Laserfiche WebLink
F, MOUNTAIN HOUSE PROPOSED ALTAMONT HEIGHTS TENTATIVE MAP 4. ENvIRoNMBNTAL CHECKusT <br /> 4.6 GaoLoGY AND Soar <br /> Fill <br /> of 50.5 feet, and the soils encountered were very stiff to hard sandy and silty clays to a depth <br /> F, of 23 feet. Below that,the soils were dense clayey or sandy silt. Boring B-2, located in the <br /> southwest corner of the site, was drilled to a depth of 20.8 feet. The soils encountered were <br /> hard, sandy or silty clay to a depth of 4 feet; silty and clayey sand from 4 to 10 feet, and hard, <br /> F', sandy and silty clay below 10 feet. Groundwater was encountered only in Boring B-5 at a <br /> depth of 46.5 feet. Groundwater elevations and soil moisture conditions within the project <br /> I, area will vary depending on seasonal rainfall (Kleinfelder USA, 2006). <br /> SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS IDENTIFIED IN 2005 SPIIIEIR <br /> t + Six potential impacts were identified in the Initial Study for the 2005 SPIIIEIR(EDAW, <br /> 2005). There were no impacts associated with surface rupture along an earthquake fault and <br /> use of septic tanks. Impacts associated with expansive soils were less than significant. <br /> F1 Impacts associated with liquefaction, landslides, and soil erosion were less than significant <br /> with the incorporation of mitigation measures presented in the MEIR along with the <br /> a regulations and implementation measures of the MHMP that control construction of <br /> improvements at the Mountain House Community. The impacts associated with strong <br /> seismic ground shaking were found to be potentially significant and unavoidable. <br /> MITIGATION MEASURES IDENTIFIED IN 2005 SPIIIEIR <br /> Fi The Initial Study for the 2005 SPIIIEIR noted that the significance of potential impact <br /> associated with seismic ground shaking would be reduced,but not entirely eliminated,by the <br /> following: <br /> Fi1. Preparation of an Earthquake Preparedness Plan that is being implemented by the <br /> MHCSD. <br /> F, 2. Regulations governing design and construction of schools and police, fire and <br /> emergency services buildings. <br /> 3. Uniform Building Code requirements for construction of residential, commercial and <br /> F industrial buildings. <br /> F.+ DISCUSSION REGARDING PROPOSED PROJECT <br /> a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk <br /> of loss, injury, or death involving. <br /> i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the <br /> F1 most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by <br /> the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence <br /> of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special <br /> hi Publication 42. <br /> The project site is not located within,nor is it adjacent to, any Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones <br /> F! (formerly Alquist-Prilolo Special Studies Zones)and no faults that displace valley alluvium <br /> h 4-29 <br />