty sang46 ——— 46 | 46 464 16 Sand J a 48 48 48 48 48 Sahd& silty sand 50 50 ad 50 / 50 ho 50 ta T T T T T T hil 1 T T T T T T T T T T T T T T LI T T T 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 -20 -10 0 10 20 01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) Rf (%) SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:51:20 AM 41 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 45.28 ft, Date: 2/2/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-42 Location: Cone resistance HAND AUGER Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction HAND AUGER Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u HAND AUGER Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio HAND AUGER Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type HAND AUGER SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type ClaySilty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay ClayClay Very dense/stiff soil Clay Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:51:24 AM 42 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com KTE Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-42 Total depth: 45.28 ft, Date: 2/2/2024 De p t h (f t ) Cone resistance Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type0 0 0 2 2 2 2 4 4 4 4 4 6 1» 6 ’ 6 6 6 8 8 \ 8 8 "4 8 10 10 S 10 10 = 10 L — Clay & iy I12 12 L 12 12 12 ly ’ clay 14 14 < 14 14 14 3d & silty sand : 7] t = Silly san & sandy silt 16 C 16 os 16 16 = 16 Saris qy 18 18 ¢ 18 18 1 18 Clay & si -\ [ _— Silly sand & sandy silt 20 20 ™ 20 20 20 Clay& silly clay Clgy 22 4 22 22 22 22 a 24 ~ E24 — E24 E24 E24 1 5 26 = 5 26 5 C 5 26 d26 [= 8 — a a 26 od [aN y denserstiff-soit T a a 2 — a ly densfe/stiff spil 28 28 gl 28 28 28 ly dense/stiff sil 30 30 30 30 30 y-densierstiff-spil q & ly densfe/stiff spil 32 32 —3] 32 32 32 L — 34 p. 34 we 34 34 34< 2 ly densie/stiff spoilNy36 36 36 36 36= - 38 = 38 38 38 — 38 ly dense/stiff spil 40 = 40 40 40 7 40 ydenserstiff spit 42 42 42 ] 42 Z 42 ahd 3 silty sand densge/stiff spila4 a4 44 i 44 _- a4 ly densp/stiff spi 46 46 46 46 46 48 48 48 48 48 50 50 50 50 50 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 2 6 8 10 12 -20 -10 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 2 4 10 12 14 16 18 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) Rf (%) SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:51:24 AM 42 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 45.87 ft, Date: 2/2/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-43 Location: Cone resistance HAND AUGER Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction HAND AUGER Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u HAND AUGER Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio HAND AUGER Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type HAND AUGER SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Sensitive fine grained Silty sand & sandy silt Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:51:29 AM 43 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt 714-901-7270 KTE Project: Kehoe Testing and Engineering steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-43 Total depth: 45.87 ft, Date: 2/2/2024 De p t h (f t ) Cone resistance Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type 0 0 2 2 2 4 4 4 6 Pg 6 ) 6 8 8 8 8 y L y silly clay 10 10 10 10RN Clgy 1242 12 1 12 12 ay& silly clay —14 14 14 14 :ja sly sang 16 16 3 16 16 16 —— Silty sand & sandy silt 181-5 181 —S 18 18 18 Cidy8 silly clay% =~ L —= Silly san & sandy silt 20 20 20 20 20{ 4 Cldy & silly clay 22 22 22 22eS = TT, o o Vely dense/stiff sil 24 E24 E24 E24 Vely-densie/stiff-soit = c br re c o Vely dense/stiff spil 26 B26 a 26 B26 Vely densle/stiff sil L (0) @ Fo) Vely densp/stiff spil 28 0 28 < a 2g (al ¥] Vely-dense/stff spit 30 >] 30 g Vely densfe/stiffsoil30 = : 30 — la 1 Vely denspi/stiff spil 32 > 32 ~> 32 32 Vely densielsHit soil 34 34 34 34 Vely denseiotif spiPd = Vely densfe/stiff spil 36 Me 36 36 36> A Vely densp/stiff spil 38 L# 38 38 38 —<<] Sr Vely densfe/stiff spil 40 = 40 40 40| >> — Y 42 < 42 42 42 m 44 44 44 44— = LF 46 — 46 46 46 48 48 48 48 48 50 50 50 50 50 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 -20 -10 © 10 20 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) Rf (%) SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:51:29 AM 43 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 46.40 ft, Date: 2/1/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-44 Location: Cone resistance HAND AUGER Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction HAND AUGER Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u HAND AUGER Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio HAND AUGER Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type HAND AUGER SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay Clay Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:51:33 AM 44 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt KT 714-901-7270 E steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Kehoe Testing and Engineering Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-44 Total depth: 46.40 ft, Date: 2/1/2024 De p t h (f t ) Cone resistance EY 12 12 3 14 = 14-Z 16 16 | =18 3 18 20 ~~ 20 Lease]224+— 22y °24 E24 5 2626 a= 228 rg 02g 30 Y] 30 32 = 32 ~ 3434 = 36 36 38 38 40 40 42 rg 42 44 44 46 Pe 46 48 48 50 50 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 Tip resistance (tsf) Sleeve friction 0 2 4 6 8 Friction (tsf) 10 12 De p t h (f t ) Pore pressure u 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 -20 -10 © 10 Pressure (psi) 20 ft ) ~~ De p t h 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 a4 46 48 50 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type clay4& sang rey Sa d & silty sang v-sand Ssandy-sitt Silty sand & sandy silt cabd oSahd-&-silty-san Silly sand & sandy silt v-sand 8-sandy-sitt Vety-densefstiff-spitVely denspi/stiff spil se/stll 9 ly densg/stiff spi Vely densp/stiff spilVely densp/stiff spil 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:51:33 AM Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 49.41 ft, Date: 2/2/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-45 Location: Cone resistance HAND AUGER Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction HAND AUGER Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u HAND AUGER Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio HAND AUGER Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type HAND AUGER SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Clay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Sand & silty sand CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:51:38 AM 45 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com KTE Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-45 Total depth: 49.41 ft, Date: 2/2/2024 De p t h (f t ) Sleeve frictionCone resistance Pore pressure u0 0 2 2 4 4 4 6 { 6 2) 6 < 6 8 8 { 8 8 10 ; 10 S 10 10 [12 12+ 12 12 14 = 14 14 14 16 = 16 ~ 16 16 - 18 ml 3 18 = 18 18 20 20 S 20 20 al22 22 = 22 22 ~~ ~~ ~~ 24 ; E04 = E24 £74 T 5 ES 526 a 26 = a 26 a 26 nly 28 — QO 2g 0 2g 0 ys£3 LThs ne ha30 rd 30 30 30 32 —J 32 32 32> > 34 34 34 34 36 36 36 36 38 L 38 TN 38 38 40 40 << 40 40 > <T {42 S 42 42 / 42 44 44 5 44 ] 44 46 | 46 A 46 46 48 48 ——— 48 7 48 50 50 50 50 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 -20 -10 © 10 20 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) Friction ratio LA ) _ «] Soil Behaviour Type 4 6 3 a ly & silfy clay 8 Clg10 i Clgy & sily clay12 ChayClgy & sily clay 14 nd & sity sang 16 i lysilt y & silly clay 18 nd & silty sang 20 Silly sand & sandy silt22 Silly sand & sandy silt 24 26 28 30 32 34 ly dense/stiff 5 sand & sandy silt 36 tiff pit silt38 ul 40 42 ET 44 46 Saphd & id sang 48 Sad-&sifty samy 50 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:51:38 AM Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt 45 Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 50.14 ft, Date: 2/2/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-46 Location: Cone resistance HAND AUGER Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction HAND AUGER Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u HAND AUGER Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio HAND AUGER Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type HAND AUGER SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Clay & silty clay Clay & silty claySilty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Clay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:51:43 AM 46 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com KTE De p t h (f t ) Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation CPT-46 Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA Total depth: 50.14 ft, Date: 2/2/2024 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type0 0 0 2 2 2 4 4 4 6 6 6 8 8 8 8 1 C10 10 ) 10 10 12 12 IN 12 12 14 14 Mo 14 14 14 16 16 p 16 16 16 4 18 18 4 18 18 18 L 20 20 20 20 20 Ady-silt< y silt 22 22 — 22 22 22 E24 fl € 24 g = E2424 NS ~ — ~ = 24 ~ Vely denste/stiffspil S [~—> S 5 5 —_e26 B26 a 26 8 26 Pay, B 26 Vefy-densierstiff-seit hy [4 > [] I” J Vey densg/stiffspil~1 02g 0 28 [a] 0 2s ’28 “ - 28 — Vely denspi/stiffspil 30 — 30 30 30 = — 30 : : ety donse/stift spilpa. iy Vely dense/stiff spil - a32 =F 32 = 32 32 4 32 Vely densp/stiff spil 34 34 << 34 / 34 — 34 Vely denselsHit sil bul P~_ o Vely densp/stiff spil36 2 36 36 36 36 N— ———[=~38 Z 38 =a 38 38 38 40 <_ 40 40 40 40 ly dense/stiff spil 42 42 [= 42 42 42 | = J << 44 £ 44 1S 44 44 = 44 IP.46 lL] 46 46 46 46 i N. L « i & sandy silt 48 48 48 48 = 48 [&sanySit [ ~~ => i & sandy silt50 50 = 50 50 re 50 T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T rT rrr rrr r71r T T T T 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 Oo 2 4 6 8 10 12 -20 -10 0 10 20 01 2 3 45 6 7 8 0 2 4 6 8 110 12 14 16 18 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) Rf (%) SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:51:43 AM 46 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 50.20 ft, Date: 2/2/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-47 Location: Cone resistance HAND AUGER Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction HAND AUGER Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u HAND AUGER Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio HAND AUGER Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type HAND AUGER SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:51:47 AM 47 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com KTE De p t h (f t ) Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation CPT-47 Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA Total depth: 50.20 ft, Date: 2/2/2024 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 12 12 12 12 14 } 14 ul 14 14 14 16 16 16 16 16Ll — 18 C| 18 C 18 18 = 18 20 20 >] 20 20 Fr 20{ ! =r22 22 22 22 22! z a e | e e24 rt 24 1 E24 rt 24 E24 c | c c - c26 B26 a 26 B26 B 26 Q [0] [}] u Q 28 = 0 28 = 028 0 28 0 28a I. r30 30 30 30 30 a Ta ly densfe/stiff spi 32 Po 32 32 32 P= 32 34 34 34 34 34 Vely densp/stiffspil ilfy sand & sandy silt36 36 36 36 36> 38 5 38 38 38 38 40 40 40 40 & sang4242 al 42 f 42 B 44 44 44 44 a4 / = Silty sand & sang 46 3 46 ~> 46 46 46 48 a8 2] as 48 £hs NE 4 rtL Fe < 50 50 50 50 — 50 Lg Vely denspi/stiff spil Silty sand & sandy silt Sapd & silty san|1 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 |I 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 -20 -10 0 10 20 01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 2 4Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) Rf (%) SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:51:47 AM 47 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 50.13 ft, Date: 2/2/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-48 Location: Cone resistance HAND AUGER Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction HAND AUGER Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u HAND AUGER Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio HAND AUGER Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type HAND AUGER SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Clay & silty clay Clay Clay Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:51:52 AM 48 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt KT Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.comE De p t h (f t ) Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation CPT-48 Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA Total depth: 50.13 ft, Date: 2/2/2024 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type0 0 2 2 4 4 6 2 6 8 7 8 10 10 12 12 12 14 14 14 16 16 D; 16 the 18 _-— 18 20 20 20 20 20 i &-sandysilt \ \ tl i & sandy silt 22 C 22 3 22 22 22 i &rsandy-sitt ~~ ~~ ~~ Lan) H H9) I Do 9) & sandy silt24 N = 24 i. S24 | E24 = 24 Cy aly clay L -26 > 8 26 nn 8 26 826 826 Cy &sitlyctay 28 0 28 0 28 Q 28 Q 28 Slay< ou sand §& sandy silt 30 P; 30 > 30 1 30 p= 30 oy densest Soi q Vely denspi/stiff spil32 = 32 SN 32 32 32 Vely densge/stit spil 34 > 34 2 34 r 34 3 34 CVEEE ZEEE I 36 g 36 < 36 36 36 Vly densplstiff spil< 38 r 38 38 38 38 40 40 = 40 { 40 4 40 Vety-dense/stiff pit 42 » 42 2 42 42 v3 42 q44 3 44 44 44 T 44 Ty sand & sandy Si 46 J 46 46 46 46 Vely densielsHitsil~~ =48 LO) 48 < 48 48 48 =< <] < EE pit50 50 3 50 50 50 ely aenge/siil spl T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T LI T T 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 -20 -10 0 10 20 01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) Rf (%) SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:51:52 AM 48 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.com Total depth: 44.49 ft, Date: 2/2/20241515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA CPT-49 Location: Cone resistance HAND AUGER Tip resistance (tsf) 7006005004003002001000 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance Sleeve friction HAND AUGER Friction (tsf) 121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Sleeve friction Pore pressure u HAND AUGER Pressure (psi) 20100-10-20 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Pore pressure u Friction ratio HAND AUGER Rf (%) 876543210 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type HAND AUGER SBT (Robertson, 2010) 181614121086420 De p th ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Soil Behaviour Type Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:51:57 AM 49 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt KT Kehoe Testing and Engineering 714-901-7270 steve@kehoetesting.com www.kehoetesting.comE De p t h (f t ) Project: Leighton Consulting / Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation CPT-49 Location: 1515 Walnut Grove Ave, Rosemead, CA Total depth: 44.49 ft, Date: 2/2/2024 Cone resistance Sleeve friction Pore pressure u Friction ratio Soil Behaviour Type0 0 0 2 2 4 4 6 6 iay-Ssity-ctay rd Cldy8 — 8 Clay& silly clay 3 10 = 10 Clay=12 12 12 1 12 Clay& silly clay| et™] Silty sand & sandy silt 14 =P 14 2 14 14 cull 14 I 5 £7 316 ~ 16 LT] 16 ] 16 16 18 18 = 18 i 18 18 20 20 — 20 f 20 == 20U ol B 22 = 22 £ 22 22 - 22= jm jy jm)24 = S24 << = 24 E24 — E24 by densp/stif Soic S26 — B 56 B56 5 26 8 26 hd & sity sang 7} o [0 J 0) 28 02s 07g 0 28 0 238L or ly dense/stiff spi 30 AN 30 30 30 30 B] \ \ Vely densge/stiff spil32 32 - 32 32 32< _ 34 $ 34 = 34 34 34 Vely dengp/stiff anil 36 I 36 Ed 36 36 3 36 38 5 38 R 38 38 38> Vely densp/stiff spil 40 40 40 40 404 Z42 ~ 42 42 42 42 2_ __=44 44 44 44 yt—"1 44 Sand-8csitty-sand 46 46 46 46 46 48 48 48 48 48 50 50 50 50 50 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 -20 -10 0 10 20 01 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Tip resistance (tsf) Friction (tsf) Pressure (psi) Rf (%) SBT (Robertson, 2010) CPeT-IT v.2.3.1.9 - CPTU data presentation & interpretation software - Report created on: 2/5/2024, 9:51:57 AM 49 Project file: C:\Users\stevek\OneDrive - Kehoe Testing and Engineering Inc\Documents\CPT Current Data\Leighton-Rosemead1-24\CPT Report\CPeT.cpt Co n e re s i s t a n c e , qo / p a 714-901-7270 Kehoe Testing andEngineering rich@kehoetesting.com www,kehostestingcom 1,000 0.1 1 Friction Ratio, Rf (%) SBT legend ll: semitive fine grained [ll 4,Clsvey shia siey chy B 7. Gravely sand to sind Wl 2.Organic material BB 5.hy sand to sandysiie #. Very stif sand t clayey sind Hl 3.cley to shy chy I ©, Closir sand to siky sand 51 9. ary tiff fine grained 10 Leighton & Associates Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Rosemead, CA CPT Shear Wave Measurements S-Wave Interval Tip Geophone Travel S-Wave Velocity S-Wave Depth Depth Distance Arrival from Surface Velocity Location (ft)(ft)(ft)(msec)(ft/sec)(ft/sec) CPT-10 5.02 4.02 4.49 3.18 1412 10.01 9.01 9.23 10.18 907 677 14.99 13.99 14.13 15.72 899 885 20.05 19.05 19.15 19.90 963 1202 25.03 24.03 24.11 24.40 988 1102 30.02 29.02 29.09 29.00 1003 1082 35.01 34.01 34.07 33.08 1030 1221 Shear Wave Source Offset -2 ft S-Wave Velocity from Surface = Travel Distance/S-Wave Arrival Interval S-Wave Velocity = (Travel Dist2-Travel Dist1)/(Time2-Time1) Leighton & Associates Lewis Rosemead Fault Investigation Rosemead, CA CPT Shear Wave Measurements S-Wave Interval Tip Geophone Travel S-Wave Velocity S-Wave Depth Depth Distance Arrival from Surface Velocity Location (ft) (ft) (ft) (msec) (ft/sec) (ft/sec) CPT-10 5.02 4.02 4.49 3.18 1412 10.01 9.01 9.23 10.18 907 677 14.99 13.99 14.13 15.72 899 885 20.05 19.05 19.15 19.90 963 1202 25.03 24.03 24 11 24.40 988 1102 30.02 29.02 29.09 29.00 1003 1082 35.01 34.01 34.07 33.08 1030 1221 Shear Wave Source Offset - 2 ft S-Wave Velocity from Surface = Travel Distance/S-Wave Arrival Interval S-Wave Velocity = (Travel Dist2-Travel Dist1)/(Time2-Time1) TEST ID: CPT-25 PRESSURE (psi) TIME: (MINUTES) 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 0 1 2 3 4 DEPTH (ft) 36.844 TEST ID: CPT-25 4 DEPTH (ft) 36.844 3 PRESSURE (psi) Vv ; 00 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 TIME: (MINUTES) APPENDIX B LABORATORY TEST RESULTS APPENDIX B LABORATORY TEST RESULTS 4//Leighton a verdantas company Project Name:Lewis/Rosemead Condos Tested By :K. Jumig Date:03/29/24 Project No. :14030.001 Checked By:A. Santos Date:04/03/24 Boring No. Sample No.03-28-24, #2 Sample Depth (ft)N/A 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 100.14 405 305 860 9:00/9:45 45 60.8691 60.8671 0.0020 82.30 82 ml of Extract For Titration (B)30 ml of AgNO3 Soln. Used in Titration (C)0.6 PPM of Chloride (C -0.2) * 100 * 30 / B 40 PPM of Chloride, Dry Wt. Basis 40 8.20 20.1 CHLORIDE CONTENT, DOT California Test 422 Wt. of Crucible (g) Temperature °C pH Value PPM of Sulfate, Dry Weight Basis PPM of Sulfate (A) x 41150 Wt. of Residue (g) (A) Time In / Time Out pH TEST, DOT California Test 643 Wt. of Crucible + Residue (g) Dry Weight of Soil + Container (g) Grayish brown s(CL) Duration of Combustion (min) Soil Identification: Moisture Content (%) Furnace Temperature (°C) Weight of Container (g) Crucible No. Beaker No. Backfill, Stockpile T2 TESTS for SULFATE CONTENT CHLORIDE CONTENT and pH of SOILS SULFATE CONTENT, DOT California Test 417, Part II Wet Weight of Soil + Container (g) Weight of Soaked Soil (g) &/Leig hton TESTS for SULFATE CONTENT = CHLORIDE CONTENT and pH of SOILS Project Name: Lewis/Rosemead Condos Tested By : Project No. : 14030.001 Checked By: K. Jumig A. Santos Date: 03/29/24 Date: 04/03/24 Boring No. Backfill, Stockpile T2 Sample No. 03-28-24, #2 Sample Depth (ft) N/A . ea Grayish brownSoil Identification: s(CL) Wet Weight of Soil + Container (g) 0.00 Dry Weight of Soil + Container (g) 0.00 Weight of Container (g) 1.00 Moisture Content (%) 0.00 Weight of Soaked Soil (g) 100.14 SULFATE CONTENT, DOT California Test 417, Part II Beaker No. 405 Crucible No. 305 Furnace Temperature (°C) 860 Time In / Time Out 9:00/9:45 Duration of Combustion (min) 45 Wt. of Crucible + Residue (g) 60.8691 Wt. of Crucible (g) 60.8671 Wt. of Residue (g) (A) 0.0020 PPM of Sulfate (A) x 41150 82.30 PPM of Sulfate, Dry Weight Basis 82 CHLORIDE CONTENT, DOT California Test 422 ml of Extract For Titration (B) 30 ml of AgNO3 Soln. Used in Titration (C) 0.6 PPM of Chloride (C -0.2) * 100 * 30 / B 40 PPM of Chloride, Dry Wt. Basis 40 pH TEST, DOT California Test 643 pH Value 8.20 Temperature °C 20.1 Project Name:Tested By :Date: Project No. :Checked By: A. Santos Date: Boring No.: Backfill, Stockpile T2 Depth (ft.) : Sample No. : 03-28-24, #2 Container No. Initial Soil Wt. (g) (Wt) Box Constant Grayish brown s(CL) Resistance Reading (ohm) 15.36 Soil Resistivity (ohm-cm) Lewis/Rosemead Condos 04/01/24 04/03/24 N/A 14030.001 K. Jumig SOIL RESISTIVITY TEST DOT CA TEST 643 Temp. (°C)pH Soil pH 2200 2250 0.00 1.00 MC =(((1+Mci/100)x(Wa/Wt+1))-1)x100 2199 16.0 82 40 8.20 20.1 4 20 30 130.183225023.05 2200 Min. Resistivity DOT CA Test 643DOT CA Test 417 Part II DOT CA Test 422 (%)(ppm)(ppm) DOT CA Test 643 1.000 Chloride Content (ohm-cm) Moisture Content Sulfate Content 5 1 2 Water Added (ml) (Wa) 10 Adjusted Moisture Content (MC)Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) 2300 Soil Identification:* *California Test 643 requires soil specimens to consist only of portions of samples passing through the No. 8 US Standard Sieve before resistivity testing. Therefore, this test method may not be representative for coarser materials. Wt. of Container (g)7.68 2300 0.00 0.00 Moisture Content (%) (MCi) Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g)Specimen No. 2180 2200 2220 2240 2260 2280 2300 2320 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 So i l R e s i s t i v i t y ( o h m - c m ) Moisture Content (%) §/ Leighton SOIL RESISTIVITY TEST DOT CA TEST 643 Project Name: Lewis/Rosemead Condos Tested By : K. Jumig Date: 04/01/24 Project No. : 14030.001 Checked By: A. Santos Date: 04/03/24 Boring No.: Backfill, Stockpile T2 Depth (ft.) : N/A Sample No. : 03-28-24, #2 Soil Identification:* Grayish brown s(CL) *California Test 643 requires soil specimens to consist only of portions of samples passing through the No. 8 US Standard Sieve before resistivity testing. Therefore, this test method may not be representative for coarser materials. Water | Adusted |pstance | Soil Moisture Content (%) (MC) | 0.00Specimen Moisture - -No. |Added (ml).+ | Reading | Resistivity Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) 0.00 (Wa) (MC) (ohm) | (ohm-cm) Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) 0.00 1 10 7.68 2300 2300 Wt. of Container (g) 1.00 2 20 15.36 2200 2200 Container No. 3 30 23.05 2250 2250 Initial Soil Wt. (g) (Wt) 130.18 4 Box Constant 1.000 5 MC =(((1+Mci/100)x(Wa/Wt+1))-1)x100 Min. Resistivity | Moisture Content Sulfate Content Chloride Content Soil pH (ohm-cm) (%) (ppm) (ppm) pH | Temp. (°C) DOT CA Test 643 DOT CA Test 417 Part II DOT CA Test 422 DOT CA Test 643 2199 16.0 82 40 8.20 20.1 2320 2300 \\T 2280 YXS \ E \£© 2260 \ >= N »= \ /2 2240 A — 3 N yaoe \ /5 2220 —A an \ )dN pdAN pd 2200 ho 2180 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 Moisture Content (%) Project Name:Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE Parcel Tested By :G. Berdy Date:05/09/24 Project No. :CLC.0014030001 Checked By:J. Ward Date:06/06/24 Boring No.LB-2 Sample No.R-1 Sample Depth (ft)5.0 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 100.16 405 304 860 6:15/7:00 45 65.4361 65.4325 0.0036 148.14 148 ml of Extract For Titration (B)15 ml of AgNO3 Soln. Used in Titration (C)0.7 PPM of Chloride (C -0.2) * 100 * 30 / B 100 PPM of Chloride, Dry Wt. Basis 100 8.11 22.5 TESTS for SULFATE CONTENT CHLORIDE CONTENT and pH of SOILS SULFATE CONTENT, DOT California Test 417, Part II Wet Weight of Soil + Container (g) Weight of Soaked Soil (g) Furnace Temperature (°C) Weight of Container (g) Crucible No. Wt. of Crucible + Residue (g) Dry Weight of Soil + Container (g) Very dark brown s(CL) Duration of Combustion (min) Soil Identification: Time In / Time Out pH TEST, DOT California Test 643 Temperature °C pH Value PPM of Sulfate, Dry Weight Basis PPM of Sulfate (A) x 41150 Wt. of Residue (g) (A) Moisture Content (%) Beaker No. CHLORIDE CONTENT, DOT California Test 422 Wt. of Crucible (g) v Leig hton TESTS for SULFATE CONTENT = CHLORIDE CONTENT and pH of SOILS Project Name: Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE Parcel Tested By : G. Berdy Date: 05/09/24 Project No. : CLC.0014030001 Checked By: J. Ward Date: 06/06/24 Boring No. LB-2 Sample No. R-1 Sample Depth (ft) 5.0 Soil Identification:Very dark brown s(CL) Wet Weight of Soil + Container (g) 0.00 Dry Weight of Soil + Container (g) 0.00 Weight of Container (g) 1.00 Moisture Content (%) 0.00 Weight of Soaked Soil (g) 100.16 SULFATE CONTENT, DOT California Test 417, Part I1 Beaker No. 405 Crucible No. 304 Furnace Temperature (°C) 860 Time In / Time Out 6:15/7:00 Duration of Combustion (min) 45 Wt. of Crucible + Residue (g) 65.4361 Wt. of Crucible (g) 65.4325 Wt. of Residue (g) (A) 0.0036 PPM of Sulfate (A) x 41150 148.14 PPM of Sulfate, Dry Weight Basis 148 CHLORIDE CONTENT, DOT California Test 422 ml of Extract For Titration (B) 15 ml of AgNO3 Soln. Used in Titration (C) 0.7 PPM of Chloride (C -0.2) * 100 * 30 / B 100 PPM of Chloride, Dry Wt. Basis 100 pH TEST, DOT California Test 643 pH Value 8.11 Temperature °C 22.5 Project Name:Tested By :Date: Project No. :Checked By:J. Ward Date: Boring No.:Depth (ft.) : Sample No. : Soil Identification:* *California Test 643 requires soil specimens to consist only of portions of samples passing through the No. 8 US Standard Sieve before resistivity testing. Therefore, this test method may not be representative for coarser materials. Wt. of Container (g)30.76 2500 0.00 0.00 Moisture Content (%) (MCi) Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g)Specimen No. 1 2 Water Added (ml) (Wa) 40 Adjusted Moisture Content (MC)Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) 2500 1.000 Chloride Content (ohm-cm) Moisture Content Sulfate Content 5 Min. Resistivity DOT CA Test 643DOT CA Test 417 Part II DOT CA Test 422 (%)(ppm)(ppm) DOT CA Test 643 4 50 60 130.043240046.14 2200 2200 38.8 148 100 8.11 22.5 SOIL RESISTIVITY TEST DOT CA TEST 643 Temp. (°C)pH Soil pH 2200 2400 0.00 1.00 MC =(((1+Mci/100)x(Wa/Wt+1))-1)x100 Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE Parcel 05/10/24 06/06/24 5.0 CLC.0014030001 LB-2 G. Berdy R-1 Container No. Initial Soil Wt. (g) (Wt) Box Constant Very dark brown s(CL) Resistance Reading (ohm) 38.45 Soil Resistivity (ohm-cm) 2150 2200 2250 2300 2350 2400 2450 2500 2550 30.0 35.0 40.0 45.0 50.0 So i l R e s i s t i v i t y ( o h m -cm ) Moisture Content (%) ¥/ Leighton Project Name: Project No. Boring No.: LB-2 Sample No. : Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE Parcel : CLC.0014030001 R-1 Soil Identification:* *California Test 643 requires soil specimens to consist only of portions of samples passing through the No. 8 US Standard Sieve before resistivity testing. Therefore, this test method may not be representative for coarser materials. G. Berdy Date: 05/10/24 Date: 06/06/24 SOIL RESISTIVITY TEST DOT CA TEST 643 Tested By : Checked By: J. Ward Depth (ft.) : 5.0 Very dark brown s(CL) Adjusted. Water . Resistance Soil Moisture Content (%) (MCi) 0.00Specimen Moisture : CL iNo. | Added (ml) 0 + Reading | Resistivity Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) 0.00 (Wa) (MC) (ohm) | (ohm-cm) Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) 0.00 1 40 30.76 2500 2500 Wt. of Container (q) 1.00 2 50 38.45 2200 2200 Container No. 3 60 46.14 2400 2400 Initial Soil Wt. (g) (Wt) 130.04 4 Box Constant 1.000 5 MC =(((1+Mci/100)x(Wa/Wt+1))-1)x100 Min. Resistivity | Moisture Content Sulfate Content Chloride Content Soil pH (ohm-cm) (%) (ppm) (ppm) pH | Temp. (0) DOT CA Test 643 DOT CA Test 417 Part II DOT CA Test 422 DOT CA Test 643 2200 38.8 148 100 8.11 22.5 2550 2500 1 \\__ 2450 \ \5 h£€ 2400S \ /~~ \ / 2 2350 — 2 \ /2 \ / : \ / O 2300oe \=] AN /ro) / oN 2250 C AN AN 2200 hs 2150 30.0 35.0 40.0 450 50.0 Moisture Content (%) Project Name:Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE Parcel Tested By:G. Bathala Date:05/07/24 Project No.:CLC.0014030001 Checked By:J. Ward Date:06/06/24 Boring No.:Sample Type:Ring Sample No.:Depth (ft.):10.0 Soil Identification: 2.415 2.415 2.415 1.000 1.000 1.000 202.46 203.38 205.32 44.73 45.57 45.14 Before Shearing 208.62 208.62 208.62 184.40 184.40 184.40 55.47 55.47 55.47 0.2781 0.2206 0.2662 0.2961 0.2568 0.3122 After Shearing 194.41 219.67 222.07 171.06 195.28 199.87 39.92 65.80 67.12 2.70 2.70 2.70 62.43 62.43 62.43 DIRECT SHEAR TEST Consolidated Undrained Water Density(pcf): Specific Gravity (Assumed): Weight of Container(gm): Weight of Dry Sample+Cont.(gm): Weight of Ring(gm): Weight of Container(gm): Weight of Dry Sample+Cont.(gm): Weight of Wet Sample+Cont.(gm): LB-2 Dark brown lean clay with sand (CL)s Sample Diameter(in): Weight of Wet Sample+Cont.(gm): Vertical Rdg.(in): Final Vertical Rdg.(in): Initial Sample Thickness(in.): Weight of Sample + ring(gm): R-3 DS LB-2, R-3 @ 10 y/ . DIRECT SHEAR TEST 4 Leig hton Consolidated Undrained Project Name: Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE Parcel = Tested By: G. Bathala Date: Project No.: CLC.0014030001 Checked By: J. Ward Date: Boring No.: LB-2 Sample No.: R-3 Sample Type: Ring Depth (ft.): 10.0 Soil Identification:Dark brown lean clay with sand (CL)s 05/07/24 06/06/24 Sample Diameter(in): 2.415 2.415 2.415 Sample Thickness(in.): 1.000 1.000 1.000 Weight of Sample + ring(gm): 202.46 203.38 205.32 Weight of Ring(gm): 44.73 45.57 45.14 Before Shearing Weight of Wet Sample+Cont.(gm): 208.62 208.62 208.62 Weight of Dry Sample+Cont.(gm): 184.40 184.40 184.40 Weight of Container(gm): 55.47 55.47 55.47 Vertical Rdg.(in): Initial 0.2781 0.2206 0.2662 Vertical Rdg. (in): Final 0.2961 0.2568 0.3122 After Shearing Weight of Wet Sample+Cont.(gm): 194.41 219.67 222.07 Weight of Dry Sample+Cont.(gm): 171.06 195.28 199.87 Weight of Container(gm): 39.92 65.80 67.12 Specific Gravity (Assumed): 2.70 2.70 2.70 Water Density(pcf): 62.43 62.43 62.43 DSIB-2 R3@ 10 Normal Stress (kip/ft²) Peak Shear Stress (kip/ft²) Shear Stress @ End of Test (ksf) Deformation Rate (in./min.) Initial Sample Height (in.) Diameter (in.) Initial Moisture Content (%) Dry Density (pcf) Saturation (%) Soil Height Before Shearing (in.) Final Moisture Content (%) 112.1 1.000 2.415 18.79 Boring No. Sample No. Depth (ft) LB-2 R-3 10 96.5 0.9638 18.8 Soil Identification:18.79 110.5 18.79 110.4 1.468 0.0500 4.000 2.528 2.521 0.0500 1.000 1.103 1.022 0.0500 1.000 2.415 1.000 2.415 2.000 1.528 96.4 0.9820 17.8 Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE ParcelDIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Consolidated Undrained 100.8 0.9540 16.7 05-24 Project No.:CLC.0014030001 Sample Type: Ring Dark brown lean clay with sand (CL)s 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 Sh e a r S t r e s s ( k s f ) Horizontal Deformation (in.) 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 Sh e a r S t r e s s ( k s f ) Normal Stress (ksf) DS LB-2, R-3 @ 10 3.00 2.50 1 g 2.00 ] [2] J[72] JgL 1.50n ] © ]> 1.005 ] 0.50 1 0.00 r r : : . 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 Horizontal Deformation (in.) 3.00 2.50 1 . g 20] [2] J $ 150]n To s ]c 1.005 ] 0.50 1 0.00 050 1.00 150 200 250 3.00 350 400 450 5.00 550 6.00 Normal Stress (ksf) Boring No. LB-2 Normal Stress (kip/ft2) 1.000 2.000 4.000 Sample No. | R-3 Peak Shear Stress (kip/ft2) e 1.103 Hm 1.528 A 2.528 Depth (ft) 10 Shear Stress @ End of Test (ksf) oO 1.022 O 1.468 A 2.521 Sample Type: Deformation Rate (in./min.) 0.0500 0.0500 0.0500 Rin Initial Sample Height (in.) 1.000 1.000 1.000 9 Diameter (in.) 2.415 2.415 2.415 Soil Identification: Initial Moisture Content (%) 18.79 18.79 18.79 Dark brown lean clay with Dry Density (pcf) 110.4 110.5 112.1 sand (CL)s Saturation (%) 96.4 96.5 100.8 Soil Height Before Shearing (in.) 0.9820 0.9638 0.9540 Final Moisture Content (%) 17.8 18.8 16.7 Project No.: CLC.0014030001 H H DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS .A Leig hton Consolidated Undrained Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE Parcel 05-24 DSIB-2 R3@ 10 Normal Stress (kip/ft²) Peak Shear Stress (kip/ft²) Shear Stress @ End of Test (ksf) Sample Type: Ring Deformation Rate (in./min.) Initial Sample Height (in.) Diameter (in.) Initial Moisture Content (%) Strength Parameters Dry Density (pcf) C (psf)φ (o)Saturation (%) Peak 603 26 Soil Height Before Shearing (in.) Ultimate 496 27 Final Moisture Content (%) 05-24 Project No.:CLC.0014030001 96.4 0.9820 1.000 17.8 Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE ParcelDIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Consolidated Undrained 1.000 1.103 1.022 0.0500 18.79 110.4 2.415 Soil Identification: 0.9540 18.79 16.7 1.000 2.415 0.9638 18.8 112.1 1.000 2.415 96.5 18.79 110.5 0.0500 4.000 2.528 2.521 0.0500 100.8 2.000 1.528 1.468 Dark brown lean clay with sand (CL)s Boring No. Sample No. Depth (ft) LB-2 R-3 10 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 Sh e a r S t r e s s ( k s f ) Horizontal Deformation (in.) 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00 Sh e a r S t r e s s ( k s f ) Normal Stress (ksf) DS LB-2, R-3 @ 10 3.00 2.50 - peel tetra + at 0 ] yd[22gn ©[4]LL7) 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 Horizontal Deformation (in.) 3.00 2.50 FS 2.00 | p ad g 1.50 -[& A = 5 100 y 0.50 0.00 050 1.00 150 200 250 3.00 350 400 450 5.00 550 6.00 Normal Stress (ksf) Boring No. LB-2 Normal Stress (kip/ft2) 1.000 2.000 4.000 Sample No. | R-3 Peak Shear Stress (kip/ft2) e 1.103 Hm 1.528 A 2.528 Depth (ft) 10 Shear Stress @ End of Test (ksf) oO 1.022 O 1.468 A 2.521 Sample Type: Ring Deformation Rate (in./min.) 0.0500 0.0500 0.0500 Soil Identification: Initial Sample Height (in.) 1.000 1.000 1.000 Dark brown lean clay with sand Diameter (in.) 2.415 2.415 2.415 (CL)s Initial Moisture Content (%) 18.79 18.79 18.79 Strength Parameters Dry Density (pcf) 110.4 110.5 112.1 C (psf) $ (©) Saturation (%) 96.4 96.5 100.8 Peak 603 26 Soil Height Before Shearing (in.) 0.9820 0.9638 0.9540 Ultimate 496 27 Final Moisture Content (%) 17.8 18.8 16.7 Project No.: CLC.0014030001 H H DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS .A Lelg hton Consolidated Undrained Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE Parcel 05-24 DSIB-2 R3@ 10 Tested By:J. Domingo Date:03/29/24 Checked By:A. Santos Date:04/03/24 Depth (ft.): 03-28-24, #1 Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) Wt. of Container No. (g) Dry Wt. of Soil (g) Weight Soil Retained on #4 Sieve Percent Passing # 4 SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in./h 3922 Expansion Index (EI meas) = ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 1000 30 1.0 0.4665 04/01/24 8:44 1.0 4006 0.4665 04/01/24 7:20 1.0 Add Distilled Water to the Specimen 03/29/24 15:18 1.0 80 0.4610 10 03/29/24 13:48 1.0 0 0.4375 0.436503/29/24 13:58 Degree of Saturation (%) [ S meas]48.9 98.8 Date Time Pressure (psi) Elapsed Time (min.) Dial Readings (in.) Total Porosity 0.301 0.321 Pore Volume (cc) 62.3 68.3 Dry Density (pcf) 117.9 114.5 Void Ratio 0.430 0.472 Moisture Content (%) 7.80 17.28 Wet Density (pcf) 127.1 134.3 Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g)786.20 578.37 Wt. of Container (g)0.00 187.70 Container No.OO Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g)847.50 645.87 Wt. of Mold (g)187.70 0.00 Specific Gravity (Assumed) 2.70 2.70 Specimen Height (in.) 1.0000 1.0290 Wt. Comp. Soil + Mold (g)608.90 458.17 Specimen Diameter (in.) 4.01 4.01 100.00 MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test 1000.00 0.00 1000.00 0.00 N/A Sample No.: Soil Identification:Grayish brown sandy lean clay s(CL) Project No.:14030.001 Boring No.: EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS ASTM D 4829 Project Name: Backfill, Stockpile T2 Lewis/Rosemead Condos # Leighton EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS ASTM D 4829 Project Name: Lewis/Rosemead Condos Tested By: J. Domingo Date: 03/29/24 Project No.: 14030.001 Checked By: A. Santos Date: 04/03/24 Boring No.: Backfill, Stockpile T2 Depth (ft.): N/A Sample No.: 03-28-24, #1 Soil Identification: ~~ Grayish brown sandy lean clay s(CL) Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (9) 1000.00 Wt. of Container No. (9) 0.00 Dry Wt. of Soil (9) 1000.00 Weight Soil Retained on #4 Sieve 0.00 Percent Passing # 4 100.00 MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test Specimen Diameter (in.) 4.01 4.01 Specimen Height (in.) 1.0000 1.0290 Wt. Comp. Sail + Mold (g) 608.90 458.17 Wt. of Mold (9) 187.70 0.00 Specific Gravity (Assumed) 2.70 2.70 Container No. 0) Oo Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) 847.50 645.87 Dry Wt. of Sail + Cont. (Q) 786.20 578.37 Wt. of Container (9) 0.00 187.70 Moisture Content (%) 7.80 17.28 Wet Density (pcf) 127.1 134.3 Dry Density (pchH) 117.9 114.5 Void Ratio 0.430 0.472 Total Porosity 0.301 0.321 Pore Volume (cc) 62.3 68.3 Degree of Saturation (%) [ S meas] 48.9 98.8 SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in./h . . Elapsed Time Dial ReadingsDate Time Pressure (psi) (min.) (in.) 03/29/24 13:48 1.0 0 0.4375 03/29/24 13:58 1.0 10 0.4365 Add Distilled Water to the Specimen 03/29/24 15:18 1.0 80 0.4610 04/01/24 7:20 1.0 3922 0.4665 04/01/24 8:44 1.0 4006 0.4665 Expansion Index (EImeas) = ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 1000 30 Tested By:GEB/ACS Date:05/09/24 Checked By:J. Ward Date:06/05/24 Depth (ft.): R-1 Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) Wt. of Container No. (g) Dry Wt. of Soil (g) Weight Soil Retained on #4 Sieve Percent Passing # 4 SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in./h Project No.:CLC.0014030001 Boring No.: EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS ASTM D 4829 Project Name: LB-1 Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE Parcel 1000.00 0.00 1000.00 0.00 5.0 Sample No.: Soil Identification:Very dark brown clayey sand (SC) Specimen Diameter (in.)4.01 4.01 100.00 MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test Specimen Height (in.)1.0000 1.0140 Wt. Comp. Soil + Mold (g)594.80 440.75 Wt. of Mold (g)191.30 0.00 Specific Gravity (Assumed)2.70 2.70 Container No.O O Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g)815.20 632.05 Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g)746.50 560.81 Wt. of Container (g)0.00 191.30 Moisture Content (%)9.20 19.28 Wet Density (pcf)121.7 131.1 Dry Density (pcf)111.5 109.9 Void Ratio 0.513 0.534 Total Porosity 0.339 0.348 Pore Volume (cc) 70.1 73.0 Degree of Saturation (%) [ S meas]48.5 97.5 Date Time Pressure (psi)Elapsed Time (min.) Dial Readings (in.) 10 05/09/24 7:17 1.0 0 0.4600 0.459005/09/24 7:27 Add Distilled Water to the Specimen 05/09/24 8:34 1.0 67 0.4705 1.0 0.4740 05/10/24 9:00 1.0 1533 0.4740 05/10/24 8:00 1.0 1473 Expansion Index (EI meas) =((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 1000 15 . EXPANSION INDEX of SOILS4 Leighton ASTM D 4829 Project Name: Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE Parcel Tested By: GEB/ACS Date: 05/09/24 Project No.: CLC.0014030001 Checked By: J. Ward Date: 06/05/24 Boring No.: LB-1 Depth (ft.): 5.0 Sample No.: R-1 Soil Identification: Very dark brown clayey sand (SC) Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (9) 1000.00 Wt. of Container No. (9) 0.00 Dry Wt. of Soil (9) 1000.00 Weight Soil Retained on #4 Sieve 0.00 Percent Passing # 4 100.00 MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test Specimen Diameter (in.) 4.01 4.01 Specimen Height (in.) 1.0000 1.0140 Wt. Comp. Sail + Mold (g) 594.80 440.75 Wt. of Mold (9) 191.30 0.00 Specific Gravity (Assumed) 2.70 2.70 Container No. 0) oO Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) 815.20 632.05 Dry Wt. of Sail + Cont. (Q) 746.50 560.81 Wt. of Container (9) 0.00 191.30 Moisture Content (%) 9.20 19.28 Wet Density (pcf) 121.7 131.1 Dry Density (pcb) 111.5 109.9 Void Ratio 0.513 0.534 Total Porosity 0.339 0.348 Pore Volume (co) 70.1 73.0 Degree of Saturation (%) [ S meas] 48.5 97.5 SPECIMEN INUNDATION in distilled water for the period of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 in./h Date Time Pressure (psi) Elapsed Time Dial Readings(min.) (in.) 05/09/24 7:17 1.0 0 0.4600 05/09/24 7:27 1.0 10 0.4590 Add Distilled Water to the Specimen 05/09/24 8:34 1.0 67 0.4705 05/10/24 8:00 1.0 1473 0.4740 05/10/24 9:00 1.0 1533 0.4740 Expansion Index (EImeas) = ((Final Rdg - Initial Rdg) / Initial Thick.) x 1000 15 LB-1 LB-1 LB-1 LB-1 LB-1 LB-2 LB-2 LB-2 R-1 R-2 R-3 R-4 R-5 R-1 R-2 R-3 5.0 7.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 5.0 7.0 10.0 Ring Ring Ring Ring Ring Ring Ring Ring 3.25 3.50 2.25 >4.50 N/A 4.00 >4.50 1.25/1.50 1216.2 1030.7 1000.0 1014.7 706.9 1229.0 1213.9 1209.6 266.4 222.0 222.0 222.0 177.6 266.4 266.4 266.4 6.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 4.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 2.415 2.415 2.415 2.415 2.415 2.415 2.415 2.415 1187.9 488.0 1195.5 519.5 416.5 1249.9 347.3 208.6 1045.5 427.9 1042.4 458.2 407.5 1119.7 309.4 184.4 231.4 39.5 243.6 38.6 39.0 223.5 39.6 55.5 Container No. 132 135 129 132 110 133 131 131 17 15 19 15 2 15 14 19 112 116 109 115 107 117 115 110 94 93 94 85 12 88 82 95 Project Name: Project No.: Tested By:KJ/GB Date:05/08/24 Moisture Content (%) Dry Density (pcf) Wet. Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) Weight of Container (g) Very dark brown clayey sand (SC) Dark brown lean clay (CL) Light yellowish brown silty sand (SM), partially disturbed Very dark brown sandy lean clay s(CL) Yellowish brown sandy silt s(ML) Yellowish brown sandy silt s(ML) MOISTURE & DENSITY of SOILS ASTM D 2216 & ASTM D 2937 Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE Parcel CLC.0014030001 Degree of Saturation (%) Weight of Rings / Tube (g) Average Length (in.) Average Diameter (in.) Wet Density Boring No. Sample No. Depth (ft.) Weight Soil + Rings / Tube (g) Sample Type Soil Identification Pocket Penetrometer (tons/ft2) Dark yellowish brown sandy lean clay s(CL) Dark brown lean clay with sand (CL)s M&D LB-1, LB-2, LB-3, LB-4 Boring No. LB-1 LB-1 LB-1 LB-1 LB-1 LB-2 LB-2 LB-2 Sample No. R-1 R-2 R-3 R-4 R-5 R-1 R-2 R-3 Depth (ft.) 5.0 7.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 5.0 7.0 10.0 Sample Type Ring Ring Ring Ring Ring Ring Ring Ring Very dark Dark yellowish Yellowish oma Very dark Yellowish Dark brown Soil Identification brown clayey on) brown pi brown sandy | sand (SM), brown pd brown sandy | lean clay with sand (SC) s(CL) silt s(ML) partially s(CL) silt s(ML) sand (CL)s disturbed Pocket Penetrometer (tons/ft%) 3.25 3.50 2.25 >4.50 N/A 4.00 >4.50 1.25/1.50 Weight Soil + Rings / Tube (g) 1216.2 1030.7 1000.0 1014.7 706.9 1229.0 1213.9 1209.6 Weight of Rings / Tube (g) 266.4 222.0 222.0 222.0 177.6 266.4 266.4 266.4 Average Length (in.) 6.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 4.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 Average Diameter (in.) 2.415 2.415 2.415 2.415 2.415 2.415 2.415 2.415 Wet. WL. of Soil + Cont. (g) 1187.9 488.0 1195.5 519.5 416.5 1249.9 347.3 208.6 Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) 1045.5 427.9 1042.4 458.2 407.5 1119.7 309.4 184.4 Weight of Container (9) 231.4 39.5 243.6 38.6 39.0 223.5 39.6 55.5 Container No. Wet Density 132 135 129 132 110 133 131 131 Moisture Content (%) 17 15 19 15 2 15 14 19 Dry Density (pcf) 112 116 109 115 107 117 115 110 Degree of Saturation (%) 94 93 94 85 12 88 82 95 ?/ Leighton MOISTURE & DENSITY of SOILS ASTM D 2216 & ASTM D 2937 Project Name: Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE Parcel Project No.: Tested By: CLC.0014030001 KJ/GB Date:05/08/24 M&D LB-1,1B-2,IB-3, LB4 LB-2 LB-2 LB-3 LB-3 LB-3 LB-3 LB-3 LB-4 R-4 R-5 R-1 R-2 R-3 R-4 R-5 R-1 20.0 30.0 5.0 7.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 5.0 Ring Ring Ring Ring Ring Ring Ring Ring >4.50 2.25 >4.50 3.00 3.00 >4.50 >4.50 990.9 994.0 610.3 1010.4 976.9 1236.5 1222.2 222.0 222.0 133.2 222.0 222.0 266.4 266.4 5.00 5.00 3.00 5.00 5.00 6.00 6.00 2.415 2.415 2.415 2.415 2.415 2.415 2.415 458.5 411.4 476.3 402.9 467.9 372.5 368.3 403.4 395.5 358.1 433.2 333.5 402.5 338.9 330.6 369.8 38.9 38.9 38.9 39.0 38.7 38.5 38.9 39.6 Container No. 128 128 132 131 126 134 132 18 17 11 24 18 11 13 10 109 110 119 106 106 121 117 87 85 71 108 83 77 80 Project Name: Project No.: Tested By:K. Jumig Date:05/09/24 MOISTURE & DENSITY of SOILS ASTM D 2216 & ASTM D 2937 Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE Parcel CLC.0014030001 Wet Density Moisture Content (%) Dry Density (pcf) Degree of Saturation (%) Average Length (in.) Average Diameter (in.) Wet. Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) Weight of Container (g) Dark yellowish brown silty sand (SM), disturbed Pocket Penetrometer (tons/ft2) Weight Soil + Rings / Tube (g) Weight of Rings / Tube (g) Yellowish brown lean clay with gravel (CL)g Dark brown silt with sand (ML)s, partially disturbed Yellowish brown silt (ML) Dark brown lean clay with sand (CL)s Dark yellowish brown silt with sand (ML)s Dark yellowish brown sandy silt s(ML) Boring No. Sample No. Depth (ft.) Sample Type Soil Identification Yellowish brown silt (ML) M&D LB-1, LB-2, LB-3, LB-4 Boring No. LB-2 LB-2 LB-3 LB-3 LB-3 LB-3 LB-3 LB-4 Sample No. R-4 R-5 R-1 R-2 R-3 R-4 R-5 R-1 Depth (ft.) 20.0 30.0 5.0 7.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 5.0 Sample Type Ring Ring Ring Ring Ring Ring Ring Ring Yellowish Yellowish atith ean Yellowish Dark brown Dark yellowish Dark yellowish Dark yellowish Soil Identification brown silt brown lean (ML)s, brown silt | lean clay with brown silt brown sandy brown silty (ML) clay with partially (ML) sand (CL)s | Withsand | “op cmy | sand GM),gravel (CL)g disturbed (ML)s disturbed Pocket Penetrometer (tons/ft?) >4.50 2.25 >4.50 3.00 3.00 >4.50 >4.50 Weight Soil + Rings / Tube (g) 990.9 994.0 610.3 1010.4 976.9 1236.5 1222.2 Weight of Rings / Tube ~~ (g) 222.0 222.0 133.2 222.0 222.0 266.4 266.4 Average Length (in.) 5.00 5.00 3.00 5.00 5.00 6.00 6.00 Average Diameter (in.) 2.415 2.415 2.415 2.415 2.415 2.415 2.415 Wet. WL. of Soil + Cont. (g) 458.5 411.4 476.3 402.9 467.9 372.5 368.3 403.4 Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) 395.5 358.1 433.2 333.5 402.5 338.9 330.6 369.8 Weight of Container (9) 38.9 38.9 38.9 39.0 38.7 38.5 38.9 39.6 Container No. Wet Density 128 128 132 131 126 134 132 Moisture Content (%) 18 17 11 24 18 11 13 10 Dry Density (pcf) 109 110 119 106 106 121 117 Degree of Saturation (%) 87 85 71 108 83 77 80 ?/ Leighton MOISTURE & DENSITY of SOILS ASTM D 2216 & ASTM D 2937 Project Name: Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE Parcel CLC.0014030001Project No.: Tested By:K. Jumig Date:05/09/24 M&D LB-1,1B-2,IB-3, LB4 LB-4 LB-4 LB-4 R-2 R-3 R-4 7.0 10.0 20.0 Ring Ring Ring >4.50 >4.50 >4.50 822.0 1225.8 1034.5 177.6 266.4 222.0 4.00 6.00 5.00 2.415 2.415 2.415 336.4 360.8 435.3 302.8 321.4 392.5 39.5 39.0 39.3 Container No. 134 133 135 13 14 12 119 117 121 82 85 82 Project Name: Project No.: Tested By:K. Jumig Date:05/09/24 MOISTURE & DENSITY of SOILS ASTM D 2216 & ASTM D 2937 Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE Parcel CLC.0014030001 Wet Density Moisture Content (%) Dry Density (pcf) Degree of Saturation (%) Average Length (in.) Average Diameter (in.) Wet. Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) Weight of Container (g) Pocket Penetrometer (tons/ft2) Weight Soil + Rings / Tube (g) Weight of Rings / Tube (g) Dark yellowish brown silt with sand (ML)s Yellowish brown sandy silt s(ML) Boring No. Sample No. Depth (ft.) Sample Type Soil Identification Brown sandy lean clay s(CL), partially disturbed M&D LB-1, LB-2, LB-3, LB-4 Boring No. LB-4 LB-4 LB-4 Sample No. R-2 R-3 R-4 Depth (ft.) 7.0 10.0 20.0 Sample Type Ring Ring Ring a oun snr Deven etoSoil Identification s(CL), partially with sand brown sandy disturbed (ML)s silt s(ML) Pocket Penetrometer (tons/ft?) >4.50 >4.50 >4.50 Weight Soil + Rings / Tube (g) 822.0 1225.8 1034.5 Weight of Rings / Tube (g) 177.6 266.4 222.0 Average Length (in.) 4.00 6.00 5.00 Average Diameter (in.) 2.415 2.415 2.415 Wet. WL. of Soil + Cont. (g) 336.4 360.8 435.3 Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) 302.8 321.4 392.5 Weight of Container (9) 39.5 39.0 39.3 Container No. Wet Density 134 133 135 Moisture Content (%) 13 14 12 Dry Density (pcf) 119 117 121 Degree of Saturation (%) 82 85 82 ?/ Leighton MOISTURE & DENSITY of SOILS ASTM D 2216 & ASTM D 2937 Project Name: Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE Parcel Project No.: Tested By: CLC.0014030001 K. Jumig 05/09/24 M&D LB-1,1B-2,IB-3, LB4 Tested By:PM/NP Date:03/28/24 Checked By: J. Ward Date:04/02/24 Backfill, Stockpile T2 Depth (ft.):N/A 03-28-24, #1 Preparation Method:X Moist Mechanical Ram Dry Manual Ram Mold Volume (ft³)0.03320 Ram Weight = 10 lb.; Drop = 18 in. 123456 3690 3818 3864 3856 1808 1808 1808 1808 1882 2010 2056 2048 868.6 883.4 1041.3 817.5 828.3 824.5 951.2 735.0 73.5 77.2 88.6 76.3 5.34 7.88 10.45 12.52 125.0 133.5 136.5 136.0 118.6 123.7 123.6 120.9 124.3 9.1 PROCEDURE USED X Procedure A Soil Passing No. 4 (4.75 mm) Sieve Mold : 4 in. (101.6 mm) diameter Layers : 5 (Five) Blows per layer : 25 (twenty-five) May be used if +#4 is 20% or less Procedure B Soil Passing 3/8 in. (9.5 mm) Sieve Mold : 4 in. (101.6 mm) diameter Layers : 5 (Five) Blows per layer : 25 (twenty-five) Use if +#4 is >20% and +3/8 in. is 20% or less Procedure C Soil Passing 3/4 in. (19.0 mm) Sieve Mold : 6 in. (152.4 mm) diameter Layers : 5 (Five) Blows per layer : 56 (fifty-six) Use if +3/8 in. is >20% and +¾ in. is <30% Particle-Size Distribution:4:44:52GR:SA:FIAtterberg Limits: LL,PL,PI Optimum Moisture Content (%) Maximum Dry Density (pcf) Net Weight of Soil (g) Wet Density (pcf) MODIFIED PROCTOR COMPACTION TEST ASTM D 1557 Project No.: Locaton: Dry Weight of Soil + Cont. (g) Weight of Mold (g) TEST NO. Soil Identification: Sample No.: Lewis/Rosemead Condos Wt. Compacted Soil + Mold (g) Project Name: Grayish brown sandy lean clay s(CL) Dry Density (pcf) Moisture Content (%) Wet Weight of Soil + Cont. (g) Weight of Container (g) 14030.001 110.0 115.0 120.0 125.0 130.0 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20. Dr y D e n s i t y ( p c f ) Moisture Content (%) SP. GR. = 2.60SP. GR. = 2.65SP. GR. = 2.70 XX MX 03-28-24, #1, Backfill, Stockpile T2 &/ Leighton Project Name:Lewis/Rosemead Condos MODIFIED PROCTOR COMPACTION TEST ASTM D 1557 Project No.: 14030.001 Locaton: Backfill, Stockpile T2 Sample No.: 03-28-24, #1 Soil Identification:Grayish brown sandy lean clay s(CL) Date: Date: Tested By: PM/NP Checked By: J. Ward Depth (ft.): N/A Preparation Method: X Mold Volume (ft3) 0.03320 Moist Dry Mechanical Ram Manual Ram Ram Weight = 10 1b.; Drop = 18 in. X 03/28/24 04/02/24 TEST NO. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Wt. Compacted Soil + Mold (q) 3690 3818 3864 3856 Weight of Mold (9) 1808 1808 1808 1808 Net Weight of Soil (9) 1882 2010 2056 2048 A —— Wet Weight of Soil + Cont. (g) 868.6 883.4 1041.3 817.5 Dry Weight of Soil + Cont. (g) 828.3 824.5 951.2 735.0 Weight of Container (9) 73.5 77.2 88.6 76.3 Moisture Content (%) 5.34 7.88 10.45 12.52 Wet Density (pcf) 125.0 133.5 136.5 136.0 Dry Density (pcf) 118.6 123.7 123.6 120.9 Maximum Dry Density (pcf) Optimum Moisture Content (%) 9.1 | 130.0PROCEDURE USED [X] Procedure A Soil Passing No. 4 (4.75 mm) Sieve Mold : 4 in. (101.6 mm) diameter Layers: 5 (Five) Blows per layer: 25 (twenty-five) May be used if +#4 is 20% or less [[] Procedure B Soil Passing 3/8 in. (9.5 mm) Sieve Mold : 4 in. (101.6 mm) diameter Layers: 5 (Five) Blows per layer: 25 (twenty-five) Use if +#4 is >20% and +3/8 in. is 20% or less [C] Procedure C Soil Passing 3/4 in. (19.0 mm) Sieve Mold : 6in. (152.4 mm) diameter Layers: 5 (Five) Blows per layer: 56 (fifty-six) Use if +3/8 in. is >20% and +24 in. is <30% Particle-Size Distribution: 4:44:52 Atterberg Limits: LL,PLPI 125.0 Dr y De n s i t y (p c f ) 3 o 115.0 110.0 \| — SP. GR. =2.60 SP. GR. = 2.65~~ SP.GR.=270\=\ =LT N L- 7 A ra d 1 7 LT LL = ed pr a 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 Moisture Content (%) MX 03-28-24, #1, Backfill, Stockpile T2 20. Tested By:N. Peterson Date:03/29/24 Checked By: J. Ward Date:04/02/24 Backfill, Stockpile T2 Depth (ft.):N/A 03-28-24, #2 Preparation Method:X Moist Mechanical Ram Dry Manual Ram Mold Volume (ft³)0.03320 Ram Weight = 10 lb.; Drop = 18 in. 123456 3591 3722 3843 3858 1808 1808 1808 1808 1783 1914 2035 2050 758.0 701.7 832.7 872.7 738.2 669.2 777.0 800.4 78.0 74.8 77.0 77.0 3.00 5.47 7.96 9.99 118.4 127.1 135.1 136.1 114.9 120.5 125.2 123.8 125.5 8.6 PROCEDURE USED X Procedure A Soil Passing No. 4 (4.75 mm) Sieve Mold : 4 in. (101.6 mm) diameter Layers : 5 (Five) Blows per layer : 25 (twenty-five) May be used if +#4 is 20% or less Procedure B Soil Passing 3/8 in. (9.5 mm) Sieve Mold : 4 in. (101.6 mm) diameter Layers : 5 (Five) Blows per layer : 25 (twenty-five) Use if +#4 is >20% and +3/8 in. is 20% or less Procedure C Soil Passing 3/4 in. (19.0 mm) Sieve Mold : 6 in. (152.4 mm) diameter Layers : 5 (Five) Blows per layer : 56 (fifty-six) Use if +3/8 in. is >20% and +¾ in. is <30% Particle-Size Distribution:3:45:52GR:SA:FIAtterberg Limits: LL,PL,PI Optimum Moisture Content (%) Maximum Dry Density (pcf) Net Weight of Soil (g) Wet Density (pcf) MODIFIED PROCTOR COMPACTION TEST ASTM D 1557 Project No.: Locaton: Dry Weight of Soil + Cont. (g) Weight of Mold (g) TEST NO. Soil Identification: Sample No.: Lewis/Rosemead Condos Wt. Compacted Soil + Mold (g) Project Name: Grayish brown sandy lean clay s(CL) Dry Density (pcf) Moisture Content (%) Wet Weight of Soil + Cont. (g) Weight of Container (g) 14030.001 110.0 115.0 120.0 125.0 130.0 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20. Dr y D e n s i t y ( p c f ) Moisture Content (%) SP. GR. = 2.50SP. GR. = 2.55SP. GR. = 2.60 XX MX 03-28-24, #2, Backfill, Stockpile T2 &/ Leighton Project Name:Lewis/Rosemead Condos Project No.: 14030.001 Locaton: Backfill, Stockpile T2 Sample No.: 03-28-24, #2 Soil Identification:Grayish brown sandy lean clay s(CL) MODIFIED PROCTOR COMPACTION TEST ASTM D 1557 Tested By: N. Peterson Checked By: J. Ward Depth (ft.): N/A Date: Date: 03/29/24 04/02/24 Preparation Method: X Mold Volume (ft3) 0.03320 Moist Dry X | Mechanical Ram Manual Ram Ram Weight = 10 1b.; Drop = 18 in. TEST NO. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Wt. Compacted Soil + Mold (q) 3591 3722 3843 3858 Weight of Mold (9) 1808 1808 1808 1808 Net Weight of Soil (9) 1783 1914 2035 2050 Wet Weight of Soil + Cont. (g) 758.0 701.7 832.7 872.7 Dry Weight of Soil + Cont. (g) 738.2 669.2 777.0 800.4 Weight of Container (9) 78.0 74.8 77.0 77.0 Moisture Content (%) 3.00 5.47 7.96 9.99 Wet Density (pcf) 118.4 127.1 135.1 136.1 Dry Density (pcf) 114.9 120.5 125.2 123.8 Maximum Dry Density (pcf) Optimum Moisture Content (%) 8.6 | PROCEDURE USED 130.0 \ [X] Procedure A \ \ \ SP. GR.=250 Soil Passing No. 4 (4.75 mm) Sieve \ pus 8P. GR. = 2:60 h f \Mold : 4 in. (101.6 mm) diameter \ \ Layers: 5 (Five) \ Bl I : 25 (twenty-fiows per layer (twenty-five) 125.0 \ \ May be used if +#4 is 20% or less [[] Procedure B Soil Passing 3/8 in. (9.5 mm) Sieve Mold : 4 in. (101.6 mm) diameter Layers: 5 (Five) Blows per layer: 25 (twenty-five) Use if +#4 is >20% and +3/8 in. is 20% or less [C] Procedure C Soil Passing 3/4 in. (19.0 mm) Sieve Mold : 6in. (152.4 mm) diameter Layers: 5 (Five) Blows per layer: 56 (fifty-six) Use if +3/8 in. is >20% and +24 in. is <30% Particle-Size Distribution: | 3:45:52 | Atterberg Limits: LL,PLPI Dr y De n s i t y (p c f ) 3 o 115.0 110.0 4 o 1 7 ~= AT AT A ve 10.0 15.0 20. Moisture Content (%) MX 03-28-24, #2, Backfill, Stockpile T2 Tested By:N. Peterson Date:05/09/24 Checked By: A. Santos Date:05/15/24 LB-1 Depth (ft.):0-5 X Moist Rammer Weight (lb.) =10.0 Dry #3/4 Height of Drop (in.) =18.0 X #3/8 #4 5.0 0.03320 1 2 3 4 5 6 3801 3865 3860 1808 1808 1808 1993 2057 2052 783.7 650.9 799.0 742.9 605.3 726.4 77.2 88.6 77.0 6.13 8.83 11.18 132.3 136.6 136.3 124.7 125.5 122.6 125.8 8.0 127.4 7.7 X Procedure A Soil Passing No. 4 (4.75 mm) Sieve Mold : 4 in. (101.6 mm) diameter Layers : 5 (Five) Blows per layer : 25 (twenty-five) May be used if +#4 is 20% or less Procedure B Soil Passing 3/8 in. (9.5 mm) Sieve Mold : 4 in. (101.6 mm) diameter Layers : 5 (Five) Blows per layer : 25 (twenty-five) Use if +#4 is >20% and +3/8 in. is 20% or less Procedure C Soil Passing 3/4 in. (19.0 mm) Sieve Mold : 6 in. (152.4 mm) diameter Layers : 5 (Five) Blows per layer : 56 (fifty-six) Use if +3/8 in. is >20% and +¾ in. is <30% Particle-Size Distribution: GR:SA:FIAtterberg Limits: LL,PL,PI CLC.0014030001 Corrected Dry Density (pcf) Preparation Method: Dry Density (pcf) Mechanical Ram Net Weight of Soil (g) Wet Density (pcf) Moisture Content (%) Wet Weight of Soil + Cont. (g) Boring No.: Sample No.: Very dark brown clayey sand (SC) Scalp Fraction (%) Maximum Dry Density (pcf) Note: Corrected dry density calculation assumes specific gravity of 2.70 and moisture content of 1.0% for oversize particles Optimum Moisture Content (%) Corrected Moisture Content (%) Mold Volume (ft³) TEST NO. Weight of Container (g) Manual Ram Dry Weight of Soil + Cont. (g) Compaction Method MODIFIED PROCTOR COMPACTION TEST ASTM D 1557 Weight of Mold (g) Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE Parcel Wt. Compacted Soil + Mold (g) B-1 Soil Identification: Project Name: Project No.: 110.0 115.0 120.0 125.0 130.0 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 Dr y D e n s i t y ( p c f ) Moisture Content (%) SP. GR. = 2.55SP. GR. = 2.60SP. GR. = 2.65 MX LB-1, B-1 @ 0-5 YL eighton MODIFIED PROCTOR COMPACTION TEST ASTM D 1557 Project Name: Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE Parcel Tested By: N. Peterson Date: 05/09/24 Project No.: CLC.0014030001 Checked By: A. Santos Date: 05/15/24 Boring No.: LB-1 Depth (ft.): 0-5 Sample No.: B-1 Soil Identification:Very dark brown clayey sand (SC) Note: Corrected dry density calculation assumes specific gravity of 2.70 and moisture content of 1.0% for oversize particles Preparation X| Moist Scalp Fraction (%) Rammer Weight (Ib.) = 10.0 Method: Dry #3/4 Height of Drop (in.) = 18.0 Compaction X'| Mechanical Ram #3/8 Method Manual Ram #4 5.0 Mold Volume (ft3) 0.03320 TEST NO. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Wt. Compacted Soil + Mold (g) 3801 3865 3860 Weight of Mold (9) 1808 1808 1808 Net Weight of Soll (9) 1993 2057 2052 |___d Wet Weight of Soil + Cont. (g) 783.7 650.9 799.0 Dry Weight of Soil + Cont. (g) 742.9 605.3 726.4 Weight of Container (9) 77.2 88.6 77.0 |___{ J Moisture Content (%) 6.13 8.83 11.18 Wet Density (pcf) 132.3 136.6 136.3 Dry Density (pcf) 124.7 125.5 122.6 Maximum Dry Density (pcf) Optimum Moisture Content (%) Corrected Dry Density (pcf) 127.4 Corrected Moisture Content (%) [7.7 ] [X] Procedure A 130.0 Y \ TT] Soil Passing No. 4 (4.75 mm) Sieve \ ! Mold : 4 in. (101.6 mm) diameter \ \ \ op er 25% Layers: 5 (Five) BY SP. GR. =265 Blows per layer : 25 (twenty-five) \ \ May be used if +#4 is 20% or less \ \ \ Procedure B : v N\ \ \ \ Soil Passing 3/8 in. (9.5 mm) Sieve \ \ Mold : 4 in. (101.6 mm) diameter \ Layers: 5 (Five) S \ Blows per layer: 25 (twenty-five) e \ \ Use if +#4 is >20% and +3/8 in. is o, \ \ 20% or less > 120.0 \ A£ \ \\[] Procedure C a \ \ Soil Passing 3/4 in. (19.0 mm) Sieve 2» \ \ \ Mold: 6in. (152.4 mm) diameter Q \ Layers: 5 (Five) \ \ \ Blows per layer: 56 (fifty-six) \ \ \ Use if +3/8 in. is >20% and +% in. 115.0 \ \ is <30% \ Particle-Size Distribution: — \Atterberg Limits: 110.0 A\0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20. [LPL PI Moisture Content (%) MXLB-1,B-1@ 0-5 Backfill, Stockpile T2 Backfill, Stockpile T2 03-28-24, #1 03-28-24, #2 N/A N/A Bulk Bulk 4086.90 874.30 231.90 76.30 3855.00 798.00 Sample Dry Weight Determination, Retained on Sieve #4 226.80 102.40 70.50 76.70 156.30 25.70 Sample Dry Weight Determination, Passing Sieve #4 605.80 503.40 109.80 76.30 496.00 427.10 BB 335.90 274.80 109.80 76.30 226.10 198.50 95.9 96.8 4.1 3.2 52.2 51.8 Project Name:Lewis/Rosemead Condos Project No.:14030.001 Tested By:KJ/JD Date:03/29/24 % Retained No. 4 Sieve Grayish brown sandy lean clay, s(CL) Weight of Container (g) Dry Weight of Soil (g) Soil Identification Dry Weight of Soil + Container (g) No Moisture Correction; ASTM D 1140 modified to include splitting the sample on the #4 sieve PERCENT PASSING No. 200 SIEVE ASTM D 1140 Dry Weight of Sample + Cont. (g) Method (A or B) Weight of Container (g) Weight of Dry Sample (g) % Passing No. 200 Sieve After Wash Weight of Dry Sample (g) Dry Weight of Sample + Cont. (g) Grayish brown sandy lean clay, s(CL) Boring No. Sample No. Depth (ft.) Sample Type % Passing No. 4 Sieve Total Sample Dry Weight Determination Dry Weight of Sample + Cont. (g) Weight of Container (g) Weight of Dry Sample (g) Weight of Container (g) Passing #200 Bulk #1 and Bulk #2 TOACKTIDECRITT,~SToCKpTE— TSTOCRpTE Boring No. T2 T2 Sample No. 03-28-24, #1 | 03-28-24, #2 Depth (ft.) N/A N/A Sample Type Bulk Bulk Soil Identification Grayish brown sandy lean clay, s(CL) Grayish brown sandy lean clay, s(CL) No Moisture Correction; ASTM D 1140 modified to include splitting the sample on the #4 sieve Total Sample Dry Weight Determination Dry Weight of Soil + Container (g) 4086.90 874.30 Weight of Container (9) 231.90 76.30 Dry Weight of Soil (g) 3855.00 798.00 Sample Dry Weight Determination, Retained on Sieve #4 Dry Weight of Sample + Cont. (g) 226.80 102.40 Weight of Container (2) 70.50 76.70 Weight of Dry Sample (g) 156.30 25.70 Sample Dry Weight Determination, Passing Sieve #4 Dry Weight of Sample + Cont. (g) 605.80 503.40 Weight of Container 9) 109.80 76.30 Weight of Dry Sample (g) 496.00 427.10 After Wash Method (A or B) B B Dry Weight of Sample + Cont. (g) 335.90 274.80 Weight of Container (9) 109.80 76.30 Weight of Dry Sample (g) 226.10 198.50 % Passing No. 4 Sieve 95.9 96.8 % Retained No. 4 Sieve 4.1 3.2 % Passing No. 200 Sieve 52.2 51.8 Project Name: Lewis/Rosemead Condos . PERCENT PASSING Project No.: 14030.001& Leighton No. 200 SIEVE ASTM D 1140 Tested By: KJ3/ID Date: 03/29/24 Passing #200 Bulk #1 and Bulk #2 LB-1 LB-3 R-3 S-1 10 15 Ring SPT 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 907.2 991.6 243.6 234.4 663.6 757.2 B B 469.0 516.4 243.6 234.4 225.4 282.0 66.0 62.8 34.0 37.2 Project Name:Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE Parcel Project No.:14030.001 Tested By:K. Jumig Date:05/08/24 PERCENT PASSING No. 200 SIEVE ASTM D 1140 Weight of Sample + Container (g) Method (A or B) Weight of Container (g) % Retained No. 200 Sieve Strong brown sandy lean clay s(CL) Boring No. Sample No. Soil Identification Depth (ft.) % Passing No. 200 Sieve Moisture Correction Weight of Dry Sample (g) Dry Weight of Sample + Cont. (g) After Wash Dry Weight of Sample (g) Wet Weight of Soil + Container (g) Sample Dry Weight Determination Moisture Content (%) Dry Weight of Soil + Container (g) Weight of Container (g) Container No.: Sample Type Dark yellowish brown sandy lean clay s(CL) Weight of Container (g) Passing #200 LB-1, R-3; LB-3, S-1 Boring No. LB-1 LB-3 Sample No. R-3 S-1 Depth (ft.) 10 15 Sample Type Ring SPT ro ons Strong brown Soil Identification lean clay sandy lean s(CL) clay s(CL) Moisture Correction Wet Weight of Soil + Container (q) 0.0 0.0 Dry Weight of Soil + Container (g) 0.0 0.0 Weight of Container (9) 1.0 1.0 Moisture Content (%) 0.0 0.0 Sample Dry Weight Determination Weight of Sample + Container (g) 907.2 991.6 Weight of Container (9) 243.6 234.4 Weight of Dry Sample (g) 663.6 757.2 Container No.: After Wash Method (A or B) B B Dry Weight of Sample + Cont. (g) 469.0 516.4 Weight of Container (9) 243.6 234.4 Dry Weight of Sample (g) 225.4 282.0 9% Passing No. 200 Sieve 66.0 62.8 % Retained No. 200 Sieve 34.0 37.2 Project Name: Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE Parcel wv . PERCENT PASSING Project No.: 14030.0017..Leighton No. 200 SIEVE ASTM D 1140 Tested By: K. Jumig Date: 05/08/24 Passing #200 LB-1, R-3; LB-3, S-1 LB-2 R-1 5.0 Ring 1119.7 223.5 896.2 Sample Dry Weight Determination, Retained on Sieve #4 70.3 60.3 10.0 Sample Dry Weight Determination, Passing Sieve #4 608.3 108.0 500.3 B 347.3 108.0 239.3 98.9 1.1 51.6 Project Name:Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE Parcel Project No.:CLC.0014030001 Tested By:K. Jumig Date:05/08/24 % Retained No. 4 Sieve Very dark brown sandy lean clay s(CL) Weight of Container (g) Dry Weight of Soil (g) Soil Identification Dry Weight of Soil + Container (g) No Moisture Correction; ASTM D 1140 modified to include splitting the sample on the #4 sieve PERCENT PASSING No. 200 SIEVE ASTM D 1140 Dry Weight of Sample + Cont. (g) Method (A or B) Weight of Container (g) Weight of Dry Sample (g) % Passing No. 200 Sieve After Wash Weight of Dry Sample (g) Dry Weight of Sample + Cont. (g) Boring No. Sample No. Depth (ft.) Sample Type % Passing No. 4 Sieve Total Sample Dry Weight Determination Dry Weight of Sample + Cont. (g) Weight of Container (g) Weight of Dry Sample (g) Weight of Container (g) Passing #200 LB-2, R-1 @ 5 Boring No. LB-2 Sample No. R-1 Depth (ft.) 5.0 Sample Type Ring Very dark Soil Identification brown sandylean clay s(CL) No Moisture Correction; ASTM D 1140 modified to include splitting the sample on the #4 sieve Total Sample Dry Weight Determination Dry Weight of Sail + Container (g) 1119.7 Weight of Container (9) 223.5 Dry Weight of Soil (g) 896.2 Sample Dry Weight Determination, Retained on Sieve #4 Dry Weight of Sample + Cont. (g) 70.3 Weight of Container (9) 60.3 Weight of Dry Sample (g) 10.0 Sample Dry Weight Determination, Passing Sieve #4 Dry Weight of Sample + Cont. (g) 608.3 Weight of Container (9) 108.0 Weight of Dry Sample (g) 500.3 After Wash Method (A or B) B Dry Weight of Sample + Cont. (g) 347.3 Weight of Container (9) 108.0 Weight of Dry Sample (g) 239.3 % Passing No. 4 Sieve 98.9 % Retained No. 4 Sieve 1.1 % Passing No. 200 Sieve 51.6 4 Leighton PERCENT PASSING No. 200 SIEVE ASTM D 1140 Project Name: Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE Parcel Project No.: Tested By: CLC.0014030001 K. Jumig Date: Passing #200 1LB-2, R-1@ 5 05/08/24 Project Name:Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE Parcel Tested By:J. Domingo Date:05/09/24 Project No. :Input By:G. Bathala Date:05/13/24 Boring No.:Checked By:J. Ward Sample No.:Depth (ft.)10.0 Soil Identification: 1 2 1 2 3 4 29 21 15 9.35 9.34 22.58 23.48 23.10 8.19 8.16 17.37 17.93 17.51 1.03 1.05 1.06 1.06 1.07 16.20 16.60 31.94 32.90 34.00 32 16 16 CL PI at "A" - Line = 0.73(LL-20) 8.76 One - Point Liquid Limit Calculation LL =Wn(N/25) PROCEDURES USED Wet Preparation Multipoint - Wet X Dry Preparation Multipoint - Dry X Procedure A Multipoint Test Procedure B One-point Test Dark yellowish brown sandy lean clay s(CL) ATTERBERG LIMITS ASTM D 4318 CLC.0014030001 LB-1 R-3 Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) Wt. of Container (g) Moisture Content (%) [Wn] TEST NO. Liquid Limit Plastic Limit Plasticity Index Classification Number of Blows [N] Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) LIQUID LIMIT PLASTIC LIMIT 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Pl a s t i c i t y I n d e x ( P I ) Liquid Limit (LL) 0.12 CL or OL ML or OL MH or OH For classification of fine-grained soils and fine-grained fraction of coarse-grained soils "A" Line 74 CH or OH CL-ML 31 32 33 34 35 10 100 Mo i s t u r e C o n t e n t ( % ) Number of Blows 20 25 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 YL eighton ATTERBERG LIMITS ASTM D 4318 Project Name: Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE Parcel Tested By: J. Domingo Date: 05/09/24 Project No. : CLC.0014030001 Input By: G. Bathala Date: 05/13/24 Boring No.: LB-1 Checked By: J. Ward Sample No.: R-3 Depth (ft.) 10.0 Soil Identification: Dark yellowish brown sandy lean clay s(CL) TEST PLASTIC LIMIT LIQUID LIMIT NO. 1 2 1 2 3 4 Number of Blows [N] EJ 29 21 15 Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) 9.35 9.34 22.58 23.48 23.10 Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) 8.19 8.16 17.37 17.93 17.51 Wt. of Container (9) 1.03 1.05 1.06 1.06 1.07 Moisture Content (%) [Wn] 16.20 16.60 31.94 32.90 34.00 60 Liquid Limit 32 For classification of fine- / grained soils and fine- Plastic Limit 16 50 1 grained fraction of coarse- TL grained soils CH or OHPlasticity Index 16 = 40 ~ "A" LiClassification CL 3 "2 30] Zz PI at "A" - Line = 0.73(LL-20) 876 | B20 Choro One - Point Liquid Limit Calculation a ° 0.12 10 1 MH or OHLL =Wn(N/25) : cL ML ML or OL 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Wet Preparation % Multipoint - Wet X | Dry Preparation 34 Multipoint - Dry < I=2cX | Procedure A Ss ¥® IN Multipoint Test £ ki]©=Procedure B 32 | One-point Test 31 10 20 25 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Number of Blows Project Name:Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE Parcel Tested By:J. Domingo Date:05/09/24 Project No. :Input By:G. Bathala Date:05/13/24 Boring No.:Checked By:J. Ward Sample No.:Depth (ft.)5.0 Soil Identification: 1 2 1 2 3 4 30 22 16 10.01 9.91 23.43 23.65 23.17 8.78 8.73 18.39 18.40 17.85 1.03 1.00 1.03 1.03 1.11 15.87 15.27 29.03 30.22 31.78 30 16 14 CL PI at "A" - Line = 0.73(LL-20) 7.3 One - Point Liquid Limit Calculation LL =Wn(N/25) PROCEDURES USED Wet Preparation Multipoint - Wet X Dry Preparation Multipoint - Dry X Procedure A Multipoint Test Procedure B One-point Test Very dark brown sandy lean clay s(CL) ATTERBERG LIMITS ASTM D 4318 CLC.0014030001 LB-2 R-1 Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) Wt. of Container (g) Moisture Content (%) [Wn] TEST NO. Liquid Limit Plastic Limit Plasticity Index Classification Number of Blows [N] Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) LIQUID LIMIT PLASTIC LIMIT 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Pl a s t i c i t y I n d e x ( P I ) Liquid Limit (LL) 0.12 CL or OL ML or OL MH or OH For classification of fine-grained soils and fine-grained fraction of coarse-grained soils "A" Line 74 CH or OH CL-ML 28 29 30 31 32 33 10 100 Mo i s t u r e C o n t e n t ( % ) Number of Blows 20 25 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 YL eighton ATTERBERG LIMITS ASTM D 4318 Project Name: Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE Parcel Tested By: J. Domingo Date: 05/09/24 Project No. : CLC.0014030001 Input By: G. Bathala Date: 05/13/24 Boring No.: LB-2 Checked By: J. Ward Sample No.: R-1 Depth (ft.) 5.0 Soil Identification: Very dark brown sandy lean clay s(CL) TEST PLASTIC LIMIT LIQUID LIMIT NO. 1 2 1 2 3 4 Number of Blows [N] TE._ JN 30 22 16 Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) 10.01 9.91 23.43 23.65 23.17 Dry Wt. of Soil + Cont. (g) 8.78 8.73 18.39 18.40 17.85 Wt. of Container (9) 1.03 1.00 1.03 1.03 1.11 Moisture Content (%) [Wn] 15.87 15.27 29.03 30.22 31.78 60 Liquid Limit 30 For classification of fine- / grained soils and fine- Plastic Limit 16 50 1 grained fraction of coarse- TL grained soils CH or OHPlasticity Index 14 = 40 ~ "A" LiClassification CL 3 "2 30] 2 PI at "A" - Line = 0.73(LL-20) 5 20] CLoroL One - Point Liquid Limit Calculation ae hd 0.12 10 1 MH or OHLL =Wn(N/25) : cL ML ML or OL 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Wet Preparation 3 Multipoint - Wet 32 ™X | Dry Preparation Multipoint - Dry < <4 31 2 X | Procedure A 3 Multipoint Test £ 30 ?ki]2Procedure B One-point Test 29 i 28 10 20 25 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Number of Blows PROJECT NAME:PROJECT NUMBER:CLC.0014030001 BORING NUMBER:LB-1 DEPTH (FT.):0-5 SAMPLE NUMBER:B-1 TECHNICIAN:O. Figueroa SAMPLE DESCRIPTION:Very dark brown clayey sand (SC)DATE COMPLETED:5/15/2024 TEST SPECIMEN a b c MOISTURE AT COMPACTION %9.1 10.0 11.0 HEIGHT OF SAMPLE, Inches 2.45 2.46 2.50 DRY DENSITY, pcf 126.9 126.0 125.0 COMPACTOR PRESSURE, psi 275 200 80 EXUDATION PRESSURE, psi 583 324 200 EXPANSION, Inches x 10exp-4 28 18 6 STABILITY Ph 2,000 lbs (160 psi)28 41 67 TURNS DISPLACEMENT 4.80 5.00 5.45 R-VALUE UNCORRECTED 71 59 39 R-VALUE CORRECTED 71 59 39 DESIGN CALCULATION DATA a b c GRAVEL EQUIVALENT FACTOR 1.0 1.0 1.0 TRAFFIC INDEX 5.0 5.0 5.0 STABILOMETER THICKNESS, ft.0.46 0.66 0.98 EXPANSION PRESSURE THICKNESS, ft.0.93 0.60 0.20 EXPANSION PRESSURE CHART EXUDATION PRESSURE CHART R-VALUE BY EXPANSION:61 R-VALUE BY EXUDATION:57 EQUILIBRIUM R-VALUE:57 R-VALUE TEST RESULTS DOT CA Test 301 Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE Parcel 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 CO V E R T H I C K N E S S B Y S T A B I L O M E T E R i n f e e t COVER THICKNESS BY EXPANSION in feet 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 0100200300400500600700800 R- V A L U E EXUDATION PRESSURE (psi) CO V E R TH I C K N E S S BY ST A B I L O M E T E R in fe e t wv Leig hion R-VALUE TEST RESULTS - DOT CA Test 301 PROJECT NAME: Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE Parcel PROJECT NUMBER: CLC.0014030001 BORING NUMBER: LB-1 DEPTH (FT.): 0-5 SAMPLE NUMBER: B-1 TECHNICIAN: O. Figueroa SAMPLE DESCRIPTION: Very dark brown clayey sand (SC) DATE COMPLETED: 5/15/2024 TEST SPECIMEN b c MOISTURE AT COMPACTION % 10.0 11.0 HEIGHT OF SAMPLE, Inches 2.46 2.50 DRY DENSITY, pcf 126.0 125.0 COMPACTOR PRESSURE, psi 200 80 EXUDATION PRESSURE, psi 324 200 EXPANSION, Inches x 10exp-4 18 6 STABILITY Ph 2,000 Ibs (160 psi) 4 67 TURNS DISPLACEMENT 5.00 5.45 R-VALUE UNCORRECTED 59 39 R-VALUE CORRECTED 59 39 DESIGN CALCULATION DATA b c GRAVEL EQUIVALENT FACTOR 1.0 1.0 TRAFFIC INDEX 5.0 5.0 STABILOMETER THICKNESS, ft. 0.66 0.98 EXPANSION PRESSURE THICKNESS, ft. 0.60 0.20 EXPANSION PRESSURE CHART 4.00 3.00 2.50 2.00 R- V A L U E 0.50 0.00 ¥& 000 050 1.00 150 200 250 3.00 350 4.00 COVER THICKNESS BY EXPANSION in feet R-VALUE BY EXPANSION: 61 R-VALUE BY EXUDATION: 57 EQUILIBRIUM R-VALUE: 57 20 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 EXUDATION PRESSURE CHART 500 400 300 EXUDATION PRESSURE (psi) 200 100 APPENDIX C PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS APPENDIX C PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS 4//Leighton a verdantas company Project Number:14030.0010000000 Test Hole Number:LB‐1 Project Name:Lewis Rosemead Condos Date Excavated: Earth Description:Alluvium Date Tested: Liquid Description:Tap water Depth of boring (ft):30 Tested By: MKD Radius of boring (in):4 Time Interval Standard Radius of casing (in):1 Start Time for Pre‐Soak:4/22/2024 Length of slotted of casing (ft):5 Start Time for Standard:4/23/2024 9:30 Porosity of Annulus Material, n :0.35 Bentonite Plug at Bottom: No 30 Reading Time Time Interval, Δt (min.) Initial/Final Depth to Water (ft.) Initial/Final Water Height, H0/Hf (in.) Total Water Drop, Δd (in.) Infiltration Rate (in./hr.) 9:43 20.00 120.0 9:55 22.60 88.8 9:55 22.60 88.8 10:05 24.11 70.7 10:05 24.11 70.7 10:15 25.39 55.3 10:23 20.01 119.9 10:53 25.25 57.0 10:57 20.01 119.9 11:27 25.38 55.4 11:44 20.01 119.9 12:14 25.12 58.6 12:22 20.01 119.9 12:52 25.12 58.6 1:00 20.02 119.8 1:30 25.31 56.3 Measured Infiltration Rate, I (Average of Last 3 Readings) = 1.07 in./hr. Reduction Factor from Test Procedure, RFt =1 Reduction Factor for Site Variability, # of Tests and Investigation, RFv =2 Reduction Factor for Long Term Siltation, Plugging and Maintenance, RFt =1 Reduction Factor, RF = RFt + RFv + RFs =4 Design Infiltration Rate = Measured Infiltration Rate / Reduction Factor (RF) = 0.27 in./hr. Field Percolation Data ‐ Falling Head Test Boring Percolation Test Data Sheet 4/22/2024 4/23/2024 Standard Time Interval Between Readings, mins: 1 12 31.2 1.15 2 10 18.1 1.04 3 10 15.4 1.11 4 30 62.9 1.09 5 30 64.4 1.12 6 30 61.3 1.05 1.05 8 30 63.5 1.10 Design Infiltration Rate 7 30 61.3 Project Number: Project Name: Earth Description: Liquid Description: Tested By: Time Interval Standard Start Time for Pre-Soak: Start Time for Standard: Standard Time Interval Between Readings, mins: 14030.0010000000 Boring Percolation Test Data Sheet Lewis Rosemead Condos Alluvium Tap water MKD 4/22/2024 4/23/2024 30 9:30 Test Hole Number: Date Excavated: Date Tested: Depth of boring (ft): Radius of boring (in): Radius of casing (in): Length of slotted of casing (ft): Porosity of Annulus Material, n: Bentonite Plug at Bottom: Field Percolation Data - Falling Head Test LB-1 4/22/2024 4/23/2024 30 4 1 Initial/Final Initial/Final . . . . nitial/kina Water Height, | Total Water InfiltrationReading Time Time Interval, At (min.} Depth to Hy/H D Ad (in) | Rate (in./hr.)Water (ft) v \ rop, in. ate (in./hr. 1 9:43 12 20.00 120.0 31.2 1.15 9:55 22.60 88.8 2 9:55 10 22.60 88.8 18.1 1.04 10:05 24.11 70.7 3 10:05 10 24.11 70.7 15.4 111 10:15 25.39 55.3 a 10:23 30 20.01 119.9 62.9 1.09 10:53 25.25 57.0 5 10:57 30 20.01 119.9 64.4 1.12 11:27 25.38 55.4 6 11:44 30 20.01 119.9 61.3 1.05 12:14 25.12 58.6 7 12:22 30 20.01 119.9 61.3 1.05 12:52 25.12 58.6 3 1:00 30 20.02 119.8 63.5 1.10 1:30 25.31 56.3 0.35 No Reduction Factor for Long Term Siltation, Plugging and Maintenance, RF, = Reduction Factor, RF = RF, + RF, + RF, = Design Infiltration Rate = Measured Infiltration Rate / Reduction Factor (RF) = Measured Infiltration Rate, | (Average of Last 3 Readings) = in./hr. Design Infiltration Rate Reduction Factor from Test Procedure, RF, = Reduction Factor for Site Variability, # of Tests and Investigation, RF, = 1 2 1 4 in./hr. Project Number:14030.0010000000 Test Hole Number:LB‐2 Project Name:Lewis Rosemead Condos Date Excavated: Earth Description:Alluvium Date Tested: Liquid Description:Tap water Depth of boring (ft):30 Tested By: MKD Radius of boring (in):4 Time Interval Standard Radius of casing (in):1 Start Time for Pre‐Soak:4/22/2024 Length of slotted of casing (ft):5 Start Time for Standard:4/23/2024 8:00 Porosity of Annulus Material, n :0.35 Bentonite Plug at Bottom: No 30 Reading Time Time Interval, Δt (min.) Initial/Final Depth to Water (ft.) Initial/Final Water Height, H0/Hf (in.) Total Water Drop, Δd (in.) Infiltration Rate (in./hr.) 8:14 21.00 108.0 8:44 21.90 97.2 8:47 20.90 109.2 9:17 21.61 100.7 9:19 20.05 119.4 9:49 21.21 105.5 9:54 20.09 118.9 10:24 21.75 99.0 10:29 20.02 119.8 10:59 20.91 109.1 11:02 20.01 119.9 11:32 21.01 107.9 11:41 20.01 119.9 11:11 21.01 107.9 Measured Infiltration Rate, I (Average of Last 3 Readings) = 0.16 in./hr. Reduction Factor from Test Procedure, RFt =1 Reduction Factor for Site Variability, # of Tests and Investigation, RFv =2 Reduction Factor for Long Term Siltation, Plugging and Maintenance, RFt =1 Reduction Factor, RF = RFt + RFv + RFs =4 Design Infiltration Rate = Measured Infiltration Rate / Reduction Factor (RF) = 0.04 in./hr. 7 30 12.0 0.16 Design Infiltration Rate 6 30 12.0 0.16 5 30 10.7 0.14 4 30 19.9 0.28 3 30 13.9 0.19 2 30 8.5 0.12 1 30 10.8 0.16 Field Percolation Data ‐ Falling Head Test Boring Percolation Test Data Sheet 4/22/2024 4/23/2024 Standard Time Interval Between Readings, mins: Project Number: Project Name: Earth Description: Liquid Description: Tested By: Time Interval Standard Start Time for Pre-Soak: Start Time for Standard: Standard Time Interval Between Readings, mins: Boring Percolation Test Data Sheet 14030.0010000000 Lewis Rosemead Condos Alluvium Tap water MKD 4/22/2024 4/23/2024 30 8:00 Test Hole Number: Date Excavated: Date Tested: Depth of boring (ft): Radius of boring (in): Radius of casing (in): Length of slotted of casing (ft): Porosity of Annulus Material, n: Bentonite Plug at Bottom: Field Percolation Data - Falling Head Test LB-2 4/22/2024 4/23/2024 30 4 1 Initial/Final Initial/Final . . . . nitial/kina Water Height, | Total Water InfiltrationReading Time Time Interval, At (min.} Depth to Hy/H D Ad (in) | Rate (in./hr.)Water (ft) v \ rop, in. ate (in./hr. 1 8:14 30 21.00 108.0 10.8 0.16 8:44 21.90 97.2 ) 8:47 30 20.90 109.2 85 0.12 9:17 21.61 100.7 3 9:19 30 20.05 119.4 13.9 0.19 9:49 21.21 105.5 a 9:54 30 20.09 118.9 19.9 0.28 10:24 21.75 99.0 5 10:29 30 20.02 119.8 10.7 0.14 10:59 20.91 109.1 6 11:02 30 20.01 119.9 12.0 0.16 11:32 21.01 107.9 7 11:41 30 20.01 119.9 12.0 0.16 11:11 21.01 107.9 Reduction Factor for Long Term Siltation, Plugging and Maintenance, RF, = Reduction Factor, RF = RF, + RF, + RF, = 0.35 Measured Infiltration Rate, | (Average of Last 3 Readings) =[ 016 | in./hr. Design Infiltration Rate Reduction Factor from Test Procedure, RF, = Reduction Factor for Site Variability, # of Tests and Investigation, RF, = Design Infiltration Rate = Measured Infiltration Rate / Reduction Factor (RF) = 1 2 1 4 in./hr. APPENDIX D SEISMIC ANALYSIS APPENDIX D SEISMIC ANALYSIS 4//Leighton a verdantas company USGS web services were down for some period of time and as a result this tool wasn't operational, resulting in timeout error. USGS web services are now operational so this tool should work as expected. [I | | a el e q Ismore Dr .“ElsmoreDr %-- = Sky Blue Pool BPlastering Co. Inc ¥ Yarrow St DA Y SA 0 I 9 IN U | E M Lewis R. Lancaster Research Library Google I OSHPD i - Map data ©2024 Date 6/13/2024, 2:35:51 PM PGA 0.904 T 8 SsRT 1.905 SsUH 2.129 SsD 2.408 S1RT 0.685 S1UH 0.766 S1D 0.754 PGAd 0.969 PGAyy 0.822 Crs 0.895 Cri 0.895 Cy 1.481 Vertical coefficient Design Code Reference Document ASCE7-16 Risk Category I Site Class D - Stiff Soil Type Value Description Sg 1.905 MCER, ground motion. (for 0.2 second period) Sy 0.685 MCER, ground motion. (for 1.0s period) Sms 1.905 Site-modified spectral acceleration value Sm null -See Section 11.4.8 Site-modified spectral acceleration value Sps 1.27 Numeric seismic design value at 0.2 second SA Spq null -See Section 11.4.8 Numeric seismic design value at 1.0 second SA Type Value Description SDC null -See Section 11.4.8 Seismic design category Fa 1 Site amplification factor at 0.2 second Fy null -See Section 11.4.8 Site amplification factor at 1.0 second PGA 0.822 MCE peak ground acceleration Fpga 1.1 Site amplification factor at PGA Site modified peak ground acceleration Long-period transition period in seconds Probabilistic risk-targeted ground motion. (0.2 second) Factored uniform-hazard (2% probability of exceedance in 50 years) spectral acceleration Factored deterministic acceleration value. (0.2 second) Probabilistic risk-targeted ground motion. (1.0 second) Factored uniform-hazard (2% probability of exceedance in 50 years) spectral acceleration. Factored deterministic acceleration value. (1.0 second) Factored deterministic acceleration value. (Peak Ground Acceleration) Uniform-hazard (2% probability of exceedance in 50 years) Peak Ground Acceleration Mapped value of the risk coefficient at short periods Mapped value of the risk coefficient at a period of 1 s DISCLAIMER The material presented in this web application should not be used or relied upon for any specific application without competent examination and verification of its accuracy, suitability and applicability by engineers or other licensed professionals. SEAOC / OSHPD do not intend that the use of this information replace the sound judgment of such competent professionals, having experience and knowledge in the field of practice, nor to substitute for the standard of care required of such professionals in interpreting and applying the results of the seismic data provided by this website. Users of the information from this website assume all liability arising from such use. Use of the output of this website does not imply approval by the governing building code bodies responsible for building code approval and interpretation for the building site described by latitude/longitude location in the search results of this website. Company Leighton & Associates, Inc. Project Number 14030.001 Project Name Lewis Rosemead Condos Project Location 1515 Walnut Avenue, Rosemead, CA Date of Field Data 1/31/2024 Survey Method CPT Shear Wave Measurement Exploration Location CPT-10 Depth (ft) Thickness, di (ft) Shear Wave Velocity, Vs (ft/sec)di/Vs 0 to 5 5.0 1,412.0 0.004 5 to 10 5.0 907.0 0.006 10 to 15 5.0 899.0 0.006 15 to 20 5.0 963.0 0.005 20 to 25 5.0 988.0 0.005 25 to 30 5.0 1,003.0 0.005 30 to 35 5.0 1,030.0 0.005 35 to 100 65.0 1,000.0 0.065 100.0 0.100 Average Shear Wave Vs 1002.9 ft/sec (in top 100') Site Class Shear Wave Velocity, Vs, ft/sec A Vs > 5,000 B 2,500 < Vs < 5,000 C 1,200 < Vs < 2,500 D 600 < Vs < 1,200 E Vs < 600 Site Class Very dense soil and soft rock Stiff soil profile Soft soil profile D SITE CLASS DETERMINATION WITH SHEAR WAVE VELOCITY Average Shear Wave Calculation (Vs) Site Class Definitions (ASCE 7-16) Soil Profile Name Hard Rock Rock Company Leighton & Associates, Inc. Project Number 14030.001 Project Name Lewis Rosemead Condos Project Location 1515 Walnut Avenue, Rosemead, CA Date of Field Data 1/31/2024 Survey Method CPT Shear Wave Measurement Exploration Location CPT-10 SITE CLASS DETERMINATION WITH SHEAR WAVE VELOCITY Average Shear Wave Calculation (Vs) Sh WwWDepth (ft) Thickness, di (ft) ear WaveVelocity, Vs (ft/sec) Oto5 5.0 1,412.0 0.004 5to 10 5.0 907.0 0.006 10to 15 5.0 899.0 0.006 15to 20 5.0 963.0 0.005 20to 25 5.0 988.0 0.005 25to 30 5.0 1,003.0 0.005 30to 35 5.0 1,030.0 0.005 35 to 100 65.0 1,000.0 0.065 100.0 0.100 Average Shear Wave vs| 1002.9 ft/sec | (in top 100") Site Class Definitions (ASCE 7-16) Site Class Soil Profile Name Shear WaveVelocity, Vs, ft/sec A Hard Rock Vs > 5,000 B Rock 2,500 < Vs < 5,000 Cc Very dense soil and soft rock 1,200 < Vs < 2,500 D Stiff soil profile 600 < Vs <1,200 E Soft soil profile Vs < 600 Site Class| D | U.S. Geological Survey - Earthquake Hazards Program Unified Hazard Tool Please do not use this tool to obtain ground motion parameter values for the design code reference documents covered by the U.S. Seismic Design Maps web tools (e.g., the International Building Code and the ASCE 7 or 41 Standard). The values returned by the two applications are not identical. Please also see the new USGS Earthquake Hazard Toolbox for access to the most recent NSHMs for the conterminous U.S. and Hawaii. A Input Edition Spectral Period Dynamic: Conterminous U.S. 2014 (u...Peak Ground Acceleration Latitude Decimal degrees Time Horizon Return period in years 34.0472 2475 Longitude Decimal degrees, negative values for western longitudes -118.083 Site Class 259 m/s (Site class D) Hazard Curve Hazard Curves Uniform Hazard Response Spectrum le+0 3.01 le-1 $Y 1e2- 2sc 5 I leq g —F] le-44 IC) 20 8 es 8 2 1e-6 —— Time Horizon 2475 years S& 16.74 —@— Peak Ground Acceleration = 1.54 g €-1 a= 0.10 Second Spectral Acceleration 2 g 1e-8 | == 0.20 Second Spectral Acceleration 3 re —e— 0.30 Second Spectral Acceleration 5 104 = le-99 _g p.50Second Spectral Acceleration 2 1e-10 | —e— 0.75 Second Spectral Acceleration c —&— 1.00 Second Spectral Acceleration Spectral Period (s): PGA<C 1e-11- —e— 2.00 Second Spectral Acceleration 051 G d Motion (g): 0.8420 le-12 | —®— 3.00 Second Spectral Acceleration roun otion {g): 0.: —e— 4.00 Second Spectral Accelerationle-13- —e— 5.00 Second Spectral Acceleration 0.0 T T T T T T T T T T T T T Tle-2 le-1 le+0 0.0 0.5 1.0 15 2.0 25 3.0 35 4.0 4.5 5.0 Ground Motion (g) Spectral Period (s) Component Curves for Peak Ground Acceleration le+0 le-14 ges le-2 [7]TB 1e3q@Q=]a ledfr[=> le-549)8L lebqo£2 ler S lesI= £ 1e-9-| = Time Horizon 2475 years —a— System 10] —e— Gridle-10 —o— Interface1e-114 —e— Fault le-2 View Raw Data Tle-1l Ground Motion (g) Tlet0 ~ Deaggregation Component Total 7 15 20 ya % Co n t r i b u t i o n to Ha z a r d 5 10 >@ XS : HW c=(-~.-25) HWc=[-25..-2) HWe=[-2.-1.5) Wcec=-[-15..-1) We=[1.-05)Cle=[05..0) [1e=[0..0.5) He=005.1) We=[1.15) HWc=[15.2) HWce=02.25) HW c=[25. +=) Summary statistics for, Deaggregation: Total Deaggregation targets Recovered targets Return period: 2475 yrs Exceedance rate: 0.0004040404 yr’ PGA ground motion: 0.84199343g Return period: 2933.5569 yrs Exceedance rate: 0.00034088311 yr’ Totals Mean (over all sources) Binned: 100% m: 6.88 Residual: 0% r: 10.11 km Trace: 0.06% €: 1440 Mode (largest m-r bin)Mode (largest m-r-z bin) m: 6.31 r: 6.67 km €: 1550 Contribution: 13.99% Discretization m: 6.52 r: 6.58 km ge 1.270 Contribution: 8.16% Epsilon keys r: min =0.0, max =1000.0, A=20.0 km m: min=4.4, max=9.4,A=0.2 € min=-3.0,max=3.0,A=0.50 €0: [-=©..-2.5) gl: [-2.5..-2.0) €2: [-2.0..-1.5) £3: [-1.5..-1.0) €4: [-1.0..-0.5) £5: [-0.5..0.0) 6: [0.0..0.5) €7: [0.5..1.0) €8: [1.0..1.5) €9: [1.5..2.0) €10: [2.0..2.5) €11: [2.5.. +x] Deaggregation Contributors Source Set Ly Source Type r m € lon lat az % UC33brAvg_FM31 System 43.17 Elysian Park (Upper) [0] 5.51 6.48 1.36 118.097°W 34.077°N 338.93 12.17 Whittier alt 1 [7] 6.50 6.74 1.44 118.046°W 33.999°N 147.70 6.40 Raymond [1] 9.31 7.22 1.55 118.103°W 34.128°N 348.32 4.58 Puente Hills [2] 9.39 7.31 0.95 118.113°W 33.963°N 196.68 4.48 Compton [1] 16.63 7.22 1.29 118.247°W 33.801°N 208.99 3.18 Elysian Park (Upper) [1] 9.36 7.18 1.15 118.169°W 34.072°N 289.61 3.02 Compton [2] 16.73 7.52 1.32 118.286°W 33.817°N 216.22 1.60 Sierra Madre [3] 15.50 7.74 1.74 118.061°W 34.185°N 7.38 1.30 UC33brAvg_FM32 System 41.45 Elysian Park (Upper) [0] 5.51 7.05 1.13 118.097°W 34.077°N 338.93 10.65 Puente Hills (Santa Fe Springs) [0] 9.31 6.95 1.02 118.043°W 33.945°N 162.03 5.52 Whittier alt 2 [6] 6.57 7.04 1.21 118.046°W 33.998°N 148.24 5.12 Raymond [1] 9.31 7.22 1.55 118.103°W 34.128°N 348.32 4.85 Compton [1] 16.63 7.29 1.26 118.247°W 33.801°N 208.99 3.45 Puente Hills (LA) [0] 6.24 7.17 0.83 118.116°W 33.990°N 206.00 2.72 Puente Hills (Coyote Hills) [1] 10.55 7.26 1.12 118.044°W 33.915°N 166.42 2.70 Compton [2] 16.73 7.49 1.32 118.286°W 33.817°N 216.22 1.38 Sierra Madre [3] 15.50 7.77 1.73 118.061°W 34.185°N 7.38 1.24 UC33brAvg_FM32 (opt) Grid 7.93 PointSourceFinite; -118.083, 34.097 7.36 5.70 1.81 118.083°W 34.097°N 0.00 1.30 PointSourceFinite: -118.083, 34.097 7.36 5.70 1.81 118.083°W 34.097°N 0.00 1.30 PointSourceFinite: -118.083, 34.106 8.00 5.72 1.90 118.083°W 34.106°N 0.00 1.07 PointSourceFinite: -118.083, 34.106 8.00 5.72 1.90 118.083°W 34.106°N 0.00 1.07 UC33brAvg _FM31 (opt) Grid 7.46 PointSourceFinite: -118.083, 34.097 7.40 5.68 1.83 118.083°W 34.097°N 0.00 1.33 PointSourceFinite: -118.083, 34.097 7.40 5.68 1.83 118.083°W 34.097°N 0.00 1.33 Leighton 14030.001 Overall vertical settlements report Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA CPTu Name CP T - 1 CP T - 1 1 CP T - 1 3 CP T - 1 5 CP T - 1 7 CP T - 1 9 CP T - 2 1 CP T - 2 3 CP T - 3 CP T - 5 CP T - 7 CP T - 9 CP T - 2 4 CP T - 2 6 CP T - 2 8 CP T - 2 9 CP T - 3 1 CP T - 3 3 CP T - 3 5 CP T - 3 7 CP T - 3 9 CP T - 4 1 CP T - 4 3 CP T - 4 4 CP T - 4 6 CP T - 4 9 CP T - 4 7 Ve r t i c a l s e t t l e m e n t ( i n ) 1.05 1.00 0.95 0.90 0.85 0.80 0.75 0.70 0.65 0.60 0.55 0.50 0.45 0.40 0.35 0.30 0.25 0.20 0.15 0.10 0.05 0.67 0.115 0.103 0.066 0.235 0.202 0.277 0.092 0.055 0.097 0.247 0.763 0.38 0.106 0.393 0.1 0.097 0.187 0.094 0.909 0.748 0.262 0.074 0.649 CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software 1 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq 4 Leghton Leighton Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA Overall vertical settlements report 1.05 1.00 0.95 0.90 0.85 0.80 0.75 0.70-1(0:67)= J = 0.65]= | S 0.60= - © 0.557 f=) - 2 0.50 8 0.454t= J [3> (0.277) [0.235] 0.202 0.092 0.097 = — on wn ~ [+)} ~— [3] [44] un [ny [e1] < 0 0 [<3] i (ya) wn ~~ [«)] i [ae] < [od [1] MNET 3 5 07 9g § pL Ep Eg pp 9 § § § ® © © om 9 ¥ ¥ ¥ ¥Y ¥ ¥6 ££ § KE KE FE EE BE 6 & 6 & § KE KE EE KE BE KE BE EE EE E KE EE EE &Q Q (8) Q (8) (8) Q Q [&) (8) Q (8) Q Q [&) Q (8) (8) Q (8) Q Q CPTu Name CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq Leighton 14030.001 Overall lateral displacements report Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA CPTu Name CP T - 1 CP T - 1 1 CP T - 1 3 CP T - 1 5 CP T - 1 7 CP T - 1 9 CP T - 2 1 CP T - 2 3 CP T - 3 CP T - 5 CP T - 7 CP T - 9 CP T - 2 4 CP T - 2 6 CP T - 2 8 CP T - 2 9 CP T - 3 1 CP T - 3 3 CP T - 3 5 CP T - 3 7 CP T - 3 9 CP T - 4 1 CP T - 4 3 CP T - 4 4 CP T - 4 6 CP T - 4 9 CP T - 4 7 La t e r a l d i s p l a c e m e n t ( i n ) 8.00 7.50 7.00 6.50 6.00 5.50 5.00 4.50 4.00 3.50 3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.108 0 0 0 0 1.377 7.103 3.267 0 5.841 0.86 0.265 1.924 0.816 0.547 0.213 2.287 0.053 2.007 CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software 1 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq 4 Leghton Leighton Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA Overall lateral displacements report 8.00 7.50 7.00 6.50 6.00 5.50 5.00 La t e r a l di s p l a c e m e n t (i n ) 2.108 0.00 er r r He ) cr 1 1 Ho ) cr r - 1 3 Ho ) ce r s Ho ) cr r 1 7 Ho ) cr r - 1 9 He ) cP T - 2 1 Cc P T - 2 3 ce r s Ho ) ce r s He ) er r He ) CP T - 2 4 CP T - 2 6 CP T - 2 8 CP T - 2 9 CP T - 3 1 CP T - 3 3 CP T - 3 5 CP T - 3 7 CP T - 3 9 CP T - 4 1 CP T 4 3 CP T - 4 4 CP T - 4 6 CP T - 4 9 CP T 4 7 CPTu Name CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq Leighton 14030.001 Overall Probability for Liquefaction report Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA CPTu Name CP T - 1 CP T - 1 1 CP T - 1 3 CP T - 1 5 CP T - 1 7 CP T - 1 9 CP T - 2 1 CP T - 2 3 CP T - 3 CP T - 5 CP T - 7 CP T - 9 CP T - 2 4 CP T - 2 6 CP T - 2 8 CP T - 2 9 CP T - 3 1 CP T - 3 3 CP T - 3 5 CP T - 3 7 CP T - 3 9 CP T - 4 1 CP T - 4 3 CP T - 4 4 CP T - 4 6 CP T - 4 9 CP T - 4 7 Ov e r a l l P r o b a b i l i t y ( % ) 9.00 8.50 8.00 7.50 7.00 6.50 6.00 5.50 5.00 4.50 4.00 3.50 3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 4.344 4.344 4.344 4.344 4.344 4.344 5.198 5.822 4.344 4.344 4.344 4.344 4.945 8.224 6.302 4.344 7.03 4.563 4.421 4.978 4.527 4.344 4.356 4.953 4.344 4.985 Probability color scheme Very High Probability High Probability Low Probability Basic statistics Total CPT number: 27 100% low probability 0% high probability 0% very high probability CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software 1 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq w Leighton Leighton 14030.001 Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA Overall Probability for Liquefaction report 14.344)[4.344](4.344)4.50 4.00 3.50]Ov e r a l l Pr o b a b i l i t y (% ) 3.00] 2.50 2.00] 1.50 1.00] 0.50] 0.00 CP T - 1 4.344 CP T - 1 1 CP T - 1 3 4.344 CP T - 1 5 CP T - 1 7 4.344] CP T - 1 9 CP T - 2 1 CP T - 2 3 CP T - 3 CP T - 5 CP T - 7 CP T - 9 < Oo [=] oY — [2]oN oN 3 3 hi aE EE EE KE KE &Q [&) (8) Q [&) Q CPTu Name CP T - 3 5 CP T - 3 7 CP T - 3 9 CP T 4 1 CP T 4 3 4.953 CP T - 4 4 CP T - 4 6 4.344 CP T 4 9 4.985 CP T - 4 7 Probability color scheme ll Very High Probability Il High Probability Il Low Probability Basic statistics Total CPT number: 27 100% low probability 0% high probability 0% very high probability CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value 6.500.90 G.W.T. (in-situ): G.W.T. (earthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA Leighton 14030.001 CPT file : CPT-1 40.00 ft 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Use fill: Fill height:Fill weight: Trans. detect. applied:Kσ applied: No N/AN/A NoYes Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied: Limit depth:MSF method: Sands onlyYes 50.00 ftMethod based Cone resistance qt (tsf)6004002000 De p t h ( f t ) 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SBTn Plot CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cy c lic S t r e s s R a t i o * (CS R *) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 No r m a l i z e d C P T p e n e t r a t i o n r e s i s t a n c e 1 10 100 1,000 Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction Ratio Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loadingZone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and groundgeometryZone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softeningZone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity,brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:14:49 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq 1 V/ Leighton 4 14030.001 Leighton LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA CPT file : CPT-1 Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (in-situ): 40.00 ft Use fill: No Clay like behavior Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (earthq.): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A applied: Sands only Points to test: Based on Ic value Average results interval: 3 Fill weight: N/A Limit depth applied: Yes Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Trans. detect. applied: No Limit depth: 50.00 ft Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT K, applied: Yes MSF method: Method based Cone resistance Friction Ratio SBTn Plot CRR plot FS Plot 0 To 0 T= 0 rE 4 2 2 2 41S 4 1% 4 6 Dp) 6 A= 6 8 8 .