The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSDP 2019-0005; BMW CARLSBAD; DRAFT GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION REPORT; 2018-12-06...________. (MU GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Ec-,v ~ APR 1 8 2019 CITY OF-CARLSBAD PLAN NING DIVISION 23241 Arroyo Vista • Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688 • phone: 949.888.6513 • fax: 949.888.1380 • info@gmugeo.com • www.gmugeo.com DRAFT Report of Geotechnical Foundation Investigation, AutoNation BMW of Carlsbad, 1050 & 1060 Auto Center Court, City of Carlsbad, California Prepared for AutoNation December 6, 2018 GMU Project No. 18-101-00 - .. .. ... ... ... .. ... .... - .____. WU GEOTECHNICAL, INC. 23241 Arroyo Vista • Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688 • phone: 949.888.6513 • fax: 949.888.1380 • info@gmugeo.com • www.gmugeo.com AUTONATION 200 SW 1st Street, 14th Floor Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 ATTENTION: Mr. Axay Patel TRANSMITTAL Sr. Construction and Development Director DATE: December 6, 2018 PROJECT: 18-101-00 SUBJECT: Report of Geotechnical Foundation Investigation, AutoNation BMW of Carlsbad, 1050 & 1060 Auto Center Court, City of Carlsbad, California DISTRIBUTION: Addressee: electronic copy ... -... - .. - • .. -- -... --- --- ------ DRAFT Mr. Axay Patel, AUTONATION, Geotechnical Investigation Report -AutoNation BMW of Carlsbad, 1050/1060 Auto Center Court, City of Carlsbad, California Table of Contents INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1 PURPOSE ........................................................................................................................... I SCOPE ................................................................................................................................ I LOCATION ........................................................................................................................ 2 SITE DESCRIPTION ..................................................................................................................... 2 TOPOGRAPHY AND PREVIOUS GRADING ................................................................ 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................................. 3 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION .................................................................................................. 3 LABORATORY TESTING ............................................................................................................ 3 GEOLOGIC FINDINGS ................................................................................................................ 3 REGIONAL GEOLOGIC SETTING ................................................................................. 3 SUB SURF ACE MATERIALS ........................................................................................... 4 GROUNDWATER ............................................................................................................. 4 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS ................................................................................................................ 4 FAULTING AND SEISMICITY ....................................................................................... 4 LIQUEFACTION AND SEISMIC SETTLEMENT .......................................................... 5 LANDSLIDES .................................................................................................................... 5 TSUNAMI, SEICHE, AND FLOODING .......................................................................... 5 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING FINDINGS .......................................................................... 6 SOIL EXPANSION ............................................................................................................ 6 SOIL CORROSION ............................................................................................................ 6 PRELIMINARY PERCOLATION TESTING ................................................................... 6 EXCAVATION CHARACTERISTICS ............................................................................. 7 IN-SITU SOIL MOISTURE CONDITIONS ..................................................................... 7 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................................. 7 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................................ 8 GENERAL SITE PREPARATION AND GRADING ....................................................... 8 STRUCTURE SEISMIC DESIGN ................................................................................... 10 FOUNDATION DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION ....................................................... 11 STRUCTURAL CONCRETE .......................................................................................... 12 FERROUS METAL CORROSION PROTECTION ........................................................ 13 MOISTURE VAPOR TRANSMISSION ......................................................................... 13 SURFACE DRAINAGE ................................................................................................... 14 BIORETENTION AREAS ............................................................................................... 14 UTILITY TRENCH BACKFILL CONSIDERATIONS .................................................. 14 SITE INFILTRATION ..................................................................................................... 16 ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVEMENT THICKNESS RECOMMENDATIONS ........... 16 CONCRETE PAVEMENT THICKNESS RECOMMENDATIONS .............................. 16 CONCRETE FLA TWORK DESIGN ............................................................................... 17 PLANTERS AND TREES ............................................................................................... 18 December 6, 2018 GMU Project 18-101-00 DRAFT Mr. Axay Patel, AUTONATION, Geotechnical Investigation Report -AutoNation BMW of Carlsbad, 1050/1060 Auto Center Court, City of Carlsbad, California PLAN REVIEW / GEOTECHNICAL TESTING DURING GRADING / FUTURE REPORT ............................................................................................................... 18 LIMITATIONS ............................................................................................................................. 19 CLOSURE .................................................................................................................................... 20 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 21 Plate 1 Plate 2 APPENDIX A: APPENDIX A-1: APPENDIXB: APPENDIXC: December 6, 2018 PLATES --Location Map --Geotechnical Map APPENDICES Geotechnical Exploration Procedures and Drill Hole Logs Previous Boring Logs and Test Pits by Others Geotechnical Laboratory Procedures and Test Results Percolation Testing ii GMU Project 18-101-00 -.. ----.. ----------• • • • -- - .. --- ... --- -... --- - ---.. - -- -------.. -- • ------ INTRODUCTION PURPOSE This report presents the results of our geotechnical foundation investigation of soil and geologic conditions for the proposed 2-story dealership building development and site improvements, as shown on the reference (1) preliminary grading plan by CDR West, for the AutoNation BMW Carlsbad Dealership to be located at 1050/1060 Auto Center Court within Car Country Carlsbad in the City of Carlsbad. SCOPE The scope of our geotechnical foundation investigation along with future plan reviews, as outlined in our May 8, 2018 proposal, is as follows: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Reviewed and efficiently utilized data from the reference (2), (3), and (4) geotechnical investigation reports by others and the reference ( 5) and ( 6) as-graded and observation and testing reports by others pertaining to the subject property, current plans and building sections, and anticipated building loading. Staked seven (7) hollow stem auger drill holes, coordinated with AutoNation, and contacted Utility Underground Service Alert (USA/Dig Alert) in order to provide advance notification of the 7 subsurface drill holes planned within the AutoNation BMW Carlsbad Dealership project area. Performed a field subsurface exploration program consisting of advancing one ( 1) hollow stem auger drill hole to a depth of approximately 50 feet (in order to verify the current groundwater level) in the footprint of the dealership building, four (4) hollow stem auger drill hole to a depth of approximately 20 feet adjacent to the building, and two hollow stem auger drill holes to a depth of approximately 5 feet in the planned bio-retention (infiltration) areas outside the dealership building and in adjacent parking lot areas. Logged the drill holes and obtained bulk and drive soil samples for geotechnical laboratory testing. Infiltration tests were performed concurrently with the two shallow drill hole locations, which was coordinated with the project civil engineer. Performed laboratory testing on soil samples obtained from the drill holes. Testing included moisture and density, particle size, Atterberg Limits, expansion, chemical, compaction, consolidation, direct shear strength, and R-value tests . Interpreted and evaluated the newly acquired field and laboratory data and integrated with the previously obtained existing data by others. Performed geotechnical engineering design which included settlement analysis, liquefaction analysis, bearing capacity and associated settlement, pavement design, and seismic parameters in accordance with the California Building Code (CBC) 2016 standards. DRAFT Mr. Axay Patel, AUTONATION, Geotechnical Investigation Report -AutoNation BMW of Carlsbad, 1050/1060 Auto Center Court, City of Carlsbad, California 6. 8. Supported the design processes by providing geotechnical design memos/e-mails with geotechnical design conclusions and recommendations for the proposed project. This included the following: • • • • • • • • • • • Foundation design and anticipated settlement of the dealership building . Site preparation, building foundation excavation, and precise grading requirements . Acceptability of the site soils for use as fill and backfill. Infiltration results. Site seismicity and seismic design parameters . Lateral earth pressures and temporary excavation . Liquefaction potential of the site soils . Retaining wall/site wall design parameters. Installation of underground utilities . Flatwork design . Asphalt pavement and concrete pavement designs. Prepared and distributed this formal geotechnical foundation report for the BMW of Carlsbad Dealership containing our final geotechnical conclusions and recommendations to support the main project submittal and permitting process. LOCATION The site is located at 1050 and l 060 Auto Center Court in the City of Carlsbad, California. The site is bound by Auto Center Court on the south, Car County Drive on the east, Canyon Road on the north, and asphalt pavement and parking structure on the west. The general location of the project site is shown on Plate 1. SITE DESCRIPTION TOPOGRAPHY AND PREVIOUS GRADING The subject site is relatively flat, with local gentle northerly gradients from the comer of Auto Center Court and Car Country Drive towards Canyon Road. Currently, the site is occupied by a one-story, u-shaped building, asphalt concrete pavement, site walls, and planter areas. Previous geotechnical investigation for this site was completed in 1987 by Woodward-Clyde Consultants, which is listed as reference (2). Following the geotechnical investigation in 1987, the site was mass graded by Kleinfelder in 1988 in accordance with reference (3). December 6, 2018 2 GMU Project 18-101-00 • .. .. • • • -• Ill ---• • ----- ----- - .. -------- --... .. .. ---- ------.. - DRAFT Mr. Axay Patel, AUTONATION, Geotechnical Investigation Report -AutoNation BMW of Carlsbad, 1050/l 060 Auto Center Court, City of Carlsbad, California PROJECT DESCRIPTION The subject project site is currently serving as an automotive dealer and repair complex surrounded by an asphalt concrete pavement parking lot and drives. We understand that the project will consist of the construction of a new BMW dealership with a 2-story building a rooftop