Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCT 00-21; HOLLY SPRINGS; GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS AND LETTERS VOLUME 1; 2001-07-09CANTARINIPROPERTY Carlsbad, California_ Geotechnical l:leports and Letters <, •• Volume 1 Prepared For: DAVID BENTLEY ~ ~ (Q ~~ ~ ~ 'lll Cl 0 ~ ~ 0 &Y ~ 0 ~ -,.~--~\, ~ ; ~ ~-d I 't::_~yiig1-I :J Q1..-------,,Leighton and Associates, Inc. I--------'~ A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY ~ .J+-9 0-too -dA I ft&t~ I RECEIVED· JAN 1 o ?N\S . ENG\NEE.R\NG . CANTARlNI PROif~RTY Carlsbad, California Geotechnical Reports_ and Letters Volume 1 Prepared For: DAVID BENTLEY rl....----,,Leighton and Associates, Inc. _c:-=:::-..=:-..::::::-.:::::-...:::::-'___. A LEIGHTON GROUP C.OMPANY 1) i\.< I. TABLE OF CONTENTS • • ••• •• Volume 1 . 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) July 28, 1998 July 8, 1999 February 3, 2000 September 15, 2000 July 9, 2001 Volume.2 Date 6) November 13,2002 7) May 3, 2004 8) 9) 10) 11) 12) 13) 14) 15) Cantarini Property Geotechnical Reports and Letters Table of Contents Preliminary Geotechnical Feasibility and Limited-Subsurface Investigation Bulking and Shrinkage Estimates Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Prelimip.ary Geotechnical Evaluation for Tentative Map Purposes Update Geotechni'cal Investigation Preliminary Evaluation of Proposed Embankment/Detention Basin Improvements Upc:Jated Geotechnical Maps of Cantarini and Holly Springs r --.:z;;.,;,- • • • •• • PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL FEASIBILITY AND LIMITED SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION, PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE CANTARINI PROPERTY, NORTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF EL CAMINO REAL AND COLLEGE BOULEVARD, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA Project No. 4980160-001 July 28, 1998 Prepared For: BENTEQ · 3573 East Sunrise Drive, Suite 221 Tucson, Arizona 95718 Leighton and Associates, Inc. A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY • ••• Leighton and Associates, Inc. A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY To: Attention: Subject: Reference: · Introduction July 28, 1998 BENTEQ 3 573 East Sunrise Drive, #221 Tucson, Arizon~ 85718 fyfr. David Bentley Project No. 4980160-001 Preliminary Geotechnical Feasibility and Limited Subsurface Investigation, Proposed Residential Development of the Cantarini Property, Northeast of the Intersection of El Camino Real and College Boulevard, Caris bad, California Southern California Soil-& Testing, Inc., 1988, Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Inves_tigation, Sycamore Creek II, College Boulevard Carlsbad, California, Project No. 8821121,ReportNo. 1, dated September9~ 1988. In accordance with your request, we have performed a preliminary geotechnical feasibility of the Cantarini Property in Carlsbad, California. The 13 8-acre site is located approximately 1,800 feet north to northeast of the intersection of El Camino Real and College Boulevard in the east-central portioµ of the City of Carlsbad (Figure 1 ). Development plans for the site have not been prepared at this time; however, we understand that the development is to consist of a lo~ density residential development with. associated streets and areas of open space. We also understand that qevelopment of the site will include the construction of College Boulevard between essentially El Camino Real and the future extension of Cannon Road and a roadway connecting the adjacent property to the east. The purpose of our investigation was to evaluate the existing site geotechnical conditions and provide preliminary geotechnical findings and conclusions relative to the feasibility of the proposed development. · Based on ~e results of our limited investigation and understanding of the planned improvements, the proposed development of the Cantarini Property is considered feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. ·specific conclusions and recommendations with-regard to site grading and construction will be provided following an additional subsurface investigation of the site. 'J;'his letter, however, presents our preliminary geotechnical fi~dingsand conclusions regarding the site . 3934 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite B205 111 San Diego, CA 92123-4425 858.292.8030 • Fax 858.292.077111 www.leightongeo.com • ··=:::,. .. •• 4980160-001 Existing Site Conditions and Proposed Development Topographically, the site generally consists of steeply sloping hillside and valley terrain in the northeast and . northwest comers of the site to gently sloping low, bro.ad hills and shallow valleys in the central and southern portions of the site. Elevations range from a high of approximately 420 ± feet mean sea level ( msl) in the northeastcomerofthe site to a low of 70 ± feet:(msl) along the extreme southwestern site boundary. Natural drainage is presently accomplished through a network of small drainages and canyon areas and the site ultimately drains in a southwesterly direction to an east-west trending canyon south of the site. Vegetation on the sjte ranges from planted vegetable crops in the southern and central portions of the site, native grasses and weeds on the steeper hillsides in the central portion of the site, and moderate to thick chaparral and trees (mainly on the hillsides and along the major drainages in the eastern portion of the site). Man-made features on the site include: 1) a single family'residence in the east central portion of the site; 2) several building associated with the farming activities across the site; 3) a relatively large pond and earthen dam in the southeastern portion of the site; 4) numerous dirt roads which cross the property ( mainly in the southern portion of the site); 5) undocumented fills associate<l with· the dirt roads, farming activities, and the earth,en dam;.and 6) fences(presumablyfor horses and/or livestock) in the eastern portion of the property. . Development or site grading plans were not available as of the date of this report. However, from our conversations with you and Mr. Bob Ladwig, we understand that the proposed development of the site will mainly be located in the south, central and western portions of the site. The relatively large open space/wildlifecorridotwill be located along the eastern property boundary and on the steep hillsides in the northeastern portion of the site . Subsurface Investigation Our limited subsurface investigation consisted of the excavation of ten exploratory trenches. The trenches were excavated to .a -maximum depth of 8 feet using a rubber-tired-backhoe. the approximate locations of the trenches are presented on the Geotechnical Map (Figure 2). The trench logs are presented in AppendixA. The trenches were excavated to evaluate the engineering characteristics of the existing surficial soils ~d formational material and to determine the depth to competent material and the extent of the different geologic units. Subsequent to the subsurface investigation, the excavations were backfilled with native soil. Site Geology Cretaceous-aged Granitics, formational materials of the Cretaceous-aged Lusardi and Tertiary-aged Santiago Formations, and surficial units consisting of colluvium, alluvium, topsoil and undocumented fill · soils were encountered or· observed during our investigation of the site. the approximate areal distribution of these geologic units are shown on the G_eotechnicalMap (Figure 2). + Cretaceous Granitic Rock (Map Symbol -Kgr) Granitic rock outcrops were observed in the northeast and northwest comers of the site. In our trench excavations in these areas, weathered granitic material was encountered below the topsoil/colluvium and generally consisted of light grayto light red brown, damp, dense, fine to coarse sand. At depth (i.e . -2-Leighton •••• .. •• 4980160-00 I depths generally 10 or more feet), relatively unweathered granitic bedrock is anticipated as well as exposed at the surface as scattered outcrops. Deep cuts (generally greater than approximately IO to 15 feet) in these areas will likely require heavy ripping or blasting. A rippability study to determine the depth to marginally rippable and unrippable rock has been recommended as part of the next phase of site investigatfon .. + Cretaceous Lusardi Formation (Map Symbol-Kl) The Cretaceous-aged Lusardi Formation was observed in the north central portion of the site both in outcrops and in our trenches. As encountered~ the Lusardi-Formation is composed of light yellow- brown and gray, dense, gravel to cobble conglomerate with a medium to coarse sandstone matrix. This unit mantles the underlying granitic bedrock and may contain scattered large to very large ( up to 10 to _20 feet in diameter) granitic boulders. Deep cuts jn this unit may encounter the underlying granitic bedro<;:k. Interbedded siltstone and sandstone material encoµntered in Trench T-10 may be an erosional remnant 0f the Cretaceous Point Loma Fonnation which crops out south of the site along El Camino Real. However, due to the limited exposure of this interbedded unit and the constraints of our investigation, we have mapped this unit as Lusardi Formation. Further investigation is necessary to determine the lateral extent and engineering characteristics of this interbedded unit. + Tertiary Santiago Formation (Map Symbol-Tsa) In the southwest portion qf the site, th~ tertiary-aged Santiago Fonnation is-exposed stratigraphically above the Lusardi Formation (but lower in elevation). The Santiago Formation is composed of a yellow-brown and off-white, dense to very dense, silty, fme sandstone. These soils typically have a low expansion potential and favorable engineering characteristics. Claystone and siltstones (having medium to high expansion potential) may be present within this unit but were not encountered during our limited evaluation. + Alluvium (Map Symbol -Qal) Quaternary-aged alluvium is present in the bottom of the main canyons and drainages on the site. These soils typically consist ofbrpwn, damp to wet, loose to medium dense/stiff, silty sands, sandy clays and silty clays. The alluvium is also considered to be moderately porous and usually contains localized zones of moderate to abundant.roots and other organic matter. The alluvium is considered potentially compressible and will need to be removed to competent formational material in areas of proposed development. + Topsoil/Colluvium(unmapped) The topsoil/colluvium encountered during our field investigation mantles the majority of the site. ·The topsoil/colluvium, as observed, consists predominantly of light brown to brown, damp to moist, stiff, sandy to silty clay and some clayey to silty sands. These soils were generally massive, porous and contained scattered roots and organics. The potentially compressible topsoil is estimated to be approximately 1 to 3 feet in thickness; however, localized areas of thicker accumulations of topsoil may be encountered during grading. Topsoil/colluvium soils on the lower hillsides of the onsite drainages can be expected to be somewhat deeper in extent and locally-variable in composition . -3-Leighton . ·.· •.. • •• ', 4980160-001 + Undocumented Fill Soils (Map Symbol-Afu) Undocumented fill soils were observed in a number of places on the site. As observed, the undocumented fill soils were generally associated with the grading of the onsite dirt roads, earth dam, and· prior farming activities on the site. These undocumented fill soils are anticipated to be relatively limited in extent. All existing .undocumented fills located on the site ·are considered potentially compressible and unsuitable in _their present state for structural support_. · Geologic Structure Based on our subsurface investigation and site reconnaissance/geologicmapping, the materials on site are generally massive with no distinctive structure. Bedding was not observed during our preliminary site . reconnaissance but is anticipated to be sli$htly_ dipping ( 10 degrees or less) toward the west. · No faults have been mapped on the site nor were_ any encoup.tered during our field study. However, the seepage zones on the east side of the site as well as seeps to the north appear to be aligned in a linear configuration which may be the result of a fracture zone or fault zone (creating a ground water barrier causing the water to flow at the surface). Minor to moderate jointing of the near surface soils may also be present on the hills.ides of the site. Jointing, if encountered, is anticipated to be randomly oriented and moderate to steeply dipping. ' Ground Water Moderate to heavy surface water seepage was noted in the northeast portion of the site and is thought to be ~ssociated with spring activity along two tributary drainages in this area. Minor seepage was also noted in exploratory Trench T-8. We understand that the current site development design is to leave this portion of the site as open space. However, if development is planned in this area or if ground water seepage is encountered in other places on the site (in areas of proposed development) mitigation of the ground water is recommend~d by methods such as -providing subdrains to reduce the impact of ground water seepage or saturated conditions. We also understand thatthe seepage in the main canyons on the eastside of the site flow into the existing pond (which contains water year around). ·Due to ·the presence of this constant surface and subsurface groundwater condition in the canyons upstream of the pond, itnprovement.s across these areas will require special grading procedures to mitigate the surface and groundwater cop.ditions. Slope Stability Based on our preliminary subsurface investigation and site reconnaissance, there is no indication of landslides or other slope instability conditions on the site. However, due the existing ground water seepage and spring activity in the northeast portion of the site, surficial slope stability problems are present and likely to worsen over time. As a result, in the event that future grading is planned in this area, ground water and seepage concerns should be addressed prior to grading . -4-Leighton •• ••• •••• 4980160-001 Geotechnical Impacts on the Proposed Development Based on our: 1) review of geologic maps and geotechnical reports; applicable to the site; 2) our site reconnaissance and limited subsurface investigation; andJ) professional knowledge of the general vicinity and experience with projects having similar conditions, the pertinent geotechnici:i.l conditions impacting site development, are presented below. Our methodology for evaluating each geotechnical constraint as well as possible measures which may be recommended to mitigate adyerse impacts are also included herein. 1) Expansive Soils The majority of the onsite soils are expected to have a low to moderate expansion potential. However, .the topsoils .that occur on the siltstone portions of the Lusardi Formation, possible claystone of the Santiago Formation, and some of the onsite alluvial soils may be highly expansive. Geotechnical observation and/or laboratory testing during the next phase of site investigation and upon completion of the graded pads is recommended to assess the expansion characteristics of typical onsite soils and to deterrhine the actual expansion potential of finish grade soils. 2) CompressibleSoil The onsite weathered formational material, alluviai colluvial and topsoil materials are considered potentially compressible in their natural state. Structural loads imposed on compr~ssible soils could result in adverse settlement. The results of our reconnaissance and backhoe investigation indicate topsoil and colluvial materials cover the majority of the site apd generally range in thickness from l to 3 . feet. Loca1ized thicker accumulation may be expected. The alluvium present in the canyons and drainages ( expected to be 5 to 15+ feet irt thickness) is also considered potentially compressible in its present state. Removal and recompaction of compressible materials may be necessary to mitigate the adverse settlement of these soils. 3) Cut Slope Stability Cut slopes within the bedrock materials may expose potentially unstable earth materials or conditions. Exploratory borings are recommended to investigate the geology that will be exposed in major cut slope·s. Laboratory testing may be utilized to evaluate the strength parameters of the materials exposed, and engineering analysis is recommended to evaluate the slope stability of both natural and ma1,mfactured slopes; Geologic inspection of the cut slopes during grading is recommended to determine _if adverse conditions are present. If adverse conditions are encountered, appropriate recommendations can be provided. In general, we anticipatethat 2: 1 (horizontal to vertical) slopes, free of advance geologic conditions, will be grossly stable. · 4) Fills and Fill Slope Stability Laboratory testing is recommended to evaluate the materials to be used as compacted fill. Based on our evaluation, the onsite soils should be suitable for use ~ compacted fill provided the soils are free of organics~ oversized rock and other deleterious material. Oversized rock may be placed in non-structural areas or in structural fills if placed in accordi:i.p.ce with recommendations of the geotechnical consultant. Subsurface exploration and engineering analysis is recommended to evaluate fill slope stability and the natural soi,s which will underlie fill slopes. No significantfill sl(?pe stability problems are anticipated on-site. Slopes at or less steep than 2:1 (horizontal to vertical) are anticipated to be grossly stable . -5-Leighton •• •. :._ . . -;.: 4980160-001 5) Ground Water Seepage Moderate to heavy ground water seepage conditions were observed in the northeast portion of the site. Surface water was also observed in the canyons below this area. Ground water may also be encountered within the fractures of the crystalline rock when ex.posed in a cut an<l in the alluvial soils in the canyon · b_ottoms. If surface water or ground water seepage conditions are present in areas of grading, recommended mitigative measures such as surface drains and/or subdrains can be provided. 6) Rippability Based on our preliminary subsurface trenching and geotechnical mapping, the majority of the onsite soils appear to be rippable with standard heavy-duty construction equipment. However, our study indicated large unweathered outcrops are exposed on the northern hilltops and ridgelines. Although, weathered granitic material was also encountered on the hillsides in this area, our professional experience and on-site trenching indicated that only the upper 5 to 10 feetof granitic bedrock should be ccinsideredrippable. The underlyirigunweatheredgranitic bedrock will probably be marginallyrippable to non-rippable and will likely need to be blasted prior to excavation in cut areas greater than approximately 10 to 15 feet ·below the existing ground surface. Non-rippable rock may also be · encountered at the existing gr~und surface. Seismic refraction traverses have been recommended as part of th~ next phase of site investigation to evaluate tp.e depth to unweathered bedrock and to _assess the rippability characteristics of the near- surface bedrock. · 7) Oversize Material Numerousboulders·of resistant bedrock occur on-site, ranging up to 10 to 20 feet in diameter. Based on our professional experience, numerous boulders of equal or greater dimensions could be exposed during exca-y.ations, nested within the weathered granitic bedrock and within the Lusardi Formation. In addition; oversize·material is likely to be generated during excavations of the granitic bedrock during grading. Recommendations will be provided for appropriate handling of oversized materials. 8) Seismicity Ground shaking as a result of an earthquake on one of the major active regional faults is the principal seismic hazard affecting the site. Geologic mapping during site grading should also be performed in order to determine if faults are present on the site. We recommend that structures be designed in accordance with state-of-the-art seismic parameters of the Structural Engineers Association of California and/or the Uniform Building Code criteria. Conclusion and Recommendations From our limited study of the site to date, it is our opinion that development of the Cantarini Property is feasible froni a geotechnical standpoint. Detailed geotechnical studies including further subsurface exploration·wm be needed to provide more specific design recommendations. The second phase of this investigation will include a rippability study, a subsurface investigation along the future extension of College Boulevard, laboratory testing, geotechnical analysis and preparation of a preliminary geotechnical cf -6-Leighton • • 4980160-001 rep(?rt presenting our recommendations concerning sjte grading, development, and engineering design parameters. The findings, conclusions and recommendations in this report are based in part upon data that were obtained from a limited number of observations, site visits, and subsurface excavations. 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 perform additional subsurface investigation and to observe the subsurface conditions during grading and construction of the project, in order to confirm that our preliminary findings are representative for the site. If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact this office. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. Attachment: Distribution: . Figure 1 -Site Location Map Figure 2 -Geotechnical Location Map · Appendix A-Trench Logs (2) Addressee (2) Ladwig Design Group Attention: Mr. Bob Ladwig -7- ·Respectful1y submitted, LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES,INC. ~.t.~ Project Geologist Leighton •-- ·:-· • BASE MAP: Thomas Bros. GeoFinder for Wirocms, $an Diego Courty, 1995, Page 866 Benteq I Cantarini Property Carlsbad, Calif atnia p, \pro1octs l&a\980160.001\drafting\980160sl. cv.s SITE 1.oCATION MAP J 0 2000 4000 APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEET PROJECT No . 4980160-001 DATE July 1998 FIGURE No. 1 . I •• 160949 LEGEND ' GEOLOGIC UNITS:.,-· Afu Kgr Qal Tsa Kl Artificial fill -undocumented (circledl buried) Cretaceous -granitics (circled where b Quaternary alluvium (circled where buri_. Tertiary Santiago Fonnation (circled, buried) Cretaceous Lusardi Formation (circle ~-~•~ w MAPSYMBOts ./2 Approximate location of exploratory tre ..,.-10 X61 X68 Project No. 498p160-001 Scme _i_:;4Q~-·=o-· ___ _ Engr./Geol. ~-JOf::m-.~Y;!;RK~W~-- Orafted By _.KA111 ____ ..._·· _____ _ Date July 1998 1045 889 Fig1.re No. 2 • A • • 01 0 ..... I )> -..... 0 .... CD 0 - ' ~ cc ::r ..+ 0 :, .~ ~ en 0 0 a '<D en • • •,':;··:· • LOG OF TRENCH NO. : _....:....T--=1 __ Project Name: Bentl~y/Cantarini Logged by: KBC ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Project Number: 4980160-001 . Elevation: 135' Equipment: JD 710 Backhoe Location: See Geotechnical Mag GEOLOGIC GEOLOGIC Sample Moist .. Density ATTJTUDES DATE: 6/26/98 DESCRIPTION: . UNIT uses No. (%) (pcf) TOPSOIL Topsoil .A @ 0-0.5': Brown. moist, stiff. fine to medium sandy clay CL TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION .. Tsa SM B @ 0.5'-5.5': Yellow-brown and off-white. damp, dense to very : dense. silty, fine sandstone; orange-brown and maroon lenses common GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: 1" = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 0° TREND: N40°E ----,---...: ~ A, -------'..-:: . . -~. -: --r-... ~ :--._ . -. .... ·--: -. 7"_. ·:-_:. -:-~ ---- I I I I I I I I I I I I ~:'j. · ...... 1·. ·:·1:' i. :-."1.: I·.·. . . . -· .. l •·1·· I• ·1 .. I· . I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I . ~ . I• .1 • ' •• 1 • -··z I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I --·. . . , . . . . • I • • • :,_ ,'-: ---. --· . r• f · .. • . . . . . . .... .. ' . .... ~-.. -,----~--.. · -. . --.... -·... e, --- ---_,_ - -----TOTAL DEPTH AT 5.5' - -----NO GROUND WATER -ENCOUNTERED AT TIME -----OF DRILLING ------BACKFILLED: 6/26/98 - • • ::· • LOG OF TRENCH NO. : _____ ._,_T--=2 __ Project Name: Bentlet/Cantarint Logged by: KBC ENGINEERING PROPERTIES en 0 .... 1. > -.... 0 ....... <D 0 _, .Project Number: 4980160-001 Elevation: 160' Equipment: JD 710 Backhoe Location: See Geotechnical MaQ GEOLOGIC GEOLOGIC ATTITUDES DATE: 6/26/98 DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses TOPSOIL Topsoil A @0-1.5': Brown. damp. loose. clayey, fine to medium sand; SC medium pores common, rootlets common. agricultural debris common B @ 1.5' -4': Dark brown. moist. stiff. ffne sandy clay: CL scattered gravel and agricultural debris · TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION Tsa C @ 4' -5': Light yellow-gray, damp to moist, very dense. silty, SM fine sandstone . '. r-(D (Q =r -0 :::, po ~ "' 0 0 a '(D "' GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION --- - -- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I- I- I- .... - - - - SCALE: 1" = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 5°SW TREND: ----- ---A) -1- . "' ... r.. ~:'-_~-. . -,- ~-. · ._·. :t --~ ••• ..!. -. --. -. . . . fi I I I I I _: · 1v -, I ·-1 . . t rf. I.:. I•. I .. I I I I I I I I I I I~ D 117# 10 I -'· 'X·' I VI I I I I I I I I I I I ~~---~ ci t:\ 0 • o_ o o , / ---~ -. . -. . .. . "6 ----.. · ..... . . : ... -,-. · .. -------C -- -------------- ---- Sample Moist. Density . No. (%) (pCf) N55°E - - - - I I I I -1 I I I I I I I I I I I - - - - TOTAL DEPTH AT 5.0' -NO GROUND WATER . -ENCOUNTERED AT TIME OF DRILLING - BACKFILLED: 6/26/98 - • • • LOG OF TRENCH NO. : _T_,_-""""3 __ Project Nallie:· Bentley/Cantarini Logged by:_~K~BC:=:-:------------ Project Number: 4980160-001 Elevation:-=---=2"="'55::.....· ·~-,---,,.-,-,-- Equipment: JD 710 Backhoe Location: .See Geotechni ca 1 Map ENGINEERING PROPERTIES g; GEOLOGIC . GEOLOGIC . Sample Moist. Density "t ATTITUDES DATE: 6/26/98 DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses No. (%) (pcf) >1-----------------------,--------------------~--------1 -· ..... 0 ...... CD 0 -1 r (D co· ::r TOPSOIL A. @ 0-1': Dark brown, damp, loose to medium dense, slightly clayey, silty, fine to medium sand; medium pores common, rootlets common, scattered agricultural debris near surface · B: @ 1-2.5': Rust-brown; moist, stiff, fine sandy clay to clayey sand CRETACEOUS LUSARDI FORMATION C @ 2. 5 · -6 · : Light ye 11 ow-brown, orange-brown and gray, moist, dense to very dense, medium to coarse sandstone; angular rock fragments common Topsoi 1 SM CL/SC Kl SM 6"1-----"---'-----------------------------'----'-'----....___-----''-----.L----'----I ; GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION ~· Cl) 0 o: [ ' (D Cl) l_l__l I I t I I .,- ,- I- I- I- I- I- I-. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SCALE: 1" = 5' -t- -t-. [A r: · --,,,. . -· -·· <. c-,-_J ,-.-~--f. -. . W,. ~-SJ~:i~:,-~~---::~i~:,·. ·,·.=-= I ll~ -+- -+- -+- -+- SURFACE SLOPE: 0° TREND: --+- --+- --+- -+- N20°E -- ...:. - - - - - TOTAL DEPTH AT 6.0' - NO GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED AT TIME - OF DRILLING - BACKFILLED: 6/26/98 - • • • LOq OF TRENCH NO. : T -4 Project Name: Bentley/Cantari·ni Logged by:---' . ..,_,K=BC:::-..,.. ____ _ Project Number: 4980160-001 Elevation:=--=2.:;..;30,....'..,..·---,..----Equipment: JD 710 Backhoe Location: See Geotechriical Map ENGINEERING PROPERTIES ~ GEOLOGIC . GEOLOGIC · Sample Moist. Density, t, ATTITUDES DATE: 6/26/98 DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses No. (%) (pcf) I -..... 0 ...... co 0 - r-(D .(Q' ::r TOPSOIL A @ 0-2': Brown. damp, medium dense. clayey, silty, fine to medium sand: fine gravel common, scattered medium pores, rootlets common ' TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION B:Nl0°W, I B @ 2'-6': Light gray and orange.:.brown, moist, dense, fine 15°W gravelly to cdbbly, fine to coarse sandstone, occasional sandy beds Topsoi 1 I SM Tsa SM ·-Ot--------'-----,---,-------------------------,---l...---J...._---l. ___ -1..-_---1 __ ----l :1 GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION ~ Cl) 0 0 .~ Cl) ~ I I I I I I I I I ~ I- I- I- I- SCALE: 1" = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 8°W I I I I I I I 1±1 I I I I I ~o -..:. o .:-~.....:- -t- -t- -+- -+- -t- -t- -+- -1- -t- TREND: N70°E - - - - - - - - TOTAL DEPTH AT 6.0' - 1NO GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED AT TIME - 10F DRILLING - 'BACKFILLED: 6/26/98 - en 0 .... I > -.... 0 ...... co 0 - . ~ (Q ::::r 0 ::, po ~ en 0 C) iii . ·i • •• •• LOG OF TRENCH NO.: T-5 ---- Project Name: Bentley/Cantarini. Logged by: KBC ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Project Number: 4980160-001 Elevation: 180' Equipment: JD 710 Backhoe Location: See Geotechnical Map GEOLOGIC GEOLOGIC Sample Moist.· Density ATTITUDES DATE: 6/26/98 DES CR I PT ION: ·UNH uses No. (%) · (pcf) . ' ARTIFICIAL FILL -UNDOCUMENTED Afu A @ 0-1.5': Brown, damp, loose, silty, fine to medium·sand; SM organic-rich, agricultural debris common TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION Tsa B ,@ 1.5' -3.5': Yellow-brown, moist, very dense. silty, fine SM to coarse sandstone @ 3.5': Practical refusal on well-cemented sandstone GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: 1" = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 3-5°W TREND: N.30°W ------------ ---; 1~7, I --..; ------ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I _ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~-,,-, I I I I I I I I I I I , I I I I I I -1~-~ _,-, ··-~· ~: ~) .. ----. -.. ·.·--:·· : -~ ~-.~ •• ..!-·_1. ---~ --- • I ..a_• ..... ·--· • • --=--' . ..-; . . . ---' ~. _..._ ----"' ~ I, ------- -----TOTAL DEPTH AT 3.5' ------NO GROUND WATER -ENCOUNTERED AT TIME -----OF DRILLING - .... ----BACKFILLED: 6/26/98 - • • ·-:·: ,• • LOG·OF TRENCH NO.: T-6 Project Name: Bentley/Cantarini Logged by:__,...,_,,.K~BC:::...,.-__ _,a_. ______ Project Number: . 4980160-001 Elevation:.,,---·-=2..,,...,75=-'------Equipment: JO 710 Backhoe Location: See Geotechnical Map ENGINEERING PROPERTIES g GEOLOGIC . . . GEOLOGIC. Sample Moist. Density "t ATTITUDES DATE: 6/26/98 DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses No. (%) (pcf) >1-----;-------,-----------,------------;----'---,+-------,+-----t---t-----11 -· .... 0 ...... <O 0 - r-CD s· ::r . TOPSOIL I Topsoil A @ 0-2. 5': Brown, dry, loose to medium dense, slightly clayey. I I SM silty, fi'ne sand': fine to medium pores common. rootlets common CRETACEOUS GRANITICS Kgr SW B ·@ 2.5'-3.5': Orange-brown, dry, very dense, fine to coarse sand (decomposed granitics): angular rock · fragments common 8"1-----..L..------------'--------------------------'------,.J'---'-----'-:-----,-....L.----.L------J ::, $20 GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: 1" = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 20°N TREND: N80°E --------------.-----,---.-,------....-------..-------,-------.--------r-------,------1 > "' I-"' Ot-o i'1--, CD "' ' I I I I I I ,----I ~I.,. ·.1. :!_::~;~~I I 13 -+- -+- -+- -+- - - - - - - - - TOTAL DEPTH AT 3.5' -NO GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED AT TIME OF DRILLING - - BACKFILLED: 6/26/98 - OI 0 -a. I > --a. 0 ...... co 0 - ~ co :,- . . 8' ::, ~ ~ "' 0 0 21. , CD "' • • • LOG OF TRENCH NO. :_....:...T-....,_7 __ Project Name.: Bentley/Cantartni Logged by: KBC ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Project Number: 4980160-001 Elevation: 240' Equipment; JD 710 Backhoe Location: See Geotechnical Mag GEOLOGIC GEOLOGIC Sample Moist. Density ATTITUDES DATE: 6/26/98 DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses No. (%) . (pcf) ARTIFICIAL FILL -UNDOCUMENTED Afu A @ 0-2': Trench backfill for 4" PVC pipe: Brown, damp medium dense. silty, fine to medium sand . SM TOPSOIL Topsoil B ·@ 0-1.5': Brown, damp, loose to medium dense, slightly SM clayey; silty fine sand; few medium pores, scattered rootlets CRETACEOUS GRANITICS Kgr C @ 1.5' -5.5': Light orange-brown, dry, dense to very dense medlum to coarse sand (decomposed graniti.cs); angular rock fragments common, scattered ·· SW fractures GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: 1" = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 3-5°N TREND: N35°W I-_,_ A ---,/""4"fVC Pll7e ... -I-~k. --- I--,_ •••• :· f --- ~ ---<::: ,····-~ -~ --:r:.·:' ' ' _,_ -~ •I~• I •t • I I I I I I I I I I, I I N: .-.,,;,,,. .. ,-, ., • ·1:1.i ~-.. '.,, I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ·~ tj\·v ... : . ~··· I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -°',a:,.·_··, •,·1 o I •,' --. _:,'b:1:, ·. ' -,--.. ~ -. .. .• ---• • I _,_ - ---C _,_ -----.... - -----TOTAL DEPTH AT 5.5' - -----NO GROUND WATER -ENCOUNTERED AT TIME -----OF DRILLING -... -,---BACKFILLED: 6/26/98 - (Tl 0 ..... I > -..... 0 ...... (0 0 - ~ ii ::r 0 :::, ~ ?;' 0 0 () .ei, ' (D 0 • • • ) LOG OF TRENCH NO. : __ T -8 Project Name: Bentley/Cantarini Logged by: KBC ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Project Number: 4980160-001 Elevation: 305' Equipment: JD 710 Backhoe Location: See Geotechnical Ma12 GEOLOGIC GEOLOGIC Sample Moist. Density ATTITUDES DATE": 6/26/98 DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses No. (%) (pcf) TOPSOIL/COLLUVIUM Qcol : A @ 0-4': Red-brown, moist to wet, medium to stiff. fine sandy CL . 1 clay; gray-brown mottling common, scattered cobbles @ 4': Minor seepage CRETACEOUS LUSARDI FORMATION Kl B @ 4' -6': Yellow-brown and gray-brown, moist, dense .. clayey to SC/SM 2 silty, fine to coarse sandstone; scattered gravel GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION : SCALE: 1" ·= 5·· SURFACE SLOPE: 0° TREND: N25°E ..... ----- .... -r---- -\ .. --;-;::,-,· .A ·. --- --Ki _ _;____ ... --~©-:: ~-D ;~··.~.'~~-rJ -r--::-j . ·I· .. 1°0. ' ·~. . I I I I I I I I I I I I ,' . . •• '1 •. I · I • ·f · .I I ·~ I I I I I I I I ·1 I I I I I I I I I I I I '"E··!. . -~ '·--:_' .. 'O, ·'· ! '/ I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I --~ ,_ ,,'-,._ _:_. . .. .· ~ .. , ~ .. o. _,_ -. . ~-.. ·.--: --~ ·,-.. , .. --y _,_ -~-.c:..5. ~ --.... . . ---. K_·-! .... .:..------- --f---TOTAL DEPTH AT 6.0' - .... ----MINOR SEEPAGE AT 4' -BACKFILLED: 6/26/98 ,----.-- .... ----- •• • • LOG OF TRENCH NO. :_T ___ -9 __ _ Project Name: Bentley/Cantarini Logged by:_-K..,..BC.,..,..._ ____ _ Project Numbe·r: 4980160-001 Elevation·:_-=-34.:..;o_· ____ _ ENGINEERING PR.OPERTIES Equipment: JD 710 Backhoe Location: See Geotechni cal Map g GEOLOGIC . . GEOLOGIC Sample Moist. Density -t· ATTITUDES DATE: 6/26/98 DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses . No. (%) (pcf) >1-----!-------------------'---"----------~---+--,----f---~--~----1 -.... 0 ...... CD 0 - r-(D ,-.· ;s: ::r TOPSOIL A @ 0-0.5': Light brown. dry, slightly clayey. siity, ffoe sand; rootlets common B @ 0.5'-2': Brown to reddish brown, moist, stiff. medium sandy clay; dark gray-brown mottles common CRETACEOUS .GRANITICS C @ 2'-8': Light gray to yellow-brown, fine to coarse sand (decomposed granitics) @ 8': Practical refusal on very dense/unweathered rock Topsoil SM SC 1 Kgr SW 8'1---------........,.----'----,.---------'-----------'----------------"-----'----'----'-------L----L----t ::, $20 ~ "' 0 0 a . (D "' GRAPHIC REPRESENTATI'ON SCALE:. 1" = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 0° TREND: N35°W 1--------.------,---r-----,--..--------.-----'-----r---------,,----,..-----r------------~------;.-------1 ~ I I I I I I I I I I I ~ . --+- --+-A7 e.·· · .. -_ .·. ··-1·-". ·.·,: . .-.. r--·-·.: .. ·; -:~ I ;;. .. ~. ;-, '., 1' .: j[j·_'.. ~,~} ~ ~-_._j· '.. ,' j' .'j,:· 1." ·i ~ . I I ,1 C·. . . I-J I-~ :·-·, ·, I--+- I---+- I--+- I I -t- -t- -t- -t- - - - - - - - - TOTAL DEPTH AT 8.0' -NO GROUND WATER . ENCOUNTERED AT TIME OF DRILLING - - BACKFILLED: 6/26/98 - en 0 ..... I > -..... 0 ""' <O 0 ....... ; . r-(D cc ::r 0 ::::, po ~ "' 0 () el , CD "' • ·.•. • •,,:, • :· . :: ... LOG OF TRENCH NO.: 0T-lO · Project Name: Bentle~/Cantarini Logged by: KBC ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Project Number: 4980160-001 Elevation: 180' Equipment: JD.710 Backhoe location: See Geotechnical Mag GEOLOGIC . GEOLOGIC Sample Moist. Density ATTITUDES DATE: 6/26/98 DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses No. . (%) (pcf) CRETACEOUS POINT LOMA(?) FORMATION Kp A @ 0-4': Interbedded light gray, damp, dense to very dense. SM/ML silty fine to medium sandstone and dark gray to 1 black, moist, hard clayey siltstone; blocky fissile GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: 1" = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 0-0 TREND: . N35°E : .. ----.,... - -.... ---- --.:.... ----------. . , -,-. - I I I 1\.• ' . .. . . . . . , . . . . . : : .... . . . , . . . . . . ·: :1:J I I I I I I I I I I I . ,-I • •·I•• I .. • • 1 • ·t · I, : I: · I I I I I I I I I I I I I . . I -~(t I, I I • '. ... --.. ~,--: . . . k' "= I I I I I . . . . ..... --... ..:-~~~ ~;---;--:-. ,---.... . . . . · .... ~ -_:_: • _ _.:....--., . . : .. ,·: .. ~ f--. -----· . . . . • ' • • I --.. ' ....... A -f-- -----,-- -_,_ -,-TOTAL DEPTH AT 4.0' - ,-_,_ --NO GROUND WATER -ENCOUNTERED AT TIME '-_,_ --OF DRILLING - f-_,_ --BACKFILLED: 6/26/98 - • • • ·-· •• . /· .. •• ·.·. ':. · .. Leighton and Associates, Inc. A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY To: Attention: Subject: Reference: July 8, 1999 Project No. 4980160-001 Ladwig Design Group, Inc. 703 Palomar Airport Road, Suite 3 00 . Carlsbad, Califomia92009 Mr. Bob Ladwig Bulking and Shrinkage Estimatesfor the Cantarini Property, Carlsbad, California Leighton and Associates, 1998, Preliminary Geotechnical Feasibility and Limited Subsurface Investigation, Proposed Residential Development of the Cantarini Property, Northeast of the Intersection of El Camino Real and College Boulevard, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 4980160-001, dated July 28, 1998 Based on our review of the referenced geotechnical feasibility r~port of the property and our professional experience with similar projects in the general vicinity of the site, this letter presents our bulking and shrinkage estimates of the on-site soils. The approximate limits ·of the geologic units are presented on Figure 2 of the referenced report. Since only a feasibility study of the property (with limited subsurface exploration) has been performed to date, the limits of the geologic units should be considered approximate. In addition, the depth of the disturbed soil within the limits of the .farmed areas of the site, as well as the depth of other surficial-soils.have not been significantly evaluated.to determine·the depths of removals in the fill areas. However, we have assumed the depth of the disturbed soils in the farmed areas is on the order of 2 feet while the topsoil and/ or colluvium is anticipated to be on the order of 3 to 5 feet in depth. The alluvium in the drainages of the site is anticipated to be on the order of 5 to 1 0+ feet. The depth of the undocumented fill is unknown but may vary from a few feet to over 10 feet. The volume change of excavated onsite materials upon recompaction as fill ·is expected · to vary with materials and location. Typically, the surficial soils and bedrock materials vary significantly in natural and compacted density, and therefore, accqrate earthwork shrinkage/bulking t:stimates cannot be determined. However, the foltowing factors (based on the results of our limited feasibility study, geotechnical analysis and professional experience on adjacent sites) are provided on Table 1 as guideline estimates. If possible, we suggest an area where site grades can be adjusted ( during the later portion of the site grading operations) be provided as a b&}ance area. · 3934 Mur:phy Canyon Road, Suite B205 11 San Diego, CA 92123-4425 · 858.292.8030 •.Fax 858.292.0771 a www.leightongeo.com • 4980160-001 Table 1 Earthwork Shrinkage and Bulking Estimates Geologic Unit Estimated Shrinkage/bulking Farmed Near Surface Soils (upper 2 feet) 10 to 20 percent shrinkage Undocumented Fill 10 to 15 percent shrinkage Topsoil/ Alluvium/Colluvium(in unfanned areas) 0 to 10 percent shrinkage Santiago and Lusardi Formations 4 to 12 percent bulking Granitic Rock (weathered upper 5 to 1.0 feet) . . 0 to 8 percent bulking Granitic Rock ( unweathered rock below 10 feet) 10 to 20 percent bulking If you have any questions regarding this letter, plea,se contact this office. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. ........,-=-.......,..,,,,..,... · Distribution: (1) Addressee (2) BuccolaEngineering Attention: Mr. Phil Buccola -2- Respectfully-submitted, LElGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. ~KW . Randall K. Wagn:r--- Senior Project Geologist Leighton • • • • ··-~. ••• • . . :;,.· > PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION · CANTARINI PROPERTY, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA February 3, 2000 Project No. 4980160-001 Prepared For: Bentley-Monarch I,. LLC 4740 East Sunrise Drive, PMB433 Tucson, Arizona 85718 Leighton and Associates, Inc . A LEIG,HTO·N GROUP COMPANY • • Leighton and Associates, Inc. A LEl'GHTON GROUP COMPANY February 3, 2000 To: Attention: Bentley-Monarchl, LLC 4740 East Sunrise Drive, P:MB433 Tucson, Arizona 85718 Mr. David Bentley Project No. 4980160-001 Subject: Preliminary Geo technical Investigation, Cantarini Property, Carlsbad, California In :iccordance with the request of Mr. Robert Ladwig of th~ Ladwig Design Group, we have performed a preliminary geotechnical investigation of the Cantarini property located northeast of the intersection of El · Camino Real and College Boulevard in Carlsbad, California. This report presents the results of our sul:>surface investigation and geotechnical analysis, and provides a summary of our conclusions and recommendations. Final development pla11s were not available at the time this report was prepared, however, a preliminary J 00-scale planning exhibit map was available and utilized during our evaluation. We understand the site will be developed with both single-and multi-family residential units, streets, associated improvements and open space areas. We also understand that development of the site will include the construction of a portion of College Boulevard (between essentially El Camino Real and the future extension of Cann~m Road) and offsite roadways connecting tQ the adjacent properties to the north · and east. Based on the results of our investigation, the proposed residential development of the site is considered feasible from a geotechnical standpoint provided the recommendations summarized in this report are implemented during the final design, grading and construction phases of the development. If you have any questions regarding our report, please cont~ct this office. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. Respectfully submitted, iQikw . RandaHK. Wagne~I Senior Project Geologist KBC/RKW/JGF Distribution: (2) Addressee (12) Ladwig Design Group, Inc., Attention: Mr. Robert Ladwig 3934 Murphy Canyon Road., Suite B205 11 San Diego, CA 92123-4425 · -858.292.8030 • Fax 858.292.0771 e www.leightongeo.com ··- •:·_ .-:-- ••• 4980160-001 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES ................................................................................................................... l 1.2 SITE DESCRIPTION ............•............•........•.................................................•.................................................•.... 3 1.3 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ................................................ , ....•......................................................................... 3 1.4 SURFACE INVESTIGATION AND LABORATORY TESTING ......•.......................•..................................................... 4 2.0 GEOTECHNICALCONDITIONS ................................ ~ ..................... ., .............................................................. 5 2.1 REGIONAL GEOLOGY .................................... : .............•....•.................•..........•........................................ : ......... 5 2.2 SITE-SPECIFIC GEOLOGY ............... , ........•....•.................................................................................................... 5 2.2.1 Undocumented Fill Soils (Map Symbol -Afa) ....................................................................................... 5 2.2.2 Topsoil (Unmapped) ............................................................................................................................. 6 2.2.3 Alluvium and Colluvium Undifferentiated(Map Symbol-Qal/Qcol) ...................................................... 6 2.2.4 Terrace Deposits (Map Symbol-Qt) ....................................................................................................... 6 2.2.5 Santiago Formation (Map Symbol-Tsa) .......................... , ..................................................................... 7 2.2.6 Point Loma Fortnation(Map Symbol-Kp) ............................................................................................. 7 2.2 . .7 LusardiFormatiorz(Map_Symbol-Kl) ......................................................................... :·························· 7 2.2.8 Cretaceous Granitic Rock (Map Symbol-Kgr) .................................. , ................................................. 8 2.3 GEOLOGIC STRUCTURE .................................................................................................................................... 8 2.4 FAULTING .................... _ ............................................... · ................................................................................... 8 2.4.1 Rose Canyon F au/t Zone ..................................................................................................................... 10 2 .5 SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS ..................................... , .......................... :. . . . . .. .. ........... ... . . .. . .. . ..•... ... . .. . .. .... .. . . . .. .• . I 0 2.6 GROUND WATER ........................................................................................................................................... 11 2. 7 ENGINEERING CHARACTERISTICS OFON-SITE SOILS ....................................................................................... 11 2. 7.1 ExpansiorzPotential ..................... -.........•............................................................................................. J 1 2. 7.2 Soluble Sulfate Content ....................................................................................................................... 12 2. 7.3 Excav<;ition Characteristics ................................................................................................................. 12 2. 7. 4 Earthwork Shrinkage and Bulking .............................................. : ....................................................... 16 2.8 SLOPE STABILITY ........................................................................................................................................... 17 3.0 CONCLUSIONS .. -................................................................................................................................................ 18 4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................................................................................................... 20 4.1 EARTHWORK ................................................................................................................................................. 20 4.1.1 4.1.2 4,1.3 4.1.4 4.1.5 4.1.6 4.1.7 Site PreparatiQn .................................................................................................................................. 20 Removal and Recompactionof Potentially Compressible Soils ........................................................... 20 Excavations ...... : ................................................................................................................................. 21 Fill Placement and Compaction .............. , .... , ...................................................................................... 21 Settlement of Deep Fill Soils._ .............. , ............................................................................................... 22 Cut/Fill Transition Conditions ............................................................................................................ 22 Expansive Clayey Soils and Selective Grading ......................... : .......................................................... 22 -i - Leighton •:' .. 4980160-001 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) 4.2 SLOPE.STABILITY ..•..•...••......•.............................•..•............•.•.•.•..•....•............•................................................ 23 4.2.1 Deep-SeatedStability ................... , ....................................................................................................... 23 4.2.2 Surjicial Stability ................................................................................................................................ 24 4.3 CONTROL OF GROUND WATER AND SURFACE WATERS .........•.•..•............•...................................................... 24 4.3.1 CanyonSubdrains ....................................................................................................................... : ....... 25 4.3.2 Stability Fill Subdrains ................................ -.......................................................................... : ............ 25 4.3.3 Cut Slope Seepage Conditions ............................................... : ............................................................ 25 . 4.4 PRELIMINARY FOUNDATION DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS .................................................................................. 26 4.4.1 Conventionally-ReinforcedFoundationDesign Foundation Design ................................................... 27 4.4.2 Post-TensionedFoundationDesign ..................................... , .............................................................. 29 4.4.3 Moisture Conditioning ........................................................................................................................ 30 4.4. 4 Lateral Earth Pressures ....................................................... , .............................................................. 31 4.4.5 FoundationSetbacks ............. ,-........................................... : ................................................................. 32 4.5 RETAINING WALL DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS ...•...•.....•............•...............••..................................................... 33 4.6 :PAVEMENT DESIGN ............................•...................•...............•.....•..•............•......•................................... : ...... 34 4.7 SURFACEDRAINAGEANDLOTMAINTENANCE ....•................•..............•.........•................................................ 34 4.8 GRADED-SLOPES .......•....... : .••.......•.........................................•...........•.....••.•.............................. : ................... 35 4.9 SETTLEMENT MONITORING ....•....•..••.•.•.•.•...•......................••..•.........................•....................•........................ 35 5.0 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS ............................................................................................................... 36 Figures Figure 1 -Site Location Map -Page 2 Tables Tabl.e 1 -Seismic Parameters for Active and Potentially Active Faults -Page 10 Table 2 -Results of the Seismic Refraction Lines -Page 14-15 Table 3 -Earthwork Shrinkage and Bulking Estimates-Page 16 Table 4 -Foundation Type Summary-Page 26 Table 5 -Minimum Foundation and Slab Design Recommendations for Conventionally ReinforcedF oundations-Page 28 Table 6 -Post-Tensioned Foundation Des~gn Recommendations for Expansive Soils -Page 29 Tab le 7 -Minimum i>resaturation Recommendations for Foundation Sub grade Soils -Page 31 Table 8-Lateral Earth Pressures-Page32 Table 9 -Minimum Foundation Setback from Slope Faqes., Page 33 Plate 1-GeotechnicalMap-In Pocket -ii-Leighton •• ••• • TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continuc::d) Appendices AppendixA-References AppendixB -Boring and Trench Logs Appendix C -Laboratory Test Procedures and Test Results Appendix D -Seismic Refraction Study AppendixE -General Earthwork and Grading Specifications for Rough-grading Appendix F -Seismic Analysis Appendix G -Slope Stability Analysis -iii - 4980160-001 Leighton •• 1.1 •• • 4980160-001 1.0 INTRODUCTION Purpose and Scope of Services This report has been prepared in accordance with the request of Mr. Robert Ladwig and presents the results of our preliminary geotechnical investigation of the Cantarini Project. the 138-acre site is located approximately 1,800 feet north to northeast of the intersection of El Camino Real and College Boulevard in the east-central portion of the City of Carlsbad, California (Figure 1 ). The purpose of our investigation was to evaluate the pertinent geotechnical conditions at the site and to provide preliminary design criteria for the proposed development. Final grading plans were not available at the time of this report, however, a preliminary 100-scale planning exhibit map was · available and utilized at the time this report was prepared. We understand that the site will be utilized for both single-family and multi-family residential developments. We also understand that portions of the site (mainly the central and eastern drainages) will remain as dedicated open space. The scope of services for our preliminary geotechnical investigation included: • Review ofpertinent available geotechnical literature (including previous geotechnical reports), geologic maps, and aerial photographs (Appendix A). • Reconnaissanceand geologic mapping of the site. • A subsurface exploration program consisting of the excavation, sampling and logging of 7 small-diameter exploratory borings and 29 shallow exploratory trenches. The small-diameter borings and trenches were excavated to evaluate the characteristics of surficial soils and formational material. Logs of the borings and trenches are presented in Appendix B. We also utilized the applicable logs of ~orings and trenches previously excavated by others for this report (which have also been presented in Appendix B). The approximate location of the borings and trenches are presented on the Geotechnical Map (Plate 1 ). • • • Laboratory testing of representative samples obtained during our subsurface exploration (Appendix_C). A rippability/seismic refraction study to evaluate the approximate seismic velocities of granitic bedrock material within proposed cut areas in order to provide a rough estimate of the rippability characteristi.cs of the materials. The results are presented in Appendix D and discussed in Section 2.7.3. The approximate locations of the seismic survey lines are presented on the Geotechnical Map (Plate 1). Geotechnical analysis of the data accumulated, including data from our previous investigation (Leighton, 1998) and from those of others for the site or adjacent sites (SCS&T, 1988 and 1998) . -1 -Leighton ••• e: .. •• NORTH BASE MAP: Thomas Bros. GeoFinder for Windows, San Diego County, 1995, Page 8ij6 eent~q I Cantarini Property Carlsbad, ·California 1"=2,000' SITE LOCATION MAP 0 2000 4000 LJ Scale in Feet _Project No. ·sao1 so-001 Date January 2000 Iii Figure No. 1 ••• • 4.2.2 4980160-001 • Stability for Temporary Backcut Slopes During Grading The temporary backGut .slopes that will be created during removal of unsuitable materials or construction of stabilization fills should have acceptable temporary factors of safety during grading. However, since there is still a small risk of slope instability, the possibility of temporary cut slopes failure~may be reduced by: (1) keeping the time between cutting and filling operations to a minimum, (2) 1imiting the maximum length of back cut slopes exposed at any one time: and (3) cutting the temporary slopes at not steeper than }., 1/2: 1 inclinations in locations of adverse geologic conditions and 1: 1 inclinations in other locations. In critical areas, we may recommend a geologist/contractor'srepresentative observe the backcut for signs of instability during excavation. It is of utmost importance to schedule the earthwork sequence such that the time · between removal and recompaction is reduced to a minimum. Full-time geologic inspection should be performed quring backcut excavation, not only to confirm the geologic conditions but also to provide early warning of incipient failure of the temporary excavations and to allow in-construction reaction to accommodate such failures and keep their occurrence to a minimum. Surficial Stability Surficial stability of the 2: 1 ( or flatt(?r) fill and cut slopes were evaluated (Appendix G). Our calculations indicate a factor of safety in excess of 1.5 for surficial stability under a 3- foot steady state seepage. However, due to the presence of potentially adverse groundwater conditions, we have recomme11ded stability fills to replace the existing slopes where seepage conditions are present ( such as the cut slope on the east side of Lots 160 through 167). 4.3 Control of Ground Water and Surface Waters Ground water was encountered in our exploratory Borings B-1 and B-3 and previous borings excavated by others along the proposed College Boulevard alignment. Surface water was also observed in the natural seepage/spring areas and adjacent drainage channels in the eastern portion of the site. The approximate depths and elevations of the ground water are depicted on the boring and trench logs (Appendix B). The water table encountered along the College Boulevard alignment is generally perched groundwater present along the base of the alluvial soils in the main drainage. Seasonal fluctuations o( surface water and ground water from those reported herein should be expected. Ground water is likely present in the eastern portion of the site due to natural seepage/spring activity in this area. The control of ground water in a hillside development is essential to reduce the potential for undesirable surface flow, hydrostatic pressure and the adverse effects of ground water on slope stability . -24-Leighton -~-· ••• 4980160-001 ·we recommend that measures be taken to properly finish grade the site such that drainage water is directed away from top-of-slopes and away from proposed structures. No ponding of water should be permitted. Drainage design is within the purview of the design civil engineer. Even with these provisions, our experience indicates that shallow groQnd water/perched ground water conditions can develop in areas where no such ground water conditions existed prior to site development, especially in areas where a substantial increase in surface water infiltration results from landscape irrigation. We recommeQd that an engineering geologist be present during grading operations to observe and record possible future seepage areas and provide field recommendations for mitigation of future potential seepage. 4.3 .1 Canyon Subdrains 4.3.2 4.3.3 In order to help reduce the potential for ground water accumulation in the proposed fill areas, we recommend subdrains be installed in the tributary drainages prior to fill placement. Specific subdrain recommendations can be made upon our review of the final site grading plans. Details for subdrain construction are provided in the attached General Earthwork and Grading Specifications (Appendix E). The actual need and/or location of subdrainage should be based on the evaluation of the configuration of the canyon bottoms by the geotechnical consultant after the ~emoval of compressible soils have been completed. However, the locations of proposed canyon subdrains are presented on the GeotechnicalMap (Plate 1). The installed subdrains should be surveyed for alignment and grade by a representative of the project civil engineer. Sufficient time should be allowed for the surveys prior to commencement of filling over the· subdrain. The subdrain outlets should be installed to discharge water into positive draimtge devices ( e.g. stortn drain boxes, natural canyol), bottoms, etc.). Stability Fill Subdrains Subdrains should be provided in the stability fills constructed on the site in order to minimize slope instability. The subdrains should be placed along the heel of the stability fill key across the entire length of the stability fill. Vertical drains on the backcut may be recommended in areas of seepage. The subdrains should be placed and constructed in accordance with the recommendationspresentedin AppendixE. Cut Slope Seepage Conditions Due to existing seepage zones in the eastern portion of the site (i.e. in the vicnity of Lots 160 through 167) or due to the anticipated presence of fractures in the granitic bedrock and/or contacts between relatively permeable formational soils overlying relatively impermeable fonnational soils being ·exposed in cut slopes on the site, groundwater seepage conditions are likely at these locations. Slopes exposing these conditions ( especially in the vicinity of the existing seepage areas or when the area at the -25-Leighton •• 4.4 ••• • 4980160-001 . ' top of the slope will be irrigated and/or where residences will be located at the toe-of- . slope) should be evaluated by the geotechnical consultant to determine if some type of subdrain system should be placed to intercept the groundwater seepage. Recommendations to mitigate the seepage conditions include installing a toe-of-slope subdrain system, installing a subdrain system at or slightly below the contact between the permeable and impermeable materials or by replacing the slope with a stability fill (such as the replacementfill/toe-of-slopesubdrain recommended along the.cut slope on the east side of Lots 160 through 167 as indicated on Plate 1 ). Preliminary Foundation Design Considerations It is not currently known what type of multi-family structures (if any) will be proposed at the site, as a resu·lt, we have only provided preliminary design recommendations for single-family residential structures. Additional recommendations can be provided as needed. The proposed foundations and slabs of the single-family residential structures should be designed in accordance with stru.ctural considerations and recommendations presented herein. Since soils ranging from low to high expansion potential are anticipated, as well as lots having a significant fill differential thickness, we provide the following foundation design considerations on Table 4. Table4 Foundation Type Summary Differential Fill Thickness Foundation Expansion Potential Across Each Lot Type less than 20 feet Conventionally Reinforced or Post- Very Low to ¥oderate Tensioned foundation (see (less than 91 per UBC Section 4.4.1 or Section 4.4.2) Standard 18-2) greater than 20 feet Post-Tensioned Foundation (see Section 4.4.2) less than 20 feet Post-Tensioned Foundation High to Very High (see Section 4.4.2) (greater than 90 per UBC Standard 18-2) .. greater than 20 feet Post-Tensioned Foundation (see Section4.4.2) -26-Leighton 4.4.1 •-· ··: ••• 4980160-001 Conventionally-Reinforced Foundation Design Foundation Design Conventionally-reinforcedfoundations should be designed and constructed in accordance with the recommendations contained in Table 5 based on the expansion potential of each lot (which needs to be determined upon the completion of grading). Conventionally reinforced foundations are only recommended for lots where the pad finish grade soils have an expansion index less than or equal to 90 (per UBC Standard 18-2) and a differential fill thickness of less than 20 feet. The vapor barrier recommended in Table 5 shou.ld be sealed at all penetrations and laps. Moisture_ vapor transmission may be· additionally reduced by use of concrete additives. Moisture barriers cart retard but not eliminate moisture vapor movement from the underlying soils up through the slabs. We recommend that the floor coverings installer test the moisture vapor flux rate prior to attempting applications of the flooring. "Breathable" floor coverings should be considered if the vapor flux rates are high. A slipsheet or equivalent should be utilized above the concrete slab if crack-sensitive floor coverings (such as ceramic tiles, etc.) are to be placed dii;ectly on the concrete slab. Our experience indicates that use of reinforcement in slabs and foundations will generally reduce the potential for drying and shrinkage cracking. However, some cracking should be expected as the concrete cures. Minot cracking is considered normal; however, it is often aggravated by a high water/cement ratio, high concrete temperature at the time of placement, small nominal aggregate size; and rapid moisture loss due to hot, dry and/or windy weather conditions during placement and curing. Cracking due to temperature and moisture fluctuations can also be expected. The use of low slump concrete (not exceeding 4 to 5 inches at the time of placement) can reduce the potential for shrinkage cracking. The slab subgrade soils underlying the conventional foundation systems should be presoaked as indicated in Section 4.4.3 prior to placement of the moisture barrier and slab ~oncrete . -27-, Leighton ' • • • . ·:: TABLES MINIMUMFOUNDA TION AND SLAB DESIGN RECOMMENDA TIONSFOR CONVENTIONALLY REINFORCED FOUNDATIONS " i~ffif iM\tciJf tr;\;_ •• ec--'j .· U.B.C. Expansion Index U.B.C. Expansion Index 0-20 21-50 Very Low Expansion Low Expansion .. I-Story Footings All footings 12" deep. Reinforcement for continuous footings: All footings 12" deep. Reinforcement for continuous footings: (See Note I) one No. 4 bar top and bqttom. . one No. 4 bar top and bottom. , 2,Story Footings All footings 18" deep. Reinforcement for continuous footings: All footings 18" deep. Reinforcement for continuous footings: (See Note I} one No. 4 bar top and bottom. one No. 4 bar top and bottom. Minimum Footing Width Continuous: 12" for I-story Continuous: 12" for I-story Continuous: 15" for2-story Continuous: 15" for 2-story Isolated column: 24" (18" deep minimum) Isolated column: 24" (I 8" deep minimum) Garage Door Grade Beam A grade beam 12" wide x 12" \feep A grade beam 12" wide x 12" deep (See Note 2) (18" deep for 2-story) should be provided across the garage · ( I 811 deep for 2-story) should be provided across the garage entrance. entrance. Living Area Floor Slabs Minimum 4" thick slab. No. 3 rebars at 18 inches or No. 4 Minimum 4"·thick slab. No. 3 rebars at 18 inches or No. 4 (See Notes 3, 4 and 6) rebars at 24 inches on center each way at midheight. 2" clean rebars at 24· inches on center each way at midheight. 2" clean. sand over 6 mil moisture barrier. sand over 6 mil moisture· barrier over 2" clean sand. Garage Floor Slabs Minimum 4" thick on 2" sand base over moisture barrier o·n Minimum 4" thick on 2" sand base•over moisture barrier on (See Notes 4, 5 and 6) pad .. No. 3 rebars at I 8 inches or No. 4 rebars at 24 inches ·on pad, No. 3 rebars at 18 inches•orNo. 4 rebars at 24 inches on center each way at midheight. Slab should be quarter-sawn. center each way at midheight. Slab should be quarter-sawn. Presoaking of Living Area Near optimum to a depth of6'1• 1.2 times the optimum moisture content to a depth of 12". and Garage 'Slabs Allowable Bearing Capacity 2,000 pounds per square foot 2,000 pounils per square foot (one-third increase for short term ( one-third increase for short term loading) ( one-third increase for short term loading) loading) Notes: (I) (2)r Depth of interior or exterior footing to be measured from lowest adjacent finish grade or drainage swale flow line elevation. The base of the grade beam should be at the same elevation as that of the adjoining footings. - a slabs should be tied to the footings as directed by the structural engineer. CD (3)c.o· (4)~ (5)0 (6)::J ueen sheeting or equivalents are acceptable. All laps and penetrations should be sealed. Ga g bs should be isolated from stem wall footings with a minimum 3/8" felt expansion Joint. Sand base should have a Sand Equivalent of 30 or greater ( e.g. washed concrete sand). U.B.C. Expansion Index 51-90 Medium Expansion All footings 18" deep. Reinforcement for continuous footings: one No. 4 bar top and bottom. All footings 18" deep. Reinforcement for continuous footings: one No. 4 bar top and bottom. Continuous: 12" for I-story Coiltin1,1ous: 15" for 2-story Isolated column: 24" (18" deep minimum) A grade·beam 12" wide x 18" deep should be provided across the garage entrance. Minimum 4" thick slab. No. 3 bars@ 18" each way or No. 4 bars @24" each way. 2" clean·sand over 6 mil Visqueen over 2" clean sand. Minimum 4" thick on 2" sand base over moisture barrier on pad. No. 3 bars @ 18" each way or No. 4 bars@ 24" each way. Slab should be·quarter-sawn. 1.3 times optimum moisttire,content to a depth.of 18". 2,000 pounds per square foot .(one-third incre!!Se for short term loading) • ••• 4980160-001 4.4.2 Post-Tensioned'FoundationDesign We recommend post-tensioned slabs be designed ih accordance with the following design parameters presented in Table 6 and criteria of the current edition 9f the Uniform Building Code. The post-tensioned foundations on the lots should be designed in accordance with lot-specific expansion potential and anticipated long-term differential settlement (if applicable) which will be provided at the completion of grading. In addition, lots with greater than approximately 20 feet of differential fill thickness should be designed for future, long-term hydroconsolidationsettlementwhen water enters the fill. We anticipate that a post-tensioned slab system may be a more cost-effective method to tolerate the above noted differential settlement; however, we can review other properly designed foundation systems, if requested . . . Table6 Post-Tensioned Foundation Design Recommendations for Expansive Soils·. Expansion Index (UBC Standard 18-2) Low t9 Medium High Very High Design Criteria (0-90) (91 -130) (131 -200) Edge Moisture Center Lift: · 5.5 feet 5.5 feet 5.5 feet Variation, em Edge Lift: 2.5 feet 2.5 feet 2.5 feet Differential Center Lift: 2.5 inches 4.1 inches 4.7 inches . Swell,Ym Edge Lift: 0.4 inches 0.8 inches 1.2 inches Differential Settlement: 1/2 inch 1/2 inch 1/2 inch . Allowable Bearing Capacity: 2,000psf 2,000psf 2,000 psf The post-tensionedfoundationsand slabs should be designed in accordance with structural considerations. Continuous footings(ribs or thickened edges) with a minimum width of 12 inches and a minimum depth of 12 inches below adjacent grade may be designed for a maximum allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot if founded into competent formational soils or properly compacted fill soils. The allowable bearing capacity may be increased by one-third for short term loading such as wind or seismic forces. Where the foundation is within 3 feet (horizontally)of adjacent drainage swales, the adjacent footing'(thickened edge or rib) should be embedded a minimum depth of 12 inches below the swale flow line . -29-Leighton • ••• 4.4.3 • 4980160-00 I Slabs should be underlain by a minimum of2 inches of clean sand (sand equivalent greater . than 30) which is in turn underlain by a vapor barrier and an additional 2 irches of clean sand. The vapor barrier should be ·sealed at all penetrations and laps. Moisture vapor transmission may be additionally reduced by use of concrete additives. Moisture barriers can retard, but not eliminate moisture vapor movement from the underlying soils up through the slabs. We recommend that the floor coverin~ installer test the moisture vapor flux rate prior to attempting applications of the flooring. ":Breathable" floor coverings should be considered if the vapor flux rates are high. A slipsheet or equivalent should be utilized above the concrete slab if crack-sensitive floor coverings (such as ceramic tiles, etc.) are to be placed directly on the concrete slab. Our experience indicates that use of reinforcement in slabs and foundations will generally reduce the potential for drying and shrinkage cracking. However, some cracking should be expected as the concrete cures. Minor cracking is con$idered normal; however, it is often aggravated by a high water/cement ratio, high concrete temperature at the time of placement, small nominal aggregate size, and rapid moisture loss due to hot, dry and/or windy weather conditions during placement and curing. Cracking due to temperature and moisture fluctuations can also be expected. The use of low slump concrete (not exceeding 4 to 5 inches at the time of placement) can reduce the potential for shrinkage cracking and the action or tensioning the tendons can close small shrinkage cracks. In addition to the careful control of watet/cementratios and slump of concrete, application of 50 percent of the design post-tensioning load within three to four days of slab pour is found to be an effective method of reducing the cracking potential. The slab subgrade soils underlying the post-tensioned foundation systems should be presoaked·as indicated in Section 4.4.3 prior to placement of the moisture barrier and slab concrete. Moisture Conditioning The slab subgrade soils underlying· both conventionally-reinforced or post-tensioned foundation systems should be presoaked in accordance with the recommendations presented in Table 7 prior to placement of the moisture barrier and slab concrete. The subgrade soil moisture content should be checked by a representative of Leighton and Associates prior to slab construction . -.30 ~ Leighton ••• • ,:, .. 