The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCT 13-03; ROBERTSON RANCH WEST VILLAGE; GEOTECHNICAL REPORT; 2014-04-29LGC Valley, Inc. Geotechnical Consulting GEOTECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT FOR ROBERTSON RANCH WEST, CARLSBAD TRACT NO. 13-03 CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA Site Address: 4980 El Camino Real Dated: April 2_9, 2014 Project No. 133023-03 Prepared For: Toll Brothers, Inc. 725 W. Town & Country Road, Suite 200 Orange, California 92868 28532 Constellation Road • Valencia • CA 91355 • (661) 702-8474 • Fax (661) 702-8475 Cl I., ~c_.;') - • 0 z ~ (.) w :c (.) z <( ...J CL April 29, 2014 Mr. Peter Kim Toll Brothers Inc. LGC Valley, Inc. Geotechnical Consulting 725 W. Town & Country Road, Suite 200 Orange, California 92868 Project No. 133023-03 Subject: Geotechnical and Environmental Recommendations Report for Robertson Ranch West, Carlsbad Tract No. 13-03, 4980 El Camino Real, Carlsbad, California In accordance with your request, LGC Valley, Inc. (LGC) has performed a geotechnical evaluation of the Robertson Ranch West property located at 4980 El Camino Real, in Carlsbad, California. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the existing onsite geotechnical conditions relative to the current grading plan design and to provide geotechnical recommendations applicable to the mass grading operations and for future site construction for the project. Our study included a review of the previous geotechnical documents of the site by GeoSoils; review of available pertinent geotechnical and geologic reports and maps relative to the property; an aerial photographic review of the site, a site reconnaissance; analysis of the collected data; and preparation of our findings, conclusions, and recommendations relative to the mass grading of the site. As a part of this report, LGC has subcontract Havasu Consulting to perform an environmental evaluation of the site and provide a Site Management Plan (Appendix E). Based on our evaluation, it is our professional opinion that the site design is suitable from a geotechnical perspective provided the findings, conclusions, opinions, and recommendations contained within this report are implemented during site development. It should be noted that a subsurface investigation, limited laboratory testing, and additional geotechnical analysis is currently . being performed. The results of this study will be provided at a later date after the completion of the field, laboratory, and analysis phase of work. If you have any questions regarding our report, please contact this office. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. Respectfully submitted, LGC VALLEY, INC. Randall K Wagner, CEG 1612 Senior Project Geologist RKW /BIH/MCH/dc Distribution: (6) Addressee Basil Hattar, GE 2734 Principal Engineer 28532 Constellation Road• Valencia• CA 91355 • (661) 702-8474 • Fax (661) 702-8475 , _ _; l I I : I -I TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1.0 IN'TRODUCTION ·-----·····--··---···--··---·-·-·----·-···-··-···-····-·--·------·---·-······-·-··· 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 Pu:RPosE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES .............................. ········································································ 1 SI1E AND PROJE;CT DESCRIPTION ....................... .-................................................................................ 2 PREVIOUS GE01ECHNICAL INvESTIGATION, OBSERVATIONS AND LABORATORY TESTING .................. 3 2.0 GEOTECHN'ICAL CONDffiONS -···--···--·-·--··-····--····-···-·-··-·-··--····--·-·--·-·-·-·-·-·· 4 2.1 REGIONAL GEOLOGY·························································································································· 4 2.2 SITE-SPECIFIC GEOLOGY .................................................................................................................... 4 2.2.1 Recent Documented and Undocumented Fill Soils (Map Symbols afc, afr, afu, and afr/u): ....... 4 2.2.2 Topsoil (Unmapped): .................................................................................................................... 5 2.2.3 Quaternary-aged Colluvium (Unmapped): .................................................................................... 5 2.2.4 Quaternary-aged Alluvium (Map Symbol -Qal): ......................................................................... 5 2.2.5 Quaternary-aged Landslide Deposits (Map Symbol -Qls): .......................................................... 6 2.2.6 Quaternary-aged Terrace Deposits (Map Symbol -Qt): ............................................................... 6 2.2.7 Tertiary-aged Santiago Formation (Map Symbol -'.fsa): .............................................................. 6 2.2.8 Jurassic-aged Santiago Peak Metavolcanics and Cretaceous-aged Granitics, Undifferentiated. :6 2.3 GEOLOGIC STRUCTIJRE ...................................................................................................................... 6 2.4 GROUND AND SURFACE WATER ......................................................................................................... 7 2.5 SLOPE STABII.lTY ··•···•··•··•·•••·····•···••··•·····•·········•···•·••····•········•···•••··•·····••····•··••···•··•···•··•·····••··•·········• 8 2.6 LABORATORY TESTING······················································································································ 8 2.7 ENGINEERING CHA.RACI'ERISTICS OF 11IE ON-SITE SOILS··································································· 8 2.7.1 Expansion Potential: ...................................................................................................................... 8 2.7.2 Soil Corrosivity: ............................................................................................................................ 8 2.7.3 Excavation Characteristics: ........................................................................................................... 9 2.7.4 Earthwork Shrinkage and Bulking: ................................................................................. : ............. 9 3.0 FAULTIN"G AND SEISWC CONDffiONS ... ·-·-··--··---· .. ----·-··-.. --.. ·---· .. --.. ···--· ....... -10 3.1 FAULTING ..............................................................................................•..................•...................... 10 3.2 SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS .••.....................•................•..................................... : ............................... 11 3.2.1 Ground Shaking ........................................................................................................................... 11 3.2.2 Liquefaction ................................................................................................................................ 11 3.2.3 Seismic Settlement and Differential Settlement.. ........................................................................ 11 3.2.4 Tsunami, Seiche, and Flooding (Earthquake Induced Dam Failure) .......................................... 11 4.0 ENVIRONMENT AL CONDffiONS ......... ·-·--·-··--····--·····--.. ··-·-·-.. ·-.. ·-·-·--····-·-··-·-..... -•• 12 5.0 CONCLUSIONS ··---·-·--··---·--····-·---·--··--·----·--·--····--··-· .. --·--····-·-·-·-·-·-··-13 6.0 RECOMI\,,ffiNDA TIO NS··--··--···· .... -···-···-··-··-····-··-... ----······-··-·-····-······-·--·-···········-·-······ 16 6.1 EARTHWORK ...............•........•................................•.........................•......•.................•......................• 16 6.1.1 Site Preparation ........................................................................................................................... 16 6.1.2 Removal and Recompaction of Unsuitable Soils ........................................................................ 16 6.1.3 Excavations ................................................................................................................................. 17 Project No. 133023-03 Page 1 April 29, 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS {Cont.) Section 6.1.4 Cut/Fill Transition Conditions .................................................................................................... 18 6.1.5 Cut Slope Stability/R.eplacement Fills ........................................................................................ 18 6.1.6 Side-Hill Shear Keys ................................................................................................................... 19 6.1.7 Fill Slope Keys ......... : ....................................................................... -........................................... 19 6.1.8 Fill Placement and Compactiorr .................................................................................................. 19 6.1.9 Compaction of Deep Fi.11 ............................................................................................................. 20 6.1.10 Expansive Soils and Selective Grading ....................................................................................... 21 6.1.11 Temporary Stability of Removal Excavations ............................................................................ 21 6.1.12 Trench Backfill and Compaction ................................................................................................ 21 6.2 CONTROL OF GROUNDWATER AND SURFACE WATERS ................................................................... 22 6.2.1 Canyon Subdrains ..... : ............................................................................................................. -.... 22 6.2.2 Stability Fill Subdrains ................................................................................................................ 23 6.2.3 Cut Slope Seepage Conditions .................................................................................................... 23 6.3 SE'T11.aIBNT MONITORING ............................................................................................................... 24 6.4 SURFACE DRAINAGE AND LoT MAINTENANCE ................................................................................. 24 6.5 TEMPoRARY!PERMANENT SHORING ................................................................................................. 24 6.6 FoUNDATIONS ...............•..•..................................•.......••.....•........•......................................•........ : .... 26 6.6.1 General ......................................................................................................... ~ .............................. 26 6.6.2 Bearing Capacity ......................................................................................................................... 27 6.6.3 Conventional Foundations ........................................................................................................... 27 6.6.4 Post-Tension Foundations ............ : ........................................................................ , ..................... 28 6.6.5 Mat Foundations .......................................................................................................................... 30 6.6.6 Foundation Settlement. ................................................................................................................ 30 6.6.7 Foundation Setback ..................................................................................................................... 30 6.6.8 Updated Seismic Design Criteria ................................................................................................ 31 6.7 RETAINING WALLS ........................................................................................................................... 32 6. 7 .1 Lateral Earth Pressures and Retaining Wall Design Considerations for Conventional Walls ... 32 6.7.2 Segmental Retaining Wall Recommendations ...... _ ...................................................................... 33 6.8 SLOPE CREEP ................................................................... : ................................................................ 36 6.9 F'REEsTANDING (TOP-OF-SLoPE) WALLS .......................................................................................... 36 6.10 PAVEMENT REcOMMENDATIONS ...................................................................................................... 37 6.11 CORROSMTI TO CONCRETE AND METAL ........................................................................................ 37 6.12 NONS1RUCTURAL CONCRETE FLA'IWORK ................................... : .................................................... 38 6.13 SLOPE MAINTENANCE ...................................................................................................................... 39 6.14 CONSTRUCT10N 0BSERV A TION AND 'TEsTINO .................................................................................. 40 7.0 L™1T A TIO NS ····----··----····--·-··----···------------·-·-·----····-·--····-·---·--··-·--·----· 41 Project N_.o. 133023-03 .· Page ii · April 29, 2014 -' I I UST OF TABLES, APPENDICES AND IUUSTRATIONS Plate 1-Geotechnical Map (In Pocket) Figures Figure 1 -Site Location Map (Rear of Text) Figure 2 -Toe of Slope Drain Detail (Rear of Text) Figure 3 -Retaining Wall Detail, Sand Backfill (Rear of Text) Fi~ 4-Geotechnical Parameters for Top of Slope Walls (Rear of Text) Appendices Appendix A -References Appendix B -Boring and Trench Logs by Others Appendix C-Laboratory Testing Procedures and Test Results by Others Appendix D -General Earthwork and Grading Specifications for Rough Grading Appendix E -Environmental Site Management Plan Project No. 133023-03 Page iii April 29, 2014 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Pwpose and Scope o(Services The main purpose of this study was to evaluate modifications to the proposed site development design, changes to the existing site conditions, and to provide preliminary geotechnical recommendations relative to the rough grading operations at the site, as necessary. Based on our review of the revised site plans and existing geotechnical documents relative to the site, it is our professional opinion that additional geotechnical subsurface exploration and laboratory testing is warranted in the northeastern and western portions of the site. Consequently, six additional large-diameter borings are proposed and the excavation, logging and sampling are currently being performed. The results of the additional geotechnical investigation will be provided at a later date upon completion of the study. This report was prepared to summarize the existing geotechnical conditions and changes to the site since the previous geotechnical investigations were performed, and to provide our geotechnical findings, conclusions, opinions, and recommendations relative to the mass grading of the site. Our scope of services included: • Review the civil drawings and the latest grading plans prepared by O'Day Consultants (Appendix A), which was used as a base for our geotechnical map (Plate 1). • Review of pertinent available geotechnical literature/publications, geologic maps, and aerial photographs (Appendix A). • Review of previous geotechnical reports prepared by GeoSoils, Inc. pertinent to the proposed site development The reports are listed in Appendix A while the boring and trench logs are presented in Appendix B; and the laboratory testing is presented in Appendix C. • Reconnaissance and geologic mapping of the site. • Geotechnical analysis of the data accumulated during our study. • Preparation of this report presenting our findings, conclusions, interpretations, and recommendations including the General Earthwork and Grading Specifications for Rough Grading (Appendix D) with respect to the proposed rough grading of the site. The approximate limits of the geologic units encountered and the boring and trench locations applicable to the development of the site are presented on the Geotechnical Map (Plate 1). The 100-scale Tentative Tract Map/Grading Plan (O'Day, 2014d), was utilized as base map for the Geotechnical Map (Plate 1). • Environmental assessment and preparation of an updated environmental report relative to the remediation of the onsite pesticide impacted soils. The environmental report and relative maps and figures are presented in Appendix E. Project No. 133023-03 Page I April 29, 2014 1.2 Site and Proiect Description The subject -site, previously known as Robertson Ranch West Village or Rancho Costera, is - · approximately 211 acres in size and is located east of the intersection of El Camino Real and Tamarack Avenue in the northeastern portion of the City of Carlsbad. The irregular-shaped site is bounded by El Camino Real on the south, Tamarack A venue on the northwest, existing residential developments on the north and east, and by Cannon Road on the southeast (Figure 1). Topographically, the site generally consists of an arcuate ridgeline that somewhat parallels Tamarack A venue to the north and a series of generally north-south trending subdued ridgelines and tributary drainages that slope from north to south. The site is bisected by two main drainages, one on the west side of the site that flows north to south from along Tamarack A venue towards Kelly Drive; and another one that flows in a northeast to southwest direction along the southeast portion of the site. Elevations range from a high of approximately 224 feet mean sea level (msl) along the ridgeline overlooking Tamarack Avenue in the northwest portion of the site to a low of 33 feet msl at the southeast comer of the site along El Camino Real. Natural drainage is presently accomplished through a network of small drainages, tributary canyon areas, and minor ravines ultimately to the north-south trending drainage on the west side of the site or to the northeast-southwest drainage on the southeast side of the site. We understand that the majority of the site has been farmed since the 1920's and that crops included vegetables, tomatoes, and flowers. Existing vegetation on the site ranges from weeds and grasses on the previously farmed areas to a thin to thick growth of chaparral mainly on the steep hillsides of the larger tributary canyons and two main drainages. Man-made features on the site include: demolished farming and green house facilities, an existing SDG&E easement along the east side of the site; a 14-inch water main running along the ridgeline adjacent to Tamarack A venue, numerous dirt roads that bound the prior farmed areas, and fences along the perimeter of the property. Grading of Planning Areas PA-11, PA-12, and PA-13 in the southeastern portion of the site has been performed and resulted in the creation of two relatively level sheet-graded pads with associated slopes separating the graded areas ·from an adjacent riparian/wetland area We understand that the development will consist of a number of Planning Areas including Planning Areas (PA) PA-1 through PA-11, PA-13, and PA-23A through PA-23C. Based on the civil drawings from O'Day, PA-1 and PA-23A through PA-23C are designated open spaces areas; PA-2 will be a RV storage facility; PA-3, PA-5, PA-6, PA-9, PA-10, and PA-13 are single-family residential communities; PA-4 will be a park site; PA-7 and PA-8 will be multi-family residential developments; and PA-11 will be a commercial site. The proposed development will consist of approximately 1.5 million cubic yards of cut and fill grading to accommodate the 328 single-family residential lots and the sheet-graded pads for the multi-family, RV storage, park site and commercial developments. Remedial grading (i.e. removal of compressible or unsuitable soils) quantities have also been previously calculated and are on the order of approximately 500,000 cubic yards. Cuts on the order of approximately 50 feet and fills on the order of approximately 45 feet are proposed. The maximum cut and fill slope heights are approximately 90 and 50 fee~ respectively. Appurtenant construction will include various retaining walls, associ!1ted interior roads, landscape areas, bio swales, and installation of underground utilities. Project Jl!o. 133023-03 Page 2_ -April 29, 2014 -' ' I _; 1.3 Previous Geotechnical Investigation, Observations and Laboratory Testing A number of previous geotechnical investigations and studies have been performed on the site between 2002 and 2014 (Appendix A). The previous subsurface investigations included the excavation of eight large-diameter borings, 24 small-diameter borings, eleven hand-dug test pits, and 56 trench/test pit excavations. The approximate locations of the borings and trenches are shown on the Geotechnical Map, Plate 1 while the boring and trench logs are presented in Appendix B. During the prior subsurface investigations, representative bulk and relatively undisturbed samples were collected for laboratory testing. Laboratory testing was performed on representative soil samples and included moisture and density tests, maximum density and optimum moisture, direct shear, triaxial shear, grain size distribution, consolidation, R-Value, Atterberg limits, and corrosion suite testing. The laboratory test results are presented in Appendix C. The moisture and density test results are presented on the boring and trench logs in Appendix B. Project No. 133023-03 . f£:,ge 3 April 29, 2014 2.0 GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS 2.1 Regional Geology The subject site is located within the coastal subprovince of the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province, near the western edge of the southern California batholith. The topography at the edge of the batholith changes from the rugged landforms developed on the batholith to the more subdued landforms which typify the softer sedimentary formations of the coastal plain such as those present on the site. · Specifically, the area is underlain mainly by sedimentary units of the Tertiary-aged Santiago Formation. Subsequent to the deposition of this unit, erosion and regional tectonic uplift created the valleys and ridges of the area Recent weathering and erosional processes haye produced the Quaternary terrace/older alluvial flood-plain deposits, younger alluvium and colluvium while human influences have created the mapped and unmapped documented and undocumented fill soils that mantle the site. 2.2 Site-Specific Geology Based on our subsurface exploration and review of the available previous geotechnical reports for the property and pertinent geologic literature and maps, the primary bedrock unit at the site is the Tertiary-aged Santiago Formation with a minor amount of undifferentiated Jurassic-aged Santiago Peak Metavolcanics and Cretaceous-aged Granitics. The bedrock units are overlain by Quaternary- aged terrace/older alluvial flood-plain deposits, landslide deposits, alluvium, colluvium, topsoil, and recent artificial documented and undocumented fills. The approximate extent of the geologic units prese!).t on the site is depicted on the Geotechnical Map (Plate 1). A brief description of the geologic units encountered on the site is presented below. 2.2.1 Recent Documented and Undocumented Fill Soils (Map Symboh afc, afr, afu, and afr/u): Previous mass_grading of Planning Areas PA-11, PA-12, PA-13, a portion of PA-23C, and the widening of the north side of El Camino Real west of Cannon Road has created a number of fill areas in the southeastern portion of the site. These fill areas are designated as afc (artificial fill, compacted), afr (artificial fill, roadway), afu (artificial fill, undocumented), or afr/u (artificial fill, roadway and/or undocumented) and generally consist of clayey to silty sands and sandy clays. The compacted fill soils (afc) were moisture-conditioned to near optimum moisture contents and compacted to a relative compaction of at least 90 percent relative compaction based on ASTM D1557 (GeoSoils, 2008c and 2008d). Prior to grading, the potentially compressible soils were removed to competent soil or to within a few feet of the existing ground water elevation. The approximate limits of the existing compacted fill soils are presented on Plate 1. We recommend that the dry, desiccated, and weathered portion of the existing compacted fill be removed to competent material. The removal depths are anticipated to be approximately 2 feet in depth. Project No. 133023-03 }'ag'! 4. April 29, 2014 In addition, the prior grading of El Camino Real also created undocumented roadway fill soils designated as afr/u. These fill soils are of unknown origin and should be considered unsuitable. If encountered during future grading, remedial measures (such as removal and recompaction, where practical) should be anticipated. Fmally, there are a number of areas on the site that are underlain by undocumented fill soils (designated as afu) that were found to be loose and potentially compressible. Complete removal of these soils is recommended. The limits of these fill soils are presented on Plate 1. It should be noted that other undocumented fill soils are present on the site but are not shown on Plate 1. These soils are associated with the unimproved dirt roads and agricultural use of the site since the 1920's. All of the undocumented fill soils are not considered suitable for the support of structural improvements. 2.2.2 Topsoil (Unmapped): The topsoil encountered during our field investigation mantles the majority of the site. The topsoil, as observed, consisted predominantly of a light-brown to brown, damp to moist, loose to medium dense to stiff, sandy to silty clay and clayey to silty sands. These soils were generally massive, porous, and contained ~attered roots, organics, and debris (decomposed plastic tubing and plastic sheeting). The unsuitable topsoil is estimated to be from 1 to 4 feet in thickness; however, localized areas of thicker accumulations of topsoil may be encountered during grading. 2.2.3 Quaternary-aged Colluvium (Unmapped): Geologic observations and review of the previous geotechnical reports indicate that potentially compressible deposits of colluvium mantle the middle and lower portions of the on-site natural slopes (especially slopes comprised of the Santiago Formation). In general, the colluvium consists of loose to medium dense silty to clayey sand and stiff sandy clays. This unit is estimated to be 2 to 6 feet thick, low to highly expansive, and is considered potentially compressible in the present state. · 2.2.4 . Quaternary-aged Alluvium (Map Symbol -Oal): Potentially compressible deposits of alluvium were encountered in the tributary drainage courses on the site. AB observed, these deposits typically consist of light brown to brown sands, sandy clays and clayey sands that are low to highly expansive, porous, and contain scattered organics. The alluvium is considered potentially compressible in the present state. In general, the alluvium is estimated to be 4 to 15 feet thick in the tributary canyons, however deeper accumulations may be present The alluvium encountered in PA-2 (near Tamarack Avenue) is on the order of 6 to 10 feet in depth while the alluvium in the main canyon in the southeastern portion of the site is on the order of the 10 to 40 feet in depth. Removals of the potentially compressible alluvial soils in this area will likely encounter groundwater within the lower portion of the alluvium; consequently, complete removal of these soils will not be practical. Settlement monitoring and construction delays may be required if the alluvium is not completely removed. Project.No. 131023-03 Page5 April 29, 2014 2.2.5 Quaternary-aged Landslide Deposits (Map Symbol -Ols ): Our subsurface investigation encountered one relatively small and shallow landslide in the northeastern portion of the site. Where encountered, the base of the landslide was on the order of 10 feet in depth. Geologic logging of Boring LB-2 (this log is not included in this report but will be available shortly) indicated that the landslide is likely old and appears to be failing along a soft clay zone. C_omplete removal of this landslide is recommended within the limits of grading. 2.2.6 Quaternary-aged Terrace Deposits (Map Symbol-Ot): Terrace or older alluvial flood-plain deposits (as mapped by Kennedy & Tan, 2005) were encountered in PA-11 and along the southern side of the main canyon in the southeastern portion of tlie site. As encountered, these soils consist of silty sand to sandy-silty clay that are considered mid-to late-Pleistocene in age. The weathered portion of this unit is considered potentially compressible and is anticipated to be on the order of 1 to 3 feet in thickness. The expansion potential of these soils range from very low to highly expansive. 2.2.7 Tertiary-aged Santiago Formation (Map Symbol-Tsa): The Tertiary-aged Santiago Formation, as encountered during our field investigation, consists primarily of massively bedded to cross-bedded silty sandstones and minor clayey sandstones and claystones/siltstones. The siltstones and claystones generally are olive green and red brown to olive gray (unweathered), damp to moist, stiff to hard, moderately fractured and sheared. The sandstone generally consists of light olive green, olive green, light brown and pale orange brown (where iron-oxidized stained), damp to moist, dense to very dense, silty very fine to medium grained sandstone. 2.2.8 Jurassic-aged Santiago Peak Metavolcanics and Cretaceous-aged Granitics, Undifferentiated (Map Symbol -Jsp!Kgr: Undifferentiated igneous and metavolcanic material is present in the open space area of PA- 23C in the eastern portion of the site. Based on the current grading plans, no grading is proposed in this area, and therefore, we do not anticipate that the igneous or metavolcanic rock will be encountered during site grading. 2.3 Geologic Strocture The overall structure of the bedrock on the site is dipping slightly to the south/southwest with dips less than 18 to 24 degrees. Based on the subsurface data, bedding within the Santiago Formation is thin to thickly bedded and generally exhibits variable bedding with strikes ranging from northwest to northeast and dips typically 4 to 16 degrees to the south, southwest, and to a lesser extent to the northeast Locally, cross bedding was observed with dips ranging from 15 to 28 degrees. Clay seams encountered in the borings· generally trend parallel to the bedding. Bedding observed within the terrace deposits in test pits, and exposed in road cuts along El Camino Real, display generally massive to thickly bedded sediments, and poorly developed sub-horizontal orientation. Project No. 133023_-03 Page6 April 29, 2014 I _) Jointing on-site is variable, but predominantly trends north to northwest, and to a lesser extent to the northeast Jointing dips were found to be generally moderately to steeply dipping (dips on the order of 45 to 89 degrees). Jointing was mainly encountered in the upper portion of the bedrock becoming less pronounced with depth. Randomly oriented shears were encountered in the Santiago Formation claystone and siltstone. Numerous wide, diffuse zones of shearing, as well as more well-defined zones, were encountered in the bedrock, and are thought to be the result of regional tectonic uplifting imparting shearing forces to the relatively stiff and unyielding siltstone and claystone. 2.4 Ground and Surface Water Groundwater was encountered in the alluvium during the previous geotechnical investigations at an approximate elevation of 45 feet msl. The water table encountered is thought to·be~ ground water within the onsite alluvial soils. Depths to perched ground water ranged from approximately'12 to 30 feet below existing grades. In addition, several seepage zones were encountered during our recent subsurface investigation along permeable units (both sands and sheared claystone/siltstones) above a lesser permeable unit generally at or near the elevation of the adjacent canyon bottoms~ The seepage in the northeast portion o( the site is likely from irrigation water from the residential development to the north. The local groundwater gradient is estimated to vary following surface drainage patterns, from a south to southwesterly direction towards Agua Hedionda Creek. The regional gradient is estimated to be in a similar direction towards Agua Hedionda Lagoon. Based on site topography, surface water is likely to · drain as sheet flow into and within the Agua Hedionda Creek during precipitation events. Groundwater levels may fluctuate during periods of precipitation. In addition, the 100-year flood zone in the main canyon on the southeast side of the site is outside the limits of the current proposed grading, and therefore will not impact site development Subdrains are recommended in the canyon removal areas and in the stability fills as indicated in Appendix D. The approximate locations of recommended canyon subdrains are depicted on the Geotechnical Map (Plate 1). It should be noted that groundwater levels might vary at the time of construction from those elevations encountered during the site geotechnical investigations. Since the elevations at which groundwater was encountered were generally below anticipated finish grade elevations, it is our opinion that groundwater related problems should be minimal provided the recommendations presented in this report are incorporated into the design and construction of the project. Since most of the proposed cut slopes on the site will be south-facing slopes, and therefore, will have out-of-slope bedding future seepage conditions are likely to occur after site development and residential landscape irrigation is applied. As a result, we recommend replacement/stability fills and/or toe-of-slope subdrains be constructed to minimize future seepage conditions. We also recommend that periodic inspection be made by either our soil engineer or engineering geologist during the grading operations and/or construction for the presence of groundwater. Remedial measures, if any, can be recommended on a case-by-case basis during the grading and construction operations. Project No. 133023-03 ·. Page 7 April 29, 2014 2.5 Slope Stability Our review of the tentative tract map and grading plans for the project (O'Day, 2014b, 2014c, and 2014d) indicates that the proposed cut and fill slopes on the site are proposed at a maximum inclination of 2: 1 (horizontal to vertical) and up to approximately 90 and 50 feet in height, respectively. The previous slope stability analysis indicated that the proposed cut and fill slopes have factor of safety of at least 1.5 and are considered globally stable for static and seismic conditions. However, previous slope stability analysis indicates that the majority of the proposed cut slopes (especially south-facing cut slopes composed of inter-bedded claystones/siltstones of the Santiago Formation) may be surficially unstable and remedial measures such as the construction of replacement/stability fills along the slope faces will be required. The recommended preliminary replacement/stability fills are presented on the Geotechnical Map (Plate 1). Specific recommendations concerning the stability of the slopes are presented in Section 6.1.5. 2.6 -Laboratory Testing Laboratory testing of the onsite soils is cµrrently being-performed by LGC on representative samples obtained from the excavated borings. A discussion of the tests performed and a summary of .the results will be presented at a later date upon completion of the geotechnical investigation. 2.7 Engineering Characteristics of the On-Site Soils Based on our review of the laboratory test results of representative on-site soils and our professional experience on adjacent sites with similar soils, the engineering characteristics of the on-site soils are discussed below. 2. 7.1 Expansion Potential The expansion potential of the on-site soils ranges from very low to very high. The sandstone within the Santiago Formation and sandy surficial soils a,e anticipated to be in the very low to moderate expansion range. The siltstone and claystone of the Santiago Formation, as well as the clayey topsoil, alluvium, and colluvium are anticipated to have a medium to very high expansion potential. Geotechnical observation and/or laboratory testing upon completion of the graded pads are recommended to determine the actual expansion potential of finish grade soils on the graded lots. To reduce the po,ss1bility of having expansion soils at or near finish pad grades, the clayey soils should be placed in deeper fill areas or outside the limits of the building pads. In addition, building pads consisting of highly expansive soils may be overexcavated and replaced with fill soils having a lower expansion potential. Building pads undercut due to expansive soils should be undercut 3 to 4 feet in depth below finish grade with the excavation bottom sloping toward the street or deeper fill area. 2. 7.2 Soil. Corrosivitv Based on the limited corrosivity testing of the on-site soils by GeoSoils, the tested soils have a pH ranging from 6.6 to 8.4; a sulfate content of 30 to 560 parts per million (ppm); chloride content of 100 to 910 ppm, and a minimum resistivity of 240 to 1,100 (ohms-cm). Caltrans currently considers a site to be corrosive to foundation elements if one or more of the following conditions exist: chloride concentrations are greater than or equal to 500 ppm, sulfate concentrations are greater than or equal to 2000 ppm or the pH is 5.5 or less. Based on the initial test results by GeoSoils, the site is considered corrosive per Caltrans criteria. Project No. 133023-03 Page8 April 29, 2014 2. 7.3 Excavation Characteristics: The site is underlain by silty to clayey sand to sandy clay surficial units and formational silty to clayey sandstones and siltstones/claystones. It is anticipated that the on-site materials can be excavated with conventional heavy-duty construction equipment Difficult excavation may be encountered where cemented layers are encountered within the Santiago Formation. 2. 7.4 Earthwork Shrinkage and Bulking: The volume change of excavated on-site materials upon recompaction as fill is expected to vary with materials and location. Typically, the surficial soils and bedrock materials vary significantly in natural and compacted density, and therefore, accurate earthwork shrinkage/bulking estimate cannot be determined. However, the following factors (based on the results of our subsurface investigation and previous investigations by GeoSoils (Appendix A), laboratory testing, geotechnical analysis and professional experience on adjacent sites) are provided on Table 1 as guideline estimates. If possible, we suggest an area where site grades can be adjusted be provided as a balance area. . Table 1 Earthwork Shrinkage and Bulking Estimates Geologic Unit Estimated Shrinkage/Bulking Existing Compacted Ftll 0 percent Agricultural Ftll (0 to 1 foot) 20 to 25 percent shrinkage Agricultural Fill (1 to 2 feet) 15 to 20 percent shrinkage Colluvium/Agricultural Fill (2 to 3 feet) 5 to 10 percent shrinkage Colluvium/weathered Formation (3 to 6 feet) 5 shrinkage to 2 percent bulking Alluvium 10 to 15 percent shrinkage Terrace Deposits 5 percent shrinkage to 3 percent bulking Santiago Formation 3 to 7 percent bulking* * The clayey and more cemented sandy soils of the Santiago Formation are anticipated to bulk more than the slightly friable sands. Project No. 133023-03. Page9 April 29, 2014 3.0 FAULTING AND SEISMIC CONDITIONS 3.1 Faulting I The southern California region has long been recognized as being seismically active. The seismic activity results from a number of active faults that cross the region, all of which are related to the San Andreas transform system, a broad zone of right lateral faults that extend from Baja California to Cape Mendocino. The numerous faults in Southern California include active, potentially active, and inactive faults. The definitions of fault activity terms used here are based on those developed for the Alquist- Priolo Special Studies Zone Act of 1972. Active faults are those faults that have had surface displacement within Holocene time (approximately the last 11,000 years) and/or have been included within an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone. Faults are considered potentially active if they show evidence of surface displacement since the beginning of Quaternary time (about two million years ago), but not since Holocene time. Inactive faults are those which have not had surface movement since the beginning of Quaternary time. · The site is not within a currently established Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone for fault rupture hazard (formerly Special Studies Zones for fault rupture hazard). Based on a review of geologic literature, no active faults are known to occur beneath or in the general vicinity of the project site. Accordingly, it appears that there is little probability of surface rupture due to faulting beneath the site. There are, however, several faults located in sufficiently close proximity that movement associated with them could cause significant ground motion at the site. Although active faulting is not present within the· site/faults relative to the off-shore step-over of the Rose Canyon-Newport-Inglewood fault zone to the west and uplift of the Cretaceous sedimentary units to the south and southeast are known to exist in general vicinity of the site. Two minor :(aults have been mapped on the site. One of the faults was encountered during the grading of'PA-12 and PA-13 in the southeast portion of the site. The fault was exposed within the western portion of the sheet-graded pad and found to only offset Pleistocene-aged terrace deposits. The fault was observed to be sinuous, generally trended N30E to N50E, and was moderately dipping (45 to 55 degrees) mainly to the west. The fault was found to die out in the cut slope along the northeast side of PA-13 and could not be traced through the southern portion of the sheet-graded pad of PA-12. Based on geologic mapping and research by GeoSoils, it was concluded by them that the fault was pre-Holocene in age and therefore not an active fault (GeoSoils, 2008c). The other fault feature was an approximate 30-foot wide fault zone with multiple fault splays across the zone. The zone was observed in a cut slope on the north side of PA-11. Geologic mapping of the fault zone indicates the zone trends N38W to N42W and dips steeply 85 to 89 degrees to the northeast The fault zone was observed to be located all within the Santiago Formatioµ and is also considered not active. Further mapping of the fault zone toward the northwest should be performed during the mass grading operations of site development to further support this conclusion. Regional active faults that occur within the San Diego area includes the off-shore Rose Canyon- Newport Inglewood fault zone to the west, the Elsinore, San Jacinto, and San Andreas faults to the east, and the Coronado Bank and San Diego Trough faults offshore to the southwest The local Rose Canyon Project No. 133023-03 Page JO April 29, 2014 fault zone trends north-northwest through San Diego Bay and downtown San Diego, crosses offshore at · La Jolla Cove and continues northward off the coast of North San Diego County. The closest known active faults to the site are the Rose Canyon fault zone located 3.7 miles (6.0 kilometers) to the west; the Coronado Bank fault zone located 20 miles (32 kilometers) to the southwest, and the Elsinore fault zone located approximately 21 miles(34 kilometers).to the northeast. 3.2 Seismic Considerations The principal seismic considerations for most structures in southern California are surface rupturing of fault traces and damage caused by ground shaking or seisn;rically induced ground settlement The possibility of damage due to ground rupture at the site is considered low since active faults are not known to cross the site. 3.2.1 . Ground Shaking The seismic hazard most likely to impact the site is ground-shaking resulting from an earthquake on one of the major regional faults. The effects of seismic shaking can be reduced by adhering to the most recent edition of the Uniform Building Code and design parameters of the Structural Engineers Association of California 3.2.2 I.igue(action The potential for seismically induced liquefaction is greatest where shallow ground water and poorly consolidated, well sorted, fine grained sands and silts are present. Liquefaction potential decreases with increasing density, grain size, and clay and gravel content, but increases as the ground acceleration and duration of seismic shaking increases. The project site is underlain by medium dense to dense clayey sand and stiff to hard clay soils and moderately to well-cemented formational materials. Based on the density and the degree of cementation of the underlying formational materials, the clay content of the on-site soils; and lack of a permanent shallow ground water elevation; the potential for generalized liquefaction in the event of a strong to moderate earthquake on a nearby fault is considered low. 3.2.3 Seismic Settlement and Differential Settlement Seismic settlement occurs when loose to medium dense granular soils densify during ground -; shaking. Such seismically induced settlement can occur in both dry and partially saturated granular soils, as well as in saturated granular soils. Due to lithologic variations, such settlement can occur differentially across a site. Differential settlement may also be induced by ground failures, such as liquefaction, flow slides, and surface rupture;S. The materials beneath the site consist of dense to very dense sandstone and claystone, mantled by medium dense to dense clayey sand and stiff to hard clay fill soils. Seismically induced settlement is not expected into occur within the formational materials and the overburden fill soils. 3.2.4 Tsunami, Seiche, and Flooding (Earlhguake Induced Dam Failure) Due to the distance of the site to the ocean, open body of waters and reservoirs, the impact of tsunamis, seiches, and earthquake-induced flooding to the site is considered low. Project No. 133023-03 Page II April 29, 2014 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS Based on review of the GeoSoils reports (Appendix A), we understand that approximately 96,000 cubic yards of pesticide impacted soils are present on the site and that these soils will be remediated by on-site burial. The current plan is to place the impacted soils within the on-site street right-of-ways in planned fill areas or excavate disposal areas beneath the streets in cut areas. Specific recommendations concerning the removal and burial procedures have already been provided by the prior environmental consultant that include: handling procedures; air monitoring and personnel protective equipment requirements; environmental c.onformance testing to ensure the impacted soils are disposed in accordance with applicable federal, state and local ordinances and guidelines; and that work plans are prepared so that the impacted soils are handled safety and that the potential risks to personnel and the environment are minimiz.ed. The environmental report provided in Appendix E provides an update to the findings, conclusions, and recommendations previous made as part of the remediation of the on-site pesticide impacted soils. Maps showing the location and proposed disposal areas of the pesticide impacted soils are also provided in Appendix E. Project No. -~33023-03 Page 12 April 29, 2014 I . I ; I I I I I I I ; I I I I ' I ' I ! ,_' I 1 ·-' 5.0 CONCLUSIONS Based on the results of our geotechnical investigation at the subject site and our review of the previous geotechnical reports applicable to the site, it is our professional opinion that the proposed grading of the Robertson Ranch West property is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint, provided the following conclusions and recommendations are incorporated into the project plans, specifications, and followed during the site grading operations. The following is a summary of the geotechnical conclusions derived from our study: • The site is underlain by the Santiago Formation, undifferentiated Jurassic Santiago Peak Metavolcanics and Cretaceous granitics, terrace deposits, landslide deposits, alluvium, colluvium, topsoil and documented and undocumented fill soils. • The undocumented fill, topsoil, colluvium, alluvium, and weathered fonnational materials are considered unsuitable in their present state and will require removal and recompaction in areas of proposed development or future fill. • Based on our subsurface exploration and field geologic mapping, the generalized site bedrock is dipping up to 18 to 24 degrees to the south and southwest and as such is generally a no1r.favorable (i.e. out-of-slope) orientation for design slopes which face south. • Evidence of ancient onsite faulting was encountered during our field investigation and by previous geology mapping during the rough grading of PA-12 and PA-13. The approximate locations of the identified faults are presented on the Geotechnical Map (Plate 1). It is our professional opinion that the faults are not active or potentially active. • Due to potential instability concerns and a compressible nature, the landslide deposits within the limits of the planned grading are considered unsuitable for structural support in their present condition and complete removals of the unstable and potentially compressible soils within the site will be required. Preliminary recommendations for the stabilization of the landslides are presented in Section 6.1.2. • Siltstone and claystone soils of the Santiago Formation are moderately to very highly expansive. These expansive soils should be removed where present within 5 feet of finish pad grades and replaced with soil having a lower expansion potential; a special foundation design (i.e. post-tensioned design) should be anticipated. • The existing on-site soils appear to be suitable material for use as fill provided they are relatively free of rocks (larger than 8 inches in maximum dimension), organic material and debris. • Active faults are not known to exist on or in the immediate vicinity of the site. Because of the lack of known active faults on the site, the potential for surface rupture at the site is considered very low. The nearest known active fault is the Rose Canyon Fault Zone which is located approximately 3.7 miles (6.0 kilometers) west of the site. • The main seismic hazard that may affect the site is ground shaking from one of the active regional faults. • Due to the clayey and/or relatively dense nature of the on-site soils, the potential for liquefaction and dynamic settlement of the site is considered unlikely, provided the recommendations for site grading (as indicated in Section 6.1 and Appendix D) are adhered to. However, relatively shallow groundwater and loose sandy soils are present in the main canyons and the potential for liquefaction of these is considered moderate unless provisions to mitigate the potential liquefaction are performed during site grading. Project No. 133023-03 Page 13 April 29, 2014 • The groundwater table was encountered in the on-site alluvium at depths from approximately 12 to 30 feet below the.existing ground surface within the main drainages. In general, the groundwater table within the main canyon along the southeast side of the site is anticipated to be at an approximate elevation of 45 feet msl. Localized seeps were also observed in a number. of the large-diameter borings at various elevations within bedrock. However, groundwater on the site is not anticipated to be a significant factor during site grading and subsequent development If groundwater seepage conditions are encountered during site development, recommendations to mitigate the conditions can be made on a case-by-case basis at that time. • The expansion potep.tial of the on-site soils ranges from very low to very high. The sandstone within the Santiago Formation and sandy surficial soils are anticipated to be in the very low to moderate expansion range. The siltstone and claystone of the Santiago Formation, as well as the clayey topsoil, alluvium, arid colluvium are anticipated to have a medium to very high expansion potential. Expansion testing should be performed at the completion of grading to aid with the design of foundation, slab and other structural elements. • Based on limited laboratory testing and our professional experience on adjacent sites, the on-site soils should posses a negligible to moderate soluble sulfate content However, some of the soils may possess high sulfate content; corrosion testing should be performed at the completion of grading to assess this potential. • With the exception· of localized cemented zones within the Santiago Formation, it is anticipated that the on- site sedimentary and surficial soils can be excavated with conventional heavy-duty construction equipment Localized cemented zones may require heavy ripping. • All oversized material should be placed in accordance with the recommendations presented in Section 6.0 and Appendix D to minimire settlement of the material around the oversized rocks. • In general, when compacted as fill soils, the surficial units (mcluding landslide deposits, topsoil, colluvium, alluvium, etc.) are anticipated to shrink and the bedrock materials are anticipated to bulk. • It is anticipated that any planned major cut slopes that will be south-facing and/or comprised of siltstones and/or claystones of the Santiago Formation will require stabilization measures to mitigate potential surficial instability. A detailed discussion on slope stability is provided in Section 6.1.5. • There is a potential for long term settlement of the alluvial materials within the main canyons if all site alluvium is not removed below the groundwater table. Settlement monitoring may be required at the completion of rough grading. This potential for settlement monuments should be evaluated during site earthwork and a settlement monitoring program initiated, as necessary. • Toe daylight cut along the northwest sides of Lots 25 through 43 will likely result in unsuitable soils being present at finish grade along the edge of the daylight cut Recommendations to construct a side-hill shear have been made and are presented in Section 6.1.6. • In order to reduce the potential for differential settlem~nt in areas of. cut/fill transitions, we recommend the entire cut portion of the transition building pads be overexcavated and replaced with properly compacted fill to mitigate the transition condition beneath the proposed structures. Project No. 133023-03 Page 14 April 29, 2014 ' I ' ~I l_ I I ~' • Due to out-of-slope bedding and the likely presence of fractured and highly expansive Santiago Formation claystone and siltstone being exposed in south-facing cut slopes, we recommend that these slopes be replaced with stability fills. Project No. 133023-03 Page 15 April 29, 2014 6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS · 6.1 Earthwork We anticipate that earthwork during the mass grading operations at the site will consist· of site preparation, removals of unsuitable soil, excavation of cut material, and fill placement We recommend that earthwork on-site be performed in accordance with the following recommendations, the City of Carlsbad grading requirements, and the General Earthwork and Grading Specifications for Rough- Grading (GEGS) included in Appendix D. In case of conflict, the following recommendations shall supersede those included as part of Appendix D. 6.1.1 Site Preparation Prior to the grading of areas to receive structural fill or engineered structures, the areas should be cleared of surface obstructions; any existing debris, unsuitable material (such as desiccated fill soils, undocumented fill soils, topsoil, colluvium, alluvium, landslide deposits, and weathered formational materials) and stripped of vegetation. Vegetation and debris should be removed and properly disposed of off-site. Holes resulting from the removal of buried obstructions that extend below finished site grades should be replaced with suitable compacted fill material. Areas to receive fill and/or other surface improvements should be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 to 12 inches, brought to an above-optimum moisture condition, and recompacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction (based on ASTMD1557). 