Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCT 03-02; Carlsbad Ranch PA 5; Geotechnical Investigation; 2005-04-11GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION, PROPOSED 53-ACRE RESORT DEVELOPMENT - PHASE 1, CARLSBAD RANCH, PLANNING AREA NO. 5, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA Prepared for: Grand Pacific Resorts 5900 Pasteur Court:, Suite 200 Carisbad, California 92008 Project No. 040575-003 April 11, 2005 .eighton and Assock A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY w. IL. :/zj J a a. Leighton and Associates, Inc. A LEIGHTON GROUP COIVIPANY April 11,2005 Project No. 040575-003 To: Grand Pacific Resorts 5900 Pasteur Court, Suite 200 Carlsbad, Califomia 92008 Attention: Mr. Tim Stripe Subject; Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed 53-Acre Resort Development - Phase 1, Carlsbad Ranch, Planning Area No. 5, Carlsbad, Califomia In accordance with your request and authorization, we have performed a geotechnical investigation for the first phase of the proposed 5 3-acre resort development to be located in Planning Area 5 of Carlsbad Ranch in Carlsbad, Califomia. The accompanying report presents a summary of the study, which included the excavation, logging, and sampling of seven geotechnical borings and six exploratory trenches within the proposed development area. Previous data from our Planning-Level Investigation are incorporated in this report. The report also provides geotechnical design recommendations including general earthwork and grading recommendations, preliminary foundation and retaining wall design criteria, preliminary pavement design, a discussion of site slope stability, and other design and construction considerations. The 20-scale grading plans prepared by Excel Engineering for Phase 1 of the site development have been utilize as the base plan for our geologic mapping. 3934 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite B205 m San Diego, CA 92123-4425 858.292.8030 • Fax 858.292.0771 » www.leightongeo.com 040575-003 If you have any questions regarding our report, please do not hesitate to contact this office. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. Respectfully submitted, LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC Sean Director of Engineering Michael R. Stewart, CEG 1349 Vice President/Principal Geologist Distribution: (2) Addressee (1) JPM Design Management Attention: Mr. John Mattox (3) Elixir Steel Framing Attention: Mr. Ray Grage (1) Palomar Reprographics Leighton 040575-003 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page LO INTRODUCnON 1 1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE 1 1.2 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION 3 1.3 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 3 2.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING 5 2.1 PREVIOUS SITE INVESTIGATIONS 5 2.2 CURRENT SITE INVESTIGATION 5 2.3 LABORATORY TESTING 5 3.0 SUMIVjARY OF GEOTECHNICAL CONOmONS 6 3.1 REGIONAL GEOLOGY 6 3.2 SITE-SPECIFIC GEOLOGY 6 3.2.1 Santiago Formation (Map Symbol - Ts) 6 3.2.2 Terrace Deposits (Map Symbol - Qt) 7 3.2.3 Quaternary Slopewash Deposits (Qsw) 7 3.2.4 Topsoil and CoUuvium (Unmapped) 8 3.2.5 Documented Artificial Fill (Afo) 8 3.2.6 Undocumented Fill (Unmapped) .....8 3.3 GEOLOGIC STRUCTURE ...9 3.4 MASS MOVEMENT 9 3.5 GROUNDWATER 9 3.6 FAULTING 10 3.7 SEISMICITY 10 3.7.1 Deterministic Seismic Hazard Analysis 10 3.7.2 Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis 12 3.7.3 UBC Seismic Design Criteria 12 3.8 SECON DARY SEISMIC HAZARDS 12 3.8.1 Shallow Ground Rupture 13 3.8.2 Liquefaction and Dynamic Settlement 13 3.8.3 Tsunamis and Seiches 13 3.9 SLOPE STABIUTY ..13 3.9.1 Cross-Section A-A' at Water Tank 15 3.9.2 Cross-Section B-B' at East Canyon 15 3.9.3 Surficial Slope Stability 15 3.10 EXPANSION POTENTIAL 16 3.11 SOIL CoRROsiVTTY 16 3.12 ANTICIPATED SHRINKAGE AND BULKING 16 4.0 CONCLUSIONS 17 5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 19 040575-003 TABLE OF CONTENTS rContinued) Section EiSe 5.1 EARTHV\/ORK 21 5.1.1 Site Preparation 21 5.1.2 Removal and Recompaction of Potentially Compressible Soils 21 5.1.3 Excavations and Oversize Material 22 5.1.4 Fill Placement and Compaction 23 5.2 CUT/FILL TRANSITION CoNomoNS 23 5.3 SLOPE STABILITY 24 5.3.1 Fill Slopes 24 5.3.2 Cut Slopes 24 5.3.3 Graded Slopes 25 5.4 CONTROL OF GROUND WATER AND SURFACE WATER 25 5.5 FOUNDATION AND SLAB CONSIDERATIONS •• 26 5.5.1 Foundation Design 26 5.5.2 Settlement 28 5.5.3 Earth and Hydrostatic Wall Pressures 28 5.6 GEOCHEMICAL CONSIDERATIONS 30 5.7 PRELIMINARY PAVEMENT DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS 30 5.8 TENNIS COURTS • 31 5.9 SWIMMING POOL -31 5.10 SELECTIVE GRADING ........31 5.11 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION AND PLAN REVIEW ..32 6.0 LIMITATIONS ........33 TABLES TABLE 1 - DETERMINISTIC SEISMIC HAZARD ANALYSIS - PAGE 11 TABLE 2 - PROBABILISTIC SEISMIC HAZARD ANALYSIS - PAGE 12 TABLE 3 - STATIC ANALYSIS PARAMETERS - PAGE 14 TABLE 4 - SEISMIC ANALYSIS PARAMETERS - PAGE 14 TABLE 5 - SHRINKAGE AND BULKING - PAGE 16 TABLE 6 - ALLOWABLE SOIL BEARING VALUES FOR SPREAD FOOTINGS - PAGE 25 TABLE 7 - EQUIVALENT FLUID WEIGHT (PCF) - PAGE 26 TABLE 8 - SOIL NAIL WALL DESIGN PARAMETERS - PAGE 27 TABLE 9 - PRELIMINARY PAVEMENT SECTIONS - PAGE 28 040575-003 TABLE OF CONTENTS rContinuedl FIGURES FIGURE 1 - SITE LOCATION MAP - PAGE 2 FIGURE 2 - REGIONAL TOPOGRAPHIC MAP - REAR OF TEXT FIGURE 3 - REGIONAL FAULT LOCATION MAP - REAR OF TEXT PLATES PLATE 1 - GEOTECHNICAL MAP - IN POCKET PLATE 2 - GEOTECHNICAL MAP - IN POCKET PLATE 3 - GEOTECHNICAL MAP - IN POCKET PLATE 4 - GEOTECHNICAL CROSS-SECTIONS - IN POCKET PLATE 5 - GEOTECHNICAL CROSS-SECTIONS - IN POCKET PLATE 6 - GEOTECHNICAL CROSS-SECTIONS - IN POCKET APPENDICES APPENDIX A • APPENDIX B • APPENDIX C • APPENDIX D REFERENCES BORING AND TRENCH LOGS SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TESTING SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS APPENDIX E - GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS 040575-003 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose and Scope This report presents the results of a supplemental geotechnical investigation that was performed to provide additional subsurface information and geotechnical recommendations specific to the Phase 1 development of the Carlsbad Ranch Hotel and Resort within Planning Area 5. Specifically, our scope of work included: • A review of geotechnical and geologic literature, and aerial photographs relative to the site (Appendix A). • Geologic mapping of site conditions. • A subsurface exploration program consisting of the excavation, logging, and sampling of seven small diameter exploratory borings 16 to 46 feet in depth and six exploratory trenches ranging from 2.5 to 10 feet in depth. All of the exploratory borings and trenches were sampled and logged by a geologist from our firm. Logs of these borings and trenches, along with the exploratory logs completed during prior investigations of the site are included in Appendix B. • Laboratory testing and analysis of selected soil samples obtained during drilling. Laboratory test results are included in Appendix C. • Preparation of 40-Scale Geotechnical Maps (Plates 1 through 3) showing the approximate locations of all geotechnical borings, and distribution of the geologic units on the site and within adjacent areas. The rough grading plans provided by Excel Engineering (2005) was used as the base map and illustrates the existing site topography along with design grades. • Preparation of twelve Geotechnical Cross-Sections (A-A' through L-L') showing subsurface geotechnical conditions relative to preliminary site design grades (Plates 4, 5, and 6). The locations of the Cross-Sections are shown on the Geotechnical Maps. • Slope stability analyses of the Geotechnical Cross-Sections A-A' and B-B' and generalized fill slopes. The results of the slope stability analyses are presented in Appendix D. • Preparation of this report presenting our findings, conclusions, and geotechnical recommendations for structure design, site grading, and general construction considerations. General Earthwork Specifications for Rough Grading are provided as Appendix E. Leighton mmmsssmmmstsmmmmmmi. AGUA HEDIONDA LAGOON P.ACIFIC • OCEAN ^ BASE MAP: 2003 Digital Edition of Thomas Guide, San Diego County 0 1000 2000 4000 1 "=2,000' Scale in Feet Carlsbad Ranch Planning Area 5 / Resort Site Garlsbad, California SITE LOCATION MAP Project No. 040575-003 Date April 2005 Figure No. 1 040575-002 1.2 Site Location and Description The site is located south of Cannon Road and north and east of the Legoland Family Park within the Carlsbad Ranch development in Carlsbad, California (Figure 1). In total, Carlsbad Ranch is an irregular-shaped complex encompassing approximately 548 acres. Carlsbad Ranch is bounded by Palomar Airport Road on the south, Car Country Carlsbad and Paseo Del Norte on the west, Agua Hedionda Lagoon on the north, and Hidden Valley Road and undeveloped land along an east-facing slope of a north-south trending canyon on the east. The proposed Planning Area 5 Resort is being considered within Lot 17 of the Carlsbad Ranch development. Lot 17 encompasses approximately 53 acres in the northeast corner ofthe Carlsbad Ranch development and is situated north of Lot 18 which is occupied by the Legoland California Theme Park. The regional site topography is shown on Figure 2. In general, the site area is characterized by a gently sloping west-facing hillside bordered by a northwest-southeast trending ridge on the east with a natural hillside east of the ridgeline. Elevations within the proposed development range from approximately 180 feet mean sea level (msl) on the west side of the property to approximately 260 feet msl on the ridgeline along the eastern edge of the property. The areas currently proposed for development generally consist of moderate to gently sloping areas. Steeper slope gradients are present within the natural slope areas to the east. Overall natural canyon slope inclinations vary from 1.5:1 to 2:1 (horizontal to vertical), with heights of approximately 60 to +120 feet from the ridgeline to the canyon bottom east of the ridgeline. Locally steeper, to near vertical, inclinations are present within the canyon slopes. Existing improvements are generally related to past and present agricultural activities on the site and existing utility easements. Existing improvements include irrigation lines and valves, an agricultural storage yard, and City water lines associated with and existing steel water tank located along the east side of the site. The tank is roughly 80 feet in diameter and 40 feet in height. We have utilized a tank capacity of 1.5M gallons in our analysis. Other unknown buried improvements may also exist. O, Proposed Development Phase 1 of the site development will included the mass grading for Phase 1 improvements along with the majority of the site grading that will accommodate future phases of the site development. Phase 1 buildings will include a hotel building, the resort conference facility building, a restaurant building, a sales building, and four villas. Site improvements will include driveways, parking areas, swimming pools, and tennis courts. Retaining structures are planned at various locations throughout the site to accomplish grade changes and as basement walls for the parking garage beneath the hotel structure. 4 Leighton 040575-003 Proposed grading is anticipated to include earthwork generally consisting of cuts from the southeastem portion of the site with fill areas in the north and west portions of the property. Depths of cut and fill are commonly on the order of ±5 to 15 feet from existing site elevations. The maximum cut depth to finish grade is proposed to descend from the exiting water tank situated along the east property line in the south portion of the site. Proposed cuts north, west, and south of the tank are approximately 30 feet below existing grades vv'ith a 15-foot-high, 2:1 (horizontal to vertical) slope and terraced retaining walls up to 15 feet in height. The maximum designed fill depth is approximately 20 to 25 feet above the existing grade in the northern-central portion of the site. 040575-003 2.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING 2.1 Previous Site Investigations Previous subsurface investigation within the site was performed in February and May of 2003 and in September of 1995 (Leighton, 2003). Previous investigation included the excavation, logging, and sampling of thirteen small-diameter borings and six large- diameter exploratory borings within the current site area. The borings were excavated to a maximum depth of 105 feet using a truck-mounted hollow-stem auger for the small- diameter borings, and a bucket-auger for the large-diameter borings. Logs of those borings are included in Appendix B. For the small-diameter borings performed in 2003, the drilling was performed using core samplers, were The locations of the previous exploratory excavations are indicated on the Geotechnical Maps (Plates 1 through 3). LB-1-03 was downhole logged. Caving conditions precluded downhole logging of LB-2- 03. 2.2 Current Site Investigation Our current subsurface investigation of Planning Area 5 of Carlsbad Ranch was performed January 18 and February 16, 2005 and included the excavation, logging, and sampling of seven small-diameter borings and six exploratory backhoe pits. All borings were sampled and surface logged by a geologist from Leighton. All borings were backfilled in accordance with County of San Diego Department of Environmental Health requirements upon completion. The approximate locations of these borings are shown on the Geotechnical Maps (Plates 1 through 3) and logs of these borings are included in Appendix B. 2.3 Laboratory Testing Laboratory testing performed during this supplemental investigation included moisture content, unit weight, grain-size distribution, shear strength, and geochemical characteristics. Testing performed as part of previous investigations has included expansion potential, plasticity (Atterberg Limits), grain-size distribution, pavement subgrade R-value, shear strength, and geochemical characteristics of the subsurface soils. A brief discussion of the laboratory tests performed and a summary of the laboratory test results are presented in Appendix C. Leighton 040575-003 3.0 SUMMARY OF GEOTECHNICAL CONDmONS 3.1 Regional Geology The site is located in the coastal section of the Peninsular Range Province, a geomorphic province with a long and active geologic history throughout Southem Califomia. Throughout the last 54 million years, the area known as the "San Diego Embayment" has undergone several episodes of marine inundation and subsequent marine regression, resulfing in the deposition of a thick sequence of marine and nonmarine sedimentary rocks on the basement rock of the Southem California batholith. Gradual emergence of the region from the sea occurred in Pleistocene time, and numerous wave-cut platforms, most of which were covered by relatively thin marine and nonmarine terrace deposits, formed as the sea receded from the land. Accelerated fluvial erosion during periods of heavy rainfall, coupled with the lowering of the base sea level during Quatemary time, resulted in the rolling hills, mesas, and deeply incised canyons which characterize the landforms we see in the general site area today. 3.2 Site-Specific Geology As encountered during site investigation and our review of geotechnical reports applicable to the site (Appendix A), Lot 17 of Carlsbad Ranch is underlain by units consisting of Quatemary Terrace Deposits and bedrock of the Santiago Formation. Mapped units situated off-site also include documented artificial fill and Quatemary-aged slopewash deposits. The areal distributions and stratigraphy of the units are shown on the Geotechnical Maps (Plates 1 through 3) and Geologic Cross-Sections (Plates 4, 5, and 6). Undocumented fills associated with previous farming activities are also anticipated within portions of the site, but are not mapped. Descriptions of each of the units are presented below. While colluvial soils are likely present, they are undifferentiated from the disturbed Terrace Deposits and undocumented fills. 3.2.1 Santiago Formation (Map Symbol - Ts) The bedrock unit underlying the entire site is the Tertiary-aged Santiago Formation. In general, the unit consists of massive to thickly-bedded sandstone with interbedded clayey siltstone and claystone. The sandstone consists primarily of light gray, light brown, and light yellow-brown, moist, dense to very dense, poorly-graded to clayey, fine- to occasionally medium-grained sandstone. The poorly-graded to slightiy silty sandstone is generally Mable, slightly micaceous and massive. The siltstone consisted of medium brown and olive-brown, moist, stiff, clayey siltstones that were fissiled to indistinctly bedded and contained calcium carbonate, manganese-oxide Leianton 040575-003 and iron-oxide staining. The claystone is typically olive-gray to brown, moist, stiff to hard. As encountered in CB-1, the claystone was silty to sandy, and generally massive to finely laminated in appearance. Claystone units encountered in Borings LB-1-03, LB-2-03, CB-3, CB-4, CB-5, CB-7, CB-8, CB-9, CB-10, and LB-6 were medium stiff to very stiff, moist to wet, and sheared with polished clay along discontinuous randomly-oriented parting surfaces. Based on the pervious borings and the additional borings performed within this investigation, the claystone layer at the interface between the Santiago Formation and the overlying Terrace Deposits is eroded laterally. Based on existing data, the claystone is anticipated to be near finish grade where design cuts are between 213 and 227 feet mean sea level (msl) in the south portion of the site. Building pads for the sales office. Villa lA, and Villa IB should be over excavated to remove the claystone bed. Adjacent cut slopes should be over excavated and replaced with stability fills. An interceptor drain may also be needed to intercept perched ground water but should be determined in the field. Sandstones are expected to have favorable engineering properties, while clayey sequences are critically expansive and can represent potential zones of weakness in slope areas. 3.2.2 Terrace Deposits (Map Svmbol - Of) Quatemary-aged Terrace Deposits overlie the Santiago Formation in most areas of the site. These deposits generally consist of orange to red brown to mottled orange gray brown, damp to moist, medium dense, silty fine- to medium-grained sand. The upper portion of the Terrace Deposits (generally the upper 4 to 6 feet is typically highly weathered and/or disturbed by the agricultural activities of the site and is anticipated to be slightly porous and potentially compressible. Localized deeper accumulations of weathered soils should be anticipated in the drainage along the westem portion of the site and within the area north of the water tank. In general, the Terrace Deposits have a very low to low expansion potential. With the exception of the upper weathered zone, the Terrace Deposits have favorable engineering properties and are suitable to receive the proposed improvements. The weathered/disturbed portion of the Terrace Deposits will require removal and recompaction in areas of proposed improvements. 3.2.3 Quaternary Slopewash Deposits (Osw) Surficial deposits of Quatemary Slopewash are mapped at the base of the natural slopes east of the site. These deposits generally consist of light to dark brown. Leighton 040575-003 clayey to silty sand. These weathered, generally loose surficial deposits consist of colluvial soils eroded from the steep east facing escarpments located up-slope. These deposits are generally mapped off-site and not expected to be encountered during on site grading. 3.2.4 Topsoil and CoUuvium (Unmapped) Surficial deposits of topsoil and coUuvium, although not mapped, mantle a majority of the site. The thickness of topsoil/colluvium is generally on the order of 1 -2 feet with locally deeper deposits in drainage and gently sloping areas. The topsoil/colluvium on site has been disturbed by past agricultural activities which have also tended to flatten out topographic irregularity by infilling of drainage and steeper slope areas. In addition, colluvial soils near the base of locally oversteepened slopes (above natural areas) is anticipated to be locally thicker due to the past agricultural activities. This is especially tme in the famied areas east of the existing water tank. In addition, during previous grading at the Carlsbad Ranch, canyon areas were identified that had been used as disposed sites for agricultural debris (organics, visgueen sheeting, plastic tubing etc.). These areas were than covered with dirt and farmed. While we have not identified any likely locations of buried debris, it is a possibility at this site. 3.2.5 Documented Artificial Fill (Afo) Artificial fill is mapped off site to the north and southeast of the proposed development area. These materials have been placed during the constmction of Cannon Road, Hidden Valley Road, and the existing Legoland Theme Park adjacent to the site. Minor artificial fills are expected to be encountered during grading along Hidden Valley Road and the Legoland Theme Park. 3.2.6 Undocumented Fill (Unmapped) Undocumented fill soil is anticipated on the site in various locations and is expected to consist of minor fills placed to create unimproved farm roads, end-dumped piles, and as utility trench backfill. In addition to these areas, based on previous experience on other areas of Carlsbad Ranch, we anticipate that some previous filling of drainage alignments and smoothing of the natural terrain was performed to facilitate onsite agricultural uses. However, based on aerial photographic review and site reconnaissance, there appears to be no major areas of undocumented fills present on site which would require extensive remedial grading. In their present state, undocumented fills are not suitable for the support of additional fills and/or Leighton 040575-003 stmctural loads. These undocumented fill soils, where present, should be removed to expose competent material in areas of proposed additional fill or improvements. 3.3 Geologic Structure Based on our review of the geologic mapping completed during the nearby rough grading operations, literature review, and our professional experience on nearby sites, the Quatemary Terrace deposits are generally massive, with no apparent bedding. Based on our field mapping, borings, and professional experience in the area, the contact with the underlying Santiago Formation is anticipated to be relatively flat to gentiy dipping to the west, with locally steeper irregularities. Local variation in bedding attitudes can be expected, resulting from cross-bedding within the Santiago Formation. Based on our previous field explorations and a review of published geologic maps ofthe site and vicinity, no active faults have been mapped or were encountered on or immediately adjacent to the site. The significance of faulting is discussed in the following section on faulting and seismicity. 3.4 Mass Movement Based on our site reconnaissance, field mapping, and review of the previous geotechnical reports, available geologic literature, maps, and aerial photographs, some sloughing and slumping can be observed to incise the ridgeline with near vertical escarpments along the easterly property line (Cross-Sections H-H', I-F, and J-J'). Quatemary slopewash deposits are mapped with the valley bottoms near the base of natural slope. 