HomeMy WebLinkAboutHarveston Supplemental Geotech & Review Mass Grading (Jan.17,2003)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I:
I,
I
i
I"
I
I',
,
I
I
I'!
I
I'
I
J;jJ () -~J~
",~'C;/>!,;~;~,,:,;<<,I\;;'~- ,,~, "'{l''';'n''P:''-' --;,jf,- 0'); 'j,;j:1-,y
,
SUPPLEMENTAL GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
AND GEOTECHNICAL REVIEW
OF 100-SCALE MASS GRADING PLAN,
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 29639 - PHASE 2, HARVESTON
TEMECULA, CAUFORNIA
t.
Prepared For:
LENNAR COMMUNITIES
391 N. Main Street, Suite 301
Corona, California 92880
Project No. 110231-017
January 17, 2003
i
Leighton and Associates, Inc.
"",,~'. .' -,~. lr,.,.( ,.,.'"",..:..'::-,. .X1"i". ..,;.p;;.
~'.~ L '<"':",.t ,.~i"."'''''~o.''\l.
\
A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY
I
I
I
I
I
I Attention:
I
I
I
I
I If you have any questions regarding this report, please do not hesitate to contact this office. We
I appreciate this opportunity to be of service.
Respectfully submitted,
I
I~A
Robert F. Rina, CEG 19
I Vice PresidentIPrincipal
RFRICERlmm
110231-Q17/finallHarveston Pbase IT
I Distribution:
I
I
I
,,~.;"~
/~e4<~> .
~~
Leighton and Associates, Inc.
A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY.
January 17, 2003
To:
Lennar Communities
391 N. Main Street, Suite 301
Corona, California 92880
Project No. 110231-017
Mr. Bill Storm
Subject:
Supplemental Geotechnical Investigation and Geotechnical Review of 100-Scale Mass
Grading Plan, Tentative Tract No. 29639 - Phase 2, Harveston, Temecula, California
In accordance with your request, Leighton and Associates, Inc. has completed a supplemental
geotechnical investigation and review of the lOO-scale Mass Grading Plan for Tentative Tract No.
29639 - Phase 2 located in the Winchester Hills area of Temecula (see Figure 1). This report
snmmarizes our findings, conclusions, and recommendations regarding the geotechnical conditions
within the property limits of Tract 29639 - Phase 2 with respect to the current mass grading plans
(RBF Consulting, 2002). For ease of reference, we have included appropriate data from previous
geotechnical investigations and other pertinent reports. Based on our review, the referenced mass
grading plans are acceptable from a geotechnical viewpoint and the subject development is feasible
provided the recommendations contained herein are implemented during future design and
'construction.
{/f#fi;fI1/L
Cameron Roberson, RCE 59883
Project Engineer
(4) Addressee
(1) LennarCommunities;'Attention: Mr. Glen Hutchens
(2) RBF Consulting; Attention: Mr. MattHix
1/
41715 Enterprise Circle N" Suile 103. Temecula, CA 92590-5661
909.296.0530:1 Fax 909.296.0534 ill 'Nwwleightongeo.cDm
I
I
,I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
110231-017
January 17, 2003
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section
Paae
1.0 INTRODUCTION/PURPOSE....................... .................................................................. ....1
1.1 Scope of Work..... ....... ........................................... ............ ................... ............ .........1
2.0 SUMMARY OF GEOTECHNICAL FINDINGS ........................................................................2
2.1 Proposed Development and Site Description ................................................................2
2.2 Regional Geology .... .............. ........... ... ..... .......................... .... .............. .................... ..2
2.3 Site Geologic Units.....................................................................................................3
2.3.1 Artificial RII- Documented ...............................................................................3
2.3.2 Artificial RII - Undocumented (Map Symbol - Afu) .............................................4
2.3.3 Artificial RII- Undocumented (Map Symbol- Afu1) ............................................4
2.3.4 Topsoil/Colluvium (Not A Mapped Unit) .............................................................4
2.3.5 Alluvium (Map Symbol- Qal)............................................................................5
2.3.6 Quaternary Older Alluvium (Map Symbol- Qalo) ..............................................5
2.3.7 Pauba Formation (Map Symbol - Qp) ................................................................5
2.4 Rippability............. ............... ........ ........................... ........................................ ..........6
2.5 Faulting and Seismicity...............................................................................................6
2.6 Secondary Seismic Hazards ........................................................................................6
2.6.1 Ground Rupture.. ............. ............... ....... ....... .......................................... .........7
2.6.2 Uquefaction..................................................................................................... 7
2.6.3 Seiches / Tsunamis ..........................................................................................7
2.6.4 Landsliding .... ............ .......... ............ ................... ........ ................. ....................7
2.6.5 Seismically-Induced Settlement.........................................................................8
2.7 Structural Seismic Design Parameters...........................................................................8
2.8 Surface and Groundwater ............................................................................................9
3.0 CONCLUSIONS. ......................... .......... ................................. .......... .......................... .......10
4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS................................................................................................... 12
4.1 Earthwork.. ............. ........... ............................................. .......... ................. ...... .........12
4.1.1 Removal and Site Preparation .........................................................................12
4.1.2 Structural Rlls and Oversize Materials..............................................................13
4.1.3 Utility Trenches and Cast-Jn-Place Pipe (CIPP) .................................................14
4.1.4 Shrinkage and Bulking .....:..... ...............;.............. ............ ......................... ......15
4.1.5 Settlement............. .......... ..... ......... ...........................,................................... .15
<i'l>:;
""..cd,>"....''''
~~?J~-"
.,;;.
,
.,
3
-j-
j .....',....'__4.___ '-"'-j j\ .......,.., i.-~~-... 1__
1...cl\jiil'.Jn diP r,,)0vC-dI.~.jJ Ii:""'.
A L2iGHTON 3ROV? CCl3.1?Ai'1'r
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
110231-017
January 17, 2003
4.1.6 Preliminary Pavement Design Parameters........................................................15
4.2 Slope Stability........... ............ ............... .................... ............... ..... .......................... ...16
4.3 Drainage... ................... ................ .................. .............. ................... ...................... ...17
4.3.1 Subdrainage ..... ...... ............................ ............... ....... ..... ............................. ...17
4.4 lateral Earth Pressures and Retaining Wall Design Considerations................................ 18
4.5 Footing Setback.......... ................... .................. ........ ......... ............ ..... ................ .... ...19
4.6 Corrosion... .... ............... ............... ............ .... ............................. .................... ............19
4.7 Control of Surface Water and Drainage COntrol...........................................................20
4.8 Irrigation, landscaping and Lot Maintenance ..............................................................20
,......
,""'.?
5.0 GEOTECHNICAL REVIEW... ........................................................................................... 21
5.1 Plans and Specifications ............................................................................................21
5.2 Construction Review........... .............. ......... ............ ..... ... ....... ............. ............ .... ........21
6.0 LIMITATIONS....... ............................... ............................................... ........................ 22
Accomoanvino Roures. Tables. Plates and Aooendices
Roures
Figure 1 - Site Location Map
End of Text
Tables
Table 1 - Lateral Earth Pressures
End ofText
Aooendices
Appendix A - References
Appendix B - Geotechnical Boring Logs, This Investigation
Appendix C - Previous Boring, CPT, and Test Pit Logs
Appendix D - laboratory Test Results
Appendix E - General Earthwork and Grading Specifications
Plates
Plates 1 through 4 - Geotechnical Map, Tract 29639 - Phase 2
In Pocket
c';>.;
...~~
'~'i'...
"l<..~
.:J
0\
- ii -
L-';r:''''''~''''n ~n"l ;\......n,...,i."';....... In~
::18J11.0 die. r,.j:)v-.,IJ':1LC-:Jj I G.
A LEIGH,O'I GROU? ~c>~"?"'N'1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
110231-017
January 17, 2003
1.0 INTRODUCTION/PURPOSE
The purpose of this geotechnical plan review was to summarize known pertinent geologic and
geotechnical data obtained to date, and evaluate this data with respect to the current mass grading
plans for the subject project. Additional subsurface geotechnical work consisting of the excavation,
logging, and sampling of seven hollow stem auger borings and six large diameter bucket auger
borings was perfonned to complete this study. The scope of services conducted during our study is
provided below:
1.1 Scooe of Work
Our scope of work for this investigation included the following items:
· Review of available infonnation, including reports presented in Appendix A and the 100-
scale Mass Grading Plan for Tentative Tract No. 29639 - Phase 2, prepared by RBF
Consultants;
· Site reconnaissance to observe and document the current surface conditions.
· Geotechnical field investigation, consisting of drilling, logging and sampling a total of
seven hollow stem and six large diameter bucket auger borings to determine subsurface
conditions. Boring logs are presented in Appendix B.
· Laboratory testing of samples collected during the field investigation to determine soil
engineering properties. Test results are presented in Appendix D.
· Analysis and geotechnical review of geologic constraints including remedial removal
earthwork, slope stability evaluation, faulting, seismic parameters and preparation of
preliminary foundation design parameters for site pavements;
· Review, analysis, and incorporation of previously collected geotechnical data onto the
Mass Grading Plans; and
· Preparation of this report, presenting our findings, conclusions and preliminary
recommendations regarding the proposed grading and development of the site.