parking. The second level of the building will be utilized for service. The structure will consist of a concrete columns and post-tensioned deck, and the front of the showroom will consist of steel-framed structure. It is also our understanding that the structure will be situated at-grade. SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION GMU conducted a subsurface exploration program to evaluate the soil conditions below the proposed building and parking areas. A total of seven (7) hollow-stem-auger, truck-mounted drill holes were excavated to a maximum depth of 21.5 feet below the existing grade. The drill hole locations are shown on Plate 2 -Geotechnical Map. Drill hole logs are contained in Appendix A. The drill holes were logged by our Staff Geologist, and samples were collected in each of the drill holes for laboratory testing. Percolation testing was also performed in two (2) of the drill hole locations (DH-6 and DH-7). LABO RA TORY TESTING Laboratory testing for the subject investigation was performed to characterize moisture and density, particle size distribution, Atterberg Limits, expansion index, maximum density, corrosion, direct shear, consolidation, and R-value. The results of our laboratory testing are summarized on Table B-1 and included within Appendix B -Laboratory Testing. GEOLOGIC FINDINGS REGIONAL GEOLOGIC SETTING The subject site is located within the coastal plain section of the Peninsular Ranges geomorphic province of California. This regional area of northern San Diego County generally consists of low eroded hills bisected by valleys filled with Quaternary alluvium. The site is underlain by the Tertiary-age Santiago Formation. Due to previous grading and development activity, this bedrock unit is locally overlain by a thin unit of artificial fill. December 6, 2018 3 GMU Project 18-IO 1-00 DRAFT Mr. Axay Patel, AUTONATION, Geotechnical Investigation Report-AutoNation BMW of Carlsbad, 1050/1060 Auto Center Court, City of Carlsbad, California SUBSURFACE MATERIALS Engineered Fill (Qafc) Engineered fill soils were encountered in all excavations at the site and consist of brown to dark brown, damp silty sands. The fills were placed as part of the previous grading operations and are estimated to be up to 8 feet in depth, with an average of 5 feet in depth. The fill soils largely possess low plasticity/expansion characteristics. Engineered fill soils were placed in 1988 under the observation of Kleinfelder (reference (3)). Santiago Formation (Tsa) Bedrock of the Santiago Formation underlies the site and was encountered under the fill in borings DH-1, DH-2, DH-3, DH-4, and DH-5. Where encountered, the bedrock consisted of brown to gray, damp to moist silty sandstone with interbeds of claystone, siltstone, and fine sandstone. Geologic structure was not observed in the samples collected; however, based on previous geotechnical reports and regional publications, structure within the bedrock is expected to be generally horizontal. GROUNDWATER Groundwater was not observed during our exploration to a maximum depth of 51.5 feet below the existing grade. Groundwater conditions may vary across the site due to stratigraphic and hydrologic conditions and may change over time as a consequence of seasonal and meteorological fluctuations, or activities by humans at this site and nearby sites. However, based on the above findings, groundwater is unlikely to impact the proposed development. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS FAUL TING AND SEISMICITY The site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, and no known active faults are shown on the reviewed geologic maps crossing the site, however, the site is located in the seismically active region of Southern California. The nearest known active faults are the San Rose Canyon and Newport Inglewood fault systems, which are located approximately 4.5 miles from the site and capable of generating a maximum earthquake magnitude (Mw) of 6.9 and 7 .5, respectively. Given the proximity of the site to these and numerous other active and potentially active faults, the site will likely be subject to earthquake ground motions in the future. A site PGAM of 0.48g was calculated for the site in conformance with the 2016 CBC. This PGAM is primarily dominated by earthquakes with a mean magnitude of 6.6 at a mean distance of 8.6 miles from the site using the USGS 2014 Interactive Deaggregation website. December 6, 2018 4 GMU Project 18-101-00 .. .. .. -.. -• .. • • ---• -• • -- --.. ---------- ---------- -- --- - -.. ------- ----- - DRAFT Mr. Axay Patel, AUTONATION, Geotechnical Investigation Report -AutoNation BMW of Carlsbad, 1050/1060 Auto Center Court, City of Carlsbad, California LIQUEFACTION AND SEISMIC SETTLEMENT Liquefaction Based on our review of Figure 3.5-3 of the Draft Program Environmental Impact Report for the Carlsbad General Plan Update, Chapter 3.5, the site is not located within a zone of potential liquefaction. In addition, based on the lack of shallow groundwater, relatively uniform soil stratum across the site, and our liquefaction analysis, it is our professional opinion that the liquefaction potential at the site is very low. Secondary Seismic Hazards Seismically induced dry sand settlement is the ground settlement due to densification ofloose, dry, cohesionless soils during strong earthquake shaking. Based on our secondary seismic hazard analysis, it is our professional opinion that the potential for seismically induced dry-sand settlement is low. LANDSLIDES Based on our review of available geologic maps, literature, topographic maps, aerial photographs, and our subsurface evaluation, no landslides or related features underlie or are adjacent to the subject site. Due to the relatively level nature of the site and surrounding areas, the potential for landslides to occur at the project site is considered negligible. TSUNAMI, SEICHE, AND FLOODING The site is not located approximately 0.75 miles from the Pacific Ocean, however, it is not located within a tsunami inundation hazard zone in accordance with the County of San Diego Tsunami Inundation Map for Emergency Planning. The potential for the site to be adversely impacted by earthquake-induced seiches is considered to be negligible due to the lack of any significant enclosed bodies of water located in the vicinity of the site. The site is within an area of minimum flooding (Zone X) as defined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA, 2012). December 6, 2018 5 GMU Project 18-101-00 DRAFT Mr. Axay Patel, AUTONATION, Geotechnical Investigation Report -AutoNation BMW of Carlsbad, 1050/1060 Auto Center Court, City of Carlsbad, California GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING FINDINGS SOIL EXPANSION Based on our evaluation and experience with similar material types, the sandy soils encountered near the ground surface at the site exhibit a very low expansion potential. SOIL CORROSION Based on laboratory test results for pH, soluble chlorides, sulfate, and minimum resistivity of the site soils obtained during our subsurface investigation, the on-site soils should be considered to have the following: • A negligible sulfate exposure to concrete per ACI 318-14, Table 19.3.2.1 • A high minimum resistivity indicating conditions that are moderately corrosive to ferrous metals. • A chloride content of up to 384 ppm (corrosive to ferrous metals). Metal structures which will be in direct contact with the soil (i.e., underground metal conduits, pipelines, metal sign posts, etc.) and/or in close proximity to the soil (wrought iron fencing, etc.) may be subject to corrosion. The use of special coatings or cathodic protection around buried metal structures has been shown to be beneficial in reducing corrosion potential. Corrosion of ferrous metal reinforcing elements in structural concrete should be reduced by increasing the thickness of concrete cover and the use of the recommended maximum water/cement ratio for concrete. The results of the laboratory chemical tests performed within the site are presented in Table B-1 in Appendix B. The laboratory testing program performed for this project does not address the potential for corrosion to copper piping. In this regard, a corrosion engineer should be consulted to perform more detailed testing and develop appropriate mitigation measures (if necessary). The above discussion is provided for general guidance in regards to the corrosiveness of the on-site soils to typical metal structures used for construction. Detailed corrosion testing and recommendations for protecting buried ferrous metal and/or copper elements are beyond our purview. If detailed recommendations are required, a corrosion engineer should be consulted to develop appropriate mitigation measures. PRELIMINARY PERCOLATION TESTING Two (2) preliminary percolation tests were performed in general conformance with the County of San Diego Low Impact Development (LID) Handbook. The percolation drill holes were excavated to depths ranging from 4 to 5 feet below the existing grade using a hollow-stem-auger, truck-mounted drill rig. The calculated infiltration rates are presented in the table below. The infiltration rates do not incorporate a factor of safety. December 6, 2018 6 GMU Project 18-101-00 • - • .. .. ---• - • • • -• • --------- - DRAFT Mr. Axay Patel, AUTONATION, Geotechnical Investigation Report -AutoNation BMW of Carlsbad, 1050/1060 Auto Center Court, City of Carlsbad, California Calculated Infiltration Rates Drill Hole Depth Below Finish Infiltration Rate Grade (feet) (inch/hour) DH-6 5.0 0.02 DH-7 4.0 0.23 The preliminary percolation test hole locations are shown on the attached Geotechnical Map, Plate 2. The results of the percolation testing are summarized in Appendix C of this report and site infiltration recommendations are presented later in this report. EXCAVATION CHARACTERISTICS Rippability The majority of the soil materials underlying the site can be excavated with scrapers and other conventional grading equipment. IN-SITU SOIL MOISTURE CONDITIONS Both the fill and formation soils are in damp to moist condition. In general, soils within the upper I 0 feet have an average degree of saturation of less than 60%. It should be noted, however, that the moisture content within the upper several feet may vary depending on rainfall and the time of year in which grading occurs. CONCLUSIONS Based on our geotechnical findings, the following is a summary of our conclusions: I. The project area is not underlain by any known active faults. 2. Groundwater is not expected to be encountered and is not anticipated to have a significant impact on the proposed development. 3. The site is not subject to liquefaction nor seismically induced dry sand settlement. 4. Site soils within the at-grade foundation influence zone are anticipated to have a very low expansion potential based on our recent laboratory test results and local experience. Recommendations for the proposed developments are based on a "very low to low" expansive condition. December 6, 2018 7 GMU Project 18-101-00 DRAFT Mr. Axay Patel, AUTONATION, Geotechnical Investigation Report -AutoNation BMW of Carlsbad, 1050/1060 Auto Center Court, City of Carlsbad, California 5. Corrosion testing indicates that the on-site soils have a negligible sulfate exposure and are moderately corrosive to buried ferrous metals and reinforcing steel. Consequently, any metal exposed to the soil shall be protected. 