\ $10 10 2 10 12 & 12 12 14 \ 14 4 14 16 2 16 == 16]TN18 =y 18 7 18 = — AU= 20 ~ 20 20 a 22 22 { 22 8 24 244 24 26 26 Fell 26 28 > 28 od 28 i -30 = 30 Le 30 32 SS 32 32 34 ga 34 ~~ 34~~ Sem 36 AS 36 Pa 36 38 << 38 38 40 40 & 40 - v~~ During earthq. 42 42 42 LE T T T T T T T 0 200 400 600 0 2 4 6 8 10 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 qt (tsf) Rf (%) Ic (Robertson 1990) CRR & CSR Factor of safety M..=7'/2, sigma’=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential 0.8 1 1 | 1 1 1 1 Nn Nn Nn Nn 1.000 1 1 11a 1 [] |I TO | ] Liquefaction - 0.7 5 8 i c i - ©ht E wn 0.6 / [ 2 ] i c 1005 ©] LS 3[+4 ] - ® 7] 0 A 5 ]S 057 / [2]° / 2S 5 [| kK2 04 ©8 / 3I=] E 3 N7 i / I = 5 02 / FE<Q ] - I<}> i9) i S I 2 0.2 rd [ ] yd ~ 0.1 1 10 0.1 i Normalized friction ratio (%) 1 [ Zone Aq: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading E No Liquefaction | Zone A,: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground h geometry LL OL BLL BLL BLL BLL BLL RL BLEUE BLL BLL Zone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softening 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Zone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity, Qtn,cs brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:14:49 PM 1 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-1 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 De p t h ( f t ) 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Fr (%)1086420 De p t h ( f t ) 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio Bq 10.80.60.40.20-0.2 De p t h ( f t ) 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 De p t h ( f t ) 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type SBTn (Robertson 1990)1817161514131211109876543210 De p t h ( f t ) 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. Soil Behaviour Type Organic soil Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Sand & silty sandVery dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltSandSand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy siltClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Sand CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:14:49 PM 2 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq SBTn legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to silty 5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand to 9. Very stiff fine grained Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-1 Norm. cone resistance I—<< 10 12 14 <=hat16 18 20 22 De p t h (f t ) 24 26 — >28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 0 50 100 150 20( Input parameters and analysis data method: NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value Analysis Fines correction method: Points to test: Qtn Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft De p t h (f t ) CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio 0 —_— yN S| 4 7 | 6 ho J 5$ 10 § 12 TS —— 14 4 16 < Pd =18 JU my20 =) { £22 ( 3 [a] 24 ag 28 3 32 S 34 <<— 36 — 38 Fy 40 2 42 T T LJ T J 0 2 4 6 8 10 Fr (%) Depth to water table (erthqg.): 40.00 ft Average results interval: 3 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Use fill: No Fill height: N/A Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type 0 0 — = 5 i 4 bs | ) I ) i. 1. 116 | | 16 18 18° i 520 £20 E20£ 1] £22 2 22 | 2 22 24 24 24 26 26 | | 26 28 28 | | 28 30 30 I | 32 32 I | 34 34 I | 36 36 i | 38 38 40 40 42 LINN INN BE I RN NN RN NN BN RN 42 IL TL LL BL IL} NE Tare HN A 02 0 02 04 06 08 1 1 2 3 4 01234567 9101112131415161718 Ic (Robertson 1990) SBTn (Robertson 1990) Fill weight: N/A ; ine] SBTn legendTransition detect. applied: No Ko applied: } Yes 1 Sensitive fine grained [J] 4. Clayey silt to silty ll 7. Gravely sand to sand et applied: Sands only ll 2 Organic material [ll 5. Sity sand to sandy silt [J] 8. Very stiff sand to Limit depth: 50.00 ft [| 3. Clay to silty clay [| 6. Clean sand to silty sand O 9. Very stiff fine grained CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:14:49 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-1 CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Liquefaction potential LPI 20151050 De p t h ( f t ) 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Settlement (in)0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements Displacement (in)0 De p t h ( f t ) 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:14:49 PM 3 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-1 CRR plot 10 12 14 [a r y =} ju r y [= ] No |ml De p t h (f t ) S N-S N[= ] N[= ] 30 32 34 36 38 A 440[During earthq 42 Input parameters and analysis data NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value 6.50 0.90 Analysis method: Fines correction method: Points to test: Earthquake magnitude M,,: Peak ground acceleration: Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft 0.2 CRR & CSR 0.4 Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot De p t h (f t ) 0 0.5 1 1.5 Factor of safety Depth to water table (erthqg.): 40.00 ft Average results interval: 3 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Use fill: No Fill height: N/A Liquefaction potential De p t h (f t ) nNEN nN[+ 3 LPI 0 5 10 Fill weight: Transition detect. applied: K, applied: Clay like behavior applied: Limit depth applied: Limit depth: 15 20 N/A No Yes Sands only Yes 50.00 ft De p t h (f t ) 10 12 14 fu r y [« ) ] fu r y@ nNo nNN Niy 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 Vertical settlements Fr De p t h (f t ) 0.2 0.4 0.6 Settlement (in) F.S. color scheme || |_|Ll | |_| Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy 10 12 14 [a r y [= [a r y [= ] nNo NN Niy nNa N[= ] 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 Lateral displacements 0 Displacement (in) LPI color scheme Il Very high risk ll High risk Il Low risk CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:14:49 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value 6.500.90 G.W.T. (in-situ): G.W.T. (earthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA Leighton 14030.001 CPT file : CPT-3 40.00 ft 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Use fill: Fill height:Fill weight: Trans. detect. applied:Kσ applied: No N/AN/A NoYes Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied: Limit depth:MSF method: Sands onlyYes 50.00 ftMethod based Cone resistance qt (tsf)5000 De p t h ( f t ) 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SBTn Plot CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cy c lic S t r e s s R a t i o * (CS R *) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 No r m a l i z e d C P T p e n e t r a t i o n r e s i s t a n c e 1 10 100 1,000 Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction Ratio Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loadingZone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and groundgeometryZone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softeningZone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity,brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:14:50 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq 4 V/ Leighton 4 14030.001 Leighton LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA CPT file : CPT-3 Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (in-situ): 40.00 ft Use fill: No Clay like behavior Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (earthq.): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A applied: Sands only Points to test: Based on Ic value Average results interval: 3 Fill weight: N/A Limit depth applied: Yes Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Trans. detect. applied: No Limit depth: 50.00 ft Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT K, applied: Yes MSF method: Method based Cone resistance Friction Ratio SBTn Plot CRR plot FS Plot 0 a — [J 0 [= 42 y 2 {1 2 2 2 6 { 6 6 6 6 8 8 Rg 8 8 8 10 10 3 10 10 10 12 12 —_—— 12 12 12<<14 [ 14 3 14 14 14 16 16 16 16 16NU > 18 18S] 18 18 18= _S <<c 20 20 20 20] 20hd[=¥ 4: fo)BE] 22 ~~ 22 2 22 22 22 24 << 24 = 24 24 24 ——26 « 261—& 26 26 26 28 C 28 <4 28 28 28 30 > 30 ¢Lr 30 30 30 32 A 3 in 32 32 32 34 p) 34 § 34 34] 34 36 36 36rd 36 ar 36 38 38 ——y 38 38 38 h 4 40 =| 40 Ea . : . . 40 40 : During gartha. : 40 0 500 0 2 4 6 8 10 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 qt (tsf) Rf (%) Ic (Robertson 1990) CRR & CSR Factor of safety M..=7'/2, sigma’=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential 0.8 1 1 [1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.000 1 1 1 | | 11 1 [] 11 ] Liquefaction - ; 0.7 5 8 J c J - ©ht ] / [4 E wn 0.6 / I 3 i c 1005 © EE[04 7 - © Twn =] = f=] ]Oo 0.5 ] / [ a ] ° / 2= 5 [| kK« 0.4 o § / | 3S E } N7 i / I = po 0.3 / - £ [4 ] |- oS J9) i S I 2 0.2 7 [ ] yd ~ 0.1 1 10 0.1 i Normalized friction ratio (%) 1 [ Zone Aq: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading E No Liquefaction | Zone A,: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground ] LL OL BLL BLL BLL BLL BLL RL BLEUE BLL BLL Joma B Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softening 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Zone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity, Qtn,cs brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:14:50 PM 4 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-3 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 De p t h ( f t ) 41 40 39 38 3736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 2322 21 20 19 18 17 1615 14 13 12 11 10 98 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Fr (%)1086420 De p t h ( f t ) 41 40 39 38 3736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 2322 21 20 19 18 17 1615 14 13 12 11 10 98 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio Bq 10.80.60.40.20-0.2 De p t h ( f t ) 41 40 39 38 3736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 2322 21 20 19 18 17 1615 14 13 12 11 10 98 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 De p t h ( f t ) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 2625 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type SBTn (Robertson 1990)1817161514131211109876543210 De p t h ( f t ) 41 40 39 38 3736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 2322 21 20 19 18 17 1615 14 13 12 11 10 98 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Norm. Soil Behaviour Type Clay Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soil Clay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soilSand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltClaySilty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilSand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clayClay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilClay Sand & silty sandSand CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:14:50 PM 5 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq SBTn legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to silty 5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand to 9. Very stiff fine grained Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-3 CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. cone resistance Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type 0 fe— 0 0 0 0 : Clay 1 1 > 1 1 1 2 274 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 Sand & sitty sand4 4 L 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 TPE6 — 6 ps : 6 Very! denge/stiff soil~~7 ai 7 7 7 7 Naru da bs HI—— Vv ry UCT LL] 8 8 a 8 8 8 9 ba 9 9 9 |Id Bd 2 :10 7 10 13 10 10 10 Very dense/siif se i 11 Ki 11 ) 3 11 11 11 12 <= 12 — 12 12 Sit 13 yal 13 = 13 13 il 14 7 14 14 14 15 ( 15 IS 15 1516 \. 16 BS 16 16 — 17 — 17 17 17 i 18 18 18 18 £19 == £19] E19 £19 E yiSe? St St? Nt? Sr Hc 20 << c 20 — c 20 £20 = y| 21 Ny a 21 B21 = F=1[+] [] [] @ @ H8 22 8 24x & 2 a2 a y a23 23 < 23 23 he it | 24 24 jp —= 24 ;25 25 — = 25 i 26 26 S 26 27 27 2728 Vad 28 S it— ml — 28 294—& 29 — 29ro IE 2 x— 32 Z/ 32 = 32N ’ .33 33 33 y-Silt-| 34 34 34 35 > 35 \ 35 - 36 36 he 36 il 37 37 37 it 38 = 38 38 39 39 39 40 40 40 eh 41 T T T T 41 T T T T T 41 T T T T T T LN LO BLN BL NL 0 50 100 150 20( 0 2 4 6 8 10 02 0 02 04 06 08 1 2 3 4 012345678 9101112131415161718 Qtn Fr (%) Bq Ic (Robertson 1990) SBTn (Robertson 1990) Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Depth to water table (erthqg.): 40.00 ft Fill weight: N/A SBTn | d Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Average results interval: 3 Transition detect. applied: No h legen Points to test: Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value: 2.60 K; applied: Yes 1 Sensitive fine grained [J] 4. Clayey silt to silty ll 7. Gravely sand to sandEarthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied: ~~ Sands only . . . ! Peak ground acceleration: ~~ 0.90 Use fill: No Limit depth applied: Yes || 2. Organic material || 5. Silty sand to sandy silt || 8. Very stiff sand toDepth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A Limit depth: 50.00 ft IB 3. Clay tossilty clay Il 6. Clean sand to sity sand [] 9. Very stiff fine grained CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:14:50 PM 5 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-3 CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 41 40 39 38 3736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 2322 21 20 19 18 17 1615 14 13 12 11 10 98 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 41 40 39 38 3736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 2322 21 20 19 18 17 1615 14 13 12 11 10 98 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 FS Plot During earthq. Liquefaction potential LPI 20151050 De p t h ( f t ) 41 40 39 38 3736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 2322 21 20 19 18 17 1615 14 13 12 11 10 98 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Settlement (in)0.080.060.040.020 De p t h ( f t ) 41 40 39 38 3736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 2322 21 20 19 18 17 1615 14 13 12 11 10 98 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements Displacement (in)0 De p t h ( f t ) 41 40 39 38 3736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 2322 21 20 19 18 17 1615 14 13 12 11 10 98 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:14:50 PM 6 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-3 CRR plot —HF OW O W O N O G O U D W N R O ju r y N ju r y w [a r y iy ju r y wu [a r y =} ju r y ~ ju r y [= ] ju r y © N[h r De p t h (f t ) S NN Nw NEY Nwu Na N~ N[= < ] N© w[= ] wrg wN ww wry wwu wa w~ w[= ] w[=A 4EN= EN=During earthg T 0 0.2 CRR & CSR Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method: Points to test: Earthquake magnitude M,,; Peak ground acceleration: Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Based on Ic value Liquefaction analysis overall plots 0 1 2 34 5 6 7 8 De p t h (f t ) 0 0.5 1 1.5 Factor of safety Depth to water table (erthqg.): 40.00 ft Average results interval: 3 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Use fill: No Fill height: N/A Liquefaction potential 0T~ 1 2- 3pgs EN J 5s |e—| NS I ga—| 9 o+— | 11 21+— 13 T— 15 61— 17 8 1+— 19 01— 2n1+— B—— BM — BT — 6 — 7 BT — 290—1— BT —n———— BRT — BT —KE LE KL 7 T— 38 39 40 41 De p t h (f t ) LPI Fill weight: Transition detect. applied: K, applied: Clay like behavior applied: Limit depth applied: Limit depth: 15 20 N/A No Yes Sands only Yes 50.00 ft De p t h (f t ) Vertical settlements WO N T DW N R E O fu r y o fu r y—- ju r y N =AW fJ{{{|JI; —\ =Ny o n fu r y@ NN = = Ow nNN De p t h (f t ) Nw NiN N(5 ) NN N WN N'= ] ww=] wN ww WwA Ww ww w NG O ; Ww [+ Hb=] o 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 Settlement (in) F.S. color scheme || |_|Ll | |_| Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Wo O o N O O T U H h W N R E F E O Lateral displacements 0 Displacement (in) LPI color scheme Il Very high risk ll High risk Il Low risk CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:14:50 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value 6.500.90 G.W.T. (in-situ): G.W.T. (earthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA Leighton 14030.001 CPT file : CPT-5 40.00 ft 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Use fill: Fill height:Fill weight: Trans. detect. applied:Kσ applied: No N/AN/A NoYes Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied: Limit depth:MSF method: Sands onlyYes 50.00 ftMethod based Cone resistance qt (tsf)5000 De p t h ( f t ) 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SBTn Plot CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cy c lic S t r e s s R a t i o * (CS R *) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 No r m a l i z e d C P T p e n e t r a t i o n r e s i s t a n c e 1 10 100 1,000 Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction Ratio Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loadingZone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and groundgeometryZone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softeningZone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity,brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:14:50 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq 7 V/ Leighton 4 14030.001 Leighton LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA CPT file : CPT-5 Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (in-situ): 40.00 ft Use fill: No Clay like behavior Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (earthq.): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A applied: Sands only Points to test: Based on Ic value Average results interval: 3 Fill weight: N/A Limit depth applied: Yes Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Trans. detect. applied: No Limit depth: 50.00 ft Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT K, applied: Yes MSF method: Method based Cone resistance Friction Ratio SBThn Plot CRR plot FS Plot0 5 0 i EE 0 0 — 2 > 2 J 2 2 4 4 4 4I =6 6 — 6 6 8 8 E3 8 8- 10 10 Ss 10 10 12 \ 12 3 12 12 14 14 A 14 14 16 16 <<S 16 16 ~~E18 5 18 — 18 18 g 20 ( 20 ———— 20 20 8 2 —_ 2 = 2 22 24 { 24 24 24 26 26 2] 26 26 28 Pd 28 28 28 30 ~ 30 - 30 30 32 32 $ 32 32 34 | i 34rd 34 34 36 = 36 ™ 36 36 38 N— 38 Lo 38 38 40 fn BY 40 4' ‘ ' ' © During earthq. °*0 500 0 2 4 6 8 10 1 2 3 4 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 . qt (tsf) Rf (%) Ic (Robertson 1990) CRR & CSR Factor of safety M..=7'/2, sigma’=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential 0.8 1 1 [1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.000 1 1 1 [EE 1 [] yt 1111] ] Liquefaction - ; 0.7 5 8 i c i - ©ht E wn 0.6 / [ 2 i - c 1005o E 3 ° J][+4 ] - ® 7]0 h | I= ]Oo 0.5 ] / [ a 7 ° / 2S 5 [| kK2 04 ©§ / | 3I=] E 3 N& ] / L = 5 02 / FE[4 ] |- o> i9) i S I 2 0.2 rd [ ] yd ~ 0.1 1 10 0.1 i Normalized friction ratio (%) 1 [ Zone Aq: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading E No Liquefaction | Zone A,: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground h geometry LL OL BLL BLL BLL BLL BLL RL BLEUE BLL BLL Zone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softening 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Zone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity, Qtn,cs brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:14:50 PM 7 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-5 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 De p t h ( f t ) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Fr (%)1086420 De p t h ( f t ) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio Bq 10.80.60.40.20-0.2 De p t h ( f t ) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type SBTn (Robertson 1990)1817161514131211109876543210 De p t h ( f t ) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Norm. Soil Behaviour Type ClayClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilClayClayClayClay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilSand & silty sandClay & silty clayClayClay & silty claySand & silty sand Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltClayClay Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilSand & silty sandSand CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:14:50 PM 8 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq SBTn legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to silty 5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand to 9. Very stiff fine grained Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-5 CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. cone resistance Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type 1] — 0 = — 0 0 — TRY —T 1 1 1 1 Clay & ay i 2 2 =; 2 2 Sty sat andy gt 3 3 = 3 3 .SE Sand & silty sand In 4 4 4 4 Silly sand& sandy si5 5 = 5 5 Very dense/stif soit|| 6 6 —— 6 6 aT7 ~~ 7 Dow 7 ; Very. dense/sti || 8 pd 8 r= Mary d hi H]4 -Y 8 8 4y Got L] 2 { 2 rd 2 ° Clay,10 7d 10 10 10 Clas 11 LN 11 11 11 AP 12 7 12 12 12 Clay 13 7 13 3 13 13 Clayr& ay 14 14 14 14 15 {¢ 15 ~ 15 15 16 16 16 16 17 17 17hy ——— 18 J ~~ 18 17 || jin) = I = = 18 =£19 E19 _ E19 E19 = £ 20 £20 £20 = ==e pa = = B20 =eo 21 { o 21 o 21 © 21 Q 83 8 2 82 a aLS. = 2223 23 — 23 23 24 24 \ 24 24 25 25 J) 25 25 26 26 SC 26 26 27 mene 27 27 27 : 28 -— 28 28 28 rt 29 29 29 29 30 30 30 31 31 (ull 31 i 32 > 32 bY 32 y-Ssilt-| 33 33 gi 33 34 34 34 35 35 35 36 36 ~ 36 y <9 37 — 37 — 37 fee = ;38 38 ra 38 ft 39 39 39 40 T J LJ T 40 T T LJ T J 40 T T J J J T |) 1] 1 [] 1 [] 1 LJ 7 LJ T J 1 LJ LJ J 0 50 100 150 20( [i] 2 4 6 8 10 02 0 02 04 06 08 1 012345678 9101112131415161718 n Fr (% Ic (Robertson 1990 SBTn (Robertson 1990ti Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Depth to water table (erthqg.): 40.00 ft Fill weight: N/A SBTn | d Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Average results interval: 3 Transition detect. applied: No h legen Points to test: Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value: 2.60 K, applied: Yes 1 Sensitive fine grained [J] 4. Clayey silt to silty ll 7. Gravely sand to sandEarthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied: ~~ Sands only . . . ! Peak ground acceleration: ~~ 0.90 Use fill: No Limit depth applied: Yes || 2. Organic material || 5. Silty sand to sandy silt || 8. Very stiff sand to Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A Limit depth: 50.00 ft [| 3. Clay to silty clay [| 6. Clean sand to silty sand O 9. Very stiff fine grained CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:14:50 PM 8 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-5 CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 FS Plot During earthq. Liquefaction potential LPI 20151050 De p t h ( f t ) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Settlement (in)0.050.040.030.020.010 De p t h ( f t ) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements Displacement (in)0 De p t h ( f t ) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:14:50 PM 9 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-5 CRR plot —RP O W R E N O O U D WN R O ju r y N ju r y w [a r y iy ju r y wu [a r y =} ju r y ~ ju r y [= ] ju r y © De p t h (f t ) rg NN Nw NEY Nwu Na N~ N[= < ] N© w[= ] wrg wN ww wry wwu w[= w~ w[= ] w0 h 4 T During &arthq !0.2 0.4 CRR & CSR EN=) 0.6 Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Points to test: Based on Ic value Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Liquefaction analysis overall plots 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 De p t h (f t ) ring kearttq.0 0.5 1 1.5 Factor of safety Depth to water table (erthqg.): 40.00 ft Average results interval: 3 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Use fill: No Fill height: N/A Liquefaction potential 04= 1 2- 3 4 s1— | 64 | 81 | 10u+— 12 B31+— 14 i51+— | 16 71+— 18o1+— 20 n4+— Fr nT—r— B—— BM — BT — 6 — 7 BT — 290—1— 0 T————n———— BRT — BT — KE LE KL 37 38 39 40 De p t h (f t ) LPI Fill weight: Transition detect. applied: K, applied: Clay like behavior applied: Limit depth applied: Limit depth: 15 20 N/A No Yes Sands only Yes 50.00 ft De p t h (f t ) Vertical settlements WO N T A R WN R E O er el d= Ww NN =O =iy ju r y (5 ) ] fu r y [« ) ] fu r y ~ N = oO wv Ww N=De p t h (f t ) nNN Nw NiN NN N N ww NG ; N'= ] ww Ww N = O ww WwBH w[0 ] Ww [= ) ] SS T— — Ww Ww Ww 0 ON 5o [4]0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 Settlement (in) F.S. color scheme || |_|Ll | |_| Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy ==RP OW W O W N O O U D WN R F E O BW WW W WW W W W w W N N N N N N N N N N R R E = = OC W ON O O T U D R A R W N F R F O O V O N O O T U D R D W N R O D O V U O I N O G O U DA W N Lateral displacements 0 Displacement (in) LPI color scheme Il Very high risk ll High risk Il Low risk CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:14:50 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value 6.500.90 G.W.T. (in-situ): G.W.T. (earthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA Leighton 14030.001 CPT file : CPT-7 40.00 ft 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Use fill: Fill height:Fill weight: Trans. detect. applied:Kσ applied: No N/AN/A NoYes Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied: Limit depth:MSF method: Sands onlyYes 50.00 ftMethod based Cone resistance qt (tsf)5000 De p t h ( f t ) 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SBTn Plot CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cy c lic S t r e s s R a t i o * (CS R *) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 No r m a l i z e d C P T p e n e t r a t i o n r e s i s t a n c e 1 10 100 1,000 Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction Ratio Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loadingZone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and groundgeometryZone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softeningZone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity,brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:14:51 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq 10 V/ Leighton 4 14030.001 Leighton LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA CPT file : CPT-7 Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (in-situ): 40.00 ft Use fill: No Clay like behavior Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (earthq.): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A applied: Sands only Points to test: Based on Ic value Average results interval: 3 Fill weight: N/A Limit depth applied: Yes Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Trans. detect. applied: No Limit depth: 50.00 ft Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT K, applied: Yes MSF method: Method based Cone resistance Friction Ratio SBTn Plot CRR plot FS Plot 0 © 0 =< | 0 [= 2 7 2 2 2 4 1 4 = 4 4 6 6 = 6 6 8 8 S 8 8 10 10 3 10 10 12 12 12 12 14 L 14 < 14 14 16 16 16 16” hb}= 18 Pe 18 = 18 18 2 20 f 20 20 20 S17) 22 22 22 24 24 f 24 24(26 26 2626 Ly 28 28 < 28 28 << ASU30 x 30 30 30 32 % 32 32 32 34 3 34 I 34 34 36 36 3 36 36 38 38 38381T T T T T T A 4 T 0 500 0 2 4 6 8 10 1 2 3 4 0 Ding carb. 0.6 0 0Buringkarthd.5 2 qt (tsf) Rf (%) Ic (Robertson 1990) CRR & CSR Factor of safety M..=7'/2, sigma’=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential0.8 M PEE I M M M M : : : 1.000 1 1 L111 al - 1] ] Liquefaction - ; 3 0.7 5 8 i c i - © i © 0.6 / [ 2 i - c 1005 ©] = 3ot - ©wn =] = f=] ]S 057 / [2]° / 2S 5 [| kK2 04 ©§ / | 35 E 3 N& ] / L =2 03 i:[8] 7 -5 1 / F 2 0.2 yd [ ] yd ~ 0.1 1 10 0.1 i Normalized friction ratio (%) 1 [ Zone Aq: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading E No Liquefaction | Zone A,: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground h geometry LL OL BLL BLL BLL BLL BLL RL BLEUE BLL BLL Zone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softening 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Zone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity, Qtn,cs brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:14:51 PM 10 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-7 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Fr (%)1086420 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio Bq 10.80.60.40.20-0.2 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 De p t h ( f t ) 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type SBTn (Robertson 1990)1817161514131211109876543210 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Norm. Soil Behaviour Type Organic soilSilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Clay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soilClay & silty clayClay & silty clay ClayClay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soilSand & silty sandSand & silty sandVery dense/stiff soilClay & silty clayClaySilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilClay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltSand CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:14:51 PM 11 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq SBTn legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to silty 5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand to 9. Very stiff fine grained Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-7 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot 0 0 — 0 0 0 1 -— 1 = 1 1 1 2 T— 2 m= 2 2 2 il 3 3 — 3 3 3 iff soll T | 4 =] 4 4 4 4 il > 3 : -— : 5 I : ry dense/siiff soil |= 4 — 6; 1 ; —— > ° I ; sand & sandy Sit | 5 \\ 8 ~~ 8 | 8 ry de iff soil Ph) 8 | J o J 9 9 ° I ? IAEA NE10 <S 10 10 10 Y 1 / 11 Y 11 11 | Very dense/stiff soil12 12 12 12 I 7 Clay& silty clay 13 13 C4 13 13 I Clay & ay 14 14 7” 14 14 — : 15 - 15 ¥ 15 15 | a & sity clay16 — 16 = 16 16 nse/ki 17 17 << 17 17 — nse, Eg 18 5) 18 ~— 5) 18 £ 18 mi E = 19 = 19 = 19 = 19 | = | 20 = a 20 a 20 2 20 f=fo, J 7] 7] @ ul @a 21 [¢ no 21 no 21 0 21 Yj a PY HG 22 — 22 2 23 23 — 23 » ol | 24 24 § 24 24 | J 25 25 ’ 25 25 [| | 26 26 26~ 2 127 = 27 27 27 28 ~ 28 $ 28 28 MH | 29 29 29 29 |] | 30 30 30 30 > | a \ 31 31 3 | 32 = 32 > 32 32 [ 33 2 33 e 33 33 un | 34 “= 34 C 34 34 35 35 35 35 3 3 Q 3 I 37 <| 3 S 37 x a 38 38 zl 38 a8 39 T y T T 39 T T T T y 39 T T y y y T IL TL LE IL BL IL} EE EEE EE EE EEE 0 50 100 150 20( 0 2 4 6 8 10 02 0 0.2 04 06 08 1 2 3 4 012345678 9101112131415161718 Qtn Fr (%) Ic (Robertson 1990) SBTn (Robertson 1990) Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Depth to water table (erthqg.): 40.00 ft Fill weight: N/A SBTn legend Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Average results interval: 3 Transition detect. applied: No Points to test: Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value: 2.60 K, applied: Yes 1 Sensitive fine grained [J] 4. Clayey silt to silty ll 7. Gravely sand to sandEarthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied: ~~ Sands only . . . ! Peak ground acceleration: ~~ 0.90 Use fill: No Limit depth applied: Yes || 2. Organic material || 5. Silty sand to sandy silt || 8. Very stiff sand toDepth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A Limit depth: 50.00 ft IB 3. Clay tossilty clay Il 6. Clean sand to sity sand [] 9. Very stiff fine grained CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:14:51 PM 11 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-7 CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 FS Plot During earthq. Liquefaction potential LPI 20151050 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Settlement (in)0.080.060.040.020 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements Displacement (in)0 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:14:51 PM 12 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-7 Liquefaction analysis overall plots CRR plot FS Plot Liquefaction potential Ow oN O T U u h WN HO —PR OW R N O U D WN =O ju r y N ju r y w [a r y iy ju r y wu [a r y =} ju r y ~ ju r y [= ] ju r y© No De p t h (f t ) ~De p t h (f t ) De p t h (f t ) NN Nw NEY Nwu Na N~ N[= < ] N© w[= ] wrg wN ww wry wwu w[= w~ w[= ] w0 0 5 10 15 20 LPI vv0 : 4 0.6 [4] 0.5 n 1.5pe ced Feoinoerthg, Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Depth to water table (erthqg.): 40.00 ft Fill weight: N/A Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Average results interval: 3 Transition detect. applied: No Points to test: Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value: 2.60 K, applied: Yes Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied: ~~ Sands only Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Use fill: No Limit depth applied: Yes Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A Limit depth: 50.00 ft De p t h (f t ) Vertical settlements VW ON O Dh WN =O De p t h (f t ) o 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 Settlement (in) F.S. color scheme || |_|Ll | |_| Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy ==RF OW w W o o O N O U M b D WN =O 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 Lateral displacements 0 Displacement (in) LPI color scheme Il Very high risk ll High risk Il Low risk CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:14:51 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg 12 LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value 6.500.90 G.W.T. (in-situ): G.W.T. (earthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA Leighton 14030.001 CPT file : CPT-9 40.00 ft 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Use fill: Fill height:Fill weight: Trans. detect. applied:Kσ applied: No N/AN/A NoYes Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied: Limit depth:MSF method: Sands onlyYes 50.00 ftMethod based Cone resistance qt (tsf)5000 De p t h ( f t ) 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SBTn Plot CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cy c lic S t r e s s R a t i o * (CS R *) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 No r m a l i z e d C P T p e n e t r a t i o n r e s i s t a n c e 1 10 100 1,000 Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction Ratio Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loadingZone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and groundgeometryZone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softeningZone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity,brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:14:52 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq 13 / Leger Leighton LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA CPT file : CPT-9 Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (in-situ): 40.00 ft Use fill: No Clay like behavior Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (earthq.): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A applied: Sands only Points to test: Based on Ic value Average results interval: 3 Fill weight: N/A Limit depth applied: Yes Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Trans. detect. applied: No Limit depth: 50.00 ft Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT K, applied: Yes MSF method: Method based Cone resistance Friction Ratio SBThn Plot CRR plot FS Plot 0 T 0 [4] [4] — 27¢& 2 2 2 4 $ 4 4 4 6 6 > 6 6 8 8 8 8 10 10 10 10 12 L 12 - 12 12 14 14 14 14 hi — 16 a 6 teEg 18 = 18 18 18 g 20 J 20 20 20 a 22 > 22 22 22] 24 24 S 24 24$rp26 [ 26 26 26 28 C 28 AY 28 28 30 30 = 30 30 S I32 fl 32 32 32 34 = 34 34 34 36 DD 36 < 36 36 38 3815 38 38 h 4 40 BL T T T 40 During earthg.0 500 0 2 4 6 8 10 1 2 3 4 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 . qt (tsf) Rf (%) Ic (Robertson 1990) CRR & CSR Factor of safety M..=7'/2, sigma’=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential 0.8 1 1 [1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.000 1 1 1 [EE | 1 [] [] 1 ] Liquefaction - i 0.7 5 8 i c i - ©ht E wn 0.6 / [ 2 ] B Ss 1005— ] | 1.* . B =[72] 8 [ E bE© 0.57 / [ 9 7 ° / 2S 5 [| kK2 04 ©§ / | 3I=] E 3 N7 i / I =2 03 i:[8] 7 -5 / - S 0.2 yd [ ] yd ~ 0.1 1 10 0.1 i Normalized friction ratio (%) 1 [ Zone Aq: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading E No Liquefaction | Zone A,: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground h geometry LL OL BLL BLL BLL BLL BLL RL BLEUE BLL BLL Zone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softening 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Zone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity, Qtn,cs brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:14:52 PM 13 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-9 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 De p t h ( f t ) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Fr (%)1086420 De p t h ( f t ) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio Bq 10.80.60.40.20-0.2 De p t h ( f t ) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type SBTn (Robertson 1990)1817161514131211109876543210 De p t h ( f t ) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Norm. Soil Behaviour Type ClaySilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilSand & silty sandVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soil Clay & silty clay ClayClay & silty clayClayVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay & silty claySand & silty sandVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilSand & silty sandVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sandSand CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:14:52 PM 14 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq SBTn legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to silty 5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand to 9. Very stiff fine grained Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-9 Norm. cone resistance Norm. friction ratio CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour TypeTa ] A1} (} (i i} 0 Thy 1 << 1 1 1 1 lly sa 2 —— 2 —— 2 2 2 i 3 3 € 3 3 3 4 = = 4 4 4 5 —— 5 | —— 5 5 5 6 << 6 < 6 6 6 7 7 NS 7 7 7 8 8 iN 8 8 8 9 2 9 9 9 9of EJ 11 11 i 111 12 > 12 nl 12 12 12 13 13 13 13 13 14 14 14 14 15 15 15 15 16 16 J 16 17 171—&g 17 fm 18 = 18 = 18 fn = 19 -_— = 19 = 19 EE = S20 £ 20 £ 20 £ £a = Pa = i=4 i=1@ 21 © 21 = © 21 [0] [7] 83 82 82 a ae 23 — 234 23 24 24 ad 24 25 Pl 25 25 26 — 26 26 27 A 27 A 27rd \28 — 28 = 28 29 ; 29 29 30 30 SE — 30 31 31 31 32 32 32 33 C 33 ~ 33 34 34 34 I 35 35 35 7 Ht 36 = 36 - 36 and 37 37 37 E ro i —38 SS 38 Very dense/ ifsc 39 39 o 39 Evil La 40 T y T T 40 T T T 40 T T y y y T IL TL TL TL LI IL BL] —3 Wt 0 50 100 150 20( 0 2 4 6 02 0 0.2 04 06 08 1 012345678 9101112131415161718 Qtn Fr (%) Ic (Robertson 1990) SBTn (Robertson 1990) Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Depth to water table (erthq.): Fill weight: N/A SBTn | d Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Average results interval: Transition detect. applied: No h legen Points to test: Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value: K, applied: Yes 1 Sensitive fine grained [J] 4. Clayey silt to silty ll 7. Gravely sand to sandEarthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied: ~~ Sands only . . . ! Peak ground acceleration: ~~ 0.90 Use fill: Limit depth applied: Yes || 2. Organic material || 5. Silty sand to sandy silt || 8. Very stiff sand to Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Fill height: Limit depth: 50.00 ft [| 3. Clay to silty clay [| 6. Clean sand to silty sand O 9. Very stiff fine grained CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:14:52 PM 14 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-9 CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 FS Plot During earthq. Liquefaction potential LPI 20151050 De p t h ( f t ) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Settlement (in)0.080.060.040.020 De p t h ( f t ) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements Displacement (in)0 De p t h ( f t ) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:14:52 PM 15 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-9 CRR plot —HF OW O N O G O U HD W N R D O ju r y N ju r y w [a r y iy ju r y wu [a r y =} ju r y ~ ju r y [= ] ju r y © De p t h (f t ) NS NN Nw NEY Nwu Na N~ N[= < ] N© w[= ] wrg wN ww wry wwu w[= w~ w[= ] w0 h 4 T During &arthq !0.2 0.4 CRR & CSR EN=) 0.6 Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Points to test: Based on Ic value Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Liquefaction analysis overall plots 0 1 2 34 5 6 7 8 De p t h (f t ) ring kearttq.0 0.5 1 1.5 Factor of safety Depth to water table (erthqg.): 40.00 ft Average results interval: 3 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Use fill: No Fill height: N/A Liquefaction potential 01= 1 2- 3pgs EN J s1— | 64 | 81 | 10u+— 12 B31+— 14 i51+— | 16 71+— 18o1+— 20 n4——r— nT—r— B—— BM — BT — 6 — 7 BT — 290—1— 0 T————n———— BRT — BT — KE LE KL 37 38 39 40 De p t h (f t ) LPI Fill weight: Transition detect. applied: K, applied: Clay like behavior applied: Limit depth applied: Limit depth: 15 20 N/A No Yes Sands only Yes 50.00 ft De p t h (f t ) Vertical settlements WO N T DW N R E O Jo W fu r y—- ju r y N ju r y w i I~ ju r y (5 ) ] fu r y [« ) ] fu r y ~ fu r y@ ju r y © NS De p t h (f t ) NNWN a, NN[L I S Pe nN [« ) ] 8 ~~ nN@ wo wpu i r g N[\+ ] —MS —— wN ww Ww hy w[0 ] Ww [e ) ] w~ Ww@ Ww [+ ] ryo o 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 Settlement (in) F.S. color scheme Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy H| [1 Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely H | ==RP OW W N O O U bD h W N R F E O BW W WW W W W W W W N N N N N N N N N N R R E = = OC W V W O N O O T U D R A R W N F R F O O L O N O O T U D R D W N R O O V U O I N O O U DA W N Lateral displacements 0 Displacement (in) LPI color scheme Il Very high risk ll High risk Il Low risk CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:14:52 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg 15 LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value 6.500.90 G.W.T. (in-situ): G.W.T. (earthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA Leighton 14030.001 CPT file : CPT-11 40.00 ft 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Use fill: Fill height:Fill weight: Trans. detect. applied:Kσ applied: No N/AN/A NoYes Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied: Limit depth:MSF method: Sands onlyYes 50.00 ftMethod based Cone resistance qt (tsf)400200 De p t h ( f t ) 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SBTn Plot CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cy c lic S t r e s s R a t i o * (CS R *) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 No r m a l i z e d C P T p e n e t r a t i o n r e s i s t a n c e 1 10 100 1,000 Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction Ratio Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loadingZone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and groundgeometryZone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softeningZone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity,brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:26 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq 16 V/ Leighton 4 14030.001 Leighton LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA CPT file : CPT-11 Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (in-situ): 40.00 ft Use fill: No Clay like behavior Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (earthq.): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A applied: Sands only Points to test: Based on Ic value Average results interval: 3 Fill weight: N/A Limit depth applied: Yes Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Trans. detect. applied: No Limit depth: 50.00 ft Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT K, applied: Yes MSF method: Method based Cone resistance Friction Ratio SBThn Plot CRR plot FS Plot 0 0 0 [=C =~2 2 2 2 4 es 4 = 47 4 S Pan6 6 ~~, 6 6 8 4 8 f 8 10 | 10 c > 10 12 { 12 12 14 ( 14 144 16 16 < 16 2. Dt& 18 18 + 18 5 20 ry 20 8, -oF?)22 << 22 24 T 24 24] 26 26Z IS28 — 28 28 30 —~_ 30 30 32 x 34S - 32 34 = I 34I 34 “—— L 36 36 36 =38 & 38 = 38 200 400 0 2 4 6 8 10 1 2 3 4 0 DlAng cartel. 0.6 0Buringkarthd-> 2 qt (tsf) Rf (%) Ic (Robertson 1990) CRR & CS Factor of safety M..=7'/2, sigma’=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential 0.8 1 1 [1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.000 1 1 1 111d . 1 [] |I TO | ] Liquefaction - i ; 0.7 5 8 i c i - ©ht E wn 0.6 / [ 2 E 3 Ss 100 5— ] | 1.