The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About3593; Faraday Avenue Extension, Alternate 8 Split; Geotechnical Investigation Faraday Avenue Extension; 1998-07-01Leighton and Associates GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FOR THE PROPOSED FARADAY AVENUE EXTENSION, ALTERNATE 8 SPLIT CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA July 1, 1998 Project No. 4980118-001 Prepared For: O'Day Consultants 2320 Camino Vida Robles, Suite B Carlsbad, California 92009 3934 MURPHY CANYON ROAD, SUITE B205 SAN DIEGO, CA 92123-4425 (619) 292-8030 " FAX (619) 292-0771 Leighton and Associates GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS July 1,1998 Project No. 4980118-001 To: O'Day Consultants 2320 Camino Vida Robles, Suite B Carlsbad, California 92009 Attention: Mr. John Strohminger Subject: Geotechnical Investigation for the Proposed Faraday Avenue Extension, Alternate 8 Split, Carlsbad, California In accordance with your request, Leighton and Associates, Inc. has performed a geotechnical investigation for the proposed Faraday Avenue Extension, Alternate 8 Split (east of Cannon Road), located in Carlsbad, California (Figure 1, Site Location Map). This report presents the results of our geotechnical review, geologic mapping, subsurface investigation, and analysis, and provides a summary of our conclusions and recommendations relative to the proposed Alternate 8 Split alignment. If you have any questions regarding this report, please contact this office. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. Respectfully submitted, LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 'Franzone Directp/of Engineer KAB/JGF/MRS Distribution: (6) Addressee Michdel R. Stewart^EG 1349 (Exp. 12/31/99) Director of Geology CERTIFIED ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST 3934 MURPHY CANYON ROAD, SUITE B205 SAN DIEGO, CA 92123-4425 (619) 292-8030 • FAX (619) 292-0771 4980118-001 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE 1 1.2 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS 3 1.3 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 3 1.4 CURRENT SITE INVESTIGATION 4 1.5 ENVIRONMENTAL SOIL SAMPLING 4 2.0 SUMMARY OF GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS 6 2.1 REGIONAL GEOLOGY 6 2.2 SITE GEOLOGY 6 2.2.1 Jurassic Santiago Peak Volcanics (Map Symbol-Jsp) 6 2.2.2 Santiago Formation (Map Symbol- Ts) 6 2.2.3 Alluvium (Map Symbol-Qal) 7 2.2.4 Colluvium/Slope Wash (MapSymbol-Qcol) 7 2.2.5 Topsail (Unmapped) 8 2.2.6 Undocumented Fill (Map Symbol-Afu) 8 2.3 GEOLOGIC STRUCTURE 8 2.4 GROUND WATER 8 2.5 MASS MOVEMENT 9 2.6 FAULTING AND SEISMICITY 9 2.7 SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS 10 2.7.1 Ground Shaking. 10 2.7.2 Liquefaction/DynamicSettlement 10 3.0 CONCLUSIONS 11 4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 13 4.1 EARTHWORK. 13 4.1.1 Site Preparation 13 4.1.2 Removal and Recompactionof'PotentiallyCompressible Soils 13 4.1.3 Excavations 14 4.1.4 Fill Placement and Compaction 14 4.1.5 Expansive Soils 14 4.1.6 Earthwork Shrinkage/Bulking 15 4.1.7 Control of Ground Water and Surface Waters 15 4.2 SLOPE STABILITY 16 4.2.1 Surficial Slope Stability. 17 4.3 CONSTRUCTIONDELAY 18 4.4 RETAINING WALL/SEGMENTED WALL DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS. 18 4.5 CORROSION CONCERNS 20 4.6 PRELIMINARY PAVEMENT DESIGN 20 5.0 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS, 22 4980118-001 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) Tables Table 1 - Summary of Soil Sample Analysis - Page 5 Table 2 - Equivalent Fluid Weight - Page 19 Table 3 - Recommended Pavement Section - Page 21 Figure Figure 1 - Site Location Map - Page 2 Plates Plate 1 - GeotechnicalMap - In Pocket Plate 2 - Geotechnical Cross-Sections A-A1 and B-B1 - In Pocket Appendices Appendix A - References Appendix B - Boring and Trench Logs AppendixC - Laboratory Test Results and Test Procedures Appendix D - General Earthwork and Grading Specifications Appendix E - Slope Stability Calculations -11 - 4980118-001 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose and Scope This report provides a summary of our findings, conclusions and recommendations regarding the onsite soil and geologic conditions to be utilized for site development purposes. In preparation of this report we have utilized the 100-scale map entitled "Faraday Avenue Preliminary Alignment Study Alternate 8 Split", prepared by O'Day Consultants, dated April 15, 1998 as a base map during this study. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the geotechnical conditions along and adjacent to the proposed alignment of the Faraday Avenue extension, alternate 8 split, and to provide conclusions and recommendations relative to site development based on the collected data and preliminary alignment plans. The scope of our services during the evaluation included the following: - Review of geotechnical literature and aerial photographs pertaining to the general vicinity of the site, and geotechnical reports pertaining specifically to the site. A list of the items reviewed is included in Appendix A. Field reconnaissance of the site and general vicinity. Subsurface investigation of the site conditions, including the drilling, logging and sampling of 5 small diameter borings, 8 large-diameter borings, and 9 backhoe trenches. All borings and trenches were logged by our geologists and backfilled upon completion. The logs of these excavations are presented as Appendix B. The logs of pertinent previously excavated borings and trenches excavated during our subsurface investigation for the adjacent proposed golf course project and proposed Cannon Road extension are also included in Appendix B and were utilized in preparation of this report. Laboratory testing of representative soil samples to evaluate the pertinent engineering properties of the onsite soils (Appendix C). Geotechnical analysis of the data obtained, including slope stability analysis, liquefaction potential, and re-evaluation of previously obtained data. Preparation of this report presenting our findings, conclusions and recommendations with respect to the proposed roadway and associated slopes. Our report includes the results of the previous subsurface exploration studies and laboratory data applicable to the Faraday Avenue Extension project. -1- CITY OF OCEANSIDE PACIFICOCEAN CITYOF SAN MARCOS CITY OF ENC1N1TAS SITE LOCATION MAP Faraday Avenue Extension Carlsbad, California PROJECT No 4980118-001 SCALE Not to scale ENGR./GEOL. JGF/MRS DRAFTED BY KAB DATE July 1, 1998 F ^n n 0 :IGURE NO. 1 4980118-001 1.2 Geologic Conditions The majority of the proposed alignment is presently developed as agricultural fields and has been partially graded and disturbed in order to facilitate the agricultural activity onsite. Topographically, the site is characterized by numerous ridges and intervening ravines and valleys that intersect a main northwest trending drainage that flows into Agua Hedionda Lagoon. Elevations along the proposed alignment range from approximately 20 feet mean sea level (m.s.l.) at the extreme northwest corner of the site in the main drainage, to approximately 265 feet mean sea level (m.s.l.) near the ridgeline along the eastern edge of the alignment. Natural slopes on the site range from relatively steep (steeper than 1:1, horizontal to vertical) to relatively gentle (less than 3:1, horizontal to vertical). Existing improvements are generally related to past and present agricultural activities on the site. Improvements associated with the agricultural fields include underground irrigation lines and valves and minor cuts and fills associated with access roads. Other onsite improvements include: access roads associated with several utility easements and a pair of small earthen dams constructed to impound water for irrigation purposes. These earthen dams are located in the central portion of the site outside of and upslope of the proposed road alignment. Evaluation of these dams was beyond the scope of our study but should be considered by the project civil engineer for possible hydrologic considerations. A relatively large desilting basin and rip rap area exists at the terminus of the existing segment of Faraday Road, which may be impacted during remedial grading necessary for the proposed alignment. Non-agricultural vegetation on-site ranges from a relatively thick growth of grasses and weeds on the undisturbed hillsides to shrubs and thick weeds in the ravines. Riparian trees and shrubs grow quite heavily in the main drainage trending northwest-southeast across the site. The majority of the proposed alignment transects hillside agricultural fields. 1.3 Proposed Development Based on our review of the 100-scale Preliminary Alignment Study Alternate 8 Split plans prepared by O'Day Consultants dated April 15,1998, it is our understanding that the proposed development will extend the existing segment of Faraday road to the northwest to intersect with the proposed Cannon Road Extension. The extension of Faraday road will include the construction of numerous cut and fill slopes. Previous investigations on site included the excavation of several exploratory backhoe trenches. These excavations were made in conjunction with a previous investigation for the proposed Carlsbad Municipal Golf Course. All pertinent trench logs are included within Appendix B. The approximate locations of the trenches are shown on the Geotechnical Map (Plate 1). Also included are the laboratory test results of representative soil samples collected during the current site investigation as well as other pertinent previous Leighton and Associates subsurface investigations on site (Appendix A). Laboratory test results relative to the Faraday Avenue project are included in Appendix C. The laboratory testing included direct shear, expansion index, moisture/density determinations, maximum dry density, minimum resistivity, pH, soluble sulfate, Atterberg Limits, R-value, and consolidation tests. Brief descriptions of the laboratory test procedures and the laboratory test results are presented in Appendix C. The test results of the moisture/density determinations are presented in the boring logs included in Appendix B. -3- 4980118-001 1.4 Current Site Investigation The current site investigation included the drilling, logging and sampling of 5 small diameter exploratory borings, 8 large diameter borings, and 9 exploratory trenches. The small diameter borings and trenches were excavated predominantly in areas of proposed fill soils in order to assess the depth of remedial grading that may be required and to evaluate the engineering properties of the onsite soils. The large diameter borings were predominantly drilled in areas where cut slopes are proposed and in areas where topographic features suggestive of slope instability were observed. The maximum depth of excavation during the most recent investigation was 61 feet below ground surface in boring LB-1. All borings and trenches were logged and sampled by our geologists and backfilled upon completion. The small diameter borings drilled in conjunction with this study have been designated B-l through B-5, the large diameter borings have been designated LB-1 through LB-8, and the trenches have been labeled as T-l through T-9. Logs of these borings and trenches, as well as those from previous studies are included as Appendix B. The locations of all exploratory excavations are indicated on the Geotechnical Map (Plate 1), located in the map pocket at the rear of the text. 1.5 Environmental Soil Sampling The purpose of collecting soil samples at approximately every 500 feet along the right-of-way is to obtain a significant number of samples to characterize possible soil contamination in the near surface soils. AH samples collected are shown in Table 1. The approximate locations of the soil samples are shown on Table 1. On May 6, 1998 thirty-three (33) samples were collected at eleven locations at depths of 6 inches, 12 inches, and 36 inches below grade. Samples were collected with a hand auger. To avoid possible cross contamination between individual samples, the hand auger was washed with a solution of trisodium phosphate (TSP) and water, double rinsed with distilled water and dried with paper towels. The soil samples were placed into laboratory supplied 4-ounce glass sample jars and immediately placed into an ice- cooled container. A Chain-of-Custody form was completed at the time of collection. At the completion of sampling, the samples were transported to Pacific Treatment Analytical Services, Inc. (PTAS) of San Diego, California, for analysis. PTAS is a California Certified Laboratory (Certification No. 1931). The 6-inch samples were analyzed for organochlorine pesticides by EPA Test Method 8080, total phosphate by SMEWW 4500 PE, Total Kjeldhal Nitrogen (TKN) by EPA Test Method 351.3 and pH by EPA Method 9045C. The other samples were placed on hold, in the event elevated levels of organochlorine pesticides were present in the 6-inch sample. The results of the soil sample chemical analysis are provided in Appendix C and summarized in Table 1. The laboratory analyses indicated that organochlorine pesticides are not present in any sample analyzed. The pH of all samples analyzed ranged from 6.3 to 8.1, which is normal for the type of soils at the subject site. Total phosphate levels of all samples analyzed ranged from 125 mg/Kg to 723 mg/Kg. TKN was detected in samples ES-6, 6 inches (1,353 mg/Kg), ES-8, 6 inches (1,119 mg/Kg), ES-9, 6 inches (74,190 mg/Kg), and ES-10, 6 inches (280 mg/Kg). -4- 4980118-001 Review of a United States Environmental Protection Agency document Preliminary Remediation Goals (PRG's) (Appendix A) indicated none of the samples taken from the upper 6 inches exceeded the allowable level for any organochlorine pesticides in the soil at a residential site. The USEPA PRG's do not address total phosphate or TKN. On June 9, 1998, we contacted Mr. David Felix of the Site Assessment & Mitigation (SAM) Division of San Diego County's Environmental Health Department who stated that there are no action or remediation levels for total phosphate or TKN in soil. It is recommended that no further environmental assessment and remedial action be performed at this time. We farther recommend that observations be made during any future site development of areas of possible contamination such as, but not limited to, the presence of underground facilities, buried debris, staining soils, waste drums, tanks, or odorous soils. Should such materials be encountered, further investigation and analysis may be necessary at that time. Soil samples were collected along the roadway alignment at approximately 500 foot intervals. The approximate location of the samples and a summary of the test results are provided below. TABLE 1 Summary of Soil Sample Analysis Sample ID. ES-1,6" ES-2, 6" ES-3, 6" ES-4, 6" ES-5, 6" ES-6, 6" ES-7, 6" ES-8, 6" ES-9, 6" ES-10,6" ES-11,6" Approximate Station No. 60+00 57+00 52+00 47+00 42+00 36+00 31+00 27+00 22+00 17+00 12+00 Organochlorine Pesticides1 (Hg/Kg) ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND Total Phosphate2 (mg/Kg) 125 195 157 331 278 689 428 723 548 367 277 Total Kjeldhal Nitrogen (TKN)3 (mg/Kg) <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 1,353 <5 1,119 74,190 280 <5 PH 7.1 7.5 7.7 7.2 8.1 7.5 7.6 7.0 7.1 6.3 7.7 Notes: 1. Reporting limits vary between 2 ng/Kg and 25 ug/Kg. 2 Reporting limits vary between 12.5 mg/Kg and 50 mg/Kg. 3 Reporting limit 5 mg/Kg. -5- 4980118-001 2.0 SUMMARY OF GEOTECHNICALCONDITIONS 2.1 Regional Geology The subject site is located within the coastal subprovence of the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Provence, near the western edge of the southern California batholith. The topography at the edge of the batholith changes from rugged landforms developed on the batholith to the more subdued landforms that typify the softer sedimentary formations of the coastal plain. 2.2 Site Geology As encountered during our investigation(s),and our review of geotechnical reports applicable to the subject site (Appendix A), the majority of the proposed alignment is underlain by the Tertiary Santiago Formation. The Jurassic-aged Santiago Peak Volcanics is the bedrock unit in the extreme southeast section of the alignment. Surficial units on-site consist of alluvium, colluvium, topsoil, and undocumented fill soils. The approximate area! distributions of the units are shown on the Geotechnical Map (Plate 1) and briefly discussed below. 2.2.1 Jurassic Santiago Peak Volcanics (Map Symbol - Jsp) The Jurassic aged Santiago Peak Volcanics crop out in the southeast portion of the subject site. Typically the unit is hard and extremely resistant to erosion and forms topographic highs. Most of the rocks are dark greenish gray where fresh but weather grayish red to dark reddish brown. The soil developed on the Santiago Peak Volcanics is the color of the weathered bedrock and supports the growth of dense chaparral. If deep removals are planned in this area, localized heavy ripping or blasting may be required. 2.2.2 Santiago Formation (Map Symbol - Ts) The bedrock unit underlying the majority of the site is the Tertiary-aged Santiago Formation. In general, the unit consists of massive to weakly bedded sandstone with interbedded clayey siltstone and silty claystone. The sandstone encountered consisted primarily of light gray, light brown, and light yellow-brown, moist, dense, silty, fine- to occasionally medium-grained sandstone. The sandstone was locally very slightly micaceous and weakly bedded to massive. Locally, bedding is out of slope with seepage noted on several bedding planes. Well cemented sandstone beds were occasionally encountered during this and previous investigations on adjacent sites and may require heavy ripping during grading. The siltstone typically consisted of brown and olive-green gray, moist, stiff, clayey siltstones that were fissile to indistinctly bedded and contained calcium carbonate, manganese-oxide and iron-oxide staining. The claystone typically was gray to brown, moist, stiff to hard, fine-grained, sandy to silty claystone that was moderately sheared. Where encountered, the upper 18 to 24 inches of the Santiago Formation appears to be moderately weathered, porous and potentially compressible. This layer should be removed and recompacted in areas of structural fill placement or settlement sensitive improvements. -6- 4980118-001 2.2.3 Alluvium (Map Symbol - Qal) Alluvium was encountered during our investigation of the proposed alignment in the majority of the drainages and the low lying areas adjacent to and along the proposed alignment. As encountered, the alluvium generally consisted of potentially compressible, moist to wet, loose to medium dense silty sands, sandy silts, and sandy clays. Within the main northwest-trending drainage (south of the proposed roadway), the alluvium is relatively thick as evidenced by approximately 20-50 feet of alluvium encountered in borings excavated for the adjacent golf course geotechnical investigation. In areas of alluvium which are expected to lie below the roadway, alluvium was encountered up to 35+ feet thick (Boring B-5) in the northern end of the alignment, and 33 feet in the central canyon area (Boring B-3). In many of the smaller side canyons, particularly in the southern end of the alignment, alluvium was encountered and mapped. However, these areas were not accessible with the drilling equipment utilized in this investigation. Backhoe trenches were excavated in these areas to evaluate alluvial depths. Alluvium was encountered to depths in excess of 19 feet (Trench T-7, T-8, and T-9). Unsaturated alluvial soils are considered potentially compressible and not suitable for the support of structural loads or additional fill soils in areas of settlement sensitive improvements. These soils should be removed and recompacted in areas proposed for structural improvements as part of site grading. Saturated alluvial soils are anticipated to settle somewhat upon application of embankment loading. 