4980160-001 Table 7 Minimum PresaturationRecommendationsfor Foundatipn Subgrade Soils Expansion Index (per UBC Standard 18-2) Presaturati on Very4ow Low Medium High Very High Criteria (0-20) (21-50) (51-90) (91-130) (greater than 131 ) Minimum . Presoaking 6 12 18 24 24 Depth(in , inches) Minimum near 1.2 times 1.3 times 1.4 times 1.5 times optimum Recommended optimum optimum optimum optimum moisture Moisture Content 4.4.4 moisture moisture moisture moisture · Presoaking or moisture conditioning may be achieved in a number of ways, but based on our professional experience, we have found that minimizing the moisture loss of pads that have been completed (by periodic wetting to keep the upper portion of the pad from drying out) and/or berming the lot and flooding if for a short period of time (days to a few weeks) are some of the more efficient ways to meet the presoaking requirements. If flooding is performed, a couple of days to let the upper portion of the pad dry out and form a crust so equipment can be utilized should be anticipated. Lateral Earth Pressures The recommended lateral pressures for the on-site expansive soil or granular soil (per Expansion Index, UBC Standard 18-2) and level or sloping backfill are presented on Table 8 . -31 -Leighton • 4.4.5 •• 4980160-001 Table 8 Lateral Earth Pressures Equivalent Fluid Weight (pct) Conditions Expansion Index Less Expansion Index Between than50 50 and 90 Level 2:1 Slope Level 2: 1 Slope Active 35 55 60 70 At-Rest 55 65 70 80 Passive 350 150 350 150 To design an unrestrained wall, such as cantilever wall, the active earth pressure may be used. For a restrained retaining wall, such as a basement wall, the at-rest pressure should be used. Further, for sliding resistance, the friction coefficient of 0.35 may be used at the concrete and soil interface. In combining the total lateral resi!ltance, the passive pressure or the frictional resistance should be reduced by 5 0 percent. Wall footings may be designed in accordance with structural considerations. The passive resistance value may be increased by one-third when considering loads of short duration including wind or seismic loads. The horizontal distance between foundation elements providing passive resistance should be a minimum of three times the depth of the elements to allow full developinentofthis passive pressure. The total depth of retained earth for design of cantilever walls should be the vertical distance below the ground surface measured at the wall face for stem design or measured at the heel of the footing for overturning and sliding. All retaining structures should be provided with a drainage blanket or drains (as indicated in Appendix E) and appropriately waterproofed. Surcharge loading effects from adjacent structures should be evaluated by the geotechnical and structural engineers. Foundation Setbacks We recommend a minimum horizontal setback distance from the face of slopes for all structural foundations, footings, and other settlement-sensitive structures as indicated on Table 9. This distance is measured from the outside bottom edge of the footing, horizontally to the slope face and is based on the slope height and type of soil. However, the foundation setback distance may be revised by the geotechnical consultant on a case- by-case basis if the geotechnicakonditionsare differentthan anticipated . -32-Leighton • 4.5 • • 4980160-001 Table9 Minimum Foundation Setback from Slope Faces Slope Height Minimum Recommended Foundation Setback less than 5 feet 5 feet 5 to 15 feet 7 feet greater than 15 feet H/2, where H is slope height; not to exceed 10 feet Please note that the soils Within the structural setback area possess poor lateral stability, and improvements(~uch as retaining walls, sidewalks, fences, pavements, etc.) constructed within this setback area may be sul;>ject to lateral movement and/or differential settlement. Potential distress to such improvements may be mitigated by providing a deepened footing or a pier and grade beam foundation system to support the improvement. The deepened footing should meet the setback as described above. Retaining Wall Design Considerations Embedded structural walls should be designed for lateral earth pressures exerted on them. The magnitude of these pressures d·epends on the amount of deformation that the wall can yield under load. If the wall can yield enough to mobiliz·e the full shear strength of the soil, it can be designed for "active" pressure. If the wall cannot yield under the applied load, the shear strength of the soil cannot be mobilized and the earth pressure will be higher. Such walls should be designed for "at -rest" conditions. If a structure moves toward the soils, the resulting resistance developed by the soil is the "passive" resistance. · For design purposes, the recommended equivalent fluid pressure for each case for walls founded above the static ground water and backfilled with soils of very low to medium expansion potential is provided in Section 4.4.4 and Table 8. Use of onsite expansive soils (soils having an expansion potential greater than 90) as wall backfill is not recommended. The equivalent fluid pressure 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. All retaining wall structures $hould be provided with appropriate drainage. The outlet pipe &hould be sloped to drain to a suitable outlet. Typical drainage design is illustrated in Appendix E . -33 -Leighton 4.6 4.7 ••• •••• 4980160-001 All excavations should be made in _accordance with the most current OSHA requirements. The granular .and native backfill soils should be compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction (based on ASTM Test Method D1557). The granular fill should extend horizontally to a minimum distance equal to one-half the wall height behind the walls. The walls should be constructed and backfilled as soon as possible after backcut excavation. Prolonged exposure of backcut slopes may result in ~ome localized slope instability. Foundations for retaining walls in competent formational soils or properly compacted fill should be embi;:dded at least 18 inches below lowest adjacent grade. At this depth, an allowable bearing capacity of2,000 psf may be assumed. Pavement Design Final pavement designs will be calculated utilizing R-value tests taken on the street subgrade soils upon completion of the street improvementoperations. 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. If fill is required to reach subgrade design grade, fill placement should be· performed in accordance with the recommendations presented in Section 4.1. The aggregate base material should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent relative compaction. Surface Drainage and Lot Maintenance Positive drainage of surface water away from structures is very important. No water should be allowed to pond adjacent to buildings or the top· of slopes. Positive drainage may be accomplished by providing drainage away from buildings at a gradient of at least 2 percent for a distance of at least 5 feet, and further maintained by a swale of drainage path at a gradient of at least 1 percent. Where lim.ited by 5-foot side yards, drainage should be directed away from foundations for a minimum of3 feet and into a collective swale or pipe system. Where necessary, drainage paths may be shortened by use of area drains and collector pipes. Eave gutters also help reduce water infiltration into the sub grade soils if the downspout~ are properly connected to appropriate outlets. Planters with open bottoms adjacent to buildings should be avoided, if possible. Planters should not be designed adjacent to buildings unless provisions for drainage, such as catch basins and pipe drains, are made. Homeowners should be reminded of the responsibilities of hillside residences, i.e., the maintenance of proper lot drainage; the undertaking of property improvements in accordance with sound engineering practice; and the proper maintenance of vegetation, including prudent lot and slope 'irrigation. -34-Leighton 4.8 4.9 •·_.· . . .... 4980160-001 Graded Slopes It is recommended that all graded slopes within the development be planted with drought-tolerant ground cover vegetation as soon as practical to protect against erosion by reducing runoff velocity. Deep-rooted vegetation should also be established to protect against surficial slumping. Oversteepening of existing slopes should be avoided during fine grading and construction unless supported by appropriately designed retaining structures. We recommend terrace drains on the slopes be designed by the civil engineer and be constructed in accordance with current City of Carlsbad specifications. Design of surface drainage provisions is within the purviewof the project civil engineer. Settlement Monitoring We recommend that fills placed above saturated alluvium and fill areas greater than 40 feet in depth be monitored (by the placement of settlement monuments upon completion of rough-grading and periodic surveying) until primary settlement is determined to be.essentially complete. Preliminary settlement monument locations should be detehilined following a review of the final site grading plans by the project geotechnical consultant. Construction of Settlement-sensitive structures in areas of deep fill or fill over saturated soils should be postponed until anticipated settlement is within tolerable limits based on the analysis ofthe geotechnicalconsultant. -35 -Leighton • 4980160-001 5.0 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS The recommendations provided in this report are based on subsurface conditions disclosed by widely spaced borings and trenches by Leighton and Associates and others and by .limited geotechnical analysis. The interpo~ated subsurface conditions should be checked in the field during construction by a representative of Leighton and Associates. We recommend that all cut areas and cut slopes be geologically mapped for the presence of potentially adverse geologic conditions and potential ground water seepage zones by an engineering geologist from Leighton and Associates during grading. All grading operations should be observed by a representative of this finn so that construction is perfonned in accordance with the recommendationsofthis report . -36-Leighton • •• •• 1.2 4980160-00 I • Preparation of this report presenting our preliminary findings, conclusions and recommendationswith respect to th!:! proposed site development. The approximate limits of the geologic units encountered and boring and trench locations of our investigation and the previous site investigations are presented on the Geotechnical Map (Plate l ). The 100-scale planning exhibit map was available and utilized in preparation of this report. Site Description The subject property, with a total of approximately 138 acres, is located north to northeast of the intersection between El Camino Real and College Boulevard in Carlsbad, California. The site consists of an approximately rectangular piece of property that is bordered by ranch homes and horse stables to the south and by agriculturally developed land and otherwise essentially undeveloped land on the east, west and north sides. Man-made features on the site include: I) a single fami_ly residence in the east central portion of the site.; 2) several building associated with the farming activities across the site; 3) a relatively large pond and earthen dam in the southeastern portion of the site; 4) numerous dirt roads which cross the property (mainly in the southern portion of the site); 5) undocumented fills associated with the dirt roads, farming activities, and the earthen dam; and 6) fences (presumably for horses and/or-livestock} in the eastern portion of the property. Topographically, the site generally consists of steeply sloping hillside and valley terrain in the northeast and northwest corners of the site to gently sloping low, broad hills and shallow valleys in th~ -central and southern portions of the site. Elevations range from a high of approximately 420 ± feet mean sea level (msl) in the northeast corner of the site to a low of 70 ± feet (msl) along the extreme southwestern site boundary. Natural drainage is presently accomplished through a network of small drainages and canyon areas, while the site ultimately drains in a southwesterly direction to an east-west trending canyon (south of the site). Vegetation on the site ranges from planted vegetable.crops in the southern and central portions of the site, native grasses and weeds on the steeper hillsides in the central portion of the site, and moderateto thick chaparral and trees (mainlyon the hillsides and along the major drainages in the eastern portion of the site). A number of natural seepage ( or springs) were encountered in the eastern portion of the site. The seepage areas were generally located in the upper portion of the on.site drainages. We understand that the central pond is fed by one or more of these seepage/springs. 1 .3 Proposed Development Final design plans and grading plans were not available at the time of our report. However, a 100- scale preliminary grading exhibit was available. Based on the plans, we understand the site will be developed for both single-family~d multi-family residential development uses. As indicated on the 100-scale planning exhibit map, approximately 186 single-family residential lots are planned across the site, while one large multi-family lot is planned in the northwest portion of the site. In addition, a number of open space lots (generally in the drainages across the site and in the eastern portion of the site) are planned. Associated improvements such as streets, slopes, underground utilities, etc. are also anticipated. Cut and fill slopes up to an approximate height of 45 feet are shown on the -3 -Leighton •• 1.4 •• 4980160-001 preliminary site development plan. Slope inclinations of 2: 1 (horizontal to vertical) or flatter are assumed. Recommendations concerning site grading and development are presented in Section 4.0 and in Appendix E. Surface Investigation and Laboratory Testing Our subsurface investigation consisted of the excavation, logging and sampling of seven small- . diameter l;>orings and 29 exploratory trenches to a maximum depth of approximately 29 and 20 feet, respectively. Logs of the borings and trenches are presented in Appendix B. Approximate locations of the borings and trenches are shown on the Geotechnical Map tPlate 1 ). Subsequent to the subsurface investigation, the borings and trenches were backfilled. The results of previous geotechnical studies have also been incorporated into this report where appropriate. The applicable seismic lines, boring and trench logs from the previous work performed by Southern California Soil -and Testing (SCS&T, 1988 and 1998) are included in Appendix B. The approximate location of the seismic lines, borings and trenches are also presented on the Geo technical Map (Plate 1 ). Limited laboratory testing was performed on representative soil samples obtain during our subsurface investigation. The laboratory tests included moisture/density determinations, sulfate content, pH and resistivity, consolidation and expansion index tests. A discussion of the tests performed and a summary of the results are presented in Appendix C. The density/moisture determinations of the undisturbed sampl~s obtained from the. borings are shown on the boring logs (Appendix B) . -4-Leighton •· .. : .. : .· .. ••••••• '··. --.· 4980160-001 2.0 GEOTECHNICALCONDITIONS 2.1 Regional Geology 2.2 The subject site is located within the coastal subprovince of .the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province, near the western edge of the southern California batholith. The topography at the edge of the batholith changes from the rugged landforms developed on the batholith to the more subdued landforms which typify the softer sedimentary formations of the coastal plain such as are present on the site. Specifically; the site is underlain by the sedimentary units "including the Quaternary-aged Terrace Deposits, the Tertiary-aged Santiago Formation, and Cretaceous-aged Point Loma Formation, Lusardi Formation and Cretaceous granitics. Subsequent to the deposition of these units, erosion and regional tectonic uplift created the· valleys and ridges of the area. Human influences, recent weathering and erosional proc.esses have produced the Quaternary and recent surficial units including undocumented fill soils, alluvium, 9olluvium, and topsoil which mantle the site. Site-Specific Geology Formational materials (including the Quaternary-aged Terrace Deposits, the Tertiary-aged Santiago Fonrtation, Cretaceous-aged Point Loma. and Lusardi Formations, and Cretaceous granitics) and surficial units (consisting of colluvium, alluv.ium,, topsoil, and undocumented fill soils) were encountered during our investigation of the site. The areal distribution of these geologic units are shown on the Geotechnical Map (Plate 1 ), Each of the geologic units present on the site are described below (youngest to oldest). 2.2.1 Undocumented Fill Soils (Map Symbol.-Afu) Undocumented fill soils were observed in a number of places on the site. As observed, the undocumented fill soils were generally associated with. the grading of the onsite dirt roads, earth dam, and prior . farming/agricultural activities on the site. These undocumented fill soils are anticipated to be relatively limited in extent and thickness, however; localized undocumented fill thicknesses may exceed 15+ feet. All existing undocumented fills .located on the site are cons.idered potentially compressible and unsuitable in their present state for structural support. These soils should be removed within the limits of the proposed grading and tnay be recompacted and used as structural fills provided detrimental materials are removed (see Section 4.1); -5-Leighton • • • 4980160-00 I 2.2.2 Topsoil (Unmapped) 2.2.3 2.2.4 The topsoil encountered during our field investigation mantles the majority of the site. The topsoil as observed, consists predominantly of light brown to brown, damp to moist, stiff, sandy to silty clay and some clayey to silty sands. These soils were generally massive, porous and contained scattered roots and organics. The · potentially compressible topsoil is estimated to be approximately l to 4 feet in thickness; however, localized areas of thicker accumulations of topsoil may be encountered during grading. The topsoil should be removed during grading and may be recompacted and used as structural fill provided detrimental materials are removed (see Section 4.1). Alluvium and Colluvium Undifferentiated(Map Symbol-Oal/Ocol) Alluvium and colluvium is present in the bottom of the main canyons and drainages on the site. The alluvial soils (Qal) are usually thickest in the center of drainages and often interfinger with colluvial soils (Qcol) on the drainage margins forming wedges of alluvial and colluvial soils that thin away from the drainages. These soils typically consist of brown, damp to wet, loose to medium dense/stiff, silty sands, sandy clays and silty clays. The alluvium typically is moderately porous and often contains localized zones of moderate to abundant roots and other organic matter. The alluvium and colluvium is considered potentially compressible and is recommended to be removed to competent fonnational material in areas of proposed development. Removal depths on the order of 5 to 15+ feet should be expected in the lower drainage elevations on the site. Removals of the alluvium and colluvfom within the proposed limits of future College Boulevard are estimated to be on the order of 10 to 25+ feet in thickness. The alluvium and colluvium may be recompacted and used as structural fill provided detrimental materials are removed (see Section 4.1). Terrace Deposits (Map Symbol-Qt) The Pleistocene-aged Terrace Deposits exist on the lower hilltops (located in the western portion of the site) unconfonnably overlying the Santiago Formation. These deposits are present in a limited extent above ah approximate elevation of 130 feet (msl) on some of the hilltops in the western portion of the site. The soil comprising the Terrace Deposits is generally composed of course sand to a sandy cobble conglomerate. According to the preliminary site development plans, the majority of the Terrace Deposits will be removed as cut material during rough grading. This material typically has a low potential for expansion and may be recompacted for use as structural fill. -6-Leighton • • • 2.2.5 4980160-001 Santiago Fonnation (Map Symbol-Tsa) In the southwest portion of the site, the Tertiary-aged Santiago Fonnation is exposed stratigraphically above th_e Lusardi and Point Loma Fonnatiorts (but lower in elevation). The Santiago Formation is composed of a yellow-brown and off-white, dense to very dense, silty, fine sandstone. These soils typically have a low to medium expansion potenti~I. Claystone and siltstones (having a medium to high expansion potential) may pe present within this unit but-do not appear to be extensive across the site, based on the data acquired .in our investigation. These soils are suitable for use as structural fill, however, it is recommended that expansive soils not be placed within 5 vertical feet of finish grade or within 10 feet horizontally of exposed fill slope faces. 2.2.6 Point Loma Formation (Map Symbol-Kp) 2.2·.7 Interbedded siltstone and sandstone material encountered in Trenches T-10, T-28 and T-29 appears to be an erosional remnant of the Cretaceous Point Loma Formation (which crops out south of the site along El Camino Real). As encountered, the unit consists of gray and yellow brown, dense to very dense, interbedded sandy siltstone/claystone and silty sandstone. The claystoneand siltstone encountered in this unit typically have a moderate to high expansion potential while the sandstone generally has a low expansion potential. These soils are suitable for use as structural fill, however, it is preferred that expansive soils not be placed within 5 vertical feet of finish grad~ or within 10 feet horizontally of exposed fill slope faces . Lusardi Formation (Map Symbol-Kl) Th~ Cretaceous-aged Lusardi Formation was observed in the north central portion of the site both in outcrops and in our trenches. A~ encountered, the Lusardi Fonnation is composed of light yellow-brown and gray, dense, gravel to cobble conglomerate with a medium tq coarse sandstone matrix. This unit mantles the underlying granitic bedrock and may contain scattered largeto very large (up to 10 to 20 feet in diameter) granitic boulders. Typically these large to very !ai:ge granitic boulders are very weathered (i.e. they generally consist of decomposed granitic). Deep cuts in this unit may encounter the underlying granitic bedrock. The soils comprising the Lusardi Fonnation generally have a low potential for expansion ~md are suitable for use as ~tructural fill . -7-Leighton •• 2.3 2.4 ··:., 4980160-001 2.2.8 Cretaceous Granitic Rock (Map Symbol ., Kgr) Granitic rock outcrops were obse_rved in the northeast and northwest corners of the site. In our trench excavations in these areas, weathered granitic material was encountered below the topsoil and generally consisted of light gray to light red brown, damp, ·dense, fine to coarse sand. At depth (i.e. depths generally 10 or more feet), relatively unweathered granitic bedrock is anticipated as well as exposed at the surface as scattered outcrops. Our rippability study indicates the·depth to marginally rippable and/or unrippable rock ranges · from approximately20 to 40 feet in the areas-of proposed cuts. Deep cuts (generally greater than approximately 10 to 15 feet) in these areas will 'likely require heavy ripping, however, minor blasting may be required in localized areas (but significant blasting is not anticipated). These soils typically have-a low potential for expansion and are suitable for use as .structural fill. Geologic Structure Review of the geologic literature applicable to the site (Appendix A), our professional experience on sites with similar soils, and geologic mapping of the site, indicate the on-site geologic units are generally flat-lying and massively bedded with occasional randomly oriented jointing. Based on the limited subsurface data and our experience with the onsite units, bedding within the formational soils is anticipated to be slightly.dipping ( 10 degrees or less) tQward the west. No faults have been mapped on the site nor were any encountered during our field study. However, the seepage zones on the east side of the site as well as seeps to the north of the site appear to be aligned in a linear configuration which rnay be the result of a fracture or fault zone ( creating a ground water barrier causing the water to. flow at the surface). Minor to moderate jointing of the near surface soils may also be present on the hillsides of the site. Jointing, if encountered, is anticipated to b~ randomly oriented and moderateto steeply dipping. Faulting bur discussion of faults on the 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 tim~ (about th~ last 11,000 years). The State Geologist has defined a potentially active fault as any fault considered to have been active during Quaternary time (fast 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 Alqµist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act of 1972 and· as most recently revised in 1997. The intent of this act is to assure that unwise urban development does not occur across the traces of active faults. Based on our review of the Fault-_Rupture Hazard Zones, the site is not located within any Fault-Rupture Hazard Zone as created by the Alquist-PrioloAct (Hart, 1997). -8 -Leighton ••• 4980160-001 San Diego, like the rest of southern California, is seismically active as a result of being located near the active margin between the North American and Pacific tectonic plates. The principal source of seismic activity is movement along the northwest-trending regional fault zones such as the San Andreas, San Jacinto and Elsinore Faults Zones, as well as along less active faults such as the Rose Canyon Fault Zone. · Our review of geologic literature pertaining to the site and general v.icinity indicates that there are no known major or active faults on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (Hannan, 1975, Weber, 1982, and Jennings, 1994). Evidence for faulting was not encountered during our field investigation. The nearest known active fault is the Rose Canyon Fault Zone (RCFZ) located approximately 7 miles west of the site. Table I provides ground motion characteristics anticipated at the site from a deterministic viewpoint. These parameters are based on the anticipated peak horizontal ground accelerations at the site from the m~imum probable earthquake expected to occur on the nearby regional faults. From a probabi:Iistic viewpoint, the design earthquake (i.e. an earthquake event or ground motion having a I 0% probability of being exceeded in 50 years per UBC Section 1631.2), can cause a horizontal ground acceleration of O .25 g. Table 1 ~eismic Parameters for Active and' PotentiallyActive Faults MAXIMUM PROBABLE EARTHQUAKE (Functional Basis Earthquake) Distance from Horizontal Ground Design Earthquake Faultto Site Moment Acceleration Acceleration (Miles) Magnitude (Gravity) (UBC, Section 1631.2), (gravity) Potential Causative Fault Rose Canyon 7 5.7 0.13 . Newport Inglewood 9 5.8 0.11 (offshore) 0.25 . Elsinore -Julian 22 6.4 0.08 Elsinore-Temecula 22 6.3 0.08 Coronado Bank (offshore) 23 6,3 0.07 Beeauseofthe lack of known active faults on the site, the potential for surface rupture at the site is considered low . -9-Leighton .: 2.5 •• ••• 2.4.1 4980160-001 Rose Canyon Fault Zorte The most significant active fault in the San Diego area is the RCFZ. This fault zone is composed of a series of right-lateral strike-slip faults that extend north-northeast through the San Diego Metropolitan Region and offshore along the northern portion of San Diego County. The RCFZ is thought to be part of a more extensive fault zone that includes the South Coast Offshore Zone of L>eformation and the Newport-Inglewood Fault Zone to the north and several extensions southward into Mexico (Treiman, 1993 ). The RCFZ has many features indicative of active faulting. Trenching studies of the fault in the Mount Soledad area (15 to 20 miles southwest of the site) indicate the most recent surface rupture on the fault probably occurred between 200+ and 500 years ago and that at least 3 events have occurred in the last 8,000 years (Lindvall and Rockwell, 1995). The recurrence interval· _for large earthquakes on the RCFZ has been estimated to be approximately 1,800 years (Anderson, et.al.;. 1989) to a maximum recurrence interval of 4,000 years (Lindvall and Rockwell, 1995). Seismic Considerations the principal seismic considerations for most structures in southern California are surface rupturing of fault traces anq damage caused by ground shaking or seismically induced ground settlement. The possibility of damage due to ground rupture is considered low since active faults are not known to cross the site. Lurching due to shaking from distant seismic events is not considered a significant hazard, although it is a possibilitythroughoutthe southern California region . The seismic hazard most likely to impact the site is ground shaking resulting from an earthquake on one of the major regional faults. The maximum probable event on the Rose Canyon fault is expected to produce a horizontal ground acceleration at the site of 0.13g. The ground acceleration due to the design earthquake (per UBC, Section 1631.2) is 0.25g. Seismic parameters for the site are provided in Table 1 and Appendix F. The effects of seismic shaking can be reduced by adhering to the most recent edition of the Uniform Building Code and design parameters of the Structural Engineers Association of California. Liquefaction of cohesionless soils can be caused by strong vibratory motion due to earthquakes. Research and historical data indicate that loose granuiar 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. Because of the dense nature of the underlying formation and lack of a near-surface, static ground water table in the areas of proposed development, it is our opinion that the potential for liquefaction or seismically induced dynamic settlement at the site due to the design earthquake is low. Hazard from seiches and tsunamis is not present as the site is located away from the immediate coastal area and there are no large standing bodies of water in-'or nearthe site . -10-Leighton 2.6 . 2.7 ._.:,_ • 4980160-001 Ground Water Ground water was encountered during our investigation along the proposed College Boulevard alignment in exploratory borings B-1 and B-3 at approximate depths of 27 .5 and 23 feet, respectively. Previous investigations south of the site have indicated shallower depths to ground water along the proposed alignment (SCS&T, 1988). The water table encountered is thought to be perched.groundwater in the lower portion of the onsite alluvial,soils. Moderate to heavy surface water seepage was noted in the eastern portion of the site and is thought to be associated with spring activity along two tributary drainages on the site. Minor seepage was also noted in exploratory Trench T-8. We understand that the current site development design is to leave the majority of this p_ortion of the site (i.e. the northeast portion) as open space. However, where development is planned in this area or if ground water seepage is encountered in other places on the site (in areas of proposed development), mitigation of the ground water is recommended by methods such as providing subdrains to reduce the impact of ground water seepage or saturated conditions ( as indicated in Section 4.3 ). We also .understand that the seepage in the tributary canyons on the east side of the site flow into the existing pond (which ·contains water year ar~:mnd), bue to the presence of this constant surface and subsurface groµndwater condition in the canyons. upstream of the pond, improvements across this . area will require special grading procedures to mitigate the surface and groundwater conditions. Engineering Characteristics of On-site Soils Based on the results of our geotechnical investigation, previous geotechnical investigations.of the site by others, laboratory testing of representative on-site soils, and our professional experience on adjacent sites with similar soils, the engineering characteristics of the on-site ~oils are discussed below. 2.7.l Expansion Potent_ial The majority of the onsite soils are expected to have a low to moderate expansion potential. However, topsoil that occurs on the siltstone and/or claystone portions of the formational material, the siltstone portions of the Lusardi and Point Loma Formations, possible siitstone and claystone of the, Santiago Formation, and some of the onsite · alluvial soils may be highly exp~nsive. Geotechnical observation and/or laboratory testing upon completion of the graded pads is recommended to determine the actual expansion potential of finish grade soils on the graded lots . -11-Leighton 2.7.2 •• '2.7.3 4980160-001 Soluble Sulfate Content Based on our laboratory testing and our professional experience on adjacent sites, the on- site soils, in general, should posses a negligibie to low. soluble sulfate content. However, some of the soils may .possess a high sulfate content which may be detrimental to normal concrete. Laboratory testing should be performed on the soils placed at or near finish grade after completion of site grading. · Excavation Characteristics As part of our preliminary investigation for the site, a seismic refraction field study was conducted on November 21, 1999. A total of 1,190 linear feet of data was collected along seven seismi<;: survey lines.-The purpose of these surveys was to evaluate the approximate seismic velocities of the Granitic Rock and Lusardi Formation material· (within proposed cut areas) in order to provide a rough estimate of the rippability characteristics of the materials. The seismic lines· were placed in areas having the deepest proposed cuts in order to evaluate the rippability of the subsurface materials. Eaqh survey line was approximately 170 feet in length (with the exception of Line 3 which was 120 feet long) and provided depths of investigation of at least 50 feet (35 feet with respect to Line 3) below the existing ground· surface. The approximate locations of the seismic survey.lines are presented on the Geotechnical Map (Plate 1). The seismic refraction method uses first-arrival times of refracted seismic waves to determine the thickness and seismic velocities of subsurface materials. The seismic waves were initiated at-the ends of e,;1ch · survey line by striking an aluminum plate with a 16-pourid hammer. Seismic waves generated· at the ground surface were reflected and refracted from boundaries separating materials of. contrasting velocities ( or densities) and were detected by a series of twenty-four surface geophones placed along the survey line. The waves detected by the geophones were recorded with a Bison 9024, 24 channel seismograph. Time-distam~e plots and associated geophysical interpretations of the seismic data from the seven survey lines were then prepared and analyzed. The data is provided in Appendix D. It should be noted that the measured seismic velocities presented on t~e plots · represent average velocities of the subsurface materials, and significant local variations due to buried boulders ( or "floaters"), localized hard or cemented zones concretions, or other anomalies may be present. In order to categorize the subsurface materials in the proposed cut areas in terms of excavation characteristics, the following classifications are utilized. This five-fold classification _scheme is based on our experience with similar rocks in the San Diego County area, arid assumes the use of a single shank D9L Dozer ( or equivalent equipment). The rippability characteristics of the site materials are classified as follows: -12 -Leighton · • • • Calculated Seismic Velocity Up to 2000 feet per second 2000 to 4000 feet per second 4000 to 5500'feet per second 5500 to 7000 feet per second Greater than 7000 feet per second 4980160-001 General Excavation Characteristic Easy ripping Moderately diffic'ult ripping Difficult ripping, possible localized blasting Very difficult ripping, probable local to general blasting Blasting required "Difficult ripping" refers to rocks, in which it becomes difficult to achieve tooth penetration, sharply reducing ripping production. Local blasting may be necessary in order to maintain a desired ripping production rate. "Very difficult ripping" refers to rocks in which the-use of heavy construction equipment is likely to cease being a cost- effective method of excavation (necessitating the use of explosives to maintain a desired excavation rate). It should emphasized that the cutoff velocities of this classification scheme are approximate and rock characteristics (such as fracture or joint spacing and orientation) play a significant role in determining rock rippability. These characteristics may also vary with location and depth in the tock mass . The average seismic velocities of the near-surface bedrock materials along the seven seismic survey lines is approximately 2600 feet per second. Below these near-surface materials (which are generally less than 7 to 10 feet in depth below the existing ground surface), the average seismic velocities of the bedrock varies from 3650 to 6600+ feet per second. The results of the seismic refraction study are tabulated in Table 2. Presented on Table 2 is the survey line location, depth of the proposed cut, the average velocity of the subsurface materials · within the range of the cut, · and the general excavation characteristic of the material. -13 -Leighton r CD co· :::::, ........ 0 :::l • Seismic Line Approximate Number Location I Lots 176-177 2 Cut slope south of Lots 176 and 177 3 "W" Street, Station No. 1 +25 to 2+45 4 "M" Street, Station < No, 7+50 to 8+70 5 Lot 149 ··~ -c- •,. :::: ,', . .; ···. .,.:· :-:··:; .: .. ··: . ..-:·.: .. . · ... :/.·:·<: " T.2 Results of the Se1 · Refraction Lines • · · Depth of Proposed Cut* Average Seismic Velocity General Excavation Characteristic (in feet) Depth Average Velocity (Subject to Local Variations) (feet) (feet/ second) .. 0 to 3 1,520 Easy Ripping 14 3 to 30-40 3,300 Moderately Difficult Ripping >30-40 6,400 Very Difficult Ripping to Probable Local to General Blasting 0 to 3 1,580 Easy Ripping 10 3 to 37-48 3,220 Moderately Difficult Ripping Very Difficult Ripping to Probable >37-48 6,920 Local to General Blasting 0 to 5 1,550 Easy Ripping 8 5 to 27-35 3,625 Moderately D.ifficult Ripping Very Difficult Ripping to Probable >27-35 6,220 Local to General Blasting 0 to 9 1,795 Easy Ripping 15 9 to 21-31 2,870 Moderately Difficult Ripping >21-31 10,030 Blasting Required 0 to 3 1,4i0 Easy Ripping 3' to 8-19 2,550 Mod<:lrately Difficult Ripping 20 8-19 to 30-37 4,220 Difficult Ripping, Possible Localized Blasting >30-37 6,650 Very Difficult Ripping to Probable Local to General Blasting ,• ,' ," . ,• . .··. ~: .:_ ·:~ '!{j~!~~, r (D CQ :::::, ....... 0 ::l • • • TABLE 2 (continued) Results of the Seismic Refraction Lines Seismic Line Approximate Depth of Proposed Cut* Average Seismic Velocity General Excavation Characteristic Number Location (in feet) Depth Average Velocity (Subject to Local Variations) (feet) (feet/second) 0 to 2 1,610 Easy Ripping "B" Street, Station 2to3-12 2,680 Moderately Difficult Ripping 6 No. 20+15 to 21+75 35 3-12 to 21-32 3,980 Moderately Difficult Ripping >21-32 6,530 Very Difficult Ripping to Probable Local to General Blasting Oto 5 1,910 Easy Ripping 3-6 4,450-5,050 Difficult Ripping, Possible Localized "C" Street, Station Blasting 7 18 No. 15+80 to 17+00 Moderately Difficult Ripping ; 5 to 25-35 3,830 . >25-35 6,650 Very Difficult Ripping to Probable Local to General Blasting * Assumes an addition undercut of 3 feet below the proposed elevation of the street corb grade or finish pad elevati~n. '4. • 2.7.4 • • 4980160-001 Based on the results of the seismic refraction study (as indicated on Table 2), it appears that the near surface materials ( and material above the proposed cut elevations) are rippable with heavy-duty construction equipment in good working order (i.e. a single . shank O9L Dozer or e_quivalent). Areas where difficult ripping and/or blasting may be required include deeper cuts in the foilowing approximate areas: • Lots 149 through 152. • In the vicinity of "B" Street Station 20+00 to 22+00. Localized blasting or other hard ripping (as well as scattered floaters) should be anticipated throughout the portion of the site underlain by granitic rock. If a significant amount of oversize material (typically rock over 8 inches in maximum dimension) is generateq, it should be placed to prevent possible settlement of the soil around the rocks, as recommended in Section 4.0 and Appendix E. Earthwork Shrinkage and Bulking Based on the results of our investigation and our professional experience with similar projects in the general vicinity of the· site, we have estimated bulking and shrinkage of the on-site soils. We have assumed the <;lepth of the disturbed soils in the farmed areas is on the order of 2 feet while the topsoil is anticipated to be_ on the order of 1 to 4 feet in depth. The alluvium and colluvium in the drainages Qf the site is anticipated to b~ on the order of 5 to 20+ feet. The depth of the undocumented fill is unknown but may vary from a few feet to over 15 feet. The volume change of excavated onsite materials upon recompaction as fill is expected to vary with materials and location. Typically, the surficial soils and bedrock materials vary significantly in natural and compacted density, and therefore, accurate earthwork shrinkage/bulking estimates cannot be determined. However, the following factors (based on the results of our investigation, geotechnical analysis and professional experience on adjacent sites) are provided on Table 3 as guiqeline estimates. If possible, we suggest an area where site grades can be adjusted (during the later portion of the site grading operations) be provided as a balance area . -16 -Leighton •• J 2.8 •• •••• 4980160-001 Table3 Earthwork Shrinkage and Bulking Estimates Geologic Unit Estimated Shrinkage/bulking Fanned Near Surface Soils (upper2 feet) 15 to 25 percent shrinkage Undocumented Fill 1 0 to 15 percent shrinkage -Topsoil/ Alluvium/Colluvium(in unfanned areas) 0 to IO percent shrinkage Terrace Deposits 0 to 5 percent shrinkage Santiago, Point Loma and Lusardi Formations 4 to I 2 percent bulking Granitic Rock (weathered upper 5 to 10 feet) 0 to 8 percent bulking Granitic Rock ( unweathered rock below IO feet) 10 to 20 percent bulking Slope Stability Based on our preliminary subsurface investigation and site reconnaissance, there is no indication of landslides or other slope instability conditions on the site. However, due the existing ground water seepage and spring activity in the eastern portion of the site (in the vicinity of Lots 160 through 167), surficial slope stability problems in this area are present and likely to worsen over time. As a result, the recommendations presented in Section-~.3.3 with regard to seepage conditions should be utilized during grading . -17 -Leighton 4980160-001 3 .0 CONCLUSIONS Based on the results of our preliminary geotechnical investigation at the subject site and our review of the previous geotechnical reports (SCS&T, 1988 and 1998), it is our opinion that the proposed development of the Cantarini property is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint, provided the following conclusions and recommendations are incorporated into the project plans, specifications, and followed during site grading and construction. The following is a summary of the geotechnical factors which may effect development of the site. • Based on our subsurface exploration and review of pertinent geotechnical reports, the site is underlain by Cretaceous Granite, the Lusardi, Point Loma and Santiago Formations, Terrace Deposits, alluvium, colluvium, topsoil, and undocumented fill soils. • The undocumented fill', topsoil, colluviuin, alluvium and weathered formational materials are porous and/or potentially compressible in their present state and will require removal and recompaction in areas of proposed development or future fill. • Siltstone and claystone formational soils, as well as, clayey surficial soils are highly expansive. • • • • • These expansive soils should be removed where they are found within 5 feet of pad grade and replaced with soil having a lower expansion potential or a special foundation design (i.e. post- tensioned design) should be provided. · It is anticipated that the on-site granitic, sedimentary and surficial soils may be excavated with conventional heavy-duty construction equipment. The deeper granitic soils and localized cemented zones_ may require heavy ripping and/or blasting Oversized material may be generated during excavation of the granitic bedrock, Lusardi Formation, an~-if cemented zones are encountered. All oversized material should be placed in accordance with the recommendations presented in Section 4.0 and Appendix£ to minimize settlement of the material around the rocks. The existing on-site soils appear to be suitable material for use as fill provided they are relatively free ofroc~s (larger than 8 inches in maximum dimension), organic material and debris. Ground water was encountered during our investigation and previous investigations along the proposed College Boulevard alignment. Moderate to heavy surface water seepage was also noted in the eastemportion of the site and is thought to be associated with spring activity along two tributary drainages in this area. Improvements in these areas will require special grading procedures to mitigate the surface and groundwater condition. If other ground water seepage conditions are encountered during site development, recommendations to mitigate the conditions can be made on a case-by-case basis in accordance with Section 4.3. Active faults are not known to exist on or in the immediate vicinity of the site . The main seismic hazard that may affect the site is from ground shaking from one of the active regional faults. -18,. Leighton •... , ... ••• • • 4980160-001 The anticipated bedrock acceleration on the site due to the design earthquake is estimated to be 0.25g. • Due to the high density characteristics of the. on-site bedrock materials and lack of a shallow -groundwater table, the potential for liquefaction in bedrock areas is considered low. The potential for liquefaction in alluvial areas is also considered low provided the alluvium is removed and replaced with compacted fill. • In general, when recompacted as fill soil, the surficial units (including topsoil, colluvium, alluvium, etc.) are anticipated to shrink while the formational materials are likely to bulk (with the exception -of the Terrace Deposits which are likely to shrink). • It. is anticipated that planned major cut slopes that will be comprised of weathered granite, formational sandstones and/or siltstones will no.t require stabilization measures to mitigate potential surficial instability (provided adverse geologic conditions are not present). Where adverse geologic conditions (such as out-of-slope bedding, clayseams, seepage zones, etc.) are present, stabilization measures such as the placement of a stability till will be required. Slope stability recommendations are presented in Section 4.2. • PotentiaLsettlementof relatively deep fills is anticipated to mainly occur during or within months of the completion of grading. However, areas of deep fill shoukl be monitored to ensure that the majority of the settlement occurs prior to construction of residential structures. In addition, lots underlain by fill differential thicknesses in excess of20 feet will require the utilization of a special foundation design (i.e. a post-tensioned slab design) . -19 --Leighton •••• 4.1 ••• 4980160-001 4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS Earthwork We anticipate that earthwork at the site will consist of site preparation, removals of potentially compressible soil, excavation of cut material, fill placement, and trench excavation and backfill. We recommend that earthwork on site be performed in accordance with the following recommendations, the City of Carlsbad grading requirements, and the General Earthwork and Grading Specifications for Rough-Grading (GEGS) included in Appendix E. In case of c~mflict, the following recommendations shall supersede those included as part of Appendix E. 4.l.l 4.1.2 Site Preparation Prior to the grading of areas to receive structural fill or engineered structures, the areas should be cleared of surface obstructions, any existing debris, potentially compressible material (such as undocumented fill soils, topsoil, colluvium, alluvium, and weathered formational materials) and stripped of vegetation. Vegetation and debris should be removed and properly disposed of offsite. Holes results from the removal of buried obstructions which extend below finished site grades should be replaced with suitable compacted fill material. Areas to receive fill and/or other surface improveqients should be scarified to a minimum depth of q to 12 inches, brought to a near-optimum moisture condition, and recompacted to at least 90 percent relative ·compaction (based on American Standard of Testing and Materials [ ASTM] Test Method D 15 57) . Removal and Recompaction of Potentially Compressible Soils As discussed in Sections 2.2 and 3.0, portions of the site are underlain by potentially compressible soi1s which may settle under the surcharge of fill and/or foundation loads. These materials include undocumented fill soils, topsoil, colluvium, alluvium, and weathered formational mater-ial. Compressible materials not removed by the planned grading should be excavated to competent material, moisture conditioned or dried back (as needed) to obtain a near optimum moisture content, and then recompacted prior to additional fj.11 placement or construction. The actual depth and extent of the required removals should be determined during grading operations by the geotechnical consultant. However, estimated removal depths are summarized below. • Existing Undocumented Fill The existing undocumented fiils should be completely removed prior to placement of additional fill. The.se materials can be utilized as fill materials provided they are moisture conditioned and free of deleterious materials. The estimated removal depths of the undocumented fill soils range from 1 to 15+ feet in depth. All trash, construction debris, and decomposablematetial should be removed and disposed off site. -20-Leighton • 4.1.3 ··-_.: 4.1.4 • • 4980160-001 Topsoil Areas to receive fill which ate on slopes flatter than 5: 1 (horizontal to vertical) and where normal benching would not completely remove the topsoil, should be excavated to competent formationaJ material prior to fill placement. Topsoil is expected to be generally 1 to 4 feet thick on the site. Localized deeper accumulations may be encountered. Alluvium and Colluvium In areas to receive fill, the alluvial and colluvial soils on the site should be removed to firm/competent formational material. Removal of alluvium and colluvium (mainly in the area of the proposed College Boulevard) will generally require overexcavation depths on the order of 5 to 25+ feet. Excavations Excavations of the weathered granite and on-site sedimentary and surficial materials may generally be accomplished with conventional heavy-duty earthwork equipment. Deep cuts in the granitics and localized cemented zones in the sedimentary units may be encountered that may require heavy ripping. Localized blasting may be required, but the need for extensive blasting is not anticipated. The cobbles and small boulders present in the Lusardi Formation and produced during excavation of the granitics may also pose some handling problems due to the abundance and size of the cobbles and small boulders. Oversized rock (greater than 8 inches in maximum dimension) that is encountered should be placed as fill in accordance with the recommendations presented Appendix E. Fill Placement and Compaction The on-site soils are generally suitable for use as compacted fill provided they are free of organic material, trash or debris, and rock fragments larger than 8 inches in maximum dimension. All fill soils should be brought to near-optimum moisture conditions and compacted in uniform lifts to at least 90 percent relative compaction based on the laboratory maximum dry density (ASTM Test Method D1557). Recommendations concerning the. placement of fill soils in deep canyons are presented in Section 4.1.5. The optimum lift thickness required to produce a uniformly compacted fill will depend on the type and $ize of compaction equipment useq. In general, fill should be placed in lifts not exceeding 8 inches in compacted thickness. Placement and compaction of fill should be performed in general accordance with the current City of Carlsbad grading ordinances, sound construction practices, and the General Earthwork and Grading Specifications of Rough-grading presented in Appendix E. -21 -Leighton ••• •• 4980160-001 4.1.5 Settlement of Deep Fm Soils 4.1.6 4.1.7 Settlement of deep compacted fill soils occurs in two manners. One is short-term (elastic) settlement due to the weight of the overlying fill soils compressing and driving the water out of the soil structure. This typically occurs during and within months after grading. The onsite silty and clayey soils compress more slowly than more granular soils. The second manner is long-term settlement which typically occurs on the order of years after the fill so·ils are placed and is triggered by wetting of the soils due to irrigation precipitation. This occurs even to properly compacted fill soils and even though canyon subdrains are constructed. Silty and clayey soils typically settle as much as two times the amount that sandy.soils will. Subsequent to removals of compressible soils, fills of up to approximately 45+ feet in thickness are planned on the site. Our experience and analysis indicates that potential settlement in these deep fill areas may be as much as I to· greater than 3 inches ( depending on compactive effort) and may take as long as I to 3 months ( or longer) to occur. Most of this settlement will likely occur during grading. Areas having fill thicknesses is greater than 40 feet should be monitored (by the placement of settlement monuments which are periodically surveyed) to determine if the short term settlement of the fill soils has occurred. Cut/Fill Transition Conditions In order to reduce the potential for differential settlement in areas of cut/fill transitions, we recommend the entire cut portion of the transition building pads be overexcavated and replaced with properly compacted fill to mitigate the transition condition beneath the proposed residential structures. For building pads with a maximum fill depth of less than 20 feet, the overexcavationof the cut portion of the building pad should be a minimum of .3 feet below the planned finish. grade elevation of the pad. For building pads having a maximum fill depth of greater than 20 feet and for transition conditions beneath multi- family residential structures, overexcavation should be accomplished so that a fill thickness differential of no greater than 40 feet exists below the building pad. All overexcavations should extend laterally at least 10 feet beyond the building perimeter. Expansive Clayey Soils and Selective Grading The laboratory test results and our professional experience with similar materials on sites in the vicinity indicate that the on-site soils possess a low to high expansion potential.As a result, the presence of highly expansive materials within 5 vertical feet from finish grade will require special foundation and slab con~iderations. In general, this condition should be limited to finish grade pads in the Santiago and/or Point Loma Formations or where these materials are utilized as compacted fill within 5 to 10 feet of finish grade . -22-Leighton 4.2 4980160-001 As an alt~mative to the special foundation recommendations provided in Section 4.4, building .pads underlain by expansive soils may be overexcavated a minimum of 5 feet below finish pad grade and replaced with properly compacted fill possessing a lower expansion potential (i.e., the sandy soil of the weathered granitics, Lusardi and. Santiago Formations and/or Terrace Deposits present on the site). Should this alternative be chosen, the overexcavation should .extend across the entire lot and be graded such that water does not accumulate beneath the structures (i.e. by providing a minimum 2 percent fall of the overexcavation bottom toward the stre.et or existing fill). Slope Stability Based on the current site development plan, cut and fill slopes up to approximately 45 feet are planned. The following is provided based on our knowledge of site conditions for use in the planning process. Additional recommendations may be warranted after final plans are developed. 4.2.1 Deep-Seated Stability • Fill Slopes The materials anticipated for use in fill slope grading wili predominantly consist of on- site sandy and cobbly soils of the Terr.ace Deposits and Lusardi Formation, sandstones and siltstones of the Point Loma and Santiago Formations, and soils derived form weathered granitic bedrock. Our analysis, assuming homogeneous slope conditions, and strength test results (from laboratory testing performed during the investigation of this site ~nd adjacent sites) indicates the anticipated fill slopes up to the maximum proposed height of 45 feet will have a calculated factor of safety of 1.5 or greater with respect to potential, deep-seated failure (Appendix G). The proposed slopes should be constructed in accordance with the recommendations of this report, the attached General Earthwork and Grading Specifications for Rough-grading (Appendix E), and City of Carlsbad grading code requirements. • CutSlopes Engineering analysis of the proposed 2: 1 cut slopes within the formational materials up to a maximum height of approximately 45 feet indicates the deep-seated stability of the slopes, in general, are st.able from a geotechnical standpoint. We recommend that the geotechnical consultant document and geologically map all excavations including cut slopes during grading. The purpose of this mapping is to substantiate the geologic conditions assumed in our analyses. Additional investigation and stability analysis may be required if unanticipated or adverse conditions are encountered during site development. -23-Leighton •• A • • ••• ••• APPENDIX A. REFERENCES 4980160-001 Anderson, J.G., Rockwell, T.K., and Agnew, D.C., 1989, .Past and Possible Future Earthquakes of · Significance to. the San Diego Region Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 5, p. 299-335. Blake, Thomas F:, 1993, EQFAULT, Version2.01. ---, 1993, FRISK 89, Version 2.0 I. Hannan, D., 1975, Faulting in the Oceanside, Carlsbad and Vista Areas, Northern San Diego County, California.in Ross, A., and Dowlens, R.J., eds., Studies on the Geology of Camp Pendleton and Western San Diego County, California: San Diego Association of Geologists, pp. 56- 59. Hart, E.W., 1997, Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California,Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zones Act of 1972 with Index to Special Studies Zones Maps: Department of Conservation, Division of 1:'fines and Geology, Special Publication 42. International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO), 1997, Uniform Building Code, Volume I - Administrative, Fire-and Life-Safety, and Field Inspection Provisions, Volume II - . Strttctural Engineering-Design Provisions, and Volume III -Material, Testing and Installation Provision, ICBO. J~nnings, C. W., 1994, Fault Activity Map of California and Adjacent Areas; California Division of Mines and Geology, Geologic Data Map 6; Scale 1 :750,000. Leighton and Associates, Inc., 1998,. Preliminary Oeotechnical -Feasibility and· Limited Subsurface Investigation, Proposed Residential Development of the Cantarini Property, Northeast of the Intersection of-El Camino Real and College Boulevard, Carlsbad, California, Project No_. 4980160-001,datedJuly28, 1998. ---,In-house Unpublished and Published Data. Lindvall, S.C., and Rockwell, T.K., 1995, Holocene Activity of the Rose Canyon Fault Zone in San Diego, · California:JournalofGeophysicalResearch, V. 100, No. Bl2, p. 24, 124-24, 132. Reichle, M.S., and Kahle, J.E.,. l-990, Planning Scenario for a Major Earthquake, San Diego-Tijuana Metropolitan Area: California Division of Mines and Geology, Special Publication 100. Rockwell, T.K., and Lindvall, S.C., 1990, Holocene Activity of the Rose Canyon Fault in San Diego, California, Based oil' Trench Exposures and Tectonic Geomorphology; Geological Society o.f America, Abstracts with Programs. · · ---, 1991, Minimum Holocene Slip Rate for the Rose Canyon Fault in San Diego, California in EnvironmentalP.erils, San 'Diego Region: San Diego Association of Geologists,p. 37-46. A-1 ··> •::.. . . . • 4980160-001 APPENDIX (Continued) Seed, H.B., and Idriss, I.M., 1982, Ground Motions and Soil Liquefaction During Earthquakes, Monogram Series, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Berkeley, California. Slemmons, D.B., and Depolo, C.M., 1986, Evaluation of Active Faulting and Associated Hazards in Active Tectonics (Studies in Geophysics): National Academy Press, p. 45-62. Southern California Soil and Testing, IIJ.c., 1988, Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, Sycamore Creek II, College Boulevard, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 8821121, dated September9, 1988. ----, 1998, Report of Prelimin~ry Geotechnical Investigation, Rancho Carlsbad, Phase II, College Boulevard; Carlsbad, California, Project No. 9811280, dated December 4, 1998. Tan,.S.S., and Giffen, D.G., 1975, Landslide Hazards in the Northern Port of the San Diego Metropolitan Area, San Diego County, California, Landslide Hazard"IdentificationMap No. 35, Division of Mines and Geology, Open-File Report No. 95-04. Tan, S.S., and Kennedy, M.P., 1996, Geologic Maps of the Northwestern Part of San Diego County, California,Plate 1, Division of Mines and Geology 96-02. Treiman, J.A., 1984, The Rose Canyon Fault Zone: A Review and Analysis, California Division of Mines and Geology, Funded by Federal Management Agency Cooperative Agreement EMF-83- K-0148. . --'-'--, 1990, Rose Canyon Fault Zone, San Diego County, California: California Division of Mines and Geology, Fault Evaluation Report FER,.216 pp. 6-8, and Portion of 1 Plate. ----, The Rose Canyon Fault Z9ne, Southern California: California Division of Mines and Geology, _Open-File Report 93-2, 45p. Weber, F .H., 1982, Recent Slope Failures, Ancient Landslides and Related Geology of the Northern-Central Coastal Area, San Diego County, California: California Division of Mines and Geology, · Open File Report 82-1 ZLA, 77p. Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities, 1995, .Seismic Hazards in Southern California: Probable Earthquakes, 1994 to 2024: Builetin of the Seismological Society of America, V. · 95, No. 2, p. 379-439. . 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. Geolo~;ical Survey, Professional Paper 1360, p. 43-91. AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS Date Source Flight PhotoNo(s) 4/11/53 USDA AXN-8M 69 and 70 A-2 GEOTECHNICAL aoRING LOG KEY Date___________ Sheet _1_ of__!_ Project KEY TO BORING LOG GRAPHICS . . Project No . .. :-Drij.lingCo. -·'----~--------------------'------~ TypeofRig • Hole Diameter . Prive Weight ...,...--,--------------------Dr9p __ in · ' Elevation Top of_H ___ o_le_+_/_---ft. Ref or Datum " . :,, "" . "" C 0 +-+-QI~ Ill • G_EOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION o,... .c~' 0 z Ill 0 ·-L V 111(1) -+-Ill 30 "'"" :,+-I'll • -;cu +-a, .COi a, a, CCf--u 0. a, Q;O +-oLL a, 0 -+-c u. :> a, ~....I 0 -00. Ill QI !!!.~ QICf-0. -'-_(I) Pv :z IC QI V -..,_ -Logged By (!) e :,, Oc ·-::i l1J ftl 0.. '-:Co (I) o..., Sampled By 0 u en. 0 w Inorganic clay of low to medium plasticity; gravelly clay; sandy clay; silty clay; lean CL clay ' ~ CH Inorganic clay of high plasticity; fat clay ' --.._ ._--A--·oL-OH' Organic-clay, silt or silty clay-clayey silt mixture:-A A A A A A_A_I ML Inorganic silt; very fine sand; silty or clayey fine sand; clayey silt with low plasticity I rndicatc MH Inorganic silt; diatomaceous fine sandy or silty soils; elastic r;ilt SPT 5 ~ii Sample .... CL-ML Low plasticity clay to silt mixture . r tndicatc .. ML-SM . Sandy silt to silty sand mixture :-.· Cal ~ ~ Sample a.,.sc Sandy clay to clayey sand mixture ~ '• ~ SC-SM Caycysand to silty sand mixture , grOU'ld .. : '::-:::::: water level at Well graded san<ft gravelly sand, little or no fines ·=·!···: tine 01 ffing" SW 10 i. =. :;. :::: SP Poorly gra4ed sand; gravelly sand, little or no fines •• l" .·. SM Silty sand; poorly graded sand-silt mixture . ..• . . . . -. . · ... ;,yb.1 SC Cayey sand; poorly graded sand-clay mixture . . P"":_\,) ~-,...·-~ GW Well graded gravel; gravel-sand mixture, little or no fines J V ( .. o· . GP Poorly graded gravel; gravel-sand mixtuIC, little or no fines 15 . . ·-Ji,~ GM Silty gravel; gravcl.-sand~t mixture ~-GC Caycy gravel; gtavcl-68nd-clay mixture . ~ Sandstone -=-· ----~ ~~ Sijtstone --·-Claystoae. t-.--- 20 ~-~- .. ~q,.,,o(I Bm:da.(~r grayc:l·and cobbles or matrix-supported conglomerate) 0 A 6, _, Congl.0111erate (rounded gravel and cobble, clast-supported) ... ~ .. - ' \ ' Igneous granitic or granitic type rock ,,.__ --.I ,. "· ,-: <• MetaYolcanic or metamorphic rock .,t ~l---z-ji Artifldal or ~-made fill Asphaltic concrete . ***:i fortland C.Cme~t Concrete -· - .- 50SAC11m> LEIGHTON &ASSOCIATES ----------------------------------1 •• APPENDIX B LOGS BY LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES OF SMALL-DIAMETER BORINGS AND TRENCHES B-7 T-29 (7 BORINGS) (29 TRENCHES) • •·=·· Date ---,------1~1_-~18~-9~9--,--__ Project • Drilling Co. :: · Hole Diameter Elevati~n Top of Hole 0 85 5 80 10 15 15 70 20 65 0 .Ctn 0..0 111...J L (!) ... ... . . . . . ... .. •':. .. ... .. ... ... . . . . . ISi QI + 0 z 8 in. +I-86 . 0 z QI 0.. E Ill CJ) Bag-! @0'-5' 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-1 Cantarini Property F&C Drilling. Sheet 1 of 2 Project No. Type of Rig 4980160-001 Hollow-Stem Auge Drive Weight ft. Ref. or Datum ---~-----=14-'-0'---"'p~o=un=d=s;;..._ ________ Drop .lQ_ in + ISi O. 30 oLL -L cc QI 0.. 20 :JI + IJ),-.. C<+-QI 0 cc.. :,, c.. 0 '-' 38 107.7 7.1 22 45 111.6 14.5 18 SM SM/SC SC 45 103.9 18.6 SM/SC 23 SM 59 120.0 11.6 See Geotechnical Map GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By Sampled By QUATERNARY ALLUVIUM (Oal) AXT AXT @·o·: Silty very fine SAND; dark brown, dry to moist, loose @3': Silty,fineSAND;darkbrowntobrown,drytomoist,mediumt,: ·;;_ .' rootle~ common throughout, few fine gravels :: /--;!. V : ,..,_ -·,:: '; ·,:;:: ;\ @ 6': Silty fine to medium SAND; dark brown, moist, medium de~-~~-::_;/: porous ·-.: :· @ 8.5': Silty fine to medh.\m SAND with clay; dark brown to reddish brown, moist, medium dense @ 11 ': Silty fine to medium SAND with clay; red-brown, moist, medium dense, slightly porous @ 13.5': Clayey fip.e to medium SAND; red-brown, moist, medium dense, slightly porous @ 16': Si~ty fine to medium SAND with clay; brown to red-brown, moist, medium dense, slightly porous @ 17.5': Silty fine-to coarse-grained SAND; red-brown, moist to wet, medium dense, possible perched groundwater condition . @ 21 '·: Silty .fine-to coarse-grained SAND with gravel; brown, wet, medium dense 27 SM/SC @ 22.5': Silty fine SAND with clay; brown to red-brown, moist to wet, medium .. dense 25 10 86/8" 94.4 26.7 SM/SC~ TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION ITsa} 60 ••• SOSA( 11/n) @ 25': Silty very fine SANDSTONE; dark brown to brown, moist, very dense, thin lieds of silt visible · 11 85/10" -@ 27.5': Ground water encountered l-'-~'--'-l---+---t'+--+---+---1----+-. @ 27 .5': Silty very ·fine SANDSTONE; dark brown to brown and orange-brown, .moist, ve dense, few scattered subrounded ravels LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES Date ----=11:....·=18:....·9~9;__ __ Project • . Drilling Co. . · Hole D~ameter · Elevation Top of Hole 8 in . +/-86 . C 0 o,...._ 0 ·-+ .i::.'"' ·-(II z ++-.CC) QI +-QI QI tll QI a.. QI a..o + QI QI tll_J 0 ->..., o'+-a.. Qlv c.. z V CD E LI.I tll en 30 55 - ' - - - . 35- 50 - - - - 40-• 45 - - - - 45- 40 - - - - so- 35 - - - - 55- 30 -_. • - I - -~ SOSA( 11/77) GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-1 Cantarini Property 2 4980160-001 F &C Drilling Sheet _2_ of Project No . Type of Rig Hollow-Stem Auge, Drive Weight ~---------=-l-=-40.:c....c:p-"-ou=n==-cls=----~----Drop 2Q_ in ft Ref or Datum See Geotechnical Map ::n ...... J,..-.. + + QI~ GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION ·-(II • (II 0 . (II,.-,. c..v tll~ 30 C'+-::, < ++-u~ oLL QI 0 Ill C Cl a.. -c.. <·-QI _en tC QI V ·+-Logged By AXT ::n Oc ·o::i 0... ·L :c 0 CJ t.) en V Sampled By AXT Total Depth = 28.4 Feet (hole left open approximately 3 hours) Ground Water Measured at 27.5 Feet at Time of Drilling f--, Backfilled with Soil Cuttings on November 18, 1999 - I- I- I- I- I- I- f- I- ,_. I- I- >- I- I- i- - LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES •• ,._. Date -~----'l=l=--1=8:...;-9:....:;9""". __ _ Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter Elevation Top of Hole C -~.,.., u .J:..,.., ·-+-+-'+-+-.J:. 0) Ill QJ 0.. QJ Q.O > QJ QI OJ tll..l QJ'I-00 L. _....,, (.!) w 90 0 ... -... ... -... -: ... .,,. >1 . .. 85 5-~ -:-: ~ - ... -... -. .. . . . 80 10-.. ... .: : : . -. . . . . -. ... ' -i.:.. ·-=-... . . .. -. . . 75 15-: ·.· .. .. ... . . . -... . . - - - 70 20-"- - - - - 65 25- - - - -I ,;o. .. SOSA( 11/77) 8 in. +/-90 . 0 Ill z OJ OJ +-0 -a. z E Ill en .... 1 2 3 4 5 6 : I'- GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-2 ft +- Ill 0 :3 0 oLL -c.. a'l OJ Q_ 44 33 46 29 87 80 Sheet _1_ of _1_ Cantarini Property Project No. Type of Rig 4980160-001 I F &C Drilling Hollow-Stem Auge ----'----'-~--=-14..:.0::.....,:;p.:::.ou:::cn:::.d~s'------,------Drop 2Q__ in See Geotechnical Map Drive Weight Ref or Datum :,\ .,.., ui.,.., +-Qlx GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION ·-Ill .• Ill.,.., L. '-" Ill~ C: '+-::,+-c:;~ QJ u t; C 00. ·-QI _en '-" o+-Logged l:3y AXT :J'J ·-::5 L. :c:§ 0 u ~..., Sampled By AXT SM QUATERNARY ALLUVIUM (Qal) @0': Silty fine SAND; dark brown to brown, moist, loose ,.. - 108.7 8.6 @3': Silty fine to inedium SAND; dark brown, moist, medium cjense ... ... SM/SC @5': Silty fine to medium SAND; brown, moist, medium dense, slightly porous ... ... SM @ 6': Silty fme to medium SAND with clay; brown to red-brown, moist, medium dense, slightly porous, few rootlets visible · >- 119.2 11.1 @ 7.5': Silty fine t6 medium SAND; brown to reddish brown, moist, very dense, -sli~htly porous - @10': Same as previous, slightly coarser grained .... .... .... 113.1 13.5 -SM-- @ 12.5': Silty fine to medium SAND; brown to orange-brown, moist, dense, \ _ _ sli~htly 0 clayey _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . ___________ IT TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION (.Tsa) .... - @ 16.5': Silty fine SANDSTONE, dark brown to brown and orange-brown, moist, -very dense ,_ Total Depth = 16.5 Feet No Ground Water Encountered at Time of Drilling Backfilled with Soil Cuttings on November 18, 1999 .... ,.... ,_ I .... .... LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES Date ---"-----=-1=-1--=1=8-....:;.9.;c..9 __ _ Project Drilling Co. Hole Piameter Elevation Top of Hole 85 0 80 5 75 10 70 15 65 20 0 .c 0) . 0.0 ltlJ c.. (!) .. . . ... II) QJ +-0 z 8 in .. +I-85 . 0 z QJ --a. E Ill (/) 3 4 .5 6 7 8 9 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-3 Sheet _I_ of _2_ Cantarini Property Project No. 4980160-001 F&C Drilling Type of Rig Hollow-Stem Auge Drive Weight ft. Ref. or Datum ---~------=14_;_0'--"'-p-=-ou=n=d=s'----------Drop 2!!__ ir: + II) 0 30 ol.L. ....,. c.. IC QJ a.. 24 :J'I + II)'"' C'+-QJ 0 oa. :J'I c.. 0 SJ SM 43 115.2 10.2 SM/SC 30 SC 31 107.5 15.7 SM/SC 18 SC 46 llQ.8 17.6 See Geotechnical Map GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By Sampled By Ol:JATERNARY ALLUVIUM' (Qal) AXT AXT @ O': Silty fine SAND; dark brown, moist, loose @ 2S: Silty fine-to medium-grained SAND; brown, moist, medium dense, some coarser grains, few scattered gravels @. 6': Silty, fine-to medium-grained SAND with clay; dark brown, moist, medium dense, scattered fine; to medium subrounded ·gravels, slightly porous @ 7.5':. Clayey fine to medium SAND; dark brown to brown and orange-brown, moist, medium dense, slightly porous @ 11': Silty fine SAND with clay; brown to orange-brown, moist, medium dense, slightly porous · ·@ 12.5-': Clayey fine .to medium SAND; brown, moist, medium dense, slightly porous ·@ 16': Sam,e as previous 28 SM/SC @ 17.5': Silty fine to coarse SAND; brown to reddish brown, moist, medium 48 105.7 19.8 19 CL dense, some zones of clayey sand, fine to medium gravels ·@ 20': Silty fine-to medium-grained· SAND with clay; brown, moist, medium dense @ 22.5': Fine to medium sandy CLAY; brown, moist, very stiff @ 23'; Ground water encountered -Sl-,f -TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa} 60 25 ... .. 10 53/6" 105.7 18.3 @ 25': Silty fine SANDSTONE; orange-brown to gray and brown, moist, very . !fense .... 505A(11/77) .. . . . ', .. .. . . . . . 11 100 @ 28': Silty fine to medium SANDSTONE; brown, moist, very dense LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-3 Date ___ ...c.-'l=-=l:...·1=8:....:·9::..::9'---~ Project • . _. __ Drillin~Co. :· Hole Diameter Elevation Top of Hole Cantarini Property F&C Drilling .. Sheet _2_ of _2_ Project No. 4980160-001 Type of Rig Hollow-Stem Auge1 8 in. +I-85 Drive Weight --~-----___,,_l_,_40:c....cPc:::cO.=.une!.d::=s::.__ ________ Drop 2.Q_ in ft Ref or Datum See Geotechnical Map . :J'I ,.,. ui,.,. C 0 .... .... QI~ GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION ·o 0 '·-Ill • --~ . .c.r-. ·-Ill z Ill 0 I/Ir-. (. V (IJ~ .... QI +t .cm QI QI ::3 0 C<t-:::1 .... -u Ill QI C. QI c.o .... -oLL QI 0 tic u. ><t-QI 'f-(IJ...J 0 C. ii:i '-cc. ·-QI _en ·Qlv Clv '-z V o+-Logged By AXT (.!) s QI :J'I . .,..::5 Ill a.. ;cC LIJ en '-0 ~.__, C u Sampled By AXT 55 30 Total Depth = 29 Feet (hole left' open approximately 3 hours) -Ground Water Encountered at 23 Feet at Time of Drilling -Backfilled with Soil Cuttings on November 18, 1999 -- I-- I-- 50 3:S-~ I- I-- -- --. ' -- 45 40-'-I-··: -I- -I- -1,-I- -- 40 45-- I-- I-- L. - .... - 35 so-- -·- -~ .... - .... - 30 55-.... .... ,- -- '-• - -- -,,: __ ,., 505AC11/n)-LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES Date ___ __;l:c..::1::....;-1::.::8:....:-9::..::9;__ __ Project • Drilling Co. . · Hole Diameter Elevation Top of Hole 8 in. +I-90~ . .c 0 o,... 0 .c" ·-Ill z :;: + . ........ .cm QJ QJ IIIQJ 0. QJ 0.0 +->QJ Q)~ 111...J 0 ..... 0J0 0. CJ...., '-z (!) e UJ Ill Cl) 90 ' 0 '. ... . ' ·-... . . -.. .. . . . •'. .. I -... ... -.. 85 5-~·· 2 -~ --" -.... ~ 3 ·=·~ -. [?) ;\~ . 80 IO-:=-:~ ~- -:\~ I -·.:.·0. .. '.· ... 5 -. .. -... ... . 75 15-<:b? 6 "-:=-:~ : =-:la: -·=.·~ -:::10· 7 .B5 -:.=.=iz ·-~ 70 20-:- ~. 8 - --: ,, • -_1, GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-4 Cantarini Property 1 4980160-001 F &C Drilling Sheet _1_ of Project No. Type of Rig Hollow-Stem Auge1 -----~----==-14-'-'0~p-=-ou=n::.:d=s'----------Drop ..ML in Drive Weight ft Ref or Datum See Geotechnical Map Jl ,... vi" +-+ a,X GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION ·-Ill • 1110 111.--. '-v Ill CJ? 30 C'+-:,+ -u ell. QJ 0 t;c u. CJ 0. io '-·'-Q) _en V o+ Logged By AXT Q) Jl :c § ·-:5 a.. L ~v CJ u Sampled By AXT SM QUATERNARY ALLUVIUM (Qal) @0': Silty fine SAND; dark brown, moist, loose '- '- 57 112.5 8.0 @ 3': · Silty fine .to medium SAND; dark brown to red-brown, moist, medium I- dense, rootlets common I- I- 28 SC -@6': Clayey fine to medium SAND; gray-brown to orange-brown, moist, medium I- dense '' I- 55 100.5 , 23.2 SM/SC @ 7.5': Silty fine to medium SAND with clay; brown, to orange-brown, moist, '-medium-dense '- ~ 36 @ IO': Same as previous, few fine gravels ~ '- 61 105.7 19.3 SM ~ @ 13.5': Silty fme SAND; brown, moist, medium dense, few fme to medium '-subrounded gravels, few shell fragments '- 25 SM/SC @ 15': Silty fme to medium SAND with clay; brown, moist, medium dense -.. '-@ 17.5': Same as previous 63 106.9 18.0 '- ~ '- 27 CL @ 20':. Fine to medium sandy CLAY; brown, moist, very stiff, scattered organics I- -----------------------------------------~ TER:J:IARY SANTIAGO FORMATION (Isa} 9 92/9" 94.3 24.6 SM/ML '-- @ 23.6': Fine sandy SiLTSTONE to silty SANDSTONE; brown to gray and \ orange, moist, _very dense 7 65 25_;_ Total Depth = 24 Feet L.. No GrQund Water Encountered at Time of Drilling -'-Backfilled with·Soil Cuttings on November 18, 1999 '- I-- I-• - I -'- ,;ii <in 505AC11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORlNG LOG B-5 Date ____ 1_1_-1_8_-9~9-~~ Sheet _I_ of _I_ Project Cantarini-Property Project No. 4980160-001 • Drilling Co. . .: .... Hole Diameter ___ 8_i_n_. __ ··· Elevation Top of Hole · +/-·· ·s9· F&C Drilling Type of Rig Hollow-Stem Auge Drive Weight ---'--_______ 14_0~p_o_u_nd_s _________ Drop 2!!_ in ft Ref or Datum See Geotechnical Map . -:::J'I ,..., ui'"' C .... a,X GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION o,.... 0 0 .... ·-Ill • ..c~ ·-Ill z Ill 0 Ill'"' '-'-' Ill~ ·-.... ::,+-+-a, ta, .cm QJ Qi 30 C'+--u Ill QJ 0.0 +-ell.. QJ 0 tic u. QJ QJ 111.J 0 -00. >'+-0~ a. -'-·-QJ _en ~'-' '-z E t.0 QJ '-' o+-· Logged By AXT (!) Ill 0.. :::J'I :c § ·-::i IJ.l (/) '-o.._, AXT 0 (.) (/). · Sampled By 0 .. ~ SM/SC QUATERNARY ALLUVIUM (Qal) ... - -.. @0': Silty fine SAND; dark brown, moist, loose .. ~ . . . -... ... ~ -.. 1 24 ... ~ @3': Silty fine SAND; dark brown, moist, medium dense, few fine subrounded -... gravels . 85 -.. g§ ._ . . . ' . 5-. . ~ 2 56 116.1 · 11.6 ... -.. @6': Silty fine SAND wit!J, clay; dark brown to brown and orange-brown, moist, -... ~ .. dense --~· ... 3 34 SM -.. . . @ 8-': Silty fine to medium SAND with gravel; brown to orange-brown, moist, -. ; . .. dense, few zones of friable sand 80 -· I-.. . . . .. @ 10': '.fop of sample, same as previous 10-:-.. I-... 4 76/1!)" 