* . B =a : E .OQ 05 i / [ a 7 ° / 2S 5 [| kK2 04 ©§ / 3 f= 7 / B Nwn h 3 ©5 02 / FE<Q ] - I<}> i9) i S I 2 0.2 rd [ ] yd ~ 0.1 1 10 0.1 i Normalized friction ratio (%) 1 [ Zone Aq: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading E No Liquefaction | Zone A,: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground i geometry LL OL BLL BLL BLL BLL BLL RL BLEUE BLL BLL Zone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softening 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Zone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity, Qtn,cs brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:26 PM 16 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-11 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Fr (%)1086420 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio Bq 10.80.60.40.20-0.2 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 De p t h ( f t ) 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type SBTn (Robertson 1990)1817161514131211109876543210 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Norm. Soil Behaviour Type ClayVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilClay & silty claySand & silty sandClay & silty clayClayClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClayClay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clayClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sandVery dense/stiff soilSand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilSand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:26 PM 17 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq SBTn legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to silty 5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand to 9. Very stiff fine grained Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-11 De p t h (f t ) N[h r —RP O WO N G UD WN =O Nb hd fb fd dk ek fk ek OW oo N O U AW N Ww Ww w ww w w w w h N N M N N N N N N N OC O N O O T U A R A R W N F R O O O N O O T U AW N Norm. cone resistance TM TN A U V "N e IM AD De p t h (f t ) ==PO WW N O W U b D WN =O 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Y 30 31 32 33 34 35 v — I 50 100 Qtn 150 20( Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method: Points to test: Earthquake magnitude M,,: Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998) 6.50 0.90 Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Based on Ic value 36 37 38 39 Depth to water table (erthq.): AN A S Ya l a Vi 4 6 8 Fr (%)N Average results interval: 3 Ic cut-off value: Unit weight calculation: Use fill: Fill height: No 40.00 ft 2.60 Based on SBT N/A De p t h (f t ) N= ==PO WO W N O W U b D WN =O NR =m me = OW oO o O N O O U AW N WL W WW Ww W w W w W w w w N N N N N D N N N VO N WN F R O O O N O O O V HA W N 02 0 Nom. pore pressure ratio Fill weight: Transition detect. applied: No K, applied: Clay like behavior applied: Limit depth applied: Limit depth: T T v v v T 0.2 04 06 038 1Bq N/A Yes Yes 50.00 ft De p t h (f t ) N= Sands only VW ON O A WN R F O oe EE Ww oo O o N G O O U A WN F R O 20 NN N N N N N N Wo NO G O U L h WN SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type Very densest soil2 ryd 53 Sily's ; 4 Very5 Clay. & | 6 Sand 7 ©GC8 GC 10 —Ic 11 : 12 2 13 Cl 14 Cl 15 Cl 16 Cl uz Cl £18 Cl = 19 Ve8 20 Vi 021 Ve 22 23 i24 vary ae 25 Si 26 3 ty sa z7 |[Clay|& silty dia 28 yi & silty diay 29 Silty sand& sandy si30 EA 31 Sand & silly sand = Very dense/siiff soll Sand & sity sand| | 34 dl EL y. silt 35 ' Very-der itY it SOt36 Very de il 37 ‘Sand & silty sand| —— 38 Very denselsiff soil ITF 012345678 9101112131415161718 Ic (Robertson 1990) SBTn (Robertson 1990) SBTn legend B 1. Sensitive fine grained B 4. Clayey silt to silty [| 7. Gravely sand to sand ll 2 Organic material ll 5. Sity sand to sandy sit [JJ] 8. Very stiff sand to [| 3. Clay to silty clay [| 6. Clean sand to silty sand O 9. Very stiff fine grained CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:26 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg 17 This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-11 CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 FS Plot During earthq. Liquefaction potential LPI 20151050 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Settlement (in)0.10.080.060.040.020 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements Displacement (in)0 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:26 PM 18 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-11 Liquefaction analysis overall plots CRR plot FS Plot Liquefaction potential oo NO Uh WN HO —RP O WO N G UD WN =O ju r y N ju r y w [a r y iy ju r y wu [a r y =} ju r y ~ ju r y [= ] S De p t h (f t ) De p t h (f t ) r=De p t h (f t ) NN Nw NEY Nwu Na N~ N[= < ] N© w[= ] wrg wN ww wry wwu w[= w~ w[= ] w© 0 5 10 15 20 LPI 0 v =F 0.6ERE Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Depth to water table (erthqg.): 40.00 ft Fill weight: N/A Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Average results interval: 3 Transition detect. applied: No Points to test: Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value: 2.60 K, applied: Yes Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied: ~~ Sands only Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Use fill: No Limit depth applied: Yes Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A Limit depth: 50.00 ft U.o n 1.5Fun earthy De p t h (f t ) N= Vertical settlements TN VW NU D WN =O a=N =O ju r y w =iy ju r y (5 ) ] fu r y [« ) ] fu r y ~ fu r y@ ju r y © nNo De p t h (f t ) nNN Nw NN [E N nN[« ) ] nN~ nN@ N'- ] Po To Me wo wpu i r g Ww ww ww a ph WN w~ Ww Ww vO © [4]0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 Settlement (in) F.S. color scheme || |_|Ll | |_| Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy ==PO WW N O U b D WN =O 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 Lateral displacements 0 Displacement (in) LPI color scheme Il Very high risk ll High risk Il Low risk CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:26 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg 18 LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value 6.500.90 G.W.T. (in-situ): G.W.T. (earthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA Leighton 14030.001 CPT file : CPT-13 40.00 ft 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Use fill: Fill height:Fill weight: Trans. detect. applied:Kσ applied: No N/AN/A NoYes Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied: Limit depth:MSF method: Sands onlyYes 50.00 ftMethod based Cone resistance qt (tsf)4002000 De p t h ( f t ) 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SBTn Plot CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cy c lic S t r e s s R a t i o * (CS R *) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 No r m a l i z e d C P T p e n e t r a t i o n r e s i s t a n c e 1 10 100 1,000 Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction Ratio Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loadingZone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and groundgeometryZone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softeningZone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity,brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:26 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq 19 /) Leighton Leighton 14030.001 LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos CPT file : CPT-13 Input parameters and analysis data Location : Rosemead CA Analysis method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (in-situ): 40.00 ft Use fill: No Clay like behavior Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (earthq.): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A applied: Sands only Points to test: Based on Ic value Average results interval: 3 Fill weight: N/A Limit depth applied: Yes Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Trans. detect. applied: No Limit depth: 50.00 ft Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT K, applied: Yes MSF method: Method based Cone resistance Friction Ratio SBTn Plot CRR plot FS Plot0 3 0 << 0 0 0 2 1C 2 2 2 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 6 6 6 6 6— 8 8 =< 8 8 8 10 10 10 10 -12 12 3 12 12 14 14 < 14 14 16 Pa 16 Zz 16 161 ~~£ 18 18 J= 18 18 8 20 — 20 )— 20 20 o 22 22 > 22 22 24 24 Hl 24 24Pa Vy26 2626 — 26 28 28 C 28 28 30 30 30 30 32 ~~ 32 32 32 34 ~ 34 < 34 34 36 36 36 36 - tr —Y 0 200 400 0 2 4 6 8 10 o Dg99eHg oe 0 o3U9LAMYs qt (tsf) Rf (%) Ic (Robertson 1990) CRR & CSR Factor of safety M..=7'/2, sigma’=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential0.8 M PRE I) M M M M : : : 1.000 ) 1 1 111d 1 ) 1) ] Liquefaction - 0.7 [ Fo i c i - ©ht E wn 0.6 / - 3 E 3 Ss 1005— ] | 1.* . B =a : E .OQ 05 i / [ a 7 ° / 2S 5 [| kK« 0.4 o 8 / 35 E 3 N7 i / I =L 03 - E [8] 7 -5 / - S 0.2 yd [ ] yd ~ 0.1 1 10 0.1 i Normalized friction ratio (%) 1 [ Zone Aq: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading E No Liquefaction | Zone A,: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground h geometry LL ILL BL LBL EL LEAL BLL BLL BLL BUELL BLL Zone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softening 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Zone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity, Qtn,cs brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:26 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq 19 This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-13 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Fr (%)1086420 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio Bq 10.80.60.40.20-0.2 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type SBTn (Robertson 1990)1817161514131211109876543210 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Norm. Soil Behaviour Type Organic soil Silty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy siltClay & silty claySand & silty sandClay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clayClay Clay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soilClay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilClaySand & silty sandVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilSand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilSand & silty sandSand & silty sand CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:26 PM 20 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq SBTn legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to silty 5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand to 9. Very stiff fine grained Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-13 CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. cone resistance Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type 0 —xu 0 — 0 f—— 0 _° —] T<< : : d Organ i 2 —— 2 = 2 2 —~ Si andy sit 314 3 3 3 = Clay & silty clay 4 4 4 4 — -5 5 5 5 [|] Sitty sand & sand 6 6 Br 6 6 [| Clay & 7 7 p— 7 7 [|] and & sifly sandpi—— ——— H5 Va 8 > 8 . a silty cla 9 AY 9 Ss 9 9 |10 } 10 18 10 10 Bil 11 11 —= 11 11 12 { 12 Ny 12 12 3 13 { 13 $ 13 13 wii 14 14 < 14 14 15 15 4 15 15 16 16 16 16 17 — 17 17 17 Sso 18 o 18 o 18 o 18 £1 £ €1 ~ Sw Zo ge | =£2 — 5 20 5 20 E20 5 21 O21 O21 @ 5 ©[a [a ~~ [= [a a22 22 < 22 » | 23 23 4 23 23 — 24 24 J 24 24 25 > 25 p 25 2% H 26 Pa 26 = 26 27 € 27 =~ 27 2 ul 28 =| 28 28 28 I 29 29 SC 29 2% [ 30 | 30 30 30 I 31 ~~ 31 < 31 31 | 32 32 32 32 [| | 33 33 33 3334 < 34 > 34 34 Hl 35 35 Y 35 35 I 3 z_ 36 > 36 36 il 37 37 37 3 [| 38 38 - 38 38 39 39 39 39 T y T T T T T T y T T y y y T IL TL LL BL IL} 0 50 100 150 20( 0 2 4 6 8 10 02 0 02 04 06 08 1 2 3 4 012345678 9101112131415161718 Qtn Fr (%) Ic (Robertson 1990) SBTn (Robertson 1990) Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Depth to water table (erthqg.): 40.00 ft Fill weight: N/A SBTn | d Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Average results interval: 3 Transition detect. applied: No h legen Points to test: Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value: 2.60 K, applied: Yes B 1. Sensitive fine grained B 4. Clayey silt to silty [| 7. Gravely sand to sand Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied: ~~ Sands only . . . ! . Peak ground acceleration: ~~ 0.90 Use fill: No Limit depth applied: Yes || 2. Organic material || 5. Silty sand to sandy silt || 8. Very stiff sand to Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A Limit depth: 50.00 ft [| 3. Clay to silty clay [| 6. Clean sand to silty sand O 9. Very stiff fine grained CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:26 PM 20 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-13 CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 FS Plot During earthq. Liquefaction potential LPI 20151050 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Settlement (in)0.10.080.060.040.020 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements Displacement (in)0 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:26 PM 21 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-13 Liquefaction analysis overall plots CRR plot FS Plot 0 1 2 34 5 6 7 8 —RO W E NO G O U A , W N R O ju r y N ju r y w [a r y iy ju r y wu [a r y =} ju r y ~ ju r y [= ] ju r y © De p t h (f t ) mS De p t h (f t ) NN Nw NEY Nwu Na N~ N[= < ] N© w[= ] wrg wN ww wry wwu wa w~ w[= ] w[+ ] > ring earth. , 0.6 0 0.5 During garthq. 15 CRR & CSR Factor of safety Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Depth to water table (erthqg.): 40.00 ft Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Average results interval: 3 Points to test: Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Use fill: No Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A Liquefaction potential De p t h (f t ) LPI 0 5 10 Fill weight: Transition detect. applied: K, applied: Clay like behavior applied: Limit depth applied: Limit depth: 15 20 N/A No Yes Sands only Yes 50.00 ft De p t h (f t ) Vertical settlements —— rT }//J VO N DW N R E O fu r y o fu r y—- ju r y N ju r y w =iy 4 \ my fu r y [« ) ] fu r y@ N — Tr ma ju r y ['- } nNo N=De p t h (f t ) nNN Nw nNEN N(5 ) nN [e ) ] nN@ N'- ] wo NN To a a wpu i r g wN ww Ww hy w[4 ] Ww [= ) ] w~ Ww@ Ww [+ ] 0 0.02 0.04 006 0.08 0.1 Settlement (in) F.S. color scheme Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy H| [1 Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely H | ==RO W NO G O U b D , W N E R E O 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 Lateral displacements 0 Displacement (in) LPI color scheme Il Very high risk ll High risk Il Low risk CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:26 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg 21 LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value 6.500.90 G.W.T. (in-situ): G.W.T. (earthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA Leighton 14030.001 CPT file : CPT-15 40.00 ft 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Use fill: Fill height:Fill weight: Trans. detect. applied:Kσ applied: No N/AN/A NoYes Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied: Limit depth:MSF method: Sands onlyYes 50.00 ftMethod based Cone resistance qt (tsf)4002000 De p t h ( f t ) 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SBTn Plot CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cy c lic S t r e s s R a t i o * (CS R *) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 No r m a l i z e d C P T p e n e t r a t i o n r e s i s t a n c e 1 10 100 1,000 Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction Ratio Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loadingZone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and groundgeometryZone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softeningZone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity,brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:27 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq 22 V/ Leighton 4 14030.001 Leighton LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA CPT file : CPT-15 Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (in-situ): 40.00 ft Use fill: No Clay like behavior Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (earthq.): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A applied: Sands only Points to test: Based on Ic value Average results interval: 3 Fill weight: N/A Limit depth applied: Yes Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Trans. detect. applied: No Limit depth: 50.00 ft Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT K, applied: Yes MSF method: Method based Cone resistance Friction Ratio SBThn Plot CRR plot FS Plot 0 0 0 — 2 pe 2 2 4 4 Ly 4 Ja 6 aT 6 8 7 8 b 8J 10 10 10 12 12 12 14 : 14 < 14 16 / 16 16 ~~E18 S 18 S 18 £20 20 == 20 Bl[a WY) — 22 — 22 24 eg 24 < 24 26 26 > 26J J 28 ( 28 ™N 28 30 30 s 30 32 12 < 32 ~34 di 34 Ay 34 36 — 3 3636 38 38 N 38 0 200 400 0 2 4 6 8 10 1 2 3 4 0 Dying earghg. 0.6 oBuring parthg.5 qt (tsf) Rf (%) Ic (Robertson 1990) CRR & CSR Factor of safety M..=7'/2, sigma’=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential 0.8 1 1 [1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.000 [] 1 1 111d . 1 [] |I TO | ] Liquefaction - : 0.7 5 8 J c J - ©ht E wn 0.6 / - 3 ] B Ss 1005— ] | =* . B =a : E .OQ 05 i / [ a 7 ° / 2= 5 [| kK2 04 ©§ / | 3 f= 7 / B Nwn 1 3 ©5 02 / FEO ] - I<}S J9) i S I 2 0.2 rd [ ] yd ~ 0.1 1 10 0.1 i Normalized friction ratio (%) 1 [ Zone Aq: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading E No Liquefaction | Zone A,: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground h geometry LL OL BLL BLL BLL BLL BLL RL BLEUE BLL BLL Zone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softening 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Zone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity, Qtn,cs brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:27 PM 22 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-15 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Fr (%)1086420 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio Bq 10.80.60.40.20-0.2 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type SBTn (Robertson 1990)1817161514131211109876543210 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Norm. Soil Behaviour Type Organic soilSand & silty sandVery dense/stiff soilClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltClayClay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClay & silty clay Clay & silty clayClayClay & silty clay ClayClay & silty clayClayClayVery dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sandVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sand Clay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clay Sand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soilSand & silty sandSand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soilSand & silty sand CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:27 PM 23 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq SBTn legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to silty 5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand to 9. Very stiff fine grained Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-15 CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. cone resistance Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio 0] 0 TT 0 1 1 1 2 2 — 2 3 a 3 : - 3 [ 4 4 4 5 1 5 5 6 — 6 67 7 — 7PJ8 pa 8 8 9 C 9 or 9 10 J 10 10 11 11 11 12 12 > 12 13 13 = 13 14 14 Pad 14 15 <¢ 15 Pg 15 16 S 16 16 17 pad 17 == 17£187 o18 oe 18 ez ~ 19 ~~ ~ 19 ~ 19 ~F< i = = f=8 20 a 20 ~ a 20 8 a 21 J a 21 ~ a 21 a 22 22 22 23 23 pe 23 24 24 24 25 25 25 26 ~~ 26 < 26 27 27 27 28 yal 28 I) 28 29 TT 29 S 29 30 Pad 30 5 30 31 31 Fant 31 32 p 32 Ne 32 33 33 Y 33 34 pon 34 > 34 35 35 J 35: = 1 : 38 38 bs 38 39] 39 39 T J LJ T T T LJ T J T T J J J T 0 50 100 150 20( 0 2 4 6 8 10 02 0 0.2 04 06 08 1 Qtn Fr (%) Bq Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Depth to water table (erthqg.): 40.00 ft Fill weight: N/A Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Average results interval: 3 Transition detect. applied: No Points to test: Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value: 2.60 K, applied: Yes Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied: ~~ Sands only Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Use fill: No Limit depth applied: Yes Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A Limit depth: 50.00 ft WO N T DN W N R O oe ee VW oO N G O O U HA WN R F R O 20 NN N D N M N N N N N N VW oN HA WN = SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type 0 10fgani soil| |! Sand & silly sand 3 Very densef/stiff soil|: Clay &silty clay | | |: Sit s dy. —— Vi ¢ : Sand &Silty sa9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 z 18 = 19 3 20 Pat 21 22 23 24 25 26 — 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 Ver il 36 Sand sand 37 Sand y-sand > Very dense/stift sail mt mt ms = Ta dr 012345678 9101112131415161718 Ic (Robertson 1990) SBTn (Robertson 1990) SBTn legend B 1. Sensitive fine grained B 4. Clayey silt to silty [| 7. Gravely sand to sand ll 2 Organic material ll 5. Sity sand to sandy sit [JJ] 8. Very stiff sand to [| 3. Clay to silty clay [| 6. Clean sand to silty sand O 9. Very stiff fine grained CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:27 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg 23 This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-15 CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 FS Plot During earthq. Liquefaction potential LPI 20151050 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Settlement (in)0.10.080.060.040.020 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements Displacement (in)0 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:27 PM 24 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-15 CRR plot —RP OW O O N O G O UD WN R O ju r y N ju r y w [a r y iy ju r y wu [a r y =} ju r y ~ ju r y [= ] ju r y © No De p t h (f t ) N[h r NN Nw NEY Nwu Na N~ N[= ] N© w[= ] wrg wN ww wry wwu wa w~ w[= ] w[+ ] T = a I Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot 0 1 2 34 5 6 7 8 De p t h (f t ) 0 ging earthg.4 0.6 CRR & CSR Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Points to test: Based on Ic value Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft 0 0.5 Duringgarthg. 15 Factor of safety Depth to water table (erthqg.): 40.00 ft Average results interval: 3 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Use fill: No Fill height: N/A Liquefaction potential De p t h (f t ) LPI 0 5 10 Fill weight: Transition detect. applied: K, applied: Clay like behavior applied: Limit depth applied: Limit depth: 15 20 N/A No Yes Sands only Yes 50.00 ft De p t h (f t ) N= OV WO N UD h W N R E O NHOW N UM A WN F O WW WW W ww w ww i N N N N N N N N WO N O U RW N R F R L , O O L O N O G O U R A W N Vertical settlements J” 8 f/J////{ 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 Settlement (in) F.S. color scheme || |_|Ll | |_| Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy ==RP OW O W N O Uh WN R F O WW WW W WW W W W N N N N N N N N N D N N RP E = = = VO N HA W N R F R L O O W O N O O O D U D R D W N R O O U O N O O UV L D L WN Lateral displacements 0 Displacement (in) LPI color scheme Il Very high risk ll High risk Il Low risk CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:27 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg 24 LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value 6.500.90 G.W.T. (in-situ): G.W.T. (earthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA Leighton 14030.001 CPT file : CPT-17 40.00 ft 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Use fill: Fill height:Fill weight: Trans. detect. applied:Kσ applied: No N/AN/A NoYes Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied: Limit depth:MSF method: Sands onlyYes 50.00 ftMethod based Cone resistance qt (tsf)6004002000 De p t h ( f t ) 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SBTn Plot CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cy c lic S t r e s s R a t i o * (CS R *) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 No r m a l i z e d C P T p e n e t r a t i o n r e s i s t a n c e 1 10 100 1,000 Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction Ratio Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loadingZone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and groundgeometryZone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softeningZone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity,brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:28 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq 25 V/ Leighton 4 14030.001 Leighton LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA CPT file : CPT-17 Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (in-situ): 40.00 ft Use fill: No Clay like behavior Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (earthq.): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A applied: Sands only Points to test: Based on Ic value Average results interval: 3 Fill weight: N/A Limit depth applied: Yes Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Trans. detect. applied: No Limit depth: 50.00 ft Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT K, applied: Yes MSF method: Method based Cone resistance Friction Ratio SBTn Plot CRR plot FS Plot 0 T 0 0 [= 2 < 2 2 2 4 < ' 4 47 4 6 : 6 Ss 6 6 >8 pd 8 ~N 8 8 ™10 10 - 10 10 12 12 < 12 12 14 14 R 144 14 16 16 - 16 16 ~~E18 18 18 18= <B 20 20 Vim 20] 20 Q 2 22 S 22 22 #1y 24 <= 24 24 267§ 26 h 26 26 28 — 28 28 28 30 < 304 30 30 32 Ne 32 { 32 32 Pasi34 [~ 34 3 34 34 p36 361 <2 36 36 38 38 > 38 38 | = T T T T A 4 7 0 200 400 600 0 2 4 6 8 0 Ding earthd. 0.6 0 00uring karthd.5 2 qt (tsf) Rf (%) Ic (Robertson 1990) CRR & CSR Factor of safety M..=7'/2, sigma’=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential 0.8 1 1 | 1 1 1 1 1 Nn Nn Nn 1.000 1 1 11a 1 [] |I TO | ] Liquefaction - | 0.7 5 8 J c J - ©ht E wn 0.6 / [ g ] i c 1005o E 3 ° J]or ] - ® 7]0 1 | 5S 7]Oo 0.5 ] / [ a 7 ° / 2= 5 [| kK2 04 ©8 / 3I=] E 3 N& ] / L = 5 02 / FE[4 ] |- oS J9) i S I 2 0.2 rd [ ] yd ~ 0.1 1 10 0.1 i Normalized friction ratio (%) 1 [ Zone Aq: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading E No Liquefaction | Zone A,: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground h geometry LL OL BLL BLL BLL BLL BLL RL BLEUE BLL BLL Zone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softening 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Zone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity, Qtn,cs brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:28 PM 25 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-17 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Fr (%)1086420 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio Bq 10.80.60.40.20-0.2 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type SBTn (Robertson 1990)1817161514131211109876543210 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Norm. Soil Behaviour Type Organic soilClay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilSand & silty sandVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilSand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltClayClay & silty clayClay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clayClay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClay & silty clay Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soilSand & silty sand CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:28 PM 26 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq SBTn legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to silty 5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand to 9. Very stiff fine grained Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-17 CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. cone resistance Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type ee me——— 30 0 0 0 o————= 0 Organic soil | 1 < ! ! ! L "Clay &silly2 2 << 2 2 2 x 3 — 3 —— 3 3 3 snse/siiff soil 4 4 4 4 4 id 5 5 & 5 5 5 |— 6 6 pl 6 6 6 7 7 — 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 8nm] 9 | —— 9 NL 9 9 9 10 ~~ 10 10— 10 104 11 7 11 11( <’ 112 12 ~ 12 12 12 13 13 < 13 13 13 14 { 14 14 14 14 15 { 15 15 15 15 16 ? 16 3 16 16 16 : Clay 17 17 17 17 17 = 19 Y = 19 = 19 = 19 c 19 Clay[& silly clay | 20 7 a 20 = a 20 B20 | 20[+] [3] [san [] @ @A 21 $ A 21 < A 21 0 21 a 21 22 22 < 22 22 22 Clay 23 23 23 23 23< wy,24 24 << 24 24 24 ,25 — S| Clay| & silly daSy 25 25 25 =a 25 Cl &= < lf ay & silly cay26 26 26 26 Ke 26 Clay 27 27 27 27 LS 27 Clay|& ay 28 28 28 28 — 28 Clay & ay 29 29 29 29 29 30 30 § 30 30 J 30 31 31 31 31 : | 31 32 32 32 32 32 : - 33 331 33 3 0 33 Sand & silly sand 34 34 2 34 34 [| 34 : 35 35 ~~ 35 35 {| 35 36 361 36 36 il 36 | 37 37 ™ 37 37 [| 37 or 38 = 38 7 38 38 Very —38 |Sand & si d39 - - - = 391 . T T y 39 . — 39 EE EL a Sai Sia Saar 0 50 100 150 20( [i] 2 4 6 8 10 02 0 02 04 06 08 1 1 2 3 4 012345678 9101112131415161718 Qtn Fr (%) Bq Ic (Robertson 1990) SBTn (Robertson 1990) Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Depth to water table (erthqg.): 40.00 ft Fill weight: N/A SBTn | d Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Average results interval: 3 Transition detect. applied: No h legen Points to test: Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value: 2.60 K, applied: Yes 1 Sensitive fine grained [J] 4. Clayey silt to silty ll 7. Gravely sand to sandEarthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied: ~~ Sands only . . . ! Peak ground acceleration: ~~ 0.90 Use fill: No Limit depth applied: Yes || 2. Organic material || 5. Silty sand to sandy silt || 8. Very stiff sand toDepth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A Limit depth: 50.00 ft IB 3. Clay tossilty clay Il 6. Clean sand to sity sand [] 9. Very stiff fine grained CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:28 PM 26 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-17 CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 FS Plot During earthq. Liquefaction potential LPI 20151050 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Settlement (in)0.060.040.020 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements Displacement (in)0 De p t h ( f t ) 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:28 PM 27 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-17 Liquefaction analysis overall plots CRR plot FS Plot Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Lateral displacements 0 0 -— 0T= 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2] 2 2 3 3 31— 3 3 4 4 4 4 ] 4 5 5 5ST— 5 ] 5 6 6 6 6 / 6 7 7 71 7 yi 7 8 8 [: — — 8 8 9 94+ 9 A 9 10 101—— 10 10 11 nr 11 11 12 12— = 12 12 13 13 13 13 14 141 = 14 14 15 15 15 15 16 161— = 16 16 17 177 ———— 17 17 mn) - ~~E 18 E £ 187 E 18 E 18 = 19 = Zt r— = 19 = 19 | 20 ‘8 B204—1— |" 20 20821 & gat+—r— A 21 & 21 22 22 22 22 23 23 — = 23 23 24 24 24 24 25 251— = 25 p— 25 26 26 26 1 26 27 271 27 27 28 281 1— 28 / 28 29 2990 1— 29 / 29 30 li hy pum— — 30 / 30 31 31t+——1— 31 { 31 32 21— = 32 I 32 33 33 33 | 33 34 MA1T— = 34 | 34 35 35 35 35 36 36 36 36 37 37 37 37 38 38 38 38 39 = v = 39 39 39 0 Oring earth. 4 0.6 0.5 During karthg. 1.5 0 5 10 15 20 1] 0.02 0.04 0.06 0g gd q : . .CRR & CS Factor of safety LPI Settlement (in) Displacement (in) Input parameters and analysis data F.S. color scheme LPI color scheme Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Depth to water table (erthg.): 40.00 ft Fill weight: N/A Bl Amost certain it will liquefy Il Very high risk Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Average results interval: 3 Transition detect. applied: No [| Very likely to liquefy [| High riskPoints to test: Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value: 2.60 K, applied: Yes Liquefaction and no lig. are equally likel fi Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied: Sands only [] a ] 9: qually y nH Low risk Peak ground acceleration: ~~ 0.90 Use fill: No Limit depth applied: Yes [| Unlike to liquefy Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A Limit depth: 50.00 ft [| Almost certain it will not liquefy CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:28 PM 27 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value 6.500.90 G.W.T. (in-situ): G.W.T. (earthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA Leighton 14030.001 CPT file : CPT-19 40.00 ft 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Use fill: Fill height:Fill weight: Trans. detect. applied:Kσ applied: No N/AN/A NoYes Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied: Limit depth:MSF method: Sands onlyYes 50.00 ftMethod based Cone resistance qt (tsf)4002000 De p t h ( f t ) 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SBTn Plot CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cy c lic S t r e s s R a t i o * (CS R *) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 No r m a l i z e d C P T p e n e t r a t i o n r e s i s t a n c e 1 10 100 1,000 Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction Ratio Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loadingZone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and groundgeometryZone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softeningZone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity,brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:29 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq 28 V/ Leighton 4 14030.001 Leighton LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA CPT file : CPT-19 Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (in-situ): 40.00 ft Use fill: No Clay like behavior Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (earthq.): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A applied: Sands only Points to test: Based on Ic value Average results interval: 3 Fill weight: N/A Limit depth applied: Yes Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Trans. detect. applied: No Limit depth: 50.00 ft Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT K, applied: Yes MSF method: Method based Cone resistance Friction Ratio SBThn Plot CRR plot FS Plot 0 0 — a 0 0 — 2 2 - 2 2p=4 4 4 4$ 46 3 6 = 6 6 8 ~~ 8 Cy 8 8 10+f 10 > 10 10 12 12 ~~ 12 12 14 14 I 14 14~~een end]16 16 Ng 16 16 £18 ( 18 = 18 18 £2 20 por a 20 20 8 22 22 22 22 24 24 ™ 24 24[ Ej26 S 26 3 26 26 28 28 <= 28 28~~ =30 30 3 30 30 a 34 34 34 34 36 36 36 36 38 38 No 38 38 — 5 h 4 40 40] T T T T 40 40 TDurng €arthg. Dunng earthq 0 200 400 0 2 4 6 8 10 1 2 3 4 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.5 1 1.5 qt (tsf) Rf (%) Ic (Robertson 1990) CRR & CSR Factor of safety M..=7'/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential 0.8 1 1 [1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.000 1 1 1 1 111d = _ ] Liquefaction - : 0.7 : S i [] / = © 9+ - 4 5 [72] B E wn 0.6 / [ 2 E 3 Ss 100 5 ~~ - | =I* . B f=)[72] 8 [ E bE Oo 0.5 ] / [ a ] ° / 2= 5 [| kK« 0.4 o 2 / 3S E } N7 i / I = po 0.3 / - £ [4 ] |- oS J9) i S I 2 0.2 7 [ ] yd ~ 0.1 1 10 0.1 i Normalized friction ratio (%) 1 [ Zone Aq: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading E No Liquefaction | Zone A,: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground h geometry LL OL BLL BLL BLL BLL BLL RL BLEUE BLL BLL Zone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softening 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Zone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity, Qtn,cs brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:29 PM 28 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-19 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 De p t h ( f t ) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Fr (%)1086420 De p t h ( f t ) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio Bq 10.80.60.40.20-0.2 De p t h ( f t ) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 De p t h ( f t ) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type SBTn (Robertson 1990)1817161514131211109876543210 De p t h ( f t ) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Norm. Soil Behaviour Type ClayClay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilSand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy silt ClayClay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clayClay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClaySilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy silt ClayClay & silty claySand & silty sandClaySilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:29 PM 29 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq SBTn legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to silty 5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand to 9. Very stiff fine grained Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-19 CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. cone resistance Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type UN a———————— 0 0 0 01 ~~ 1 — 1 1 1 ay] | . | 2 2 Ld 2 2 2mm] Ne ||3 < 3 — 3 3 3 o gn 4 Ee — 4 4 4 4 Very-der i : ; ~ > : > Silty sand & sandy sit =] ae Ver Jensel ! soil: : p—— : : Ve 3 ense/stif soil 9 i 9 a 9 pS 9 Sa nd & sy i nd! P Te — Silty sand & sandy silt10 pad 10 3S 10 10 1011 11 7 11 11 11 Clay 21 12 << 12 12 12 Clay|8 sity dla13 J 13 Ty 13 13 13 14 7 14 <\ 14 14 15 $ 15 15 15 1614 16 16 16 17 17 17 17 &Si yo 18 a 18 18 18 = & a £19 Py E19 <S—= E19 19 Ee £20 £ 20 3 £ 20 £ 50 £a = = +t Ed @ 21 3 o 21 ” o 21 @ 21 Fo) 02» { 0 2 0 2 0 5 o 23 23 23 23 ily cla24 3 24 EE 24 24 RRL } 25 25 25 25 iod — —. i” 2 & si " 27 27 << 27 27 Silty sand|& sandy silt2814 28 28 28 ; iS— — ysit]29 29 — 29 29 30 S 30 = 30 30 } 31 31 31 31 v 8s | 32 — ll ha 32 32 d & silly sand33 33 33 33 | 34 34 34 - :34 36 36 36 - -3 << 5 Di 5 36 Silty sand & sandy silt — Ne 37 ery de iff sail38 38 38 :39 39 Pat 38 "sand & sandy silt\ 39 39 A . aIl40 T y T T 40 T T T T y 40 T T y y y T 40 T T T T T rT T i y 0 50 100 150 20( 0 2 4 6 8 10 02 0 02 04 06 08 1 1 2 3 4 012345678 9101112131415161718 Qtn Fr (%) Bq Ic (Robertson 1990) SBTn (Robertson 1990) Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Depth to water table (erthqg.): 40.00 ft Fill weight: N/A SBTn | d Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Average results interval: 3 Transition detect. applied: No h legen Points to test: Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value: 2.60 K; applied: Yes 1 Sensitive fine grained [J] 4. Clayey silt to silty ll 7. Gravely sand to sandEarthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied: ~~ Sands only . . . ! Peak ground acceleration: ~~ 0.90 Use fill: No Limit depth applied: Yes || 2. Organic material || 5. Silty sand to sandy silt || 8. Very stiff sand to Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A Limit depth: 50.00 ft [| 3. Clay to silty clay [| 6. Clean sand to silty sand O 9. Very stiff fine grained CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:29 PM 29 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-19 CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 FS Plot During earthq. Liquefaction potential LPI 20151050 De p t h ( f t ) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Settlement (in)0.20.150.10.050 De p t h ( f t ) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements Displacement (in)0 De p t h ( f t ) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:29 PM 30 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-19 CRR plot —HF OW O N O G O U HD W N R D O ju r y N ju r y w [a r y iy ju r y wu [a r y =} ju r y ~ ju r y [= ] ju r y © De p t h (f t ) rg NN Nw N-S Nwu Na N~ N[= < ] N© w[= ] wrg wN ww wry wwu w[= w~ w[= ] w[+h 4 1 During Earthq ’0 0.2 0.4 0.6 CRR & CSR EN=) Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Points to test: Based on Ic value Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Liquefaction analysis overall plots 0 1 2 34 5 6 7 8 De p t h (f t ) Daring q. 0 0.5 1 1.5 Factor of safety Depth to water table (erthqg.): 40.00 ft Average results interval: 3 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Use fill: No Fill height: N/A Liquefaction potential 01= 1 2- 3pgs EN J s1— | 64 | 81 | 10u+— 12 B31+— 14 i51+— | 16 71+— 18o1+— 20 n4+— Fr 22 Bn1T+— 24 BT — 6 — 7 BT — 290—1— 0 T————n———— BRT — BT — KE LE KL 37 38 39 40 De p t h (f t ) LPI Fill weight: Transition detect. applied: K, applied: Clay like behavior applied: Limit depth applied: Limit depth: 15 20 N/A No Yes Sands only Yes 50.00 ft De p t h (f t ) Vertical settlements WO N T DW N R E O fu r y o fu r y—- ju r y N ju r y w =iy ju r y (5 ) ] I=Ny fu r y@ ju r y © nNo N=De p t h (f t ) nNN Nw Niy NN ay un nN~ NN 0 © wo ww w WN = Ww hy ww Ww No Ww@ Ww [+ ] ryo o 0.05 01 0.15 0.2 Settlement (in) F.S. color scheme || |_|Ll | |_| Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy ==RP OW W N O O U bD h W N R F E O BW W WW WW W W W W w N N N N N N N D N N N D N R E RE OC W V W O N O I O U D R W N F R O O U W I O I N O I O U DA W N , OO U I N O G O U DW N Lateral displacements 0 Displacement (in) LPI color scheme Il Very high risk ll High risk Il Low risk CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:29 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg 30 LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value 6.500.90 G.W.T. (in-situ): G.W.T. (earthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA Leighton 14030.001 CPT file : CPT-21 40.00 ft 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Use fill: Fill height:Fill weight: Trans. detect. applied:Kσ applied: No N/AN/A NoYes Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied: Limit depth:MSF method: Sands onlyYes 50.00 ftMethod based Cone resistance qt (tsf)5000 De p t h ( f t ) 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SBTn Plot CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cy c lic S t r e s s R a t i o * (CS R *) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 No r m a l i z e d C P T p e n e t r a t i o n r e s i s t a n c e 1 10 100 1,000 Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction Ratio Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loadingZone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and groundgeometryZone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softeningZone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity,brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:29 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq 31 /) Leighton Leighton 14030.001 LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos CPT file : CPT-21 Input parameters and analysis data Location : Rosemead CA Analysis method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (in-situ): 40.00 ft Use fill: No Clay like behavior Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (earthq.): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A applied: Sands only Points to test: Based on Ic value Average results interval: Fill weight: N/A Limit depth applied: Yes Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Trans. detect. applied: No Limit depth: 50.00 ft Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT K, applied: Yes MSF method: Method based Cone resistance Friction Ratio SBTn Plot CRR plot FS Plot 0 4 0 —_— [4] — 2 [4 2 2 4 4 4 " 4 6 { 6 ~ 6 : : = N<<10 10 L 10 12 12 ry 12MN 14 14 rd 14 16 16 - 16 18 18 18 ~~ £ 2 20 20 g 22 » . 2 o of 24 24 26 sg 26 26 28 S 28 28 30 { 30 > 30 32 32 ; 3 32 34 = 34 > 34 36 I) 36 Zl 36 38 38 4 38 ~ —40 ya 40 C 40 D 40 42 421 42i Em —— — 0 500 0 2 4 6 8 10 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 qt (tsf) Rf (%) Ic (Robertson 1990) CRR & CSR Factor of safety M..=7'/2, sigma’=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential 0.8 1 1 [1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.000 1 1 1 111d = _ ] Liquefaction - hy : 0.7 8 [ ] / » Ss E 3 2 3 E wn 0.6 / [ 2 i - c 1005 ©] seanmny o (o/ |® {3 7- ©0 k © 4]© os / I © . ° / 2S 5 [| kK2 04 ©§ / | 35 1 / 5h 3 ©po 0.3 / - £ [4 ] |- o> i9) i S I 2 0.2 7 [ ] yd ~ 0.1 1 10 0.1 i Normalized friction ratio (%) 1 [ Zone Aq: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading E No Liquefaction | Zone A,: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground i geometry LL OL BLL BLL BLL BLL BLL RL BLEUE BLL BLL Zone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softening 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Zone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity, Qtn,cs brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:29 PM 31 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-21 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 De p t h ( f t ) 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Fr (%)1086420 De p t h ( f t ) 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio Bq 10.80.60.40.20-0.2 De p t h ( f t ) 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 De p t h ( f t ) 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type SBTn (Robertson 1990)1817161514131211109876543210 De p t h ( f t ) 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. Soil Behaviour Type ClayClay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltClayClay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay ClayClay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clayClay & silty clayClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy silt Clay Clay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltSand CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:29 PM 32 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq SBTn legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to silty 5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand to 9. Very stiff fine grained Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-21 Norm. cone resistance (a — — WA I N 10 12 14 16 No De p t h (f t ) ™/ WT We a 26] 28 30 32 34 [ 36 38 [a ————— 40 Ss 42 T J LJ T 0 50 100 150 20( Qtn Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Points to test:Based on Ic value Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Peak ground acceleration:0.90 Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft De p t h (f t ) CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type 0 0 0 0 1 a T— BY sity da2 C- 2 2 i 4 = 4 4 Very dense/siiff soil |Silty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy silt6 S 6 6 | & sandy siny Rol8 8 8 Ll(a Silty sand & sandy silt 10 my 10 10 S—] Clay |12 : 12 12 Clay|& silty diay>14 — 14 14 Clay 16 eS 16 16 Clayf& \ R Clay18 18 18 Clay 20 - £20 £ 20 £20 Clay Net Ne? Sr 22 5 22 ES ES 22 a & g “ g 24 £ 24 24 24 i 26 y 26 26 26 28 pi 28 { 28 28 30 = 30 30— 30 32 FF 32 0 32 34 > 34 34 34 x5 nd &36 % 36 36 36 sity 38 < 38 38 38 nd & sandy silt i nd40 “ 40 40 r "T 40 nd & sandy silt 42 << 42 Pp. 42 . hd T T T T y T T y y y T LE LILA LL I I A a a 0 2 4 6 8 10 02 0 0.2 04 06 08 1 1 2 3 4 01234567 9101112131415161718 Fr (%) Bq Ic (Robertson 1990) SBTn (Robertson 1990) Depth to water table (erthqg.): 40.00 ft Fill weight: N/A Average results interval: 3 Transition detect. applied: No SBTn legend Ic cut-off value: 2.60 K, applied: Yes 1 Sensitive fine grained [J] 4. Clayey silt to silty ll 7. Gravely sand to sandUnit weight calculation: Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied: ~~ Sands only . . . ! .Use fil: No Limit depth applied: Yes ll 2 Organic material ll 5. Sity sand to sandy sit [JJ] 8. Very stiff sand to Fill height: N/A Limit depth: 50.00 ft [| 3. Clay to silty clay [| 6. Clean sand to silty sand O 9. Very stiff fine grained CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:29 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg 32 This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-21 CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Liquefaction potential LPI 20151050 De p t h ( f t ) 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Settlement (in)0.20.150.10.050 De p t h ( f t ) 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements Displacement (in)21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:29 PM 33 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-21 Liquefaction analysis overall plots CRR plot FS Plot Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Lateral displacements 0 -— =m ___ 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 4 4 4 / 4 6 6 6 / 6 8 8 8 8 10 10 10 10 12 12 12 12 14 14 14 14 16 16 16 i 16 18 18 18 18 Eg 20 £2 E20 E 20 Eg 20 = i f= = =| 22 |’ 22 B 22 "22 "22fo) J] © Q ooa o o o [a]24 24 24 24 24 26 26 26 r 26 26 28 28 28 28 / 28 30 30 30 30 32 32 32 32 34 34 34 34 36 36 36 ] 36 38 38 38 38 40 40 7 40 / 40D —] 42 | 42 42 42 T T T 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 5 10 15 20 [J] 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 CRR & CSR Factor of safety LPI Settlement (in) Displacement (in) Input parameters and analysis data F.S. color scheme LPI color scheme Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Depth to water table (erthg.): 40.00 ft Fill weight: N/A Bl Amost certain it will liquefy Il Very high risk Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Average results interval: 3 Transition detect. applied: No [| Very likely to liquefy [| High riskPoints to test: Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value: 2.60 K, applied: Yes Liquefaction and no lig. are equally likel fi Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied: Sands only [] a ] 9: qually y nH Low risk Peak ground acceleration: ~~ 0.90 Use fill: No Limit depth applied: Yes [| Unlike to liquefy Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A Limit depth: 50.00 ft [| Almost certain it will not liquefy CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:29 PM 33 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value 6.500.90 G.W.T. (in-situ): G.W.T. (earthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA Leighton 14030.001 CPT file : CPT-23 40.00 ft 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Use fill: Fill height:Fill weight: Trans. detect. applied:Kσ applied: No N/AN/A NoYes Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied: Limit depth:MSF method: Sands onlyYes 50.00 ftMethod based Cone resistance qt (tsf)6004002000 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SBTn Plot CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cy c lic S t r e s s R a t i o * (CS R *) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 No r m a l i z e d C P T p e n e t r a t i o n r e s i s t a n c e 1 10 100 1,000 Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction Ratio Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loadingZone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and groundgeometryZone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softeningZone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity,brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:30 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq 34 / Leger Leighton LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA CPT file : CPT-23 Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (in-situ): 40.00 ft Use fill: No Clay like behavior Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (earthq.): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A applied: Sands only Points to test: Based on Ic value Average results interval: 3 Fill weight: N/A Limit depth applied: Yes Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Trans. detect. applied: No Limit depth: 50.00 ft Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT K, applied: Yes MSF method: Method based Cone resistance Friction Ratio SBThn Plot CRR plot FS Plot0 T 0 a 0 — 2 > 2 = 2 4 ? 