2.2.4 Colluvium/ Slope Wash (Map Symbol- Qcol) Holocene aged colluvium / slope wash was encountered mantling the lower valley slopes. As encountered, the colluvium / slope wash typically consisted of poorly consolidated surficial materials derived from nearby soil and decomposed bedrock sources. This reworked debris is deposited along the flanks of the lower valley slopes by the action of gravity and surface water. Generally, the material was light brown to dark brown, damp to moist, medium dense, silty to clayey sand that was generally 2 to 20+ feet in thickness, although locally it may be deeper. The colluvium/slope wash was typically porous and anticipated to be potentially compressible under the load of proposed fills or improvements. In places, it is difficult to distinguish the sandier colluvial soils from the underlying weathered Santiago Formation. -7- 4980118-001 2.2.5 Topsoil (Unmapped) Topsoil was encountered essentially covering the entire site, but was not mapped. The topsoil was found to be generally light brown to dark brown, damp, loose to medium dense, silty sands with moderate amounts of clay. The topsoil was generally ± 3 feet in thickness and contains moderate amounts of decomposed organics. Where disturbed by the previous agricultural activities, the topsoil may locally be up to 5 feet thick. This unit was evaluated to be compressible under the loading of fill soils or other improvements. 2.2.6 Undocumented Fill (Map Symbol - Afu) Undocumented fill soil is present on the site in various locations. The major undocumented fill areas consisted of earthen embankments for agricultural ponds, unimproved roads, end-dumped debris piles, and utility trench backfill. Our site reconnaissance indicated that potentially compressible alluvium was left in place beneath these fill areas. In addition, our literature review did not indicate that any documentation or testing was completed for these areas. Undocumented fill soils were also noted in several other locations within the subject site. As encountered, the undocumented fill consisted of numerous soil types, but typically the fill soils were light brown to medium brown and gray, moist to very moist, loose, silty sands and clayey sands. These soils should be removed to expose competent material in areas of proposed fill soils or improvements. 2.3 Geologic Structure The bedrock units encountered on the site were generally massive with no apparent bedding. However, based on our professional experience in the area, bedding of the underlying Santiago Formation is anticipated to be relatively gently dipping (i.e. 5 to 10 degrees) to the west. 2.4 Ground Water Ground water was encountered in several of our borings within several of the onsite drainages in the lower elevations of the site particularly in the main northwest trending drainage located south and west of the proposed alignment. The presence of ground water in these areas will limit the removal of alluvium and undocumented fill in these areas. Perched groundwater conditions were also encountered in several of our large diameter borings on- site (LB-2, LB-3, and LB-4). The zones of ground water were encountered even though no irrigated source is immediately upgradient of these areas. Accordingly, zones of seepage are anticipated to be exposed during construction of cut slopes and will require the use of stability fills with subdrains. Ground water is not anticipated to be a constraint to site development provided the recommendations provided in this report and during the course of grading are implemented. -8- 4980118-001 2.5 Mass Movement Based on our review of the previous geotechnical reports, available geologic literature and maps, and aerial photographs, several features indicative of mass movements (such as landslides, surficial slumps, etc.) were observed within the areas proposed for development. In the central and north- central portion of the proposed alignment an area has been mapped as a landslide complex based on topographic expression and data gathered during our subsurface investigation. Geologic mapping of excavations in this area should be performed during site grading. Localized zones of weak claystone&iltstone material and friable sands are present in the Santiago Formation and may create localized areas that are prone to slope instability if exposed in a cut slope. Accordingly, all cut slopes greater than 10 feet in height should be stabilized by construction of stability fill with subdrains. In addition, all cut slopes and stability fill backcuts should be mapped by an engineering geologist during site grading. Additional recommendations for slope stabilization can be provided as needed during site grading. 2.6 Faulting and Seismicitv Our discussion of the faults on-site is prefaced with a discussion of California legislation and state policies concerning the classification and land-use criteria associated with faults. By definition of the California Mining and Geology Board, an active fault is a fault which has had surface displacement within Holocene time (about the last 11,000 years). The State Geologist has defined a potentially active fault as any fault considered to have been active during Quaternary time (last 1,600,000 years) but that has not been proven to be active or inactive. This definition is used in delineating Fault Rupture Hazard Zones as mandated by the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act of 1972 and most recently revised in 1994. The intent of this act is to assure that unwise urban development does not occur across the traces of active faults. Base on our review of the Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones, the subject site is not located within any Fault-Rupture Hazard Zone as created by the Alquist-Priolo Act (Hart, 1994). However, several inactive fault zones have been mapped in a number of places within and adjacent to the subject site. These inactive fault zones are not considered to be a constraint to site development. The location of the proposed development can be considered to lie within a seismically active region, as can all of southern California. The subject site lies within Seismic Zone 4 as outlined in Section 1629 of the 1997 edition of the UBC. The Rose Canyon Fault Zone which is located approximately 4.5 miles to the west of the site is considered to have the most significant seismic effect at the site from a design standpoint. A maximum probable earthquake of moment magnitude 5.9 on the fault could produce a peak horizontal ground acceleration of approximately 0.30g at the site. The slip rate of the fault is estimated at 1.5 mm/yr. (State of California, 1996) and the soil profile type is Sc (per Table 16-Jofthe 1997 UBC). -9- 4980118-001 2.7 Seismic Considerations The principal seismic considerations for most structures in southern California are surface rupturing of fault traces, damage caused by ground shaking and/or seismically induced liquefaction or dynamic settlement. The probability of damage due to ground rupture is considered minimal since active faults are not known to cross the site. Ground lurching due to shaking from distant seismic events is not considered a significant hazard, although it is a possibility throughout the southern California region. 2.7.1 Ground Shaking The seismic hazard most likely to impact the site is ground shaking resulting from an earthquake on one of the major regional faults. As discussed above, a maximum probable event on the Rose Canyon Fault Zone (considered the design earthquake for this site) could produce a peak horizontal acceleration at the site of 0.30g. 2.7.2 Liquefaction/Dynamic Settlement Liquefaction of cohesionless soils can be caused by strong vibratory motion due to earthquakes. Research and historical data indicate that loose granular soils underlain by a near-surface ground water table are most susceptible to liquefaction, while the stability of most silty clays and clays is not adversely affected by vibratory motion. The Santiago Formation is generally not considered liquefiable due to its high density characteristics. From our preliminary field study, it appears that the area most likely susceptible to liquefaction is the main drainage area located south and west of the roadway. The smaller drainages below the proposed roadway is composed of silty to clayey alluvium overlain by a significant thick of non-saturatedfill soils. Accordingly, it is our professional opinion that the proposed roadway alignment has a low potential for liquefaction due to the design earthquake. -10- 4980118-001 3.0 CONCLUSIONS Based on our review of the 100-scale Preliminary Alignment Study, Alternate 8 Split plans prepared by O'Day Consultants, and the results of our geotechnical investigations and review of pertinent data, it is our opinion that the proposed development of the Faraday Avenue is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint provided the following conclusions and recommendations are incorporated into the design and construction of the project. The following is a summary of the geotechnical factors which may affect development of the site. • Based on subsurface investigations, the site is underlain by alluvium, colluvium/slope wash, undocumented fill soils, landslide debris, the Santiago Formation, and the Jurassic Santiago Peak Volcanics. • The topsoil, colluvium, alluvium, weathered formational material and undocumented fill soils are porous and/or potentially compressible in their present state and will require removal and recompaction in areas of proposed structural improvements. We anticipate alluvial removals cannot be accomplished within 2 feet above the water table. Where complete removals are not made, settlement should be anticipated as well as a construction (delay in areas of the deeper drainages where removal of saturated alluvial soils could not be performed). The need for settlement monitoring is likely in these areas and final recommendations should be provided based on review of final grading plans. • Ancient landslides are present on site and will require construction of earthen buttresses/stability fills where exposed in cut slopes. • Based on our subsurface investigations of the formational soils and surficial soils present on the site, we anticipate that these materials will be rippable with heavy-duty construction equipment. However, localized concretions and cemented layers within the Tertiary Santiago Formation (if encountered), may require heavy ripping during excavation. In addition, the Jurassic Santiago Peak Volcanics that crop out in the southeastern portion of the site are extremely hard and may require localized heavy ripping and/or blasting for removal should design plans change in this area. Significant amounts of oversized material should be anticipated if such measures are required. • Undocumented fill soils are present on the site at various locations. Removal of these materials will be required in areas proposed for structural improvements • Laboratory test results of representative soil samples from our investigations onsite the and our previous experience on adjacent sites indicate the soils present on the site have the following soil engineering characteristics: very low to high expansion potential negligible to considerable sulfate content adequate shear strength in both existing formational soils or as properly compacted fill soils mild to high potential for corrosion to buried metal conduits -11- 4980118-001 • The existing onsite soils appear to be suitable for use as fill material provided they are free of organic material, debris, and rock fragments larger than 6 inches in maximum dimension. • Ground water was observed in several of the borings excavated in the alluvial areas onsite. It is anticipated that groundwater will limit the extent of required removals in the area adjacent to the intersection with the proposed Cannon Road extension in the area of Boring B-2 and B-3, in the area of Borings B-4 and B-5, and in the immediate vicinity of the main drainage west and south of the proposed roadway alignment onsite. Perched ground water conditions were encountered within several of the large diameter borings excavated during the course of this study. Seepage is typically encountered where a relatively impermeable material such as a claystone or a cemented layer (i.e. the Santiago Formation) underlies a relatively permeable material such as sandstone or sandy fill soils. We recommend stability fills on all south and west facing cut slopes to increase slope stability. In addition, after removal of undocumented fill and alluvium, canyon subdrains should be installed to avoid a fiiture buildup of water. Additional subdrains may be required based upon our review of final development plans and conditions encountered during site grading. • Active or potentially active faults are not known to exist on the Faraday Avenue project. However, inactive faults and other seismic features have been mapped and/or observed transecting the site. The impact of these faults will depend on their location and relation to the proposed cut slopes and structural improvements. The observed sheared material associated with the faulting may affect the stability of the cut slopes and, in roadway areas, juxtapose materials with differing engineering characteristics at grade. The exact location of the faulting can best be determined during grading operations. Mitigative measures may include overexcavation and recompaction or special structural section recommendations and stabilization fills for impacted proposed cut slopes. • A maximum probable earthquake of moment magnitude 5.9 on the Rose Canyon fault could produce a peak horizontal ground acceleration of approximately 0.30g at the site. The slip rate of the fault has been estimated at 1.5mm/yr. (State of California, 1996) and the soil profile type is Sc (per Table 16-J of the!997UBC). • Based on our evaluation, the potential for liquefaction of the majority of site soils due to the design earthquake is considered low. • Grading of the subject site may result in a transition condition (cut/fill) in several of the proposed roadway areas. Section 5.1.6 provides recommendations to mitigate these conditions. • Environmental sampling along the alignment did not encounter concentrations of organochlorine pesticides, phosphate, or Total Kjeldhal Nitrogen above the presently known action levels. -12- 4980118-001 4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 4.1 Earthwork We anticipate that earthwork at the site will consist of site preparation, excavation, removal and recompaction of potentially compressible soils, fill placement, and backfill. We recommend that earthwork on the site is performed in accordance with the following recommendations, the City of Carlsbad grading requirements, and the General Earthwork and Grading Specifications included in Appendix D. In case of conflict, the following recommendations shall supersede those in Appendix D. 4.1.1 Site Preparation Prior to grading, all areas to receive structural fill or engineered structures should be cleared of surface and subsurface obstructions, including any existing debris, potentially compressiblematerial (such as topsoil, colluvium, alluvium, weathered formation materials, and undocumented fill soils), and stripped of vegetation. Holes resulting from removal of buried obstructions which extend below finish site grades should be replaced with suitable compacted fill material. All areas proposed to receive structural fill or slopes with inclinations greater than 3 to 1 should be scarified to a minimum depth of 12 inches, brought to near optimum moisture condition, and recompacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction (based on ASTM Test Method D1557-91) prior to the placement of any additional fill soils. 4.1.2 Removal and Recompaction of Potentially Compressible Soils In general, alluvium, colluvium, topsoil, landslide debris, weathered formational soils, and undocumented fill soils in areas of proposed structural fill, should be excavated, moisture conditioned or dried back to obtain a near optimum moisture content, and then compacted prior to placing any additional fill. These soils are anticipated to be porous and potentially compressible in their present state, and may settle appreciably under the surcharge of fills or foundation loading. Removals in areas of proposed structural improvements should be projected downward at a 1:1 (horizontal to vertical) to competent formational material (where applicable) prior to the placement of additional fill soils. In general, we estimate alluvial removals will range up to a maximum of 15-25 feet in depth, and will be limited by the depth of ground water. The colluvial removals will in general range from 5 to ± 20 feet, while removals of topsoil and near-surface soil will be on the order of 2 to 4 feet. It should be noted that deeper removals may be required in areas proposed for structural improvements due to localized thicker zones of compressiblesoils. -13- 4980118-001 Other areas of undocumented fill although limited in extent may require complete removal and recompaction if structural improvements are proposed. 4.1.3 Excavations Excavations of the onsite materials may generally be accomplished with conventional heavy-duty earthwork equipment. It is not anticipated that blasting will be required or significant quantities of oversized rock (i.e. rock with maximum dimensions greater than 6 inches) will be generated during grading (excluding Santiago Peak Volcanics). However, if oversized rock is encountered, it should be placed as fill in accordance with the details presented in Appendix D. Due to the relatively high density characteristics and coarse nature of the onsite soils, temporary excavations such as utility trenches with vertical sides in the onsite soils should remain stable for the period required to construct the utility, provided they are free of adverse geologic conditions. Trench operations should be performed in accordance with the most recent OSHA requirements. For excavations deeper than 15 feet, specific recommendations can be made on a case by case basis. 4.1.4 Fill Placement and Compaction The onsite soils are generally suitable for use as compacted fill provided they are free of organic material, debris, and rock fragments larger than 6 inches in maximum dimension. Fill soils placed in areas of proposed structural improvements and/or slopes within inclinations greater than 3 to 1 should be brought to near-optimum moisture content and compacted in uniform lifts to at least 90 percent relative compaction based on laboratory standard ASTM Test Method D1557-91. The 90 percent relative compaction should extend a minimum often feet outside the structural improvement footprint and downward at a 1:1 projection (horizontal to vertical) to competent material. The optimum lift thickness required to produce a uniformly compacted fill will depend on the type and size of compaction equipment used. In general, fill should be placed in lifts not exceeding 8 inches in thickness. Placement and compaction of fill should be performed in general accordance with the current City of Carlsbad grading ordinances, sound construction practice, and the General Earthwork and Grading Specifications presented in Appendix D. 4.1.5 Expansive Soils The expansion potential of the soils encountered within the subject site are described as follows: Undocumented Fill: Low expansion potential for the majority of the soils. Minor amounts of silty sand/clayey sand soils may have a moderate expansion potential. -14- 4980118-001 Alluvium and Colluvium: Low expansion potential for sandy soils to high for clayey soils. Topsoil: Low expansion potential for sandy soils to high for clayey soils. Santiago Formation: Low expansion potential for silty sandstone, medium to high for sandy to clayey siltstones and high to very high for the silty claystones. Expansion testing of representative finish grade soils in proposed building areas should be performed upon completion of rough grading to better assess the expansion potential of the finish grade soils so that final foundation recommendations can be provided, as necessary. 