4.5 Geology, Soils and Seismicity Environmental Setting Impacts and Mitigation Measures References...4.

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "4.5 Geology, Soils and Seismicity Environmental Setting Impacts and Mitigation Measures References...4."

Transcription

1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 4.5 Geology, Soils and Seismicity Environmental Setting Impacts and Mitigation Measures References FIGURES Figure Active and Potentially Active Bay Area Earthquake Faults Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 4.5-i 4.5_Geology.doc\25-JAN-07\

2 SECTION 4.5 Geology, Soils and Seismicity 4.5 GEOLOGY, SOILS AND SEISMICITY This section of the EIR presents a description of the existing geology, soils and seismic conditions in the project area and analyzes the potential physical environmental effects of the proposed Campus Master Plan related to seismic hazards, underlying soil characteristics, slope stability, erosion, and excavation of soils. In response to the Notice of Preparation, a commenter stated that the EIR evaluation of geologic impacts should be based on core samples taken around the campus and should include the effects of the construction of larger buildings (e.g., the hotel) on surrounding development. To the extent that this issue involves significant effects on the environment under CEQA criteria, it is addressed in this section Environmental Setting Geologic Overview Regional Geology San Francisco is located on the northern tip of the San Francisco Peninsula, within the Coast Ranges geomorphic province. The Coast Ranges is a northwest-trending series of mountain ranges and valleys. The general geologic setting of the city is characterized by relatively rugged bedrock hills bounded by broad valleys and underlain by unconsolidated deposits. The bedrock consists of consolidated rocks of the Franciscan Complex and the Great Valley Sequence of late Jurassic and Cretaceous age. The Franciscan Complex that underlies the SFSU campus generally consists of graywacke (sandstone), shale, chert, greenstone, and melange; in certain places, serpentine, an asbestos-containing rock-type, is found within the shale matrix. The Great Valley Sequence generally consists of sandstone and shale. Bedrock outcrops in hilly areas account for approximately 24 percent of the land surface in San Francisco. Quarternary sediments lie on the eroded bedrock surface and consist of an alternating sequence of terrestrial and estuarine deposits that reflect major sea level fluctuations during the Pleistocene and Holocene epochs. Low stands of sea level are recorded by the deposition of terrestrial sediments, whereas estuarine sediments such as the Yerba Buena Mud (also known locally as Old Bay Clay) and Bay Mud were deposited during high sea-level stands. In the vicinity of the campus, bedrock outcrops of the Franciscan formation are exposed on the hills east of 19 th Avenue. The bedrock surface dips steeply towards the west. The top of the bedrock under the campus may range from elevation 200 to 300 feet (Dames & Moore, 1999). The San Francisco peninsula lies within a down-dropped structural block bounded by the East Bay Hills and the Santa Cruz Mountains. Other major structural elements of the San Francisco Bay region include the San Andreas fault, located about 2.8 miles to the west of the campus, and the Hayward fault, which is approximately 16 miles to the east of the campus. Seismicity associated with these faults is discussed in Section , Seismicity, below. Campus Master Plan Draft EIR _Geology.doc\25-JAN-07\

3 Local Geology and Site History A 1938 aerial photograph shows that the SF State campus area was totally undeveloped except for Lake Merced Boulevard, which at the time crossed the northern lobe of the lake at a point east of the present location of the road. In 1946, portions of the existing slopes were cut to fill the low areas and to build the roadway embankment for the realignment of Lake Merced Boulevard. As part of this roadway realignment or shortly thereafter, the portion of the lake extending eastwards of Lake Merced Boulevard was partially filled, and is now occupied by Cox Stadium, Maloney Field, the Central Parking Garage, and tennis courts. The major geologic units encountered on the campus include: artificial fill; medium dense to dense wind blown deposits, which are probably remnants of old sand dunes; and the Colma Formation consisting of very dense sands with minor amounts of silt and clay that were deposited in estuarine and coastal environments. The Colma Formation overlies the Plio-Pleistocene marine sediments of the Merced Formation, which consists of sands, silt, and clay deposited in a shallow marine environment. Bedrock, which is present below the Merced formation, is estimated to range from elevation 200 to 300 feet under the SF State campus, as indicated previously Soils The soils beneath the SF State campus are well-drained loams and sandy loams formed on soft sandstone (SF State, 2006). These types of soils are typically not expansive. Expansive soils are those that possess shrink-swell characteristics and are usually fine-grained clay sediments that expand and contract due to moisture and desiccation. Other soils characteristics that pertain to the valley portion of the campus and the upland portions of the campus are further described below. The Valley The valley is about 300 feet wide, side-to-side, and at the lowest point, the center of the valley portion of the SF State campus is about 60 feet lower in elevation than the top of the adjacent slopes. The elevation in the bottom of the valley is about +60 feet above sea level. Based on boring data collected from a central location in the valley, the artificial fill ranges from 30 feet to 55 feet deep (Harding Lawson Associates, 1991). The fill tapers in thickness from the center of the drainage outward to the base of the adjacent native slopes. The fill consists of poorly-graded sand with silt and silty sand. The sand is fine-grained, medium dense to dense above the groundwater table, and loose below the groundwater table. Groundwater was encountered between elevations +18 and +28 feet above sea level, or about 30 to 40 feet below existing grades in this portion of the campus. Alluvial fine-grained silty sand was encountered below the fill in the center of the valley. The upper portion of the alluvial sand is high in organic content and was probably the former lake bottom. Beneath the saturated alluvial soils, dense to very dense silty and clayey sand was encountered, similar to that encountered on the existing adjacent native slopes. This dense to very dense sand underlying the center of the valley and on the adjacent native slopes is mapped as belonging to the Colma Formation (Harding Lawson Associates, 1991). 4.5_Geology.doc\25-JAN-07\ San Francisco State University