6.1.2 Removal. and Recompaction of Unsuiiable Soils As discussed in Sections 2.2 and 5.0, portions of the site are underlain by unsuitable soils, which may settle under the surcharge of fill and/or foundation loads. These materials include desiccated documented fill soils, undocumented fill soils, topsoil, colluvium, alluvium, landslide deposits and weathered formational material. Compressible materials not removed by the planned grading should be excavated to competent material, moisture conditioned or dried back (as needed) to obtain an above-optimum moisture content, and then recompacted prior to additional fill placement or surface improvements. The actual depth and extent of the required removals should be determined during grading operations by the geotechnical consultant; however, estimated removal depths are summarized below. 1) Existing Documented Fill The desiccated upper portion of the existing documented fills located in Planning Areas PA-11 and PA-12 in the southeastern portion of the should be removed to competent fill prior to placement of additional fill. These materials can be utilized as fill materials provided they are moisture conditioned and free of deleterious materials. The estimated removal depths of the desicca~ documented fills are anticipated to be on the order of approximately 2 feet. However, deeper removals may be required along the edges of the fill where left-in-place unsuitable soils may be present below the 1:1 (horizontal to vertical) removal edge extending from the existing toe-of-slope down underneath the fill. Project No. 133023-03 Page 16 . -··.,.,... April 29, 2014 , I I _I 2) Existing Undocumented Fill The existing undocumented fills should be completely removed prior to placement of additional fill. These materials can be utilized as fill materials provided they are moisture conditioned and free of deleterious materials. The estimated removal depths of the undocumented fill soils range from 1 to more than IO feet in depth. All trash, construction debris, and decomposable material should be removed and disposed of off- site. 3) Topsoil Areas to receive fill which are on slopes flatter than 5: 1 (horizontal to vertical) and where normal benching would not completely removed the topsoil, should be stripped to suitable formational material prior to fill placement Topsoil is expected to be generally 1 to 4 feet thick, although localized deeper accumulations may be encountered during grading. 4) Alluvium and Colluvium Within the limits of grading, colluvial and alluvial materials should be completely removed to competent material. Where the alluvium/colluvium is located above the ground water elevation, this will most likely entail complete removal of these materials to competent bedrock. In areas where a shallow water table prevents the removal of these materials using conventional earthmoving equipment, (i.e. scrapers), we recommend the remaining material be removed by top loading (wet removal) or settlement monitoring of the areas will be required prior to construction of site improvements. 5) Landslide Deposits The landslide deposits within the limits of the planned grading should be completely removed to competent material during site grading in order to remove the highly disturbed and weathered material. The actual depth of stripping or overexcavation should be determined during grading based on field observations by the geotechnical consultant However, based on our review of previous data and limited subsurface investigation, the depth of the overexcavation is on the order of IO feet below existing grade. 6.1.3 Excavations Excavations of the on-site sedimentary and surficial materials may generally be accomplished with conventional heavy-duty earthwork equipment Localized cemented zones in the Santiago Formation may be encountered that may require heavy ripping. All oversized rock that is encountered should be placed as fill in accordance with the recommendations presented Appendix D. Project No. 133023-03 Page 17 April 29, 2014 6.1.4 Cut/Fill Transition Conditions In order to reduce the potential for differential settlement in areas of cut/fill transitions, we recommend the entire cut portion of the transition building pads be overexcavated and replaced with properly compacted fill to mitigate the transition condition beneath the proposed structure. For transitions less steep than a 2: 1 (horiwntal to vertical), the overexcavation of the cut portion of the building pad should be a minimum of 3 to 4 feet below the planned finish grade elevation of the pad. For cut/fill transitions steeper than a 2: 1 (horiwntal to vertical) and for transitions beneath multi-unit and large commercial structures, site specific overexcavation recommendations should be made during site grading. All overexcavations should extend across the entire lot or laterally at least 10 feet beyond the building perimeter or footprint '~-· 6.1.5 Cut Slope Stability/Replacement Fills Geologic mapping of the site indicates that out-of-slope bedding and the likely presence of fractured and highly expansive Santiago Formation claystone and siltstone will be exposed in south-facing cut slopes. These conditions along with the moderate erosion and rilling, as well as, potential seepage conditions on the planned cut slope faces will result in possible surficial instability issues on these cut slopes. As a result; we recommend that the south-facing cut slopes on the site be replaced with stability fills. Based on the existing geotechnical conditions and current grading plans, the recommended stability/replacement fill locations are presented on the Geotechnical Map (Plate 1). We recommend that the stability/replacement fill have a minimum horizontal width of 15 feet from the back-cut to the slope face. We also recommend that the stability/replacement fill key be excavated a minimum of 15 feet wide with a minimum depth of at least 5 feet below the toe- of-slope. The key bottom should ·be tilted a minimum ·of 2 percent into-the-slope. Benching of the back-cut as the fill is placed, as well as, overbuilding the slope and trimming it back may be required. We also recommend that a subdrain be installed along the back bottom edge of the key and at minimum 30-foot vertical intervals if the replacement fill is greater than 30 feet in height (this condition should only occur for the large slope above El Camino Real on the southwest side of the site). The outlet locations of the subdrains should be determined in the field during site grading. The subdrains should consist of a 4-inch diameter perforated PVC pipe surrounded by 3 cubic feet (per linear foot) of crushed rock wrapped in filter fabric (Marifi 140N or equivalent). The subdrain should have a minimum fall of I-percent toward the outlet Project No. 133023-03 Page 18. _(: ~-'.:-:...!~~-~, ..... ~ ~ ' April 29, ?014 -~ ;_·-- \ 6.1.6 Side-Hill Shear Keys Geotechnical review of 40-scale grading plans indicate that the rear or northwest side of Lots 25 through 43 have a side-hill daylight cut situation (i.e. the edge of the cut area will start right at the top edge of a descending relatively-steep n~ slope). Review also indicates that a small (generally less than 5-to 7-foot high) cut slope descends from the rear-of-the lot down to a 00 (decomposed granite) pedestrian trail with a 15-foot wide easement Due to potentially compressible soils and anticipated steep hillside soil creep conditions, we recommend that a side-hill shear key be constructed along the edge of the side-hill daylight cut Toe side-hill shear key should be excavated a minimum of 12 to 15 feet in horizontal width with the bottom at the outer edge (i.e. closest to the hillside) excavated at least 2 feet into competent formational material. The key bottom should also have a fall of at least 2-percent into-the-slope. Due to the presence of the proposed DG pedestrian trail along the edge of the daylight cut, the shear key will likely be located within the 15-foot trail easement Depending upon the location of the anticipated 1:1 (horizontal to vertical) back-cut of the key, the small descending slope may also need to be removed and replaced with compacted fill. If this should occur, care should be taken so that the building footprint of planned residential structure on the lot is not undercut and the lot has to be treated as a cut-fill transition lot (see Section 6.1.4). 6.1. 7 Fill Slope Keys Prior to the placement of fill slopes that will be placed above natural and/or cut areas on the site; a fill slope key should be constructed. The fill slope key should be excavated at least 2 feet 'into competent soil along the toe-of-slope and constructed approximately 15 feet wide with the key bottom angled a minimum of 2 percent into-the-slope. The anticipated fill slope key locations are presented on the Geotechnical Map (Plate 1). 6.1.8 Fill Placement and Com1X1Ction The on-site soils are generally suitable for use as compacted fill provided they are free of organic material, trash or debris, and rock fragments larger than 8 inches in maximum di,mension. All fill soils should be brought to above-optimum moisture conditions and compacted in uniform lifts to at least 90 percent relative compaction based on the laboratory maximum dry density (ASTM D1557). The optimum lift thickness required to produce a uniformly compacted fill will depend on the type and size of compaction equipment used. In general, fill should be placed in lifts not exceeding 8 inches in compacted thickness. Placement and compaction of fill should be performed in general accordance with the current City of Carlsbad grading ordinances, sound construction practices, and the General Earthwork and Grading Specifications of Rough-Grading presented in Appendix D. Project No. 133023-03 Page 19 April 29, 2014 If import soils are to be used as fill, they shall be essentially free from organic matter and other deleterious substances, and should contain no materials over 6 inch~ in maximum dimension, have a low expansion potential (i.e., Expansion Index ranging from O to 50), and negligible sulfate content Representative samples of the desired import source shall be given to the Geotechnical Consultant at least 48 hours (2 working days) before importing grading begins so that its suitability can be determined and appropriate tests performed 6.1.9 Compaction of Deep Fill Settlement of deep compacted fill soils occurs in two manners. One is short-term (elastic) settlement due to the weight of the overlying fill soils compressing the soils. This typically occurs during construction for sandy soils and within months after grading for finer-grained soils. As a result, the onsite silty and clayey soils compress more slowly than soils that are more granular. The second maI;lller is long-term settlement that typically occurs on the order of years after the fill soils are placed This occurs even to properly compacted fill soils and even though canyon subdrains are constructed. Based on our review of the mass grading plans for the project (O'Day, 2014c), fill soils of up to approximately 45 feet are proposed in the street crossing the canyon between Planning Areas PA-8 and PA-10. However, due to the anticipated removals of the compressible alluvial soils in the area of this deep fill, the maximum fill thickness will be on the order of 70 to 75 feet Our professional experience and analysis indicates that potential settlement in these deep fill areas will be as much as 5 inches or more (depending on compactive effort) and may take as long as 3 to 6 months (or longer) to occur. Most of this settlement will likely occur during grading. However, to reduce the time for post-construction settlement to occur, structural fills placed below a depth of 40 feet below finish grade should be placed at a minimum relative compaction of 93 percent (based on ASTM Test Method D1557). In addition, the fill soils should be moisture conditioned to at least 2 percent over the optimum moisture content The settlement is expected to occur during construction and within approximately 3 to 6 months ( depending on fill depth and relative compaction) following fill placement provided the deep fills are placed at a 93 percent relative compaction (based on ASTM Test Method D1557). This is a rough estimate and may vary depending on the actual conditions encountered during grading. In order to determine that the anticipated short-term settlement has been substantially completed, a series of near-surface settlement monuments should be installed immediately after rough grading and elevations obtained using a benchmark on formational material. We recommend that the settlement monuments be surveyed once a week for the first month, then twice monthly for 3 months, and then monthly until it can be established that the anticipated settlement has occurred. Construction of settlement sensitive improvements in the areas of deep fill should be delayed until the settlement is within the tolerable limits of the proposed improvements. Long-term fill settlement typically occurs years after grading. The anticipated differential settlement is based on actual total and differential fill thickness below proposed improvements. Differential settlement estimates will be provided at the completion of grading and may be mitigated by speciaj _graqifig during the future fine grading operations and/or foundation design. Project No. 133023-03 Page 20 April 29, 2014 6.1.10 Expansive Soils and Selective Grading The previous laboratory test result by GeoSoils and our professional experience with similar materials on sites in the vicinity indicate that the on-site soils possess a very low to very high expansion potential. As a result, the presence of highly expansive materials within 5 vertical feet from finish grade will require special foundation and slab considerations (i.e. the use of a post-tension foundation system). In general, this condition should be limited to finish grade pads comprised of Santiago Formation claystone or siltstone or where these materials are utilized as compacted fill within 5 feet of finish grade. As an alternative to the use of a post-tension foundation system on lots possessing a medium to very high expansion potential, the building pads may be overexcavated a minimum of 5 feet below finish pad grade and replace with properly compacted fill possessing very low to low expansion potential (i.e., the sandy soil of the Santiago Formation). Should this alternative be chosen, the overexcavation should extend across the entire lot and be graded such that water does not accumulate beneath the structures (by providing a minimum 2 percent fall of the overexcavation bottom towards the street or existing fill). 6.1.11 Temporary Stability o(Removal Excavations Due to the recommended depth of remedial grading ( on the order of 5 to 20 feet), the temporary stability of the excavations along the perimeter of the site should be within a tolerable range. However, if earthwork depths exceed anticipated values, temporary stability needs to be considered. All excavations for the proposed development should be performed in accordance with current OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Agency) regulations and those of other regulatory agencies, as appropriate. Temporary excavations maybe cut vertically up to five feet Excavations over five feet should be slot-cut, shored, or cut to a 1:1 (horizontal to vertical) slope gradient Surface water should be diverted away from the exposed cut, and not be allowed to pond on top of the excavations. Temporary cuts should not be left open for an extended period of time. Planned temporary conditions should be reviewed by the geotecbnical consultant of record in order to reduce the potential for sidewall failure. The geotechnical consultant may provide recommendations for controlling the length of sidewall exposed 6.1.12 Trench Backfill and Compaction The onsite soils may generally be suitable as trench backfill provided they are screened of rocks and other material over 6 inches in diameter and organic matter. Trench backfill should be compacted in uniform lifts (generally not exceeding 8 inches in compacted thickness) by mechanical means to at least 90 percent relative compaction (per ASTM Test Method D1557). If trenches are shallow and the use of conventional equipment may result in damage to the utilities; clean sand, having sand equivalent (SE) of 30 or greater, should be used to bed and shade the utilities. Sand backfill should be densified. The densification may be accomplished by jetting or flooding and then tamping to ensure adequate compaction. A representative from LGC should observe, probe, and test the backfill to verify compliance with the project specifications. Project No. 133023-03 Page 21 April 29, 2014 6.2 Control of Ground Water and Surface Waters Based on our review of the project geotechnical data, it is our opinion that a permanent shallow ground ·water table does not currently exist at the site. However, a perched ground water condition is present within the alluvial soils in the main drainages of the property. The control of ground water in a hillside development is essential in order to reduce the potential for undesirable surface flow, hydrostatic pressure and the adverse effects of ground water on slope stability. We recommend that measures be taken to properly finish grade the site such that drainage water is directed away from top-of-slopes and away from proposed structures. No ponding of water should be permitted. Drainage design is within the purview of the design civil engineer. Even with these provisions, our experience indicates that shallow groun,d water/perched ground water conditions can develop in areas where no such ground water conditions existed prior to site development, especially in areas where a substantial increase in surface water infiltration results from landscape irrigation. We recommend that an engineering geologist be present during grading operations to observe and record possible future seepage areas and provide field recommendations for mitigation of future potential seepage. · 6.2.1 Canyon Subdrains In order to help reduce the potential for ground water accumulation in the proposed fill areas, we recommend sulxlrains be installed in the bottoms of canyons fill areas ( or on the sides of the removal if saturated alluvium is left-in-place) prior to fill placement The canyon subdrains should consist of a 6-inch diameter PVC pipe surrounded by a minimum of 9-cubic feet (per linear foot) of 3/4-inch gravel wrapped in a filter fabric (Mirafi 140N or equivalent). Where the subdrain is placed on fill in order to outlet the subdrain, the subdrain should consist of solid PVC pipe. The subdrain should have a minimum fall of at least 1 percent Preliminary canyon subdrain locations are presented on the Geotechnical Map (Plate 1). Details for subdrain construction are provided in the attached General Earthwork and · Grading Specifications (Appendix D). The actual need and/or location of canyon subdrains should be based on the evaluation of the configuration of the canyon bottoms by the geotechnical consultant after the removal of compressible soils have been completed. A representative of the project civil engineer should survey the installed subdrains for alignment and grade. Sufficient time should be allowed for the surveys prior to commencement of .fill placement operations over the subdrain. Toe subdrain outlets should be installed to discharge water into positive drainage devices (e.g. storm drain boxes, natural canyon bottoms, etc.). Project No. 133023-03 Page 22 April 29, 2014 6.2.2 Stability Fill Subdrains Subdrains should be provided in the stability fills constructed on-site in order to minimize surficial slope instability. The subdrains should be placed along the heel of the stability fill key (across the entire length of the key) and along the back-cut at approximately 30-foot vertical intervals. The subdrains should be placed and constructed in accordance with the recommendations presented in Appendix D. 6.2.3 Cut Slope Seepage Conditions Due to the anticipated presence of relatively permeable soils (i.e. Santiago Formation sandstone) underlain by relatively impermeable formational claystone or siltstones exposed in cut slopes on the site, groundwater seepage conditions are likely at these contacts. Slopes exposing these conditions (especially when the area at the top of the slope will be irrigated and/or where strucrures will be located at the toe-of-slope) should be evaluated by the geotechnical consultant to determine if some type of subdrain system should be placed to intercept the groundwater seepage. Recommendations to mitigate the seepage conditions include installing a toe-of-slope subdrain system, installing a subdrain system at or slightly below the contact between the permeable and impermeable materials or by replacing the slope with a stability fill (discussed in Section 6.2). With respect to the south-facing cut slope along the northeast side of the site (in the vicinity of Lots 250 through 262), we recommend a subdrain be installed along the toe-of-slope. The recommended subdrain system should consist of a 4-inch diameter perforated PVC pipe installed (holes down) in a trench having a minimum fall of at least 1-to 2-percent toward the outlet location. The trench should have a minimum depth of 3 to 4 feet and a minimum width of 12 inches. Toe trench should be backfilled to within 12 inches of the ground surface with permeable material or clean 3/4-inch gravel wrapped in filter fabric (Mira:fi 140N or equivalent). The subdrain outlet or ''tightline" should consist of a 4-inch solid PVC pipe. A typical detail of the toe-of-slope subdrain construction is presented as Figure 2. We also recommend that clean-outs be considered in several locations along the subdrain system (such as at the high point, angle point and/or where the perforated pipe transitions into solid pipe). A concrete cutoff wall should also be constructed where the perforated pipe transitions to a solid tight-line pipe. The cutoff wall should have a minimum width of 6 inches, be notched into the bottom and sides of the trench wall a minimum of 4 inches, and extend at least 6 inches above the top of the subdrain pipe. Between the cutoff wall and the outlet point, solid (non-perforated) pipe should be utilized. The outlet location and subdrain pipe should be surveyed by the project civil engineer to ensure the subdrain outlet pipe has the minimum 1-to 2-percent fall toward the outlet location. We also recommend that a representative of LGC Valley observe the toe-of-slope subdrain installation and document the placement and construction operations. Project No. 133023-03 Page 23 . April 29, 2()14 6.3 Settlement Monitonng We recommend that where alluvium is left-in-place beneath the fill, the fill area should be monitored (by the placement of settlement monuments upon completion of rough-grading and periodic surveying). The only place on site based on the current grading plans is the roadway fill between PA-8 and PA-10 in the eastern portion of the site. The number of settlement monuments necessary for monitoring and their placement locations should be determined following a review of the site grading plans by the project geotechnical consultant Construction of settlement-sensitive structures in these deep fill areas should be postponed until anticipated settlement is within tolerable limits based on the analysis of the geotechnical consultant 6.4 Surface Drainage and Lot Maintenance Positive drainage of surface water away from structures is very important No water should be allowed to pond adjacent to buildings or the top of slopes. Positive drainage may be accomplished by providing drainage away from buildings at a gradient of at least 2 percent for a distance of at least 5 feet, and further maintained by a swale of drainage path at a gradient of at least 1 percent Where limited by 5- foot side yards, drainage should be directed away from foundations for a minimum of 3 feet and into a collective swale or pipe system. Where necessary, drainage paths may be shortened by use of area drains and collector pipes. Eave gutters also help reduce water infiltration into the subgrade soils if the downspouts are properly connected to appropriate outlets. Property owners should be reminded of the responsibilities of hillside maintenance practices (i.e., the maintenance of proper lot drainage; the undertaking of property improvements in accordance with sound engineering practices; and the proper maintenance of vegetation, including prudent lot and slope irrigation). Planters with open bottoms adjacent to buildings should be avoided. Planters should not be designed adjacent to buildings unless provisions for drainage, such as catch basins, liners, and/or area drains, are made. Overwatering must be avoided. 6.5 Temporary!Pennanent Shoring The following preliminary geotechnical parameters may be utilized by the shoring consultant for design of the temporary/permanent shoring system. Temporary shoring is generally considered to have a service life of two years or less. The recommendations provided herein with regard to shoring of any site excavation or as a part of a permanent wall design for excavation of 20 feet or less, are based on assumed conditions, extrapolated from the data gathered from this investigation. The shoring designer should independently evaluate the parameters provided, and conduct an additional investigation if they consider necessary. Project No. 133023-03 !'age 24 April 29,· 2014 I I I I Prior to construction, the contractor should verify underground clearance of any existing utility lines or. structures that must be removed or protected in place during construction, or may conflict with any proposed shoring system. Any tieback anchors and/or soil nails that extend beyond the site property limits will require permission from the adjacent property owner. Special attention will be required to protect existing settlement sensitive improvement in close proximity to the proposed excavation, such as adjacent structures located along the boundary of the site. Typical cantilever shoring, where deflection of the shoring will not impact the performance of adjacent structures, may be designed using the active equivalent fluid pressures of 35 pounds per square foot (psf) per foot of depth ( or pcf) for temporary shoring and 45psf for permanent shoring. Braced (i.e. internal bracing -rakers) or tied-back shoring is recommended in areas where the shoring will be .located close to existing structures in order to limit shoring. defections or required due to the proposed depth of excavation. Braced or tied-back shoring with a level backfill may be designed using an active trapezoidal soil pressure of 27H and 35H in pounds per square foot (psf), where H is equal to the depth in feet of the excavation being shored (shape of the trapezoid should be 0.2H, 0.6H, 0.2H) for temporary and permanent shoring, respectively. Any building, equipment, or traffic loads located within a 1:1 (horizontal to vertical) projection from the base of the shoring should be added to the applicable lateral earth pressure. A minimum additional uniform lateral pressure of 100 psf for the upper 10 feet should be added to the appropriate lateral earth pressures to account for typical vehicle traffic loading. The proposed shoring should be designed for a maximum shoring deflection of up to I-inch for permanent shoring and up to 2-inches for temporary shoring, and up to 1- inch adjacent to the street (non-surcharged condition) and up to a maximum of 0.5-inches adjacent to existing buildings (surcharged condition). In addition, the above noted lateral earth pressures for shoring does not include hydrostatic pressures since no groundwater is anticipated where shoring is anticipated. Consideration should be given to increasing the provided lateral earth pressures and/or design factors of safety in order to further limit shoring deflections and subsequent potential impacts on adjacent structures and improvements, as necessary. If temporary pressure/post-grouted tieback anchors are used, anchors may be designed using a preliminary bond stress of 2,500 pounds per square foot (psf). However, the tieback designer should make an independent evaluation in order to verify the preliminary bond stress is adequate for site conditions. Tieback bond stress should be verified by field testing. Tieback anchors should minimally be designed, constructed, and tested in accordance with the requirements of the Post-Tensioning Institute (PTI). For design purposes, tieback should obtain their load-carrying capacity from the soil behind a plane taken to be 3 horizontal feet from the bottom of the shoring facing and inclined at an angle of 60 degrees measured from the horizontal extending to the top of the excavation. Passive resistance of soldier piles may be assumed to be an equivalent fluid pressure of 350 pcf to a maximum value of 3,500 psf. The passive earth pressure may be increased by 100 percent for isolated piles. Piles with spacing greater than 3 times of pile diameter can be considered as isolated piles. In order to develop the full lateral resistance, firm contact between the soldier pile and undisturbed soils must be assured. For vertical shoring capacity, an allowable skin friction of 500 psf may be used for the portion of pier below the proposed development excavation. End bearing should be neglected. Drilling of shafts for solider piles may require casing or drilling mud to prevent caving. Project No. 133023-03 Page 25 April 29, 2014 . :--.;...~ The components of the shoring system should be designed by a California licensed structural and/or -:_ civil engineer specializing in the design of shoring systems. Field pullout testing should be performed during construction to verify the estimated pullout resistance used in the design and/or post grout tubes should be used to ensure adequate design capacities are obtained. Ultimately, it is the specialty contractor's responsibility to obtain the required pullout capacity, which may require design and/or field modifications. LGC should review the shoring plans prior to construction to verify that geotechnical recommendations are properly implemented into the project plans It is highly recommended that a program of documentation and monitoring be devised and put into practice before the onset of any groundwork. The contractor should establish survey points on the shoring, adjacent streets, and neighboring buildings within 100 feet of the excavation perimeter prior to any excavation. These survey points should be used to monitor the movement of the shoring and existing improvements during construction excavation. The monitoring program should include, but not necessarily be limited to detailed documentation of the existing improvements, buildings and utilities around the excavation, with particular attention to any distress that is already present prior to the start of work. A licensed surveyor should be retained to establish monuments on the shoring and the surrounding ground prior to excavation. Such monuments should be monitored for horiwntal and vertical movement during construction. Results of the monitoring program should be provided immediately to the project structural (shoring) engineer and LGC for review and evaluation. 6.6 Foundations 6.6.1 General Preliminary recommendations for foundation design and foundation construction are presented herein. When the structural loads for the proposed structures are known they should be provided to our office to verify the recommendations presented herein. The following foundation recommendations are provided. The three foundations -recommended for the proposed structures are: (1) Conventional foundation for very low expansion potential and shallow fills; (2) Post-Tension foundations; or (3) Mat Slabs. I The information and recommendations presented in this section are not meant to supersede design by the project structural engineer or civil engineer. specializing in the structural design nor impede those recommendations by a corrosion consultant Should conflict arise, modifications to the foundation design provided herein can be provided. Project No. 133023-03 -Page 26 April 29, 2014 6.6.2 Bearing Capacity Shallow foundations may be designed for a maximum allowable bearing capacity of 2,000 lb/:ft2 (gross), for continuous footings a minimum of 12 inches wide and 18 inches deep, and spread footings 24 inches wide and 18 inches deep, into certified compacted fill or bedrock. A factor of safety greater than 3 was used in evaluating the above bearing capacity value. This value maybe increased by 250 psf for each additional foot in depth and 100 psf for each additional foot of width to a maximum value of 3,000 psf. Lateral forces on footings may be resisted by passive earth resistance and friction at the bottom of the footing. Foundations may be designed for a coefficient of friction of 0.35, and a passive earth pressure of 250 lb/:ft2/ft. The passive earth pressure incorporates a factor of safety of greater than 1.5. All footing excavations should be cut square and level as much as possible, and should be free of sloughed materials including sand, rocks and gravel, and trash debris. Subgrade soils should be pre-moistened for the assumed medium expansion potential (to be confirmed at the- end of grading). These allowable bearing pressures are applicable for level (ground slope equal to or flatter than 5H: 1 V) conditions only. Bearing values indicated above are for total dead loads and frequently applied live loads. The above vertical bearing may be increased by one-third for short durations of loading which will include the effect of wind or seismic forces. 6.6.3 Conventional Foundations Conventional foundations may be used to support proposed structures underlain by very low expansive soils (i.e. Expansion Index less that 20 and Plasticity Index less than 15) and with less than 30 feet of fills. · Continuous footings should have minimum widths of 12 inches, 15 inches or 18 inches for one-story, two-story or three-story structures, respectively. Individual column footings should have a minimum width of 24 inches. Footings for proposed two story structures should have minimum depths (below lowest adjacent finish grade) of 18 inches and 12 inches for exterior and interior footings, respectively for assumed medium expansion potential (51-90 Expansion Index). The subgrade should be moisture-conditioned and proof-rolled just prior to construction to provide a firm, relatively unyielding surface, especially if the surface has been loosened by the passage of construction traffic. Project No. 133023-03 Page 27 April 29, 2014 · '?hie ·u~deislab vapor/moisture retarder (i.e. an equivalent capillary break method) may consist or'a minimum 15-mil thick Stego (or equivalent) in conformance with ASTM E 1745 Class A material, placed in general conformance with ASTM B1643, underlain by a minimum 2-inch of sand and overlain by 1-inch of sand, as needed. The · sand layer requirements above the vapor barrier are the purview of the foundation engineer/structural engineer, and should be provided in accordance with ACI Publication 302 "Guide for Concrete Floor and Slab Construction". These recommendations must be confirmed (and/or altered) by the foundation engineer, based upon the performance expectations of · the foundation. Ultimately, the design of the moisture retarder system and recommendations for concrete placement and concrete mix design, which will address bleeding, shrinkage, and curling are the purview of the foundation engineer, in consideration of the project requirements provided by the architect and developer. The underslab vapor/moisture retarder described above is considered a suitable alternative in accordance with the Capillary Break Section 4.505 .2.1 of the CALGreen code. Subgrade soils should be pre-saturated to optimum moisture content to a depth of 12 inches for a very low expansion potential. Expansion index testing should be performed at the end of grading for confirmation. The minimum thickness of the floor slabs should be at least 4.5 inches, and joints should be provided per usual practice. 6.6.4 Post-Tension Foundations Based on the site geotechnical conditions and provided the remedial recommendations provided herein are implemented, the site may be considered suitable for the support of the anticipated structures using a post-tensioned slab-on-grade foundation system, for the anticipated low to medium expans_ive soils and for deeper fill areas. The following section summaries our recommendations for the foundation system. Table 2 contains the geotechnical recommendations for the construction of PT slab on grade foundations. The structural engineer should design the foundation system based on these parameters including the foundation settlement as indicated in the following section to the allowable deflection criteria determined by the structural engineer/architect Project No. 1}3023-03 Page 28 April 29, 2014 ·.·;:·- I I i I ' I ' I Table2 Prellmlnarv Geo technical Parameters for Post-Tensioned Foundation Desi1m Parameter Vaine Expansion Classification (Assumed to be confirmed at Low and Medium Expansion the completion of grading): Thomthwaite Moisture Index (From Figure 3.3): -20 Constant Soil Suction (From Figure 3.4): PF3.6 Center Lift Low Medium Edge moisture variation distance (from Figure 9.0 feet 9.0 feet 3.6), em: 0.3 inches 0.49 inches Center lift, Ym: Edge Lift Low Medium Edge moisture variation distance (from Figure 5.2 feet 5.0 feet 3.6), em: 0.7 inches 1.3 inches Edj:!;e lift, Ym: Soluble Sulfate Content for Design of Concrete Mix in Contact with Site Soils in Accordance with American Negligible Exposure Concrete Institute standard 318, Section 4.3: Corrosivity of Earth Materials to Ferrous Metals: Severely Corrosive Modulus of Subgrade Reaction, k (assuming 100 pci (low) presaturation as indicated below): 85 pci (medium) Additional Recommendations: 1. Presaturate slab subgrade to at least optimum-moisture content or to 1.2 times optimum moisture, to minimum depths of 12 and 18 inches below ground surface, respectively for low and medium expansion potentials. 2. Install a 15-mil Stego Wrap (or equivalent) moisture/vapor barrier in direct contact with the concrete (unless superseded by the Structural/Post-tension engineer*) with 1 to 2 inches of sand below the Stego Wrap. 3. Minimum perimeter foundation embedment below finish grade for moisture cut off should be 12 and 18 inches, respectively for low and medium expansion potentials. 4. Minimum slab thickness should be 5 inches. * The above sand and Visqueen recommendations are traditionally included with geotechnical foundation recommendations although they are generally not a major factor influencing the geotechnical performance of the foundation. The sand and Visqueen requirements are the purview of the foundation engineer/corrosion engineer (in accordance with ACI Publication 302 "Guide for Concrete Floor and Slab Construction") and the homebuilder to ensure that the concrete cures more evenly than it would otherwise, is protected from corrosive environments, and moisture penetration of through the floor is acceptable to future homeowners. Therefore, the above recommendations may be superseded by the requirements of the previously mentioned parties. Project No. 133023-03 Page 29 April 29, 2014 6.6.5 Mat Foundations A mat foundation can be used for support of proposed residential buildings. An allowable soil bearing pressure of 1,000 psf may be used for the design of the mat at the surface under the slab area. The allowable bearing value is for total dead loads and frequently applied live loads and may be increased by one-third for short durations of loading which will include the effect of wind or seismic forces. A coefficient of vertical subgrade reaction, k, of 85 pounds per cubic inch (pci) may be used to evaluate the pressure distribution beneath the mat foundation. The magnitude of total and differential settlements of the mat foundation will be a function of the structural design and stiffness of the m3:t Based on assumed structural loads, we estimate that total static settlement will be on the order of an inch at the center of the mat foundation.' Post construction differential settlement can be taken as one-half of the maximum estimated settlement Resistance to lateral loads can be provided by friction acting at the base of foundations and by passive earth pressure. Foundations may be designed for a coefficient of friction of 0.35. Minimum perimeter footing embedment provided in the previous sections maybe reduced for the mat slab design. Coordination with the structural engineer will be required in order to ensure structural loads are adequately distributed throughout the mat foundation to avoid localized stress concentrations resulting in potential settlement. The foundation plan should be reviewed by LGC to confirm preliminary estimated total and differential static settlements. ----·. - 6.6.6 Foundation Settlement Based on previous analysis by others, following the geotechnical release for construction, the static and seismically induced post~nstruction settlements are estimated to be less up to 2- inch with a differential settlement of approximately of I-inch in 40 feet for shallow foundations with less than 30 feet of newly placed compacted fills, and up to a total 3 inches_ of total settlement with a differential settlement of approximately of 2-inch in 40 feet for shallow foundations with fills greater than 30 feet in thickness. , 6.6.7 Foundation Setback All foundation located close to slopes should have a minimum setback per Figure 1805.3.1 of the 2013 CBC. The setback distances should be measured from competent materials on the outer slope face, excluding any weathered and loose materials. · Project No. 133023-03 Page 30 April 29, ?0~1- 6.6.8 Updated Seismic Design Criteria The site seismic characteristics were evaluated per the guidelines set forth in Chapter 16, Section 1613 of the 2013 California Building Code (CBC). Representative site coordinates of latitude 33.1542° N and longitude -117.3036° W were utilized in our analyses. The maximum considered earthquake (MCE) spectral response accelerations (SMS and SM1) and adjusted design spectral response acceleration parameters (Sos and S01 ) for Site Class D are provided in Table 3. Table 3 U111UI1:P.d Seismic Desivn. Parameters Selected Parameters from 2013 CBC, Section Seismic Design Values 1613 -Earthquake Loads Site Class per Chapter 20 of ASCE 7 D Risk-Targeted Spectral Acceleration for Short 1.083g Periods (Ss)* Risk-Targeted Spectral Accelerations for I-Second 0.417g Periods (S1)* Site Coefficient Fa per Table 1613.3.3(1) 1.067 Site Coefficient Fv per Table 1613.3.3(2) 1.583 Site Modified Spectral Acceleration for Short Periods (SMs) for Site Class D 1.155g [Note: SMS = FaSs] Site Modified Spectral Acceleration for 1-Second Periods (SM,) for Site Class D 0.66g [Note: SM1 = FvSi] Design Spectral Acceleration for Short Periods (Sos) for Site Class D 0.77g [Note: Sos = (2'3)SMS] Design Spectral Acceleration for I-Second Periods (S01) for Site Class D 0.44g [Note: S01 = (2'3)SMi] Mapped Risk Coefficient at 0.2 sec Spectral 0.968 Response Period, CRS (per ASCE 7) Mapped Risk Coefficient at 1 sec Spectral Response 1.02 Period, CR, (per ASCE 7) * From USGS, 2013 Section 1803.5.12 of the 2013 CBC (per Section 11.8.3 of ASCE 7) states that the maximum considered earthquake geometric mean (MCEo) Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) should be used for geotechnical evaluations. The PGAM for the site is equal to 0.453g (USGS, 2013). A deaggregation of the PGA based on a 2,475-year average return period indicates that an earthquake magnitude of 6.79 at a distance of approximately 11.4 km (7.1 mi) from the site would contribute the most to this ground motion (USGS, 2008). Project No. 133023-03 Page 31 April 29, 2014 6.7 Retaining Walls 6.7.1 Lateral, Earth Pressures and Retaining Wall Design Considerations for Conventional Walls -The following lateral earth pressures presented in Table 4 may be used for the design of any future site retaining walls. We recommend low expansive soils for retaining wall backfill if no onsite soils fit the required minimum parameters (SE greater than 30). The recommended lateral pressures for approved soils (expansion index less than 30 per U.B.C. 18-1-B, less than 15 percent passing #200 sieve, and PI less than 15) for level or sloping backfill are presented on the table below. The recommended lateral pressures for clean sand or approved select soils for level or sloping backfill are presented on the following table. Table4 Lateral Earth Pressures for Retainin2 Walls Equivalent Fluid Weight (pcf) Conditions Level Backfill 2:1 Backfill Seismic Earth Presmire (pcf) * Sloniru! Upwards Approved Select Approved Select Level 2H:1V Material Material Active 35 55 20 46 At-Rest 50 75 -- Passive 250 --- * For walls with greater than 6-feet in backfill height, the above seismic earth pressure should be added to the static pressures given in the table above. The seismic earth pressure should be considered as an inverted triangular distribution. with the resultant acting at 0.6H in relation to the base of the retaining wall footing (where H is the retained height). The aforementioned incremental seismic load was determined in general accordance with the standard of practice in the industry (using t,he Mononobe- Okabe method for active and Woods method for at-rest) for determining earth pressures as a result of seismic events. Embedded structural walls should be designed for lateral earth pressures exerted on them. The magnitude of these pressures depends on the amount of deformation that the wall can yield under load. If the wall can yield enough to mobilize the full shear strength of the soil, it can be designed for "active" pressure. If the wall cannot yield under the applied load, the shear strength of the soil cannot be mobilized and the earth pressure will be higher. Such walls should be designed for "at-rest'' conditions. If a structure moves toward the soils, the resulting resistance developed by the soil is the ''passive" resistance. Project No. 133023-03 Page 32 April 29, 2014 I I ~' I I I 6.7.2 For design purposes, the recommended equivalent fluid pressure for each case for walls founded above the static groundwater and backfilled with low expansive onsite or import soils is provided in the table above. The equivalent fluid pressure values assume free-draining conditions. The backfill soils should be compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction. The walls should be constructed and backfilled as soon as possible after back-cut excavation. Prolonged exposure of back-cut slopes may result in some localized slope instability. If conditions other than those assumed above are anticipated, the equivalent fluid pressure values should be provided on an individual-case basis by the geotechnical engineer. Surcharge loading effects from any adjacent structures should be evaluated by the geotechnical and structural engineers. Surcharge loading on retaining walls should be considered when any loads are located within a 1:1 (horizontal to vertical) projection from the base of the retaining wall and should be added to the applicable lateral earth pressures. Where applicable, a minimum uniform lateral pressure of 100 psf should be added to the appropriate lateral earth pressures to account for typical vehicle traffic loading. All retaining wall structures should be provided with appropriate drainage and appropriately waterproofed. The outlet pipe should be sloped to drain to a suitable outlet Typical wall drainage design is illustrated on the attached Figure 3. It should be noted that the recommended subdrain does not provide protection against seepage through the face of the wall and/or efflorescence. Efflorescence is generally a white crystalline powder (discoloration) that results when water, which contains soluble salts, migrates over a period of time through the face of a retaining wall and evaporates. If such seepage or efflorescence is undesirable, retaining walls should be waterproofed to reduce this potential. For sliding resistance, the friction coefficient of 0.35 may be used at the concrete and soil interface. Wall footings should be designed in accordance with structural considerations. The passive resistance value may be increased by one-third when considering loads of short duration such as wind or seismic loads. For short term loading (i.e. seismic) the allowable bearing capacity may be increased by one-third for seismic loading. Foundations for retaining walls in properly compacted· fill should be embedded at least 18 inches below lowest adjacent grade. At this depth and a minimum of 12 inches in width, an allowable bearing capacity of 1,500 psf may be assumed. A factor of safety greater than 3 was used in evaluating the above bearing capacity value. This value maybe increased by 250 psf for each additional foot in depth and 100 psf for each additional foot of width to a maximum value of 2,500 psf. All excavations should be made in accordance with Cal OSHA. Excavation safety is the sole responsibility of the contractor. Segmental Retaining Wall Recommendations Based on our review, segmental retaining walls will have up to a 2H:1V sloping backfill above the walls. The zone of influence for geogrid-reinforced walls is defined by a lH: 1 V projection from the heel of the bottom geogrid to the finished ground surface overlying the wall. Project No. 133023-03 . Page 33 April 29, 2014 The following geotechni~ parameters presented in . Table 5 may be utilized by the wall · engineer in design of the onsite segmental walls. Design of segmental retaining walls should be per the National Concrete Masonry Association (NCMA) guidelines (or equivalent guidelines). TableS Desh!n Soil Strerurth Parameters Cohesion (psf) Friction Angle Unit Weight (Degrees) .