3.5 Ground Water Ground water was locally encountered during our previous and current site explorations. Significant quantities of ground water were also encountered during previous grading for Legoland Family Park adjacent to the southwesterly portion of the site, and a subdrain was installed to direct water away from lower elevations. The ground water is believed to be perched on the contact between the overlying Terrace Deposits and underlying Santiago Formation, as well as on clayey beds within the upper Santiago Formation. Perched ground water conditions are generally the result of permeable earth materials overlymg a less permeable unit. Seepage was also previously observed within the Legoland East Expansion area. This seepage was observed along a clayey bed within the relatively permeable Terrace Deposits near the relatively dense (less permeable) Tertiary Santiago Formation. Local areas of lush -9- I • I- LBighion mssan, 040575-003 vegetation in the open space natural canyon area east of the site also indicates the likely presence of seepage. The proposed site development will include cuts that may extend down to the depth where previous ground water seepage conditions were encountered. Subdrainage is recommended as discussed later in this report and in Appendix E. 3.6 Faulting Our discussion of faults on the site is prefaced with a discussion of Califomia legislation and policies concerning the classification and land-use criteria associated with fauhs. By definition of the Califomia Geological Survey, an active fault is a fault that has had surface displacement within Holocene time (about the last 11,000 years). The state geologist has defined a potentiaiiv active fault as any fault considered to have been active during Quatemary time (last 1,600,000 years). This definition is used in delineating Earthquake Fault Zones as mandated by the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act and as subsequentiy revised in 1997. The intent of this act is to assure that unwise urban development and certain habitable structures do not occur across the traces of active faults. The subject site is not included within any Earthquake Fault Zones as created by the Alquist-Priolo Act (Hart, 1997). Our review of available geologic literature (Appendix A) indicates that there are no known major or active faults on or in the immediate vicinity of the site. The location of the site relative to known active faults is included as Figure 3. The nearest known active regional fauh is the Rose Canyon Fault Zone located approximately 4.8 miles west ofthe site. Fault segments have been mapped within the canyon to the east, but are considered to be inactive (Leighton, 1992). 3.7 Seismicity The site can be considered to lie within a seismically active region, as can all of Southem Califomia. To evaluate the seismic hazard at the site. Deterministic and Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analyses (DSHA and PSHA) were performed. 3.7.1 Deterministic Seismic Hazard Analvsis Deterministic Seismic Hazard Analysis (DSHA) represents the ground motion calculated from the maximum magnitude earthquake event occurring at the closest location along the nearest known active faults to the site. Table 1 indicates potential seismic events that could be produced by the maximum magnitude earthquakes. Leiqnton 040575-003 A maximum magnitude earthquake is the maximum expectable earthquake given the known tectonic framework. Site-specific seismic parameters included in Table 1 are the distances to the three nearest known active faults (CGS, 2003), earthquake magnitudes, and calculated horizontal ground accelerations at the mean and one standard deviation of the attenuation relationship. The distances and maximum magnitude events in Table 1 were determined using the digitized fault coordinates and summarized magnitudes used by State of California (CGS, 2003). The upper 100 feet of the site may be considered to be a Type Sc soil profile. Where foundations are underlain by more than 20 feet of artificial fill, a Type SD soil profile should be used in seismic design. Ground motions in our analysis are for soft rock site conditions and were developed using the attenuation relationship of Abrahamson and Silva (1997) for soft rock sites. Table 1 Deterministic Seismic Hazard Analysis Potential Causative Fault Distance from Fault to Site (Miles) Maximum Moment Magnitude Event Horizontal Ground Motion at Mean of Attenuation Relationship (Gravity) Horizontal Ground Motion at One Standard Deviation of Attenuation Relationship (Gravity) Rose Canyon 4.8 7.2 0.47 0.72 Newport- Inglewood (Offshore) 7 7.1 0.35 0.53 Coronado Banks 21 7.6 0.16 0.24 As indicated in Table 1, the Rose Canyon Fauh Zone is considered to have the most significant effect at the site from a design standpoint. An earthquake of moment magnitude M7.2 on the fault could produce a peak horizontal ground acceleration at the site of approximately 0.47g with a standard deviation of 0.25g. -11-Leightor 040575-003 3.7.2 Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analvsis Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis (PSHA) was also performed to develop design ground accelerations. The return intervals of interest for the PSHA correspond to the 475-year and 949-year events. These events are associated with the Design Basis Ground Motion, which is the ground motion that has a 10 percent chance of being exceeded in 50 years, and the Upper Bound Earthquake Ground Motion, which is considered the ground motion having a 10 percent chance of being exceeded in 100 years. Similar to the DSHA, the attenuation relationship of Abrahamson and Silva (1997) was utilized for the PSHA. Table 2 provides the postulated ground motions at the site for the Design Basis and Upper Bound Earthquake Ground Motions. Table 2 Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis Probability of Exceedance Peak Horizontal Ground Motion (Gravity) 10 Percent in 50 Years 0.24 10 Percent in 100 Years 0.34 3.7.3 CBC Seismic Design Criteria The effect of seismic shaking may be mitigated by adhering to the Califomia Building Code (CBC) and state-of-the-art seismic design parameters of the Structural Engineers Association of Califomia. The site is located within Seismic Zone 4 as per Figure 16-2 ofthe 2001 California Building Code (CBSC, 2002). The upper 100 feet of the site may be considered to be a Type Sc soil profile per Table 16-J of tiie 2001 CBC Where foundations are underlain by more than 20 feet of artificial fill, a Type SD soil profile should be used in seismic design. Near source factors Na and Nv for the site equal to 1.0 and 1.1, respectively, are appropriate based on the seismic setting and criteria of Tables 16A-S and 16A-T ofthe 2001 CBC. 3.8 Secondan/ Seismic Hazards Secondary effects tiiat can be associated with severe ground shaking during or following a relatively large earthquake include shallow ground rupture, soil liquefaction and dynamic -12- 040575-003 settiement, seismic slope instability, seiches, and tsunamis. These secondary effects of seismic shaking are discussed in the following sections. 3.8.1 Shallow Ground Rupture Ground rupture because of active faulting is not likely to occur on site due to the absence of known active faults. Cracking due to shaking from distant seismic events is not considered a significant hazard, although it is a possibility at any site. 3.8.2 Liquefaction and Dynamic Settlement Liquefaction and dynamic settlement of soils can be caused by strong vibratory motion due to earthquakes. Both research and historical data indicate that loose, saturated, granular soils are susceptible to liquefaction and dynamic settlement. Liquefaction is typified by a loss of shear strength in the affected soil layer, thereby causing the soil to liquefy. This effect may be manifested by excessive settlements and sand boils at the ground surface. The Terrace Deposits and Santiago Formation are not considered liquefiable due to their physical characteristics, high-density characteristics, and age. 3.8.3 Tsunamis and Seiches Based on the distance between the site and large, open bodies of water, and the elevation of the site with respect to sea level, the possibility of seiches and/or tsunamis is considered to be very low 3.9 Slope StabiliW Geologic sections through the proposed cut slope west of the water tank (Cross-Section A- A') and the existing ridgeline (Cross-Section B-B') were analyzed for their deep-seated stability (Appendix D). Slope stability analyses were performed using the computer software program SlopeW. Idealized models were constmcted using the geologic sections and soil strengths derived fi-om laboratory test results, our observations, and professional judgements. The soil strength values used in static analysis are provided in Table 3. LBiahton 040575-003 Table 3 Static Analysis Parameters Soil Type Friction Angle (degrees) Cohesion (psf) Artificial Fill 33 200 Terrace Deposits 38 200 Santiago Formation 40 100 Santiago Formation Clay Bed 22 300 Seismic slope stability analysis was performed using pseudo-static methods and by yield analysis displacement methods. Pseudo-static analysis was performed using a pseudo-static coefficient of kh =0.15. The modal magnitude event of M7.0 along the Rose Canyon Fauh Zone at a modal distance of 8 kilometers was considered in displacement analysis that was performed using decoupled (Bray and Rathje, 1998) and rigid-block (USGS, 2003) methods. Seismic soil strength parameters used in deep-seated stability analysis are presented in Table 4. Table 4 Seismic Analysis Parameters Material Friction Angle (degrees) Cohesion (psf) Artificial Fill 33 200 Terrace Deposits 42 200 Santiago Formation 40 100 Santiago Formation Clay Bed 22 600 Our deep-seated stability search routines considered circular and wedge-type failure surfaces analyzed using Bishop's modified method and Spencer's method of limit equilibrium analysis. Surficial stability analysis was perfonned using an infinite slope model, the soil strengths in Table 3, and considering saturated depths of 3 and 4 feet below the slope face. Stability calculation summary plots and tables are provided in Appendix D. -14- 040575-003 3.9.1 Cross-Section A-A' at Water Tank Stability analysis of the proposed slopes west of and below the existing water were performed considering static properties and loading conditions and indicated a factor-of-safety of at least 1.5 to resist deep-seated instability. Seismic slope stability was analyzed by pseudo-static and displacement methods. Pseudo-static analysis considering dynamic properties and pseudo-static loading, indicates a factor-of-safety of at least 1.1 to resist deep-seated instability. By the decoupled (Bray and Rathje, 1998) and rigid-block methods (USGS, 2003) displacement methods, calculated displacements at the design event (10 percent chance of exceedance in 100 years) are calculated to be less than 1/2 inch which is considered to be within acceptable limits for this type of analysis. 3.9.2 Cross-Section B-B' at East Canyon Stability analysis considering static properties and loading conditions indicated a factor-of-safety of at least 1.5 to resist deep-seated instability. Seismic slope stability was analyzed by the pseudo-static method considering dynamic properties and pseudo-static loading. Pseudo-static analysis indicates a factor-of-safety at least 1.1. Based on our review of this current design plans, additional setback beyond that recommended for foundation embedment is not considered necessary for the proposed building locations. 3.9.3 Surficial Slope Stabilib/ The strength parameters presented in Table 3 were used for our surficial stability analysis. Based on our analysis, 2:1 (horizontal:vertical) graded slopes are generally considered to possess a factor-of-safety of 1.5 to resist surficial instability. Natural slopes steeper than 2:1 and weathered claystone materials and surficials canyon slopewash/colluvial materials are considered susceptible to surficial instability. While local instability is likely within oversteepened natural slopes, overall, canyon slopes are not considered to be especially prone to rapid retreat. Further improvements to control surface runoff waters will likely mitigate rilling of natural drainages. Surficial stability analysis was performed to evaluate surface inclinations with factor-of-safety of 1.5 for 3-foot and 4-foot depths of saturation. Those results are provided in Appendix D. -15- . . , Leighton 040575-003 3.10 Expansion Potential The anticipated expansion potential of the soils encountered within Lot 17 of Carlsbad Ranch are described as follows: • Terrace Deposits: Very low to low expansion potential. This is the predominant soil type at-grade within the site. • Santiago Formation: Low expansion potential for silty sandstone, medium to high for sandy to clayey siltstones and high to very high for the claystones. This formation type may be encountered in cut areas. It is noted that the materials from the upper clay bed in LB-1 were tested and found to be ver>' highly expansive. 3.11 Soil Corrosivity The test results from this and previous investigations performed for the Carlsbad Ranch project and adjacent tracts indicate the onsite soils derived from Terrace Deposits possess a negligible to minor soluble sulfate content and a ver>' mild to moderate potential for corrosion to buried metals. Materials derived from the Santiago Formation have been found on nearby sites to present a negligible to severe potential for sulfate attack and moderate to high potential for corrosion of buried metals. Laboratory testing of finish grade soils at- grade or in contact with concrete and/or buried metal conduits should be performed once site-specific plans are developed. A corrosion engineer should be contacted for design of measures to mitigate corrosion. 3.12 Anticipated Shrinkage and Bulking Provided below are estimated ranges of shrinkage and bulking for on site materials. We recommend additional exploration be performed to better assess depth and distribution of remedial grading of potentially expansive and compressible soils in proposed fill and shallow cut areas. We also recommend incorporating a balance area into the project so that export or additional import can be balanced from that area during grading. Table 5 Shrinkage and Bulking Material Anticipated Shrinkage and Bulking Topsoil/Colluvium 10 to 20 percent shrinkage Terrance Deposits and Santiago Formation 5 percent bulking, 5 percent shrinkage Weathered Formation 5 to 10 percent shrinkage -16-Leighton 040575-003 4.0 CONCLUSIONS Based on the resuhs of our Geotechnical Investigation of the site, h is our opinion that the proposed development is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint, provided the following conclusions and recommendations are incorporated during design and construction. • Based on our subsurface exploration and review of pertinent geotechnical reports, the site is underlain by the Quatemary-aged Terrace Deposits, and bedrock of the Tertiary-aged Santiago Formation. Minor unmapped surficial deposits of coUuvium (topsoil) and undocumented artificial fill should be expected. • The undocumented fill, topsoil, coUuvium, and weathered formational materials are considered unsuitable in their present state and will require removal and recompaction in areas of proposed development or future fill. • The claystone soils of the Santiago Fonnation were found to be very highly expansive. These expansive soils should either be removed where present within 10 feet of finish pad grades and replaced with soil having a lower expansion potential or a post-tensioned or mat-type foundation design should be provided. Similar treatment should be performed if those soils are below other distress-sensitive improvements (e.g. swimming pools, tennis courts). Within asphalt paving areas, these soils should be removed where present within 5 feet of grade. Where exposed in slopes, a stability fill and subdrains are recoimnended. • The existing on-site soils are suitable material for use as fill provided they are relatively free of rocks (larger than 8 inches in maximum dimension), organic material and debris. • Evidence for active faulting was not encountered during our field investigation or review. The geologic literature (Appendix A) indicates there are no known major or active faults on or in the immediate vicinity of the site. Because of the lack of known active faults on the site, the potential for surface mpture at the site is considered low. • The main seismic hazard tiiat may affect the site is ground shaking from one of the active regional fauhs. The nearest known active fauh is the Rose Canyon Fault Zone, which is considered a Type B seismic source based on the 2001 Califomia Building Code (CBSC, 2002), and is located approximately 4.8 miles (7.7 kilometers) west of the site. • Due to the age and relatively dense nature of the on-site soils, the potential for liquefaction and dynamic settlement of the site is considered very low. • Minor to heavy seepage was encountered in several of our subsurface borings. Most significant to the proposed development, seepage was noted within the lower Quatemary Terrace deposits and upper portion of the Santiago Formation bedrock, commonly perched on the relatively -17- , . , Leighton 040575-003 impermeable beds of the Santiago Formation. Ground water seepage conditions should be expected during site development. Recommendations to mitigate seepage conditions can be made as site development plans evolve, following further site investigation, and during site grading. The expansion potential of the on-site soils ranges from very low to very high. The sandstone within the Santiago Formation and Quaternary Terrace deposit soils are anticipated to be in the very low to moderate expansion range. The siltstone and claystone of the Santiago Formation, as well as the clayey topsoil, alluvium, and coUuvium are anticipated to have a medium to very high expansion potential. Due to the presence of a steep natural slope in the proximity of Cross-Sections H-H', I-F, and J- J' along the eastem boundary of the development area and a potential for slope instability in this area, a setback is recommended along the ridgetop for buildings and other critical stmctures. Based on the current plans, all buildings are located outside of this stmctural setback area. Proposed cut and fill slopes have been calculated to have adequate factor-of-safety for both static and seismic conditions. We note however, in the event of a major earthquake, some minor (less than 1/2 inch) movement may occur in these areas. -18- , . , Leiqhto 040575-003 5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 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 perfonned in accordance with the following recommendations, the City of Carisbad grading requirements, and the General Earthwork and Grading Specifications for Rough-Grading (GEGS) included in Appendix E. In case of conflict, the following recommendations shall supersede those included as part of Appendix E. 5.1.1 Site Preparation Prior to the grading of areas to receive stmctural fill or engineered stmctures, the areas should be cleared of surface obstmctions, any existing debris, potentially compressible material (such as undocumented fill soils, topsoil, coUuvium, and weathered fomiational materials) and stripped of vegetation. Vegetation and debris should be removed and properiy disposed of offsite. Holes results from the removal of buried obstmctions 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 at least 2 percent above the optimum moisture condition, and recompacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction (based on ASTM Test Method Dl 557). 5.1.2 Removal and Recompaction of Potentially Compressible Soils As discussed in Section 3.0, portions of the site are underlain by potentially compressible soils that may settle under the surcharge of fill and/or foundation loads. These materials include undocumented fill soils, topsoil, coUuvium, and weathered formational material. Compressible materials not removed by the planned grading should be excavated to competent material, moisture conditioned (as needed) to obtain the recommended moisture content, and then recompacted prior to additional fill placement or constmction. The actual depth and extent ofthe required removals should be determined during grading operations by the geotechnical consultant. Estimated removal depths are summarized below. Leightor 040575-003 Undocumented Fill Minor amounts of undocumented fill soil is anticipated on the site in various locations and is expected to consist of minor fills placed to create unimproved farm roads, end-dumped piles, and utility trench backfill. However, based on aerial photographic review and site reconnaissance, there appears to be no major areas of undocumented fills present on site which would require extensive remedial grading. Undocumented fill soils, if encountered, should be removed to expose competent material in areas of proposed additional fill or improvements. Topsoil Areas to receive fill which are on slopes flatter than 5:1 (horizontal to vertical) and where normal benching would not completely remove the topsoil should be excavated to competent formational material prior to fill placement. Topsoil is expected to be generally 1 to 3 feet thick on the site. Localized deeper accumulations may be encountered. CoUuvium In areas to receive fill, the colluvial soils on the site should be removed to firm/competent formational material. Removal of coUuvium will generally require overexcavation depths on the order of 2 to 4 feet. 5.1.3 Excavations and Oversize Material Excavations of the onsite materials may generally be accomplished with conventional heavy-duty earthwork equipment. We do not anticipate the generation of significant quantities of oversize material. Oversize material (greater than 8 inches maximum dimension) if encountered, should be handled in accordance with the General Earthwork and Grading Specifications for Rough Grading presented in Appendix E. For preliminary planning, temporary excavation slopes at 1:1 may be assumed in unsaturated Terrace Deposit materials. Where ground water is present at shallow depth, modified sloping recommendations may be necessary. All excavation and excavations oversight should be performed in accordance with OSHA requirements. Leighton 040575-003 For temporary conditions that are necessary to create proposed slopes and retaining walls north, west and south of the water tower, maintaining reduced water levels within the reservoir and slope movement monitoring using inclinometers may be recommended during grading depending on wall-type selection and temporary stability conditions. 