"l~
.'
,
,
':::1,
~
~J
~.'L...
~J.!~
""'"
-5
- 1-
Leighton and Associates, Inc.
A LEiGHTON G,..OU? COM?AWr
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,I
I
I
110231-017
January 17, 2003
2.0 SUMMARY OF GEOTECHNICAL FINDINGS
2.1 Prooosed DeveloDment and Site DescriDtion
Based on our review of the referenced Mass Grading Plans, (RBF, 2002) and our
understanding of the project, the proposed development may consist of individual and multi-
family residential home sites, commercial sites, open space areas, and associated roads and
appurtenances. Conventional cut and fill hillside grading is proposed with excavation and fill
depths on the order of 60 and 30 feet, respectively. Remedial removal of surficial soils will
increase the fill depth to approximately 45 feet. Permanent cut and fill slopes are proposed at
inclinations of 2: 1 (horizontal to vertical) with maximum heights of approximately 20 and 35
feet respectively. Temporary cut and fill slopes are proposed with a maximum height of 25
feet and 45 feet respectively and are proposed at inclinations that range from 2:1 to 4:1
(horizontal to vertical).
Topographically the site is characterized by rolling hill and intervening alluvial valleys. Site
elevations vary from a high of approximately 1,165 feet above mean sea level (msl) along the
easterly trending ridgeline located in the south-east portion of the site (plate 4) to a low of
approximately 1,055 feet above msl near the western property boundary (plate 1). The
ridgelines are variable in orientation and form a dendritic drainage pattern directing drainage
to the south and primarily to the southwest.
Previous grading and improvements along the site boundaries are associated with the
construction of Date Street, Interstate 15, Ynez Road, Pacific Century Homes Tract 29548,
Woodside Homes Tracts 23626 and 29111, Parcel 3 of Tract 19677 and Tract 29639-1 -
Phase 1.
Vegetation on the site consists of a moderate growth of grasses and weeds, which cover the
majority of the site. Some stockpiled enddump soils and other construction debris are locally
scattered on the property. Stormwater retention basins exist at the end of the major drainages.
2.2 Reaional Geoloav
The subject property is located within a prominent natural geomorphic province in
southwestern California known as the Peninsular Ranges. It is characterized by steep,
elongated ranges and valleys that generally trend northwestward. The most common rock
types found in the Peninsular Ranges consist of 140 to 105 million-year old formations
(Silver and Chappel, 1988), including the metasedimentary Bedford Canyon Formation and
Santiago Peak Volcanics. These formations were intruded by granodiorite, quartz monzonite
and other granitics of the Southern California Batholith during the Cretaceous period
(Kennedy, 1977). Tectonic activity, along the numerous faults in the region has created the
geomorphology present today.
-<<~
~
w~
"r;z~
-',P"
- 2-
Leighton and ,Associates, Inc.
A LEIGH-;-O,'l GR.OUP CQM?),N'f
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
,
!
I
I
I
I
Ie.
~~{
I
i
,
i
1:::;.
1;-;
r;:.-
I
I
,
i
!
i
I
~
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
110231-017
January 17, 2003
Specifically, the site is situated in the southern portion of the stable Penis Block, an eroded
mass of Cretaceous and older crystalline and metamorphic rock. Thin sedimentary,
metamorphic and volcanic units locally mantle the bedrock with alluvial deposits filling in
the lower valley and drainage areas. The Penis Block is bounded by the San Jacinto fault
zone to the northeast, the Elsinore fault zone to the southwest, the Cucamonga fault zone to
the northwest and to the southeast by the Temecula basin which is poorly defined.
The Penis Block in the Temecula Valley region had a complex history, apparently undergoing
relative vertical movements of several thousand feet in response to movement on the Elsinore
and San Jacinto fault zones. These movements, in conjunction with the semi-arid climate and
the resistance to weathering of the rock, are responsible for the formation and preservation of
ancient, generally flat-lying erosion surfaces now present at various elevations. These surfaces
give the Penis Block its unique geologic character. The sedimentary units of the subject site
were deposited on these erosion surfaces. Alluvial deposits (recent and older Pleistocene-
aged) and Pauba formation sedimentary materials fill in the lower valley and drainage areas.
k;::
!{: ~:
".-.---
i'.-..'
2.3 Site Geoloaic Units
The earth materials encountered on site consist of documented artificial fill, undocumented
fill, topsoil, colluvium, recent and older alluvium, and the Pauba formation. These units are
discussed in the following sections in order of increasing age. The approximate surficial
distribution of these materials is depicted on the accompanying Geotechnical Maps (plates 1
through 4). Anticipated remedial removal depths within each of these units (when known)
have also been provided in this section for ease of reference. General earthwork remedial
removals are discussed in Section 4.1 of this report.
2.3.1 Artificial FiII- Documented
Documented artificial fill borders the majority of the site as previously graded site
improvements, see the Geotechnical Map (plates 1 through 4) and Appendix A. These
fills are generally considered suitable for support of additional fill or structures.
Evaluation of the fills and associated underlying alluvial soils associated with Parcel 3
Tract 19677 may be needed based on future planned development and exposures during
grading. Grading adjacent to these existing fills will require removal of unsuitable
surficial soils adjacent to the existing toe of slopes and evaluation of removal bottom
accepted by others. Benching into the existing fill embankments and evaluation of the
fill to be left in place should be performed during rough-grading in these areas.
Additional removal of existing documented fill soils may be required based on
conditions encountered and the planned development.
~
""''4'"
~~~
"';"'"
1
- 3 -
I '""'i,..,ln'-n ~~d Q.........,-,r,;.......J.,-..-"' I.,........
!-c,~ llU J dfJ I ,:j~V_d::l1.':::.:), Jilt.,,;,
A L-'OIGHTON GRCU? CO,\H',.3.NY
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
110231-017
January 17, 2003
2.3.2 Artificial FiII- Undocumented (MaD Svmbol-Aful
Undocumented artificial fill exists in limited areas as retention basins, small stockpiles
and exploratory trench backfill throughout the site. Basin embankments and stockpiles
of undocumented fill were generally less than 5 to 10 feet in height and consist of fill
soils that are likely generated from onsite sources. Some onsite undocumented fill soils
may have been placed in drainage swales to facilitate passage of unimproved roadways.
Undocumented fill soils, where present, are unsuitable in their present state to support
structural fill or improvements. These onsite soils should be cleared of debris and
organic material, moisture conditioned and placed in general accordance with
recommendations of this report including Appendix F.
i
i
!
i
I
,
,
[;::."
k:.;:
t:}
2.3.3 Artificial Fill - Undocumented (MaD Svmbol - Afu,)
Undocumented artificial fill exists as canyon and road embankment fill placed during
the construction of Interstate 15. Evaluation of the fill and associated underlying alluvial
soils associated with this previous construction may be needed based on future planned
development and exposures during grading. Grading adjacent to this existing fill will
require removal of unsuitable surficial soils adjacent to the existing toe of slopes and
evaluation of removal bottom accepted by others. Benching into the existing fill
embankments and evaluation of the fill to be left in place should be performed during
rough-grading in these areas. Additional removal of existing documented fill soils may
be required based on conditions encountered and the planned development.
2.3.4 TODsoil/Colluvium (Not A MaDDed Unitl
Topsoil/Colluvium will be encountered mantling the majority of the site. Composition
and thickness will vary depending upon which unit it overlies. Topsoil and colluvium
will likely have a low to locally a high expansion potential and generally consist of
reddish brown, silty sand, silty clay to sandy clay with a variety of minor roots.
Generally, topsoil and colluvium will range from two to six feet thick, but thicker
accumulations may be encountered. All topsoil and colluvium should be removed from
any areas that will receive structural fill soils and/or structural improvements. Topsoil
and colluvial materials cleared of debris and organic material are suitable for reuse as
compacted fills. This material may be low to highly expansive.
E::::
~:'::.
Thick colluvial soils may also contribute to slope-instability where they are day-lighted
in cut slope faces. If thick colluvial soils are observed at the top edges of cut slopes,
recommendations for flatter slope layback (flatter than 2: 1) or removal and replacement
may be necessary. A detail of this lay back may be provided during a pre-construction
meeting.
"'""
-k.~:ol
,"","'fI'
~.'"
<:,,~
i",~
~
- 4-
I ", rI ^ " ,
_Blgnlon anu i'"\SSOClareS, InC,
A lE1GHTON GROU? COiJl?ANY
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
110231-017
January 17, 2003
2.3.5 Alluvium (MaD 5vmbol- Oal)
Alluvium soil was encountered in drainage areas and throughout the lower portions of
the site. The alluvial soils are locally derived, deposited in the drainages, and generally
consist of gray-brown, damp to moist, silty fine to medium sand. Alluvium is Holocene-
aged (less than 11,000 years old). All alluvium should be removed from any areas that
will receive structural fill soils and/or structural improvements. Removal depths within
the alluvium will range from 3 to 35 feet, depending upon location (See Geotechnical
Map, Plates 1 through 4). Some localized deeper removals may be necessary. Alluvial
materials cleared of debris and organic materials are suitable for reuse as compacted
fills.