(pcf) Infill (Reinforced) Soil 0 30 125 Retained (Backfill) Soil -50 30 120 Foundation Soil 50 30 120 The PGAM for the site is equal to 0.453g (USGS, 2013), should be used for the proposed design. Once the wall designer designs the wall considering external, internal, and local wall stability, LGC will then check the global slope stability. Where global slope stability is the controlling factor, additional geogrid will be added to the design and/or the geogrid will be lengthened, as needed. Thus, the final design is expected to satisfy both the "conventional method" of modular wall design as well as global slope stability'. All excavations should be made in accordance with Cal OSHA, as a general guideline. The backfill soils (having an expansion index less than 30 per U.B.C. 18-1-B) should be compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction (based on ASTM Test Methods D2922 and D3017). The walls should be constructed and backfilled as soon as possible after back-cut excavation. Prolonged exposure of back-cut slopes may result in some localized slope instability. Excavation safety is the sole responsibility of the contractor. The subject walls may be backfilled using the onsite native soils. For closed face walls we recommend a minimum 1-foot-wide drainage gallery be constructed immediately behind the face of the wall using Class II Permeable material and augmented with a perforated 4-inch PVC pipe, or per the wall manufactures specifications. This drainage layer and drain is not a requirement for open faced walls. The remainder of the wall may be backfilled using the onsite native soils. The subject segmental retaining walls should be constructed founded onto ' . competent soils (i.e. compacted fills or competent native soils), or per manufactures specifications. For preliminary purposes the allowable bearing capacities to be used in the wall design is 1,500 pounds per square foot Project No. 133023-03 Page 34 April 29, 2014 . I i i I ' ' From a geotechnical perspective, the onsite soils are generally suitable for use. as compacted fill, provided they are screened of rocks greater than 8 inches in maximum dimension, organic materials and construction debris. Fill soils should be brought to at least optimum-moisture content, and recompacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction (based on ASTM. Test Method D1557). The optimum lift thickness to produce a uniformly compacted fill will depend on the type and size of compaction equipment used. In general, fill should be placed in uniform lifts generally not exceeding 8 inches in compacted thickness. Placement and compaction of fill should be performed in accordance with local grading ordinances under full-time observation and testing of the geotechnical consultant 1be geotechnical consultant shall review and approve all fill materials, include onsite and import materials. Prior to placement of the geogrid, the surface of the compacted fill shall be prepared such that it has a maximum variation of 6 vertical inches over a distance of 15 feet Each geogrid layer shall be pulled taut and secured in-place prior· to placing backfill material on the geogrid. The geogrid layers shall be continuous and no splice and/or connection system will be accepted. The contractor shall not operate tracked construction equipment directly upon the geogrid reinforcement, but shall use rubber tired equipment All passes with tracked equipment for the purposes of obtaining compaction shall be done in straight lines and shall minimize the turning movements of the equipment to reduce the potential for displacing and/or damaging the geogrids. The manufacturer shall provide to the owner quality control testing for the each lot of blocks which are shipped to the site. The contractor shall install the block per the manufacturers recommended procedures. All excavations should be made in accordance with Cal OSHA, as a general guideline. All excavations should be made at 1:1 inclinations or flatter. Once excavation has been initiated, the segmental retaining wall should be constructed as soon as possible after back-cut excavation. Prolonged exposure of back-cut slopes may result in some localized slope instability. Excavations should be planned so that they are not initiated without sufficient time to backfill them prior to weekends, holidays, or forecasted rain. Excavation safety is the sole responsibility of the contractor. We recommend the contractors proposed plan of operations be reviewed by this office prior to initiation of work and closely monitored by representatives of this office during excavation and construction. A backdrain should be installed at the heel of the wall back-cut consisting of a 4 inch PVC pipe surrounded by %" crushed rock and wrapped in a filter fabric and outletted through the wall face or to. another suitable outlet. If water seepage is encountered along the wall back- cut, a continuous chimney drain consisting of a one foot layer Caltrans Class II permeable material shall be placed at the heel along the back-cut behind the geogrid, as necessary. The chimney drains should be outletted through the backdrain at the heel of the cut. The outlet pipes should be constructed at the low points of the subdrains and have a minimum 2 percent fall to the outlet location. Additional subdrains may be needed if seepage and/or areas of potential seepage are encountered during grading operations. Project No. 133023-03 Page 35 April 29, 2014 Positive drainage of surface. ~ater away from _the base _and top of the proposed segmental retaining walls are important A concrete V-ditch shall be constructed behind the top of each · of the proposed the wall to prevent surface water from the infiltrating the backfill soil. The · V-ditch shall be design and placed by the project civil engineer in accordance the local codes. The zone of influence for geogrid-reinforced modular block walls is defined by a lH: 1 V projection from ·the heel of the bottom geogrid to the finished ground sµrface overlying the wall. Any building or vehicle loads within this zone should be considered in the wall design. 6.8 Slope Creep Due to the potentially expansive nature of the fill soils within the site, the probability exists for development of a creep condition on the slopes within the site with the passage of time. Creep is a very slow nearly continuous downward and outward movement of slope soils. The movement is minimal under small shear stresses, however sufficient to produce permanent deformation but not large enough to produce a shear failure as occurs in a landslide. For the site slopes, the principal cause for development of a creep condition is a result o~ repeated cycles of swelling and contraction of expansive soils over a period of time due to seasonal variations in the moisture content and is an irreversible process resulting in a loss ot' shear strength and subsequent buildup of small shear stresses. Experience has shown that creep can affect surficial soils to vertical depths of several feet depending on the expansiveness of the soils and the slope height and inclination, as well as a number of other factors. Other factors which can contribute to development of a slope creep condition include overwatering and subsequent saturation of the slope soils, prolonged or intense rainfall, prolonged periods of drought, rodent activity, inadequate plant materials used for slope protection, inadequate drainage facilities, and/or lack of a proper slope maintenance program. Creep cannot be stopped or eliminated; however, proper foundation embedment and design can be provided such that the magnitude, depth and rate of creep movement can be mitigated for structures proposed on or near descending slopes. For slope heights greater than 10 feet, the slope creep will impact improvements within approximately 10 to 15 feet from the top of slope. Some settlement and tilting may occur in improvements located in this outer 10 to 15 feet of the pad. 6.9 Freestanding (Top-of.Slope) Walls Freestanding wall footings should be founded a minimum of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent grade. To reduce the potential for unsightly cracks, we recommend inclusion of construction joints at 10-to 20-foot intervals. Due to the potential creep of soils, where free standing walls are constructed close to top-of-slope, some tilt of the wall should be anticipated. To reduce the amount of tilt, a combination of grade beam and caisson foundations may be used to support the wall. The system should consist of minimum 12-inch diameter caissons placed at 8 feet maximum on centers, and each 8 feet long and connected together at top with 12-inch by 12-inch grade beam. The geotechnical design parameters for the caisson are shown on the attached Figure 4. Project No. 133023-03 Page36 April 29, 2014 ' I ! I 6.10 Pavement Recommendations Based on an preliminary assumed minimum R-value of 10, based on previous R-value testing of representative site soils, and an assumed Traffic Indices (Tl's) of 5 (Cul De Sacs and local streets), 6 or 7 (for collector streets), we recommend the following minimum pavement sections (Table 6). The R- value should be determined during the concluding stages of grading, and the final pavement section should be designed accordingly. Tl's for the streets within the subject project site should be obtained from the appropriate regulatory agency or calculated by a traffic engineer. Final pavement sections should be confirmed by the project civil engineer based upon the project traffic index and the City of Carlsbad minimum requirements. Table 6 Recommended Minimum Pavement Sections Traffic Index 5 6 7 Asphalt Concrete (in.) 4 4 4 Aggregate Base (in.) 8 11 14 The aggregate base material should conform to the specifications for Class 2 Aggregate Base (Caltrans) or Crushed Aggregate Base (Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction). The base material should be compacted to achieve a minimum relative compaction of 95 percent The subgrade should achieve a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent through the up~r 12 inches. Base and subgrade materials should be moisture-conditioned to relatively uniform moisture content at or slightly over optimum. 6.11 Corrosivitv to Concrete and Metal The National Association of Corrosion Engineers (NACE) defines corrosion as "a deterioration of a substance or its properties because of a reaction with its environment" From a geotechnical viewpoint, the "environment'' is the prevailing foundation soils and the "substances" are the reinforced concrete foundations or various buried metallic elements such as rebar, piles, pipes, etc., which are in direct contact with or within close vicinity of the foundation soil. In general, soil environments that are detrimental to concrete have high concentrations of soluble sulfates and/or pH values of less than 5.5. ACI 318R-08 Table 4.3.1 provides specific guidelines for the concrete mix design when the soluble sulfate content of the soils exceeds 0.1 percent by weight or 1,000 ppm. The minimum amount of chloride ions in the soil environment that are corrosive to steel, either in the form of reinforcement protected by concrete cover, or plain steel substructures such as steel pipes or piles, is 500 ppm per California Test 532. Project}/o. 133023-03 Page37 April 29, 2014, - .... --.. Based on· previous site soil testing by others, the onsite soils are classified as having a negligible sulfate exposure condition in accordance with .ACI ,318R-08 Table 4.3.1. As a preliminary recommendation due to results of sulfate content testing, concrete in contact with onsite soils should be designed in accordance with ACI 318R-08 Table 4.3.1 for the negligible category. It is also our opinion that onsite soils should be considered severely corrosive to buried metals. Site grading will redistribute the materials, which may result in soils with different corrosion potentials. Therefore, the as-graded soil conditions should be verified with confirmatory sampling and testing during the grading phase of the project. Despite the minimum recommendation above, LGC is not a corrosion-engineering firm. Therefore, we recommend that after site grading, consultation with a competent corrosion engineer be initiated to evaluate the actual corrosion potential of the site and to provide recommendations to reduce the corrosion potential with respect to the proposed improvements, as necessary. The recommendations of the corrosion engineer may supersede the above requirements. 6.12 Nonstructural Concrete Flatwork Concrete flatwork (such as walkways, bicycle trails, etc.) have a high potential for cracking due to changes in soil volume related to soil-moisture fluctuations because these slabs are typically much thinner than foundation slabs and are not reinforced with the same dynamic as foundation elements. To reduce the potential for excessive cracking and lifting, concrete should be designed in accordance with the minimum guidelines outlined in Table 7. These guidelines will reduce the potential for irregular cracking and promote cracking along construction joints, but will not eliminate all cracking or lifting. Thickening the concrete and/or adding additional reinforcement will further reduce cosmetic distress. _ Project No. 133023-03 Page 38 April 29, 2014 ·Minimum Thickness (in~inches) Presaturation Reinforcement Thickened Edge Crack Control Maximum Joint Spacing Aggregate Base ~13 Swpet.faintenance . Table7 Nonstructural Concrete Flatwork Private Private Patio/Entryways Sidewalks Driveways 4 5 5 Wet down Presoak: to 12 subgrade soils inches Presoak: to 12 prior to placement inches No. 3 at 24 inches No. 3 at 24 inches -on centers on centers -8" X 8" -- Saw cut or deep Saw cut or deep Saw cut or deep tool joint to a tool joint to a tool joint to a minimum of 1/3 minimum of 1/3 minimum of 1/3 the concrete the concrete the concrete thickness thickness thickness 10 feet or quarter 5 feet cut whichever is 6 feet closer --2 2 Sidewalk, Curb, and Gutter City/Agency Standard City/ Agency Standard City/ Agency Standard City/ Agency Standard City/ Agency Standard City/ Agency Standard , City/ Agency Standard To reduce the potentiaHor erosion and slumping of graded slopes, all slopes should be planted with ground cover and deep-rooted vegetation as soon as practical upon completion of grading. Surface water runoff and standing water at the top-of-slopes should be avoided. Oversteepening of slopes should be avoided during construction activities and landscaping. Maintenance of proper lot drainage, undertaking of property improvements in accordance with sound engineering practice, and proper maintenance of vegetation, including regular pad and slope irrigation, should be performed. Trenches excavated on a slope face for utility of irrigation lines and/or for any purpose should be properly backfilled and compacted by a vibratory plate, or equivalent, in order to obtain a minimum 90 percent relative compaction, in accordance with ASTM Test Methcxl D1557, to the slope face. Observation/testing and acceptance by the geotechnical consultant during trench backfill is recommended. A rodent control program should be established and maintained. Project No. 133023-03 Page.39 __ April 29, 2014 6.14 Construction Observation and Testing The recommendations provided in this report are based on subsurface observations and geotechnical analysis by others. The interpolated subsurface conditions should be checked in the field during construction by a representative of LGC. Construction observation and testing should also be performed by the geotechnical consultant during future grading, excavations, backfill of utility trenches, preparation of pavement subgrade and placement of aggregate base, foundation or retaining wall construction or when an unusual soil condition is encountered at the site. Grading plans, foundation plans, and final project drawings should be reviewed by this office prior to construction. Project No. 133023-03 Page40 April 29, 2014 7.0 UMITATIONS Our services were performed using the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable engineers and geologists practicing in this or similar localities. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the conclusions and professional advice included in this report. The samples taken and submitted for laboratory testing, the observations made and the in-situ field testing performed are believed representative of the entire project; however, soil and geologi~ conditions revealed by excavation may be different than our preliminary findings. If this occurs, the changed conditions must be evaluated by the project soils engineer and geologist and design(s) adjusted as required or alternate design(s) recommended. This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or of his/her representative, to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the architect and/or project engineer and incorporated into the plans, and the necessary steps are taken to see that the contractor and/or subcontractor properly implements the recommendations in the field. The contractor and/or subcontractor should notify the owner if they consider any of the recommendations presented herein to be unsafe. The findings of this report are valid as of the present date. However, changes in the conditions of a property can and do occur with the passage of time, whether they be due to natural processes or the works of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standards may occur, whether they result from legislation or the broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, the findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside our control. Project No. 133023-03 Page 41 April 29, 2014 LGC Figure 1: Site Location Map Project Name Toll Brothers/Robertson Ranch Project-No. 133023-03 Robertson Ranch Eng. I Geol. BIH/MCH/RKW Scale not to scale City of Carlsbad, California Date 4/29/14 Pad grade _...:;;,-----~ Drain may be Drain pipe •., ... : . .. .. ,• ·•· . . . .. · ......... : ··· Native· .. · · '·. soil --.: .. · · 12-inch . :· . cap -..: minimum . :.· ..... . . :·· • ..... . . · .. . ·/ . : ~ .... ~.:-~: ... Permeable material :::::::::::::: 24-inch : ::::::::::::: minirttJm constructed into, or a~ the toe-of-slope 1. SoH cap compacted to 90 percent relative compaction. 2. Permeable material may be gravel wrapped in filter fabric (Mirafi 140N or equivalent). 3. 4-inch-diameter, perforated pipe (SDR-35 or equivalent) with perforations down 4. Pipe to maintain a minimum 1 percent fall. 5. Concrete cut-off wall to be provided at transition to solid outlet pipe. 6. Solid outlet pipe to drain to approved area 7. Cleanouts are recommended at each property line. * From Geosoils, October, 11 , 2010 Report ----~~----~~~~~~--~~~~~ .... ~~~~~~~~-""~~ LGC Figure 2 Toe of Slope Drain n ·etail Project Name Project No. Eng. I Geo!. Scale Date Toll Brothers/Robertson Ranch 133023-03 BIH/MCH n/a 04/29/14 FENCE- EXTENT OF FREE DRAINING SAND BACKFILL, MINIMUM HEEL WIDTH OR H/2 WHICH EVER IS GREATER NATIVE BACKFILL COMPACTED TO MINIMUM 90% RELATIVE COMPACTION PER ASTM1557-D 1' MINIMUM WATER PROOFING PER CIVIL ENGINEER---~---.---..----.~,..........-.---....,.....~------ FREE DRAINING SAND BACKFILL SE 30 OR GREATER -----+-'-...-'--'"i-,-.,.0..- BACKCUT PER OSHA ------1 MINIMUM 1 CUBIC FOOT PER LINEAR FOOT BURRITO TYPE SUBDRAIN, CONSISTING OF 3/4 INCH CRUSHED ROCK WRAPPED IN MIRAFI 140N OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT 4 INCH DIAMETER, SCHEDULE 40 PERFORATED PVC PIPE TO FLOW TO DRAINAGE DEVICE ·<~:.· ·;-/<:\/ .. ·: ... '·.:/·<;:·:·=::/·:·;·.::.\ ~.:: ·.:.:: ,, J: t-" J: (!) w J: _, _, ~ Figure 3: Project Name Toll Brothers/Robertson Ranch LGC Retaining Wall Detail, Sand Backfill Project No. Eng. I Geol. Scale Date 133023-03 BIH/MCH NIA 4/29/1 4 ALLOW ABLE VERTICAL LOADS Allowable Bearing Pressures: 1,500 lbs/sq. ft at a pepth of 12 inches Below Creep Zone Allowable Increase: 250 lbs/sq. ft per foot of increased depth to a Maximum of2,500 lbs/sq. ft (Neglecting the Top 5 Feet) Allowable Skin Friction: 600 lbs/sq. ft per foot of Depth (Neglecting the Top 5 Feet) _,,,,.,--? 1):J'O-e / ciee:9 /? ?/ / / ?/ /?/ ALLOW ABLE LATERAL LOADS Fa=(35x52 /2) x L = 438L, Where L=Caisson Spacing Pp= 120 psf/ft Fp=(60o+120d)/ 2 x (d-5) x (3xD) Where D=Caisson Diameter and d=Depth Below Ground LGC Figure 4: Geotechnical Parameters For Top of Slope Walls ~-Perimeter Wall or Other Improvements 10-15' ~ ___.-? 6-8' ?------------ DRILLED PIER Ignore Passive Pressure in Upper 5' Pa=35 psf/ft Fp 120xd d Project Name Toll Brothers/Robertson Ranch Project No. 133023-03 Eng. I Geol. BIH/MCH Scale NIA Date 4/29/14 Tsa Jsp/Kgr ?, .. -- 1--11--" ~ Tertiary Santiago Formation, Circled Wl1ere Buried Jurassic Sanf1ago Peale ~ etavo can1cs an -retaceous (U11differe11tiateu), Circled Wl1ere Buried Approximate Location of Geologic Contact, Dotted wl1ere Buried, Q11eried where Uncertai11 Approxi111ate Location ofFa11lt, Arrows Indicate Dip Direction (in degrees), Queried where Uncertain Approximate Li111its of Fill, Q11eried where Uncertain Approximate Location of Fault Attitude with Dip (i11 degrees) Approxi111ate Location of Bedding Attitude with Dip (in degrees) Approxi111ate Location ofI-Iorizontal Bedding Attitude Approxin1ate Location of Joi11t or Fracture Attitude with Dip (in degrees) 57' 71' L a • L..----/ Approxi111ate Location ofExisti11g Canyon Subdrain, Witl1 Elevation (in Feet) LB-6 ~ T.D," 109.5' /; II I 1' ·~* \t· ;.f· }' Approximate Location of Large-Diameter Boring by LGC0 Valley in April 2014 (6 Total) I ,:;,. -~,,. \. . -~ ft ' ')' '· . I (, . I I ~ . ~}v ,'11 ~ ' ' ? . ' ; i~ ' I / 11 I I I TP-'4,Q ' I' II tti c' Tli= 5' Ii I I Qt Qal 4' ~· ,t'' .Y \ I, l '' I ~ f, } ! \ 'i SCALE: 1",,,1 00' 1 oo' o 1 oo' 200' ~iiiiiiii ~~ I ; I I I ·i I I I • I I j I ; I / 'Qr' al 1 . ' f l I I I j i I I ' . I I I \ ! ' , < • ',. • ' H.I\ 11 "'' ~ T.D."' 5' IX] T.D." 5' TA-109 -T.D.:a 12' TP"219 IC] T.D.cc 3' TP-307 liiiiiil T.D.= 6.5' HIIIIII ------ \- T r '?·c.'-r ',; ',_ ·~· Tsa Approxi111ate Location of Hand-Auger by GeoSoils in March 2011 (11 Total) Approxi111ate Location of Test Pit by GeoSoils in January 2002 (26 Total) Approximate Location of Test Pit by GeoSoils in June 2010 (9 Total) Approxin1ate Location of Test Pit by GeoSoils in April 2011 (19 Total) Approxi111ate Location of Test Pit'By GeoSoils in May 2013 (2 Total) ' Approxi111ate Location of Trash/Debris Disposal Area Stability/Replacen1ent Fill Key with Subdrain Approximate Location of Reco111111ended Canyon Subdrain Approximate Location of Recon1111ended Side Hill and Toe-of-Slope Shear Key at Daylight Cut Recon1111ended Cut-Fill Transition Lot Undercut (74 Total) ,V' \ ! IA, ' ' ·''---.. ~ 11 ___ 11 __ _ 'J J 11 I \ ' ' j ' r t pfr/u ' I " ' I i I I I I I ' II ' '' 1' ' ' I I I f ' " ' I, 1 I/ l I I I ' I • ' I ·y --'rra,,y. ,Jt-:i f. / NI, \ l\o.:ITff. ,JC' .,.r~ ! ~/_ .... ,,,~-,,,-.;.,,,, ' / ' ' I ,,,/ / / L [D )7-··· / See Ge0S61ls Report dated July ..--1' ·11 ..- ,J 1_§.,.2008 for a discussi'op of the .,.....grading in PA-11 _ ~ 1 _,., .,rfJ/ I/ / . ~-/ I II II ,, ,, I HA-1 @ T.D.= 5' I 1 I Plate 1 -Geotechnical Map • •, I Qt • ' • • • • ~ 39' 11 I ( / -01~' • • Qt I I ' I Qal /' 'f ' I / ·!, I 'I> (, . •/ I I ' ./ Qal . \ \ • • J ii Tsa I • • • I ·',~ I ' = • afc • Qal . ' '' ))' c\ \ ' ,, ' ', '" ,~--~ ' " Tsa Recommended Complete Removal of Landslide within Lt-~'-> Grading Limits (assumed 10-foot depth to competent material) _/ ' ~' I I ,., Qt ~ See GeoSoils Report daled June 5, 2008 for a discussion of the grading in PA-12 and PA-13 • • • • • (oai) • ~- afc • • • ate -I • PROJECT NAME Robertson Ranch, Tract 13-03 PROJECT NO. 133023-01 ENG . I GEOL. BIHIRKW SCALE 1"=100' DATE April 29, 2014 ' I I I I ' r I I ' ' '. afc I' I I ) ' APPENDIX A References American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 2013, Minimum De ign Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, ASCE/SEJ 7-10, Third Printing, 2013. California Building Standards Commission, 20 J 3, California Building Code, California Code of Regulations Title 24, Volumes 1 and 2, dated July 2013. California Geological Survey, 2007, Fault rupture hazard zones in California, Alqui st-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act with index to earthquake fault zone maps: California Geological Survey, Special Publication 42, dated 1997 with interim revision dated 2007 __ , 2008b, Guidelines for evaluating and mitigating sei mic hazards in Californi a, Special Publication 117a: California Geological Survey California Di vision of Mines and Geology, 1986a, Guidelines to geologic/seismic reports: California Di vision of Mines and Geology, Note 42 __ , 1986, Recommended guidelines for preparing engineering geologic reports: California Division of Mines and Geology, Note 44 __ , 1996a, Guideline for evaluating, the hazard of surface fa ult rupture: California Division of Mines and Geology __ , 1996b, Probabilistic seismic hazard assessment for the State of California: California Division of Mines and Geology, Open-File Report, 96-08 __ , 1997. Gui.de)jnes for evaluating and mitigating seismic hazards in California, Special Pu blication 11 7: California Division of Mines and Geology __ , 2002, Guidelines for evaluating the hazard of surface fault rupture, DMG Note 49: California Division of Mines and Geology California Department of Toxic Substan ces Control (DTSC), 200 I, Im port Advisory Clean Import Fill Mate1ial, October. California Deprutment of Transportation (Caltrans), 2012, Corrosion Guidelines, Version 2.0: Caltrans, November 2012 E isenberg, LI., 1985, Pleistocene Faults and Marine Terraces, Northern San Diego County in Abbott, P.L., Editor, On the Manner of Depositi on of the Eocene Strata in Northern San Diego County, San Diego Association of Geologists, Field Trip Guidebook, pp. 86-91. Project No. 133023-03 Page A-l April 29, 2014 Eisenberg, L.1 and Abbott, P.L., 1985, Eocene Lithofacies and. Geologic History, Northern San Diego County in Abbott, P.L., ed., On the Manner of Deposition of the Eocene Strata in Northern San Diego County: San Diego Association of Geologists, Field Trip Guidebook, pp. 19-35. GeoSoils, Inc., 2002, Geotechnical evaluation of the Robertson Ranch Property, City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, California. W.O. 3098-Al-SC, dated January 29. __ , 2004, Updated geotechnical evaluation of the Robertson Ranch property, Carlsbad, San Diego County, Calif?r.rla. W.0. 3098-A2-SC, dated September 20. , I _, 2006a. Work plan for detailed agricultural chemical residues in soil, APN 208-010-36, Planning Area 12 -13.44 acres, and Planning Area 13 -6.92 acres, Robertson Ranch West, Carlsbad, San Diego County, California 92010, W.O. E5247.1-SC, dated December 4. _, 2006b, Revised work plan for detailed agricultural chemical residues in soil, APN 208-010-36, · Planning Area 12 -13.44 acres, and Planning Area 13 -6.92 acres, Robertson Ranch West, Carlsbad, San Diego County, California 92010, Voluntary Assistance Case H39700-001, W.0. E5247.1-SC, dated December 27. -~ 2007a. Preliminary geotechnical evaluation, Planning Area 12 (13.44 Acres), and Planning Area 13 (6.92 Acres), Robertson Ranch West, Carlsbad, San Diego County, California 92010, City of Carlsbad Planning Department Application No. SUP 06-12/HDP 06-04, W.0. 5247-A-SC, dated January 31. _, 2007b, Preliminary geotechnical evaluation update, Planning Area 11, Robertson Ranch corridor and widening of EI Camino Real at Cannon Road, Robertson Ranch West, Carlsbad, San Diego County, California 92010, City of Carlsbad Planning Department application no. SUP 06-12/HDP 06-04, W.O. 5247- Al -SC, dated January 31. __ , 2007e, Detailed Agricultural Chemical Residue Survey, APN 208-010-36, Planning Area 12 -13.44 Acres, and Planning~ 13 -6.92 Acres, Robertson Ranch West, Carlsbad, San Diego County, California 92010, W.0. E5247.1-SC, dated March 22. _, 2007d, Revised detailed agricultural chemical residue survey, APN 208-010-26, Planning Area 12 - 13.44 acres, and Planning Area 13 -6.92 acres, Robertson Ranch West, Carlsbad, San Diego County, California 92010, Voluntary Assistance Case H39700-001, W.O. E5247.1-SC, revised date June 7. _, 2007e, Updated phase I environmental site assessment and limited agricultural residue survey, Robertson Ranch West, Carlsbad, San Diego County, California 92010, W.0. E5491-SC, dated July 27. _, 2007f, Update phase I environmental site assessment, PA 23C Habitat Corridor, Robertson Ranch West, Carlsbad, San Diego County, California 92010, W.O. E5247.2-SC, dated August 15. -~ 2007g, Detailed agricultural residue survey, Robertson Ranch West, Carlsbad, San Diego County, California 92010, W.O. E5491.2-SC, dated October 17. _, 2007h, Proposed location for placement of toxaphene affected soil, APN 208-010-36, the habitat corridor, Robertson Ranch West, Carlsbad, San Diego County, California 92010, W.O. E5491.3-SC, dated October 25. Project No. 133023-03 PageA-2 April 29, 2014 I I I I I I -' __ , 2007i, Request for r Assistance. Robertson Ranch West, Carlsbad, San Diego County, Californ ia 920 I 0, W.O. E549 l .3-SC, dated October 25 __ , 2007j, Additional testing and revised proposed locati on for placement of toxaphene affected soil, APN 208-0 l 0-36, the habitat corridor, Robertson Ranch West, Carlsbad, San Diego County, California 92010, W.O. E5491.3-SC. dated November 20. __ , 2007k, Addendum to "Additional testing and revised proposed location for placement of toxaphene affected soil. APN 208-0 I 0-36, the habitat corridor, Robertson Ranch West, Carlsbad, San Diego County Caljfornia 920 JO," W.O. E549 l .3-SC, dated December 7. __ , 2008a, Report of Removal and Placement of Pesticide Affected SoiJ During Rough Grading, Robertson Ranch West, Pl anning Area I 2, Proposed Park Site, City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, California 920 10. APN 208-010-36, DEH File No. H39700-001, W. 0. E5247. l-SC, dated March 5. __ , 2008b, Report of Removal and Placement of Pesticide Affected Soil During Rough Grading, The Habitat Conidor, Robert on Ranch West, City of Carlsbad ,San Diego County, Californi a 920 I 0, APN 208- 01 0-36, DEH File No. H39717-00I , W.O. E5247.3-SC, dated May J3. __ , 2008c. Report of mas grading, Planning Area 12 (13.44 Acres). and Planning Area J3 (6.92 Acres), Robertson Ranch West, Carlsbad, San Diego County, California 920 I 0, City of Carlsbad Plan ning Department Application No. SUP 06-12/HDP 06-04, W.0. 5247-Bl-SC, dated June 5. __ , 2008d, Report of mass grading, Pl anning Area 11 , Robertson Ranch habi.tat corridor and widening of El Camino Real at Cannon Road, Robertson Ranch West, Carl sbad, San Diego County, California 92010, City of Carlsbad Planning Department Application No. SUP 06-12/HDP 06-04, W.O. 5247-B2-SC, dated July 16. __ , 20 I Oa, Updated geotechnical investigation fo r Robertson Ranch West Village, Carlsbad, San Diego County, Califo rn ia, W.O. 6145-A-SC, dated October I 0. __ , 2010b. Update phase I environmental site assessme nt and supplemental agricultural residue survey, Robertson Ranch West, Carlsbad, San Diego County, California 920] 0, W.O. E5491.2-SC, dated October 25. __ , 20 I Oc, Addendum to update phase I environmental site assessment and supplemental agricultural res.idue survey. Robertson Ranch West. Carlsbad. San Diego County, California 92010, W.O. E6 l 45-SC, dated November l. __ , 2010d, Addendum No. 2, update phase [ environmental site assessment and suppleme ntal agricultural residue survey, Robertson Ranch West, Carlsbad, San Diego County. California 92010, W.O. E6145-SC, dated December 9. __ , 201 1 a, Geotechnical review of urfi cial erosion, portion of Planning Area I J, Rancho Costera (Robertson Ranch West Village), City of Carlsbad, San Di ego County, California, W.O. 6145-A I-SC. dated April 2 1. __ . 2011 b, Soil texture and groundwater evaluation, Planning Area 23C (Wetland/Habitat Area), Rancho Costera, Carlsbad, San Diego County, Califo rnia. W.O. 6 145-A2-SC, dated April 22. Projecr No. 133023-03 Page A-3 April 29, 2014 _ _, 201 lc, Slopes, drainage, retaining walls, remedial removals, and pavement conditions, Rancho ·· Castera and El Camino Real, Carlsbad, San Diego County, California, W.O. 6145-A3-SC, dated April 28. _, 2011d, Work plan for property mitigation plan, Rancho Castera (formerly Robertson Ranch West), Carlsbad, San Diego County, California'92010, Voluntary Assistance Case H39768-001 W.O. E6145.1-SC, dated May 4. __ , 201 le, Geotechnical investigation for the planned improvement of El Camino Real, between Cannon . Road and Tamarack Avenue, Rancho Castera (Formerly Robertson Ranch West Village), Carlsbad, San Diego County, California, W.O. 6145-E-SC, dated May 11. _, 2011f, Supplement to the updated geotechnical investigation for Rancho Castera (Formerly Robertson Ranch West Village), Carlsbad, San Diego County, California, W.0. 6145-Al-SC, dated June 6. _, 2011g, Geotechnical response to "1st review for MP 02-03 (C)/CT 11-01/HDP 11-0101/SUP 11- 02/HMP 11-03/Robertson Ranch West Village," dated June 23, 2011, by Planning Division, City of Carlsbad, W.0. 6145-A4-SC, dated August 17. _, 2011h, Geotechnical Review of coastal development permit plans for El Camino Real Rancho Castera Project, Carlsbad, San Diego County, California, W.0. 6145-A4, dated September 12. __ , 201 li, Property mitigation plan, Rancho Castera (formerly Robertson Ranch West), Carlsbad, San Diego County, California 92010, Voluntary Assistance Case H39768-001, dated October 10. _, 201 lj, Geotechnical review and response to 2nd City review comments (engineering) Rancho Castera project (Robertson Ranch west village), Carlsbad, San Diego County, California, W.0. 6145-AS-SC, dated October 17. _, 201 llc, Geotechnical review of erosion potential, Rancho Castera land bridge, Rancho Castera Project (Robertson Ranch west village), Carlsbad, San Diego County, California, W.0. 6145-A6-SC, dated October 18. __ , 2012a, Response to 2nd review for CDP 11-10/HDP 11-02/SUP 11-03/HMP 11-04-ECR southbound widening view comments (engineering), Rancho Castera project (Robertson Ranch west village), Carlsbad, San Diego County, Califemia, W.O. 6145-A7/El-SC, dated January 3. _, 2012b, Rancho Castera and El Camino Real: bioswales/bioretention areas and desiltation basins, dated January 13. __ , 2012c, Draft Supplemental Analysis and Review of Slope Stability, Improvement of El Camino Real, Rancho Castera Project (Robertson Ranch West Village), Carlsbad, San Diego County, California, W.O. 6145-A7-SC, dated January 20. · _, 2012d, Response to DEH Review and Addendum to ''Property Mitigation Plan, Rancho Castera (Formerly Robertson Ranch West), Carlsbad, San Diego County, California 92010, Voluntary Assistance Case H39768-001," (W.O. E6145.l-SC, dated October 24, 2011), W.O. E6145.2-SC, dated February 24. _ f>_roject No. 133023-03 Page A-4 April 29, 2014 __ , 20 J 2e, Preliminary geotechnical review of "vesting master tentative map fo r Rancho Costera," 40- scale plans, sheet I through 2 1, Job No. 10 1307. Revised May 1, 2012, by O'Day Consul tants. W.O. 6 145- A9-SC, dated May 24. __ , 2013a, Addendum to the Updated and Supplemental Geotechnical Investi gations for Rancho Costera (Formerl y Robertson Ranch West Village). Carlsbad, San Diego County, Califo rnia, W.O. 6 145-A 10-SC. dated July 16. __ , 2013b, I st Draft Response to DEH Review and 2nd Addendum to "Property Mitigation Pl an, Rancho Co tera (Formerl y Robertson Ranch West). Carlsbad, San Diego County, California 92010, Voluntary Assistance Case H39768-00I," (W.O. E6145.1-SC, dated October 24, 2011 , by GeoSoil, lnc.), W. 0. E6145.3-SC, dated September 24. __ , 2014a, Response to DEH Review and 3rd Addendum to '·Property Mitigation Pl an, Rancho Costera (Formerl y Robertson Ranch West), Carlsbad, San Diego County, California 920JO, Voluntary Assistance Case H39768-00 1," W.O. E6145 .l-SC, dated October 24 by GeoSoils lnc.), W.O. E6145.4-SC, dated January 21. Hannan, D., J 975, Faulting in the Oceanside, Carlsbad and Vi sta Areas, Notthern San Diego County, California in Ross, A. and Dowlens, R.J., eds., Studies on the Geology of Camp Pendleton and Western San Diego County, California: San Diego Association of Geologists, pp. 56-59. Hart, E.W., 1997, Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in Cali fornia, Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zones Act of 1972 wi th Index to Special Studies Zones Maps: Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Special Publication 42. http://www.earth.goo~!le.com. http://www.historicaerials.com/ International Code Council, 2009, Internati onal Bui lding Codes: International Code Council Jennings. C.W., and Bryant, W.A., 20 I 0, Fault acti vity map of California: California Geological Survey, I :750,000 Scale, California Geologic Map Series, Map No. 6 Ke nnedy, M.P., and Tan, S.S., 2005, Geologic map of the Oceanside 30' by 60' quadrangle, California: Californi a Geological Survey. Regional Geologic Map No. 2, scale I: I 00,000 Leighton and Associates, 1nc., 1992, City of Carlsbad. Geotechnical Hazards Analysis and Mapping Study, 84 Sheets, dated November, 1992. LGC Vall ey, Inc., Undated, Unpublished In-House GeotechnicaJ Data. Lindvall, S. and Rockwell, T.K., 1995, Holocene activity of the Ro e Canyon fa ult, San Diego, California: Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. I 00, No. B 12, pp. 24121-24 132 Projec1 No. 133023-03 Page A-5 April 29, 2014 O'Day ConsultaQts, .2013, G!ading Plans for Rancho Costera, Robertson Ranch West Village, Carlsbad Tract No. 13-03, Drawing No. 480-3A, 26 Sh~ts .. dated November 25. _, 2014a, Vesting Tentative Map for Carlsbad Tract No. 13-03-2, 23 Sheets, dated January 16. _, 2014b, Grading and Improvement Plans for El Camino Real Widening, Robertson Ranch West Village, CDP.11-10, Drawing No. 477-6, 96 Sheets, dated March 3. __ , 2014c, Tentative Map, Robertson Ranch West Village, Carlsbad-Tract No. 13-03-2, 32 Sheets, dated March 5. _, 2014d, Rancho Costera Grading Plan, Robertson Ranch West Village, Carlsbad Tract No. 13-03,100- Scale Composite Sheet, dated March 31. Tan, S.S., and Kennedy, M.P., 1996, Geologic Maps of the Northwestern Part of San Diego County, California: California Division of Mines and Geology, DMG Open-File Report 96-02, 2 Plates. Tan, S.S., and Giffen, D.G., 1995, Landslide Hazards in the Northern Port of the San Diego Metropolitan Area, San Diego County, California, Landslide Hazard Identification Map No. 35, Division of Mines and Geology, Open-File Report No. 95-04. Treiman, J.A., 1993, The Rose Canyon fault zone, southern California: California Division of Mines and Geology, Open File Report 93-02 Treiman, J.A., 1993, The Rose Canyon Fault Zone, Southern California: California Division of Mines and Geology, Open-File Report 93-02, 45 p. Treiman, J.A., 1984, The Rose Canyon Fault Zone: A Review and Analysis, California Division of Mines and Geology, Funded by Federal Management Agency Cooperative Agreement EMF-83-K-0148. ----, 1993, The Rose Canyon Fault Zone, Southern California: California Division of Mines and Geology, Open-File Report 93-2, 45p. USGS and CGS, 2006, Quaternary fault and fold database for the United States, from USGS web site: http//earthquakes.usgs.gov/regional/qfaults United States Department of Agriculture, 1953, Aerial Photographs, Flight AXN-8M, Numbers 68, 69, 70, 9 101, 102, and 103, Scale approximately 1:20,000, dated April 11, 1953. Weber, F.H., 1982, Recent Slope Failures, Ancient Landslides and Related Geology of the Northern-Central Coastal Area, San Diego County, California: California Division of Mines and Geology, Open File Report 82-12LA, 77 p. Wilson, K.L., 1972, Eocene and Related Geology of a Portion of the San Luis Rey and Encinitas Quadrangles, San Diego County, California: Master Thesis, University of California at Riverside, 123 p. Project No. 133023-03 Page A-6 _ ~ April 29, 2014 United States Geological Survey (USGS), 2008a, ''2008 National Seismic Hazard Maps -Fault Parameters" Retrieved December 17, 2013, from: http://geohazards.usgs.gov/cfusion!hazfaults search/hf search main.cfm 2008b, ''2008 Interactive Deaggregations (Beta)," Retrieved December 12, 2013, from: https://geohaz.ards.usgs.gov/deaggint/2008/ 2013, U.S. Seismic Design Maps, Retrieved December 12, 2013, from: http:// geohazards. usgs. gov/designmaps/us/batch.php#csv Aerial Photographs Review Date Source Flight. PhotoNo(s) 1928 SD County 30 E3 to E6 and F2 to F5 1953 USDA AXN-8M 19 to 21 1975 SD County 34 12 ·10 14 1975 SD County 35 9 and 10 ,:_ Project No. 133023-03 .. ~,.----.· -~-PageA-7 April 29, 2014 . i ' APPENDIXB Boring and Trench Logs by Others · Project No. 113020-01 -Page B-1 April 29, 2014 UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM CONSISTENCY OR RELATIVE DENSITY .. Major Dlvl81ona Group Typical Names CRITERIA Symbola GW Well-graded gravels end gravel- sand mixtures, little or no fines Standard Penetration Teat i i <O -C: co 01 Poorly graded gravels end Penetration (I) 0 0 '<t > i!J~ C!:l GP gravel-sand mixtures, little or no Resistance N Relative (I) iil fines (blows/ft) Density ~ e ~ ! C (!) 0 0 SIity gravels gravel-sand-slit 0-4 Ve,:y loose .!R • ~ j lt GM 0~ mixtures CJ) C ]! 4-10 Loose j 0 ~ c:, Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay ~1 GC mixtures 10 -30 Medium H SW Well-graded sands and gravelly 30-50 Dense 0 ci ~j sands, little or no fines a ~ 0 ii5 > 50 Very dense £i <O '§ '<t SP Poorly graded sands and !!! int graveDy sands, llttle or no fines 0 ~ SM SIity sands, sand-silt mlxturea i~i Clayey sands, sand-clay SC mixtures Inorganic sBts, very fine sands, Standard P!!:!etr&tlQ!! Test ML rock flour, silty or clayey fine sands .i i~j Unconfined I norganlc clays of low to Penetration Compressive <O ] !1 ls CL medium plastlclty, g ravally clays, Resistance N Strength .!!l§ 1l g' sandy clays, silty clays, lean (blows/ft) Consistency (tons/ff) a· u.i clays CJ)~ Organic slits and organic silty <2 VBfY Soft <0.25 ii OL clays of low plasticity 2-4 Soft 0.25-.050 1 !!! Inorganic silts, mlcaceous or 4-8 Medium 0.50 -1.00 Ii: ~ ~~~ MH dlatomaceous fine sands or slits, elastic silts 0 13,§ j 8-15 Stiff 1.00 -2.00 ~ Inorganic clays of high plasticity, ]i} CH tat clays 15 -30 Very Stiff 2.00-4.00 ~ ::J ~ >30 Hard >4.00 Cl Organic clays of medium to high OH plasticity Highly Organic Soils PT Peat, muclc, and other highly organlc sons 3" 3/4' #4 #10 #40 #200 U.S. Standard Sieve I Unified Soll I I Gravel I Sand I SDt or Clay I Cobbles I I I Classification coarse fine coarse medlum fine MOl§!TURE CONDmONS MATERIAL QUANTITY OTHER SYMBOLS Dry Absence of moisture: dusty, dry to the touch trace 0-5% C Core Sample Slightly Moist Below optimum moisture content for compaction few 5-10 % s SPTSample Moist Near optlmum moisture content little 10-25 % B Bulk Sample Very Moist AbcNe optlmum moisture content some 25-45% -Groundwater - Wet Visible free water; below water table Qp Pocket Penetrometer BASIC LOG FORMAT: Group name, Group symbol, (graln size), color, moisture, consistency or relative density. Additional comments: odor, presence of roots, mica, gypsum, coarse gral ned particles, etc. EXAMPLE: Sand (SP), fine to medium gralned, brown, moist, loose, trace silt, I~ fine gravel, few cobbles up to 4' In size, some hair roots and rootlets. Flle:Mgr. c;\Sollaasstf.wpd PLATE A-1 s = a. c!: 15 20 25 GeoSoils, Inc. PROJECT: CA!,.AVERA HILLS II, LLC McMlllin, Robe.rtson Ranch Sample I .i 'ti ~ CD .D G; .3 !i 'E i B ::::, ~ I 5 dl II) ::::, ::::, SM 23 CL 27 29 7 13 Mc:MiDin, Robertson Ranch BORING LOG W.O. 3098-A 1-SC BORING HB-5 SHEET_1_ OF --3_ DATE EX'CAVATcD 10-3--01 SAMPLE METHOD: 130LB HAMMER O" DROP Ill §: C ~ O · ~ .3 .. U) --. :.,. . ·..-:-·. ~:-:..,,..· ~: .:,,:.· . .;...:-·~: ,;,.·. ""/:"." st.andsrd Penelrallon Test S/.. Groundwater Undisturbed, Ring Sample · Description of Material COLLUVIUM[TOPSOIL @ O' SILlY SAND, brown, dry to moist, loose. ALWVJUM @ 5' SANDY CLAY, broWn, moist, very stiff. @ 6' GROUNDWATER. @10' SANDY CLAY, brown, wet, very stiff. @15' SANDY CLAY, greenish brown to brown, wet, very stiff. @ 20' SANDY CLAY. light brown, saturated, medium stiff. @ 25' SANDY CLAY w/SILT, light brown, saturated, stiff. GeoSoils, Inc. PLATE B-39 i -. .. .. .. -_J GeoSofls; Inc. ·PRfJ.JE(:r: CALAVERA HILLS II, LLC Mc.M1llln, ~:Ranch ,. ~: 'i i I: 1: I 'M ; ID ID. I 15 ~ -. - . ., 35~ m 14 - . - -. 40 .. ·Ir 12 . . SM. . ·- ·, -.. - 45· - ' - - ~ 50 i 5& ML - - - - 55~ - - - -,• :J,/JcMl!ln, Robertson Ranch BORING LOG BORJNG, DATE~VA:1ED 1~1 SAl#'lE'MB7-IOD: 130LB HAMMER'C40" DROP II ~ l 5J. GrolnJwatar i j._-l---~-·Urds1161RKJ,_· ·_~_Ssmpa_, ----,---,------I 1 besci'\i_Don of~ ~:· :-"'.'. --..-. "t.r-> "0: ,,,;,;.· .. i: ;....;,; ~:--~·. ,-,.;,·. . ~>. _,.., r. .,;,,,:.·. 0:: ..,_ ::.;.;.,· -<"> :--:--: ...... @ 30' SILTY SAND, oJive,brown, satr..iraled, mecfium'densa:· orangelron .oxida., . . . . . . . ' @.36' SILTY SAND, llghtbrown; saturated, madlum dense; uange Iron ·oxide. -. -. . . - WEATHERED SANTIAqo FORMAJlOl\1 . -@ 40' SILTY·SANDSTQNE, ·oltva brown, eabiratedi medium.~;· orange lron oxide. SANTIAGO FORMATION @ 50' ci..AYEY SILTSTONE,· 6llve.. dry to damp, hard.· Total OepCti • 51.5' Grounowater@ ff ·Bsckllhd cin 10/03/01 GeoSoils1 Inc. PLATE B-40 ------------ g ,G a. .. C GeoSoils, Inc. PROJECT: CALAVERA HILLS 11, LLC McMIDin, Robertson Ranch Sample '5' :g .s. "Cl' ~ .. E ~ 5i 6°i ~ ]i "' ::, .x "Cl I g a :I C: m ::, m ::, SM 5 . 19 SM 10 39 15 25 20 24 25 19 McMillin, Robertson Ranch BORING LOG W.O. 3098-A1..SC BORING HB-6 SHEET_ OF~ DA1EEXCAVATED 10-3-01 SAMPLE METHOD: 130LB HAMMER @40" DROP .""'!'9'.· ·-"·' >":". -~:· ~.· ~: ·..;.:. . . :,:-,: ·!""':"" • . ..,.,. .. ·~:--· ::.:..:- ,r:· . . ~:· .~.· -~: .-?>: ."t"".' ·-· .,;,:-·. :~:-.;.,o.. •,,r:•. :~:-.v-.· ·~: ·~·. :..;-:-·~: -~·. :0:-.:.,,..· .,...;..~ Standard Penetration Test 5;l. Groundwater Undisturbed, Ring Sample Description of Material COLLUVIUM/TOPSOIL @ O' SILTY SAND, brown, dry, loose. @ 4' SILTY SAND, light brown. moist, loose. ALLUVIUM: @5' SILTY SAND, brown, moist, medium dense. @10' SILTY SAND, light brown, moist, dense. :..;.-:-@15' SILTY SAND, light brown, wet medium dense. ...,.., . ...... .--. . . v-.· ;.,:..: ...:-:-·. '"1"':· .:.;..· .,.,.,. .. -~:~ v-.· ,r:·. ~:-. :..r. ~ ;...:--· .:,,·. ,'-(',' :or-: ~·. @ 20' SILTY SAND, light brown, wet, medium dense. ,;.,,.. ·,-,:,·. ..;.-:-@ 25' SILTY SAND, light brown, wet, medium dense. GeoSoils, t.nc. PLATE B-41 I _I I J __ I GeoSolls~ ·Inc: ·PROJECT: CALAVERA HILLS II, U.C McMliln,.Roberfson Ranch Sanipla "?5 I I ..i .3: .e I ~ 1 1 R s ~ 17 SM· - - - - 35 ~ 45 SU - .. - - 40- - .- - - 45 - - - - ro,; - - - - 65- - - - - -McMlllln, .R.obertscn Ranch .. l' £ ··1 i c!I ' a<)~NGLOG w.o. 3098-A 1-SC ~ -HB-6 llA7E EXCAVATED 1IJ.3.01 SAMPf..E METHOD: 130CB HAMMER @40" DROP . Ii standsld Penelra1ion Test · ~ Und1sttNbed, Ring Sample Deiij;I iption of Material ' . '. ·~:: @ 30' S!LlY ·SAND, ligltbrown, saturated, mediUm densa. >':'" ~:. ....... ~. ~= '("',' :..,,..· .. -. ..r.· ..;.-: ...... ........ ~: SANTIAGO FORI/IATION @ 35' SILlY SANDSTONE,,gieen, wet, oonse. Total~ = 36.5' . 12'ollncfvi.ra1er' @ 3Q' BaokHlled 10/02/01 GeoSoils, fnc. PLATE B-42 BORING LOG GeoSoDs,:Jnc., . .. w.o. 3098-A2-SC PROJECT.· CALAVERA HILLS II, lLC BORING BA-1 SHE:ET_1_ OF~ Robertson Ranch. Carlsbad DA TE EXCAVATED 9-14--04 LOGGED BY: Sample SAMPLE METHOD: 0-27' 3,500 bl; 'D-Sfl 2,400 l:ls; 66-85' 1,&JO lbs Approx. EJevatlon: ~ USL E II SbJndatd PenetraftJn T5Sl I :S ~ ~ l 'Sl.. GroundwalBr g 1 C: ~ Unclslurbed, Rklg Sample J ~ 0 § ,.. :5 g e! ! i d j .a DesCI lpffon of Material ::> ~ SC ~ COlLlMUM: 1-~ @11 CLAYEY SAND, dark grayish brown to grayish brown, dry, loose; 2 few roots. -SC t0 SANTIAGO FORMATION; 3-~ @Z CLAYEY SANDSTONE, brown, dry, loose to medium dense; 4-randomly fradured. caHche common along fractures (N70E, B5NW; N40E, BOSE; N32W, 76SW), fine grained. 5-~ 6 114.0 14.6 85.9 ~ @ 5' Callche less common. 6-~ 7 SM "-("',· @ T SIL lY SANDSTONE, yelJowlsh brown, dry, dense; massive, v-. 8-... c:aHche generally absent ,-,:-· . 9-..,.. v-.· '\ 10)111f& ;...:..: 8 125.8 10.6 88.8 . .:,,.:. .. 11 ..,... . :-".'· 12-..,.,. ~: @ 12 Becomes moist 13-v-.· .. --· 14-~:-v-. 15-~ ~. 6 119.9 11.7 81.8 ..:,,.· . . . 16-........ :-".'-17-,:,,,• ~-18-:-1-: -. . 19-....;...:- :.r .. :llllf& 5 106.2 19.5 69.1 ,-,:-· @ 20' Bedding attitude: N30E, 2NW. ..:,,.· i.r . ..,... 22-. ...,,,. .. ........ 23-::.,<. ,-,:--, 24-~> ..,.._. 25 ~ 5 SC 106.,4 19.1 91.0 ?§ @25' CLAYEY SANDSTONE, brown to olive brown, sllghtly moist, 26-dense; fractured (N76W, 18NE; N20E, 44SE; N40W, 60SW; NSW, 27-~ 22NE). 28-~ 29 - SM '-("",' @29' SILlY SANDSTONE, yellowlsh brown, slightly moist. dense; 30 ,..,.._. massive fine i:irained. ~ 8 SC 109.3 17.2 88.8 0' i 31-~ @30' CLAYEY SANDSTONE, orive brown, moist, dense. ' 32- 33-~ 34-~ Robertson Ranch, Carlsbad· . GeoSoils, Inc. Plate B-17 GeoSoUs, Inc.. PROJECT: CALAVERA HILLS II, Ll.C Robertson Ranch, Carlsbad BORJNG LOG W.D. 308B-A2-SC BORING ____ BA_-1 __ DATE EXCAVATED __ S-_1_4-04 ___ LOGGED BY: ___ _ SAMPLE METHOD: 0-27' 3,500 b; '0-BS 2,400 lbs; 55-85' 1,500 lbs Approx. Elevaflon: 1.M' MSL standsrd PenetratJon Test Description of Material ~ 10 SC 116.3 14.3 89.4 ~ 36-+--4c.,c.,<..<+---+---1-----11----+------!<..;L,...!----------------------------l SM :;: : @ 36' SIL TY SANDSTONE, olive brown to gray brown, moist, dense; 37--. . lndurated, massive. 38-v-.· 38--r--t---t---j~;;-"t----r----r---r::-·..,..-:::t'--5(@~39'~8~as~ru~co~ntact~~N~1~0'.!:::i...:c4~NW!.!.!:·=-----~----c--~---/1- sp · :-:·. @ 39' SANDSTONE, grayish brown, moist, dense; massive, fine to 401~ 17 127.4 8.8 78.3 :-,:· medium grained. 41 : : · .. 42- 43- 44- 45- 48- 47- 48- 48- 50- 51- ~ 13 120.4 122.9 •, ·,: •,:' 8.8 62.0 .. ··.·· ... 8.3 63.2 · ... 52-+----4-+---+---+----t----+----lr:~·~:t---=----~~...,.....,.....,....,..,=-="=""-=-==----:-----,.-~----~----t SM · ;:;_: @ 52' SIL TY SANDSTONE, gray brown, moist, dense; cross-bedded 53--. . (N40W, 12SW; NBW, BSW), fine grained . 54- 55- 56-~ 12 119.3 ..;,.· v-.· ~: 12.8 87.7 ..:,,.• '-("".· 7'""7·' 57-+----4-+---+---1-----11----+----+~-~·+----------------------------1 SC 0 @57 CLAYEY SANDSTONE, olive brown, moist, dense; bedd'ing: 5B-+----4-+---!-S-M--l----+---+--+.:.<~~ .. h\'--'N=1~0=E=-c-8~NW=-':~fllie"""'-~a~.ra~lned~~·---------------~r .v-.· @ 58' SILTY SANDSTONE, oHve brown, moist, dense; massive. 59- 60-116.6 12.9 78.2 ·--:0-· v-.· @ 60' As per 58'. ·0. ..:,,.·. 61- 62+-~-+--+--c--+-----ll---+---+T'-"~"t---=--o=:-=-:-:--=:=-7=':"-:-:'.:c-==:-~---:=---:----:--:--:---~--:-:::------1 SC ~ @62' CLAYEY SANDSTONE, ollve brown, moist, dense; bedding: 63 -+---+-S-M--+---+----+----+""':.,.."'"'h. \ N12E, 11 NW. 64-:.:,..:-@ 63' 1" CLAYSTONE interbed. N5W 7SW. ::; @63' SILTY SANDSTONE, olive brown, slight moist, dense; bedding: 65- 66- ffl- 68- 69- 30 117.7 9.6 62.7 Robertson Ranch, Carlsbad v-. · N30E, 6NW. ;.,:..: .>.-". '-("". ~-,.,.,.. ~-· -. . .,... GeoSoUs, Inc. Plate B-18 r GeoSoila, Inc. PROJECT: CAIJ\VERA HIU.S II, LLC l :6 ! 71- 72- 73- 74- 75- 76- n 78- 79 BO- 81- 82- 83-' B4- 65- 86 87- 88- 89- 90- 91- 92- ~ IIl 93-~- 94- 95- 96- 97- 98- 99- 100- 101- 102- 103- 104- Robertson Ranch, Car1abad Sample ·i I i ;: i § ~ U) a :J IIl :J ~ 30 SM 115.9 w 30 114.8 SC SM ~ 30 116.3 ~ 30 118.7 RobertsonRanch,Carlsbad ~ ·I 8.1 8.0 12.6 12.B l C 0 = s ! 50.5 48.3 78.9 66.1 BORING LOG w.o. 3098-A2-SC BORING BA-1 SHEET 2_ OF 2_ DATE EXCAVATED 9-14-04 LOGGED BY:. __ ---'- SMA..E AETHOD: 0-ZT' 3,500bi;ZT.fE2,4001h11; 55-86' 1,5001be Approx. Elevation: 1M' MSL stsndNd Penetration Test Description of Material ~:· @ 70' As per63'. ....:-·. ....-.· ~: ,.:,:-·. ,.,... ·-· @ 7fl As per 70', cross-bedding In SANDSTONE: N5E, 4NW, basal contact: N40E, SSE . @ TT' CLAYEY SANDSTONE, grayish brown, moist, dense. @ W SILTY SANDSTONE, Hght brown to grayish brown, moist, dense; bedding: N20E, 5NW @80' As per 7g_ @ 85' As par 80'. T otaJ Depth = 86' No Grotmdwater Encountered Backfi11ed 9-14-2004 With Bentonlte Chips -GeoSolls, Inc. Piela B-19 '· BORING LOG GeoSoils, Inc. w.o. 3098-A2-SC PROJE:CT: CALAVERA HIU.S II, LLC BORJNG BA-2 SHEET_1_ OF~ Robertson Ranch, Cartsbad ~i DA 7E EXCAVATED 9-16-04 LOGGED BY: Sample SAM='LE METHOD: ~ 3,500 Ill; 'D -65' 2,400 lbs; 55-85' 1,500 Iba Approx. ElavaHon: fil' MSL 'e II stsndard Penetrafion Test 0 .e, l "SJ_ Groundwater "5! .a :i.: iE i i I ! 'e I i ~ Undisturbed, Ring Ssmple ! ; ::::, ~ §' t ~ Description of Material SC ~ COLLUVIUM: ·1-f0 @O' CLAYEY SAND w/SILT, brown, dry, loose; few gravel size 2 SANDSTONE fraaments from 1' -2'. -SM "-1'.' SANTIAGO FORMATION: 3-v-.· ... @ ~ SIL TY SANDSTONE, light yellowlsh brown to brown, snghtly ""· 4-0-: moist, dense; massive, randomly fractured, fine grained. ........ 5-~ ~- 5 118.B 8.0 54.0 ..;....•, .. 6-'-r .• ..,,._. 7-SC ~ @6%.' CLAYEY SANDSTONE, olive brown to brown, moist, dense; 8-~ becldlng: N30E, 12SE; cross-bedding: N5W, 16SW, fine grained. 9 SM ...,.. . @ 9' SIL TY SANDSTONE, light yellowish brown to gray, moist, dense; :.,.,· 10-~ 7 122.3 11.5 86.0 ,.,-;-· . massive to weakly cross-bedded: N2W, 17SIN. 11-..:,...·. @ 10' As per 9'. «-.· 12-~ . ..,,.._ 13-'-r .. ...,... 14-·.;,:,,·, :'-!': 15--~ v-.· 4 114.1 9.8 57.8 ... @ 15' As per 10'. -~·. 16-~:-«-.· 17-;,.:..: ...n·. 18 SC 0 @ 18' CLAYEY SANDSTONE, olive brown, moist, dense; bedding: 19 SM -.r-.. ' N5W BSW. r 20-:.,.,· @ 19' SILTY SANDSTONE, brown to gray, moist, dense; ~ 5 116.2 10.6 66.4 --cross-bedded: N5E, 1 ONW; N5W, 20SW, fine grained . 21-.;.,.· :. .. : 22-SC t0 @21%' CUWEY SANDSTONE, olive brown to brown, moist, dense; massive, fine grained. 23-~ - 24 17 SM -r-.· @ 24' SIL TY SANDSTONE, gray, wet, dense; massive, water seepage :.,.,· 25-~ 96.5 ... Into hole, fine grained. 7 119.9 13.8 ·...-:-·. ~·. 26 SC ~ @26' CLAYEY SANDSTONE, ollve brown, moist, dense; massive to 27-~ weakly bedded: N-S, 10W; fractures: N70W, 82NE and N10W, 65SW; 28-~ 109.7 19.6 99.0 ~ N20W, 27NE. 11 29- 30-@ 31.~ 10 120.0 13.4 93.8 ~ @31' CLAYEY SANDSTONE, ollve brown, moist, dense; fractures: 32-~ N30W, 68NE; N10E, 79SE. 33 SM '-{",· @ 33' SIL TY SANDSTONE, yellowish gray, molst, dense; weakly 34-:.,..· cross-bedded: N2DW, 15SW, fracture: N-S, 60E, fine grained. ...-:-·. ~-. Robertson Ranch, Cartsbad GeoSoils, Inc. Plate 8-20 •, GeoSoils, Inc. PROJECT: CALAVERA HILLS II, LLC Robertson Ranch, Carlsbad BORING LOG W.O. 3098-A2-SC BORING __ _,__BA-_2 __ DATE EX'CAVATED __ B-_1_5-04 ___ LOGGED BY.-__ _ SAMPLE METHOD: 0-27' 3,600 lbs; Zl-6& 2,400 bl; 65-85' 1,500 lbs Approx. Elsva1fon: fil' MSL ~ 36- 37- 38- 39- 40- 41- 42- 43- 44- 45- 46- 47- 48- 49- 50- 51- 52- ~ 15 ~ 15 ~ 15 SM 120.0 122.0 122.3 123.5 12.8 12.1 89.B -1". :.,..· ,>';'' ~: ........ ;...:..· .;,..·. '<" .. :.,r..· ..,.,., 90.5 ...... ~:, ...;,,.· standard Panetralion Test Description of Materlal @ 35' As per 33'. @ 36' As per 35', becomes massive. @ 40' As per 36'. .....-.. :--:-. @ 44' Bedding: N1 OE, 4N'W . ..,.,., 12.5 93.6 . -r. · 11.6 90.3 '("',. ;...,:..· ..>,'. -r. ~· ..,.,., ..,..,. @45 As par40'. @ 50' As per 45', cemented. 53-l---+-+---l-,--::--l------l--+---+T007°t---=--=c:-=-:-:--:=--:-=-=-=====-:-:=c-:;-------:-:-"""7"---:-~-;:-----; SC 0, @63' CLAYEY SANDSTONE, ollve gray, moist, dense; beddlng: 54-1---+-+----1-S-M--+----+---+---¥--"''1"~ .. h,'--'-N~1~0=E"-'-15=N~'Wc...=.,,.--=-__,,-=--------'.,..--,------,------=-----~r 55-:-7· @ 54' SIL TY SANDSTONE, gray, slightly moist, dense; massive, ~ 10 121.3 8.4 61.4 ~: cemented. @ 55' As per 54' . ........ 58- 57- 58- ,.,-:- ..:r-·. @ fil' Less cemented, weak bedding: N-S, 5-BW . 59- ·~: ........ @ 60' As per 55'. 60- 61- 112 ... 70.5 ,r.· 116.3 52-1---+---1~~1--c-sc::--1--~--1---+-~---P.~P.~~--@~6~2'~C~LA--:-,-:YEY=-:~SAN~~D~ST=o==-=N=E,-g-ray~,-mo~ist,,...-;-~de_nse_;_wea_~~~y~bed--;-,ded.:-7-----j 63-l---+-+---+---+------l--+----11'.;L...f---=--=:c:-=':"'=-:-=:-:-:-:=-::==c:-:-=:-----:-:-=-----:-:--:----:-:-=----; SM ;:;:: @63' SILTY SANDSTONE, gray, moist, dense; weakly bedded. 64-,>';'' 65-~ 35 115.2 10.9 59.9 ~: 66-..:,,.·, 67- 68- 69- '("',' ~ ..,.,. v-. ,>';'", ...... @65' As per63', cross-bedding: N15W, 15SW. Robertson Ranch, Carlsbad . GeoSoils, Inc. Plate · B-21 GeoSoUs, Inc. ... PROJECT: CAI.AVERA HILLS II, LLC Robertson Ranch, Car1ebad Sample -l I "C ~ l ? ., i I ~ i :6 I ~ l ~ ~ t i :, ~ 30 SM 121.7 12.3 71- 72- 73- 74- 75-~ 30 1222 12.4 76- 77- 78- 79- 80-~ 30 113.7 8.6 81- 82- 83- ~ I 84- 85-~ 30 125.2 10.9 86 87 88- 89- 90- 91- 92- 93- 94- 95- 96- 97- 98- 99- 100- 101- 102- 103- 104- Robertson Ranch, Cartsbad ~ 13 :a ~ m C/J 90.8 B2.7 49.8 85.7 BORING LOG W.O. 309B-A2-SC BORING BA-2 SHEET~ OF~ DATE EXCAVATED 9-15-04 LOGGED BY: ___ _ SAMPLE METHOD: 0-27' 3,500 hi; Zl-6fl 2,400 bs; 55-85' 1,600 h Approx. Eievalion: fil IISL Description of Material "-1'.· v-.· -.. ~-. ....-.· ':"';, ..:,,.·. ,JO . ....-.· :-':' . .:,,.·. ......... ·~: @ 7r:J As per 65', bedding: N10W, 10SW. @ 7S As per 7r:J. Bedding: N40E, 5SE ~:,, ~.. @ 80' As per 7S. Bedding: N5E, 4NW. ,...,..,. ~·. '1"",' @BS As per 80'. T otaJ Depth = 86' Seepage Encountered From 24' to 26' Backfilled 9-15-2004 With Berrtonite GeoSoils, ~c. Plate B-22 BORING LOG w.o. __ 3098-A2 __ -sc __ --l PROJECT: CAI.AVERA HILLS II, LLC Robertson Ranch, Carlsbad BORING ____ BA-3 __ _ SHEET_1_ OF__!_ 1- 2- Sample SC DATE EXCAVATED __ B-_1_6-04 ___ LOGGED BY: __ _ SAMPLE METHOD: O-Z7' 3,600 lbs; ZT-55' 2.400 lbs; 65-85' 1,500 lbs Approx. Elevatlon: 11.§' MSL standard PenetralJon Test '5l-Groundwatsr Undlsturbed, Ring Sample DesCI ipOon of Material COLUMUM: @f1 CLAYEY SAND, dark brown, dry, loose; few n;,ots. ~ 0 3-+--+--t---+-S-M--+----t----t---t'";::::--~::l--=SANTIA-,--=-=GO-=-FORMA=---=-c=TION:=--~.