4 The Uplands Upland portions of the campus exist in both the northern and southern portions of the campus on either side of the valley. Here, elevations range from about +85 to +100 feet. Based on boring data collected from two upland locations on the SF State campus, one in the academic core and one in the Village, previously developed portions of campus are covered by a layer of artificial fill of varying thickness, texture, and density (Kleinfelder, 1998; Dames & Moore, 1999). These fills are underlain by a layer of medium dense to dense sand in some locations, considered to be native dune sands. Very dense sands of the Colma Formation are present directly under the fill layer or directly under the native dune sand layer, depending on the location. Groundwater is below elevation +20, or about 65 to 70 feet below existing grades in these portions of the campus Seismicity Faulting and Seismic Shaking The site is located within a region characterized by the seismically active San Andreas fault system, which is the principal tectonic element of the North American/Pacific plate boundary in California. In the San Francisco Bay Area, seismic slip is partitioned onto subsidiary structures, such as the San Andreas, Hayward, and Calaveras faults that are distributed across the Coast Ranges province. Figure shows the major active faults in the San Francisco Bay area. Many of these faults have been active in historical time, while earthquakes on other major faults have not been recorded. The San Andreas and Hayward faults have the highest slip rates and are the most seismically active of any faults in the Bay Area. Other important earthquake sources that are capable of producing large-magnitude earthquakes are the San Gregoria, Calaveras, Rodgers Creek, and Greenville fault zones. The campus is not located in an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault zone, and no mapped faults pass through the campus (USGS, 1998). The nearest fault is the San Bruno Fault, approximately 0.7 mile southwest of the project (Wagner and others, 1990). Based on the distance to the nearest active fault and the conclusions of prior geotechnical evaluations, the potential for fault rupture on the site is very low (Dames & Moore, 1999; Harding Lawson Associates, 1991; Kleinfelder, 1998). Severe seismic ground shaking is a possibility in the area of the SF State campus. The most recent update of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) national hazard maps shows the probabilistic peak horizontal ground accelerations (PGA) and spectral accelerations (SA) for the vicinity of the campus, which are provided below in Table PGA and SA are expressed as a fraction of the acceleration due to gravity ( g ). Table Peak Horizontal Ground Accelerations (PGA) and Spectral Accelerations (SA) 10% probability of exceedance in 50 years 5% probability of exceedance in 50 years PGA 0.96 g 1.18 g 1.46 g 0.2 sec SA 1.91 g 2.55 g 3.13 g 0.3 sec SA 1.96 g 2.62 g 3.14 g 1.0 sec SA 1.22 g 1.70 g 2.45 g Source: Frankel and others % probability of exceedance in 50 years Campus Master Plan Draft EIR _Geology.doc\25-JAN-07\

5 This level of ground shaking could result in seismic-related ground failure. However, earthquakes on the active faults in the region are expected to produce a range of ground-shaking intensities at the SF State campus. The San Andreas fault was the source of the 1906 San Francisco earthquake and the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquakes. The 1906 San Francisco earthquake, with an estimated moment magnitude of 7.9, produced very strong to violent shaking intensities in the vicinity of the campus (ABAG, 2003a). The 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, with an estimated moment magnitude of 6.9, produced strong shaking intensities in the project area (ABAG, 2003b). Other faults, such as the Hayward and Calaveras faults, have also caused large-magnitude earthquakes (Dames & Moore, 1999). Therefore, hazards related to ground shaking could affect the SF State campus. Ground deformation within the SF State campus during the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake was limited to an area bounded approximately by North and South State Drive and Lake Merced Boulevard, a portion of the valley, which was the former easterly extension of the northern portion of Lake Merced (Dames & Moore, 1999). This area was filled after the connection to Lake Merced was blocked with the realignment of the Lake Merced Boulevard. Liquefaction Liquefaction is a phenomenon during which the ground suffers severe and sudden loss of strength due to earthquake-induced ground shaking; resulting in significant ground movements, which may lead to foundation bearing capacity failures and other damage to structures. Hazard maps produced by ABAG depict liquefaction and lateral spreading hazards for the entire Bay Area in the event of a significant seismic event (ABAG, 2004a). According to these maps, the SF State campus is in an area with a low to very low potential to experience liquefaction. However, the California Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG) has designated the valley portion of the SF State campus as a Seismic Hazard Zone for liquefaction potential (CDMG, 2001). This designation refers to areas where historic occurrence of liquefaction, or local geological, geotechnical and groundwater conditions indicate a potential for permanent ground displacements such that mitigation will be required to reduce the risk to acceptable levels. Additionally, liquefaction potential was cited as a concern during a previous geotechnical investigation in the valley portion of the campus (Harding Lawson Associates, 1991). Moreover, as noted above, the valley portion of the campus was subjected to damage during the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake. Settlement and Lateral Spreading During an earthquake, settlement of the ground surface can occur as a result of the rapid compaction and settling of subsurface materials that are composed of loose, non-compacted sediments. Settlement can occur at both uniform and different rates. There is a potential for earthquake-induced ground settlement in the valley portion of the campus, due to the presence of artificial fill materials, and elsewhere on campus where there are loose fills. Lateral spreading is the result of large, permanent lateral movements typically associated with sloping ground that is susceptible to liquefaction. Even though the valley portion of the campus has the potential for liquefaction, lateral spreading is not likely given that liquefaction will not likely occur in a uniform fashion throughout the drainage, thereby providing resistance to lateral spreading (Harding Lawson Associates 1991). 4.5_Geology.doc\25-JAN-07\ San Francisco State University

6 Landslides During an earthquake, landslides can also occur in areas with sloping topography. As the SF State campus is mostly relatively flat, earthquake-induced landslides will generally not be a hazard on the campus. However, seismic hazard maps produced by ABAG identify one isolated area on the SF State campus as a Seismic Hazard Zone for landslide potential, based on information from the California Geological Survey (ABAG, 2004b). This zone is located between the existing Corporation Yard and the UPN tower apartment buildings, just northeast of North State Drive Regulatory Setting The following laws, ordinances, regulations, and standards will apply to campus development and will minimize the potential for impacts related to geology and soils. Federal Clean Water Act. The Clean Water Act empowers the U.S. EPA with regulation of wastewater and stormwater discharges into surface waters by using National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits and pretreatment standards. At the state level, these permits are issued by the Regional Water Quality Control Boards, but the U.S. EPA may retain jurisdiction at its discretion. The Clean Water Act s primary application for geology and soils is with respect to the control of soil erosion during construction. State California Building Code. The California Building Code (CBC) contains the minimum standards for grading, building siting, development, seismic design, and construction in California. Local standards other than the CBC may be adopted if those standards are stricter. The CBC includes the standards associated with seismic engineering detailed in the Uniform Building Code of Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act. The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (California Public Resources Code Section 25523(a); 20 CCR 1752(b) and (c); 1972 (amended 1994)) was passed in 1972 to mitigate the hazard of surface faulting to structures for human occupancy. The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act's main purpose is to prevent the construction of buildings used for human occupancy on the surface trace of active faults. Before a project can be permitted, cities and counties must require a geologic investigation to demonstrate that a proposed building will not be constructed across active faults. A licensed geologist must prepare an evaluation and written report of a specific site. If an active fault is found, a structure for human occupancy cannot be placed over the trace of the fault and must be set back from the fault, generally 50 feet. The SF State campus is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault zone. Seismic Hazards Mapping Act. The California Public Resources Code Chapter 7.8, 1990 Seismic Hazards Mapping Act allows the lead agency to withhold permits until geologic investigations are conducted and mitigation measures are incorporated into plans. The Seismic Hazards Mapping Act addresses not only seismically induced hazards but also expansive soils, settlement, and slope stability. The Seismic Hazards Mapping Act will be relevant to soil conditions at the campus. Campus Master Plan Draft EIR _Geology.doc\25-JAN-07\