4 4 6 4 6 6 8 Vd 8 8 10 [4 10 10 12 12 12 af 14 14 16 16 16 >18 ) 18 18 20 20 20] D2 _ 2 2 = 24 24 od 24£ 13 | YaB 26 3 26 26 0 28 § 28 28 30 —— 30 > 30 32 << 32 32 34 34 34 36 36 = 36 38 5 38 38 - 40 40 {] 40 During earthq.42 42 1 42 44 44 44 46 46 46-1 — 48 48+ 8] — = 50-1f i 50 TTT 50 — 0 200 400 600 0 2 4 6 8 10 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 qt (tsf) Rf (%) Ic (Robertson 1990) CRR & CSR Factor of safety M..=7'/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential 0.8 1 1 | 1 1 1 1 1 Nn Nn Nn 1,000 1 1 1 EE] —1 [] |I TO | ] Liquefaction - / ; 0.7 5 8 i c 4 / » Ss E 3 7} E wn 0.6 / [ g i c 1005 © ] an oo eq 2 J [7] : [ = iOo 0.5 ] / [ a ] ° / 2S 5 [| kK« 0.4 o § / | 3— 4 B N& 1 / [3LQ 03 4 5 £ <Q ] - I<}> i9) i S I 2 0.2 7 [ ] yd ~ 0.1 1 10 0.1 i Normalized friction ratio (%) 1 [ Zone Aq: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading E No Liquefaction | Zone A,: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground i geometry LL OL BLL BLL BLL BLL BLL RL BLEUE BLL BLL Zone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softening 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Zone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity, Qtn,cs brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:30 PM 34 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-23 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Fr (%)1086420 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio Bq 10.80.60.40.20-0.2 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type SBTn (Robertson 1990)1817161514131211109876543210 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. Soil Behaviour Type Organic soilClay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltClayVery dense/stiff soilClay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soilClay & silty clayClay Clay Clay & silty clayClayClay & silty clay ClayClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClay & silty clay ClayClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy silt ClayClay & silty clayClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy silt CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:30 PM 35 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq SBTn legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to silty 5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand to 9. Very stiff fine grained Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-23 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio ———= ==]2 2 —_— fmmes———1 << 4 = 4 6 3 6 8 — 8 —— 10 = 10 Z L 12 = 12 3 14 33 14 16 py 16 18 18 pz —20 3 20 3 —] i EE -umeo co == =24 = 24 =r= Fa = =326 3 26 3 ao [a] [=]28] 28 30 30 —— 32] 32 34] 34 Se36 —— 36 38 38 40 40 — 42 42 { 44 44 46 -_ 46 48 48 1— ed50 50 iT J LJ T T 1] T LJ T J 0 50 100 150 20( 0 2 4 6 8 10 Qtn Fr (%) Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Depth to water table (erthqg.): 40.00 ft Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Average results interval: 3 Points to test: Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Use fill: No Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A N © [= A 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 a2 44 46 48 50 Nom. pore pressure ratio 02 0 02 04 06 Bq Fill weight: Transition detect. applied: K, applied: Clay like behavior applied: Limit depth applied: Limit depth: 08 1 N/A No Yes Sands only Yes 50.00 ft SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type I Ve ry dense/stiff soil-& silty ay -Very, dense/stiff soilsilty olay 2 2[e ) ] ~~[=~~ =[=X[1]o De p t h (f t ) nd & sandy silt soy otnd & sandy silt3La LI Lb| | 56 78 9101112131415161718 Fervor 01234 Ic (Robertson 1990) SBTn (Robertson 1990) SBTn legend B 1. Sensitive fine grained B 4. Clayey silt to silty [| 7. Gravely sand to sand ll 2 Organic material ll 5. Sity sand to sandy sit [JJ] 8. Very stiff sand to [| 3. Clay to silty clay [| 6. Clean sand to silty sand O 9. Very stiff fine grained CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:30 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg 35 This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-23 CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Liquefaction potential LPI 20151050 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Settlement (in)0.250.20.150.10.050 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements Displacement (in)21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:30 PM 36 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-23 Liquefaction analysis overall plots CRR plot Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Lateral displacements 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 4 4 4 4 6 6 6 6 8 8 r 8 J 8 10 10 10 { 10 12 12 — 12 I] 12” 14 14 — 14 14 16 16 — 16 16 18 18 r 18 18 20 \ 20 20 20 22 22 r 22 22fry jy = joy =24 = 24 — = 24 24r= r= = = =26 oy 2 26 — = 26 226oa o o o [a]28 28 — 28 28 30 30 30 / 30 32 32 r 32 ] 32 34 34 34 | 34 36 36 r 36 f 36 38 38 — 38 / 38 h 440 40 — 40 40During earthq Va 7 42 42 — 42 42 44 44 44 44 46 46 46 a 46 48 48 48 ~g 48 — 50 = = i — 50 50 50 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 5 10 15 20 [J] 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 CRR & CSR Factor of safety LPI Settlement (in) Displacement (in) Input parameters and analysis data F.S. color scheme LPI color scheme Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Depth to water table (erthg.): 40.00 ft Fill weight: N/A Bl Amost certain it will liquefy Il Very high risk Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Average results interval: 3 Transition detect. applied: No [| Very likely to liquefy [| High riskPoints to test: Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value: 2.60 K, applied: Yes Liquefaction and no lig. are equally likel fi Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied: Sands only [] a ] 9: qually y nH Low risk Peak ground acceleration: ~~ 0.90 Use fill: No Limit depth applied: Yes [| Unlike to liquefy Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A Limit depth: 50.00 ft [| Almost certain it will not liquefy CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:30 PM 36 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value 6.500.90 G.W.T. (in-situ): G.W.T. (earthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA Leighton 14030.001 CPT file : CPT-24 40.00 ft 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Use fill: Fill height:Fill weight: Trans. detect. applied:Kσ applied: No N/AN/A NoYes Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied: Limit depth:MSF method: Sands onlyYes 50.00 ftMethod based Cone resistance qt (tsf)400200 De p t h ( f t ) 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SBTn Plot CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cy c lic S t r e s s R a t i o * (CS R *) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 No r m a l i z e d C P T p e n e t r a t i o n r e s i s t a n c e 1 10 100 1,000 Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction Ratio Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loadingZone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and groundgeometryZone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softeningZone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity,brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:31 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq 37 / Leger Leighton LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA CPT file : CPT-24 Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (in-situ): 40.00 ft Use fill: No Clay like behavior Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (earthq.): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A applied: Sands only Points to test: Based on Ic value Average results interval: 3 Fill weight: N/A Limit depth applied: Yes Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Trans. detect. applied: No Limit depth: 50.00 ft Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT K, applied: Yes MSF method: Method based Cone resistance Friction Ratio SBThn Plot CRR plot FS Plot 0 Id 0 — 0 HRN 2 =4 4 4 6 1% 6 6 8 8 EN 8< 10 10 . 10 12 12 124 14 TS 14 14 16 C 16 16-1 18 18 18 20 { 20 z 20 ~~E22 22 < 22 c po5 24 24 < 24 8 26 { 26 ~=_ 26 28 KY 28 28 30 30 30 32 = 32 32 34 34 34 36] 36 36 38 38 40 — PRI of 40 —D— During & 42 42 42a ——— - — 1a 46 46 46 48 = | Pee ——— 48 ; : 200 400 0 2 4 6 8 10 1 2 3 4 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 qt (tsf) Rf (%) Ic (Robertson 1990) CRR & CSR Factor of safety M..=7'/2, sigma’=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential 0.8 1 1 [1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.000 1 1 1 1 111d _ ] Liquefaction - y : 0.7 5 8 ipu c= - i - ©ht E wn 0.6 / [ g ] B = 1004~~ E | oo a.x, ] 0 Ofipe ¢ Cog © PN b= 3 0 k © 4] £ 05] / fT ]° / 2S 5 [| kK2 04 ©§ / | 3— 4 B Nr= =& ] / L = 5 02 / FE[4 ] |- o> i9) i S I 2 0.2 rd [ ] yd ~ 0.1 1 10 0.1 i Normalized friction ratio (%) 1 [ Zone Aq: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading E No Liquefaction | Zone A,: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground h geometry LL OL BLL BLL BLL BLL BLL RL BLEUE BLL BLL Zone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softening 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Zone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity, Qtn,cs brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:31 PM 37 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-24 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 De p t h ( f t ) 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Fr (%)1086420 De p t h ( f t ) 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio Bq 10.80.60.40.20-0.2 De p t h ( f t ) 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 De p t h ( f t ) 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type SBTn (Robertson 1990)1817161514131211109876543210 De p t h ( f t ) 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. Soil Behaviour Type ClayClay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilSand & silty sandSand & silty sandClay & silty clayClayClayClay Clay Clay & silty clayClay & silty clayClayClay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay ClayClay & silty clayClaySilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy silt ClayClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clay Sand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy silt CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:31 PM 38 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq SBTn legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to silty 5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand to 9. Very stiff fine grained Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-24 Norm. cone resistance Norm. friction ratio CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) 0 0 [ 2 2 4 — 4 6 Ba 6 < 8 £ 8 %< Sy -| < 10 TT 10 2 12 12( 14 3 14 = -—16 = 16 » 18 = 18 20 { 20 —~ T22 J zg 22 4 e = = Pa3 24 { = 24 =7) fo) dl fo)0 26 4 0 26 ——— o 28 28 30] 30 32 -— 32Sn —J| 34 { 34 36 — 36 wRal Te—351-<o 38 _—TE S3 40 = 40 py — 42 42 — ——— | -44 44 < " Et 46 < 48 T . — 48 r T T 0 50 100 150 20( 2 4 6 8 Qtn Fr (%) Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Depth to water table (erthqg.): 40.00 ft Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Average results interval: 3 Points to test: Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Use fill: No Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 02 0 02 04 06 08 1 Nom. pore pressure ratio nNN De p t h (f t ) R 26 Fill weight: Transition detect. applied: K, applied: Clay like behavior applied: Limit depth applied: Limit depth: N/A No Yes Sands only Yes 50.00 ft SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type — [3 8 Very de De p t h (f t ) Feryreeryireevl LL LAN LN LAN BL BLIN BLN LN IL 012345678 9101112131415161718 Ic (Robertson 1990) SBTn (Robertson 1990) SBTn legend B 1. Sensitive fine grained B 4. Clayey silt to silty [| 7. Gravely sand to sand ll 2 Organic material ll 5. Sity sand to sandy sit [JJ] 8. Very stiff sand to [| 3. Clay to silty clay [| 6. Clean sand to silty sand O 9. Very stiff fine grained CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:31 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg 38 This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-24 CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Liquefaction potential LPI 20151050 De p t h ( f t ) 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Settlement (in)0.250.20.150.10.050 De p t h ( f t ) 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements Displacement (in)10.50 De p t h ( f t ) 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:31 PM 39 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-24 Liquefaction analysis overall plots CRR plot Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Lateral displacements 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 4 4 4 / 4 6 6 r 6 J; 6 8 8 8 J 8 10 10 r 10 10 12 12 12 12 14 14 r 14 14 16 16 16 16 18 18 — 18 18. 20 20 — 20 20 Eg 22 E £ 22 — E 22 Eg 22 = i f= [I = =3g 24 = 3 24 Bs 24 = 24 [7] Jo] [7] Jo] fo)0 2 [a 0 26 — 0 26 0 26 28 28 — 28 28 30 30 — 30 30 32 32 r 32 | 32 34 34 34 34 36 36 r 36 36 38 38 38 / 38 h 4 L40 During & 40 40 gy= 40 42 42 I 42 42 — — 44 44 44 44 46 46 46 46 48 T T T 48 48 48 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 5 10 15 20 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.2! 0 0.5 1 CRR & CSR Factor of safety LPI Settlement (in) Displacement (in) Input parameters and analysis data F.S. color scheme LPI color scheme Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Depth to water table (erthg.): 40.00 ft Fill weight: N/A Bl Amost certain it will liquefy Il Very high risk Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Average results interval: 3 Transition detect. applied: No [| Very likely to liquefy [| High riskPoints to test: Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value: 2.60 K, applied: Yes Liquefaction and no lig. are equally likel fi Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied: Sands only [] a ] 9: qually y nH Low risk Peak ground acceleration: ~~ 0.90 Use fill: No Limit depth applied: Yes [| Unlike to liquefy Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A Limit depth: 50.00 ft [| Almost certain it will not liquefy CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:31 PM 39 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value 6.500.90 G.W.T. (in-situ): G.W.T. (earthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA Leighton 14030.001 CPT file : CPT-26 40.00 ft 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Use fill: Fill height:Fill weight: Trans. detect. applied:Kσ applied: No N/AN/A NoYes Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied: Limit depth:MSF method: Sands onlyYes 50.00 ftMethod based Cone resistance qt (tsf)6004002000 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SBTn Plot CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cy c lic S t r e s s R a t i o * (CS R *) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 No r m a l i z e d C P T p e n e t r a t i o n r e s i s t a n c e 1 10 100 1,000 Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction Ratio Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loadingZone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and groundgeometryZone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softeningZone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity,brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:32 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq 40 Leighton 14030.001w Leighton Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos CPT file : CPT-26 Input parameters and analysis data Location : Rosemead CA Analysis method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (in-situ): 40.00 ft Use fill: No Clay like behavior Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (earthq.): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A applied: Sands only Points to test: Based on Ic value Average results interval: 3 Fill weight: N/A Limit depth applied: Yes Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Trans. detect. applied: No Limit depth: 50.00 ft Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT K, applied: Yes MSF method: Method based Cone resistance Friction Ratio SBThn Plot CRR plot FS Plot 0 0 0 2 4 2 2 4 y 4 4 6 6 < 6 8 8 8 10 10 10 12 12 12 14 14 14 16 16] 16 8 18 = 18 20 3 20 20] 22 22eg 22 y £ 24 24 24 5 26 4 26 26 0 28 28 28 ¢30 30oy L 30 p= 32 L 32 hy 32 —34 <<] 34 34 36 << 36 36> Ly38 Lr’ 38 C= 38 40 J 40 21 ¥ 421 &= 42 44 a 44 44 46 =——l 46 46 48 c 48 48 50 a 50-1 —-rt 50 = = 0 200 400 600 0 2 4 6 8 10 1 2 3 4 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 qt (tsf) Rf (%) Ic (Robertson 1990) CRR & CSR Factor of safety M..=7'/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential0.8 M ' ] : N N N N N N N 1.000 ) 1 [EE | NR ] Liquefaction - : 0.7 : S i [] / = © a+ - E 3 2 3 E wn 0.6 / [ g ] B Ss 100 5 ~~ - | =Ix, ] WUNNRIEITONGINPS &® Oo] = J a : E .OQ 05 i / [ a 7 ° / 2S 5 [| kK« 0.4 o 8 / 3I=] E 3 N& ] / L =L 03 - E <Q ] - I<}lo) ] / [ 2 0.2 yd [ ] yd ~ 0.1 1 10 0.1 i Normalized friction ratio (%) 1 [ Zone Aq: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading E No Liquefaction | Zone A,: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground h geometry LL OL BLL BLL BLL BLL BLL RL BLEUE BLL BLL Zone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softening 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Zone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity, Qtn,cs brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:32 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq 40 This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-26 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Fr (%)1086420 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio Bq 10.80.60.40.20-0.2 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type SBTn (Robertson 1990)1817161514131211109876543210 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. Soil Behaviour Type Clay Silty sand & sandy siltClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay ClayClay & silty clay ClayClay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClay & silty clay ClayClay & silty clayClay & silty clay Clay & silty clayClay & silty clayClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltClaySand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soil CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:32 PM 41 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq SBTn legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to silty 5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand to 9. Very stiff fine grained Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-26 Norm. cone resistance i a 2 J — = 6 —II 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 De p t h (f t ) WY TT A De p t h (f t ) 28 30 32 34 = 36 38 40 42 46 48 Vai 50 ————— | 0 50 100 150 20( Qtn Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Points to test: Based on Ic value Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Te — 10 —~Ts14 16 SS— -18 20 22 24 26 De p t h (f t ) 28 30 32 34 36 38 § 40 p= 44 le 46 1 50 48 rE. T o N 4 6 Fr (%) Depth to water table (erthqg.): 40.00 ft Average results interval: Ic cut-off value: Unit weight calculation: Use fill: Fill height: 3 2.60 Based on SBT No N/A 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 Nom. pore pressure ratio De p t h (f t ) 02 0 02 04 06 08 1 Bq Fill weight: Transition detect. applied: K, applied: Clay like behavior applied: Limit depth applied: Limit depth: N/A No Yes Sands only Yes 50.00 ft 26 nN@ w Ww NO SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type ~ T 1dsilty clay nd & Sandd nd & sandsilty clay 10 Clay|& silty dlay sity dey i dasilty dlay <So © XO OO ER E << ) Odooel Qo l o 24 Clay | De p t h (f t ) LLI LI BLT T J 6 7 8 9101112131415161718 I 2 3 4 [J] Ic (Robertson 1990) SBTn (Robertson 1990) SBTn legend B 1. Sensitive fine grained B 4. Clayey silt to silty [| 7. Gravely sand to sand ll 2 Organic material ll 5. Sity sand to sandy sit [JJ] 8. Very stiff sand to [| 3. Clay to silty clay [| 6. Clean sand to silty sand O 9. Very stiff fine grained CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:32 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg 41 This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-26 CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Liquefaction potential LPI 20151050 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Settlement (in)0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements Displacement (in)6420 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:32 PM 42 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-26 CRR plot 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 De p t h (f t ) 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42] 46 Durin 48 50 0.2 i 0.4 CRR & CSR 0.6 Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method: Points to test: Earthquake magnitude M,,: Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value 6.50 0.90 Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Liquefaction analysis overall plots De p t h (f t ) 0 0.5 1 1.5 Factor of safety Depth to water table (erthqg.): 40.00 ft Average results interval: 3 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Use fill: No Fill height: N/A Liquefaction potential 2+—1 r 14 i 18 i 20 n1+—1| r 24 De p t h (f t ) 28 i 30 - 21T—1 r 34 1—1 r 38 i 44 46 48 50 LPI Fill weight: Transition detect. applied: K, applied: Clay like behavior applied: Limit depth applied: Limit depth: 15 20 N/A No Yes Sands only Yes 50.00 ft 10 12 14 16 18 20 De p t h (f t ) 8 8 BX wN 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 Vertical settlements pj ® I :8 yd 0.2 0.4 0.6 Settlement (in) F.S. color scheme || |_|Ll | |_| Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 Lateral displacements 0 2 4 6 Displacement (in) LPI color scheme Il Very high risk ll High risk Il Low risk CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:32 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg 42 LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value 6.500.90 G.W.T. (in-situ): G.W.T. (earthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA Leighton 14030.001 CPT file : CPT-28 40.00 ft 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Use fill: Fill height:Fill weight: Trans. detect. applied:Kσ applied: No N/AN/A NoYes Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied: Limit depth:MSF method: Sands onlyYes 50.00 ftMethod based Cone resistance qt (tsf)4002000 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SBTn Plot CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cy c lic S t r e s s R a t i o * (CS R *) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 No r m a l i z e d C P T p e n e t r a t i o n r e s i s t a n c e 1 10 100 1,000 Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction Ratio Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loadingZone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and groundgeometryZone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softeningZone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity,brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:33 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq 43 V/ Leighton 4 14030.001 Leighton LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA CPT file : CPT-28 Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (in-situ): 40.00 ft Use fill: No Clay like behavior Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (earthq.): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A applied: Sands only Points to test: Based on Ic value Average results interval: 3 Fill weight: N/A Limit depth applied: Yes Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Trans. detect. applied: No Limit depth: 50.00 ftq g w P!Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT K, applied: Yes MSF method: Method based Cone resistance Friction Ratio SBTn Plot CRR plot FS Plot 0 TN 0 Ts 0 = 0 — 2 rg 2 LS 2 2 4 Id 4 4 4 513 6 > 6 6 8 J 8 8 | 8 10 \ 10 S 10 a 10 12 S 12 — 12 iB 12 14+ 14 14 — 14 16 16 16 -S 16 181% 18 C — 18 <, 18+ 21 20 x 20 5] 20 en 22 22 a 22 3 22 = 2 24 : 24 iB 24B26 26 26 B 26 0 28 28 28 | 4 28 30 30 30 3 30 32 32 32 T- 32 34 > 341—% 34 34 36 N 36 % 36 36 38 & 38 < 38 BH 38 40 — 40 40 40 - vDuring earthq.42 = 42 3 42 t 42 44 ~ 44 5 44 44 46 46 ¢ 46 46] — 48] 48 48 48]— ——— - 50 —== 50 = ———r——1—T—1— 50 50 : — 0 200 400 0 2 4 6 8 10 1 2 3 4 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 qt (tsf) Rf (%) Ic (Robertson 1990) CRR & CSR Factor of safety M..=7'/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential 1 1 [1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Nn 1 1 1 [EE | []0.8 1,000 - —t ] Liquefaction - ; 3 0.7 5 8 J c 4 / » S k 3 on E wn 0.6 / [ 2 i - c 1005 x] . ost 2 37) : [ s .© 0.57 / [ © . ° / 2= 5 [| kK2 04 ©§ / | 3I=] E 3 N7 i / I =2 03 -[8] 7 -5 / - S 0.2 yd [ ] yd ~ 0.1 1 10 0.1 i Normalized friction ratio (%) 1 [ Zone Aq: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading E No Liquefaction | Zone A,: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground h geometry LL OL BLL BLL BLL BLL BLL RL BLEUE BLL BLL Zone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softening 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Zone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity, Qtn,cs brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:33 PM 43 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-28 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Fr (%)1086420 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio Bq 10.80.60.40.20-0.2 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type SBTn (Robertson 1990)1817161514131211109876543210 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. Soil Behaviour Type Organic soilSand & silty sand Clay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltClay ClayClay & silty clayClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltClayClay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clay CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:33 PM 44 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq SBTn legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to silty 5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand to 9. Very stiff fine grained Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-28 Norm. cone resistance TT = 0 2 4 6 8 10 JA 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 De p t h (f t ) 28 30 [28 8 h Af A 32 34 \36 38 40 42 44 ®46 48 50 50 100 Qtn 150 20( Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method: Points to test: Earthquake magnitude M,,: Peak ground acceleration: Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value 6.50 0.90 De p t h (f t ) CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio \/ 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 -<26 De p t h (f t ) 28 30 32 34 A 36 38 40 42 A| 44 46 No AM 48 50 Depth to water table (erthq.): N f4 Fr 6 (%) Average results interval: Ic cut-off value: Unit weight calculation: Use fill: Fill height: 40.00 ft 3 2.60 Based on SBT No N/A [1h — 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 Nom. pore pressure ratio 02 0 02 04 06 Bq Fill weight: Transition detect. applied: K, applied: Clay like behavior applied: Limit depth applied: Limit depth: 08 1 N/A No Yes Sands only Yes 50.00 ft ~~[=~~ =[=X[1]o 2 2[e ) ] SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type > 0 BE Organic SOI 2 Sand-&si ite! 4 Clay & si y i nd & sandy silt 6 D it i. nd & sandy sit 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 £2=g 26 28 Clay 30 a 32 Clay & A i.34Ni 5 sity sa ] 36 © iS nd | & sa dy 38 B | 40 Sand & si hdB N avs2 }| Silty sand/& sandy si RB 44 Silty sand& sandy si46 SEE| Sand & silty sand48 - :Silty sand & sandy silt —= 50 { Bye i / I|IL TL ILI TL JL TOL ILI TL LA TOL BLE TLASILA LI BL BL I 2 3 4 012345678 9101112131415161718 Ic (Robertson 1990) SBTn (Robertson 1990) SBTn legend B 1. Sensitive fine grained B 4. Clayey silt to silty [| 7. Gravely sand to sand ll 2 Organic material ll 5. Sity sand to sandy sit [JJ] 8. Very stiff sand to [| 3. Clay to silty clay [| 6. Clean sand to silty sand O 9. Very stiff fine grained CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:33 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg 44 This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-28 CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Liquefaction potential LPI 20151050 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Settlement (in)0.30.20.10 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements Displacement (in)3210 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:33 PM 45 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-28 CRR plot 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 De p t h (f t ) 28 30 32 34 36 38 h. 440IDuring earthq 42 46 48 50 Input parameters and analysis data NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value 6.50 0.90 Analysis method: Fines correction method: Points to test: Earthquake magnitude M,,: Peak ground acceleration: Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft 0.2 CRR & CSR 0.4 Liquefaction analysis overall plots De p t h (f t ) 0 0.5 1 1.5 Factor of safety Depth to water table (erthqg.): 40.00 ft Average results interval: 3 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Use fill: No Fill height: N/A Liquefaction potential De p t h (f t ) BH- |461 48 50 LPI Fill weight: Transition detect. applied: K, applied: Clay like behavior applied: Limit depth applied: Limit depth: 15 20 N/A No Yes Sands only Yes 50.00 ft 10 12 14 16 18 De p t h (f t ) 8g 8 8 8% RN B Ww hy 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 Vertical settlements J/|/ y [4 / g =8 Lf 7 0.1 0.2 0.3 Settlement (in) F.S. color scheme || |_|Ll | |_| Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 a2 44 46 48 50 Lateral displacements i“ 0 1 2 Displacement (in) LPI color scheme Il Very high risk ll High risk Il Low risk CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:33 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg 45 LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value 6.500.90 G.W.T. (in-situ): G.W.T. (earthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA Leighton 14030.001 CPT file : CPT-29 40.00 ft 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Use fill: Fill height:Fill weight: Trans. detect. applied:Kσ applied: No N/AN/A NoYes Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied: Limit depth:MSF method: Sands onlyYes 50.00 ftMethod based Cone resistance qt (tsf)5000 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SBTn Plot CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cy c lic S t r e s s R a t i o * (CS R *) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 No r m a l i z e d C P T p e n e t r a t i o n r e s i s t a n c e 1 10 100 1,000 Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction Ratio Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loadingZone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and groundgeometryZone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softeningZone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity,brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:33 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq 46 V/ Leighton 4 14030.001 Leighton LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA CPT file : CPT-29 Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (in-situ): 40.00 ft Use fill: No Clay like behavior Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (earthq.): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A applied: Sands only Points to test: Based on Ic value Average results interval: 3 Fill weight: N/A Limit depth applied: Yes Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Trans. detect. applied: No Limit depth: 50.00 ft Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT K, applied: Yes MSF method: Method based Cone resistance Friction Ratio SBTn Plot CRR plot FS Plot 0 ™ 0 | 0 — 2 Ny 2 —— 2 Kw4 4 4Pe be6 g 6 & 6 8 8 =g 8 of 10 10 12 ba 12 12 14 14 < 144 16 16 fre 16 18 18 18 £20 t 20 3 20Nt 5 22 3 22 22 A 24 24 24 26 26 = 26 28 £ 28 28 30 LS 30 30] 32 32 32Id 334 b) 34 34 36 7 36 g 36 38 38 Y 38 ol & 3 v40 40 -2 3 During earthq. 42 = 42 jr? 42 a“ PE — M1 : : 0 500 0 2 4 6 8 10 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 qt (tsf) Rf (%) Ic (Robertson 1990) CRR & CSR Factor of safety M..=7'/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential 0.8 1 1 [1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.000 1 1 1 111d . 1 [] |I TO | ] Liquefaction - ; . 0.7 5 S ] / » Ss E 3 2 E wn 0.6 / [ 2 i - c 1005 x] = 3 3 0s] FE]S 057 / [2]° / 2S 5 [| kK2 04 ©2 / 35 1 / 5h 3 ©5 02 / FE[4 ] |- o> i9) i S I 2 0.2 rd [ ] yd ~ 0.1 1 10 0.1 i Normalized friction ratio (%) 1 [ Zone Aq: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading E No Liquefaction | Zone A,: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground i geometry LL OL BLL BLL BLL BLL BLL RL BLEUE BLL BLL Zone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softening 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Zone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity, Qtn,cs brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:33 PM 46 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-29 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Fr (%)1086420 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio Bq 10.80.60.40.20-0.2 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type SBTn (Robertson 1990)1817161514131211109876543210 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. Soil Behaviour Type Organic soilClay & silty clayClay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soilSand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltClay Clay Clay & silty clayClay & silty clayClay & silty claySand & silty sandClay & silty clayClay & silty clay Clay & silty clayClayClayClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClay Clay Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sandSand CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:33 PM 47 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq SBTn legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to silty 5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand to 9. Very stiff fine grained Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-29 CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. cone resistance Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Norm. Soil eae Type OF 0 °T oe soil — &l a2 2 — 2 £3 ay 7.— cB‘dense! iff soil 4 4 4 =it —— nd & sand ait 6 6 6 4 sand & sandy silal —— 8 Ej 8 ~ 8 10 L 10 10 12 S 12 = 12———14 < 14 14p—— 16 iY 16 <r 16 18 < 18 = 18 20 20 20 —~ 2g g BN g 3 g £ 22 £ 22 — £ 22 = 2a j=1 ~ j=1 F=4 8[+] [3] [3] © @0 24 C 0 24 0 24 [a O24 26 FY 26 ~~ 26 26 28 28 Ex 28 28 30 ~~ 30 30 C —3 Si32 — 32 Ny 32 34 & 34 ¢ 34 GC 36 36 36 SiY V 38 > 38 38 Sik= 3 S40 — 40 § 40 i 42 42 42 ¥ S44 44 44 S —T y T T T T T T y T T y y y T IL TL ILI TL IL BL BL I = LN LI LA NL NN I 0 50 100 150 20( 0 2 4 6 8 10 02 0 02 04 06 08 1 012345678 9101112131415161718 Qtn Fr (%) Bq Ic (Robertson 1990) SBTn (Robertson 1990) Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Depth to water table (erthqg.): 40.00 ft Fill weight: N/A SBTn | d Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Average results interval: 3 Transition detect. applied: No h legen Points to test: Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value: 2.60 K, applied: Yes B 1. Sensitive fine grained B 4. Clayey silt to silty [| 7. Gravely sand to sand Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied: ~~ Sands only . . . ! Peak ground acceleration: ~~ 0.90 Use fill: No Limit depth applied: Yes || 2. Organic material || 5. Silty sand to sandy silt || 8. Very stiff sand to Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A Limit depth: 50.00 ft [| 3. Clay to silty clay [| 6. Clean sand to silty sand O 9. Very stiff fine grained CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:33 PM 47 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-29 CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Liquefaction potential LPI 20151050 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Settlement (in)0.10.080.060.040.020 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements Displacement (in)0 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:33 PM 48 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-29 CRR plot 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 De p t h (f t ) 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 A 4 During earthqg40 42 0 0.2 0.4 CRR & CSR 0.6 Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Points to test: Based on Ic value Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot De p t h (f t ) 0 0.5 1 1.5 Factor of safety Depth to water table (erthqg.): 40.00 ft Average results interval: 3 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Use fill: No Fill height: N/A Liquefaction potential 12 14 nNo De p t h (f t ) N nNEN nN [- )|T N[+ ] 30 32 ¥— 36 38 40 42 Fill weight: Transition detect. applied: K, applied: Clay like behavior applied: Limit depth Limit depth: 5 10 LPI 15 20 N/A No Yes Sands only Yes 50.00 ft applied: Vertical settlements 10 12 14 16 De p t h (f t ) N De p t h (f t ) 28 30 ™ aN 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 Settlement (in) 0.1 F.S. color scheme Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy || |_|Ll | |_| 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 Lateral displacements 0 Displacement (in) LPI color scheme Il Very high risk ll High risk Il Low risk CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:33 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg 48 LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value 6.500.90 G.W.T. (in-situ): G.W.T. (earthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA Leighton 14030.001 CPT file : CPT-31 40.00 ft 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Use fill: Fill height:Fill weight: Trans. detect. applied:Kσ applied: No N/AN/A NoYes Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied: Limit depth:MSF method: Sands onlyYes 50.00 ftMethod based Cone resistance qt (tsf)4002000 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SBTn Plot CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cy c lic S t r e s s R a t i o * (CS R *) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 No r m a l i z e d C P T p e n e t r a t i o n r e s i s t a n c e 1 10 100 1,000 Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction Ratio Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loadingZone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and groundgeometryZone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softeningZone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity,brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:34 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq 49 V/ Leighton 4 14030.001 Leighton LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA CPT file : CPT-31 Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (in-situ): 40.00 ft Use fill: No Clay like behavior Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (earthq.): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A applied: Sands only Points to test: Based on Ic value Average results interval: 3 Fill weight: N/A Limit depth applied: Yes Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Trans. detect. applied: No Limit depth: 50.00 ft Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT K, applied: Yes MSF method: Method based Cone resistance Friction Ratio SBTn Plot CRR plot FS Plot 0 TX 0 r 0 — 2 ¢ 2 2 4 4 — 4 6 1 6 = 6-1 8 ! 8 8 10 { 10 10 12 12 12J14 14 14 16 16 3 16 18 18 184 20 201 20] 224 += 22 22 = 24 24 24 = _ge—B 26 = 26 26 0 28 —s* 28 28<30 30 = 30 32 32 32 34 It 34 3 34 36 4 36 2 36 38 < 38 7 38 A 440 ~~ 40 S 40 Durin42 5 42 42 44 $ 44 Id 44 46 - — _S ad — 48 = 48 a 48 — —= 50 = I oo 50 T - - 0 200 400 0 2 4 6 8 10 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 qt (tsf) Rf (%) Ic (Robertson 1990) CRR & CSR Factor of safety M..=7'/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential 0.8 1 1 [1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.000 1 1 1 | | Ll 1 _ ] Liquefaction - : 0.7 : S [ ] / = © a i © 0.6 / - 3 E 3 = 1004 0 . oo | 8 I [04 7 - © Twn =] = f=] ]S 057 / [2]° / 2S 5 [| kK2 04 ©8 / 3I=] E 3 N& ] / L = 5 02 / FE[4 ] |- o> i9) i S I 2 0.2 rd [ ] yd ~ 0.1 1 10 0.1 i Normalized friction ratio (%) 1 [ Zone Aq: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading E No Liquefaction | Zone A,: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground h geometry LL OL BLL BLL BLL BLL BLL RL BLEUE BLL BLL Zone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softening 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Zone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity, Qtn,cs brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:34 PM 49 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-31 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Fr (%)1086420 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio Bq 10.80.60.40.20-0.2 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type SBTn (Robertson 1990)1817161514131211109876543210 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. Soil Behaviour Type Organic soil Clay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClay & silty clay ClayClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sandSand & silty sandSand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clayClaySilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clay Clay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sandClayClay & silty clayClay & silty clay CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:34 PM 50 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq SBTn legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to silty 5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand to 9. Very stiff fine grained Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-31 CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. cone resistance Norm. friction ratio 0 0 3 = oe 2 4 2 4 = 4 C —6 | 6 8 : 8 iy 10 10 12 2 12 14 14 16 { 16 2 18 18 20 20_—RT 22fry = - =En = Ea E£ | £ £26 ; 226 3 oa = [a] [a]28 28 = 30 30 = 32 BS 32 3 34 / — 34 3 ” < I38 < 38 7 40 40 p42 ~~ 42 rd 44 S 44 Et 46 46 48 b 48 50 T J LJ T 50 T T LJ T J 0 50 100 150 20( 0 2 4 6 8 10 Qtn Fr (%) Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Depth to water table (erthqg.): 40.00 ft Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Average results interval: 3 Points to test: Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Use fill: No Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A N [= A 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 a2 44 46 48 50 02 0 Nom. pore pressure ratio De p t h (f t ) Fill weight: Transition detect. applied: K, applied: Clay like behavior applied: Limit depth applied: Limit depth: 02 04 06 08 1 N/A No Yes Sands only Yes 50.00 ft Norm. Soil Behaviour TypeSBTn Plot De p t h (f t ) ay |ay &s aMa] 8FT ARERR 2 3 4 012345678 9101112131415161718 Ic (Robertson 1990) SBTn (Robertson 1990) SBTn legend B 1. Sensitive fine grained B 4. Clayey silt to silty [| 7. Gravely sand to sand ll 2 Organic material ll 5. Sity sand to sandy sit [JJ] 8. Very stiff sand to [| 3. Clay to silty clay [| 6. Clean sand to silty sand O 9. Very stiff fine grained CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:34 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg 50 This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-31 CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Liquefaction potential LPI 20151050 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Settlement (in)0.40.30.20.10 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements Displacement (in)543210 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:34 PM 51 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-31 CRR plot N [= 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 De p t h (f t ) 28 30 32 34 36 38 h 440IDuring eartl 42 46 48 50 Input parameters and analysis data NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value 6.50 0.90 Analysis method: Fines correction method: Points to test: Earthquake magnitude M,,: Peak ground acceleration: Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft 0.2 CRR & CSR 0.4 Liquefaction analysis overall plots De p t h (f t ) 0 0.5 1 1.5 Factor of safety Depth to water table (erthqg.): 40.00 ft Average results interval: 3 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Use fill: No Fill height: N/A Liquefaction potential N a Bp 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 De p t h (f t ) 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42]vis 44 46 48 50 Fill weight: Transition detect. applied: No Ks appllied: 5 10 15 20 LPI N/A Yes Clay like behavior applied: Sands only Limit depth applied: Yes Limit depth:50.00 ft 10 12 14 16 18 20 De p t h (f t ) g 8 8B BX Ww hy 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 Vertical settlements f / ~~ J TT7 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 Settlement (in) F.S. color scheme || |_|Ll | |_| Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy N [= A 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 a2 44 46 48 50 Lateral displacements ( I'd [J 0 1 2 3 4 5 Displacement (in) LPI color scheme Il Very high risk ll High risk Il Low risk CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:34 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg 51 LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value 6.500.90 G.W.T. (in-situ): G.W.T. (earthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA Leighton 14030.001 CPT file : CPT-33 40.00 ft 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Use fill: Fill height:Fill weight: Trans. detect. applied:Kσ applied: No N/AN/A NoYes Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied: Limit depth:MSF method: Sands onlyYes 50.00 ftMethod based Cone resistance qt (tsf)5000 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SBTn Plot CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cy c lic S t r e s s R a t i o * (CS R *) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 No r m a l i z e d C P T p e n e t r a t i o n r e s i s t a n c e 1 10 100 1,000 Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction Ratio Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loadingZone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and groundgeometryZone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softeningZone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity,brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:36 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq 52 V/ Leighton 4 14030.001 Leighton LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA CPT file : CPT-33 Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (in-situ): 40.00 ft Use fill: No Clay like behavior Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (earthq.): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A applied: Sands only Points to test: Based on Ic value Average results interval: 3 Fill weight: N/A Limit depth applied: Yes Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Trans. detect. applied: No Limit depth: 50.00 ft Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT K, applied: Yes MSF method: Method based Cone resistance Friction Ratio SBTn Plot CRR plot FS Plot 0 TS 0 =| 0 — 2 2 —— 2 4ie 4 — 4 6 6 L 6 8 8 = 8 10 10 10 121% 12 12 14 =F 14 —— 14 16 16 16 18 18 184 20 20 20] 22my =~ 22 22 £2 S 24 24 a 26 $ 26 3 26 0 28 28 28< S30 2 30 % 30 32 4 32 ; 32 34 ? 