-----------------1 4--. @ ':J SIL TY SANDSTONE, gray to yellowtsh brown, slightly moist, 5-118.8 ~· · dense; massive, fracture: N40W, BONE; N50E, 79SE. 6- 7- 7 12.7 65.9 ' '<'"'.' ;..,,;-: ·..>,,·. '<' .. ;.,:--: 8-:;:: : 9-1--+-i---+--+----+---+--~·~~~··--=--=-=:-:-c-c-=~~=-::c==-~,.........,,---,---.,....----:---,.------l SC 0 @ 9' ClAYEY SANDSTONE, olive brown to brown, moist, dense; some 10-~ 7 111.a 132 es.o ~ lnterbedded gray SANDSTONE, bedding: N20F, 16NW; N16E, 12NW; 11-~ ~ fracture: N32W, 76SW-, N40E, BOSE; N60E, 60SE, basal contact: Y/ N20W, SSW. 12-'?3 13-+--+--t----+-S-M--+----+---+---t<;::::-.~::i--~@:.-,-13=,~s=IL~TY~S~AND:-:-:::~ST===o=N=E~,=llgh...,....,.t-g-ra-y-,moist,---,.-:-~den-se-·~.beddin---,c-=--g:~N~1~0W..,...,....,.,--; 14-;...:.,: 12SW. 15- 16- 17- 8 124.0 11.5 0:-91.0 ........ ;.,,:. : ..:n-·. '<' .. :.A. 18-..,,.., -<"> 19+--+-+--+--+----+--+--~-~~~·1---:--.......,..-,--~-=-~-==-=-~---------,-------1 SC ~ @ 19' CLAYEY SANDSTONE, olive brown to brown, moist, dense; 20-~ 7 118.2 14.0 92.8 ~ massive to wealdy bedded: N10W, 12SW. 21-1---1---+--+---+-----+--+---'/..4-,'-//1--------------------1 22-SM ;::::, : @ 21 %' SIL TY SANDSTONE. 23- 24- 25- 26- 27- 28- 29- ~8 114.0 >-":''. ·..;.,.· 15.7 92.5 '<'.' :-7': @25' As per 25', beddlng: N10W, BSW; cross-bedding: N67W, 18NE. ,r.·. Vs' .. 30+--t'777t--=-t::~+-""'."'7':::-:--+--:::--+~-,-+'"'?'rl---:=:-::-c:c:-=:-:-:-:=-::-==:-:=--::=:-:=-::,....,.-:--~.,..,.,.--,-,...-c----,-----I · ~ 19 SP/ML 117.3 9.7 63.0 · · @ 30' SANDSTONE w/SILT, rJght gray, slightly moist, dense; massive. 31- 32- 33- 34- Robertson Ranch, Carlsbad· GeoSoils, Inc. Plate B-23 GeoSolls, me.. PROJECT: CALO.VERA HILLS II, UC Robertson Ranch, Carlsbad BORING LOG W.O. · 3098-A2-SC BORTNG -----"BA--'-'--3 __ DATE S<CAVATED __ B-_15-04 ____ LOGGED BY: ___ _ 36- 37- 38- 39- 40- 41- 42- 43- 44- Sample ~ 16 SP/ML ~ 20 118.3 12.1-80.7 121.1 12.9 93.1 SAMPLE METHOD: 0-'Zl' 3,500 lbs; '0-5!'/ 2,400 lbs; ~ 1,500 Iba •' . ,• •' ... Approx. Elevation: jj§' MSL standard PenelralJon Test Description of Material @ 35' As per 30', becomes moist. @40' As per 35'. 45- 46- @ 45' As per 40'. 47-f--t---1r---~;:;--t---t---t-----e,i,j-t~f'l)~4~7'~BasaJ~~co~n~tact:~~N~1~0~E.4NW~~----------__:-_/, SC ~ @47' CLAYEY SAND, olive brown to brown, molat, dense; bedding: 12.1 90.1 121.9 '0 N30E, 4NW. 49-+--l---l--~s=M,-c--1----+--+---¥::;:~-:~:-@=-4~9~'S~1~LTY=-=-SAN=-=7.o~ST===o~N~E~.~nght--=-=-g-ra-y-,-~~~~h7.tly-m~oist:-:--:-to-moist,---:-.-:-:-dense--. --i 5o-~ 19 114.2 9.0 63.0 ;...:,.· @ 50' As per49'. 48- 51-;;:· 52 63- ;_,.:...· ..;,,.·. '-:'"".' Y.-: ,.;i-:,-·. _,.._. 54- 55- 56- ol- w 20 125.4 10.9 90.1 @ 55' As per 50', becomes cemented, cross-bedding: N25E, 24NW. 58- 59- 60- 61- 62- 63- 64- w 30 .V-. ..,.. ..;.,.·. .....:-·. '<". · @ 59' Bedding; N5E, 6NW. :..,,.,· 117.0 11.7 74.8 ;...:.-: @60'Asper55'. '-("'.' 55-~ 30 117.7 12.9 84.1 ~: @65'Asper60'. 551...J----IUL.'-+---i---l----l-----f---h-<.-++----,-,,...,..,..,=-===--:-=~~=-----:------------t $P/Ml @ 68' SANDSTONE w/SIL T, gray, wet, dense. 67~17 @ 67' Seepage encountered into hole. 68- 69- Robertson Rench, Cerisbecl GeoSoils, lneo Plate B-24 PROJECT: CAL.AVERA HILLS II, LLC Robertson Ranch, Carlsbad BORING LOG w.o. 309B-A2-SC DATE EXCAVATED _ _;9-:.....1.;.;::5-04_:_:_ __ LOGGED BY.-__ _ SAMPLE METHOD: D-27' 3,500 lbs; Zl-6S 2,400 lbs; 65-85' 1,500 lbs Approx. Elevation: 11§' USL SIBndard Penelrallon Test Undisturbed. Rlng Sample Description of Materlal :.l:t: 71-f---l'CLLL..f--~+-~+-~~-+-~-+~~~fi----~--~----~~-----~~~--~~~~--~--~------I C:::-@ 71' SILTY SANDSTONE, fight gray, moist, dense; massive, seepage n- 73- 74- 75- ,.,.._ . ....:-..;,,.·. · 30 115.9 12.9 80.2 ~: absent @ 71' Basal contact: N5E, 4NW. ~ ..... 76-+---f'=-'t---+-~+---~-+~--+--~+>-<-~4··1--=--,-,~-c,----==---~--~~~~~~~--~----~--~---l T otal Depth = 7f!/ 77- 78- 79- 80- 61- 82- 63- 84- 85- 86- 87- 88- 89- 90- 81- 92- 93- 94- 85- 96- 97- 98- 99- 100- 101- 102- 103- 104- Robertson Ranch, Garlsbad Seepage Encountered From 67'-71' Baclcfllled 9-15-2004 With Bentonlte ~oils,lnc... Plats B-25 GeoSolls, Inc. PROJl:CT: CAI.AVERA HILLS I~ LLC Robertson Ranch, Carlabad 1- 2- 3- ,4- 5- 6- 7- 8- 9- 10- 11- 12- 13- 14- 16- 16- 17- 18- Sample SM 122.0 121.-4 72 7.9 BORING LOG W.O. 3098-A2-SC · BORJNG ____ BA-4 __ _ SHEET_1_ OF~ DATE EXCAVATED __ 9-:_1c..:6-04c...:....;. __ LOGGED BY:. __ _ SAMPLE t.ETHOD: D-XT' 3,500 Im; 'Zl-56' 2,400 D:s; 56-85' 1,500 Iba Approx. Elevation:~· MSL Standerd Penetratbn Test Description of Material SANTIAGO FORMATION: --:""".' v..· ,.,.;-·. @O' SILTY SANDSTONE, yellowish brown, dry, medium deose; bedding: N45E, 1 OSE; NOOE, 6NW; N36E, 6NW; subhorlzontat ~: ,N45W, 20NE; Fractures: N20W, 81NE; N5DE, 73SE; N25W, 74NE. ..,..., I.('. ~: ,:,,.· 532 ..;-:, v..· ~-. i.r-.• ~: @5' AB per O', becomes light gray, massive to weakly bedded, fractures less common. .;,:.·, 57.8 ..;-:, @ 15' SILTY SANDSTONE, yellowish brown to light reddlsh brown, :.,,..· slightly moist, dense; massive. '-"·. -.. · 0: ff1l 1g Gradatlonal contad: N20W: 5SW. 19·-t--t-t---tcsw=v;,t-----t---t--r-.~ •• ~.r"-~~~~~~~~:!,_!:~~~~-=--c--:,------:---,------'/ • • • • @ 19' SANDSTONE, light gray, slightly moist, dense; massive to 20- 21- 22- 23- 24- 25- 26- 27- 8 127.9 8.5 76.9 . . .. .. . . .. . . . . .. . . .. . . . . .. weakly bedded: N20W, 2SW, fine to medium grained . . . . . 28- 29-t--t-t---tc=..-t-----t---t--r.··...,..~~-~:~~tii)29'~~8~asa~l~co~ntact:~~N~20~W~3~S~W~._--:c....,..,.:---:--,---:-------:,-------'r SM v... @ 29' SILTY SANDSTONE, fight gray, slightly moist, dense; massive, 30- 31- 32- 33- 34- Robertson Randt, Carlsbad -. fine grained . .;,,.· ........ ;...;. ..;,,.· . . '<" .. :.,,..· ,.,.,.., ."';"'.' GeoSoils, Inc. Plate B-26 .. ~Us,-~c:. - .. - PROJECT. CAl.AVERA HILLS II, LLC Robertson Ranch, Carlsbad Sample . :s I ) i l g 1 1 § i :6 ~ ; C. 1!! 5 ~ ~ ~ ::> ili ~ 30 SM 125.8 11.6 36- 37- 38- 38- 40- 41-.• 42~~ 43- 44 SC 45 ~ 30 SM 125.7 10.0 46- 47- 48- 49- 50- 51- 52 53- 54- 55-w 30 124.4 11.4 56- 57- 58- 58- 60- 61- 62- 63- 64- 65-~ 30 119.0 11.8 66- 67- 68- 69- , Robertson Ranch, C!lrlsbacl ~ ~ s .. C/J 97.2 83.8 91.5 80.3 BORING LOG W.O. 3098-A2-SC BORING BA-4 SHEET -3_ OF -2_ DA1E EXCAVATED 9-16-04 LOGGED BY:. __ _ SAMPLE A£THOD: 0-Zl' 3,500 lbs; ZT-56 2,400 1111; 55-85' 1,500 hi Approx. ElavatJon: ~ MSL "5l Groundwater Descrip1lon of Material ;:;: : @ 36' As per 29'. ,-.:,· . ...:,...·. @ 42' Seepage encountered from boring sidewalls. .:n· ._. ~ @ 44' CLAYEY SANDSTONE, olive brown, moist, dense; weakly "1"'.·\'-"b=ed==cled:~·~N251N=:;;.~~3S~'N..:....:..:.·----------------__.Jr v-.. @ 45' SILTY SANDSTONE, gray, moist, dense; masstve to weakly . ~: bedded: N22W, 2S'N, fine grained. '<'. :.,,..· ..,., .. ..;..· -.. :0:• v-.· ..,..., :-":"'. ...,...., ...,.. · @ 55' As per 45', becomes yellowish brown to light gray. :.,,..· ,-.:,·. '-0":· v-.· -r: . ..;,,.·. '<' .. :.,,.. ,.,.... .;,,.•, @ Sl' Very lndurated. @ 59' Few spicules and blabs of opaque material, less lndurated. @ 65' As per 55'. Plate B-27 -~ ,' - GeoSoUs, Inc.. PROJECT: CALAVERA HIUS II, LLC Robertson Ranch, Carlsbad Sample 0 a! .c g E -e 1 (fj R ~ i ~ ~ ca ::, iii ::, SM 71- 72- 73- 74- 75- 75- 77- 78- 79- 80-ra 30 81- 119.6 12.1 82- 83- 84- 85- 86- B7- BB- 89- 90- 91- 92- 93- 94- 95- 96- 97- 98- 99- 111C 101- 102- 103- 104- Robertson Ranch, Carlsbad BORING LOG W.O. 309S-A2-SC BORING ____ BA_-4 __ DATE EXCAVATED __ 9-_1_6-04 ___ LOGGED BY;.· ___ _ SAMPLE fllETHOD: ~ 3,500 lbB; ZT-68 2,400 lbs; 55-86' 1,500 ba Approx. El9VBl:lon: ggQ' MSL stMd8rd Penatratlon Test Undfsturbad. Ring Sample Description of Material .'-!"". v..· ·-··~· 84.0 ....... "':". .;.,· ,-,,:-•, o..r.· @ 7S Subhorlzontsl bedd"ing. :..,,..· >":'". ~:-v-.· ·..n·. i..r. -~: . ..,.,.. :..,,..· ,->';'". :-"':"" . .:n.·. i..r. ~: .;,,.· '-('. -~· ·,;,;-· .~~ -~-·-.. ~:-....... ~-.;.,· ,-,.:-·. ~-· ""·. ~: ...n·. i..r.· ~- 0.·. '<" .. :.rs. ,.r:-·. · .. ; ....... @ 80' SIL lY SANDSTONE, llght gray, moist. dense; massive to weakly bedding, bedcfmg appears subhorizontal. @ 90' SIL lY SANDSTONE, Dght gray, moist, dense; massive. Total Depth= 100' Seepage Encountered From 42' to 44' BaclcfiI1ad 9-16-2004 With Bentonlta Chips GeoSoils, Inc. Plate B-28 BORING LOG GeoSoils, Inc. -.. w.o. 6145-A-SC PROJECT: SHAPELL HOM!p BORING BA-101 SHEET_1_ OF2._ Robertson Ranch West DA TE EXCAVATED &-10-10 LOGGED BY: RBB Sample ~METHOD: Mocllled Cal Sampler, 140 Im @ 30" Drop Approx. ElaYatlon: 142' MSL i Im stsndard PBnelratlon Test 0 ~ 'SJ GroundwalBr "Cl i· i ~ ? I ~ ~ UncilstlJrbed, Rk1IJ Sample 1 1 ~ § I ~- ~ t .a Description of Material ID iiS ::J r'3 CL ~ !QPSOIL: .. 1-@ O' SANDY CLAY, dark grayish brown, moist, stiff. 2 l:,t\A,r:1 -WEATHERED SANTIAGO FORMATION: 3-SM '-'("°·. @ 2' lnterbedded SIL TY fine SANDSTONE and SANDY CLAYSTONE, r v-.· .. yellowish brown to brownish gray, moist, medium dense/stiff; highly --4-.:,.· I fractured --.,,. . v-.· 5-~ ;....:.-, TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION; 5-9" 121.6 13.3 97.7 .:,,.· @ Z'h' SIL TY SANDSTONE, yellowish brown to buff, moist, dense; fine .. 6-........ grained. 0. ,.,.,. .. @ 31h' Bedding: N3D"W/5"SW. Fracture: N42"W/84°NE 7-'-("',' @ 5' As per 2%', saturated; trace lnfflled fractures. V-.' B-... @ T Bedding: N19°W/12°SW. ,->';'" • .;..· 9-v-.· :-":"' -· 10-v-.· 0. 11-,.....;-·, '<"'.' 12-:..,,.. .. "" . 13-0: @ 12%' Low angle cross-bedcfmg. '-"·' @ 13' Bedding: N40°E/2°NW. ~. 14-VO• .. ........ @ 14%' SIL TY SANDSTONE, Dght gray; fine-to coarse-grained. 15-~ .J"-7-10" 122.7 10.2 77.4 ..n· . @ 15' SIL TY SANDSTONE, fight gray to light brown, wet, madlum 16-....... dense; fine-grained. :.,,.. .r.·' @ 15'h' Bedding: N33"E/5"NW . 17-~: @ 16%' Callche inflllecl fracture: N40"W/ e1·sw. :.,,. . 18-·,r: . @ 1T Sub-horizontal bedding. ..:,,.· @ 18' SIL TY SANDSTONE, light gray; fine grained. ... 19-. er .. ;,:.: 20-a:,:, . .. @ 20' Cross bedding (low angle) . ....... :..,.. 21-,.;;,·, @ 21' SILTY SANDSTONE, gray, moist, dense. 0-:-22-v-. ... :J"':"' . 23-.;,...· . v-. @ 23' Bedding: N1ouwrrsw . ;....:w· 24-..:,.,· .. ........ 25 ~ 4-12" SM/SC 116.4 11.5 72.5 I,, @ 25' SIL TY SANDSTONE, light gray, moist, mecfrum dense; fine 26-R-11"' 1~-:i n 1? 1 i:;o -:i grained to CLAYEY SANDSTONE, grayish brown, moist, medium w.a UI dense. 27 SM "'"· ~ 26' CLAYEY SANDSTONE i:1ravish brown moist dense. .~.· @ Lb°%' SILTSTONE, gray to reddish yellow; sllck ped surfaces. 28-,.,... .:,.• Beddini:1: N76°E/13°NW . 29-r.r . @ 2T SIL TY SANDSTONE, fight gray; fine grained. ..,,... Bl 28' As oer 26W. Beddlni:1: N42°E/1"NW . .:n· ; ~~,Inc. Robertson Ranch West Pt ate 8-9 L ! BORING LOG GeoSoils, Inc.. w.o. 6145-A-SC PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES BORING BA-101 SHEET--3_ OF-2._ Robertson Ranch \Nest DA TE 8(CA VA TED 6-10-10 LOGGED BY: RBB Sample SAMPLE METHOD: l.b9l!ld cal Sampler, 140 lls @ 30" Drop .. Approx. Elevation: lli° MSL I m Stsndsrd Penstralion Test ~ I l ~ Grounclwalsr I ~ l g [ C: ~ Undisturbed, Ring Samp/8 0 I CIJ § j "" i ! ~ ~ ~ en ~-0 ! Descrfp6on of Ma1erfal m ::> :: SM ~-· @ 30' As per 26%'. ..,..,. 31-....:--. @31' SILTY SANDSTONE, yellowish brown to right gray . ..;,..·. 32-........ Fault N6"WNert. Bedding: N12"W/13"NE. ~- 33-.Ao'. .. @ 33' Concretion '-r. 34--~: ..,.,.., .. "(", 35-~ :..,,.,· @ 35' SIL TY SANDSTONE, light gray, wet, medium dense; fine 16-13" 122.0 11.9 88.8 ... ,-,.:-·, 36-..,,. . grained, near vertical fracture . V',' 37-~-~·-.. . '-r .. 38-0 @38' Bedding: N30°W/4"SW . . ..,.,.., 39-'<' .. :..,O.,' @ 39' Fault N1 °ENert. 40-,,.,.., 0:- '-"'·' 41--. . ..,,.·, 42-'-I".' @ 42' Fault N15"W/68"SW offsets SIL TY fine SANDSTONE and ;...,;. . 43-'..>,-SIL TY fine-to coarse-grained SANDSTONE. '<' :..,,..· 44-... ..,.,. . 0:-45-~ 16-14" 123.5 7.5 58.8 ,.,.. . @45' SILTY SANDSTONE, light gray, moist, dense; fine grained, trace .. ~- 46-..;.· coarse grains . ........ 47-~. ..:,,· .. '-r, 48-:..;.. ..,.,.. 49-...,.. :,.r,,· 50-,-,:- ..,h". 51-~-· ~ . ..;.,,.· 52-.. '-r .. ~- 53-..,.,.., '-1""'.' 54-:..,O.,' ... ,-,.:-·, 55-~ ~:- 16-11" 118.7 9.0 60.5 '-"'·' @ 55' SIL TY SANDSTONE, buff, moist, dense; fine grained. ~ 56-..;,.· .. '<' .. 57-;..,:-: ...:,:,. . 58-. '<". :.,,.· @.58' Bedding: NrE/4"NW. ,,,,. .. 59-0-:-@59' Bedding: N30°E/15°NW. :.r-. . . . Robertson Ranch West GeoSoils, Inc. Plate B-10 GeoSolls, Inc. PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES Robertson Ranch West 61- 62- 63- 64- 65- 66- 68- 69- 70- 71- 72- 73- 74- 75- 76- 77- 78- 79- 80- 81- 82- 83- 84- Sample ~ 24-1~ ~ 26-11" SM 108.5 115.3 8.2 41.4 7.9 48.4 BORING LOG w.o. __ 6_1_4_6-_A-sc __ _ BORING BA-101 SHEET2_ OF2_ DATE EXCAVATED 6-10-10 LOGGED BY: . ...,_RBB=-- SAMPLE METHOD: Modified Gal Sampler, 140 lbs C 30" Droo ·~. 0.· '-"·. ;...:.._ ...:,,.·. '-,",' ;...,.:· ,:,,,·. "-:"'.· :..,,..· '"'7' '-"· ~-..;..,.· . ..,,... 0: ..,.,._ . "1""'." ;...,..· ,..,.,._ ........ ~---:"": '-,",' ·~·. '-("'," ~: ..n·. 1 -!'9". ..,,.. . :..,,..· -~· '-<'"," J.. ·-" Approx. Elevation: 116 MSL stsndard Penetration Test UncNsh.Jrbf,d, Ring Samp/B Description of Material @ 65' SILTY SANDSTONE, buff to yellowfsh brown, clamp, dense; fine grained. Bedding: N10"W/10.NE. @66' Cross beddfng: N20"W/10"SW . @ 73' Bedding: N51.E/1 O"NW . @ 75' SILTY SANDSTONE, buff to yellowish brown, damp, dense; fine to medium grained. @ 76' Bedding: N10"E/10•NW. 85-+---4~.1-----1----1-----l--+---F--'--'-+--------=--c--,-,.,,--,,,=,,~,...-,,-----,...-,--.,,------,--------1 ~ 24-12• SW 118.3 11.6 77.3 • • @85'S1LTYSANDSTONE,llghtgray,wet,dense;finetocoarse 864---4L<-L<'l-----l----l-----lr--+---+--·-·~~Qra!lo<.c-.-'-'-'--ed~.__,.----------------------~r Total Depth= 86' 87- 88- 89- Robertson Ranch West No Groundwater/Caving Encountered Backfllled 6-10-2010 0-35' -3 Kelly Weights; 35-65' -2 Kelly Weights (Inner); 65-86' -1 Kelly Weloht (Innermost) GeoSoils, Inc. Plata B-11 2 3 4 5 GeoSoils, Inc. PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES Robertson Ranch West · Sample 27 0 .0 E ?ii en 0 en ::, USC 6 7-+--+,-,.,..,f----l--+-----1----+---42 USC 115.2 16.1 98.0 8 9 10 22 15.2 11 12 13 14 15-+--+,.,...,....1--4-2--f~C-L-+--1-0-6.-1-1--2-0.~2-+--9-5.-6--, 16 17 18 19 BORING LOG W.O. 6145-A-SC BORING ____ B_-_10_1_;_ SHEET __ OF~ DATE EXCAVATED __ 6_-9_-_10 __ LOGGED BY..·~ R~B~B __ SAMPLE METHOD: Standard Pene1ration/Mocfdied Cal Sampler, 140 lbs @ 30" Drop Approx. Elevation: 53' MSL Standard Penetration Test "5l. Groundwater Undisturbed, Ring Sample Description of Material QUATERNARY ALLUVIUM: @ O' SANDY CLAY/CLAYEY SAND, dark gray, dry becoming wet at 2 feet, soft/loose becoming very stiff/medium dense at 2 feet. @ 3' Water seepage into boring. @ 5' No recovery. Likely as per O'. QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS: @ 7' SANDY CLAY/CLAYEY SAND, dark brownish gray, saturated, hard/dense. @ 10' SANDY CLAY to CLAYEY SAND, tan to light brownish gray, wet, very stiff/medium dense. @ 14' Water seepage into boring. @ 15' SANDY CLAY, tan, wet, hard. 20-l--l;,.,.,..,d---,-:,--1::=:::::-:--J-----t--:=-=--i~--14'nft--=-~~-;-;-;:;:::--;------;----:--;----;:---;-----;:----:----:-----:-------i 22.3 @ 20' SAND, tan, saturated, medium dense; fine-grained coarsening 21 21 .2 downward to fine-to coarse-grained, becoming SIL TY SAND at -21 25.0 feet 22 :·.·, 23 24 25-f--l,...,..,.f-------f---=---+---:-::--f--=--:---:---t--:--:--:--+7'~-=-===-=--=-=--:-=-:-::c:-:-=---:----:---c:------,-----,--;-----,:------,-------t 21 SC 107.0 21.0 100.0 @ 25' CLAYEY SAND, brownish gray, saturated, medium dense. 26 27-+--+---+----1-L/_S_C+-----1----+--- 28 29 Robertson Ranch West TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION: @ 27' SANDY CLA YSTONE/CLA YEY SANDSTONE, dark gray becoming light brownish gray, moist, hard/dense. GeoSoils, line .. Plate B-2 $ = Q. ., 0 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 GeoSoils, Inc. PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES Robertson Ranch West Sample '6 0 .9, "O D ~ ., E -e (ii .3 . e c "' "' rn ::> -"' 'i5 3: (.) ~ "S C: 0 rn ID ::> iii ::> 0 L/SC 54 107.4 Robertson Ranch West l l . C: I!? i .3 "' .3 0 "' :E rn 17.6 19.0 93.0 BORING LOG W.O. 6145-A-SC BORING ____ B_-_10_1 __ SHEET _3_ OF _3_ DATE EX'CAVATED __ s_-_9-_1_0 __ LOGGED BY:~R=B=B __ SAMPLE METHOD: Standard Penetration/Modified cat Sampler, 140 lbs @ 30" Drop Approx. Eevation: 53' MSL II ~ Standard Penetration Test "::l-Groundwate~ Undisturbed, Ring Sample Description of Material @ 30' As per 27'. @35' SANDY CLAYSTONE/CLAYEY SANDSTONE, tan, gray, and reddish yellow, wet, hard/dense coarsening downward to SILTY SANDSTONE, tan, wet dense. Total Depth= 36Yz' Perched Groundwater from 3-7' and 14-25' Back.filled (3-9-2010 GeoSoils, Inc. Plate B-3 2 3 4 GeoSoils, Inc. PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES Robertson Ranch West Sample 0 .0 E ~ ~ en ::> SM c ::> ~ 0 ~ C 0 ;:: e! .a t'II en BORING LOG W.O. 6145-A-SC BORING ____ B_-_10_2 __ SHEET_ OF _3_ DATE EXCAVATED ___ 6-_9_-1_0 __ LOGGED BY:-"-R=B=B __ SAMPLE METHOD: Standard Penetration/Modified Cal Sampler, 140 lbs @ 30" Drop ."-'!°".' .:.,o..· -~· . ..,no·. .:..r-.· ':-":''. ·..;.:,.·. .i...r--.· ;,,..· ·,.;,,:-·. -~:- Approx. Elevation: 52' MSL Standard Penetration Test 'Sl-Groundwater Undisturbed, Ring Sample Description of Material QUATERNARY ALLUVIUM: @ O' SIL TY SAND, grayish brown, dry, loose. S-+--"""'...t----1------1--~--t-------t----t-;-rt--=-~--,----c--:--:-::-:--c--:=...,.-::-:--..,..,---=-:----,-~--=-----=-,--------1 16.7 @ 5' lnterbedded CLAYEY SAND to SILTY SAND to SANDY CLAY, 6 brownish gray to grayish brown, moist, medium dense to stiff. 7 8 9 10 115.5 15.8 96.6 11 12 13 14 15 19.4 16 17 18 19 20 37 104.0 22.8 99.3 21 22 23 24 25-1--m..a...+--1~5:,--;--=c~L-+-----+-~247.~7-+--- 26 27 28 29 Robertson Ranch West QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS: @ 10' SANDY CLAY, mottled grayish brown and dark brownish gray, saturated, hard; coarsening downward to CLAYEY SAND, tan , saturated, dense. @ 12' Groundwater seepage into boring. @ 15' SANDY CLAY to CLAYEY SAND, reddish yellow to brownish gray, moist to wet, very stiff/medium dense. @ 20' As per 15', saturated, very stiff/dense. @ 24' Groundwater encountered. TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION: @ 25' SANDY CLAYSTONE, tan to dark gray, moist, stiff. GeoSoils, Inc. Plate 8-4 ~ .c ii Q) a 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 GeoSoils, Inc. PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES Robertson Ranch West Sample 'a 0 S, "O .a :: Q) E -e >, .a ~ en ·2 en II) ::, -"' 'i5 :!: t) 3 C 0 en ~ m ::, iD ::, a 106.2 17 us 109.4 Robeirts6n Ranch West ~ ~ 0 C Q . . I!! :;:, ::, e! ;;; .a 0 m :: en 18.8 89.4 22.1 18.8 97.4 BORING LOG W.O. 6145-A-SC BORING ____ B_-_10_2 __ SHEET __3_ OF __3_ DA TE EXCAVATED __ 6_-_9-_1_D __ LOGGED BY:~R=B=B __ SAMPLE METHOD: Standard Penetration/Modified cal Sampler, 140 lbs @30" Drop Ill ~ Approx. Elevation: 52' MSL Standard Penetration Test Sl.. Groundwater Undisturbed, Ring Sample Description· of Material @30' SANDY CLAYSTONE, brownish gray, wet, hard; becoming SILTY SANDSTONE, light grayish brown, moist, dense. @ 35' SANDY CLAYSTONE, brownish gray, moist, very stiff; to SILTY SANDSTONE, brownish gray, wet, medium dense; to SANDY CLAYSTONE, brownish gray to reddish yellow, moist, very stiff; to SANDY CLAYSTONE,·dark gray and reddish yellow, moist, very stiff. @40' CLAYEY SANDSTONE, light brownish gray and reddish yellow, saturated, dense; coarsening downward to SANDSTONE, light brownish ra , saturated, dense; fine to medium rained. Total Depth= 41%' Perched Groundwater from 12-15' and 24-25' Backfilled 6-9-2010 GeoSoils, Inc. Plate B-5 BORING LOG GeoSoils, Inc. w.o. 6145-A-SC PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES BORING B-103 SHEET_ OF~ Robertson Ranch West DATE EXCAVATED 6-9-10 LOGGl;D BY: RBB Sample SAMPLE METHOD: standard Pe11etration/Modified Cal Sampler, 140 lbs @ 30" Drop m Approx. Elevation: 59' MSL c-Standard Penetration Test () 0 .e, l 'Sl-Groundwater "O .c ~ ~ Q) E C: ~ Undisturoed, Ring Sample s -e >, 0 .3 E en ·c ~ ~ en :::, :6 rn "' ::, ~ C. ..I< =a ;i: u 2:-~ Q) "3 C: 0 en 0 Description of Material a m ::, iii ::, a :a en SC QUATERNARY ALLUVIUM: @ O' CLAYEY SAND, dark gray, dry becoming wet at 3', loose becoming medium dense at 3'. 2 3 4 5 64 124.6 9.7 78.6 @ 5' CLAYEY SAND, dark gray to dark grayish brown, wet, dense. 6 7 8 9 10 16 CL 25.7 QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS: 11 @ 10' SANDY CLAY, reddish yellow, moist, stiff. 12 13 14 @ 14' Groundwater encountered. 15 @ 15' No recovery. 16 17 108.4 19.6 98.7 @ 17' SAND with minor SILT, light grayish brown, saturated, medium 18 dense; fine to medium grained. 19 20 23.0 @ 20' SAND, light grayish brown, saturated, medium dense; fine to 21 coarse grained, trace SANDY CLAY interbeds, gray wet, very stiff; trace gravel. 22 23 24 25 46 SC 110.7 19.1 100.0 TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION: 26 @ 25' CLAYEY SANDSTONE, tan, gray, and reddish yellow, saturated, dense. 27 28 29 Robertson Ranch West GeoSoils, Inc. Plate 8-6 GeoSoils, Inc. PROJECT: SHAP8..L HOMES Robertson Ranch West Sample 'a i5 .!:!, g "i ! ;: s 1 ~ 'g_ ~ j !3 :5 till C/J '& m iii :J m 41 Cl/SC 31- 32- 33- 34- 35- 36- 37- 38- 39- 40- 41- 42- 43- 44- 45- 46- 47- 48- 49- 50- 51- 52- 53- 54- 55- 56- 57- 58- 59- Robertson Ranch I.Nest ... ' : l [ C: i I :i i C/J 17.6 BORING LOG w.o. __ a_1_45-A-S __ c __ BORJNG ____ B-_1_03 __ DATE EXCAVATED __ 6-9_-1_0 __ LOGGED BY:-'-RB~B __ SAMPLE METHOD: Slmxlerd PenelrBllon.Yod CBI Sen-4Jler, 140 lbs @ 30" Drop e ~ Approx. Bavafion: 69' MSL SfBndard Penetration Test Urdish.ubed, Ring Sample Description of Material @ 30' lnterbedded SANDY CLAYSTONE, dark gray, moist, hard; and CLAYEY SANDSTONE, light brownish gray and reddish yellow, moist, dense. · r Total Depth= 31W Perched Groundwater from 14-25' No Caving Encountered Bac:kfllled 6-9-2010 · GeoSoils, Inc. Pfate . B-7 PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES Robertson Ranch West BORING LOG W.O. 6145-A-SC BORING ____ s_._10_4 __ SHEET__ OF_1_ DA TE EXCAVATED __ 6_-_9-_1_0 __ LOGGED BY:,""'R~B:.:B __ Sample SAMPLE METHOD: S1andard Penetration/Modified Gal Sampler, 140 lbs@ 30" Drop 2 3 4 "C a, -e 2 "' -"' 'c 3 C III :::, 0 .0 E ~ en CJ en :::, USC ~ C 0 :;:, I'!! 2 "' en Approx. Elevation: 57' MSL Standard Penetration Test rJ.. Groundwater Undisturbed, Ring Sample Description of Material QUATERNARY ALLUVIUM: @ O' SANDY CLAY/CLAYEY SAND, dark gray, dry becoming moist at -2', soft/loose becoming stiff/medium dense at -2'. 5-1---i.,.....,;----1f---+----f----+---32 sc 14.6 @ 5' CLAYEY SAND, dark brownish gray, moist, dense. S+---l~l----l--cs~c:-+---+---+---+7-'rt--~Q7U~A~T=ER=N~A~R=Y~TE=R=RA::-:-:C=E~D=E=PO::-=S~IT=s~:----"----------I 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 49 116.0 15:3 94.9 14 15+--"79V~-:--::-t~M7/~S-::t-----+-~16~.6::-t---tr 16 23.1 17 18 19 204--....... ....l-----f--l------lf----+---tt,;, 33 CL 106.8 23.1 99.9 21 22 23 24 @ 6' CLAYEY SAND, reddish yellow to brownish gray, moist, medium dense. @ 10' CLAYEY SAND, brownish gray, wet, dense. @ 13W Groundwater encountered. @ 15' SILTY to CLAYEY SAND, reddish yellow, wet, medium dense becoming SANDY CLAY, light brown to gray, wet, stiff at -16'. TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION: @ 20' SANDY CLAYSTONE, dark brownish gray to reddish yellow, saturated, very stiff. 25+--lovv""----1-,...,..-l------l'----+---~++--=-=-=-=-:c:-=-:-::c-:--:--=--:::---:---=-':":'":-:--=--:---:-:-----:--~-:----t 39 SM 20.4 : ~:: @ 25' SIL TY SAND with minor CLAY, buff, brownish gray and reddish 26 ,:,:-·. yellow, moist, dense; fine grained. 1---l"'"""'l----i---+----+---+----+...a....:.+--=--:-=--:--:-==-c::-----------------------i 27 Total Depth= 26W Perched Groundwater from 13%-20' 28 No Caving Encountered · Backfilled 6-9-2010 29 Robertson Ranch West GeoSoils, Inc. Plate 8-8 BORING LOG GeoSoils, Inc. W.O. 6145-E-SC PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES BORING ____ B_-_20_1 __ SHEET_1 _ OF _3_ Rancho Castera, El Camino Real DA TE EXCAVATED __ 3-_2_8-_11 __ LOGGED BY:~R~G~C~- Sample SAMPLEMETHOD: _Holl_rm_S_re_m_Au~g~e_r ________________ -1 "5l -e 2 rn -" 'o "5 C: ID ::, 0 .a E >, 1/) II) () 1/) ::, CL C: 0 ~ ::, iii II) Approx. Elevation: 114' MSL Standard Penetration Test :l.. Groundwater Undisturbed, Ring Sample Description of Material COLLUVIUM: @ O' SANDY CLAY, dark olive brown, wet, soft. 2 3-+--+---+----t---+------ll----+----¥7''7i----c--=::----::-::::::-c--=-::-~=-:c=--::------------------; SC TERRACE DEPOSITS {Qt): 4 @ 3' SIL TY SAND w/CLA Y, brown, moist, loose. 5~.1---+.-......11--s-o----1'--s-M-+--1-10-_-1---,1--10-_-7-+--56-.-5-.+.~~+.+. _@_5_'_8_e_c_o_m_e_s_S~I-LTY=--s-A_N_D~.-b-r_o_w_n_,_m_o~is-t,-d~e-n_s_e-;w_e_a~kl_y_d~e-v-e~lo_pe__,.d-, --1 .:...,.,...· 6 . :->7·. sub-horizontal bedding. ·~·. 7 ~-.;,-:,..: 8 ~- .'-r'.' -~-· 9 -~. -~--10-+--iTr>...+----i--.,--+-----ir---::---1--,--Tt------------------------------l 98.0 23.7 91 .3 @ 10' As per 5', CLAYEY SAND interbeds. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 50+ 106.7 107.8 C/SP 108.7 Rancho Costera, El Camino Real 17.6 84.8 16.8 83.1 11.3 57.2 ,:, . @ 15' As per 10' SILTY SAND w/CLAYEY SAND interbeds, mottled olive brown and brown, moist, dense; sub-horizontal. bedding. @ 20' As per 15'. @ 25' lnterbedded CLAYEY SAND and tine to medium grained SAND, olive brown to brown, slightly moist to moist, dense. Plate 8-2 BORING LOG GeoSoils, Inc. w.o. 6145-E-SC PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES BORING B-201 SHEET~ OF~ Rancho Castera, El Camino Real DA TE EXCAVATED 3-28-11 LOGGED BY: RGC Sample SAIH'LE METHOD: Holkiw S1em /v.qJ!' Approx. Elsva6on: 114' MSL . 'u m Standard P&netratJon Test I .s l ¥ Grounclwat5r I ~ l g 5 ~ Unc§sturbed, Ring &tmple I '2 s I t B :> ,l!: g ~ Description of Material ~ dl CT.) c'-l :> :.'!: ~ 45/ SP 94.7 6.2 22.0 .• @ 30' SAND w/CLAY, moist, dense; medium grained, poorly sorted. 31-50-4w 109.B 10.3 53.9 . •' .. 32-· . 33-. . : ·. 34--.. 35 ~ 50-6" SC !'Jo Recove11 ~ @35' ClAYEY SAND, brown to otive brown, moist, dense. 36- 37-~ 38- 39-~ 40 ~ 50-4" SCJSP 96.6 6.1 22.5 @40' SAND and CLAYEY SAND interbeds, sub-horizontal bedding. .. 41-: 42-: 43-.. : 44-: : 45-~ 50-4" @ 45' As per 40'. 46 Total Depth = 46' 47-No Groundwater Encountered Backijlled 3-28-2011 48- 49- 50- 51- 52- 53- 54- 55- 56- 57- 58- 59- Rancho Castera, El Camino Real GeoSoils, lneo Plate B-3 BORING LOG GeoSoils, Inc.. ,. -~ ' -. ' w.o. 61~ PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES BORING 8-202 SHEET_1_ OF--3_ Rancho Costerii, El Camino Reel DATE EXC.AVA7ED 3-28-11 LOGGED BY: RGC Sempls SAMPLE METHOD: Holi:Jw San Auger Approx. Eleval:lon: g MSL I m Stsndard PenetralJon Tast I i ;: l §: ~ "SJ_ GroundwBtar g ! '2 I ,g Uncl5lurbed, Rfn,J Sample :5 8 ::::, l ! ~ ~ ~ 5 ~ Descrlpfion of Material m ::!: ,1C/RAI @ O' Asphalt -B inches over 4 inches R.A.P. ·-1 SW .. @ 1' Base -12 Inches, dark gray brown, well graded sand with some .. . . 2 . . fine aravel . ,r SC ~ .BLL;, 3-@ 2' CLAYEY SAND, light gray, wet. medium dense. 4-~ .. 5-~ 19 99.3 19.0 75.5 ~ 6-~ 7 'l; CL ALLUVJ!,!M: 5Y @ 7' CLAY with SAND, dark brown, wet. flnn. 9-@ 8' Stabilized groundwater level 10-~ 20 11- 12-@ 12' Becomes SANDY CLAY, very dar1c grayish brown, wet, finn. 13- 14 ISP/CL @ 14' CLAYEY SAND and SAND, brown to-dark brown, sab.Jrated ,, (water bearing sand), medium dense. Water level in boring rose to 8'. 15-~ 19 112.6 15.2 B5.7 16-•' : 17-: : 18- 19-:'.-~ ,• 20 I 11 SP 111.4 18.3 99.9 @ 20' SAND, dark gray, saturated, loose to medium dense. 21-·-. 19 22-·. . ,• 23 ISP/CL @23' lnterbedded SAND and CLAYEY SAND, dark gray brown, •' saturated, loose. 24- 25- m 8 26-,, : 27-,, 28-.. : 29- : \ GeoSoils, Inc. Rancho Costars, El Camino Real Plata 84 PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES Rancho Castera, El Csmlno Real Sample 0 i ~ I 1 :; 1 ~ :6 .... .!!I ~ :5 C. 'C i!' ~ "!!I C: II) ID ::i ID ::i D ~ i ::E m 7 31- 32- 33- 34- 35- 36- 37- 38- 39- 40- 41- 42- 43- 44- 46- 46- 47- ·48- 49- 50- 61- 52- 63- 54- 55- 56- '57- 58- 59- Rancho Coslera, El Camino Raal ~ C: ,B e .3 ~ BORING LOG W.O. __ 6_1_45-_E-S_C_--1 BORING ---~B-_:20:..c2=--- DA7E EX'CAVA TED __ 3-_28-_1_1 __ LOGGED BY: RGC SAMPLEMETHOD: _fblbN __ Slem--'-~lw!J«~----------------1 II ~ :::I •' Approx. Elevation: 42' MSL standard Penetralhn Test Undisturbed, Ring SsmpJa Description of Material Total Depth m 31%' Groundwater Encountered@ a depth of 8' (EL= 34' MSL) Baclcfllled 3-~2011 GeoSoils, Inc.. Plata 8-5 BORING LOG GeoSoils, Inc. W.O. 6145-E-SC PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES BORING ____ B_-_20_3 __ SHEET__ OF -2._ Rancho Castera, El Camino Real DATE EXCAVATED __ 3-_2_8-_1_1 __ LOGGED BY:~R~G~C~- Sample SAMPLEMETHOD: _Ho_1_1ow_sm_m_A~ug~~------------------1 Approx. Elevation: 45' MSL Standard Penetration Test -c i a, .0 :l ~ .s: iii C. X '5 ~ a, :i i:: D Cl ID ::::, iii l [ i:: I!! D :, ~ iii :, 0 1a ~ Cl) 'Sl-Groundwater Undisturbed, Ring Sample Description of Material @ O' Asphalt -6 inches over 4 inches R.A.P. ROAD BASE: 2+-__Jf---f---+-=-:-+----+----t---r--=--t~-=-~0.~8=3'~G~ra===d=ed::...:::S~A~N~D~w:.:..:.,:ith:.:...:G~RA:::....:..:V~E=L:.t...:d=ark~~ra::.u~m~o~is~t:....::.de~n~s~e~.-------1 SM : ~:: FILL: 3 . .,,... @2' SILTY SAND, light gray, moist, medium dense. ·..;.,..·. 4 ~· ':-":', 5 ·~ . . i...r.· :..,:..· 6 ·-. v-. · 7 7' As er2'. l--~~--'---+-:~-+-~ ........ -t--'" ...... -t-w=,.w_r7"':n--~~...!..!:~::!...!::..:... _____ .,...,.. ____________ _,.,. __ -'1 8 @ 7%' SAND to CLAYEY SAND, dark grayish brown, moist, medium 9 10-l--+--+-----1-C-/_C_L+-------1---+--- 11 12 13 14 1s+--~..+--1-6-+-C~L-+--,1-0-2.~6---1-:-23~.5=--l-::-::-::-- 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 11 106.1 21 .3 100 dense; few roots. ALLUVIUM (Qal): @ 10' CLAYEY SAND to SANDY CLAY, dark brown, wet, loose/firm. @ 13' Stabilized water level in boring. @ 15' SANDY CLAY, dark grayish brown to dark olive brown, weUsaturated, stiff; fine few water or sand grains. @ 20' As per 15', soft. ~ WAsm~ 1--~~--'~t:-;:-;;;-;:;t----i----t---~~~~!::...!.~~~~-------------------'1 26 @25%' CLAYEY SAND, very dark grayish brown, saturated, medium dense; interbeds of SAND (SP). 27 28 29 Rancho Castera, El Camino Real GeoSoils, In«: .. Plate 8-6 GeoSoUs, lac .. ---' PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES Rancho Castera, El Camino Real Sampla I :8 l ~ 1 = j ~ ! ~ -g ~ Cl) Cl :J Cl :J I ~ ~ ~ s 5 .!!I _j m 18 31- 32- 33- 34- 35- 36- 37- 38- 38- -40- 41- 42- 43- 44- 45- 46- 47- 48- 49- 50- 51- 52- 53- 54- 55- 56- 57- 58- 58- Rancho Costera, El Camino Real l C: :8 e .a ~ BORING LOG W.O. 6145-E-SC BORING ___ ....:B-....:2:.::.03.:....___ SHEET -2.._ OF -2.._ DA1E EXCAVATED __ 3-_28-_1_1 __ LOGGED BY..·~ R=GC~- SAMPLEMETHOD: _Hobv __ san_~Augar-"'------------------l m ~ :-::f Approx. Elevation: §' IIISL Description of Material @30' As per25', interbedcled SAND and CLA.YEY SAND. Total Depth = 31 !I.a' Groundwater Encountered@ a depth of 13' (EL= 32' MSL) Backfi1Jed 3-28-2011 GeoSoils, Inc. Plata B-7 g :5 C. Cl) 0 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 GeoSoils, Inc. PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES Rancho Castera, El Camino Real Sample 1i" 0 8 'O .c ~ 0) E -e ,.. ::, !E (/) "2 iii ., (/) :::, -" =a 3:: (.) ~ "5 C 0 (/) III ::> iii :::, Cl ~ ~ C E 0 .3 ~ "' .3 0 "' ::E (/) 102.2 16.9 72.5 41 102.9 19.9 85.4 43 92.7 27.1 91.4 BORING LOG W.O. 6145-E-SC BORING ____ B_-2_0_4 __ SHEET_ OF_!_ DATE EXCAVATED __ 3_-2_9_-1_1 __ LOGGED BY:...:..R=G=C'---- SAMPLEMETHOD: _H_ollow __ Stem __ Au~ger::;.._ ________________ ~ m ~ Approx. Elevation: 68' MSL Standard Penetration Test "Sl. Groundwater Undisturbed, Ring Sample Description of Material @ O' Asphalt-6 inches over 4 inches R.A.P. ROAD BASE: @0.83' Well graded SAND with minor GRAVEL, gray brown, moist, dense. TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qt): @ 1.83-8' SANDY CLAY, light olive brown, moist to wet, very stiff. @8-15' SANDY CLAY, reddish brown, wet, stiff. @ 15-20' SANDY CLAY, light olive brown to reddish brown, wet, hard. @20-26' SILTY CLAY interbeds, brown to reddish brown, wet, very stiff. 26-+--~"'i-----t---11------t---+---f.o<L<C<t---------------------------------i T otal Depth = 26' 27 No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 3-29-2011 28 29 Rancho Castera, El Camino Real GeoSoils, In~ .. · Plate B-8 BORING LOG GeoSoils, Inc. WO. 6145-E-SC PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES BORING B-205 SHEET_ OF_!_ Rancho Castera, El Camino Real DATE EXCAVATED 3-29-11 LOGGED BY: RGCIBEV Sample SAMPLE METHOD: Honow Stem Auger Approx. Elevation: 81' MSL c::-Ii Standard Penetration Test (.) 15 .e, l 'Sl... Groundwater "Cl .c ~ l Q) E C: ~ Undisturbed, Ring Sample s .c >, 0 :j = en c !!! :;, £i ii, ol en :::> .3 ~ .,,, =a 3: (.) "' .3 a. ~ 15 Description of Material Q) 3 C: 0 en "' Cl ID :::> jjj :::> Cl :E en @ O' Asphalt - 8 inches over 4 inches R.A.P. ROAD BASE: 2 @ 1' SAND, Ii ht brown, moist, dense; minor ravel. TERRACE DEPOSITS {Qt}: 3 @ 2.3' SANDY CLAY to SIL TY CLAY, light brown, moist to wet, very 4 stiff. 5 102.9 19.9 86.8 6 7 8 9 SM ,>w("',' @ 9-15' SIL TY SAND, light brown, moist to wet, dense. .;.r.· 10 50 110.1 16.2 85.5 ·...:,"'' ·.:,..·. 11 .~ . . .,,.. . 12 ...;..:.·. 13 ·:-":'·: ·....:,,:,,·. 14 .c..,,..· ·~·. 15 ·~·. 49 106.9 6.7 32.6 .~· . ..,..... 16 ·..r.-· . . :...r.· 17 ·:-"'7·' @ 17' SILTY SAND, orange brown, moist, dense . .....:,,;-·. 18 .'-!'"'.· ,;,_,,,:..,· 19 .,........ ./>• ,;_...,-.,· 20 51 100.4 5.4 22.2 -~· @ 20' SIL TY SAND, light brown, moist, dense. ..;,:.·. 21 ~-· :...,:..· 22 ..,, . \..(°',' .:...,:... 23 CL @ 23' SANDY CLAY, light brown to orange brown, moist, very stiff. 24 25 67 91 .5 25.8 84.6 26 Total Depth= 26' 27 No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 3-29-2011 28 29 Rancho Castera, El Camino Real GeoSoils, Inc. Plate 8-9 ---- GeoSoils, Inc. PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES Rancho Castera, El Camino Real s :5 0. d) Cl 1 2 3 4 5- 6- 7- 8- 9- . Sample "'O 0) ~ ;: 0 ffi -e ~ ~ 'o :i C: CD ::, ~ 50 c-C) 0 .9, ~ ~ E >, Cl) C: Cl) ::::, u Cl) ~ ::::, 0 1~C/RAI SW SC SM 105.2 15.0 BORING LOG W.O. 6145-E-SC BORING -------B-206 SHEET_1_ OF_1_ DATE EXCAVATED __ 3_-2_9-_1_1 __ LOGGED BY:_R_G~C __ SAMPLE METHOD: _H_o1_1ow_stem __ PJ.J_g~e_r -----------------< Approx. Elevation: 84' MSL Standard Penetration Test '5l.. Groundwater Undisturbed, Ring Sample Description of Material @ O' Asphalt -8 inches over 4 inches RAP. ROAD BASE: ® 1' SAND, liQht brown, moist, dense. TERRACE DEPOSITS {Qt): @2.3' CLAYEY SAND, light brown to reddish brown, moist, dense. 69.3 -~-· @ 4Yz' SIL TY SAND, light brown, moist, dense. .:-1":". .:.r- .l.f"'. -~ ·,...r:-·, .~.· 10-~ 61 \J0Recove11 ·:;> @10'Asper5'. 11-+--~~c..<.<.f---+---+-----+----t---t-·'""'~··t---=----:-=-----cc----:-c:----------------------; 1.2- 13- 14- 15- 16- 17- 18- 19- 20- 21 - 22- 23- 24- 25- 26- 27- 28- 29- Rancho Castera, El Camino Real Total Depth= 11' No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 3-29-2011 GeoSoils7 Inc: .. Plate B-10 BORING LOG GeoSoils, Inc. · · . W.O. __ 6_1_4&-E_-S_C_---i PROJECT: SHAP8.L HOMES BORJNG ____ B-_20_7 __ SHEEr_1_ OF_!_ Rancho Castera, El Camino Real DATE .EXCA VA TED __ 3-_29-_1_1 __ LOGGED BY:~RG~C __ Sample SAMPLEAETHOD: _~ __ SIBm __ ALgi,r~----------------1 ii E g I i ~ :6 in i ~ ~ ! '§ '2 ~ B m ::, ID Approx. Elevation: rJ: MSL m standard Penslralion T98t l l "SJ_ Ground,WJier C: ~ UndisllJrbed, Ring Sample j 0 j j Description of Material ,f,C/RAI ~ 1-SW " @ O' Asphalt -6 Inches over 4 inches RAP. .. ROADBASE; . . 2-.. @ 0.83' SAND, light brown, moist, dense; minor gravel . . .. CL 3 4 5-~ 67 112.1 8 I TERRAC~ QEPOSITS {~; @2.3' SANDY CLAY, fight brown to brown, moist, very stiff. 14.9 82.7 Total Depth C 6' 7-No Groundwater Encouritered Backfilled 3-29-2011 8- 9- 10- 11- 12- 13- 14- 15- 16- 17- 18- 19- 20- 21- 22- 23- 24- 25- 26- 27- 28- 29- Rancho Coste111, El Camino Real GeoSoils, Inc.. -Plate B-11 BORING LOG GeoSoils, lac. w.o. 6145--E-SC PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES BORING ____ B-_208 __ SHEET_1_ OF_!_ Rancho Castera, El Camino Real DA 1E EXCAVATED __ 3-29-__ 1_1 __ LOGGED BY: . ...:..RGC=-- Sample SAMPIEMETHOD: ~Holtlw~~Slsn=.;.;.~Augs,"~----------------1 ~ Ill g i ~ ! ! ::E Jj Approx. EIEIVBtion! 55' IISL StBndard Penelration Test Undlsturb&d, Rk1g Sample Description of Material J~CIRAJb @ O' Asphalt -6 inches over 4 Inches RAP. . . . . .. . . SW ROADBASE: .. . ... . ... @ 0.83' SAND, Hght brown, moist, dense; minor gravels, 16 indles ~.·\ :.r.· ........ _;,,.· ""·' 3- 4- '--"th=1c1c'°'='=.c-:-----~--=-=----------------'r SANTIAGO FORMATION ffsal: @2.2' SILTY SAND, light brown, moist to wet, dense. "":'". ..;,:.· 10.8 40.7 '-{', . . " . \ 5-~ 50-6" 97.3 6 7- @fl SILTY SAND, light brown, mo1st, very dense. Total Depth ::: 6' -. No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 3-29-2011 8- 9- 10- 11- 12- 13- 14- 15- 16- 17- 18- 19- 20- 21- 22- 23- 24- 25- 26- 27- 28- 29- Rancho Castera, El Camino Real Plate B-12 PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES Rancho Castera, El Camlno Real Sample 15 I I .c g E J ~ = .... ~ ! "3 0) m ::> ~ [ :,: ! :5 g I 'II:,/RAI 1 SN 2 SM 3- 4- .) 5-~ 251 6 r~ •• 110.8 1"-n 7- B- B- 10- 11- 12- 13- 14- 15- 16- 17- 18-· 19- 20- 21- 22- 23- 24- 25- 26- 27- 28- 29- Rancho Costere, El Camino Reel l C ~. s c\3 751; BORING LOG W.O. 6145-E-SC BORING ____ B-_209 __ SHEET_1_ OF_1_ DATE 8<CAVATED __ 3-_2_B-_1_1 __ LOGGED BY:~RGC~~- SAMPLE/,IETHOD: _Hol!ow __ S!em __ ~~----------------< m ~ -1". :.,.. .. ..,.. :.,. . . . ,-,.:-· ..,.·. ......... . . ~-..n·. '-('. ;..,..· Approx. Elsvatlon: §!l JIISL stsndard Panelratfon Test U11!llstu!bsd, Ring Sample Description of Material @ O' Asphalt - 7 inches over 4 Inches RAP. ROADBASE; fl>. 0.91' SAND brown. moi!':t dense· minor aravel. TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qt): @ 2' SIL TY SAND, fight brown, moist to wet, dense to very dense. Total Depth= 6' No Groundwater Encountered Backfined 3-29-2011 Plat& B-13 s :5 C. Q) 0 2 3 4 GeoSoils, Inc. PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES Rancho Costera, El Camino Real Sample 'n 15 .9, "O .0 ;: a, E ..0 >, .a ~ en '2 "' ., en ::, "" =a 3: (.) ~ "5 C: 0 r:n ID ::::> iii ::::> 0 l ~ 2 II) 0 :;E SW CL BORING LOG W.O. 6145-E-SC BORING ____ B_-_21_0 __ SHEET_ OF_1_ DATE EXCAVA1ED __ 3_-2_9_-1_1 __ LOGGED BY.·_ R~G_C __ SAMPLEMETHOD: _H_o1_1ow_s1em __ A_ug_~ ________________ __, C m C: ~ 0 ; Approx. Elevation: 47.5' MSL Standard Penetration Test Undisturbed, Ring Sample "Sl.. Groundwater e! 2 al r:n Description of Material @ O' Asphalt -8 inches over 4 inches R.A. P. 1' SAND, brown, moist, dense, minor ravel, 20 inches thick. ALLUVIUM (Qt): @ 2.3' SANDY CLAY, brown, wet, stiff. 5-¥--h-.-...!-----+--l------l---+---~4+------------------------------1 23 SC 97.4 22.9 87.0 @ 5' CLAYEY SAND, olive gray, wet, medium dense. 6 @ 5' Groundwater encountered. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15-4--h-.-...!-----+--l------l---+---+s,,;:+1------------------------------1 21 CL 108.8 20.1 100 @ 15' SANDY CLAY, brown, saturated, very stiff. 16+--f".£.''4---+--1-----i---+---+"'"i---::=--c--,-::::--:-::---:-=--------------------~ Total Depth = 16' 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Rancho Costera, El Camino Real Groundwater Encountered@ a depth of 5' (EL= 42.5' MSL) Backfilled 3-29-2011 GeoSoils, lnco Plate B-14 GeoSoils, Inc. PR().JEc;T: SHAPELL HOMES Rancho Castera, El Camino Real $ :5 Cl. 0) 0 2 3 4 5- Sample "O 0) ,e :, in ,5 C: :::, 0 .0 : E a:; en (.) en :::, , C/RAI SW CL C' 0 a s: ~ I!! c :, :::, ui ~ 0 0 ::iE 108.7 15.7 BORING LOG W.O. 6145-E-SC BORING ____ B_-2_1_1 __ SHEET_1 _ OF_1_ DATE EXCAVATED __ 3-_2_9_-1_1 __ LOGGED BY: RGC SAMPLE METHOD: _H_ol_low__:.Ste=m __ Ac:..eug<.ee--r -----------------, Approx. Elevation: 62' MSL m Standard Penetration Test ~ ~ 'Sl Groundwater C: ~ Undisturbed, Ring Sample 0 ~ .a "' Description of Material en @ O' Asph_alt - 7 inches over 4 inches R.A.P. .~.· ROAD BASE: ~. @ 0.91' SAND, brown, moist to wet, dense; minor gravel. ... ":-"':"' . . . SANTIAGO FORMATION {Isa}: @2.4' SANDY CLAYSTONE, light brown, wet, hard/dense. 79.9 I Total Depth = 6' ~ 50-6" 6-+---~'4-----l--!------1f----+---.f""l-------,-~--,--::-:--'---------------------l 7- 8- 9- 10- 11- 12- 13- 14- 15- 16- 17- 18- 19- 20- 21- 22- 23- 24- 25- 26- 27- 28- 29- Rancho Castera, El Camino Real No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 3-29-2011 Plate 8-15 PROJECT: SHAPB..L HOMES Rancho Costara, El Camino Real Sample 0 I "5! .c ~ g E i 1 ~ ::: C :5 i ~ ::, ! :3 [JJ "B iii ::, ~ ! .!! 0 :::!: 1~C/RAIP 1 SW 2- 3-SC 4- 5 6- 7- 8- a- 10- 11- 12- 13- 14- 15- - 16- 17- 18- 19- 20- 21- 22-' 23- 24- 25- 26- 27- 28- 29- Rancho c·ostera, El Camino Real···-·· l C ,g_ e! .a ~ BORING LOG w.o. __ 6_14_5-E_-SC __ -l ·BORJNG ____ B-_2_12 __ SHEET_1_ OF _J__ DATE .EXCA VATED __ 3-_29-_1_1 __ LOGGED BY..·...,_ RGC=-- SAMPLEMETHOD: _Hollow __ Sll!lm __ AUOJBf--=------------------1 [Ii ~ .. .. . . .. .. aa ~ Approx. Elevation: 76' MSL standard Pen9tratlon Test UndisturbBd, Ring Sample Description of Material @ D' Asphalt -9 Inches over 4 Inches RAP. ROADBASE; @ 1.1' SAND with some SILT end GRAVEL, medium gray, moist, dense. f ALL(Af): @2.5' CLAYEY SAND, olive brown, moist, medium dense. Total Depth c 5' No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 3-29-11 Pfate· 8-16 BORING LOG GeoSoils, Inc.. w.o. 6145-E-SC PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES BORING B-213 SHEET_1_ OF_!_ Rancho Castera, El Camino Real DA1E EXCA VATBJ 3-30-11 LOGGED BY: RGC Sample SAMPLE METHOD: HalowSlem~ Approx. Elevation: M' MSL E m Standard PenetratJon Test "?i ~ 'Si-Groundwa!Br ! .c ~ ~ g 1 1 § j i ~ Undfsturbed, RJng Sample :6 ~ i C. .><: =g ~ ·~ ~ ::> ID ~ D :i Cl) Description of Material I ,,C/RAI @ O' Asphalt -7 inches thick over 4 Inches RAP. 1-SW .. ROAD BASE: .. . . 2 . . fi2 0.91' SAND with SILT and GRAVEL. brown moist dense . r SC ~ BLLCAfl: 3-0. @ 1.9' CLAYEY SAND, brown, moist, medium dense. 4-~ 5-~ "'11 1NI A ,; A ?? ., ~ ~ SP . ,• TERRACI;; QEPOSITS (Qt\: 6-,• •, .. @5%' SAND, brown, dry, medium dense. 7-.. 8-..... 9-.. · .. ·.·, 10-~ 5~ 102.8 3.0 132 . ,·. 11-.. . ,• 12- ·. 13-· . .. 14-GP • • @ 13%' Becomes GRAVELLY SAND, brown, di)', dense. • • • 15 • ~ 60 SM 100.8 4.0 16.6 ,"-'('"",' SANTIAGO FORMATION IT~}; ..,.. .. Im 15' SILTY SANDSTONE light yellowish s:irav. dry dense. 16 r 17-Total Depth c 16' No Groundwater Encountered 18-Backfilled 3-30-2011 19- 20- 21- 22- 23- I 24- l __ l 25- -26- I r I I 27- 28- I i 29- i I I Rancho Castera, El Camino Real GeoSolls, Ineo .. Plate 8-17 GeoSoils,lnc. PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES Rancho Castera, El Camino Re.al i £ 0. a, 0 1- 2 3 4 5 Sample "C a, .c .3 rn ~ :a 3 C: [II :::, ~ ;;: 0 iii 59 0 .c E >, en en () en :::, J~C/RAI SW SM C t) S: ~ C "2 :::, e ::, iii i::' Cl 0 ::E 110.9 11.5 ~ C: 0 ;a I!! .3 tO en 61.9 BORING LOG WO. 6145-E-SC BORING ____ B_-2_1_4 __ SHEET_1_ OF_1_ DATE EXCAVATED __ 3_-3_0_-1_1 __ LOGGED BY:_R_G_C __ SAMPLEMETHOD: _H_ol_low_Sm_m_Aug-=-~----------------~ Ill ~ ."'-(".· .:..,,,.· -~·. ·...r.-. .~.· -~·. ·...;,:,,·. .r.....r-.· .-.,-. Approx. Elevation: 83' MSL Standard Penetration Test :l.-Groundwater Undisturbed, Ring Sample Description of Material @ O' Asphalt-7 inches thick over 4 inches RAP. ROAD BASE: ® 0.9' GRADED SAND with few GRAVELS. FILL{Afl: @2.1' SILTY SAND, brown, slightly moist, dense. 6 7_ SC 196:: ~ @6' CLAYEY SAND, brown and olive gray, moist, dense. 8-1-~-+---+-S-M~----+---+---¥--:::;:~:+--S-ANT--IA-G_O_F_O_R_MA_TI_O_N_{T_s_al-:---------------1 @ 8' SIL TY SANDSTONE, light yellow gray, dry, dense. 9- 10- 11- 12- 13- 14- 15- 16- 17- 18- 19- 20- 21- 22- 23- 24- 25- 26- 27- 28- 29- 50 114.6 '-In Re.coven Rancho Castera, El Camino Real 11.3 67.7 -~-- ·0 :• .'"<""".' -~--. ..,..._ ."<". -~-- ,...;,,:,.·. ,'-("°.· ,...,.. . ..ft". .Vo . . ..,.. ·~·. @ 13' As per 8', becomes very dense . Total Depth= 15W No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 3-30-2011 . GeoSoiiis, Inc. Plate 8-18 BORING LOG GeoSoUs, Inc. w.o. 6145-E-SC PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES BORING S:.21 s SHEET_1_ OF__!_ Rancho Castera, El Camino Real DATE EXCAVATED 3-30-11 LOGGED BY: RGC Sampls SAMPU= AETHOD: 1-klbv 5Efn /vJglJr Approx. Elevation: 79' IISL E m standard PenetratJon Test I :S ;: ~ l ~ GroundwaiBr g 1 i: ~ Undisturbed, Ring Sampla ! ~ j 0 = ,5 B :::, s Q. ~ ~ 5 Deecrlpflon of Material ~ :, ~ :i m m rn ,,CIRAJ' @ O' Asphalt-8 Inches thick over 4 inches RAP. 1 SW .. ROADBASE: .. 2 . . , fil 1' SILTY SAND to SAND. brown moist. medium dense . r SC 0 AU(Afl: 3-~ @ 2 CLAYEY SAND,.brown and 6ght gray, moist, medium dense. - 4-~ 5 ~ 50-6" SM 3.6 "-("',' @5' Becomes SILTY SAND wfth some angular GRAVEL :.,0., 6-... >"'."'. ~-. 7-........ !"":""' • B-..;,-;.•. .. o..r-• ...,.... 9-.,.,.. "{"',' 10 ~ 44 SC 112.0 9.4 52.1 ~ @. 10' Becomes CLAYEY SAND, light brown to brown, moist, dense. 11-0 12-~ 13-~ 14-~ 15-~ ~ 15' As oer 1 O'. -V/// 57 cu 1"" /; AR 7A A "'!".· ALUMUM fQaJ>: 16 r \ im 15%' SILTY SAND varv dark !'.!ravish brown, slh::ihtlv moist dense. 17-Total Depth= 16' 18-No Groundwater Encountered Backfitled 3-30-2011 19- 20- 21- I .. ' 22- 23- 24- 25- 26- 27- 28- 29- Rancho Castera, El Camino Real GeoSoils, Inc. Plate B-19 BORING LOG GeoSoDs, lnic. w.o .. 6145-E-SC PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES " BORING B-216 SHEET_1_ OF_!_ Rancho Costera, El Camfno Real DA 7E EXCAVATED 3-30-11 LOGGED BY: RGC _) Sample SAMPLE AETHOD: INJwSlam~ Approx. Elevation: 1§ USL :[ m stsndsrd Penetralioll Test I i ~ l l "Sj_ GroundwatBr g I 0:: j ~ -~ Undlslurbed, Ring Sample t ~ C: s ::, ~ I! '& Description of Material ::, er., ~ as m ::, III ::, CQ 11CIRAJb @ O' Asphalt -8 inches thick over 4 indles R.A.P. 1 SW .. ROAD BASE: .. . . 2-.. @ 1' SAND with SILT and a few angular GRAVELS, dark gray, moist, .. r SC ~ dense. 3-BLLCAft: 4-~ @2.2' CLAYEY SAND, brown, moist, medlum dense. ( 5-~ 30 108.9 10.0 51.0 ?a @ 5' As per 2.2'. 6-~ 7-~ 8-?J 9-~ 10 ~ 85 SW 108.3 11.4 57.4 .. @ 10' Becomes SAND, gray brown to dark gray brown, dry, dense; well .. . . 11-.. graded. . . . . . . 12-.. . . . . 13-. . .. . . . . 14-. . .. . . 15 . . ~ 64 SM 118.0 8.8 58.2 '-: .. SANTIAGO F:QRMATION ffsal: :.,0.. 16 ... @ 15' SILTY SANDSTONE medium i:irav, moist dense. r 17-Total Depth= 16' No Groundwater Encountered 18-Baclcfilled 3-30-2011 19- 20- 21- 22- 23- 24- 25- 26- 27- 28- 29- Rancho Castera, El Camino Real · GeoSoils, Inc. Plata 8-20 BORING LOG .. GeoSolla, Inc. w.o. 6145-A10-SC PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES BORJNG B-301 SHEET_1_ OF~ Rancho Costera DA TE EXCAVATED 5-20-13 Sample SAMPLE METHOD: 30• Bucket Auger Approx. Elevation: 220' MSL ~ m Standard Penetration Test ! ~ ~ l i ¥ Groundwater ~ [ I ~ Undtsturbed, Rlf1/J Sample I\; Seepage i 1 U) '"" ~ = ~ C: j :::, C. .,. "E i:::' .a Description of Material ~ :i 0 8l aJ. :::, aJ Cl :E SC 0 QUATERNARY COLLUVIUM; rru O' CLAYEY SAND dark brownish arav damo. loose. -SC V/ WEATHERED SANTIAGO FORMATION: SM ...,.. rru 1' CLAYEY SANDSTONE buff and liaht tan damo. dense. r -.JO -TERTIARY SANTIAGO EQRMATION; r " SIQI '-" · 11 rru 1%' SIL TY SANDSTONE buff and lioht tan moist. dense. 'r - .JO @ 2%' SANDY SILTSTONE, dark gray, moist, stiff . .JO t > Z1h' Beddino: N80°W 4°SW. CL w > ~~· SIL TY SANDSTONE buff and liaht tan moist. dense. SC //., t > 4' SANDY CLAYSTONE llqht tan moist hard. ~ 8-8" SM 115.6 10.7 65.5 '-" .JO i 4%' CLAYEY SANDSTONE buff and liaht tan moist. dense . I 6-.JO ( >5' SIL TY SANDSTONE, buff and light tan, moist, dense . ...,.. o.<' -./' ...,.. ...,.. -.JO .JO ..;,.. -.JO .JO ~ 11-12" ~P/Sf.J 1302 7.9 77.B @ 10' SANDSTONE with SILT, very fine.grained, buff and light -tan, moist, dense to SIL TY SANDSTONE with trace CLAY, moist, dense. 12- - -·., ~ 9-10" SM 112.4 13.B 77.4 .JO @-1s•s1L TY SANDSTONE, ~ray, reddish yellow, and buff, .JO -...,.. moist, dense; high-angle, callche-filled fractures . ...,.. ...,.. -~ ..r- er 18-.JO ...,.. '-" - .JO ...,.. -~ ...,.. 9-12" 112.7 12.9 72.9 o.<' @ 20' SIL TY SANDSTONE, buff and light gray, moist, dense. v" -..r-...,.. :_,,.. -...,.. '-" ...,.. @ 22%' Concretion -1' thick . -...,.. ...,.. 24-...r. v" ..r- Rancho Costera GeoSoils, Inc. PL.ATE B-2 BORING LOG GeoSo~ Inc. .. w.o. 6145-A 10-SC - PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES BORING B-301 SHEET~ OF~ Rancho Costera DA TE EXCAVATED 5-20-13 Sample SAMPLE METHOD: 30" Bucket Auger Approx. Elevation: 220' MSL 'ti' m StBndard Penetration Test :8 -9: ? 'Sl Groundwater I § ? ? [ C: ~ Undisturbed, Rlf1IJ Sample ~ Seepage 1 U) '2 I!! 2 = -" ~ ::::, i ~ ! "5 ~ U) t ~ c'B Description of Material III ::::, ai ::::, ~ 9-12" SM 119.8 12.2 85.0 v" @ 25' As per 20', wet "" -"" "" @ 26' Cross Bedding: N55°W, 7°NE. _,._ Mt1S~ I @ 27' SANDSTONE, fine grained, grayish brown, moist, dense; r -cross-bedded. @ 27Y4' SILTSTONE/CLAYSTONE, grayish brown, moist, stiff; -CL ~ beddin~: N71 °W/15°NE. (8) 27Y.! SIL TY SANDSTONE. IIQht Qrav. moist dense. SM . "" @ 28o/4' CLAYSTONE, mottled greenish gray and reddish 30 ~ 12-12" ML 98.4 11.8 46.0 ,-' r ,--r vellow .wet hard· contact: N71°W/9°NE Beddlna: N75°E/4°NW. 21K ,-' r (8) 29%' SIL TY SANDSTONE arav. moist dense. ~ 17-12" :lM/ML 113.5 16.4 95.3 @30' SANl}Y·61l:TSTONE, dark gray, greenish gray, and r -reddish tallow, niolst, hard; iron-oxide staining to CLAYEY SANDS ONE buff and llaht arav. moist dense. -@31' SIL TY SANDSTONE, buff and slightly gray, damp, dense to SANDY SILTSTONE, greenish gray, moist, hard to SANDY SC/SF CLAYSTONE, greenish gray, wet, very stiff; contact: r ISM N60°E/7°NW. -~ 25-11" 9.4 69.7 ®33' Iron-oxide stained bed: N1°W/9°SW. 121.8 36-134' Coarsens to CLAYEY SANDSTONE, light tan and gray. 35' SAND with trace SILT, very fine grained, reddish yellow, dark gray, and brownish gray, damp, very dense to SIL TY SP SANDSTONE buff and liQht tan. r -@37' SANDSTONE, fine grained, gray, moist, dense. @38' Iron-oxide stained bed: N60°E/12°SE (cross bed). - -~ 25-7" 10.6 78.7 @40' SANDSTONE with SILT, very fine grained, buff and 121.8 -yellowish brown, moist, very dense. 42-@42' Concretion -8" thick. - - ~ 25-11" SM 123.0 9.1 69.5 v" • @45' SIL TY SANDSTONE, buff and light gray, moist, dense. '-" -..r-_,._ ...r -.j' ..,, /\ ,.,,._ 48-V"' @48' Gross beddlAg: E-W/12°S . ..r-,.,... -,• J' -.,:-- Rancho Costera ~ils,lnc. PLATE;, B-3 BORING LOG GeoSoila, Inc. w.o. 6145-A10-SC PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES BORING B-301 SHEET__]_ OF~ Rancho Costera DA TE EXCAVATED 5-20-13 Sample SAMPLE METHOD: 30" Bucket Auger m Approx. Elewtlon: 220' MSL E Standard Penetration Test I :B ~ l l ¥ Groundwater g [ C: ~ Undisturbed, Ring Sample I\; Seepage 1 U) '2 j :8 '8. ~ ::> e! -"' 'E c:;, .a ~ :i ~ rJs Description of Material ID ::> iii Cl ~ 16-10" SP 111.3 7.7 41.9 @50' SANDSTONE with SILT, very fine grained, buff and light -gray, damp, dense. - - 54- -~ @54%' Concretion. 16-10" 110.9 8.4 44.9 @55' As per 50'. - - -@58' Cross bedding: N10°E/17°SE. -@59' Cross bedding: N40°E/20°SE. 60-~ 30-6" 108.6 9.1 46.0 @60' As per 50'. -11K - -@63' SANDSTONE, fine to medium grained, light gray, wet, -dense @64' Concretion. @64%' SANDSTONE fine to coarse arained. -~///. ----· ·---·------,n ·~~-~ ·--~ ............ i @65' SIL TY SANDSTONE, very fine grained, buff and gray, f ~ SlQJ ~ 66--../' wet dense. -../'' \ @65~' CLA YSTONE bed -1 R thick. beddina: N32°E/11 °SE. I -../' ·@65% SIL TY SANDSTONE, very fine grained, gray, moist, -...r _,,.. dense· contact: N 11 °E/5°SE seeoaae encountered. -@6'73~' SILTSTONE/CLAYSTONE, light brown, wet, hard; r S1QJ ~ -../' beddlna: N75°W/5°SW. -v:-@68' SIL "fY,SANDSTONE, very fine to fine grained, buff and -../' ...r light ~ray, wet, dense; seepage absent. High angle cross -~ _,,.. bedding: N30°W/15°SW between 68-71'. 40-6" 119.8 10.5 72.8 ..,... -../' @70' As per 68' --../' -../' 72-_,.. -../' -../' -../' -...r .. -_,,... -..,... -../' ,J"', Rancho Costars GeoSolls, Inc. PLATE B-4 BORING LOG .. GeoSoUa, Inc. w.o. 6-145-A 10-SC --- PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES BORING B-301 SHEET~ OF_§_ Rancho Costars DATE EXCAVATED 5-20-13 Sample ' -SAMPLE METHOD: 30" Bucket Auger Approx. Elevation: 220' MSL E m Standard Penetration Test ! E ~ l l °Sl Groundwater i [ 2 ~ Uncfisturbed, Ring Sample #\I Seepage i ] CJ) 'E 2! £j ~ :::> j e! C. .>t: '6 ~ .i3 Desaiptlon of Material ~ ~ C: CJ) 0 ~ :::> ID :::> Cl ~ ~ 40-8" SM 116.2 8.8 55.2 '-"' @75' SIL TY SANDSTONE, fine to medium grained, llght gray, '"" ~ moist dense· trace sub-anaular coarse arains. SP f 76' SANDSTONE, fine to coarse grained, llght gray, moist, -ense. 78- - ®77%' Iron-oxide stained bed: N86°W/19°SW (cross bed). ~ 40-8" SM V' @80' SIL TY SANDSTONE, fine to medium grained, llght gray, '-"' -'-"' wet, dense. _,.. -.r --.r- ..r-@82' Concretion -10" thick . _,.. -v' v' 84Ati; V' v' @84' Seepage encountered. v' -v' -.r -.r- ~ 40-7" SP 126.0 6.0 44.0 @86' SANDSTONE, fine to coarse grained, light gray and 124.3 5.5 41.6 reddish yellow, moist, dense; becomes SIL TY SANDSTONE, SM V' fine to coarse grained, reddish yellow, moist, dense; strongly I v' -v' oxidized subrounded to subanQular orained seeoaae absent. v' @87' SIL TY SANDSTONE, very fine grained, grar., moist, v' -":' dense; contact undulatory, primarily subhorlzonta . ~ @87~' Bedding: N64°E/4°NW. '-"' 90-~ 40-7" 12.0 v' @88' SIL TY SANDSTONE, light gray, moist, dense; fine v' grained. -111</18 V' @89' SIL TY SANDSTONE, gray, moist, dense; highly v' v' cemented. -._r-·. @90' SIL TY SANDSTONE, very fine grained, gray, damp, -.r -.r-dense. -~ @92' Subhorizontal bedding. v' _,.... -_,.. V' v' ~ 40-8" SP @95' SANDSTONE, fine grained, ~ray, damp, dense; becoming 96-SIL TY SANDSTONE, very fine grained, light gray and yellowish brown, damp, dense. - - - .. GeoSoils, Inc. - Rancho Costera PLATT;_ B-5 BORING LOG GeoSoU., Inc. w.o. 6145-A 10-SC -- PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES BORING B-301 SHEET~ OF~ Rancho Costera DA TE EXCAVATED 5-20-13 Sanple SAMPLE METHOD: 30" Bucket AuQer Approx. Elevation: 220' MSL R m Standard Penetraoon Test ! :B ~ l l ¥ Groundwater i [ s ~ Undisturbed, Ring Sample I\, Seepage .a J U) :I: I ~ = ~ C: .21 :J 0. -" "E ~ .a ~ :5 U) a, Description of Material ID :J :J U) ~ 40-10" SP Total Depth= 101' 102-No Groundwater/Cavin~ Encountered Seepage into Beddln~ ncountered Betweem Depths of -Approximately 65' to 7' and 84' to 86' Backfilled 5-21-2013 - - - - 108- - - - - - 114- - - - - - 120-.. .,. - - - - Rancho Costera GeoSoU., Inc. PLATE;_ B-6 BORING LOG GeoSoUs, Inc. 6145-A 10-SC w.o. PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES BORING B-302 SHEET_1_ OF--2_ Rancho Costera DA TE EXCAVATED 5-22-13 Sample SAMPLE METHOD: · 30" Bucket Auger ApprmC Elevation: 160' MSL i m Standard Penetration Test i l ;: g g 'Sj_ Groundwater i § ~ Undisturbed, Ring Sample #\I Seepage i i (I) '"" i :,;, I ~ C: ~ :::) .