The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCT 16-07; MARJA ACRES; SUPPLEMENTAL GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION AND REVIEW; 2021-07-26 17991 Fitch • Irvine, California 92614 • PHONE (949) 442-2442 • FAX (949) 476-8322 • www.nmggeotechnical.com July 26, 2021 Project No. 21014-01 To: NUWI Carlsbad, LLC 2001 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 401 Santa Monica, California 90403 Attention: Mr. Jason Han, Partner Subject: Supplemental Geotechnical Investigation and Review of 40-Scale Grading Plan for Proposed Marja Acres Mixed Use Development, 4901 El Camino Real, City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, California In accordance with your request and authorization, NMG Geotechnical, Inc. (NMG) has performed a supplemental geotechnical investigation and prepared this geotechnical review report of the 40-scale grading plan for the proposed Marja Acres development, located at 4901 El Camino Real, City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, California. The rough grading plan reviewed was prepared by Howes/Weiler/Landy Planning and Engineering (HWL) and the latest version was received by NMG on July 26, 2021. The 58-sheet grading plan also includes wall plans for the MSE, CMU and cantilever shoring wall plans. We also reviewed the Onsite and Offsite Improvement Plans prepared by HWL received on May 28, 2021, and the retaining wall calculations prepared by Regional Shoring Design, Inc. received on July 26, 2021. Our supplemental investigation consisted of three large-diameter, bucket-auger borings to depths of up to 70 feet. We also reviewed the prior geotechnical investigation and design reports for the subject site prepared by GeoSoils, Inc. (GSI) and NOVA. The data was compiled onto the Geotechnical Map (Plate 1). The rough grading plan was reviewed in light of the geologic model, and geotechnical analysis was performed to provide updated remedial grading design, as shown on the Remedial Measures Map (Plate 2). Eight new cross-sections were prepared to illustrate the geotechnical conditions and recommended remedial measures (Plate 3). Based on our investigation and analyses, the proposed grading and future residential development are considered geotechnically feasible, provided the recommendations in this report are implemented during design, grading and construction. 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR ii NMG If you have any questions regarding this report, please contact our office. We appreciate the opportunity to provide our services. Respectfully submitted, NMG GEOTECHNICAL, INC. Terri Wright, CEG 1342 Reza Saberi, GE 3071 Principal Geologist Principal Engineer TW/RS/WG/je Distribution: (1) Addressee (E-Mail) (1) Mr. Benny Sam, Madison Real Estate Consulting (E-mail) (1) Mr. Mel Landy, HWL (E-Mail) 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR iii NMG TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 4 1.1 Purpose and Scope of Services ....................................................................................... 4 1.2 Site Location and Description ........................................................................................ 5 1.3 Site History ..................................................................................................................... 5 1.4 Previous Studies ............................................................................................................. 6 1.5 Field Exploration ............................................................................................................ 7 1.6 Laboratory Testing ......................................................................................................... 8 1.7 Proposed Grading and Development .............................................................................. 8 2.0 GEOTECHNICAL FINDINGS ......................................................................................... 10 2.1 Geologic Setting ........................................................................................................... 10 2.2 Earth Units .................................................................................................................... 10 2.3 Geologic Structure and Faulting ................................................................................... 12 2.4 Surface Water and Groundwater .................................................................................. 12 2.5 Regional Faulting and Seismicity ................................................................................. 12 2.6 Liquefaction Analysis ................................................................................................... 13 2.7 Mass Movements .......................................................................................................... 13 2.8 Laboratory Testing ....................................................................................................... 14 2.9 Slope Stability .............................................................................................................. 14 2.10 Settlement Potential ...................................................................................................... 15 2.11 Expansive Soil Characteristics ..................................................................................... 16 2.12 Soluble Sulfate Contents .............................................................................................. 17 2.13 Rippability and Generation of Oversize Material ........................................................ 17 2.14 Earthwork Shrinkage, Bulking and Subsidence ........................................................... 17 2.15 Existing Utilities and Structures ................................................................................... 18 2.16 Potential Use of Infiltration BMPs ............................................................................... 19 3.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................ 20 3.1 General Conclusion and Recommendation .................................................................. 20 3.2 Site Clearing and Preparation ....................................................................................... 20 3.3 Remedial Grading Measures ........................................................................................ 20 3.4 Overexcavation/Lot Capping ....................................................................................... 21 3.5 Grading and Earthwork Specifications ......................................................................... 21 3.6 Slope Stabilization ........................................................................................................ 23 3.7 Groundwater ................................................................................................................. 24 3.8 Subdrains ...................................................................................................................... 24 3.9 Water Quality Basins and BMPs .................................................................................. 24 3.10 Settlement and Settlement Monuments ........................................................................ 24 3.11 Rippability and Oversize Rock ..................................................................................... 26 3.12 Protection of Existing Utilities ..................................................................................... 27 3.13 Building Foundations and Slabs ................................................................................... 27 3.14 Interior Slab Moisture Mitigation ................................................................................. 30 3.15 CMU Wall Design Parameters ..................................................................................... 30 3.16 Permanent Shoring Wall Design Parameters ............................................................... 32 3.17 Temporary Shoring Wall Design Parameters ............................................................... 32 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR iv NMG 3.18 MSE Wall Design Parameters ...................................................................................... 33 3.19 Foundation Setback ...................................................................................................... 34 3.20 Seismic Design Parameters .......................................................................................... 35 3.21 Expansion Potential ...................................................................................................... 35 3.22 Cement Type and Corrosivity ...................................................................................... 35 3.23 Exterior Concrete (Non-Structural) .............................................................................. 36 3.24 Preliminary Asphalt Concrete Pavement Design ......................................................... 37 3.25 Vehicular PCC Pavements ........................................................................................... 38 3.26 Interlocking Concrete Paver Sections............................................................................ 39 3.27 Groundwater ................................................................................................................. 39 3.28 Surface Drainage and Irrigation ................................................................................... 40 3.29 Maintenance of Graded Slopes ..................................................................................... 40 3.30 Utility Construction ...................................................................................................... 41 3.31 Temporary Shoring for Utility Construction ................................................................ 41 3.32 Improvements near Tops of Slopes ............................................................................... 42 3.33 Laboratory Testing During Grading ............................................................................. 43 3.34 Future Plan Reviews ..................................................................................................... 44 3.35 Geotechnical Observation and Testing during Grading ............................................... 44 4.0 LIMITATIONS .................................................................................................................. 45 LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Figures Figure 1 – Site Location Map – Rear of Text Figure 2 – Regional Fault Map – Rear of Text Figure 3 – Retaining Wall Drainage Detail - Rear of Text Appendices Appendix A – References Appendix B – Boring, Trench and CPT Logs Appendix C – Laboratory Test Results Appendix D – Seismic Data Appendix E – Liquefaction Analysis Appendix F – Slope Stability Analysis Appendix G – General Earthwork and Grading Specifications Plates Plate 1 – Geotechnical Map – In Pocket Plate 2 – Remedial Measures Map – In Pocket Plate 3 – Geotechnical Cross-Sections – In Pocket 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 1 NMG EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The northern portion of the site is underlain by alluvium in the low-lying area adjacent to El Camino Real. The upper mesa area is covered by a marine terrace deposit (also mapped as older alluvium) that is up to 25 feet thick and overlies bedrock of the Santiago Formation. The bedrock is mapped by the prior geotechnical consultant to be exposed at the surface on the north- and west- facing hillside areas; however, based on our site visit and prior trenching by others, we anticipate there will be 2- to 7-foot-thick layer of topsoil/colluvium over the bedrock. Groundwater was found at a depth of approximately 14 feet in the alluvium in the low-lying northern area. The prior trench excavations on the mesa did not encounter groundwater but they had not been extended to bedrock. Additional borings were drilled on the mesa that encountered a highly expansive paleosol (old soil) at depths of 5 to 20 feet below existing grade. Bedrock was encountered below the paleosol at depths of 11 to 27 feet deep. There are no major or active faults mapped at the site. The closest major active fault is the Rose Canyon/Newport Inglewood Fault zone located approximately 6 miles to the west (offshore). The main geotechnical constraints and issues for design, grading and construction at the site include the following: • Up to 10 feet of undocumented fill is present in the northern low-lying areas. This material was placed in at least three episodes of grading operations over the past 60 years, and no documentation could be found. Therefore, this material is considered unsuitable and should be entirely removed down to competent alluvium prior to placement of new compacted fill. • Settlement potential of saturated alluvium in the northern portion of the site. Considering groundwater at 14 feet and recommended removals up to 10 feet deep, up to 30 feet of clayey alluvium may be left in-place, with additional fill loading of up to 25 feet. The area impacted by settlement and the suggested locations of settlement monuments are shown on Plate 2. • Settlement monitoring is anticipated to take between 4 to 8 months until an equilibrium condition is reached and one can safely predict a reasonable future settlement that can be tolerated by the proposed buildings. Delaying construction in this area should be anticipated, or a fill surcharge may be placed to expedite the settlement in that area. • Differential settlement may impact the properties along the cut/fill line at the transition lots from bedrock to deeper fill areas. Deeper overexcavation is recommended for transition lots. The building slabs will need to be designed to tolerate the anticipated differential settlements. • Undocumented fill is also present in the northeast corner below the adjacent mobile home development (Cross-Section 7-7'). The proposed shoring wall along the perimeter is designed to support an additional 5 feet of soil for remedial removal within this area. The remedial removal will then extend at 1H:1V to competent native material. The undocumented fill should be evaluated by the geotechnical consultant during the grading. Additional removals in sections/slot cuts may be recommended within the proposed building pads. 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 2 NMG • Cuts of up to 25 feet deep are planned for lots on the mesa (majority of the southern portion of the site), which are anticipated to expose the terrace deposit, highly expansive paleosol layer and/or bedrock. The cut lots should be overexcavated to provide at least 4 feet of compacted fill under the lots, or 1 foot of fill below the bottom of the footings, whichever is greater. Cut portions of transition lots should be overexcavated to provide 5 feet of compacted fill. If highly expansive claystone is encountered adjacent to less expansive sandstone or if highly expansive clay seams or faults are encountered at the overexcavation bottom, then additional overexcavation may be recommended during grading. • Design cuts along the southern edge will create a north-facing cut slope with retaining wall at the toe. The cut slope is anticipated to expose terrace over bedrock, with anticipated neutral bedding. The retaining wall at the toe-of-slope is planned between 4 and 12.9 feet high. The proposed lots are lower in elevation than the existing lots to the south. The slope should be rebuilt during grading with a 1:1 backcut beginning near the property line to the recommended overexcavation grade (see Cross-Sections 3-3' through 5-5'). This backcut will need to be mapped by the engineering geologist during grading to confirm the anticipated favorable conditions. • Bedding in the bedrock dips to the west and the stability of the hillsides and slope along western areas were evaluated by additional bucket-auger borings. Cross-Sections 1-1′, 1a-1a′, and 2-2′ were prepared depicting the subsurface geology and were analyzed for slope stability. Slope stability analysis shows that the proposed slopes have adequate factor of safety. A key is proposed within the bedrock and older alluvium area which is 30 feet wide with bottom elevations of 35 to 50 feet msl (Plate 2). • The expansion potential of the onsite materials is anticipated to vary from moderate to high. Additional testing of onsite soils after grading of the site will be needed for design. The foundations and slabs for the proposed buildings will need to be designed considering the expansive nature of onsite soils (Post-Tensioned per PTI method or Wire-Reinforced per WRI method). • There are numerous walls planned, including MSE walls up to 26 feet high around the perimeter of the development, a tiered cantilever shoring wall up to 26 feet total height in the southeast corner, a cantilever shoring wall in the southwest corner near Basin #1, a cantilever shoring wall along the eastern perimeter and numerous CMU walls throughout the development. • Grading is planned within the San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E) easement in the southwest portion of the site. A MSE wall up to 13.7 feet high and a fill slope ascending 22 feet above the wall is designed beneath the existing overhead lines. A shorter MSE wall is planned around an existing SCE tower. Special equipment and logistics may be needed for grading in these areas within the easement. • The MSE walls will require granular low expansion backfill materials, which may be difficult to produce from the onsite terrace deposit or sandstone bedrock. We encountered clean sandy materials within the older alluvium along the southwestern area of the site (Plate 2). These 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 3 NMG materials may be mined and stockpiled for backfilling of the proposed MSE walls. The sandy layers within the bedrock unit were generally deeper; however, locally these layers may be encountered at shallower depths (on the bottom of the lot overexcavation). Import of select backfill material or other alternatives, such as lime treatment, should be evaluated upon discussion with the wall contractor. Currently, the project earthwork is estimated to have an export of approximately 79,500 cy. • Numerous water quality features are planned throughout development (Plate 2). They will need liners and/or underdrains due to the majority of the site being covered with compacted fill, the locations of the facilities next to slopes and hillsides, and the generally poor percolation rates within the soils and bedrock. • There is a large storm drain energy dissipator planned along the west side of the project, with an MSE wall over top of the structure (Sheets 12 and 31 of the grading/wall plans). We recommend discussing the logistics of construction of this system with the grading and wall contractors. Construction of the proposed storm drain and utility lines should also be evaluated within this area and along the MSE walls to avoid cutting into the geogrid reinforcement after construction of the walls. • There are numerous utilities that will either need to be relocated and/or protected-in-place during grading. There is a 10-inch Kinder Morgan (KM) petroleum pipeline subparallel to El Camino Real that veers onsite in the western half of the property, two SDG&E overhead transmission lines along the western property boundary, and an SDG&E overhead power line crossing the western portion of the property to the existing house and outbuildings on the mesa. There were also manholes for storm drain and sewer observed in the low-lying areas during our site visits. The onsite overhead power line and the other service utilities will be removed during grading. The SDG&E transmission lines and KM petroleum pipeline will remain in-place. The backfill over the petroleum pipeline should be evaluated during grading. • Two palm tree cell towers previously located in the center of the mesa with large cables extending downhill to transformers were recently removed. There were two 17-to-18-foot excavations made to remove the cell tower foundation that were filled with uncompacted fill that will need to be removed and recompacted. The locations of these backfilled areas are shown on Plate 2. • There may be old septic systems and cesspits/leach fields near the existing structures at the site which will need to be removed during grading. • Areas of buried chicken remains, pottery, and nursery remains may be encountered during rough grading and will need to be removed from the site. • During remedial removals and or utility removal in the low-lying area, saturated alluvium may be encountered. These areas may require stabilization with granular material and/or geofabric for workability of the equipment. Considering groundwater at a depth of 14 feet in those areas, dewatering may also be needed if excavations extend below the groundwater table. 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 4 NMG 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose and Scope of Services NMG Geotechnical, Inc. (NMG) has performed a supplemental geotechnical investigation at the subject Marja Acres development, in the city of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, California (Figure 1). The plan reviewed was prepared by Howes/Weiler/Landy Planning and Engineering (HWL) and the latest version was received by NMG on July 26, 2021. We also reviewed the Onsite and Offsite Improvement Plans prepared by HWL, received on May 28, 2021. MSE, CMU and Permanent Shoring Wall Plans are included with the Rough Grading Plan set (58 sheets). NMG also reviewed the calculations for the cast in place wall prepared by Regional Shoring Design, Inc. and received on July 26, 2021. The collected geotechnical data by NMG and others were compiled to construct a geologic model of the site and to supplement parameters for geotechnical analysis. Geologic cross-sections were developed and engineering analyses were performed to provide remedial recommendations for the proposed grading, including depth of removals of unsuitable material, pad overexcavation, slope stabilization measures, fill settlement monitoring and the locations of canyon-type subdrains. This report presents our geotechnical findings, conclusions, and provides recommendations for remedial grading and construction of the site. As part of our study, we have prepared the Geotechnical Map (Plate 1), Remedial Measures Map (Plate 2), and geotechnical cross-sections (Plate 3). Our scope of services for this study included the following: • Background and Aerial Photo Review: The background review consisted of researching and compiling geotechnical data related to the site, including both published and unpublished reports and maps. This study also included a review of historic aerial photographs and topographic maps dating back to the early 1900s. • Geologic Map Compilation: We complied the prior geotechnical information at the site, beginning with the original study by Geosoils, Inc. (GSI), and later studies by NOVA (Appendix A). We also reviewed the as-graded information from the Robertson Ranch grading along the north side of El Camino Real by LGC Valley, Inc. This data was added to the geotechnical map (Plate 1). Upon review of the existing data, we developed our supplemental geotechnical investigation to determine the geologic structure and bedding attitudes. • Field Mapping: Field mapping was performed at the site to evaluate the geomorphic features, limits of undocumented fills, bedrock outcrops or cuts, and review of perimeter conditions. • Subsurface Exploration: Field staking of boring locations and utility clearance were performed prior to the investigation. The subsurface exploration consisted of excavation, sampling and downhole-logging by an engineering geologist of two bucket-auger borings (B-1 and B-2) in the western portion of the mesa area. A third bucket-auger boring (B-3) was excavated (no samples collected) near Nova's Boring LD-2 to observe and document the geologic conditions described in their boring. A complete set of boring, trench and CPT logs by NMG and others are presented in Appendix B. 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 5 NMG • Laboratory Testing: Laboratory testing of selected earth materials was conducted in general conformance with applicable ASTM test standards. Test results are summarized and presented in Appendix C. For this phase of study, the data was evaluated to establish design strength parameters of earth units primarily for use in slope stability analysis. The in-situ moisture content and dry density data are included on the geotechnical boring logs (Appendix B). A summary of shear strength testing and slope stability analysis are presented in Appendix F. • Geotechnical Analysis: Geotechnical analysis of the collected data included preparation of the Geotechnical Map (Plate 1) and geotechnical cross-sections (Plate 3) and boring logs. We evaluated and analyzed the proposed development grading in light of slope stability, settlement and seismic exposure. Remedial grading measures were developed for the grading plan and remedial measures map was prepared (Plate 2). The seismic design parameters in accordance with the 2019 California Building Code (CBC) are included in Appendix D, the liquefaction analysis results are included in Appendix E, and the slope stability analysis is included in Appendix F. • Report Preparation: Preparation of this report, which includes our findings, conclusions and recommendations for the planned grading, with accompanying illustrations and appendices. 1.2 Site Location and Description The approximately 20-acre site is located south of El Camino Real, west of Cannon Road, east of an existing Southern California Edison easement and north of an existing residential development in the city of Carlsbad. The site has two levels with a mesa covering the majority of the site and hillsides down to lower levels along the northern and western portion of the property. The elevations vary from a high of 110 feet above mean sea level (msl) in the southeast portion of the site, to a low of 48 feet msl at the northwest corner. There is a gently sloping hillside along the north and west sides of the mesa, generally 3H:1V or flatter, and locally as steep as 2H:1V. The low-lying area is about 80 to 280 feet wide along the northern portion of the property, measured horizontally from El Camino Real. Based on our site visits, the buildings at the site appeared to be vacated or abandoned. Existing utilities were noted throughout the site as discussed in the Geotechnical Findings section of this report. The outbuildings on the southwest portion of the mesa have old equipment and signs suggesting there was a prior land-use for chicken egg sales (Marja Acres Eggs, Carlsbad, California). The residential home in this area also appeared to be abandoned. During our recent field work, the cell towers were being removed. 1.3 Site History Based on historic aerial photos and topographic maps (EDR, 2015), the following site history can be developed. • The two-lane El Camino Real was constructed by 1938. The main creek channel along the west side of the project was essentially in the current location. The tributary creek channel in the northern portion of the site appeared to be located along the southern side of the channel at the base of the hillside, with over bank deposits over the low-lying area. 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 6 NMG • By 1946, there was a fence line along the southern boundary. The site was in essentially natural condition prior to the 1950s. • By 1953, the existing road up to the mesa was constructed to access a residential house and long chicken coops on the western portion of the mesa. The northern low land area, was still a natural stream wash area. • In 1963, additional buildings were constructed, including additional chicken coops across the mesa and the residential house was added onto. It appeared the middle portion of the low-lying area had been graded with additional fill being placed and a portion of the large building fronting El Camino Real was constructed. • By 1970, the residential homes and associated roads to the west of the property had been constructed. • By 1973, there were residential developments constructed to the south of the property, an overhead SCE line was constructed along the western property limits, and a building was constructed in the northeast corner of the site. It appears that additional fill was placed on the eastern portion of the low-lying area by 1973. • In 1979, the majority of the chicken coops were removed from the mesa and there were piles of soil and/or debris in the northwest low-lying area. • By 1985, the piles in the northwest area had been leveled out. The mobile home park to the east of the property was graded and constructed. • Between 1990 and 2009, the mesa area appeared to be used for row crops with various temporary buildings in the southwest portion of the mesa. In 1990, the northwest low-land area was being graded, possibly by additional fill placement and by 1993, it appears a nursery was located in the northwest corner of the site. • By 2003, both of the cell towers in the central mesa area were constructed. • It appears the southwest portion of the mesa was being used for nursery between 2010 and 2016. There was a small yard with plants and occasional buildings just east of the remaining chicken coop. The remainder of the mesa appear to be a cleared dirt surface with scattered trees. • A large development was graded to the north of the property, across El Camion Real, between 2014 and 2015. (The Robertson Ranch project was graded under the geotechnical observation and testing of LGC Valley, 2016.) 1.4 Previous Studies A prior investigation was performed at the site by GSI (2016 and 2018). This investigation included three hollow-stem borings in the northern low-lying area and 10 backhoe trenches on the 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 7 NMG mesa. Their study also included limited laboratory testing. Their backhoe trenches on the mesa did not extend to bedrock or proposed finish grades. NMG prepared a due diligence report (NMG, 2021), which at the time was based on our background review, site reconnaissance and the data by GeoSoils. In early 2021, NOVA performed an additional investigation which included five hollow-stem borings on the mesa and nine Cone Penetrometer Test probes (CPTs) in the low-lying area and performed laboratory testing (NOVA, 2021a). NMG performed a third-party review of their report and provided comments to NOVA. We also received the CPT data to perform liquefaction and settlement analysis. NOVA then prepared an updated report (NOVA, 2021b) and a response to NMG comments (NOVA, 2021c). They also prepared a response report for the City comments (NOVA, 2120d). Later in May 2021, NOVA performed additional investigation, including two bucket-auger borings and several trenches, for the west facing hillside with the SCE towers (NOVA, 2021e). They did not sample the borings to evaluate shear strengths of the bedrock and clay beds, except for one remolded shear strength test on a sample of the bedrock. Slope stability analysis was performed based on arcuate failure. Along-bedding strengths/block type analysis was not performed. These and other pertinent published reports and maps reviewed for this study are referenced in Appendix A. The borings, trenches and CPTs by GSI and NOVA are included in Appendix B and the locations are shown on Plate 1. Their laboratory testing is also included in Appendix C. 1.5 Field Exploration Our field exploration included excavation of three additional large-diameter, bucket-auger, borings (B-1, B-2, and B-3) to depths of up to 70 feet on the western side of the mesa. The borings were sampled (with the exception of B-3), geotechnically surface-logged and downhole-logged by an engineering geologist to evaluate the conditions of the earth units and bedrock stratigraphy and structure. Soil samples were taken at selected intervals with a 2.5-inch-inside-diameter California split-barrel sampler. The samples were also taken to obtain a measure of resistance of the soil to penetration (recorded as blows-per-foot on our geotechnical boring logs). Drive weights for the bucket-auger vary with the telescoping Kelly bar and depth of sample, as noted on the boring logs. Bulk samples of onsite soils were collected from the cuttings and used for additional soil identification purposes and laboratory testing. Soil samples were visually classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). Upon completion of downhole logging, borings were backfilled with cuttings and tamped with the Kelly bar for compaction. The locations of the two borings are shown on the Geotechnical Map (Plate 1) and the logs are included in Appendix B. 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 8 NMG 1.6 Laboratory Testing Laboratory tests performed on selected bulk and relatively undisturbed soil samples include: • Moisture content and dry density; • Grain-size distribution; • Atterberg limits; • Maximum dry density and optimum moisture content; • Direct shear; • Expansion index; and • Sulfate content Laboratory tests were conducted in general conformance with applicable ASTM standards. Laboratory test results are presented in Appendix C. In-situ moisture and dry density results are included on the geotechnical boring logs (Appendix B). 1.7 Proposed Grading and Development The plans reviewed for our study included the following: Rough Grading Plan: The rough grading plan for Marja Acres was prepared by HWL, and the latest version AutoCAD files provided to NMG on June 30, 2021, which was used as the base for our Plate 1. We also received a PDF of the entire set on July 26, 2021. This plan set consists of 58 sheets, including: Sheet 1 – Title sheet with vicinity map, notes, and legend; Sheet 2 – Street sections and miscellaneous sections; Sheet 3 – BMP and Storm Drain details; Sheet 4 – Mitigation measures; Sheet 5 – Key map, details, and additional notes; Sheets 6 through 8 – Demolition plan; Sheets 9 through 16 – Rough grading plan, with notes and details; Sheets 17 through 27 – Private storm drains; Sheets 28 through 38 – Anchor retaining wall plans; Sheets 39 through 50 – Structural CMU retaining wall details; Sheet 51 – Concrete energy dissipater details Sheets 52 through 57 – Permanent soldier beam wall plans; and, Sheet 58 – BMP site plan. The grading will consist of cuts and fills up to 25 feet. Graded slopes will be 2H:1V or flatter and be up to 27 feet high, many of which will also include retaining walls. MSE walls are proposed around the perimeter of the site. Cast-in-place shoring walls are planned in the southeast corner, along the eastern perimeter and south of Basin No. 1; and concrete masonry walls locally throughout the development. 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 9 NMG The grading plan currently indicates that the site will have roughly 265,000 cubic yards of cut, 185,000 cubic yards of fill and 79,500 cubic yards of export. Updated remedial quantities will be provided by NMG to the project civil engineer based on the recommendations included in this report. We understand that the project will consist of residential and commercial development. The proposed commercial portion of the site is located within the northern area and adjacent to El Camino Real, and includes a senior living facility in the northwest area, and restaurants and retail in the central low-lying area. The residential development includes construction of 115 large townhomes and 120 small townhomes. The commercial development will include 46-unit affordable senior housing, 13 townhomes, 4,000 square feet of quality restaurant and 6,000 square feet of specialty retail. Drive areas, local areas of street parking and several bio-filtration areas are shown on the plans. Access to the development will be from two locations along El Camino Real. Improvement Plans: Two sets of street improvement plans were reviewed, including the offsite improvement plans (5 sheets) for improvements to El Camino Real and the onsite improvement plans (13 sheets) for the new streets within the development. Both sets were prepared by HWL and received by NMG on May 28, 2021. Permanent Retaining Wall Plan: The cast-in-place retaining wall plan and calculations for the shoring wall, prepared by Regional Shoring Design, and received by NMG on July 26, 2021 were also reviewed. The updated plans and calculations were prepared in collaboration between NMG and Regional Shoring Design, Inc. The shoring walls include the eastern perimeter of the site, the retaining wall along the basin within the southwestern area of the site and two-tier walls along the southern perimeter of the site, with a combined height of 26 feet. 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 10 NMG 2.0 GEOTECHNICAL FINDINGS 2.1 Geologic Setting The site is located in the Peninsular Range Province of southern California, along the coastal plains of San Diego County. It is located on the U.S. Geological Survey 7.5-minute San Luis Rey Quadrangle. It lies along a gently sloping hillside area, approximately 2 miles from the coastline. The site consists of an upper mesa with a gentle hillside along the north and west sides. There is a stream channel along the western side of the property that drains into Agua Hedionda, with a tributary stream channel that runs along the base of the hillside, at the southern edge of the low-lying area. The site geology consists of alluvium in the northern low-land area, marine terrace deposits (also mapped as older alluvium) capping the mesa, a small area of older stream terrace alluvium in the southwest corner of the site and bedrock of the Santiago Formation that underlies the other earth units. The bedrock underlies up to 40 feet of alluvium in the north, 2 to 7 feet of topsoil/colluvium on the hillsides, and up to an estimated 25 feet of terrace deposits on the mesa. Minor amounts of undocumented fills overlie the native materials in the low-lying areas and locally on the mesa. In the northeastern corner of the site, undocumented fill up to 30 feet thick was placed during the grading for the adjacent mobile home development. US Department of Agriculture (USDA, 1973) has mapped several different soil types at the site. The upper mesa and western slopes are covered with Las Flores loamy fine sand; the north-facing hillsides are covered with Diablo clay; and the alluvium is covered with Salinas clay loam. The soils on the mesa and hillsides have high expansion potential and are in Hydrologic Group D. The soils on the low-lying areas are moderately expansive and in Hydrologic Group C. 2.2 Earth Units The descriptions of each of the units encountered at the site from oldest to youngest is as follows: Santiago Formation (Map Symbol: Tsa): The Eocene-age Santiago Formation underlies the site, below the surficial deposits. This bedrock consists of interbedded grayish brown silty sandstone, siltstone and silty claystone, that is generally medium dense and moist. Downhole logging by NOVA indicated the bedrock is thin to medium bedded, varying between 0.1 foot to 5 feet in thickness. The sandstone beds were generally massive and thicker, with the finer grained siltstones and claystones generally thinner. A 0.1-foot-thick, highly plastic clay was found at a depth of 39 to 40 feet deep in Boring LD-1, that was observed only 2/3 of the way around the boring. This bedrock unit was also encountered in the borings drilled by NMG. The bedrock was generally moderately bedded, with interbedded clayey and silty sandstone, claystone and silty claystone. The thinner clay beds were typically 1- to 6- inches thick, varied from plastic to brittle and were typically not sheared, except locally tectonic shears (randomly oriented and discontinuous) were noted. The clay beds were in the more laminated or well bedded sequences associated with the 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 11 NMG claystone beds. The clayey and silty sandstone beds were typically thicker bedded (1- to 10- feet thick), and individually these beds were massive. Paleosol (old buried soil): NOVA identified an old soil horizon on the bedrock under the terrace deposit as a paleosol in their hollow stem borings drilled on the mesa. This layer was found in four of the five borings and described as a 5- to 7.5-foot-thick layer of sandy clay and clay that had abundant caliche and some iron staining. This material was stiff/very stiff, had a USCS soil classification of CH/CL and a generally high expansion index. In the NMG Boring B-3, a gray brown clayey layer was encountered at a depth of 35.5 feet that had scattered roots, that were up to ¼-inch-diameter and were white in color. This layer might have been a paleosol under the older alluvium found in the upper portions of the boring. Terrace Deposit (Map Symbol: Qt): The terrace materials capping the mesa were originally mapped by the state as the first emergent marine terrace, with the lowest elevation or youngest age (Tan and Kennedy, 1996). Later, the unit was mapped as older alluvium (Kennedy, et al., 2007). NMG has chosen to use the prior mapping as a terrace deposit for this capping unit in order to differentiate it from the local older stream terrace alluvium in the southwest corner of the site. These deposits cap the top of the mesa and consist of interlayered olive to orange brown sandy clay, clayey sandy silt and silty sand, with abundant orange (iron) staining. The layers vary from 0.1 to 5 feet in thickness and the material varies from medium dense to very stiff. Blow counts during sampling varied between 15 and 53 blows per foot with a 140-pound weight dropping 30 inches and the USCS classifications included CL, ML, with some SM. Older Alluvium (Map Symbol: Qoa): An older alluvium was found in Borings B-3 and LD-2, which appears to be an older stream terrace along the westerly canyon area. The materials consisted of thick bedded sands and clays. The clayey sections consisted of gray and brownish gray clay and silty clays that were massive, moist, medium stiff and had local iron staining. The sand sections consisted of light gray fine sands that were massive, moist, medium dense, well graded and highly friable. Only two attitudes and one tectonically sheared clay were encountered in the upper 35 feet of Boring B-3. Alluvium (Map Symbols: Qal): Based on prior geotechnical studies, the alluvium underlies the northern low-lying area of the site. The alluvium consists primarily of fine-grained soils (silts and clays), with USCS classifications of SC, CL, CH, and some SP. The layers vary from 0.5 to 5 feet in thickness and the material varies from loose to medium dense/stiff, and dry to saturated. Blow counts during sampling varied between 7 and 32 blows per foot with a 140-pound weight dropping 30 inches. Surficial Failure: Two surficial failures were mapped in the western portion of the site (NOVA, 2021b) and are shown on Plate 1. The two surficial failures are small and generally consists of topsoil and highly weathered bedrock. They appear to be shallow at depths of 5 to 15 feet deep. Topsoil (Not mapped): Trenches excavated on the mesa and hillsides indicate that is between 1 to 3 feet of soil (or colluvium) at the surface. On the mesa, this soil layer was previously plowed for row crops. The material consists mostly of clay and silty clay, that is brown, dry to moist, loose 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 12 NMG to medium stiff. Based on observations of the soil cracks up to 1 inch wide over the ground surface, the material is anticipated to be expansive. Undocumented Fill (Map Symbol: Afu): There is between 4 and 10 feet of undocumented fill in the low-lying northern area, that was brought onto the site during three different grading operations in the past 60 years. There is up to 30 feet of fill in the northeast corner of the site for the adjacent mobile home development, that we were not able to find documentation for compaction. The majority of these fills are believed to have been generated from the native alluvium and terrace deposit at the site, and consist of clayey sand and sandy clay. 2.3 Geologic Structure and Faulting Bedding attitudes are mapped by the State as dipping 10 to 15 degrees to the west. This structure is generally favorable for the north-facing hillside, but may be adverse along the west-facing hillsides. Within the borings, the bedding was generally dipping 2 to 20 degrees toward the west; however, in locally the bedding was variable, with dips to the north, east and south. Two "ancient" faults were mapped during grading to on the north side of El Camino Real in the bedrock (LGC, 2016). There are no major faults mapped at the site (Tan and Kennedy, 1996 and Kennedy et.al. 2007), nor is the site in a fault rupture hazard zone (CGS, 2010 and 2018). Two minor faults were found at depth in the bottom of B-1, that offsets sandstone beds below a depth of 60 feet. 2.4 Surface Water and Groundwater There is a channel at the base of the hillside (along the southern edge of the low-lying area). The incised drainage is present only locally in the western and eastern portions of the site. Some of the surface water that falls onsite, drains into the westerly drainage channel and outlets through an existing 24-inch-diameter culvert under the SDG&E access road into the stream along the west side of the site. During the times we have been onsite, the channel has been dry. There was a prior headwall that outletted into the upper end of this drainage channel, south of El Camino Real in the northeast portion of the site; however, we did not observe it in the field. Groundwater was found in the alluvium at depths of 14 to 15.5 feet below ground surface in the northern low-lying areas. Groundwater was also encountered in Boring LB-1 at a depth of 44 feet, in B-1 at 61 feet, in B-2 at 63 feet and in B-3 at 50 feet. 2.5 Regional Faulting and Seismicity No major or active faults are mapped at the site (CGS, 2010), nor is the site located within a fault-rupture hazard zone as defined by the Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zones Act (CGS, 2018). Thus, the potential for fault rupture hazard at the site is considered very low. The State has mapped one minor fault attitude to the north of the site, dipping 81 degrees west (Tan and Kennedy, 1996). Two faults were mapped during grading to the north side of El Camino Real in the same general area, as shown on Plate 1 (LGC, 2016). These faults were found to offset 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 13 NMG bedrock. No evidence of recent activity was found during grading. These faults may extend across the roadway under the alluvium and if found, should be further evaluated during the proposed grading. The closest major active fault is the Rose Canyon/Newport Inglewood Fault zone located approximately 6 miles to the west (offshore). The anticipated primary seismic hazard at the subject site is ground shaking due to regional active faults. Figure 2, Regional Fault Map, shows the locations of the regionally active faults in relation to the site. These offsite active faults are capable of producing strong ground shaking at the site. Using the USGS deaggregation computer program (2021) and the site coordinates of 33.1503 degrees north latitude and -117.3077 degrees west longitude, the controlling feature is the Rose Canyon Fault. This fault is located 9.9 km west of the site with a Maximum Moment Magnitude of 7.0. Seismic design parameters were calculated based on computer program by the Structural Engineers Association/Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development (2021). The results are presented in Section 3.20 and the data is included in Appendix C. The alluvium left-in-place below the northern portion of the development has very low liquefaction potential (see Section 2.6 for further discussions). Tsunami and seiche are not considered hazards at this site due to the elevation and the distance of the site from the ocean. No confined bodies of water are located immediately adjacent to the site. 2.6 Liquefaction Analysis Following grading, the site will consist of fill overlying bedrock and the potential for liquefaction in these areas is slight. It is estimated that up to 30 feet of alluvium will be left-in-place underlying the fill; however, the alluvium soils generally consist of clays that are not prone to liquefaction. Per our review of the CPT logs and our analysis, the potential for liquefaction hazard, lateral movement, flow liquefaction and seismic settlement is anticipated to be very low. The liquefaction induced settlement is generally anticipated to be less than ½ inch. Liquefaction analysis is included in Appendix E. 2.7 Mass Movements No landslides are mapped at the site by the State (CDMG, 1996). During our study and site reconnaissance, we did not find evidence of landslides at the site. The hillsides onsite are gently sloping, mostly flatter than 2H:1V. We did note evidence of local erosion in the drainage channels and swales. NOVA's original report shows two small surficial failures mapped within the western portion of the site along the loop road and SDG&E access road. NOVA's updated reports do not show these small surficial failures. We have included these two small features to our geotechnical map (Plate 1). 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 14 NMG 2.8 Laboratory Testing The site is underlain by a variety of earth units, most in their natural state, some created by human activity. At the completion of mass grading, most of the development area will be underlain by engineered fill over bedrock and terrace deposits with the exception of the northern portion of the site where fills up to 25 feet in thickness will be placed over alluvium. The majority of the engineered fill material will be derived from a mixture of the onsite soils. We designed the testing program to develop the engineering properties of both the existing, in- place materials as well as the anticipated fill that will be created from the grading process. We compared the test results from this study to prior studies by others, as part of the process of assigning engineering parameters to earth units for the geologic site model. We then used the model to evaluate the feasibility of the proposed grading plan and to update the design features and/or remedial grading measures to mitigate potential geotechnical impacts to the development as well as adjacent areas. We performed the following laboratory tests as part of this study: • In-place moisture content and dry density; • Direct shear (undisturbed and remolded samples); • Grain-size distribution; • Atterberg Limits; • Maximum dry density and optimum moisture; • Expansion index; and • Soluble sulfate content. Laboratory tests were conducted in general conformance with applicable ASTM test standards. In place moisture content and dry density test results are shown on the geotechnical boring logs in Appendix B. The majority of the remaining test results are summarized in a table at the beginning of Appendix C, followed by the actual test results. A table of shear test results and details of direct shear testing are also discussed in the foreword to Appendix F (slope stability analysis). The significance of test results and engineering properties of the existing and graded earth units are described in this report. Laboratory testing results by others are also included in Appendix C. 2.9 Slope Stability Slope Stability Analysis: We have prepared a total of eight cross-sections to represent the geologic conditions and the proposed grading at the site. Cross-Sections 1-1', 1a-1a' and 2-2' were analyzed for slope stability along the western edge of the site, where the bedding dips toward the west. Shear strengths utilized in our slope stability analysis were determined based on laboratory testing by NMG and others, and our experience with the earth unit in nearby areas. The results are presented in Appendix F. We used the two-dimensional limit equilibrium program GSTABL7 on selected cross-sections to analyze gross slope stability. We discuss the selection of design shear strengths and present the results of our analyses in Appendix F. Per County of San Diego Grading Ordinance and prevalent 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 15 NMG local geotechnical practice, we applied minimum factors of safety of 1.5 (static) in order to determine whether remedial measures were necessary. The pseudo-static seismic analysis was performed in accordance with the Special Publication 117A, Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California, published in 2008. Per Special Publication 117A, a design seismic peak ground acceleration of 0.34g was used. The design peak ground acceleration is two-thirds of the PGAM. Per Special Publication 117A, a coefficient of seismic horizontal acceleration, kh, of 0.14 was calculated. However, a minimum kh of 0.15 was used for the analysis which is consistent with the prior analysis performed by others. A minimum factor of safety of 1.0, per Special Publication 117A, was used to determine the adequacy of the design slopes and shear keys with seismic loads. We performed slope stability analysis for the MSE Wall No. 1 as depicted on geotechnical Cross- Sections 1-1' and 1a-1a'. MSE Wall No. 1 retains up to 26 feet of soil. The lengths and strengths for primary grids as shown on the MSE wall plan were used for the analysis. Slope stability analysis was also performed for temporary backcut conditions, and was found to have an adequate factor of safety. Surficial Stability: We analyzed the surficial slope stability of planned slopes. Surficial stability depends upon the steepness of the slopes and the compaction and strength of near-surface soils (upper 4± feet). The cohesion of the fill material is particularly important. The graded fill slopes will primarily consist of processed bedrock, terrace, existing undocumented fill and some alluvial materials. From our evaluation of the site, we expect that the fill will be sufficiently cohesive to provide adequate surficial stability for the planned 2H:1V slopes. The surficial stability analysis is included at the rear of Appendix F. 2.10 Settlement Potential As discussed previously, the majority of the site will be underlain by fill materials over bedrock and terrace deposits. The proposed fills within the northern portion of the site will be underlain by up to 30 feet of alluvium which is composed of layers of compressible clays. Even competent earth materials, including compacted fill will settle to some degree when subjected to large stresses. Maximum fill depths (after remedial removals) at the site may approach 35 feet. These deep fills will settle under their own weight, but the majority of the settlement will take place during grading and prior to the start of construction of site improvements and buildings. The remaining settlement may still be on the order of a few inches, depending upon the total fill thickness, characteristics of the fill soil, and the underlying earth units. Based on our analysis, significant settlement (over 5 inches) may occur within the northern portion of the site where fill will be placed over alluvium. The bedrock formation has very low compressibility and is not anticipated to settle more than 1 inch. Because of the variable nature and behavior of earth materials, settlement analyses, at best, provide only rough estimates of total and differential settlements. Therefore, a settlement monitoring using surveyed monuments is the most common local practice for verifying post-grading settlement especially where significant fill is planned over compressible materials. 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 16 NMG Based upon our review of the proposed grading plan and our preliminary remedial measures, we have identified three areas for monitoring fill settlement. Settlement monuments will be located above the fill areas and periodically surveyed by a licensed land surveyor. Recommended settlement monument locations are shown on the Remedial Measures Map (Plate 2). A report will be prepared after settlement analysis indicates the remaining long-term settlement is within the tolerable range for the planned development of the site. The report will be submitted to the City for their review prior to the start of home construction. We have used this approach successfully on numerous projects over the years with similar subsurface conditions. In order to expedite the settlement within the northern portion of the site, where fills are planned over alluvium, surcharge load consisting of 10 to 15 feet of soil may be placed. The surcharge load should at minimum cover the proposed building pads and extend 5 feet beyond the building pads laterally. Differential settlement can occur at the transition/contact between materials of substantially different engineering properties. This potential can be significant where fill is placed over bedrock on steeper slopes, especially in steep-sided canyons. These potential differential settlements can be mitigated by overexcavation of the bedrock in fill/bedrock transition areas and also by maintaining flatter fill/bedrock contacts near the pad surface. Differential settlement also becomes less of an issue with the passage of time. We have provided recommendations for overexcavation of the cut portion of the lots and we are also performing settlement monitoring within the deep fill areas. Strong ground shaking can cause the densification of soils, resulting in local or regional settlement of the ground surface. During strong ground shaking, soil grains may become more tightly packed due to the collapse of voids or pore spaces. This type of failure typically occurs in loose, granular, cohesionless soil and can occur in either wet or dry conditions. Because of the type of soil at the site, the remedial recommendations regarding removals and recompaction, the potential for seismically-induced settlement at the site is considered low and will be on the order of ½ inch or less. Our remedial recommendations with respect to settlement are designed to accommodate the typical accepted maximum total and differential settlements for low rise residential construction. This is typically, 1 to 3 inches of total settlement and 0.5 to 1.5 inch of differential settlement over a 40-foot span. 2.11 Expansive Soil Characteristics The terrace deposits on the upper mesa were found to have expansion cracks, indicating the near- surface soils are expansive. In addition, siltstone and claystone in the bedrock and the paleosol layer are also expansive in nature. Soil mapping by the USDA indicates the soils onsite are highly expansive on the mesa and hillside and moderately expansive over the low-lying areas. Prior testing by GeoSoils, Inc. indicates that onsite soils have expansion indices in the range of 17 (very low) to 128 (high) and plasticity indices of 30 and 47. Highly plastic clays were encountered in their borings and trench pits throughout the site and at shallow depths. 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 17 NMG Based on testing by NMG and NOVA, the expansion indices for the onsite earth units range from 82 to 126 (medium to high expansion). The terrace deposits and bedrock also contain abundant clays/claystones and silts/siltstone. Therefore, most of the fill created from onsite earth units is expected to result in high expansion potential. Expansion test results are included in Appendix C. Additional testing will be required following the completion of grading to confirm/update the geotechnical design parameters provided in this report. 2.12 Soluble Sulfate Contents Based on the laboratory test results the soluble sulfate content of the onsite soils may be classified as "S0" (negligible) per Table 19.3.1.1 of ACI-318-14 (results in Appendix C). Additional testing will be necessary following the proposed grading to confirm/update the parameters provided in this report. 