HomeMy WebLinkAbout18-Public Works
-
File Nort.50 ~/'V
CITY OF SAN BERNQDINO - REQUEST FWI COUNCIL Jd:TION
From: ROGER G. HARDGRAVE REC'D.-AOM~~l:. Adoption of Procedures and
Guidelines -- Liquefaction
Dept: Public Works/Engineering IS8S Jljl \ 8 Ar.\ Ii): 05 Investigations and Reports
Date: 7-14-89
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
08-16-82 -- Resolution No. 82-345 adopted to establish procedure"
and guidelines for evaluating the hazard of liquefac-
tion of soils.
03-23-89 -- Legislative Review Committee reviewed proposed pro-
cedures and guidelines for evaluating liquefaction
potential. Concern was expressed over reference to
Water Department maps. Item continued.
07-17-89' -- First reading of Ordinance creating Section 15.08 of
San Bernardino Municipal Code Liquefaction
Potential, conducted.
Recommended motion:
Adopt resolution.
cc: Marshall Julian
Jim Richardson
Jim Penman
e-Brad Kilger
Herb Wessel
Larry Reed
Contact person: Gene R. Klatt
Staff Report &
Supporting data attached: Resolution
Phone:
')125
Ward:
All
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Amount: N / A
Source: (Acct. No.)
(Acct, Descriotion)
Finance:
Council Notes:
...<:: n....:"
AClenda Item No.. 1a'
"CITY OF SAN BERNCRDINO - REQUEST .oR COUNCIL ACTION
STAFF REPORT
Concurrently, with the second reading of the Ordinance
on Liquefaction, adoption of the attached resolution will set
forth the guidelines for the preparation of the required reports
and the contents of the reports.
In meetings with Planning, Building and Safety, Water
Department, City Attorney's Office, Consulting Soils Engineers
and others, it was determined that a guideline for the
preparation of reports would be useful and necessary to insure
adequate compliance with the adopted ordinance.
After much discussion and consideration, agreement was
reached on the content, format and submittal process for such
reports. The attached resolution sets forth these requirements.
Staff recommends the adoption of the attached resolution
adopting procedures and guidelines for liquefaction reports.
7-14-89
75.0264
o
o
1
RESOLUTION NO.
2
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ADOPTING
3 PROCEDURES AND GUIDELINES FOR LIQUEFACTION INVESTIGATIONS AND
REPORTS REQUIRED BY CHAPTER 15.08 OF THE SAN BERNARDINO MUNICIPAL
4 CODE; ,AND RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 82-345.
5 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS:
6
SECTION 1. Administrative procedures/Guidelines for
7 Liquefaction Investigations and Reports.
8 In accordance with Chapter 15.08 of San Bernardino
9
The Director of Public Works/City Engineer has
10 established the following procedures/guidelines for liquefaction
Municipal Code.
11 investigations and reports.
12
13
14
SECTION 2. The Investigation.
A.
Purpose.
The investigation shall be designed and
carried out to determine the potential for liquefaction.
For
15 complex, essential structures, the investigation shall be as
16
thorough as current technology will permit.
Investigations may
17 also require the expertise of a registered geologist, or
18 registered engineering geologist, since both geologic/seismic
19 elements and quantitative materials testing will be involved.
20
Site investigation.
B.
21
Seismic factors.
The history of earthquake
1.
22
activity and recurrence intervals of damaging earthquakes
23
shall be discussed.
A design earthquake shall be
24
postulated, with a best estimate of the following
25
characteristics as they will be experienced at the site:
26
Richter magnitude.
Maximum Probable RoOk Accel~ration from
a.
27
b.
28
PZ/dys
July 10, 1989
1
10
11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
o
o
various faults, (as shown in the Seismic Element
of the General Plan) that produces the highest
value.
c.
Time (duration) of strong shaking.
d.
Dominant frequencies of seismic spectra.
e.
In no case shall the rock acceleration be
less than the amount indicated on the map in the
Seismic Element of the General Plan entitled:
'Maximum Credible Rock Acceleration from
Earthquakes. '
2. Hydrologic conditions.
The historical record of
12 depths to the ground water table (or saturated conditions) shall
13
be determined for the site from City records.