119.6 7.6 ' . -.:..: . . ·:-:. ----TBRTIARY SAIS:TIAGO FORMATION (Tsa) 1-: ... SM ... @11-': Bottom of sample: silty fine SANDSTONE; brown to orange-brown, -. .. moist, very dense -. . ... 5 90/10" @ 12.5': Silty fine to medium SANDSTONE; brown to orange, moist, very dense, -.. well indurated, few calcium carbonate blebs · -... ' . .. 15 .. · 15-Total Depth = 14 Feet ._; No Ground Water Encountered at. Time of Drilling Backfilled with Soil Cuttings on November 18, 1999 - -- -,... 70 - 20- -',- -- -,... 65 -- 25-I-,_ I- ,-- - I 60 -.. SOSA C 11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES Date -----=1=-l:...:-l;:.:·8:...:-9::..:9;...__~ Project .. Drilling Co . • : :·Hole Diameter Elevation Top of Hole 8 in. +/-97 . C _o,,.... u 0 .r:."' Ill z ·-+ ,._.+-.tm + ai QJ QJ "'QI 0. QI ' 0.0 +-QI QJ ..... >c+-111...J 0 0. QJ.._,, c<+-L z ...,. (!) E UJ Ill (/) 0 .. .. .. -... . . 95 -... .. 1 -. .. .. ... ,--.. . . . 5--'. -2 . --.....:: .---- • 90 --.. ~ ... 3 -~ .. ~ ... ~ .. . . . 10~ ~ ... 4 .. ~ -. ;: 85. - 5 - ·- 15- - .. 80 - - - 20-. - 75 ·- - -· 25- ·-· 70 - -•• - I . --.• , . SOSA( 11/77) GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-6 Sheet _1_ of _I_ Cantarini Property Project No. 4980160-001 F&C Drilling Type of Rig Hollow-Stem Auge1 Drive Weight ________ ---=:l..!.40=--cP:.::::O.::::u=nd=s:;--________ Drop -1!!_ in ft Ref or Datum See Geotechnical Map :::n "' ui"' +-QJ~ GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION +-·-Ill • Ill 0 Ill"' t....,. 111U? 3 0 ::,,._. C'+-c:;~ oU.. QJ 0 'tic al L 00. ·-!1 _(/) ...,. Logged By AXT QJ :::n Oc -~::i a.. L :E: 0 0 u cn'-" Sampled By AXT SM QUATERNARY.ALLUVIUM (Qal} -@0': Silty fine SAND; brown, moist - ,- 25 84.8 15.2 @3': Silty fine to medium SAND; brown to orange and lig!it brown, moist, ,- medium-dense, slightly porous I- ,_, 16 SM-SP ·@5': Silty fine to medium SAND; dark brown, moist, medium dense, slightly porous ,-@6': Fine to medium. SAND; brown, moist, medium dense, poorly graded 35 115.0 15.8 SM/SC I- -@ 8': Silty fine to medium SAND with clay; gray-brown to brown, moist, medium dense I- @ 10': Silty fine to medium SAND with clay; gray-brown to orange, moist, I- 32 medium dense, few calcium carbonate blebs SM/ML--------------------------------------1-IERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION <Tsa) I- 99 103 . .S 21.5 I- @13': Silty fine SANDSTONE to fine sandy SILTSTONE; orange-brown to \ . lirown, moist, some manganese blebs I Total· Depth ,;= 13.5 Feet No Ground Water Encountered at Time of Drilling I-Backfilled with Soil Cuttings on November 18, 1999 I- .... I- I- - - I- I- . . LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES Date -----=l=l-=-1=8-=-9c.:::9 __ _ . Project • Drilling Co. · Hole Diameter · Elevation Top of Hole 8 in. +I- . C 0 a,.._ 0 .J:.,..._ Ill z :;:-+-+-+-·-.J:. m QJ QJ IIJQJ 0. QJ 0.0 -+-> QJ QJ QJ 111..J 0 -~~ c'+-0. L z 'V t!) . s Ill llJ (/) 0 .. Bag-2 ... .. @0'-5' -... . . ~ .. ~ . . . .. I -... .. ... -. .. . . . • 5-l1-: ~- .. 2 ... .. -~ ... -.. ~ . . . .. 3 -' ... ~ . -... ~ . . 10-. -.. ~ 4 -~ ... ~ . . -.. ... t;Q -; ·-· 5 . ,. ~ :--: I~ ... -... 15- ...c - - .,.. 20- - - - - 25- -"' - -• -; I . ~n 505A(11/77) GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-7 Sheet _l_ of 1 Cantarini Property 4980160-001 F&C Drilling Project No. Type of Rig Hollow-Stem Auger Drive Weiiht ft Ref or Datum -~------~14...:..0:::_.cp-=-o=un:=cd=s::,__ ________ Drop .lQ_ in. See Geotechnical Map :n ,..._ iii,..._ -+-+-QJ~ GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPfION Ill • Ill 0 111....._ '-'V 111U? 30 :::,-+-C'+--u au. QJ 0 "t;c u. . Cl 0. -c.. ·-! _(/) co QJ 'V Loggeq By AXT ::n ~c ·--:::i 0.. '-0 ~'V Cl u Sampled By AXT SM QUATERNARY ALLUVIUM Qal) @0': Silty fine SAND; dark brown, moist, loose ~ 21 109.4 7.7 @ 3': Silty fine to medium SAND; dark brown, moist, medium dense, slightly I- porous, few organics · I- 38 SM/SC @5': Same as previous, slightly clayey L... L... 49 115.0 14.4 @ 8.5': Silty fine to medium SAND with clay and gravel; brown to dark brown, moist, inediu!ll dense, slightly porous, 1/2-1" subrounded gravels in cuttings 41 @ 10': Silty fine SAND with clay; brown to orange-brown, moist, medium dense, scattered fine to medium subangular gravels, few manganese blebs, slightly porous @ 12:5': Top of sample, same as previous · 66 110.l 7.4 SM TERTIARY SANTIAQO FORMATION (Tsa) - @ 13.5': Bottom of sample: silty fine to medium SAND; orange-brown, moist, _dense, well indurated .. Total Depth = 15 Feet · No Ground Water Encountered at Time of Drilling Backftlled with Soil Cuttings on November 18, 1999 I- LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES •• •• • . LOG OF TRENCH NO. :_T,_,--=--1 __ Project Name: Bentley/Cantarini Logged by:_----'K"'"'BC=-------Project Number: 4980160-001 Elevation:_-=-13=5 __ · _________ _ E-qui pment: JD 710 Backhoe Location: See Geotechni ca 1 Map ENGINEERING PROPERTIES i GEOLOGIC . GEOLOGIC Sample Moist. Density 1' ATTITUDES DATE: 6/26/98 DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses No. (%) (pcf) > ' ·1 -.. 1. 0 ..... <O 0 - r-<D (C. '::1' - TOPSOIL A @ 0-0.5': Brown. moist. stiff. fine to medium sandy clay TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION B @ 0.5'-5.5': Yellow-brown and off-white. damp, dense to very dense. silty, fine sandstone; orange-brown and maroon lenses common 0 . Topsoil Tsa CL SM ; GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: 1" = 5' SURFACE SLOPE.: 0° TREND: N40°E ~ Cl) 0 Q. Sl> -CD Cl) TOTAL DEPTH AT 5.5' NO GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED AT TIME OF DRILLING BACKFILLED: 6/26/98 ... ···:_.·. Ol 0 .... I )> -.... 0 ...... c.o 0 - . r-(D ·cE ::r 0 :;J ~ ~ (/) 0 2 '$» -CD (/) .: • • :-:-:. LOG OF TRENCH NO.: T-2 Project Nqme: Bentl~y/Cantarini Logged by: KBC ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Project Number: 4980160-001 . El evati-on: 160' Equipmen~: JD 710 Backhoe Loc·ation: See Geotechnical MaR GEOLOGIC · GEOLOGIC Sample Moist. Density . .\ TTITUDES DATE: 6/26/98 . DESCRIPTION: . UNIT uses No. (%) (pcf) TOPSOIL .Topsoil A @0-1.5': Brown. damp. loose, clayey, fine to medium sand; SC medium pores common. rootlets common. agricultural debris common . B @ 1. 5' -4': Dark brown, moist. stiff. fine sandy clay; CL scattered gravel and·agricultural debris TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION Tsa. C @ 4' -5': Light yellow-gray, damp to moist. very dense. silty, SM fine sandstone ' : GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: 1" = 5-' SURFACE SLOPE:· 5 °SW TREND: .N55°E .. -·-. :· A) . --- ,-----~-:7 . ..... . . ·. i. . ..... .L.-: . ----<. ..:~-: ••• ..!. ~tr.'".~• ,--_,_ .., .. . • , . 4. . t'd-1..:._ I•. I .. . ft. I I I I I I I I f · I I I I ..:_ . -,v I -, I ·-, . I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ 0 1(,,'IIC., -• l~I I / I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I I I I -. l --• .:. ~q-~:~ -K. ----.. ----"B --.. ---,--~ .. --~· .. ... .... -,_ --- ..... --C ---. -_,_ _,... TOTAL DEPTH AT 5.0' - .... --_,_ NO GROUND WATER -ENCOUNTERED -AT TIME ...... _,_ _,... OF DRILLING - ---_,... BACKFILLED: 6/26/98 - ••• •• , • · LOG OF TRENCH NO. : _T.,___-=-3 ____,_ Project Name: Bentley/Cantari-ni Logged by:_-KB~C,-,--____ _ Project Number: · 4980160.,.001 Elevation: 255 · . ENGINEERING. PROPERTIES Equipment: · JD 710 Backhoe location: See Geotechnical Map . g GEOLOGIC GEOLOGIC Sample Moist. Density '1 .~TTITUDES DATE: 6/26/98 DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses No. (%) (pcf) >1----~----------------------------t----t--~--~---+-----11 -·· ..... 0 ' (0 0 - r (I) ,. (0. ::r TOPSOIL !Topsoil A @ 0-1' :. Oq,rk brown. damp; loose to medium dens.e. slightly· clayey, silty, fjne to medium sand;. medium pores common. rootlets common. scattered agricultural debris near surface B @ 1-2.5': Rust-brown. moist. stiff. fine sandy clay to clayey sand · CRETACEOUS LUSARDI FORMATION C ·@ 2. 5 · -6 ·: Light yell ow-brown. orange-brown and gray. moi.st, · dense to very dense. medium to coarse sandstone; angular rock fragments common · Kl. SM . CL/SC,, SM -Ot--------'----------------:----------------------L---.1....-----1.. ___ _L_ _ ___JL__--I SURFACE SLOPE: 0° ~I GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION ~ .en 0 () ~--(I) en SCALE: 1" = 5' TREND: N20°E TOTAL DEPTH AT 6.o· NO GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED AT TIME OF DRILLING BACKFILLED: 6/26/98 01 0 .... ·, > -.... 0 ....,_ co 0 . - • •• Project Name: Bentley/Cantarjnt Logged .by: KBC Project Number: 4980160-001 Elevation: 230' Equipment: JD 710 Backhoe Location: See Geotechnical Mag· GEOLOGIC GEOLOGIC .:\ TTITUDJ:S DATE: 6/26/98 DESCRIPTION: UNIT · TOPSOIL ' Topsoil A @ 0-2': Brown. damp. medium dense, clayey, silty, fine to medium sand; fine gravel common. scattered medium pores-. root 1 ets common TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION Tsa B:Nl0°W, . B @ 2' -6': Light gray and orange:brown, moi.st. dense. fine 15°W gravelly to cobbly, fine to coarse sandstone. occqs·i ona T sandy beds • LOG OF TRENCH NO. : _ T-4 ENGINEERING PROPERTIES ' Sample Moist. Density uses No. (%} (pcf) SM . SM ' . r (t) cc :,- 0 :::, S20 > (I) (I) 0 (') ·iu -(t) (I) GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION f-- .... ._ - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I .... ._ -.... - .... - .... · SCALE: 1" ·= 5' --A)_ -- :-·=.· .. 1): -· ~-~ • ... ,+• A•--:•,- ~ ,,. . . . -. .. ~ .... , -. . -~;..:··-··c .,_. I I I I I ••• ·--,.. ·;T·°-1~ I I ··~ . ·.r.---.-. ~~ . --. -:-4.:·. B - ~I•~ --. ;; . _,_ -- -- -- _,_ _,_ SURFACE SLOPE: 8°W TREND: N?0°E ---. ,. ~··1 ---. . o · .. ----.. -·~-- • ., -• I . -t) -----~·., I 1· I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ?o . .,: o ----... ~ .:-.~,. --- ------ --TOTAL DEPTH AT 6.0' ---NO GROUND WATER -ENCOUNTERED AT TIME --OF DRILLING ---RA(K'FTI I rn · F-./?F.JQ~ - 01 0 ..... I > -..... 0 ..... (0 0 - ,... (D co ".j' . . -0 ::, ~ > en en 0 0 ri'; -CD en • • • LOG OF TRENCH NO.: T~5 --------- Project Name: Bentle~/Cantarini Logged by: KBC-ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Project Number: 4980160-001 Elevation: 180' Equipment: JD 710 Backhoe Location: See Geotechnical Map GEOLOGIC GEOLOGIC Sample· Moist. Density ATTITUDES DATE: 6/26/98 DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses No. (%) (pcf) ARTIFICIAL FILL -UNDOCUMENTED Afu A @ 0-1.5': · Brown. damp. loose, silty, fine to medium sand: SM organic-rich. agricultural debris common . TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION Tsa B @ 1.5' -3..5': Yell ow-brown. moi'st. very dense. s i-1 ty', fine SM to coarse sandstone @ 3.5': Practical refusal on well~cemented sandstone· GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: 1" = 5' · SURFACE SLOPE: 3-5°W TREND: N30°W ---_,_ ----. ------. A7, --------- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I · I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I, I I I I I I I I I ' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I __,-, .·.~· (P: ~.;, z·.·-1 -~--~ .. --- -··"""':"·· .·~-.---. ii ---...... < :'.-· -;-..L '1··-~ -. ,..:- ........ . . --,-"--.I_'_..,·---- --'-~i, -,--- -., . ----TOTAL DEPTH AT 3.5' - -----NO GROUND WATER -ENCOUNTERED AT TIME -----·OF DRILLING - ,-----BACKFILLED: 6/26/98 - • • • LOG OF TRENCH NO. : ___ T-6 Project Name: Bentley/Cantarini Logg_ed by:_· ~KB=-=C:..,.,---'------ Project Number: 4980160-0Ul Elevation:-=---=-27'="'5'----'·..,.......... -=-----=,.....,..,..- _ Equipment; JD 710 Backhoe· .Locati'on: See Geotechnical Map ENGINEERING PROPERTIES g~EOLOGIC GEOLOGIC Sample Moist. Density -t !,TTITUDES DATE: 6/26/98 DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses No. (%) (pcf) > 1, -..... 0 ..... (0 0 - r-(1) 0· :::,- TOPSOIL I Topsoi 1 A @ 0-2.5': Brown. dry, loose to medium dense. slightly clayey. I I SM silty. fine. sand; . fine to medium pores common. rootlets common CRETACEOUS GRANITIC$ B @ 2. 5 · -3. 5 ·: Orange-brown; dry. very den·se .. fine to coarse sand (decomposed granitics); angular rock fragments common Kgr' SW -0 1-----.1.-------------,----------:---'----------1...----'-----'--~---'------''-------l :::, GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION ·SCALE: · l". = 5'. SURFACE SLOPE: 20°N TREND: N80°E ~ . . . . > (I) 1- (1) 01-Q. ~ I--mi t- t- I- t- t- I- L______l I I I I I I I , -, ,-I I I I I I I I l I 1'-•I.,,~. J~I I 13 I I I . I I TOTAL DEPTH AT 3.5' -+-,NO GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED AT TIME -+-I OF DRILLING -+-'BACKFILLED: 6/26/98 - - - - - - - - - - - - 01 0 .... I )> -.... 0 ....... ·CO 0 - r (I) 6 ::,--0 ::, ~ )> en en 0 0 ji5 -(I) en • • • · ... •, LOG OF TRENCH .NO.: T-7 Project Name: Bentley/Cantarini Logged by: KBC ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Project Number: 4980160-001 Elevation: 240' .. Equipment: JD 710 Backhoe Location: See Geotechnical Map .. GEOLOGIC .GEOLOGIC Sample 'Moist: Density· .t!..TTITUDES• DATE: 6/26/98 DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses No. ·(%) (pcf) ARTIFICIAL FILL -· UNDOCUMENTED Afu A @ 0-2': Trench back_f i 11 for 4" PVC pi'pe: Brown. damp SM medium dense. silty, fine to.medium sand .. TOPSOIL Topsoil B @ 0-1.5': Brown. damp, loose to medium dense, slightly · SM clayey; silty fine sand; few medium pores. : sc.attered rootlets CRETACEOUS GRANITICS · . Kgr C @ 1.5' -5.5': Light orange-brown. dry, dense to very dense medi:um to coqrse sand (decompose~ ·grar:iiti-cs); SW angular rock fragments common,.scattered fractures ' GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION . SCALE: 1" = 5·' SURFACE S~OPE: 3-5°N TREND: N35°W --... . A --. -/4''-PVC Pf Pf; ---~~g --- -----'---' ---..... :· t ---· .. ~ ---~ I/ I I I -,--• •I• • I 'I • ,·. -~·V., I I I I I I I.· I I· I I I "'R?:i A .. 1·, ., · 1;ti~--~ : .. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I. I I I I I I I I I I I ·~ dVU .. ' -~.:-1,· l • l I I I I I I I I I I I I I ---~ . . .. :: ,:.--. :· ! : •df I • • . --- --~--·· .. , ----. , . - ,--'-C -,-- ,-_,_ _,_ - ,-_,_ .,.; ,-TOTAL DEPTH AT 5.5' - -_,_ ' _,_ NO GROUND WATER -ENCOUNTERED AT TIME --'-_,_ OF DRILLING - ,--'-_,_ BACKFILLED: 6/26/98 - ~-- Ol 0 ..... I > -..... 0 ' co 0 - ' r (1) co ::r -0 ::, ~ > Cf) • Cf) 0 0 el (1) Cf) • •• • LOG OF TRENCH NO. :_T ___ ·-____ 8 __ , Project Name: Bentlet/Cantarini Logged by: KBC ENG.+ NEERING PROPERTIES Project Number: ·4980160-001 Elevation: 305' Equipment: JD 710 Backhoe Location: See Geotechnical MaQ GEOLOGIC GEOLOGIC Sample Moist. Density ATTITUDES DATE: .6/26/98 DESCRIPTION: UNIT . uses Nb. (%) (pcf) TOPSOIL/COLLUVIUM Qcol A @ 0-4': Red-brown. moist to wet, medium to stiff, fine sandy CL 1 clay; gray-brown mottling common. scattered cobbles @ 4·: Minor seepage CRETACEOUS LUSARDI FORMATION Kl B @ 4· -6': Yellow-brown and gray--brown. moist. dense. clayey to SC/SM 2 silty, fine to coarse sandstone: scattered gravel . ' GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: 1" = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 09 TREND: ·N25°E ' ,.... -,---- -_,.... --- -\ .... ·--··A·· --- , ... ~ · ..... -~ar: ~~ ; .:.::··.~-·-:-: ~--J -,.... -~~i··,···,'()' --. . . I I I I I I I I I I I I· • · ·. I • I ' I' I· .I I •/ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ·~-·!, ··~··. '· .'(,), ·'· ! ·.-7 I I I I I I I I I I I ,.... --·-:-4 ._..._.._ • . . ':-: . ·'.1 . -0. _,.... -~ •, • r • -~--.·--: --~ . -. , .... ---y _,.... -):·.;.·B~ --!-.• _,_ -. ~...: .. ·..:..------- -----TOTAL DEPTH AT 6.0' - -----MINOR SEEPAGE AT 4' -BACKFILLED: 6/26/98 ,.... ----- ------ • • • LOG OF TRENCH NO.:_~ T-~ Project Name: . Beritl ey/Cantarini · Logged by:_~KB=:-;:C:..,-------,- Project Number: 4980160-001 El evati on.:=---=3-="40"--·-,--..,....,...,......_:--,-:--Equi pment: JD 710 Backhoe Location: See Geotechnical Map ENGINEERI-NG PROPERTIES ~ GEOLOGIC . GEOLOGIC . Sample Moist. Density -t ATTITUDES DATE: 6/26/98 DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses No. (%) (pcf) ' >f-----+------------------------------t----+----i-----+---+------1 L --4 0 -' (0 0 - r ~-(C ::r TOPSOIL A @ o~o.s·: Light brown. dry, slightly clayey, silty, fine sand: rootlets common B @ 0. 5 · -2 · : Brown to reddish brown. moist, stiff. medium · sandy clay; dark gray-brown mottles common CRETACEOUS GRANITICS C @ 2'-8': Light gray to yellow-brown. fine to coarse sand (decomposed granitics) @ 8': Prqctical refusal on very dense/unweathered rock ·Topsoil SM SC 1 Kgr SW -o~---.1-.------------------,-----------"'""----1---L-----l'---__.__-----1 ; GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION. SCALf l" = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 0° · TREND: N35°W > cn1-cn 0 I-() p3 r--CD 1-C/J I- I- I- f- f- f- .... 1 I I I I I L L I I I I I I I -+- -I-Al m ~. . . . r .. ~c • ~ ••• I 1$(.··.·1::~i::.-;:·@·~.;<·~j:j· .. ;::··;//j:]321 I ·. c·· ·. . ·i: : . . . . , . . ·, -t-:· .. , -I- -I- l !TOTAL DEPTH AT 8.0' NO GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED AT TIME -4-· I OF DRILLING -I--I-I BACKFILLED: 6/26/gR - - - - - - - - - - - - • • ( • ·.· ·:··.·· LOG OF TRENCH NO. : T-10 Project Name: Bentley/Cantarini Logged by:_. ~K'='cBC~----,--- Project Number: . 4980160-001 Elevation:-=---=18;;;.-:0:..-'..,....--,--.....,__,,.....___ Equipment: JD 710 Backhoe Location: See Geotechnical Map ENGINEERING PROPERTIES ~ GEOlOGIC GEOLOGIC Sample Moist. Density -t ,i\TTITUDES DATE: 6/20/98 DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses No. (%) (pcf) )> . I, -.... 0 ....... CD 0 - r (1) cc :r CRETACEOUS POINT LOMA(?) FORMATION A. @ 0-4': Interbedded light gray, d~mp. dense to very dense. silty fine to medium sandstone and dark gray to black. moist. hard clayey siltstone; blocky fissile Kp SM/ML 1 !J GRAPHIC ~EPRESENTATION-I I I I I I SCALE : 1" = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 0° TREND: N35°E )> "' "' 0 0 lii -(1) "' ~ f I- I- I- )- I I I I I I I I I I I _l 1-I -'-- -I---- -'--~t·· .. · .. · ···-I~··:·-· ·-2b I I · ... ·.1:: I 1>1• ,+:(, -·~ ,·1~·L·.J.~:._. '-1':....t ~ - - - - -+-TOTAL DEPTH AT 4.0' - -'--+-NO GROUND WATER 1ENCOUNTERED AT TIME - -+--+-I OF DRILLING - -1--+-1 Allr10::·n , r::-n. c:. 10c. ,no - • • ./ .., '' LOG'OF TRENCH NO.:~T--1~1 __ Project Name: Cantarini Property Project Number :_4.:.:9=8~0,=16=0._.-=00=l.....,_ __________ _ Equipment: JD7l0 Logged by:, _____ KB ___ C ______ _ ETe~ation~ 176 Feet Location: See Geotechnical Map ENGINEERING PROPERTIES g GEOLOGIC -GEOLOGIC · -Sample Moist. Density,. -t ATTITUDES · DATE: 11/15/99 DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses No. (%l (pcf) >1----,-----+-----:-----'----,,-----------------------------1------+-----,--+---1-----+-----,-----I ..... 0 ..... ·CO ,o -: ~ iii" ::r TOPSOIL A @ 0-3': Silty, fine to medium SAND; brown, moist, loose, slightly clayey, fine to medium pores common, rootlets common, agricultural debris common TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION B @ 3'-15': Fine to medium SANDSTONE; greenish gray with orange-brown iron-oxide staining common, damp . to moist, dense to y,ery dense @ 15': Practical refusal SM Tsa SM S't-------''------------------------------.l---..L_..__;____J __ __;._...l_ __ L.o_-,--~ ~I GRAPHIC REPRE~ENTATION ~ "' 0 0 ji;" -(D "' SCALE: , • I ! ,,,'• I •. '@ .-! -·· • • I B ~ ' ' I ' ' .. -" ,, • I ~ ,. ' . ' . ' SURFACE SLOPE: 12°W TREND: N60°E TOTAL DEPTH AT 15 FEET NO GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED BACKFILLED: 11/15/99 • • • LOG OF TRENCH NO.:_T~-1~2~- Project Name: Cantarini Property logged by: KBC ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Project Numbert . 4.980160-001 Elevation: 148 Feet ---=------.......a-----Equi pme_nt: JD710 Locatjon: See Geotechnical Map : GEOLOGIC GEOLOGIC Sample Moist. Density : ATTITUDES DATE: 11/15/99 DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses No. (%) (pcf) TOPSOIL SM •· I· A @· 0-3.5': Silty fine to medium SAND; brown, dry to damp, : loose, large pores common, rootlets common QUATERNARY COLLUVIUM/WEATHERED BEDROCK Qcol B @ 3'-9': Clayey SAND; greenish gray, orange-brown iron-oxide SC 1 staining common, moist, m~oium dense TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION t @ 9'-14': Silty fine SANDSTONE; greenish gray, damp,·dense Tsa SM · to very dense . .. • @ i4': Practical refusal . ' 1-----......._ ___ ___,.------------------------"""-'-!--'------'--~--'-----'---'--.....__ __ --I GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: 111 = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 10°S TREND: 'N5°W. I --• ... , . ·: ~:_·· .. --G~:>:.-.=_ .. ·-~.--':/ == = . . .. . '• If---lo • ' 'l .. ~ ---. ---.~· .~. . ., ·~ ---~·-· .. ·_· .. ~. ---I _, µ__., --r,·-•• I I I I I I I I I I •.,1 ~I~•, 1°' I I I O I I 0ol I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I~ • I I O I • r • ~ i o I I 4 •', ' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i-,,. : •• ---· ~ •--:-• ..__,a...-L ... .--~-q ---. . . ... ®. . . . \.!,. : ·::::_·· _.-~;_~ ', ~.-: ·. :~_-:pj-: ·';,. == = • .--. ·--··--4•11 1---i.a.. •.• : <i • • -• , -1---. -.. , . : ·· ... ,.. , ~ _.,'....!. • :--~:-. :·@·. _:__. _:_;..;'1· -,... TOTAL DEPTH AT 14 FEET - _ -~··. C .\. · · • _,_ NO GROUND WATER _ '-;-.. · -• --;-• :-ENCOUNTERED """ -•--· :-· .. ~ _,_ BACKFILLED: 11/15/99 -----~ - • . '.·:·· • • LOG OF TRENCH NO.:~ T~l3 - Project Name: Cantari.ni Property Logged by: KBC . . ENGiNEERING PROPERTIES Project Number:· 4980160-001 Elevation:. 150 Feet · Equipment: JD710 Location: · See Geotechnical Map : GEOLOGIC GtOLOGIC Sample . Moist. Density · ATTITUDES DATE:. 11/15/99 DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses· No. (%) (pcf) . . TOPSOIL . : A @ 0-2.5': Clayey ·fine to medium SAND; brown, ·damp, medium SC 1 dense, fine to medium pores common, rootlets · common. B @ 2.5'-3.5': Fine to medium SAND; brown, damp loose to medium SM dense, abundant large pores, friable .. TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION Tsa C @ 3.5'-11.5': Fine to medium SANDSTONE; light or~nge-brown, SM damp, dense to very dense, approximately horizontally bedded, cross-bedding common . ' I ~ .. ,1------'-----,--------------------,-----~------"-----'-----'------,---'---....__.,.__-, 1 , GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: l" = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 5°W TREND: Nl5°E i . • -~ ·.· ·:;· I --~ • • • ::..,._ ,:_ -• • -,--: -.v--.:__:.:·-=. ·.· ®-· ----=~. ·. . -..--~ .. ' ,. . . .,._~ .. I t 1--~ ~ • .......:..-~, ~ ... ,... • • • ... -1--- t-• • ~ ;-,. •• ,• .. .. ·.··, ~ -i::::=-,. •, ,-.' \ .,., : 00 ' • ® ,; . : I .. ~ I~ --- I I I I I I I I I I . 0 1, :1•' .I .•1°,· 9 ·,~ •"I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I 1 1 I I I I I I I ,.. • • I r. r • , ·1 I I I I I I I . I I I I I I I I I I I I ._.,.. . . . . .. . --!... • . • • • ' • ., • • • • • --- • I .. I • • ,J I • •• • • • • : ), • •• -,--• , • • 4 • ---' ~ . . ... . . . . . . . . . -\-.... • • • • . •• •• _:. • • l "@ .-.. "' : -----,, . ..· ~ . . ---. . . ,, ..... "' ~ ,· ..... _ -¾·: . · ... ·. ·_.. _-:·: · ·. ,: -.... TOTAL DEPTH AT 13.5 FT ... .. .. . ' .. . ---•• ·L • •• • • • • , •• ;·. _,_ NO GROUND WATER -· · '. . ·· ·: .. ' . ' ENCOUNTERED ---: · .. : ~· ·. .. ... _,_ BACKFILLED: 11/15/99 - --f--• .. •• • -foo--. . . • Project Name: Cantarini Property Project Number:_4.:..:9=8=0=16=0...,-,.:..0.:::.:01_~---"------Equipment: JD710 · • logged by:_.:..:K=BC~------- Elevation: · 160 Feet Location: See Geotec:hnica l Map • · ... ····• LOG OF TRENCH NO. :___,_T ...... -1 ...... 4 __ ENGINEERING PROPERTIES ~ GEOLOGIC GEOLOGIC Sample Moist. Density "'t ATTITUDES DATE: 11/15/99 "OESCRlPTION: UNIT uses . No. {%) {pcf) >1-------l----------------,-------------------lf----+-----+-------lf----l------'11 _, ...a.' ~ 1(0'" 0 - r (t) co· :r TOPSOIL A @ 0-1,5': Silty fine SAND; -brown, damp, loose, few medium pores, rootlets common TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION B @ l.5'-10': Fine to medium SANDSTONE; very light gray with orange-brown iron-oxide staining common, damp to moist, dense C @ 10' -13'_: Sandy SILTSTONE; dark gray, moist, dense, fossilized animal burrows common D @ 13'-15': SILTSTONE; dark gray, moist, d~n.se E @ 15'-20': Silty, fine _to medium SANDSTONE; light to dark gray, moist, dense SM I Tsa I SM SM/ML I 1 ML SM 01-------'----=-------'-'---'-------------,----------,---,----'----...___-___,_ ___ _.__ __ ,....__--l ; GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: 111 = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 25°W TREND: N85°W ~ en 0 C) su· -(t) en I I I I -+- -+- -+- J_~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-I 1 , , _ , 1 , , , m• , , , . . • , • '\ : 'I •:• l I . • \ .~ 1 • , , · , , , 1 1 0 ·.···.·-\{''1: . .-.1, .. _._. __ , ,_.._ -:I = : 1: · ... ·, ·@· •. tT.: · J-. ~ : . .... . ~ .. -8 j : :.~-~@·· ·~A1·:--oh' c··_ ·.~I·-, .. ®···.·. A a 0 ~ . . . J'l· • . .... ..., . j l ' . . . . f. • ._ .• ' • I , ••• . • • • ,.. ~ , ., r •' • I, • • 1· • • • . . _ . . ~ ~ .. "•-; . -I· \··1· ·1·-·, ,I .. · ... ~-ct> ... ' . ,. . ,,. ~ ·1 . . ~-. ,, . . .,, ., . . .• :::, '• j • • • ' • • I • •• • • " • () _§ ·-____._1-_l--=:. : _._ ~Ji: 1±1. ';J _..-_ _._. :-. --., V 1. :r ;;r -t- -t- -t- -+- ---I I I ... 't· • . :.~-,~·1, .... _ ... ;,:. i-.r ~ _, .i :,: :tr . -.---. ·_.·--,.·.··:·:·, !,.'1·1 li:• ."f.·. ,. : -~',.:~ -~ -\ I l _,·. j '-~ :j ·.~ 1· , -·_ ·:; · :,)·1· Ll..., :I"", :... ·: -· • .. _,, ..: .. ;...:.•4-______ r------===:::::::i:= 1 I ,,--... - ]. - I I I I I I I I I I I I - - - - TOTAL DEPTH AT 20 FEET - -NO GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED BACKFILLED: 11/15/99 -- • • • LOG OF TRENCH NO.: T-15 Project Name: Cantarini Progerty L9gged by: KBC ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Project Number: 4980160-001 Elevation: 260 Feet Equipment: JD710 Location: · See Geotechn i ca 1 Mag : GEOLOGIC ·GEOLOGIC Sample Moist. Density · ATTITUDES DATE: 11/15/99 DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses No; (%) (pcf) . TOPSOIL '. SM ' ; . @ 0-0.5': Silty fine to medium SAND.; brown, dry, loose, • A • rootlets common . ' CRETACEOUS GRANITIC$ Kgr B @ 0.5'-2.5': Weathered GRANITE; orange-brown, dry, very SM dense, weathers to silty medium to coarse sand,..:size grains @ 2.5': Practical· refusal ' '. I GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: 1" = 5' SURFACE SLOP~: 3-5°W TREND: N25°W . ® ,--i---'-' t---,--,--. -,-,-" ··r t •• • 'r,/-.• ··~.,,. ·-._:.,-:, ,1.,-:,,: · ... i .. : •. ·i·/ - ,--~>/;;/~ v.· ·® < ··: ··-i; v~ . ---. ,: I I I I I I I I I I I I '.r...t, '-' ·· _. B .,•y. I ./ I J J I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~-'/ ·;!. ~: ·' -~ V I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I. I I, I 1 -... " ,--,---- ,--,--1--'-.... -,----.... -,---- ,--1---TOTAL DEPTH AT 2.5 FT. ---,--,-NO GROUND.WATER -ENCOUNTERED --,--,-BACKFILLED: 11/15/99 - ,--,--,-- • • • LOG OF TRENCH NO.:~T_-1_6 __ Project Name: Cantarinj Property · Logged by: _ _,_,_K=BC.,___ ______ _ ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Project Number:_· _4~9:,;;8.;.01~6=0:....--=-00:.::1~--,.-------,--Equ i pment: JD710 Elevation: 238 Feet Location: See.Geotechnical. Map ~ GEOLOGIC-. GEOLOGIC Sample .Moist. Density T ATTITUDES. DATE: 11/15/99 DESCRIPTION: UNIT : uses No. (%) (pcf) )> I -.... 0 ...... ·(0•· 0 _, r (I) io" :::r CRETACEOUS LUSARDI FORMATION A @ 0-2.5': Silty fine to medium SANDSTONE; off.,white to very 'light gray with orange-brown iron-oxide staining common, damp, dense to very.dense B @ 2.5'-8': Sandy gravel CONGLOMERATE; orange-brown, damp, dense to very dense; cobbles common @ 8': Practical refusal Kl SM GP 01------'----'------------~---------------,-L-----'-----l-----L---...t__---l ~ GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: 1" = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 0° TREND: N20°E )> (/)I--en 01-0 ii,'1-.... (Di-en I- I- I- I- I- I-. I- t- I I I I I J __ I_I _L__J_ I I I I I 1·~ I I I -+- •• ,,,. "' • • -: *' ·-··--.. · . ~ ... . , , .. A . ... . ~--~-:-... -· ., ' .... :\' ". •;', •;--•_ I I io_f.· ti:,_-_.,_-_ !2_ I•' I"' I 1' -r-1 l \~' J I . l • . I • I '• o I I 0-, .. , (). , ,0 • -+- -+-\ b IJ .: (7 ~ 'O, • 0• • O O O ·····o ,C,()o•, \. /J. -~ • fJ • • • _-.CY -t--.....;;_. ...• , ,,Q 0 fJ O , ,., ,_ a . _ o. . -+- -I- -+- -+- -+- -t- -t- -t- - - - - - -- - TOTAL DEPTH AT 8 FEET - -NO GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED BACKFILLED: 11/15/99 -- • -· • .. LOG OF TRENCH NO.:_ T-17 Project Name: Cantarini Property Logged by:_--'K=BC ___________ _ Project Number: . 4980160-001 Elevation: _____ 2 __ 05____....F __ e,aa..et __________ _ ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Equipment: JD710 Location: See Geotechni~al Map ~ GEOLOGIC GEOLOGIC Sample Moist. Dens.ity -t ATTITUDES DATE:, 11/16/99 DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses No. (%) (pcf) >1--------+----------------'----------,.-----------------+------1----'-+----'----l. -1-..... 0 ......... «> ·O - r-(1) co· :::r. TOPSOIL A @ 0-2': Silty SAND; dark brown, moist, loose, slightly clayey, few medium pores, rootlets common CRETACEOUS LUSARDI FORMATION B @ 2' -12': Silty, fine to coa·rse SANDSTONE; gray with orange- brown iron-oxide stafoing, damp, dense to very dense, scattered cobble and boulders SM Kl SM -01---,------'-------'--------'------------------------,,,-------'-------''------''--------,.1--,-~~-----1 -~ GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION ~ "' 0,- 0 s5·,--~-, I- I- t- t- I- I- I- t- _I _ ___I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SCALE: 1" = 5' •• I ..... : .:~··.:,·:·"~ ~.i ••• \':• I I I L~-l--'--\ • .-__L ___ _'L_, .l__,_,__J~;~, ~· ~~ I I I I ,-~ ~1-1··--t-\ ,•. . .) :·· I ' I -t-\• -• 0 •, •, .• I 0 l \ · ... -''..-.~ 'i) • •• • '@' ~ -i- -i- -i- -i- t' : .. • , B ' • .... .. 1' ' .. , • ' • 'I. '•II '0 \ '\-; , .. ... .. •, Q/ . . . ' ·, 6 • , ...... 0 • ', SURFACE SLOPE: 5-7°S TREND: Nl0°W -t-- -t-- -t-- -t-- - - - - - - - - .TOTAL DEPTH AT 12 FEET - -NO GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED BACKFILLED: 11/16/99· -- ••• • • LOG OF TRENCH NO.:~T--1~8 __ Project Name:. Cantarini ProQert~ Logged by: KBC .. ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Project Number:. 4980160-001 Elevation: 195 Feet Equipment:· JD710 Location:· See Geotechnical MaQ GEOLOGIC GEOLOGIC Sample Moist. Density . ATTITUDES DATE: 11/16/99 DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses No. (%) (pcf) ' TOPSOIL I A @ 0-1': Silty SAND; brown; moist, loose, few medium pores, SM rootlets common I I B @ l'-2.5': Sandy CLAY; dark brown, moist, medi-um to stiff, CL . few cobbles QUATERNARY COLLUVIUM Qcol .. C @ 2.5'-4': Clayey fine to coarse SAND; orange to red-brown,. SC moist, stiff to very stiff, few cobbles TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION Tsa D @ 4'-6': Fine to coarse SANDSTONE; yellow-brown, damp, dense, SM fractured CRETACEOUS LUSARDI FORMATION Kl E @6'-9': Medium to coarse SANDSTONE; gray, damp, dense to SM very d'ense, moderate silica cement @ 9': Practical refusal GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE:· 111 '= 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 5-7°S TREND: N32°E I . . ·1 td"A) ~--..:.. ·= _-...,,.----.... . . ~· . _, -., . ~--_.J ---.. , ~ , .......... ~ ~-.!.-;,;..::.. ~ ~--· . . --·,.. ,._., ->? ---. ~~---=-:;·-·_: .. ~ ·;··· ~-:--. -. ~~..:-~ ---.,, ... r., .. ,.: --=-:;: ---:" ---. ' ~;.·-· . ~~-0'-' • ...• J ,, ,---: ~ .,·~ ' \,-. . ' . ---. I I I I\ • · .,:=-C ':, I ' j • ,., -,~ • ..... I I I I I I I I I I I ·" ( .... I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I '-~ .... ~ ~-· ! • I ,·---; ·,. ~I/ I' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I --=\···. :· .:: . J @··-··. ··. ::: J -.... - • • I D , -. . ... " \ ---: ,' _ ... ·· -----,_ ,# .. ·-". ' I -I " •• I• I .. . ---\ . : -@5·· ;:<·y ---.... ' .. .... --•,__ ••, I J ---. ' -. .. .. ' . .. ,. .. . ,, .. • I • . . ~--~. ·-~ TOTAL DEPTH AT 9 FEET --------'---NO GROUND WATER -ENCOUNTERED ,-----BACKFILLED: 11/16/99 ------- • ••• • :-.-·· LOG OF TRENCH NO.:~ T-19 Project Name: Cantarini Property Logged by: KBC ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Project Number: 4980160-001 Elevation: 185 Feet Equipment: . JD710 Location: See Geotechnical Map I GEOLOGIC GEOLOGIC ·Sample Moist. Density · ATTITUDES DATE: 11/16/99 DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses No. (%) (pcf) '1-----+----------------------------------,-.---+----+----+-----ll----+--------'----I . QUATERNARY COLLUVIUM Qcol I 1 A @ 0-12': · Clayey SAND; brown, mo-ist to wet, soft to medium, SC 1 gravel common '. CRETACEOUS LUSARDI FORMATION Kl B @ 12'-14.5': Gravelly to cobbly, fine to coarse SANDSTONE; GW yellow-brown, damp, very dense . GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: 111 = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 5°SW TREND: N65°E ' t ____ T ____ T _______ --=I=~=~1'=:=:=:~~=:=f:==:==:~~-7-rr---,----I----,----,---J . ~ ~-. . I . . -. , , .:. c...; • ·r. • .----. .. . · ... ,_ ... ~ .... ., . . .,,, ~ I 1--rr·--I ... • -t' -., --- I --~ ' • • :,. ; • •Q • 0' '•.: 0 • • • 'I --- :·-I I I I I I I I I I I I -I\:;~: .--· ~~-.. _\·-:-: ,' •,~-~.'I I I I I I --I I I I I I I I I I I I - I I I I I I I I I I I I l I I , I I I I • _..! • I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -. ·' ~ ---~ .. , ~ • " ·, -t-- ,• "•~ ·,-~ .. • J I I f----' •' 0 • • _, I J •" • , -~ - • ' -• I • • • I • f / ~ --t:) • ... -. • -i.--, .. • •• . ' .. • I ,.._ --.... -· • , ·,, tJ I,., --- -... ' ' ,_!....- ~ ---\' .... , :;. · :, }~, .. ·/ --TOTAL DEPTH AT 14. 5 FT~ _ -~ · . . ,_..;' -' · .. , __ NO GROUND WATER _ -. . · . ' · -. . ENCOUNTERED ---~-P.. :• -,. ·,-.• t1·:-c;7··. --BACKFILLED: 11/16/99 - --~ '' O,ii®, 91/ ---"~o .... v .. ,'l __ •• • • -LOG OF TRENCH NO. : _ T -20 Project Name: Cantarini ProQerty Logged by: KBC ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Project Numper: 4980160-001 Elevation: 120 Feet . Equipmenti JD710 Location: See Geotechni~al MaQ . " : GEOLOGIC GEOLOGIC Sample Moist. Density· · ATTITUDES DATE: 11/16/99 .DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses No; (%) (p.cf) ', . QUATERNARY COLLUVIUM --Qcol • ' • A @ 0-8': Clayey SAND; brown, moist, soft to medium, scattered SC • cobble - TERTIARY SANTIAGO FdRMATION Tsa B @ 8'-10': Silty, fine to medium SANDSTONE; gray, dry, dense, SM fossilized plant material common : -. ~ . I I GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: 1" = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 5°SE TREND: N45°W , .. 1--,-' _,... -I . -. --. . . , _. .: . , I,_ , .,. • , J• I ' ·, -,_ -I ~ ~__;:;_ :,: -, , ... ~ ,_·.' -·c;; . . . I ,-. -. -,--• . .• A I " '.._ I ~ • I ' . ... "· I' .. --I ,_ -. . --, •I• ... ·., •". • I -.... - I I I I I I I I I I I I ·\ :.,__ ' I 'I I I f • • I • 1° I .: I ., . f I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ''\'.','''" I I I .t I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I • • I --1--• • ., ~ : ,: I ', • , -:--.. ---'. . . . . . '' \ '' • I • ----;-~'" ,-. . , -. .. ,, \ --- . . -·---\ .... ·--,, ---' : . '' . ' •, . '• ~ I ----I\" , ~ ~ . : --·~ ,, --. . . ---. "'• ,' -~ .. - I, .. • I 4. . ·-·· ~··@ ·:y ---.:-B . . ---TOTAL DEPTH AT 10 FEET -_,.! • ·-.: ... ---•.:.. :.~ !.: •• tr' --NO GROUND WATER -ENCOUNTERED --... --BACKFILLED: 11/16/99 - ------ • • • LOG OF:TRENCH NO.:~T--2~1 __ Project Name: Cantarini Property Project Number:_·4~9=8=01=....;:6'""0--0"'""0;..::1=---------Equipment: JD710 Logged by:.....,.......:..:K=BC:..,_...._ ___ _ flevation; 92 Feet _ Location: See Geote~hnical Map ENGINEE~ING PROPERTIES g;IGEOLOGIC I I I I t ATTITUDES DATE: 11/16/99 . . DESCRIPTION: GEOLOGJC1 t Sample Moist. Density UNIT uses No. . (%) (pcf) -1 _,I, 0 ..... <O ·O -1 r (D fi'i ::::r - QUATERNARY C~LLUVI.UM A @ 0-3.5': Clayey SAND; light brown, damp to moist, medium, scattered gravel, medium pores common, rootlets common B @ 3.5'-4.5': Medium SAND; brown, dry, loose, abundant medium to large pores, friable C @ 4.5'-6': Clayey SAND; light brown, damp to moist, niedium, medium pores common D @ 6'~9': Sandy CLAY; dark brown, moist, stiff E @ 9'-ll.5'2 Fine to coarse SAND; yellow-brown, moist, loose to medium dense,· scattered cobble @ 17.5': Exceeded reach of backhoe I I Qcol I SC SM I I I SC CL SM 01------..__-----------------,-----------------~--...;..L..----..__---' _ __._ ______ ...._ __ __,_ ___ --I ~ GRAPHIC Rl:PRESENTATION SCALE: I" = 5' E SLOPE: 2-3°S TREND: NI0°E > . ..,___;,: . ~ ,-"/ ; -® . .,_ .. ; ... _ ----;-. "'. ~ . :.....:..,: ' • A , ~ _ _______.. , ,.,,. -. .. "' ' ~ !' '. '1 ,. , • : • .... • ,). ,._, , , .. ... .. . ,, . . . . /. . ... ·.,. L -I f I I I I I I . -.. ' ; -: ., . .,, .. .. ( --1--J ~ • ,., .. ± ... , ... ®-. -.. -· v·· .- \ ·' . . E . ·-: .. . •'. .-.. : ,,. _i;· .. - I J • '-, -'• • ,, ' :_ ' ") . . .. --_, , f -. \ _, . -/ -.: .. 1/ I -+- -+- -1- -1- - - - - - - - I - TOTAL DEPTH AT 17.5 FT_ -NO GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED BACKFILLED: 11/16/99 -- • •• . : •• LOG OF TRENCH NO.: T-22 Project Nlme: Cantarini Property Project Numb~r : __ 4.:..::9=8=0-16:...:0a...-=OO=l=---------- Logged by:_..:.:K=BC,.__ ____ _ Elevation: 100 feet ENGINEERING PROPERTI_ES Equi pment: JD710 Location:· See Geotechnical Map ~ GEOLOGIC .GEOLOGIC Sample Moist. Density 7' ATTITUDES DATE: 11/16/99 DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses · No. (%) (pcf) > - -::J:'I 0 ...... <O 0 - r (I) c5· ::r QUATERNARY COLLUVIUM I Qcol A -@ 0-7.5': · Clayey SAND; dark gray-brown, moist to wet, soft to medium, organic matter tommon TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION B @ 7.5-9': Fi.ne to medium SANDSTONE; light gray with yellow- brown staining common, damp to moist, dense Tsa SC SM ()1--------.-1---------,------------'------------_.l.----,--'----,-1----l.....---'--J._--l ~ GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: 111 = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 2-3°S TREND: Nl0°E )> Cl) I-"' Ot-o su·1--<?>·1-"' I- I- I- I- I- I- ~ ~ .l I I I I I L I , ____ J__J I I I I I I -I I I I I -t- : l~~ :. 'f· .. · ·: :~-; -__._:. (i ·. : : .. : . ' ®·· ;_ \ _'_,_·: ~ ,.·-1::1 • • • I I• -I I _,,. • .-,I , I I I . . J' I ·1 • I I I ,1 I I I I I I J I l , . ...:..:.._.... .... . -" l ;. .. ..... ' .. ' ., ,I . ~ . . : . . , --,.-J ,; ... I --~:• \._---=-•, -~, ; t -• (e\-I~.! • •) ~ -t-~~__/ ~ -+- -+- -+- - - - - - - - - TOTAL DEPTH AT 9 FEET - -+-1NO GROUND WATER -ENCOUNTERED l !BACKFILLED: 11/16/99 - - • • • LOG OF TREN'cH NO.-:---.!.T--=-2=· 3 __ Project Name: Cantarini ProQerty Logged by: KBC ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Project Number: 4980160-001 . Elevation: 132 Feet Equipment: JD710 .. Location: See Geotechnical MaQ GEOLOGIC GEOLOGIC Samp-le Moist. Density ATTITUDES DATE: 11/16/99 DESCiUPT ION: UNIT uses No. ' (%) (pcf) TOPSOIL A @ 0-2 1 : Clayey fine to coarse SANO;.brown, moist, soft to· medium, organic matter ·co_mmon · ·. SC QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS Qt B @ 2'-4': Medium to coarse SAND; red-brown, moist, medium SP . dense to dense C @ 4' -·5 I; Coarse sandy gravel to cobble CONGLOMERATE; red-GP brown, moist, dense ', . . . • GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION . SCAL~: 111 = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 2-.3°W TREND: N5E . ---_,_ - -_,_ -K.· . . -. ·,.'@' ...... .,. ·-····t --. . -·.,A' .·..:...,_ ... • • .. •I --. -· . . . . . .. ,,. : . ~-., ... __ .· ... _, . . .. ... , ·---'\ ,· .. ---. .,--( :, ·. ·, ... . -;J I I I I I I I I I I I I I • •• I ,.1 ' •, I •, I • •j I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 'I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I '\t•,'' -.: . '@ .'., ',•l,.7 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I . .,, ---. -I lit "' •• . ,. ---~ ' ---, ·'@ -;-:·.t / ----<'!>-!'t; "' d:J ------ ------ -----TOTAL DEPTH AT 5 FEET - ---_,_ NO GROUND WATER -ENCOUNTERED ---_,_ BACKFILLED: 11/16/99 ------- • • • LOG OF TRENCH NO.: T-24 Project Name: Cantarini ProQert~ Logged by: KBC ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Project Number: 4980160-001 Elevation: · 116 Feet Equipment: JD710 · Location: -See Geotechni~al MaQ : GEOLOGIC GEOLOGIC Sample Moist. Density · ATTITUDES DATE: 11/16/99 DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses No . (%) (pcf} . . QUATERNARY COLLUVIUM Qcol • • A @ 0-9.5': Silty SAND; brown to dark gray-brown, moist to SM . , wet, loose, slightly clayey, medium pores· common, > . few pockets with abundant large pores B @ 9.5'-16': Silty SAND; yellow-brown, moist, medium dense,. SM clayey lenses common @ 16': Excavation exceeded reach of backhoe . I I r ~ I I GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: l" = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 5°S TREND: N5E Cl • I .. I . '. ,' " '\ ~ ,, ", .. . .. . ....... , .:: . , . I i-.... ,. •" • /' I ..,.,. I ' II --. -. , I ~-~--_,... --J .·-J. I,--. ..: .. ~ ... -."' .,. . ---!. .. J • • ' ' i--.. • ~ ...... _ 1--,.,,~ "'~-~ •: ,, . I,-----" ." I" :,I' I , ' '. ··--i--..... •, ~' r ---, --;-,• • I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ·1 I • I ' • I ,,,-• I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I. I I I I I I I I I I I I '\'' ' I I I I· </ '' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I, I ... .. . .... , --~ . ' . . ,. .,. .. ---... ~.-· .. ....,,. ,• , :·. . --~ : . . : ... _ ; -,, ----.... ·, I.\--,...~-. .,_--'• I --I ---... , ... ~ . -· . , , . . , ---.. _.,. •• I ---. . . ,. .. r, -• , ' . ,. ,• .. TOTAL DEPTH AT 16 FEET -.... --. ---·· ® •:;-;-..... ,. . -----. . .. .... , . B . . ·, , • --NO GROUND WATER -•' I • • • ENCOUNTERED ..... --\ ·. ': ·: : :-.....:...... . . --BACKFILLED: 11/16/99 -,, . ' . . .. -.. -·-·-· ... V I---l , ' ' ' -: \ _,.... -. . -. /.·, ' .,,, I ~ f •_. '• __,. • ,;I ~ • • • LOG OF TRENCH NO. :___.,T__,-2=-=5 __ Project Name: . Cantarini Prouerty Logged by: KBC ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Project Number: 4980160-001 El evati-on: · 140 Feet Equipment: JD710 Location: See Geotechntcal Mau GEOLOGIC GEOLOGIC. Sample Moist. Density ATTITUDES DATE: 11/16/99 DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses No. (%) (pcf) TOPSOIL I A @ 0-0.5': Silty fine SAND; brown, damp, loose, root 1 ets common · ·SM I I TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION Tsa B:N35°W, B @ 0.5'-3': Fine to coarse SANDSTONE; yellow-brown and gray, SM 12°SW damp, dense, bedding common ; . GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION. SCALE:· l 11 = 5'' SURFACE SLOPE: 3-5°W TREND: N55°E I • ~ ---_...,. - -"""'· • -'-Tl -: ,, ,, .,,• ... · .. · .. ·~---8;7' ---'\., .: ... · ,, • . r. ... . ~ Ni·?:···:'. , I-·@· ..... "'---. . ,· B ·'. ; ... • .. , ., . I •• •• • . --·--., . · ..... ", .. ·.~ ·V -• I I I I I I I I I I I I I I • ' i • ' • •I' • •' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ------ ------ ------ ------ -----TOTAL DEPTH AT 3 FEET - -----NO GROUND WATER -ENCOUNTERED ---. --BACKFILLED: 11/16/99 ----'--- • • • .. LOG OF TRENCH NO.: . T-26 Project Name: Cantarini Property Logged by:_..!,.!K=BC:::___ ____ _ ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Project Number:_4 ____ 9~8 ..... 01 .... 6~0--0~0-1-______ _ Elevation: 212 Feet Equipment: JD710 Location: See Geotechnical Map ~ GEOLOGIC GEOLOGIC .Sample · Moist. Density -t ATTITUDES DATE: 11/16/99 DESCRIPTION: UNIT USCS No. (%) (pcf) > I -..I, 0 ...... «> 0 - -r-(1) s· -::r TOPSOIL/QUATERNARY COLLUVIUM A @ 0-4 .. 5': Sandy CLAY; dark brown, moist, stiff, gravel and cobble common, rootlets common near ground surface QUATERNARY COLLUVIUM B @ 4.5'-8': Sandy CLAY; yellow-brown, moist, stiff CRETACEOUS LUSARDI FORMATION C @ 8'-16.5': Silty,: fine to medium SANDSTONE; light gray-green and yellow-brown, damp to moist, dense, crumbly to blocky Qcdl · SC Qcol SC 1 Kl SM -·01------'-----------------------------'--------L------'----L------l.__ _ _l._...:..._--J ~-GRAPHIC ~EPRESENTATION ~ (/) Ot-o j:i;"t--~ii- I- I- I- I- I- I- I- I- i -____L___L___L .l I I I I I I I I I I I SCALE: 1" = 5' . .... . ... . ,. .... /~· ' .,. "'· J ·-, l"j;I. . ·.\!:Y, -· -. ,_ - I I I _ I i _f -J I I I I J_ '\' ;...-1 ·7 I• ,7.:...:=:i---~=i:l_:_ r,_-!I I I .. . : ,®· . . . . : ...--• . . B . . ., -+-~: . :· .:__. . . :_ ·. ·. . : -' -I-. ~ -· •t l~-, __ •• -• . ... .. . . "-~·----\ -+-,.·-·-· .. t-,t ' L ·-. -+- -+- -+- I • ' -"--• • I I , ''~C•._.;:• ,, ~\ • ~ • I \, • , -·-·-· 1. ; ... -+-\··-·· -· ·-• .,. I -\ '-~-• 1__ _ I ~ : ;/ ACE SLOPE: 5°W · TREND: N55°W - - - - L_ I __ f I I ·1 - - - - TOTAL DEPTH AT 16. 5 FT .... 1NO GROUND WATER I -+---ENCOUNTERED -+--1BACKFILLED: 11/16/99 - -+-I - • • • LOG OF TRENCH NO.: T-27 Project Name: Cantarini Property .Logged by:_"""'K=B.:..C __ __,. __ _ Project Number:. 4980160-001 Elevation:~~2=1-5_F~e=et_~~~- Equi pment: JD710 Location: See Geotechni ca 1 ·Map· ENGINEERING PROPERTIES ~ GEOLOGIC GEOLOGIC Samp 1 e Moist. Density T ATTITUDES DATEt 11/16/99 DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses No. {%) (pcf) >1-----+--------------------,----------------l,-'----4-------4-------!~--'-1----11 _, _., 0 ....... (0 ·O ~ r <D co· :r - TOPSOIL/QUATERNARY COLLVUIUM Qcol A @ 0-4': Sandy CLAY.; dark brown, damp, medium, medium to 1 arge CL pores common, blocky CREATCEOUS LUSARDI FORMATION Kl B @ 4'-6': Silty fine to coarse SANDSTONE; light gray and SM yellow-brown, damp, dense, crumbly · 01'--' -'------'---------------------------,----L-----'-----'----...._ _ __,, __ -l ·; GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION · SCAL~: 1" = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: .I0°S TREND: N45°E ~I- C/) 01- 0 p;·1--i·i- I- I- I- I- I- I- I- I- 1 I I I I I I I I I I --.---,--I ---1 I I I I I I 7 -I- ; -··: -~ •. ·_-:~-, . :,@' A~ ~r; ''.·-?_: ·t 1-:,-· ,· .1 ;:; ~Jl-,_L_i -• -• I t • • ·~ '±~~1.J~I I I ., . -*, ... . .. . .. . : . 0-F@·? -1-•:-::-: ... ·-:-:--~-- .. • I, -• • .,,,- -1- -1- -1- -1- -1- -1- -1- -1- -I- -I- 7 - - I I I I I I I I I I I I - - - - TOTAL DEPTH AT 6 FEET - -NO GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED BACKFILLED: 11/16/99 -- • •• • LOG Ot TRENCH NO.: T-28- Project Name: Cantarini P-roperty Logged by:_ ........ K ___ BC ________ _ Project Number: 4980160~001 · £levation: __ 2_55_F_e_et ____ _ Equipm~nt: JD710 Location: See Geotechriical Map ENGINEERING PROPERTIES ~ GEOLOGIC GEOLOGIC Sample Moist. Density t ATTITUDES. DATE: 11/16/99 DESCRIPTfON: UNIT uses No. (%) (pcf) --4 0 ..... ·<O 0 -1 r CD cc· =r TOPSOIL/QUATERNARY COLLUVIUM A @ 0-3': Sandy CLAY; dark brown, damp, medium, crumbly to blocky, rootlets common near ground surface QUATERNARY COLLUVIUM B @ 3'-4.5': Sandy CLAY; .gray-brown with white calcium carbonate blebs common to abundant, moist, stiff CREATACEOUS POINT LOMA FORMATION C @ 4.5'-16': Interbedded sandy SILTSTONE and silty SANDSTONE; gray and yellow, moist, dense to very dense, blocky · Qcol CL · Qcol CL Kp ., SM/ML 1 --01------.L-------------,------------'-----'---_._ _ _,__-.......___---1-_~ ; GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: SURFACE SLOPE: 12°SW · TREND: N3tl 0 E ~ en 0 0 a CD, "'I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1>4:~ ·~_rr_1-.. I _I =n=.-~· I I I I I I I I I I ., I I I I I I I I I I I I TOTAL DEPTH AT 16 FEET NO GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED BACKFILLED: 11/16/99 • • • ·~·· LOG OF TRENCH NO.:· __ T_-2_9_~ Project Name: Cantarini Property Logged by: KBC I ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Project Number: 4980160-001 Elevation: 278 Feet Equipment: JD710 Location: See Geotechn ica 1 Map g GEOLOGIC . GEOLOGIC ,Sample, Moist. Density ."t ATTITUDES DATE: 11/16/99 DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses No. (%) {pcf) )> . -1 .... 0 ..... (0 0 r (l) ia", ':I' TOPSOIL A @ 0-2': Sandy CLAY; dark brown, moist, soft, blocky, few calcium carbonate·blebs CREATACEOUS POINT LOMA FORMATION B @ 2' -19. 5' : Fine sandy SILTSTONE to silty fine SANDSTONE; light gray to light gray-brown, damp to moist, dense,. calcium carbonate blebs common in upper I-foot of unit CL Kp SM/ML 8°1-----'-----'------------,-----'--------------.-l...----L---lL---....J_--..J...._---------l ~I GRAPHIC RE~RESENTATION ~ (/) 0 0 a (D (/) SCALE:· l 11 =: · 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 8°W TREND: N75°W . . . ·, --. I' I . . j . • .. '. · , J • · 'j ·· · '· · r-: .. ·· . ®·. I · ··· I . , .. . . I . . • .-1.,. 1.,, .• , __ ·r ••• ,,, _J ·1~ -.. • I . -I \ I ,, . , I . l • -~ } i I . . .... . ' .I ' .. I • . -' .. .. _ .... g a -~ I TOTAL DEPTH AT 19.5 FT NO GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED BACKFILLED: 11/16/99 ••• • APPENDIX B. LOGS BY SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING OF SMALL-DIAMETER BORINGS AND TRENCHES DURING PREVIOUS PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION T-1, T-2, T-8 ANP T-9 -$- (1998) B1-1, B1-2 • (1998) ET-5, ET-7 AND ET-16 -~ (1998) ··. . . EB-5 (1998) T1-1-T1-21 1111 (T1-13 IS LOCAT_E~ ~FFSITE) (1998) J ' • J j J .I J J J •• J I LOG OF TEST TRENCH NUMBER Tl Date Excavated:· ----=10:.:..:12:c.:.1.::...:98"---'--~ Equipment: _._. --=B.;..,A;..;:C:..::.cKH:=;o.;:O:;..::E=----- Surface Elevation(ft): 122.0 5 15 .· ... SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS TOPSOIL -Brown, Humid, Loose, CLAYEY SILTY SAND (SM/SC) . -.~: ·: .. · SUBSOIL-Brown, Moist, Medium Dense, Very CLAYEY SAND :. -:. : : (SC) : ... : : .... · ·.. . .. . . : ... : : ... . . . . . . . .. ,: . . . ·.. . .. -: .... : : ... SANTIAGO FORMATION -Pale Green, Moi~t, Stiff, CLAYEY SANDY SILT (ML) Dark Green, Moist, Stiff, ·sANDY CLAY (CL), Moderately Fractured, Waxy Parting Surfaces, Discontinuoµs Lens · Pale Green, Moist, Stiff, CLAYEY SANDY SILT (ML) Contact Dips 7 Degrees/250 -Gray,-Humid, Dense, SILTY SAND (SM) . TRENCH ENDED @ 16 FT. Logged by: MF Project Manager: DBA Depth to Water(ft): SAMPLES 0 . ,....._ >-. w ~ E- i:Q ......... 3: ~ ~ w E-0 ;::, rx: E---< E-;::, z Cl'.) ~ E-;::, rx: Cl) -Cl'.) 0 E-0 .....l ->-Q ~~ z ;::, 0 rx: u ;::, a'.l ::E 08 .....l E- CK l::.__:;:;-.J.__-_J_-.,.----,-----£ SOUTHERN, CALiFORNIA---:--P-ro-'--1e_c_t _N-am-e: ________ P_ro_je_c....1.t _N....;01-. _J_ _ __..1.._P_la-te..L-N-0.-w SOI½-& TESTI'NG, INC. RANCHO CARLSBAD 9811280.l 12 J j J ] ·--- J J • J ' • I] , . LOG OF TEST TRENCH NUMBER T2 Date Excavated: 10/2/98 Logged by: MF Equipment: BACKHOE Project Manager: DBA Surface Elevation(ft): 104.0 Depth to Water(ft): SAMPLf":;S a 0 u.l 0 CQ ,......_ ,-l ~ ct::, u SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS :) ..__,, .... E- :r: :r: Cl) E-0.. -:::a::: 0... ~ a .....J u.l z :) a 0 ;:) CQ TOPSOIL -Brown, Humid, Loose, SI[TY SAND (SM) SUBSOIL -Dark Orange-Brown, Moist, Medium Dense, CLAYEY 5 15 SILTY SAND (~C/SM) TERRACE DEPOSITS -Brown to Gray to Rust Mottled; Moist, Medium Dense to Dense, CLAYEY SILTY SAND (SM/SC), ·.--.. ··. ·. Moderately Weathered, Some Caliche . •, .. . .. . . .. ·. -·.-. --~-·:-:·: . : ·-. .-. .... -· : ·-.· .. ·. Dark Orange, Moist, M~dium Dense to Dense, CLAYEY SILTY SAND (SC/SM), some Gravel Gray t~ .Oran~e, CLAYEY SILTY SAND (SC/SM) - TRENCH ENDED-@ 17 FT. £ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA w SOIL & TESTING, INC. Project Name: RANCHO CARLSBAD Project No. 9811280.l. ,......_ ~ >-~ ..__,, ~ CG u.l E-0 ~ ..... E- :) z -< E-:) CG Cl) 0 Cl'. ->--Q a:) t; 0 ~ (.) -< ti ~ a8 .....JE- Plate No. 13 •:·-:. '• ... • • • .. •• • .. J I i !,;l , LOG OF TEST TRENCH NUMBER TS Date Excavated: J0/2/98_ Equipment: BACKHOE Surface Elevation(ft): 103.0 c.::r 0 ,-.. ...l ct: u .....,, 55 ::i:: E-<. 0.. t:i.. ~ w 0 0 ~ • .. . . . . · . . . . . . . ·. .. ,. ·· ... '-5 -. -10 - .-15 - SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS TOPSOIL -Dark Gray Brown, Dry to Humid, Medium Dense, Very CLAYEY SAND (SC) SUBSOIL -Dark Gray Brown, Humid, Very Stiff, SANDY CLAY (CL), Gradational Contact SANTIAGO FORMATION -Gray to Rust.Mottled, Humid, Dense, SILTY SAND (SM), Well Cemented PRACTJCAL REFUSAL@ 6 FT.· Logged by: MF Project Manager: DBA Depth to Water(ft): SAMPLES Cl ,.-... ~ ;>-c f.ll ~ o:i ...__, ~ pc; p:: w f-, 0 :::> pc; f-, -< f-<. ::J z en ::x:: f-, ::J C:C: en ...... ~ 0£-, Cl ...l >-cc ~~ z :::, 0 pc; (.) :::, t::Q ~ o& ...l f-, "' ... 1-.__~--l---L-------------..------'--,------------L_J._.J_ _ _L_....L_ ~ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA w SOIL & TESTING, INC. Project Name: Project No. 9811280.1 Plate No. 19 RANCHO CARLSBAD •.. ·_. .; .J J J J J ,I • • • I • a Date Excavated: LOG OF TEST TRENCH NUMBER T9 10/2/98 Equipment: BACKHOE Logged by: MF Project Manager: DBA Surface Elevation(ft): 96.0 Depth to Water(ft): '--5 - . . I-10 - ~ 15 - SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 11;?./;0 TOPSOIL -Dark Gray Brown, Dry to Humid, Medium Dense, Very ~ -CLAYEY SAND (SC) _ _ ~ SUBSOIL -Dark Gray Brown, Humid, Very Stiff, SANDY CLAY ~ (CL), Gradational Contact SANTIAGO FORMATION -·Dark Gray-Brown.to Rust, Humid, Very Hard, SANDY SILT (ML), Highly Weathered to 3 ft., Moderately W~athered Below 3 ft., Bedding Dips 8 begrees/190 SAMPLES Q u.l 04 ~ ;::, f-< Cl) :3 ...... Q z ;::, ;::, 04 -CK .. . . . •. Tan, Humid, Dense, SILTY SAND (SM), Well Cemented ,_ . . .• . . . PRACTICAL REFUSAL@6.5 FT. -CK ,-.. ~ >-, ~ '-" ~ ~ u.l E--< 0 ~ ...... E--< ;::, z < E--< ;::, ~ Cl Cl) 0 E-->--C' 04 u 0 ~(.) < tJ ~-ao ,-H ~-.__~~----'------------------------1..-1..-1.. _ _1__.J_ ~ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA w SOIL & TESTING, INC. Project No. 9811280. l Plate N, Project Name: RANCHO CARLSBAD 20 •• j j J J J J • i. .. J J J J J J 4 J J --z w 6 >-:z • >-~ 0.. BORING NU.MBER EB·S' I-() >-w ~ ---0 I-.)( -->-I-I-w :z I--u .. -w w z -I-< :z: a: _:z w -. I-z -0 Cl) a: -,- -> 0 :x:-w ..J (,) w ::, w I-(/) < < 0 z ::, I--- ELEVAT10H a: a: :Z· -z I-..J 0 u: I-(/) . a: I-_; UJ -I-I-I- a. a. < Cl) < -w I-Cl) -a (J (/) w < (.) w :::E . C/l ;;; 0. -o.. u, a w -....... a. -I-..J < < (/) 0.. 0 0.. :z: :z: (/) • >--0 :z w 0.. a (/) < < :1 < 0 a: w w 3: a: :f 0 a: :f -,I OESCR IPTIOH (,) 0 0.. a: ~ a (.) 0 .c· (.) (.) 0 - SM/ Brown, SILTY to CLAYEY Humid Loose/ t BAG SC SAND Medium - Dense - - --- 5 1 rl,:,r,c;p - J uos · ML Light Brown to Tan, VERY Humid V(;.ry 50 - CLAYEY SILT Stiff I -- -( PRE-QUATERNARY SEDIMENTS - -- ·10 I .. - UDS SM Reddish Light Brown, VERY Very 34 99.0 8.4 SILTY SAND Stiff/ - -Very - Layer Gravel from 12 ft. Dense --to 14 ft. - 15 [ SM Brown, SLIGHTLY SIL TY BAG FINE to COARSE SAND - - -- -- -';1!~) ... , . 20 I \·} UDS Rusty Brown 40 106.7 5.3 :'!:;;· '.;\ ?t .:?~)t?\; ... -Very 0iffi cult to Drill -;"t ~t;r) - 25 - :-: . :~ ; ls}~_ .. :,: .. ,.; -• :a:·' '·-~ ·> ,._,_; . ,r. -- -- -- 30 ~ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG .. SOIL &TESTING, INC. LOGGED BY: RF DATE LOGGED: 3-09-89 JO.B HUMBER: 8821126 Plate No. 10 - •• j J J J J J J •• J. J J J ,. J ' J J I --:z: Contfoued w 0 >-z • >-,I(. -0. BORING NUMBER EB-S" I-(.) >-LU .. --I-w 0 I-,t{ -->-..... z :z: ..... -.(.) .. ~ LU UJ z -t-< :z: a: I-z "O (/) a: - -w UJ ;;; > 0 ::c UJ ..J (.) ELEVATION w ::) a: :;; z -< -< 0 z ::i I--- ..J --a: I-a: I-_; UJ -I-z I-I- I-- 0. 0. 0 u. -i( (/) -< -w. I-. (/) -0 u (/) LU < (.) UJ ::t (/) iii 0. -Q. Cf/ C w ----a. -I-..J -< 0 0. :z: (/) • - 0 -< (/) 0. z >-0 z UJ c.. 1/) -< -< ::E -< 0 a: w w J a: ::E 0 a: ::E ..J DES CR IPTIOH (.) 0 c.. a: 0 0 :a () 0 () 30 (.) -.. I UDS SC Mottled Brown to Dark HtJm id Very .63 Brown, CLAYEY FINE to Dense - -COARSE-SAND - With Black Specks of -· -Charcol -- 35-- -- -- -- -- 401 : UDS - SM Light Rusty Brown to Yel-48. lowish Reddish Brown, . ' - -SILTY SANO With Interbed~ ,· . ed CLAYEY SANDY SILT . - 45-SW/ Tan, Moderately FRIABLE; Humid/ Very SM FINE to COARSE SAND Moist Dense - - - i -I 50 I UDS 81 Bottom -: - - • - - - - -· ~ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOC SO I L & T EST I NG,. I NC. LOGGED BY: RF DATE LOGGED: 3-09-f JOB HUMBER: 8821126 Plate No. 11 • w z - 0 >-z Ill --0. BORING ·> >-~ ...: NUMBER11-1 I-u >-0 UJ I-->-I-I-w u ;,It --I-z z I--... -w -c( z a: I-z -c C/) -w z :::i UJ UJ cii a: --:i: w ...I (;.) w < < -z I-> 0 . ...-.. ,...I ELEVATION -..... ,, t a: I-z 0 ::> ----I .J. u a: I-- Q. Q. 0 u. < <~w a: I--w -I-z I-I- en en en I-C/) -0 u C/) UJ < u w ~ Q. -Q. (I) 0 -....... w a. -I-...I C < •CJ) ' Q. 0 Q. z z cn· Cl) >--0 < Cl) < < :::i: ·< 0 a: UJ 3: z UJ c.. UJ a: ::i: a: ..J 0 E S C R I P T'I O N cjO Q. a: 0 0 0 ~ (.) .J:l (,) 0 0 (.) '-SM ALLUVIUM, Medium Brown, Humid Loose SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM - 2 -SAND, Porous - '"" BAG Mais t. - 4 L.. - L.. - 6 1. us SM Dark Brown, Slightly Moist loose 10 113. 0 11. 3 - -Porous to -' . 8 -Medium Dense - -- 10-- I us SM Medium to Dark Brown Moist/ 13 - 12--Wet -_y· --·--·-----• (Two hours after -Satur-·-._14-dri 11 i ng) ated -·-'-~ -- 161 us SM Medium Brown Satur-Very 6 - -ated Loose -. 18--.. -- 20-SM/ Medium Brown, CLAYEY -SC SILTY SAND -- 22---- 24-- ' ; -- 261 us SC L igh·t Brown to Tan, Satur-Loose 9 97.7 25.8 CLAYEY SAND ated - .,... -- 28--: - -- 30 ._·. ~ SOUTHERN CALIF-ORNIA SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG SOIL &TESTING, INC. LOGGED BY: JH DATE LOGGED: 6-29-88 JOB NUMBER: 8821121 Plate No. 3 .. w z --a. 0 >-z 4) >-- ..; >-BORING NUMBERB1-1 i,.;'U >-.o w ·>· ..,: -* I-1-· w --I-z I--u ... -w * -<( z a: Zw-I-z -c (/) -w z • --~ w u Continued w :::i -a: > 0 ..J ELEVATION w I-Cl) <( <( 0 z :::> I- ..J --a: i-:. a: Cl) z --- 0., 0 LL < a: ... -w -... z ..... ..... :::!: (/) cii Cl) <( -w I-(/) ..... 0 (J Cl) w < u w 0. -0. Cl) 0 -.... w a. -I-.J 0 <( Cl) a. 0 a. z Ul "' -0 < Cl) <( < :E <( 0 a: z ~ >-z w a. w w a:. :E ..J QESCR IPTION u 0 a: 0 0 0: :E 0. 0 u .c u 0 30 u .. ·SC -ALLUVIUM, Light Brown to Satur-Loose Tan, CLAYEY SAND ated - 32--•' ----,----· ---·-· ·---·-,__ ·-... ----·-0----i-- 34-Gray Tan, SILTY SAND, Satur-Medium Firmer Drilling at 33' ·ated Dense - --" - 351 26 - -- 38-Gravel at 38' - -· -I 40-- J ·US · SM Gray Tan, SILTY FINE TO Satur-Medium 16 99.1 24.7 MEDIUM SAND, With ated Dense - -42-Slight Clay Binder and - -with Gravel - ~4-- : --- 46-:-· -. -- 48-- -- 50---~ -SM·-I------Slower Drilling -·-'"5afuP: i--·-·--Medium ----- 52-ated Dense - -to - 54-' Dense - • -; Satur- 55 I.· SM Dark Gray, SILTY SANO Medium 28 - ated Dense -Bottom at 56 1 Formational Soi1s not - -Reached - -· - - ~ SOUTH_ERN CALIFORNIA SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG SOIL &TESTING, INC. LOGGED BY: JH DATE LOGGED: 6-29-88 . JOB NUMBER: 8821121 Plate No. 4 • z -w >-z 4) >-- a. 0 BORING NUMBERB1-2 I-(.) >-w ·> -* .. --0 I-->-I-I-w (.) .. -w *--z I--w z -I--< z a: Zw-I-z -c en a: --> 0 -. :I: w ...I u ELEVATION 74 1 w ::::i w I-Cl) < < 0 z ::::i I--- I-..J --a: I-a: Cl) z a: I-w -I-z I-I-a. 6 u. --a. <( Cl) <( -w I-en -0 0 en w <( cj w ~ en <n a. -a. Cl) 0 w -...... a. -I-..J a. 0 a. z -Cl) Ill -0 < 0 <( Cl) z >-z w 0.. Cl), <( <( ~ <( 0 a: w w ~ a: ~ 0 a: :e ...I DESCR IPrtON (.) 0 0.. a: 0 0 u 0 u .0 u 0 - -·SM ALLUVIUM, Medium Brown, Humid ·Loose BAG SILTY SAND - 2 ------------SM/ Dark Brown to Gray Brown, Humid Loose .. -SC CLAYEY SILTY SAND - 4-- -- 6 I us SC CLAYEY SAND Moist Medium 19 112.3 14.5 -Dense -- 8 -- "qi { Measured after auger -removed) --Hr - I us SC Medium Brown, CLAYEY Satur-Loose/ 10 111. 2 17.9 - 12-MEDIUM TO COARSE SAND, ated Medium Porous Dense - --• ·:·· .. 14--: --- 16----. 18-- -- 20--I us SC Medium_Brown, CLAYEY Satur-Medium 17 110.0 1a~·o - 22-_ SAND ated/ -Dense Wet -· --{8" to 12" Layer of - 24-Gravel at21.5') - ' 26-ML POSS IBLE SANTIAGO Moist/ -Medium FORMATION, Ye 11 ow Brown, Wet Dense/ - -SANDY SILT -Dense. - 2a:: -:;::::="" Break in Log - - 311 50/411 108. 7 18.3 -us Bottom at 31 1 • ~ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SUBSURFACE EXPL·ORATION LOG _SOIL &T~STING,INC. -LOGGED BY: JH DA TE LOGGED: 6-29-88 JOB NUMBER: 8821121 Plate No. 5 -. , • -z >-* w 0 TRENCH NUMB.ERTI-1 CJ >->--0. I-w I-I-I-~ z I-z z z -w -w 0 >-a: -'~ I-< w ::, w ui Cl) Cl) a: > . .J (.) a: a: . I-z :::, I-I-I-z -z I-(.) w --ELEVATION < Ch < ~ w 1/J -I-. .J:. ..J 0 LL. 180'1 0 0 en w < < . I-CJ) -0. 0. Q 0. 0. 0 0, t--I a. 0. Cl) 0. 0:. >--0 1/J :e (I) < ::E E a: z ~ UI < < < 0 0 a: :e·o a: 0 0 Cl) .J b 0 (.) 0 DESCRIPTION U· 0~ 13AG CL TOPSOIL, Dark Brown, -SANDY . Moist Medium _·CK CLAY, Plastic Stiff -2, CK SM LUSARDI FORMATION, Tan, Dry/ Dense .... SILTY FINE TO COARSE SAND Humid - 4 I -CK 121. 9 7.5 ,_ -3AG · 6 I -CK --- I---· -.-. -----·-·----a, -CK SM Orange Brown, SILTY SAND Dry/ Very 114.8 i4.l -·. Humid Dense - 1~ Bottom at 10 1 -- -- --• ;--.. ,) -TRENCH NUMBER 1-2 --- 0 fLEVATI©N 225 1 BAG CL TOPSOIL, Dark Brown/Black, · Mai st/ Stiff -I CK SANDY CLAY, Plastic Very .. . 2, Moist -CK -- 41 CL LUSARDI FORMATION, Tan with· Moist/ 'Stiff -CK Rust Red Brown, SILTY Very .;... -SANDY CLAY, Plastic, Moist 6~ CK Highly Weathered - BAG Very 114. 7 14.2 -Stiff ~ I -CK -... 1 • 3AG ~-~ ---.._ -'-· --I---· --·---·-· ------- CK ML Gray, SANDY SILT, . Moist/ Humid 120.0 10. 7 --(SILTSTONE) Wet l? V -Bottom at 12 1 --. • ~ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION L-OG _SOIL &.TESTING,INC. LOGGED ev: RF DATE LOGGED: 6-29-88 JOB N_lJMBE'R: 8821121 Plate iJo.· 11 - • z· * LIJ 0 >->-TRENCH NUMBER 1-3 (.) >---C. ... w I-I-I-* z >-I-z a: z z -IU LU 0 --I-< w ~ w w Cf) Cf) a: > -= u a: I-z ~ I-I--I-a: z -.. w . ELEVATION 180 1 (/) LU -I-z I-u 0 u. -< en < IU ..I -0. 0 u Ill IU < -< I-0. (/) 0. en 0 Q. (/) 0 I-..I C. 0. ~ en . 0. 0. z: >-0 w LIi < :::E a: z ~ < "( < 0 a: :::E 0 0 0 a: 0 (/) ..J u 0 (.) u DESCRIPTION u 0 CL/ FILL, Brown, SIL TY SAND Humid Loose -SM and SANDY CLAY - 2--.. -- 4 ~ CK .SM LUSARDI FORMATION, Dark Dry/ Very 3AG Gray B1a.ck, SILTY SAND Humid · Dense - 6-(SANDSTONE) I - a! C.K - Bottom at 7.5 1 -------· --TRENC-H NUMBER 1-4 : ---• ELEVATION 154 1 p SM lOPSOIL, Gray Black, SILTY Humid Loose .._.-CK 2~ SAND, Grading to SANDY CLAY· -BAG . CK CL Moist Stiff -.. -CL O~DER ALLUVIUM, Tan with Moist Medium· - 4~ CK· Rust Brown, SANDY CLAY Dense - BAG· - 6a Ck SM LUSARDI FORMATION, Rust Moist Dense -Brown,-SILTY .SAND --. CK SM Gray Brown , Humid/ Very 117. 5 11.3 -.. Moist Dense -' \ - 10-- \ .. ; -Bottom at g• ------ ---- • ·~ SOUTl:fERN CALIFORNIA . SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG SOI_L & TESTING,INC. LOGGED BY: RF DATE LOGGED:. 6-29-88 . ' JOS NUMBE'R: 8821121 Plate No. 12 • -z >-* UI 0 TRENCH NUMBER >->--0.. 1-5 ... w ... 0 I-I-* z I-z z -w w 0 >-a: z ~-.:: I-< w :::, w w u, (/) a: > z :::, ... ,_ I--i.u ..J u a: ... a: I-z w ;: z I-u --ELEVATION 149' u, I-:r: ..J 0 u. -c: (/) -c: -w Q 0 (/) w < -< I-(/) ui a. a. a, Q a. I-..J a. 0.. a. 0 0. a. J: >-0 z w :E (/) < :E < a: :E UI c( < 0 0 a: :E 0 a: 0 a (/) ' ..J u Q 0 (.) 0 (.) DESCRIPTION SC TOPSOil, Dark Brown, Dry Loose I CK SANDY CLAY TO CLAYEY SAND - 2 CL .Moist Medium ~ CK SM LUSARDI FORMATION, Tan Moist .Dense to '' BAG With Rust and Brown Very - 41 Mottling, SILTY SAND -Dense· -CK -- 91 -CK 8_ Bottom at 7' -.-- -TRENCH NUMBER 1-6 - --ELEVATIOi~ 105' 0 • \. • CK SM/ TOPSOIL, Brown to Dark · Humid Loose - . _,2 • SC Brown, CLAYEY SILTY SAND -CK TO SILTY SAND ~ BAG SM Very - 4 I Moist -CK I -SM - 6~ -CK SC ALLUVIUM, Gray Brown, Very Medium B_AG CLAYEY SAND Moist Dense - 81 -CK -..... ' '' '1~ ·--· ------CK ----- BAG ML Rust-Yellow Mottling, · Very Stiff -SANDY SILTY (REWORKED) Moist 1? •• e,;r,,. ML LUSARDI FORMATION, Gray Moist Hard --with Yello"" Mottling, FINE \ 14.. SANDY SILT {SILTSTONE) - -- Bottom at 13' -- ..... -.... ·~ SOUT_HERN CALIFORNIA SUBS UR FACE EXPLORATION LOG LOGGED BY: RF DATE LOGGED: 6-29-88 SO-IL & TESTING,INC. . ' JOB NUMBE'R: 8821121 Plate No. 13 - • z >-* w 0 NUMBER 1-7 >->--Q. TRENCH I-w I-(.) I-I-~ z --. >-..,. z a: z z -w -w 0 ---I-< w ::, w w Cl) (/) a: > -. ..J (). . z ::, ... I-a: I-C: I-% w --ELEVATION (/) w -;: I-z I-(.) -..J 0 u. 205 1 < (/) < ·-w 0 0 CJ) w < < I-Q. CJ) -0.. 0.. a, 0 Q. ... ..J Q. C. (I) C. 0 Q. -0 :::E CJ) z: >-z w :I: UI < < :E < 0 a: . a: :I: a: Q < 0 0 0 CJ) ..J (.) 0 (.) .o OE;SCRIPTION (.) 0 ~L/ 'TOPSOIL, Dark Brown to Moist Medium -CH . Dark Gray, SANDY SILTY CLAY, · Stiff - 21 CK Highly Expansive ..,. 4~ CK CL SUBSOIL, Tan Brown, SANDY Very Stiff - BAG CLAY Moist - 6 ML LUSARDI FORMATION, Green Moist Hard -Gray, SANDY SILT, - a-(SILTSTONE) - Bottom at 8.5 1 10-----. TRENCH NUMBER 1-8 - ' I --ELEVATION 124 1 1 CL TOPSOIL, Dark Brown, Moist Medium . --SANDY CLAY Stiff - 21 CK - -SC ALLUVIUM, Tan, CLAYEY SAND Moist Medium -.4, CK· Dense --- 6~ -SM Gray Brown, SILTY SAND ·--------,-,-·---CK Moist· Medium Dense -BAG a, - CK -- !<a - t CK SM Tan With Rust Brown . --Mottling - 12-Formational Not Encountered - ---Bottom at 12.5 1 14----' • ~ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG .. LOGGED ev: RF DATE LOGGED:. 6-30-88 SOIL & TESTING,INC. JOB HUMBE"R: 8821121 Plate No. ·14 •• z > ~ w 0 1-9· · > >--- C. TRENCH NUMBER I-w I-0 I-I-* z -: > I-% a: z z -w -w 0 ---I-< L+J, ::, w w Cl) VJ a: > ,: ··--I 0 a: I-I-z z -::, I-I--a: ,:-w 0 u: ELEVATION 130 1 en w -... z I-0 ;c -I < (/) < -w 0 0 Cl) w < < ... Cl) -C. 0. 0 a. 0. Cl),, 0 0, I--I D. 0. 0.. D. -0 ::E Cl) c( :E z: a: > z w ~ UI, < < 0 0 a: ::E 0 a: 0 c( 0 0 Cl) -I 0 0 (.) 0 DESCRIPTION 0 CL TOPSOIL, Dark Gray Brown, Very Medium -SANDY CLAY Moist .Stiff - 2'(i CK - ·-C SC SUBSOIL, Tan, CLAYEY SAND Very Medium - 4 Moist Stiff -ML/ LUSARDI FORMATION, Tan Dry/ Hard - ' SM Brown with Rust Mottling, Humid 6-VERY S1LTY SAND Grading to - -' SILTY SAND Very -Moist Dense -Bottom at 5.5' -- -- -- -TRENCH NUMBER 1-10 - --•• ELEVATION 180' . :: ,0 ~: .. -:.;. SC/ TOPSOIL, Dark Brown, VERY Dry/ Loose --CL CLAYEY SAND Humid 2-- --SM LUSARDI FORMATION, Tan Humid Very 4-with Rust Brown Mottling, Dense -SILTY SAND -- 6-Bottom.at· 5.51 - ,, -- --. ----• • ----------- • ; ~ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG LOGGED BY: RF DATE LOGGED: 6-30-88 SOIL & TESTING,INC. JOB NUMBE'R: 8821121 Plate No .. 15 w Q. -->-• ' -I---w. .. ..J r-0. 0.. :E UI a < (/) .0 - 2 - - 4 --, 6- - 8- - 10- -· 1i.. - ,,·. - r ~~ ~:-':' ' 0 -~ CK BAG 2 - 4-- 6a CK -a, CK -I ' 10-- I I CK 12- - -I • ~ I I z 0 1-11 T·R ENC~ NUMBER I-. ' < ..J u --ELEVATION 118' 0 u. (/) -Cl) Cl) c( ..I 0 DESCRIPTION . SM TOPSOIL, Brown to Dark · Brown, SILTY SAND . SM ALLUVIUM, Medium Brown, SILTY SAND WITH CLAY BINDER SM/ SC SM . Rust Brown Bottom at 10.5 Feet Forma tiona l Not Encountered TRENCH NUMBER 1-~2 ELEVATION 134' CL FILL TO 6 FE~T, Dark Gray, SANDY CLAY CL/ Brown Gray, VERY SANDY CLAY SC -·CL & LUSARDI FORMATION, Tan SM Brown with White Mottling, . A 1 terna ting Layes of SANDY CLAY AND SILTY SAND - Bottom at 12' SOUTHERN C~Llf9RNIA SOIL & TESTING,INC. ~ >->--I-u >--w I-· ... ... ~ z z C: z z -w .:.. w 0 -w :::>· w w Cl) (I') a: > a: .... cc I-% % ;: ::, I--I- Cl) w I-z I-u < (I) < -w C u w < 0. 0. 0, Q Q. Cl) ..I < Q. 0 -I-0. :f 0.. :r: >-0 z w ::E < a: < 0 0 a: :E 0 C: u a 0 0 0 Dry/ .. Loose ·Humid - - Very Loose -Moist -- Medium Loose - Dense -- Very Medium - Moist Dense ·- -- - - ' - Humid/ Medium Moist Stiff --- Moist Medium -Stiff - . , Moist/ Very Very Stiff to - Moist Den~e -- ; - ----- SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG LOGGED BY: RF DATE LOGGED: 6-30-88 JOB NUMBE'R: 8821121 Plate No .. 16 - • z w 0 >->-* 0. TRENCH NUMBER 1-13 I-0 >--- I-w I-I-~ z >-z z I-w < a: z --w 0 -.... I-w w CJ) a: -..J 0 ::, w Cl) > . z I-w --ELEVATION a: ... a: ... z -::, I- .:: ..J 0 LI. -llO' < Cl) < en-LI.I w -I-z I-0 I-(I') -C. -Q 0 U) w < -c: 0. Ci. Q Q. C. Cl) a. 0 a, -I-..J a. ~ (I') 0. z: 0 Lil < < :E < a: >-z w :E Q < 0 0 a: :E 0 a: ..J 0 en (.J Q 0 0 DESCRIPTION (.) 0 CL TOPSOIL, Dark Brown, SANDY Dry/ Medium I CK CLAY Humid Dense - 2 I CK ML LUSARDI FORMATION, Tan, Dry/ Stfff -SANDY SILT WITH CLAY Humid - 4 I CK SM Tan, VERY SILTY SAND Dry/ Dense -Humid - 6-' -Very -Dense - 81 . CK CL/ Dark Gray, VERY. CLAYEY SAND Humid De·nse -SC - 1~ ·. CK SM Tan, SILTY SAND Dry/ Very -Hum.id · Dense - ., .. 1-? Bottom a:t 12' -:--• . ' --..... _, :.-- -TRENCH NUMBER 1-14 --E;LEVATI0N 137' -! 0 SC TOPSOIL, Brown, CLAYEY Dry/ Loose -SAND TO VERY SANDY CLAY Humid - . 21 BAG r1 SC/ LUSARDI FORMATION, Red Humid/ Dense -s~ Brown to Tan, SILTY Moist - 41 CK · CLAYEY SAND, (SANDSTONE) - i-_BAG - 6--• ; -- 8-- -Bottom at 8.5' -- 1.0---- • .. ··~ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA s·uBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG ,, SOIL & TESTING,l·NC. LOGGED av: RF DATE LOGGED: 6-31-88 JOB NUMBE'R: 8821121 Plate No. 17 • z * 1/J 0 >->->---0. TRENCH NUMBER 1-15 I-w I-(.) I-I-* :z ~ >-I-z a: z z -w w 0 -I-c( w ::, w w Cl) Cl) a: > . ....._ ..J O· a: I-z ::, I-t-I-a: z -w 0 u. ELEVATION 284' < Cl) . Cl) w w -I-z. I-u . ..J -< -Cl (J C/) w < < t-0. (I) C. 0. a, 0 Q. ..J 0. Cl) 0. 0 a. -0 I-a. :I: Cl) J: >-:z w ll.1 < :I: < a: ~ 0 < < 0 0 a: ~ 0 a: 0 Cl) ..J (.) Cl u (.) bE;SCRIPTIDN u 0 CL ·TOPSOIL, Dark Brown to_ Moist Medium -Gr,ay Brown to very Dense -' 2 -Moist - 4, CK· Greenish with Rust Red Wet Stiff -RA~ SC LUSARDI FORMATION, Highly Very Medium -Weathered, Greenish Brown, Moist Dense to - 6J Rust Brown and Tan, CLAYEY Dense -CK SAND ' !.. BAG - 8---- 10-----·--.--. ·-----Rapid Seepage at 10' Sa tura tee Dense -- 1;: Bottom at 12' --·~ --~ -----TRENCH NUMBER 1-16 ---ELEVATION 232' ·O .. -SC TOPSOIL, Dark Brown, Humid Loose -r.1 Avr:v SANn . 2. SM LUSARDI FORMATION~ Rust Dry/ Very - BAG Orange Brown, SILTY SAND Humid Dense \ - 4-- -; ' ,-Bottom at 3' - --Very Difficu·lt to Excavate -with Backhoe ------- . . ·~ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SUBS UR FACE EXPLORATION LOG .. s01:L & TESTING,INC. LOGGED av: RF DATE LOGGED: 8-24-88 JOB NUMBE'R: 8821121 Plate No. -18 .. -: •. ---.. .· .. ; I-~ ·u1 0 :z ~ 2 TRENCH NUMBER 1-17 >-... < I-..J ~· w O u. ELEVATION 184 1 ~ Cl) u; i----,------------------1 :I: (/) < < (I) ..J (..) I-l1J z 0:: W.:::, 0:: I-< Cl) ~ -~ 0 < :f >-1- "' z -l1J - Q ~ >-•a: 0 w 0:: ::, I-.(/) 0 ::e * -* :z -w 0 > I--I-z I-(..) w < < I-..J Q. z w ::e 0 0:: 0 0. (.) DESCRIPTION 0 ~-~-..J.---,.;;__--------+-------+---~t--..... ---r---r--CL TOPSOiL, Dark Brown to Moist ~tiff -Dark Gray, SANDY CLAY - 2 -,_-+-'--l-------------"""""".'"""""""".'""., -+----t------t-----r---.-----; -SM - 4 I BAG CK - LUSARDI FORMATION, Gray Humid/ to Rust Brown, SILTY SAND Moist (SANDSTONE) Dense Very D.ense - - - 6 -~--'----'--s~o--t_t_om_a_t~6'!""' 1 _________________ ..,_ _____ ....., __ _, -- - - 0 . SM - 2 -GP/ • GM . ;:. - ""'4 ~ BAG 6 I SM ·CK 8- - - - 0 SM . -• 2 ~CK SM BAG 4 . -- .. Difficult to Excavate TRENCH NUMBER 1-18 TOPSOIL, Brown, SILTY SAND Dry LUSARDI FORMATION, Rust Brown, GRAVEL WITH SILTY SAND MATRIX Rust Brown, SILTY SAND Bottom at 7' Difficult to Excavate TRENCH NUMBER 1•19 ELEVATION 237 1 Humid Humi·d Loose Very Dense Very Dense TOPSOIL, Dark Brown, SILTY Dry/Humid loose SAND . LUSARDI FORMATION, Rust Brown, SILTY SAND ( SANDSTONE·) ~ Bottom at 41 ; ·~ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA .SOIL & TESTING,INC. SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG 'LOGGED BY: RF DATE LOGGE_O: 8-24-88 JOB NUMBE'R: 8821121 Plate No. -19 -- - - - -- - - - - - - - - - -- • < < < •• z ·>-* >--w 0 NUMBER 0 >--ci: TRENC.H 1-20 ... w ... ... ... w ~ z I-z a: z z --w 0 >-< w w (/) (/) a: > --~-: ... ::) UJ I-... _, 0. a: ... z z ::> -. ... a: w-':: z ... 0 : W. o U: ELEVATION 182 1 < (/) CJ) w .... .-'-< Q 0 (/) w < < I- _, < (/) -Cl. Cl. Cll C ci I-_, Cl. 0. 0 -Cl. (/) 0. Cl. J:: >-0 z w ::E . :E fl) < :E c( a: a: :E a: UI < < 0 0 0 0 a (/) _, (.J Q 0 (.J ·u DESCRIPTION 0 SM TOPSOIL/SUBSOIL, Brown Dry Loose -SC/ SILiY SAND TO VERY CLAYEY -- 2 CL SAND I CK SM LUSARDI FORMATION, Light · Humid/ Very Gray to tan with Rust Moist Pense - 4~ ~ Mottling, SILTY SAND - ·• ~ ML -Gray Brown to·Rust Brown, Moist Hard 6 -SAND SILT ---Bottom at 5' --Very Slow Digging -- -TRENCH NUMBER 1-21 - -- 0 ELEVATION 292' • SC TOPSOIL; Brown, CLAYEY SAND Dry Loose --TO SANDY CLAY 0 CL Moist Stiff -.. ; . - ·' :":: --CL/ ALLUVIUM, Green Brown, SANDY Moist Stiff 4-SC CLAX TO CLAYEY SAND - -- .6 SC LUSARDI FORMATION, Brown, V,ery Medium --CLAYEY SAND Moist Dense g_ • < ---. --------------.. CL/ Grading to CLAYEY SAND/SANDY 1 « --SC CLAY, Pale Greeni.sh Beige, 10-Highly Weathered ---- 1,2 Bottom at 12 1 • ----------- • ··~. SOUTHER.N CALIFORNIA SUBS.UR FACE EXPLORATION. LOG LOGGEP ev: RF DATE LOGG~0: 8-24-88 SOIL'& TESTING,INC. - JOB NUMBE'R: 8821121 Plate No. -20 ••• , .. - - ' .iJ J J J. J •..... ;: .· illll J i i , --- ' •• ut z 0 w TRENCH NUMBER ET-S' ('_ -·1--: >--<( -I-u _J --w -ELEVATICN = LL _J 0 -I-a. (/) (/) C. ~ en w <( <( 0 (/) _J u DESCRIPTION 0 $M/ Dark Brown, SILTY to CLAYEY -SC SAND ·(TOPSOIL) 1 - - 2 - Dark Brovm, SANDY CLAY to 3 -CLAYEY SAND - 4 J CK SM/ ·(ALLUVIUM) CL 5 L BAG I L 6L - 7 - - ·g I CK SC Mottled Light Brown to Med- iuni B·rown 9 - - 10 __ SM Light Brown, VERY SILTY SAND - 11 ·-Tan Brown, SILTY FINE to -COARSE SAND 12 Bottom - - - - - ~. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA S·OIL & TESTING,I.NC. -,ilt >->---u >-I-w r I-~ z z z I--w -w 0 a: z -w w w en (/) a: > -::::i z ::::i I--I-a: i-a: I-z -z en w -I-I-u <( (/) <( w -Cl u (/) w < .< a. -a. (/) Cl 0. ..J 0 --I-a. a. a. z . a: >-0 z w < ~ < a: ~ ~- 0 0 0 a: 0 Cl u u u Humid/ Loose/ Moist Medium - Dense - - - - Humid Medium Dense/ - Medium Stiff 108.1 14.9 Moist •Loose/ 111. 0 12.4 Medium Dense Humid Medium Dense/ Dense ; - SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LO< LOGGED BY: RF DATE LOGGED: 2-'27-8S J·os NUMBER: 8821126 Plate No. 24 J ~ j J J _J J JI I . ··.~ ~ ,. • f uJ c .. -: >--I---llJ -..J I-0.. c.. ::E uJ Cl <( (/) 0 - 1 - I 2_ -. 3 - ·4 , Ck • I. SL BAG - 6 - - 7- - 8- - g_ - l(L - 11_ - 12_ - - .... - ~ z 0 -TRENCH NUMBER ET-1 I- < ..J u --E:...EVATION 0 u. -"-(/) (/) (/) < ..J 0 DESCRIPTION SM/ Dark Bro.wn, SILTY to CLAYEY SC SAND (TOPSqIL) CL/ Dark Brown, SANDY to SILTY SC CLAY· (SUBSOIL)' SC Mottled Tan to Brown, VERY CLAYEY SAND (ALLUVIUM) ML/ Pale Light' Grey, Layer of SM CLAYEY SILT With FINE SAND SM/· Tan, SILTY SAND to CLAYEY SC SANO : Bottom . . - SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL.& T·ESTING,INC. -.,e. >->--->-I-UJ I-0 I-,< z z z I--UJ -w 0 a: z -llJ llJ en . (/) a: > -:::, llJ z :::, I--I-a: I-a: I-z -z (/) UJ -I-I-0 < (/) < -llJ 0 u (/) UJ < < 0.. -0 0 a.. (/) £--I-..J 0.. 0.. 0.. 0 UJ z a: >-z ::E < ::E < 0 a: ::E 0 a: 0 0 0 u 0 u Humid Loose/ Medium - Dense . Moist Medium Stiff/ Medium Dense Moist Medium Dense Humid/ Medium Moist Sti.ff Medium Dense - - SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LO LOGGED BY: RF DATE LOGGED: 2-27-E JOB HUMBER: 8821126 Plate No. 26 ·J J J • A:-, ~ ! ----::: I- C. UJ 0 0 1 - 2 - - 3 - - 4.J 5 - - 6_ - 7 - Br :... ' g: I 10 .... - - - - - - - - w a. >- I-. UJ ..J a. ::::E <( ii) CK BAG CK z 0 TRENCH NUMBER ·ET-" -I- <( ..J u --ELEVATiCN u. ' 0 -Cf) (/) (/) -<( ..J u DESCRIPTION SM Dark Brown, SILTY SAND ~ (TOPSOIL) · CL Dark Brown, SANDY CLAY ~ (SUBSOIL) SM Rusty, Light Brown to Tan., SILTY fl NE to COARSE SAND- STONE - Over-Consolidated ( PRE-QUATERNARY SEDIMENTS) SM Dark Grey Brown, 'SILTY SAND- STONE With Specks of Charcol (PRE-QUATERNARY S~OIMENTS)- Bottom SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL & TESTING,r"HC. >->--I-u >-w I-I-.)<. z z I--w C: z --w w :::, w w Cl) (/) a: > a: I-z z -:::, I--I-a: w -z I-<( C/) Cf) w I-<( -0 u w <( a. -0 Cf) 0 0.. Cf) a. -I-...J 0.. -C. z >-0 z w <( ::::E <( a: 0 o· a: ::::E 0 a: 0 u u Humid Loose Humid/ Stiff Moist Humid Very Dense 108.4 7.1 Humid Very Dense 110. 7 16.7 • SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOt LOGGED sv: JBR JOB HUMBER: 8821126 DATE LOGGED: 2 -28-8 Plate No. 35 -~ -z 0 -I-u <( Cl. ::::E 0 u - . . I I • z -* w Q. tRENCH >->->---C. -NUMBER 1 I-w I-(.J I-I-~ z -: >-I-z a: z z -w -w 0 ->-<( w w w en (/J a: > --..J (.J :::> I-z :::> I--I-a: z -.