6. Based on our percolation testing and calculated infiltration rates, the site soils in the upper 5 feet are deemed not feasible for infiltration of water. RECOMMENDATIONS GENERAL SITE PREPARATION AND GRADING General The following recommendations pertain to any required grading associated with the proposed improvements and corrective grading needed to support the proposed improvements. All site preparation and grading should be performed in accordance with the City of Carlsbad grading code requirements and the recommendations presented in this report. Clearing and Grubbing All significant organic material such as weeds, brush, tree branches, or roots, or construction debris such as old irrigation lines, asphalt concrete, and other decomposable material should be removed from the area to be graded. No rock or broken concrete greater than 6 inches in diameter should be utilized in the fills. Corrective Grading Remedial grading will serve to create a firm and workable platform for construction of the proposed developments such as new 2-story dealership and associated pavement and site flatwork. The fill material encountered during our subsurface investigation is competent for support of new foundations provided that remedial grading is performed in order to densify any disturbed soil that may be encountered during the grading operation. Based on our review of existing as-graded reports for the subject site, we understand that portion of the proposed car dealership building will be situated in engineered fill while the remaining portion will be situated in a cut Santiago Formation. For structures that will be found in both cut and fill areas should have the cut portion of the building foundation be supported on at least 3 feet of compacted fill. It should be noted that the recommendations provided herein are based on our subsurface exploration and knowledge of the on-site geology. Actual removals may vary in configuration and volume based on observations of geologic materials and conditions encountered during grading. The bottom of all remedial grading removals should be observed by a GMU representative to verify December 6, 2018 8 GMU Project 18-101-00 • • • - • - .. • • • --• • -• --------- -- - --.. -- - ... - - ----------- -- ----- "" -- DRAFT Mr. Axay Patel, AUTONATION, Geotechnical Investigation Report-AutoNation BMW of Carlsbad, 1050/1060 Auto Center Court, City of Carlsbad, California the suitability of in-place soil prior to performing scarification and recompaction. Corrective grading recommendations are outlined below. Foundations Within Fill Portion/Slab on Grade: Grading recommendations for support of new foundations within existing engineered fill and slab on grade should consist of the following: o The bottom of the foundation/slab section should be scarified to a depth of at least 8 inches, moisture conditioned to 2% above optimum moisture content, and recompacted to at least 90% relative compaction. Foundations Within Cut Portion: Grading recommendations for support of new foundations within the cut portion should consist of the following: o The foundation should be excavated to a depth of at least 3 feet below the bottom of the footing. o The bottom of the foundation should then be scarified to a depth ofat least 6 inches, moisture conditioned to 2% above optimum moisture content, and recompacted to at least 90% relative compaction. o Following the approval of the over-excavation bottom by a representative ofGMU, the onsite material may be used as fill material to achieve the planned subgrade elevation. o The fill material should then be placed in 6-to-8-inch-thick lifts, moisture conditioned to at least 2% above optimum moisture content, and compacted to achieve 90% relative compaction. Flatwork/Pavement Areas: Grading recommendations for the support of the asphalt and concrete pavement and flatwork should consist of the following: o The pavement/flatwork section should be excavated to the bottom of the pavement structural/flatwork section (i.e., bottom of the aggregate base). o The bottom of the excavation should then be scarified to a depth of at least 8 inches, moisture conditioned to least 2% above optimum moisture content, and recompacted to at least 90% relative compaction. o Following the approval of the over-excavation bottom by a representative of GMU, the onsite material may be used as fill material to achieve the planned subgrade elevation. o The fill material should then be placed in 6-to-8-inch-thick lifts, moisture conditioned to at least 2% above optimum moisture content, and compacted to achieve 90% relative compaction. December 6, 2018 9 GMU Project 18-101-00 DRAFT Mr. Axay Patel, AUTONATION, Geotechnical Investigation Report-AutoNation BMW of Carlsbad, 105011060 Auto Center Court, City of Carlsbad, California If the existing loose fill materials are found to be disturbed to depths greater than the proposed remedial grading, then the depth of over-excavation and re-compaction should be increased accordingly in local areas as recommended by a representative of GMU. Temporary Excavations Temporary excavations for demolitions, earthwork, footings, and utility trenches are expected. We anticipate that unsurcharged excavations with vertical side slopes less than 4 feet high will generally be stable, however, some sloughing of cohesionless sandy materials encountered near the existing grade at the site should be expected. Our recommendations for temporary excavations are as follows: • Temporary, unsurcharged excavation sides over 4 feet in height should be sloped no steeper than an inclination of 1 H: 1 V (horizontal:vertical). • Where sloped excavations are created, the tops of the slopes should be barricaded so that vehicles and storage loads do no encroach within 10 feet of the tops of the excavated slopes. A greater setback may be necessary when considering heavy vehicles, such as concrete trucks and cranes. GMU should be advised of such heavy vehicle loadings so that specific setback requirements can be established. • If the temporary construction slopes are to be maintained during the rainy season, berms are recommended to be graded along the tops of the slopes in order to prevent runoff water from entering the excavation and eroding the slope faces. Our temporary excavation recommendations are provided only as minimum guidelines. All work associated with temporary excavations should meet the minimal requirements as set forth by CAL- OSHA Temporary slope construction, maintenance, and safety are the responsibility of the contractor. STRUCTURE SEISMIC DESIGN No active or potentially active faults are known to cross the site, therefore, the potential for primary ground rupture due to faulting on-site is very low. However, the site will likely be subject to seismic shaking at some time in the future. Based on our field exploration and the site soil profile, the site should be designated as Site Class D based on the measured Standard Penetration Resistance within drill hole DH-3. The seismic design coefficients based on ASCE 7-10 and 2016 CBC are listed in Table 2 below. December 6, 2018 10 GMU Project 18-101-00 • .. .. --.. .. • ... • • -• - -... ---• -- • • -• -• DRAFT Mr. Axay Patel, AUTONATION, Geotechnical Investigation Report-AutoNation BMW of Carlsbad, 105011060 Auto Center Court, City of Carlsbad, Califomia Table 2: 2016 CBC Site Categorization and Site Coefficients Categorization/Coefficient Design Value Site Class based on Soil Profile (ASCE 7, Table 20.3-1) D Short Period Spectral Acceleration Ss •• 1.145 I-sec. Period Spectral Acceleration S, .. 0.440 Site Coefficient Fa (Table 11.4-1) .. 1.042 Site Coefficient Fv (Table 11.4-2) .. 1.560 Short Period MCE* Spectral Acceleration SMs •• 1.193 1-sec. Period MCE Spectral Acceleration SM1 .. 0.687 Short Period Design Spectral Acceleration Sos .. 0.795 1-sec. Period Design Spectral Acceleration So, .. 0.458 MCE Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) • 0.456 Site Coefficient FPaA (Table 11.8-1)** 1.044 MCE Peak Ground Acceleration (PGAM) • 0.476 Mean Contributing Magnitude to MCE Event 6.6 • MCE: Maximum Considered Earthquake •• Values Obtained from USGS Earthquake Hazards Program website are based on the ASCE7-10 and 2016 CBC and site coordinates of N33 .1346° and WI 17.3242°. It should be recognized that much of southern California is subject to some level of damaging ground shaking as a result of movement along the major active (and potentially active) fault zones that characterize this region. Design utilizing the 2016 CBC is not meant to completely protect against damage or loss of function. Therefore, the preceding parameters should be considered as minimum design criteria. FOUNDATION DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION General The criteria contained in the following section may be used for the design and construction of the proposed car dealership. Foundation design parameters are presented below. General Foundation Design Parameters o Bearing Material: Engineered Fill o Removal and Re-compaction Depth: 3 feet below bottom of footing for foundations found within the cut portion of the site. o Minimum Footing Size: • Width: 18 inches • Depth: 18 inches embedment below lowest adjacent soil grade ( depth) o Allowable Bearing Capacity: 3,000 psf for the minimum footing size given above. • Above value may be increased by 1/3 for temporary loads such as wind or December 6, 2018 11 GMU Project 18-101-00 DRAFT Mr. Axay Patel, AUTONATION, Geotechnical Investigation Report -AutoNation BMW of Carlsbad, 105011060 Auto Center Court, City of Carlsbad, California seismic o Settlement: • Static Settlement: • Total: 1.0 inch • Differential: 0.50 inches over a span of 30 feet o Lateral Foundation Resistance: • Allowable passive resistance: 300 psf/ft ( disregard upper 6 inches, max 3,000 psf) • Allowable friction coefficient: 0.30 • Above values may be combined without reduction and may be increased by 1/3 for temporary loads such as wind or seismic Slab Subsection and Slab Design Minimum Thickness: The minimum slab thickness shall be 6 inches. Minimum Slab Reinforcement: Minimum slab reinforcement shall not be less than No. 4 bars placed at 18 inches on center. Welded wire mesh is not recommended. Care should be taken to position the reinforcement bars in the center of the slab. Slab Subgrade • The upper 12 inches of the on-site soils and subgrade soil should be moisture conditioned to 2 percent above the optimum moisture content and compacted to a minimum relative compaction of90 percent in accordance with the latest version of ASTM D1557. • A 4-inch-thick section of compacted ¾-inch crushed rock shall be provided directly below the slab. • Place moisture vapor retarder per the Moisture Vapor Transmission section of this report. • Sand above the moisture retarder/barrier (i.e., directly below the slab) is not a geotechnical issue. This should be provided by the structural engineer of record based on the type of slab, potential for curling, etc. STRUCTURAL CONCRETE Laboratory tests indicate that the onsite soils are classified as having a "negligible" sulfate exposure and "SO" sulfate exposure category per ACI 318-14, Table 19 .3 .1.1. However, due to the low to moderate soil resistivity and chloride contents obtained from our test result, the on-site soil is severely corrosive to ferrous metals such as reinforcing steel. On this basis, we recommend that a Type IIN cement with a maximum water to cement ratio of 0.50 with a minimum compressive strength of 4,000 psi for structural elements (i.e., foundations, walls, etc.) be used. Utilization of CBC moderate sulfate level requirements will also serve to reduce the permeability of the concrete December 6, 2018 12 GMU Project 18-101-00 -.. -- .. • • • .. • • • • • • • • -• • - • • • • .. • .. • .. -----... - -... ... ... -- -- ... -- - • • .. ... ---- DRAFT Mr. Axay Patel, AUTONATION, Geotechnical Investigation Report -AutoNation BMW of Carlsbad, 1050/1060 Auto Center Court, City of Carlsbad, California and help minimize the potential of water and/or vapor transmission through the concrete. Wet curing of the concrete per ACI Publication 308 is also recommended . Wet curing of the concrete per ACI Publication 308 is also recommended. The aforementioned recommendations in regards to concrete are made from a soils perspective only. Final concrete mix design is beyond our purview. All applicable codes, ordinances, regulations, and guidelines should be followed in regard to the designing a durable concrete with respect to the potential for sulfate exposure from the on-site soils and/or changes in the environment. FERROUS METAL CORROSION PROTECTION The results of the laboratory chemical tests performed on a sample of soil collected within the site indicate that the on-site soils are corrosive to ferrous metals. Consequently, metal structures which will be in direct contact with the soil (i.e., underground metal conduits, pipelines, metal sign posts, etc.) and/or in close proximity to the soil (wrought iron fencing, etc.) may be subject to corrosion. The use of special coatings or cathodic protection around buried metal structures has been shown to be beneficial in reducing corrosion potential. Additional provisions will be required to address high chloride contents of the soil per the 2016 CBC to protect the concrete