Laserfiche WebLink
(a BENDER READY -MIX CONCRETE MANUFACTURING PROJECT <br />Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration <br />JULY 2011 <br />2) Strong seismic ground shaking? <br />Less Than Significant Impact With Mitigation Incorporated. Southern California has numerous <br />active seismic faults subjecting residents to potential earthquake and seismic - related hazards. Seismic <br />activity poses two types of potential hazards for residents and structures, categorized either as primary <br />or secondary hazards. Primary hazards include ground rupture, ground shaking, ground displacement, <br />subsidence, and uplift from earth movement. Primary hazards can also induce secondary hazards <br />such as ground failure (lurch cracking, lateral spreading, and slope failure), liquefaction, water waves <br />(seiches), movement on nearby faults (sympathetic fault movement), dam failure, and fires. <br />As stated above in Response 4.6(a), no faults (active, potentially active, or inactive) are known to exist <br />within the City. However, the City is in close proximity to two major faults: the Newport- Inglewood <br />Fault Zone and the Whittier - Elsinore Fault Zone. The San Andreas and Raymond Faults are also <br />proximate to the City. Of these faults, the Newport- Inglewood Fault Zone is considered the most likely <br />source for future earthquakes. These faults are listed in Table 4.6 -1, Principal Faults Affecting the <br />Proiect Site. <br />Table 4.6 -1 <br />Principal Faults Affecting the Project Site <br />1=AULT NAME <br />APPROXIMATE <br />DISTANCE <br />FjICHTERMAGNITUDEOF. <br />MAXI MUM CREDIBLE <br />SITE= MILES <br />HIS'ORICAL EA�t7HQUAKE. <br />RICHTER MAGNITUDE <br />Newport- In lewood <br />8 <br />6.3 1993 <br />7.1 <br />Whittier- Elsinore <br />12,5 <br />5.5(1938) <br />71 <br />6.0 1910 <br />Raymond <br />_f <br />30 <br />NIA <br />6.8 <br />San Andreas <br />40 <br />6.5(1948) <br />8.25 <br />8.0 1957 <br />Source: City of Santa Ana General Plan, Seismic Safety Element, reformatted January 2010. <br />Given the proximity of these earthquake faults to the site, the proposed project could be subjected to <br />seismic shaking. However, the proposed project would not include the development of any new <br />structures or other facilities that could expose people to potential substantial adverse effects from <br />seismic shaking. Moreover, the existing structures on -site have not sustained substantial damage due <br />to seismic shaking since their construction in 1965. <br />As stated within Section 2.0, Proiect Description, the project would involve minor aesthetic, drainage, <br />water quality, and safety improvements. None of these improvements would substantially alter the <br />existing structures on -site. The construction of proposed components such as a 10 -foot high block wall <br />and aesthetic screening on the existing rooftop would comply with the existing construction ordinances <br />and the California Building Code, (CBC) in order to minimize hazards during a seismic event. <br />Adherence to these building requirements would minimize risks related to seismic shaking to a less <br />than significant level. <br />Mitigation Measure: <br />GEO -1 The Project Applicant shall ensure that the proposed project meets the design parameters <br />identified in the latest version of the California Building Code. <br />4.6 -2 <br />31A-52 <br />t <br />1 <br />GEOLOGY AND SOILS I <br />