-... w --ELEVATION I-a: en w -I-z I-CJ 0 u. < en w· -' -<( -Cl (J (/J w <( <( Ii. (/) Q. c.. 0 a. (/) 0 Cl) I--I Q. ... :::E Q. c.. 0 en :E % .a:. >-z UJ :!: w < <( <( a: ~ a: 0 < 0 0 0 0 en ..J (.J 0 (.J u DE$CRiPTION u D -SM REDDISH BROWN, SILTY SAND· MOIST MEDIUM -{D.G.) DENSE TO 1-DENSE -.. · -BG - 2-: - --- 3--CK ---- -- --TRENCH NUMBER 2 -- 0 • . SC REDDISH BROWN, CLAYEY SAND WET LOOSE ~ (TOPSOIL) I -1-CK 100.7 20.8 - BG. CL/C~ RtDDISH BROWN, SANDY GLAY · WET MEDIUM -STIFF - 2 -SM YELLOW BROWN, SILTY SAND· MOIST DENSE TO· -. .. (LUSARDI FORMATION) VERY DEN~E 3-BG .. -. -- 4-CK 121 • 9 · 7.0 - -- 5-- -- \ 6-- -- 7. . CK . ---- • ·~ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG SOIL & TESTING,IN'C. LOGGED BY: JH DATE LOGGED: 11-23-83 JOB NUMBE'R: 14272 A 1 · ., • z - w 0 TRENCH ::,.. ;I!. C. NUMBER 8 I-u >-> -- --: ::,.. I-w I-I-I--~ z -I-<( z a:. z z -w -w --u UJ en 0 . ..J ::J UJ w Cf) a: > -~-. w EL,..EVATION a: I-I-z z ::J I--I- LL. a: -... : ...J 0 -< en en w -I-z I-u 0.. (/) Cl') C. < -w a (J w < -· C. 0 0. en < :E cn 0 en w C. C. -I-..J 0. C < < < ::::!: < z a: > 0 z w :!: cn ...J 0 0 a: ::::!: 0 a: o· u DESCRIPTION u C u 0 u -SM. BROWN; SILTY SAND ( QAL.) MOIST LOOSE - l---~ - 2 ... -BG -- 3_ - --4_ ---5_ --- 6_ - --. ..7._ ,. -.. . :--·:..... ( REFUSAL ON LARGE BOULDERS) 8 - - --l ---- I -- -- I -- -- I -- • -; -j --( --- i . --I · -- • i~ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG SOIL & T~STlNG,INC. . ·LOGGED By: JH DATE LOGGED:11 _23_83 . JOB HUMBE"R: •., -14272 A 6 z w 0 TRENCH >-* Q. i= NUMBER 9 I-(.) >-> - ~ >-z w I-I-I-*-z -I-<( C: :z z -LU UJ 0 -' ...J (J w ::::> .. w w Cl) Cl) C: -> •--.---. w u. ELEVATION a: i;.. a: I-z z -::::> I--I- ...J 0 -< CJ) < (/) UJ w -I-z I-(.) Q. U) --0 (J UJ ,Cl) Q. Q. a Cl) < <( 0 (/) 0. ,_. w ~ Cl) Q. Q. I-..J Q. -0 <( <. < == < z a: > 0 :z UJ :E U) ..J. 0 0 a: :i: 0 a: (J DESCRIPTION (.) a (.) 0 0 (J -SC BROWN; CLAYEY ~AND MOIST LOOSE - 1 -CK - ,· -- 2 CK SM YELLOW BROWN, SILTY SAND MOIST DENSE 116.8 ... BG (LUSARDI FORMATION) 12.8 - 3_ - -- 4 -- -- -- ~ ----.. ··-:•· .· - --------- -- -- -- -- -- -- ' -- -- ---- ---- ~ . SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA· ·suss UR FACE EXPLORATION LOG SOIL & TESTING,INC. LOGGED BY: JH DATE LOGGEOi 1 _23 _83 JOB NUMBE"R: 14272 A 7 • • C • • •• 4980160-001 APPENDIXC Laboratory Testing Procedures and Test Results Expansion Index Tests: The expansion potential of selected materials was evaluated by the Expansion Index Test, U.B.C. Standard No. 18-2. Specimens are niolded under a given compactive energy to approximately the optimum moisture content and approximateiy 50 percent saturation or approximately90 percent relative compaction. The prepared 1-inch thick by 4-inch diameter specimens are loaded to an equivalent 144 p·sf surcharge_ and are inundated with tap water until volumetric equilibrium is reached. The results of these tests are presentedin the table below: Expansion Expansion Sample Location Sample Description Index Potential T-12#1@6' . Green-gray clayey fine to 58 Medium medi11m sand T-26 #1 @5-6' Yellow brown sandy clay 128 High T-28 #1 @4-6' Yellow and light gray 130 High sandy silt Moisture and Density Determination Tests: Moisture content and dry density detertnination·s were performed on relatively undisturbed samples obtained froip. 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. Consolidation Tests: Consolidation tests wei:-e 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 con,solidation pressure curves are presented in the attached figures.· .Soluble Sulfates: The soluble sulfate contents ·of selected samples were determined by standard geochemical methods. The t~st ~esults are presented in the table below: Sample Location Sample Description Sulfat.e Cont~nt .Potential Degree ·of Sulfate (%) Attack* T-12#1@6' Green-gray clayey fine 0.015 Negligible to medium sand . T-26 #1 @ 5-6' Yell ow brown sandy 0.045 Negligible clay T-28 #1 @4-6' Yell ow and light gray less than 0.015 Negligible sandy silt C-1 •• • 4980160-001 APPENDIXC Laboratory Testing Procedures and Test Results ( continued) Minimum Resistivity and pH Tests: Minimum resistivity and pH tests were performed in general accordance with California Test Method 643. The result~ are presented in the table below: Sample Location Sample Description pH Minimum Resistivity (ohms-cm) 1-28#1 @4-6' Yellow and light gray sandy silt 7.8i 3300 C-2 0 1 2 -_,_ r--... 1--... ~"' 3 .· ~ 4 .......... 5 !"i. "\ 6 t\.. I r---"" t---t---"-~ 7 r-..... --'" r---., I'--._ '!'-. --r-'--8 .. 9· 10 11 12 0.1 1 10 ' VERTICAL STRESS (kst) Test Method : AStM D2435-90 •• Before Adding Water • After Adding Water Boring No. B-1 Dry Density (pcf) 103:0 Sample No. 6 Moisture Content(%): Depth (feet) 15.0 Before 22.0 Soil Type SM/SC After 19.9 Type of Sample Undisturbed CONSOLIDATION Project No. 4980160-001 •• -PRESSURE CURVE -Project Name Cantarini Property rnaJ Date 1/7/00 Figure No. 1 ••• }:-_ 0 1 • r--... "-2 't11 "r-s I'--_ 3 -~ 4 -~ Ill . 5 "' ·---i---... !'I t--,... t--'--6 ---------- I'--, r--.__ r--- 7 ,_ ~ h.. t-. -- 8 9 10 11 12 0.1 . 1 10 VERTICAL STRESS (ksf) Test Method : ASTM P243~-90 • Before Adding Water • After Adding Water Bbring No. B-1 Dry Density (pcf) 108.2 Sample No. 8 Moisture Content(%): · Depth (feet) 21.0 Before 18.5 Soil Typ~ SM After 15.0 \ Type of Sample Undisturbed. CONSOLIDATION Project No. 4980160-001 • -PRESSURE CURVE -Project Name Cantarini Property [][!] Date 1/7/00 Figure No. _2_ ··':- ··-- 215 So. Highway 101, Suite 203 + Solana Beach, CA 92075 Phone (619)481-8949 + Fax (619)481-8998. · November 18, 1999 Leighton & Associates, Inc. Project Number: 99312 3934 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite B205 San Diego, CA 92123 Attn: Kevin Colson re: Seismic refraction survey, Project 4980160-001, Carlsbad, CA This brief letter report is to present the :findings of a seismic refraction survey conducted a short distance north-northeast of the Rancho Carlsbad Golf Course in Carlsbad, California (Fig. 1) on November 18, 1999. The survey was carried out on the Ladwig/Cantarini Dev~lopment properties. Seven lines were shot and, measured from off end shot to far offset geophone, each line was 120 feet long. However, all lines, except line 3, had additional offend shots fired in order to investigate deeper. Generally, the two off end shots, off both the forward and reverse ends, were 5 and 50 feet from the nearest geophone in the string. Purpose of the survey was to determine depth to bedrock, weathered and unweathered, and its rippability. These values were determined utilizing seismic refraction methodology. A Bison 9024, 24 channel seismograph system was applied to the task. This instrument has DIFP, digital instantaneous floating point, capability. This translates into a computer-controlled seismograph that records incoming sigruµs_at all instrument settings, and these are analyzed by the computer, which then outputs optimum, balanced traces ·with maximum informational content. Sutvey Design -Locations of the seven single spread .lines, numbered 1 through 7, are illustrated (Figs. 2 & 3). Lines 6 and 7 are some distance away from the other five; consequently, it was necessary to show these two lines on a separate location map (Fig. 3). It is seen that each of the lines is located where significant cut slopes will be developed. Most line lengths are 170 feet from far offset shot to farthest offset geophone. The ex~eption, line 3, was 120 feet long. These ·. spread lengths permit the survey to investigate to depths of about 50 and 35 feet, respectively. These investigation depths are greater than planned depths of cut slopes. Geophone interval was 5 feet, and there were 5 foot and 50 foot offsets of off end shots to nearest geophone. There was also a 10 foot gap between geophones 12 and 13 where the split spread shot was fired. The spreads were shot forward, split spread and reverse. This redundacy aids in determining dip and undulations in layer boundaries. Source was a heavy duty sledge hammer equipped with an inertial trigger. The accelerated weight drop source was available but was not needed. Vertical stacking was carried out as a noise abatement strategy, and to build ener~. Elevations for all shot and geophone locations were surveyed in, as relative elevations, • --car Co-gntty Dr Sailfish Pl Wilshire St· l ·. . '. JfT1'n . ~ caTavera La • • . , ~Portiaµ~ Ct Cerro de la calavera ... · > ... -Lexington Circle -~-.:·:.. ' ~tirJing Ct ' t. +-' Ga'.teshead Rd ..::1 \: Evans 1Point ... . . . •• . ·z: -~ <·.~:-:.--· -~- FaradayA..Je ,I. / ,,4 •• Aston'Ave ... J., I f' CollegeBl~d .. , .. \ ,I. \ \.,.'!7--r-· ... \ ' \ ;--Hid4bt Valley.~-d. ; , I Sweetbrlar Circle .j, I .. -\ ' ' -~ .. -'. McClellan-Palomar + \. \ .-. \.-Kelloge Ave l -..., I Wright St'. l ,1. ,-.Edson _k·c· · • ·t Madrigal ·---lllllllllO .j,, ,\, ' {!\'..-Paseo del Norte •• !:": l -Briarwood.Dr \ i ' l .. San Francisco!peak ... oak Lake ... Collinos Way. 1 .l -:-f·, ·, ;AtlipsWay . '{ ":J.1 ; ',: .._ • !.. •• _:i . 'v· )#irosWa,y \•-I, :· ,-· .. . ~-.. squir ~ Im.ram , _ __; Co~ de la Pina ,I.'. . -sandpiper FIGURE 1 • , -/ .'/ ___ ,., ,. . . :,..,.._ ,,.· ~--: Fl~U_fti 2 ._.· • FIGURE3 •.. . ', ••• -·6- arbitarily setting the forward end at I 00 feet. Then by registration with a detailed topographic map furnish by the client, these relative elevations were converted to· absolute. The site was away from freeways and busy streets; consequently, traffic noise was usually low. Wind noise . was no more than a very minor problem. Geologic Setting -The site is on the Peninsular Ranges Batholith, consisting of a composite of individual Mesozoic· intrusive bodies, mostly granitic cl~ rocks. Metamorphosed host rocks, mostly Jurassic .in age and locally found in roof pendants, are found here and there among the granities. None of the host rocks, however, appeared to be in the immediate area. ·The immediate area is near a join of granites and metamorphic host rocks, however. The intrusive rocks tend to be bi-modal. Small basic intrusive rock bodies are found l9cally within the granitic terrain, but none of the basic rocks have been mapped nearby. The site is at the irregular onlap edge of younger sedimentary rocks. Tertiary sedimentary formations dominate the younger rocks; however, the Upper Cretaceous Lusardi Formation is found at the bottom near the onlap edge. It consist mostly of conglomerates with individual clasts up to room size. These clasts were locally derived directly from the .higher "hills" in the granitic terrain. Seismic surveys in this crystalline .rock setting have virtually always revealed a three layer case in · the refraction data. the topmost fayer is commonly thin and is composed of soil and colluvium. The second layer is weathered crystallines and the de~pest layer is unweathered crystalline rocks. Because there are sedimentary rocks where some of the lines were laid out, four layers might be expected, and four were found to be present at these line locations. BriefDescription ofthe Geophysical Method Applied -Seismic refraction investigates the subsurface by generating arrival time and offset distance information to determine the path and -velocity ofan elastic disturbance in the ground. The disturbance is created by shot, hammer, weight drop or some comparable method of putting impulsive energy into the ground. Detectors are laid out at regular intervals in a line to measure the first arrival energy and the time of its arrival. The data are plotted in time-distance graphs, from which velocity of, and depth to, layers can be calculated. This is possible because rays (a continuum point on an expanding wave front) ofthe disturbance wave follow a direct route, and are refracted across layer bound,aries where there is a difference in elastic and density properties. The critically refracted ray travels along the layer interface, at the speed of the lower layer, and continuously "feeds" energy back to the surface, to be successively detected by the line of geophortes. Shots are normally reversed from one end of the line to the other, to determine whether or not the layering is horizontal or dipping. Artd a split spread shot adds redundancy to improve the interpretation. Th~ acquired data are .computationally intense. A ray-tracing computer program, S1PT2 in this instance, is used to iteratively honor all refracting surfaces, velocities, and to be able to consider a large number of layers, where t_hey are present.· A first energy arrival.picking · program, with such'features as zoom, filtering, time stretching, separation of traces, AGC and balancing of traces, is also applied. IntelJ)retation -· Monitor records are produced in the field with _each shot. These are prints of the raw data as it comes in to _the recorder. · They show the quality pf the data, so that the operator can det~rmine whether or not the data are . pickable; or sho.ts need to be repeated. Two representative monitor records,' one _a.split spread sh~t from line 3 and a reverse shot from the same line (Fig. 4) are illustrated. -1-· •• • •• .. ~J ~--· r•.J ~ j r,.:, -·-· ••• -· -· -·--· --· J.), (,J h.i _,. ,'j t.,!) ,x, -..J ()1 <;l .t:. '.h ~<, ·-· i:.1 •'{: co -.J t'Y, (J) J.::. ()) I\) -" 1·· . .J ~..) t,) 1'.l ~.., -· ----= ·--·---- .L. t,J ~) -o •1.1 ci:, -l 0, <.n L ul 10 -o <O ro -._1 (;, 01 L. 1.v l·J - •••• .. ,·· SISON 9000 SERIES BISON 9000 SERIES Record Name: LEIG0012 Record Name: LEIG0013 !;)ate l t: 18:99 Time l 1 : 34 Date t l : 18: 99 Time 11 :36 Hi-cut 2000 Lo-c·u t 32 Hi-cut 2000 Lo-cut 32 Sa.mp! e rt . 500ms DF'lc Out Sample rt • 500ms DF'lc Out Delay(ms) DF'hc Out De·I ay (ms) DF'hc Out Channels 24 DF'nt Out Channels 24 DF'nt Out Samples 500 DF'bp Out Samples 500 DF'bp Out · Rec I.eh 250ms Age Off Rec !en 250ms Age Off Time sc~le = 10 (ms)/division. Time scale = 10 (ms)/division. PCH GN STK EX PCH GN. STK EX PCH. ·GN STK EX PCH GN STK EX t 01 M 0002 09 + 13 M 0002 15 +.-0 l M ()003 07 + 13 M 0003 09 + 02 M 0002 10 + 14 M 0002 14 t 02 M 0003 07 + 14 M 0003 10 t 03 M OOQ~ 09 + 15 M 000.2 12 + 03 .. M 0003 08 + 15 M 0003 10 +. 04 M 0002· 09 + 16 M 0002 12 + 04 M 0003 08 + 16 M 0003 l I + 05 M 0062 10 + 17 M 0002 12 .+ 05 M 0,003 08 + 17 M 0003 11 + 06 M 0002 10 + 18 M 0002 11 + 06 M ·0003 08 + 18 M 0003 11 + 07 M 0002 11 + 19 M 0002 -10 + 07 M 0003 08 -1: 19 M 0003 1 I + 08 M 0002 I. I + 20 M · 0002 10 + 08 M 0003 09 + 20 M 0003 12 + 09 M 0002 12 + 21 M 0002 09 + 09 M 0003 09 + 21 M 0003 12 + 10 M · 0002 ·14 + 22 M 0002 09 + 10 M 0003 ·09 + 22 M 0003 14 + 11 M 000-2 15 ·+ 23 M 0002 09 + 11 M. 0003 09 + 23 M 0003 14 + ·12 M 0002 15 + 24 M 0002 09 + 12 M oorrn 09. + 24 M 0003 16 FIGURE 4 •••• .. ··-.-. •-· -8- First energy arrivals are seen to be quite sharp on the raw records, although some very minor wind noise is coming in mostly on the far offset trac~s. · This is not uncommon for off end shot records. Even so, with use of a computer picking program, with zoom, filtering, etc., there was no difficulty in picking the first energy arrivals. There should not be significant variation in picked .. arrival times should the first breaks l;)e picked by several persons independently. More of the shooting parameters are listed below the monitor records (Fig. 4 ). The first pick infonnation, geophone locations and geometry of the spreads,· are input to a routine that produces a time-distance plot ( e.g. Fig. 5; from line 5, all shots). The six curves reflect the shots at the five positions along the line, as · previously outlined. The split shot, however, produces two curves going in opposite directions. This is one of the lines located on the thin edge of the Lusardi Formation. The data show the expected 4-layer case, as is illustrated by generalized straight lines drawn through some of the curves. It is seen that the slopes of these generalized straight lines through the data vary from high angle to quite flat. This is an expression -- of differing velocities in the various layers. · It is obvious that the topmost layer is quite thin. Minor undulations in the curves, based on the raw data, are mostly explained by the fact that elevation corrections are not yet applied to the data in the time-distance plot, and perhaps small disturbances from noise, and lower energy at far offset geophones. Minor variations in the positions· of the "dog-legs" in the several curves are mostly an expression of the_ laterally changing thicknesses of the uppermost layers. The models were calculated utilizing the SiPT2 program which includes an iterative ray tracing procedure. With the processing of the "corrected" data, including elevation corrections, geologic models were developed for the seven lines (Figs.-6-12). J3oundaries appear to be somewhat undulating; this is typfoal of weathered crystalline rocks where weathering is generally a little ~eeper where there is a little mo~e access to the subsurface for air and water. Differing fracture densities,. among· other things, can account for these differences._ The undulations are not as pronounced as they appear, however, inasmuch as there is some vertical exaggeration in the structure sections. In general the layer boundaries mimic the surface topography. Thickness. of the soil/colluvium layer averages three feet, but varies from feather edge to nine feet. This material appears to consist of soiVcolluvium with only slight compositional variation due to the host rock on which it -developed. Average velocity of layer 1 materials is approximately 1500 ft/sec. This is typical. Variation in soil/colluvium velocity is small, ranging from 1412 to 1914 ft/sec. Layer 2, d~signated the· oldest sedimentary layers, found under lines 5 and 6, has an average thickness in the order of 9 feet, and varies considerably as might be expected at the onlap .edge of deposition. Average velocity is 2608 ft/sec. · This is in the "normal" range for weathered sedimentary rocks. · Layer 3, designated the weathered granitic rocks, has an average velocity of 3650 ft/sec, where sampled. Its velocity variation is moderate, Thickness is about 32 feet, but it is systematically a -little thinner where overlain by the Lusardi Formation. This might be expected inasmuch as the overlying material would account_ for a less intense weathering environment. • • E :icample Time-Distance 6 r aph --Line 5 0 20 40 60 80 .100 1.20 f"t 40 40 30 30 20 20 .10 1.0 Layer 1 0 SP Geo ... ····>«··· .......... ) 0 I C • • • • • > C ·1. 2 4 6 8 .10 1.2 SeisMic Refraction Surve~ Carlsbad1 California .14 .16 .18 20 22 24 SP Geo Ladwig/Cantarini Job 49801.60-001. NoveMber .181 1.999 FIGURE 5 • I 1.0 I • 360 350 340 330 (feet) 320 3J.f;) 300 290 280 • Line l. C B __ :w,...,.• .. ~/· ,· ,··;· ;· ;, ; i ~,,, ... ~',',','i',','i',":',',',',', ~ • -;::!t.~"7 ;,·~ . ~· ·r~"·!·!r 1.520 f't/s ,,,,,,.,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,.,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,.,,.,,.,,,,.,,.,,.,,>,,.,,,, o' • ' I If ~ I• 1 • • •: :: ; : 111 1 • 111 1 • 1 ; ____ .. # , , , , , , ... ,,,,, ,,,,,,,','/',',',',',',',',',',',',','/'i',',',', :,;;.;..;,,,,,,,.,,,,.,,,,,,,;; ,l,,;•,-, ,;,,.,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,,,.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,,,.,,,,.,,,,,,,,.,,,,,,.,,,,.,,,,,,,,~,,,,,,,,,.,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,',',',', ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,~,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,','~',',',',',',',',',',',',',~,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,'~',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',~,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,, ,, ,,, ',,,,, ,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,.,, ,, ... ,. ... ... ... ... ... ... ' ', ,,, ,, ,,,,,,, ,,, ,,,,,, ,, ,,,,,,-,,,' ,, , ,, ,.,, ,, , ,., ,,,,,,', , ,,,,,, ,, ,,.,,.,,.. ,, \.,. ,,,,,,,, ,,,, \,', ,,,,'""' ,, ,, '""' ,, ,,,,,,, 3 3 0.1 ft /s -., ,._,, ,,,,,,,,,, '""', ,'""' ,, ,:, \,. '.., ,,,, ,,.,. ,, ,., ,., ,, ','.., ,, \,\, .. ,, ,, ,'~',',',',','~',,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,~,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,' ''' --,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,~,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,~,,,,,,,~,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ----=-------·-------==-~~ '',';',,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,~,,,~,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ---::-~-=;_~~~::§;_~:§;_-:;_~ ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, -===================== ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,~,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, -======================= ,~,,,,,,,,,,,~,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,~,,,, ------=---=--:...~:--=---==-=--:...---------=--=--------:----=--:. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ... ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ... ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,_,' ---¾...~------------------------ 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 f't I··:·········:) Soi I (','c't'c'!-r',') Weath , bedrock f#=~;fil-&,-..;#J Unweath, bedrock SeisMic Refraction Survey ·Ladwig/Cantarini Job 4980160-001 Carlsbad~ California NoveMber 18~ 1999 FIGURE 6 ..... 0 I -11-.:, ... ~ (J Ii-0 ""' 0 I. 0 'O 0 N Ill I r-- ""' ,Q 0 l.fJ ~ ..r ~ .t::. 0 ,fol co t!> I'll er, H Q,I ~ ~ 0 3 .a C 0 :::l 0 ""' lj er, •I'! er, C er, •l'I ""' I. I'll .. 0 ... co co C ""' I'll c.l I. ~ ' Q,I· (J m J2 0 •l'I t I. 3 Q,I 'O 'O ~ Ill I'll 0 0 ,Q .J z ••• N "' Q,I .t::. C ,fol •l"I I'll .J llf . ::t ~ :fl Q,I :::), I. ::, c,, I'll •l'I C C 0 I. •l'I 0 ,fol Ii- (J •l'I ID ,-c '"4 I. I'll •l'I Ii-c.l 0 Q,I a: .. ~ "C ~ (J ID •"4 .a 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 O· 0 t U'I .... l.fJ It) ~ (I') A) N ""' 0 cr, co ~ U'I ,-c (I') (I') (I')' (I') A) (I') (I') (I') N N N •l'I I. --111 I'll c,, c.l • • 370 360 350 340 (feet) 330 320 31.0 300 290 0 !········:····) Soi 1 20 SeisMic Refraction Survey Carlsbad6 California • Line 3 B . :: !::: ;: ;;f: ;:;: (:: .1:!>,52 40 60 so· 1.00 1.20 ft bedrock (,,,,,,,,,,','! Weath . bedrock Ladwig/Cantarini Job 49801.60-001. NoveMber 186 1.999 FIGURE 8 • I -4 N I • 360 350 340 330 (feet) 320 310 300 290 280 0 ponible boulders: or core. :stones 20 • Line 4 SE C -__.,,___.. l.794 ft/s ::::::::::\HHU/··'.·····'.·. 40 60 80 100 1··:········-;J Soi 1 ('c'"c'c'c'c'c') Wea th. bedrock J.20 ft bedrock SeisMic Ref·ract ion Survey Ladwig/Cantarini Job 4980J.60-00J. Carlsbad~ California NoveMber J.8~ J.999 FIGURE 9 • ..... w I • /-( .. 240 230 220 21.0 (feet) 200 1.90 J.80 1.70 1.60 0 !·············) Soi 1 20 S:eisMie: Ref'rae:tion-S:urve!:j Carlsbad, California • Line 5 40 Lusardi FM 60 80 l'r'e'r'e't'e'I Weathered Ladwig/Cantarini NoveMber 1.8, 1.999 . 1.00 1.20 f't Unweath. Job 4980160-001 FIGURE 10 • .... .i:i,. I • 280 270 260 250 (feet) 240 230 220 21.0 thin cemented layer 5883 ft/s 20 • Line 6 1607 fth C 40 60 80 0 l···-;-·-;-·-:J Soil t0o0o0o0n°o0o0l Lusardi FM l'c'",',','/",'1 Weathered Seis111ic Ref'raction Survey Ladwig/Cantarini Carlsbad, Calif'ornia Nove111ber 1.8, 1.999 J.00 J.20 f't Unweath. Job 49801.60-00J. FIGURE 11 • -l u, I • 280 270 260 25,0 (feet) 240 230 220 2l.O 200 • Line 7 East thin cemented layer 4454 -5051 ft/s: pouible boulder c or core done •. : :,~ '.' :-, ,, ':' '' '.':''.' ~'-~'.~~~-~~~'.~-~-~-~-:', ,, ',, i2,1;4 . f~'.".:; ~i, i \ :r ,: nmm ~ ,, ,~i~ ... ,. ,~, .. -~-. -~ .,,,,,;,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,~~ > i ;, i· ~ ~-,,,,,,,,,,,',',:{ll~®M~::::: :-=: ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,',:ii:~::=~~~.t:: .. · . . ~ ,~,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,~;:::;:;tfr:I, ,sq. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,~,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,' '~'' '' '' ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, , ,, ,,,,,, ,,.,., ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,,,,,,,,,, ,, ,,,, ,,:-,,, ,, ,,,,,,,,, ~ 8 3 0 f't / s ', ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,'!>,,, ,, ,,,, ,, ,,,,,, ,,,,:-, ,,,,,, ,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,~',',',~,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,,~,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,~,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,~,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,~,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,~',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',';',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',~,,,,,,,,,,,,, ~~,,,~,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,~',',',~,,,,,,,~,,;,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, '_,,,,~,,,,,,,,,,,,,,..._,,,",',',,'';',' '-"-~-=--=-==-==-=~"--' ' ,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, .. ,,,,,,, .... ,,,,,,,,,','.,' ,,.,,,, ,' ~' '--=--=-====~ ,':.-',,',',','' ' '' ' ,. ' ' ---=--==--=:--=:..-=:..-=:..-=:..-=i:-:::-~~.::::_-==----' ' ' ,,, '' ' '' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' _-.::::_--=:_-=:_-=:::,..:::=-::-~ --------------=' -::. =~~=====::-=-==-===::-====="==A-~~"':;,,.,."'::__--~--~-::--~--:::-. . A ------------~~-----------------------------------------------------~ 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 ft 1······:··-;.·J Soi 1 (','r'r'<'r'r'I Weath. bedrock &-~=~-~:::#)Unweath. bedrock SeisMic Refraction Survey Ladwig/Cantarini Job 4980160-001 Carlsbad 1 California NoveMber 181 1999 FIGURE 12 • -l °' I ••• •• •:-:. :,·, •••• -17- Finally, thickness of "unweathered" layer 3 (the deepest layer imaged) was not determined; presumably it extends to great depth. Its seismic velocity is m the order of 6600 ft/sec, with small variation around this value; except beneath line 4 where an abnormally high velocity of I 0,030 ft/sec was definitely encountered. This latter velocity is more typical of unweathered granites in this setting, and the unusually low velocities, around 6600 ft/sec, found under the other lines are hot readily explained. Shearing resulting. in lower velocities, or a geologic event that can bring about two weathered layers, recent uplift, fundamental change in water table, climatic event, for example, may account for a second weathered layer wherein the deeper layer is less intensely weathered than the shall·ower one. · Core rocks, or room size boulders in the Lusardi Fonnation, are possibly present beneath some of the line layout~. Generally, core rocks are· expressed in the time-distance plots by small local peak perturbations in the layer l/layer 2 ·boundary (or in this instance, also the Iayerl/layer 3 boundary). This results from the fact that seismic velocities are higher in the local, less· weathered core rock. The positive perturbations were seen on the lines 4, 5 and 7 data sets. The positions of possible core rocks ar.e shown on the structure sections. · Another significant feature, from the standpoint of planned ground-shaping activities, is an apparent thin, hard layer locally beneath lines 6 and 7. The highly consolidated layer is, ·on average a little less than three feet thick. It is thin enough so that it does not trigger the "hidden layer'' problem in seismic refraction analyses, when a higher velocity layer is over a layer of slower velocity. Its velocity is in the order of 5200 ft/sec~ and is, therefore, of significantly higher velocity than the weathered granite beneath it. A monitor record for the split spread·shot on line 7 shows that this high velocity material is present ·in a thin bed by the weak flatter arrivals. This lineup .of first arrivals is annotated with an arrow on the record (Fig. 13). Moreover, it is not seen . extending to the end of the .line on the opposite side of the shot position. Thus, it has definite ends and is; therefore, local and mappable. The highly consolidated layer is seen to occur with a correlation to a slight high in the boundary at the top of the weathered granite. It is not certain that the thin layer is in the upper part of the weathered granite or at the base· of the overlying layer. Inasmuch as the overlying material is different from line 6 (Lusardi) to line 7 (soi.1/colluvi~), a simpler geologic explanation accrues to the interpretation that the hard layers are in the upper part of the weathered granite. Silicification processes of hydrothermal origin are well known, but there are commonly other expressions of hydrothermal activity in the rocks, in addition to silica deposition. Such tell-tale signs were not observed. Silica gels can form in _a .low temperature and pressure environment under certain physico-chemical conditions, and silica ce~ents are then deposited with the loss of water. Although we can only speculate on the origin of these hard, seismically fast layers, it is clear enough from drilling experiences that the rock is very toug);i. The Caterpillar Rippability. chart is illustrated (Fig. 14) and it is the basis -for deternftning rippability of the rocks encountered in the survey. The chart is empirical, but is based on thousands. of field and laboratory samples. It is seen that layers l, 2 and 3 are easily rippable everywhere sampled. Depth to layer 4, the fastest layer, average~ about 44 feet, but locally comes to within about 22 feet of the surface. Because of these thicknesses, it is unlikely that any ripping into layer 4 will occur during development of this site. Nevertheless, the layer 4 velocities suggest that these rocks are roughly in. the marginally rippable category (with heaviest equipment) over -18~ • I\) N t,J l\.l l\.l •• -· ••• --_. •·• -, -~ -AWN-o~m~maAWN-o~ro~~WAWN- --..-.-.. --· .... -· ·-.... ·--·-----· --· ---. --... ··-----.. -.. ----· ----- .. ---.. -----·-··· ·-... --· -. -·· ..... --------·------·-·-·-----·-- ··-·-· ··-... ·-· --·--· ..... ----··--------· -·--,._. ...... --·. ------· ··-... -·. -----··-.... --···-... -· -·· --·--. -..... ·--·-· .... --.. ·-·---- 1--1--1--1-----· ----~4--1 ------··---· --· -·-··-· -------·-... ·--... --· .... ·-· ...... ·--·-··-·------· -·-· . , -· ·-... ·-· -·· --· ·-·-.... -· --·-·· ...... -· ·-----· . . ----·- ·M·--_,, 00 --000 --............. , -·-·-· ... ,, -O•oo -,•oo oo ·-· oM ... o•• ----,-oo 0000----·-·---· ·-· -...... -·---------·· ------· " -··-.... ---·· --· ----•• ··a I SON 9000 SERIES Record Name: LEfG003I Date 11: 18 :99 Time 16:58 IH.:..out 2000 Lo,-.cut 32 Sample rt . 500ms DFlc Out De I aY (ms) DFhc Out Channels 24 DFnt Out Samples 500 Dfbp Out Rec len 250ms Ase Off Time sea.le = 10 (ms)/divlsion, PCH GN STK EX. PCH GN STK EX + 01 M 0002 10 + 13 M 0002 15 + 02 M 0002 10 + 14 M 0002 14 + 03 M 0002 I t + 15 M 0002 13 + 04 M 0002 11 + 16 M 0002 -12 + 05 M 0002 12 + 17 M 0002 i2 + 06 M 0002 12 + 18 "M 0002 12 + 07 M 0.002 1~ + 19. M 0002 I { + 08 M 0002 12 t 20 M 0002 11 + 09 M 0002 13 + 21 M 0002 1 I + 10 M 0002 13 + 22 M 0002 10 + 11 M 0002 14 + 23 M 0002 I I + 12 M 0002 15 + 24 M Q002 10 FIGURE 13 • •• • -19- most of the area, but not everywhere. It would seem cautious, for planning purposes, to assign the-layer 4 rocks to the unrippable category, if they should be enountered . 09N Ripper P.erforrnance • Multi or Single Shank No. 9 Ripper Rippers • Estimated by Seismic Wave Velocities Seismic Velocity o 2 J Meiers Per" Second x 1000 L..--.l.----'L----..l.--"-'---...l-.---''-------'-----1 Feel Per Second x 1000 o 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1-1 12 IJ 14 15 TOPSOIL CLAY I GLACIAL TILL r--.,,, ''' ,,, ,,, ' '' ~-. '-~ .. '\. '- · IGNEOUS ROCKS I GnANITE .,, ' ''·" ._, ' ...... '-.'-."-. ''' '' ,,,-." 0!'\SALT [\,_', '·'' . ',:;;,.'.,; · .. '· . •. '· ·,' , .. '.', ': '·' HIAI' llOCK r,,,,,,, .','-,.','• ... _,_.. __ ,,., ,,,·, ,., ,,,,,_,, . SEDIMENTAHY IIOGKS SHALE . ,. ., ''·'··', , .. ,, , ''·':...'&~ .. ,,,:-,.. ,:, ', ···'· ,,'. '', ,·,. '' '·· . '..~~ SANl)SlONE· s,1:is 10Nt: l"-'-''' ''' ''' ''.::--' ''• ',,, CI.AYSIONI: .. ,, '' '' '-''''' '' ''"' '"" CON{;l.()M[llAI [ I--'-''-,,,,'"''~''-'''--'·'\. "\S imrcc1A """ '"' ',.,,,:,, ',~~, !'-.'-"''' ... ,,._,_. .. · ·. ---·:::~ C:Al.1(;111 1:,_..._ . ',' ·.,,.:,..:, '· '', ,:, ,,.__~~~~ UM(.:it()N(; METAMORPHIC HOCKS -SC!ll51 r, '' . '~ '· ''' ~' ''· ,,, '' '-"'' . SLAH. ·~"' .,,,.,,, '·'·' .·," ',', --"'-~ MINERALS I!, ORES i. COAL """ '·""" "" ··'-'·" '·'-"" '"'' IIION OIIE f\.' ,,,, "'"'"' '-'' ,,,,,,,," fllPl'AOtl: MArlGIN/IL NON-Hll'PAULC 1,s, --ssss:g Figure 14. Caterpillar rippability chart Conclusions The shallow subsurface structure imaged by seismic refraction information, is generally 3 layers typical of the Peninsular batholithic terrain, but there are four layers at this site where there is a onlap relationship onto the granites by Late Cretaceous sedimentary rocks. The first three layers are easily rippable, and the deepest layer revealed is marginal to non-rippable with heaviest equipment. Nevertheless, the deepest layer -rocks tend to be deeper than about 30 · feet from the surface. There is some geophysical evidence, as well as visual, for the presence of core rocks locally, and a thin, about three feet thick, highly consolidated layer under lines 6 and 7. All data generated on this project are in confidential file in this office, and are available for review by authorized persons at any time. The opportunity to participate in this investigation is very much appreciated. Please call, if there are questions . GWC:arr •• ·- •• APPENDIX D LOGS BY SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING OF SEISMIC TRAVERSES · S1-1 1111111111 (1998) · -· . --~ ~• ~ 180 120 60 150 100 50 120 80 40 90 60 30 60 40 20 · I :1::··:1i -~---'··,'[l:·lij-TJ:·i 1;li! li:!fl 1 TI ITj,;i!f" lr.r1T~1i·~ i:i~~-~ Tf-T i·f'".1. ; : . : ;_+' ; I . ; i l : i i . m; i t' I : ' ; : : li' ! I ; ! I ; : ; ; i I l i • ! I ! ! n· I . . ' I. l I ; +-,-H-+r-t-'-;f-f-1-t-t-+-+- ·1 JTj: ! t . q r-1·1 ·. i. ·. ~I. n '. : ! i"i"1 ·rr ·ti 1-: ! ,r·r, . T , , .! 1·1 ' l.-f . ' I ,.. ..... r . . . , .. , , i ' . ' . , . ' . , , , , . . • , 1 1 , , . I· .. ·f-i-i : i • ,· • : • , . : ., I • , • : , • l ! i r j •• l ! I , 11 11 ! . , . . . --. I . I . 1 I ' I • I ' • • I I I • . . • I I I I . I ' I I ' . . I • • . -j-1 ; I ;. 1 , I . , , ; , . I j • • I I I • · : • •, 1 t • t i f • . f I I ' . ·I I I : ! ! .11 .: ! 1' ~ i I : l : 111 ·,· ! '. : . 1· ; 1, ill' I : : (I I l JI I 1,· ·j l~ . . . ·. l ... ·, '. ...... , , •.• , ! ,., w·· .,, , ,.1., I -. i·' ~ ! : !· l.L....i. ~U_I -~ ~. i.LLJ.I I .; . L~l ........... ~ ..... J_ I I -.·· . , •. t! lt"il· :;.-'I H;li. r r !' l i }~''ii,, I l! i ··!11 '·II ,11 ' [i 1· l I-J. ~ ,~-=111'·!_ii·1i-L1 t1:t11-r.u:t 111 : ,· 1 :rj 11 , Pt. 1, ! , ii , i I I· . .i: -, i 1 -~ -1L. . l. 1 1 1 · : t .-. . _ . , 1 .. t-1.1 ~ 1 1 1 · / ttL--, ! : . : , f·. . , -i I I . -. r -+ • -, ,. --, , , ,_ 1 1· , ! I.' I: I 'ti Ii' I,; 'I . .., I . • . . . I i ,. ·-. • I +-+;.....rt+ -t ···r· ... + ~ tr,·· ..... . . . ~ . I ! ! : i ! ,< 1' i ! I: .1· t ! ·,· ! I ·,· i ! ; : I: i I I i ! 1' .11 j I 1 i ; ! i . 1' l I : '1 l t I ,· 41 i I i : I i f'"ijf '. , .... , I 'I· I I ill .. I t 'I t .J : I I I 1' ,,, I 1. ! ' 11 • ,· ' : I : I ti : . I 1 J ' I I I . . I : ~ -t-· I i . I . ·1 ·j I . ; . ! I I ! . ' 1· .,. I •• ; • ; 1 . T :1;:;J111 .11 'r 1 ,: :. ii 1 1 111 1 1 ! I ·.qi! iii ·1: l·i!·ji .:,j It , I; ! ;: ,r_, ·11 I i I I I Ii .. I 1i; di,··· · .. -I ; l I I . : lir I . IJJ..l: : I., I . I , ' -1 _I ........-.-,1-1-1--t-+-+-+-+-++.....+-+-! I I ! [ l 1· . ' --...---. . .i I ! -1-4 i I r . + ~ •. 1 ~ =1 I ; : ,· l l 1 1' I ! 11 ! I i I I ' i ,· I I : I f i I :· 1 I I . I i i . I' I 1· i i 1j ·• t. ! : I I!.. . . - I • I • • I 1 I ' . I • I . I I 11 I I I ' I . I I I I • . .. . I • I I l 1 I I I I . . j . : • : I • I I . i I i ! I • I i ! . i '. . I : I . ! ! ,. I ' I I : · 1 I . ' ! I i ; 1 I ·i ' 1 · 1 i l I . II!:) I! i; I I 1·1 !1 I I_!! I I I I! i l; 11 '·,· 11 I: i 1 , ,, 11-1 I: .'. I . I . ! ! '. ! '1"' ! ' .. l Ii . . . • I I '· 1 I I I ' I : I 1 · ' . 1 I I I ' ' I : I I I I t' I ' , .. I: I I I 1., I 1· 'j, · 1 •. : ; . '. ! ., , : 1 I 1 : ·: 1 ;,: I . l ·· 1 i I I iJ ! 'It · ,. ~! i,, ·ii L! · 1 · .,. ·+ 1 ! ' ' •. I O ' • ' I I., I I I ' ' ' ! i t ' I· f ' L • I I ' ' • • I-~ f I •. 1 I' ' ' ~ ;_.,..+-r··-J+:· ·+-·+ . . . . . :---.,. ..... .,.-:-+-i-·. ·---·-:r-++-, . : ,· ' ·r·-+1.,, i •• . ; I I • I I . 1 11 ; I I ' ,· ; i '1 pg ... 71ef; I'' I I I i I • I . I I j ' I 1 , 1 • I . I ' I I ' i i i I I I I ' • I i I 1 I I . I I . . . T"' I I I I. I : I I I. 'I I ., , I I .. I . I • • '. !.'·' '!I:• ,' .,· i ,' .. ; ., :, :'?'I I t!f. !· ' I I . ',,' ., ·1·1:•· '!J: · 1 I ••• : ' • I • I I I • • I • I ' I I . . . I 11 . I ' . I I It I I I 'I 'I . . . l I I I .. I I I ' I .. I 'I ' . ' . I • 1·· ;__,'I: ti! I I'[ I I I I I·,, I!. I Ii. ii I. ·1 I I ! ! i :_...I I I. I : ; . 1 ·11 ; I; ·1-. : i ! . : . I;; I. I ... , I I: . r·r·~-. -:. 6000' ; s ! ! I/ ·II : . t. ·, ! I I 'd ~ ;11 • : I! l i ! ! ·1 Ii I ' ! ; : .I , I I I : ! l i : • ! ! i ! ' : : :, . . . -I . , . , , . 'f' Fp , I 1 , 1 , , 1 • • 1 ;:, , • , 1 I I , , 1 , • , 1 • , I : 1 , I I , , , , , . , . I I , , . I 1 , • , I I . . ••.•• I I. .,-,-.. ' I : i I I! ! . I. "0 I Iii;!' 1· ! • I I I! I:. I I ; I i. I ! ; I I . : I. i I. : ,. I;. I I I • i .. 'i. j I I' • i 'I. .,·!'I: .. i C,1-\' . I ; I! j I; 1· . : .. ':. ! 'I 11 i. I I:.:.... . Ii Ii I! I·: '';; ,· i ft" • • • • , t • • I ' ; 1· I : . 1· t ' • ,., .. J • I ' I : : J ; I I . ' I I • . f i ' I I I ; i 1 1 ' I I I • I . I I • • • ! I I I I ! . . l I !, i i J_ 30 20 10 "~" • 0 ' '• '-• • • T; ••• 0 • -· ·! f-~_J):---I•, ••••i•: ~--r~ •··•· +~-t _;_.,. ,. --~-+.. ,l. ,. •·h·1--' +--,· -I•~--:•·•, ........ ,--,--,.J .•. -.; .;-+-rr • • ••• I • t I I I I • ! . ~ : . ~i-: ' ·: ~ .. ; ... i I ~90 : . ~ i ' ; •• I ~ :. : 1 J l t ; ; : t i j I I ; -: f • I 1 • : • : • • '. .. ! : I : i I • : I i I I . . . : : : : : ! ! i: ~: . ·r.:; '.: ! : : : . r·:··:-:----~f.Ps. : '. l: ~: -; ! ! : '. i : ! i:: : ; ; : I '. : . ! : . : ' . i; ! : : : : '. : ! . ! : i. l' . ~s·: -~,·:.:·::; ;:.;'.·: ... ;:.:: :i-~-i-< .. ;_~;:':;·: :;i!;;i::.~.:'. ::· .;::;;:i: i!··,_ ,U'': 1 ~' I ; , , , ; ~. , 1 , , , ; , • , • I , , 1 , • : l • ..... .l/r-.. , I ; ·1 r : 1 ! ' • . ; . : l , : • : , , , I ! , (~~ ; ; , • • • , • j • • • • ; • • • = • . : . : • . , i~(J· . . . : , , , . , , 1 · . . . . , : = • • • ! • • , . l , i '\.\ "J .• i , P.. n 5. , .. 1 1 . : .•. 1 • · . , r.i. ,, . . , , ; • ~ .. ;::, . , : .. , i , , , . , . . , I . : , . . . . · . , , I ·.:::1:1~ ·.rJ__._ft:-;-:.i.:: .. :;: ,.:L.~ d'f~f~~:j_ .i:.~1.1..:t.:. ~~Li .. H.d.L L.1.11:l.L .. !:._J.1.1:..;L :iHL. ·_ ~ I I I I ''Li :!~ t-130 20 40 60 30 60 90 40 80 120 50 60 100 120 150 180 70 80 90 100 140 160 180 200 210 240 270 300 DISTANCE > ~ N.._ ... s SOUTHERN. CALIFORNIA BOIL & TESTING, INC. •••c RIVaRDALa •TA••T aAN 01•00, CALll"ORNIA •• .,.a JOB Sycamore Creek GEOLOGIST __ RE JOB NO. 8821121 ELEVATION 340 ± TRAVERSE NO. S 1-1 SURFICIAL MAT'L. SIL TY SAND TRAVERSE TYPE ROCK TYPE GRAfHTIC • • • . • ••••• Leighton and Associates, Inc. GENER.AL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICA TrOt,IS Page I of 6 LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC . . GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS FOR ROUGH GRADING J.O · General · 1.1 1.2 3030:109'4 · · Intent These General Earthwork and Grading Specifications are for the grading and -~~rthwork shown on the approved grading plan(s) and/or indicated in the geotechnical report(s). These Specifications are a part_ ~f the recommendations contained in the .... geotechnical report(s). · In case of conflict,":the spe¥ific' 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 recommendatiops that could supersede these specifications or the .recommendations in the geotechnicalreport(s). · · 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 preli~inruy geotechnical findings, conclusions, and recommenda_tions 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 perfo~ the _appropriate level of observation, mapping, and compaction testing. J?urfog the grading and earthwork ope~ations, the Geotechnical Consultant shall observe, . i;nap, and docUinent the subsurface exposures. to . verify. tlte geotechnical design assumptions. If the observed conditions are found to .be significap.tly different than the inteIJ>reted assumption~ during the d_esign phase, the Geotechnical Consultant shall inform the_. 9wner, rec9mm~nd appropriate changes in design to accommodate the observed cond~tions, and notify the review agency Where required. Subsurface areas to be geotechnicallyobserved, mapped, elevations recorded~ and/or tested include natural ground after it has been cleared for receivingtill 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-conditioningand pr<;>cessing of the s~bgrade 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 C<;>ntractoron a routine and frequent basis . •• •• • Leighton and Associates, Inc. GENERAL EARTHWORK.AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page2 of6 I.3 The Earthwork Contractor. The Earthwork Contractor (Contractor) shall be qualified ~ -. --·--. ' -· -experienced, and knowledgeaf?le 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 Spec'ifications prior to commencement of grading. The Contractor shall be solely responsible for perfonning 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 infonn the own~r and the Geotechnical Consultant of changes in work s9hedules 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 ac~rdance 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 irtay recommend to the owner that construction be stopped until the conditions are rectified. . . 2.0 . Preparation of Areas to be Filled 3030.1094 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 G~technical Consultant. The Geotechnical Consultant shall evaluate· the extent of these removals depending on specific site conditions. Earth fill material shall not contain more than I 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 ha~dlingofthese 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. . •• • •• Leighton and Associates, Inc. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page3 of6 2.2 Processin~ Existing ground that has bee~ declared satisfactory for support of fill by the ·· -Geotechnical Consultant shall be scarifieci' .to a minimum dept~ 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 report(s) and the grading plan; soft, loose, dry, saturated, spongy, organic-rich, highly fractured or otherwise unsuitable ground shall be overexcavated to competent ground as evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant during grading. 2.4 Benching Where fills are to be placed on ground With slopes steeper than 5:1 (horizontal to vertical units), the ground shall be stepped or benched. Please see the Standard Details for a graphic illustration .. The lowest bench or key shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide and at least 2 feet deep, into competentmaterial 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 ot otherwise overexcavated to provide a flat subgrade forthefilL 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 JOJO 1094 3 .I 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 pote11tial;-or low strength shall b_e placed in areas acceptable to the Geotechnical Consultant or mixed with other soils to achiev~_satisfactory.fill material. 3 .2 ,Oversize: Oversize material defined as rock, or other irreducible material with a maximum dimension greater than 8 inches, shall rtot be buried or placed in fill unless location, _materials, and placement_methods are specifically accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant. 3.3 Placement operations shall be such that nesting of oversized material does not occur and such that oversize material is c9mpletely surrounded-by compacted or densified fill. Oversize material shall not-be placed within IO vertical feet of finish grade or within 2 feet of future utilities or underground construction. Import If importing of fill material is required for grading, proposed import material shall meet the requirements of Section 3.1. The pot~ntial import source shall be given to the ••• •• • ••• Leighton and Associates, Inc. GENERAL EARTHWORK.AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page4of6 4.0 JOJO. 1094 Geot~chnicalConsultantat le~t 48 hours_G working days) before importing begi_ns so that .. its suitabilitycan be determined and appropriate tests performed. Fill Placement and Compaction 4.1 Fill Layers: Approved fill material shall be pl~ced in areas prepared to receive fill (per Section 3.0) 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. E/41.ch layer shall be spread evenly and mixed thoroughly to attain_ relative uniformity of material and moisture throughout. 4.4 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 Dl557-91). 4.3 4.4 Compaction of Fill: After ea:ch 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 D 1557-91). Compaction equipment shall be adequately sized and be either specifically designed for soil compaction or of proven reliability to efficiently achieve the specified l~vel of compaction with uniformity. · · 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 maximutndensityper ASTMTest"Method.Dl5~7-91. 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 iii 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. .,.:. •••• ••• Leighton and Associates, Inc. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page 5 of6 5.0 6.0 .7.0 J0J0.1094 . 4. 7 Compaction Test Locations: The Geotecp1!ical Consultant shaII document the approximate -elevation and horizontal coordinates-of each test location, The <;;9ntractor shall coordinate with the project surveyor to assure that ·sufficient grade stakes are established so that the Geotechnical Consultant can determine the test iocations with sufficient accuracy. At a minimum, two grade stakes within a horizontal distance of I 00 feet and vertically less than 5 feet apart.from potential test locations shall be provided. Subdrain Installation Subdrain syst~ms shall be installed in accordance with the approved geotechnical report(s), the grading plan, and the Standard Details. The Geotechnical Consultant may recommend additional subdrains and/or changes in subdrain extent, location, grade, or material depending on conditions encountered during grading. A.II 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 Contractol,"for these surveys. Excavation Ex~vations, 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. Trench Backfills 7.1 The Contractor shaff follow all OHSA and Cal/OSHA requirements for safety of trench excavations. 7.2 All bedding and backfill of utilitytrenches 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 I foot above the top of the conduit to the surface. 7.3 . The jetting of the b~dding 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. e:-- • Leighton and Associates, lnc. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECLPICA HONS Page6 of6 3030.1094 7.5 Lift. thickness of trench backfill shalLnot 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. •••• .. •·:- OUTLET PIPES 4•• NON-PERFORATED PIPE, 100' MAX. O.C. HO~IZONTA_UY, . 30' MAX. O.C. VERTICAU Y • SUBDRAIN INSTALLATION ~ Subdrain collector pipe shall be· Installed with perforations down or, unless otherwise designated by the geotechnical consultant. Outlet pipes shall be non-perforated pipe. The subdrain pipe shall have at least 8 perforations uniformly spaced per foot. Perforation ~ be ¼· to 1n• If drilled holes are u$ed. All subdrain pipes shall hav.e a· gradient ~ least 2% towards the outlet. . • SUBDRAIN PIPE -Subdrain pipe shall be ASTM 02751, SOR 23.5-or ASTM 01527, Schedule 40, or ASTM 03034, S~R 23'.5, Sched~le 40 Polyvinyl Chloride Plastic (PVC) pipe. • All outlet pipe shail be placed in a trench no widerthan twice the subdtain pipe. Pipe shall be in soil of SE>30 ~ed 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 []IT] SPECIFICATIONS ~ U STANDARD DETAILS D 4/95 • ••• ~CTED PLANE 1 TO 1 MAXMJM FROM TOE OF SLOPE TO APPR0'f"ED GAOUNO NATURAL GROUND ·------- CUT FACE NATURAL GROUND ~ - 2'MIN. KEY DEPTH SHALL BE .CONSTFIUCTED PFIOA TO Fl.L PlACEMENT TO ASSURE ADEQUATE GEOLOGIC C0NOIT10NS PROJECTED PLANE . 1 TO 1 MAXIMUM FROM . TOE OF SLOPE TO APPAOVEO.GAOUNO 2'MIN. KEY DEPTH KEYING AND BENCHING REMOVE UNSUITABLE MATERIAL FILL SLOPE FILL-OVER-CUT SLOPE CUT-OVER-FILL- SLOPE For Subdrairis See . Standard Detail C ·BENCHN3 8HALL BE DONE WHEN slOPES ANGLE IS EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN 5:1 MINIMUM BENCH HEIC3HT SHALL BE 4 FEET MINIMUM FILL WIQTH SHALL BE 9 FEET GENERAL eAi!THWORK AND GRADING rn· ~"[TI SPECIFICATIONS &!-U STANDARD DETAILS A REV. 4/11/96 •. :: ••• FINISH GRADE ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- · -------' --------------------_.:.__-:-_-=._ _____ 10• MIN.----CPMPACTED FILL:..-:..-_-_-:: ------------~----.-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------=~= =-=~n------=-----n---=-:: = a-=-------------------------------------~-----------0: --------------------------:.:::7---,--. -. ---·~ .. ---. ·==-=-~~--:-:-:-:--------~-a~~~; =n-~-----n-------------:z_--------------. ----------...:. .... --..;. -_;=--~-----=-=--'+--------· ...:..;~ ---~-:---o------. -..;.--::tO' MIN;--S2::---:-------,-,---,-· £_=--~---~====E--:-----· ------~-------------..:4• MIN --==~15' MIN~--------..... -_--:-· : ~~--~==-kfl=------:0:-:1?-=~-=-===~=~=_;-=---~--c ____ :.._;2=_0VERSIJ~----------.,...---,-:-:--=--== ~=--· _-_--JETTED OR FLOODED ---7----:--WINDROW _____ ,......;. __ .:_____ . ------.GRANULAR MATERIAL ----~--------~-----~ . • Oversize rock Is 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 fiH all the Voids. . • Do not bury rock within 1 o feet c:A finish grade,. • Windrow of buried rock shall be· parallel to the finished slope fill. · ELEVATION A-A' . PROFILE ALONG WINDROW JETTED OR FLOODED GRANULAR MATERIAL OVERSIZE . ROCK DISPOSAL -~--_-_--- GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING r::Ja[I]_ SPECIFICA TJONS U STANDARD DETAILS s· 4/95 •••• • NATURAL ~GROUND ~ .. --~----=. -. -----------------. ----......-.2-- BENCHING -_.;_ ______ ..,..._ coMPAcTEo FILL -~-....:_...:. ____ z-::.i"'-'!I~~ ~ . -~-----· . --:--~--REMOVE :-. ---~'S...;: : :· ~= =-== ==~ ~------UNSUITABLE ,... · _ --:...-..;..~:--· -,--~-:---_-. MATERIAL ------·-------~---------------------- CAL TRANS CLASS II PERMEABLE OR #2 ROCK (9FT.3/FT.) WRAPPED IN FILTER FABRIC . ·. FILTER FABRIC (MIRAFI 140 OR'-. . . APPROVED 'COLLECTOR PIPE SHALL EQUIVALENT) BE MINIMUM &• DIAMETER . SCHEDULE 40 PVC PERFORATE[;) CANYON SUBDRAIN OUTLET DETAIL PIPE. SEE STANDARD DETAIL D DESiGN FINISHED GRADE PERFORATED PIPE &•+ MIN. ·~J---20'-MiN.~ - . NON-PERFORATED . 5' MIN. &•+ MIN. CANYON SUBDRAINS FOR PIPE SPECIFrlCA TION FILTER FABRIC (MIRAFI 140 OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT) #2 ROCK WRAPPED IN FILTER FABRIC OR CAL TRANS CLASS 11 PERMEABLE. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING rn[IJ · SPECIFICATIONS cs U STANDARD DETAILS C ••••• .. • RETAINING WALL DRAINAGE DETAIL RET AiNING WALL . ··- W ~LL. WATf?.~.P~_9PFING PER ARCHITECT'S SPECiFICA TIONS:-,. ___ _ FINISH GRADE SOIL .E!ACJ{FI.LL, COMPACTED .TO . 8~ PERC_ENT;RELATIVE COMPACTION* --=-~--=---~---~-~"""L---~-----~-- ~---=-------·2•TYP~~--~ .-----------~~~-- 0 -, 0-~-:, ~~~~~-"'" . . ._ . '"r I-::-::-::-::-::-::-=-. IO e~ MIN°1-'? ~~~~~-;-'FIL TE.R FABRic· "ENVELOPE· OVERLAP----==· · · ·· · · ··-·-· · · ~ -~·-·0··· o ::-::-::-:? ·,(MIRAFI 140N,_ OR A_PPROVED I O O • equ1y ~1;~~1::?:** ---·· I ; ·,: MIN.. _3/4,,--1~1,2~ CLEAN GRAVEL*.* 4 .:_(MIN.I DIAMETER PER FORA T·eo ,-... -. -~'. -· 'PVC PIPE (SCHEDULE 40 OR· ·---:..==:=t=t=t=t=t~-:MPA~TEO Fl~_~'.:;:~'.:;:'.:;:~ I ·: 0 I: -~i Oo EQUIVALE.NT) WITH PERFORATIONS ORIENTED1DOWN.·AS DEPICTED . MINIMUM ,: :PERCENT G.RADIENT .TO SUITA'8LE OUTL_ET . . -~-' NO-T TO SCALE ·SPECIFICATIONS FOR CALTRANS .CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL U.S. Standard S.ieve Size 1" 3/411 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>?S COMPETENT ,BEDROCK_ OR MATERIAL AS EV.ALUATED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULT AN..T *BASED ON ASTM 01557 **IF CAL TRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL (SEE-GRADATION TO LEFT) IS USED IN PLACE OF 3/4•-1.-112• GRAVEL, FILTER FABRIC MAY BE DELETED. CAL TRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL SHOULD BE COMPACTED TO 9Q PERCEN°f;RELATI-VE COMPACTION* NOTE:COMPOSITE DRAINAGE PRODUCTS SUCH AS MIRADRAIN OR J-DRAIN MAY BE; USED AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO GRAVEL OR CLASS 2. INSTALLATION SHOULD BE PERFORl'vED IN ACCORDANCE WITH MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS. • 1::=-· .. • :; :-•. ··: .. KEY f FILTER FABRIC ENVELOPE (MIRAFI · 140N OR APPROV-ED ·EQUIVALENT)* ·STABILITY -FILL / BUTTRESS DETAIL -=-==-=~.'.=:.-;,'"--::..-t, f=='.( 1~11 4• fiJ Ni~i~~iir:,.~iD PIPE., _ _,j!_f; ---=-~:;::s-~~,L~ 100' MAX. O.C. HORIZ.ONTALL Y ,· --====-===-=--~ - ·30• "MAX. ·o.c. VERTICALLY . -=--=--~==-==--~==-==-=·:: - :e~:~~~~~;~-~ '"' ~ -SEE SUBDRAIN TRENCH SEE ·T-CONNECTION· DETAIL 4• ¢ PERFORATED . . PIPE DETAIL LOWE$T SUBDRAIN SHOULD ' BE SITUATED AS LOW AS POSSIBL.E 1'0 ALLOW SUIT ABLE OUTLET: * IF CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL' IS USED 'IN PLACE OF· 3./4.-:-1·1/2~ GRAVEL, FIL TEA. FABRl'C MAY :BE DELETED ·SPtCIFICATIONS FOR CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL U.S. Standard Sieve Size % Passing 1" 100 3/4° 90-100 3/8" 40-100 No. 4 25-40 No. 8 18-33 No. 30 5-15 No. 50 0-7 SU6DRAIN "tRENCH DETAIL No. 200 0-3 Sand Equiva1ent>75 NOTES: For buttress dimensions, see geotechnlc.al·-report/plans. Actual dimensions of buttress and .. sub.drain may be-changed by the geotechnlcal .consultant base·d on field condltl'ons. . . . ' . . :.: . ••• SUBDRAI~ INSTALLAT-IO~h81.1bdi'aln pipe should be Installed with perforations down as·dep·icted • At locations recommended by the_ ge~~e¢hnical1consultan~. noni>edorated pipe should be Installed SUBDl:IAIN TYPE-Subdrain type sh9uld be Acrylon trite Butadiene Styrene (A.B.S.), Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) or approved equivalent. Class 125,SDR 32.5 stiould be used for maximum fill depths of 35 feet. Class 200, SOR 21 should be used for maximum fill depths of 100 feet. • ••• ··=: DATE: Monday, December 6, 1999 ************************************* * * * * * * E Q F A U L T Ver. 2.20 * * * * * * ************************************* (Estimation of Peak Horizontal Acceleration From Digitized California Faults) SEARCH PERFORMED FOR: Cantarini Property JOB NUMBER: 980160-001 JOB NAME: Cantarini Property SITE COORDINATES: LATITUDE: 33.1467 N LONGITUDE: 117.2767 W SEARCH RADIUS: 100 mi ATTENUATION RELAT~ON: 2) Boore et al. (1993a) Horiz. -Random -Site Class B UNCERTAINTY (M=Mean, S=Mean+l-Sigma): M SCOND: 0 COMPPTE PEAK HORIZONTAL ACC]j:LERATION FAULT-DATA FILE USED: CDMGSCE.DAT SOURCE OF DEPTH VALUES (A=Attenuation File, F=Fault Data File): A ·--- e:---: -----------------------------DETERMINISTIC SI.TE PARAMETERS Page 1 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- I I MAX. CREDIBLE EVENT 11 MAX. PROBABLE EVENT I I I APPROX, l-------------------11-------------------I I ABBREVIATED !DISTANCE I MAX. I PEAK I SI.TE 11 MAX. I PEAK I SITE I I FAULT NAME I mi (km) I CRED. I SITE I INTENS I I PROB. I SITE I INTENS I I I I MAG. !ACC. gj MM 11 MAG. !ACC. gj MM I !--------------------. -----1---------~-----1------1------11-----1------1------1 I SAN ANDREAS -Coachella I 71 (114) I 7 .10 I O. Q48j VI 11 7 .10 I O. 048 I VI I ,,--------------------------1---------1----.-1------1------11-----1------1------1 !SAN ANDREAS -San Bernardi! 64 (102) I 7.301 0.05-71 VI 11 7.301 0.0571 VI I 1--------------------------~---------I----1------1------11-----1------1------1 jSAN ANDREAS -Southern I 64 (102) I 7.401 0.0611 VI 11 7.301 0.0571 VI I 1--------------------------1--------l-----1------1----·-11-----1------1------1 I SAN :ANDREAS --Mojave I 81 (131) I 7 .10 J O. 043 I VI 11 7 .10 I O. 043 I VI I I ------------------------1---------1----1------1------11---· -1------1------1 !SAN ANDREAS -1857 Rupture! 81 (131) I 7.801 _0.0621 VI I I 7.501 0.0531 VI I 1-----------------------·. ---1---------1-----1------1------11-----1------1------1 !SUPERSTITION HILLS (San Jal 84 (135) I 6.601 0.0321 V I I 5.90I 0.0221 IV I 1-------------------------!--------1-----1------1------11-----1------1------1· !SUPERSTITION MTN. (San Jae! 79 (128) I 6.60j 0.0331 V 11 6.10I 0.0261 V I I -· ---------------------.-----I ---------I -----I -----· I ------11 -----I ------I ------I !SAN JACINTO' -BORREGO I 63 (101) I 6.601 0.0401 V 11 6.101 0.0311 V I I -----------------------1---------1-----1---~--I------I 1-----1------1------1 jsAN JACINTO-COYOTE CREEK I 49 < 79) I 6.001 o.054I VI I I 6.201 o.039I v I I ----------· ----------------I ---------I -----I ------I -------I I -----I ------I ------I !SAN JACINTO-ANZA I 45 ( 72) / 7.20I 0.0721 VI 11 6.90I 0.061I VI I 1--------------------------1~--------1-----1------1------11-----1------1------1 !SAN JACINTO-SAN JACINTO VA 46 ( 74) / 6.90/ 0.060I VI II 6.801 0.0571 VI I 1--------------------------------· --· ----1------1----· -11------.1------1------1 I SAN JACINTO-SAN BERNARDINO 60 ( 96) 6. 70 ,. 0. 044 / VI 11 6. 70 I O. 044 I VI I 1----------------------------------------r------1------11-----------1------1 !LAGUNA SALADA I 86 (139) 7.001 •0.0391 V II 6.30 0.0271 V I !--------------------------------------1------1------11-----------1------1 !ELSINORE-COYOTE MOUNTAIN 55 ( 88) 6.801 0.05Qj VI II 6.20 0.0361 V I I ------------------------------------------I -----: I ----· -I I -----------I ------I !ELSINORE-JULIAN /~2-~ ( 35) 7.101 0.1111. VII 11 6.4oj .:0.0011 VII I I --------.-------------------:v, -... ---------1------1------11-----1------1------1 IE:LSINORE-TEMECULA I~~~·-;< 35) 6.001 0.1001 VII 11 ~--.301' od>77I VII I ,--------·------------------! ',_ . _____ -----1------1------11-----1------1------1 !ELSINORE-GLEN IVY I 34 ( 55) 6.80/ 0.0711 VI I I 6.301 0.055I VI I 1--------------------------1--------------1------1------11-----1------1------1 !WHITTIER I 53 ( 85) I 6.001 0.0511 VI_ 11 5.90/ o.0321 v I 1-----------------------------------1-----1-----1------11-----1------1------1 !BRAWLEY SEISMIC ZONE . 92 (148)"1 6.401 0.027I V II 6.401 0.0271 V I 1----------------------------------1-----1------1------11-----1------1---·--1 !CHINO-CENTRAL AVE. (Elsino 50 ( 80) I 6.701 0.0621 VI I I 5.501 0.0331 v I 1------------------------------------1-----1------1------11-----1-------1------1 !EARTHQUAKE VALLEY I 40 ( 65) I 6.501 0.0541 VI 11 .5.701 0.0351 V I l--------------------------1----------1-----.1------1------·1 1-----1------1------1 !ELMORE RANCH I 83 (133) I 6.601 0.0321 V I I 5.401 0.0171 IV I l--------------------------1---------1-----I------I------I 1-----1------1------1 1coRONADO BANK r·:'2~ < 37) 1 7.401 0 .. 1321 VIII 11 6.30·1 0.0141 vrr 1 1--------------------------1-.:i--,------,-----1------J------.11------:-----1------1 INEWPQRT-INGLEWOOD (Offshorl ''9 ( 14) 6.901 0.2041 VIII 11.~-8_0 ie_-1141 VII I 1-------------------------1--------------1· -----1------11------_ .. ---1------1 /ROSE CANYON I '·7 (''12)1 6.9ol o.2341 IX lf'5.101··ij\·12sj VII I 1------------------------1---------1-----1------1------11-----1------1------1 • ••• •• DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS Page 2 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------jMAX. CREDIBLE EVENTj jMAX. PROBABLE EVENTj I APPROX. I -----------'-.,. -------I I -------------------I ABBREVIATED !DISTANCE I MAX. I PEAK I SITE .I I MAX. I PEAK I SITE I FAULT NAME I mi (km) jCRED.j SITE jINTENSj·jPROB.I SITE jINTENSI I I I MAG. !ACC. gj MM 11 MAG. !ACC. gj MM I 1--------------------------1--------1-----1------1------11-----I------I------I !CLAMSHELL-SAWPIT I 02 (132) I 6.5oJ o.0381 v 11 5.ooj 0.0111 IV I 1-------------------------1---------1 ----l------1------11-----1------1------I !CUCAMONGA I 72 (116) I 7.00I 0.0541 VI 11 6.101 0.0341 V I l--------------------------1---------1-----I------I -----11-----1 .-----1------1 !HOLLYWOOD I 87 (139) I 6.401 0.0341 V I I 5.301 0.019I IV I 1--------------------------1---------1-----I------I-----I 1-----1------1------1 !MALIBU COAST I 95 (152) I 6.701 0.0371 V 11 4.90I 0.014I IV I 1--------------------------1---------I-----I------I-----11-----1------1------1 NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (L.A.Basl 49 ( 79) I 6.90j 0.0571 VI I I 5.60j 0.0291 V I ------------------------J----.----1-----1------1------11-----1------1------1 PALOS VERDES I 39 .( 64) I 7.101 0.0751 v:tI 11 6.201 o.0471 VI I ---------------------------1---------1-----1------1------I I'-----I ------1------I RAYMOND . I 82 (132) I 6.5oj -0.0381 v 11 5.001 0.0111 IV I --------------------------1---------1 ·----l------l------11-----1------1------1 SAN GABRIEL I 99 (160) I .7.00I 0.0351 V I I 5.601 0.0111 IV I -------------------------1---------1-----1---.--1------11-----1------1------1 sAN JOSE I 10 (112) I 6.50I o.0431 VI 11 5.ooj 0.0191 IV I --------------------.-----1---------1-----I------I------I 1-----1------1------1 SANTA MONICA I 92 (147) I 6.601 0.036'1 v 11 5.5ol 0.0201 IV I -------------· --------------I ---------I -· ---I ------I --· ---11 -----I ------1------I SIERRA MADRE (San Fernando! 97 (157) I 6.701 0.0371 V I I 5.601 0.0201 IV I 1--------------------------1---------I-----I------I------11-----1------1------1 !SIERRA MADRE I 72 (116) I 1.001 0.0541 VI I I 6.201 0.0351 V I !-------------------------1--------1-----1------1------11-----1------1------1 jVERDUGO I 85 (136) I 6.101 0.0411 v I I s.201 0.0191 Iv I 1--------------------------1--------------"l'-------1------11-----1------1------I jcoMPTON THRUST I 59 < 94) 6.8oj o.0861 VII 11 s.001 o.o51j VI I 1-------------------------1--------------1------1------11-----1------1------1 !ELYSIAN PARK THRUST I 61 < 98) 6.101 0.0191 VII II s.001 o.0491 VI I --------------------------1--------· 1-----1-----1------tl----1------1------1 BURNT MTN. I 76 (122) I 6.401. 0.0311 v 11 s.101 0.0161 IV I -------------------------1---------1---1------1------11-----1------1------1 CLEGHORN -I 78 (125) j 6. so j O. 032 I V 11 6. 00 j O. 025 V I ---------------------------------·-1-----1------1· -----11--.-!------------1 IEUREKA PEAK . 78 (126) I 6.401 o.o3oj v 11 s.101 0.01s IV I 1----------------------------------. 1-----1-.-·---1------11-----1------.. ----I HELENDALE -s. LOCKHARDT 87 (141) I 7.101 0.0401 V I I 5.401 0.0161 IV 1------------------------1--------J-----1------1------11-----1------1------ IJOHNSON_VALLEY_ (Northern) -l-94_ (151) 1-6.701-o.0311 ___ v __ 1 ,_s.20,_0.0141 _Iv __ jLANilERS I 86 (138) I 1.30 o.046j VI· I I s.201 o.01sj Iv I I LENWOOD-LOCKHAAMLD: WOMA{ 91: (146) I:,. 3 cl: 0. o•f VI: It·· ·a/: 0. 01 {: IV ::I NORTH_ FRONTAL_ FAULT_ zoNE _ii-••_ 1n,11-6.101 _o. 040 / __ v __ II_ s .201-o. 01a 1--rv __ I jNORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE <I 80 (129) I 7.ooj o.osoj VI 11 s.6oj 0.0241 IV I 1-------------------------1--------1-----1------1------11--~--1------1------1 jPINTO MOUNTAIN I 70 (113) I 7.001 0.0451 VI I I 6.101 0.0281 V I 1-----------------------· -1-----. -·--1-----1-------1------11-----I------I -----· I PETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS Page 3 -------.-----------------------------------------.--·-------------------------I I I I ABBREVIATED FAULT NAME I I APPROX. /DISTANCE I mi (km) /MAX. CREDIBLE EVENT! jMAX. PROBABLE EVENTj I-----------------11-------------------1 I MAX. I PEAK I SITE 11 MAX. I PEAK I SITE I jCRED./ SITE jINTENSI !PROB. I SITE IINTENSI I I I MAG. !ACC. gj MM 11 MAG. !ACC. gj MM I r---------------------------1----------1-----I-------l------11-----1------1------1 !PISGAH-BULLION MTN.-MESQUij100 (161) I 7.101 o.036I v I I s.4ol 0.0151 IV I 1--------------------------1---------l-----1------1 -----11-----1------1------1 !EMERSON So. -COPPER MTN. I 94 (151) I 6.90/ 0.034/ V I I 5.30/ 0.015/ IV I I ---------------------------1----------I -----I ------I ------I I------I ------I ------I ***************************************************************************** -END OF SEARCH-52 FAULTS FOUND WITHIN THE SPECIFIED SEARCH 'RADIUS. THE ROSE CANYON FAULT rs ~LOSEST TO THE SITE. IT IS ABOUT }7 .. 2 MILES AWAY. , LARGEST MAXIMUM-CREDIBLE SITE ACCELERATION: 0.234 g LARGEST MAXIMUM-PROBABLE SITE ACCELERATION: 0.125 g •• PROBABILITY OF EXCEEDANCE vs. ACCELERATION 100 .--,--.---,--r-T""-,-...-.,-,-.,-,-,--,-,--.,.-..,.-.r,TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTl"T17 90 i-------------~---------------; ....---... ~ w 80 u z <( 70 0 w w ·u 60 X w LL 50 0 '~ 40 _j m 30 <( m 0 ~ 20 Q_ . 10 8.o EXPOSURE PERIODS: 25 years 75 years 50 years 100 years 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 ACCELERATION (g) BOORE ET AL(1997) NEHRP C (520) JOB No.: 980160-001 . :'. -·:· AVERAGE RETURN PERIOD vs. ACCELERATION 10000000 8 6 -4 ./ ,,--..._ 2 (/) L. 1000000 8 0 _/ / V Q) 6 >-4 '--" - / 0 2 0 100000 8 O:'.: w ·6 Q_ 4 V / V / / ,/ z 2 O:'.: 10000 8 :::) I-6 w 4 / , / ,, O:'.: 2 w 1000 8 0 <( 6 / V O:'.: 4 w ~ 2 100 8 / / l I 6 4 I 2 111111111 111111111 111111111 1111111111 111i'111i1 111111111 111111111 111111111 111111111 111111111 '111111111 111111111 llllrtlll 11 I 111111 111111111 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.-6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 ACCELERATiON ( g) Cantarini Property BOORE ET .AL(1997) NEHRP C (520) JOB No.: 9801 q0-001 • ,' • • •• •• •• SAN FRANCISCO SITE LOCATION ( + ): Latitude -33. 1467 N Longitl!d!l -117.2767 W Cantannr Property 0 50 SCALE (Miles). FRISKSP FAULT MAP JOB No.: 980160-001 100 •. ' • APPENDIX G STABILITY ANALYSIS FOR HOMOGENEOUS EARTH SLOPES Design Parameters and Assumptions Type of Slope: 45 foot high cut slope Type of Soil Materials: Granitic Rock, Lusardi' Formation or Terrace Deposits H = B:eight of Slope 13 = Angle of Slope · y1 = Total (wet) Unit Weight ~ = Angle of Internal Friction C = Cohesion •·No seepage forces = 45 feet = 26 degrees = 125 pcf = 32 degrees = 200 psf • Total shear strength parameters are used in lieu of effective strength Analysis Di;mensionless Parameters = Y ·H·tan<I> )..cf = t . C · =17.6 Stability Number (from Figure 10 of Reference 2) = Ncf = 46 980160-001 Minimum Factor of Safety= F.S. (min.)= N· cf C Yr. H = 1.6 (~1.5 0.K.) References 1. Bell, J.M., Dimensionless Parameters for Homogeneous Earth Slopes, Journal, Soil Mechanics and · Foundation Division, American Society of Civil Engineers, No. SM5, September 1966. 2. Janbu, N., Discussion for (Reference -1), Journal, Soil Mechanics and Foundation Division, American Society of Civil Engineers, No. SSM6, November 1967 . G-1 -~--· •• APPENDIX G (<;::ONTINUED) STABILITY ANALYSIS FOR HOMOGENEOUS EARTH SLOPES Design Parameters and Assumptions Type of Slope: 45 foot high fill slope Type of Soil Materials: Onsite materials H = Height of Slope ~ = Angle of Slope y1 = Total (wet) Unit Weight $ = Angle of Internal Friction C = Cohesion • No seepage forces = 45 feet = 26 degrees = 125 pcf = 30 degrees = 150 psf • Total shear strength parameters are used in lieu of effective strength Analysis Dimensionless Parameters = Y ·H·tan"-A -t "'=21.6 cf c Stability Number (from Figq.re 10 of Reference 2) = Ncf = 60 Minimum Factor of Safety= .F.S .. ~min-> = References N· cf C = 1.6 Y,. H (~1.5 .O.K.) 980160-001 1. Bell, J.M., Dimensionless Parameters for Homogeneous Earth Slopes; Journal, Soil Mechanics and Foundation Division, American Society of Civil Engineers, No. SM5, September 1966. 2. Janbu, N., Discussion for (Reference -1), Journal, Soil Mechanics and Foundation Division, American Society of Civil Engineers, No. SSM6, November 1967 . G-2 .. •• • APPENDIX G ( continued) SURFICIAL SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS ASSUMED PARAMETERS z = Depth of Saturation = 3 ft. i = Slope Angle = 26 degrees Yw = Unit Weight of Water= 62.4 pcf Yi = Saturated Unit.Weight of Soil= 125 pcf ~ = Apparent Angle of Internal Friction = ~2 degrees C = Apparent Cohesion = 200 pcf FS = c + otan <I> = C +(yt -y)Z cos2i tan <I> T . Yt Z sin i cos i · FS 2.0 (~LS, o.k.) • cut slope G-3 980160-001 ••• • • APPENDIX G ( continued) SURFICIAL SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS ASSUMED PARAMETERS z = Depth of Saturation = 3 ft. i = Slope Angle= 26 degrees Yw = Unit Weight of Water= 62.4 pcf Yi = Saturated Unit Weight of Soil= 125 pcf cj> Apparent Angle of Internal Friction= 30 degrees C = Apparent Cohesion= 150 pcf FS = c + ou,ui <I> = C +(y1 -y w~z cos2i tan <f> T y1 Zsinicosi FS = 1:6 (~1.5, o.k.) • . fill slope G-4 980160-001 • • • ••• •. :·. Leighton and Associates, Inc. A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL EVLAUTION FOR TENTATIVE MAP PURPOSES, CANTARINI PROPERTY, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA September 15, 2000 Project No. 4980160-003 Prepared For: Bentley-Monarch, LLC 7449 Mag~llan Street Carlsbad, California 92009 3934 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite B205 E San Diego, CA 92123-4425 858.292.8030 • Fax 858.292.077111 www.leightongeo.com •• • • Leighton and Associates, Inc. A LEIG.HTON GROUP COMPANY To: Attention: Bentley-Monarch,LLC 7449 Magellan Street Carlsbad, California 92009 Mr. David Bentley September 15, 2000 Project No. 4980160-003 Subject: · Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation for Tentative Map Purposes, Cantarini Property, Carlsbad, California In accordance with your request, we have performed a preliminary geotechnical evaluation for tentative map purposes of the Cantarini property located northeast of the intersection of El Camino Real and College Boulevard in Carlsbad, California. This report presents the revised results of our preliminary geotechnical investigation (Leighton, 2000) and provides a summary of our conclusions and recommendations. Final development plans were not available at the time thi~ .report was prepared, however, a preliminary 100-scale tent~tive map was available and utilized during our evaluation. We understand the site will be developed with approximately 115 single-family residential lots, streets, associated improvements and open space areas. We also understand that development of the site may include the construction of a portion of College Boulevard (between essentially El Camin<;> Real and the future extension of Cannon Road) and offsite roadways conn_ectingto the adjacent properties to the north and east. Based on the results of our tentative map evaluation, the proposed residential development of the site is considered feasible from a geotechnical standpoint provided the recommendati_ons summarized in this report are implemented during the final design, grading, .and construction phases of the development. If you have any questions regarding our report, please contact this office. We appreciate this opportunityto be of service. Respectfully submitted, KBC/RKW/JGF Distribution: (2) Addressee (1 0).Ladwig Design Group, Inc., Attention: Mr. Robert Ladwig 3934 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite B20511 San Diego, CA92123-4425 858.292.8030 11 Fax 858.292.077111 www.leightongeo.com ••• ••• ••• 4980160-003 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 PURPOSEANDSCOPEOFSERVICES •...•..•......•...•..............••.•..•....••....•..••..•..•..••.......••.•.......•.. , ....•.....••...•.....•...•. I 1.2 S_ITEI>ESCRIPTION ................................................ , •.......•.... : •.•...•..•.•.•...••...•....•......•••..•............................•....... 3 1.3 PR0POSED.DEVELOPMENT ....................................... ,, ..•...•....•....•...•.••....••..•..•..••.....••..•........•.....••..•.................• 4 1.4 SURFACE lNvESTIGATION AND LABORATORY TESTING ...•..•...••.•.•..•...•.•.....•.•..•...•.......•..•..........•....•...••...••...•.•. 4 1.5 GEOTECHNICAL REVIEW OF TiiE REVISED SITE PLANS .•..•..•..•...•...•............•...........•................•..........•............. 4 2.0 GEOTECHNICALCONDITIONS ...................................................................................................................... 6 2.1 REGIONAL GEOLOGY······································································································································· 6 2.2 SITE-SPECIFIC GEOLOGY ....•....••.....••..•....•..•....•..•.......•....•...•..•...•............................•...•.............•...................... 6 2.2.1 UnclocumentedFill Soils (Map Symbol -Afa) ...........................•........................................................... 6 2.2.2 Topsoil (Unmapped) ............................................................................................................................. 7 2.2.3 Alluvium and Colluvium Undifferentiated(Map Symbol-Qal/Qcol) ...................................................... 7 2.2.4 Terrace Deposits (Map Symbol-Qt) ....................................................................................................... 7 2.2.5 SantiagoFormation(MapSymbol-Tsa) ...................................... , ......................................................... 8 2.2.6 PointLomaFormation(MapSymbol-Kp) ............................................................................................. 8 2.2. 7 Lusardi Formation (Map Symbol-Kl) .................................................................................................... 8 2.2.8 Cretaceous Granitic Rock (Map Symbol -Kgr) .................................................................................... 9 2.3 GEOLOGiC STRUCTURE ...•..••.••••.•..••..•••..•.•.•..••.•.••...•••.•.•••...•.•••••••• , ..•••••••••.•••••••..•...••...•..•........•.•....••.•.•....•...... 9 2.4 f AULTING .•••••....•....•..•••..••....••...•••....•••••.•••..•..•••••....•.......•.•...•••..•••....•.•••••..•••••...••..•....•...•.........••...•.........•...... 9 2.4.1 RoseCanyonFaultZone ..................................................................................................................... 11 2.5 SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS ..•.•....•••..••••..•••••.••.••...••..•.••••..••.•. , •••.•..•.....•..•••.•..••.•••..•..••••.•..••.........••.... : .•.....••...• 11 2.5.1 Uniform__BuildingCode Seismic Parameters ....................................................................................... 11 2.6 GROUND WATER············································································································································ 12 2.7 ENGINEERING CHARACTERISTICS OF ON'-SITE SOILS ........................................... , ........................................... 12 2.7.1 ExpansionPotential ............................................................................................................................ 12 2. 7.2 Soil Corrosivity ................................................................................................................................... 13 2. 7.3 Excavation Characteristics ................................................................................................................. 13 ·2. 7.4 EarthworkShrinkageand Bulking ...................................................................................................... 17 2.8 SLOPE STABILITY ........................................................................................................................................ 18 3.0 CONCLUSIONS ....................................................................................................................... , .......................... 19 4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................................................................................................... 21 4.1 EARTHWORK .•••••••••.•.••••.•...••••.•••••• · •••••.•••••••.••••.••.•.••.••••••.•••••..•••••.•....•.•.••.••••••••••.•..•.•....•...••.....•••.••.••....•.••••. 21 4.1.1 4.1.2 4.1.3 4.1.4 4.1.5 Site Preparation ........................................ ,······:··················································································· 21 Removal and Recompaction of Potentially Compressible Soils ........................................................... 21 Excavations ........................................................................................................................................ 22 Settlement of Deep Fzll Soils.......................................................................................... . ......... 23 Fill Placement and C-ion ..................................................................................... i/1 ........ 22 -i-Leighton •• 4980160-003 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) 4.1.6 4.1.7 Cut/Fill Transition Conditions ..................... -....................................................................................... 23 Expansive Clayey Soils andSelective Grading .................................................................................... 