>< '8 !S ~ .a Description of Material :! C: --JJ-Cl CD :::) CD :::) ::!: ·-SC ~-QUATERNARY COLLUVIUM: rn)O' SANDY CLAY brown drv becomina damo with deoth stiff. -CL ~ WEATHERED SANTIAGO FORMATION: -@1' CLAYEY SANDSTONE, mottled brown and reddish yellow, I moist, dense. - -CL ~ TERTIARY SANTIAGQ FQRMATION: @3%' CLAYEY SANDSTONE, reddiwellow and light ~ray, moist, medium dense, becoming SIL SANDSTONE, ne to ~ 9-8" SP 116.7 6.6 41.7 medium grained, buff and reddish yellow, moist, dense. r 6-@41.4' CLAYSTONE bed, dark gray, approximately x· thick, 1 beddlna: N50°E/11 °NW. -@5' SANDSTONE, fine to medium grained, light gray, moist, dense. -@6%' Cross bedding: N60°W/6°SW. - @ 10-11· SM 119.9 7.8 54.1 '-; @10' SIL TY SANDSTONE, fine to coarse grained, reddish "/// .. ·-YI Yl vellow moist dense. -= ··SM"-'-"'' I -r-@10%' SILTSTONE/LEAN CLAYSTONE, greenish gray, moist, ._.,-. hard; interbeds of reddish yellow, becoming SIL TY 12-._.,-. ..r SANDSTONE, fine to medium grained, reddish yellow, moist, ~ dense· contact: N34°W/6°SW. -..,._ -r-@103.,.'4' SIL TY SANDSTONE, fine to coarse grained. -._.,-. @12' Bedding: N34°W/6°SW . ._.,-. '-"' @14%' SIL TY SANDSTONE, very fine grained, gray, moist, ~ 10-11· CL 122.8 11.5 81.8 I \ dense. r -115' SANDY CLAYSTONE, very fine grained, gray, wet, hard. 16' Fractured: N50°E/60°SE. •. ~ 10-7" SM 117.0 112 71.7 ._.,-. @17' SILTY SANDSTONE, fine grained, gray, moist, dense. ._.,-. 18-._.,-. ._.,-. V' SP @19' Concretion, SANDSTONE, highly cemented. ~ 10-8" CL 114.4 12.9 76.9 ~ @20' SANDY LEAN CLAYSTONE, tan and dark gray, moist to -wet, hard; coarsens to SIL TY SANDSTONE, fine to coarse SM ._,-. \ orained buff and orav. moist dense· contact: N30°W/18°SW. r -._.,-. @ 21 X' SIL TY SANDSTONE, fine to medium grained, light ..,._ ._,-. gray, moist, dense . -..r :_;._ ..,._ 24-._,-. ._,-. •._,-. Rancho Costera GeoSolls, In~ B-7" ~ -.. , .... ~-PLATE --: ·· GeoSoils, Inc. PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES Rancho Costera Sample - ~ 10-7" SM 112.6 - 5.7 32.1 BORING LOG W.O. 6145-A10-SC BORING B-302 SHEET --2_ OF --2_ DA7EEXCAVATED 5-22-13 SAMPLE METHOD: _30_"_B_uck_e_t_A_,ug"---e_r -------------------, Stsndard Penetration Test Undsturbed, RJng Sample Approx. Elevation: 160' M5l. ¥ Groundwater #\; Seepage Desa1ptlon of Material @25' SIL TY SANDSTONE, fine to coarse gralned, llght gray, damp, dense; subangular grained. 30-+----+-~'777"f-2...,...0--,-10.,..,,•1=-sMJM~l+--L-1,...,.1=-1 . ...,...4-+-6=-.4,------t-4-:--:1-:c.3-----t-r"'r-rl-----=@c--::3c--:cO-:-' s=1:-:--L=TY:-:-::S:--:AN----:-:--::D=-=s=T=o=Nc--:cE=,-----=fi=-n-e--=-to-co_a_rse--g-ra-:-ln-ed-----:-, --,-b-uff=-a-nd--;-;:-lig-----:h--:-t------J _ ~ 21K gray, moist, dense; gray SANDY SILTSTONE lnterbeds. @30*' Fracture: N89°W/73°SW. - 20-9" SM 36- - - ~ 20-9" 102.8 42- - ~ 20-8" 119.7 - 48- CL Rancho Costera @32' Greenish gray and gray riJ:HJp clasts. @33' Fracture: N18°W/58°NE. @35' SIL TY SANDSTONE, fine to coarse grained, buff and llght gray, moist, dense; subangular grained. @36' Iron-oxide stained cross bed: N24°W/15°NE. 10.0 43.5 ...,._ @40' SIL 1Y SANDSTONE, fine grained, light gray, moist, dense. 9.1 63.1 @41 Y:z' Cross bedding. @43' SIL TY SANDSTONE, fine to coarse grained, gray, moist, dense; planar cross bedding. @45' SIL TY SANDSTONE, fine to medium grained, light yellow, moist, dense; trace subangular coarse grains. "' @48' Concretions -1" thick, bedding: N4°E/1°NW. @49' CLAYSTONE, greenish gray and dark gray, damp, hard; --,,•--:~ .C:JJ,.,.,.,· ,I GeoSoils, Inc. PLATE 8-8 g :S Q. ~ 54 PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES . Rancho Costars :8 "i [ -e I (/) i ~ -" 'g :5 (/) al :::> al :::> 20-8" MUC i ?; :t== C :::> t 116.6 109.5 124.5 l l C I 0 +J e ! 12.6 79.7 15.0 77.9 8.8 67.0 6Q-+-----+,~t---+--+-----+---+--~ 30-6" SM 118.2 1.8 12.1 11K 66 72 Rancho Costera BORING LOG w.o. 6145-A10-SC BORING B-302 DA TE EXGA VA TED 5-22-13 SAMPLE METHOD: _.::_30=--"-=B-=uck=et::..:.Au==-=------------------, m ~ Approx. Elevatton: 160' MSL Urrdlsiurbed, Ring Sample Description of Material 50' SANDY SILTSTONE, dark gray, damp, hard; becoming LEAN CLAY, greenish gray and reddish yellow, damp, hard; randomly fractured. @55' SIL TY CLA YSTONE, dark gray, damp, hard; trace plant fosslls, trace iron pyrite, lnterbeds of dark gray SIL TY SANDSTONE. @60' SIL TY SANDSTONE, fine grained, dark gray, dry becoming moist with depth, dense; highly cemented becoming less cemented with de th. Total Depth= 61' No Groundwater/Caving Encountered Seepage Encountered @ 49-50' Backfilled 5-22-2013 GeoSolls, Inc. PLATE B-9 BORING LOG GeoSoils, Inc:. ·, ... . ' w.o. 6145-A 10-SC PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES BORING B-303 SHEET_1_ OF---1_ Rancho Costera DA TE EXCAVATED 5-23-13 Sample SAMPLE MET'Hbo: 30" Bucket Auger Approx. Elevation: 142' MSL ~ a standard Penetration Test i ] ~ l l ¥ Groundwater g [ ,g ~ Undsturbed, Ring Sample ~ Seepage ! i (/) :t::: I!> :6 ~ C: I i ::i C. ->< t Desctiption of Matertal. ~ '5 C: (/) CJ ::i CJ ::i (/) - SM v' QUATERNARY COLLUVIUM; ...r- -...r-@O' SIL TY SAND, dark grayish brown, dry, loose; porous . CL WEATHERED SANTIAGO EORMATION: -@1~' SANDY CLAYSTONE, light yellow, dark greenish brown, .. and gray, moist, medium stiff . ~ SC ~ TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION: -ra @3' CLAYEY SANDSTONE, very fine grained, llght yellow and llght gray, moist, medium dense. ~ 7-12" SM 106.0 15.8 74.5 ,.,... @5' SIL TY SANDSTONE, fine grained, light yellow and light --<' 6-. ,..,... gray, wet, dense; contact: N2°W/12°SW, fault: NB0°W/75°SE . ...r- -r -._r- ...r- ...r--...r- ...r- v' -...r- ...r- -~ ...r- 9-12" 104.7 15.9 72A -r @10' SIL TY SANDSTONE, very fine grained, light yellow and ._r-light gray, wet, dense. --" ,.,... ...r-12 ...r- v' ...r--,.,... ...r- --r ..;: @14' Fault: N10°E/56°SE. ...r- ~ 7-12" SC * 17.1 . 0 @15' CLAYEY SANDSTONE, very fine grained, light yellow and -108.3 18.2 88.7 ~ light gray, moist, dense; sample disturbed. - 18-~ @17%' Bedding: N71 °W/1 °NE. SM ,.,... @18~' Coarsens to SIL TY SANDSTONE, fine to medium ...r--,.,... grained, yellow and light~ray, moist, dense. ...r-@19' Fault: N10°E/68°S . ~ ~ 10-11" $P/Sfv 1052 15.0 69.3 @20' SAND with SILT/SIL TY SAND, very fine grained, buff and -light gray, moist, dense; trace manganese-oxide. - - 24- Rancho Costera GeoSoils, Inc:. PLATE;_ 8-10 BORING LOG GeoSoUs, Inc. w.o. 6145-A 10-SC PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES BORING B-303 SHEET__±_ OF~ Rancho Costera DA TE EXCAVATED 5-23-13 Sample SAMPLE METHOD: 30" Bucket Auger Approx. ElevatlOI'\: 142' MSL E m Standard Penetration Test ! :s ;: l l 2 Groundwater ? [ § ~ Undisturbed, Ring Sample ~ &epage ~ ] (/) ~ I!! :,:, t ~ :::, I ~ ..I< .a "9 (/) t ~ Description of Material D Ol :::, :::, ::i: ~ 11-12· SM 108.5 14.5 73.4 ...,., @25' SIL TY SANDSTONE, very fine grained, light gray and -./' -...,., buff, moist, dense; hit anie planar cross bedding: ...,., N18°E/32°NW; fault: 28° 27°SE . --r @26X Becomes wet -,._,,... ML ,---, , \ ®27' Hloh anole planar cross beddini:t: N18°W/30°SW. r ,---, , @27X' SANDY SILTSTONE, reddish yellow, wet, hard; contact: -,---, ,---, N27°W/21 °SW. ,---, , -,---' r @28' Seepage encountered. ,---' r ,---' r 129• Fractures: N60°E/71 °SE and N9°E/65°SE. ,---' r ,29Y:z' Hlah anale planar cross beddlno: N20°W/17°SW. 30 ~ 19-11" IMUCL . 108.7-19.1 96.7 1;tB r 21K @30' SANDY CLA YSTONE (Paleosol), greenish gray, and SM ...,., reddish yellow, wet, stiff; abundant, internal, randomly oriented r ._,,... pressure faces. Dominant pressure faces oriented: -._,,... N61 °E/59°SE and N61 °E/30°NW . ._,,.... --r @31' SILTY SANDSTONE, fine grained, gray, wet, dense; -._,,... contact N82°E/41 °SE . ._,--@31 Y:z' Fault N78°E/53°SE. V' -._,,... @32' Fault: N40°E/63°SE, truncated by fault: N78°E/53°SE. '-" __,. ®34Y:z' Hioh anole planar cross beddlna: N32°W/44°SW. ~ 7-12" SC 103.5 16.8 74.6 ~ @35' CLAYEY SANDSTONE, light tan, wet, dense; interbeds of 36~~ ~ SANDY CLAYSTONE, greenish gray, wet, stiff. @36' Fault: N10°E/54°NW, slickens1des indicate dip-slip -movement, plunges N75°E. ~ @36' Caving and seepage encountered. -~ - -~ ~ @40' CLAYEY SANDSTONE, fine to coarse grained, light tan 12-12" 118.1 11.2 74.3 ~ -and light gray, moist, dense; becoming SANDY CLAYSTONE, ~ reddish yellow, light gray, and light tan, moist, hard. 42- -~ -~ '/':'. ~ 10-12" SM 112.0 13.1 73.1 '-" @45' SIL TY SANDSTONE, fine to medium grained, light tan, ._,,... ~ arav. and reddish vellow wet dense. " MUSC ,---, , @46' lnterbedded SANDY SILTSTONE, reddish yellow, moist, ,---, ,-, , hard; and SANDY CLAYSTONE (Paleosol), greenish gray and ~ 20-11" SM 109.4 17.3 89.4 '-;' gray, wet, stiff; polished surfaces, abundant gypsum, trace r ._,,... 48-'-" rounded pebbles. '-" ccM6' Seeoaae encountered. .J' -._,,... @47' SIL TY SANDSTONE, very fine grained, grayish brown, ._,--. gray, and yellow, wet, dense; abundant gypsum . '-" · Rancho Costera GeoSoU., Inc. PLA~ 8-11 . GeoSoils, Inc. i '8. ~ PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES Rancho Costera Sample l i I ~ i Cl) :t:: ~ C: .,. :::) "3 "E i::' Ill :::) Ill :::) Cl SP l 2! .a .fl 0 ~ l m C: ~ 0 "" e! .a rJs BORING LOG w.o. 6145-A10-SC BORING B-303 DA 7E EXCAVATED 5-23-13 Approx. Elevation: 142' MSL SIBndard PenetratJon Tast Undisturbed, Ring Sample ¥ Groundwater f\j Seepage Description of Material @49' SIL TY SANDSTONE, very fine grained, dark gray and -+---+.~+--~+-~+-~~-+-~-+~~+-,-+,~~red~d~ls~h~v~e~ll~o~w-----=-m~o=is~t~d~e~n~se~.~~~~~~~~~~~~~r @50' SANDSTONE, very fine grained, dark gray, dry, dense; hiahlv cemented. ~ 15-12" ML 110.7 16.7 89.2 ,-, , - - 54- ~ 18-12" SM/ML 110.6 16.6 88.9 - - - 60- 66- - - - - 72- Rancho Costera ,-, , ,-, , ,-, , ,-, , ,-, ,-, , ,-, , ,-, , ,-, , ,-, , ,-, ,-, @51' SANDY SILTSTONE, reddish yellow, moist, hard; fossiliferous. @55' lnterbedded SIL TY SANDSTONE and SANDY SILTSTONE, very fine grained, dark gray and black, wet, dense. Practical Refusal @ 57' Seepage Encountered @ 3646' and 46-50' Caving Encountered @ 36' Backfilled 5-23-13 * Indicated Disturbed GeoSoils, Inc. PLATE B-12 I GeoSoUa, Inc. PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES Rancho Costera Sample c5 i l ! .c ~ l g .a J I ~ 2! i t -"' ~ ~ ::J j ~ :3 en c::, :§l ID ::J ::J Cl en SM CL 20 115.4 15.0 91.6 6 CIC 113.3 15.6 89.7 12 CL 12 109.7 17.7 92.3 18 SP 27 112.9 16.2 92.2 24 Rancho Costera BORING LOG w.o. 6145-A10-SC BORING B-304 SHEET_1_ OF~ DATE EXCAVATED 5-21-13 SAMPLE METHOD: _Ho_llow __ Ste_m_Aug-----"----e_r --------------1 Approx. EleYatlon: 55' MSL m Standard Penetration Test ~ Urrc8sturbed, Rlng Sample Description of Material QUATERNARY ALLUVIUM: @ O' SIL TY SAND, gray brown, dry, loose. @'Z SANDY CLAY, very dark gray brown (10YR 3/2), moist, firm, @ 5' As per 2', wet. @ 5' Stabilized water level after free water encountered at 16'. @ 10' CLAYEY SAND to SANDY CLAY, dark brown (10YR 3/3), wet, medium dense to stiff. @ 14' SANDY CLAY, dark brown, wet, firm. QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS; @ 16' SAND with CLAY, brown (10YR 4/3), saturated, loose; groundwater encountered. EOCENE SANTIAGO FORMATION; @ 19' SANDSTONE, light gray (2.SY 2/2), wet, medium dense. GeoSoils, Inc. PLATE 8-13 I I I i ' I l _; GeoSoils, Inc. ~ . . . ... PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES Rancho Costera Sample ! I i ~ l g j ] ~ I:! I ~ :::, I .,. ~ t ~ U) 0 :::, CD :::, i 40 SP - - - - 30- - - - - - 36- . - - - - - 42- - - - - - 48- - Rancho Costera BORING LOG w.o. 6145-A10-SC - BORING B-304 SHEET__±_ OF__±_ DATE EXCAVATED 5-21-13 SAMP1£ METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger Approx. Elevation: 55' MSL m Standard Penetration Test l 'Sj_ Groundwater ~ ~ Undisturbed, Ring Sample I\; SeeP8{J6 j Description of Material @ 25' As per 19', becomes slightly moist, dense; few subhorizontal lamination, and one near vertical fracture. Total Depth= 26.5' Groundwater Encountered@ 16', Stabilized Water Level@ 5' No Caving Encountered Backfilled 5-21-2013 GeoSolls, Inc. PLATE;,_ B-14 BORING LOG GeoSolla, lac. w.o. 6145-A 10-SC PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES BORING B-305 SHEET_1_ OF~ Rancho Costera DA TE EXCAVATED 5-21-13 Sample -SAMPLE METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger Approx. Elevation: 62' MSL E m Standard PenetratJon Test l :s ~ l l ¥ Groundwater g [ ,S ~ Undisturbed, Ring Sample I\, Seepage j 1 (/) "e I ! ~ => e .>L. 'E ~ .a Description of Material. ~ => '1ii => J.l SM "'"' QUATERNARY ALLUVIUM: "'"' --./' @ O' SIL TY SAND, gray brown, dry, loose. -./' "'"' -'-";' . .,,.. -./' CL ~ @ 3' SANDY CLAY, very dark gray brown (10YR 3/2), moist, -firm. -~ 19 113.2 16.6 95.2 @ 5' As per 3', wet. 6-@ 6' Groundwater encountered. --· - -I ~ 10 SP 99.4 24.7 '98.6 QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS: -@ 10' SAND with SILT, light brown, saturated, loose. 12- - -,_! -~ @ 15' As per 10', medium dense. 14 21.0 2 CL ~ EOCENE SAN11AGO FORMATION: -@ 16' CLAYSTONE, brownish gray (2.5Y 5/2), saturated, firm to II stiff. 18- - m 10 SP 18.5 @ 20' SANDSTONE, light brown, saturated, medium dense. ~ CL I @ 21' SANDY CLAYSTONE, brownish gray (2.5Y 5/2), -saturated, firm to stiff. - 24-~ Rancho Costera GeoSolla, lac. PL.ATE 8-15 I i = C. ~ 36 42 48 GeoSoU., Inc. PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES Rancho Costera Sample ! l j 1 Cl) .I< ~ "E ~ =i iii =i i ~ "" C: =i 5 12 CIC 15 SC 20 SP Rancho Costera l e j 0 ~ 17.5 16.4 17.1 l ~ ~ Jl BORING LOG W.O. 6145-A10-SC BORING B-305 SHEET _2_ OF _2_ DA TE EXOA VA TED 5-21-13 SAMPLE METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger m ~ Approx. Elevation: 62' MSL Standard Penetration Test UndJsturbed, Ring Sample Desaiption of Material @25' lnterbedded CLAYEY SANDSTONE and SANDY CLAYSTONE, brownish gray (2.5Y 5/2), saturated, medium dense and stiff. @ 30' SANDY CLAYSTONE, light brownish gray, wet, stiff. @35' CLAYEY SANDSTONE, light brownish gray, wet, medium dense. @ 40' SANDSTONE, light brownish gray (2.5Y 5/2), wet, medium dense. Total= 41%' Perched Groundwater Encountered @ 6' No Caving Encountered Backfilled 5-21-2013 · · GeoSoils, lac. PLATE B-16 BORING LOG GeoSoils, Inc. WO. 6145-E-SC PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES BORING ____ H_A_-_1 __ SHEET_1_ OF_1_ Rancho Costera, El Camino Real DATE EXCAVATED _ __.:.3-....:2c:.B--'1-'1--LOGGED BY: RBBIRGC Sample SAMPLEMETHOD: ~H-'an_;.d....;.Au..:...:,.;ge-'r------------------~ 'u 0 S, "C .c ~ g 0) E -e >, .:3 ~ cn c :5 "' cn ::::> C. -"' '5 :'!: C) ~ 0) 3 C: 0 cn 0 I]] ::::> ii5 ::::> 0 :s!e Ill ~- C: ~ 0 ""' e! .3 ca en SW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . z-+----+--1--~s-c~,~s~,-;.----1---+---+r-. ... • . ... 3-.• 4- 5-l--l---+---+--+----+----ll.-----1:J.:1·· 6- 7- 8- 9- Rancho Castera, El Camino Real Approx. Elevation: 81' MSL standard Penetration Test "'¥ Groundwater Undisturbed, Ring Sample Description of Material FILL: @O' SILTY SAND to SAND, dark gray, slightly moist, medium dense; few asphalt fragments, angular gravel. TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qt): @ 2' CLAYEY SAND, brown and olive brown, moist dense; few SILTY SAND interbeds. · Total Depth= 5' No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 3-28-2011 Plate B-21 GeoSoils, Inc. PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES Rancho Castera, El Camino Real Sample C" CJ 'i5 5 'C .0 ~ ~ Q) E ,e >, .g ~ (/) 1= .r:. (/) ::> ii "" '5 ;:: 0 c.'." Q) "5 C: 0 Cl) 0 ID ::> ffi ::> 0 ~ .. ~ .3 U) 0 ::iE ISC/Cl 1- cusc 2-/SW CUML ;i 0 C: 0 ~ .3 "' (/) BORING LOG W.O. 6145-E-SC BORING _____ H_A_-2 __ SHEET_1 _ OF__..!_ DATE EXCAVATED __ 3_-2_B-_11 __ LOGGED BY..·~ R=B~B __ SAMPLE METHOD: _H_an_d_A_ug=-er--------------------i m ~ Approx. Elevation: 100' MSL Standard Penetration Test 5;l.. Groundwater Undisturbed, Ring Sample Description of Material TALUS: @ O' CLAYEY SAND/SANDY CLAY, brown to olive brown, wet, loose/soft; trace gravel. QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS {Qt): @ 1%' lnterbedded SANDY CLAY, CLAYEY SAND and well graded SAND, brown to olive brown, wet, stiff/medium dense. @2Yz' SILTY CLAY/CLAYEY SILT, olive brown to brownish gray, moist, very stiff. 3+--f---+-----l--,-f-------lf----+---+'-''-'-l--~:::-::=-==-:--=-=-:--:-::-::-----:----:-~-;-,--.,.,.-----.,...,..-------1 SM .::;.· @3' SILTY SAND, fine grained, reddish yellow, gray, and brown, moist, dense. :0 :· .~.· . ..,,... 4+--.i----1-----1'---.i-------lf-----l---~·..,,.~··~··'l---------~---------------------i Total Depth = 4Yz' 5- 6- 7- 8- 9- Rancho Castera, El Camino Real No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 3-28-2011 GeoSolls, line. Plate 8-22 GeoSoils, Inc. PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES Rancho Colltera, El Camino Real 1 iii SM 1- 2- SC 3- BORING LOG W.D. 6145-E-SC BORING -------'--HA-3 __ _ SHEET_1_ OF _J_ DA TE EXCAVATED __ 3-_2B-_1_1 __ LOGGED BY..·-'-RBB==--- SAMPLEMETHDD: ~Hend=..::.~Auge,r=..:. ________________ ~ '-('" . ..,.._. ...-:--. .:,..· '-"·. ;,:..· ~- o.r.· :.A" ~ Approx. Elevation: .Qr IISL standard PenelrBtlon Test UndfsJurbad, Ring Sample Description of Material TALUS; @ O' SIL TY SAND, brown to olive brown to gray . WEATHERED TERRACE DEPOSITS; @2%' CLAYEY SAND, dark gray, moist, dense; sHghtly porous, trace root hairs. ij 4 1---1---l-----1-S-CIS-i--+-~-~--1---1-----1+-_]· __ QU_A_JERNAR ___ Y_TERRAC ___ E_DEPOSITS ___ {_Qt)_: __ ~----~----1 @3%' lnterbedded CLAYEY SAND and SILTY SAND, fine grained, 1 gray, brown, and reddish yellow, moist, very dense; moderately r 5- 6- 7- 8- 9- Rancho Coster,a, El Camino Real \ cemented. ~~---------' Total Depth = 4' No GroundwateriCavlng Encountered Backfilled 3-28-2011 '. ~ils,lnc. Plate B-23 ' I I : 1- I I ! PROJECT: SHAPEI..L HOMES Rancho Castera, El Camino Real Sample 'a I a g I ;: 1 :i= :5 ~ C: -"" .l!! => Cl. l! g ~ 3 3 ID => m l ~ I SM 1- 2- ? ,g e! .a a, (/J BORING LOG W.O. 6146-E-SC BORING ____ HA_-4 __ SHEET_1_. OF_!_ DATE EXCA VA TED __ 3-c_2_B-_1_1 __ LOGGED BY:_RB_B __ SAMPI.EAETHOD: _Hml:l_k9er___;. ________________ --1 m ~ ........ v-. ........ ..,,. . ,.,..._. ,r;-..:,,· '<'. :..,,-.· ...,.,. 0:-v-.· ~. 0 :.r .. :-":" .;,,..·. <r. 0: ..,;,:,,·. Approx. Elavafion: fil' USL standard PenelnttJon Tsst Description of Material IA!J..§;. @O' SILTY SAND with mfnor CLAY, fine grabied, yellowish brown, brown, and gray, wet, loose . @ 1' SILTY SAND, fine grained, yellowish brown, brown, and gray, wet, loose . 3-+--+-+---+S~C!S---i~+-----+---+--+r t) QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qt): 4- 5- 6- 7- B- 9- Rancho Costera, El Camino Real @ 3' !nterbedded CLAVEY and SIL TY SAND, fine grained, gray to ~ yellowish brown, moist, dense, becoming very dense with depth; r moderatelv cemented. ~=-=:.c~-----~ Total Depth = 3%' No Groundwater/Caving Encountered Backfilled 3-28-2011 Plate B-24 GeoSoils, IDCo PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES Rancho Castera, El Camino Real Sample '6 0 S: "C .&J ~ g Q) E -e >. :::, = rn c :5 in ri'i rn :) 0. X i5 ;:: (.) 2:-Q) 3 C: 0 rn 0 Ill :) iii :) Cl ~ ~ 0 C: e! 0 .a ~ "' .a 0 ta :E rn USC 2-i--+--+--~-S-M-+---~---+--- 3-+--t--+---t~u:-:-::-s~ct----t---+--___, 4-l--~-l----!--~----!---+-----1 5 6 7 8 9 Rancho Castera, El Camino Real BORING LOG W.O. 6145-E-SC BORING ____ H_A_-_S __ SHEET_ OF_1_ DATE EXCAVATED __ 3-_2_B_-1_1 __ LOGGED BY:...:.R=B=B __ SAMPLEMETHOD: _H_an_d_Aug-=-~---------------------1 m ~ Approx. Elevation: 45' MSL Standard Penetration Test ":;l.. Groundwater Undisturbed, Ring Sample Description of Material ARTIFICIAL FILL (Aft: @O' SANDY CLAY/CLAYEY SAND, dark brown to dark brownish gray, wet, stiff/medium dense. @2' SILTY SAND with minor CLAY, fine grained, yellowish brown to gray, moist, dense. @ 3' SANDY CLAY/CLAYEY SAND, dark brown to dark gray, wet, very stiff/dense; trace asphaltic concrete fragments. · Total Depth = 4' · No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 3-28-2011 GeoSoils, line .. Plate B-25 GeoSolls, Inc. PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES Rancho Castera, El Camino Real Sample 'i3 i .9, "C ~ ~ m ~ i 'e £i .l!! ~ :::> l· rl!!: § "& :, en CD CD :::> SM/SC /CL 1- SM BORING LOG W.O. 6145-E-SC BORJNG ____ HA-6 __ _ SHEET_1_ OF _J_ DATE B<CA VA TED __ 3-28-__ 1_1 __ LOGGED BY:~RBB~-- SAMPLEMETHOD: _Hand_Auger---=-------------------1 Approx. Elevation; §!' MSL standard Penetration Test Descr1ptton of Material IAld.§;. @O' SILTY SAND, CLAYEY SAND, and SANDY CLAY, fine grained, light gray to gray, wet. loose/soft. :-:·: TERJ1ARY SANTIAGO FORMATION ffsal: 2-+--1--+---+--+-----+---1---+'""'"-h\ ill 1%' SIL TY SANDSTONE fine aralnecl llaht arav. moist verv dense. f 3- 4- 5- 6- 7- 8- 9- Rancho Castera, B Camino Real Practical Refusal@ 2' No Groundwater Encountered Baclcflllad 3-28-2011 Plate B-26 BORING LOG GeoSolls., Inc. -----WO. 6145-E-SC PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES BORING HA-7 SHEET_1_ OF_1_ Rancho Castera, El Camino Real DA TE EXCAVATED 3-28-11 LOGGED BY: RBB Sample SAMPLE METHOD: Hlln!Auger ' Approx. Elevation: 54' IISL E m standard Penetration Test 0 t SI-Groundwater "'5l 1 ~ t ~ ~ 1 = s I ~ Urdlslurbed, Rng Sample t ; C: ..!!! ::, ~ "2 ~ .!l ~ j Ill Description of Material ::, 1i5 rn SM/SC TALUS: -@ O' SIL TY SAND to CLAYEY SAND, fine grained, light gray to gray to brown, wet, loose. 1- SM ~-· TBmARY SANTIA@Q FORMATION (Isa): 2-V,. @ 1.%' lnterbedded SIL TY SANDSTONE, fine to medlum grained, ..-:-· ~: yellowish brown to Ught gray, moist dense. '-r-I I ~,: ..;.,.· .. '-r .. 3-~-..,,. .. " '·(''". . . :..;.. Practical Refusal@ 3~' No Groundwater Encountered 4-Backf1Ued 3-28-2011 5---· 6- -- 7- a- 9- Rancho Castera, El Camino Real GeoSoils, ·1nc.. Plate B-27 I I I ' : -} I I I I I I I I I ' GeoSoils, Inc. PROJECT: SHAPEU HOMES Rancho Costeta, El Camino Real Sampla i E 'C ;: ~ m i j ~ :Ei ~ C: ~ ::, c.. 5 ~ Cl) ID :::i ID :::i l I!! ::, I $M/SF 2- 3- 4- 5- 6- 7- 8- 9- Rancho Costera, El Camino Real i Is = ~ ~ BORING LOG W.O. 6145-E-SC BORING ____ HMI __ _ SHEET_1_ OF~ DA7E EX'CA VATED __ 3-28-_1_1 __ LOGGED BY:-=-RBB==--- SAMPLENETHOD: ~f-lllnd:.:..c..c:.~Auger::=.;. ________________ ~ Ii ~ . . . . : . Approx. Elffltal:ion: §1' MSL SlBndard PBMtration Test "SJ-Groundwater Desca ip6on of MateriaJ TALUS: @ O' SILTY SAND to pooly graded SAND, fine grained, light gray to brownish gray, moist to wet, loose . Prac6cal Refusal @ 1 %' No Groundwater Encountered Backflled 3-28-2011 GeoSoils, Inc. Plate 8-28 GeoSoila, Inc. PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES ,. Rancho Castera, El Camino Reel Sample 'a i .e, g ! ;: .a J "" l ; C: ~ ~ ::, al 2:-Cl $MISC 1- 2- 3- '7 4- 5- 6- 7- 8- 9- Rancho Costera, El Camino Reel [ C: g s m c.o BORING LOG W.O. 6145-E..SC BORING ____ HA_,.g __ SHEET_1_ OF_!_ DATE EXCAVATED __ s.,_28-_1_1 __ LOGGED BY:~RBB~-- SAMPLE METHOD: _Hand_Auger---=-------------------1 Approx. Elevation: ~ MSL Undlsturbed, Rk'Q Sample Desciiptlon of Materlal ARTIFICIAL ALL; @ O' SIL TY to CLAVEY SAND, dark gray, fight gray, and brown, wet becoming saturated at -1 ', loose. @ 3~' Groundwater encountered. Total Depth c 4%' Groundwater@. a depth of 3~' (Elc 42.5' MSL) No Caving Encountered Backflnec:t 3-28-2011 GeoSoils, Inc.. Plata B-29 ,~ ! ' I 1 .• PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES Rancho Castera, B Camino Real Sample 0 E I .c ~ ~ E >, 1 en ~ :[ ~ ::> ~ ~ ~ CD :5 m ::> Cl CL 1- BORING LOG w.o. 6145-E-SC BORJNG ____ HA-_1_0·_0• _ SHEET_1_· OF_!_ DA TE .EXCA VA TED __ 5-29-_1_1 __ LOGGED BY:-'-RBB==--- SAMPLEAETHOD: _Hend---'Auger--"----------------~ Approx. Ele'llatlon: 90' MSL standBrd Penetratbn Test Undislurbed, Ring SampJe Description of Material ~ @O' SANDY CLAY, dark brown and dark olive brown, wet, very soft; trace rock fragments, trace organics. 2-l---l---11---~-4---+---+---ffH+f------------------------ CL I HIGHLY WEATHERED TERRACE DEPOSITS: @2 SANDY Cl,.AY, dark brown to dark olive brown, wet, stiff; trace / organics. 3-1---1---1---1--+--I-----++' ---pM/S( QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS {Qt); rsPtcl 4- 5-l---l---11---~-4---+---+---+-"- 6- 7- 8- 9- Rancho Costera, El Camino Real @3' lnterbedded CLAYEY SAND, SILTY SAND, poorly graded SAND, and SANDY CLAY, fine to medium grained, brown to gray, moist, dense/very stiff. Total Depth = 5' No Groundwater/Caving ·Encountered Baclcfllled 3-29-2011 GeoSoils, Inc. Plate· B-30 GeoSoils, Inc. PROJECT: SHAPELL HOMES Rancho Castera, El Camino Real Sample c-<J 15 .9, -0 ..c ;: (I) E s -e >, .3 ~ Cl) c .c ., U) ::::, i5. -"' =a ~ (.) ~ a, :; C: Cl) Cl lD ::::, ai ::> Cl l I!! .3 ., 15 :;E SC ISC/CL 1- CL l C: 0 ~ .3 a, U) BORING LOG w.o. __ s_1_4_5-_E_-s_c __ _, BORING ____ H_A_-1_1 __ SHEET_1_ OF_1_ DATE EXCAVATED __ 3-_2_9-_1_1 __ LOGGED BY .. ·""'" R=B=B __ SAMPLEMeTHOD: _H_an_d_Au_g~e_r------------------~ ml ~ ~ Approx. Elevation: 78' MSL standard Penetration Test :ii.. Groundwater Undisturbed, Ring Sample Description of Material ARTIFICIAL FILL (Af): @O' CLAYEY SAND, dark gray brown, wet, loose; trace organics. @ W CLAYEY SAND/SANDY CLAY, brown to olive brown, wet, medium dense. @ 1%' SANDY CLAY, reddish brown to brown, wet, stiff. 2+--+---+-----l~SM_/_S~,C+-----1----1----K-< @ 2' SIL TY to CLAYEY SAND, SANDY CLAY, and poorly graded SAND, fine to medium grained, brown, olive brown, and gray, wet, dense/very stiff. CUSF 3--1--;----+----i~c~u-s-c;-----i----+--~ 4- S+--+---+-----li---+-----1----1--~ 6- 7- 8- 9- Rancho Castera, El Camino Real @ 2%' As per 2', saturated. @ 3' SANDY CLAY/CLAYEY SAND, dark gray, yellowish red, and light brown, wet, very stiff. Total Depth = 5' No Groundwater/Caving Encountered Possible Perched Water Seepage @ 2%' (Local Irrigation) Backfilled 3-29-2011 Plate B-31 ------------------ • TP-1 0'-3' CL 0'-3' bulk 3'-4' 4'-5' 4'-5'bulk TP-2 0'-2' CL 2'-3' 3'-5' ring@3' bulk@3'-5' TP-3 0'-3' CL 3'-4' 4'-6' LOG OF EXPLORATORY TEST PITS COLLUVIUM: SANDY CLAY, dark brown, moist, soft. W.O. 3098-A1-SC McMillin Companies January 23, 2002 WEATHERED SANTIAGO FORMATION: SIL TY SANDY CLAY, orange brown to brown, moist, medium stiff. SANTIAGO FORMATION: SANDY SILTSTONE, olive gray, damp, stiff; highly fractured. Total Depth = 5' No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 1/10/02 COLLUVIUM: SANDY CLAY, brown, moist, soft; rootlets. WEATHERED SANTIAGO FORMATION: SANDY CLAYSTONE, light olive gray, moist, medium stiff. SANTIAGO FORMATION: CLAYSTONE, olive gray, moist, stiff to very stiff. Total Depth = 5' No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 1/10/02 COLLUVIUM: SANDY CLAY, brown, moist, soft; rootlets. WEATHERED SANTIAGO FORMATION: SANDY CLAYSTONE, dark olive brown, moist, medium stiff. SANTIAGO FORMATION: SANDY CLAYSTONE, olive gray, moist, stiff. Total Depth= 6' No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 1/10/02 PLATE B-29 TP-4 0'-2%' CL 2Vz'-3Vz' 3Vz'-6' TP-5 0'-2' CL 2'-4' CL 4'-6' CL 6'-7' ring@?' TP-6 0'-2' SC 2'-5' ring@3' ------ W.O. 3098-A1-SC McMillin Companies January 23, 2002 LOG OF EXPLORATORY TEST PITS - COLLUVIUM: SANDY CLAY, brown, moist, soft; rootlets. WEATHERED SANTIAGO FORMATION: CLAYEY SANDSTONE TO SANDY CLAYSTONE, olive gray, moist, medium dense to medium stiff; orange iron oxide staining. SANTIAGO FORMATION: SANDY CLAYSTONE, olive gray, moist, stiff. Total Depth = 6' No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 1/10/02 COLLUVIUM: SAND CLAY, brown, moist, soft; rootlets. SAND CLAY, dark brown, moist, medium stiff; caliche. LANDSLIDE DEPOSITS: SAND CLAY, brown to light brown, moist, medium stiff; rip up clasts of sedimentary bedrock. SANTIAGO FORMATION: SANDY CLAYSTONE, olive gray, moist, stiff. Total Depth = 7' No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 1 /1 0/02 COLLUVIUM: CLAYEY SAND, brown, moist, loose; rootlets. SANTIAGO FORMATION: SILTY SANDSTONE, olive gray, moist, dense; orange iron oxide. Total Depth = 5' No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 1/10/02 PLATE 8-30 ------ ----------- -- - - - W.O. 3098-A1-SC McMillin Companies · January 23, 2002 LOG OF EXPLORATORY TEST PITS TP-7 0'-2' SC 2'-3' 3'-5' TP-8 0'-2%' SM 2%'-5' 5' TP-9 0'-3' SC 3'-9' SM 9'-10' 10'-12' COLLUVIUM: CLAYEY SAND, dark brown, moist, loose; rootlets. WEATHERED SANTIAGO FORMATION: CLAYEY SANDSTONE, olive gray to light brown, moist, medium dense; orange iron oxide. SANTIAGO FORMATION: SILTY SANDSTONE, light brown, moist, dense. Total Depth = 5' No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 1/10/02 COLLUVIUM: SILTY SAND, brown, dry, loose; rootlets. UNDIFFERENTIATED VOLCANICS AND GRANITES: light brown to orange brown, moist, dense; granite floaters 6-12 inches. GRUDES INTO METAMORPHIC AND VOLCANIC ROCK, orange brown, dry, very dense; randomly fractured. Practical Refusal @ 5' with 41 OD Backhoe No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 1/10/02 COLLUVIUM: CLAYEY SAND, dark brown, moist, loose.; rootlets. ALLUVIUM: SIL TY SAND, light brown to brown, moist, medium dense. WEATHERED SANTIAGO FORMATION: SILTY CLAYSTONE, olive gray, moist, medium stiff. SANTIAGO FORMATION: SILTY CLAYSTONE, olive gray, moist, stiff. Total Depth = 12' No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 1 /10/02 PLATE 8-31 II TP-21 0'-2' SM 2'-3' 3'-5' TP-22 0'-2' SM 2'-4' SM 4'-6' SM TP-25 0'-2' CL 2'-5' ------- W.O. 3098-A1-SC McMlllin Companies January 23, 2002 LOG OF EXPLORATORY TEST PITS COLLUVIUM: SIL TY SAND, light brown, damp, loose. WEATHERED SANTIAGO FORMATION: SILTY SANDSTONE, light brown, damp, medium dense. SANTIAGO FORMATION: SILTY SANDSTONE, light brown, damp, dense. Total Depth = 5' No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 1 /11 /02 COLLUVIUM: SILTY SAND, brown, damp, loose; rootlets. WEATHERED TERRACE DEPOSITS: SILTY SAND, brown, damp, medium dense. TERRACE DEPOSITS: SIL TY SAND, olive brown, damp, dense to very dense with depth. Practical Refusal = 6' No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 1 /11 /02 COLLUVIUM: SANDY CLAY, dark brown, moist, soft. TERRACE DEPOSITS: SILTY CLAYSTONE, olive gray, wet, stiff. Total Depth= 5' No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 1 /11 /02 PLATE B-32 - - - - - - - TP-26 0'-2' 2'-4' 4'-12' 12' TP-27 0'-2' 2'-10' 10'-11' --------------- • SM SM 3'-4' bulk SM SM SM LOG OF EXPLORATORY TEST PITS W.O. 3098-A1-SC McMillin Companies January 23, 2002 COLLUVIUM: SIL TY SAND, brown, damp, loose; rootlets. ALLUVIUM: SILTY SAND, light brown, damp, loose; friable sands. SIL TY SAND, llght brown, moist to wet, loose to medium dense. SANTIAGO FORMATION: SILTY SANDSTONE, olive gray to gray, wet, medium dense to dense. Total Depth = 12' No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 1 /11 /02 COLLUVIUM: SILTY SAND, brown, moist, loose; rootlets. ALLUVIUM: SIL TY SAND, light brown, moist, loose to medium dense. SANTIAGO FORMATION: SILTY SANDSTONE, olive gray, moist, medium dense to dense. Total Depth = 11' No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 1 /11 /02 PLATE 8·33 • TP-28 0'-2' SM 2'-8' SM 8'-12' SM 12'-13' 13'-14' TP-29 0'-2' SM 2'-5' TP-30 0'-1' SM 1'-3112' SM 31h'-5' - W.O. 3098-A1-SC McMillin Companies January 23, 2002 LOG OF EXPLORATORY TEST PITS COLLUVIUM: SIL TY SAND, brown, moist, loose; rootlets. ALLUVIUM: SIL TY SAND, light brown, wet, loose to medium dense. SILTY SAND, brown, wet, medium dense. WEATHERED SANTIAGO FORMATION: SILTY SANDSTONE, olive brown, moist, medium dense. SANTIAGO FORMATION: SILTY SANDSTONE, olive gray, moist, dense. Total Depth = 14' No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 1 /11 /02 COLLUVIUM: SILTY SAND, brown, moist, loose; rootlets. SANTIAGO FORMATION: SIL TY SANDSTONE, light brown, damp, medium dense to dense. Total Depth = 5' No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 1/11/02 COLLUVIUM: SIL TY SAND, brown, dry, loose. SIL TY SAND, dark brown, moist, loose. SANTIAGO FORMATION: SIL TY SANDSTONE, light brown, moist, medium dense to dense. Total Depth = 5' No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 1 /11 /02 PLATE 8-34 -- - - ----- 0 TP-31 0'-3' SM 3'-4' TP-32 0'-2' SM 2'-4' TP-33 0'-2' SM 2'-4' ------- - - - - ring@4' ring@3' LOG OF EXPLORATORY TEST PITS W.O. 3098-A1-SC McMillin Companies January 23, 2002 COLLUVIUM: SIL TY SAND, brown, damp to moist, loose to medium dense with depth. SANTIAGO FORMATION: SILTY SANDSTONE, light brown, moist, dense. Total Depth = 4' No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 1/11/02 COLLUVIUM: SILTY SAND, brown, damp to moist, loose to medium dense; rootlets. SANTIAGO FORMATION: SILTY SANDSTONE, light brown, moist, dense. Total Depth= 4' No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 1 /11 /02 COLLUVIUM: SIL TY SAND, brown, damp, loose; rootlets. SANTIAGO FORMATION: SILTY SANDSTONE, light brown, moist, dense. Total Depth = 4' No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 1/11/02 PLATE 8-35 " TP-34 0'-2' SM 2'-14' SM 14' TP-35 0'-2' 2'-7' 7'-8' ring@8' TP-36 0'-2' SM 2'-9' SM 9'-10' ------- W.0. 3098-A1 -SC McMillin Companies January 23, 2002 LOG OF EXPLORATORY TEST PITS COLLUVIUM: SILTY SAND, brown, moist, loose; roots and rootlets. ALLUVIUM: SILTY SAND, light brown, moist, loose to medium dense. SANTIAGO FORMATION: SILTY SANDSTONE, brown to olive gray, moist, dense. Total Depth = 14' No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 1 /1 1 /02 COLLUVIUM: SILTY SAND, light brown, moist, loose; rootlets. ALLUVIUM: SIL TY SAND, dark brown, moist to wet, medium dense. SANTIAGO FORMATION: SILTY SANDSTONE, light brown, moist, dense. Total Depth = B' No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 1/11/02 COLLUVIUM: SIL TY SAND, brown, moist, loose; rootlets. ALLUVIUM: SILTY SAND, dark brown, moist, loose to medium dense. SANTIAGO FORMATION: CLAY SANDSTONE, gray to light brown, very moist, medium dense. Total Depth = 1 O' No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 1 /11 /02 PLATE 8-36 - - - -- - - - TP-37 0'-3' SM 3'-10' SM 10'-12' TP-38 0'-1' SC 1'-4' 4'-6' 4' TP-41 0'-5' SM 5'-10' SM 10'-11' SM ---------- LOG OF EXPLORATORY TEST PITS W.O. 3098-A1-SC McMillin Companies ~anuary 23, 2002 COLLUVIUM: SIL TY SAND, brown, moist, loose; rootlets. ALLUVIUM: SILTY SAND, dark brown, moist, loose to medium dense. SANTIAGO FORMATION: CLAYEY SANDSTONE, gray to light brown, very moist, medium dense. Total Depth = 12' No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 1/11/02 COLLUVIUM: CLAYEY SAND, dark yellowish brown, moist, loose; porous, some organics. SANTIAGO FORMATION: SANDSTONE, yellowish gray to light yellowish brown, wet, soft to medium dense; massive. SANDSTONE, yellowish gray, moist, medium dense; wearly cemented, massive to weakly bedded (N26W, 10SW; N13W, 21SW; N80W, 6SW). Total Depth = 6' No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 1 /11 /02 ALLUVIUM: SIL TY SAND, very dark gray brown, moist, loose. SILTY SAND, very dark gray brown, loose, wet; seepage at 6'-6%'. SIL TY SAND, very dark gray brown, loose, wet; groundwater at 1 O'. Total Depth = 11' Perched Groundwater @ 1 O' Backfilled 1 /11 /02 PLATE B-37 TP-39 01-61 SC/CL 6'-7' 71-81 7' 81-101 LOG OF EXPLORATORY TEST PITS W.O. 3098-A1-SC McMlllln Companies January 17, 2002 COLLUVIUM: SANDY CLAY, very dark gray brown, moist, soft; dessicated, orous. SANTIAGO FORMATION: SANDSTONE, light yellowish brown, damp, medium dense; weakly cemented, massive. SANDSTONE/CLAYSTONE, yellowish brown and olive gray, moist, medium dense to stiff; lnterbedded bedding N13W 9SW. SANDSTONE, yellowish gray, damp, dense; cemented, beddln N25W, 11SW. Total Depth = 1 O' No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 1/11/02 PLATE 9.39 ---- - - - • TP-40 0'-1' 1'-4' - --- - - - - LOG OF EXPLORATORY TEST PITS W.O. 3098-A1-SC McMlllin Companies January 17, 2002 COLLUVIUM: CLAY SAND, brown, moist, loose. SANTIAGO FORMATION; SANDSTONE, yellowish gray, damp, medium dense; bedding N14W, 10SW; N30W 7SW cemented. Total Depth = 4' No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 1/11/02 PLATE B-40 TP-42 0'-3' SC 3'-5' TP-43 0'-4' SM 4'-9' SM 9'-10' SM TP-44 0'-2' SM 2'-3' 3'-5' -- - - - LOG OF EXPLORATORY TEST PITS W.O. 3098-A1-SC McMillin Companies January 23, 2002 COLLUVIUM: CLAYEY SAND, brown, dry, loose; porous. SANTIAGO FORMATION: SILTY SANDSTONE, brown, moist, medium dense. Total Depth = 5' No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 1 /11 /02 ALLUVIUM: SILTY SAND, brown, moist, loose. SIL TY SAND, brown, moist, loose, becomes wet. SILTY SAND. brown, becomes saturated, groundwater encountered. Total Depth = 1 O' Groundwater Encountered @ 9' Backfilled 1 /11 /02 COLLUVIUM: SIL TY SAND, light brown, damp, loose. WEATHERED SANTIAGO FORMATION: SILTY SANDSTONE, light brown, damp, medium dense. SANTIAGO FORMATION: SILTY SANDSTONE, light brown, damp, dense. Total Depth = 5' No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled 1 /11 /02 PLATE 8-38 ------------ - - - - TP-101 95 SC 1%-3 SC 3-41/2 SC 4%-6% SC UND@6 UNO = Undisturbed TP-102 127 0-1% SM 1Y2-3 SC 3-41/2 SC W.O. 6145-A-SC Shapell Homes Robertson Ranch West Logged By: RB June 3, 2010 LOG OF EXPLORATORY TEST PITS 15.6 111.4 ARTIFICIAL FILL (UNDOCUMENTED): CLAYEY SAND, grayish brown, moist, medium dense, porous; trace trash near surface. QUATERNARY COLLUVIUM: CLAYEY SAND, brownish gray, moist, medium dense. WEATHERED SANTIAGO FORMATION: CLAYEY SAND, mottled grayish brown and tan, moist, medium dense becoming dense with depth. TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION: CLAYEY SANDSTONE, tan, moist, dense; thickly bedded. Total Depth=6W No Groundwater/Caving Encountered Backfilled 6-3-201 o TOPSOIL/COLLUVIUM: SILTY SAND with MINOR CLAY, dark grayish brown, dry becoming damp with depth, medium dense; porous. WEATHERED SANTIAGO FORMATION: CLAYEY SAND, mottled brownish gray and tan, moist, medium dense; slightly porous. TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION: CLAYEY SANDSTONE, tan to reddish yellow, moist, dense; possible paleoliquefaction features (injection .dikes). Total Depth=4W No Groundwater/Caving Encountered Backfilled 6-3-2010 PLATE 8-12 TP-103 102 0-2 SC 2-9 SC 9-11 SP 11-12 SM 12-13 SM - - - - LOG OF EXPLORATORY TEST PITS W.O. 6145-A-SC Shapell Homes Robertson Ranch West Logged By: RB June 3, 2010 ARTIFICIAL FILL (UNDOCUMENTED}: CLAYEY SAND, brown to gray, moist, loose. QUATERNARY COLLUVIUM: CLAYEY SAND, dark gray and brown, damp becoming wet with depth, loose to medium dense; caving encountered @9'. QUATERNARY ALLUVIUM: SAND, light gray to brown, moist, loose; trace silt interbeds. WEATHERED SANTIAGO FORMATION: SILTY fine SAND, buffto reddish yellow, moist, medium dense. TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION: SILTY SANDSTONE, gray, moist, dense; weak bedding: N39°W/8°SW. Total Depth=13' No Groundwater Encountered Caving Encountered @ 9' Backfilled 6-3-2010 PLATE B-13 ------ - - - TP-104 126 0-3 SC 3-41/z SM 4%-7 SM TP-105 140 0-11/z SM 1%-3V2 SM 3%-4 SM - ---- - -lill - LOG OF EXPLORATORY TEST PITS W.O. 6145-A-SC Shapell Homes Robertson Ranch West Logged By: RB June 3, 2010 ARTIFICIAL FILL {UNDOCUMENTED}: CLAYEY SAND, brown, moist, loose; abundant plastic. HIGHLY WEATHERED SANTIAGO FORMATION: SIL TY SAND, brown to dark gray, damp, dense; highly cemented concretion@ 4112 (concretion has semi-linear contact, trends N10°W) silcrete duripan? TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION: SILTY SANDSTONE, tan, moist, very dense. Total Depth=?' No Groundwater/Caving Encountered Backfilled 6-3-201 O Very difficult trenching@ 4112' (westerly side of trench) ARTIFICIAL FILL (UNDOCUMENTED}: SILTY SAND, brown to tan, dry to damp, loose; porous. HIGHLY WEATHERED SANTIAGO FORMATION: SILTY SANDSTONE, buff, damp, medium dense; highly fractured, fractures: N49°W/?8°NE, N28°E/79°NW, N85°W/19°NE. TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION: SILTY SANDSTONE, buff, moist, dense. Total Depth=4' No Groundwater/Caving Encountered Backfilled 6-3-201 O PLATE B-14 TP-106 172 0-Vz SC Vz-2 SM 2-5 SM/ML UND@3 TP-107 162 0-1 SM 1-3 SM 3-3% SM 3V2-4 SM -- - W.O. 6145-A-SC Shapell Homes Robertson Ranch West Logged By: RB June 3, 2010 LOG OF EXPLORATORY TEST PITS QUATERNARY COLLUVIUM: CLAYEY SAND, dark gray to tan, dry, loose; porous, disturbed due to agricultural activities. HIGHLY WEATHERED SANTIAGO FORMATION: SIL TY fine SAND, tan, dry, medium dense; highly fractured (random orientations). 16.9 101.9 TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION: SIL TY fine SANDSTONE with SANDY SILTSTONE interbeds, light gray, tan and reddish yellow, damp, dense; iron-oxide staining along some bedding planes. Bedding: N10°E/9°SE Total Depth=5' No Groundwater/Caving Encountered Backfilled 6-3-1 O ARTIFICIAL FILL {UNDOCUMENTED}: SILTY SAND with minor CLAY, brown, damp becoming moist with depth, loose; trace debris. QUATERNARY COLLUVIUM: SIL TY SAND, grayish brown, moist, medium dense. WEATHERED SANTIAGO FORMATION: SILTY fine SAND, light tan, moist, dense. TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION: SIL TY fine SANDSTONE, light tan to reddish yellow, moist, dense; infilled fractures. Total Depth=4' No Groundwater/Caving Encountered Backfilled 6-3-10 PLATE B-15 - -- - - - - -- TP-108 106 0-2 SC/CL 2-2% SC 21/2-3% SM TP-109 56 0-9 CL UND@4 9-12 CL - - - - W.O. 6145-A-SC Shapell Homes Robertson Ranch West Logged By: RB June 3, 2010 LOG OF EXPLORATORY TEST PITS TOPSOIL/COLLUVIUM: CLAYEY SAND/SANDY CLAY, grayish brown, dry becoming moist with depth, loose/soft; porous, disturbed due to agricultural activities. WEATHERED SANTIAGO FORMATION: CLAYEY fine SAND, reddish yellow to light gray, moist, medium dense; abundant iron-oxide staining. TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION: SIL TY fine SANDSTONE, light gray, moist, dense. Total Depth=3W No Groundwater/Caving Encountered Backfilled 6-3-10 21.3 105.6 ALLUVIUM: SANDY CLAY, dark gray to brown, moist becoming saturated with depth, stiff. QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS: SANDY CLAY, grayish brown, wet, medium dense. Total Depth=12' Groundwater/Caving Encountered @ 9' Backfilled 6-3-1 o ·PLATE B-16 - LOG OF EXPLOl;IATORY TEST PITS W.O. 6145-A1 -SC Shapell Homes Rancho Costera Logged By: SHW April 13, 2011 .• ~Ttt}1'.. ··:e~f: .\0~rt~ ' . :i~~~r : s~t~E:: l~jl~i:!:J Itit!tv~;. !f J;)1~i111;i::tii!1!11~1~i~{f f 1i\J~i'11,;}t:;:1;rtt~~:: ;·J TP-201 88 0-% SC Bag@ 8.2 103.0 AGRICULTURAL FILL: CLAYEY SAND, fine grained, light olive gray, SP 1-2 TP-202 156 SC SP - 0-3 moist, loose. Ring @ 3 Bag @ 0-3 Ring @ 3 15.9 13.3 7.5 8.2 11 .2 107.6 102.6 103.4 103.8 94.0 17.2 108.9 12.1 108.5 SANTIAGO FORMATION: SANDSTONE, fine grained, light gray, moist, soft; poorly cemented to friable, moderately weathered and fractured, massive. Becomes medium dense. With iron oxide staining. Total Depth = 3W No Groundwater/Caving Encountered Backfilled 4-13-2011 AGRICULTURAL FILL: CLAYEY SAND, fine grained, olive gray, moist, loose. SANTIAGO FORMATION: SANDSTONE, fine grained, light gray, very moist, loose; friable, moderately weathered and fractured, massive. Total Depth = 3W No Groundwater/Caving Encountered Backfilled 4-13-2011 · PLATE B-2 - - TP-203 174 TP-204 163 -------- - - - - O-Y2 CL Bag@ 0-3 V2-1 V2 1%-3 CL Ring@2 3-5 SP 0-1/.i SC Bag@ 0-3 %-3 SP Ring @2 W.O. 6145-A}-SC Shapell Homes Rancho Castera Logged By: SHW April 13, 2011 LOG OF EXPLORATORY TEST PITS 15.8 102.9 19.9 1!)0.3 22.1 97.4 15.2 94.3 17.0 106.2 19.5 111.0 9.8 115.6 13.6 109.9 9.1 105.0 14.7 107.2 AGRICULTURAL FILL: SANDY CLAY, fine grained, grayish brown, slightly moist to moist, soft. moist to very moist COLLUVIUM: SANDY CLAY, fine grained, grayish brown, slightly moist to moist, soft. SANTIAGO FORMATION: SANDSTONE, fine to medium grained, light gray, moist, medium dense; moderately cemented, slightly weathered and fractured, massive. Total Depth = 5' No Groundwater/Caving Encountered Backfilled 4-13-2011 AGR ICULTURAL FILL: CLAYEY SAND, fine grained, grayish brown, moist, loose. SANTIAGO FORMATION: SANDSTONE, fine grained, light brownish gray, moist, loose to medium dense; poorly cemented to friable, moderately weathered and fractured, massive to weakly sub-horizontal bedding, N1 ?°W, 3°SW. Total Depth = 3' No Groundwater/Caving Encountered Backfilled 4-13-2011 PLATE B-3 .. ... . .. SAMPLE·· .. .. . ·,_.,TEST··• ECEV:. '·DEPTH : .GROUP ·:·oEPTH-::'.' . . (ft.) .. . : PITNO:> ; , '(ft.) ., SYMBOL . . ·_ (fl:}' . :=. .. . ,. .. TP-205 198 0-1 SC Bag@O Ring @ 1 1-3 SC TP-206 175 0-1/2 SC Bag@ 0-4 %-2 CL 2-4'12 CL Ring@4 --- - - - W.O. 6145-A1 -SC Shapell Homes Rancho Costera Logged By: SHW April 13, 2011 LOG OF EXPLORATORY TEST PITS i >ivi,ii~t.·d~,t "FIEltlll~DR'l-''.! itit(f ?):.{~: ; ........ :i.,:. '·'" · ..... \. ,•'+"··.:, .. ~ .. ;_.,:~,·J .• : )(/h'.,J}J '~/J:' .,- ·· :oeNsit:Y ·fr I ( .. t...~}·'~:/,.:,., '~_': ,=.: .... ,1~-;~(:",J:~?J;,•'• : • ''•,··: ,i .· (%) : '·j>-:·;P~~CRIP.[lpNi/ 1:_· f ;. ~-,., . .. ·. .. _,..' 0 :: ' ,: ;• .. , ·,ci, ···1r ':":i :~ ~~ -:~ .. ~~-;-\·~ '_\ ',??:. ~~::_-:.·/:?t:'-! ;:~, ... '"_') _;,i'.'·JO.·::i:~··.1: :-' ,_., ,dd , • · .. : pc t,. ·. , . l 'i_ -. !,'' ..... 11.4 108.1 AGRICULTURAL FILL: CLAYEY SAND, fine grained, brownish gray, moist, loose. 14.6 103.6 SANTIAGO FORMATION: CLAYEY SANDSTONE, fine grained, light gray, 18.7 106.1 moist, soft; poorly cemented to friable, weathered and fractured, massive. 18.1 1~0.6 Total Depth = 3' No Groundwater/Caving Encountered Backfilled 4-13-2011 17.9 87.1 AGRICULTURAL FILL: CLAYEY SAND, fine grained, brownish .gray, : moist, loose. 21.2 97.6 SANTIAGO FORMATION: SANDY CLAYSTONE, fine grained, light gray to light olive, moist, soft; poorly cemented, slightly weathered, massive to poorly bedded. 22.6 87.1 CLAYSTONE, mottled light gray and dark olive, moist, medium stiff; 24.0 93.5 moderately cemented, poorly bedded. Bedding: N3°E, 14°NW. 21.0 96.2 ' I Total Depth = 4112' No Groundwater/Caving Encountered Backfilled 4-13-2011 PLATE B-4 - - - --------- C :.Ttst<· 'liEv. · cii::'PrH PlfNo.·'· ··(f9 · . . (~.) .. TP-207 220 0-1/2 Vz-2 2-3 I LOG OF EXPLORATORY TEST PITS W.O. 6145-A1 -SC Shapell Homes Rancho Co~tera Logged By: SHW April 13, 2011 SC Bag@ 10.4 93.9 AGRICULTURAL FILL: CLAYEY SAND, fine grained, light gray, moist, SP SP/CL 0-3 very loose. Ring@2 14.9 19.0 18.3 115.2 101 .7 108.7 I SANTIAGO FORMATION: SANDSTONE, fine to medium grained, light olive gray, moist, medium dense; moderately cemented, slightly weathered, moderately fractured with red and olive mottled CLAYSTONE in east half of pit. SANDSTONE/CLAYSTONE thinly bedded to massive. Bedding: N16°E, 11°SE. Total Depth = 3' No Groundwater/Caving Encountered Backfilled 4-13-2011 PLATE B-5 ' LOG OF EXPLORATORY TEST PITS W.O. 6145-A1-SC Shapell Homes Rancho Costera I Logged By: SHW April 13, 2011 ;;~;~~: i':E~t'i' 'r\~Tt: :i!00u;~· '.'S11!~E;c tf J:'.~t% }{( ii~::1,i~J{{!, ., . ! : '! , 0 'i~tl t!~~!i,~ij~;;::;:;:::;f i,:: :}•J''J/; TP-208 152 0-1 CL Bag@ 12.0 103.0 AGRICULTURAL FILL: SANDY CLAY, fine grained, brownish gray, moist, CL 2112-4 SC 4-5 SP TP-209 173 0-1/z SC V2-3 SP - -- -- 0-4 soft .. Ring@ 4% Bag@ 0-3 Ring@ 1 20.6 22.0 20.0 11.6 14.8 12.8 13.9 14.7 107.6 101 .0 91 .6 104.2 I 106.1 105.8 I 105.3 105.8 - very moist, with plastic debris. COLLUVIUM: CLAYEY SAND, fine grained, brownish gray, very moist, loose; bore holes. SANTIAGO FORMATION: SANDSTONE, light gray, moist, loose to medium dense; poorly cemented to friable, moderately weathered, massive. Total Depth = 5' No Groundwater/Caving Encountered Backfilled 4-13-2011 AGRICULTURAL FILL: CLAYEY SAND, fine grained, brownish gray, moist, loose. SANTIAGO FORMATION: SANDSTONE, fine grained, light gray, moist, loose to medium dense; friable, weathered, moderately fractured, massive to poorly bedded. Bedding: N82°E, 10°SE. Total Depth = 3' No Groundwater/Caving Encountered Backfilled 4-13-2011 PLATE 8-6 - - TP-21 o 182 0-% %-3 3-3% TP-211 211 %-1112 - - - SC SP CL SC SP SP Bag @ 0-3 Ring@3 Bag@ 0-3 Ring@2 - - - - - - - - - W.O. 6145-A1-SC Shapell Homes Rancho Castera Logged By: SHW April 13, 2011 LOG OF EXPLOftATORY TEST PITS 12.0 18.7 15.5 13.3 14.1 14.0 12.6 14.5 · 108.1 110.8 110.9 105.5 104.8 94.7 106.2 AGRICULTURAL FILL: CLAYEY SAND, fine grained, grayish brown, moist, loose. SANTIAGO FORMATION: SANDSTONE, fine grained, olive gray, moist, soft; friable, massive to poorly bedded, weathered, fractured. CLAYSTONE, mottled reddish brown and olive, moist, medium dense; moderately to well cemented, fractured, slightly weathered, thickly bedded. Bedding: N70°W, ?°SW. Total Depth = 3112' No Groundwater/Caving Encountered Backfilled 4-13-2011 AGRICULTURAL FILL: CLAYEY SAND, fine grained, brown, moist, loose. SANTIAGO FORMATION: SANDSTONE, white to pale yellowish gray, moist, medium dense; poorly cemented, massive to poorly bedded, slightly weathered, slightly fractured, oxide staining. Dense; moderately cemented, sub-horizontal bedding. Bedding: N35°E, 4°SE. Total Depth = 3' No Groundwater/Caving Encountered Backfilled 4-13-2011 PLATE B-7 TP-212 154 O-V2 1Yz-3 TP-213 138 0-1/2 Yz-3 -- SM SC SC SC SC Bag @ 0-3 Ring @2 Bag@ 0-3 Ring @ 1 - - W.O. 6145-A~-SC Shapell Homes Rancho Castera Logged By: SHW April 13, 2011 LOG OF EXPLORATORY TEST PITS 8.1 109.9 24.6 103.8 12.6 1 ~ 1.7 26.0 1!)2.9 14.7 1 ~2.0 15.9 100.4 26.3 98.5 24.3 95.9 AGRICULTURAL FILL: SILTY SAND, fine to medium grained, grayish brown, slightly moist, loose. SANTIAGO FORMATION:CLAYEYSANDSTONE, fine grained, light gray, moist, loose; poorly cemented, slightly weathered, fractured, weakly bedded to massive, sub-horizontal bedding. Becomes olive gray. Total Depth = 3' No Groundwater/Caving Encountered Backfilled 4-13-2011 AGRICULTURAL FILL: CLAYEY SAND, fine grained, grayish brown, moist, loose. SANTIAGO FORMATION: CLAYEY SANDSTONE, fin e grained, mottled gray and olive brown, very moist, loose; poorly cemented, moderately weathered and fractured, poorly bedded to massive. Bedding: N50°W, 6°SW. Total Depth = 3' No Groundwater/Caving Encountered Backfilled 4-13-201 1 PLATE B-8 ------ ------------- - - - TP-214 116 0-1 CL Bag@ 0-4 1-4 CL Ring @2 TP-215 210 0-% SC Bag@ 0-3 1/2-3 SP Ring@ 1 W.O. 6145-A1 -SC Shapell Homes Rancho Castera Logged By: SHW April 13, 2011 LOG OF EXPLORATORY TEST PITS I 15.4 102.3 28.3 91.5 29.9 88.5 34.0 85.1 35.1 85.0 ' I 13.0 101.6 16.4 105.2 15.8 113.9 18.3 107.9 AGRICULTURAL FILL: SANDY CLAY, fine grained, olive brown, moist, soft. SANTIAGO FORMATION: CLAYSTONE, olive gray, very moist, soft; moderately cemented, highly weathered and fractured, thickly bedded, heavy oxide staining, trace gypsum. Total Depth = 4' No Groundwater/Caving Encountered Backfilled 4-13-2011 AGRICULTURAL FILL: CLAYEY SAND, fine grained, brownish gray, slightly moist, loose. SANTIAGO FORMATION: SANDSTONE, fine grained, light gray, moist, loose to medium dense; poorly cemented, massive to poorly bedded, moderately weathered and fractured. Bedding: N66°W, 6°SW. Total Depth = 3' No Groundwater/Caving Encountered Backfilled 4-13-2011 PLATE B-9 TP-216 124 0-1 1-4 4-6 TP-217 76 0-1 1-2 2-5 SC SC CL SC SC SC Bag@ 0-4 Bag@ 0-5 ------- W.O. 6145-A1-SC Shapell Homes Rancho Castera Logged By: SHW April 13, ;2011 LOG OF EXPLORATORY TEST PITS 10.2 88.9 17.9 87.0 18.2 91 .9 19.0 93.7 22.1 95.2 22.4 99.8 24.9 100.2 12.4 1117.8 11.5 1:05.8 12.5 100.4 11 .1 103.3 12.5 101.3 15.6 93.3 AGRICULTURAL FILL/COLLUVIUM: CLAYEY SAND, fine grained, brownish gray, moist, loose. SANTIAGO FORMATION: CLAYEY SANDSTONE, fine grained, light gray, moist, loose; poorly cemented, highly weathered and fractured. CLA YSTONE, light gray to olive gray, moist, hard; moderately cemented, poorly bedded, sub-horizontal. Total Depth = 6' No Groundwater/Caving Encountered Backfilled 4-13-2011 . ALLUVIUM: CLAYEY SAND, fine grained, dark grayish brown, moist, loose to medium dense. Becomes brown. Becomes grayish brown, slightly moist, loose to medium dense. Total Depth = 5' No Groundwater/Caving Encountered Backfilled 4-13-2011 PLATE B-10 ------- - -- JTEST~ .. ·· .: ~Le.v: .. ,,: 6EP0TH PiT·N:o. ·, :(~.:) (tt):': TP-218 118 0-1 1-2 2-3 3-6 6-7% TP-219 96 0-1 1-3 ------ SC SC SC SC SC SC/CL SC/CL Bag@ 0-5 Ring@3 W.O. 6145-A1-SC Shapell Homes Rancho Castera Logged By: SHW April 13, 2011 LOG OF EXP LO~ATORY TEST PITS 14.4 110.4 18.9 96.5 19.2 1 )4.2 13.2 114.2 18.0 107.4 20.2 106.1 AGRICULTURAL FILL: CLAYEY SAND, fine grained, brownish gray, moist, loose. Becomes very moist. Plastic debris. SLOPEWASH : CLAYEY SAND, brown, very moist, medium dense; oxide stringers, and porous. SANTIAGO FORMATION: CLAYEY SANDSTONE, olive brown, very moist, soft; poorly cemented, weathered, massive, fine grained. Total Depth = ?Vz' No Groundwater/Caving Encountered Backfilled 4-13-2011 ARTIFICIAL FILL: CLAYEY SAND, gray brown, slightly moist, medium dense to loose. Becomes moist, medium dense. Total Depth = 3' No Groundwater/Caving Encountered Backfilled 4-13-2011 PLATE B-1 1 TEST ELEV. DEPTH GROUP SAMPLE DEPTH PIT NO. (ft.) (ft.) SYMBOL (ft.) TP-306 145 0-2 CL 2-4 CL 4-6 CL 6-61/2 CL - - -- W.O. 6145-A10-SC Shapell Homes Rancho Costera Lo gged By: RGC May 30, 2013 LOG OF EXPLORATORY TEST PITS MOISTURE FIELD DRY DENSITY DESCRIPTION (%) (pct) COLLUVIUM: SANDY CLAY, brown, dry, soft; dessicated, few roots. SANDY CLAY, dark brown, moist, soft to medium stiff; disseminated caliche. HIGHLYWEATHERED SANTIAGO FORMATION: SANDYCLAYSTONE, brown, moist, medium stiff; hig hly weathered. SANTIAGO FORMATION: SANDY CLAYSTONE, olive gray, moist, stiff to hard. Total Depth = 6112' No Groundwater/Caving Encountered Backfilled 5-30-2013 PLATE B-17 - - TEST ELEV. DEPTH GROUP SAMPLE DEPTH PIT NO. (ft.) (ft.) SYMBOL (ft.) TP-307 155 0-2 CL 2-4 CL 4-6 CL 6-6V2 CL - - - - - W.O. 6145-A10-SC Shapell Homes Rancho Castera Logged By: RGC May 30, 2013 LOG OF EXPLORATORY TEST PITS MOISTURE FIELD DRY DENSITY DESCRIPTION (%) (pcf) COLLUVIUM: SANDY CLAY, brown, dry, soft; dessicated, few roots. SANDY CLAY, dark brown, moist, medium stiff; some disseminated caliche. HIGHLYWEATHERED SANTIAGO FORMATION: SANDY CLAYSTONE, brown, moist, medium stiff; highly weathered with relict, less weathered bedrock inclusions. SANTIAGO FORMATION: SANDY CLAYSTONE, olive gray brown, moist, stiff to hard. Total Depth = 6W No Groundwater/Caving Encountered Backfilled 5-30-2013 PLATE B-18 Project No. 133023-03 APPENDIXC Laboratory Test Results by Others Page C-1 April 29, 2014 ~ I I -I ~ I ' i ' I I j -I I ~ ~ -g: @ C i I !!; 6,000 . 5,000 / V 4,000 / V / 1 /' § / . I ~000 V ~ a:: / ~ J: CD I 2,000 / ./ ~[ V 1,000 /' ~ ~ ~ 0 0 1,000 2,oop 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 NORMAL PRESSURE. p&f Sample -·--Range Classification PrhnaryfReeldual Sample Type Id MC% C ' -.....