7 4.5.2 Impacts and Mitigation Measures Standards of Significance The following standards of significance are based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. For purposes of this EIR, the project will have a significant impact with regard to hazards if it will: Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault. Strong seismic ground shaking, seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction, landslides. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water. The above standards are further addressed in the evaluation of impacts with the following exceptions. The standard related to septic tanks is not further evaluated in this section, as the campus does not utilize septic facilities. Additionally, as expansive soils have not been identified on the SF State campus in previous geotechnical investigations, the standard related to expansive soils will not be further addressed in this section Analytical Method The potential for impacts associated with site geologic conditions were evaluated through the review of: (1) prior geotechnical investigations conducted for campus construction projects, including site-specific boring information; (2) prior environmental review documents for campus construction projects; (3) regional and state data related to geologic, seismic, and soils conditions (e.g., seismic hazard mapping prepared by the U.S. Geological Survey, the California Geological Survey, and the California Division of Mines and Geology); and (4) relevant federal and state regulations. The analysis compares identified impacts to the standards of significance stated above and determines the impact s level of significance under CEQA. If the impact is determined to be significant, the analysis identifies feasible mitigation measures to eliminate the impact or reduce it to a less-than-significant level. If the impact cannot be reduced to a less-than-significant level after implementation of all feasible mitigation measures, then the impact is identified as significant and unavoidable. The project s potential contribution to cumulative impacts is also identified. 4.5_Geology.doc\25-JAN-07\ San Francisco State University

8 Campus Master Plan Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impact GEO-1: Significance: Mitigation GEO-1: Residual Significance: Development under the proposed Campus Master Plan will not expose people and structures on campus to substantial adverse effects associated with fault rupture, but could result in substantial adverse effects related to seismic ground shaking or seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction, lateral spreading, landslides, and/or settlement. Potentially significant Where existing geotechnical information is not adequate, detailed geotechnical investigations shall be performed for areas that will support buildings or foundations. Such investigations for building or foundation projects located in the valley portion of the SF State campus will comply with the California Geological Survey s Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California (Special Publication 117), which specifically address the mitigation of liquefaction and landslide hazards in designated Seismic Hazard Zones (CGS, 1997). All recommendations of the geotechnical investigations will be incorporated into project designs. Less than significant Despite the fact that the SF State campus is located in a seismically active region of California, no active or potentially active faults have been identified on or near the campus. As indicated previously, the nearest fault is the San Bruno Fault, approximately 0.7 mile southwest of the project. Based on the distance to the nearest active fault and the conclusions of prior geotechnical evaluations, the potential for fault rupture on the site is very low. Therefore, there is no potential for adverse effects related to fault rupture on the campus. Severe seismic ground shaking and related ground failure is a possibility in the area of the SF State campus. As indicated in the Environmental Setting section, the valley portion of the campus has potential for ground failure related to liquefaction, settlement, and landslide; while the remainder of the campus has some potential for effects related to settlement in areas with loose surficial fills. To address these types of concerns, the SF State campus routinely performs geotechnical investigations that evaluate the potential for liquefaction, settlement, and other types of ground failure at each building site. These reports include recommendations applicable to foundation design, earthwork, and site preparation to minimize or avoid the potential for building damage and injury. The campus will implement Mitigation GEO-1 to ensure that such investigations will continue to be performed as the campus develops under the proposed Campus Master Plan, and that the recommendations of such investigations are incorporated into project designs. Moreover, the design of all future projects will comply with the California Building Code, which includes specific provisions for structural seismic safety. Future projects will also be subject to review by the CSU Seismic Review Board. As indicated in the Environmental Setting section, the CDMC has designated the valley portion of the campus as a Seismic Hazard Zone for liquefaction potential, and the CGS has designated one isolated Campus Master Plan Draft EIR _Geology.doc\25-JAN-07\

9 area on the SF State campus as a Seismic Hazard Zone for landslide potential. As a result of these designations, the future construction of the proposed Gymnasium/Recreation-Wellness Center located in the valley will be required to comply with the California Geological Survey s Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California (Special Publication 117), which specifically address the mitigation of liquefaction and landslide hazards in designated Seismic Hazard Zones (CGS, 1997). Mitigation GEO-1 requires that geotechnical investigations for proposed buildings and/or foundations in the valley portion of the campus will be conducted in accordance with these guidelines. It should also be noted that the concern raised by a commenter during the NOP period that proposed large new buildings (e.g., the hotel) could potentially result in damage to adjacent development will also be addressed through the implementation of recommendations from site-specific geotechnical investigations, compliance with the California Building Code, and review of projects by the CSU Seismic Review Board. Overall, with implementation of Mitigation GEO-1, development under the proposed Campus Master Plan will not expose people and structures on campus to substantial adverse effects associated with seismic ground shaking or seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction, lateral spreading, landslides, and/or settlement. Impact GEO-2: Significance: Mitigation GEO-2: Residual Significance: Development under the proposed Campus Master Plan will not result in substantial erosion of soils during construction. Less than significant Mitigation not required Less than significant Construction of facilities anticipated under the proposed Campus Master Plan will result in short-term soil-disturbing activities that could lead to increased erosion including cut and fill, grading, trenching, boring, and removal of trees and other vegetation. To comply with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements for construction site storm water discharges, projects involving construction sites that are 1 acre or more are required to prepare and implement a storm water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP). Appropriate erosion-control measures will be incorporated into each SWPPP and implemented during site preparation, grading, and construction. These measures will include but are not limited to the following: design and construction of cut and fill slopes in a manner that will minimize erosion, protection of exposed slope areas, control of surface flows over exposed soils, use of wetting or sealing agents or sedimentation ponds, limiting soil excavation in high winds, construction of beams and runoff diversion ditches, and use of sediment traps, such as hay bales. Following construction of individual projects, erosion potential will be very low because future project sites will be covered by buildings, pavement, and/or landscaping. Therefore, the impact related to erosion and sedimentation will be less than significant. Erosion issues related to the effects of alterations to predevelopment storm water runoff patterns are discussed in Section 4.7, Hydrology and Water Quality. 4.5_Geology.doc\25-JAN-07\ San Francisco State University