2.13 Rippability and Generation of Oversize Material The rippability characteristics of bedrock depend upon the rock type and hardness, depth of weathering, degree of fracturing, and structure of the rock. Our bucket-auger borings, drilled with a EZ Bore 120 drilling rig were advanced with relative ease to depths of up to 70 feet. In addition, borings drilled with a hollow-stem-auger drill rig were able to drill to depths of 41.5 feet on the mesa. We anticipate that the earth units will be excavatable with normal earthmoving equipment, including D-9 and D-10 dozers for ripping prior to loading in scrapers. The design cuts and remedial grading excavation may locally generate oversize rocks (larger than 12 inches in the maximum diameter). Oversize rocks may be encountered locally within the undocumented fills. Oversize materials should be disposed of in the deeper fills as specified in Section 3.5 and Appendix G. 2.14 Earthwork Shrinkage, Bulking and Subsidence Due to the inherent variability of bedrock and soil materials, earthwork volume changes are difficult to accurately quantify. The following table provides earthwork shrink/bulk estimates based on laboratory testing of the onsite soil and bedrock units and our experience with similar materials: Material Approximate Shrinkage/Bulking Undocumented Fill (Afu), Topsoil and Alluvium (Qal) 5 to 15 percent shrinkage Older Alluvium (Qoa) 3 to 7 percent shrinkage Terrace Deposit (Qt) 0 to 5 percent shrinkage Sandstone and Claystone Bedrock (Tsa) 5 percent shrinkage to 5 percent bulk Ground subsidence at the site is estimated to be on the order of 0.1 foot at the site. 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 18 NMG 2.15 Existing Utilities and Structures There are several buildings, outbuildings, and utilities at the site that were noted during our study: • On the northern low-lying area, there is a large building in the center that has been used for several purposes over the years, and the businesses appear to be vacated at this time. Behind the long building, there are trash and concrete bins, equipment buildings, Verizon building and electric meters. There is a large, asphalt paved parking lot around this building. • The northwestern portion of the low-lying area was recently used as a nursery and there are remnant plants, trees, organics, irrigation pipes and a shed. • The northeastern portion of the low-lying area has a fenced yard with a central building that has prior pottery and nursery uses. The sign indicates that Carrillo Pottery has been there for over 20 years. • On the western side of the mesa, there are several building structures, including a house, and several outbuildings and sheds. This is where the prior chicken farm was located; there is still signage in the shed area for Marja Acres Eggs. • There is a Kinder Morgan 10-inch petroleum pipeline that parallels El Camino Real, and veers onsite through the western entry and prior nursery area in the northwest (Plate 2). Sheet 3 of the Tentative Tract Map includes a note that this pipeline was abandoned; however, the pipeline owner ma intend to keep the line in place. • There are two overhead power transmission lines that run north-south along the western boundary, mostly offsite, except in the southwest where the design extends into the easement. These lines are shown in red on Plate 2. • There are two north-south trending overhead power lines with several poles that cross the western portion of the site, from the western entry to the residential structure and from the center of the site to intersect with the other overhead line. There is a large transformer along the line by the driveway. • There were two cell towers in the middle of the upper mesa. The western tower was in a fenced area with a concrete pad and some other at-grade equipment. The eastern tower was not fenced and had large cables extending from the north side of the tower down to the hillside. These cables were in line with the electric panels behind the large central building. The towers, wires and equipment were removed prior to grading and there are two large areas of uncompacted fill where the 18-foot-deep foundations were removed (Plate 1). • There were also manholes in the lower parking lot for storm drain, sewer, and other utilities that serviced the buildings. • There is an abandoned 14-inch water line along the southern property line, which we understand will be protected in-place to avoid any offsite grading. The demolition plan is included as Sheets 6 through 8 of the rough grading plan. These sheets show these facilities and whether they should be removed or protected in place. 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 19 NMG 2.16 Potential Use of Infiltration BMPs The soils at the site are considered in Hydrologic Group C and D (USDA, 1973), which are generally not suitable for infiltration. The Group C soils are located in the low-lying areas, where removals will be made down to 4 feet from the groundwater table, and up to 25 feet of additional fill is planned over this area. After grading, the site will be covered with 4 to 35 feet of compacted fill. Grading on the upper mesa is also anticipated to have over 4 feet of fill above dense sandstone, siltstone and claystones. The rough grading plan and overall Sheet 60 of the plan shows seven water quality basins or Best Management Practice (BMPs). BMPs -1, -2 and -3 are small basins or channels on the west side of the project above the natural hillside and channel. BMPs -4 and -7 are larger basins on the northern side of the project, which will be underlain by deep compacted fill. BMPs -5 and -6 are located at the toes of fill slope and will be underlain by compacted fill. In order to protect the hillsides, fill slopes and compacted fills, these BMPs are considered biofiltration, and have underdrains and locally impermeable liners. The use of infiltration BMPs at the site is not feasible and therefore, not recommended. 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 20 NMG 3.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 3.1 General Conclusion and Recommendation Based on our findings, the subject site is considered geotechnically feasible for the proposed residential development, provided the recommendations of this report are implemented during design, grading and construction. Our recommendations are considered minimum and may be superseded by more stringent requirements of others. In addition to the recommendations herein, General Earthwork and Grading Specifications are also provided in Appendix G. The Remedial Measures Map (Plate 2) depict the recommended remedial measures based on the rough grading plan and the results of our geotechnical analysis and evaluation. This map shows the estimated remedial removal depths, the locations of slope stabilization measures including keys, overexcavation (lot capping) depths, the locations of canyon-type subdrains, and the location of settlement monitoring devices. Some of the remedial measures (stabilization fill keys and canyon-type subdrains) are also shown on the geotechnical cross-sections (Plate 3). 3.2 Site Clearing and Preparation Significant vegetation, miscellaneous trash and construction debris and other deleterious materials should be removed and disposed of offsite prior to the start of grading operations. Concrete materials and asphalt pavements may be incorporated into deeper fill areas provided the resulting material adheres to the recommendations provided in Section 3.5 and Appendix G of this report. The geotechnical consultant should also provide observation and documentation during the abandonment/removal of the utilities throughout the site. 3.3 Remedial Grading Measures Remedial Removals: Unsuitable earth materials, including undocumented fills, topsoil, surficial failures, alluvium, weathered bedrock and terrace deposits should be removed prior to placement of fill. Estimated removal depths generally vary from 5 to 12 feet from existing grades. Locally, deeper removals (up to 15 feet) may be required if the undocumented fills are deeper than anticipated. Recommended remedial removals in the alluvium are estimated to be between 7 and 10 feet deep to entirely remove the undocumented fill and highly weathered alluvium. During removals in the low-lying area, there could be pipelines to be removed that were not previously anticipated. Deleterious and/or organic materials should be removed offsite (not placed in the fill). Based on our review of the prior borings and trenches, the remedial removals on the hillsides are anticipated to vary from 5 to 7 feet deep, and up to 10 feet deep in the swales. The removals in the location of the historic channel at the south end of the low-lying area may extend deeper, up to 15 feet locally. Remedial removals within the northeastern area of the site along the existing residential mobile home development should start near the property line or shoring wall, and extend down at a 1:1 to remove 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 21 NMG as much of the undocumented fill as possible (see Cross-Section 7-7'). The condition of the undocumented fill materials in this area should be evaluated during grading to confirm the suitability of the fill to remain in place. If the materials are determined to be unsuitable, additional removals may be necessary by either heavy benching and/or additional removals in sections. Removal bottoms should expose competent material as determined by the geotechnical consultant during grading. Removal bottoms should be observed, geologically mapped and accepted by the geotechnical consultant prior to subdrain installation, removal bottom preparation, and placement of fill. The estimated removal depths are shown on the Remedial Measures Map (Plate 2). These depths are based on our interpretation of the subsurface data, exposed field conditions, laboratory testing and planned grading. The actual depths and lateral limits of remedial removals will be determined in the field during grading based on the exposed conditions. Stabilization of Wet Removal Bottoms: If remedial removal bottoms expose wet, soft material near the groundwater table that is too saturated to support conventional compaction equipment, stabilization of the removal bottom will be required. Removals below the groundwater, if necessary, may need to be performed with an excavator. The removal bottom below the groundwater should be stabilized by placing a layer of approved geofabric with 12 to 24 inches of 1- to ¾-inch crushed rock. Alternatively, crushed aggregate base material may be suitable for stabilization. These options should be reviewed and accepted by the project team based on actual field conditions. The approximate location of the groundwater table, where applicable, is shown on the Geotechnical Cross-Sections (Plate 3). 3.4 Overexcavation/Lot Capping Design cut areas should be overexcavated a minimum of 4 feet to provide a uniform thickness of fill below the site. Where there is a cut/fill transition, the lots should be overexcavated a minimum of 5 feet (Plate 2). If differential bedrock types (claystone and sandstone) and/or clay beds/faults are encountered at the 4-foot overexcavation bottom, those lots should be excavated to a depth of 10 feet below finish grade (or 6 additional feet) to help mitigate the potential effects of differential expansion. The overexcavation bottom should be reviewed by the geotechnical consultant prior to placement of fill to determine the need for the additional overexcavation. 3.5 Grading and Earthwork Specifications General Grading and Earthwork: Grading and excavations should be performed in accordance with the City of Carlsbad Grading and Drainage Ordinance and the General Earthwork and Grading Specifications included in Appendix G of this report. These specifications include figures that depict minimum grading standards for slope construction, subdrain installation, oversize-rock placement and overexcavation in daylight-cut areas. Some specifications are reiterated below with additional recommendations. 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 22 NMG Miscellaneous trash, debris, vegetation, and stockpiled fill should be removed prior to grading operations. Prior to placement of additional fill, the bottoms should be scarified, moisture- conditioned, and recompacted. Fill materials should be compacted to at least 90 percent of maximum dry density, as determined by ASTM Test Method D1557. Fill materials should be placed in loose lifts no thicker than 8 inches. Materials should be moisture-conditioned and processed as necessary to achieve uniform moisture content that is within moisture limits required to assure adequate bonding and compaction. Onsite soil materials are considered suitable as fill materials below the building foundations and slab. Fill Placement and Compaction: After completion of remedial removals and review by the geotechnical consultant, the approved bottom should be scarified (if possible), moisture- conditioned and recompacted, as needed, prior to placement of fill. Fill should be placed in nearly horizontal lifts less than 8 inches in loose thickness, moisture-conditioned and compacted to a minimum 90 percent of the maximum density as determined by Test Method ASTM D1557 (except as discussed in following sections). Fills placed against ground sloping more than 5:1 (H:V) should be keyed and benched into competent material. Moisture content of compacted fill should be over optimum-moisture content and relatively uniform throughout the fill material. Suitable Fill Materials: Onsite materials which are relatively free of deleterious substances should be suitable for use as compacted fill. Oversize Material: Limited oversize rock (greater than 12 inches in the maximum dimension) may be generated during grading especially within the bedrock materials. The contractor may break the rock into fragments less than 12 inches in largest dimension and incorporate into the fill. The General Earthwork and Grading Specifications in Appendix G include details of the placement of oversize rock in rock rows in the deeper fills. The grading logistics should be planned such that oversize rock materials can be placed in the deep fill areas. Concrete and asphalt pavements that are encountered during grading should be disposed of offsite or incorporated into the deeper compacted fill under the following conditions: • Concrete and asphalt should be dispersed throughout the fill bodies and not concentrated within small areas. • Concrete and asphalt should be placed below 10 feet of finish grade, or 2 feet below the deepest utility, in order to limit the interference with building and infrastructure construction. • Asphalt concrete should be broken down to less than 8 inches in maximum dimension. The project environmental consultant should also approve the placement of asphalt concrete below residential lots. • Portland concrete, free of metal (i.e., rebar, bolts, etc.), should be broken to less than 4 feet in maximum dimension. Concrete materials over 12 inches in size should be placed in accordance with the oversize rock disposal specifications in Appendix G. Slope Face Construction: Slope faces should be compacted to a minimum 90 percent relative compaction. Slopes should either be overbuilt a minimum of 4 feet horizontal (2 feet vertical) and 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 23 NMG trimmed back to the compacted slope face, or built at grade with back-rolling every 4 vertical feet with a sheepsfoot roller and tested/accepted as the slope is constructed. The slope construction should be verified by the geotechnical consultant through survey/GPS. Fill/Bedrock Interface: Fill/bedrock contacts should not be steeper than 1.5H:1V. 3.6 Slope Stabilization Stabilization Keys: A keyway is recommended for the slopes/walls along the western portion of the site as shown on the Remedial Measures Map and Cross-Sections 1-1', 1a-1a' and 2-2'. Based on our slope stability analysis, this key is 30 feet in width, with bottom elevations varying between 35 and 50 feet msl. A stabilization fill key, 15 feet wide by 5 feet deep, is also recommended for the north-facing cut slope in the northwestern portion of the site above BMP #5 and the roadway. The north-facing slope along the southern boundary will be replaced with compacted fill by excavating down at 1H:1V starting at the daylight line and extending down to the overexcavation depth (Cross-Sections 3-3' through 5-5' on Plate 3). Our recommended slope-stabilization measures are shown on the accompanying Remedial Measures Map (Plate 2) and Geotechnical Cross-Sections (Plate 3). The geotechnical consultant should observe and map remedial excavations to verify the anticipated geologic conditions prior to placement of the subdrain and/or fill materials. If the conditions vary significantly from those anticipated, then additional slope stability analysis should be conducted to determine if the remedial measures need to be modified. General recommendations for keyways and slope construction as well as subdrain details are provided in the text of the report and Appendix G. Fill Slopes: Fill keys are recommended at the toes of planned fill slopes in accordance with the details in our Grading and Earthwork Specifications (Appendix G). Fill keys are an equipment width wide and should be excavated a minimum of 2 feet into competent material with a 1-foot or 2-percent tiltback at the heel of the key. Temporary Stability: Recommended measures to reduce the potential for backcut failures are as follows: • The key bottoms and removal excavations should not be left open for long periods of time, especially around the perimeter of the site. • The backcuts and front cuts should be carefully excavated at the recommended angles and avoid oversteepening of these slopes. Cutting areas at steeper angles than recommended may result in backcut failure. • Backcuts and front cuts should be "slope-boarded" on a routine basis so that the geotechnical consultant can map the slope adequately during excavation to recognize, as early as possible, if conditions are more adverse than expected. 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 24 NMG 3.7 Groundwater The groundwater table is shown on the cross-sections (Plate 3). Groundwater may be encountered during remedial grading in the northern low-lying area, near the removal bottom and possibly in the keys along the western portion of the site and in the deeper utility trenches with the northern portions of the site. If undocumented fill extends into the groundwater table there may be some saturated materials that will require removal below the groundwater table. These materials may locally require special equipment (excavators and top-loading and/or "swamp dozers") to remove the wet soils. These soils will need to be dried back for use in compacted fills. Gravel/rock layer may be necessary to prepare a workable surface on the soft removal bottom (see Section 3.3. 3.8 Subdrains Subdrains and backdrains for fill slopes, stabilization fills, and keys should be constructed in accordance with the minimum recommendations provided in Appendix G. Specifications for filter materials (including rock and fabric), layout and location, collection and outlet-pipe type, and construction methods are provided within these figures. Canyon-type subdrains should be a minimum of 9 cubic feet per linear foot of ¾-inch crushed rock with an 8-inch-diameter, Schedule 40 PVC collection pipe and should be placed on the removal bottoms of the canyons prior to placement of fill. The pipe diameter may be decreased to 4 inches in diameter where the run of the subdrain does not exceed 500 linear feet. For subdrains that are between 500 and 1,000 linear feet, 6-inch-diameter pipe should be used. For subdrains larger than 1,000 linear feet, 8-inch-diameter, Schedule 40 PVC pipe should be used. The geotechnical consultant should evaluate the need for additional subdrains where the canyons are wide or where seepage is encountered. The approximate locations of recommended canyon-type subdrains are shown on the Remedial Measures Map (Plate 2). In addition to the general recommendations provided above, subdrain locations may be modified, or additional subdrains may be recommended based on the actual field conditions encountered during grading. Subdrain outlets should be protected in place with outlet markers (see marker detail in Appendix G). 3.9 Water Quality Basins and BMPs The rough grading plan includes several water quality basins and BMPs throughout the site. The basins and BMPs will be lined with concrete or other types of impermeable liners that are water tight and do not introduce surface water into the fill below. Storm drain lines connecting to these basins should be provided with anti-seep collars behind the inlet and outlets, and down slopes. Construction of the basins should be observed and approved by the geotechnical consultant. It is also important that proper maintenance of the basins be performed throughout their design life. 3.10 Settlement and Settlement Monuments The amount of settlement will depend upon the type of foundation(s) selected and future loading by additional fill and structures. Per our review of the prior geotechnical reports, including the 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 25 NMG laboratory test data, and considering the proposed grading at the site, we calculate over 5 inches of total settlement within the northern portion of the site where fill materials will be underlain by compressible alluvium. However, the majority of this settlement is anticipated to occur during the project grading and within the settlement monitoring period (4 to 8 months). Considering the remedial grading recommendations and provided that the settlement monitoring is performed until an acceptable remaining settlement condition is achieved, we anticipated that the total post-grading and construction settlement for the proposed buildings will be on the order of 2 to 3 inches. The differential settlement is anticipated to be on the order 1.5 inch over a span of 40 feet. Higher total and differential settlement should be anticipated if the settlement monitoring period is shortened. NMG should be provided with the foundation plans and structural loads, once available, in order to further evaluate the potential for post-construction settlement of the proposed building and associated improvements. The parameters provided herein will then be confirmed/updated based on the planned foundations and loads, and based on the additional testing and analysis. Settlement Monitoring: Settlement monitoring will be needed considering the proposed grading at the site and presence of approximately 30 feet of compressible alluvium and shallow groundwater within the northern portion of the site (Plate 2). The monitoring could take between 4 to 8 months until an equilibrium condition is reached and the geotechnical consultant can predict a reasonable future settlement that can be tolerated by the future buildings. Surcharge loading in the area may be designed in order to expedite the settlement of the alluvium. The geotechnical consultant will install three monuments at the completion of grading and will then contact the surveyor to begin monitoring. Please note that the monuments will be installed at different times and as the areas reach design grade. Initially, monuments should be surveyed weekly (for six weeks) until settlement trends are established and then monthly thereafter. The survey data of these monuments should be forwarded to the geotechnical consultant after each reading. The settlement monitoring period needed to establish the settlement trend is anticipated to be on the order of two to three months. The settlement trend should be analyzed to determine if remaining settlements are within the tolerable limits of proposed construction. The survey data should be presented in a tabular form including the initial monument elevation, subsequent surveyed elevations, change in elevation from last survey and cumulative change in elevation from initial reading. The following includes a more detailed information regarding the settlement monitoring: Precise Survey of Settlement Monitoring Devices: Surveying for these devices should have a minimum of second-order precision; horizontal locations should be recorded to the nearest 0.005 foot and elevations should be recorded to the nearest 0.001 foot. Please note that this level of precision is standard-of-practice for settlement monitoring and will require the following survey procedures: • Establish three project benchmarks: These benchmarks should be established in stable ground and they should be in a location that will not be graded at a later date. All three benchmarks will be utilized to survey each settlement monument location, and later to monitor 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 26 NMG all settlements. Because the benchmarks need to be in a stable location, the geotechnical consultant should recommend the locations to the surveyors. The new project benchmarks should be calibrated by running closed-loop level circuits from primary (County) survey benchmarks on or near the site. • Install settlement monuments: The geotechnical consultant will install the settlement monuments in the deeper fill areas which includes installing a 1-inch galvanized rod embedded 5 feet into the compacted fill. Concrete is placed around the rod to the surface. • Precisely monitor the monuments: After the project benchmarks have been calibrated, run closed loop level circuits from the project benchmarks to the settlement devices for both the initial reading and all subsequent readings. The precise elevations of the settlement monument risers should be surveyed in accordance with the following schedule: once a week for two weeks; then every two weeks for six weeks; then every four weeks. The geotechnical consultant will provide notification as to when the monitoring should be terminated. • Send the settlement data to the geotechnical consultant soon after the surveys: After each elevation reading, the data (including the field survey sheet) should be tabulated in an elevation comparison spreadsheet (one spreadsheet per monitoring device) and sent to the geotechnical consultant for analysis. Note that monument preservation, timely readings, and precision of measurements are very important to the interpretation and extrapolation of data. • Settlement monument removal: Upon the completion of the settlement monitoring, the monuments will need to be removed and the disturbed soil should be replaced with compacted fill. Building construction over the northern portion of the site should not commence until the monitoring data indicate that the remaining settlements are within tolerable limits. A report documenting these conditions will be submitted to the City for review and approval. Once an area is released from a settlement standpoint, the total and differential settlement for that area should be on the order of 2 to 3 inches and 1 to 1.5 inches over a span of 40 feet, respectively, over the design life of the residential structures. Settlements of other areas where fills are not as deep or are placed over bedrock are not anticipated to exceed these estimates, provided unsuitable materials are removed and fill is placed per our recommendations. Each surface monument should be installed per the detail at the rear of Appendix G in the General Earthwork and Grading Specifications. Monuments should be installed as soon as possible after reaching design grades at each location in order to start the monitoring process; the sooner the monitoring starts, the sooner a settlement trend can be established in order to determine if an area can be released for construction. 3.11 Rippability and Oversize Rock Based on the prior drilling at the site, we anticipate the majority of this bedrock may be graded using larger earthmoving equipment (D-9 and D-10 bulldozers) in the planned excavations. 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 27 NMG Oversize rock, concrete without rebar, and asphalt will be generated during grading in the undocumented fill and bedrock. Recommendations and specifications for the placement of oversize materials in the fill are provided in Section 3.5 and Appendix G. 3.12 Protection of Existing Utilities The existing building structures throughout the site will need to be demolished and the materials, including the foundations, will need to be removed from the site prior to grading. The utilities in the low-lying area may need to be removed or relocated since there will be deep fills placed above the pipelines and they would be subject to settlement. The overhead power lines on the mesa will also need to be removed and/or relocated to perform the planned grading. Any utilities deeper than the remedial grading will need to be removed and the backfill compacted under the observation of the geotechnical consultant. We understand that the 10-inch diameter Kinder Morgan line can tolerate the proposed fill loads. It may be difficult to perform the planned grading under the transmission power lines in the southwest portion of the site. We recommend this be reviewed and evaluated by the grading contractor to determine the proper equipment to be used under the requirements of the power company's guidelines. Existing improvements and utilities in the street and parkway that are to be protected in-place should be located and visually marked prior to demolition and grading operations. Some of the backbone utilities may also be installed prior to or during the ongoing residential development and will need to be protected-in-place. Excavations adjacent to improvements to be protected-in-place or any utility easement should be performed with care so as not to destabilize the adjacent ground. Grading and construction activities over the pipelines should be performed in accordance with the requirements of the pipeline owner. The 10-inch Kinder Morgan line may need to be protected in place in the northwest portion of the site and the removals around and over the line should be performed under the direction of this utility company. Excavations adjacent to any pipeline easement should be performed with care, so as not to undermine or destabilize the adjacent ground. Operation of heavy equipment and crossings over these lines with heavy equipment should be in conformance with the appropriate utility-company guidelines (e.g., ramps, plating, etc.). Stockpiling of soils (more than 5 feet in height) at or near existing structures and over utility lines should not be allowed without review by the geotechnical consultant and the structure/utility line owner(s). 3.13 Building Foundations and Slabs The slab and foundations should be designed by the project structural engineer based on the proposed structure type and the anticipated loading conditions. The foundation soils are anticipated to have expansive soil conditions and will be subject to climatic and landscape moisture fluctuations. The following foundation recommendations are provided with the assumption that the grading recommendations included in Section 3.3 and 3.5 of this report are implemented during grading of 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 28 NMG the site. The parameters provided below may be updated upon completion of grading and additional laboratory testing. The recommended net allowable bearing capacity for continuous and isolated footings may be calculated based on the following equation: qall = 700 D + 300 B + 1,000 (but not to exceed 3,000 psf) where: D = embedment depth of footing, in feet B = width of footing, in feet Also, the following parameters may be used for design of foundation and slabs: • Soil unit weight = 120 pcf • Soil internal friction angle = 28 degrees • Coefficient of Friction = 0.35 • Subgrade modulus (k) of 50 pci (corrected for large slabs) • Soil elastic modulus (Es) of 1,000 psi The dead load of concrete below adjacent grades (buried concrete foundations) may be neglected. The allowable bearing pressure and friction coefficient may be increased by one-third for wind and seismic loading. We recommend that strip and isolated footings for the buildings have a minimum embedment depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent grade. Continuous footings should be at least 12 inches wide and isolated column footings should be at least 24 inches wide. The footings of freestanding and isolated structures, such as walls and pilasters, should have a minimum embedment depth of 24 inches into approved soils. The following table provides our general guidelines and preliminary recommendations for design of post-tensioned foundations and slabs on expansive soil in accordance with the 2019 California Building Code (CBC) and Post-Tension Institute (PTI) DC 10.5 Edition provisions. 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 29 NMG GEOTECHNICAL GUIDELINES FOR DESIGN OF POST-TENSIONED SLABS* Parameter Recommendation Center Lift * Edge Moisture Variation Distance, em * Center Lift, ym 7.50 feet 0.95 inches Edge Lift * Edge Moisture Variation Distance, em * Edge Lift, ym 3.90 feet 1.25 inch Presaturation, as needed, to obtain the minimum moisture down to the minimum depth 1.3 x optimum down to 18 inches *Based on method in CBC 2019 For uniform-thickness post-tensioned slabs, we recommend that the slabs have a thickened edge such that the slab is embedded a minimum of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent grade. The thickened edge should be tapered and have a minimum width of 12 inches. If non-uniform (ribbed) post-tensioned slabs are used, we recommend minimum embedment of 18 inches below adjacent grades for the thickened edges. In addition, as indicated in the DC 10.5 Edition of PTI, shape factor calculations should be performed by the project structural engineer in order to determine if strengthening/modification of foundations are necessary. Per PTI guidelines, the modifications to the foundations design should be considered if the shape factor (ratio of square of foundation perimeter over foundation area) exceeds 24. If non-post-tensioned slabs-on-grade and foundations are considered at the site in accordance with Wire Reinforcement Institute (WRI) method (per the 2019 California Building Code), an effective Plasticity Index of 30 is considered appropriate for the upper 15 feet of soil materials. For non-post-tensioned slabs, we recommend a minimum embedment of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent grade for the perimeter footings. Also, the upper 18 inches of subgrade soil should be pre-saturated to 130 percent of optimum moisture content prior to placement of moisture barrier and concrete. The foundations and slabs should also be designed to tolerate the total and differential settlements discussed in this report. For the design of pole-type foundations (i.e., light poles, shade structures, etc.), an allowable soil- bearing pressure (S1) of 360 psf/ft may be used for Equation 18-1 (the "pole" equation) of the 2019 California Building Code (CBC) Section 1807.3.2.1 to determine the depth of embedment for the footings, considering level ground conditions. The equation is applicable for designed embedment depths of less than 12 feet for the purpose of computing lateral pressure. Also, for vertical loads on pole-type foundations, an allowable skin friction of 250 pounds per square foot may be used. For cast-in-place pole-type foundations, the vertical end bearing pressure should be neglected. 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 30 NMG 3.14 Interior Slab Moisture Mitigation In addition to geotechnical and structural considerations, the project owner should also consider interior moisture mitigation when designing and constructing slabs-on-grade. The intended use of the interior space, type of flooring, and the type of goods in contact with the floor may dictate the need for, and design of, measures to mitigate potential effects of moisture emission from and/or moisture vapor transmission through the slab. Typically, for human occupied structures, a vapor retarder or barrier has been recommended under the slab to help mitigate moisture transmission through slabs. The most recent guidelines by the American Concrete Institute (ACI 302.1R-04) recommend that the vapor retarder be placed directly under the slab (no sand layer). However, the location of the vapor retarder may also be subject to the builder's past successful practice. Placement of 1 or 2 inches of sand over the moisture retardant has been common practice by builders in southern California. Specifying the strength of the retarder to resist puncture and its permeance rating is important. These qualities are not necessarily a function of the retarder thickness. A minimum of 10-mil is typical but some materials, such as 10-mil polyethylene ("Visqueen"), may not meet the desired standards for toughness and permeance. The vapor retarder, when used, should be installed in accordance with standards such as ASTM E 1643 and/or those specified by the manufacturer. Concrete mix design and curing are also significant factors in mitigating slab moisture problems. Concrete with lower water/cement ratios results in denser, less permeable slabs. They also "dry" faster with regard to when flooring can be installed (reduced moisture emissions quantities and rates). Rewetting of the slab following curing should be avoided since this can result in additional drying time required prior to flooring installation. Proper concrete slab testing prior to flooring installation is also important. Concrete mix design, the type and location of the vapor retarder should be determined in coordination with all parties involved in the finished product, including the project owner, architect, structural engineer, geotechnical consultant, concrete subcontractors, and flooring subcontractors. 3.15 CMU Wall Design Parameters Lateral Earth Pressures: Recommendations for lateral earth pressures for permanent retaining CMU walls with approved onsite drained soils are as follows: Lateral Earth Pressures Equivalent Fluid Pressure (psf/ft.) Conditions Level 2:1 Slope Active 45 70 At Rest 65 90 Passive 320 160 (if sloping in front of wall) 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 31 NMG These parameters are based on a soil internal friction angle of 28 degrees and soil unit weight of 120 pcf. To design an unrestrained retaining wall, such as a cantilever wall, the active earth pressure may be used. For a restrained retaining wall, the at-rest pressure should be used. Passive pressure is used to compute lateral soils resistance developed against lateral structural movement. The passive pressures provided above may be increased by one-third for wind and seismic loads. The passive resistance is taken into account only if it is ensured that the soil against embedded structure will remain intact with time. Future landscaping/planting and improvements adjacent to the retaining walls should also be taken into account in the design of the retaining walls. Excessive soil disturbance, trenches (excavation and backfill), future landscaping adjacent to footings and over-saturation can adversely impact retaining structures and result in reduced lateral resistance. For sliding resistance, the friction coefficient of 0.35 may be used at the concrete and soil interface. The coefficient of friction may also be increased by one-third for wind and seismic loading. The retaining walls may also need to be designed for additional lateral loads if other structures or walls are planned within a 1H:1V projection. The seismic lateral earth pressure for walls retaining more than 6 feet of soil and level backfill conditions may be estimated to be an additional 15 pcf for active and at-rest conditions. The earthquake soil pressure has a triangular distribution and is added to the static pressures. For the active and at-rest conditions, the additional earthquake loading is zero at the top and maximum at the base. The seismic lateral earth pressure does not apply to walls retaining less than, or equal to, 6 feet of soil (2019 CBC Section 1803.5.12). Drainage behind walls that retain more than 30 inches of soil should also be provided in accordance with the attached figure (Figure 3). The waterproofing and drainage systems for the retaining walls that are located between the future residential lots may require additional measures to minimize the potential for nuisance seepage. Specific drainage connections, outlets and avoiding open joints should be considered for the retaining wall design. Foundation Design: The recommended net allowable bearing capacity for continuous and isolated wall footings may be calculated based on the following equation: qall = 700 D + 300 B + 1,000 (not to exceed 4,000 psf) where: D = embedment depth of footing, in feet B = width of footing, in feet The dead load of concrete below adjacent grades (buried concrete foundations) may be neglected. The allowable bearing pressure and friction coefficient may be increased by one-third for wind and seismic loading. We recommend that the footings of freestanding and isolated structures, such as walls and pilasters, have a minimum embedment depth of 24 inches into approved soils. The foundations should also be designed to meet the setback requirements provided in this report. 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 32 NMG 3.16 Permanent Shoring Wall Design Parameters Permanent shoring walls are planned along the southern and eastern perimeters of the site. For design of permanent shoring walls, the following parameters should be used: • Soil Active Pressure for Level Ground Behind the Wall = 45 psf/ft • Soil Active Pressure for 2H:1V Ascending Slope Above the Wall = 70 psf/ft • Soil Passive Pressure for Level Ground in Front of the Wall = 320 psf/ft • Seismic Lateral Earth Pressure = 15 psf/ft • "I" Factor (arching effect for soldier piles 2.5 diameters or more apart) = 2.25 • Active Pressure Coefficient, Ka = 0.37 (use for transfer of surcharge load to walls) Passive pressure is used to compute lateral soils resistance developed against lateral structural movement. The passive resistance is taken into account only if it is ensured that the soil against embedded structure will remain intact with time. Future landscaping/planting and improvements adjacent to the retaining walls should also be taken into account in the design of the retaining walls. Excessive soil disturbance, trenches (excavation and backfill), future landscaping adjacent to footings and over-saturation can adversely impact retaining structures and result in reduced lateral resistance. For permanent shoring walls, we recommend that the passive pressure in the upper 1 foot be neglected. The retaining walls may also need to be designed for additional lateral loads if other structures or walls are planned within a 1H:1V projection. For vertical loads on soldier piles/caissons, an allowable skin friction of 250 pounds per square foot may be used. For cast-in-place caisson foundations, the vertical end bearing pressure should be neglected. The seismic lateral earth pressure for walls retaining more than 6 feet of soil and level backfill conditions should be used. The earthquake soil pressure has a triangular distribution and is added to the static pressures. For the active and at-rest conditions, the additional earthquake loading is zero at the top and maximum at the base. The seismic lateral earth pressure does not apply to walls retaining less than, or equal to, 6 feet of soil (2019 CBC Section 1803.5.12). Drainage behind walls that retain more than 30 inches of soil should also be provided per shoring engineer's recommendations and shoring plans. 3.17 Temporary Shoring Wall Design Parameters Considering the proposed remedial grading along the northeastern perimeter of the site, the permanent retaining wall should also be designed for 5 additional feet of retaining and 1H:1V sloping in front of the wall. This will expedite remedial removal along the eastern perimeter of the site where existing undocumented fill is present. For design of the temporary shoring wall the following parameters should be used: • Soil Active Pressure for Level Ground Behind the Wall = 29 psf/ft 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 33 NMG • Soil Passive Pressure for 1H:1V in Front of the Wall = 130 psf/ft • "I" Factor (arching effect for soldier piles 2.5 diameters or more apart) = 2.25 • Active Pressure Coefficient, Ka = 0.23 (use for transfer of surcharge load to walls) Passive pressure is used to compute lateral soils resistance developed against lateral structural movement. The passive resistance is taken into account only if it is ensured that the soil against embedded structure will remain intact with time. For design of the temporary shoring wall, we recommend that the passive pressure in the upper 6 feet be neglected. A passive pressure of 780 psf may be used at a depth of 6 feet and may be increased by 130 psf/ft for each additional foot of embedment (per above). The retaining walls may also need to be designed for additional lateral loads if other structures or walls are planned within a 1H:1V projection. For vertical loads on soldier piles/caissons, an allowable skin friction of 250 pounds per square foot may be used. For cast-in-place caisson foundations, the vertical end bearing pressure should be neglected. The seismic lateral earth pressure for temporary shoring walls may be neglected. The geotechnical consultant should review the conditions during the deeper excavation and installation of shoring. Care should be taken at all times by personnel and/or equipment operators working adjacent to the excavations. 3.18 MSE Wall Design Parameters MSE Walls/Select Grading: Several MSE walls are planned for the site. Expansive soils and highly plastic clays/silts typically are not suitable for the backfill/reinforcement zone of these walls. Sandy materials may be available onsite and within the bedrock and older alluvium. However, the bedrock may be hard to excavate and the potential oversize rocks generated through the excavation may not be suitable for the backfill zone of the walls. The condition of the bedrock should further be evaluated during the grading and if suitable, select grading may be performed at the site in order to use these materials for backfilling of the MSE walls. Alternatively, suitable soils (i.e., granular materials) should be imported for the MSE wall backfill, or lime treatment may be evaluated upon discussion with the wall contractor. The design parameters for MSE walls per our recent subsurface exploration and laboratory testing is as follows: Wall Zone Retained Foundation Phi Angle (Degrees) 30 30 30 Cohesion (psf) Neglected 200 200 Soil Unit Weight, Gamma (pcf) 120 120 120 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 34 NMG The parameters provided herein are with the assumption that select backfill will be used for the wall zone. Select backfill should consist of silty sand or sands that have low expansion potential (Expansion Index of 50 or less) and maximum rock size of 6 inches in a well graded matrix. Alternatively, Class 2 aggregate base, Crushed Miscellaneous Base or sand with an SE of 20 or greater may be used. Drainage behind walls should also be provided in accordance with manufacturer's recommendations. NMG has reviewed the design and calculations for the proposed MSE walls and performed slope stability analysis to confirm that they are designed in accordance with our recommendation (please also refer to Sections 2.9 and 3.6 of this report). 3.19 Foundation Setback The footings of structures located above descending slopes should be set back from the slope face in accordance with the minimum requirements of the County of San Diego, City of Carlsbad and CBC criteria, whichever is greater. The setback distance is measured from the outside edge of the footing bottom along a horizontal line to the face of the slope. The tables below summarize the minimum setback criteria for structures above descending slopes: Structural Setback Requirements Case A – Building and Retaining Wall Footings Above Descending Slopes Slope Height [H] (feet) Minimum Setback from Slope face (feet) Less than 10 5 10 to 20 ½ * H 20 to 30 10 More than 30 ⅓ * H (maximum of 40') Case B – Freestanding Wall Footings Above Descending Slopes Slope Height [H] (feet) Minimum Setback from Slope face (feet) Less than 10 5 10 to 20 ½ * H More than 20 10 For freestanding walls and other structures that are sensitive to lateral movement (e.g., smooth stucco finish, glass screens, etc.), we recommend that the structural setback requirements in accordance with Case A above be followed or that additional design measures be used to help control the potential for cracking and displacements. Otherwise, typical freestanding walls may have a setback in accordance with Case B. 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 35 NMG 3.20 Seismic Design Parameters The following table summarizes the seismic design criteria for the subject site. The seismic design parameters are developed in accordance with ASCE 7-16 and 2019 CBC. Please note that, considering the proposed structures and anticipated structural periods, site-specific ground-motion hazard analysis was not performed for the site. The seismic response coefficient, Cs, should be determined per the parameters provided below and using equation 12.8-2 of ASCE 7-16. Selected Seismic Design Parameters from 2019 CBC/ASCE 7-16 Seismic Design Values Reference Latitude 33.1503 North Longitude 117.3077 West Controlling Seismic Source Rose Canyon Fault USGS, 2021 Distance to Controlling Seismic Source 9.9 km USGS, 2021 Site Class per Table 20.3-1 of ASCE 7-16 D SEA/OSHPD, 2021 Spectral Acceleration for Short Periods (Ss) 0.99 g SEA/OSHPD, 2021 Spectral Accelerations for 1-Second Periods (S1) 0.36 g SEA/OSHPD, 2021 Site Coefficient Fa, Table 11.4-1 of ASCE 7-16 1.103 SEA/OSHPD, 2021 Site Coefficient Fv, Table 11.4-2 of ASCE 7-16 1.95 Design Spectral Response Acceleration at Short Periods (SDS) from Equation 11.4-3 of ASCE 7-16 0.73 g SEA/OSHPD, 2021 Design Spectral Response Acceleration at 1-Second Period (SD1) from Equation 11.4-4 of ASCE 7-16 0.47 g TS, SD1/ SDS, Section 11.4.6 of ASCE 7-16 0.64 sec TL, Long-Period Transition Period 8 sec SEA/OSHPD, 2021 Peak Ground Acceleration Corrected for Site Class Effects (PGAM) from Equation 11.8-1 of ASCE 7-16 0.51 g SEA/OSHPD, 2021 Seismic Design Category, Section 11.6 of ASCE 7-16 D 3.21 Expansion Potential The onsite soils have "very low" to "high" expansion potential. Additional laboratory testing will need to be performed for design and following completion of grading operations and our review of the as-graded geotechnical report in order to confirm the expansion potential of the near-surface soils. The geotechnical design parameters provided herein will then be updated based on our findings. 3.22 Cement Type and Corrosivity We anticipate the soluble sulfates exposure in the onsite soils to be classified as "S0" (negligible) per Table 19.3.1.1 of ACI-318-14. Structural concrete elements in contact with soil include footings and building slabs-on-grade. The flatwork and sidewalk concrete are typically not considered structural elements. Concrete mix for structural elements should be based on the "S0" 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 36 NMG soluble sulfate exposure class of Table 19.3.2.1 in ACI-318-14. Other ACI guidelines for structural concrete are recommended. Also, onsite soils are expected to be corrosive to metals. Additional corrosivity testing will need to be performed at the completion of grading in order to confirm/update the parameters provided herein. 3.23 Exterior Concrete (Non-Structural) Exterior concrete elements, such as driveways, sidewalks and other hardscape, are susceptible to lifting and cracking when constructed over expansive soils. With expansive soils, the impacts to flatwork/hardscape can be significant, generally requiring removal and replacement of the affected improvements. Please also note that reducing concrete problems is often a function of proper slab design; concrete mix design, placement, and curing/finishing practices. Adherence to guidelines of the American Concrete Institute (ACI) is recommended. Also, the amount of post-construction watering, or lack thereof, can have a very significant impact on the adjacent concrete flatwork. For reducing the potential effects of expansive soils, we recommend a combination of presaturation of subgrade soils; reinforcement; moisture barriers/drains; and a sublayer of granular material. Though these types of measures may not completely eliminate adverse impacts, application of these measures can significantly reduce the impacts from post-construction expansion of soil. The degrees and combinations of these measures will depend upon: • Expansion potential of the subgrade soils; • Potential for moisture migration to the subgrade; • Feasibility of the measures (especially presaturation); and • Economics of these measures versus the benefits. These factors should be weighed by the project owner determining the measures to be applied on a project-by-project basis, subject to the requirements of the local building/grading department. The following table provides our recommendations for varying expansion characteristics of subgrade soils. Additional considerations are also provided after the table. We recommend that the "High" category be used during design and construction. 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 37 NMG Typical Recommendations for Residential Concrete Flatwork/Hardscape Expansion Potential (Index) Recommendations Very Low (< 20) Low (20 – 50) Medium (51 – 90) High (91 – 130) Very High (> 130) Slab Thickness (Min.): Nominal thickness except where noted. 4" 4" 4" 4" 4" Full Subbase; thickness of sand or gravel layer below concrete N/A N/A Optional 2" – 4" 2" – 4" Presaturation; degree of optimum moisture content (opt.) and depth of saturation Pre-wet Only 1.1 x opt. To 6" 1.2 x opt. to 18" 1.3 x opt. to 18" 1.4 x opt. to 24" Joints; maximum spacing of control joints. Joint should be ¼ of total thickness 10' 10' 8' 6' 6' Reinforcement: rebar or equivalent welded wire mesh placed near mid-height of slab N/A N/A Optional (WWF 6 x 6 – W1.4 x W1.4) No. 3 rebar, 24" o.c. both ways or equivalent wire mesh No. 3 rebar, 24" o.c. both ways Restraint: Slip dowels across cold joints; between sidewalk and curb N/A N/A Optional Across cold joints Across cold joints (and into curb) The more expansive soils, because they are clayey, can take significantly longer to achieve recommended presaturation levels. Therefore, the procedure and timing should be carefully planned in advance of construction. For exterior slabs, the use of a granular sublayer is primarily intended to facilitate presaturation and subsequent construction by providing a better working surface over the saturated soil. It also helps retain the added moisture in the native soil in the event that the slab is not placed immediately. Where these factors are not significant, the subbase layer may be omitted. Design and maintenance of proper surface drainage is also very important. If the concrete will be subject to heavy loading from cars/trucks or other heavy objects, thicker slabs should be used. 3.24 Preliminary Asphalt Concrete Pavement Design Final structural pavement sections should be based on R-value testing after the completion of grading. Based on an assumed design R-value of 5 and estimated traffic indices (TIs), we recommend the following preliminary pavement sections: 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 38 NMG Street Location Estimated TIs Pavement Section Main Drives 6.0 0.35' AC / 1.00' AB or 0.40' AC / 0.85' AB or 0.50' AC / 0.60' AB or Private Courts 5.0 0.35' AC / 0.60' AB or 0.40' AC / 0.50' AB Parking Stalls (and Fire Lanes/Emergency Access) 4.0 0.25' AC / 0.50' AB AC = Asphalt Concrete, AB = Aggregate Base Please note that for two-stage paving operations, we recommend that the final AC cap be a minimum of 0.10 foot thick and the base AC course have a minimum thickness of 0.25 foot. Asphalt concrete pavement should be placed in accordance with the requirements of Sections 301 and 302 of the Standard Specifications of Public Works Construction (the Greenbook). Prior to construction of pavement sections, the subgrade soils should be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches, moisture-conditioned as needed, and recompacted in-place to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction (per ASTM D1557). Subgrade should be firm prior to AB placement. AB materials can be crushed aggregate base or crushed miscellaneous base in accordance with the Greenbook (Section 200-2). The materials should be free of any deleterious materials. Aggregate base materials should be placed in 6- to 8-inch-thick loose lifts, moisture-conditioned as necessary, and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent relative compaction (per ASTM D1557). Asphalt concrete should also be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 95 percent. Unpaved median and parkway areas should also be provided with vertical moisture barrierst. 3.25 Vehicular PCC Pavements For vehicular PCC pavements (not including the driveway to homes), including trash enclosures, we recommend 7 inches of PCC reinforced with No. 3 rebar at 24 inches on-center, both ways, over compacted subgrade. The subgrade soils should be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches, moisture-conditioned as needed, and recompacted in-place to a minimum of 95 percent relative compaction (per ASTM D1557). 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 39 NMG 3.26 Interlocking Concrete Paver Sections The following recommendations should be implemented during construction of concrete pavers (if any): Pedestrian Flatwork Driveways (for garage entrances) 60-millimeter-thick concrete paver over approximately 1 inch of sand over a minimum of 4 inches of concrete reinforced with No. 3 bars at 24 inches on center or equivalent wire mesh over subgrade. The concrete low pour may be replaced with 6 inches of aggregate base (AB) over compacted subgrade or 4 inches of AB over a layer of geofabric (Mirafi 500X or equivalent) over compacted subgrade. 80-millimeter-thick concrete paver over approximately 1 inch of sand over a minimum of 4 inches of concrete reinforced with No. 3 bars at 24 inches on-center or equivalent wire mesh over subgrade. The concrete low pour may be replaced with 6 inches of AB over compacted subgrade or 4 inches of AB over a layer of geofabric (Mirafi 500X or equivalent) over compacted subgrade. A concrete band along the perimeter of the pavers should be provided for lateral restraint. The concrete band should, at minimum, be 12 inches deep and deepened to below the depth of disturbed soil, if adjacent to landscape/planter areas. Also, a drainage system consisting of a 2-inch PVC drainage pipe should be installed at the low end of the concrete low pour at 10-foot intervals through the slab and filled with pea gravel. The PVC drainage pipe should drain to a minimum 6-inch-diameter by 12-inch-deep drain pit filled with pea gravel below the pipe. The paver surfaces should slope away from structures a minimum of 2 percent. The concrete underlayment for the drive areas should be provided with weakened plane joints at maximum 15-foot intervals. If the pavers are to be set in mortar or are underlain with AB, this drainage system is not required. Prior to construction of the paver sections, the subgrade soils should be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches and recompacted in-place to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction (per ASTM D1557). The upper 18 inches of subgrade for driveways to homes and walkways should then be presaturated to 130 percent of optimum moisture content. Aggregate base materials can be crushed aggregate base or crushed miscellaneous base in accordance with the Greenbook (Section 200-2). The materials should be free of any deleterious materials. Aggregate base materials should be placed in 6- to 8-inch-thick loose lifts, moisture-conditioned as necessary, and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent relative compaction (per ASTM D1557). 3.27 Groundwater Based on review of the prior geotechnical reports and existing data, groundwater is on the order of 14 feet deep in the northern portion of the site. Groundwater levels may fluctuate both seasonally and annually. The recommended remedial removals and deeper utility lines may locally extend 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 40 NMG down to near the saturated alluvium in this area. If deeper excavations are needed to remove undocumented fill and/or utilities, local dewatering may be needed. 