23 4.2 SLOPE STABILITY ........................................................................................................................................... 24 4.2.1 Deep-SeatedStability ...................... , ................................................................................................... 24 4.2.2 Surjicial Stability ................................................................................................................................ 25 4.3 CONTROL OF GROUNDWATER AND SURF ACE WATERS .................................................................................. 25 4.3.1 CanyonSubdrains ............................................................................................................................... 26 4.3.2 Stability Fill Subdrains ....................................................................................................................... 26 4.3.3 Cut Slope Seepa[fe Conditions ............................................................................................................ 27 4.4 PRELIMINARY FOUNDATION DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS .................................................................................. 27 4.4.1 C9nventionally-ReinforcedFoundationDesign FoundationDesign ................................................... 28 4.4.2 Post-TensionedFoundationDesign .................................................................................................... 31 4.4.3 Moisture Conditioning ........................................................................................................................ 32 4.4.4 FoundationSetbacks ........................................................................................................................... 33 4.5 LATERAL EARTH PRESSURE AND RETAINING WALL DESIGN ............... : .......................................................... 34 4.6 PAVEMENTDESIGN ........................................................................................................................................ 35 4.7 SURFACEDRAINAGEANDLOTMAINTENANCE ............................................................................................... 36 4.8 GRADEo'SLOPES ............................................................................................................................................ 36 4.9 SEITLEMENTMONITORING .................................................................................................... : ....................... 36 5.0 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS ....... : ............................................ , .......................................................... 37 FIGUR,ES FIGURE 1-SITE LOCATION MAP-PAGE2 TABLES TABLE 1 -SEISMIC PARAMETERS FOR ACTIVE AND POTENTIALLY ACTIVE FAUL TS -PAGE 10 '.f ABLE 2 -RESULTS OF THE SEISMIC REFRACTION LINES -PAGES 15~ l 6 TABLE 3 -EARTHWORK SHRINKAGE AND BULKING ESTIMATES -PAGE 18 TABLE 4 -FOUNDATION TYPE SUMMARY -PAGE 28 TABLE 5 -MINIMUM FOUNDATION AND SLAB DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CONVENTIONALLY REINFORCED FOUNDATIONS -PAGE 30 TABLE 6 -POST-TENSIONED FOUNDATION DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS FOR EXPANSIVE SOILS -PAGE 31 TABLE 7 -MINIMUM PRESATURATION RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SUBGRADE SOILS UNDERLYING SLABS -PAGE 33 'f ABLE 8 -MINIMUM STRUCTURAL SETBACK FROM SLOPE Ft\CES -PAGE 34 TABLE 9 -LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES-PAGE 35 PLATE PLATE 1 -GEOTECHNICAL MAP -IN POCKET -ii -Leighton • • • TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) APPENDICES APPENDIX A -REFERENCES APPENDIX B -BORING AND TRENCH LOGS APPENDiX C -LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES AND TEST RESULTS APPENDIX D .,. SEISMIC REFRACTION STUDY APPENDIX E -GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS FOR ROUGH-GRADING APPENDIX F ..: SEISMIC ANALYSIS APPENDIX G -SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS -iii - 4980160-003 Leighton • • . . •• ••• . . '"t' ~-~. I • UPDATE GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION, CANTARINI PROPERTY, CARLSBAD,CALIFORNIA July 9, 2001 Project No. 980160-003 Prepared For BENTLEY-MONARCH, LLC 30112 Ivy Glen Drive, Suite 180 Laguna NigUel, California 92677 Leighton and Associates, Inc . A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY ••• • •• Leighton and Associates, Inc. A LEIGHTON GROUP C·OMPANY To: Attention: Subject: References: Introduction July 9,.2001 Bentley-Monarch, LLC 30112 Ivy Glen Drive, Suite 180 Laguna Niguel, California 92677 Mr .. David Bentley Project No. 980160-003 Update Geotechnical Evaluation, Cantarini .Property, Carlsbad, California Buccola Engineering, 2000, Composite.Tentative Map Cantarini Property, dated October 25, 2000, revised June 14, 2001 Leighton and Associates, Inc., 2000, Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation for Tentative Map Purposes, Cantarini Property, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 4980160-002, dated September 15, 2000 ~---, 2001, Geotechnical Investigation for the Proposed College Boulevard and Cannon Road, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 4990101-002, dated March 20, 2001 In accordance with your request, we have performed an update evaluation of the Cantarini property located northeast of the intersection of El Camino Real and College Boulevard in Carlsbad, California. The purpose of our update evaluation was to review the revised tentative map design (Buccola, 2001) reJative to the existing geotechnical conditions of the site. In addition, we have reviewed the geotechnical findings of the study performed for the College Boulevard extension (Leighton, 2001) and incorporated the findings into this update evaluation. This report presents our findings, conclusions, and recommendations of our update evaluation, a revised geotechnical map for the project (Plate 1 ), applicable boring and trench logs from the College Boulevard investigation (Appendix A), and a copy of the previous geotechnical report relative to the project (Appendix B). The most current tentative map design was used as the base map to present the existi.ng geotechnical conditions of the site (Plate 1 ). Findings Based on our review of the revised tentative map prepared by Buccola Engineering (received July 9, 2001), the notable differences between the revised tentative map and the map utilized for Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation performed in September 2000 are summarized below. In general, the changes include reducing the numbers of lots to 105, 1/2-acre minimum lots, eliminating the loop road on the Mandana property to the east, adding an interior loop road near the easterly edge of the property, and the 3934 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite B205 • San Diego, CA 92123-4425 858.292.8030 • Fax 858.292.0771 E www.leightongeo.com . •·:-. 980160-003 realignment of the loop road off site through the Holly Springs property. Specific revisions to the revised tentative tract map include the following: • Minor grade and alignment changes throughout the project. • A decrease of IO lots from 115 to 105 lots (with the numbering sequence significantly different). • Elimination of the eastern offsite portion of "A" Street. • Elimination of the access road at the northern terminus of"L" Street (which had connected to "M" .Street at the northeast side of the site). • The extension of "J" Street from the area of the existing residential structure up the hill to "M" Street. • Increase in the 9pen space area in the eastern portion of the site and in the northwest comer of the site (i.e. Lot F) . . Review of the College Boulevard Preliminruy Geotechnical Investigation In the early part of 200 I, Leighton performed a geot~chnicai investigation of the proposed alignment of College Boulevard and Cannon Road for the City of Carlsbad (Leighton, 2001 ). Based on our review of the geotechnical report, a total of five large diameter borings and eight exploratory trenches were excavated along futlJ,re alignment College Boulevard on or in the general vicinity of the Cantarini property. In addition, geologic mapping of the proposed alignment was also performed. Based on the results of the subsurface investigation and geologic mapping, we have revised the geologic conditions along the western side of the Cantarini property and utilized the findings, conclusions and recommendations presented in the College Boulevard geotechnical report to revise some of the recommendations for the development of the Cantarini property. Based on our review of the College boulevard geotechnic'al report (Leighton, 2001) the notable differences between the Cantarini geotechnical report and the College Boulevard report include the following: · • The extent of the terrac.e deposits (map symbol -Qt) is more extensive than originally mapped. • Three inactive faults were mapped generally trenqing in a north-south direction with steep dips. • Bedding of the sedimentary units along the pr9posed College Boulevard alignment dipping to the west. As a result, the recommendation to replace all cut slopes along the alignment with a replacement or stability fill slope were made. Conclusions and Recommendations Based on. our review of referenced reports and revised tentative map for the Cantarini property, it is our professional opinion that the proposed revised tentative tract design is feasible from a geotechnical -2-Leighton 980160-003 ·standpoint provided recommendations summarized in this update evaluation and the geotechnical report for the Cantarini property (Appendix B) are implemented during design, grading, and construction phases of the development. · We recommend that all-the cut slopes proposed on the Cantarini property that are comprised of the sedimentary Santiago Formation (map symbol -Tsa) be replaced with a stability fill to mitigate possible adverse out-of-slope bedding conditions. The stability fills shoµld have a minimum width of 15-feet and extend all the way up to the top of slope. The stability fill key should be constructed a minimum of 5 feet below the toe-of-slope and the key bottom angled at least 2 percent into-the-slope. The stability fill backcut should not be $teeper than a 1: 1 slope inclination. A subdrain system consisting of 4-inch diameter perforated pipe surrounded by a minimum of 3 cubic feet (per linear foot) of crushed 3/4-inch gravel and wrapped in filter fabric{Mirafi 140N or equivalent) should be placed along the bottom of the backcut and outletted to an appropriate drainage facility. We also re.commend that geologic mapping in the vicinity of the inactive faults during grading be performed in order to evaluate potential instability concerns or other problems related to the on-site faulting. If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact this office. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. Respectfully submitted, LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC . • ;:· -::::--~~ Director eolo Attachments: Plate 1 -Geotechnical Map Appendix A -Applicable Borings and Trench from the College Boulevard Preliminary Investigation (Leighton, 2001) · Appendix B -Preliminary . Geotechnicai Evaluation for Tentative Map Purposes, Cantarini Property, Carlsbad, California; dated September 15, 2000 Distribution: (5) Addressee (5) Ladwig Design Group Attention: Mr. Bob Ladwig -3-Leighton • • • • •• •• ,:: · Appendix A LC-I LC-2 LC-4 LC-5 LC-6 ' ' ' ' TC-2 through TC-9 e Large-Diameter Borings Exploratory Trenches From: Leighton and Associates, 2001, Geotechnical Investigation for the Proposed College Boulevard and Cannon Road, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 4990101-002, dated March 20, 2001 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-1 Date -"--~---=-1=-1--=1...;:.4--"0.;:;.0· __ _ Sheet _l_of _2_ Project Fraser/College and Cannon Project No. 990101-002 Driiling Co. San Diego Drilling Type of Rig E-100 Bucket Auge1 .... __ !_1:_~.;.a~.,.io_i::U_T_eo..;t;~r-of_H...:,ol:.e....:;:;;;·-3;;;;1_0;;;;2_0;;;;-;;-;..:.ft:. . ...,.....:~:..;:.:/;... e~o';:.D:.e;;f:.:!:~:_-.:_;;;;_:::~;;;;-;;;;-;;:~-;;;;-;;;;;_;.;;_;;;;;...;:.0;;;;;--"2;5;';4;,1;1;3;;;;;#"-;;;;;=~;5;:;--'!;7;:;n-';~;:;eLC..,9;:;a-"-8;:;L=l;:;#"""e;:;v-e;1;;;;;;;;=D:::r;:;op=;:;3;:;0=in::. ··'. • 0 5 10 15 20 25 0 .cm 0.0 111.J c.. ~ .... " -, ...... .,. . . . -:---.. . .. ~_(Jf· .. " .. . . . . ··. ~ .. --. -.. , .. . ,, ~-••• ~ ~ • 9 ... ...! ' • . .. . . . . ... . --. . . . . . --. . . ... ~' ...... Ill QJ 1J '::J ·+ + + <I: ; • • .,.·, C:b,orizontal -...... ~ .... . . .. ... "' ... . . -· --. . . . : :----.. " '-"-. . . -. ., .... ., -..... .. "' -. . .. ,.._ ,A.-.. ... . -·. " " .. • T!9' . -:-..... ~-...: . ... ,· . . . . . . . . . ~ -. : ... . , . . .,., .. . -·-. . -., ., .... . ... .. -·-,_ . -. -· . -., I .,. -... SOSA C 11/77) . 0 z QJ Q. e I'll Cl) 2 3 :,Bulk-4 4 4 5 j) + 11)...-,. C'+-QJ 0 Cl Q. j) . c.. Cl ....,, 106.6 10.4 SM SM SC SM ML SM ML -CL SM GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By ________ l\ID_J _______ _ Sampled By ________ l\ID __ J ______ _ ARTIFICIAL FILL @ O': Silty clayey SAND: brown, moist, medium dense; brick, pipe, and clay fragments common QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS @ 2.5': Silty medium SAND: red-brown, damp, medium dense to dense @ 5.8': Clayey SAND: brown, damp, medium dense to dense; cobble and , gravel very rare, massive @ 7': Silty medium SAND: red-brown to brown, damp, dense TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION ----- @ 11': Clayey SILTSTONE: brown, damp, stiff @ 11.8': Silty medium SANDSTONE @ 12.7': Clayey SILTSTONE: brown, damp, stiff @ 15': Silty CLAYSTONE: dark gray-brown, moist, stiff @ 16': Clayey medium SANDSTONE: gray-green, damp to moist, dense @ 20': Silty fine to medium SANDSTONE: light gray-brown, damp, very dense; coarse grains rare LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES • • • Date 11-14-00 -.,..----=-='-'--':...;:_---, __ Project Drilling Co. . Hole Diameter 30 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-1 Sheet _2_of_2_ Fraser/College and Cannon Project No. 990101-002 San Diego Drilling Type of Rig E-100 Bucket Auge Drive Weight 0-25' 4;113# 25-47' 2,981# Drop 30 in · Elevation Top of Hole 120 ft Ref or Datum Mean Sea Level .. . :n .,,... VI" 0 UI 0 +-+-QJ~ GEOTECHNlCAL DESCRIPTION a, ·-UI • .c" ·-"C z UI 0 u,,,.._ t."' Ill~ ++-.c 0) ::, 30 C:'+-::,+- Q. QJ a, oil. ~c -u Q.O +-a, 0 u . QJ QJ lll...J ·--OQ. 00 Q. -c.. ·-a, _en t. +-e . al a, "' 01: Logged By MDJ (!) +-:n ·-:5 (C Ill a. t. :CO· g..., (/) 0 u · Sampled By MDJ . 30 . . 5 I 12 125.8 8.3 SM TERTIARY SANTIAGO.FORMATION (Continued} -. . . . . . .. @ 30'.: Silty fine SANDSTONE: light gray, damp, very dense ~ '-- '-- '-- 35-6 12 117.5 12.3 @ 35': Same as 30' .._ -Total Depth = 36 Feet ~ ' Geologically logged to 31 feet No ground water encountered at time of drilling -Backfilled with native soils: 11/14/00 .._ .._ - 40-._ .._ - ._ - ,_ - '-- 45-"" -- '-- ._ - "" - 50-.._ "" - '-- --1--'- '-- 55--,-- '-- .._ - -.._ -I- l,{l 505A(11/77-) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-2 Date ----=11=-·=15=-·=00=----Sheet _1_ of _2_ Project Fraser/Collegeand Cannon. Project No. 990101-002 Drilling Co. • ·. Hole Diameter i · Elevation Top of Hole Ul .I;"" 0 QI ·-"U -+-+ .I; 0) :::, 0. QI 0.. 0 -+-OJ OJ 1'11.J c<+-'--+-. V (.!) -+-<C 0 "-:·= ' 5 10 15 20 25 505AC11/77) 30 126 ft. . 0 z ~ 0.. e I'll .en 2 Bulk-~ 12'-16 4 Bulk-5 27'-29 San Diego Drilling Type of Rig E-100 Bucket Auge1 Drive Weight Ref. or Datum :::n ,-.., -+-+ QI~ Ul 0 Ul ,-.., (. V 30 cc+-:::,-+-oLL. t;c QI 0 -'-Cl 0.. ·-OJ al OJ V o+ :::n 0. ;cC '-0 C u 3 102.4 8.8 6 4 tn'"' Ul • 1'11(1) . -u u. _cn ·-:::i ~v SM SM 0-25' 4,113# 25-47' 2,981# Drop 2!_in. Mean Sea Level GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By ---,------=MD=.::..J ______ _ Sampled By ________ MD_J ______ _ TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION @ 10": Silty SANDSTONE: orange-brown, damp, medium dense; fracture sheared · @ 3.4': Claystone beds, beds offset 1. l' @ 5': Silty medium SANDSTONE: orange-brown, damp, medium dense @ 5.5': Clay filled fractures ML-SM @ 6.5': Very fine sandy SILTSTONE to silty very fine SANDSTONE: brown, damp, dense, calcium carbonate blebs, fractured SM ML SM-ML @ 10': Silty very fine to fme SANDSTONE: gray, damp, dense; iron-oxidized staining, traces of clay, concretions @ 12': Very fine sandy SILTSTONE: brown, damp to moist, loose to medium stiff, gravel and sand rare sand clast within silt @ 15': Silty fine SANDSTONE to sandy SILTSTONE: brown, moist to damp, medium dense, iron-oxidized fractures @ 20': Silty very fine SANDSTONE to very fine sandy SILTSTONE: brown ·. to gray, damp, stiff to dense; iron-oxidized stain @25': Clay clasts within SAND GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-2 Date ----=11=-·=15'--0.a:..;O;__ __ Sheet _2 _ of _2_ Project Fraser/College and Cannon Project_ No. 990101-002 Drilling Co. San Diego Drilling Type of Rig E-100 Bucket Auge1 • . ·. Hole Diameter 30 Drive Weight ·. Elevation Top of Hole 126 ft Ref or Datum . 0-25' 4,113# 25-47' 2,981# Drop .lQ_ in. Mean Sea Level . ::n ,,.... uir.. . Ill 0 + + Q)~ GEOTECHNICAL DESCRWfION 0 Q) ·-lllui '.c""' ·-"C z 1110 11),-,. '-\J Ill • +.-°t .c IJ) :::1 Q) 30 C:'+-· :::1+ .... u Lr QJ 0.0 + -oU. Q) 0 in C: u. Cl~ ttf..J ·-0. -'-ca. ·..-l '"""en '-+ lO QJ \J Logged By MDJ (.!) .... e r! 0 C: ·-:::i <C Ill 0. :c 0 ~~ Cl) CJ u Sampled By MDJ 30 -~,-.~·.-: 6 8 114.5 15.'3 ML-SM TERTIARY BANTIAGO FORMATION (Continued} -:;-.,.:::3' @ 30.5': Sandy SILTSTONE to silty SANDSTONE: gray, damp, very dense..,_ l:~ -.. .... -.... .,. ~ :::c .... ...: - 35-'-- -- Total Depth = 36 Feet -Geologically Logged to 33 feet -. No ground water encountered at time of drilling -Backfilled with native soils: 11/15/00 - -.... 40-- ->-•• -- ->- -- 45 __: · ~ -- "-- -- - 50-- - - - - 55- ->- ->- - - ,:;r, SOSA( 11 /77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-4 · Date -·-----=l=l--=-1=6-=-0=0~--Sheet _I_ of _2_ Project Fraser/College and Cannon Project No. 990101-002 Drilling Co . • -··Hole Diameter Elevation Top of Hole 30 • • Ill .c'"' 0 QI ·-'U ++ .cm ::, 0.. QI a.o + QI QI 111..J ·-c~ [. +-(!) + <C 0 '7 ~ ( -t-:"'-' -. ---. .._. --,.. -"':-~ . .,,-,. ... -,r -. ,,, .... C:horizontal --.. .,,,,... .. 5-~ .A.l .. - -:-fl,)~;_- -~ wavy contact J:Nl9W, 74SW -• -t: -r 10~~0. -~: C:NlOE, 60SE _,;;,. f'' ----._ _. ·-=- •l -- 15-· ~-.., -. . -:' ~ .. -.. 102 -.! .-• • F:Nl8W, 74NE -__ ,•: ~- - ~ ... . . -. ir't,• :-20-J', .: ..... :_., -... .,. > ..:. .:.,,; ·., -· ..,,. ,,, .. . --... . . . • • i • ...:.. "'= : • 25- .,.. - - 505AC11/77) San Diego Drilling Type of Rig E-100 Bucket Auger Drive Weight 0-25' 4,113# 25-47' 2,981# Drop .1.Q_in. ft Ref or Datum Mean Sea Level . 0 z QI -0.. . :a (/) 2 Bulk-3 Bulk-4 5 ::n ,.., .+ +-QI~ ·-(. V 1110 Ill-"' 3& ::,+-C't-'tic 0 QI 0 iii fu ca. ·-QI V o+-a. ::n :cC '-0 C (.) I/push 97.9 11.6 3 102.1 io.8 10 121.3 12.9 ,;.,-., Ill • Ill~ -u (.) . _(I) ·-:::i ~v SM SC SM SC SM GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By -------~MD=.::...J ______ _ Sampled By ________ MD_J ______ _ QUATERNARY ALLUVIUM/COLLUVIUM @ O': Silty clayey SAND to sandy CLAY: brown, damp to moist, loose roots ,... top 1' ..... @ 3': Clayey fine SAND: light brown, damp to moist, loose @ 5': Silty fine SAND: light brown, damp, loose; with traces of clay t- TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION----------------,- @ 6.9': Clayey very fine SANDSTONE with silt: gray, damp, dense; · weathered, blocky, fractured @ 9': Same as 6.9' but not weathered @ 9.7': Sandstone bed, wavy contact: approximately 1/2" claystone bed below sandstone striated slightly plastic fracture @ 11.5': Clayey SANDSTONE @ 1-1 ': 6" sandstone bed: wavy contact @ 12.3': Same as 11' but blocky @ 12.4': Clay-lined fracture/fault; steeply dipping; clay is approximately 1/2" thick, striated and plastic @ 14.8': 112cm thick steeply dipping plastic clayseam @ 15': Clayey vezy fine SANDSTONE: gray-brown, damp Bulk at 20', silty medium SANDSTONE: orange-brown, damp, dense I- t- sc,CL @-25': Fracture infilled with sandy CLAYSTONE: surrounded by silty t- medium SANDSTONE: orange ..... SM @ 26': Silty medium to coarse SANDSTONE: orange-brown, damp, very dense ._ @ 28': Sarne as 26' LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECBNICAL BORING LOG LB-4 Date ----=ll=--=16:c..-0.;:..;0;..._"----Sheet _2_ of Project Fraser/Coliege and Cannon Project No. 2 990101-002 _ _ Drilling Co. San Diego ])rillin~ Type of Rig E-100 Bucket Auge, • . · Hole Diameter 30 Drive Weight ______ O.:;.-_ --=2=-5'_4.:..z'-=-11==3:.:.:#--=2=-=5:......-4..:..:7:......'-=2:..z.:,9c..::8:..=l:.:..# _____ Drop 30 in. · _ Elevation Top of Hole 102 ft Ref or Datum Mean Sea Level ·-· . :Jl '"' Iii'"' Ill 0 + + OJ~ ·GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION 0 OJ ·-Ill • .J::.'"' 'O z Ill 0 Ill'"' LV Ill~ ++ .J::. 0) ,:, ::3 0 C'+-.2+ 0. QJ QI ol1. -u 0.0 + OJ 0 Ill C u. OJ OJ 111...J ·--OQ. ct Q. -L ·-OJ _en '-+ IC QI V o+ . Logged By MDJ (!) E :Jl . ·-::i + I'd a.. :C C <I: en L 0 ~v Sampled By MDJ 0 (..) 30 Total Depth = 29 Feet -Geologically logged to 24.5 feet No ground water encountered at time of drilling ,_ Baclcftlled with native. soils: 11/16/00 -. ,_ -,.... -,.... 35~ ,_ -I- r ~ I- --I- -,_ 40-,_ -,-• ..., - -- -- 45-- -I- - -... -... 50-... -.... -- - - 55-'- - - -.--- 1m SOSA( 11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-5 Date 11-16-00. Sheet _1_ of _2_ P~ject Drilling Co. Fraser/College and Cannon Project No. 990101-002 • . Hole Diameter · · · Elevation Top of Hole .s:::." u +-1-.c 0) Q. Q) 0.0 QI Q) f'II...J 00 L t!) 0 __ ,.,;.. ~ -- .;;._ -----" ..... . . -. .. .. . . . -.. .,. . ~ V: .. .,, ti) QI "C ::, -1-·-+ -1-<t 30 134 -;;.-.~;, C·N28W 7SW .,. o. . , . 5 0 •0' . .. . ! •• -.. 0-• 0. .•• . . --4 • .. --~-: ~orizontal ' : ~--·· -., ••• If :P: ,;: . 10-, .. -• -c•o ~O.;,CI =·--horizontal .::Oo--:--- ;.._ ·..:.. ..... ' •'-0 •i. • .. -~· ft . 0 z Q) -0. E Ill (I) 2 15 uenerally horizontal Bulk-3 -'u. ~- 20 -.. ·-_-.;,•· ~ -. -----~ --- -. -----· .. ,,... . _p-_ -. iTrt-----------........ --- _ 0 ~~ • generally horizontal 0-0• --0 i... o.,o 25--: ::.:~· • -~ erosional contact ~ ·-- .. -~, • ----~--<in 505A{11/77) - 4 Sari Diego Drilling Prive Weight Ref orDatum :::n ,... -1-QI~ -1-·-ti) 0 Ulr. L '-' ::30 C'+-i-1-. oLL QI u tile -'-OQ. ·-QI a:l Q) .._, o-i-:::n a. ·;c 5 L Cl u 3 109.1 12.6 push 3 Ill" ti) • Ill~ ..,..u u. _en ·-::, ~.._, SM-CL SM/SC SC-SM SC-CL CL-CH ---- Type of Rig E-120 Bucket' Augei 0-25' 4,113# 25-47' 2,981# Drop _J!L in. Mean Sea Level GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By _______ ..;:l\ID=.::...J ______ _ Sampled By ______ __.:MD=..:...J ______ _ QUATERNARY COLLUVIUM @ 0'-4': Silty very fine SAND with CLAY: brown, damp, loose; roots - .... QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qt) ,_ @ 4': Silty medium to coarse SAND: red-brown, damp, medium dense @ 5': Silty medium SAND with clay: orange-brown into brown; calcium carbonate blebs, gravel rare @ 8': Silty clay bed: red-brown, damp, medium stiff @ 8.2': Same as 5' @ 10': Silty fme to medium SAND: red-brown, damp to moist, loose; traces of clay, gravel rare @ 11 ': Clayey SAND to sandy CLAY: red-brown, damp to moist, medium stiff, gravel rare @ 15': Two 1.5" clay beds brown, damp to moist, medium stiff @ 15.5': .Interbedded silty SAND with CLAY: Same as 10', wavy contact Bulk collected at 18' @ 20': Sandy CLAY: light red-brown, moist; gravel in sampler shoe CRETACEOUS LUSARDI FORMATION @ 22': Clayey SAND with gravel to sandy CLAY with gravel: red-brown, ,_ damp to moist, medium dense; 3-5% gravel @ 26': Silty coarse SAND with gravel: red-brown, damp, medium dense; weathered granite boulder, damp ,@27': Same as 22' ,_ LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-5 Date ---,---"""l=l-"""1"'"6-...;;0'"""0 __ ~ Sheet _2_of _2_ Project Fraser/College and Cannon Project No. 990101-002 Drilling Co. Sari Diego Dr.:illing Type of Rig E-120 Bucket Auge1 • . -:.: Hole Diameter 30 Drive Weight . '' ·= Elevation· Top of Hole 134 ft Ref or Datum 0-25' 4,113# 25-47' 2,981# Drop -1Q__in. Mean Sea Level . :J'I ,,... ui,,... Ill 0 + + QI~ GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION 0 QI ·-Ill • .J:.,,... ·-,, z Ill 0 . Ill-'"' L '-" Ill~ ++ .J:. 0). :I QI 3 0 C'+-i+ -u a. QI a.o + oLL QJ 0 Ill C u. QI QJ 111..J ·--00. 0~ a. -L ·-QJ _en '-+-lD QJ '-" o+ Logged By MDJ (.!) e :J'I ·-::i +-Ill 0.. El§ (C en '-g--., Sampled By MDJ CJ u 30 -::;:...-5 9 SC CRETACEOUS LUSARDI FORMATION (Continued) ,...... ~,.,.. . @ 30': Clayey medium SANDSTONE: brown, damp, dense -~~ Same as 27' - .•. '~ -. -_,,,....::;: --. -I-• ---wavy contact CL ·@ 33.5.': 3" silty CLAY: green, damp to moist, medium stiff --·-...: _-=£~ Bulk-6 35-SM @ 34.8': Silty medium fine to medium SAND: orange-brown, damp, very I-dense Bulle at 35' ~ '-- -7 · Total Depth = 37 Feet -Geologically logged to 34.8 feet No ground water encountered at time of drilling -Backfilled with native soils: 11/16/00 40-•,.:.· .. : ,,• -t- -t- -t- -t- 45- - - - - 50-.. - - - -- 55-~ -, -w I -~ ! --••• l -- ,;n SOSA( 11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECBNICAL BORING LOG LB-6 Date ------=1=1-=-2=0-=-0-=-0 __ _ Sheet _1_ of 2 Project Fraser/College and Cannon Project No. 990101-002 Drilling Co. San Diego Drilling Type of Rig E-120 Bucket Auge1 • Hole Diameter 30 Drive Weight ______ 0=-·-=-25~'-4.:i,.=11=3=#-=2=5_-4::.c7_' -=-2=,9..:cS=l#'------Drop 30 in. Elevation Top of Hole 130 ft Ref -or Datum Mean Sea Level . :JI ,... Iii" Ul 0 +-+-Qlx GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION 0 QI ·-Ill • .t:." ·-1J z 1110 11),-.. t,. V ti! CJ? . ++-.t:. C) :::, QI ::30 C'+-. :::,+--u 0. QI a.o +-oU. QI 0 1n C u .. QI QI tll.J ·--co. 00 Q. .,.... '-·-QI _en r.. +-IC QI V o+-Logged By MDJ (..!) +-s :JI :C C . ·-::i ti! Q. (I: en '-0 ~v -Sampled By MDJ Cl u 0 1--, _',,.. CL QUATERNARY COLLUVIUM . ~~ '.I @O': Sandy CLAY: brown, damp, loose; roots ------:!~~ -=-==--------------------------------------c:generally -.: .. ::~ ·;·:.:: horizontal QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS -... SM @ 2.4': Silty very fine to fine SAND: light red-brown, damp to moist, -·-.... --medium dense; massive, no bedding -:;: ; :.-. ----:::.. C:N16E, 13NW 5-~"-----' CL @4.5': Silty CLAY: brown, moist, medium stiff; discontinuous grades into ... ..... ,.,, N80E SAND -r,::--.-.. ~-CS:9NW @ 5.2': 1/2" plastic clay seam: green, moist . . . @ 5.5'-5.8': CLAY: dark olive-gray; moist, stiff, 1/4 plastic clayseam, ... . .. . .. undulating -,,, .. ... . . CS:N-S, 4W . . . . . . . -~~ C:N60W, ?NE Clayey SILT to silty CLAY -~--.,, @8': -~ --@ 9': Clay bed: gray, damp to moist 10-: .• :;.'! SM @ 9.5': Silty, gravelly, fine to coarse SAND: light red-brown, damp to moist, '~ olf. 1 5 medium dense; clay build at contact • -·t·'' wavy contact @ 10.5': Silty medium SAND: light red-brown, damp, dense; calcium -carbonate blebs, rare gravel, massive, light gray, vertical sand filled ~· • C>· fractures (possible liquefaction features) -... . . . o~ -~!' • : t::··. -€(,1: •• It. . 15-! ,•' . Bulk-2 SM @ lS'·: Silty fine SAND: light red-brown, moist to damp, dense .. . ! . . -. ' . -... ~ .. -.. ..... . . . ,,_ '. --·--..... . .. --...... -0:. '--C\, l 20-o.pce, @ 19.5': Silty fine to medium SAND: light brown, damp to moist, dense; ... ' ' . 3 5 SM gravel rare, coarse sand rare ---N22W,3NE @ 20.5': Silty CLAY to clayey SILT: gray, damp, dense -~~-·CL/ML ---horizontal "lo • ",!,. -~. -.... ~ -i): t>, SM @23.2': Gravelly SAND: brown, damp, dense, weathered granitic boulders -• 'I ii within sand matrix -'oO 0 25- ___ o--.;,.. 9;.:. Bulk-4 -0~ .... ----=~ horizontal SC @ 26.2': Clayey SAND: light brown, moist, medium dense? ---·'>-:-, @ 27.-28': Bulk - .. ' ~ 4 • ... ' -- - <to 505AC11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-6 Date 11-20-00. Sheet _2_ of 2 Project Fraser/College and Cannon Project No. . 990101-002 Drilling Co. San Diego Drilling . Type of Rig E-120 Bucket Auge • Hol~ Diameter . 30 Elevation Top of Hole 130 Drive Weight ------"---"0::__·2=5:;_'_;4=,1=1=3=#-=2c:::5_-4=.;.7_' -=2:,.:;.,9..::c8=1#::..,__ _____ Drop .1Q_ in ft Ref or Datum Mean Sea Level . :::n ,-.. ui,-.. Ill 0 +-+-QJ~ GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION 0 QJ ·-Ill • .r:'"' ·-,, z Ill 0 Ill,-.. !.. 'V Ill (I) ++-.r;o, :, 30 C: '+-:,+ . QI -u 0. QI 0.0 + oLL. QJ 0 ti C: u . QJ QI IU ... J ·--Cl 0. ct 0. -!.. ·-QJ _en !.. + e al QJ 'V o+-Logged By MDJ (!) + j) I: s . Ill Cl. ·-:::::, <I: (/) !.. ~'V Sampled By MDJ Cl CJ 30 Total Depth = 30 Feet -. Geologically logged to 28 feet - No ground water encountered at time of drilling -Backfiljed with native soils: 11/20/00 - -- -I- 35-- -· I- -- -- .-I- 40-- --, I-• -I- -- '--- 45-- -I- -I- -- -I- 50---'-I- -- -- -- -- 55-- ...: - -- --• -- /;[\ SOSA( 11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES •• • • LOG OF TRENCH: ---=-T-=-2a...-...·· _____ _ Project Name: Fraser/College & Cannon L9gged by: l\IDJ Project Number: ---'.'""'9..._90.,..1....,0._.l_,-0=0=2'---------Elevation: 95' I ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Equipment: 710 Backhoe Location/Grid: College I GEOLOGIC GEOLOGIC. ATTITUDES I DATE: 11/6/00 DESCRIPTION: UNIT I uses QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS A @ 0-7': Clayey fine SAND to sandy clay: brown, damp, loose; rootlet common; porous B @ 7'-8': Fine SANI): orang~-brown, damp, medium dense C @ 8' -11.5': Silty medium SAND with gravel to clayey sand: red-brown to mottled orange and green, damp, medium dense to dense Qt GRAPHICAL REPRESENTATION: SCALE: 5' SURF ACE SLOPE: 3° ! \.I\ --I • \ "' • I ), -. ~ ' --7 ('' ' I -, ~v~ , , -' -:"' . .--' . . -\' -,-... . --, ----.--"'--..!. ,-1 -I • .... -·--....... . -"'-:--:...... _-... -:. ~ -I -I . -. . ' .. ' . . . . . -... . SC SP SM I I I I t:~:~JJ.~ . ~:J.:¾l3.~'~,,>_;;);:;cs ~ .:-~ L,,.~.~-~~, ·····--• -o, I -· '-<' ,,. lill•iki01"1ki: Zl St; C.C• .:;;,- Sample No. Moisture (%) TREND: N-S Total Depth= 11.5 Feet Density (pct) No Ground Water Encountered Backfilled with native soil: 11/6/00 • • • .·.·.:. LOG OF TRENCH: _...,_T-=-3:___-,--_ Project Name: . Fraser/College & Cannon Logged by: MDJ . ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Project Number: -"""9""'90,.._l..,,0u.1.;...:-0...,.0,...2'--------,--Elevation: 12 ' Equipment: . . 71 O Backhoe Location/Grid: · College I GEOLOGIC ATTITUDES I DATE: 11/6/00 DESCRIPTION: TOPSOIL A @0'-1.5': Clayey SAND: brown, moist, loose; roots QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS ·B @ 1.5'-5.5': Silty medium to coarse SAND with gravel: red-brown, damp, medium denseto dense C @5.5'-7': Silty CLAY: green, damp, stiff GEOLOGIC UNIT I uses TopsoH SC Qt SM CL GRAPHICAL REPRESENTATION: SCALE: 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 3°S t -• ·oo• ~ o .• o . ~ . . .0 b ~ • I ... , .~ Sample I Moisture No. (%) Density (pcf) TREND: Nl0W Total Depth= 7 Feet No Ground Water Encountered Backfilled with native soil: 11/6/00 • r • • LOG OF TRENCH: _ _.,t_-4,..__ __ _ Project Name: Fraser/College & Cannon -Logged by: MDJ Project Number: 990101-002 Elevation: 80: ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Equipment: 110 Backbo~ Location/Grid: C:nllP.uP. - GEOLOGIC 11/6/00 DESCRIPTION: GEOLOGIC Sample Moisture Density · ATTITUDES DATE: UNIT uses No. (%) (pct) · ARTIFICIAL FILL (undocumented) Afu A @0'-3.5': Clayey fine to medium SAND with SILT: brown, damp, SM 1 medium dense to dense; brick fragments, roots and plastic debris .common OUATERNAAYALLUVIUM/COLLUVIUM Qal/Qcol : B @ 3 .5'-13': Clayey fine to medium SAND with silt: brown to dark brown, SM damp, medium dense to very dense; becomes very dense at 6 ', difficult to excavate, did not reach bedrock GRAPHICAL REPRESENTATION: SCALE: 5' SURF ACE SLOPE: 2°W TREND: N77W \..: .f: (.: --,., p II • .:..· '-'-; ,· . '. ~ .. V •• C) • ,a I • -.o'--·. -. . ;-. --=-:_ . ,o. _,, 0 • . ' . . .. -. -· ·~, • • J .... ,-, -,--\ . ... ---. -"7/ . . . . -..... , , .. . -. -.. ' .. ~ ~. -· \· -~. ·.--.... -. . . . . . ' -:-• . -.-. . . -• . . . -. . . ,. • • • • I ·y . . , -• • --... I ·-Total Depth= 13 Feet • IO ,-. . .. . No Ground Water Encountered I,-Backfilled with native soil: 11/6/00 . -. . ' I® . . . . ' r-:--l • . ' . . . .. .' • • . . ', • LOG OF TRENCH: _ _,,.T-=-5'----- Project Name: . Fraser/College & Cannon Logged by: MDJ Project Number: _ _,,,_9~9:.,..01...,0"-'ls.,.~0"'"9""'2=---------Elevation: 11 O' :ENGINEERING PROPERTIES . Equipment: 71 Q B.ackboe Location/Grid: Cot1ege 1 GEOLOGIC .. AIDTUDES I DATE: 11/6/00 DESCRIPTION: TOPSOIL A @ 0'-3.5': Clayey SAND to sandy clay: brown, damp, medium dense; rootlets common TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION B @3.5'-5': Siltyfme SANDSTONE: oran~e-brown, damp, dense GRAPHICAL REPRESENTATION: SC~E: 5' -..., . --......... c:-_:_-:~.-~ ~~>:;7 A ~ B GEOLOGIC UNIT Topsoil Tsa uses CL/ SC SM SURFACE SLOPE: 3°S Sample No. Moisture (%)_ TREND: N-S Total Depth= 5 Feet Density (pct) No Ground Water Encountered Backfilled with native soil: 11/6/00 ti::. • • LOG OF TRENCH: --"-T_,,-6,__ __ _ ProjectName:. Fraser/College & Cannon Logged by: MDJ ' Project Number: 990101-002 Elevation: 108' ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Equipment: 110 Backbot Location/Grid: Coll<>oP. GEOLOGIC DATE: 11/6/00 DESCRIPTION: GEOLOGIC Sample Moisture Density ATTITUPES UNIT uses No. (%) (pcf) TOPSOIL Topsoil A @0'-2': Sandy CLAY: dark brown, moist, loose; roots common CL TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION (weathered) Tsa B @ 2 '-5': Sandy CLA YSTONE: orange-brown with green mottles, damp to CL moist, stiff I C @ 5'~5.5': Silty very fme SANDSTONE to very fine sandy SILTSTONE: SM/ dark gray, damp, very dense ML · GRAPHICAL REPRESENTATION: SCALE: 5' SURF ACE SLOPE: 1 ° TREND: N15W ,---~. --· , . ·---.' ~~ . . . -.--· -. .. • --!. ' • i---• •• ' • -!. ___ •• .:.__ • '· ·=--· ... --; . . \"• ~ ,__ '.._ ';? ,, -, . . . -A -. ·-. . -,.~·----. -·· . 7'_ • -:---:-: , · .. ~· ~·-...:- <-/ ~ ... . Total Depth= 5.5 Feet B No Ground Water Encountered Backfilled with native soil: 11/6/00 C • •••• • LOG OF TRENCH: _..,.T__.-7 ___ _ Project Name: Fraser/College & Cannon Logged by:. MDJ Project Number: 990101-002 Elevation: 106' ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Equipment: 1l0Backhoe Location/Grid: f1nl1Prr"' .. - · GEOLOGIC DATE: 11/6/00 DESCRIPTION: GEOLOGIC Sample Moisture Density A'ITITUDES-UNIT uses No. (%) (pcf) QUATERNARY ALLUVIUM/COLLUVIUM Qal/ Qcol A @ O' -4': Clayey fme SAND: brown, loose to medium dense; roots SC .. TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION Tsa B @4'-5': Silty medium SANDSTONE: orange-brown, damp, dense SM GRAPHICAL REPRESENTATION: SCALE: 5' SURFACE SLOPE; 3° TREND: N77W -\f ----=-.· ~:--:-x : o !._, \ f Io -·' . -...:._:_ . --. . • . ..__ -:__1 • :._.:__· ...:. . . , ' . ' , ' ' I .. •, · ....... • • I • --=-• • , .... ' . ''.' ··. :J · .... ' 0 It'• -f\ \ I"® Total Depth= 5 Feet No Ground Water Encountered ·B Backfilled with native soil: l 1/6/00 •• •• • LOG Of TRENCH: _....,.T---"-8"'--,-_______ _ Project Name: Fraser/College & Cannon Logged by: MDJ Project Number: 990101-002 Elevation: 95' ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Equipment: 110 Backbo~ locatfon/Grid: (;!'lnnon GEOLOGIC DATE: 11/6/00 DESCRIPrtON: ; GEOLOGIC Sample Moisture Density ATTITUDES UNIT uses No. (%) (pcf) QUATERNARY ALLUVIUM/COLLUVIUM Qal/ Qcol A @0'-8': Sandy silty CLAY: dark brown, moist, medium dense CL TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION Tsa B @ 8'-8.5': Silty medium SANDSTONE: orange-brown, damp to mo1st, SM dense ' GRAPIDCAL REPRESENTATION: SCALE: 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 0° TREND: N25W \', . -. r--,, , -• . -:--. ~' .-. .. . ~·· --. "' ,--t -· I I-.-·-. .. _, -. . .,' ·-"' ' --,.. . . . ---:-. . -· .-A -, . . -:---... . . ·:t ~ . -.:. -: .- :-··-=.'-! ..... Total Depth= 8.5 Feet , I No Ground Water Encountered -~' . ·-. ~ , Backfilled with native soil: 11/6/00 ~:'.:-.:·,:.0 , ®-_......-, . ·:· • ::. •• LOG OF TRENCH: _ _..T___,,-9'---_ _.___ Project Name: Fraser/College & Cannon Logged by: MDJ ., . Project Number: 990101-002 Elevation: 121' ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Equipment: 110Backhoe Location/Grid: Cannon, GEOLOGIC DATE: 11/6/00 DESCRIPTION: GEOLOGIC Sample Moisture Density , ATTITUDES UNIT uses No. (%) (pct) OUATERNARYCOLLUVIUM/ALLUVIUM Qcol/Qal A @0'-9': Sandy CLAY to clayey SAND: dark brown, moist, medium-dense; CL/ porous SC QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS Qt ' ' B @' 9 '-1 0': Silty medium SANDSTONE: orange-brown, damp to moist, SM -dense ,' GRAPIIlCAL REPRESENTATION: SCALE: 5' SURF ACE SLOPE: 1 ° TREND: N65E ' I'{. -.. .,. . . . ~ -. --:--.... --: .. ~ , • • ---f I ---. . -· .-:-·.-:--·-:---· . ' . --. ·--.=:.. . ~--·; .--· -:--. . -· -. ·__:__ -·---:-"" C - '-• I,--• .._ I .. ·' .. . . -.. ~, . . · ·/ -----v® Total Depth= 10 Feet .. ,...._ . ., , .. -·-No Ground Water Encountered .. \'--.. -. Backfilled with native soil: 11/6/00 . -. ·-·v ·-··. ,,_ .. \······ ·····) ... I••, t ', ...... ".· '* .: •• .. . . . • •• Project Namei Fraser/College & Cannon Logged by: MDJ Project Number: --""9.490,._l...,0'--'1--'-0=0=2=------------'--Elevation: 100' Equipn'lent: 71 O Backhoe Location/Grid: Cannon 1 GEOLOGIC AffiTUDES I DATE: 11/1/00 DESCRIPTION: . TOPSOIL A @ 0'-2': Silty, very fine SAND with CLAY: dark brown, moist, loose; rootlets common TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION B @2'-4.5': SiltyfiJ?.e to medium SANDSTONE: orange-brown to light brown, damp, dense . 'GEOLOGIC UNIT Topsoil I Tsa GRAPHICAL REPRESENTATION: . SCALE: 5' SURF ACE SLOPE: 0° * iJ· ._:.. ·_:_,. ·---:.·.- \--··. ·,_:,. ~ _'_. ,' ; ·:-:-:. 7 I "® .:_ .. .:,__... . A .. ~ . • I \S· .. ·. ,.__,-.~-'.lSK· I : . . - ; • • • I • : -J • I • I • • • ': ·:.: .. ' ... l 8 • . .. , LOG OF TRENCH: T-10 · ENGJNEERil~'G PROPERTIES uses SM SM Sample Moisture Density No. (%) (pcf) 1 TREND: N25W Total Depth= 4.5 Feet No Ground Water Encountered Backfilled with native soil: 11/7/00 B • -r-- 1'"'11 -. r • 1' ! i ' u To:· Attention: Subject: Leighton and Associates Bentley-Monaich,LLC 7449 Magellan.Street Carlsbad, California 92009 Mr. David Bentley · · · · GEO T·E CH N l,C AL CONSULTANTS September15, 2000_ Project No. 4980160-003 Preliminary Geotechnical Evalµation for Tentative Map Purposes, Cantarini Property, Carlsbad, California In accordance with your request, we have performed a preliminary geotechnical evaluation for tentative map purposes of the Cantarini property located northeast of the intersection of El Camino Real and College · Boulevard in Carlsbad, California. This report presents.the revised results of our -preliminary geotechnical investigation (Leighton, 2000) and provides a summary of our conclusions and recommendations. Final development plans were not available at the time this report was prepared, however, a preliminary 100-scale tentative map was available and utilized during our evaluation. We understand the site will be.developed with approximately 115 single-family residential lots, streets, associated improvements and open space areas. We also understand that development of the site may include the construction of a portion of College Boulevard (between essentially El Cami119 Real and the future extension of Cannon Road) and offsite roadways cotmectingto the adjacent properti~~ to the north and east. Based on the results of our tentative map evaluation, the proposed residential development of the site is .considered feasible· from a geotechnical standpoint provided the recommendations summarized in this report are implemented during the final design, grading, and construction phases of the development. If you have any questions regarding our report, please contact this office. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. Respectfully submitted, KBC/RKW/JGF Distribution: (2) _Addre~see (l 0) Ladwig Design Group, Inc., Attention: Mr. Robert-Ladwig 3934 Murphy Canyon Road, #B20S, San Diego, CA 9213-4425 {619) 292-8030 • FAX (619) 292-0771 • www.lelghton_geo.com • ~ - ~ 1 / ~ ~ r . T ;- •• j 4980160-003 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................ u ......................................................................... 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES ••.•.•.•..••...•.•.....••...•..•...••.•.•.•.•.....•..•.•.•..............................•.•..•....•..............• I SITE DESCR,IPTION ••.•••••.•........••...•..•....•.•....•..•.......•...•.••.....•.•.........••....•..•.• -..............................................•..•... 3 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ....••.•••••....••..•••••....••........• : ...•...•..•...........••.•.•...........•..............•...........•..••............... 4 1.4 SURFACE INVESTIGATION ANDLABORA TORY 'fEsTING :: .................................................................................. 4 1.5 -GEOTECHNICAL REVIEW OF TIIE REVISED SITE PLANS ..•..........••..••.•..••...••... : •.........••....•.................•.......•........ 4 ·2.0 GEOTECHNICALCONDiTIONS ..................................................................................................... , ................ 6 2.1 REGIONAL GEOLOGY ......................................................... ·•···•·••·••···••··•·•·••····•···•···••···••····••·······•·••·••··•·······•··· 6 .2.2 SITE-SPECIFIC GEOLOGY .••••••.•..•••.•••.••.•...•.....••..• -•..••...•.•.•.....••...•...•.•.••..•................•.................•.......•............... 6 2.2.1 UndocumentedFill Soil$ (Map Symbol -Afu) ................................. : ................................. ······:·· ........... 6 2.2.2 Topsoil (Unmapped) .......................•..................................................................................................... 7 2.2.3 Alluvium and Co/luvium Undifferentiated(Map Symbol-Qal/Qcol) ...................................................... 7 2.2.4 TerraceDeposits(Map.Symbol-Qt) ....................................................................................................... 7 2.2.5 SantiagoFormation(Map Symbo/-Tsa) ................................................................................................ 8 2.2.6 Point Loma Formation.(Map Symbol-Kp) ............................................................................................. 8 2.2.7 Lusardi Formation (Map.Symbol-Kl) .................................................................................................... 8 2.2.8 · Cretaceous Granitic Rock (Map Symbol -K~) ... , ................................................................................ 9 2.3. GEOLOGiC STRUCTuRE •••••••.•.••.•.•••••••..••.••.•...••.••.•.••.•••.•.•.....•.••••.•...•••.••.•.••.......•.•.•........•...•....••.•...........•......•. 9 2.4 FAULTING.-.••••••.•••••••.••••••••••••••••••••.•.••••.•••••.•.••••..•.••••••.••••.•.••...•... · .•.•••••...••••..•••.•..•..•.•....•...•••....••..••••••...•.•.•••. 9 2.4.l Rose Canyon Fault Zone .......................... , ................................................................................ : ......... 11 2.5 SEISM1C CONSIDERATIONS ............................................................................................................................. 11 2.5.1 UniformBuildingCodeSeismfcParameters .............. _. ........................................................................ 11 2.6 GROUND WATER·················································· ......................................................................................... 12 2.7 ENGINEERING CHARACTERISTIC~ OF ON-SITE SOILS ................................. : ••.•••••••••••.•••••...••..•.•••••••.•••••••.•.•.•••• 12 2.7.1 · 2.7.2 2.7.3 2.7.4 E.:xpansionPotential ............................................................................................................................ 12 Soil Corrosivity; .................................................................................................................................. 13 Excavation Characteristics .................................................... ,............................................................ 13 EarthworkShrinkage and Bulking ...................................................................................................... 17 2.8 -SLOPE STABILITY ................................................. , ......................................................................................... 18 3.Q-CON.CLUSIONS ........................................................•......................................................................................... 19 4.0 RECOMI.\,fENDATIONS ..................................................................................................................................... 21 4.1 EARTHWORK ........................... -................. -................................................................................................... 21 4.1.1 4.1.2 4.1.3 4.lA 4.1.5 Site Preparation .................. , ............•...... .' ........ : ............................................................................. : .... 21 Removal and Recompactionof PotentiallyCompressibleSoils ........................................................... 21 Excavations ............................ ·············································· .............................................................. 22 Fill Placem~nt and Compaction ......................................................... , ................................................ 22 Settlement of Deep Fill Soils .........•...................................................................................... ~IIII:;::: -i----.::..:-----= • . r . J ! i. I f l 1 ! r L u • i-.. i..i 4980160-003 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) 4.1.6 Cut/Fil/Transition Conditions ................................. ; .......................................................................... 23 4.1. 7 Expansive Clayey Soils and Selective Grading ...... , ............................................................................. 23 4.2 SLOPE STABILITY ........................................................................................................................................... 24 4.2.l Deep-SeatedStability .......................................................................................................................... 24 4.2.2 Surficia/Stability ................................................................................................................................ 25 4.3 CONTROL OF GROUND WATER AND SURF ACE WATERS .................................................................................. 25 4.3.l 4.3.2 4.3.3 CanyonSubdrains ..................................•........ '. ................................................................................... 26 Stability Fill Subdrains ............... , ................................................ _ ..................................................... 26 Cut Slope Seepage Conditions ............................................................................................................ 27 4.4 PRELIMINARY FOUNDATIONDESIGN CONSIDERATIONS .................................................................................. 27 4.4.1 4.4.2 4.4.3 4.4.4 Conventiona/ly-ReinforcedFoundationDesign FoundationDesign ......... :: ........................................ 28 Post-TensionedFoundationDesign .................................................................................................... 31 Moisture Conditioning .................................... : ................................................................................... 32 FoundationSetbacks ........................................................................................................................... 33 4.5 LATERAL EARIB PRESSURE AND RETAININGW ALL DESIGN .......................................................................... 34 4.6 PAVEMENT DESIGN ........................................................................................................................................ 35 4.7 -8URFACEDRAINAGEANDLOTMAlNTENANCE ............................................................................................... 36 4.8 GRADED SLOPES ................................................................................. · ......................................................... 36 4.9 SETTI.,EMENTMbNITORING ............................................................................................................................ 36 5.0 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS ............................................................................................................... 37 FIGURES FIGURE I -SITE LOCATION MAP-PAGE 2 TABLES TABLE 1 -SEISMIC PARAMETERS FOR ACTIVE AND POTENTIALLY ACTIVE FAULTS -PAGE 10 TABLE 2 -RESULTS OF 1HE SEISMIC REFRACTION LINES -PAGES 15-16 TABLE 3 -EARTHWORK. SHRINKAGE AND BULKING ESTIMATES-PAGE 18 TABLE4-FOUNDATIONTYPESUMMARY-PAGE28 TABLE 5 -MINIMUM FOUNDATION AND SLAB DESIGN RECOMMENDATION:S FOR CONVENTIONALLY REINFORCED FOUNDATIONS· PAGE 30 TABLE 6 -POST-TENSIONEDFOUNDA TION DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS FOR EXPANSIVE SOILS -PAGE 31 TABLE 7 -MINIMUM PRESATURATION RECOMMENDATIONS FOR SUBGRADE SOILS UNDERLYING SLABS· PAGE 33 TABLE 8 -MINI~ STRUCTURAL SETBACK FROM SLOPE FACES -PAGE 34 TABLE 9 -LATERAL EARIB PRESSURES -PAGE 35 PLATE PLATE 1 -GEOTECHNICAL MAP-IN POCKET · ~ ii- 1 .. ·· •··: . 1 •·.-_ .. r f J l i B L TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) APPENDICES APPENDIX A -REFERENCES APPENDIX B -BORING AND TRENCH LOGS APPENDIX C -LABORATORY TEsT PROCEDURES AND TEST RESULTS APPENDIX D -SEISMIC REFRACTION STUDY APPENDIX E -GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATJONS FOR ROUGH-GRADING APPENDIX F -SEISMIC ANAL;YSIS APPENDIX G -SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS -iii - 4980160-003 • r f , i • l, f r i . i b ·U f l 1.1 4980160-003 1.0 INTRODUCTION Purpose and Scope of Services This report has been prepared in accordancewith the request of Mr. Robert Ladwig and presents the results of our preliminary geotechnical investigation{Leighton, 2000) and our tentative map update evaluation of the Cantarini Project. The 138-acre site is located approximately 1,800 feet north to northeast of the intersectionof El Camino Real and College Boulevard in the east-central portion of the City of Carlsbad, California (Figure 1). The purpose of our preliminary investigation was to evaluate the pertinent geotechnical conditions at the site and to provide preliminary design criteria for the proposed development. Final grading plans were not available at the time of our preliminary report, however, a preliminary I 00-scale planning exhibit map (Bucco la Engineering, 1999) was available and utilized at the time our preliminary report was prepared. A tentative map (Buccola Engineering, 2000) presenting the revised development and grading design was utilized during our update evaluation and as the base map for the geotechnical ma:p presented in this report as Plate I. We understand that the site will be utilized as a single-family residential development. We also under~tand that portions of the site (mainly the central and eastern drainages) will remain as dedicated open space. The scope of services for our preliminary geotechnical investigation included: • Review of pertinent available geotechnical literature (including previous geotechnical reports), geologic maps, and aerial photographs (Appendix A). · · • Reconnaissanceand geologicmaP.pingofthe site. • A subsurface· exploration program consisting of the excavation, sampling and logging or' 7 small-diameter exploratory borings and 29 shallow exploratory trenches. The small-diameter borings and trenches _were excavated to evaluate the characteristics of surficial soils and formational material. Logs of the borings and trenches are presented in Appendix B. We also utilized the applicable logs of borings and trenches previously excavated by others for this report (which have 1dso been presented in Appendix B). The approximate location of the borings llild trenches are presented on the GeotechnicalMap (Plate 1 ). • Laboratory testing of representative samples obtained during our subsurface exploration (Appendix C). ... • A rippability/seismic refraction study to evaluate the approximate seismic velocities of granitic bedrock material within proposed cut areas in order to provide a rough estimate of the rippability characteristics of the materials. The results are presented in Appendix D and discussed in Section 2.7.3. The approximate locations of the seismic survey lines are presented on the Geotechnical Map (Plate 1 ). Geotechnical analysis of the data accumulated, including data from our previous investigation (Leighton, 1998) and from those.of others for the site or adjacent sites (SCS&T, 1988 and 1998). -1- . ' ··--,. '.i ' ~ . ;· : I • f . l '' t .. f ~ l i r: t ~ t : .:, [~ u ft [I LI p j t u NORTH BASE MAP: Thomas Bros. GeoFinder for Windows, San Diego County, 1995, Page 866 Benteq / Cantarini Property Carlsbad, Cal i.for:nia 1"=2,000' SITE LOCATION MAP Project No. 980160-003 Date . September 2QOO II Figure No. 1 l •. : .. . -~ j I l, r· ,, . . [ • j; • j .1 4980160-003 • Preparation of a report presenting our preliminary findings, conclusions and recommendations with respect to the proposed site development(Leighton, 2000). The scope of our tentative map update evaluation included the following: • Review of the revised site development design as indicated on the new tentative tract map (Bucco la; 2000) relative to the previous design as shown on the l 00-Scale Exhibit Map (Buccola, 1999). • • Review of the project geotechnical data . Preparation ofthis revised project geotechnical report presenting our updated conclusions and recommendations based on the new site design. 1.2 Site Description The subject property, with a total of approximately 138 acres, is located north to northeast of the intersection between El Camino Real and College Boulevard in Carlsbad, California: The site consists of an approximately rectangular piece of property that is bordered by ranch homes and horse stables to the south and by agriculturally developed land and otherwise essentially undeveloped land on the east, west and north sid~s. Man-made features on the site include: I) a · single family residence in the east central portion of the s-Ite; 2)°'several building associated.with the fanning activities across the site; 3) a relatively large pond and earthen dam in the southeastern ·-· · portion of the site; 4) numerous dirt roads which_ cross the property (mainly in the southern portion of the site); 5) undocumented fills associated with the dirt roads, fanning activities, and the earthen dam; and-6) fences (pr.esumablyfot horses and/or livestock)-in the eastel"Ifportion of the property._ Topographically, the site -generally consists of steeply sloping. hillside and valley terrain in the · northeast and northwe&t comers of the site to gently sloping low, broad hills ap.d shallow valleys in the central and southern portions of the site. Elevations range from a high of approximately 420 ± feet mean sea level (msl) in the northeast comer of the site to a low of 70 ± feet (msl) along the extreme southwestern site boundary. Natural drainage is presently accomplished through a network of small drainages and canyon areas, while the site ultimately drains in a southwesterly direction to an east-west trending canyon (south of the site). Vegetation on the site ranges from planted vegetable crops in the southern and central portions of the site, native grasses and weeds on the steeper hillsides in the central portion of the &ite, and moderate to thick chaparral and trees (mainly on the hillsides and along the major drainages in the eastern portion of the site). A number of natural seepage ( or springs) were encountered in the eastern portion of the site. The seepage areas were generally located in the upper portion of the onsite drainages. We understand that one or more ofthese seepage zones or springs feed the central pond . -3- ;:::11· I -~ --~ . -.. -.. -=-._= • ,. •• . r . i:. . r . l f ! I .i, u 1.3 1.4 1.5 4980160-003 Proposed Development Final design plans and grading plans were not available at the time of our report. However, a 100- scale tentative tract map (Buccola Engineering, 2000) was available. Based on the plans, we understand the site will be developed for single-family residential development uses. As indicated .on th~ 1 O.Q-:.sca1e.map, approximat~ly 11.5 .single-family residential lots are planned across the site. In addition, a number of open space lots (generally in_ the drainages across the site and in the eastern portion of the site) are planned. Associated improvements such as streets, slopes, underground utilities, etc. are also anticipated. Cut and fill slopes up to an approximate height of 50 to 55 feet are shown on the tentative tract map (Bucco la, 2000). Slope inclinations of 2: 1 (horizontal to vertical) or flatter are assumed. Recommendations concerning site grading and development are presented in Section 4.0 and in Appendix E. Surface Investigation and Laboratory Testing Our s_ubsurface investigation (Leighton, 2000) consisted of the excavation, logging and sampling of seven srriall-diameterborings and 29 exploratory trenches to a maximum depth of approximately29 and 20 feet, respectively. Logs of the borings and trenches are .present~d in Appendix B. Approximate locations of the borings and trenches are shown on the Geotechnical Map (Plate 1 ). Subsequent to the subsurface investigation, the b~rings and trenches were-backfilled. The results of previous geotechnical studies have also been incorporated into this report where appropriate. The applicable ·seismic lines, boring and trench logs fron;i -the previous work perfonned by Southern -California Soil and Testing(SCS&T, 1988 and 1998) are included in AppendixB. The approximate location of the seismic lines, borings and trenches are also presented on the Geotechnical Map (Plate 1). Limited laboratory testing was performed on· representative soil samples obtain during our subimrface inves#gation. The laboratory tests included moisture/density determinations, sulfate content, pH and resistivity, consolidation and expansion index tests. A discussion of the tests perfonned and a summary of the results are presented in Appendix C. The density/moisture determinations of the undisturbed samples obtained from the borings are shown on the boring logs (Appendix B). GeotechnicalReview of the Revised Site Plans The new tentative tract map and the existing geotechnical conditions of the site are presented as Plate 1. Based on our review of the new tentative map (Buccola, 2000) relative to the previous design (Bucco la, 1999), the following items have changed. • The minimum lot size has increased to 1/2-acre. The -proposed multi-·unit area in the northwestern portion of the site has been eliminated and replaced with single-family lots. -4- ·-•I •·: .,. . I r j .1 . f l. t, I _j r i .·, .. ,·, . ·.· , • . . :' I iJ 4980160-003 • In general, the graded/developmentareas relative to the open space areas have remained unchanged. How~ver, a possible roadway is proposed along the eastern property line. We understand this road will only be constructed if the proposed road on the adjacent Mandana property is not constructed. • The street locations and lot 'layouts are significantly different than previously designed. However, the grades and ·elevations of the streets and lots have not changed as much { other than to balance the ·site and min,imize elevation differences between the lots and adjacent streets). • Our geotechnical' review of the existing geotechnical conditions as shown on the geotechnical map · (Plate 1) indicate a number of new cut slopes in the western portion of the site that may contain adverse geotechnical conditions (i.e. out-of-slqpe bedding and claystone units). We recommend that . a supplemental geotechnical investigation (including large-diameter borings to evaluate the subsurface geology, laboratory testing of representative soil samples, geotechnical analysis, and preparation of revised ge_otechnical conclusions aQd recommendations}be performed prior to the site grading operations to evaluate the cut slopes in the western portion of the site . -5- • f r [" j ~ ! 1 J . L •: .1 . i; -2.l 2.2 4980160-003 2.0 GEOTECHNICALCONDITIONS ' Regional Geology The subject site is located within the coastal subprovince of the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province, near the western edge of the southern California batholith. The topography at the edge of the batholith changes from the _rugged landforms developed on the batholith to the more subdued landforms whi'ch typify the softer sedimentary formations of the coastal plain such as are present on the site. Specifically, the site is underlain by the sedimentary units including the Quaternary-aged Terrace Deposits, the Tertiary-aged Santiago Formation, and Cretaceous-aged Point Loma Formation, Lusardi Formation and Cretaceous granitics. Subsequentto the deposition of ~ese units, erosion and regional tectonic uplift created the valleys and ridges of the area. Human influences, recent weathering and erosional processes have produced the Quaternary and recent surficial units including undocumented· fill soils, alluvium, colluvium, and topsoil that mantle the site. The regional ground water table is anticipated to be slightly above sea level. However, perched ground water was encountered at a depth on the order of 25 feet in the alluvial area, while groundwater seepage zones are present al~ng fractures in the granitic bedrock. -Site-Specific Geology Formational materials (including the Quaternary-aged Terrace Deposits, the Tertiary-aged· Santiago Formation, Cretaceous--aged Point Loma and Lusardi Formations, and Cretaceous granitics) and ·surficial units· (consisting of colluvhitn, alluvium, topsoil, and undocumented fill soils) were encountered during our investigation of the site. The areal distribution of these ge<;>logic units are shown on the Geotechnical Map (Plate 1 ). Each of the geologic units present on the site is described below (youngest to oldest). · 2.2.l UiidocumentedFill Soils (Map Symbol-Afu) · Undocumented fill soils were observed in a number of places on the site. As observed; the undocumented fill soils were generally associated with the grading of the.onsite dirt roads, earth dam,· and prior farming/agricultural activities on the site. These undocumented fill soils are anticipated to be relatively limited in extent and thickness, however,· localized undocumented fill thicknesses may exceed 15+ feet. All. existing undocumented fills located on the site are considered potentially compressible and unsuitable in their present state for structural support. These soils should be removed within the limits of the proposed grading and may be recompacted and used as structural fills provided detrimental materials are rell?-oved (see Section 4.1 ). ·-· • . L , ? : t . i. • j 2.2.2 2.2.3 . 2.2.4 4980160-003 Topsoil (Unmapped) The topsoil encountered during our field investigation mantles the majority of the site. The topsoil as observed, consists predominantly o~ ligl.lt brown to brown, damp to moist, stiff, sandy to silty clay_ and some_ clayey to_ silty sands. These soils were generally massive, porous and contained ~catteted roots and organics. The potentially compressible topsoil is estimated to be approximately 1 to 4 feet in thickness; however, localized areas of thicker accumulations of topsoil may be encountered during grading. The topsoil should be removed during grading and may be recompacted and used as structural fill provided detrimental materials are removed (see Section 4.1). Alluvium and Colluvium Undifferentiated(Map Symbol-OaVOcol) AJluvium and collu:vium is present in the bottom of the main canyons and drainages on the site. The ailuvial soils (Qal) are usually thickest in the center of drainages and often interfinger with colluvial soils (Qcol) on the drainage margins forming wedges of alluvial and colluvial. soils that thin away from the drainages. These soils typically consist of bro'Yfl, damp to wet, loose to medium dense/stiff, silty sands, sandy clays and silty clays. The alluvium typically is moderately porous and often contains localized zones of moderate to abundant roots and other organic matter. The alluvium and colluvium is considered potentially compressible and is recommended to be removed to competent formational material in areas of proposed dev~lopment. Removal depths on the order of 5 to 15+ feet should :be expected in the lower drainage elevations on the site. Removals of the alluvium and colluvium within the proposed limits of future College · Boulevard are estimated to be on the order of l O to 25+ feet in thickness. The alluvium a_nd colluvium ·may be recompacted and used as structural fill provided detrimental _materials are removed (see Section 4.J) . Terrace Deposits (Map Symbol-Qt) The Pleistocene-aged Terrace D·eposits exist on the lower hilltops (located in the western portion· of the site) unconfonnabJy overlying the Santiago Formation. These deposits are · present in a limited extent above an a,pproximate elevation of 130 feet (msl) on some of the hilltops in the western portion of the site. The soil comprising the Terrace Deposits is generally composed of course sand to a sandy cobble conglomerate. According to the preliminary site development plans, the majority of the Terrac·e Deposits will be remove . 1 ,< ,.,, .. : .~- as -cut material during rough grading. This material typically has a low potential fi.t~;\;~:~~/;_: expansion and may be recompacted for use ·as structural fill. ,,:.-,. ;,,:t '_ -,~ •· -' ' -7- •• •• ·.· r . r:· ~! 2.3 •. :_· r 2.4 . r t . L . ! . 1 ] ' ~ :. j 4980160-003 2.2.8 Cretaceous Granitic Rock (Map Symbol -Kgr) · Granitic rock outcrops were observed in the northeast and northwest corners of the site. In our trench excavations in these areas, weathered granitic material was encountered below the topsoil and generally consisted of light gray to light red brown, damp, dense, fine to · coarse sand. At depth (i.e. depths generally IO or more feet), relatively unweathered granitic bedrock is anticipated as well as exposed at the surface as scattered-outcrops. Our rippability study indic;ate~ the depth to marginally rippable and/or unrippable rock ranges from approximately20 to 40 feet in the areas of proposed cuts. Deep cuts (generally greater than approximately 10 to 15 feet) in these areas will likely require heavy ripping, however, minor blasting may be required in localized areas (but significant blasting is not anticipated). These -soils typically have a low potential for expansion and are suitable for use as structural fill. · G~ologic Structure Review of the geologic literature applicable to the site (Appendix A), our professional experience on sites with similar soils, and geologic mapping of the site, indicate the on-site geologic units are generallyflat-lying and massively bedded with occasional randomly oriented jointing. Based on the limited subsurface data and our experience with the on.site units, bedding within the formational · soils is anticipated to be slightly dipping (10 degrees or less) toward the west. No faults have been mapped ort the site nor were any encountered during our.field study. However, the seepage zones on the east side of the site as well as seeps to the north of the site appear to be aligned in a linear configuration which may be the res~lt of a fracture or fault zone ( creating a ground water barrier causing the water to flow at the surface). Minor to moderate jointing of the near surface soils may ~lso be present on the hillsides of the site. Jointing, if encountered, is _anticipated to be randomly oriented.and moderate.to steeply dipping. Faulting Our discussion of faults on the 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 displacementwithin 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 as most recently revised in 1997. The intent of this act is to assure that unwise urban development does not occur across the traces of active faults. Based on our review of the Fault-Rupture Hazard Zo11e~, th~ site is not located within any Fault-Rupture Hazard Zone as created by the Alquist-PrioloAct (Hart, 1997). -9- ···: -:-. r '· [ r ' ,, - lr [" !· ~ p i: i.L 1 • '! ! L [j ' : t • JI 4980160-003 .. San biego, like the rest of southern California, is· seismically active as a result of being located near the active margin between the North American and Pacific tectonic plates. The principal source of seismic activity is movement along the northwest-trending regional fault zones such as the San Andreas, San Jacinto and Elsinore Fauits Zones, as well as along less active faults such as the Rose Canyon Fault Zone. Our review of geologic literature pertaining to the site and general vicinity indicates that there are no known major or active faults on or in. the immediate vidnity of the site (Hannan, 1975,. Weber,· 1982, and Jennings, 1994). Evidence for faulting 'Yas not encountered during our field investigation. The nearest known active fault is the Rose Canyon Fault Z~me (RCFZ) located approximately 7 miles west of the site. Table 1 provides ground motion characteristics anticipated at the site from a deterministic viewpoint. The peak -horizontal ground accelerations presented in the table were determined based on the maximum magnitude earthquake that is considered possible on the nearby regional faults. · From a probabilistic viewpoint, the design ~arthquake (i.e. an earthquake event or ground motion having a 10% probability of being exceeded in 50 years per UBC Section 1631.2) can cause a horizontal ground acceleration of 0.25g. · · Table 1 Seismic Parameters for ,A.ctive and Potentially Active -F_aults MAXIMUM CREDIBLE EARTHQUAKE .. Horizontal Ground Horizontal Ground Acceleration Acceleration (Gravity) (Gravity) .By Boore et. al. By Boore et: al. ( 1997) Horiz. Distance from (1997) Horiz. Soil (310)@ Fault to Site Moment Soil (310)@ Mean+ 1 Standard Potential Causative Fault ·(Miles)·_ Magnitude Mean· Development Rose Canyon 6.6 6.9 0.30 0.50 Newport Inglewood 8.5 , . 6.9 0.25 0.43 (offshore) Elsinore -Julian 23 7.4 0.14 0.23 Elsinore -Temecula 23 6.8 0.12 0.20 Coronado Bank (offshore) 23 7.1 0.16 0.27 Because of the lack of known active faults on the site, the potential for surface rupture at the site is considered low. · -10- •·- ·' •• . r . r-~ . . ; J L 1 q I-• n ;. : r l I r 1 2.5 2.4.I 4980160-003 Rose Canyon Fault'Zone The most significant active fault in the San Diego area is the RCFZ. This fault zone is composed of a series of right-lateral strike-slip faults that extend north-northeast through the San Diego Metropolitan Region and offshore along the northern portion of San Diego County. The RCFZ is thought to be part of a more extensive fault zone that includes the Sout}J Coast QffshoreZone ofDeformationand the NeWport-InglewoodFault Zone to the north and several extensions southward into Mexico (Treiman, 1993 ). The RCFZ has many features indicat~ve of active faulting. Trenching studies of the fault in the Mount Soledad area (15 to.20 niiles_southwestofthe site) indicate the most recent surface rupture on the fault probably occurred between 200+ and 500 years ago and that at least 3 events have occurred in the last 8,000 years (Lindvall and Rockwell, 1995). Seismic Considerations The principal seismic considerations for most structures in southern California are surface rupturing of fault traces and' damage caused by ground shaking or seismically induced ground settlement. The possibility of damage due to ground rupture is considered low since active faults are not known to cross the site. The seismic hazard most likely to impact the site is ground-shaking resulting from an earthquake on one of the major regio~al faults. The effects of seismic shaking can be reduced by adhering to the most recent edition of the Uniform Building Code and design parameters of the Structural En_gineers Association of California. Liq~efaction of cohesionless soi~s can be caused by strong vibratory motion due to earthquakes . ·Research and historical dat~dndicate that loose granular soils underlain by a near-surface_gr(?und water table are most susceptible to liquefaction, while the stability of most silty clays and clays is not adversely affected by vibratory motion. Because of the dense nature of the underlying formation, it is our opinion that the potential for liquefaction or seismically induced dynamic settlement at the site clue to the design earthquake is low. Hazard from seiehes and tsunamis is not present as the site is located away from the immediate coa~tal area and there are no large standing bodies of water in or ·near the site. 2.5 .1 : Uniform Building Code Seismic Parameters The site is located within Seismjc Zone· 4. The soil profile types at the site following the planned grading are anticipated to include Types S8, Sc, S0 , Near source factors ofN. = 1.0 and Nv= 1.0 are considered appropriate base on the seismic setting. -11- ••• '. f •:· ,• : f . . ,L· t , J. ii, . r p l j, u n f ~ I: l •'", , t i . d ' ' d 2.6 4980160-003 Ground Water Ground water was encountered during our investigation along the proposed College Boulevard alignment in exploratory borings B-1 and t3 ... 3 at approximate depths of 27.5 and 23 feet, respectively. Previous investigations south of the site have indicated shallower depths to ground water along the proposed alignment (SCS&T, 1988). The ·water table encountered is thought to be perched groU;ndwater in the lower portiop. of the onsite alluvial soils. Moderate to heavy surface water seepage was noted in the eastern portion of the site and is thought to be associated with spring activity along two tributary drainages on the site. Minor seepage was also noted in exploratory Trench T-8. We understand tha~ the current site development design is to leave the majority of this portion of the site (i.e. the northeast portion) as open space. However, where development is planned in this area or if ground water seepage is encountered in other places on the site (in areas of proposed development), mitigation of the ground water is recommended by methods such as providing subdrains to reduce the impact of ground water seepage or saturated conditions (as i.Iidicated in Section 4.3). · We also understand that the seep~ge in the tributary canyons·on the east side of the site flow into the existing pond (which contains water year around). Due to the presence of this constant surface and subsurface groundwater condition in the canyons upstream of the pond (i.e. in the southeastern portion of the site), improvements, across this are~ will require special grading procedures to mitigate the surface and groundwaterconditions. 2. 7 · Engineering Characteristics of Ort-site Soils .Based on the results of our geotechnical investigation, previ_ous geotechnical investigations of the site by others, laboratory testing of representative on-site soils, and our professiop.al experience on adjacent sites wi~h-similar soils, the engineering characteristics of the on-site soils are discussed below . 2.7.1 Expansion Potential The majorjty of the onsite, soils are expected to have a low to moderate expansion potential. However, topsoil that occurs on the Siltstone and/or claystone portion1? of the formational material, the silts(one portions of the Lus~di and Point Loma Formations, possible siltstone· and claystone of the Santiago. Formation, and some of the onsite alluvial soils may be highly expansive. Geotechnical observation and/or laboratory testing upon completion of the graded pads is recommended to determine the actual ·e~pansion potential of finish grade soils on the.graded lots. · -12- .• -.. : . r. i: J, ... -'I' -: . .. r J r i . 