The depth to
14 ground water used in the analysis, as determined by borings,
15 shall be stated, but design will be based on a level no less than
16 ten (10) feet.
17
18
3. Subsurface Investigation.
Borings shall be used to
determine the necessary subsurface information.
They should
19 extend to a minimum depth of fifty (50) feet and be spaced across
21
20 the site so that significant variations in subsurface,conditions
23
22 be:
,will be defined.
24
25
26
27
28
a.
b.
Examples of significant subsurface data would
drilling rate,
standard penetration test at every five (5) feet
from surface ASTM No. D 1586-67,
c.
d.
PZ;dys
July 10, 1989
classification, definition, and depth of soils,
general stratigraphy.
2
10
o
o
1
For essential projects, more subsurface information
2 utilizing pits, trenches and geophysical investigations may be
3
necessary.
They allow direct observation of the undisturbed
4 vertical section so that evidence of liquefaction such as sand
5 boils, sand dikes, or chaotic disturbance of the soil or sediment
6 can be viewed. Also, horizontal and vertical permeability can be
7 better estimated from a view of the undisturbed layering.
8 Furthermore, the ancient sedimentary environment of the site can
9 . be interpreted from the trench of pit walls.
4.
Geophysical Investigation.
Refraction seismic
11 techniques may be useful to define the ground water table, but
12 this indirect method should only be used to confirm or extend
13 downhole or trench data.
14
15 The report may be simple or comprehensive, depending upon
SECTION 3. The Report.
16 the vulnerability of the site to liquefaction and the kinds of
17 buildings or other structures to be built. The following topics
18 should be considered and included if pertinent.
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
A. Text
1.
Site location relative to established property
boundaries.
2.
City reference number (CUP, ROP, Tract No., ,etc.)
3.
4.
Purpose and scope of investigation.
Design earthquake parameters (discussed above).
5.
Description of kind and location of proposed
construction.
6.
Procedures and techniques used in the
PZ/dys
July 10. 1989
3
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
o
o
1
investigation.
Detailed description of subsurface conditions and
2
7.
3
results of quantitative testing.
4
B. Conclusions and Recommendations.
5
1.
Identify the location and distribution of areas
6
vulnerable to liquefaction and estimate the depth of
7
zones of possible failure due to liquefaction.
8
2.
Identify critical parameters of the design
9
earthquake:
fault, magnitude, accelerations,
duration, frequency, etc.
3.
Identify procedures for reducing hazard of
liquefaction.
a.
geotechnical.
b. structural.
C. Documentation of Report.
1.
2.
PZ/dys
July 10, 1989
Include index map showing location of s~te.
Include site plan which shall display:
a.
topography (if available);
b.
proposed building location;
c.
locations of borings, wells, trenches;
d.
surface geological features.
3.
Include logs of borings (with blow counts), wells
trenches.
4.
Include sample descriptions and locations.
5.
Include sample analysis and tests, based upon the
penetration analysis developed by Dr. Bolton Seed, or
other approved method.
4
10
11
12
o
o
1
6.
Include graphs and charts, as needed to
2
demonstrate liquefaction potential.
3
4
7.
Include description of analytical. techniques
used.
5
8.
Include signatures and license numbers of
6
Registered Civil Engineers responsible for the report,
and any Registered Geologists that assisted in the
7
8
preparation.
9
9. Include a list of references utilized in report.
10. List final recommendations with references to
conclusions.
SECTION 4. Submittal.
13 Two copies of the required Liquefaction Report and
14 Mitigation Measures shall be submitted to the Director of Public
16
15 Works/City Engineer and approved prior to issuance of grading and
building permits.
If the Liquefaction Report and Mitigation
17 Measures are approved by the Director of Publiq Works/City
18 Engineer, a copy will be forwarded to the Director of Building
19
20 structural plans shall contain a statement that the building has
and Safety for reference in checking structural plans.
The
21 been designed in accordance with the Mitigation Measures
23
22 contained in the Liquefaction Report.