5.1.4 Fill Placement and Compaction The onsite soils are generally suitable for use as compacted fill provided they are free of organic material, debris, and rock fragments larger than 6-inches in maximum dimension. All fill soils should be brought to at least 2 percent above optimum moisture content and compacted in uniform lifts to at least 90 percent relative compaction based on laboratory standard ASTM Test Method D1557. The optimum lift thickness required to produce a uniformly compacted fill will depend on the type and size of compaction equipment used. In general, fill should be placed in lifts not exceeding 8 inches in thickness. Highly expansive clays may be buried in fills below depths of 10 feet, at least 10 feet outside of the building envelopes and away from slope faces. These materials should be placed with moisture contents at least 5 percent above optimum moisture. Placement and compaction of fill should be performed in general accordance with the current City of Carisbad grading ordinances, sound construction practices, and the General Earthwork and Grading Specifications for Rough Grading presented in Appendix E. 5.2 Cut/Fill Transition Conditions Based on our review, the Phase I building pads will be predominantly in cut areas. The restaurant pad will have a shallow transition. As discussed in Section 3.2.1, we recommend the overexcavation of claystones in the sales office pad, the Villa lA pad, and the Villa IB pad. As such, tiiose pads are anticipated to be compacted fill pad comprised of very low to low expansion potential materials. 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 stmctures. The overexcavation of the cut portion of the building pads is anticipated to be at least 2 to 5 feet below the bottom of the proposed building foundations. All overexcavations should extend across the entire buildable portion of the lot or at least Leighton 040575-003 10 feet beyond tiie building perimeter. Altematively, in cut pads or pads with shallow transitions, the upper 12 inches of the cut pad area may be scarified and recompacted and all building foundations extended into competent formational soils. Also, should at-grade foundations be situated over backfill for below grade retaining walls, foundations should be deepened below a 2:1 plane extending up from the lower pad grade. 5.3 Slope Stability Based on the cunent site development plan, fill slopes up to approximately 35 feet are planned. Cuts up to 30 feet, comprised of 15-foot, 2:1 slopes and 15-foot high retaining walls are also planned. The following is provided based on our knowledge of site conditions for use in the planning process. These recommendations should be updated once final plans are developed and additional site investigation performed. 5.3.1 Fill Slopes The materials anticipated for use in fill slope grading will predominantly consist of on-site soils derived from Tenace deposits. Our analysis, assuming homogeneous slope conditions, indicates the anticipated fill slopes up to the maximum proposed height of 35 feet will have a calculated factor of safety of 1.5 or greater with respect to potential, deep-seated failure (Appendix D). The proposed slopes should be constmcted 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. 5.3.2 Cut Slopes Engineering analysis of the proposed 2:1 cut slopes within the formational materials up to a maximum height of approximately 30 feet (including retaining wall) indicates the deep-seated stability of the slopes, in general, possess a static factor of safety in excess of 1.5. Where cut slopes are made between elevation 213 and 227 in the vicinity of tiie sales building, Villa lA or Villa IB, a stability fill is recommended. Standard details are provided in Appendix E. During grading, we recommend that the geotechnical consultant observe and geologically map all excavations including cut slopes during grading. The purpose of this mapping is to substantiate the geologic conditions anticipated in our analyses. Additional investigation and stability analysis may be required if unanticipated or adverse conditions are encountered during site development. -22- Leighton 040575-003 5.3.3 Graded Slopes We recommend that all excavations and cut slopes be observed and mapped by a geologist from our firm during grading operations to verify that the soil and geologic conditions encountered do not differ significantly from those assumed in our analysis. Oversteepening of existing slopes should be avoided during fine-grading and constmction unless supported by appropriately designed retaining stmctures. Erosion and/or surficial failure potential of slopes may be reduced if the following measures are implemented during design and constmction ofthe subject slopes. Cut and fill slopes should be provided with appropriate surface drainage features and landscaped with drought-tolerant vegetation as soon as possible after completion of grading to minimize the potential for erosion. Berms should be provided at the top of all slopes and drainage directed such that surface mnoff on slope faces is minimized. In slopes where seepage is present, drainage should be provided as shown in Appendix E. Slopes which require additional special drainage features can be evaluated and recommendations provided by the geotechnical consultant during grading operations. We recommend against the exclusive use of either highly expansive clayey soils or poorly graded sands of the Santiago formation. Highly expansive soils are generally known to be subject to surficial failures when exposed in slope faces. Clayey soils of the Santiago Formation tend to weather, thereby surficially losing integrity when exposed on slope faces. Poorly graded sands utilized in slope faces may be subject to excessive erosion and rilling. A mixture of clayey soils and sandy soils is recommended to reduce overall expansion potential and slope erosion and increase surficial slope stability. We recommend that a mixture of soils be approved by the project geotechnical engineer prior to placement in fill slopes. 5.4 Control of Ground Water and Surt'ace Water Locally, relatively shallow ground water and/or seepage conditions were encountered during our previous and current site investigations, as well as during previous grading for Legoland Family Park adjacent to the site. The ground water is believed to be perched on the contact between the overlying Tenace Deposits and underlying Santiago Formation. As a result, to mitigate the potential for accumulation of a shallow perched ground water condition, we recommend subdrains and interceptor drains be installed during site grading and for all retaining walls. The locations of the proposed subdrains should be determined after additional field investigation and during the site grading operations. -23- Leightor 040575-003 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. 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 and pavements. No ponding of water should be permitted. Drainage design is within the purview of the design civil engineer. Even with these provisions, our experience indicates that shallow ground water/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 inigation. We recommend that an engineering geologist be present during grading operations to explore for fiiture seepage areas and provide field recommendations for mitigation of future potential seepage. 5.5 Foundation and Slab Considerations Foundations and slabs should be designed in accordance with structural considerations and the following recommendations. These recommendations assume that the soils encountered within 10 feet of pad grade have a low to medium potential for expansion. Additional expansion testing should be performed as part of the fine grading operations. If highly expansive soils are encountered and selective grading cannot be accomplished, additional foundation design may be necessary. 5.5.1 Foundation Design We anticipate that the proposed structure can be supported on compacted fill soils or formational material by isolated spread and/or continuous footings designed in accordance with the following criteria. -24- Leighton 040575-003 Table 6 Allowable Soil Bearing Values for Spread Footings Depth Below Lowest Adjacent Soil Grade or Basement Slab Elevation (feet) Allowable Soil Bearing Value for Isolated or Continuous Spread Footings (Minimum Width = 2 feet) 2* 5,000 psf 3 6,500 psf 4 8,000 psf * Minimum Depth of Embedment The above values are for dead plus live loads and may be increased by one-third for short-term wind or seismic loads. We recommend a minimum horizontal setback distance from the face of slopes for all structural footings and settlement-sensitive improvements. This distance is measured from the outside edge of the footing, horizontally to the slope face (or to the face of a retaining wall) and should be a minimum of H/2, where H is the slope height (or retaining wall) in feet, to a maximum of 15 feet along 2:1 slopes. For steeper slopes, case-by-case recommendations should be provided. Please note that the soils within the structural setback area, other than those addressed within this report, 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. Along the oversteepened portions of the east-facing ridgeline slopes, episodic failures should be anticipated. Slabs on grade should be reinforced with reinforcing bars placed at slab mid- height. Slabs should have crack joints at spacings designed by the structural engineer. Slabs should be a minimum of 5 inches thick and reinforced with No. 4 rebars at 18 inches on center on center (each way). The slab should be underlain by 2-inch layer of clean sand (Sand Equivalent>30). A moisture barrier (10 mil) should be placed below the sand layer if reduction of moisture vapor up through the concrete slab is desired (such as below equipment, living/office areas, etc.), which is in tum underlain by an additional 2-inches of clean sand. If applicable, slabs should also be designed for the anticipated traffic loading using a modulus of subgrade reaction of 200 pounds per cubic inch. -25- , , , Leighton 040575-003 All waterproofing measures and any additional vapor control measures necessitated by planned architectural finishes or serviceability requirements should be designed by the project architect. 5.5.2 Settlement The recommended allowable bearing capacities are based on a maximum total settlements of less than 1 inch and differential settlements less tan 1/2-inch. 5.5.3 Earth and Hydrostatic Wall Pressures For design puiposes, the following lateral earth pressure values for level or sloping backfill are recommended for walls backfilled with onsite soils of low to medium expansion potential (expansion potential less than 20 per ASTM Test Method D4829). Table 7 Equivalent Fluid Weight (pcf) Conditions Level 2:1 Slope Active 33 60 At-Rest 55 80 Passive 350 (maximum of 3 ksf) 150 (sloping down) Unrestrained (yielding) cantilever walls up to 15 feet in height should be designed for an active equivalent pressure value provided in Table 7. For the design of walls restrained from movement at the top (nonyielding) such as basement walls, the at-rest pressm-es should be used. If conditions other than those covered herein are anticipated, the equivalent fluid pressure values should be provided on an individual case basis by the geotechnical engineer. A surcharge load for a restrained or unrestrained wall resulting from automobile traffic may be assumed to be equivalent to a uniform lateral pressure of 75 psf which is in addition to the equivalent fluid pressure given above. For other uniform surcharge loads, a uniform lateral pressure equal to 0.35q should be applied to the wall (where q is the surcharge pressure in psf). The wall pressures assume walls are backfilled with free draining materials and water is not allowed to accumulate behind walls. A typical wall drainage design is provided in Appendix E. Wall backfill should be brought to at least 2 percent above the optimum moisture content and compacted by mechanical methods to at least 90 percent relative compaction -26-Leighton 040575-003 (based on ASTM D1557). Where distress-sensitive improvements extend over retaining wall backfill, we recommend wall backfill be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction. Wall footings should be designed in accordance with the foundation design recommendations and reinforced in accordance with structural considerations. For all retaining walls, we recommend the setback distance from the outside base of the footing to daylight as previously discussed for foundations. Lateral soil resistance developed against lateral structural movement can be obtained from the passive pressure value provided above. Further, for sliding resistance, the friction coefficient of 0.33 may be used at the concrete and soil interface. These values may be increased by one-third when considering loads of short duration including wind or seismic loads. The total resistance may be taken as the sum of the frictional and passive resistance provided that the passive portion does not exceed two-thirds of the total resistance. Should soil nail walls be considered, the following design parameters may be considered in design. Table 8 Soil Nail Wall Design Parameters Soil Property Design Value Internal Friction Angle, (j) (degrees) 32 Cohesion, c (psf) 50 Total Unit Weight, y (pcf) 130 Ultimate Bond Stress (psi) 5 to 10 It should be noted that the bond stress developed by the soil nails will be highly dependent on the methods of construction along the expertise of the contractor. The selected design bond stress should be verified by field testing. An appropriate testing and inspection program should be provided as part of the project plans. Appropriate surcharge pressure should be applied for walls influenced by surcharge loading. The wall design engineer should also design wall rigidity based on deflection tolerable to the existing and proposed improvements. If tied-back or braced excavations are considered, additional recommendations can be provided. ^9 -27- Leighton 040575-003 5.6 Geochemical Considerations Concrete in direct contact with soil or water that contains a high concentration of soluble sulfates can be subject to chemical deterioration commonly known as "sulfate attack." Soluble sulfate results (Appendix C) indicated a negligible soluble sulfate content. Refer to Table 19-4 in the 2001 California Building Code for mix requirements. Chloride content, resistivity and pH tests were performed on bulk samples of soils collected during our investigation. Based on test results (Appendix C), the site soils have a moderate to very conosive potential to buried uncoated metal conduits. We recommend further review be performed and measures to mitigate con-osion provided by a conosion 5.7 Preliminary Pavement Design Considerations The appropriate pavement section depends primarily on the type of subgrade soil, shear strength, traffic load, and planned pavement life. Since an evaluation of the characteristics of the actual soils at pavement subgrade cannot be made at this time, we have provided the following pavement sections to be used for planning purposes assuming an R-value of 40. These sections assume granular materials derived from Terrace Deposits are present with the upper 2 feet of pavement subgrade. The final subgrade shear strength will be highly dependent on the soils present at finish pavement subgrade. The preliminary pavement design sections have been provided on Table 9. Final pavement design should be evaluated based on R-value tests perfonned on. representative subgrade soils upon completion of grading. Table 9 Preliminary Pavement Sections Pavement Loading Condition Traffic Index R-Value = 40 Pavement Sections Auto Parking Areas 4.5 3 inches AC over 4 inches Class 2 base Auto Driveways 5.0 3 inches AC over 4 inches Class 2 base Light Duty Tmck Driveways 6.0 3.5 inches AC over 6 inches Class 2 base Moderate Duty Truck Driveways 7.0 4 inches AC over 7 inches Class 2 base -28-Leightor 040575-003 For areas subject to tmck loading (up to 20 kips, single axles), we recommend a full depth of Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) section of 7 inches on 6 inches of Class 2 aggregate base with appropriate steel reinforcement and crack-control joints as designed by the project stmctural or civil engineer. We recommend that sections be as nearly square as possible. A mix that provides a 600 psi modulus of rupture should be utilized. The actual pavement design should also be in accordance with City of Carlsbad and ACI criteria. All pavement section materials should conform to and be placed in accordance with the latest revision of the Greenbook and American Concrete Institute (ACI) codes and guidelines. Prior to placing the AC or PCC pavement section, the upper 12 inches of subgrade soils and all aggregate base should have relative compaction of at least 95 percent (based on ASTM Test Method D1557). If pavement areas are adjacent to heavily watered landscape areas, we recommend some measure of moisture control be taken to prevent the subgrade soils from becoming saturated. It is recommended that the concrete curb separating the landscaping area from the pavement extend below the aggregate base to help seal the ends ofthe sections where heavy landscape watering may have access to the aggregate base. Concrete swales should be designed in roadway or parking areas subject to concentrated surface runoff 5.8 Tennis Courts If Portland Cement Concrete tennis court surfaces are planned to mitigate crack development, we recommend the Post-Tensioning Institute design method be utilized. Additional recommendations can be provided upon request. 5.9 Swimming Pool The elevation of the swimming pool is near the elevation of the very highly expansive claystone bed. If the claystone bed is found to continue beneath the pool, the area may need to be uniformly overexcavated and replaced with compacted fill. 5.10 Selective Grading Recommendations have been made to remove highly expansive claystone materials from beneath plarmed improvement areas. Consideration should be given to making those remedial excavations so that the highly expansive materials can be placed in deeper fill areas outside of future building pad locations. The highly expansive materials should be I I -29- , . , Leightor 040575-003 compacted at elevated moisture content, at least 4 percent above the optimum moisture content. 5.11 Construction Observation and Plan Review Construction observation of all onsite excavations and field density testing of all compacted fill should be performed by a representative of this office. We recommend that excavations be geologically mapped by the geotechnical consultant during grading for the presence of potentially adverse geologic conditions. Project grading and foundation drawings should be reviewed by Leighton and Associates, Inc. before excavation to see that the recommendations provided in this report are incorporated in the project plans. -30- '/ " 040575-003 6.0 LIMITATIONS The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based in part upon data that were obtained from a limited number of observations, site visits, excavations, samples, and tests. Such infomiation is by necessity incomplete. The nature of many sites is such that differing geotechnical or geological conditions can occur within small distances and under varying climatic conditions. Changes in subsurface conditions can and do occur over time. Therefore, the findings, conclusions, and recommendations presented in this report can be relied upon only if Leighton has the opportunity to observe the subsurface conditions during additional site investigation, grading, and construction of the project, in order to confirm that our preliminary findings are representative for the site. -31- '9 I ••- '-.--rSfe-.-rCi V _,,^Evar1$ Point r'" ..-,/' -A' - \ \ < PROJECT SITE rvj^vjv, COR!' ^ 4 1, NORTH 1 "=2,000' REGIONAL TOPOGRAPHIC MAP Carlsbad Ranch Planning Area 5 / Resort Site Carlsbad, California Project No. Scale Engr./Geol. Drafted By Date 040575-003 1 "=2.000' SAC/MRS KAM March 2005 Leighton and Associates, Inc, A LEKil-ilON i,.iROLJF- C O M P/. ^J ¥ Figure No. 2 4 -A 1^ ^ ' - \ \ 'v. 1; .-T - \.. ^ J V > 1 L . \ ^I'"'-- ^^^^ Rive .^/> \ 0^ .7 r , ^ V ~, I. SITE .>''il -.if V \ ...^-\.-. .\\' V r\ X. \ \ .A ' /i ,]n/i rA' -/A ^Z-^' •"••.V*- \ •! ;.. - ; •: sSo .r- \'>^ = , J^ \ • / y / / r • . / / c.;.^ . \ "7.' — .1, M <Z^^/'^'^/~-^\ ~ ' I ( 7 \VA I / \\:'\ 750,000 1,500,000 Adapted from Jennings, 1994, Fault Activity Map of California and Adja- cent Areas: CDMG, California Geologic Data Map Series, Map No. 6 EXPLANATION Fault traces are indicated by solid lines where well located, by dashed lines where approximate or inferred, by dotted lines where concealed and queried where uncertain. Coloring and highlighting indicate the age or regency of displacement: PINK Faults that show displacement during historic time (i.e. last 200 years) ORANGE Faults that show displacement during Holocene (i.e. last 10,000 years) GREEN Faults that show displacement during late Quaternary (i.e. last 700,000 years) PURPLE Faults that show displacement during Quaternary (i.e. last 1.6 million years) BLACK Faults without recognized Quaternary displacement (considered inactive faults) REGIONAL FAULT LOCATION MAP Carlsbad Ranch Planning Area 5 / Resort Site Carlsbad, California Project No. Scale Engr./Geol. Drafted By- Date 040575-003 1'-approx. 12 miles SAC/MRS KAM April 2005 Leighton and Associates, Inc. J R O U P r o (./ p,-, rv.' V Figure No. 3 040575-003 APPENDIX A REFERENCES Abrahamson, N.A. and Silva, W.J., 1997, Empirical Response Spectral Attenuation Relations for Shallow Coastal Earthquakes, Seismological Research Letters, Vol. 68, No. 1 January/February, 1997. Blake, 2000, EQFAULT, Version 3.0. Blake, 2000, FRISKSP, Version 4.00 Bray, J.P. and Rathje, E.M. Earthquake-Induced Displacements of Solid-Waste Landfills, ASCE Joumal of Geotechnical and GeoEnvironmental Engineering, March 1998. Califomia Building and Safety Commission, 2002,2001 Califomia Building Code. Califomia Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG), 1995, Landslide Hazards in the Northem Part of the San Diego Metropolitan Area, San Diego County, Califomia, Open-File Report 95-04. , 1996, Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment for the State of Califomia, Open-File Report, 96-08. , 1998, Maps of Known Active Fault Near-Source Zones in Califomia and Adjacent Portions of Nevada, Febmary 1998. Califomia Geological Survey, 2003, The Revised Califomia Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment Maps, June 2003. Excel Engineering, 2003, Tentative Map for Planning Area No. 5 of Carlsbad Ranch, Resort Site, Carisbad, Califomia, Sheets C-4 through C-9; Project No. 01065, dated January 31, 2003. , 2005, Grading Plans for Carlsbad Ranch, Planning Area No. 5, Resort Site, Phase 1, Carlsbad, Califomia, Sheets I through 48, Project No. CT-03-02, undated. 2005, Improvement Plans for Carlsbad Ranch, Planning Area No. 5, Resort Site, Phase I, Carlsbad, Califomia, Sheets 1 through 18, undated. A-1 040575-003 APPENDIX A (Continued) Hart, E.W., 1997, Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in Califomia, Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fauh Zoning with Index to Special Study Zones Maps: Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Special Publication 42. Jemiings, C.W., 1994, Fault Activity Map of Califomia and Adjacent Areas, with Locations and Ages of Recent Volcanic Emptions: Califomia Division of Mines and Geology, Califomia Geologic Data Map Series, Map No. 6, Scale 1:750,000. Kennedy, M.P., 1975, Geology of the Westem San Diego Metropolitan Area, Califomia; Del Mar, La Jolla, and Point Loma 7-1/2 Minute Quadrangles; in Geology of the San Diego Metropolitan Area, Califomia: Califomia Division of Mines and Geology Bulletin #200, pp. 9-39. Kennedy, M.P. and Clarke, Samuel H. 1999a, Analysis of Late Quatemary Faulting in San Diego Bay and Hazards to the Coronado Bridge, San Diego, Califomia, California Division of Mines and Geology, OFR 97-1 OA. , 1999b, Analysis of Late Quatemary Faulting in San Diego Bay and Hazards to the Coronado Bridge, San Diego, Califomia Division of Mines and Geology, OFR 97-1 OB. Leighton and Associates, Inc., 1992, City of Carlsbad Geotechnical Hazards Analysis and Mapping Study, 84 Sheets, dated November 1992. , 1995, Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, Lego Family Park and Pointe Resorts, Lots 17 and 18 of Carlsbad Ranch, Carlsbad, Califomia, Project No. 4950294-001, dated October 5, 1995. 