10 Cumulative Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impact GEO-3: Significance: Mitigation GEO-3: Residual Significance: Cumulative development, including the development on campus under the proposed Campus Master Plan, could expose people or structures to potential adverse effects involving seismic ground shaking and related ground failure. Less than significant Mitigation not required Less than significant The broader geographic area for the analysis of cumulative impacts involving risks associated with earthquakes and geologic hazards is all of the City and County of San Francisco. New development throughout San Francisco will comply with the current seismic provisions of the CBC and local building codes. These state and local requirements are designed to ensure that structures developed in regions prone to significant ground shaking can withstand the likely stress that would result. Compliance with the CBC by the development community, including the SF State campus, will ensure that cumulative effects involving seismic ground shaking and related ground failure will be less than significant. It is reasonable to assume that San Francisco will enforce the seismic provisions of the CBC on new development and significant adverse impacts will be avoided References Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). 2003a. Modeled Shaking Intensity Map for San Francisco, 1906 San Francisco Earthquake. October. Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). 2003b. Modeled Shaking Intensity Map for San Francisco, 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake. Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Earthquake Program, 2004a. Liquefaction Susceptibility Map. April. Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Earthquake Program. 2004b. California Geological Survey Seismic Hazard Zones of Required Investigation (Landslides). April. California Building Standards Commission California Building Code, Title 24, Part 2. California Division of Mines and Geology State of California Seismic Hazard Zones. City and County of San Francisco Official Map. November. California Geological Survey. 1997a. Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California. Special Publication 117. March 13. City and County of San Francisco, Planning Department.1997b San Francisco General Plan. Community Safety Element. Campus Master Plan Draft EIR _Geology.doc\25-JAN-07\

11 Dames & Moore Geotechnical Investigation. The Village at Centennial Square Student Apartments. San Francisco State University. March. Frankel, A.D., Petersen, M.D., Mueller, C.S., Haller, K.J., Wheeler, R.L., Leyendecker, E.V., Wesson, R.L., Harmsen, S.C., Cramer, C.H., Perkins, D.M., and Rukstalles, K.S Documentation for the 2002 Update of the National Seismic Hazard Maps. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report (U.S. Geological Survey website: eqint.cr.usgs.gov). Harding Lawson Associates Geotechnical Investigation Faculty Office/Laboratory/Gymnasium Building San Francisco State University. April. International Conference of Building Officials. 1997c. Uniform Building Code. ICBO. Whittier, California. Kleinfelder Geotechnical Investigation Report Proposed Emergency Generator Installation San Francisco State University. San Francisco, California. April. San Francisco State University Creative Arts Building Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration. Prepared by URS Corporation. United States Geological Survey (USGS) Preliminary Geologic Map of the San Francisco Wouth 7.5 Quadrangle and Part of the Hunters Point 7.5 Quadrangle. San Francisco Bay Area, California. Prepared by M. G. Bonilla. Wagner, D.L., Bortugno, E.J., and McJunken, R.D Geologic Map of the San Francisco-San Jose Quadrangle. 4.5_Geology.doc\25-JAN-07\ San Francisco State University

12

GEOLOGY AND SOILS. This chapter summarizes geologic and geotechnical aspects of the site as they relate to the Project.

GEOLOGY AND SOILS. This chapter summarizes geologic and geotechnical aspects of the site as they relate to the Project. 9 GEOLOGY AND SOILS INTRODUCTION This chapter summarizes geologic and geotechnical aspects of the site as they relate to the Project. This chapter utilizes information from the following reports prepared

More information

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS G. GEOLOGY AND SOILS

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS G. GEOLOGY AND SOILS IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS G. GEOLOGY AND SOILS The following section is a summary of the geotechnical report conducted for the proposed project. The Report of Geotechnical Investigation Proposed

More information

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS E. GEOLOGY AND SOILS

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS E. GEOLOGY AND SOILS IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS E. GEOLOGY AND SOILS The following section is a summary of the geotechnical report conducted for the Proposed Project. The Geotechnical Engineering Investigation (the

More information

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS E. GEOLOGY/SOILS

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS E. GEOLOGY/SOILS IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS E. GEOLOGY/SOILS Except where otherwise noted, the following Section is based on the Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Medical Office Buildings and Mixed-Use

More information

Setting MOUNTAIN HOUSE NEIGHBORHOODS I AND J INITIAL STUDY 5. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Issue

Setting MOUNTAIN HOUSE NEIGHBORHOODS I AND J INITIAL STUDY 5. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Issue Issue Less Than Significant or No Impact Potential Significant Impact Adequately Addressed in MEIR MEIR Required Additional Review: No Significant Impact Less Than Significant Impact Due to Mitigation

More information

Impact : Changes to Existing Topography (Less than Significant)

Impact : Changes to Existing Topography (Less than Significant) 4.2 Land Resources 4.2.1 Alternative A Proposed Action Impact 4.2.1-1: Changes to Existing Topography (Less than Significant) Development of the project site would involve grading and other earthwork as

More information

9. GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERALS

9. GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERALS June 28, 2018 Page 9-1 9. GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERALS This EIR chapter describes the existing geological, soil, and mineral conditions in the planning area. The chapter includes the regulatory framework

More information

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS E. GEOLOGY AND SOILS

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS E. GEOLOGY AND SOILS IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS E. GEOLOGY AND SOILS The following analysis is based on the Geotechnical Investigation Report, Proposed Mid-Rise Multi- Family Residential Development Project Wetherly

More information

5.11 Geology and Soils

5.11 Geology and Soils 5.11 Geology and Soils 5.11 GEOLOGY AND SOILS This section evaluates the geologic and seismic conditions within the City of Azusa and evaluates the potential for geologic hazard impacts associated with

More information

3E. Geology and Soils

3E. Geology and Soils INTRODUCTION The purpose of this chapter is to evaluate the proposed project s impacts on local geological features and whether it would expose people or structures to adverse geological impacts. Potential

More information

4.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

4.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS 4.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS This section addresses the project site geology and soils and analyzes potential changes that would result from development of the Wye Specific Plan project. 4.5.1 Environmental Setting

More information

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS E. GEOLOGY/SOILS

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS E. GEOLOGY/SOILS IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS E. GEOLOGY/SOILS The following discussion is based upon information contained in the Hollywood Redevelopment Plan Amendment EIR and a letter prepared by Geotechnologies,