---• HP.-1 28.0 I..J8Y6Y :sana Prbnary Shear Undisturbed 112.9 12.1 473 40 D HA-1 26.0 Residual Shear Undisrurbed 112.9 12.1 393 30 &~.A--1.ollll RA-Joi Note: Sample lnnuhdated ptior to tasting GeoSofts, Inc. . DIRECT SHEAR TEST 5741 Palmer Way Project BLUESTONE COMMUNITTES est-Carlsbad, CA 92008 Number. 6081-A-SC Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Fax: (760} 931-0915 Date: July 02 2010 Plate D-1 ~.ooo /' s.000---1---. ,. , ---1-/if---/-+--,,.L.--/ /---!J l 4,000---+-----v--------v~ 1· I wz-/ / vvv Sample • HA-1 ~ D HA-1 ; BA-10/ !i Dapth/EI. Range Classfffcatfon 85.0 ~ Note: Sample lnnundated prior to testing ~ . ~ GeoSoils, Inc. ~ 57 41 Palmer Way ~~ Carlsbad, CA 92008 NORMAL PRESSURE, psf Prlmary/Reslclua1 Sample Type \ MC% c Primary Shear UndJsb.Hbed 113.4 11.6 1202 Residual Shear Undisturbed 113.4 11.6 315 DIRECT SHEAR TEST Project BLUESTONE COMMUNmEs Number. 6081-A-SC ... @ ~~ Telephone: (760).438-3155 ~ · Fax: (760) 931-0915 ,-.·.· Dais: July 02 201 o Plate D-2 fl 36 35 8,000 .. - 5,000 4,000 .. ~ ,_.... -!. ,_.... g _L----:; I 3,000 ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ X • co .. -~ I . 2,000 0 ~ I 1,000 I 0 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 .. NORMAL PRESSURE, psf "Sample Depth/El. Primary/Residual Shear Sample Type . 'Yi! MC% C ' • TP-02 3.0 Primary Sheer Undisturbed 109.9 13.6 1608 20 I • TP-02 3.0 Residual Shear Undisturbed 109.9 13.6 1345 20 I -gj ~ Note: Sample lnnundatad prior to testing ~ -GeoSoHs, Inc. DIRECT SHEAR TEST ! 9Sf-5741 PalmerWay Project MCMILUN i Carlsbad, CA 92008 . Number: 3098-A 1-SC T elephona: {760) 438-3155. r. C ~ (760) 931-0915 Date: January 2002 Plate D-3 !!l r~· ... , 6,000 -- .. 5,000 . I 4,000 ~ 1· V Lmro ~ ~ V :c / en 2,000 /r / I 1,000 / 0 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 NORMALPRESSURE,psf Sample DeptM:¥1. Prtmary/Resldual Shear Sample Type 1:i MC% C • • TP--26 3.0 Primary Shear Ramolded 102.6 13.0 130 31 I • TP-26 3.0 Resk:lual Shear Remolcled 102.6 . 13.0 98 31 "ij ~ -!!i ~ Note: Sample lnnundatecl prior to testing ~ GeoSons, Inc. QIRECT SHEAR TEST i «&Sf-5741PalmerWay Project MCMILLIN i Carlsbad, CA 92008 Number. 3098-A 1-SC Telephone: (760) 438-3155 --:: Fax: (7.60) 931-0915 Data: January 2002 Plate D-4 !!l " .. 5,0001---------+------+------+------+------+------+---1 /' ~0001----_:._---1---------.....,.L;.,£__---l------l------l---'----I-~ /~ 6.__ ___ ~=------=-:'-::,.,,-----~-=-------,:-::'=:--------=-":"=----~ 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 NORMAL PRESSURE, psf Sample Depth/EL Primary/Residual Shear Sample Typa 'Y.,. MC% c + e TP-32 3.0 Primary Shear Undisturbed 101.2 9.8 464 35 j ~•-+-TP_..a2 __ -+-__ s_.o ___ Raskl __ ua1_s_h_ear __ -+-___ U_ndlsturbed ____ ---1c--10_1_.2-+-_a_a---1_361_-+-_36"----i ~L-l-~_...JC---~_.___~~~~-'--~~~~__.__,_~-'-'-_,____, !l ~ Note: Sample lnnunda1ed prlol:'to testing ~ ~ · GeoSoBs, Inc. ; «est-5741 PalmerWay · Carlsbad, CA 92008 t · Tel!3phone: (760) 438-3155 ! Fax: (760) _931-0915 DIRECT SHEAR TEST ProjBCt: MCMILLIN Number. 3098-A1-SC Date: Jan.uary 2002 Plate D-5 5,0001---,--------------+-----------1--------t 4,0001--------------1------+-----------+---------1---t OL-___ __. ____ ____,_ ____ __._ ____ :-'-____ _.__ ____ _._~ 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 6,000 6,000 NORMAL PRESSURE, paf Sempfa Depth/El. Pr1mary/Resldual Shear Sample Type °ti: MC% c + • TP-35 8.0 Prfmruy Shear Undtsturbecl 99.0 13.3 250 Zl I • TP-35 8.0 Residual Shear Undisturbed 99.0 13.3 208 28 i~~-+-~-t-~~---t-~~~-+--+-~~-+-~• ~ L-L-----'----'----------'------.....;._--'-----'---'---1------'-----' § ~ Note: Sample lnnundated prior to testing DIRECT SHEM, TEST ProJOC:t MCMIWN · Number. 3998-A1-SC ·--Date: January 2002 Plate D-6 ' I I __ , I I -~ ~ ; ! i !!l - 6,000 / ·v / ; 5,000 V V 4,000 . /. • / y V i V ' z ~ / w 3,000 / ! :c y (I) I I ./ 2,000 V I/ I 1,000 0 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 . 4,000 5,000 6,000 NORMAL PRESSURE, psf Sample Depth/EL Primary/Residual Shear .. Sample Type ?i MC% C + • TP-39 8.0 Prhnary Shear Undisturbed 115.0 14.3 3189 48 • lP-39 8.0 Residual Shear unclJsturbed 115.0 14.3 1007 29 Note: Sample lnmmdated prior to testing GeoSoUs, Inc: DIRECT SHEAR TEST est-5741 palmerWay Project: MCM_ILLIN Carlsbad, CA 92008 Number. 3098-A 1-SC Telephone: (760) 438-3155 . Fax: (760) 931:-0915 Date: January 2002 Plate D-7 3,500 ~ ~ ----3,000 .,, ~ ---V ~ ~ / --2,600 ~ ~/< l ~ § •• / .. I 2,000 •• V I / en - 1,500 / .. I 1,000 /. • / / ! 500 0 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 NORMAL PRESSURE, pat' Sample . ·Depth/EL Prfmary/Resldual Shear · Sample Type t MC% C + I : BA-1 25.0 Primary Shear Undisturbed 104.3 19.1 2278 15 BA-1 25.0 Residual Shear Undisturbed 104.3 19.1 638 33 ~ ~ -~ @ Note: Sample lnnundated prior to testing ; ~ DIRECT SHEAA1TEST i GeoSoils, Inc. est-5741 PalmerWay Project MCMILLIN Carlsbad, CA 92008 . i Telephone: (760) 438-3.155 Number: 3098-A1-SC Fax: (760) 931-0915 Date: September 2004 Plate D-8 !!i i I I I I 1 I i I ·~ I I I 3,600 / ... 3,000 / V 2,500 / V l / • I .. 2,000 ~ w '/ ~ en / / ~- J: CIJ ~ 1,500 ~ ~ ) ~ I -~ ' 1,000 ~ I/ 500 / 0 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,600 3,000 3,600 NORMAL PRESSURE, psf Sample Depth/El Prlmary/RealduaJ Shear Sample Type t MC% C + I : BA-1 45.0 Prtmary Shear Undisturbed 120.0 a.a 316 46 BA-1 45.0 Residua! Shear Undisturbed 120.0 8.8 573 22 I ~ ~ Note: Sample lnnundated prior to testing i ~ DIRECT SHEAR TEST a GeoSolls, Inc. j est-5741 PalmerWay Project MCMILLIN . . · Carlsbad, CA 92008 ! · · JA Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Number: 3098-A1-SC Fax: (760) 931-0915 Date: September 2004 Plate D-9 li!i 3,600 3,000 -. 2,500 ---~ l ~ ~ ~ ~ C) ~ 2,000 .. ~ .,.,.,.... ~ ! ::c ~ CtJ 1,500 V ~ 1,000 . 500 0 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,600 NORMAL PRESSURE, psf Sample Depth/EL PrlmaryiResldual Shear Sample Type 'ti MC% C + ! • BA-1 63.0 Primary Shear Undisturbed 103.6 20.1 1266 21 • BA-1 63.0 Residual Shear Undisturbed 103.6 20.1 1180 21 i· . -~ ! Note: Sample lnnundated prtor to testing ; I DIRECT SHEAR TEST J GeoSoils, Inc. est-5741 PalmerWay Project MCMIWN i Carlsbad, CA 92008 Number: 309B-A1-SC Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Fax: (760)931-0915 Date: September 2004 Plate D-10 l!i . -.. I ' 3,500 V - 3,000 / ,/ -l 2,600 / / / / !. / I § / z 2,000 ~ / . V ! / V :r: en 1,500 vii .~ 1,000 / V /'l 600 ~ 0 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,600 3,000 3,500 NORMAL PRESSURE, psf Sample Depth/El. Prlmary/Realdual Shear Sample Type t MC% C + I: BA-1 75.0 Primary Shear Uncllsturbed 114.6 8.0 141 41 BA-1 75.0 Residual Shear Undisturbed 114.5 8.0 '297 32 ij ~ -~ f Note: Sample lnnundated prior to testing ~ i DIRECT SHEAR TEST j . GeoSoils, Inc. &Sf-5741 PalmerWay Project MCMIWN Carlsbad, CA 92008 i Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Number: 3098-A1-SC Fax: (760) 931-0915 Date: September 2004 Plate D-11 !!l ____--v--- 3,5001-------ll-------+----+----+-:::,,-"=---+----+-----I---I ~-------~ 3,000 v- ------- 6001----~-----+----+----t-----+-----+------+-----l o.__ __ ___.,__ __ ___. ___ __. ___ __._ ___ __._-,-__ ..,........ _______ ___. 0 500 1,000 1,600 2.000 2.500 · 3,000 3,500 NORMAL PRESSURE, psf Sample Depth/El. Primary/Residual Shear Sample Type Id MC% C ~ • BA-2 ~ • BA-2 30.5 Primary Shear 30.5 Residual Shear Undisturbed Undisturbed 120.0 13A 2786 120.0 13.4 574 t + 19 32 ~ 1-1-----+-------------+---------+--~------+---i -! ....__._ ___ __._ ___ ......_ _______ _._ _______ _,__ _ ___._~-__,_ __ ..,__ _ __, ! Note: Sample lnnundated prior to tasting I o: GaoSolls, Inc. j &SJ 5741 PalmerWay Cartsbad, CA 92008 ~ Telephone: (760) 438-3155 ~ Fax: (760) 931--0915 ~ . -DIRECT SHEAR TEST Project MCMIW-IN Number. 3098-A 1-SC Date: September 2004 Plate 0-12 ,- _,,,., .... ~·' V 3,600 /;/' ~ . 4 ,/ V .,,. 3,000 / V / /;/" / / / .,,,.,,./ ' ' .. ··" 2,500 / / V-, ' _/ l • .... · // • g 2,000 /Y I V / I ~/ h ~ :c CD 1,600 V ~ ,' 1,000 / ~ / ,· V r· - ) /( ±.-. / / ·" . .,. .. -/;"" 500 V ~-/ / /. i..-........ \ c'.,, 0 C" ·o .. 500 1,000 1,600 2,000 2,600 3,000 3,500 NORMAL PRESSURE, paf Sample Depth/EL Primary/Residual Shear Sample Type fd MC% C ' I : BA-4 25.0 Primary Shear Undisturbed 126.2 B.6 1666 30 BA-4 26.0 Residual Shear Undlsturbed 126.2 8.5 258 34 ~ -~ ! Note: Sample lnnundated prlor to testing . I DIRECT SHEAR TEST j GeoSons, Inc. 'Ht 5741 Palmer Way Project MCMILLIN . Carlsbad, CA 92008 i Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Number: 3098-A1-SC Fax: (760) 931-0915 Date: September 2004 Plate D-13 l!i , It / 3,600 .. / 0 v-/ / .. 3,000 / 1V / 2,500 / V V I/ -/ !. § 2,000 V. V ·1 / •• J:s., '• • ! J: / co 1,600 / V I 1,000 / V 600 / V 0 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,600 3,000 3,500 NORMAL PRESSURE, psf ) Sample Depth/El. Prlmary/Resldual Shaer Sample Typa ti MC% C iii I : BA-4 45.0 Prtmary Shear Undlsturbed 124.6 10.0 1126 41 BA-4 45.0 Residual Shear Undisturbed 124.6 10.0 225 41 ! ! ! Note: Sample Iooundated prior to testing : I DIRECT SHEAR TEST i GeoSolls, Inc. . «Hf-5741 Palmer Way Project MCMILLIN Cartsbacl, CA 92008 j Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Number: 3098-A1-SC Fax: (760) 931-0915 Date: September 2004 Plate D-14 !!i 3,0001---------+---1 ---+-----+-----+---~-----1-----1 ~/ 2,500 t----;----;----t-----t--:----t-w-· ----,;, .• ~("'--,,c-------,1---1 :,~----+~--+-~-+-~~·-~/~--~~---~---~ I V,V i v/ -~ 1,5001-------t-----+-----+-"-7~--t-----;-----;-------t----t /(" V 1000 / ./ ·v / 500 / V o.__ ___ .,__ ___ ..__ ___ ..._ ___ _._ ___ _._ ___ _._ ___ _,____.J 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 NORMAL PRESSURE, psf Sample Depth/El. Primary/Residual Shear sample Type li MC% C ~ ~.·-t-BA-4----;---65_.o_,i--__ P_rimary __ s_hear __ -+ ___ U_ndl_sturbed _______ 11_1~--+-1_1_.B-+-B40--t--29--t ~ BA-4 65.0 Residual Shear Undisturbed 117 .B 11.B 322 35 g ; 1-+---~----+----------+-----_----+----+---t---+---t ! .......... ___ ___. ___ _._ _______ __,_ ________ _._ _ __._ __ _._ _ __._ _ ___, ! Note: Sample lnnundated prior to testing : I c GeoSolls, Inc. j es• 5741 PalmerWay Carf sbad, CA 92008 ~ ' Telephone: (760) 438-3155 ~ Fax: (760) 931-0915 !!; DIRECT SHEAR TEST Project MCMILLIN Number. 309B-A1-SC Date: September 2004 Plate D-15 -1.0 I~ i---'----0.6 -r--. t--.. I'-... r--. ~ 0.0 ~ 0.5 \ ~ 1.0 \ 1.5 \ 'I-2.0 I~ \ z "' \ ~ r-,.... ;',...~ I 2.5 \ ~ \ 3.0 "-i 1\ ~-3.6 . ~ "' \ 4.0 "' "' ~-4.6 5.0 5.5 100 1,000 · 10,000 STRESS, psf Sample DepthlB. Visual ClassfficatJon t MC MC H20 Initial Initial Anal e B-101 15.0 Sandy Clay 104.-4 20.2 20.1 250 i t -~ stress at whJch 'IIBter was added: 250 psf ~ Strain Difference: ---0.74% ~ a CONSOLIDATION TEST ~ GeoSolls, Inc. . ~ fit-5741 PalmarWay Project BLUESTONE ,COMMUNmES Carlsbad, CA 92008 j Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Number: 6081-J\-SC Plate D-16 Fax: (760) 931-0915 . Date: July 02 2010 ~ -1.0 • . .. , .. ' ... -0.5 - -' ! ,. _J -I ~ I I. 0.0 • ------. ' 0.5 "' " 1.0 '-) ~- 1.5 ~ '#-. 2.0 I I \ ~ 2.5 \ 3.0 3.5 I\ \ j \ 4.0 \ 4.5 \ ~ \ 5.0 \ -- 5.5 100 1,000 10,000 SlRESS,psf Sample Depth/EL V-ISUal Classfflca:Hon t MC MC H20 Initial Initial Final e B-101 25.0 SandyClay 106.2 21.0 18.2 250 i ~ ~ stress at which water was added: 250 pet @ strain Dllfarence: --0.07% ;1; I! CONSOLIDATION TEST I GeoSoils, Inc. fit-5741 Palmer:Way Project BLUESTONE COMMUNmEs I Carlsbad, CA 92008 · Number. 6081-A-SC . Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Fax: (760) 931-0915 Date: July 02 2010 Plate D-17 I!: -1.0 ---- ..Q.5 Ck ----r-, ...._ r-. :--........ 0.0 'o, " ~ 0.5 \ ~ 1.0 \ 1.5 ' --\ .,. 2.0 f .\ II 2.5 '\ 3.0 "-... \ " r-...... \ 3.5 "' '~ \ 4.0 \ ~~ \ 4.5 :"--... ....... ............... ~ " .......... 5.0 5.5 100 1,000 10,000 STRESS, pgf Sample IJepth{B. Visual ClassHicafion rd MC MC H20 lnffial lnltial Anal It B-102 20.0 Clayw/ Sand 103.3 22.8 20.7 250 i I -gJ stress et whkfl water was added: 250 psf ! strain Dffferenca: ---0.61% II CONSOLIDATION TEST ! GeoSolls, Inc. 5"! 41 Pabner Way Project BLUESTONE COMMUNnlES l est-Carlsbad, CA 82008 Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Number: 6081-A-SC Fax: (760) 931-0915 Date: July 02 201 D Plate D-18 !; ~ I ! ' --: I I I , I i I I I ~-1.- i _ _I I I I C -~ " i - ~ g X I! I I 2i -1.0 -0.5 -0.0 -i---~ 0.6 . 1.0 1.5 *-2.0 ! 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 100 Sample Depth/8. e B-103 17.0 SUtySand stress at which water was added: 250 psf Strain Difference: _....: -0.01 % GeoSofis, Inc. 57 41 Palmer Way 65-f-Cartsbad, CA 92008 Telephone: (760) 438-3155 · Fax: (760) 931-0915 . ~ f'... ....... f',._ !'I ~ ~ ·~ '\ ~ '\ " IL "' "" ~ ~ " -u 1,000 10,000 STRESS,paf V1sual Classtflcatlon t MC MC H20 lnfflal lnJtial Final 107.8 19.6 17.0 250 GONSOUDAllON TEST Project: BLUESTONE COMMUNITIES '' Ni.Imber: 6081-A-SC Date: July 02 2010 Plate D-19 -1 0-,....:._ -""'-t ...... -, ..... I 0 0 ' I "\ ' 1 \ • 2 \ 3 \ \ I . \ 4 \ '$. z \ ~ 5 ' ' \ 6 \ I ,. 7 ...... , I I"-r-,:-,. ' . 8 . r----- ~ \ 9 ~ "'-. l..-... ......... r--..1',.. ( - 10 '~ 11 100 · 1,000 10,000 1i:18 STRESS, "psf Sample Depth/EL Visual Classification 'Y.t MC MC H20 Initial lnfflal Final I e HB-5 16.0 102.7 23.3 20.8 250 ~ gj ~ g i:I: CON SO LIDA TION. TEST I -_ GeoSoHs, Inc. - -5741 PalmerWay Project MCMILLIN I Carlsbad, CA 92008 . A Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Number: 3098-A1-SC Fax: (760) 931-0915 . Date:· January 2002 Plate D-20 !! -1 0 --""',__ i--_ -"1 ~ 1 ' .....,~ 2 4l " I\ I J 3 . \ 4 \ ';f!. \ ·- z I 5 \ I I 6 \ \ 7 \ 8 I~ ........ 'r-- 9 ""'-- ............... \ ----~ t-_ 10 r----~ I 11 100 1,000 10,000 1rf STRESS,psf Sample Depth/EL Visual Classification t MC MC H20 fnltlal Initial Final - ; • HB-6 15.0 106.7 11.7 16.3 2500 I· -!!! ~ ' ' ' ~ CONSOLIDATION TEST i GeoSoUs, Inc: est-5741 PalmerWay Project MC~ILLIN I Carlsbad, CA 92008 Number. 3098-A 1-SC Telephone: (760) 438-3155 · Fax: (760) 931-0915 Date: January 2002 · Plate D-21 '!! I I I -1 0 ----"1 t...... ( r---t--.r-. .. . 1 ~ . 11. 2 ."" 3 f'-.. ) \ 4 \ ';/!. z ~ i 5 \ I \ 6 \ \ 7 ilk t-...r-8 ---------t"---1 h -r--,- 9 --, 10 - 11 100 _ 1,000 10;000 1if STRESS,psf Sample Depth/1;:I. Vlsual Classlffcatlon 'Y.i' MC MC H20 Initial lnltial Final I • HB-6 5.0 Sanely Clay 107.5 12.5 16.9 2000 ~ ~ ! ~ fl ~ CONSOLIDATION TEST i GeoSoffs, Inc. -5741 PalmerWay Project MCMILLIN ! Carlsbad, CA 92008 Number: 3098-A 1-SC . Telephone: {760) 438-3155 Fax: (760) 931-0915 Plate D-22 !fl .. Date: Januruy 2002 : i J ~ ! I I ! U.S. SE\/'E ClPENINil IN INCHES I UASIEVE~ I ~ e 4 3 2 1.5 1ll4 ~ 3 L B s 1° 14115 20 3D 40 l5ll BO 100140 200 100 I I I r I II I I ~ I I I ' ~ 95 90 i ~I\ ' ' 85 ~ \~ : ,= \ 80 \ . ~ i \ 75 : : I): I\ \. ~ 70 -\ \· ~ !i:65 1 \ I\ \ C) ~ ~BO l \ \ ~55 : ffi 50 : ; ~ : z \ u:: 45 i40 ~ ~ 0:: \ ~36 30 : \ 25 .~ : 20 • \ : 15 r. -~: 10 5 0 : 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE IN MIWMETERS I I GRAYa. I roarae I SAND I SILT DR CLAY I COBBLES I I coarae line medium fine Sample Depth Range Visual ClassfflcafionlUS cu.ss!RCATION u. PL Pl Cc cu • 8-101 15.0 SandyClay D B-101 20.0 SlllySand 128 4.Tl .A. B-102 15.0 Sandy Clay Sample Depth D100 D60 D30 D10 %Gravel %Sand %Silt I %Clay ~· B-101 15.0 4.75 0.082 0.0 41.3 58.7 :::o B-101 20.0 4.75 0.349 0.181 0.0 89.6 10.4 ~ .A.. 8-102 15.0 19 0.153 0.4 48.5 51.1 < : :: - C GRAINSIZEDIBTRIBUTION ! GeoSoils, Inc. ~ .. 5741 PalmerWay Project BLUESTONE COMMUNmES Carlsbad, CA 92008 I Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Number. 6081-A-SC Fax: (760) 931-0915 Data: July 022010 Plate D-23 SE U.S. SIE.VE oPENING IN INCHES I U.S. SEVE Nl.NBERS I HYDROMETER B 4 3 2 1.S 1 r4 ~ ! I,, 8 B 10 1418 2D llO 40 15D BO 10014D 200 100 I ,1 I I 11 ' """"I ~ ,I I I 95 t ., '\ : ~ 00 t -85 : \ 80 rn ~ '. 75 J\ 70 ~ : ~ !cB5 \ i\ ~ Cl ~60 \ I ~ ~55 \ \ ffi 50 t z \ ~ rr: 45 !z \ ~40 ~35 \ ~ ~ ' 30 \ .-25 t ~ ~ 20 ~ 15 10 : 5 ( 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS I. COBBLES I GRAVEL I roarae I SAND I SILT OR CLAY I coarB8 I fine medium I fina S1i11Dple Depth Range Visual Clas;slflcaOon/USCS CLASSIFICATION LL PL Pf Cc Cu • B-103 17.0 Silly Sand . -- D B-104 10.0 SandyClay Sample Depth D100 D60 D30 D10 %Gravel %Sand %Sift I %Clay ~. B-103 17.D 19 0.334 0.121 D.4 77.2. 22.4 ::: D B-104 10.D 4.75 0.225 D.D 63.7 36.3 ~ :: = = C GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION i GeoSolls, Inc. 6 est-57 41 Palmer Wa'f Project BLUESTONE COMMUNmEs Carlsbad, CA 92008 I Telephone: {760) 438-3155 Number: 6081-A-SC Fax: {760) 931-0915 Date: Juty 02 2010 Plate D-24 !!i ' I , I I I i, ~ I_ ; I I ' ' U.S. ~ OPENING IN INCHES I U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS I HYDROMETER B 4 3 2 1.5 1 314 112318 3 A. 6 B 10 1416 20 30 40 50 BO 100140 200 100 I II I I II '."' K "' I I "1' 1'1!t--~ I I 95 " \ ~ \ 90 : : \ )\ ~ 85 : : ~ ~ 80 : \ \ 75 1 \ : : 70 \ \ ~65 : Ii C) ~60 : \ fij 55 : \ ffi 50 z \ U:: 45 \ ~ : \ \ ~40 ~35 \ ~ \ \ 30 ). \ 25 : \ ~ 20 : \ ~ ~: 15 : ' 10 : 5 0 : 100 10 1 0.1 O.Q1 0.001 GRAIN SIZE IN MIWMETERS I COBBLES I GRAYa I coarse I SAND I SILT OR Cl.AY I coarse I fine medium I fine Sample Depth Classfficaflon LL PL Pl Cc Cu • BA-2 30.5 ctA YEY SAND(SC) 37 24 13 • BA-4 25.0 Silty Saru1 ... BA-4 46.0 6IJty Sand .. ~ Sample Depth D100 D60 D30 D10 %Gravel %Sand %Slit I %Clay ! • BA-2 30.5 2 0.097 0.0 53.4 46.6 ~-BA-4 25.0 4.75 0.407 0.169 0.0 85.1 14.9 ~ A BA-4 45.0 4.75 0.207 0.104 0.0 76.7 23.3 ~ I ! GeoSolls, Inc. GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION ~ ~~ 57 41 Palmer Way Project MCMILLIN ...... Carlsbad, CA 92008 I a Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Number. 3098-A1-SC Fax: (760) 931-0915 Date: September 2004 Plate D-25 !!: U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES I U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS I HYDROMETER B " 3 2 1.15 1 ::,/4 '112318 3 " B 8101418 20 30 40 60 BO 100140200 100 I II I I I I I I -~ I I I 95 : : I'\ : \. : 90 \ 86 : \ 80 ~ 75 70 : : ~65 : C!) ~60 : ~55 : : ffi 50 z u: 45 : ~ \ ~40 ~35 \ \ 30 25 i 20 15 10 5 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE IN MIWMETERS I COBBLES I GRAVEL I coarse I SAND I SILTORCLAY I coarae I fine medium I fine Sample Depth Classification LL PL Pl Cc Cu • BA-4 65.0 SlltySand :!I Sample Depth D100 060 D30 010 %Gravel %Sand %Slit I %Clay ~ • BA-4 65.0 2 0.17 0.092 0.0 78.0 21.B ~ ~ ~ ~ i GeoSoils, Inc. GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION ~ «fit-5741 Palmer Way Project MCMILLIN .. Carlsbad, CA 92008 I Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Number: 3098-A1-SC Fax: (760) 931-0015 Date: September 2004 Plate D-26 l!l ' I U.S.~ OPENff3 IN tJCt£B I U.S. stEVE NI.U3ERS I HYDROUETER 6 4 3 2 1.5 1 314 1f2s.rs 3 i 6 s 10 14 16 211 30 40 ~ 60 100 140 :!lD 100 · I II II I ~ I I I I 1--1-. I I I I I I I I I 95 ~ I ~ I I I I I \ I I ~ I I I 90 It 11 t I I I I ! ' 85 I I I\ I I I I \ I I I I I BO r 'r 1 II I I \ I : I I I 75 I I I • I I . \. I 1 I I I 70 I I I '1 I I \ I l I I I !i: 65 I I I I ' I I \ I C) I I I I ~60 II I I I I I I .~l >-55 I ~ I £0 I ~ I I I ·~~ ffi 50 I I I I I 11 I, 11 I II z I I I I I \ u: 45 I I I I I ~ I I I I I 140 I I I I I Ill~ 0 I I I I I 'Ill ,, I I I I I ' I I I I "'I.. UJ I I I I 0..36 I 1 I I I I 1 I 30 I I I I I I I I 25 I l I I I I I I I J I 20 I I I I I I 1 I 15 I I ~ I I I I I I I I I 10 1, 1, I I I I I I I I I I 5 I I I I I. I I I 0 I I I I I' 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS I COBBLES I GRAVH. I coarae I SAND I SILT OR CLAY I coarae I fine medium I fine · Sample Depth Classification LL PL Pl Cc Cu. • H~ 15.0 Sample Depth D100 060 D30 D10 %Gravel %Sand %Silt I %Clay § • HB-5 15.0 4.75 0.081 0.0 41.4 18A 40.2 ~ ... ~ · . .. --::, ~ C GRAJN SIZE DISTRIBUTION I GeoSoils, Inc. ~ est-·5741 PalmerWay Pro}ect MCMILLIN Carlsbad, CA 92008 I Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Number: 3098-A1-SC Fax: (760) 931-0915 Date: January 2002 . Plate D-27 ~ u.a SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES I U.S. SIEVE N!JIIJBERS I HYDROMETER B 4 3 2 1.6 1 814 ~ 3 4 B 610 141a 20 so 40 w·60 100140200 100 I II II I ~ I II 11'-H.. ~. l I l I I I 95 1 h I I "" I I 90 II II ' I, I I ' I I 85 I I r I r r I\ I, 80 It It It I I I\ I r -I I 75 ~ I r ~ I I I 1! I 70 I, I " I I :\ I I I I I !i:65 I I I I I I I I C!) 1! ! I\.. rf iBO I I I "\ I ~ I I I fu55 I I r I r I r ffi 50 r r I 1! It \ I \. I ti: 45 I I I I I I I I 140 ' I I \. I I I I 't I, It I I I ~35 I I I I I I.I I I I llll ! I I 30 I, ' I r I 111 I I I N ~ 25 I I I I I ru. .. 'r---..11, I I 20 ' ' I I :-:-. I I 15 I I u I 1 I I I I 10 I h I I I I I I 5 I I I I I I I I 0 I I I I 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS j COBBLES I GRAV8-I roarse I SAND I SILTORClAY I coarse I fine madlum I fine . Semple Depth Classfflcatlon LL PL Pl Cc Cu • HB-5 25.0 ClA YEY SAND(SC) 36 15 21 Sample. Depth D100 D60 D30 D10 %Gravel %Sand %Sift I %Clay 5 • HB-5 25.0 9A23 0.266 0.037 0.8 632 13.0 23.0 ~ ~ --: C .. GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION I GeoSons, Inc. ~ .est-5741 Palmer Way Project MCMILLIN ~ Carlsbad, CA 92008 .. Number. 3098-A 1-SC Telephone: (760) 438-3155 · Fax: (760) 931-0915 Date: January 2002 Plate D-28 l!l US. SIEVE OPe!NG IN INCHES I U.S. SIEVE NUMBffiS I HYDROMETER 6 4. 3-2 1..f!.. ~-814 1 3 4 B a10 1416 20 30 40 f!O BO 100140200 100 I I I I ' I II 1 I n~ I I I I t I I I I I 95 I I I I I I I [\ I BO 1, I '1 I . I I 1 I \ I I I I I 85 I I I .~ I I 80 It I I I I I I 75 I I I I \ I I I :\ I I ~ 70 I I I I I I I I I I I ~65 I h I 1 \ I ~ I I \ (!) I ~ I ~60 I I 1, I I I \ I I u I 1 I >-·55 I ~ I I I Ill I ~ I I \ I ~50 I I I I I I I I I \. I II 45 I l I I I I I I I I ~40 I ; I I \ I I I I I ,, I I j I I \ I ~35 I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I ,I 30 I I I I I I I I I •i-. 25 I I I I I ~ I I I ~l'-e. I I ~ 1 I 20 I I I I I --h I h I I I ~ 15 I I I I I ----· I ~ I I I I I I I 10 I ~ I I I I I I I 5 I I I I I I I I I 0 I I I I I 100 10 1 0.1 O.D1 0.001 GRAIN SIZE IN MIWMETERS I COBBLES I GRAVR I SAND I SILT OR CLAY I coarse I finB : coarse I · medium· I fini, Sample DBpth Classfflcation LL PL Pl Cc cu • HB-6 15.0 Sample Depth D100 D60 D30 D10 %Gravel %Sand %Slit I %Clay ~ • HB-6 15.0 9.423 0.231 0.056 0.4 67.5 13.1 19.1 !: L. ~ ~ .. --::, :; C: GRAIN SIZE DISTRlBUTION I GeoSoDs, Inc. ~ est-57 41 Palmer Way Project MCMIWN . Carlsbad, CA 92008 I Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Number: 3098-A1-SC Fax: {760) 931-0915 Date;· January 2002 Plate D-29 !!l U.S. SIEVE OP8'1Nl3 IN INCHES I U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS I HYDROMETER 6 4 8 2 1.5 1 314 1t2a,,s· 3 l 6 810 14 16 20 80 40 60 BO 100140200 100 I I II I ~ I ,, I" I T1~11 I I I I I I ~ I I I 95 I ~ II I I I ~ ~-' I I • • I ~ . I \ I I 00 I It It I I I ~ I I ~ I 85 I r I I\ I I I ~ I \ I I I I " I . . I BO II .. ~i. ~--1, I I I ' I I I I I 75 I I I I I : I \ I I I 70 Ir 1 ' II I ~ 1 I I I : !i: 65 I I 1 I ~ I \ C!) I I ~60 ;, I I ,, I I -~ I I I >-55 I I I Ill I I I \ .. ~50 I I I ' I I \ ti: 45 I l I I I i40 I I ~ I \ I I I I I I Ir It I I 1 ~ I I 0::: I I I I ~ I ~35 I I ~ I I I I I 111 I I I I I \ 30 1, 1, I 1, I 1 L I I I I I I I Ir( ·25 I I I I I ..... I : I I 'I I ~ I I --.. 20 I I I I I 1 I I I ~ I I I I',,',,, 15 I • I I I ~ I I I ----. I I I I I 10 t I I I I I I I I I 5 I I I I I I I ~ I I 0 I I I I 100 10 1 cr.1 0.01 0.001 GRAJN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS I COBBLES I GRAVB_ I ccerae I SAND I SILT OR CLAY I coarae I fine • medk.rm I fine - Sample Depth ClasslficaUon LL PL Pl Cc Cu • HB-6 25.0 Sample Depth D100 D60 D30 D10 %Gravel %Sand %SUt I %Clay ; • HB-6 25.0 4.75 0.167 0.051 0.0 64.5 16.7 18.8 :: ~ ~ ~ ;:, :; I! GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION I GeoSolls, Inc. & est-57 41 Palmer Way Project: MCMILLIN Carlsbad, CA 92008 i Telephone: (760) 438-3155 ~ Number. 3098-A 1-SC Fax: (760) 9~1-0915 Date: January 2002 Plate D-30 !!l I i - I I I I ~~ ,, I I I ~ ~ ~ ~ g g i .. !! BO CL 50 ~40 0 ~ ./ i; / / / ~30 / . •' ~ / / a. ./ e ./ .,/ b / 20 ' / ./ ./ / / / 10 v"' ;/ / CL-ML / ML I 0 I 0 20 40 Sample DapthlEl. LL PL Pl Fines 8 B-101 10.0 43 19 24 D B-104 5.0 41 19 22 GeoSoils, Inc. 5741 PalmerWay est-Cartsbad, CA 92008 Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Fax: (760) 931-0915 ·--- / V 1.,/ .v CH ,I / / ./ i,./ V / / / / /./, ~/ / V V MH BO BO 100 LIQUID LIMIT uses CLASSIFICATION Sandy Clay Sandy Clay ATTERBERG LIMITS' RESULTS Project BLUESTONE.COMMUNmEs Number. 6081-A-SC Data: July 201 O Plate D-31 60 ~ v· l/ V CL CH. / ' 50 / . ·-7 V ' I/ ' / '/ / ~ 40 ., 13 I/ V ;?; / • / ~ / ~ 30 V V .~ ; / D.. / / 20 / l)/ / / 10 v. / V CL--ML V ML MH I - D 0 20 .. 40 60 80 100 LIQUID LIMIT Sample Depth/EL LL PL Pl Flnes ClasslflcaUon e TP-01 0.0 51 15 36 • TP-02 3.0 43 25 18 Clay I -· I ~ ~ -§ I i GeoSoDs. Inc. A TTERBER~ LIMITS' RESULTS -~ 5741 PalmerWay Project MCMILLIN Cartsbad, CA·92008 Number: 3098-A 1-SC Telephone: (760) 438-3155 ~ !!; Fax: (760) 931-0915 Date: January 2002 Plate D-32 ~ I I I ~ -' ! I ; @ ~ ~ ij i i - ~ !!i 60 CL 50 (i) 40 ~ / f / / / ~ 30 / ~ / / a.. / / // ./ 20 /, V / / / / / / 10 ,,/ V CL-ML / ML I n I 20 40 Sample Depth/EL LL PL Pl Fines • BA-1 20.0 NP NP NP • BA-1 63.0 61 24 27 I< GeoSolls, Inc. -5741.PalmerWay Carlsbad, CA 92008 Telephone: (760) 438-3155 FB?C (760) 931-0915 / V' / .V / CH / / / / // V / / / / / /, / V / V MH 60 60 100 LIQUID LIMIT Classlflca6on \,. ... _. ' . : - A TTERBERG LIMITS' RESULTS Projact: MCMILLIN Number: 309B-A1-SC Date: September 2004 Plate 0~33 - 60 / , / V / Cl CH -/ ,(__ -- / -- 50 / ~ , V 1,/ / / / / ~ 40 / / 0 / V ~ / / ~ / / / ~ 30 / ,· V 0) / ~ / n.. / / / ./ 20 / ' :/ / / / --/ / / / 10 / .V ,. CL-Ml / ML MH I ' 0 I 0 20 40 60 BO 100 LIQUID LIMIT I Sample Depth/El, LL PL Pl Flhe8 Clasalflcatlon • BA-2 30.5 37 :24 13 47 ClA YEY SAND{SC) ' -' .. - I ~ !!l f i j GeoSolls, Ilic. A ITERBERG LIMITS' RES UL TS est-6741 PalmerWay Project MCMILLIN Cansbad, CA 92008 . Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Number: 3098-A1-SC c( Fax: (760) 931-0915 Data: September 2004 Plate D-34 ~ i e 1 I I r -II Prime Testing, Inc. 41668 Ivy Sbvet Ste 114 Murrieta, CA 92562 ph (951) 894-2682 • fx (9!i1) 894-2683 Work Order No.: 10G1200 Client: GeoSoils, Inc. Project No.: 6081-A-SC Project Name: Bluestone Communities· Report Date: July 9, 2010 Laboratory Jest(s) Results Summary The subject soil samples were processed In accordance with Callfomia Test Method CTM 643 and tested for p_H I Minimum Resistivity (CTM 643), Sulfate Content (CTM 417) and Chloride Content (CTM 422). The test results foRow: Minimum Sulfate Sulfate Chloride Sample ldentiflcatlon pH Resistivity Content Content Content (ohm-cm} (mg/kg) (% bywgt) (ppm) fl1r101 ~@15' BA 1,100 30 0.003 100 TP-6@3' 6.6 240 560 0.056 910 *ND=No Detection We appreciate the opportunity to serve you. Please do not hesitate to contact us with any questions or clarifications regarding these results or procedures. Jt.ft;- Ahmet K. Kaya, Laboratory Manager Plate D-35 I~ I I cmwuv.J'100,AI. MEMB!R www.primetesilng.com fo1T11 No. CP-lR ~-0_5/10 U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES I U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS I HYDROMETER 6 4 3 2 1.5 1 314 1 3 6 810 1416 20 30 40 50 BO 100140200 100 I I I II ~PS ~ I 1· II I I I : 95 \ : 90 : ~ 86 : ~\ 80 In ~ : : ~ 75 : I\ : : : [\ 70 : I\: A r'I [~ ~65 : ~ ~ : C) : : ~60 1\ ' I\ r\ ~55 \ : ffi 50 In -\ \ z 1--: u:: 45 : ~ !z : \i : ~40 : : 0:: : ~ \ ~35 : \ \ : 30 1 \ 25 : 20 : ~ \ 15 '\. : 10 ' • 5 : 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE IN MIWMETERS I I GRAVEL l coaffie j SAND I I COBBLES I I SILT OR CLAY coarse fine med tum fine Sample Depth Range VlSUal Classificatlon/USCS CLASSIFICATION LL PL Pl Cc Cu ~ 8-202 20.0 Sandw/ Slit 1.48 6.21 D 8-202 25.0 Clayey Sand A B-203 20.0 Sandy Clay Sample Depth D100 D60 030 D10 %Gravel %Sand %Slit I %Clay ; e B-202 20.0 9.5 0.701 0.343 0.113 0.1 92.5 7.3 ;l D B-202 25.0 9.5 0.401 0.1 68.8 31.1 ~ Ji,. B-203 20.0 9.5 0.223 0.6 53.7 45.7 = = - C GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION ~ GeoSoils, Inc. ~ &Sf. 57 41 Palmer Way Project SHAPELL HOMES Carlsbad, CA 92008 i Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Number. 6145-A2-SC Fax: (760) 931-0915 Date: May 04 2011 Plate: C -1 !!i - I I r I I , I I '- - I I I ! _I I I ' ,_,, I : I ! ! - I I I , I U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES I U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS I HY!JR(lMETER B 4 3 2 1.5 1 11,l 1~ 3 B 910 1416 20 30 40 6060 100140200 100 I ii I ,..~ II : I ~ ~ I I I : r--.:., 95 ~ ~ ' \ 90 ~ \ 85 ' [\} : ' I'\~: BO \ )'i \ : :~ \ ~ 75 : I~ \ "" : : 70 : \ ;\ \ ' : ~· 1-65 ~ ::c ~ \ : C) ~60 : \ \ ~55 \ \ c::: W50 : ~\ z u:::45 !z \ ~ ~40 I c::: \ ~35 : ~: 30 : • 25 : : 20 15 : 10 : 5 : 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAJN SIZE IN MIWMETERS l I GRAVEL I coarse I SAND I SILT OR CLAY I COBBLES I I coarsa fine medJum fine Sample Depth Range Visual Classlflcatlon/USCS CLASSIFICATION LL PL Pl Cc Cu • B-203 30.0 ClayeySand D B-205 2.3 2.34 Sandy Clay A. B-210 15.0 Clayey Sam:! Sample Depth D100 D60 D30 D10 %Gravel %Sancl %Silt I %Clay ;:-. B-203 / 30.0 4.75 0232 0.0 68.3 31.7 ~ D B-205 2.3 19 4.6 28.6 66.8 ~ A 8-210 15.0 4.75 0.17 0.0 57.9 42.1 ~ : ::; : ~ GeoSolls, Inc. GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION s est-5741 PalmerWay Project SHAPELL HOMES Carlsbad, CA 92008 I Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Number. B145-A2-SC . Fax: (760) 931-0915 Date: May 04 2011 Plate: C-2 !!; U.S. SIEVE OPENNG IN INCHES I U.S. SIEVE NLr.lSffiS I HYDROt.ETER 6 4 3 2 1.5 1 314 1f2m 3 I B 810 1416 20 30 40 50eo 100140200 100 I II I I II II ~ I I I II I I I 95 " : ~. ' 90 \ 85 \ 80 \ : 75 70 : ~65 : ,, (!) I ~60 \: fu55 ~ 0:: !~ W50 \ z ii: 45 : \ !z 1\ ~40 : 0:: -· I'\. ~35 : \ : 30 : ~~ 25 : : 20 15 10 : : 5 : : 0 : 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE IN MIWMETERS I I GRAVEL I roarse I SAND 1 · COBBLES I I SILTORCuW coarae fine medium fine Sample Depth Range VJsuaJ Classification/USCS CLASSIFICATION LL PL Pf Cc e B-214 2.0 Clayey Send Sample Depth D100 D60 D30 D10 %Gravel 'YoSarnf %Slit I ;: • B-214 2.0 4.75 0.531 0.095 0.0 72.7 27.3 ii L ~ ~ :: : C GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION : GeoSoils, Inc. ~ est-57 41 Palmer Way Project SHAPELL HOMES Garlsbad, CA 92008 I Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Number: 6145-A2-SC Fax: (760) 931-0915 Date: May 04 2011 Plate: C-3 !!: 0.001 I Cu %Clay I : I -J , I I ,I I I SIEVE SIZES 3/4 4 30 200 i 65 1: ~J~: \\ -60t-t--t--+-~-tt-t-t-t--t-t--t--tt-~-m~it"t--t----t--~--t-NTfl--t-t--+----t--~-tt-t-t--t--t-t---i--t-~-1+1H+-t-+-t--t-~~ !~t-t----~+H-t-+-+-t--t-~:1~~11~-~~-~-~+-t~-+t+t~~~-+--+----i-H+++-+-+--+-~-H-++-+-+-+-t--l co I I~~ ~~ ~ \ ffi 50~--l--l-~--l+l-l--l-+-+--l----l+-ll~--l+l~~~H-~--l+l--14-M>-rl--l-~--l+l+l--+-+--l--l-~--l-J.jf-t+-l---J--l---l-~~ z : II~~~~~. '\ ~451-+--+--+-~~~++-+--+r-~~~~~~x---l+l-+-lr--l--+\-'.+'.--l-~~>+-l--++-+--l-~-l-l-1--1-1---1---1--1---l-~~ ffi~~-+-~H--4-~'~~~~~~~~~~~·~\~\--4+~-+-4-++i--1-1--+-+-4--+-~ ffi35~·~· -+--tt++++-t-+-~!.__t+t+t~~~~~~~~~~'+-+-t-\~~'r--++++-H---+--1-~~-H-f-+-i--+-~ a. : :~~~~~ \\ 30r-+--+--+-~-t+1H+++---t----,i-1~-++i++*11+--'<~r@:~~$%~~++-+--+-......,,..,~,\-H-,1;-+++-+--+----l+++++-+-+-+---1 I I • v~~ ~~~ ~~ \ ~ 251--+--t--+-~-++t++-+-+-+---tt-~-++t++-tt+-t-~.SW.~~~,-+---;-~--N-'!,:H-+-+--+--+-~-t+i++++-+--i-~~ 201-+-+-l-~-l+H~H-~i~++++~:4,: -l-+r~~~v~~~~~~~~~~~~~,u++-+--+-~-l-+-l-l-l--1---1--1-----t 15 ~--+--+1-H++-+-+--+!-: --H-++++l:!-+--+--+----H'rr,iv ~~~ ~~~~~~~'l-,--H-l++-l--+-+---1--=-H++-l-l--l--+-+---I : : ~~~~w~ 10t-+-+--t-~--tf-i-++++-t--;r- 1 ~--t+i-++tr 11 +-11--t----t++t~l~~~,~~~~~~S11';1~~~-t-+-t--+-~--tr1-+++-+-+--+-~~ 5t-+-+--t-~--tf-i-++-t-+-+--;+-l'~--tf-i++t++-t--+-~--t+iH-t++-t--f"~~~;a-+-t-+-t--+-~-t+,1-+++-t-+--+-~~ I I I '""" ~~ 0~~~~,.......,..~.._._~~11~..,..,....~~:1~~~~~~i.._._~_.._~_._._...._._.,_._~_.._~~'--'-'-......... _..__,_~~ 100 10 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE IN MIWMETERS GRAVEL I COBBLES coarse I fine SILT OR CLAY fine Note: Shaded area represents specifications for Cal Trans Class II Base 19-mm maxjmum oartk:fe al:?;e. operating range Percent -.......:,~ Sample Depth/El. s. E. 1" 3/4" #4 #30 #200 • 8-203 0.0 100.0 86.2 54.5 212 D 8-210 0.7 100.0 88.4 58.0 23.7 Specifications 25 100 90-100 3fHj() 10-30 2-9 GeoSoils, Inc. · GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION . fi141 Palmer Way ~~~-Carlsbad; CA 92008 ~~ Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Fax: (760) 931-0915 Project SHAPELL HOMES Number. 6145-A2-SC Date: May 04 2011 Plate: C-4 0.001 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 I-65 :::c S2 60 ~ 55 ?a o:: 50 w z u:::: 45 ~ w 40 ~ If 35 30 26 20 15 10 5 0 SIEVESIZES 314 4 30 200 -~ ~ I I '~ II ~)\ I ,~ I\ t :~ .. : I\ 1:~ II I\ I II ~~~~ II I I I I\ !I 11 - I ~ v ~ I \ I ~ I II ~~~ ~1: \ ' I ' 11 r1~~ ~ I f\ II ~ I ~~ ~~ ~ I\ I . I ~~ ~~ ~~ \ ' I I\ I ~ ~ ~ ~--i\ I I ~ r@ ~ \ I I\ I r~ ~ ~ ~~~. \ I I II ~ ~ ~~ ~~ \ I I I II ~ ~~ti. ~~ ~ I I ~ ..... ' ' I I ~ j~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~A I I I I Ir, ~~ ~ ~ ~ I I I I ~,~ ~ ~~~ I I I I '<I'<( ( Ii I 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 GRAIN .SIZE IN MIWMETERS COBBLES GRAVEL SAND coarse fine coarse medium fine SILT OR CLAY Note: Shaded area represents specifications for Cal Trans Class II Base 19-rnm maximum particle size, operating range Sample Depth{EL s. E. Percent Passino 1" 3/4" #4 #30 #200 • B-213 0.6 100.0 87.1 54.1 232 Specifications 25 100 90-100 35-60 10-30 2-9 GeoSolls, Inc. GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION fi: Carlsbad, CA 92008 e 5741 Palmer Way Sf-Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Fax: (760) 931-0915 Project SHAPELL HOMES Number: 6145-A2-SC Date: May 04 2011 Plate: C-5 0.001 4,000 3,000 ~ .....- i r-t -C) ~ I 2,000 Cl) ~ ~ ~ :i: CJ) ~ I 1,000 0 0 1,000 2,000 · 3,000 4,000 NORMAL PRESSURE, psf Sample Depth/8 Range Classification Prfmary/Resldual Sample Type yd MC% C 4' • B-1 10.0 vlSy w/ ::;ana Primary Shear Undlstt.rrbed 98.1 23.7 1118 20 i 0 B-1 10.0 Residual Shear U ndisturl:led 98.1 23.7 1187 18 ~ ~ -I_ !§ - a Note: Sample lnnundated prtor to testing I __ : ii GeoSoils, Inc. DIRECT SHEAR TEST ; 57 41 Palmer Way Project SHAPELL HOMES I 9St-Carlsbad, CA 92008 Number: 6145-A2-SC Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Fax: (760) 931-0915 Date: May 04 2011 Plate: C-6 !,!; 4,000 I I I I I I 3,000 I / " -!. t - '. / C!I I 2,000 V 0::: ' ~ :c CJ) • • 1,000 :_1 ·- 0 D 1,000 ' 2,000 3,000 4,000 NORMAL PRESSURE, psf '__) Sample Depth/B. Range Classification Primary/Residual Sample Type yd MC% C 4P • B-1 30.0 Clayey Sand Primary Shear Undisturbed 962 62 377 33 i D B-1 30.0 Residual Shear Undisturbed 96.2 62 356 33 ~ -~ ~ Note: Sample lnnundated prtor to testing ~ GeoSoTis, Inc. DIRECT SHEAR TEST ~ lest-· 57 41 Palmer Way Project SHAPELL HOMES Carlsbad, CA 92008 Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Number: 6145-A2-SC Fax: (760) 931-0915 Date: May 04 2011 Plate: C-7 !!i ----.-~ ' 4,000 3,000 8. t C!) z ~ 2,000 en ~ :r: en 1,000 ) 0 0 1,000 Sample uepuuo.. Range Classification 8 B-202 20.0 Sana wt :::,11t i D B-202 20.0 g ~ ~ -Note: Sample lnnundated prior to testing ~ ~ GeoSoils, Inc. !est-. 57 41 Palmer Way i •·. . ' Carlsbad, CA 92008 Telephone: (760) 43~3155 Fax: (760) 931-0915 !1: / V / V p .. 2,000 3,000 4,000 NORMAL PRESSURE, psf - Primary/Residual Sample Type % MC% C 4i Primary Shear Undisturbed 112.8 18.3 277 39 Residual Shear Undisturbed 112.B 18.3 229 39 DIRECT SHEAR TEST Project SHAPELL HOMES Number: 6145-A2-SC Date: May 04 2011 Plate: C-B 4,000 3,000 l ~ ' z w a: L----I-2,000 Cl) ~r ~ :z: ~ er., ! ~ ___-; 1,000 I ~ 0 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 NORMAL PRESSURE, psf Sample Depth/B Range Classification Primary/Residual Sample Type yd MC% C cp • 8-203 15.0 Clayey S8nc1 Prbnary Shear Undlsb.Jrbed 101.1 23.5 790 17 i D 8-203 15.0 Residual Shear Undisturbed 101.1 23.5 811 16 ~ Cl . --.. - gi ~ Note: Sample lnnundated prior to testing ~ GeoSoils, Inc. DIRECT SHEAR TEST iest-57 41 Palmer Way Project: SHAPELL HOMES Carlsbad, CA 92008 Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Number. 6145-A2-SC Fax: (760) 931-0915 Date: May 04 2011 Plate: C-9 el ' 4,000 - 3,000 ~ I '! t C!) / ffi ~ 2,000 / ~ J: u, G "/ ] . 1,000 V 0 0 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 NORMAL PRESSURE, psf Sample DepthlEI. Range Classification Primary/Residual Sample Type 'Yci MC% C ct> e B-208 5.0 SHty Sand Primary Shear Undlsturt:>ed 97.9 10.8 293 33 f D B-208 5.0 Residual Shear Undisb.Jrbed 97.9 10.8 372 31 ~ ~ -~ ~ Note: Sample lnnundated prior to testing ~ DIRECT SHEAR TEST ~ GeoSoils, Inc. ~ 57 41 Palmer Way Project SHAPELL HOMES GS£ Carlsbad, CA 92008 j · -· .fJA Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Number: 6145-A2-SC Fax: (760) 931-0915 Date: May 04 2011 Plate: C -10 !!: -4,000 / '/ V / V / 3,000 / V .. ! / / t 0 Cl ffi ~ 2,000 V / ! :I: U) 1,000 r 0 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 NORMAL PRESSURE, psf Sample· DeptWEI Range Classification Primary/Residual Sample Type Y.i MC% C 4P e B-209 5.0 ;:,anay '-'•s.Y Primary Shear U ncfJSturbed 113.8 14.0 1171 34 i D B-209 5.0 Residual Shear Undisturbed 113.8 14.0 176 38 I -!'.l ' ij Note: Sample Inn undated pi:ior to testing ~ DIRECT SHEAR TE ST j GeoSoils, Inc. ~ fS7 41 Palmer Way Project SHAPELL HOMES ~i-Garlsbad, CA 92008 Number: 6145-A2-SC j ...,. Telephone: {760) 438-3155 Fax: (760) 931-0915 . Date: May 04 20"11 F late: C -11 ~ 4,000 -· ... ·-.. 3,000 i t .. (!) ~ :;:; I 2,000 ~ ! ~ J: U) ~ ~ 1,000 0 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 NORMAL PRESSURE, psf .. Sample uepuuet. Range Classfflcatlon Primary/Residual. Sample Type yd MC% C cj, e B-210 15.0 i.;rayey ::;ana Primary Shear Undisturbed 107.8 20.1 1028 17 i D B-210 15.0 Residual Shear Undisturbed 107.8 20.1 1018 16 8 ; g,j ~ Note: Sample lnnundated prior to testing ~ GeoSoils, Inc. DIRECT SHEAR TEST i 57 41 Palmer Way Project SHAPELL HOMES ;GSI-Carlsbad, CA 92008 Number: 6145-A2-SC Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Fax: (760) 931-0915 Date: May 04 2011 Plate: C-12 ~ 4,000 - -· 3,000 V 1 :r: I-(!I z w / ~ 2,000 UJ V ~ :c UJ / 1,000 / ! 0 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 NORMAL PRESSURE, psf Sample Depth/8. Range Classfficatfon Primary/Residual Sample Type yd MC% C "' e B-213 15.0 Sandw/ ~111: Primary Shear Undisturbed 101.3 4.0 1.13 34 f D B-213 15.0 Residual Shear Undisturbed 101.3 4.0 91 34 ~ ~ - 3 -Note: Sample lnnundated prior to testing ~ c GeoSoils, Inc. DIRECT SHEAR TEST ; e9i 5741 PalmerWay Project SHAPELL HOMES Carlsbad, CA 92008 f Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Number: 6145-A2-SC Fax: (760) 931-0915 bate: May 04 2011 Plate: C -13 !!: 4,000 . 3,000 V C: l l t G I p 2,000 / ~ :c I en / ...,?, 1,000 V 0 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 NORMAL PRESSURE, psf Sample Depth/EL Range Classification Primary/Residual SampleType % MC% C <Ii e B-216 5.0 Clayey Sand Primary Shear Undisturbed 109.8 10.0 562 27 i D B-216 5.0 Residual Shear U ncflSturbed 109.8 10.0 509 29 § ~ - ~ ~ Note: Sample lnnundated prior to testing ~ DIRECT SHEAR TEST ; GeoSoils, Inc. 57 41 Palmer Way Project SHAPELL HOM_ES est-Carlsbad, CA 92008 j Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Number: 6145-A2-SC !!i Fax: (760) 931-0915 Date: May 04 2011 Plate: C-14 -0.0 -.., __ t---1---. t--. 0.5 t-: II ~ ., 1.0 ~~ 1.5 "' 2.0 "" 1~ ' .. 2.5 "' 3.0 ["-. I"'- 3.5 4.0 ~ z ~ 4.6 U) 5.0 - 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 8.5 ; 9.0 100 1,000 10,000 STRESS,psf Sample Depth/8. V"tsUal Classification yd MC MC H20 Initial Initial Final 0 B-202 15.0 sntySand 114.B 15.0 13.7 1000 ~ ' . -~ Stress at which water was added: 1000 psf ~ Strain Difference: ----0.05% a: CONSOLIDATION TEST a GeoSoils, Inc. ! e . · 5741 PalmerWay Project SHAPELL HOMES ~ Carlsbad, CA 92008 ! . Si-Telephone: (760)438-3155 Number. 6145--A2..SC -Fax: (760) 931-0915 Date: May 04 2011 Plate: C -15 !!; -0.0 ----r---I---r--... r----0.5 i--.. ~ 1.0 "\ 1.5 ~I 2.0 \ \ 2.5 3.0 \ 3.5 .. \ 4.0 ;#!. \ z ~ 4.6 5.0 \ 5.5 \ 6.0 \ 6.5 4~ 0-,. \ 7.0 '-,. I'--\ ' 7.5 r-.... 8.0 ~ \ l~ \ 8.6 ...__ \ -----~· 9.0 I--- 100 1,000 10,000 STRESS,psf Sample Depth!El. Visual Classification % MC MC H20 lnltfal lnltlaJ Final 8 B-210 5.0 Sandy Clay 97.3 22.9 21.4 1000 i 8 I I ~ -~ Stress at which water was added: 1000 psf -~ Strain Difference: ____ 0.02% lii CONSOLIDATION TEST I GeoSoils, Inc. 'f'"-11-57 41 Palmer Way Project SHAPELL HOMES I Carlsbad, CA 92008 Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Number: 6145-A2-SC Fax: (760) 931-0915 Date: May 04 2011 Plate: C -16 !!l I ; -0.0 - 0.5 'l-------......., ~ - 1.0 ~""' 1.5 ~~ 2.0 ·-t--~ "' -~ ~ 2.5 ' -, 3.0 C 3.5 -.. 4.0 -~ z ~ 4.5 5.0 5.5 8.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 8.5 9.0 100 1,000 10,000 STRESS,psf Sample Depth/8. VfsuaJ Cfassfficatlon ""1 MC MC H20 Initial Initial Final ~ B-215 15.0 Sandy Clay 126.3 9.6 7.9 1000 i ~ : ~ strass at which water was added: .1000 psf ~ strain Difference: ----0.06% ~ ii CONSOLIDATION TEST ! GeoSoils, Irie. est-5741'PalmerWay Project SHAPELL HOMES I Carlsbad, CA 92008 Number: B145-A2-SC Tele~hone: (760) 438-3155 Fax:: (760) 931-0915 Date: May 04 2011 Plate: C-17 !!: __ ) '~ I ' I i I 1 1· I I I I I TEST SPECIMEN A B C D Compactor air pressure PSI 350 350 350 Water added % 1.6 2.3 2.6 Moisture at compaction % 8.0 8.7 -9.0 Height of sample . IN 2.4 2.38 2.37 Dry density PCF 130.6 130.3 130.6 R-Value by exudation 76 55 42 R-Value by exudation, corrected 75 52 38 Exudation pressure PSI 515 337 286 Stabilitv thickness FT 0.31 0.58 0.74 I Expansion pressure thickness FT 0.23 0.03 ·o.oo DESIGN CALCULA 110N DATA SAMPLE INFORMA 110N Traffic index, assumed 5.0 Sample Location: B-203 Base ~------------------------------~ Gravel equivalent factor, assumed 125 Sample Description: Brown Silty Sand 1---------=----------------...a--------------+--------i -------------------~--------------u iii b ri um O Notes: NA 43 umbrium 43 Expansion, StabDHy Equilibrium 2.00 / / I/ g ~-50 :c s rn I/ / I/ / / >-.a I/ :H.oo m I/ I/ ~ I/ u ~ ' I/ I/ .... Ill ~0.50 (.) -~ I/ -~ -· I/ "" I/ ,_ ~ -·-I/ ,_ ~ ~ I/ 0.00 I/ 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 Cover Thickness by Expansion Pressure (ft) GeoSoils, Inc. I,: 57 41 Palmer Way Carlsbad, CA 92008 ~ · Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Fax: (760) 931-0915 ~------------------------------~ Cal-Trans Test 301 R-Value By Exudation BO 70 ' BO 50 m ::, "ii 40 ::::, 0:: 30 20 -- 10 0 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 ExudaHon Pressure (psi) R -VALLIE TEST RES UL TS Project SHAPELL HOMES Number: 6145-E-SD Date: r-1 f Fl ure: C -18 TEST SPECIMEN Compactor.air pressure Water added Moisture at compaction Height of sample Drydensitv R-Value by exudation R-Value by exudation, corrected Exudation pressure Stability thickness Exoanslon pressure thickness DESIGN CALCULATION DATA 200 g ~.50 :a .s Cl) >, .c :1.00 GI .2 0 :2 I- L. a, ~0.50 0 I/ 0.00 0.00 I/ Expansion, Stability Equfllbrlum I/ I/ I/ -1/ / I/ i.. I/ "' I/ 1, I/ "Ii.I I/ I"'-... I/ ~ I/ k'.' ............. I/ - 0.50 1.00 1.50 31 31 '/ / Cover Thickness by Expansion Pressure (ft) GeoSoils, Inc. i.'.:-5741 PalmerWay . Carlsbad, CA 92008 '.!i Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Fax: (760) 931-0915 I/ 2.00 PSI-.. % % IN PCF PSI Ft FT BO 70 60 50 30 20 10 0 800 A B C '' . 350 350 250 0.0 0.0 1.1 12.6 13.6 14.6 2.44 2.46 2.5 118.4 116.3 113.0 57 41 18 55 41 18 508 357 249 0.55 0.76 1.05 1.07 0.70 0.33 SAMPLE INFORMATION R-Value By Exudation . • ~ " " " " " .... ' -, \ \. -,,. 700 600 500 400 300 200 Exudation Pressure (psJ) R -VALUE TEST RES UL TS Project SHAPELL HOMES Number: 6145-E-SD · D 100 Date: r-11 Fi ure: C -19 0 .. TEST SPECIMEN A B C D Compactor air pressure PSI 350 280 200 Water added % 0.0 0.8 1.8 Moisture at compaction % 12.0 13.0 14.0 Height of sample IN 2.42 2.43 2.49 Dry density PCF 119.7 117.7 115.8 R-Value by exudation 36 17 13 R-Value by exudation, corrected 34 16 13 Exudation pressure PSI 511 328 262 Stability thickness FT 0.82 1.06 1.11 Exoanslon pressure thickness FT 0.50 0.40 0.27 DESIGN CALCULATION DATA SAMPLE INFORMATION Traffic Index, assumed 5.0 Sample Location: 8-204 Subgrade 2-4' Gravel equivalent factor, assumed 1.25 Sample Description: Greenish Gray Sandy Clay Expansion, stabllltv equilibrium 0 Notes: R-Value by expansion NA 0% Retained on 314 inch sieve R-Value by exudation 14 Test Method: Cal-Trans Test 301 _J R-Value at equilibrium 14 R-Value By ExudaUon 80 Expansion, Stability EquDlbrh.nn 2.00 V 70 ·. ' I/ I/ 60 g / ~-50 / V 50 :a / s / Cl> 0) :J -1i' ..... / iil 40 ::::, :1.00 1 I/ \ / a: ~ m -.f2 I/ 30 " " u / " :c " I-/ ... I/ 20 . " m " ~0.50 / ""' (.) -1.t, -• t---.. I-· ·--10 / I/ 0.00 I/ 0 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 BOO 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Cover Thickness by Expansion Pressure (ft) ExudaUon Pressure (psi} GeoSolls, Inc. R -VALUE TEST RESULTS ~i 5741 PalmerWay Project SHAPELL HOMES ~ , Carlsbad, CA 92008 "' Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Number. 6145-E-SD Fax: (760) 931-0915 Date: Apr-11 Figure: C-20 TEST SPECIMEN A B C D Comoactor air pressure PSI 160 100 70 Water added % 2.7 5.6 6.7 Moisture at compaction . % 20.0 22.9 24.3 Height of sample (N 2.47 2.52 2.56 Dry density PCF 105.7 99.3 96.8 R-Value bv exudation 13 7 5 R-Value by exudation, corrected 13 7 5 Exudation pressure PSI 598 328 219 Stability thickness FT 1.11 1.19 1.22 Exoansion pressure thickness FT 0.67 0.43 0.27 DESIGN CALCULATION DATA SAMPLE INFORMATION 5.0 Sample Location: B-205 @ 23-4' ~~~~~~~~~~~~- 1.25 SampJe Description: Gray Clay W/ Sand 1--~~~~~~~~....._~~~~-1--~~--t -~~~----''------'-~~~~~~ 2.00 g ~.50 :a .s 0) ~ ;1.00 .2 u :2 1-... a, ~0.50 0 / 0.00 0.00 / Expansion., StabUfty Equlllbrfum I/ I/ / / A I/ ~ ....... ~ i/ I/ / I/ / I/ / I/ ,-- - ,--,-••>--/ I/ -->--·- 0.50 1.00 1.50 0 Notes: NA 0% Retained on 3/4 inch sieve 6 Cal-Trans Test 301 6 R-Value By Exudation 80 / 70 I/ / 60 50 a, :I iii 40 > rt! 30 20 >---.. .... ,-- -10 0+--~+-~-+-~-+-~-+-~-+-~-1-~--.~~ 2.00 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Cover Thickness by Expansion Pressure (ft) Exudation Pressure (psi) GeoSoUs, Inc. ~-~will'. 5741 Palmer Way ~ Carlsbad, CA 92008 Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Fax: (760) 931-0915 R -VALUE TEST RESULTS Project: SHAPELL HOMES Number: 6145-E-SD Date: r-11 Fi ure: C-21 .TEST SPECIMEN A 8 C D Comoactorarrpressure PSI 350 210 130 Water added % 1.9 3.0 4.0 Moisture at compaction % .11.0 12.1 13.1 Heiaht of sample IN 2.34 2.46 2.58 Dry density PCF 127.4 125.5 119.3 R-Value by exudation 24 19 12 R-Value by exudation, corrected 23 19 12 Exudation pressure PSI 641 403 228 Stabilltv thickness FT 0.97 1.04 1.13 • Expansion pressure thickness FT 2.23 1.67 0.30 DESIGN CALCULATION DATA SAMPLE INFORMATION Traffic Index, assumed 5.0 Sample Location: B-206 @ 2.3-4 Gravel equivalent factor, assumed 1.25 Sample Description: Yellow Brown Sandy Clay Expansion, stablllty equilibrium 1.08 Notes: R-Value by expansion 16 0% Retained on 3/4 Inch sieve R-Value bv exudation 15 Test Method: Cal-Trans Test 301 R-Value at equilibrium 15 R-Value By Exudation 80 Expansion, Stability Equfllbrlwn 3.00 1.1 70 I/ ., ., §:2-50 I.I 60 I/ I/ ~ ., ., 50 :i:i ., .s2.00 ,., m rn / :i >, I, ai 40 .0 l.1 >, 311.50 l.1 a:: l.1 C: 1.1 ~ I.I 30 0 1.1 :c 1-1.00 l.1 ,.. .... l.1 20 a> > 1-1-1-I.I -0 I.I 0 o.50 ,__,__,_ L. I, ,_ I, 10 1.1 I/ I, ,_ ' 0.0Q I, 0 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 BOO 700 BOO 500 400 300 200 100 0 Cover Thickness by Expansion Pressure (ft) Exudation Pressure (psi) GeoSolls, Inc. R -VALUE TEST .RESULTS ~i 5741 Palmer Way Project SHAPELL HOMES '' , Carlsbad, CA 92008 ~< Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Number: 6145-E-SD Fax: (760) 931-0915 , Date: Apr-11 FJi:1ure: C-22 TEST SPECIMEN A B C D Compactor air pressure PSI 300 250 180 Water added % 0.7 1.2 2.2 Moisture at compaction % 10.5 11.0 12.0 Height of sample IN 2.39 2.39 2.45 Dry densltv PCF 127.3 125.6 123.2 R-Value by exudation 27 19 15 R-Value by exudation, corrected 25 18 15 Exudation pressure PSI 490 374 285 Stability thickness. I FT 0.93 1.04 1.09 Expansion pressure thickness FT 0.87 0.47 0.30 DESIGN CALCULATION DATA SAMPLE INFORMATION Traffic Index, assumed 5.0 Sample Location: B-207 @2.3-4', Subgrade Gravel equivalent factor, assumed 125 Sample Description: Gray Brown Clayey Sand Exoanslon, stability equlllbrlum 0 Notes: R-Value bv expansion NA 0% Retained on 3/4 inch sieve R-Value-by exudation 15 Test Method: Cal-Trans Test 301 R-Value at equilibrium 15 R-Value By Exudation 80 Expansion, stability Equffibrtum 2.00 / 70 / I/ 60 g :/ ~.50 / / 50 j V I/ II) co :I >, / "ii 40 .Q ~ 1:!1.00 ....... ..... V a:: Ill --1--4 / ~ I/ 30 u / :E -I-I/ "-.. V 20 ..... Ill ~0.50 / 0 -· .. / / 10 I/ 0.00 I/ 0 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Cover Thickness by Expansion Pressure (ft) Exudation ~ (psi} . -. ~ GeoSoils, Inc. R -VALUE TEST RESULTS ~I 5741 Palmer Way Project: SHAPELL HOMES ' • Carlsbad, CA 92008 .. :~ Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Number. 6145-E-SD Fax: (760) 931-0915 Date: Apr-11 Flgure: C-23 . j TEST SPECIMEN A B. C D Compactor air pressure PSI 350 350 200 Water added % 0.9 1.8 2.6 Moisture at compaction % 8.3 9.2 10.0 Height of sample IN 2.43 2.41 2.48 Dry density PCF 134.6 132.4 126.3 R-Value by exudation 61 30 10 R-Value by exudation, corrected 59 28 10 Exudation pressure PSI 580 353 160 Stabilitv thickness FT 0.50 0.90 1.15 Expansion pressure thickness FT 0.60 0.27 0.00 DESIGN CALCULATION DATA SAMPLE INFORMA 110N 5.0 Sample Location: 8-210@ 0-7-2.3, Road Base ~~~----='---~~~~~~~ 1.25 Sample Description: Gray Brown Silty Sand W/ Gravel 1--~~-'-~~~~~-'--~~~~+-~~-1 2.00 ~.50 j 0) >, .a :1.00 CD C ..x: .2 ..c: I-... a, ~0.50 0 ~ / 0.00 0.00 ' I/ uilibrium Expansion, stability Equfllbrlwn V I/ I/ / / / / ' I/ ~" I/ ' / '\ V )< -/ I/ -/ 0.50 1.00 1.50 0.55 Notes: ~~~~~~~~~~~~ 57 0% Retained on 3/4 inch sieve 23 Test Method: Cal-Trans Test 301 23 R-Value By Exudation 80 / 70 / / ... 60 ' '\ ' 50 " '\ " ' ' " '\ " "'-30 ""' ' " )--20 ,_ --""t>- 10 " 0 2.00 Cover Thickness by Expansion Pressure (ft) 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Exudation Pressure (psi) GeoSoils, Inc. 15741 PalmerWay ' Cartsbad, CA 92008 ·' Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Fax: (760) 931-0915 R·-VALUE TEST RESULTS Project SHAPELL HOMES Number: 6145-E-SC Date: r-11 Fi ure: C-24 TEST SPECIMEN Compactor air pressure Water added Moisture at compa.ction Height of sample Dry density R-VaJue by exudation R-Value by exudation, corrected Exudation pressure Stability thickness Expansion pressure thickness DESIGN CALCULATION DATA 2.00 .B' ;1.00 .12 u :c 1-... a, ~0.50 0 I/ 0.00 0.00 / Expansion, StabHity Equllibrlum I/ I/ / !/ !/ IA / 7 ...._ I/ ~ / I/ / / / I/ I/ 0.50 1.00 1.50 14 14 I/ !/ / 2.00 Cover Thickness by Expansion Pressure·(ft) GeoSoils, Inc. 57 41 Palmer Way Carlsbad, CA 92008 Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Fax: {760) 931-0915 A B C D PSI 310 220 160 % 2.7 3.7 5.2 % '. ' " 12.4 13.4 14.9 IN 2.46 2.52 2.6 PCF 121.9 120.4 116.3 22 15 13 22 15 13 PSI 511 367 275 FT 1.00 1.09 1.11 FT 1.27 0.97 0.43 SAMPLE INFORMATION 0% Retained on 3/4 inch sieve Cal-Trans Test 301 R-Value By Exudation . 70 60 50 a, :, ~ a: 40 30 ... 20 -..... ---- 0-t-~-t-~-t-~+-~+-~+-~+-~-+----l 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Exudation Pressure (psi) \ ,. R -VALUE TEST RESULTS Project SHAPELL HOMES Number: 6145-E-SC Date: r-11 Fi re: C -25 --, I I ' TEST SPECIMEN Compactor air pressure Water added_ Moisture at compaction Height of sample Dry density . R-Value by exudation R-Value bv exudation, corrected Exudation pressure Stabllitv thickness Expansion pressure thickness DESIGN CALCULATION DATA R-Value at equilibrium 14 200 ~.50 i >. .a ;1.00 .2 u :c 1-... QI j;0.50 0 I- I/ 0.00 0.00 ·- ,/ Expansion, Stability EqulHbrium I/ :/ / / l/ I/ / I/ -r--,._ I/ I/ ,-.. t-. I/ ..., I/ I/ I/ >-~/ ~ ,__ ,__. ·-1-1-I/ 0.50 1.00 1.50 Covar Thickness by Expansion Pressure (ft) GeoSolls, Inc. I. 57 41 Palmer Way -'· , Carlsbad, CA 92008 . .,. Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Fax: (760) 931-0915 I/ 2.00 A 8 C D PSI 280 210 130 % 1.0 2.8 3.8 % 13.2 15.0 16.0 IN 2.45 2.5 2.56 PCF 119.5 115.7 109.4 ) 32 15 12 32 ... , 15 12 PSI 660 341 237 FT 0.87 1.09 1.13 FT 1.40 0.60 0.00 SAMPLE INFORMATION 4% Retained on 314 inch sieve Test Method: Cal-Trans Test 301 R-Value By Exudation 80 70 60 50 Cl) :::s ii 40 >. a: . 30 ...... .... ...... ...... ... 20 ...... " '-· 10 0 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Exudation Pressure (psi) R -VALUE TEST RES UL TS _ Project SHAPELL HOMES Number. 6145-E-SC Date: r-11 Fi ure: C-26 TEST SPECIMEN Compactor air pressure Water added Moisture at compaction Height of sample Dry density R-Value bv exudation R-Value by exudation, corrected Exudation pressure Stability thickness Expansion pressure thickness DESIGN CALCULATION DATA 2.00 g ~.50 :c I ~ ;1.00 ....... C: .II: .E .c 1-.. G) 1;0.fiO (.) . 1-- 1-- - I/ 0.00 0.00 1-- I/ Expansion, stability Equfllbrlum ,/ / I/ v· / I/ [', It I/ 'i-. I/ ' I/ " ~. I/ I/ I/ --,-.. I/ ·--I/ I/ 0.50 1.00 1.50 15 15 / I/ Cover Thickness by Expansion Pressure (ft) GeoSolls, Inc. · I::: 57 41 Palmer Way Cartsbad, CA 92008 "· Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Fax: (760) 931-0915 / 2.00 A B C D PSI 350 •, -270 220 % 0.5 1.5 2.5 % 11.0 12.0 13.0 IN 2.46 2.5 2.48 PCF 122.8 120.7 117.6 41 19 8 41 19 8 PSI 581 350 209 FT 0.76 1.04 1.18 FT 0.60 0.30 0.03 SAMPLE INFORMATION R-Value By Exudation 80...-~.-~-.-~-,--~--r-~-r-~--,-~--,-~--, 70 60 so · ar :i ! 40. 30 20 10 D BOO 700 , ... ... 