1998a, Final As-Graded Report of Rough Grading, Lego Family Park, Carlsbad, Califomia, Project No. 4960151-003, dated Febmary 10, 1998. 1998b, Geotechnical Investigation for the Proposed Carlsbad Municipal Golf Course, Carlsbad, CaUfomia, Project No. 4841363-006, dated Febmary 16, 1998. -, 2001a, As-Graded Report of Rough and Fine Grading, East Expansion Area, Legoland, Califomia, Carlsbad, Califomia, Project No. 960151-015, dated Febmary 20, 2001 -, 2001b, Geologic Reconnaissance, Proposed 53-Acre Resort Development, Lot 17, Planning Area 5, Carisbad Ranch, Carisbad, Califomia, Project No 040575-001, dated November 29, 2001. A-2 040575-003 APPENDIX A (Continued) , 2003, Planning-Level Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed 53-Acre Resort Development, Lot 17, Planning Area 5, Carlsbad Ranch, Carlsbad, Califomia, Project No. 040575-002, dated May 14, 2003. United States Geologic Survey (USGS), 2003, Java Programs for Using Newmark's Method and Simplied Decoupled Analysis to Model Slope Performance during Earthquakes, Open File Report, 03-005, Version 1.0, 2003. AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS Date Source Flight No. Photo No. Scale 4-1-53 USDA AXN-8M 100, 101, and 102 1"=2000' Aerial Fotobank, 1999, Aerial Foto-Map Book, San Diego County, 1999. Aerial Graphics, 1986-87, Aerial Foto-Map Book, San Diego County 1986-87. A-3 Small - Diameter Boring Logs (This Investigation) GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG KEY Date Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter Elevation Top of Hole KEY TO BORING LOG GRAPHICS Sheet 1 of Project No. Type of Rig Drive Weight Location Drop 1^ LU o 0) •D 3 •S3 0) Q. E re OT WO 0) u QO. >. Q JSC tf)0) Oc SO o «)--r OT^ DESCRIPTION Logged By Sampled By If) I- o a d' ^• 10- n n 0^ 15- 20- 25- 30- SAMPLE TYPES: SPLIT SPOON RING SAMPLE B BULK SAMPLE TUBE SAMPLE B-1 C-l G-1 R-l SH-1 S-1 X G GRAB SAMPLE SH SHELBY TUBE Asphaltic concrete Portiand cement concrete CL CH Inorganic clay of low to medium plasticity; gravelly clay; sandy clay; silly clay; lean clay OL ML MH ML-CL GW GP GM GC Inorganic silt; clayey silt with low plasticit>' Inorganic silt; diatomaceous fine sandy or silty soils; elastic silt Clayey silt to silty clay Well-graded gravel; gravel-sand mixture, little or no fines Poorly graded gravel; gravel-sand mixture, little or no fines SW SP SM SC Clayey gravel; gravel-sand-clay mixture Well-graded sand; gravelly sand, little or no fines Poorly graded sand; gravelly sand, little or no fines Silty sand; poorly graded sand-silt mixture Bedrock Ground water encountered at time of drilling Bulk Sample Core Sample Grab Sample Modified Califomia Sampler (3" O.D., 2.5 I.D.) Shelby Tube Sampler (3" O.D.) Standard Penetration Test SPT (Sampler (2" O.D., 1.4" I.D.) TYPE OF TESTS: DS DIRECT SHEAR MD MAXIMUM DENSITY CN CONSOLIDATION CR CORROSION SA SIEVE ANALYSIS CU TRIAXIAL SHEAR El EXPANSION INDEX RV R-VALUE 4 LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-1 2-15-05 Grand Pacific Resorts Sheet 1 of ^ Project No. 040575-003 Date Project Or^^'mOo. west Hazmat Type of Rig Hollow-Stem Auger Hole Diameter 8" Drive Weight 140 pound hammer Drop ^ Elevation Top of Elevation 239' Location See Map c o |i Ui LL 5*- 1^ CD in •a 3 235 230 10- SAMPLE TYPES: S SPLIT SPOON R RING SAMPLE B BULK SAMPLE T TUBE SAMPLE O Z a a. E (0 OT tf>0 CQO) tf) C<4- 01 u QQ. 98 S-I tf) (U — Oc SO o tf)^ _OT OD OT-^ DESCRIPTION Logged By Sampled By GJM GJM 123.1 50/6" 9.7 R-2 198/10' S-2 18 R-3 I 33 109.5 UNDOCUMENTED ARTIFICL^ FILL (AM @ 0': Silty fine to medium SAND: Brown to dark red-brown, damp to moist, loose QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS fOf) @ 4': Silty fine to medium SAND: Mottled orange gray-brown, damp to moist, very dense 0) o 0) Q. 17.3 105.5 $10': Silty fine to medium SAND: Mottled dark orange-brown, damp to moist, very dense 115': Silty fine to medium SAND: Orange-brown, moist to wet. verv dense CH TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa) @18': CLAYSTONE: Olive gray, moist, very stiff @20': CLAYSTONE: Olive gray, moist, very stiff 18.8 SC @25': CLAYSTONE: Olive-gray, moist, hard @ 26': Grades to clayey SAND: Light olive-gray, moist, dense G GRAB SAMPLE SH SHELBY TUBE TYPE OF TESTS: DS DIRECT SHEAR MD MAXIMUM DENSITY CN CONSOLIDATION CR CORROSION SA SIEVE ANALYSIS AT ATTERBURG LIMITS El EXPANSION INDEX RV R-VALUE 4 LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-1 Date 2-15-05 Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter 8" Elevation Top of Elevation 239' Grand Pacific Resorts West Hazmat Drive Weight Location Sheet 2 Project No. Type of Rig of 040575-003 140 pound hammer Hollov\/-Stem Auger Drop 30" See Map JOfl, 205 1^ •So* 2-1 o 30- 35- 200 195 tf) o •D Z3 O z o a. E n OT tf)0 50 ou- ~ i~. DQo) 0. R-4 82 tf) Cit- O) u DQ->. tf)* Oc SO O 103.8 R-5 I 50/6 40- 190 45- 50- S-3 185 180 55- 60- 6.8 in—r _OT CO— DESCRIPTION SM 58 Logged By Sampled By GJM GJM @ 30': Silty fine to medium SANDSTONE: Light gray, damp to moist, very dense tf) 0) I- o 0) a. >i @ 35': Silty fine to medium SANDSTONE: Light grav. moist, very dense @ 40': Silly fine to medium SANDSTONE: Light gray, moist, very dense Total Depth = 41.5 Feet Ground water encountered at 18 Feet at time of Drilling Backfilled with bentonite grout on 2/15/05 SAMPLE TYPES: S SPLIT SPOON R RING SAMPLE B BULK SAMPLE T TUBE SAMPLE G GRAB SAMPLE SH SHELBY TUBE TYPE OF TESTS: DS DIRECT SHEAR MD MAXIMUM DENSITY CN CONSOLIDATION CR CORROSION SA SIEVE ANALYSIS AT ATTERBURG LIMITS El EXPANSION INDEX RV R-VALUE 4 LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-2 Grand Pacific Resorts Date 2-15-05 Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter 8^^ Drive Weight Elevation Top of Elevation 249' Location West Hazmat Sheet 1 of Project No. Type of Rig 040575-003 140 pound hammer Hollow-Stem Auger Drop 30" See Map h UJ S-o o tf) T3 3 o z a. E re OT tf)0 50 ou- a. OT C>i- 0)0 QQ-OT« Oc SO o _OT od Logged By Sampled By DESCRIPTION GJM GJM tf) 1- <u CL 0-5' 245 240 235 10- 15— 230 ^7 225 20 25- mi '.on m 220 m SAMPLE TYPES: S SPLIT SPOON R RING SAMPLE B BULK SAMPLE T TUBE SAMPLE R-l • 50/6" S-1 58 97.5 12.0 R-2 98 S-2 48 R-3 I 62 116.1 UNDOCUMENTED ARTIFICIAL FILL (Afu) @ 0': Silty fine to medium SAND: Orange-brown, dainp to moist, loose to medium dense 'OUATEWAJiY TERIUCEljEPdSifsTOt) @ 3': Silty fine to medium SAND: Orange-brown, damp to moist, verj' dense 16.3 96.9 @ 10': Silty fine to medium SAND: Dark orange-brown, damp to moist, very dense 1 15': Silty fine to medium SAND: Gray-green, damp to moist, very dense CH 24.2 @ 20': Silty fine to medium SAND: Gray and orange-brown, damp to moist, dense TERTL^RY SANHAGO FORMATION (Tsa) @ 22': CLAYSTONE: Olive-gray, damp to moist, hard G GRAB SAMPLE SH SHELBY TUBE TYPE OF TESTS: DS DIRECT SHEAR MD MAXIMUM DENSITY CN CONSOLIDATION CR CORROSION SA SIEVE ANALYSIS AT ATTERBURG LIMITS El EXPANSION INDEX RV R-VALUE LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-2 2-15-05 Date Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter Elevation Top of Elevation 249' Grand Pacific Resorts West Hazmat Sheet 2 Project No. Type of Rig of 040575-003 8" Drive Weight Location 140 pound hammer Hollow-Stem Auger Drop 30" See Map h I"- lij 5*- 1^ S-o o 3 o z a Q. E re OT OTO $o CM--— k. a. w 0) u QQ. tf)a> oc SO O tf)-^ _OT OD CO— Logged By Sampled By DESCRIPTION GJM GJM tf) I- 4- o (U Q. >. 30- R-4 215 35- 210 205 40- 45- 200 195 50- R-5 I 82 S-3 55- 190 60- 54 SM @ 30': Silty fine to medium SANDSTONE: Light gray, damp, ver>' dense ! 35': Silty fine to medium SANDSTONE: Light gray, damp, very dense @ 40': Silty fine SANDSTONE: Light gray-brown, moist, very dense Total Depth = 41.5 Feet Ground water encountered at 20 feet at time of drilling Backfilled with bentonite gi'out on 2/15/05 SAMPLE TYPES: S SPLIT SPOON R RING SAMPLE B BULK SAMPLE T TUBE SAMPLE G GRAB SAMPLE SH SHELBY TUBE TYPE OF TESTS: DS DIRECT SHEAR MD MAXIMUM DENSITY CN CONSOLIDATION CR CORROSION SA SIEVE ANALYSIS AT ATTERBURG LIMITS El EXPANSION INDEX RV R-VALUE LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-3 Date 2-15-05 Grand Pacific Resorts Sheet 1 of Project No. 040575-003 Project Drilling Co. West Hazmat Type of Rig Hollow-Stem Auger Hole Diameter 8;; Drive Weight 140 pound hammer Drop ^ Elevation Top of Elevation 231' Location See Map h I"- LU 230 •SO" S-o 2-1 o 225 OT 0) T3 3 2 < ^7 215- 210 SAMPLE TYPES: S SPLIT SPOON R RING SAMPLE B BULK SAMPLE T TUBE SAMPLE O Z 0) a. E re OT R-l OTO CQo) CL OT Cvi- 0) U QQ. >< L_ Q 73 3 = W 0) : o •o _OT OZ) OT— Logged By Sampled By DESCRIPTION GJM GJM I 50/4' B-1 i R-2 I 89/8" R-2A TOPSOIL @ 0': Silty fine to medium SAND: Dark brown, moist, loose QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS (Ot) @ 2': Silty fine to medium SAND: Orange-brown, damp to moist @ 5': Silty fine to medium SAND: Orange-brown, dajnp to moist, dense M 0) O 0) Q. >> 87.4 33.2 R-3 I 98 R-4 I 80 94.6 CH SM @ 10'; No recovery SM 7.4 TERTIARY SANTL\GO FORMATION (Tsa) @ 13': CLAYSTONE: Olive gray, moist, hard ! 15': CLAYSTONE: Olive gray, moist, hard 1 16': Grades to silty fine to medium SANDSTONE: Grayish-green, moist 120': Fine to medium silty SANDSTONE: Light gray, damp, very dense; slightly friable J 25': Fine to medium silty SANDSTONE: Light gray, damp, vety dense; slightly friable G GRAB SAMPLE SH SHELBY TUBE TYPE OF TESTS: DS DIRECT SHEAR MD MAXIMUM DENSITY CN CONSOLIDATION CR CORROSION SA SIEVE ANALYSIS AT ATTERBURG LIMITS El EXPANSION INDEX RV R-VALUE 0 LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-3 Grand Pacific Resorts Date 2-15-05 Project Drilling Co. West Hazmat Hole Diameter 8^^ Drive Weight Elevation Top of Elevation 231' Location Sheet 2 Project No. Type of Rig of 040575-003 140 pound hammer Hollow-Stem Auger Drop 30" See Map •C O) s-o 2-1 o OT 0) •c 3 +-< +3 +-* < o z 0) Q. E re OT OTO CM- a. OT C<». 0) U QQ. OTO) OC SO o OTT _OT OD co- Logged By Sampled By DESCRIPTION GJM GJM OT O Ci a. >. H 30- 200 R-5 92 35- 195 190 185 40- 45- 180 175 50 55- 60- S-1 72 R-6 g 78 SM @ 30': Silty fine SANDSTONE: Light gray, damp, very dense; slightly friable @ 35': Silly fine SANDSTONE: Light gray, damp, very dense; slightly friable @ 40': Silty' fine SANDSTONE: Light gray, damp, ver)' dense; slightly friable Total Depth = 41 Feet Perched ground water encountered at 12 feet at time of drilling Backfilled with bentonite grout on 2/15/05 SAMPLE TYPES: S SPLIT SPOON R RING SAMPLE B BULK SAMPLE T TUBE SAMPLE G GRAB SAMPLE SH SHELBY TUBE TYPE OF TESTS: DS DIRECT SHEAR MD MAXIMUM DENSITY CN CONSOLIDATION CR CORROSION SA SIEVE ANALYSIS AT ATTERBURG LIMITS El EXPANSION INDEX RV R-VALUE 4 LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-4 2-16-05 Date Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter Elevation Top of Elevatiori^ Grand Pacific Resorts West Hazmat Sheet 1 of Project No. Type of Rig 040575-003 8" Drive Weight Location 140 pound hammer Hollow-Stem Auger Drop 30;;^ See Map •to LU s-o 2-1 o 20- 25- SAMPLE TYPES: S SPLIT SPOON R RING SAMPLE B BULK SAMPLE T TUBE SAMPLE OT 0) •a 3 +.» < a E re OT OTO a. R-l I 82 S-1 R-2 w CH-0) u QQ. >> fc. Q «s c OT (U .—^ Oc so O OT-r —OT 03 CO— 104.2 54 11.0 60 R-3 R-4 I 52 85 119.9 Logged By Sampled By DESCRIPTION GJM GJM TOPSOIL @ 0': Silty fine to medium SAND: Dark brown, damp lo moist, loose to medium dense 14.2 SC QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS (Ot) @ 2': Silty fine to medium SAND: Mottled orange and gray, damp to moist, very dense @ 5': Silty fine to medium SAND: Mottled orange and gray, damp to moist, very dense (fl 0) o <u Q. >. @ 10': Clayey fine to medium SAND: Dark red-brown, moist, vety dense; slightly mottled SM @ 15': Clayey fine to medium SAND: Light gray to olive-gray, damp to moist, dense; slightly mottled orange TERTLUIY SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa) @ 18': Silty fine to medium SANDSTONE: Light gray to light olive-gray, damp to moist, dense @ 20': Silty fine to medium SANDSTONE: Light gray to light olive-gray, damp to moist, dense ) 25': Silty fine SANDSTONE: Light gray, damp, very dense; slightly friable G GRAB SAMPLE SH SHELBY TUBE TYPE OF TESTS: DS DIRECT SHEAR MD MAXIMUM DENSITY CN CONSOLIDATION CR CORROSION SA SIEVE ANALYSIS AT ATTERBURG LIMITS El EXPANSION INDEX RV R-VALUE LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-4 Date 2-16-05 Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter Grand Pacific Resorts West Hazmat Sheet 2 Project No. Type of Rig of 040575-003 8" Elevation Top of Elevatioti^ Drive Weight Location 140 pound hammer Hollow-Stem Auger Drop 30" See Map •1^ req, I"- LLI 5- S-o 2-1 o in <o 3 +-< < Logged By Sampled By DESCRIPTION GJM GJM w 0) (V Q. 30-] 30': Silty fine to medium SANDSTONE: Light gray to yellow-brown, damp to moist, very dense 35-@ 35': Silty fine to medium SANDSTONE: Liglit gray, damp, very dense; cemented 40— 45- (@_40': Silty fine to medium SANDSTONE: Light gray, damp, very \ dense; cemented Total Depth = 40.5 Feet No ground water encountered at time of drilling Backfilled with bentonite grout on 2/16/05 50- 55— 60- SAMPLE TYPES: S SPLIT SPOON R RING SAMPLE B BULK SAMPLE T TUBE SAMPLE Q GRAB SAMPLE SH SHELBY TUBE TYPE OF TESTS: DS DIRECT SHEAR MD MAXIMUM DENSITY CN CONSOLIDATION CR CORROSION SA SIEVE ANALYSIS AT ATTERBURG LIMITS El EXPANSION INDEX RV R-VALUE 4 LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-5 Date 2-16-05 Grand Pacific Resorts Sheet 1 of Project No. 040575-003 Project Drilling Co. West Hazmat Type of Rig Hollow-Stem Auger Hole Diameter 8'^ Drive Weight 140 pound hammer Drop 30" Elevation Top of Elevation 259' Location See Map S-o 2-1 in •a 3 o z « Q. E re OT wo so on. OT C>*- 0) U QQ. a OT« oc so o OT-r OD co- Logged By Sampled By DESCRIPTION GJM GJM OT O CD Q. >< t- 255 250 245 10— 15— 240 235 230 20- 25- 30- S-1 TOPSOIL @ 0': Silty fine to medium SAND: Dark brown, moist, loose to medium dense 58 R-l I 50/6 S-2 105.5 R-2 I 50/6" R-3 I 90 10.! 115.8 9.8 QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS (Ot) @ 2': Silty fine to medium SAND: Orange-brown, damp to moist, medium dense to dense ! 5': Silty fine to medium SAND: Orange-brown, damp to moist, vety dense @ 10': Silty fine to medium SAND: Orange-brown, damp to moist, vety dense ! 15': Silty fine to medium SAND: Dark orange-brown, damp, vety dense il5'-25': Vety dense @ 20': Silty fine to medium SAND: Orange-brown, damp, vety dense @ 25': Silty fine to medium SAND: Orange-brown, damp, vety dense SAMPLE TYPES: S SPLIT SPOON R RING SAMPLE B BULK SAMPLE T TUBE SAMPLE G GRAB SAMPLE SH SHELBY TUBE TYPE OF TESTS: DS DIRECT SHEAR MD MAXIMUM DENSITY CN CONSOLIDATION CR CORROSION SA SIEVE ANALYSIS AT ATTERBURG LIMITS El EXPANSION INDEX RV R-VALUE 4 LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-5 2-16-05 Date Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter Elevation Top of Elevation 259' Grand Pacific Resorts West Hazmat Sheet 2 Project No. Type of Rig of 040575-003 8" Drive Weight Location 140 pound hammer Hollow-Stem Auger Drop 30" See Map 50/6" OT C<4-0) U QQ. waj oc SO O 60—J SAMPLE TYPES: S SPLIT SPOON R RING SAMPLE B BULK SAMPLE T TUBE SAMPLE _OT OD CO- SM CH Logged By Sampled By DESCRIPTION GJM GJM @ 30': Silty fine to medium SAND: Orange-brov\'n, damp, vety dense CL @ 35': Silty fine to medium SAND: Dark brown to dark _orangfcbxowurnpist, jyet, very dense TERTL^Y SANTL\GO FORMATION (Tsa) @ 36': CLAYSTONE: Olive gray, damp to moist, hard @ 40': CLAYSTONE: Olive-gray, damp to moist, hard @ 42': CLAYSTONE: Olive-gray, damp to moist, hard @ 45': CLAYSTONE: Olive gray, damp to moist, hard (g46'- Becomes fine to medium silty SANDSTONE: Light gray-green, \ " moist, vety dense i Total Depth = 46 Feet Ground water encountered at 36 feet at time of drilling Backfilled with bentonite grout on 2/16/05 0) o 0) Q. G GRAB SAMPLE SH SHELBY TUBE TYPE OF TESTS: DS DIRECT SHEAR MD MAXIMUM DENSITY CN CONSOLIDATION CR CORROSION SA SIEVE ANALYSIS AT ATTERBURG LIMITS El EXPANSION INDEX RV R-VALUE LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-6 Date 2-16-05 Grand Pacific Resorts Sheet 1 of Project No. 040575-003 Project Drilling Co. West Hazmat Type of Rig Hollow-Stem Auger Hole Diameter 8^ Drive Weight 140 pound hammer Drop 30" Elevation Top of Elevation 210' Location See map c 5a) LU *^ a) Q" •So* s-° 2-1 o OT 0) •D 3 < Q. E re OT OTO 50 ou- a. •tf) Cv- 0) u Qa fc. Q OTfl) OC SO o OT^ i£OT O lOT OD co- Logged By Sampled By DESCRIPTION GJM GJM OT o 0) Q. 210 205 200 195 10- 15- 190 185 20 25- 180J 30 SAMPLE TYPES: S SPLIT SPOON R RING SAMPLE B BULK SAMPLE T TUBE SAMPLE R-l I 74 107.3 R-2 I 78 I R-3 I 80 9.8 TOPSOIL @0': Silty fine to medium SAND: Brown, moist, loose to medium dense "QUATERNARY TCRRACEDEPOSlfsTOt) @ 2': Silty fine to medium SAND: Orange-brown, damp to moist, medium dense @ 5': Silty fine to medium SAND: Orange-brown, damp to moist, very dense 121.9 I R-4 I 88 I R-5 I 82 111.5 11.7 ! 10': Silty fine to medium SAND: Orange-brown, damp to moist, vety dense 6.5 ! 15': Silty fine to medium SAND: Red-brown, damp to moist, vety dense @ 20': Silty fine to medium SAND: Red-brown, damp to moist, very dense @ 25': Silty fine to medium SAND: Red-brown, damp to moist, vety dense G GRAB SAMPLE SH SHELBY TUBE TYPE OF TESTS: DS DIRECT SHEAR MD MAXIMUM DENSITY CN CONSOLIDATION CR CORROSION SA SIEVE ANALYSIS AT ATTERBURG LIMITS El EXPANSION INDEX RV R-VALUE 4 LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-6 Grand Pacific Resorts Date 2-16-05 Project Drilling Co. West Hazmat Hole Diameter 8;; Drive Weight Elevation Top of Elevation 210' Location Sheet 2 of Project No. Type of Rig 040575-003 140 pound hammer Hollow-Stem Auger Drop 30" See map h LU S-o 2_j C5 w •a < o z aj a E re OT wo oU- CQo a. in CM-a> u QQ. waj Oc SO O OT-r (flCO _OT •5=3 co- Logged By Sampled By DESCRIPTION GJM GJM w a> o a> a. 180 30- I R-6 80 SM @ 30': Silty fine to medium SAND: Orange-brown, damp to moist, vety dense; slightly friable 175 35-I R-7 I 82 170 40- 165 45- 160 50- 155 55- I R-8 I 86 150 60- 50/4" j 35': Silty fine to medium SAND: Orange-brown, damp to moist, vety dense; slightly friable @ 40': Silty fine to medium SAND: Orange-brown, damp to moist, very dense; slightly friable (nl 45': No recovery, cobble in sample. 2" rounded Total Depth = 45.5 Feet No ground water encountered at time of drilling Backfilled with bentonite on 2/16/05 SAMPLE TYPES: S SPLIT SPOON R RING SAMPLE B BULK SAMPLE T TUBE SAMPLE G GRAB SAMPLE SH SHELBY TUBE TYPE OF TESTS: DS DIRECT SHEAR MD MAXIMUM DENSITY CN CONSOLIDATION CR CORROSION SA SIEVE ANALYSIS AT ATTERBURG LIMITS El EXPANSION INDEX RV R-VALUE LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-7 Date 2-16-05 Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter 8" Elevation Top of Elevation 186' Grand Pacific Resorts West Hazmat Sheet 1 of J\_ Project No. Type of Rig 040575-003 Drive Weight Location 140 pound hammer Hollow-Stem Auger Drop 30" See Map 1^ re a, Iu- UJ s-o 2-1 o w a) T3 2 S < o z a E re OT wo 50 ou. OQa> a. w Cx- 0) u QQ. >. wa> oc SO O OT-r _OT OD co- Logged By Sampled By DESCRIPTION GJM GJM w a> H a> Q. 185 5— 180 R-l B-1 @4-8 I 89 116.3 9.6 TOPSOIL 0^ Silty fine to. medium _SAND:JDarkbrown^dainij to moistjqose. UATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qt) @ 1': Silty fine to medium SAND: Orange-brown, damp to moist, vety dense 15': Silty fine to medium SAND: Orange-brown, damp to moist, vety dense 175 170 165 160 10- R-2 I 78 123.4 10.4 15- 20- 25- 30- R-3 10': Silty fine to medium SAND: Dark orange-brown, damp to moist, dense to vety dense 60 107.8 11.9 @ 15': Silty fine to medium SAND: Dark orange-brown, damp to moist, dense to very dense Total Depth = 16.5 Feet No ground water encountered at time of drilling Backfilled with bentonite grout on 2/16/05 SAMPLE TYPES: S SPLIT SPOON R RING SAMPLE B BULK SAMPLE T TUBE SAMPLE G GRAB SAMPLE SH SHELBY TUBE TYPE OF TESTS: DS DIRECT SHEAR MD MAXIMUM DENSITY CN CONSOLIDATION CR CORROSION SA SIEVE ANALYSIS AT ATTERBURG LIMITS El EXPANSION INDEX RV R-VALUE 4 LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Trench Logs (This Investigation) X O Z w H fin o a o aj on O 00 C -a <u 00 so o c C3 > 5 a o o O H 2 o W Q c c/: Pi: O !^ O D. -o != o 'p c c c XI P a. c C D. '5 cr tx5 pa < Q o Q O H UJ H o < p cu i: o (U ot) c o Q < cn TD 2 =^ Ofi o « o T3 O T3 a. cd O -a o oc OJ T3 >, oc o O t op c/3 < w < W H < o -5 o Q < s o I 0) OC c cfl 1- 2 § ^ I 00 P D S o c 00 -o o 'a. P o o g on 0) e o o 03 CQ x> -o o oc oc o c _o '.p cfl > t3 t C c/: a: o !C 'u CI: 0- -a c c^ c cfl o ID C C IT c c u x> 6 Z o o il .1^ o ^ & o CO O 00 o cfl o O a C c c: ff '5 a" tfl § I—I H 2 u 00 PJ O PJ H < Q a Q O H PJ H O < a a o o o S p u cfl T3 ffl Q OO -3 u p OJ ic oc < UJ O w pq H < Ol tu -o p 3 -3 cu P o g S3 o .JO I (U 00 00 6 p •5 cu S tc CU CU iJO Jp ^ Cfl ©I -O P cfl C o cu OC o -p <U u o 8 "5 Si i'! U cn 6 g o -o O cu C CU >. cu cu T3 3 CO o _ o '-0 +-1 cU o E (N >^ (§) ^ ff) ffl I PJ Q PJ PH o UJ O < 00 PJ hJ <: u 00 o ^; g < oo PH < CJ p. a f- O I H UH O o o T3 cu oc oc o c o > cu s t: c o tc 'o cfl 0--a cfl V- C cu e cfl z O cU C C \ <r f~ tr c c o Si S 3 o Q 6Z cfl 00 U O cfl o o 1 c JZ c ct ff P PJ O P tfl o o HH H PH 2 u O) PJ Q O UJ H < 5 Q Sg O H UJ H O < 00 o PH o H 00 < tfl PH o cn o o o P o cfl T3 P p Q 00 p -a cu cu c t/5 < tfl u < UJ H Pi UJ H < O cu -ID O P o p cu oc p cfl < 00 P -a P tc CQ tfl Q i UJ PH o J 00 tfl O < UH Pi 00 PJ HJ < o 00 cfl o < UJ P- UJ Pi < P-< Pi a ^ r- U, W o 1:3 ca H ffl CL P cu o X u I tf O a o .52 o cfl 00 C/) O C TD cu 00 00 o Cfl > o w CD CJ tc 'o c^ TJ I- c c cfl o cu u p- f C C ir <r C C o p o cu u. 0. 