More information

5. Environmental Analysis

5. Environmental Analysis 5.3 GEOLOGY AND SOILS The potential geology and soils impacts associated with development within The Platinum Triangle have been fully analyzed in two previous EIRs, including: Anaheim Stadium Area Master

More information

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS E. GEOLOGY AND SOILS

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS E. GEOLOGY AND SOILS IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS E. GEOLOGY AND SOILS INTRODUCTION This section evaluates potential impacts related to geology, including seismicity, and soils associated with development of the proposed

More information

GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND SEISMICITY

GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND SEISMICITY 4.9 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND SEISMICITY 4.9.1 Introduction Information about the geological conditions and seismic hazards in the study area was summarized in the FEIR, and was based on the Geotechnical Exploration

More information

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS G. GEOLOGY AND SOILS

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS G. GEOLOGY AND SOILS IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS G. GEOLOGY AND SOILS INTRODUCTION The information and analysis in this section is based primarily on the following report, which is included in Appendix IV.G of this EIR:

More information

4.9 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

4.9 GEOLOGY AND SOILS 4.9 GEOLOGY AND SOILS 4.9.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS TOPOGRAPHY AND RELIEF Zone 40 is located in the central portion of Sacramento County. The topography of the county is represented by three physiographic

More information

4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS The analysis in this Subsection is based, in part, on information contained in four (4) reports prepared by Southern California Geotechnical that assessed the existing surface and subsurface geologic conditions.

More information

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS C. GEOLOGY/SOILS

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS C. GEOLOGY/SOILS IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS C. GEOLOGY/SOILS The following section is a summary of the preliminary geotechnical consultation conducted for the Proposed Project. The Report of Geotechnical Engineering

More information

3.6 Geology, Soils, and Seismicity

3.6 Geology, Soils, and Seismicity 0 0... Existing Conditions... Regulatory Setting Federal There are no federal laws, regulations, or standards related to geology and soils that are applicable to the Proposed Project. State Alquist-Priolo

More information

4.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

4.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS 4.5.1 Setting 4.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS a. Regional Geology. The is located in the south central Santa Cruz Mountains in the heart of the Central Coast ranges of California. This is a seismically active region

More information

4.5 Geology and Soils

4.5 Geology and Soils Environmental Impact Analysis Geology and Soils 4.5 Geology and Soils This section assesses potential impacts related to geologic and soil hazards. 4.5.1 Setting a. Topography and Geology San Leandro is

More information

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS F. GEOLOGY AND SOILS

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS F. GEOLOGY AND SOILS IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS F. GEOLOGY AND SOILS INTRODUCTION This section of the DEIR evaluates potential impacts to the project site s geologic environment that may result from implementation of

More information

Geology, Soils, and Seismicity

Geology, Soils, and Seismicity Section 3.8 Geology, Soils, and Seismicity Introduction This section generally evaluates the effects of the alternatives analyzed in this Supplemental DEIS with regard to geology, soils and seismicity.

More information

3.8 Geology/Soils. Environmental Setting. Topography. Geology and Soils

3.8 Geology/Soils. Environmental Setting. Topography. Geology and Soils 3.8 Geology/Soils This section examines whether implementation of the 2004 Land Use Mobility Elements, Zoning Code Revisions, and Central District Specific Plan the will expose people or structures to

More information

Section 4.6 Geology and Soils Introduction

Section 4.6 Geology and Soils Introduction 4.6 invisible_toc_marker County of Kern Section 4.6 Geology and Soils 4.6.1 Introduction As described in Chapter 2 of this Supplemental EIR (SEIR), an EIR was previously certified for the Alta Oak Creek

More information

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS G. GEOLOGY AND SOILS

IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS G. GEOLOGY AND SOILS IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS G. GEOLOGY AND SOILS The following section is based upon the City of El Segundo General Plan and General Plan EIR and addresses the following geologic issues: soil erosion,

More information

4.6 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERAL RESOURCES

4.6 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERAL RESOURCES Ascent Environmental 4.6 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERAL RESOURCES This section of the EIR describes the existing geology, soils, and mineral resources at and in the vicinity of the project site and analyzes

More information

Date: April 2, 2014 Project No.: Prepared For: Mr. Adam Kates CLASSIC COMMUNITIES 1068 E. Meadow Circle Palo Alto, California 94303

Date: April 2, 2014 Project No.: Prepared For: Mr. Adam Kates CLASSIC COMMUNITIES 1068 E. Meadow Circle Palo Alto, California 94303 City of Newark - 36120 Ruschin Drive Project Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Appendix C: Geologic Information FirstCarbon Solutions H:\Client (PN-JN)\4554\45540001\ISMND\45540001 36120

More information

4.5 GEOLOGY AND SEISMICITY

4.5 GEOLOGY AND SEISMICITY 4.5 GEOLOGY AND SEISMICITY INTRODUCTION This section identifies the potential for geologic and seismic hazards to occur on or near the proposed project site. Issues of concern include suitability of soil

More information

4.L GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND SEISMICITY 4.L.1 INTRODUCTION

4.L GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND SEISMICITY 4.L.1 INTRODUCTION 4.L GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND SEISMICITY 4.L.1 INTRODUCTION This section addresses potential environmental effects of the proposed TOD Plan for Downtown Inglewood and Fairview Heights related to geology, soils,

More information

3.4 GEOLOGY AND SOILS Environmental Setting

3.4 GEOLOGY AND SOILS Environmental Setting 3.4 GEOLOGY AND SOILS This section discusses the existing geologic and soils conditions and evaluates the potential impacts related to geology and soils as a result of the proposed project. This section

More information

4.5 GEOLOGY, SOILS AND SEISMICITY

4.5 GEOLOGY, SOILS AND SEISMICITY 4.5 This section summarizes information on geology, soils and seismic hazards, and mineral resources in the Truckee area, as well as potential area-wide geologic hazards and regional seismic characteristics

More information

Converse Consultants Geotechnical Engineering, Environmental & Groundwater Science, Inspection & Testing Services

Converse Consultants Geotechnical Engineering, Environmental & Groundwater Science, Inspection & Testing Services Converse Consultants Geotechnical Engineering, Environmental & Groundwater Science, Inspection & Testing Services Ms. Rebecca Mitchell Mt. San Antonio College Facilities Planning & Management 1100 North

More information

ENGINEER S CERTIFICATION OF FAULT AREA DEMONSTRATION (40 CFR )

ENGINEER S CERTIFICATION OF FAULT AREA DEMONSTRATION (40 CFR ) PLATTE RIVER POWER AUTHORITY RAWHIDE ENERGY STATION BOTTOM ASH TRANSFER (BAT) IMPOUNDMENTS LARIMER COUNTY, CO ENGINEER S CERTIFICATION OF FAULT AREA DEMONSTRATION (40 CFR 257.62) FOR COAL COMBUSTION RESIDUALS

More information

4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS 4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS The purpose of the Geology and Soils section is to evaluate whether the proposed project would expose people or structures to major geotechnical hazards or substantially contribute

More information

4.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

4.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS 4.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS This section discusses the proposed project s potential impacts relating to geologic hazards. This section is partially based on the Preliminary Soil Engineering and Geologic Hazards

More information

4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS 4.6 GEOLOGY AND OIL 4.6.1 ummary able 4.6-1 summarizes the identified environmental impacts, proposed mitigation measures, and residual impacts of the proposed project with regard to geology and soils.