4.1.6 Earthwork Shrinkage/Bulking The volume change of excavated onsite materials upon recompaction as fill is expected to vary with material and location. Typically, the surficial soils and bedrock material vary significantly in natural and compacted density, and therefore, accurate earthwork shrinkage/bulkingestimates cannot be determined. However, the following factors, based on the results of our geotechnical analysis and our experience grading the adjacent Carlsbad Ranch project, are provided as guideline estimates. If possible, we suggest an area where site grades can be adjusted be provided and utilized as a balance area. Topsoil: 5-10 percent shrinkage. Undocumented Fill 5-15 percent shrinkage Col luvium/S lope Wash 0-4 percent shrinkage Alluvium 5-15 percent shrinkage Santiago Formation 4-7 percent bulking (sandstone) Santiago Formation 5-9 percent shrinkage (claystone&iltstone) Santiago Peak Volcanics 10-18 percent bulking 4.1.7 Control of Ground Water and Surface Waters Based on the data gathered during this investigation and previous preliminary investigations on adjacent sites, it is our opinion that except for deep alluvial areas and the main canyon drainages, a permanent shallow ground water table does not currently exist at the site. The control of ground water in a hillside development is essential to reduce the potential for undesirable surface flow or seepage, hydrostatic pressure and the adverse effects of ground water on slope stability. We recommend that measures be taken to properly finish grade each sheet-graded area, such that drainage water is directed away from top-of-slopes. No ponding of water should be permitted. Drainage design is within the purview of the design civil engineer. Even with these provisions, our experience indicates that shallow ground water conditions can develop in areas where no such ground water conditions existed prior to site development, especially in areas where a substantial increase in surface water infiltration results from landscape irrigation. We recommend that an engineering geologist be present -15- 4980118-001 during grading operations to observe and record areas of present and possible future seepage. Canyon subdrains should be installed in the canyon bottoms that will be infilled and in the keys of stability or buttress fill slopes in order to collect subsurface water and minimize the saturation of the fill soils. The locations for recommended subdrains should be made after review of final grading plans. Additional subdrains may be recommended based on observations made during site grading and review of final development plans. If seepage conditions occur in cut slopes or other areas of the tract, shallow subdrains may be installed to collect the ground water and minimize problems associated with saturated soil. The subdrains should be installed in accordance with the details presented in Appendix D. 4.2 Slope Stability The proposed slopes were analyzed for their deep-seated and surficial stability (Appendix E). Slope stability analyses were performed using the PC software program XSTABLE and the method of homogeneous earth slopes. The values used in the analysis are provided below: Slope Stability Analysis Parameters Soil Type Santiago Formation Clay seam Fill/ButtressesFill (Claystone/Sandstone Mix) Landslide Material Friction Angle (degrees) 30 9 29 26 Cohesion (psf) 250 50 200 200 Due to the interbedded nature of the sandstone and claystone materials in this unit, the friction angle and cohesion values were estimated from these respective values obtained from the claystone and sandstone units themselves. The strength value for the fill soils must be confirmed prior to placement of the mixed fill to verify our assumptions. Cut slopes in the Santiago Formation and fill slopes derived from the predominant on site materials were analyzed for inclinations up to 2 to 1 (horizontal to vertical). Where adverse geologic conditions such as clay seams do not exist, a factor of safety of 1.5 or greater was calculated for the proposed slopes. However, our laboratory tests indicate that slopes derived from the Santiago Formation claystone only may possess deep-seated instability (when constructed at an inclination of 2:1 [horizontal to vertical]) to a maximum height of only 20 feet (less than the maximum proposed slope heights). Therefore, we recommend that the Santiago Formation claystone be utilized only in deeper fills or thoroughly mixed with onsite sandy soils in accordance with the recommendations of the geotechnical consultant. We recommend that the fill material be tested during grading to evaluate the strength parameters of the fill. -16- 4980118-001 A precise grading plan for the proposed alignment was not presented for our review at the time of this report. However, based on our review of the preliminary alignment map cut and fill slopes are anticipated to be constructed at slope inclinations of 2:1 (horizontal to vertical) or flatter. Maximum cut slope heights of ± 60 feet and maximum fill slope heights of ± 30 feet are anticipated. While some changes from this plan are anticipated, the overall site grading is not likely to differ significantly. Geotechnical analysis indicates that the proposed cut slopes will generally be stable against deep- seated failure if adverse geologic (i.e., clay seams, or out-of-slope-bedding)conditions do not occur in the cut slopes. However, due to the presence of weak clay layers, zones of friable sands, seepage, and out-of-slope bedding, all cut slopes greater than 10 feet in height shall have a stability fill and drains to reduce the potential for slope instability. Due to the potential for additional seepage due to future upslope development, vertical drainage panels are recommended along the backcut on 20 foot centers. A stability fill detail is presented in Appendix D. Slopes may be placed at 1-1/2:1 (horizontal to vertical) if horizontal layers of geogrid are used to stabilize the slope. If this is proposed, the replacement fill may have to be thicker than for a stability fill. Fill slopes up to 30 feet in height at an inclination of 2:1 (horizontal to vertical) were analyzed to have an adequate factor of safety (>1.5). The approximate locations of the buttress and stability fill are shown on Plate 2. Slopes in the areas of landslides as represented by Cross-Sections A-A' and B-B' were analyzed for stability. The results are presented in Appendix E and indicate that a buttress is necessary in Cross Section B-B' to increase the factory of safety to in excess of 1.5 (see Plate 2). We recommend that all excavations and cut slopes be observed and mapped by a geologist from our firm during grading operations to verify that the soil and geologic conditions encountered do not differ significantly from those assumed in our analysis. Oversteepening of existing slopes should be avoided during fine-grading and construction unless supported by appropriately designed retaining structures. Cut and fill slopes should be provided with appropriate surface drainage features and landscaped with drought-tolerant vegetation as soon as possible after completion of grading to minimize the potential for erosion. In slopes where seepage is present, drainage should be provided as shown in Appendix D. Slopes which require additional special drainage features can be evaluated and recommendations provided by the geotechnical consultant during grading operations. 4.2.1 Surficial Slope Stability Our calculationsof surficial stability (Appendix E) show a calculated factor of safety of 1.5 or greater for the proposed slopes. The strength parameters presented in the previous table were used for our analysis. Erosion and/or surficial failure potential of fill slopes may be reduced if the following measures are implemented during design and construction of the subject slopes. We recommend against the exclusive use of either highly expansive clayey soils or poorly graded sands of the Santiago formation. Highly expansive soils are generally known to be subject to surficial failures when exposed in slope faces. Clayey soils of the Santiago -17- 4980118-001 Formation weather, generally losing integrity when exposed on slope faces. Poorly graded sands utilized in slope faces may be subject to excessive erosion and rilling. A mixture of clayey soils and sandy soils is recommended to reduce overall expansion potential and slope erosion and increase surficial slope stability. We recommend that mixture of soils be approved by the project geotechnical engineer prior to placement in fill slopes. Cut and fill slopes should be provided with appropriate surface drainage features and landscaped with drought-tolerant, slope-stabilizing vegetation as soon as possible after grading to minimize potential for erosion. Berms should be provided at the top of all slopes and drainage directed such that surface runoff on slope faces is minimized. 4.3 Construction Delay The roadway alignment proposes significant fill loads on areas where complete removals of alluvium cannot be accomplished due to ground water. These areas are near Borings B-2/B-3 and B-4/B-5. We recommend that placement of the pavement and concrete curb-and-gutter and sidewalks be delayed for the following delay periods. The utility construction can commence if the individual utility can tolerate the anticipated settlement. We estimate that approximately 2/3 of the following settlement amount will occur within the first 1/2 of the construction delay period. Based on our analysis, we estimate the following magnitude and time of settlement in these two areas: Area of Existing Canyon B-2/B-3 B-4/B-5 Magnitude of Settlement (inches) 7-9 4-6 Construction Delay (days) 100-120 180-200 We recommend that settlement monuments be installed to further evaluate the amount of timing of the settlement. For planning proposed, a minimum of 14 monuments shall be installed and monitored. We note that the above presents rough estimates only and actual times may vary. 4.4 Retaining Wall/Segmented Wall Design Considerations Embedded structural walls should be designed for lateral earth pressures exerted on them. The magnitude of these pressures depends on the amount of deformation that the wall can yield under load. If the wall can yield enough to mobilize the full shear strength of the soil, it can be designed for "active " pressure. If the wall cannot yield under the applied load, the shear strength of the soil cannot be mobilized and the earth pressure will be higher. Such walls should be designed for "at rest" conditions. If a structure moves toward the soil, the resulting resistance developed by the soil is the "passive" resistance. For design purposes, the recommended equivalent fluid pressure for each case for walls founded above the static ground water table and backfilled with soils of very low to low expansion potential (less than 50 per UBC 18-2) and moderate expansion potential (less than 90 per UBC 18-2) is provided below. Soils with high expansion potential shall not be used as retaining wall backfill. -18- 4980118-001 Table 2 Equivalent Fluid Weight (pcf) Condition Active At-Rest Passive Very Low to Low Expansion Soils Level 35 55 350 (maximum = 3 ksf) 2:1 Slope 55 65 ~ Moderate Expansion Soils Level 45 65 350 (maximum = 3 ksf) 2:1 Slope 65 85 350 The above values assume free-draining conditions. If conditions other than those assumed above are anticipated, the equivalent fluid pressure values should be provided on an individual-case basis by the geotechnical engineer. AH retaining wall structures should be provided with appropriate drainage. The outlet pipe should be sloped to drain to a suitable outlet. Typical drainage design is illustrated in Appendix D. Wall back cut excavations less than 3 feet in height can be made near vertical. For back cuts greater than 4 feet in height, but less than 15 feet in height, the back cut should be flattened to a gradient of not steeper than 1:1 (horizontal to vertical) slope inclination. For back cuts in excess of 15 feet in height, specific recommendations should be requested from the geotechnical consultant. Soil resistance developed against lateral structural movement can be obtained from the passive pressure values in the previous table. Further, for sliding resistance, a friction coefficient of 0.35 may be used at the concrete and soil interface. These values may be increased by one-third when considering loads of short duration including wind or seismic loads. The total resistance may be taken as the sum of the frictional and passive resistances provided the passive portion does not exceed two-thirds of the total resistance. The allowable bearing pressure shall be taken as follows: Allowable Bearing Capacity (psf) 2,000 2,500 3,000 Minimum Embedment into Competent Material (inches) 18 24 30 For other walls, such as Keystone or Earthstone, we recommend the following design parameters: Friction Angle of Backfill = 28 degrees Cohesion = 100 psf Passive Resistance^ 300 pcf Unit Weight of Backfill = 125 pcf -19- 4980118-001 Bearing Capacity = 2,000 psf (18 inch embankment) = 2,500 psf (24 inch embankment) = 3,000 psf (30 inch embankment) Backcut Slope =1:1 (Fill Soils) = 1-1/2:1 (Colluvial Soils) = 3/4i1 (Formational Soils) Drainage = Toe drain and panel drains along backcut if slope is greater than 8 feet high. V- ditchattopofwall. 4.5 Corrosion Concerns The test results from site investigations performed on the adjacent Carlsbad Ranch and other nearby projects indicate the onsite soils possess a negligible to high soluble sulfate content. Soluble sulfates, if present in significant amounts, can be damaging to conventional Type I/II cement. Therefore, as a preliminary recommendations, sulfate resistant cement (Type II or V) should be used. In addition, laboratory testing of finish grade soils at grade or in contact with concrete and/or buried metal conduits should be performed once grading operations are completed. Our minimum resistivity test results indicate that the onsite soils do possess a very corrosive potential to buried, uncoated metal conduit. A corrosion engineer should be consulted to address this condition. 4.6 Preliminary Pavement Design Final pavement recommendations should be provided based on R-value testing of roadway subgrade soils as final grades are achieved. Since we did encounter both clay and sandy soils in our investigation, the R-Value of the actual roadway may vary greatly. Accordingly, based on our laboratory test results, for planning purposes, we have assumed the sandy onsite soils will have an R-value of 50 and the clay soils will have a R-Value of 5. Utilizing an assumed traffic indices of T.I. = 7.0, 8.0 and 9.0, the following structural pavement section can be assumed for planning purposes. -20- 4980118-001 Table3 Traffic Index 7.0 8.0 9.0 Recommended Pavement Section Sandy Subgrade R=50 4 inches asphalt concrete over 6 inches aggregate base 5.0 inches of asphalt concrete over 5.0 inches of asphalt concrete 6.0 inches of asphalt concrete over 6.0 inches of aggregate base Clayey Subgrade R=5 4 inches of asphalt concrete over 1 5 .5 inches of aggregate base 5 .0 inches of asphalt concrete over 17.5 inches of aggregate base 6.0 inches of asphalt concrete over 20.0 inches of aggregate base To reduce costs, selective grading should be accomplished so that sandy soils can be left in the upper 4 feet of roadway subgrade. If this cannot be accomplished, an alternate to the thick pavement section recommended for clay soils would be lime-treatment of the upper 8 to 16 inches of subgrade soils. Lime-treatment may eliminate the need for base in clayey subgrade areas. The upper 12 inches of subgrade soils should be scarified, moisture conditioned and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent relative compaction based on ASTM Test Method D1557-96. If fill is required to reach subgrade design grade, fill placement should be performed in accordance with the recommendations presented in Section 4.1.4. The aggregate base material should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent relative compaction. Class 2 aggregate base should meet the requirements of Caltrans specifications. We recommend that the curbs, gutters, and sidewalks be designed by the civil engineer or structural engineer. We suggest control joints at appropriate intervals as determined by the civil or structural engineer be considered. We also suggest a minimum thickness of 4 inches for sidewalk slabs. In accordance with City of Carlsbad guidelines, concrete improvements within city right of ways should be underlain by a minimum of 6 inches of Caltrans Class 2 aggregate base. If pavement areas are adjacent to heavily watered landscape areas, we recommend some measures of moisture control be taken to prevent the subgrade soils from becoming saturated. It is recommended that the concrete curbing separating the landscaping area from the pavement extend below the aggregate base to help seal the ends of the sections where heavy landscape watering may have access to the aggregate base and subgrade. Concrete swales should be designed in roadway or parking areas subject to concentrated surface runoff. -21- 4980118-001 5.0 CONSTRUCTIONOBSERVATIONS The conclusions and recommendations in this report are based in part upon data that were obtained from a limited number of observations, site visits, borings and trenches, samples, and tests. Such information is by necessity incomplete. The nature of many sites is such that differing geotechnical or geological conditions can occur within small distances and under varying climatic conditions. Changes in subsurface conditions can and do occur over time. Therefore, the findings, conclusions, and recommendations presented in this report can be relied upon only if Leighton has the opportunity to observe the subsurface conditions during grading and construction of the project, in order to confirm that our preliminary findings are representative for this site. -22- 4980118-001 APPENDIX A REFERENCES Abbott, P.L., ed., 1985, On the Manner of Deposition of the Eocene Strata in Northern San Diego County; San Diego Association of Geologists Fieldtrip Guidebook, April 13,1985. Albee, A.L., and Smith J.L., 1966, Earthquake Characteristics and Fault Activity Southern California m Southern California, Association of Engineering Geologists, Special Publication, dated October 1966. Bolt, B.A., 1973, Duration of Strong Ground Motion, Proc. Fifth World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Rom, Paper No. 292, pp. 1304-1313. dated June 1973. Bonilla, M.J., 1970, Surface Faulting and Related Effects, in Wiegel, R., Ed., Earthquake Engineering,New Jersey, Prentice-Hall, Inc., pp. 47-74. California Division of Mines and Geology, 1975, Fault Map of California, Scale 1"=750,000'. Eisenberg, L.I., 1983, Pleistocene Terraces and Eocene Geology, Encinitas and Rancho Santa Fe Quadrangles, San Diego County, California, San Diego State University Master's Thesis (unpublished), p. 386. , 1985, Pleistocene Faults and Marine Terraces, Northern San Diego County ]n Abbott, P.L., Editor, On the Manner of Deposition of the Eocene Strata in Northern San Diego County, San Diego Association of Geologists, Field Trip Guidebook, pp. 86-91. Geotechnics, 1992, Phase 1 Geotechnical Investigation, Carlsbad Ranch, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 0054-0001-00, dated September25,1992. Greensfelder, R.W., 1974, Maximum Credible Rock Accelerations from Earthquakes in California, California Division of Mines and Geology, Map Sheet 23. Hannan, D.L., 1975, Faulting in the Oceanside, Carlsbad, and Vista Areas, Northern San Diego County, California in Ross, A. and Dowlen, R.J., eds., Studies on the Geology of Camp Pendleton and Western San Diego County, California, San Diego Association of Geologists Field Trip Guidebook, pp. 56-60. Hart, 1988, Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zones Act of 1972 with Index to Special Study Zones Maps: Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Special Publication42. Hart, E.W., 1992, Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Alquist-Priolo Special studies Zones Act of 1972 with Index to Special Study Zones Maps: Department of Conversation, Division of Mines and Geology, Special Publication42. A-l 4980118-001 APPENDIX A (Continued) Hileman, J.A., Allen, C.R., and Nordquist, J.M., 1973, Seismicity of the Southern California Region, 1 January 1932 to 31 December 1972: California Institute of Technology Seismology Laboratory, Pasadena, California. ICG, Inc., 1988, Geotechnical Map and Cross Section A-A', Plates 2 and 3, Job 05-7379-002-00-00,dated January 1988. International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO), 1997, Uniform Building Code. , 1997, Uniform Building Code, Volume I-Administrative, Fire- and Life-Safety, and Field Inspection Provisions; Volume H-Structural Engineering Design Provisions; and Volume Ill-Material, Testing and Installation Provisions: ICBO. Jennings, C.W., 1975, Fault Map of California: California Division of Mines and Geology, Geologic Map No. 1, Scale 1:750,000. , 1992, Preliminary Fault Activity Map of California: California Division of Mines and Geology, Open File Report 92-03, Scale 1:750,000. Joyner, W.B., and Boore, D.M., 1982, Prediction of Earthquake Response Spectra, in Proceeding 51st Annual Convention, Structural Engineers Association of California; Also U.S. Geological SurveyOpen-FileReport81-977,p. 16. Lamar, D.L., Merifield, P.M., and Proctor, R.J., 1973, Earthquake Recurrence Intervals on Major Faults in Southern California, in Moran, D.E., Slosson, J.E., Stone, R.O., and Yelverton, C.A., Eds., 1973, Geology, Seismicity, and Environmental Impact, Association of Engineering Geologists, Special Publication. Leighton and Associates, Inc., 1985, Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Huntington Palomar Business Park, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 4841363-02, dated April 5,1985. , 1987, Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, Portion of Lot H of Rancho Agua Hedtonda, Partition Map No. 823, Northeast Corner of Interstate 5 and Cannon Road, Carlsbad, California,ProjectNo. 