1 CL cr O cfl O o HJ d. c c CI ff tfl o H P-H 2 o 00 UJ Q o tfl < Q 00 a o o o _o O p o < -a <u P UJ cu a -1 fc O H tfl h-O < cn o < cu P CU '•i o g p' o cu oc c cfl O Q < C/2 -a cu P o CD tc p (U o o cu ffl cU Cfl ff3 Q U 1 H tf O O O P .12 o ^ 2 p o CJ O O o tfl o C X) T3 cu 00 00 o c cfl > cu W c: 1 o cfl o O P § PH 2 o 00 tfl Q t c c/: cu p; o tc 'o cfl p--a sz cfl c CD P +-» o cu c c c c E 3 +-» CJ CL C f s c ct cu P D. '3 CT tfl o PJ H < Q CJS o Q Sfc O H tf) H O < 00 o o o o cfl Q ci < 00 TD cU P CU tc -^ XJ rp ci: oc < p p cu p. p TD p" ? o X) I <u oc p cfl Q Z < cn S TD ^ X3 O cfl ^—» • —. cu ciD 00 Xl cfl P cu T3 cu > cu X) cu o o cu CQ cu TD cu > p" O cu OC P cfl ;.H 00 TD cu •5 O cu g o o cu PQ CQ Large Diameter Boring Logs (Leigliton, 2003) GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB1-03 Date 2-17-03 Sheet 1 of 2 Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter Elevation Top of Hole 241 ft. Grand Pacific Resort Morrison DriUing (San Diego Drilling) Project No. Type of Rig 040575-002 30 in. Drive Weight Ref. or Datum Bucket Auger Drop 12 in. Mean Sea Level u JC 0) a o (D_l L CD QJ TJ 3 a £ CO u-CH- QJ O a a L a ^ o a cj .CO o; CO GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By _ Sampled By MDJ MDJ lo- ts— 20 — j:N10W, 44NE fr:N20W, 60NE gc:N30-N45W, 3SW 25- I push Bag-3 @25' cs:N44E, 25-45SE fr:N55E, 51SE fr:N45W, 40NE gc:N20-60W 5-6NE llf.2 7.4 82.0 39.3 SM QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS fOt) @ 0': Silty fine to medium SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, damp, dense to very dense; iron-oxide staining, massive SP^SM CH CH SM @ 17.2'-17.8': Two light gray SAND infilled joints, sand is slightly less cemented than orange-brown sandstone surrounding feature @ 18': Three 1.5" to 3" thick beds of dark brown moderately cemented sandstone that are offset by light gray sand infilled fracture; beds are interbedded with orange-brown sandstone; gravel and cobble rare; fracture very slightly open at 19' @ 20'-20.5': Fine SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, wet, dense; cobble at die base of sandstone; moderate to heavy seepage within the layer, general contact, wavy erosional contact TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsal @ 20.5': CLAYSTONE: Olive, moist to wet, stiff; discontinuous randomly-oriented parting surfaces, moderately plastic layers that interbed with highly plastic CLAYSTONE layers ©21': Discontinuous wavy randomly-oriented fractures throughout CLAYSTONE Plastic (fat) layers interbedded between blocky CLAYSTONE; closely spaced tight fractures; randomly oriented plastic parting surfaces @ 26': 1/4" thick plastic clayseam along striated polished surface; continuous @ 26.2': Fracture below it connects with clayseam on north side of boring @ 29': Discontinuous plastic clay-lined fracture @ 29.6': Silty fme SANDSTONE: Light gray, damp, dense; slightly friable; gradational upper contact 505A(11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOGLB1-03 Date 2-17-03 Project Drillmg Co. Hole Diameter 30 in. Elevation Top of Hole 241 ft. Grand Pacific Resort Morrison Drilling (San Diego Driiling) Sheet 2 Project No. Type of Rig of 040575-002 Drive Weight Ref. or Datum Bucket Auger Drop 12 in. Mean Sea Level 30- 35- 40- 45- 50- 55- 0 £ 0) Q. O (0-1 L CD in 0) X) 3 ,b:generally horizontal O QL £ CO O^ 1 Bag-5 @36' 01^ CH- Qi U Q a \_/ L a 112.6 jcn u .to C/) SM SP SM-SP SP GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By _ Sampled By MDJ MD.I TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION fTsa) (Continued) @ 30': Significant caving 1 35': Fine SANDSTONE: Pale gray to off-while, damp, dense, very friable 38'-40': Silty fine SANDSTONE to fine SANDSTONE: Pale gray, damp, very dense, iron-oxidized stained bed at 38', iron-oxide stained krotovina; less friable than above Geologically Logged to 42 feet Ground water encountered at 20 feet at time of drilling Total Depth = 46 feet Boring caved to 20 feet on 2/18/03 Backfilled with 41 cubic feet of bentonite grout and native soi! on 2/18/03 505A( 11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES Date 2-18-03 Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter Elevation Top of Hole GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB2-03 Sheet Grand Pacific Resort Project No. Type of Rig 1 of 040575-002 Moirison Drilling (San Diego Drilling) 30 in. 262 ft. Drive Weight Ref. or Datuin Bucket Auger 12 in. Drop Mean Sea Level o x: cn a o fO_J L CD in •o O •z. a E (0 CO CO iS\r\ (U U O Q. V Jl L a CJ CJ ISl GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By _ Sampled By MDJ MDJ lo- ts- 20- 25- ig-1 5'-6' 2 I 7 I I 114.8 8.4 SM SM QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS (Ot) @ 0': Silty fine to medium SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, damp, very dense to dense 18': Significant caving during drilling I 20': Silty medium SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, damp, very dense; iron-oxide staining 505A(11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES Date 2-18-03 Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter Elevation Top of Hole 262 ft. GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB2-03 Sheet 2 Grand Pacific Resort Project No. Type of Rig of 040575-002 Morrison Drilling (San Diego Drilling) 30 in. Drive Weight Ref. or Datum Bucket Auger Drop 12 in. Mean Sea Level in 0 (U — •D JZ 0) D a. 0 +• fa_i — L +-CD •I-W o OJ a E (0 W CO b a. in c<+-01 u a Q. Jl L a GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By _ Sampled By MDJ MDJ 30- 35- 40- 45- 1 119.6 9.2 SM QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qt) (Continued) CH 82.7 37.6 SP-SM '38': Encountered wet SAND caving saturated sands, heavy seepage and caving to 41' TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa) @ 41': CLAYSTONE: Olive, moist to wet, stiff; discontinuous randomly-oriented parting surface ) 48': Fine SAND; Gray, wet, dense, water filling boring faster than driller can drill out 50 — 55 — fiO- Did not downhole log Total Depth = 49 feet Boring caved at 38 feet Ground water encountered at 38 feet at time of drilling Backfilled with 52 cubic feet of bentonite grout and native soil on 2/17/03 505A( 11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES Hollow Stem Auger Core Boring Log (Leighton, 2003) GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG CB-1 Date 2-19-03 Grand Pacific Resort Tri-County Drilling Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter 10 in. Drive Weight Elevation Top of Hole 188 ft. Ref. or Datum Sheet Project No. 1 of 4 040575-002 140 pounds Type of Rig HS Core Rig CME 95 Drop 30 in. Mean Sea Level IZ u> 0. o ra_i L ID in QJ TD 3 a £ D. Jl Ifirs QJ U o a Jl C. Q a j(o GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By Sampled By MDJ/BJO MDJ/BJO 10- 15- 20- 25- 30- b:generally horizontal 86 54 98 SM SM SP-SM SP SM QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS (OO @ 0': Silty fine SANDSTONE: Red-brown, dvy, medium dense 3.5': Silty fine SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, damp, veiy dense 10': Becomes dense ' 15': Becomes very dense 15'-20': Run#l, Recovery/RQD = 80/72 15'-16': No recoveiy 16'-17.8': SUty fine SANDSTONE, Orange-brown, damp, dense 17.8'-20': Well cemented SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, damp, very dense J20'-25': Run #2, Recovery/RQD = 100/95 ? 20-23.7': Silty medium SANDSTONE: Orange-brown to red-brown, damp, very dense ! 23'-23.5': Well indurated blocky SANDSTONE: Interbedded 1/8" Uiick light brown beds, generally horizontal ) 23.5'-25': Very fine SANDSTONE with silt: Orange-brown, damp, very dense; micaceous )25'-30': Run #3, Recovery/RQD=96/90 ) 25'-25.5': Very fine SANDSTONE with silt: Orange-brown, damp, dense; massive > 25.5'-26.4': Fine SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, di7 to damp, dense; friable ! 26.4': Silty fme SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, damp, very dense 505A( 11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG CB-1 Date 2-19-03 Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter Elevation Top of Hole 188 ft. Grand Pacific Resort Tri-County Drilling Sheet 2 Project No. Type of Rig of 4 040575-002 10 in. Drive Weight Ref. or Datum 140 pounds HS Core Rig CME 95 Drop 30 in. Mean Sea Level O ^ 0) ao fO-l L CD tn QJ •D 3 <i: £ cn D. in CH-OI u Q a N. J) c • u Ul GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By Sampled By MDJ/BJO MDJ/BJO 30- b:horizontal 35- 40- 45- Bag-4 5 50-6 degrees north dip 55- SM SP SM SP 72 SP SP-SM QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS (Ot) @ 30'-35': Run #4, Recovery/RQD = 100/70 @ 30'-32.2': Silty medium SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, moist, dense; micaceous @ 32.2'-33.1': Fine SANDSTONE: Light gray/orange-brown, damp lo dty, dense; mottled, cross-bedded, iron-oxide stained bedding @ 33.r-35': Silty fine SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, damp, dense; possible cross-bedding; micaceous @35'-40': Run #5, Recovery/RQD= 100/80 @ 35'-36.7': SUty fme SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, dense TERTL^RY SANTLAGO FORMATION @ 36.7'-40': Fine SANDSTONE: Yeliow-brown, damp, dense; micaceous; friable @40'-45': Run #6, Recovery/RQD= 100/100 Fine SANDSTONE: Yellow-brown, damp to dry, dense; micaceous; friable I 45'-50: Run #7, Recoveiy/RQD = 95/90 I 45'-50': Fine to very fme SANDSTONE: Pale gray, dry to damp, very dense; micaceous, friable @50'-55': Run #8, Recovery/RQD = 100/100 @50'-52.2': Very fme SANDSTONE: Light gray, damp, very dense; friable, iron-oxide blebs ) 52.2'-55': Fine to very fme SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, moist, very dense; faint bedding ) 52.5': Perched ground water i55'-60': Run #9, Recovery/RQD = 90/80 I 53'-60': Fme SANDSTONE with silt: Orange-brown, light gray, moist to wet, very dense 505A(11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG CB-1 Date Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter 2-19-03 Grand Pacific Resort Tri-County Drilling Sheet Project No. Type of Rig 3 of 4 040575-002 10 in. Drive Weight Elevation Top of Hole 188 ft. Ref. or Datum 140 pounds HS Core Rig CME 95 Drop 30 in. Mean Sea Level m QJ TI 3 a. £ o^ CO b CL Jl in^-^ CH-QJ U a QL Jl c a .\' CJ GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By Sampled By MDJ/BJO MDJ/BJO 65- 80- 6-10 degree dip SP SC CL ML CL CL SC SM SC SM CH TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa) @ 60'-65': Run #10, Recovery/RQD = 90/55 Fine SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, moist to wet, dense; iron-oxide staining ) 65' -70': Run # U, Recovery/RQD = 100/40 ! 65'-66.7', clayey silty very fine SANDSTONE; Gray with orange-brown staming, wet, dense ) 66.7'-68': Gray and brown, light brown CLAYSTONE: Moist, stiff; laminated with clayey SILT to SAND layers l/8"-l/2" thick; 6 to 10 degree dip; orange (iron-oxide) stained friable fine grained sand laminations 1 68'-69': Clayey sandy SILTSTONE: Gray, moist, medium stiff ) 69'-70': Same as above 67'-68': Solid gray CLAY at 69.5'. Cone sample tested in lab from 69.5'-70' > 70'-75': Run #12, Recovery/RQD = 100/40 1 70'-71.5': CLAYSTONE: Gray, moist, stiff 1 71.5'-73.4': CLAYSTONE: Gray-brown widi lenticular SAND/SILT blebs/laminations; mottled with iron-oxide staining ) 73.4'-75': Clayey fine SANDSTONE: Orange-brown to yellow-brown, moist, dense, friable ) 75'-80': Run #13, Recovery/RQD = 86/86 ) 75'-77': Clay to silty SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, moist, dense; friable; increasing or decreasing coarsens with depth I 77'-80': SANDSTONE widi silt and clay: Gray, moist, dense; very fme to medium grained, friable, massive; rare pebbles I 80'-85': Run #14, Recovery/RQD = 100/100 ) 80'-85': Silty clayey SANDSTONE: Gray, moist, dense; friable, generaUy fme to medium grained, massive, iron-stained with depth 1 85'-90': Run #15, Recovery/RQD=90/86 ! 85'-86.6': Silty clayey SANDSTONE: Gray, moist, dense I 86.6'-86.8': CLAYSTONE; Blue-gray, moist, stiff; wavy, irregular contacti bentonitic, subhorizontal I 86.8'-90': Clayey silty SANDSTONE: Gray with iron oxide in diffuse layers, moist, dense, fme to medium grained with scattered coarse grains 505A( 11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG CB-1 Date 2-19-03 Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter _ Elevation Top of Hole 188 ft. Grand Pacific Resort Tri-County Drilling Sheet Project No. Type of Rig 4 of 4 040575-002 10 in. Drive Weight Ref. or Datum 140 pounds HS Core Rig CME 95 Drop 30 in. Mean Sea Level tn QJ n 3 a E (0 £L Ifl/-.. QJ 0 a a II L Q jC/J o CO ZD GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By _ Sampled By MDJ/BJO MDJ/BJO 90- 95- 100- 105- 110- 115- ?.0- TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa) (Continued) @ 90'-95': Run #16, Recovery/RQD = 100/90 @ 90'-95': Gray silty to clayey SANDSTONE: Moist, dense, very fine to fine grained widi scattered medium to coarse grains; sandy CLAY laminations, l/4"-l/2" thick, gray, horizontal @ 92' and 92.6', othenvisel massive @ 95'-100': Run#17, Recovery/RQD = 95/88 @ 95'-100': Gray silty to clayey SANDSTONE: Moist, dense,; very fme to fme grained with scattered medium to coarse grains; evidence of gray rip-ups clasts between 96'-97' dismrbed sample 100'-105': Run #18, Recoveiy/RQD = 92/92 100'-105': Gray silty to clayey SANDSTONE: Moist, dense, very fine to fine grained with scattered medium to coarse grains 102'-103': Gray clay rip-up clasts, rare rounded gravel 80 Total Depdi = 105 Feet Perched ground water encountered at 56 feet to 66 feet Backfilled witii 59.3 cubic feet of bentonite grout on 2/19/03 505A( 11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG CB-2 Date 5-7-03 Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter Elevation Top of Hole Grand Pacific Resorts Tri-County Drilling Sheet Project No. Type of Rig 1 of 040575-002 8 in. 195 ft. Drive Weight Ref. or Datum N/A HS Core Rig CME 95 Drop N/A in. Mean Sea Level lo- ts- 20- 25- 30- O SZ Ul Q. O (0-1 L CD -2Z/ / in Q) •D 3 <E a E CL CH-OI u Q a Jl L Q CJ jCO u -to 0^ C/) SC SM SM SC SM GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By _ Sampled By MDJ MDJ ARTIFICIAL FILL - Undocumented (Afu) @0-5': Run#l, Recovety/RQD = 70/55 @ 0-2.5': Clayey SAND: Brown, moist, loose; flowers and roots I 2.5'-5': Silty fine SAND widi clay: Orange-brown, damp to moist, loose QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qt) @ 5'-10': Run #2, Recovery/RQD=70/62 (@ 5': Silty fine SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, damp, dense; recovered 3.5' @ 6'-6.5': Laminated bedding 10'-15': Run #3, Recovery/RQD = 100/65 10': Silty fine SANDSTONE: Orange/red-brown, damp, dense; gray sand infilled, near vertical joint 1 r-12.8', two parallel 40-45 degree dipping joints, possibly mechanical breaks, massive 15'-20': Run #4, Recovery/RQD = 80/80 15': Silty SANDSTONE widi clay: Red-brown, damp to moist, dense; massive, recovered 4' out 5' 16.5'-17.2': Clayey SANDSTONE: Red-brown, moist, dense )20'-25': Run #5, Recoveiy/RQD=78/65 ) 20'-20.7': Silty medium SANDSTONE with clay: Red-brown, moist, dense slightiy friable I 20.7': Silty fine SANDSTONE with clay: Orange/red-brown, damp to moist, dense 1 25'-30': Run #6, Recovery/RQD 40/30 ) 25'-29': Silty fme to medium SANDSTONE: Red-brown, moist, dense; massive, recovered 1 sample using sand catcher, possible water seepage at 22' @29.5': Silty very fine SANDSTONE: Brown, damp to moist, dense 505A( 11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG CB-2 Date 5-7-03 Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter Elevation Top of Hole 195 ft. Grand Pacific Resorts Tri-County Drilling Sheet 2 Project No. Type of Rig of 040575-002 8 in. Drive Weight Ref. or Datum N/A HS Core Rig CME 95 Drop N/A in. Mean Sea Level U JZ m a o a!_i L CD tn QJ TJ 3 CL E (0 cn CO ifl CH-OI u o a Jl L a GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By Sampled By MDJ MDJ 30- 35- 40- 45- 50- b:generally horizontal SM QUATERNARY TERRACE (QO (Continued) @ 30'-35': Run #7, Recovery/RQD = 75/70 @ 30': Silty fine to medium SANDSTONE: Red-brown, damp, dense I 32.5': Gravelly silty SANDSTONE: Red-brown, damp, dense SM/GM SM ML SM TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa) @ 33': Silty fme SANDSTONE witli gravel and cobble: Orange-brown, damp, dense; micaceous @35'-40': Run #8, Recovery/RQD = 62/62 @ 35': Fine SANDSTONE with silt, and gravel and cobble: Light brown, moist, dense; friable; massive; recovered 1.2' of this sample, logged cuttings, possible seepage 38': Silty very fme SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, damp, dense; black blebs (1/16"); micaceous; moderately bedded 1 40'-45': Run #9, Recovery/RQD= 100/92 I 40'-43.2': Silty very fme to fine SANDSTONE: Light orange-brown, damp to moist, dense; micaceous; cross-bedding dipping 4 to 10 degrees ) 43.2'-44.7': Silty vety fine to fme SANDSTONE: Light orange-brown, wet micaceous, cross-bedding (4-10), seepage at siltstone contact I 44.7'-45.3': Very fme sandy SILTSTONE: Brown, damp to moist, stiff I 45'-50': Run #10, Recovery/RQD = 100/95 ' 45.3': Silty fine SANDSTONE: Gray to light brown, moist to wet, dense; micaceous Ground water at 48; measured with tape 55- fin- Total Deptii = 50 Feet Seepage at 22 Feet, 35 Feet, and 43.2 Feet Ground water encountered at 48 Feet Backfilled witii bentonite/cement grout on 5/7/03 505A(11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG CB-3 Date 5-7-03 Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter Elevation Top of Hole 240 ft. Grand Pacific Resorts Sheet Project No. 1 of 2 040575-002 Tri-County Drilling in. Drive Weight Ref. or Datum N/A Type of Rig HS Core Rig CME 95 Drop N/A in. Mean Sea Level u H Ul a o L CD in QJ TJ 3 <i: a E (0 CO m oi CL Jl in/-N CH-OI u Q a. Jl c. Q a jcn o CJl GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By _ Sampled By MDJ MDJ 10- 15- :T I b:horizontal SM CH SC SM QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS (Ot) @0'-3': Run#I, Recovery/RQD = 100/100 @ 0': Silty fine to medium SANDSTONE: Red-brown, moist, medium dense; roodets top 3.5", 0-3' undisturbed I 3.5'-5': Did not core sample, logged cuttings i 5' -10': Run #2, Recovery/RQD = 78/70 • 5': Silty medium SANDSTONE witii clay: Red-brown, damp, dense; moderately mottled @ 10'-15': Run #3, Recovery/RQD = 30/25 @ 10': Silty fine to medium SANDSTONE: Red-brown, damp, dense; recovered 1.5' of sample, logged cuttings @ 15': No recovery @ 15': Silty gravelly SANDSTONE: Red-brown, damp, den.se; hit cobble at 17'-19', logged cutting TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa) @ 19'; Fine sandy CLAYSTONE to CLAYSTONE, gray-green, moist, stiff; at 19'-25' logged cuttings Drilled out claystone plugging auger at 24'-25' @25'-30': Run #6, Recoveiy/RQD= 100/90 @ 25'-27.5': CLAYSTONE: Gray-green, moist, stiff to very stiff; fat clay; highly plastic, discontinuous randomly-oriented parting surfaces @ 27.5': Sandy CLAYSTONE: Olive-gray, damp to moist, very stiff ) 28.5': Clayey SANDSTONE: Gray-brown, damp, dense ) 29.5': Siltv SANDSTONE: Light brown, damp, very dense 505A( 11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG CB-3 Date 5-7-03 Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter Elevation Top of Hole 240 ft. Grand Pacific Resorts Tri-County Drilling Sheet 2 Project No. Type of Rig of 040575-002 HI. Drive Weight Ref. or Datum N/A HS Core Rig CME 95 Drop N/A in. Mean Sea Level in o QJ — XI JZ Ul 3 a. o -1- ai_i — L -f- CD +- <r: 30- 35- 40- 45- 50- a E cn Ifl CQ in /-s QJ o cn a \. Jl a CJ jcn CJ CO ZD SP-SM GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By _ Sampled By MDJ MDJ TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa) (Continued) @ 30'-35': Run #7, Recovery/RQD=20/20 @ 35': Fine SANDSTONE with silt: Pale gray-brown, damp, dense; logged cuttings @ 35'^0'; Run #8, Recovery/RQD=40/35 @ 40': Very fine to fme SANDSTONE with silt: Off-white, dry to damp, dense; extremely friable, logged cuttings i40'-45': Run #9, Recovery/RQD = 90/74 I 40': Very fme to fme SANDSTONE witii silt: Off-white to pale brown, diy to damp, dense )45'-50': Run#I0, Recovery/RQD=72/58 > 45': Very fme SANDSTONE witii silt: Off-white, dry to damp, dense; several generally horizontal iron-oxide stained beds Total Depth = 50 Feet No ground water encountered at time of drilling Backfilled with bentonite/cement slurry on 5/7/03 55 — fiO- 505A( 11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG CB-4 Date 5-8-03 Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter _ Elevation Top of Hole 356 ft. Grand Pacific Resorts Tri-County Drilling Sheet Project No. Type of Rig 1 of 2 040575-002 8 in. Drive Weight Ref. or Datum N/A HS Core Rig CME 95 Drop N/A in. Mean Sea Level in OJ TJ 3 <E 01 a if) 3^ CO oi a. in^ CH- OI 0 Q a Jl c o '- C - o CJ JCO CJ CO ZD GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By _ Sampled By MDJ MDJ lo- ts- 20- 25- / apparent dip 2-4 deg apparent dip 4-6 deg SM SM/SC SM SM/CL SM SC/CL SM SM/GM SM QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS (QO @ 0': Silty fine to medium SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, damp, dense I 5'-10': Run #1, Recovery/RQD=50/38 i 5': SUty medium SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, damp, very dense; recovered 2.5' out of 5' logged cuttings 10'-15': Run #2, Recovery/RQD = 58/32 10'-13.7': Silty medium SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, damp, very dense; 2' of sample not recovered, logged cuttings 13.7'-14.4': Interbedded silty SANDSTONE and clayey SANDSTONE, orange-brown (SM) and brown (SC), damp, dense 14 4'-15': Silty SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, damp, dense 15'-20': Run #3, Recovery/RQD = 80/68 16.5'-19': Silty SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, damp dense; interbedded with brown sandy CLAYSTONE beds 0.1' tiiick, dipping 2-4 degrees @ 20'-23.5': Run #4, Recovery/RQD = 100/92 @ 20'-21.2': Silty medium SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, damp to moist, dense @ 21.2'-21.9': Interbedded sandy CLAYSTONE/clayey SANDSTONE (brown) and sdty SANDSTONE (orange-brown), damp, dense and stiff, apparent dip 4-6 degrees, diinly bedded @ 23.5': Hit cobble, drilled dirough cobble Silty gravelly medium SANDSTONE widi gravel; Orange-brown, damp, dense; logged cuttings @25'-30': Run #5, Recovery/RQD=76/62 @ 25'28': Silty medium SANDSTONE witii clay: Red-brown to brown, damp to moist, dense; 1 foot not recovered @ 28'-30': Silty medium SANDSTONE: Red-brown, moist to wet, dense; possible seepage 505A< 11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG CB-4 Date 5-8-03 Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter _ Elevation Top of Hole 356 ft. Grand Pacific Resorts Tri-County Drilling Sheet 2 Project No. Type of Rig of 040575-002 8 in. Drive Weight Ref. or Datum N/A HS Core Rig CME 95 Drop N/A in. Mean Sea Level o JZ Ul a o m_i L CD in QJ TJ 3 o •z. a E m CO o^^ Qj CL in^ CH-OJ u Q a Jl c CJ jcn o .(/) cn GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By _ Sampled By MDJ MDJ 30- 45- b:dips 1-2 deg b:horizontal SM QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS (Ot) @ 30'-35': Run #6, Recovery, RQD = 40/22 @ 35': Silty medium SANDSTONE: Orange/red-brown, recovered only 2 feet moist to wet, dense. CH SC SM SP TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa) @ 35'-40': Run #7, Recovery/RQD= 100/90 @ 35': CLAYSTONE: Olive, moist, very stiff to stiff; discontinuous randomly-oriented parting surfaces ) 39': Clayey SANDSTONE tlien grades into silty SANDSTONE: Gray-brown, damp, very dense; iron-oxide staining, claystone laminations 1 40'^5': Run #8, Recovery/RQD = 100/82 ) 40'-40.8': Silty SANDSTONE: Gray-brown, moist, dense ) 40.8'^4': Fine SANDSTONE: Pale gray, moist to wet, den.sc; possible seepage ) 44': Fine SANDSTONE: Off-white, damp, dense; micaceous, friable )45'-50': Run #9, Recovery/RQD = 100/88 > 45': Fine SANDSTONE: Off-white, damp, dense; miaceous, friable 50- 55- Total Deptii = 50 Feet Seepage at 28 Feet, 35 Feet, and 41 Feet Backfdled with bentonite/cement slurry on 5/8/03 505A(11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG CB-5 Date 5-8-03 Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter Elevation Top of Hole 222 ft. Grand Pacific Resorts Tri-County Drilling Sheet 1 Project No. Type of Rig of 1 040575-002 8 in. Drive Weight Ref. or Datum N/A HS Core Rig CME 95 Drop N/A in. Mean Sea Level o JZ Ul Q. O nJ_l L CD in QJ Tl 3 CL E (0 CO a. Jl tn^ CH-OI o a a Jl L a u cn ZD GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By _ Sampled By MDJ MDJ 10- SC-SM SC SC/GC 15- 20- 25- 30- ARTIFICIAL FILL - Undocumented (Afu) @0-5': Run #1, Recovery/RQD = 60/36 @ 0'-3': Silty SAND to clayey SAND: Brown, damp to moist QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qt) or (Tsa) @ 4': Clayey SANDSTONE: Red-brown, damp medium dense; weadiered, mottled Hit cobble at 8' Gravelly clayey SANDSTONE: Gray-green, damp, dense; iron-oxide stained; mottled, no recovery except for undisturbed chunks Refusal at 8.5 Feet Total Deptii = 8.5 Feet No ground water encountered at time of drilling Backfdled with bentonite/cement slurry on 5/8/03 505A( 11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG CB-5A 5-8-03 Date Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter Elevation Top of Hole Grand Pacific Resorts Tri-County Drilling Sheet 1 Project No. Type of Rig of 040575-002 8 in. 222 ft. Drive Weight Ref. or Datum HS Core Rig CME 95 Drop N/A in. Mean Sea Level in 01 TJ 3 o a E <n cn tL OQ in^ CH-OI u a CL \_/ Jl L a .cn cn' GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By _ Sampled By MDJ MDJ 15- b:generally horizontal 25- SC-SM SC SM SC/GM CH SM-SP SM SP ARTIFICIAL FILL (Afti) @ 0-2.5': Silty/clayey SAND: Brown, moist, loose QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qt) @ 2.5': Clayey SANDSTONE: Red-brown to brown-gray, damp to moist, dense; weatiiered '5'-8': Run #1, Recovery/RQD = 100/84 ' 5': Silty SANDSTONE wifli clay: Orange-brown, damp to moist, dense; gravel and cobble 7.5'-8' I 8'-15': Drilled tiirough (cobble), gravelly sUty/clayey SANDSTONE: Orange-brown to gray-brown, damp, dense; logged cuttings, did not core sample from 8-15' @ 15'-20': Run #2, Recovery/RQD = 78/66 @ 15'-16': Gravelly clayey/silty SANDSTONE: Gray-brown, damp, dense; I _ _ mottled_, 2"_thick CLAYSTqN_Ejit_base TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa) @ 15.8': CLAYSTONE: Olive, moist, stiff @ 16'-20': Silty fme SANDSTONE to fme SANDSTONE widi silt: Pale gray-brown, damp, dense; friable; iron-oxide blebs )20'-25': Run #3, Recovery/RQD=78/52 ! 