More information

5.9 Geology and Soils

5.9 Geology and Soils 5.9 Geology and Soils 5.9 GEOLOGY AND SOILS This section evaluates the geologic and seismic conditions within the City of Azusa and evaluates the potential for geologic hazard impacts associated with

More information

5.3 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

5.3 GEOLOGY AND SOILS 5.3 GEOLOGY AND SOILS SUMMARY The impact analysis presented in this section evaluates project impacts related to geologic hazards. The geotechnical analyses prepared for the project concluded that the

More information

5. Environmental Analysis

5. Environmental Analysis 5.4 This section of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) evaluates the potential for implementation of the San Gorgonio Pass Campus Master Plan to impact geological and soil resources. The analysis

More information

4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

4.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. MARCH 2008 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT YUCCA VALLEY RETAIL SPECIFIC PLAN The purpose of the Geology and Soils section is to evaluate whether the proposed project would create

More information

2. Initial Summary of Preliminary Expert Opinion of Converse and Psomas Reports

2. Initial Summary of Preliminary Expert Opinion of Converse and Psomas Reports UNITED WALNUT TAXPAYERS PRELIMINARY REVIEW OF NEGATIVE GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF CONSTRUCTING EARTHFILL PAD FOR A SOLAR FARM ON THE WEST PARCEL - DRAFT 1. Introduction A licensed Engineering

More information

IV. Environmental Impact Analysis D. Geology

IV. Environmental Impact Analysis D. Geology IV. Environmental Impact Analysis D. Geology 1. Introduction This section evaluates potential geologic hazards and soil conditions associated with the proposed project, including fault rupture, ground

More information

Guidelines for Site-Specific Seismic Hazard Reports for Essential and Hazardous Facilities and Major and Special-Occupancy Structures in Oregon

Guidelines for Site-Specific Seismic Hazard Reports for Essential and Hazardous Facilities and Major and Special-Occupancy Structures in Oregon Guidelines for Site-Specific Seismic Hazard Reports for Essential and Hazardous Facilities and Major and Special-Occupancy Structures in Oregon By the Oregon Board of Geologist Examiners and the Oregon

More information

5.6 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND SEISMICITY

5.6 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND SEISMICITY This section discusses the geology of the Project area and general vicinity and analyzes hazards related to geology and soils, such as potential exposure of people and property to geologic hazards, landform

More information

5.4 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

5.4 GEOLOGY AND SOILS 5.4 GEOLOGY AND SOILS INTRODUCTION This section describes the geology and soils of the project site and analyzes issues such as potential exposure of people and future improvements to geologic and seismic

More information

IV. Environmental Impact Analysis D. Geology and Soils

IV. Environmental Impact Analysis D. Geology and Soils IV. Environmental Impact Analysis D. Geology and Soils 1. Introduction This section evaluates geologic and soils hazards that could potentially result due to implementation of the proposed project. Geologic

More information

3.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

3.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS This section describes the geology of the project site and surrounding vicinity and analyzes issues such as potential exposure of people and future improvements to geologic hazards, alterations to terrain,

More information

3.1.3 Geology and Soils

3.1.3 Geology and Soils 3.1.3 Geology and Soils This section addresses the potential geology and soils impacts associated with implementation of The Villages Escondido Country Club Project (Project). The section describes the

More information

4.4 GEOLOGY AND SOILS Existing Conditions

4.4 GEOLOGY AND SOILS Existing Conditions 4.4 GEOLOGY AND SOILS This section evaluates the direct, indirect, short-term, and long-term effects of the proposed Cypress College Facilities Master Plan (proposed project) on geology, soils, and exposure

More information

NOA ASSESSMENT HARRIS QUARRY MENDOCINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA TABLE OF CONTENTS

NOA ASSESSMENT HARRIS QUARRY MENDOCINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA TABLE OF CONTENTS NOA ASSESSMENT HARRIS QUARRY MENDOCINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction... 1 Scope of Services... 1 Project Location and Description... 1 Geologic Setting... 1 Regional Geology... 1 Site

More information

4.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

4.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS 4.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS This section discusses the Project s potential impacts relating to geologic hazards. This section is partially based on the Geotechnical Engineering Report included in Appendix E.

More information

4.10 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND SEISMICITY

4.10 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND SEISMICITY 4.10 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND SEISMICITY 4.10.1 INTRODUCTION This section describes the geology of the SVRTC and the susceptibility of site soils to seismically induced hazards. Faults in the corridor and past

More information

3.5 Geology and Soils

3.5 Geology and Soils 3.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS The following reports have been prepared to analyze the geological impacts of the proposed project and are included in their entirety in Appendices F1 through F7 of this Draft Environmental

More information

SLOPE STABILITY EVALUATION AND ACCEPTANCE STANDARDS

SLOPE STABILITY EVALUATION AND ACCEPTANCE STANDARDS INFORMATION BULLETIN / PUBLIC - BUILDING CODE REFERENCE NO.: LABC 7006.3, 7014.1 Effective: 01-01-2017 DOCUMENT NO.: P/BC 2017-049 Revised: 12-21-2016 Previously Issued As: P/BC 2014-049 SLOPE STABILITY

More information

3.3 GEOLOGY AND SOILS Environmental Setting Geologic Conditions

3.3 GEOLOGY AND SOILS Environmental Setting Geologic Conditions 3.3 GEOLOGY AND SOILS This section describes existing geologic and soil conditions, such as faults or unstable soils, and analyzes potential impacts that could pose hazards for the Fountain Valley Crossings

More information

4.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

4.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS 4.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS Geologic and soil conditions on campus are generally as described in the 1989 LRDP EIR. Relevant information from the Earth Resources section (pages 147-157) in Volume I of that document