34 2 34+ 36 ¢ 36 36 38 eS 38 38 40 40 40 v= Pd During earthq.42 ~~ 42 > 42 44 R “lB 44 46 46 46 - 8 T—_F 48 487] ~~ 50 >| 50] rT 50 = rt] 0 500 0 2 4 6 8 10 1 2 3 4 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 qt (tsf) Rf (%) Ic (Robertson 1990) CRR & CSR Factor of safety M..=7'/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential 0.8 1 1 [1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.000 1 1 1 111d 1 [] |I TO | ] Liquefaction - ; 0.7 5 8 i c i - ©ht E wn 0.6 / [ g i c 1005© ] LL R220 1 2 J ©] [8S 057 / [2]° / 2S 5 [| kK© 4 [@]g / TZ— 4 B Nr= =7 i / I = 5 02 / FE<Q ] - I<}> i QO E / - 4 0.2 rd [ ] yd ~ 0.1 1 10 0.1 i Normalized friction ratio (%) 1 [ Zone Aq: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading E No Liquefaction | Zone A,: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground h geometry LL OL BLL BLL BLL BLL BLL RL BLEUE BLL BLL Zone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softening 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Zone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity, Qtn,cs brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:36 PM 52 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-33 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Fr (%)1086420 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio Bq 10.80.60.40.20-0.2 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type SBTn (Robertson 1990)1817161514131211109876543210 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. Soil Behaviour Type Organic soilSilty sand & sandy silt ClayClay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soilClay Clay Clay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soilSand & silty sandClayClay & silty clay Clay ClayClay & silty clayClay & silty clay Clay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soilClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy siltClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sand CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:36 PM 53 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq SBTn legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to silty 5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand to 9. Very stiff fine grained Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-33 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type 0 0 0 0 T H— Bae T 9 anic 7] [, _— 5 << 5 it Sand& sad it 4 la 4 -= 4 { | Clay .| = — I J Fs Clay|& silty dlay 6 6 6 er 5 - || 8 ; 8 = = 8 y p < [ 10 10 10 p1 < 12 12fo 14 14 14 16 ¢ 16 16 18 \ 18 18 20 > 20 20 22 22 22fry = — = = == 24 E24 = E24 = =£ = Ei IE 5 £ £26 226 226 2 26 2 oa [a] [a] o a28 a 28 = 28 30 30 $ 30 32 rad 32 ip) 32 34 => 34 < 34 36 ) 36 J 36 38 38 EH] 38 240 ~ 40 L 40 hd & sand 42 <u 42 D> 42 nd & sand—————| 44 "= a4 46 46 = 46 48 48 48 50 T 1 y T 1] T 1 50 T T t T y 50 T T y y y T |IL TL LI IL BL) ; y 1] 0 50 100 150 20( 0 2 4 6 8 10 02 0 0.2 04 06 08 1 2 3 4 012345678 9101112131415161718 Qtn Fr (%) Bq Ic (Robertson 1990) SBTn (Robertson 1990) Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Depth to water table (erthqg.): 40.00 ft Fill weight: N/A SBTn | d Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Average results interval: 3 Transition detect. applied: No h legen Points to test: Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value: 2.60 K, applied: Yes 1 Sensitive fine grained [J] 4. Clayey silt to silty ll 7. Gravely sand to sandEarthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied: ~~ Sands only . . . ! Peak ground acceleration: ~~ 0.90 Use fill: No Limit depth applied: Yes || 2. Organic material || 5. Silty sand to sandy silt || 8. Very stiff sand to Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A Limit depth: 50.00 ft [| 3. Clay to silty clay [| 6. Clean sand to silty sand O 9. Very stiff fine grained CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:36 PM 53 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-33 CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Liquefaction potential LPI 20151050 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Settlement (in)0.10.080.060.040.020 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements Displacement (in)0.80.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:36 PM 54 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-33 CRR plot 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 De p t h (f t ) 28 30 32 34 36 38 h 440[During earthq 42 46 48 50 Input parameters and analysis data NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value 6.50 0.90 Analysis method: Fines correction method: Points to test: Earthquake magnitude M,,: Peak ground acceleration: Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft 0.2 0.4 CRR & CSR Liquefaction analysis overall plots De p t h (f t ) 0 0.5 1 1.5 Factor of safety Depth to water table (erthqg.): 40.00 ft Average results interval: 3 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Use fill: No Fill height: N/A Liquefaction potential 10 g4—— “ug ef 1s 4—— 20 n4— -r 24 De p t h (f t ) B4——— sob—— 4— r 34 4— Bs4——— 44 46 48 50 LPI Fill weight: Transition detect. applied: K, applied: Clay like behavior applied: Limit depth applied: Limit depth: 15 20 N/A No Yes Sands only Yes 50.00 ft Vertical settlements 10 12 14 16 18 20 iy De p t h (f t ) PY N (/ Ig/ g/ £[=[(}]/ a nN@ wo wN 34 36 38 40 42 a4 46 48 J= 50 o 0.02 0.04 0.06 008 0.1 Settlement (in) F.S. color scheme || |_|Ll | |_| Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Lateral displacements 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 J48 —a1—501 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Displacement (in) LPI color scheme Il Very high risk ll High risk Il Low risk CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:36 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg 54 LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value 6.500.90 G.W.T. (in-situ): G.W.T. (earthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA Leighton 14030.001 CPT file : CPT-35 40.00 ft 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Use fill: Fill height:Fill weight: Trans. detect. applied:Kσ applied: No N/AN/A NoYes Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied: Limit depth:MSF method: Sands onlyYes 50.00 ftMethod based Cone resistance qt (tsf)5000 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SBTn Plot CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cy c lic S t r e s s R a t i o * (CS R *) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 No r m a l i z e d C P T p e n e t r a t i o n r e s i s t a n c e 1 10 100 1,000 Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction Ratio Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loadingZone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and groundgeometryZone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softeningZone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity,brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:38 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq 55 / Leger Leighton LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA CPT file : CPT-35 Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (in-situ): 40.00 ft Use fill: No Clay like behavior Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (earthq.): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A applied: Sands only Points to test: Based on Ic value Average results interval: 3 Fill weight: N/A Limit depth applied: Yes Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Trans. detect. applied: No Limit depth: 50.00 ft Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT K, applied: Yes MSF method: Method based Cone resistance Friction Ratio SBTn Plot CRR plot FS Plot 0-1 0 = 0 — i} — 2 < 2 2 2 4 4 4 4 6 6 ~ 6 6 8 8 8 8 10 N 10 5 10 10»12 3 12 — 12 12 14 S 14 = 14 14 16 C 16 Cl 16 16 18 ] 18 p 18 18 20 P) 20 — = 20 20] 22 22E « 22 22 £2? 24 —— 24 24 B26 26 5 26 26 0 28 Sg 28 % 28 28 30 3 30 S 30 30 32 1} 32 3 32 32 34 SQ 34 34 344) 36 < 36 ) 36 36 38 % 38 J 38 38 A 4 40 __ 40 40 40 During earthq. 42 P. 42 S 42 42 44 pp BPPE He 44 44 46 < 46 46 46] 48 v 48 < 48 48] 50 = I § TTT 50 50 T T T 0 500 0 2 4 6 8 10 1 2 3 4 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 qt (tsf) Rf (%) Ic (Robertson 1990) CRR & CSR Factor of safety M..=7'/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential 0.8 1 1 [1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.000 1 1 1 111d - 1 [] yt 1111] ] Liquefaction - ; 0.7 5 8 i c i - ©ht E wn 0.6 / [ g E = 1004 = i we oan 2 I [04 7 - © T 0 A 5 ]S 057 / [2]° / 2S 5 [| kK2 04 ©2 / 3I=] E 3 N7 i / I = 5 02 / FE[4 ] |- o> i9) i S I 2 0.2 rd [ ] yd ~ 0.1 1 10 0.1 i Normalized friction ratio (%) 1 [ Zone Aq: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading E No Liquefaction | Zone A,: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground i geometry LL OL BLL BLL BLL BLL BLL RL BLEUE BLL BLL Zone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softening 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Zone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity, Qtn,cs brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:38 PM 55 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-35 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Fr (%)1086420 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio Bq 10.80.60.40.20-0.2 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type SBTn (Robertson 1990)1817161514131211109876543210 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. Soil Behaviour Type Organic soilClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilClay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClayClayClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clayClay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soilClay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilClay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:38 PM 56 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq SBTn legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to silty 5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand to 9. Very stiff fine grained Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-35 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio TT &= } = 4 3 4 6 — 6I'd P8 [ 8 ~~ 10 x 10 x 12 = 12 14 < 14 <Tl 16 16 9 18 = 18 = 20 — 20 = < £4 Ex p = ££ = & —r g8 26 2 3 26 3 28 -— 28 30 30 5 32 X 32 g y 34 > 34 >) § <36 3 36 )) 38 38 J 0 Vaal 0 42 42 ~ 44 441% 46 46~N— << 48 p: 438 <= 50 T J LJ 1] T 50 T T LJ T J 0 50 100 150 20( 0 2 4 6 8 10 Qtn Fr (%) Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Depth to water table (erthqg.): 40.00 ft Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Average results interval: 3 Points to test: Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Use fill: No Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 a2 44 46 48 50 Nom. pore pressure ratio ~~[=~~ =[=X[1]o 02 0 02 04 06 08 1 Bq Fill weight: Transition detect. applied: K, applied: Clay like behavior applied: Limit depth applied: Limit depth: N/A No Yes Sands only Yes 50.00 ft 2 2a A SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type 0 Organic solClay & silty dla Insand'& sandy si nse/siff soil 2nse/sl | I Scand& sandysitcy aol 8 ay & silty clay De p t h (f t ) SdNd 2nse/stiffsoi Osan nd & sandsilty sandnd & sand o e s s e e e s s e m E e — — |_ | | | | YS silty sandEi and nd & sandy Irervreryyen LL LAN LN LAN BL BLIN BLN LI IL 2 3 4 012345678 9101112131415161718 Ic (Robertson 1990) SBTn (Robertson 1990) SBTn legend B 1. Sensitive fine grained B 4. Clayey silt to silty [| 7. Gravely sand to sand ll 2 Organic material ll 5. Sity sand to sandy sit [JJ] 8. Very stiff sand to [| 3. Clay to silty clay [| 6. Clean sand to silty sand O 9. Very stiff fine grained CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:38 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg 56 This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-35 CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Liquefaction potential LPI 20151050 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Settlement (in)0.080.060.040.020 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements Displacement (in)0.250.20.150.10.050 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:38 PM 57 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-35 CRR plot 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 De p t h (f t ) 28 30 32 34 36 38 h 440[During earthq 42 46 48 50 Input parameters and analysis data NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value 6.50 0.90 Analysis method: Fines correction method: Points to test: Earthquake magnitude M,,: Peak ground acceleration: Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft 0.2 CRR & CSR 0.4 Liquefaction analysis overall plots De p t h (f t ) 0 0.5 1 1.5 Factor of safety Depth to water table (erthqg.): 40.00 ft Average results interval: 3 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Use fill: No Fill height: N/A Liquefaction potential 10 4+—r— ar 20 n4+— 24 De p t h (f t ) B4—1— sob——r— 4+— 34 4— s4—1— “utr 46 48 50 LPI Fill weight: Transition detect. applied: K, applied: Clay like behavior applied: Limit depth applied: Limit depth: 15 20 N/A No Yes Sands only Yes 50.00 ft Vertical settlements 10 12 14 16 18 20 iy De p t h (f t ) PY N ~~ De p t h (f t ) nN@ wo wN —— 34 36 38 —— —— 40 42 a4 46 48 50 o 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 Settlement (in) F.S. color scheme || |_|Ll | |_| Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 a2 44 46 48 50 Lateral displacements I [J 0 005 01 015 0.2 0.25 Displacement (in) LPI color scheme Il Very high risk ll High risk Il Low risk CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:38 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg 57 LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value 6.500.90 G.W.T. (in-situ): G.W.T. (earthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA Leighton 14030.001 CPT file : CPT-37 40.00 ft 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Use fill: Fill height:Fill weight: Trans. detect. applied:Kσ applied: No N/AN/A NoYes Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied: Limit depth:MSF method: Sands onlyYes 50.00 ftMethod based Cone resistance qt (tsf)4002000 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SBTn Plot CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cy c lic S t r e s s R a t i o * (CS R *) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 No r m a l i z e d C P T p e n e t r a t i o n r e s i s t a n c e 1 10 100 1,000 Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction Ratio Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loadingZone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and groundgeometryZone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softeningZone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity,brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:39 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq 58 V/ Leighton 4 14030.001 Leighton LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA CPT file : CPT-37 Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (in-situ): 40.00 ft Use fill: No Clay like behavior Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (earthq.): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A applied: Sands only Points to test: Based on Ic value Average results interval: 3 Fill weight: N/A Limit depth applied: Yes Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Trans. detect. applied: No Limit depth: 50.00 ft Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT K, applied: Yes MSF method: Method based Cone resistance Friction Ratio SBTn Plot CRR plot FS Plot 0 = 0 r— 0 — 2 Fd 2 -— 2 4 4 ~~ 4 6 66 — 8 8 [4 8 10 10 — 10- -12 12 - 12 14 14 14 16 4 16 - 16 18 » 18 < 18 E20 =, 20 20 r=r= 22 = 22 p 22 R24 24 24ce — .26 26 — 26 28 2 28 § 28] 30 S \ 30S 30 32 5 32 a 32 34 —— 34 34Pd 36 } 36 36 38 3 38 38 Ps h 4 40 ’ 40 40 Dyin 42 Ne ———] 42 >) 42 44 = | T T T T 44 T FT 0 200 400 0 2 4 6 8 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 qt (tsf) Rf (%) Ic (Robertson 1990) CRR & CSR Factor of safety M..=7'/2, sigma’=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential0.8 M PR IY) M M M M M : : 1.000 ) 1 (EE | _ n ] Liquefaction - he : 0.7 8 i [ ] / » Ss a E 3 2 7 3 E wn 0.6 / - 3 E 3 Ss 100 5 ~~ - | =I14 . eer = ]a : E .OQ 05 i / [ a hb ° / 2S 5 [| kK2 04 ©§ / | 3I=] E 3 N7 i / I = 5 02 / FE<Q ] - I<}> i9) i S I 2 0.2 rd [ ] yd ~ 0.1 1 10 0.1 i Normalized friction ratio (%) 1 [ Zone Aq: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading E No Liquefaction | Zone A,: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground h geometry LL OL BLL BLL BLL BLL BLL RL BLEUE BLL BLL Zone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softening 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Zone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity, Qtn,cs brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:39 PM 58 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-37 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Fr (%)1086420 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio Bq 10.80.60.40.20-0.2 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 De p t h ( f t ) 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type SBTn (Robertson 1990)1817161514131211109876543210 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. Soil Behaviour Type Organic soilClay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilClay & silty clayClay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay ClayClay & silty clayClay & silty claySand & silty sandClaySand & silty sand Clay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilClaySand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilClay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy siltClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:39 PM 59 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq SBTn legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to silty 5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand to 9. Very stiff fine grained Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-37 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio a | 0 —_— 2 2 - a 5 a = 6 (| 6 2 8 “ 8 I 10 10 Ne“> .12 & 12 memmeentil14 14 = B— hl]16 = 16 <18 ; 18 <| Eg 20 g 20 g § 22 5 22 5 [7] fo) fo)0 24 0 24 < = 26 r= 26 = x 28 < 30 30 32 i) 32 2 34 $ — 34 —36 3 36 g 38 ~¥ 38 { 40 pd 40 42 N— 42 A 44 T J LJ T 44 T LJ T J 0 50 100 150 20( 2 4 6 8 10 Qtn Fr (%) Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Depth to water table (erthqg.): 40.00 ft Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Average results interval: 3 Points to test: Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Use fill: No Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 Nom. pore pressure ratio De p t h (f t ) 02 0 02 04 06 08 1 Fill weight: Transition detect. applied: K, applied: Clay like behavior applied: Limit depth applied: Limit depth: N/A No Yes Sands only Yes 50.00 ft SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type = T T T a Hl ort Ver De p t h (f t ) y sit y git |||5 |HN|i111]1Ll| Feryreryirervi veer vrery 2 3 4 012345678 9101112131415161718 Ic (Robertson 1990) SBTn (Robertson 1990) SBTn legend B 1. Sensitive fine grained B 4. Clayey silt to silty [| 7. Gravely sand to sand ll 2 Organic material ll 5. Sity sand to sandy sit [JJ] 8. Very stiff sand to [| 3. Clay to silty clay [| 6. Clean sand to silty sand O 9. Very stiff fine grained CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:39 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg 59 This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-37 CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Liquefaction potential LPI 20151050 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Settlement (in)0.150.10.050 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements Displacement (in)1.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:39 PM 60 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-37 Liquefaction analysis overall plots CRR plot FS Plot Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Lateral displacements 0 -— =m ___ 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 4 4 4 f 4 6 6 6 6 8 8 — 8 8 10 10 r 10 10 12 12 r 12 / 12 14 14 — 14 / 14 16 16 16 16 f 16 18 18 18 — 18 f 18 £ 20 E 20 5 20 r £ 20 E 20 § 22 g 2 g 22 — 5 22 5 22 fo) J] © Q o0 24 0 24 0 24 0 24 J 0 24 26 26 26 — 26 / 26 28 28 28 r 28 | 28 30 30 — 30 | 30 32 32 32 / 32 34 34 — 34 / 34 36 36 r 36 | 36 38 38 — 38 38 > J40 - 40 40 J 40During earth _— 42 42 2-1 42 44 T T T T 44 44 44 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 5 10 15 20 [J] 0.05 0.1 0.15 0 0.5 1 1.5 CRR & CSR Factor of safety LPI Settlement (in) Displacement (in) Input parameters and analysis data F.S. color scheme LPI color scheme Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Depth to water table (erthg.): 40.00 ft Fill weight: N/A Bl Amost certain it will liquefy Il Very high risk Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Average results interval: 3 Transition detect. applied: No [| Very likely to liquefy [| High riskPoints to test: Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value: 2.60 K, applied: Yes Liquefaction and no lig. are equally likel fi Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied: Sands only [] a ] 9: qually y nH Low risk Peak ground acceleration: ~~ 0.90 Use fill: No Limit depth applied: Yes [| Unlike to liquefy Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A Limit depth: 50.00 ft [| Almost certain it will not liquefy CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:39 PM 60 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value 6.500.90 G.W.T. (in-situ): G.W.T. (earthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA Leighton 14030.001 CPT file : CPT-39 40.00 ft 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Use fill: Fill height:Fill weight: Trans. detect. applied:Kσ applied: No N/AN/A NoYes Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied: Limit depth:MSF method: Sands onlyYes 50.00 ftMethod based Cone resistance qt (tsf)5000 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 Cone resistance SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 SBTn Plot CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cy c lic S t r e s s R a t i o * (CS R *) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 No r m a l i z e d C P T p e n e t r a t i o n r e s i s t a n c e 1 10 100 1,000 Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 Friction Ratio Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loadingZone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and groundgeometryZone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softeningZone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity,brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:41 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq 61 V/ Leighton 4 14030.001 Leighton LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA CPT file : CPT-39 Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (in-situ): 40.00 ft Use fill: No Clay like behavior Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (earthq.): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A applied: Sands only Points to test: Based on Ic value Average results interval: 3 Fill weight: N/A Limit depth applied: Yes Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Trans. detect. applied: No Limit depth: 50.00 ft Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT K, applied: Yes MSF method: Method based Cone resistance Friction Ratio SBTn Plot CRR plot FS Plot0 — 2 2 2 4 4 — 4TA ;8 A 8 8 10 \ 10 Ny 10 12 ~~ 12 12 14 __ 14 = 14 16 16 [a 16 18 18 18 fem) 20 [ 20 P, 20y=£2 \C 22 pe 224 hd Qa 24 24 2487 << —26 << 26 26 28 T_ 28 i 28+ 30 > 30 d 30 32 Pa 32 32 34 SN 34 34 36 S 36 36 38 J, 38 38 40 40 40 roPd $ During earthg. 42 ¥ 42 C 42 en" 44 44 44rl 0 500 0 2 4 6 8 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 qt (tsf) Rf (%) Ic (Robertson 1990) CRR & CSR Factor of safety M..=7'/2, sigma’=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential 0.8 1 1 [1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1,000 1 1 1 [EE | - 1 [] |I TO | ] Liquefaction - ; 0.7 5 S ] / » Ss E 3 2 E wn 0.6 / - 3 E 3 = 1004— . oI k=] myx LB]0 h | I= ]Oo 0.5 ] / [ a 7 ° / 2S 5 [| kK2 04 ©8 / 35 1 / 5i 3 ©5 02 / FE<Q ] - I<}> i9) i S I 2 0.2 rd [ ] yd ~ 0.1 1 10 0.1 i Normalized friction ratio (%) 1 [ Zone Aq: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading E No Liquefaction | Zone A,: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground i geometry LL OL BLL BLL BLL BLL BLL RL BLEUE BLL BLL Zone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softening 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Zone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity, Qtn,cs brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:41 PM 61 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-39 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Fr (%)1086420 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio Bq 10.80.60.40.20-0.2 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type SBTn (Robertson 1990)1817161514131211109876543210 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. Soil Behaviour Type Organic soilClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClayClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sand Sand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soilClaySilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilClay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clay Clay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty claySand & silty sand CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:41 PM 62 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq SBTn legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to silty 5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand to 9. Very stiff fine grained Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-39 Norm. cone resistance 10 Jd5[4 12 — 14 16 18 Fa l 20 22 Ny De p t h (f t ) /De p t h (f t ) 24 — 26 —— 28 = 30 — 32 — 34 36 38 40 42 An e , , 0 50 100 Qtn 150 20( Input parameters and analysis data NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value Analysis method: Fines correction method: Points to test: Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 32 34 36 38 40 £ 42 L 44 CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio i / \s MM De p t h (f t ) lb 0 2 4 6 Fr (%) Depth to water table (erthq.): Average results interval: Ic cut-off value: Unit weight calculation: Use fill: Fill height: 40.00 ft 3 2.60 Based on SBT No N/A 2 | 4 3S. al pM. d|. Bl. Hi. 118 i | 20 20~~ 2 3 BI£22 24 a in d|26 26 >|. . Bi30 30 1 | 32 32 y i Il, 1] 38 38 | | 40 40 44 44 i T T J J J T 02 0 02 04 06 08 1 1 2 3 Bq Ic (Robertson 1990) Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type Fill weight: Transition detect. applied: K, applied: Clay like behavior applied: Limit depth applied: Limit depth: N/A fu r y =} fu r y [e o ] nNo 22 NA —fredEe =a©[s) nN=} N[e o ] Ww o aERY 8&8) y ysit ysilt ysilt 2nse/sfiff soi nse {iff S‘Very dense/siiff soil Silty sand & sand sitSilty sand & sandVery de i silt Very dense/siiff sq lay &ysit Clay &silty, claySilty sand'& sandy tt Sand & sifly sand 9 1011121314151617 18 SBTn (Robertson 1990) No SBTn legend Yes Sands only ll 2 Organic material 50.00 ft Bl 3. Clay tossilty clay B 1. Sensitive fine grained B 4. Clayey silt to silty ll 5. Sity sand to sandy sit [JJ] 8. Very stiff sand to [| 6. Clean sand to silty sand O 9. Very stiff fine grained [| 7. Gravely sand to sand CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:41 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg 62 This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-39 CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Liquefaction potential LPI 20151050 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Settlement (in)0.150.10.050 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements Displacement (in)0.80.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:41 PM 63 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-39 Liquefaction analysis overall plots CRR plot FS Plot Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Lateral displacements 0 1 0 0 31 0 2 2 2 2 4 4 4 4 6 64 6 6 8 S44 — r 8 8 10 10-F——— 10 10 12 12 — 12 12 14 145 r 14 14 16 164 — 16 J 16 18 18 18 pas 18 20 20 — r 20 20~~ ~~ Lem) ~~ ~~E E E E vd E~~ ~— ~— - Nr rtht 22 pt = 22 = 22 = 22 B Fo 8 B 88 24 8 A 24 hat 24 A 24 26 26 — r 26 26 28 28 ——— 28 28 30 30 30 30 32 324 — r 32 32 34 MAF 34 34 36 36 36 36 38 38 38 38 v | J40 During earthq, a 40 40 / 40 42 K 42] 2 ~~ 42 as 44 44 44 44 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 0 5 10 15 20 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 CRR & CSR Factor of safety LPI Settlement (in) Displacement (in) Input parameters and analysis data F.S. color scheme LPI color scheme Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Depth to water table (erthg.): 40.00 ft Fill weight: N/A Bl Amost certain it will liquefy Il Very high risk Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Average results interval: 3 Transition detect. applied: No [| Very likely to liquefy [| High riskPoints to test: Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value: 2.60 K, applied: Yes Liquefaction and no lig. are equally likel fi Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied: Sands only [] a ] 9: qually y nH Low risk Peak ground acceleration: ~~ 0.90 Use fill: No Limit depth applied: Yes [| Unlike to liquefy Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A Limit depth: 50.00 ft [| Almost certain it will not liquefy CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:41 PM 63 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value 6.500.90 G.W.T. (in-situ): G.W.T. (earthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA Leighton 14030.001 CPT file : CPT-41 40.00 ft 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Use fill: Fill height:Fill weight: Trans. detect. applied:Kσ applied: No N/AN/A NoYes Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied: Limit depth:MSF method: Sands onlyYes 50.00 ftMethod based Cone resistance qt (tsf)5000 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SBTn Plot CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cy c lic S t r e s s R a t i o * (CS R *) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 No r m a l i z e d C P T p e n e t r a t i o n r e s i s t a n c e 1 10 100 1,000 Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction Ratio Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loadingZone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and groundgeometryZone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softeningZone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity,brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:43 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq 64 V/ Leighton 4 14030.001 Leighton LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA CPT file : CPT-41 Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (in-situ): 40.00 ft Use fill: No Clay like behavior Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (earthq.): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A applied: Sands only Points to test: Based on Ic value Average results interval: 3 Fill weight: N/A Limit depth applied: Yes Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Trans. detect. applied: No Limit depth: 50.00 ft Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT K, applied: Yes MSF method: Method based Cone resistance Friction Ratio SBTn Plot CRR plot FS Plot 1 TT ° a2 2 2 4 1 4 = 4 6 6 a Vs 6ns 2 f8 8 1 8 10 10 = 1 10 12 2 12 — 12 14 % 14 = 2 14 16 — 16 16 18 { 18 r= 18 20 204+— : 20Pp ke = CE24 -sl dla 26 26 26© < = |0 28 3 28 BH 28 30 30 B 30 324 —= 32 : 324 34 1 -< 34 > 34 36 36 \ 36 38 1 38 3840 [- A 440 40 -> Z [| During earthq.42 \ 42 42 44 N—— 44 W || 44 46 —— 46 > 46 q—1 4 —48 < a8 48 Te 50 = 50 2 ———TTT 50 — 0 500 0 2 4 6 8 10 1 2 3 4 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 qt (tsf) Rf (%) Ic (Robertson 1990) CRR & CSR Factor of safety M..=7'/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential 0.8 1 1 [1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.000 1 1 1 111d - [] [] |I TO | ] Liquefaction - ; 0.7 5 8 J c J - ©ht E [75] 0.6 / [ 2 i - c 1005© "eee 00 00 0 /¢ am 2 3 ©] [8S 057 / [2]» / i a GetS i 5 [| kK2 04 ©§ / | 3— 4 B Na 1 / a. 5 02 / FE[4 ] |- oS J9) i S I 2 0.2 rd [ ] yd ~ 0.1 1 10 0.1 i Normalized friction ratio (%) 1 [ Zone Aq: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading E No Liquefaction | Zone A,: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground i geometry LL OL BLL BLL BLL BLL BLL RL BLEUE BLL BLL Zone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softening 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Zone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity, Qtn,cs brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:43 PM 64 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-41 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Fr (%)1086420 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio Bq 10.80.60.40.20-0.2 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type SBTn (Robertson 1990)1817161514131211109876543210 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. Soil Behaviour Type Organic soil Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay ClayClay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClayClay & silty clay ClayVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sandSandSilty sand & sandy siltSand CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:43 PM 65 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq SBTn legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to silty 5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand to 9. Very stiff fine grained Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-41 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio 2 2 4 4 = 18 \ 8 10 } 10 Me 12 = 12 —-14 14 =- 16 16 -—— 18 18 << 20 20 22 ES ES 22 il £2 — SP Er= a = =Q 26 —_— 53 26 — 53a o << o28 28 30 Be 30™ —— 32 32<< <l 34 34 36 36 3 38 < 38 I 40 h 40 Z 42 \\ 42 / 44 44 — 46 46 Cc 48 48 50 50T J LJ T T T LJ T J 0 50 100 150 20( 0 2 4 6 8 10 Qtn Fr (%) Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Depth to water table (erthqg.): 40.00 ft Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Average results interval: 3 Points to test: Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Use fill: No Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 a2 44 46 48 50 Nom. pore pressure ratio 02 0 02 04 06 Bq Fill weight: Transition detect. applied: K, applied: Clay like behavior applied: Limit depth applied: Limit depth: 08 1 N/A No Yes Sands only Yes 50.00 ft De p t h (f t ) 26 SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type 0 Organic soil ; Cla4 y 6 Clay|& silly cla 8 Clay 10 Clay|& silly clay 1 Clay Clay| & silty clay: hylan d Clay! & si 16 Clay & silty dla 18 Clay |Clay & si da) 20 | Clay 22 en Very densest soit BH & | —— Ve ry dense/ fad i < ery denser/siff soil | = | B 2% || Silty sand & sandB s ify sand & san28 Clay & silty clay| 1 Silty sand & sand I : :i 32 34 B | 36 -1B 01 ah| “ Al 46 Sand-8 ydBB is San 50 i i i San nd & sand y it|IL TEL IL TL ILI LA LI BL I Ly JL NL TL LN BLE BL 012345678 9101112131415161718 Ic (Robertson 1990) SBTn (Robertson 1990) SBTn legend B 1. Sensitive fine grained B 4. Clayey silt to silty [| 7. Gravely sand to sand ll 2 Organic material ll 5. Sity sand to sandy sit [JJ] 8. Very stiff sand to [| 3. Clay to silty clay [| 6. Clean sand to silty sand O 9. Very stiff fine grained CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:43 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg 65 This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-41 CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Liquefaction potential LPI 20151050 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Settlement (in)0.080.060.040.020 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements Displacement (in)0.50.40.30.20.10 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:43 PM 66 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-41 CRR plot 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 P— oe 24 26 De p t h (f t ) 28 30 32 34 36 38 A 440During earthqg 42 46 wT ———— 50 I 0.2 | 0.4 CRR & CSR 0.6 Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method: Points to test: Earthquake magnitude M,,: Peak ground acceleration: Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value 6.50 0.90 Liquefaction analysis overall plots De p t h (f t ) 0 0.5 1 1.5 Factor of safety Depth to water table (erthqg.): 40.00 ft Average results interval: 3 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Use fill: No Fill height: N/A Liquefaction potential De p t h (f t ) 0 5 10 Fill weight: Transition detect. applied: K, applied: Clay like behavior applied: Limit depth applied: Limit depth: 15 20 N/A No Yes Sands only Yes 50.00 ft De p t h (f t ) Vertical settlements aX De p t h (f t ) nN@ wo 32 34 36 38 40 42 a4 46 48 50 o 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 Settlement (in) F.S. color scheme || |_|Ll | |_| Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 Lateral displacements 0 01 02 03 04 05 Displacement (in) LPI color scheme Il Very high risk ll High risk Il Low risk CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:43 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg 66 LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value 6.500.90 G.W.T. (in-situ): G.W.T. (earthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA Leighton 14030.001 CPT file : CPT-43 40.00 ft 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Use fill: Fill height:Fill weight: Trans. detect. applied:Kσ applied: No N/AN/A NoYes Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied: Limit depth:MSF method: Sands onlyYes 50.00 ftMethod based Cone resistance qt (tsf)4002000 De p t h ( f t ) 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SBTn Plot CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cy c lic S t r e s s R a t i o * (CS R *) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 No r m a l i z e d C P T p e n e t r a t i o n r e s i s t a n c e 1 10 100 1,000 Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction Ratio Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loadingZone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and groundgeometryZone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softeningZone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity,brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:44 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq 67 /) Leighton Leighton 14030.001 LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos CPT file : CPT-43 Input parameters and analysis data Location : Rosemead CA Analysis method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (in-situ): 40.00 ft Use fill: No Clay like behavior Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (earthq.): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A applied: Sands only Points to test: Based on Ic value Average results interval: Fill weight: N/A Limit depth applied: Yes Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Trans. detect. applied: No Limit depth: 50.00 ft Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT K, applied: Yes MSF method: Method based Cone resistance Friction Ratio SBThn Plot CRR plot FS Plot 0 TT 0 0 — 2 2 2 4 4 4 6 Pa 6 6 8 { 8 8 10 | 10 10 ]12 N— 12 12 14 14 § 14 16 16 p= 16 18 3 18 3 18 mE { 20 \ 20 y=Nat£ 22 22 22 53 24] 24 24 0 2 26 26 28 =~ 28 = 28 30 p 30 30 32 32 32 wl 34 + 34 36 > 36 Ll 36 38 << 38 3 38] 40 BS 40 b, 40 —¥& \ During earthg. J 42 42 bY 42 44 44 44 46 hn | —— 46 T r r 0 200 400 0 2 4 6 8 10 2 3 4 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 qt (tsf) Rf (%) Ic (Robertson 1990) CRR & CSR Factor of safety M..=7'/2, sigma’=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential 1 1 [1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 [EE | 1 [] |I TO |0.8 1,000 T] Liquefaction - ; 0.7 5 8 i c i - ©ht E wn 0.6 / - 3 ] i c 1005 = ] Cl 2 Jx i | J]7) : s .© 0.57 / [ © . ° / 2S 5 [| kK2 04 ©2 / 3 f= 7 / B Nwn h 3 ©2 03 / - £ <Q ] - I<}> i9) i S I 2 0.2 rd [ ] yd ~ 0.1 1 10 0.1 i Normalized friction ratio (%) 1 [ Zone Aq: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading E No Liquefaction | Zone A,: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground i geometry LL OL BLL BLL BLL BLL BLL RL BLEUE BLL BLL Zone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softening 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Zone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity, Qtn,cs brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:44 PM 67 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-43 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 De p t h ( f t ) 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Fr (%)1086420 De p t h ( f t ) 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio Bq 10.80.60.40.20-0.2 De p t h ( f t ) 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type SBTn (Robertson 1990)1817161514131211109876543210 De p t h ( f t ) 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. Soil Behaviour Type Sensitive fine grainedSensitive fine grained Clay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltClay Clay & silty clay ClayVery dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy siltClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilClay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilClay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soilClay & silty clayClay & silty clay Very dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilClay & silty clayClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soil CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:44 PM 68 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq SBTn legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to silty 5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand to 9. Very stiff fine grained Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-43 CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. cone resistance Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type [1] (} i} 0 — Sensi ined2 N 2 rs IVE Ing gareSensitive fine grained 4 4 4 a Clay|& silty clay 6 a 6 6 Silty sand|& sandy silt | 8 Sq 8 8 Clay Clay| & silly dla10 X, 10 ~~ 10 y ty diayN— > Clay . 12 12 ST 12 Veryrder i 14 14 14 -)] Sand & sity sa nd 16 16 AN 16 1 = i nd|& sandy silt18 = 18 18 Bye ay y da > Sity and& sandy silt20 7 20 iY 20 Claw 8 i En S_] g, g, Eg, Eg, y & sly diay§ 5 << 5 5 5 Very dense/stiff soil @ 24 o 24 =_ © 24 @ 24 @ 24 Very dense/stiff sai 1]a a 4 a a e Very dense/stiff sq 26 a 26 = 26 26 Very densersiiff soilVery dense/stiff soilCN 28 — 28> L ay &30 30 30<7 332 = 32 ; 32 34 = 34 > 34 36 = 36 § 36 38 = 38 p! 38 40 — 40 40— {42 42 $ 42 44 44 44 46 T y T T 1 46 T T T T y 46 T T y y y T |I TL I LA BL) T TI (} 50 100 150 20( 0 2 4 6 8 10 02 0 02 04 06 08 1 1 2 3 4 012345678 9101112131415161718 Qtn Fr (%) Bq Ic (Robertson 1990) SBTn (Robertson 1990) Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Depth to water table (erthqg.): 40.00 ft Fill weight: N/A SBTn | d Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Average results interval: 3 Transition detect. applied: No h legen Points to test: Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value: 2.60 K; applied: Yes 1 Sensitive fine grained [J] 4. Clayey silt to silty ll 7. Gravely sand to sandEarthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied: ~~ Sands only . . . ! Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Use fill: No Limit depth applied: Yes || 2. Organic material || 5. Silty sand to sandy silt || 8. Very stiff sand to Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A Limit depth: 50.00 ft [| 3. Clay to silty clay [| 6. Clean sand to silty sand O 9. Very stiff fine grained CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:44 PM 68 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-43 CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Liquefaction potential LPI 20151050 De p t h ( f t ) 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Settlement (in)0.80.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements Displacement (in)0.20.150.10.050 De p t h ( f t ) 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:44 PM 69 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-43 Liquefaction analysis overall plots CRR plot FS Plot Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Lateral displacements 0 — 1 0 0 0 Pe 2 2 2 2 4 4 4 4 6 6 6 6 8 84+— 8 — 8 10 10 10 10 12 12 12 12 14 14 14 14 16 16 16 16 18 18 18 18 20 20 20 20 fry jy = joy =2» = 2 =) S22r= r= = = =S24 > SF2a4+— S24 24oa o o o [a] 26 26 26 26 28 28 28 28 30 301— — 30 30 32 32 32 32 34 34 34 34 36 361— — 36 36 38 38 38 38 h 4 40 During earthqg 40 40 40 J -42 2 42 42 |" 44 44 44 44 46 T T T 46 46 46 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 0 5 10 15 20 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 CRR & CSR Factor of safety LPI Settlement (in) Displacement (in) Input parameters and analysis data F.S. color scheme LPI color scheme Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Depth to water table (erthg.): 40.00 ft Fill weight: N/A Bl Amost certain it will liquefy Il Very high risk Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Average results interval: 3 Transition detect. applied: No [| Very likely to liquefy [| High riskPoints to test: Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value: 2.60 K, applied: Yes Liquefaction and no lig. are equally likel fi Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied: Sands only [] a ] 9: qually y nH Low risk Peak ground acceleration: ~~ 0.90 Use fill: No Limit depth applied: Yes [| Unlike to liquefy Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A Limit depth: 50.00 ft [| Almost certain it will not liquefy CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:44 PM 69 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value 6.500.90 G.W.T. (in-situ): G.W.T. (earthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA Leighton 14030.001 CPT file : CPT-44 40.00 ft 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Use fill: Fill height:Fill weight: Trans. detect. applied:Kσ applied: No N/AN/A NoYes Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied: Limit depth:MSF method: Sands onlyYes 50.00 ftMethod based Cone resistance qt (tsf)4002000 De p t h ( f t ) 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 SBTn Plot CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cy c lic S t r e s s R a t i o * (CS R *) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 No r m a l i z e d C P T p e n e t r a t i o n r e s i s t a n c e 1 10 100 1,000 Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction Ratio Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loadingZone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and groundgeometryZone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softeningZone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity,brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:46 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq 70 / Leger Leighton LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA CPT file : CPT-44 Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (in-situ): 40.00 ft Use fill: No Clay like behavior Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (earthq.): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A applied: Sands only Points to test: Based on Ic value Average results interval: 3 Fill weight: N/A Limit depth applied: Yes Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Trans. detect. applied: No Limit depth: 50.00 ft Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT K, applied: Yes MSF method: Method based Cone resistance Friction Ratio SBTn Plot CRR plot FS Plot 0 0 r= [J] — 2 2 2 4 4 4 6 br) 6 6 8 ; 8 8 8<10 { 10 S 10 10 12 12 ren 12 12 p 14 14 14 14 16 — 16 pa 16 16 18 ~ 18 g 18 18 20 20 20 20 hd2 \\ 22 <u 22 22 B24 24 24 24 QO 26 CZ 26 Tx 26 26 28 < 28 = 28 28 30 PR 30 30 30, 32 — 3 < 32 32 34 & 334 34 34 36 < 36 rs 36 36 38 38 3 38 38 h 440 > 40 4 40 40 During earthq.42 Z 42 3 42 42 44 44 44 44 [ —46 Ml 46] ————— 46 6 7 T T0 200 400 0 2 4 6 8 10 1 2 3 4 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 qt (tsf) Rf (%) Ic (Robertson 1990) CRR & CSR Factor of safety M..