20'-23': SUty fine SANDSTONE to fme SANDSTONE: Pale gray-brown to orange-brown, damp, dense ) 23'-24': SUty SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, dense; iron-oxide stained ) 24'-25': Fine SANDSTONE witii silt: Offwhite, damp, dense; iron-oxide blebs ) 25'-30': Run #4, Recovery/RQD = 90/80 ) 25': Fine SANDSTONE: Off-white to pale gray, damp, dense; iron-oxide blebs, krotovina, concentric iron-oxide staining 505A( 11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG CB-5A 5-8-03 Date Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter Elevation Top of Hole 222 ft. Grand Pacific Resorts Tri-County Drilling Sheet 2 Project No. Type of Rig of 2 040575-002 8 in. Drive Weight Ref. or Datum HS Core Rig CME 95 Drop N/A in. Mean Sea Level .C Ul CL O m_i L CD in OJ TJ 3 <E O QJ a cn CL in^ c<+- QJ U a CL Jl L n QJC - o CJ CJ ;cn o .cn tn GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By Sampled By MDJ MDJ 30- 35- 40- 45- 50- b:cross-bedding 55- SP-SM SP TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa) @ 30'-35': Run #5, Recovery/RQD = 100/80 @ 30': Silly fine SANDSTONE to fine SANDSTONE witii silt: Orange-brown and pale gray, damp, dense; iron-oxide blebs and cross-bedding @ 35'-40': Run #6, Recovery/RQD = 94/80 @ 35': Fine SANDSTONE: Pale gray, damp, dense; friable @ 40'-45': Run #7, Recovery/RQD = 100/90 @ 40: Fine SANDSTONE: Pale gray, damp, dense; friable )45'-50': Run #8, Recoveiy/RQD = 100/86 ) 45': Fine SANDSTONE: Pale gray, damp, dense; friable Total Deptii = 50 Feet No ground water encountered at time of drilling Backfilled widi bentonite/sluriy cement on 5/8/03 505A(11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG CB-6 Date 5-9-03 Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter Elevation Top of Hole Grand Pacific Resorts Tri-County Drilling Sheet Project No. Type of Rig 1 of 040575-002 8 in. 244 ft. Drive Weight Ref. or Datum N/A HS Core Rig CME 95 Drop N/A in. Mean Sea Level 10- 15- 20- 25- 30- O SZ Ul Q. O rtJ_J L CD in QJ TJ 3 <E b:geiierally horizontal b:2-3 dipping O £ cn O^ oi CL Jl in^ CH-OI u a a Jl L • - O a jcn o cn cn SC SM SC SM SC SP GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By _ Sampled By MDJ MDJ ARTIFICIAL FILL/TOPSOIL @ 0': Clayey SAND: Brown, moist, loose QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS (Ot) @ 3'-5': Silty SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, damp, dense I 5'-10': Run #1, Recovery/RQD = 100/78 I 5': SUty medium SANDSTONE: Red-brown, damp, dense; massive @ I0'-15': Run #2, Recovery/RQD = 92/68 @ 10': SUty SANDSTONE: Red-brown, damp, dense; massive @ 14.7': 1/8" diick clayey SANDSTONE bed: Dark gray-brown damp, dense @ 15'-20': Run #3, Recovery/RQD = 100/54 @ 15': Clayey SANDSTONE: Olive-gray, damp, dense; interbedded widi dark gray beds @ 20'-25': Run #4, Recovery/RQD = 100/85 @20'-20.9': SUty medium SANDSTONE: Red-brown, damp, dense @ 20.9'-23': SUty medium SANDSTONE: Light brown, damp, dense TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa) @ 23': Clayey medium SANDSTONE: Olive gray-brown, damp, very dense; black blebs, thickly bedded, a discontinuous sandy clay-lined fracture @ 25'-30': Run #5, Recovery/RQD = 90/60 @ 25': Fine SANDSTONE: Pale gray, damp, dense 505A(11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG CB-6 Date 5-9-03 Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter 8 in. Elevation Top of Hole 244 ft. Grand Pacific Resorts Tri-County Drilling Sheet 2 Project No. Type of Rig of 040575-002 Drive Weight Ref. or Datum N/A HS Core Rig CME 95 Drop N/A in. Mean Sea Level a; Ifl 01 TJ 3 a. E (0 Ul CL in r\ CH-OI o a D. Zfl L Q jcn o -CO CO GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By _ Sampled By MDJ MDJ 35- cross-bedding apparent 3-4 dip SP-SM SM SM/CL SC SP SC-SM SP TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa) (Continued) @ 30'-35': Run #6, Recoveiy/RQD = 60/60 @ 30': Silty fine SANDSTONE to fine SANDSTONE: Pale gray to orange-brown, damp, dense; friable, iron-oxide blebs and cross-bedding, hit cobble at 33', did not recover core at 33'-35' ) 35'-40': Run #7, Recoveiy/RQD = 90/90 S 35'-37.7': SUty fme SANDSTONE to fme SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, moist, dense; massive possible; seepage, friable J 37.7'-38.r: Gravelly sUty SANDSTONE: Brown, moist, dense; friable J 38 r-39.r: Interbedded sUty SANDSTONE: Light brown, damp, dense and sandy CLAYSTONE: Olive-gray, damp, stiff, dipping 3-4 degrees ? 39.1': Clayey SANDSTONE: Gray-brown, damp, dense M0'-40.5': Run #8, Recoveiy/RQD = 80/60 J 40.5'^2': Fine SANDSTONE: Pale gray, damp, dense; friable @ 42'-44': Clayey SANDSTONE and silty SANDSTONE: Pale gray, damp, dense; moderately indurated, dips 1-3 degrees, interbedded @ 44': Fine SANDSTONE: Pale gray, damp, dense 45- Total Deptii = 45 Feet Seepage at 35 Feet at time of DrUling Backfflled witii bentonite/cement sluny on 5/9/03 50- 55- 505A(11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG CB-7 Date 5-9-03 Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter 8 in. Elevation Top of Hole 225 ft. Grand Pacific Resorts Tri-County Drilling Sheet Project No. Type of Rig 1 of 040575-002 Drive Weight Ref. or Datum N/A HS Core Rig CME 95 Drop N/A in. Mean Sea Level oi^ o SZ Ul a o aJ_J L CD in QJ •a 3 QJ a cn tL CQ in/-\ CH- OI u a a Jl L a .\* jcn "CJ tn GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By _ Sampled By MDJ MDJ 15- 20- b:generally horizontal SM QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS @ 0': SUty medium SANDSTONE: Red-brown, moist, medium dense; logged cuttings to 5' SM/GM ) 4.5'-9': Silty medium SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, moist, dense; gravelly, hit cobble, no core sample, logged cuttings CH SC SP TFRTL^RY SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa) @ 9': CLAYSTONE: Olive-green, moist, stiff @ 10'-15': Run#l, Recovery/RQD = 100/78 @ 10'-12.8': CLAYSTONE: Olive-green, moist, stiff; fat clay; discontinuous randomly-oriented parting surfaces 12.8': Clayey SANDSTONE: Gray-green, damp, dense 14.3': Fine SANDSTONE: Light gray, damp, dense; fnable, micaceous 15'-20': Run#2, Recoveiy/RQD = 92/54 15': Fme SANDSTONE: Light gray, damp, dense; friable, micaceous SP-SM )20'-25': Run #3, Recovery/RQD = 100/86 > 20'-22.7': Fme SANDSTONE witii sUt: Orange-brown, moist, dense; slightly friable, possible slight seepage, iron-oxide stained I 22.7': Fine SANDSTONE witii sUt: Pale gray, moist, dense; slightly friable, possible slight seepage, iron-oxide stained 25- Total Deptii = 25 Feet Seepage at 23 Feet Backfdled witii bentonite/cement sluriy on 5/9/03 505A(11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG CB-8 Date 5-9-03 Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter Elevation Top of Hole Grand Pacific Resorts Tri-County Drilling Sheet 1 of Project No. Type of Rig 040575-002 8 in. 241 ft. Drive Weight Ref. or Datum N/A HS Core Rig CME 95 Drop N/A in. Mean Sea Level 25- in QJ TJ 3 a £ m cn ifl/-\ CH-OI o a a. Jl L Q i C - o CJ CJ jcn CJ cn CO SM SM-SC SM SM/GM CH SC SP GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By Sampled By MDJ MDJ QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qt) @ 0'-: Logged cuttings, silty SANDSTONE: Red-brown, moist, medium den.se ! 5'-l0': Run #1, Recovery/RQD = 100/75 ) 5'-6.4': SUty medium SANDSTONE: Red-brown, moist, dense ) 6.4'-7.7': Silty medium SANDSTONE witii clay: Brown, damp, very dense ) 7.7'-10': Interbedded silty SANDSTONE: Red-brown, damp, dense (1/2" to 1.5" tliick) (diickening downwards) and clayey SANDSTONE/sandy CLAYSTONE: Brown, damp, dense; 6-10 degree dipping i 10'-I5': Run #2, Recoveiy/RQD = 100/70 I 10': SUty medium SANDSTONE: Red-brown, moist, dense; possible seepage at 14' 14': Laminated SANDSTONE beds I I5'-20': Run #3, Recovery/RQD = N A/N A > 15.5': Gravelly SANDSTONE: Red-brown, damp, dense; due to large cobble could not core sample, logged cuttings TERTL\RY SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa) @ 19': CLAYSTONE: Olive-green, moist, stiff @20'-25': Run #4, Recovery/RQD = 100/95 @ 20': CLAYSTONE; Olive-green, moist, stiff; discontinuous randonly-oriented parting surfaces @ 25'30': Run #5, Recovery/RQD = 100/76 @ 25'-28.4': CLAYSTONE: Olive-green, moist, stiff; discontinuous randomly-oriented parting surfaces Wavy contact @28.4'-29.4' @29.4'-30': contact : Clayey SANDSTONE: Green-gray, damp, dense Fine SANDSTONE: Pale gray, damp, dense; friable, gradational 505A( 11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG CB-8 Date 5-9-03 Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter 8 in. Elevation Top of Hole 241 ft. Grand Pacific Resorts Tri-County Drilling Sheet 2 Project No. Type of Rig of 2 040575-002 Drive Weight Ref. or Datum N/A HS Core Rig CME 95 Drop N/A in. Mean Sea Level CJv 30- U SZ U) a. o fD_J L CD 35 40- 45- 50- 55- in OJ TJ 3 O a £ fa cn CO fc CL Jl in ^ CH-OI u Q a Jl L O jcn o .CO cn GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By _ Sampled By MDJ MDJ Total Deptii = 30 Feet Seepage at 14 Feet Backfilled with bentonite/cement slurrv' on 5/9/03 505A(11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG CB-9 Date 5-9-03 Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter Elevation Top of Hole 244 ft. Grand Pacific Resorts Sheet Project No. 1 of 2 040575-002 Tri-County Drilling 8 in. Drive Weight Ref. or Datum N/A Type of Rig HS Core Rig CME 95 Drop N/A in. Mean Sea Level 10- 15- 20- 25- 30- O SZ Ul £L O (O-J L CD 505A( 11/77) in QJ TJ 3 QJ a cn JLL cofc in^ CH- QJ U Q a Jl L a .\* CJ jcn a cn SM SC SM GM SM CH SC SP GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By _ Sampled By MDJ MDJ QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qt) @ 0': SUty SANDSTONE: Red-brown, moist (top 2') to damp, loose (top 2') to medium dense; logged cuttings )5'-10': Run #1, Recoveiy/RQD = 20/35 ) 5'-6': SUty medium SANDSTONE: Red-brown, damp, dense ) 6'-7': Clayey SANDSTONE: Dark red-brown, damp to moist, dense ) 7': SUty medium SANDSTONE: Red-brown, moist, dense 10'-15': Run #2, Recovery/RQD = 60/50 10': SUty medium SANDSTONE: Red-brown, moist to damp, dense Hit cobble at 13', did not recover sample below 13' 15'-20': Run #3, Recovery/RQD=65/65 15': SUty medium SANDSTONE: Red-brown, damp to moist, dense > 20'-25': Run #4, Recovery, RQD=88/88 I 20'-21.5': Same as 15', except moist, possible seepage at 21' TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa) @ 21.5': CLAYSTONE: Olive-green, moist, very stiff; wavy erosional contact )25'-30': Run #5, Recovery/RQD = 100/72 ) 25.7': Clayey SANDSTONE: Gray-brown, damp, very dense; moderately indurated, gradational contact wavy I 28.9': Fine SANDSTONE: Pale gray, damp, dense; friable LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG CB-9 Date 5-9-03 Grand Pacific Resorts Tri-County Drilling Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter 8 in. Drive Weight Elevation Top of Hole 244 ft. Ref. or Datum Sheet 2 Project No. Type of Rig of 040575-002 N/A HS Core Rig CME 95 Drop N/A in. Mean Sea Level 30- 35- 40- 45- 50- 55- u JZ Ul Q. O fll_J c_ CD in QJ TJ 3 O a E cn tf CQ CL Jl CH- OI U CJ a Jl L Q .\' jcn CJ .cn o; CO GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By _ Sampled By MDJ MDJ Total Deptii = 30 Feet Seepage at 21 Feet Backfilled with bentonite/slurrj' cement on 5/9/03 505A(11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG CB-10 5-9-03 Date Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter Elevation Top of Hole 233 ft. Grand Pacific Resorts Sheet Project No. 1 of 1 040575-002 Tri-County Drilling 8 in. Drive Weight Ref. or Datum N/A Type of Rig HS Core Rig CME 95 Drop N/A in. Mean Sea Level °-i ci^ 10- 15- 25- o JZ Ul a o ni_j c_ CD in QJ n 3 O a E (0 cn CQ CL Jl in.^ CH-01 o Q Q. w Jl L a • o u CJ jcn o cn ZD SC SM SM/GM CH SP GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By _ Sampled By MDJ MDJ TOPSOIL @ 0'-2': Clayey SAND: Brown, damp, loose QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS (Ot) @ 2': Silty SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, damp, dense ) 5'-10': Run #1, Recovery, RQD= 15/10 ) 5': SUty medium SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, damp, very dense, poor recovery, logged cuttings 10'-15': Run #2, Recovery/RQD=65/65 10': SUty, medium SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, damp, very dense, very dense 13.5': Gravelly SANDSTONE widi cobbles: Red-brown, damp, dense 15': Drilled tiirough cobble, did not core sample, logged cuttings @ 17'-20': Run #3, Recoveiy/RQD= 100/100 . @ 17': Resumed coring ^@ 17': Gravelly SANpSTONE_witii_cobbles:_Red^browii, damp, dense TERTL^RY SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa) @ 17.6': CLAYSTONE: Olive-green, moist, stiff; discontinuous randomly-oriented parting surfaces @20'-25': Run #4, Recovery/RQD = 100/80 > 22': Fine SANDSTONE: Pale gray, damp, dense; friable Total Deptii = 25 Feet No ground water encountered at time of drilling BackfUld witii bentonite/cement slurry on 5/9/03 505A<11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES Large Diameter Boring Logs (Leighton, 1995) 9-26-95 Date Project Drillmg Co. Hole Diameter [ Elevation Top of Hole GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-3 Legoland/Carlsbad Ranch Daves Drilling 24 in. ft. Drive Weight Ref. or Datum 0.27=4.500#; 27-52=3.700# Sheet 1 of _2_ Project No. Type of Rig 495Q294.001 Bucket Auger Drop 12 in. Mean Sea Level u £ D) CLO fU-J L va i/> 0) TJ d 10- 15- 20- 25- O z a £ m cn Bag-l CL I 2 I 5 I 3 I 6 Jl ifi/-\ CH-OI U a a Jl L a QJ$> ML SM GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By _ Sampled By. MLF MLF TFrRRACF,DEPOSITS ., ^ , _ ..^ Reddish yellow with iron oxide staimng; damp, loose, SILT with fine 5JA1NU @ 5': Driller reports harder drilling 110': Yellowish red with iron oxide staining, moist, dense, silty fine SAND @20': As above 211 505A(11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES Date 9-26-95 Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter Elevation Top of Hole GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-3 Legoland/Carlsbad Ranch Daves Drilling Sheet 2 of 2 Project No. Type of Rig 4950294-001 Bucket Auger 24 in. ft Drive Weight Ref. or Datum 0-27=4.500#; 27-52=3.700# Drop 12 in. Mean Sea Level 0 s: tn a o 01 _i L CD TJ 3 a: o z £L e rt cn ^8 CQ OJ lfi/-\ CH-OI 0 Q a. Jl c CJ 3.*. QJ cn GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By _ Sampled By. MLF MLF 30- 35- 40- 45- 50- 55- I 4 I 8 5 I 7 SM @ 35':^Ver^pale brown, with iron oxide staining, moist, dense, silty fme ! 40': As above; last 5 feet completed on September 27,1995 Total Depth = 41 Feet No Ground Water Encountered at Time of Drilling Backfilled on September 27, 1995 505AC11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES Date 9-27-95 Project DriUing Co. Hole Diameter Elevation Top of Hole 260 ft GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-5 Legoland/Carlsbad Ranch Daves Drilling Sheet 1 of __2_ Project No. Type of Rig 4950294-001 Bucket Auger 24 in. Drive Weight Ref. or Datum 0-27=4500#; 27-52=3.700# Drop 12 in. Mean Sea Level 5 — 10- 15- O Z u> a o m_i t. CD 20 — 25- 2£L 505A(11/77) Vt QJ T> 3 a. E rt cn s-1 CQ 2 I 7 I 3 I 8 1 4 I 6 Jl ifi/-^ CH-OI U a a Ifl 01 lil^. cn SP SM SP SP SP Logged By _ Sampled By. GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION MLF MLF TOPSOIL Red-brown, moist, loose to medium dense, fme to medium SAND, trace of SILT; micaceous TFRBACF.PBPQSrrS . ^. • @ 4': Yellowish brown, moist, medium dense silty SAND @ 10': As above; with trace of SILT ) 20': As above; dense ) 29': As above; dense LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES Date 9-27-95 Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter Elevation Top of Hole 260 ft. GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-5 Legoland/Carlsbad Ranch Sheet 2 of 2 Daves DrilUng Project No. Type of Rig 4950294-001 Bucket Auger 24 in. Drive Weight Ref. or Datum 0-27=4.500#; 27-52=3.700# Drop 12 in. Mean Sea Level Q3 0 CLO rt_J L CD T3 3 a e m cn Ifl CQ ^ QL \tlrs CH-OI O a Q. 31 L a - o o if) GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By _ Sampled By MLF MLF 30- 35- 40- 45- 50- 55- m- 2 SP-SM @ 32': Yellowish red, wet, fine to medium SAND with fine to coarse gravel T \ and cobbles; rounded, up to 6 inches diameter quartzite r Stopped 32 feet due to caving caused by Ground Water Total Depth = 32 Feet Ground Water Encountered at 31 Feet C:aving at 31 to 32 Feet Backfilled on September 27,1995 505A( 11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-6 Date 9-27-95 Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter _ Elevation Top of Hole -f /- 228 Legoland/Carlsbad Ranch Daves DriUing Sheet Project No. Type of Rig 1 of 24 in. Drive Weight ft. Ref. or Datum 0-27=4.500#; 27-52=::3,700;;< 4950294-001 Bucket Auger Drop 12 iu. Mean Sea Level LU 225 220 215 210 205 200- in OJ o z a E rt cn oi CL 2 • push I Ifl/S CH-OI O CD CL Jl C o '- c • o u XZ icn CJ CO SP CH SP GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By Sampled By MLF MLF TERRACE DEPOSITS Yellowish red, moist, fine to medium SAND; trace of SILT; micaceous; upper 1 to 2 feet dismrbed by fanning 10': Slight amount ofjeepagej^isjtabiwe the_clayjayer SANTIAGO FQ~RMAT10N @ 10': Light olive-gray, moist, CLAY; laminations; randomly oriented shears/parting surfaces 18': Driller indicated drilling became hard I 20': Light gray, micaceous, damp, medium dense, fine to medium SAND; slightly I 26': Becomes damp, driller having trouble keeping sand in bucket, friable SAND 505A(11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES 9-27-95 Date Project _^ Drilling Co. _ Hole Diameter Elevation Top of Hole 228 ft. GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-6 Legoland/Carlsbad Ranch Daves DriUing Sheet 2 Project No. Type of Rig of 4950294-001 24 In. Drive Weight Ref. or Datura 0-27=4.500#; 27-52=3.700# Bucket Auger _ Drop 12 in. Mean Sea Level o Oi^ 30- 35- 40- 45 — 50- 55- 0 JZ Ul 0.0 rt_i c CD HI Ot TJ 3 Q. £ rt cn u. CO CH-OI O o a Jl c a 3.x. ^ 0 o sen u .to cn GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By _ Sampled By MLF MLF Total Depth = 30 Feet Due to No Recovery Seepage at 10 Feet Backfilled on September 27,1995 505A(11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES Date 9-27-95 Project DrilUng Co. Hole Diameter 24 In. Elevation Top of Hole 186 ft. GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-7 Legoland/Carlsbad Ranch Daves Drilling Sheet 1 of 2 Project No. 4950294-001 Type of Rig Bucket Auger Drive Weight Ref. or Datum 0-27=4500#; 27-52=3.700# Drop 12 in. Mean Sea Level s: 0) a o rt_J c CD 10- 15- 20- 25 — W 0) TJ 3 O z a e rt cn Bag-l CD QJ O a a Jl a I 3 I 4 o3 cn Logged By _ Sampled By SM SM SP GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION MLF MLF TOPSOIL @ 0': Dark brown, moist, sUty fine to medium SAND Encountered abandoned steel water line at 4 feet, moved 10 feet north and redrilled TP.RRACB DRPOSrr @ 5': YeUowish red, moist, dense, silty fine to medium SAND @ 10': Yellowish red, moist, medium dense, fine to medium SAND; slightly micaceous @ 20': As above SSL 505A(11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-7 Date 9-27-95 Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter Elevation Top of Hole -f/- 186 ft. Legoland/Carlsbad Ranch Daves Drilling Sheet 2 Project No. Type of Rig of 24 in. Drive Weight Ref. or Datum 0-27=:4.500#; 27-52 = 3,700/< 4950294-001 Bucket Auger Drop 12 in. Mean Sea Level UJ o SZ u> CLO ra_i L CD in OJ o z a £ rt cn Jl in.^ CM-01 u a a Jl c. o i c - o u .cn u .