1 . r ••• _l 2.7.2 2.7.3 4980160-003 Soil Corrosivity Laboratory tests carried out on selected soil samples collected from the subject site indicate that the· soils are of negligible to low soluble sulfate content, neutral pH and moderate electricalresistivity. These findings 1ndic;ate that the corrosive effects of the onsite soils tested to steel and concrete components is expected to be low to moderate. However, soils having high sulfate content ai;id low electrical resistivity, which are detrimental to steel and concrete may also be present at the subject site. Laboratory testing should be performed on the soils pl_aced at or near finish grade after completion of site grading to ascertain the corrosivity characteristics. Excavation Characteristics As part of our preliminary investigation for the site, a seismic refraction field study was conducted on November 21, 1999. A total of 1,190 linear feet of data was collected along seven seismic survey lines. The purpose of these surveys was to evaluate the approximate· seismic velocities of the Granitic Rock and Lusardi FonI_1.ation material (within proposed cut areas) in order to provide a rough estimate of the rippability characteristics of the materials. The seismic lines were placed in areas having the deepest proposed cuts in order to evaiuate the rippability of the subsurface materials. Each survey line was approximately 170 feet in length (with the exception of Line 3 which was 120 feet long) and provided-depths of investigation of at least 50 feet (3.5 fee.t. with respect to Line 3) below the existing ground surface. The approximate locations of the seismic survey lines are presented on the Geotechnical Map (Plate l ) . The seismic refraction method uses fir$t-arrival times of refracted seismic waves to determine the thickness and seismic velocities of subsurface materials. The seismic waves were initiated at the ends of each survey line by striking an aluminum plate with. a 16-pound hammer. Seismic waves generated at the ground surface were reflected and refracted from boundaries separating materials of contrasting velocities ( or densities) and were detected by a series of twenty-four surface geophones placed along the survey line. The waves detected by the geophones were recorded with a Bison 9024, 24 channel seisffi:ograph. Time-distance plots _and associated geophysical interpretations of the seismic data from the seven sUivey lines were then prepared and analyzed. The data is provided in Appendix D. It should be noted that the measured seismic velocities presented on the plots represent average Velocities of the subsurface materials; and significant local variations dl!e to buried boulders ( or "floaters"), localized hard or c~mented zones concretions, or other anomalies ·may be present. In order to categorize the subsurface materials in the proposed cut areas in terms of excavation characteristics, the following classifications are utilized. This five-fold classification scheme is based on our experience with similar rocks in the San Diego County area, and assumes the use of a single shank D9L Dozer ( or equivalent . equipment). The rippability characteristics of the site materials are classified as follows: -13- . p .... i r, ! 1 T j, J f ·1 • J Calculated Seismic Velocity Up to 2000 feet per second 2000 to 4000 feet per second 4000 to 5500 feet per secorid 5500 to 7000 feet per second Greater th~n 7000 feet per second 4980160-003 General Excavation Characteristic Easy ripping Moderately difficult ripping Difficult ripping, possible localized. blasting Very difficult ripping, probable local to general blasting Blasting required "Difficult ripping" refers to rocks, in which it becomes difficult to achieve tooth penetration, sharply reducing ripping production. Local blasting may be necessary in order to maintain a desired ripping production rate. "Very difficult ripping" refers to "rocks in which the use of heavy construction equipment is Iilcely to cease being a cost- effective method of excavation (necessitating the use of explosives· to maintain a desired excavation rate). It should emphasized that the cutoff velocities of this classification scheme are approximate and rock characteristics (such as fracture or joint spacing and orientation) play a significant role in determining rock rippability. These characteristics may also vary with loc~tion and depth in the rock mass. . . The average seismic· velocities of the near-surface bedrock materials along the seven seismic survey lines is approximately 2600 feet per second. Below these near-surface materials (which are generally less than 7 to 10 fee~ in depth below the existing ground surface), the average seismic velocities of the bedrock varies from 3650 to 6600+ feet per second. The results of the seismic refraction study are tabulated in Table 2. Presented on Table 2 is the survey line location, depth of the proposed cut, the average velocity of the subsurface materials within the range of the cut, and the general excavation characteristic of the material. -14- ---...... -· TABLE2 - Results of the Seismic Refraction Lines .. Seismic Line Approxhm1te Approximate Depth of Average Seismic Velocity General Excavation Characteristic N~mber Location Proposed Cut* (in feet) Depth Average Velocity (Subject to Local Variations) (feet) (feet/ second) . ' . Oto 3 1,520 Easy Ripping 1 Lots 111 and 112 1;4 3 to 30-40 3,300 Moderately Difficult Ripping >30-40 6,400 Very Difficult Ripping to Probable Local to General Blasting Oto 3 l,580 Easy Ripping 2 Lot 111 · 8 3 to 37-48 3,220 Moderately Difficult Ripping >37-48 6,920 Very Difficult Ripping to Probable Local to General Bl~ting " Oto 5 1,550 Easy Ripping 3 "W'' Street, Station 8 5 to 27-35 3,625 Moderately Difficult Ripping . No. 1+25 to .2+45 Very Difficult Ripping to Probable ~>27-35 6,220 Local to General Blasting Oto9 '. 1,795 Easy· Ripping . 4 "M" Stre.et, Sqition 15 ·9to4l-31 2,870 Moderately Difficult Ripping No. 7+50 to 8+70 >21-31 · 10,030 Blasting Required Oto 3 1,410 Easy Ripping 3 to 8-19 2,550 Moderately Difficult Ripping 5 L.cit97 . 20 8-19 to 30-317 4,220 Difficult Ripping, Possible Localized Blasting >30-37 6,650 Very Difficult Ripping to Probable Local to General Blasting .. ·: .. :' .· : : .-:.t::\: ~~ ~7\: ~ ::_·,'.I .. _: .1 " ' ._, ,,_:, "~·:.:··.: . , , ... ·: ·tJ.l..::.ll.l~3Li£.f ,------, hr,-,, .. :--1~ c:::~ •. :;::;,::;: ~ .-,... __ .,.._ ....., __ . ,.., ... ,i,; ~ln11'"-' lit<'t1 ,.wf'""' •• -,to-• °!II tt· • ···~1'1'ff ,It-rt"""'""...,, ti""'• ·-rtl l""' .. ..., .,... ...... :'..,, ........ .,; t:1' .,., .. TABLE 2 ( contin_ued) Results of the Seismic Refraction Lines Seismic Line Approximate. Approximate Depth of· , Average Seismic Velocity General Excavation Characteristic Number · Location Proposed Cut* (in feet) Depth Average Velo~ity (Subject to, Local Variations) (feet} (feet/second) Oto 2 1,610 Easy Ripping 2to3-12 2,680 Moderately Difficult Ripping 6 Lots 47. and 57 30 3-12 to 21.-32 3,980 Moderately Difficult Ripping >21-32 6,530 Very Difficult Ripping to Probable Local to General Blasting Oto 5 1,910 Easy Ripping 3-6 4,450-5,050 Difficult Ripping, Possible Localized "C" Stre.et, Station Blasting 7 No. 1.5+8.0 to 17+00 15 Moderately Difficult Ripping 5 to 25-35 3,830 '' >25-35 6,650 Very Difficult Ripping to Probable Local to General.Blasting * Assumes an addition undercut of 4 feet below·the proposed elevation of the street curb grade or finish pad elevation . . . • t-. .!. .i . ~ t J . ~ • 1 r r '' l i. U· i r d 2.7.4 4980160-003 Based on the resuits of the seismic refraction study (as indicated on Table 2), it appears that the ne.ar surface ma~erials ( and materia:1 above the proposed cut elevations) are . rippable with heavy-duty construction equipment in good working order (i.e. a single shank D9L Dozer or equivalent). Localized blasting or other hard tipping (as well as. scattered floaters) should be anticipated throughout the portion of the sikunderlain by granitic rock. If a significant amount of oversize material (typically rock over 8 inches in maximum dimension) is generated, it should be placed to prevent possible settlement of the soil around the rocks, as recommended in Section 4.0 and Appendix E. Earthwork Shrinkage and Bulking Based on the results of our investigation and our professional experience with similar projects in the general vicinity of the site, we have estimated bulking and shrinkage of the on-site soils. We have assumed the depth of the disturbed soils in the farmed areas is on the order of 2 feet while the topsoil is anticipated to be on the order of 1 to 4 feet in depth. The · alluvium and colluvium in the drainages of the site is anticipated to be on the order of 5 to 20+ feet. The depth of the undocumented fill is unknown but may vary froni a few feet to over 15 feet. The volume change or excavated onsite materials upon recompaction as fill is expected to vary with materials and location. Typically, the surficial soils and bedrock.materials vary significantly in natural and compacted density, and therefore, accurate earthwork shrinkage/bulking estimates cannot be determined. However, the following factors (based on the results of our investigation, geotechnical analysis and professional experience on adjacent sites) are provided on Table 3 as guideline estimates. If possible, we suggest an area where site grad~s can be adjusted ( during the later portion of the site grading operations) be provided as a balance area . -17- • • . r ' .. i . r , . . J '-!'. . I. f E If i I •• l 2.8 4980 I 60-003 Table3 Earthwork Shrinkage.and Bulking Estimates Geologic Unit Estimated Shrinkage/bulking Farmed Near Surface Soils (upper 2 feet) 15 to 25 percent shrinkage Undocumented Fill IO to 15 percent shrinkage Topsoil/ Alluvium/Colluvium(in unfarmed areas) 0 to IO percent shrinkage Terrace Deposits 0 to 5 percent shrinkage Santiago, Point Loma and Lusardi Formations 4 to 12 percent bulking Granitic Rock(weathered upper 5 to 10 feet) 0 to 8 percent bulking Granitic Rock (upweatheredrock below lO feet) 10 .to 20 percent bulking Slope Stability Our preliminary investigation and site reconnaissance did not encounter any evidence of landslides at the su_bject site. In addition, our evaluation of the site indicates that natural and proposed cut slopes are expected to be grossly stable. However, ensuring that the final slopes have adequate factors of safety against static and pseudostatic instability (i.e., factors of safety equal to or greater than 1.5 and LI, respectively) may necessitate remedial earthw0rk; for example, construction of shear keys or stabilization buttresses, as ·applicable. A detailed review of the· stability of slopes impacting the subject development should be carried out during the geotechnical review ·of the finalized grading' plans for the subject site, and suitable measures should be taken to provide the slopes with adequate factors of safety . Due to existing groundwater seepage and. spring activity in the eastern portion of the site (in the_ vici~ity of Lot 90 through 92 and the adjacent street), this part of the site was observed to contain localized .pockets of surficial instability. Th~ sutficial stability problems in this part of the site are likely to worsen over time. To minimize the extent of these problems, the geotechnical recommendations provided in Section 4.3.3 ·sh~uld be carri~d out during grading. -18- p i - i. i: • l • f r .f f 3 f u 1 r ' ,! . t j, I: u i ! • l d- 4980160-003 3 .0 CONCLUSIONS J3ased on the res1:1lts of our preliminary geotechnical investigation at the subject site and our review of the previous geotechnical reports (SCS&T, 1988 and 1998), it is our opinion that the proposed development of the Cantarini property is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint; provided the following conclusions and recommendations are ipcorporated into the project plans, specifications, and followed during site grading arid construction. · Th~ following is a summary of the geotechnical factors that m~y effect-development of the site. • Based on our subsurface exploration and review of pertinent geotechnical reports, the site is underlain by Cretaceous Granite, the Lusardi, Point Loma and Santiago Formations, Terrace Deposits, alluvium, colluvium, topsoil, and undocumented fill soils. • · The undocumented fill, topsoil, colluvium, alluvium and Weathered formational materials are porous and/or potentially compressible in their present state ·and will require·removal and recompaction in ·areas of proposed development or future fill. • Siltstone and claystone formational soils, as well as, clayey surficial soils are-highly expansive. These expansive soils should be removed where they are found within 5 feet of pad grade and replaced with soil having a lower expansion potential or a special foundation design (i.e. post- tensioned design) should be provided. · • It is anticipated that the on-site granitic, sedimentary and surficial soils may be excavated with conventional heavy-duty construction equipment. The deeper granitic soils and localized cemented zones may require heavy ripping and/or blasting Oversized material may be generated during excavation of the granitic bedrock, Lusardi Formation, and if cemented zones are encountered. All oversized material should be placed in accordance with the recommendations presented in Section 4.0 and Appendix E to minimize settlement of the material around the rocks . • The existing on-site soils appear to be suitable material for use as fill provided they are relatively freeofrocks (larger than 8 inches in maximuin dimension), organic material and debris. · • · Ground water was encountered during our investigation and previous investigations along the proposed College Boulevard.alignment. Moderate to heavy sutface.wat~r seepage was also noted in the eastern portion of the site and is thought to be· associated with spring act1vity along two tributary drainages in this area. Improvements in these areas will require special gradiµg procedures to mitigate the surface and groundwater condition. If other. ground water seepage con4itions are encountered during site development, recommendations to mitigate the conditions can be made on a · . case-by-case basis in accordance with Section 4.3. • Active faults are not known to exist on or in the iqimediate vicinity of the site. • The main seismic hazard that may affect the site is from ground shaking from _one of the active regional faults; -19- • T • • • L ~ I r • f !' ~ i l. i, u 4980160-003 Due to the high-density characteristics of the on-site bedrock materials and lack of a shallow groundwater table, the potential for liquefaction in bedrock areas is considered low. The potential for liquefaction in alluvial areas is also considered low provided the alluvium is removed and replaced with compacted fill. In general, when recompacted as fill soil, the surficial units (including topsoil, colluvium, alluvium, etc;) are anticipated to shrink while the formational materials are likely to bulk (with the exception of the Terrace Deposits that are likely to-shrink). It is anticipated that planned major cut slopes that will be comprised of weathered granite, formational sandstones and/or siltstones will hot require stabilization measures to mitigate potential surficial instability (provided adverse geologic conditions are not present). Where adverse geologic conditions (such as out-of-slope bedding, clayseams, seepage zones, etc.) are present, stabilization measures such as the placement of a stability .till will .be required. Slope stability recommendations are presented in Section 4.2. · Potep.tial settlement of relatively deep fills is anticipated to mainly occur during or within months of the completion of grading. However, areas of deep fill should be monito_red to ensure that the majority of the settlement occurs prior to construction of residential structures. In addition, lots underlain by fill differential thicknesses in excess of 20 feet will require the utilization of a special foundation design (i.e. a post-tensioned slab design). A supplemental geotechnical investigation to evaluate the stability of the proposed natural and cut slopes within the subject site is recommended, once the final grading plans are available .. -20- 4.1 . f • .L . ' . i .j h ! r : I [ L t f 4980160-003 4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS Earthwork We anticipate that earthwork at the site will consist of site preparation, removals of potentially compressible soil, excavation of cut material, fill placement, and trench excavation and backfill. We recommend that earthwork on site be performed in accordance with the following recommendations, the City of Carlsbad grading requirements, and the General Earthwork and Grading Specifications for Rough-Grading (GEGS) included in Appendix E. In case of conflict, the following recommendati,::>ns shall supersede those included as part of Appendix E. 4.1.1 4.i.2 Site Preparation Prior to the grading of areas to receive structural fill or engineered structures, the areas sho'uld .be cleared of surface obstructions, any existing debris, potentially compressible material.(such as undocumented fill soils, topsoil, colluvium, alluvium, and we~thered formational materials) and stripped of vegetation. Vegetation and debris should be removed and properly disposed of offsite. Holes results from the removal of buried obstructions which extend below finished site grades should be replaced with suitable compacted fill material. Areas to receive fill and/or other surface improvements should be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 to-12 inches, brought to a near-optimum moisture condition~ and recompactedto at least 90 percent relative compaction (based on American Standard of Testing and Materials [ASTM] Test Method D 1557). Removal and Recompaction of Potentially Compressible Soils As disc;µssed in Sections 2.2 and 3.0, portions of the site are underlain by potentially compressible soils that may settle un<Jer the surcharge of fill and/or foundation loads . These materials include undocumented fill soils, topsoil, colluvium, alluvium, and weathered fonnational material. Compressible materials not removed by the planned grading should ·be excavated to competent material, moisture conditioned or dried back ( as heeded) to obtain a near optimum moisture content, and then recompacted-prior to additional fill placement or construction. The actual depth and extent of the required removals should be determined during grading operations by the geotechnical consultant · However, estimated removal depths are summarized below. • Existing Undocumented Fill The existing undocumented fills should be completely removed prior to placement of additional fill. These materials c_an be utilized as fill materials provided they are ·moisture conditioned an~ free of deleterious materials. The estimated removal depths of the undocumented fill soils range from l to 15+ feet in depth. All trash, construction debris, and decomposable material should be removed and disposed off site. -21- ••• . ,. 4.1.3 •• .,_,/1•-,e . ' • J. 4.1.4 J . i: . r • L r • r = l f, J •• . f • 4980160-003 Topsoil Areas to receive fill which are o_n slopes flatter than 5: I (horizontal to vertical) and where nonnal benching would not completely _remove the topsoil should be excavated to competent fonnational material prior to fill placement. Topsoil is expected to be generally 1 to 4 feet thick on the site. Localized deeper accumulations may be encountered. • Alluvium and Colluvium In areas to receive fill, the alluvial and colluvial soils on the site should be removed to finn/competent fonnational material. Removal of alluvium and colluvium (mainly in · the area of th~ proposed College Boulevard) will generally require overexcavation depths on the order of 5 to 25+ feet. Excavations · Excavations of the weathered granite and on-site sedimentary ahd surficial materials may generally be accomplished with conventional heavy-duty earthwork equipment. Deep cuts in the granitics and localized cemented zones in the sedimentary units may be encountered that may require heavy ripping. Localized .blasting may be required, but· the need for extensive blasting is not anticipated. The cobbles and small boulders present in the Lusardi Forniation and produceq dqring excavation of the granitics may also pose some handling problems due to the abundance and size of the cobbles and small boulders. Oversized rock (greater than 8 inches in maximum dimension)that is encountered should be placed as fill in accordap.cewith the recommendations presented Appendix E . Fill Placement and Compaction The on-site soils are generally suitable for use as compacted fill provided they ar~ free of organic material, trash or debris, and rock fragments larger than 8 inches in maximum dimension. All fill soils should be brought to or above near-optimum moisture conditions and compacted in unifonn lifts to at least 90 percent relative compaction based on the . laboratory maximum dry density (ASTM Test ·Method D1557). Recommendations concemingthe placement of fill soils in deep canyons are presented in Section 4.1.5. Toe optimum iift thickness required to produce a unifonnly compacted fill will depend on the type and size of compaction equipment used. In general, fill should be placed in lifts not exceeding 8 inches in compacted thickness. Placement and compaction of fill should be perfonned irt general accordance with the current City of Carlsbad grading ordinances, sound construction practices, and the General Earthwork and Grading Specifications of Rough-grading presented in Appendix E. · -22- • .. . : ?' l - ' •.. · •, ' - f : t • l i u l'.J r . i i, ! r L f !' 4.1.5 4980160-003 Settlement of Deep Fill Soils Settlement of deep compacted fill soils occurs in two manners. One is short-term (elastic) settlement due to the weight of the overlying fill soils compressing and driving the water out of the soil structure. This typically.occurs during and within months after grading. The onsite silty and clayey soils compress more slowly than more granular soils. The second manner is long-term settlementthat typically occurs on the order of years after the fill soils are placed and is triggered by wetting of the soils due to irrigation precipitation. This occurs even to prope!lY compacted fill soils and even though canyon subdrains are constructed._Silty and clayey soils typically settle as much as two times the amount that sandy soils will. · Subsequent to removals of compressible soils, fills of up to approximately 45+ feet in thickness are planned on the site. Our experience and analysis indicates that potential settlement in these deep fiil areas may be as much as 1 to greater than 3 inches ( depending on compactive effort) and may take as long as l to 3 months ( or longer) to occur. Most of this settlement will likely occur during grading. Areas. having fill thicknesses is greater than 40 feet should be monitored (by the placement of settlement monuments which are _periodically surveyed) to determine if the short-term settlement of the fill soils has occurred. 4.1.6 . Cut/Fill Transition Conditions In order to reduce the potential for differential settlement in areas of cut/fill transitions, we . recommend the entire cut portion of the. transition building pads be overexcavated and replaced with properly compacted fill to mitigate the transition condition beneath the proposed residentiaLstructures. For building pads with a maximum fill depth of less_ than 20 feet, the overexcavation of.the cut portion of the building pad should be a minimum of 4 feet ·below the planned finish grade elevation of the pad. For building pads having a maximum fill depth of greater than 20 feet and for transition conditions beneath multi- family residential structures, overexcavation should be accomplished so that a fill thickness differential of no greater than 40 feet exists below the building pad. All overexcavations should extend laterally at least_ 10 feet beyond the building perimeter. 4.1. 7 Expansive Clayey Soils artd Selective Grading The laboratory test results and our professional experience with similar materials on sites in the vicinity indicate that the oh-site soils possess a low to high expansion potential. As a result, the presence of highly expansive materials within 5 vertical feet from finish grade will require special foundation and slab considerations. In general, this condition should be limited to finish grade pa(is in the Santiago and/or Point Loma Formations or where these materials are utilized as compacted fill within 5 to 10 feet of finish grade. -13- ·-01 . ;::::: ~ :=::::. ... -.;;-; ---= •. : " i ; ! I• I - ! r i. '" ! n ! ' I' l' I l L r " " . i r p f f J' i 1 f • J ' i • --• . ' l i 4.2 4980160-003 As an alternative to the special foundation re~ommendations provided in Section 4.4, building pads underlain by expansive soils may be overexcavated a minimum of 5 feet below finish pad grade and replaced with properly compacted fill possessing a lower expansion potential (i.e., the saridy soil of the weathered granitics, Lusardi and Santiago Formations and/or Terrace Deposits present on the site). Should this alternative be chosen, the overexcavationshould extend across the entire lot and be graded such that water does not accumulate beneath the structures (i.e. by providing a minimum 2 percent fall of the overexcavation bottom toward the street or existing fill). Slope Stability Based on the current site development plan, cut and fill slopes up to approximately 45 feet are planned. The following is provided base_d on our knowledge of site conditions for use in -the planning process. Additional recommendations may be wi:rrranted after final plans are developed. 4.2.1 Deep-Seated Stability • Fill Slopes The materials anticipated for use in fill slope grading will predominantly consist of on- site sandy and cobbly soils of the Terrace Deposits and Lusardi Formation, sandstones and siltstones of the .Point Loma and Santiago Formations, and soils derived form _ weathered granitic bedrock. Our analysis, assuming homogeneous slope conditions, and strength test results(from laboratory testing performed during the investigation of "this site and adjacent sites). indicates the anticipated fill slopes up to the -maximum proposed height of 45 feet will have a calculated factor of safety of 1.5 or greater with respect to potential, deep-seated failure (Appendix G). The proposed slopes should be constructed in accordance with the recommendations of this report, the attached General Earthwork and Grading Sp«;:cifications for Rough-grading (Appendix E), and City of Carlsbad grading code requirements. • CutSlopes Engineering analysis of the proposed 2: 1 cut slopes within the formational materials up to a maximum height of approximately 45 feet indicates the deep-seated stability of the slopes, in general, possess a static factor of safety in excess of 1.5. Howev~r, .. this analysis assumes no adverse geologic conditions are present. Because some on~ite sedimentary units may possess aqvetse conditions, additional investigation of the proposed cutslopes has been recommended once final grading plans are - developed. --- -24- • 1 .. • r • r :c l l. f • u r '' i t ': 1 L 1 r f""\l lJ ~ f. i.f • r d 4.3 4.2.2 4980160-003 During grading, we recommend that the geotechnical consultant document and geologically map all excavations including cut slopes during grading. The purpose of this majiping is to substantiate the · geologic conditions assumed in otir analyses. Additional investigation and stability analysis may be required if unanticipated or adverse conditions are encountered_ during site development. • Stability for Temporary Backcut Slopes Durin·g Grading The temporary backcut slopes that will be cre1:1ted during removal of unsuitable materials or construction of stabilizationcfills should have acceptable temporary factors of safety during grading. However, since there is still a small risk of slope instability, the possibility of temporary cut slopes failures may be reduced by: (1) keeping the time between cutting ·and filling operations to a minimum, (2) limiting the maximum length of back cut slppes exposed at any one time, and (3) cutting the temporary slopes at not steeper than 1-1/2: 1 inclinations in lo¢ations of adverse geologic conditions and 1: I inclinations in other locations. In critical areas, we may recommend a geologist/co~tractor'srepresentativeobserve the backcut for ~igns of instability during excavatjon. It is of utmost importance to schedule the earthwork sequence such that the time between removal and recompaction is reduced to a minimum. Full-time geologic . inspection should be performed during backcut excavation, not only to confirm the geologic conditions but also to provide early warning of incipient failure of the temporary exc·avations and to allow in-construction reaction to accommodate such failures and keep their occurrence to a minimum . Surficial Stability Surficia:l stability of the 2:J (or-flatter) fiil and cut slopes·were evaluated (Appendix G). Our calculations-indicate a factor of safety in excess of 1.5 for surficial stability under a 3- foot steady state seepage·. Howevir, due to the presence of potentially adverse groundwater conditions, we· have recommended stability fills to repJace the existing slopes where seepage conditions are present (such as the cut slope on the east side of Lots 160 through 167). Control of Ground Water and Surface Waters Ground water was encountered in our exploratory Borings B-1 and B-3 and previous borings excavated by others along the proposed College Boulevard alignment. Surface water was also observed in the natural seepage/spring areas and adjacent drainage channels in the eastern portion of the site. The !,ipproximate depths and· elevations of the ground water are depicted on the boring and trench logs (Appendix B). The water table encountered along the College Boulevard alignment is _generally perched groundwater present along the base of the alluvial soils in the main drainage. Seasonal fluctuations of surface water and ground water from those reported herein should be expected. -25- •• ), ;; •:-. . •. ··=:: .l . ' J H I 1 i .. : } I • l. L r r I " [J it :··: d ' . . r 4980 I 60-003 Ground water is likely present in the eastern portion of the site due to natural seepage/spring activity in this area. The contro_l of ground water in a ~illside development is essential to reduce the potential . for undesirable surface flow, hydrostatic pressure and the adverse effects of ground water on sfope stability. We recommend that measures be taken to properly finish grade the site· such that drainage water is directed away from top-of-slopes and away from proposed structures. No ponding of water should be pennitted. Drainage design is within the purview of the design civil engineer. Even with these provisions, our experience indicates. that shallow ground water/perched ground water conditions can develop in areas where no such ground water conditions existed prior to site development, especially in areas wher~ a subst~ntial_ increase in surface water infiltration results . from landscape irrigation. We recommend that an engineering geologist be present during grading qperations to observe and record possible future seepage areas and provide-field recommendations for mitigation of future potential seepage. 4.3.1 ·. CanyonSubdrains 4.3.2 In order to help reduce the potential fot ground water accumulation in the proposed fill areas, we recommend subdrains be installed in the tributary drainages prior· to fill placement: Specific ·subdrain recommendations can be made upon our review of the final site grading plans. Details for subdrain construction are provided in the attached General Earthwork and Grading Specifications (Appendix-E). The actual need and/or location of subdrainage should be based on the evaluation of the configuration of the canyon bottoms. by the geotechnic1:1.l consultant after the removal of compressible soils have been . completed. However, the locations of proposed canyon subdrains are presented on the GeotechnicalMap (Plate 1). The installed subdrains should be surveyed for alignment and grade by a representative of the _project civil engineer. Sufficient time should be allowed for the surveys prior to commencement of filling over the subdrain. The subdrain outlets should .be .. installed to discharge water into positive drainage devices ( e.g. stonn drain boxes, natural canyon bottoms, etc.). Stability Fill Subdrains Subdrains should be provided. in the stability fills constructed on the site in order to minimize slope instability. The subdrains should be placed along the heel of the stability fill key across the. entire length of the stability fill. Vertical drains on the backcut may be recommended in areas of seepage. The subdrains should be placed and constructed in accordance with the recomin~ndations presented in Appendix E. -26- '. •·:· ~ - :;· •·:_ .. . :,, r- J • T· ii, u r I [. 4980160-003 4.3.3 Cut Slope Seepage Conditions Due to existing seepage zones in the eastern portion of the site (i.e. in the vicinity of Lots 90 through 92 and the street to the east) or due to the anticipated presence of fractures in the granitic bedrock and/or contacts between relatively permeable formational soils overlying rela~ively impermeable formational soils being exposed in cut slopes on the site~ groundwater seepage conditions are likely at these locations. Slopes exposing these ·conditions (especially in the vicinity of the existing seepage areas-or when.the area at the -top <;>f the slope will be irrigated and/or where residences will. be located at the toe-of- . slope) should be.evaluated by the geotechn:ical consultant to determine if some type of subdrain system should be placed to intercept the groundwater seepage. Recommendations to mitigate the seepage conditions include installing a toe-of-slope subdrain system, installing a subdrain system at or slightly-below the contact between the permeable and impermeable materials or by replacing-the slope with a stability fill (such as the replacementfill/toe-of-slopesubdra1n recommended along the cut slope on the east side of Lots 90 through 92 and the proposed adjacent street as indicated-on Plate 1 ). 4.4 · PreliminaryFoundation_Design Considerations It is not currently-known what type of multi-familystructutes (if any) will be proposed at the site, as : a result, we have only provided preliminary design recommendations for single-family residential · str_uctures. Additiona~ recommendation~ can be provided as needed. · The proposed foundations and slabs <>f the single-family residential structures should be ·designed in accordlitnCe with structural considerations and rec~mmen.dations presented herein. Since soils ranging from low to high expansion potential are anticipated, as well as lots haviQ.g a significant fill differential thickness, we provide the following foundation design considerations on Table 4. . . . -27- • . t • y , ii: '. . - . -' ' l " •• r r I . i ~ u j - i ·• i l u ! r, ! t • J I 4980160-003 " · Table4 I Foundation Type. Summary . Differential FiU Thickness Foundation Expansion Potential . Across Each Lot Type less than 20 feet Conventionally Reinforced Foundation Very Low to _Low (see Section 4.4.1) or Post-Tensioned (less than 51 per UBC F<:mndation (~ee Section 4.4.2) Standard 18-2) greater than 20 feet Post-Tensioned Foundation (see Section 4.4.2) .. . . less than 20 feet Post-Tensioned Foundation Medium to Very High (see Section 4.4.2) (greater than 50 per UBC Standard 18-2) greater than 20 feet Post-Tensioned Foundation · (see ~ection 4.4.2) 4.4.1 Conventio1:1ally-Reinforced Foundation Design Foundation Design Conventionally reinforced foundations should be designed and constructed in accordance with the recommendations contained in Table 5 based on the expansion potential of the lots ( which needs to be detennined upon the co:r:npletion of grading). Conventionally reinforced foundations are only recommended for lots where the pad finish grade soils have an expansion index less than or equal to 50 (per UBC Standard 18-2) and a differential fill thickness of less than 20 feet. The vapor barrier reco~mended in Table 5 should be sealed at all penetrations and laps. Moisture vapor transmission may be additionally reduced by use of concrete additives. Moisture harriers can retard but not eliminate moisture vapor ·movement from the underlying soil_s up through the slabs. We recommend that the floor coverings installer test the moisture vapor flux rate prior to att~mpting applications of the flooring. ·"Breathable" floor coverings should be considered i:f the vapor flux rates are high. A slipsheet or equivalent should be utilized above the concrete. slab if crack-sensitive floor coverings (such as ceramic tiles, etc.) are to be placed directly on the conc_!ete slab. -28- •.. : :~ ••• ·r : r ; L ~j H i ~ ! r i' ! ' l L r r '. i.' . . . r : f: i.} ! f l. }; 4980160-003 Our experience indicates that use of reinforcementin slabs and foundations will generally reduce the potential for drying and shrinkage cracking. However, some cracking should be expected as the concrete cures. Minor cracking is considered normal; however, it is often aggravated by a high water content, high concrete temperature at the time of placement, small nomin~l aggregat~ size, and rapid moisture loss due to hot, dry and/ or windy weather conditions during · placement and curing. Cracking due to temperature and moisture fluctuations can also be expected. The use of low water content concrete can redu·ce the potential for shrinkage cracking. The slab subgrade soils .underlying the conv~ntional foundation systems should be presoaked as indicated in Section 4.4.3 prior to placement of the moisture barrier and slab concrete. -29- . r ••• ' . r r u l -I,. ! r i ' f t u ! T j.1 .•. . . ' I t 4.6 4980 I 60-003 For design purposes, the recommended equivalent fluid pressure for each case for walls founded above the static ground water and backfilled with onsite soils of low expansion potential, or select granularsoils having sand equivalentof30 or more is provided ih Table 9. Use of onsite expansive soils (soils having an expansion potential greater than 90) as wall backfill is not recommended. The equi_valent fluid pressure values assume free .. draining con~itions. 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. All 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 E . . . .. Table9 Lateral Earth Pressures Equivalent Fluid Weight (pct) Onsite Soils of Select Granular Backfill, Having Sand Expansion Index Less Equivalent of 30 or More than50 Conditions Level 2:1 Slope Level 2:1 Slope -Active 45 60 32 46 At-Rest 65 80 50 72 Passive 300 150 ---- All excavations should. be made in accorda,nce with the most current OSHA requirements. The granular and native backfill soils should be compacted to. at least 90 percent relative compaction (based on ASTM Test Method D 1557). The granular fill should extend horizontally to a minim,um · distance equal to one-half the wall height behin~ the walls. The walls should be constructed and backfilled as ·soon as possible after backcut excavation. Prolonged expo·sure of backcut slopes may result in some localized slope instability. Foundations for retaining walls in competent formational soils or properly compacted fill should be embedded at least 18 inches below lowest adjacent grade. At this depth, an allowable bearing capacityof2,000 psfmay be assumed. Pavement Design Final ·pavement designs will be calculated utilizing R-value tests taken on the street subgrade soils upon completion-of the street improvement operations. The upper 12 inches of ~ubgrade soils should be scarified, moisture conditioned and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent relative compaction based ori ASTM Test Method D1557. If fill is required to reach subgrade design grade, fill placement should be performed in accordance with the recommendations presented in Section 4. I. The aggregate base material should be compacted to a minimum of95 percent relative compaction. -35- •-:-· .. -. Appendix A ···:_· • ··-· l I I f Li 1 r ; : l L l 1 u d 4.7 4.8 4.9 4980160-003 Surface Drainage and Lot Maintenance Positive drainage of surface water away from structur~s is very important. No water should be allowed to pond adjacent to buildings or the top of slopes. Positive drainage may be accomplished by providing drainage away from buildings at a gradient of at least 2 percent for a distance of at least s· fifet, and further maintained by a swale of drainage path at a gradient of at least 1-percent. Where limited by 5-foot side y;uds, drainage should be directed away from foundations for a minimum of 3 feet and into a collective swale or pipe··system. Where necessary, drainage paths may be shortened by use of ~rea drains and collector pipes. Eave gutters also help reduce water infiltration into the subgtade soils if the downspouts are properly connected to appropriate outlets. Planters with open bottoms adjacent to buildings should be avoided, if possible. Planters should not be designed adjacent to buildings unless provisions for drainage,-such ~s catch basins and pipe drains, are made. Homeowners should be reminded of the responsibilities of hillside residences, i.e., the maintenance of proper lot drainage; the undertaking of property· improvements in accordance with sound engineering practice; and the proper maintenance of vegetation, including prudent lot and slope irrigation. · Graded Slopes It is recommended that all .graded slopes within the development be planted with drought-tolerant ground cover vegetation as soon as practical to protect against erosion by reducing runoff velocity. Deep-rooted vegetation should also be established to protect against surficial slumping. ·Oversteepening of existing slopes should be avoided during fine grading and construction unless supported by appropriately designed retaining structures. We recommend terrace drains on the slopes be designed by the civil engineer and be constructed in ac¥ordance with current City of Carlsbad specifications. Design of surface drainage provisions is within the p~~iew of theprojectcivil engineer. · Settlement Monitoring We recommend that fills placed above saturated alluvium and fill areas greater than 40 feet in depth be monitored (by the placement of settlement monuments upon completion of rough-grading and periodic· surveying) until primary settlement is determined to be essentially complete. Preliminary settlement monument locations should be determined following a review of the final site grading plans by the project geotechnical consultant. Construction of settlement-sensitive structures in areas of deep fill or fill over saturated soils shoqld be postponed until anticipated settlement is within tolerable limits based on the analysis of the geotechnical consultant. -36- • • .i, • r t . l f i t 4980 I 60-003 5.0 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS · The recommendations provided in this report are based on subsurface conditions disclosed by widely spaced borings and trenches by Leighton and Associates and others and by limited geotechnical analysis. The interpob1ted subsurface con~itions should be checked· in the field during construction by a representative of Leighton and Associates. We recommend that all cut areas and cut slopes be geologically mapped for the presence of potentially adverse geologic conditions and potential ground water seepage zones by an engineering geologist from Leighton and Associates during grading. A representative of this firm. should observe all grading operations .so that construction is performed in accordance with the recommendations of this report . -37- r-w--.. -.-.. \tr--:-.. -·~ c ..... :.::::: ~ .---...-=--, ...,.. __ ,.._ . ...,., ar-i· ,,ti., C:"'r~ .--·---, r.t,t ..... ~. '" I:" ~ .... ..,.j .... .,. .. ,, tr·· -~ .~""" ~-··~ 4980160-003 TABLES MINIMUM FOUNDATION AND SLAB DESIGNRECOMMENDATIONSFOR CONVENTIONALL YREINFORCED FOUNDATIONS · I-Story Footings (See Note 1) 2-Story Footings (See Note 1) Minimum Footing Width · Garage Door Grade Beam (SeeNote2) Living Area Floor Slabs (See Notes 3, 4 and 6) Garage Floor Slabs (See Notes 4, 5 and 6) Presoaking of-Living Area and'Garage Slabs Allowable Bearing Capacity (one-third·increase for shorHenn loading). Notes: U.B.C. Expansion Index 0-20 Very Low Expansion All fqotings 12" deep, Reinforcement for continuous footings: one No. 4 bar tpp and bottom. All footings 18" deep: Reinforcement for continuousfootings: one No. 4 bar · top and bottom. Continuous: 12" for I-story· Continuous: 15" for 2-story Isolated column: 24" (18" deep minimum) A grade beam 12" wide x 12" deep (18" deep for 2-story) should be provided across the garage entrance. · Minimum4" thick slab. No. 3 rebars lit 18 inches-or No. 4 rebars at24 inches on center each way at midheight. 2" clean sand over IO-mil moisture barrier. Minimum 4" thick on 2" sand base over·moisture barrier on pad. No. 3 rebars at 18-inches orNo.4 rebars at24 inches on center each way atmidheight. Slab should be quarter-sawn. Near optimum to a deptl! of 6". 2,000 pounds per square foot (one-third increase for short teint.loading) U.B.C. Expansion Index 21-50 Low Expansion All footings 12" deep. Reinforcement for .continuous footings: one No. 4 bar top and bottom. All footings 18" deep. Reinforcement for continuous footings: one No. 4 bar top and bottom: Continuous: 12"·for I-story Continuous: 15" for 2-story Isolated column: 24" (18" deep minimum) A grade beam 12" wide x 12" deep (18" deep for 2-story) should be provided across the garage entrance. Minimum 4" thick slab. No. 3 rebars at 18 inc'1es or No. 4 rebars at 24 inches on center each way·at midheight. 2" clean sand over IO mil moisture barrier over 2" clean sand. Minimum 4" thick on 2" sand base over moisture barrier on pad: No. 3 rebars at 18 inches or No. 4·rebar_s at 24 inches on center each way at midheight. Slab should be quarter-sawn. 1.2 times the optimum moisture content to a depth of 12". 2,000 pounds per square foot · (one-third increase for short term loading) (I) Depth of interior or exterior footing to be measured from .lowest adjacent finish grade or drainage swale flow line elevation. (2) The base of the grade beam should be at the same elevation as that of the adjoining footings. (3) Living area slabs should be tied to the footings as directed by the structural engineer. ( 4) I 0-mil Visqueen sheeting or equivalents are acceptable. All laps and penetrations should be sealed (5) Garage slabs should be isolated from stem wall footings with a minimum 3/8" felt expansion joint. (6) Sand base should have a Sand Equivalent of 30 or greater ( e.g. washed concrete sand). ·--:·. . r . . . -'- : ! . i r . t • L • f : f . ~ 4.4._2 4980160-003 Post-Tensioned Foundation Design We recommend post-tensioned slabs be designed in accordance with the following design parameters presented in Table 6 and criteria of the current edition of the Uniform Building Code. The post-tensioned foundations on the lots should be designed in accordance with lot-specific expansion potential and anticipated long-term differential settlement (if applicable )which will be provided at the completion of grading . In addition, lots with greater than approximately20 feet of differential fill thickness should be design~d for future, long-term hydroconsolidationsettlementwhen water enters the fill. We anticipate that a post-tensioned slab system may be a more cost-effective method to tolerate the above noted differential settlement; however, we can review other properly designed foundation systems, if requested. Table6 Post-Tensioned Foundation Design Recommendations for Expansive Soils ExpansiQn Index (UBC Standard 18-2) Very Low to Medium High Very High Design Criteria (0-90) (91-130) (131 -200) Edge Moisture Center Lift: 5.5 feet 5.5 feet 5.5 feet Variation, em Edge Lift: 4.0 feet 4.5 feet 5.0 feet Differential Center Lift: 2.5 in~hes 4.0 inches 4.7 inches · Swell,Ym Edge Lift:· , 0.8 inches 1.0 inches 1.5 inches Differential Settlement: 1/2 inch 1/2 inch 1/2 inch Allowable Bearing Capacity: 2,000psf 2,000psf 2,000psf The post-tensioned foundations and slabs should be designed in accordance with structural · considerations.Continuous footings (ribs or thickened edges) with a minimum width of 12 inches and a minimum depth of 12 inches below adjacent grade may be designed for a maximum allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot if founded into competent formationai soils or properly" compacted fill soils. The allowable bearing capacity may be increased by one-third for short-term loading such as wind or seismic forces. Where the foundation is within 3 feet (horizontally)of adjacent drainage swales, the adjacent footing· (thickened edge or ·rib) should be embedded a minimum depth of 12 inches below the swale flowljne . -31- • . •. t"'· • f •. ,· . f ! J r· ' . i n ! l L J i'l' ' . r. : ~ • j. • . 1 4.4.3 4980160-003 Slabs should be underlain by a minimum of 2 inches of clean sand (sand equivalent greater than 30) which is in turn underlain by a l 0-mil vapor barrier and an additional 2 inches of clean sand. The vapor barrier should be sealed at all penetrations and laps. MQisture vapor transmission may be additionally reduced by use of concrete additives. Moisture barriers can retard; but not eliminate moisture vapor movement from the underlying soils up through the slabs. We recommend that the floor covering in.Staller test the moisture·vapor flux rate prior to attempting applications of the flooring. "Breathable" floor coverings should be considered if the vapor flux rates ·are high. A slipsheet or equivalent should be utilized above the concrete slab if crack-sensitive floor coverings (such as ceramic tiles, etc.)are to be placed directly on the concrete slab. Our experience indicates that use of reinforcement in slabs and foundations will generally reduce the potential for drying and shrinkage cracking. However, some cracking should be expected as the concret~ cures. Minor cracking is considered normal; however, it is often aggravated by a high water/cement ratio, high concrete temperature at the time of ,piacement, small nominal aggregate size, and rapid moisture loss due to hot, dry and/or windy weather conditions during placement and curing. Cracking due to temperature and n10istur~ffluctuations can al~o be expected. The use of low slump concrete (not exceeding 4 to 5 inches at the time of placement) can. reduce the potential for shrinkage cracking and the action of tensioning the tendons can close small shrinkage cracks. In addition to the careful control of water/cement ratios and slump of concrete, application of 50 percent of the design post-tensioning load within three to four days of slab pour is found to be an . effective·method of reducing the cracking potential. The slab subgrade_ soils underlying the post-tensioned foundation systems should be presoaked as indicated in Section 4.4.3 prior to placement of the moisture barrier and slab concrete. Moisture Conditioning The slab subgrade soils underlying both conventionally-reinforced.or post-tensioned foundation systems should be presoaked in accordance with the recommendations presented in Table 7 prior to placement of the moisture barrier and slab concrete. The subgrade soil moisture contep.t should be checked by a representative of Leighton and Associates prior to slab construction. -32- •. -.- . r [ . " l' j ,· .. •• j 4980160-003 Table 7 Minimum Presaturation Recommendations for Subgrade Soils Underlying Slaps Expansion-Index (per UBC Standard 18-2) Presaturation Very Low Low Medium High Very High Criteria (0-20) (21-50) (51-90) (91-130) (greaterthan 131) -Minimum Presoaking 6 12 18 24 24 Dep~h(in inches) Minimum near 1.2 times 1.3 times l.4times 1.5 times optimum Recommended optimum optimum optimum optimum moisture Moisture Content moisture moisture moisture moisture Presoaking or moisture conditioning may be achieved in a. number of ways, but based on our professional experience, we have found that minirpizingthe moisture loss of pads that have been completed (by periodic wetting to keep the upper portion of the pad from drying out) and/or bermingth~ lot and flooding if for a short petiod_oftinie (days to a few weeks) are some of the more efficient ways t9 meet the presoaking requirements. If flooding is performed, a couple of days to let the upper portion of the pad dry out and form a crust so equipment can be utilized should be anticipated. 4.4.4 Foundation Setbacks We recommend a minimum horizontal setback distance from the face of slopes for all structural foundations, footings, and other settlement-sensitive structures as indicated on Table 8. This distance is measured from the -outside bottom edge of the footing, horizontally to the slope face and is based on the slope height ~nd type of soil. However, the foundation setback distance may be revised by the geotechnical consultant on a case- by-case basis if the geotechnical conditions are differentthan anticipated. -33- . '1' •·.::· , r j -t , r n r r lr t ~ ••• ,, i.J 4980160-003 Table 8 .. Minimum Structural Setback from Slope Faces· Slope Height · Minimum· Recommended Foundation Setback less than 15 feet 7 feet greater than 15 feet H/2, where H is slope height; not to exceed 10 feet Please note that the soils within the structural setback area possess poor lateral stability, and .improvements (such as retaining walls, sidewalks, fences, pavements, etc.) constructed within this setback area may be subject to lateral movement and/or differential settlement. Potential distress to such improvements may be mitigated by providing a deepened footing or a pier and grade beam foundation system to support the improvement. The deepened footing should meet the setback as described above . 4.5 . . Lateral Earth Pressure and Retaining Wall Design 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 he designed for "active" pressure. If the wall cannot yield under the applied load, the shear strength of the soil cannot be mobilized and the earth pressure will be higher. Such walls should be designed for "at rest" conditions. If a structure moves toward the soils, the resulting resistance developed by the soil is the "passive" resistance .. To design an unrestrained wall, such as cantilever wall, the active earth pressure may be used. For a restrained retaining wall, such as a basement wall, the at-rest pressure should be used. Further, for · sliding resistance, the friction coefficient of 0.35 may be used at the concrete and soil interfac·e. In combining the total lateral resistance, the passive pressure or the frictional resistance should be reduced by 50 percent. Wall footings may be designed in accordance with structural considerations. The passive resistance value may be increased by one-third when considering loads of short duration including wind or seismic loads. The horizontal distance between foundation elements providing passive resistance should be a minimum of three times the depth of the elements to allow full development of this passive pressure. The total qepth .of retained earth for design ~f cantilever walls should be the vertical distance below the ground surface measured·at the wall face for stem design or 111easured at the heel of the footing for overturning and sliding. All retaining structures should be provided with a drainage blanket or drains ( as indicated in Appendix E) and appropriately waterproofed. Surcharge loading effects from adjacent ·structures should be evaluated by the geotechnical and structural engineers. -34- ~---.·. l111 '· ....:........_ ''~ I .;.J, _-;.;i • •• , . • APPENDIX A REFERENCES 4980160-003 Anderson~ J.Q., Rockwell, T.K., and Agn~w, D.C., 1989, ~ast and Pos~ible Future' Earthquakes of Significance to the San Diego Region EarthquakeSpectra, Vol. 5, p. 299-335. a.lake, ThomasF-., 1993,EQFAULT, Version2.0l. ---.-1993,FRISK89, Version2.0l. '-, Bucco la, 1999, Cantarini 100-Scale Exhibit, undated, received pecember 8, 1999. ---, 2000, 100-Scalt~-Preliminary Tentative Tract Map, Cantarini Property, Carlsbad, California, .-,undated, received Septembed2, 2000. · Hannan, D., 1975, ~aulting in the Oceanside, Carl'sbad and Vista Areas, Northern San Diego County, Caiifomia in Ross, A., and Dowlens, R.J., eds., Studies on the Geology of Camp Pendleton and Western San Diego County, California: 'San Diego Association of Geologists, pp. 56- 59. ' Hart, E.W., 1997; Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zones Act of 1972 with Index to Special Studies Zones Maps: Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Special Publication 42 . .Intema~ional Conference of Building Officials· (ICBO), 1997, Uniform Building Code, Volume I - Administrative, Fire-and Life-Safety, arid Field Inspection Provisions, Volume II -.. Structural Engineering' Design .. Provisions;· and Vohime III -Material, Testing· ·and Inst~llationProvision, ICBO. Jennings, C. W., 1994, Fault Activity Map of California-and Adjacent Areas; California Division of Mines . . a,nd Geology~ Geologi_c D~ta Map 6, Scale 1 :750,000. . -Leighton and. Associates, lnp., 1998, Prelimin~ Geotechnical Feasibility and Limited Subsurface Investigation, Proposed Residential Development of the Cantarini Property, North~ast of . the Intersection of .m C~mino Real and College. Boulevard, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 4980160-001,dateci July 28, 1998. , · ~---, 2000, Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, Cantarini Property, Carlsbad, California,. Project No. 4980160-00J,dated February 3, 2000. ·, . ---,In-house Unpul?lished and Published Data. Lindvall, S.C., and Rockwell, T.K., 1995, Holoc¢ne Activity of the Rose Canyon Fault Zone in San Diego, Califomia:JournalofGeophysicalResearch, V. 100, No. B12, p. 24, 124-24, 132. Reichle, M.S., and Kahle, J.E., 1990, Planning Scenario for a Major Earthquake, San Diego-Tijuana Metropolitan Area: CalifomiaDivision of Mines and Geology, Special Publication 100 . A-1 •( {·: '. ~ ••• 4980160-003 APPENDIX A (Continued) Rockwell, T.K., and Lindvall, S.C., 1990, Holocene Activity of the Rose Canyon Fault in San _Diego, California, Based on Trench Exposures and Tectonic Geomorphology; Geological Society of America, Abstractswith Programs.- -~-, 1991, Minimum Holocene Slip Rate for the Rose Canyon Fault in San Diego, California in Environmental Perils, San Diego Region: _San Diego A_ssociation of Geologists, p. 37-46. Seed, H.B., and Idriss, I.M., 1982, Ground Motions and Soil Liquefaction During Earthquakes, Monogram Series, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Berkeley, California. Slemmons, D.B., and Depolo, C.M., 1986, Evaluation of Active Faulting and Associated Hazards in Active Tectonics (Studies in Geophysics): N3:tional Academy Press, p. 45-62. Southern California Soil and Testing, Inc., 1988, Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, Sycamore Creek II, College Boulevard~ Carlsbad, California, Project No. 8821121, dated September9, 1988. - ---, 1998, Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Iiwe.st~gation, Rancho Carlsbad, Phase II, College Boulevard, Carlsbad, Califotnia,ProjectN0.9811280, dated December 4, 1998. Tan, S.S., and Giffen, D.G., 1975, Landslide Hazards in the.Northern Port of the San Diego Metropolitan Area, San Diego County, California, Landslide Hazard Identification Map No. 35, Division of Mines and Geology, Open-File Report No. 95-04. Tan, S.S., and Kennedy, M.P., 1996, Geologic Maps -of the Northwestern Part of San Diego County, California, Plate 1, Division of Mines and Geology 96-02. Treim~n, J .A., 1984, The Rose Canyon Fault Zone: A Review and Analysis, California Division of Mines and Geology, Fqnded by Federal Management Agency Co.operative Agreement EMF-83- K-0148. ----, 1990, Rose Canyon Fault .Zone, San Diego County, California: California Division of Mines and Geology, Fault Evaluation.Report FER-21:6 pp. 6-8, and Portion of 1 Plate. ---, 1993, The Rose Canyon Fault Zone, Southern California: California Division of Mines and Geology, Open-File Report 93-2, 45p. · Weber, F.H., 1982, Recent Slope Failures, Ancient Landslides and Related Geology of the Northern-Central _ Coastal Area, San Diego County, California: California Division of Mines and _Geology, Open File Report 82-12LA, 77p. Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities, 1995, Seismic Hazards in Southern California: Probable Earthquakes, 1994 to 2024: Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, V. 95, No. 2, p. 379-439. . A-2 ••••• '. r:' \·,· •,_._ • 4980160-003 APPENDIX A (Continued) Ziony, J.L, and Yerkes, RF., 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, p. 43-91. AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS Date Source Flight PhotoNo(s) 4/11/53 USDA AXN-8M 69 and 70 A-3 AppendixB •:; . • GEOTECHN,fCAL BORING LOG KEY Date -----------Sheet _1_ of -1.._ Project No. Project ----------'· KE=Y;;:;...;;;.TO=·=B;..;:O;.,;;:.RI=N::..:.G.:=:..:;;LOG=-'·-G_RAP ___ H_I_CS"'--_-----" . Drilling Co • • ·'iole Diameter Elevation Top of Hole +/- . C 0 o" 0 .c"' z -.,_;. -fll +-OJ ++-.cm QI OJ ~OJ 0. OJ 0.0 + QI QI 111..1 0 -0. !~ c~ (.. z e (.!) Ill lJJ en 0 w ~ A 'A 4 4 A A 4 A "'"' ... """ I 5 ½II . r .. :-.. · « & r-2 .. .",I ... • :-:-:-:• .. !::-: ; ::; : : 10 :. =. :;. ::::' l .. ·. .. ·.· .. . . ,. ... ~ .. :,;. '" P'"!oq ~-" -~ l 'l C O' · • 15 . . -)i \~ ~ '/ ··~ -=-.. ......-.-. --........ --~ ==-~ ----i,.---- 20 i-,---- ru0 0 017 ",,. 0 ~ "~· '· \ ' 1.,. -I ~~ .... ,== -Ill~//, 25-- f:t:t~ - - - 505AC11/77) Type of Rig Drive Weight --------'--------------,.--Drop _in. ft. Ref. or Datum :n ,.... •,.,. + +-QI~ Ill • GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION -lllcn 1110 (.. V . 111,.... :,.,_ II! • 3& C&f--u 0 OJ 0 +-c (.J • co. Ill QI -r.. _en a:l QI V -+ Logged By ~c . 0.. :n ·-~ (.. 0 ~v Sampled By C u Inorganic clay-of low-to medium plasticity; gravelly clay; sandy clay; silty clar. lean CL clay - CH Inorganic clay of high plasticity; fat clay OL-OH Orgariic·clay, silt or siltyclay-dayeysilt mixtures I- ML Inorganic silt; vci:y fine sand; silty or clayey fine sand; clayey silt with low plasticity ndicatc MH Inorganic silt; diatomaceous fine sandy or silty soils; ·elastic silt SIT Sample CL-ML Low pl~ticity clay to silt mixture .. rn,dicate i ML-SM Sandy silt. to silty sand mixture Cal Sample I- CL-SC Sandy clayto clayey sand mixture .2.. ·•dcatea gr~ SC.SM Qayey sand to silty sand mixture water levelat time o1 drlii,g SW Well graded sand;.gravclly sand, little or no fines SP Poorly graded' sand; gravelly sand, little or no fines SM Silty sand; poorly graded sand-6ilt mixture SC Qaycy sand; poorly graded sand-clay mixture ... GW Well graded gravel; _grilvcl-6and mixture, little or no fines GP Poorly graded gravel; gravcl-6and mixture, little or no fines GM Silty gravct gravcl-6attd-6ilt mixture GC Qaycy grave~ gravcl-6attd-clay mixture Sandstone Siltstone Caystonc Brcccia (angular gravel and cobbles or matrix-6Upported conglomerate) Conglomerate (rounded gravel and cobble, clast-6upported) Igneous granitic or granitic type rock Metavolcanic or metamorphic rock Artificial or man-made fill Asphaltic conmte Portland Cement Concrete '" LEIGHTON &ASSOCIATES \ :. •• APPENDIX B LOGS BY LEIGHTON -AND ASSOCIATES OF SMALL-DIAMETER BORINGS AND TRENCHES . B-7 T-29 (7 BORINGS) (29 TRENCHES) Date ---,--,--=11=-·=18c...;-9:;..::9;__~~ Project • Drilling Co. , . Hole Diameter .,.. ___ ..:::8:...!i~n~. __ Elevation Top of Hole +/-86 . C a,,.._ 0 0 .r:.= ·-Ill Z· :;::+-+-+--.r:. 0) QJ QJ Ida, a. QJ a.a +->QJ QI QI Id...! 0 -a. Ol0 00 '-z -(.!) e tll llJ· CJ) 0 ; .. '.Bag-1 .... 85 -@0'-5' ... .. '. -' .. .. . . . 1 -. .. .. ... -.. . ·.·· .. . . 5-... ' . .. 2 80 -.. . ' . . . -. : .; ... , ,-,; . -~-3 --:;-;~ -:,:·:ia 10-,-:=::~ -:-r0 4 75 -;)~ -:;:;rar ·-·0 5 --~ -~~ 15-:=-:~ -:-ra 6 70 . -::::~ -:::~ ·.·,~ . .._.. -... · -7 -... ... -.. . . . . . 20-.. .. a .. . . . . . 65 -· . . ... . . -. . . . . ..:..: ~' ~ : : ~ 9 . · .. ~ ... ~ . . 25--~--.. 10 60 -.. ... ~' : : : -. .. . ',. "GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-1 / Sheet _1 _ of 2 Cantarini Property Project No. 4980160-001 F&C Drilling Type of Rig Hollow-Stem Auger Drive Weie;ht --------~14..:.:0~p~ou=n::.:d==s'-----------Drop .1!L_ in. ft Ref or Datum See Geotechnical Map ::n ,,..... ui,,..... +-QI~ GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION +-·-Ill • Ill 0 II),,-.. '-'-" Id~ 30 C't-::,+--u oLL QI 0 t;c (.) . oa. -c.. ·-QI _en al QI '-" o+-Logged By AXT ::n ·-::5 0.. :C C '-0 o,._,, Cl (.) CJ) Sampled By AXT SM QUATERNARY ALLUVIUM (Oal} @0': Silty very fine SAND; dark brown, dry to moist, loose I- ' I- 20 ,_. @3': Silty, fine SAND; dark brown to brown, dry to moist, medium dense, rootlets common throughout, few fine gravels ..... I- 38 107.7 7.1 @6': Silty fine to medium SAND; dark brown, moist, medium dense, slightly '- porous ~ 22 SM/SC I- @8.5': Silty fine to medium SAND with clay; dark brown to reddish brown, L-moist, medium·dertse I- 45 111.6 14.5- I-@ 11': Silty fine to medium SAND with clay; red-brown, moist, medium dense, slightly porous I- 18 I- SC @ 13,.5': Clayey fme to medium SAND; red-brown, moist, medium dense, slightly _ porous I- 45 103.9 18.6. SM/SC Silty fme to medium.SAND with clay; brown to red-brown, moist, medium -@ 16': dense, slightly porous '- Silty fine-to coarse-grained SAND; red-brown, moist to wet, medium 23 SM @ 17.5': ~ dense, possible perched groundwater condition '- L- 59 120.0 11.6 '-@21': Silty fine-to coarse-grained SAND with gravel; brown, wet, medium.dense I- 27 SM/SC @ 22.5': _Silty fme SAND with clay; brown to red-brown, moist to wet, medium '--dense . - fu7sc-TERTIARY SANIIAQQ FORMATION <Tsa) --------86/8" 94.4 26.7 @25': · Silty very fine SANDSTONE; dark brown to brown, moist, very dense, ... · thin beds of silt visible ... i ~ 11 85/10" @ 27.5': Ground water encountered @ 27 .5': Silty very fine SANDSTONE; dark brown to brown and orange-brown, ,_ • -... \ moist, very dense, few scattered subrounded gravels It f - ~fl SOSA( 11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-1 Date ___ __.;l::..:1:...;-1::..::8:....:-9~9:....-__ Project • . Drilling Co. . Hole Diametei: 8 in .. Elevation Top of Hole +/-86 ft Sheet 2 of 2 Cantarini _Property Project No. 4980160-001 F&C Drilling Typ_e of Rig Hollow-Stem Auger Drive Weight -------~-=1....:.40~p-"-o=un=ds=---------Dr~p .lQ__ in. Ref or Datum See Geotechnical Map . :::n ,,..._ ui ,,..._ C +-QJ~ ·O 0 0 + ·-Ill • GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION ·-""' .er. ·-IJ) z IJ) 0 Ill'"' L V 111CJ? ...... ++-.ctn QJ 30 C'f-::,+- I'll QJ a. QJ 0.0 +-QJ oU. QJ 0 1;ic -u > QJ QJ QI -u . ~0 o.._ C'U....J 0 a. -L 00. ·-QJ. _(/) '-z s '° QJ V o+ Logged By AXT V (!) :::n ·-::5 UJ I'll a.. L ;cC CJ) 0 . o,...,, Sampled By AXT Cl u (/) . 30 Total Depth = 28.4 Feet (hole left open approximately 3 hours) 55 -Ground Water Measured at 27.5 Feet at Time of Drilling -Backfilled with Soil Cuttings on November 18, 1999 ~ - '--- ~ - 35-'-- 50 -~ ~ - L-- '--- 40----:-..... 45 -~ I-- ~ - '--- 45-L- ~ 40 -. ....: ..... I-- L.. - so~ L.. .. L.. 35 - L-~ L-- ~ - 55-~ 30 ~ -I- L-- L--•• -L- ' ,:;," · . 505AC11/77) LElGHTON & ·ASSOCIATES Date ----=11:....·-=18:....-9::...:9'----- Project . Drj.lling Co. ··:·· Hole Diameter Elevation Top of Hole 8 in. +/-90 . C 0 Or-. .0 z .er--·-Ill ·-+ ++ + QI .cm QI QI . fll,QI 0. QI a.a + QI QI ->..., o'+-fll..J 0 0. QI.._,, t. z ....,, (!) e -m UJ 90 ·O '. ... ·-· -... " ' .. •' -.. -. . . .. 1 -. -.. . . . 85 5-. . 10'~ ~ ... ¾ 2 -:-: . -:I; .. ,-: ... 3 -.. ... . . -. , . . . . 80 10-.. ... 4 ··--: : :· ... -. . . ... :..:....: .. 5 -. -: ... .. -... . . . 75 15-.. 6 ... .. -. : •'' - - - 70 20- - - - - 65 25- - - -•• - "'" . -:in ·- SOSA( 11/77) GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-2 / Sheet _l_of _l_ Cantarini Property Project No.' 4980160-001 F&C Drilling · Type ·of Rig· Hollow-Stem Auger Drive Weight ft Ref or Datum -----------=-14..:...:0c...c..po"-'u==n:::.::d~s ________ Drop _]_Q_ in. See Geotechnical Map :,'I r-. J,r-. + + Qlx GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Ill 0 ·-'-....,, Ill • Ulr--fll~ 30 ::,+ C'+--u all. QI 0 ti C u. ' -'-Cl a. ·-QI ___ (/) '° QI ....,, o+ Logged By AXT :,'I . a.. I: C ·-::::> '-0 g....,, j;J u · Sampled By AXT SM QUATERNARY ALLUVIUM (Qal) @0': Silty_ fine SAND; dark brown to brown, moist, loose ,_ ~ 44 108.7 8.6 @3': Silty fine to medium SAND; dark brown, moist, medium dense I- I- I- 33 SM/SC @5': Silty fine to J,Uedium SAND; brown, moist, medium dense, slightly p9rous L... SM @6': Silty fine to medium SAND with clay; brown to red-brown, moist, medium dense, slightly porous, few rootlets visible I.., 46 '119.2 11.1 @ 7 .5\, Silty fine to !Iledium SAND; brown to reddish brown, moist, very dense, slightly porous - - ~ 29 @ 10': Same as previous, slightly coarser grained I- ,_ 87 113.l 13.5 @ 12.5': ·Silty fine to medium SAND; brown to orange-brown, moist, dense, ' 17 SM \. _ _ sli~htly clay~y ___________________________ TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa) ~ -80 @ 16.5': Silty fine SANDSTONE, dark brown to brown and orange-brown, moist, -very dense- L... Total Depth = 16.5 Feet . No Ground' Water Encountered at Time of Drilling Backfilled with Soil Cuttings on November 1-8, 1999 I- ..... ..... ..... - - ..... ..... ~ ..... ... - LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES •• ·:· • GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-3 ../ Date ____ 1:::.:1::..--1:..::8'--'-9::...:9~--Sheet _l_of _2_ Project Drilling Co . Jiole Diameter Elevation Top of Hole 85 · 0 80 5 75 10 70 15 65 20 60 25 505A(11/77) u .cm c.o 111...l '-(.!) ... '• .. . : : .·. :' .... . ·. ·.· ., .. :, : : . 8 in. +I-85 (ll OJ + 0 z . 0 z OJ C. e Ill CJ) 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Ii Cantarini Property Project No.. 4980160-001 F&C Drilling Type of Rig ·· -Hollow~Stem Auger . Drive Weight ft. Ref. or Datum ------'---·:....1=-4~0'-p-=-o:::..cu:::::n=-=d=s ________ Drop 30 in . 24 ·::Tl + (II'"' C'+-OJ u cc. ::Tl '-0 V '"' OJ~ c...':'-' :::,+ 1n C ·-OJ o+ ;cC 0 u ui'"' 11'1 • Ill CJ) -J u. _en ·-::i ~"-' SM See Geotechnical Map GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged . .8y Sampled By QUATERNARY ALLUVIUM (Qal) AXT AXT @ O': Silty fine SAND; dark brown, moist, loose @ 2.5': Silty fine-to medium-grained SAND; brown, moist, medium dense, some ,coarser grains, few scattered gravels 43 . 115.2 10.2 SM/SC 30 SC @ 6':. Silty, fine-to medium-grained SAND with clay; dark. brown, moist, medium dense; scattered fine to medium subrounded gravels, slightly porous @ 7.5': Clayey fi!}e to·medium SAND; dark brown to brown and orange-brown, moist, medium dense, slightly porous 31 107.5 15.7 SM/SC 18 46 110.8 . 17.6 28 '• 48 105.7 19;8 19 53/6", 105.7 18.3 100 SC @ 1'1'_: Silty fine SAND with clay; brown to orange-brown, moist, medium dense, slightly porous @ 12.5': Clayey fine to medium SAND; brown, moist, mediull! dense, slightly pOfOUS , @ 16': .Same as previous SM/SC-.... @ 17.5': .Silty fine· to.coarse.SAND; brown to reddish brown, moist, medium dense, some zones of clayey sand, fme to mediul)l gravels CL @ 20': Silty fine-to medium-grained SAND with clay; brown, moist, medium dense @ 22.5': Fine to medium sandy CLAY; brown, moist, v_ery stiff @ 23': Ground water encountered -s1.f -TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa} @ 25': Silty fme SANDSTONE; orange-brown to gray and brown, moist, very dense @ 28': Silty fme to medium SANDSTONE; brown; moist, very dense LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES Date ___ __.;1::..:1:.....;'-l:.::8~-9~9 __ _ Project • . Drilling Co, · : Hole Diameter ~·_--8"--=in=·-- . Elevation Top of Hole +/-85 . C 0 a" 0 .c"" ·-Ill z ·-+ ++-+a, .cm 0, 0, I'll Q) '1. m 0.0 + ->4-Q)'f-t!I...J 0 a. ~v Clv '-z E w (D t!I ~ 55 30 - - - - 50 35-;- - - - - 45 40-• - - - - 40 45- - - - """ 35 50- - - - - 30 55- - - -• -. ., "~-,~ SOSA{ 11 /77.) GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-3 Sheet 2 of 2 Cantarini Property Project No. 4980160-001 F&C Drilling Type of Rig Hollow-Stem Auger . Drive Weight ---------=1...:.40=-'.cP..::.ou=n:::.:d=s'---------Drop _l,Q_ in. ft Ref or Datum See Geotechnical Map :,, "" Ji"" +-+-Q)~ GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION ·-Ill • Ill 0 ~~· (. V I'll~ 30 ::,+ u~ oLL. Q) 0 °tj C -'-Cl a. ·-Q) _(/) ma, V a+ Logged 13y AXT a.· . :,, :C C ·-::5 '-0 fl,'-' AXT Cl CJ Sampled By Total Depth = 29 Feet (hole left open approximately 3 hours) Ground Water Encountered at 23 Feet at Time of Drilling -Backfilled with Soil Cuttings on November 18, 1999 ._ ~ I- ~ L.. L.. .... L.. .... . . L.. L.. L.. ' .. ~ L- L- I- '. I- L.. . L- I... L- L- I- ~ I- ,__ ,__ L- LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES •• •• .. •• GEOTECHNICAL BORlNG LOG B-4 / Date --,---=-=11=--=18::....-9=.9'---- Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter Elevation Top of Hole C 8 in. +I-90 . 0 ft . +- Sheet 1 Cantarini Property _ of_l_ 4980160-001 Project No, Type of Rig F &C Drilling Hollow-Stem Auger Drive Weight -~-----__,-=1...:.40:::.....cP..::.Ou=n:=cd=s;_· --------'--Drop _lQ_in. Ref o·r Datum See Geotechnical Map ::n r.. uir-.. +-QI~ GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION o,.... 0 ·-Ill • :;:+-.c""' ·-·111 z Ill O· U)r.. L...., t11U? +-1ii 30 :::,+-.t:m QJ Cr+-·1110J , 8;-a, 0.0 +-QJ oU. QJ 0 1;ic 0~ >Q) (11..J 0 -00. 0. -c.. ·-QJ __ en QJ~ o'+-L z ca QI ...., o+-Logged By AXT ...., E ·-::::5 t!) ::n :c C: UJ Ill 0.. L en 0 ~...., Sampled By AXT 0 u 90 ... 0 , , ~ SM QUA T.ERNARYALLUVIUM (Oal} . , , , , @0': Silty fine SAND; dark brown, moist, loose ~ -, , . '. , , . I--. , . , ,. 1 57 · 112.5 8.0 -. .. @3': Silty fine to medium SAND; ·dark brown to red-brown, moist, medium I- dense, rootlets common I--... ·~. . . 85 5 ~ 2 28 SC I- @6': Clayey fine to medium SAND; gray-brown to orange-brown, moist, medium ~ -I dense -I- ·--~ ::_:~ 3 55 100.5 23.2' SM/SC @7.51: Silty fine to medium SAND with clay; brown, to orange-brown, moist, ... medium dense -::_:~ ~ ~\~ 80 IO-~ ~/~ A 36 @10': Same as previous, few fine gravels -... ;::~ --· ' '-' ... · ... 5 61 105.7 19.3 SM -· .. : " I-... -,,; . •, @ 13.5': Silty fine SAND; brown, inoist, medium den·se, few fine to medium ~ · subrounded gravels, few shell fragments ... 75 15-!1f:? . S!\f/SC Silty fine to medium SAND with clay; brown, moist, medium dense I- 6 25 @ 15': -: =-:f0. I- -:\~' ~ -~ @ 17.5': Same as previous -.;:I½ 7 63 106.9 18.0 I-. r,B -:::~ I- -70 20-,-~ I- 8 27 CL @20': Fine to medium sandy CLAY; brown, moist, very stiff, scattered organics ~ ~ -----------------• -------------------------L-.TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION (Isa) '. 9 92/9" 94.3 24.6 SM/ML I--. @ 23.6': Fine sandy SILTSTONE to silty SANDSTONE; brown to gray and \ . orange, moist, very dense 17 65 25-Total Depth = 24 Feet No Ground Water Encountered at Time of Drilling I- -Backfilled with Soil Cutµngs on November 18, 1999 I- ... - ... - I-- /;() -:m 505A(11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-5 Date ~---'-_1_1~·:_18~~9~9 __ _ Sheet _1_ of Project Project No. Cantarini Property 1 4980160-001 Drilling Co. --""""· ____________ _.,_,_ _______ "--_ Type of Rig Hollow-Stem Auger .::iHole Diameter 8 .in. ________ _;1:;:..4:;..;;0'"""p"-o=u=n=d=·s ________ Drop . __JQ_in. · Elevation Top of Hole +/-89 See Geotechnical Map F &C Drilling Driv~ Weight ft Ref or Datum 85 80 • .. : 75 70 .65. • I 60 0 .CO) 0.0 111..J t. (.!) ... -. .. . : :·. IO-.. -: ~~ ·."';_:' .. .• -. ... -.. . . ,. ... 15- - - - - 20- - ~ ; - -' 25- - - - - ~n SOSA{ 11/77) Ill QI ,t-o :z . 0 z QI 0. E Ill (/) 2 3 +- Ill 0 :30 ol.l.. -t. ca QI Q. 24 56 34 ::n ,,..... +-Qlx ·-t. y Ill,-,. C'+-::,+- QI 0 t;c 00. ·-QI ....,, o+-::n 1:C t. 0 CJ u .. U6.l 11.6 4 76/10" 119.6 7.6 5 ·90110· .. vi""'· Ill • Ill~ u-t: _en ·-::5 ~'"" SM/SC .. SM SM GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By Sampled By QUATERNARY.ALLUVIUM (Qal) AXT AXT @0': Silty fine SAND; dark brown, moist, loose @ 3': Silty .fine SAND; dark brown, ,moist, medium dense, few fine subrounded gravels -. @ 6': Silty fine SAND with clay; dark brown to brown and orange-brown, moist, - dense @ 8': Silty fine to medium SAND with gravel; brown to orange-brown, moist, dense, few zones of friable sand · @ 10': Top of sample, same as previous TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION {Tsa) - @ 11 ': Bottom.of sample: silty fine SANDSTONE; brown to orange-brown, moist, very dense - @ 12.5': Silty fine to medium SANDSTONE; brown to orange, moist, very dense, well indurated, few calcium carbonate blebs - Tota! Depth = 14 Feet No Ground Water Encountered at Time of Drilling 'Backfilled with Soil Cuttings on November 18, 1999 - - - ,_ I- ,_ - - - - - - I- I- - - LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-6 ••• Date -----=l=l:.....:-1=-=8:.....:-9:...::9___ Sheet 1 of 1 Pr9ject --. ----~-.:__ __ .....:C:::.::a:::n::.::t=ar=-=i=ni:....:Pr:c.;;:.:o:..cp~ert::...:.,,..Y' ___ __,..