3.28 Surface Drainage and Irrigation Maintaining adequate surface drainage, proper disposal of run-off water, and control of irrigation will help reduce the potential for future moisture-related problems and differential movements from soil heave/settlement. Surface drainage should be carefully taken into consideration during grading, landscaping, and building construction. Positive surface drainage should be provided to direct surface water away from structures and slopes and toward the street or suitable drainage devices. Ponding of water adjacent to the structures should not be allowed. Buildings should have roof gutter systems and the run-off should be directed to parking lot/street gutters by area drain pipes or by sheet flow over paved areas. Paved areas should be provided with adequate drainage devices, gradients, and curbing to prevent run-off flowing from paved areas onto adjacent unpaved areas. Considering the climatic conditions in southern California and the expansive soil mitigation measures provided herein, a two-percent slope away from structures should be provided which is in substantial compliance with the 2019 CBC. Also, the swales with one-percent slopes are acceptable from our geotechnical standpoint and are common practice in this locale. Construction of planter areas immediately adjacent to structures should be avoided if possible. If planter boxes are constructed adjacent to or near buildings, the planters should be provided with controls to prevent excessive penetration of the irrigation water into the foundation and flatwork subgrades. Provisions should be made to drain excess irrigation water from the planters without saturating the subgrade below or adjacent to the planters. Raised planter boxes may be drained with weepholes. Deep planters (such as palm tree planters) should be drained with below-ground, water-tight drainage lines connected to a suitable outlet. Moisture barriers should also be considered. It is also important to maintain a consistent level of soil moisture, not allowing the subgrade soils to become overly dry or overly wet. Properly designed landscaping and irrigation systems can help in that regard. 3.29 Maintenance of Graded Slopes To reduce the erosion and surficial slumping potential of the graded slopes, permanent manufactured slopes should be protected from erosion by planting with appropriate ground cover or by placing suitable erosion protection. These measures should be applied as soon as is practical. Proper drainage should be designed and maintained to collect surface waters and direct them away from slopes. A rodent-control program should be established and maintained, as well, to reduce the potential for damage related to burrowing. In addition, the design and construction of improvements and landscaping should also provide appropriate drainage measures. 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 41 NMG 3.30 Utility Construction Excavations should be performed in accordance with the requirements set forth by Cal/OSHA Excavation Safety Regulations (Construction Safety Orders, Section 1504, 1539 through 1547, Title 8, California Code of Regulations). In general, after grading, the compacted fill may be classified as Type "B". Excavation into terrace deposits and bedrock may encounter adverse bedding (especially on the eastern side of the trenches). Saturated alluvium may also be encountered in the northern areas. Both adverse bedding and saturated alluvium should be classified as Type "C." Cal/OSHA regulations indicate that, for workmen in confined conditions, the steepest allowable slopes in Type "B" soils are 1:1 (horizontal to vertical) and for Type "C" soils are 1.5:1 (horizontal to vertical) for excavations less than 20 feet deep. Where there is no room for these layback slopes, we anticipate that shoring will be necessary. Excavations should be reviewed periodically by the contractor's qualified person to confirm compliance with Cal/OSHA requirements. Trenches deeper than 20 feet require specific evaluation/analysis by the geotechnical consultant. Trench excavations adjacent to structures should conform to any clearance requirements on the grading and foundation plans. Trenches excavated on a graded slope-face should be properly backfilled and compacted in order to obtain a minimum 90 percent relative compaction to the slope face. Trenches excavated next to structures and foundations should also be properly backfilled and compacted to provide full lateral support and reduce settlement potential. Native soils should be suitable for use as trench backfill. Native backfill materials should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction (per ASTM D1557). Select granular backfill (i.e., clean sand with SE 30 or better) may be used in lieu of native soils, but should also be compacted or densified with water jetting and flooding. Trenches excavated next to structures and foundations should also be properly backfilled and compacted to provide full lateral support and reduce settlement potential. 3.31 Temporary Shoring for Utility Construction Trench excavations should be stabilized per the latest edition of CalOSHA requirements (shoring or laying back of trench walls). Groundwater and/or saturated soils may also be encountered in deeper excavations within the northern portion of the site and into alluvium. The onsite bedrock and older alluvium materials may locally be sandy, friable and prone to caving. The installation and removal of the shoring need to be performed properly to minimize lateral movements and avoid creating unstable trench-wall stability conditions. For excavations less than 20 feet in depth, the contractor should use the published CalOSHA shoring systems and follow their construction requirements. Shoring that deviates from CalOSHA standards or for excavations greater than 20 feet in depth should be designed by a registered professional engineer. 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 42 NMG The pressure distribution below may be used for design of temporary shoring for utility lines. σh H σh = 29H for drained conditions and 60H for undrained conditions where: H is in feet and σh is in lbs/ft2. Heavy construction loads and stockpiles of excavated soils should be kept away from the edge of the trench, at minimum, a distance equal to the depth of the excavation. Otherwise, these surcharges will need to be considered for design of the shoring system. Also, shoring will need to protect adjacent utilities, buildings, walls and improvements in-place. The geotechnical consultant should review the conditions during the deeper excavation and installation of shoring. Care should be taken at all times by personnel and/or equipment operators working adjacent to the excavations. 3.32 Improvements near Tops of Slopes Both manufactured and natural slopes can undergo deformations over time due to changes in moisture content and gravitational forces. Hillside lots are subject to soil phenomena referred to as slope creep and lateral fill extension (LFE). In the past, this has also been called "lot stretching" due to the associated horizontal component of earth movement. These phenomena are expected to some degree or another with all graded fill slopes. The exact mechanisms of these natural processes are not entirely understood but most geotechnical professionals agree that LFE is associated with expansive soil and an increase in the moisture content of the fill over time. The magnitude of LFE is generally believed to depend on factors such as slope height, expansion potential of the soil, and initial moisture content. As the fill gets wetter and the soil expands, the slope area moves outward with surface displacements that can range from fractions of an inch to several inches. LFE effects can extend tens of feet into top of slope lots, depending on the factors previously mentioned. At some point, LFE is thought to reach an equilibrium point and movements either cease or greatly diminish. If rear yard improvements are not designed and built with this in mind, tilting, cracks, separations and other distress may occur. Slope creep is the result of the pull of gravity on a slope and the tendency of the soil near the top of slope and on the slope face to very slowly move downhill as the soil expands and contracts with seasonal variations in soil moisture. The magnitude of slope creep is also generally thought to depend on the height of the slope, its steepness, the type of soil, and the degree of moisture variation. Slope creep may continue indefinitely. The movement of the side yard fencing and tilting 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 43 NMG of improvements like the pools that are closer to the top of slope may be due to slope creep, as well as LFE. While it is generally not practical or economical to eliminate the effects of LFE and slope creep, some measures can be incorporated into the design and construction of rear yard improvements to mitigate the effects of these phenomena. These measures include: • Setting improvements back from the edge (top) of slope. • Deepening foundations. • Reinforcing concrete. • Including "soft" landscape zones in hardscape areas where soil movements will be buffered and have less impact. • Tying improvements together to resist movements. • Not tying improvements together (de-coupling) to allow for soil movements without causing damage to the improvements (e.g., expansion joints, flexible connections, slip dowels). • Using adjustable types of improvements, such as concrete pavers and wood fencing. • Incorporating adjustable hardware for gates hinges, latches, etc. Side yard (privacy) walls and walls along tops-of-slopes should be designed to mitigate LFE and slope creep effects. Expansion joints for masonry side yard walls that are perpendicular to slopes should be provided at a maximum horizontal spacing of 10 feet within 30 feet of top-of-slope. Expansion joints and/or adjustable connections should also be provided where side yard walls meet top-of-slope walls and/or pilasters. Pools, spas, or other water features built close to tops of slopes in expansive soil have a potential for tilting and lateral movement. Pool shells, plumbing connections, and coping/decking must be designed to account for these movements and the associated forces. Even then, while their function may not be compromised, aesthetic impacts should be factored into the architectural designs. The design of building foundations and walls should follow the minimum setback guidelines provided in this report. 3.33 Laboratory Testing During Grading The upper 15 feet of the fill below finish grades of lots will need to be sampled and tested during the rough grading of the site for design of foundations. We recommend that samples be collected for laboratory testing consisting of expansion potential, Atterberg Limits, hydrometer, grain-size distribution, and soluble sulfate content. Additional laboratory testing, including R-value, will need to be performed at the completion of street grading in order to provide a final pavement design report. Laboratory testing for proposed MSE walls including import soils should consist of direct shear, grain-size distribution, Atterberg Limits, and expansion potential as deemed necessary. 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 44 NMG 3.34 Future Plan Reviews Future grading plans and any revisions/changes to the current plan for the proposed site development should be reviewed by the geotechnical consultant prior to grading. Geotechnical reports with recommendations specific to engineered grading plans and proposed residential development should be issued once construction level plans are available. The geotechnical consultant should also review the foundation plans for the proposed buildings at the site. Homeowners and their design/construction team should be familiar with the recommendations in this report as well as principles described in a useful reference published by the California Geotechnical Engineers Association (CalGeo), titled, "Coexisting with Expansive Soil: An Informational Guide for Homeowners." This free booklet can be downloaded at www.calgeo.org. Improvement plans by homeowners should be provided to a geotechnical consultant for review. 3.35 Geotechnical Observation and Testing during Grading Geotechnical observation and testing should be performed by the geotechnical consultant during the following phases of grading and construction: • During site preparation, clearing and demolition, prior to site processing; • During backfill of excavations after removal of existing improvements, building foundations and utility pipelines; • During earthwork operations, including remedial removals and fill placement; • Upon completion of any foundation excavations, prior to placement of reinforcement or pouring concrete; • During slab and hardscape subgrade preparation and upon completion of presaturation; • During construction of structural pavement sections; • During construction of retaining walls, including subdrains and geogrid placement; • During placement of backfill for utility trenches; and • When any unusual soil conditions are encountered. 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR 45 NMG 4.0 LIMITATIONS This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of our client within the specific scope of services requested by them for the proposed development. This report or its contents should not be used or relied upon for other projects or purposes or by other parties without the written consent of NMG and the involvement of a geotechnical professional. The means and methods used by NMG for this study are based on local geotechnical standards of practice, care, and requirements of governing agencies. No warranty or guarantee, expressed or implied, is given. The findings, conclusions, and recommendations herein are professional opinions based on interpretations and inferences made from geologic and engineering data from specific locations and depths, observed or collected at a given time. By nature, geologic conditions can vary from point to point, can be very different in between points, and can also change over time. Our conclusions and recommendations are subject to verification and/or modification during excavation and construction when more subsurface conditions are exposed. NMG's expertise and scope of services did not include assessment of potential subsurface environmental contaminants or environmental health hazards. MARJA ACRES 4901 EL CAMINO REAL CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA Project Number: 21014-01 Project Name: Marja Acres Date: 7/26/2021 By: RS/TW Figure 1 Service Layer Credits: © 2021 Microsoft Corporation ©2021 Maxar ©CNES (2021) Distribution Airbus DS ©2021 TomTom SITE LOCATION MAP 0 500 1,000Feet1 inch = 1,000 feet ± Subject Site P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Drafting\GIS\SiteLocation.mxd CRI STI ANI TOSFAULTALIS O F AULT T E N AJA FAULTHARRISFAULT FAU L T WILLARD F A ULT WILDOMAR F A U LTCREEP CORON AD OB A NKIN G L E W O O D - R O S E C A N Y O N FAULTZ O N E MARJA ACRES 4901 EL CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA Project Number: 21014-01 Project Name: Marja Acres Date: 7/26/2021 By: RS/TW Figure 2 Service Layer Credits: Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap,increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase,IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China(Hong Kong), (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS UserCommunity California Department of Conservation:http://data-cadoc.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/b70a766a60ad4c0688babdd47497dbad_0 Subject Site REGIONAL FAULT MAP Base: California Geological Survey, Fault Activity Map of California, 2010 Legend ) Faults Certain Concealed Approximately Located Historic Holocene Late Quaternary Quaternary Recency of Movement P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Drafting\GIS\RegionalFault.mxd±0 3 6Miles 1 inch = 6 miles NMG Geotechnical, Inc.RETAINING WALL DRAINAGE DETAIL 1' Cover 3+" 3+" NOTES:1. PIPE TYPE SHOULD BE PVC OR ABS, SCHEDULE 40 OR SDR35 SATISFYING THE REQUIREMENTS OF ASTM TEST STANDARDD1527, D1785, D2751 , OR D3034.2. FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE APPROVED PERMEABLE NON-WOVEN POLYESTER, NYLON, OR POLYPROPYLENE MATERIAL.3. DRAIN PIPE SHOULD HAVE A GRADIENT OF 1 PERCENT MINIMUM.4. WATERPROOFING MEMBRANE MAY BE REQUIRED FOR A SPECIFIC RETAINING WALL (SUCH AS A STUCCO OR BASEMENT WALL).5. WEEP HOLES MAY BE PROVIDED FOR LOW RETAINING WALLS (LESS THAN 3 FEET IN HEIGHT) IN LIEU OF A VERTICAL DRAINAND PIPE AND WHERE POTENTIAL WATER FROM BEHIND THE RETAINING WALL WILL NOT CREATE A NUISANCE WATERCONDITION. IF EXPOSURE IS NOT PERMITTED, A PROPER SUBDRAIN OUTLET SYSTEM SHOULD BE PROVIDED.6. IF EXPOSURE IS PERMITTED, WEEP HOLES SHOULD BE 2-INCH MINIMUM DIAMETER AND PROVIDED AT 25-FOOT MAXIMUMSPACING ALONG WALL. WEEP HOLES SHOULD BE LOCATED 3+ INCHES ABOVE FINISHED GRADE.7. SCREENING SUCH AS WITH A FILTER FABRIC SHOULD BE PROVIDED FOR WEEP HOLES/OPEN JOINTS TO PREVENT EARTHMATERIALS FROM ENTERING THE HOLES/JOINTS.8. OPEN VERTICAL MASONRY JOINTS (I.E., OMIT MORTAR FROM JOINTS OF FIRST COURSE ABOVE FINISHED GRADE) AT 32-INCHMAXIMUM INTERVALS MAY BE SUBSTITUTED FOR WEEP HOLES.9 THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT MAY PROVIDE ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR RETAINING WALLS DESIGNED FOR SELECT SAND BACKFILL. 3/21 RETAINING WALL DRAINAGE.ai AGGREGATE SYSTEM DRAIN COMPOSITE DRAINAGE SYSTEM Weep Hole (optional) Native backfill Native backfill Clean sand vertical drain having sand equivalentof 30 or greater or other free-draining granularmaterial Mirafi G100N, Contech C-Drain 15K, or equivalentdrainage composite. Alternative: Class 2 permeablefilter material (Per Caltransspecifications) may be used forvertical drain and aroundperforated pipe (without filter fabric)Minimum 1 ft.3/ft. of 1/4 to 1 1/2" size gravelor crushed rock encased in approvedFilter Fabric 4-inch diameter perforated pipe with properoutlet. (See Notes below for alternate dischargesystem) 4-inch diameter perforated pipe with proper outlet.Peel back the bottom fabric flap,place pipe next to core,wrap fabric around pipe and tuck behind core. (See Notesfor alternate weep hole discharge system) Cut back of core to match size ofweep hole. Do not cut fabric. Waterproofing (optional) Retaining wall Retaining wall Wrap filter fabricflap behind core Provide proper surface drainage(drain separate from subdrain) Provide proper surface drainage(drain separate from subdrain) 1' to 2' Cover RetainedHeight 1'min. Weep Hole (optional) OPTION 1: OPTION 2: NOTE: DRAINAGE SYSTEM NOT REQUIRED FORWALLS WITH RETAINED HEIGHT OF 30 INCHES OR LESS NOTE: DRAINAGE SYSTEM NOT REQUIRED FORWALLS WITH RETAINED HEIGHT OF 30 INCHES OR LESS FIGURE 3 APPENDIX A 21014-01 July 26, 2021 210726 GPR A-1 NMG APPENDIX A REFERENCES California Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG), 1996, Geologic Maps of the Northwestern Part of the San Diego County, California, Plate 1, Geologic Map of the Oceanside, San Luis Rey and San Marcos 7.5' Quadrangles, San Diego County, California, by Tan, S.S. and Kennedy, M.P. California Geological Survey (CGS), 2008, Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California, Special Publication 117, Originally Adopted March 13, 1997, Revised and Re-adopted September 11, 2008. California Geological Survey (CGS), 2010, Fault Activity Map of California and Adjacent Areas (Scale 1: 750,000), Geologic Data Map No. 6, Compiled and Interpreted by Charles W. Jennings and William A. Bryant. California Geological Survey (CGS), 2018, Earthquake Fault Zones, A Guide for Government Agencies, Property Owners / Developers, and Geoscience Practitioners 2018. for Assessing Fault Rupture Hazards in California, Special Publication 42, Revised. California Geological Survey (CGS), 2021, Fault Activity Map of California, Interactive Map, web site address: https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/fam/; Date Accessed: February, 2021. County of San Diego, 2007, Guidelines for Determining Significance, Geologic Hazards, Land Use and Environment Group, Department of Planning and Lan Use, Department of Public Works, dated July 30, 2017. County of San Diego, 2012, San Diego County Grading Ordinance, Amended by Ordinance No. 10224 (N.S.), effective 10-25-12. EDR, 2015, The EDR Aerial Photo Decade Package, Inquiry Number 4410798.9, dated September 15, 2015. EDR, 2015, EDR Historic Topographic Map Report, Inquiry Number 4410798.4, dated September 15, 2015. GeoSoils, Inc., 2002, Geotechnical Evaluation of the Robertson Ranch Property, City of Carlsbad, Sand Diego County, California, W.O. 3098-A1-SC, dated January 29, 2002. GeoSoils, Inc., 2016, Geotechnical Evaluation of Marja Acres, APN 207-101-35 & -37, 1910 El Camino Real, Carlsbad, San Diego County, California, Work Order 6971-A-SC, dated July 8, 2016. GeoSoils, Inc., 2018, Update of the Geotechnical Update for Marja Acres, APN 207-101-35 & -37, 1910 El Camino Real, Carlsbad, San Diego County, California, Work Order 6971-A1-SC, dated June 11, 2018. 21014-01 July 26, 2021 APPENDIX A REFERENCES (Cont'd) 210726 GPR A-2 NMG Kennedy, M.P, Tan, S.S., Bovard, K.R., Alverez, R.M., Watson, M.J. and Gutierrez, C.I., 2007, Geologic Map of the Oceanside 30x60 minute Quadrangle, California, California Geological Survey Regional Geologic Map No. 2, scale 1:100,000. LGC Valley, Inc., 2014, Geotechnical and Environmental Recommendations Report for Robertson Ranch West, Carlsbad Tract No. 13-03, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 133023-03, dated April 29, 2014. LGC Valley, Inc., 2016, As-Graded Report of Mass Grading, Planning Areas PA-1 through PA-3, PA-5, PA-6, PA-9, PA-10, PA-13 and PA-23A through PA-23C, Robertson Ranch, Carlsbad Tract No. 13-03, Carlsbad, California, Project No. 133023-03, dated June 28, 2016. Nationwide Environmental Title Research, LLC. (NETR), 2021, Historic Aerials by NETR Online, web site address: https://historiaerials.com NMG Geotechnical, Inc. 2021, Geotechnical Due Diligence Study for Marja Acres Development, 4901 El Camino Real, Carlsbad, County of San Diego, California, Project No. 21014-01, dated February 18, 2021. NOVA, 2021a, Report Update Geotechnical Investigation, Marja Acres Mixed-Use Development, 4901 El Camino Real, Carlsbad, CA, Project No. 2021026, dated March 10, 2021. NOVA, 2021b, Revised Report Update Geotechnical Investigation, Marja Acres Mixed-Use Development, 4901 El Camino Real, Carlsbad, CA, Project No. 2021026, dated March 24, 2021. NOVA, 2021c, Response to Review Comments, Updated Geotechnical Investigation, Marja Acres Mixed-Use Development, 4901 El Camino Real, Carlsbad, CA, Project No. 2021026, dated March 26, 2021. NOVA, 2021d, Response to Land Development Engineering Division Review Comments, Marja Acres Mixed-Use Development (Project No. 9322.1, Log No. 21358), 4901 El Camino Real, Carlsbad, CA, Project No. 2021026, dated May 25, 2021. NOVA, 2021e, Second Update Report Geotechnical Investigation, Marja Acres Mixed-Use Development, 4901 El Camino Real, Carlsbad, CA, Project No. 2021026, dated May 26, 2021. Southern California Soil and Testing, Inc., 1982, Report of Geotechnical Investigation, El Camino Estates, El Camino Real, Carlsbad, California, Job No. SCS&T 14067, Report No. 1, dated August 18, 1982. Structural Engineers Association/Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development, 2021, U.S. Seismic Design Maps, web site address: https://seismicmaps.org/; Date Accessed: February 9, 2021. 21014-01 July 26, 2021 APPENDIX A REFERENCES (Cont'd) 210726 GPR A-3 NMG U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1973, Soil Survey, San Diego, California, Soil Conservation Service and Forest Service, issued December 1973. U.S. Geological Survey, 2021, Unified Hazard Tool, NSHM 2014 Dynamic Deaggregation Program; web site address: https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/interactive/; Date Accessed: February 9, 2021. U.S. Geological Survey, 2021b, USGS Historical Topographic Map Explorer, web site address: https://liningatlas.aregis.com/topoexplorer/index.html APPENDIX B BORING LOGS BY NMG (THIS INVESTIGATION) NMG Gczotczchnical, Inc. Page 1 of 3 DATE STARTED: DRILLING COMPANY: 7/8/21 DATE ENDED: _ __,_7c,:l8e..o/2'-'1 __ Dave's Drilling Boring No. B-1 � EQUIPMENT USED: HOLE DIAMETER (in.) DRIVE DROP (in.) DRIVE WEIGHT (lbs.) 1i Q) EZ-Bore GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION: 89 ft 30" DATUM: _m_sl ________ _ 12" LOCATION: Adjacent To Driveway Near House. 0-27': 4,500lbs, 27-52': 3,500lbs, 52-75': 2,500Ibs. 75-102': 1,000lb!COORDISTATION: V) Q) 'O 'O 0 � ..c Q) -.n., E :::; ::, Q)za. 'O E c: "'"' C/) vi--:V) C/) "' .-(.) (.) . _C/) '6 ::i C/)� Logged By: Sampled By: DESCRIPTION ZKH/TW ZKH .:... w f g_1---+---+---,.--.--,l"'l-------+----.-+----+-----1----------------------------+---t---+----1 � _ t...::: �� ,-�i::iir Dirt area near house driveway. !z: -� �. @ 0'-1.8': Brown sandy CLAY, damp, medium stiff, roots. G --:, ;:-� 1-Terrace Deposit (Qt) C�;...:!:· _ j:_ t •\\ �::_ __ ,/.(=II @ 1.8': Contact, irregular, silty CLAY with sandy zones, moist, stiff, FeO '" r= ⇒ : ,_stained. massive, jumbled/mottled appearance. ,_ @ 3.5': Calcium carbonate-rich zone, subparallel to ground surface, � --::;::-:-- ' continuous around boring. i ��-Et & -;f:-� � • i•l� .!!' 8_Q_ - 7_Q_ - ---�-� -----. -.. -, � -. ; : _ .. ; . ; . --. -.. :,_--. .��<� _;_.,. . � -.. ►. --= ... - · ..... .. @ 10' GB: N35E, 13-20NW @11.?'CB: N20W, 10-11SW @12.6'CB: N32W, SSW @15.8'C: N11W, 24SW --...__ @ 24' B: N22E, - ------ -... ... .. 6JL ,.-� 14SE @25.9' CB: N20E, ?NW @28.3'C: N44W, 15-44SW D-1 B-1 D-2 D-3 I- I- I I- I- I I- I- ,- SB-1 � I- I- I- GEOTECHNICAL LOG OF BORING 2 CL 4 SM 5 SM @ 5' SAMPLE: Olive gray CLAY, moist, stiff, mottled, FeO stained, roots. @ 6.5': Near vertical caliche lined fractures. @ 7': little to no roots. Santiago Formation (Tsa) @ 8': High point on E wall, low point at 8.5' on SW wall, erosional, calcium carbonate abundant above contact. Yellowish brown to light gray silty fine SANDSTONE, damp, dense. @ 1 O' SAMPLE: Pale yellow to light gray silty fine SANDSTONE, damp, medium dense, micaceous, FeO stained, thinly bedded in sample. @ 10.4': Bedding, slightly coarser sand bed, high point at 10', low point at 10.4', some cross bedding, 4" thick, friable. Below is sandy SIL TS TONE bed. @ 11.2': Similar bed as above, SANDSTONE bed, 5" thick, slightly undulatory. @ 11.7': Gray CLAY bed, 1/4" to 1/2" thick, continuous, low point 11.8', some calcium carbonate along bed, not sheared. @ 12.6': CLAY bed, grayish brown, brittle, moderately plastic when wet, low point at 12.8', 1" to 1.5" thick, not sheared, some roots. Below is light gray to pale yellow silty fine SANDSTONE. @ 15.8': Gray silty CLAYSTONE bed, up to 1' thick, moist, stiff, some FeO staining, sandy layer within the claystone bed. @ 17': Clean SANDSTONE bed, low point at 17. 7', friable. @ 17.8': Grayish brown CLAYSTONE, 2" to 4" thick. @ 19.3': Grayish brown CLAYSTONE, massive silty fine SANDSTONE below. @ 20' SAMPLE: light greenish gray silty fine to medium SANDSTONE, moist, dense, trace clay content. @ 23': Cleaner silty fine to coarse SANDSTONE, bottom at 24'. @ 24': CLAYSTONE bed, undulatory, 2" to 1 O" thick, low point at 24.6', erosional contact is FeO stained. @ 25.9': Brown CLAY bed, low point at 26.2', 1/4" to 1/2" thick, undulatory, plastic, not sheared, gray CLAYSTONE on top and bottom of clay bed, silty fine SANDSTONE/sandy Sil TSTONE below. @ 28.3': Gray CLAY-lined Contact, highly plastic, undulatory, erosional, silty fine SANDSTONE below. 21014-01 Marja Acres 113.1 21.4 119.9 11.3 110.9 12.3 � NMG NMG Geotechnical. Inc. Page 2 of 3 DATE STARTED: DRILLING COMPANY: 7/8/21 DATE ENDED: -----'-7'""/8'-"/2'"""'1 __ Dave's Drilling Boring No. B-1 EQUIPMENT USED: HOLE DIAMETER (in.) DRIVE DROP (in.) DRIVE WEIGHT (lbs.) - - -.-..4---. �;-� --, . 5..Q_ -:;_;:7··4Q__. -·t?. EZ-Bore GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION: 89 ft 30"DATUM: ...:mc:..=sl'----------12" LOCATION: Adjacent To Driveway Near House. 0-27': 4,500Ibs, 27-52': 3,500Ibs, 52-75': 2,500Ibs, 75-102': 1,000lb!COORD/STATION: @31.5' CB: N35W, 14SW @36.7' GB: N40W, 18SW D-5 @43.TC: L- I - - L- Q) a. Cl> 4 5 V)--:Cl> Cf) "' . -(.) (.) . _ Cf) ·5 ::ien� SM SM DESCRIPTION Logged By: ZKH/TW Sampled By: __,Z::K..,,H...:.._ ________ _ @ 30' SAMPLE: Light gray silty fine SANDSTONE, moist, dense. FeO stained, massive. @ 30.4': Brown clayey SANDSTONE, 6" thick. low point at 30.6'. @ 31.5': CLAY bed, continuous, low point at 31.9', some sand in clay, pale yellow SANDSTONE below. @ 33.4': Brown clay fine SANDSTONE, 2" thick. Similar bed at 34.5', interfayered zone. @ 36.7': Brown clayey bed, low point at 37'. Below has some random white blebs in SANDSTONE. @ 40' SAMPLE: Olive gray silty fine SANDSTONE, moist, dense, FeO stained, massive. • N20W, 48SW @ 43.7': Light gray silty fine SANDSTONE, massive, slightly more dense/cemented than above, bioturbated, worm burrows . - - ' 4Q__ - 5_[_ 3..Q__ ... -., ' : ' . -. ·-... . . ( • -I . : @49.6' B: N2W,5SW @56.4' CB: N46W, 2-3NE @57.3' SH: N42W, 25SW @ 57.7' C: N12E, 16NE Ii L- B-2 D-6 I L- L- SB-2 � B-3 � - GEOTECHNICAL LOG OF BORING 7 SM ML @ 47.9': Contact, sharp color change, high point at 43.7' . @ 49.6': CLAYSTONE/SILTSTONE bed, 1' thick, red SANDSTONE bed in middle of bed, brittle, some FeO staining, below is massive yellowish gray SANDSTONE. @ 50' SAMPLE: Upper (Not in Sample): Olive gray silty fine SANDSTONE, moist, dense, FeO stained. Lower: Red to green SILTSTONE. moist. very stiff, mottled. @ 56': Dark gray CLA YSTONE, very stiff to hard. @ 56.4': Red CLAY bed, tectonically sheared, low point at 56.9'. @ 57.7': Contact with pale yellow SANDSTONE. 21014-01 Marja Acres 114.2 7.8 112.6 13.8 123.1 12.0 NMG NMG Geotechnical, Inc. Page 3 of 3 DATE STARTED: _ ___,_7'""'/8""'/2'-'1 __ DRILLING COMPANY: DATE ENDED: __ 7/_8�/2_1 __ Dave's Drilling Boring No. B-1 EQUIPMENT USED: HOLE DIAMETER (in.) DRIVE DROP (in.) DRIVE WEIGHT (lbs.) Q) - Cl 0 _J .!< .c a. � C) \2.Q_ 7_Q_ I,,_ - - - -- 7i_ - - 1.Q_ -8_Q_ Si_ - - - _Q_ 90 EZ-Bore 30"GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION: DATUM: msl 89 ft ------------12" LOCATION: Adjacent To Driveway Near House. 0-27': 4,500lbs, 27-52': 3,500Ibs, 52-75': 2,500lbs, 75-102': 1,000lbl'COORD/STATION: If> Q) " ::, 0 � .c Q) - .0 ., E ::a ::, o,z 0." E C "' "' <fl D-8 - t- t- I- I- � I I- I- I- I- t- I- � - - - t- t- t- t----- 12 15 (/) � If> <fl "' . -(_) (_) . -<fl ·o::; <fl� Logged By: DESCRIPTION ZKH/TW Sampled By: _Z_K_H _________ _ SM-SC @ 60' SAMPLE: Light gray silty/clayey fine SANDSTONE, wet, dense, massive. @ 61 ': Moderate seepage along fracture. @ 63': Light gray silty fine SANDSTONE, saturated, dense, fractured, FeO stained features are truncated by calcium carbonate lined faults. SM @ 70' SAMPLE: Light gray to while silty fine to medium SANDSTONE, saturated, very dense. Notes: Total Depth: 71.0 Feet. Downhole Logged to 67 Feet. Seepage at 61 Feet. Standing Groundwater at 66 Feet After 1.5 Hours. Backfilled with Cuttings and Tamped. GEOTECHNICAL LOG OF BORING 21014-01 Marja Acres 110.8 14.2 124.6 10.8 NMG NMG Geotechnical. Inc. Page 1 of 3 DATE STARTED: DRILLING COMPANY: EQUIPMENT USED: HOLE DIAMETER (in.) DRIVE DROP (in.) DRIVE WEIGHT (lbs.) 7/9/21 DATE ENDED: ----'-7'"""/9::..:/2'-'1 __ Dave's Drilling EZ-Bore 30" 12" Boring No. GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION: 89 ft DATUM: �m=sl'----------- B-2 LOCATION: Along South Perimeter Mid-Slope. 0-27': 4,500Ibs, 27-52': 3,500Ibs, 52-75': 2,500Ibs, 75-102': 1,000lbS:OORD/STATION: � � g, V, l21 � <Ii � DESCRIPTION i � 5 � � � � §� � 0 Logged By: ZKH/TW -�-g � a a. � �z en �(/) � c w � -.. E-c 0� ·o � o it � o <., ro ai co-CfJ -Sampled By: ZKH c=-.-Cf) 0 t:i1--+--.+:W:,...,,_._t-"" _____ 1---,-+--+--+,,......�....,,.,_,,.�-----------------+---+---+----1 � �� i::i�: Dirt Lot. ; -I� �@0'-1.5': Dark brown sandy CLAY, caliche, trace roots. desiccated. -ii -Terrace Deposit (Qt) � -� ( -). @ 1.5': Light brown to reddish brown silty/clayey SAND, MnO staining, � _ ·_ '\ _, :r bedrock fragments, very moist, medium dense, soil-like. � _ t3: E -c· , ,!! � ' : Lt\ � +:½: ii -"" . � -- I. .. J: 8.Q_ - - - 7.Q_ - - - 6.Q_ -----' @ 13.5' B: N28E, SNW @17.6' GB: N1W, 14SW @26.S'CB: N45W, 14SW B-1 D-1 D-2 D-3 I f-I ,- ,- D-4 I - D-5 I SB-1 � I GEOTECHNICAL LOG OF BORING 2 2 2 2 SC @ 5' SAMPLE: Brown clayey fine SAND, moist, medium dense. @ 6.5': Increase in calcium carbonate blebs/weathering, massive. @ 8': Scattered pebbles . SM-SC @ 10' SAMPLE: Brown silty/clayey fine SAND, moist, medium dense, trace bedrock fragments, pinhole pores, massive. @ 11': Slightly sandier layer, gradational contacts, flat-lying. Santiago Formation (Tsa) @ 13.1 ': Contact: Low point at 13.4' on W wall, irregular. @ 13.5': SANDSTONE bed with pebbles, sub-angular, less than 1" diameter, MnO stained, 6" thick, laminated, weathered. Near-vertical calcium carbonate lined fracture cuts through sandstone bed. @ 15' SAMPLE: Brown silty/clayey fine SAND, moist, medium dense, trace bedrock fragments, pinhole pores, massive. @ 17.6': 1 /2" thick clayey lense. @ 19': Gray silty/clayey SANDSTONE, density increases, random FeO staining, massive. MUCL @ 20' SAMPLE: Yellowish brown to gray CLAYONE/SIL TSTONE, very moist, stiff, bedded. @ 20.9': Contact, irregular, SANDSTONE above, CLAYSTONE below, low point at 21.8' on S wall. @23.5': Brown CLAY bed within CLAYSTONE, irregular, and discontinuous, caliche lined. @ 24.1 ': Grades to SANDSTONE, micaceous, some cross bedding at 26', SM FeO staining. @ 25' SAMPLE: Gray to yellowish brown silty fine SANDSTONE, moist, dense. @ 26.8': Contact, SANDSTONE above, CLAYSTONE below. Claystone is micaceous, highly plastic, light gray, irregular bentonitic bed; claystone below is tectonically sheared. @ 29.3': Contact, low point at 29.5' on NE wall. silty fine SANDSTONE 21014-01 Marja Acres 124.2 11.5 117.5 10.5 115.3 7.7 102.3 10.8 NMG NMG Geotechnical, Inc. Page 2 of 3 5j � � DATE STARTED: DRILLING COMPANY: EQUIPMENT USED: HOLE DIAMETER (in.) DRIVE DROP (in.) DRIVE WEIGHT (lbs.) � ,s a. Q) ...J 0 a. � (!) 7/9/21 DATE ENDED: _ ___:,7.:..,/9""'/2"-'1 __ Boring No. B-2 Dave's Drilling 30" 12" GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION: 89 ft DATUM: �m�sl'---------LOCATION: Along South Perimeter Mid-Slope. 0-27': 4,500Ibs, 27-52': 3,500Ibs, 52-75': 2,500Ibs, 75-102': 1,000Ib£OORD/STATION: "' Q) 'O ::, 0 � £i ., E ::i:::, Q) za. 'O E c: "'"'en (I)';' "' en "' -() () - en '6 ::i en� DESCRIPTION Logged By: ZKHfTW Sampled By: _Z=..:K:..:H _________ _ "' t 1/J £ (!):1---+--+w,.:....--.,;;..1-----+----,.,..--,+-.,,.,,.-+.,.-,-----,--,--...,...--.,.,...,...----------------1---,�+.,...---1---1 .,; , 0_6 I 2 SC below, clay rip-up clasts at 29.9'. 112.5 11.4 � _ ",.,. 0 �-_0-· @ 30' SAMPLE: Gray clayey SANDSTONE, moist, dense, slightly FeO � •• 0 , • stained, caliche. 0 _ - . • @ 31.5' GB: ,-@ 31.5': Pebbly SANDSTONE bed, cross-bedded. C!> ,_ N64E, 7SE � . i � -�- �3 _5 ·-; ;..:-: .,::.'.;;; - � (!) 0;;; � £ 5.Q_ ir:w (!) :::, < Iii 13 :::, ID t f &! 4Q_ - - - - 4Q_�... ,::-� 5..!!_ - r-. �--::·· � -= ----._ .. -. �� -:--: -'_:_:: 5��--�"• � @33.1'CB: N72E, 18SE @39.9'GC: N60W, 20NE @41.9'8: N31E, 13NW @45' B: N15E, 7SE @45.2' CB: N60W, 4NE @47.8'GB: N45E, 6NE @50.7' C: N19W, 20NE 3.Q_ � @58.9'8: 60 . . . . . N86W, 7SW t- 0-7 I I- 8-3 � t- t- - D-8 I I- I- t- t- GEOTECHNICAL LOG OF BORING 2 SM 2 SC @ 33.1 ': CLAY bed, truncated by clean SANDSTONE bed on down-dip side, erosional. CLAY bed is continuous 314th of the boring, low point at 33.8', 1" thick, SANDSTONE below. @ 38.2': Pale yellow fine to coarse SANDSTONE, MnO stained, cross-bedded. @ 39.9': Silty fine SANDSTONE. scattered pebbles along top of bed. @ 40' SAMPLE: Gray silty fine SANDSTONE, moist, dense, FeO stained, micaceous, trace fine to medium sand, massive to cross-bedded. @ 41.9': Brown clayey SANDSTONE, continuous, 3" thick, gradational contacts, below is silty SANDSTONE with trace pebbles, friable. @ 43.5': Clean fine to coarse SANDSTONE to 44.8', rip-up clasts on bottom of bed. @ 44.8': Contact with reddish brown plastic CLA YSTONE, near horizonatal, irregular, erosional pebbles/cobbles on bottom. Below is soft clayey SIL TS TONE, 3-4" thick. @ 45.2': CLAY bed, not sheared, no prominent surface, internally massive, repeating brown and gray CLAYSTONE to 48'. @ 48': Contact, silty to clayey SANDSTONE, gradational. @ 50' SAMPLE: Gray clayey fine SANDSTONE, moist, dense, trace fragments of brown clay. @ 50.7': Bottom of SANDSTONE, brown CLAYSTONE bed, 2-3" thick. similar bed at 51.8', sandy CLAYSTONE between beds. Below is silty fine to medium SANDSTONE to 53', SILTSTONE below. @ 54.9': Brown CLA YSTONE, near horizontal. @ 58.9': Contact with SIL TSTONE/CLAYSTONE, FeO stained contact, gray clayey SANDSTONE below. 21014-01 Marja Acres 108.3 12.2 106.6 17.1 � NMG 0 (!) <D 0 N (!) ::; z «> E .,... .!!I "' 0 -', a. (!) 0 ;::; .P ii:: w (!) <( w C!l t g a: NMG Geotechnical. Inc. Page 3 of 3 DATE STARTED: 7/9/21 DATE ENDED: 7/9/21 Boring No. B-2 Dave's Drilling DRILLING COMPANY: EQUIPMENT USED: EZ-Bore GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION: 89 ft HOLE DIAMETER (in.) 30"DATUM: msl DRIVE DROP (in.) 12" LOCATION: Along South Perimeter Mid-Slo12e. DRIVE WEIGHT (lbs.) 0-27': 4,500Ibs, 27-52': 3,500lbs, 52-75': 2,500lbs. 75-102': 1,000Ib£OORD/STATION: £ � � C 0 .c � a. > Q) Q) 0 ui - -1 - - 2.Q_ 7..Q__ -- 7� -- - - 1.Q_ -8.Q__ - - - -- -8� - - - .Q_ 90 C) 0 ....J 0 i:. 0. � (.'.) w ! r •'' -. -.., . - < • --. . . A Q�g., �C><t;f C)o ..:::, .. 0,, ·c,•� o,to'• 'O 0 � .c Q) (/) - .0 Q) ., Eu :!!: :, .a � z � O.u E C <1l <1l (/) D-9 - � !- I-)I-I I- I- � D-10 I I- I- '- L-. � � � � I- '- '- L-. L-. � L-. � � � GEOTECHNICAL LOG OF BORING a 0 u.. Qi 0.. (/) ;: 0 ai 5 4 (I)� (/) (/) <1l • -(.) U-_(/) ·o ::i C/l- SC ::SM DESCRIPTION Logged By: ZKH/TW Sampled By: ZKH @ 60' SAMPLE: Gray clayey fine SANDSTONE, wet, medium dense. @ 60.1': FeO stained bed. @ 63'-65': Abundant rounded cobbles, up to 3" by 6" diameter. @ 69' SAMPLE: Gray silty fine to medium SANDSTONE.saturated, very \dense, trace rounded pebbles. Notes: Total Depth: 69 Feet. Heavy Seepage at 63 Feet. Standing Groundwater at 63 Feet After 1.5 Hours. Belled out 1' Between 63 and 65 Feet. Backfilled with Cuttings and Tamped. 21014-01 Marja Acres 'E' s a,'$. ;:;. � -� :, -·;;; - C <1l (/) Cl) E C ·o CQ) Q) 0 :!!: 0 a: c'.:' u 0 102.4 21.9 I 98.5 23.5 � NMG NMG Ge:ote:chnical, Inc. Page_1_of_2_ DATE STARTED: DRILLING COMPANY: 7/9/21 DATE ENDED: -�7'""/9""'/2c.c1 __ Dave's Drilling Boring No. B-3 � � -0 <1> E EQUIPMENT USED: HOLE DIAMETER (in.) DRIVE DROP (in.) DRIVE WEIGHT (lbs.) C) $ 0 .c () a. ., ['! 0 c., EZ-Bore GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION: 75 ft 30" DATUM: _m_sl ________ _ 12" LOCATION: Southwest Corner Mid-Slope. 0-27': 4,500Ibs, 27-52': 3,500Ibs, 52-75': 2,500/bs, 75-102': 1,000Ib£OORD/STATION: "'., .2 E <( 0 � £_25 ., E ::; :, ., za. "O E C <I) <I) (/) "' 0 (/) -:"' (/) <I) • c3 � -(/) ·5 ::i (/)- Logged By: Sampled By: DESCRIPTION ZKH/TW ZKH C Q) '$ "' � --1!: :, -'iii -c "' Q) E ., ·5 C ., 0 ::; 0 a:: c'.' <.) 0 � ii1----1---+,-:--:;,._�-�-;-,�--,5- ;-- _; .: ;.• .- 1-------+---..-+----1---+-�-�-:-:-i-�-: -D-irt_L_o_t __ ---------------------l---+---+----1 "' _ _ w f: - ; _ -Q�- _ -(:I -- _ i -_--.; - - -¥ ! �<.!! a::w (:I :::, < "' (.) :::, C'.l i: 2' &! - 7_Q_ - - - - 6.Q_ - - ------ ----- �.;;: 101 _;;:::::..-� � �� @ 9. 7' GB: --. ,-- · N15E, 17NW ..... ,, ,,,.,--..--· ---= ,, - -� -@17'GB:N4E, �-. -5NW --... 2_Q__ .::--, -'-' 5.Q_ 2� ,- __.:::::-� :--:--.....--_ ---------·,· ... -�-'_' --· -·-·--· L-----· --·---::__ -- ,----- -- t- t- t- t- >-- - - - - - - >- >---- GEOTECHNICAL LOG OF BORING 1@ 0'-1 ': Brown clayey SAND. damp, stiff, roots. Older Alluvium (Qoa) @ 1 ': Gray to brown sandy CLAY, highly weathered, abundant caliche, mottled. # 3': Caliche lined fracture, not well-defined, massive sandy CLAY/SAND. @ 4': FeO staining, abundant caliche at 5'. @ 6': SAND bed, below is greenish gray CLAY. @ 7.2': Contact with CLAY, soft, plastic, pich pushes in 0.5" into clay, cemented caliche blebs above, low point at 7.4' on SE wall. @ 8.5': Abundant caliche. @ 9.7': Very clayey zone, low point at 10.2' on SW wall, 2" thick, highly plastic, continuous, not well defined, below is gray CLAY. plastic, stiff, FeO stained with white calcium carbonate blebs. @ 11 ': Gradational change to SAND. @ 11.5': Light grayish brown silty fine SAND, some FeO staining. @ 12': Silty fine SAND, friable, dense, moist. @ 13': Light gray silty SAND. @ 15': SAND. little silt, FeO staining, highly friable. @ 1 7': Lenses of brownish gray CLAY, possible bedding on clayey lense. 4" thick CLAY on E wall, horizontal, pinches out on W wall. @ 17.2': Similar CLAY lense as above, continuous halfway around boring, pinches on W wall. @ 18': Light brown SAND, mottled FeO staining. @ 23': Light brown fine to coarse SAND, contact at 23.3', contact is irregular, gradational, massive sandy CLAY/clayey SAND below. @ 27.5': Brownish gray more CLAY than SAND, massive. 21014-01 Marja Acres I � NMG �"',::: ;; .,c·c: 0.. ,:... (!) <D 0 N z i3 (!) z 1ii c E >-!!l "' 0 -'-, 0.. (!) 9 � 0 ;;;, .!!1 � ir:LJ.J (!) ::, < >-LJ.J "' () ::, t l? a:: NMG Gczotczchnical, Inc. Page 2 of 2 DATE STARTED: 7/9/21 DATE ENDED: 7/9/21 Boring No. B-3 DRILLING COMPANY: Dave's Drilling EQUIPMENT USED: EZ-Bore GROUND SURFACE ELEVATION: 75 ft HOLE DIAMETER (in.) 30" DATUM: msl DRIVE DROP (in.) 12" LOCATION: Southwest Corner Mid-Slo12e. DRIVE WEIGHT (lbs.) 0-27': 4,500lbs, 27-52': 3,5001bs, 52-75': 2.500lbs, 75-102': 1,000lbCOORD/STATION: 5 .Q "' > Q) [ij - - - 4Q_ - - 3_Q_ - - - 2.Q__ - 5 .c a. Q) Cl - 0) 0 ....J 0 E C. � CJ w E ·-;_ _,___. ·-· -· _:_ --. -•, ' -..,... . ,.. _ .. =--s. --=-::-� .. _ _:::;:-.� -·· . .,..,,�� 3� - 4Q__ - �-:..�- "":--: .&. , -·.: 'q. --�_:_ .. -· ·-. ' � -.-·. -,, -•• 0 � _. -... ,·-t�-·:. � � � � '• '-.._. ---�--.,.:::::::::_ --' ----., .... · .. ·,•·. � �·, �-----,, r. - ! ,-. -� .... ��-: .. 4§_ ;0·: • __,., . .?.-: .. _..�--� ·= :::-;.,::-·�� --· --.. ·-,_ ..so !.- - - 5� - 60 Q) -0 .3 � @34.3' SH: N10E, 33NW @39.8' GB: N30W, 16NE @42' B: N59W, · 2-3SW @ 43' B: N 25E, 9NW @45' C: N17E, 28SE -""' -0 0 � .c Q) - .!l ., E ::. ::, .1/ZC. -0 E c: "'"' Cl) I- ----- I- I--------- I- -- I- I- I- I- I- I- I- GEOTECHNICAL LOG OF BORING 0 DESCRIPTION 'n 0 (,?--:-.e Q) � u. Cf) Logged By: ZKH/TW c � --"" .; "' ::, -:. -u ·;;; - C: 0.. u C: ·6 2 E _ Cl) Q) Q) � '6 ::i Cl ::. g 0:: 0 cn-Sampled By: ZKH u i:' iD Cl @ 32': Grades to clayey SAND, roots, sandy CLAY/clayey SAND. @ 33.6'-34.2': Grades back into SAND. @ 34.2': CLAY, tectonically sheared, discontinuous. @ 34.7': Trace amounts of small charcoal/black blebs. @ 35.5': Cobble-sized chert, subangular, roots along CLAY, possible paleosol. @ 38: More roots. I\@ 39.5': Scattered rounded cobbles. r Santiago Formation (Tsa) @ 39.8': Pebble bed, low point at 40.2'. @ 41.2': SANDSTONE, 6" thick, CLAYSTONE below, more bedded, FeO stained. @ 42.2'-42.5': SANDSTONE. @ 42.5'-42.9': CLAYSTONE. @ 43': Contact with clean SANDSTONE, CLA YSTONE below, irregular, FeO stained. @ 44.5': SANDSTONE, friable. @ 45': Silty fine SANDSTONE, below is cross-bedded. \@ 50': Wet, moisture increases. I Notes: Total Depth: 50 Feet. Downhole Logged to 48 Feet. Groundwater Collected at 50 Feet. Backfilled with Cuttings and Tamped. 21014-01 � Marja Acres NMG BORING, TRENCH AND CPT LOGS BY NOVA (2021b & 2021e) BORING AND TRENCH LOGS BY GEOSOILS (2016) APPENDIX C LABORATORY TESTING BY NMG (THIS INVESTIGATION) B-1 D-1 5.0 84.0 2 137.3 113.1 21.4 100.0 B-1 B-1 5.1 7.0 83.9 110.4 25.9 56 26 62 14 MH 350 29 450 29.0 120.0 12.0 126 0.05 B-1 D-2 10.0 79.0 4 133.4 119.9 11.3 75.2 B-1 D-3 20.0 69.0 5 124.6 110.9 12.3 64.2 26 9 SC 300 33 450 39.0 B-1 SB-1 25.9 63.1 101.5 30.7 51 27 CH 400 14 400 14.0 B-1 D-4 30.0 59.0 4 123.2 114.2 7.8 44.4 SM/ML 50 32 250 38.0 B-1 D-5 40.0 49.0 5 128.1 112.6 13.8 75.1 SC/CL 100 33 700 36.0 B-1 D-6 50.0 39.0 7 137.8 123.1 12.0 87.6 92 ML 425 22 475 34.0 B-1 SB-2 57.1 57.5 31.9 52 28 CH B-1 D-7 60.0 29.0 12 126.5 110.8 14.2 73.4 B-1 D-8 70.0 19.0 15 138.0 124.6 10.8 82.8 B-2 B-1 3.0 5.0 86.0 35 24 CL 82 0.09 B-2 D-1 5.0 84.0 1 138.5 124.2 11.5 87.2 48 23 33 20 SC B-2 D-2 10.0 79.0 2 129.8 117.5 10.5 65.3 B-2 D-3 15.0 74.0 2 124.2 115.3 7.7 45.3 B-2 D-4 20.0 69.0 2 NR B-2 D-5 25.0 64.0 2 113.3 102.3 10.8 45.0 SM 100 27 200 28.0 B-2 SB-1 26.8 62.2 94.8 39.0 63 45 CH 180 12 180 12.0 B-2 D-6 30.0 59.0 2 125.3 112.5 11.4 61.9 SC 50 28 400 28.0 B-2 D-7 40.0 49.0 2 121.5 108.3 12.2 59.2 SM B-2 D-8 50.0 39.0 2 124.7 106.6 17.1 79.3 B-2 D-9 60.0 29.0 5 124.8 102.4 21.9 91.6 B-2 D-10 69.0 20.0 4 121.6 98.5 23.5 89.2 Printed: 7/27/21; Template: SUM_SOIL_LAB_ALL; Proj ID: 21014-01.GPJ APPENDIX Carlsbad, California SUMMARY OF SOIL LABORATORY DATA Sheet 1 of 1 Marja Acres Project Number: 21014-01 Boring/Sample Information BoringNo.SampleNo.Depth(feet) (feet) RemarksSolubleSulfate Content (% by wt) R-ValueExpansion Index Compaction OptimumMoistureContent(%)Depth MaximumDryDensity(pcf)Count(N) Direct Shear Peak FrictionAngle ( )Cohesion(psf)Friction Ultimate Angle ( )Cohesion(psf) USCSGroupSymbol(%) AtterbergLimits LL(%)PIContent(% pass.2µ) HydrometerFines o o Blow Clay Sieve/ Content(% pass.#200) DegreeofSat. (%) FieldDryDensity(pcf) FieldMoistureContent(%) Field Density(pcf) WetEnd (feet)Elevation Geotechnical, Inc. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 LIQUID LIMIT(%)PLASTICITY INDEX (%)A-LINEU-LINE ML or OLCL- ML 16 7 4 CL or OL MH or OH CH or OH PLASTICITY CHART Marja Acres Carlsbad, California PROJECT NO. 21014-01 Template: NMATT; Prj ID: 21014-01.GPJ; Printed: 7/21/21 Geotechnical, Inc. Symbol LL 62 26 51 52 35 33 63 PassingNo. 200 Sieve (%) 56 48 Description Number (Qt) Yellowish brown sandy elastic SILT (Tsa) Light brownish gray clayey SAND (Tsa) Very dark yellowish gray fat CLAY (Tsa) Light red fat CLAY (Qt) Brown sandy CLAY (Qt) Brown clayey SAND (Tsa) Dark grayish brown fat CLAY USCS MH SC CH CH CL SC CH PI 14 9 27 28 24 20 45 Boring B-1 B-1 B-1 B-1 B-2 B-2 B-2 Number Sample Depth (feet) B-1 D-3 SB-1 SB-2 B-1 D-1 SB-1 5.1 - 7.0 20.0 25.9 57.1 - 57.5 3.0 - 5.0 5.0 26.8 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.0010.010.11101001,000 36 SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES 100 200 PERCENT PASSINGU.S. STANDARD MH ML SC Passing 2µ (%) Passing Sieve (%) 56 92 48 CActivity PI/-2µMoistureSampleDepth (feet) BOULDERS COBBLES GRAVEL coarse LL 62 33 Field 26 12 12 14 20 26 23 0.54 0.87 6 SILT OR CLAY 1-1/2 3/4 3/8 fine PARTICLE SIZE (mm) Symbol USCSNo. 200cCuPI (%) SAND fine U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER 12 8 coarse medium 3 50416 30 Boring Number B-1 B-1 B-2 Number B-1 D-6 D-1 5.0 - 7.0 50.0 5.0 PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION Marja Acres Carlsbad, California PROJECT NO. 21014-01 Template: NMSIV; Prj ID: 21014-01.GPJ; Printed: 7/20/21 Geotechnical, Inc. Ȁ !Ȁ ! "Ȁ " #Ȁ !"!"#$%&'#(' )*++!,!- .,#$%&'/ $.++ .-.-.#('/ $Ȁ %Ȁ !ȀȀ !!Ȁ !"Ȁ !#Ȁ !&Ȁ 001 0 34 0 2 )+$5! %$.-6 7 +.6 '"5) .%.,- *6 6 %-.) -8 6 ' () *+Ā, -../0 123Ā45/0 6Ā27689Ā-.72*1:Ā; <=>?@ !& ++-. 6 ! AB 9-89:/)+$59:/!$.;62:&. )>)% )5 ?) @)5&-) A//3:/ >- CD.7*-EĀF? GH? IJ "! KĀĀI5LĀ<MEĀ"! Ȁ! &NȀ! OPIQKĀĀI516*-8EĀAR!%R"! Sample Compacted Moisture (%) Compacted Dry Density (pcf) Final Moisture (%) Volumetric Swell (%) Expansion Index1 Value/Method Expansive Classification2 Soluble Sulfate (%) Sulfate Exposure3 B-1B-15-7'11.5 102.8 29.8 12.58 126 A High 0.05 S0 B-2B-13-5'10.5 108.2 23.6 8.16 82 A Medium 0.09 S0 Test Method: ASTM D4829 HACH SF-1 (Turbidimetric) Notes: 1. Expansion Index (EI) method of determination: [A]E.I. determined by adjusting water content to achieve a 50 ±2% degree of saturation[B]E.I. calculated based on measured saturation within the range of 40% and 60%2. ASTM D4829 (Classification of Expansive Soil)3. ACI-318-14 Table 19.3.1.1 (Requirement for Concrete Exposed to Sulfate-Containing Solutions) Expansion Index and Soluble Sulfate Test Results (FRM001 Rev.5) Project No. 21014-01 Project Name: Marja Acres NMG 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 0 2,000 4,000 6,0000 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 NORMAL STRESS (psf)SHEAR STRENGTH (psf)Template: NMDSWGRAPH; Prj ID: 21014-01.GPJ; Printed: 7/20/21 Geotechnical, Inc. 29.0 Cohesion (psf)450 350 Parameter Peak Ultimate SHEAR STRENGTH PARAMETERS Sample Type:Remolded to 92% R.C.Rate of Shear (in./min.): 25.9 110.4 Saturation (%): Degree of 99 Liquid Limit:Percent Passing Sample No. B-1 Final Moisture Content (%): Final Dry Friction Angle (degrees)29.0 62 Plasticity Index:14 56No. 200 Sieve: Sample Description:(Qt) Yellowish brown sandy elastic SILT USCS:MH Boring No. B-1 0.005 Density (pcf): Depth: 5.0 - 7.0 ft 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 0 0.10 0.20 0.300 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESUULLTS Marja Acres Carlsbad, California PROJECT NO. 21014-01 NORMAL STRESS (psf) SHEAR DISPLACEMENT (in)SHEAR STRESS (psf) psfN = 1,000 N = 2,000 N = 4,000 psf psf 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 0 2,000 4,000 6,0000 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 NORMAL STRESS (psf)SHEAR STRENGTH (psf)Template: NMDSWGRAPH; Prj ID: 21014-01.GPJ; Printed: 7/20/21 Geotechnical, Inc. 39.0 Cohesion (psf)450 300 Parameter Peak Ultimate SHEAR STRENGTH PARAMETERS Sample Type:Undisturbed Rate of Shear (in./min.): 25.5 111.5 Saturation (%): Degree of 99 Liquid Limit:Percent Passing Sample No. D-3 Final Moisture Content (%): Final Dry Friction Angle (degrees)33.0 26 Plasticity Index:9 No. 200 Sieve: Sample Description:(Tsa) Light brownish gray clayey SAND USCS:SC Boring No. B-1 0.05 Density (pcf): Depth: 20.0 ft 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 0 0.10 0.20 0.300 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 DDIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Marja Acres Carlsbad, California PROJECT NO. 21014-01 NORMAL STRESS (psf) SHEAR DISPLACEMENT (in)SHEAR STRESS (psf) psfN = 1,000 N = 2,000 N = 4,000 psf psf 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 NORMAL STRESS (psf)SHEAR STRENGTH (psf)DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Marja Acres Carlsbad, California PROJECT NO. 21014-01 Template: NMDS; Prj ID: 21014-01.GPJ; Printed: 7/27/21 Geotechnical, Inc. 38.0 Cohesion (psf)250 50 Parameter Peak Ultimate SHEAR STRENGTH PARAMETERS Sample Type:Undisturbed Rate of Shear (in./min.): 18.8 108.1 Saturation (%): Degree of 77 Liquid Limit:Percent Passing Sample No. D-4 Final Moisture Content (%): Final Dry Friction Angle (degrees)32.0 Plasticity Index:No. 200 Sieve: Sample Description:(Tsa) Light olive brown silty SAND / sandy SILTUSCS:SM/ML Boring No. B-1 0.0025 Density (pcf): Depth: 30.0 ft 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 0 2,000 4,000 6,0000 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 NORMAL STRESS (psf)SHEAR STRENGTH (psf)Template: NMDSWGRAPH; Prj ID: 21014-01.GPJ; Printed: 7/20/21 Geotechnical, Inc. 36.0 Cohesion (psf)700 100 Parameter Peak Ultimate SHEAR STRENGTH PARAMETERS Sample Type:Undisturbed Rate of Shear (in./min.): 26.8 111.5 Saturation (%): Degree of 99 Liquid Limit:Percent Passing Sample No. D-5 Final Moisture Content (%): Final Dry Friction Angle (degrees)33.0 Plasticity Index:No. 200 Sieve: Sample Description:(Tsa) Olive brown clayey SAND/sandy CLAYUSCS:SC/CL Boring No. B-1 0.005 Density (pcf): Depth: 40.0 ft 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 0 0.10 0.20 0.300 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 DDIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Marja Acres Carlsbad, California PROJECT NO. 21014-01 NORMAL STRESS (psf) SHEAR DISPLACEMENT (in)SHEAR STRESS (psf) psfN = 1,000 N = 2,000 N = 4,000 psf psf 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 0 2,000 4,000 6,0000 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 NORMAL STRESS (psf)SHEAR STRENGTH (psf)Template: NMDSWGRAPH; Prj ID: 21014-01.GPJ; Printed: 7/20/21 Geotechnical, Inc. 34.0 Cohesion (psf)475 425 Parameter Peak Ultimate SHEAR STRENGTH PARAMETERS Sample Type:Undisturbed Rate of Shear (in./min.): 22.0 119.0 Saturation (%): Degree of 99 Liquid Limit:Percent Passing Sample No. D-6 Final Moisture Content (%): Final Dry Friction Angle (degrees)22.0 Plasticity Index:92No. 200 Sieve: Sample Description:(Tsa) Light brownish gray sandy SILT USCS:ML Boring No. B-1 0.005 Density (pcf): Depth: 50.0 ft 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 0 0.10 0.20 0.300 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 DDIRIREECCT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Marja Acres Carlsbad, California PROJECT NO. 21014-01 NORMAL STRESS (psf) SHEAR DISPLACEMENT (in)SHEAR STRESS (psf) psfN = 1,000 N = 2,000 N = 4,000 psf psf 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 0 2,000 4,000 6,0000 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 NORMAL STRESS (psf)SHEAR STRENGTH (psf)Template: NMDSWGRAPH; Prj ID: 21014-01.GPJ; Printed: 7/20/21 Geotechnical, Inc. 28.0 Cohesion (psf)200 100 Parameter Peak Ultimate SHEAR STRENGTH PARAMETERS Sample Type:Undisturbed Rate of Shear (in./min.): 26.0 101.3 Saturation (%): Degree of 100 Liquid Limit:Percent Passing Sample No. D-5 Final Moisture Content (%): Final Dry Friction Angle (degrees)27.0 Plasticity Index:No. 200 Sieve: Sample Description:(Tsa) Light olive brown silty SAND USCS:SM Boring No. B-2 0.05 Density (pcf): Depth: 25.0 ft 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 0 0.10 0.20 0.300 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 DDIRIREECCTT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Marja Acres Carlsbad, California PROJECT NO. 21014-01 NORMAL STRESS (psf) SHEAR DISPLACEMENT (in)SHEAR STRESS (psf) psfN = 1,000 N = 2,000 N = 4,000 psf psf 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 NORMAL STRESS (psf)SHEAR STRENGTH (psf)DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Marja Acres Carlsbad, California PROJECT NO. 21014-01 Template: NMDS-RES; Prj ID: 21014-01.GPJ; Printed: 7/20/21 Geotechnical, Inc. 12.0 Cohesion (psf)180 Parameter SHEAR STRENGTH PARAMETERS Sample Type:Remolded Residual Rate of Shear (in./min.): Content (%):39.0 94.8 Saturation (%): Degree of 99 Liquid Limit:Percent Passing Residual Sample No. SB-1 Friction Angle (degrees) Density (pcf): 63 Plasticity Index:45 No. 200 Sieve: Sample Description:(Tsa) Dark grayish brown fat CLAY USCS:CH Boring No. B-2 0.005 Final Moisture Final Dry Depth: 26.8 ft 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 0 2,000 4,000 6,0000 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 NORMAL STRESS (psf)SHEAR STRENGTH (psf)Template: NMDSWGRAPH; Prj ID: 21014-01.GPJ; Printed: 7/20/21 Geotechnical, Inc. 28.0 Cohesion (psf)400 50 Parameter Peak Ultimate SHEAR STRENGTH PARAMETERS Sample Type:Undisturbed Rate of Shear (in./min.): 24.5 106.7 Saturation (%): Degree of 97 Liquid Limit:Percent Passing Sample No. D-6 Final Moisture Content (%): Final Dry Friction Angle (degrees)28.0 Plasticity Index:No. 200 Sieve: Sample Description:(Tsa) Gray silty clayey SAND USCS:SC Boring No. B-2 0.005 Density (pcf): Depth: 30.0 ft 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 0 0.10 0.20 0.300 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 DDIRIREECCTT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Marja Acres Carlsbad, California PROJECT NO. 21014-01 NORMAL STRESS (psf) SHEAR DISPLACEMENT (in)SHEAR STRESS (psf) psfN = 1,000 N = 2,000 N = 4,000 psf psf 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 0 2,000 4,000 6,0000 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 NORMAL STRESS (psf)SHEAR STRENGTH (psf)Template: NMDS-RES WGRAPH; Prj ID: 21014-01.GPJ; Printed: 7/14/21 Geotechnical, Inc. 14.0 Cohesion (psf)400 Parameter SHEAR STRENGTH PARAMETERS Sample Type:Remolded Residual Rate of Shear (in./min.): Content (%):30.7 101.5 Saturation (%): Degree of 100 Liquid Limit:Percent Passing Residual Sample No. SB-1 Friction Angle (degrees) Density (pcf): 51 Plasticity Index:27 No. 200 Sieve: Sample Description:(Tsa) Very dark yellowish gray fat CLAY USCS:CH Boring No. B-1 0.005 Final Moisture Final Dry Depth: 25.9 ft 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 0 0.10 0.20 0.300 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 DDIRIREECCT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Marja Acres Carlsbad, California PROJECT NO. 21014-01 NORMAL STRESS (psf) SHEAR DISPLACEMENT (in)SHEAR STRESS (psf) psfN = 1,000 N = 2,000 N = 4,000 psf psf LABORATORY TESTING BY NOVA (2021e) Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content (ASTM D1557) Sample Location B -1 B-2 B-3 B-5 Sample Location B-2 B-3 B-5 Sample Location B - 1 B -1 B-2 B-3 B-5 LO-2 LO-2 LO-2 LO-2 Sample Location Remolded TSA GEOTECHNICAL MAlERIALS SPECIAL INSPECTION Sample Maximum Optimum Moisture Depth Dry Density (ft) Soil Description (pct) 20 -22.5 Olive Brown Sandy Clay 122.6 15-17.5 Olive Brown Clayey Sand 119.3 15-20 Gray Brown Sandy Clay-Clayey Sand 118.2 15 -20 Gray Brown Silty Clay/Clayey Silt 124.7 Density of Soil in Place (ASTM D2937) Sample Depth Moisture (ft) Soil Description (%) 12.5 -14 Gray Brown Sandy Clay-Clayey Sand 15.4 17 -19 Brown Clayey Sand 18.2 25 -26.5 Gray Brown Silty/Sand Clay 19.6 Atterberg Limits (ASTM D4318) Sample Depth Liquid Plastic Plasticity (ft} Limit, LL Limit, PL Index, Pl 20 -22.5 46 16 30 25 -26.5 52 19 33 5 -10 49 16 33 15-16.5 51 22 29 20-25 53 19 34 6-7 29 17 12 16.3 85 26 59 23-24 67 17 50 34.7 65 23 42 Expansion Index (ASTM D4829) Sample Location B -1 B -1 B-2 B-3 Depth (feet) Surface Sample Depth Expansion Expansion (ft.} Index Potential 20-22.5 124 High 25-27.5 98 High 5 -10 103 High 15-20 92 High Direct Shear (ASTM D3080) Friction Angle (degrees) Soil Description Gray Brown Clayey Sandstone 32 Content (%) 12,0 11.7 12.7 11.5 Dry Density (pct) 105.4 108.9 105.1 uses (% Finer than No. 40) CL CH CL CH CH CL CH CH CH Apparent Cohesion (psf} 135 LAB TEST RES UL TS NOV A DVBE • SBE • SOVOSB • SLBE MARJA ACRES 1910 EL CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD, CA 4373 View11dge Avenue. Si.Jile B San Diego, CA 92123 P: 858.292. 7575 944 cane AmaMce1, Suite F San Clemente, CA 92673 P 949.388,7710 BY GN DATE MAY 2021 PROJECT: 2021026 I APPENDIX: D.2 LABORATORY TESTING BY GEOSOILS (2016) APPENDIX D 2/9/2021 U.S. Seismic Design Maps https://seismicmaps.org 1/2 KB/Carlsbad Latitude, Longitude: 33.1503, -117.3077 Date 2/9/2021, 11:32:33 AM Design Code Reference Document ASCE7-16 Risk Category III Site Class D - Stiff Soil Type Value Description SS 0.993 MCER ground motion. (for 0.2 second period) S1 0.362 MCER ground motion. (for 1.0s period) SMS 1.095 Site-modified spectral acceleration value SM1 null -See Section 11.4.8 Site-modified spectral acceleration value SDS 0.73 Numeric seismic design value at 0.2 second SA SD1 null -See Section 11.4.8 Numeric seismic design value at 1.0 second SA Type Value Description SDC null -See Section 11.4.8 Seismic design category Fa 1.103 Site amplification factor at 0.2 second Fv null -See Section 11.4.8 Site amplification factor at 1.0 second PGA 0.434 MCEG peak ground acceleration FPGA 1.166 Site amplification factor at PGA PGAM 0.506 Site modified peak ground acceleration TL 8 Long-period transition period in seconds SsRT 0.993 Probabilistic risk-targeted ground motion. (0.2 second) SsUH 1.106 Factored uniform-hazard (2% probability of exceedance in 50 years) spectral acceleration SsD 1.5 Factored deterministic acceleration value. (0.2 second) S1RT 0.362 Probabilistic risk-targeted ground motion. (1.0 second) S1UH 0.398 Factored uniform-hazard (2% probability of exceedance in 50 years) spectral acceleration. S1D 0.6 Factored deterministic acceleration value. (1.0 second) PGAd 0.5 Factored deterministic acceleration value. (Peak Ground Acceleration) CRS 0.898 Mapped value of the risk coefficient at short periods CR1 0.91 Mapped value of the risk coefficient at a period of 1 s 2/9/2021 U.S. Seismic Design Maps https://seismicmaps.org 2/2 DISCLAIMER While the information presented on this website is believed to be correct, SEAOC /OSHPD and its sponsors and contributors assume no responsibility or liability for its accuracy. The material presented in this web application should not be used or relied upon for any specific application without competent examination and verification of its accuracy, suitability and applicability by engineers or other licensed professionals. SEAOC / OSHPD do not intend that the use of this information replace the sound judgment of such competent professionals, having experience and knowledge in the field of practice, nor to substitute for the standard of care required of such professionals in interpreting and applying the results of the seismic data provided by this website. Users of the information from this website assume all liability arising from such use. Use of the output of this website does not imply approval by the governing building code bodies responsible for building code approval and interpretation for the building site described by latitude/longitude location in the search results of this website. 2/9/2021 Unified Hazard Tool https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/interactive/1/4 Unied Hazard Tool Input U.S. Geological Survey - Earthquake Hazards Program Please do not use this tool to obtain ground motion parameter values for the design code reference documents covered by the U.S. Seismic Design Maps web tools (e.g., the International Building Code and the ASCE 7 or 41 Standard). The values returned by the two applications are not identical.  Edition Dynamic: Conterminous U.S. 2014 (u… Latitude Decimal degrees 33.1503 Longitude Decimal degrees, negative values for western longitudes -117.3077 Site Class 259 m/s (Site class D) Spectral Period Peak Ground Acceleration Time Horizon Return period in years 2475 2/9/2021 Unified Hazard Tool https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/interactive/2/4 Deaggregation Component Total ε = (-∞ .. -2.5) ε = [-2.5 .. -2) ε = [-2 .. -1.5) ε = [-1.5 .. -1) ε = [-1 .. -0.5) ε = [-0.5 .. 0) ε = [0 .. 0.5) ε = [0.5 .. 1) ε = [1 .. 1.5) ε = [1.5 .. 2) ε = [2 .. 2.5) ε = [2.5 .. +∞) 98.587.5Magnitu de ( M w)76.565.554.5 5 25 45 Clos e s t D i s t a n c e , r R u p ( k m ) 65 85 105 1255% Contribution to Hazard1015205 25 45 65 85 Clos e s t D i s t a n c e , r R u p ( k m ) 105 125 98.587.57 6.5 Magnit u de ( M w)65.554.5 2/9/2021 Unified Hazard Tool https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/interactive/3/4 Summary statistics for, Deaggregation: Total Deaggregation targets Return period:2475 yrs Exceedance rate:0.0004040404 yr⁻¹ PGA ground motion:0.52145171 g Recovered targets Return period:2775.5457 yrs Exceedance rate:0.00036028951 yr⁻¹ Totals Binned:100 % Residual:0 % Trace:0.06 % Mean (over all sources) m:6.68 r:15.68 km ε₀:1.29 σ Mode (largest m-r bin) m:6.9 r:10.36 km ε₀:1 σ Contribution:13.57 % Mode (largest m-r-ε₀ bin) m:6.91 r:9.94 km ε₀:0.89 σ Contribution:7.95 % Discretization r:min = 0.0, max = 1000.0, Δ = 20.0 km m:min = 4.4, max = 9.4, Δ = 0.2 ε:min = -3.0, max = 3.0, Δ = 0.5 σ Epsilon keys ε0:[-∞ .. -2.5) ε1:[-2.5 .. -2.0) ε2:[-2.0 .. -1.5) ε3:[-1.5 .. -1.0) ε4:[-1.0 .. -0.5) ε5:[-0.5 .. 0.0) ε6:[0.0 .. 0.5) ε7:[0.5 .. 1.0) ε8:[1.0 .. 1.5) ε9:[1.5 .. 2.0) ε10:[2.0 .. 2.5) ε11:[2.5 .. +∞] 2/9/2021 Unified Hazard Tool https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/interactive/4/4 Deaggregation Contributors Source Set  Source Type r m ε0 lon lat az % UC33brAvg_FM31 System 35.25 Rose Canyon [18]9.88 6.95 0.94 117.402°W 33.111°N 243.35 18.81 Oceanside alt1 [0]15.73 7.05 1.11 117.596°W 33.057°N 249.00 3.73 Elsinore (Temecula) rev [5]35.03 7.59 1.84 117.008°W 33.341°N 52.65 2.37 Carlsbad [5]14.91 7.19 1.03 117.463°W 33.036°N 228.82 1.89 Rose Canyon [16]11.08 6.61 1.19 117.362°W 33.062°N 207.30 1.43 San Jacinto (Anza) rev [1]74.39 8.11 2.31 116.829°W 33.687°N 36.54 1.15 UC33brAvg_FM32 System 31.25 Rose Canyon [18]9.88 6.98 0.94 117.402°W 33.111°N 243.35 17.87 Elsinore (Temecula) rev [5]35.03 7.62 1.81 117.008°W 33.341°N 52.65 2.50 Oceanside alt2 [6]15.69 7.65 0.76 117.598°W 33.061°N 249.82 1.75 Coronado Bank alt2 [10]35.30 7.53 1.92 117.573°W 32.924°N 224.52 1.19 Carlsbad [5]14.91 6.66 1.37 117.463°W 33.036°N 228.82 1.19 Rose Canyon [16]11.08 6.48 1.28 117.362°W 33.062°N 207.30 1.14 San Jacinto (Anza) rev [1]74.39 8.11 2.32 116.829°W 33.687°N 36.54 1.13 UC33brAvg_FM31 (opt)Grid 16.90 PointSourceFinite: -117.308, 33.200 7.35 5.67 1.10 117.308°W 33.200°N 0.00 3.40 PointSourceFinite: -117.308, 33.200 7.35 5.67 1.10 117.308°W 33.200°N 0.00 3.40 PointSourceFinite: -117.308, 33.254 11.08 6.00 1.41 117.308°W 33.254°N 0.00 1.70 PointSourceFinite: -117.308, 33.254 11.08 6.00 1.41 117.308°W 33.254°N 0.00 1.70 UC33brAvg_FM32 (opt)Grid 16.60 PointSourceFinite: -117.308, 33.200 7.35 5.67 1.10 117.308°W 33.200°N 0.00 3.38 PointSourceFinite: -117.308, 33.200 7.35 5.67 1.10 117.308°W 33.200°N 0.00 3.38 PointSourceFinite: -117.308, 33.254 11.09 6.00 1.41 117.308°W 33.254°N 0.00 1.69 PointSourceFinite: -117.308, 33.254 11.09 6.00 1.41 117.308°W 33.254°N 0.00 1.69 APPENDIX E NMG Geotechnical, Inc. 17991 Fitch Irvine, CA 92614 Overall vertical settlements report Project title : Marja Acres Location : Carlsbad, CA CPTu Name CPT-1 CPT-2 CPT-3 CPT-4 CPT-5 CPT-6 CPT-7 CPT-8 CPT-9 Vertical settlement (in) 0.64 0.62 0.600.580.56 0.54 0.52 0.50 0.48 0.46 0.44 0.42 0.400.380.36 0.34 0.32 0.30 0.28 0.26 0.24 0.220.200.18 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.10 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0.153 0.001 0.001 0 0 0.346 0.107 0.147 0.564 CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software 1 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq NMG Geotechnical, Inc. 17991 Fitch Irvine, CA 92614 Overall Liquefaction Potential Index report Project title : Marja Acres Location : Carlsbad, CA CPTu Name CPT-1 CPT-2 CPT-3 CPT-4 CPT-5 CPT-6 CPT-7 CPT-8 CPT-9 LPI value 17.00 16.00 15.00 14.00 13.00 12.00 11.00 10.00 9.00 8.00 7.00 6.00 5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 0.00 1.057 0 0.008 0 0 1.88 0.542 0.605 2.819 LPI color scheme Very high risk High risk Low risk Basic statistics Total CPT number: 9 100.00% low risk 0.00% high risk 0.00% very high risk CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software 1 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value 7.000.51 . G.W.T. (in-situ):G.W.T. (earthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Project title : Marja Acres Location : Carlsbad, CA NMG Geotechnical, Inc. 17991 Fitch Irvine, CA 92614 CPT file : CPT-1 14.00 ft25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Use fill:Fill height: Fill weight:Trans. detect. applied:Kσ applied: Yes15.00 ft 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Clay like behaviorapplied:Limit depth applied: Limit depth:MSF method: Sands onlyNo N/AMethod based Cone resistance qt (tsf)400200 Depth (ft) 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SBTn Plot CRR plot FILL CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cyclic Stress Ratio* (CSR*) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 Normalized CPT penetration resistance 1 10 100 1,000 Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction Ratio Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot Factor of safety21.510.50 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loadingZone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground geometryZone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softeningZone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity,brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:15 AM Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq 1 This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-1 Cone resistance qt (tsf)400200 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34333231302928272625 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3210 Cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 363534 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 171615 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 10 Friction Ratio Pore pressure u (psi)1050 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34333231302928272625 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3210 Pore pressure Insitu SBT Plot Ic(SBT)4321 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 363534 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 171615 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 10 SBT Plot Soil Behaviour Type SBT (Robertson et al. 1986)1817161514131211109876543210 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34333231302928272625 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3210 Soil Behaviour Type SandClay & silty clayClaySilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy silt Clay Clay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClay & silty clay Clay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltClayClay Clay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soil CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:15 AM 2 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A SBT legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to siltyclay5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand toclayey sand9. Very stiff fine grained This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-1 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34333231302928272625 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3210 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Fr (%)1086420 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34333231302928272625 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3210 Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio Bq 10.80.60.40.20-0.2 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34333231302928272625 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3210 Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 363534 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 171615 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 10 SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type SBTn (Robertson 1990)1817161514131211109876543210 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34333231302928272625 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3210 Norm. Soil Behaviour Type SandSilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clayClay & silty claySand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltClayClay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClaySilty sand & sandy siltClayClay Silty sand & sandy siltClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy silt Clay Clay & silty claySilty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soil CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:15 AM 3 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq SBTn legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to siltyclay5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand toclayey sand9. Very stiff fine grained Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-1 Total cone resistance qt (tsf)400300200100 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34333231302928272625 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3210 Total cone resistance Liquefaction analysis overall plots (intermediate results) SBTn Index Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 363534 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 171615 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 10 SBTn Index Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34333231302928272625 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3210 Norm. cone resistance Grain char. factor Kc 109876543210 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34333231302928272625 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3210 Grain char. factor Corrected norm. cone resistance Qtn,cs 200150100500 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34333231302928272625 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3210Corrected norm. cone resistance CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:15 AM 4 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-1 CRR plot FILL CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34333231302928272625 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3210 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34333231302928272625 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3210 FS Plot During earthq. LPI Liquefaction potential20151050 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34333231302928272625 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3210 LPI Vertical settlements FILL Settlement (in)0.150.10.050 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34333231302928272625 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3210 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements FILL Displacement (in)0 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34333231302928272625 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3210 Lateral displacements CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:15 AM 5 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-1 Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 Normalized CPT penetration resistance 1 10 100 1,000 Liquefaction analysis summary plots Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cyclic Stress Ratio* (CSR*) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Thickness of surface layer, H1 (m)109876543210 Thickness of liquefiable sand layer, H2 (m) 12.0 11.0 10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 Analysis PGA: 0.51 PGA 0.40g - 0.50g CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:15 AM 6 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-1 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 6004002000 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34333231302928272625 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3210 Norm. cone resistance Check for strength loss plots (Robertson (2010)) Grain char. factor Kc 109876543210 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34333231302928272625 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3210 Grain char. factor Corrected norm. cone resistance Qtn,cs 200150100500 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34333231302928272625 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3210Corrected norm. cone resistance SBTn Index Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 363534 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 171615 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 10 SBTn Index Liquefied Su/Sig'v Su/Sig'v 0.50.40.30.20.10 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34333231302928272625 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3210 Peak Su ratio Liq. Su ratio Liquefied Su/Sig'v CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:15 AM 7 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value 7.000.51 . G.W.T. (in-situ):G.W.T. (earthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Project title : Marja Acres Location : Carlsbad, CA NMG Geotechnical, Inc. 17991 Fitch Irvine, CA 92614 CPT file : CPT-2 14.00 ft25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Use fill:Fill height: Fill weight:Trans. detect. applied:Kσ applied: Yes15.00 ft 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Clay like behaviorapplied:Limit depth applied: Limit depth:MSF method: Sands onlyNo N/AMethod based Cone resistance qt (tsf)400200 Depth (ft) 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Cone resistance SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 SBTn Plot CRR plot FILL CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 CRR plot During earthq. Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cyclic Stress Ratio* (CSR*) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 Normalized CPT penetration resistance 1 10 100 1,000 Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Friction Ratio Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot Factor of safety21.510.50 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 FS Plot During earthq. Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loadingZone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground geometryZone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softeningZone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity,brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:17 AM Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq 75 This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-2 Cone resistance qt (tsf)400200 Depth (ft) 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 Depth (ft) 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Friction Ratio Pore pressure u (psi)50-5-10 Depth (ft) 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Pore pressure Insitu SBT Plot Ic(SBT)4321 Depth (ft) 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 SBT Plot Soil Behaviour Type SBT (Robertson et al. 1986)1817161514131211109876543210 Depth (ft) 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Soil Behaviour Type ClaySilty sand & sandy silt Clay Clay & silty clayClaySilty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soilSand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:17 AM 76 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A SBT legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to siltyclay5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand toclayey sand9. Very stiff fine grained This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-2 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 Depth (ft) 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Fr (%)1086420 Depth (ft) 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio Bq 10.80.60.40.20-0.2 Depth (ft) 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 Depth (ft) 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type SBTn (Robertson 1990)1817161514131211109876543210 Depth (ft) 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Norm. Soil Behaviour Type ClaySilty sand & sandy silt Clay Clay & silty clayClay Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy siltClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soilSand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:17 AM 77 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq SBTn legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to siltyclay5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand toclayey sand9. Very stiff fine grained Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-2 Total cone resistance qt (tsf)400300200100 Depth (ft) 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Total cone resistance Liquefaction analysis overall plots (intermediate results) SBTn Index Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 Depth (ft) 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 SBTn Index Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 Depth (ft) 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Norm. cone resistance Grain char. factor Kc 109876543210 Depth (ft) 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Grain char. factor Corrected norm. cone resistance Qtn,cs 200150100500 Depth (ft) 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0Corrected norm. cone resistance CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:17 AM 78 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-2 CRR plot FILL CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 Depth (ft) 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 Depth (ft) 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 FS Plot During earthq. LPI Liquefaction potential20151050 Depth (ft) 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 LPI Vertical settlements FILL Settlement (in)0.0010.0010.0000.0000 Depth (ft) 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements FILL Displacement (in)0 Depth (ft) 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:17 AM 79 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-2 Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 Normalized CPT penetration resistance 1 10 100 1,000 Liquefaction analysis summary plots Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cyclic Stress Ratio* (CSR*) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Thickness of surface layer, H1 (m)109876543210 Thickness of liquefiable sand layer, H2 (m) 12.0 11.0 10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 Analysis PGA: 0.51 PGA 0.40g - 0.50g CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:17 AM 80 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-2 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 3002001000 Depth (ft) 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Norm. cone resistance Check for strength loss plots (Robertson (2010)) Grain char. factor Kc 109876543210 Depth (ft) 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Grain char. factor Corrected norm. cone resistance Qtn,cs 200150100500 Depth (ft) 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0Corrected norm. cone resistance SBTn Index Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 Depth (ft) 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 SBTn Index Liquefied Su/Sig'v Su/Sig'v 0.50.40.30.20.10 Depth (ft) 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Peak Su ratio Liq. Su ratio Liquefied Su/Sig'v CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:17 AM 81 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value 7.000.51 . G.W.T. (in-situ):G.W.T. (earthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Project title : Marja Acres Location : Carlsbad, CA NMG Geotechnical, Inc. 17991 Fitch Irvine, CA 92614 CPT file : CPT-3 14.00 ft25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Use fill:Fill height: Fill weight:Trans. detect. applied:Kσ applied: Yes15.00 ft 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Clay like behaviorapplied:Limit depth applied: Limit depth:MSF method: Sands onlyNo N/AMethod based Cone resistance qt (tsf)10050 Depth (ft) 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SBTn Plot CRR plot FILL CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cyclic Stress Ratio* (CSR*) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 Normalized CPT penetration resistance 1 10 100 1,000 Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction Ratio Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot Factor of safety21.510.50 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loadingZone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground geometryZone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softeningZone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity,brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:19 AM Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq 129 This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-3 Cone resistance qt (tsf)10050 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 876543210 Cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 Depth (ft) 4039383736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 222120191817 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3210 Friction Ratio Pore pressure u (psi)1050 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 876543210 Pore pressure Insitu SBT Plot Ic(SBT)4321 Depth (ft) 4039383736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 222120191817 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3210 SBT Plot Soil Behaviour Type SBT (Robertson et al. 1986)1817161514131211109876543210 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 876543210 Soil Behaviour Type ClaySilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clayClay & silty clay ClayClay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clayClay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clayClayClay ClayClay & silty clay ClayClay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClay & silty clay CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:19 AM 130 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A SBT legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to siltyclay5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand toclayey sand9. Very stiff fine grained This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-3 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 876543210 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Fr (%)1086420 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 876543210 Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio Bq 10.80.60.40.20-0.2 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 876543210 Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 Depth (ft) 4039383736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 222120191817 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3210 SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type SBTn (Robertson 1990)1817161514131211109876543210 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 876543210 Norm. Soil Behaviour Type Clay & silty clayClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClayClay Sand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clayClayClay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClayClay & silty clay CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:19 AM 131 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq SBTn legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to siltyclay5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand toclayey sand9. Very stiff fine grained Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-3 Total cone resistance qt (tsf)80604020 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 876543210 Total cone resistance Liquefaction analysis overall plots (intermediate results) SBTn Index Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 Depth (ft) 4039383736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 222120191817 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3210 SBTn Index Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 876543210 Norm. cone resistance Grain char. factor Kc 109876543210 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 876543210 Grain char. factor Corrected norm. cone resistance Qtn,cs 200150100500 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 876543210Corrected norm. cone resistance CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:19 AM 132 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-3 CRR plot FILL CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 876543210 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 876543210 FS Plot During earthq. LPI Liquefaction potential20151050 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 876543210 LPI Vertical settlements FILL Settlement (in)0.0010.0010.0010.0000.0000 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 876543210 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements FILL Displacement (in)0 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 876543210 Lateral displacements CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:19 AM 133 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-3 Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 Normalized CPT penetration resistance 1 10 100 1,000 Liquefaction analysis summary plots Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cyclic Stress Ratio* (CSR*) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Thickness of surface layer, H1 (m)109876543210 Thickness of liquefiable sand layer, H2 (m) 12.0 11.0 10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 Analysis PGA: 0.51 PGA 0.40g - 0.50g CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:19 AM 134 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-3 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 100806040200 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 876543210 Norm. cone resistance Check for strength loss plots (Robertson (2010)) Grain char. factor Kc 109876543210 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 876543210 Grain char. factor Corrected norm. cone resistance Qtn,cs 200150100500 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 876543210Corrected norm. cone resistance SBTn Index Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 Depth (ft) 4039383736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 222120191817 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3210 SBTn Index Liquefied Su/Sig'v Su/Sig'v 0.50.40.30.20.10 Depth (ft) 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 876543210 Peak Su ratio Liq. Su ratio Liquefied Su/Sig'v CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:19 AM 135 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value 7.000.51 . G.W.T. (in-situ):G.W.T. (earthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Project title : Marja Acres Location : Carlsbad, CA NMG Geotechnical, Inc. 17991 Fitch Irvine, CA 92614 CPT file : CPT-4 14.00 ft25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Use fill:Fill height: Fill weight:Trans. detect. applied:Kσ applied: Yes15.00 ft 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Clay like behaviorapplied:Limit depth applied: Limit depth:MSF method: Sands onlyNo N/AMethod based Cone resistance qt (tsf)2001000 Depth (ft) 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Cone resistance SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 SBTn Plot CRR plot FILL CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 CRR plot During earthq. Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cyclic Stress Ratio* (CSR*) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 Normalized CPT penetration resistance 1 10 100 1,000 Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Friction Ratio Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot Factor of safety21.510.50 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 FS Plot During earthq. Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loadingZone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground geometryZone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softeningZone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity,brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:21 AM Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq 203 This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-4 Cone resistance qt (tsf)2001000 Depth (ft) 2019.519 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 87.576.565.55 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 Cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 Depth (ft) 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 1615.51514.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.587.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 4 3.5 32.521.5 1 0.5 Friction Ratio Pore pressure u (psi)210 Depth (ft) 2019.519 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 87.576.565.55 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 Pore pressure Insitu SBT Plot Ic(SBT)4321 Depth (ft) 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 1615.51514.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.587.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 4 3.5 32.521.5 1 0.5 SBT Plot Soil Behaviour Type SBT (Robertson et al. 1986)1817161514131211109876543210 Depth (ft) 2019.519 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 87.576.565.55 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 Soil Behaviour Type Clay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clayClayClay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:21 AM 204 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A SBT legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to siltyclay5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand toclayey sand9. Very stiff fine grained This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-4 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 Depth (ft) 2019.519 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 87.576.565.55 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Fr (%)1086420 Depth (ft) 2019.519 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 87.576.565.55 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio Bq 10.80.60.40.20-0.2 Depth (ft) 2019.519 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 87.576.565.55 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 Depth (ft) 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 1615.51514.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.587.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 4 3.5 32.521.5 1 0.5 SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type SBTn (Robertson 1990)1817161514131211109876543210 Depth (ft) 2019.519 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 87.576.565.55 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 Norm. Soil Behaviour Type Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sandClay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Very dense/stiff soilClay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay Organic soil Clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:21 AM 205 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq SBTn legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to siltyclay5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand toclayey sand9. Very stiff fine grained Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-4 Total cone resistance qt (tsf)200100 Depth (ft) 2019.519 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 87.576.565.55 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 Total cone resistance Liquefaction analysis overall plots (intermediate results) SBTn Index Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 Depth (ft) 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 1615.51514.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.587.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 4 3.5 32.521.5 1 0.5 SBTn Index Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 Depth (ft) 2019.519 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 87.576.565.55 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 Norm. cone resistance Grain char. factor Kc 109876543210 Depth (ft) 2019.519 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 87.576.565.55 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 Grain char. factor Corrected norm. cone resistance Qtn,cs 200150100500 Depth (ft) 2019.519 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 87.576.565.55 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 Corrected norm. cone resistance CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:21 AM 206 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-4 CRR plot FILL CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 Depth (ft) 2019.519 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 87.576.565.55 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety21.510.50 Depth (ft) 2019.519 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 87.576.565.55 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 FS Plot During earthq. LPI Liquefaction potential20151050 Depth (ft) 2019.519 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 87.576.565.55 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 LPI Vertical settlements FILL Settlement (in)0 Depth (ft) 2019.519 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 87.576.565.55 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements FILL Displacement (in)0 Depth (ft) 2019.519 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 87.576.565.55 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 Lateral displacements CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:21 AM 207 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-4 Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 Normalized CPT penetration resistance 1 10 100 1,000 Liquefaction analysis summary plots Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cyclic Stress Ratio* (CSR*) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Thickness of surface layer, H1 (m)109876543210 Thickness of liquefiable sand layer, H2 (m) 12.0 11.0 10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 Analysis PGA: 0.51 PGA 0.40g - 0.50g CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:21 AM 208 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-4 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 3002001000 Depth (ft) 2019.519 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 87.576.565.55 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 Norm. cone resistance Check for strength loss plots (Robertson (2010)) Grain char. factor Kc 109876543210 Depth (ft) 2019.519 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 87.576.565.55 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 Grain char. factor Corrected norm. cone resistance Qtn,cs 200150100500 Depth (ft) 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Corrected norm. cone resistance SBTn Index Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 Depth (ft) 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 1615.51514.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.587.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 4 3.5 32.521.5 1 0.5 SBTn Index Liquefied Su/Sig'v Su/Sig'v 0.50.40.30.20.10 Depth (ft) 2019.519 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 87.576.565.55 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 Peak Su ratio Liq. Su ratio Liquefied Su/Sig'v CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:21 AM 209 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value 7.000.51 . G.W.T. (in-situ):G.W.T. (earthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Project title : Marja Acres Location : Carlsbad, CA NMG Geotechnical, Inc. 17991 Fitch Irvine, CA 92614 CPT file : CPT-5 14.00 ft25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Use fill:Fill height: Fill weight:Trans. detect. applied:Kσ applied: Yes15.00 ft 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Clay like behaviorapplied:Limit depth applied: Limit depth:MSF method: Sands onlyNo N/AMethod based Cone resistance qt (tsf)4020 Depth (ft) 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Cone resistance SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 SBTn Plot CRR plot FILL CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 CRR plot During earthq. Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cyclic Stress Ratio* (CSR*) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 Normalized CPT penetration resistance 1 10 100 1,000 Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Friction Ratio Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot Factor of safety21.510.50 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 FS Plot During earthq. Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loadingZone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground geometryZone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softeningZone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity,brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:22 AM Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq 247 This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-5 Cone resistance qt (tsf)5040302010 Depth (ft) 2019.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 87.576.565.554.543.532.521.51 0.5 0 Cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 Depth (ft) 19.519 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 1514.51413.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 21.510.5 0 Friction Ratio Pore pressure u (psi)210 Depth (ft) 2019.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 87.576.565.554.543.532.521.51 0.5 0 Pore pressure Insitu SBT Plot Ic(SBT)4321 Depth (ft) 19.519 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 1514.51413.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 21.510.5 0 SBT Plot Soil Behaviour Type SBT (Robertson et al. 1986)1817161514131211109876543210 Depth (ft) 2019.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 87.576.565.554.543.532.521.51 0.5 0 Soil Behaviour Type Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay ClayClay & silty clay Clay & silty clayClaySilty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clayClay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:22 AM 248 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A SBT legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to siltyclay5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand toclayey sand9. Very stiff fine grained This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-5 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 Depth (ft) 2019.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 87.576.565.554.543.532.521.51 0.5 0 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Fr (%)1086420 Depth (ft) 2019.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 87.576.565.554.543.532.521.51 0.5 0 Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio Bq 10.80.60.40.20-0.2 Depth (ft) 2019.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 87.576.565.554.543.532.521.51 0.5 0 Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 Depth (ft) 19.519 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 1514.51413.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 21.510.5 0 SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type SBTn (Robertson 1990)1817161514131211109876543210 Depth (ft) 2019.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 87.576.565.554.543.532.521.51 0.5 0 Norm. Soil Behaviour Type Silty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clayClayClay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty claySilty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clayClay Clay CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:22 AM 249 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq SBTn legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to siltyclay5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand toclayey sand9. Very stiff fine grained Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-5 Total cone resistance qt (tsf)5040302010 Depth (ft) 2019.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 87.576.565.554.543.532.521.51 0.5 0 Total cone resistance Liquefaction analysis overall plots (intermediate results) SBTn Index Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 Depth (ft) 19.519 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 1514.51413.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 21.510.5 0 SBTn Index Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 Depth (ft) 2019.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 87.576.565.554.543.532.521.51 0.5 0 Norm. cone resistance Grain char. factor Kc 109876543210 Depth (ft) 2019.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 87.576.565.554.543.532.521.51 0.5 0 Grain char. factor Corrected norm. cone resistance Qtn,cs 200150100500 Depth (ft) 2019.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 87.576.565.554.543.532.521.51 0.5 0Corrected norm. cone resistance CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:22 AM 250 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-5 CRR plot FILL CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 Depth (ft) 2019.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 87.576.565.554.543.532.521.51 0.5 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety21.510.50 Depth (ft) 2019.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 87.576.565.554.543.532.521.51 0.5 0 FS Plot During earthq. LPI Liquefaction potential20151050 Depth (ft) 2019.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 87.576.565.554.543.532.521.51 0.5 0 LPI Vertical settlements FILL Settlement (in)0 Depth (ft) 2019.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 87.576.565.554.543.532.521.51 0.5 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements FILL Displacement (in)0 Depth (ft) 2019.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 87.576.565.554.543.532.521.51 0.5 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:22 AM 251 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-5 Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 Normalized CPT penetration resistance 1 10 100 1,000 Liquefaction analysis summary plots Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cyclic Stress Ratio* (CSR*) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Thickness of surface layer, H1 (m)109876543210 Thickness of liquefiable sand layer, H2 (m) 12.0 11.0 10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 Analysis PGA: 0.51 PGA 0.40g - 0.50g CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:22 AM 252 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-5 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 806040200 Depth (ft) 2019.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 87.576.565.554.543.532.521.51 0.5 0 Norm. cone resistance Check for strength loss plots (Robertson (2010)) Grain char. factor Kc 109876543210 Depth (ft) 2019.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 87.576.565.554.543.532.521.51 0.5 0 Grain char. factor Corrected norm. cone resistance Qtn,cs 200150100500 Depth (ft) 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0Corrected norm. cone resistance SBTn Index Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 Depth (ft) 19.519 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 1514.51413.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 21.510.5 0 SBTn Index Liquefied Su/Sig'v Su/Sig'v 0.50.40.30.20.10 Depth (ft) 2019.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 87.576.565.554.543.532.521.51 0.5 0 Peak Su ratio Liq. Su ratio Liquefied Su/Sig'v CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:22 AM 253 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value 7.000.51 . G.W.T. (in-situ):G.W.T. (earthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Project title : Marja Acres Location : Carlsbad, CA NMG Geotechnical, Inc. 17991 Fitch Irvine, CA 92614 CPT file : CPT-6 14.00 ft25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Use fill:Fill height: Fill weight:Trans. detect. applied:Kσ applied: Yes15.00 ft 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Clay like behaviorapplied:Limit depth applied: Limit depth:MSF method: Sands onlyNo N/AMethod based Cone resistance qt (tsf)604020 Depth (ft) 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Cone resistance SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 SBTn Plot CRR plot FILL CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 CRR plot During earthq. Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cyclic Stress Ratio* (CSR*) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 Normalized CPT penetration resistance 1 10 100 1,000 Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Friction Ratio Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot Factor of safety21.510.50 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 FS Plot During earthq. Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loadingZone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground geometryZone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softeningZone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity,brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:24 AM Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq 291 This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-6 Cone resistance qt (tsf)604020 Depth (ft) 20 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.576.565.55 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 Cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 Depth (ft) 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.51514.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.587.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 4 3.5 32.521.5 1 0.5 Friction Ratio Pore pressure u (psi)210-1 Depth (ft) 20 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.576.565.55 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 Pore pressure Insitu SBT Plot Ic(SBT)4321 Depth (ft) 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.51514.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.587.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 4 3.5 32.521.5 1 0.5 SBT Plot Soil Behaviour Type SBT (Robertson et al. 1986)1817161514131211109876543210 Depth (ft) 20 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.576.565.55 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 Soil Behaviour Type Clay & silty clayClay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clayClay & silty claySand & silty sandClay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clayClay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:24 AM 292 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A SBT legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to siltyclay5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand toclayey sand9. Very stiff fine grained This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-6 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 Depth (ft) 20 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.576.565.55 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Fr (%)1086420 Depth (ft) 20 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.576.565.55 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio Bq 10.80.60.40.20-0.2 Depth (ft) 20 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.576.565.55 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 Depth (ft) 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.51514.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.587.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 4 3.5 32.521.5 1 0.5 SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type SBTn (Robertson 1990)1817161514131211109876543210 Depth (ft) 20 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.576.565.55 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 Norm. Soil Behaviour Type Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Clay Clay & silty claySilty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Clay & silty clayClaySilty sand & sandy silt Clay Clay & silty clayClay & silty clayClay & silty clayClay Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:24 AM 293 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq SBTn legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to siltyclay5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand toclayey sand9. Very stiff fine grained Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-6 Total cone resistance qt (tsf)604020 Depth (ft) 20 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.576.565.55 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 Total cone resistance Liquefaction analysis overall plots (intermediate results) SBTn Index Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 Depth (ft) 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.51514.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.587.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 4 3.5 32.521.5 1 0.5 SBTn Index Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 Depth (ft) 20 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.576.565.55 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 Norm. cone resistance Grain char. factor Kc 109876543210 Depth (ft) 20 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.576.565.55 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 Grain char. factor Corrected norm. cone resistance Qtn,cs 200150100500 Depth (ft) 20 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.576.565.55 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 Corrected norm. cone resistance CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:24 AM 294 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-6 CRR plot FILL CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 Depth (ft) 20 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.576.565.55 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety21.510.50 Depth (ft) 20 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.576.565.55 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 FS Plot During earthq. LPI Liquefaction potential20151050 Depth (ft) 20 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.576.565.55 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 LPI Vertical settlements FILL Settlement (in)0.30.20.10 Depth (ft) 20 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.576.565.55 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements FILL Displacement (in)0 Depth (ft) 20 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.576.565.55 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 Lateral displacements CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:24 AM 295 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-6 Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 Normalized CPT penetration resistance 1 10 100 1,000 Liquefaction analysis summary plots Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cyclic Stress Ratio* (CSR*) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Thickness of surface layer, H1 (m)109876543210 Thickness of liquefiable sand layer, H2 (m) 12.0 11.0 10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 Analysis PGA: 0.51 PGA 0.40g - 0.50g CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:24 AM 296 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-6 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 806040200 Depth (ft) 20 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.576.565.55 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 Norm. cone resistance Check for strength loss plots (Robertson (2010)) Grain char. factor Kc 109876543210 Depth (ft) 20 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.576.565.55 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 Grain char. factor Corrected norm. cone resistance Qtn,cs 200150100500 Depth (ft) 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Corrected norm. cone resistance SBTn Index Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 Depth (ft) 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.51514.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.587.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 4 3.5 32.521.5 1 0.5 SBTn Index Liquefied Su/Sig'v Su/Sig'v 0.50.40.30.20.10 Depth (ft) 20 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.5 11 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.576.565.55 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 Peak Su ratio Liq. Su ratio Liquefied Su/Sig'v CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:24 AM 297 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value 7.000.51 . G.W.T. (in-situ):G.W.T. (earthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Project title : Marja Acres Location : Carlsbad, CA NMG Geotechnical, Inc. 17991 Fitch Irvine, CA 92614 CPT file : CPT-7 14.00 ft25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Use fill:Fill height: Fill weight:Trans. detect. applied:Kσ applied: Yes15.00 ft 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Clay like behaviorapplied:Limit depth applied: Limit depth:MSF method: Sands onlyNo N/AMethod based Cone resistance qt (tsf)4002000 Depth (ft) 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SBTn Plot CRR plot FILL CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cyclic Stress Ratio* (CSR*) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 Normalized CPT penetration resistance 1 10 100 1,000 Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction Ratio Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot Factor of safety21.510.50 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loadingZone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground geometryZone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softeningZone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity,brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:25 AM Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq 335 This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-7 Cone resistance qt (tsf)4002000 Depth (ft) 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 Depth (ft) 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Friction Ratio Pore pressure u (psi)50-5 Depth (ft) 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Pore pressure Insitu SBT Plot Ic(SBT)4321 Depth (ft) 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 SBT Plot Soil Behaviour Type SBT (Robertson et al. 1986)1817161514131211109876543210 Depth (ft) 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Soil Behaviour Type Silty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clay Clay & silty clay ClayClay & silty clay Clay Organic soil Clay Clay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClay Sand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltClay Clay Clay Clay & silty clayClay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soilSand & silty sandVery dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Very dense/stiff soilSand & silty sandSand & silty sand CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:25 AM 336 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A SBT legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to siltyclay5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand toclayey sand9. Very stiff fine grained This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-7 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 Depth (ft) 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Fr (%)1086420 Depth (ft) 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio Bq 10.80.60.40.20-0.2 Depth (ft) 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 Depth (ft) 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type SBTn (Robertson 1990)1817161514131211109876543210 Depth (ft) 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Norm. Soil Behaviour Type Silty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltClayClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltClayClay & silty clayClayClayClay & silty clay Clay Organic soil Clay Clay & silty clayClayClay & silty clayClay Sand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltClay Clay Clay & silty clayClay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soilSand & silty sandVery dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sandVery dense/stiff soilSand & silty sandSand & silty sand CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:25 AM 337 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq SBTn legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to siltyclay5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand toclayey sand9. Very stiff fine grained Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-7 Total cone resistance qt (tsf)5004003002001000 Depth (ft) 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Total cone resistance Liquefaction analysis overall plots (intermediate results) SBTn Index Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 Depth (ft) 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 SBTn Index Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 Depth (ft) 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Norm. cone resistance Grain char. factor Kc 109876543210 Depth (ft) 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Grain char. factor Corrected norm. cone resistance Qtn,cs 200150100500 Depth (ft) 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0Corrected norm. cone resistance CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:25 AM 338 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-7 CRR plot FILL CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 Depth (ft) 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 Depth (ft) 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 FS Plot During earthq. LPI Liquefaction potential20151050 Depth (ft) 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 LPI Vertical settlements FILL Settlement (in)0.10.080.060.040.020 Depth (ft) 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements FILL Displacement (in)0 Depth (ft) 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:25 AM 339 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-7 Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 Normalized CPT penetration resistance 1 10 100 1,000 Liquefaction analysis summary plots Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cyclic Stress Ratio* (CSR*) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Thickness of surface layer, H1 (m)109876543210 Thickness of liquefiable sand layer, H2 (m) 12.0 11.0 10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 Analysis PGA: 0.51 PGA 0.40g - 0.50g CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:25 AM 340 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-7 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 4003002001000 Depth (ft) 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Norm. cone resistance Check for strength loss plots (Robertson (2010)) Grain char. factor Kc 109876543210 Depth (ft) 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Grain char. factor Corrected norm. cone resistance Qtn,cs 200150100500 Depth (ft) 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0Corrected norm. cone resistance SBTn Index Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 Depth (ft) 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 SBTn Index Liquefied Su/Sig'v Su/Sig'v 0.50.40.30.20.10 Depth (ft) 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Peak Su ratio Liq. Su ratio Liquefied Su/Sig'v CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:25 AM 341 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value 7.000.51 . G.W.T. (in-situ):G.W.T. (earthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Project title : Marja Acres Location : Carlsbad, CA NMG Geotechnical, Inc. 17991 Fitch Irvine, CA 92614 CPT file : CPT-8 14.00 ft25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Use fill:Fill height: Fill weight:Trans. detect. applied:Kσ applied: Yes15.00 ft 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Clay like behaviorapplied:Limit depth applied: Limit depth:MSF method: Sands onlyNo N/AMethod based Cone resistance qt (tsf)200100 Depth (ft) 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Cone resistance SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 SBTn Plot CRR plot FILL CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 CRR plot During earthq. Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cyclic Stress Ratio* (CSR*) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 Normalized CPT penetration resistance 1 10 100 1,000 Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Friction Ratio Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot Factor of safety21.510.50 40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 FS Plot During earthq. Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loadingZone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground geometryZone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softeningZone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity,brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:27 AM Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq 399 This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-8 Cone resistance qt (tsf)200100 Depth (ft) 4039383736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9876543210 Cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 Depth (ft) 4039383736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22212019181716 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3210 Friction Ratio Pore pressure u (psi)1050 Depth (ft) 4039383736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9876543210 Pore pressure Insitu SBT Plot Ic(SBT)4321 Depth (ft) 4039383736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22212019181716 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3210 SBT Plot Soil Behaviour Type SBT (Robertson et al. 1986)1817161514131211109876543210 Depth (ft) 4039383736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9876543210 Soil Behaviour Type Clay Clay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy silt Clay Clay & silty clayClay & silty clay Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clayClayVery dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soilClay & silty claySand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay ClaySilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clay Sand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy siltSilty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clay CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:27 AM 400 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A SBT legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to siltyclay5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand toclayey sand9. Very stiff fine grained This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-8 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 Depth (ft) 4039383736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9876543210 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Fr (%)1086420 Depth (ft) 4039383736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9876543210 Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio Bq 10.80.60.40.20-0.2 Depth (ft) 4039383736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9876543210 Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 Depth (ft) 4039383736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22212019181716 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3210 SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type SBTn (Robertson 1990)1817161514131211109876543210 Depth (ft) 4039383736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9876543210 Norm. Soil Behaviour Type Clay & silty clayClay Very dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy silt Clay & silty clayClayVery dense/stiff soil Very dense/stiff soilClay & silty claySand & silty sandSilty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clay ClayClay ClaySilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clayClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy silt Silty sand & sandy siltClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty claySand & silty sandClaySilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clay CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:27 AM 401 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq SBTn legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to siltyclay5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand toclayey sand9. Very stiff fine grained Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-8 Total cone resistance qt (tsf)20015010050 Depth (ft) 4039383736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9876543210 Total cone resistance Liquefaction analysis overall plots (intermediate results) SBTn Index Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 Depth (ft) 4039383736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22212019181716 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3210 SBTn Index Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 Depth (ft) 4039383736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9876543210 Norm. cone resistance Grain char. factor Kc 109876543210 Depth (ft) 4039383736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9876543210 Grain char. factor Corrected norm. cone resistance Qtn,cs 200150100500 Depth (ft) 4039383736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9876543210Corrected norm. cone resistance CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:27 AM 402 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-8 CRR plot FILL CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 Depth (ft) 4039383736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9876543210 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety 21.510.50 Depth (ft) 4039383736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9876543210 FS Plot During earthq. LPI Liquefaction potential20151050 Depth (ft) 4039383736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9876543210 LPI Vertical settlements FILL Settlement (in)0.150.10.050 Depth (ft) 4039383736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9876543210 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements FILL Displacement (in)0 Depth (ft) 4039383736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9876543210 Lateral displacements CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:27 AM 403 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-8 Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 Normalized CPT penetration resistance 1 10 100 1,000 Liquefaction analysis summary plots Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cyclic Stress Ratio* (CSR*) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Thickness of surface layer, H1 (m)109876543210 Thickness of liquefiable sand layer, H2 (m) 12.0 11.0 10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 Analysis PGA: 0.51 PGA 0.40g - 0.50g CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:27 AM 404 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-8 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 Depth (ft) 4039383736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9876543210 Norm. cone resistance Check for strength loss plots (Robertson (2010)) Grain char. factor Kc 109876543210 Depth (ft) 4039383736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9876543210 Grain char. factor Corrected norm. cone resistance Qtn,cs 200150100500 Depth (ft) 4039383736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9876543210Corrected norm. cone resistance SBTn Index Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 Depth (ft) 4039383736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22212019181716 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3210 SBTn Index Liquefied Su/Sig'v Su/Sig'v 0.50.40.30.20.10 Depth (ft) 4039383736 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9876543210 Peak Su ratio Liq. Su ratio Liquefied Su/Sig'v CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:27 AM 405 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS REPORT Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method:Fines correction method: Points to test:Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration: NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998)Based on Ic value 7.000.51 . G.W.T. (in-situ):G.W.T. (earthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Project title : Marja Acres Location : Carlsbad, CA NMG Geotechnical, Inc. 17991 Fitch Irvine, CA 92614 CPT file : CPT-9 14.00 ft25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Use fill:Fill height: Fill weight:Trans. detect. applied:Kσ applied: Yes15.00 ft 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Clay like behaviorapplied:Limit depth applied: Limit depth:MSF method: Sands onlyNo N/AMethod based Cone resistance qt (tsf)10050 Depth (ft) 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Cone resistance SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 SBTn Plot CRR plot FILL CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 CRR plot During earthq. Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cyclic Stress Ratio* (CSR*) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 Normalized CPT penetration resistance 1 10 100 1,000 Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Friction Ratio Mw=71/2, sigma'=1 atm base curve Summary of liquefaction potential FS Plot Factor of safety21.510.50 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 FS Plot During earthq. Zone A1: Cyclic liquefaction likely depending on size and duration of cyclic loadingZone A2: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss likely depending on loading and ground geometryZone B: Liquefaction and post-earthquake strength loss unlikely, check cyclic softeningZone C: Cyclic liquefaction and strength loss possible depending on soil plasticity,brittleness/sensitivity, strain to peak undrained strength and ground geometry CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:29 AM Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq 473 This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-9 Cone resistance qt (tsf)10050 Depth (ft) 20 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.51312.51211.511 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 43.532.521.5 1 0.5 0 Cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots Friction Ratio Rf (%)1086420 Depth (ft) 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.51716.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.511 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.576.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 21.51 0.5 0 Friction Ratio Pore pressure u (psi)210-1 Depth (ft) 20 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.51312.51211.511 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 43.532.521.5 1 0.5 0 Pore pressure Insitu SBT Plot Ic(SBT)4321 Depth (ft) 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.51716.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.511 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.576.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 21.51 0.5 0 SBT Plot Soil Behaviour Type SBT (Robertson et al. 1986)1817161514131211109876543210 Depth (ft) 20 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.51312.51211.511 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 43.532.521.5 1 0.5 0 Soil Behaviour Type Silty sand & sandy siltClay & silty claySilty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sand Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clayVery dense/stiff soil Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soil Clay Clay & silty clayClayClay & silty clay Clay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltClay & silty clay Silty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sand CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:29 AM 474 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A SBT legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to siltyclay5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand toclayey sand9. Very stiff fine grained This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-9 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 Depth (ft) 20 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.51312.51211.511 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 43.532.521.5 1 0.5 0 Norm. cone resistance CPT basic interpretation plots (normalized) Norm. friction ratio Fr (%)1086420 Depth (ft) 20 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.51312.51211.511 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 43.532.521.5 1 0.5 0 Norm. friction ratio Nom. pore pressure ratio Bq 10.80.60.40.20-0.2 Depth (ft) 20 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.51312.51211.511 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 43.532.521.5 1 0.5 0 Nom. pore pressure ratio SBTn Plot Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 Depth (ft) 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.51716.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.511 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.576.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 21.51 0.5 0 SBTn Plot Norm. Soil Behaviour Type SBTn (Robertson 1990)1817161514131211109876543210 Depth (ft) 20 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.51312.51211.511 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 43.532.521.5 1 0.5 0 Norm. Soil Behaviour Type Silty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilSilty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy silt Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soilSand & silty sandVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soilVery dense/stiff soil Sand & silty sand Silty sand & sandy siltVery dense/stiff soil Clay Clay & silty clayClayClay & silty clay Clay & silty claySilty sand & sandy siltClay Silty sand & sandy siltSand & silty sand CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:29 AM 475 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq SBTn legend 1. Sensitive fine grained 2. Organic material 3. Clay to silty clay 4. Clayey silt to siltyclay5. Silty sand to sandy silt 6. Clean sand to silty sand 7. Gravely sand to sand 8. Very stiff sand toclayey sand9. Very stiff fine grained Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-9 Total cone resistance qt (tsf)10050 Depth (ft) 20 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.51312.51211.511 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 43.532.521.5 1 0.5 0 Total cone resistance Liquefaction analysis overall plots (intermediate results) SBTn Index Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 Depth (ft) 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.51716.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.511 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.576.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 21.51 0.5 0 SBTn Index Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 Depth (ft) 20 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.51312.51211.511 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 43.532.521.5 1 0.5 0 Norm. cone resistance Grain char. factor Kc 109876543210 Depth (ft) 20 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.51312.51211.511 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 43.532.521.5 1 0.5 0 Grain char. factor Corrected norm. cone resistance Qtn,cs 200150100500 Depth (ft) 20 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.51312.51211.511 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 43.532.521.5 1 0.5 0Corrected norm. cone resistance CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:29 AM 476 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-9 CRR plot FILL CRR & CSR 0.60.40.20 Depth (ft) 20 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.51312.51211.511 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 43.532.521.5 1 0.5 0 CRR plot During earthq. Liquefaction analysis overall plots FS Plot Factor of safety21.510.50 Depth (ft) 20 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.51312.51211.511 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 43.532.521.5 1 0.5 0 FS Plot During earthq. LPI Liquefaction potential20151050 Depth (ft) 20 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.51312.51211.511 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 43.532.521.5 1 0.5 0 LPI Vertical settlements FILL Settlement (in)0.40.20 Depth (ft) 20 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.51312.51211.511 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 43.532.521.5 1 0.5 0 Vertical settlements Lateral displacements FILL Displacement (in)0 Depth (ft) 20 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.51312.51211.511 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 43.532.521.5 1 0.5 0 Lateral displacements CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:29 AM 477 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq F.S. color scheme LPI color schemeInput parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A Almost certain it will liquefy Very likely to liquefy Liquefaction and no liq. are equally likely Unlike to liquefy Almost certain it will not liquefy Very high risk High risk Low risk This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-9 Normalized friction ratio (%)0.1 1 10 Normalized CPT penetration resistance 1 10 100 1,000 Liquefaction analysis summary plots Qtn,cs 200180160140120100806040200 Cyclic Stress Ratio* (CSR*) 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Liquefaction No Liquefaction Thickness of surface layer, H1 (m)109876543210 Thickness of liquefiable sand layer, H2 (m) 12.0 11.0 10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 CPT-9 (2.82) Analysis PGA: 0.51 PGA 0.40g - 0.50g CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:29 AM 478 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A This software is licensed to: NMG Geotechnical, Inc.CPT name: CPT-9 Norm. cone resistance Qtn 200150100500 Depth (ft) 20 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.51312.51211.511 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 43.532.521.5 1 0.5 0 Norm. cone resistance Check for strength loss plots (Robertson (2010)) Grain char. factor Kc 109876543210 Depth (ft) 20 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.51312.51211.511 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 43.532.521.5 1 0.5 0 Grain char. factor Corrected norm. cone resistance Qtn,cs 200150100500 Depth (ft) 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0Corrected norm. cone resistance SBTn Index Ic (Robertson 1990)4321 Depth (ft) 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.51716.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.5 13 12.5 12 11.511 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.576.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 21.51 0.5 0 SBTn Index Liquefied Su/Sig'v Su/Sig'v 0.50.40.30.20.10 Depth (ft) 20 19.5 19 18.5 18 17.5 17 16.5 16 15.5 15 14.5 14 13.51312.51211.511 10.5 10 9.5 9 8.5 8 7.5 7 6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 43.532.521.5 1 0.5 0 Peak Su ratio Liq. Su ratio Liquefied Su/Sig'v CLiq v.2.2.1.7 - CPT Liquefaction Assessment Software - Report created on: 7/27/2021, 10:50:29 AM 479 Project file: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\CLiq\210218.clq Input parameters and analysis data Analysis method: Fines correction method:Points to test: Earthquake magnitude Mw:Peak ground acceleration:Depth to water table (insitu): NCEER (1998)NCEER (1998) Based on Ic value7.00 0.5114.00 ft Depth to water table (erthq.):Average results interval: Ic cut-off value:Unit weight calculation: Use fill:Fill height: 25.00 ft3 2.60Based on SBT Yes15.00 ft Fill weight: Transition detect. applied:Kσ applied: Clay like behavior applied:Limit depth applied:Limit depth: 120.00 lb/ft3 YesYes Sands onlyNoN/A APPENDIX F 21014-01 July 26, 2021 APPENDIX F SUMMARY OF SHEAR STRENGTH TESTING AND SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS Design parameters used for slope stability analysis were derived from: • Direct shear testing of undisturbed and remolded samples; • Observation of soil units during our site exploration; and • Experience with similar earth units from other projects. NMG performed direct shear tests on seven undisturbed and remolded samples that were collected during our subsurface exploration in order to better evaluate the strength parameters for the bedrock and artificial fill units. The following table includes the compiled direct shear test results for the site: Boring Sample No. Sample Type Depth Earth Unit Direct Shear Ultimate Peak Φ c Φ c B-1 B-1 Remolded to 92% 5-7' Terrace Deposit (Qt) 29 350 29 450 B-1 D-3 Undisturbed 20' Santiago Formation Bedrock (Tsa) 33 300 39 450 B-1 SB-1 Remolded Residual 25.9' Santiago Formation Bedrock (Tsa) 14 400 -- -- B-1 D-4 Undisturbed 30' Santiago Formation Bedrock (Tsa) 32 50 38 250 B-1 D-5 Undisturbed 40' Santiago Formation Bedrock (Tsa) 33 100 36 700 B-1 D-6 Undisturbed 50' Santiago Formation Bedrock (Tsa) 22 425 34 475 B-2 D-5 Undisturbed 25' Santiago Formation Bedrock (Tsa) 27 100 28 200 B-2 SB-1 Remolded Residual 26.8' Santiago Formation Bedrock (Tsa) 12 180 -- -- B-2 D-6 Undisturbed 30' Santiago Formation Bedrock (Tsa) 28 50 28 400 The soil strength parameters utilized in our slope stability analysis for static and pseudostatic conditions are listed in the following table for the associated earth units. These strengths are considered average of the summarized testing data and are appropriate values for long-term design as well as short-term pseudo-static slope stability analyses. A more detailed discussion of the parameters used for our analysis is included for each earth unit in the following table. 21014-01 July 26, 2021 Design Static and Pseudo-static Soil Strength Parameters Earth Unit Friction Angle (degrees) Cohesion (psf) Static Pseudo-static Static Pseudo-static Bedrock Units Santiago Formation (Tsa) 30 36 200 240 Clay Seams 14 17 200 240 Alluvium (Qal) 26 31 200 240 Older Alluvium (Qoa/Qalo) 30 36 200 240 Compacted Fill (Af) 30 36 200 240 Santiago Formation Bedrock (Tsa) NMG conducted direct shear testing on five relatively undisturbed samples of bedrock collected from our subsurface investigation. The laboratory test results by NMG show the ultimate internal friction angle of the bedrock varies from 22 degrees to 33 degrees with cohesions in the range of 50 to 425 psf. Comparing the laboratory test results to prior laboratory tests results for Santiago Formation and also the referenced reports including the shear strengths for the soils within the property north of the site, a design friction angle and cohesion of 30 degrees and 200 psf, respectively, were used for the bedrock. NMG conducted residual shear testing on two remolded samples taken from clay seams found in the bedrock. The laboratory tests show the residual internal friction angles ranging from 12 to 14 degrees with cohesions ranging from 180 to 400 psf. Atterberg Limit testing was also performed on clayey samples collected from the borings. The plasticity data were used to evaluate residual shear strength estimates based on published correlations. The correlations of the liquid limit and plasticity index indicated that residual friction angles of clay layers within the bedrock units should be more than 14 degrees (15 to 20 degrees). A design friction angle and cohesion of 14 degrees and 200 psf, respectively, were used for clay seams. Alluvium/Older Alluvium (Qal, Qoa/Qalo) Per our experience with alluvial soils, we have used a friction angle of 26 degrees with a cohesion of 200 psf for alluvium, and a friction angle of 30 with a cohesion of 200 psf for older alluvium. These values were increased by 20 percent for short-term pseudo-static analysis. Compacted Fill (Af) NMG conducted one direct shear test on a remolded sample of terrace deposit (Qt) in order to supplement the shear strength values for the fill materials. Our testing shows ultimate shear 21014-01 July 26, 2021 strength of 29 degrees at a cohesion of 350 psf. The peak values for internal friction angle were 29 degrees at a cohesion of 450 psf. Based on our engineering evaluation of the available data, considering the site history, the existing fill and bedrock units, we have used a design ultimate internal friction angle and cohesion of 30 degrees and 200 psf for the compacted fill materials (Af). The design peak values for the internal friction angle and cohesion were determined to be 20 percent higher and at 36 degrees and 240 psf, respectively. Pseudo-static Shear Strengths and Analysis Shear strengths used for pseudo-static analysis are based on the peak direct shear test results and are typically significantly higher than the design static strength parameters. We increased the ultimate shear strengths by 20 percent for the short-term pseudo-static analysis, which is typically considered conservative. The pseudo-static seismic analysis was performed in accordance with the Special Publication 117A, Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California, published in 2008. Per Special Publication 117A, a design seismic peak ground acceleration of 0.34g was used. The design peak ground acceleration is two-thirds of the PGAM. Per Special Publication 117A, a coefficient of seismic horizontal acceleration, kh, of 0.14 was calculated. However, a minimum kh of 0.15 was used for the analysis. A minimum factor of safety of 1.0, per Special Publication 117A, was used to determine the adequacy of the design slopes for seismic loading. Surficial Slope Stability Analysis Surficial slope stability analysis was performed for the proposed slopes at the site. The analysis included 2H:1V slopes and show a factor of safety of more than 1.50. Computer Program GSTABL7 version 2 with STEDwin solve slope stability problems by a two-dimensional limiting equilibrium method and were developed at Purdue University. The methods employed in this program include the Modified Bishop Method, which permits circular arc failure surfaces, and the Simplified Janbu Method and Spencer Method, which allow failure surfaces of general shape (circular arc and non-circular). The Simplified Janbu Method provides a solution that satisfies the force equilibrium, while the Spencer Method satisfies both force and moment equilibriums. All methods yield a "factor of safety" (FOS) against instability of the slope. A minimum static FOS of 1.5 and a minimum pseudo-static FOS of 1.0 were used for design, as discussed above and per Special Publication 117A. Summary of Slope Stability Analysis The following table includes a summary of slope stability analysis performed for this study and the calculated factor of safety of the analyzed conditions: 21014-01 July 26, 2021 SUMMARY TABLE Cross-Section File Name Analysis Type FOS (Static) FOS (Pseudo-Static) 1-1' 04, 04p Block 2.00 1.64 05, 05p Block 1.94 1.37 06, 06p Block 1.84 1.33 1a-1a' 01, 01p Circular 1.52 1.48 01t Circular 1.95 -- 03-sp, 03p-sp Block (Spencer) 1.70 1.48 03t Block 1.62 -- 05t Block 1.83 -- 06t Block 2.09 -- 2-2' 01, 01p Circular 1.69 1.29 03, 03p Block 1.81 1.43 050010001500200025003000350040000 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500Shear Strength (psf)Normal Stress (psf)Direct Shear UltimateStrength SummaryB‐1 @ 5‐7'B‐1 @ 20'B‐1 @ 30'B‐1 @ 40'B‐1 @ 50'B‐2 @ 25'B‐2 @ 30'C=200, Phi=30Linear (C=200, Phi=30)Design: C = 200 psf; φ= 30°Boring No. and Sample Depth P:\2021\21014-01 CARLSBAD - MARJA ACRES\STED\1-1'\SUMMARY OF SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS 1-1'.DOC Summary of Slope Stability Analysis Cross-Section 1-1' Filename Description Factor of Safety (FS) Static Pseudostatic 04, 04p Design Profile; Analyzed along Top Clay Bed 2.00 1.64 05, 05p Design Profile; Analyzed along Middle Clay Bed 1.94 1.37 06, 06p Design Profile; Analyzed along Lowest Clay Bed 1.84 1.33 Project No.: 21014-01 Project Name: Marja Acres NMG 05010015020025030035040005010015020025021014-01: 1-1'; Static; Design; Along Highest Clay Layerp:\2021\21014-01 kb carlsbad - marja acres\sted\1-1'\04.pl2 Run By: RTE 7/21/2021 04:21PM1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 33311333111123232222W1W1W1bcdefghija# FSa 2.00b 2.00c2.00d 2.00e 2.00f 2.00g 2.02h 2.02i 2.02j 2.02SoilDesc.AfTsaQalSoilTypeNo.123TotalUnit Wt.(pcf)120.0120.0120.0SaturatedUnit Wt.(pcf)120.0120.0120.0CohesionIntercept(psf)200.0Aniso200.0FrictionAngle(deg)30.0Aniso26.0PorePressureParam.0.000.000.00PressureConstant(psf)0.00.00.0Piez.SurfaceNo.W1W1W1GSTABL7 v.2 FSmin=2.00Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method for the case of c & phi both > 0 05010015020025030035040005010015020025021014-01: 1-1'; Static; Design; Along Highest Clay Layerp:\2021\21014-01 kb carlsbad - marja acres\sted\1-1'\04.plt Run By: RTE 7/21/2021 04:21PM1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 33311333111123232222W1W1W1 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1-1'\04.OUT Page 1 *** GSTABL7 *** ** GSTABL7 by Dr. Garry H. Gregory, Ph.D.,P.E.,D.GE ** ** Original Version 1.0, January 1996; Current Ver. 2.005.3, Feb. 2013 ** (All Rights Reserved-Unauthorized Use Prohibited) ********************************************************************************* SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS SYSTEM Modified Bishop, Simplified Janbu, or GLE Method of Slices. (Includes Spencer & Morgenstern-Price Type Analysis) Including Pier/Pile, Reinforcement, Soil Nail, Tieback, Nonlinear Undrained Shear Strength, Curved Phi Envelope, Anisotropic Soil, Fiber-Reinforced Soil, Boundary Loads, Water Surfaces, Pseudo-Static & Newmark Earthquake, and Applied Forces. ********************************************************************************* Analysis Run Date: 7/21/2021 Time of Run: 04:25PM Run By: RTE Input Data Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1-1'\04.in Output Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1-1'\04.OUT Unit System: English Plotted Output Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1-1'\04.PLT PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: 21014-01: 1-1'; Static; Design; Along Hi ghest Clay Layer BOUNDARY COORDINATES 13 Top Boundaries 20 Total Boundaries Boundary X-Left Y-Left X-Right Y-Right Soil Type No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Below Bnd 1 0.00 116.00 35.00 115.00 3 2 35.00 115.00 60.00 120.00 3 3 60.00 120.00 65.00 123.00 3 4 65.00 123.00 80.00 129.00 1 5 80.00 129.00 96.00 130.00 1 6 96.00 130.00 106.00 130.00 3 7 106.00 130.00 115.00 137.00 3 8 115.00 137.00 140.00 143.00 3 9 140.00 143.00 145.00 144.00 1 10 145.00 144.00 147.00 148.00 1 11 147.00 148.00 161.00 155.00 1 12 161.00 155.00 221.00 156.00 1 13 221.00 156.00 400.00 159.00 2 14 140.00 143.00 144.00 138.00 3 15 144.00 138.00 221.00 156.00 2 16 65.00 123.00 96.00 130.00 3 17 0.00 104.00 25.00 96.00 2 18 25.00 96.00 40.00 99.00 2 19 40.00 99.00 120.00 132.00 2 20 120.00 132.00 144.00 138.00 2 Default Y-Origin = 0.00(ft) Default X-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) Default Y-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS 3 Type(s) of Soil Soil Total Saturated Cohesion Friction Pore Pressure Piez. Type Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Pressure Constant Surface No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) Param. (psf) No. 1 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.00 0.0 1 2 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.00 0.0 1 3 120.0 120.0 200.0 26.0 0.00 0.0 1 ANISOTROPIC STRENGTH PARAMETERS 1 soil type(s) Soil Type 2 Is Anisotropic Number Of Direction Ranges Specified = 3 Direction Counterclockwise Cohesion Friction Range Direction Limit Intercept Angle No. (deg) (psf) (deg) 1 3.0 200.00 30.00 2 18.0 200.00 14.00 3 90.0 200.00 30.00 ANISOTROPIC SOIL NOTES: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1-1'\04.OUT Page 2 (1) An input value of 0.01 for C and/or Phi will cause Aniso C and/or Phi to be ignored in that range. (2) An input value of 0.02 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with no water weight in the tension crack. (3) An input value of 0.03 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with water weight in the tension crack. 1 PIEZOMETRIC SURFACE(S) SPECIFIED Unit Weight of Water = 62.40 (pcf) Piezometric Surface No. 1 Specified by 3 Coordinate Points Pore Pressure Inclination Factor = 0.50 Point X-Water Y-Water No. (ft) (ft) 1 40.00 111.00 2 200.00 110.00 3 360.00 101.00 Janbus Empirical Coef is being used for the case of c & phi both > 0 A Critical Failure Surface Searching Method, Using A Random Technique For Generating Sliding Block Surfaces, Has Been Specified. 4000 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated. 2 Boxes Specified For Generation Of Central Block Base Length Of Line Segments For Active And Passive Portions Of Sliding Block Is 20.0 Box X-Left Y-Left X-Right Y-Right Height No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) 1 120.00 132.00 150.00 135.00 3.00 2 150.10 135.10 200.00 143.00 3.00 Following Are Displayed The Ten Most Critical Of The Trial Failure Surfaces Evaluated. They Are Ordered - Most Critical First. * * Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method * * Total Number of Trial Surfaces Attempted = 4000 Number of Trial Surfaces With Valid FS = 3982 Statistical Data On All Valid FS Values: FS Max = 20.978 FS Min = 2.004 FS Ave = 2.957 Standard Deviation = 1.231 Coefficient of Variation = 41.63 % Failure Surface Specified By 5 Coordinate Points Point X-Surf Y-Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 111.374 134.180 2 121.727 132.396 3 157.333 137.393 4 167.807 154.431 5 168.169 155.119 Factor of Safety *** 2.004 *** **** END OF GSTABL7 OUTPUT **** 05010015020025030035040005010015020025021014-01: 1-1'; P-Static; Design; Along Highest Clay Layerp:\2021\21014-01 kb carlsbad - marja acres\sted\1-1'\04p.pl2 Run By: RTE 7/21/2021 04:23PM1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 33311333111123232222W1W1W1bcdefghija# FSa 1.64b 1.64c1.64d 1.64e 1.64f 1.64g 1.65h 1.65i 1.65j 1.65SoilDesc.AfTsaQalSoilTypeNo.123TotalUnit Wt.(pcf)120.0120.0120.0SaturatedUnit Wt.(pcf)120.0120.0120.0CohesionIntercept(psf)240.0Aniso240.0FrictionAngle(deg)36.0Aniso31.0PorePressureParam.0.000.000.00PressureConstant(psf)0.00.00.0Piez.SurfaceNo.W1W1W1Load ValuePeak(A) 0.340(g)kh Coef. 0.150(g)<GSTABL7 v.2 FSmin=1.64Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method for the case of c & phi both > 0 05010015020025030035040005010015020025021014-01: 1-1'; P-Static; Design; Along Highest Clay Layerp:\2021\21014-01 kb carlsbad - marja acres\sted\1-1'\04p.plt Run By: RTE 7/21/2021 04:23PM1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 33311333111123232222W1W1W1 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1-1'\04p.OUT Page 1 *** GSTABL7 *** ** GSTABL7 by Dr. Garry H. Gregory, Ph.D.,P.E.,D.GE ** ** Original Version 1.0, January 1996; Current Ver. 2.005.3, Feb. 2013 ** (All Rights Reserved-Unauthorized Use Prohibited) ********************************************************************************* SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS SYSTEM Modified Bishop, Simplified Janbu, or GLE Method of Slices. (Includes Spencer & Morgenstern-Price Type Analysis) Including Pier/Pile, Reinforcement, Soil Nail, Tieback, Nonlinear Undrained Shear Strength, Curved Phi Envelope, Anisotropic Soil, Fiber-Reinforced Soil, Boundary Loads, Water Surfaces, Pseudo-Static & Newmark Earthquake, and Applied Forces. ********************************************************************************* Analysis Run Date: 7/21/2021 Time of Run: 04:23PM Run By: RTE Input Data Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1-1'\04p.in Output Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1-1'\04p.OUT Unit System: English Plotted Output Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1-1'\04p.PLT PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: 21014-01: 1-1'; P-Static; Design; Along Highest Clay Layer BOUNDARY COORDINATES 13 Top Boundaries 20 Total Boundaries Boundary X-Left Y-Left X-Right Y-Right Soil Type No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Below Bnd 1 0.00 116.00 35.00 115.00 3 2 35.00 115.00 60.00 120.00 3 3 60.00 120.00 65.00 123.00 3 4 65.00 123.00 80.00 129.00 1 5 80.00 129.00 96.00 130.00 1 6 96.00 130.00 106.00 130.00 3 7 106.00 130.00 115.00 137.00 3 8 115.00 137.00 140.00 143.00 3 9 140.00 143.00 145.00 144.00 1 10 145.00 144.00 147.00 148.00 1 11 147.00 148.00 161.00 155.00 1 12 161.00 155.00 221.00 156.00 1 13 221.00 156.00 400.00 159.00 2 14 140.00 143.00 144.00 138.00 3 15 144.00 138.00 221.00 156.00 2 16 65.00 123.00 96.00 130.00 3 17 0.00 104.00 25.00 96.00 2 18 25.00 96.00 40.00 99.00 2 19 40.00 99.00 120.00 132.00 2 20 120.00 132.00 144.00 138.00 2 Default Y-Origin = 0.00(ft) Default X-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) Default Y-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS 3 Type(s) of Soil Soil Total Saturated Cohesion Friction Pore Pressure Piez. Type Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Pressure Constant Surface No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) Param. (psf) No. 1 120.0 120.0 240.0 36.0 0.00 0.0 1 2 120.0 120.0 240.0 36.0 0.00 0.0 1 3 120.0 120.0 240.0 31.0 0.00 0.0 1 ANISOTROPIC STRENGTH PARAMETERS 1 soil type(s) Soil Type 2 Is Anisotropic Number Of Direction Ranges Specified = 3 Direction Counterclockwise Cohesion Friction Range Direction Limit Intercept Angle No. (deg) (psf) (deg) 1 3.0 240.00 36.00 2 18.0 240.00 17.00 3 90.0 240.00 36.00 ANISOTROPIC SOIL NOTES: (1) An input value of 0.01 for C and/or Phi will cause Aniso P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1-1'\04p.OUT Page 2 C and/or Phi to be ignored in that range. (2) An input value of 0.02 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with no water weight in the tension crack. (3) An input value of 0.03 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with water weight in the tension crack. 1 PIEZOMETRIC SURFACE(S) SPECIFIED Unit Weight of Water = 62.40 (pcf) Piezometric Surface No. 1 Specified by 3 Coordinate Points Pore Pressure Inclination Factor = 0.50 Point X-Water Y-Water No. (ft) (ft) 1 40.00 111.00 2 200.00 110.00 3 360.00 101.00 Specified Peak Ground Acceleration Coefficient (A) = 0.340(g) Specified Horizontal Earthquake Coefficient (kh) = 0.150(g) Specified Vertical Earthquake Coefficient (kv) = 0.000(g) Specified Seismic Pore-Pressure Factor = 0.000 Janbus Empirical Coef is being used for the case of c & phi both > 0 A Critical Failure Surface Searching Method, Using A Random Technique For Generating Sliding Block Surfaces, Has Been Specified. 4000 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated. 2 Boxes Specified For Generation Of Central Block Base Length Of Line Segments For Active And Passive Portions Of Sliding Block Is 20.0 Box X-Left Y-Left X-Right Y-Right Height No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) 1 120.00 132.00 150.00 135.00 3.00 2 150.10 135.10 200.00 143.00 3.00 Following Are Displayed The Ten Most Critical Of The Trial Failure Surfaces Evaluated. They Are Ordered - Most Critical First. * * Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method * * Total Number of Trial Surfaces Attempted = 4000 Number of Trial Surfaces With Valid FS = 3994 Statistical Data On All Valid FS Values: FS Max = 13.525 FS Min = 1.638 FS Ave = 2.153 Standard Deviation = 0.735 Coefficient of Variation = 34.11 % Failure Surface Specified By 4 Coordinate Points Point X-Surf Y-Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 109.347 132.603 2 120.181 130.724 3 197.743 143.053 4 208.520 155.792 Factor of Safety *** 1.638 *** **** END OF GSTABL7 OUTPUT **** 05010015020025030035040005010015020025021014-01: 1-1'; Static; Design; Along Middle Clay Layerp:\2021\21014-01 kb carlsbad - marja acres\sted\1-1'\05.pl2 Run By: RTE 7/21/2021 04:42PM1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 33311333111123232222W1W1W1bcdefghija# FSa 1.94b 1.94c1.94d 1.94e 1.94f 1.94g 1.94h 1.94i 1.95j 1.95SoilDesc.AfTsaQalSoilTypeNo.123TotalUnit Wt.(pcf)120.0120.0120.0SaturatedUnit Wt.(pcf)120.0120.0120.0CohesionIntercept(psf)200.0Aniso200.0FrictionAngle(deg)30.0Aniso26.0PorePressureParam.0.000.000.00PressureConstant(psf)0.00.00.0Piez.SurfaceNo.W1W1W1GSTABL7 v.2 FSmin=1.94Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method for the case of c & phi both > 0 05010015020025030035040005010015020025021014-01: 1-1'; Static; Design; Along Middle Clay Layerp:\2021\21014-01 kb carlsbad - marja acres\sted\1-1'\05.plt Run By: RTE 7/21/2021 04:42PM1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 33311333111123232222W1W1W1 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1-1'\05.OUT Page 1 *** GSTABL7 *** ** GSTABL7 by Dr. Garry H. Gregory, Ph.D.,P.E.,D.GE ** ** Original Version 1.0, January 1996; Current Ver. 2.005.3, Feb. 2013 ** (All Rights Reserved-Unauthorized Use Prohibited) ********************************************************************************* SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS SYSTEM Modified Bishop, Simplified Janbu, or GLE Method of Slices. (Includes Spencer & Morgenstern-Price Type Analysis) Including Pier/Pile, Reinforcement, Soil Nail, Tieback, Nonlinear Undrained Shear Strength, Curved Phi Envelope, Anisotropic Soil, Fiber-Reinforced Soil, Boundary Loads, Water Surfaces, Pseudo-Static & Newmark Earthquake, and Applied Forces. ********************************************************************************* Analysis Run Date: 7/21/2021 Time of Run: 04:42PM Run By: RTE Input Data Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1-1'\05.in Output Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1-1'\05.OUT Unit System: English Plotted Output Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1-1'\05.PLT PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: 21014-01: 1-1'; Static; Design; Along Mi ddle Clay Layer BOUNDARY COORDINATES 13 Top Boundaries 20 Total Boundaries Boundary X-Left Y-Left X-Right Y-Right Soil Type No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Below Bnd 1 0.00 116.00 35.00 115.00 3 2 35.00 115.00 60.00 120.00 3 3 60.00 120.00 65.00 123.00 3 4 65.00 123.00 80.00 129.00 1 5 80.00 129.00 96.00 130.00 1 6 96.00 130.00 106.00 130.00 3 7 106.00 130.00 115.00 137.00 3 8 115.00 137.00 140.00 143.00 3 9 140.00 143.00 145.00 144.00 1 10 145.00 144.00 147.00 148.00 1 11 147.00 148.00 161.00 155.00 1 12 161.00 155.00 221.00 156.00 1 13 221.00 156.00 400.00 159.00 2 14 140.00 143.00 144.00 138.00 3 15 144.00 138.00 221.00 156.00 2 16 65.00 123.00 96.00 130.00 3 17 0.00 104.00 25.00 96.00 2 18 25.00 96.00 40.00 99.00 2 19 40.00 99.00 120.00 132.00 2 20 120.00 132.00 144.00 138.00 2 Default Y-Origin = 0.00(ft) Default X-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) Default Y-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS 3 Type(s) of Soil Soil Total Saturated Cohesion Friction Pore Pressure Piez. Type Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Pressure Constant Surface No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) Param. (psf) No. 1 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.00 0.0 1 2 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.00 0.0 1 3 120.0 120.0 200.0 26.0 0.00 0.0 1 ANISOTROPIC STRENGTH PARAMETERS 1 soil type(s) Soil Type 2 Is Anisotropic Number Of Direction Ranges Specified = 3 Direction Counterclockwise Cohesion Friction Range Direction Limit Intercept Angle No. (deg) (psf) (deg) 1 3.0 200.00 30.00 2 18.0 200.00 14.00 3 90.0 200.00 30.00 ANISOTROPIC SOIL NOTES: (1) An input value of 0.01 for C and/or Phi will cause Aniso P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1-1'\05.OUT Page 2 C and/or Phi to be ignored in that range. (2) An input value of 0.02 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with no water weight in the tension crack. (3) An input value of 0.03 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with water weight in the tension crack. 1 PIEZOMETRIC SURFACE(S) SPECIFIED Unit Weight of Water = 62.40 (pcf) Piezometric Surface No. 1 Specified by 3 Coordinate Points Pore Pressure Inclination Factor = 0.50 Point X-Water Y-Water No. (ft) (ft) 1 40.00 111.00 2 200.00 110.00 3 360.00 101.00 Janbus Empirical Coef is being used for the case of c & phi both > 0 A Critical Failure Surface Searching Method, Using A Random Technique For Generating Sliding Block Surfaces, Has Been Specified. 4000 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated. 2 Boxes Specified For Generation Of Central Block Base Length Of Line Segments For Active And Passive Portions Of Sliding Block Is 20.0 Box X-Left Y-Left X-Right Y-Right Height No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) 1 65.00 108.00 160.00 122.00 3.00 2 160.10 122.10 240.00 135.00 3.00 Following Are Displayed The Ten Most Critical Of The Trial Failure Surfaces Evaluated. They Are Ordered - Most Critical First. * * Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method * * Total Number of Trial Surfaces Attempted = 4000 Number of Trial Surfaces With Valid FS = 3993 Statistical Data On All Valid FS Values: FS Max = 10.644 FS Min = 1.944 FS Ave = 3.085 Standard Deviation = 1.067 Coefficient of Variation = 34.58 % Failure Surface Specified By 6 Coordinate Points Point X-Surf Y-Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 53.049 118.610 2 68.728 107.238 3 175.369 125.379 4 188.933 140.077 5 202.178 155.063 6 202.584 155.693 Factor of Safety *** 1.944 *** **** END OF GSTABL7 OUTPUT **** 05010015020025030035040005010015020025021014-01: 1-1'; P-Static; Design; Along Middle Clay Layerp:\2021\21014-01 kb carlsbad - marja acres\sted\1-1'\05p.pl2 Run By: RTE 7/21/2021 04:44PM1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 33311333111123232222W1W1W1bcdefghija# FSa 1.37b 1.37c1.37d 1.37e 1.37f 1.37g 1.37h 1.37i 1.40j 1.40SoilDesc.AfTsaQalSoilTypeNo.123TotalUnit Wt.(pcf)120.0120.0120.0SaturatedUnit Wt.(pcf)120.0120.0120.0CohesionIntercept(psf)240.0Aniso240.0FrictionAngle(deg)36.0Aniso31.0PorePressureParam.0.000.000.00PressureConstant(psf)0.00.00.0Piez.SurfaceNo.W1W1W1Load ValuePeak(A) 0.340(g)kh Coef. 0.150(g)<GSTABL7 v.2 FSmin=1.37Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method for the case of c & phi both > 0 05010015020025030035040005010015020025021014-01: 1-1'; P-Static; Design; Along Middle Clay Layerp:\2021\21014-01 kb carlsbad - marja acres\sted\1-1'\05p.plt Run By: RTE 7/21/2021 04:44PM1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 33311333111123232222W1W1W1 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1-1'\05p.OUT Page 1 *** GSTABL7 *** ** GSTABL7 by Dr. Garry H. Gregory, Ph.D.,P.E.,D.GE ** ** Original Version 1.0, January 1996; Current Ver. 2.005.3, Feb. 2013 ** (All Rights Reserved-Unauthorized Use Prohibited) ********************************************************************************* SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS SYSTEM Modified Bishop, Simplified Janbu, or GLE Method of Slices. (Includes Spencer & Morgenstern-Price Type Analysis) Including Pier/Pile, Reinforcement, Soil Nail, Tieback, Nonlinear Undrained Shear Strength, Curved Phi Envelope, Anisotropic Soil, Fiber-Reinforced Soil, Boundary Loads, Water Surfaces, Pseudo-Static & Newmark Earthquake, and Applied Forces. ********************************************************************************* Analysis Run Date: 7/21/2021 Time of Run: 04:44PM Run By: RTE Input Data Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1-1'\05p.in Output Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1-1'\05p.OUT Unit System: English Plotted Output Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1-1'\05p.PLT PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: 21014-01: 1-1'; P-Static; Design; Along Middle Clay Layer BOUNDARY COORDINATES 13 Top Boundaries 20 Total Boundaries Boundary X-Left Y-Left X-Right Y-Right Soil Type No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Below Bnd 1 0.00 116.00 35.00 115.00 3 2 35.00 115.00 60.00 120.00 3 3 60.00 120.00 65.00 123.00 3 4 65.00 123.00 80.00 129.00 1 5 80.00 129.00 96.00 130.00 1 6 96.00 130.00 106.00 130.00 3 7 106.00 130.00 115.00 137.00 3 8 115.00 137.00 140.00 143.00 3 9 140.00 143.00 145.00 144.00 1 10 145.00 144.00 147.00 148.00 1 11 147.00 148.00 161.00 155.00 1 12 161.00 155.00 221.00 156.00 1 13 221.00 156.00 400.00 159.00 2 14 140.00 143.00 144.00 138.00 3 15 144.00 138.00 221.00 156.00 2 16 65.00 123.00 96.00 130.00 3 17 0.00 104.00 25.00 96.00 2 18 25.00 96.00 40.00 99.00 2 19 40.00 99.00 120.00 132.00 2 20 120.00 132.00 144.00 138.00 2 Default Y-Origin = 0.00(ft) Default X-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) Default Y-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS 3 Type(s) of Soil Soil Total Saturated Cohesion Friction Pore Pressure Piez. Type Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Pressure Constant Surface No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) Param. (psf) No. 1 120.0 120.0 240.0 36.0 0.00 0.0 1 2 120.0 120.0 240.0 36.0 0.00 0.0 1 3 120.0 120.0 240.0 31.0 0.00 0.0 1 ANISOTROPIC STRENGTH PARAMETERS 1 soil type(s) Soil Type 2 Is Anisotropic Number Of Direction Ranges Specified = 3 Direction Counterclockwise Cohesion Friction Range Direction Limit Intercept Angle No. (deg) (psf) (deg) 1 3.0 240.00 36.00 2 18.0 240.00 17.00 3 90.0 240.00 36.00 ANISOTROPIC SOIL NOTES: (1) An input value of 0.01 for C and/or Phi will cause Aniso P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1-1'\05p.OUT Page 2 C and/or Phi to be ignored in that range. (2) An input value of 0.02 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with no water weight in the tension crack. (3) An input value of 0.03 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with water weight in the tension crack. 1 PIEZOMETRIC SURFACE(S) SPECIFIED Unit Weight of Water = 62.40 (pcf) Piezometric Surface No. 1 Specified by 3 Coordinate Points Pore Pressure Inclination Factor = 0.50 Point X-Water Y-Water No. (ft) (ft) 1 40.00 111.00 2 200.00 110.00 3 360.00 101.00 Specified Peak Ground Acceleration Coefficient (A) = 0.340(g) Specified Horizontal Earthquake Coefficient (kh) = 0.150(g) Specified Vertical Earthquake Coefficient (kv) = 0.000(g) Specified Seismic Pore-Pressure Factor = 0.000 Janbus Empirical Coef is being used for the case of c & phi both > 0 A Critical Failure Surface Searching Method, Using A Random Technique For Generating Sliding Block Surfaces, Has Been Specified. 4000 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated. 2 Boxes Specified For Generation Of Central Block Base Length Of Line Segments For Active And Passive Portions Of Sliding Block Is 20.0 Box X-Left Y-Left X-Right Y-Right Height No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) 1 65.00 108.00 160.00 122.00 3.00 2 160.10 122.10 240.00 135.00 3.00 Following Are Displayed The Ten Most Critical Of The Trial Failure Surfaces Evaluated. They Are Ordered - Most Critical First. * * Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method * * Total Number of Trial Surfaces Attempted = 4000 Number of Trial Surfaces With Valid FS = 4000 Statistical Data On All Valid FS Values: FS Max = 5.424 FS Min = 1.374 FS Ave = 2.058 Standard Deviation = 0.566 Coefficient of Variation = 27.48 % Failure Surface Specified By 7 Coordinate Points Point X-Surf Y-Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 29.073 115.169 2 30.113 114.380 3 50.063 112.971 4 69.424 107.955 5 221.834 133.015 6 232.597 149.872 7 236.713 156.263 Factor of Safety *** 1.374 *** **** END OF GSTABL7 OUTPUT **** 05010015020025030035040005010015020025021014-01: 1-1'; Static; Design; Along Lowest Clay Layerp:\2021\21014-01 kb carlsbad - marja acres\sted\1-1'\06.pl2 Run By: RTE 7/21/2021 04:48PM1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 33311333111123232222W1W1W1bcdefghija# FSa 1.84b 1.84c1.84d 1.84e 1.84f 1.84g 1.84h 1.84i 1.84j 1.84SoilDesc.AfTsaQalSoilTypeNo.123TotalUnit Wt.(pcf)120.0120.0120.0SaturatedUnit Wt.(pcf)120.0120.0120.0CohesionIntercept(psf)200.0Aniso200.0FrictionAngle(deg)30.0Aniso26.0PorePressureParam.0.000.000.00PressureConstant(psf)0.00.00.0Piez.SurfaceNo.W1W1W1GSTABL7 v.2 FSmin=1.84Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method for the case of c & phi both > 0 05010015020025030035040005010015020025021014-01: 1-1'; Static; Design; Along Lowest Clay Layerp:\2021\21014-01 kb carlsbad - marja acres\sted\1-1'\06.plt Run By: RTE 7/21/2021 04:48PM1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 33311333111123232222W1W1W1 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1-1'\06.OUT Page 1 *** GSTABL7 *** ** GSTABL7 by Dr. Garry H. Gregory, Ph.D.,P.E.,D.GE ** ** Original Version 1.0, January 1996; Current Ver. 2.005.3, Feb. 2013 ** (All Rights Reserved-Unauthorized Use Prohibited) ********************************************************************************* SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS SYSTEM Modified Bishop, Simplified Janbu, or GLE Method of Slices. (Includes Spencer & Morgenstern-Price Type Analysis) Including Pier/Pile, Reinforcement, Soil Nail, Tieback, Nonlinear Undrained Shear Strength, Curved Phi Envelope, Anisotropic Soil, Fiber-Reinforced Soil, Boundary Loads, Water Surfaces, Pseudo-Static & Newmark Earthquake, and Applied Forces. ********************************************************************************* Analysis Run Date: 7/21/2021 Time of Run: 04:48PM Run By: RTE Input Data Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1-1'\06.in Output Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1-1'\06.OUT Unit System: English Plotted Output Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1-1'\06.PLT PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: 21014-01: 1-1'; Static; Design; Along Lo west Clay Layer BOUNDARY COORDINATES 13 Top Boundaries 20 Total Boundaries Boundary X-Left Y-Left X-Right Y-Right Soil Type No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Below Bnd 1 0.00 116.00 35.00 115.00 3 2 35.00 115.00 60.00 120.00 3 3 60.00 120.00 65.00 123.00 3 4 65.00 123.00 80.00 129.00 1 5 80.00 129.00 96.00 130.00 1 6 96.00 130.00 106.00 130.00 3 7 106.00 130.00 115.00 137.00 3 8 115.00 137.00 140.00 143.00 3 9 140.00 143.00 145.00 144.00 1 10 145.00 144.00 147.00 148.00 1 11 147.00 148.00 161.00 155.00 1 12 161.00 155.00 221.00 156.00 1 13 221.00 156.00 400.00 159.00 2 14 140.00 143.00 144.00 138.00 3 15 144.00 138.00 221.00 156.00 2 16 65.00 123.00 96.00 130.00 3 17 0.00 104.00 25.00 96.00 2 18 25.00 96.00 40.00 99.00 2 19 40.00 99.00 120.00 132.00 2 20 120.00 132.00 144.00 138.00 2 Default Y-Origin = 0.00(ft) Default X-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) Default Y-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS 3 Type(s) of Soil Soil Total Saturated Cohesion Friction Pore Pressure Piez. Type Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Pressure Constant Surface No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) Param. (psf) No. 1 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.00 0.0 1 2 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.00 0.0 1 3 120.0 120.0 200.0 26.0 0.00 0.0 1 ANISOTROPIC STRENGTH PARAMETERS 1 soil type(s) Soil Type 2 Is Anisotropic Number Of Direction Ranges Specified = 3 Direction Counterclockwise Cohesion Friction Range Direction Limit Intercept Angle No. (deg) (psf) (deg) 1 3.0 200.00 30.00 2 18.0 200.00 14.00 3 90.0 200.00 30.00 ANISOTROPIC SOIL NOTES: (1) An input value of 0.01 for C and/or Phi will cause Aniso P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1-1'\06.OUT Page 2 C and/or Phi to be ignored in that range. (2) An input value of 0.02 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with no water weight in the tension crack. (3) An input value of 0.03 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with water weight in the tension crack. 1 PIEZOMETRIC SURFACE(S) SPECIFIED Unit Weight of Water = 62.40 (pcf) Piezometric Surface No. 1 Specified by 3 Coordinate Points Pore Pressure Inclination Factor = 0.50 Point X-Water Y-Water No. (ft) (ft) 1 40.00 111.00 2 200.00 110.00 3 360.00 101.00 Janbus Empirical Coef is being used for the case of c & phi both > 0 A Critical Failure Surface Searching Method, Using A Random Technique For Generating Sliding Block Surfaces, Has Been Specified. 4000 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated. 2 Boxes Specified For Generation Of Central Block Base Length Of Line Segments For Active And Passive Portions Of Sliding Block Is 20.0 Box X-Left Y-Left X-Right Y-Right Height No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) 1 52.00 80.00 160.00 108.00 3.00 2 160.10 108.00 240.00 127.00 3.00 Following Are Displayed The Ten Most Critical Of The Trial Failure Surfaces Evaluated. They Are Ordered - Most Critical First. * * Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method * * Total Number of Trial Surfaces Attempted = 4000 Number of Trial Surfaces With Valid FS = 4000 Statistical Data On All Valid FS Values: FS Max = 10.256 FS Min = 1.844 FS Ave = 2.953 Standard Deviation = 1.094 Coefficient of Variation = 37.06 % Failure Surface Specified By 8 Coordinate Points Point X-Surf Y-Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 22.802 115.349 2 32.476 105.737 3 46.766 91.744 4 65.520 84.795 5 177.242 113.055 6 187.531 130.205 7 200.089 145.771 8 209.899 155.815 Factor of Safety *** 1.844 *** **** END OF GSTABL7 OUTPUT **** 05010015020025030035040005010015020025021014-01: 1-1'; P-Static; Design; Along Lowest Clay Layerp:\2021\21014-01 kb carlsbad - marja acres\sted\1-1'\06p.pl2 Run By: RTE 7/21/2021 04:55PM1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 33311333111123232222W1W1W1bcdefghija# FSa 1.33b 1.33c1.33d 1.33e 1.33f 1.33g 1.33h 1.33i 1.33j 1.33SoilDesc.AfTsaQalSoilTypeNo.123TotalUnit Wt.(pcf)120.0120.0120.0SaturatedUnit Wt.(pcf)120.0120.0120.0CohesionIntercept(psf)240.0Aniso240.0FrictionAngle(deg)36.0Aniso31.0PorePressureParam.0.000.000.00PressureConstant(psf)0.00.00.0Piez.SurfaceNo.W1W1W1Load ValuePeak(A) 0.340(g)kh Coef. 0.150(g)<GSTABL7 v.2 FSmin=1.33Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method for the case of c & phi both > 0 05010015020025030035040005010015020025021014-01: 1-1'; P-Static; Design; Along Lowest Clay Layerp:\2021\21014-01 kb carlsbad - marja acres\sted\1-1'\06p.plt Run By: RTE 7/21/2021 04:55PM1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 33311333111123232222W1W1W1 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1-1'\06p.OUT Page 1 *** GSTABL7 *** ** GSTABL7 by Dr. Garry H. Gregory, Ph.D.,P.E.,D.GE ** ** Original Version 1.0, January 1996; Current Ver. 2.005.3, Feb. 2013 ** (All Rights Reserved-Unauthorized Use Prohibited) ********************************************************************************* SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS SYSTEM Modified Bishop, Simplified Janbu, or GLE Method of Slices. (Includes Spencer & Morgenstern-Price Type Analysis) Including Pier/Pile, Reinforcement, Soil Nail, Tieback, Nonlinear Undrained Shear Strength, Curved Phi Envelope, Anisotropic Soil, Fiber-Reinforced Soil, Boundary Loads, Water Surfaces, Pseudo-Static & Newmark Earthquake, and Applied Forces. ********************************************************************************* Analysis Run Date: 7/21/2021 Time of Run: 04:55PM Run By: RTE Input Data Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1-1'\06p.in Output Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1-1'\06p.OUT Unit System: English Plotted Output Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1-1'\06p.PLT PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: 21014-01: 1-1'; P-Static; Design; Along Lowest Clay Layer BOUNDARY COORDINATES 13 Top Boundaries 20 Total Boundaries Boundary X-Left Y-Left X-Right Y-Right Soil Type No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Below Bnd 1 0.00 116.00 35.00 115.00 3 2 35.00 115.00 60.00 120.00 3 3 60.00 120.00 65.00 123.00 3 4 65.00 123.00 80.00 129.00 1 5 80.00 129.00 96.00 130.00 1 6 96.00 130.00 106.00 130.00 3 7 106.00 130.00 115.00 137.00 3 8 115.00 137.00 140.00 143.00 3 9 140.00 143.00 145.00 144.00 1 10 145.00 144.00 147.00 148.00 1 11 147.00 148.00 161.00 155.00 1 12 161.00 155.00 221.00 156.00 1 13 221.00 156.00 400.00 159.00 2 14 140.00 143.00 144.00 138.00 3 15 144.00 138.00 221.00 156.00 2 16 65.00 123.00 96.00 130.00 3 17 0.00 104.00 25.00 96.00 2 18 25.00 96.00 40.00 99.00 2 19 40.00 99.00 120.00 132.00 2 20 120.00 132.00 144.00 138.00 2 Default Y-Origin = 0.00(ft) Default X-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) Default Y-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS 3 Type(s) of Soil Soil Total Saturated Cohesion Friction Pore Pressure Piez. Type Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Pressure Constant Surface No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) Param. (psf) No. 1 120.0 120.0 240.0 36.0 0.00 0.0 1 2 120.0 120.0 240.0 36.0 0.00 0.0 1 3 120.0 120.0 240.0 31.0 0.00 0.0 1 ANISOTROPIC STRENGTH PARAMETERS 1 soil type(s) Soil Type 2 Is Anisotropic Number Of Direction Ranges Specified = 3 Direction Counterclockwise Cohesion Friction Range Direction Limit Intercept Angle No. (deg) (psf) (deg) 1 3.0 240.00 36.00 2 18.0 240.00 17.00 3 90.0 240.00 36.00 ANISOTROPIC SOIL NOTES: (1) An input value of 0.01 for C and/or Phi will cause Aniso P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1-1'\06p.OUT Page 2 C and/or Phi to be ignored in that range. (2) An input value of 0.02 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with no water weight in the tension crack. (3) An input value of 0.03 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with water weight in the tension crack. 1 PIEZOMETRIC SURFACE(S) SPECIFIED Unit Weight of Water = 62.40 (pcf) Piezometric Surface No. 1 Specified by 3 Coordinate Points Pore Pressure Inclination Factor = 0.50 Point X-Water Y-Water No. (ft) (ft) 1 40.00 111.00 2 200.00 110.00 3 360.00 101.00 Specified Peak Ground Acceleration Coefficient (A) = 0.340(g) Specified Horizontal Earthquake Coefficient (kh) = 0.150(g) Specified Vertical Earthquake Coefficient (kv) = 0.000(g) Specified Seismic Pore-Pressure Factor = 0.000 Janbus Empirical Coef is being used for the case of c & phi both > 0 A Critical Failure Surface Searching Method, Using A Random Technique For Generating Sliding Block Surfaces, Has Been Specified. 4000 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated. 2 Boxes Specified For Generation Of Central Block Base Length Of Line Segments For Active And Passive Portions Of Sliding Block Is 20.0 Box X-Left Y-Left X-Right Y-Right Height No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) 1 52.00 80.00 160.00 108.00 3.00 2 160.10 108.00 240.00 127.00 3.00 Following Are Displayed The Ten Most Critical Of The Trial Failure Surfaces Evaluated. They Are Ordered - Most Critical First. * * Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method * * Total Number of Trial Surfaces Attempted = 4000 Number of Trial Surfaces With Valid FS = 4000 Statistical Data On All Valid FS Values: FS Max = 7.396 FS Min = 1.326 FS Ave = 2.085 Standard Deviation = 0.681 Coefficient of Variation = 32.66 % Failure Surface Specified By 9 Coordinate Points Point X-Surf Y-Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 8.336 115.762 2 12.628 111.618 3 28.955 100.067 4 46.440 90.356 5 65.441 84.114 6 228.525 122.836 7 241.778 137.815 8 255.658 152.214 9 259.475 156.645 Factor of Safety *** 1.326 *** **** END OF GSTABL7 OUTPUT **** P:\2021\21014-01 KB CARLSBAD - MARJA ACRES\STED\1A-1A'\SUMMARY OF SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS 1A-1A'.DOC Summary of Slope Stability Analysis Cross-Section 1a-1a' Filename Description Factor of Safety (FS) Static Pseudostatic 01, 01p Design Profile; 29' High MSE Wall w/ 22' Long 8XT Grids; Circular Analysis 1.52 1.48 01t Temporary Backcut; Circular Analysis 1.95 -- 03-sp, 03p-sp Design Profile; 29' High MSE Wall w/ 22' Long 8XT Grids; Analyzed along Lower Clay Bed 1.70 1.48 03t Temporary Backcut; Analyzed along Lower Clay Bed 1.62 -- 05t Temporary Backcut; Analyzed along Middle Clay Bed 1.83 -- 06t Temporary Backcut; Analyzed along Upper Clay Bed 2.09 -- Project No.: 21014-01 Project Name: Marja Acres NMG 040801201602002402803200408012016020021014-01; 1a-1a'; Static; Design; MSE Wall; 8XT Grids 22' Long; Circularp:\2021\21014-01 kb carlsbad - marja acres\sted\1a-1a'\01.pl2 Run By: RTE 7/27/2021 08:11AM1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 3311111111111322222222222R1 4419 Lb/ftR2 4419R3 4419R4 4419R5 4419R6 4419R7 4419R8 4419R9 4419R10 4419R11 4419R12 4419R13 4419R14 4419bcdefghija# FSa 1.52b 1.53c1.53d 1.53e 1.53f 1.54g 1.54h 1.55i 1.55j 1.55SoilDesc.AfTsaQalQaloSoilTypeNo.1234TotalUnit Wt.(pcf)120.0120.0120.0120.0SaturatedUnit Wt.(pcf)120.0120.0120.0120.0CohesionIntercept(psf)200.0Aniso200.0200.0FrictionAngle(deg)30.0Aniso26.030.0PorePressureParam.0.000.000.000.00PressureConstant(psf)0.00.00.00.0Piez.SurfaceNo.W1W1W1W1GSTABL7 v.2 FSmin=1.52Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Modified Bishop Method 040801201602002402803200408012016020021014-01; 1a-1a'; Static; Design; MSE Wall; 8XT Grids 22' Long; Circularp:\2021\21014-01 kb carlsbad - marja acres\sted\1a-1a'\01.plt Run By: RTE 7/27/2021 08:11AM1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 3311111111111322222222222R1 4419 Lb/ftR2 4419R3 4419R4 4419R5 4419R6 4419R7 4419R8 4419R9 4419R10 4419R11 4419R12 4419R13 4419R14 4419 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\01.OUT Page 1 *** GSTABL7 *** ** GSTABL7 by Dr. Garry H. Gregory, Ph.D.,P.E.,D.GE ** ** Original Version 1.0, January 1996; Current Ver. 2.005.3, Feb. 2013 ** (All Rights Reserved-Unauthorized Use Prohibited) ********************************************************************************* SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS SYSTEM Modified Bishop, Simplified Janbu, or GLE Method of Slices. (Includes Spencer & Morgenstern-Price Type Analysis) Including Pier/Pile, Reinforcement, Soil Nail, Tieback, Nonlinear Undrained Shear Strength, Curved Phi Envelope, Anisotropic Soil, Fiber-Reinforced Soil, Boundary Loads, Water Surfaces, Pseudo-Static & Newmark Earthquake, and Applied Forces. ********************************************************************************* Analysis Run Date: 7/27/2021 Time of Run: 08:11AM Run By: RTE Input Data Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\01.in Output Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\01.OU T Unit System: English Plotted Output Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\01.PL T PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: 21014-01; 1a-1a'; Static; Design; MSE Wa ll; 8XT Grids 22' Long; Circular BOUNDARY COORDINATES 13 Top Boundaries 25 Total Boundaries Boundary X-Left Y-Left X-Right Y-Right Soil Type No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Below Bnd 1 0.00 38.00 80.00 42.00 3 2 80.00 42.00 103.00 47.00 3 3 103.00 47.00 110.00 49.00 1 4 110.00 49.00 115.00 78.00 1 5 115.00 78.00 130.00 78.00 1 6 130.00 78.00 130.10 77.00 1 7 130.10 77.00 175.00 77.00 1 8 175.00 77.00 175.10 78.00 1 9 175.10 78.00 237.00 78.00 1 10 237.00 78.00 237.10 74.00 1 11 237.10 74.00 260.00 74.00 1 12 260.00 74.00 260.10 78.00 1 13 260.10 78.00 320.00 78.00 1 14 103.00 47.00 108.00 42.00 3 15 108.00 42.00 113.00 37.00 2 16 113.00 37.00 138.00 37.00 2 17 138.00 37.00 166.00 50.00 2 18 166.00 50.00 187.00 55.00 2 19 187.00 55.00 218.00 73.00 2 20 218.00 73.00 235.00 73.00 2 21 235.00 73.00 235.10 70.00 2 22 235.10 70.00 262.00 70.00 2 23 262.00 70.00 262.10 74.00 2 24 262.10 74.00 320.00 74.00 2 25 0.00 15.00 108.00 42.00 2 Default Y-Origin = 0.00(ft) Default X-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) Default Y-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS 4 Type(s) of Soil Soil Total Saturated Cohesion Friction Pore Pressure Piez. Type Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Pressure Constant Surface No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) Param. (psf) No. 1 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.00 0.0 1 2 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.00 0.0 1 3 120.0 120.0 200.0 26.0 0.00 0.0 1 4 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.00 0.0 1 ANISOTROPIC STRENGTH PARAMETERS 1 soil type(s) Soil Type 2 Is Anisotropic P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\01.OUT Page 2 Number Of Direction Ranges Specified = 3 Direction Counterclockwise Cohesion Friction Range Direction Limit Intercept Angle No. (deg) (psf) (deg) 1 0.0 200.00 30.00 2 7.0 200.00 14.00 3 90.0 200.00 30.00 ANISOTROPIC SOIL NOTES: (1) An input value of 0.01 for C and/or Phi will cause Aniso C and/or Phi to be ignored in that range. (2) An input value of 0.02 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with no water weight in the tension crack. (3) An input value of 0.03 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with water weight in the tension crack. REINFORCING LAYER(S) 14 REINFORCING LAYER(S) SPECIFIED REINFORCING LAYER NO. 1 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 110.00 49.00 0.00 0.000 2 113.00 49.00 4419.00 0.000 3 115.29 49.00 4419.00 0.000 4 117.57 49.00 4419.00 0.000 5 119.86 49.00 4419.00 0.000 6 122.14 49.00 4419.00 0.000 7 124.43 49.00 4419.00 0.000 8 126.71 49.00 4419.00 0.000 9 129.00 49.00 4419.00 0.000 10 132.00 49.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 2 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 110.34 51.00 0.00 0.000 2 113.34 51.00 4419.00 0.000 3 115.63 51.00 4419.00 0.000 4 117.92 51.00 4419.00 0.000 5 120.20 51.00 4419.00 0.000 6 122.49 51.00 4419.00 0.000 7 124.77 51.00 4419.00 0.000 8 127.06 51.00 4419.00 0.000 9 129.34 51.00 4419.00 0.000 10 132.34 51.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 3 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 110.69 53.00 0.00 0.000 2 113.69 53.00 4419.00 0.000 3 115.98 53.00 4419.00 0.000 4 118.26 53.00 4419.00 0.000 5 120.55 53.00 4419.00 0.000 6 122.83 53.00 4419.00 0.000 7 125.12 53.00 4419.00 0.000 8 127.40 53.00 4419.00 0.000 9 129.69 53.00 4419.00 0.000 10 132.69 53.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 4 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 111.03 55.00 0.00 0.000 2 114.03 55.00 4419.00 0.000 3 116.32 55.00 4419.00 0.000 4 118.61 55.00 4419.00 0.000 5 120.89 55.00 4419.00 0.000 6 123.18 55.00 4419.00 0.000 7 125.46 55.00 4419.00 0.000 8 127.75 55.00 4419.00 0.000 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\01.OUT Page 3 9 130.03 55.00 4419.00 0.000 10 133.03 55.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 5 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 111.38 57.00 0.00 0.000 2 114.38 57.00 4419.00 0.000 3 116.67 57.00 4419.00 0.000 4 118.95 57.00 4419.00 0.000 5 121.24 57.00 4419.00 0.000 6 123.52 57.00 4419.00 0.000 7 125.81 57.00 4419.00 0.000 8 128.09 57.00 4419.00 0.000 9 130.38 57.00 4419.00 0.000 10 133.38 57.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 6 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 111.72 59.00 0.00 0.000 2 114.72 59.00 4419.00 0.000 3 117.01 59.00 4419.00 0.000 4 119.30 59.00 4419.00 0.000 5 121.58 59.00 4419.00 0.000 6 123.87 59.00 4419.00 0.000 7 126.15 59.00 4419.00 0.000 8 128.44 59.00 4419.00 0.000 9 130.72 59.00 4419.00 0.000 10 133.72 59.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 7 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 112.07 61.00 0.00 0.000 2 115.07 61.00 4419.00 0.000 3 117.35 61.00 4419.00 0.000 4 119.64 61.00 4419.00 0.000 5 121.93 61.00 4419.00 0.000 6 124.21 61.00 4419.00 0.000 7 126.50 61.00 4419.00 0.000 8 128.78 61.00 4419.00 0.000 9 131.07 61.00 4419.00 0.000 10 134.07 61.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 8 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 112.41 63.00 0.00 0.000 2 115.41 63.00 4419.00 0.000 3 117.70 63.00 4419.00 0.000 4 119.99 63.00 4419.00 0.000 5 122.27 63.00 4419.00 0.000 6 124.56 63.00 4419.00 0.000 7 126.84 63.00 4419.00 0.000 8 129.13 63.00 4419.00 0.000 9 131.41 63.00 4419.00 0.000 10 134.41 63.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 9 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 112.76 65.00 0.00 0.000 2 115.76 65.00 4419.00 0.000 3 118.04 65.00 4419.00 0.000 4 120.33 65.00 4419.00 0.000 5 122.62 65.00 4419.00 0.000 6 124.90 65.00 4419.00 0.000 7 127.19 65.00 4419.00 0.000 8 129.47 65.00 4419.00 0.000 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\01.OUT Page 4 9 131.76 65.00 4419.00 0.000 10 134.76 65.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 10 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 113.10 67.00 0.00 0.000 2 116.10 67.00 4419.00 0.000 3 118.39 67.00 4419.00 0.000 4 120.67 67.00 4419.00 0.000 5 122.96 67.00 4419.00 0.000 6 125.25 67.00 4419.00 0.000 7 127.53 67.00 4419.00 0.000 8 129.82 67.00 4419.00 0.000 9 132.10 67.00 4419.00 0.000 10 135.10 67.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 11 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 113.45 69.00 0.00 0.000 2 116.45 69.00 4419.00 0.000 3 118.73 69.00 4419.00 0.000 4 121.02 69.00 4419.00 0.000 5 123.31 69.00 4419.00 0.000 6 125.59 69.00 4419.00 0.000 7 127.88 69.00 4419.00 0.000 8 130.16 69.00 4419.00 0.000 9 132.45 69.00 4419.00 0.000 10 135.45 69.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 12 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 113.79 71.00 0.00 0.000 2 116.79 71.00 4419.00 0.000 3 119.08 71.00 4419.00 0.000 4 121.36 71.00 4419.00 0.000 5 123.65 71.00 4419.00 0.000 6 125.94 71.00 4419.00 0.000 7 128.22 71.00 4419.00 0.000 8 130.51 71.00 4419.00 0.000 9 132.79 71.00 4419.00 0.000 10 135.79 71.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 13 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 114.14 73.00 0.00 0.000 2 117.14 73.00 4419.00 0.000 3 119.42 73.00 4419.00 0.000 4 121.71 73.00 4419.00 0.000 5 124.00 73.00 4419.00 0.000 6 126.28 73.00 4419.00 0.000 7 128.57 73.00 4419.00 0.000 8 130.85 73.00 4419.00 0.000 9 133.14 73.00 4419.00 0.000 10 136.14 73.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 14 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 114.48 75.00 0.00 0.000 2 117.48 75.00 4419.00 0.000 3 119.77 75.00 4419.00 0.000 4 122.05 75.00 4419.00 0.000 5 124.34 75.00 4419.00 0.000 6 126.63 75.00 4419.00 0.000 7 128.91 75.00 4419.00 0.000 8 131.20 75.00 4419.00 0.000 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\01.OUT Page 5 9 133.48 75.00 4419.00 0.000 10 136.48 75.00 0.00 0.000 A Critical Failure Surface Searching Method, Using A Random Technique For Generating Circular Surfaces, Has Been Specified. 4800 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated. 80 Surface(s) Initiate(s) From Each Of 60 Points Equally Spaced Along The Ground Surface Between X = 40.00(ft) and X = 110.00(ft) Each Surface Terminates Between X = 115.00(ft) and X = 200.00(ft) Unless Further Limitations Were Imposed, The Minimum Elevation At Which A Surface Extends Is Y = 0.00(ft) 5.00(ft) Line Segments Define Each Trial Failure Surface. Following Are Displayed The Ten Most Critical Of The Trial Failure Surfaces Evaluated. They Are Ordered - Most Critical First. * * Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Modified Bishop Method * * Total Number of Trial Surfaces Attempted = 4800 Number of Trial Surfaces With Valid FS = 4800 Statistical Data On All Valid FS Values: FS Max = 9.119 FS Min = 1.519 FS Ave = 2.766 Standard Deviation = 1.089 Coefficient of Variation = 39.36 % Failure Surface Specified By 20 Coordinate Points Point X-Surf Y-Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 74.407 41.720 2 79.134 40.091 3 83.984 38.875 4 88.920 38.083 5 93.907 37.719 6 98.907 37.788 7 103.882 38.288 8 108.795 39.215 9 113.610 40.563 10 118.290 42.321 11 122.802 44.477 12 127.110 47.015 13 131.183 49.915 14 134.991 53.155 15 138.505 56.712 16 141.699 60.559 17 144.548 64.668 18 147.033 69.007 19 149.133 73.544 20 150.383 77.000 Circle Center At X = 95.616 ; Y = 95.494 ; and Radius = 57.806 Factor of Safety *** 1.519 *** **** END OF GSTABL7 OUTPUT **** 040801201602002402803200408012016020021014-01; 1a-1a'; P-Static; Design; MSE Wall; 8XT Grids 22' Long; Circularp:\2021\21014-01 kb carlsbad - marja acres\sted\1a-1a'\01p.pl2 Run By: RTE 7/27/2021 08:16AM1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 3311111111111322222222222R1 4419 Lb/ftR2 4419R3 4419R4 4419R5 4419R6 4419R7 4419R8 4419R9 4419R10 4419R11 4419R12 4419R13 4419R14 4419bcdefghija# FSa 1.48b 1.48c1.49d 1.49e 1.50f 1.50g 1.50h 1.50i 1.51j 1.51SoilDesc.AfTsaQalQaloSoilTypeNo.1234TotalUnit Wt.(pcf)120.0120.0120.0120.0SaturatedUnit Wt.(pcf)120.0120.0120.0120.0CohesionIntercept(psf)240.0Aniso240.0240.0FrictionAngle(deg)36.0Aniso31.036.0PorePressureParam.0.000.000.000.00PressureConstant(psf)0.00.00.00.0Piez.SurfaceNo.W1W1W1W1Load ValuePeak(A) 0.340(g)kh Coef. 0.150(g)<GSTABL7 v.2 FSmin=1.48Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Modified Bishop Method 040801201602002402803200408012016020021014-01; 1a-1a'; P-Static; Design; MSE Wall; 8XT Grids 22' Long; Circularp:\2021\21014-01 kb carlsbad - marja acres\sted\1a-1a'\01p.plt Run By: RTE 7/27/2021 08:16AM1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 3311111111111322222222222R1 4419 Lb/ftR2 4419R3 4419R4 4419R5 4419R6 4419R7 4419R8 4419R9 4419R10 4419R11 4419R12 4419R13 4419R14 4419 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\01p.OUT Page 1 *** GSTABL7 *** ** GSTABL7 by Dr. Garry H. Gregory, Ph.D.,P.E.,D.GE ** ** Original Version 1.0, January 1996; Current Ver. 2.005.3, Feb. 2013 ** (All Rights Reserved-Unauthorized Use Prohibited) ********************************************************************************* SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS SYSTEM Modified Bishop, Simplified Janbu, or GLE Method of Slices. (Includes Spencer & Morgenstern-Price Type Analysis) Including Pier/Pile, Reinforcement, Soil Nail, Tieback, Nonlinear Undrained Shear Strength, Curved Phi Envelope, Anisotropic Soil, Fiber-Reinforced Soil, Boundary Loads, Water Surfaces, Pseudo-Static & Newmark Earthquake, and Applied Forces. ********************************************************************************* Analysis Run Date: 7/27/2021 Time of Run: 08:16AM Run By: RTE Input Data Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\01p.i n Output Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\01p.O UT Unit System: English Plotted Output Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\01p.P LT PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: 21014-01; 1a-1a'; P-Static; Design; MSE Wall; 8XT Grids 22' Long; Circular BOUNDARY COORDINATES 13 Top Boundaries 25 Total Boundaries Boundary X-Left Y-Left X-Right Y-Right Soil Type No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Below Bnd 1 0.00 38.00 80.00 42.00 3 2 80.00 42.00 103.00 47.00 3 3 103.00 47.00 110.00 49.00 1 4 110.00 49.00 115.00 78.00 1 5 115.00 78.00 130.00 78.00 1 6 130.00 78.00 130.10 77.00 1 7 130.10 77.00 175.00 77.00 1 8 175.00 77.00 175.10 78.00 1 9 175.10 78.00 237.00 78.00 1 10 237.00 78.00 237.10 74.00 1 11 237.10 74.00 260.00 74.00 1 12 260.00 74.00 260.10 78.00 1 13 260.10 78.00 320.00 78.00 1 14 103.00 47.00 108.00 42.00 3 15 108.00 42.00 113.00 37.00 2 16 113.00 37.00 138.00 37.00 2 17 138.00 37.00 166.00 50.00 2 18 166.00 50.00 187.00 55.00 2 19 187.00 55.00 218.00 73.00 2 20 218.00 73.00 235.00 73.00 2 21 235.00 73.00 235.10 70.00 2 22 235.10 70.00 262.00 70.00 2 23 262.00 70.00 262.10 74.00 2 24 262.10 74.00 320.00 74.00 2 25 0.00 15.00 108.00 42.00 2 Default Y-Origin = 0.00(ft) Default X-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) Default Y-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS 4 Type(s) of Soil Soil Total Saturated Cohesion Friction Pore Pressure Piez. Type Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Pressure Constant Surface No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) Param. (psf) No. 1 120.0 120.0 240.0 36.0 0.00 0.0 1 2 120.0 120.0 240.0 36.0 0.00 0.0 1 3 120.0 120.0 240.0 31.0 0.00 0.0 1 4 120.0 120.0 240.0 36.0 0.00 0.0 1 ANISOTROPIC STRENGTH PARAMETERS 1 soil type(s) P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\01p.OUT Page 2 Soil Type 2 Is Anisotropic Number Of Direction Ranges Specified = 3 Direction Counterclockwise Cohesion Friction Range Direction Limit Intercept Angle No. (deg) (psf) (deg) 1 0.0 240.00 36.00 2 7.0 240.00 17.00 3 90.0 240.00 36.00 ANISOTROPIC SOIL NOTES: (1) An input value of 0.01 for C and/or Phi will cause Aniso C and/or Phi to be ignored in that range. (2) An input value of 0.02 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with no water weight in the tension crack. (3) An input value of 0.03 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with water weight in the tension crack. Specified Peak Ground Acceleration Coefficient (A) = 0.340(g) Specified Horizontal Earthquake Coefficient (kh) = 0.150(g) Specified Vertical Earthquake Coefficient (kv) = 0.000(g) Specified Seismic Pore-Pressure Factor = 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER(S) 14 REINFORCING LAYER(S) SPECIFIED REINFORCING LAYER NO. 1 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 110.00 49.00 0.00 0.000 2 113.00 49.00 4419.00 0.000 3 115.29 49.00 4419.00 0.000 4 117.57 49.00 4419.00 0.000 5 119.86 49.00 4419.00 0.000 6 122.14 49.00 4419.00 0.000 7 124.43 49.00 4419.00 0.000 8 126.71 49.00 4419.00 0.000 9 129.00 49.00 4419.00 0.000 10 132.00 49.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 2 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 110.34 51.00 0.00 0.000 2 113.34 51.00 4419.00 0.000 3 115.63 51.00 4419.00 0.000 4 117.92 51.00 4419.00 0.000 5 120.20 51.00 4419.00 0.000 6 122.49 51.00 4419.00 0.000 7 124.77 51.00 4419.00 0.000 8 127.06 51.00 4419.00 0.000 9 129.34 51.00 4419.00 0.000 10 132.34 51.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 3 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 110.69 53.00 0.00 0.000 2 113.69 53.00 4419.00 0.000 3 115.98 53.00 4419.00 0.000 4 118.26 53.00 4419.00 0.000 5 120.55 53.00 4419.00 0.000 6 122.83 53.00 4419.00 0.000 7 125.12 53.00 4419.00 0.000 8 127.40 53.00 4419.00 0.000 9 129.69 53.00 4419.00 0.000 10 132.69 53.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 4 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 111.03 55.00 0.00 0.000 2 114.03 55.00 4419.00 0.000 3 116.32 55.00 4419.00 0.000 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\01p.OUT Page 3 4 118.61 55.00 4419.00 0.000 5 120.89 55.00 4419.00 0.000 6 123.18 55.00 4419.00 0.000 7 125.46 55.00 4419.00 0.000 8 127.75 55.00 4419.00 0.000 9 130.03 55.00 4419.00 0.000 10 133.03 55.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 5 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 111.38 57.00 0.00 0.000 2 114.38 57.00 4419.00 0.000 3 116.67 57.00 4419.00 0.000 4 118.95 57.00 4419.00 0.000 5 121.24 57.00 4419.00 0.000 6 123.52 57.00 4419.00 0.000 7 125.81 57.00 4419.00 0.000 8 128.09 57.00 4419.00 0.000 9 130.38 57.00 4419.00 0.000 10 133.38 57.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 6 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 111.72 59.00 0.00 0.000 2 114.72 59.00 4419.00 0.000 3 117.01 59.00 4419.00 0.000 4 119.30 59.00 4419.00 0.000 5 121.58 59.00 4419.00 0.000 6 123.87 59.00 4419.00 0.000 7 126.15 59.00 4419.00 0.000 8 128.44 59.00 4419.00 0.000 9 130.72 59.00 4419.00 0.000 10 133.72 59.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 7 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 112.07 61.00 0.00 0.000 2 115.07 61.00 4419.00 0.000 3 117.35 61.00 4419.00 0.000 4 119.64 61.00 4419.00 0.000 5 121.93 61.00 4419.00 0.000 6 124.21 61.00 4419.00 0.000 7 126.50 61.00 4419.00 0.000 8 128.78 61.00 4419.00 0.000 9 131.07 61.00 4419.00 0.000 10 134.07 61.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 8 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 112.41 63.00 0.00 0.000 2 115.41 63.00 4419.00 0.000 3 117.70 63.00 4419.00 0.000 4 119.99 63.00 4419.00 0.000 5 122.27 63.00 4419.00 0.000 6 124.56 63.00 4419.00 0.000 7 126.84 63.00 4419.00 0.000 8 129.13 63.00 4419.00 0.000 9 131.41 63.00 4419.00 0.000 10 134.41 63.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 9 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 112.76 65.00 0.00 0.000 2 115.76 65.00 4419.00 0.000 3 118.04 65.00 4419.00 0.000 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\01p.OUT Page 4 4 120.33 65.00 4419.00 0.000 5 122.62 65.00 4419.00 0.000 6 124.90 65.00 4419.00 0.000 7 127.19 65.00 4419.00 0.000 8 129.47 65.00 4419.00 0.000 9 131.76 65.00 4419.00 0.000 10 134.76 65.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 10 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 113.10 67.00 0.00 0.000 2 116.10 67.00 4419.00 0.000 3 118.39 67.00 4419.00 0.000 4 120.67 67.00 4419.00 0.000 5 122.96 67.00 4419.00 0.000 6 125.25 67.00 4419.00 0.000 7 127.53 67.00 4419.00 0.000 8 129.82 67.00 4419.00 0.000 9 132.10 67.00 4419.00 0.000 10 135.10 67.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 11 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 113.45 69.00 0.00 0.000 2 116.45 69.00 4419.00 0.000 3 118.73 69.00 4419.00 0.000 4 121.02 69.00 4419.00 0.000 5 123.31 69.00 4419.00 0.000 6 125.59 69.00 4419.00 0.000 7 127.88 69.00 4419.00 0.000 8 130.16 69.00 4419.00 0.000 9 132.45 69.00 4419.00 0.000 10 135.45 69.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 12 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 113.79 71.00 0.00 0.000 2 116.79 71.00 4419.00 0.000 3 119.08 71.00 4419.00 0.000 4 121.36 71.00 4419.00 0.000 5 123.65 71.00 4419.00 0.000 6 125.94 71.00 4419.00 0.000 7 128.22 71.00 4419.00 0.000 8 130.51 71.00 4419.00 0.000 9 132.79 71.00 4419.00 0.000 10 135.79 71.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 13 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 114.14 73.00 0.00 0.000 2 117.14 73.00 4419.00 0.000 3 119.42 73.00 4419.00 0.000 4 121.71 73.00 4419.00 0.000 5 124.00 73.00 4419.00 0.000 6 126.28 73.00 4419.00 0.000 7 128.57 73.00 4419.00 0.000 8 130.85 73.00 4419.00 0.000 9 133.14 73.00 4419.00 0.000 10 136.14 73.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 14 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 114.48 75.00 0.00 0.000 2 117.48 75.00 4419.00 0.000 3 119.77 75.00 4419.00 0.000 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\01p.OUT Page 5 4 122.05 75.00 4419.00 0.000 5 124.34 75.00 4419.00 0.000 6 126.63 75.00 4419.00 0.000 7 128.91 75.00 4419.00 0.000 8 131.20 75.00 4419.00 0.000 9 133.48 75.00 4419.00 0.000 10 136.48 75.00 0.00 0.000 A Critical Failure Surface Searching Method, Using A Random Technique For Generating Circular Surfaces, Has Been Specified. 4800 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated. 80 Surface(s) Initiate(s) From Each Of 60 Points Equally Spaced Along The Ground Surface Between X = 40.00(ft) and X = 110.00(ft) Each Surface Terminates Between X = 115.00(ft) and X = 200.00(ft) Unless Further Limitations Were Imposed, The Minimum Elevation At Which A Surface Extends Is Y = 0.00(ft) 5.00(ft) Line Segments Define Each Trial Failure Surface. Following Are Displayed The Ten Most Critical Of The Trial Failure Surfaces Evaluated. They Are Ordered - Most Critical First. * * Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Modified Bishop Method * * Total Number of Trial Surfaces Attempted = 4800 Number of Trial Surfaces With Valid FS = 4800 Statistical Data On All Valid FS Values: FS Max = 5.720 FS Min = 1.478 FS Ave = 2.372 Standard Deviation = 0.702 Coefficient of Variation = 29.60 % Failure Surface Specified By 20 Coordinate Points Point X-Surf Y-Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 74.407 41.720 2 79.134 40.091 3 83.984 38.875 4 88.920 38.083 5 93.907 37.719 6 98.907 37.788 7 103.882 38.288 8 108.795 39.215 9 113.610 40.563 10 118.290 42.321 11 122.802 44.477 12 127.110 47.015 13 131.183 49.915 14 134.991 53.155 15 138.505 56.712 16 141.699 60.559 17 144.548 64.668 18 147.033 69.007 19 149.133 73.544 20 150.383 77.000 Circle Center At X = 95.616 ; Y = 95.494 ; and Radius = 57.806 Factor of Safety *** 1.478 *** **** END OF GSTABL7 OUTPUT **** 040801201602002402803200408012016020021014-01; 1a-1a'; Static; Temporary Backcut; Circularp:\2021\21014-01 kb carlsbad - marja acres\sted\1a-1a'\01t.pl2 Run By: RTE 7/27/2021 09:24AM1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 33 322222222222bcdefghija# FSa 1.95b 1.97c1.98d 1.99e 1.99f 2.00g 2.01h 2.01i 2.01j 2.01SoilDesc.AfTsaQalQaloSoilTypeNo.1234TotalUnit Wt.(pcf)120.0120.0120.0120.0SaturatedUnit Wt.(pcf)120.0120.0120.0120.0CohesionIntercept(psf)200.0Aniso200.0200.0FrictionAngle(deg)30.0Aniso26.030.0PorePressureParam.0.000.000.000.00PressureConstant(psf)0.00.00.00.0Piez.SurfaceNo.W1W1W1W1GSTABL7 v.2 FSmin=1.95Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Modified Bishop Method 040801201602002402803200408012016020021014-01; 1a-1a'; Static; Temporary Backcut; Circularp:\2021\21014-01 kb carlsbad - marja acres\sted\1a-1a'\01t.plt Run By: RTE 7/27/2021 09:24AM1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 33 322222222222 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\01t.OUT Page 1 *** GSTABL7 *** ** GSTABL7 by Dr. Garry H. Gregory, Ph.D.,P.E.,D.GE ** ** Original Version 1.0, January 1996; Current Ver. 2.005.3, Feb. 2013 ** (All Rights Reserved-Unauthorized Use Prohibited) ********************************************************************************* SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS SYSTEM Modified Bishop, Simplified Janbu, or GLE Method of Slices. (Includes Spencer & Morgenstern-Price Type Analysis) Including Pier/Pile, Reinforcement, Soil Nail, Tieback, Nonlinear Undrained Shear Strength, Curved Phi Envelope, Anisotropic Soil, Fiber-Reinforced Soil, Boundary Loads, Water Surfaces, Pseudo-Static & Newmark Earthquake, and Applied Forces. ********************************************************************************* Analysis Run Date: 7/27/2021 Time of Run: 09:24AM Run By: RTE Input Data Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\01t.i n Output Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\01t.O UT Unit System: English Plotted Output Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\01t.P LT PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: 21014-01; 1a-1a'; Static; Temporary Back cut; Circular BOUNDARY COORDINATES 13 Top Boundaries 14 Total Boundaries Boundary X-Left Y-Left X-Right Y-Right Soil Type No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Below Bnd 1 0.00 38.00 80.00 42.00 3 2 80.00 42.00 103.00 47.00 3 3 103.00 47.00 108.00 42.00 3 4 108.00 42.00 113.00 37.00 2 5 113.00 37.00 138.00 37.00 2 6 138.00 37.00 166.00 50.00 2 7 166.00 50.00 187.00 55.00 2 8 187.00 55.00 218.00 73.00 2 9 218.00 73.00 235.00 73.00 2 10 235.00 73.00 235.10 70.00 2 11 235.10 70.00 262.00 70.00 2 12 262.00 70.00 262.10 74.00 2 13 262.10 74.00 320.00 74.00 2 14 0.00 15.00 108.00 42.00 2 Default Y-Origin = 0.00(ft) Default X-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) Default Y-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS 4 Type(s) of Soil Soil Total Saturated Cohesion Friction Pore Pressure Piez. Type Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Pressure Constant Surface No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) Param. (psf) No. 1 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.00 0.0 1 2 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.00 0.0 1 3 120.0 120.0 200.0 26.0 0.00 0.0 1 4 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.00 0.0 1 ANISOTROPIC STRENGTH PARAMETERS 1 soil type(s) Soil Type 2 Is Anisotropic Number Of Direction Ranges Specified = 3 Direction Counterclockwise Cohesion Friction Range Direction Limit Intercept Angle No. (deg) (psf) (deg) 1 0.0 200.00 30.00 2 7.0 200.00 14.00 3 90.0 200.00 30.00 ANISOTROPIC SOIL NOTES: (1) An input value of 0.01 for C and/or Phi will cause Aniso C and/or Phi to be ignored in that range. P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\01t.OUT Page 2 (2) An input value of 0.02 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with no water weight in the tension crack. (3) An input value of 0.03 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with water weight in the tension crack. REINFORCING LAYER(S) 14 REINFORCING LAYER(S) SPECIFIED REINFORCING LAYER NO. 1 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 110.00 49.00 0.00 0.000 2 113.00 49.00 4419.00 0.000 3 115.29 49.00 4419.00 0.000 4 117.57 49.00 4419.00 0.000 5 119.86 49.00 4419.00 0.000 6 122.14 49.00 4419.00 0.000 7 124.43 49.00 4419.00 0.000 8 126.71 49.00 4419.00 0.000 9 129.00 49.00 4419.00 0.000 10 132.00 49.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 2 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 110.34 51.00 0.00 0.000 2 113.34 51.00 4419.00 0.000 3 115.63 51.00 4419.00 0.000 4 117.92 51.00 4419.00 0.000 5 120.20 51.00 4419.00 0.000 6 122.49 51.00 4419.00 0.000 7 124.77 51.00 4419.00 0.000 8 127.06 51.00 4419.00 0.000 9 129.34 51.00 4419.00 0.000 10 132.34 51.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 3 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 110.69 53.00 0.00 0.000 2 113.69 53.00 4419.00 0.000 3 115.98 53.00 4419.00 0.000 4 118.26 53.00 4419.00 0.000 5 120.55 53.00 4419.00 0.000 6 122.83 53.00 4419.00 0.000 7 125.12 53.00 4419.00 0.000 8 127.40 53.00 4419.00 0.000 9 129.69 53.00 4419.00 0.000 10 132.69 53.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 4 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 111.03 55.00 0.00 0.000 2 114.03 55.00 4419.00 0.000 3 116.32 55.00 4419.00 0.000 4 118.61 55.00 4419.00 0.000 5 120.89 55.00 4419.00 0.000 6 123.18 55.00 4419.00 0.000 7 125.46 55.00 4419.00 0.000 8 127.75 55.00 4419.00 0.000 9 130.03 55.00 4419.00 0.000 10 133.03 55.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 5 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 111.38 57.00 0.00 0.000 2 114.38 57.00 4419.00 0.000 3 116.67 57.00 4419.00 0.000 4 118.95 57.00 4419.00 0.000 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\01t.OUT Page 3 5 121.24 57.00 4419.00 0.000 6 123.52 57.00 4419.00 0.000 7 125.81 57.00 4419.00 0.000 8 128.09 57.00 4419.00 0.000 9 130.38 57.00 4419.00 0.000 10 133.38 57.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 6 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 111.72 59.00 0.00 0.000 2 114.72 59.00 4419.00 0.000 3 117.01 59.00 4419.00 0.000 4 119.30 59.00 4419.00 0.000 5 121.58 59.00 4419.00 0.000 6 123.87 59.00 4419.00 0.000 7 126.15 59.00 4419.00 0.000 8 128.44 59.00 4419.00 0.000 9 130.72 59.00 4419.00 0.000 10 133.72 59.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 7 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 112.07 61.00 0.00 0.000 2 115.07 61.00 4419.00 0.000 3 117.35 61.00 4419.00 0.000 4 119.64 61.00 4419.00 0.000 5 121.93 61.00 4419.00 0.000 6 124.21 61.00 4419.00 0.000 7 126.50 61.00 4419.00 0.000 8 128.78 61.00 4419.00 0.000 9 131.07 61.00 4419.00 0.000 10 134.07 61.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 8 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 112.41 63.00 0.00 0.000 2 115.41 63.00 4419.00 0.000 3 117.70 63.00 4419.00 0.000 4 119.99 63.00 4419.00 0.000 5 122.27 63.00 4419.00 0.000 6 124.56 63.00 4419.00 0.000 7 126.84 63.00 4419.00 0.000 8 129.13 63.00 4419.00 0.000 9 131.41 63.00 4419.00 0.000 10 134.41 63.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 9 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 112.76 65.00 0.00 0.000 2 115.76 65.00 4419.00 0.000 3 118.04 65.00 4419.00 0.000 4 120.33 65.00 4419.00 0.000 5 122.62 65.00 4419.00 0.000 6 124.90 65.00 4419.00 0.000 7 127.19 65.00 4419.00 0.000 8 129.47 65.00 4419.00 0.000 9 131.76 65.00 4419.00 0.000 10 134.76 65.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 10 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 113.10 67.00 0.00 0.000 2 116.10 67.00 4419.00 0.000 3 118.39 67.00 4419.00 0.000 4 120.67 67.00 4419.00 0.000 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\01t.OUT Page 4 5 122.96 67.00 4419.00 0.000 6 125.25 67.00 4419.00 0.000 7 127.53 67.00 4419.00 0.000 8 129.82 67.00 4419.00 0.000 9 132.10 67.00 4419.00 0.000 10 135.10 67.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 11 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 113.45 69.00 0.00 0.000 2 116.45 69.00 4419.00 0.000 3 118.73 69.00 4419.00 0.000 4 121.02 69.00 4419.00 0.000 5 123.31 69.00 4419.00 0.000 6 125.59 69.00 4419.00 0.000 7 127.88 69.00 4419.00 0.000 8 130.16 69.00 4419.00 0.000 9 132.45 69.00 4419.00 0.000 10 135.45 69.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 12 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 113.79 71.00 0.00 0.000 2 116.79 71.00 4419.00 0.000 3 119.08 71.00 4419.00 0.000 4 121.36 71.00 4419.00 0.000 5 123.65 71.00 4419.00 0.000 6 125.94 71.00 4419.00 0.000 7 128.22 71.00 4419.00 0.000 8 130.51 71.00 4419.00 0.000 9 132.79 71.00 4419.00 0.000 10 135.79 71.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 13 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 114.14 73.00 0.00 0.000 2 117.14 73.00 4419.00 0.000 3 119.42 73.00 4419.00 0.000 4 121.71 73.00 4419.00 0.000 5 124.00 73.00 4419.00 0.000 6 126.28 73.00 4419.00 0.000 7 128.57 73.00 4419.00 0.000 8 130.85 73.00 4419.00 0.000 9 133.14 73.00 4419.00 0.000 10 136.14 73.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 14 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 114.48 75.00 0.00 0.000 2 117.48 75.00 4419.00 0.000 3 119.77 75.00 4419.00 0.000 4 122.05 75.00 4419.00 0.000 5 124.34 75.00 4419.00 0.000 6 126.63 75.00 4419.00 0.000 7 128.91 75.00 4419.00 0.000 8 131.20 75.00 4419.00 0.000 9 133.48 75.00 4419.00 0.000 10 136.48 75.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER DATA HAS BEEN SUPPRESSED A Critical Failure Surface Searching Method, Using A Random Technique For Generating Circular Surfaces, Has Been Specified. 4800 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated. 80 Surface(s) Initiate(s) From Each Of 60 Points Equally Spaced Along The Ground Surface Between X = 113.00(ft) and X = 187.00(ft) Each Surface Terminates Between X = 218.00(ft) P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\01t.OUT Page 5 and X = 320.00(ft) Unless Further Limitations Were Imposed, The Minimum Elevation At Which A Surface Extends Is Y = 0.00(ft) 5.00(ft) Line Segments Define Each Trial Failure Surface. Following Are Displayed The Ten Most Critical Of The Trial Failure Surfaces Evaluated. They Are Ordered - Most Critical First. * * Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Modified Bishop Method * * Total Number of Trial Surfaces Attempted = 4800 Number of Trial Surfaces With Valid FS = 4800 Statistical Data On All Valid FS Values: FS Max = 9.063 FS Min = 1.953 FS Ave = 3.523 Standard Deviation = 1.126 Coefficient of Variation = 31.98 % Failure Surface Specified By 22 Coordinate Points Point X-Surf Y-Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 140.593 38.204 2 145.538 37.461 3 150.514 36.979 4 155.510 36.758 5 160.509 36.799 6 165.500 37.103 7 170.468 37.668 8 175.400 38.493 9 180.281 39.575 10 185.099 40.912 11 189.840 42.500 12 194.492 44.334 13 199.040 46.410 14 203.474 48.722 15 207.780 51.262 16 211.947 54.026 17 215.964 57.004 18 219.818 60.188 19 223.501 63.571 20 227.001 67.141 21 230.308 70.891 22 231.980 73.000 Circle Center At X = 157.229 ; Y = 131.919 ; and Radius = 95.180 Factor of Safety *** 1.953 *** **** END OF GSTABL7 OUTPUT **** 040801201602002402803200408012016020021014-01; 1a-1a'; Static; Design; MSE Wall; 8XT Grids 22' Long; Lowest Clay Bedp:\2021\21014-01 kb carlsbad - marja acres\sted\1a-1a'\03-sp.pl2 Run By: RTE 7/26/2021 04:08PM1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 3311111111111322222222222R1 4419 Lb/ftR2 4419R3 4419R4 4419R5 4419R6 4419R7 4419R8 4419R9 4419R10 4419R11 4419R12 4419R13 4419R14 4419bcdefghija# FSa 1.70b 1.70c1.70d 1.70e 1.70f 1.70g 1.70h 1.70i 1.70j 1.70SoilDesc.AfTsaQalQaloSoilTypeNo.1234TotalUnit Wt.(pcf)120.0120.0120.0120.0SaturatedUnit Wt.(pcf)120.0120.0120.0120.0CohesionIntercept(psf)200.0Aniso200.0200.0FrictionAngle(deg)30.0Aniso26.030.0PorePressureParam.0.000.000.000.00PressureConstant(psf)0.00.00.00.0Piez.SurfaceNo.W1W1W1W1GSTABL7 v.2 FSmin=1.70Safety Factors Are Calculated By GLE (Spencer`s) Method (0-2) 040801201602002402803200408012016020021014-01; 1a-1a'; Static; Design; MSE Wall; 8XT Grids 22' Long; Lowest Clay Bedp:\2021\21014-01 kb carlsbad - marja acres\sted\1a-1a'\03-sp.plt Run By: RTE 7/26/2021 04:08PM1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 3311111111111322222222222R1 4419 Lb/ftR2 4419R3 4419R4 4419R5 4419R6 4419R7 4419R8 4419R9 4419R10 4419R11 4419R12 4419R13 4419R14 4419 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\03-sp.OUT Page 1 *** GSTABL7 *** ** GSTABL7 by Dr. Garry H. Gregory, Ph.D.,P.E.,D.GE ** ** Original Version 1.0, January 1996; Current Ver. 2.005.3, Feb. 2013 ** (All Rights Reserved-Unauthorized Use Prohibited) ********************************************************************************* SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS SYSTEM Modified Bishop, Simplified Janbu, or GLE Method of Slices. (Includes Spencer & Morgenstern-Price Type Analysis) Including Pier/Pile, Reinforcement, Soil Nail, Tieback, Nonlinear Undrained Shear Strength, Curved Phi Envelope, Anisotropic Soil, Fiber-Reinforced Soil, Boundary Loads, Water Surfaces, Pseudo-Static & Newmark Earthquake, and Applied Forces. ********************************************************************************* Analysis Run Date: 7/26/2021 Time of Run: 04:08PM Run By: RTE Input Data Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\03-sp .in Output Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\03-sp .OUT Unit System: English Plotted Output Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\03-sp .PLT PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: 21014-01; 1a-1a'; Static; Design; MSE Wa ll; 8XT Grids 22' Long; Lowest Clay Bed BOUNDARY COORDINATES 13 Top Boundaries 25 Total Boundaries Boundary X-Left Y-Left X-Right Y-Right Soil Type No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Below Bnd 1 0.00 38.00 80.00 42.00 3 2 80.00 42.00 103.00 47.00 3 3 103.00 47.00 110.00 49.00 1 4 110.00 49.00 115.00 78.00 1 5 115.00 78.00 130.00 78.00 1 6 130.00 78.00 130.10 77.00 1 7 130.10 77.00 175.00 77.00 1 8 175.00 77.00 175.10 78.00 1 9 175.10 78.00 237.00 78.00 1 10 237.00 78.00 237.10 74.00 1 11 237.10 74.00 260.00 74.00 1 12 260.00 74.00 260.10 78.00 1 13 260.10 78.00 320.00 78.00 1 14 103.00 47.00 108.00 42.00 3 15 108.00 42.00 113.00 37.00 2 16 113.00 37.00 138.00 37.00 2 17 138.00 37.00 166.00 50.00 2 18 166.00 50.00 187.00 55.00 2 19 187.00 55.00 218.00 73.00 2 20 218.00 73.00 235.00 73.00 2 21 235.00 73.00 235.10 70.00 2 22 235.10 70.00 262.00 70.00 2 23 262.00 70.00 262.10 74.00 2 24 262.10 74.00 320.00 74.00 2 25 0.00 15.00 108.00 42.00 2 Default Y-Origin = 0.00(ft) Default X-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) Default Y-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS 4 Type(s) of Soil Soil Total Saturated Cohesion Friction Pore Pressure Piez. Type Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Pressure Constant Surface No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) Param. (psf) No. 1 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.00 0.0 1 2 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.00 0.0 1 3 120.0 120.0 200.0 26.0 0.00 0.0 1 4 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.00 0.0 1 ANISOTROPIC STRENGTH PARAMETERS 1 soil type(s) P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\03-sp.OUT Page 2 Soil Type 2 Is Anisotropic Number Of Direction Ranges Specified = 3 Direction Counterclockwise Cohesion Friction Range Direction Limit Intercept Angle No. (deg) (psf) (deg) 1 0.0 200.00 30.00 2 7.0 200.00 14.00 3 90.0 200.00 30.00 ANISOTROPIC SOIL NOTES: (1) An input value of 0.01 for C and/or Phi will cause Aniso C and/or Phi to be ignored in that range. (2) An input value of 0.02 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with no water weight in the tension crack. (3) An input value of 0.03 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with water weight in the tension crack. REINFORCING LAYER(S) 14 REINFORCING LAYER(S) SPECIFIED REINFORCING LAYER NO. 1 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 110.00 49.00 0.00 0.000 2 113.00 49.00 4419.00 0.000 3 115.29 49.00 4419.00 0.000 4 117.57 49.00 4419.00 0.000 5 119.86 49.00 4419.00 0.000 6 122.14 49.00 4419.00 0.000 7 124.43 49.00 4419.00 0.000 8 126.71 49.00 4419.00 0.000 9 129.00 49.00 4419.00 0.000 10 132.00 49.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 2 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 110.34 51.00 0.00 0.000 2 113.34 51.00 4419.00 0.000 3 115.63 51.00 4419.00 0.000 4 117.92 51.00 4419.00 0.000 5 120.20 51.00 4419.00 0.000 6 122.49 51.00 4419.00 0.000 7 124.77 51.00 4419.00 0.000 8 127.06 51.00 4419.00 0.000 9 129.34 51.00 4419.00 0.000 10 132.34 51.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 3 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 110.69 53.00 0.00 0.000 2 113.69 53.00 4419.00 0.000 3 115.98 53.00 4419.00 0.000 4 118.26 53.00 4419.00 0.000 5 120.55 53.00 4419.00 0.000 6 122.83 53.00 4419.00 0.000 7 125.12 53.00 4419.00 0.000 8 127.40 53.00 4419.00 0.000 9 129.69 53.00 4419.00 0.000 10 132.69 53.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 4 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 111.03 55.00 0.00 0.000 2 114.03 55.00 4419.00 0.000 3 116.32 55.00 4419.00 0.000 4 118.61 55.00 4419.00 0.000 5 120.89 55.00 4419.00 0.000 6 123.18 55.00 4419.00 0.000 7 125.46 55.00 4419.00 0.000 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\03-sp.OUT Page 3 8 127.75 55.00 4419.00 0.000 9 130.03 55.00 4419.00 0.000 10 133.03 55.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 5 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 111.38 57.00 0.00 0.000 2 114.38 57.00 4419.00 0.000 3 116.67 57.00 4419.00 0.000 4 118.95 57.00 4419.00 0.000 5 121.24 57.00 4419.00 0.000 6 123.52 57.00 4419.00 0.000 7 125.81 57.00 4419.00 0.000 8 128.09 57.00 4419.00 0.000 9 130.38 57.00 4419.00 0.000 10 133.38 57.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 6 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 111.72 59.00 0.00 0.000 2 114.72 59.00 4419.00 0.000 3 117.01 59.00 4419.00 0.000 4 119.30 59.00 4419.00 0.000 5 121.58 59.00 4419.00 0.000 6 123.87 59.00 4419.00 0.000 7 126.15 59.00 4419.00 0.000 8 128.44 59.00 4419.00 0.000 9 130.72 59.00 4419.00 0.000 10 133.72 59.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 7 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 112.07 61.00 0.00 0.000 2 115.07 61.00 4419.00 0.000 3 117.35 61.00 4419.00 0.000 4 119.64 61.00 4419.00 0.000 5 121.93 61.00 4419.00 0.000 6 124.21 61.00 4419.00 0.000 7 126.50 61.00 4419.00 0.000 8 128.78 61.00 4419.00 0.000 9 131.07 61.00 4419.00 0.000 10 134.07 61.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 8 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 112.41 63.00 0.00 0.000 2 115.41 63.00 4419.00 0.000 3 117.70 63.00 4419.00 0.000 4 119.99 63.00 4419.00 0.000 5 122.27 63.00 4419.00 0.000 6 124.56 63.00 4419.00 0.000 7 126.84 63.00 4419.00 0.000 8 129.13 63.00 4419.00 0.000 9 131.41 63.00 4419.00 0.000 10 134.41 63.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 9 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 112.76 65.00 0.00 0.000 2 115.76 65.00 4419.00 0.000 3 118.04 65.00 4419.00 0.000 4 120.33 65.00 4419.00 0.000 5 122.62 65.00 4419.00 0.000 6 124.90 65.00 4419.00 0.000 7 127.19 65.00 4419.00 0.000 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\03-sp.OUT Page 4 8 129.47 65.00 4419.00 0.000 9 131.76 65.00 4419.00 0.000 10 134.76 65.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 10 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 113.10 67.00 0.00 0.000 2 116.10 67.00 4419.00 0.000 3 118.39 67.00 4419.00 0.000 4 120.67 67.00 4419.00 0.000 5 122.96 67.00 4419.00 0.000 6 125.25 67.00 4419.00 0.000 7 127.53 67.00 4419.00 0.000 8 129.82 67.00 4419.00 0.000 9 132.10 67.00 4419.00 0.000 10 135.10 67.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 11 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 113.45 69.00 0.00 0.000 2 116.45 69.00 4419.00 0.000 3 118.73 69.00 4419.00 0.000 4 121.02 69.00 4419.00 0.000 5 123.31 69.00 4419.00 0.000 6 125.59 69.00 4419.00 0.000 7 127.88 69.00 4419.00 0.000 8 130.16 69.00 4419.00 0.000 9 132.45 69.00 4419.00 0.000 10 135.45 69.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 12 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 113.79 71.00 0.00 0.000 2 116.79 71.00 4419.00 0.000 3 119.08 71.00 4419.00 0.000 4 121.36 71.00 4419.00 0.000 5 123.65 71.00 4419.00 0.000 6 125.94 71.00 4419.00 0.000 7 128.22 71.00 4419.00 0.000 8 130.51 71.00 4419.00 0.000 9 132.79 71.00 4419.00 0.000 10 135.79 71.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 13 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 114.14 73.00 0.00 0.000 2 117.14 73.00 4419.00 0.000 3 119.42 73.00 4419.00 0.000 4 121.71 73.00 4419.00 0.000 5 124.00 73.00 4419.00 0.000 6 126.28 73.00 4419.00 0.000 7 128.57 73.00 4419.00 0.000 8 130.85 73.00 4419.00 0.000 9 133.14 73.00 4419.00 0.000 10 136.14 73.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 14 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 114.48 75.00 0.00 0.000 2 117.48 75.00 4419.00 0.000 3 119.77 75.00 4419.00 0.000 4 122.05 75.00 4419.00 0.000 5 124.34 75.00 4419.00 0.000 6 126.63 75.00 4419.00 0.000 7 128.91 75.00 4419.00 0.000 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\03-sp.OUT Page 5 8 131.20 75.00 4419.00 0.000 9 133.48 75.00 4419.00 0.000 10 136.48 75.00 0.00 0.000 Janbus Empirical Coef is being used for the case of c & phi both > 0 A Critical Failure Surface Searching Method, Using A Random Technique For Generating Sliding Block Surfaces, Has Been Specified. 4800 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated. 2 Boxes Specified For Generation Of Central Block Base Length Of Line Segments For Active And Passive Portions Of Sliding Block Is 10.0 Box X-Left Y-Left X-Right Y-Right Height No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) 1 40.00 30.00 105.00 33.00 5.00 2 106.00 33.00 200.00 39.00 5.00 Factor Of Safety Calculation By GLE (Spencer`s) Method of Slices Has Gone Through 20 Iterations Theta FOS FOS (deg) (Moment) (Force) (ki=1.0) (Equil.) (Equil.) Lambda 13.00 2.483 2.377 0.231 19.50 3.030 2.963 0.354 34.17 8.426 10.723 0.679 20.05 3.092 3.032 0.365 15.82 2.686 2.589 0.283 30.56 5.615 6.214 0.591 18.56 2.930 2.853 0.336 16.38 2.731 2.637 0.294 32.75 7.005 8.296 0.643 17.86 2.862 2.779 0.322 14.10 2.557 2.453 0.251 39.88 0.000 0.000 0.835 39.88 0.000 0.000 0.835 39.88 0.000 0.000 0.835 39.88 0.000 0.000 0.835 39.88 0.000 0.000 0.835 39.88 0.000 0.000 0.835 39.88 0.000 0.000 0.835 39.88 0.000 0.000 0.835 39.88 0.000 0.000 0.835 The Trial Failure Surface In Question Is Defined By The Following 10 Coordinate Points Point X-Surf Y-Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 88.58 43.87 2 95.13 39.28 3 102.22 32.23 4 113.32 34.34 5 119.66 42.07 6 121.68 51.86 7 128.53 59.14 8 132.61 68.28 9 137.80 76.82 10 137.91 77.00 The Factor Of Safety For The Trial Failure Surface Defined By The Coordinates Listed Below Is Misleading. Failure Surface Defined By 10 Coordinate Points Point X-Surf Y-Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 75.90 41.80 2 83.07 39.41 3 90.38 32.58 4 107.58 32.11 5 112.66 40.72 6 115.53 50.30 7 122.58 57.40 8 123.03 67.38 9 129.10 75.34 10 130.07 77.30 Factor Of Safety For The Preceding Specified Surface = 4.239 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\03-sp.OUT Page 6 Theta (ki = 1.0) = 24.16 Deg Lambda = Factor Of Safety Calculation By GLE (Spencer`s) Method of Slices Has Gone Through 20 Iterations Theta FOS FOS (deg) (Moment) (Force) (ki=1.0) (Equil.) (Equil.) Lambda 13.00 3.716 3.016 0.231 19.50 4.064 3.591 0.354 37.61 4.704 15.827 0.770 20.49 4.118 3.707 0.374 15.59 3.853 3.214 0.279 33.91 4.727 8.348 0.672 19.26 4.051 3.564 0.349 16.69 3.912 3.309 0.300 34.49 4.733 8.966 0.687 19.65 4.073 3.608 0.357 16.66 3.911 3.306 0.299 33.91 4.727 8.347 0.672 19.96 4.089 3.643 0.363 17.35 3.947 3.369 0.312 32.59 4.701 7.240 0.639 21.12 4.153 3.786 0.386 19.22 4.049 3.560 0.349 29.30 4.580 5.564 0.561 23.68 4.293 4.167 0.439 22.66 4.238 4.003 0.418 The Trial Failure Surface In Question Is Defined By The Following 10 Coordinate Points Point X-Surf Y-Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 92.59 44.74 2 96.93 40.82 3 104.23 33.99 4 128.53 33.91 5 132.11 43.25 6 138.82 50.66 7 144.91 58.59 8 151.93 65.72 9 156.89 74.40 10 159.20 77.00 Factor Of Safety Calculation By GLE (Spencer`s) Method of Slices Has Gone Through 20 Iterations Theta FOS FOS (deg) (Moment) (Force) (ki=1.0) (Equil.) (Equil.) Lambda 13.00 2.664 2.487 0.231 19.50 3.194 3.012 0.354 0.00 2.068 1.945 0.000 0.00 2.068 1.945 0.000 13.16 2.675 2.497 0.234 0.00 2.068 1.945 0.000 0.00 2.068 1.945 0.000 36.81 10.652 12.969 0.748 2.47 2.155 2.020 0.043 0.00 2.068 1.945 0.000 0.00 2.068 1.945 0.000 39.77 5.050 26.194 0.832 0.31 2.078 1.954 0.005 0.00 2.068 1.945 0.000 0.00 2.068 1.945 0.000 37.89 13.025 17.378 0.778 1.39 2.116 1.986 0.024 0.00 2.068 1.945 0.000 0.00 2.068 1.945 0.000 32.43 6.303 6.580 0.635 The Trial Failure Surface In Question Is Defined By The Following 10 Coordinate Points Point X-Surf Y-Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 80.51 42.11 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\03-sp.OUT Page 7 2 83.07 40.07 3 92.72 37.46 4 100.22 30.84 5 109.32 35.15 6 116.07 42.53 7 118.77 52.15 8 125.49 59.57 9 128.57 69.08 10 131.94 77.00 Factor Of Safety Calculation By GLE (Spencer`s) Method of Slices Has Gone Through 20 Iterations Theta FOS FOS (deg) (Moment) (Force) (ki=1.0) (Equil.) (Equil.) Lambda 13.00 2.681 2.279 0.231 19.50 3.358 2.774 0.354 0.00 1.918 1.743 0.000 0.00 1.918 1.743 0.000 26.37 4.572 3.734 0.496 0.00 1.918 1.743 0.000 0.00 1.918 1.743 0.000 26.39 4.576 3.737 0.496 0.00 1.918 1.743 0.000 0.00 1.918 1.743 0.000 27.16 4.765 3.899 0.513 0.00 1.918 1.743 0.000 0.00 1.918 1.743 0.000 0.72 1.948 1.764 0.013 0.00 1.918 1.743 0.000 0.00 1.918 1.743 0.000 1.39 1.978 1.784 0.024 0.00 1.918 1.743 0.000 0.00 1.918 1.743 0.000 32.43 6.496 5.689 0.635 The Trial Failure Surface In Question Is Defined By The Following 10 Coordinate Points Point X-Surf Y-Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 92.71 44.76 2 96.12 41.36 3 104.08 35.30 4 110.31 31.01 5 114.35 40.16 6 119.32 48.83 7 126.16 56.13 8 132.95 63.48 9 140.00 70.57 10 146.17 77.00 Factor Of Safety Calculation By GLE (Spencer`s) Method of Slices Has Gone Through 20 Iterations Theta FOS FOS (deg) (Moment) (Force) (ki=1.0) (Equil.) (Equil.) Lambda 13.00 5.227 4.002 0.231 19.50 5.784 4.935 0.354 39.02 1.998 19.002 0.810 20.74 5.864 5.157 0.379 15.62 5.472 4.338 0.280 33.73 5.203 10.053 0.668 20.19 5.830 5.057 0.368 18.16 5.685 4.713 0.328 31.39 5.673 8.498 0.610 22.67 5.963 5.547 0.418 21.26 5.894 5.257 0.389 26.69 6.022 6.581 0.503 23.31 5.986 5.687 0.431 23.75 6.001 5.790 0.440 25.16 6.027 6.142 0.470 24.50 6.018 5.971 0.456 24.53 6.019 5.980 0.456 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\03-sp.OUT Page 8 0.00 3.896 2.787 0.000 33.89 5.158 10.187 0.672 8.16 4.740 3.478 0.143 The Trial Failure Surface In Question Is Defined By The Following 9 Coordinate Points Point X-Surf Y-Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 88.92 43.94 2 92.29 40.74 3 100.39 34.89 4 138.77 33.44 5 141.16 43.15 6 145.33 52.24 7 147.70 61.96 8 154.70 69.10 9 159.52 77.00 Factor Of Safety Calculation By GLE (Spencer`s) Method of Slices Has Gone Through 20 Iterations Theta FOS FOS (deg) (Moment) (Force) (ki=1.0) (Equil.) (Equil.) Lambda 13.00 3.392 2.952 0.231 19.50 4.380 3.692 0.354 0.00 2.395 2.227 0.000 0.00 2.395 2.227 0.000 23.09 5.283 4.380 0.426 0.00 2.395 2.227 0.000 0.00 2.395 2.227 0.000 6.39 2.790 2.511 0.112 0.00 2.395 2.227 0.000 0.00 2.395 2.227 0.000 30.07 9.314 7.477 0.579 0.00 2.395 2.227 0.000 0.00 2.395 2.227 0.000 30.28 9.544 7.654 0.584 0.00 2.395 2.227 0.000 0.00 2.395 2.227 0.000 #################### SOME LINES SKIPPED #################### Following Are Displayed The Ten Most Critical Of The Trial Failure Surfaces Evaluated. They Are Ordered - Most Critical First. * * Safety Factors Are Calculated By GLE (Spencer`s) Method (0-2) * * Selected ki function = Bi-linear Selected Lambda Coefficient = 1.00 Forces from Reinforcement, Piers/Piles, Soil Nails, and Applied Forces (if applicable) have been applied to the slice base(s) on which they intersect. Specified Tension Crack Water Force Factor = 0.000 Total Number of Trial Surfaces Attempted = 4800 Number of Trial Surfaces With Valid FS = 4702 Statistical Data On All Valid FS Values: FS Max = 6.543 FS Min = 1.701 FS Ave = 2.766 Standard Deviation = 0.580 Coefficient of Variation = 20.99 % ((Simplified Janbu FS for Critical Surface = 1.370)) Failure Surface Specified By 11 Coordinate Points Point X-Surf Y-Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 56.170 40.809 2 57.843 39.490 3 67.379 36.477 4 76.990 33.716 5 86.937 32.687 6 116.367 33.399 7 123.438 40.470 8 127.608 49.559 9 131.643 58.709 10 133.471 68.541 11 137.270 77.000 *** FOS = 1.701 Theta (ki=1.0) = 10.14 *** Lambda = 0.179 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\03-sp.OUT Page 9 **** END OF GSTABL7 OUTPUT **** 040801201602002402803200408012016020021014-01; 1a-1a'; P-Static; Design; MSE Wall; 8XT Grids 22' Long;Lowest Clay Bedp:\2021\21014-01 kb carlsbad - marja acres\sted\1a-1a'\03p-sp.pl2 Run By: RTE 7/26/2021 04:31PM1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 3311111111111322222222222R1 4419 Lb/ftR2 4419R3 4419R4 4419R5 4419R6 4419R7 4419R8 4419R9 4419R10 4419R11 4419R12 4419R13 4419R14 4419bcdefghija# FSa 1.48b 1.48c1.48d 1.48e 1.48f 1.48g 1.48h 1.48i 1.48j 1.48SoilDesc.AfTsaQalQaloSoilTypeNo.1234TotalUnit Wt.(pcf)120.0120.0120.0120.0SaturatedUnit Wt.(pcf)120.0120.0120.0120.0CohesionIntercept(psf)240.0Aniso240.0240.0FrictionAngle(deg)36.0Aniso31.036.0PorePressureParam.0.000.000.000.00PressureConstant(psf)0.00.00.00.0Piez.SurfaceNo.W1W1W1W1Load ValuePeak(A) 0.340(g)kh Coef. 0.150(g)<GSTABL7 v.2 FSmin=1.48Safety Factors Are Calculated By GLE (Spencer`s) Method (0-2) 040801201602002402803200408012016020021014-01; 1a-1a'; P-Static; Design; MSE Wall; 8XT Grids 22' Long;Lowest Clay Bedp:\2021\21014-01 kb carlsbad - marja acres\sted\1a-1a'\03p-sp.plt Run By: RTE 7/26/2021 04:31PM1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 3311111111111322222222222R1 4419 Lb/ftR2 4419R3 4419R4 4419R5 4419R6 4419R7 4419R8 4419R9 4419R10 4419R11 4419R12 4419R13 4419R14 4419 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\03p-sp.OUT Page 1 *** GSTABL7 *** ** GSTABL7 by Dr. Garry H. Gregory, Ph.D.,P.E.,D.GE ** ** Original Version 1.0, January 1996; Current Ver. 2.005.3, Feb. 2013 ** (All Rights Reserved-Unauthorized Use Prohibited) ********************************************************************************* SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS SYSTEM Modified Bishop, Simplified Janbu, or GLE Method of Slices. (Includes Spencer & Morgenstern-Price Type Analysis) Including Pier/Pile, Reinforcement, Soil Nail, Tieback, Nonlinear Undrained Shear Strength, Curved Phi Envelope, Anisotropic Soil, Fiber-Reinforced Soil, Boundary Loads, Water Surfaces, Pseudo-Static & Newmark Earthquake, and Applied Forces. ********************************************************************************* Analysis Run Date: 7/26/2021 Time of Run: 04:31PM Run By: RTE Input Data Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\03p-s p.in Output Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\03p-s p.OUT Unit System: English Plotted Output Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\03p-s p.PLT PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: 21014-01; 1a-1a'; P-Static; Design; MSE Wall; 8XT Grids 22' Long;Lowest Clay Bed BOUNDARY COORDINATES 13 Top Boundaries 25 Total Boundaries Boundary X-Left Y-Left X-Right Y-Right Soil Type No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Below Bnd 1 0.00 38.00 80.00 42.00 3 2 80.00 42.00 103.00 47.00 3 3 103.00 47.00 110.00 49.00 1 4 110.00 49.00 115.00 78.00 1 5 115.00 78.00 130.00 78.00 1 6 130.00 78.00 130.10 77.00 1 7 130.10 77.00 175.00 77.00 1 8 175.00 77.00 175.10 78.00 1 9 175.10 78.00 237.00 78.00 1 10 237.00 78.00 237.10 74.00 1 11 237.10 74.00 260.00 74.00 1 12 260.00 74.00 260.10 78.00 1 13 260.10 78.00 320.00 78.00 1 14 103.00 47.00 108.00 42.00 3 15 108.00 42.00 113.00 37.00 2 16 113.00 37.00 138.00 37.00 2 17 138.00 37.00 166.00 50.00 2 18 166.00 50.00 187.00 55.00 2 19 187.00 55.00 218.00 73.00 2 20 218.00 73.00 235.00 73.00 2 21 235.00 73.00 235.10 70.00 2 22 235.10 70.00 262.00 70.00 2 23 262.00 70.00 262.10 74.00 2 24 262.10 74.00 320.00 74.00 2 25 0.00 15.00 108.00 42.00 2 Default Y-Origin = 0.00(ft) Default X-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) Default Y-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS 4 Type(s) of Soil Soil Total Saturated Cohesion Friction Pore Pressure Piez. Type Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Pressure Constant Surface No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) Param. (psf) No. 1 120.0 120.0 240.0 36.0 0.00 0.0 1 2 120.0 120.0 240.0 36.0 0.00 0.0 1 3 120.0 120.0 240.0 31.0 0.00 0.0 1 4 120.0 120.0 240.0 36.0 0.00 0.0 1 ANISOTROPIC STRENGTH PARAMETERS 1 soil type(s) P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\03p-sp.OUT Page 2 Soil Type 2 Is Anisotropic Number Of Direction Ranges Specified = 3 Direction Counterclockwise Cohesion Friction Range Direction Limit Intercept Angle No. (deg) (psf) (deg) 1 0.0 240.00 36.00 2 7.0 240.00 17.00 3 90.0 240.00 36.00 ANISOTROPIC SOIL NOTES: (1) An input value of 0.01 for C and/or Phi will cause Aniso C and/or Phi to be ignored in that range. (2) An input value of 0.02 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with no water weight in the tension crack. (3) An input value of 0.03 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with water weight in the tension crack. Specified Peak Ground Acceleration Coefficient (A) = 0.340(g) Specified Horizontal Earthquake Coefficient (kh) = 0.150(g) Specified Vertical Earthquake Coefficient (kv) = 0.000(g) Specified Seismic Pore-Pressure Factor = 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER(S) 14 REINFORCING LAYER(S) SPECIFIED REINFORCING LAYER NO. 1 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 110.00 49.00 0.00 0.000 2 113.00 49.00 4419.00 0.000 3 115.29 49.00 4419.00 0.000 4 117.57 49.00 4419.00 0.000 5 119.86 49.00 4419.00 0.000 6 122.14 49.00 4419.00 0.000 7 124.43 49.00 4419.00 0.000 8 126.71 49.00 4419.00 0.000 9 129.00 49.00 4419.00 0.000 10 132.00 49.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 2 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 110.34 51.00 0.00 0.000 2 113.34 51.00 4419.00 0.000 3 115.63 51.00 4419.00 0.000 4 117.92 51.00 4419.00 0.000 5 120.20 51.00 4419.00 0.000 6 122.49 51.00 4419.00 0.000 7 124.77 51.00 4419.00 0.000 8 127.06 51.00 4419.00 0.000 9 129.34 51.00 4419.00 0.000 10 132.34 51.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 3 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 110.69 53.00 0.00 0.000 2 113.69 53.00 4419.00 0.000 3 115.98 53.00 4419.00 0.000 4 118.26 53.00 4419.00 0.000 5 120.55 53.00 4419.00 0.000 6 122.83 53.00 4419.00 0.000 7 125.12 53.00 4419.00 0.000 8 127.40 53.00 4419.00 0.000 9 129.69 53.00 4419.00 0.000 10 132.69 53.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 4 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 111.03 55.00 0.00 0.000 2 114.03 55.00 4419.00 0.000 3 116.32 55.00 4419.00 0.000 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\03p-sp.OUT Page 3 4 118.61 55.00 4419.00 0.000 5 120.89 55.00 4419.00 0.000 6 123.18 55.00 4419.00 0.000 7 125.46 55.00 4419.00 0.000 8 127.75 55.00 4419.00 0.000 9 130.03 55.00 4419.00 0.000 10 133.03 55.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 5 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 111.38 57.00 0.00 0.000 2 114.38 57.00 4419.00 0.000 3 116.67 57.00 4419.00 0.000 4 118.95 57.00 4419.00 0.000 5 121.24 57.00 4419.00 0.000 6 123.52 57.00 4419.00 0.000 7 125.81 57.00 4419.00 0.000 8 128.09 57.00 4419.00 0.000 9 130.38 57.00 4419.00 0.000 10 133.38 57.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 6 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 111.72 59.00 0.00 0.000 2 114.72 59.00 4419.00 0.000 3 117.01 59.00 4419.00 0.000 4 119.30 59.00 4419.00 0.000 5 121.58 59.00 4419.00 0.000 6 123.87 59.00 4419.00 0.000 7 126.15 59.00 4419.00 0.000 8 128.44 59.00 4419.00 0.000 9 130.72 59.00 4419.00 0.000 10 133.72 59.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 7 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 112.07 61.00 0.00 0.000 2 115.07 61.00 4419.00 0.000 3 117.35 61.00 4419.00 0.000 4 119.64 61.00 4419.00 0.000 5 121.93 61.00 4419.00 0.000 6 124.21 61.00 4419.00 0.000 7 126.50 61.00 4419.00 0.000 8 128.78 61.00 4419.00 0.000 9 131.07 61.00 4419.00 0.000 10 134.07 61.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 8 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 112.41 63.00 0.00 0.000 2 115.41 63.00 4419.00 0.000 3 117.70 63.00 4419.00 0.000 4 119.99 63.00 4419.00 0.000 5 122.27 63.00 4419.00 0.000 6 124.56 63.00 4419.00 0.000 7 126.84 63.00 4419.00 0.000 8 129.13 63.00 4419.00 0.000 9 131.41 63.00 4419.00 0.000 10 134.41 63.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 9 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 112.76 65.00 0.00 0.000 2 115.76 65.00 4419.00 0.000 3 118.04 65.00 4419.00 0.000 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\03p-sp.OUT Page 4 4 120.33 65.00 4419.00 0.000 5 122.62 65.00 4419.00 0.000 6 124.90 65.00 4419.00 0.000 7 127.19 65.00 4419.00 0.000 8 129.47 65.00 4419.00 0.000 9 131.76 65.00 4419.00 0.000 10 134.76 65.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 10 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 113.10 67.00 0.00 0.000 2 116.10 67.00 4419.00 0.000 3 118.39 67.00 4419.00 0.000 4 120.67 67.00 4419.00 0.000 5 122.96 67.00 4419.00 0.000 6 125.25 67.00 4419.00 0.000 7 127.53 67.00 4419.00 0.000 8 129.82 67.00 4419.00 0.000 9 132.10 67.00 4419.00 0.000 10 135.10 67.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 11 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 113.45 69.00 0.00 0.000 2 116.45 69.00 4419.00 0.000 3 118.73 69.00 4419.00 0.000 4 121.02 69.00 4419.00 0.000 5 123.31 69.00 4419.00 0.000 6 125.59 69.00 4419.00 0.000 7 127.88 69.00 4419.00 0.000 8 130.16 69.00 4419.00 0.000 9 132.45 69.00 4419.00 0.000 10 135.45 69.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 12 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 113.79 71.00 0.00 0.000 2 116.79 71.00 4419.00 0.000 3 119.08 71.00 4419.00 0.000 4 121.36 71.00 4419.00 0.000 5 123.65 71.00 4419.00 0.000 6 125.94 71.00 4419.00 0.000 7 128.22 71.00 4419.00 0.000 8 130.51 71.00 4419.00 0.000 9 132.79 71.00 4419.00 0.000 10 135.79 71.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 13 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 114.14 73.00 0.00 0.000 2 117.14 73.00 4419.00 0.000 3 119.42 73.00 4419.00 0.000 4 121.71 73.00 4419.00 0.000 5 124.00 73.00 4419.00 0.000 6 126.28 73.00 4419.00 0.000 7 128.57 73.00 4419.00 0.000 8 130.85 73.00 4419.00 0.000 9 133.14 73.00 4419.00 0.000 10 136.14 73.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 14 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 114.48 75.00 0.00 0.000 2 117.48 75.00 4419.00 0.000 3 119.77 75.00 4419.00 0.000 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\03p-sp.OUT Page 5 4 122.05 75.00 4419.00 0.000 5 124.34 75.00 4419.00 0.000 6 126.63 75.00 4419.00 0.000 7 128.91 75.00 4419.00 0.000 8 131.20 75.00 4419.00 0.000 9 133.48 75.00 4419.00 0.000 10 136.48 75.00 0.00 0.000 Janbus Empirical Coef is being used for the case of c & phi both > 0 A Critical Failure Surface Searching Method, Using A Random Technique For Generating Sliding Block Surfaces, Has Been Specified. 4800 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated. 2 Boxes Specified For Generation Of Central Block Base Length Of Line Segments For Active And Passive Portions Of Sliding Block Is 10.0 Box X-Left Y-Left X-Right Y-Right Height No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) 1 40.00 30.00 105.00 33.00 5.00 2 106.00 33.00 200.00 39.00 5.00 Factor Of Safety Calculation By GLE (Spencer`s) Method of Slices Has Gone Through 20 Iterations Theta FOS FOS (deg) (Moment) (Force) (ki=1.0) (Equil.) (Equil.) Lambda 13.00 2.063 2.143 0.231 19.50 2.353 2.532 0.354 6.19 1.869 1.893 0.108 0.00 1.739 1.738 0.000 0.00 1.739 1.738 0.000 12.00 2.030 2.099 0.213 0.30 1.745 1.744 0.005 0.00 1.739 1.738 0.000 0.63 1.751 1.752 0.011 0.41 1.747 1.747 0.007 0.41 1.747 1.747 0.007 0.41 1.747 1.747 0.007 0.41 1.747 1.747 0.007 0.41 1.747 1.747 0.007 0.41 1.747 1.747 0.007 0.41 1.747 1.747 0.007 0.41 1.747 1.747 0.007 0.41 1.747 1.747 0.007 0.41 1.747 1.747 0.007 0.41 1.747 1.747 0.007 The Trial Failure Surface In Question Is Defined By The Following 9 Coordinate Points Point X-Surf Y-Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 79.04 41.95 2 82.08 40.16 3 89.33 33.28 4 118.91 34.35 5 120.85 44.16 6 127.74 51.41 7 129.15 61.31 8 132.03 70.88 9 134.07 77.00 The Factor Of Safety For The Trial Failure Surface Defined By The Coordinates Listed Below Is Misleading. Failure Surface Defined By 9 Coordinate Points Point X-Surf Y-Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 39.13 39.96 2 45.42 33.73 3 53.77 28.22 4 162.04 37.50 5 168.62 45.03 6 172.72 54.15 7 179.78 61.23 8 183.73 70.42 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\03p-sp.OUT Page 6 9 187.95 78.00 Factor Of Safety For The Preceding Specified Surface = 1.636 Theta (ki = 1.0) = 8.83 Deg Lambda = Factor Of Safety Calculation By GLE (Spencer`s) Method of Slices Has Gone Through 20 Iterations Theta FOS FOS (deg) (Moment) (Force) (ki=1.0) (Equil.) (Equil.) Lambda 13.00 1.965 2.163 0.231 19.50 2.001 2.443 0.354 5.98 1.933 1.980 0.105 0.00 1.906 1.872 0.000 1.35 1.912 1.894 0.024 3.46 1.922 1.931 0.061 2.54 1.918 1.914 0.044 2.57 1.918 1.915 0.045 9.01 1.947 2.049 0.159 2.82 1.919 1.919 0.049 0.73 1.910 1.884 0.013 2.79 1.919 1.919 0.049 2.80 1.919 1.919 0.049 2.80 1.919 1.919 0.049 2.80 1.919 1.919 0.049 2.80 1.919 1.919 0.049 2.80 1.919 1.919 0.049 2.80 1.919 1.919 0.049 2.80 1.919 1.919 0.049 2.80 1.919 1.919 0.049 The Trial Failure Surface In Question Is Defined By The Following 10 Coordinate Points Point X-Surf Y-Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 43.63 40.18 2 45.32 38.54 3 52.63 31.72 4 106.04 32.40 5 112.96 39.61 6 118.72 47.79 7 119.37 57.77 8 124.25 66.49 9 130.19 74.54 10 131.90 77.00 Factor Of Safety Calculation By GLE (Spencer`s) Method of Slices Has Gone Through 20 Iterations Theta FOS FOS (deg) (Moment) (Force) (ki=1.0) (Equil.) (Equil.) Lambda 13.00 1.616 1.834 0.231 19.50 1.731 1.928 0.354 89.94 2.598 2.527 ***** 65.08 24.395 -12.283 2.153 89.94 2.598 2.527 ***** 89.94 2.598 2.527 ***** 0.00 1.919 1.725 0.000 89.94 2.598 2.527 ***** 89.94 2.598 2.527 ***** 0.00 1.919 1.725 0.000 89.94 2.598 2.527 ***** 89.94 2.598 2.527 ***** 0.00 1.919 1.725 0.000 89.94 2.598 2.527 ***** 89.94 2.598 2.527 ***** 0.00 1.919 1.725 0.000 89.94 2.598 2.527 ***** 89.94 2.598 2.527 ***** 0.00 1.919 1.725 0.000 89.94 2.598 2.527 ***** The Trial Failure Surface In Question Is Defined By The Following 9 Coordinate Points Point X-Surf Y-Surf P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\03p-sp.OUT Page 7 No. (ft) (ft) 1 32.88 39.64 2 33.94 39.13 3 41.46 32.53 4 195.63 37.57 5 201.92 45.34 6 206.67 54.14 7 213.27 61.65 8 219.60 69.40 9 221.03 78.00 Factor Of Safety Calculation By GLE (Spencer`s) Method of Slices Has Gone Through 20 Iterations Theta FOS FOS (deg) (Moment) (Force) (ki=1.0) (Equil.) (Equil.) Lambda 13.00 1.650 1.813 0.231 19.50 1.658 2.015 0.354 5.65 1.625 1.665 0.099 0.00 1.600 1.583 0.000 0.35 1.602 1.588 0.006 2.64 1.612 1.619 0.046 1.65 1.608 1.605 0.029 1.70 1.608 1.606 0.030 11.35 1.645 1.775 0.201 1.92 1.609 1.609 0.034 0.00 1.600 1.583 0.000 2.59 1.612 1.618 0.045 1.66 1.608 1.605 0.029 1.72 1.608 1.606 0.030 89.94 2.235 2.313 ***** 4.80 1.622 1.652 0.084 0.00 1.600 1.583 0.000 0.72 1.604 1.593 0.012 2.47 1.612 1.617 0.043 1.73 1.608 1.606 0.030 The Trial Failure Surface In Question Is Defined By The Following 11 Coordinate Points Point X-Surf Y-Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 51.19 40.56 2 55.29 38.68 3 62.97 32.28 4 72.58 29.50 5 112.31 33.10 6 118.47 40.98 7 124.61 48.87 8 125.51 58.83 9 131.39 66.92 10 138.42 74.03 11 141.39 77.00 The Factor Of Safety For The Trial Failure Surface Defined By The Coordinates Listed Below Is Misleading. Failure Surface Defined By 9 Coordinate Points Point X-Surf Y-Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 62.32 41.12 2 69.29 34.42 3 79.19 33.02 4 185.95 36.89 5 192.24 44.66 6 199.16 51.89 7 204.22 60.52 8 207.60 69.93 9 211.90 78.00 Factor Of Safety For The Preceding Specified Surface = 1.719 Theta (ki = 1.0) = 8.82 Deg Lambda = The Factor Of Safety For The Trial Failure Surface Defined By The Coordinates Listed Below Is Misleading. Failure Surface Defined By 10 Coordinate Points Point X-Surf Y-Surf P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\03p-sp.OUT Page 8 No. (ft) (ft) 1 35.14 39.76 2 40.59 34.32 3 49.30 29.40 4 193.38 36.42 5 200.21 43.73 6 206.18 51.75 7 210.64 60.70 8 217.47 68.00 9 223.19 76.20 10 224.96 78.00 Factor Of Safety For The Preceding Specified Surface = 1.723 Theta (ki = 1.0) = 7.67 Deg Lambda = Factor Of Safety Calculation By GLE (Spencer`s) Method of Slices Has Gone Through 20 Iterations Theta FOS FOS (deg) (Moment) (Force) (ki=1.0) (Equil.) (Equil.) Lambda 13.00 2.577 2.429 0.231 19.50 3.063 2.927 0.354 89.94 69.422 0.355 ***** 19.31 3.046 2.909 0.350 0.00 2.026 1.903 0.000 0.00 2.026 1.903 0.000 #################### SOME LINES SKIPPED #################### Following Are Displayed The Ten Most Critical Of The Trial Failure Surfaces Evaluated. They Are Ordered - Most Critical First. * * Safety Factors Are Calculated By GLE (Spencer`s) Method (0-2) * * Selected ki function = Bi-linear Selected Lambda Coefficient = 1.00 Forces from Reinforcement, Piers/Piles, Soil Nails, and Applied Forces (if applicable) have been applied to the slice base(s) on which they intersect. Specified Tension Crack Water Force Factor = 0.000 Total Number of Trial Surfaces Attempted = 4800 Number of Trial Surfaces With Valid FS = 4660 Statistical Data On All Valid FS Values: FS Max = 4.144 FS Min = 1.478 FS Ave = 1.927 Standard Deviation = 0.372 Coefficient of Variation = 19.33 % ((Simplified Janbu FS for Critical Surface = 1.293)) Failure Surface Specified By 11 Coordinate Points Point X-Surf Y-Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 56.170 40.809 2 57.843 39.490 3 67.379 36.477 4 76.990 33.716 5 86.937 32.687 6 116.367 33.399 7 123.438 40.470 8 127.608 49.559 9 131.643 58.709 10 133.471 68.541 11 137.270 77.000 *** FOS = 1.478 Theta (ki=1.0) = 6.72 *** Lambda = 0.118 **** END OF GSTABL7 OUTPUT **** 040801201602002402803200408012016020021014-01; 1a-1a'; Static; Temporary Backcut; Along Lower Clay Bedp:\2021\21014-01 kb carlsbad - marja acres\sted\1a-1a'\03t.pl2 Run By: RTE 7/27/2021 09:34AM1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 33 322222222222bcdefghija# FSa 1.62b 1.62c1.62d 1.62e 1.62f 1.62g 1.62h 1.62i 1.62j 1.62SoilDesc.AfTsaQalQaloSoilTypeNo.1234TotalUnit Wt.(pcf)120.0120.0120.0120.0SaturatedUnit Wt.(pcf)120.0120.0120.0120.0CohesionIntercept(psf)200.0Aniso200.0200.0FrictionAngle(deg)30.0Aniso26.030.0PorePressureParam.0.000.000.000.00PressureConstant(psf)0.00.00.00.0Piez.SurfaceNo.W1W1W1W1GSTABL7 v.2 FSmin=1.62Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method for the case of c & phi both > 0 040801201602002402803200408012016020021014-01; 1a-1a'; Static; Temporary Backcut; Along Lower Clay Bedp:\2021\21014-01 kb carlsbad - marja acres\sted\1a-1a'\03t.plt Run By: RTE 7/27/2021 09:34AM1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 33 322222222222 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\03t.OUT Page 1 *** GSTABL7 *** ** GSTABL7 by Dr. Garry H. Gregory, Ph.D.,P.E.,D.GE ** ** Original Version 1.0, January 1996; Current Ver. 2.005.3, Feb. 2013 ** (All Rights Reserved-Unauthorized Use Prohibited) ********************************************************************************* SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS SYSTEM Modified Bishop, Simplified Janbu, or GLE Method of Slices. (Includes Spencer & Morgenstern-Price Type Analysis) Including Pier/Pile, Reinforcement, Soil Nail, Tieback, Nonlinear Undrained Shear Strength, Curved Phi Envelope, Anisotropic Soil, Fiber-Reinforced Soil, Boundary Loads, Water Surfaces, Pseudo-Static & Newmark Earthquake, and Applied Forces. ********************************************************************************* Analysis Run Date: 7/27/2021 Time of Run: 09:34AM Run By: RTE Input Data Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\03t.i n Output Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\03t.O UT Unit System: English Plotted Output Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\03t.P LT PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: 21014-01; 1a-1a'; Static; Temporary Back cut; Along Lower Clay Bed BOUNDARY COORDINATES 13 Top Boundaries 14 Total Boundaries Boundary X-Left Y-Left X-Right Y-Right Soil Type No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Below Bnd 1 0.00 38.00 80.00 42.00 3 2 80.00 42.00 103.00 47.00 3 3 103.00 47.00 108.00 42.00 3 4 108.00 42.00 113.00 37.00 2 5 113.00 37.00 138.00 37.00 2 6 138.00 37.00 166.00 50.00 2 7 166.00 50.00 187.00 55.00 2 8 187.00 55.00 218.00 73.00 2 9 218.00 73.00 235.00 73.00 2 10 235.00 73.00 235.10 70.00 2 11 235.10 70.00 262.00 70.00 2 12 262.00 70.00 262.10 74.00 2 13 262.10 74.00 320.00 74.00 2 14 0.00 15.00 108.00 42.00 2 Default Y-Origin = 0.00(ft) Default X-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) Default Y-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS 4 Type(s) of Soil Soil Total Saturated Cohesion Friction Pore Pressure Piez. Type Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Pressure Constant Surface No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) Param. (psf) No. 1 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.00 0.0 1 2 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.00 0.0 1 3 120.0 120.0 200.0 26.0 0.00 0.0 1 4 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.00 0.0 1 ANISOTROPIC STRENGTH PARAMETERS 1 soil type(s) Soil Type 2 Is Anisotropic Number Of Direction Ranges Specified = 3 Direction Counterclockwise Cohesion Friction Range Direction Limit Intercept Angle No. (deg) (psf) (deg) 1 0.0 200.00 30.00 2 7.0 200.00 14.00 3 90.0 200.00 30.00 ANISOTROPIC SOIL NOTES: (1) An input value of 0.01 for C and/or Phi will cause Aniso C and/or Phi to be ignored in that range. P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\03t.OUT Page 2 (2) An input value of 0.02 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with no water weight in the tension crack. (3) An input value of 0.03 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with water weight in the tension crack. REINFORCING LAYER(S) 14 REINFORCING LAYER(S) SPECIFIED REINFORCING LAYER NO. 1 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 110.00 49.00 0.00 0.000 2 113.00 49.00 4419.00 0.000 3 115.29 49.00 4419.00 0.000 4 117.57 49.00 4419.00 0.000 5 119.86 49.00 4419.00 0.000 6 122.14 49.00 4419.00 0.000 7 124.43 49.00 4419.00 0.000 8 126.71 49.00 4419.00 0.000 9 129.00 49.00 4419.00 0.000 10 132.00 49.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 2 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 110.34 51.00 0.00 0.000 2 113.34 51.00 4419.00 0.000 3 115.63 51.00 4419.00 0.000 4 117.92 51.00 4419.00 0.000 5 120.20 51.00 4419.00 0.000 6 122.49 51.00 4419.00 0.000 7 124.77 51.00 4419.00 0.000 8 127.06 51.00 4419.00 0.000 9 129.34 51.00 4419.00 0.000 10 132.34 51.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 3 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 110.69 53.00 0.00 0.000 2 113.69 53.00 4419.00 0.000 3 115.98 53.00 4419.00 0.000 4 118.26 53.00 4419.00 0.000 5 120.55 53.00 4419.00 0.000 6 122.83 53.00 4419.00 0.000 7 125.12 53.00 4419.00 0.000 8 127.40 53.00 4419.00 0.000 9 129.69 53.00 4419.00 0.000 10 132.69 53.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 4 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 111.03 55.00 0.00 0.000 2 114.03 55.00 4419.00 0.000 3 116.32 55.00 4419.00 0.000 4 118.61 55.00 4419.00 0.000 5 120.89 55.00 4419.00 0.000 6 123.18 55.00 4419.00 0.000 7 125.46 55.00 4419.00 0.000 8 127.75 55.00 4419.00 0.000 9 130.03 55.00 4419.00 0.000 10 133.03 55.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 5 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 111.38 57.00 0.00 0.000 2 114.38 57.00 4419.00 0.000 3 116.67 57.00 4419.00 0.000 4 118.95 57.00 4419.00 0.000 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\03t.OUT Page 3 5 121.24 57.00 4419.00 0.000 6 123.52 57.00 4419.00 0.000 7 125.81 57.00 4419.00 0.000 8 128.09 57.00 4419.00 0.000 9 130.38 57.00 4419.00 0.000 10 133.38 57.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 6 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 111.72 59.00 0.00 0.000 2 114.72 59.00 4419.00 0.000 3 117.01 59.00 4419.00 0.000 4 119.30 59.00 4419.00 0.000 5 121.58 59.00 4419.00 0.000 6 123.87 59.00 4419.00 0.000 7 126.15 59.00 4419.00 0.000 8 128.44 59.00 4419.00 0.000 9 130.72 59.00 4419.00 0.000 10 133.72 59.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 7 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 112.07 61.00 0.00 0.000 2 115.07 61.00 4419.00 0.000 3 117.35 61.00 4419.00 0.000 4 119.64 61.00 4419.00 0.000 5 121.93 61.00 4419.00 0.000 6 124.21 61.00 4419.00 0.000 7 126.50 61.00 4419.00 0.000 8 128.78 61.00 4419.00 0.000 9 131.07 61.00 4419.00 0.000 10 134.07 61.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 8 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 112.41 63.00 0.00 0.000 2 115.41 63.00 4419.00 0.000 3 117.70 63.00 4419.00 0.000 4 119.99 63.00 4419.00 0.000 5 122.27 63.00 4419.00 0.000 6 124.56 63.00 4419.00 0.000 7 126.84 63.00 4419.00 0.000 8 129.13 63.00 4419.00 0.000 9 131.41 63.00 4419.00 0.000 10 134.41 63.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 9 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 112.76 65.00 0.00 0.000 2 115.76 65.00 4419.00 0.000 3 118.04 65.00 4419.00 0.000 4 120.33 65.00 4419.00 0.000 5 122.62 65.00 4419.00 0.000 6 124.90 65.00 4419.00 0.000 7 127.19 65.00 4419.00 0.000 8 129.47 65.00 4419.00 0.000 9 131.76 65.00 4419.00 0.000 10 134.76 65.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 10 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 113.10 67.00 0.00 0.000 2 116.10 67.00 4419.00 0.000 3 118.39 67.00 4419.00 0.000 4 120.67 67.00 4419.00 0.000 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\03t.OUT Page 4 5 122.96 67.00 4419.00 0.000 6 125.25 67.00 4419.00 0.000 7 127.53 67.00 4419.00 0.000 8 129.82 67.00 4419.00 0.000 9 132.10 67.00 4419.00 0.000 10 135.10 67.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 11 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 113.45 69.00 0.00 0.000 2 116.45 69.00 4419.00 0.000 3 118.73 69.00 4419.00 0.000 4 121.02 69.00 4419.00 0.000 5 123.31 69.00 4419.00 0.000 6 125.59 69.00 4419.00 0.000 7 127.88 69.00 4419.00 0.000 8 130.16 69.00 4419.00 0.000 9 132.45 69.00 4419.00 0.000 10 135.45 69.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 12 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 113.79 71.00 0.00 0.000 2 116.79 71.00 4419.00 0.000 3 119.08 71.00 4419.00 0.000 4 121.36 71.00 4419.00 0.000 5 123.65 71.00 4419.00 0.000 6 125.94 71.00 4419.00 0.000 7 128.22 71.00 4419.00 0.000 8 130.51 71.00 4419.00 0.000 9 132.79 71.00 4419.00 0.000 10 135.79 71.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 13 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 114.14 73.00 0.00 0.000 2 117.14 73.00 4419.00 0.000 3 119.42 73.00 4419.00 0.000 4 121.71 73.00 4419.00 0.000 5 124.00 73.00 4419.00 0.000 6 126.28 73.00 4419.00 0.000 7 128.57 73.00 4419.00 0.000 8 130.85 73.00 4419.00 0.000 9 133.14 73.00 4419.00 0.000 10 136.14 73.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 14 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 114.48 75.00 0.00 0.000 2 117.48 75.00 4419.00 0.000 3 119.77 75.00 4419.00 0.000 4 122.05 75.00 4419.00 0.000 5 124.34 75.00 4419.00 0.000 6 126.63 75.00 4419.00 0.000 7 128.91 75.00 4419.00 0.000 8 131.20 75.00 4419.00 0.000 9 133.48 75.00 4419.00 0.000 10 136.48 75.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER DATA HAS BEEN SUPPRESSED Janbus Empirical Coef is being used for the case of c & phi both > 0 A Critical Failure Surface Searching Method, Using A Random Technique For Generating Sliding Block Surfaces, Has Been Specified. 4800 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated. 2 Boxes Specified For Generation Of Central Block Base Length Of Line Segments For Active And Passive Portions Of P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\03t.OUT Page 5 Sliding Block Is 5.0 Box X-Left Y-Left X-Right Y-Right Height No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) 1 140.00 35.00 145.00 35.00 3.00 2 146.00 35.00 280.00 43.00 3.00 Following Are Displayed The Ten Most Critical Of The Trial Failure Surfaces Evaluated. They Are Ordered - Most Critical First. * * Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method * * Total Number of Trial Surfaces Attempted = 4800 Number of Trial Surfaces With Valid FS = 4800 Statistical Data On All Valid FS Values: FS Max = 34.142 FS Min = 1.615 FS Ave = 2.690 Standard Deviation = 1.950 Coefficient of Variation = 72.48 % Failure Surface Specified By 13 Coordinate Points Point X-Surf Y-Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 138.172 37.080 2 138.407 36.901 3 142.173 33.612 4 209.655 38.008 5 213.038 41.690 6 216.568 45.231 7 219.668 49.154 8 222.868 52.996 9 225.285 57.373 10 228.607 61.110 11 231.501 65.187 12 234.061 69.482 13 235.077 70.681 Factor of Safety *** 1.615 *** **** END OF GSTABL7 OUTPUT **** 040801201602002402803200408012016020021014-01; 1a-1a'; Static; Temporary Backcut; Along Middle Clay Bedp:\2021\21014-01 kb carlsbad - marja acres\sted\1a-1a'\05t.pl2 Run By: RTE 7/27/2021 09:38AM1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 33 322222222222bcdefghija# FSa 1.83b 1.83c1.83d 1.83e 1.83f 1.83g 1.83h 1.83i 1.83j 1.83SoilDesc.AfTsaQalQaloSoilTypeNo.1234TotalUnit Wt.(pcf)120.0120.0120.0120.0SaturatedUnit Wt.(pcf)120.0120.0120.0120.0CohesionIntercept(psf)200.0Aniso200.0200.0FrictionAngle(deg)30.0Aniso26.030.0PorePressureParam.0.000.000.000.00PressureConstant(psf)0.00.00.00.0Piez.SurfaceNo.W1W1W1W1GSTABL7 v.2 FSmin=1.83Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method for the case of c & phi both > 0 040801201602002402803200408012016020021014-01; 1a-1a'; Static; Temporary Backcut; Along Middle Clay Bedp:\2021\21014-01 kb carlsbad - marja acres\sted\1a-1a'\05t.plt Run By: RTE 7/27/2021 09:38AM1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 33 322222222222 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\05t.OUT Page 1 *** GSTABL7 *** ** GSTABL7 by Dr. Garry H. Gregory, Ph.D.,P.E.,D.GE ** ** Original Version 1.0, January 1996; Current Ver. 2.005.3, Feb. 2013 ** (All Rights Reserved-Unauthorized Use Prohibited) ********************************************************************************* SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS SYSTEM Modified Bishop, Simplified Janbu, or GLE Method of Slices. (Includes Spencer & Morgenstern-Price Type Analysis) Including Pier/Pile, Reinforcement, Soil Nail, Tieback, Nonlinear Undrained Shear Strength, Curved Phi Envelope, Anisotropic Soil, Fiber-Reinforced Soil, Boundary Loads, Water Surfaces, Pseudo-Static & Newmark Earthquake, and Applied Forces. ********************************************************************************* Analysis Run Date: 7/27/2021 Time of Run: 09:38AM Run By: RTE Input Data Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\05t.i n Output Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\05t.O UT Unit System: English Plotted Output Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\05t.P LT PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: 21014-01; 1a-1a'; Static; Temporary Back cut; Along Middle Clay Bed BOUNDARY COORDINATES 13 Top Boundaries 14 Total Boundaries Boundary X-Left Y-Left X-Right Y-Right Soil Type No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Below Bnd 1 0.00 38.00 80.00 42.00 3 2 80.00 42.00 103.00 47.00 3 3 103.00 47.00 108.00 42.00 3 4 108.00 42.00 113.00 37.00 2 5 113.00 37.00 138.00 37.00 2 6 138.00 37.00 166.00 50.00 2 7 166.00 50.00 187.00 55.00 2 8 187.00 55.00 218.00 73.00 2 9 218.00 73.00 235.00 73.00 2 10 235.00 73.00 235.10 70.00 2 11 235.10 70.00 262.00 70.00 2 12 262.00 70.00 262.10 74.00 2 13 262.10 74.00 320.00 74.00 2 14 0.00 15.00 108.00 42.00 2 Default Y-Origin = 0.00(ft) Default X-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) Default Y-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS 4 Type(s) of Soil Soil Total Saturated Cohesion Friction Pore Pressure Piez. Type Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Pressure Constant Surface No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) Param. (psf) No. 1 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.00 0.0 1 2 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.00 0.0 1 3 120.0 120.0 200.0 26.0 0.00 0.0 1 4 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.00 0.0 1 ANISOTROPIC STRENGTH PARAMETERS 1 soil type(s) Soil Type 2 Is Anisotropic Number Of Direction Ranges Specified = 3 Direction Counterclockwise Cohesion Friction Range Direction Limit Intercept Angle No. (deg) (psf) (deg) 1 0.0 200.00 30.00 2 7.0 200.00 14.00 3 90.0 200.00 30.00 ANISOTROPIC SOIL NOTES: (1) An input value of 0.01 for C and/or Phi will cause Aniso C and/or Phi to be ignored in that range. P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\05t.OUT Page 2 (2) An input value of 0.02 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with no water weight in the tension crack. (3) An input value of 0.03 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with water weight in the tension crack. REINFORCING LAYER(S) 14 REINFORCING LAYER(S) SPECIFIED REINFORCING LAYER NO. 1 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 110.00 49.00 0.00 0.000 2 113.00 49.00 4419.00 0.000 3 115.29 49.00 4419.00 0.000 4 117.57 49.00 4419.00 0.000 5 119.86 49.00 4419.00 0.000 6 122.14 49.00 4419.00 0.000 7 124.43 49.00 4419.00 0.000 8 126.71 49.00 4419.00 0.000 9 129.00 49.00 4419.00 0.000 10 132.00 49.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 2 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 110.34 51.00 0.00 0.000 2 113.34 51.00 4419.00 0.000 3 115.63 51.00 4419.00 0.000 4 117.92 51.00 4419.00 0.000 5 120.20 51.00 4419.00 0.000 6 122.49 51.00 4419.00 0.000 7 124.77 51.00 4419.00 0.000 8 127.06 51.00 4419.00 0.000 9 129.34 51.00 4419.00 0.000 10 132.34 51.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 3 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 110.69 53.00 0.00 0.000 2 113.69 53.00 4419.00 0.000 3 115.98 53.00 4419.00 0.000 4 118.26 53.00 4419.00 0.000 5 120.55 53.00 4419.00 0.000 6 122.83 53.00 4419.00 0.000 7 125.12 53.00 4419.00 0.000 8 127.40 53.00 4419.00 0.000 9 129.69 53.00 4419.00 0.000 10 132.69 53.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 4 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 111.03 55.00 0.00 0.000 2 114.03 55.00 4419.00 0.000 3 116.32 55.00 4419.00 0.000 4 118.61 55.00 4419.00 0.000 5 120.89 55.00 4419.00 0.000 6 123.18 55.00 4419.00 0.000 7 125.46 55.00 4419.00 0.000 8 127.75 55.00 4419.00 0.000 9 130.03 55.00 4419.00 0.000 10 133.03 55.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 5 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 111.38 57.00 0.00 0.000 2 114.38 57.00 4419.00 0.000 3 116.67 57.00 4419.00 0.000 4 118.95 57.00 4419.00 0.000 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\05t.OUT Page 3 5 121.24 57.00 4419.00 0.000 6 123.52 57.00 4419.00 0.000 7 125.81 57.00 4419.00 0.000 8 128.09 57.00 4419.00 0.000 9 130.38 57.00 4419.00 0.000 10 133.38 57.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 6 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 111.72 59.00 0.00 0.000 2 114.72 59.00 4419.00 0.000 3 117.01 59.00 4419.00 0.000 4 119.30 59.00 4419.00 0.000 5 121.58 59.00 4419.00 0.000 6 123.87 59.00 4419.00 0.000 7 126.15 59.00 4419.00 0.000 8 128.44 59.00 4419.00 0.000 9 130.72 59.00 4419.00 0.000 10 133.72 59.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 7 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 112.07 61.00 0.00 0.000 2 115.07 61.00 4419.00 0.000 3 117.35 61.00 4419.00 0.000 4 119.64 61.00 4419.00 0.000 5 121.93 61.00 4419.00 0.000 6 124.21 61.00 4419.00 0.000 7 126.50 61.00 4419.00 0.000 8 128.78 61.00 4419.00 0.000 9 131.07 61.00 4419.00 0.000 10 134.07 61.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 8 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 112.41 63.00 0.00 0.000 2 115.41 63.00 4419.00 0.000 3 117.70 63.00 4419.00 0.000 4 119.99 63.00 4419.00 0.000 5 122.27 63.00 4419.00 0.000 6 124.56 63.00 4419.00 0.000 7 126.84 63.00 4419.00 0.000 8 129.13 63.00 4419.00 0.000 9 131.41 63.00 4419.00 0.000 10 134.41 63.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 9 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 112.76 65.00 0.00 0.000 2 115.76 65.00 4419.00 0.000 3 118.04 65.00 4419.00 0.000 4 120.33 65.00 4419.00 0.000 5 122.62 65.00 4419.00 0.000 6 124.90 65.00 4419.00 0.000 7 127.19 65.00 4419.00 0.000 8 129.47 65.00 4419.00 0.000 9 131.76 65.00 4419.00 0.000 10 134.76 65.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 10 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 113.10 67.00 0.00 0.000 2 116.10 67.00 4419.00 0.000 3 118.39 67.00 4419.00 0.000 4 120.67 67.00 4419.00 0.000 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\05t.OUT Page 4 5 122.96 67.00 4419.00 0.000 6 125.25 67.00 4419.00 0.000 7 127.53 67.00 4419.00 0.000 8 129.82 67.00 4419.00 0.000 9 132.10 67.00 4419.00 0.000 10 135.10 67.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 11 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 113.45 69.00 0.00 0.000 2 116.45 69.00 4419.00 0.000 3 118.73 69.00 4419.00 0.000 4 121.02 69.00 4419.00 0.000 5 123.31 69.00 4419.00 0.000 6 125.59 69.00 4419.00 0.000 7 127.88 69.00 4419.00 0.000 8 130.16 69.00 4419.00 0.000 9 132.45 69.00 4419.00 0.000 10 135.45 69.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 12 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 113.79 71.00 0.00 0.000 2 116.79 71.00 4419.00 0.000 3 119.08 71.00 4419.00 0.000 4 121.36 71.00 4419.00 0.000 5 123.65 71.00 4419.00 0.000 6 125.94 71.00 4419.00 0.000 7 128.22 71.00 4419.00 0.000 8 130.51 71.00 4419.00 0.000 9 132.79 71.00 4419.00 0.000 10 135.79 71.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 13 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 114.14 73.00 0.00 0.000 2 117.14 73.00 4419.00 0.000 3 119.42 73.00 4419.00 0.000 4 121.71 73.00 4419.00 0.000 5 124.00 73.00 4419.00 0.000 6 126.28 73.00 4419.00 0.000 7 128.57 73.00 4419.00 0.000 8 130.85 73.00 4419.00 0.000 9 133.14 73.00 4419.00 0.000 10 136.14 73.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 14 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 114.48 75.00 0.00 0.000 2 117.48 75.00 4419.00 0.000 3 119.77 75.00 4419.00 0.000 4 122.05 75.00 4419.00 0.000 5 124.34 75.00 4419.00 0.000 6 126.63 75.00 4419.00 0.000 7 128.91 75.00 4419.00 0.000 8 131.20 75.00 4419.00 0.000 9 133.48 75.00 4419.00 0.000 10 136.48 75.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER DATA HAS BEEN SUPPRESSED Janbus Empirical Coef is being used for the case of c & phi both > 0 A Critical Failure Surface Searching Method, Using A Random Technique For Generating Sliding Block Surfaces, Has Been Specified. 4800 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated. 2 Boxes Specified For Generation Of Central Block Base Length Of Line Segments For Active And Passive Portions Of P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\05t.OUT Page 5 Sliding Block Is 5.0 Box X-Left Y-Left X-Right Y-Right Height No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) 1 192.00 55.00 193.00 55.00 3.00 2 194.00 55.00 280.00 61.00 3.00 Following Are Displayed The Ten Most Critical Of The Trial Failure Surfaces Evaluated. They Are Ordered - Most Critical First. * * Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method * * Total Number of Trial Surfaces Attempted = 4800 Number of Trial Surfaces With Valid FS = 4800 Statistical Data On All Valid FS Values: FS Max = 50.119 FS Min = 1.827 FS Ave = 3.608 Standard Deviation = 2.372 Coefficient of Variation = 65.73 % Failure Surface Specified By 8 Coordinate Points Point X-Surf Y-Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 188.211 55.703 2 192.741 54.067 3 209.784 56.081 4 213.146 59.782 5 215.835 63.997 6 217.941 68.532 7 221.091 72.415 8 221.319 73.000 Factor of Safety *** 1.827 *** **** END OF GSTABL7 OUTPUT **** 040801201602002402803200408012016020021014-01; 1a-1a'; Static; Temporary Backcut; Along Upper Clay Bedp:\2021\21014-01 kb carlsbad - marja acres\sted\1a-1a'\06t.pl2 Run By: RTE 7/27/2021 09:42AM1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 33 322222222222bcdefghija# FSa 2.09b 2.09c2.09d 2.09e 2.09f 2.09g 2.09h 2.09i 2.20j 2.20SoilDesc.AfTsaQalQaloSoilTypeNo.1234TotalUnit Wt.(pcf)120.0120.0120.0120.0SaturatedUnit Wt.(pcf)120.0120.0120.0120.0CohesionIntercept(psf)200.0Aniso200.0200.0FrictionAngle(deg)30.0Aniso26.030.0PorePressureParam.0.000.000.000.00PressureConstant(psf)0.00.00.00.0Piez.SurfaceNo.W1W1W1W1GSTABL7 v.2 FSmin=2.09Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method for the case of c & phi both > 0 040801201602002402803200408012016020021014-01; 1a-1a'; Static; Temporary Backcut; Along Upper Clay Bedp:\2021\21014-01 kb carlsbad - marja acres\sted\1a-1a'\06t.plt Run By: RTE 7/27/2021 09:42AM1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 33 322222222222 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\06t.OUT Page 1 *** GSTABL7 *** ** GSTABL7 by Dr. Garry H. Gregory, Ph.D.,P.E.,D.GE ** ** Original Version 1.0, January 1996; Current Ver. 2.005.3, Feb. 2013 ** (All Rights Reserved-Unauthorized Use Prohibited) ********************************************************************************* SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS SYSTEM Modified Bishop, Simplified Janbu, or GLE Method of Slices. (Includes Spencer & Morgenstern-Price Type Analysis) Including Pier/Pile, Reinforcement, Soil Nail, Tieback, Nonlinear Undrained Shear Strength, Curved Phi Envelope, Anisotropic Soil, Fiber-Reinforced Soil, Boundary Loads, Water Surfaces, Pseudo-Static & Newmark Earthquake, and Applied Forces. ********************************************************************************* Analysis Run Date: 7/27/2021 Time of Run: 09:42AM Run By: RTE Input Data Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\06t.i n Output Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\06t.O UT Unit System: English Plotted Output Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\06t.P LT PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: 21014-01; 1a-1a'; Static; Temporary Back cut; Along Upper Clay Bed BOUNDARY COORDINATES 13 Top Boundaries 14 Total Boundaries Boundary X-Left Y-Left X-Right Y-Right Soil Type No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Below Bnd 1 0.00 38.00 80.00 42.00 3 2 80.00 42.00 103.00 47.00 3 3 103.00 47.00 108.00 42.00 3 4 108.00 42.00 113.00 37.00 2 5 113.00 37.00 138.00 37.00 2 6 138.00 37.00 166.00 50.00 2 7 166.00 50.00 187.00 55.00 2 8 187.00 55.00 218.00 73.00 2 9 218.00 73.00 235.00 73.00 2 10 235.00 73.00 235.10 70.00 2 11 235.10 70.00 262.00 70.00 2 12 262.00 70.00 262.10 74.00 2 13 262.10 74.00 320.00 74.00 2 14 0.00 15.00 108.00 42.00 2 Default Y-Origin = 0.00(ft) Default X-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) Default Y-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS 4 Type(s) of Soil Soil Total Saturated Cohesion Friction Pore Pressure Piez. Type Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Pressure Constant Surface No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) Param. (psf) No. 1 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.00 0.0 1 2 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.00 0.0 1 3 120.0 120.0 200.0 26.0 0.00 0.0 1 4 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.00 0.0 1 ANISOTROPIC STRENGTH PARAMETERS 1 soil type(s) Soil Type 2 Is Anisotropic Number Of Direction Ranges Specified = 3 Direction Counterclockwise Cohesion Friction Range Direction Limit Intercept Angle No. (deg) (psf) (deg) 1 0.0 200.00 30.00 2 7.0 200.00 14.00 3 90.0 200.00 30.00 ANISOTROPIC SOIL NOTES: (1) An input value of 0.01 for C and/or Phi will cause Aniso C and/or Phi to be ignored in that range. P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\06t.OUT Page 2 (2) An input value of 0.02 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with no water weight in the tension crack. (3) An input value of 0.03 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with water weight in the tension crack. REINFORCING LAYER(S) 14 REINFORCING LAYER(S) SPECIFIED REINFORCING LAYER NO. 1 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 110.00 49.00 0.00 0.000 2 113.00 49.00 4419.00 0.000 3 115.29 49.00 4419.00 0.000 4 117.57 49.00 4419.00 0.000 5 119.86 49.00 4419.00 0.000 6 122.14 49.00 4419.00 0.000 7 124.43 49.00 4419.00 0.000 8 126.71 49.00 4419.00 0.000 9 129.00 49.00 4419.00 0.000 10 132.00 49.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 2 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 110.34 51.00 0.00 0.000 2 113.34 51.00 4419.00 0.000 3 115.63 51.00 4419.00 0.000 4 117.92 51.00 4419.00 0.000 5 120.20 51.00 4419.00 0.000 6 122.49 51.00 4419.00 0.000 7 124.77 51.00 4419.00 0.000 8 127.06 51.00 4419.00 0.000 9 129.34 51.00 4419.00 0.000 10 132.34 51.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 3 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 110.69 53.00 0.00 0.000 2 113.69 53.00 4419.00 0.000 3 115.98 53.00 4419.00 0.000 4 118.26 53.00 4419.00 0.000 5 120.55 53.00 4419.00 0.000 6 122.83 53.00 4419.00 0.000 7 125.12 53.00 4419.00 0.000 8 127.40 53.00 4419.00 0.000 9 129.69 53.00 4419.00 0.000 10 132.69 53.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 4 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 111.03 55.00 0.00 0.000 2 114.03 55.00 4419.00 0.000 3 116.32 55.00 4419.00 0.000 4 118.61 55.00 4419.00 0.000 5 120.89 55.00 4419.00 0.000 6 123.18 55.00 4419.00 0.000 7 125.46 55.00 4419.00 0.000 8 127.75 55.00 4419.00 0.000 9 130.03 55.00 4419.00 0.000 10 133.03 55.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 5 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 111.38 57.00 0.00 0.000 2 114.38 57.00 4419.00 0.000 3 116.67 57.00 4419.00 0.000 4 118.95 57.00 4419.00 0.000 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\06t.OUT Page 3 5 121.24 57.00 4419.00 0.000 6 123.52 57.00 4419.00 0.000 7 125.81 57.00 4419.00 0.000 8 128.09 57.00 4419.00 0.000 9 130.38 57.00 4419.00 0.000 10 133.38 57.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 6 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 111.72 59.00 0.00 0.000 2 114.72 59.00 4419.00 0.000 3 117.01 59.00 4419.00 0.000 4 119.30 59.00 4419.00 0.000 5 121.58 59.00 4419.00 0.000 6 123.87 59.00 4419.00 0.000 7 126.15 59.00 4419.00 0.000 8 128.44 59.00 4419.00 0.000 9 130.72 59.00 4419.00 0.000 10 133.72 59.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 7 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 112.07 61.00 0.00 0.000 2 115.07 61.00 4419.00 0.000 3 117.35 61.00 4419.00 0.000 4 119.64 61.00 4419.00 0.000 5 121.93 61.00 4419.00 0.000 6 124.21 61.00 4419.00 0.000 7 126.50 61.00 4419.00 0.000 8 128.78 61.00 4419.00 0.000 9 131.07 61.00 4419.00 0.000 10 134.07 61.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 8 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 112.41 63.00 0.00 0.000 2 115.41 63.00 4419.00 0.000 3 117.70 63.00 4419.00 0.000 4 119.99 63.00 4419.00 0.000 5 122.27 63.00 4419.00 0.000 6 124.56 63.00 4419.00 0.000 7 126.84 63.00 4419.00 0.000 8 129.13 63.00 4419.00 0.000 9 131.41 63.00 4419.00 0.000 10 134.41 63.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 9 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 112.76 65.00 0.00 0.000 2 115.76 65.00 4419.00 0.000 3 118.04 65.00 4419.00 0.000 4 120.33 65.00 4419.00 0.000 5 122.62 65.00 4419.00 0.000 6 124.90 65.00 4419.00 0.000 7 127.19 65.00 4419.00 0.000 8 129.47 65.00 4419.00 0.000 9 131.76 65.00 4419.00 0.000 10 134.76 65.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 10 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 113.10 67.00 0.00 0.000 2 116.10 67.00 4419.00 0.000 3 118.39 67.00 4419.00 0.000 4 120.67 67.00 4419.00 0.000 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\06t.OUT Page 4 5 122.96 67.00 4419.00 0.000 6 125.25 67.00 4419.00 0.000 7 127.53 67.00 4419.00 0.000 8 129.82 67.00 4419.00 0.000 9 132.10 67.00 4419.00 0.000 10 135.10 67.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 11 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 113.45 69.00 0.00 0.000 2 116.45 69.00 4419.00 0.000 3 118.73 69.00 4419.00 0.000 4 121.02 69.00 4419.00 0.000 5 123.31 69.00 4419.00 0.000 6 125.59 69.00 4419.00 0.000 7 127.88 69.00 4419.00 0.000 8 130.16 69.00 4419.00 0.000 9 132.45 69.00 4419.00 0.000 10 135.45 69.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 12 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 113.79 71.00 0.00 0.000 2 116.79 71.00 4419.00 0.000 3 119.08 71.00 4419.00 0.000 4 121.36 71.00 4419.00 0.000 5 123.65 71.00 4419.00 0.000 6 125.94 71.00 4419.00 0.000 7 128.22 71.00 4419.00 0.000 8 130.51 71.00 4419.00 0.000 9 132.79 71.00 4419.00 0.000 10 135.79 71.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 13 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 114.14 73.00 0.00 0.000 2 117.14 73.00 4419.00 0.000 3 119.42 73.00 4419.00 0.000 4 121.71 73.00 4419.00 0.000 5 124.00 73.00 4419.00 0.000 6 126.28 73.00 4419.00 0.000 7 128.57 73.00 4419.00 0.000 8 130.85 73.00 4419.00 0.000 9 133.14 73.00 4419.00 0.000 10 136.14 73.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER NO. 14 10 POINTS DEFINE THIS LAYER POINT X-COORD Y-COORD FORCE INCLINATION NO. FACTOR 1 114.48 75.00 0.00 0.000 2 117.48 75.00 4419.00 0.000 3 119.77 75.00 4419.00 0.000 4 122.05 75.00 4419.00 0.000 5 124.34 75.00 4419.00 0.000 6 126.63 75.00 4419.00 0.000 7 128.91 75.00 4419.00 0.000 8 131.20 75.00 4419.00 0.000 9 133.48 75.00 4419.00 0.000 10 136.48 75.00 0.00 0.000 REINFORCING LAYER DATA HAS BEEN SUPPRESSED Janbus Empirical Coef is being used for the case of c & phi both > 0 A Critical Failure Surface Searching Method, Using A Random Technique For Generating Sliding Block Surfaces, Has Been Specified. 4800 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated. 2 Boxes Specified For Generation Of Central Block Base Length Of Line Segments For Active And Passive Portions Of P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\1a-1a'\06t.OUT Page 5 Sliding Block Is 5.0 Box X-Left Y-Left X-Right Y-Right Height No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) 1 200.00 60.00 201.00 60.00 3.00 2 202.00 60.00 280.00 70.00 3.00 Following Are Displayed The Ten Most Critical Of The Trial Failure Surfaces Evaluated. They Are Ordered - Most Critical First. * * Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method * * Total Number of Trial Surfaces Attempted = 4800 Number of Trial Surfaces With Valid FS = 4792 Statistical Data On All Valid FS Values: FS Max = 21.008 FS Min = 2.089 FS Ave = 4.771 Standard Deviation = 1.608 Coefficient of Variation = 33.71 % Failure Surface Specified By 7 Coordinate Points Point X-Surf Y-Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 196.211 60.349 2 200.150 59.336 3 213.935 60.953 4 217.012 64.894 5 220.499 68.478 6 223.983 72.063 7 224.260 73.000 Factor of Safety *** 2.089 *** **** END OF GSTABL7 OUTPUT **** P:\2021\21014-01 CARLSBAD - MARJA ACRES\STED\2-2'\SUMMARY OF SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS 2-2'.DOC Summary of Slope Stability Analysis Cross-Section 2-2' Filename Description Factor of Safety (FS) Static Pseudostatic 01, 01p Design Profile; No Key; Circular Analysis 1.69 1.29 03, 03p Design Profile; No Key; Analyzed along Top Clay Bed 1.81 1.43 Project No.: 21014-01 Project Name: Marja Acres NMG 040801201602002402803203604004400408012016020024028021014-01; 2-2'; Static; Design; Circularp:\2021\21014-01 kb carlsbad - marja acres\sted\2-2'\01.pl2 Run By: RTE 7/21/2021 03:54PM1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 2444411422422222W1W1W1bcdefghija# FSa 1.69b 1.71c1.71d 1.73e 1.73f 1.73g 1.74h 1.75i 1.75j 1.76SoilDesc.AfTsaQalQaloSoilTypeNo.1234TotalUnit Wt.(pcf)120.0120.0120.0120.0SaturatedUnit Wt.(pcf)120.0120.0120.0120.0CohesionIntercept(psf)200.0Aniso200.0AnisoFrictionAngle(deg)30.0Aniso26.0AnisoPorePressureParam.0.000.000.000.00PressureConstant(psf)0.00.00.00.0Piez.SurfaceNo.W1W1W1W1GSTABL7 v.2 FSmin=1.69Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Modified Bishop Method 040801201602002402803203604004400408012016020024028021014-01; 2-2'; Static; Design; Circularp:\2021\21014-01 kb carlsbad - marja acres\sted\2-2'\01.plt Run By: RTE 7/21/2021 03:54PM1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 2444411422422222W1W1W1 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\2-2'\01.OUT Page 1 *** GSTABL7 *** ** GSTABL7 by Dr. Garry H. Gregory, Ph.D.,P.E.,D.GE ** ** Original Version 1.0, January 1996; Current Ver. 2.005.3, Feb. 2013 ** (All Rights Reserved-Unauthorized Use Prohibited) ********************************************************************************* SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS SYSTEM Modified Bishop, Simplified Janbu, or GLE Method of Slices. (Includes Spencer & Morgenstern-Price Type Analysis) Including Pier/Pile, Reinforcement, Soil Nail, Tieback, Nonlinear Undrained Shear Strength, Curved Phi Envelope, Anisotropic Soil, Fiber-Reinforced Soil, Boundary Loads, Water Surfaces, Pseudo-Static & Newmark Earthquake, and Applied Forces. ********************************************************************************* Analysis Run Date: 7/21/2021 Time of Run: 03:54PM Run By: RTE Input Data Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\2-2'\01.in Output Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\2-2'\01.OUT Unit System: English Plotted Output Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\2-2'\01.PLT PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: 21014-01; 2-2'; Static; Design; Circular BOUNDARY COORDINATES 10 Top Boundaries 16 Total Boundaries Boundary X-Left Y-Left X-Right Y-Right Soil Type No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Below Bnd 1 0.00 109.00 25.00 109.00 2 2 25.00 109.00 65.00 119.00 4 3 65.00 119.00 100.00 127.00 4 4 100.00 127.00 105.00 127.00 4 5 105.00 127.00 121.00 131.00 4 6 121.00 131.00 175.00 156.00 1 7 175.00 156.00 230.00 156.00 1 8 230.00 156.00 255.00 156.00 4 9 255.00 156.00 300.00 156.00 2 10 300.00 156.00 425.00 156.00 2 11 121.00 131.00 230.00 156.00 4 12 25.00 109.00 145.00 110.00 2 13 145.00 110.00 185.00 110.00 2 14 185.00 110.00 225.00 114.00 2 15 225.00 114.00 240.00 122.00 2 16 240.00 122.00 255.00 156.00 2 Default Y-Origin = 0.00(ft) Default X-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) Default Y-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS 4 Type(s) of Soil Soil Total Saturated Cohesion Friction Pore Pressure Piez. Type Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Pressure Constant Surface No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) Param. (psf) No. 1 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.00 0.0 1 2 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.00 0.0 1 3 120.0 120.0 200.0 26.0 0.00 0.0 1 4 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.00 0.0 1 ANISOTROPIC STRENGTH PARAMETERS 2 soil type(s) Soil Type 2 Is Anisotropic Number Of Direction Ranges Specified = 3 Direction Counterclockwise Cohesion Friction Range Direction Limit Intercept Angle No. (deg) (psf) (deg) 1 3.0 200.00 30.00 2 20.0 200.00 14.00 3 90.0 200.00 30.00 Soil Type 4 Is Anisotropic Number Of Direction Ranges Specified = 3 Direction Counterclockwise Cohesion Friction Range Direction Limit Intercept Angle No. (deg) (psf) (deg) P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\2-2'\01.OUT Page 2 1 3.0 200.00 30.00 2 20.0 200.00 14.00 3 90.0 200.00 30.00 ANISOTROPIC SOIL NOTES: (1) An input value of 0.01 for C and/or Phi will cause Aniso C and/or Phi to be ignored in that range. (2) An input value of 0.02 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with no water weight in the tension crack. (3) An input value of 0.03 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with water weight in the tension crack. 1 PIEZOMETRIC SURFACE(S) SPECIFIED Unit Weight of Water = 62.40 (pcf) Piezometric Surface No. 1 Specified by 3 Coordinate Points Pore Pressure Inclination Factor = 0.50 Point X-Water Y-Water No. (ft) (ft) 1 25.00 104.00 2 206.00 100.00 3 395.00 103.00 A Critical Failure Surface Searching Method, Using A Random Technique For Generating Circular Surfaces, Has Been Specified. 4800 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated. 80 Surface(s) Initiate(s) From Each Of 60 Points Equally Spaced Along The Ground Surface Between X = 0.00(ft) and X = 125.00(ft) Each Surface Terminates Between X = 170.00(ft) and X = 300.00(ft) Unless Further Limitations Were Imposed, The Minimum Elevation At Which A Surface Extends Is Y = 0.00(ft) 15.00(ft) Line Segments Define Each Trial Failure Surface. Following Are Displayed The Ten Most Critical Of The Trial Failure Surfaces Evaluated. They Are Ordered - Most Critical First. * * Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Modified Bishop Method * * Total Number of Trial Surfaces Attempted = 4800 Number of Trial Surfaces With Valid FS = 4800 Statistical Data On All Valid FS Values: FS Max = 8.723 FS Min = 1.693 FS Ave = 3.052 Standard Deviation = 0.955 Coefficient of Variation = 31.28 % Failure Surface Specified By 7 Coordinate Points Point X-Surf Y-Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 112.288 128.822 2 126.920 125.519 3 141.890 126.467 4 155.988 131.589 5 168.075 140.472 6 177.174 152.398 7 178.557 156.000 Circle Center At X = 131.104 ; Y = 178.114 ; and Radius = 52.761 Factor of Safety *** 1.693 *** **** END OF GSTABL7 OUTPUT **** 040801201602002402803203604004400408012016020024028021014-01; 2-2'; P-Static; Design; Circularp:\2021\21014-01 kb carlsbad - marja acres\sted\2-2'\01p.pl2 Run By: RTE 7/21/2021 03:59PM1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 2444411422422222W1W1W1bcdefghija# FSa 1.29b 1.30c1.31d 1.31e 1.31f 1.32g 1.32h 1.33i 1.33j 1.33SoilDesc.AfTsaQalQaloSoilTypeNo.1234TotalUnit Wt.(pcf)120.0120.0120.0120.0SaturatedUnit Wt.(pcf)120.0120.0120.0120.0CohesionIntercept(psf)240.0Aniso240.0AnisoFrictionAngle(deg)36.0Aniso31.0AnisoPorePressureParam.0.000.000.000.00PressureConstant(psf)0.00.00.00.0Piez.SurfaceNo.W1W1W1W1Load ValuePeak(A) 0.340(g)kh Coef. 0.150(g)<GSTABL7 v.2 FSmin=1.29Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Modified Bishop Method 040801201602002402803203604004400408012016020024028021014-01; 2-2'; P-Static; Design; Circularp:\2021\21014-01 kb carlsbad - marja acres\sted\2-2'\01p.plt Run By: RTE 7/21/2021 03:59PM1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 2444411422422222W1W1W1 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\2-2'\01p.OUT Page 1 *** GSTABL7 *** ** GSTABL7 by Dr. Garry H. Gregory, Ph.D.,P.E.,D.GE ** ** Original Version 1.0, January 1996; Current Ver. 2.005.3, Feb. 2013 ** (All Rights Reserved-Unauthorized Use Prohibited) ********************************************************************************* SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS SYSTEM Modified Bishop, Simplified Janbu, or GLE Method of Slices. (Includes Spencer & Morgenstern-Price Type Analysis) Including Pier/Pile, Reinforcement, Soil Nail, Tieback, Nonlinear Undrained Shear Strength, Curved Phi Envelope, Anisotropic Soil, Fiber-Reinforced Soil, Boundary Loads, Water Surfaces, Pseudo-Static & Newmark Earthquake, and Applied Forces. ********************************************************************************* Analysis Run Date: 7/21/2021 Time of Run: 03:59PM Run By: RTE Input Data Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\2-2'\01p.in Output Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\2-2'\01p.OUT Unit System: English Plotted Output Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\2-2'\01p.PLT PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: 21014-01; 2-2'; P-Static; Design; Circul ar BOUNDARY COORDINATES 10 Top Boundaries 16 Total Boundaries Boundary X-Left Y-Left X-Right Y-Right Soil Type No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Below Bnd 1 0.00 109.00 25.00 109.00 2 2 25.00 109.00 65.00 119.00 4 3 65.00 119.00 100.00 127.00 4 4 100.00 127.00 105.00 127.00 4 5 105.00 127.00 121.00 131.00 4 6 121.00 131.00 175.00 156.00 1 7 175.00 156.00 230.00 156.00 1 8 230.00 156.00 255.00 156.00 4 9 255.00 156.00 300.00 156.00 2 10 300.00 156.00 425.00 156.00 2 11 121.00 131.00 230.00 156.00 4 12 25.00 109.00 145.00 110.00 2 13 145.00 110.00 185.00 110.00 2 14 185.00 110.00 225.00 114.00 2 15 225.00 114.00 240.00 122.00 2 16 240.00 122.00 255.00 156.00 2 Default Y-Origin = 0.00(ft) Default X-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) Default Y-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS 4 Type(s) of Soil Soil Total Saturated Cohesion Friction Pore Pressure Piez. Type Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Pressure Constant Surface No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) Param. (psf) No. 1 120.0 120.0 240.0 36.0 0.00 0.0 1 2 120.0 120.0 240.0 36.0 0.00 0.0 1 3 120.0 120.0 240.0 31.0 0.00 0.0 1 4 120.0 120.0 240.0 36.0 0.00 0.0 1 ANISOTROPIC STRENGTH PARAMETERS 2 soil type(s) Soil Type 2 Is Anisotropic Number Of Direction Ranges Specified = 3 Direction Counterclockwise Cohesion Friction Range Direction Limit Intercept Angle No. (deg) (psf) (deg) 1 3.0 240.00 36.00 2 20.0 240.00 17.00 3 90.0 240.00 36.00 Soil Type 4 Is Anisotropic Number Of Direction Ranges Specified = 3 Direction Counterclockwise Cohesion Friction Range Direction Limit Intercept Angle P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\2-2'\01p.OUT Page 2 No. (deg) (psf) (deg) 1 3.0 240.00 36.00 2 20.0 240.00 17.00 3 90.0 240.00 36.00 ANISOTROPIC SOIL NOTES: (1) An input value of 0.01 for C and/or Phi will cause Aniso C and/or Phi to be ignored in that range. (2) An input value of 0.02 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with no water weight in the tension crack. (3) An input value of 0.03 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with water weight in the tension crack. 1 PIEZOMETRIC SURFACE(S) SPECIFIED Unit Weight of Water = 62.40 (pcf) Piezometric Surface No. 1 Specified by 3 Coordinate Points Pore Pressure Inclination Factor = 0.50 Point X-Water Y-Water No. (ft) (ft) 1 25.00 104.00 2 206.00 100.00 3 395.00 103.00 Specified Peak Ground Acceleration Coefficient (A) = 0.340(g) Specified Horizontal Earthquake Coefficient (kh) = 0.150(g) Specified Vertical Earthquake Coefficient (kv) = 0.000(g) Specified Seismic Pore-Pressure Factor = 0.000 A Critical Failure Surface Searching Method, Using A Random Technique For Generating Circular Surfaces, Has Been Specified. 4800 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated. 80 Surface(s) Initiate(s) From Each Of 60 Points Equally Spaced Along The Ground Surface Between X = 0.00(ft) and X = 125.00(ft) Each Surface Terminates Between X = 170.00(ft) and X = 300.00(ft) Unless Further Limitations Were Imposed, The Minimum Elevation At Which A Surface Extends Is Y = 0.00(ft) 15.00(ft) Line Segments Define Each Trial Failure Surface. Following Are Displayed The Ten Most Critical Of The Trial Failure Surfaces Evaluated. They Are Ordered - Most Critical First. * * Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Modified Bishop Method * * Total Number of Trial Surfaces Attempted = 4800 Number of Trial Surfaces With Valid FS = 4800 Statistical Data On All Valid FS Values: FS Max = 4.910 FS Min = 1.293 FS Ave = 2.240 Standard Deviation = 0.519 Coefficient of Variation = 23.19 % Failure Surface Specified By 16 Coordinate Points Point X-Surf Y-Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 36.017 111.754 2 50.999 112.496 3 65.959 113.582 4 80.891 115.013 5 95.785 116.788 6 110.635 118.905 7 125.432 121.364 8 140.169 124.163 9 154.837 127.301 10 169.429 130.777 11 183.937 134.587 12 198.353 138.731 13 212.670 143.206 14 226.880 148.009 15 240.976 153.139 16 248.307 156.000 Circle Center At X = 11.507 ; Y = 760.755 ; and Radius = 649.464 Factor of Safety *** 1.293 *** **** END OF GSTABL7 OUTPUT **** 040801201602002402803203604004400408012016020024028021014-01; 2-2'; Static; Design; Along Top Clay Bedp:\2021\21014-01 kb carlsbad - marja acres\sted\2-2'\03.pl2 Run By: RTE 7/21/2021 04:00PM1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 2444411422422222W1W1W1bcdefghija# FSa 1.81b 1.81c1.81d 1.81e 1.81f 1.81g 1.81h 1.81i 1.81j 1.81SoilDesc.AfTsaQalQaloSoilTypeNo.1234TotalUnit Wt.(pcf)120.0120.0120.0120.0SaturatedUnit Wt.(pcf)120.0120.0120.0120.0CohesionIntercept(psf)200.0Aniso200.0AnisoFrictionAngle(deg)30.0Aniso26.0AnisoPorePressureParam.0.000.000.000.00PressureConstant(psf)0.00.00.00.0Piez.SurfaceNo.W1W1W1W1GSTABL7 v.2 FSmin=1.81Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method for the case of c & phi both > 0 040801201602002402803203604004400408012016020024028021014-01; 2-2'; Static; Design; Along Top Clay Bedp:\2021\21014-01 kb carlsbad - marja acres\sted\2-2'\03.plt Run By: RTE 7/21/2021 04:00PM1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 2444411422422222W1W1W1 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\2-2'\03.OUT Page 1 *** GSTABL7 *** ** GSTABL7 by Dr. Garry H. Gregory, Ph.D.,P.E.,D.GE ** ** Original Version 1.0, January 1996; Current Ver. 2.005.3, Feb. 2013 ** (All Rights Reserved-Unauthorized Use Prohibited) ********************************************************************************* SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS SYSTEM Modified Bishop, Simplified Janbu, or GLE Method of Slices. (Includes Spencer & Morgenstern-Price Type Analysis) Including Pier/Pile, Reinforcement, Soil Nail, Tieback, Nonlinear Undrained Shear Strength, Curved Phi Envelope, Anisotropic Soil, Fiber-Reinforced Soil, Boundary Loads, Water Surfaces, Pseudo-Static & Newmark Earthquake, and Applied Forces. ********************************************************************************* Analysis Run Date: 7/21/2021 Time of Run: 04:00PM Run By: RTE Input Data Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\2-2'\03.in Output Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\2-2'\03.OUT Unit System: English Plotted Output Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\2-2'\03.PLT PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: 21014-01; 2-2'; Static; Design; Along To p Clay Bed BOUNDARY COORDINATES 10 Top Boundaries 16 Total Boundaries Boundary X-Left Y-Left X-Right Y-Right Soil Type No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Below Bnd 1 0.00 109.00 25.00 109.00 2 2 25.00 109.00 65.00 119.00 4 3 65.00 119.00 100.00 127.00 4 4 100.00 127.00 105.00 127.00 4 5 105.00 127.00 121.00 131.00 4 6 121.00 131.00 175.00 156.00 1 7 175.00 156.00 230.00 156.00 1 8 230.00 156.00 255.00 156.00 4 9 255.00 156.00 300.00 156.00 2 10 300.00 156.00 425.00 156.00 2 11 121.00 131.00 230.00 156.00 4 12 25.00 109.00 145.00 110.00 2 13 145.00 110.00 185.00 110.00 2 14 185.00 110.00 225.00 114.00 2 15 225.00 114.00 240.00 122.00 2 16 240.00 122.00 255.00 156.00 2 Default Y-Origin = 0.00(ft) Default X-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) Default Y-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS 4 Type(s) of Soil Soil Total Saturated Cohesion Friction Pore Pressure Piez. Type Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Pressure Constant Surface No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) Param. (psf) No. 1 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.00 0.0 1 2 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.00 0.0 1 3 120.0 120.0 200.0 26.0 0.00 0.0 1 4 120.0 120.0 200.0 30.0 0.00 0.0 1 ANISOTROPIC STRENGTH PARAMETERS 2 soil type(s) Soil Type 2 Is Anisotropic Number Of Direction Ranges Specified = 3 Direction Counterclockwise Cohesion Friction Range Direction Limit Intercept Angle No. (deg) (psf) (deg) 1 3.0 200.00 30.00 2 20.0 200.00 14.00 3 90.0 200.00 30.00 Soil Type 4 Is Anisotropic Number Of Direction Ranges Specified = 3 Direction Counterclockwise Cohesion Friction Range Direction Limit Intercept Angle P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\2-2'\03.OUT Page 2 No. (deg) (psf) (deg) 1 3.0 200.00 30.00 2 20.0 200.00 14.00 3 90.0 200.00 30.00 ANISOTROPIC SOIL NOTES: (1) An input value of 0.01 for C and/or Phi will cause Aniso C and/or Phi to be ignored in that range. (2) An input value of 0.02 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with no water weight in the tension crack. (3) An input value of 0.03 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with water weight in the tension crack. 1 PIEZOMETRIC SURFACE(S) SPECIFIED Unit Weight of Water = 62.40 (pcf) Piezometric Surface No. 1 Specified by 3 Coordinate Points Pore Pressure Inclination Factor = 0.50 Point X-Water Y-Water No. (ft) (ft) 1 25.00 104.00 2 206.00 100.00 3 395.00 103.00 Janbus Empirical Coef is being used for the case of c & phi both > 0 A Critical Failure Surface Searching Method, Using A Random Technique For Generating Sliding Block Surfaces, Has Been Specified. 4000 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated. 2 Boxes Specified For Generation Of Central Block Base Length Of Line Segments For Active And Passive Portions Of Sliding Block Is 15.0 Box X-Left Y-Left X-Right Y-Right Height No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) 1 105.00 109.00 145.00 120.00 3.00 2 145.10 120.10 225.00 144.00 3.00 Following Are Displayed The Ten Most Critical Of The Trial Failure Surfaces Evaluated. They Are Ordered - Most Critical First. * * Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method * * Total Number of Trial Surfaces Attempted = 4000 Number of Trial Surfaces With Valid FS = 3991 Statistical Data On All Valid FS Values: FS Max = 13.563 FS Min = 1.811 FS Ave = 2.222 Standard Deviation = 0.716 Coefficient of Variation = 32.23 % Failure Surface Specified By 7 Coordinate Points Point X-Surf Y-Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 94.566 125.758 2 108.402 120.838 3 121.228 113.060 4 176.072 130.648 5 184.444 143.094 6 192.191 155.939 7 192.228 156.000 Factor of Safety *** 1.811 *** **** END OF GSTABL7 OUTPUT **** 040801201602002402803203604004400408012016020024028021014-01; 2-2'; P-Static; Design; Along Top Clay Bedp:\2021\21014-01 kb carlsbad - marja acres\sted\2-2'\03p.pl2 Run By: RTE 7/21/2021 04:02PM1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 2444411422422222W1W1W1bcdefghija# FSa 1.43b 1.43c1.43d 1.43e 1.43f 1.43g 1.43h 1.43i 1.43j 1.43SoilDesc.AfTsaQalQaloSoilTypeNo.1234TotalUnit Wt.(pcf)120.0120.0120.0120.0SaturatedUnit Wt.(pcf)120.0120.0120.0120.0CohesionIntercept(psf)240.0Aniso240.0AnisoFrictionAngle(deg)36.0Aniso31.0AnisoPorePressureParam.0.000.000.000.00PressureConstant(psf)0.00.00.00.0Piez.SurfaceNo.W1W1W1W1Load ValuePeak(A) 0.340(g)kh Coef. 0.150(g)<GSTABL7 v.2 FSmin=1.43Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method for the case of c & phi both > 0 040801201602002402803203604004400408012016020024028021014-01; 2-2'; P-Static; Design; Along Top Clay Bedp:\2021\21014-01 kb carlsbad - marja acres\sted\2-2'\03p.plt Run By: RTE 7/21/2021 04:02PM1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 2444411422422222W1W1W1 P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\2-2'\03p.OUT Page 1 *** GSTABL7 *** ** GSTABL7 by Dr. Garry H. Gregory, Ph.D.,P.E.,D.GE ** ** Original Version 1.0, January 1996; Current Ver. 2.005.3, Feb. 2013 ** (All Rights Reserved-Unauthorized Use Prohibited) ********************************************************************************* SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS SYSTEM Modified Bishop, Simplified Janbu, or GLE Method of Slices. (Includes Spencer & Morgenstern-Price Type Analysis) Including Pier/Pile, Reinforcement, Soil Nail, Tieback, Nonlinear Undrained Shear Strength, Curved Phi Envelope, Anisotropic Soil, Fiber-Reinforced Soil, Boundary Loads, Water Surfaces, Pseudo-Static & Newmark Earthquake, and Applied Forces. ********************************************************************************* Analysis Run Date: 7/21/2021 Time of Run: 04:02PM Run By: RTE Input Data Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\2-2'\03p.in Output Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\2-2'\03p.OUT Unit System: English Plotted Output Filename: P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\2-2'\03p.PLT PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: 21014-01; 2-2'; P-Static; Design; Along Top Clay Bed BOUNDARY COORDINATES 10 Top Boundaries 16 Total Boundaries Boundary X-Left Y-Left X-Right Y-Right Soil Type No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Below Bnd 1 0.00 109.00 25.00 109.00 2 2 25.00 109.00 65.00 119.00 4 3 65.00 119.00 100.00 127.00 4 4 100.00 127.00 105.00 127.00 4 5 105.00 127.00 121.00 131.00 4 6 121.00 131.00 175.00 156.00 1 7 175.00 156.00 230.00 156.00 1 8 230.00 156.00 255.00 156.00 4 9 255.00 156.00 300.00 156.00 2 10 300.00 156.00 425.00 156.00 2 11 121.00 131.00 230.00 156.00 4 12 25.00 109.00 145.00 110.00 2 13 145.00 110.00 185.00 110.00 2 14 185.00 110.00 225.00 114.00 2 15 225.00 114.00 240.00 122.00 2 16 240.00 122.00 255.00 156.00 2 Default Y-Origin = 0.00(ft) Default X-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) Default Y-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS 4 Type(s) of Soil Soil Total Saturated Cohesion Friction Pore Pressure Piez. Type Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Pressure Constant Surface No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) Param. (psf) No. 1 120.0 120.0 240.0 36.0 0.00 0.0 1 2 120.0 120.0 240.0 36.0 0.00 0.0 1 3 120.0 120.0 240.0 31.0 0.00 0.0 1 4 120.0 120.0 240.0 36.0 0.00 0.0 1 ANISOTROPIC STRENGTH PARAMETERS 2 soil type(s) Soil Type 2 Is Anisotropic Number Of Direction Ranges Specified = 3 Direction Counterclockwise Cohesion Friction Range Direction Limit Intercept Angle No. (deg) (psf) (deg) 1 3.0 240.00 36.00 2 20.0 240.00 17.00 3 90.0 240.00 36.00 Soil Type 4 Is Anisotropic Number Of Direction Ranges Specified = 3 Direction Counterclockwise Cohesion Friction Range Direction Limit Intercept Angle P:\2021\21014-01 KB Carlsbad - Marja Acres\Sted\2-2'\03p.OUT Page 2 No. (deg) (psf) (deg) 1 3.0 240.00 36.00 2 20.0 240.00 17.00 3 90.0 240.00 36.00 ANISOTROPIC SOIL NOTES: (1) An input value of 0.01 for C and/or Phi will cause Aniso C and/or Phi to be ignored in that range. (2) An input value of 0.02 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with no water weight in the tension crack. (3) An input value of 0.03 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with water weight in the tension crack. 1 PIEZOMETRIC SURFACE(S) SPECIFIED Unit Weight of Water = 62.40 (pcf) Piezometric Surface No. 1 Specified by 3 Coordinate Points Pore Pressure Inclination Factor = 0.50 Point X-Water Y-Water No. (ft) (ft) 1 25.00 104.00 2 206.00 100.00 3 395.00 103.00 Specified Peak Ground Acceleration Coefficient (A) = 0.340(g) Specified Horizontal Earthquake Coefficient (kh) = 0.150(g) Specified Vertical Earthquake Coefficient (kv) = 0.000(g) Specified Seismic Pore-Pressure Factor = 0.000 Janbus Empirical Coef is being used for the case of c & phi both > 0 A Critical Failure Surface Searching Method, Using A Random Technique For Generating Sliding Block Surfaces, Has Been Specified. 4000 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated. 2 Boxes Specified For Generation Of Central Block Base Length Of Line Segments For Active And Passive Portions Of Sliding Block Is 15.0 Box X-Left Y-Left X-Right Y-Right Height No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) 1 105.00 109.00 145.00 120.00 3.00 2 145.10 120.10 225.00 144.00 3.00 Following Are Displayed The Ten Most Critical Of The Trial Failure Surfaces Evaluated. They Are Ordered - Most Critical First. * * Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method * * Total Number of Trial Surfaces Attempted = 4000 Number of Trial Surfaces With Valid FS = 4000 Statistical Data On All Valid FS Values: FS Max = 8.080 FS Min = 1.428 FS Ave = 1.827 Standard Deviation = 0.515 Coefficient of Variation = 28.19 % Failure Surface Specified By 7 Coordinate Points Point X-Surf Y-Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 78.848 122.165 2 83.141 119.454 3 97.537 115.238 4 112.273 112.437 5 217.953 142.501 6 227.438 154.122 7 229.281 156.000 Factor of Safety *** 1.428 *** **** END OF GSTABL7 OUTPUT **** z =Depth of Saturation = 4.0 ft b = Buoyant Unit Weight of Soil = 57.6 pcf t = Total Unit Weight of Soil = 120.0 pcf = Slope Angle = 26.6 degrees =Angle of Internal Friction = 30.0 degrees c = Cohesion = 200.0 psf Force Tending to Cause Movement: Force Tending to Resist Movement: Factor of Safety: 2 zgb cos2 a tan f + 2c zt sin 2 1.59F.S. = FD = zt cos  sin  = 1/2 zt sin 2  FR = zb cos2  tan  + c Surficial Slope Stability Analysis = O:\Geotech\Surficial Stability Analysis1 Rev. 07/2003 APPENDIX G APPENDIX G GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS 1.0 General 1.1 Intent: These General Earthwork and Grading Specifications are for the grading and earthwork shown on the approved grading plan(s) and/or indicated in the geotechnical report(s). These Specifications are a part of the recommendations contained in the geotechnical report(s). In case of conflict, the specific recommendations in the geotechnical report shall supersede these more general Specifications. Observations of the earthwork by the project Geotechnical Consultant during the course of grading may result in new or revised recommendations that could supersede these specifications or the recommendations in the geotechnical report(s). 1.2 Geotechnical Consultant: Prior to commencement of work, the owner shall employ a geotechnical consultant. The geotechnical consultant shall be responsible for reviewing the approved geotechnical report(s) and accepting the adequacy of the preliminary geotechnical findings, conclusions, and recommendations prior to the commencement of the grading. Prior to commencement of grading, the Geotechnical Consultant shall review the "work plan" prepared by the Earthwork Contractor (Contractor) and schedule sufficient personnel to perform the appropriate level of observation, mapping, and compaction testing. During the grading and earthwork operations, the Geotechnical Consultant shall observe, map, and document the subsurface exposures to verify the geotechnical design assumptions. If the observed conditions are found to be significantly different than the interpreted assumptions during the design phase, the Geotechnical Consultant shall inform the owner, recommend appropriate changes in design to accommodate the observed conditions, and notify the review agency where required. Subsurface areas to be geotechnically observed, mapped, elevations recorded, and/or tested include natural ground after it has been cleared for receiving fill but before fill is placed, bottoms of all "remedial removal" areas, all key bottoms, and benches made on sloping ground to receive fill. The Geotechnical Consultant shall observe the moisture-conditioning and processing of the subgrade and fill materials and perform relative compaction testing of fill to determine the attained level of compaction. The Geotechnical Consultant shall provide the test results to the owner and the Contractor on a routine and frequent basis. O:\NMGDOC\Reports\Appendices\grading Specifications.doc G-1 1.3 The Earthwork Contractor: The Earthwork Contractor (Contractor) shall be qualified, experienced, and knowledgeable in earthwork logistics, preparation and processing of ground to receive fill, moisture-conditioning and processing of fill, and compacting fill. The Contractor shall review and accept the plans, geotechnical report(s), and these Specifications prior to commencement of grading. The Contractor shall be solely responsible for performing the grading in accordance with the plans and specifications. The Contractor shall prepare and submit to the owner and the Geotechnical Consultant a work plan that indicates the sequence of earthwork grading, the number of "spreads" of work and the estimated quantities of daily earthwork contemplated for the site prior to commencement of grading. The Contractor shall inform the owner and the Geotechnical Consultant of changes in work schedules and updates to the work plan at least 24 hours in advance of such changes so that appropriate observations and tests can be planned and accomplished. The Contractor shall not assume that the Geotechnical Consultant is aware of all grading operations. The Contractor shall have the sole responsibility to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish the earthwork in accordance with the applicable grading codes and agency ordinances, these Specifications, and the recommendations in the approved geotechnical report(s) and grading plan(s). If, in the opinion of the Geotechnical Consultant, unsatisfactory conditions, such as unsuitable soil, improper moisture condition, inadequate compaction, insufficient buttress key size, adverse weather, etc., are resulting in a quality of work less than required in these specifications, the Geotechnical Consultant shall reject the work and may recommend to the owner that construction be stopped until the conditions are rectified. 2.0 Preparation of Areas to be Filled 2.1 Clearing and Grubbing: Vegetation, such as brush, grass, roots, and other deleterious material shall be sufficiently removed and properly disposed of in a method acceptable to the owner, governing agencies, and the Geotechnical Consultant. The Geotechnical Consultant shall evaluate the extent of these removals depending on specific site conditions. Earth fill material shall not contain more than 1 percent of organic materials (by volume). No fill lift shall contain more than 5 percent of organic matter. Nesting of the organic materials shall not be allowed. If potentially hazardous materials are encountered, the Contractor shall stop work in the affected area, and a hazardous material specialist shall be informed O:\NMGDOC\Reports\Appendices\grading Specifications.doc G-2 immediately for proper evaluation and handling of these materials prior to continuing to work in that area. As presently defined by the State of California, most refined petroleum products (gasoline, diesel fuel, motor oil, grease, coolant, etc.) have chemical constituents that are considered to be hazardous waste. As such, the indiscriminate dumping or spillage of these fluids onto the ground may constitute a misdemeanor, punishable by fines and/or imprisonment, and shall not be allowed. 2.2 Processing: Existing ground that has been declared satisfactory for support of fill by the Geotechnical Consultant shall be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches. Existing ground that is not satisfactory shall be overexcavated as specified in the following section. Scarification shall continue until soils are broken down and free of large clay lumps or clods and the working surface is reasonably uniform, flat, and free of uneven features that would inhibit uniform compaction. 2.3 Overexcavation: In addition to removals and overexcavations recommended in the approved geotechnical report(s) and the grading plan, soft, loose, dry, saturated, spongy, organic-rich, highly fractured or otherwise unsuitable ground shall be overexcavated to competent ground as evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant during grading. 2.4 Benching: Where fills are to be placed on ground with slopes steeper than 5:1 (horizontal to vertical units), the ground shall be stepped or benched. Please see the Standard Details for a graphic illustration. The lowest bench or key shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide and at least 2 feet deep, into competent material as evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant. Other benches shall be excavated a minimum height of 4 feet into competent material or as otherwise recommended by the Geotechnical Consultant. Fill placed on ground sloping flatter than 5:1 shall also be benched or otherwise overexcavated to provide a flat subgrade for the fill. 2.5 Evaluation/Acceptance of Fill Areas: All areas to receive fill, including removal and processed areas, key bottoms, and benches, shall be observed, mapped, elevations recorded, and/or tested prior to being accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant as suitable to receive fill. The Contractor shall obtain a written acceptance from the Geotechnical Consultant prior to fill placement. A licensed surveyor shall provide the survey control for determining elevations of processed areas, keys, and benches. O:\NMGDOC\Reports\Appendices\grading Specifications.doc G-3 3.0 Fill Material 3.1 General: Material to be used as fill shall be essentially free of organic matter and other deleterious substances evaluated and accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to placement. Soils of poor quality, such as those with unacceptable gradation, high expansion potential, or low strength shall be placed in areas acceptable to the Geotechnical Consultant or mixed with other soils to achieve satisfactory fill material. 3.2 Oversize: Oversize material defined as rock, or other irreducible material with a maximum dimension greater than 12 inches, shall not be buried or placed in fill unless location, materials, and placement methods are specifically accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant. Placement operations shall be such that nesting of oversized material does not occur and such that oversize material is completely surrounded by compacted or densified fill. Oversize material shall not be placed within 10 vertical feet of finish grade or within 2 feet of future utilities or underground construction. 3.3 Import: If importing of fill material is required for grading, proposed import material shall meet the requirements of Section 3.1. The potential import source shall be given to the Geotechnical Consultant at least 48 hours (2 working days) before importing begins so that its suitability can be determined and appropriate tests performed. 4.0 Fill Placement and Compaction 4.1 Fill Layers: Approved fill material shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill (per Section 3.0) in near-horizontal layers not exceeding 8 inches in loose thickness. The Geotechnical Consultant may accept thicker layers if testing indicates the grading procedures can adequately compact the thicker layers. Each layer shall be spread evenly and mixed thoroughly to attain relative uniformity of material and moisture throughout. 4.2 Fill Moisture Conditioning: Fill soils shall be watered, dried back, blended, and/or mixed, as necessary to attain a relatively uniform moisture content at or slightly over optimum. Maximum density and optimum soil moisture content tests shall be performed in accordance with the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM Test Method D1557-91). 4.3 Compaction of Fill: After each layer has been moisture-conditioned, mixed, and evenly spread, it shall be uniformly compacted to not less than 90 percent of maximum dry density (ASTM Test Method D1557-91). Compaction equipment shall be adequately sized and be either specifically designed for soil compaction or of proven reliability to efficiently achieve the specified level of compaction with uniformity. O:\NMGDOC\Reports\Appendices\grading Specifications.doc G-4 4.4 Compaction of Fill Slopes: In addition to normal compaction procedures specified above, compaction of slopes shall be accomplished by backrolling of slopes with sheepsfoot rollers at increments of 3 to 4 feet in fill elevation, or by other methods producing satisfactory results acceptable to the Geotechnical Consultant. Upon completion of grading, relative compaction of the fill, out to the slope face, shall be at least 90 percent of maximum density per ASTM Test Method D1557-91. 4.5 Compaction Testing: Field tests for moisture content and relative compaction of the fill soils shall be performed by the Geotechnical Consultant. Location and frequency of tests shall be at the Consultant’s discretion based on field conditions encountered. Compaction test locations will not necessarily be selected on a random basis. Test locations shall be selected to verify adequacy of compaction levels in areas that are judged to be prone to inadequate compaction (such as close to slope faces and at the fill/bedrock benches). 4.6 Frequency of Compaction Testing: Tests shall be taken at intervals not exceeding 2 feet in vertical rise and/or 1,000 cubic yards of compacted fill soils embankment. In addition, as a guideline, at least one test shall be taken on slope faces for each 5,000 square feet of slope face and/or each 10 feet of vertical height of slope. The Contractor shall assure that fill construction is such that the testing schedule can be accomplished by the Geotechnical Consultant. The Contractor shall stop or slow down the earthwork construction if these minimum standards are not met. 4.7 Compaction Test Locations: The Geotechnical Consultant shall document the approximate elevation and horizontal coordinates of each test location. The Contractor shall coordinate with the project surveyor to assure that sufficient grade stakes are established so that the Geotechnical Consultant can determine the test locations with sufficient accuracy. At a minimum, two grade stakes within a horizontal distance of 100 feet and vertically less than 5 feet apart from potential test locations shall be provided. 5.0 Subdrain Installation Subdrain systems shall be installed in accordance with the approved geotechnical report(s), the grading plan, and the Standard Details. The Geotechnical Consultant may recommend additional subdrains and/or changes in subdrain extent, location, grade, or material depending on conditions encountered during grading. All subdrains shall be surveyed by a land surveyor/civil engineer for line and grade after installation and prior to burial. Sufficient time should be allowed by the Contractor for these surveys. O:\NMGDOC\Reports\Appendices\grading Specifications.doc G-5 6.0 Excavation Excavations, as well as over-excavation for remedial purposes, shall be evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant during grading. Remedial removal depths shown on geotechnical plans are estimates only. The actual extent of removal shall be determined by the Geotechnical Consultant based on the field evaluation of exposed conditions during grading. Where fill-over-cut slopes are to be graded, the cut portion of the slope shall be made, evaluated, and accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to placement of materials for construction of the fill portion of the slope, unless otherwise recommended by the Geotechnical Consultant. 7.0 Trench Backfills 7.1 Contractor shall follow all OHSA and Cal/OSHA requirements for safety of trench excavations. 7.2 Bedding and backfill of utility trenches shall be done in accordance with the applicable provisions of Standard Specifications of Public Works Construction. Bedding material shall have a Sand Equivalent greater than 30 (SE>30). The bedding shall be placed to 1 foot over the top of the conduit and densified by jetting. Backfill shall be placed and densified to a minimum 90 percent of maximum from 1 foot above the top of the conduit to the surface, except in traveled ways (see Section 7.6 below). 7.3 Jetting of the bedding around the conduits shall be observed by the Geotechnical Consultant. 7.4 Geotechnical Consultant shall test the trench backfill for relative compaction. At least one test should be made for every 300 feet of trench and 2 feet of fill. 7.5 Lift thickness of trench backfill shall not exceed those allowed in the Standard Specifications of Public Works Construction unless the Contractor can demonstrate to the Geotechnical Consultant that the fill lift can be compacted to the minimum relative compaction by his alternative equipment and method. O:\NMGDOC\Reports\Appendices\grading Specifications.doc G-6 7.6 Trench backfill in the upper foot measured from finish grade/subgrade within existing or future traveled way, shoulder, and other paved areas (or areas to receive pavement) should be placed to a minimum 95 percent relative compaction unless specified differently by the governing agency. NMG Geotechnical, Inc. TYPICAL FILL KEY ABOVE NATURAL SLOPEMINIMUM STANDARD GRADING DETAILS DESIGN FINISH GRADE BROW BERM COMPETENTMATERIAL MAINTAIN 9' MIN. HORIZONTAL WIDTHFROM SLOPE FACE TO BENCH/BACKCUT NATURALGRADE TOE OF SLOPE SHOWNON GRADING PLAN PROJECTED SLOPE GRADIENT(1:1 MAXIMUM) BACKCUT -- VARIES 2' MINIMUMKEY DEPTH PLACE COMPACTED BACKFILLTO ORIGINAL GRADE MINIMUM 1' TILT BACK OR 2% SLOPE(WHICHEVER IS GREATER) NOTE: BENCHING SHALL BE REQUIRED WHEN NATURAL SLOPES ARE EQUAL TO ORSTEEPER THAN 5:1 OR WHEN RECOMMENDED BY THE SOIL ENGINEER. WHERE THENATURAL SLOPE APPROACHES OR EXCEEDS THE DESIGN SLOPE RATIO, SPECIALRECOMMENDATIONS WILL BE PROVIDED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER. VARIABLE COMPACTED FILL KEY IN COMPETENTMATERIAL. MINIMUMWIDTH OF 15 FEET ORAS RECOMMENDED BYTHE GEOTECHNICALCONSULTANT. FIGURE 1 4' TYPICAL 8/96 FILL KEY ABOVE NAT. SLOPE.ai REMOVE UNSUITABLE MATE RI A L NMG Geotechnical, Inc. TYPICAL FILL ABOVE CUT SLOPEMINIMUM STANDARD GRADING DETAILS FIGURE 2 DESIGN FINISH GRADE COMPACTED FILL COMPETENTMATERIAL BROWBERM 4'TYPICAL CUT/FILL SHOWN ONGRADING PLAN NATURAL GRADE CUT SLOPE TO BE CONSTRUCTEDPRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF FILL TYPICAL HEIGHT OF BENCHES IS4 FEET OR AS RECOMMENDED BYTHE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT MINIMUM 1' TILT BACK OR 2% SLOPE(WHICHEVER IS GREATER) VARIABLE KEYWAY IN COMPETENTMATERIAL. MINIMUMWIDTH OF 15 FEET ORAS RECOMMENDED BYTHE GEOTECHNICALCONSULTANT 2' NOTE: THE FILL PORTION OF THE SLOPE SHALL BE COMPACTEDAS STATED IN THE PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS. 9' MIN. 8/03 TYP FILL ABOVE CUT SLOPE.ai R E M O V E U N S U I TA B L E M AT E R I A L NMG Geotechnical, Inc. TYPICAL BUTTRESS FILLMINIMUM STANDARD GRADING DETAILS TERRACE DRAIN BROWBERM IN-PLACE EARTH MATERIAL KEYWAY COMPACTED FILL BLANKET FILL IF RECOMMENDEDBY THE GEOTECHNICALCONSULTANT (3' TYPICAL) DESIGN FINISH GRADE 30' MAX W D MINIMUM 1' TILT BACKOR 2 % SLOPE(WHICHEVER IS GREATER) 2% TYP SLOPE OF INTERFACE TO BE MAXIMUM PERMITTEDFOR SAFE WORKING CONDITIONS, AS RECOMMENDEDBY GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT. TYPICAL HEIGHT OFBENCHES 4 FEET. KEY IN COMPETENTMATERIAL. MINIMUMWIDTH (W) AND DEPTH (D)OF BUTTRESS KEY ASRECOMMENDED BY THEGEOTECHNICALCONSULTANT. NOTE: SUBDRAIN DETAILS, SEE FIGURE 5. FIGURE 3 1/04 TYP BUTTRESS FILL.ai NMG Geotechnical, Inc. TYPICAL STABILIZATION FILLMINIMUM STANDARD GRADING DETAILS COMPETENT MATERIALACCEPTABLE TO THEGEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT TYPICAL HEIGHT OF BENCHES IS 4'OR AS RECOMMENDED BY THEGEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT MAINTAIN A 9' MINIMUM HORIZONTAL WIDTHFROM SLOPE FACE TO BACKCUT OR BENCH MINIMUM 1' TILT BACK 2' MIN.KEY BOTTOM COMPACTED FILL TERRACE DRAIN BLANKET FILL IF RECOMMENDEDBY THE GEOTECHNICALCONSULTANT (3' TYPICAL) FIGURE 4 15' MINIMUM BACKCUTAT TOP OF SLOPE VARIABLE 15' MINIMUMKEY WIDTH 9/96 STABILIZATION FILL.ai DESIGN FINISH GRADE NOTE: SEE FIGURE 5 FOR TYPICAL SUBDRAIN DETAILS FORSTABILIZATION FILLS NMGNMG Geotechnical, Inc.Geotechnical, Inc. TYPICALTYPICAL ST STABILIZAABILIZATION TION AND BUTTRESS FILLAND BUTTRESS FILL SUBDRAINS SUBDRAINSMINIMUM STMINIMUM STANDARD GRADING DETANDARD GRADING DETAILSAILS OUTLETS OUTLETS TO BE SPO BE SPACED ACED AT 100' 100'MAXIMUM INTERMAXIMUM INTERVALS. EXTEND 12 INCHESALS. EXTEND 12 INCHESBEYOND FBEYOND FACE OF SLOPE ACE OF SLOPE AT TIME OF ROUGHTIME OF ROUGHGRADING CONSTRUCTION.GRADING CONSTRUCTION. DESIGNDESIGNFINISHFINISHSLOPESLOPE BROWBROWBERMBERM BLANKETBLANKET FILL FILL IF RECOMMENDED BY IF RECOMMENDED BYGEOTECHNICALGEOTECHNICAL CONSUL CONSULTANTANT(3' (3' TYPICAL)TYPICAL) 2' CLEAR 10' MIN30' MAX COMPACTEDFILL 2% 2% 4-INCH DIAMETER NON-PERFORATED OUTLET PIPETO BE LOCATED IN FIELD BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT NOTE:TRENCH FOR OUTLET PIPES TO BEBACKFILLED WITH ON-SITE SOIL. "FILTER MATERIAL" TO MEETFOLLOWING SPECIFICATIONOR APPROVED EQUIVALENT. SIEVE SIZE 1"3/4"3/8"NO. 4NO. 8NO. 30NO. 50NO. 200 PERCENTAGEPASSING10090-10040-10025-4018-335-150-70-3 FILTER MATERIAL - MINIMUM OF THREE CUBIC FEET PER FOOT OF PIPE.SEE FILTER MATERIAL SPECIFICATION. ALTERNATE: IN LIEU OF FILTER MATERIAL, THREE CUBIC FEET OFGRAVEL PER FOOT OF SUBDRAIN (WITHOUT PIPE) MAY BE ENCASED IN FILTER FABRIC.SEE GRAVEL SPECIFICATION, AND FIGURE 6 FORFILTER FABRIC SPECIFICATION "GRAVEL" TO CONSIST OF 1/2" TO 1" CRUSHED ROCKPER STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR PUBLICWORKS CONSTRUCTION. FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE LAPPED A MINIMUM OF 12 INCHESON ALL JOINTS. MINIMUM 4-INCH DIAMETER SCHEDULE 40ASTM D1527 OR D1785 OR SDR 35 ASTM D2751OR D 3034. FOR FILL DEPTH OF 90 FEET ORGREATER, USE ONLY SCHEDULE 40 OREQUIVALENT. THERE SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF8 UNIFORMLY SPACED PERFORATIONS PERFOOT OF PIPE INSTALLED WITH PERFORATIONS ON BOTTOM OF PIPE.PROVIDE CAP AT UPSTREAM END OF PIPE.SLOPE AT 2 PERCENT TO OUTLET PIPE. FIGURE 5 SEE DETAIL BELOW DETAIL OUTLET PIPE TO BECONNECTED TOSUBDRAIN PIPE WITHTEE OR ELBOW 8/96 ST8/96 STAB. BUTTRESS FILLAB. BUTTRESS FILL SUBDRAINS.ai SUBDRAINS.ai 30' MAX NMG Geotechnical, Inc. TYPICAL CANYON SUBDRAINMINIMUM STANDARD GRADING DETAILS FIGURE 6 NOTES: DOWNSTREAM 20' OF PIPE AT OUTLET SHALL BE NON-PERFORATED AND BACKFILLED WITHFINE-GRAINED MATERIAL PIPE SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 4-INCH DIAMETER. FOR RUNS OF 500 FEET OR MORE, USE 6-INCHDIAMETER PIPE, OR AS RECOMMENDED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT . TYPICALBENCHING SEE DETAIL BELOW COMPETENT MATERIAL NATURAL GRADE FILTER FABRICS SHALL BE PERMEABLE NON-WOVEN POLYESTER, NYLON, OR POLYPROPYLENE MATERIAL CONFORMINGTO THE FOLLOWING: 1) GRAB TENSILE STRENGTH. POUNDS, MIN. ASTM D 4632......................................................90 2) ELONGATION, AT PEAK LOAD, PERCENT, MIN. ASTM D 4632.................................................50 3) PUNCTURE STRENGTH, LBS., MIN. ASTM D 3787....................................................................45 4) COEFFICIENT OF WATER PERMITTIVITY, 1/SEC. ASTM D 4491............................................>0.7 5) BURST STRENGTH, P.S.I., MIN. ASTM D 3786..........................................................................180 6" MIN. 18" MIN.3' TYPICAL DEPTH ANDBEDDING MAY VARYWITH PIPE AND LOADCHARACTERISTICS.3' TYPICAL DETAIL FILTER MATERIAL - MINIMUM OF NINE CUBIC FEET PER FOOTOF PIPE. SEE FIGURE 5 FOR FILTER MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS. ALTERNATE: IN LIEU OF FILTER MATERIAL, NINE CUBIC FEET OFGRAVEL PER FOOT OF SUBDRAIN (WITHOUT PIPE) MAY BEENCASED IN FILTER FABRIC. SEE FIGURE 5 TO GRAVELSPECIFICATION. SEE ABOVE FOR FILTER FABRIC SPECIFICATION.FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE LAPPED MINIMUM OF 12 INCHES ONALL JOINTS. MINIMUM 4 INCH DIAMETER SCHEDULE 40 ASTM D 1527, ORD 1785, OR SDR 35 ASTM 2751 OR D 3034. FOR FILL DEPTH OF90 FEET OR GREATER, USE ONLY SCHEDULE 40 OR APPROVEDEQUIVALENT. THERE SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 8 UNIFORMLYSPACED PERFORATIONS PER FOOT OF PIPE INSTALLED WITHPERFORATIONS ON BOTTOM OF PIPE. COMPACTED FILL MINIMUMCLEARANCEDIMENSIONS Rev. 8/96 CANYON SUBDRAIN.ai REM O V E U N S U I T A B L E M A T E R IA L TYPICAL OVERSIZE ROCK PLACEMENT METHODMINIMUM STANDARD GRADING DETAILFOR STRUCTURAL FILL PLACE OVERSIZE MATERIAL IN TRENCH.FALSE SLOPE OR CUT SLOT INTO APPROVEDMATERIAL. OVERSIZE MATERIAL MAY BE PLACEDSIDE BY SIDE IF SIZE PERMITS. (NOT TO EXCEEDA WIDTH OF 4 FEET) FILL VOIDS WITHSELECT GRANULARSOIL PLACED BYWATERDENSIFICATIONAND MECHANICALCOMPACTION.NESTING OR STACKING OFOVERSIZEMATERIALIS NOT ACCEPTABLE. FIGURE 7 4’ 4’ 4' MIN. 15' MIN. 15' MIN. NOTES:A) OVERSIZED ROCK IS DEFINED AS LARGER THAN 12" IN SIZE (IN GREATEST DIMENSION). B) SPACE BETWEEN ROCKROWS SHOULD BE ONE EQUIPMENT WIDTH OR A MINIMUM OF 15 FEET. C) THE WIDTH AND HEIGHT OF THE ROCKROW SHALL BE LIMITED TO FOUR FEET AND THE LENGTH LIMITED TO 300 FEET UNLESS APPROVED OTHERWISE BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT. OVERSIZE SHOULD BE PLACED WITH FLATEST SIDE ON THE BOTTOM. D) OVERSIZE MATERIAL EXCEEDING FOUR FEET MAY BE PLACED ON AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS IF APPROVED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT. E) FILLING OF VOIDS WILL REQUIRE SELECT GRANULAR SOIL (SE > 20, OR LESS THAN 20 PERCENT FINES) AS APPROVED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT. VOIDS IN THE ROCKROW TO BE FILLED BY WATER DENSIFYING GRANULAR SOIL INTO PLACE ALONG WITH MECHANICAL COMPACTION EFFORT. F) IF APPROVED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT, ROCKROWS MAY BE PLACED DIRECTLY ON COMPETENT MATERIALS OR BEDROCK, PROVIDED ADEQUATE SPACE IS AVAILABLE FOR COMPACTION. G) THE FIRST LIFT OF MATERIAL ABOVE THE ROCKROW SHALL CONSIST OF GRANULAR MATERIAL AND SHALL BE PROOF-ROLLED WITH A D-8 OR LARGER DOZER OR EQUIVALENT. H) ROCKROWS NEAR SLOPES SHOULD BE ORIENTED PARALLEL TO SLOPE FACE. I) NESTING OR STACKING OF ROCKS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. FINISH GRADE TYPICALROCK ROW FINISHSLOPEFACE 3/04 TYP OVERSIZE ROCK PLACEMENT.ai PROFILE ALONG ROCKROW 300’ MAX. SECTION THROUGH ROCKROW 4’ MAX. NMG Geotechnical, Inc. 10’ MIN. 10’ MIN. 4’MAX. 4’MAX. NMG Geotechnical, Inc. TYPICAL OVEREXCAVATION OF DAYLIGHT LINEMINIMUM STANDARD GRADING DETAILS FIGURE 8 NOTE: DEEPER THAN THE 3-FOOT OVEREXCAVATION MAY BE RECOMMENDED BY THEGEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT IN STEEP TRANSITIONS. COMPETENT MATERIAL ACCEPTABLETO THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT OVEREXCAVATE AND RECOMPACT UNSUITABLE MATERIAL NATURAL GRADE COMPACTED FILL 5' MIN. CUT LOT OVEREXCAVATE AND RECOMPACT UNSUITABLE MATERIAL NATURAL GRADE COMPACTED FILL 3' MIN.SEE NOTE 3' MIN. SEE NOTE 5' MIN. CUT FILL LOT (TRANSITION) COMPETENT MATERIAL ACCEPTABLETO THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT TYPICAL BENCHING TYPICAL BENCHING DESIGNFINISH GRADE DESIGNFINISH GRADE 8/96 OVEREXCAVATION OF DAYLIGHT LINE.ai NMG Geotechnical, Inc. SUBDRAIN OUTLET MARKERMINIMUM STANDARD GRADING DETAILS A A Elevation Elevation A A Section A-A Section A-A SUBDRAIN OUTLET MARKER - 4" PIPE SUBDRAIN OUTLET MARKER - 6" AND 8" PIPE PVC SCHEDULE 40 OR 80 SUBDRAIN PVC DRAIN GRATE CAP 12" X 8" X 12" STANDARDCONCRETE COLUMN BLOCK NO. 4 STEEL REINFORCED BARMINIMUM 3'-0" LONG (2 REQUIRED) BAGS FILLED WITH DRY CONCRETEMIX TO BE PLACED FOR SUPPORTAND WETTED (2 REQUIRED) ABS OR PVC SUBDRAIN ABS OR PVC DRAIN CAP 8" X 8" X 16" STANDARDCONCRETE BLOCKBACKFILLED WITH EARTH NO. 4 REINFORCED STEELBAR MINIMUM 3'-0" LONG 4" MIN. 2" + 2:1 SLOPE 2:1 SLOPE Rev. 3/04 SUBDRAIN OUTLET MARKER.ai DETAIL 1 NMG Geotechnical, Inc. TYPICAL SURFACE SETTLEMENT MONUMENTMINIMUM STANDARD GRADING DETAILS FIGURE 9 PLACE 6" BELOW FINISH GRADE CAP SECURED WITH EPOXY 6" DIAMETER X 3' DEEP HOLE CONCRETE BACKFILL 3/4" X 5' IRON PIPE2'-6" 3'-0" 5'-6" 6" SURFACE SETTLEMENT MONUMENT.ai 891012131415161718676869707172737475767778PM 3451MAP 7292MAP 8033MAP 10558469+00470+00471+00472+00473+00474+00475+00476+00477+00478+00479+00480+00481+00482+00483+00484+00PM 3451PM 3451MAP 8033MAP 7292(EV)(EV)EVEVEX. 24" CMP(EV)(EV)8CLFF=72.25PAD 71.57CLFF=72.256CLFF=72.255CLFF=72.259CLFF=71.75PAD 71.0FF=71.751CLFF=71.752CLFF=71.753CLFF=71.75PAD 71.04CL10CLFF=71.7511CLFF=71.7512CLFF=71.7513CLFF=71.75FF=82.25224LFF=82.25225LFF=82.25226LFF=82.25PAD 81.5227LFF=82.25PAD 81.5228LFF=81.75PAD 81.0232LFF=81.75231LFF=81.75230LFF=81.75229L236LFF=83.75235LFF=83.75234LFF=83.75233LFF=83.75PAD 83.0PAD 71.0PAD 71.0PAD 71.0PAD 71 .0PAD 71.0PAD 71.0PAD 71.0PAD 71.5PAD 71.5PAD 71.5PAD 83.0PAD 83.0PAD 83.0PAD 81.5PAD 81.5PAD 81.5PAD 81.0PAD 81.0PAD 81.0218LFF 82.75PAD 82.0219LFF 82.75220LFF 82.75221LFF 82.75222LFF 82.75223LFF 82.75PAD 82.0PAD 82.0PAD 82.0PAD 82.0PAD 82.0ADAFF=60.67PAD 60.0FF=60.67PAD 60.0FF=60.67PAD 60.0FF=60.67PAD 60.0FF=69.67PAD 69.0FF=72.67PAD 72.0FF 78.75PAD 78.021SFF 80.25PAD 79.531SFF 82.75PAD 82.0159LFF 85 .75PAD 85.0160S161L162L163L164L165L166L167LFF 85.75PAD 85.0168LFF 85.75169LFF 85 .75170LFF 85 .75171LFF 85.75172LFF 85.75173LFF 85.75174LFF 85.75175LFF 85 .25176LFF 85.25177LFF 85.25178LFF 85 .25179LFF 85.25180LFF 85.25181LFF 85.25158LPLAN 7FF 86.25PAD 85.50157LFF 86.25156LFF 86.25155LFF 86.25154LFF 86.25153LFF 86.75PAD 86.0237LFF 86.75PAD 86.0PLAN 4PLAN 6PLAN 6PLAN 5PLAN 4PLAN 7PAD 84 .5FF 85.75FF 85 .75FF 85 .75FF 85 .75FF 85 .75FF 85 .75FF 85 .75PAD 85.50PAD 85.50PAD 85.50PAD 85.50PAD 85 .0PAD 85.0PAD 85.0PAD 85.0PAD 85.0PAD 85.0PAD 85.0PAD 85.0PAD 85 .0PAD 85 .0PAD 85.0PAD 85.0PAD 85.0PAD 85.0PAD 84 .5PAD 84.5PAD 84.5PAD 84 .5PAD 84 .5PAD 84.57SFF=77.75PAD 77 .08SFF=77.75PAD 77 .06SFF=78.25PAD 77 .55SFF=78.25PAD 77 .54SFF=78.75PAD 78.03SFF=78.75PAD 78 .02SFF=79.25PAD 78 .51SFF=79.25PAD 78.528SFF 79.25PAD 78.527SFF=79.25PAD 78.5FF 78.75PAD 78.022SFF 79.75PAD 79.029SFF 79.75PAD 79.030SFF 82.25PAD 81.5FF 81.75PAD 81.0FF 82.25PAD 81.540SFF 82.25PAD 81.541SFF 82.75PAD 82.042SFF 81.75PAD 81.0134LFF 87.75PAD 87.0FF 87.75PAD 87.0132LFF 88.25PAD 87.511S75S74S76S77S78S84S83S82S81S79S80SADAADAPLAN 2ADAADAADAPLAN 3PLAN 1PLAN 1PLAN 3FF 77.75PAD 77.0FF 78.25PAD 77.5FF 77.75PAD 77.0FF 78.25PAD 77.5FF 78.75PAD 78.0FF 78.75PAD 78.0FF 78.75PAD 78.0FF 78.75PAD 78.0FF 78.75PAD 78.0FF 78.75PAD 78.0FF 78.75PAD 78.0FF 78.25PAD 77.588SPLAN 3FF 78.25PAD 77.589SPLAN 1FF 78.25PAD 77.590SPLAN 2FF 77.75PAD 77.085SPLAN 386SPLAN 1FF 77.75PAD 77.0FF 77.75PAD 77.087SPLAN 312S13S14S15SFF 80.25PAD 79.5FF 80.25PAD 79.5FF 80.25PAD 79.5FF 79.75PAD 79.0FF 79.75PAD 79.026SFF=79.75PAD 79.025SFF 79.75PAD 79.024SFF 80.25PAD 79.523SFF 80.25PAD 79.567SFF 83.25PAD 82.566SFF 83.25PAD 82.565SFF 83.75PAD 83.064SFF 83.75PAD 83.063SFF 84.25PAD 83.562SFF 84.25PAD 83.550SFF 86.75PAD 86.051SFF 86.75PAD 86.052SFF 86.25PAD 85.553SFF 86.25PAD 85.554SFF 85.75PAD 85.055SFF 85.75PAD 85.035SFF 82.75PAD 82.036SFF 82.75PAD 82.037S38S133L130LFF 88.75PAD 88.0129LFF 88.75PAD 88.0128LFF 89.25PAD 88.5127LFF 89.25PAD 88.5147LFF 87.75PAD 87.0146LFF 87.75PAD 87.0145LFF 88.25PAD 87.5144LFF 88.25PAD 87.5143LFF 88.75PAD 88.0142LFF 88.75PAD 88.0FF 79.25PAD 78.520SFF 79.25PAD 78.519SFF 79.75PAD 79.018SFF 80.25PAD 79.517SFF 80.25PAD 79.516SFF 81.75PAD 81.068SFF 81.75PAD 81.069SFF 82.25PAD 81.570SFF 82.25PAD 81.571SFF 82.75PAD 82.072SFF 82.75PAD 82.073SFF 80.25PAD 79.532SFF 80.75PAD 80.033SFF 80.75PAD 80.034SFF 83.75PAD 83.056SFF 83.75PAD 83.057SFF 84.25PAD 83.558SFF 84.25PAD 83.559SFF 84.75PAD 84.060SFF 84.75PAD 84.061S43SFF 85.75PAD 85.044SFF 85.75PAD 85.045SFF 86.25PAD 85.546SFF 86.25PAD 85.547SFF 86.75PAD 86.048SFF 86.75PAD 86.049SFF 87.75PAD 87.0135LFF 87.75PAD 87.0136LFF 88.25PAD 87.5137LFF 88.75PAD 88.0138LFF 88.75PAD 88.0139LFF 89.25PAD 88.5140LFF 89.25PAD 88.5141LFF 87.75PAD 87.0148LFF 87.75PAD 87.0149LFF 88.25PAD 87.5150LFF 88.75PAD 88.0151LFF 88.75PAD 88.0152L131LFF 88.25PAD 87.539S94SFF 83.25PAD 82.593SFF 83.2592SFF 83.2591SFF 83.2599SFF 85.75100SFF 85.75101SFF 85.75102SFF 85.75PAD 85.0110SFF 87.75PAD 87.0109SFF 87.75108SFF 87.75107SFF 87.75118SFF 89.25117SFF 89.25116SFF 89.25115SFF 89.25126LFF=90.75PAD 90.0125LFF=90.75124LFF=90.75123LFF=90.75186LFF 89.50FF 89.50188LFF 89.50189LFF 89.50PAD 88.75197LFF 88.00PAD 87.25196LFF 88.00195LFF 88.00194LFF 88.00213LFF 86.75PAD 86.0212LFF 86.75211LFF 86.75210LFF 86.75ADAFF 83.25PAD 82.5095SFF 83.2596SFF 83.2597SFF 83.2598SFF 85.75103SFF 85.75104SFF 85.75105SFF 85.75PAD 85.0106SFF 87.75PAD 87.0111SFF 87.75112SFF 87.75113SFF 87.75114SFF 89.25122SFF 89.25121SFF 89.25120SFF 89.25PAD 88.5119SFF=90.75PAD 90.0182LFF=90.75183LFF=90.75185LFF=90.75184LADAADAADAADAADAADAADAADAADAPAD 90.0PAD 90.0PAD 90.0PAD 88.75PAD 88.75PAD 88.75PAD 90.0PAD 90.0PAD 90.0PAD 88.5PAD 88.5PAD 88.5PAD 88.5PAD 88.5PAD 88.5PAD 88.5PAD 87.0PAD 87.0PAD 87.0PAD 87.0PAD 87.0PAD 87.0PAD 85.0PAD 85.0PAD 85.0PAD 85.0PAD 85.0PAD 85.0PAD 82.50PAD 82.50PAD 82.50PAD 82.5PAD 82.5PAD 82.5ADAADAFF 89.50PAD 88.75190LFF 89.50191LFF 89.50192LFF 89.50193LFF 88.00201LFF 86.25217LFF 86.25216LFF 86.25215LFF 86.25PAD 85.5214LADAADAADAPAD 87.25PAD 88.75PAD 87.25PAD 88.75PAD 87.25PAD 88.75PAD 87.25PAD 86.0PAD 85.5PAD 86.0PAD 85.5PAD 86.0PAD 85.5202LFF 87.25FF 87.25FF 87.25205LFF 87.25PAD 86.5ADAFF 88.00200LFF 88.00199LFF 88.00PAD 87.25198LFF 87.25207LFF 87.25PAD 86.5206LFF 87.25208LFF 87.25209LPAD 86.5PAD 87.25PAD 86.5PAD 87.25PAD 86.5PAD 86.5PAD 86.5PAD 86.5ADA203L204L187LBIO-FILTRATION BASINBIO-FILTRATION BASIN BIO-FILTRATIONBASIN - BMP 7BIO-FILTRATIONBASIN - BMP 4BMP 6BMP 3BIO-FILTRATION BASIN - BMP 1BMP 2BMP 5QalQalQalAfu AfuAfuAfuAfuAfuAfuAfuTsaTsaTsaTsaTsaTsaQtQtQtQtQtQtQtQalQalT.D. 11'TP-1T.D. 9'TP-2T.D. 8'TP-3T.D. 10'TP-4T.D. 7'TP-5T.D. 15.5'TP-6T.D. 9'TP-7T.D. 10'TP-8T.D. 7'TP-9T.D. 7'TP-10 Tsa @ 7'Tsa @ 5.5'Tsa @ 2'Qt @ 0-10'Afu @ 0-3.5'Qt @ 3.5'Afu @ 0-4'Qt @ 4'T.D. 26'@ 17'Afu @ 0-5'Qal @ 5'Tsa @ 20'T.D. 41'@ 15.5'Afu @ 0-4'Qal @ 4'Tsa @ 35'T.D. 51.5'@ 14'Afu @ 0-7'Qal @ 7'Tsa @ 36'GB-2GB-1GB-3El Camino RealQt @ 0-11'Qt @ 0-10'Qt @ 0-15.5'Qt @ 0-7'Qt @ 0-5.5'Qoa @ 0-7'30W2-3???DUDU888 161414141417161614822 4 6 12 7 4988 52 84124123116112424140414545939545534668997778474848515556636160463532616780746564601 0 4 ' 92 ' 95 '102 ' 11 0 '81 ' 8 4 ' 8 6 '81.5'8 0 '77 ' 86 '45 . 5 ' 46 .5 ' 4 7 . 5 '59 . 5 ' 50 .5 ' 51.9 ' 52. 4 ' 52' 53 .8 ' 59 . 9 ' 5 4 '54.9'5 8 '65'65.8'65.7'45'SM-5TsaQalTsa/SSAfTsaAfo/Qal83CPT-4CPT-5CPT-6CPT-3CPT-1CPT-2CPT-9CPT-7T.D.20'T.D.20'T.D.40.25'T.D.40'T.D.20'T.D.33.25'T.D.25.5'T.D.20'Afo/QtTP-4TP-5T.D.7.5'Qal@0'Tsa@3'@4'T.D.4'Tsa@4'TP-6T.D.6.5'Qal@2'Tsa@6'TP-1T.D.7'Qal@2'Tsa@6'TP-3T.D.6'TP-2T.D.4.5'Tsa@1.2'LD-2NB-3NB-2NB-4NB-5NB-1T.D.41.5'Qoa@0'Paleosol@20'Tsa@27.5'T.D.26.5'Qoa@0'Paleosol@20'Tsa@25'T.D.31.5'Qoa@0'Paleosol@5'Tsa@11'T.D.31.5'Qoa@0'Paleosol@15'Tsa@20'T.D.43'Qoa@0'Paleosol@34.3'Qt@36.2'LD-1T.D.44'Tsa@3.3'@44'T.D.31.5'Qoa@0'Paleosol@20'Tsa@25'Cell TowerRemoved18' DeepCell TowerRemoved17' DeepCPT-8T.D.40.25'B-2B-13 3'22'11'4 5 5' 6 6' 4'77'B-3T.D.50'T.D.69'Tsa@13.5'@63'T.D.71'Tsa@9'@66'20W@13'1020E@26'735W@31.5'1440W@36.7'182W@49.6'546W@56.4'217E@62'6315E@9.7'174E@17'5N10E@34.3'3359W@42'2-369E@27'1572E@24'1860W@40'2015E@45'760W@45.2'41a1a'QoaQoaTsaNMGGeotechnical, Inc.PLATE 1GEOTECHNICAL MAPMARJA ACRES4901 EL CAMINO REALCITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIAProject No.: 21014-01Project Name: Marja AcresDate: 7/26/2021SCALE: 1" = 40'By: RS/TWQalEARTH UNITS - CIRCLED WHERE BURIEDTsaAfuQtUNDOCUMENTED FILLALLUVIUMTERRACE DEPOSIT SANTIAGO FORMATIONOTHER SYMBOLS - LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATEL E G E N DGEOLOGIC CONTACT, DOTTED WHERE BURIEDFAULT, DOTTED WHERE BURIEDLIMITS OF EXISTING FILLSYMBOLS - LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE, QUERIED WHERE UNCERTAINCLAYSTONE MARKER BEDMARKER BEDE-W30GEOLOGIC ATTITUDES- LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE, DASHED WHERE BURIEDBEDDINGFAULTCLAY BEDRUPTURE SURFACEHOLLOW-STEM AUGER BORING BY GEOSOILS (2016), SHOWING TOTALDEPTH, DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER AND DEPTH TO EARTH UNITSGB-3T.D.26'@17'Afu @ 0-5'Qal @ 5'Tsa @ 20'TEST PIT BY GEOSOILS (2016), SHOWING TOTAL DEPTH AND DEPTHTO EARTH UNITSTP-10T.D.7'Qt @ 0-5.5'Tsa @ 5.5'BUCKET AUGER BORING, THIS INVESTIGATION, SHOWING TOTALDEPTH, DEPTH TO EARCH UNITS AND DEPTH TO GROUNDWATERB-3T.D.50'@50'CPT-9CONE PENETROMETER TEST LOCATION BY NOVA (2021a), SHOWINGTOTAL DEPTHT.D.20'HOLLOW STEM AUGER BORING LOCATION BY NOVA (2021a), SHOWINGTOTAL DEPTH, AND DEPTH TO EARTH UNITS.NB-5T.D.31.5'Qoa@0'Paleosol@20'Tsa@25'LARGE DIAMETER BUCKET AUGER BORING LOCATION BY NOVA(2021e), SHOWING TOTAL DEPTH AND DEPTH TO EARTH UNITS.LD-2T.D.43'Qoa@0'Paleosol@34.3'?Qtm@36.7'TEST PIT LOCATION BY NOVA (2021e), SHOWING TOTAL DEPTH ANDDEPTH TO EARTH UNITSTP-6T.D.6.5'Qoa@0'Qal@2'Tsa@6'41EXISTING REMOVAL BOTTOM ELEVATIONEXISTING SUBDRAIN SHOWING ELEVATION AND OUTLET45 . 5 '77'GEOLOGIC CROSS-SECTIONGENERALIZED BEDDINGGENERALIZED CONTACTQoaOLDER ALLUVIUMSURFICIAL FAILURE 891012131415161718676869707172737475767778PM 3451MAP 7292MAP 8033MAP 10558EL CAMINO REALEL CAMINO REALPARK DR .PARK DR . KELLY DR.R/WR/WPLPL PLPLPLPL CLCLCLR/WR/WR/WR/WCLCLR/WR/WPM 3451PM 3451(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)(PUBLIC)MAP 8033MAP 7292 (PUBL IC ) (PUBL IC )S75°47'50"E 361.66' (S76°18'48"E 361.82')S18°57'34"W 977.24' (S18°32'12"W 976.88')N83°42'14"E 653.83'N87°52'15"E 333.00'N78°14'38"E 275.01 ' N02°23'32"E 124.51'S87°52'28"W 110.42'S87°52'28"W 461.27'N65°22 '26 "E 1291 .68 ' (N64 °58 '15 "E 1291 .66 ' ) N02°23'45"E 315.88' (N01°58'54" 315.79')S87°52'28"W 571.69' (S87°27'37"W 578.92')21.70 '1269.98 '469+00470+00471+00472+00473+00474+00475+00476+00477+00478+00479+00480+00481+00482+00483+00484+008CLFF=72.25PAD 71.57CLFF=72.256CLFF=72.255CLFF=72.259CLFF=71.75PAD 71.0FF=71.751CLFF=71.752CLFF=71.753CLFF=71.75PAD 71.04CL10CLFF=71.7511CLFF=71.7512CLFF=71.7513CLFF=71.75FF=82.25224LFF=82.25225LFF=82.25226LFF=82.25PAD 81.5227LFF=82.25PAD 81.5228LFF=81.75PAD 81.0232LFF=81.75231LFF=81.75230LFF=81.75229L236LFF=83.75235LFF=83.75234LFF=83.75233LFF=83.75PAD 83.0PAD 71.0PAD 71.0PAD 71.0PAD 71 .0PAD 71.0PAD 71.0PAD 71.0PAD 71.5PAD 71.5PAD 71.5PAD 83.0PAD 83.0PAD 83.0PAD 81.5PAD 81.5PAD 81.5PAD 81.0PAD 81.0PAD 81.0218LFF 82.75PAD 82.0219LFF 82.75220LFF 82.75221LFF 82.75222LFF 82.75223LFF 82.75PAD 82.0PAD 82.0PAD 82.0PAD 82.0PAD 82.0ADAFF=60.67PAD 60.0FF=60.67PAD 60.0FF=60.67PAD 60.0FF=60.67PAD 60.0FF=69.67PAD 69.0FF=72.67PAD 72.0FF 78.75PAD 78.021SFF 80.25PAD 79.531SFF 82.75PAD 82.0159LFF 85 .75PAD 85.0160S161L162L163L164L165L166L167LFF 85.75PAD 85.0168LFF 85.75169LFF 85 .75170LFF 85 .75171LFF 85.75172LFF 85.75173LFF 85.75174LFF 85.75175LFF 85 .25176LFF 85.25177LFF 85.25178LFF 85 .25179LFF 85.25180LFF 85.25181LFF 85.25158LPLAN 7FF 86.25PAD 85.50157LFF 86.25156LFF 86.25155LFF 86.25154LFF 86.25153LFF 86.75PAD 86.0237LFF 86.75PAD 86.0PLAN 4PLAN 6PLAN 6PLAN 5PLAN 4PLAN 7PAD 84 .5FF 85.75FF 85 .75FF 85 .75FF 85 .75FF 85 .75FF 85 .75FF 85 .75PAD 85.50PAD 85.50PAD 85.50PAD 85.50PAD 85 .0PAD 85.0PAD 85.0PAD 85.0PAD 85.0PAD 85.0PAD 85.0PAD 85.0PAD 85 .0PAD 85 .0PAD 85.0PAD 85.0PAD 85.0PAD 85.0PAD 84 .5PAD 84.5PAD 84.5PAD 84 .5PAD 84 .5PAD 84.57SFF=77.75PAD 77 .08SFF=77.75PAD 77 .06SFF=78.25PAD 77 .55SFF=78.25PAD 77 .54SFF=78.75PAD 78.03SFF=78.75PAD 78 .02SFF=79.25PAD 78 .51SFF=79.25PAD 78.528SFF 79.25PAD 78.527SFF=79.25PAD 78.5FF 78.75PAD 78.022SFF 79.75PAD 79.029SFF 79.75PAD 79.030SFF 82.25PAD 81.5FF 81.75PAD 81.0FF 82.25PAD 81.540SFF 82.25PAD 81.541SFF 82.75PAD 82.042SFF 81.75PAD 81.0134LFF 87.75PAD 87.0FF 87.75PAD 87.0132LFF 88.25PAD 87.511S75S74S76S77S78S84S83S82S81S79S80SADAADAPLAN 2ADAADAADAPLAN 3PLAN 1PLAN 1PLAN 3FF 77.75PAD 77.0FF 78.25PAD 77.5FF 77.75PAD 77.0FF 78.25PAD 77.5FF 78.75PAD 78.0FF 78.75PAD 78.0FF 78.75PAD 78.0FF 78.75PAD 78.0FF 78.75PAD 78.0FF 78.75PAD 78.0FF 78.75PAD 78.0FF 78.25PAD 77.588SPLAN 3FF 78.25PAD 77.589SPLAN 1FF 78.25PAD 77.590SPLAN 2FF 77.75PAD 77.085SPLAN 386SPLAN 1FF 77.75PAD 77.0FF 77.75PAD 77.087SPLAN 312S13S14S15SFF 80.25PAD 79.5FF 80.25PAD 79.5FF 80.25PAD 79.5FF 79.75PAD 79.0FF 79.75PAD 79.026SFF=79.75PAD 79.025SFF 79.75PAD 79.024SFF 80.25PAD 79.523SFF 80.25PAD 79.567SFF 83.25PAD 82.566SFF 83.25PAD 82.565SFF 83.75PAD 83.064SFF 83.75PAD 83.063SFF 84.25PAD 83.562SFF 84.25PAD 83.550SFF 86.75PAD 86.051SFF 86.75PAD 86.052SFF 86.25PAD 85.553SFF 86.25PAD 85.554SFF 85.75PAD 85.055SFF 85.75PAD 85.035SFF 82.75PAD 82.036SFF 82.75PAD 82.037S38S133L130LFF 88.75PAD 88.0129LFF 88.75PAD 88.0128LFF 89.25PAD 88.5127LFF 89.25PAD 88.5147LFF 87.75PAD 87.0146LFF 87.75PAD 87.0145LFF 88.25PAD 87.5144LFF 88.25PAD 87.5143LFF 88.75PAD 88.0142LFF 88.75PAD 88.0FF 79.25PAD 78.520SFF 79.25PAD 78.519SFF 79.75PAD 79.018SFF 80.25PAD 79.517SFF 80.25PAD 79.516SFF 81.75PAD 81.068SFF 81.75PAD 81.069SFF 82.25PAD 81.570SFF 82.25PAD 81.571SFF 82.75PAD 82.072SFF 82.75PAD 82.073SFF 80.25PAD 79.532SFF 80.75PAD 80.033SFF 80.75PAD 80.034SFF 83.75PAD 83.056SFF 83.75PAD 83.057SFF 84.25PAD 83.558SFF 84.25PAD 83.559SFF 84.75PAD 84.060SFF 84.75PAD 84.061S43SFF 85.75PAD 85.044SFF 85.75PAD 85.045SFF 86.25PAD 85.546SFF 86.25PAD 85.547SFF 86.75PAD 86.048SFF 86.75PAD 86.049SFF 87.75PAD 87.0135LFF 87.75PAD 87.0136LFF 88.25PAD 87.5137LFF 88.75PAD 88.0138LFF 88.75PAD 88.0139LFF 89.25PAD 88.5140LFF 89.25PAD 88.5141LFF 87.75PAD 87.0148LFF 87.75PAD 87.0149LFF 88.25PAD 87.5150LFF 88.75PAD 88.0151LFF 88.75PAD 88.0152L131LFF 88.25PAD 87.539S94SFF 83.25PAD 82.593SFF 83.2592SFF 83.2591SFF 83.2599SFF 85.75100SFF 85.75101SFF 85.75102SFF 85.75PAD 85.0110SFF 87.75PAD 87.0109SFF 87.75108SFF 87.75107SFF 87.75118SFF 89.25117SFF 89.25116SFF 89.25115SFF 89.25126LFF=90.75PAD 90.0125LFF=90.75124LFF=90.75123LFF=90.75186LFF 89.50FF 89.50188LFF 89.50189LFF 89.50PAD 88.75197LFF 88.00PAD 87.25196LFF 88.00195LFF 88.00194LFF 88.00213LFF 86.75PAD 86.0212LFF 86.75211LFF 86.75210LFF 86.75ADAFF 83.25PAD 82.5095SFF 83.2596SFF 83.2597SFF 83.2598SFF 85.75103SFF 85.75104SFF 85.75105SFF 85.75PAD 85.0106SFF 87.75PAD 87.0111SFF 87.75112SFF 87.75113SFF 87.75114SFF 89.25122SFF 89.25121SFF 89.25120SFF 89.25PAD 88.5119SFF=90.75PAD 90.0182LFF=90.75183LFF=90.75185LFF=90.75184LADAADAADAADAADAADAADAADAADAPAD 90.0PAD 90.0PAD 90.0PAD 88.75PAD 88.75PAD 88.75PAD 90.0PAD 90.0PAD 90.0PAD 88.5PAD 88.5PAD 88.5PAD 88.5PAD 88.5PAD 88.5PAD 88.5PAD 87.0PAD 87.0PAD 87.0PAD 87.0PAD 87.0PAD 87.0PAD 85.0PAD 85.0PAD 85.0PAD 85.0PAD 85.0PAD 85.0PAD 82.50PAD 82.50PAD 82.50PAD 82.5PAD 82.5PAD 82.5ADAADAFF 89.50PAD 88.75190LFF 89.50191LFF 89.50192LFF 89.50193LFF 88.00201LFF 86.25217LFF 86.25216LFF 86.25215LFF 86.25PAD 85.5214LADAADAADAPAD 87.25PAD 88.75PAD 87.25PAD 88.75PAD 87.25PAD 88.75PAD 87.25PAD 86.0PAD 85.5PAD 86.0PAD 85.5PAD 86.0PAD 85.5202LFF 87.25FF 87.25FF 87.25205LFF 87.25PAD 86.5ADAFF 88.00200LFF 88.00199LFF 88.00PAD 87.25198LFF 87.25207LFF 87.25PAD 86.5206LFF 87.25208LFF 87.25209LPAD 86.5PAD 87.25PAD 86.5PAD 87.25PAD 86.5PAD 86.5PAD 86.5PAD 86.5ADA203L204L187LBIO-FILTRATION BASINBIO-FILTRATION BASIN BIO-FILTRATIONBASIN - BMP 7BIO-FILTRATIONBASIN - BMP 4BMP 6BMP 3BIO-FILTRATION BASIN - BMP 1BMP 2BMP 5(EV)(EV)EVEVEX. 24" CMP(EV)(EV)El Camino Real3 3'22'11'4 5 5' 6 6' 4'77'1a1a'SMSMSMEl Camino RealCC5' OX5' OX5' OX5' OX5' OX5' OX5' OX5' OX5' OX4' OX4' OX4' OX4' OX4' OX4' OX4' OX4' OX4' OX±5'±6'±10'±10'±10'±10'±10'±10'±10'5'5'5'5'5'5'5'5-7'5-7'5-7'5-7'5-7'5-7'8-10'8-10'8-10'8-10'8-10'8-10'±12'454550458-10'RecommendedStab Fill KeyW=15'; D=5'45504048'46.5'47'50'52' 46'45'46' 44'46'High Point RecommendedKeyW=30'±10'4" PERFStructuralSetback35353540Limits ofRemedial GradingEARTH UNITS - CIRCLED WHERE BURIEDL E G E N DAREA OF PROPOSED BIO FILTRATION BMP'S; WILL REQUIREUNDER DRAINS AND/OR IMPERMEABLE LINERSAREA IMPACTED BY SETTLEMENT MONITORINGAREA OF UNDOCUMENTED FILL OVER ALLUVIUM (REMOVALSMAY NEED TO BE PERFORMED IN SECTIONS OR USE SHORING)RECOMMENDED SETTLEMENT MONITORING LOCATIONSMSCE OVERHEAD LINE AND TOWERNMGGeotechnical, Inc.PLATE 2REMEDIAL MEASURES MAPMARJA ACRES4901 EL CAMINO REALCITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIAProject No.: 21014-01Project Name: Marja AcresDate: 7/26/2021SCALE: 1" = 40'By: RS/TWKINDER MORGAN PETROLEUM PIPELINECAPPROXIMATE LOCATION OF CELL TOWER15' WIDE AREA OF LIMITED REMOVALS OVER 10" KIINDERMORGAN PIPELINETRANSITION LOTS TO BE OVEREXCAVATED A MINIMUM OF 5'BELOW FINISH PAD GRADE35RECOMMENDED KEY SHOWING BOTTOM ELEVATIONPOTENTIAL MINING AREA FOR SANDY MATERIAL48'RECOMMENDED CANYON TYPE SUBDRAIN, SHOWINGELEVATION AND OUTLET8-10'5' OXCUT-FILL LINERECOMMENDED REMEDIAL REMOVAL DEPTH IN FEETRECOMMENDED DEPTH OF OVER-EXCAVATION IN FEET 22'-400408012016012016040800-40PLDLDesignProfileT.D. 43'T.D. 69'LD-2(Proj. ^ 27')B-2TP-9T.D. 31.5'NB-3(Proj. ^ 58')ExistingProfileN 75° WQtTsaQoaAfT.D. 50'B-3(Proj. ^ 37')??? ?17°5°32°(33)QoaTsaTsaRecommended KeyW=30', Btm El. 45'RecommendedRemedial Removals/OX9°(15)9°(18)2°(14)Intersection3-3'RecommendedCanyon-TypeSubdrain1°(2-3)33'-400408012016012016040800-40?????AfuAfuQalGB-2(Proj. ^ 89')CPT-4T.D. 51.5'T.D. 20'ProposedMSEWallDLTsaEl CaminoRealCLDesignProfileExistingProfileExistingProfileExistingProfileDesignProfileCLBio-FiltrationBasin-BMP#3Intersection1-1'B-1T.D. 71'QtAfuQalTsaTsaTsaQtQt?Bio-FiltrationBasin-BMP 1CLTP-9(Proj. ^ 28')T.D. 7'ProposedShoringWallPL???B-2T.D. 69'Tsa?Intersection2-2'N 16° E??????15°(18)12°(15)19°(20)1°(7)??????6°(10-11)1°(7)15°(18)1°(5)2°11°(14)ProposedSenior Housing5-10' Deep KinderMorgan 10" PipelineTransition LotsRecommeneded 5'OXExistingHomeRecommendedRemedial Removals/OXRecommendedRemedial Removals/OX??11GridZone8'Wide?Bio-FiltrationBasin-BMP#2Intersection1-1'Intersection1a-1a'Non-Structural Area1144'55'-400408012016012016040800-40-400408012016012016040800-40GB-1T.D. 41'ProposedMSEWallDLEl CaminoRealDesignProfileAfuQtExistingProfileCLNB-2(Proj. ^ 37')T.D. 31.5'ProposedWallPLTsaTsaTsaQalAfu?????Bend inSectionBend inSectionN 14° WN 2° EAfu???GB-3T.D. 26'??QalProposedMSEWallEl CaminoRealDLTsaTsaProposedCMUWallDesignProfileAfuQtExistingProfileNB-4(Proj. ^ 22')T.D. 26.5'ProposedWallPLN 1° WTransition LotsRecommeneded 5' OXRecommendedRemedial Removals/OXProposedCommercialBuilding5-10' Deep KinderMorgan 10" Pipeline5-10' Deep KinderMorgan 10" Pipeline11RecommendedRemedial Removals/OX??ExistingHome?GridZone8'Wide11RecommendedRemedial Removals/OXGridZone10'WideBio-FiltrationBasin-BMP#6CL111166'7'7-4004080120160-400408012016012016040800-4012016040800-40??AfuQalTsaTsaApproximateOriginal ProfileProposedMSEWallDesignProfileDLQtNB-1(Proj. ^ 30')T.D. 41.5'ProposedShoringWallPLExistingProfileIntersection7-7'N 2° ECPT-9T.D. 20'CLProposedWallApproximateOriginal ProfileQalAfuAfuQal????Intersection6-6'TsaTsa?N 78° ETransition LotsRecommended 5' OXPL114' Vertical???RecommendedRemedial Removals/OXGrid Zone5' WideRecommendedRemedial Removals/OX1111'-400408012016012016040800-40Intersection3-3'LD-1(Proj. ^ 30')B-1(Proj. ^ 27')T.D. 44'T.D. 70'DesignProfileProposedCLProposedMSEWallPLAfCreekBottomQal???TsaQtExistingProfileN 82° W9°(10)7°13°(5)5°??Recommended KeyW=30', Btm El. 50'?RecommendedCanyon-TypeSubdrainGridZone12' WideRecommendedRemedial Removals/OX1a1a'40801201601201604080ProposedMSEWallGridZone22'WideT.D. 6.5'TP-6CLDesignProfileT.D. 71'B-1(Proj. AlongStrike 100')ProposedBio-FiltrationBasinBMP#3QtQalExistingProfilePLQalRecommendedCanyon-TypeSubdrainRecommended Key30' WideBottom Elev. 35'TsaTsaTsa???F4°(14)3°(18)3°(5)1°(2)60°(63)RecommendedRemedial Removals/OX00N 51° WIntersection3-3'7°6°(10)12NMGGeotechnical, Inc.PLATE 3Project No.: 21014-01Project Name: Marja AcresDate: 7/26/2021SCALE: 1" = 40'By: RS/TW