<S) in GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By Sampled By MLF MLF 30- 155- 35 — 150 40- 10 SP 145 m SANTIAGO FORMATION @ 30': Very pale brown, moist, dense, fine to medium SAND @ 30': Driller indicated hard drilling I CH I 40': Light olive-gray, damp, very stiff CLAY 45- 140- 50- 135 55- 130 ML Total Deptih = 41 Feet No Ground Water Encountered at Time of Drilling Backfilled on September 27, 1995 505A( 11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES Hollow-Stem Auger Boring Logs (Leighton, 1995) GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG KEY Date Project DriUing Co. Hole Diameter Elevation Top of Hole +/- KEY TO BORING LOG GRAPHICS Sheet 1 of _1_ Project No. Type of Rig Drive Weight ft Ref. or Datum Drop .in. c .0^ HI Iti 4) O Z 0 z a E It cn lfi/-\ CH-OI U a a "< 0) *- 0 u if> GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By Sampled By 10- 15- 20- 0^0 1/1$: U, CL CH Inorganic clay of low to medium plasticity; gravelly clay; sandy clay; silty clay; lean clay Inorganic clay of high plasticity; fat clay OL-OH ML Organic clay, silt or silty clay-clayey silt mixtures Inorganic silt; very fine sand; silty or clayey fine sand; clayey silt with low plasticity MH CL-ML Inorganic silt; diatomaceous fine sandy or sUty soils; elastic silt Low plasticity clay lo silt mixture ML-SM CL-SC Sandy sill to silty sand mixture Sandy clay to clayey sand mixture SC-SM SW Qayey sand to silty sand mixture Well graded sand; gravelly sand, little or no fines SP SM Poorly graded sand; gravelly sand, little or no fines SUty sand; pooriy graded sand-silt mixture SC GW Qayey sand; poorly graded sand-clay mixture Well graded gravel; gravel-sand mixture, little or no fines GP GM Poorly graded gravel; gravel-sand mixture, little or no fine* Silty gravel; gravel-sand-silt mbcture OC Qayey gravel; gravel-sand-clay mixture Sandstone Siltstone Qaystone Breccia (angular gravel and cobbles or matrix-supported congtomerate) Conglomerate (rounded gravel and cobble, ctast-supported) Igneous granitic or granitic type roclc Metavolcanic or metamorphic rock Artificial or man-made fill Asphaltic concrete Portland Cement Concrete 505A<11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES Date 9-11-95 Project Drilling Co. Hole Diameter Elevation Top of Hole -f/- 182 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG SD-3 Legoland/Carlsbad Ranch Sheet 1 of 1 Barge's Drilling Company Project No. Type of Rig 4950294-001 Sin. Drive Weight ft Ref. or Datum 140 pounds Hollow-Stem Auger Drop 30 in. Mean Sea Level c M Q> UJ u ao rt_j c CD Ut QJ O Z a e rt cn CL Ifi/s CH-OI U a a J» L a '- c • o o o3 cn GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By Sampled By SCB SCB 180- 31 46 124.8 124.0 10.7 11.2 175 10- 170 15- 165 20- 160 155 25- SM TP.RRACR DF-POSrrS./FILL?? @ 0-2': Light reddish brown, dry, loose silty SAND SM TP.RRACR DEPOSITS @ 2'; Orange-brown, moist, medium dense to dense, fine silty SAND with iron oxide staining and manganese staining @ 6': Same as above Total Depth = 6J Feet No Ground Water Encountered at Time of Drilling Hole Backfilled on September 11,1995 505A(11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG SD-10 Date 9-11-95 Project DriUing Co. Hole Diameter Elevation Top of Hole +/- 182 ft. Legoland/Carlsbad Ranch Barge's DriUing Company Sheet 1 of 1_ Project No. Type of Rig 4950294-001 Truck Mounted Sin. Drive Weight Ref. or Datum 140 pounds Drop 30 in. Mean Sea Level c o ao L CO l/> 01 a E rt CO o^ CQQ) CL 0/^ CH-OI U a a. J) L. Q l6 • O a a _<n <n' GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION Logged By Sampled By SCB SCB 180- 175- 10- SM 'SM TQPSOIL @ 0-1': Bro^j^d^njej^locse^silty^SAND I 67 118.3 12.3 TERPAOB DEPOSITS @ r-5': Orange-brown, damp, dense, silty SAND with trace of clay binder; slightly cemented ) 5': Same as above I 50/5" 127.7 12.1 > 10': Same as above 170 15- 165 20- 160- 25- 155- Total Depth = 11^ Feet No Ground Water Encountered at Time of Drilling Hole Backfilled on September 11, 1995 505A(11/77) LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES 04075-003 APPENDIX C Summary of Laboratorv Test Results from this Investigation Particle Size Analysis (ASTM D422) Particle size analysis was performed by mechanical sieving and hydrometer methods according to ASTM D 422 and D 4318. The percent fine particles from tiiese analyses are summarized below. Plots ofthe sieve and hydrometer results are provided on the Figures in this appendix Boring Soil Type Percent Passing No. 200 Sieve B2-B1 @ 0-5 feet Yellowish brown silty sand (SM) 26 Laboratorv Maximum Drv Densitv and Optimum Moisture Content (ASTM D1557-91) The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of typical materials was determined in accordance with ASTM Test Method D 1557-91. The results of these tests are presented in the table below. Sample Location Description Maximum Dry Density (pcf) Optimum Moisture Content (% dry weight) B2-B1 @ 0-5 feet Yellowish brown silty sand (SM) 127.5 11.5 Expansion Index f ASTM D 4829) The expansion potential of selected materials was evaluated by the Expansion Index Test, U.B.C. Standard No. 18-2. Specimens are molded under a given compactive energy. The prepared 1-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. Sample Location Expansion Index Expansion Potential B2-B1 @ 0-5 feet 9 Very Low C-l 04075-003 APPENDIX C (Continued) pH and Resistivity Minimum resistivity and pH tests were performed in general accordance with Califomia Test Methods 532 / 643. The results are presented in the table below: Sample Location pH Minimum Resistivity (ohm-cm) B2-B1 (c^ 0-5 feet 7.55 3440 Soluble Sulfate and Chloride The soluble sulfate contents contained within selected samples of soil were determined by Califomia Test Method 417 part II. The test results are presented in the table below: Sample Location Soluble Chloride (ppm) Potential for attack B2-B1 @ 0-5 feet <150 Negligible Soluble Chloride The soluble sulfate chloride contained within selected samples of soil were determined by Califomia Test Method 422. The test results are presented in the table below: Sample Location Soluble Chloride (ppm) B2-B1 @ 0-5 feet 250 Sand Equivalent Test: Sand equivalent tests was performed on selected sample to determine portion of fines in the sandy sample according to the test methods ASTM 2419 / CT 217. The resuh is presented below: Sample Location Soil Type Average SE B2-BI @ 0-5 feet Yellowish brown silty sand (SM) 17 C-2 04075-003 APPENDIX C (Continued) Direct Shear Test Results (ASTM D3080-0\98) Direct shear tests were performed on selected undisturbed samples that were soaked for a minimum of 24 hours under a surcharge equal to the applied nonnal force during testing. After transfer ofthe sample to the shear box, and reloading the sample, pore pressures set up in the sample due to the transfer were allowed to dissipate for a period of approximately 1 hour before application of shearing force. The samples were tested under various normal loads, a motor-driven, strain- controlled, direct-shear testing apparatus. The rate of shearing used for the tests were 0.010 in/min for the silty sand samples. The test results are presented in the table below. Plots ofthe data are included in tliis appendix. C-3 6000 5000 4000 (A CL V) W I 3000 to ra S) CO 2000 1000 • / // / // • 1000 2000 3000 4000 Vertical Stress (psf) 5000 6000 Boring Location Sample Depth (feet) Sample Description B1-R1 Reddish Brovi/n Silty Sand (SM) Peak Friction Angle, fpeak (deg) Cohesion, c'peak (psf) Ultimate Friction Angle, f^n (deg) Cohesion, c'uu (psf) Average Strength Parameters 44 (5) 0.2" Friction Angle, (t)'@ 0.2" (deg) 37 Cohesion, c'@ 0.2" (psf) 700 350 42 Deformation Rate 0.010 in/mIn 550 DIRECT SHEAR SUMMARY Project No. Project Name 040575-003 GPR/PA5 Leighton 6000 5000 4000 V) a. in V) i 3000 (0 L. ffi d) JC CO 2000 1000 A/ // / // // 1000 2000 3000 4000 Vertical Stress (psf) 5000 6000 Boring Location Sample Depth (feet) Sample Description B1-R2 15 Reddish Brown Silty Sand (SM) Peak Friction Angle, fpeak (deg) Cohesion, c'peak (Psf) Ultimate Friction Angle, ^\y, (deg) Cohesion, c'un (psf) Average Strength Parameters 44 @ 0.2" Friction Angle, (t)'@0.2-(deg) Cohesion, c'@o.2" (PsO 38 750 450 44 Deformation Rate 0.010 In/min 450 DIRECT SHEAR SUMMARY Project No. Project Name 040575-003 GPR/PA5 Leighton 6000 5000 4000 (A a. in in £ 3000 to ra <u .c CO 2000 1000 /k.yZ 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 Vertical Stress (psf) Boring Location Sample Depth (feet) Sample Description B2-R2 15 Brown Silty Sand (SM) Average Strength Parameters Peak Friction Angle, (t)'peak (deg) 42 @ 0.2" Friction Angle, <j)'@ 0.2• (deg) Cohesion, c'peak (Psf) 850 37 Ultimate Friction Angle, (deg) Cohesion, c'un (psf) 40 Cohesion, c'@o.2" (psf) Deformation Rate 450 0.010 fn/min 650 DIRECT SHEAR SUMMARY Project No. Project Name 040575-003 GPR/PA5 Leighton 5000 1000 Boring Location Sample Depth (feet) Sample Description 2000 3000 Vertical Stress (psf) B4-R3 4000 5000 20 Brown Silty Sand (SM) 350 Average Strength Parameters Peak Friction Angle, (j)'peak (deg) 38 (5) 0.2" Friction Angle, (|)'@0,2" (deg) 38 Cohesion, c'peak (Psf) 400 Cohesion, c'@o.2" (psf) Ultimate Friction Angle, ^'M (deg) 38 Cohesion, c'^n (psf) 400 Deformation Rate 0.010 in/min DIRECT SHEAR SUMMARY Project No. Project Name 040575-003 GPR/PA5 Leighton 60 50 CL X 40 <u XI c - 30 For classificafion of fine- grained soils and fine-grained fraction of coarse-grained soils 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Liquid Limit (LL) GRAVEL SAND FINES COARSE FINE CRSE MEDIUM FINE SILT/CLAY U.S. STANDARD SIEVE OPENING U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBER 3.0" 1 1/2" 3/4" 3/8" #4 #8 #16 #30 #50 #100 #200 100.000 10.000 1.000 PARTICLE - SIZE (mm) 0.100 0.010 Boring No.: Sample No.: Depth (ft.): Soil Type GR:SA:Fi LL,PL,PI B-2 81 0.0-5.0 SM 0 : 74 : 26 N/A Visual Sample Description: SM: YELLOWISH-BROWN SILTY SAND Leighton and Associates, Inc. Project No.: 040575-003 GRAND PACIFIC RESORTS ATTERBERG LIMITS, PARTICLE - SIZE CURVE ASTM D 4318, D 422 SIEVE B-ZB1 Laboratory Testing (Leighton, 2003) 040575-002 APPENDIX C Summan/ of Laboratorv Test Results from tinis Investigation Particle Size Analysis (ASTM D422) Particle size analysis was perfomied by mechanical sieving and hydrometer methods according to ASTM D422 and D4318. The percent fine particles from these analyses are summarized below. Plots of the sieve and hydrometer results are provided on the Figures in this appendix Boring Depth (feet) Percent Passing No. 200 Sieve Percent Smaller Than 2 microns CBl r 69.5-70 91 58 LB 1-03 25 95 87 LB2-03 _ 42 96 81 Laboratorv Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content (ASTM D1557) The maximum diy density and optimum moisture content of typical materials was determined in accordance with ASTM Test Method D1557. The results of these tests are presented in the table below. Sample Location Description Maximum Dry Density (pcf) Optimum Moisture Content (% dry weight) LB2-03, @ 5-6 feet Orange silty brown sand (SM) 126.5 11.5 Expansion Index (ASTM D 4829) The expansion potential of selected materials was evaluated by the Expansion Index Test, ASTM Test Method D4829. Specunens are molded under a given compactive energy. The prepared 1-inch thick by 4-inch diameter specimens are loaded to an equivalent 144 psf surcharge and are mundated with water until volumetric equilibrium is reached. The results of these tests are presented in the table below. Sample Location Expansion Index LB 1-03, @25feet 244 C-l 040575-002 APPENDIX C (Continued) R-Value (California Test No. 301) The resistance "R"-value was detemiined by the Califomia Materials Method No. 301 for base, subbase, and basement soils. The samples were prepared and exudation pressure and "R"-value detennined. The graphically detennined "R"-value at exudation pressure of 350 psi is reported. Sample Location Equilibrium R-Valuc LB2-03, @ 5-6 feet 69 pH and Resistivity (California Test No. 643) Minimuni resistivity and pH tests were perfonned in general accordance with Califomia Test Method 643. The results are presented in the table below: Sample Location PH Minimum Resistivity LB2-03, @ 5-6 feet 8.2 2,630 Soluble Sulfate (California Test No. 417) The soluble sulfate content contained within selected samples of soil were detemiined by Calitliniia Test Method 417. The test results are presented in the table below: Sample Location % Soluble Sulfates LB2-03, @ 5-6 feet 58 Chloride Content (Califomia Test No. 422) Water-soluble chloride content of soils was determined by Califomia Test Method No. 422. LB-2-03 (Sl 5-6 Feet 33 C-2 040575-002 APPENDIX C (Continued) Atterberg Limits (ASTM D 4318) The Atterberg Limits were determined in accordance with ASTM Test Metiiod D4318 for engineering classification of the fine-grained materials and presented in the table below: Boring Depth (feet) Plasticity hidex Liquid Limit (%) Plastic Limit (%) USCS Soil Classification CB-1 69.5-70 57 87 30 CH LB 1-03 25 87 120 33 CH LB2-03 42 62 106 44 CH Direct Shear Test Results (ASTM D3Q80) Direct shear tests were performed on selected "undisturbed" samples that were soaked for a minimum of 24 hours under a surcharge equal to the applied nonnal force during testing. The samples were tested under various nonnal loads, a motor-driven, strain-controlled, direct-shear testing apparatus. The rates of shearing used for the tests were between 0.001 in/inin and 0.001 in/min for the clay samples and 0.0025in/inin for the more granular samples. Thc test results are presented in the table below. The peak shear resistance was recorded to detennine the peak Strength parameters. The ultimate strength parameters were detennined by recording the shear resistance over a defonnation range of 0.3-inclies and identifying the inflection point along the shear stress versus horizontal deformation plot. Plots of the data presented in the table are also included in this appendix. Boring Location Sample Depth (feet) Peak Friction Angle (degrees) Peak Apparent Cohesion (psf) Ultimate Friction Angle (degrees) Ultimate Apparent Cohesion (psf) CB-1 69.5-70 24 800 23 600 LB 1-03 10 42 200 36 100 LB 1-03 22 31 300 30 200 LB 1-03 30.5 36 400 34 200 LB2-03 20 42 300 38 250 LB2-03 30 39 ^ 400 33 350 LB2-03 42.5B 16 1000 16 800 C-3 040575-002 APPENDIX C (Continued) Repeated Direct Shear Testing For Sample LB2-03 at 42.5 Feet, following initial shearing the shear box was returned to its aligned position and the sample resheared twice more at a strain rate of 0.0001 in/min and twice more at a rate of 0.0003 in/min. The developed minimum resistance was recorded at each load. Boring Location Sample Depth (feet) Residual Friction Aigle (degrees) Apparent Cohesion (psf) LB2-03 42.5 6 175 Consolidated Undrained Triaxial Test (modified ASTM D4767) The consolidated undrained triaxial compression test for the remolded sample was perfomied in accordance with the ASTM D4767. A modified test that consisted of loading and shearing on the same sample at multiple loads was performed on the "undisturbed" sample. The remolded sample was moisture conditioned and compacted in a split mold. The samples were then placed in the testing device and a small seating load was applied, to secure the sample in the testing device. The samples were saturated by the applying a back pressure. The axial load and chamber pressure were increased in small increments until the change in chamber pressure was witiiin tolerance to the measured change in sample pore fluid pressure, indicating that the sample was fully saturated. Once the sample was fully saturated and had completed primary consolidation, the samples were loaded axially at a rate of 0.012 in/min for the remolded sample, and a rate of 0.0024 in/min for the "undisturbed" sample. The table below reports the peak total and effective strength values for the samples obtained from the triaxial compression testing. The "undisturbed" sample was perfomied as a multi-stage shear, where the sample was tested at the highest confining pressure, followed by a reduction in confining stress and then resheared. Boring Location Sample Depth (feet) Shear Type Undrained Friction Angle (degrees) Undrained Apparent Cohesion (psf) Effective Friction Angle (degrees) Effective Apparent Cohesion (psf) *LB2-03 5-6 Peak 22 2000 33 200 LB2-03 42 Post Peak 7 400 11 300 *Remolded to approximately 90 percent of the maximum dry density at 2% above optimum moisture content. C-4 040575-002 APPENDIX C (Continued) Torsional Ring Shear Test (ASTM D6467): Torsional ring shear testing was perfonned using a Broiiiliead Ring Shear test device. The sample was prepared as a paste, placed in the sample container of test apparatus, inundated, and consolidated by incremental loading to the preconsolidation pressure. Following consolidation, the sample was tested at the maximum normal load to obtain a "softened" peak strength of the remolded paste. Prior to residual strength testing, the ring shear base was rotated at least one hill rotation to create a sheared plane within the sample. Shear testing was performed at a rate of 0.032 degrees per minute (approx. 0.0008 inches per minute). The table below reports thc sample location, the confining pressure load, and the secant "softened" and residual friction angle. Minimum shear resistance values were utilized for determination of secant residual friction angles at each of the confining pressures. "Softened" Strength Test Results Sample Location Normal Confining Load (psf) Secant "Softened" Friction Angle (degrees) LB2-03t 6,000 10 Residual Strength Test Results Sample Location Normal Confining Load (psf) Secant Residual Friction Angle (degrees) 6,000 7.1 LB2-03, @ 25 feet 4,000 8.4 LB2-03, @ 25 feet 2,000 10.3 C-5 2500 2000 a, 1500 CO 0) 1_ ifl I- S 1O00 500 4 • 500 Boring Location Sample Depth (feet) Sample Description 1000 1500 Vertical Stress (psf) LB1-03 2000 2500 10 Orange Brown Silty Sand (SM) Average Strength Parameters Peak Friction Angle, f peak (deg) 42 (3)0.3" Friction Angle, <j)'@0.3-(deg) 31_ Cohesion, c'peak (Psf) 200 Ultimate Friction Angle, fm, (deg) Cohesion, c'^i, (psf) 36 Cohesion, c'@o.3"(Psf) Deformation Rate 0.0025 in/min 100 DIRECT SHEAR SUMMARY Project No. 040575-002 Proj ect Name GPR/PA5 3000 2500 2000 a VI m 0) cn ra 01 cn 1500 1000 500 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 Vertical Stress (psf) Boring Location Sample Depth (feet) Sample Description LB1-03 22 Olive Fat Clay (CH) Average Strength Parameters Peak Friction Angle, f peak (deg) 31 (S) 0.3" Friction Angle, (jt'^oj-(deg) 29 Cohesion, c'peak (psf) 300 Cohesion, c'@ o r (Psf) 0_ Ultimate Friction Angle, f uit (deg) Cohesion, c'u,, (psf) 200 30 Deformation Rate 0.0017 in/min DIRECT SHEAR SUMMARY Project No. Project Name 040575-002 GPR/PA 5 X 0) •o >^ 1/1 100 90 -I 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 For classification of (me goined soils and fine grained fraction ot coarse grained soils CY\oy 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 Liquid Limit (LL) GRAVEL SAND FINES COARSE FINE CRS MEDIUM FINE . SILT CUY U S STANDARD SIEVE OPENING U.S, STANDARD SIEVE NUMBER HYDROMETER 100 80 70 H O 60 UJ m 50 cc LU LC 40 LU ^ 30 UJ D- 20 10 0 100.000 10.000 1.000 0.100 PARTICLE - SIZE (mm) 0.010 0.001 Boring Number Sample Number Depth (ft.) Soil Type GR SA Fl (%) LL PL PI LB1-03 3 25.0 CH 0 5 95 12 33 87 Sample Description: CH, OLIVE-BROWN FAT CLAY 'feratest Labs,, Inc ATTERBERG LIMITS, PARTICLE - SIZE CURVE ASTM D 4318, D 422 Project Name: 040575-002 Grand Pacific Resort 03-03 4000 3000 m CL in 0) i_ in ra SZ in 2000 1000 <• yZ^ r yZ • Z^ 1000 2000 3000 Vertical Stress (psf) 4000 Bonng Location Sample Depth (feet) Sample Description LB1-03 30.5 Light Gray Pooriy Graded to Silty Sand (SP-SM) Peak Friction Angle, f peak (deg) Cohesion, c'peak (Psf) Ultimate Friction Angle, fm, (deg) Cohesion, C'^K (psf) Average Strength Parameters 36 (S) 0.3" Friction Angle, fgcs- (deg) 31_ 400 34 Cohesion, c'@ 0.3- (Psf) Deformation Rate 150 0.0025 in/min 200 DIRECT SHEAR SUMMARY Project No. Project Name 040575-002 GPR/PA 5 6000 5000 4000 CL in in % 3000 ro JZ if) 2000 1000 » • 1000 2000 3000 4000 Vertical Stress (psf) 5000 6000 Boring Location Sample Depth (feet) Sample Description LB2-03 5-6 Orange-brovi/n Silty Sand (SM), @ 90% R.C. Total Strength Parameters Friction Angle, 4i (deg) 22 Cohesion, c (psf) 2000 Effective Strength Parameters Friction Angle, f (deg) 33 Cohesion, c' (psf) 200 TRIAXIAL SHEAR SUMMARY Project No. Project Name 040575-002 GPR/PA 5 Resort 3000 2500 2000 in a. in in I 1500 cn i-ra <u x: cn 1000 500 -yA yZ J ly^ z<y \^^^^^^^ 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 Vertical Stress (psf) Bonng Location Sample Depth (feet) Sample Description LB2-03 20 Orange Brown Silty Sand (SM) Peak Friction Angle, (j)' peak (deg) Cohesion, c'peak (Psf) Ultimate Friction Angle, f^it (deg) Cohesion, c'^, (psf) Average Strength Parameters 42 (S) 0.3" Friction Angle, <|)"@o.3- (deg) 33 Cohesion, c'@0 3" (PsO 300 100 38 Deformation Rate 0.0025 in/min 250 DIRECT SHEAR SUMMARY Project No, Project Name 040575-002 GPR/PA 5 4000 3000 w a w w 0) in ra a) .c in 2000 1000 —-Z —3 < /^^^^^^ 1000 2000 3000 Vertical Stress (psf) 4000 Boring Location Sample Depth (feet) Sample Description LB2-03 30 Grange Brown Silty Sand (SM) Peak Friction Angle, fpeak (deg) Cohesion, c'peak (psf) Ultimate Friction Angle, (jj'un (deg) Cohesion, c'^i, (psf) Average Strength Parameters 39 (Sl 0.3" Friction Angle, (t)'@0.3" (deg) 32 Cohesion, c'@ 0.3" (psf) 400 50 33 Deformation Rate 0.0025 in/min 350 DIRECT SHEAR SUMMARY Project No. Project Name 040575-002 GPR/PA 5 100 90 80 ^ 70 2 60 •o ra D. 50 40 30 20 10 0 For classification of fme- qrained soils and fine-grained ^ . . , CM or OH fraction of coarse-grained soils CL or OL ' ML or OL 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 Liquid Limit (LL) GRAVEL SAND FINES COARSE RNE CRSE MEDIUM i FINE SILT 1 CLAY U S STANDARD SIEVE OPENING U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBER 3,0"' 1 1/2" 3/4" 3/8" #4 #8 #16 ff30_^±#m_#20Q HYDROMETER 1.000 0.100 PARTICLE - SIZE (mm) 0.010 0.001 Boring No,: Sample No.: Depth (ft.): Soil Type GR:SA:n LL,PL,PI LB2-03 5A 42 CH 0:4:96 106,44,62 Soil Description: Olive fat clay (CH) Teratest Labs, Inc. A LEIGHTON G«0«P GOMPAHr ATTERBERG LIMITS, PARTICLE - SIZE CURVE ASTM D 4318, D 422 Project No.: Grand Pacific Resort 040575-002 05-03 SA S. Hyd LB-9 5A @ 42 6000 5000 4000 m o. in in I 3000 in ra JC in 2000 1000 1000 2000 3000 4000 Vertical Stress (psf) 5000 6000 Boring Location Sample Depth (feet) Sample Description LB2-03 42.5B Olive Fat Clay (CH) Peak Friction Angle, f peak (deg) Cohesion, c'peak (Psf) Ultimate Friction Angle, <(>'•« (deg) Cohesion, c'^n (psf) Average Strength Parameters 16 Residual Friction Angle, (jj'^s (deg) Cohesion, c'^s (psf) 1000 175 16 800 Defonnation Rate Residual Deformation Rate 0.0017 in/min 0.0003 in/min DIRECT SHEAR SUMMARY Project No. Project Name 040575-002 GPR/PA 5 6000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 Vertical Stress (psf) Boring Location Sample Depth (feet) Sample Description LB2-03 42.5B Olive Fat Clay (CH) Average Strength Parameters Peak Friction Angle, <})'peak (deg) 16 & 0.3" Friction Angle. (t.'@0.3-(deg) 16 Cohesion, c'peak (psf) 1000 Cohesion, c'@o,3" (psf) 250 Ultimate Friction Angle, (|)'uit (deg) Cohesion, c'uu (psf) 16 Deformation Rate 0.0017 in/min 800 DIRECT SHEAR SUMMARY Project No. Project Name 040575-002 GPR/PA 5 3000 2500 2000 in Q. U) tn 2 1500 CO ro 0) J: cn 1000 500 500 1000 1500 2000 Vertical Stress (psf) 2500 3000 Boring Location Sample Depth (feet) Sample Description LB2-03 42 Olive Fat Clay (CH), Joint-Type Shear Total Strength Parameters Friction Angle, (j) (deg) 7 Cohesion, c (psf) 400 Effective Strength Parameters Friction Angle, (j)' (deg) 11 Cohesion, c' (psf) 300 MULTI-STAGE TRIAXIAL SHEAR Project No. Project Name 040575-002 GPR/PA 5 Resort 10000 2000 4000 6000 8000 Vertical Stress (psf) Boring Location Sample Depth (feet) Sample Description CB-1 69.5-70 Gray silty clay (CH) 10000 Average Strength Parameters Peak Friction Angle, fpeak (deg) 24 @ 0-3" Friction Angle. f@o.3-(deg) 18 Cohesion, c'peak (psf) 800 Cohesion, c'@o.3" (psf) 300 Ultimate Friction Angle, (j)'ui, (deg) Cohesion, C'UH (psf) 23 Deformation Rate 0.001 in/min 600 DIRECT SHEAR SUMMARY Project No. Project Name 040575-002 GPR/PA 5 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Liquid Limit (LL) GRAVEL SAND FINES COARSE FINE CRS MEDIUM FINE SILT CLAY U S STANDARD SIEVE OPENING U S, STANDARD SIEVE (WMBER 3" 1 1/2" 3M" 3/a- (M #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200 HYDROMETER 100.000 10.000 1.000 0.100 PARTICLE - SIZE (mm) 0.010 0.001 Boring Sample Depth Soil Type GR SA Fl LL PL PI Number Number (ft.) Soil Type (%) CB-1 1 69.5-70.0 CH 0 9 91 87 30 57 Sample Description: CH, OLIVE-BROWN FAT CLAY •ferat«5Sl Labs. Inc. ATTERBERG LIMITS, PARTICLE - SIZE CURVE ASTM D 4318, D 422 Project Name: 040575-002 Grand Pacific Resort 03-031 Appendix D Slope Stability Analyses 2:lFill Slope Stability Analyses (0 "(0 cc c < CO C/) CD Q. O C/3 CD 0 _ o H— . . O OJ CO -= CL 2 c ^ N CO _o 03 a CD if) Ol 0.5 ^ .— r E Cfl TO w iZ < 03 o o 03 (y) U0!1BA9|3 8A!lB|8y CO CO 03 c < 03 •4—» CO CD Q. _g CO N O CO "m O •2 "-^ CO iS 6 ^ •o o ^ "O 0) ^ W CD CL CO CD a o x: CD « ^ cSi ^ in CD ^ ^ II 2 > c 0) _ 03 (1) CO O °^ 2. E o to 03 CD CO (y) U0IJBA9I3 8A!JB|8y I I Cross Section A-A' Static Analyses < < c g o CD CO CO CO o O tl o CO o KJ ^—' jE = (D CO 'co 03 C < CO o 03 O o CN CN (D Q. CO < c CO O .. -.^ -a o o CD SZ CO o 03 CL T3 C 03 J3 03 •4—» CO CD Q. O CD CO CD a E (2 03 'co il < c\i CD 03 CO o » o 03 LL CO D. O O LO CNJ II •D 03 O _J CD i= H-03 O O H- CO CD -I—« 03 (i33J) N0liVA313 g o <D CO CO CO o i— O •c o CO CD 01 o N ifl C\i O ro CO Q. O ~ CCD O • • •i: -a o o 0) JZ C/) 03 c < CO Q. o CD "5 O -Q 03 03 CL TD c GD CO CO <> E CO Ct3 CO 0) Z >^ - o"i^ c O CO E< CD H— 03 CO o O 03 T3 03 O _1 CD OD-1- I 03 O i_ D CO CD -4—» 03 H— O o (i33d) NOI1VA313 Cross Section A-A' Pseudo-Static (Seismic) Analyses < ill •Bio ro CO >, O C 03 cn -C CD < O Q.C Ct CO t) o ca •7= 03 03 CO CO to 03 v., — C O CL U.