=7'/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential 0.8 1 1 [1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1.000 1 1 1 111d 1 [] |I TO | ] Liquefaction - ; 0.7 5 8 J c J - ©ht E [75] 0.6 / [ g E 3 = 1004 ~~ - r=) -* . B =a : E .OQ 05 i / [ a 7 ° / 2= 5 [| kK2 04 ©§ / | 3I=] E 3 N7 i / I = 5 02 / FE<Q ] - I<}S J9) i S I 2 0.2 rd [ ] yd ~ 0.1 1 10 0.1 i Normalized friction ratio (%) 1 [ Zone Aq: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading E No Liquefaction | Zone A,: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground i geometry LL OL BLL BLL BLL BLL BLL RL BLEUE BLL BLL Zone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softening 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Zone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity, Qtn,cs brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:46 PM 70 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-44 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 De p t h ( f t ) 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Fr (%)1086420 De p t h ( f t ) 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio Bq 10.80.60.40.20-0.2 De p t h ( f t ) 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 De p t h ( f t ) 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type SBTn (Robertson 1990)1817161514131211109876543210 De p t h ( f t ) 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. Soil Behaviour Type Organic soilClaySilty sand & sandy siltSensitive fine grainedSilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clay Clay & silty clayClayClay & silty claySand & silty sandVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilClayVery dense/stiff soilClayClay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soil CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:46 PM 71 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq SBTn legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to silty 5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand to 9. Very stiff fine grained Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-44 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type 4} 0 T 0 | T— Q ani soil |2 4 2 2 g ga :2ilty sa d & sandy silt4 4 = 4 A :~~ ~ — [| | | ISiy sand & sandy sit 6 — 6 Ls 6 |][== sand & san 8 8 8 1 ( y Q10 2 10 ~S 10 HI 12 ~~ 12 — 12 | 14 14 " 14 | 16 16 2 16 | 18 18 < 18 | 20 20 LS 20 | ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~Ea» Ex» ~ Ea E22 E,£ kN £ AN £ £ 2 £324 «_ S24 — S24 2 224[a [a] [a] [a [a 26 26 - 26 26 KL 26 |= = dl ]28 28 28= = dl30 2 30 30- 3— |32 — 32 y 32 i | 34 < 34 $ 34 | | 36 < 36 36~ $ i38 = 38 3 38 I | 40 40 4 40 42 42 42 q 5 g B44 44 44 46 46 46 ST y T T T T T T y T T y y y T |IL TL LI IL BL) Tv 1 LI LI LA NL NN I 0 50 100 150 20( [i] 2 4 6 8 10 02 0 02 04 06 08 1 2 3 4 012345678 9101112131415161718 Qtn Fr (%) Bq Ic (Robertson 1990) SBTn (Robertson 1990) Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Depth to water table (erthqg.): 40.00 ft Fill weight: N/A SBTn | d Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Average results interval: 3 Transition detect. applied: No h legen Points to test: Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value: 2.60 K; applied: Yes 1 Sensitive fine grained [J] 4. Clayey silt to silty ll 7. Gravely sand to sandEarthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied: ~~ Sands only . . . ! Peak ground acceleration: ~~ 0.90 Use fill: No Limit depth applied: Yes || 2. Organic material || 5. Silty sand to sandy silt || 8. Very stiff sand to Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A Limit depth: 50.00 ft [| 3. Clay to silty clay [| 6. Clean sand to silty sand O 9. Very stiff fine grained CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:46 PM 71 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-44 CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Liquefaction potential LPI 20151050 De p t h ( f t ) 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Settlement (in)0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements Displacement (in)0.20.150.10.050 De p t h ( f t ) 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:46 PM 72 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-44 Liquefaction analysis overall plots CRR plot FS Plot Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Lateral displacements 0 -— =m ___ 0 0 0 2 2 2 Wea 2 |4 4 4 J 4 6 6 6 6 8 8 8 8 10 10 10 10 12 12 12 12 14 14 14 14 16 16 16 16 18 181— — 18 18 20 20 20 20 fry \ jy = joy =22 = E22 E22 E22= | | = = = =Q 24 = 2 24 Q 24 9 24 oa o o [a] [a] 26 26 26 26 28 28T— — 28 28 30 30 30 30 32 32 32 32 34 34 34 34 36 36 36 36 38 B1T— 38 38 h 4 40 During earthqg 40 40 40 42 42 42 42 L— pm44 44 44 44 Sh 46 46 46 46LJ T J 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0 5 10 15 20 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 CRR & CSR Factor of safety LPI Settlement (in) Displacement (in) Input parameters and analysis data F.S. color scheme LPI color scheme Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Depth to water table (erthg.): 40.00 ft Fill weight: N/A Bl Amost certain it will liquefy Il Very high risk Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Average results interval: 3 Transition detect. applied: No [| Very likely to liquefy [| High riskPoints to test: Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value: 2.60 K, applied: Yes Liquefaction and no lig. are equally likel fi Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied: Sands only [] a ] 9: qually y nH Low risk Peak ground acceleration: ~~ 0.90 Use fill: No Limit depth applied: Yes [| Unlike to liquefy Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A Limit depth: 50.00 ft [| Almost certain it will not liquefy CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:46 PM 72 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value 6.500.90 G.W.T. (in-situ): G.W.T. (earthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA Leighton 14030.001 CPT file : CPT-46 40.00 ft 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Use fill: Fill height:Fill weight: Trans. detect. applied:Kσ applied: No N/AN/A NoYes Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied: Limit depth:MSF method: Sands onlyYes 50.00 ftMethod based Cone resistance qt (tsf)4002000 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 Cone resistance SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 SBTn Plot CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cy c lic S t r e s s R a t i o * (CS R *) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 No r m a l i z e d C P T p e n e t r a t i o n r e s i s t a n c e 1 10 100 1,000 Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 Friction Ratio Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loadingZone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and groundgeometryZone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softeningZone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity,brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:48 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq 73 / Leger Leighton LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA CPT file : CPT-46 Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (in-situ): 40.00 ft Use fill: No Clay like behavior Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (earthq.): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A applied: Sands only Points to test: Based on Ic value Average results interval: 3 Fill weight: N/A Limit depth applied: Yes Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Trans. detect. applied: No Limit depth: 50.00 ft Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT K, applied: Yes MSF method: Method based Cone resistance Friction Ratio SBTn Plot CRR plot FS Plot=] 0 -> > — 2 4 4 4] 6 6 615 CE 10 10 \ | 10 12 12 ’d 12 14 14 ee 14 16 16 || 16s - 18 18 c= P 18 ~ 22] 22 22 £ 24 24 — y 24£ ~~ _ [|B 26 26 > g 26 0 28 = 28 a 28 30 30 al 30 324 — = 32 327 34 34 34<< KE:36 = 36 Pe 36 38 < 38 p4 B 38 40 40 40 - v© << YS [| During earthq. 42 42 a — 44 || 44 & 46 -rl 46 461De48 =| 48 48 —— 50 = 50 TT 50 T — 0 200 40C 0 2 4 6 8 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 qt (tsf) Rf (%) Ic (Robertson 1990) CRR & CSR Factor of safety M..=7'/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential 0.8 1 1 [1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1,000 1 1 1 [EEE | E ] Liquefaction - - 0.7 : S i [ ] / = S 9 p | 7] 7] B E [75] 0.6 / [ g ] B = 1004 ~~ 4 oO 1x ] * p= ]- ©0 A 5 ]Oo 0.5 ] / [ a ]o / - 8= 5 [| kK« 0.4 o 2 / 3 1 3 ©po 0.3 / - £ [4 ] |- oS J9) i S I 2 0.2 7 [ ] yd ~ 0.1 1 10 0.1 i Normalized friction ratio (%) 1 [ Zone Aq: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading i No Liquefaction | ro oct Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground LL OL BLL BLL BLL BLL BLL RL BLEUE BLL BLL Zone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softening 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Zone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity, Qtn,cs brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:48 PM 73 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-46 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Fr (%)1086420 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio Bq 10.80.60.40.20-0.2 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type SBTn (Robertson 1990)1817161514131211109876543210 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. Soil Behaviour Type Organic soil Clay Clay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clay Clay & silty clay ClayClaySilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clay Clay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clayClay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soilClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clay CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:48 PM 74 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq SBTn legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to silty 5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand to 9. Very stiff fine grained Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-46 CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. cone resistance Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type 0 —Organic spil 2 ( 2 2 3 Clay41% 4 4 6 > 6 A 6 cl 8 er 8 8 SiC ¢10 P) 10 “> 10 C 12 12 12LY Ca C14 14 — 14 Si 16 | — 16 16 Qi- iS]D> - 18 < 18 ee 18AY Ss20 < 20 20 22 —— 22 =_ 22£ bd c <7 z = rnE24 ~~ — E24 N E24 EE , E 82 E 2 I B26 8 2Q ~~ © ul © o 26 o[a] a a [a [a]28 28 28_ 30 - 30 — 30 32 32 g 32 34 34 — 34So ~~36 = _ 36 36— ¢38 38 38 TrIg nse/sisd 40 40 by 40 nd & sand42 —— 42 42 :red q snse/siff sq 44 < 44 44 46 46 46 i : lay y - a8 - 48 48 — sand & sandy silt- sgn &da ndy si 50 T T y T T 50 T T 1 T y 50 T T y y y T |IL TL LI IL BL) T By sly cay |_|i] 50 100 150 20( 0 2 4 6 8 10 02 0 02 04 06 08 1 2 3 4 012345678 9101112131415161718 Qtn Fr (%) Bq Ic (Robertson 1990) SBTn (Robertson 1990) Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Depth to water table (erthqg.): 40.00 ft Fill weight: N/A SBTn | d Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Average results interval: 3 Transition detect. applied: No h legen Points to test: Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value: 2.60 K; applied: Yes 1 Sensitive fine grained [J] 4. Clayey silt to silty ll 7. Gravely sand to sandEarthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied: ~~ Sands only . . . ! Peak ground acceleration: ~~ 0.90 Use fill: No Limit depth applied: Yes || 2. Organic material || 5. Silty sand to sandy silt || 8. Very stiff sand to Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A Limit depth: 50.00 ft [| 3. Clay to silty clay [| 6. Clean sand to silty sand O 9. Very stiff fine grained CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:48 PM 74 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-46 CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Liquefaction potential LPI 20151050 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Settlement (in)0.250.20.150.10.050 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements Displacement (in)21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:48 PM 75 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-46 CRR plot 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 og na d 24 26 De p t h (f t ) 28 30 32 34 36 38 h 440During earthqg 42 46 48 50 Input parameters and analysis data NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value 6.50 Analysis method: Fines correction method: Points to test: 0.2 | 0.4 CRR & CSR Earthquake magnitude M,,: Peak ground acceleration: Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft 0.90 Liquefaction analysis overall plots De p t h (f t ) 0 0.5 1 1.5 Factor of safety Depth to water table (erthqg.): 40.00 ft Average results interval: 3 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Use fill: No Fill height: N/A Liquefaction potential 12 r 14 — 18 — 20 22 r 24 De p t h (f t ) 28 — 30 — 34 36 r 38 — 44 — 46 48 50 LPI Fill weight: Transition detect. applied: K, applied: Clay like behavior applied: Limit depth applied: Limit depth: 15 20 N/A No Yes Sands only Yes 50.00 ft Vertical settlements 10 12 14 16 18 20 iy De p t h (f t ) PY N De p t h (f t ) nN@ wo wN 34 36 38 40 42 a4 46 48 50 S/S~ o 0.05 01 0.15 02 0.25 Settlement (in) F.S. color scheme || |_|Ll | |_| Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 Lateral displacements I, 0 0.5 1 1.5 Displacement (in) LPI color scheme Il Very high risk ll High risk Il Low risk 2 CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:48 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg 75 LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value 6.500.90 G.W.T. (in-situ): G.W.T. (earthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA Leighton 14030.001 CPT file : CPT-47 40.00 ft 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Use fill: Fill height:Fill weight: Trans. detect. applied:Kσ applied: No N/AN/A NoYes Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied: Limit depth:MSF method: Sands onlyYes 50.00 ftMethod based Cone resistance qt (tsf)4002000 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 SBTn Plot CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cy c lic S t r e s s R a t i o * (CS R *) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 No r m a l i z e d C P T p e n e t r a t i o n r e s i s t a n c e 1 10 100 1,000 Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 Friction Ratio Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loadingZone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and groundgeometryZone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softeningZone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity,brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:50 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq 76 /) Leighton Leighton 14030.001 LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos CPT file : CPT-47 Input parameters and analysis data Location : Rosemead CA Analysis method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (in-situ): 40.00 ft Use fill: No Clay like behavior Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (earthq.): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A applied: Sands only Points to test: Based on Ic value Average results interval: Fill weight: N/A Limit depth applied: Yes Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Trans. detect. applied: No Limit depth: 50.00 ft Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT K, applied: Yes MSF method: Method based Cone resistance Friction Ratio SBThn Plot CRR plot FS Plot 0 0 — 2 6 2 4 8 4] 6 10 6 8 3 812 10 14 10 12 16 — 12 14 y ped 14 16 18 16 18 = 20 > 18 20 ? 22 20 Tc 22 ? 24 3 22 = 24 26 24£1a 26 4 28 26 8 28 La 28< .30 << 32 P=, 30 32 2 3234 < 34 34- 36 3 36 38 2 38 38 40 h, 440 Vat 5 7 40 During earthq.42 42 44 44 [ 44 46 5 46 Fa 46 48 ~ 48 48 50 — on PJ I 50— 0 200 400 0 2 4 6 8 10 2 3 4 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 qt (tsf) Rf (%) Ic (Robertson 1990) CRR & CSR Factor of safety curveM.,=7'/2, sigma'=1 atm base[1 1 L L L0.8 : t Summary of liquefaction potential ) 1 (EE |1,000 ] Liquefaction - : 0.7 : S i [] / = Ic afia] -. - o -0.6 / [ 84 B = 1004~~ E | ° a.* i ( I | p=] 3- ©wn =] = f=] ]OQ 05 ] / | 2% 4° 1 / Fa= i 5 [| K2 04 ©g / 3_ i B Nf= =[1] E / B ©2 03 / - £ [54 7] - [=]>= 4 [6] E yy | =z 0.2 7 [ ] vd - 0.1 ET 10 0.1 i Normalized friction ratio (%) 1 [ Zone Aq: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading E No Liquefaction | Zone A,: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground h geometry LL OL BLL BLL BLL BLL BLL RL BLEUE BLL BLL Zone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softening 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Zone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity, Qtn,cs brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:50 PM 76 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-47 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Fr (%)1086420 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio Bq 10.80.60.40.20-0.2 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type SBTn (Robertson 1990)1817161514131211109876543210 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. Soil Behaviour Type Silty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy siltClayClay & silty clay ClayClay & silty clayClayClaySilty sand & sandy siltClayClay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clayClaySilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clayClay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clayClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sand CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:50 PM 77 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq SBTn legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to silty 5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand to 9. Very stiff fine grained Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-47 CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. cone resistance Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type 0 0 —— — | 0 0 2 2 2 2 4 4 4MN— 6 A 6 6 pa sill8 - 8 8 10 ) 10 10 12 12 12A ’14 ps 14 14 | 16 16 —_ 16 —— <<18 18 18 1— :20 i 20 = 20 [S| 22 22 22 24= Ps = = = : =24 = 24 = 24 = 26 =£ | SMA £ ] £ £ t | ==>g 26 g 26 g 26 g 28 | g —28 p 28 i 28 30 Lb30 p 30 30 b | | 32 = > 32 CG 32 | | 34 ; 34 34 i 36 S 36 36 | 38 38 y 38 | | 40 40 )! 40 | 42 < 42 f a2 |iF “1 " L46 > 46 { 46 [] 48 48 48= _s 50 T y T T 1 50 T T T T y 50 T T y y y T 1] I T I 1] T LN 0 50 100 150 20( 0 2 4 6 8 10 02 0 02 04 06 08 1 012345678 9101112131415161718 Qtn Fr (%) Bq Ic (Robertson 1990) SBTn (Robertson 1990) Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Depth to water table (erthqg.): 40.00 ft Fill weight: N/A SBTn | d Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Average results interval: 3 Transition detect. applied: No h legen Points to test: Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value: 2.60 K, applied: Yes 1 Sensitive fine grained [J] 4. Clayey silt to silty ll 7. Gravely sand to sandEarthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied: ~~ Sands only . . . ! Peak ground acceleration: ~~ 0.90 Use fill: No Limit depth applied: Yes || 2. Organic material || 5. Silty sand to sandy silt || 8. Very stiff sand to Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A Limit depth: 50.00 ft [| 3. Clay to silty clay [| 6. Clean sand to silty sand O 9. Very stiff fine grained CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:50 PM 77 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-47 CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Liquefaction potential LPI 20151050 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Settlement (in)0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements Displacement (in)21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 50 48 46 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:50 PM 78 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-47 Liquefaction analysis overall plots CRR plot Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Lateral displacements 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 4 4 418 ope 4 6 6 6 6 8 8 r 8 J 8 10 10 10 10 12 12 — 12 12 14 14 —— 14 — 14 16 16 — 16 16 18 18 r 18 18 20 20 20 20 22 22 r 22 22fry jy = joy =24 = 24 —— = 24 24r= r= = = =26 oy 2 26 — = 26 226oa o o o [a]28 28 — 28 28 30 30 — 30 30 32 32 r 32 32 34 34 34 34 36 36 r 36 36 38 38 — 38 38 h 4 40 During earthqg 40 40 40 A 42 42 — 42 / 42 pd 44 44 44 44 - / ve 46 46 f 46 46 J 48 48 48 48 50 = = 50 50 50 0 0.2 0.4 0 0.5 1 1.5 0 5 10 15 20 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 CRR & CSR Factor of safety LPI Settlement (in) Displacement (in) Input parameters and analysis data F.S. color scheme LPI color scheme Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Depth to water table (erthg.): 40.00 ft Fill weight: N/A Bl Amost certain it will liquefy Il Very high risk Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Average results interval: 3 Transition detect. applied: No [| Very likely to liquefy [| High riskPoints to test: Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value: 2.60 K, applied: Yes Liquefaction and no lig. are equally likel fi Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied: Sands only [] a ] 9: qually y nH Low risk Peak ground acceleration: ~~ 0.90 Use fill: No Limit depth applied: Yes [| Unlike to liquefy Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A Limit depth: 50.00 ft [| Almost certain it will not liquefy CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:16:50 PM 78 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998) NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value 6.500.90 G.W.T. (in-situ): G.W.T. (earthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA Leighton 14030.001 CPT file : CPT-49 40.00 ft 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Use fill: Fill height:Fill weight: Trans. detect. applied:Kσ applied: No N/AN/A NoYes Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied: Limit depth:MSF method: Sands onlyYes 50.00 ftMethod based Cone resistance qt (tsf)6004002000 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SBTn Plot CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cy c lic S t r e s s R a t i o * (CS R *) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 No r m a l i z e d C P T p e n e t r a t i o n r e s i s t a n c e 1 10 100 1,000 Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction Ratio Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loadingZone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and groundgeometryZone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softeningZone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity,brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:21:14 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq 79 V/ Leighton 4 14030.001 Leighton LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Project title : 14030.001 Lewis Rosemead Condos Location : Rosemead CA CPT file : CPT-49 Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (in-situ): 40.00 ft Use fill: No Clay like behavior Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) G.W.T. (earthq.): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A applied: Sands only Points to test: Based on Ic value Average results interval: 3 Fill weight: N/A Limit depth applied: Yes Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Ic cut-off value: 2.60 Trans. detect. applied: No Limit depth: 50.00 ft Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT K, applied: Yes MSF method: Method based Cone resistance Friction Ratio SBTn Plot CRR plot FS Plot 0 0 = 4} ei 2 2 ~ 2 4 1 4 4 6 6 LS 6 8if 8 BK § 8 10 { 10 =, 10 12 12 12Lr] 14 ri 14 5 14 16 16 16 18 18 18 £20 G 20 > 20rt 4 £22 22 22a > -A 24 = 24 24 26 al 26 26 28 [4 28 { 28 30 ) 30 { 30 32 32 3 32 34 34 34 36 36 36] 38 38 38 A 4 40 hy 40 40 During earthq. 42 ~ 42 42 4 = _ 44 0 200 400 600 0 2 4 6 8 10 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 S| (] C {Robertson actor or sareqt (tsf Rf (% Ic (Robert 1990 CRR & CSR Fact f safety M..=7'/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential 0.8 1 1 | 1 1 1 1 1 Nn Nn Nn 1,000 1 1 1 | | Ll 1 [] 11 ] Liquefaction - ; 0.7 5 8 i c 4 / » S E 3 2 E wn 0.6 / - 3 i - c 1005 ©] ane SE-Ba : E .OQ 05 i / [ a hb ° / 2S 5 [| kK2 04 ©8 / 3 f= 7 / B Nwn h 3 ©2 03 i:[8] 7 -5 / - S 0.2 yd [ ] yd ~ 0.1 1 10 0.1 i Normalized friction ratio (%) 1 [ Zone Aq: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loading E No Liquefaction | Zone A,: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground h geometry LL OL BLL BLL BLL BLL BLL RL BLEUE BLL BLL Zone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softening 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Zone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity, Qtn,cs brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:21:14 PM 79 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-49 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Fr (%)1086420 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio Bq 10.80.60.40.20-0.2 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type SBTn (Robertson 1990)1817161514131211109876543210 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Norm. Soil Behaviour Type Organic soilSensitive fine grainedSensitive fine grained Clay Clay & silty clay ClayClayClayClayClay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilClay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soilSand & silty sand CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:21:14 PM 80 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq SBTn legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to silty 5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand to 9. Very stiff fine grained Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-49 Norm. cone resistance 4 | od R310 12 14 16 oS20 22 De p t h (f t ) De p t h (f t ) 24 26 = 28 Fa 30 P 32 34 36 NW 38 AN40 42 ~~[a T v LJ T 0 50 100 150 20( Qtn Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Points to test: Based on Ic value Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Peak ground acceleration: 0.90 Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio JL 10 \12 \ ol£ 18 20 22 24 De p t h (f t ) 26 30 32 Z 28 IF {234 36 ) 38 40 3 42 44 0 2 4 6 Fr (%) Depth to water table (erthq.): Average results interval: Ic cut-off value: Unit weight calculation: Use fill: Fill height: 40.00 ft 3 2.60 Based on SBT No N/A Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type== 1G SDIl4 94 in e in gran 2 Sensitive finegl | 4 A Clay 6 Si 1 IClay|& dy da 8 NN cy 10 £4 Clay 4 Clay 12 = Clay& si| Ve a! den sail 14 | | 16 16 I | S4 hd 18 18 ity sand'& sandy si 20 hi Silty sand& sandy silte 20 al Eg Clay &[si 22 £ 2 p= Very de iff soil2 N 2 Very dense/stff sil nD24 Oo 24 >| & 4 y Ea i in 26 26 Hl ve A : Soil 28 28 Silty sand & sandy si 30 | | Silty sand & sandy silt30 | Ve i 32 32 | | ve 34 34 v 36 | | I S0l36 | | 2nse/siiff sq 38 38. . 1] 42 2nse/stiff soi42 marnse! if sc a T T y y y T 44 SE ES —— LN A-Lc LL 02 0 02 04 06 08 1 1 2 3 4 012345678 9101112131415161718 Bq Ic (Robertson 1990) SBTn (Robertson 1990) Fill weight: N/A Transition detect. applied: No SBTn legend Ko applied: } Yes 1 Sensitive fine grained [J] 4. Clayey silt to silty ll 7. Gravely sand to sand pions ear Sands only ll 2 Organic material ll 5. Sity sand to sandy sit [JJ] 8. Very stiff sand to Limit depth: 50.00 ft [| 3. Clay to silty clay [| 6. Clean sand to silty sand O 9. Very stiff fine grained CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:21:14 PM Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg 80 This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-49 CRR plot CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Liquefaction potential LPI 20151050 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Settlement (in)0.060.040.020 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements Displacement (in)0.050.040.030.020.010 De p t h ( f t ) 44 42 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:21:14 PM 81 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500\14030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiq.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value6.500.9040.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation:Use fill:Fill height: 40.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBTNoN/A Fill weight:Transition detect. applied: Kσ applied:Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: N/ANo YesSands onlyYes50.00 ft Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk This software is licensed to: Leighton Group, Inc CPT name: CPT-49 Liquefaction analysis overall plots CRR plot FS Plot Liquefaction potential Vertical settlements Lateral displacements 0 — 1 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 4 4 4 4 6 6 6 6 8 8 8 8 10 10— 10 10 12 12 12 ~— 12 14 14 14 / 14 16 16 16 / 16 18 181— — 18 pg 18 = 20 | = = 20 - 20 ya = 20 f= = = = pd = 5 22 = = 22 = 22 £ 222 2 2 2 { 20 24 o o24|— — 0 24 / no 24 26 26 26 / 26 28 28 28 28 30 30 30 / 30 32 2+— 32 / 32 34 34 34 { 34 36 36 36 / 36 38 38 38 38 v LL / 40 During earthqg 40 40 40 42 42 42 42 44 44 44 44 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0 0.5 1 1.5 0 5 10 15 20 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 CRR & CSR Factor of safety LPI Settlement (in) Displacement (in) Input parameters and analysis data F.S. color scheme LPI color scheme Analysis method: NCEER (1998) Depth to water table (erthg.): 40.00 ft Fill weight: N/A Bl Amost certain it will liquefy Il Very high risk Fines correction method: NCEER (1998) Average results interval: 3 Transition detect. applied: No [| Very likely to liquefy [| High riskPoints to test: Based on Ic value Ic cut-off value: 2.60 K, applied: Yes Liquefaction and no lig. are equally likel fi Earthquake magnitude M,,: 6.50 Unit weight calculation: Based on SBT Clay like behavior applied: Sands only [] a ] 9: qually y nH Low risk Peak ground acceleration: ~~ 0.90 Use fill: No Limit depth applied: Yes [| Unlike to liquefy Depth to water table (insitu): 40.00 ft Fill height: N/A Limit depth: 50.00 ft [| Almost certain it will not liquefy CLiq v.3.0.3.2 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 6/13/2024, 1:21:14 PM 81 Project file: P:\INFOCUS PROJECTS\14001-14500114030 Lewis Rosemead Condos\001\Analyses\Cliq Runs\14030.001 Liquefaction Analysis CLiqg.clg Liquefaction Susceptibility Analysis: SPT Method Leighton Youd and Idriss (2001), Martin and Lew (1999) Description: Lewis Rosemead Condos; Case 4; PGAm 0.904; existing GW 40; Overex. 8 Project No.: 14030.001 Jun 2024 General Boring Information: Existing Design Design Overex or Ground design Boring Location General Parameters: Boring GW GW Fill Height mitig depth Surface gw Coordinates amax = 0.90g No.Depth (ft)Depth (ft)(ft)(ft)Elev (ft)elve X (ft)Y (ft)MW = 6.5 LB-1 40 40 8 -40 MSF eq: 1 LB-2 40 40 8 -40 MSF = 1.44 LB-3 40 40 8 -40 Hammer Efficiency =84 LB-4 40 40 8 -40 CE = 1.40 0 CB = 1 0 CS for SPT? TRUE 0 Unlined, but room for liner 0 Rod Stickup (feet) =3 0 Ring sample correction =0.65 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Leighton Page 1 of 1 Liquefaction Susceptibility Analysis: SPT Method Youd and Idriss (2001), Martin and Lew (1999) Description: Lewis Rosemead Condos; Case 4; PGAm 0.904; existing GW 40; Overex. 8 Project No.: 14030.001 Jun 2024 General Boring Information: Existing Design Design Overexor Ground Boring GW GW Fill Height mitig depth Surface No. Depth (ft) Depth (ft) (ft) (ft) Elev (ft) LB-1 40 40 8 LB-2 40 40 8 LB-3 40 40 8 LB-4 40 40 8 Leighton OO OO OO OO Oo OO Oo Oo oo oo Boring Location Coordinates X(t) Y(ft) Leighton General Parameters: 8max = 0.90g My =6.5 MSF eq: 1 MSF = 1.44 Hammer Efficiency= 84 Ce=1.40 Ce=1 Cg for SPT? TRUE Unlined, but room for liner Rod Stickup (feety= 3 Ring sample correction = 0.65 Page 1 of 1 Summary of Liquefaction Susceptibility Analysis: SPT Method Leighton Liquefaction Method: Youd and Idriss (2001). Seismic Settlement Method: Tokimatsu and Seed (1987) and Martin and Lew (1999). Project: Lewis Rosemead Condos Project No.: 14030 Boring No. Approx. Layer Depth Approx Layer Thick- ness Plasticity ("n"=non susc. to liq.) Estimated Fines Cont gt Nm or B Sampler Type (enter 2 if mod CA Ring)Cs Nm (corrected for Cs and ring->SPT) Exist svo' (N1)60 (N1)60CS CRR7.5 (assume CLEAN SAND) CRR7.5 (w/o Plasticity Crit)CRR7.5 Design svo' CSR7.5 CSRM Liquefaction Factor of Safety Seismic Sett. of Layer Cummulative Seismic Settlement (ft) (ft)(%) (pcf)(blows/ft)(blows/ft) (psf)(psf)(in.) (in.) LB-1 8.0 to 8.8 0.8 66 120 17 2 1 11.1 900 18.9 27.6 0.202 0.357 0.357 900 0.58 0.40 NonLiq 0.04 1.5 LB-1 8.8 to 12.5 3.8 66 120 11 2 1 7.2 1200 11.2 18.5 0.124 0.197 0.197 1200 0.57 0.40 NonLiq 0.56 1.4 LB-1 12.5 to 17.5 5.0 66 120 12 1 1.18 14.2 1800 18.2 26.8 0.194 0.333 0.333 1800 0.57 0.39 NonLiq 0.33 0.9 LB-1 17.5 to 22.5 5.0 60 120 28 2 1 18.2 2400 22.6 32.1 0.250 >Range >Range 2400 0.56 0.39 NonLiq 0.22 0.5 LB-1 22.5 to 27.5 5.0 60 120 18 1 1.25 22.5 3000 24.9 34.9 0.291 >Range >Range 3000 0.55 0.38 NonLiq 0.27 0.3 LB-1 27.5 to 32.5 5.0 20 120 87 2 1 56.6 3600 60.3 68.7 >Range >Range >Range 3600 0.55 0.38 NonLiq 0.02 0.1 LB-1 32.5 to 37.5 5.0 20 120 66 1 1.3 85.8 4200 84.7 95.0 >Range >Range >Range 4200 0.52 0.36 NonLiq 0.02 0.0 LB-1 37.5 to 40.0 2.5 10 120 100 2 1 65.0 4800 60.0 62.2 >Range >Range >Range 4800 0.50 0.35 NonLiq 0.01 0.0 LB-1 40.0 to 42.5 2.5 10 120 100 2 1 65.0 4800 60.0 62.2 >Range >Range >Range 4800 0.50 0.35 NonLiq 0.00 0.0 LB-1 42.5 to 47.5 5.0 10 120 100 1 1.3 130.0 5088 116.6 120.0 >Range >Range >Range 5088 0.50 0.35 NonLiq 0.00 0.0 LB-1 47.5 to 52.0 4.5 40 120 100 2 1 65.0 5376 56.7 73.1 >Range >Range >Range 5376 0.50 0.35 NonLiq 0.00 0.0 LB-2 0 to 6.3 6.3 OX 99 120 50 1 1.3 65.0 600 116.0 144.2 >Range >Range >Range 600 0.58 0.40 NonLiq 0.00 3.2 LB-2 6.3 to 8.0 1.8 OX 70 120 50 1 1.3 65.0 900 110.9 138.1 >Range >Range >Range 900 0.58 0.40 NonLiq 0.00 3.2 LB-2 8.0 to 8.8 0.8 70 120 22 2 1 14.3 900 24.4 34.3 0.280 >Range >Range 900 0.58 0.40 NonLiq 0.02 3.2 LB-2 8.8 to 12.5 3.8 70 120 7 2 1 4.6 1200 7.1 13.6 0.089 0.146 0.146 1200 0.57 0.40 NonLiq 0.88 3.2 LB-2 12.5 to 17.5 5.0 70 120 3 1 1.1 3.3 1800 4.2 10.1 0.066 0.114 0.114 1800 0.57 0.39 NonLiq 1.17 2.3 LB-2 17.5 to 22.5 5.0 70 120 20 2 1 13.0 2400 16.1 24.4 0.172 0.280 0.280 2400 0.56 0.39 NonLiq 0.47 1.2 LB-2 22.5 to 27.5 5.0 20 120 25 1 1.3 32.5 3000 36.1 42.5 >Range >Range >Range 3000 0.55 0.38 NonLiq 0.08 0.7 LB-2 27.5 to 32.0 4.5 70 120 15 2 1 9.8 3600 10.4 17.5 0.117 0.186 0.186 3600 0.55 0.38 NonLiq 0.63 0.6 Leighton Page 1 of 2 JDH; 6/13/2024 Summary of Liquefaction Susceptibility Analysis: SPT Method Liquefaction Method: Youd and Idriss (2001). Seismic Settlement Method: Tokimatsu and Seed (1987) and Martin and Lew (1999). Project: Lewis Rosemead Condos Project No.: 14030 Leighton Sampler five Plasticity Type } Nin ane CRR7 Liquefaction Seismic Cummulative("n"=non (enter 2 if (corrected (wio i NBoring Approx. Layer Thick- susc. to Estimated m mod CA forCsand Exist CLEAN piasticity Design Factor of Sett. of Seismic No. Depth ness liq.) FinesCont vy, orB Ring) Cs r1ing>SPT) o,, (Nido (Ni)socs SAND) Crit) CRR;5 ow CSRys CSRy Safety Layer Settlement (ft) (ft) (%) (pcf) (blows/ft) (blows/ft) (psf) (psf) (in.) (in.) LB-1 8.0 to 88 0.8 66 120 17 2 1 11.1 900 189 27.6 0.202 0.357 0.357 900 0.58 0.40 NonlLiq 0.04 1.5 LB-1 8.8 to 12.5 3.8 66 120 11 2 1 7.2 1200 11.2 18.5 0.124 0.197 0.197 1200 0.57 0.40 NonlLiq 0.56 1.4 LB-1 125 to 17.5 5.0 66 120 12 1 1.18 14.2 1800 18.2 26.8 0.194 0.333 0.333 1800 0.57 0.39 NonlLiq 0.33 0.9 LB-1 17.5 to 22.5 5.0 60 120 28 2 1 18.2 2400 226 321 0.250 >Range >Range 2400 0.56 0.39 NonlLiq 0.22 0.5 LB-1 225 to 275 5.0 60 120 18 1 125 225 3000 24.9 34.9 0.291 >Range >Range 3000 0.55 0.38 NonlLiq 0.27 0.3 LB-1 27.5 to 325 5.0 20 120 87 2 1 56.6 3600 60.3 68.7 >Range >Range >Range 3600 0.55 0.38 NonlLiq 0.02 0.1 LB-1 325 to 37.5 5.0 20 120 66 1 1.3 85.8 4200 84.7 95.0 >Range >Range >Range 4200 0.52 0.36 NonlLiq 0.02 0.0 LB-1 37.5 to 40.0 25 10 120 100 2 1 65.0 4800 60.0 62.2 >Range >Range >Range 4800 0.50 0.35 NonlLiq 0.01 0.0 LB-1 <¢ > 25 10 120 100 2 1 65.0 4800 60.0 62.2 >Range >Range >Range 4800 0.50 0.35 NonlLiq 0.00 0.0 LB-1 <- . 5.0 10 120 100 1 1.3 130.0 5088 1166 120.0 >Range >Range >Range 5088 0.50 0.35 NonlLiq 0.00 0.0 LB-1 4.5 40 120 100 2 1 65.0 5376 656.7 73.1 >Range >Range >Range 5376 0.50 0.35 NonlLiq 0.00 0.0 LB-2 0 to 6.3 6.3 OX 99 120 50 1 1.3 65.0 600 116.0 144.2 >Range »>Range >Range 600 0.58 0.40 NonlLiq 0.00 3.2 LB-2 6.3 to 8.0 18 OX 70 120 50 1 1.3 65.0 900 1109 138.1 >Range >Range >Range 900 0.58 0.40 NonlLiq 0.00 3.2 LB-2 8.0 to 88 0.8 70 120 22 2 1 14.3 900 244 34.3 0.280 >Range >Range 900 0.58 0.40 NonlLiq 0.02 3.2 LB-2 8.8 to 12.5 3.8 70 120 7 2 1 4.6 1200 7.1 13.6 0.089 0.146 0.146 1200 0.57 0.40 NonlLiq 0.88 3.2 LB-2 12.5 to 17.5 5.0 70 120 3 1 1.1 33 1800 4.2 10.1 0.066 0.114 0.114 1800 0.57 0.39 NonlLiq 1.17 23 LB-2 17.5 to 22.5 5.0 70 120 20 2 1 13.0 2400 16.1 24.4 0.172 0.280 0.280 2400 0.56 0.39 NonlLiq 0.47 1.2 LB-2 225 to 275 5.0 20 120 25 1 1.3 325 3000 36.1 42.5 >Range >Range >Range 3000 0.55 0.38 NonLiq 0.08 0.7 LB-2 27.5 to 320 45 70 120 15 2 1 9.8 3600 104 17.5 0.117 0.186 0.186 3600 0.55 0.38 NonLiq 0.63 0.6 Leighton Page 1 of 2 JDH; 6/13/2024 Boring No. Approx. Layer Depth Approx Layer Thick- ness Plasticity ("n"=non susc. to liq.) Estimated Fines Cont gt Nm or B Sampler Type (enter 2 if mod CA Ring)Cs Nm (corrected for Cs and ring->SPT) Exist svo' (N1)60 (N1)60CS CRR7.5 (assume CLEAN SAND) CRR7.5 (w/o Plasticity Crit)CRR7.5 Design svo' CSR7.5 CSRM Liquefaction Factor of Safety Seismic Sett. of Layer Cummulative Seismic Settlement (ft) (ft)(%) (pcf)(blows/ft)(blows/ft) (psf)(psf)(in.) (in.) LB-3 0 to 6.3 6.3 OX 70 120 50 1 1.3 65.0 600 116.0 144.2 >Range >Range >Range 600 0.58 0.40 NonLiq 0.00 2.6 LB-3 6.3 to 8.0 1.8 OX 70 120 50 1 1.3 65.0 900 110.9 138.1 >Range >Range >Range 900 0.58 0.40 NonLiq 0.00 2.6 LB-3 8.0 to 8.8 0.8 70 120 19 2 1 12.4 900 21.1 30.3 0.229 >Range >Range 900 0.58 0.40 NonLiq 0.02 2.6 LB-3 8.8 to 12.5 3.8 70 120 22 2 1 14.3 1200 22.4 31.9 0.249 >Range >Range 1200 0.57 0.40 NonLiq 0.15 2.6 LB-3 12.5 to 17.5 5.0 62 120 6 1 1.1 6.6 1800 8.5 15.2 0.100 0.162 0.162 1800 0.57 0.39 NonLiq 0.68 2.5 LB-3 17.5 to 22.5 5.0 70 120 18 2 1 11.7 2400 14.5 22.4 0.155 0.248 0.248 2400 0.56 0.39 NonLiq 0.48 1.8 LB-3 22.5 to 27.5 5.0 70 120 6 1 1.1 6.6 3000 7.3 13.8 0.090 0.148 0.148 3000 0.55 0.38 NonLiq 1.17 1.3 LB-3 27.5 to 32.0 4.5 70 120 35 2 1 22.8 3600 24.3 34.1 0.278 >Range >Range 3600 0.55 0.38 NonLiq 0.13 0.1 LB-4 0 to 6.3 6.3 OX 30 120 50 1 1.3 65.0 600 116.0 138.6 >Range >Range >Range 600 0.58 0.40 NonLiq 0.00 0.5 LB-4 6.3 to 8.0 1.8 OX 70 120 50 1 1.3 65.0 900 110.9 138.1 >Range >Range >Range 900 0.58 0.40 NonLiq 0.00 0.5 LB-4 8.0 to 8.8 0.8 70 120 24 2 1 15.6 900 26.6 36.9 0.328 >Range >Range 900 0.58 0.40 NonLiq 0.02 0.5 LB-4 8.8 to 12.5 3.8 70 120 27 2 1 17.6 1200 27.5 38.1 0.355 >Range >Range 1200 0.57 0.40 NonLiq 0.12 0.4 LB-4 12.5 to 17.5 5.0 70 120 15 1 1.24 18.6 1800 23.8 33.5 0.270 >Range >Range 1800 0.57 0.39 NonLiq 0.13 0.3 LB-4 17.5 to 22.5 5.0 70 120 57 2 1 37.1 2400 46.0 60.2 >Range >Range >Range 2400 0.56 0.39 NonLiq 0.03 0.2 LB-4 22.5 to 27.5 5.0 70 120 37 1 1.3 48.1 3000 53.4 69.0 >Range >Range >Range 3000 0.55 0.38 NonLiq 0.04 0.2 LB-4 27.5 to 32.0 4.5 70 120 42 2 1 27.3 3600 29.1 39.9 0.415 >Range >Range 3600 0.55 0.38 NonLiq 0.11 0.1 Leighton Page 2 of 2 JDH; 6/13/2024 SamplerApprox » CRRy5 en on A i comme (assume Cres Liquefaction Seismic Cummulative Boring Approx. Layer Thick- gusc.to Estimated m mod CA forCs and Exist CLEAN piasticity Design Factor of Sett. of Seismic No. Depth ness lig.) FinesCont y, orB Ring) Cs ring>SPT) o,, (Ni)so (Ni)socs SAND) Crit) CRR;5 ow, CSR;s CSRy Safety Layer Settlement (ft) (ft) (%) (pcf) (blows/f) (blows/ft) (psf) (psf) (in.) (in.) LB-3 0 to 6.3 6.3 OX 70 120 50 1 1.3 65.0 600 116.0 1442 >Range >Range >Range 600 0.58 0.40 NonLiq 0.00 2.6 LB-3 6.3 to 8.0 18 ox 70 120 50 1 1.3 65.0 900 1109 138.1 >Range >Range >»Range 900 0.58 0.40 NonLiq 0.00 2.6 LB-3 8.0 to 8.8 0.8 70 120 19 2 1 12.4 900 2141 30.3 0.229 >Range >Range 900 0.58 0.40 NonLiq 0.02 2.6 LB-3 8.8 to 125 3.8 70 120 22 2 1 143 1200 224 31.9 0.249 >Range >Range 1200 0.57 0.40 NonLiq 0.15 2.6 LB-3 125 to 17.5 5.0 62 120 6 1 1.1 6.6 1800 8.5 15.2 0.100 0.162 0.162 1800 0.57 0.39 NonLiq 0.68 25 LB-3 175 to 225 5.0 70 120 18 2 1 11.7 2400 14.5 22.4 0.155 0.248 0.248 2400 0.56 0.39 NonLiq 0.48 1.8 LB-3 225 to 275 5.0 70 120 6 1 1.1 6.6 3000 7.3 13.8 0.090 0.148 0.148 3000 0.55 0.38 NonLiq 1.17 1.3 LB-3 27.5 to 32.0 4.5 70 120 35 2 1 22.8 3600 243 34.1 0.278 >Range >Range 3600 0.55 0.38 NonLiq 0.13 0.1 LB-4 0 to 6.3 6.3 OX 30 120 50 1 1.3 65.0 600 116.0 138.6 >Range >Range >Range 600 0.58 0.40 NonLiq 0.00 0.5 LB-4 6.3 to 8.0 18 ox 70 120 50 1 1.3 65.0 900 1109 138.1 >Range >Range >Range 900 0.58 0.40 NonLiq 0.00 0.5 LB-4 8.0 to 8.8 0.8 70 120 24 2 1 15.6 900 26.6 36.9 0.328 >Range >Range 900 0.58 0.40 NonLiq 0.02 0.5 LB-4 8.8 to 125 3.8 70 120 27 2 1 17.6 1200 27.5 38.1 0.355 >Range >Range 1200 0.57 0.40 NonLiq 0.12 0.4 LB-4 125 to 17.5 5.0 70 120 15 1 124 186 1800 238 335 0.270 >Range >Range 1800 0.57 0.39 NonLiq 0.13 0.3 LB-4 175 to 225 5.0 70 120 57 2 1 37.1 2400 46.0 60.2 >Range >Range >Range 2400 0.56 0.39 NonLiq 0.03 0.2 LB-4 225 to 275 5.0 70 120 37 1 1.3 48.1 3000 534 69.0 >Range >Range >Range 3000 0.55 0.38 NonLiq 0.04 0.2 LB-4 275 to 32.0 4.5 70 120 42 2 1 27.3 3600 29.1 39.9 0415 >Range >Range 3600 0.55 0.38 NonLiq 0.11 0.1 Leighton Page 2 of 2 JDH; 6/13/2024 APPENDIX E GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING RECOMMENDATIONS APPENDIX E GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING RECOMMENDATIONS 4//Leighton a verdantas company APPENDIX E LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC. EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDE SPECIFICATIONS TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Appendix E Page E-1.0 GENERAL ........................................................................................................... 1 E-1.1 Intent ............................................................................................................. 1 E-1.2 Role of Leighton Consulting, Inc. ................................................................... 1 E-1.3 The Earthwork Contractor ............................................................................. 1 E-2.0 PREPARATION OF AREAS TO BE FILLED ..................................................... 2 E-2.1 Clearing and Grubbing .................................................................................. 2 E-2.2 Processing ..................................................................................................... 3 E-2.3 Overexcavation ............................................................................................. 3 E-2.4 Benching ....................................................................................................... 3 E-2.5 Evaluation/Acceptance of Fill Areas .............................................................. 3 E-3.0 FILL MATERIAL ................................................................................................. 4 E-3.1 Fill Quality ...................................................................................................... 4 E-3.2 Oversize ........................................................................................................ 4 E-3.3 Import ............................................................................................................ 4 E-4.0 FILL PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION ........................................................... 4 E-4.1 Fill Layers ...................................................................................................... 4 E-4.2 Fill Moisture Conditioning .............................................................................. 5 E-4.3 Compaction of Fill .......................................................................................... 5 E-4.4 Compaction of Fill Slopes .............................................................................. 5 E-4.5 Compaction Testing ...................................................................................... 5 E-4.6 Compaction Test Locations ........................................................................... 5 E-5.0 EXCAVATION ..................................................................................................... 6 E-6.0 TRENCH BACKFILLS ........................................................................................ 6 E-6.1 Safety ............................................................................................................ 6 E-6.2 Bedding and Backfill ...................................................................................... 6 E-6.3 Lift Thickness ................................................................................................ 