If the Liquefaction Report and M~tigation Measures
24 submitted to the Director of Public Works/City Engineer are
25 determined to be unacceptable,' the interested party may, appeal
26
this decision to the Mayor and Council.
No permits will be
27 issued prior to approval by the Director of Public Works/City
28
PZ/dys
July 10, 1989
5
o
o
1 Engineer or prior to an appeals decision by the Mayor and Common
2 Council approving the Liquefaction Report and Mitigation
3 Measures.
4 I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly
5 adopted by the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San
6 Bernardino at a meeting thereof, held on the
7 day of , 1989, by the following vote, to wit:
8 AYES: Council Members
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
9
of
NAYS:
ABSENT:
City Clerk
The foregoing resolution is hereby approved this
day
, 1989.
W. R. Holcomb, Mayor
Approved as to
form and legal content:
JAMES F. PENMAN,
City Attorney
I'
Ii 1~
BYU0><.h ' '~"-"....
PZ/dys
July 10, 1989
6
,
o
o
"TV ~~ S~N \\E'\N~,RiJ\Nt
~," I 'WI _,.."vi'
.,. :-.,,"'j t~ '~l.r' ~ '.
Hh:it..........,. . :r:' .~~~~:',.,
."'''EE' ..,. , ,"
: .'I.~!..1\i'" .~" . -,i "
NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF NEGATIVE DECLARATION 15 ~\ S O~
OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT 89 ~UG ,
THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO proposes to adopt a Negative Declaration
for the following projects. The Environmental Review Committee
found that the project will not have a significant effect on the
environment on the basis of the Initial Study and mitigation
measures (If applicable).
L
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 89-31 - Tenant improvements to an
existing office building to include classrooms and an admi-
nistration office for use as a night school located at 685 East
Carnegie Drive.
3.
REVIEW OF PLANS NO. 89-39 - To develop 16 single-family homes on
16 existing substandard lots located on Acacia Street between
28th and 29th Streets.
v-:.
PROPOSED LIQUEFACTION RESOLUTION - The City is proposing a reso-
lution to replace the existing resolution which regulates the
format and contents of any required liquefaction study.
Copies of the Initial Study are available for public review at the
Planning Department, 300 North "D" Street, San Bernardino, CA
92418, and the Feldheym Library, 555 West 6th Street, San
Bernardino, CA. Any environmental comments you have should be
received in this office no later than 4:00 p.m., August 30, 1989.
If you do not respond in writing, we will assume that you have no
opinions and/or recommendations on the above projects.
SUBMITTED: August, 15, 1989
PUBLISH: August 17, 1989
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DEPARTMENT
300 North "D" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
384-5057
CP
C5 NOPND81089
C Y OF SA'N BERNA
INO
INITIAL STUDY
Liquefaction Resolution
A Resolution of the City Council of San Bernardino to
regulate the preparation of Liquefaction Reports for
projects located in areas of the City of San Bernar-
dino which have been identified in the City's General
Plan as having a high or moderately high to moderate
, potential for Liquefaction in a major earthquake.
August 4, 1989
.
Prepared for:
Department of Public Works/City Engineer
Prepared by:
MICHAEL W. GRUBBS
Public Works/Engineering
City of San Bernardino
C Y OF SAN BERNA
INO
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS/CITY ENGINEER
INITIAL STUDY
Liquefaction is the phenomenon of soil behaving as a liquid
during a major earthquake. Studies have shown that liquefaction
is most likely to occur during hiah groundwater conditions in
non-cohesive soils (medium sands silts). Duringa liquefaction event,
soils lose a portion or all of their ability to support loads
sometimes resulting in upset and/or failure of building founda-
tions in the liquefaction area.
The General Plan has attempted to identify areas of the City
which have a high (H) or moderately high to moderate (MHM)
potential for liquefaction in the event of a major earthquake.
Since 1982, regulation of development within moderate and high
liquefaction potential areas has been carried out under Resolution
No. 82-345, which requires that s liquefaction report be prepared
for all new developments in the City determined high to moderate
zones (Zones A & 8) except single family wood frame detached, two
unit wood frame single story and additions up to 25% of the
original.