reinforcement. The laboratory testing program performed for this project does not address the potential for corrosion to copper piping. In this regard, a corrosion engineer should be consulted to perform more detailed testing and develop appropriate mitigation measures (if necessary). The above discussion is provided for general guidance in regards to the corrosiveness of the on-site soils to typical metal structures used for construction. Detailed corrosion testing and recommendations for protecting buried ferrous metal and/or copper elements are beyond our purview. If detailed testing is required, a corrosion engineer should be consulted to perform the testing and develop appropriate mitigation measures . MOISTURE VAPOR TRANSMISSION Moisture Vapor Retarder A vapor retarder or barrier equivalent to Stego 15 Mil Class A should be utilized overtop of the required gravel/stone course. The retarder/barrier should be installed as follows: o Below moisture-sensitive flooring areas. o Installed per manufacture's specifications as well as with all applicable recognized installation procedures such as ASTM E 1643-98. o Joints between the sheets and the openings for utility piping should be lapped and taped. If the barrier is not continuously placed across footings/ribs, the barrier should, as a minimum, be lapped into the sides of the footing/rib trenches down to the bottom of the trench . December 6, 2018 13 GMU Project 18-101-00 DRAFT Mr. Axay Patel, AUTONATION, Geotechnical Investigation Report-AutoNation BMW of Carlsbad, 1050/1060 Auto Center Court, City of Carlsbad, California o Punctures in the vapor barrier should be repaired prior to concrete placement. The need for sand and/or the amount of sand above the moisture vapor retarder should be specified by the structural engineer. The selection of sand above the retarder is not a geotechnical engineering issue and is hence outside our purview. It should be noted that the moisture retarder is intended only to reduce moisture vapor transmissions from the soil beneath the concrete and is consistent with the current standard of the industry in building construction in southern California. It is not intended to provide a "waterproof' or "vapor proof' barrier or reduce vapor transmission from sources above the retarder (i.e., concrete). The evaluation of water vapor from any source and its effect on any aspect of the proposed building space above the slab (i.e., floor covering applicability, mold growth, etc.) is outside our purview and the scope of this report. SURFACE DRAINAGE Surface drainage should be carefully controlled during and after grading to prevent ponding and uncontrolled runoff adjacent to the structures. Particular care will be required during grading to maintain slopes, swales, and other erosion control measures needed to direct runoff toward permanent surface drainage facilities. Positive drainage of at least 2% away from the perimeters of the structures and site pavements should be incorporated into the design. In addition, it is recommended that nuisance water be directed away from the perimeter of the structures by the use of area drains in adjacent landscape and flatwork areas and roof drains tied into the site storm drain system. BIORETENTION AREAS We recommend that an impermeable liner be installed at the bottom and in the sides of all bioretention areas at the subject site to prevent lateral water migration into the adjacent structures and pavements. UTILITY TRENCH BACKFILL CONSIDERATIONS General New utility line pipelines should be backfilled with both select bedding materials beneath and around the pipes and compacted soil above the pipe bedding. Recommendations for the types of the materials to be used and the proper placement of these materials are provided in the following sections. December 6, 2018 14 GMU Project 18-101-00 .. • • .. .. • • - • • • • -• -• --- .. .. -• .. -- • .. • • .. - ... .. - -- .. ------ DRAFT Mr. Axay Patel, AUTONATION, Geotechnical Investigation Report -AutoNation BMW of Carlsbad, 1050/1060 Auto Center Court, City of Carlsbad, California Pipe Bedding The pipe bedding materials should extend from at least 6 inches below the pipes to at least 12 inches above the crown of the pipes. Pipe bedding should consist of either clean sand with a sand equivalent (SE) of at least 30 or crushed rock. If crushed rock is used, it should consist of ¾-inch crushed rock that conforms to Table 200-1.2 of the 2018 "Greenbook." Pipe bedding should also meet the minimum requirements of the City of Carlsbad. If the requirements of the County are more stringent, they should take precedence over the geotechnical recommendations. Sufficient laboratory testing should be performed to verify the bedding meets the minimum requirements of the Green book. Based on our subsurface exploration and knowledge of the onsite materials, the soils that will be excavated from the pipeline trenches will not meet the recommendations for pipe bedding materials; therefore, imported materials will be required for pipe bedding . Granular pipe bedding material having a sand equivalent of30 or greater should be properly placed in thicknesses not exceeding 3 feet, and then sufficiently flooded or jetted in place. With proper techniques, flooding or jetting is not expected to have an adverse impact on existing site soils. Crushed rock, if used, should be capped with filter fabric (Mirafi 140N, or equivalent) to prevent the migration of fines into the rock. Trench Backfill All existing soil material within the limits of the pipeline alignment are considered suitable for use as trench backfill above the pipe bedding zone if care is taken to remove all significant organic and other decomposable debris, moisture condition the soil materials as necessary, and separate and selectively place and/or stockpile any inert materials larger than 6 inches in maximum diameter. Imported soils are not anticipated for backfill since the on-site soils are suitable. However, if imported soils are used, the soils should consist of clean, granular materials with physical and chemical characteristics similar to those described herein for on-site soils. Any imported soils to be used as backfill should be evaluated and approved by GMU prior to placement. Soils to be used as trench backfill should be moistened, dried, or blended as necessary to achieve a minimum of 2% over optimum moisture content for compaction, placed in loose lifts no greater than 8 inches thick, and mechanically compacted/densified to at least 90% relative compaction as determined by ASTM Test Method D 1557. No rock or broken concrete greater than 6 inches in maximum diameter should be utilized in the trench backfills. December 6, 2018 15 GMU Project 18-101-00 DRAFT Mr. Axay Patel, AUTONATION, Geotechnical Investigation Report-AutoNation BMW of Carlsbad, 1050/1060 Auto Center Court, City of Carlsbad, Califomia SITE INFILTRATION Based on our preliminary percolation test result as discussed previously in this report and as presented in Appendix C, the two test locations showed inadequate infiltration rates within the upper 5 feet of the site soils. Also, due to the presence of engineered fill and dense to very dense formation, infiltration at the site is deemed not feasible. ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVEMENT THICKNESS RECOMMENDATIONS Asphalt Pavement Design Based on the R-value test results, as well as testing completed in the vicinity, an R-value of 50 was used for the design. The table below provides recommended minimum thicknesses for asphalt concrete (AC) and aggregate base sections for two traffic indices. Recommended Minimum AC and Base Section Thicknesses Traffic Asphalt Aggregate Location R-Value Index Concrete (in.) Base* (in.) Driveways 50 5.5 4.0 4.0 Parking Stalls 50 4.0 3.0 4.0 * assumed R-Value = 78 Asphalt concrete pavement construction should be m accordance with the following recommendations: • The planned pavement structural sections should consist of aggregate base materials (AB) and asphalt concrete materials (AC) of a type meeting the minimum Caltrans and City of Carlsbad requirements. • The subgrade soils should be prepared in accordance with the Corrective Grading section of this report. • The AB and AC should be compacted to at least 95% relative compaction. CONCRETE PAVEMENT TillCKNESS RECOMMENDATIONS It is anticipated that Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) pavement will be constructed as part of the drive way approaches. The table below provides minimum PCC pavement section constructed over properly prepared subgrade and AB section. December 6, 2018 16 GMU Project 18-101-00 DRAFT Mr. Axay Patel, AUTONATION, Geotechnical Investigation Report -AutoNation BMW of Carlsbad, 1050/1060 Auto Center Court, City of Carlsbad, California Recommended Minimum PCC and Base Section Thicknesses Traffic PCC (in.) Aggregate Location R-Value Index Base* (in.) Driveways 50 6.0 6.0 4.0 * assumed R-Value = 78 Concrete pavement construction should be in accordance with the following recommendations: • The pavement structural sections should consist of aggregate base materials (AB) and Portland Cement Concrete (PCC). • The subgrade soils should be prepared in accordance with the Corrective Grading section of this report. • The AB should be compacted to at least 95% relative compaction. CONCRETE FLATWORK DESIGN Due to the moderately expansive nature of the on-site soils, we recommend that the sub grade for the subject concrete flatwork be moisture conditioned to 2% over optimum to a depth of 12 inches below finish grade and compacted to 90% relative compaction. A 6-inch-thick section of Class 2 aggregate base (AB) or crushed miscellaneous base (CMB) should then be placed on the compacted subgrade soils, brought to optimum moisture condition, and compacted to 95% relative compaction prior to placement of flatwork reinforcing steel and concrete. For flatwork concrete underlain by aggregate base, Type IIN cement with a maximum water/cement ratio of 0.50 and minimum compressive strength of 3,250 psi may be used. Please ref er to the Concrete Flatwork Table below for a summary of our flatwork recommendations: Subgrade Aggregate Minimum Expansion Description Preparation Base Concrete Reinforcement<3l Joint Concrete<SJ (I) (Class 2 or Thickness Spacing <4> CMB)<2> (Maximum) Concrete Paving 2% over 6-inch-5-inches No. 3 bars @ IO-foot x 10-Type IIN ( flatwork/stair/curb optimum to thick 18"o.c.b.w. and foot using 9-3,250 psi adjacent) 12-inches at section at dowel into inch speed min. 90% relative 95% building and curb dowels with compaction relative using 9-inch No. 3 bars @ compaction Speed Dowels @ 18" o.c. 18"o.c (1) The moisture content and compaction o_f the subgrade must be verified by the geotechnical consultant prior to base placement. (2) For pedestrian usages only, S E. 30 sand may be used instead of Aggregate Base or CMB. December 6, 2018 17 GMU Project 18-101-00 DRAFT Mr. Axay Patel, AUTONATION, Geotechnical Investigation Report -AutoNation BMW of Carlsbad, 1050/1060 Auto Center Court, City of Carlsbad, California (3) Reinforcement to be placed in the middle of the recommended concrete section. (4) Control Joints: Suggested spacing of Pedestrian areas at JO'. (5) Final concrete mix design to be supplied by others. PLANTERS AND TREES Where new trees or large shrubs are to be located in close proximity of new concrete flatwork, rigid moisture/root barriers should be placed around the perimeter of the flatwork to at least 2 feet in depth in order to offer protection to the adjacent flatwork against potential root and moisture damage. Existing mature trees near flatwork areas should also incorporate a rigid moisture/root barrier placed at least 2 feet in depth below the top of the flatwork. PLAN REVIEW/ GEOTECHNICAL TESTING DURING GRADING/ FUTURE REPORT Plan Review GMU should review the final construction plans to confirm that they are consistent with our recommendations provided in this report. Geotechnical Testing Geotechnical observation and testing should be performed by GMU during the following stages of precise grading and construction: • During site clearing and grubbing. • During removal of any buried irrigation lines or other subsurface structures. • During all phases of grading including over-excavation, temporary excavations, removals, scarification, ground preparation, moisture conditioning, proof-rolling, and placement and compaction of all fill materials. • During grading for the proposed car dealership building. • During pavement and flatwork section placement and compaction. • Foundation slab construction. • When any unusual conditions are encountered. Future Report If required, a report summarizing our construction observation/testing services will be prepared at project completion. December 6, 2018 18 GMU Project 18-101-00 • -.. .. --• • ---• • - • • • --- • • -------------- -.. -- • • --... .. --... -- .. ... - --- -------- DRAFT Mr. Axay Patel, AUTONATION, Geotechnical Investigation Report-AutoNation BMW of Carlsbad, 105011060 Auto Center Court, City of Carlsbad, California LIMITATIONS All parties reviewing or utilizing this report should recognize that the findings, conclusions, and recommendations presented represent the results of our professional geological and geotechnical engineering efforts and judgements. Due to the inexact nature of the state of the art of these professions and the possible occurrence of undetected variables in subsurface conditions, we cannot guarantee that the conditions actually encountered during grading and foundation installation will be identical to those observed and sampled during our study or that there are no unknown subsurface conditions which could have an adverse effect on the use of the property. We have exercised a degree of care comparable to the standard of practice presently maintained by other professionals in the fields of geotechnical engineering and engineering geology, and believe that our findings present a reasonably representative description of geotechnical conditions and their probable influence on the grading and use of the property. Because our conclusions and recommendations are based on a limited amount of current and previous geotechnical exploration and analysis, all parties should recognize the need for possible revisions to our conclusions and recommendations during grading of the project. Additionally, our conclusions and recommendations are based on the assumption that our firm will act as the geotechnical engineer of record during grading of the project to observe the actual conditions exposed, to verify our design concepts and the grading contractor's general compliance with the project geotechnical specifications, and to provide our revised conclusions and recommendations should subsurface conditions differ significantly from those used as the basis for our conclusions and recommendations presented in this report . Detailed corrosion testing and recommendations for protecting buried ferrous metal and/or copper elements are beyond our purview. This report has not been prepared for use by other parties or projects other than those named or described herein. This report may not contain sufficient information for other parties or other purposes. December 6, 2018 19 GMU Project 18-101-00 DRAFT Mr. Axay Patel, AUTONATION, Geotechnical Investigation Report-AutoNation BMW of Carlsbad, I 050/1060 Auto Center Court, City of Carlsbad, California CLOSURE We are pleased to present the results of our geotechnical foundation investigation for this project. The Plates and Appendices that complete this report are listed in the Table of Contents. If you have any questions concerning our findings or recommendations, please do not hesitate to contact us and we will be happy to discuss them with you. dra/18-101-00R (12-06-18) December 6, 2018 Respectfully submitted, GMU GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Nadim Sunna, M.Sc., P.E. 84197 Project Geotechnical Engineer Lisa Bates, PG, CEG 2293 Associate Engineering Geologist David R. Atkinson Senior Engineer/Project Manager Reviewed by: S. Ali Bastani, Ph.D., P.E., G.E. 2458 Director of Engineering 20 GMU Project 18-101-00 • • .. • --- -- - • -• • --- • • • -- -- --- - - --... - • ---.. .. ... .. .. .. DRAFT Mr. Axay Patel, AUTONATION, Geotechnical Investigation Report -AutoNation BMW of Carlsbad, 105011060 Auto Center Court, City of Carlsbad, California REFERENCES SITE-SPECIFIC REFERENCES (1) (2) (3) Preliminary Grading and Drainage Plan, BMW of Carlsbad, CA, prepared by CDR West, dated :XXXXX . Woodward-Clyde Consultants, "Geotechnical Investigation, Car County Expansion, Carlsbad, California," Woodward-Clyde Consultants Project No. 8751256Y-S101, dated August 19, 1987. Kleinfelder, "Report of Testing and Observation During Grading, Car County Carlsbad Expansion, Carlsbad, California," Kleinfelder Project No. 51-1380-01, dated August 4, 1988. TECHNICAL REFERENCES California Building Standards Commission and International Conference of Building Officials, 2016, 2016 California Building Code. Draft Program Environmental Impact Report for the Carlsbad General Plan Update, Chapter 3.5: Geology, Soils and Seismicity. FEMA, 2012, Flood Insurance Rate Map, San Diego County, California and Incorporated Areas, Map Number 06073C0764G, dated May 16. Idriss, I.M., and Boulanger, R.W., 2008, Soil Liquefaction During Earthquakes: Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. Ishihara, K., 1985, Stability of Natural Deposits During Earthquakes, Proceedings, 1 Jlh International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, pp. 321-376. Pradel, D., 1998, Procedure to Evaluate Earthquake-Induced Settlements in Dry Sandy Soils, Journal ofGeotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 124, No. 4, pgs. 364-368. Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, by Public Works Standards, Inc., 2018, The Greenbook 2018 Edition . State of California, 2009, Tsunami Inundation Map for Emergency Planning, County of San Diego, Oceanside Quadrangle / San Luis Rey Quadrangle, dated June 1 . U.S. Geological Survey, 2013a, 2014 Interactive De-aggregations Program; web site address: http://geohazards.usgs.gov/deaggint/2008/ . December 6, 2018 21 GMU Project 18-101-00 DRAFT Mr. Axay Patel, AUTONATION, Geotechnical Investigation Report -AutoNation BMW of Carlsbad, 1050/1060 Auto Center Court, City of Carlsbad, California U.S. Geological Survey, 2013b, U.S. Seismic Design Maps, web site address: http://earthguake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/usdesign.php. December 6, 2018 22 GMU Project 18-101-00 ---.. .. .. - - -• • • • • • .. .. • • • • • • • >' ., • " Q. l, 0 0 8 I 5 ' ., ., 2 PROJECT LOCATION 1050 AUTO CENTER DR CARLSBAD.CA Agua Hed1ondo Lagoon (t a g 0 "\ '¾:, r. ,.,...., " g ..,. a ,._.,.a- (.9".d'' .., l ! f ::a 1 t .., i ~ 7-~ \, • • p 0 u I . -· a 0-.,_ ... Car/sbnd Flower Fields 0 m ·-Cannot'\ Road - .. a Location Map l l p Legolancl California ~/)~ ~ 0 800, GMlJ Date: December 6, 2018 Plate ? liii-.Z!!!!!!!~----~ ~----------1 :S.__ _____________________________ ...._ __ GIOTIONCM. ___ HC_.__P_ro_J•_ct_N_o_.: ___ 1a_-1_01_-4_o_ ....... __ _, I I B I a I I ., 0 N, 9 DH-7 ~ APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF PROPOSED BORINGS Geotechnical Map Date: December 6, 2018 Project No.: 18-101-00 Plate 2 - ---- -- ... ---... ------- APPENDIX A Geotechnical Exploration Procedures and Drill Hole Logs by GMU Geotechnical, Inc. GMU GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Mr. Axay Patel, AUTONATION, Geotec/mical Investigation Report-AutoNation BMW of Carlsbad, 1050/1060 Auto Center Court, City of Carlsbad, California APPENDIX A GMU GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION PROCEDURES AND DRILL HOLE LOGS DRAFT Our exploration consisted of one ( l) hollow-stem auger drill hole within the site to a maximum depth of 50 feet, four (4) hollow-stem auger drill hole within the site to a maximum depth of 20 feet, and two (2) hollow-stem auger drill hole within the site to a maximum depth of 5 feet in order to provide subsurface information for pavement design, continuous soil data for the dealership building foundation design, and percolation tests. The approximate locations of the drill holes are shown on Plate 2 -Geotechnical Map. Our drill holes were logged, and "undisturbed" samples were taken using a 3.0-inch outside- diameter drive sampler which contains a 2.416-inch-diameter brass sample sleeve 6 inches in length. In addition, blow counts recorded during sampling from the drive sampler are shown on the drill hole logs. Standard Penetration Tests (SPTs) were also taken in the rotary wash drill holes. Small bulk samples of the material were collected, and blow counts for each SPT and sleeve sample were recorded on the logs. Bulk samples of the soil materials were also collected from some of the drill holes. The logs of each drill hole are contained in this Appendix, and the Legend to Logs is presented as Plate A-1 and A-2. The geologic and engineering field descriptions and classifications that appear on these logs are prepared according to Corps of Engineers and Bureau of Reclamation standards. Major soil classifications are prepared according to the Unified Soil Classification System as modified by ASTM Standard No. 2487. Since the description and classification that appear on the Log of Drill Hole are intended to be that which most accurately describe a given interval of a drill hole (frequently an interval of several feet), discrepancies do occur in the Unified Soil Classification System nomenclature between that interval and a particular sample in that interval. For example, an 8-foot-thick interval in the Log of Drill Hole may be identified as silty sand (SM) while one sample taken within the interval may have individually been identified as sandy silt (ML). This discrepancy is frequently allowed to remain to emphasize the occurrence of local textural variations in the interval. December 6, 2018 A-1 GMU Project 18-101-00 MAJOR DIVISIONS :& TYPICAL NAMES COARSE-GRAINED SOILS More Than 50% Retained On No.200 Sieve Based on The Material Passing The 3-lnch (75mm) Sieve. Reference: ASTM Standard 02487 FINE-GRAINED SOILS 50% or More Passe The No.200 Sieve Based on The Material Passing The 3-lnch (75mm) Sieve. Reference: ASTM Standard 02487 HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS GRAVELS 50% or More of Coarse Fraction Retained on No.4 Sieve SANDS More Than 50% Clean Gravels Gravels With Fines Clean Sands E >, <J) Well Graded Gravels and Gravel-Sand Mixtures, Little or No Fines. GP --Poorly Graded Gravels and Gravel-Sand Mi><tures _.;--_ Little or No Fines. GM .. • • Silty Gravels, Gravel-Sand-Silt Mixtures. GC Clayey Gravels, Gravel-Sand-Clay Mixtures. SW Well Graded Sands and Gravelly Sands, Little or No Fines. SP ·:.·:.· Poorly Graded Sands and Gravelly Sands, Little or No Fines. of Coarse Fraction 1-----+--+-,,...,..