600 SOD 400 300 200 Exudation Pressure (psi) R -VALUE TEST RES UL TS Project SHAPELL HOMES Number: 6145-E-SC 100 0 Date: r-11 Fi ure: C -27 · TEST SPECIMEN A B C D Compactor air pressure PSI 350 350 280 Water added % 1.4 2.3 3.3 Moisture at compaction % 7.9 B.B 9.8 Height of sample IN 2.5 2.38 2.47 Dry density PCF 134.1 133.2 129.8 R-VaJue by exudation 68 48 22 R-Value by exudation, corrected 68 45 22 Exudation pressure PSI 681 419 281 Stability thickness FT 0.41 0.67 1.00 Expansion pressure thickness FT 0.60 0.30 0.00 DESIGN CALCULA TJON DATA SAMPLE INFORMATION Traffic index, assumed 5.0 Sample Location: B-214@ 2-6, Subgrade Gravel equivalent factor, assumed 125 Sample Description: Gray Brown Silty Sand W/Gravel Expansion, stability equllibrium 0.5 Notes: R-Value by expansion 61 0% Retained on 3/4 Inch sieve R-Value by exudation 26 Test Method: Cal-Trans Test 301 R-Value at equilibB"ium 26 R-Value By Exudation BO Expansion, stablnty Equillbriwn I I 2.00 70 / ~ / ""-' / ' 60 g / ' "' ~.50 / ' / 50 '" :a V '" J!! " / Ill -en :, : I I I >, / ~ 40 '' .a V ' ;1.90 c:: '\ r\. / ' ' ] '\_ / 30 ' ' 0 :2 ' I/ '\ t-~~ / '-... I/ 20 a, ' ~0.50 / '" 0 I/ I/ 10 I/ / 0.00 0 I __ ' 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 D Cover Thickness by Expansion Pressure (ft) Exudation Pressure (psi) GeoSoils, Inc. R -VALLIE TEST RES UL TS Olrl 5741 PalmerWay Project SHAPELL HOMES :'-Carlsbad, CA 92008 ,". · Telephone: (760) 438-3155 -Number: 6145-E-SO Fax: {760) 931-0915 Date: Apr-11 Figure: C-28 4;000 --·-· - 3,500 3,000 2,500 _...........-1, ! ~ ~] t ~ C) @ 2,000 ~ ~ CIJ I ~ ~ :r: __,-----en 1,500 ~ ~ 1,000 ---· -. . .. ----. ·-. -· . -···--.. . . . .. ..... . ------. ~----· . -· .... ---. ·- 500 0 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 NORMAL PRESSURE, psf Sample Depth/8. Range Classfficatlon Primary/Residual Sample Type Yci MC% C ~ G B-201 10.0 Clay w/ ::;and Primary Shear Undisturbed 98.1 23.7 1118 20 i D B-201 10.0 Residual Shear Undisturbed 98.1 23.7 1187 18 I - ~ Note: Sample lnnundated prior to testing ~ ~ GeoSoils, Inc. DIRECT SHEAR TEST l efjf.-57 41 Palmer Way Project SHAPELL HOMES Carlsbad, CA 92008 i ' " . ,:,;:~ Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Number: 6145-E-SC Fax: (760) 931-0915 Date: Jt,me 2011 Plate: C-7 ~ ~ ' ..,. >' ----. ' --·----. ---4,0CXf 3,500 . 3,000 v· / 2,500 -V !. / § z ~ 2,000 / rn ~ :c /' U) K 1,500 / ,/ 1,QOO --~--. ·---------7 ----···--. ----·---. .. . --·--···· .. . ------· ··--~-- / 500 / 0 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 NORMAL PRESSURE, psf ' Sample ~-Range Classification PrimaryfResidual ·...----Sample Type Y.i MC% C cp -, I Cl B-201 30.0 Clayey Sand Primary Shear Undisturbed 96.2 6.2 377 33 f D B-201 30.0 Residual Shear Undisturbed 96.2 6.2 356 33 @ ~ - ~ ~ _Note: Sample lnnundated prior to testing i GeoSoils, Inc. DIRECT SHEAR TEST !6'i~ 57 41 Palmer Way Project SHAPELI,. HOMES Carlsbad, CA 92008 I ,, . , 'i.\:fi-; .r~ Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Number: 6145-E-SC Fax: (760) 931-0915 Date: June 2011 Plate: C -8 ~ 4,000 t 3,500 / / I t_ 3,000 / ,,AJ v/ / 2,500 / -V V -! t / (!) z ~ 2,000 I-V U) ~ ~ ::c U) 1,500 ./ V 1,000 V' ~ 500 V 0 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 NORMAL PRESSURE, psf ! I Sample Depth/EL Range Classlflcatlon Prfmary/ReslduaJ Sample Type yd MC% C q, g • B-301 30.0 Clayey Sand Primary Shear Undisturbed 103.1 11.7 134 41 I:. D B-301 30.0 Residual Shear Undisturbed 103.1 11.7 324 36 8. Reshear Shear Undisturbed s - gJ t Note: Sample lnnundated Prior To Test .. ro DIRECT SHEAR TEST ~ GeoSolls, Inc. ili ~. 5741 Palmer Way Project SHAPELL Carlsbad, CA 92008 i · '.· i-Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Number. 6145-A10-SC o Fax: {760) 931-0915 · Date: .July 2013 Plate: C - 1 gi 4,000 3,500 3,000 i : ! 2,500 /. ::r- ! / t / C!) z w 2,000 ~ ~ Cl) / ! :r: ~ Cl) 1,500 ~ ~ 1,000 ~ ~ ~ 500 "' 0 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 NORMAL PRESSURE, psf Sample Depth/El. Range Classiflcatlon Prlmary/Resldual Sample Type yd MC% C cj, "'. B-301 30.0 Clayey Sand Primary Shear ;; Remolded 98.4 11.8 478 29 ~ D B-301 30.0 Residual Shear Remolded 98.4 11.8 462 29 ~ A B-301 ·30,0 Reshear Shear Remolded 98.4 11.8 536 29 ~ gi § ~-Note: Sample lnnundated Prior To Test .. ~ GeoSoils, Inc. DIRECT SHEAR TEST ~ 57 41 Palmer Way Project: SHAPELL ~&Sf. Carlsbad, CA 92008 Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Number: 6145-A10-SC 0 Fax: (760) 931-0915 Date: July 2013 · Plate: C-2 21 g • ;;:: D 8 ... s ! :i' I-C!) 4,000 m ~ 2,000 rn ~ J: rn Sample B-301 B-301 B-301 Depth/El. Range Classlflcatlon 50.0 Clayey Sand 50.0 50.0 NORMAL PRESSURE, psf Prtmary/Resldual Sample Type t MC% C + Primary Shear Undisturbed 112.7 7.7 821 23 Resldual Shear Undisturbed 112.7 7.7 546 23 Reshear Shear Undisturbed 112.7 7.7 473 23 ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ; Note: Sample lnnundated Prior To Test 1D ~ GeoSoils, Inc. iii .~q 5741 Palmer Way t . , ~~hia. Carlsbad, CA 92008 ll! ·, ~.!.J, Telephone: (760) 438-3155 B Fax: .(760) 931-0915 ~ DIRECT SHEAR TEST Project: SHAPELL Number: 6145-A10-SC Date: July 2013 Plate: C-3 4,000 - ,3,500 3,000 2,500 ! /. ::r: I-Cl z w 2,000 ./ c::: / I-U) ~ / ::c U) 1,500 ./ ~ / 1,000 / V / / 500 ~ 0 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 NORMAL PRESSURE, psf Sample Depth/EL Range Classification Primary/Residual Sample Type % MC% C 4P "' . B-305 10.0 -Sandy Clay Primary Shear Undisturbed 99.9 24.7 367 26 ;;- ;: D B-305 10.0 Residual Shear Undisturbed 99.9 24.7 361 26 ti Reshear Shear Undisturbed Cl ~ ~ -, 85 Note: Sample lnnundated Prior To Test ~ ~ DIRECT SHEAR TEST ~ GeoSolls, Inc. . 5741 Palmer Way Project SHAPE LL· ~ es~ Carlsbad, CA 92008 ~ · S Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Number: 6145-A10-SC o Fax: (760) 931-0915 Date: July 2013 Plate: C-4 gi 0.0 --~ ~ "" I'--" 0.5 I"..__ "' ~ 1.0 I'\ 1.5 I\ 2.0 * ·~ \ ;;i "" ~ 2.5 " \ " I'---. Cl) ~ 3.0 \ ~ ~ \ r-----.... ~ --r---3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 100 1,000 10,000 STRESS,psf Sample Depth/El. Vlsual Classification yd MC MC H20 Initial lnltlal Flnal g • B-304 5.0 Clayey Sand 116.6 15.0 14.3 1000 ;:: ij ~ ~ ~ Stress at which water was added: 1000 psf i Strain Dtfference: -----0.04% <D CONSOLIDATION TEST ! GeoSolls, Inc. ~ ~ 57 41 Palmer Way Project SHAPELL i est-Cartsbad, CA 92008 ,, Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Number: 6145-A10-SC . Fax: (760) 931-0915 Date: July 2013 -Plate: C-5 !!l 0.0 --~ ~ "' "' 0.5 " :~ 1.0 \ \ 1.5 \ 2.0 \ \ * z ~ 2.5 \ (/) - 3.0 ·~ \ "' "'-, 3.5 '--\ ~ ~ \ 4.0 ------\ ----o 4.5 5.0 100 1,000 10,000 STRESS,psf Sample Depth/El. Visual Claaalflcation 'Y.i MC MC H20 Initial Initial Final E • B-304 10.0 Clayey Sand 106.4 15.6 19.6 1000 ~ 8 I I ~-- gi ~ Stress at which water was added: 1000 psf ~-Strain Difference: ----4.99999999999999E-02% .. CD CONSOLI DA llON TEST ~ GeoSoils, Inc. es 5741 Palmer Way Project: SHAPELL Carlsbad, CA 92008 -~ I-Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Number: 6145-A10-SC Fax: (760) 931,0915 Date: July 2013 Plate: C-6 !!l •• _,_·-.. ; -.i ' Sample Depth/El. • B-304 15.0 Clayey Sand Stress at which water was added: 1000 psf Strain Difference: 0.02% ;;; GeoSoils, Inc. ~ . 57 41 Palmer Way I ~a!._ Carlsbad, CA 92008 ~~:r;;, Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Fax: (760) 931-0915 !11 STRESS,psf Vlsual Classification MC MC H20 Initial Initial Final 110.3 17.7 16.4 1000 CONSOLIDATION TEST Project: SHAPELL Number. 6145-A10-SC Date: July 2013 ---·· -Plate: C-7 -- -0.0 - --------- -------I'----I"--'1 ~ 0.5 ~ ~ 1.0 ~ 1.5 \ \ j 2.0 ·~ '-\ I'--I"--I\ " ~ #. z ~ 2.5 f\ ~j---____ \ (I) . ~ i---------_ ~ r-----.. 3.0 --------- 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 100 1,000 10,000 STRESS,psf -----·' Sample Depth/EL Vlsual Classification yd MC MC H20 Initial Initial Final ~ e B-305 5.0 Clayey Sand 114.3 16.6 15.6 1000 i -en :::J ~ Stress at which water was added: 1000 psf l Strain Difference: ----0.01% .; CONSOLIDATION TEST ~ GeoSoils, Inc. ~ es 5741 Palmer Way Project SHAPELL Carlsbad, CA 92008 r I-Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Number: 6145-A10-SC __ Fax: (760) 931-0915 _ Date: July 2013 Plate: C-8 !!2 ~ -~ U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES I U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS I HYDROMETER B 4 3 2 1.5 1 314 1/2 3 i 6 a10 141B 21 30 4I 50 60 100140200 100 I II I I I • I I --r--::l::,~ ... --~ ~ I 95 '-1-,,1 \ ~ 90 I\ \ 85 • t 80 \ 75 ~ • · .. 70 \ ~65 (!) \ ~60 \. 5j 55 \ 0::: W5Q \ z u::: 45 !z ~40 0::: ~35 • 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS COBBLES I GRAVEt · SAND I I I I I SILT OR CLAY coarse fine coarse medium fine Sample Depth Range Visual Classlflcatlon/USCS CLASSIFICATION LL PL Pl Cc Cu • B-302 10.0 SIity Sand D B-302 50.0 aay ... B-303 30.0 Clayw/ Sand • B-303 47.0 Sandy Clay "' Sample Depth D100 D60 D30 D10 %Gravel %Sand %Silt I %Clay Ne ~ 8-302 10.0 9.5 0.174 02 67.5 32.3 tiD B-302 50.0 2 0.0 5.0 95.0 C) ~ ... B-303 30.0 4.75 0.0 28.3 71.7 gi. B-303 47.0 4.75 0.086 0.0 47.9 52.1 ~ i GeoSoils, Inc. GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION "' ~ est-57 41 Palmer Way Project: SHAPELL Carlsbad, CA 92008 z Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Number: 6145-A10-SC ~ C) Fax: (760) 931-0915 Date: _July 2013 Plate: C-9 22 U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES I U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS I HYDROMETER 6 4 3 2 1.5 1 314 112. 3 l 6 610 1416 20 30 40 50 60 100140200 100 I II I I I - I ~ 1-:: I I I "' 95 \ ~t---1\ \ ~\ 90 \ II 85 ~ \\ 80 \ 75 I 70 \ \ ,\ ~65 \~ CJ I [ij 60 \ t ~ £Ii 55 \ \ ~ 0::: W5Q z U: 45 • !z \ \ ~40 0::: 'ii ~35 \ \ 30 25 \. ~ 20 15 10 5 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS I-~-- COBBLES I GRAVEL SAND I I I I SILT OR CLAY coarse fine coarse mecllum fine Sample Depth Range Visual Classlflcation/USCS CLASSIFICATION LL PL Pf Cc Cu • B-304 5.0 Clayey Sand D B-304 10.0 Clayey Sand .... B-304 15.0 Clayey Sand + B-304 20.0 Clayey Sand !'.: Sample Depth D100 D60 D30 D10 %Gravel %Sand %Slit I %Clay ~-B-304 5.0 9.5 0.139 0.4 53.3 46.3 ~D B-304 10.0 9.5 0.159 0.1 54.7 45.2 L, ~ .... B-304 15.0 4.75 0219 0.0 63.6 36.4 gi + B-304 20.0 4.75 0.542 0204 0.0 79.9 20.1 -, 0.. ~ i GeoSolls, Inc. GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION C> i I i fe&i- 57 41 Palmer Way Project: SHAPELL Carlsbad, CA 92008 Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Number: 6145-A10-SC Fax: (760) 931-0915 Date: July 2013 Plate: C -10 · l!l U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES I U.S. SIEVE NUMBERS I HYDROMETER 6 4 3 2 1.6 1 314 1 ~ 3 6 9101416 20 30 40 5060 100140200 +, 100 I II I I I ;,-~ ~ I I I 95 ~~ ~ ,, 90 ). It\ 85 \ )i 80 ·~\ 75 70 \\ ~65 \ (!) ,\ ~60 ~\ ~55 \ ~ c::: ~ W5Q z \ I ~45 ~ I\ z I, ~40 c::: ~35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS COBBLES I GRAVEL SAND I I I I I SILT OR CLAY coarse fine coarse medium fine Sample Depth Range Vlsual ClasaificaUon/USCS CLASSIFICATION ,LL PL Pl Cc Cu • B-305 5.0 Clayey Sand D B-305 10.0 Sandy Clay ... B-305 16.0 Clayey Sand !'.? Sample Depth D100 D60 D30 D10 %Gravel %Sand %Slit I %Clay " . c=: B-305 5.0 9.5 0.142 0.9 50.5 48.7 80 B-305 10.0 4.75 0.116 0.0 49.0 51.0 ~ ... B-305 16.0 9.5 0.155 0.3 57.5 422 gi fu i -GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION a, GeoSoils, Inc. !G,Sf. 57 41 Palmer Way Project: SHAPELL Carlsbad, CA 92008 Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Number: 6145-A10-SC ffi Fax: (760) 931-0915 Date: July 2013 Plate: C -11 l!l -- AP Engineering & Testing,. Inc. 20 1--------1 ----- ~ 15 .. -----·-------!---•---------------- -t---',--2'-,#<f----ia-+-::r---t-----,----;.---t----+1-e-Corifining Pressu~ = 40:0 psi 0 s 10 15 3° Failure Criteria: 5% Axial Strain ~ 20-t---l ~ C/l ,fll w 0: 1-(/) 0: ~ I C/l 15 C= 0.50 ksf C= 0.60 ksf 5 - 20 25 30 p' (ksf) 35 40 -e-conflning Pressure= ·60.Q psi --6-Conflniog Pressure= ao.o psi 45 50 55 ._ . • 60 . I _ _,_ __ ,_,_ .. __ , ____ --. --. . ' • . . . ' ' o ..................... ...-............... ~ ............................. ..-........ ....-4--............. --....................................... +·-.-.----....... ...__..,-+-....... .,..._.. 0 Project Name. Project No.: Test Pit: Sample No.: Depth (ft): 5 :10 Shapell 6145-A9-SC 8-301 86 15 20 25 30 35 NORMAL STRESS (ksf) 40 45 50 Sample Type: Mod. Cal, Sample Descnption: Sandstpne Avg. Dry Lin.it Weight (pct): 125.'2. Avg. Initial Moisture Content(%): 5.5 55 Confining Pressures:. 40.0, '60.Q, 80.0 psi 60 CU TRIAXIAL MULTI-STAGE TES:Ji WITH PORE PRESSURE MEASUREMJ:NT ASTM D4767 W.O. 614!5-A10-SC PLATE C-12 AP Engfneer(ng '&-Testing Inc. 15~--- ·er . a= 2.50 ksf 5' 0 5 10 2° Failure Criteria: 5% rocfal strain 15 -·- c-II) ~ ti) ffi a: 10 ~ a: ~ J: ti) .5 15 20 p' (ksf) t · I 25 -&-Confining Pressure ='25.0 psl -&-Conflnin; Pressure =-45.0. psi ---its-Confining Pressure= 65.0 psi 30 35· 40 q--............. ---.-.. ............................. __ ........ _........, __ ....... ___ ....... _____ ......,~-------...-1i,,....,.-.----.--............. -.-........-t I) Project Name:· Proje.ct Ng :: Test Pit: Sample No.: Depth.(ft): 5 Shapell 6145-A9-SC B-302 ·55 10 15· 20 25 30 35 40 NORMAL ST8ESS (ksO Sample Type: Mod. Cal. Sampte Description; Claystone Avg. Dry Unit Weight (pct): 125.5 Avg, 'lnitiai Moisture Content(%): 8.8 Confining_ Pfessures; 25.0, 45,Q, 65.0 psi: CU TRIAXIAL MULTI-STAGE TEST WITH PO'RE PRESSURE 'MEASUREMJ:NT ASTM 04767 - W.O. 614!5-A10-SC PLATE C-13 AP Engineerrng & Testing Inc. 4 a=-0.50 ksf--.-I --1- 2 -f---':All~'--...g,..---+-'-==-+--~'---+-----H~Confining Pressure =7,0 psi n 2 4 6 12 Failure Criteria: 5o/o A>cial Strain 8 -- ,6 4 -- 2 0 0 2 C = b.80 ksf C' = 1.20 ksf 4 8 8 10 12 14 p' (ksf) 10 12 14 NORMAL STRESS (ksfl -S-Conflning Pressure = 15.0. psi :,--6-Confining Pressure= 30.0 psi 16 48 20 22 16 18 20 Project Name: Shapell Sample Type: Mod.Cal. Project No.: 6145-A9-SC-Sample Description: Clay Test Pit: 8-303 Avg. Dry Un1t Weight (pcf), 108.7 Sample No.: Avg. lhitial Moisture Content {°lo): 18.2 Depth (ft): 15 Confining Pressures: 7.0, 15.0, 30.0 psi CU TRIAXIAL MULTI-STAGE TEST WITH PORE PRESSURE 'MEASUREMENT ASTM 0·4767 24 24 W.O. 614!5-A10-SC PLATE,C-14 : .... . ·: ; ,,,,. .,: ..... ,.... . •/ \; AP Englneerfng a Testing Inc. 8 e C rn ~ a= 1.60 ksf --: .CT 4 2 ,._---,::;;...,-=--,;c=---+--¥11-'---i---l---+----;-----t------,-e-eonfining Pressure= ~ 0.0 psi 0 2 4 s: 8 12 Failure Criteria: 5% AJcl;:il Strain 10 p' (ksf) 12 -e-Confining Pressure =-'2S.O psi :-tr-Confining Pressure= 40:0 psi 1-4 16 18 20 ~ 8 .. ___ , -~-+---1----1----l---··------,---,,---,----,::;; .. -1 =----. ~- m· --~ ,6 (IJ Q'. . ~ C = 1.'60·ksf C' = i 70 ksf -~ 4 .. ------~---< 0 . Project Name: Project No.~ Test Pit: Sample No;: Depth.(ft): 2 4 Shapell :B145-A9-SC B-303. 30 6 10 12 14 NORMALST~ESS (ksij ------, ----t 16 18 20 Sample Type: Mod.Cal. Sample Description; Claystone Avg. Dry Unit Weight tpcf): 114.8 Avg. Initial Moisture Content(%): 16.6 Confining Pressures: 1 O.Or25.0, 40.0 psi 24 CU TRIAXIAL MULTI-STAGE TEST WITH .PORE PRESSURE MEASURENJENT ASTM 04767 W.O. 6i45-A10-SC PLATE C-15 I . I APPENDIXD LGC V ALI.EY, INC. General Earthwork and Grading Specifications for Rough Grading 1.0 General 1.1 Intent: These General Earthwork ancl Grading Specifications are for the grading and earthwork shown on the approved grading plan(s) and/or indicated in the geotechnical ·report(s). These Specifications are a part of the recommendations contained in the geotechnical report(s). In case of conflict, the specific recommendations in the geotechnical report shall supersede these more general Specifications. Observations of the earthwork by the project Geotechnical -Consultant during the course of grading may result in new or revised recommendations that could supersede these specifications or the recommendations in the geotechnical report(s). 1.2 The Geotechnical Consultant of Record: Prior to commencement of work, the owner shall employ a qualified Geotechnical Consultant of Record (Geotechnical Consultant). The Geotechnical Consultant shall be responsible for reviewing the approved geotechnical report(s) and accepting the adequacy of the preliminary geotechnical findings, conclusions, and recommendations prior to the commencement of the grading. LGC Valley, Inc. Prior to commencement of grading, the Geotechnical Consultant shall review the "work plan" prepared by the Earthwork Contractor (Contractor) and schedule sufficient personnel to perform the appropriate level of observation, mapping, and compaction testing. During the grading and earthwork operations, the Geotechnical Consultant shall observe, map, and document the subsurface exposures to verify the geotechnical design assumptions. If the observed conditions are found to be significantly different than the interpreted assumptions during the design phase, the Geotechnical Consultant shall inform the owner, recommend appropriate changes in design to accommodate the observed conditions, and notify the review agency where required. The Geotechnical Consultant shall observe the moisture-conditioning and processing of the subgrade and fill materials and perform relative compaction testing of fill to confirm that the attained level of compaction is being accomplished as specified. The Geotechnical Consultant shall provide the test results to the owner and the Contractor on a routine and frequent basis. General Earthwork and Grading Specifica'tions Page 1 of6 . _. 1.3 .. ~ . The Earthwork Contractor: The Earthwork Contractor (Contractor) shall be qualified, experienced, and knowledgeable in earthwork logistics, preparation and processing of ground to receive fill, moisture-conditioning and processing of fill, and compacting fill. The Contractor shall review and accept the plans, geotechnical report(s), and these Specifications prior to commencement of grading. The Contractor shall be solely responsible for performing the grading · in accordance with the project plans and specifications. The Contractor shall prepare and submit to the owner and the Geotechnical Consultant a work plan that indicates the sequence of earthwork grading, the number. of "equipment'' of work and the estimated quantities of daily earthwork contemplated for the site prior to commencement of grading. The Contractor shall inform the owner and the Geotechnical Consultant of changes in work schedules and updates to the work plan at least 24 hours in advance of such .changes so that appropriate personnel will be available for observation and testing. . The Contractor shall not assume that the Geotechnical Consultant is aware of all grading operations. The Contractor shall have the sole responsibility to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish the earthwork in accordance with the applicable grading codes and agency ordinances, these Specifications, and the recommendations in the approved geotechnical report(s) and grading plan(s). If, in. the opinion of the Geotechnical Consultant, unsatisfactory conditions, such as unsuitable soil, improper moisture condition, inadequate compaction, insufficient buttress key size, adverse weather, etc., are resulting in a quality of work less than required in these specifications, the Geotechnical Consultant shall reject the work and may recommend to the owner that construction be stopped until the conditions are rectified. It is the contractor's sole responsibility to provide proper fill compaction. 2.0 Preparation o(Areas to be Filled 2.1 Clearing and Grubbing: Vegetation, such as brush, grass, roots, and other deleterious material shall be sufficiently removed and properly disposed of in a method acceptable to the owner, governing agencies, and the Geotecbnical Consultant. LGC Valley, Inc. The Geotechnical Consultant shall evaluate the extent of these removals depending on specific site conditions. Earth fill material shall not contain more than 1 percent of organic materials (by volume). No fill lift shall contain more than 10 percent of organic matter. Nesting of the organic materials shall not be allowed. If potentially hazardous materials are encountered, the Contractor shall stop work in the affected area, and a hazardous material specialist shall be informed immediately for proper evaluation and handling of these materials prior to continuing to work in that area General Earthwork and Grading Specif,cations Page2of6 .- 1 -I I I _, As presently defined by the State of California, most refined petroleum products (gasoline, diesel fuel, motor oil, grease, coolant, etc.) have chemical constituents that are considered to be hazardous waste. As such, the indiscriminate dumping or spillage of these fluids onto the ground may constitute a misdemeanor, punishable by fines and/or imprisonment, and shall not be allowed. The contractor is responsible for all hazardous waste relating to his work. The Geotechnical Consultant does not have expertise in this area. If hazardous waste is a concern, then the Client should acquire the services of a qualified environmental assessor. 2.2 Processing: Existing ground that has been declared satisfactory for support of fill by the Geotechnical Consultant shall be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches. Existing ground that is not satisfactory shall be overexcavated as specified in the following section. Scarification shall continue until soils are broken down and free from oversize material and the working surface is reasonably uniform, flat, and free from uneven features that would inhibit uniform compaction. 2.3 Overexcavation: In addition to removals and overexcavations recommended in the approved geotechnical report(s) and the grading plan, soft, loose, dry, saturated, spongy, organic-rich, highly fractured or otherwise unsuitable ground shall be overexcavated to competent ground as . evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant during grading. 2.4 Benching: Where fills are to be placed on ground with slopes steeper than 5:1 (horizontal to vertical units), the ground shall be stepped or benched. Please see the Standard Details for a graphic illustration. The lowest bench or key shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide and at least 2 feet deep, into competent material as evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant Other benches shall be excavated a minimum height of 4 feet into competent material or as otherwise recommended by the Geotechnical Consultant Fill placed on ground sloping flatter than 5:1 shall also be benched or otherwise overexcavated to provide a flat subgrade for the fill. 2.5 Evaluation/Acceptance of Fill Areas: All areas to receive fill, including removal and processed areas, key bottoms, and benches, shall be observed, mapped, elevations recorded, and/or tested prior to being accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant as suitable to receive fill. The Contractor shall obtain a written acceptance from the Geotechnical Consultant prior to fill placement A licensed surveyor shall provide the survey control for determining elevations of processed areas, keys, and benches. 3.0 Fill Material 3.1 General.: Material to be used as fill shall be essentially free from organic matter and other deleterious substances evaluated and accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to placement Soils of poor quality, such as ttiose with unacceptable gradation, high expansion potential, or low strength shall be placed in areas acceptable to the Geotechnical Consultant or mixed with other soils to achieve satisfactory fill material. LGC Valley, Inc. General Earthwork and Grading Specifications Page3of6 3.2 Oversize: Oversize material defined as rock, or other irreducible material with a maximum dimension greater than 8 inches, shall not be buried or placed in fill unless location, materials, and placement methods are specifically accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant Placement operations shall be such that nesting of oversized material .does not occur and such that oversize material is completely surrounded by compacted or densified fill. Oversize material shall not be placed within 10 vertical feet of finish grade or within 2 feet of future utilities or underground construction. 3.3 lmpo11: If importing of fill material is required for grading, proposed import material shall meet the requirements of Section 3.1. Toe potential import source shall be given to the Geotechnical Consultant at least 48 hours (2 working days) before importing begins so that its· suitability can be determined and appropria1:f: _tests performed. 4.0 Fill P'/acement and Compaction 4.1 Fill Layers: Approved fill material shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill (per Section 3.0) in near-horizontal layers not exceeding 8 inches in loose thickness. Toe Geotechnical Consultant may accept thicker layers if testing indicates the grading procedures can adequately compact the thicker layers. Each layer shall be spread evenly and mixed thoroughly to attain relative uniformity of material and moisture throughout 4.2 Fill Moisture Conditioning: Fill soils shall be watered, dried back, blended, and/or mixed, as necessary to attain a relatively uniform moisture content at or slightly over optimum. Maximum density and optimum soil moisture content tests shall be performed in accordance with the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM Test Method D1557-91). 4.3 Compaction o(Fill: After each layer has been moisture-conditioned, mixed, and evenly spread, it shall be uniformly compacted to not less than 90 percent of maximum-dry density (ASTM Test Method D1557-91). Compaction equipment shall be adequately sized and be either specifically designed for soil compaction or of proven reliability to efficiently achieve the specified level of compaction with uniformity. 4.4 Compaction of Fill Slopes: In addition to normal compaction procedures specified above, compaction of slopes shall be accomplished by backrolling of slopes with sheeps-foot rollers at increments of 3 to 4 feet in fill elevation, or by other methods producing satisfactory results acceptable to the Geotechnical Consultant Upon completion of grading, relative compaction of the fill, out to the slope face, shall be at least 90 percent of maximum density per ASTM Test Method D1557-91. 4.5 Compaction Testing: Field tests for moisture content and relative compaction of the fill soils shall be performed by the Geotechnical Consultant Location and frequency of tests shall be at the Consultant's discretion based on field conditions encountered. Compaction test locations will not necessarily be selected on a random basis. Test locations shall be selected to verify adequacy of compaction levels in areas that are judged to be prone to inadequate compaction (such.as close to slope faces and at the fill/bedrock benches). LGC Valley, Inc. General Earthwork and Grading Specifications Page4 of6 · I _J -J I I I I _I I I '_j I I I~ I I I 4.6 Frequency of Compaction Testing: Tests shall be taken at intervals not exceeding 2 feet in vertical rise and/or 1,000 cubic yards of compacted fill soils embankment In addition, as a guideline, at least one test shall be taken on slope faces for each 5,000 square feet of slope face and/or each 10 feet of vertical height of slope. The Contractor shall assure that fill construction is such that the testing schedule can be accomplished by the Geotechnical Consultant The Contractor shall stop or slow down the earthwork construction if these minimum standards are not met 4.7 Compaction Test Locations: The Geotechnical Consultant shall document the approximate elevation and horiwntal coordinates of each test location. The Contractor shall coordinate with the project surveyor to assure that sufficient grade stakes are established so that the Geotechnical Consultant can determine the test locations with sufficient accuracy. At a minimum, two grade stakes within a horiwntal distance of 100 feet and vertically less than 5 feet apart from potential test locations shall be provided. s.o Subdrain Instailation 6.0 Sulxlrain systems shall be installed in accordance with the approved geotechnical report(s), the grading plan, and the Standard Details. The Geotechnical Consultant may recommend additional subdrains and/or changes in subdrain extent, location, grade, or material depending on conditions encountered during grading. All subdrains shall be surveyed by a land surveyor/civil engineer for line and grade after installation and prior to burial. Sufficient time should be allowed by the Contractor for these surveys. Excavation Excavations, as well as over-excavation for remedial purposes, shall be evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant during grading. Remedial removal depths shown on geotechnical plans are estimates only. The actual extent of removal shall be determined by the Geotechnical Consultant based on the field evaluation of exposed conditions during grading. Where fill-over-cut slopes are to be graded, the cut portion of the slope shall be made, evaluated, and accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to placement of materials for construction of the fill portion of the slope, unless otherwise recommended by the Geotechnical Consultant LGC Valley, Inc. General Earthwork and Grading Specifica'tions Paga5of6 7.0 Trench Backfills 7.1 The Contractor shall follow all OHSA and Cal/OSHA requirements for safety of trench excavations. 7.2 All bedding and backfill of utility trenches shall be done in accordance with the applicable provisions of Standard Specifications of Public Works Construction. Bedding material shall have a Sand Equivalent greater than 30 (SE>30). The bedding shall be placed to 1 foot over the top of the conduit and densified by jetting. Backfill shall be placed and densified to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum from 1 foot above the top of the conduit to the surface. 7.3 The jetting of the bedding around the conduits shall be observed by the Geotechnical Consultant. 7.4 The Geotechnical Consultant shall test the trench backfill for relative compaction. At least one test should be made for every 300 feet of trench and 2 feet of fill. 7.5 Lift thickness of trench backfill shall not exceed those allowed in the Standard Specifications of Public Works Construction unless the Contractor can demonstrate to the Geotechnical Consultant that the fill lift can be compacted to the minimum relative compaction by his alternative equipment and methcxl. LGC Valley, Inc. General Earthwork and Grading Specifications Page 6of6 Natural Ground Proposed Grade ~ Notes: 1) Continuous Runs in Excess of 500' Shall Use 8" Diameter Pipe. 2) Final 20' of Pipe at Outlet Shall be Solid and Backfilled with Fine-grained Material. \ 12" Min. Overlap, _\-'----JJ Secured Every 6 Feet \ 6" Collector Pipe (Sched.40,Perf.PVC) 3/4" -1 1/2" Crushed Rock Proposed Outlet Detail May be Deeper Dependent upon Site Conditions 6" Perforated PVC Schedule 40 =r==~~~~=:}~--11:---3/4" -1 1/2" Crushed Rock Geo fabric (Miraf i 140N or Approved Equivalent) Remove Unsuitable Materials Geofabric (Miraf i 140N or Approved Equivalent) LGC CANYON SUBDRAINS 11/26/02 Cut Lot (Exposing Unsuitable Soils at Design Grade) 1:1 Projection To Competent Material 1:1 Projection To Competent Material Competent Material Overexcavate and Recompact Note 1: Removal Bottom Should be Graded Note 2: Where Design Cut Lots are With Minimum 2"/o Fall Towards Street or Excavated Entirely Into Competent Other Suitable Area (as Determined by Material, Overexcavation May Still be Soils Engineer) to Avoid Ponding Below Required for Hard-Rock Cond it ions or for Building Materials With Variable Expansion Characteristics. Cut/Fill Transition Lot Proposed Grade - ,,,..... -- ---1:1 Projection To Competent Material - .1l!frlt~}t?I~;,:~{tit1£~}l:;(ftt~-i*t;it)'{t:~:;:::t:,'/ ··_:,,.::.:··>:"'.''' . .'·-'\\, Co ~ot'.<f.<,.:.~ ·· ·.,,.: .. , .... e, .. · .... ·, andRecompact 1;}\J,;})°E~~~~~~~er;ol ~~:.:' ;iu!i::~:::;~~;1 (H V) LGC • I *Deeper if Specified by Soils Engineer CUT AND TRANSITION LOT OVEREXCA V ATION DETAIL Fill Slope 4' Typical ~e~0" · .-,:-: ... ,. ·•· .;. < 8' Typical --~ -.. ~--~,;:;::··:~0~::~?F/r.::·::,:···· Competent Material _ ===--' ~ater of 2% Slope o·r 1 oot Tilt Back .·.:·:"· .. ':'·,···~.".,: .. . 2' Min. j .. , ... . 15' Min. Key Width Fill-Over-Cut Slope Natural Cutf~,::nd~ 11-el" .-. •·•··•.· 4' Typ;cal ·, ~: :.r:-:.<:S?:ts\Y.:::::?.:···· ' Competent ate;'.a~ypical :::; :~101:er.:6{ i~/St6~~::; 1 t T"lt B kWidth Varies -,,."---. ·: .. .-· ... ·:. ~--~ .. ·· 5 .. ,.... oo , ac Cut-Over-Fill Slope 1:1 Projection to Competent Material 15' Min. Key Width " Construct Cut Slope First Competent Material % Slope or 1 Foot Tilt Back -----15' Min. Key Width Note: Natural Slopes Steeper Than 5:1 (H:V) Must Be Benched. LGC KEYING AND BENCHING · 11126/02 - - Deeper in Areas of Swimming Pools, Etc. Windrow Parallel to Slope Face Jetted or Flooded Approved Proposed Grade Granular Material ----~PT-~ Excavated Trench or Dozer V-cut Note: Oversize Rock is Larger than 8" in Maximum Dimension. LGC • I Section A-A' OVERSIZE ROCK DISPOSAL DETAIL l-15• Min. -l Proposed Grade \ \ \ 5' Typical Compacted Fill if Recommended by Soils Engineer I-15' Min. (30' Max.) Competent Material 2:1 (H:V) Back Cut or as , Designed by Soils Engineer ' Key Dimensions Per Soils Engineer (Typically H/2 or 15' Min) Greater of 2':'o Slope \ or 1 foot Tilt Bae -----' Perf. PVC Pipe \ Perforations Down------------.. 12" Min. Overlap, Secured Every 6 Feet \ Geofabric (Mirafi 140N -------~------ or Approved Equivalent) LGC TYPICAL STABILIZATION FILL DETAIL • I Proposed Grade \ \ \ 5' Typical Compacted Fill if Recommended by Soils Engineer 4' Typical (30' Max.) Compdent Material )-:1 (H:V) Back Cut or as Designed by Soils Engineer " Key Dimensions Per Soils Engineer \ Greater of 2% Slope ~r 1' Tilt Back ______ , Perf. PVC Pipe \ Perforations Down ------------... \ 12" Min. Overlap, Secured Everty 6 Feet --......... ~ ~~m Sched. 40 Solid PVC Outlet Pipe, (Backfilled --+---'>-___ .lfi~nfj~~~ijl and Compacted With Native Materials) l.l Outlets to be Placed Every 100' (Max.) O.C. Geofabric (Mirafi 140N ________ .,..._ ------~ or Approved Equivalent) LGC TYPICAL BUTTRESS DETAIL • I APPEND/XE . Environmental Site Manggement Plan Project No. 133023-03 Page E-1 April 29, 2014 I I I~ I I SITE MANAGEMENT PLAN RDBERTSTDN RANCH WEST, CARLSBAD TRACT NO. 1 3-03 CARLS BAD, CA. SUBMITTED TD: LGC VALLEY 28532 CONSTELLATION ROAD VALENCIA CALIFORNIA 91 355 PREPARED BY: HAVASU CONSULTING 1 0368 US HWY 395 OAK HILLS, CA 92344 APRIL 28, 201 4 HAVASU CONSULTING ROBERTSON RANCH WEST TRACT ND. 1 3·03 ENVIRONMENTAL -CIVIL CARLSBAD, CA. TABLE OF CONTENTS STATEMENT OF LIMITATIONS AND PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATION ..................................................... 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................. 4 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 5 2.0 BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................... 5 2.1 PLANNED SITE USAGE ................................................................................................................. 6 2.2 GEOLOGY AND HYDROGEOLOGY .......................................................................................... 6 2.3 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTIGATIONS ................................................ 7 2.4 KNOWN ENVIRONEMTNAL CONDITIONS .................................................................................. 7 3.0 SITE MANAGEMENT PLAN OBJECTIVES ......................................................................................... 7 3.1 SITE MANAGEMENT PLAN ........................................................................................................... 8 3.2 LOCATION OF TOXAPHENE IMPACTED SOIL ............................................................................ 8 3.3 TOXAPHENE MANAGEMENT APPROACH ................................................................................. 9 3.3.1 VOLUMES .............................................................................................................................. 9 3.3.2 OBSERVATIONS ..................................................................................................................... 9 3.3.3 AIR MONITORING ............................................................................................................... 10 3.3.4 CONFIRMATION SAMPLING .............................................................................................. 11 3.3.5 CLOSE OUT ......................................................................................................................... 12 4.0 HEALTH AND SAFETY GUIDELINES AND PROP 65 NOTIFICATION .............................................. 12 4.1 GENERAL ................................................................................................................................... 12 4.2 COMMUNITY HEALTH AND SAFETY PLAN ................................................................................ 13 4.3 SITE SPECIFIC HEALTH AND SAFETY PLAN ............................................ · .................................... 14 4.3.1 DAILY SAFETY MEETING ...................................................................................................... 14 4.3.2 EXCAVATION SIDE WALLS ................................................................................................. 14 4.3.3 WATER ................................................................................................................................. 15 4.3.4 STOCKPILES ......................................................................................................................... 15 4.3.5 RAIN ..................................................................................................................................... 15 4.3.6 EQUIPMENT DECONTAMINATION ..................................................................................... 16 4.3.7 DUST CONTROL .................................................................................................................. 16 4.3.8 UNANTICIPATED CONDITIONS AND IDENTIFIED DEBRIS .................................................. 18 5.0 MANAGEMENT OF SITE MANAGEMENT PLAN ........................................................................... 18 I 5.1 RESPONSIBILITIES ........................................................................................................................ 18 J 5.2 NOTIFICAITON ........................................................................................................................... 19 5.3 MODIFICATIONS TO SITE MANAGEMENT PLAN ...................................................................... 19 6.0 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................. 20 Page 1 HAVASU CONSULTING ROBERTSON RANCH WEST TRACT NO. l 3-03 ENVIRONMENTAL -CIVIL FIGURES Plate 1 Supplemental Soll Sample Location Map (GSI 2011) Figure 2 Site Map (GSI 2011) Plate 1 Site Map (GSI 2014) APPENDICES CARLSBAD, CA. · Appendix A DEH approved Community Health and Safety Plan and Site Specific Health and Safety Plan Page2 . I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I HAVASU CONSUL.TING ROBERTSON RANCH WEST TRACT NO. 1 3-03 ENVIRONMENTAL -CIVIL CARLSBAD, CA. STATEMENT Of LIMITATIONS AND PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATION This Site Management Plan (SMP) was prepared for the sole use of LGC Valley pertaining to Robertson Ranch West, Cortsbad Tract No. 13-03, Carlsbad. California. The information presented herein is based solely on the agreed upon scope of work outtined in this document. Havasu Consulting (Havasu) makes no warranties or guarantees as to the accuracy or completeness of information provided or compiled by others. 11 is possible that information exists beyond the scope of this SMP. Additional information, which was not found or available to Havasu at the time of writing this document. may result in modification of the plan presented. This document is not a legal opinion. The services performed by Havasu have been conducted in a manner consistent with the level of care ordinarily exercised by members of our profession currently practicing under similar conditions. No other warranty, expressed or impned. is made. Prepared by: President Page3 HAVASU CONSULTING ROBERTSON RANCH WEST TRACT NO. 1 3·03 ENVIRONMENTAL -CIVIL CARLSBAD, CA. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Havasu Consulting .(Havasu) submits this Site Management Plan (SMP) to LGC Valley (LGC) for the Robertson Ranch West Tract No. 13-03 project located In Carlsbad, Callfomla; See Site Location Map and Geotechnlcal Map as provided In LGC's Geotechnlcal and Environmental Recommendations Report for Robertson Ranch West Tract No. 13-03 dated April 28, 2014. This document presents background site conditions, health and safety matters, and a site management plan. At the time of this SMP, the site covers approximately 211 acres and generally slopes toward the south to southwest with elevations ranging from approximately 33 feet MSL at the southeast corner of the site to approximately 224 feet MSL on the north. Hlstorlcally, site use consisted of agriculture development from approximately 1928 until the present. The site Is planned to be developed as a mixed residential and commercial development. The results of the soil analyses reported In the previous site Investigations 'performed by GeoSolls, Inc. (GSI) and other consultants determined toxaphene to be the main constituent of concern, detected at concentrations at or above California Human Health Screening Levels (CHHSLs). Therefore, toxaphene Impacted soils, their location, handling and placement, Is the main focus of this document. The elements presented In this SMP have been acquired from previously County of San Diego Department of Environmental Health (DEH) approved work plans, health and safety plans, and environmental reports prepared by GSI and other consultants as lnqlcated in Section 6 - References. Havasu Consulting has been retained by LGC Valley as the environmental consultant for this scope of work (Environmental Consultant-of-Record) for the subject site and as such accepts the findings, conclusions, and recommendations contained within the above referenced DEH approved reports except as modified herein. Page 4 _, -, I I HAVASU CONSULTING ROBERTSON RANCH WEST TRACT NO. 1 3·03 ENVIRONMENTAL -CIVIL CARLSBAD, CA. 1.0 INTRODUCTION . This section of the report summarizes the environmental aspects of the project site and Includes Havasu's review of the reports and documents forwarded to Havasu by LGC Valley; additional documents within LGC Valley's In-house library or obtained by LGC Valley for review; and LGC Valley's field reviews of the site preformed over the past several weeks. The specific purpose of this SMP Is to provide Information regarding known en.vlronmental conditions at the site and to outline general procedures related to soil management at the site. As such, this SMP presents a summary of the site background, Including environmental sampling Information, a summary of the known environmental conditions, and procedures and requirements for soil management at the site. The elements presented In this SMP have been acquired and summarized from previously County of San Diego Department of Environmental Health (DEH) approved work plans, health and safety plans, and environmental reports prepared by GeoSolls, Inc (GSI) and other consultants as Indicated In the references section. If additional environmental Information becomes available or the site development configuration or proposed use changes, the SMP shall be reviewed and modified as appropriate. If the current land-use changes, It Is the responsibility of the property owner to Implement, and revise as necessary, the SMP and notify the appropriate regulatory agencies and all Involved parties. Havasu Consulting has been retained by LGC Valley as the environmental consultant for this scope of work (Environmental Consultant-of-Record) for the subject site and as such accepts the findings, conclusions and recommendations contained within the referenced DEH approved reports except as modified herein. 2.0 BACKGROUND The site covers approximately 211 acres and generally slopes toward the south to southwest with elevations ranging from '.3pproxlmately 33 feet MSL at the southeast corner of the site to approximately 224 feet MSL en the north. Page5 HAVASU CONSULTING ROBERTSON RANCH WEST TRACT ND. 1 3·03 ENVIRONMENTAL -CIVIL CARLSBAD, CA. The historical site use consisted of agriculture development from at least 1928 until the present. The type of agriculture typically Included, but was not Jlmlted to, row crops such as tomatoes, beans, squash, strawberries, and flowers. Based upon previous chemical testing of near-surface soils, detectable concentrations of restricted agricultural residues exist within some areas of the subject property. In particular, previous analytical test results identified the presence of toxaphene at concentrations that exceed the California Human Health Screening Levels (CHHSLs) for residential soils. Other pesticides, Including DOD, DOE, DDT, and Heptachlor were also Identified on the site, but were detected at concentrations below the residential CHHLSs. Therefore, toxaphene ' . Impacted soils, their location, handling and placement, Is the main focus of this document. 2.1 PLANNED SITE USAGE The site Is planned to be developed as a mixed residential and commercial development as outlined In LGC's Geotechnlcal and Environmental Recommendations ~eport for Robertson Ranch West Tract No. 13-03 dated April 28, 2014 (LGC Geotechnlcal Report). 2.2 GEOLOGY AND HYDROGEOLOGY The site geology and hydrogeology Is summarized within LGC Geotechnlcal Report and.ls well document In numerous environmental reports for the site. Based on numerous site excavations Including borings, CPTs, test pits, site mapping, and soil testing, the near-surface soil present at the site Is a loamy mix of varying proportions of clay, silt and sand with generally low permeability derived from the Santiago Formation, which occurs at depth throughout most of the site. Alluvium, both recent and older alluvial flood- plain/terrace deposits and colluvlum are located within the canyon bottoms and lower hillsides of the site. Recently excavated deep bucket auger borings within site bedrock did not encounter a constant ground water source across the site, though random areas of seepage/perched ground water were encountered. Within the alluvium that occurs at the base of the hillsides and within the canyons, site-wide depth to groundwater Is anticipated to be encountered at Page6 I I I I I I i I I -1 I L HAVASU CONSULTING ROBERTSON RANCH WEST TRACT ND. 1 3-03 ENVIRONMENTAL -CIVIL CARLSBAD, DA. depths generally ranging from 1 Oto 15+ feet below the ground surface, but Is not anticipated to be encountered during site earthwork relative to site grading for environ mental mitigation. Prior studies by GSI Indicate that the highest anticipated ground water elevation Is 45 feet MSL: and as a result, pesticide Impacted soil will not be placed below an elevation of 50 feet MSL. Pesticide Impacted soils will not be placed In areas where the future high groundwater elevation Is within five feet of the Impacted soils. 2.3 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTIGATIONS Several environmental Investigations have been performed at the site between 2006 and 2011 as shown In Section 6 -References. Speclflcally and relevant to this document, soil samples were analyzed for organochlorine pesticides by EPA Method 8081A based on observations and conclusions from Phase 1 ESAs conducted at the site by GSI. The results of the soil analyses reported that toxaphene was detected at concentrations at or above (CHHSLs). 2.4 KNOWN ENVIRONEMTNAL CONDITIONS Historical and recent environmental Investigations Indicate that the upper portion of the soil profile (upper approximate 1 to 2 feet) is Impacted with toxaphene In various locations across the site as shown on Plate 1. Other chemicals detected during various phases of review were not In concentrations that indicated a significant threat to persons or the environment. During the project update Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) and agricultural survey for Robertson Ranch West (GeoSolls, 2007), a number of hazardous materials, storage areas, and/or potential site activity/processes were noted. The results of the study was presented In the GeoSolls report dated July, 27, 2007 within the text of the report and on Figure 2. The figure showing the potential Impacted areas Is Included in LGC Geotechnlcal Report. 3.0 SITE MANAGEMENT PLAN OBJECTIVES The overall objective of this SMP Is to assure the protection of human health and the environment during site remediation work of the toxaphene Impacted soil. The SMP will be available to site personnel prior to the.Implementation of any earthwork activities to address Page7 HAVASU CONSULTING ROBERTSON RANCH WEST TRACT ND. 1 3-03 ENVIRONMENTAL -CIVIL CARLSBAD, CA. potential environmental Issues that may be associated with th'e handling of the Impacted so!I or encountering other unknown conditions as part of excavation activities. Based upon a review of site conditions, the following specific objectives were developed for the site: oo Prepare site specific guidelines for appropriate health and safety precautions for workers who may encounter Impacted soil (Site Specific Health and Safety Plan); oo Prepare guidelines for appropriate health and safety precautions for the off-site community (Community Health and Safety Plan); and oo Prepare procedures for the management of Impacted soil at the site during earthwork ' activities (Site Management Plan). 3.1 SITE MANAGEMENT PLAN This section outlines the procedures for site management that shall be Implemented during site development and earthwork activities. All work shall be performed In accordance with the requirements and protocols of the County of San Diego DEH, San Diego Air Pollution . Control District (SDAPCD), and applicable Federal. State and local age11cles under the I . supervision of a California Licensed Engineer or Professional Geologist. Fl~ld activities will be I conducted In accordance with a Site Specific Health and Safety Plan ahd Community Health and Safety Plan . . 3.2 LOCATION OF TOXAPHENE IMPACTED SOIL . Based on the site studies by GeoSolls, a map showing the pesticide-Impacted areas requiring remediation was prepared (Geosoils, 2011) that provided the estimated depth of toxaphene requiring removal on the property (See Plate 1, Supplemental So" Sample Location Map, GSI 2011). The anticipated maximum depth of excavation below existing ground surface ranges from 1 to 4 feet. Ho'f'ever, the majority of the remediation excavations will be 1 to 2 feet below the existing ground surface. Page8 - I I I HAVASU CONSULTING ROBERTSON RANCH WEST TRACT ND. 1 3-03 ENVIRONMENTAL -CIVIL CARLSBAD, CA. -. 3.3 TOXAPHENE MANAGEMENT APPROACH Prior to the starting of grading, toxaphene Impacted soils will be heavily Irrigated to minimize dust generation during grading. As.grading occurs regular wetting and watering of the pesticide Impacted soil will be performed to maintain moist soils and minimize potential dust from exiting the site or Impacting site workers. In accordance with previously approved studies providing suitable disposal locations, a map (Plate 1 -Site Map, GSI 2014) was prepared by GSI showing the planned disposal locations. The base of the toxaphene Impacted soil will be placed upon competent material that Is at least five feet above the highest anticipated groundwater elevation, while the top of the Impacted soil will be covered by Mlrafi 140 fabric or suitable Impacted-soils delineation method as approved by the DEH to be used as a marker of the impacted soil's location. Based on a review of project environmental documents, the Impacted soil will be placed at least two feet below the deepest underground utility and/or at least 12 feet below the proposed street finish grade elevation (whichever Is deeper) within the street right-of-ways. In addition, based on GSl's conclusions of the anticipated highest groundwater elevation of 45 feet (MSL), no Impacted soil shall be placed below an elevation of 50 feet MSL These locations will result In toxaphene soils In proposed street areas approximately between 12 and 20 plus feet below site design grades. Non-Impacted or clean soil excavated during the mltlga_tlon process or elsewhere on site Is proposed to be used for capping these soils. 3.3.1 VOLUMES At this time, It Is approximated that 94,622 cubic yards of toxaphene Impacted soil are located on site (GeoSolls, 201 O). Based on the site plan, there Is sufficient space In the street right-of-way areas Indicated on the attached Plate 1 -Site Map (GSI 2014) to place these soils; If additional Impacted soils are encountered based on subsequent testing, site mining at these locations can be performed to accommodate any excess toxaphene Impacted soils. 3.3.2 OBSERVATIONS Real-time observations, random sampling, and confirmation sampling will be conducted at the site under the supervision of a Callfomla Llcensep Engineer or Professional Geologist to ensure that mltlgqtlon objectives are met (the removal and burial of toxaphene Impacted Page9 HAVASU CONSULTING ROBERTSON RANCH WEST TRACT-ND. 1 3-03 ENVIRONMENTAL -CIVIL CARLSBAD, CA. soils). Excavation vertflcatlon sampling will consist of one to two soil samples per Impacted . ·-.. --. area to verify complete removals. A site specific-work plan will address the conformation sampling and the requirements to eventually get closure of the pesticide Impacted soil. 3.3.3 AIR MONITORING Initially, during the first three or four days of excavation and soil disposal activities, samples wlll be collected at six locations based on predominant wind patterns at the perimeter of the Site and near the excavation and stockpile/reuse areas to evaluate background airborne concentrations of toxaphene and dust particulate concentrations. Dust meter readings at the metering stations every hour during earthwork operations as the excavation and disposal operations proceed. Wind direction and speed monitoring wlll be conducted on a dally basis and whe~ significant direction and speed changes using a portable apparatus and documented. Weekly air sampling (more If necessary) would continue after the Initial 3 to 4 day startup and will be conducted from all six air monitoring stations, however, only the downwind air monitoring stations would be submitted for laboratory analysis, provlded,the wind direction remains relatively consistent during the sampling period. The weekly air ~amples collected from the other locations (the crosswind or upwind samples) will submitted to lab and placed on hold. The perimeter air monitoring will be performed until confirmation samples Indicate that the mitigation criteria have been met and the placement of a clean soil cap overlying the toxaphene Impacted soil has been constructed. Based on the results of the air monitoring for toxaphene and the total dust readings during the Initial days of excavation and soil disposal activities, the data wlll be evaluated and statistically assessed whether or not there ls a correlation between concentrations of toxaphene and total dust measurements. If a direct correlation Is established, and action level for toxaphene will be established based on the relationship of the total dust measured as total particulate concentrations In air to toxaphene concentrations. lihe established action level will be total dust measurement at which toxaphene concentrations are below ' - the modified RSL. Page10 _ I I I'--' I I_ ~I I I HAVASU CONSULTING ROBERTSON RANCH WEST TRACT ND. 1 3-03 ENVIRONMENTAL -CIVIL CARLSBAD, CA. Total dust reac:!lngs that exceed the lowest of the established action levels will trigger Increased dust suppression efforts at the Site or a halt In construction operations. The DEH (or SDAPCD, If applicable) Project Manager will be notified of air sampling exceedances the next business day. The notlflcatlons will Include the action taken to abate the exceedance and follow-up sampling must be conducted and reported to ensure abatement activities were successful. Meetings will be conducted with the developer and grading contractor to discuss the soil disposal plan, air monitoring, sequencing, and duration of work. If any Information changes that may Impact perimeter air monitoring, the DEH will be contacted and an addltional addendum to the Community Health and Safety Plan will be submitted to the DEH for approval. 