I
i
i
I
I
I
,
I
I
lee:
lf~
2.3.6 Ouaternarv Older Alluvium (MaD Svmbol- Oalo)
Older alluvium was encountered locally in the major drainage areas underlying the
younger Alluvium. The older alluvium represents a horizontally stratified unit in which
individual layers vary in color, moisture content, density and composition. Unit layers
are typically composed of dark olive brown to reddish brown, moist, stiff to dense, very
fine sandy clayey silt to silty coarse sand with abundant iron oxide staining, caliche
common, scattered pebbles, mottling, and minor porosity.
The generally non-porous, dense, moist Older Alluvium is considered suitable to support
additional fill or structures if the in-place materials are tested and determined to be at 90
percent relative compaction and 85 percent saturation.
2.3.7 Pauba Formation (MaD Svmbol- 00)
The late Pleistocene-aged Pauba Formation was encountered throughout the site. This
bedrock unit is generally comprised of light brown to olive-brown to medium brown,
damp to moist, medium dense to dense, siltstone, sandstone and silty claystone. Fractures
are commonly lined with calcium carbonate. The dense, unweathered Pauba formation
materials are considered suitable for support of additional fill or structures. The
expansion index tests within the Pauba formation indicate a very low to medium
expansion (See Appendix D). However, some of the clayey weathered materials and
distinct clay beds within the Pauba formation have a high to very high expansion
potential. Removal depths within the weathered Pauba Formation will generally range
from approximately 2 to 6 feet, depending upon location. Localized deeper removals may
be necessary to remove the highly weathered or expansive materials. The Pauba
formation materials are suitable for use as compacted fills if prepared in accordance with
recommendation of this report and the City of Temecula guidelines.
I
1:"-'-
'-..
t.:.,
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
,..,:>.;
"""'~
"'~,
q
- 5-
I "Ic'n'o" ~.nd '\--00;-':>- '--
_c'; ll' Ii d h,)~ Id~'-';::'l jl j(-"
,.\ L;::jG.'i,CN GR.'JU? c::'n::>).N'!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
110231-017
January 17, 2003
2.4 RiDDabilitv
The onsite Pauba formation is anticipated to be readily rippable utilizing conventional heavy-
duty earth moving equipment. Localized lenses of moderately indurated siltstone and
sandstone may be encountered, but should also be rippable.
2.5 FaultinG and Seismicitv
The subject site, like the rest of Southern California, is located within a seismically active
region near the active margin between the North American and Pacific tectonic plates. The
principal source of seismic activity is movement along the northwest-trending regional faults
such as the San Andreas, San Jacinto and Elsinore fault zones. These fault systems produce
up to approximately 55 millimeters per year of slip between the plates. The Elsinore fault
zone is estimated to accommodate a slip rate of 4-5 millimeters per year (mm1yr.) (WGCEP,
1995).
i
I
,
\<'--
t:::;=
As defined by the California Geologic Survey (CGS), an active fault is one that has had
surface displacement within the Holocene Epoch (roughly the last 11,000 years). The CGS
has defined a potentially active fault as any fault which has been active during the Quaternary
Period (approximately the last 1,600,000 years). These definitions are used in delineating
Earthquake Fault Zones as mandated by the Alquist-Priolo Geologic Hazard Zones Act of
1972 and as subsequently revised in 1994, 1997, and 1999 (Hart, 1999), as the Alquist-
Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act and Earthquake Fault Zones. The intent of the act is to
require fault investigations on sites located within Special Studies Zones to preclude new
construction of certain inhabited structures across the trace of active faults.
The subject site is not included within any earthquake Fault Zones as created by the
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act (Hart, 1999). The nearest zoned active fault is
the Temecula segment of the Elsinore Fault Zone located approximately 1.4 miles (2.3 km)
southwest of the westerly portion of the site.
There are several significant active faults within southern California that could affect the site
in terms of ground shaking. Of these, the San Andreas, San Jacinto and Elsinore-Temecula
fault zones are the most prominent due to their proximity and relative high seismic potential.
,:
l>~:::
2.6 Secondarv Seismic Hazards
Secondary hazards generally associated with severe ground shaking during an earthquake
are ground rupture, liquefaction, seiches or tsunamis, flooding (dam or levee failure),
landsliding, rock falls, and seismically-induced settlement.
"""
~
~,
\0
- 6-
L ",'I"'," t.,n. ~dnri !!.~~'-"-'I"'i"'~ I.,~,c
v '::1 I,,,,, I 1'..., 'V.~'vv 4.1.'-'....., I.
A. LEiGHTON GROU" :Oi'A?A.:>l'(
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
110231-017
January 17, 2003
2.6.1 Ground RUDture
Ground rupture is generally considered most likely to occur along pre-existing active
faults. Since this study nor previous geologic studies have not identified on-site recent
(Holocene) fault activity, the potential for site ground rupture is considered very low.
2.6.2 Liauefaction
Liquefaction of cohesionless soils can be caused by strong vibratory motion due to
earthquakes. Research and historical data indicate that loose, granular soils below a
near surface ground water table are most susceptible to liquefaction, while the
stability of most clayey silts, silty clays and clays deposited in fresh water
environments are not adversely affected by vibratory motion. Liquefaction is
characterized by a loss of shear strength in the affected soil layers, thereby causing
the soil to flow as a liquid. This effect may be manifested at the ground surface by
settlement and/or sand boils. In order for the potential effects of liquefaction to be
manifested at the ground surface, the soils generally have to be granular, loose to
medium dense, saturated relatively near the ground surface and must be subjected to a
sufficient magnitude and duration of ground shaking.
Based on our observations and the findings of referenced geotechnical reports, the
soft near surface alluvial deposits (soils susceptible to liquefaction) within the
proposed development area will be removed and recompacted during planned
remedial grading. The proposed design placement of up to approximately 30 feet of
compacted fill will also mitigate the potential effects of liquefaction. In addition,
significant drainage features will receive a subdrain prior to placement of planned fill.
An approximate location and size of pipe is depicted on the accompanying
geotechnical maps (plates 1-4). Therefore, it is our opinion that following
implementation of grading and earthwork recommendations herein, the potential for
adverse liquefaction and associated dynamic liquefaction-related settlement to affect
structures due to the design earthquake event is considered low for this site.
2.6.3 Seiches I Tsunamis
Due to the distance to large bodies of water, the possibility of Tsunamis is considered
very low. Some seismically induced wave action (seiche) should be anticipated in
property areas adjacent to the man-made lake planned for this portion of the project.
2.6.4 Landslidina
Several landslides have been mapped by others offsite, on adjacent properties. The
major onsite earth materials observed are generally not prone to landsliding. Due to
the flat-lying nature of the Pauba formation and the planned grading depicted on the
....~
.~~
~fc~
~\,..
\\
- 7-
1 ~i'1h.~.""r' ""'!"'\d C""c.,..,,,,,,i..-~--... 1..-;,....
____IU lV..... j :jll ; .~.....Uc:ichv,)i J IV,
V
)" L=:]:;,~TON3ROlJ? CO~,I.::>,.l.:~'-:
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
110231-017
January 17, 2003
referenced mass grading plan (RBF, 2002), landsliding due to seismic activity or
other methods is not anticipated.
2.6.S Seismicallv-Induced Settlement
!
I
I
i
,
I
,
I
i
I
i
, -
j.;:;,
it
Seismically induced settlement generally occurs within areas of loose dry granular soils
with relative low density. Following the recommended removals, site preparation and
fill compaction as described in Section 4.1, the potential for seismically induced
settlement (dynamic densification) is low.
2.7
Structural Seismic Desian Parameters
Our evaluation of the regional seismicity included a detenninistic analysis using
EQFAULT and EQSEARCH, (Blake, 2000a & 2000b). As indicated above, the nearest
known active fault and source of the design Earthquake is the Temecula Segment of the
Elsinore Fault Zone, which is located approximately 2.3 Ian (1.4 miles) to the southwest
of the subject site. The maximum credible earthquake is currently estimated to be
magnitude 6.8Mw (Blake, 2000b).
The Uniform Building Code (UBC) established Seismic Zones (often accepted as
minimum standards) based on maps showing ground motion with a 475-year return period
or a 10% probability of exceedance in 50 years. Our analysis indicates a lO% probability
that a peak ground acceleration of 0.71g would be exceeded in 50 years. The design
earthquake therefore, is considered a magnitude 6.8 event on the Temecula segment of the
Elsinore Fault Zone. The effect of seismic shaking may be mitigated by adhering to the
1997 Uniform Building Code (UBC) and seismic design parameters suggested by the
Structural Engineers Association of California. This site is located within seismic zone 4.
Seismic design parameters are presented below:
Seismic Zone = 4
Seismic Source Type = B
Near Source Factor, N. = 1.3
Near Source Factor, Ny = 1.6
Soil Profile Type = Sn
Horizontal Peak Ground Acceleration = 0.71g
(10% probability of exceedance in 50 years)
The structural engineer should consider both the UBC design factors presented in this
Section as well as the PGA (10% probability of exceedence in 50 years) when designing
the foundations for improvements on this site.
:"li-~
..~~
~~..
.,.,,.