+-----------------------11 Passes Sands SM ;. ·: ·: No.4 Sieve With : ·: ·: Fines SC @... SILTS AND CLAYS Liquid Limit Less Than SO% SILTS AND CLAYS Liquid Limit 50% or Greater ML I CL OL MH 111 CH ~ OH - Silty Sands, Sand-Silt Mixtures. Clayey Sands, Sand-Clay Mixtures. Inorganic Silts, Very Fine Sands, Rock Flour, Silty or Clayey Fine Sands or Clayey Silts With Slight Plasticity. Inorganic Clays of Low To Medium Plasticity, Gravelly Clays, Sandy Clays. Silty Clays, Lean Clays. Organic Silts and Organic Silty Clays of Low Plasticity Inorganic Silts, Micaceous or Diatomaceous Fine Sandy or Silty Soils, Elastic Silts. Inorganic Clays of High Plasticity, Fat Clays. Organic Clays of Medium To High Plasticity, Organic Silts. PT ~ Peat and Other Highly Organic Soils. The descnpt,ve terminology of the logs is modified from current ASTM Standards to suit the purposes of this study ADDITIONAL TESTS OS = Direct Shear HY = Hydrometer Test TC= Triaxial Compression Test UC = Unconfined Compression CN = Consolidation Test (T) = Time Rate EX = Expansion Test CP = Compaction Test PS = Particle Size Distribution El = Expansion Index SE = Sand Equivalent Test AL = Atterberg Limits FC = Chemical Tests RV= Resistance Value SG = Specific Gravity SU = Sulfates CH = Chlorides MR = Minimum Resistivity pH (N) = Natural Undisturbed Sample (R) = Remolded Sample CS = Collapse TesVSwell-Settlement GMU GEOTECHNICAL INC. PS-11/1612012 GEOLOGIC NOMENCLATURE B = Bedding C = Contact J = Joint F = Fracture Flt= Fault S = Shear RS = Rupture Surface 0,./ = Seepage -I-. = Groundwater SAMPLE SYMBOLS rn [!] [!] []] @] Undisturbed Sample (California Sample) Undisturbed Sample (Shelby Tube) Bulk Sample Unsuccessful Sampling Attempt SPT Sample 10: 10 Blows for 12-lnches Penetration 6/4: 6 Blows Per 4-lnches Penetration P: Push (13): Uncorrected Blow Counts ("N" Values) for 12-lnches Penetration-Standard Penetration Test (SPT) 1% 10%. LEGEND TO LOGS ASTM Designation: D 2487 3% 20% (Based on Unified Soil Classification System) 5% Plate A-1 SOIL DENSITY/CONSISTENCY FINE GRAINED Consistency Field Test Verv Soft Easilv penetrated by thumb, exudes between fingers Soft Easily penetrated one inch by thumb, molded by fingers Firm Penetrated over 1/2 inch by thumb with moderate effort Stiff Penetrated about 1/2 inch by thumb with great effort VervStiff Readily indented by thumbnail Hard Indented with difficulty by thumbnail COARSE GRAINED Density Field Test Verv Loose Easilv oenetrated with 0.5" rod pushed by hand Loose Easily penetrated with 0.5" rod pushed by hand Medium Dense Easily oenetrated 1' with 0.5" rod driven by Sib hammer Dense Dificult to oenetrat 1' with 0.5" rod driven by Sib hammer Very Dense Penetrated few inches with 0.5" rod driven by Sib hammer BEDROCK HARDNESS Density Field Test SPT (#blows/foot) Soft Can be crushed by hand, soil like and structureless 1-30 Moderatelv Hard Can be orooved with finaemails, crumbles with hammer 30-50 Hard Can't break by hand, can be grooved with knife 50-100 Verv Hard Scratches with knife, chics with hammer blows >100 GRAIN SIZE Description Sieve Size Grain Size Approximate Size Boulders >12" >12" Laraer than a basketball Cobbles 3-12" 3-12" Fist-sized to basketball-sized Gravel Coarse 3/4-3" 3/4-3" Thumb-sized to fist-sized Fine #4-3/4" 0.19-0.75" Pea-sized to thumb-sized Coarse #10-#4 0.079-0.19" Rock-salt-sized to pea-sized Sand Medium #40-#10 0.017-0.079" Suaar-sized to rock salt-sized Fine #200-#40 0.0029-0.017" Flour-sized to suaar-sized Fines passing #200 <0.0029" Flour-sized and smaller SPT Mod f#blows/footl l#blows/footl <2 <3 2-4 3-6 4-8 6-12 8-15 12-25 15-30 25-50 >30 >50 SPT Mod f#blows/footl f#blows/footl <4 <5 4-10 5-12 10-30 12-35 31-50 35-60 >50 >60 ! MODIFIERS Trace 1% Few 1-5% Some 5-12% Numerous 12-20% Abundant >20% MOISTURE CONTENT Dry-Very little or no moisture Damp-Some moisture but less than optimum Moist-Near optimum Very Moist-Above optimum WeVSaturated-Contains free moisture GMU LEGEND TO LOGS Plate A-2 GEOTECHNICAL. INC. PS-11/16/2012 I Project: AUTONATION BMW of Carlsbad Log of Drill Hole DH-1 Sheet 1 of 2 Project Location: 1050 & 1060 Auto Center Ct, Carlsbad, CA Project Number: 18-101-00 Date(s) 5/29/1 8 Logged BD Checked LB Drilled By By Drilling Hollow Stem Auger Drilling 2R DRILLING Total Depth 21.5 feet Method Contractor of Drill Hole Drill Rig Type CME75 Diameter(s) of Hole, inches 8" Afeprox. Surface E evation, ft MSL 103.0 Groundwater Depth NOT ENCOUNTERED [0.0] Sampling BULK, CAL, SPT Drill Hole NATIVE [Elevation], feet Method(s) Backfill Remarks Driving Method and Drop 140 lb AUTO HAMMER SAMPLEDATJI TEST DATA .; .S! (!) GEOLOGICAL to z 0 ENGINEERING ;f!. .; ...J " 1--g_ ...J 0 .S! t) CLASSIFICATION AND ORIENTATION CLASSIFICATION AND (J) £! W · <( i== 0::: s: o:::1--z :i :i: w (!) i-: ::>z zi 0 ~ c.. DESCRIPTION DATA DESCRIPTION ...J WO z::i: 1--W E~ I-c.. co ...J 552 (J)I--=>c, w c.. ~ :::; :::; co -Z >--0(JJ ...J w <( ::> u.. ~~ oo 0:::W ow w 0 (!) (J) zo :::eu OS: <( I---..4$PHALT I SPHAL T CONCRETE (approximately •', : 'CRUSHED AGGREGATE BASE I ~-5 inches) II ··:,·· :: SANTIAGO FORMATION {Tsa) CRUSHED AGGREGATE BASE I . ..... :::◄:: ,', approximately 3 inches) ,', SIL TY SANDSTONE (SM); dark brown, ·:,,( damp, medium dense to dense, .::-::. ,• fine-grained sand ::◄:: 100 >( .. '>( ::~: ·.' .' ,• ::~:· -5 ~---SIL TY SANDSTONE (SM); orange brown, ~ 13 damp, medium dense to dense, 15 fine-grained sand 15 95 :··: ,• ~..:..,.·: -POORLY GRADED SANDSTONE (SP); light brown to orange brown, very dense, -10 fine grained sand with trace gravel E 6 5 107 50/4" 90 ,. grayish brown -15 rn FAT CLAY (CH); gray, moist to very ~ 6 II moist, hard 9 ii 24 , 11fiJ Ii 85 .!ui: ;:·:,i if ..,, GMU Drill Hole DH-1 GEOTECHNICAL INC. <X) ai ;::: -, Q. (!) $ 0 ,b .., > w a: I a I Project: AUTONATION BMW of Carlsbad Project Location: 1050 & 1060 Auto Center Ct, Carlsbad, CA Log of Drill Hole DH-1 Sheet 2 of 2 Project Number: 18-101-00 a, SAMPLE DATA TEST DATA ~ (!) (0 z 0 GEOLOGICAL ENGINEERING ?f!. a, ...J <I) 'ti ...J 0 ~ (.) CLASSIFICATION AND ORIENTATION CLASSIFICATION AND Cl) f! W · f-a. <( a:S: a:f-z ~ :i :i: w WO C!>t-.:" =,Z z~ 0 Cl. DESCRIPTION DATA DESCRIPTION ...J Z I f-w E~ f-(l_ ID...J 5Q C/lf-=>c., w Cl. ~ ::; ::, ID -Z ►-OCfl ...J w <( => u. ~~ oo 0::W ow w □ (!) Cl) zo ::;u OS: <( f- ~'(' L p0(6" 8 104 I:!! . ., moist, trace yellow sand fti~{ ~ Total Depth: 21.5 feet No Groundwater 80 GMU Drill Hole DH-1 GEOTECHNICAL INC. "' ai ;::: ~ w Ct: I 0 I Project: AUTONATION BMW of Carlsbad Log of Drill Hole DH-2 Sheet 1 of 2 Project Location: 1050 & 1060 Auto Center Ct, Carlsbad, CA Project Number: 18-101-00 Date(s) 5/29/18 Logged BD Checked LB Drilled By By Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger Drilling Contractor 2R DRILLING Total Depth of Drill Hole 21.5 feet Drill Rig Type CME75 Diameter(s) of Hole, inches 8" Afiprox. Surface E evation, ft MSL 105.0 Groundwater Depth NOT ENCOUNTERED [0.0] Sampling BULK, CAL, SPT Drill Hole NATIVE [Elevation], feet Method(s) Backfill Remarks Driving Method 140 lb AUTO HAMMER and Drop SAMPLEDAT.4 TEST DATA Q) ~ (.'.) lo z 0 GEOLOGICAL ENGINEERING ~ Q) ....I "' f-~ ..J 0 ~ (.) CLASSIFICATION AND ORIENTATION CLASSIFICATION AND en £! ~.,.: <( j::: 0::?; z :i :i: w WO c.,.,.: =>z z~ 0 ~ DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION ..J ZI f-w E~ f-c.. DATA 0.. m --' 5Q enf-=>c., w c.. ~ :::;; :::;;m -Z >--Oen ....I w <( ::::> u.. ~~ oo o::w ow UJ 0 (.'.) en zo :::;;u □?: <( f- ~ ,4SPHALT / SPHAL T CONCRETE (approximately . CRUSHED AGGREGATE BASE I l'.-5 inches) >( SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa) JRUSHED AGGREGATE BASE ·:•( approximately 3 inches) POORLY GRADED SANDSTONE (SP); .:~. dark brown, damp, dense to very dense, ::~: fine-grained sand ::,( brown ◄ >( >< 100 >-5 .7 .. >( -SIL TY SANDSTONE (SM); orange brown, 21 13 114 moist, very dense, fine-to-medium ,-33 coarse-grained sand, some gravel ,-50 - ,, 95 >-10 '' light gray, damp to moist, fine-grained ~ 16 . ·.: ... sand 35 .-·:. 50 .----- ... _. 90 ~15 medium to coarse-grained sand. ( 22 8 100 50/2" -::- ,, GMU Drill Hole DH-2 GEOT£Cf;NICAL INC. ~ (!) "' 5 ::::, :::;; (!) -, 0.. (!) 9 § d, "' > w a: :r: Cl I Project: AUTONATION BMW of Carlsbad Project Location: 1050 & 1060 Auto Center Ct, Carlsbad, CA Log of Drill Hole DH-2 Sheet 2 of 2 Project Number: 18-101-00 .; SAMPLE DAT.II TEST DATA .& (!) to z 0 GEOLOGICAL ENGINEERING 'if-.; ...J "' 't; ...J 0 .& t) CLASSIFICATION AND ORIENTATION CLASSIFICATION AND en £! w • I-a. < ~ a::S: a:1-z :i I w WO (!) ,.: =>z zi 0 < a. DESCRIPTION DATA DESCRIPTION ...J z :r: 1-W t:~ > I-a. "'...J ~ IB enl--::::>(!) w a. ~ :::;; ::;;ai -Z >--Cl en ...J w < ::::> u. 15 :s: oo c,:W ow w 0 (!) en zo ::.u o:S: <I- :1:·:1: fine-grained sand ' 50(6" Total Depth: 20.5 feet No Groundwater GMU Drill Hole DH-2 GEOTECHNICAL INC. <X) iii ;::: S; w a: I 0 I Project: AUTONATION BMW of Carlsbad Log of Drill Hole DH-3 Sheet 1 of 3 Project Location: 1050 & 1060 Auto Center Ct, Carlsbad, CA Project Number: 18-101-00 Date(s) 5/29/1 8 Logged BD Checked LB Drilled By By Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger Drilling Contractor 2RDRILLING Total Depth of Drill Hole 51.5 feet Drill Rig Type CME75 Diameter(s) of Hole, inches 8" Afeprox. Surface E evation, ft MSL 103.0 Groundwater Depth NOT ENCOUNTERED (0.0) Sampling BULK, CAL, SPT Drill Hole NATIVE [Elevation], feet Method(s) Backfill Remarks Driving Method 140 lb AUTO HAMMER and Drop SAMPLE DAT.II TEST DATA Q) .S! C, GEOLOGICAL ENGINEERING !o z Q) 0 "' ~ 0 ..J ...J <( 0 .S! CLASSIFICATION AND ORIENTATION CLASSIFICATION AND Cl) £l W· I-~ (..) et: 'i: a:1-z i= :i :i: w c.,...: :::,Z -1-0 ;; DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION ..J WO ZI 1-W ZI t:~ I-0.. DATA a. IIl..J 5Q C/)1-:::,(!) UJ 0.. ~ ::::;; ::::;; IIl -Z >--OCI) ...J w <( :::,u.. ~~ oo et:W ow w 0 C, Cl) zo ::::;;u o'i: <( I---...ASPHALT , -"SPHAL T CONCRETE (approximately .. CRUSHED AGGREGATE BASE I f.5 inches) // :::,:: ENGINEERED FILL (Qafc) :::RUSHED AGGREGATE BASE .::{_ .. approximately 3 inches) SIL TY SAND (SM); brown, damp to moist, ·::◄:· .. dense to very dense, fine-grained sand :::{ ·::,··· 100 ...... ...... ,' .>( .· .. ·::{ .. -5 :::◄:: . SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa) POORLY GRADED SANDSTONE with 15 3 1079 .. SILT (SP-SM); light brown with some -27 ·.·. yellow, moist, very dense, fine grained -50 sand - ·. 95 -10 ~ .. : ,-POORLY GRADED SANDSTONE (SP); ~ 11 brown with some dark yellow, moist, 17 dense 19 ... 90 . ·: .. . •· -15 dark brown, very dense, medium ...... 17 7 116 coarse-grained sand. >-32 . •· ...... 45 .. -.. 85 : .. GMU Drill Hole DH-3 GEOTECHNICAL INC -, 0.. ~ ID '.5 ::::, ::; " ~ " 0 9 § a, ~ w a: r 0 I Project: AUTONATION BMW of Carlsbad Project Location: 1050 & 1060 Auto Center Ct, Carlsbad, CA Log of Drill Hole DH-3 Sheet 2 of 3 Project Number: 18-101-00 QJ SAMPLE DATA TEST DATA .!!! C!) 1o z 0 GEOLOGICAL ENGINEERING * QJ ...J (II u ...J 0 .!!! (.) CLASSIFICATION AND ORIENTATION CLASSIFICATION AND en f! w -I-': <( ~ Q'.~ a:1-z :i :i: w c.,i-.: ::::,Z z~ 0 0.. DESCRIPTION DATA DESCRIPTION ...J WO zr 1-W t:~ I-0.. ID-' ~~ enl-::::>c., UJ 0.. ~ ::; ::;m -Z >--Oen ...J w <( ::::,u.. :s ~ oo a:W ow UJ 0 C!) en zo :::;u 0~ <( I- light brown to brown, medium dense, R 11 fine-grained sand 12 brown to dark brown ts 17 .. 80 : .· . .. . •· .. -25 light to dark brown with some black, dry to E 15 4 104 .•· .. damp, very dense 50/6' 75 .. -30 -::' ,-SIL TY SANDSTONE (SM); moist, § 5 mediume dense, fine-grained sand 9 10 ·:. •· .. . • .• 70 -35 ··_::-gray with some yellow, slightly moist, very -15 10 104 dense -26 ..... > -50 ,..:..,.. ,-POORLY GRADED SANDSTONE (SP); gray with some yellow, damp, medium to coarse-grained sand 65 .. •.· -40 dark gray, damp, medium dense ~ 7 13 gray 17 --' .. ~---SIL TY SANDSTONE (SM); dark gray, ...... damp, very dense 60 .. . . . · .. .. GMU Drill Hole DH-3 GEOTECHNICAL. INC I Project: AUTONATION BMW of Carlsbad Project Location: 1050 & 1060 Auto Center Ct, Carlsbad, CA Log of Drill Hole DH-3 Sheet 3 of 3 Project Number: 18-101-00 a, SAMPLE DAT.II TEST DATA -2! (!) GEOLOGICAL ENGINEERING <O z a, 0 "' ;f. t; --' 0 -2! u CLASSIFICATION AND ORIENTATION CLASSIFICATION AND en ,9 );!..:-1--': a:~ ~ :r: :i: w WO (!) ..:-::::,Z z~ DESCRIPTION DATA DESCRIPTION --' z J: 1--W en > 1--a. a. (l) ...J ~ ~ enl--::::,(!) 1--w a. ~ ::;; ::;;m -Z >--en --' w < ::::, u. ls~ oo a:W w w Cl (!) en zo ::eu 0~ 1-- •·,. grayish yellowish brown, fine-to-medium l 37 12 109 coarse-grained sand 50 .. .... 55 -50 ·_::• ~ 18 ,', 31 :<i: 44 ----------------Total Depth: 51.5 feet No Groundwater GMU Drill Hole DH-3 GEOTECHNICAL INC. ..., n. (!) 0 9 0 ,;, ~ w Q'. I 0 I Project: AUTONATION BMW of Carlsbad Log of Drill Hole DH-4 Sheet 1 of 2 Project Location: 1050 & 1060 Auto Center Ct, Carlsbad, CA Project Number: 18-101-00 Date(s) 5/29/18 Logged BD Checked LB Drilled By By Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger Drilling Contractor 2R DRILLING Total Depth of Drill Hole 21.5 feet Drill Rig Type CME75 Diameter(s) of Hole, inches 8" A~prox. Surface E evation, ft MSL 101.0 Groundwater Depth NOT ENCOUNTERED [0.0] Sampling BULK, CAL, SPT Drill Hole NATIVE [Elevation], feet Method(s) Backfill Remarks Driving Method and Drop 140 lb AUTO HAMMER SAMPLE DATA TEST DATA ., .l!! (.') !o z 0 GEOLOGICAL ENGINEERING ;f. ., ...J ., 1-g_ ....J 0 .l!! (.) CLASSIFICATION AND ORIENTATION CLASSIFICATION AND CJ) .. w -<( i= Q'. s: Q'.1-z I :i: w (.') ~ ::Jz -~ 0 ~ a.. DESCRIPTION DATA DESCRIPTION ....J WO ZI 1-W Z:i; ~~ I-a.. CD ....J 5Q (/)I-:::)(.') w a.. ~ ::; ::; CD -Z >--0CJ) ...J w <( ::Ju.. ~~ oo crW Ow w □ (.') CJ) zo ::;u OS: <( I- 4SPHALT "SPHAL T CONCRETE (approximately 3 -.... nches) 1 er'.".: "'£:RUSHED AGGREGATE BASE I ··:-( 100 SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa) ~RUSHED AGGREGATE BASE / e· •. approximately 4 inches) ··:.,( .· · .. SIL TY SANDSTONE (SM); dark brown, °>{ damp, fine to medium coarse-grained :::,:: .. sand :· ... ::{ .. ·:,: .. ::,:. >( -5 _;..,-,-POORLY GRADED SANDSTONE (SP); ·:,· § 7 light to orange brown, damp, medium 10 95 dense, fine-to-medium coarse-grained 19 sand -10 -9 28 94 ~ ~SANDY CLAYSTONE (CL); gray, moist, 17 90 very stiff, fine-grained sand -23 ~ ,-SIL TY SANDSTONE (SM); orangish ..... brown, moist, medium dense, medium coarse-grained sand .. ·. >-15 .. ~ 8 . • .. .. 