3.3.4 CONFIRMATION SAMPLING Approximately 35 random representative soil samples consisting of one or two soll samples per Impacted area will be collected from the base of the excavation In each segment excavated to verify that toxaphene has been removed to the site cleanup levels. If toxaphene Is detected above the site cleanup levels at any location, additional excavation will occur until the toxaphene Is removed to the site cleanup level. Additional verification sampling will occur at that location to further confirm removal. As an added level of verification foll<;:>wlng the completion of remedial activities and site grading, representative soil samples will be collected from fifteen random locations throughout the site. Soll samples will be collected from the shallow subsurface at a depths of Oto 3 feet below ground surface below the designed finished grade and analyzed for residual pesticides using EPA Test Methods 8081 A. Verification sample results from the surface will be used to evaluate that no pesticides Impact above site cleanup levels exist within the fill to be In contact with occupants and construction workers. Page11 HAVASU CONSULTING ROBERTSON RANCH WEST TRACT ND. 1 3-03 ENVIRONMENTAL -CIVIL CARLSBAD, CA. 3.3.5 CLOSE OUT Once the remed~al objectives as defined by GSI and approved by DEH have been verified, no further remedial excavation will occur In those areas. If subsequent toxaphene Is detected at any of the known locations, additional excavation will occur until the toxaphene ·Is removed as verified by supplemental testing. Upon the completion of all environmental mitigation activities, an as-built map will be prepared indicating the locations and depth of Impacted soll placed on the property and Included In a final closure report. 4.0 HEALTH ANID SAFETY GUIDELINES AND PROP 65 NOTIFICATION 4.1 GENERAL Health and safety Is the responsibility of the entity performing any subsurface Intrusion. Therefore, a slte-spectflc health and safety plan (HSP) that confirms to the requirements of all federal, state, and local regulations and codes shall be developed by all contractors for activities that encounter Impacted soil at the site. This plan should describe the Intrusive activities and address standard safety precautions such as protective measures for workers I and soil handling methods. The HSP will describe the minimum standards; that shall be adhered to during Intrusive site activity; It shall be Jhe responsibility of the contractor to ensure that these standards and other precautions, as necessary, will be Implemented throughout the course of any Intrusive activity. ·- Chemicals ldenttfled under California's Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 (Proposition 65) have been detected In soil at the site. Proposition 65 notifications are required If the estimated exposure to a person exceeds State of California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) ·safe harbor level~ (SHL). SHLs are called no significant risk levels (NSRLs) for chemicals classified as carcinogens, and maximum allowable dose levels (MADLs) for chemicals with reproductive end points. It Is recommended that a contractor Independently evaluate the need for Proposition 65 nottflcation to their workers. It also Is recommended that the contractor provide their own evaluation on the need for Proposition 65 notification associated with other activities under Page12 I -J HAVASU CONSULTING ROBERTSON RANCH WEST TRACT NO. 1 3-03 ENVIRONMENTAL -CIVIL CARLSBAD, CA. their control. Such·actlvltles may Involve exposure Issues beyond the presence of chemicals In soil at the site, for example but not limited to, equipment diesel exhaust In air. As per the County of San Diego DEH, air and dust monitoring prior to and during the Impacted soil remediation will be required as part of environmental consultant's services. Contractors engaged In work activities at the site shall conduct area specific or personal air monitoring using particulate meter. The specific site air-monitoring program Is outlined In this report and the project HSP for the site and should be Incorporated Into the remediation contractors' own HSP. The action levels shall be determined by the contractor's HSP. Should monitoring Indicate the need for respiratory protection, the contractor shall Immediately cease work In the area and notify the Owner. To reduce worker exposure to contaminated dust, all heavy equipment should have closed cabs with positive pressure. During handling of toxaphene Impacted soils, If open air cabs are used and/or If workers are on the ground, respirators with NIOSH approved cartridges such as N100 or better filter cartridges or equivalent as deemed appropriate by the contractor should be used. 4.2 COMMUNITY HEALTH AND SAFETY PLAN The Community Health and Safety Plan provides guidance awareness of the handling of known and unknown hazards that may be encountered at the site, as well as provide guidance for a safe work environment for the public. The Plan helps reduce exposure to chemicals by: oo Reducing community exposures to potential hazards and nuisances caused by site work through planning, performing and recording mitigation measures; oo Promoting community awareness of the proposed remedlat'lon project, such that the public can help protect themselves, and; oo Monitoring and mitigating potential public hazards and nuisances caused by the site work that may migrate offslte, such as dust. The area surrounding the subject site Is an active urban environment. Site access will need to be enforced especially during site grading and handling of toxaphene Impacted soil. It Is anticipated that the site will restrict access to authorized personnel only. Based on the Pag,e13 HAVASU CONSULTING ROBERTSON RANCH WEST TRACT NO. 1 3-03 ENVIRONMENTAL -CIVIL CARLSBAD, CA. contaminants of ccmcem Identified at the site, the primary health and safety Issue associated with the planned remedial excavation activities under this SMP will be proper control of dust during site grading activities. A copy of the DEH approved Community Health and Safety plan Is Included In Appendix A. 4.3 SITE SPECIFIC HEALTH AND SAFETY PLAN The following Health and Safety Plan Is to be followed by all LGC Valley personnel and their sub consultants during the Impacted soil mitigation excavation process and should be used as a guide along w'ith the DEH approved Health and Safety Plan In Appendix A. It Is the Intent of the Health· and Safety Plan to address risks associated with the site, surrounding area, and proposed activities. The health and safety guidelines In this plan were prepared specifically for this site, Its conditions, and Its purposes, and It can be amended If conditions change. The DEH approved Health and Safety Plan Is included In Appendix A. 4.3.1 DAILY SAFETY MEETING Prior to commencing work each day, a Dally Safety Meeting wlll be performed with all employees and subcontractors conducted by the Owner's Representative or the Remediation Contractor. The purpose of the meeting will be to Inform all employees and subcontractors of proper working procedures, site specific hazards, and emergency procedures. All workers must acknowledge that the Health and Safety Plan was reviewed prior to commencement of dally activities. 4.3.2 EXCAVATION SIDE WALLS Any excavation of toxaphene impacted soil that requires deep removals that result In side walls In excess of five feet In height will need to be sloped to a minimum 1 :1 (Horizontal to Vertical) Inclination to avoid the potential of failure Into the work area. As the excavations are relatively shallow to their overall area (generally one to two feet In d~pth), the potential Impact from this condition Is possible and should be evaluated by the Project Geologist on a regular basis. Modifications to this recommendation may be made by the Project Geologist or Geotechnlcal Engineer after appropriate analysis has been performed. Page14 I I I I I _I HAVASU CONSULTING ROBERTSON RANCH WEST TRACT ND. 1 3·03 ENVIRONMENTAL -CIVIL CARLSBAD, CA. 4.3.3 WATER The liberal use of water should be performed during site earthwork to help ensure that dust Is controlled prior to and during soll pick-up, transport and placement to reduce the potential for dust migrating around the site or off the site. Watering should occur prior to soil pick-up In the affected area to reduce dust migration during transport. 4.3.4 STOCKPILES If stockpiles are formed with toxaphene solls, the location of the stockplle should be assessed In order to assure that no toxaphene remains at the stockpile location. The only alternative to this condition is If the stockpile is located atop another toxaphene-impacted area. The top layer of stockpiles should be kept moist to develop a crust each day In order to keep dust to a minimum and an SDAPCD approved Impacted soil stockpile dust suppression or SDAPCD accepted or permitted cover should be used. Stock piled soils should not extend higher than a water truck can easily water the entire pile (anticipated to be approximately 8 to 12 feet in height). Toxaphene impacted stockpiles should be surrounded and flagged with ribbon or other similar measure to Indicate their presence and location to all on site personnel. Workers should be careful not to disturb or enter these areas unless required to do so through work operations. It Is anticipated tt:iat toxaphene Impacted soils will be "handled· with scrapers, dozers, loaders and other similar machines and not handled directly by persons performing work other than the site Engl~eer or Geologist over-seeing operations and the Implementation of these measures and then only while wearing appropriate personal protective clothing. 4.3.5 RAIN If site development Is required during rainy periods, care should be taken to minimize the negative effects of run-off which could carry toxaphene Impacted soil off site. Please note that the regulating agency may recommend that no work be conducted when the potential for rain Is above 40 percent. Educated Judgment should be used to determine the significance of every potential rainfall event and how It might affect the remedial grading activities. tf any significant rains are forecast anytime during site grading, berms wlll need to Page15 HAVASU CONSULTING ROBERTSON RANCH WEST TRACT NO. 1 3·03 ENVIRONMENTAL -CIVIL CARLSBAD, CA. be con_structed around the perimeter of all stockpl!~s to control the potential for soils migrating away from the stockpile area through a water medium. If a significant rainfall event Is forecast, sheeting should be used to cover stockpile soils to reduce the potential for erosion and random migration of these soils. An appropriate SWPPP should be prepared for the site and followed accordingly. 4.3.6 EQUIPMENT DECONTAMINATION Equipment contacting native soil shall require decontamination prior to leaving the site. To minimize equlpmen't requiring decontamination, earthwork activities shall utilize dedicated equipment. If vehicles are exposed to native soil, decontamination procedures shall Include removing loose soil from the vehicle's exterior with brooms or brushes. Soll not remove_d by brushing shall be removed by washing at an appropriately placed decontamination area, likely near the entrance. Water from the cleaning processes shall be collected and contained on site. To ensure that Impacted soil ls not carried offslte, all vehicles and equipment should be Inspected prior to exiting the site. If significant amounts of soil are trapped within the tries or under-carriage of vehicles, the soil should be removed prior to the vehicle exiting the site. During and at the e.nd of each day any soil deposited outside the exit of the site will be swept· up and returned to the property for onslte management. 4.3.7 DUST CONTROL When earthwork activities occur, dust control measures shall be Implemented to minimize dust generation. Standard dust control measures will be employed per, but not limited to, SDAPCD guidelines. Professional Judgment should be exercised. The Contractor shall be responsible for the mitigation of dust during any construction activities. If visible dust Is observed at the perimeter of the site boundaries as a result of on-site construction activities or If sensitive receptors are present during construction activities, the Contractor shall enhance mitigation measures to eliminate the presence of visible dust at the site boimda·ry. Page16 ~' i I I I : I ,_) HAVASU CONSULTING RDBERTSDN RANCH WEST TRACT ND. 1 3-03 ENVIRONMENTAL -CIVIL CARLSBAD, CA. During excavation and stockpiling activities, copious amounts of water must be applied to the soil prior to and during grading In order to suppress dust particles from becoming air- borne. Additionally, toxaphene Impacted soil must not be disturbed If winds exceed about 13 miles per hour (mph) or as directed by the DEH and/or SDAPCD. All stockpiled soils must be covered with heavy grade plastic sheets while water suppression Is not employed or a SDAPCD approved (or permitted) method for dust suppression, particularly during non- working hours during non-working hours. During excavation activities, site workers will Implement the best engineering controls available in the Industry to manage dust emissions. The following table summarizes the control measures for the different activities: Stockpiles Off-Site Perimeter oo Apply water as necessary to maintain soil In a damp condition to ensure that visible emlsslons do not exceed 20 feet In any direction. oo Setup fences upwind, as needed. oo Stabilize soil once earth-moving activities are completed. oo Stablllze stockpiled material Add or remove material from the downwind portion of the stockpile. oo Stockpiles should not be greater than eight feet In height to allow proper water Irrigation. oo Keep materials from accumulating Immediately outside the Site. oo Sweep the Immediate surroundings continuously or on an as-needed basts. oo Apply water as required. oo Use DEHS or City approved method for mitigation and collection of dust migration onto surrounding streets (le. Street Sweeper, etc.) Page 17. HAVASU CONSULTING ROBERTSON RANCH WEST TRACT ND. 1 3-03 ENVIRONMENTAL -CIVIL CARLSBAD, CA. 4.3.8 UNANTICIPATED CONDITIONS AND IDENTIFIED DEBRIS Should unanticipated conditions be encountered during subsurface activities, such as the presence of trash, underground storage tanks, drums, or other hazardous material or debris . ~. . that does not appear Inert; the Contractor shall Immediately cease work In this area and notify the Owner of the unanticipated conditions. Work shall proceed In other areas of the site until the Owner has cleared the area for continuation of work and has notified the Contractor that the unanticipated conditions have been evaluated and mitigated, as necessary. The Contractor shall also perform notifications pursuant to Section 5.2. Phase 1 ESAs at the site Identified above ground debris resulting from site activities. Debris Included discarded agriculture/farming waste, dismantled automobiles, above ground storage tanks, and farm equipment, among other Items. At the time of the Phase 1 ESA report, some of the debris was In the process of being removed. The contractor will notify the owner of any residual debris Identified on site. Debris will be assessed fm hazard potential (discarded automotive fluids, residual pesticides in above ground tanks, etc.) and disposed of In accordance wlth applicable local, State, and Federal guidelines. All toxaphene Impacted soil shall be controlled and maintained according to this document <;1nd In accordance with all applicable provisions of the State of Callfornl,a and/or Federal Law .. The excavation of soil requires dust control measures and shall be done In accordance with, but not limited, to, California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA) and San Diego Air Pollution Control District (SDAPCD). 5.0 MANAGEMENT OF SITE MANAGEMENT PLAN This section discusses responslbllltles for managing this SMP and the circumstances under which this SMP may· be modified. 5.1 RESPONSIBILITIES The Owner or the Owner's representative shall oversee Implementation of this SMP at the site. ' In addition, the Owner or the Owner's representative shall make available a copy of the SMP . to Contractors performing earthwork at the site. T~e Contractor shall be responslble.f?r adhering to this SMP, following project speclflcatlons, and ensuring Job and site safety. An Page.18 --' --, ' I -I I I I I HAVASU CONSULTING ROBERTSON RANCH WEST TRACT ND. 1 3-03 ENVIRONMENTAL -CIVIL CARLSBAD, CA. Owner or the Owner's representative may observe Intrusive act_lvltles but Is not responsible for directing/supervising the Contractor's operations/work. The contractor Is also responsible for providing a copy of the SMP to Its subcontractors. 5.2 NOTIFICAITON Notification shall be made by the Owner or the Owner's representative to the appropriate agency depending on the environmental Issue encountered. Potential notification scenarios Include: oo Notification to the appropriate agencies If an unknown underground containment structure (e.g., UST or monitoring well) Is encountered; and oo Notification to the appropriate agencies regarding unanticipated conditions. 5.3 MODIFICATIONS TO SITE MANAGEMENT PLAN This SMP was developed based on Havasu's understanding of current conditions at the site and applicable regulations. It may be necessary to modify this SMP from time to time for any of several reasons, Including: oo Change In property use; oo Change In understanding of environmental conditions (e.g., newly identified chemicals); oo Intrusive activity that Is not addressed by this SMP; oo New chemical toxicity Information for detected constituents at the site; oo Notification of new requirements by a regulatory agency; or oo Severe weather or other unforeseen conditions. Page19 HAVASU CONSULTING RO BERTE ON RANCH WEST TRACT NO. 1 3-03 ENVIRONMENTAL -CIVIL CARLSBAD, CA. 6.0 REFERENCES California Department ofToxlc _Substances Control (DTSC), 2001, Import Advisory Clean Import FIii Material, October. 2006-12-27, Revised work plan for detailed agricultural chemical residues In soil, APN 208-010- 36, Planning Area 12 -13.44 acres, and Planning Area 13 -6.92 acres, Robertson Ranch West, Carlsbad, San Diego County, California 92010, Voluntary Assistance Case H39700-001, W.O. E5247.1-SC, dated December 27. 2007-03-22 Detailed Chemical Survey PA-12 [GeoSolls E5247.1-SC] 2007-06-07, Revised detailed agricultural chemical residue survey, APN 208-010-26, Planning Area 12 -13.44 acres, and Planning Area 13 -6.92 a_cres, Robertson Ranch West, Carlsbad, San Diego County, California 92010, Voluntary Assistance Case H39700~001, W.O. E5247.1-SC, revised date June 7. 2007-07-27, Updated phase I environmental site assessment and limited agricultural residue survey, Robertson Ranch West, Carlsbad, San Diego County, California 92010, W.O. E5491-SC, dated July 27. 2007-08-15 UPDATE Phase 1 ESA PA-23C [GeoSolls E5247.2-SC] 2007-10-17, Detailed agricultural residue survey, Robertson Ranch West, Carlsbad, San Diego County, California 92010, W.O. E5491.2-SC, dated October 17. 2007-10-25 Pesticide Disposal Area PA-23C [GeoSolls E5491.3-SC] 2007-11-20 Add'I Testing & Revised Disposal Area PA23C [GeoSolls E5491.3-SC] 2007-12-07 ADDENDUM Add'I Testing & Revised Disposal Area PA23C [GeoSolls E5491.3-SC] 2008-03-04 DEH Cas~_H397_00-001 Closure E-mall Page20 .... ~-·· .:. -- ' I ' HAVASU CONSULTING ROBERTSON RANCH WEST TRACT NO. 1 3-03 ENVIRONMENTAL -CIVIL CARLSBAD, DA. 2008-03-05 Pesticide Removal Report PA-12 [GeoSolls E524 7 .1-SC] 2008-05-13, Report of removal and replacement of pesticide affected soil during rough grading the habitat corridor. Robertson Ranch West, City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, California 92010, APN 208-010-36, DEH FIie No. H39717-001, W.O. E5247.3-SC, dated May 13. 2010-10-25, Update phase I environmental site assessment and supplemental agricultural residue survey, Robertson Ranch West, Carlsbad, San Diego County, California 92010, W.O. E5491.2-SC, dated October 25. 2010-11-01, Addendum to update phase I environmental site assessment and supplemental agricultural resldu_e su_rvey, Robertson Ranch West, Carlsbad, San Diego County, California 92010, W.0. E6145-SC, dated November 1. 2010-12-09, Addendum No. 2, update phase I environmental site assessment and supplemental agricultural residue survey, Robertson Ranch West, Carlsbad, San Diego County, California 92010, W.O. E6145-SC, dated December 9. 2011-05-04, Worl< plan for property mitigation plan, Rancho Castera (formerly Robertson Ranch West), Carlsbad, San Diego County, California 9201 O, Voluntary Assistance Case H39768-001 W.O.E6145.1-SC, dated May 4. 2011-10-10, Property mitigation plan, Rancho Castera (formerly Robertson Ranch West), Carlsbad, San Diego County, California 92010, Voluntary Assistance Case H39768-001, dated October 10. 2012-02-24, Response to DEH Review and Addendum to "Property Mitigation Plan, Rancho Castera (Formerly Robertson Ranch West), Carlsbad, San Diego County, California 92010, Voluntary Assistance Case H39768-001/ (W.0. E6145.1-SC, dated October 24, 2011), W.O. E6145.2-SC, dated February 24. 2013-09-24 1st DRAFT Response & 2nd Addendum to Mitigation Plan [GeoSolls E6145.3 SC] Page21 HAVASU CONSULTING ROBERTSON RANCH WEST TRACT ND. 1 3·03 ENVIRONMENTAL -CIVIL CARLSBAD, CA. 2013-10-29 2nd DRAFT Response & 2nd Addendum to Mitigation Plan [GeoSolls E6145.3 SC] 2013-10-29 DRAFT Plate 1 -Site Plan [GeoSolls 6145.3-SC] 2013-10-29 DRAFT Plate 2 -Cross Sections A to F [GeoSolls 6145.3-SC] 2013-10-29 DRAFT Plate 3 -Cross Sections G to O [GeoSolls 6145.3-SC] 2013-10-29 DRAFT Plate 4-Cross Sections P to Z [GeoSolls 6145.3-SC] 2013-10-29 DRAFT Prate 5 -Cross Sections AA to FF [GeoSolls 6145.3-SC] 2014-01-21, Response to DEH Review and 3rd Addendum to • Property Mitigation Plan, Rancho Castera (Formerly Robertson Ranch West), Carlsbad, San Diego County, California 92010, Voluntary Assistance Case H39768-001," (W.O. E6145.1-SC, dated October 24, 2011), W.O. E6145.4, dated January 21. Page22 I I HAVASU CONSULTING ROBERTSON RAN OH WEST TRACT NO. 1 3-03 ENVIRONMENTAL -CIVIL CARLSBAD, DA. _J FIGURES 1 I I I *1' Depth OS 2.0' Depth 0.5' 2.0' Depth 0.5' 2.0' ID th DOE 6-8' 0.013 *f 0. Decth DOE 6-8' ND *1' 0.052 DOE 0.014 0.033 DOE 0.042 ND DOE o.on ND DDE 0.021 ND S-4 DDD DDT ND ND ND 0.013 P-19 DDD DDT ND 0.060 NO ND DDT ND P-20 DOD DDT ND 0.0064 ND ND DDT ND P-21 DOD DDT ND 0.023 ND ND S-3 DOD DDT Tox Tox 0.540 0.350 Tox 0.640 ND Tox •= ND ND Tox ·-0250 ND ND NO 0.470 ND 0.015 0 - s-e ]!E DOD DDT Tox ll'w ND ND 0.360 ND 0.021 0.490 - -P-15 Depth DDE DDD DDT 0.5' 0.047 0.013 0.030 - I °::I~ ,~:i ~ ITox~I --- S-15 -- Depth DDE DDD DDT To ----·~ I 6-B' ND I ND ND ND s-v DOE 0.029 0. I 4' ND I I I Depth DOE I 0.5' ND I 20' ND I Depth DOE 6-8' 0.0078 I 'l ll'~th l ~I I I I Depth DOE I OS ND DOE 6-8' 0.023 *1' ND Depth S-31 (%) S-26 () S-16 • P-35 ~ Ji,' 2' 4' • • • I Depth DOE r.· 0.093 z ND I 4' ND DDD DDT ND 0.014 NO ND ND ND ',, ............ --------P-28 DDD DDT To ND ND ND ND ND ND DDD ND P-24 ~, P-26 DDD ND + S-8 DOD DDT Tox ND ND 0.650 -ND ND ND - DOE 0.006 Nu ND DOD ND ND ND DDT ND Depth DOE 0.5' 0.022 S-19 2.0' ND DOD DDT Toxaphene ND ND ND Nu N" ND ND ND ND LEGEND Approximate location of soil sample for pesticide chemical analysis(GSI, 2010) Approximate location of soil sample for pesticide chemical analysis(GSI, 2007) Approximate location of soil sample for pesticide chemical analysis(GSI, 2007) Approximate location of supplemental sample One foot mitigation area Two foot mitigation area Four foot mitigation area P-23 DOD DDT ND 0.019 ND ND I I I I S-25 DDT 0.052 ND ND ToxapMne 1700 ND ND :J - Laboratory test results for soil sample. Results for DOE, DOD, DDT, and Toxaphene in mg/kg ;and results for STLP (Soluble Threshold Limit Concentration) in ug/L. (ND -not detected or below laboratory test limits; --not performed at this depth) S-21 Depth DOE DDD DDT Toxaphene Y,' 0.130 ND 0.074 2.0 *f ND ND ND ND Tox 2' ND ND ND ND 0.320 4' ND ND ND ND P-18 I 0.046 I 0.0055 I 0.026 I 0280 Tox 0.210 ND 1 I I I P-27 Depth DOE DDD DDT To 0.5' ND ND ND ND 1~~,~, P-33 ~, DDT ND S-7 -DOE DOD DDT Tox ...... 6-8' ND ND ND 0.510 -•r ND ND ND ND .... DDT ND DDT ND ---·-Approximate Area of Removal A 64,567 s. f. 2,391 cu.yd. B 92,353 s.f. 6,841 cu.yd. C 829,614 s.f. 30,726 cu.yd. D 52,610 s.f. 3,897 cu.yd . E 306,852 s. f. 22,730 cu. yd. F 92,064 s.f. 13,639 cu.yd. G 294,804 s. f. 10,919 cu.yd. H 63,526 s.f. 2,353 cu.yd. I 20,279 s. f. 1,126 cu.yd. 94,622 cu.yd. Z:\~hared\AutoCAD Files\6100\E6145 Shopell Homes\E6145.1\PMP\E6145.1 -SC -PMP -Supplemental Soil Sample Location Mop -Plate 1.dwg Oct 10, 2011 11:02am 'I '"°''""' •=•we """'"" ,00,0000 '"°'~''' ,oo,_o, ,oo-~, ,oo-rn, ,oo,-,,., ,oo,,wo,, ,ooM,,a, P-12 Depth DOE DOD DDT Tox OS 0.110 0.023 0.130 0.990 ii: -- 2.0' ND ND ND ND P-13 Depth I DOE I DDD I DDT I Tox -OS I 0.051 I 0.017 I 0.065 I 0240 -- P-14 Depth DOE DOD DDT Tox 0.5' 0.047 ND 0.140 0.780 20' ND ND ND ND P-32 Depth I DOE I DOD I DDT ITox 15' I 0.022 I ND I 0.023 I 0250 S-20 Depth DOE ODD DDT Toxaphene Ji,' ND ND ND ND z ND ND ND ND 4' ND ND ND ND P-30 DDT ND ' ' ' \ ' ' ' ' Depth *6-8' ' * 1' I I I I I I I I ~ I r I I r r r I I r I r I r r I I I r r I I r I I I r r I r I r I I I r r I I r r r I I r r I I ,e·, -~ ~I Depth __ l _DOE_I ~rJx:i~-29~1-DDT-,T-o~-w-1 15' 0.021 ND 0.018 Depth Y:,· •r 2' 4' S-30 P-1 DOD DDT Toxaphene SYI.P Depth DOE DDD DDT To ND 0.028 0.440 -OS 0.071 ND 0.027 0.550 NO 0.017 0.230 -2.0' 0.015 ND ND ND S-13 . ' DOE 6-8' 0260 *1' 0.190 th 6-8' *1' P-16 DOE DDD 0.120 ND 0.0088 ND S-14 DOD DDT ND ND ND ND Depth l DOE I DOD I DDT I To ' 0.5' I 0.052 I 0.015 I 0.050 I 0.390 S-10 DOD DDT Tox sn.r ND 0200 2.500 -0.019 0.120 2.0 - DDT 0.073 ND Tox 0.150 ND S-31 ,~th,~, Depth DOE DOD DDT oxaphene S'I\J' *6-8" 0.050 ND 0.018 0.360 -*f 0. ND ND ND ---1.------"' y / / ><"'! '-./ sfi.P -- REVISED: 5/11/2011 S-22 DOE DOD DDT 0.052 ND 0.033 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND Toxaphene 1300 ND ND ND =!:: -- 2110..---_,.., Cm t c•wula 92010 . 780-Gl-7700 __ , __ awl C t1111Mng ........ Pr •• """"'"9 N ~- GRAPHIC SCALE 200 0 100 200 400 l""-"iiii~-~~-~' iii.iiiiiii r-;...;.. .. 1 C ~--I i "=?O:J ' P-2 DOD I i I ' + P-4 Depth DOE DDD DDT Tox · 0.5' 0.082 ND 0.028 0.850 2.0' ND ND ND ND P-3 DDD I DDT ND 0.018 S-23 Depth DOE DDD DDT Toxaphene ~tll)Qlil 8n.P x· 0.100 0.010 0.051 1.500 -~ *1' ND ND ND ND 0.029 2' ND ND ND ND -.,.. 4' ND ND ND ND -- S-29 DOE DOD DDT Toxaphene 0.048 ND 0.023 0.460 - S-24 Depth DOE DOD DDT Toxaphene STLP Y.' 0.022 ND 0.0072 0.390 -2' 0.140 ND 0.040 OJ30 1¥= 4' ND ND ND ND Depth DOE DOD S-28 DDT Toxaphene sfip 1' ND ND ND ND -.,. ' ... ' .. , ""' ~., - P-8 Depth DOE DOD DDT Tox 0.5' 0.110 ND 0.025 0.850 2.0' ND ND ND ND P-9 Depth DDE DOD DDT Tox 0.5' I 0.028 ND I 0.020 0260 Depth y,, *1' 2' 4' S-25 DOE DOD DDT Toxaphene 8m: 0.093 ND 0.052 1.700 0.027 ND 0.016 0240 -ND ND ND ND -ND ND ND NO - S-12 Depth DOE DOD DDT Toxaphene ........ x· 0.110 ND 0.063 0.670 -2' ND ND ND ND -4' ND ND ND ND - S-27 Depth DOE DOD DDT Toxaphene STI.P *f 0.058 ND 0.048 0.500 --2Y,' ND ND ND ND - ' P-6 Depth DOE DDD DDT Tox .. _ -0.5' 0.054 ND 0.033 0.470 '"' ND ND . 20' ND ND . P-7 Depth I DOE I DOD I DDT I Tox ... I 0.012 I ND I 0.010 I 0230 -S-26 Depth DOE DOD DDT Toxaphene ST\.P r.' 0.042 ND 0.021 0.160 lC *1' 0.048 ND 0.019 ND -2' ND ND ND ND -4' ND ND ND ND - S-11 I S-18 Depth DOE DOD DDT Toxaphene r.' ND ND ND ND 2' . 0.015 ND ND ND 4' ND ND ND ND ALL LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE This document or efile is not a part of the Construction Documents and should not be relied upon as being an accurate depiction of design. ~c. RIVERSIDE CO. ORANGE CO. SAiV DIEGO CO. SUPPLEMENTAL SOIL SAMPLE LOCATION MAP Plate 1 w.o. E6145.1-SC DATE: 10/11 SCALE: 1" = 200' + \\\ + + \\\ ~\ + R-.tla/Land + + + 2710 Lolllr -... w.t ... 100 Cu.lll1II, Calla• 1211)10 '7I0-831-7100 '9c'7I0-831....., ., + + + + + + + + + GRAPHIC SCALE 400 0 200 400 800 ~ .......... 1¥ ,---~, ,,, = 400' + N + ALL Loc1 r10NS ARE f PPROXIM1 TE ~ This document or efi/e is not a part of the Construction Documents and should not be relied upon as being an accurate depiction of design. ! + + + + --- RIVERSIDE CO. C. ORANGE CO. SAN DIEGO CO . SITE MAP Fi ure 2 DATE: 10/11 SCALE: 1": 400' Afr -Hoodwoy mi GS/ LEGEND Afn -Non-sfnx:turol fill Afc -Artificial fill -ploc«! 1HHW t!M obs«wtion t~fing of GS/ Qal -Quaf.moty ollwium (circled whtlre buti«I) Qt -Ouotema,y t~ <hposits (cirr:ltld w"-buri«I) Tsa -TMfio,y Santiago Formotion (circMd w!Mm buri«I) Jsp/Kgr -Jurossic Santiago ~k Volcanics and Ctwt~ grrmitics (cirr:ltld w"-buri«I) PA -Planning ,4n,o ?--lipproximm location of g«>logic contact (qllMIM ,,,,_ unct!rloin} ?• • • • • -Approximo~ location of conctK1!itd g«>logic contact (qllMIM w"-unct!rloin} ~ -Approximot, <hpfll of f'MIOvol (!Ht} HH HH' 1-------1 -lipproximot, location of g«>logic cross s«tion @ -Approxif'fl(Jf1 location of propos«I mom1onng stufion ~ -lipproximot, locofion of propos«I ~t of impoctld $()/7 with ,stimotld disposal quantity EiIBiliJ -Propoffd minld area for fl,, p/o<:MIMt of impoclld $()/7 wit// ~mot«/ disposal quantity -=--ApproxinHlf, locotion of silt f,nc, and/or filt,r roll bomtlr for ,wmova/ of impocttld $()/7 -A,A,--lipproximot, locotion of silt f,nc, and/ or filf,r roll bomtlr for flll ploclf'Mflt of impoclld soils ~ -Approxma/1! loco/ion of ~WO/JS p/ocmit!Tlt of mpocttKJ soi ((;SI, 2008) + + ~--~- T - + + + + + + GRAPHIC SCALE 400 0 200 400 800 7" = 400' --- + + -· + + + + + + -........ ,. ........ 11••- + + ALL LOCA TIONS ARE APPROX/MA TE This document or efi/e is not a part of the Construction Documents and should not be retied upon as being an accurate depiction of design. + + + + SITE MAP Plate 1 W.O. E6145.4-SC DATE: 01/14 SCALE: 1" = 400' HAVASU CONSULTING ROBERTSON RANCH WEST TRACT ND. 1 3-03 ENVIRONMENTAL -CIVIL CARLSBAD, CA. APPENDIX A I I I I ' ' ! ' . - I I I I I , .I COMMUNITY HEALTH AND SAFElY PLAN ' •' I . AND· ... _ SITE SPECIFIC HEALTH AND SAFETY PLAN I COMMUNITY HEAL 11i AND SAFETY PLAN Site Identification Portions of the site are currently developed as a nursery on 201 acres of land loeated In the northeasterly part of Carlsbad, California (the "sitej. Assessor parcel number associated with the site is 208-010-40. The site is listed as an open case with the San Diego County Department of EnvironrnentaJ Health (Case #H39768-001). The site has been proposed to be redeveloped with a residential subdMslon along with parks and a commercial center. Evaluation of Potential Public Exposure to Hazards The site consists of approximately 201 acres of land which has_ been predominantly used for agricultural purposes since prior to 1930. Since 2006, numerous subsurface pesticide investigations have been conducted on the site resulting in the collection of a total of 104 soil samples for the analysis of residual pesticides. Pesticide analysis identified localities where the presence of toxaphene, at concentrations that exceed the California Human Health Screening Levels (CHHSL.s) for residential soils. Other pesticide constituents, including 4,4-DDD, 4,4-DDE, 4,4-DDT, and Heptachlor were identified at concentrations below, action levels indicated by the CHHSL.s. Based on the results of the investigations, soil impacted with toxaphene at concentrations above the CHHSLs existed from the surface to a maximum depth of +3.0 feet below ground surface. However, the vast majority of the toxaphene impacted soil exists from the surface to a maximum depth of 1 to 2 feet below the ground surface. The depth of migration of the pesticides appeared to be primarily due to site grading during agricultural activities. Soil encountered during the investigations generally consisted of brown to olive gray sandy clay to clayey silty sand, and was generally moist to wet. The proposed property developer (Shapell Homes) plans to excavate and stockpile onsite soil with toxaphene concentrations above the site cleanup levels discussed above. All soils with toxaphene concentrations above the site cleanup level, will be placed in an excavation created onsite and have a minimum cover of 12 feet, and/or fill depths as directed by the site cMI engineer to avoid contact with utilities. This soil will be placed within the proposed land bridge, beneath proposed streets, and 5 feet above the highest anticipated groundwater level. Grading of the site will involve heavy earth-moving equipment to excavate the impacted soil and deposit these soils within specifically placed excavations. Clean imported fill material will cover the impacted soil and compacted upon which improvements can be safely placed. The excavation and movement of toxaphene impacted soil will pose an exposure concern. Specifically, the exposure of toxaphene through inhalation, dermal contact, and ingestion or airborne dust particles would pose the greatest public health concern. Additionally, noise and hazards associated with large moving equipment will also presented by earth grading operations. Based on the site's location within a predominantly residential area, proper protocols will need to be in place during the remedial activities to reduce exposure to potential health hazards. Contaminant Characteristics Toxaphene was the only pesticide found at the site at concentrations that exceeded State and Federal screening levels. All other pesticides were found to be significantly below levels Which pose as a human exposure concern (CHHSLs). Therefore, this study will focus on the characteristics and occurrence oftoxaphene contaminated soil. Toxaphane is non-combustible, highly toxic when ingested in sufficient concentrations, and has a strong bond to soil grains. Based on onsite analytical testing, toxaphene is not water soluble and, therefore, does not migrate or represent a concern for groundwater contamination. Toxaphene does not diffuse In air, therefore, if buried, contaminant vapor migration is not a concern. The Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA) recommended a maximum average amount of alr exposure oftoxaphene to workers to not exceed 0.5 micrograms per cubic meter of air (mg/m3} per 8-hour workday over a 40-hour work week. The National Institute of Occupational Safety & Health (NIOSH) currently does not ha,ve a recommended limit for up to a 10-hour workday over a 40-hour workweek. ACC(?rding to the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), toxaphene is classified as Gr(?UP 28 carcinogen (p~ibly carcinogenic to humans [IARC, 20091). The National Toxicology Program (NTP) has determined that toxaphene is reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen (NTP, 2005), and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) has classified toxaphene as a 82 carcinogen (probable human carcinogenic [IRIS, 201 O]). The American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) has classified toxaphene as an A3 carcinogen (confirmed animaJ carcinogen with unknown relevance to humans [ACGIH, 2009]). The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibited all uses of toxaphene in 1990. In 1982, however, the US EPA cancelled the registration of toxaphene for use as a pesticide, except for use on livestock, in er.nergency situations. According to Agency for Toxic Substance and Disease Registry (ATS DR), no studies are available on the effects of acute inhalation exposure to toxaphene in humans or animals (ATSDR, 1996). Acute oral exposure to toxaphene in humans results in Central Nervous System (CNS) stimulation, with the major effect begin convulsive seizures. The dose necessary to induce nonfatal convolutions in humans is approximately 1 O milligrams per kilogram body weight per day (mg/kg/day [ATSDR, 1996]}. Animal studies have reported effects on the liver, kidney, and CNS from acute oral exposure to toxaphene. Additionally, animal studies have reported development effects, including behavior effects and immunosuppression, in offsprings of rats exposed orally to toxaphene. Several studies have reported no reproductive effects from oral exposu_re to toxaphene in rats (ASTOR, 1996). Community Health and Safety Plan Afe:e:\wp9\env\e61 OO\e8145.1.chasp W.O. E6145.1-SC Page2 • .~ -1 I I ! : ' ' I "-' i I Methods of Exposure The primary onsite source of contamination was the legal application of agricultural pesticides. The secondary source of contamination is the soil grains that the-pesticides have bound to. The primary mode of transportation is wind and earth-moving operations during proposed grading. Additionally, a less likely mode of transportation Is bioaccumulation of pesticides in plant material such as edible fruit and vegetables. The direct exposure to toxaphene impacted soil through Ingestion, inhalation, and dermal contact is the main human health concern. Actlvities that involve the handling of impacted soil, such as gardening and home improvements that involve excavation work, may result in exposure. Bioaccumulation results in the uptake of chemical pesticides Into edibte fruits and vegetables, and is not known .to occur onsite. The burial of the impacted soil to a depth of 12 feet below ground surface, or fill depths as directed by the site cMI engineer to avoid contact with utilities, beneath soil containing pesticide-impacted soil at non-detect to below the site cleanup levels, would eliminate the risk of plant uptake and human contact of toxaphene at concentrations above the CHHSLs. Inhalation of airborne dust Is another route for exposure to toxaphene. The US EPA Integrated Risk Information System has not published a reference concentration for toxaphene for chronic inhalation exposure. Due to the chemical characteristics of toxaphene vapor intrusion, leaching, and groundwater impacts are not applicable concerns on site. Monitoring To date, GSI is unaware of any monitoring devices that detect toxaphene concentrations in real time. Air samples can be collected the glass fiber filter method; however, samples would require analysis at an offsite fixed laboratory and would be of little to no use in the field. Therefore, GSI does not recommend air monitoring. Engineering Controls The following engineering controls will be utilized in order to reduce the risk of human exposure to toxaphene contaminated soil during remedial activities: Dust During excavation and stockpiling activities, copious amounts of water must be applied to the soil in order to suppress dust particles from becoming air-borne. Addit:lonaltV,,·. toxaphene impacted soil must not be disturbed if winds exceed 13 miles per hour (mph). All stockpiled soils must be covered with heavy grade plastic sheets while water suppression is not employed, particularly during non-working hours. Community Health and Safety Plan Rle:e:\wp9\env\e6'100\e6145.1.chasp W.O. E6145.1-SC Paga3 Site Security The site will be fenced and gated, limiting access to only those authorized to be onslte. Noise Equipment operation times will be dictated by the City of Carlsbad, Zoning Ordinances. The site is surrounding by resid~al neighborhoods. It Is anticipated that noise may be_ an issue which will require some level of cooperation between the developer and the surrounding neighborhoods, as on any. construction project Open Excavations Given the size of the potential excavations, It will be required to have them remain open over-night. As a result. safety for entering an exaction due to illegal entry is a concern after hours. Every effort will be made to backfill excavations at the end of each workday, but for those that remain open, proper fencing and flagging of the excavation will occur after operating hours. In addition, proper slopes will be _maintained as well as one open end for ease of entry and exit from the excavatio_ns. Soll Management To ensure that impacted soil is not carried offsite, all vehicles and equipment should be inspected prior to exiting the site. If significant amounts of soil are trapped within the tires or under-carriage of vehicles, the soil should be removed prior to the vehicle exiting the site. During and at the end of each day, any soil deposited on El Camino Real -outside the exit of the site should be swept up and returned to the site for proper management Best Management Practices If site development is required during rainy periods, care should be taken to minimize the negative effects. Typically, the City has recommended that no work be conducted when the potential for rain is above 40 percent Reasonable judgment should be used to detem,ine the significance of the potential rainfall event and how it might affect the remedial grading activities. If a significant rainfall event is anticipated or occurs during construction operations, necessary measures must be taken to minimize erosion of stockpiles and limit soil erosion from offsite migration. A Stam, Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) should be prepared if construction activities extend into winter months. Site Safety Officer The designated project superintendent chosen by Shapell Homes will serve as the Site Safety Officer. GSI will assist the Site Safety Officer in areas where they are unfamiliar with site safety. The job of the Site Safety Officer will be to monitor dust control and ensure that the site is only accessed by authorized personnel. In the event of an emergency, the Site Community Health and Safety Plan FUe:e:\wp9\env\e61 OO\e61'4&.1.etiasp W.O. E6145.1-SC Page4 I ' I , I ' I I I Safety Officer will have the authority to shut down site activities and the knowledge to notify the appropriate emergency responders. Emergency Planning Toxaphene is non-flammable and does not represent a fire or explosion concern. In the event of an emergency where site activities are halted,. necessary measures must be taken to ensure that contaminated soil does not leave the site. -All stockpiles must be covered and trenches must be fenced. tf in the event of an emergency, the Site Safety Officer must notify the following agencies or indMduals: City of Carlsbad Engineering Inspector: {760) 438-4178 City of Carlsbad Fire Department: 911 or (760) 931-2141 San Diego Deparbnent of Environmental Health: Carol Fenner -(619) 338-2455 Public Notification Prior to the Implementation of the proposed work, public notices will be mailed or hand-delivered to neighboring residences contiguous to the subject property. The notices will identify the proposed work, days and hours of operation, and an estimated schedule of the project Details will include: Site Safety Officer's and GSl's contact infom,ation, identification of potential concerns including dust and noise; a brief description of planned activities, and the Proposition 65 Warning of the potential exposure to chemicaJs known or suspected by the state of California to cause cancer. Notices will also be placed on the fence surrounding the site's perimeter immediately prior to start of construction actMties. GSI will prepare a Public notification Letter for disbibution to the neighbors using the example provided in the most recent San Diego County Department of Environmental Health Site Assessment and Mitigation Manual. Traffic Control Plan The site is located within a residential area of Carlsbad. The main roadway to access the site (El Camino Real) consist of a divided four-lane paved road with no parking allowed on the shoulder. Additionally, there are no sidewalks aJong El Camino Real. Trucks and all other vehicles should be aware of the following precautions: a The maximum speed limit on 4-lane major roads is 55 miles per hour (mph). Large trucks should limit their speed to 45 mph to accounffor their longer· stopping distance; • Due to the lack of sidewalks, residents may be walking in the street. Drivers of trucks and other vehicles must be alert at aJI times. Community Health and Safety Plan Ale:e:\wp9\env\B61 OD\e6145.1.i::hasp .< GeoSoils, lneo W.O. E6145.1-SC Pages SPECIFIC SITE HEALTH AND SAFETY PLAN FOR -- PROPOSED GRADING, RANCHO COSTERA PLANNING AREA PA-3 THROUGH PLANNING AREA PA-10 -CARLSBAD, SAN DIEGO COUNn', CALIFORNIA 9201 O' . EMERGENCY NOTIFICATION REFERENCE Emergency Response -Are/Police/Ambulance ............................ 911 Hospital -Tri-City Medical Canter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (760) 724-8411 Address: 4002 Vista Way, Oceanside, California Directions: Take El Camino Real north. Proceed to Vista Way (under the Higtlway 78 overpass). Proceed east on West. Vista Way then to the entrance of Tri-City Medical Center, on the north side of West. Vista Way and Highway 78. Location of the hospital site in the Thomas Guide for San Diego County is page 1107, coordinates 81. Poison Control Center . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (619) 543-6000 1-800-876-4766 County of San Diego Department of Health Services Deparbnent of Environmental Health Land and Water Quality DMsion ......... -. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (856) 505-6700 Client [ Mr. John Buller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (323) 968-7538 r (323) 229-621s -! I Operations I Consultant I Mr. Bryan Vo~s. GeoSoils, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (760) 438-3155 (760) 801-7136 ·aeoSoib, lne. Standard Procedure for Reporting Emergencies Provide the following information when calling for assistance in an emergency situation: 1 . Name, phone number, and location of person making call 2. Number of persons exposed or injured 3. Nature of emergency 4. Actions already taken 5. Remain on the phone unless instructed otherwise. INTRODUCTION This Community Health and Safety (H&S) Plan has been developed specifically for the assessment activities Including the excavation of elevated levels of pesticide in soil, to be performed on Planning Area 2 through Planning Area 10, in Carlsbad, San Diego County, Galifornia It addresses potential public health concerns and provides guidelines to reduce the potential for exposures and/or Injuries to the surrounding public from the activities to be performed at the subject site. This H&S Plan is designed to be specific with regard to the proposed onsite activities and the potential for encounters with hazardous materials and hazardous situations. However, due to potential variations of anticipated conditions at the site, it should be noted that unforeseen situations could arise during the performance of the environmental services that would necessitate a deviation from this H&S Plan. Thus, provisions will be made to allow modifications to the H&S Plan when appropriate. SITE LOCATION It is our understanding that the subject property is comprised of approximately 201 acres, located in the northeasterly part of the Carlsbad, San Diego County, California Overall, the agricultural area is located west of College Boulevard and north of El Camino Real and east of Tamarack Avenue (see Figure 1). POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS Potential chemical, physical, and operational hazards Identified by GSI and described in this document are not anticipated to cause any unsafe or unhealthy environmental effects. Should conditions be encountered that require protective measures other than those outlined for this project, on site activities will be suspended or modified until the appropriate control methods can be implemented. Specific Site Health and Safety Plan Flle:e:\wp9\enV\e61 OO\e6145.1.ssh GecSoih, l,w. W.O. E6145.1-SC Page2 Base Map: TOPO!@ ©2003 National Geographic, U.S.G.S San Luis Rey Quadrangle, California --San Diego Co., 7.5 Minute, dated 1997, current 1999. Base Map: The Thomas Guide, San Diego Co., Street Guide and Directory, 2005 Edition, by Thomas Bros. Maps, pages 1106 and 1107. Reproduced with pennlsslon granted by Thomas Bros. Maps This map Is copyrighted by Thomas Bros. Maps. n Is unlawful lo copy or reproduce 11/ or any part thereof, whether for personal use or resahl, without pennlsslon. All rights reserved. N w.o. c. E6145.1-SC SITE LOCATION MAP Figure 1 I I LIMITED PUBLIC NOTIFICATION The limited public notlfication program will consist of informing affected entities, as identified by representatives of the consultant and the client, of the dates and nature of the proposed aclivlties. OVERVIEW OF POTENTIAL HAZARDS Toxaphane is the contaminant of concern at the site. Potential chemical, physical, and operational hazards identified by the consultant and described in this document are not anticipated to.ca.use any unsafe or unhealthy environmental effects to the public. The public will be excluded from the area of the soil removal activities. Symptoms of overexposure to soil affected by toxaphene usually occur after a lengthy exposure. The concentrations required to produce the symptoms of an overexposure generally depend upon the type of exposure Ongestion, inhalation, or skin contact), the duration of each exposure and/or number of exposures, and the concentration. Routes of Exposure Inhalation, ingestion, skin absorption, and skin and/or eye contact. Symptoms Symptoms of overexposure may include but are not limited to eye, nose and respiratory system irrttation, giddiness, headache, nausea, staggered gait (walking style), fatigue, anorexia ~oss of appetite), lassitude (weakness, exhaustion), dermatitis Onflammation of the skin), bone marrow depression (blood cell production depression), and abdominal pain. Hazard Control There will be DQ eating, drinking, or smoking during remedial grading of the contaminated soils. During grading operations, personal protection O.e., clothing) is not required, unless contaminated soils are being handled by individuals. Based upon previous laboratory test results and the chemical nature of agricultural residues, contamination onsite appears to be non-volatile; therefore, air monitoring is not anticipated. Other hazards/annoyances that could develop during the field operations include noise created by the operation of heavy equipment, such as a scraper, dozer, backhoe, or track hoe, and the chance offire or explosion. The potential for the presence of explosive vapors or a fire from these soil excavation activities is considered minimal. Specific Site Health and Safety Plan Ale:e:\wp9\enV\e61 W.e6145.1.ssh GeoSoib, lne. W.O. E6145.1-SC Page4 Rre protection shall be provided by at least a 20-pound ABC-type portable fire extinguisher readily avallable to trained personnel onsite, and located within 1 O feet of spark-producing operations: Personnel shall also be familiar with the procedures for summoning emergency assistance from the fire department Smoking, open flames, or other Ignition sources will not be permitted within 25 feet of the work area Noise hazards are often created around large equipment (e.g., scrapers, ddzers, backhoes and drill rigs) that generate excessive noise. The effects of noise can include: personnel being startled, annoyed, or distracted; physical damage to the ear, pain, and temporary or permanent hearing loss; communication interference that may cause increased potential hazards due to the inability to warn of danger and proper safety precautions to be taken. Despite the identification of these potential hazards, it is not anticipated that noise levels will exceed existing safety standards. The operational safety hazards that could exist on the site including being hit by equipment, falling objects, falling in holes or ditches, and slippery surfaces. Heavy power equipment shall be operated by experienced and certified (where applicable) operators and shall be located and operated in a safe manner. When heavy equipment is moved on or off the site, a spotter shall assist the driver in watching for and locating above ground obstacles, pedestrian traffic, vehicular traffic, and other hazards. SITE OPERATING PROCEDURES Procedures for the conduct of site visitors during the performance of the soil removal/remedial excavation and associated activities at Rancho Castera have been established to reduce the possibility of injury resulting from exposures to the hazards of concern. These procedures require the cooperation of all. onsite personnel and visitors during the project and will be strictly enforced by the Site Manager. No one shall be allowed to enter the site without the required authorization from either Mr. John Buller, Project Manager, or the consultant (GSQ. Onsite personnel and visitors will also be required to check in with the Site Manager when entering the site and check out when leaving the site. EMERGENCY RESPONSE/PLANNING Prior to beginning field activities, the Project Manager and the Site Manager shall plan emergency procedures. Initial planning includes establishing an alarm system (e.g., horn) and the best means for evacuation from work areas in the event of a catastrophic event (e.g., explosion, fire, etc.). Onsite personnel shall also be informed of the location of the telephones and other communication devices located onsite. Specific Site Health and Safety Plan Flle:e:\wp9\enV\e61 OO\e6i 45.1.ssh ... .,,. W.O. E6145.1-SC Pages ~ I I 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11, 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 --I 20 SIGN IN SHEET FOR PA 3 THROUGH PA 10 PROPERTY PRE-GRADE MEETING Date --------