\'Z--
- 8 -
1 --i(l'--~-n .-..nc' I' ........,..,r'I'....h~c:. I-.r:
'-~I:jJIi.U I ell! r\':;vl...!".i '':;'',",'-'J li,-"
A LE.IGHTON :;RClU~ C0~,1."":>'N':'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2.8
110231-017
January 17, 2003
Surface and Groundwater
Surface water was observed flowing into the detention basin from Tract 29111. This
surface flow originates from the existing storm drain outlet of the adjacent development
It is our understanding based upon the mass grading plan provided by RBF that the stOrnl
drain will be directed into a permanent channel and eventually enter a storm drain near
the intersection of Date Street and Ynez Road. Groundwater is not anticipated to be
encountered during grading or future development. In addition, groundwater levels can
be expected to fluctuate seasonally within the subject site. During the rainy season,
groundwater and/or seepage may be prevalent in the canyon bottoms and wash areas.
I
I
I
Standing and surface flowing water was observed previously on the site; and therefore
canyon subdrains will be required in the canyon fill areas. Groundwater and/or seepage
may also develop in fill and cut slopes within fill and earth materials of contrasting
permeabilities or within bedrock joints and fractures. Treatment of possible seepage
within building pads or slope areas can be provided on an individual basis after an
evaluation by the geotechnical consultant during grading operations. Perched
groundwater is possible on this project site at cut/fill contacts or at lower permeable
zones or layers within bedrock or fill. Additional review of the potential perched water
zones and mitigation will be made during grading and earthwork.
,-,-'.'
.~
.,~~
~
"~-r:~..t
.iI
\~
- 9-
Lsighton and Associatesl Inc.
A L::OIGHTON GROL:? COM?).,NY
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
110231-017
January 17, 2003
3.0 CONCLUSIONS
Based on our geotechnical evaluation and review of the referenced rough-grading plan, it is our
opinion that the proposed development is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint and may be
constructed provided the following recommendations are implemented during grading and
incorporated into the design and construction.
i
I
I
I
I
i
i
i
I
I
i
I
k
The following is a summary of the geotechnical conclusions that may affect development of the site.
· Maximum amount of cut and fill based on currently available plans, (Appendix A), is
approximately 60 and 30 feet, respectively. Permanent cut and fill slopes indicated on these
plans (Appendix A) are both proposed with maximum heights of approximately 20 and 35 feet
respectively. The depth of maximum fill may increase due to remedial grading beyond that
recommended herein.
r.-,",
~:;: ".:
· Permanent cut and fill slopes up to 20 and 35 feet in height if constructed at inclinations of 2:!
(horizontal to vertical) are considered stable. These slopes may be subject to increased erosion
if left unplanted or unprotected. The use of granular cohesionless (sand) earth material on
slope faces should be avoided.
· The Pauba formation bedrock is anticipated to be readily rippable to design elevations.
· Based on our supplemental subsurface investigation, our review of the previously completed
geotechnical reports, and our experience on nearby sites, it is our opinion that the on-site earth
materials can be excavated with well-working, heavy-duty conventional grading equipment.
· Based on laboratory testing and visual classification, onsite soil materials generally possess a
very low to low expansion potential, however, highly expansive soils may be encountered
during rough-grading. In the vicinity of borings B-lO!, B102 and B105, medium to highly
expansive soils appear to be within 5 :t feet of design grade. Additional testing should be
performed during site grading. Selective grading of highly expansive earth materials (if
encountered) may be recommended.
· Experience on the adjacent Harveston Phase I project provided sulfate potential attack to be
negligable. However, it is recommened the sulfate tests be taken during the construction of the
this project.
· The site will likely experience strong ground shaking during the duration of the project. The
design ground motion having a lO percent probability of being exceeded in 50 years is
expected to produce a peak horizontal ground surface acceleration at the site of O.71g.
· Secondary seismic hazards consisting of densification and liquefaction are considered low for
this site. Considering the site conditions, planned remedial earthwork, and existing/predicted
groundwater elevations. . .
I'.>
. .
i
I
~~
.";;*~,,
)<?~
'\''''':~~r
\/>1.
- 10 -
L,",'.-,1 l "",-,..,. 1'\---'" .,...l....,..... 1_,....
e>J'::inlOI' ana r\;:,;:,OCJC.l;:;;:', 111e..
A L'::GH70N GROUP '::::J,'''P,:I.NY
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
110231-017
January 17, 2003
.
The existing onsite soils appear suitable for fill construction provided they are relatively free of
organic material and debris. Expansive soils, if encountered, should be thoroughly blended
with sandy soils and placed a minimum of 5 feet below planned finish grade elevation.
Ground water was encountered during previous investigations in boring B-24 at 20 feet below
existing grade. Remedial removal depths in this area are estimated to be lO feet deep below
existing grade. Shallow ground water is not expected to be a factor during site excavation and
construction. Perched groundwater is possible along cut/fill contacts or in areas of contrasting
permeability. Recommendations to mitigate the potential for ground water buildup are
included in Section 4.0. In addition, localized seeps may occur in isolated areas in the future
after periods of heavy rainfall or inigation. These localized seeps should be treated on an
individual basis, if they occur.
.
.
Due to the granular nature of the on site soils; unprotected or unplanted slopes may be subject
to increased erosion. The proposed slopes should be planted as soon as feasible and watering
should be kept to the absolute minimum necessary to maintain plant vigor.
Settlement and compacted fill over bedrock is not anticipated to be excessive. Seismically
induced settlement, (densification) should be considered in structure design.
.
.-.".-.
,"
i
"';~~
,.z~if
~f1
( \-5
- 11-
I ~. 'hl.r, ""n!~ r\....,....{....,r.i--+-.... I
,-cJgl lVn di lU I-"~~V ,..l!d'.C~) nc,
A l..,,-IGHTO!, GR0!J.~ C'').'A?~N'f
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
110231-017
January 17, 2003
4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
4.1 Earthwork
Earthwork should be performed in accordance with the General Earthwork and Grading
Specifications in Appendix E and the following recommendations. The recommendations
contained in Appendix E are general grading specifications provided for typical grading
projects and some of the recommendations may not be strictly applicable to this project. The
specific recommendations contained in the text of this report supersede the general
recommendations in Appendix E. The contract between the developer and earthwork
contractor should be worded such that it is the responsibility of the contractor to place the fill
properly in accordance with the recommendations of this report and the specifications in
Appendix E, notwithstanding the testing and observation of the geotechnical consultant.
4.1.1 Removal and Site Preoaration
Prior to grading, the proposed structural improvement areas (i.e. all structural fill areas,
pavement areas, buildings, etc.) should be cleared of surface and subsurface
obstructions. Heavy vegetation, roots, and debris if encountered should be disposed of
offsite. Water wells, septic tanks and cesspools, if encountered, should be removed or
abandoned in accordance with the Riverside County Department of Health Services
guidelines.
Unsuitable materials should be removed from the proposed fill areas and any cut areas
where unsuitable materials extend below proposed cut grades. Unsuitable materials will
consist of undocumented fill, exploratory trench backfill, topsoil, colluvium, alluvium,
and weathered bedrock. These soils should be removed down to competent dense
material as determined by the geotechnical consultant, scarified, moisture-conditioned,
and compacted prior to placing fill. The removal limit should be established by a 1: I
projection from the edge of fill soils supporting settlement-sensitive structures
downward and outward to competent material identified by the geotechnical consultant.
Removals adjacent to Ynez Road, Parcel three of Tract 19677, and Interstate 15 may be
limited due to existing underground utilities. If the desired removals are not feasible
along Ynez Road, Parcel three of Tract 19677, and Interstate 15; additional
consolidation/settlement testing of the existing, left-in-place soils should be performed
during grading. Additional foundation recommendations or setbacks for settlement
sensitive structures may be warranted in this area based on the results of additional site
testing.
I
~:;
It is our understanding that this project is to be sheet graded based upon the plans
provided by RBF, 2002. Therefore, the location of buildings are not as of yet known.
In this case, there is no need to:over-excavate'cut-fiIl transition areas.
"'~,
...,.,.,,"'"
\",~~"."t.:4
'';$",
.'% .:.~
'. zJ
\(,p
i'
I
I
-12 -
Leighton and i\3.sociat,S,s, Inc.
A Li:TuH,ON G.'l.QlJ? C'J,\i?~~'{
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
110231-017
January 17, 2003
Any over-excavated surface of bedrock that is performed should be scarified and/or
cross-ripped and watered prior to placement of compacted fill. The over excavated
surface should be sloped a minimum of 2 percent to facilitate drainage along the
fill/bedrock contact toward the street or deeper fill area. The actual overexcavation
depth may be increased based on the field condition encountered and proposed
foundation system.
After completion of the recommended removal of unsuitable soils, the approved
surface should be scarified a minimum of 8-inches, moisture conditioned as necessary
to near optimum and compacted prior to placing fill.
Removal depths will vary with location. Preliminary estimated removal depths are
depicted on the Geotechnical Map (plates 1 through 4). Removal will also include
benching into competent material as the fills rise. Moderately to non-weathered Pauba
formation siltstone and sandstone is considered competent material. Generally, dense
Pauba formation bedrock is considered competent if extremely weathered material is
not encountered.
Keyways will be necessary at the toe of proposed fill slopes throughout the site.