8870059-01,dated February 17,1987. , 1989a, Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Carltas Rancho Agua Hedionda Regional Shopping Center, Northeast of Interstate 5 and Cannon Road, Carlsbad, California, ProjectNo. 8891551-01,dated September29,1989. , 1991, Supplemental Geotechnical Evaluation, Proposed College Business Park, Carlsbad Tract 85-17, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 8841363-04, dated January 16, 1991 revised September 24,1991. , 1992, City of Carlsbad Geotechnical Hazards Analysis and Mapping Study, 84 Sheets, dated November, 1992. A-2 4980118-001 APPENDIX A (Continued) , 1994b, Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation for Tentative Map Purposes, Carlsbad Ranch, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 4930489-04, dated July 5,1994. , In-house unpublished data. Lindvall, S.C., Rockwell, T.K., and Lindvall, C.E., 1990, The Seismic Hazard of San Diego Revised: New Evidence for Magnitude 6+ Holocene Earthquake on the Rose Canyon Fault Zone: Proceedings of Fourth U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Volume 1, pp.679-688. Moore and Taber, 1987, Report of Geotechnical Services, Carlsbad Tract No. 81-46, Airport Business Center UnitNo. 1, City of Carlsbad, California, Job No. 285-256, dated February 25,1987. Ploessel, M.R., and Slosson, J.E., 1974, Repeatable High Ground Accelerations From Earthquakes - Important Design Criteria, California Geology, V. 27. Reichle, M.S., and Kahle, I.E., 1990, Planning Scenario for a Major Earthquake, San Diego-Tijuana Metropolitan Area: California Division of Mines and Geology, Special Publication 100. Rick Engineering, 1987, Site Development Plan, College Business Park, Carlsbad Tract No. 85-17, Scale l"=100',JobNo. 8495C, dated May 1,1985, Revised September 4,1987. , 1985, Site Development Plan, College Business Park, Carlsbad Tract No. 85-17, Scale 1"=100', Job No. 8495C, dated May 1,1985, Revised September4,1987. Schnabel, R., and Seed, H.B., 1973, Accelerations in Rock from Earthquakes in the Western United States, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, V. 63, No. 2, pp. 501-516. Seed, H.B., and Idriss, I.M., 1982, Ground Motions and Soil Liquefaction During Earthquakes, Monogram Series, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Berkeley, California. Seed, H.B., and Idriss, I.M., and Kiefer, R.W., 1968, Characteristics of Rock Motions During Earthquakes, Journal of Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division, ASCE, V. 95, No. SM5, Proc. Paper 6783, pp. 1199-1218. Singh, A., 1970, Shear Strength and Stability of Man-Made Slopes, in Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Divisions, ASCE, No. SM6, pp. 1879-1892. , 1982, Recent Slope failures, Ancient Landslides and Related Geology of the North-Central Coastal Area, San Diego County, California, California Division of Mines and Geology, Open File Report 82-12, LA. -, 1963, Geology and Mineral Resources of San Diego County, California: California Division of Mines and Geology, County Report 3, 309p. A-3 4980118-001 APPENDIX A (Continued) U.S. Department of the Navy, 1969, Civil Engineering, DM-5. , 1982, Foundations and Earth Structures, DM 7.2. , 1986, Soil Mechanics, DM 7.1. United States Department of the Interior Geologic Survey, 1968, 7.5-Minute Encinitas Quadrangles, Scale 1:24,000, Photo Revised 1975. United States Department of the Interior Geologic Survey, 1996, Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment for the State of California, Open File Report 96-706. U.S. EPA, 1998, Region 9, Preliminary Remediation Goals. Wilson, K.L., 1972, Eocene and Related Geology of a Portion of the San Luis Rey and Encinitas Quadrangles, San Diego, California. Ziony, J.I., and Yerkes, R.F., 1985, Evaluating Earthquake and Surface-Faulting Potential in Ziony, ed., 1985, Evaluating Earthquake Hazards in the Los Angeles Region - An Earth - Science Perspective: U.S. Geological Survey, Professional Paper 1360, pp. 43-91. A-4 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG KEY Date Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter Elevation Top of Hole +/- KEY TO BORING LOG GRAPHICS Drive Weight ft. Ref. or Datum Sheet 1 of Project No. Type of Rig 1 Drop in E 1 evat I on(feet) 11 0 — o .C0O.O CO '//// '$$> rib A AA A A *A * A 1 IIx/ % $ I r<••. :j:j:j: •'•':•'.•' •-"•*.mffXVJt JVC °t : y$fy i M L^!.- -I^T -T^TZZT &« ?1 TlT]SfesJ^ _ V 6 f $ftKN v_ N i**M? ///$•// trtoj•*-o In - A-A-o-G o 01 a «CO a. ndicateSPT Sample ndicate Cal Sample k C«fr-OIUQO. Q dcateswater time 01 Mo i stureContent (JO |^_ poundevelat cbttng • ^^ **IT3 CL CH OL-OH ML MH CL-ML ML^M CL-SC SC-SM SW SP SM sc GW GP GM GC GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By Sampled Bv Inorganic clay of low to medium plasticity; gravelly clay; sandy clay; silty clay; lean clay Inorganic clay of high plasticity, fat clay Organic clay, silt or silty clay-clayey silt mixtures Inorganic silt; very fine sand; silty or clayey fine sand; clayey silt with low plasticity Inorganic silt; diatomaceous fine sandy or silty soils; elastic silt Low plasticity clay to silt mixture Sandy silt to silty sand mixture Sandy day to clayey sand mixture Clayey sand to silty sand mixture Well graded sand; gravelly sand, little or no fines Poorly graded sand; gravelly sand, little or no fines Silty sand; poorly graded sand-tilt mixture Clayey sand; poorly graded sand-clay mixture Well graded gravel; gravel-cand mixture, little or no fines Poorly graded gravel; gravel-cand mixture, little or no fines Silty gravel; gravel-sand-«lt mixture Clayey gravel; gravel-sand-clay mixture Sandstone Siltstone daystone Breccia (angular gravel and cobbles or matrix-supported conglomerate) Conglomerate (rounded gravel and cobble, dast-supported) Igneous granitic or granitic type rock Metavokanic or metamorphic rock Artificial or man-made fill Asphaltic concrete 505A<11/77)LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-l Date Prqjec Drillii Holel Elevat JUsiistu 105- 100- 95- 90- 85- 80- 5-11-98 t igCo. )iamet ion To Depth(feet)o — - 5 — _ 10 — * e _____ 20 — 25 Faraday Avenue Sheet 1 of 2 Project No. 980118-001 West Hazmat Type of Rig Hollow-Stem Auee er 8 in. pof Hole +/- 106 o .CO)aord_lL.CD HHHI ^Mji mw///Ammw /^/'///,w/.''///, ftQJ+-O 6z 01 a.E(0O) 1 2 3 4 5 6 Drive Weigh ft. Ref. or Datu §8!"• cofcQ. 14 16 48 75 64 50/3' y>•*- u»/^CM-(U UQ Q.\-S 3>La 87.9 98.0 108.4 100.9 105.3 MoistureContent <5O |10.6 16.9 12.3 11.2 13.0 s 20.2 t 140 pounds Drop 30 in m Mean Sea Level U)~8<» G^_cn '53CO sc CL GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Loeeed By KAB Sampled BY TA QUATERNARY ALLUVIUM (Oall @ 3': Brown, moist, loose, clayey fine lo medium SAND @ 8' : With some white calcium deposits and occasional fragments of light gray SILTSTONE @ 10': Reddish brown, dense, moist, clayey fine SAND with some light tan, fine to coarse angular gravel SANTIAGO PEAK VOLCANICS ( Jsp) @ 13*: Reddish brown, moist, severely weathered with Santiago Peak Formation (weathered to hard silty CLAY with angular gravel) @ 18': Same as at 13 feet @ 23': Very light tan, moist, very dense silty, sandy angular grave! with abundant iron staining @27': Ground water encountered @ 28': Orange-brown, wet, dense, fine to coarse angular gravel @ 29' : Top of hard layer 505ACH/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-l Date ™" Project 5-11-98 ct ;ng Co. Diameter 8 in. LtionTopofHole +/- 106 Faraday Avenue West Hazmat Drive Weicht ft. Ref. or Datum Sheet 2 Project No. Type of Rig 140 pounds Mean Sea Level of 2 980118-001 Hollow-Stem Augei Droo 30 in.E 1 evat i on(feet)75- 70- 65- 60- 55- 50-Depth(feet)*j< 40 — _ 45 — - 50 — - 55 — fin — o .CO)O.O(B_l£_CD wn Notesdz 01 0.E(dV)[ §8 0^ <Q oiO_ •50/3.5". - - - - - - J*-t- tfls-^CH-QJ Oa CL^^ 31LQ MoistureContent (JO(fi~ S» o^_w '53w GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By KAB Sampled By TA @ 33*: No recovery (practical refusal) Total Depth = 34 Feet Ground Water Encountered at 27 Feet at Time of Drilling Hole Backfilled on May 1 1 , 199S 505AC11/77)LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-2 Date 5-L1-98 Sheet 1 of 1 Project Faraday Avenue Project No. 980118-001 Drilling Co. West Hazinat Type of Rig Hollow-Stem Auge Hole Diameter 8 in. Drive Weight 140 pounds Drop 30 in Elevation Top of Hole +/- 72 ft. Ref . or Datum Mean Sea Level °~ fflffi>£«s!, UJ 70- 65- 60- 55- 50- 45- ^ f «01(51w o — — _ 5 — - 10 — 15 — 20 — 25 — nn O .cmao LCD '///,'///, W/ '% m §w, //// 01 oz oz OJ EffiO) +- in OSoR^- Q_ i | 14 2 | 32 23 31 CH-Q) Oo a La 95.7 104.0 94.1 /•N L^ ^ <" QI £^*-ou 16.4 16.8 22.5 . ift ^^ (jft *-? -o w5 "53CO CL GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By KAB Sampled By TA ALLUVIUM (Pan @ 1': Dark brown, moist, sandy CLAY @ 5': Medium dense dark brown, moist, sandy CLAY @ 10': Dense dark brown, moist, sandy CLAY © 15': Medium dense dark brown, moist, sandy CLAY Total Depth = 16 Feet No Ground Water Encountered at Time of Drilling Hole Backfilled on May 11, 1998 505A<ii/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-3 Date Project 5-11-98 ct ing Co. Diameter 8 in. ition Top of Hole +/- 64 Faraday Avenue West Hazmat Drive Weieht ft. Ref. or Datum Sheet 1 of 2 Project No. 980118-001 Type of Rig Hollow-Stem Augei 140 pounds Drop 30 in Mean Sea Level "^ -•«g^» 2>*111 60- 55- 50- 45- 40- 35- £***• nioi ,£Q^ 5 — - 10 — _ — 15 — _ — - 20 — _ — — - O .CO)Q.OfO_l O ^ '*ys''' J^s ' ' 7/v' ' '•S/-- ' //^ ' ' // ' ' i/V^ ' jfy ' ' SS <J//t '' /•/ • f f /, • y-}/' ' ss' '/^f 'sfy' /•/ ;xXx^ /'*// ' 's/^j * / /* ' '/s' "/>*j^y• -/f, /fy r's y./f • —-^.^ in01•HOz: 1 *oz Of CO 1 2 3 4 5 •»- o^- ^ , AUL 22 18 30 18 24 Ut*-. 01 Oa a. ^wLa 99.0 101.4 102.8 96.4 t."^-H-!-•*•tf (y °"cE Oo 18.3 13.7 19.5 22.5 T7 — ^(0 o*-* tn~~ . O ^^<nw SC/SM SC/SM CL SM/CL SM GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By KAB Sampled By TA TOPSOIL @ 0': Dark brown, moist, clayey, silty fine to medium SAND QUATERNARY ALLUVIUM fOall @ 3': Brown, moist, medium dense, clayey, silty, fine to coarse SAND, abundant organic fragments @ 5': Same as above with increase in clay to sandy CLAY @ 10*: Brown, moist, medium dense, clayey, silty fine to coarse SAND to sandy CLAY @ 15': Same as at 10 feet with gravel clast in sample tip, scattered stringers oflight gray fine SAND @ 20': Light brown to brown, moist to wet, clayey, silty, fine to coarse SAND to sandy CLAY © 23': Ground water encountered @ 25': Light brown, saturated, medium dense, silty, fine to coarse SAND 505A(11/77)LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-3 Date 5-11-98 Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter 8 in. Elevation Top of Hole +/- 64 Faraday Avenue West Hazmat Drive Weight ft. Ref. or Datum Sheet 2 of 2 Project No. 980118-001 Type of Rig Hollow-Stem Augei 140 pounds Drop 30 in Mean Sea Level c 1| LJ 30- 25- 20- 15- 10- 5 Depth(feet)30 — - — 35 — - - - 40 — - 45 — - 50— - 55 — U Q.O<D_I O ^ \Jr7 ' '&/'<. •/ / s '///• % tfl +-O Oz 01 Q.E CO '1 '1 §8 I11" 37 53 J>•H cC Q) UCD Q. 31 Q /-^loisturentent CJi*- oU * |«i odCO CL/ML SM/CL sc GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged Bv KAB Sampled By TA @ 30': Brown, damp, dense, silty CLAY to clayey SILT TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION fTsl @ 32': Light green-gray, moist, clayey fine to medium SAND to sandy CLAY in cuttings @ 35': Light green-gray, moist, dense, slightly clayey, fine to medium SAND Total Depth = 36 Feet 6 Inches Ground Water Encountered at 23 Feet at Time of Drilling Hole Backfilled on May 18, 1998 505AC11/77)LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-4 Date 5-11-98 Sheet 1 of 2 —• Project Faraday Avenue Drilling Co. Hole Diameter West Hazmat 8 in.Drive Weight Project No. 980118-001 Type of Rig Hollow-Stem Augei 140 pounds Drop 30 in — Elevation Top of Hole +/- 48 ft. Ref. or Datum Mean Sea Level c *"*" •+-^J >tj:fS/ LJ «. 40- 35- 30- 25- 20- +" ni D- tit£"Qw o — - 5 — _ 10— —_ 15 — - 20 — — ™" 25 — - U .ca« CD 1 1K;/£ ' x 'jx :%'/, *v '^' /, ' j- '4 >4''/ '$. '// 'K >~) *>•/< '4< X j 0)o_l //1 %x\H / /4}/'// r // /'// r 4*/'// r</: ^x; / ) / 'y-</ > 4'<//,///£< & *y. / ' fr//4/,y?4x ^x" •/^ Vt(U•*-oz 1 6z fit01 Q. EtnTU(/) 1 2 Bag-3 hi fyt ic 4 5 6 "8^O £_ CD O •• 15 26 19 13 11 -i- c£01 UO Q. 3)*^£_Q 99.3 100.0 91.2 90.8 86.3 v _^ 4- T? C._ n o c t. Q CJ 19.1 18.9 16.6 21.8 \7• v 30.2 S^— , - CJ (/>~ • O "^en SC/CL SM/CL SM/CL SM SM/CL CL/SC GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By KAB Sampled By TA TOPSOIL @ 0': Brown, moist, clayey, fine to medium SAND to silty sandy CLAY QUATERNARY ALLUVIUM fOaH @ 3': Brown, moist, medium dense clayey, silty fine to coarse SAND to sandy CLAY @ 5': Same as at 3 feet @ 10': Brown, moist, medium dense, silty to clayey, fine to medium SAND to sandy CLAY @ 15': Light yellow-brown, damp, medium dense, silty fine SAND @ 20': Same as at 15 feet to sandy CLAY ©24': Ground water encountered @ 25*: Light brown to brown, saturated, silty sandy CLAY to clayey SAND 505AC11/77)LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-4 Date 5-11-98 Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter 8 in. Elevation Top of Hole +/- 48 Faraday Avenue West Hazmat Drive Weight ft. Ref. or Datum Sheet 2 of 2 Project No. 980118-001 Type of Rig Hollow-Stem Aueer 140 pounds Drop 30 in Mean Sea Level °~ 5S ]fe UJ 15- 10- 5- o- -5- -10- .C~ &$aS 30 — _ _ oe — 40 — - 45 — - - 55 — - U £0)O.OfO_lLCD Ml OJ-I- Oz oz 01 a V) •H eofca. 41 42 , — ^CH-OI Ua a a *-\a.*MoistiContent§2 o^ '53to SM GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By KAB Sampled By TA TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION (Ts) @ 30': Light yellow-brown, wet, slighdy clayey, fine to coarse SAND (massive) @ 35': Same as at 30 feet, silty fine to coarse SAND Total Depth = 36 Feet 6 Inches Ground Water Encountered at 24 Feet Hole Backfilled on May 18, 1998 505AC11/77)LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES Date 5-11-98 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-5 Faraday Avenue Sheet 1 of 2 Project No.980118-001Project Drilling Co. West Hazmat Type of Rig Hollow-Stem Au^c Hole Diameter 8 in. Drive Weight 140 pounds Drop 30 in — Elevation Top of Hole +/- 49 ft. Ref. or Datum Mean Sea Level 1 evat i on(feet)UJ AC45- 40- 35- 30- 25- 20 Depth(feet)0^^_— — 5 — — 10 — _ — - 15 — - — 20 — _ - 25 — _ u .CO)Q.O «_l CD /•fy '• ^ ~*//"'t W< '%'- W''' W' y/' $/''</x/; y/- '$\ $\ $'. $' $/'' f'7/- P % '•/// ' //, '/x'<m ^ 01 oz *o 01 Q.E CO 1 2 §1 f\U. 34 14 -t- 0" U °^ t_o 98.9 83.2 loisture 1ntent (^) |"- oo 21.4 32.4 ^ B U)^ SM/CL SM/CL GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged Bv KAB Sampled Bv TA TOPSOIL @ 0': Brown, moist, blocky, silty, clayey fine to medium SAND to sandy CLAY QUATERNARY ALLUVIUM fOaH @ 5': Dark brown, moist, clayey, silty, fine to medium SAND to sandy CLAY @ 10': Dark brown, moist, medium dense, clayey fine to medium SAND to sandy CLAY @ 15': Same as at 10 feet @ 20': Light yellow-brown, moist, clayey fine to medium SAND to sandy CLAY @ 22': Ground water encountered @25': Same as at 20 feet but wet to saturated 505AC11/77)LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES Date 5-11-98 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-5 Faraday Avenue Sheet 2 of 2 Project No.980118-001Project Drilling Co. West Hazmat Type of Rig Hollow-Stem Auger Hole Diameter 8 In. Drive Weight 140 pounds Drop 30 in. Elevation Top of Hole +/- 49 ft. Ref. or Datum Mean Sea Level g^ win .2 ~ LU 15- 10- 5- o- -5- -10- "£"£01 ,~ 0^, 30 — - ~~ 35 — - 40 — - - 45 — - 50 — - 55 — - U -CO)Q.O CD HI '$/'* >%//, H fnf MlQJ OZ 6z (U E 'U! •t- o11-__ 30 41 •H CU Ua a £_ Q jS ••""c" Q| °"c O ^cn 0°, * — . O ^^a>^ SM/CL sc SM/SC GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By KAB Sampled By TA @ 30': Yellow-brown to brown, wet, dense, clayey fine to coarse SAND to sandy CLAY - ~ TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION (Ts\ @ 35': Driller reports material becomes slighdy more difficult to drill spoils are yellow-brown SAND (saturated) with CLAY _ @ 40': Yellow-brown, saturated, dense, clayey, silty fine to coarse SAND Total Depth = 41 Feet 6 Inches Ground Water Encountered at 22 FeetHole Backfilled on May 18, 1998 - - - - _ - . 505A(11/77)LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-1 Date Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter 5-7-98 Faraday Avenue San Diego Drilling Sheet 1 of 3 Project No. 980118-001 Type of Rig __Bucket 30 in.Drive Weight 0'-30'; 5,000 Ibs.; 31 '-60'; 3,841 Ibs.Drop 30 ir Elevation Top of Hole + /-172 ft. Ref. or Datum Mean Sea Level £^ •^"fll <o£Q^ 0 — - 5 — - - 10 — 15 — 20 — _ 25 — .20= o £ roQ.O <0_J LCD •V ' '"~~y& '.' ''' '.'• _ . •. . . ' r— 1' . •-- .^ w tf>01T3 •»- —•t- Oz CO 1 Bag-2 £I4'-!6 3 •4- 3 1 1Q ^ CD |jj 6 Bulk 6 3*-i- CH-QJ O Q Q. 3,W O 107.8 114.7 ^ f.^ j—^in ^.!- Q)o cE oo 8.9 11.5 . ift ^^ (A «A — . .t 1 "^ o ^^cow SM/CL SM SM/SC GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By KAB Sampled By KAB TOPSOIL @ 0': Dark brown, moist, stiff to medium dense, clayey, silty SAND to sandy CLAY, abundant roots, root casts, and open pores TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION <Ts) @ 2': Light brown to light gray, damp, dense, silty fine to medium SAND, moderately indurated, weakly bedded to massive @ 5': Same as above @ 6': Material is much less oxidized with sharp contact (bedding) with light gray SAND @ 10': Light gray, slightly damp, dense, slightly silty, fine to medium SAND @ 15': Same as at 10 feet, massive to weakly bedded, very friable @ 20': Light greenish gray, damp, dense, silty, fine SAND, moderately to well indurated @ 22': Material becomes silty to slightly clayey, fine laminated SAND @25': Slight increase in clay from above 505AC11/77)LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-1 Date Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter 5-7-98 Faraday Avenue Sheet 2 of 3 Project No.980118-001 San Diego Drilling 30 in.Drive Weight Type of Rig Bucket Q'-30*; 5,000 Ibs.; 31'-60'; 3,841 Ibs. Drop 30 in. — Elevation Top of Hole +/-172 ft. Ref. or Datum Mean Sea Level "a"*ditS!Q^ - — 35 — - 40 — 45 — 50 — - 55 — U Ic CDQ.O CD . . • • * G- n in01T33•*- — -I- dz QJ 0.£(0</) 4 5 •*- «gB^_ ^ a. 7-6" 9-6" •H CM-01 Ua a. a 108.1 104.2 A| *^ ^+- .!