______ Project No. 4980160-001 Drilling Co. ·F&C Drilling Type of Rig Hollow-Stem Auger Hole Diameter 8 in. Drive Weight -----~---=-14""0c....,c..p~ou=n=d=-=s ________ Drop _lQ_in. Elevation Top of Hole· +/-97 ft Ref or Datum See Geotechnical Map I . :n ,,.._ ui'"' C 0 + + QI~ GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION o,.._ 0 ·-Ill • .c'"' z Ill 0 '-..,, (II~ :;+ ·-Ul Ill'"' ::,+ . . ++ .CO) Q) QI 30 C'I--u (II QI 0.. QI . 0..0 + a.LL QI 0 tic u . >QI QI QI tll...J 0 -Cl 0.. ~0 00 0.. -c... ·-Q) _en L z e co QI ..,, o+ . Logged By AXT (.!) (II a. :n l: C ·-::> LLI L 0 ~..,, (/) Cl u Sampled By AXT -·0 C .. SM QUATERNARY ALLUVIUM (Oal} ... .. @0': Silty fine SAND; brown, moist '--... . . 95 -. . '-.. . . . -. 1 25 84.8 15.2 I-.. @3': Silty .fine to medium.SAND; brown to orange and light brown, moist, . ... medium dense, slightly porous ~ -... . 5-. . L- -2 16 SM-SP @5': Silty fine to medium SAND; dark brown, moist, medium dense, slightly . -porous -. ~ -.. @ 6': ·Fine to medium SAND; brown, moist, medium dense, poorly graded --. ..... • · 90 -- ... ~ 3 35 115.0 15.8 SM/SC -.. @ 8': Silty fine to medium SAND with clay; gray-brown to brown, moist, medium ..... ~ dense · · • -@j ..... 10-.. @10': Silty fine to medium SAND with clay; gray-brown to orange, moist, I- ... ~ 4 32 medium dense, few cal~ium ca,rbonate blebs -;, SM/ML-------------------------------------~ -TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa) 85 -L- ... -5 ' 99· 103.5 21.5 L- @ 13': Silty fine SANDSTONE·to fine sandy SILTSTONE; orange-brown to I/ \ brown, moist, some manganese blelis -Total Depth = 13.5 Feet 15- No GroQnd Water Encountered at Time of Drilling ~ Backfilled with Soil Cuttings on November 18, 1999 ..... - 80 ...:. L- -- - 20-..... -- -75 .- -~ .. I-- L. 25- L-- L-70 - '--• ·,. -- .. 505A(11/77) ·LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES • • • Date --------'1=1~~1=·s;....;-9;....:;;9 __ _ I Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter Elevation Top of Hole C . ~r.. 0 .i::,r.. ·-........ ........ . .i::.m ri! QJ .o.~ 0.0 >·QJ ,U,J QJ~ . QJ'+-c...,,. L (!) w 0 ,. .. ·-. ,. .. -.. . . . -.. . . .. -.. ... -. ... 5-,-·c.. : :,; 0· .. ~ -... -.. ~ . . . .. -. .-. ·, ~ .. ... -.. •,. •' ~ .. IO-... ~- -.. ~ ... b9 . . -·~ : . ;. ~ -"·L--. ... ~ .. . . . -·-·. .. 15- - - - - 20- - - - .:.. .. 25- - - - - .• , SOSA( 11/77) 8 in. +I- . 0 U'I z QJ +-QJ 0 -0. z e ,u (/) Bag-2 @0·~5· 1 2 3 4 5 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-7 Sheet _l _ of 1 Cantarini Property Project No. .. · 4980160-001 F&C Drilling Type of Rig Hollow-Stem Auger Drive Weight ·-------'----=14-"'0'-·""p.o"-u=n=d=s _______ --'--,-Drop .lQ_in. ft Ref or Datum See Geotechnical Map :n r,. ,;. r,. +-QJ~ GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION +-·-U'I • 1110 U'I r,. L .._,, ,u~ 30 C'+-::,+- 01.L QJ 0 t;c u<: 00. -L ·-QJ _(/) al QJ ...,, o+-Logged By AXT ·a.. :n :E: C ·-:::5 L 0 ~...,, .. 'AXT Cl u Sampled By SM QUATERNARY ALLUVIUM Oa[} @0': Silty fine SAND; dark brown, moist, loose - " - 21 109.4 7.7 ~ @3': Silty fine to medium SAND; dark brown, moist, medium dense, slightly porous, few organics I- L- 38 SM/SC @5': Same as previous, slightly clayey 1-- 1-- 49 115.0 14.4 - @8.5': Silty fine-to medium SAND with clay and gravel; brown to dark brown, moist, medium dense, slightly porous, 1/2-1" subrounded gravels in cuttings - Silty fine SAND with clay; brown to orange-brown, moist, medium dense, I- 41 @ 10': scattered fine to medium subangular gravels; few manganese blebs, slightly I-.porous 1-- 66 110.1 7.4 @ 12.5': Top of sample, same as previous _ SM TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa} - @ 13.5': Bottom of sample: silty fine to medium SAND; orange-brown, moist, 1-- dense, well indurated ... -Total Depth = .15 Feet No Ground Water Encountered at Time of Drilling 1---Backfilled with Soil Cuttings on November 18, 1999 I- '- '- '- L- ~ 1-- ~ '- I- I- I- ~ .. LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES en 0 .... I > -...L 0 ' <D 0 - r-(D (0 :r -0 :::, ~ ~ "' 0 2 .sn -(D "' • • •• LOG OF TRENCH NO.: T-1 -~-- Project Name: Bentle~/Cantarini Logged by: KBC ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Project Number: 4980160-001 Elevation: 135: Equipment: JD 710 Backhoe· Location: See Geotechnical Mag GEOLOGIC · GEOLOGIC ·Sample Moist. Density ATTITUDES DATE.: 6/26/98 DESCRIPTION: UNIT · uses No. (%) (pcf) TOPSOIL Topsoil A @ 0-0.5': Brown. moist. stiff. fine to medium sandy clay CL· TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION Tsa SM B @ 0.5'-5.5': Yellow-brown and off-white, damp, dense to very dense. silty, fine sandstone; orange-brown and maroon lenses common GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: 1" = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: .0° TREND: N40°E --,--,-----A, ----~ --- ._ ·-. • --~---< ;.. -:-,:.. -_ ·:: . -~ --: -. :-_ .. :-....: . ~~ ---~:-:'j.·r . .,., .. ·:· ,: ' i. :-.', ' : I.··. ... -· .. I I I I I I I I I 1· I I I ··1·· I' ·1 .. f·. I I I I I I I I . . I I I I I I I I I • I I I I I l l l l ·~ • • ,I •I• • • V. . . l l l l I I I I I I ---.. -· .. · ... ,. .... ' I • • • ~ ,'--: '---. --· . r• r · ... .......... ---<2'· .. · .... ' . ---. . --.... . -·.. . e, -----....,: --- -----TOTAL DEPTH AT 5.5' -NO GROUND WATER : ------.. ENCOUNTERED AT TIME -----OF DRILLING - ..... ----BACKFILLED: 6/26/98 - - 01 0 -i. I )> --i. 0 ....... CD 0 - r (t) <C ::r -0 :::, s,o ~ Ch 0 () .~ -(t) Ch • • • -LOG OF TRENCH NO. : T-2 '-- Project Name: Bentley/Cantarini Logged by: KBC ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Project Number: 4980160-001 · Elevation: 160' Equipment: . .JD 710 Backhoe Location: See Geotechnical Mag ' . ' GEOLOGIC GEOLOGIC Sample Moist. Density ATTITUDES DATE: 6/26/98 DESCRIPTION: -UNIT uses No. (%) (pcf) TOPSOIL Topsoil A @ 0-1.5': Brown. damp. l_oose, clayey, fine to medium sand; · SC medium pores common. rootlets common. agricultural debris common B @ 1. 5' -4': Dark brown. moist, stiff. fine sandy clay: CL scattered gravel and·agrtcultural debris TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION Tsa C @ 4' -5': Light yellow-gray, damp to moist. very dense. silty, SM fine sandstone ; ' ,. -· GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: 1". =-5' SURFACE SLOPE: 5°SW TREND: N55°E .. ,------ ,---A) _,_ -J -.. ·:-·. ·i.·. ~:r.,:~~-_,_ -~ --,-~ .. . ...:... ---. . . . ~ . . fi I I I I I I I I I I I I I ..;_ -__ 1v I -, I ·-1 . . f(/. 1..:. I•. I .. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ' ' \ , • I I ··~ 0 1(7#1(/ I -'· , I z_•' I ., I I I I I I I I I ' ' \ I I ,-~--::._· . ..: ~-ti -3~7 ----. -~B -.. _,_ I-. '·.:.,.·,. · .. ·.·:· .. - I---c;_; --- I---_,_ - ,-_,... _,_ TOTAL DEPTH AT 5.o· - ,-_,_ _,_ NO GROUND WATER -ENCOUNTERED AT TIME -----OF DRILLING - I-_,_ --BACKFILLED: 6/26/98 - • • • .'- LOG OF TRENCH NO.: T-3--- Proj.ect Name: Bentley/Cantarini Logged by:_"""'K-BC::-:-.. --_ __,....,... __ Project Number:· 4980160-001 Elevation:_--=2=55,a...·----~ ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Equipment: · JD 710 Backhoe. Location: See Geotechhical Map ~ GEOLOGIC -GEOLOGIC Sample Moist. 1 -Density, t ATTITUDES DATE: "6/26/98 DESCRIPTION: UNH · uses No. (%) (pcf) .I • I -..... 0 ........ (0 0 - r (1) (C ;;r - TOPSOIL A @0-1': Dqrk brown. damp. loose to medium dense. slightly clayey, silty, fine to medium sand: medium pores common. rootlets common. scattered agricultural· debris near surface B @ 1-2.5': Rust-brown. moist. stiff, fine sandy clay to clayey s·and CRETACEOUS LUSARDI FORMATION C @ 2.5'-6': Light yellow--brown. orange-brown and gray, moist. dense to very dense, medium to coarse sandstone; angular rock fragments common 0 . Topsoil Kl ~I GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: 1" = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 0° ~ Ch 0 C) -~ -(1) Ch ~ f I- I- I- I- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -t- -t-[A ':~ ;:' ~-~·-·p --. ~. ~-• ->-f ~ • -• I , -,. • • -• f -• ,(. I (2~~: . ·: i :..:.,· '. ~ · . ..:\j ~ :I , 01 •• = U ------------------I i(B I 1 -t--+- -I--+- -I--+- -+---I- SM CL/SC . SM TREND: N20°E I 1TOTAL DEPTH AT 6.0' INO GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED AT TIME 10F DRILLING 'BACKFILLED: 6/26/98 - - - - - - - - - - - - • • • LOG OF .TRENCH NO.: T-4 ,_.-- Project Name: Bentl~t/Cantarini Logged by: KBC ENGINEERING PROPERTIES 4980160-001 Elevation: 230' . ' Project Number: · Equi pnient: JD 710 Back·hoe Location: See Geotechnical MaQ 01 0 ..... I )> -..... 0 ........ CD 0 - r-(t) (Q :r g ::, ~ )> (/) (/) 0 0 ,ii,; -(t) "' GEOLOGIC GEOLOGIC ATTITUDES DATE: 6/26/98 DESCRIPTION: -· UNIT uses TOPSOIL Topsoil A @ 0-2': Brown. damp. medium dense, clayey, silty, fine to medium sand: fine g·rave l common. scattered medium SM pores. rootlets common TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION Tsa SM 8:Nl0°W. B @ 2'-6': Light gray· and orange~brown. moist. dense. fin~ 1s0 w gravelly to·cobbly, fine to coarse sandstone. occasional sandy beds ' : GRAPHIC REPRES~NTATION . SCALE: 1" = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 8°W TREND: t--t-. A)_ -- t--t--' . ..._-.7 ---. 4 ~ ·-· .--. . ...... ... . . : :.. o:. ::..:. ----=::;:: ~~:----~--~ ,e, • . . - • .J,o •• :..-.. ,. .. -• • • _. • I • --~~ I -- I I I I I I I I I I I I ,···~ ·.1-"l~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ··~ . -.r .'· -,-. o ~o · . ..:. a I I I I I I I t---. -:-.4_;., B -_,_ ~-~·c;, _: ... t-. -t-.!-_d..,:. _,_ ~ . t-_,_ _,_ .... _,_ -t- •, .... ---,- .... ---t- t----,- t-_,_ -t- ···--· -··-- Sample Moist. Density No. {%) CpcO N70°E - - - - I I I I I I I I I I I I I - - - - TOTAL DEPTH AT 6.0' -NO GROUND WATER -ENCOUNTERED AT TIME OF DRILLING - BACKFILLED: 6/26/98 - Ol 0 .... I > -.... 0 ........ <D 0 - ' r ~ (Q :::,--0 ::, ~ > (/J (/J 0 0 ·ii> -(l) en • ·:,::. • • LOG OF TRENCH NO.: T~S / Project Name: .. Bentle~{!Cantarini Logged by: KBC ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Project Number:. 4980160-001 Elevation: 180' Equipment: JD 710 Backhoe Location: See Geotechnical Mag ~ GEOLOGIC GEOLOGIC . Sample Moist. Density ATTITUDES DATE: 6/26/98 D°ESCRI-PTION: UNIT uses No. (%) (pcf) · ARTIFICIAL FILL. -UNDOCUMENTED Afu . . A @ 0-1.5': Brown. damp. loose, silty, fine to medium sand: organic-rich, agricultural debris common SM TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION Tsa B @ 1.5.' -3.5': Yellow-brown, moist, .very dense. si-lty, fine SM to coarse sandstone @ 3.5': Practical refu·sal on well-cemented s·andstone .. ' ) GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: 1" = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 3-5°W TREND: N30°W -_.._ --- ---_,_ -' ---A).· _,_ - .... ----- l I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ :: . ·--~-.~:..: ..I ~---7 ,_ ~-~ .. --- -:-. -.. .. ~. -. ;J --.... ~-:--.-· -:-'-.1· ~ -f--. .,_ . ' ... . . ' '. ---.... . . i-,.,,,,..:._• ,--. -_,_ - ---'---1, _,_ - ,-., ----TOTAL DEPTH AT 3.5' - -_,_ --NO GROUND WATER -ENCOUNTERED AT TIME -----OF DRILLING - .... _,_ --BACKFILLED: 6/26/98 - ·---· ·-· .. • ••• • LOG OF TRENCH NO. : T-6 v Project Name: Bentley/Cantarini Logged by:_~K-Bt_~---'--- Project Number: 4980160-·001 Ilevation:-=--=2-75~'-"-...,.._-,,....---'- Equipment: JD 710· Backhoe Location: See Geotechnical Map ENGINEERING PROPERTIES ~ GEOLOGIC -· . GEOLOGIC Sample Moist. Density -t ATTITUDES· DATE: 6/26/98 DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses No.. (%) (pcf) > . . ' -..... 0 ~ 0 - r (t) (C ::,- TOPSOIL A @ 0-2.5': Brown. dry. loose to medium dense, slightly clayey, silty. fine sand; fine to medium pores common. rootlets common CRETACEOUS GRANITICS B @ 2.5'-3.s··: Orange-brown. dry, very dense. fine to coarse sand (decomposed granitics); angular rock fragments common Topsoil SM Kgr SW -o~----'---........,...-,---'----------------'---,--------,-----------1.---..1----L. __ -,-J _ __:___J__---1 ~ GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: l" ~ 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 20°N TREND: N80°E > C/) Cl) 0 2 •jl) -(t) C/) t l I- I- I- ,.... I I I I I I I I I I J_ I .----t I I 'B. - - - - I - - - - TOTAL DEPTH AT 3.5' - -+-,NO GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED AT TIME - -+-I OF .DRILLING - -+-'BACKFILLED: 6/26/98 - • • • LOG OF TRENCH NO.: __ T-7 / · Project Name: Bentley/Cantarini Logged by: · KB[) Elevation: 04 · ENGINEERING PROPERTIES 01 0 .Jo. I > -.Jo. 0 ...... (0 0 - r-(D cc :,--0 ::, ~ ~ "' 0 0 '1> -(D en Project Numper: '4980160-001 Equipment: JD 710 Backhoe Location: See Geotechnical MaQ '' GEOLOGIC GEOLOGIC ATTITUDES DATE: 6/26/98 DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses , ARTIFICIAL F-ILL ~, UNDOCUMENTED Afu A @ 0-2': Trench backfill for 4" PVC pipe: Brown, damp medium dense, silty,· fi he to medium sand SM TOPSOIL Topsoil B @ 0-1.5': Brown, damp, loose to medium dense; slightly clayey; silty fine sand: few medium pores. · SM . scattered rootlets ·. CRETACEOUS GRANITICS Kgr C @l.5'-5.5': Light orange-brown, dry, dense to very dense medium to coarse sand (decomposed grahitics); SW angular rock fragments common, scattered fractures · GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: 1" = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 3-5°N TREND: ---.A --/4''rvc PtP'c ---B . -- ---~:._·.Q. ..... ·.·. ---_-.-.-;--~ --J;·.' I I I ->-; .. ·., .,. I '---':"":':-•.v.r.: I I I I I I I I I I I I ~.~ .. f't·' • ·f :/ I .. ~ ... I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I O I ·~ KJ·\·v ..... ·6' I I I I I I •••. ''j . :.~,_.,<. .... -i--..•..• ,_· .. -- .... -.... ~·· .. :·· .. -- I .... --C -- ----,- -----.... ----- -->------,---- ... Sample Moist. Density No. (%.) (pcf) N35°W - - - - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I - - - - TOTAL DEPTH AT 5.5' -NO GROUND WATER -.ENCOUNTERED AT TIME OF DRILLING . - BACKFILLED: 6/26/98 - Ol 0 ...a. I > ,. -...a. 0 ...... co 0 - r (D (0 :r ' ,' -0 :, $20 ~ "' 0 Q ,Sl) -(D "' • • • LOG OF TRENCH NO.: T-8 c.-, Project Name: . Bentl el'./Cantari ni Logged by: KBC ENGjNEERING PROPERTIES Project Number: 4980160-001 El evat i-on: 305' I Equipment: JD 710 Backhoe .. Location: See G~otechnical Mag . GEOLOGIC GEOLOGIC Sample Moist. Density ATTITUDES DATE: 6/26/98 DESCRIPTION: UNIT usts No. (%) (pcf) . TOPSOIL/COLLUVIUM Qcol A @ 0-4': Red-brown, moist to wet, medium to stiff, fine sandy CL 1 clay; gray-brown mottling common, scattered cobbles @ 4': . Minor seepage CRETACEOUS LUSARDI FORMATION Kl : B @ 4' -6': Yellow-brown and gray-brown, moist, dense, clayey to SC/SM 2 .. silty, fine to coarse sandstone: scattered gravel .: GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION . SCALE: l" = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 0° TREND: ·N25°E ,:... -.... --- -->-' ---- --.... -\ .... · .. ··A·· -~a/~ ~-D ; :.::· --~-·-:-:-~.-} -.,-....... --~~;-.,·.-,·a· --, .. I I I I I I I I I I I I · · ·. I · I • I• I· .I I •/ I I I I · I I I I I I I I I I I I ' I I I I ·~-·-. .. ~ \ .. .:_' .. 'D, . . ! / I I I I I I I I I >---·--........... . . . . . . ·'..I. .. C) . ---. . _,..-• • • I • ~-, .·.--: ~ ·~ . .-- >--·,--·. ;y ->-- 0~·-0~-B. ~ .... --.. ---. K:-!, . ·.:..---,----- .... ---,-TOTAL DEPTH AT 6.o· - ---_,_ MINOR SEEPAGE AT 4' -BACKFILLED: 6/26/98 ,----.... - -----.... - -4·· • Project Name: Bentl~y/Cantarini Project Number: _4=9=80--=1=6 ___ 0--=0..;.;01=---------Equipment: JD 710 Ba·ckhoe •• Logged by: _.e..>.:KB:::..:::C'-------'---- Elevation: -,--:·-"'-3-:'-'40"-'-~-.,,._--Locat ion:~ See Geotechnical Map • LOG OF.TRENCH NO.: T-9 V ENGINEERING PROPERTIES GEOLOGICl l Sample ~1 GEOLOGIC I I I I Moist. Density t ATTITUDES _ DATE: 6/26/98 _ : DESCRIPTION: UNIT -uses No. -..... 0 ....... (0 0 - r (D fCi ::T TOPSOIL A @ 0-0.5': _Light brown,.dry, slightly clayey, silty, fine sand; rootlets common B @ O. 5' -2 ·: Brown to-reddish brown. moist. stiff. medium sandy clay; dark gray-brown mottles common CRETACEOUS GRANITICS· C @ 2'-8':. Light gray to yellow-brown, fine to coarse sand (decomposed granitics) @ 8': Practical refusal on very dense/unweathered rock Topsoil I SM SC 1 I I Kgr I SW' (%) (pcf). -!1-I -GRA-PH_I..,..C _._~_EP-R-ES-E-NT_A_T_IO_N ~-----:---SC_A_L_~-:-1-" -=-5-,------SU--'R,-FA_C_E --S-LO-PE.1--:_0_0____,__T.1-. R--,EN_D....,....: -L..N'--35-0 W __ _...J'---_J., _ __;_· --11 )> cn en 0 0 ,i -(D en [ I I I I. I I I I I f t- f- t- --+--A( I I tf-t;-. :f:i.13i·\l:·@;1:."/:T·i"-;::J:;33ZI ,, , ... "'V' I ·. c·· ·. ·-i:: . . . . ...... ~ , -+-- -+- -+- -+- r I - - - - - - - - -t-,TOTAL. DEPTH AT 8.o· - -+-,NO GROUND WATER - -+-ENCOUNTERED. AT TIME . , OF DRILLING - -t-I BACKFILLED:· 6/26/98 - 0, 0 ~ I )> I -~ 0 ...... <O 0 - • • • LOG OF TRENCH NO.: T-10 ~ Project Name: Bentley/Cantarini Logged by: KBC ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Project Number: 4980160~001 Elevation :=-......,,18,.,....o_· ----,---=--~ Equipment: JD 710 Backhoe Location: See· G~otechnical Map· GEOLOGIC _ :GEOLOGIC . Sample Mai.st. Density ATTITUDES DATE: 6/26/98. DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses No. . (%) (pcf) CRETACEOUS POINT LOMA(?) FORMATION · Kp A @ 0-4': -Interbedded light gray, damp. dense to very dense. SM/ML silty fine to medium sandstone and dark gray to 1 black, moist, hard clayey siltstone; blocky fissile ' •. r (I) (0 .:::r -0 ::, S)o )> C/) C/) 0 0 ·i:ii -CD C/) .. . GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION . SCALE: 1" == 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 0° -TREND: N3S0 E t-----~ - 1-----i--- --~ -1--- -I I I I I I I I I I l ,~\.=1=.'°:=-_._-r-,-.. -:-.-:._.-.-:--.,7'""._.-t-,."":"":j·::/.'·. ·. ·. ·_·.,·.-.... ·,:·.;:·. ·.":1:J1 I I --I I I I I I I I l I I I - ,-.. -~:·.-:~.: .. :_, .. ~.-.:. ·---:~:_.-~ .· ---I I I . , I I I ' ·' • • • . . • • . ... : • --·: ' • K I I I I I I I . I I I : =~ ~:~-~~~~---~ A . == = ----I'--- ,.. ----TOTAL DEPTH AT 4. 0' - ,... __ _,_ NO GROUND WATER _ ENCOUNTERED AT TIME -------OF DRILLING - ,.. --_,_ BACKFILLED: 6/26/98 - • •• • LOG OF TRENCH NO.: T-11 ,___,- Project Name: Cantarini Property Logged -by:_..:.,K:.:::.8-=--C _______ ___ · Project Number: 4980160-001' Elevation: 17.6 Feet . ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Equipment: JD710 Location: See Getitechnical Map g GEOLOGIC . GEOLOGIC Sample Moist. Density t ATTITUDES. DATE: · 11/15/99 DESCIHPTI,ON: UNIT uses No. · (%) (pcf) -1 ..4 0 ..... ·CO 0 r (D co· ::r TOPSOIL A @ 0:-3': Silty, fi.ne to medium SAND; brown, moist, loose·, slightly-clayey, fine to.medium pores common, rootlets common, agricultural debris common TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION B @ 3'-15': Fine to m~dium SANDSTONE; greenish gray with orange-bro.wn iron-oxide staining common, damp to moist, dense to very dense · @ 15': Practical refusal SM Tsa SM ()1-------'-----------------'----'------------------.L.----!---..L..----...JL...-....,__._L __ ---l ~I GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: ~ (/) 0 Q. s» -(D (/) -1 .... ·. : . ·t· .' .®.: ·. ·. ·. ·, _ .. • • • • • I B .. . . . ·. : . . ' .. -' ... · ': .·, -: .., ~ '*> ._ " I • . -. -.. I .\' -'· . , '" ' ' SURFACE SLOPE: 12°W TREND: N60°E: TOTAL DEPTH AT 15 FEET NO GR_OUND · WATER ENCOUNTERED BACKFILLED: 11/15/99 • • • LOG OF TRENCH NO.: T-'!2 L-,-"' Project.Name: Cantarini Property Project Number: ___ . _4'""'9 __ 8 __ 01=6 ___ 0_-0"'""0;;..:;1.__ ______ ____ Logged by:_..:..:K=-BC::........, ____ _ Elevation: 148.Feet ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Equipment: JD710-Location: See Geotechn i ca 1 M~\p ~ GEOLOGIC _ . . GEOLOGIC Sample Moist. Density i ATTITUDES DATE: 11/15/99 DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses No. (%) . (pcf) -.J. 0 ' (0 0 -1 ~ s: ::r TOPSOIL A @ 0-3.5': Silty fine to medium,SAND; brown, dry to damp, 1 oose, 1 arge pores common, rootlets common · · ·. QUATERNARY COLLUVIUM/WEATHERED BEDROCK B @ 3'~9': Clayey SAND; greenish gray, orange-brown iron-oxide staining common, moist, medium dense TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION C @ 9'-14': Silty.fine SANDSTONE; greenish gray, damp, dense to very den·se . @ 14': Practical refusal SM 1 Q·col SC 1 Tsa SM $'1-------'------------------------,-----.-------,-----'-------'-----''-------'----....L.-----,-I ; GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: 1" ·= 5' · SURFACE SLOPE:. l0°S TREND: N5°W > ~---~·-·~· (/J • I (/J 0 0 j;i;' • • -.. (D, • • • • • " • • (/J , __ -,---r;;---; .. :--·. --••. I __L__ L _ ,L IL I I I I I I I I I I I '\I I I • -"--I·• I I 1· : 'f . ·I 4 1· I I I. . --.-.-. -+··· • •. . . @ .,__._._ . • R • . ·-:--•·.. B • . . --:-~ ' • • • ~ • , I " • I • " • -.--.,....-, . : • • ,: r-;-. ·-. ·:--. . , . . . 1 .. , .. =ti .,;,.,-• -··--•• t •• -. --·--. © ... . _._. __ ... ·\ "• . " -!-'\. • __ .-_.__ .. --·-· .... ,., ., . ' , .,, -+-.......__ ·-----··-,.-~ -+- I -t- -I- -+- -+- - - - - - -- I - TOTAL DEPTH AT 14 FEET - -NO GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED BACKFILLED: 11/15/99 -- • • ..... LOG OF TRENCH NO.: • 1\i3 ~ Project Name: Cantarini Progert~ Logged by: KBC ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Project Number: 4980160-001 . Elevation: · f50 Feet- Equipment: JD710 Location: See Geotechnical MiQ I GEOLOGIC GEOLOGIC Sample· Moist: Density · ATTITUOES DATE: 11/15/99 DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses No. . (%) (pcf) TOPSOIL I A @ 0-2.5': Clayey fine to medium SAND; ·brown, damp, medium SC I dense, fine to medium pores common, rootlets . common B @ 2 • 5 ' ·_ 3 . 5 ' : Fine to medium SAND; brown, damp loose to medium SM dense, abundant large pores, friable TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION Tsa C @ 3.5'-13.5': Fine to medium SANDSTONE; light orange-brown, SM damp, dense to very dense, approximately horizontally bedded, cross-bedding common .. .. ' : I GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: 1" = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 5°W TREND: _Nl5°E I fl . ., ..... :., _, ' .... • .~~-®.-::::-:,..:-:-,,• .. ---- ·-'• • ,.&.~ ----:-• .. ~ • ~ ""_..:.. I • ----. . --. . ~ . . . . r -._·-~.------~-I~·•• ,I> ---..:. •.., ... • ,_ --:--,_o ,_ ,• ... ., ,,;,,I -. : ==-. ·. " . .._ ,, .. ~ ·. . . B .~ . : , ... , ~ -.:.. .. - . I I I I I I II ·111.··1.:1··.1.:1·,.~1~,'IIII I I I I I I I I I I I · I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I\-'.-~ , .. ! ,. .. ,. . • I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I .I .... -~ .. :: ·. ·. ' ... . . . ---. . . . i,, l "' , • ./ .. . . . .. .... ·-. . ' • • • ' •. : t-I ---1--• ~ • ,... .. " . . . ..... • : • " ,I . . . . . .... -:~ . . . @ ... ---. . . .... -,. ~ ....... ~ '. 1 I a a • : . ---. . ,, • .. • .. 'II ~ " . •.· .. : ' . . . . .. ~ .. . . . . . . . . TOTAL DEPTH AT 13.5 FT -.... -. •. . . . . --.. .. . . . . I NO GROUND WATER . ' . . . ) .... --.. "' .. • II II.,, ••• ---. . ENCOUNTERED . . . .. . . . .. -. --. . . . ~ --BACKFILLED: · 11/15/99 --. . . --. . . ---. ' . • • • LOG OF TRENCH NO.: T-i4 ~ Project Name: Cantarini Property Logged by: _ _,..K=BC,.__ ____ _ ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Project Number :_4.:...::9;..;:::8-=-0=l 6:..;:0;..,,.·--=-00=1=---------Equi pment: JD71Q. - Elevation: 160 Feet Locc!,t ion: See Geotechn i ca 1. Map ~ GEOLOGIC GEOLOGIC Sample Moist. 'Density "t ATTITUDES DATE: 11/15/99 DESCRIPTION: UNIT USCS No.. (%) (pcf) :l>L-----'---'-----------'-----'-----------------------------Jl-----h-----J..---1------1----l -1 ...L 0 ...... <O 0 -1 ~ co· :r TOPSOIL A @ 0-1.5': ~ilty fine SAND; brown, damp, loose, few medium pores, rootlets common TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION B @ L5'-10': C @ 10'-13': D E @ 13' -15': @ 15' -20': Fine to medium SANDSTONE; very light gray with orange~brown iron~oxide staining common, damp to moist, dense Sandy SILTSTONE; dark gray, moist, dense, fossilized animal burrows common SILTSTONE; dark gray, moist, dense . Silty, fine to medium SANDSTONE; light to dark gray,· moist, dense Tsa SM SM SM/ML ML SM 1 ()1-----L----,-----------------,-.-,'---------'---------'----'--'-~--1---L-.---L.---1-------J ~I GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION ~ (/) 0 0 iii" -(1) (/) ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ t- t- t- I- SCALE: 1" = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 25°W TRENrr: N85°W [ ~ -. ·1·~ ' . -~ . . •, . ·, • I • · I· ,·,. \·-... . 01 . . . ·. :. ··1 : .\ ... I~-... :-:l .' . ~ . ,I , -. • .• .. • ~ ,, • • • . · 1 • • I • •• ' • ; 1· :. '1 • • ' ,• • '. . I • ,· • .... • I · l . l \ . . ' .. ' .· .. : .. ,.~· .... ·~ ..... -· ...... ':. ·. ::. ' 'i' .1,--,--.. 1,_ ... 1i ] .. '.~I, ' ' .. .-1, I I I ' I -+- -+- -+- -+- -+- -+- -+- 1 m• 1 J • . • • •• 1 : •1 ··•L· I . , ~ , , 1 · 0 '. . ... .' \ : ,. . • ,1. , . • 1 • . . • . I I. I I I = ' 1· .. ., • ' 1 · . . • . • 1 . . , . • , ,, . -:-1 ~ . . . . . . : .... : @·· .' l.:. l •• : : . ... . • 1-, ,.' .g 0 : -~ .. ·~@· ~ 1 · : .o I ; C .. ~ I' -, .· ® . . . .. . A -0 -,.-••••• fi '.Jl' . ;. ... ··.. -j 'I .·, ' I I. • .. ·' ' I I ·.-. . . ,.. __. ~ :.,;"'·i :··.·· .. \··1···1:~.1,·.··.·:_.-.. ~--~~ ~ ,'• "\' = 1-· · ·1·· .,, ·.·,, ,. ~ ..... · · ... n -,I·····~ ··Ji·., .. • .. _ -·· _::·-··._-!I. =s- =s" -I- -+- -+- -I- · ~-' f ~I • ·t· ' -. . ·· -, •• _ . 1'• •. -•o', '•" • •. • ,•,. •. • I•:,, -+-•.: .. 1 '· .. -. .' • • • ., .... 't . ' ... . : .. • · . • j· • I ·1· . ·1·· , .. · . · . . · . · . ~ .. · · · · :.-1:.-·::_,~_ ·1'··1· \=i.-1 ... ; ,. :· .. < ... ·,·.-..... ··._. ... J· --:., .-·~,. : .... · I 'I-.·~-~ ·1 -~ ,. · .. -· . · · . · , .. , · .. '. ·:· . -·,· ,; .. 1··1-L·1 • • .-, . ·; ~ ··._ •• -••.• :' ·._ : .•. · , .. ;. ·-.• l._, ....•. "'!; .,, •: ,. ', ' : , .: .... _ . .:·. . t .. I a .,.. - - - I I I I I I I I I I I I - - - - TOTAL DEPTH AT 20 FEET - NO GROUND WATER: -ENCOUNTERED BACKFILLED: 11/15/99 -- 01 0 ..a. I > -1 .... 0 ...... (0 0 -1 • • Project Name: Cantartnt ProQerty · Logged by: KBC Project Number: 4980160-001 Elevation: 260 Feet Equipment: JD710 Location: See Geotechnical NaQ GEOLOGIC ·. . . GEOLOGIC ATTITUDES. DATE: 11/15/99 DESCRIPTION: UNIT TOPSOIL A @ 0-0.5': Silty fine to medium SAND; brown, dry, loose, rootlets common ' CRETACEOUS GRANITICS Kgr B @ 0.5'-2.5': Weathered GRANITE; orange .... brown,.dry, very dense, weathers to silty medium to coarse sand-size grains .. @ 2.5': Practical refusal • ~O.G OF TRENCH NO.: T-15 L__ ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Sample Moist. Densi.ty uses No. . (%) (pcf) SM : : SM ,. r CD (0 ::;' -0 ::, s:io > (/) (/) 0 0 su -CD en .... .... .... - - - -- -- >- - GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION· I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SCALE: l 11 = 5' .. _._ ® \ --. . " • -.. t ./ "=" /--· -·--.. ~ ._ __ .... _.',) 7'.'-;,: -~!-": . -~:; I.,:/ • :A',@·:..:. h': ··i; I ·,·•/'1 ,1 ·• ; B . ,•y, I ./ I I I I I ~--!/ . ·;-~-~: ·' ~ -.... •' . -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - SURFACE SLOPE: 3-5°W TREND: N25°W --- --- : ··. ·,·/ ---1/?. _,... -',: I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ,..-I I I I I . I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I _._ - _._ - --- --- ' ->-TOTAL DEPTH AT 2.5 FT. - ,_._ NO GROUND WATER -ENCOUNTERED --BACKFILLED: 11/15/99 - ->-- • Project Name: Cantarihi Property Project Number:_· -'·4 __ 9 ___ 80 ___ 1 ___ 6 ___ 0_-0 ___ 0 ___ 1 _______ _ Equipment:· JD710 • Logged by :_.....:K=-BC:;.,:,·-------,- Elevat ion: 238 -Feet Location: See .Geotechni ca 1 Map • LOG OF TRENCH NO.: T-16t / ENGINEERING PROPERTIES ~ GEOLOGI-C GEOLOGIC · Sample · Moist. Density -t ATTITUDES · DATE: 11/15/99 DESCRIPTION: . UNIT uses 'No. (%} (pcf) > . -1 ..... 0 ...... <O 0 -1 ~ s· :::r - CRETACEOUS LUSARDI FORMATION A B @ 0-·2.5': Silty fine to medium SANDSTONE; off-white to very light gray with orange-brown iron-oxide staining common, damp, dense to very dense @ 2.5'-8': Sandy gravel.CONGLOMERATE; orange-brown, damp, dense to very dense, cobbles common @ 8': Practical refusal I Kl SM ( GP 0 1-----'-------------'-------,---------------'----'-----'---__J'------'-~--'---'-------I ~ GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: 111 = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 0° TREND: N20°E )> en i-en Ot-o ~I--(D en I. I I I I I I I I I I I I -+- . . .. • ~ ... . . ;,.:..-@' ', ' -. -• •. _:_ .. _,,. I. I •, • I -;,·:-t .. • : I •la f,; lo'_ I" _ _'__() I, I I J_ \'. J I· . i ' I • I 10 o I D ,, I QI_'· J I • 1.. .# • • 0 • "· 0 • 0 , .I> D ~ • 0 ~ I) t' • 0 ,-~ '': : c,: ~ . ,' e, ••• op-. . • ®·· o " -<>· a -1-\·,,' o, ,_. "o u·, 'if".: o 'o••, ~ 01> •IJ.,O.•, •• •,:,' • .c -1-\ ()' If _: t7 ~ 1/, , tJ' • O D O O ',o • O ·····o -<9~o·, \. Fl, •D • " • • • : P' -+-~ .. " . ,o 0 {) 0 •. ,1 ,_ ~ o. • , -t- -t- -t- -t- - - - - - - - - TOTAL DEPTH AT 8 FEET - NO GROUND WATER -ENCOUNTERED -1-1BACKFILLED: 11/15/99 - -1-I - • Project Na~e: Cantarini Property Project Number: 4980160~001 -----".......=.""-------~---------------Equipment:, JD710 • Logged by:_-'-'K=B~C--'------Elevation:. 205 Feet Location: _See Geotechnical Map • LOG OF TRENCH NO.: T-17 '-- ENGINEERING PROPERTIES ~ GEOLOGIC GEOLOGIC Sample Mdist: Density -t ATTITUDES DATE: 11/16/99 DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses No. (%) (pcf) >l'-----1-----------------.a.----,----'------+---+----+---.i----+----l -1 -" 0 ...... (0 0 ·- r co iE,." ~ TOPSOIL A @ 0-2': Silty SAND; dark brown, moist, loose~ slightly clayey, few medium pores, rootlets common · CRETACEOUS LUSARDI FORMATION B @ 2'-12': Silty, fine to coarse' SANDSTONE; gray with orange- brown iron-oxide staining, damp, den.se to very dense, scattered cobble and boulders SM Kl SM oi------'-------------------''-----------,------L----,-L-----'---,---"---'----'------'--'------l ·~ GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: l" = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 5-7°S TREND, NI0°W > ~ L--~ .. •. ,· 0 - _.,_ . • .. -.• @· . ' ,, . . . .. , • -,.. ' t • • ' ... 0 :-• -, • ' I ..,)\.• ~ \ \. • I• l:. •., \, -· , ' , • .. ,. r . , • ~ : r • ,: , .. .-• • • •" • ( • • • '/ " " o ..;,, I CD .. • , ..... : .......... I • ·," '-. I. •• ... ... • • .: • a, ... ' .. . I • I : ~ • • \ • I-I I ...J~ I I 1--1--~~~~~~~. I• l.: I._ 'L ,.L~._L_.:1, · ·1' I- I- I- I I I I I I I I I . I I I I I ~ ·1, ... ~1 -! · ._I I I.-. 11 • ] • } 1 J • • -\ .,, 1 ....... '\ 0 ' • '., 0·• I 0 -1-\• - •• -··· 'i) @' ti -I-'.: "'· B ' - - - - - - - I-i •• -1-'\ • - (.,. / 0.; ': I- I- I- I- -t- -t- -t- -t-~ •,. ·. -.: _ _.ll/ a .. ·.··· .. ·' • • • I t, • , ..... ~~·-•• I ·~ ·. ' . • ' I • . , . . .. - -+-,TOTAL DEPTH AT 12 FEET - -+-, NO GROUND WATER -ENCOUNTERED -+-'BACKFILLED: 11/16/99 - -I-I - • • • LOG OF TRENCH NO.: T-18 '\-.,, Project Name: Cantarini ProQerty Logged by: KBC ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Project Number: 4980160-001 Elevation: 195· Feet Equipment.: .JD710 Location: See Geotechn i ca 1 Mag· GEOLOGIC . GEOLOGIC Sample Moist. ·Density_ ATTITUDES DATE: 11/16/99 DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses · No. (%) (pcf) TOPSOIL A @ 0-1': Silty SAND; brown, moist, loose, few medium pores, SM rootl~ts common . B . @ 1'-2.5': Sandy CLAY; dark brown, moist, medium to stiff, CL few cobbles . QUATERNARY COLL UV IUM Qcol C @ 2.5'-4': Clayey fine.to coarse SAND; orange to red-brown, SC moist, stiff to very stiff, few cobbles TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION Tsa D @4'-6': Fine to coarse SANDSTONE; yellow-brown, damp, dense, SM fractured CRETACEOUS. LUSARDI FORMATION Kl E :@ 6' -9 I! Medium to coarse SANDSTONE; gray, damp, dense to SM very dense, moderate silica cement @ 9': Practical refusal - GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: l 11 = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 5-7°S TREND: N32°E . ~ ___ ...:.. .. : _::._ .. :.,,.:.:.._/ --i-----. . . .,• ... ., ., . ~-_.J ---•.• ·.~ •• '!--,•.7. ~ W,-=:::,•;;-·~ ~···· '.. --/ .. ,. .... --. ---~ __::. ... _ .. . .. .. ~ •: I ~} ~ ... '. ----< . --y -. ~~ .,r .. ~ r-----~-:· ---' ~~-·~-:· · .. , ... ;, - I I I, I\ ,--.-_,,.,_ 1,: • - •(..'. I I I ---_.-,:::..r.':;, ._.i .' ,.,· "J~ I I I I I I I I _. ,-' ( 'I• . I I I I I I I I I I I I' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I \, ~. ·L . .J .!..,!--.• •! ' I , ''---'-; ·, . ~r/ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ..... -=\ ...... ' ® ·._ . ·. ··. .::-J ---.... ~ . ·.. ,.: ', D , -..... --: ' • a.~ --I I -• ., ,, .. , " ... , . -.., ~ -. , . i---\ . ,··->:-:.·-;; ~ ---.... ·, :· . • •• I I @· ~-~ . i---.... ---~ -. ,. : ' . ..... : ·; ! .. • I ' ~--~ ....... i-_,_ --TOTAL DEPTH AT 9 FEET - i---->-NO GROUND WATER -ENCOUNTERED i-_,_ --BACKFILLED: 11/1?/99 -· ----.... - • • ,, •• LOG OF -TRENCH NO. : T -·19 ~ Project Name: Cantarini Progerty Logged by: KBC ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Project Number: 4980160-bOl Elevation: 185 Feet Equipment: . JD710 Location: See Geotechnical Mag : .GEOLOGIC GEO~OGIC Sample Moist.. Density ·.ATTITUDES· DATE: 11/16/99 DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses No .. (%) (pcf) . . gUA1ERNARY COLLUVIUM · Qco_l . @ o--@c1ayey SAND; brown,-moist to wet, soft to medium, I A SC I I .gravel common · CRETACEOUS LUSARDI FORMATION Kl B @ 12_' -14.5': Gravelly to cobbly, fine to coarse SANDSTONE; GW yellow~brown, damp, very.dense . . . GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION -SCALE: ' I" ::, 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 5°SW TREND: N65°E I -. • r , ... ·a. • ,-~ • -... -J : -~ 'r.: : ---... •' ..... _ -\. . ., ' . ., , . . ' -T·---. I ,,; J ... "'ll ·, .. -t -----. ' ~ __ • • .. '.. -· • 0 '-~ ' I ,. 0 . --' --. . -. ., __ , .. J I \•..i_; I -.. ·... __ 1, • I ---,.-b • I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I ' I ' -, • _'I I • 1 •. ,·.,,·,, I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1· I I I I I I I I I I I I I , I I I I • ..._! • I .. I I I I, I I I I I I I I I I ·I I I ---~® ·_. --.... .: . ., ' . ---' ,·, ... --·-o I I --.... . . .,, ' .. ---• I .. .. -:--' , ---0 . . -~ •' : I . -i:--. ---.. --: ., , • ., t) !> .-_,_ --. -J I --\' .-. ;. j ,---· ........ 1--:c-. ·, o· __::_.JI . . --TOTAL DEPTH AT 14.5 FT~ ~ ' ., I • ' NO GROUND WATER ,---. . . .,,. I ·---.,,-\ ---. . ... .. ENCOUNTERED .... --~ 0 I • •• • • < ''•t:J' --BACKFILLED: 11/16/99 -• . •• 0 :--.·@·v ,-__ ,_ 00.J . ·" ---. ..., t:> .... v.,., , • • • ·.·.· LOG OF TRENCH NO. : T -20 ,---· Project Name: Cantarini ProQerty _Logged by: KBC ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Project Number: 4980160-001 Elev.at ion:. 120 Feet .. Equipment: JD710 Location: See Geotechnical MaQ : GEOLOGIC GEOLOGIC Sample Moist. Density · ATTITUDES DATE: 11/16/99 DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses No. (%) (pcf) gUATERNARY COLLUVIUM . Qcol . ' I A @ 0-8': Clayey SAND; brown, moist, soft to medium, scattered SC I cobble I TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION Tsa B @ 8'-10': Silty,_fine to medium SANDSTONE; gray, dry, dense, SM fossiliz~d plant material common , . . , GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: l 11 = 5' . SURFACE SLOPE: 5°SE TREND: N45°W · . ----' • ! .. I --- ---. . . ,.. ... · . , . : -. . = -, ... • ,. J ,I . ,,. ,; ...... --. . ~ ~~:,: ~·. -·~ . . . I--;--.. J' , .... - • I ..... A , .. . .. , . .· -.. --I---· . • I .... - I ·\ '.....- -/ · ............... • •I .• I• I •• • I ., I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ I 'I I· I 1 I I I I I 1· I I I I I I I I. I I I r I I I I I I I I I I "\ '.'. ,.,. I I I .> I I I •I I I I I. I I I I I I I I • • I ,--~ • .... .,~: ! :·~ .# -. .:._ -. . . • I • ' -. ' \ . ' . . . I--,--;-_:-c' r ,-.. , ----. . ,; ·----. ~-· ·-. --,__ .. : ! \' .. J ' ,-t ---•, • •' , I ... \ , -;-:; ~ . : --~ ,,, --. . ---. ,. . . --·· -. .. -' ,4. • • .,,:,_-•• \i~® . :j/ --... . . ---TOTAL DEPTH AT 10 FEET -__,.! • --.: .. -_..,_ . _;,. ;~ :.: •. r" . --NO GROUND WATER -ENCOUNTERED .... -.... --BACKFILLED: 11/16/99 - ------ • • • LOG OF TRENCH NO.:_ T-il ~ Project Name: Cantarini Prbperty Project Number:_4~9_8~0-16~0_-_00-1 _______ _ Logged by:_..,_,K=BC:::..,_ ____ _ Elevation: .92 Feet ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Equi-pment: JD710 Location: See Geotechnical Map ~I GEOLOGIC I I I I t ATTITUDES DATE: 11/16/99 . .DESCRIPTION: GEOLOGIC! I Sample Moist. Density -UNIT uses No. (%) (pcf) --L 0 ...... (0 0 _, ~ ca· :,- QUATERNARY COLLUVIUM A @ 0-3.5': Clayey SAND; light brown, damp to moist, medium, scattered gravel, medium pores common, rootlets common B @ 3.5' -4.5': Medium SAND; brown, dry, loose,. abundant medfum to large pores, friable C @ 4.5'-6': Clayey SAND; li.ght brown., damp to moist, medium, medium pores common D @ 6' -9': Sandy CLAY; dark brown; moist, ·stiff E @ 9'-17.5': Fine to coarse SAND; yellow-brown, moist, loose to medium dense, scattered cobble @ 17.5': Exceeded reach of backhoe I I Qcol I SC SM SC CL SM I I - C)l--------'--'-----------------------'----'---------------'------,.._-----,---J'-------J'------1------1 ~-GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: 111 = 5' E SLOPE: 2-3°S TREND: Nl0°r ~ . .:--.;.: . ; . ,· . . / ; -® . . .,_ . : . -., . ~,.A, I 'I j ' .. "1 ,. , \ .. ,,.. . ~ -I- -+- - - -+--~--·~H~~~~~-++++-f-+-+++j I .,. ~ ... , --,-·~ .... ~,, ~. I I I I I I ~ - I I I I I I I I I -., i..:. ,-. -==:--:-., I. ® ' . . . ·: . . _' I ' -I-.--~, .,-'-'. ,' -:-::::,_.. I , • I• • • '.:..---:-I o. I• \ ~ ., " I -I-... .. . ::---,/ _, . . -, , . I ., ., .-• ; ( I • -I- I- I- I- I- I -+-I • ,,.: , , -+-I ,I ' .®• v:.•.' .· --+-\ < .' -.-.. • ,· l -. -r: ', ., , -: .. ;: . I :. ._ •; • , : 1 ' -I- --t- -+- -+- \ ,.' -/ I 1/ '-. -.. .-_, ':-';1/ - - - TOTAL DEPTH AT 17.5 FT - -NO GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED BACKFILLED: 11/16/99 -- • • • LOG OF TRENCH NO.: T-Z2 ~ Project Name: Cantari n·i Property Logged by: _ ......... K __ BC=---___ __._ ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Project Number:_4=9-=8=01::..;:6=0 ....... ~o ..... o;..a;I __________ _,.. Equipment: JD710 El evat.i qn: 100 Feet Location: See Geotechnical Map ~ GEOLOGIC . GEOLOGIC Sample Mai st-. Density 't, ATTITUDES DATE: .11/16/99 DESCRIPllON: UNIT uses No. (%) (pcf) I. -1 ..... 0 ..... <O 8.1 r (D cE" ::r QUATERNARY COLLUVIUM A @ 0~7.5': Clayey SAND; dark gray-brown, moist to wet, soft to medium, organic m,tter common · TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION B @ 7.5-9': Fine to medium SANDSTONE; light gray with yellow- ·brown staining common, damp to moist, dense Qcol SC Tsa SM 51----...L------~---'---'-----'-------'--------------------L---'--.....L,_--'---L-----'L----L----I ~I GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION ?: u, 0 (') i ~ I I I I i _I_ I _I ,----. I ,-I SCALE: 1" = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 2-3°S -I- l/:::_: .. _. ··r· ---:.--, --~,-; ---:-.-.,/:_ I • • • • A .. ., . ---, ,<-• J: f . .... ®. ,,. : ... . . \ -... I I I I ',1, I j I : . I' I ·1 -''1 • • 11 , I , 11 I. 1 ~. I I I , l, -.-1;-:r-J 7,1.,. Ii I I -~ r -" ·.•. . =.·., l :. . ...... J .. J ., i ·~ ~ -; : .,· ' ~., , , .. ' . :. .. . J • .. ... ---:-' •• , .... -' ... ., ~/ ... .. ' • i -•. • .. .., ;;• I. _•: . ! Ci:~· -J -~! • ·.J '/ -1-.,./ .. ...,.,,.\UJ i-_~ -I--+- -I--+- -I--+- TREND: Nl0°E - - - - - - - - TOTAL DEPTH AT 9 FEET - NO GROUND WATER -I ENCOUNTERED -BACKFILLED: 11/16/99 I - <.n 0 .... I )> -· ...I, 0 ' <O 0 -, . -r (I) (0 ::r --0 :::s ~ ~ (/) 0 0 iu -gj • •• • LOG OF TRENCH NO~ : T -d L,__ · Project Name: Cantarini ·ProQerty Logged by: KBC ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Project Number: 4980160-001. Elevation: 132 Feet ' · Equipment: . JD710 Location: See G~ot~chhtcal MaQ ,, GEOLOGIC GEOLOGIC Sample Moist . . Density ATTITUDES DATE: 11/16/99 DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses No. (%) (pcf) TOPSOIL A @ 0-2': Clayey fine to coarse SAND; brown, moist, soft to SC medium, organic matter common QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS Qt B @2'-4': Medium·to coarse SAND; red-brown, moist; medium SP dense to dense C @ 4' -5': Coarse sandy gravel to cobble CONGLOMERATE; red-GP brown, moist, dense : GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION .. SCALE: 1 II = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 2-3°W . TREND: N5E - -----.... - ------K. ·. ·,:@'···-· .. -,, '· ····/ -· --, .'-. , : A , . ·--:-.,. • • .. •I ------. . • ,. " r :• -,.. "I".,/••• .. _, ....... ,, .... -I-. ----- I I 1 I 1 I I I I I I I I ~--~I ·:.1 •' . , .--( :, ·. · .... ', I -.., .• 'j/ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -1 I I I '\-~•'•I • '',I@ I '···.7 · I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~~ . B· ... , , ., .... -.... . -. . . . ,. ---~ , @) ... V ..... -. ., 0-; ... J; ---,-<>· :,:; r, c!) ------ ------ -----TOTAL DEPTH AT 5 FEET - -----NO GROUND WATER -ENCOUNTERED -----BACKFILLED: 11/16/99 - ------ • • • LOG OF TRENCH NO.: T~24 L----' Project Name: Cantarini ProQerty Logged by: kBC ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Project Number: 4980160-001 ~levation: 116 Feet Equipment: JD710 Location: See Geotechnical MaQ . ' GEOLOGIC GEOLOGIC .. Sample· Mai st. Density ATTITUDES DATE: 11/16/99 . DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses No. (%) (pcf) QUATERNARY COLLUVIUM Qcoi A @ 0-9.5': Silty SAND; brown to dark gray-brown, moist to SM wet, loose, slightly clayey, medium pores common, few pockets with abundant large pores B @ 9.5'-16~: Silty SAND; yellow-brown, moist, medium dense, SM clayey lenses common @ 16': Excavation exceeded reach of backhoe GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: I" = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 5°S TREND·: N5E I ' . . ' .. , -'' \I . \ : ,, \ .. .. \ ' i .. •/ .: .• : . , . .... .,... -• " • I • 4*' ' '• -----\--~--•"'., • : , I .'-I. .... -, .. :. '"" ... -~ ... -,--· • J .. • ' ... ..... ' --. : ·: :;: -~ ,.,-.,-~-,. ~·~ •: ,, . _,.... -, , . -. -I'-..... ., ~· ---- I I I I . I I I I I I I I ·1 I ·• I ' • I Iii• '.---;'~ • I I · I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I · I I I I I I I I '\'' I I . I I /' I I I I I I I I -I I I I I I I I I ... .. . .. ---. . . .. .,. .. ::::'' ---... .....:.....:..-.. --"t'.._• ........ ··-.-· ---: . ·.: , , ---. . . . , \ -1 ·.-.----: -• -· • l -~·----... 1 .. J' • ... • , . . , ---..... •• I --- . . , ... I I •I.,• , ' . · ... ' TOTAL DEPTH AT 16 FEET -..... ---~--··· . "° . _.; . -- ---'··® .. ·, . . --NO GROUND WATER .. ! . -.. , I ENCOUNTEREO -~-. . . _ .. ..:-.. -'-\' . . . . BACKFILLED: 11/16/99 -. . . . . .. - : ' ,. ---· .-· 1/ ---I ,• ---'' ' \ .. ~ . /. " -. . _, •;,., .. I__.. ~ 01 0 _,, I )> _, ...L' 0 ..... CD 0 _, r (I) (0 :,-g- :::, s:)o. ~ Cl) 0 0 iu -(D Cl) ,. • • LOG OF TRENCH NO.: T-25<--- · Project Name: . Cantarini Progerty Logged by: KBC ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Project Number: 4980160-001 Elevation: 140 Feet Equipment: JD710 Location:. See Geotechnical Mag GEOLOGIC -GEOLOGIC Sample Moist. Density- ATTITUDES DATE: 11/16/99 DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses No. ' (%~ (pcf) · TOPSOIL : A @ 0-0.5': Silty fine SANO; brown, damp., loose, rootlets common SM TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION Tsa B:N35°W, B @ 0.5' -3': Fine to coarse SANDSTONE; yell ow-brown and gray, SM 12°SW damp, dense, beddi n·g common GRAPHIC R_EPRESENTATION SCALE_: 1" = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 3-5°W TREND: N55°E .... --~ _,_ - -~ .• +-r.n" .. ~ ., .,, . -........ ~ -.... s;Y' ----,.· . --: ., :. •. · .• ·r. --. -·.:::, Ki'··:~_.;.'.', '@· ..... --- I. B ' . ;. •., . . ; . • I.,•• • --...; --,, ... , ' . . . . ~, ., ·.~ ·'.1/ I I I I I I I I I I I I I .• i. 1 . .... . I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I' I I I I I I I I I I ------ ------. ---. --- ------ ---_,_ TOTAL DEPTH AT 3 FEET - -----NO GROUND WATER -ENCOUNTERED -----BACKFILlED: 11/16/99 - I---_,_ - • • • LOG OF TR~NC Project Name: Cantarini Property Logged by: ________ KB~C _____ _ Project Number:· 49.80160-001 Elevation: 212 Feet Equipment: JD710 Location: See Geotechnical Map ~ GEOLOGIC L:l-lic-+flft---GEOLOGIC Samp·1 e Moist. Density, T ATTITUDES. DESCRIPTION:. UNIT u_scs No. (%) (pcf) > . .... 0 ..... (0 0 -1 ~· r5· ::r brown, moist, stiff, gravel and ootlets commQn near ground surface QUATERNARY COLLUVIUM moist, stiff CRETACEOUS LUSARDI FORMATION C @ 8'-16.5': Silty, fine to medium SANDSTONE; light ~ray-green and yellow-bro~n, damp to moist, dense, crumbly to blocky Qcol SC Qcol SC 1 Kl SM ![ GRAP~lC REPRESENTATION -Sl'.7 ; I > I I J;.,.:-.-I "I I I I SCALE: l 11 = 5' ..._ ACE SLOPE: 5°W TREND: N55°W • • _._·_:___(° -,•' •• -.~ ..... _-:--,.. .. ~ ~ ~ ' ., (/) (/) 0 0 iu' -a J ..__ --. ® ' .. t·. _._. . . -: . ' ~~ __ ... _ ·..:.:;_. ,-. • ,__ .,,. __:.I, ···-· . I "•-.-·.--. .,_ •. ·'·~·-,--.. I I' . - . . . ··1· ' . ,, 0·+ · --~~ ,,~.... ." ... ·· ._._ .. .-J:..-• . -. 1. ·-.... ~ .. \ • I \ • =---.;_-,·--::. .. I .,- TOTAL DEPTH AT 16.5 FT NO GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED BACKFILLED: 11/16/99 I. • • LOG OF TRENCH NO.: T:27 ~ Project Name: Cantarini ProQerty Logged by: KBC ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Project Number: 4980160-001 ' . Elevation: ·215 Feet Equipment: JD710 · Location: See Geotechnical MaQ '• : GEOLOGIC GEOLOGIC Sample Moist. Density · ATTITUDES DATE: 11/16/99 DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses No. (%) (pcf) ' TOPSOIL/QUATERNARY COLLVUIUM Qcol ' • Sandy CLAY; dark brown, damp, medium, medium to l;lrge • A @ 0-4': CL I pores common, blocky . CREATCEOUS LUSARDI FORMATION Kl B @ 4' -6': Silty fine to coarse.SANDSTONE; light gray and SM yellow-brown, damp, den~e, crumbly . . . . GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION SCALE: l 11 = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: l0°S TREND: N45°E ; ) • ' .... --_.:,. -y -' • • I • • . . ---·\ •I•" •• !, -• ---J ... •., ' -... ,, -: ' . ' . -----' ,. I • • 0·,.,-;-:-• I I-· ~ • -·• ., I -.... - '" f\~ _..--. . '--:7 .. ' ... !_ -~.. • ---:;-!. -·, - ~·.·,II _,_ _, I • 1~ I •· I ..!. --, :~:·;-=,-;-.· I I I I I r· I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 'I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ,. ,__,. '· -: . ! -:'· . '· ' I_/ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I .... --~= ~@:·~_-.Jj: /' ---.. >---~ ,.-:-:= .·: --- .' I. -• • -· >------ >------ .... -----TOTAL DEPTH AT 6 FEET - .... -1---NO GROUND WATER -ENCOUNTERED .... -'"": --BACKFILLED: 11/16/99 - --1---- • • • LOG OF TRENCH NO. : T -z's ,__.- Project Name: Cantarini Property Project Number:_4=9-=8--01=6"""0_-__ 00 __ l ___ . _______ _ Logged by:_..:..:K:..aBC:;._ ____ _ Elevation: 255 Feet ENGINEERING PROPERTIES Equipment: JD710 Location: See Geo"technical Map GEOLOGIC! I Sample g:I GEOLOGIC I I I I tJATTITUD.Es· · DATE: 11/16/99 . Moist. Density ....... ...a. 0 ...... (0 8 DESCRIPTION: TOPSOIL/QUATERNARY ·COLLUVIOM A @ o~3': Sandy CLAY; dark brown, damp, medium, crumbly to blocky, rootlets common near ground surface QUATERNARY COLLUVIUM B @ 3'-4.5': Sandy CLAY; gray-brown with white calcium carbonate blebs common to abundant, moist, stiff CREATACEOUS POINT LOMA FORMATION r C @ 4.5' -16': Interbedded sandy -SILTSTONE and· silty SANDSTONE; ~-gray and yellow, moi.st, dense to very dense, .. UNIT uses No. (%) (pcf) I I . Qcol I CL I Qcol I CL Kp SM/ML 1 '::f' blocky ()1----~....._---'--'---------'----------,--------------'----~--....._ __ __. __ __.__ __ ---I ; GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION ___,~SURFACE SLOPE: ? f f ~1 I I I 1 . . . . • I- I- I- I- ~ . 12°SW TRENO: N30 ° E· t -+-I -+-I -I -I - - - - I I I I I I . I I I - - - - TOTAL DEPTH AT 16 FEET - :i NO GROUND WATER -ENCOUNTERED BACKFILLED: 11/16/99 -- • • • LOG OF TRENCH NO.: T-2~~ Project Name: Cantarini Property ProjeGt Number:_4.:..;:;9=8~0=16;;...;:0:....~~00--'l::..;·""""·--------- Logged by: _,.....K ___ BC _____ --,...-_- Elevation: 278 Feet ENGINEERING PROPERTIES · Equipment: JD710 Location: See Geotechnical Map ~ _GEOLOGIC . GEOLOGIC Sample Moist. _Density. 7 ATTITUDES DATE: 11/16/99 DESCRIPTION: UNIT uses No. (%). (pcf) ,. >1-------4-------------------------,----+---+----+-'-----l-----+-----'---I -1 -L 0 ..... (0 0 - .-<D (0 '=t' . TOPSOIL A @ 0-2': Sandy CLAY; dark brown, moist, soft, blocky, few . calcium carbonate .blebs CREATACEOUS POINT LOMA FORMATION B @ 2'-19.5': Fine sqndy SILTSTONE to silty fine SANDSTONE; light gray to ·light gray-brown, damp to moist, dense, -Calcium carbonate blebs common in upper I-foot of unit CL Kp SM/ML' Cjl------'---------------'-----'---------------'-----'-----',-----,-L---.L----; ~I GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION ~ "' 0 0 i» -m ~ I I I I I I I ·1 I ~ t- I- I- t- I I&' I I i a :;I (I) 5 = SCALE: . l 11 = 5' SURFACE SLOPE: 8°W . '. j_ 1··~1. ~r. · . ~ 1· l ~ -I-_:,.1·r···-. ,, • ~ -1 -I-. . . . . ) I, I I. I • 'I I· 1 I · I · 1. ! 1 \ I , • I -I- -I- ;:,,i-~·T· . I I ~ I . ,-y, .----. . ~\ I . • . · I . . . • .. · I · f' t· -I-I • ·t · , ' . . I . . , t ' ~ ~ 0 6 o .. • , -I-\. I , I ' '· I i . ; ; .. . @' I ... . ' t .. -I-\,·,r·, ·· ··1, ·. 11 · ·-·r · ·1,,1·-A 1 'I I I --' • · ~ ,.. • t ... • \ J • • • • .. • • • • I --1-.-~ t . ·· · j ! i · -. \ I ' ~-L ~-L~ I · flTc, ~ ,,, .... · ' I I · · . -I-I • I -I-~ l"1 -. ~ ---~-. ' I • . . . . - -I- -1- TREND: N75°W I I I "f} "ti a :;I (I) :, 0 ::3' - - -- I· I I I I I I I I I - I I I I - I - I - TOTAL DEPTH AT 19.5 FT- -NO GROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED BACKFILLED: 11/16/99 -- ,. •• •• APPENDIX B LOGS BY SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING OF SMALL-DIAMETER BORINGS AND TRENCHES DURING PREVIOUS PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION rT-1, T-2, T-8 AND T-9 -$- (1998) . B1-1, B1-2 •• · (1998) · ET-5, ET-7 AND ET-16 ~ (1998) EB-5 EB (1.998) T1-1-T1-21 1111· (T1-13 IS LOCATED OFFSITE} (1998) I J ~ ... J J J j J _i -J- ·--- 1- -11 - j 1 Date Excavated: LOG OF TEST TRENCH NUMBER Tl 10/2/98 Equipment: ___ =.:BA~C::.:::KH=O=E __ _ Logged by: MF Project Manager: OBA Surface Elevation(ft): -~--"-12_2-'_o __ _ Depth to Water(ft): I - -·5 - -. . . . . _; SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ~OPSOIL-Brown 1 Humid, Loose, CLAYEY SILTY SAND (SM/SC) SUBSOIL-Brown, Moist, Medium Den,se, Very CLAYEY SAND (SC) SANTIAGO FORMATION -Pale Green, Moist, Stiff, CLAYEY _SANDY SILT (ML) - ._ 10 I 111 i'l:I • Dark Green, Moist,Stiff, SANDY CLAY (CL), Moderately Fractured, Waxy Parting Surfaces, Discontinuous Lens ~ Pale Green, Moist, Stiff, CLAYEY SA_NDY SILT (ML) . . Contact Dips 7 Degrees/250 Gray, Humid, Dense, SILTY SAND (SM)--. ----------- -15 _·-.:---··_:· -:: · .... :-. . TRENCH ENDED @ 16 FT. -- SAMPLES Q ,-._ £->,-< 1-Ll ~ i:o -...,, ;3: er: CZ::: w £-0 :::> CZ::: £--<( £-:::> z (/) ::,c £-:::> er: (/) -C/) 0£-Q ....l ->-< Q ~~ z :::> 0 er: () :::> i:o ~ a-S ....l E-c -CK - !=--=~.i.____...L..._ _________ -,--_____ -____ _J__J__j__j__JL__ ~ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA 'W SOIL & TESTING, INC. Project Name: _ RANCHO CARLSBAD Project No. 9811280. l Plate No. 12 J i ••• . J· j j j J J ·-·· •• .J J J J I] . . . Date Excavated: LOG OF TEST TRENCH NUMBER T2 10/2/98 Equipment: ____ B=A~C=K=H=O=E __ _ Surface Elevation(ft): 104.0 .0 0 -l u ~ ~ 0 : .... -.-: ... . . SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS TOPSOIL-Brown, Humid, Loose, SILTY SAND (SM) ·SUBSOIL .,, Dark Orange-Brown, Moist, Medium Dense, CLAYEY SIL TY SAND (SC/SM) · .... : : TERRACE DEPOSITS -Brown to Gray to Rust Mottled, Moist, _ ·.: : : Medium Dense to Dense, CLAYEY SILTY SAND (SM/SC), Moderately Weathered, Some Caliche , ..... ··. ·. .· : .... • . . . .. : : .. : : 5 . ·. ·. :-. ·. :. : .· . · ..... : -15,i,rk Orange, Moist, Medium Dense to Dense: CLAYEY SILTY - SAND (SC/SM), some Gravel 10 Gray to Orange, CLAYEY SIL TY SAND (SC/SM) 15 TRENCH ENDED@ 17 FT. Logged by: MF Project Manager: DBA Depth to Water(ft): SAMPLES Cl ,-... ~ >--u.l ~ o:'.l ,._,, ;3: 0::: 0::: u.l E-< 0 ::J 0::: ...... E-< E-< ::J z < Cl) ~ E-< ::J 0::: Cl) ...... Cl) 0 E-< Cl -l ...... >,-< C ~t3 z ::J 0 0::: (.) ;:) o:'.l :E ac -l E-< I: ·._£-~--:-~-..__S_O_U_.___TH-E-:-R-N_C_A_L_I..,..F_O_R_N_I_A_--'-P---ro-je....,c-t -N-am-e:--------P-ro-~e-c..J.t N_...10._J___j__P_la-tej_N_o_. w SOIL & TESTING, INC. RANCHO CARLSBAD. 9811280.1 13 .:. . .. • • ••• J j J J I I I ' i ~· .. °' i: LOG OF TEST TRENCH NUMBER T8 Date Excavated: 10/2/98 Equipment: BACKHOE Surface Elevation(ft): 103.0 0 0 ,-.. -~ 4:: u SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS .._,, -::r: ::r: f-< p.. 0.. < w ~ 0 0 ~ TOPSOIL -Dark Gray Brown, Dry to Humid, Medium Dense, Very ;, __ ·.·.:/. I" ..... / CLAYEY SAND (SC). • SUBSOIL -.Dark Gray Brown, Humid, Very Stiff, SANDY CLAY (CL), Oradational Contact . . .. SANTIAGO FORMATION -Gray to Rust,Mo,ttled, Humid, Dense, . . ·. . . : ·. SILTY SAND (SM), Well Cemented . . . . . . . . . . . . . . •. . . -5 -:. .. ~ .. .. . . . . . . . . PRACTICAL REFUSAL@ 6 FT . - -10 - .. ; -15 - .. .. Logged by: MF Project Manager: DBA Depth to Water(ft): SAMPLES 0 ,-.. ~ >--w ~ CQ ..__, ~ ~ ~ Lil t: 0 ::::> ~ f-< f-< ;:J z < (/') f-< ;:J ~(/') ...... ~ (I') 0 E--c 0 ~ ->--Q ~fB z ;:J 0 ~ (.) ;:J CQ ~ o& ~ E--c Plate No. ~ SOUTHERN_CALIFORNIA .w so_~L & TESTING,. INC. Project Name:· RANCHO CARLSBAD Project No. 9811280. l 19 . . •• .J j J ·J J ••••• J ,. ·,I • • • ~ • ca - LOG OF TEST TRENCH NUMBEl:Z TY ---- Date Excavated: 1012198 Logged by: MF Equipment: BACKHOE Project Manager_: DBA Surface Elevation(ft): 96. 0 Depth to Water(ft): SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS TOPSOIL -Dark Gray Brown, Dry to Humid, Medium Dense, Very CLAYEY SAND (SC) . . . SUBSOIL, -Dark Gtay Brown, Hurriid, Very Stiff, SANDY CLAY (CL), Gradational Contact , · SANTIAGO FORMATION -Dark Gray-Brown to Rust, Humid, Very . Hard, SANDY SILT (ML), Highly Weathered to 3 ft., Moderately Weathered Below 3 ft., Bedding Dips 8 Degrees/190 SAMPl.£5 a w o:l 0:: ::::> E-(/.) ~ ...... Q ....l z ;::::) ;::::) P'.l CK · · ·:·: Tan, Humid, Dense, SILTY SAND (SM}, Well Cemented '-- ~ 5 -·. ·: ·: .. 0- '-10 - ---15 - ?. , ;::i .. . . ,•. PRACTICAL REFUSAL @·6.5 FT. CK ,---. >--~ f-.__,, ;3:: ci::: w f-0 ci::: ...... f- ;::::) z ~ f-;::::) ci::: V) (/) 0£-->--Q ~~ 0 ci::: <) ~ a& ...J E- t:.__~__._ __ ..__ _____ --'--__ ..;..._ __ .a...-_ _________ _j___Jc..._L__.l__j__ £ SOU~HERN CALIFORNIA w SOIL & TESTING, INC. Project No·. 9811280. l Plate N< Project Name: RANCHO CARLSBAD 20 •• i I ..,; j j J J J J : ••• J J J J J J J. -· -::z: UJ • 0 >-::z: >-~ -0. BORING NUMBER EB-S I-c., >-w !: --0 I---. >-I-I-w :z: I--c., ... -w ~ w z -I-:z: 'Cl --<( a: z w -·1-z (/) a: > 0 w ::, w I-(f). ~ < -z ::i, ·:· I- :c UJ ...J (.) ELEVATION 0 --. - I-...J --a: I-a: (/) ::z: a: I-w -I-z I-I-- 6.. 0. 0 LL < (/) < -w I-(f) -a u (/) w < 0 UJ :E (/) iii 0. -a. (/) 0 w ·---... a. -I---' < 0 < (/) 0. 0 Cl. :z: z (/) • >--0 z w 0.. (f) < < :E < 0 a;: . UJ w ~ a: :E 0 a: :E ..I DESCRIPTION (.) 0 0.. a: ~ 0 (.) 0 c., .c 0 0 - SM/ Brown, SILTY .to CLAYEY Humid Loose/ t BAG SC . SAND .. M'edium - Dense - - -- 5 I npncc.a - J UDS ML. Light Brown to Tan, VERY Humid Very 50 -CLAYEY SILT. $ti.ff -- -( PRE-QUATERNARY SEDIMENTS I - -- io I UDS SM Reddish - Light Brown, VERY Very 34 99.0 8.4 SILTY SAND Stiff/ - -Very - Layer Gravel from 12 ft. Dense --to 14 ft. .. ,. 15 [ SM Brown, SLIGHTLY SILTY BAG FINE to COARSE SAND - - -- -- -. - .. -20 I UDS Rusty 'Brown -40 106. 7 5.3 - - -Very Difficult to Drill - -- -- 25 -: _;, -- -- -- -- 30 ·~SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG ;_sF_; . SO I L & T E S Tl NG, INC. LOGGED BY: RF DATE LOGGED: 3-09-89 ., JOB NUMBER: 8821126 Plate No. 10 i ·:· ·J J J •• •• ' .··. J. J J J ,. J J . . --z Continued UJ 6 >-z • >-* -o..· ·BORING NU~BER 83-5" (.) >-" UJ ~ --0 I-- ..,, >-I- . I-. UJ I-::z:: I--u ~ -UJ ~ UJ z I-~ :z: a: :z: ui -I-z -0 (/) a: - -> 0 UJ :::, UJ I-(/) < < -z 1-- :c UJ ...J (.) ELEVATION 0 -:::, -- I-...J --a: 1--a: (/) z a: I-UJ -I-z 1--1-- 0 u. -- 0.. 0.. < en < -w I-(/) -Cl (J (/) UJ < u w ~ (/) in . 0.. -0.. (/) 0 UJ -----ci -1--...J -< 0 -< (/) 0.. 0 0.. z z (/) .. >--0 z UJ 0.. (/) < < ::E < 0 CI; UJ" w. 3: a: :E 0 a: ::E ...J DESCR IPTIOH u 0 0.. a: ~ Cl u 0 ..c (.) u 301 uos SC Mottled Brown to Dark Humid Very 63 Brown, CLAYEY FINE to Dense - -COARSE SAND - With Black Specks of --Charco 1 · .. .. -- 35.,... - --· -- -- -- 40 I .. - UD$ SM Light Rusty Brown to Yel-48 -lowish Reddish Brown, -SILTY SAND With Interbed-. - ed CLAYEY SANDY SILT --- SW/ Tan, Moderately FRIABLE 45·-Hurni d/ Very SM FINE to COARSE SAND Moist Dense - -- -· - ·-- -- _so I UDS 81 - Bottom -: - - • - -.. - - - ~ SOUTHERN CALIF.ORNIA SU B S U R F.A C E EXP LO RATION LOG. · SOIL &TESTING, INC. LO·GGED BY: RF DATE LOGGED: 3-09-8 JOB HUMBER: 8821126 Plate No. 11 w z - a. 0 >-z Gl >-- >--BORING NUMB.ER81-1 I-(.) >-0 w ·> I--,fi. -I-I-w u ·-~ --I-z z I-... ... -w -<( z a: I-z "O en -· UJ z ./>~ w -a: w ..J u ELEVATION w ::::, w I-Cl) <( < z I-> 0 ..J --73.01 • • a: I-.a: en z 0 -::::, -- a. 0 LL a: I-..: UJ -I-z I-I- . ::E en en < U)· < -'-w I-Cl'.) -a l) en w <( . w a. -a. CJ) 0 w ----- (.) 0. -I-..J 0 < CJ) a. 0 0. z :z en U) >--0 < C/l < < ::E < 0 a: w ~ z w Q. (.) 0 w a: ~ 0 a: :1: ..J DESCRIPTION . a. a: 0 Cl u J:l u 0 0 u '-SM-ALLUVIUM, Medium Brown, Humi-d Loose SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM - 2 SAND,-Porous - BAG Mo, st. - 4 - - 6 I us SM Dark Brown, Slightly Moist Loose 10 113.0 11. 3 - -Porous to -- 8 -Medium Dense - -- 10--. - I us SM Medium to Dark Brown Moist/ 13 - 12-.Wet -X .. --·----------::-(Two hours after .}4-Satur- drilling) ated ----161 us SM Medium Brown-Satur-Very 6 - -ated Loose - 18-- -- 20-SM/ Medi-um Brown, CLAYEY --SC S!lTY SAND --.. 22-- -- 24-- \ : -- 261 us SC Light Brown to Tan, Satur-· Loose 9 97.7 25.8 CLAYEY SANO ated - -.. -- 28---- 30 ,•:1 ~ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG ' JH S_OIL &TESTIN.G, INC. LOGGED BY: DATE LOGGED: 6-29-88 JOB NUMBER: 8821121 Plate No. 3 w z - 0.. 0 >-z Q) >-- ->-BORING· NUMBER81-1 I-·u >-0 w ·> I--ct! I-I-w u * ---I-z z I--.. -w -< :z a: "'C -w z Continued w w c:;; I-z C/) a: -~·.;c w ..J (.) w ::, <( <( -z I-> 0 ..J ----ELEVATION a: ·I-a: I-· z 0 -::, -- . . .l. 0.. 0 LL <( ~ w a: I-...: w ~ I-z I-I-<( CJ) w· :: CJ) iii 0.. o.. C/l a I-CJ) -Cl (J (/) w <( (.) -w·-...... a <( 0.. 0 0.. z a. -I-..J <( (/) z C/) Cl> >--0 Cl) <( :: <( 0 a: ~ z w a. < w w cc :: cc ..J DESCRIPTION u 0 0.. a: 0 Cl 0 :: (.) ~ (.) 0 30 (.) -SC ALLUVIUM, Light Brown to Satur-Loose Tan, CLAYEY SAND ated - 32-- -->----'-----·--'--·-... ----~ ·-... ---'---- 34-. Gray Tan, SILTY SAND, Satur-Medium Firmer Drilling at 33 1 ated Dense - ,-- 361 26 - . -- 38-Gravel at 38 1 ... - -- 40-.:.. J us SM Gray Tan, SILTY FINE TO Satur-Medium 16 99 .1-24.7 MEDil:IM SANO, w·ith ated Dense - 42-_ Slight Clay Binder and - -with Gravel - -~4--. : --- 46----- 48-- -- 50-·-- -I--TM------Slower Orillin_g_ --'"§'fur----·--.--- 52-ated · Medium Dense --to - 54-Dense . - ' -' 56'1 SM Dark Gray, SILTY SAND Satur-Medium 28 -ated Dense -Bottom at 56 1 F orma tiona 1 Soils not - -Reached - -- .. : : ~ SOUTRERN CALIFORNIA SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG ~~IL~·&TE.STING, INC. LOGGED BY: JH DATE LOGGED: 6-29-88 JOB NUMBER: 8821121 Plate No. 4 .. z -w ·O > z " >---a.. NUMBERB1-2 UJ ·> -~ -> -BO.RING I-UJ I-(,) > 0 I-* -I-. z I-(,) ,_ -w -I--UJ z -.. < .... z a: z UJ -I-z 'C (/) a: -.~.J: w ..J (..) w ::::> w I-Cf) <( <( -z I-> 0 ELEVATION 74 1 0 :::, -;... .. I-..J --a: I-c:: (/) z a: I-UJ -I-z I- Cl. • . O' u. --I-. • 0. < Cf) <-W . I-(/) -Cl ,(J. Cf) w <t (.) .. w -~ Cf) cii Cl. -a.(/) 0 UJ -...... a. -I-..J 0 < Cf) Q.. 0 Cl. z (/) "' > -0 <( ~ < . a: z UJ ~ z UJ Q. Cf) < <( 0 0 UJ a: :::i: 0 a: ::E a: ~ ..J D E S C R I P T'IO N .(,) a. Cl (,) 0 (..) .c 0 u -SM ALLUVIUM, Medium Brown, Humid ·Loose BAG SILTY SAND - 2 ,_ -------,--SM/ Dark Brown to Gray Brown, Humid Loose .• ... SC CLAYEY SILTY SAND - 4 -- -- 6 I us SC CLAYEY SAND Moist Medium 19 112. 3 14.5 - -Dense I - 8 -- '<;Q ( Measured after auger -removed) ---10--• us SC Medium Brown, CLAYEY Satur-Loose/ .. 10 111. 2 17.9 - 12-MEDIUM TO COARSE SAND, ated Medium Porous Dense - -- •. _,14-- --·-· -- 16-· --- 18-- -- 20--I us SC Medium Brown, CLAYEY Satur-Medium 17 110.0 1s:·o - 22-SAND ated/ Dense Wet - -. (Bu to 1211 Layer. .of - 24-Gravel ·at 21.'5 1 ) - ' - 26-ML POSSiffLE SANTIAGO Mais t/ Medium FORMATION, Yellow Brown, Wet · Dense/ - -SANDY SILT -Dense. - 28: ~t l ·-Break in Log - - 31) 50/411 108. 7 18.3 -us Bottom at 31 1 ., .. ~ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG ~!£:; SO ~ L_ & T E ST I NG, I N C. LOGGED BY: JH DATE LOGGED: 6-29-88 JOB NUMBER: 8821121 Plate No. 5 z / ~ ~ t R ENC H NU M.B E R TI -1-./' · 1-w >-z a: , • >->-. 1:-u t-z z >- 1---w· ol!.. -* z , ---..,; .... d I-..J~ W::, '-' a: ·i,:.. ~ 0 U: ELEVATION· 180' , .. t-·~ a. ill ui a. 0 w w (I) ""I-z. -< Cl) w ll. 0 0 0. (I) z -w -0 g_ a: ::, I- I-z 1/) w 0 ~ ::E . 0 LU 0 > --t-i-(.) < -< ..J a. • a. UI 0 ::E (/)----------------< < < :E II) ..J (.) O I BAG CL Ii _·CK - 4 CK BAG 6 I CK - DESCRIPTION TOPSOIL~ Oark Brown, SANDY CLAY, Plastic LUSARDI FORMATION, Tan, SJLTY FINE TO COARSE SAND Mo.ist Dry/ Humid < z: a: 0 O (.) Medium Stiff Dense '---·---_,,_ ·--. -~ -- 8 I CK SM Orange Brown, SILTY SAND -Dry/ Humid Very Dense >-a: 0 121. 9 114.8 (.) 7.5 i4.l UJ ~ a: 0 (.) - - - - - - - - 1 r-,.------'!!"911-----'!!'l!"'!'-----------... --------..... ---,._---1 Bottom at 10 1 -- -- -· - TRENCH NUMBER 1-2 ./ ---fLEVATION 225 1 Ot-i--..--..,.. ___________ ..., ____ .,... ___ _,. __ ...,. ___ ,.... __ -i 13AG CL I CK 21 CK - 4·I CL CK ·- 6 m CK [BAG ~ I CK ... BAG TOPSOILs Dark Brown/Black, SANDY CLAY, Plastic LUSARDI FORMATION, Tan with· Rust Red Brown, SILTY SANDY CLAY, Plastic, Highly Weathered Moist/ Very Moist Mai st/ Very Moist Stiff Stiff Very . Stiff 114. 7 - - - - - - 14.2 - - - l(.i-;..c....------. ---------------_.__ - _ CK ML Gray, SANDY SILT.., . _ (SILTSTONE) 1? V ~-Bottom at 12 1 - .. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL & TESTING,INC. Moist/ Wet Humid 120.0 10. 7 - - SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG LOGGED BY: RF DATE LOGGED: 6-29-88 JOB NUMBE'R: 8821121 Plate ilo.· 11 .. ' • z 1-3/ * w 0 >-TRENCH NUMB~R (.) >->---0. I-w I-I-I-* :z >->-z a: :z: z w -w 0 --= >-< w ::>· w w Cl) (i) a: > I, -_J (.) a: I-I-z z -:, I-I-w ELEVATION 180 1 a: C/) w -I-z I-u :. 0 u. < Cl) < w . i-..J -0. -0. CJ (/) w < < a:. en Cl). 0 0. en 0 0. o·~ _J 0. 0. 0. -0. I.II ~ Cl) < ::E z: a: >-w :::E < < 0 a: :E 0 < 0 0 a: 0 en _J u 0 0 (.), DESCRIPTION (.) 0 CL/ FILL, Brown, SILTY SAND Humid Loose· -SM and SANDY CLAY - 2----.. 4 ~ CK SM LUSARDI fORMATION, Dark Dry/ Very BAG Gray Black, SILTY SAND Humid Dense - 6...: (SANDSTONE) I - a! CK - Bottom at 7.5 1 --------TRENCH NUMBER 1-4 ~ ---• ELEVATION 154 1 ·:l SM TOPSOIL, Gray Black, SILTY Humid L9ose ,: _:..· CK 2f SAND, Grading to SANDY CLAY· -BAG -CK CL Moist Stiff --CL -OLDER ALLUVIUM, Tan with Moist Medium - . 4~ CK Rust Brown, SANDY CLAY Dense - BAG - ·5a CK SM LUSARDI FORMATION, 'Rust Mo·i st Dense -Brown, SIL TY .SAND -- 811 CK SM Gray Brown Humid/ Very 117 .5 11. 3 - Moist Dense -\ - 10-- \ : -Bottom at 9' · --' --- -- """'. -. • ·~ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG SOtL 3' TESTIN·G,INC. LOGGED BY: RF DATE LOGGED: 6-2S-88 JOB HUMBFR: · 8821121 .. Plate No. 12 ,. z "*-w 0 -1->->->--_0.. T_R ENCH N.UMBER 1-5 ,_ w I-0 ... I-~ z >-I-% cc z z -w -w 0 • --I-< w :::, w w "' Cf) a: > -·-.,J (.) % ::) ... -I--a: I-I-% -w --ELEVATION 149 1 cc w -I-z I-() .:c 0 u. -< (/) w :.J (/) -< 0 (J en w < < I-(I) -0.. 0.. 0 0. 0. 0 a, I-:..i 0. 0.. (I) 0.. 0.. 0 :E (I) ::E z: a: >-z LLJ ::e UI < '< < 0 a: :E cc < 0 0 0 0 (/) .,J u 0 u u DESCRIPTION 0 0 SC TOPSOIL, Dark Brown, Dry Loose I CK SANDY CLAY TO CLAYEY SAND - .2 CL Moist· Medium r CK· SM LUSARDI FORMATION, Tan Moist Dense to · BAG With Rust and Brown Very· - 4_1 Mottling, SILTY SAND -Dense--CK -- 6 I -CK 8_ Bottom at 71 ·--- -TRENCH NUMBER 1-6 ,_---- --ELEVATIOH 105 1 0 I CK SM/ TOPSOIL, Brown to Dark Humid Loose -• ',2. SC Brown, CLAYEY SILTY SAND -, CK TO SILTY SAND -BAG SM Very -4. C'K ,, Moist - -SM - 6_~ -CK SC ALLUVIUM, Gray Brown, Very Medium BAG CLAYEY SAND Moist Dense - 81 -CK -- 1~ ·-------CK ----- HAG ML Rust-Yellow MOttlin~-, · Very Stiff -SANDY SILTY (REWORKED) ·Moist 1? ,. (.;K ML LUSARDI FORMATION, Gray Moist Hard --with Yello~ Mottling, FINE 14... \ SANDY SILT ~(SILTSTONE) - -- Bottom at 13 1 ---- ' • ~ SOUTHERN CALIFOR·NIA SUBS URFA'CE EXPLORATION LOG .. LOGGED BY: RF DATE LOGGEP: 6-29-88_ SOIL & TESTING,INC. JOB NUMBE'R: 8821121 Plate No. .13 . - • z * UI 0 1/ .. >->->--0. TRENCH NUMBER _1-7v I-w t-(.) I-* z -: >-I-z a: z z I--w -w 0 --~ t-< w ::, w w Cl) Cl) a: > .. ..J ~ z ::, I-I-a; r-a: I-z --; : w 0 u. .ELEVATION 205 1 w -z I-CJ .: -< Cl) < Cl) w I-.::·· ..J 0 0 w < ... (/) -Q;, C. 0 0. Cl) -< 0. 0. Cl) 0... 0 a, -t-..J 0. ~-Vi ::E 0. J:: a: >-0 z w ::e UI < < < 0 a: ::E Q < 0 0 a: 0 en ..J (.) C (.) . (.) DESCRIPTION (.) 0 - CL/ TOPSOIL, Dark Brown to Moist Medium -CH Dark Gray, SANDY SILTY CLAY Stiff - 21 CK Highly Expansive - 4~ CK CL SUBSQIL, Tan Brown, SANDY Very Stiff - BAG CLAY Moist - 6 ML LUSARD.I FORMATION, Green Moist .Hard -Gray, SANDY SILT, · - a-(SIL1STONE) - Bottom at 8.5 1 10-----. TRENCH NUMBER 1-8 .._,,,/' - ' •• -I -'ELEVATION 124 1 :':'. ') :-· ·"' ·CL TOPSOIL, Dark Brown, Moist Medium --· -SANDY CLAY Stiff - 21 CK -.. --. SC ALLUVlUM, Tan, CLAYEY SAND Moist Medi-um - 41 , CK Dense - -- 6~ -SM""° ------·-.-----,-·--- CK Gray Brown, SILTY SAND Moist Medium BAG Dense -a, - CK ' -- ~<a - I CK ·SM Tan With Rust Brown -Mottling ...,. 12-Formational Not Encountered - ---Bottom at 12.5 1 .. 14-· --- . • ·.~ SOUTHERN CALIFOR·NIA · :.SU.85 URFAC.E EXPLORATION LOG SCllL & rESTING,IN'C. LOGGED BY: RF DATE LOGGED: 6-30-88 JOB tWMBcR: 8821121 Plate No. ·14 • : .. LU Q. >-c.-.-I----w .l: ..J ... 0.. C. ::E UI 0 < (I) O· - . 2_'fi CK - z V >->-' ~ TRENCH NUMB.ER 1-9 v' < ..J (.) ELEVATION . 1_30 1 o· ii: tri ;:;; ' (/) .,.__--------,---~--1 < ..J ·O CL SC OESCR I PTIO N TOPSOIL, Dark Gray Brown, SANDY CLAY . SUBSOIL, Tan, CLAYEY SAND Very Moist ... (.) L.. ' z z .-.. ~ w (J'J cc ... :z '!( ~ w ,Q. 0, 0 ~ J: cc 0 0 (.) Medium Stiff Very Medium >-... Cl) z -w .... C [ >-a: C - w ~ cc ::) I- I-z Cl) w 0 ~ ::E .0 (.) ~ :z w 0 > --I-I-(.) ·< < ..J . il. w ::E a: 0 ·u - - - 4 -l----'---l----+------""'---~---+..:..M:.:::.O..:.:i S::..:t=------1--.::::.S..:::.t 1.:..:· f~f--t----t---t----i _ ML/ ' SM 6-"' . -' LUSARDI FORMATION, Tan Brown with Rust Mottling, VERY SILTY SAND Grading to SILTY SAND Dry/ Hard -Humid - - -""~-----------------------------------------·-.-Bottom at 5.5' Moist Very Dense -- -- -- -TRENCH NUMBER 1-10 ~ - -- •,_.:: p-1i--...... -,-.;,;;EL;;,;;E.;.;VA.;.;T.;.IO;,;.N,.....l_8_0_1 -----,..--·-· -...... .,...---,------,---r----1 __ .,.. SC/ TOPSOIL, Dark Brown, VERY Dry/ Loose ... --CL CLAYEY SAND Humid 2- -- 4- - 6_ - -- -' - -- - - SM LUSARDI FORMATION, Tan with Rust Brown Mottling, SILTY SA·NO Bottom-at 5.5' ; -~ ··SOUTHERN CALI.FORNI~ ~ -SOIL & TESTING,INC. Humid Very Dense ' ,SUBSURFACE.EXPLORAJION LOG - - - - - - - - _: - - ..;. -- LOGGED BY: RF DATE LOGGED: 6-30-88 JOB NUMBE'R: 8821121 Plate No .. 15 z • LU 0 TRENCH. NUMBER. 1-11 L n: -: >-I--... < --..J ~ w 0 u. ELEVATION 118 1 ..J ,-,U, cii 0. 0. ~ U) Ul. <· 0 < en . ..J u OESCRIPilON 0 -· SM TOPSOIL, Bro_wn to Dark -Brown, SILTY SAND 2 - .... . SM ALLUVIUM, Medium Brown, 4-'. - 6 - - 8- - 10- - 12- -- 'b 2~ CK BAG - 4- - 6. CK -s, CK -I ' 10- I CK 12- --I • I· ~. SILTY SAND WITH CLAY BINDER SM/ SC ' SM Rust Brown Bottom at 10.5 Feet Formational Not Encountered TREN·CH NUMBER 1-1V ELEVATION 134 1 CL FILL TO 6 FEET, Dark Gray, SANDY CLAY CL/ Brown Gray, VERY SANDY CLAY SC c~ & LUSARDI FORMATION, Tan SM Brown with White Mottling, Alternating Layes of SANDY CLAY AND SILTY SAND - Bottom at 12' SOUTHERN CAL·IFORNIA ·s01 L & TESTl~G,INC. v:. ~ > >-· >--w I-0 I-... ~ z z a: z z -w ILi 0 UJ ::,. w w en Cl) a: > z :J I-... a: ... a: ... z --< (/) er, w w -... z ... u -< -0 (.I ILi < 0. Cl. 0··· a. fl) < 0. 0 0, t-..J 0. 0. E >-0 UJ <" :E a: z :E < 0 . ' ·a: ~ 0 0 a: 0 . (.) 0 0 0 Dry/ Loose Hum.id - - Very Loose -Moist - - Medium Loose - Dense - - Very Med·ium - Moist Dens.e ·- -- - - - Humid/ Medium Moist Stiff - - - Moist Medium -Stiff - Moist/ Very Very Stiff to - Moist Dense - --l ; - - - - ~ - SUBSURFAC.E EXP LOR AT ION-LOG . LOGGED BY: RF DATE LOGGED: 6-30-88 JOB NUMBE'R: 8821121 Plate No. -16 .. ' - • :z w 0 > >-* a.. TRENCH NUMBER 1-13 I-(.) >--1--LU ... I-~ z -: >-:z: a: z ·z I--LU -LU 0 -.-I-< UJ -1/) -..J (.) ' ::::, w w Cl) a: > . --a: i--:-a: ... z z -::, I--I-w ELEVATION ..:. ..J 0 u. uo· < Cl) < (/) w w -I-z I-u 1--(/) --0 (.) w c( a.. 1/) .. Q. c.. en 0 Q. Cl) -< a.. ~ 1/) Q. 0 c.. -I-..J a. Ul < .2: E a: >-0 z w ::E 0 < < < 0 0 a: ::E 0 Ir ..J 0 (/) (.) 0 (.) (.) DESCRIPTION (.) 0 CL TOPSOIL, Dark Brown, SANDY Dry/ Medium I CK CLAY Hamid Dense - . ·2-I CK ML LUSARDI FORMATION, Tan, Ory/ Stfff -SANDY SILT WITH CLAY -Humid - 4 I CK SM Tan, VERY SILTY SAND Dry/ Dense -Humid - 6-• -Very --Dense - 81 ' ... CK CL/ Dark Gray, VERY. CLAYEY SAND Humid Dense -SC - 10,, CK SM Tan, SILTY SAND 0ry/ Very -Humid Dense - ·-·1 ". Bot.tom ::.+ 12 1 --• ...... , . -.... •..,: /l --. ' TRENCH NUMBl:R 1-14 '--- ELEVATION~ '. --! .0 SC TOPSOI[, 01uw11, CLAYEY Dry/ Loose -SAND TO VERY SANDY CLAY Humid - 21 BAG r1 SC/ LUSARDI FORMATION, Red Humid/ Dense -Sf/ Brown to Tan, SILTY Mai.st - 41 CK CLAYEY SAND, (SANDSTONE) - .... BAG - 6--- ' • -- 8-- -Bottom at 8.5 1 -- 10---- • -'!".:: .. . •·~ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ... SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION ·toG ... SOIL & T-ESTING,INC. !-OGGEO BY: RF DATE LOGGED: 6-31-88 JOB NUMBER: .. 8821121 Plate No .. 17 -z ~ T R ENC H NU M.B E R 1-1 5 < -----Le. .--w >->->--I-0 I-t-* z z -UJ -Cl) * -z w 0 •--..,; : . 1-0. w 0. >-1-.J ~ ~ 0 u. ELEVATION 284' C/) - 0. C/) ___________________ - z a: w ::,· a: 1-;c: Cl) ll. 0. 0 < :I: LL! w ·1-a: Cl) < -ll. a, C/) a: z ::::l I-z -w -I-z w (J 0 0 Cl) w C. 1-- > I--I-(.) c( < .J Ill a ::E Cl) < < C/) t3 DESCRIPTION a. z: a: < 0 0 u >-o· :z C: :I: 0 0 0 ll. w :E a: 0 (.) o-+---+---+-----------------+--------+-----+----t----+---cL TO~SOIL, ·Dark Brown to Moist Medium - 2 - 1 CK 4 .r RAr, - 6 1 CK L BAG a-- 10-·- - SC. Gray Brown to very Dense Moist Greenish with Rust Red Wet LUSARDI FORMATION, Highly Very Weathered, Greeni~h Brown, Moist Rust Brown and Tan, CLAYEY SAND Stiff Medium Dense to Dense --,-,----·-r-----Sa·tura tec Dl;!nse - - - - - - - - --·1Z2-i..__._ ____ .,._~ ____ ...., _____ ..,._ ____ ._ ___ -. ___ .._ _____ ....,i Bottom at· 12' - - -TRENCH NUMBER 1-16 .__,-- ELEVATION 232 1 - - - - - - " 0 -----..----------.... ----..... ---~--..... --..... --... • SC - 2L SM I BAG TOPSOIL, Dark Brown, rr AYr:V ~ANn LUSARDI FORMATION, Rust Orange Brown, SILTY SAND Humid Dry/ Humid Loose Very Dense - - --4-\ -"---•--------~---1...-----'-----------------; - - - -- .·~ Bottom at 3' Very Difficu.lt to Excavate with Backhoe SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL & TESTING,INC. - -- -- SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG LOGGED BY: RF DATE LOGGED: 8_24_88 JOB NUMBE'R: 8821121 Pl ate Nb • -18 •---~ ·-t-Q. UI 0 w Q. >-I- w .J Q. ~ < (I) :z: 0 I-< .J (.) --0 u.. ti) -Cl) (I) < .J (.) .,........-.,_ TRENCH NUMBER 1-_17 .(. ~ . :z: a: w.::, a: .... ELEVATION 184 1 < ti) Q. Q. 0 < ~ DESCRIPTION >->->-. I-(.) ... ... z z -w 11.J ti) Cl) a: I-z z en w < -w 0 0.. a, 0 0. <( z: a: >-0 0 a: u 0 --Q a. - w ~ a: ::, I-t-. z (/) w 0 ~ ~ 0 u z w 0 ::: j:: I-(.) " < < .J 0. UJ :! a: 0 u 0 -+--~----...-----------...... ----1-------+-----+----+-----1 CL T0PSOIL, Dark Brown Moist -to Stiff Dark Gray, SANDY CLAY - 2 -- -SM LUSARDI FORMATION, Gray Humid/ Dense Very Dense - 4 I .BAG ... CK to Rust Brown, SILTY SAND Moist (SANDSTONE) - - ,5 ~------------------------'--------------.-----i Bottom. at 61 - - - - 0 - 2 -• · .... .. ""4 I-BAG 6 I CK 8.:.... - - - 0 -\ 2 I CK -BAG 4 - -•• ·~ Difficult to Excavate - - TRENCH NUMBER 1-18 i----- - SM TOPSOIL, Brown, SILTY SAND Dry Loose - GP/ LUSARDI FORMATION, Rust Humid Very GM Brown, GRAVEL WITH SILTY Dense SAND MATRIX - - - SM: Rust Brown, SILTY SAND Hurni.cl Very -Dense Bottom at 71 Difficult to Excavate - - " TRENCH NUMBER 1-19 ---- ELEVATION 237 1 - SM TOPSOIL, Dark Brown, SILTY SAND -Dry/Humid Loose - SM LUSARDI FORMATION, Rust - Brown, Sil TY SAND -(SANDSTONE) - Bottom at 41 - - SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL & TESTING,INC. SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG -LOGGED BY: RF DATE LOGGE_b: 8_24_88 . JOB HUMBE"R: 882_1121 Plate No. -19 . ' •• z· v ... >-* 0 >->--w TRENCH NUMBER 1-2ov w I-(.) I-*-z 0.. · 1-z : z I--w -w 0 ~ >-a: z -< w ::, w. w (/) (/) a: > ---~ I-(.) I-z ::::> I--t--...J a: z -. I-a: w -I-z t-(.) w· ii:: . ELEVATION 182 1 .. < (/) < -~ w ,I;. 0 0 0 Cl) w < < ...J -0. 0 I-(/) 0. a, a. I-...J 0. 0.. (/J 0.. 0 -Q. 0. z: . a: >-0 z w . :E (/) < :;E ct a: :E a: :!: UI' < 0 0 0 0 0 < 0 (/) ...J (.) (.) (.) l) QESCRIPTION 0 SM TOPSOIL/SUBSOIL, Brown . ' Dry Loose -SC/ SILTY SAND TO VERY CLAYEY -- 2 CL SAND I CK· SM LUSARDI-FORMATION, Light Humid/ Very Gray to tan with Rust Moist Dens·e - 4 ~ ~ Mottling, SILTY SAND -.. \ ML Gray Brown to Rust Brown, Moist Hard . ·, 6 -' SAND SILT ---Bottom at 5' --Very Slow Digging --... TRENCH NUMBER 1-21 - -.... - -0 ELEVATION 292' • SC TOPSOIL, Brown, CLAYEY SAND Dry Loose --TO SANDY CLAY !') CL Moist Stiff -. ~ -· --CL/ ~M, Gr. en Brown, SANDY Moist Stiff 4-sc_ ( CLAY TO EY SAND - -- 6 SC LUSARDI FORMATION, Brown, Very Mediwm --CLAYEY SAND Moist Dense -a_ --f----i---· ---CL/ Grading to CLAYEY SAND/SANDY· l .. --SC CLAY, Pale Greeni?h Beige, 10-Highly Weathered - -- 1,2 Bottom at 12' ; ---- ·------- • ·~ SOUTHERN CALJ.FOR NIA SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG LOGGED BY: RF DATE LOGGED: 8-24-88 SOIL'& TESTING,INC. - JOB NUMBE'R: 8821121 Plate No. .20 .. .. •-·-- - i Iii} J J J J •i-· . .J ·.I ; .I -.,- ~ UJ ,._ -: >--I-' --UJ :: ...J I-a. c.. :E 1:..1 C <( (/) 0 - 1 - - 2 - 3 - - 4 J CK 5 L l BAG L 6 L - 7 - - 81 CK 9 - - 10_ - 11 - - 12 -'-- - - - - ·~ :z 0 Nu M BE R ET-S' ... TRENCH -I- <( ...J u ---~L-EVATICN 0 L1. -(/) (/) (/), <( ...J u 0E5CRI.PTION SM/ Dark Brown, .SILTY to CLAYEY SC SAND (TOPSOIL) > .. Dark Brovm, SANDY CLAY to CLAYEY SAND SM/ (ALLUVIUM) CL SC Mottled Light ium Browri Brown to Med- SM Light Brown, VERY SILTY SAND Tan Brown, SILTY FINE to COARSE $AND Bottom s9UTHERN -CALIFORNIA SOIL & TESTING,IHC. - V ~ >->---(.) >-I-. UJ I-I-;!. z z z I--LU -UJ 0 a: z -LU UJ LU Cl). (I) a: > -3 z :::, I--I-a: I-a: I-z -z Cf) w -I-I-(.) <( CJ) <( w Cl u w <( <( a. -a. . ;;; ' Cl 0. Cf) 0 --I-...J a. a. a. 0 :::1: z a: >-z UJ ~ <( <( 0 a: ~ 0 0: 0 Cl 0 (.) (.) (.) Humid/ . Loose/ Moist ·Medium - Dense - - - Humid Medium : Dense/ - Medium -Stiff - 10s· .1 14.9 -I - - - - - - - Moist Loose/ 111. 0 12.4 -Medium Dens.e - - - Humid Medium Dense/ Dens·e ' .. SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG LOGGED BY: RF DATE LOGGED: 2-27-89 JOB HUMBER: 8821126 Plate No. 24 J . i •··-.. j J J J J ~ • • ••• --' ~ ~ ~ ·~ .. f"' z 0 UJ TRENCH NUMBER tT-7 -C', I-->-,c( -I-u -...J ---E:...EVA\l~N--w LJ.. = 0 ...J --Cf) I-Q. Cl) t!. :::E. Cl) w ,c( 0 . ,c( Cf) ...J u DESCRIPTION 0 SM/ Dark Brown, SILTY t0 CLAYEY -SC SAND (TOPSOIL) 1 - CL/ Dark Brown, SANDY to SILTY 2 -' SC CLAY (SUBSOI.L) - 3 SC Mottled Tan to Brovm, VERY -CLAYH SAND 41 CK I -5L BAG (ALLUVIUM) '- 6 - - 7- - 8-ML/ Pale Light Grey, Layer of SM CLAYEY SILT With FINE SAND - g_ - 10..: SM/ · Tan, SILTY SAND to CLAYEY -SC SAND .. ... 