Keyways are also required at a fill over cut contact. Keyways should be excavated into
dense bedrock as depicted in Appendix E. Continuous benching into dense bedrock
should be conducted as the fill placement proceeds. Benching and keying should be of
sufficient depth to remove all loose material as shown in Appendix E. A minimum
bench height of 2 feet into approved bedrock material should be maintained at all times.
The keyway bottoms should be a minimum of 18 feet wide and inclined into slope at
least 2 percent.
For fill over cut slopes, a keyway should be excavated between the fill and competent
bedrock after removal of unsuitable surficial soils. The cut portions of the slope and
keyway excavations should be geologically mapped by a geologist prior to fill
placement to ensure competent bedrock material will be exposed in the underlying cut
slope.
4.1.2 Structural Fills and Oversize Materials
The onsite soils are suitable for use as compacted fill, provided they are relatively free
of organic materials, debris and oversize materials. Areas to receive structural fill
and/or other surface improvements should be prepared in accordance with Section 4.1.1
and scarified to minimum depth of 8 inches, brought to near optimum moisture content,
and compacted. The optimum lift thickness to produce a uniformly compacted fill will
depend on the type and size of compaction equipment used. In general, fill should be
placed in uniform lifts not exceeding 8 inche's in thickness. Fill soils should be placed
at or above the minimum optimum moisture content. Fills placed on slopes steeper
-iC,...
;'~
,~.~CSiII
"r..
'J' _....,..
\'\-
- 13-
I 0'(11 1,._...,-., t' 1\ "',"""'" i........."".-- t...,..,
LvJ;0nlun dnlJ 1""'\,').:::vCl!::HC~) II il....
A L:::;Gi-I,(:;,1 ,:;,,':;1)::> C:J~,PA>I'{
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
110231-017
January 17, 2003
than 5 to 1 (horizontal to vertical) should be keyed and benched into approved
formational soils (see Appendix E for benching detail).
The fill greater than 50 feet thick should be compacted to 95-percent relative
compaction.
Fill slopes should be overbuilt a Inlmmum of 2 feet and trimmed back to the
compacted core or rolled with a weighted sheepsfoot compaction roller as the fill
slope height increases in maximum 5 foot increments.
4.1.3 Utility Trenches and Cast-In-Place Pice CCIPP)
j:-;'-
The onsite soils may generally be suitable as trench backfill provided they are screened
of rocks over 6 inches in diameter and organic matter. Trench backfill should be
compacted in uniform lifts (not exceeding 8 inches in compacted thickness) by
mechanical means to at least 90 percent relative compaction (ASTM Test Method
D1557-91).
Excavation of utility trenches should be performed in accordance with the project
plans, specifications, and all applicable OSHA requirements. The contractor should be
responsible for providing the "competent person" required by OSHA standards.
Contractors should be advised that sandy soils (such as fills generated from the onsite
alluvium) can make excavations particularly unsafe if all safety precautions are not
taken. In addition, excavations at or near the toe of slopes and/or parallel to slopes may
be highly unstable due to the increased driving force and load on the trench wall. Spoil
piles from the excavation(s) and construction equipment should be kept a minimum of
10 feet (or the depth of trench) away from the sides or tops of the trenches.
For planning purposes, it is our opinion that CIPP storm drain systems within the
subject development will be feasible from a geotechnical perspective. Based on our
laboratory data and our professional experience on the adjacent Harveston Phase I Site,
it is our opinion that the trench wall stability requirements of local water districts will
be achieved. California-OSHA requirements should be followed during all pipeline
trenching. It is the contractor's responsibility to maintain a safe work area during
underground construction at all times.
Additional soil testing should be performed during grading or trench excavation to
confirm these findings and determine the actual expansion and corrosion potential of
the soils in contact with the CIPP system.
Groundwater was locally encountered during. our previous field explorations. Although
significant changes to the regional groundwater table are not anticipated, changes can
and do occur with time, season and the influence of irrigation. The subject tract will
"""
;.;~~
~~~,
\~
- 14-
1-':;:('1!""~~'r' ;'.'"'(1 "~c.i!('i~f.=1, '1'-:(
,_....J::;)II.U J '-lll-.l /i,-"_-"", '-'I.... 0'-'-'1 I, :,
..1. L:::lG"TS,1 7>,,()U? caM?_~N'!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
110231-017
January 17, 2003
receive canyon subdrains during mass grading and therefore groundwater will be
controlled, however, seepage within trench walls is possible. Seepage within trenches
is not anticipated to effect trench wall stability.
4.1.4 Shrinkaae and Bulkina
The volume change of excavated onsite materials upon recompaction is expected to
vary with materials, density, insitu moisture content, location, and compaction effort.
The in-place and compacted densities of soil materials vary and accurate overall
determination of shrinkage and bulking cannot be made. We understand that the
grading contractor for Phase 1 has determined that an overall shrinkage of
approximately 7 percent for all materials placed and compacted occurred. Therefore,
we recommend site grading include, if possible, a balance area or ability to adjust
import/export quantities to accommodate some variation. Based on our subsurface
investigation and experience with similar materials, the following values are provided
as guidelines:
[
r
Topsoil, Alluvium, and Undocumented Fill
8 to lO percent shrinkage average
Weathered Pauba
2 to 8 percent shrinkage
Pauba Formation
2 percent shrink to 5 percent bulk
4.1.5 Settlement
A majority of settlement of on site fill materials is expected to occur during and within
90 days following fill placement. However, following the placement of fill, additional
settlement may occur due to (a) new footing/foundation loads and (b) compression
within the fill due to the affect of effective stresses during the life of the project.
4.1.6 Preliminarv Pavement Oesian Parameters
I
I:;
Based on an anticipated range ofR-values from 8 to 35 and design traffic indices of 5.0
9.0, the following preliminary pavement structural sections have been tabulated in
accordance with the City of Temecula standards and specifications.
~
~
~..
~J1~
-~
\'\
- 15-
i "":C11,"\~("'-; .....r...J c........(""\"i-~-.... !'If:
L~i I iL'Jl1 ::;, j!J il.:).)vlndl::;,,), 1] ,....
~ '
.:\ L::1GC;J:J~j -3::<'~U? CQ,\l?..\N'!
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
110231-017
January 17, 2003
Preliminary Pavement Design Parameters
T.I. = 5.0 T.I. = 6.0 T.I. = 7.0 T.I. = 8.0 T.I. = 9.0
R-Value AC AB AC AB AC AB AC AB AC AB
(in.) (in.) (in.) (in.) (in.) (in.) (in.) (in.) (in.) (in.)
8 3.0 9.5 3.5 12.0 4 15 4.5 18 5.5 20
14 3.0 8.5 3.5 11.0 4 14 4.5 16 5.5 18
20 3.0 7.5 3.5 10.0 4 12 4.5 15 5.5 16
25 3.0 6.5 3.5 9.0 4 11 4.5 13 5.5 15
30 3.0 6.0 3.5 8.0 4 10 4.5 12 5.5 13
35 3.0 6.0 3.5 7.0 4 9 4.5 10 5.5 11
Prior to placement of class 2 aggregate base CAB), the subgrade should be processed in
order to attain near optimum moisture and a minimum of 95 percent relative
compaction based on ASTM D1557-9 to a minimum of twelve inches below subgrade.
The subgrade should be "proof rolled" with heavy equipment in order to verify that the
sub grade soils do not "pump" or yield.
Prior to the placement of asphaltic concrete (AC) the AB should be processed and
compacted in place to a minimum of 95 percent relative compaction based on the
laboratory standard CAL2l6.
AC should be placed on compacted AB and compacled to a minimum of 95 percent relative
compaction based on the laboratory standards ASTM D1561 and D2726.
Preparation of sub grade soils and pavement should be accomplished under the
observation and testing of the project soils engineer, and in accordance with the
requirements of the City of Temecula.
4.2 SlaDe Stabilitv
Based on our review, both permanent cut and fill slopes are proposed at 2: 1 (horizontal to
vertical) inclinations and flatter with heights up to approximately 16 feet. Temporary cut and
fill slopes are on the order of 20 feet and 38 feet, respectively. Based on our review, it is our
opinion that the proposed cut and fill slopes will be grossly and surficially stable (Appendix
D), provided cut slopes are free from adverse geological conditions, such as out of slope
bedding and jointing. All cut slopes and temporary construction cuts should be observed by an
engineering geologist during grading. All slopes should be constructed in accordance with the
most current version of the UnifoJ,1Il Building Code CUBC) guidelines and the City of
Temecula requirements. If there is adiscrepancy between the recommendations in the UBC,
City of Temecula requirements or these presented in this report, the more stringent
recommendations should be used.
i-;';':'
i::"-;"
I'
i
!
4'iZ
~
~
-z,P
-16 -
'I .-.i--'~~I\''""' .....~ri ~---""OC'I"";'''''''''' 1-,-.,....
_Ci::jl !l\.,;i I dll.J i .:::;0 :::l~:::'~J ,i i\.;.
)., L;::IGflTON GROUf' COMPANY
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
110231-017
January 17, 2003
Due to the granular nature of the soils, surficial erosion may develop on unplanted or
unprotected slopes. In addition, due to the granular nature of the soils at the subject site,
construction of the fill slopes may warrant blending of cohesive (silts and clays) soils into very
sandy soils in order to increase surficial slope stability. This recommendation will be given at
the time of rough-grading based on the soils encountered.
Cut and fill slopes should be provided with appropriate surface drainage features and
landscaped (with drought tolerant vegetation) as soon as possible after grading to minimize the
potential for erosion. Berms should be provided at the top of fill slopes, brow ditches should
be constructed at the top of cut slopes. Lot drainage should be directed such that surface
runoff on the slope face is minimized. The outer portion of fill slopes should be either
overbuilt by 2 feet (minimum) and trimmed back to the finished slope configuration or
compacted in vertical increments of 5 feet (maximum) by a sheepsfoot roller as the fill is
placed. The slope face should then trackwalked by dozers of appropriate weight to achieve the
final configuration and compaction out to the slope face.
L."
4.3 Drainaae
Over-the-slope drainage should not be permitted. All drainage should be directed away from
slopes and structures by means of approved permanent/temporary drainage devices. Adequate
storm drainage of the sheet graded pads should be provided to avoid siltation of temporary
catch basins. Linear sandbagging of the sheet graded pads tangential to flow directions in
periodic intervals, should reduce erosion potential of runoff over these pads.
4.3.1 Subdrainaae
Subdrainage will be necessary in canyon fills and fill over cut keyways. Fills generally
saturate near geologic contacts and the subdrains should outlet this excess water to
suitable discharge areas. Contacts on fill over cut slopes which daylight cut material
can present seepage problems once irrigation of the slopes and upper pads begins. The
subdrainage within the fill over cut keyways should mitigate this seepage problem.
Subdrain details are provided in Appendix F, General Earthwork and Grading
Specifications. Preliminary locations of canyon subdrains are depicted on the
Geotechnical Maps (plates 1- 4). Canyon subdrains up to 500 lineal feet should consist
of 6-inch diameter perforated pipe. Canyon subdrains greater than 500 feet should
consist of 8-inch pipe. A 20-foot section of non-perforated pipe should be placed at the
outlet location. The connection between the perforated and non-perforated pipe should
be sealed with a minimum 6-inch thick, concrete cut-off wall placed a minimum of 2
feet beyond the perimeter of the gravel "burrito". All outlets should be protected with a
concrete apron and cover. Subdrain pipe may be schedule SID 35 (or equal) placed in
accordance with Appendix E.-,
t<;
~
,e.,f)jJ
~~
"~
."-~
v.
- 17-
Lejghton and }l,ssocj~tesJ Inc.
..\ L~IGHTaN G~OU? CDM?ANY
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
110231-017
January 17, 2003
4.4 Lateral Earth Pressures and Retainino Wall Desion Considerations
The recommended lateral pressures for low expansive site soil (expansion index less than 50
per UBC IS-I-B) and level or sloping backfill are presented on Table 1, (rear oftext).
Embedded structural walls should be designed for lateral earth pressures exerted on them.
The magnitude of these pressures depends on the amount of deformation that the wall can
yield under load. If the wall can yield enough to mobilize the full shear strength of the soil, it
can be designed for "active" pressure. If the wall cannot yield under the applied load, the
shear strength of the soil cannot be mobilized and the earth pressure will be higher. Such
walls should be designed for "at rest" conditions. If a structure moves toward the soils, the
resulting resistance developed by the soil is the "passive" resistance.
For design purposes, the recommended equivalent fluid pressure for each case for walls
founded above the static ground water and backfilled with soils of very low to low expansion
potential is provided in Table 1 (presented at rear of text). The equivalent fluid pressure
values assume low expansive, free-draining conditions. If conditions other than those assumed
above are anticipated, the equivalent fluid pressure values should be provided on an
individual-case basis by the geotechnical engineer. Surcharge loading effects from the
adjacent structures should be evaluated by the geotechnical and structural engineer. All
retaining wall structures should be provided with appropriate drainage and waterproofing.
The outlet pipe should be sloped to drain to a suitable outlet. Typical wall drainage design is
illustrated in Appendix E.
For sliding resistance, the friction coefficient of 0.35 may be used at the concrete and soil
interface. Lateral passive pressures may be used in accordance with the values provided in
Table 1. These values may be used for foundations with a embedment of one foot and
increased by the same value for each additional foot to a maximum lateral bearing of 2,OOOpsf.
In combining the total lateral resistance, the passive pressure or the frictional resistance should
be reduced by 50 percent. Wall footings should be designed in accordance with structural
considerations. The passive resistance value may be increased by one-third when considering
loads of short duration, including wind or seismic loads. The horizontal distance between
foundation elements providing passive resistance should be a minimum of three times the
depth of the elements to allow full development of these passive pressures. The total depth of
retained earth for design of cantilever walls should be the vertical distance below the ground
surface measured at the wall face for stem design or measured at the heel of the footing for
overturning and sliding.
,
i,~;
;:~.:..
i
Wall backcut excavations less than 5 feet in height can be made near vertical. For backcuts
greater than 5 feet in height, but less than 15 feet in height, the backcut should be flattened to
a gradient not steeper than 1: I (horizontal to vertical) slope inclination. For backcuts in
excess of 15 feet in height, specific recommendations should be requested from the
geotechnical consultant. The granular and native backfill soils should be compacted to at least
90 percent relative compaction (based on ASTM Test Method DI557). The gnmular fill
0>.
~.., ....1/
~;~ r
"'.~
I
i
I
1
,
I
I
I
I
!
- 18-
I ;:.; ~I~~r,;n ;:'irl ~ ~,'"'r;""'-~';::~ 1;-""'"
L...,I;jIJlv ! l,.dl'...l' ,..........u_,jd~......"-'J JI'-'.
A LEI;;HTON G;<.:}U? CO:\\?ANY
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
110231-017
January 17, 2003
should extend horizontally to a minimum distance equal to one-half the wall height behind the
walls. The walls should be constructed and backfilled as soon as possible after backcut
excavation. Prolonged exposure of backcut slopes may result in some localized slope
instability.
Foundations for retaining walls in competent formational soils or properly compacted fill
should be embedded at least 18 inches below lowest adjacent grade. At this depth, an
allowable bearing capacity of 2,500 psf may be utilized.
For free standing (unrestrained) walls over 5 feet or that present a life/safety hazard, the lateral
earth pressures should be increased to reflect the increment of additional pressure caused by the
design earthquake. Accordingly, an increment of lateral pressure equal to 21 H2, where H is
the height of the wall, should be applied at a distance of 0.6H above the toe of the wall. Under
the combined effects of static and earthquake loads on the wall, a factor of safety between 1.1
and 1.2 is acceptable when evaluating the stability (sliding, overturning) of the wall (NA VFAC
DM 7.02). All retaining wall structures should be provided with appropriate pipe and ground
drainage and waterproofing.
i
I
lh
c....,
4.5 Footina Setback
We recommend a minimum horizontal setback distance from the face of slopes for all
structural footings and settlement-sensitive structures (i.e. fences, walls, signs, etc.). This
distance is measured form the outside edge of the footing, horizontally to the slope face (or to
the face of a retaining wall). Please note that the soils within the structural setback area
possess poor lateral stability and improvements (such as retaining walls, sidewalk, fences,
pavements, etc.) constructed within this setback area may be subject to lateral movement
and/or differential settlement. Potential distress to such improvements may be mitigated by
providing a deepened footing or a pier and grade-beam foundation system to support the
improvement. The deepened footing should meet the setback as described below.
Slope Height Recommended Footing Setback
< 5 feet 5 feet minimum .
5-15 feet 7 feet minimum
> 15 feet H/2, where H is the slope height, not to
exceed 10 feet for 2: 1 slopes
':-:';'.
4.6 Corrosion
Laboratory tests were not performed as part of the scope of this project. However, it is
recommended that corrosion tests be performed through out the construction phase. Concrete
-i~
~."
.;;p;,:,-~~
~.Y".'"
'~~~
1-'1;)
-19 -
Leighton and Assoclates) Inc.
A l:;:IG!-1TON G~:)U;: CO.,PA>IY
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
110231-017
January 17, 2003
foundations in contact with site soils should be designed according to test results in order to
resist sulfate corrosion in accordance with Table 19-A-4 of the Uniform Building Code. A
qualified corrosion engineer should be consulted if corrosion sensitive materials are to be
used. Additional corrosion (pH, chloride, resistant) testing onsite soils should be performed
during grading.
4.7 Control of Surface Water and Drainaae Control
Positive drainage of surface water away from structures is very important. No water should
be allowed to pond adjacent to buildings. Positive drainage may be accomplished by
providing drainage away from buildings at a gradient of at least 2 percent for a distance of at
least 5 feet, and further maintained by a swale on drainage path at a gradient of at least 1-
percent. Where limited by 5-foot side yards, drainage should be directed away from
foundations for a minimum of 3 feet and into a collector swale or pipe system. Where
necessary, drainage paths may be shortened by use of area drains and collector pipes and/or
paved swales. Eave gutters also help reduce water infiltration into the subgrade soils if the
downspouts are properly connected to appropriate outlets.
Planters with open bottoms adjacent to buildings should be avoided, if possible. Planters
should not be designed adjacent to buildings unless provisions for drainage, such as catch
basins and pipe drains, are made. No ponding of water from any source (including
irrigation) should be permitted onsite as moisture infiltration may increase the potential for
moisture-related distress. Experience has shown that even with these controls for surface
drainage, a shallow perched ground water or subsurface water condition can and may
develop in areas where no such condition previously existed. This is particularly true where
a substantial increase in surface water infiltration resulting from site irrigation occurs.
Mitigation of these conditions should be performed under the recommendations of the
geotechnical consultant on a case-by-case basis.
4.8 Irriaation. LandscaDina and Lot Maintenance
Site irrigation should be controlled at all times. We recommend that only the minimum
amount of irrigation necessary to maintain plant vigor be utilized. We recommend that
where possible, landscaping consist primarily of drought-tolerant vegetation. A
landscape consultant should be contacted for proper plant selection. For large graded
slopes adjacent to open space areas, we recommend native plant species be utilized and
that irrigation be utilized only until plants are well established. At that time, irrigation
could be significantly reduced.
~
'~.<;~.'. ~
'-'if"
c, ""'...!ilI"
- --~
~A,
-20 -
L?".' "<\""~'-'-- ~.--. I i\ '''''-'''"'''''I'"'~''''''''' j .....
r:::lUI HUll ci jO r\..::;.)vl...: :::lL.:;:,), 1nl.,.!,
~ ,
A L.::!GHTGN 3i<.OUP COi,I:'>),..'1,(
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
110231-017
January 17, 2003
5.0 GEOTECHNICAL REVIEW
Geotechnical review is of paramount importance in engineering practice. The poor performances
of many foundation and earthwork projects have been attributed to inadequate construction review.
We recommend that Leighton and Associates be provided the opportunity to review the following
items.
5.1 Plans and Soecifications
The geotechnical engineer should review the project lot specific rough-grading plans,
foundation plans and specifications prior to release for bidding and construction. Such review
is necessary to detennine whether the geotechnical recommendations have been effectively
implemented. Review findings should be reported in writing by the geotechnical engineer.
5.2 Construction Review
Observation and testing should be performed by Leighton and Associates representatives
during grading and construction. It should be anticipated that the substrata exposed during
construction may vary from that encountered in the previously excavated borings and test pits.
Reasonably continuous construction observation and review during site grading and
foundation installation allows for evaluation of the actual soil conditions and the ability to
provide appropriate revisions during construction, if required.
Site preparation, removal of unsuitable soils, approval of imported earth materials, fill
placement, foundation installation and other site geotechnically-related operations should be
observed and tested by representatives of Leighton and Associates.
Additional laboratory tests of subsurface materials to confirm compacted density and moisture
content, corrosive potential, expansion potential, and resistance value (R-value) should be
performed during grading.
~-">f'l!.
~
":"':c~~
~'"""
'r:'~
L~",.
- 21-
L-'-'-'- - -- ' ,\ -- '-'-- I -
t:i8i i~:Ji I ::lj iC ,-,,).)CCI':H::;0, ,ril......
~ L21GHiGN SR'::;U? CO,'.I?,~;-lY
i
i
I
,
I
,
i
I
I
i
i
I
I
I
i
I
1::-
j.\
I
i
~{::'
~::."'-
f..;....
I
I
~\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
110231-017
January 17, 2003
6.0 UMITAllONS
I
I
I"
i
I
This report was necessarily based in part upon data obtained from a limited number of
observances, site visits, soil samples, tests, analyses, histories of occurrences, spaced subsurface
explorations and limited information on historical events and observations. Such information is
necessarily incomplete.. The nature of many sites is such that differing characteristics can be
experienced within small distances and under various climatic conditions. Changes in subsurface
conditions can and do occur over time.
i
i
I
I
I
k,.,
This report was prepared for Lennar Communities, based on Lennar Communities needs,
directions, and requirements. This report is not authorized for use by, and is not to be relied upon
by any party except Lennar Communities and its successors and assigns as owner of the property,
with whom Leighton has contracted for the work. Use of or reliance on this report by any other
party is at that party's risk. Unauthorized use of or reliance on this report constitutes an agreement
to defend and indemnify Leighton and Associates from and against any liability which may arise as
a result of such use or reliance, regardless of any fault, negligence, or strict liability of Leighton
and Associates.
I
~... .
I"
I
I
I
I
.4~
~'~:
~,,~';~,
c, :;:!',jf
....~,.
~
- 22-
1-'"-;"'_._, -_-1 A-.-,-r"I.-r-0 1,-,-
~=l\;jll'.\.;: ;:l.i IU, ,0,'>..;.... CLC0l Ii Iv.
A !..S!-:;,nON G,qOU? C8,"'?_~Wr
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
/
~';/~
,~~~-}/
\
\\
'I
~ I
I
"> ,)
~<.i" (
/
/
,
"
,
,
"
,
,
"
//-
/
Base Map: The Thomas Guide Digital Edition Inland Empire 2000, Not To Scale
Harveston
Tract 29639 Phase II
Temecula, California
Riverside County, California
Project No.
..
..~~
~'"
1/
SITE LOCATION
MAP
110231-017
Date
January 2003
FlQUre No. 1
I
I
I
, I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
110231-017
January 17, 2003
TABLE 1
Lateral Earth Pressures
Conditions Equivalent Fluid Weight (pcf)!
Level Backfill 2: 1 Slope Backfill
Active 45 65
At-Rest 65 lOO
Passi ve2 250 (maximum 2 ksf) 125 (Sloping Down)
t Assumes drained conditions. (See Appendix E)
2 Assumes a level condition that will remain for the duration of the project.
,.,.'
reo;
r:)
Vb
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
110231-017
January 17, 2003
APPENDIX A
References
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 1994, Settlement Analysis, Technical Engineering
and Design Guides as Adapted from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, No.
9, ASCE Press, 1994
Blake T.F., 2000a, EQSEARCH Version 2.2, A Computer Program for the Estimation of Peak
Horizontal Acceleration from Southern California Historical Earthquake
Catalogs, Users Manual, 94pp_ with data file updated, 1995.
Blake, T. F., 2000b, EQFAULT, A Computer Program for the Deterministic Prediction of Peak
Horizontal Acceleration from Digitized California Faults, User's Manual,
79pp_
v.
Blake, T. E, 2000c, FRlSKSP, A Computer Program for the Probabilistic Estimation of Seismic
Hazard Using Faults as Earthquake Sources, User's Manual, 116pp_
Blake, T. E, 2000d, UBCSEIS, Version 1.0, User's Manual for Evaluating the Seismic
Parameters in accordance with the 1997 UBC, 53 pp.
BSSC, 1994, NEHRP Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings,
Part 1 - Provisions, FEMA 222A4, NEHRP Recommended Provisions for
Seismic Regulations for New Buildings, Part 1 - Provisions, FEMA 222A,
Federal Emergencv Management Agencv, 290p.
California, State of, Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, 1966, Geologic
Map of California, Santa Ana 30' X 60' Quadrangle, Southern California,
scale 1:250,000. *
California, State of, Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology 1990, Special
Studies Zones, Munieta Quadrangle, 7.5 Minute Series.*
Converse Consultants, 1988, Liquefaction Evaluation, Winchester Hills, Tentative Parcel Map
23336, Rancho California, California, Converse Consultants Inland Empire
(CEll) Project Number 88-81-117-01, dated September 9, 1988.
Converse Consultants, 1990, Geotechnical Investigation, Tentative Tracts 25321 through 25324,
and 25464, Winchester Hills Residential Development, Temecula, California,
Converse Project Number 89-81-173-01, dated October 8, 1990.
Converse Consultants, 1999, Summary -Of Geotechnical Conditions, Sweetwater Specific Plan,
Approximately 560-Acre Site, Temecula, C;ilifornia, Converse Project
Number 98-81-lO4-01, dated June 21, 1999.
~
~
~-
""~..':':
'. .,
-%
yo.....
A-I
I :::]i'''lh'n.- :;;;-id'\ :~"""~I~r=:.~ lil('
....'-','..dll'-'II ....,,'"' r'1"'...VI.... """-"-'J I. '-'.
~
A '-!I':;:-;TCl:-l::;~OUP CO:vlP,l.:l'{
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
110231-017
January 17, 2003
References (continued)
Hart, E.W., Bryant, W. A., 1999, Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning with Index to Earthquake Zones Maps:
Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Special
Publication 42. Revised 1997, Supplements 1 and 2 added 1999.
International Conference of Building Officials, 1997 Uniform Building Code, Volumes 1-3.
Ishihara, K., 1985, "Stability of Natural Deposits During Earthquake", Proceedings of the
Eleventh International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation
Engineering, A.A. Belkema Publishers, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Jennings, C.W., 1994a, Fault Activity Map of California and Adjacent Areas, California Division
of Mines and Geology, Geologic Data Map Series, No.6, Scale: 1:750,000.
Jennings, C.W., 1994b, Fault Map of California: Faults, Volcanoes, Thermal Springs, and
Thermal Wells, California Division of Mines and Geology, Geologic Data
Map No.1, Scale 1:750,000.
Kennedy, M.P., 1977, "Recency and Character of Faulting Along the Elsinore Fault Zone in
Southern Riverside County, California", Special Report 131.