7 APPENDIX E LEIGHTON CONSULTING, INC. EARTHWORK AND GRADING GUIDE SPECIFICATIONS TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Appendix E Page E-1.0 GENERAL...............eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeccccccmmmmmmmnnnnnnnnnnnsnsssnssssssnssssssnnnnnnnnnnnns 1 E-1.1 1 = 0 1 E-1.2 Role of Leighton Consulting, INC.............ooiiiiiiiii eee 1 E-1.3 The Earthwork Contractor...........ooooieiiiii eee eee 1 E-2.0 PREPARATION OF AREAS TOBE FILLED ..........eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeennees 2 E-2.1 Clearing and Grubbing ..........coeuiii 2 E-2.2 eg Fo ToToT] oJ 3 E-2.3 OVEereXCavation ...........oooo iii eee eee eee eee errr e eee e eens 3 Ey SN = 7-1a Tod 11a Vo SP 3 E-2.5 Evaluation/Acceptance of Fill Areas...........coo.ooiiiiiiiiiiiiiceeeee eee 3 E-3.0 FILL MATERIAL......... oo eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeecmmmmmmmnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnsnnssnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn 4 E-3.1 I THE= 1 4 E-3.2 LO ANT= 4 E-3.3 1] oo) 4 E-4.0 FILL PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION ..........eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee meee eee eennnnnnnnnnes 4 E-4.1 I = YY SS 4 E-4.2 (11LY; CoTE=Y(] (3 ©] oT [117] 11 {o [FS 5 E-4.3 Compaction Of Fill...reece eee 5 E-4.4 Compaction of Fill SIOPES.........uuoiieiieeeeeeee eee eee eens 5 E-4.5 Compaction TeStiNG .....cceuiiiiiiiiiii ieee eee ener 5 E-4.6 Compaction Test LoCations............coouuiiiiiiiiiiiiiiicceee eee eee 5 E-5.0 EXCAVATION...........eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeccccmmmmmmmmmmmmnnnnsnsnnnssnsssnssssssnssssssnnnnnnnnnnnns 6 E-6.0 TRENCH BACKEF ILLS .............. oo eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeccmemeeennnnnnnn nnnn nnnnnnnn nnnnnnnnnnnnnnns 6 E-6.1 T= 1-7 YS 6 E-6.2 Bedding and BackKf(ill...............oooeiiie rere 6 E-6.3 Lift THICKNESS ceo e aera naeaans 7 E-1 E -1.0 GENERAL E-1.1 Intent These Earthwork and Grading Guide Specifications are for grading and earthwork shown on the current, approved grading plan(s) and/or indicated in the Leighton Consulting, Inc. geotechnical report(s). These Guide Specifications are a part of the recommendations contained in the geotechnical report(s). In case of conflict, the project-specific recommendations in the geotechnical report shall supersede these Guide Specifications. Leighton Consulting, Inc. shall provide geotechnical observation and testing during earthwork and grading. Based on these observations and tests, Leighton Consulting, Inc. may provide new or revised recommendations that could supersede these specifications or the recommendations in the geotechnical report(s). E-1.2 Role of Leighton Consulting, Inc. Prior to commencement of earthwork and grading, Leighton Consulting, Inc. shall meet with the earthwork contractor to review the earthwork contractor’s work plan, to schedule sufficient personnel to perform the appropriate level of observation, mapping and compaction testing. During earthwork and grading, Leighton Consulting, Inc. shall observe, map, and document subsurface exposures to verify geotechnical design assumptions. If observed conditions are found to be significantly different than the interpreted assumptions during the design phase, Leighton Consulting, Inc. shall inform the owner, recommend appropriate changes in design to accommodate these observed conditions, and notify the review agency where required. Subsurface areas to be geotechnically observed, mapped, elevations recorded, and/or tested include (1) natural ground after clearing to receiving fill but before fill is placed, (2) bottoms of all "remedial removal" areas, (3) all key bottoms, and (4) benches made on sloping ground to receive fill. Leighton Consulting, Inc. shall observe moisture-conditioning and processing of the subgrade and fill materials, and perform relative compaction testing of fill to determine the attained relative compaction. Leighton Consulting, Inc. shall provide Daily Field Reports to the owner and the Contractor on a routine and frequent basis. E-1.3 The Earthwork Contractor The earthwork contractor (Contractor) shall be qualified, experienced and knowledgeable in earthwork logistics, preparation and processing of ground to receive fill, moisture-conditioning and processing of fill, and compacting fill. The Contractor shall review and accept the plans, geotechnical report(s), and these Guide E-1.1 E-1.2 E-1.3 E-1.0 GENERAL Intent These Earthwork and Grading Guide Specifications are for grading and earthwork shown on the current, approved grading plan(s) and/or indicated in the Leighton Consulting, Inc. geotechnical report(s). These Guide Specifications are a part of the recommendations contained in the geotechnical report(s). In case of conflict, the project-specific recommendations in the geotechnical report shall supersede these Guide Specifications. Leighton Consulting, Inc. shall provide geotechnical observation and testing during earthwork and grading. Based on these observations and tests, Leighton Consulting, Inc. may provide new or revised recommendations that could supersede these specifications or the recommendations in the geotechnical report(s). Role of Leighton Consulting, Inc. Prior to commencement of earthwork and grading, Leighton Consulting, Inc. shall meet with the earthwork contractor to review the earthwork contractor's work plan, to schedule sufficient personnel to perform the appropriate level of observation, mapping and compaction testing. During earthwork and grading, Leighton Consulting, Inc. shall observe, map, and document subsurface exposures to verify geotechnical design assumptions. If observed conditions are found to be significantly different than the interpreted assumptions during the design phase, Leighton Consulting, Inc. shall inform the owner, recommend appropriate changes in design to accommodate these observed conditions, and notify the review agency where required. Subsurface areas to be geotechnically observed, mapped, elevations recorded, and/or tested include (1) natural ground after clearing to receiving fill but before fill is placed, (2) bottoms of all "remedial removal" areas, (3) all key bottoms, and (4) benches made on sloping ground to receive fill. Leighton Consulting, Inc. shall observe moisture-conditioning and processing of the subgrade and fill materials, and perform relative compaction testing of fill to determine the attained relative compaction. Leighton Consulting, Inc. shall provide Daily Field Reports to the owner and the Contractor on a routine and frequent basis. The Earthwork Contractor The earthwork contractor (Contractor) shall be qualified, experienced and knowledgeable in earthwork logistics, preparation and processing of ground to receive fill, moisture-conditioning and processing of fill, and compacting fill. The Contractor shall review and accept the plans, geotechnical report(s), and these Guide E-1 Leighton Consulting, Inc. Earthwork and Grading Guide Specifications E-2 Specifications prior to commencement of grading. The Contractor shall be solely responsible for performing grading and backfilling in accordance with the current, approved plans and specifications. The Contractor shall inform the owner and Leighton Consulting, Inc. of changes in work schedules at least one working day in advance of such changes so that appropriate observations and tests can be planned and accomplished. The Contractor shall not assume that Leighton Consulting, Inc. is aware of all grading operations. The Contractor shall have the sole responsibility to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish earthwork and grading in accordance with the applicable grading codes and agency ordinances, these Guide Specifications, and recommendations in the approved geotechnical report(s) and grading plan(s). If, in the opinion of Leighton Consulting, Inc., unsatisfactory conditions, such as unsuitable soil, improper moisture condition, inadequate compaction, adverse weather, etc., are resulting in a quality of work less than required in these specifications, Leighton Consulting, Inc. shall reject the work and may recommend to the owner that earthwork and grading be stopped until unsatisfactory condition(s) are rectified. E -2.0 PREPARATION OF AREAS TO BE FILLED E-2.1 Clearing and Grubbing Vegetation, such as brush, grass, roots and other deleterious material shall be sufficiently removed and properly disposed of in a method acceptable to the owner, governing agencies and Leighton Consulting, Inc.. Care should be taken not to encroach upon or otherwise damage native and/or historic trees designated by the Owner or appropriate agencies to remain. Pavements, flatwork or other construction should not extend under the “drip line” of designated trees to remain. Leighton Consulting, Inc. shall evaluate the extent of these removals depending on specific site conditions. Earth fill material shall not contain more than 3 percent of organic materials (by dry weight: ASTM D 2974). Nesting of the organic materials shall not be allowed. If potentially hazardous materials are encountered, the Contractor shall stop work in the affected area, and a hazardous material specialist shall be informed immediately for proper evaluation and handling of these materials prior to continuing to work in that area. As presently defined by the State of California, most refined petroleum products (gasoline, diesel fuel, motor oil, grease, coolant, etc.) have chemical constituents that E-2.1 Leighton Consulting, Inc. Earthwork and Grading Guide Specifications Specifications prior to commencement of grading. The Contractor shall be solely responsible for performing grading and backfilling in accordance with the current, approved plans and specifications. The Contractor shall inform the owner and Leighton Consulting, Inc. of changes in work schedules at least one working day in advance of such changes so that appropriate observations and tests can be planned and accomplished. The Contractor shall not assume that Leighton Consulting, Inc. is aware of all grading operations. The Contractor shall have the sole responsibility to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish earthwork and grading in accordance with the applicable grading codes and agency ordinances, these Guide Specifications, and recommendations in the approved geotechnical report(s) and grading plan(s). If, in the opinion of Leighton Consulting, Inc., unsatisfactory conditions, such as unsuitable soil, improper moisture condition, inadequate compaction, adverse weather, etc., are resulting in a quality of work less than required in these specifications, Leighton Consulting, Inc. shall reject the work and may recommend to the owner that earthwork and grading be stopped until unsatisfactory condition(s) are rectified. E-2.0 PREPARATION OF AREAS TO BE FILLED Clearing and Grubbing Vegetation, such as brush, grass, roots and other deleterious material shall be sufficiently removed and properly disposed of in a method acceptable to the owner, governing agencies and Leighton Consulting, Inc... Care should be taken not to encroach upon or otherwise damage native and/or historic trees designated by the Owner or appropriate agencies to remain. Pavements, flatwork or other construction should not extend under the “drip line” of designated trees to remain. Leighton Consulting, Inc. shall evaluate the extent of these removals depending on specific site conditions. Earth fill material shall not contain more than 3 percent of organic materials (by dry weight: ASTM D 2974). Nesting of the organic materials shall not be allowed. If potentially hazardous materials are encountered, the Contractor shall stop work in the affected area, and a hazardous material specialist shall be informed immediately for proper evaluation and handling of these materials prior to continuing to work in that area. As presently defined by the State of California, most refined petroleum products (gasoline, diesel fuel, motor oil, grease, coolant, etc.) have chemical constituents that E-2 Leighton Consulting, Inc. Earthwork and Grading Guide Specifications E-3 are considered to be hazardous waste. As such, the indiscriminate dumping or spillage of these fluids onto the ground may constitute a misdemeanor, punishable by fines and/or imprisonment, and shall not be allowed. E-2.2 Processing Existing ground that has been declared satisfactory for support of fill, by Leighton Consulting, Inc., shall be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches (15 cm). Existing ground that is not satisfactory shall be over-excavated as specified in the following Section E-2.3. Scarification shall continue until soils are broken down and free of large clay lumps or clods and the working surface is reasonably uniform, flat, and free of uneven features that would inhibit uniform compaction. E-2.3 Overexcavation In addition to removals and over-excavations recommended in the approved geotechnical report(s) and the grading plan, soft, loose, dry, saturated, spongy, organic- rich, highly fractured or otherwise unsuitable ground shall be over-excavated to competent ground as evaluated by Leighton Consulting, Inc. during grading. All undocumented fill soils under proposed structure footprints should be excavated E-2.4 Benching Where fills are to be placed on ground with slopes steeper than 5:1 (horizontal to vertical units), (>20 percent grade) the ground shall be stepped or benched. The lowest bench or key shall be a minimum of 15 feet (4.5 m) wide and at least 2 feet (0.6 m) deep, into competent material as evaluated by Leighton Consulting, Inc.. Other benches shall be excavated a minimum height of 4 feet (1.2 m) into competent material or as otherwise recommended by Leighton Consulting, Inc.. Fill placed on ground sloping flatter than 5:1 (horizontal to vertical units), (<20 percent grade) shall also be benched or otherwise over-excavated to provide a flat subgrade for the fill. E-2.5 Evaluation/Acceptance of Fill Areas All areas to receive fill, including removal and processed areas, key bottoms, and benches, shall be observed, mapped, elevations recorded, and/or tested prior to being accepted by Leighton Consulting, Inc. as suitable to receive fill. The Contractor shall obtain a written acceptance (Daily Field Report) from Leighton Consulting, Inc. prior to fill placement. A licensed surveyor shall provide the survey control for determining elevations of processed areas, keys and benches. E-2.2 E-2.3 E-2.4 E-2.5 Leighton Consulting, Inc. Earthwork and Grading Guide Specifications are considered to be hazardous waste. As such, the indiscriminate dumping or spillage of these fluids onto the ground may constitute a misdemeanor, punishable by fines and/or imprisonment, and shall not be allowed. Processing Existing ground that has been declared satisfactory for support of fill, by Leighton Consulting, Inc., shall be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches (15 cm). Existing ground that is not satisfactory shall be over-excavated as specified in the following Section E-2.3. Scarification shall continue until soils are broken down and free of large clay lumps or clods and the working surface is reasonably uniform, flat, and free of uneven features that would inhibit uniform compaction. Overexcavation In addition to removals and over-excavations recommended in the approved geotechnical report(s) and the grading plan, soft, loose, dry, saturated, spongy, organic- rich, highly fractured or otherwise unsuitable ground shall be over-excavated to competent ground as evaluated by Leighton Consulting, Inc. during grading. All undocumented fill soils under proposed structure footprints should be excavated Benching Where fills are to be placed on ground with slopes steeper than 5:1 (horizontal to vertical units), (>20 percent grade) the ground shall be stepped or benched. The lowest bench or key shall be a minimum of 15 feet (4.5 m) wide and at least 2 feet (0.6 m) deep, into competent material as evaluated by Leighton Consulting, Inc.. Other benches shall be excavated a minimum height of 4 feet (1.2 m) into competent material or as otherwise recommended by Leighton Consulting, Inc.. Fill placed on ground sloping flatter than 5:1 (horizontal to vertical units), (<20 percent grade) shall also be benched or otherwise over-excavated to provide a flat subgrade for the fill. Evaluation/Acceptance of Fill Areas All areas to receive fill, including removal and processed areas, key bottoms, and benches, shall be observed, mapped, elevations recorded, and/or tested prior to being accepted by Leighton Consulting, Inc. as suitable to receive fill. The Contractor shall obtain a written acceptance (Daily Field Report) from Leighton Consulting, Inc. prior to fill placement. A licensed surveyor shall provide the survey control for determining elevations of processed areas, keys and benches. E-3 Leighton Consulting, Inc. Earthwork and Grading Guide Specifications E-4 E -3.0 FILL MATERIAL E-3.1 Fill Quality Material to be used as fill shall be essentially free of organic matter and other deleterious substances evaluated and accepted by Leighton Consulting, Inc. prior to placement. Soils of poor quality, such as those with unacceptable gradation, high expansion potential, or low strength shall be placed in areas acceptable to Leighton Consulting, Inc. or mixed with other soils to achieve satisfactory fill material. E-3.2 Oversize Oversize material defined as rock, or other irreducible material with a maximum dimension greater than 6 inches (15 cm), shall not be buried or placed in fill unless location, materials and placement methods are specifically accepted by Leighton Consulting, Inc.. Placement operations shall be such that nesting of oversized material does not occur and such that oversize material is completely surrounded by compacted or densified fill. Oversize material shall not be placed within 10 feet (3 m) measured vertically from finish grade, or within 2 feet (0.61 m) of future utilities or underground construction. E-3.3 Import If importing of fill material is required for grading, proposed import material shall meet the requirements of Section E-3.1, and be free of hazardous materials (“contaminants”) and rock larger than 3-inches (8 cm) in largest dimension. All import soils shall have an Expansion Index (EI) of 20 or less and a sulfate content no greater than (≤) 500 parts- per-million (ppm). A representative sample of a potential import source shall be given to Leighton Consulting, Inc. at least four full working days before importing begins, so that suitability of this import material can be determined and appropriate tests performed. E -4.0 FILL PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION E-4.1 Fill Layers Approved fill material shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill, as described in Section E-2.0, above, in near-horizontal layers not exceeding 8 inches (20 cm) in loose thickness. Leighton Consulting, Inc. may accept thicker layers if testing indicates the grading procedures can adequately compact the thicker layers, and only if the building officials with the appropriate jurisdiction approve. Each layer shall be spread evenly and mixed thoroughly to attain relative uniformity of material and moisture throughout. E-3.1 E-3.2 E-3.3 E-4.1 Leighton Consulting, Inc. Earthwork and Grading Guide Specifications E-3.0 FILL MATERIAL Fill Quality Material to be used as fill shall be essentially free of organic matter and other deleterious substances evaluated and accepted by Leighton Consulting, Inc. prior to placement. Soils of poor quality, such as those with unacceptable gradation, high expansion potential, or low strength shall be placed in areas acceptable to Leighton Consulting, Inc. or mixed with other soils to achieve satisfactory fill material. Oversize Oversize material defined as rock, or other irreducible material with a maximum dimension greater than 6 inches (15 cm), shall not be buried or placed in fill unless location, materials and placement methods are specifically accepted by Leighton Consulting, Inc.. Placement operations shall be such that nesting of oversized material does not occur and such that oversize material is completely surrounded by compacted or densified fill. Oversize material shall not be placed within 10 feet (3 m) measured vertically from finish grade, or within 2 feet (0.61 m) of future utilities or underground construction. Import If importing of fill material is required for grading, proposed import material shall meet the requirements of Section E-3.1, and be free of hazardous materials (“contaminants”) and rock larger than 3-inches (8 cm) in largest dimension. All import soils shall have an Expansion Index (El) of 20 or less and a sulfate content no greater than (<) 500 parts- per-million (ppm). A representative sample of a potential import source shall be given to Leighton Consulting, Inc. at least four full working days before importing begins, so that suitability of this import material can be determined and appropriate tests performed. E-4.0 FILL PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION Fill Layers Approved fill material shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill, as described in Section E-2.0, above, in near-horizontal layers not exceeding 8 inches (20 cm) in loose thickness. Leighton Consulting, Inc. may accept thicker layers if testing indicates the grading procedures can adequately compact the thicker layers, and only if the building officials with the appropriate jurisdiction approve. Each layer shall be spread evenly and mixed thoroughly to attain relative uniformity of material and moisture throughout. Leighton Consulting, Inc. Earthwork and Grading Guide Specifications E-5 E-4.2 Fill Moisture Conditioning Fill soils shall be watered, dried back, blended and/or mixed, as necessary to attain a relatively uniform moisture content at or slightly over optimum. Maximum density and optimum soil moisture content tests shall be performed in accordance with the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) Test Method D 1557. E-4.3 Compaction of Fill After each layer has been moisture-conditioned, mixed, and evenly spread, each layer shall be uniformly compacted to not-less-than (≥) 90 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM Test Method D 1557. In some cases, structural fill may be specified (see project-specific geotechnical report) to be uniformly compacted to at- least (≥) 95 percent of the ASTM D 1557 modified Proctor laboratory maximum dry density. For fills thicker than (>) 15 feet (4.5 m), the portion of fill deeper than 15 feet below proposed finish grade shall be compacted to 95 percent of the ASTM D 1557 laboratory maximum density. Compaction equipment shall be adequately sized and be either specifically designed for soil compaction or of proven reliability to efficiently achieve the specified level of compaction with uniformity. E-4.4 Compaction of Fill Slopes In addition to normal compaction procedures specified above, compaction of slopes shall be accomplished by back rolling of slopes with sheepsfoot rollers at increments of 3 to 4 feet (1 to 1.2 m) in fill elevation, or by other methods producing satisfactory results acceptable to Leighton Consulting, Inc.. Upon completion of grading, relative compaction of the fill, out to the slope face, shall be at least 90 percent of the ASTM D 1557 laboratory maximum density. E-4.5 Compaction Testing Field-tests for moisture content and relative compaction of the fill soils shall be performed by Leighton Consulting, Inc.. Location and frequency of tests shall be at our field representative(s) discretion based on field conditions encountered. Compaction test locations will not necessarily be selected on a random basis. Test locations shall be selected to verify adequacy of compaction levels in areas that are judged to be prone to inadequate compaction (such as close to slope faces and at the fill/bedrock benches). E-4.6 Compaction Test Locations Leighton Consulting, Inc. shall document the approximate elevation and horizontal coordinates of each density test location. The Contractor shall coordinate with the project surveyor to assure that sufficient grade stakes are established so that Leighton E-4.2 E-4.3 E-4.4 E-4.5 E-4.6 Leighton Consulting, Inc. Earthwork and Grading Guide Specifications Fill Moisture Conditioning Fill soils shall be watered, dried back, blended and/or mixed, as necessary to attain a relatively uniform moisture content at or slightly over optimum. Maximum density and optimum soil moisture content tests shall be performed in accordance with the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) Test Method D 1557. Compaction of Fill After each layer has been moisture-conditioned, mixed, and evenly spread, each layer shall be uniformly compacted to not-less-than (2) 90 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM Test Method D 1557. In some cases, structural fill may be specified (see project-specific geotechnical report) to be uniformly compacted to at- least (=) 95 percent of the ASTM D 1557 modified Proctor laboratory maximum dry density. For fills thicker than (>) 15 feet (4.5 m), the portion of fill deeper than 15 feet below proposed finish grade shall be compacted to 95 percent of the ASTM D 1557 laboratory maximum density. Compaction equipment shall be adequately sized and be either specifically designed for soil compaction or of proven reliability to efficiently achieve the specified level of compaction with uniformity. Compaction of Fill Slopes In addition to normal compaction procedures specified above, compaction of slopes shall be accomplished by back rolling of slopes with sheepsfoot rollers at increments of 3 to 4 feet (1 to 1.2 m) in fill elevation, or by other methods producing satisfactory results acceptable to Leighton Consulting, Inc... Upon completion of grading, relative compaction of the fill, out to the slope face, shall be at least 90 percent of the ASTM D 1657 laboratory maximum density. Compaction Testing Field-tests for moisture content and relative compaction of the fill soils shall be performed by Leighton Consulting, Inc.. Location and frequency of tests shall be at our field representative(s) discretion based on field conditions encountered. Compaction test locations will not necessarily be selected on a random basis. Test locations shall be selected to verify adequacy of compaction levels in areas that are judged to be prone to inadequate compaction (such as close to slope faces and at the fill/bedrock benches). Compaction Test Locations Leighton Consulting, Inc. shall document the approximate elevation and horizontal coordinates of each density test location. The Contractor shall coordinate with the project surveyor to assure that sufficient grade stakes are established so that Leighton E-5 Leighton Consulting, Inc. Earthwork and Grading Guide Specifications E-6 Consulting, Inc. can determine the test locations with sufficient accuracy. Adequate grade stakes shall be provided. E -5.0 EXCAVATION Excavations, as well as over-excavation for remedial purposes, shall be evaluated by Leighton Consulting, Inc. during grading. Remedial removal depths shown on geotechnical plans are estimates only. The actual extent of removal shall be determined by Leighton Consulting, Inc. based on the field evaluation of exposed conditions during grading. Where fill-over-cut slopes are to be graded, the cut portion of the slope shall be made, then observed and reviewed by Leighton Consulting, Inc. prior to placement of materials for construction of the fill portion of the slope, unless otherwise recommended by Leighton Consulting, Inc.. E -6.0 TRENCH BACKFILLS E-6.1 Safety The Contractor shall follow all OSHA and Cal/OSHA requirements for safety of trench excavations. Work should be performed in accordance with Article 6 of the California Construction Safety Orders, 2009 Edition or more current (see also: http://www.dir.ca.gov/title8/sb4a6.html ). E-6.2 Bedding and Backfill All utility trench bedding and backfill shall be performed in accordance with applicable provisions of the 2018 Edition of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (Green Book). Bedding material shall have a Sand Equivalent greater than 30 (SE>30). Bedding shall be placed to 1-foot (0.3 m) over the top of the conduit, and densified by jetting in areas of granular soils, if allowed by the permitting agency. Otherwise, the pipe-bedding zone should be backfilled with Controlled Low Strength Material (CLSM) consisting of at least one sack of Portland cement per cubic-yard of sand, and conforming to Section 201-6 of the 2018 Edition of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (Green Book). Backfill over the bedding zone shall be placed and densified mechanically to a minimum of 90 percent of relative compaction (ASTM D 1557) from 1 foot (0.3 m) above the top of the conduit to the surface. Backfill above the pipe zone shall not be jetted. Jetting of the bedding around the conduits shall be observed by Leighton Consulting, Inc. and backfill above the pipe zone (bedding) shall be observed and tested by Leighton Consulting, Inc.. E-6.1 E-6.2 Leighton Consulting, Inc. Earthwork and Grading Guide Specifications Consulting, Inc. can determine the test locations with sufficient accuracy. Adequate grade stakes shall be provided. E-5.0 EXCAVATION Excavations, as well as over-excavation for remedial purposes, shall be evaluated by Leighton Consulting, Inc. during grading. Remedial removal depths shown on geotechnical plans are estimates only. The actual extent of removal shall be determined by Leighton Consulting, Inc. based on the field evaluation of exposed conditions during grading. Where fill-over-cut slopes are to be graded, the cut portion of the slope shall be made, then observed and reviewed by Leighton Consulting, Inc. prior to placement of materials for construction of the fill portion of the slope, unless otherwise recommended by Leighton Consulting, Inc.. E-6.0 TRENCH BACKFILLS Safety The Contractor shall follow all OSHA and Cal/OSHA requirements for safety of trench excavations. Work should be performed in accordance with Article 6 of the California Construction Safety Orders, 2009 Edition or more current (see also: http://www.dir.ca.gov/title8/sb4a6.html ). Bedding and Backfill All utility trench bedding and backfill shall be performed in accordance with applicable provisions of the 2018 Edition of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (Green Book). Bedding material shall have a Sand Equivalent greater than 30 (SE>30). Bedding shall be placed to 1-foot (0.3 m) over the top of the conduit, and densified by jetting in areas of granular soils, if allowed by the permitting agency. Otherwise, the pipe-bedding zone should be backfilled with Controlled Low Strength Material (CLSM) consisting of at least one sack of Portland cement per cubic-yard of sand, and conforming to Section 201-6 of the 2018 Edition of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (Green Book). Backfill over the bedding zone shall be placed and densified mechanically to a minimum of 90 percent of relative compaction (ASTM D 1557) from 1 foot (0.3 m) above the top of the conduit to the surface. Backfill above the pipe zone shall not be jetted. Jetting of the bedding around the conduits shall be observed by Leighton Consulting, Inc. and backfill above the pipe zone (bedding) shall be observed and tested by Leighton Consulting, Inc.. E-6 Leighton Consulting, Inc. Earthwork and Grading Guide Specifications E-7 E-6.3 Lift Thickness Lift thickness of trench backfill shall not exceed those allowed in the Standard Specifications of Public Works Construction unless the Contractor can demonstrate to Leighton Consulting, Inc. that the fill lift can be compacted to the minimum relative compaction by his alternative equipment and method, and only if the building officials with the appropriate jurisdiction approve. E-6.3 Leighton Consulting, Inc. Earthwork and Grading Guide Specifications Lift Thickness Lift thickness of trench backfill shall not exceed those allowed in the Standard Specifications of Public Works Construction unless the Contractor can demonstrate to Leighton Consulting, Inc. that the fill lift can be compacted to the minimum relative compaction by his alternative equipment and method, and only if the building officials with the appropriate jurisdiction approve. E-7 APPENDIX F FIELD DENSITY TEST FOR FAULT TRENCH BACKFILL APPENDIX F FIELD DENSITY TEST FOR FAULT TRENCH BACKEFILL 4//Leighton a verdantas company #/ Leighton Leighton and Associates, Inc. Irvine Office 2600 Michelson Dr, Suite 400 Irvine, CA 92612 Phone: (949) 250-1421 | Fax: (949) 250-1114 Soil Nuclear Gauge Report Date: 06/25/2025 Test Method: ASTM D 6938 Client:Project: Lewis Management Corp. 1156 N. Mountain Avenue Upland,CA 91786 14030.001 Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE Parcel/HSP 1515 Walnut Grove Rosemead, CA Test Results Retest Test # Of Test Date | Proctor ID Method Soil Classification Optimum Moisture (%) MaximumDry Density (pcf) In Place Moisture (%) In Place DryDensity {pcf) In Place Wet Density (pcf) Probe Depth (in) Percent Compaction Min/Max Comp. (%) Optimum Moisture Tolerance (%)Remark 1 04/02/24 | 03-28-24,#1, Backfill, StockpileT2 A CL 9.1 124.3 11.9 114.8 128.5 92 90/100 0/3 DP/MP 2 04/02/24 | 03-28-24,#1, Backfill, StockpileT2 CL 9.1 124.3 111.3 124.2 20 90/100 0/3 DP/MP 3 04/02/24 | 03-28-24, #1, Backfill, StockpileT2 CL 9.1 124.3 114.5 128.1 92 90/100 0/3 DP/MP 4 04/02/24 | 03-28-24,#1, Backfill, StockpileT2 CL 9.1 124.3 10.8 115.0 127.4 93 90/100 0/3 DP/MP 5 04/02/24 | 03-28-24, #1, Backfill, StockpileT2 CL 9.1 124.3 12.1 118.3 132.6 95 90/100 0/3 DP/MP 6 04/02/24 | 03-28-24, #1, Backfill,StockpileT2 CL 9.1 124.3 116.2 129.9 93 90/100 0/3 DP/MP 7 04/03/24 | 03-28-24,#1, Backfill,StockpileT2 CL 9.1 124.3 12.0 115.4 129.2 93 90/100 0/3 DP/MP 8 04/03/24 | 03-28-24, #1, Backfill, StockpileT2 CL 9.1 124.3 11.6 113.8 127.0 92 90/100 0/3 DP/MP Test Information Test # |Test Location Elevation Reference Make / Model / SN / Calibrated Gauge Specs Gauge StandardizationDensity Standard/Moisture Standard Field Technician 1 Compacted Fill (CF): Northern portion of T2 pit SG-20 CPN / MC3-Elite / 31122 / 04/12/2023 3604 / 966 Kendall, Guy Page 1 of 10 #/ Leighton Leighton and Associates, Inc. Irvine Office 2600 Michelson Dr, Suite 400 Irvine, CA 92612 Phone: (949) 250-1421 | Fax: (949) 250-1114 Soil Nuclear Gauge Report Date: 06/25/2025 Test Method: ASTM D 6938 Client:Project: Lewis Management Corp. 1156 N. Mountain Avenue Upland, CA 91786 14030.001 Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE Parcel/HSP 1515 Walnut Grove Rosemead, CA 2 Compacted Fill (CF): Northern SG-18' CPN / MC3-Elite / 31122 / 04/12/2023 3604 / 966 Kendall, Guy portion of T2 pit 3 Compacted Fill (CF): Northern SG-16' CPN / MC3-Elite / 31122 / 04/12/2023 3604 / 966 Kendall, Guy portion of T2 pit 4 Compacted Fill (CF): Northern SG-14' CPN / MC3-Elite / 31122 / 04/12/2023 3604 / 966 Kendall, Guy portion of T2 pit 5 Compacted Fill (CF): Northern SG-12' CPN / MC3-Elite / 31122 / 04/12/2023 3604 / 966 Kendall, Guy portion of T2 pit 6 Compacted Fill (CF): Northern SG-10" CPN / MC3-Elite / 31122 / 04/12/2023 3604 / 966 Kendall, Guy portion of T2 pit 7 Compacted Fill (CF): Middle portion SG-19' CPN / MC3-Elite / 31122 / 04/12/2023 3622 / 947 Kendall, Guy of pit/trench T2 8 Compacted Fill (CF): Middle portion SG-17" CPN / MC3-Elite / 31122 / 04/12/2023 3622 / 947 Kendall, Guy of pit/trench T2 Remarks Comments DP/MP: Density Pass / Moisture Pass Tests are "Direct Transmission" (Method A) unless probe depth is noted as"Backscatter". Gauge calibration data on file with the testing agency. Page2 of 10 Soil Nuclear Gauge Client: Project:#/ Leighton Report Date: 06/25/2025 Lewis Management Corp. 14030.001 Leighton and Associates, Inc. Test Method: ASTM D 6938 1156 N. Mountain Avenue Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE Parcel/HSP Irvine Office Upland, CA 91786 1515 Walnut Grove 2600 Michelson Dr, Suite 400 Rosemead, CA Irvine, CA 92612 Phone: (949) 250-1421 | Fax: (949) 250-1114 Test Results In Place In Place Optimum Optimum Maximum In Place Dry Wet Probe Min/Max MoistureRetest Soil Moisture | Dry Density | Moisture | Density | Density Depth Percent Comp. Tolerance Test # Of Test Date | Proctor ID | Method | Classification (%) (pcf) (%) (pcf) (pcf) (in) Compaction {%) (%) Remark 9 04/03/24 | 03-28-24, A CL 9.1 124.3 12.1 117.7 131.9 8 95 90/100 0/3 DP/MP#1, Backfill, StockpileT2 10 04/03/24 | 03-28-24, A CL 9.1 124.3 11.9 111.4 124.7 8 2 90/100 0/3 DP/MP#1, Backfill, StockpileT2 11 04/04/24 | 03-28-24, A CL 9.1 124.3 11.5 113.6 126.7 8 91 90/100 0/3 DP/MP #1, Backfill, StockpileT2 12 04/04/24 | 03-28-24, A CL 9.1 124.3 14.8 114.9 131.9 8 92 90/100 NA DP#1, Backfill, StockpileT2 13 04/04/24 | 03-28-24, A CL 9.1 124.3 15.4 114.9 132.6 8 92 90/100 NA DP #1, Backfill, StockpileT2 14 04/04/24 | 03-28-24, A CL 9.1 124.3 15.0 112.0 128.8 8 90 90/100 NA DP #1, Backfill,StockpileT2 15 04/04/24 | 03-28-24, A CL 9.1 124.3 14.7 114.5 131.3 8 92 90/100 NA DP#1, Backfill,StockpileT2 16 04/04/24 | 03-28-24, A CL 9.1 124.3 14.8 113.0 129.7 8 91 90/100 NA DP #1, Backfill, StockpileT2 Test Information Gauge Specs Gauge StandardizationTest # |Test Location Elevation |Reference Make / Model / SN / Calibrated Density Standard/Moisture Standard Field Technician 9 Compacted Fill (CF): Middle portion SG-14' CPN / MC3-Elite / 31122 / 04/12/2023 3622 / 947 Kendall, Guy of pit/trench T2 Page 3 of 10 #/ Leighton Leighton and Associates, Inc. Irvine Office 2600 Michelson Dr, Suite 400 Irvine, CA 92612 Phone: (949) 250-1421 | Fax: (949) 250-1114 Soil Nuclear Gauge Report Date: 06/25/2025 Test Method: ASTM D 6938 Client:Project: Lewis Management Corp. 1156 N. Mountain Avenue Upland, CA 91786 14030.001 Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE Parcel/HSP 1515 Walnut Grove Rosemead, CA 10 |Compacted Fill (CF): Middle portion SG-11' CPN / MC3-Elite / 31122 / 04/12/2023 3622 / 947 Kendall, Guy of pit/trench T2 1" Compacted Fill (CF): Pit/trench T2 -5.0 Existing Grade CPN /MC3 / M370308650 / 09/01/2023 22623/8100 Crawford, Eric north 22° 12 |Compacted Fill (CF): Pit/trench T2 -5.0 Existing Grade CPN /MC3 / M370308650 / 09/01/2023 22623/8100 Crawford, Eric north 22° 13 |Compacted Fill (CF): Pit/trench T2 -3.0 Existing Grade CPN /MC3/ M370308650 / 09/01/2023 22623 /8100 Crawford, Eric north 22° 14 |Compacted Fill (CF): Pit/trench T1 -11.0 Existing Grade CPN / MC3 / M370308650 / 09/01/2023 22623 /8100 Crawford, Eric ctr. 15 |Compacted Fill (CF): Pit/trench T1 -10.0 Existing Grade CPN /MC3/ M370308650 / 09/01/2023 2262378100 Crawford, Eric ctr. 16 |Compacted Fill (CF): Pit/trench T1 -8.0 Existing Grade CPN /MC3/ M370308650 / 09/01/2023 22623/8100 Crawford, Eric ctr. Remarks Comments DP/MP: Density Pass / Moisture Pass Tests are "Direct Transmission" (Method A) unless probe depth is noted as"Backscatter". Gauge calibration data on file with the testing agency. DP: Density Pass Page4 of 10 Soil Nuclear Gauge Report Date: 06/25/2025 Test Method: ASTM D 6938 #/ Leighton Leighton and Associates, Inc. Irvine Office 2600 Michelson Dr, Suite 400 Irvine, CA 92612 Phone: (949) 250-1421 | Fax: (949) 250-1114 Client:Project: Lewis Management Corp. 1156 N. Mountain Avenue Upland, CA 91786 14030.001 Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE Parcel/HSP 1515 Walnut Grove Rosemead, CA Test Results In Place In Place OptimumOptimum Maximum In Place Dry Wet Probe Min/Max MoistureRetest Soil Moisture | Dry Density | Moisture | Density | Density Depth Percent Comp. Tolerance Test # Of Test Date | Proctor ID | Method | Classification (%) (pcf) (%) (pcf) (pcf) (in) Compaction {%) (%) Remark 17 04/08/24 | 03-28-24, A CL 9.1 124.3 13.4 113.4 128.6 8 91 90/100 NA DP#1, Backfill, StockpileT2 18 04/09/24 | 03-28-24, A CL 9.1 124.3 14.6 113.1 129.6 8 91 90/100 NA DP#1, Backfill, StockpileT2 19 04/10/24 | 03-28-24, A CL 9.1 124.3 11.0 112.4 124.8 8 90 90/100 NA DP #1, Backfill, StockpileT2 20 04/23/24 | 03-28-24, A CL 9.1 124.3 14.5 113.5 130.0 8 91 90/100 NA DP#1, Backfill, StockpileT2 21 04/23/24 | 03-28-24, A CL 9.1 124.3 15.6 113.8 131.6 8 92 90/100 NA DP #1, Backfill, StockpileT2 22 04/23/24 | 03-28-24, A CL 9.1 124.3 16.7 114.9 134.1 8 92 90/100 NA DP #1, Backfill,StockpileT2 23 04/23/24 | 03-28-24, A CL 9.1 124.3 14.9 113.1 129.9 8 91 90/100 NA DP#1, Backfill,StockpileT2 24 04/23/24 | 03-28-24, A CL 9.1 124.3 17.1 111.5 130.6 8 90 90/100 NA DP#1, Backfill, StockpileT2 Test Information Gauge Specs Gauge Standardization Test # |Test Location Elevation |Reference Make / Model / SN / Calibrated Density Standard/Moisture Standard Field Technician 17 |Compacted Fill (CF): Pit/trench T1 -15.0 Existing Grade CPN / MC1-DRP / MD60308225/ 32059/ 10697 Crawford, Eric south end 09/14/2023 Page 5 of 10 #/ Leighton Leighton and Associates, Inc. Irvine Office 2600 Michelson Dr, Suite 400 Irvine, CA 92612 Phone: (949) 250-1421 | Fax: (949) 250-1114 Soil Nuclear Gauge Report Date: 06/25/2025 Test Method: ASTM D 6938 Client: Project: Lewis Management Corp. 14030.001 1156 N. Mountain Avenue Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE Parcel/HSP Upland, CA 91786 1515 Walnut Grove Rosemead, CA 18 |Compacted Fill (CF): Pit/trench T1 12.0 Existing Grade CPN / MC3 / M370308650 / 09/01/2023 22560 / 8084 Crawford, Eric south end 19 |Compacted Fill (CF): Pit/trench T1 -10.0 Existing Grade CPN /MC3 / M370308650 / 09/01/2023 22560 / 8084 Crawford, Eric south end 20 |Compacted Fill (CF): Exploretory pit SG -13' CPN / MC1-Elite / 31081 / 02/15/2024 3788 /961 Guevara, Anthony T1 southwest corner of site 21 |Compacted Fill (CF): Exploretory pit SG -10 CPN / MCA1-Elite / 31081 / 02/15/2024 3788 / 961 Guevara, Anthony T1 southwest corner of site 22 |Compacted Fill (CF): Exploretory pit SG -7 CPN / MC1-Elite / 31081 / 02/15/2024 3788/7961 Guevara, Anthony T1 southwest corner of site 23 |Compacted Fill (CF): Exploretory pit SG 4 CPN / MC1-Elite / 31081 / 02/15/2024 3788 /961 Guevara, Anthony T1 southwest corner of site 24 |Compacted Fill (CF): Exploretory pit SG -2' CPN / MC1-Elite / 31081 / 02/15/2024 3788 /961 Guevara, Anthony T1 southwest corner of site Remarks Comments DP: Density Pass Tests are "Direct Transmission” (Method A) unless probe depth is noted as"Backscatter". Gauge calibration data on file with the testing agency. Page 6 of 10 Soil Nuclear Gauge Report Date: 06/25/2025 Test Method: ASTM D 6938 #/ Leighton Leighton and Associates, Inc. Irvine Office 2600 Michelson Dr, Suite 400 Irvine, CA 92612 Phone: (949) 250-1421 | Fax: (949) 250-1114 Client:Project: Lewis Management Corp. 1156 N. Mountain Avenue Upland, CA 91786 14030.001 Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE Parcel/HSP 1515 Walnut Grove Rosemead, CA Test Results Test #Retest of Test Date Proctor ID Method Soil Classification Optimum Moisture (%) MaximumDry Density (pcf) In Place Moisture (%) In Place DryDensity {pcf) In Place Wet Density (pcf) Probe Depth (in) Percent Compaction Min/Max Comp. (%) Optimum Moisture Tolerance (%)Remark 25 04/23/24 03-28-24,#1, Backfill, StockpileT2 A CL 9.1 124.3 15.9 113.1 131.1 91 90/100 NA DP 26 05/02/24 03-28-24,#2, Backfill, StockpileT2 CL 8.6 125.5 10.6 122.0 134.9 97 90/100 0/3 DP/MP 27 05/02/24 03-28-24, #2, Backfill, StockpileT2 CL 8.6 125.5 117.0 130.6 93 90/100 0/3 DP/MP 28 05/02/24 03-28-24,#2, Backfill, StockpileT2 CL 8.6 125.5 10.8 119.5 132.4 95 90/100 0/3 DP/MP 29 05/02/24 03-28-24, #2, Backfill, StockpileT2 CL 8.6 125.5 120.0 1334 96 90/100 0/3 DP/MP 30 05/02/24 03-28-24, #2, Backfill,StockpileT2 CL 8.6 125.5 11.4 118.4 131.9 94 90/100 0/3 DP/MP 31 05/03/24 03-28-24,#2, Backfill,StockpileT2 CL 8.6 125.5 119.8 133.2 95 90/100 0/3 DP/MP 32 05/03/24 03-28-24, #2, Backfill, StockpileT2 CL 8.6 125.5 10.9 121.8 135.1 97 90/100 NA DP Test Information Test #Test Location Elevation Reference Gauge Specs Make / Model / SN / Calibrated Gauge StandardizationDensity Standard/Moisture Standard Field Technician 25 Compacted Fill (CF): Exploretory pit T1 southwest corner of site SG CPN / MC1-Elite / 31081 / 02/15/2024 3788 /961 Guevara, Anthony Page 7 of 10 #/ Leighton Leighton and Associates, Inc. Soil Nuclear Gauge Report Date: 06/25/2025 Test Method: ASTM D 6938 Irvine Office 2600 Michelson Dr, Suite 400 Irvine, CA 92612 Phone: (949) 250-1421 | Fax: (949) 250-1114 Client:Project: Lewis Management Corp. 1156 N. Mountain Avenue Upland, CA 91786 14030.001 Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE Parcel/HSP 1515 Walnut Grove Rosemead, CA 26 |Compacted Fill (CF): South ramp SG-13.5' CPN / MC1-Elite / 31191 / 08/01/2023 3996/1085 Conell, Richard part of trench 27 |Compacted Fill (CF): Southern ramp S$G-15.5' CPN /MC1-Elite / 31191 / 08/01/2023 3996/1085 Conell, Richard of trench T3 28 |Compacted Fill (CF): Most Northern SG-17.5' CPN / MC1-Elite / 31191 / 08/01/2023 3996 / 1085 Conell, Richard part of T3 29 |Compacted Fill (CF): Most Northern SG-19.5' CPN / MC1-Elite / 31191 / 08/01/2023 3996 / 1085 Conell, Richard part of T3 30 |Compacted Fill (CF): Most Northern $G-19.5' CPN / MC1-Elite / 31191 / 08/01/2023 3996/1085 Conell, Richard part of T3 31 |Compacted Fill (CF): North corner of SG-13.5' CPN / MC1-Elite / 31191 / 08/01/2023 3953/1070 Conell, Richard T3 32 |Compacted Fill (CF): Middle of T3 SG-13.5 CPN / MC1-Elite / 31191 / 08/01/2023 3953/1070 Conell, Richard Remarks Comments DP: Density Pass DP/MP: Density Pass / Moisture Pass Tests are "Direct Transmission" (Method A) unless probe depth is noted as"Backscatter". Gauge calibration data on file with the testing agency. Page 8 of 10 #/ Leighton Leighton and Associates, Inc. Irvine Office 2600 Michelson Dr, Suite 400 Irvine, CA 92612 Phone: (949) 250-1421 | Fax: (949) 250-1114 Soil Nuclear Gauge Report Date: 06/25/2025 Test Method: ASTM D 6938 Client:Project: Lewis Management Corp. 1156 N. Mountain Avenue Upland,CA 91786 14030.001 Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE Parcel/HSP 1515 Walnut Grove Rosemead, CA Test Results Test #Retest of Test Date Proctor ID Method Soil Classification Optimum Moisture (%) MaximumDry Density (pcf) In Place Moisture (%) In Place DryDensity {pcf) In Place Wet Probe Density Depth (pcf) (in) Percent Compaction Min/Max Comp. (%) Optimum Moisture Tolerance (%)Remark 33 05/06/24 03-28-24,#2, Backfill, StockpileT2 A CL 8.6 125.5 11.3 119.0 132.5 8 95 90/100 0/3 DP/MP 34 05/06/24 03-28-24,#2, Backfill, StockpileT2 CL 8.6 125.5 115.9 129.1 8 92 90/100 NA DP 35 05/07/24 03-28-24, #2, Backfill, StockpileT2 CL 8.6 125.5 121.1 135.0 8 96 90/100 NA DP 36 05/07/24 03-28-24,#2, Backfill, StockpileT2 CL 8.6 125.5 13.1 117.6 133.0 8 94 90/100 NA DP 37 05/07/24 03-28-24, #2, Backfill, StockpileT2 CL 8.6 125.5 10.5 121.1 133.8 8 96 90/100 NA DP 38 05/08/24 03-28-24, #2, Backfill,StockpileT2 CL 8.6 125.5 10.6 122.9 135.9 8 98 90/100 NA DP 39 05/09/24 03-28-24,#2, Backfill,StockpileT2 CL 8.6 125.5 12.3 119.8 134.5 8 95 90/100 NA DP 40 05/09/24 03-28-24, #2, Backfill, StockpileT2 CL 8.6 125.5 10.6 120.6 133.4 8 96 90/100 NA DP Test Information Test #Test Location Elevation Reference Make / Model / SN / Calibrated Gauge Specs Gauge StandardizationDensity Standard/Moisture Standard Field Technician 33 Compacted Fill (CF): North section of T3 SG-11.5'CPN / MC1-Elite / 31191 / 08/01/2023 3938/1057 Conell, Richard Page 9 of 10 #/ Leighton Leighton and Associates, Inc. Irvine Office 2600 Michelson Dr, Suite 400 Irvine, CA 92612 Phone: (949) 250-1421 | Fax: (949) 250-1114 Soil Nuclear Gauge Report Date: 06/25/2025 Test Method: ASTM D 6938 Client:Project: Lewis Management Corp. 1156 N. Mountain Avenue Upland, CA 91786 14030.001 Lewis/Rosemead Condos SCE Parcel/HSP 1515 Walnut Grove Rosemead, CA 34 |Compacted Fill (CF): South section SG-11.5' CPN / MC1-Elite / 31191 / 08/01/2023 3938/1057 Conell, Richard of T3 35 |Compacted Fill (CF): Middle section SG-9.5' CPN / MC1-Elite / 31191 / 08/01/2023 3939/1086 Conell, Richard of T3 36 |Compacted Fill (CF): Middle section SG-9.5' CPN / MC1-Elite / 31191 / 08/01/2023 3939/1086 Conell, Richard of T3 37 |Compacted Fill (CF): Northeast SG-11.5' CPN / MCA1-Elite / 31191 / 08/01/2023 3939/1086 Conell, Richard section of T3 38 |Compacted Fill (CF): Middle section SG-9.5 CPN / MC1-Elite / 31191 / 08/01/2023 3990/1069 Conell, Richard of T3 39 |Compacted Fill (CF): Northern SG-8.0 CPN / MC1-Elite / 31191 / 08/01/2023 3928/1069 Conell, Richard section of T3 40 |Compacted Fill (CF): Northwest SG-8.0' CPN / MC1-Elite / 31191 / 08/01/2023 3928/1069 Conell, Richard section of T3 Remarks Comments DP/MP: Density Pass / Moisture Pass DP: Density Pass Tests are "Direct Transmission" (Method A) unless probe depth is noted as"Backscatter". Gauge calibration data on file with the testing agency. Page10 of 10