Resolution No. 82-345 was written after the 1978-80 floods and was
based on limited experience. In working with it over the years
we have found the requirements of the liquefaction to be ambiguous
and sometimes inadequate.
An Ordinance enabling regulation of development in the liquefac-
tion zones is currently under consideration by the City Council
and has been recommended for a negative declaration by the
Environmental Review Committee. This Resolution will satisfy
Section 15.08.070 of the proposed ordinance by defining the
requirements of liquefaction reports. '
>
-
-
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CHECKLIST
""'IIil
BACKGROYND
Application Number:
Project Description: Resolution to regulate the preparation of lique-
faction r~rts for develqpments within areas of the City which have been identi-
~;Qd ~c:!.h~u;ng high n:r mrvlo,...a't'oly high ton 1'TlfViQ,..~-t-Q pr"nJ:llhility nF li1.11,::r.fJ:llrtinn
~n a major earthquake.
Location: Al11J:llnrt tJit'hin t'ho J:lll""QJ:ll nf th,:lo r:it-y itiQnt-ifi.on in t-ho r~nQrJ:lll PlAn
as having a high or moderately high to moderate potential of liquefaction in a
major earthquake.
Environmental Constraints Areas: None
General Plan Designation:
Various
Zoning Designation:
Various
B. ~HVIEONM~NTAL IMPACTS Explain answers, where appropriate, on a
separate attached sheet.
1. EaJ.th Resources Will the proposal result in:
Yes
No
Maybe
a.
Earth
filII
more?
movement (cut and/or
of 10,000 cubic yards or
x
b.
Development and/or
a slope greater
natural grade? '
grading
than
on
15%
x
c.
Development
Alquist-Priolo
Zone?
within the
Special Studies
x
d. Modification of any unique
geologic or physical feature?
x
\..
REVISED 12/87
~
PAGE 1 OF 8
-
4.
-
r
n
t"'"\
Yes
No
Maybe
.....
e. Soil erosion on or off the
project site?
f. Modification of a channel,
creek or river?
x
x
g.
Development
subject
mudslides,
other similar
within an area
to landslides,
liquefaction or
hazards?
x
h. Other?
2. bIR RESOURCES: Will the proposal
result in:
Substantial
an effect
quality?
b. The creation of objectionable
odors?
a.
air
upon
emissions or
ambient air
x
x
c. Development within a high wind
hazard area?
x
3.
WATER RESOURCES:
proposal result in:
a. Changes in absorption rates,
drainage patterns, or the rate
and amount of surface runoff
due to impermeable surfaces?
Will
the
y
b. Changes in the course or flow
of flood waters?
y
c. Discharge into surface waters
or any alteration of surface
water quality?
d. Change in the quantity or
quality of ground waters?
e. . Exposure of people or property
to flood hazards?
f. Other?
x
,
x
x
~ ~
REVISED 12/87 PAGE 2 OF 8
n
("'\
Maybe
"
,.
4.
BIOLOGICAL R~SOURC~~:
proposal result in:
Could the
a.
Change
unique,
species
habitat
trees?
in the number of any
rare or endangered
of plants or their
including stands of
b.
in the number of any
rare or endangered
of animals or their
Change
unique,
species
habitat?
c. Other?
5. NOISE: Could the proposal result
in:
a. Increases in existing noise
levels?
b. Exposure of people to exterior
noise levels over 65 dB or
interior noise levels over 45
dB?
c. Other?
6.
Will the
LAND_ USE:
result in:
proposal
a. A change in the land use as
designated on the General
Plan?
b. Development within an Airport
District?
c. Development within wGreenbeltW
Zone A,B, or C?
d~ Development within a high fire
hazard zone?
e. Other?
Yes
No
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
~ ~
REVISED 10/87 PAGE 3 OF 8
"
r
-
Maybe
'"
7.
MAN-MADE HA~~~~:
project:
Will
the
a. Use, store, transport or
dispose of hazardous or toxic
materials (including but not
limited to oil, pesticides,
chemicals or radiation)?
b. Involve the release
hazardous substances?
of
c. Expose people to the potential
health/safety hazards?
d. Other?