_ w £c a 10.1 11.4 S^au CO '53w^ SM GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Lossed By KAB Sampled By KAB @30': Refusal due to extremely hard, well-cemented sandstone. No recovery. Boring re-entered 5/13/98 with core barrel to get past extremely hard, well-cemented (silica), fine- to medium-grained SANDSTONE @ 35': Light gray, damp, very dense, silty fine to medium SAND to SANDSTONE, moderately to well indurated @ 38'-40': Very well-cemented sandstone layer ~ @45': Same as at 35 feet @ 50': Very well-cemented zone, core barrel required to advance boring to 55 feet @ 55': No sample (Cal) taken, rock debris in tube, very dense 505AC11/77)LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES Date Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter Elevation Top 5-7-98 30 in. of Hole +/-172 ft. GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-1 Sheet 3 of Faraday Avenue Project No. San Diego Drilling Type of Rig Drive Weieht 0'-30'; 5,000 Ibs.; 31'-60'; 3,841 Ibs. Ref . or Datum Mean Sea Level 3 980118-001 Bucket Drop 30 ir f!Qw — 65 — 70 — 75 — 80 — 85 — O -C 0)Q-O*_l CD inQJ T33-t- -I--1- <C O OJ Q.Efd(/) §8fr- eofc Q. 31-*- W>^CH-OI OQ 0.^s 31£_a MoistureContent C/iu?^ > o^_o '530) GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By KAB Sampled By KAB Total Depth = 60 Feet No Ground Water Encountered at Time of Drilling Hole Backfilled on May 13, 1998 505A(11/77)LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-2 Date Project 5-7-98 ;t ngCo. Diameter 30 in. tionTopofHole +/-126 ft. Faraday Avenue San Diego Drilling Drive Weight Ref . or Datum Sheet 1 of Project No. Tvoe of Rig 0'-30'; 5,000 Ibs.; 31 '-60'; 3,841 Ibs. Mean Sea Level 2 980118-001 Bucket Drop 30 in .c~•4- '•TT tt MlOliSf 03 o — - _ 5 — - _ _ 10 — ™ — ~ 15 — — - 20 — - _ 25 — 0 .C 0)Q.Offl_l CD • • • .1. . .— • Jr^ r.~ y " .vv. •V .' • .'^'. -.'^ ? M ' — '*.'*'- A ". '• * . "-. . -• "NL~-.Jftc..:^V5V 4V .***.". .^ • - "•">'""._-. _ . • •-• — • -. . •"• -• - . _ . ,. . . .- • - '-^:;~;- •- •£,' :mi. •vS$ QJ•o •*- —+• ^P Oz fitUJ ^Eflini07 Bag-l_ 2 3 4 »°3 1 1o"- ~~* (fn JJT AL^ 1 4 g 31-i- C*H OJ Oa a 3>^ La 93.9 108.4 ^ QJ-5 ^4-lA C<u °"cE ou 27.9 11.1 *\fl^^jfl -.r — r »LJ ^^ _co o3 SM/CL CL/SC SM ML SM LL/aM SM ML/SM GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By KAB Sampled By KAB TOPSOIL @ 0': Dark brown, damp to moist, stiff to medium dense, silty, fine tomedium SAND to silty, fine sandy CLAY LANDSLIDE DEBRIS fOlsl @ 3': Greenish-gray to light brown, damp to moist, medium dense to stiff, silty fine sandy CLAY to clayey fine SAND @ 5': As at 3 feet with reddish orange oxidation staining, fractures randomlyoriented @ 8': Several 8 to 10 inches in diameter, well-cemented clasts ofSANDSTONE @ 10': Green-gray, slightly damp, dense, silty fine to medium SAND, moderately to well indurated, spoils containing more SANDSTONE fragments mixed with loose sand@ 11': Gray, damp, fine sandy SILTSTONE to clayey siltstone, material moist, blocky to crumbly with gypsum abundant lining randomly oriented fractures ' @ 13.7': Rupture surface 1 inch thick indistinct plastic, zone abundant1 gypsum around surface, material above is blocky and jumbled, material1 below is dense, 2 inch claystone below surface TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION CTs) © 13.9': 4'-6": Thick light brown, damp, well-«mented, fine to medium SANDSTONE lense, dipping 10 degrees northwest, very sharp contact with underlying gray dense SILTSTONE@ 16': 1/2 inch thick, gypsum seam dipping 12 degrees to the northeast @ 18.9': 2 inches of CLAYSTONE grades to slightly cemented SANDSTONE @ 19': Driller reports difficult drilling, 1/2 inch thick gypsum seam dipping 15 degrees northeast @ 20*: Light brown, slighdy damp, very dense, silty fine to medium SANDSTONE, well indurated/slighdy cemented @ 23': Gypsum lining abundant fractures and bedding planes dipping 20 degrees northwest @ 25': Medium gray, damp, very dense, fine sandy SILTSTONE to silty fine SANDSTONE, abundant marine fossil (impressions, highly oxidized friable shell fragments, infilled burrows, etc.) 505A<11/77)LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-2 Date 5-7-98 ""~ Project Faraday Avenue Drilling Co, Hole Diameter San Diego Drilling Sheet 2 of 2 Project No. Type of Rig 980118-001 Bucket 30 in.Drive Weight 0'-30'; 5,000 Ibs.; 31 '-60'; 3,841 Ibs.Drop 30 it — Elevation Top of Hole + /-126 ft. Ref. or Datum Mean Sea Level ^^+* Q_ S 01 cSQ^ - 35 — 40 — 45 — 50 — 55 — U .C 0)Q.OfD_lLCD X£ -V*f• _>_(. •- -0- • $':. Vt 01 3 —•4-<n oz £mw 5 -«- 3i^O__ Q_ 5-5" 314- CM-01 Uo a La 97.3 ^ L^ J-H1n C"• 01 °cEoU V 22.2 * S" (j LJ W 05 ML/SM SM GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By KAB Sampled By KAB @30': Same as at 25 feet @ 33': Perched ground water encountered @ 35': Light gray to light yellow-brown, slightly damp, extremely dense, silty fine to medium SANDSTONE, very well cemented ~\ @ 38': As at 35 feet near practical refusal, drilling halted due to density of \ well-cemented material Total Depth = 38 Feet Perched Ground Water Encountered at 33 Feet Hole Backfilled on May 7, 1998 505A(11/77)LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-3 Date Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter 5-8-98 Faraday Avenue San Dieeo Drilling Sheet 1 of 2 Project No. Type of Rig 980118-001 Bucket 30 in.Drive Weight 0'-30'; 5,000 Ibs.; 31*-60*; 3,841 Ibs.Drop 30 in -~ Elevation Top of Hole +/-114 ft. Ref. or Datum Mean Sea Level "a"*01(2!Qw o — 5 — - - 10 — - 15 — - 20 — 25 — U .C 0)Q.O £_CD T<»: .— -•. — . -. .— .. -. , — . - . - .. _ • - . . — . .— . — . — - j ' .- • &(UTJ34-._. +• C d <U CO 1 2 3 -H o11- 3 4 8 •H <U Ua a. ^o 101.5 101.9 109.1 f -!-"£ _ 01 o"c CJ 21.3 22.3 17.2 V ^CO o° COz *°3 CL/SC ML/CL ML/SM ML/SM SM GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By KAB Sampled By KAB TOPSOIL @ 0': Dark brown, moist, stiff, fine sandy CLAY to clayey SAND, abundant organic debris LANDSLIDE DEBRIS fOls^ @ 2': Mixed greenish gray, damp, highly fractured SILTSTONE with light brown stiff CLAYSTONE to siltstone @ 5': Greenish-gray, slightly damp, dense, fine sandy SILTSTONE to silty fine SANDSTONE TERTIARY SANTIAGO (Ts) @ T: Material is very dense, highly fractured greenish gray SILTSTONE to silty SANDSTONE @ 10': Same as above, moderately to well-cemented with abundant iron-oxide staining lining fractures, oxidized, totally replaced, marine shells visible in side walls @ 15': Green-gray to reddish brown (oxidized), slightly damp, dense, fine sandy SILTSTONE to silty fine SANDSTONE, fractures in sample are randomly oriented and discontinuous @ 20': Same as at 15 feet, material has slighly more sand content than above @ 25*: Light brown, damp, very dense, slightly silty, fine- to medium-grained SANDSTONE @ 28': Perched ground water 505AC11/77)LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-3 Date 5-8-98 "" Project Faraday Avenue Drilling Co. Hole Diameter San Diego Drilling Sheet 2 of 2 Project No. 980118-001 Type of Rig _Bucket 30 in.Drive Weight 0'-30'; 5,000 Ibs.; 31*-60'; 3,841 Ibs.Drop 30 in — Elevation Top of Hole 4-/-114 ft. Ref. or Datum Mean Sea Level ^ ^ L.0 • QJ J Jr ^^ 30 — - 'If - 40 — - 45 — - 50 — 55 — O J= 0)ao CD - . — • - . — • ^ ' •— ' - -I-"'" .".'.' I/I 01•a34- —-1--1-<C i Oz EflfCO 4 Bag-5 ftj^fl'—rft'l *8o — - 0_ 10-8" .j, -i- CM-<u oa a. 31£.O 102.9 s~^»z 2.*-wc °CE0O 17.6 S«5^ - Io (ft 03 ML/SM SM/ML GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Lofiged By KAB Sampled By KAB @ 30': No visual log below seepage completed @ 30': From spoils material is green-gray, damp to moist, dense, fine sandy SILTSTONE to silty fine SANDSTONE @ 36': Light greenish gray, slightly damp, extremely dense, fine to medium grained sandy SILTSTONE to silty SANDSTONE, abundant orange-brown oxidation @38': Difficult drilling reported @ 40*: Light brown to olive-brown, dense, silty fine SANDSTONE to fine sandy SILTSTONE @ 45*: Same as above Total Depth = 47 Feet Perched Ground Water at 28 Feet Hole Backfilled with Moderate Compactive Effort 5/9/98 505AC11/77)LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-4 Date "" Project 5-8-98 ct ing Co. Diameter 30 in. itionTopofHole +/-108 ft. Faraday Avenue San Diego Drilling Drive Weight Ref . or Datum Sheet 1 of Project No. Type of Rig 0'-30'; 5,000 IDS.; 31'-60'; 3,841 Ibs. Mean Sea Level 2 980118-001 Bucket Drop 30 in •^^Q-m0)«JQ^ o — 5 — - 10 — — — i ^ 20 — - 25 — O f (j) Q.O L.CD • * i. . „ - . '_ . '- . .-. . • — '- - • "•* • ' . ' r1. v' .'-.' ' . ' .-. . — , _ ~:. - .- • . _ ., 'r"— -7 VI01 34- —4- <E gyspum 10 to 15 degrees northwest *Oz E U) Bag-1 @2'-5' 2 3 4- 3iO— , Bulk 3 6 I CH-OI O0 0- •j^£_a 98.4 105.6 OlS . -*-"uiC._ <u O"^*- oCJ 24.0 19.4 JSf>~~f ^oto * cow SM/CL SM/SC SM/ML SM GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By KAB Sampled By KAB TOPSOIL @ 0' : Dark brown, damp to moist, stiff to medium dense, silty fine to medium sandy CLAY to clayey, silty SAND; abundant organic detritus TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION fTs) @ 2': Light brown to greenish gray, damp, dense, slightly clayey to clayey. silty fine to medium SAND @ 5': Material becomes better cemented with less clay content, slightly less moisture @ 10': Greenish gray, slightly damp, dense, clayey to fine sandy SILTSTONE to silty SANDSTONE, oxidized clayey pectin shell casts common throughout @ 13'6": 1-2" thick, oxidized discontinuous silt layer @ 15': Same as at 10 feet @ 20': Light gray to light brown, slightly damp, dense to very dense, silty fine SANDSTONE with abundant oxidized reddish orange staining (marine fossils) @ 22': Abundant gypsum filling minor fractures and northwest bedding planes (10 to 15 degrees) @ 25': Material becomes very silty and extremely dense 505AC11/77)LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-4 Date Project 5-8-98 ;t ngCo. Diameter 30 in. [ion Top of Hole +/-108 ft. Faraday Avenue San Diego Drilling Drive Weight Ref. or Datum Sheet 2 of Project No, Type of Rig 0'-30'; 5,000 Ibs.; 31*-60'; 3.841 Ibs. Mean Sea Level 2 980118-001 Bucket Drop 30 in r~ I-LJ«^ - " - 35 — — 40 — 45 — 50 — 55 — U 0.0flj-l CD . •-_-. .'. OJ•o3•*- +-4- • Oz (U a£a) 4 Bag-5 +- j£ 0_ 10-12" Bulk 3)•H C4-01 Ua a £.a 108.8 ^Nj-S -H1*"MO 1 =*- oa 17.8 V & "S co^ SM VIL/SM GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By KAB Sampled By KAB @ 30': Light gray to light yellow-brown, dry, extremely dense, silty, fine to medium well-cemented SANDSTONE @ 33': Seepage from several (slight) fractures in SILTSTONE/SANDSTONE, water running down wall ~\@ 37': As above with refusal on bucket core barrel not attempted gray, \ damp, fine sandy SILT to silty SAND Total Depth = 37 Feet Ground Water Encountered at 33 Feet Hole Backfilled with Moderate Compacdve Effort on May 8, 1998 505AC11/77)LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-5 Date 5-8-98 "• Project Faraday Avenue Drilling Co. Hole Diameter San Diego Drilling Sheet 1 of 3 Project No. 980118-001 Type of Rig _Bucket 30 in.Drive Weight 0'-30'; 5,000 Ibs.; 31'-60'; 3,841 Ibs.Drop 30 in Elevation Top of Hole + /-140 ft. Ref. or Datum Mean Sea Level .c~••-InO-QJ aw o — — - - 5 — 10 — - 15 — 20 — 25 — VI o .CO)ao CD .'.'.'. •'"?• :>, . • • v>01•o -1— —4-<c oz:_,w 0. (0 Bag-1 ©3'-$' 2 3 -i- 3 1O — £_ Q_ 16 5 j, ~^ CM-01 Oa a £_a 112.0 116.0 ^v2- 1 "*~* c._ <u°t CJ 7.5 6.0 * tfi ._ — . * O CO o>^ SM GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By KAB Sampled By KAB TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION fTs^ @ 0': Light brown, damp, medium dense, slightly, silty fine- to medium-grained SANDSTONE, massive and slightly micaceous @ 5': Same as above @ 10': Off-white to slightly greenish-gray, slightly damp, dense, slightly silty, fine to medium SANDSTONE @ 15': Weakly defined west dipping discontinuous bedding planes (10 to 12 degrees) minor amounts of iron-oxide staining along beds @ 20': Light yellow-brown, damp, dense, friable, silly fine to coarse SAND @ 25': Increase in moisture content to very moist SAND very friabie 505A<11/77)LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-5 Date Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter 5-8-98 Faraday Avenue San Diego Drilling Sheet 2 of 3 Project No. 980118-001 Type of Rig _Bucket 30 in.Drive Weight Q'-30'; 5,000 IDS.; 31'-60*; 3,841 Ibs.Drop 30 in — Elevation Top of Hole +/-140 ft. Ref. or Datum Mean Sea Level J,^ +- "]JT fa '•' <U(2!Qw •anJU - 35 — — — 40 — - — A e - - _ 50 — ee - fin— u .C 0)Q.O CD . — • "* -• _- - . . - . _ >~:f -"L -„ -__"- T,^ ~ - _ - - -~_ "_ — - "_.'—- "^- '.' l!~ i_'--~ irt01•o 4- .—4- 4-<c 1 o fllw Q.£ -i- 3 1 ,o11- (O Q) <0 [ U.cn J4 5 ' 6 J43'-45 ' 8 L ' Bulk 1 8-8" 3*-i- c£Q) UQ Q. 31£_ a 111.9 110.7 107.3 106.9 ^ L.^ ~ +- i« C._ o>o"£E oa 12.1 15.7 17.3 17.4 . &^ . IO CO~ •o ^^ C/)^ SM ML/SM SM/ML ML/CL ML/CL ML/SM GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Lofiged By KAB Sampled By KAB TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION fTsl Continued @ 30': Light yellow-brown, damp, dense, silty fine to coarse SAND to SANDSTONE, friable to weakly cemented @35': Same as above @ 36': Contact (sharp) with light greenish gray, very moist, dense, fine sandy SILTSTONE to clayey, silty fine SANDSTONE @ 40': Light greenish-gray, damp, dense, silty fine SANDSTONE to fine sandy SILTSTONE @ 43': Decrease in moisture content @ 44': Green-gray, slighdy damp, very friable, fine sandy SILT @ 47': Marked increase in clay content, material becomes dark gray, dense to very dense, fine sandy, silry, CLAYSTONE to clayey SILTSTONE @ 50': Dark charcoal gray, slightly damp, very dense, clayey, SILTSTONE to silty CLAYSTONE @ 55': As at 50 feet @ 59': Dark charcoal gray, slightly damp, very dense, fine sandy SILT to silty SAND, well indurated 505A<11/77}LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES Date Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter 5-8-98 30 in. Elevation Top of Hole +/-140 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-5 Sheet 3 of Faraday Avenue Project No. San Diego Drilling Type of Rig Drive Weieht 0'-30'; 5,000 Ibs.; 31 '-60'; 3,841 Ibs. ft. Ref. or Datum Mean Sea Level 3 980118-001 Bucket Drop 30 in •c£&!o£ 60 — 65 — 70 — 75 — 80 — ocOJ on o .C 0)Q.Offl_it_CD I/IQ*•O3•H -1--1-<C 6 QJ Q. 4 CO s§0^ cQaio_ D»-1- W»y^ CH-OI Ua a.^^ 31 CD MoistureContent (JO*S~8«> a^ _w 080) GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By KAB Sampled By KAB Total Depth = 60 Feet No Ground Water Encountered at Time of Drilling Hole Backfilled on May 1 1 , 1998 505A(11/77)LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-6 Date 5-8-98 Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter 30 in. Elevation Top of Hole + 7-150 ft. Faraday Avenue San Diego Drilling Drive Weight Ref. or Datum Sheet 1 of Project No. Type of Rip 0'-30'; 5,000 Ibs.; 31*-60*; 3,841 Ibs. Mean Sea Level 2 980118-001 Bucket Drop 30 in ^^4— ' Q, j[(U«jT °^ o — - - 5 — 10 — 15 — 20 — - 25 — U JI 0) O.O L VV: _" ?-'' •' ' .^. - •- .. - • '_ • ' •' , • / v V (A<U•a -t-._ •H-t- Oz 07 1 2 "g O^ 3 7 31•*- C1*- OJ Ua a a 104.3 115.5 ^Na;* 1 "*~I- c._ Q> U 20.5 12.9 * g<0 L) ".- — tO "™^ww SM ML/CL CH SM GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By KAB Sampled By KAB TOPSOIL @ 0': Brown, damp to moist, slightly clayey, silty, fine to medium SAND @ 2': Light greenish brown to gray, fine to medium grained sandy SILT to silty SAND, weakly bedded to massive dripping 10 to 12 degrees west where bedding visible @ 5': Same as above @ 10': Olive green-gray, damp, stiff to medium dense, clayey SILTSTONE to silty CLAYSTONE with iron-oxide staining on fracture surfaces @ 12'6": Reddish brown, stiff, moist, 1 inch thick clay seam dipping 10 to 12 degrees west-northwest, no visible shearing, very plastic CLAY @ 14'6": Material abruptly changes to tight green-gray, silty fine to medium SAND, moderately indurated @ 20': Very light brown, damp, very dense, slightly silty, fine- to medium-grained SANDSTONE @ 25': Sand components becomes slightly coarser 505A(11/77)LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-6 Date Project 5-8-98 ct ing Co. Diameter 30 in. ttionTopofHole + /-ISO ft. Faraday Avenue San Diego Drilling Drive Weight Ref . or Datum Sheet 2 of Project No. Type of Rip 0'-30'; 5,000 Ibs.; 31 '•«)'; 3,841 Ibs. Mean Sea Level 2 980118-001 Bucket Drop 30 in ££ (U tJL W 30 — - 35 — 40 — - 45 — 50 — 55 — U .C 0)Q.OrtJ_J£.CD . • ' • ' - - •' -. Vt01TJ -I-._ 4-4-<E Oz (U Emen 3 4 s| ^ , CL 5 9 31 4- (fl^v CM-QJ Ua a 3*La 111.5 109.0 ^QI^J It °CE0U 10.7 9.4 |*» ,- '530) SM GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logfied By KAB Sampled By KAB @ 30': Light gray-brown, damp, dense, silty fine to medium SAND; moderately indurated @ 35*: Same as at 30 feet, very dense @ 40': Light brown to orange-brown, damp, very dense, silty fine to coarse SANDSTONE Total Depth = 41 Feet No Ground Water Encountered at Time of Drilling Hole Backfilled on May 11, 1998 505A<11/77)LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-7 Date Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter 5-8-98 Faraday Avenue San Diego Drilling Sheet 1 of 2 Project No. Type of Rig Bucket 980118-001 30 in.Drive Weight 0'-30'; 5,000 Ibs.; 31 '-60*; 3,841 Ibs.Drop 30 in — Elevation Top of Hole +/-120 ft. Ref. or Datum Mean Sea Level £~4- "Jjj O- tt\01 £Q^> — - _ e - - - 10— : : 1 £ 20 — - 25 — U JI 0)Q.O rtl-J CD •.'•".'' . «™ • x •O -'-^ • T -r^'-*' L' -• S ^j ' . -r/ in0) 3-I- —4-4- <C O fllW Q_ £ cn r ' ' +- 3| iO — f AU- , ' '• ^ in^ CH-OI uQ Q. y,^ /a 104.1 117.1 110.7 s-\«es ~ 4- .* C._ <«o"^*- o(J 18.7 12.5 12.3 & ^i \CJ 07~ • O "^O)w SM/SC SM SM/ML GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged Bv KAB Sampled Bv KAB TOPSOIL @ 0': Dark brown, damp to moist, medium dense, clayey, silty, fine to medium SAND TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION <Ts^ @ 3': Light brown, slighdy damp, silty fine to medium SAND, abrupt change in density from above @ 5': Light brown, slighdy damp, medium dense, moderately friable, silty, fine to medium SAND @ 10': Bedded light gray to oxidized orange damp to moist, silty fine SAND to sandy SILT @ 14': Material becomes sandier than above @ 15': Olive-green to light brown, slighdy damp, medium dense, friable, fine sandy SILT to silty fine SAND @ 20': Same as at IS feet @ 25': Very light greenish-gray to light brown, slighdy damp, medium dense, silty fine to medium SAND to sandy SILT, friable 505A{11/77)LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-7 Date 5-8-98 — Project Faraday Avenue Drilling Co. Hole Diameter San Diego Drilling Sheet 2 of 2 Project No. 980118-001 Type of Rig _Bucket 30 in.Drive Weight 0'-30'; 5,000 Ibs.; 31'-60'; 3,841 Ibs.Drop 30 in — Elevation Top of Hole +/-120 ft. Ref. or Datum Mean Sea Level .c~ "*~ nt0- 01 %t 30 — 35 — - 45 — 50 — 55 — U n roQ.O CO 7-- .^ '" ~ •; ; ' -. (0 % •*- •¥•4-<E OZ a. £ CO ;4 1 VI "° 3i O 6 : 31 (ft/-*CH-OJ Ua a La 109.8 ^^ t.1^ ^•*-', (; '5* E OCJ 7.3 . &— ftO_co w" SM/ML SM GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By KAB Sampled BY KAB @30': Same as at 25 feet ® 35': Light brown, damp, very dense, silty fine to coarse SANDSTONE Total Depth = 40 Feet No Ground Water Encountered at Time of Drilling Hole Backfilled on May 11, 1998 505AC11/77)LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-8 Date Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter 5-8-98 Faraday Avenue San Diego Drilling Sheet 1 of 2 Project No. Type of Rig 980118-001 Bucket 30 in.Drive Weight 0'-30'; 5,000 Ibs.; 31'-60'; 3,841 Ibs. — Elevation Top of Hole +/-94 ft. Ref. or Datum Mean Sea Level Drop 30 ir ll - - r - 10 — 15 — - 20 — 25 — U Q.O LO • ' • • ''to'!. •—— '_ ' '5' '-- :f . ' "0 !'• •" \'.' •.*v- ;'"• — • '•'v> ' •T -i- ' \ in01•o +- -*- 4- ^ 6z (U Q.£ CO 1 2 Bag-3 J18'-21 4 •H Cfc push msh-6" 1 Bulk push +• c**-01 Ua a 31 a 90.5 105.2 104.4 .!?§ E ou 28.2 15.9 18.5 Ift ^^ tft /A tnw SM CL-ML ML ML/CL SM SM/ML ML SM SM/ML CL-CH CL/ML GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By KAB Sampled By KAB TOPSOIL @ 0': Dark brown, damp, clayey, silty fine to medium SAND with abundant organic debris from agricultural activity LANDSLIDE DEBRIS fOls^ @ 2': Olive, green-gray, moist, stiff, silty CLAY to clayey SILT, fractured randomly oriented @ 3'-10": Light yellow, damp, SILT, dipping 10 to 12 degrees west-northwest @ 5': Olive, green-gray, moist to wet, stiff, silty CLAY to clayey SILT @ 8'-9': Light yellow-brown lens of fine to coarse friable SAND, moist towet @ 10*: Material becomes light gray to gray moist, silty fine SAND to sandy SILT, very friable @ 15': Light gray, damp, very friable, fine sandy SILT, visible porosity as pinholes @ 18'-21*: Same as at 15 feet @ 25': Brown, damp to moist to wet, friable, fine sandy SILT to silty fine SAND TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION fTs^ @ 26' : Sharp contact with light gray to gray, stiff, silty CLAY to clayseam +/-1/2M" thick grading to very dense green-gray silty CLAYSTONE to clayey SILTSTONE with marked decrease in moisture at contact 505A(11/77)LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-8 Date 5-8-98 Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter 30 in. Elevation Top of Hole +/-94 ft. Faraday Avenue San Diego Drilling Drive Weight Ref. or Datum Sheet 2 of Project No. Type of Rip 0>-30'; 5,000 Ibs.; 31 MM'; 3,841 Ibs. Mean Sea Level 2 980118-001 Bucket Drop 30 in ^ £"£ 0) <T_ ^ 30 — - 35 — - _ 45 — 50 — 55 U .C 0)Q.O LCD .