11_ : ' . - 12..,. Bottom - - - .,.... .~. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL & TES·TING,INC! -~ >->--I-u >-w I-I-~ z z z I--w -w 0 0:: z w UJ CJ) Cl) a: ·> -::,-. UJ z " ::, I-·-I-a: I-C: I-z -/fl w -I-z I-(.) ,c( (/) ,c( w -Cl u w < D Cl) < Q. -Q. (/) a. -I-...J 0 -0. Q. . Q. z: >-0 z w :E a: :E ,c( ,c( a: :::E. 0 0 0 a: a 0 u u (.) Humid Loose/ Medium . - Dense - Moist Medium Stiff/ - Medium - . ' Dense Moist Medium -Dense - . · Humid/ Medium Moist Stiff .. Medium Dense . SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LO LOGGED BY: RF DATE L_OGGEO: 2-27-8 JOB NUMBER: 8821126 Plate No. 26 J,: j J ~ I- C.. w 0 ·w c.. >- 1- w ...J c.. ::!: <( Vl z ~ T R E NC H NU M BE R ·ET-K, <( ....Ju -0.:: E!...EVATiCN Vl Vl 1---------------~ Vl <( ....J (.) I-w z a: UJ ::J a: I- <( (/) c.. .. - 0.. 0 <( ::!: >- 1-(.) >- z z '.:: UJ w (/) a: I-z <( ~ UJ c.. (/) 0 ~ :t.· a: 0 6. u >- 1--(/) z -UJ 0 u a. >-cr:: 0 - UJ * a: :::, . I-. ~ z (j) UJ 0 t'-z .::!: .0 u z UJ 0 > -I-I-u <( <( ....J c.. w ::!: a: 0 u DESCRIPTION 0-J----,.,.,...-+-----------,----...----------+-----+-----+----+---~ SM Dark Brown, SILTY SANO Humid Loose .1 - 2- - 3- - 5_ - 6· - -· ·~..--(-TO_P_so_r_L_) ---,------¼---,---4-----+---+----l---__., CL Dark Brnwn, SANDY CLAY Hunr1d/ Stiff ~'i-(_s_u_BS-'O-I_L.,....) -,--~-----+-Mo_i-'-s_t_. _· ----1-----1--~-1------+---- SM Rusty, Light Brown to Tan, Humi.d SILTY FINE to COARSE SAND- Very Dense STONE · · Over-Consolidated 108.4 (PRE-QUATERNARY SEDIMENTS) 7-t---+---+------'-------+-----'--4-----+----4-----+--- SM - Br :... BAG g: I CK Dark Grey Brown, SILTY SAND.;. Humid STONE With Spec ks of Cha.rco 1 (PRE-QUATERNARY SEDIMENTS) Very Dense 110.7 16.7 10~--i--...... --------------i-------......,1,-----!,---...... ----i--- - - - - - -· -· Bottom SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL & TESTING,INC. SUBSURFACE-EXPLORATION LO( LOGGED BY: JBR DATE LOGGED: 2 8~ -28-_ .JOB NUMBER: 8821126 Plate No. 35 " • z -~ u.i 0 >->->--a. t-TRENCH NUMBER 1 t-w I-(.) I-I-~ z -: >-z a: z z -w -w 0 ->-< w w (/) ti) a: > -u :::> w I-...I a: I-·Z z -:::> -I---. w --. ELEVATION I-a: w -z I-u 0 u. " < (/) . en w I-..J '• < -Cl (J w < (/) -0.. -Q. Cl C. en < 0. en .···• ti) Q. 0 --t-...J a. ~ (/) Q. 0 w .. < :E .z a: >-z UJ ~ < < < 0 0 a: ~ 0 a: Q 0 ti) ...J (.) a u u DESCRIPTION (..) 0 . -SM REDDISH BROWN; SILTY SAND MOIST MEDIUM (D.G.) -DENSE TO 1-DENSE - BG .. -" - 2---...:.. 3--CK ---- .... ---TRENCH NUMBER 2 -- 0 SC REDDISH BROWN, CLAYEY SAND WET LOOSE ~ (TOPSOIL) I _:: 1-CK 100.7 20.8 - BG CL/Ch REDDISH BROWN, · SANDY CLAY WET MEDIUM -STIFF - 2 . -SM YELLOW BROWN, SILTY SAND MOIST -DENSE TO -(LUSARDI FORMATION) VERY DENSE 3-BG ---- 4-CK 121.9 7.0 - -- 5-- -- \ 6-- -- 7. . Cf< ,, . -- -- ,• ~ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SUBSURFACE. EXPLORATION LOG SOIL~ TESTING,INC. LOGGED s·v: JH DATE LOGGED: 11-23-83 . ,. JOB NUMBE'R: 14272 A 1 . " " ., .. • z w 0 - 0. ;::: TRENCH .NUMBER >->-:rl?. >-8 I-w (.) >--. -I-I-I-~ z -I-<( z a: z z -w .-(.) w Cl) -w 0 .:::.. _J -::i w w en a: > - UJ -ELEVATION a: I-I-z z ::i f-. I- 0 u. a: : _J -< en ~ w ~ ·. f-z : i:-u U) < w 0. U) .. 0. a a 0 (/J w <( ·-·~ U) o. 0 c.. en 0. < ··W -I-_J c.. < ~· :!: a. 2: >-0 a <( <( a: z w ~ VJ _J (j 0 a: ~ 0 a: 0 U. DESCRIPTION (.) a t) ,0 t) -SM BROWN, SILTY SAND (QAL.) MOIST LOO$E -,_ - ' -- 2_ -BG --3 . . -- ,.... - 4 -- ' -- 5 -- -- 6 -- ' ---I } I 1-: -- :-.. :-( REFUSAL ON LARGE BOULDERS} 8 -" --I j -- -- I -- -- I -- -- ( -• - -' -: -- ~· --- i . -- I -- .. • ·~ s·ouTHERN ·CA·LIFORNIA SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG SOIL & T~STING,INC. LOGGED BY: JH DATE LOGGED:l l 2 -3-83 .• JOB NUMBER: 14272 A 6 ., ' • z w o: TRENCH >-* a. NUMBER 9 1-. (.) > >-- --: >-I-W. I-I-* z z a:. z I--w -I-< .. z --UJ 0 -:: u . w ::, w w C/) C/) a: -> -·~-w -ELEVATION a: I-I-z z -::i I--I- .o u. a: ..J -< CJ) < Cl) w w -I-z I-(.) a. (/), CJ) Cl. --0 0 0 Cl) UJ < -0 Cl. Cl) a. < w ::E Cl) Cl. a. I-..J Cl. < < < !!: z a: >-0 z LU 0 < 0 a: ::E ::E Cl) ..J 0 0 a: u DESCRIPTION u 0 u 0 0 u -SC BROWN, CLAYEY SAND MOIST LOOSE .. - 1 -CK --- 2. -CK .SM YELLm~ BROWN, SIL TY SAND MOIST ... BG · (LUSARDI FORMATION) DENSE 116.8 12 .8 - 3_ --,' - 4 - -- ---- ~ -- --.. ·-- ----- -- -- -,-. - . -- -- -- -- -- \ : -.. - -- ..,.. -- -- ..:.. - .. . ~. . SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ·suss URFA c·e EXPL_ORA T 10 N LOG SOIL & TESTING,INC. LOGGED BY: JH DATELOGGED~l-2J_BJ JOB NUMBE'R: 14272 A 7 •:• ... Appendix C • e::- • 4980160-003 APPENDIXC Laboratory Testing Procedures and Test Results Expansion-index Tests: The expansion potential of selected marerials yvas evaluated by the Expansion Index Test, U.B.C. Standard No. 18-2. Specimens are molded under a given compactive energy to approximately the optimum moisture content and app.roximately 50 percent saturation or approximately90 percent relative compaction. The prepared I-inch thick by 4-inch diameter specimens are loaded to an equivalent 144 psf surcharge· and are inundated with tap water until volumetric equilibrium is reached. The results of these tests are presented in the table below: Expansion Expansion Sample Location Sample Description Index Potential T-12#1@6' Green-gray clayey fine to 58 Medium medium sand T-26 #1 @5-6' Yellow brown sandy clay 128 High T-28 #1 @4-6' Yell ow and light gray 130 High sandy silt 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 appli9able, only moisture content was determined from "undisturbed" or disturbed samples. · Consolidation Tests: Consolidation tests were performed on selected, re}atively 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.1:he consolidation pressure curves are presented in the attached figures. 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 Sample Description Sulfate Content Potential Degree of Sulfate (%) Attack* . T-12#1 @6' Green-gray clayey fine 0.015 Negligible to medium sand T-26 #1 @5-6' Yellow brown sandy 0.045 Negligible clay T-28 #1 @4-6' Yell ow and light gray less than 0.0-15 Negligible sandy silt C-1 ··.:· ··::- •• 4980160-003 APPENDIXC Laboratory Testing Procedures and Test Results ( continued) Minimum Resistivity and pH Tests: Minimum resistivity and pH tests were performed in general accordance with California Test Method 643. The results ar~ presented in the table below: Sample Location Sample Description pH Minimum Resistivity (ohms-cm) T-28 #1 @.4-6' Yell ow and light gray sandy silt 7.82 3300 C-2 0 1 .. 2 ----,, -)--... 3 tlr-,_ 4 -~ ........ 5 ~. -~ 6 [\. • I---'.~ t--.. t--i--I" 7 1-.. C -----r---.. "r---..__ I'-~ 8 -----f-... -... 9 " 10 . ••• • 11 12 0.1 1 10 V_ERTICA.L S~RESS (kst) Test Method : ASTM D2435-90 • Before Adding Water • After Adding Water aoring No. B-1 Dry Density (pcf) 103.0 Sample No. 6 Moisture Content(%): . " Depth (feet) 15.0 Before 22.0 Soil Type SM/SC After 19.9 Type of Sample Undisturbed . " CONSOLIDATION Project No. 4980160-001 •• -PRESSURE CURVE -Project Name Cantarini Pronerty rn[]] Date 1/7/00 Figure No. _1_ . . •• .. 0 1 >. ,, 11"---r---.... 2 : 't1 t----"' ~ 3 "'" 4 ~ 5 IL • r-----"hi ,......_ t--. 6 r:-~ .. ~ " i----t'-... K I'-.. .. 7 r---.. ~ ,_ "--- 8 9 10 •. ,_ 11 12 0.1 1 10 VERTICAL STRESS (kst) Test Method : ASTM D2435-90 • Before Adding Water • After Adding Water Boring No. B-1 Dry Density (pcf) 108.2 Sample No. 8 Moisture Content(%): Depth (feet) 21.0 Before 18.5 Soil Type SM After 15.0 Type of Sample Undisturbed CONSOLIDATION Project No. 4980160-001 •• -PRESSURE CURVE -Project Name Cantarini Property [][I] Date 1/7/00 Figure No. _2_ ••• AppendixD ' .• ..... • 215 So. Highway 101, Suite 203 + Solana B~ach, CA 92075 Phone (619)481-8949 + Fax (619)481-8998 Leighton & Associates, Inc. 3934 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite B205 San Diego, CA 92123 November 18, 1999 Project Number: 99312 Attn: Kevin Colson re: Seismic refraction survey, Project 49-80160-001, Carlsbad, CA _This brief letter report is to present the findings of a seismic refraction survey conducted a short distance north-northeast of the Rancho Carlsbad Golf Course in Carlsbad, California (Fig. 1) on November 18, 1999. The survey was carried out on the Ladwig/Cantarini Dev~lopment properties. Seven lines were shot and, measured from off end shot to far offset geophone, each line was 120 feet long. However; all lines, except line 3, had additional offend shots fired in order to investigate deeper. Generally, the two off end shots, off both the forward and reverse ends, were 5 and 50 feet from the nearest geophone in the string. · Purpose of the survey was to determine depth to bedrock, weathered and unweathered, and its rippability. These. values were determined utilizing seismic refraction methodology. A Bison 9024, 24 channel seismograph syste,n was applied to the task. This instrument has DIFP, digital instantaneous floating point, capability. This translates into a computer-controlled seismograph that records incoming signals at all instrurnent settings, and these are analyzed by the computer, which then. outputs optimum, balanced traces with maximum informational content. Survey Design -Locations of the seven single spread lines,·numbered 1 through 7, ate illustrated (Figs. 2 & 3). Lines 6 and 7 are some distance away from the other five; consequentiy, it was necessary to show these two lines on a separate location map (Fig. 3). It is seen that each of the lines is located where significant cut slopes will be developed. Most line lengths are 170 feet from far offset shot to farthest offset geophone. The exception, line 3, was 120 feet long. These spread lengths permit the survey to investigate to depths of about 50 and 35 feet, respectively. These investigation depths are greater than planned depths of cut slopes. . . Geophone interval was 5 feet, and there were 5 foot and 50 foot offsets of off end shots to nearest geophone. There was also a 10 foot gap between geophones 12 and 13 where the split spread shot was fired. The spreads were shot forward, split spread and reverse. This redundacy aids in determining dip and undulations in layer boundaries. Source was a heavy duty sledge hammer equipped with an inertial trigger. The accelerated weight drop source was available but was not needed. Vertical stacking was carried out as a noise abatement strategy, and to build energy. Elevations for all shot and geophone locations were surveyed in, as relative elevations, ,,,~ ~ calave;a 'r- '. ·\ · R~ge~ts ~P . .... l--~-\ kAye .. -······ " i :., .. ~-; Agua Hedionda • Evans 1.Poi nt A cerro de la calavera A .... , i j I Faraday Aje J .... ........ AstQ1i.Ave -t I College alfd ....... \ l '. \ -car Cowitry Dr '-. . ... ' . \ -Hidc\en Valley Rd .... ···· \ Mcclellan-Palomar + : I \ Sailfish Pl S~eetbr(ar Circle t ' . ... ,~::~-Caminita Madrigal +: ,·i' . ii!{•e-Paseo de! Norte ;/ '·-) ::/ ., Bri~ood Dr ./·~-:. • "! /-i ! \ -. \-Kelloge Ave W.rightSt1 j + '.-.Edson ' ' . ; San Francisco)feak oak Lake ... • . . ' Collinos Wa:f .1 .::~ . i-' . ., -.. ;Atlios1Way \-~-ij _; l ' .. l ,· ' . ' :,~ ·, tos~ay squir Corf.e de la Pina t _; - ·-Sandpiper -· ,·" . .·: . :..•.•,: ... ' 1-----.:. . .,,. ~· .' ·".; , .. ·;;!. / . . ·.-4 ·. /</1/ /·:~~ ... ~-. 7:/ .Y..~ .. ·.,· /.. ;. ., :""4-•. , l .J ,.. ; " ~- · · · ./ FIG.URE 3 •• • -6- arbitarily setting the fon:vard · e~d at 100 feet. Then qy registration with a detailed topographic map furnish _by the client, ·. these relative elevations were_ ·1yonverted to absolute. The site was .. away from freeways· .and. busy streets; consequently, traffic no.ise was usually Jow. Wmd noise was· no more than a very minor problem: ... Geologic Setting -The site is on the Penh-is~!~ Ranges Batholith,' consisting ~fa composite. of individual Mesozoic intrusive bodies, . mostly. granitic clan rocks. ·Metamorphosed host rocks, mostly Jurassic in age and locally fouf1:d. in roof pendant~, are ·found here and there among the granities. None of the host rocks, however, appeared to be in the im.inediate area. The immediate area is near a join of granites and metam9rphic host rocks, however. The intrusive rocks tend to be bi-modal. Small basfo· intrusive rock bodies are found locally within the granitic terrain, but none of the basic rocks have been mapped nearby. The site is at the irregular onlap edge· of younger sediq:lentary rocks. Tertiary sedimentary fonpations dominate the younger rocks; however, the Upper Cretaceous Lusardi Formatiou is found at the bottom near the onlap edge. It consist mostly of conglomerates with _individual clasts up to room size. These clasts were locally · derived directly from the higher "hills" in the granitic terrain. · . Seismic .surveys in this ·crystalline rock setting have virtually always revealed a three layer case in the refraction data. The topmost layer is commonly thin and is composed of soil and colluvium. The second layer is weathered crystallines and the deepest layer is unweathered crystalline rocks. Bec~use.tbere ar_e sedjmentary rocks where some of the ljnes were laid out, four layers might be expected~ and four we~e found to be present at these line locations. Brief Description of the Geophysical hfuthod Applied -Seismic refraction investigates the subsurface by generating arrival time and offset distance information to determine the path and velocity of an elastic disturbance in the ground. The disturbance is created by shot, hammer, weight drop or some comparable method of putting impulsive energy into the ground. Detectors are laid out at regular intervals in a line to measure _the first arrival energy and the time of its arrival. The <l;ata are·plotted in time-distance graphs, from which velocity of, and depth to, layers can be Ci;tlculated. This is.possible because rays (a continuum point on an expanding wave frortt) of the disturbance wave follow a direct route, and are refracted across layer boundaries. where there is a difference in. elastic and density properties.· The critically refracted ray travels along the layer .interfa~e, at the speed of the lower layer, ari.d c~ntinuously "feeds" energy back to the surface, to be ·successiyely detected by the line -of geophones. . . . . . . . . Shot.s are normally reversed jJ;om orie end of the line to the other, to determine whether or not the layering is hor~ontal or dipping .. And a split spread shot adds re~undancy to improve the interpretation. The acquired data are computationally intense. ~ ray-trac~g computer progran.1, SIP)'.'2 hi this instanc~, is.used to ·iteratively honor all refra,cting surfaces, velocities, and to be able . to consider a large number oflayers, where they are present. A.first energy arrival picking program, with such features as zoom, filtering,' time stretching, ·separation of traces, AGC and . b~lancing of trac~s, is also a,pplied. · · Interpretation -:-Monitor.,rec9rds are produced in the field with each shot. These are prints of the raw data as· it_ comes in. to the recorder. They show the quality of the data, so that the operator can determine whether or not the data are pickable, or shots need to be .repeated. . Two representative monitor records, one a split spread shot from line 3 and a reverse shci from the same line (Fig. 4) are illustrated. -1 / •. ·:' • • -7- ~-' ~-.' J\) ~} I\) -· ·-· •.• -· -·· ·-.-.•• --· J~ (,1 t• J -• () 1{i 1)) "'•J 0°• (il .l':. I,}) j•,/ ••• 'i:_1 .-.... : (0 -J \}1 \.fl J:!. ti) ") - BISON 9000 SERIES Record Name: LEIG0012 Date 11: 18:99 Time· 11 :34 Hi-cut 2000 Lo-cut 32 Samp I e .rt . 500ms DFI c ·· Out Delay(ms) DFhc Out Channels 24 DFnt Out ·sampl'es 500 DF.bp Out Rec len 250ms Age Off Time sc .. a I e = 10 (ms)/division. PCH GN STK EX PCH GN. STK EX + 01 M 0002 09 + 13 M 0002 15 + 02 M 0002 10 + 14 M 0002 14 + 03 M 0002 09 + 15 M 0002 12 + 04 M 0002 09 + 16 M 0002 12 + 05 M 0002 10 + 17 M 0002 12 + 06 .M 0002 10 + 18 M ·0002 11 + 07 M 0002 11 + 19 M 0002 10 + 08 M 0002 1-1 + 20 M 0002 10 + 09 M . 0002 12 + 21 M 0002 .09 + 10 M 0002 14 + 22 M 0002 og. + 11 M 0·002 15 + 23 M 0002 09 + 12 M 0002 15 + 24 M 0002 09 FIGURE t·.) ~.,) I\) ~) t-.) -· --· -·--·----~~~-o~m~G~L~~-o~m~mmL~~- :·:~:~~~~ .. klJ~.k:;l,:.J.J~J·-J.t 1·:·j··_ -':j ... · ··-1=-1:··-~~-. --~~~·~··~:l·1'·~·.-··,. ,.·.·. , ............. . .. ·-~-........ -. ...... ·-......... .. ..... l ' . ... . ., ·( . . . 4 ............... ,~.·-~··· ~ .. -., •••• <· ... .• ,...-· .. , .. ,-'j;,.-' . .. ~.~ , . t ) '· . :. . ·---}. .. !~·,::::..,~• .............. ~.,,,~ . ...,_ ... J.. .• <0.,.! .... , .. , .. )t .. , .... ~·-·1'--·!!!-) .......... . r '.) . . . • ,._ • ··· ., f \ _. .r <" .. .. /.· .,.;,.·•" :·.7.i' ., .. · .. · ,:·, ... ~--~ ·. .I ·\ . :··"')• '!' ,·· .~\, ... \ .---·;r.....,:;· .~ •:,.. ·: . ·' .. . ··1·i: .. · ,.'.~'.· ......... ·::-:..~ .... ···.:·· .. ~--·. . ~·~7-... ·:J•i~··t::'f.'~, t:~.~·~'.····-.. ........... ~ ... ~·,¼-···--,.....----,~~· --. ~ ,~~-·;..-·-,,... ·-.~-·-· .. •·t·.-·-:-.:,::·.-(·~.-<--·--. < . ..s .. s ;--.rr:.t:~ ~.,... .... < .• ,· . . . . L .. ~~.".:.~:;.,.)~•,,., . ,: .. '~·'"-".'< ... ) , .. ._~: .. <'~-f.',:~ ............ -··11-.... (-· .. ..,..._(.~~~----"c:....... ~·~ .. t.. >,x· ,..:,~.·-· . . ! _,,.Ill"',<' ....... ..__, .... ,. --...-;1 l . .:,..li.:! , • .:-v ,-~l ___ z_ ·~ .... ... . -· ... .. . ·o··~·<.._ .. (-~· i,.:..,_~·· ;. . }!ii<', .. ·:~<°': ·(.·,.P ·1,. .. :.~· _:__,_~:_ L_ { l<Q;~lL11{1 .. )~f .. ----· ·--· --.... 7 ..... ·-··· ~FFf).<;.·;( ·:~·-.~· ri-· · .-}~f: .. --....... • •. I!". :--.., ,~;::-,-c·C,--,-~r:· ')L .. L .. . ... . . . . . . .. . ... --. ... . .. -... /:.( ~-li,il.L<... . ( ( · / . -':r,' .. . ......... -. ·: .. .... . ·-... ~-. Jtc,~ (",. . . ) . . /': .. ::~~-~-~::j~~M~tfL --L±1~: BISON .9000· SERIES Record Name: LEIG0013 Da-te 11: 18:99 Time 11 :36 Hi-cut 20.00 Lo-cut 32 Somp·l e rt .-500ms DFlc Out De I ay (ms) DFhc Out Channels ·· 24 Dfnt Out S-amp I es 500 Dfbp Out Rec Jen 250ms Ase. Off Time scale= 10 (ms)/'division. PCH GN STK EX PCH GN STK · EX +. 01 M 0003 07 + 13 M 0003 09 + 02 M 0003 07 + 14 M 0003 10 + 03 M 0003 08 + 15 M 0003 10 t 04 M .ooos 08 ·+ 16 M 0003 1 I +·05 M ·0003 .08 + 17 M 0003 11 · + 06 M 00()3 08 + 18 M 0003 11 + 07 M· 0003 08 + 19 M 0003 11 t 08 M 0003 09 + 20 M 0003 12 + 09 M 0003 09 + 21 M 0003 12 + 10 M 0003 09 + 22 M 0003 14 + 11 M 0003 09 + 2~3 M 0003 14 + 12 M 000~-3 09 + 24 M 0003 16 4 •• • ;. . . ·> -8- First energy arrivals are seen to be quite sharp on the raw records, although some very minor wind noise is coming in mostly on the far offset traces. This is not uncommon for off end shot records. Even so, with use of a computer picking program, with zoom, filtering, etc., there was . no difficulty in picking the first energy arrivals. There should not be significant variation in picked arrival times should the first breaks be picked ~y several persons independently. More of the shooting parameters are listed below the monitor records (Fig. 4 ). The first pick<infonnation, geophone:locations and geometry of the spreads, are input to a routine that produces a time-distance plot (e.g. Fig. 5, from line 5, all shots). The six curves reflect the shots at the five positions along the line, as previously outlined. The split shot, however, produces two curves going in opposite directions. This is one of the lines located on· the thin edge of the Lusardi Formation. The data show the expected 4-layer case, as is illustrated by generalized straight lines drawn through some of the curves. It is seen that the slopes of these· generalized straight lines through the data vary from high angle to quite flat. This is an expression of differing velocities in the various layers. It is obvious that the topmost layer is quite thin. Minor undulations in the curves, based on the taw data, are mostly explained by .the fact that elevation corrections are not yet applied to the data in the time-distance plot, and perhaps small disturbances .from noise, and lower energy at far · -offset geophones. Minor variations in the positions of the "dog-legs" in the several curves are mostly an expression of the laterally changing thicknesses of the uppermost layers . The models were calculated utilizing the SIPT2 program which includes an iterative ray tracing procedure. With the processing of the "corrected" data, including elevation corrections, geologic models were developed for the seven lines (Figs. 6-12). Boundaries appear to be somewhat· undulating; this is typical of weathered crystalline rocks where weathering is generally a little deeper where there is a -little more access to the subsurface for air and water. Differing fracture densitie~, among other things, can account for these differences. The undulations are not as pronounced as they appear,· however, inasmuch as there. is some vertical exaggeration in the structure sections. In general the layer boundaries mimic the surface topography. Thickness. of the soil/colluvium. layer averages three feet, but varies from feather edge to nine feet. This material appears to consist of soiVcolluvium with only slight compositional variation due to the host rock on which it developed. Average velocity of layer i materials is approximately 1500 ft/sec. This is typical. Variation in soil/colluvium velocity is small, ranging from 1412 to 1914 ft/sec. Layer 2, designated the· oldest-sedimentary layers, found under lines 5 and 6, has an average thickness in the order of9 feet, and varies considerably as might be expected at the onlap edge of deposition. Average velocity is 2608 ft/sec. This is in the "normal" range for weathered sedimentary rocks. Layer 3,. designated the weathered granitic rocks, has an average velocity of 3650 ft/sec, where sampled .. Its velocity variation is moderate, Thickness is about 32 feet, but it is systematically a little thinner where overlain by the Lusardi Formation. This might be expected inasmuch as the overlying material would account for a less intense weathering environment. • • ·-:. Example Time-Di$tance Graph-· Line 5 40 30 20 .J.O 0 SP Geo B 0 20 :1 .2 4 6 8· SeisMic Ref'raction Survey Carlsbad~ California 40 6Q 80 J.00 120 f't C 10 12 Layer 1 14 J.6 J.8 20 22 24 40 30 20 l.O 0 D SP Geo Ladwig/Cantarini Job 49801.60-00J. NoveMber l.8, J. 999 FIGURE 5 ' • I ~ I -10-..... +i .x CJ Ii,. 0 ""' 0 I,.. 0 ,:s 0 N di I \0 ""' .Q 0 l.tJ ~ ""' .r:.. 0 E5 +i co t.!) ltl CTI H di 'd' r.:.. 3 0 C: .Q 0 ::i 0 ""' I') O'I •l"C O'I C O'I •l"C ""' I,.. IO .. 0 ... co co C: ""' ltl CJ I,.. .x ' QI CJ Ir! .Q 0 •l"C E I,.. J QI 'O 'Ci :> 111 IO 0 .• '.:- 0 .Q .J z """ &J:J QI .r:.. C +' •"4 ltl .J · 111 :t 0 ~ 'd' :,'I 111 :> 0 I,.. :, N V,I ltl •l"C C C: 0 I,.. •"4 0 +' '+-CJ •l"C IV po( po( I,.. ltl 0 '"" Ii,. CJ 0 QI 0: .. V,I '13 ~ CJ ltl •"4 .Q 0 0 0 0 ,..., 0 0 0 0 0 :c 1/1 "° u, 'd' M -N ""' 0 (71 co 1/1 po( M M. M M ~ ¢:i M ~ N N •"4 I,.. a) QI ltl -· -V,I CJ • •• I ("J Cl) ~ ru ID -., l'I) l'I) l'I) C,,J w C,,J -C,,J C,,J Cl,) Cl,) ,.., ~ '""' 11'1 ..J co lJ) 0 ... l'I) ~ Cl,) .iii. (JI er, Ill 3 0 ·0 .c 0 0 C ... 0 0 C C -tr ~-ru n C. Cl) .. :0 0 ID ("J -ti ,.., a, ., ,_. '""' fl.I ,.., n -ti l'1' 0 "'' ., 0 :::, ::, ,.., fl.I Cl) C ., (: ID IC I ~ :c ~ ll'j0'/l'i'111111' " " " ' ' ' " ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' l .. 1 ~ ID I I I 1" •II I I I ..{_.( .( .( .( .( .( .( .( .( _.,., .( .( .( .( ..[ ..[ ..[ .( ..[, :·· r ll.t ,',ti' cr, ,,,,,,,,,,, ., ., ... ... ... ... ...... ,. ., w ., ., ., ,. . ., ., ., ., ., ... .... l't' IJl1J>ltl1l1 ','.,'.,'.,'.,'.,'.,'.,"'.,·N ','.,','.,'.,'.,'.,'.,'.,' U1 ::, I ,. ,,,,,, ... ,,,,,,,,,,,,, ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' .... ' ' ' ·, ' ' ' ' ' ' co ID •• ~h J~~h JJJJJJ~JJ. ~~~~~~~~~' -· ····------...... ----------l'I) 'fJ' -----------:z r 0 Ill ID C 0. 0. ID t ., l ,.., 0 tr l!I n t'D '\ ,::-., (j tu co .... :::, co l'1' 0 .. tu ., .... ,.., ~ :, ~ ,.., ~ c., C: .... 0 C O' :, 0 t ~ .iii. ID H i,.t:) Ill (j) co l't' ~ 0 ,. ... trJ a-, 'fJ' 0 ... -..J I ID N 0 0. C 0 ., ... 0 -ti n l'1' ,::- •• -LL- -12- •• +i .::i:: (.I .... 0 ..i 0 Ii. 0 "c: C) N OJ I co ..i .Q 0 r:i:i It) ..i ~ . .c 0 t.!) .... co H tt1 "' J:i:.i OJ 'di 0 3 .Q C 0 :, 0 ..i lj . (7\ .... (7\ C (7\ .... ..i I.. I'll .. 0 .... co co C ..i I'll C.l Ii. .::i:: ' OJ (.I 13'1 .a 0 .... E Ir. 3 OJ "c: "O :, OJ I'll 0 .Q . .J z • M OJ .c c, .... .... I'll .J OJ :I I ::n OJ :) Ii. :, C4 I'll .... C C: 0 Ii. ,f'I 0 +i .... (J .... tO .-1 .-1 Ii. l'U •r( .... t.) 0 QI en 0: .. "CS ~ (.I I'll ,f'I .c 0 0 0 0 ..... 0 0 0 0 0 s: Ul -r,; It) In ~ G,) (I) N ~ 0 er. Ul .-1 M M M M e (I') (I) (I') M N •1'4 Ii. -GJ I'll ..... C4 t.) • • 360 350 340 330 (feet) 320 3J.O 300 2·90 possible boulders or core stones • Line 4 C SE ~~l'.Jl\u01-•:~:~:~::::~:tgf;t~~~@:::r:1:::imr:::~1:DW ,,,,,,,.,,,,.,,,,':!..i'ff@rd.0 .. ,',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',.',',',',',',',',',',',',',-', , , , , , !t:::re-:?.?:~:::r?:f:~::::f::3:=:~i-?~~i-==:::::'',',', , , , , . ,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,,,.,,,/.',',',',~,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,·;·,-,·~',',',',',',',',',',',', ~',,,,,,,,,.,,,,.,,.,,'.\,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,':..,,,,,,,,,,,~,~,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,.,,.,,.,,.,,.,,,,,.,,,,,,.,,.,,,,,,,,,.,,,,.,,,,,,,,,.,,.,,.,,.,,.,,,,.,,.,,.,,.,,.,,. ,,, ,, ,, ', ,,,:, ,, ,,,, ,, ~, ,,. \, ,,,, ',':,',', ,, ',';', ,,,,"!,.,'"' 2 8 7 0 ft/ ,,.,,. ,,,,.,, ,,,,~, ,,~, ,, ',' ',,'' ,, ,,. ,, ,,. '' ,, ,, ,,:-,.,. ,, ,,. ,,. '' ,,,.,,,,.,,,,,,,,.,,.,,.,,,,~,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ........ -~',,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,~,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,'~',',',',',',',',',',',~,',';',,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,~',',',',',',',',',',',',',', ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,'/',','~',', ,,,,,,,,,,,,,':-,',',',',',',',';',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',','-,',',',',"!-,',/:•,''II'',','/',',',' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ~ ' ' ' ' ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,~,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,' --=---:E:-£'-E:-E?::::_-=.-=-.-=.-=.-=.-:..-:::::...-:..• ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,~,';',',',',',',',',',',',~,',',';',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',' --~.:::..-=-.::--::-::-:-.:::_-=-.::-.:::-:::.::-.?:::::--.:::-:.. ;,',',',','/!to,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,. ... ,~,'.,',',~,,,,,. .... ,,,,,,,, ' ' '-, ' ' ,,.,,,,'~',' ' -----=----:ff;_-=;_~-:;_-:;_-=l:?:;#;_-E;_-::;_-::;_-=;_~:§;_-::;:_-;;;_~ ?~;~;~;~;~;~;~--'--~~~~~'.:.'.:.'.:.'.:.',',.','.:.~--======================================== --------------------------------------------------------·-·· -·.:::::--=---.=-.=---...:-...: ·-=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=-..::"'-=: .::.-=--=-"':.."'=."":."':. "":."":.--:.· :---=-.:--=--=--=--=--=--=-...=-..:: =--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=-· :--..=--=--=--=--=----=---=--=--= =--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=-· 280 0 20 40 60 80 J.00 1.20 ft bedrock f't'·t't','t','1 Wea th. bedrock SeisMic Refraction Surve~ Ladwig/Cantarini .Job 49801.60-00J. Carlsbad~ California NoveMber 18~ 1999 FIGURE 9 .- .... w I -14- .... '+-J:. .-f 0 .... 0 I'll 0 N 41 I 0 "1 3 0 """" C IJ) ::i .-f r::i 0 ~ o:i er, U) ~ H 0 ~ .Q 0 0 .-f lj c:r, •Pl c:r, 'll C 'c:r, 41 •Pl "1 I,. Ii. 41 l'O .. 0 J:. .... o:) 0:) .... C "1 l'O l'O 41 C.l Ii. :I ' QI ~ ,a .. ~ '"' t 3 QI 'll :> l'!I 0 0 ..I z •·= .. It) IJ) " 41 .c ,po( t .J LL •Pl 'll 0 Ii. qi. /0. 1/1 :i .J ~ :s'f QI :> 0 Ii. :i N a:,,) l'O ,po( C C: 0 I,. •Pl 0 .... '+-CJ •Pl l'O 1-1 Ii. l'O C """ '+-CJ ,..c QI 0 re .. (.,) 'C (J l'O ~ •Pl .Q 0 0 0 0 =-0 0 0 0 0 t Ul ~ ~ N .-f 4) 0 c:r, o:) r-\I) Ul """ N N N N 4) N .-f "1 .-f .-f •..C I,. --Ill ID a:,,) CJ • . . .c_ -15'- ••• .... i+:-J:. ..._ -0 +J 0 .. z 0 .... It! N I ... LU ""' l 0 C 1,0 .r:z:i ::) ""' f5 0 co C.!) er, H ., ~ 0 .Q 0 0 ""' I"). er, ff op( er, ..... 'a C cr, ..., ..... QJ •l'I ""' I"--I,. L C QJ l'(I ~ c.o 0 J:. .. co ,-C ""' co .. l'(I l'(I QJ t) L :x ' QJ O'l .Q ~ op( :c l QJ 'a :, I'll 0 0 .J z •. : 1,0 t) Ill GJ C •l'I :c .J u. •l'I 'a 0 I,. ., l'(I Ill :, ... .J Q) s I ::ri .. QI . :> L :I Ct) tU •l'I C C 0 L •l'I 0 .... lj. u •l'I l'(I ""' L l'(I ""' .... Cl op( QJ 0 C: ~ 'Cl (,') u l'(I ~ ,p( .Q 0 0 0 0 -0 0 0 0 :c Ill ., co r-Ill In Q) ., M N """ Ul ""' N N N N e N N N N .... l,. -GJ l'O -Ct) t) • • 280 270 260 250 (fe~t) 240 230 220 21.0 200 \I/est thin cemented layer 4454 -5051 fth . ~~-.:: ~: - • Line 7 ·East po:s::s:ible boulder C l ;,;-;,;-;,;-;-;-;-;-;,;-;,;-;,;,;-;,;-;-;-;,;-;-;,;,;-;-,,,,,,,,,,,,,,;,,,,,;-;,;-;-;-;-;,;,;,;-;,;-;-;-;-;-;,;-;-;-;,;,;-;-;,;,;,; J ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,~,~,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,~',',',',',',',',',',''',',,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, , ,, ,, ,, ,,,, ', ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ', ,, ,, ,, ,, ,,,,. , ,., ,, ,, ,, ,, \,' ,.~, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ', ,, ,, ,, ,,,.. ', ,, ,, ,,,, ,, ,,,,,, ,, ,, ~; ,, ,, ', ,, ', ,, '; ', ',',', \,, '/' ,, ,, ,, t'"'',',',','~',',',',',~;',',',',',',','~'I'',',',',','"'',',\,',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',',';',',',',',,.',',',',',',',',', , ,, ',','/ .. ,,','I'' I'' I'' I'',, I'',', .... ,,/",' I'',',,,,,, I'',,,' I'' I'' I'' I'' I'\/,' I'',' I'' I',,',,,' I'' I'' I'' I'' I''/ .. ,',';',,,;',' I'',' I'' I'' I'',, I'' I'',' I'' I'' I'',,' I'' I' § ~>::~~~-€-. -~ ~ ... -~ ~ .. -~~ ~ 5~ ~ ·~ ~ .. ~ ~. . ~. ~---= .:;::~ £-€-=;::-%~~-=;::-%??-~~ § 0 20 40 60 80 J.00 1···········-:J Soi 1 (','<'<'<'<'<') Weath. bedrock 1.2Q ft bedrock SeisMic Refraction Survey Ladwig/Cantarini Job 49801.60-001. Carlsbad1 California NoveMber J.8 1 J.999 FIGURE 12 • I -l 0\ I I •• 4 :,' •• -17- Finally, thickness of "unweathered" layer 3 (the deepest layer imaged) was not determined; presumably it extends to great depth. Its seismic velocity is in the order of 6600 ft/sec, with small variation around this value; except beneath line 4 where an abnormally high velocity of 10,030 ft/sec was definitely encountered. This latter velocity is more typical of unweathered granites in this setting, and the unusually low velocities, around 6600 ft/sec, found under the other lines are not readily explained, Shearing resulting in lower velocities, or a geologic event that can bring about two weathered layers, recent uplift, fundamental chang_e in water table, climatic event, for example, may account for a second weathered layer wherein the deeper layer is less intensely weathered than the shallower one. · · · Core rocks, or room size boulders in the Lusardi Formation, are possibly present beneath some of the line layouts. Generally, core rocks are exp~~~se~ in the tirp.e-distance plots by small local peak perturbations in the layer I/layer 2 boundary (or in this instance, also the layerl/layer 3 boundary). This results from the fact that seismic velocities are higher in the local,. less weathered core rock. The positive perturbations were seen on the lines 4; 5 and 7 data sets. Th~ position~·of possible core rocks are shown on the structure sections. Another significant . feature, from the standpoint . of. pJanned · ground-shaping activities, is an apparent thin, hard layer locally beneath lines 6 and 7. The highly consolidated layer is, on average a little less than three feet thick.-It is thin enough $0 that it does not trigger the "hidden layer" problem in seismic refraction analyses, when a higher velocity layer is ov~r. a layer of slower velocity. Its velocity is in the order of 5200 ft/sec, and is;· therefore, of significantly higher velocity than the weathered granite beneath it. A monitor record for the split spread shot on line 7 shows that this high velocity material is present in· a thin bed. by the weak flatter arrivals. This lineup of first arrivals is annotated with an arrow on the record (Fig. 13). Moreover, it is not seen extending to the end of the line on the opposite side of the shot position. Thus,. it has· definite ends and is, therefore, local and mappable. The highly consolidated layer is seen to occur with a correlation to a slight high in the boundary at the top of the weathered gra,nite. It is not certain that the thin layer is in the upper part of the weathered granite or at the base of the overlying layer. Inasmuch as the overlying material is different frorp, line 6 (Lusardi) to line 7 (soil/colluvium), a simpler geologic explanation accrues to the interpretation that the hard layers are in the upper part of the weathered granite. Silicification processes of hydrothermal origin are well known, but there are commonly other expressiom, of hydrothermal activity .in _the rocks, in addition to silica deposition. Such tell-tale signs were not observed. Silica gels can form in a low temperature and pressure environment under certain physico-chemical_ co1:1ditions, and silica cements are. then deposited with the loss of water. Although we can only speculate on the origin of these hard, seismically fast layers, it is clear enough fro~ drilling experiences that the rock is very tough. The Caterpillar Rippability chart is illustrated (Fig. 14) and it is the basis for determining rippability of the rocks encountered in the suryey. Tue chart is empirical, but is based on thousands of field and laboratory samples. It is seen that layers l, 2 and 3 are easily rippable everywhere sampled. Depth to layer 4, the fastest layer, averages about 44 feet, but locally comes to within about 22 feet of the surface. Because of these thicknesses, it is unlikely that any ripping into layer 4 will occur during development of this site. Nev<?rtheless, the layer 4 velocities suggest th_at these rocks are r:oughly in the marginally rippable ·category (with heaviest equipment) over •• • • -18- I\) I\) I\) l\.l t\l ..• -· .•• ---~-· -· .... -AWl\)-oom~Q~AW~-o~ro~~WAWI\J- ----·------... __ , ~ ...... ----------·-· -· -·---·-... -···-·· --------... ·-_., --------··-' ... --···-···-· -· -~---·-·-···--.............. --·-- --\-~1---1--1------· -----,-+--I--, ----.... ·-:. .. ,--· -·-··-· ·-------· ·-.. ·-....... --· ..... --· ...... ···-·-··-·---·-· -·-· . --......... ---· --· ··-·-.... -· ---···-........ -· -----·-. ·---·--. . . ________ ...... ·--·· ...... ,u ....... -·-·-· ,.., -...... --••••• _, ... _; ___ ... ·-· ---·-- ---·-.. .•. .... ··---.. ----... ------... .. -..... --. .. -· ··-... --··-... --~--·--------.... _____ --- BISON 9000 SERIES 0 Record Name: LEIG0031 ·nate 11: 18 :99 Time 16:58 Hi.:..cut 2000 Lo-cut 32 S·amp I e rt , 500ms -OF' I c Out Delay(ms) DF'hc Out Channels 24 DFnt Out Samples 500 DF'bp Out Rec Jen 250ms Ase Off Time scale·= 10 (ms)/division, PCH GN STK EX PCH GN STK EX + 01 M 0002 10 + 13 M 0002 15 +. 02 M 0002 10 + 14 M 0002 14 + 03 M 0002 II + 15 M 0002 13 + 04 M 0002 11 + 16 M 0002 12 +·05 M 0002 12 f 17 M 0002 12 + 06 M OO(J2 12 + 18 M 0002 12 + 07 M 0002 12 + 19 M 0002 I \ + 08 M ·0002 ·12 + 20 M 0002 11 + 09 M 0002 13 + 21 M 0002 11 + 10 M 0002 · 13 + 22 M 0002 10 + 11 M 0002 . 14 + 23 M 0002 11 + 12 .M 0002 15 + 24 M 0002 10 FIG~E 13 •·:. • -19- most of the area, but not everywhere. It wo1,1ld seem cautious, for planning purposes, to assign the layer 4 rocks to the unripp.able category, if they should be enountered. 09N Ripper Performance • Multi or Single Shank No. 9 Ripper Rippers • Estimated by Seismic Wave Velocities Seismic Velocity o· Meiers Per Second x 1000 Feel Per Second x ·1000 0 TOPSOIL CLAY ·GLACIAL TILL IGNEOUS ROCKS GnANITE -01\Slll.1 1 HIii' ilOCK SEOIMENTAIW f'IOCKS SIi/iL[ S11:NDSIONE Sll.l:; 1 ON!: GI.IIYSIONC GONtil.OMl:IIAI [ 11nrcc111 C:lll 1<;111 LIM(.!;iON( ·Mfl/\MOHPHIG nocKS SGlll51 Sl/\1[ MINEnALS & ORES CO/IL 'lllON OrtE rHPl'II0l~ 2 3 2 3 • 5· 6 ·7 8 9 10 . 11 12 1J 14 15 ,,,:-.. ''''-.,..::., ,_,,,. ~,,, ... , ~ ' .. ' '.' . ·,' 1.,,, '"·'' .,,. ''-.''-'-',,,,,,,,,.,,,, !,','-:''' ·,. ,:;,.:,; ··.'·,'· ' ... ,,·, '·' ·' .,, -. .'( t,·,'' '' '-.', ·, ',, •, <'~·-·-:, ', ,·, '·' ', ,,,,', I ''-'-'-.','-.', '-'-. ·, '\ '-'-', -..;:,;::;::_,~ "'-"',',',•.'-.',,· ,,,,,,,,,, .. ,. ~ 1,,' '-'' ''' ''" 0-."--~-:SSS 10,."""'' ,, ''''' ""'' ''' I'\.''',.:,-.,,,'-. .'\\.'::,.'..'\.,'""',',>::.~ k",, '-~, '-s,:,,,,, "-"-,"-. '·' , -..:.,:;::;= ,,_,'' '·'. • .... _, '' · .. '·,_, ·, •, \.:. . ,.,.,,, '·'· ··,'-~, '·' ,,','·"' ~~;_:-, I r, ''' "' '· '' "-~,; ''·' ,,, '·'' 10'' '' '-. '' '\ .,,,.,,' .. '' ,·, ,,,,, ' . . ... I r-., "'··' '''' ,,, ,,, ,_,, '' ''' ['\.'' ',,' ','< '', ', , .. , ",,, ', ',," MI\HGIN/\L NON,Hll'l'I\Ul.( t':iS:S::..::,S,,~ · Figure 14. · Caterpillar rippability chart Conclusions -The shallow subsurface structure imaged by. seismic refraction information, is generally 3 layers typical of the Peninsular batholithic terrain, but there are four layers at this site where there is a onlap relationship_ onto the granites by Late Cretaceous sedimentary rocks. The first three layers are easily rippable, and the deepest layer revealed is marginal to non-rippable with heaviest equipment. Nevertheless; the deepest layer rocks tend to be deeper than about 30 feet from the surface. There is some geophysical evidence, as well as visual, for the presence of core rocks locally, and a thin, about three.feet thick, highly consolidated layer under lines 6 and 7. All ~ata generated on this project are in confidential file in this office, and are available for review by authorized persons at any time. The opportunity to participate in this investigation is very much appreciated. Please call, if there are questions. GWC:arr ••• APPENDIX D LOGS BY SOUTH.ERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING OF SEISMIC TRAVERSES S1-1 11111111H (1998) . -• -L ~-" • ,. ·1 ~ :··: : 1· ·:-:~ . t'·i 11 ~1 l I T1· : ·, j ; l i I : l : I fl Tl rr: l . ; l r· lfl·--:1··--:-J~l :·~ . : ·= ·1· ~-T-, ·r j,f'. ;r-p· -1.wm-:ri ',j-'1'·; -~~·t:ry-f .; •• '. : ; '. I : I ·I I ; : : ffi' . , 11 ; . '. ! : : ; I I i ; ! I I! : : ; . ' i. . ,. ,1 I n': 1· ' .1 .. ; ,. ·:· I· i ! . 1· !·/ I l r1 I l· . . . i , · ··+ 1 , . • t i • ! i • ; j I t , , ; · · ii ! ! i • I ; ' ; : r i I •. ! i , ' I r · ; Irr! t · · I ! i 1 .. · 180 120 60 l+n-r . ~ ·,"-:-' 1 ; ,. ,t·~ l • j :···~ °j~ ..... -11·1 ! n··t . r . ·1·1 , ,""f • ' • I .-~ -' .. r I I ' I . I . . . I I I • • I ' I r ' I ' ' . I r I I I I t ,. • . I I .. IJ. J 7 ! .. r-1 1!] . : : : ! : . : ' I • I .. I I • l 1· ' ! ' i • l ; i I ! . ' ! I • : ! ' . i 1 t • : I ' . I . . . . l I -• ·t f-' .-, . , , . . 1 I· . I , ,, . , . . I ... , , 1 . r-, , : , • I I I j 1 . · ' · .. ~ · · -· ·-J • --·r, i : r I r I I ' 1 • 1 • ~ : 1 j 1 1 : ; · ; . 1· ' Ii 1' ,. -1 ·1 i j ! ,-· i ; · · 1· ·I · -I· .,...._.. ~ ·• ;-i·l .. ',....'-·•· -1·1·. I . I ' • • ' ••. , r • • I I I I I • . • • • I r . • I • I ·r I l I .r. • i I· ., I 1·1 ~ ·~·. ! l I .. I , ,· .-: . i : ; I : , .. ' , ; ' , . : . , ' , . ! : •. I i : r . .i I . . . .. t I . ' ! .. i. ·f· ·1 ; . . . . : ! . I . l.' ! I ! ! I I ; I I I I ' : • I I I I i I ! I i I ·' i I I I I ! 1-. . ,' . '. i · 1· I !· q ·t l , .. ·--m.i"t;::· I 11. ;; 1 !i,!,1 1;: ::Iii I JJ.:·!il di 11 ·. I·· ··.-I .-ii -!.f~H--,1 -ti·.·_":":: 150 100 so . ......._ • ...,....,_._ .... -m· rr++rri~ . . 1 .. ttl · . I . I l . fl I + l l I . .j 'fl I I I:;· ·1'l1i·' j· ,., .. ~t: ''" ··t "'""Irr·:, _t (,'I ·11 L, ·-·_1r'""'. , ........ ,.1 -Jt .. , .. I.! .... : .. -·:; . I I I I . . '. I I i . : ·t' 1· : : I I : l r I ,· . r' . . .1 • I --• ' I · 1 · 1 ...; 4 . I • ....:. l . . .... . -...... ~.·1! i :1· : ,' !; ' I 1• ·:! 11 I,,._ . .. . '·1·-'1·,!i· .. L, .; •. , __ .. ...... I ! r ! ! . I I ! . I : i. I . ; I I . . I I I I· I .. t .. I . -· .. ' ~ I · r· 11 I j r I . . ...... -. I I ! I ' ·r j I I I ' ~I I • 11 . I· ·r I I i .l I . . . . . " . . . I , . . . -I '! : I . I '·Ir J . I I i ! .. ,. -+· ; 1--i-., i--. l -. ' . . . . . I • . '! I . '~·r--..... I . ; ; : , . inl. ! . ; . . -. I ! l i , • . .. t · :t I 1 1 i 11 ·1 P . . ... . ·1 .:. ~ . . -. 1. I ! : .i-r~ l l l ;-.. · : · -i 120 80 40 h-Tr---·:-+t -t ,· ·rrt--~ ...... I I I I I I ' I ,· I ! ·1·-:-1 I I l . . ! I. I I . . I I . ! • I . I ' I ! ; i! I . ' : . ' . I I ·1 ·. I I ! . 1· . ·!' ! . ' I I . • ' I I 1 • j I I I ! .. ........ -, r • • ' • I · I • ,. I ' · I ' 1 I ! r • : • j I • I I ' · r I , j ' • , · I I • · f I l I I ~ · 1 r --• ~ · i .• J I i · i 1. 1 1· ! ill · : · , , 1 , ,· , , i , 1 1 , • · , 1 1 • I , i ; 1 1 I· • • · 1 I I ' ' , I ; I r i ! . , ·, ,· J ; , ! I . . , : : . ,-1· . , . . i . I .J, ·1 ·, I . • . -' I · 1 ! . ·, i ·1· ! •·: ; -i . · ! : I i J l 11 I ! I l ! I ' • : • l . I .. j . I . . i I. . ! I I . l I I ! I : . _1,··1'·!·il1·:,,1 . ·1111 i j: I l; ii.. i' · ,/ -1· 'ii 'i ·r I '1 11 ~ .. f ,·11,-.,11 .,,·. 11-··1.11: . ; I I ' m" I I I t' I I • . ' ,. . . I . . I I . I r· I I i I ; i ·t· 90 60 30 H··-' , . · , + 4 , . .~ . , . . , ; + . . J. 1---1-, • ~ , ··1 l ; I . I i I I j . i 11 ,TT,· ! I ·ti· I . I ' I· I · 11 . I ... ·, I • ; •• ' ! 1· : ! 1.1+ I i j i I I ., t r l : ! j I ' t I j ! ! I • I I 1 • I t ' . • 1 I I . j 1 I I j · ~-• ; ' I j ! }" ,· 1 • 1 • t , , , I ! · ; : I · I I 11 1. 1 ! . I ' l : j · 1 I ! · I 1 .. · , . : , f ! ·J t I ! ! : · · I . : ; ; : ; l : I I r 'r ! r : '1 ! . I ; : ; '. i : l ·, I ! : 11 I ·, i : I : . ' l · 1 i . . . 1' : ! I I:', i 11 i 111 I . I :.; I: i: I I I ·,If I • 1· I!! I 1· • 1 I· I:! I 1· I, 1 I, .. I I I . . I . i I I '.: : l t , .. ''·,!:I j ! I' 1': I , 1': ! .. ·. r Ii I• ' 1 .. : ! 1 . . j · · f i ; ,· .. I: i It , 1-! I -.• I I • ! ·.' ? I : ! I I '·I I ' i • • I ' ' : J. ! . 1 .· • i I I !J ! 11 l I . I Lt I I • l 1 L! . . I 1 ·· 1· .. ! ! • : · 1 : • , ; ! J I i I I I. ! , · • · : 1 I • I r I ' L' · 1 I • : I . I · t· 1 I ! · · 1·'! I t :· ! I I I I · · t 60 40 20·f-·+-rr··-1-t-:· t·.+ .. ~ ... ,, ,--·.,. •·T-r,-· Ti··m·,·.-·-r-++-'":··, · .. 1 • ·r·~ ·~·+ .. · ,·-r·r, • ! ' · 11 • I f j · I I ' I • , ! p9!:: /7Jcf, I" I , ! · I , I ' I : I I j I • I • I , I · 1 I , !f , I I I , r , ! 1 ! I 1 , I ; ! . : ' . . I I ~ I I I ' _. 1· • y i ; u . . . : ! I ! I ! ' i ! I I ! I ! : i I . . I 11· . ! ' I I . . . 1· I . i ·i ? I • I : i ! ' I ! ' •••••• I • I I I I • • I . I • I /I I . • • • I ' ' I I • I ' I· I • I '· . I l ·1 ' . . l I I I .. ' I I • " " I I . : ' I . I. ~-' , ; : ti! i ' ·~ 1 I , r • 1· I 1· ! • .,, , 1 i · i ; t • I :, : I . 1 , !. l j C..... 1. , , • ! ; , I j , ; 1 : 'j I • ;. j ! . : . , ; i , . , . ., I , . . r·r-·,-. -~ 6ooo' J::. ! ! "' t 1 • • 1 • •1 : 1 I ' 1-1 1 ~; 1 , • , , ·: ! 1 i i j I . 1 , I 1 : , 1.1 • I , , : , 1 ! : . , i ; , . , : :-. . . ·, • , .• I ,· ·rt--p I ! '! I Ir i I ~-'-~ I 'l w--··: l ! I ! '. ! I .. ': r; ! I ,. ! ! • I 1· 1 ! : ' ! : . . ! r: • 'I ! I : : I·' ' .. ·, , . . . , , , , I I· . · • , I, • , , r • 11() ·. , It , · ! I I ·:. I I 1 · I,. , 1 1 1, , • I .... 1 . , , , I 1 , • , , , , It,. 'l .• .. i • : 1 , , • : ,, • ..1:. ,· ! l ; : . • i 01-1' . 1 ; , , i 1 : 1· · , : .. • : • , i : I '1 ; . I , : . · .. .. -1 i , i 1 : 1 , • , ; , ·, ; f · . • . . . .• · . l • ; · i : . • • , .. · ,-: ... ; ~ . . . .! : , ; • : 1 ~! : : • ! . . . : ! ! 1 , ; i r ! ! ..I 1 • • 1 • : • • • • • : 1 t • 1 : • • , ! : 1 • i ., J_' • 30 20 10. ~--..... '-·. • , .1 .... -1 -· .• I --!,+~I·· ·-··t·· l·j ~ ..... +-·-·· --··-1,-.--~--i-77 •..• ·~· !---,-••• ··-. ..... . ....... -,-"'-'··· -"' • .,...ttr· .. .. .. : . , , . , .. , . , : . __...:-i,: ·: ~-: .. 1. 890 ,: : , .. ; · 1, . : • , 1:,:, : , l,,: : : . . 1. · : . , . · : , • , 1 i: , , ; Ii 1 1 ·.. . .. , i,:,,: . ...,-.• : ; . .. , .. ; ...•. ·1~-FPs . , : , . i. =,, i,:. , : , ; , .•. , ... , : . . j, ••• : ; . i , , ·. 1. ; . I : : i. '.: : ~; .. ·: ; ' : l : : . : : I •• :-;·· -~~-;---,. • .:.j_: l : : : ! i ; : :. ; . ! l !' l i j l i I : ; '. : . : : . i '. : : : ! ; : : i : : ''[ i, i -::._<y_S ,i._,-i---;I I ; :· . : • : • ! i : : : : : ; • • • . ! : ·: :. '. : : ! ; I : '"·:-jJ..: j ';, ~ ' : !, !' ; l : ! ! i . i ' : : . : : ! i : ~ : ; i . : : I I I : ~ <;_:,\) ~ ; . ; I, . . • , • i . • •• : , : • = •• ! . : :;---<7 ,'t~O. . . ; , , , I : , 1 · .. · . i : : ... ! •• , . l , ; \. .. :::,~P.·1~=sft: .. :;!1:.:· .::·1:1:: r.11 =sn-<· i;·:1·->lts<;:jl1·1 i .;·1::: 1,:Ji 1:::· :,·1·i ·I i .1 -.... ! • , .,_ :t..1:......1. ,.. • , .. l.,, ,.. . I. J., , .• 'i'.JJ ••... J .. , , .... !... , ... J J .,_;,J.J..Ll.L ...... [ 1, :.L .. , , __ .1.L.L-., L . ,J .,_ ... _ j 11 11 m-o , 10 t-_ . I 20 .__ _____ ___.l30 20 40 . 60 30. 60 90 40 80 120 so 60 100 120 . 150 180 70 80 90 .100 140. 160 180 200 210 240 270 300 DISTANCE---+- ~ N-4 -.s SOUTHERN. CALIFORNIA BOIL & .T.EBTING, INC. •••a RIVaRDALa •TR •• T aAN 01•00, CALll"ORNIA ait1R0 JOB Sycamore Greek JOB NO. 8821121 TRAVERSE NO. S 1-1 TRAVERSE TYPE GEOLOGIST RF ELEVATION 340 ± SURFICIAL MAT'L. SILTY SAND ROCK TYPE GRAfHTIC Appendix E • ••• • Leighton and Associates, Inc. . GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page I of 6 : LEIGHTON AND AS SOCIA TES, J;NC. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPf;CIFICA TIO NS FOR RO_UGH GRADING 1.0. · General l.l 1.2 3030.1094 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 r~port(s); These Specifications are a part of the recommendations contained in the geotechnic~..l 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 Geotechnicaf Consultant during the course of grading may result in new. or revised recommendations th~t could supersede these specifications or the recommendations in the geotechnical-report( s ). · The Geotechnical Consultant of Record: Prior to commencement of work, the owner shall employ the Geotechnical Consultant of Record (Geotechnical Consultant).· The Geotechnical Consµltants shall be responsible for reviewing the approved geotechnical repqrt(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 o~er, recommend appropriate changes in design to accommodate the observed conditions, and notify the review agency where required. Subsurface areas to be geotechnicallyobserved, 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-conditioningand processing of the subgrade and filf materials and perfonn 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. -•.... . ,' ,• • Leighton and Associates, Inc. . GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page2.of6 1.3 The Earthwork Contractor. The Earth~~rk Contractor (Contractor) shall be qualified, -experienced, and knowledgeable in earthwork logistics, preparation and processing of ~round to receive fill, moisture-conditioningand processing of fill, and compacting fill. The Contractor shall reyiew a:nd 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 an<l 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 accordancewi~ the applicable grading codes and agency ordinances, these Specifications, and the recommendations 'in the approved geotechnical report(s) artd grading plan(s). If, in the opinion of the Geotechnical Consuitant, unsatisfactory conditions, such as unsuitable soil, improper moisture ~ndition, 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 J0J0.1094 2.1 Clearing and Grubbing: Veget,ation, 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 GeotechnicalConsultant. · 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 ~hall 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 . • •• • Leighton and Associates, Inc. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND Gi\ADING SPECIFICATIONS Page3 of6 2.2 Processing: Existing ground that has been declared satisfactory for support of fill by the -GeotechniGal Consultant shall be scarified to a minimum depth of 9 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 sµrface is reasonably uniform, flat, and free of un~ven features that would inhibit uniform compaction. · 2.3 Overexcavatiorr -In· ·addition to removals and overexcavations recommended in the approved geotechnical report(s) and the grading plan, soft, loose, dry, saturated, spongy, organic-rich, highly fractured or otherwise unsuitable ground shall be overexcavated to competent ground as evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant during grading. 2.4 Benching: Where fills are to be placed on ground with slopes steeper than 5: I (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 0r otherwise overexcavated to provide a flat subgrade 2.5 for the fill. · ·· · Evaluation/ Acceptance of Fill Areas. All areas to receive fill, including removal and processed areas, key bottoms, and benches,'shall be observed, 'fuapped, elevations recorded, and/or tested prior to being accepted by the Gecitechnical 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 3030.1094 3. i 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 placemen~. Soils of poor quality, such as those with unacceptable gradation1 high expansion potential; or low strength shaII be placed in areas acceptable to the Geotechnical Consultant or mixed with other soils to achieve satisfactoryfiII material. . . 3.2 Oversize: Oversize material defined as rock, or other irreducible material with a maximum 3.3 dimension greater than 8 inches, shall not be buried or placed in fiII 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 materfal shall not be placed within 10 vertical feet of finish grade or within 2 feet- of future utilities or underground construction. 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 • ••• .,-.· Leighton and Associates, Inc. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFIC:ATIONS Page 4 of 6 Geot(?chnical Consultant at least 48 hours~(i working days) before importing begi_ns so that its suitability can be determined and appropriate tests performed. 4.0 Fill Placement and Compaction 3030 .. 1094 4.1 Fill Layers: Approved fill material shall be placed in are?-s prepared to receive fill (per Section 3.0) in near-horizontal layers not exceeding 8 inches in loose thickness. The · Geotechnica{ 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 thoroughlyto 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 unifonn 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 D 1557-91). 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 PHI Slopes: In addition to normal compaction procedures specified above, compaction of slopes shall b~ accomplished by· backrolling 0f slopes with sheepsfoot roU~rs at· increments of 3 to 4 feet ~n fill elevation, or _by other methods producing satisfactory results acceptable to· the· Geotechnical Consultant. · Upon completion of grading, relative compaction of the fill, ot,1t to the. slope face, shaU be at least 90 percent of maximum density per ASTM Test Method D 1557-91. 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 e>n field conditions encountered. Compaction tes~ l_ocations will n9t 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 inadequatecompaction(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 cons.truction 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. • •••• - •• Leighton and Associates, Inc. GENERALEARTHWORKAND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page 5 of 6 4. 7 Compaction Test Locations: The Geotec_~11ical Consultant shall document the approximate · elevation and horizontal coordinates of each test location, The <:;;9ntractor shall coordinate with the project surveyor to assure that ·sufficient grade stakes are established so that the Geotechnical Consul~nt can detennine the test °Iocations 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 · Subdraininstallation 6.0 7.0 3030.1094 Subdrain systems shall be installed in accordance with.the approved geotechnical report(s), the grading plan, and the· Standard Details. The Geotechnical-Consultant may recommend additional subdrains and/or changes in. subdrain extent, location, grade, or material depending on conditions encountered during grading. All subdrains shall-b.e surveyed by a land surveyor/civil engineer for line and grade after installation and prior to burial. Sufficient time should be allowed by the Contractoi: for these surveys. Excavation Excavations, as well as over-excavation for remedial purposes, shall be evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant during grading. Remedial removal depths shown on geotechnical plans are estimates only. The actual extent of remova:l 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 9fthe 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, unle.ss otherwise recommended by the Geotechnical Consultant. Trertch Backfills 7.1 The Contractor shall follow all OI-JSA and C~l/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 Pub.lie Works Construction. · Bedding material shall have a Sand Equivalent greater than 30 (SE>30). The bedding shall be placed to' l · foot over the top of the conduit and densified by jetting. Backfill shall be placed and densified to a minim~m 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 Geo technical Consultant shall test the trench bac~fi.ll for relative compaction. At least one test should be made for every 300 feet of trench and 2 feet of fill. •• • L~ighton and Associates, Inc. GENERAL EARTHWORK.AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS. Page6 of6 3030.1094 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 alternativeequipmerttand method . • OUTl.,ET PIPES 4•4> NON-PERFORATED PIPE, 100' MAX. O.C. HORIZONTALLY, 30' MAX: O.C. VERTICALLY • SUBDRAIN INSTALLATION -Subdrain collector pipe shall be installed with perforations down or, unless otherwise desigrnlted by the geotechnical consultant. Outlet pipes shall be 11CXrperforated pipe. The subdrain pipe shall have at least 8 perforations uniformly spaced per foot. ·Pelforation shaft be ¼· to ½· If dnlled holes are used. All subdrain pipes shall hav.e .a gradient ~ least 2% towards the outlet. • SUBDRAIN PIPE-Subdraln pipe ~hall be ASTM 02751, SOR 23.5 or ASTM 01527, Schedule 40, or ASTM 03034, SOR ~;s, Sched~le 40 Polyvinyl Chloride Plastic (PVC) pipe. • All outlet pipe shall be placed In a trench no wider tnan twice tt,e 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 [lfj[}] SPECIFICATIONS ~ U STANDARD DETAILS D 4/95 . I I ••• •. .'. ••• . PROJECTED Pl.ANE 1 TO 1 MAXIMUM FROM TOE OF SLOPETO.APPRO"IEO GROUND . NATURAL GROUND ·--- CUT FACE NATURAL GROUND --~ . 2'MIN. KEYDEPlli SHALL BE CON8TRUCTEO PflOR TO FU PLACEMENT TO.ASSURE ACEQUATE oeOl.OGIC CONOn10NS PROJECTED PLANE . 1 TO 1 MAXIMUM FROM TOE OF SLOPE TO APPROVED GROUND 2'MIN. KEY DEPTH KEYING AND BENCHING REMOVE UNSUITABLE MATERIAL FILL SLOPE FILL-OVER-CUT SLOPE CUT-OVER-FILL SLOPE For Subdrains See . Stand~rd Detail C GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING flfl[I] SPECIFlqA TIONS U STANDARD DETAILS A REV. 4/11/g6 FINISH GRADE _____ _.:_.:, __ _.:10' MIN ----coMPACTED FILL·----· SLOPE __ -----------:-_ =--£-:=: ·---· -_-:...-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ ----- FACE . __:-_ _:-_-_-__:-_-_-_-_-_:-__ . ---~---· -_-_-_-__:-_-_-_--:_-:...-:...-_-_-_-_-_:: --=--===-=~-~~--=----------n-=---=-=~--:-----a---=- -------~7¥: . ·== .. = =~-=~ ====~~=-f=~=-=======::;=--.-_-_-_-_-_--~-~ -==-.:-.:¾:--:...;f""E---_-_-_-..:--=:.::--A._--.:...-_-_:-_-_-_-------:..7-..--=~-u~---~~-------:--i.A-------=--:t~MI;;-::-=--~=-=-=-----CO:-_:-__ -~::.-~~::: -----~: ---~==-:~~------------==t~'..!.-:.:-~---_-_----_-_-_-_-_-....:-_-_:.:4• MIN.::.:---15• MIN.--------. --·---~:.::;;c-_-______________ ·----------------· -==--=-==~~~~~~fl-~~~~ =~~~-~= ~~ ==~~-~=:: OR FLOODED .;;._-.,;:;,~-..:---_--:...WINDROW:-_:-_-_-_-_:-_-_-:.-.--:---· ___ GRANULAR MATERIAL • Oversize rock Is larger than e 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 fiH all the voids. • Do not bury rock within 1 0 feet of finish grade. · • Windrow of buried rock $hall be parallel to the finished slope fill. ·ELEVATION A-A' PROFILE ALONG WIN0ROW JETTED OR FLOODED . · GRANULAR MATERIAL OVERSIZE ROCK DISPOSAL _A -------=--· -- GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING [][l] SPECIFICATIONS U STANDARD DETAILS e· ·-· ._':_ • NATURAL '-.,.--GROUND ."' . REMOVE ..-::::.~--UNSUITABLE MATERIAL CALTRANS CL.ASS 11 PERMEABLE OR #2 ROCK (9FT,3/FT.) WRAPPED iN FILTER FABRIC FIL TEA FABRIC ~I~~~: OR"-coLLECTOR .. PIPE SHALL EQUIVALENl)' BE MINIMUM G9 DIAMETER SCHEDULE 40 PVC PERFORATED CANYON SUBDRAIN OUTLET DETAIL PIPE. Sf;:E STANDARD DETAIL D DESl~N. FINISHED GRAD_E PERFORATED PIPE &•• MIN. J--2o'MIN.~ NON-PERFORATED . 5' MIN. &•+ MIN. CANYON SUBDRAINS FOR PIPE SPJ=CIFICATION FILTER FABRIC (MIRAFI 140 OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT) #2 ROCK WRAPPED IN FILTER FABRIC OR.CALTRANS CLASS 11 PERMEABLE • GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING [][l]n -SPECIFICATIONS cs U STANDARD DETAILS C -4/95 • • • RETAINING WALL DHAINAG.E DETAIL RET AiNING WAL'=._ W ~LL' W AT~;~_~!},(?PFING PER ARCHITECT'S SPECiFICATi.9~5",.--- . . ·- FINISH GRADEi ..SC>IL .l;J.AC!(FI.LL, COMPACTED .TO . 90 PERCENTiRELATIVE COMPACTION* ·4·\<t.11Nl:oiAMETeR Pe.RFOAAT·eo· ~:r--·--,i......rElli -"PVC PIPE ·(SCHEDULE 40 ORf t===t==-~-=..-·--~~·-. ~. =E"~~=t~~:§::;:~~ ·---:.~=t~=t~9MP A q_TEI) -~~j..j:~=t~~ .EOUJ.Y ~LEJ,1;1:~ .Wfl'.i:i ... P.ER~o·a.f\ ,:10N~ ORIENTEDIOOWN.1AS DEPICTED· t.1·1Ni°MuM jjjeRc~NT. tiRA·o,eN:t:. TO SUITA~LE OUTLET . WALL FOOTING. ffi -~t:;;;~=:-:--~~ N01' TO SCALE . . ·SPECIFICATIONS FOR CALTRANS CLAS$ 2 PERMEABL~ MATERIAL U.S. Standard Sieve -Si.ze 111 3/411 3/811 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 COMPETENt· BEDROCK OR MATERIAL' AS EVALUATED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT . . *BASED ON. ASTM 0155'7 **IF CALtRANl3 CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL (SEE-GRADATION TO LEFT) IS USED IN PLACE OF 314•;..1.:112• GRAVEL, FILTER FABRIC Mi\Y -BE DELETED. CAL TRAri°s· CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATEl:liAL SHOULD BE CO.MPAQTED. TO sq: PERCEN"'t11RELATIVE COMPACTION* NOTE:COMPOSITE DRAINAGE PRODUCTS SUCH AS MJRADRAIN· OR J-0RAIN MAY BE. USED· AS. AN .ALTERNATIVE TO GRAVEL OR Cl,.AS.S 2.INSTALLATION SHOULD BE PERFORM3) IN ACCORDANCE WITH MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS. • ···: ·STABILITY FILL / BUTTR'ESS DETAIL -=-===-===-~--=--t r::=1 l':::-111 4• ¢ Ng~i~~icr~~\!D. PIPE_,· --===---~~~~~~: Ill~! 'og~ ,M: !;/ o~c~ ~ :~~~6' 1tl';,L v ~-a:::::~.:-.:=-=:===:: =~~;T / --:2% MIN-------i=°~=------=---~~::-==-==-= .. . . SEE SUBDRAIN TRENCH· DETAIL LOWEST SU~ORAIN SHOULD ' BE SITUATED AS LOW AS . POSS.IBL:-i~ to ALLOW SUITABLE OUTLET r-.__10' MIN· PERFORATED L..J.__j EACH SIDE · PIPE~ · . . . CAP NON-P!=RF-ORATEO .OUTLET PIPE . KE-Y WID'l'tf t-.CO.NNECTION DETAIL AS N0TED.'ON··GRADING ·PLANS . . .1°5' MIN._ · . . FILTER FABRIC . ENVELOPE. (MIRAFI ·140N OR APPROVED -EQU_IVAL.ENT)* SEE -r.:.coNNECTION.: DETAIL:, 4• ¢ PERFORATED' PIPE SUBDRAIN tRJ;NCH DETAlL NOTES: * IF CALTRANS CLASS 2 PER.MEABLE MATERIAL' IS USE0··1N PLACE OF 314•~1-112:-GRAVEL, FILTER FABRfC MAY' :BE Dl:LETED ·SPECIFICATIONS FOR CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL U.S. Standard · Sieve Size l" ... 3/411· 3/811 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 F~:>r but~r'ess. dimensions, see geotedhnl~al--report/plans. Actual _dlme·nslons of buttress and, sub_dr·a1~ ma~ _be-ch9:nge_d by the geotechnlcal· .consultant-base·d on field condltl"ons. SUBDRAIN INSTALLAT-·IOt4,.Subdraln pipe should· be lnsUlled with p.erforatlons down as c;jep·lcted. At locatlcms recorn~ended by. the geote.chnlcal\consultan~, nonperforated pipe ·should be Installed SUB~~A!N. TY_PE.:.Subdraln ·type shQuld be Acrylon trffe Butadlene Styrene. (A-.B.S.), Polyvl~yl C~lorlde (PVC) or approved equivalent. crass 1~5,SDR .32.6-should be used for maximum fill depths of·35 feet. Class 200,SDR .21 shouid be used. for maximum fill depJhs of 1-00 .feet.. · •-·.: -. . . AppendixF . · . •• .•. :.· .. .. ••• CALIFORNIA FAULT MAP Cantarini/Project No. 4980160-003 1000 900 800 700 600 500 300 200 100 0 -400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 400 500 600 • • CALIFORNIA FAULT MAP· Cantarini/Project No. 4980160-003 350 300 250 200 150 • 100 50 0 · -50 -1 00 -\--l--'-..L-.L--+-'----"--....,__,.l!Y-..,__._--'-'--1-....l-...l.-'-'---'-+ .............. .__._--+__.__..__,__---'--t!---'L-..,___,._----'--i~...L......L.----'--1-' 50 100 150 200 250 -300 350 400 450 • • _ _: • *********************** * * * * * EQFAULT * * * * * *********************** DETERMINISTIC ESTIMATION OF PEAK ACCELERATION FROM DIGITIZED FAULTS JOB NUMBER: 4980160-003 JOB NAME: CcJ.ntaiini/Project No. 4980160-003 CALCULATION NAME: Cantarini FAULT-DATA-FILE NAME: CDMGFLTE.DAT SITE COORDINATES: SITE LATITQDE: SITE LONGITUD~: 33 .1407 117. 283:8 SEARCH RADIUS: 100 mi DATE: 09-19-2000 ATTENUATION ·RELATION: · 5) Boore et al. UNCERTAINTY (M=Median,· S=Sigrna): M DISTANCE MEASURE: cd_2drp (1997) Horiz. -SOfL (310) Number of Sigmas: 0.0 SCOND: 1 Basement Depth: 5.00 km Campbell SSR: COMPUTE PEAK HORIZONTAL ACCELERATION FAULT-QATA FILE USED: CDMGFLTE.0AT MINIMUM DEPTH VALUE (km): 0.0 Campbell SHR: ··:: ._:_: •• EQFAULT SUMMARY DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS -------------------------- Page 1 ----------·-------------------·-------·-------·---------·---------------------- !ESTIMATED MAX. EARTHQUAKE EVENT APPROXIMATE 1-----.------------------------- ABBREVIATED DISTANCE I MAXIMUM I PEAK IEST. SITE FAULT NAME mi (km) !EARTHQUAKE! SITE !INTENSITY I I MAG. (Mw) I ACCEL. g IMOD.MERC. ==================== .==== ======!=== == =======!= ==·=.===i==========I. ======= ROSE CANYON I 6.6( 10.6) I 6.9 I 0.298 I IX NEWPORT~INGLEWOOD (Offshore) I 8.5( 13.6) I 6.9 I 0.254 I IX CORONADO BANK .. · 22.6( 36.3) I 7.4 I 0.162 I VIII ELSINORE-TEMECULA 22.6( 36.4) I 6.8 I. 0.118 I VII ELSINORE-JULIAN 22. 6 ( 36 .. 4) I 7 .1 I 0. 138 I VIII ELSINORE.,...GLEN IVY 34.9(. 56-.2) I 6 .. 8 I 0.084 I VII PALOS VERDES 39.1( 63 .. ·0)-I 7.1 I 0.091 I VII ~ARTHQUAKE VALLEY 40.7( 65.5) I 6.5 I 0.064 I VI SAN JACINTO-ANZA 4S.4( 73.1) I 7.2 I 0.085 VII SAN JACINTO-SAN JACINTO VALLEY 46.5( 74.9)1 6.9 I 0.071 VI NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (L.A.Basin) 49.1( 79.0) I 6.9 I. 0.068 VI CHINO-CENTRAL AVE;. (Elsino:i::-e) 49.2( 79.1) I 6.7 I 0.075 VII SAN JACINTO-COYOTE CREEK 49.9( 80.3) I 6.8 I 0.064 VI WHITTIER 53.4( 85.9)1 ·6.8 I 0.061 VI ELSINORE--COYOTE MOUNTAIN 5 4 . 7 ( 8 8 . 0) I 6. 8 0 . 0 6 0 VI COMPTON THRUST 58.8( 94.6) I . 6.8 ·o.069 VI SAN JACINTO-SAN BERNARDINO 60.6( 97.5) I 6.7 0.052 VI ELYSIAN PARK THRUST I 61.0( 98.2)1 6.7 0.063 VI SAN JACINTO -BORREGO I 6.3. 2 ( lOl. 7.) I 6 .. 6 0. 04 8 VI SAN ANDREAS -San Bernardino I 64.4( 103.7) I 7.3 0.068 VI SAN ANDREAS· -Southern I 64.4( 103.7) I 7.4 0.072 VI SAN JOSE I 70.2( 112.9) I 6.5 0.051 VI PINTO MOUNTAIN I 71.2( 114.6) I 7.0 0.054 VI SAN ANDREAS -Coachella I 71.6( 115.3) I 7.1 0.057 VI CUCAMONGA I 72.5( 116.7) I 7.0 0.065 VI SIERRA MADRE I 12,8( 117.2) I 7.0 0.065 VI NORTH FRONTA~ FAULT ZONE (West) I 76.0( 122.3) I 7.0 0.063 VI BURNT MTN. .1 76.4( 123.0)1 6.4 0.037 V CLEGHORN I 78.4( 126.1) I 6.5 0.039 V EUREKA PEAK I 7'9.2( 127.5) I 6,4 0.036 V SUPERSTITION MTN. (San Jacinto) I 79.5( 127.9) I 6.6 0.040 V NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (East) I 79.7( 128.2) I 6.7 0.051 VI SAN ANDREAS --1857 Rupture I 82.1( 132.1) I 7.8 0.074 VII SAN ANDREAS -Mojave I 82.1( 132.1)1 7.1 0.051 VI RAYMOND I 82. 3 ( 132. 4) I 6. 5 0. 045 VI CLAMSHELL-SAWPIT I 82.4( 132.6)1 6.5 0.045 VI ELMORE RANCH I 83 .1 ( 133. 7 )_ J 6. 6 0. 039 V ~UPERSTITION HitLS (San Jacinto) I 84.1( 13~.4) I 6.6 0.038 V VERDUGO I 84.9( 136.7) I 6.7 0.049 VI LAGUNA SALADA I 86.1( 138.5)-1 ':/.0 0.047 VI • •• ••• DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS Page 2 ---------------------, ---------"-----, -,----------·----------------------·----- LANDERS HOLLYWOOD ABBREVIATED FAULT NAME HELENDALE -S. LOCKHARDT LENWOOD-LOCKHART-OLD WOMAN SPRGS SANTA MONICA BRAWLEY SEISMIC ZONE JOHNSON VALLEY (Northern) EMERSON So. -COPPER MTN. MALIBU COAST ~IERRA MADRE (San Fernando) NORTHRIDGE (E. Oak Ridge) SAN GABRIEL !ESTIMATED MAX. EARTHQUAKE EVENT APPROXIMATE !------------------------------ DISTANCE / I MAXIMUM I PEAK I EST: SITE mi (km) !EARTHQUAKE! SITE !INTENSITY I MAG. (Mw) I ACCEL. g JMOD.MERC. ·======= ===== .======== !==========!========= 86.6( 87.0( 88.3( 91.8( 92.0( 92.3( 94. 6 ( 94.6( 94. 9 ( ·97. 9 ( 98.5( 99.7 ( 139.4) 140.0) 142.1) :\.47.8) 148.0) 148. 6) 152.3) 152.3) 152.7) 157. 6) 158.5) 160.4) 7.3 I 0.054 I VI 6.4 I 0.041 I V 7. 1 I 0. 0 4 8 I VI 7.3 I 0.052 I VI 6.6 I 0.044 I VI 6.4 I 0.032 I V 6.7 I 0.037 I V ·. 6. 9 I 0. 0 41 I V 6.7 I 0.045 I VI 6.7 I 0.044 I VI 6.9 I 0.049 I VI 7.0 I 0.042 I VI ********•********************~****~***************k**************************** -END OF SEARCH-52 FAULT.S FOUND WITHIN THE SPECIFIED SEARCH RADIUS . THE RO$E CANYON FAULT IS CLOSEST TO THE SITE. IT IS ABOUT 6.6 MILES (10.6 km) AWAY. LARGEST MAXIMUM~EARTHQUAKE SITE ACCELERATION: 0.2976 g •• ••• •• *********************** * * * E Q F A u L T * * * * Version 3.00 * * * *****************~***** DETERMINISTIC ESTIMATION OF PEAK ACCELERATI.ON FROM DIGITIZED FAULTS JOB NUMBER: 4980160~003 JOB NAME: Ca,ntarini/Project No. 4980160-003 CALCULATION NAME: Cantarini FAULT70ATA-FILE NAME: CDMGFLTE.DAT SITE COORDINATES: SITE LATITUDE: SITE LONGITUDE-: 33.1407 117.2838 SEARCH RADIUS: 100 mi DATE: 09-19-2000 ATTENUATION RELATION: 5) Boore et al. (1~97) Horiz. -SOIL (310) UNCERTAINTY (M=Median, S=Sigma): S Number of Sigmas: 1.0 DISTANCE MEASURE: cd_2drp SCOND: 1 Basement Depth:. 5.00 km Campbell SSR: Campbell SHR: COMPUT.E PEAK HORIZONTAL ACCELERATION FAULT-DATA FILE USED: CDMGFLTE.DAT MINIMUM DEPTH VALUE (km): 0.0 •• • ·:· EQFAULT SUMMARY DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS Page 1 !'ESTIMATED MAX. EARTHQUAKE EVENT APPROXIMATE 1------------------------------- ABBREVIATED DISTANCE I MAXIMUM I PEAK IEST. SITE FAULT NAME mi (km). !EARTHQUAKE! SITE !INTENSITY I I MA.G. (Mw) I ACCEL. g IMOD.MERC. =========================== ====i=== ==========!==== === =1· =========!========= ROSE CANYON I NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (Offshore) I CORONADO BANK I ELSINORE~TEMECULA I ELSINORE-JULIAN I ELSINORE~GLEN IVY I PALOS VERDES I "E;ARTHQUAKE VALLEY I SAN JACINTO-ANZA I SAN JACINTO-SAN JACINTO VALLEY I NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (L.A.Basin) I CHINO-CENTRAL.AVE. (Elsinore) I SAN JACINTO-COYOTE CREEK I WHITTIER I ELSINORE-COYOTE MOUNTAIN I COMPTON THRUST I SAN JACINTO-SAN BERNARDINO I ELYSIAN PARK THRUST I SAN JACINTO -BORREGO I SAN ANDREAS -San Bernardino I SAN ANDREAS -Southern I SAN JOSE I PINTO MOUNTAIN I SAN ANDREAS -Coachella I CUCAMONGA I SIERRA MADRE I NORTH-FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (West) BURNT MTN. CLEGHORN EUREKA PEAK SUPERSTITION MTN. (San Jacinto) NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (East) SAN ANDREAS~ 1857 Rupture SAN ANDREAS -~ojave RAYMOND CLAMSHELL-SAWPIT ELMORE RANCH SUPERSTITION HILLS (San Jacinto) VERDUGO I LAGUNA SALADA I 6. 6 ( 8 .5 ( 22.6( 22.6( 22 .. 6 ( 34.9( 39.1( 40. 7 ( 45. 4 ( 46. 5 ( 49 .1 ( 49.2 ( 49. 9 ( 53 .. 4 ( 54. 7 ( 58. 8 ( 60.6( 61.0( 63.2 ( 64. 4 ( 64.4( 7Q.2( 71.2 ( 71.6( 72.5 ( 72. 8 ( 76 ... 0 ( 76. 4 ( 78,. 4 ( 79. 2 ( 79.5 ( 79. 7 ( 82.1( 82.1( 82.3( 82. 4 ( 83.1( 84.1( 84.°9( 86.1( 10. 6) I 13. 6) I 36. 3) I 36. 4 ). I 36. 4~ I 56.2)" I 63. 0) · 65.5) '.73.1) 74. 9) 79.0) 79 .1) 80.3) 85. 9)_ 88.0) 94. 6) 97. 5) 98.2) 101. 7) 103.7) 103.7) 112. 9) 114.6} 115.3) 116.7)1 117 .2) I 122. 3 )· I 123 .0) I 126.1) I 127.5) I 127. 9) I 128.2) I 132 .1) I 132 .1) I 132. 4) I 132. 6) I 133. 7) I 1-35.4) I 136. 7) I 138 .5) I -6.9 6.9 7.4 6.8 7.1 6.8 7.1 6.5 ·] .2 6.9 6.9 6. 7-- 9. 8 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.7 6.7 6.6 7.3 7.4 6.5 7.0 7.1 7.0 7.0 7.0 6.4 6.5 6.4 6.6 6 .. 7 7.8 7.1 6.5 6.5 6.6 6.6 6.7 7.0 I I I I I r I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I _I I I I I I I I I I I I 0.501 0.427 0.272 0.198 0.232 0.142 0.152 0.108 0.143 0.120 0.115 0.126 0.108 0.102 0.100 0.116 0.088 0.106 0.081 0.115 0.121 0.086 0.091 0.095 0.109 0.109 0.105 .. 0.063 0.065 0.061 0.068 0.087 0.124 0.086 0.076 0.076 0.065 0.065 0.082 0.079 X X IX VIII IX VIII VIII VII VIII VII VII VIII VII VII VII VII VII VII VII VII VII VII VII VII VII VII VII VI VI VI VI VII VII VII VII VII VI VI VII VII • DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS Page 2 --------.. ------·-------' . -. ---------------:------------------------------------ !ESTIMATED MAX. EARTHQUAKE EVENT APPROXIMATE 1------------------------------- ABBREVIATED DISTANCE I MAXIMUM I PEAK IEST. SITE FAULT NAME mi (km} I EARTHQUAKE I SITE I INTENSITY I I MAG. (Mw) I ACCEL. g IMOD.MERC. ========== -== -==================I== -======== _ -= I·====-== -==I========== ========= LANDERS I 86.6( 139.4) I 7.3 I Q.091 VII HOLLYWOOD I 87.0( 140.0)1 6.4 I 0.069 VI HELENDALE -S. LOCKHARDT I 88.3( 142.1) I 7.1 I 0.081 VII LENWOOD-LOCKHART-OLD WOMAN SPRGSI 91.8( 1'47.8)1 7.3 I 0.087 VII SANTA MONICA I 92.0( 148.0) I 6.6 I 0.073 VII BRAWLEY SEISMIC ZONE I 92.3( 148.6) I 6.4 I 0.054 VI JOHNSON VALLEY (Northern) I 94.6(. 152.3)1 '6.7 I. 0.062 VI EMERSON .So. -COPPER MTN. I 94.6( 152_.3} I 6.9 I 0.069 VI MALIBU· COAST I 94. 9 ( 152. 7} I 6. 7 I O. 07 6 VII SIERRA MADRE (S'.3-n Fernando} I 97. 9 ( 157. 6) I 6. 7 I O. 074 VII NORTHRIDGE (E. Oak Ridge} I 98.5(_158.5) I 6.~ I 0.082 VII SAN GABRIEL I 99.7 ( 160.4)1 7.0 'I 0.070 VI * * * * * * * * * * * * *'* * * * * * *·* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *'* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * -END.OF SEARCH-52 FAULTS FOUND WITHIN THE SPECIFIED SEARCH RADIUS. THE ROSE CANYON FAULT rs CLOSEST TO THE SITE. IT.IS ABOUT 6.6·MILES {10.6 km) AWAY. 'LARGEST MAXIMUM-EARTHQUAKE SIT.E ACCELERATION: 0.5006 g •••• Appendix G • ••• .•. :. .. •• APPENDIXG STABILITY ANALYSIS FOR HOMOGENEOUS EARTH SLOPES Design Parameters and Assumptions Analysis Type of Slope: 45 foot high cut slope Type of Soil Materials: Granitic Rock, Lusardi'Formation or Terrace Deposits H = Height of Slope ~ = Angle of Slope Yt = Total (wet) Unit Weight <p =Angle.of Internal Friction C = Cohesi9n • No seepage forces = 45 feet = 26 degrees = 125 pcf = 32 degrees = 200 psf • Total shear strength parameters are used in lieu of effective strength . · r •H•tan.rp Dimensionless Parameters = Acf = 1 = 17. 6 1 C Stability Number (from Figure 10 of Reference 2) = Ncf = 46 2 Minimum Factor of Safety= F.S. (min.)= Ncf • C = 1. 6 3(::?:1.5 O.K.) r,•H References 980160-003 1. Bell, J.M., Dimensionless Parameters for Homogeneous Earth Slopes, Journal, Soil Mechanics and Foun~ation Division, American Society ofCivil Engineers, No. SM5, September 1966. 2. Janbu, N., Discussion for (Reference -1), Journal, Soil Mechanics and Foundation Division, American. S0ciety of Civil Engineers, No. SSM6, November 1967 . G-1 • > .. APPENDIX G (CONTINUED) STABILITY ANALYSIS FOR HOMOGENEOUS EARTH SLOPES Design Parameters and Assumptions Type of Slope: 45 foot high fill .slope Type of Soil Material~: Onsite materials H = Height o( Slope ~ = Angle of Slope .Yt = Total (wet) Unit Weight cp = Angle of Internal Friction C=Cohesion • No seepage forces = 45 feet :::;:: 26 degrees = 125 pcf = 30degrees = 150 psf • Total shear strength parameters are used in lieu of effective strength Analysis . . · y •H•tan¢ . D1mehs1onless Parameters = Acf = 1 = 21. 6 4 C . . Stability Number (from Figure 10 of Reference 2) = N cf= 60 5 Minimum Factor of Safety= F.S. (min.)= Ncf • CH 1.6 6(~1.5 O.K.) r,• References 980160-003 1. Bell, J.M., Dimensionless Parameters for Homogeneous Earth Slopes, Journal, Soil Mechanics and Foundation Division, American Society of Civil Engineers, No. SM5, September 1966. 2. Janbu, N., Discussion for· (Reference -1), Journal, Soil Mechanics and Foundation Division, American Society of Civil Engineers, No. SSM6, November 1967 . G-2 • ••• , • APPENDIX G ( continued) SURFICIAL SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS ASSUMED PARAMETERS z. = Depth of Saturation = 3 ft. i = Slope Angle= 26 degrees Yw = Unit Weight of Water= 62.4 pcf Yt Saturated Unit Weight of Soil= 125 pcf <p Apparent Angle oflnternal Friction= 32 degrees c· = Apparent Cohesion = 200 pcf FS= C+o-tan¢ = C+(r,~rw)Z cos2itan¢ T y,Zsini~osi FS = 2.0(~1.5, o.k.) • cut slope G-3 980160-003 • • APPENDIX G ( continuedJ SURFICIAL SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS ASSUMED PARAMETERS z = Depth of Saturation= 3 ft. i = Slope Angle= 26 degrees Yw. = Unit Weight of.Water= 62.4 pcf Yt = Saturated Unit Weight of Soil= 125 pcf cp' Apparent Angle oflntemal Friction = 30 degrees C = Apparent Cohesion= 150 pcf FS= C+atan¢ = C+(y,-yw)Zcos2itan¢ T . . y, Z sin i cos i FS = 1.6 (~1.5, o.k.) • fill slope G-4 980160-003 • " ·" ' C ' "' C C C <;'l c::, 'ti -, ~ 1~ "' ~ I • > " "" • • • • --. ' ., < -0 . __ .-_--. -.::-~,,-~--, qi m ~ -$-Ell • . " " " " • 0 • • --. ' •• -< • •' 0 • •o •o --• • " " ' 0 --" . 0 • 0 • • • 0 • 6l ., \ '" ~ 'P l • in' ' ;,,: ;,s ~ ~ • lQ ;,s 0 • -~ :',j ~ C " 0 . ' " • -• 0 C " 0 ' • . " • • 0 • 0 • -0 • 0 . -:, • -· . . • • •< • 0 • -• 0 0 " C • ~3 ' 0 • • 0 -. . . - I :i. ·1:, :c . cp l> I ~;;,'., .,,_ :,.:;_ l I I I ' I -t ., ..• :,:-;:' \ \ \ ,.\" ·:,;~~-~ :~. :•,, / / ,/ / (." .,-,.,:.\. . ' .. (', t i <.;0~· ... \ ·, ,f ' \\ -~~ . \ ;, \ ' l ·· 1 i GEOTECHNICAL MAP · Cantarini Property Carlsbad, California ENGINEER/GEOLOGIST, SAC/RKW DRAFTING BY: GJM/MDJ Leighton and Associates, Inc. A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY {'. -f . ' ., \ ·,.,_. \ ' \ \ e•' /' ' .. \' ,.,,: ,· /\ I ./ I ( .· •, ' • \ ./ ,-sp' . . . 1r0P11 ... . D / ' . / . SCAif: 1" = .40· . LEGEND GEOLOGIC UNITS Afu Qal/Qcol Qt Tsa Kgr/Jsp Artificial Fill-undocumented Quaternary Alluvium and Colluvlum- undifferentiated (circled where hurried) Quaternary Terrace Deposits Tertiary Santiago Formation Cretaceous Granltics and Jurassic Santiago Peak Volcanics-undifferentiated MAP SYMBOLS -----•• ? TP-11 ~ Approx. location of geologic contact {dashed where approximate, dotted where buried, queried where uncertain) Approx; location of exploratory trench (Geosoils, 2000) SL-3~--l Approx. location of seismic line_ (Geosoils, 2000) / ·; ... ..,~.,{' :,: 7· / 'L / .. / / ---· / <. 1 ·•-;,.": ...... __ ~,--·--------,&- _,\l" ·\ i . " . ' ~------"~-.... ~ ____ ...,- / , -.z -,, -L-~, ,., "; c, ·~-.,,, ··\ . \ ._/ /i, ··-/':\, / ,; /' / '\ ' ' '· ' ' I \[ •,\ I\ I ' \ .. ' ' ' \ \ \ ' ,. l i: ! 1~ . ·--~ \ . ",r· .» -\ ••• )>' ··1J if ,· ' i , I I \ \ ·· ·1p f r f /•,c I , I I ' ';\' -I / , \ I : , . I '/ !\ \ . \ ,\ ' I ... ' ' \ I ' ,. ' ' i. / _,.,.~-,. ' • -'1.. \ I \ ,, . ' I I i ! / '' \ \ L \ : l \ I \-·' - \ ' \ \ ' I'· \''"' ' . \ \ \-\ ' i' -\-. '•, j ~, . ' ' ' \ \ \. ·\ \ \\ t \ ' I \ ,· .I.' •' ' ,"> \ \ " ,· \ ·\ ·\ \ ''\: ':,:· ... ----· ~-----~ ... -. I ~~.,_;.,,• . -,., . -'; \ -··· \ = _,,. ' ' L \. ·•f-lOL:LY Jif'frltvGS . . . . .. . ' . "·:· .- . ~ ., -. \ )o· . ~ -·::c-.,,..··_, '·-:- . . .. :.~ ... \ .. ..,_ '. -.. ____ '- -,--_-/.. -t· . ; . ; ·7 , . ,' , . '' ~,,..· ' ' ,<-:'-/C / , ___ \{,---------~-~: :, " . ·' ·' ,, \ . "\ ' ',, ,c,/ -~·-) I I' -· -·-: . .,. -:--"'-·· C) \ ' " ., '·, . ', -:;,,01£11:--· ;........,;. · --~-,_,.,.~: . ...;...-...,..:.,,..~ =~ · flECYH{)NJC OAT,,! fl!.£'S ARF}PR:'l?EfE.,lfNd: ONLY • ANO AHE'WOf: ro E'E f)Sf;,7) FO'lr flOWZ(lliflAL Yfr. lfJ?l!rJAJ. · stmWY aOlitft;'l}l. . . • , ~~}<>,,~~'{""',~ • " ,' " ' ,. / I, '.' ./' /., h _...,;:-·',-,.:.'. ' . ,,, ,,.__,. ., ' ·~ .... ..;..;.;,.;.;,.;;.,~·k,..,.,,t,;i;;;;:...;.;,.. .. '" . -~~ ~ ..... ~~... ;.,.,.1.;.,.;;...;;,,;.,~ .. '" • 1 -· r ' ,rl"\-, ·---;~·-. ,, ' ' ! . .:::--. ., .,, '• ' ---, ·--~---,. ._ ---- --: . -, j' I . ·---·' ·-,...._ \ ., ' ' '\ \ ----· -~--- I ' . T-, 0 '·-"" i - ' \ ,. .. i ', I ' ; ~ \, ', ,· ./ -< ' '. .,, ', . ,, '·-. ,, ., I . \ \ >;,. . ' ··,r-., ,~.-:,": .,:':"~,' ·i -v· . ' -. " . } .. I ' . \ '. -...· ' ·-. \ . \ . " \ ·/' \ : ! . . ;·:,,,) ,,, l '· .... /' ) 71 I I I ' I / I • \: ',. . ' I , ,· I / ,,j"'' /, ;· , , ·1 \ . ~-.-::'·-· J'f" "' ... ,.:-t \,/ I /1 ,, \,_,,:,f···c-~-~ . f," / I . . --------r ~ ./ .. . "l' ,, • I I "' / ... ," _L. . --- ... , \ ,/ I I I I.· • \ I 'I --. / ' ' ,_,.· .\ ',,. "\ , / \ C I , f/-v \ ' . ,/ \;' ' . ' ·,. ', I ---~ ----------- . , -, -~-"-~ ·.-. '·, PROJECT:980160•003 SCALE; 1 "=40' Leighton and Associates; Inc . A !.EIGlHON GROUP COMPANY fllTAININIJ WAll JJ£TAIL 9 ... 9. . N. r.s. . ' 1 • C"t . . '>{8 ,, ,· o· 10' ,)'' ,j()'· . rr:zrq,;;. T?t'.¢7; 20' · Sr-Alf;., 1' = 40' i 80'