HomeMy WebLinkAboutCT 03-02; CARLSBAD RANCH PA5; GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION; 2015-04-24I
I
I
I
I
OFFICE LOCATIONS
ORAl'<GE COUNTY
CORPORATE BRANCH
2992 E. La Palma Avenue
Suite A
Anaheim, CA 92806
I Tel: 714.632.2999
Fax: 714.632.2974
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
SAN DIEGO
IMPERIAL COUNTY
6295 Fenis Square
SuiteC S~1l Diego, CA 92121
Tel: 858.537.3999
Fax: 858.537.3990
I~LAND EMPIRE
14467 Meridian Parkway
Buildillg2A
Riverside, CA 92518
Tel: 951.653.4999
Fax: 951.653.4666
I~ro
44917 Golf Center Pkwy
Suite 1
Indio, CA 92201
Tel: 760.342.4677
Fax: 760.342.4525
OC/LA/INLAND EMPIRE
DISPATCH
800.491.2990
SAN DIEGO DISPATCH
888.844.5060
www.mtglinc.col1l
Geotechnical Engineering
Construction Inspection
Materials Testing
Environmental
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III
Grand Pacific Resorts
Carlsbad, California
Prepared For:
Grand Pacific Resorts
5900 Pasteut Court, Suite 200
Carlsbad, California 92008
Prepared By:
MTGL,InC.
6295 Ferris Square, Suite C
San Diego, California 92121
Apri124, 2015
MTGL Project No. 1916Allr-_____________ ....".."",.
MTGL Log No. 15-1063 ' REC~~' . j}i
SEP 1 7 2015
'lAND DEVlElLO~MENT
E~~~G~NEER~NG
01-1:1< E I .O( .\ IIO'S
OIH \G~ ("01 .\ r\
( ()I~I'OIU I E Ill{ \ '1,( II
~'N2 f· Lli Palma .'\\elllle
!'>Ultj! \
,\1Jhcilll ('\ l}2XIII,
I d 71·1"_(~ 2'1,-)"
\,;" 71-1 () ,? :'174
S.\ .... DIEGO
IMN:RI \1 Cot 'In
629< Fen 1\ ~qll.tr~
Sune' ('
SlInlJlego CA <),2121
r cI 1<51{ ,.17 N')')
1',1\ X5H 537 :l'Ntl
1:>:1.A.\O E'1I'11l1
1·; .. \(,7 f'vknJI:tn Park \\U)
B.Jllthng }, \
R"'!f'Hk ( .\ <)2''11{
lei ')il/l)i-l')li,}
[a\ ')." I 653 -111b6
,,·nto
44917 (jol! Cl:lltcl Ph \I \
SUIl.: I
Indl\!. CA lJ22111
I'd 71>0 .'42 4677
,.;" 7NI342 ·1)2"
O( ItAII"1 A'\11 t~IPIRF
I.lJW.H(1I
8(11.1·1'.112'.1'111
SA.'" DIEGO 1)1;''' IT( 11
\\\\\\ 11Il,gJIIll't.:(ll11
,. r
April 24, 2015
Grand Pacific Resorts
5900 Pasteur Court, Suite 200
Carlsbad, California 92008
Attention: Mr. Houston Arnold
Geotechnical Engineering
Construction Inspection
Materials Testing
Environmental
MTGL Project No. 1916All
MTGL Log No. 15-1063
Subject: GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
Marbrisa Resorts -Phase ill
Grand Pacific Resorts
Carlsbad, California
Dear Mr. Arnold:
In accordance with your request and authorization we have completed a
Geotechnical Investigation for the subject site. We are pleased to present the
following report which addresses both engineering geologic and geotechnical
conditions including a description of the site conditions, results of our field
exploration and laboratory testing, and our conclusions and recommendations for
grading and foundations design.
Based on our investigation, the site will be suitable for construction, provided the
recommendations presented herein are incorporated into the plans and specifications
for the proposed construction. Details related to geologic conditions, seismicity, site
preparation, foundation design. and construction considerations are also included in
the subsequent sections of this report.
We appreciate this opportunity to be of continued service and look forward to
providing additional consulting services during the planning and construction of the
project. Should you have any questions regarding this report, please do not hesitate
to contact us at your convenience.
Respectfully submitted,
MTGL,Inc.
S~a!.~GE2813
Vice President I Engineering
pagei
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation
Carlsbad. California
TABLE OF CONTENTS
MTGLProjectNo.1916All
MTGL Log No. 15-1063
1.00 IN"TRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................... 1
1.01 PLANNED CONSTRUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1
1.02 SCOPEOFWORK ........................................................................................................................... 1
1.03 SITE DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................ ' ............................. 1
1.04 FIELD INVESTIGATION ................................................................................................................... 2
1.05 LABORATORY TESTING ................................................................................................................. 3
2.00 FIN'DIN"GS ...................................................................................................................................... 4
2.01 REGIONAL GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS ...........................................••...•......•.•.••.....•....•.........••.......•.•. 4
2.02 SITE GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS ........................................................................................................ 4
2.03 GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS ........................................................................................................ 5
2.04 FAULTING AND SEISMICITY ........................................................................................................... 5
2.05 LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL ............................................................................................................ 6
2.06 LANDSLIDES ................................................................................................................................... 6
2.07 TSUNAMI AND SEICHE HAzARD .................................................................................................... 6
3.00 CONCLUSIONS .......................................................................................................... , ................ 7
3.01 GENERAL CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................... 7
3.02 EARTHQUAKE ACCELERATIONS \ CBC SEISMIC PARAMETERS .................................................... 7
3.03 EXPANSION POTENTIAL ................................................................................................................ 8
4.00 REC01\1l\fENDATIONS ............................................................................................................. 9
4.01 EXCAVATION CHARACTERISTICS/SHRINKAGE ............................................................................. 9
4.02 SETTLEI\1ENT CONSIDERATIONS ................................................................................................... 9
4.03 SITE CLEARING RECOMl\.1ENDATIONS ......................................................................................... 10
4.04 SITE GRADING RECOMl\.1ENDATIONS -STRUCTURES .................................................................. 10
4.05 SITE GRADING RECOMl\.1ENDATIONS -CUTIFILL TRANSITION .................................................. 11
4.06 SITE GRADING RECOMl\.1ENDATIONS -HARDSCAPE AND PA VEI\1ENTS ...................................... 11
4.07 COMPACTION REQUIREI\1ENTS .................................................................................................... 11
4.08 FILL MATERIALS ......................................................................................................................... 11
4.09 SWIMMING POOLS ....................................................................................................................... 12
4.10 SLOPES ........................................................................................................................................ 12
4.11 FOUNDATIONS ............................................................................................................................. 13
4.12 CONCRETE SLABS ON GRADE AND MISCELLANEOUS FLATWORK ............................................. 13
4.13 PREWETTING RECOMl\.1ENDATION .............................................................................................. 15
4.14 CORROSIVITY .............................................................................................................................. 15
4.15 RETAINING WALLS ..................................................................................................................... 15
4.16 FOUNDATION SETBACKS ............................................................................................................. 17
4.17 PAVEI\1ENTDESIGN ........................................................................ , ..................................... > ....... 17
4.17.1 ASPHALT CONCRETE ............................................................................................................... 17
4.17.2 PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE ............................................................................................. 18
4.18 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS ............................................................................................. 18
4.18.1 MOISTURE SENSITIVE SOILS/WEATHER RELATED CONCERNS ................................................. 18
Page ii
------------------------------------:,....--------------,
Marbrisa Resorts -Phase ill -Geotechnical Investigation
Carlsbad, California
MTGLProjectNo.1916All
MTGL Log No. 15-1063
4.18.2 DRAINAGE AND GROUNDWATER CONSIDERATIONS ................................................................ 19
4.18.4 UTILITY TRENCHES ......................................•......................................................................... 21
4.18.5 SITEDRAINAGE ...................................................................................................................... 22
4.19 GEOTECHNICAL OBSERVATION/TESTING OF EARTHWORK OPERATIONS .................................. 22
5.00 LIl\flTATIONS ........................................................................................................................... 23
ATTACHMENTS:
Figure 1 -Proposed Development Plan
Figure 2 -Rough Topo Map
Figure 3 -Geologic Cross Section (A-A')
Figure 4 -Geologic Cross Section (B-B')
Figure 5 -Geologic Cross Section (C-C')
Figure 6 -Geologic Cross Section (D-D')
Figure 7 -Geologic Cross Section (E-E')
Figure 8 -Retaining Wall Drainage Detail
Appendix A -References
Appendix B -Field Exploration Program
Appendix C -Laboratory Test Procedures
Appendix D -Standard Earthwork and Grading Specifications
Page iii
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation
Carlsbad, California
1.00 INTRODUCTION
MTGLProjectNo.1916A11
MTGL Log No. 15-1063
In accordance with your request and authorization, MTGL, Inc. has completed a Geotechnical
Investigation for the subject site. The following report presents a summary of Qur findings,
conclusions and recommendations based on our investigation, laboratory testing, and engineering
analysis.
1.01 Planned Construction
It is our understanding that the Phase III Project will include construction of a total of six villa
buildings that range from two to four stories, two four-story hotel buildings, a one-story
restaurant/lobby/meeting building, two one-story maintenancelback of hotel buildings, and a
potential two-story parking garage. Other improvements at the site are to include automobile
parking, concrete hardscape, swimming pool, and associated underground utilities. The proposed
development is shown on the Proposed Development Plan, Figure 1.
1.02 Scope of Work
The scope of our geotechnical services included the following:
• Review of geologic, seismic, ground water and geotechnical literature.
• Logging, sampling and backfilling of 13 exploratory borings drilled with an 8-inch diameter
hollow stem auger drill rig to a maximum depth of 51Yz feet below existing grades and 19
exploratory test pits with a mini-excavator to a maximum depth of 10 feet below existing
grade. Appendix B presents a summary of the field exploration program.
• Laboratory testing of representative samples (See Appendix C).
• Geotechnical engineering review of data and engineering recommendations.
• Preparation of this report summarizing our findings and presenting our conclusions and
recommendations for the proposed construction.
1.03 Site Description
The project is located along Grand Pacific Drive, south of Cannon Road, in Carlsbad, California.
The Proposed Development Plan, Figure 1, shows the site and proposed development layout. The
site is bordered on the north by Cannon Road, on the west by undeveloped land, on the south by
previous development within the Grand Pacific Resorts, and on the east descending slopes. Grand
Pacific Drive runs through the site in a north-south direction.
Page 1
Marbrisa Resorts -Phase ill -Geotechnical Investigation
Carlsbad, California
-------------------
MTGLProjectNo.1916All
MTGL Log No. 15-1063
Portions of the site were part of previous grading activities which created relatively level pads
graded so that sheet flow would take rainwater to a detention basin. Portions of the site are being
used as agricultural fields growing flowers while the remainder of the site is barren. There is a large
stockpile of soil on the northeastern portion of the development. The stockpile of materials is from
previous grading activities within the entire Marbrisa Grand Resorts development. Figure 2, Rough
Topo Map, was generated using the 'As-Built' conditions following the previous grading activities.
Figure 2 does not accurately represent the topography of the entire site since it does not show the
stockpile of the soil that was generated from previous grading activities.
1.04 Field Investigation
Prior to the field investigation, a site reconnaissance was performed by an engineer from our office
to mark the boring and test pit locations, as shown on the Proposed Development Plan, and to
evaluate the borings and test pits exploration locations with respect to obvious subsurface structures
and access for the drilling rig. Underground Service Alert was then notified of the marked location
for utility clearance.
Our subsurface investigation consisted of drilling test borings utilizing a truck mounted drill rig
equipped with an 8-inch diameter hollow stem auger and excavating test pits with a track mounted
mini-excavator. See Appendix B for further discussion of the field exploration including logs of test
borings and test pits.
Borings were logged and sampled using Modified California Ring (Ring) and Standard Penetration
Test (SPT) samplers at selected depth intervals. Samplers were driven into the bottom of the boring
with successive drops of a 140-pound weight falling 30 inches. Blows required driving the last 12
inches of the I8-inch Ring and SPT samplers are shown on the boring logs in the "blows/foot"
column (Appendix B). SPT was performed in the borings in general accordance with the American
Standard Testing Method (ASTM) DI586 Standard Test Method. Representative bulk soil samples
were also obtained from our borings and test pits.
Each soil sample collected was inspected and described in general conformance with the Unified
Soil Classification System (USCS). The soil descriptions were entered on the boring logs. All
samples were sealed and packaged for transportation to our laboratory.
Page 2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Marbrisa Resorts -Phase ill -Geotechnical Investigation
Carlsbad, California
1.05 Laboratory Testing
MTGLProjectNo.1916All
MTGL Log No. 15-1063
Laboratory tests were performed on representative samples to verify the field classification of the
recovered samples and to determine the geotechnical properties of the subsurface materials. All
laboratory tests were performed in general conformance with ASTM or State of California Standard
Methoqs. The results of our laboratory tests are presented in Appendix C of this report.
Page 3
Marbrisa Resorts -Phase ill -Geotechnical Investigation
Carlsbad. California
2.00 FINDINGS
2.01 REGIONAL GEOLOGIC CONDmONS
MTGLProjectNo.1916All
MTGL Log No. 15-1063
The site is located in the coastal portion of the Peninsular Range Province of California. This area of
the Peninsular Range Province has undergone several episodes of marine inundation and subsequent
marine regression throughout the last 54 million years, which has resulted in the deposition of a
thick sequence of marine and nonmarine sedimentary rocks on the basement rock of the Southern
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 Quaternary
times, resulted in the rolling hills, mesas, and deeply incised canyons which characterize the
landforms in the general site vicinity today.
2.02 SITE GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS
As observed during this investigation, and our review of geotechnical maps, the site is underlain at
depth by Quaternary-aged Old Paralic Deposits, Unit 2-4 Undivided (QOP2-4) and Tertiary-aged
Santiago Formation (Tsa). Previously placed engineered fill materials were encountered above the
formational materials. Logs of the subsurface conditions encountered in our borings are provided in
Appendix B. Generalized descriptions of the materials encountered during this investigation are
presented below. Geologic Cross Sections are shown on Figures 3 thru 7. The Geologic Cross
Sections were prepared using the information obtained from the Rough Topo Map, Figure 2.
Previously placed fill soils were encountered in all borings and test pits, except for Test Pit numbers
1 and 13, and extended up to 15Y2 feet below existing grade. As observed in our borings and test
pits, the fill materials consisted of Silty Sand (SM), Clayey Sand (SC), Sandy Clay (CL), and Sandy
Fat Clay (CH). The fills ranged in color from brown, reddish brown, and yellowish brown. In
general, the sands were fine to coarse grained, loose to medium dense and the clays were medium
plasticity and were firm to hard. Some organics and gravels were encountered in the fills.
Quaternary-aged Old Paralic Deposits, Unit 2-4 Undivided (QOP2-4) [formerly Terrace Deposits] was
encountered in all the borings and test pits at depths that ranged from existing ground surface to 35
feet below existing grade. As observed in our explorations, the Old Paralic Deposits consisted of
Silty Sandstone 'SM', Poorly Graded Sandstone with Silt 'SP-SM', Sandy Claystone 'CL', and
Claystone 'CL'. Colors ranged from reddish brown, dark brown, light brown, orangish brown,
Page 4
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Marbrisa Resorts -Phase ill -Geotechnical Investigation
Carlsbad, California
MTGL Project No. 19161\11
MTGL Log No. 15-1063
yellowish brown, reddish brown with black, and gray. The sandy materials were fine to coarse
grained, moist, and moderately cemented. The clayey materials encountered were medium
plasticity, moist, and moderately indurated. In general, the Old Paralic Deposits are considered
suitable for support of structural loading in their current condition.
Tertiary-aged Santiago Formation was encountered throughout the site below the Old Paralic
Deposits. The Santiago Formation material encountered consisted of Silty Sandstone 'SM', Poorly
Graded Sandstone 'SP', Poorly Graded Sandstone with Silt 'SP-SM', Siltstone 'ML', Claystone
'CL', and Fat Claystone 'CH'. The sandy materials were light reddish brown, light gray, light
brown, yellowish brown, fine to medium grained, moist, and moderately cemented. The siltstone
materials encountered were observed to be light organish brown and gray, non-plastic, moist, and
moderately cemented. The claystones encountered were gray, medium to high plasticity, moist, and
moderately to strongly indurated. The Santiago Formation material is expected to underlie Old
Paralic Deposits. In general, the sandy materials of the Santiago Formation are considered suitable
for support of structural loading in their current condition; however, there are highly expansive
clayey portions of the formation that require special handling during construction.
2.03 Groundwater Conditions
Groundwater was encountered in one boring, Boring B-1, at a depth of 41 feet below existing grade.
It should be recognized that excessive irrigation, or changes in rainfail or site drainage could
produce seepage or locally perched groundwater conditions within the soil underlying the site.
2.04 Faulting and Seismicity
Active earthquake faults are very significant geologic hazards to development in California. Active
faults are those which have undergone displacement within the last approximately 11,000 years.
Potentially active faults show evidence of displacement within the last approximately 1.6 million
years. The site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone and there are no
known active faults mapped through the site, therefore, surface rupture of an active fault is not
considered to be a significant geologic hazard at the site.
Potential seismic hazards at the site are anticipated to be the result of ground shaking from seismic
events on distant active faults. The nearest known active fault is the Rose Canyon fault zone, which
is located about 5.0 miles west of the site. A number of other significant faults also occur in the San
Diego metropolitan area suggesting that the regional faulting pattern is very complex. Faults such as
those offshore are known to be active and any could cause a damaging earthquake. Otheractive
PageS
Marbrisa Resorts -Phase ill -Geotechnical Investigation
Carlsbad, California
MTGLProjectNo.1916All
MTGL Log No. 15-1063
faults within the region include the Coronado Banks fault zone, approximately 21.0 miles southwest
of the site, and the Elsinore fault zone, approximately 22.6 miles northeast of the site. The San
Diego metropolitan area has experienced some major earthquakes in the past, and will likely
experience future major earthquakes.
2.05 LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL
Liquefaction is a phenomenon where earthquake induced ground vibrations increase the pore
pressure in saturated, granular soils until it is equal to the confining, overburden pressure. When this
occurs, the soil can completely lose its shear strength and become liquefied. The possibility of
liquefaction is dependent upon grain size, relative density, confining pressure, saturation of the soils,
and strength of the ground motion and duration of ground shaking. In order for liquefaction to occur
three criteria must be met: underlying loose, coarse-grained (sandy) soils, a groundwater depth of
less than about 50 feet and a nearby large magnitude earthquake. Given the relatively dense nature
of the subsurface soils, and the absence of a groundwater table, the potential for liquefaction at the
site is considered to be negligible.
2.06 LANDSLIDES
Evidence of ancient landslides was not found at the subject site. Recommendations are provided in
the following sections of the report which will help to reduce the potential for future slope
instabilities.
2.07 TSUNAMI AND SEICHE HAzARD
The site is not located within an area mapped by the California Geological Survey as subject to
inundation by tsunami. Given the location of the site at an elevation of over 200 feet MSL, within a
densely developed area, the inundation hazard posed by tsunami is considered to be low. Seiches
are not considered to be a hazard due the absence of above-ground tanks or reservoirs located
immediately up gradient from the site.
Page 6
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Marbrisa Resorts -Phase ill -Geotechnical Investigation
Carlsbad, California
3.00 CONCLUSIONS
3.01 GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
MTGL Project No. 1916A11
MTGL Log No. 15-1063
Given the findings of the investigation, it appears that the site geology is suitable for the proposed
construction. Based on the investigation, it is our opinion that the proposed development is safe
against landslides and settlement provided the recommendations presented in our report are
incorporated into the design and construction of the project. Grading and construction of the
proposed project will not adversely affect the geologic stability of adjacent properties. The nature
and extent of the investigation conducted for the purposes of this declaration are, in our opinion, in
conformance with generally accepted practice in this area. Therefore, the proposed project appears
to be feasible from a geologic standpoint. There appears to be no significant geologic constraint
onsite that cannot be mitigated by proper planning, design, and sound construc.tion practices.
Specific conclusions pertaining to geologic conditions are summarized below:
• Due to proximity of the site to regional active ,and potentially active faults, the site could
experience moderate to high levels of ground shaking from regional seismic events within
the projected life of the building. A design performed in accordance with the current
California Building Code and the seismic design parameters of the Structural Engineers
Association of California is expected to satisfactorily mitigate the effects of future ground
shaking.
• The potential for active (on-site) faulting is considered low.
• The potential for liquefaction during strong ground motion is considered low.
• The potential for landslides to occur is considered low if the remedial rec9mmendations
presented herein are incorporated.
• The on-site fill materials are considered not suitable for structural support in their present
condition. Recommendations are presented in the following sections forremedial grading at
the site.
• The proposed structures may be supported by a conventional shallow foundation system if
the undocumented fill materials are mitigated as recommended.
3.02 EARTHQUAKE ACCELERATIONS \ CBC SEISMIC PARAMETERS
The 2013 California Building Code seismic design parameters were obtained from the USGS
website using a project location of latitude 33.13° North and a longitude of 117.31° West. Based
upon the anticipated grading requirements at the site a Site Class D was used for the project. The
2013 Seismic Design Parameters are presented below:
Page 7
------------------------------,
Marbrisa Resorts -Phase ill -Geotechnical Investigation
Carlsbad, California
--Grou~d: Moti6n,
Parameter
Ss
Site Class
SDS
3.03 EXPANSION POTENTIAL
Value
1.119
0.431
D
1.178
0.676
0.785
0.450
MTGLProjectNo.1916All
MTGL Log No. 15-1063
Highly expansive claystone materials were encountered within the Santiago Formation. The
claystone observed had an Expansion Index of233. These materials are not considered suitable for
support of any new loads. Recommendations are provided in this report for mitigation of these
highly expansive clayey materials. Other clayey materials were encountered within the fill and Old
Paralic Deposits and are considered to have a very low to medium expansion potential (Expansion
Index of 0 to 71). The on-site fill soil could be used for structural support but structural design
criteria should be taken into consideration for the on-site soil's medium expansion potential.
Page 8
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Marbrisa Resorts -Phase ill -Geotechnical Investigation
Carlsbad, California
4.00 RECOMMENDATIONS
MTGLProjectNo.1916A11
MTGL Log N~. 15-1063
Our recommendations are considered minimum and may be superseded by more conservative
requirements of the architect, structural engineer, building code, or governing agencies. Tbe
foundation recommendations are based on the expansion index and shear strength of the onsite soils.
Import soils, if necessary should have a very low expansion potential (Expansion Index less than
20) and should be approved by the Geotechnical Engineer prior to importing to the site. In addition
to the recommendations in this section, additional general earthwork and grading specifications are
included in Appendix D.
4.0 I EXCAVATION CHARACTERISTICS/SHRINKAGE
Our exploratory borings were advanced with little difficulty within the fill soils and no oversize
materials were encountered in our subsurface investigation. Our exploratory borings were advanced
with some effort within the moderately cemented formational materials. Accordingly we expect that
all earth materials will be rippable with conventional heavy duty grading equipment with
experienced operations and that oversized materials are not expected.
Shrinkage is the decrease in volume of soil upon removal and recompaction expressed as a
percentage of the original in-place volume, which will account for changes in earth volumes that will
occur during grading. Bulking is the increase in volume of soil upon removal recompaction
expressed as a percentage of the original in-place volume. Our estimate for shrinkage of the onsite
fill soils are expected to range from 5 to 10 percent. Our estimate for bulking of the formational
materials is estimated to range from 5 to 10 percent. It should be noted that bulking and shrinkage
potential can vary considerably based on the variability of the in-situ densities of the materials in
question.
4.02 SETTLEMENT CONSIDERATIONS
Based on the proposed grading recommendations, we anticipate that properly designed and
constructed foundations that are supported on compacted fill materials will experience a total static
settlement of up to 1.0 inch with differential settlements of Yz an inch. As a minimum, structures
supported by shallow conventional foundations should be designed to accommodate a total
settlement of at least 1.0 inch with differential settlements of Yz an inch over a horizontal distance of
40 feet.
Page 9
Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation
Carlsbad, California
4.03 SITE CLEARING RECOMMENDATIONS
MTGLProjectNo.1916All
MTGL Log No. 15-1063
All surface vegetation, trash, debris, asphalt concrete, portland cement concrete and underground
pipes should be cleared and removed from the proposed construction site. Underground facilities
such as utilities may exist at the site. Depressions resulting from the removal of foundations of
existing buildings, buried obstructions andlor tree roots should be backfilled with properly
compacted material. All organics, debris, trash and topsoil should be removed from the grading area
and hauled offsite.
4.04 SITE GRADING RECOMMENDATIONS -STRUCTURES
Remedial grading for new buildings at the site should include removal of all previously placed fills
to expose undisturbed formational materials (Old Paralic Deposits, Unit 2-4, Undivided or Santiago
Formation). Based on information from the borings and test pits, removals may extend to about 15Y2
feet below existing grade. The bottom of the removals should then be evaluated by the geotechnical
engineer or geologist to see if further remedial grading is warranted.
Once formational materials have been exposed and approved, the undocumented fill materials (with
an expansion index of less than 50 and with no deleterious materials) may be placed as compacted
fill. Prior to fill placement, the exposed excavation bottom should be scarified to a depth of 8 to 12
inches, moisture conditioned and re-compacted. The materials should be compacted to at least 90
percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM Test Method D1557 at a moisture
content that is slightly above optimum moisture content. Fill materials placed at a depth greater than
30 feet below finished grade should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the maximum dry
density.
The highly expansive claystone materials of the Santiago Formation should not underlie new
structures. Based on the information from the field investigation, the expansive clayey materials
appear to underlie the main 4-story hotel building. Remedial grading should include complete
removal of all expansive claystone materials beneath the structure. The claystone materials should
be properly disposed of off-site. The lateral extent of the removals should extend from the building
footprint a distance equal to the distance measured from finish grade elevation to the bottom of the
removals, but should not be less than 10 feet.
Page 10
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation
Carlsbad, California
4.05 SITE GRADING RECOMMENDATIONS -CUTiFILL TRANSITION
MTGLProjectNo.1916All
MTGLLogNo.15-1063
After remedial grading to remove all previously placed fill materials and highly expansive clayey
materials have been performed, there is a potential within the individual building footprints to have a
transition where footings rest both on undisturbed formational materials and compacted fill. This
'cut/fill' transition could result in adverse differential settlement. To mitigate the cut/fill transition
we recommend that the formational deposits within the cut portion of the building pad be over-
excavated to a depth equal to one-half of the maximum fill depth (but not less than 3 feet) of the fill
portion of the building pad. The depths are those measured from the bottom of the proposed
footings. The over-excavated cut soils may then be placed as compacted fill. The purpose of the
cut/fill mitigation is to provide a uniform fill of at least 3 feet mat beneath all of the footings.
4.06 SITE GRADING RECOMMENDATIONS -HARDSCAPE AND PAVEMENTS
Remedial grading for new hardscape and pavement areas should include removal of all previously
placed fills to expose undisturbed formational materials (Old Paralic Deposits, Unit 2-4, Undivided
or Santiago Formation). Prior to re-compaction of soils, the exposed excavation bottom should be
scarified to at least 8 to 12 inches, moisture conditioned, and compacted. The materials .should be
compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum density at a moisture content that is slightly
above optimum.
4.07 COMPACTION REQUIREMENTS
All fill materials should be compacted to at least 90 percent of maximum dry density as determined
by ASTM Test Method D1557. Deep fill materials, those placed at a depth that is greater than 30
feet below finished grade, should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density as
determined by ASTM D1557. Fill materials should be placed in loose lifts, no greater than 8 jnches
prior to applying compactive effort. All engineered fill materials should be moisture-conditioned and
processed as necessary to achieve a uniform moisture content that is slightly above optimum
moisture content and within moisture limits required to achieve adequate bonding between lifts.
4.08 FILL MATERIALS
Removed and/or over-excavated soils may be reused as engineered fill except for expansive soils
(expansion index greater than 50) and soils containing detrimental amounts of organic material, trash
and other debris.
Page 11
Marbrisa Resorts -Phase ill -Geotechnical Investigation
Carlsbad, California
MTGLProjectNo.1916All
MTGL Log No. 15-1063
Imported materials shall be free from vegetable matter and other deleterious substances, shall not
contain rocks or lumps of a greater dimension than 4 inches, shall have an expansion index of less
than 20, and shall be approved by the geotechnical consultant. Soils of poor gradation, expansion, or
strength properties shall be placed in areas designated by the geotechnical consultant or shall be
removed off-site.
4.09 SWIMMING POOLS
Remedial grading for swimming pools should include removal off all previously placed fills to
expose undisturbed formational materials (Old Paralic Deposits, Unit 2-4, Undivided or Santiago
Formation). The over-excavation should extend a minimum of five feet laterally from the
swimming pool footprint. The exposed excavation bottom should be scarified to at least 8 to 12
inches, moisture conditioned, and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry
density at a moisture content that is slightly above optimum. The excavated soils may then be
placed as compacted fill. Soils to be placed within five feet of planned swimming pool bottoms
should have a low expansion potential, expansion index less than 20. The low expansion potential
should extend a minimum of five feet beyond pool footprint.
4.10 SLOPES
Grading at the site will include construction of a variety of minor fill slopes. We recommend that
slopes be inclined no steeper than 2: I (horizontal to vertical). Fills over sloping ground should be
constructed entirely on prepared bedrock. In areas where the existing ground surface slopes at more
than a 5: 1 gradient, it should be benched to produce a level area to receive the fill. Benches should
be wide enough to provide complete coverage by the compaction equipment during fill placement.
Slopes constructed at 2: 1 or flatter should be stable with regard to deep seated failure with a factor of
safety greater than 1.5, which is the generally accepted safety factor. However, all slopes are
susceptible to surficial slope failure and erosion, given substantial wetting of the slope face.
Surficial slope stability may be enhanced by providing proper site drainage. The site should be
graded so that water from the surrounding areas is not able to flow over the top of the slopes.
Diversion structures should be provided where necessary. Surface runoff should be confined to
gunite-lined swales or other appropriate devises to reduce the potential for erosion. It is
recommended that slopes be planted with vegetation that will increase their stability. Ice plant is
generally not recommended.
Page 12
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Marbrisa Resorts -Phase ill -Geotechnical Investigation
Carlsbad, California
MTGL Project No. 1916All
MTGL Log No. 15-1063
4.11 FOUNDATIONS
The recommendations and design criteria are "minimum" in keeping with the current standard-of-
practice. They do not preclude more restrictive criteria by the governing agency or structural
considerations. The project structural engineer should evaluate the foundation configurations and
reinforcement requirements for actual structural loadings. The foundation design parameters
assumes that remedial grading is conducted as recommended in this report, and that all the buildings
are underlain by a relatively uniform depth of compacted fill with a low to medium expansion
potential. Note that expansion index testing should be conducted on the individual building pads
during finish grading in order to confirm this assumption.
Conventional shallow foundations are considered suitable for support of the proposed structures
provided that remedial grading to remove undocumented fill materials and mitigation of cut/fill
transitions are performed.
Allowable Soil Bearing:
Minimum Footing Width:
Minimum Footing Depth:
Coefficient of Friction: 0.33
Passive Pressure:
3,000 IbslW (allow a one-third increase for short-term wind
or seismic loads). The allowable soil bearing may be increase
500 IbslW for every 12-inch increase in depth above the
minimum footing depth and 250 IbslW for every 12-inch
increase in width above the minimum footing width. The
bearing value may not exceed 6,000 IbslW
24 inches
24 inches below lowest adjacent soil grade
350 psf per foot of depth. Passive pressure and the friction of
resistance could be combined without reduction
4.12 CONCRETE SLABS ON GRADE AND MISCELLANEOUS FLATWORK
Interior slab-on-grade should be designed for the actual applied loading conditions expected. The
structural engineer should size and reinforce slabs to support the expected loads utilizing accepted
methods of concrete design, such as those provided by the Portland Cement Association or the
American Concrete Institute. A modulus of subgrade reaction of 150 pounds per cubic inch (Pci)
could be utilized in design. Based on geotechnical consideration, interior slab for conventional slab-
on-grade design should be a minimum of 5 inches and should be reinforced with at least No. 4 bars
on 18 centers, each way. Actual reinforcement should be designed by the project structural engineer
Page 13
Marbrisa Resorts -Phase ill -Geotechnical Investigation
Carlsbad, California
MTGLProjectNo.1916All
MTGL Log No. 15-1063
based upon medium expansion potential. Structural slabs should be designed by the structural
engineer and should span from foundation supports.
Concrete slabs constructed on soil ultimately cause the moisture content to rise in the underlying
soil. This results from continued capillary rise and the termination of normal evapotranspiration.
Because normal concrete is permeable, the moisture will eventually penetrate the slab. Excessive
moisture may cause mildewed carpets, lifting or discoloration of floor tiles, or similar problems. To
decrease the likelihood of problems related to damp slabs, suitable moisture protection measures
should be used where moisture sensitive floor coverings, moisture sensitive equipment, or other
factors warrant.
A commonly used moisture protection in southern California consists of about 2 inches of clean
sand covered by at least 10 mil plastic sheeting. In addition, 2 inches of clean sand are placed over
the plastic to decrease concrete curing problems associated with placing concrete directly on an
impermeable membrane. However, it has been our experience that such systems will transmit from
approximately 6 to 12 pounds of moisture per 1,000 square feet per day. This may be excessive for
some applications, particularly for sheet vinyl, wood flooring, vinyl tiles, or carpeting with
impermeable backing that use water soluble adhesives. If additional moisture protection is needed,
then a Stego Wrap moisture barrier, or equivalent, may be used in lieu of 10 mil plastic sheeting.
The Stego Wrap should be installed per the manufacturers' recommendations.
Concrete is a rigid brittle material that can withstand very little strain before cracking. Concrete,
particularly exterior hardscape is subject to dimensional changes due to variations in moisture of the
concrete, variations in temperature and applied loads. It is not possible to eliminate the potential for
cracking in concrete; however, cracking can be controlled by use of joints and reinforcing. Joints
provide a pre-selected location for concrete to crack along and release strain and reinforcement
provides for closely spaced numerous cracks in lieu of few larger visible cracks. Crack control
joints should have a maximum spacing of 5 feet for sidewalks and 10 feet each way for slabs.
Differential movement between buildings and exterior slabs, or between sidewalks and curbs may be
decreased by doweling the slab into the foundation or curb.
Exterior concrete slabs on the expansive site soils may experience some movement and cracking.
Exterior slabs should be at least 4 inches thick and should be reinforce with at least 6x6, W2.9/w2.9
welded wire fabric or No.4 bars spaced at 18 inches on center, each way, supported firmly at mid-
height of the slab.
Page 14
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Marbrisa Resorts -Phase ill -Geotechnical Investigation
Carlsbad. California
4.13 PREWETTING RECOMMENDATION
MTGLProjectNo.1916All
MTGL Log No. 15-1063
The soils underlying the slab-on-grade should be brought to a minimum of 2% and a maximum of
4% above their optimum moisture content for a depth of 12 inches prior to the placement of
concrete. The geotechnical consultant should perform insitu moisture tests to verify that the
appropriate moisture content has been achieved a maximum of 24 hours prior to the placement of
concrete or moisture barriers.
4.14 Corrosivity
Corrosion series tests consisting of pH, soluble sulfates, soluble chlorides, and minimum resistivity
were performed on selected samples of the on-site soils. Soluble sulfate levels for the on-site fill
soils indicate a negligible sulfate exposure for concrete structure. As such, no special considerations
are required for concrete placed in contact with the on-site soils. However, it is recommended that
Type II cement to be used for all concrete.
Based on the soluble chloride levels the on-site soils have a degree of corrosivity to metals that is
negligible. Based on the pH and Resistivity, the on-site soils have a degree of corrosivity to ferrous
metals that is moderately corrosive. The actual corrosive potential is determined by many factors ip.
addition to those presented herein. MTGL, Inc. does not practice corrosion engineering.
Underground metal conduits in contact with the soil need to be protected. We recommend that a
corrosion engineer be consulted.
4.15 RETAINING WALLS
Embedded structural walls should be designed for lateral earth pressures exerted on the walls. The
magnitude of these earth pressures will depend on the amount of deformation that the wall can yield
under the load. If the wall can yield sufficiently to mobilize the full shear strength of the soils, it
may be designed for the active condition. If the wall catmot yield under the applied load, then the
shear strength of the soil cannot be mobilized and the earth pressures will be higher. These walls
such as basement walls and swimming pools should be designed for the at rest condition. If a
structure moves towards the retained soils, the resulting resistance developed by the soil will be the
passive resistance.
For design purposes, the recommended. equivalent fluid pressure for each case for walls constructed
above the static groundwater table, backfilled with low expansive soils, and where remedial grading
has been performed is provided below. Retaining wall backfill should be compacted to at least 90%
Page 15
---------------------------------------,
Marbrisa Resorts -Phase ill -Geotechnical Investigation
Carlsbad, California
MTGL Project No. 1916A11
MTGLLogNo.15-1063
relative compaction based on the maximum density defined by ASTM D1557. Retaining structures
may be designed to resist the following lateral earth pressures.
• Allowable Bearing Pressure -3,000 psf
• Coefficient of Friction (Soil to Footing) -0.33
• Passive Earth Pressure -equivalent fluid weight of 300 pcf
(Maximum of 2,000 pcf)
• At rest lateral earth pressure -60 pcf
• Active Earth Pressures -equivalent fluid weights:
" .
Slope of Retained Equl\'aleitt Fluid Weight
Materbd. (pet)
Level 40
2:1 (H:V) 55
It is recommended that all retaining wall footings be embedded at least 24 inches below the lowest
adjacent finish grade. In addition, the wall footings should be designed and reinforced as required
for structural considerations.
Lateral resistance parameters provided above are ultimate values. Therefore, a suitable factor of
safety should be applied to these values for design purposes. The appropriate factor of safety will
depend on the design condition and should be determined by the project Structural Engineer. If any
super-imposed loads are anticipated, this office should be notified so that appropriate
recommendations for earth pressures may be provided.
Retaining structures should be drained to prevent the accumulation of subsurface water behind the
walls. Back drains should be installed behind all retaining walls exceeding 3.0 feet in height. A
typical detail for retaining wall back drains is presented as Figure 8. All back drains should be outlet
to suitable drainage devices. Walls and portions thereof that retain soil and enclose interior spaces
and floors below grade should be waterproofed and damp-proofed in accordance with the 2013
CBC.
For retaining walls exceeding 6 feet in height we recommend that a seismic retaining wall design be
conducted by the structural engineer. For seismic design we used a peak site acceleration of 0.45g
calculated from the modified seismic design parameters (Ss/2.5). For a retained wall condition, such
as the planned basement levels, we recommend a seismic load of l8H be used for design. The
Page 16
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Marbrisa Resorts -Phase ill -Geotechnical Investigation
Carlsbad, California
MTGL Project No. 1916A11
MTGL Log No. 15-1063
seismic load is dependent of the retained wall height where H is the height of the wall, in feet, and
the calculated triangular loads result in pounds per square foot exerted at the base of the wall and
zero at the top of the wall.
4.16 FOUNDATION SETBACKS
As a minimum, structural foundations should be setback from any descending slope at least 8 feet.
Screen-wall foundations should have a minimum setback of 5 feet. The setback should be measured
horizontally from the bottom outside edge of the footing to the slope face. The horizontal setback
can be reduced by deepening the foundation to achieve the recommended setback distance projected
from the footing bottom to the slope face. It should be recognized that the outer few feet of all
slopes are susceptible to gradual down-slope movements due to slope creep. This will affect
hardscape such as concrete slabs. We recommend that settlement sensitive structures, including
concrete slabs, not be constructed within 5 feet of the slope top without a specific review by the
geotechnical consultant.
Utility trenches, swimming pools, and biorentention basins that are adjacent to foundations should
not extend into the footing influence zone defined as the area within a line projected at a 1: I
(horizontal to vertical) drawn from the bottom edge of the footing.
4.17 PAVEMENT DESIGN
Alternatives for asphalt or Portland cement concrete pavements are given below. Immediately prior
to constructing pavement sections, the upper 12 inches of pavement subgrade should be scarified,
brought to about optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximUm
dry density as determined by ASTM D 1557. Aggregate base should also be compacted to at least
95 percent relative compaction. Aggregate base should conform to Caltrans Class IT or Standard
Specifications for Public Works Constructions (SSPWC), Section 200 for crushed aggregate base.
Asphalt concrete should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the Hveem unit weight. Asphalt
concrete should conform to SSPWC Section 400-4.
4.17.1 ASPHALT CONCRETE
Asphalt concrete pavement design was conducted in general accordance with Caltrans Design
Method (Topic 608.4). Two traffic types are anticipated at the site. These include areas oflight
traffic and passenger car parking (Traffic Index of 4.5), and access and truck routes (Traffic
Index of 6.0). The project civil engineer should review these anticipated traffic levels to
Page 17
Marbrisa Resorts -Phase ill -Geotechnical Investigation
Carlsbad, California
MTGL Project No. 1916Al1
MTGLLogNo.15-1063
determine if they are appropriate. Laboratory R-Value tests on the site soils indicate an R-Value
range of 20 to 64. For preliminary pavement design, an R-value of 20 was used. R-Value
confinnation and final pavement design should be perfonned on the finished soils within the
pavement areas. The following pavement sections would apply based on the Caltrans Design
Method.
Ttafficlndex Asvha~t Thickness Ba~e Thicknes$
4.5 3 inches 6 inches
6.0 4 inches 9 inches
4.17.2 PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE
Concrete pavement design was conducted in accordance with the simplified design procedure of
the Portland Cement Association. This methodology is based on a 20 year design lift. For
design, it was assumed that aggregate interlock would be used for load transfer across control
joints. Laboratory R-Value tests indicate that the subgrade materials will provide a 'low'
sub grade support. Based on these assumptions, we recommend that the pavement section
consist of 6 inches of Portland cement concrete over native subgrade. This PCC section is
applicable for both truck traffic areas and passenger car parking areas. Crack control joints
should be constructed for all PCC pavements on a maximum of 10 foot centers, each way.
Concentrated truck traffic areas, such as trash truck aprons, should be reinforced with at least
No.4 bars on 18-inch centers, each way.
4.18 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS
4.18.1 MOISTURE SENSITIVE SOILS/WEATHER RELATED CONCERNS
The upper soils encountered at this site may be sensitive to disturbances caused by construction
traffic and to changes in moisture content. During wet weather periods, increases in the moisture
content of the soil can cause significant reduction in the soil strength and its support capabilities.
In addition, soils that become excessively wet may be slow to dry and thus significantly delay
the progress of the grading operations. Therefore, it will be advantageous to perfonn earthwork
and foundation construction activities during the dry season. Much of the on-site soils may
be susceptible to erosion during periods of inclement weather. As a result, the project Civil
Engineer/Architect and Grading Contractor should take appropriate precautions to reduce the
potential for erosion during and after construction.
Page 18
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Marbrisa Resorts -Phase ill -Geotechnical Investigation
Carlsbad, California
4.18.2 DRAINAGE AND GROUNDWATER CONSIDERATIONS
MTGLProjectNo.1916All
MTGL Log No. 15:-1063
Groundwater was encountered in Boring B-1 at a depth of approximately 41 feet below existing
grade. It should be noted, however, that variations in the ground water table may result from
fluctuation in the ground surface topography, subsurface stratification, precipitation, irrigation,
and other factors that may not have been evident at the time of our exploration. Seepage
sometimes occurs where relatively impermeable and/or cemented fonp.ational materials are
overlain by fill soils. We should be consulted to evaluate areas of seepage during construction.
Water should not be allowed to collect in the foundation excavation, on floor slab areas, or on
prepared subgrades of the construction area either during or after construction. Undercut or
excavated areas should be sloped to facilitate removal of any collected rainwater, groundwater,
or surface runoff. Positive site drainage should be provided to reduce infiltration of surface
water around the perimeter of the building and beneath the floor slabs. The grades should be
sloped away from the building and surface drainage should be collected and discharged such that
water is not permitted to infiltrate the backfill and floor slab areas of the building.
4.18.3 TEMPORARY EXCAVATIONS AND SHORING
Short term temporary excavations in existing soils may be safely made at an inclination of 1: 1
(horizontal to vertical) or flatter. If vertical sidewalls are' required in excavations greater than 3
feet in depth, the use of cantilevered or braced shoring is recommended. Excavations less than 3
feet in depth may be constructed with vertical sidewalls without shoring or shielding. Our
recommendations for lateral earth pressures to be used in the design of cantilevered and/or
braced shoring are presented below. These values incorporate a uniform lateral pressure of 72
psf to provide for the normal construction loads imposed by vehicles, equipment, materials, and
workmen on the surface adjacent to the trench excavation. However, if vehicles, eqUipment?
materials, etc. are kept a minimum distance equal to the height of the excavation away from the
edge of the excavation, this surcharge load need not be applied.
Page 19
Marbrisa Resorts -Phase ill -Geotechnical Investigation
Carlsbad, California
P = 30 H psI
P Total = 72 psI + 30 H psI
P = 25 H sl
MTGLProjectNo.1916All
MTGL Log No. 15-1063
72 sl
P Total = 72 61+ 25 H sl
SHORING DESIGN: LATERAL SHORING PRESSURES
Design of the shield struts should be based on a value of 0.65 times the indicated pressure, Pa,
for the approximate trench depth. The wales and sheeting can be designed for a value of 2/3 the
design strut value.
STRUTS
(typ.)
UNDISTURBED
SOIL
BEDDING Pa = 30 HSh psf
HEIGHT OF SHIELD, HSh = DEPTH OF TRENCH, Dt ' MINUS DEPTH OF SLOPE, H1
TYPICAL SHORING
DETAIL
Placement of the shield may be made after the excavation is completed or driven down as the
material is excavated from inside of the shield. If placed after the excavation, some over-
excavation may be required to allow for the shield width and advancement of the shield. The
shield may be placed at either the top or the bottom of the pipe zone. Due to the anticipated
thinness of the shield walls, removal of the shield after construction should have negligible
effects on the load factor of pipes. Shields may be' successively placed with conventional
trenching equipment.
Page 20
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Marbrisa Resorts -Phase ill -Geotechnical Investigation
Carlsbad, California
MTGL Project No. 1916AII
MTGLLogNo: 15-1063
Vehicles, equipment, materials, etc. should be set back away from the edge of temporary
excavations a minimum distance of 15 feet from the top edge of the excavation. Surface waters
should be diverted away from temporary excavations and prevented from draining over the top
of the excavation and down the slope face. During periods of heavy rain, the slope fa.ce should
be protected with sandbags to prevent drainage over the edge of the slope, and a visqueen liner
placed on the slope face to prevent erosion of the slope face.
Periodic observations of the excavations should be made by the geotechnical consultant to verify
that the soil conditions have not varied from those anticipated and to monitor the overall
condition of the temporary excavations over time. If at any time during construction conditions
are encountered which differ from those anticipated, the geotechnical consultant should be
contacted and allowed to analyze the field conditions prior to commencing work within the
excavation. All CallOSHA construction safety orders should be observed during all
underground work.
4.18.4 UTILITY TRENCHES
All Cal/OSHA construction safety orders should be observed during all underground work. All
utility trench backfill within street right of way, utility easements, under or adjacent to
sidewalks, driveways, or building pads should be observed and tested by the geotechnical
consultant to verify proper compaction. Trenches excavated adjacent to foundations should not
extend within the footing influence zone defined as the area within a line projected at a 1: 1
(horizontal to vertical) drawn from the bottom edge of the footing. Trenches crossing
perpendicular to foundations should be excavated and backfilled prior to the construction of the
foundations. The excavations should be backfilled in the presence of the geotechnical engineer
and tested to verify adequate compaction beneath the proposed footing.
Utilities should be bedded and backfilled with clean sand or approved granwar soil to a depth of
at least I-foot over the pipe. The bedding materials shall consist of sand, gravel, crushed
aggregate, or native, free draining soils with a sand equivalence of not less than 30. The bedding
should be uniformly watered and compacted to a firm condition for pipe support.
The remainder of the backfill shall be typical on-site soil or imported soil which should be
placed in lifts not exceeding 8 inches in thickness, watered or aerated to near optimum moisture
content, and mechanically compacted to at least 90% of maximum dry density (ASTM DI557).
Page 21
Marbrisa Resorts -Phase ill -Geotechnical Investigation
Carlsbad, California
4.18.5 SITE DRAINAGE
MTGL Project No. 1916All
MTGL Log No. 15-1063
The site should be drained to provide for positive drainage away from structures in accordance
with the building code and applicable local requirements. Unpaved areas should slope no less
than 2% away from structure. Paved areas should slope no less than 1 % away from structures.
Concentrated roof and surface drainage from the site should be collected in engineered, non-
erosive drainage devices and conducted to a safe point of discharge. The site drainage should be
designed by a civil engineer.
4.19 GEOTECHNICAL OBSERVATION/TESTING OF EARTHWORK OPERATIONS
The recommendations provided in this report are based on preliminary design infonnation and
subsurface conditions as interpreted from the investigation. Our preliminary conclusion and
recommendations should be reviewed and verified during site grading, and revised accordingly if
exposed Geotechnical conditions vary from our preliminary findings and interpretations. The
Geotechnical consultant should perfonn Geotechnical observation and testing during the following
phases of grading and construction:
• During site grading and over-excavation.
• During foundation excavations and placement.
• Upon completion of retaining wall footing excavation prior to placing concrete.
• During excavation and backfilling of all utility trenches
• During processing and compaction of the subgrade for the access and parking areas and
prior to construction of pavement sections.
• When any unusual or unexpected Geotechnical conditions are encountered during any
phase of construction.
Page 22
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
Marbrisa Resorts -Phase ill -Geotechnical Investigation
Carlsbad, California
5.00 LIMITATIONS
MTGL Project No. 1916All
MTGL Log No. 15-1063
The findings, conclusions, and recommendations contained in this report are based on the site
conditions as they existed at the time of our investigation, and further assume that the subsurface
conditions encountered during our investigation are representative of conditions throughout the site.
Should subsurface conditions be encountered during construction that are different from those
described in this report, this office should be notified immediately so that our recommendations may
be re-evaluated.
This report was prepared for the exclusive use and benefit of the owner, architect, and engineer for
evaluating the design of the project as it relates to geotechnical aspects. It should be made available
to prospective contractors for infonnation on factual data only, and not as a warranty of subsurface
conditions included in this report.
Our investigation was perfonned using the standard of care and level of skill ordinarily exercised
under similar circumstances by reputable soil engineers and geologists currently practicing in this or
similar localities. No warranty, express or implied, is made as to the conclusions and professional
advice included in this report.
This finn does not practice or consult in the field of safety engineering. We do not direct the
Contractor's operations, and we are not responsible for their actions. The contractor will be solely
and completely responsible for working conditions on the job site, including the safety of all persons
and property during perfonnance of the work. This responsibility will apply continuously and will
not be limited to our nonnal hours of operation.
The findings of this report are considered valid as of the present date. However, changes in the
conditions of a site can occur with the passage of time, whether they are due to natural events or to
human activities on this or adjacent sites. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate codes
and standards may occur, whether they result from legislation or the broadenjng of knowledge.
Accordingly, this report may become invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside our control.
Therefore, this report is subject to review and revision as changed conditions are identified.
Page 23
FIGURES
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
c "05
C/) c
"O.Q
:::l .Q
c-c·-.Q 0
ear3 eam ~ ... 0 ... u
Q)
Q)...J Q)O a.
(1)
.oQ) .o...J C/)
E-EQ) E~ C/)
:::lea :::lm eo e
z.§ ZE LL+=i u
o>X ;t::·x C/)~ .2
;se 0.0 O>+=i 0>
... a. -... cC/) 0
~~ C/)a. .;:: Q) (5
Q)a. 0> 1-« alE
Q)
(9
>1 9
(J\ .....
+ :1 I w /Xl a..
~+
I-
~
..... "
" " '> , , ,
~ ';" ".
< ,
en C(
,
.~
J
I,
z
:3
0. .... z w :l
'0. 0 ...J W > w
'0
0 w en 0 D.
~ 0.
dd
Z,Z
'I-(!) oD-w....J ...,
,0-a:: a..
b o .....
0 z
J
C)
to-:E
..2
.----.--
w' e:: .. ::» '
CD u::
--'" ,,-,"'-::'
SCALE: 1" = 1 00'
REFERENCE: Grading Plans for: 'As-Built' Carlsbad Ranch Planning Area No.5, Sheets 11, 12, 13, 15, 17, and 18 (2006).
. ,
KEY:
A Boring Number and T B-13 Approximate Location
~ Test Pit Number and ~ TP-19 Approximate Location
+
E E'
Borings From Previous
Investigations
I I Geologic Cross Section
ROUGH TOPO MAP
MTGL, INC
PROJECT NO. 1916A 11
LOG NO. 15-1063
FIGURE 2
c
270'
. .
260
250 -
:
240 -, ,
-
Proposed ElevatIon
B-10 B~11
---
(projected 20~ ,f$W) , ,(proj~ct~d 33' .f,.IE), .
(projected 13' SW) TP-11
' ..
-
.. ., ,
FILL
FILL ---'--'_. __ ._'._', ..
230
220'
QOP2-4 QOP2-4
7-~ ..
Tsa CH --.....--. ~ ~_w
-FILL 7-'" ------210'
7 ___ . QOP2-4
TD=10'
200' -
190' -
180' -
170' -'
160' -
KEY: -'.,
"'--'-__ 1 Approximate locati.on of geologic contact
(queried where uncertain)
Proposed Building Location
.~
to--
TD=21%'
-
I
,
Tp'",51 ,
S .28.3° E
FILL Previously placed Fill
QOP2-4 Old Paralic Deposits, Unit 2-4; Undivided
Tsa Santiago Formation
CH High 'Expansive Fat Clay
CB-7
,(ptojectE!d'6' NE) ,-.-
... .. ... ProPO~ FF -224.3 ft
Tsa ------------
TD=25'
,
~
,
,
i
1
'.
I
)
I
!
I
I' :'
I
I,
it I:
t
c·
270'
...
-260'
~ 250'
I-240'
TP-18
(projected 42' NE)
B-13 230'
T Fill.
-.1:
TD=4'
QOP2-4
«;:H
'·7 ---
"
:f.-
-7
m r-m
220' ~ o z -CD' ---I-210' ~ -------7
l-
f-
f-
TD=51 ,
f-
200'
90'
80~
.70'
160'
::J
3
!!!. ........
. SCALE: 1" '::; 30' .'
2:1 VERTICAL EXAGGERATION
GEQLOG'lC CROSS-SECTIONS'
I p~OJECr NO. 1916A1 1.1:
MTGL~ INC I. LOG NO. 15-1063
.:FIGVRE.511:
r!
D
240'
'-230'
'-220' ' '
'-210'
, __ ' 200' -en F;:
.5 -190' Q)
~
_' B-2 ..
~ FILL
Proposed FF-1~
'-? -Z 0
i= ~
'-180' QOP2-4
W ...J W ,-170'
'-160'
?
Tsa
J
150' -TD=41Yz'
140' -
130' ---
KEY:
---1 Approximate location of Qeologic contact
(queried where uncertain)
Proposed Building Location
, ,
,
j ,
\
\
,
CB-2 TP-5
(projected 19' NE) (projected 4S' NE) Proposed FF = 198.511 .
" FILL
T -=
TD=4W
QOP2-4
i
I,
Tsa
TD=50'
FILL Previously placed Fill
QOP2-4 Old Paralic Deposits, Unit 2-4, Undivided
Tsa Santiago Formation
CH High Expansive Fat Clay
,
B-4 TP-6
(projected 8S' NE) (projected 87' NE)
EldSting Grade T FILL
.L
TD=3'
QOP2-4
TD=41Y:z' Tsa
SCALE: 1" = 3Q'
2:1 VERTICAL EXAGGERATION
D'
240'
.' 230'
I--220'
I--210' Proposed FF.=207.95ft ,-
B-7
(projected 14' NE)
....
? I-200' m r m
I-
<
190' ~
0 Z -CD'
I-180' ~
:::::J
3
!t!. -I--170'
I--160'
?
~
TD=46Y:z'
I-150'
I-140'
130'
GEOLOGIC CROSS-SECTIONS
PROJECT NO. 1916A11
MTGL, INC I LOG NO. 15-1063
FIGU~E 6111
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
KEY:
-1i)
E
.E
Q5
~ --z o
~ W -I W
E E'
240' 240'
...
230 230' , ~.
-~
--
220 220'
210 210'
-B'l ~
(proje~ted 24"SW\ TP-2 r ,,,,,"''''''M'' (projected 1~ SW ~ ,B", " ' B-<I FILL (p""e_ 53" NE) ) ~,_ ("",ected lS NE) -~.,~. (pio]ecl"d 18' NE) _ __ I ,-'-· .. I....:--J
200
190
200' m .-m
190' ~ o z
? _I-.L-FILL TD=4%' FILL
oJ ----.. TD=6%' _______ ~------------------------------------------------------------------~L---? -
QOP2-4
_ ~p,. -
? oJ
TD=26%'
--~
Tsa -?
-~ oJ
TD=41Y,'
I
f-
180
-CD'
180' ~
:::J
3 (J) -:::::: 170 170'
160' 160'
150' 5Q'
140' 40~
TD=51%' ,
130' 130'
S 24.40 E
\ 1
SCALE: 1"·= 30'
2:1 VERTICAL EXAGGERATION
FILL Previously placed Fill . !.
II ,. , " ,lquenea wnere uncertain) Qop,. Old Pamlic Deposits, unit 2-4, Undivided 'I GEOLOGIC CROSS-SECTI()NS
. . . Tsa Santiago Formation . PROJECT NO .. 'I ' Proposed Building Location' ' ", ',19,16A 11 ' I:,' CH High ExpahslveFalClay , MTGL, INC L()G ,,!O,llH,063
I ..
? Approximate location of·geologic contact (queried w/1e--.. ---....... :_\
[II FIG~R~ 71
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Marbrisa Resorts -Phase ill -Geotechnical Investigation
Carlsbad, California
Retaining wall
Wall waterproofing
per architect's
specifications
Provide open cell head
joints or outlet drain at
50 feet on center to a ~
",liable '''''""e '''''00 '"
Finished Grade 3"min.
MTGL Project No. 1916Al1
MTGLLogNo.15-1063
Soil backfill, compacted to
90% relative compaction*
Filter fabric envelope
(Mirafi 140N or approved
equivalent) **
Minimum of 1 cubic foot
per linear foot of 3/4"
crushed rock
3" diameter perforated
'-=====;;;:::;----'&-
PVC pipe (schedule 40 or
equivalent) with perforations
oriented down as depicted
minimum 1 % gradient to
suitable outlet.
Compacted fill
Wall footing
SPECIFICATIONS FOR CLASS 2
PERMEABLE MATERIAL
(CAL TRANS SPECIFICATIONS)
Sieve Size % Passing
1" 100
3/4" 90-100
3/S" 40-100
No.4 25-40
No.S 1S-33
No.30 5-15
No.50 0-7
No.200 0-3
* Based on ASTM D1557
** If class 2 permeable material (See
gradation to left) is used in place of
3/4" -11/2" gravel. Filter fabric may
be deleted. Class 2 permeable material
compacted to 90% relative compaction. *
RETAINING WALL DRAINAGE DETAIL
Figure 8
APPENDIX A
REFERENCES
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation
Carlsbad, California
APPENDIX A
REFERENCES
MTGLProjectNo.1916All
MTGL Log No. 15-1063
Anderson, lG., Rockwell, T.K., Agnew, D.C (1989). Past and Possible Future Earthquakes of
Significance to the San Diego Region, Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 4, No.2, pp 299-335.
California Building Standards Commission (2013). 2013 California Building Code, July 2013.
California Division of Mines and Geology, 1997, Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California,
Special Publication 42.
California Geological Survey, 2008, Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in
California, Special Publication 117.
Excel Engineering (2006). 'As-Built' Grading Plans for: Carlsbad Ranch, Planning Area No.5,
Resort Site -Phase 1, Project No. CT 03-02, Drawing No. 428-9A, Sheets 11, 12, 13, 15, and
17.
Kennedy, Michael P. and Siang Tan (2005). Geologic Map of the Oceanside 30' x 60'
. Quadrangle, California, USGS Digitally Prepared.
Leighton and Associates (2005). Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed 53-Acre Resort
Development -Phase 1, Carlsbad Ranch, Planning Area No.5, Carlsbad, California, Project
No. 040575-003, April 11.
Seed, H.B. and Whitman, R.V., 1970, Design of Earth Structures for Dynamic Loads in ASCE
Specialty Conference, Lateral Stresses in the Ground and Design of Earth-Retaining
Structures.
U.S. Geologic Survey (2010). Design Maps, http://geohazards.usgs.gov/designmpas/us.
Page Al
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I APPENDIXB
FIELD EXPLORATION PROGRAM I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Marbrisa Resorts -Phase ill -Geotechnical Investigation
Carlsbad, California
APPENDIXB
FIELD EXPLORATION PROGRAM
MTGL Projec(No. 1916All
MTGL Log No. 15-1063
The subsurface conditions for this Geotechnical Investigation were explored by excavating 13
exploratory borings and 19 exploratory trenches. The exploratory borings were excavated using an
8-inch diameter hollow-stern-auger to a maximum depth of 51 Yz feet below existing grade. The
exploratory trenches were excavated using a track-mounted mini-excavator to a maximum depth of
10 below existing grade. The approximate locations of the borings and test pits are shown on the
Proposed Development Plan (Figure 1). The field exploration was performed under the
supervision of our engineer who maintained a continuous log of the subsurface soils encountered
and obtained samples for laboratory testing. All drive samples were obtained by SPT or California
Tube Sampler.
Subsurface conditions are summarized on the accompanying Logs of Borings and Logs of Test
Pits. The logs contain factual information and interpretation of subsurface conditions between
samples. The stratum indicated on these logs represents the approximate boundary between earth
units and the transition may be gradual. The logs show subsurface conditions at the dates and
locations indicated, and may not be representative of subsurface conditions at other locations and
times.
Identification of the soils encountered during the subsurface exploration was made using· the field
identification procedure of the Unified Soils Classification System (ASTM D2488). A legend
indicating the symbols and definitions used in this classification system and a legend defining the
terms used in describing the relative compaction, consistency or firmness of the soil are attached in
this appendix. Bag samples of the major earth units were obtained for laboratory inspection and
testing, and the in-place density of the various strata encountered in the exploration was determined
The exploratory borings were located in the field by using cultural features depicted on a
preliminary site plan provided by the client. Each location should be considered accurate only to
the scale and detail of the plan utilized.
The exploratory borings were backfilled in accordance with State of California regulations which
incorporated compacting soil cuttings and bentonite chips.
We are also presenting select borings from the 2005 Geotechnical Investigation by Leighton and
Associates, Inc. The information from these borings were used for geologic interpretation and
engineering analysis.
PageBl
Marbrisa Resorts -Phase ill -Geotechnical Investigation
Carlsbad, California
MTGL Project No. 1916All
MTGL Log No. 15-1063
Description'
Boulders
Cobbles
Gravel Coarse
Fine
Coarse
Sand Medium
Fine
Fines
GRAVELS
are more than half of
coarse fraction larger
than #4 sieve
SANDS
are more than half of
coarse fraction larger
than #4 sieve
Clean Gravels (less
than 5% fines)
Gravels with fines
Clean Sands (less
than 5% fines)
Sands with fines
SILTS AND CLAYS
Liquid Limit
Less than 50
SILTS AND CLAYS
Liquid Limit
Greater than 50
Highly Organic Soils
G~~JZ~.
. Sieve. size Grafu Size'
GW
GP
GM
GC
SW
SP
SM
SC
ML
CL
OL
MH
CH
OH
PT
Well-graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures,
little or no fines
Poorly-graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures,
little or no fines
Silty Gravels, poorly-graded gravel-
sand-silt mixtures
Clayey Gravels, poorly-graded gravel-
sand-clay mixtures
Well-graded sands, gravelly sands,
little or no fines
Poorly-graded sands, gravelly sands,
little or no fines
Silty Sands, poorly-graded sands-
gravel-clay mixtures
Clayey Sands, poorly-graded sand-
gravel-silt mixtures
Inorganic clays oflow to med plasticity,
gravelly, sandy, silty, or lean clays
Inorganic clays oflow to med plasticity,
gravelly, sandy, silty, or lean clays
Organic silts and clays
oflow plasticity
Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous
fine sands or silts
Inorganic clays of high plasticity,
fat clays
Organic silts and clays of medium
to high plasticity
Peat, humus swamp soils with
high organic content
. SI,Zlli PR()PO~TiQN
. ApproXimate'SiZe I Trace -Less than 5%
>12" >12" Larger than basketball-sized Few-5%to 10%
3"-12" 3"-12" Fist-sized to basketball-sized Little -15% to 20%
%"-3" %"-3" Thumb-sized Some -30% to 45%
#4-%" 0.19" -0.75" Peat-sized to thumb-sized Mostly -50% to 100%
#10-#4 0.079" -0.19" Rock salt-sized to pea-sized c _ MOISTt1RE CONTENT -:' ,
#40 -#10 0.017" -0.079" Sugar-sized to rock salt-sized Dry -Absence of moisture
#200-#40 0.0029" -0.017" Flour-sized to sugar-sized Moist -Damp but not visible
Passing #200 <0.0029" Flour-sized or smaller Wet -Visible free water
., , CQNSISTENCY FJNEGIWNED SOILS: , RELATIvE,DENSITY CQARSEGlliUNED',S()ILS :,
. Apparent " 8PT Mod CA Sampler ApPllrent 8PT . Mot:i'CA,8ampler
,,' nensitv·· .. ,(Biows/li'oot) (BlowslFooi)· Density (BlowslFoot) , .. (Blow.slF~ot)
Very Soft <2 <3 Very Loose <4 <5
Soft 2-4 3-6 Loose 4-10 5-12
Firm 5-8 7-12 Medium Dense 11-30 13-35
Stiff 9-15 13-25 Dense 31-50 36-60
Very Stiff 16-30 26-50 Very Dense <50 <60
Hard >30 >50
Page B-2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
1
1
I
1
·1
I·
1
1
1
1
1
I
I
1
1
1
1
1
Logged by: SEV
lIIJethod of Drilling:
Ii: w w· ii:' j::' ..I ..I
0:: a. a. (,)
!:!:. w == == e:.
:c a. c:( c:( ~ Ii: ~ (fJ (fJ
W ~ en w ~ ..I Z C ::I W
al C al C
1
2 _rr:'V
'
I-3 36 I'~: 128
I-4
I-5 ,..--.,-.
,"
6 .. '
20 ,SPT
7
I-8
9
10 I:-:--\ --,'-~
I-11 78-8" ~ 112
12
13
14
15 I"",,,,; ~~':. .... ~:. ... ',-'
16 61 ~
17
18
19
I-20 ~,
21 71 I-$PT
22
23
I-24
25 ~
26 59 SPT
27
,28
29
I-30
PROJECT NO_1916A11
BORING NO. B-1
Date Drilled: 3/9/2015
8-inch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: 185' msl
.-~ e.... w 0:: DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS ::I t;
(5
== -,-
FILL: Silty Sand (SM), reddish brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, medium
dense, trace clay.
8.4
OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS, Unit 2-4, Undivided (QOI>2-4): Silty Sandstone 'SM',
reddish brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented.
8.4
Some gravel.
SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa): Silty Sandstone 'SM', light reddish brown,
fine grained, moist, moderately cemented.
A LOG OF BORING FIGURE B-1a
Logged by: SEV
Method of Drilling:
Ii: w w ii:' [ ...I ...I ~ a.. a.. (.)
w ::E ::E !!:..
i!: a.. < < ~ ; U) U) a.. w li: U) w 9 ~ ...I Z Q ~ ~ W fXI Q fXI Q
I-31 59 1m
I-32
33
I-34
I-35 ~
I-36 i 50 ; .
I ~
I-37
I-38
I-39
40 I 41 'ie, ,~ 68
I-42
I-43
1-44
I-45 I I-46 58
47
48
I-49
I-50 ---------~ ----,------
I-51 41 ~i~ ',. l;
I-52
I-53
1-54
I-55
I-56
I-57
I-58
I-59
I-60
PROJECT NO. 1916A11
BORING NO. B-1 (continued)
Date Drilled: 3/9/2015
8-lnch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: 185' msl
..... ~ w ~ DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS ~ 6 ::E
[Continued]
Silty Sandstone 'SM', light gray, fine grained, moist, moderately cemented. Atterberg Limits
(Non-Plastic)
Grayish brown, moist to wet.
y -
(Non-Plastic) Atterberg Limits
-----"(~~it:g!£~t~~y~IQ6~:~8~:Qt~fi[q~~~iD~Ity::m~IiGJtQ!i9ilI~~~t~t~::::::::::
Total Depth: 51 Yo feet
Groundwater encountered at 41 feet
Backfilled: 3/9/2015
.. LOG OF BORING FIGURE B-1b
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I-1
I-2
I-3
I-4
I-5
I-6
I-7
I-8
I-9
I-10
I-11
I-12
I-13
I-14
I-15
I-16
I-17
~ 18
I-19
I-20
I-21
I-22
I-23
roo 24
I-25
I-26
I-27
I-28
I-29
-30
~" I-...,..,..-I:~ ~"tI' : .
39 ,CAl'· , 114 6.8
,"
31 I:~pi
74 .:.!!!.
.... ',
.1:~.:,~.
43 ~
FILL: Silty Sand (SM), reddish brown, fine to medium grained, moist, medium
dense.
OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS. Unit 2·4. Undivided (QOD2-4): Silty Sandstone 'SM'..
reddish brown, fine to medium grained, moist, moderately cemented.
Dark brown and reddish brown.
Trace clay.
------------.---,-----_.-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
50
i..,..-, '
48 ,'SPT
Poorly graded sandstone with silt 'SP-SM', reddish brown and brown, fine to,
coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented.
PROJECT NO. 1916A11 ..6 LOG OF BORING
Maximum Density!
,Optimum Moisture
FIGURE 8 .. 2a
~----------~---------------------------,---------------------.---.
BORING NO. B·2 (continued)
Logged by: SEV Date Drilled: 3/13/2015
Method of Drilling: a-Inch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: 193' msl
Ii: w w G:' -i=' ...I ...I ~
0:: a. a. CJ e....
!:. w ::E ::E !!:. w ::c a. ~ ~ ~ 0:: DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS l-f/) ~ a. ~ w ~ f/) w ~ ...I Z Q ...I 0:: :I W 0
!XI Q !XI Q ::E
I':' lvontlnued]
31 62 ~ Poorly graded sandstone with slit'SP-SM', reddish brown and brown, fine to
,.. 32 coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented, rounded gravel.
I-33
I-34
I-35 I~i S!,~'''''A''''''' ~"''''''·TIOr. (Taa): Silty Sandstone 'SM', light brown with oranglsh I-36 70 ~ brown, fine grained, moist, moderately cemented.
I-37
I-38
I-39
I-40
41 53
42 Total Depth; 41% feet
43 Groundwater not encountered
Backfilled: 3/13/2015
44
-45
46
47
48
-49
-50
roo 51
I-52
I-53
1-54
I-55
I-56
I-57
I-58
I-59
I-60
PROJECT NO. 1916A11 A LOG OF BORING FIGURE B-2b
L--______________________ _
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Logged by: SEV
Method of Drilling:
I-w W u:-i=' u. ...J ...J
0:: Il. Il. (J
!:!:.. w ::& ::& e:.
:c Il. c( ~ ~ I-; U)
Il. W ~ W ~ U)
0 .J Z Q ...J 0:: ::I W
lXI Q lXI Q
1
2
3 ~
4 58 CAt' ~ 127
5 ~
I-6 32 :'.)'-:; rSPT
I-7
8
9
10 ~
, .
-11 40 (SPT
I-12
I-13
14
I-15 ~
16 70 :!t!
17
18
I-19
20 ~ . . . ~;", '
" 21 55 I'S,fiT
22
-23
24
25 1:-::-:
26 51 'SPT':
27
I-28
-29
30
PROJECT NO. 1916A11
BORING NO. B-3
Date Drilled: 3/10/2015
8-inch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: 18~' msl
....... ~ w 0:: DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS ::I I-U)
(5
::&
FILL: Silty Sand (SM), reddish brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, medium
dense to dense, some gravel, trace clay.
9.6 Brown, dense.
OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS, Unit 2.4, Undivided (Qop2-4): Silty Sandstone 'SM',
reddish brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented, trace clay.
Reddish brown and dark brown, fine to medium grained.
Total depth: 26% feet
Groundwater not encountered
Backfilled: 3/10/2015
A LOG OF BORING FIGURE B-3
----------~
BORING NO. B·4 I Logged by: SEV Date Drilled: 3/13/2015
Method of Drllll 8-lnch diameter hollow-stem au Elevation: 195%' msl
t: w w iL ~ I [ ...I ...I 0::: a. a. u t..
W :::E :::E e:.. w ::c a. -a: -a: ~ 0::: DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS I-~ U) U) ~ I a. w !I:: U) w 9 ~ ...I Z Q 0::: :l W 0
III Q III Q :::E
I
2 (QOI>2-4): Silty Sandstone 'SM',
light brown, fine grained, moist, moderately cemented. I 3
4 75-9" 118 10.4 Light brown with orangish brown.
5 I
6 87
7 I 8
9 I 10
11 42 Fine to medium grained, trace clay. I 12
13 I 14
15 I 16 71 Orangish brown with dark brown.
17 I 18
19
20 I
21 88-
22 I
23
24 I
25
26 55 Rounded gravel. I 27
28 I 29
30 I A LOG OF BORING PROJECT NO. 1916A11 FIGURE B·4a I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Logged t>y: SEV
Method of Drilling:
t: w w LL ~ -I -I Il: a. a. 0
!!:. w :::IE :::IE e:..
:::r: a. tJj < ~ t-~ tn a. w !:II:: tn W ~ -I Z Q -I Il: :;) W
III Q III Q
f-31 88-
11W ~
-32
-33
f-34
35 ~
36 50-3" ~
37
38
39
40
41 ~ r~
54 api"
42
43
-44
45
46
-47
r-48
49
50
51
-52
53
54
-55
-56
57
-58
f-59
60
PROJECT NO. 1916A11
BORING NO. B-4 (continued)
Date Drilled: 3/13/2015
8-inch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: 19~%' msl
-
.-. ~ ~ w Il: DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS :;)
t;
(5
:::IE
Poorly graded sandstone with silt 'SP-SM', orangish brown and dark brown,
fine to medium grained, moist, moderately cemented.
Gravel.
SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa): Silty Sandstone 'SM', light brown, fine grained,
moist, moderately cemented.
Total depth: 41 Yo feet
Groundwater not encountered
Backfilled: 3/13/2015
.
,
A LOG OF BORING FIGURE B-4b
.,
Logged by: SEV
Method of ~.-::::i'!:f.
t: w w u:-[ ...I ...I IX D. D. (J
w :IE :IE ~ ::c D. ~ c( ~ t-~ U)
D. W !II:! U) w ~ ...I Z Q IX :::I W en Q en Q
, . ~: .'
I-1
I-2 ~
I-3
I-4
I-5
I-6
I-7
I-8
I-9
I-10
I-11 23
I-12
I-13
I-14
I-15 50-6" • 107
I-16
I-17
I-18
I-19
I-20 I I-21 57
I-22
I-23
I-24
I-25 ~ I-26 50 Je!
I-27
I-28
I-29
I-30
PROJECT NO. 1916A11
BORING NO. B·5
Date Drilled: 3/12/2015
a-Inch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: --
..... ~ w IX DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS ~ 5 :IE
f!bb: Silty Sand (SM). brown. fine to coarse grained. moist. loose to R-Value
medium dense. trace clay.
Some gravel.
ISandy Clay (CL). brown. medium plasticity. moist. hard.
5.8
IOLD PARAI Ir. UI:I"Ui:J11 i:J, Unit 2.4. I .... (Qop2-4): Silty Sandstone 'SM'.
brown to reddish brown. fine to medium grained. moist. moderately cemented.
ISandy vIOY"LU"" 'CL·. gray. medium l-"O"LlI.iILY. mOist .................... ,,1' ....... , ..........
(LL=37.3. PI=12.9. PI=24.4)
Atterberg limits
A LOG OF BORING FIGURE B-5a
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Logged by: SEV
Method of Drilling:
Ii: w w iL j::' ..I ..I
0:: 0-0-(,)
!:!:.. w :::s :::s e:..
::E: 0-c( c( ~ I-~ tn tn
0-W ~ u; w 2!: ..I Z Q 0:: :::I W m Q m Q
~
I-31 54 I,SPT'
I-32
I-33
I-34
I-35 T
I-36
I','. "~
39 '$P~ r-=:-:-
I-37
I-38
r. 39
I-40 I~,; J .. : .. ;
I-41 66
;!t,,~,
2.!.
I-42
I-43
I-44
I-45 50-3" 1---0-I"$I!T
I-46
I-47
I-48
I-49
I-50
I-51
I-52
I-53
1-54
I-55
I-56
I-57
I-58
I-59
I-60
PROJECT NO. 1916A11
BORING NO. B-5 (continued)
Date Drilled: 3/12/2015
8-inch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: --
;t ~ w 0:: DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS :::I t;
(5 :::s
Silty Sandstone 'SM', reddish brown, fine to medium grained, moist, moderately
cemented.
Trace clay.
Gravels.
ilBORING REFUSAL ON GRAVEL LAYER AT 47 FEET)
Total depth: 47 feet
Groundwater not encountered
Backfilled: 3/12/2015
A LOG OF BORING FIGURE B-5b
Logged by: SEV
Method of Drilling:
Ii: w w u:-[ .... .... D:: D. D. (,)
w :IE :IE ~
:J: D. c( ~ ~ ti: ~ (/)
W 1IC (/) w 9 ~ .... Z Q D:: ::I W co Q co Q
!
I-1 "." ,
I-2 ~
I-3 It f-4 37 125
I-5 ~ I-6 31 r-
I-7
I-8
I-9
I-10
70 I I-11
f-12
I-13
I-14
f-15
f-16 75
I-17
I-18
I-19
I-20 ~. f-21 59
f-22
I-23
f-24
I-25 ~ I-26 66
f-27
f-28
I-29
I-30
PROJECT NO. 1916A11
BORING NO. B·6
Date Drilled: 3/9/2015
8-lnch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: 189%' msl
..... ~ ~
W D:: DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS ~ 0 :IE
.E!bb: Silty Sand (SM), reddish brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, medium Expansion Index
¥Se.
\"'''I'a, ''',U, I Index = 0)
12.1 Dense.
IBrown and dark gray, fine to medium grained, abundant organics.
IOLD P4R41 Ir. •• ;:" Unit 2.4, I" .I,. (~2-4): Silty Sandstone 'SM',
reddish brown, fine to medium grained, moist, moderately cemented.
Reddish brown and dark brown.
A. LOG OF BORING FIGURE B-6a
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.1
I
I
I
Logged by: SEV
Method of Drilling:
Ii: w w G:' j::' ..J ..J a: a. a. 0
!!:.. w :IE :IE e:.
::z:: a. ~ ~ ~ I-~ a. w lIr:: U) w 0 i! ..J Z Q ..J a: ::I w co Q co Q
I-31 54 I-~PT:
I-32
I-33
I-34
!-35 -:-:-;;--
I-36 50-6" ,iSPT
I-37
I-38
I-39
I-40 i-.--
'-'1', '~ _
• >
--
!-41 .. ",,~
67 ~$PT
I-42
I-43
1-44
I-45
I-46
I-47
I-48
49
50
I-51
52
53
I-54
I-55
I-56
I-57
I-58
I-59
!-60
PROJECT NO. 1916A11
BORING NO. B-6 (continued)
Date Drilled: 3/9/2015
8-inch diameter hollow-stem auger J:lev~tion: 189%' msl -
~ ~ ~
w a: DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS ::I t;
0 :IE
[Continued]
Silty Sandstone 'SM', light brown and orange, fine to coarse grained, moist,
moderately cemented, some gravels.
SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa): Silty Sandstone 'SM', light brown, fine grained,
moist to wet, moderately cemented.
Total depth: 41 % feet
Groundwater not encountered
Backfilled: 3/9/2015
... LOG OF BORING FIGURE e-6b.
BORING NO. B·7
Logged by: SEV Date Drilled: 3/12/2015
Method of Drilling: 8-lnch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: 202' msl
t: w w ii:" --[ ..J ..J :.!! ~ a.. a.. u ~ w :IE :IE E!:. w
~ a.. ~ ~ ~ ~ DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS a.. ; w ~ fij ~ w 9 ~ ..J Z Q ~ ;:) w 0
In Q In Q :IE
!-1 .E.!.bb: Sandy Fat Clay (CH), brown, medium plasticity, moist, firm to hard.
I-2
I-3 50-6" ~ '~~, 114 13.4 pH, Resistivity,
I-4 iOLD PARAI Ira ,Unlt2.4. I (Qop2-4): Silty Sandstone 'SM', Sulfate, Chloride
~ brown and reddish brown, fine to medium grained, moist, moderateiy cemented.
I-5
50-6" I I-6 Reddish and yellowish brown, fine grained.
I-7
I-8
9
10 I 11 50-5W
12
13
-14 Sandy Ciaystone 'CL', reddish brown with black, low plasticity, moist, moderately
indurated.
15 1(55.9% Passing No. 200 Sieve; LL=27.0, PL=15.3, PI=11.7) No. 200 Wash,
16 Atterberg Limits
19
-17
.... '"'' 'CL', reddish brown, medium plasticity, moist, moderately indurated. 18 -,
-19
20 I -21 42
Silty Sandstone 'SM', reddish brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately
valllalllau, trace clay.
-22
-23
-24 Poorly Graded Sandstone with Slit 'SP-SM', yellowish brown and brown, fine to
lIadl,,, grained, moist, moderately cemented.
i-25 ~ I~ ... . ... Atterberg Limits \',..", ' .. ","VI
-26 47
-27
... 28
!-29
I-30
PROJECT NO. 1916A11 A LOG OF BORING FIGURE B-7a
'-----------------~-------------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Logged by: SEV
Method of Drilling:
t: w w ~ j:" ...I ...I
It &:I. &:I. ()
!!:. w ::E ::E !!:.
::a:: &:I. c( c( ~ I-~ I!) I!)
&:I. W ~ I!) w ~ ...I Z C It ::l W
III C III C
I-31 ' ,
42 :81'>1 ..........
-32
I-33
I-34
I-35 -::-"'"
36 50-5%" :.!!!!
-37
I-38
I-39
I-40 50-5%" 'aPr ~
I-41
I-42
-43
-44
-45 .-.,;:;-",
46 86 8PT
47
-48
49
50
51
-52
53
54
55
-56
57
-58
-59
60
PROJECT NO. 1916A11
BORING NO. B-7 (continued)
Date Drilled: 3/12/2015
8-inch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: 202' m~1
~ :::e ~ w It DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS ::l l-I!) 0 ::E
[Continued]
Poorly Graded Sandstone with Silt 'SP-SM', yellowish brown and brown, fine to
medium grained, moist, moderately cemented.
Dark brown and black, abundant gravels.
Yellowish brown.
SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa): Silty Sandstone 'SM', yellowish brown, fine
IQrained moist moderatelv cemented.
Total depth: 46% feet
Groundwater not encountered
Backfilled: 3/12/2015
A LOG OF BORING FIGURE B-7b
Logged by: SEV
Method of Drilling:
t: w ~ ii:' g ....t
0:: A. A. (J
w ::E ~ e:.. :c A. ~ ~ Ii: ~ VI W ~ VI w i!: z C 0:: ~ W III C III C
I-1
2
3
4
I-5
6
7
I-8
9
10
I-11 14
12
13
14
15 •• 16 75-11" lei 105
I-17
I-18
19
20 ~
I -21 ~,!, i
72 3,
22
23
-24
-25 ~ \'; :
-26 ~ ... ; 70 I;*'!t·
-27 -----------------,------
-28 ~
-29 76 aPir
30
PROJECT NO. 1916A11
BORING NO. B·8
Date Drilled: 3/12/2015
8·lnch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: 213' msl
...... ~ w 0:: DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS ~ 0 ::E
FILL: Silty Sand (SM), yellowish brown, fine to medium grained, moist, medium
dense, trace clay.
Some gravels.
9.4
SANTIAGO FORMATION (Taa): Silty Sandstone 'SM', fight brown and reddish
brown, fine grained, moist, moderately cemented.
(16.0% Passing No. 200 Sieve) No. 200 Wash
Oranglsh brown.
Total depth: 29% feet
Groundwater not encountered
Backfilled: 3/12/2015
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Poorly Graded Sandstone with Slit 'SP-SM', fight brown and reddish brown, fine to
medium grained, moist, moderately cemented.
.. LOG OF BORING FIGURE B·8
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I BORING NO. B-9
Logged by: SEV Date Drilled: 3/11/2015
Method of Drilling: 8-inch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: 212' msl
I "-
Ii: w w iL ~ i= ...I ...I 0:: a. a. 0 ~
!:!::.. w :IS :IS e:. w
::c a. < ~ ~ 0:: DESCRIPTION LABTEST$ I I-~ 't/) :::I
a. w ~ l-t/) t/) w ~ ...I Z 0 Q ...I 0:: :::I W
III Q III Q :IS
I 1 FILL: Poorly graded Sand (SP), light orang ish brown, medium grained, moist,
medium dense.
2
I I-3 f.:--.-
4 47 CAl: 125 8.0 Orangish brown. -~
I -5 f---,-,-Coarse grained.
I-6 28 ,'SPT
I I-7
I-8
I I-9
'-10 -"
I -11 50-5" I"SPT-OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS, Unit 2·4, Undivided (QOP2-4): Poorly Graded
Sandstone 'SP', orangish brown, medium to coarse grained, moist, moderately"
I-12 ......... cemented.
I 13
14
I I-15 ~
I-16 "" -, Coarse grained, iron oxide staining. 85 I "SPT
I 17
18
19
I 20 ~
21 60 I SPr Medium to coarse grained. I 22
23
I 24
I-25 ..........
I 26 55 'SPT Coarse grained, trace clay. ~
27
I 28
-29
I 30
A PROJECT NO. 1916A11 LOG OF BORING FIGURE B-9a
I A1}lJi"1th.
Logged by: SEV
Method of Drilling:
Ii: w w Ii:' g ..J ..J ~ a. a. u
w ::E ::E ~ :c a. ~ ~ ~ I-~ a. w ~ tn W 9 ~ z Q ~ ::I W
aI Q aI Q
,
I-31 51 ~
I-32
-33
34
-35 ~ ,~<;
-36 38 ~
37
38
39
-40 i :-41 50 .'
:-42
I-43
1-44
I-45
I-46
~ 47
I-48
I-49
-50
51
52
-53
-54
55
-56
-57
58
-59
-60
PROJECT NO. 1916A11
BORING NO. B·9 (continued)
8-lnch diameter hollow-stem auger
;;i' ~ w ~ DESCRIPTION ~ 0 ::E
----------~--.
Date Drilled: 3/11/2015
Elevation: 212' msl
LAB TESTS
I
I
SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa): Sandy Siltstone 'ML', light orangish brown,
I
I
I
I
I
non-plastic, moist, moderately cemented.
Abundant gravels.
Light gray to oranglsh brown.
Total depth: 41 % feet
Groundwater not encountered
Backfilled: 3/11/2015
A LOG OF BORING FIGURE B-9b
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Logged by: SEV
Method of Drilling:
t: w w ii:' i=' ...J ...J ~ a. a. (J
!:!:. w ::IE ::IE e:.
::c a. <C ~ ~ Ii: ~ en w ~ ii) w ~ ...J Z C IX :I W £0 C £0 C
-"
I-1
I-2
I-3 50-5" 1·,CAl 126 ~ .' ,.. 4
5 " -. _ r~,
I-6 52 ~
I-7
I-8
I-9
-10 .
,'" ~
-11 29 'CAt; : 87
I-12 I-'--""
I-13
14
I-15 -------_. I,,,,,,, " .---,------
I-16 ·sPT 49 i-=-=-
17
18
19
20 I "It" ."
, "
21 56 :lipT.
I-22
23
24
25
I-26
27
28
29
30
PROJECT NO. 1916A11
BORING NO. B-10
Date Drilled: 3/11/2015
8-inch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: 22,5' msl
-~ w IX DESCRIPTION LABTE$TS :I In (5
::IE
FILL: Poorly Graded Sand 'SP', orangish brown, medium to coarse grained,
moist, medium dense.
3.1 Very dense.
OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS, Unit 2-4, Undivided (QoP2-4): Poorly Graded
Siltstone 'SP', orangish and reddish brown, medium to coarse grained, moist,
moderately cemented.
Orangish brown, coarse grained.
32.4
SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa): Fat Claystone 'CH', gray, high'plasticity, moist,
moderately indurated.
._-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy Siltstone 'ML', gray, non-plastic, moist, moderately indurated.
Total depth: 21% feet
Groundwater not encountered
Backfilled: 3/11/2015
A LOG OF BORING FIGURE B·10
Logged by: SEV
Method of ~1::::iIH'
t: w w u::-[ ..J ..J 0:: 11. 11. to)
w :IE :IE ~
~ 11. < ~ ~ ~ tn
W ~ tn W ~ Z Q ..J 0:: :::I W IX! Q IX! Q
f-1
I-2
f-3 50-5" ~ 120
f-4
f-5 r f-6 26 !
f-7
f-8
f-9
I-10 ~ I~l; I-11 11 • f-12 ;. f-13 82
I-14
I-15 I-I-16 60 1&
I-17
I-18
I-19
I-20 I I-21 63
I-22
I-23
I-24
I-25 ~
I-26 48 ~
I-27
I-28
I-29
I-30
PROJECT NO. 1916A11
BORING NO. B·11
Date Drilled: 3/11/2015
a·lnch diameter hollow·stem auger Elevation: 224' msl
..... ~ ~ w 0:: DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS ~ 0 :IE
if!bb: Poorly Graded Sand (SP), light yellowish brown, medium to coarse grained,
moist, medium dense.
7.8
IOLD DADAI 'I' ,Unit 2.4, (QOP2-4): Poorly Graded
Sandstone 'SP', oranglsh brown, coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented.
Oranglsh brown and reddish brown, trace clay.
ISANTIAGO FORMATION (Taa): Fat Claystone 'CH', gray, high plasticity, moist,
moderately Indurated. Direct Shear
Silty Sandstone 'SM', light orang ish brown, medium grained, moist, moderately
cemented.
Light gray.
A. LOG OF BORING FIGURE 8·11a
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Logged by: SEV
Method of Drilling:
t: w w u: i=' ...I ...I
~ a-a-u
!:!:. w :::E :::E e:.
:J: a-~ ~ ~ ... ~ a-w lII:: w =:!: (f)
0 ...I Z Q ...I 0:: :::I W
In Q In Q
31 77 ~
32
~ 33 --------.. _--.---.• -----
34
35 I .. _,;:,~
, .-
-36 90-11" :.!!!.
37
38
39
40 ~
50-6"
,. "~~
-41 ~
42
43
44
!-45 5i:; :;~,X:
-46 ,", 88 .;!!!.
47
!-48
!-49
-50 Ie • ,',
51 50-6" -SPT
-52
53
54
~ 55
-56
-57
-58
i-59
60
PROJECT NO. 1916A11
BORING NO. B-11 (continued)
Date Drilled: 3/11/2015
8-inch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: 22~'msl
-~ ~ w ~ DESCRIPTION LABTESiS :::I ... (f)
0 :::E
[Continued]
Silty Sandstone 'SM', light gray, fine grained, moist, moderately cemented, iron
oxide.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Poorly Graded Sandstone 'SP', light orangish brown, medium grained, moist,
moderately cemented.
Reddish brown, iron oxide.
Light gray.
Oranaish brown.
Total depth: 51 feet
Groundwater not encountered
Backfilled: 3/11/2015
.. LOG OF BORING FIGURE B-11 b
-,
-, '
Logged by: SEV
Method of DrmliIH;
Ii: w ~ Li:" [ .J
0:: 0. 0. 0 w ~ ~ e:.. ::c 0. ~ oe( ~ I-~ (I)
0. ~ ~ (I) w 9 .J Z Q 0:: ::) w
til Q til Q
I-1 ,"
I-2 ~.
I-3 lm; I-4 32 114
I-5 ~
~ ... 6 32 -7
I-8
I-9
I-10 I I-11 45 116
I-12
I-13
I-14
I-15 I I-16 32
I-17
I-18
-19
-20 I~~' ... 21 18 ~
I-22
I-23
I-24
25 P0
26 72 ~
27
28
29
30
PROJECT NO. 1916A11
BORING NO. B·12
Date Drilled: 3/10/2015
8-lnch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: 226' msl
--~ ~ w 0:: DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS ~ 0 ~
1.E.!.6b: Silty Sand (SM), brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, medium dense. Maximum Densltyl
Optimum Moisture,
Direct Shear
13.1
IOLD DADAI II"! . Unit 2.4 ........ (QOD2-4): Silty Sandstone 'SM',
.~ brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented, trace clay.
Direct Shear
15.3
SANTIAGO (TS8): Silty Sandstone 'SM', light brown and reddish
brown, fine grained, moist, moderately cemented.
Orang Ish brown,
A LOG OF BORING FIGURE B-12a
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Logged by: SEV
Method of Drilling:
Ii: w w ~ i=' ...J ...J
0:: a. a. C,)
!:!:. w :::E :::E e:..
:J: a. :; :; ~ I-~ a. w lIc:: u; w g ~ ...J Z Q 0:: :::I W
III Q III Q
31 78 (SF!T<
I-32
33
34
35 ,....."..,....
" ;,.'
36 .;~ ~~'
86 >~·t,.-.~ ~SPT
37
38
-39
40
41
42
I-43
I-44
-45
-46
47
48
49
50
I-51
52
53
I-54
I-55
56
I-57
I-58
I-59
I-60
PROJECT NO. 1916A11
BORING NO. B·12 (continued)
Date Drilled: 3/10/2015
a-inch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: 226' msl
....... ~ w 0:: DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS :::I ti 0 :::E
Poorly Graded Sandstone 'SP', light brown, fine grained, moist, moderately
cemented.
-
Total depth; 36% feet
Groundwater not encountered
Backfilled: 3/10/2015
A LOG OF BORING FIGURE B-12b
-----------------------------------------------------------.,
Logged by: SEV
Method of D.-::::i.~.
Ii: w ~ G:" [ ...I
II:! A. A. (.)
W :IE I e:..
::z:: A. ~ ~ t-~ A. W ~ w i:!: rn
9 ...I Z Q II:! !:) W III Q III Q
:~
I-1 ~ I-2
I-3 .-
t-4 33 • 123
5 ,...........
',",~",
6 22 • 7
-8
9 50-5" E
10
11
12
13 50-6"
-14
-15 50-6" • -16
-17
-18
-19 28 92
t-20
t-21 36
I-22
I-23
t-24
t-25 I~~
I-26 53 ~
I-27
t-28
t-29
t-30
PROJECT NO. 1916A11
BORING NO. B·13
Date Drilled: 3/10/2015
8-lnch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: 230' msl
~ !-w II:! DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS i:! rn (5
:IE
i.E.!.bb: Silty Sand (SM), brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, medium dense, pH, Resistivity,
trace clay. Sulfate, Chloride
Dark brown with biack, fine to medium grained, some gravel, some organics.
10.5
iOLD DADA' ,~ LlCt"U;:t'I;:t, Unit 2.4, , (Qop2004): Silty Sandstone 'SM',
reddish brown and brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented,
trace clay.
I Gravel.
Reddish brown, fine grained.
SANTIAGO FORMATIOh (Tsa): Fat Claystone 'CH', gray, high plasticity. moist,
indurated.
Direct Shear
26.2
(78.6% Passing No. 200 Sieve; LL=76.2, PL=20.5, PI=55.7; No. 200 Wash,
Expansion Index = 233) Atterberg limits,
Expansion Index
Sandy Claystone 'CL', gray, medium plasticity, moist, moderately Indurated.
Poorly Graded Sandstone with Silt 'SP-SM', light brown, fine grained, moist,
moderately cemented.
Silty Sandstone 'SM', yeliow and light brown, fine grained, moist, moderately
cemented.
• LOG OF BORING FIGURE B-13a
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Logged by: SEV
Method of Drilling:
Ii: w w ii:' i=' .J .J 0:: a.. a.. (,)
!:!:.. w ~ ~ e:.
::t: a.. < < ~ I-~ m m a.. w ~ en w i2! .J Z C 0:: ::J W
al C al C
I-31 57 I'SPT
I-32
I-33 ----------------._-----
I-34
I-3f? ~
I-36 50-6" I aPT
I-37
I-38
I-39
I-40 I",,~~;,
;":,' "
I-41 50-6" :!!!.
I-42
I-43
I-44
I-45 5
I-46 50-6" ~
I-47
I-48
I-49
I-50 '~;f
I-51 50-5"
I-52
I-53
1-54
I-55
I-56
I-57
I-58
I-59
I-60
PROJECT NO. 1916A11
BORING NO. B-13 (continued)
Date Drilled: 3/10/2015
8-inch diameter hollow-stem auger Elevation: 230' m~1
~ t.. w 0:: DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS ::J I-m (;
~
[Continued]
Silty Sandstone 'SM', yellow and light brown, fine grained, moist, moderately
cemented.
._----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Poorly Graded Sandstone 'SP', yellow and light brown, fine grained, moist,
moderately cemented.
Total depth: 51 feet
Groundwater not encountered
Backfilled: 3/10/2015
A LOG OF BORING FIGURE B-13b
-
LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO.1
Logged by: SEV
Equipment Used:
Date Excavated: 3/10/2015
l-
I-1
l-
I-2
l-
i-3
l-
i-4
I-
- 5
-6
-7 --8 --9 -
-10
Mini-Excavator with 18-lnch bucket Elevation: 181' msl
DESCRIPTION
OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS. Unit 2-4. Undivided (QOP2 •• .): Silty Sandstone 'SM', reddish brown,
fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented, trace clay.
Total depth: 5% feet
Groundwater not encountered
Backfilled: 3/10/2015
LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO.2
LAB TESTS
Logged by: SEV
Equipment Used: Mini-Excavator with 18-lnch bucket
Date Excavated: 3/10/2015
Elevation: 185' msl
I-
1-1
l-
i-2
l-
i-3
l-
I-4
l-
I-5
l-
i-6
l-
i-7
I-8
l-
I-9
I-
DESCRIPTION
Fill: Silty Sand (SM), brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, medium dense, trace clay.
OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS. Unit 2-4. Undivided (aoP2-4): Silty Sandstone 'SM', reddish brown,
fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented, trace clay.
Total depth: 4% feet
Groundwater not encountered
Backfilled: 3/10/2015
LAB TESTS
~ 10 ~--~------------------------------------------------------~ __________ ~
PROJECT NO. 1916A11 A. LOG OF TEST PITS FIGURE B-14
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO.3
Logged by: SEV Date Excavated: 3/10/2015
Equipment Used: Mini-Excavator with 18-inch bucket Elevation: 187' msl
w i=' ...J D. !!:. ~ x DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS l-t/)
D. !iii:: W ...J Q ::) III
J_',
1-1 ~ FILL: Silty Sand (SM), brown, fine to medium grained, moist, medium dense. _ R-Value
l-
I--2
"--3
- 4
I-5
I-OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS. Unit 2-4. Undivided (Q.,p2-4):· Silty Sandstone 'SM', reddish brown, I-6 "'" fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented, trace clay. l-
I-7 Total depth; 6 feet l-
I-S Groundwater not encountered
"-Backfilled: 3/1012015
- 9
-10
LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO.4
Logged by: SEV Date Excavated: 3/9/2015
Equipment Used: Mini-Excavator with 18-inch bucket Elev~tion: 191' msl
w
i=' ...J D. !!:. ~ x DESCRIPTION LA~TESTS I-D. !iii:: w ..oJ Q ::)
III
l-FILL: Clayey Sand (SC), reddish brown and brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, medium dense. I-1
l-
I--2
I-
~ 3
I-
- 4
- 5
I--6
I-OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS. Unit 2-4. Undivided (Qop2-4): Clayey Sandstone 'SC', reddish
I-7 ............ brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented, trace clay.
I-Total depth: 6% feet l-S Groundwater not encountered ...
I-9 Backfilled: 3/9/2015
...
-10
PROJECT NO. 1916A11 LOG OF TEST PITS FIGURE B-15
LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO.5
Logged by: SEV
Equipment Used:
Date Excavated: 3/10/2015
I-
r-
I-
r-2
I-
r-3
I-
r-4
I-
r-5
I--6
-7
-8
-9
-10
Mini-Excavator with 18-lnch bucket Elevation: 194' msl
W ..I no ! DESCRIPTION
lII:: ..I ::I 10
.E!bb: Silty Sand (SM), brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, medium dense.
OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS. Unit 2-4, Undivided (QoP2-4): Silty Sandstone 'SM', light brown,
"' fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented.
Total depth: 4% feet
Groundwater not encountered
Backfilled: 3/10/2015
LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO.6
LAB TESTS
Logged by: SEV
Equipment Used: Mini-Excavator with 18-lnch bucket
Date Excavated: 3/10/2015
Elevation: 197' msl
---
- 2 --3 -'-4
I--5 ... -6
~ -7
l-
I-8
"---9
I-
'-10
DESCRIPTION
FILL: Silty Sand (SM), brown, fine to coarse, moist, medium dense.
OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS. Unit 2-4. Undivided (QOP2-4): Silty Sandstone 'SM', light brown and
' ... ~: orang ish brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented.
~
Total depth: 3 feet
Groundwater not encountered
Backfilled: 3/10/2015
PROJECT NO. 1916A11 A. LOG OF TEST PITS
LAB TESTS
Maximum Densityl
Optimum Moisture
FIGURE B-16
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO.7
Logged by: SEV Date Excavated: 3/10/2015
Equipment Used: Mini-Excavator with is-inch bucket Elevation: 214' msl
w
j:' ...I Q. !!::.. ~ ::t: DESCRIPTION "LAB TESTS Ii: UI
~ W ...I C ;:)
ID
l-FILL: Silty Sand (SM), brown, fine to medium grained, loose to medium dense. 1--1
"-
-2
-3
-4 -
I--5 ._-----'CayerCi{crushed-rock~-----------------------------------------------------------------------
l-
I--6 " OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS. Unit 2-4. Undivided (Qop2-4): Silty Sandstone 'SM', reddish l-
I--7 brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented. .
"-Total depth: 6 feet - 8 Groundwater not encountered
-9 Backfilled: 3/10/2015
-10
LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO.8
Logged by: SEV Date Exc~vated: 3/10/2015
Equipment Used: Mini-Excavator with is-inch bucket Elevation: 205' msl
w
j:' ...I
Q. !!::.. == ::t: c( DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS J-UI
Q. ~ W ...I C ;:)
ID
l-FILL: Silty Sand (SM), brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, medium dense. I--1 -
,..-2
-3
. -OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS. Unit 2-4. Undivided (QOP2-4): SiltY·Sandstone 'SM', reddish -4 brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented. l-
I--5 Total depth: 4 feet l-
I--6 Groundwater not encountered
Backfilled: 3/10/2015 I--7 --8
-9
I-
---10
PROJECT NO. 1916A11 LOG OF TEST PITS FIGURE B-17
LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO.9
Logged by: SEV Date Excavated: 3/10/2015
Equipment Used: Mini-Excavator with 18-lnch bucket Elevation: 213' msl
w g oJ a.. ~
:l: c( DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS l-I/) a.. ~ w oJ Q ::l en
l-FILL: Silty Sand (SM), brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, medium dense. I-1
- 2 Trace clay.
-3
-4 --5 -Total depth: 10 feet -6 Groundwater not encountered -Backfilled: 3/10/2015 -7 -
I-8 Gravels. ..
I-9 SANTIAGO FORMATION (Isa): Fat Claystone 'CH', olive gray, high plasticity, moist, I-
"-10 moderately indurated.
LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO. 10
Logged by: SEV Date Excavated: 3/10/2015
Equipment Used: Mini-Excavator with 18-lnch bucket Elevation: 211' msl
w g oJ a.. ~
j: c( DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS I/) a.. ~ w oJ Q ::l en
l-FILL: Silty Sand (SM), brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, medium dense.
I-1
I-OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS, Unit 2-4. Undivided (QOP2-4): Silty Sandstone 'SM', reddish I-2
I-brown to brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented.
I-3 -Total depth: 3 feet -4 Groundwater not encountered
-5 Backfilled: 3/10/2015
-6 --7
-8 --9
-10
PROJECT NO. 1916A11 LOG OF TEST PITS FIGURE B-18
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO. 11
Logged by: SEV Date Excavated: 3/10/2015
Equipment Used: Mini-Excavator with 18-inch bucket Elevation: 222' msl
w
j:' .J Q. !:!:. :::E :x:: '" DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS I-m Q. ~ W .J C :::l al
--1 FILL: Silty Sand (SM), brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, medium dense.
I--2
l-
I-3
l-
I-4
"-I'\.. OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS, Unit 2-4, Undivided (Qop2-4): Silty Sandstone 'SM', reddish -5 brown to brown, fine to coarse grained, moist. moderately cemented.
-6 Total depth: 411. feet --7 Groundwater not encountered
Backfilled: 3/10/2015 -
I-8 ,
l-
I--9 -
-10
LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO. 12
Logged by: SEV Date Excavated: 3/10/2015
Equipment Used: Mini-Excavator with 18-inch bucket Elevation: 226' msl
w j:' .J
Q. U. :::E -:x:: ~ DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS I-Q. ~ W .J C :::l al
I-1 FILL: Silty Sand (SM), brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, medium dense.
l-
I-2 ... -----'STItySaria-{SM)~browii-aria-reciciiShbrowri,-fiiie-tocoarSegrairiecrmoisCmEidiiim-cieiise~----------.~,
l-. some calcium carbonate. pH, Resistivity, I-3
"-Sulfate, Chloride .. -4
-5 OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS. Unit 2-4, Undivided (Qop2-4): Silty Sandstone 'SM', reddish
brown to brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented. -
I-6 Total depth; 5 feet l-
I-7 Groundwater not encountered
I-Backfilled: 3/10/15
I--8
I--9
-10
PROJECT NO. 1916A11 LOG OF TEST PITS FIGURE B-19
LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO. 13
Logged by: SEV
Equipment Used:
Date Excavated: 3/10/2015
-1 -
- 2 -
- 3 -
- 4 ,...
~ 5
,...
I-e
l-
I-7
I-8
r-
I-9
r-
Mlnl·Excavator with 18·lnch bucket Elevation: 215' msl
DESCRIPTION
OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS. Unit 2-4. Undivided (Qop2-4): Silty Sandstone 'SM', reddish
brown to brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented.
Total depth: 7 feet
Groundwater not encountered
Backfilled: 3/10/2015
LAB TESTS
~ 10 ~--~------------------------------------------------------~----------~
LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO. 14
Logged by: SEV
~nlltr'm.~nt Used: Mlnl·Excavator with 18·lnch bucket
[
~ W Q
2
3
4
5
e
7
8
9
DESCRIPTION
Silty Sand (SM), brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, medium dense.
(Expansion Index = 0)
Total depth: eYo feet
Groundwater not encountered
Backfilled: 3/10/2015
Date Excavated: 3/10/2015
Elevation: 219' msl
LAB TESTS
Expansion Index
PROJECT NO. 1916A11 LOG OF TEST PITS FIGURE B·20
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO. 15
Logged by: SEV Date Excavated: 3/10/2015
Equipment Used: Mini-Excavator with 18-inch bucket Elevation: 221' msl
-
w i=' -I 0. !:!:.. :IE
:::t: .~ DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS t-o. ~ W -I Q ::;,
III
l-FILL: Silty Sand (SM), brown, fine to medium grained, moist, medium dense. r-1
'--2 --3 --4 -r-5
t-Total depth: a feet
r-6 Groundwater not encountered
I-Backfilled: 3/10/2015
r-7
'--a I"\. OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS. Unit 2-4. Undivided (Qop2-4): Silty Sandstone 'SM', orangish --9 brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented.
-10
LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO. 16
Logged by: SEV Date Excavated: 3/10/2015
Equipment Used: Mini-Excavator with 18-inch bucket Elevation: 232' msl
w
i=' -I 0. !:!:.. ~ :::t: DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS Ii: ~ W -I Q ::;,
III
l-FILL: Silty Sand (SM), brown fine to coarse grained moist medium dense. r-1
I-OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS. Unit 2-4. Undivided (Qop2-4): Silty Sandstone 'SM', reddish brown r-2
I-and brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented.
-3 --4
-5 Total depth: 4 feet
Groundwater not encountered
r-6 Backfilled: 3/10/2015
I-
r-7
I-
r-a
I-
- 9 -
-10
PROJECT NO. 1916A11 LOG OF TEST PITS FIGURE B-21
-------------------~-----~---------------.
LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO. 17
Logged by: SEV
Equipment Used:
Date Excavated: 3/10/2015
Mini-Excavator with 18-lnch bucket Elevation: 223' msl
DESCRIPTION
::. 1 ~.E!bb: Silty Sand (SM), brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, medium dense.
-
- 2 -
- 3 -
- 4 -
- 5 ~--~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~--~~~~~~--~ _ OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS. Unit 2-4. Undivided (Qop2-4): Silty Sandstone 'SM', reddish brown
~ 6 and brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented.
:-r-7
I-8
l-
I-9
I-
Total depth: 5% feet
Groundwater not encountered
Backfilled: 3/10/2015
LAB TESTS
R-Value
~ 10 ~--~------------------------------------------------------~----------~
LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO. 18
Logged by: SEV
Equipment Used:
Date Excavated: 3/10/2015
Mini-Excavator with 18-lnch bucket Elevation: 227'W msl
-1
-
- 2 -
- 3
- 4
- 5 -
- 6 -
- 7
- 8
- 9 -
~ D.. ~ DESCRIPTION
~ -I :::I !Xl
FILL: Silty Sand (SM), brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, medium dense.
OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS. Unit 2-4. Undivided (Qop2-4): Silty Sandstone 'SM" reddish brown
fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented.
Total depth: 3% feet
Groundwater not encountered
Backfilled: 3/10/2015
LAB TESTS
-10 ~--~--------______________________________________________ ~ __________ _J
PROJECT NO. 1916A11 ~ LOG OF TEST PITS FIGURE B-22
~----------------------------------~-------------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO. 19
Logged by: SEV
Equipment Used:
Date Excavated: 3/10/2015
--1
I-2
r-
I-3
r-
I-4
I-
-5 --6
-7
I-8
r-
I-9
I-
'-10
W ..J ll.
Mini-Excavator with 18-inch bucket Elevation: 233' msl
! DESCRIPTION LAB TESTS'
~ ..J :;) III
FILL: Silty Sand (SM), brown, fine to coarse grained, moist, medium dense.
OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS, Unit 2-4, Undivided (Qop2-4): Silty Sandstone 'SM', reddish brown
fine to coarse grained, moist, moderately cemented.
Total depth: 4 feet
Groundwater not encountered
Backfilled: 311012015
PROJECT NO. 1916A11 A. LOG OF TEST PITS FIGUREB-23
I
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG 8-7
Date ~ __ -...::2::....-..;..16.:;;..-...;;.0.;:;..5 ___ _
. Project
Drilling Co.
Grand Pacific Resorts
Sheet 1
Project No.
Type of Rig
of 1 I
040575-003
West Hazmat
Hole Diameter 8"
Elevation Top of Elevation 186'
Drive Weight
Location See Map
HollOW-Stem Auger
Drop 30" I 140 pound hammer
r: 1/1 (,,) g .... £i .... :COl QI '0 IV(J.) e.(J.) e.o .a >(J.) (J.)QI E...J (J.)u. ou. E jjj (!) «
N J: 0 ,. ... . . ....
185 -" -,'
• t ... t.: ......
...... --... *. , . , " .... -.. -...... :.~. :-.:.
-+ ......... .... +.+,. , , " 5-: .:.:.: .•.. :
180 -+ ... + ... .. ,. ....
'-' ',' -... + + ..
: .... :: It ...
+ ... " ... -......... . ",
-:: .. :. :. :-.::
10-" ........ ........
'" ','
175 -.', ::.:':' ..... -... +. -': ....
",
-:': :',:.:',:,
" ... -. -': +.'" .. ",
15-.. : ..... :. :+:+.
+ .....
170 -'-: : '::,
-
-
-
20-
165 -
-
-
-
25-
160 -
-
-
-
30
SAMPLE TYPES:
S SPUTSPOON
R RING SAMPLE
B BULK SAMPLE
T TUBE SAMPLE
0 ~ (1)~ cn-DESCRIPTION .... Z 'iii w ' ~g '-..... IV~ (1) r:'t-.ar: QlO -(,) Q. OU-W(J.) (,), 00. ,--_en E mt >. Or: '0:;) Logged By GJM IV n. ... :Eo en 0 (,) en-
Sampled By GJM
;:iM TOPSOn.,
Hfu0"';'J¥Rt~JU<. tQ.lllerulllIl.s8ND:..PsrlLb!9w....dMl1P tQ mo.isUQQ~ _ UATE ARYTERRACE DEPOSITS (bo
f@ 1': :silty tme to medium SAND: urange-brown, damp to moist, very dense
R·1 89 116.3 9.6 @ S': Silty fine to medium SAND: Orange· brown, damp to moist, very B·l dense
@4-8'
R-2 78 123.4 lOA @ 10': Silty fine to medium SAND: Dark orange-brown, damp 10 moist, dense to very dense
R·3 60 107.8 11.9 @ IS': Silty fine to medium SAND: Dark orange· brown, damp to moist, dense to very dense
Total Depth = 16.5 Feet
No ri0und water encountered at time of drilling
Bac filled with bentonite grout on 2/16/05
TYPE OF TESTS: 41 G GRAB SAMPLE OS DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANAl.. VSIS
SH SHELBY TUBE MD MAXIMUM DENSITY AT ATTERBURG LIMITS
CN CONSOLIDATION EI EXPANSION INDEX
CR CORROSION RV R,VALUE
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
1/1 .... W QI I-.... 0 (J.) g;
l-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I e 2-19-03 jec-t--------~~~~----
Drilling Co.
l Ie Diameter
evation Top of Hole
~~ IJ\
0 I!) .-"C .cOl =' 0.0 .... r~ Ill....! .-e.. 0\-
CD .... <C
o
11 -: ; ~ : : -: ; ~ ..
I -: :: , , , ' -',., ,
" '
I 5-:.:::
-, , ',',
" '
I
_:::' ,
" . -' ,',', " . , ,
-'.', ,
110
--= : : ~ : : .
I
,I
:1
,I
I
I • ~
I i ,
• I L I
-:: : ..
-'.' , ' , .
-:, :
15-:': , . '. ' -:: .. '
-: . :',' , .; .
-:.:' ,
-,' '
, "
20-:.: . ,
'. ' -" '. '
_ :': ': .. : horizontal -~~'; , '[ : b:generally
: ': ': ~ .
25-:':';" ,
i ,0
-~~(/ -,
" ,
" ' -, ,"
" ,
SOSA( 11/77)
10 in.
188 ft
.
0 Z
QJ -0. S III (I)
2
3
n
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG CB-l Sheet _1_ of _4_ j,
Project No. .04057-5-002
Type of Rig HS Core Rig CME 95 ~5 Grand Pacific Resort
Tri-County Drilling
Drive Weight
Ref or Datum
Jl r..
0\--+-QJ~ .-
If) ° Ill""'
e..V'
:30 C4-=' .... olL QJO ""c III I!) jOe.. 00.
'J '-0\-I!) Jl °c a.. e.. 1:0
0 u
86
54
98
________ -'1~4!.::0:..Jpt:.:o~u::;n~d::::.s ________ Drop .1Q.. in~ ~ f ~ I
OJr. If) • 1Il~ -u U.
_(I) ._::) g",
SM
SM
SP-SM
SP
SM
Mean Sea Level
GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION
Logged By _____ ----=MD=J::;./;::.BJ:::.:O:::.-____ _
Sampled By MDJ/BJO
QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS (Ot)
@ 0': Silty fme SANDSTONE: Red-brown, dry, medium qense
@ 3,5': Silty fine SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, damp, very deJ)se
@ 10': Becomes dense
@ IS': Becomes very dense
@ 15'-20': RunJil. RecoveryIRQD=80/72
@ 15'-16': No recovery
@ 16'-17,8': Silty fme SANDSTONE, Orange-brown, damp, dense
@ 17,8'-20': Well cemented SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, damp, very
dense
@20'-25': Run 112. RecoveryJRQD=100/95
@20-23,7': Silty medium SANDSTONE: Orange-brown to red-brown, damp,
very dense
@23'-23.5': Well indurated blocky SANDSTONE: Interbedded 118" thick
light brown beds, generally horizontal
@23.5'-25': Very fine SANDSTONE with sill: Orange-brown, damp, very
dense; micaceous
@ 25'-30': Run 113, RccoveryJRQD:=96/90
@ 25'-25.5'; Very fme SANDSTONE with silt: Orange-brown, damp, dense;
massive
@ 25.5'-26.4': Fine SANDSTONE: Orange-browIl, dry 10 damp, dense;
friable .
@ 26.4': Silty fme SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, damp, very dense I
I r
I
i
LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES
------------------~~--------------------------~------~-----------------------------------,
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG CB-l I
Date ____ ...!.2~-1!:.:9::..:.-~03::!:.._ __ _ Sheet _2_ of _4_ .
Project No. 040575-002 'I
Type of Rig HS Core Rig CME !
Project
Drilling Co.
Hole Diameter
Elevation Top of Hole
til
.c'"' 0 QI .-"0 +-+-.cOl ;j o.QI 0.0 +-QIQI 11I...J .-O'+-c-+-'"' (.!) +-
10 in.
188 ft.
Grand Pacific Resort
Tri-County Drilling
Drive Weight
Ref. or Datum
140 pounds Drop .1!L iii
Mean Sea Level :1
:n '"' • ~ tilt ~'"' ~c ~~ GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION I
:3 0 1:4-;j+--0 QI 0\.1.. QI 0 1ii I: u. -r.. 00. QI ~ III QI v .-+--(I) MDI/BID
<l:
30
111 a..:n ~ I: '-:5 Logged By ______ -=.:.=:.:...::::;~ _____ _
~~~~d=========db=(I)==d===~d~d=~U;°d=(I);O=v=fS;am~p;led;;BY~==========~MD~J~ro~J~D~===========,I
SM OUATERNARYTERRACE DEPOSITS (Oil ' .. _ .... ,' .
~ of.... . . · .
-.. :..:.
3S~[:i~:" b,h";W,ml
-: >:.:. : · .' ~ .
-:::::::~:'
:::' .. -:', .::-:.:, · .', -:.:.:>.::
40-":"':-.> : ~:.::. : .. :
-'.:: .' :-.' . · .' _ ........ .
· . .'
45-',::,,::-:::' ,',:
-:':?>
.' '. -:.:':;.:'::
' .. · . . . -:.:. :;.:> -:-:.::. :.
50 -:-;.;:->:: 6 degrees nonh dip · . '.' -~«< -:::::;:<:
-:.:.::->::
',': ..
-:.:.::.:':: · .,','.
55-... :~.
" .
-:; : · .
-: ....
-:: : · .
.' ". · : ~ -" ' ... :
/if)
505A<11 177)
Bag-4
5 72
SP
SM
SP
SP
SP-SM
@ 30'·35': Run #4, Recovery/RQD= 100170
@ 30'-32.2': Silty medium SANDSTONE: Orange-brown. moist, dense; I
micaceous
@ 32.2'-33.1': Fine SANDSTONE: Light gray/orange-brown, damp to dry,
dense; mottled, cross-bedded, iron-oxide stained bedding
@33.1'-35': Silty fme SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, damp, dense; possible I
cross-bedding; micaceous
@ 40'-45'; RUD #6, Recovery/RQD= 100/100
Fine SANDSTONE: Yellow-brown. damp to dry, dense; micaceous; friable
@ 45'-50: Run #7, Recovery/RQD=95/90
@45'-50': Fine to very fme SANDSTONE: Pale gray, dry to damp, very
dense; micaceous, friable
I
I
I
I
I
@ 50'-55': Run #8, Recovery/RQD=loo/loo I
@50'·52.2': Very fme SANDSTONE: Light gray, damp, very del,se; friable,
iron-oxide blebs
@ 52.2'-55': Fine to very fme SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, moist, very
dense; faint bedding
@52.5': Perched ground water
@ 55'-60': Run #9, Recovery/RQD=90/80
@53'-60': Fwe SANDSTONE with silt: Orange-brown,light gray, moist to
wet, very dense
I
I
I
LEIGIITON & ASSOCIATES I
I
I
I
I I
• ,
I E!:.. -
I late ____ ...;2:;:..-.=1.:;...9-...;;0..;:,3 __ _
'rlect
).ling Co.
IDle Diameter 10 in.
ation Top of Hole 188
'. " .' . .. : .... . . ~ : .... .: :.: .. ' . . ' . ,': .. " .' .
505AC11!71)
10 degree dip
ft.
.
0 Z
Q! -0. E III (J)
Grand Pacific Resort
Tri-County Drilling
Drive Weight
Ref. or Datum
" ......
+ -/-QJ;N
111 0 til,"" (..'-'
3 0 C'i-='+ AU. Q!O tic -c.. 00. .-Q! tOQ! 'V 0+ n. " l::C c.. 0 0 U
ui""' 111 • 1l1~ -u u.
_(J) .-;:; ~'"'
SF
SC
CL
ML
CL
GL
SC
SM
SC
SM
CH
Sl1~et _.3_ pf' A":
Prpject No. ··,Q4.05.~5,,:,.o.02
Type of Rig HS core'itig 0ME 2.=
140 pounds Drop ~in.
Mean Sea Level
GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION
Logged By ______ .=.:;MD=::·~J~IB:!::J~O~ ____ _
Sampled By MDJ/BJO
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 #11, RecoveryIRQD=lOO/40
@ 65'..{)6.7', clayey silty very flne SANDSTONE; Gray with orange-brown
staining, wet, dense
@ 66.7'·68': Gray and brown, light brown CLAYSTONE: Moist, stiff;
laminated with clayey SILT to SAND layers 1/8"-1/2" thick; 610 10
degree dip; orange (Iron-olCide) stained friable fine grained sand
laminations
@ 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 H12, Recovery/RQD=IOO/40
@ 70'-71.5': CLAYSTONE: Gray, moist, stiff
@7I.S'-73.4': CLAYSTONE: Gray-brown willi lenticular SAND/SILT
blebsllaminations; mottled willi iron-oxide staining
@ 73.4'·75': Clayey fme SANDSTONE: Orange-brown [0 YellOW-brown,
moist, dense, friable
@ 75'-80': Run #13, Recovery/RQD=86/86
@ 75'-77': Clay to siJty SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, moist, dense; friable;
increasing or decreasing coarsens with deplli
@77'-80': SANDSTONE willi sUtand clay: Gray, moist, dense; very fme to
medium grained, friable, massive; rare pebbles
@ 80'-85': Run #14, Recovecy/RQD= 100/100
@ 80'-85': Silty clayey SANDSTONE: Gray, moist, dense; friable, generally
fme to medium grained, massive, iron-stained with depth
@ 85'-90': Run #15, Recovery/RQD=90/86
@ 85'-86.6': Silty clayey SANDSTONE: Gray, moist, dense
@ 86.6'-86.8': CLAYSTONE: Blue-gray, moist, stiff; wavy, irregular ''''' .... ~'''I'-I
bentonitic, subhorizontaI
@ 86.8'-90'; Clayey silty SANDSTONE: Gray with iron oxide in diffuse
layers, moist, dense, fine to medium grained willi scattered coarse
grains
LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES
j
I
!: •
I I i
Date ____ ..:;;2'-'-1:,:;9....:-0'-"3 __ _
-Project
Drilling Co.
Hole Diameter 10 in.
Elevation Top of Hole 188 ft.
. If) 0 0 Ql .c/"'o .-"0 Z +-.... .cOl =' Ql o..Ql 0..0 .... QlQl ro.....l o~ 0.. c... -+-e t.!) -+-ro <C (/)
90
95
100
I GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG CD-l
Grand Pacific Resort
Tri-County Drilling
Drive Weight
Ref. or Datum
:n r. vi'" +-+-Ql~ c...V III •
III 0 Ill'" rotl! 3° C'+ =' .... -u 01.J... QlO tic U • 00.. -c... .-Ql -(/) COOl ....., o-+-
0.. :n l:C '-::i c... 0 0....., 0 u (/)
140 pounds
Sheet 4
Project No.
Type of Rig
Mean Sea Level
of 4 I
_--,,-04;..;;.O~57=5-,-0:c:;.0:;:;..2 __
HS Core Rig CME 95
Drop .l.!L inl
GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION
Logged By _____ ----.:l\:.:..:ID=J/:.=:B:::.JO~ ____ _
Sampled By l\IDJIBJO
TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION ITsal (Continued)
@ 90'-95': Run #16, Recovery/RQD= 100/90
@ 90'-95': Gray silty to clayey SANDSTONE: Moist, dense, very fme to fine
grained with scattered medium to coarse grains; sandy CLAY
laminations, 1/4"-112" thick, gray, horizontal@92' and 92.6', ollltrwis
massive
@ 95'-100': RUn #17, Recovery/RQD=95188
@ 95'-100': Gray silty to clayey SANDSTONE: Moist, dense,; very fine to
fme grained with scattered medium to coarse grains; evidence of gray
rip-ups clasts between 96'-97' disturbed sample
@ 100'-\05': Run HI8, Recovery/RQD=92192
@ 100'·105': Gray silty to clayey SANDSTONE: Moist, dense, very fme to
fme grained with scattered medium to coarse grains
@ 102'·103': Gray clay rip-up clasts, rare rounded gravel
4 80
105--~~~------------+----#~--4----+----~---4~---------------------------------------------H.
110
115
505A( 11{77)
Total Depth = 105 Fcet
Petched ground water encountered at 56 feet to 66 feet
Backfilled with 59.3 cubic feet of bentonite grout on 2/19/03
LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES I
il t
II
! 1:1 "
i ' ,
!
Date ____ ...::5:....,;-7:.....;-.:::.::03"--__ _
~roject
Drilling Co.
Hole Diameter 8 in.
Elevation Top of Hole 195
III 0 OJ .c""' '-"0 +-+-.cm :::I o.Ql 0.0 +-OJ OJ 1ll...J .-o~ L +-(!) +-<t
0 ~ -
-.~ · ~. . . -'.' .'. · .', .. : .
'.' .. -· .', ','. , .. -, l~ •
5-: : ; , ..
" .. ;., . ' .. : . .. ~ .. '
4<," j. -; ! ~; · . :: : .... .. -" . · -· . · '.' · . -' .. · , · .' · . · ' -" . <. : · . · .. · .
10-: : : '. ' · . · . · · .
' .. -, . · . : ! : ,-. · . -l ~: k ••• · . · .. ' .. .. . ' ~
-
: ~ -=
· ," ~ · . · . '-· . -· .
' .. 15-· .
' .. · . · . -'" ' .. · . ~i/ ~~ -
· . -' ..
-
' .. · . · . 20-' .. · .
' .. -. · .
' .. · . -' .. · .
' .. -' .. · . -' .. · .
' ..
25-' · .
' ..
-· . · . · . · . -' · . · . -' · . · . · . · . · . -: · .
10 ' ..
505A(11/77)
ft
.
° Z
OJ -0. f: III (I)
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG Cil-2
Sheet _1_. of _2_
Grand Pacific Resorts Project No. 0405757002
Tri-County Drilling Type of Rig liS Core Rig CJ\1E 95
Drive Weight
Ref or Datum
________ ~Nc!!/~A~ ________ Drop N/A in.
Mean Sea Level
::n ""' eft""' +-+-OJX GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION .-III •
III ° Ill,,", L'-' Ill~ 3° CLf-:::I+--u OLL QlO +-c U.
-L 00. IIlQl _(I) to OJ '-' 'o+-Logged By MOJ a.. ::n I;:c '-:5 L ° ~""' 0 u Sampled By MDJ
SC ARTIFI!:;IAL FILL -!J:ndQcumented (Afu)
@0-5': Run HI, Recovery/RQD=7015S
@ 0-2.5'; Clayey SAND: Brown, moist, loose; flowers and rools
SM @ 2.5'-5'; Silty fine SAND with clay: Orange-brown, damp to moist, loose
-s1 .. f --OUATERN-ARY TERi,(CE DEPOSiTS (Qtl-- ---- - - - - - - - - -
@ 5'-10': Run 112, RecoverylRQD=70/62
@5'; Silty fmc SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, damp, dense; recovered 3.5'
@6'-6.5': Laminated bedding
@ 10'-15'; Run #3, RecoverylRQD= 100165
@10': Silty fme SANDSTONE: Orange/red-brown, damp, dense; gray sand
inftlled, near vertical joint 11'-12.8', two parallel40-45 degree dipping
joinlS, possibly mechanical breaks, massive
@ 15'-20'; Run H4, Recovery/RQD=80/80
@ 15'; Silty SANDSTONE with clay: Red-brown, damp to moist, dense;
massive. recovered 4' out 5'
SC @ 16.5'-17.2'; Clayey SANDSTONE: Red-brown, moist, dense
SM
@20'-25'; Run liS, Recovery/RQD=78/6S
@ 20'-20.7': Silty medium SANDSTONE with clay: Red-brown, moist, dense
. slightly friable @ 20.7': Silty fme SANDSTONE with clay.; Orangelred-brown, damp to
moist, dense
@25'-30': Run #6, Recovery/RQD 40/30
@2S'-29': Silty fme to medium SANDSTONE: Red-brown, moist, dense;
massive, recovered! sample using sand catcher, possible water seepage
at 22'
I
l-
@29.S': Silty verY fine SANDSTONE: Brown, damp to moist dense
LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES
I
i
'1'
I !
I
I
I f ,
I
Date _____ 5~-..:...7~-0~3~ __ _
Project
Drilling Co.
Hole Diameter
Elevation Top of Hole
Ul 0 OJ .r:." '-'0 ++ .r:.m :3 o..QJ 0..0 + QJQJ 1lJ..J '-00 L + (!) +-<r:
30 · .' · . -· .' · .
' .. · . -· .
-: :~/~ · .
-: :
35-· . :'k · . -.-:
' ..
· . · . -' .. · .
' .. · . -
· . -' ..
40-
' .. · . -' ..
-· .
· . · . -' ..
' .. -.
. '..:.1-45-.~ . b:generaUy · . ' .. : horizontal -' ..
-
' .. -· . ' ..
-· . · .
50
-
-
-
-
55-
-
-
-
-
~n
505A(11/77)
8 in .
195 ft.
,
0 Z
QJ -0.. E IlJ (J)
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG CB-2 I
Grand Pacific Resorts
Sheet _2_ of _2_ ,
Project No. 040575-002
Type of Rig HS Core Rig CME 9 Tri-County Drilling
Drop N/A' Drive Weight N/A _in'l Ref. or Datum Mean Sea Level
::n ,...
ui""' 01-+ QJ~ GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION I .-Ul ' Ulo Ull" L'-' 1lJ~ 3° c ..... :3+ -u ou. QJO tic 00.. U, -L .-QJ _(J) IOQJ '-' o+-Logged By MDJ ::n '-::i a. L L:~ I 0 u ~'-' Sampled By MDJ
SM Q!IATSBNARY TERRACE (Qt) (QQnlinuedl
@ 30'-35': Run #7, RecoveryfRQD=75170 I @ 30': Silty flne to medium SANDSTONE: Red-brown, damp, dense
----_~_33·~·~ 2,!v~l~ ~It.l ~A..N!?~T~liE.:. ~e~-~ro_w!:.ja..mE.j:!ls~ ______ SMfGM TERTIARY SANTIA!JQ FORMATIQI::! (T~a) I @ 33': Silty fme SANDSTONE with gravel and cobble: Orange-brown.
damp, dense; micaceous
@ 35'-40'; Run 68, RccovcryfRQD=62f62
@ 35': Fine SANDSTONE with silt, and gravel and cobble: Light brown. I moist, dense; friable; massive; recovered 1.2' of this sample. logged
cuttings, possible seepage
SM
@ 38': Silty very fine SANDSTONE: Orange-brown, damp, dense; black
blebs (\f16"); micaceous; moderately bedded ~I
@ 40'-43.2': Silty very fine to fine SANDSTONE: Light orange-brown. damp
@ 40'-45': Run 119, Recovery/RQD= IOOf92 ~
to moist, dense; micaceous; cross-bedding dipping 4 to 10 degrees I
@ 43.2'-44.7': Silty very flne to fme SANDSTONE: Light orange-brown, wet~
micaceous, cross-bedding (4-10), seepage at siltstone contact ~
\
!I
ML @ 44.7'-45.3'; Very fine sandy SILTSTONE: Brown. damp to moist, stiff
SM @ 45'-50': Run 610, Recovery/RQD=I00/95
@ 45.3'; Silty fme SANDSTONE: Gray to light brown, moist to wet, dense;
micaceous
I g Ground water at 48; measured with tape .
I Total Depth = 50 Feet
Seepage at22 Fect, 35 Feet, and 43.2 Feet
Ground water encountered at 48 Feet
Backfilled wilh bentonite/cement grout on 5nl03 I
I
LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES I
Date 5-7-03
Project
Drilling Co.
Hole Diameter
Elevation Top of Hole
o
5
10
15
... ,.! .. . · .... '," · ~. .
• ~ .... 4
· " .. '.' ...... · . . ~
• oW w .. '. ~.' ~. -' _ .. : ,,'"". ' ..
, : . ~: .. :.
" .. " ..
.. ~ 4 ......
'.' . · '. . .'
" --' .. · " .....
".' .. · '.,. .... '.: .. , .. 4. · .. · ~. . · '. · .. .. ' .. · . ~. '." ......
{ . A. ~ .. . . ... . . · ' .. ~.' .
4." • P , .... · .. ... . · ..... ~ .
' .. .. ' .... . .... . . · .'~ .... . '.' .. .. ... :" ..... .
' .. . · '. '.: " .. . · ..... . .... . · '. ~ . . .
50,51\(1"1177>
8 in.
240 ft.
.
0 Z
OJ -a. e ttl en
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG CB-3
Grand Pacific Resorts
Tri-County Drilling
Drive Weight
Ref. or Datum
:n r. ..... ..... OJ~
111 0 Ill...,. L'oJ
3 0 ctt-::l ..... oll. OJO 'Inc -L 00. ._ OJ
IDOJ 'oJ 0 .....
0.. :n l::;c L 0 0 u
.......
III •
• F -~ -,<", ','" -_r_ ........ -:',.....,.-.-'.-~-1
GEOTECHNICAL DESGiU@ifON ;
I
III en ttl • -u u .
Logged By ______ ...;:MD:..:=.::::.:::...J __ --..;.::.;:'-""":-:;""":,":;:,.::_".~.~~"
Sampled By MDJ
_en
'-::i as"" " ' ~ -~"'-,..--> ... --.
SM QUATERNARY TERRACE'DEPOSITS (O't)
@ 0'-3': RUn HI, RecoverylRQD= 100/100
@ 0': Silty fine to medium SANDSTONE: Red-brown, moist, medium'_"} ~.
dense; rootlets top 3.5". 0-3' undisturbed ;. ,
@ 3.5'-5': Did not core sample, logged cuttings
@ 5'-10': Run H2, Recovery/RQD=78170
@ 5': Silty medium SANDSTONE with clay: Red-brown, damp, dense;
moderately mottled
@ 10'-15': Run #3, Recovery/RQD",,30125 .
@ 10': Silty fine to medium SANDSTONE: Red-brown, damp, dense;
recovered 1.5' of sample, logged cuttings
@ 15': No recovery
@ IS': Silty gravelly SANDSTONE: Red-brown, damp, dense; hit cobble at
17'-19" logged cutting
-CH--TERTIARy SA~l'fIAGo -FoRMATiON Usaf --- - -------- -...,
@ 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 H6, Recovery/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
SC @ 28.5': Clayey SANDSTONE: Gray-brown, damp, dense
SM ,dense
LEIGHTON & AsSOCIATES
Date ____ --=-5--"7-.;-0=3'--__ _
_ Project
Drilling Co.
Hole Diameter
Elevation Top of Hole
III U QJ £""' '-'U +-+-£0) ::1 o.QJ 0.0 +-QJQJ Ill...! .-0:.:'; t. +-CD +-<I:
30
' .. · . -' .. · .
.. . ' . -" ' .... · .. · . · . -· . · . · . -" '.' '.
35-' .. · . · .. -" ',' '.
' .. · . -· .. · . · . · . -· . -· .
· .' 40-:';':" :
· . -· .' .
," ....
' .. -· . · .' · .
-· . · . · . · . -· .
45-· . · .
' .. · . · . -::: · . -:-;.;-. :
· . -:: : · . · .
-:'--:": · . · . SO
-
-
-
-
55-
-
-
-
-
fiO
505AC11!n)
8 in.
240 ft.
. a Z
QJ -0. e III (I)
~--~--------------
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG CB-3
Grand Pacific Resorts
Tri-County Drilling
Sheet ~ 'of . '1}:. .-.-
Project No. -.. -·~75~002:'.
Type of Rig HS'Cote::Ri ~eME
Drive Weight ________ --.:N..:.:/o!.:A'--__________ Drop -NiA ro..
M Ref. or Datum ean Sea Level
:Jl ""' vi" +-+-QJX GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION 1/10 .-t."'" 1/1 •
Ill'" Ill~ 3 0 C'+ ::1+--u I oLL. QJU 'tic u. 00. -t. .-QJ _(I) COQJ ...., o+-Logged By MDJ :n 1::c '-::i 0-t. 0 ~...., 0 u Sampled By MDJ II
SP-SM T!:lRTIARY SANTI6QQ EQRMATIQN {T§a} (Conlillll~) -II
@ 30'-35': Run #7, Recovery/RQD==20/20 r-
@ 35', .-"" SANDSTONE wW, ,n" .,\, ,my·b,~" d=" d,"", \,,,01 I J ~~p .
I
I~ @ 35'-40': Run U8, Recovery/RQD==40/35
@ 40': Very fine 10 fine SANDSTONE with sill: Off-while, dry to damp,
dense; extremely friable, logged cuttings I
1-
@40'-45': Run #9, RecoverylRQD=90n4
@ 40', V,'" fin, • r"" SANDSTONE wlili ,il" Off·.hl" ... \, brow" I dry to damp, dense
I
@ 45'-50'; RUn #10, Recovery/RQD=72/58
I @ 45': Very fme SANDSTONE with sUt: Off-white, dry 10 damp, dense;
several generally horizontal iron-oltide stained beds
I ,
I Total Depth = 50 Feet
No ground water encountered at time of drilling
Backfilled with bentonite/cement slurry on 517103
I
I
·1
I
LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES -,-
I
I
If ~:;eC-l------~5.~9~-O~3~----
I
I .,
II
Drilling Co.
Hole Diameter
Elevation Top of Hole
.c""' 0 .-+-+-£0> 0.01 0.0, 0101 111-1 00 L ro
o ..
-:,:' .
-: ' :. '
" .
-:. :
-"', , , , . ,.,.!\
5-';' :,
-'
-,.': : ,
-::
,O~~
III III "0 ;;j +-.-
.f-
of-<r.
=~ -~ ~f-41 b:generally
15 _ : -: -::-:-> horizontal
, ' ...... -~,>./
, ' , ' -~,>;:-:,::
-::=::><
0'
20-:~'~ ''.':
.' '. -::-: . , :
" .
-: : . : , ,
'.' .
-,' '.",
8 in.
225 ft
o Z
01
0. E III (J)
"',<._, ''''' ........... GEOTECHNlCAL BORIIN,G ,Lt!)G ,cBit .' .-",_. > ~" ~-.--~----·-·~m .. -,', . . -._-.'.' ,. ,.'. . " . ' .. tl
Sheet -l' of. ._1t ;! -~". .... --""'--Grand Pacific Resorts Projej::t;F,.io. -,.Oll.o.5i5~0.(}i. ,.,,~_ .
Tri-County Drilling Type of Rig ;HS~¢.Qxie."Rig{@r\1i~~·
Drive Weight ________ --=N-!!/.!.!A~ ______ · __ ._ .•. '~~~f'l;,;~~~)ii':' .
Ref or Datum Mean Sea Level
Ill,", elf-IJJ()
q~
:Jl L o
SM
-. """'''-''''''''~t
GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION '
Logg~ By ______ -'MD~.::..J __ ~ __ _
Sampled By MDJ
OUATERNARY TERRAC§ DEPOSITS
@O': Silty 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
SP-SM
-----------------------------------~ TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION Usa)
@ 9': CLAYSTONE: Olive-green, moist, stiff
@ 10'-15': Run#I, Recovery/RQD=lOOnS
@ 1O'-12.S': CLAYSTONE: Olive-green, moist, stiff; fat clay; discontinuous
randomly-oriented paning surfaces
@ 12.8': Clayey SANDSTONE: Gray-green, damp, dense
@ 14.3': Fine SANDSTONE: Light gray, damp, dense; friable, micaceous
@ 15'-20': Run 112, .Recovery/RQD=92154
@ 15': Fine SANDSTONE: Light gray, damp, dense; friable, micaceous
@ 20'-25': Run #3, Recovery/RQD= 100/86
@ 20'-22.7': Fine SANDSTONE with sill: Orange-brown, moist, dense;
slightly friable, possible slight seepage, iron-oxide stained
@22.7': Fine SANDSTONE with sill: Pale gray, moist, dense; slightly
friable, pOssible slight seepage, iron-oxide stained .
25~~~~----------+---~----~--+---+---~~--------------------------------------~
-
-
-
-
505AC11/77)
Total Depth = 2S Feet
Seepage at 23 Feet
Backfilled with bentonitelcemenl slurI)' on 5/9(03
LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES
-
f l
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB1-@,3 ;1
Date ____ -'=-2-....::1:..!.7~-O:.:::::3 __ _ Sl:).eet 1 of 2,
..
Pr,?ject
Drilling Co.
Hole Diameter
Elevation Top of Hole
30 in.
.c'"' (J .-++ .cm o.QI 0.0 QIQI Ill-l 00 L ill
· .. -..... ' · ....
-, . . . s-: . " . . . .. -, . . . · -.,
-' " .... -.
-· .. ' -,'. "
10-'~ : ... · ' -. ,.'
• I' t: ..
-' . . ~ . .
" , -"
., .
-" "., .........
15-.,.," ~ t
-.. . .......
-';:' ," : .. .
1II QI "0 ::l + .-+ + a:
-,,: .. '" j:NIOW, 44NE
~-•. ''Z:
241
201 -:.".':. fr:N20W, 60NE ~.,: ..ct. !-;:;-~ gc:N30-N4SW, 3SW
-~~¥" "" :: -;:;;..
--5 "-=t'i ,""44B. 25-45'. _ ' -=-"-""1 -:M ("N" •• 51'.
~\-fr:N45W, 40NE
'W ,'! ,', ·il!c:N20·60W S-6NE
S05A(11177>
---Grand Pacific Resort Project No. o,46:5'Z5~o02
Morrison Drilling (San Diego Drilling) Type of Rig ihi-cket:'Augei:", -, .
Drive Weight _____________________ Brop . 12,"i;; I
ft Ref or Datum
,
° Z
QI -0. E III (f)
2
Bag-3
@2S'
+-
1/10 :30 olL..
-L cOQI
0-
9
push
:n ,....
+ QI;-': .-1/1,..,. LV
Clf-::l+
QlfJ tic 00. .-QI v 0+ :n J:C L 0 0 u
115.2 7.4
82.0 39.3
tit ...... 1II •
IllCl! u~
-(J)
--:5 ~v
SM
Mean Sea Level
GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION
Logged By ______ --!:.MD=J:...-_____ _
Sampled By MDJ
QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPQSITS COt)
@ 0': Silty fine to medium SANDSTONE: Omnge·brown, damp. dense to
very dense; iron-oxide staining, massive
, I,
I
• I
I
I
I
II
II
II
cemented !han orange-brown sandstone surrounding feature @ 17.2'-17.S': Two light gray SAND infiJledjoints, sand is slightly less II
@ 18': Three 1.5" to 3" thick beds of dark brown moderately cemented
sandstone that are offset by light gray sand infllied fracture; beds are
interbedded with orange-brown sandstone; gmvel and cobble rare;
fmcture very slightly open at 19'
SP-SM @ 20'-20.5': Fine SANDSTONE: Omnge-brown, wet. dense; cobble at the I -CH--• base of sandstone; modemte to heavy seepage within the layer, general r
Il __ ~.!!~l.!. '!a!y_e~slo!!aLc~nE1'?! _________________ _
CH
SM
TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION lTsa)
@ 20.5': CLAYSTONE: Olive, moist to wet, stiff; discontinuous ]
randomly-oriented parting surfaces, modemtely plastic layers that
int.erbed with highly plastic CLAYSTONE layers
@ 21': Discontinuous wavy randomly-oriented fractures throughout
CLAYSTONE
Plastic (fat) layers interbedded between blocky CLAYSTONE; closely spaced il
right fmctures; modomly oriented plastic parting surfaces II
@ 26': 114" thick plastic clayseam along striated polished surface; continuous
@ 26.2': Fmcture below it connects with clayseam on north side of boring il
@ 29': Discontinuous plastic clay-lined fmcture
@ 29.6': Silty fme SANDSTONE: Light gmy. damp, dense; slightly friable; I_
gmdational upper con!,llct II
LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES -
I
I '"' "';". " '--.,...-"'"'----~-----~-
GEOTECHNICAL BORING bOG~LIB4~~'~: .
. -.:-:: . ~~ '"'''''' , ' ::::\, -' Sfi~t. "~..2 ,_ 'of, ,}L." '.' .
Pfoject~N(;;, -,,':, ' ~;7,5.;Oj)2~_",_:
Type oi'Rig,', -:)ii?AR~~~\rifeE~~ I 2-17-03
. ,ct _____________________ ~G~r~a~n~d~P~a~c~if~ic~R~~~o~rt~ ________________ __
rilling Co. Morrison Drilling (San Diego Drilling)
111 Diameter 30 in, Drive Weight ,~,,: :IDt9F':'~~:,.fu~
1 ~tion Top of Hole 241 ft. Ref. or Datum Mean Sea Level • "'''' A ~~. ~_. ____ "", .... _ ~_"_ .. _ ">"'.-_o:' __ "_~~,_~,, -~.-, " --~ , -, ! . ::n ...... v. " ~ ; til + Q)~ GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION .
I () OJ 0 -I-.-III • -' !,
,--0 Z lIlO III"" c.."" Ill~ , ,
-COl ;j OJ 3° C'+-;j-l--u n.o + 0lL. OJU +C CJ. Ill-l -on. !IlOJ Gltt-.-n. -c.. _(I) 0"", c.. + e dlOJ '-J '0-1-Logged By MDJ i
I t!l + III 0.. ::n I:c '-:5 <I:: (IJ c.. 0 ~v MDJ 0 u Sampled By .
jU . ~ ... /, '", SM T~RTIARY SANTIAgO FORMATION cr~al (Qontinued} ~ :~ I • 4 4 112.6 8.5 @ 30': Significant caving
1= · .". " .... · . , ' '
t! :. : ... · , · .. · ..
I =
..... , ... · . · " , .
35-.' :. ' ..
I · · .. ' SP @ 35'; Fine SANDSTONE: Pale gray to off-white, damp, dense, very friable
-· · . · -Bag-5 · . • . , @36' -. . , . .
I -,. · .
I.~I';:'" b:generally SM-SP @ 38'-40'; SillY fine SANDSTONE (0 fine SANDSTONE: Pale gray, damp,
horizontal very dense, iron-oxidized stained bed at 38', iron-oxide stained
krotovina; less friable than above 1~·~ lr~ .-.. ". -.. ' SP \\~. ", · ,"" -, .
J
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
...... · '.
-
-
45-
-
-
-
50-
,-
-
-
-
55-
-
-
-
....;
(;0
505A(11/IT)
.
Geologically Logged to 42 feet Ground water encountered at 20 feet at lime of drilling
Total Depth = 46 feet
Boring caved to 20 feet on 2118/03 Backfilled with 41 cubic feet of bentonite grout and native soil on 2118f03
LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES
, j
I
I' I." ) ; '] , , ~; " ,->
J
,
f ,
,
I
I.
I
f
I
I
I
I
I
------------
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG LB-6 I
Date ____ ..::..9-..::2:..!...7-..,,::9..::,5 __ _ Sheet _1 _ of _2_
Project No. 4950294-001 I
Type of Rig Bucket Auger
Project Lego\and/Carlsbad Ranch
Drilling Co. Daves Drilling
Hole Diameter 24 in. Drive Weight ____ --..:::0-=-2:.:..7_=-:.4l.!:,5~OO=.!C#~;_=2.:...7 -.::.52:::...=_3:::.J'L.!..70~0~# ____ Drop .lL in.
Elevation Top of Hole +1-228 ft. Ref. or Datum Mean Sea Level
C Or. £,..." ._+-
+-QJ +-+-
IllQJ o.QJ
>Lf-QJQJ
OJ,-, oLf-v
LI.I
0
225
5
220
10
215
15
2\0
20
205
25
200
0 .-£0) 0.0 1ll...J L C.!l
:>. ::~':.::
· . . ' . . ' .
~ ·.·4 .....
· . . . .' . . . ....... ,"
' .. . ' : .... · .
" . . : ....
.' .
· . . ' .
.' .
' .. ",:. ,',
' .. · . · .
' .. · . · . . ' .
.. :" " .' ',.,,',
'. '., . · . ,,,.
' .. · .. : ....
.. '.' .. ", ' .. . ' . . ' '.
' .. . ' . . ' '. · " .. ' .. .' . · ., ... .: " . ' .' . "
',' , .. .. ,,:, .'
:,:. : ': .' .. ' " ,.,.'
· . '.' : , :' , .:
" ',:-:,'
' .. · .. : ..... '.' '.'
." .,' :.:' ','
.
° III Z
QJ QJ +-0 0-Z E III (I)
Bag-!
2
3
+-
III ° 3 0 oll..
-L o::lQJ n..
push
4
j1 ,..., ui'" +-QJX LV III •
Ill,..., rt!~ :;j+-CLf--u QJO "tic u. 00. .-Q) (I) v o+-j1 l:c '-::J L 0 g"" 0 u
SP
--cW-
SP
GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION
Logged By MLF
Sampled By MLF
T6RMCE QEPQSITS
Yellowish red, moist, fine to medium SAND; trace of SILT; micaceous; upper 1 to
2 feet disturbed by farming
·~_I.2':.. ~Ii~h.!. a!JI£u,!!t 2f..sll!P21g.: ~~ ~~v~ t!:e .E1~y Ja~eE ___________
:'>A~T!AGO EORMATIQ~
@ 10': Lightolive-gray, moist, CLAY; laminations; randomly oriented
shearslparting sutfaces
.@ 18': Driller indicated drilling became hard
@20': Lighlgray, micaceous, damp, medium dense, fme to medium SAND; sliglilly
@ 26': Becomes damp, driller having trouble keeping sand in buckel, friable
SAND
LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES
I
I
GEOTECHNICAL BORING lOG LB .. e
I pate ___ ~9:.;.!.2!.!..7·:.='.9~5 __ _
Project . Legolnnd/Cnrlsbad Ranch
. Drilling Co. Daves Drilling
I Hole Diameter 24 In. Drive Weight
, Elevation Top of Hole 228 ft Ref or Datum . . ---. :n '" I
I
I
I
I
I
,I
.r;r. ++
0 1/1 01 "0
0 +-Z \1)0
3 0
CoO'" + QlX GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION .--.;;; III • \I)", t.. lIIeI!
I
I
I
I
I ,
t
~ '., r' I I;
!..C •• __ _
.cOl Q,Ql 0.0 QlU) 111-1 c~ L to
'30
-
..
-
..
35-
..
..
..
..
40-
..
-
-
..
45-
..
-
-
..
50-
-
-
..
-
55-
..
-
..
..
'n
S05A( 11/77)
::J QI +--'-0. +-+ E
<r: I'll en
C't-::J+--u 01.1.. 010 tic u • 00. -t.. ._ 01 _(I) CPU) v o+-Logged By MLF :n :E:§ .-:;; 0.. L ~v c u Sampled By MLF
.
Total Depth := 30 Feet Due to No Recovery Seepage at 10 Feet
Baclcfilled on September 27. 1995
.
,
LEIGHTON & ASSOCIATES
-, """'-.. ""--_.,"',....,. ----,. -.
i
~
'lJl
Date 9.11-95 GEOTECHNICAL BORiNGLQQ'$.I\l.~Sh"iM~t_tit:~,~. .~
Project ----____ ---!:Leg~o~la::::n:.!!d:t..:/C~a~r!!!Js~ba::::d~Ra:=n:.:::.ch::_.._______ ' ,P*QJ#t:1!o;-:,~-::mti19~~O)L,., I
Drilling Co. Barge's DrUltng CompanY'1YPe-ofRig . :i,"-~!i'!'!f';Strni~~uge~'"
Hole Diameter -81n. Drive Weight 140 pounds • ',.'Drpp::'3'o,l}fu l' f
Elevation Top otHole +1-~82 ft. Ref. or Datum GEOTECHM~:~:L:SCRI~TI~ ~ ~; ~! c .~~ .c'" 0 -\I) ........
1_~~~~k=~=i~*==d~d=;J~~~~u~e~dB~Y~~~~~===~SC~B~==========~I' r VI Sampled By SeB
o . . TERRACE DEPOSITSIFILL11
. • @ 0-2': Light reddish brown, dry, loose silty SAND ., -:.... \:
....+-.t:t» QJ Q/ e.QI ~<U 0.0 of-QJ~ 111-1 0 ~!!; 0,-, l5 z
LIJ
180
175
· . }:, - . r:.' ,'-: . ::: . :
-::: '. · . -'. ' ..
5-:.:". · . _ ..... .
' ..
-
-
1
2 46 124.0 11.2
-W~CBDEPQSITf--------~----------------
@ 2': Orange-brown, moist, medium dense to dense, fine silty SAND with iron
oxide stainlng and manganese staining
@ 6': Same as above
Total Depth = 6.5 Peet
No Ground Water Encountered al Time of Drilling Hole Backfilled on September 11, 1995
I
II}
I
I
I
~I
I
I
JI
J
I~
I
-I -
I
I
I
I~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I·
I
I
I
I
I
:1
il
I
I
APPENDIXC
LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
APPENDIXC
LABORATORY TESTING PROCEDURES
Classification
Soils were classified visually, generally according to the Unified Soil Classification
System. Classification tests were also completed on representative samples in accordance
with ASTM D422 for Grain Size. The test resultant soil classifications are shown on the
Boring Logs and Test Pit Logs in Appendix B.
In-Situ MoisturelDensity
The in-place moisture content and dry unit weight of selected soil samples were determined
using relatively undisturbed samples from the Cal Tube Sampler. The dry unit weights and
moisture contents are shown on the Boring Logs in Appendix B.
Percent Passing No. 200 Sieve
Particle size determinations for the percentage of sample passing the No. 200 sieve were
perfonned in general accordance with the laboratory procedures outlined in ASTM test
Method Dl140. The results are shown on the Boring Logs in Appendix B.
Atterberg Limits
The liquid limit, plastic limit, and plasticity index of selected soil samples were estimated in
general accordance with the laboratory procedures outlined in ASTM D 4318. The results
are shown on the Boring Logs in Appendix B.
Maximum Density
Maximum density tests were perfonned on a representative bag sample of the near surface
soils in accordance with ASTM D1557. Test results are presented on the table below.
Page C-l
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation
Carlsbad, California
MTGL Project No. 1916All
MTGLLogNo.15".1063
'S3mple -" , ,'MaxjmumDry , QPtimum Mc)b~i'e , , ' , , :O~s¢ripti~Jj LQc~«Q", .. , " ' , ])e ... ~ity,{pf;f) , C~nte~t (0/0) ,
B-2 at 2' to 4' Silty Sand (SM) -Reddish brown 132.5 7.5
B-12 at 0 to 2' Silty Sand (SM) -Brown 129.9 9.9
TP-6 at 2' to 3' Silty Sandstone 'SM' -Light brown 128.8 7.7
6. Direct Shear
Direct Shear Tests were perfonned on in-place samples of site soils in accordance with
ASTM D3080. The test results are presented in Figures C-l thru C-4.
7. Expansion Index
8.
Expansion Index testing was completed in accordance with the standard test method ASTM
D4829. Test results are presented below.
"-" " ' . , , , . Sa~l>le 0, , Expansion Il'ulex, " ,E'xpansif)I1 ' , Descdptioll, -
" LO,ca,tio,. " , ", " -. .. , ,(En ' I,.dex
B-6 at 0 to 2' Silty Sand (SM) -Reddish brown 0 Very Low
B-13 at 19' to 20' Fat Claystone 'CH' -Gray 233 Very High
TP-14 at 0 to l' Silty Sand (SM) -Brown 0 Very Low
Corrosion
Chemical testing was perfonned on representative samples to detennine the corrosion
potential of the onsite soils. Testing consisted of pH, chlorides (CTM422), soluble sulfates
(CTM 417), and resistivity (CTM 643). Test results are as follows:
"
_, _ 'q_h> -" ' " ,---", .. '., , -. ,. ..
", 'Sample " "
, , Chl()rides ' Sulfates, , ' R~sistivity pH tQ_~tdiOn -' .. (ppm) (Pp~) job~-~~-, , -, , .. . ~ , , -, , , .-
B-7 at 3' to 5' 8.3 77 128 3280
B-13 at 0 to 2' 7.2 74 181 2300
TP-12 at 2' to 4' 8.5 40 111 2400
PageC-2
------------~~---.
Marbrisa Resorts -Phase ill -Geotechnical Investigation
Carlsbad, California
9. R-Value
MTGL Project No. 1916A11
MTGL Log No. 15-1063
R-value test was perfonned on samples of the upper soils in general accordance with the
laboratory procedures outlined in ASTM D 2844. Test results are presented below.
-
Sample ; --Description ' " " R .. VlllUe , -Lo~atio"" " , ,
B-5 at 0 to 2' Silty Sand (SM) -Brown 20
TP-3 at 0 to l' Silty Sand (SM) -Brown 26
TP-17 atOto l' Silty Sand (MS) -Brown 64
PageC-3
I
I
'I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
6000r------,r-~F~a7il.---.--r-U~I-t.---.~~~~~~~~~~~~rr~~TT~~1
C, psf
IP,deg
Tan 4»
180 144
37.8 34.0
0.77 0.67
o 2000 4000
6000 H-++t+-H-++-HI-H-lI~H-l-1 H 1
1 5000 H-+-+-++++++-+-+~I-H!-!-!-!-!--II
~ 4000 H-I ++t+K-bl ~++-H-H-+--'H-l-H
vi I 3
_~ I: I
(f) 3000 H-+P.-' t+-H-+1-H-H1-H-+--'H-l-H
.... ro ~ I
C/) 2000 Hh'H-t+-H--i'>t-t==r-H+-1H-IH-H 2
o 5
Sample Type:
Description:
Specific Gravity= 2.65
Remarks:
Figure C-l
10 15 20
Strain, %
6000
Normal Stress, psf
Sample No.
Water Content, %
Dry Density, pcf
}g Saturation, %
'c Void Ratio
Diameter, in.
Heiaht, in.
Water Content, %
Dry Density, pct 1i) ~ Saturation, %
~ Void Ratio
Diameter, in.
Height. in.
Normal Stress, pst
Fail. Stress, pst
. Strain, %
Ult. Stress, psf
Strain, %
Strain rate, in.lmin.
Client:
8000
II
1 1
10000 12000
1 2 3
15.3 14.2 14.9
102.2 99.1 1 00.8
65.6 56.3 61.5
O.61R6 0.6687 0.6413
2.42
1.00
22.7
103.1
99.5
2.42
1.00
24.2
100.5
99.5
2.42
1.00
23.0
102.6
99.7
0.6041 0.6453 0.6117
2.42 2.42 2.42
0.99 0.99 0.98
1000 3000 5000
883 2649 3982
9.5 3.6 6.9
842 2116 3538
14.3 14.0 15.2
0.01 0.01 0.01
Project: MARBRISA -PHASE III
Sample Number: B-ll Depth: 12'
Proj. No.: 1916-All Date Sampled: 3/9115
DIRECT SHEAR TEST REPORT
MTGL, Inc.
San Dieao CA
Tested By: :::.;JH'-'--_________ Checked By: .::::S-!.V ________ _
6000 Fall. Ult. I I
C, psf 308 0
~,deg 33.7 36.2 -+
Tan($: 0.67 0.73 I I I
-_._-
H I I I 1 + + --4000 1 I ,
-L 1 I
1 I 1
I
1i5 U5 a. a. I 1
• If) (f) (f)
(f) Q) ~ ....
Ci5Ci5 2000 I 1 1 I
~=ffi 1 ~ :::lLL -1 --
;"j -+-1 1
1
1 I . I 01 ..... : I I I I I 1
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000
Normal Stress, psf
3000 3 Sample No. 1 2 3
I Water Content, % 9.2 9.3 9.3
2500 Dry Density, pet 116.5 116.4 116.4
(ij Saturation, % 57.9 58.6 58.6 ,.::: 'c Void Ratio 0.4196 0.4216 0.4216 1ii 2000
a. Diameter, in. 2.42 2.42 2.42 u; ,
(f) 2 Heiqht in. 1.00 1.00 1.00 ~ 1500 Ci5 Water Content, % 15.3 15.1 14.9 .... (tI Dry Density, pet 117.6 118.1 118.5 Q) -.c: (f) UJ 1000 Q) Saturation, % 99.5 99.9 100.0 I-
~ Void Ratio 0.4068 0.4003 0.3961
1 Diameter, in. 2.42 2.42 2.42
SOD Height, in. 0.99 0.98 0.98 -----1-----Normal Stress, pst 1000 2000 4000 --------. -1--, .. -
0 ---Fail. Stress, psf 842 1841 2908
0 5 10 15 20 Strain, % 2.3 3.2 8.8
Strain, % Ult. Stress, pst 573 1656 2877
Strain, % 12.4 12.5 12.7
Strain rate, in.lmin. 0.01 0.01 0.01
Sample Type: Client:
Description:
Project: MARBRISA -PHASE III
Specific Gravity= 2.65 Sample Number: 8-12 Depth: 0_2'
Remarks: REMOLDED AT 90% RELATIVE
COMPACTION. Proj. No.: 1916-Al1 Date Sampled:
DIRECT SHEAR TEST REPORT
MTGL, Inc.
Figure C-2 San Dieao CA
Tested By: ~JH,-!--_________ Checked By: ;:::S..:..V ________ _
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I -
I
I
I
I
I-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
6000 I I I I
I f
I I I I I
I I
I I I I I I I P-I I I --H-I 1
H I 7.T I I I
I I -
4000 I I I ! I I I
I I I I
(nUl I I
I I I/i I 0.0. I I I I -en (J) (J) (J) Q) I ~ '-I I I I I I Ci5Ci5 2000 I I I
:::~ I I I II. I
::::;ILL I I I
I Fail. I Ult. ! I I I I I C, pst 454 I 45 I
I I I I l)J,dea 44_1 I 36.0
/, I Tarl($) 0.97 I 0.73 0 I I I I
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000
Normal Stress, pSf
6000 I I Sample No. 1 2 3 I I
Water Content. % IS.! 15.2 l5.3
5000 I
I I I I Dry Density, pet 116.0 114.9 117.2
I
I Cii Saturation, % 93.6 91.6 98.3 :;::
4000 , I E Void Ratio 0.4267 0.4401 0.4116 -(J) 0. Diameter, in. 2.42 2.42 2.42
eli (J) -Heiqht. in. 1.00 LOO 1.00 ~ J
Ci5 3000 I 3 Water Content, % 15.6 16.0 14.7
"-ttl Dry Density, pet 117.1 116.2 119.0 Q) -.c I (J) (/) 2000 I I ~ Saturation, % 100.0 100.0 99.8 I
I 2 « Void Ratio 0.4125 0.4243 0:3904
Diameter, in. 2.42 2.42 2.42
1000 , Heiaht, in. 0.99 0.99 0.98 1 ----Normal Stress, pst 1000 2000 4.000 --- -----
0 ---------------Fail. Stress, pst 1249 2655 4245
0 5 10 15 20 Strain, % 3.9 3.6 3.4
Strain. % Ult. Stress, psf 767 1503 2946
Strain. % 13.6 15.0 13_3
Strain rate, in.!min. 0.01 0.01 0.01
Sample Type: Client:
Description:
Project: MARBRISA -PHASE III
Specific Gravity= 2.65 Sample Number: B-12 Depth: 10'
Remarks:
Proj. No.: 1916-A II Date Sampled: 3/9/15
DIRECT SHEAR TEST REPORT
MTGL, Inc.
Figure C-3 San Dieao. CA
Tested By: :::.:JH..!...-________ Checked By: .:::::S..!-V ________ _
3000 Fail. I Ult.
C, psf 1587 997 ,1
c1J,deQ 10.5 14.8 I -!== J.J. ..
Tan(~') 0.19 0.26 I ..... f-
H --1.-1-
2000 I , T I I I
I I , I I
I --I -00(;) a. a. I "en I III III III OJ ~ .... en en 1000 I
~~ :::)u..
I I
I
I
0 I I I I
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
Normal Stress, psf
3000 Sample No. 1 2 3
Water Content, % 26.7 25.7 26.2
2500 I Dry Density, pef 91.2 91.7 94.3
tij Saturation, % 86.9 84.8 91.9 E
2000 £ Void Ratio 0.8142 0.8043 0.7552 -3 III a. Diameter, in. 2.42 2.42 2.42 vi 2
III Height in. 1.00 1.00 1.00 ~ 1500 I US Water Content, % 30.1 29.2 27.2 .... !'is Dry Density, pef 92.0 93.3 96.1 OJ ..c: 1 iii en 1000 ~ Saturation, % 99.9 99.9 99.7
« Void Ratio 0.7979 0.7737 0.7218
Diameter, In. 2.42 2.42 2.42
500 Height, in. 0.99 0.98 0.98
-.--' --. -----_. -.. Normal Stress, psf 1000 2000 4000 . ------t-..
0 . -------. Fail. Stress, psf 1662 2126 2276
0 5 10 15 20 Strain, % 3.9 5.2 3.7
Strain, % Ult. Stress, pst 1083 1791 1963
Strain, % 15.5 15.9 13.2
Strain rate, In.lmin. 0.Q1 0.01 0.01
Sample Type: Client:
Description:
Project: MARBRISA -PHASE III
Specific Gravity= 2.65 Sample Number: B-13 Depth: 18'
Remarks:
Proj. No.: 1916-All Date Sampled:
DIRECT SHEAR TEST REPORT
MTGL, Inc.
Figure C-4 San Dieao CA
Tested By: :"JH-'--_________ Checked By: .::::S..:.,V ________ _
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Marbrisa Resorts -Phase ill -Geotechnical Investigation
Carlsbad, California
APPENDIXD
MTGLProjectNo.1916All
MTGLLogNo.15-1063
STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
PageC-4
Marbrisa Resorts -Phase m -Geotechnical Investigation
Carlsbad, California
APPENDIXD
MTGL Project No. 1916All
MTGL Log No. 15-1063
GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
GENERAL
These specifications present general procedures and requirements for grading and earthwork as
shown on the approved grading plans, including preparation of areas to be filled, placement of fill,
installation of subdrains, and excavations. The recommendations contained in the attached
geotechnical report are a part of the earthwork and grading specifications and shall supersede the
provisions contained herein in the case of conflict. Evaluations performed by the Consultant
during the course of grading may result in new recommendations, which could supersede these
specifications, or the recommendations of the geotechnical report.
EARTHWORK OBSERVATION AND TESTING
Prior to the start of grading, a qualified Geotechnical Consultant (Geotechnical Engineer) shall be
employed for the purpose of observing earthwork procedures and testing the fills for conformance
with the recommendations of the geotechnical report and these specifications. It will be necessary
that the Consultant provide adequate testing and observation so that he may determine that the
work was accomplished as specified. It shall be the responsibility of the Contractor to assist the
Consultant and keep them apprised of work schedules and changes so that he may schedule his
personnel accordingly.
It shall be the sole responsibility of the Contractor to provide adequate equipment and methods to
accomplish the work in accordance with applicable grading codes or agency ordinances, these
specifications and the approved grading plans.
Maximum dry density tests used to determine the degree of compaction will be performed in
accordance with the American Society for Testing and Materials Test Method (ASTM) D 1557.
PREPARATION OF AREAS TO BE FILLED
Clearing and Grubbing: All brush, vegetation and debris shall be removed or piled and otherwise
disposed of.
PageDI
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
·1
I
I
I
I
I
I
Marbrisa Resorts -Phase ill -Geotechnical Investigation
Carlsbad, California
MTGL Project No. 1916All
MTGLLogNo.15-1063
Processing: The existing ground which is detennined to be satisfactory for support of fill shall be
scarified to a minimum depth of 12 inches. Existing ground, which is not satisfactory, shall be
overexcavated as specified in the following section.
Overexcavation: Soft, dry, spongy, highly fractured or otherwise unsuitable ground, extending to
such a depth that surface processing cannot adequately improve the condition, shall be
overexcavated down to finn ground, approved by the Consultant.
Moisture conditioning: Overexcavated and processed soils shall be watered, dried-back, blended,
and mixed as required to have a relatively uniform moisture content near the optimum moisture
content as detennined by ASTM D1557.
Recompaction: Overexcavated and processed soils, which have been mixed, and moisture
conditioned uniformly shall be recompacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent of
ASTMD1557.
Benching: Where soils are placed on ground with slopes steeper than 5: 1 (horizontal to vertical),
the ground shall be stepped or benched. Benches shall be excavated in firm material for a
minimum width of 4 feet.
FILL MATERIAL
General: Material to be placed as fill shall be free of organic matter and other deleterious
substances, and shall be approved by the Consultant.
Oversize: Oversized material defined as rock, or other irreducible material with a maximum
dimension greater than 12 inches, shall not be buried or placed in fill, unless the location, material,
and disposal methods are specifically approved by the Consultant. Oversize disposal operations
shall be such that nesting of oversized material does not occur, and such that the oversize material
is completely surrounded by compacted or densified fill. Oversize material shall not be placed
within 10 feet vertically of fmish grade or within the range of future utilities or underground
construction, unless specifically approved by the Consultant.
Import: If importing of fill material is required for grading, the import material shall meet the
general requirements.
PageD2
Marbrisa Resorts -Phase ill -Geotechnical Investigation
Carlsbad, California
FILL PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION
MTGL Project No. 1916A11
MTGL Log No. 15-1063
Fill Lifts: Approved fill material shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill in near-horizontal
layers not exceeding 6 inches in compacted thickness. The Consultant may approve thicker lifts if
testing indicates the grading procedures are such that adequate compaction is being achieved with
lifts of greater thickness. Each layer shall be spread evenly and shall be thoroughly mixed during
spreading to attain uniformity of material and moisture in each layer.
Fill Moisture: Fill layers at a moisture content less than optimum shall be watered and mixed, and
wet fill layers shall be aerated by scarification or shall be blended with drier material. Moisture
conditioning and mixing of fill layers shall continue until the fill material is at uniform moisture
content at or near optimum.
Compaction of Fill: After each layer has been evenly spread, moisture conditioned, and mixed, it
shall be uniformly compacted to not less that 90 percent of maximum dry density in accordance
with ASTM D1557. Compaction equipment shall be adequately sized and shall be either
specifically designed for soil compaction or of proven reliability, to efficiently achieve the
specified degree of compaction.
Fill Slopes: Compacting on slopes shall be accomplished, in addition to normal compacting
procedures, by backrolling of slopes with sheepsfoot rollers at frequent increments of 2 to 3 feet as
the fill is placed, or by other methods producing satisfactory results. At the completion of grading,
the relative compaction of the slope out to the slope face shall be at least 90 percent in accordance
with ASTM D1557.
Compaction Testing: Field tests to check the fill moisture and degree of compaction will be
performed by the consultant. The location and frequency of tests shall be at the consultant's
discretion. In general, these tests will be taking at an interval not exceeding 2 feet in vertical rise,
andlor 1,000 cubic yards of fill placed. In addition, on slope faces, at least one test shall be taken
for each 5,000 square feet of slope face andlor each 10 feet of vertical height of slope.
SUBDRAIN INSTALLATION
Sub drain systems, if required, shall be installed in approved ground to conform to the approximate
alignment and details shown on the plans or herein. The sub drain location or materials shall not be
changed or modified without the approval of the Consultant. The Consultant, however, may
recommend and, upon approval, direct changes in subdrain line, grade or materials. All sub drains
PageD3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Marbrisa Resorts -Phase III -Geotechnical Investigation
Carlsbad, California
MTGLProjectNo.1916All
MTGL Log No. 15-1063
should be surveyed for line and grade after installation and sufficient time shall be allowed for the
surveys, prior to commencement of fill over the subdrain.
EXCAVATION
Excavations and cut slopes will be examined during grading. If directed by the Consultant, further
excavation or overexcavation and refilling of cut areas, and/or remedial grading of cut slopes shall
be performed. Where fill over cut slopes are to be graded, unless otherwise approved, the cut
portion of the slope shall be made and approved by the Consultant prior to placement of materials
for construction of the fill portion of the slope.
PageD4