More information

4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS This section describes the geology of the Planning Area and analyzes issues such as potential exposure of people and property to geologic and soil hazards. In addition, potential seismic hazards such as

More information

SLOPE STABILITY EVALUATION AND ACCEPTANCE STANDARDS

SLOPE STABILITY EVALUATION AND ACCEPTANCE STANDARDS INFORMATION BULLETIN / PUBLIC - BUILDING CODE REFERENCE NO.: LAMC 98.0508 Effective: 1-26-84 DOCUMENT NO. P/BC 2002-049 Revised: 11-1-02 Previously Issued As: RGA #1-84 SLOPE STABILITY EVALUATION AND ACCEPTANCE

More information

3.4 Geology/Soils/Paleontological Resources

3.4 Geology/Soils/Paleontological Resources Section 3.4 Geology, Soils, and Paleontological Resources This section evaluates potential geology and soils impacts, and also paleontological impacts. The analysis is based on a preliminary geotechnical

More information

Sacramento Modesto Roseville Pleasanton September 19, 2013 Marcia Medina GHD Inc. 417 Montgomery Street, Suite 700 San Francisco, CA Subject: GE

Sacramento Modesto Roseville Pleasanton September 19, 2013 Marcia Medina GHD Inc. 417 Montgomery Street, Suite 700 San Francisco, CA Subject: GE Sacramento Modesto Roseville Pleasanton September 19, 2013 Marcia Medina GHD Inc. 417 Montgomery Street, Suite 700 San Francisco, CA 94104 Subject: GEOTECHNICAL REPORT AMENDMENT Stonybrook Creek Crossings

More information

3.0 SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL GEOTECHNICAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES

3.0 SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL GEOTECHNICAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES 3.0 SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL GEOTECHNICAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES This section summarizes the principal geotechnical conditions that occur in the project area. The potential impact that each condition

More information

4.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

4.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS 4.5.1 INTRODUCTION This resource section evaluates the potential environmental effects related to geology and soils from implementation of. The analysis includes a review of regional geology, seismicity

More information

4.4 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

4.4 GEOLOGY AND SOILS 4.4 GEOLOGY AND SOILS SUMMARY This section describes the existing geologic and soils conditions on the project site, and the potential for geotechnical hazards to affect the Via Princessa East Extension

More information

5.5 Geology, Soils and Seismicity

5.5 Geology, Soils and Seismicity 5.5 Geology, Soils and Seismicity 5.5.1 Introduction Information and recommendations presented in this section were taken from the original East Lake Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) [State

More information

4.2.5 Geology and Soils

4.2.5 Geology and Soils 4.2.5 Geology and Soils Introduction This section evaluates potential geologic, seismic, and soils (geological) impacts associated with construction and operation of the proposed (WVLCSP) project. Specifically,

More information

SURFACE GEOLOGY AND LIQUEFACTION SUSCEPTIBILITY IN THE INNER RIO GRANDE VALLEY NEAR ALBUQUERQUE, NEW MEXICO

SURFACE GEOLOGY AND LIQUEFACTION SUSCEPTIBILITY IN THE INNER RIO GRANDE VALLEY NEAR ALBUQUERQUE, NEW MEXICO SURFACE GEOLOGY AND LIQUEFACTION SUSCEPTIBILITY IN THE INNER RIO GRANDE VALLEY NEAR ALBUQUERQUE, NEW MEXICO Keith I. Kelson, Christopher S. Hitchcock, and Carolyn E. Randolph William Lettis & Associates,

More information

CHAPTER GEOLOGICALLY HAZARDOUS AREAS Applicability Regulations.

CHAPTER GEOLOGICALLY HAZARDOUS AREAS Applicability Regulations. CHAPTER 19.07 GEOLOGICALLY HAZARDOUS AREAS 19.07.010 Applicability. Geologically hazardous areas may pose a threat to the health and safety of citizens when incompatible development is sited in areas of

More information

3.18 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

3.18 GEOLOGY AND SOILS 3.18 GEOLOGY AND SOILS This section discusses geologic resource concerns as they relate to the environment, public safety, and project design both during construction and after completion of the project.

More information

GEOLOGY AND SOILS 7.1 INTRODUCTION 7.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Regulatory Context

GEOLOGY AND SOILS 7.1 INTRODUCTION 7.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Regulatory Context CHAPTER 7.0 GEOLOGY AND SOILS 7.1 INTRODUCTION This chapter describes the geologic and soils characteristics of Phases 1 and 2 of the proposed Plan area and evaluates the extent to which implementation

More information

PRELIMINARY WORKING DRAFT Work in Progress

PRELIMINARY WORKING DRAFT Work in Progress IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS H. MINERAL RESOURCES 1.0 INTRODUCTION This section addresses the potential impacts of the Proposed Project on mineral resources (i.e., sand, gravel and petroleum). The

More information

3.5 Geology, Soils, and Paleontology

3.5 Geology, Soils, and Paleontology 3.5 Geology, Soils, and Paleontology Overview of Impacts The analytical approach taken by this Subsequent EIR is described in Section 3.0 (Introduction to Environmental Analysis). The following section

More information

Section 3.5 Geology and Soils ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING GEOLOGIC SETTING

Section 3.5 Geology and Soils ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING GEOLOGIC SETTING Section 3.5 Geology and Soils This section discusses the environmental setting, existing conditions, regulatory context, and potential impacts of the project in relation to geology and soils. The information

More information

4.4 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

4.4 GEOLOGY AND SOILS Environmental Impacts Analysis: Geology and Soils 4.4 GEOLOGY AND SOILS This discussion addressed potential geologic impacts resulting from implementation of the proposed project. One study has been submitted

More information

8.0 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

8.0 GEOLOGY AND SOILS This section describes the current geologic and soil conditions at each of the Dollar General project sites and analyzes issues related to geology and soils. Geotechnical studies have been prepared for

More information

4.3 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

4.3 GEOLOGY AND SOILS 4.3 GEOLOGY AND SOILS This section describes the geology, soils, and seismicity of the Specific Plan area. The information presented below has been developed based on several sources of data. These sources

More information

Roy Pyle March 24, 2017 Chief Facilities Planner Contra Costa Community College District 500 North Court Street Martinez, CA 94533

Roy Pyle March 24, 2017 Chief Facilities Planner Contra Costa Community College District 500 North Court Street Martinez, CA 94533 State of California Natural Resources Agency Edmund G. Brown Jr., Governor Department of Conservation John G. Parrish, Ph.D., State Geologist California Geological Survey 801 K Street MS 12-31 Sacramento,

More information

4.6 GEOTECHNICAL RESOURCES

4.6 GEOTECHNICAL RESOURCES 4.6 GEOTECHNICAL RESOURCES 4.6.1 INTRODUCTION This section describes the existing geological setting of the project site, identifies associated regulatory requirements, evaluates potential impacts, and

More information

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT POLICY & PROCEDURE

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT POLICY & PROCEDURE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT POLICY & PROCEDURE Policy No: DSP-OO3 Release Date: January 1, 2014 Effective Date: January 1, 2014 Revision Date: March 1, 2018 TITLE: The City Policy for Site Specific

More information

Important Concepts. Earthquake hazards can be categorized as:

Important Concepts. Earthquake hazards can be categorized as: Lecture 1 Page 1 Important Concepts Monday, August 17, 2009 1:05 PM Earthquake Engineering is a branch of Civil Engineering that requires expertise in geology, seismology, civil engineering and risk assessment.

