Laserfiche WebLink
relief feature than is currently found. The effect of such berms will be <br />primarily visual and a positive aesthetic effect. <br />Mitigation Measures <br />No significant landform impacts will occur with the preferred alternative; <br />therefore, no mitigation measures are needed. <br />B. SEISMIC HAZARDS I ' <br />As discussed in Section III-A.2 of this report, although unlikely, seismic <br />hazards that could affect the project area involve the potential for subsidence <br />and liquefaction. Figure 10 graphically illustrates the location of those <br />portions of the project area that could be affected by such hazards. <br />Since subsidence and liquefaction phenomenon involve soil settlement and loss <br />of soil cohesion, damage to buildings and structures, especially habitable and .- <br />critical structures such as hospitals, reservoirs, schools, etc., are of most <br />concern during such events. The proposed project involves no building <br />construction. The Santiago Creek Bridge lies within an area considered to ., <br />have a high potential for subsidence. At this time, it is not known whether the <br />bridge supports were designed and constructed to withstand such an event. r <br />The potential for subsidence induced damage to this bridge therefore exists. ., <br />Displacement of utility poles, street lights and traffic signal devices may occur <br />within the potential subsidence and liquefaction hazard areas. These activities <br />could occur with the preferred street widening alternative. If not anchored <br />properly, such structures could become loose and wobbly and may collapse <br />during subsidence and liquefaction events. Street pavement, curb, gutter, and <br />sidewalk could buckle and crack if a strong seismic event stimulated <br />subsidence and liquefaction in the project area. Loose utility poles, traffic <br />signals and street lights, along with cracked and buckled pavement, curb and <br />sidewalks could result in safety hazards to pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicular <br />commuters in the areas. Although the potential for subsidence or liquefaction <br />events in Santa Ana is considered low, such consequences as described above .. <br />could occur with the preferred alternative. <br />Typically, utility poles, street light poles, traffic signal devices, etc. are not t <br />designed to withstand such seismic events. This is due to the fact that such <br />structures are not considered critical, as compared to a hospital, school, etc. It <br />is also due to the extraordinarily higher costs of removing and replacing <br />subsurface materials with subsidence /liquefaction characteristics or with <br />constructing extensive footings that reach down to stable subsurface material. <br />IV -2 <br />75C -137 <br />r <br />