8. HOUSING: Will the proposal:
a. Remove existing housing or
create a demand for additional
housing?
b. Other?
9. ~RANSfORTATION/CI~ATION: Could
the proposal result in:
a. An increase in traffic that is
greater than the land use
designated on the General
Plan?
b.
Use of existing,
new, parking
structures?
or demand for
facilities/
c,. Impact upon existing public
transportation systems?
d. Alteration of present patterns
of circulation?
e. Impact to rail or air traffic?
f. Increased safety hazards to
vehicles, bicyclists or
pedestrians?
"-
REVISED 10/87
-
Yel;
No
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
~
PAGE 4 OF 8
~
.!...
-
J::..
-
.a
'"
J'" .
o
g.
A disjointed pattern
roadway improvements?
h. Other?
10. ~~C SERVICES Will the proposal
impact the following beyond the
capability to provide adequate
levels of service?
a.
Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools (i.e. attendance,
boundaries, overload, etc.)?
b.
c.
d.
Parks or other recreational
facilities?
e.
Medical aid?
f.
Solid waste?
g. Other?
11. ~!LITIES: Will the proposal:
a. Impact the following beyond
the capability to provide
adequate levels of service or
require the construction of
new facilities?
1. Natural gas?
2. Electricity?
3. Water?
4. Sewer?
5. Other?
b.
Result in a
pattern of
extensions?
disjointed
utility
c.
Require the construction of
new facilities?
REVISED 10/87
.~.
of
oYes
.
No
y
y
y
x
x
x
x
x
x
X
X
x
X
Maybe
""Il
~
PAGE 5 OF 8
.-
Maybe
""Il
~
12. AESTHETI~:
a. Could the proposal result in
the obstruction of any scenic
view?
b. Will the visual impact of the
project be detrimental to the
surrounding area?
c. Other?
13.
~Y~~URA~--F~QURCES:
proposal result in:
a. The alteration or destruction
of a prehistoric or historic
archaeological site?
Could the
b.
Adverse
impacts
historic
object?
c. Other?
physical or aesthetic
to a prehistoric or
site, structure or
14. Mandatory Findings of Significance
(Section 15065)
"
The California Environmental
Quality Act states that if any of
the following can be answered yes
or maybe, the project may have a
significant effect on the
environment and an Environmental
Impact Report shall be prepared.
a. Does the project have the
potential to degrade the
quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop
below self sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant
or animal community, reduce
the number or restrict the
range of a rare or endangered
plant or animal or eliminate
-- Yes
No
x
x
x
x
REVISED 10/87
PAGE 6 OF 8
~
-
-
r
~
-
-Yes
No
Maybe
""Il
important examples of the
major periods of .California
history or prehistory?
b. Does the project have the
potential to achieve short
term, to the disadvantage of
long-term, environmental
goals? (A short-term impact
on the environment is one
which occurs in a relatively
brief, definitive period of
time while long-term impacts
will endure well into the
future. )
c. Does the project have impacts
which are individually
limited, but cumulatively
considerable? (A project may
impact on two or more separate
resources where the impact on
each resource is relatively
small, but where the effect of
the total of those impacts on
the environment is
significant. )
d. Does the project have
environmental effects which
will cause substantial adverse
effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
C. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION AND MITIGATION MEASURES
(Attach sheets as necessary.)
x
x
x
x
l"" I ....~ 1.""".1 "",I.__l
" ~
REVISED 10/87 PAGe 7 OF 8
.h.
-
-
V
DETERMINAT10N
On the basis of this initial study,
The proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
u
"
GJ
o
The proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, although there will not be a significant effect in
this. case because the mitigation measures described above have
been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
prepared.
The proposed project MAY have a Significant effect on the
environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
o
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA
~ r1(J~ - {)A~
Name and Title
,5f1A I ~ ~(a.kI. V\ QA.
Signature
Date: A.{~ 1- i (q?{
110...
~
ReVIseD 12/87
PAGe 8 OF 8