More information

5.5 Geology and Soils

5.5 Geology and Soils 5.5 Geology and Soils The analysis in this section of the EIR addresses the potential impacts associated with geology and soils that may occur due to implementation of the proposed Collier Park Renovations

More information

3.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

3.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS 3.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS This section of the EIR examines the regional and local geologic and soil characteristics of the project site and surrounding area. For the lagoon enhancement component, the analysis

More information

Downtown Anchorage Seismic Risk Assessment & Land Use Regulations to Mitigate Seismic Risk

Downtown Anchorage Seismic Risk Assessment & Land Use Regulations to Mitigate Seismic Risk Prepared for: The Municipality of Anchorage Planning Department and the Geotechnical Advisory Commission Downtown Anchorage Seismic Risk Assessment & Land Use Regulations to Mitigate Seismic Risk Prepared

More information

J.H. Campbell Generating Facility Pond A - Location Restriction Certification Report

J.H. Campbell Generating Facility Pond A - Location Restriction Certification Report J.H. Campbell Generating Facility Pond A - Location Restriction Certification Report Pursuant to: 40 CFR 257.60 40 CFR 257.61 40 CFR 257.62 40 CFR 257.63 40 CFR 257.64 Submitted to: Consumers Energy Company

More information

PHYSICAL SCIENCE FINAL

PHYSICAL SCIENCE FINAL PHYSICAL SCIENCE FINAL Liquefaction Doreen Wallace, Tesla Grogan, Amber Ward, Erik Garcia, Cinthia Salas, Alexis Albers Liquefaction What is it? Conditions needed How it works Effects of Liquefaction Soil

More information

3.12 Geology and Topography Affected Environment

3.12 Geology and Topography Affected Environment 3 Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences 3.12 Geology and Topography 3.12.1 Affected Environment 3.12.1.1 Earthquakes Sterling Highway MP 45 60 Project Draft SEIS The Kenai Peninsula is predisposed

More information

Section 5.7 Geology and Soils

Section 5.7 Geology and Soils Section 5.7 Section 5.7 5.7.1 PURPOSE This section describes the existing geologic, soil, and seismic conditions within the City of Artesia and identifies potential impacts that could result from implementation

More information

2.10 Geology/Soils/Seismic/Topography

2.10 Geology/Soils/Seismic/Topography 2.10 Geology/Soils/Seismic/Topography 2.10.1 Regulatory Setting This section discusses geology, soils, and seismic concerns as they relate to public safety and project design. Earthquakes are prime considerations

More information

3.9 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERALS

3.9 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERALS 3.9 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND MINERALS 3.9.1 INTRODUCTION This section covers three closely related topics: geology (including geologic hazards such as earthquakes), soils, and mineral resources. For each of

More information

4.5 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND SEISMICITY

4.5 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND SEISMICITY 4.5 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND SEISMICITY 4.5 GEOLOGY, SOILS, AND SEISMICITY INTRODUCTION The Geology, Soils, and Seismicity chapter of the EIR describes the geologic and soil characteristics of the (proposed

More information

CCR Surface Impoundment Location Restrictions Demonstration. MidAmerican Energy Company, Louisa Generating Station

CCR Surface Impoundment Location Restrictions Demonstration. MidAmerican Energy Company, Louisa Generating Station CCR Surface Impoundment Location Restrictions Demonstration MidAmerican Energy Company, Louisa Generating Station Final October 17, 2018 CCR Surface Impoundment Location Restrictions Demonstration Prepared

More information

4.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

4.5 GEOLOGY AND SOILS 4.5 The following chapter summarizes information concerning current geologic conditions at the EA Study Area. It also provides an evaluation of the potential environmental consequences of future development

More information

4.4 GEOLOGY, SOILS AND SEISMICITY

4.4 GEOLOGY, SOILS AND SEISMICITY 4.4 GEOLOGY, SOILS AND SEISMICITY This section of the EIR describes the regional geology, regional seismicity, topography and soil and subsurface conditions of the project area, which includes Coaches

More information

265 Dalewood Way alteration permit #2016/02/17/9761 June 30, 2016 Appeal #16-109 Deck at Rear due to conflict with Slope Protection Act A. Executive Summary: We are in receipt of the Notification of Structural

More information

3.10 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

3.10 GEOLOGY AND SOILS 3.10 GEOLOGY AND SOILS This section evaluates the potential impacts of the proposed project on geology, soils, and seismic hazards. This evaluation is based on the Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation

More information

Should you have any questions regarding this clarification, please contact the undersigned at or (925)

Should you have any questions regarding this clarification, please contact the undersigned at or (925) October 8, 2015 Revised October 13, 2015 Contra Costa Community College District 500 Court Street Martinez, CA 94553 Attention: Ron Johnson Subject: Clarification of Grading Requirements Diablo Valley

More information

No comments related to geology and soils were received during public review of the Notice of Preparation.

No comments related to geology and soils were received during public review of the Notice of Preparation. Ascent Environmental 4.5 Geology and Soils GEOLOGY AND SOILS 4.5.1 Introduction This section identifies and evaluates potential impacts that could result from geologic or soil conditions as a result of

More information

4.3 GEOLOGY AND SOILS

4.3 GEOLOGY AND SOILS Introduction This section of the EIR is based on a site visit by Mr. Steven Bond, a certified engineering geologist and registered geologist, and his review of related studies. The references are included

More information

appendix e: geologic and seismic hazards

appendix e: geologic and seismic hazards appendix e: geologic and seismic hazards CONTENTS: E-2 Fault Rupture E-3 Ground Shaking E-5 Seismic Ground Deformation E-5 Liquification E-6 Seismically Induces Landslide E-6 Landslide Hazard E The following

More information