- . _ . -. - \ _ V ' " . ' .1. I/I01 3•*- .—4- <E OZ (U toCO 5 •g g£— . Q_ 6 3, •l- CM-01 Ua a £_a 109.5 *^lr« 1 =£^^0CJ 10.0 * s«_ * ,_ 0 = ML/CL SM GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Loeeed By KAB Sampled By KAB TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION fContinued) @ 30': Greenish gray, damp, very dense, silty CLAYSTONE to clayey SILTSTONE grading to silty SANDSTONE to sandy siltstone © 35': Light gray, damp, dense, slightly silty, fine to coarse SAND Total Depth = 40 Feet No Ground Water Encountered at Time of Drilling Backfilled on May 12, 1998 505A(11/77)LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES LOG OF TRENCH NO.: T-l <no Project Name: Faraday Avenue Project Number: 980118-001 Equi pment: 710 4X4 Backhoe Logged by: KAB Elevation: Location: +/-541 MSL Carlsbad GEOLOGIC ATTITUDES DATE: 5/20/98 DESCRIPTION GEOLOGIC UNIT ENGINEERING PROPERTIES uses Sample No. Moist. (X) Density Cpcf) COo <Dto' cf3 ARTIFICIAL FILL 1 @0'-5': Light gray to light brown, damp, medium dense. slightly clayey, silty fine to coarse sand, visible discontinuous lifts 10"-12" thick, very friable QUATERNARY ALLUVIUM/COLLUVIUM 2 @5'-13': Brown to green-gray moist, medium dense, clayey silty fine to medium sand to very sandy clay TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION 3 @13'-14': Dark green-gray, damp, dense, silty sandy claystone to clayey silty sandstone Af SM Qal/ Qcol Ts SM/CL ML/SM GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: 1" =5'SURFACE SLOPE: 0(TREND: N50°W TOTAL DEPTH AT 14' NO GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED BACKFILLED: 5/20/98 LOG OF TRENCH NO.: T-2 Oio 1*> 1 o*xCD O <D O 3"3 0*£toOo £<DCO Project 1 Project 1 Equipment GEOLOGIC ATTITUDES Jame: Faraday Avenue Loqqed by; Juniber: 980118-001 Elevation: 710 4X4 Backhoe Location: KAB +/-481 Carlsbad DATE: 5/20/98 DESCRIPTION: QUATERNARY ALLUVIUM/COLLUVIUM 1 @0'-8': Dark brown, damp to moist, slight porous, medium dense, clayey sllty fine to coarse sand to sandy clay TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION 2 @8'-10': Light brown to greenish gray, damp, medium dense to dense, sllty fine to medium sand, weakly bedded GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: 1" = 5' 1 1 1 1i i i i _ - I i 1 1 1 1 1 1 _L -h" x "T^rn GEOLOGIC UNIT Qal/Qcol Ts ENGINEERING PROPERTIES uses SC/CL SM Sample No. Moist. U) Density Cpcf) SURFACE SLOPE: 12°SW TREND: N80°E — --• i ^— —n ^ij - LV 2 • r \ \ 1 * /'r 1 1 '1 1 1 i1 ~ TOTAL DEPTH AT 10' NO GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED BACKFILLED: 5/20/98 " LOG OF TRENCH NO.: T-3 Oto 1 1 o•x O *"* 2. ff 3 (0Oo ft(D0) Pro.lect Name: Faraday Avenue Pro.lect Number: 980118-001 Equipment: 710 4Y,4 Backhoe GEOLOGIC ATTITUDES Logged by KAB Elevation: Location: +/-110' Carlsbad DATE: 5/20/98 DESCRIPTION: TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION 1 @0'-8': Light brown, damp, medium dense, friable si Ity fine sand, weakly bedded, slightly oxidized weathered Tertiary Santiago Formation TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION 2 @8'-13': Red-brown to brown, damp, claystone GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: 1" =5' -_ - 1 1 1 - - I i 1 1 1 1 1 > 1 \ : x • " , • ' • • V- very stiff,silty sandy GEOLOGIC UNIT Ts Ts ENGINEERING PROPERTIES uses SM CL-CH Sample No. T-3 #1Bulk SURFACE SLOPE: 5°SE TREND: N78° • • \ r '-_"- ^ I , —— -• .. i- i • * - . ., * ~- "— -- *i. . - •*.. z ^^^^m *»^-ti— —'-. -^/ jf . — -/ / -„ . — • —* • I •. . • i * ' s^ / ' ./-• ' . • 1\1 I I Moi st . U) Density Cpcf) E -_ - I ii i - TOTAL DEPTH AT 13' NO GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED BACKFILLED: 5/20/98 " LOG OF TRENCH NO.: T-4 01o Project Name: Faradav Avenue Project Number:, Equipment: 98Q118-QQ1 710 4X4 Backhoe Logged by:. Elevation:, Location- KAB +/-110' MSL Carlsbad GEOLOGIC ATTITUDES DATE: 5/20/98 DESCRIPTION GEOLOGIC UNIT ENGINEERING PROPERTIES uses Sample No. Moi st. U) Density Cpcf) QUATERNARY ALLUVIUM/COLLUVIUM (Oo 1 00'-17*Brown to light brown, moist, silty fine to medium sand, friable to medium dense, moderately porous TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION 2 @17'-19'6": Light gray to greenish gray, moist, medium dense silty sand, weakly bedded, friable Qal/ Qcol Ts SM SM <D5' GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: 1" = 5'SURFACE SLOPE: 0° TREND: E-W TOTAL DEPTH AT 19'6" NO GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED BACKFILLED: 5/20/98 LOG OF TRENCH NO.: T-5 01o Project Name: Faradav Avenue Project Number:. Equipment: 980118-001 710 4X4 Backhoe Logged by:. Elevation:. Location: KAB +/-90' MSL Carlsbad GEOLOGIC ATTITUDES DATE: 5/20/98 DESCRIPTION GEOLOGIC UNIT ENGINEERING PROPERTIES uses Sample No. Moist. (X) Density Cpcf) QUATERNARY ALLUVIUM/COLLUVIUM <oo 1 (PO'-ll':Brown to light brown, damp to moist, friable to medium dense, silty fine sand, moderately porous with scattered roots and organic debris TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION 2 @H'-19'6": Very light brown, damp, friable to medium dense, silty fine sand Qal/ Qcol Ts SM SM (D GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: 1" = 5'SURFACE SLOPE: 2°SW TREND: E-W TOTAL DEPTH AT 19'6" NO GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED BACKFILLED: 5/20/98 LOG OF TRENCH NO.: T-6 Oio.dh oX.<D O 2. o fl* OftOftoo1Oft Project 1 Project 1 Equipment GEOLOGIC ATTITUDES Jame: Faraday Avenue Loqqed by: KAB Jurrcber: 980118-001 Elevation: +/-961 710 4X4 Backhoe Location: Carlsbad DATE: 5/20/98 DESCRIPTION: TOP5QIL 1 00' -4': Dark brown, moist, stiff, sllty sandy clay to clayey silty sand, porous TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION 2 @4 '-7': Oxidized, greenish gray, moist, friable Cupper 2') to dense, fine sandy siltstone to sllty fine sandstone, moderately Indurated at base of trench GEOLOGIC UNIT Topsol 1 Ts ENGINEERING PROPERTIES uses SM/CL ML/SM Sample No. Moist.m Density (pcf) GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: 1" = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 10°SW TREND: E-W 1 1 1i i i - 1 ii i I i \ i * — '\ ™"~V; ^ i __- •• ill1 „— — — — ^•"; " '-^." : 2 : r j . <<^r^ 1 / 1 i i i i I i - i TOTAL DEPTH AT 7' NO GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED BACKFILLED: 5/20/98 ~ LOG OF TRENCH NO.: T-7 Clo Project Name: Faradav Avenue Project Number:. Equipment: 980118-001 710 4X4 Backhoe Logged by:. Elevation:. Location: KAB +/-130' MSL Carlsbad GEOLOGIC ATTITUDES DATE: 5/20/98 DESCRIPTION GEOLOGIC UNIT ENGINEERING PROPERTIES uses Sample No. Moist. (*) Density Cpcf) CDO TOPSOIL 1 @0'-3': Topsoi 1 CL Dark brown, moist, stiff, slightly porous, silty, fine to coarse sandy clay with abundant roots, root casts, and organic debris T-7 #1 <D QUATERNARY ALLUVIUM/COLLUVIUM 2 @3'-19'6": Light yellowish brown, moist to wet, slightly clayey to clayey silty fine to coarse sand with weakly developed discontinuous bedding to laminations, friable, with scattered charcoal fragments and small clasts of claystone and siltstone to total depth of trench Qal/ Qcol SC/SM GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: 1" = 5'SURFACE SLOPE: 8°SW TREND: N-S " I I I I -p . TOTAL DEPTH AT 19 '6" GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED (P 18' BACKFILLED: 5/20/98 LOG OF TRENCH NO.: T-8 eno Project Name: Faradav Avenue Project Number:. Equipment: 980118-001 710 4X4 Backhoe Logged bv: KAB Elevation: Location: +/-110' MSL Carlsbad GEOLOGIC ATTITUDES DATE: 5/20/98 DESCRIPTION GEOLOGIC UNIT ENGINEERING PROPERTIES uses Sample No. Moist. (*) Density Cpcf) TOPSOIL CD O 1 @0'-2': Dark brown, damp to moist, stiff, silty sandy clay to clayey silty sand QUATERNARY ALLUVIUM/COLLUVIUM 2 @2'-18': Light yellow-brown friable, moderately porous to porous, moist, weakly laminated to massive, slightly clayey, silty fine to medium sand Topsoi1 Qal/ Qcol SM/CL SM Qy*•O3 GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: 1" = 5'SURFACE SLOPE: 12°SW TREND: E-l TOTAL DEPTH AT 18' NO GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED BACKFILLED: 5/20/98 LOG OF TRENCH NO.: T-9 01o 1_h o COo (D CO O3 CO Ooa<DCO Project ^ Project ^ Equipment GEOLOGIC ATTITUDES Jame: Faraday Avenue Juniber: 980118-001 710 4X4 Backhoe Loqqed by: KAB Elevation: +/-9B' MSL Location: Carlsbad DATE: 5/20/98 DESCRIPTION: TOPSOIL 1 @0'-2': Dark brown, moist, stiff, porous, silty fine to coarse sandy clay QUATERNARY ALLUVIUM/COLLUVIUM 2 @2'-13': Light yellow-brown, damp, medium dense to dense, silty fine sand with carbonate stringers throughout very porous with charcoal fragment common throughout @13'-19': Material abruptly changes to mixed/laminated red- brown, yellow-orange, and light green-gray, moist, slightly clayey, silty, fine to medium sand GEOLOGIC UNIT Topsoi 1 Qal/ Qcol Qal/ Qcol ENGINEERING PROPERTIES uses CL SM SM/SC Sample No. Moi st . U) Density Cpcf) GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: 1" = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 3°S TREND: E-W 1i - - - Ii \ - 1 1 1 1 --— • " . — ' , ^ 'Vrt ') . S~ r^ •r :-'\ ' ^\^-~ -> -T- ' — *^ ~" ' -N'r<" 1 1 ' ; Z] ' ~v '•X'X' '" ^' •'. '' • " "".*•"• rf '''-"."" 1 "-- •'""'-. ' / 1 1 •if ^ /III1 1 1 1 i i1 1 - TOTAL DEPTH AT 19' NO GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED BACKFILLED: 5/20/98 LOG OF TRENCH NO.: T-6A eno Project Name: Carlsbad P&D KAB Project Number: 4841363-006 Equi pment: John Deere 710D 4x4 hoe Logged by: Elevati on: Location: Carlsbad. CA +/-115' msl GEOLOGIC ATTITUDES DATE: 12/4/97 DESCRIPTION: SW facing slope E. of River GEOLOGIC UNIT ENGINEERING PROPERTIES uses Sample No. Moist U) Density (pcf) <oo TERTIARY SANTIAGO A @0'-4': Light brown, damp, very dense, silty, fine to medium sandstone, upper 6" slightly to moderately weathered Bulk sample taken 0'-3' Ts SM T-6A Sample #1 Bulk 2.«Q=r GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION West Wall SCALE: 1" = 5'SURFACE SLOPE: 4°SW TREND: NS TOTAL DEPTH AT 4' NO GROUND WATER BACKFILLED AND WHEELROLLED: 12/4/97 LOG OF TRENCH NO.: T-7A 01o Project Name: Carlsbad P&D Project Number: 4841363-006 Logged bv: KAB Equ1pment: John Deere 710D 4x4 hoe Elevation: +/-111' msl Location: Carlsbad. CA GEOLOGIC ATTITUDES DATE: 12/4/97 DESCRIPTION: Adjacent to S. Side of College GEOLOGIC UNIT ENGINEERING PROPERTIES uses Sample No. Moist. U) Density (pcf) COo COLLUVIUM/TOPSQIL A @ 0-1': Dark brown, damp to moist, loose, clayey, silty fine sand TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION B @ l'-6': Light brown, moist, dense to very dense, slightly clayey, silty fine sandstone Qcol/ Topsoi1 Ts SM-ML SM 2.(O I3 GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION North Wall SCALE: 1" = 5'SURFACE SLOPE:TREND: EW TOTAL DEPTH AT 6' NO GROUND WATER BACKFILLED AND WHEELROLLED: 12/4/97 LOG OF TRENCH NO.: T-8A Oio "t 1 o CDO <D O If CO COoo1CO Project 1 Project 1 Equi pment GEOLOGIC ATTITUDES Jame: Carlsbad P&D Loqqed bv: KAB Juniber: 4841363-006 Elevation: +/-112' msl John Deere 710D 4x4 hoe Location: Carlsbad. CA DATE: 12/4/97 DESCRIPTION: N. of River 400' TERTIARY SANTIAGO SANDSTONE A @ 0-6': Light brown, damp to moist, dense, randomly fractured sandstone, minor calcium carbonate deposited in fractures GEOLOGIC UNIT Ts ENGINEERING PROPERTIES uses SM Sample No. Moi st . (X) Density (pcf) GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION North Wall SCALE: 1" = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 12° TREND: EW I ii i - I 1 1 1 1 ^W I i I I i - - TOTAL DEPTH AT 6' NO GROUND WATER BACKFILLED AND WHEELROLLED: 12/4/97" LOG OF TRENCH NO.: T-9A 01o Project Name: Carlsbad P&D Project Number: 4841363-006 Logged bv: KAB Equi pment: John Deere 71QD 4x4 hoe Elevation: +/-26S' mslLocatlon: Carlsbad. CA GEOLOGIC ATTITUDES DATE: 12/4/97 DESCRIPTION: 75' N. of College Avenue GEOLOGIC UNIT ENGINEERING PROPERTIES uses Sample No. Moist (X) Density Cpcf) CD O ALLUVIUM A (P 0-3': Dark brown, moist, soft, very clayey silty sand TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION B @ 3'-7': Orange-brown, damp, very dense, silty to clayey finesand Bag sample at 0-3' of Qal Qal Ts SM-CL SM-CL T-9A Sample #1 Bulk aCD'D-*+OD CD GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION North Wall SCALE: 1" - 5'SURFACE SLOPE: 10°E TREND: EW I I I I I I I I I I I I TOTAL DEPTH AT 7' NO GROUND WATER BACKFILLED: 12/4/97 4980118-001 APPENDIX C Laboratory Testing Procedures and Test Results Atterberg Limits: The Atterberg Limits were determined in accordance with ASTM Test Method D423 for engineering classification of the fine-grained materials and presented in the table below: Sample Location SD-3, 10' SD-4,10* SD-3, 15' SD-5, 10' SD-1,8' Liquid Limit (%) 27.9 33.0 44.1 40.0 32.1 Plastic Limit (%) 18.3 19.3 18.2 17.7 17.2 uses Soil Classification ML ML CL CL ML Consolidation Tests: Consolidation tests were performed on selected, relatively undisturbed ring samples. Samples were placed in a consolidometer and loads were applied in geometric progression. The percent consolidation for each load cycle was recorded as the ratio of the amount of vertical compression to the original 1-inch height. The consolidation pressure curves are presented in the test data. Where applicable, time-rates of consolidation were recorded and presented below: Sample Location SD-4,20' SD-4,25' Coefficient of Consolidation Cv (cmVsec) 1.3 xlO'3 2.0x10° C-l 4980118-001 APPENDIX C (continued) Direct Shear Tests: Direct shear tests were performed on selected undisturbed samples which were soaked for a minimum of 24 hours under a surcharge equal to the applied normal force during testing. After transfer of the sample to the shear box, and reloading the sample, pore pressures set up in the sample due to the transfer were allowed to dissipate for a period of approximately 1 hour prior to application of shearing force. The samples were tested under various normal loads, a motor-driven, strain-control led, direct-shear testing apparatus. The test results are presented in the test data. Sample Location B-1,10' B-2, 15' B-2,5' B-3,5' B-5, 10' LB-5,30' B-5, 20' B-6, 10' LB-4,43'^15' LB-4,3'-5' Friction Angle (degrees) 52 59 37 67 47 35 43 56 29 30 Apparent Cohesion (psf) 40 60 490 210 116 470 190 160 225 435 Moisture and Density Determination Tests: Moisture content and dry density determinations were performed on relatively undisturbed samples obtained from the test borings and/or trenches. The results of these tests are presented in the boring and/or trench logs. Where applicable, only moisture content was determined from "undisturbed" or disturbed samples. C-2 4980118-001 APPENDIX C (Continued) Maximum Density Tests: The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of typical materials were determined in accordance with ASTM Test Method D1557. The results of these tests are presented in the table below: Sample Location LB-4,3'-5' B-5,43' Maximu m Dry Density (pcf) 105.0 113.0 Optimum Moisture Content (%) 19.0 14.8 Minimum Resistivity and pH Tests: Minimum resistivity and pH tests were performed in general accordance with California Test Method 532. The results are presented in the table below: Sample Location LB-2,0'-3' SD-l,3'-4' pH 6.7 7.1 Minimum Resistivity(ohms-cm) 2,700 8,000 Corrosivity Category Moderately Corrosive Low Corrosive Soluble Sulfates: The soluble sulfate contents of selected samples were determined by standard geochemical methods. The test results are presented in the table below: Sample Location LB-2,0'-3' SD-l,3'-4' Sulfate Content (%) <0.005 O.005 Potential Degree of Sulfate Attack* Negligible Negligible * Based on the 1997 edition of the Uniform Building Code, Table No. 19-A-4 prepared by the InternationalConferenceof Building Officials (ICBO, 1997). "R"-Value: The resistance "R"-value was determined by the California Materials Method No. 301 for base, subbase, and basement soils. The samples were prepared and exudation pressure and "R"-value determined. The graphically determined "R"-value at exudation pressure of 300 psi is reported. Sample Number B-5,3'-6' (Sandstone) B-i,14'-16' (Sandstone) LB-2,0'-3'(Topsoil) R-Value 69 70 5 C-3 Pacific Treatment 4340 Viewridge Avenue, Suite A • San Diego, CA 92123 Analytical Services, Inc. ^ Analytical Chemistry Laboratory May 20, 1998 Gradient Engineers, Inc. Project Name: L&a 980118-001/Faraday Attn: Tom Mills Laboratory Log No.: 0959-98 3934 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite B204 Date Received: 05/07/98 San Diego, California 92123 Sample Matrix: Eleven soil samples PO No.: 980118-001 Please find the following enclosures for the above referenced project identified: 1) Analytical Report 2) QA/QC Report 3) Chain of Custody Form Comment: T.K. Nitrogen was performed by subcontract laboratory, results enclosed. Certificate of Analysis Samples were analyzed pursuant to client request utilizing EPA or other ELAP approved methodologies. Date of extraction, date of analysis, detection limits and dilution factor are reported for each compound analyzed. A minimum of 90% of the data for each analytical method is associated with acceptable quality control criteria. Determinations of completion were made by assessing the following QA/QC functions, as applicable to methodology: • Surrogate Percent Recovery, Laboratory Control Sample (LCS) percent recoveries for all analyses, • Matrix Spike Recovery/Matrix Spike Duplicate Recovery (MSR & MSDR) and Relative Percent Difference (RPD from MSR & MSDR). / certify that this data report is in compliance both technically and for completeness. Release of the data contained in this hardcopy data report has been authorized by the following signature. lanis Columbo Vice President/Laboratory Director Water • Soil • Waste • Wastewater • Marine Sediment & Tissues • Elutriate Analyses That Produce Results! ANALYSIS RESULTS - EPA 8080 ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES CLIENT: GRADIENT ENGINEERS, INC. PROJECT NAME/No.: L&A980118-OOi/FARADAY PTASLOG#: METHOD BLANK SAMPLE ID: N/A DILUTION FACTOR: 1 DATE SAMPLED: N/A DATE RECEIVED: N/A DATE EXTRACTED: 05/08/98 DATE ANALYZED: 05/11/98 MATRIX: SOLID SAMPLE VOL./WT.: 30 GM ANALYTE ALDRIN ALPHA-BHC BETA-BHC GAMMA-BHC (LINDANE) DELTA-BHC CHLORDANE ODD DDE DDT DJELDRIN ENDOSULFANI ENDOSULFANH ENDOSULFAN/SULFATE ENDRIN ENDRIN ALDEHYDE HEPTACHLOR HEPTACHLOR EPOXIDE METHOXYCHLOR TOXAPHENE REPORTING LIMIT PPB (UG/KG) 2 2 2 2 2 20 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 20 25 RESULTS PPB (UG/KG) ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND - NON DETECT AT OR ABOVE INDICATED REPORTING LIMIT REPORTING LIMITS AND RESULTS HAVE BEEN ADJUSTED ACCORDINGLY TO ACCOUNT FOR DILUTION FACTOR. SURROGATE PARAMETER TCMX ACCEPTABLE RECOVERIES 26-146 % RECOVERY 82 \ Pacific Treatment Analytical Services, Inc. 4340Viewrid0eAve.,SuiteA-SanDiego.CAS2123 (619)560-7717 FAX (619) 560-7763 ANALYSIS RESULTS - EPA 8080 ORGANOCHLOR1NE PESTICIDES CLIENT: GRADIENT ENGINEERS, INC, PROJECT NAME/No.: L&A980118-001/FARADAY PTASLOG#: 0959-98-1 SAMPLE ID: ES-1/6" DILUTION FACTOR: 1 DATE SAMPLED: 05/06/98 DATE RECEIVED: 05/07/98 DATE EXTRACTED: 05/08/98 DATE ANALYZED: 05/18/98 MATRIX: SOIL SAMPLE VOL./WT.: 30 GM ANALYTE ALDRIN ALPHA-BHC BETA-BHC GAMMA-BHC DELTA-BHC CHLORDANE 4,4-DDD 4,4-DDE 4,4-DDT DIELDRTN ENDOSULFANI ENDOSULFANn ENDOSULFAN SULFATE ENDRIN ENDRIN ALDEHYDE HEPTACHLOR HEPTACHLOR EPOXIDE METHOXYCHLOR TOXAPHENE REPORTING LIMIT PPB (UG/KG) 2 2 2 2 2 20 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 20 20 25 RESULTS PPB (UG/KG) ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND - NON DETECT AT OR ABOVE INDICATED REPORTING LIMIT REPORTING LIMITS AND RESULTS HAVE BEEN ADJUSTED ACCORDINGLY TO ACCOUNT FOR DILUTION FACTOR, SURROGATE PARAMETER TCMX ACCEPTABLE RECOVERIES 26-146 % RECOVERY 113 Pacific Treatment Analytical