< 03 CD Cl) >- CO := CD O C CL CJ) CO ^ •o o s 03 CO o o 03 LL O II -*—» C 0 •Q it CD o o CO 'CD CO (i33d) N0liVA313 c LL O a O in < I < c o N 01 .52 ovi CO O ~ 03 ro o ^ ^ CO CO CO O 03 < CO JD 0 _ 03 (fl t 0 < O Q. r ^-9.0 Ci: CO tj B --E CO Cl. o -C CD CO LO 7^ CO O -4—» 03 CO 6 -D TJ C =3 03 CD , n C" CD CL •o o 0 CD £ ro Z CO 'co 03 c < 0 M— 03 CO o o 03 O O 0 O > 0 o Ct3 •- -1= •-CO C O JZ h- D O OL in o II "c 0 •g it 0 o O E CO '0 CO (1333) NOIiVA313 z Cross Section A-A' Displacement (Seismic) Analyses < < c g o 0 CO CO CO o O tl o CO 0 H= CO 'o >^ 03 03 T3 < C T3 2 g o > JN cn -a v_ "0 05 > c < o. c CO o .. -o o o CD ^ C/5^ 0^ E w 03 'in 2 >^ 0 il < 03 CO O o 03 CVJ CD CZ) II » c 0 g 0 o O E CO '0 CO (1333) N0I1VA313 c LL g 'Q. o c q "o 0 CO CO CO o O tr o CO 0 cc CO "o >^ 03 CO CL C •o< c -o 03 0 N Cfl csi CD Q. < CO c DQ o . -•j:= T3 CJ O 0) JZ '0 ojS E CO ro CO Z >. 0) ro CD >- E < a 03 CO o 03 CD II "c 0 'g it 0 o O g E CO •0 CO s (133=1) NOIlVABnS Cross Section B-B' Static Analyses CO th c .g o 0 CO w ' w o JN CO CO " o cn ^-.^ O CD 03 CJ^^O tl >CQ o s c ^ ^ o Q: iS o ^co I -.^ ro ^ o Z CO ro CD U) 0 o 0 in Q-OO C^CNi o SZ <D *-• t; 0 Ct3 S CO 4— CO o 'cfl i~ >^ O 03 O C Ct3 < LL (i33d) N0aVA313 (133d) NOIiVA313 g R CQ I DQ O N CO CD CO W (M CO *- - 03 OJ O - KJ ^ ^ ^ o iS o CL O DC .y ^CO CO ct3 C .y Z ^ KJ 2 ^ CD CO LL o JZ 0 0 03 ^ CO to o CO i_ 03 O S ro < LL U33d) N0flVA313 DQ DQ 'ts 4 0 CO CO « CO CO ^ o CO .^•i= ro ro ^co o o< tr >DQ o .t; c rr\ —: _ CO .- 0 JZl CL - o 0 o c 0 Q-oo CO _ ro -y^c^ H=: tD C^ Q. m 03 O I •D O 4—• 0 0 CO ^ CO ^ CO S 5^ KIJ CtJ in tn o (O 1- — 3 cc "o ,1^ — 5 ro CD CO u. < LL ^ - ro cc ro ^ (i33i) NOIiVA3n3 8 $ GQ I c o N Cfl Cfl CO -C' -.P o ro 0! C^ ^ O 0 JD .y or: ro 'o CO °^ 0^ CO i .9 Z "ro^ CD WLL o 0 CO CO O tr o g •Q 03 CL T5 C 03 Q. O (J -C ^ 0 03 ^ CO . >+— (0 o 'co i_ ^ 2 ro o c cc < LL Tsa ••I (133J) N011VA313 Cross Section B-B' Pseudo-Static (Seismic) Analyses (i33d) NOIiVA313 DQ 1 CQ c g *-4—• o 0 CO CO CO o to Cfl ro 'cc <C0 JD 0 _ ro CO tr 0CQ cot) a O CD o i2 bi 03 CO ^ °- c!) cc T3 T3 C =5 CC 0 0 CD CLLL 0 in o . c o ^ tt 0 cc ^ CO 0 o o E .CO 'o o *w CO i_ f- z >^ o E C cc CD < LL CO U33d) NOUVA313 (i3ad) NOiivAgna N DQ In CQ .55 cvj •2 role CO >o c)) o Oco tr o ro Cfl Q. o SZ 0 QQ CO CD a c in 0 — — IL CO tj g g DQ • a, o CD SZ ro 03 CO CO 0 TD O SZ "0 0 03 CO CL TD -3:5 r- -1 ^ O CC ~ CO "to >^ O -—- » CC o tfl = c cc CD CL LL < LL C 13 ^ii CC 0 0 CD II "c 0 •g it 0 o O g E CO '0 CO (i33dt N0liVA313 N CO CO ro CO r= Z3 JD 0 ro CO Oco"^ tr 0DQ DQ I DQ g 'o 0 CO CO CO o in 0 o c o 0 CD CO J; II 03 CO •L TD O '0 03 O CO -§z 0 0 . . 0 SB CO 0 ^8 CD Q. IL to 'co o h 03 o.5i2 c cc 0 < LLCO {133d) NOLLVA3n3 DQ w DQ .« ^ e ^.g O *^ — ro 03 c)) g 5 0 br ro to tr QjCQ O Q. C or: cot) O CJ 0 o iS • • CO ^ CL A E -r, -2 ro TD TD ro 0 W 0 CD Q. u_ Q. O « CO Ln DQ • o 0 ro :^ CO CO o 'co i_ >< o ro o c ro < LL UD CD II ^—' C 0 'g it 0 o O g E CO '0 CO Surficial Slope Stability Analyses Infinite Slope Formula Description: Input Parameters: Artificial Fill remolded to 90% Relative Compaction derived from Terrace Deposit materials Cohesion = Friction Angle = Soil Unit Weight = Calculated Factor of Safety 200 psf 33 degrees 125 pcf Slope Inclination Factor of Safety Slope Inclination 3-ft Seepage 4-ft Seepage 1 : 1 1.39 1.13 1.2 : 1 1.47 ^ 1.20 1.4 : 1 1.58 ^ 1.30 1.5 : 1 1.64 1.35 1.6 : 1 1.71 1.41 ^ 1.75 : 1 1.81 1.50'^ 1.8 : 1 1.84 1.53 2 : 1 1.98 1.65 Infinite Slope Formula Description: Terrace Bluff Zone input Parameters: Cohesion = Friction Angle = Soil Unit Weight = Calculated Factor of Safety 200 psf 32 degrees 130 pcf Slope Inclination Factor of Safety Slope Inclination 3-ft Seepage 4-ft Seepage 1 : 1 1.35 1.09 1.2 : 1 1.43 ^ 1.17 1.4 : 1 1.54 ^ 1.27 1.5 : 1 1.60 1.32 1.6 : 1 1.66 1.38 1.75 : 1 1.76 1.46 1.8 : 1 1.79 1.49 2 : 1 1.93 1.61 Infinite Slope Formula Description: Terrace Deposits (Cut, Lightly Indurated) Input Parameters: Cohesion = Friction Angle = Soil Unit Weight = Calculated Factor of Safety 200 psf 38 degrees 130 pcf Slope Inclination Factor of Safety Slope Inclination 3-ft Seepage 4-ft Seepage 1 : 1 1.43 1.18 1.2 : 1 1.53 1.27 1.4 : 1 1.65 1.38 1.5 : 1 1.72 1.44,^^, 1.6 : 1 1.79 1.51 1.75 : 1 1.90 1.60 1.8 : 1 1.94 1.64 2 : 1 2.09 1.77 Infinite Slope Formula Description: Input Parameters: Santiago Formation (Dense, Fine Sandstone) Cohesion = Friction Angle = Soil Unit Weight = Calculated Factor of Safety 100 psf 40 degrees 125 pcf Slope Inclination Factor of Safety Slope Inclination 3-ft Seepage 4-ft Seepage 1 : 1 0.95 0.82 1.2 : 1 1.05 0.91 1.4 : 1 1.15 1.01 1.5 : 1 1.21 1.06 1.6 : 1 1.27 1.12 1.75 : 1 1.35 1.20 1.8 : 1 1.38^^--1.23 2 : 1 1.51 1.34 Leighton and Associates, Inc. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page 1 of 6 LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS FOR ROUGH GRADING 1.0 General 1.1 Intent: These General Earthwork and Grading Specifications are for the grading and earthwork shown on the approved grading plan(s) and/or indicated in the geotechnical report(s). These Specifications are a part of the recommendations contained in the geotechnical report(s). In case of conflict, the specific recommendations in the geotechnical report shall supersede these more general Specifications. Observations of the earthwork by the project Geotechnical Consultant during the course of grading may result in new or revised recommendations that could supersede these specifications or the recommendations in the geotechnical report(s). _J 2- The Geotechnical Consultant of Record: Prior to commencement of work, the owner shall employ the Geotechnical Consultant of Record (Geotechnical Consultant). The Geotechnical Consultants shall be responsible for reviewing the approved geotechnical report(s) and accepting the adequacy of the preliminary geotechnical findings, conclusions, and recommendations prior to the commencementof the grading. Prior to commencementof 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 obsen'c, 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 infomi the owner, recommend appropriate changes in design to accommodate the observed conditions, and notify the review agency where required. Subsurface areas to be geotechnically observed, mapped, elevations recorded, and/or tested include natural ground after it has been cleared for receiving fill but before fill is placed, bottoms of all "remedial removal" areas, all key bottoms, and benches made on sloping ground to receive fill. The Geotechnical Consultant shall observe the moisture-conditioningand processing of the subgrade and fill materials and perform relative compaction testing of fill to determine the attained level of compaction. The Geotechnical Consultant shall provide the test results to the owner and the Contractor on a routine and frequent basis. 3030.1094 Leighton and Associates, Inc. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page 2 of 6 1.3 The Earthwork Contractor: The Earthwork Contractor (Contractor) shall be qualified, experienced, and knowledgeable in earthwork, logistics, preparation and processing of ground to receive fill, moisture-conditioningand processing of fill, and compacting fill. The Contractor shall review and accept the plans, geotechnical report(s), and these Specifications prior to commencement of grading. The Contractor shall be solely responsible for performing the grading in accordance with the plans and specifications. The Contractor shall prepare and submit to the owner and the Geotechnical Consultant a work plan that indicates the sequence of earthwork grading, the number of "spreads" of wol-k and the estimated quantities of daily earthwork contemplated for the site prior to commencementof grading. The Contractor shall inform the owner and the Geotechnical Consultant of changes in work schedules and updates to the work plan at least 24 hours in advance of such changes so that appropriate observations and tests can be planned and accomplished. The Contractor shall not assume that the Geotechnical Consultant is aware of all grading operations. The Contractor shall have the sole responsibility to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish the.earthwork in accordance with the applicable grading codes and agency ordinances, these Specifications, and the recommendations in the approved geotechnical report(s) and grading plan(s). If, in the opinion of the Geotechnical Consultant, unsatisfactory conditions, such as unsuitable soil, improper moisture condition, inadequate compaction, insufficient buttress key size, adverse weather, etc., are resulting in a quality of work less than required in these specifications, the Geotechnical Consultant shall reject the work and may recommend to the owner that construction be stopped until the conditions are rectified. 2.0 Preparation of Areas to be Filled 2.1 Clearing and Grubbing: Vegetation, such as brush, grass, roots, and other deleterious material shall be sufficiently removed and properly disposed of in a method acceptable to the owner, goveming agencies, and the Geotechnical Consultant. The Geotechnical Consultant shall evaluate the extent of these removals depending on specific site conditions. Earth fill material shall not contain more than 1 percent of organic materials (by volume). No fill lift shall contain more than 5 percent of organic matter. Nesting of the organic materials shall not be allowed. If potentially hazardous materials are encountered, the Contractor shall stop work in the affected area, and a hazardous material specialist shall be informed immediately for proper evaluation and handling of these materials prior to continuing to work in that area. As presently defined by the State of Califomia, most refined petroleum products (gasoline, diesel fuel, motor oil, grease, coolant, etc.) have chemical constituents that are considered to be hazardous waste. As such, the indiscriminate dumping or spillage of these fluids onto the ground may constitute a misdemeanor, punishable by fines and/or imprisonment, and shall not be allowed. 3030.1094 Leighton and Associates, Inc. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page 3 of 6 2.2 Processing: Existing ground that has been declared satisfactory for support of fill by the Geotechnical Consultant shall be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches. Existing ground that is not satisfactory shall be overexcavated as specified in the following section. Scarification shall continue until soils are broken down and free of large clay lumps or clods and the working surface is reasonably unifonn, flat, and free of uneven features that would inhibit unifonn compaction. 2.3 Overexcavation: In addition to removals and overexcavations recommended in the approved geotechnical report(s) and the grading plan, soft, loose, dry, saturated, spongy, organic-rich, highly fractured or otherwise unsuitable ground shall be overexcavated to competent ground as evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant during grading. 2.4 Benching: Where fills are to be placed on ground with slopes steeper than 5:1 (horizontal to vertical units), the ground shall be stepped or benched. Please see the Standard Details for a graphic illustration. The lowest bench or key shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide and at least 2 feet deep, into competent material as evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant. Other benches shall be excavated a minimum height of 4 feet into competent material or as otherwise recommended by the Geotechnical Consultant. Fill placed on ground sloping flatter than 5:1 shall also be benched or otherwise overexcavated to provide a flat subgrade for the fill. 2.5 Evaluation/Acceptance of Fill Areas: All areas to receive fill, including removal and processed areas, key bottoms, and benches, shall be observed, mapped, elevations recorded, and/or tested prior to being accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant as suitable to receive fill. The Contractor shall obtain a written acceptance from the Geotechnical Consultant prior to fill placement. A licensed surveyor shall provide the survey control for determiningelevations of processed areas, keys, and benches. 3.0 Fill Material 3.1 General: Material to be used as fill shall be essentially free of organic matter and other deleterious substances evaluated and accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to placement. Soils of poor quality, such as those with unacceptable gradation, high , expansion potential, or low strength shall be placed in areas acceptable to the Geotechnical Consultant or mixed with other soils to achieve satisfactory fill material. 3.2 Oversize: Oversize material defined as rock, or other irreducible material with a maximum dimension greater than 8 inches, shall not be buried or placed in fill unless location, materials, and placement methods are specifically accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant. Placement operations shall be such that nesting of oversized material does not occur and such that oversize material is completely surrounded by compacted or densified fill. Oversize material shall not be placed within 10 vertical feet of finish grade or within 2 feet of future uti 1 ities or underground construction. 3030.1094 Leighton and .'\ssociates, Inc. GENERA L EARTH WORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page 4 of 6 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 Geotechnical Consultant at least 48 hours (2 working days) before importing begins so that its suitability can be determined and appropriate tests perfonned. 4.0 Fill Placement and Compaction 4.1 Fill Layers: Approved fill material shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill (per Section 3.0) in near-horizontal layers not exceeding 8 inches in loose thickness. The Geotechnical Consultant may accept thicker layers if testing indicates the grading procedures can adequately compact the thicker layers. Each layer shall be spread evenly and mixed thoroughly to attain relative unifonn ity of material and moisture throughout. 4.2 Fill Moisture Conditioning: Fill soils shall be watered, dried back, blended, and/or mixed, as necessary to attain a relatively uniform moisture content at or slightly over optimum. Maximum density and opfimum 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 01557-91). 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 unifonnity. 4.4 Compaction of Fill Slopes: In addifion to nonnal 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 maximuin density per ASTM Test Method D1557-91. 4.5 Compaction Testing: Field tests for moisture content and relative compaction of the fill soils shall be performed by the Geotechnical Consultant. Location and frequency of tests shall be at the Consultant's discretion based on field conditions encountered. Compaction test locations will not necessarily be selected on a random basis. Test locations shall be selected to verify adequacy of compaction levels in areas that are judged to be prone to inadequate compaction (such as close to slope faces and at the fill/bedrock benches). Leighton and .Associates, Inc. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page 5 of 6 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 standardsare not met. 4.7 Compaction Test Locations: The Geotechnical Consultant shall docuinent the approximate elevation and horizontal coordinates of each test location. The Contractor shall coordinate with the project sui-veyor to assure that sufficient grade stakes are established so that the Geotechnical Consultant can detennine the test locations with sufficient accuracy. At a minimum, two grade stakes within a horizontal distance of 100 feet and vertically less than 5 feet apart from potential test locations shall be provided. 5.0 Subdrain Installation Subdrain systems shall be installed in accordance with the approved geotechnical report(s). the grading plan, and the Standard Details. The Geotechnical Consultant may recommend additional subdrains and/or changes in subdrain extent, location, grade, or material depending on conditions encountered during grading. All subdrains shall be surveyed by a land surveyor/civil engineer for line and grade after installation and prior to burial. Sufficient time should be allowed by the Contractor for these surveys. 6.0 Excavation Excavations, as well as over-excavation for remedial purposes, shall be evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant during grading. Remedial removal depths shown on geotechnical plans are estimates only. The actual extent of removal shall be determined by the Geotechnical Consultant based on the field evaluation of exposed conditions during grading. Where fill-over-cut slopes are to be graded, the cut portion of the slope shall be made, evaluated, and accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to placement of materials for construction ofthe fill portion of the slope, unless otherwise recommended by the Geotechnical Consultant. Leighton and Associates, Inc. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Page 6 of 6 7.0 Trench Backfills 7.1 The Contractor shall foilow all OHSA and Cal/OSHA requirements for safety of trench excavations. 7.2 All bedding and backfill of utility trenches shall be done in accordance with the applicable provisions of Standard Specifications of Public Works Construction. Bedding material shall have a Sand Equivalent greater than 30 (SE>30). The bedding shall be placed to 1 foot over the top of the conduit and densified by jetting. Backfill shall be placed and densified to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum from 1 foot above the top of the conduit to the surface. 7.3 The jetting of the bedding around the conduits shall be observed by the Geotechnical Consultant. 7.4 The Geotechnical Consultant shall test the trench backfill for relative compaction. At least one test should be made for every 300 feet of trench and 2 feet of fill. 7.5 Lift thickness of trench backfill shall not exceed those allowed in the Standard Specifications of Public Works Construction unless the Contractor can demonstrate to the Geotechnical Consultant that the fill lift can be compacted to thc minimum relative compaction by his alternative equipment and method. 3030.1094 FILL SLOPE PROJECTED PLANE 1 TO 1 MAXIMUM FROM TOE OF SLOPE TO APPROVED GROUND GROUND REMOVE UNSUITABLE MATERIAL BENCH HEIGHT (4' TYPICAL) 2 MIN,—' KEY DEPTH LOWEST BENCH (KEY) FILL-OVER-CUT SLOPE EXISTING GROUND SURFACE BENCH I LgENCH HEIGHT (4' TYPICAL) REMOVE UNSUITABLE MATERIAL CUT-OVER-FILL SLOPE OVERBUILD AND TRIM BACK -CUT FACE SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO FILL PLACEMENT TO ASSURE ADEOUATE GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS EXISTING- GROUND SURFACE PROJECTED PLANE 1 TO 1 MAXIMUM FROM TOE OF SLOPE TO APPROVED GROUND CUT FACE SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO FILL PLACEMENT REMOVE UNSUITABLE MATERIAL BENCH HEIGHT (4* TYPICAL) FOR SUBDRAINS SEE STANDARD DETAIL C 2' MIN.—" KEY DEPTH LOWEST BENCH (KEY) BENCHING SHALL BE DONE WHEN SLOPE'S ANGLE IS EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN 5:1. MINIMUM BENCH HEIGHT SHALL BE 4 FEET AND MINIMUM FILL WIDTH SHALL BE 9 FEET. GENERAL EARTHWORK AND z^^^T KEYING AND BENCHING GRADING SPECIFICATIONS KEYING AND BENCHING STANDARD DETAILS A LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES -FINISH GRADE SLOPE FACE :=>^coWArTEMa' OVERSIZE WINDROW 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 FILL ALL THE VOIDS. DO NOT BURY ROCK WITHIN 10 FEET OF FINISH GRADE. WINDROW OF BURIED ROCK SHALL BE PARALLEL TO THE FINISHED SLOPE. GRANULAR MATERIAL TO BE DENSIFIED IN PLACE BY FLOODING OR JETTING. DETAIL -JETTED OR FLOODED GRANULAR MATERIAL TYPICAL PROFILE ALONG WINDROW OVERSIZE ROCK DISPOSAL GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS STANDARD DETAILS B LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES \ - EXISTING GROUND SURFACE BENCHING REMOVE UNSUITABLE MATERIAL SUBDRAIN TRENCH SEE DETAIL BELOW CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE OR #2 ROCK (9FT"3/FT) WRAPPED IN FILTER FABRIC // FILTER FABRIC (MIRAFI MON OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT)* MIN. BEDDING COLLECTOR PIPE SHALL BE MINIMUM 6" DIAMETER SCHEDULE 40 PVC PERFORATED PIPE. SEE STANDARD DETAIL D FOR PIPE SPECIFICATIONS SUBDRAIN DETAIL DESIGN FINISH GRADE NONPERFORATED 5"0 MIN 6" 0MIN. PIPE FILTER FABRIC (MIRAFI HON OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT) CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE OR #2 ROCK (9FT'^3/FT) WRAPPED IN FILTER FABRIC DETAIL QF CANYON SUBDRAIN OUTLET CANYON SUBDRAINS GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS STANDARD DETAILS C LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES 15' MIN. OUTLET PIPES 4" 0 NONPERFORATED PIPE, 100' MAX. O.C. HORIZONTALLY. 30' MAX OC, VERTICALLY BACK CUT 1:1 OR FLATTER SEE SUBDRAIN TRENCH DETAIL LOWEST SUBDRAIN SHOULD BE SITUATED AS LOW AS POSSIBLE TO ALLOW SUITABLE OUTLET -KEY DEPTH (2' MIN.) KEY WIDTH NOTED ON GRADING PLANS (15' MIN.) 12" MIN. OVERLAP — FROM THE TOP HOG RING TIED EVERY 6 FEET CALTRANS CLASS PERMEABLE OR #2 ROCK (3 FT''3/FT) WRAPPED IN FILTER FABRIC ^4" 0 // \ NON-PERFORATED A \ OUTLET PIPE PROVIDE POSITIVE SEAL AT THE JOINT T-CONNECTION FOR COLLECTOR PIPE TO OUTLET PIPE 6 MIN. COVER 4 0 PERFORATED PIPE FILTER FABRIC ENVELOPE (MIRAFI 140 OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT) 4" MIN. BEDDING SUBDRAIN TRENCH DETAIL SUBDRAIN INSTALLATION - subdrain collector pipe shall be instolled with perforation down or, unless otherwise designated by the geotechnical consultont. Outlet pipes shall be non-perforated pipe. The subdrain pipe shall hove at leost 8 perforotions uniformly spoced per fool. Perforation sholl be 1/4" to 1/2" if drill holes ore used. All subdroin pipes shall hove a gradient of ot least 2% towords the outlet. SUBDRAIN PIPE - Subdroin pipe sholl be ASTM D2751, SDR 23.5 or ASTM D1527, Schedule 40, or ASTM D3034, SDR 23.5, Schedule 40 Polyvinyl Chloride Plastic (PVC) pipe. All outlet pipe shall be placed in o trench no wide thon twice the subdrain pipe. Pipe sholl be in soil of SE >/=30 jetted or flooded in place except for the outside 5 feet which sholl be native soil backfill. BUTTRESS OR REPLACEMENT FILL SUBDRAINS GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS STANDARD DETAILS D LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES -SOIL BACKFILL, COMPACTED TO 90 PERCENT RELATIVE COMPACTION BASED ON ASTM D1557 RETAINING WALL WALL WATERPROOFING PER ARCHITECT'S SPECIFICATIONS •:-3 2 TYP.: WALL FOOTING FILTER FABRIC ENVELOPE (MIRAFI MON OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT)" 3/4" TO 1-1/2" CLEAN GRAVEL 4" XMIN.) DIAMETER PERFORATED PVC PIPE (SCHEDULE 40 OR EQUIVALENT) WITH PERFORATIONS ORIENTED DOWN AS DEPICTED MINIMUM 1 PERCENT GRADIENT TO SUITABLE OUTLET 3" MIN. COMPETENT BEDROCK OR MATERIAL AS EVALUATED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT NOTE: UPON REVIEW BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT, COMPOSITE DRAINAGE PRODUCTS SUCH AS MIRADRAIN OR J-DRAIN MAY BE USED AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO GRAVEL OR CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL. INSTALLATION SHOULD BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS. RETAINING WALL DRAINAGE DETAIL GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS STANDARD DETAILS E LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES