HomeMy WebLinkAboutCT 79-01; PALOMAR AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK; SOILS REPORT; 1978-10-04l-"
•
I
I GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FOR
ON-SITE DISPOSAL OF SEWAGE EFFLUENT
For
PALOMAR AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK
Carlsbad,· California
To
PALOMAR AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK
62~ 1 Yarrow Drive, Suite C
Carlsbad, California
October 1978
PETER A. lENDRUM ASSOCiATES
GJG;r~EER;NG DEPARif;'ENT
. ,'
· .' .... -... : .. ,. · " • • · ~ "
'.,
: ... : -.)
..............
'\' ... : ..
, .
-J .
" .
, ,
I I ! it! I' ' l' \ , ,
, J . ., . l
.j
....
October 4, 1978
218-12, 23'92
ROBERT PRATER ASSOCIATES
Consulling Soil. Foundolion & Geological Engineers
Palomar Airport Business Park
6231 Yarrow Drive, Suite C
Carlsbod, California 92008
Attention: Mr. Bernard W. Gilmore
Re: Geotechnical Investigation for
On-Site Disposal of Sewoge Effluent·:-·····
Palomar Airport Business Park
Carlsbad, California
GentJemen:
a ln accordonce with your request we have performed a geotechnical investigation of the
_Palo~ar Airport Business Park for the purpose of evaluating the suitability of the sub-
surface soil, geologic and groundwater conditions for disposing of sewage effluent from
septi~ syster:n~ 'utilizing seepage pits. The accompanying repGrt presents the results of
our office research, field investigation work, laboratory tests-and engineering analyses.
The soil, geologic and groundwater conditions are di"sc::ussed and our conclusions regard-
ing the use of seepage pits cit the site are p~esented.
If you have any questions conceniing our findings, please call.
Very truly yours,
ROBERT PRATER ASSOCIATES
~~ 'C:=::-... -
Robert Prat~r, C. E.
RP:jsr
Copies: Addressee (1)
Willdan Associates, Attn: Mr. Henry l. Worley (1)
California Regional Water Quality Co.ntrol Boord, San Diego Region (12)
10505 Roselle SIreel, San Diego, California 92121 • {714J 453-~ I 6XJ AlIa Visla Drive, Suite 105, Visla, California 9ZJ83 • {714J 758-9144
Letter of Transmittal
Title Page
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION
SCOPE
SITE CONDITIONS
A. Surface
B. Geology
C. Groundwater
CONCLUSIONS
Figure 1 -Site Plan
Figure 2 -Vicinity Map
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Figure 3 -Idealized Geologic Profiles
Exploratory Boring Logs 1 and 2
TobIe 1 -Estimated Quantities of Effluent and Evap~tran$piratjon Potential e Table 2 -In-Situ Porosities (n) " ,:
Table 3 -Infiltration Test Data
Table 4 -" ~Iectrical Resistivity Data
APPENDIX A -SEISMIC REFRACTION GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY
APPENDIX B -WATER QUALITY DATA
Page No.
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
A-1
B-1
INTRODUCTION
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FOR
ON-SITE DISPOSAL OF SEWAGE EFFLUENT
FOR
PALOMAR AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
In this report we present the results of our geotechnical investigation of the s\Jbject 330
acre business park located southwest of the intersection of Palomar Airport Rood andEl, .
Camino Real in Carlsbad, California. The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate
the suitability of the subsurface soil, geologic, -and groundwater conditions at the site for
disposing of sewage effluent from septic systems utilizing seepage pits. Our work was
directed at supplying the information required by the California Regional Water Quality
Control Board in their "Application for Waste Discharge Requirements, Land Disposal. 1\
Our past involvement with the bu~iness park developm~nt has included 1) detailed geo-
technical investigations for the existing Phase 1 portion of the business park and for the
PT&T improvements along the alignment of Camino Vida Roble within the phase II portion e of the park, 2) earthwork observation and testing services in connection with the initial
Phose I mass grading operations and the Phase II PT &T improvements, 3) a detailed geo-
technical in.v~stjgation for the phase II portion of the business park, 4) numerous detailed
foundation investigations for individu~1 building sites within"-the Phase I portion of the
park as well as earthwork observ"ation and testing services in connection with finish grad-
ing operations for individual building sites, Gnd 5) the performance of percolation and
capacity tests for seepage pit installations on individual lots throughout the phase I area.
At this time only a part of the Phase I portion of the park has been devel?ped. Site
usage to da~e has been primarily light business/industrial and it is anticipated that the
remainder -of the business park will be developed with facilities of similar usage. Based
on metered ;""ater usage quantities provided by the Carlsbad Municipal Water District
for the-12-month period ending July 1978, it has been estimated that the quant.i~ies of
sewage effluent to be disposed of when the park is fully developed will be appro~imately
30,165 and 21,440 gallons per day for Phase I and Phase II, f'espectiv-e-Iy.
SCOPE
The scope of work performed in this investigation included 1) a gathering and review of
all soil, geologic and groundwater information available in our files, 2) a geologic sit,e
reconnaissance, 3) the drilling of two deep exploratory borings to establish the depth to e regional groundwater, 4) sampling and water quality" testing of both surface water and -
groundwater,S) an electrical resistivity survey, 6) a seismic refraction survey of selected
,! ,
218-12
Page 2
areas, 7) a large scale infiltration test on a selected lot, 8) soil ond geological engineer-
ing analysis of the data obtained, and 9) the preparation of this report. The data obtained
and the analyses performed were for the purpose of pr<?viding more detailed, information on
the subsurface soil, geologic and groundwater conditipns with respect to the overall suit-
ability of the site for disposal of sewage effluent from septic systems utilizing seepage pits.
SITE CONDITIONS
A. Surface
As indicated on the Vicinity Map, Figure 2, the business park is'located astride the upper
portion of Canyon de las Encinas which runs generally from east to west and eventually
drains to a marsh about one mile west of the property. The site is irregular in shape with a
total plan area of approximately 330 acres. For the most part the topography is moderately
rolling with ground surface elevations ranging "from a high of about el.. 320 near the eastern
extremity of the site to a low of about el ~ ':.120 near the wE7st end. The northeast portion of
the site has been previously graded and several buildings have been constructed on some
lots. A low dam and pond which are indicated on the U. S. G. S. Encinitas Quadrangle dated
1968 in the )¥estern portion'lof the site are no longer ,tn existence. The southern abutment of
the embankfl!ent has been cpt out, allowing any surface water to flow down the canyon
unimpeded. ' At the time of our field investigation there was only a small amount of surface
. water in scattered locations on the canyon bottom in the western portion of the site. This tit water resultS from storm run,'off and irrigation on the adjacent hHlsides. Ground surface veS'-
etation in the ungraded portions of the site varies frqm a moderate growth of dry grass and
weeds in th~ ,higher portions of the site to a very dense growth of brush and trees in the
lower-Iying'western portion. In the previously graded Pha~e 'I portion of the park surface
vegetation is spar~e on the relatively flat undeveloped lots. However, the slopes have been
hydroseeded and numerous trees and shrubs hav~ been planted throughout the developed
portion of the area. -'
According to "Climates of San Diego County" (obtained from the San Diego County Farm
Advisor's office) published by the University of California Agriculture Extension Service
dated November 1970 and an insert for page 87 dated April 1977, the evapotranspiration
potential for the south coastal, zone, in which the site is located, is 44 . .4 inches per year'!
According to Table 8 on page 61 of the same publication, the average yearly precipitation
for the nearest reporting station (Vista) is 16.5 inches. Deducting the total prec'ipitatio'~
from the total potential evapotranspiration results in a net pt;tential evapotranspiration
rate of 27.9 inches per year. In units of go lions per day per square foot of landscape area,
this is an evapotranspiration rate of 0.04765 gallons per day per square foot. Based on this
net potential evapotranspiration rate and estimates of the landscape areas for proposed lots
provided by Willdan Associates we have computed potential evapotranspiration quantities
for the individual lots. The potential evapotranspiration rates thus computed and the ,esti-
mated quantity of effluent to'be disposed of on individual lots are presented in Table 1. There
are approximately 17 acres of' existing dense brush and trees in the low-lying area west of
the proposed Phase I and II developments with an additional evapotranspiration. potential of
approximately 36/00~ gallons per day.
.J,
, !
I
'1
I
\ I
'I ,I
I I
i
"
,1
I
• 218-12
Page 3
As on indication of the existing potential for evapotranspiration in the Phase I area where
landscape growth has been established, it is our understanding that an average of 15,000
gallons of water per day was used for landscape irrigation during the year July 1977 to
July 1978. ,.
According to Department of Water Resources Bulletin 106-2 there are records of 6 wells
present within one mile of the park (see Vicinity Map, Figure 2). However, we were un-
able to locate the ~ells in the field and it appears that they have been abandoned since
the establishment of imported water suppliEfs. There are also no known diversions of surface
waters within one mile of the site. . ,
B. Geology
The business pork site is underlain at relatively shallow depths by sandstone af.ld mudstone
strata of the Eocene Del Mar Formation which ·exhibit a regional' dip of about 1 to 2 degrees
to the southwest. The strata have been m1191y folded with dips locally ranging up to about
20 degrees. The formational materials are generally_-mant-Ied by several feet of fine silty
and clayey sands. The upper part of the Del Mar Formation is comprhed predominantly of
soft sandstones ranging from 30 to 60 feet in thickness with occasional interfingers of mud-
stone. The sandstones consist essentially of interbedded fine grained silty and clayey
sands. This sandstone part is underlain by mudstones consisting .of interbedded sandy and
clayey silts an.d silty clays which are exposed in the lower portions of the slopes in the
higher eastern third of the site. The usually gradational contact between the sandstone
and mudstone interval lies at about el. 300 in the northeastern .port of the pr6perty and at
about el •. 1.QO in the western extremity of the site. ;
'Porosities for the dominant sandstone upper part of the Del Mar'Formation were determined
by means of in-situ density measure'ments at seyeral locations across the site. The results
of the tests and computed porosities are summarized in Table 2 and if.ldicate on overage
porosi ty of 0.38. .
The results. of seepage pit capacity tests which have been performed at the site are sum-
marized in Table 3. In addition, in-situ permeabilities were computed for. the typical
on-site formational materials utilizing the seepage pit infiltration data. The data indi.-
cotes an average permeability of 0.3 feet per day for the dominant sandstone port of the
Del Mar formation.
'e:::=or· -
c. Groundwater
Two deep exploratory borings (B-1 and B-2) were drilled in the lower-lying portions of
the site at the approximate locations indicated on the site plan and slotted plastic pipes
(piezometers) were installed to establish and monitor the depth to the regional ground-
water table. logs of the borings are enclosed following Figure 3. The groundwater
depths in the borings were m~asured on July 28 and September 23, 1978 and indicated
depths of approximately 24.9 and 24 .4 feet, respectively, in Boring 1, and 20.0 and
21.6 feet in Boring 2. The gradient of the existing ground surface as well as the indicated
water table surface between the two borings is approximately 0.014 feet per foot.
"
.218-12
WPage 4
tin order to more accurately define the subsurfoce soil, geologic, and groundwater con-
aitions underlying two"' narroW portions of the canyon, a seismic refraction geophysical,
survey was performed. The approximate locations of the seismic refraction traverses are
indicated on the site plan. The results of the seismic refraction survey are presented in
Appendix B. Utilizing the additional information provided by this work two idealized
sections were developed for the narrow portions of the canyon at the locations indicated
on the site plan. The idealized sections are presented on Figure 3.
As the refraction survey indicates there is 0' fJlegligible thickn~ss of alluvium on the
canyon floor which has been carved into the !saft sondstone of the Del Mar Formation.
The seismic refraction traverses indicate a relatively flat free groundwdter surface
(which is non-conformable with the ground surface configuration) that extends through
two distinct seismic wave velocity layers into the hills comprising, th~ sides of the canyon.
The flow of groundwater to the west is therefore taking place in a wide band of forma-
tional soils and is not confined to a narrow zone 'of alluvial soil in the canyon bottom.
Groundwater has been encountered in 10 other borings.drilled at the site. These test
holes are numbered 3 through 12 on the site, plan and the corresponding groundwater
elevations are denoted next to the boring locations. The groundwater encountered at
the higher elevations in the north~rn portion of the Pha'se I area (Lots 2A and 2:B) does not,
in our opinion, represent a free gro'undwater condition of large areal extent. The ground-
water encountered in the borings is probably indicative of isolated pockets of entrapped
_water. This conclusion is based on the fact that groundwater was not encountered in all
the borings drilled in this portion of the site and the groundwater elevations varied sub-
stantially i.r~ those bOfings wh~re it was encountered. '
The entrapped water encounte~eCJ 'in some of the borings on Lots 2A and 2B raised some
concern about the ability of the subsurface soils to dispose of large quantiti,es of effluent.
Accordingly, a large scale, infiltration test was 'performed in one of the capacity test holes
subsequent to which the level of .water in ,10 surrounding capacity test holes was measured.
The locations of the infiltration and 10 observation holes are indicated on the site plan.
On July 27 pnd 28, 1978, 210,000 gallons of water were pumped into the infiltration test
hole. Me'asurements made in the 10 surrounding holes just before and approximately 60
days after the water had been ~niected showed no difference in the depths to groundwater
thereby indicating that all the water had drained from the area. Therefore, it appears
that there is no lateral confinement in the subsurface soils to prevent the disposal of large
quantities of effluent. .~ ... -
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the results of this investigation it is o'ur opinion that the site is in general suit-
able for the disposal of sewage effluent by septic systems uti tizing seepage pits. More
specifically, it appears that the estimated 51,605 gallons per day of effluent for the
phase t and Phase II portions of the business park can be suitably disposed of by a com-
bination of subsurface seepage and evapotranspiration. However, since our work also
"218-12
• Page 5
indicates that there are random isolated areas of relatively impermeable soils across the sit~, the suitability of individual lots for disposing of sewage effluent utilizing seepage
pits should be determined on the basis of seepage pit jnfiltratian tests performed on each
lot. J -
We anticipate that "most, if not all, of the effluent disposed of into the ground will be
lost to evapotranspiration. Based on our knowledge of the subsurface conditions, it is
anticipated that subsurface seepage will generally follow the bedding-of the subsurface
soils resulting in evapotranspiration losses on individual lots from planter areqs and land-
scaped stopes~ Any deeper seep?,ge that ~ight pass through the lower-lying portions of
the Phase I and II developments "is expected to be lost to evapotranspiration in the heqvily
vegetated l7-acre area west of Phase II. Although evapotranspiration rates ore subiect
to substantial seasonal fluctuations, the large storage capacity of -the voids within the
soil will, in our opinion, handle effluent that is not lost by evapotranspiration during
the winter months. Based on our evaluation 6f the properties of the soils-underlying fhe
site, we estimate that a lO-foot depth otl:lnsaturated soil above the groundwater table
will be capable of storing approximately 6-years of effluent, even with the conservative
assumption that all effluent will be retained in the ground and no effluent will be lost by
subsurface flow out of t~e area or by evapotranspira~ion.
"~ ........
1:
,J-U! DJ.,,/ (/'. Pt~·-····· e ; q~ -:t l, . ... .,.. ... ...:.' """ : . .,.~ -:1--~ .f;:-/ .f" --." , o't. .• F .. ' : :: ;' . ~''''' • • • # . .,... .,
•• ,,_/1. )' -. ,: ,. i
" : l 1 . \
r.··lit
LEGEND
o Indicates approximate recorded
•
Approximate Scale
'"",._. (tholJ}~md5 of feet)
F o 1 2 4
well locations within one mile of site.
Bose: U. S. G. S. Encinitas and San Luis Rey Quadrangles, 7.5
Minute Series (Topographic).
ROBERT PRATER ASSOCIATES
Con,v".np SO". fovndor.on t Geo'o~.col fn~.neerl
VICINITY MAP
PALOMAR AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK
Carlsbad; California
218-12
DATE PROJECT NO.
Figure 2 October 1978
DRILL RIG Mobile B-61 SURFACE ELEVATION 192.rox) LOGGED BY RJB
DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER See Note BORING DIAMETER 8 Inches DATE DRILLED 7-12-78
ZIlJ~ -; W e.~ x DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION Qut . :rZ e a: ... Z ....... 0:;:-a: ::; ~ _ ~~::;~ DEPTH w oJ «Cf) W z <zo:"-"-wz n. :::n~ !<~ wwo'" za:w
ISYM-SOIL (FEET) ::E w-o ~z ~a::l-~ On. a:
DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS COLOR CONSIST. < z~....J u::E1-
BOL TYPE Cf) ~a:e 0 1->-ZoCf) 0 Cf)m =>0
SILTY SAND (SANDSTONE) brown medium SM :---dense r--to dense r-...
f--
f-lO -
I I--.. I .. .. I--
I--
1-. -
·20-
CLAYEY SAND (SANDSTOt;.lE): brown medium SC I--
dense f----to dense .. I--.
I--
30
: , I--
1-
SANDY and CLAYEY SILT Igreenish hard ML I--
(SILTSTONE) igr~y : f---
i I--e f-40-; I--
.. : I---. . , . ! ! I--
I--
I-50-: I--
SILTY CLAY (CLAYSTONE) blue hard CH I--.. .
green I--. -l-
I-60-
: I--
f--
I--..
p'_. f-----
I-70-,
I--
I--
f--
I--
I (continued) I-SQ-. e EXPLORATORY BORING LOG
I ROBERT PRATER ASSOCIATES PALOMAR AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK
Con''''"np So,I. FOllndolton t. Geolog,col f ng,ne.,1S .. Carlsbad, California ..
I PROJECT NO. DATE
218-12 Oc tober 1978
BORING 1
NO. (pg. 1)
"'~~-JlI~~~~~ __ ~~ . .. .. ~"'W~~"""'mT>l!llI6:M' ------. Mobile 8-61 192~ DRILL RIG SURFACE ELEVATION LOGGED BY RJB -
DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER See Note BORING DIAMETER 8 Inches DATE DRILLED 7-12-78
zw-"': . UJ 0'"
DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION 2 0 1;: . ;i:Z w>::I: ,a: I-Z, a:-a: ::; ~ _ ziijl-
'. DEPTH w ~~'" wI--enC1-...l ...z <zo:"-"-wZ"-... :; ~~, <w wwoen za:w lll
!SYM-SOil IFEET) ::!: ~lZ ~a: ... ~ o ... a:~
DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS COLOR CONSIST. < z~..J 0 1->-0::!:1-
BOl TYPE '" ~a:!!!. z 0'" ' 0 "'[I) :;)0
SILTY CLAY (CLAYSTONE) blue hard CH r--: qreen '-
SANDY and CLAYEY SILT dark hard ML I--
(SILTSTONE) gray --.
I ~ 90 -
I --., I , ..
i
j I--
I I--,
I t--
1-100-
j , t--:
1 ! ~. -i . -.
• -0
i ,--
0
I --
I -110-! .. -: -:
..;. ( ,
0 f-: -e l-f _ i
r-11o-
; l-" -I :
I
1 '--
I • 0 -~ ,--,
I
I Bottom of Boring = 128 Feet -130 -I , ' . -I l-
I 0
o. f-, -
Note: Slotted plastic pipe (piez:" -.
t-
o om'eter) installed in boring I--
after drilling. Depth to I--
groundwater measured on I--
: July 28 and September 23, I ,--
1978 at approximately 24.9 I--
and 24.4 feet, respectively. ""'.~ i--.., -
I--
I--
0 I--,
I--
I--Note; The stcgtificalion lines repre>ent the apP",,!,!,,,,,t.
boundary between malerial types and the Iransitian may I--"-
i e be "",dual. .
EXPLORATORY BORING LOG
ROBERT PRATER ASSOCIATES
Consuhmg So,l, FoundOhon & Geologlcol Eng,,!eers
PALOMAR AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK.
Carlsbad, California
t-_P_R_O_JE_C_T_N_O_, _+-___ D_AT_E_-'---I BORING
218-12 ()ctober 1978 NO,
1 (pg. 2) ,
, ,
I I \ ,
:~,
~
I ! I
.
.
DRILL RIG Mobile 8-61 !; SURFACE ELEVATION 137 (aFtix) .LOGGED BY RJB
DEPTH 10 GROUNDWATER See BORING DIAMETER 8 Inches DAlE DRILLED 7-12-78
z ...... . w If' DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION ~ut: . :tZ r:c 'a: -D'EPTH .... t-z ...... wI-r:c :; ~ _ :z <:) -'
" I~~t DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS
CLAYEY SAND
SILTY SAND (SANDSTONE) .
"
Note: Slotted plastic pipe (piez-
ometer) installed in boring
after drilling. Depth to
: groundwater measured on
July 28 and September 23,
1978 at approximately 20.0
21 .6 feet, respective Iy.
. -.
. ,
"
.. , '
(grading gravelly) _.-. -.
-
..
Bottom of Boring = 67 Feet
Note: The stratification lines repre,en! ,he approximate
boundary between material types and ,he 'mnsi!"", may
be ",aclval.
ROBERT PRATER ASSOCIATES
Cor-sulflng So", FoundOhon & Geolog.col Engineers
COLOR
~~ffow-
Ish
brown
reddish
brown
I I
. -. " ,
,light
brown
.
;
-' «II) I-Z <za:lL
Q. ::~~ <'" "'woll)
SOil (FEET) :l: .... -0 ~~ ~r:cl-~
CONSIST. < z~-' 0 1->-TYPE ." ~a:~ u II)m
.~:~~ium ense sc I--
I---
I--
medium SM '--
dense -10 -
to dense I--
I--
I--
I-.~
~20-
-...
--,
I---I--
I-30 -
., r--
I--
,... -
,.. -
f-40 -"-
I--. l--.-.
I--
,.. -
I-50 -
,.. ....
','
I--.
I--
I--,
1-60-
I--
I--
I-...;
. "" .. -:;;:
c-70 -
--
--
--
--
--
EXPLORATORY BORING LOG
PALOMAR AIRPORT BusiNESS PARK
Carfsbad, California
t-_P_R_O_J_E_C_T_N_O_._-+ __ ---,DA_T_E __ ~ BORING
218-12 October 1978 NO.
2
wZlL r:c w'" Q.a:~ :l;t-
0'" u
•
I i I' !, .
I
l • t j,
-j
• 218-12
TABLE 1
ESTIMATED QUANTITIES OF EFFLUENT AND
EVAPOTRANSPIRATION POTENTIAL
AvaiJabre
Estimated landsc,ape Evapotranspiration Effluent Area Potentiar Lot No; (gals/day) (ft2) (gals/day)
13 2,855 135,070 6,436 ' 1 1,533 82,927 3,951 2A 4,592 250,148 11,920 2B 2,384 .. 128,562 6,126 4A 1,476 ',' 37,652 1,794 '-.' .. 4B 1,167 62,241 2,966 6 1,672 89,086 4,245 7 1,821 99,48:1 4,740 10 : 1,606 46 644 2,223 , ,
i ' 12A f 1 098', 165,678 7,895 I ' ,
128 Resub - 1 861 44,872 2, 138 I e -2 : 1,234 65,400 3,116
[ -3 545 27,50) 1,310 -4 545 27,501 1,310 I ' :., 5 ; 1 004 52,767 2,514 I , ,
I -6 861 44,872 2,138 -7 344 16,449 784 I -8 861 " 44,872 2,138 1 I -9 603 30,661 1,461 -10 603 ' 30,661 1,461 -11 373 18,028 859
"-12 373 18,028 ' , ,859
-13 344 16,448 784 14C 1,390 110,015' 5,242, 18 Resub - 1 -643 32,871 1,566 -2 651 ' 33,345 C;:::-..... -1,589 -3 649 33,187 1,581 -4 672 34,450 1,642 -5 826 42,978 2,048 -6 841 43.,767 2,085 -7 781 40,450 1,927 -8 738 38,081 1,815
-9 6'89 35,397 1,687 -10 8M 43,924 2,093
(continued)
• • 218-12
TABLE 1 (Cont.)
ESTIMATED QUANTITIES OF EFFLUENT AND
EVAPOTRANSPIRA TI ON POTENTIAL
Available
Estimated landscape Evapotranspiration .
Effluent Area Potenti':1l
Lot No. (gals/day) (ft2) (gals/day)
18 Resub -11 772 39,976 1,905
-12 1,171 61,926 2,951
-13 1,096 57,820 2,755
-14 430 21,·186 1,010
-15 1,254 66,505 ~,169
-16 961 50,398 2,401
-17 947 49,609 2,364
-18 1,406 74,874 i3,568
-19 1,214 64,294 :3 064 . ,
. 16 Resub - 1 803 41,714 ~ 1,988
-2 522 26,240 : 1,250
J e -3 611 31,134 ·1 484 . ,
-4 422 20,712 ; 987
-5 511 25,608 1,220
-6 344 16,448 784
-7 344 16,448 784
-8 344 16,448 784
17 ·398 25,290 ... 1,205
(;::;::: ... -
·e
Lot 16
Lot 16
Lot 16
Lot 16
Lot 13
Location
Future Development Area
Future Development Area
Future Development Area
Lot 18
•
TABLE 2
IN-SITU POROSITIES (n)
In-Situ
Dry Density (pef)
104.9
'. 103.8
108.0
109.3
103.7
104.2
98.3 -'.
98.0'-" .
98.3
In-Situ
Moisture Content (%)
9.4
11.7
11.2
8.6
17.3
16.9
13.6
14.6
20.4
218-12
Porosity,n
0.36
0.37
0.35
0.34
0.37
0.37
0.41
0.41
0.41
• 218-12 '
! I
TABLE 3' ~
-~i
INFILTRATION TEST DATA
Measured Capacity
Test Hole I nfil tratj on Rate Per' Pit
. Lot No. Depth (Feet) (Minutes/Inch) (Gallons/Day)
Lot 2A-A 50 .. 1.5 7,337
"
-8 50 ' 5.0 2,270
-C 35 2.1 5,472
-0 44 0.8 14,500
-E 43 0.8 13,748
-G 49 0.5 24,125
-H 50 0.5 24,000
I -J 25.5 1.6_-7,171
I I ' ! -K 46 0.4 28,320
-M 5~ 7.8 1,454
-N 50 0.9 11,904
-0 46.5 0.4 31,632
-P 30 6.8 1,652
e -R 36 0.5 20,592
-S 47 0.6 19,824
-T, 39 0.4 30,912
-V 40 0.8 13,392
Lot 6 ' 57 0.4, 28,000
Lot 7-1 55 ~', " 3.3 3,456
-2 40 2.2 5,04p
Lot 8-1 50 21.4 528
-2 50. 78.3 144
-3 54 19.6 5(6
-4 56 5.0 2266' ,
-5 50 6.7 .l::::;::!. .... -1,690
Lot 12 Resub-H-3 50 3.9 2,906
-H-7 51 3.0 3,758
-H-9 51 0.5 22 344' , ,
-H-11 55 0.3 41.,952 .
Resistivity Line No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17.·
• '218-12
TABLE 4
ELECTRICAL RESISTIVITY DATA
.' ".
location
lot 2.4 I lot 28'
Lot 2B
Lot 2A
lot 2A
Lot 8
Lot 8
Lot 8'·'>
Lot 5
lot 4·
',Lot 12 Resubdivision -Lot 3 , .
Lot 12 Resubdivision -Lot 5 ~ ..
Lot 12 Resubdivision -Lot 9
Lot 16
lot 18
Lot 18
; Future Deve topment Are.a
Resistivity (ohm-meters)
.(::::: .... -
. 39,150
12,600
58,000
41,800
47,000
7,220
.4,560
2,720
3,000
4,050.
24,000
2,415
1,710
1,710
27,000
17,000
57,000
. I
i
• •
APPENDIX A
SEISMIC REFRACTION GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY
•
e::::: ...... -
I \ , .
T. FUNNEKOITER
I1EGIS1EREQ GEOLOGIST
C£~TlfIED ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST
P. O. SOX S7S • ESCONDIDO, CALIF. 92025
7..(6-2793
.-=NGINEERING GEOLOGY
Robert Prat~r & Associates
11585 Sorrento Valley Rd Suite 101
San Diego,Calif •. 92121
Attn: Dave Hespeler
•. I ..
Dear Sir,
• SEISMIC INVESTIGATIONS
For
Suhdivilion Oelign
Pipelines • Roods
Sehmlc Rippohility Studies
August 28,1978
Enclosed is the Subsurface Investigation Report of the Palomar
Airport Business Park. A total of 1900 lineal feet of:Seismic
line was run on the site. Flagging was placed at all locations
at the ends of the lines.
Very truly yours,
T. Funnekotter
t== .... -
...
T. FUNNEKOTTER
RfGISlERED GEOLOGIST
CERTIFIED ENGINEERING GEOlOGIST
• O. BOX 575 • ESCONDIDO, CALIF. 92025
7046·2793
E.INEERING GEOLOGY,
SUBSURFACE -lNVESTIGATION
PALOMAR AIRPORT BUSINESS
PARK
SAN DIEGO COUNTY;CALIF.
AUGUST 28,1978
~.,.--
.' SEISMIC ,INVESTIGATIONS
For
Subdiviliol1 Design
Pipelines • Roods
Sehmlc Rippobility Sludi.,
, T. FUNNEKOTTER
REGI!>TERED -GEOLOGIST
C[RllfIED ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST
• O. BOX 575 • E!>CONDIDO, CAUF. 92025
e 7"'6·2793
PURPOSE:
l~lETHOD:
DISCUSSION:
E.INEERING GEOLOGY • • SEISMIC INVES-r:IGATIONS
For
Svbdivision Oe.ign
Pipelines • Roods
Seismic: Rippobllity Slvcliel
1 •
To evaluate subsurface conditions along select
l~nes of.a proposed develop~ent in order to provide
inro~IDationlas to the velocity, configuration and
number of the sedimentary strata within a specific
drainage system.
Geologic reconriaissance. Refraction Seismography.
. .; -..
The site is, 'just s,?uth of Palomar Airport in low
rolling hills in a mildly dissected ,sedimentary
area •. The compos,ition of the site is principally
silty and clayey -sands, siltstones and shales'.
Eight Seismic traverses 1.;ere run on the site
principp.lly to acquire a-velocity cross section
-.1J.ormal to the cree~. bed approximately 500 feet in
. both directions. These ,lines are located approximat-
ely as shown on the enclosed maps and are labelled
lines A thru H. In area 1 are lines A thru D, and H
-in area 2 lines E thru G.
Line A was run southeasterly from Pizo 1 for 500
~".-
.feet. Four distinct velocity layers were located
here, i.e., 1200 to 1400 ft/sec .from 3 to 7 feet
deep, 1800 to '200q ft/sec from 20 to 29 feet deep,
3300 to 3600 ft/sec from 35 to 63 feet deep, .. and , . a velocity of 5200 to 5300 ft/sec at ,thi$ lower
depth.
,
q". FUNNEKOTTER
RfGISlERED GEOlOGIST
CERllFIED ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST
O. BOX 575 • ESCONDIDO, CALIF. 92025 e 7.c6·2793
DISCUSSION:
E~EERING GEOLOGY • SEISMIC INVESTIGATIONS
For
Svbdivilion Delign
Pipelines -. Roods
Se~mlc Rippobility Studies
On the north side of the creek four 200 feet runs
were made but are not continuous because much of
this area is·loose fill material with high soft . I
. I embankments .!. the Seismic lines were positioned.
to avoid this material. which is extremely absorbent
of shock waves.
Lin~ B is, for the most part, two velocity zones, . ': ~. ;. ...
1400 ft/sec and 5200 ft/sec -the 1400 ft/sec mat-
erial is 26 to 33 f~et deep.
Li'ne H is just north of B and has three velocity
,
zones, i.e., 1700, 3400, and 5200 ft/sec -the first
layer is 17 to 28 feet deep, the second layer from
28 to 41 feet deep.
Line C is also a,three layer situation 1400 ft/ .
sec to 12 feet, 3200 fi/sec from 42 to 45 feet and
at this lower depth 5200 rt/sec.
Line D -1600 rt/sec to 20 f~et,'3200 ft/sec frOm
44 'to 54 feet, 50QO rt/sec at the lowe~ depths. The
end of line D is approximately~OO feet northeast
of Pizo 1.
Lines E thru G are in area 2 -line Ewas run on
the high voltage line access road -here three velo-
city zones were measured -1100 ft/sec to 6 feet,-
1500 ft/sec to 22 feet, and 3100 ft/sec to a maximum
'depth of penetration of 49 to 51 feet. This means
I
, T. FUNNEKOTTER
REGI51ERED. GEOLOGIST
CERllFIED ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST
• O. BOX 575 • E5CONDIDO. CALIF. 92025
7-46·2793
DISCUSSION:
CONCLUSION:
• INEERING GEOLOGY •• SEISMIC INVESTIGATIONS
For
Subdivioion Deoign
Pipelines • Roods
Seiomlc Rippobility Studiel
3
that the lower layer could extend considerably
deeper, but this is unknown.
Line F is !'lear the creek bed -here was measured
, '
I 1100~ft/sec! to 7 feet, 1700 ft/sec to 27-29 feet,
and 5000 ft/sec at this lower depth.
Line G was run on the north bank of the highviay.
Four velocity 'zones were located here -1600 ft/sec
to 7 feet, 2100 ft/sec to 27 feet, 3200 ft/sec to
59 feet, and 5000 ft/sec at 59 feet.
Three primary velocity'zones were located, i.e.,
!
800 to 2100 ft/sec, 3200 to 360~ ft/sec, and 5000
to 5300 ft/sec. The upper layerts) is loose' soil,
alluvium, and moderateiy consol~dated silty and
~layey sands. Many, ,runs indicate two velocity bands
within this upper group; however since the lines
were run over areas of fill, more or less compacted,
loose disturbed areas, dirt roads (~ildly compacted)
this variation,is expected. The' second layer is a
distinct velocity change -it was found on all runs
C:;::-c --
except those runs near the creek bed' ( B, and F).' The
5000-5300 ft/sec velocity was measured on all runs
except line E •
• It is probable that the 5000 rt/sec "layer" is
the water table for the following reas<?ns:, it is
at a low inclination and non conformable to the .
surface, 5000 ft/sec, is typically water velocity,
ang, Pi~9 1 encountered groundwater at 33 feet.
, T. FUNNEKOTTER
'EG IS 1 E RED -GEOLOGIST
CERTifiED ENGINHRING GEOLOGIST
p. O. BOX 575 • ESCONDIDO. CAUF. 92025
7.46·2793
CONCLUSION:
E.INEERING GEOLOGY SEISMIC INVESTIGATIONS
For
Subdivision D~llgn
Pip~l1ne, • Rood,
5eiomlc Rippobility Sludi",
4
However this does not-preclude the possibility that
the 5000 ft/sec "layertt could be a lithologic change.
An addit'ion~l conclu~ion can be drawn on the above I
water table premise, i.e., that the 3200-3600 ft/sec
layer is a porous medium since the 5000 ft/sec v-elo-
city was measured within this medium and not on top
of it. Additional ~Qrings couid decide this premise
with-more certainty.
For additional Seismic information, see attached
sheets.
As a comparison of Uhardness"of sandstone and:
granite,rippability bec0mes difficult in granite!
at 5000 ft/sec, however in sandstone this upper lim-
it is over BOOO ft/sec •. -'
Submitted by T. Funnekotter
, T. FUNNEKOTIER
REGISTERED 'GEOLOGIST
CERTIfiED ENGINEERING GEOlOGIST
EAINEERING GEOLOGY •
• O. BOX 575 • ESCONDIDO, CALIF. 92025 e 7~6·2793
SEISMIC RIPPABILITY INFORMATION
SEISMIC I~VESTIGAT'ONS
For
SubdivisIon o.."gn
Pipeline. • Rooc! •
SeiJmlt Rippobill~ Siudlu
The following points should be considered when evaluating
Seismic information:
I 1. All velocities, depths, ahd thicknesses are averages and
qualified as follows:
G good
F fair
P -poor
VP -very poor
? -questionable
Grades of G, F, and P should be considered reliable; VP
and? should be considered as indications only.
2. Each profile provides information in the immediate area
of that profile -extrapolation outward from this line
must be considered ,speculative. In other words a velocity
cross section is given along a specific line of investi-
gation -10 to 20 feet from this line the conditions
could vary. In order to avoid any surprises between the
Seismic lines additiortal Seismic lines would be in order.
3. As'the velocity of material increases~' ripping becomes
progressively more difficult until at some point it is
more economical to drill and shoot the material prior to
excavation. Rippability also varies with the type of
material; however', in general, D-9 Ca't single ripper per-
formance, should be ',as follows: rippable to 5000 ft/ sec,
marginal from 50qO to 5500 ft/sec, 'and non-rippable over
5500 ft/sec. The changeover from a ripping to a blasting
operation usually occurs within the marginal zone~
To determine rippability is essentially an economic
decision -whether to continue ripping at higher velocities
or to blast at lower velocities'· depends on the type' of job,
type of equipment, expertise of the opefato~~, amount of
excavation, how the rock is to be disposed of, time factor,
etc. For example, in fractured rock a trench type of
operation is more .difficult than a hillside job, especially
if boulders are present. In a trench manuverability of
the heavy equipment is limi~ed and rock disposal is a
bigger problem. . .
The degree of fracturing is a factor in determining
rippability, i.e t • more fracturing, lower velocities,
easier ripping. The same velocity could represent either
decomposed or fractured rock.
· T. FUNNEKOITER E4t'INEERING GEOLOGY SEISMIC 'INVESTIGATIONS
For REG ISH RED GEOLOGIST
CERTIFIED [NGINHRING GEOLOGIST Svbclivillol'l o".igl'l
Pipelines • Roods O. BOX 575 • E!>CONDIDO, CALIF. 92025
7 .. 6·2793 , Seis.m1c Rippchllity Slvdi ..
4.
SEISMIC -RIPPABILITY INFORMATION
Boulders are identified
many boulders (ME), a~d
notations can also mean
boulders are considered
and even possibly to 30
as scattered boulders
larg~ boulders (LB).
hard angular blocks.
tJ be over' 10 feet in
feet'in diameter.
(SB),
These
Large
diameter
5. For trenching operations, the rippability figures must
be adjusted downward, i.e., velocities as low as 3500
ft/sec may indicate difficu~t ripping depending on the
degree of fracturing of the rock. Fractured rock and
even small boulders can o_e very troublesome in a narrow
trench. For example, decomposed-granite is easier to
dig than fractured granite even when the velocities are
similar. However, in gen'eral, based on a machine com-
:parable to a Kohring 505, most materials with velocities'
,of approximately 3800 ft/sec or less should be rippable,
over 4300 ft/sec non-rippable, and marginal in between.
:In a narrow trench a condition of'many boulders can be
:alrnost as troublesome as solid rock so the above figures
-should be used with discretion.
--
~ ......
"
I I,
, I
! ,
i
:1
'I' 1,
i
i'l j, , .
'.
'.
'.
-:
"
.-
. '-
" ,
-.... -
•
-tF-.
.-' ... :-: ~
.'
~ ..
1 • -!
t
I
•
APPENDIX B
WATER QUALITY DATA
•
Samples of the existing groundwater at the site were obtained from Borings 1 and 2
in which piezometers were installed. A sample of surface water was obtained in the
canyon bottom near Boring 2. The resul.ts of chemical analyses of the water samples
are presented on page B-1. Test r~sults nuniber 1 and 2 are for the samples obtained
from Borings 1 and 2, respectively:~ Test reSult n.umber 3 is for thesurfoce water sample.
Chemical analyses of the imported water source for the Carlsbad Municipal Water Dis-
trict were provided by the District and are presented on page B-2.
e:::= .........
II· if I'
I' .
(CLARKSON CHEMICAL LABORATORY)
ANALYTICAL AND CONSULTING CHEMISTS
:11150 TRDUISDALIt DRIVI: CHULA VISTA, CAUI'ORNIA g:lOID
tSTA"LISHtD II'Z.
r-Robert Prater Associates
11585 Sorrento Valley Rd.
Suite 101
DATI:: August 31, 1978
San Diego, CA 92121 " P.O. #
L
LABORATORY NO. vl-8704
SAMPLI!:: AS RECEIVED: ThI;ee 'Water Samples, Designated as #1 P ABP P-l
Ground water, #2 PABP _P-2 Ground water, #3 PABP
I ~. -C kG' d -,'" • _.,': _::_,:.t:.:::'..~.:; ree ~" roun water.
ANALYSiS: . {On. Til ter.ea::,Samples)
Total Dissolved Solids
~loride
Nitrate None Detected less than
Iron
Manganese
Methylene-blue-active substance
Boron
Odor
; . -.: -;-":,
#1:-
950 ppm
195 ppm
73 ppm
15 ppm
185 ppm
62.2%
360 ppm
.2, ppm
".2 ppm
.29 ppm ~. __
*.1 ppm
.28 ppm
None
4Ifotal Nitrogen
Total Phosphorus None 'Detected less than
*None Detected less than
'#2
1026 ppm
78 ppm
44 ppm
17 ppm
185 ppm
69.1%
520 ppm
.2 ppm
2.0 ppm
.2S ppm
*.1 ppm
.24 ppm
None
#3
1418 ppm
284 ppm
*.1 ppm
.07 ppm
.8 ppm
.18 ppm
90 ppm
.2' ppm
\ j'
1.1 I ", I, ::
----6"" •• i~ ..... .i~u ... u ..... -rr .. ';.;;. UU .... V tV" • ",-"'-'-;';-(j"f(--a:r'['-l '"C,-t\r
Jtni. COHSTITU~HT JUL AUG T OCT ~ DBC ~ rED I MAR
Silicn (S 2) 8.4 8.2 .8_._6_ 8.1 __ 8.3 _t·LB_l~oJ_9.J ___ 9 .. 1
APR .I
Iron (Fe) I NR I NR I NR I NR I NR IJ-lR._LNR 1 NR 1 NR
Cnlcium (Co) I 80 80 .136 I 77 76 Ll_9_LBl LRO 1 R?
Mngl1enium (Mg) 1 .. '31 .• _01 30 I 30 129.5J_3.~OJ 30.0 1 30.0110.0110.0
So cli urn (N.) J 103 104 102 1021104 1102 110~ 1103 I' 101
Potassium (K) I 4.5 4.4 4.54.4 ~ __ 4._6_._~.] __ ~.L .. 4.5 4.5
Ca rbona te (CO J) ,I 0 I 0 I 4 I 0 I 0 I 5, I 0 I 0 I 0
Bicarbonate -(HC0 3) 1 156 I 153 I 104 1 148J145 1.142 1 155 1 155 1 160
Sulfa te (SO 4) I 289 I 284 I 281 I 281 I 281. 1 285 __ L29L 1_285_ 1 ?Rb
tChlOiide (C1). 'I 89 I·n 193 188 I 90 192 In 88 az. I . ,
Nitrate" (N0 3) "O~ _QJ_~O O~ 1 0.2 0.40.3 0.3 0.2
Fluoride (F) , O. 25 LJh)~6-'--J)-,_~L~3_'LI~. 34 I O. 34 ~321 0.3 'I 0.29
noron (n) I NR 1 0.14,1 NR I NR ' I NR J:NR INK 1 fh"'121 0.11
Total Dissolved Solids
Hard ness as CaCa 3
Total
Carbonate
Nonca rbona te R
_6J3LI 680 I 669 j' 665 U61J 67-7, 1_6_9_6 1_.6i8.L 67a
327 1 323 I 313 I 314 J~J.1J _321 .318 1 __ .1?~ 'I 3?P.
_:L~~I ____ ~l_1~LI .. 12J.-'_:L.19 __ 1 ).24 12711271111
_19_LL.llLl1.92.:.--' . J.9J J ____ 19_ 4.1 19 7 201 1 196 1 197
J
Alkalinity-Phenolphthalein : '0 0 3 0 0 40 0 Jl ~
I-,
Alkalinity-To tal '128 ,125 121 121 119 ,124 127 127. 131 '
Free Carbo~ Dioxide (CO 2) "'. 1 2 l' 2 l' '1 III I
Color 1 NR I NR 1 NR 1 NR 1 NR I NR \ NR 1 illI 1 NR 1
I"Turbidity (JTU)' 1,1L·~1,1. ~O.6 : 1.5 : 0.9 '.1.0 ~1,4 '_'O,57~' o.~,
Ilyd~ogen Ion-Concentrat:ion-(pB)' I 8.331 .a.13! a.A4Ia.lal ~,-3.Q1.8.2918.351 IL1111 A.11
E1~ctrical Conductivity (ECXlO
b
@25°C) . 'I 1050 ! 1040 110'L0_1J..D41LL1040_!1050_1-.l070L1.060. 11050
Total Sus.pended Matter t, 697 I 698 \. 692 707 1,685 jNR' 1 714 I 706 '\ 71d J , J /.J
IIrAppro",llOately equal to patts per million
NI\-No,t [1.epo.l.'ted ~ ---~--
., .
. /
.
ttl I "?I
,_. . .•. -._----."-'-'------._-_ .... ------.. ,-.•. , ---."----'. . .. --' , .. -:.:-. --~ .. =.;..:::.::..;,;;;-~. ;;;;;;;==~==============