Services, Inc. 4340VtowridgeAve..SuiteA*SanDiago,CA92123 (619)560-7717 FAX (619)560-7763 ANALYSIS RESULTS - EPA 8080 ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES CLIENT: GRADIENT ENGINEERS, INC. PROJECT NAME/No.: L&A980118-001/FARADAY PTASLOG*: 0959-98-4 SAMPLE ID: ES-2/6" DILUTION FACTOR: 1 DATE SAMPLED: 05/06/98 DATE RECEIVED: 05/07/98 DATE EXTRACTED: 05/08/98 DATE ANALYZED: 05/19/98 MATRIX: SOIL SAMPLE VOL./WT.: 30 GM ANALYTE ALDRIN ALPHA-BHC BETA-BHC GAMMA-BHC DELTA-BHC CHLORDANE 4,4-DDD 4,4-DDE 4,4-DDT DffiLDRIN ENDOSULFANI ENDOSULFANH ENDOSULFAN SULFATE ENDRIN ENDRIN ALDEHYDE HEPTACHLOR HEPTACHLOR EPOXIDE METHOXYCHLOR TOXAPHENE REPORTING LIMIT PPB (UG/KG) 2 2 2 2 2 20 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 20 20 25 RESULTS PPB (UG/KG) ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND : ND ND ND ND . ND - NON DETECT AT OR ABOVE INDICATED REPORTING LIMIT SURROGATE PARAMETER TCMX ACCEPTABLE RECOVERIES 26-146 % RECOVERY 109 Pacific Treatment AnalyticalSen/lceB, Inc. 4340 ViewrldgeAve., Suite A -SanDtego.CA 92123 (619)560-7717 FAX (619)560-7763 ANALYSIS RESULTS - EPA 8080 ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES CLIENT: GRADIENT ENGINEERS, INC. PROJECT NAME/No.: L&A980H8-001/FARADAY PTASLOG#: 0959-98-7 SAMPLE ID: ES-3/6" DILUTION FACTOR: 1 DATE SAMPLED: 05/06/98 DATE RECEIVED: 05/07/98 DATE EXTRACTED: 05/08/98 DATE ANALYZED: 05/19/98 MATRIX: SOIL SAMPLE VOL./WT.: 30 GM ANALYTE ALDRIN ALPHA-BHC BETA-BHC GAMMA-BHC DELTA-BHC CHLORDANE 4,4-DDD 4,4-DDE 4,4-DDT DIELDRIN ENDOSULF AN I ENDOSULFAN H ENDOSULFAN SULFATE ENDRIN ENDRIN ALDEHYDE HEPTACHLOR HEPTACHLOR EPOX3DE METHOXYCHLOR TOXAPHENE REPORTING LIMIT PPB (UG/KG) 2 2 2 2 2 20 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 20 20 25 RESULTS PPB (UG/KG) ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND - NON DETECT AT OR ABOVE INDICATED REPORTING UMTT SURROGATE PARAMETER TCMX ACCEPTABLE RECOVERIES 26-146 % RECOVERY 121 Pacific Treatment Analytical Services, Inc. 4340 viewndjeAve., Suite A-sanDiego.CA 92123 (6i9)seo-77i7 FAX (619) seo-7763 ANALYSIS RESULTS - EPA 8080 ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES CLIENT: GRADIENT ENGINEERS, INC. PROJECT NAME/No.: L&A980118-001/FARADAY PTASLOG#: 0959-98-10 SAMPLE ID: ES-4/6" DILUTION FACTOR: 1 DATE SAMPLED: 05/06/98 DATE RECEIVED: 05/07/98 DATE EXTRACTED: 05/08/98 DATE ANALYZED: 05/19/98 MATRIX: SOIL SAMPLE VOL.AVT.: 30 GM ANALYTE ALDRIN ALPHA-BHC BETA-BHC GAMMA-BHC DELTA-BHC CHLORDANE 4,4-DDD 4,4-DDE 4,4-DDT DIELDRIN ENDOSULFANI ENDOSULFANH ENDOSULFAN SULFATE ENDRIN ENDRIN ALDEHYDE HEPTACHLOR HEPTACHLOR EPOXIDE METHOXYCHLOR TOXAPHENE REPORTING LIMIT PPB (UG/KG) 2 2 2 2 2 20 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 20 20 25 RESULTS PPB (UG/KG) ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND - NON DETECT AT OR ABOVE INDICATED REPORTING LIMIT REPORTING LIMITS AND RESULTS HAVE BEEN ADJUSTED ACCORDINGLY TO ACCOUNT FOR DILUTION FACTOR. SURROGATE PARAMETER TCMX ACCEPTABLE RECOVERIES 26-146 % RECOVERY 98 Pacific Treatment Analytical Services, Inc. 4340 viewridgeAve.. suite A *sanDieoo.CA 92123 (619)560-7717 FAX (619) 560-7763 ANALYSIS RESULTS - EPA 8080 ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES CLIENT: GRADIENT ENGINEERS, INC. PROJECT NAME/No.: L&A980118-001/FARADAY PTASLOG*: 0959-98-13 SAMPLE ID: ES-5/6" DILUTION FACTOR: 1 DATE SAMPLED: 05/06/98 DATE RECEIVED: 05/07/98 DATE EXTRACTED: 05/08/98 DATE ANALYZED: 05/19/98 MATRIX: SOIL SAMPLE VOL./WT.: 30 GM ANALYTE ALDRIN ALPHA-BHC BETA-BHC GAMMA-BHC DELTA-BHC CHLORDANE 4,4-DDD 4,4-DDE 4,4-DDT DIELDRIN ENDOSULFANI ENDOSULFANn ENDOSULFAN SULFATE ENDRIN ENDRIN ALDEHYDE HEPTACHLOR KEPTACHLOR EPOXIDE METHOXYCHLOR TOXAPHENE REPORTING LIMIT PPB (UG/KG) 2 2 2 2 2 20 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 20 20 25 RESULTS PPB (UG/KG) ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND - NON DETECT AT OR ABOVE INDICATED REPORTING LIMIT SURROGATE PARAMETER TCMX ACCEPTABLE RECOVERIES 26-146 % RECOVERY 116 \ Pacific Treatment Analytical Services, Inc. 4340ViewrldgeAve..SutteA-SanOiego,CA92123 (619)560-7717 FAX (619) 560-7763 ANALYSIS RESULTS - EPA 8080 ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES CLIENT: GRADIENT ENGINEERS, INC. PROJECT NAME/No.: L&A980118-001/FARADAY PTASLOG#: 0959-98-16 SAMPLE ID: ES-6/6" DILUTION FACTOR: 1 DATE SAMPLED: 05/06/98 DATE RECEIVED: 05/07/98 DATE EXTRACTED: 05/08/98 DATE ANALYZED: 05/19/98 MATRIX: SOIL SAMPLE VOL./WT.: 30 GM ANALYTE ALDRIN ALPHA-BHC BETA-BHC GAMMA-BHC DELTA-BHC CHLORDANE 4,4-DDD 4,4-DDE 4,4-DDT DffiLDRIN ENDOSULFANI ENDOSULFANH ENDOSULFAN SULFATE ENDRIN ENDRIN ALDEHYDE HEPTACHLOR KEPTACHLOR EPOXIDE METHOXYCHLOR TOXAPHENE REPORTING LIMIT PPB (UG/KG) 2 2 2 2 2 20 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 20 20 25 RESULTS PPB (UG/KG) ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND - NON DETECT AT OR ABOVE INDICATED REPORTING LIMIT REPORTING LIMITS AND RESULTS HAVE BEEN ADJUSTED ACCORDINGLY TO ACCOUNT FOR DILUTION FACTOR. SURROGATE PARAMETER TCMX ACCEPTABLE RECOVERIES 26-146 % RECOVERY 108 Pacific Treatment Analytical Services, Inc. 4340 VjewndgeAve., suite A -sanDiego.cA 92123 <619}560-7717 FAX <619) 560-7763 ANALYSIS RESULTS - EPA 8080 ORGANOCHLOREVE PESTICIDES CLIENT: GRADIENT ENGINEERS, INC. DATE SAMPLED: 05/06/98 DATE RECEIVED: 05/07/98 PROJECT NAME/No.: L&A980118-001/FARADAY DATE EXTRACTED: 05/08/98 PTASLOG*: 0959-98-19 DATE ANALYZED: 05/19/98 SAMPLE ID: ES-7/6" MATRIX: SOIL DILUTION FACTOR: 1 SAMPLE VOL./WT.: 30 GM ANALYTE ALDRIN ALPHA-BHC BETA-BHC GAMMA-BHC DELTA-BHC CHLORDANE 4,4-DDD 4,4-DDE 4,4-DDT DffiLDRIN ENDOSULFANI ENDOSULFANn ENDOSULFAN SULFATE ENDRIN ENDRIN ALDEHYDE HEPTACHLOR HEPTACHLOR EPOXIDE METHOXYCHLOR TOXAPHENE REPORTING LIMIT PPB (UG/KG) 2 2 2 2 2 20 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 20 20 25 RESULTS PPB (UG/KG) ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND - NON DETECT AT OR ABOVE INDICATED REPORTING UMTT SURROGATE PARAMETER TCMX ACCEPTABLE RECOVERIES 26-146 % RECOVERY 96 Pacific Treatment Analytical Services, Inc. 4340 viewridgeAve.. Suite A-San Diego, CA 92123 (619>560-7717 FAX (619) 560-7763 ANALYSIS RESULTS - EPA 8080 ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES CLIENT: GRADIENT ENGINEERS, INC. PROJECT NAME/No.: L&A980118-001/FARADAY PTAS LOG #: 0959-98-19 (DUPLICATE) SAMPLE ID: ES-7/6" (DUPLICATE) DILUTION FACTOR: 1 DATE SAMPLED: 05/06/98 DATE RECEIVED: 05/07/98 DATE EXTRACTED: 05/08/98 DATE ANALYZED: 05/19/98 MATRIX: SOIL SAMPLE VOL./WT.: 30 GM ANALYTE ALDRIN ALPHA-BHC BETA-BHC GAMMA-BHC DELTA-BHC CHLORDANE 4,4-DDD 4,4-DDE 4,4-DDT DffiLDRIN ENDOSULFANI ENDOSULFANH ENDOSULFAN SULFATE ENDRIN ENDRIN ALDEHYDE HEPTACHLOR HEPTACHLOR EPOXIDE METHOXYCHLOR TOXAPHENE REPORTING LIMIT PPB (UG/KG) 2 2 2 2 2 20 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 20 20 25 RESULTS PPB (UG/KG) ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND = NON DETECT AT OR ABOVE INDICATED REPORTING LIMIT SURROGATE PARAMETER TCMX ACCEPTABLE RECOVERIES 26-146 % RECOVERY 111 Pacific Treatment Analytical Services, Inc. 4340 viewridgeAve., Suite A-San Diego, CA 92123 (619)560-7717 FAX (619) 560-7763 ANALYSIS RESULTS - EPA 8080 ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES CLIENT: GRADIENT ENGINEERS, INC. PROJECT NAME/No.: L&A980118-001/FARADAY PTASLOG*: 0959-98-22 SAMPLE ID: ES-8/6" DILUTION FACTOR: 1 DATE SAMPLED; 05/06/98 DATE RECEIVED: 05/07/98 DATE EXTRACTED: 05/08/98 DATE ANALYZED: 05/19/98 MATRDC: SOIL SAMPLE VOL./WT.: 30 GM ANALYTE ALDRIN ALPHA-BHC BETA-BHC GAMMA-BHC DELTA-BHC CHLORDANE 4,4-DDD 4,4-DDE 4,4-DDT DffiLDRIN ENDOSULFANI ENDOSULFANH ENDOSULFAN SULFATE ENDRIN ENDRIN ALDEHYDE HEPTACHLOR KEPTACHLOR EPOXIDE METHOXYCHLOR TOXAPHENE REPORTING LIMIT PPB (UG/KG) 2 2 2 2 2 20 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 20 20 25 RESULTS PPB (UG/KG) ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND - NON DETECT AT OR ABOVE INDICATED REPORTING LIMIT SURROGATE PARAMETER TCMX ACCEPTABLE RECOVERIES 26-146 % RECOVERY 102 Pacific Treatment Analytical Services, Inc. 4340Viewr1dgeAve.,SiiiteA*SanDiego,CA92123 (619)560-7717 FAX (619) 560-7763 ANALYSIS RESULTS - EPA 8080 ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES CLIENT: GRADIENT ENGINEERS, INC. PROJECT NAME/No.: L&A980118-001/FARADAY PTASLOG#: 0959-98-25 SAMPLE ID: ES-9/6" DILUTION FACTOR: 1 DATE SAMPLED: 05/06/98 DATE RECEIVED: 05/07/98 DATE EXTRACTED: 05/08/98 DATE ANALYZED: 05/19/98 MATRIX: SOIL SAMPLE VOL./WT.: 30 GM ANALYTE ALDRIN ALPHA-BHC BETA-BHC GAMMA-BHC DELTA-BHC CHLORDANE 4,4-DDD 4,4-DDE 4,4-DDT DffiLDRIN ENDOSULFANI ENDOSULFANn ENDOSULFAN SULFATE ENDRIN ENDRIN ALDEHYDE HEPTACHLOR HEPTACHLOR EPOXIDE METHOXYCHLOR TOXAPHENE REPORTING LIMIT PPB (UG/KG) 2 2 2 2 2 20 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 20 20 25 RESULTS PPB (UG/KG) ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND = NON DETECT AT OR ABOVE INDICATED REPORTING LIMIT SURROGATE PARAMETER TCMX ACCEPTABLE RECOVERIES 26-146 RECOVERY 118 Pacific Treatment Analytical Services, Inc. 4340 ViewridgeAve., Suite A. San Diego, CA 92123 (619)560-7717 FAX (619) 560-7763 ANALYSIS RESULTS - EPA 8080 ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES CLIENT: GRADIENT ENGINEERS, INC. PROJECT NAME/No.: L&A9801I8-001/FARADAY PTASLOG#: 0959-98-28 SAMPLE ID: ES-10/6" DILUTION FACTOR: 1 DATE SAMPLED: 05/06/98 DATE RECEIVED: 05/07/98 DATE EXTRACTED: 05/08/98 DATE ANALYZED: 05/19/98 MATRIX: SOIL SAMPLE VOL./WT.: 30 GM ANALYTE ALDRIN ALPHA-BHC BETA-BHC GAMMA-BHC DELTA-BHC CHLORDANE 4,4-DDD 4,4-DDE 4,4-DDT DffiLDRIN ENDOSULFANI ENDOSULFAN H ENDOSULFAN SULFATE ENDRIN ENDRIN ALDEHYDE HEPTACHLOR KEPTACHLOR EPOXIDE METHOXYCHLOR TOXAPHENE REPORTING LIMIT PPB (UG/KG) 2 2 2 2 2 20 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 ' 2 • ,..-< 20 20 :-.y- 25 • . ...' RESULTS PPB (UG/KG) ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND - NON DETECT AT OR ABOVE INDICATED REPORTING LIMIT ACCEPTABLE RECOVERIES 26-146 ,; , % RECOVERY 97 i Pacific Treatment Analytical Services, Inc. 4340 viewrwceAve., suite A -San Diego, CA 92123 (619>560-7717 FAX (619) 560-7763 ANALYSIS RESULTS - EPA 8080 ORGANOCHLORINE PESTICIDES CLIENT: GRADIENT ENGINEERS, INC. DATE SAMPLED: 05/06/98 DATE RECEIVED: 05/07/98 PROJECT NAME/No.: L&A980H8-001/FARADAY DATE EXTRACTED: 05/08/98 PTASLOGtf: 0959-98-31 DATE ANALYZED: 05/19/98 SAMPLE ID: ES-11/6" MATRDC: SOIL DILUTION FACTOR: 1 SAMPLE VOL./WT.: 30 GM ANALYTE ALDRIN ALPHA-BHC BETA-BHC GAMMA-BHC DELTA-BHC CHLORDANE 4,4-DDD 4,4-DDE 4,4-DDT DIELDRIN ENDOSULFAN I ENDOSULFAN n ENDOSULFAN SULFATE ENDRIN ENDRIN ALDEHYDE HEPTACHLOR KEPT ACHLOR EPOXIDE METHOXYCHLOR TOXAPHENE REPORTING LIMIT PPB (UG/KG) 2 2 2 2 2 20 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 20 20 25 RESULTS PPB (UG/KG) ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND = NON DETECT AT OR ABOVE INDICATED REPORTING LIMIT REPORTING LIMITS AND RESULTS HAVE BEEN ADJUSTED ACCORDINGLY TO ACCOUNT FOR DILUTION FACTOR, SURROGATE PARAMETER TCMX ACCEPTABLE RECOVERIES 26-146 % RECOVERY 114 Pacific Treatment Analytical Services, Inc. 4340\fiewridgeAve.,SuiteA-SanDiego,CA92123 (619)560-7717 FAX (619) 560-7763 ANALYSIS RESULTS CLIENT: GRADIENT ENGINEERS, INC. PROJECT NAME/NO.: ANALYSIS METHOD: ANALYSIS: SAMPLE ID L&A 980118-00 1/FARADAY SMEWW4500PE TOTAL PHOSPHORUS PTASLOG* REPORTING LIMITS PPM(MG/KG) DATE SAMPLED: DATE RECEIVED: DATE ANALYZED: MATRIX: DF RESULTS PPM (MG/ECG) 05/06/98 05/07/98 05/14-15/98 SOIL ES-1/6" ES-1/6" (DUP.) ES-2/6" ES-3/6" ES-4/6" ES-5/6" ES-6/6" ES-7/6" ES-8/6" ES-9/6" ES-10/6" ES-11/6" 0959-98-1 0959-98-1 (DUP.) 0959-98-4 0959-98-7 0959-98-10 0959-98-13 0959-98-16 0959-98-19 0959-98-22 0959-98-25 0959-98-28 0959-98-31 50 50 50 50 25 12.5 50 50 50 50 25 25 1000 1000 1000 1000 500 250 1000 1000 1000 1000 500 500 125 119 195 157 331 278 689 428 723 548 367 277 DF - DILUTION FACTOR DUP.-DUPLICATE ND - NOT DETECTED AT LISTED REPORTING LIMITS. REPORTING LIMITS AND RESULTS HAVE BEEN ADJUSTED ACCORDINGLY TO ACCOUNT FOR DILUTION FACTOR. Pacific Treatment Analytical SCIVice8f Inc. 4340Vlewr1dgeAve.,SuiteA*SznDifigo,CA92123 (619)560-7717 FAX (619} 560-7763 ANALYSIS RESULTS CLIENT: GRADIENT ENGINEERS, INC. PROJECT NAME/NO.:ANALYSIS METHOD: ANALYSIS: L&A 980118-001/FARADAY EPA 9045 A pH DATE SAMPLED: 05/06/98 DATE RECEIVED: 05/07/98 DATE ANALYZED: 05/08/98 MATRIX: SOIL SAMPLE ID ES-1/6" ES-2/6" ES-3/6" ES-4/6" ES-5/6" ES-6/6" ES-7/6" ES-8/6" ES-9/6" ES-10/6" ES-10/6" (DUP.) ES-11/6" PTASLOG# 0959-98-1 0959-98-4 0959-98-7 0959-98-10 0959-98-13 0959-98-16 0959-98-19 0959-98-22 0959-98-25 0959-98-28 0959-98-28 (DUP.) 0959-98-31 REPORTING LIMITS pH UNITS 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 DF 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 RESULTS pH UNITS 7.1 7.5 7.7 7.2 8.1 7.5 7.6 7.0 7.1 6.3 6.3 7.7 DF - DILUTION FACTOR DUP. - DUPLICATE ND - NOT DETECTED AT LISTED REPORTING LIMITS. I Pacific Treatment Analytical Services, Inc. 4340 VlewndgeAve., Suite A-SanOiego.CA 92123 (619)560-7717 FAX (619} 560-7763 QA/QC REPORT METHOD: EPA 8080-SOIL DATE ANALYZED: 05/11/98 QA/QC SAMPLE: PTAS 0959-98-22 SPIKED ANAL YTE GAMMA-BHC HEPTACHLOR ALDRIN DffiLDRIN ENDRIN 4,4-DDT LCS % R 80 84 71 90 97 78 MS%R 72 54 82 81 74 101 MSD % R 77 67 88 83 83 122 RPD 7 21 7 2 11 19 ACCEPTABLE LCS.MS/MSD CRITERIA % 32-127 34-111 42-122 36-146 30-147 25-160 ACCEPTABLE RPD CRITERIA % <30 <30 <30 <30 <30 <30 LCS % R - LABORATORY CONTROL SAMPLE PERCENT RECOVERY MS % R - MATRIX SPIKE PERCENT RECOVERY MSD W R - MATRIX SPIKE DUPLICATE PERCENT RECOVERY RPD - RELATIVE PERCENT DIFFERENCE Pacific Tfeatment Analytical Services, Inc. 4340 WewridgeAve.. Suite A »San Diego. CA 92123 (619)560-7717 FAX (619) 560-7763 QA/QC REPORT QA/QC SAMPLE: DATE ANALYZED: SPIKED ANALYTE pH ERA 9977 05/08/98 TV 9.08 DV 9.05 AR 8.88 - 9.28 QA/QC REPORT DATE ANALYZED: 05/14-15/98 SPIKED ANALYTE PHOSPHORUS PHOSPHORUS LCS%R 99 100 MS%R 104 109 MSD % R 111 110 RPD 7 1 ACCEPTABLE LCS.MS/MSD CRITERIA % 80-120 80-120 ACCEPTABLE RPD CRITERIA % <20 <20 TV-TRUE VALUE DV - DETERMINED VALUE AR = ACCEPTABLE RANGE LCS % R - LABORATORY CONTROL SAMPLE PERCENT RECOVERY MS H R - MATRIX SPIKE PERCENT RECOVERY MSD % R - MATRIX SPIKE DUPLICATE PERCENT RECOVERY RPD - RELATIVE PERCENT DIFFERENCE Pacific Treatment Analytical Services, Inc. 4340Vtewri<fgeAve.,SurteA*SanDi0go.CA92123 (619)560-7717 FAX (619) 560-7763 PAT-CHEM LABORATORIES Customer: Attention: Sample Date: Report Date: Sample I.D.: Subject: Sampling Data: Method: Results: Pacific Treatment 4340 Viewridge Avenue, Suite A San Diego, CA92123 Mr. Roger Lahr 5-6-98 (Rec. 5-8-98) 5-20-98 39374 Solid Sample Analysis Sampled By: Date Analyzed: P.O. #: 98102-0959-98 Customer 5-11-9810 5-18-98 Samples were analyzed per of EPA Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods (SW-846). Sample # ES-1/6 ES-2/6 ES-3/6 ES-4/6 ES-5/6 ES-6/6 ES-7/6 ES-8/6 ES-9/6 ES-10/6 ES-11/6 10ppmSTD 10ppmSTD Duplicate Sample Blank T.K. Nitrogen Analysis < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 < 5 1353 < 5 1119 74,190 280 < 5 10.2 10.9 6 < 0.05 mg/Kg mg/Kq mg/Kg mg/Kg mg/Kg mg/Kg mg/Kg mg/Kg mg/Kg mg/Kg mg/Kg mg/L mg/L % relative percent difference mg/L Comments:Parameter T.K. Nitrogen EPA Method 351.3 Detection Limit 5 mg/Kg RespectfullySubmitted, Pat Brueckner Laboratory Director CORPORATE OFFICE: 1 1990 Discovery Ct. • Moorpark, CA 93021 • (805) 532-0012 • FAX (805) 532-0016 SAN DIEGO OFFICE: 4805-B Mercury St. • San Diego, CA 921 11 • (619) 505-0835 • FAX (619) 505-0837 fi3$S*0»^w v WHITE - FILE COPY YELLOW - LAB COPY PINK - PROJECT MANAGER COPY » rajy-^ *~^3"• , LOCATION SAMPLERS SAMPLE NUMBER DATE TIME DEPTH BELOW GRADE (FT) ! SAMPiE TYPE :g CON(LIPRESERVAESSARY)TYP(IFO a: 3UJO CALL & SEND RESULTS TO: LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES, INC. ATTENTION: j PHONE NO.v~n REMARKS tS'; UU1 I9 JO s ^ '3 -M Z-S '(* •1 >^ JCt • 0 r C " <• * ie ^y SAMPLES INTACT:YES NO SAMPLES PROPERLY COOLED:YES no SAMPLES N0 IF NOT, WHY: hi|Wd^Mt"4->» -< RELINQUISHED BY: RELINQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME DATE/TIME RECEIVED RECEIVED BY: SAMPLES PLACED IN LAB REFRIGERATOR DATE TIME RELINQUISHED BY: LAB REP. INITIALS DATE/TIME RECEIVED FOR LAB BY: LABORATORY NAME:CERTIFICATION NO: TAT" CHAIN-OF-CUSTODY RECORD Project No. Project Name DateV.-'" 4010 390 UHITE - FILE COPY YELLOW - LAB COPY PIMK - PROJECT MANAGER COPY LOCATION V -<* « >> / SAMPLERS^ SI MATURE ) SAMPLE NUMBER DATE TIME DEPTH BELOW GRADE (FT) "SAMPLE TYPE 1 OFAINOOE OfTAINERCONTAINER(LIQUID OVATPSERSSARY)p (/> Q ZZ>UJ o o CALL & SEND RESULTS TO: LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES, INC. ATTENTIONS i-S i^s-n C $+3r^\- f>'i is ^4 '^ SAMPLES INTACT:YES SAMPLES PROPERLY COOLED:YES SAMPLES ACCEPTED:YES IF NOT, WHY: H0 NO NO RELINQUISHED BY: RELINQUISHED BY: DATE/TIME DATE/TIME RECEIVED BY: RECEIVED BY: SAMPLES PLACED IN LA8 REFRIGERATOR DATE TIME RELINQUISHED BY: LAB REP. INITIALS DATE/TIME RECEIVED FOR LAB BY: LABORATORY NAME:CERTIFICATION NO: CHAIN-OF-CUSTODY RECORD Project No. Project Name LfU 4010 390 WHITE - FILE COPY YELLOW - LAB COPY PINK - PROJECT MANAGER COPY Leighton and Associates, Inc. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page 1 of6 LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS FOR ROUGH GRADING 1.0 General 1.1 Intent These General Earthwork and Grading Specifications are for the grading and earthwork shown on the approved grading plan(s) and/or indicated in the geotechnical report(s). These Specifications are a part of the recommendations contained in the geotechnical report(s). In case of conflict, the specific recommendations in the geotechnical report shall supersede these more general Specifications. Observations of the earthwork by the project Geotechnical Consultant during the course of grading may result in new or revised recommendations that could supersede these specifications or the recommendations in the geotechnical report(s). 1.2 The Geotechnical Consultant of Record: Prior to commencement of work, the owner shall employ the Geotechnical Consultant of Record (Geotechnical Consultant). The Geotechnical Consultants shall be responsible for reviewing the approved geotechnical report(s) and accepting the adequacy of the preliminary geotechnical findings, conclusions, and recommendations prior to the commencement of the grading. Prior to commencement of grading, the Geotechnical Consultant shall review the "work plan" prepared by the Earthwork Contractor (Contractor) and schedule sufficient personnel to perform the appropriate level of observation, mapping, and compaction testing. During the grading and earthwork operations, the Geotechnical Consultant shall observe, map, and document the subsurface exposures to verify the geotechnical design assumptions. If the observed conditions are found to be significantly different than the interpreted assumptions during the design phase, the Geotechnical Consultant shall inform the owner, recommend appropriate changes in design to accommodate the observed conditions, and notify the review agency where required. Subsurface areas to be geotechnically observed, mapped, elevations recorded, and/or tested include natural ground after it has been cleared for receiving fill but before fill is placed, bottoms of all "remedial removal" areas, all key bottoms, and benches made on sloping ground to receive fill. The Geotechnical Consultant shall observe the moisture-conditioning and processing of the subgrade and fill materials and perform relative compaction testing of fill to determine the attained level of compaction. The Geotechnical Consultant shall provide the test results to the owner and the Contractor on a routine and frequent basis. 3030.1094 Leighton and Associates, Inc. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page 2 of6 1.3 The Earthwork Contractor The Earthwork Contractor (Contractor) shall be qualified, experienced, and knowledgeable in earthwork logistics, preparation and processing of ground to receive fill, moisture-conditioning and processing of fill, and compacting fill. The Contractor shall review and accept the plans, geotechnical report(s), and these Specifications prior to commencement of grading. The Contractor shall be solely responsible for performing the grading in accordance with the plans and specifications. The Contractor shall prepare and submit to the owner and the Geotechnical Consultant a work plan that indicates the sequence of earthwork grading, the number of "spreads" of work and the estimated quantities of daily earthwork contemplated for the site prior to commencement of grading. The Contractor shall inform the owner and the Geotechnical Consultant of changes in work schedules and updates to the work plan at least 24 hours in advance of such changes so that appropriate observations and tests can be planned and accomplished. The Contractor shall not assume that the Geotechnical Consultant is aware of all grading operations. The Contractor shall have the sole responsibility to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish the earthwork in accordance with the applicable grading codes and agency ordinances, these Specifications, and the recommendations in the approved geotechnical report(s) and grading plan(s). If, in the opinion of the Geotechnical Consultant, unsatisfactory conditions, such as unsuitable soil, improper moisture condition, inadequate compaction, insufficient buttress key size, adverse weather, etc., are resulting in a quality of work less than required in these specifications, the Geotechnical Consultant shall reject the work and may recommend to the owner that construction be stopped until the conditions are rectified. 2.0 Preparation of Areas to be Filled 2.1 Clearing and Grubbing: Vegetation, such as brush, grass, roots, and other deleterious material shall be sufficiently removed and properly disposed of in a method acceptable to the owner, governing agencies, and the Geotechnical Consultant. The Geotechnical Consultant shall evaluate the extent of these removals depending on specific site conditions. Earth fill material shall not contain more than 1 percent of organic materials (by volume). No fill lift shall contain more than 5 percent of organic matter. Nesting of the organic materials shall not be allowed. If potentially hazardous materials are encountered, the Contractor shall stop work in the affected area, and a hazardous material specialist shall be informed immediately for proper evaluation and handling of these materials prior to continuing to work in that area. As presently defined by the State of California, most refined petroleum products (gasoline, diesel fuel, motor oil, grease, coolant, etc.) have chemical constituents that are considered to be hazardous waste. As such, the indiscriminate dumping or spillage of these fluids onto the ground may constitute a misdemeanor, punishable by fines and/or imprisonment, and shall not be allowed. 3030.1094 Leighton and Associates, Inc. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page 3 of6 2.2 Processing Existing ground that has been declared satisfactory for support of fill by the Geotechnical Consultant shall be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches. Existing ground that is not satisfactory shall be overexcavated as specified in the following section. Scarification shall continue until soils are broken down and free of large clay lumps or clods and the working surface is reasonably uniform, flat, and free of uneven features that would inhibit uniform compaction. 2.3 Overexcavation In addition to removals and overexcavations recommended in the approved geotechnical reports) and the grading plan, soft, loose, dry, saturated, spongy, organic-rich, highly fractured or otherwise unsuitable ground shall be overexcavated to competent ground as evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant during grading. 2.4 Benching Where fills are to be placed on ground with slopes steeper than 5:1 (horizontal to vertical units), the ground shall be stepped or benched. Please see the Standard Details for a graphic illustration. The lowest bench or key shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide and at least 2 feet deep, into competent material as evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant. Other benches shall be excavated a minimum height of 4 feet into competent material or as otherwise recommended by the Geotechnical Consultant. Fill placed on ground sloping flatter than 5:1 shall also be benched or otherwise overexcavated to provide a flat subgrade for the fill. 2.5 Evaluation/Acceptance of Fill Areas: All areas to receive fill, including removal and processed areas, key bottoms, and benches, shall be observed, mapped, elevations recorded, and/or tested prior to being accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant as suitable to receive fill. The Contractor shall obtain a written acceptance from the Geotechnical Consultant prior to fill placement. A licensed surveyor shall provide the survey control for determining elevations of processed areas, keys, and benches. 3.0 Fill Material 3.1 General: Material to be used as fill shall be essentially free of organic matter and other deleterious substances evaluated and accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to placement. Soils of poor quality, such as those with unacceptable gradation, high expansion potential, or low strength shall be placed in areas acceptable to the Geotechnical Consultant or mixed with other soils to achieve satisfactory fill material. 3-2 Oversize: Oversize material defined as rock, or other irreducible material with a maximum dimension greater than 8 inches, shall not be buried or placed in fill unless location, materials, and placement methods are specifically accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant. Placement operations shall be such that nesting of oversized material does not occur and such that oversize material is completely surrounded by compacted or densified fill. Oversize material shall not be placed within 10 vertical feet of finish grade or within 2 feet of future utilities or underground construction. 3.3 Import If importing of fill material is required for grading, proposed import material shall meet the requirements of Section 3.1. The potential import source shall be given to the 3030.1094 Leighton and Associates, Inc. GENERAL EARTH WORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page 4 of 6 Geotechnical Consultant at least 48 hours (2 working days) before importing begins so that its suitability can be determined and appropriate tests performed. 4.0 Fill Placement and Compaction 4-1 Fill Layers: Approved fill material shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill (per Section3.0) in near-horizontal layers not exceeding 8 inches in loose thickness. The Geotechnical Consultant may accept thicker layers if testing indicates the grading procedures can adequately compact the thicker layers. Each layer shall be spread evenly and mixed thoroughly to attain relative uniformity of material and moisture throughout. 4.2 Fill Moisture Conditioning Fill soils shall be watered, dried back, blended, and/or mixed, as necessary to attain a relatively uniform moisture content at or slightly over optimum. Maximum density and optimum soil moisture content tests shall be performed in accordance with the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM Test Method D1557-91). 4.3 Compaction of Fill: After each layer has been moisture-conditioned, mixed, and evenly spread, it shall be uniformly compacted to not less than 90 percent of maximum dry density (ASTM Test Method D1557-91). Compaction equipment shall be adequately sized and be either specifically designed for soil compaction or of proven reliability to efficiently achieve the specified level of compaction with uniformity. 4.4 Compaction of Fill Slopes: In addition to normal compaction procedures specified above, compaction of slopes shall be accomplished by backrolling of slopes with sheepsfoot rollers at increments of 3 to 4 feet in fill elevation, or by other methods producing satisfactory results acceptable to the Geotechnical Consultant. Upon completion of grading, relative compaction of the fill, out to the slope face, shall be at least 90 percent of maximum density per ASTM Test Method Dl 557-91. 4.5 Compaction Testing Field tests for moisture content and relative compaction of the fill soils shall be performed by the Geotechnical Consultant. Location and frequency of tests shall be at the Consultant's discretion based on field conditions encountered. Compaction test locations will not necessarily be selected on a random basis. Test locations shall be selected to verify adequacy of compaction levels in areas that are judged to be prone to inadequate compaction (such as close to slope faces and at the fill/bedrock benches). 4.6 Frequency of Compaction Testing: Tests shall be taken at intervals not exceeding 2 feet in vertical rise and/or 1,000 cubic yards of compacted fill soils embankment. In addition, as a guideline, at least one test shall be taken on slope faces for each 5,000 square feet of slope face and/or each 10 feet of vertical height of slope. The Contractor shall assure that fill construction is such that the testing schedule can be accomplished by the Geotechnical Consultant. The Contractor shall stop or slow down the earthwork construction if these minimum standards are not met. 3030.1094 Leighton and Associates, Inc. GENERAL EARTH WORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page 5 of6 4.7 Compaction Test Locations: The Geotechnical Consultant shall document the approximate elevation and horizontal coordinates of each test location. The Contractor shall coordinate with the project surveyor to assure that sufficient grade stakes are established so that the Geotechnical Consultant can determine the test locations with sufficient accuracy. At a minimum, two grade stakes within a horizontal distance of 100 feet and vertically less than 5 feet apart from potential test locations shall be provided. 5.0 Subdrain Installation Subdrain systems shall be installed in accordance with the approved geotechnical reports), the grading plan, and the Standard Details. The Geotechnical Consultant may recommend additional subdrains and/or changes in subdrain extent, location, grade, or material depending on conditions encountered during grading. All subdrains shall be surveyed by a land surveyor/civil engineer for line and grade after installation and prior to burial. Sufficient time should be allowed by the Contractor for these surveys. 6.0 Excavation Excavations, as well as over-excavation for remedial purposes, shall be evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant during grading. Remedial removal depths shown on geotechnical plans are estimates only. The actual extent of removal shall be determined by the Geotechnical Consultant based on the field evaluation of exposed conditions during grading. Where fill-over-cut slopes are to be graded, the cut portion of the slope shall be made, evaluated, and accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to placement of materials for construction of the fill portion of the slope, unless otherwise recommended by the Geotechnical Consultant. 7.0 Trench Backfills 7.1 The Contractor shall follow all OHSA and Cal/OSHA requirements for safety of trench excavations. 7.2 All bedding and backfill of utility trenches shall be done in accordance with the applicable provisions of Standard Specifications of Public Works Construction. Bedding material shall have a Sand Equivalent greater than 30 (SE>30). The bedding shall be placed to 1 foot over the top of the conduit and densified by jetting. Backfill shall be placed and densified to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum from 1 foot above the top of the conduit to the surface. 7.3 The jetting of the bedding around the conduits shall be observed by the Geotechnical Consultant. 7.4 The Geotechnical Consultant shall test the trench backfill for relative compaction. At least one test should be made for every 300 feet of trench and 2 feet of fill. 3030.1094 Leighton and Associates, Inc. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page 6 of6 7.5 Lift thickness of trench backfill shall not exceed those allowed in the Standard Specifications of Public Works Construction unless the Contractor can demonstrate to the Geotechnical Consultant that the fill lift can be compacted to the minimum relative compaction by his alternative equipment and method. 3030.1094 PROJECTED PLANE 1TO1 MAXIMUM FROM TOE OF SLOPE TO APPROVED GROUND NATURAL GROUND FILL SLOPE , REMOVE UNSUfTABLE MATERIAL BENCH HEIGHT 2'MIN. KEY DEPTH -IS' MIN. LOWEST BENCH (KEY) FILL-OVER-CUT SLOPE •1TMM.—Hi LOWEST BENCH' I—2'MIN. KEY DEPTH __ 4'TYPICAL ' I—BENCH HEIGHT REMOVE UNSUITABLE MATERIAL CUT PACE SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO FILL PLACEMENT TO ASSURE ADEQUATE GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS CUT FACE TO BE CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO FIL PLACEMENT^ NATURAL GROUND OVERBUILT AND TRIM BACK PROJECTED PLANE 1TO1 MAXIMUM FROM TOE OF SLOPE TO APPROVED GROUND DESIGN SLOPE REMOVE NSUfTABLE MATERIAL CUT-OVER-FILL SLOPE For Subdrains See Standard Detail C BENCH HEIGHT 2* MIN.—J KEY DEPTH LOWEST BENCH (KEY) BENCHNG SHALL BE DONE WHEN SLOPES ANGLE IS EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN 5:1 MMMUM BENCH HEIGHT SHALL BE 4 FEET MMMUM FILL WDTH SHALL BE 9 FEET KEYING AND BENCHING GENERAL, EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS STANDARD DETAILS A LEU REV. 411/96 FINISH GRADE SLOPE FACE HO1 MIN.^r^r.COMPACTED FILL-— 'OVERSIZE "WINDROW : JETTED OR FLOODED GRANULAR MATERIAL • Oversize rock te larger than 8 inches In largest dimension. • Excavate a trench in the compacted fill deep enough to bury all the rock. • Backfill with granular soil jetted or flooded In place to fill all the voids. • Do not bury rock within 10 feet of finish grade. • Windrow of burled rock shafl be parallel to the finished slope fiH.ELEVATION A-A1 PROFILE ALONG WINDROW JETTED OR FLOODED GRANULAR MATERIAL OVERSIZE ROCK DISPOSAL GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS STANDARD DETAILS B ^•a- JiJ 4/05 NATURAL GROUND BENCHING REMOVE UNSUITABLE MATERIAL i~srrr_-_nnr_r-_r. COMPACTED FILL t MIN. OVERLAP FROM THE TOP HOG RING TIED EVERY 6 FEET CALTRANS CLASS II PERMEABLE OR #2 ROCK' (9FT.VFT.) WRAPPED IN FILTER FABRIC FILTER FABRIC (MIRAFM400R, \ / APPROVED ^COLLECTOR PIPE SHALL CANYON SUBDRAIN OUTLET DETAIL PERFORATED PIPE MIN. APPROVED EQUIVALENT) BE MINIMUM 6" DIAMETER SCHEDULE 40 PVC PERFORATED PIPE. SEE STANDARD DETAIL D FOR PIPE SPECIFICATION DESIGN FINISHED GRADE . NON-PERFORATED__; - & M 6B+ MIN. IN. X*2 XFAE FILTER FABRIC (MIRAFI140OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT) #2 ROCK WRAPPED IN FILTER FABRIC OR CALTRANS CLASS II PERMEABLE. CANYON SUBDRAINS GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS STANDARD DETAILS C nJUUJ 4/05 OUTLET PIPES 4'<|> NON-PERFORATED PIPE, 100' MAX. O.C. HORIZONTALLY, 30' MAX. O.C. VERTICALLY BACKCUT1:1 OR FLATTER 2' MIN. POSITIVE SEAL SHOULD BE PROVIDED AT THEJOI OUTLET PIPE (NON-PERFORATED) CALTRANS CLASS II PERMEABLE OR #2 ROCK (3FT.3/FT.) WRAPPED IN FILTER FABRIC 12- MIN. OVERLAP FROM THE TOP HOG RING TIED EVERY 6 FEET FILTER FABRIC (MIRAF1140 OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT) T-CONNECT1ON FOR COLLECTOR PIPE TO OUTLET PIPE SUBDRAIN INSTALLATION - Subdrain collector pipe shall be Installed with perforations down or, unless otherwise designated by the geotechrdcaJ consultant Outlet pipes shall be non-perforated pipe. The subdrain pipe shall have at least 8 perforations uniformly spaced per foot Perforation shall be W to W If drflted notes are used. All subdrain pipes shall have a gradient at least 2% towards the outlet SUBDRAIN PIPE - Subdrain pipe shall be ASTM D2751, SDR 23.5 or ASTM D1527, Schedule 40, or ASTM D3034, SDR 23.5, Schedule 40 Poiyvinyl Chloride Plastic (PVC) pipe. All outlet pipe shall be placed in a trench no wider than twice the subdrain pipe. Pipe shall be in soil of SE>30 jetted or flooded in place except for the outside 5 feet which shall be native soil backfill. BUTTRESS OR REPLACEMENT FILL SUBDRAINS GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS STANDARD DETAILS D JU 4/95 RETAINING WALL DRAINAGE DETAIL SOIL BACKFILL. COMPACTED TO 90 PERCENT RELATIVE COMPACTION* 06* MIN. * OVERLAP H--~HHCOMPACTED FILL— RETAINING WALL WALL WATERPROOFING PER ARCHITECT'SSPECIFICATIONS WALL FOOTING- ^ NOT TO SCALE SPECIFICATIONS FOR CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL U.S. Standard Sieve Size 1" 3/4" 3/8" No. 4 No. 8 No. 30 No. 50 No. 200 % Passing 100 90-100 40-100 25-40 18-33 5-15 0-7 0-3 Sand Equivalent>75 FILTER FABRIC ENVELOPE (MIRAFI 140N OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT)** CLEAN GRAVEL** 4* (MIN.^JPJAMETER PERFORATED PVC PIPE (SCHEDULE 40 OR EQUIVALENT) WITH PERFORATIONS ORIENTED DOWN AS DEPICTED MINIMUM 1 PERCENT GRADIENT TO SUITABLE OUTLET 3* MIN. COMPETENT BEDROCK OR MATERIAL AS EVALUATED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT * BASED ON ASTM D1567 **IF CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL (SEE GRADATION TO LEFT) IS USED IN PLACE OF 3/4"-1-1/2* GRAVEL. FILTER FABRIC MAY BE DELETED. CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL SHOULD BE COMPACTED TO OQ PERCENf?RELATlVE COMPACTION * NOTECOMPOSITE DRAINAGE PRODUCTS SUCH AS MIRADRAIN OR J-DRAIN MAY BE USED AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO GRAVEL OR CL^SS Z INSTALLATION SHOULD BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WTTH MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS. 980118-001 APPENDIX E STABILITY ANALYSIS FOR HOMOGENEOUS EARTH SLOPES Design Parameters and Assumptions Type of Slope: 2:1 cut slope Type of Soil Materials: Santiago Formation H = Height of Slope = 60 feet 0 — Angle of Slope = 26 degrees 7t = Total (wet) Unit Weight = 130 pcf 4> = Angle of Internal Friction = 30 degrees C = Cohesion = 250 psf • No seepage forces • Total shear strength parameters are used in lieu of effective strength Analysis Y, * H • tan <|>Dimensionless Parameters = A - = = 18cf C Stability Number (from Figure 10 of Reference 2) = N = 50 Minimum Factor of Safety = F.S. (min) = N^ • —— = 1.6 (> 1.5 O.K.) ' " References 1. Bell, J.M., Dimensionless Parameters for Homogeneous Earth Slopes, Journal. Soil Mechanics and Foundation Division, American Society of Civil Engineers, No. SMS, September 1966. 2. Janbu, N., Discussion for (Reference - 1), Journal. Soil Mechanics and Foundation Division, American Society of Civil Engineers, No. SSM6, November 1967. 980118-001 STABILITY ANALYSIS FOR HOMOGENEOUS EARTH SLOPES (continued) Design Parameters and Assumptions Type of Slope: Fill Slope Type of Soil Materials: Derived from Santiago Formation H = Height of Slope = 30 feet |3 = Angle of Slope = 26 degrees 7t = Total (wet) Unit Weight - 125 pcf 4> = Angle of Internal Friction = 29 degrees C = Cohesion = 200 psf • No seepage forces • Total shear strength parameters are used in lieu of effective strength Analysis y • H • tan (J>Dimensionless Parameters = A = = 10.* Stability Number (from Figure 10 of Reference 2) = tf . = 35 Minimum Factor of Safety = F.S. (min) = Ntf • C =1.9 (S 1.5 O.K.)yr a References 1. Bell, J.M., Dimensionless Parameters for Homogeneous Earth Slopes, Journal. Soil Mechanics and Foundation Division, American Society of Civil Engineers, No. SMS, September 1966. 2. Janbu, N., Discussion for (Reference - 1), Journal. Soil Mechanics and Foundation Division, American Society of Civil Engineers, No. SSM6, November 1967. E-2 980118-001 APPENDIX E (continued) SURFICIAL SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS • Cut Slope • Santiago Formation ASSUMED PARAMETERS Z = Depth of Saturation = 4 ft. i = Slope Angle = 26 degrees 7W = Unit Weight of Water = 62.4 pcf 7, = Saturated Unit Weight of Soil = 130 pcf <f> = Apparent Angle of Internal Friction = 30 degrees C = Apparent Cohesion = 250 pcf C + otan <t> _ c +(Y, - Y*)Z cos2i tan T Y. Z sin i cos i FS = 1.8(>1.5;o.k.) E-3 980118-001 APPENDIX E (continued) SURFICIAL SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS • Fill Slope • Derived from Santiago Formation ASSUMED PARAMETERS Z = Depth of Saturation = 4 ft. / = Slope Angle = 26 degrees 7W = Unit Weight of Water = 62.4 pcf 7t = Saturated Unit Weight of Soil = 125 pcf 0 = Apparent Angle of Internal Friction = 29 degrees C = Apparent Cohesion = 200 pcf C + otan $ c +(Y, - Y JZ cos2/ tan=T yt Z sin i cos i FS = 1.6C>1.5;o.k.) E-4