12 85 ...... 17 .• GMU Drill Hole DH-4 GEOTECHNICAL INC. ~ w Q'. J: 0 I Project: AUTONATION BMW of Carlsbad Project Location: 1050 & 1060 Auto Center Ct, Carlsbad, CA Log of Drill Hole DH-4 Sheet 2 of 2 Project Number: 18-101-00 Q) SAMPLE DAT.II TEST DATA -2? (!J ENGINEERING "' z· Q) 0 GEOLOGICAL V, 'if. 0 .J .J <f) ,9 w. <( 0 -2? u CLASSIFICATION AND ORIENTATION CLASSIFICATION AND a:;:: a:1-I-': z i== I I' w WO (!) ~ ::,Z zj: 0 <( DESCRIPTION DATA DESCRIPTION .J z J: 1-W E~ > I-a.. 0.. CD .J 5Q <f)I-::,(!) w a.. ~ ::;; ::;;m -Z >--0<f) ....I w <( ::, u. ~~ oo a:W ow w Cl (!J <f) zo ::i:U oi:: <( I- orangish brown with some yellow, very 15 13 120 .. dense -27 80 -50 ----------------Total Depth: 21.5 feet No Groundwater GMU Drill Hole DH-4 GEOTECHNICAI.. INC, -, tl. (!) a, '.5 :::, ::;; (!) -, tl. (!) 0 9 § ,;, ~ w 0: I 0 I Project: AUTONATION BMW of Carlsbad Log of Drill Hole DH-5 Sheet 1 of 2 Project Location: 1050 & 1060 Auto Center Ct, Carlsbad, CA Project Number: 18-101-00 Date(s) 5/29/18 Logged BD Checked LB Drilled By By Drilling Hollow Stem Auger Drilling 2R DRILLING Total Depth 21 .5 feet Method Contractor of Drill Hole Drill Rig Type CME75 Diameter(s) of Hole, inches 8" Aeprox. Surface E evation, ft MSL 102.0 Groundwater Depth NOT ENCOUNTERED [0.0] Sampling BULK, CAL, SPT Drill Hole NATIVE [Elevation], feet Method(s) Backfill Remarks Driving Method and Drop 140 lb AUTO HAMMER SAMPLE DATA TEST DATA ci ~ (!) 1o z 0 GEOLOGICAL ENGINEERING ~ ci ....I "' 'o ....I 0 ~ () CLASSIFICATION AND ORIENTATION CLASSIFICATION AND Cl) £! 8:!i-:-1-": <( ~ 0: s: z J: :i: w (!) i-:-:::,Z z~ 0 0.. DESCRIPTION DATA DESCRIPTION ....I WO Z I 1-W t:~ I-0.. al...J 5Q (/)I-:::,(!) UJ 0.. c2 ::;; ::;; al -Z >--0 (/) ....I UJ <( :::,u.. ~~ oo 0:W o w UJ □ (!) Cl) z o :::;u OS: <( I- r='@ LASPHALT "SPHAL T CONCRETE (approximately 3 nches) ,'. ""." rcRUSHED AGGREGATE BASE I ::◄:: ENGINEERED FILL (Qafc) CRUSHED AGGREGATE BASE / approximately 4 inches) ·::~:· 100 SIL TY SAND (SM); brown, damp, >( ··_::-fine-grained sand _::{_ ?::. >( -· -· :◄ .• >( ...... \.,( -· ·:•· -5 ·· .. SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa) SIL TY SANDSTONE (SM); dark brown, 21 7 124 damp, very dense, medium grained sand, >-33 ..... trace roots and gravel ~ 50 ~ 95 ..... :·' _. -10 .. -POORLY GRADED SANDSTONE (SP); ~ 7 brown to dark brown, damp, medium 12 : dense to very dense, fine-to-medium coarse-grained sand, trace silt 14 90 >-15 .. 50/5" 4 114 85 GMU Drill Hole DH-5 GEOTECHNICAL INC ~ (!) ~ :::, :::; (!) -, 0.. (!) ~ 0 d, S; w a: I 0 I Project: AUTONATION BMW of Carlsbad Project Location: 1050 & 1060 Auto Center Ct, Carlsbad, CA Log of Drill Hole DH-5 Sheet 2 of 2 Project Number: 18-101-00 ., SAMPLE DATA TEST DATA -2! (!) ENGINEERING (0 z 0 GEOLOGICAL ',I!. ., _, "' 'ti ...J 0 -2! u CLASSIFICATION AND ORIENTATION CLASSIFICATION AND Cl) £! l:!~ 1-": <( l= a:: s: (!) ~ z :i :i: UJ WO ::,Z zj: 0 <( DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION _, ZI 1-UJ E~ > I-a. DATA 0.. ID ...J 5£1 C/)1-::,(!) w a. ~ :::; ::;in -Z >--0CI) _, w <( ::,u.. ~~ oo a::UJ ow w Cl (!) Cl) zo :::;u OS: <( I- : R 11 17 light brown, very dense, fine to medium K 40 \!rained sand I 80 1 mai uepm: .£1.::, reec No Groundwater GMU Drill Hole DH-5 GEOTECHNICAL. INC. <X) iii ;::: -, a.. (!) ~ ::, :::; (!) ~ (!) 0 9 0 a, <') > w 0:: I 0 I Project: AUTONATION BMW of Carlsbad Log of Drill Hole DH-6 Sheet 1 of 1 Project Location: 1050 & 1060 Auto Center Ct, Carlsbad, CA Project Number: 18-101-00 Date(s) 5/29/18 Logged BD Checked LB Drilled By By Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger Drilling Contractor 2R DRILLING Total Depth of Drill Hole 5.0 feet Drill Rig Type CME75 Diameter(s) of Hole, inches 8" Afeprox. Surface E evation, ft MSL 101.0 Groundwater Depth NOT ENCOUNTERED [0.0) Sampling BULK, CAL, SPT Drill Hole NATIVE [Elevation], feet Method(s) Backfill Remarks Driving Method and Drop 140 lb AUTO HAMMER SAMPLE DAT.41 TEST DATA ai ~ (!) «> z 0 GEOLOGICAL ENGINEERING ;/1 ai ...J <I) 1-8: ...J 0 ~ (.) CLASSIFICATION AND ORIENTATION CLASSIFICATION AND en B. w -<( i== o::~ o::1-z :i :i: w c., ~ ::,Z z~ 0 ~ 0.. DESCRIPTION DATA DESCRIPTION ...J WO ZI 1-W t:~ I-a.. (O...J S:Q enl-:::,c., w 0.. ~ :::; :::;; co -Z >--Oen ...J w <( :::, LL ~~ oo 0::W ow w 0 (!) en zo ::OU 0~ <( I- -= --ASPHALT SPHAL T CONCRETE (approximately 1. RUSHED AGGREGATE BASE I .5 inches) :::,: 100 .. ENGINEERED FILL (Qafc) :;RUSHED AGGREGATE BASE approximately 3 inches) I >( .. SIL TY SAND (SM); brown, damp, ::◄:. medium dense to dense, fine to medium ::,,( coarse-grained sand >{. •·. ::~: .::~:_ ···,( -5 :::◄:: Total Depth: 5 feet No Groundwater GMU Drill Hole DH-6 GEOTECHNICAI.. INC ii'. (.!) a, 5 ::::, :::; (.!) .., a.. (.!) ~ § rb I Project: AUTONATION BMW of Carlsbad Log of Drill Hole DH-7 Sheet 1 of 1 Project Location: 1050 & 1060 Auto Center Ct, Carlsbad, CA Project Number: 18-101-00 Date(s) 5/29/18 Logged BD Checked LB Drilled By By Drilling Hollow Stem Auger Drilling 2R DRILLING Total Depth 5.0 feet Method Contractor of Drill Hole Drill Rig Type CME75 Diameter(s) of Hole, inches 8" A~prox. Surface E evalion, fl MSL 101.0 Groundwater Depth NOT ENCOUNTERED [0.0] Sampling BULK, CAL, SPT Drill Hole NATIVE [Elevation], feet Method(s) Backfill Remarks Driving Method 140 lb AUTO HAMMER and Drop SAMPLE DAT.41 TEST DATA .; .& (.!) GEOLOGICAL ENGINEERING io z 0 #-.; ...J "' ..... g_ ...J VJ ,fl ~..: <( 0 .& u CLASSIFICATION AND ORIENTATION CLASSIFICATION AND a:~ z ~ :i :i: w WO (.!) ..: ::::,Z z~ 0 <( DESCRIPTION DATA DESCRIPTION ...J ZI ..... w E~ > ..... a. a. 00 ...J 5Q VJ ..... ::::,(.!) UJ a. ~ :::; :::; 00 -Z >--OVJ ...J UJ <( ::::,u.. ~~ oo a:W ow UJ 0 (.!) VJ zo :::.u 0~ <( ..... = -ASPHALT • SPHAL T CONCRETE (approximately .. 'CRUSHED AGGREGATE BASE I .5 inches) II ··:,·· CRUSHED AGGREGATE BASE r· 100 SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa) >< approximately 3 inches) .. SIL TY SANDSTONE (SM); dark brown, >,( .. damp ·:◄· .. ·::{ :::,:_ ),( ·.:-·:,{ >-5 >( Total Depth: 5 feet No Groundwater GMU Drill Hole DH-7 CEOTECHNICAL INC. APPENDIX A-1 Previous Boring Logs and Test Pits by Others GMU DATE OF BORING 2-2!'.1-82 WATER DEPTH DATE MEASURED TYPE OF DRILL RIG CME 55 HOLE DIAMETER 8" H. S .A. WEIGHT OF HAMMER 140 lbs. FALLING 30" SAMPLES b .... ► J!? .,..: IL _:: IJ,J# I-1/) ~ :IE p iii Cl) lo.. IJ,J ~§ Si-: w t ...J DESCRIPTION ffi .... I-a. ...._ I-z :E en (I) l,J 0 ~ 0: D. ct ~ 0 W -I-ILi w 1/) g z er. ~8 ~ 5 0 a, :::> t; 0 SURFACE ELEVATION: Annroximatelv 112' -1 K 19 Moist, dark gray brown, silty sand with some clay CULTIVATED SOIL - -Medium dense, moist, light reddish bziown-ito brown, s.hlty sand (SM) LINDAVISTA FORMATION - 5-~ 24 2 :; 108 KiS , - - - -Medium dense to dense, moist, light brown, poorly 10-graded sand (SP) locally with some siltvand reddish 3 ~ 24 brown mottles LINDAVISTA FORMATION 5 104 GS - - - - 15-~ 51 -4 - -5 Dense, moist, brown, silty sand (SM) -... LINDAVISTA FORMATION 20-~ 6 52 - -... I -7 -._ Dense to very dense, moist, brown to dark brown, silty to poorly graded sand (SM/SP) 25-... LINDAVISTA FORMATION -8 x 46 - - - 30 .Project: CAR COUNTRY EXPANSION Fig. Project No . 8751256Y-SI01 LOG OF BORING B-1 A-2 LA/OR-0181-202 WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS DATE OF BORING ___ 7_-_2_4-_s_7 __ WATER DEPTH _____ DATE MEASURED ___ _ TYPE OF DRILL RIG OIB 55 HOLE DIAMETER 8 " H.S.A. WEIGHT OF HAMMER 140 lbs. F'ALLING __ 3_o_"_SAMPLES t t A. .., 0 9 j 80 - . 35-1- 10 61 - - - - - - - 45- - - - 50- - - - - -- 60- OESCR I PTION SURFACE ELEVATION: Approximately 112' (Continued) riense to very ,'\ense, moist, brm:n tu :lark b,·own , silty to poorly gra<1e-~. sand (SM/SP) LINDAVISTA FOID1ATION 1 Pale bro•-·m t <.-liqht gray be,low 45 • Botton, of Bnr.inq at 56½ feet Prc,;ect: Cl\R COUNTRY EXPANSION CONT LOG OF BORING B-1 . Project No. 8751256\'-SIOl i: ii z ~i ► a: 0 a: .., ::c ... 0 Fig. A-3 WOODWARD -CLYDE CONSULTANTS DATE OF TEST PIT _____ 1-_2_2_-a_1 ____ PIT OIMENSIONS ____ i_s_ .. _s_ac_kh_oe ____ _ EQUIPMENT t: - - - -- 1 I 5-- - - - - 10- - - - - case 588E DESCRIPTION SURFACE ELEVATION: Approximately 1~6' Dry to moist:,) ,brown to dark brown, silty sand CULTIVATED SOIL Medium dense, moist, reddish b~own with gray mottles, silty sand (SM) LINDAVISTA FORMA~ION Bottom of Pit at 5¼ feet Project: CAR COUNTRY EXPANSION LOG OF TEST PIT Project No. 8751256Y-SIOi REMAlltCS T-15 Fi;. A-21 DATE OF TEST PIT. ____ 7_-2_2_-_87 _____ PIT DIMENSIONS:...-__ 1_8_"_B_a_c1_cho_e __ ,._ __ EQUIPMENT case 580E t: C . % .J ... .. .. I ~ ., ---1 I -'- -,- 2 I .. ,_ -- - - 10- - - - - ..J 2 :a >-., DESCRIPTION SURFACE ELEVATION: Aooroximatelv 102' Moist, dark brown, silty sand CULTIVATED SOIL Medium dense, moist, brown, silty sand (SM) LINDAVISTA FORMATION 1 Less silt content below 5' with zones of gray brown Bottom of Pit at 7 feet REMAIIICS Project : CAR COUNTRY EXPANSION Prolect No. 8751256Y-SI01 LOG OF TEST PIT T-16 ------ --- --- -----.. -------- APPENDIXB Geotechnical Laboratory Procedures and Test Results by GMU Geotechnical, Inc. GMU GEOTECHNICAL, INC. .. ... .. ---.. -.. .. ... -- - -- - ---- --... --- DRAFT Mr. Axay Patel, AUTONATION, Geotechnical Investigation Report -AutoNation BMW of Carlsbad, 1050/1060 Auto Center Court, City of Carlsbad, California APPENDIXB GEOTECHNICAL LABORATORY PROCEDURES AND TEST RESULTS MOISTURE AND DENSITY Field moisture content and in-place density were determined for each 6-inch sample sleeve of undisturbed soil material obtained from the drill holes. The field moisture content was determined in general accordance with ASTM Test Method D 2216 by obtaining one-half the moisture sample from each end of the 6-inch sleeve. The in-place dry density of the sample was determined by using the wet weight of the entire sample. At the same time the field moisture content and in-place density were determined, the soil material at each end of the sleeve was classified according to the Unified Soil Classification System. The results of the field moisture content and in-place density determinations are presented on the right- hand column of the Log of Drill Hole and are summarized on Table B-1. The results of the visual classifications were used for general reference. PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION As part of the engineering classification of the materials underlying the site, samples were tested to determine the distribution of particle sizes. The distribution was determined in general accordance with ASTM Test Method D 422 using U.S. Standard Sieve Openings 3", 1.5", ¾, 3/s, and U.S. Standard Sieve Nos. 4, 10, 20, 40, 60, 100, and 200. In addition, on some samples, a standard hydrometer test was performed to determine the distribution of particle sizes passing the No. 200 sieve (i.e., silt and clay-size particles). The results of the tests are contained in this Appendix B. Key distribution categories(% gravel;% sand, etc.) are contained on Table B-1. ATTERBERG LIMITS As part of the engineering classification of the soil material, samples of the on-site soil material were tested to determine relative plasticity. This relative plasticity is based on the Atterberg limits determined in general accordance with ASTM Test Method D 4318. The results of these tests are contained in this Appendix B and also Table B-1. December 6, 2018 B-1 GMU Project 18-101-00 DRAFT Mr. Axay Patel, AUTONATION, Geotechnical Investigation Report -AutoNation BMW of Carlsbad, I 050/1060 Auto Center Court, City of Carlsbad, California EXPANSION TESTS To provide a standard definition of one-dimensional expansion, a test was performed on typical on-site materials in general accordance with ASTM Test Method D 4829. The result from this test procedure is reported as an "expansion index". The results of this test are contained in this Appendix B and also Table B-1. CHEMICAL TESTS The corrosion potential of typical on-site materials under long-term contact with both metal and concrete was determined by chemical and electrical resistance tests. The soluble sulfate test for potential concrete corrosion was performed in general accordance with California Test Method 417, the minimum resistivity test for potential metal corrosion was performed in general accordance with California Test Method 643, and the concentration of soluble chlorides was determined in general accordance with California Test Method 422. The results of these tests are contained in this Appendix B and also Table B-1. COMPACTION TESTS Bulk samples representative of the on-site materials were tested to determine the maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of the soil. These compactive characteristics were determined in general accordance with ASTM Test Method D 1557. The results of this test are contained in this Appendix B and also Table B-1. CONSOLIDATION TESTS The one-dimensional consolidation properties of"undisturbed" samples were evaluated in general accordance with the provisions of ASTM Test Method D 2435. Sample diameter was 2.416 inches and sample height was 1.00 inch. Water was added during the test at various normal loads to evaluate the potential for hydro-collapse and to produce saturation during the remainder of the testing. Consolidation readings were taken regularly during each load increment until the change in sample height was less than approximately 0.0001 inch over a two-hour period. The graphic presentation of consolidation data is a representation of volume change in change in axial load. In addition, time rate tests were performed for select samples. The results of these tests are contained in this Appendix B. December 6, 2018 B-2 GMU Project 18-101-00 • • .. • ---.. • • • • • • • • • • • • • .. -• - .. • .. -• -.. --------------- - ---- -----.. -------- DRAFT Mr. Axay Patel, AUTONATION, Geotechnical Investigation Report -AutoNation BMW of Carlsbad, I 050/1060 Auto Center Court, City of Carlsbad, California DIRECT SHEAR STRENGTH TESTS Direct shear tests were performed on typical on-site materials. The general philosophy and procedure of the tests were in accord with ASTM Test Method D 3080 -"Direct Shear Tests for Soils Under Consolidated Drained Conditions". The tests are single shear tests and are performed using a sample diameter of 2.416 inches and a height of 1.00 inch. The normal load is applied by a vertical dead load system. A constant rate of strain is applied to the upper one-half of the sample until failure occurs. Shear stress is monitored by a strain gauge-type precision load cell and deflection is measured with a digital dial indicator. This data is transferred electronically to data acquisition software which plots shear strength vs. deflection. The shear strength plots are then interpreted to determine either peak or ultimate shear strengths. Residual strengths were obtained through multiple shear box reversals. A strain rate compatible with the grain size distribution of the soils was utilized. The interpreted results of this test are shown in this Appendix B. R-V ALUE TESTS Bulk samples representative of the underlying on-site materials were tested to measure the response of a compacted sample to a vertically applied pressure under specific conditions. The R- value of a material is determined when the material is in a state of saturation such that water will be exuded from the compacted test specimen when a 16.8 kN load (2.07 MPa) is applied. The results from these test procedures are reported in this Appendix B. December 6, 2018 8-3 GMU Project 18-101-00 TABLE B-1 SUMMARY OF SOIL LABORATORY DATA Sample Information Sieve/Hydrometer Atterberg Limits Compaction Chemical Test Results In Situ In Situ In Situ Maxlmun Optimum Expansion Boring Depth, Elevation Geologic uses Water Dry Unit Satur-Gravel Sand, <#200, <21,1, LL PL Pl R-Value Min. Dry Unit Water Sulfate Chloride Number feet feet Unit Group Content Weight, ation, % % % % Index pH ReslstlvitJ Weight, Content, (ppm) (ppm) Symbol % pcf % pcf % (ohm/cm) DH-1 0 103.0 Tsa SM 7.8 115 384 4720 DH-1 10 93.0 Tsa SP 4.7 107 23 DH-1 15 88.0 Tsa CH 53 25 28 DH-1 20 83.0 Tsa CH 8.4 104 37 DH-2 0 105.0 Tsa SM 0 90 10 117.0 11.0 DH-2 5 100.0 Tsa SM 13.4 114 78 DH-2 15 90.0 Tsa SM 7.6 100 31 DH-3 0 103.0 Qafc SM 0 78 22 0 DH-3 5 98.0 Tsa SP-SM 3.4 1079 -11 DH-3 15 88.0 Tsa SP 6.9 116 43 DH-3 25 78.0 Tsa SP 3.9 104 17 DH-3 35 68.0 Tsa SM 9.6 104 43 DH-3 45 58.0 Tsa SM 11.8 109 60 DH-4 0 101.0 Tsa SM 0 DH-4 10 91.0 Tsa CL 27.7 94 97 DH-4 20 81.0 Tsa SP 12.8 120 89 DH-5 5 97.0 Tsa SM 7.3 124 59 DH-5 15 87.0 Tsa SP 3.8 114 22 DH-6 0 101.0 Qafc SM 56 I I I I Project: AUTONATION BMW of Carlsbad GMlJ Project No. 18-101-00 I I ' . ' ' I I I I I I ' ' I I I I I I I ' I I . ' I I I I I I I I t I I I -.... -----... -... -------- ·- ·-"' -~ ;::: ... 0 -(!) ::i "' :::; -(!) ~ (!) -ci 9 § -co CJ) ... a. -N ;;;, ... -~ ~I -er: w Ill er: w -s, :::, :::; -(!) ----- a: >< w C ~ ~ 0 j:: rn 5 0. Boring Number DH-1 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 CL-i.1L 10 20 Depth Geologic (feet) Unit 15.0 Tsa GEOTECHNICAl, INC CH or OH ,, ~/ v-: .. LINE / / / CL orOL ;/ / / / MH ~rOH V ML orOL 30 40 50 60 70 80 LIQUID LIMIT, LL Test Water LL PL Pl Classification Symbol Content(%) • 53 25 28 FAT CLAY (CH) ATTERBERG LIMITS Project: AUTONATION BMW of Carlsbad Project No. 18-101-00 90 100 / 110 GRAVEL COARSE FINE 3• 100 90 80 70 1-::i::: C) w 60 3: > al It: W 50 z ii: 1-z W 40 u It: w D. 30 20 10 0 Boring Number DH-2 DH-3 U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING 1.5" 3/4" 3/8" 10 #4 Depth Geologic (feet) Unit 0.0 Tsa 0.0 Qafc SAND COARSE MEDIUM FINE U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200 ~ " ~ Symbol • IZI ~ \ \ ) \ \ \ \ \ 4 \ \ \ \ \ \ I \ \ ' .. \ "' \ "- 0.1 PARTICLE SIZE IN MILLIMETERS LL Pl SIL TY SANDSTONE (SM) SIL TY SAND (SM) SILT 0.01 Classification PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION Project: AUTONATION BMW of Carlsbad Project No. 18-101-00 CLAY 0.001 • ----------- - • - • • • -• --.. • .. ---.. ---------.. -- ... -----~ as ;::: -~ (!) -$ ;; co .. Cl) I-UJ .. Cl)' ;, 0 -~ < a. ::;; -0 u I ::, ::;; -(!) ----- G:" u .e: ~ (I) z w Q > 0:: Q 140 135 130 125 120 115 110 105 100 95 90 85 80 0 • Boring Depth Number (feet) DH-2 0.0 GMU GEOTECHNICAL, INC \\ i---- \ \ '~\ \\ _./ ~\ ~ • \\ \ (\ ~ \ ~ ~ ~ ~ '-~ '-10 20 30 40 MOISTURE CONTENT(%) Geologic Maximum Optimum Symbol Dry Density, Moisture Classification Unit pcf Content,% Tsa • 117 11 SIL TY SANDSTONE (SM) COMPACTION TEST DATA Project: AUTONA TION BMW of Carlsbad Project No. 18-101-00 SG=2.60 SG=2.70 50 4,000 3,500 3,000 'i 2,500 S: rn rn w ~ 2,000 ti ~ ~ :c rn 1,500 1,000 / 500 V 0 0 0 / V V V / /c V v /. / . / ~ V .. / C ~ V 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 NORMAL STRESS (psf) SAMPLE AND TEST DESCRIPTION Sample Location: DH-2 @ 5.0 ft Geologic Unit:Tsa Classification: SIL TY SANDSTONE (SM) Strain Rate (in/min): 0.005 Sample Preparation: Undisturbed Notes: STRENGTH PARAMETERS STRENGTH TYPE COHESION (psf) • Ill GMU GEOTECHNICAJ.. INC Peak Strength 258 Ultimate Strength 276 SHEAR TEST DATA Project: AUTONATION BMW of Carlsbad Project No. 18-101-00 FRICTION ANGLE (degrees) 35.0 27.0 -.. • -----• -------• -.. • • -.. -• -• -.... -.. .. ---------- , .. ------~ ill -~ 15 (.'} -::, "' ::. Cl -~ Cl -~ 0 ; -0:: < w :I: -~I (.) w -0:: i5 I ::, ::. -Cl --·--.. i.::-Ill ~ u, u, w a: ... u, a: <( w :J: u, 4,000 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 / ,, V 0 0 V V 0 / / V / v~ / / V / /4• / 4 / ✓ .... / / V V _,..,a 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 NORMAL STRESS (psf) SAMPLE AND TEST DESCRIPTION Sample Location: DH-3 @ 5.0 ft Geologic Unit:Tsa Classification: POORLY GRADED SANDSTONE (S SM) Strain Rate (in/min): 0.005 Sample Preparation: Undisturbed Notes: Sample saturated prior and during shearing • Ill STRENGTH PARAMETERS STRENGTH TYPE COHESION (psf) Peak Strength 450 Ultimate Strength 6 SHEAR TEST DATA Project: A UT ONA TION BMW of Carlsbad Project No. 18-101-00 FRICTION ANGLE (degrees) 34.0 31.0 GEOTECttNICAl, INC ...J 0 (/) z ~I ::Ii (!) 0 2 3 --~ z 4 ~ 1-U) 5 6 7 8 100 Boring Depth Number (feet) DH-1 20.0 GMU GEOTECHNICAl, INC tr--_ ~ -. ~ --- . - Geologic In Situ or Symbol Remolded Unit Sample Tsa • In Situ Ill In Situ & In Situ * In Situ ~ 1,000 STRESS(psf) % Hydro- Collapse 1"1~ ◄~ -- w 0.52 FAT CLAY (CH) W = water added ~ \ I\ I\ I\ ,~ -• 10,000 Classification CONSOLIDATION TEST DATA Project: AUTONATION BMW of Carlsbad Project No. 18-101-00 ---- • ------- • -• -- • - Ill - --.. - -.. .. .. - --- .... .. - .. --.. -.... ~ ~ ·-;::: .-0 -(!) => o<I :; c., -~ c., 0 .. 9 § ~ --' 0 en z -0 u I => :; -c., ----- 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 100 Boring Depth Number (feet) DH-5 5.0 GMU GEOTECHNICAL. INC W = water added •r--..__ ~-4,-._ I"--.. i---.. t--.. ~ ......... ~ "" [". "' --"' . --r--r---t--i-- w 1,000 STRESS (psf) Geologic In Situ or % Hydro-Symbol Remolded Classification Unit Sample Collapse Tsa • In Situ 0.13 SITL Y SANDSTONE (SM) IJl In Situ A In Situ * In Situ CONSOLIDATION TEST DAT A Project: AUTONA TION BMW of Carlsbad Project No. 18-101-00 " t---. ~ • 10,000 ... --- -- APPENDIXC -Percolation Test Result - ... -- - -- ---.. -GMU .. GEOTECHNICAL, INC . -- Riverside/Orange County -Percolation Rate Conversion Porchet Method, aka Inverse Borehole Method Project Name: Project Number: Test Hole Number: Test Hole Radius: Total Depth : Trial Start Time 1 8:21:00AM 2 8:51:00AM 3 9:21:00AM 4 9:51:00AM 5 10:21:00AM 6 10:53:00AM 7 11:23:00AM 8 11:53:00AM 9 12:23:00 PM 10 12:53:00 PM 11 1:23:00 PM 12 1:53:00 PM Autonation -BMW Carlsbad 18-101-00 DH-6 4 60.0 inches inches End Time I Total Time (min) (min) 8:51:00AM 30.0 30.0 9:21:00 AM 30.0 60.0 9:51:00AM 30.0 90.0 10:21:00AM 30.0 120.0 10:52:00AM 31.0 151.0 11:23:00 AM 30.0 181.0 11:53:00AM 30.0 211.0 12:23:00 PM 30.0 241.0 12:53:00 PM 30.0 271.0 1:23:00 PM 30.0 301.0 1:53:00 PM 30.0 331.0 2:23:00 PM 30.0 361.0 Initial Final Initial Final Infiltration Depth of Depth of Hight of Height of "H Havg Water (Do) Water (Ot) Water (Ho) Water(Hr) Rate (It) (ft) (ft) (in) (in) (in) (in) (in/hour) 2.65 2.66 28.20 28.08 0.12 28.14 0.02 2.65 2.66 28.20 28.08 0.12 28.14 0.02 2.65 2.66 28.20 28.08 0.12 28.14 0.02 2.65 2.66 28.20 28.08 0.12 28.14 0.02 2.65 2.66 28.20 28.08 0.12 28.14 0.02 2.65 2.66 28.20 28.08 0.12 28.14 0.02 2.65 2.66 28.20 28.08 0.12 28.14 0.02 2.65 2.66 28.20 28.08 0.12 28.14 0.02 2.65 2.66 28.20 28.08 0.12 28.14 0.02 2.65 2.66 28.20 28.08 0.12 28.14 0.02 2.65 2.66 28.20 28.08 0.12 28.14 0.02 2.65 2.66 28.20 28.08 0.12 28.14 0.02 Average Infiltration Rate {In/hour) 0.02 DH-6 Infiltration Rate vs. Time 0.02 ~ 0.02 t--..-;-4--+-;--+-..... ~;...-+-"'T""'.,_---4.,....-+--...-+--,-....--7 :, i ~:~: ! 0.01 +-------------+----< ----+----+ .. ~ 0.01 -1----+----lf----+----+---1---- .g 0.01 +---+--I! i 0.00 .E 0.00 -1----+----lf----+---1-----+-----4----+----l 0.00 0.0 so.a 28.13 so.a 100.0 150.0 200.0 Tlme (mln) DH-6 250.0 Water Level Drop vs. Time 300.0 100.0 150.0 200.0 250.0 300.0 Tlme (min) 350.0 400.0 350.0 400.0 Riverside/Orange County• Percolation Rate Conversion Porchet Method, ako Inverse Borehole Method Project Name: Project Number: Test Hole Number: Test Hole Radius: Total Depth : Trial 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Start Time 8:15:00AM 8:45:00AM 9:18:00AM 9:48:00AM 10:18:00AM 10:50:00AM 11:20:00AM 11:50:00AM 12:20:00 PM 12:50:00 PM 1:20:00 PM 1:50:00 PM 0.40 -;:-0.35 :, _g 0.30 ~ 0.25 QI : 0.20 C .g 0.15 ~ 0.10 "' .!: 0.05 0.00 0.0 e 25.so '0 ] 25.60 ~ 25.40 ~ 25.20 25.00 Autonation -BMW Carlsbad 18-101-00 DH-7 4 48.0 End Time 8:45:00 AM 9:18:00AM 9:48:00AM 10:18:00AM 10:48:00AM 11:20:00AM 11:50:00AM 12:20:00 PM 12:50:00 PM 1:20:00 PM 1:50:00 PM 2:20:00 PM 50.0 inches inches /I t (min) 30.0 33.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 Total Time (min) 30.0 63.0 93.0 123.0 153.0 183.0 213.0 243.0 273.0 303.0 333.0 363.0 Initial Final Depth of Depth of Water (Do) Water (DI) (ft) (ft) 1.70 1.91 1.70 1.87 1.70 1.90 1.70 1.90 1.70 1.89 1.70 1.88 1.70 1.90 1.70 1.86 1.70 1.86 1.70 1.84 1.70 1.85 1.70 1.83 DH-7 Infiltration Rate vs. Time 100.0 150.0 200.0 Time (min) DH-7 250.0 Water Level Drop vs. Time 300.0 Initial Hight of Water (Ho) (In) 27.60 27.60 27.60 27.60 27.60 27.60 27.60 27.60 27.60 27.60 27.60 27.60 I 350.0 l 1. 0.0 50.0 100.0 150.0 200.0 Tlme(mln) 250.0 300.0 350.0 Final Infiltration Height of 'H Hava Water (Hr) Rate (it) (in) (in) (in) (in/hour) 25.08 2.52 26.34 0.36 25.56 2.04 26.58 0.26 25.20 2.40 26.40 0.34 25.20 2.40 26.40 0.34 25.32 2.28 26.46 0.32 25.44 2.16 26.52 0.30 25.20 2.40 26.40 0.34 25.68 1.92 26.64 0.27 25.68 1.92 26.64 0.27 25.92 1.68 26.76 0.23 25.80 1.80 26.70 0.25 ' 26.04 1.56 26.82 0.22 Average Infiltration Rate (in/hour) 0.23 400.0 400.0