Kramer, Steven, L., 1996, Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering, Prentice Hall, 1996.
Krinitsky, E., L., Gould, J., P., Edinger, P., H., 1993, Fundamentals of Earthquake-Resistant
Construction, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1993.
Leighton and Associates, 1979, Geotechnical Feasibility Study, "1-15 Corridor", Rancho
California, County of Riverside, California, Project Number 679204-01,
dated June 26, 1979.
Leighton and Associates, 1986, Final Compaction Report Of Rough Grading Tract 19677,
Industrial Park V, Rancho California, Riverside County, California, Project
Number 6851870-01, dated May 27, 1986.
Leighton and Associates, 1986, Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation And Liquefaction Study,
Proposed Commercial Site 70+ Acres, Parcel Map 21361, Northeast Of
Winchester And Ynez Roads, Rancho California, California, Project
Number 6860619-01, dated July 11, 1986.
Leighton and Associates, 1986, Final Compaction Report Of Rough Grading Parcel Map 21361,
Rancho California, Riverside County, California, Project Number 6860619-
02, December 9, 1986.
.....~
~y..
,,' ",.
-T. ,"',.
.......
1fJ
A-2
I ,...,; " ~.' ""''''d 1\ '"'^"'r:i,...T,......... I'.....,.'
LClgnlon elll rl':'':'1..)-,I;::1tC0, ! Iv.
,\. L?:IGCi,ON G~_OUP COM?.I.'\!Y
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
110231-017
January 17, 2003
References (continued)
Leighton and Associates, 2001a, As-Graded Report of Rough Grading for Tract 29111-1 and
_ Tract 23626-1 (proposed Park Site), Planning Area 2, Lots 1 Through 67,
Murrieta Hot Springs Area, Riverside County, California, Project Number
11980158-005, dated January 15,2001.
Leighton and Associates, 2001 b, As Graded Report of Rough Grading for Tract 29111, Planning
Area 2, for Tract 29111, Planning Area 2, Lots lThrough 58, Murrieta Hot
Springs Area, Riverside County, California, Project Number 11980158-005,
dated July 20,2001.
Leighton and Associates, 2001c, Supplemental Geotechnical Investigation And Geotechnical
Review Of Interim Arroyo Mass Grading Plan, Tentative Tract No. 29639, .
Harveston, Temecula, California, LD01-058GR Project Number 110231-
004, dated December 10, 2001.
Mann, John F., 1955, Geology of a Portion of the Elsinore Fault Zone, California Division of
Mines and Geology, Special Report 43, dated October, 1955.
McGuire, R. K., 1978, FRISK: Computer Program for Seismic Risk Analysis Using Faults as
Earthquake Sources, U.S. Geological Survev Open-File Report 78-lO07,
69p.
Morton, D. M., 1999, Preliminary Digital Geologic Map of the Santa Ana 30'X 60' Quadrangle,
Southern California, Version 1.0, Open-File Report 99-172.
Naval Facilities Engineering Command, 1986a, Soil mechanics design manual 7.01, Change 1:
U.S. Navy, September.
Naval Facilities Engineering Command, 1986b, Foundations and earth structures, design manual
7.02, Changes 1: U.S. Navy, September.
Petersen, M. D., Bryant, W. A., Cramer, C. H., Cao, T., Reichle, M. S., Frankel, A. D.,
Lienkaemper, J. J., McCrory, P. A., and Schwartz, D. P., 1996, Probabilistic
Seismic Hazard Assessment for the State of California, California
Department of Conservation. Division of Mines and Geologv Open-File
Report 96-08: U.S. Geological Survev Open-File Report 96-706.
i:~::-
r
I
I
!
Petra, 2002, Geotechnical Report of Rough Grading of Tract 29548 (The Arboretum) and Mass
Grading of Tract 30563 (Curta Bella), City of Murrieta, Riverside County,
California, J.N. 417;99, dated June 20, 2002.
. .
~.'"
.,.~"",.
~t:li...",.."
.,. 'ii'
. .
.t;;;
;\.
?
A-3
L~. "~ ~~d ^" '-'-~ I~
::;ignlun "II r\,:,::oOCICll.::;::O, IIIC.
A '--::=:IGH,0~1 G::l.Q\j;> COM?J..N'r
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
110231-017
January 17, 2003
References (continued)
RBF Consulting, 2002, Harveston Mass Grading Tract No. 29639 - Phase 2, dated November
18, 2002, 10 Sheets.
Saul, R. B., 1978, Elsinore fault zone, south Riverside County, California: California Division of
Mines and Geology Fault Evaluation Report FER-76 and supplements
(unpublished).
Schnabel, P.B., and Seed, H.B., 1973, "Accelerations in Rock for Earthquakes in the Western
United States", Bull. of the Seismol. Soc. of Am., Vol. 63, No.2, pp 501-
516.
Seed, H.B., Idriss, I.M., and Kiefer, F.W., 1969, Characteristics of Rock Motions During
Earthquakes, Journal of Soil Mechanics and Foundation Division, ASCE, V.
95, No. SM5, Proc. Paper 6783, pp. 1199-1218.
Silver, L. T., and Chappel, B. W., The Peninsular Ranges Batholith: An Insight into the
Evolution of the Cordilleran Batholiths of Southwestern North America,
Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh: Earth Sciences, 79, 105-
121, 1988.
Tokimatsu, K., and Seed, H.B., 1987, Evaluation of Settlements in Sands Due to Earthquake
Shaking, ASCE Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 113, No.8, dated
August 1987
United States Department of the Interior Geological Survey, 1953 (Photo Revised 1979),
Murrieta Quadrangle, 7.5 Minute Series.
WGCEP - Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities, 1995, Seismic Hazards in
Southern California: Probable Earthquake Probabilities, Bull. Seismol. Soc.
Amer., Vol. 85, No.2, pp 379-439.
*Effective January 1, 2002 this department, as pertaining to geology, has been renamed as the
California Geologic Survey
~
.;!i:!3i~ 9;1/
~-.
;.,.,'~
.~
A-4
Leighton and Associates, Inc.
,\ LEIGH"TGN G~au? C::J:\I?:UlY
I
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-101
12-3-02
Ita
oject
lIIingCo.
-1ole Diameter 24"
vation Top of Hole +/-
Sheet 1
Project No.
Type of Rig
of
2
110231-017
Bucket Auger
Drop 30"
Harveston Phase II
Big Johnny's Drilling
Drive Weight
Location
See Below
See Map
1125'
0 ,., Ul
Q)~ ui-:- DESCRIPTION -
u - - Ul
I .c_ :EO) Ul 2 Ul8 'w ~ UlCfJ ..
0." .s .. <:..... ".. "'. J-
<>'0 ~ ..u -<: -t.)
.... Q. Ul" t.). '0
cLL ~-' 0 iiiCii c<>. .-- _CfJ
(!) 2 E ,., 0<: 'o:::i Logged By ..
'" 0- ~ ::;:0 AVI c-
CfJ c t.) CfJ- ,.,
Sampled By AVI J-
0
" . '. SM @Surface: Light brown. damp, silty SAND
.'
I .: .<......
'. . .
'" ".
. .
I
I
I
I
I
LE TYPES:
SPLIT SPOON
~NG SAMPLE
ULK SAMPLE
BE SAMPLE
. '-:. ':',
'.
... '.
5
:', '.:. '.:
'.
'" '.
. .
. ....
:: ': ','Samplel
'. . .@7'
',' ....
@ 8'; Light, damp, silty SAND, iron staining, manganese nodules
10
.'
.:. '-:. ,',
" . .
'" "
5
2
'.
:'. '.:. ',:.
'. . .
... '.
'.:.":'
15
___CL
CL-M
@13.5':GradcstoRedMbrown, moist clayey SILT - - - - --
- 4.5': Light m:.aY..-moist. eLA Y p-od= = = = = = - = = =
a 15'; Olive-brown, moist SILT, micas and iron stains
@ 1~ Grades to Rcd.bro...\'n~oist,-;iltYSAND with ironstain-;- --
f
~
Samte3 t=
. . .@J
... "
" "
" ........
. . .
'. . .
.: ..... I
. ....
. . '.
'. .-.
SM
PRo Fcl it PA.D g.L~" .
@20': Grades to Olive-brown. moist, silty fine SAND with manganese
nodules, rootlets
20
4
5
'.' :."
:': ..:....
'. . .
'" '.
. .
25
@25': Brown. moist, sandy SILT, manganese stains
Sample6
@23'
@ 2~ Brown, moist, clayey SILT to silty CLAY with stringers- ~ -
" ....
~ ---
. .'
'. .
'" .
'. '.
'. . .
. .
. .
-7':Lightg~~wn,moistSRIDlens=~=====~
,27.31: Brown, mOist, sandy SILT, manganese stams
G GRAB SAMPLE
C CORE SAMPLE
TYPE OF TESTS:
SU SULFATE
OS DIRECT SHEAR
MD JlJlAXIMUM DENSITY
CN CONSOLIDATION
CR CORROSION
CS CORROSION SUITE
MC MOISTURE CONTENT
MD MOISTURE & DENSITY
HCO HYDROCOLLAPSE
HO HYDROMETER
SA SIEVE ANALYSIS
AI.. ATTERBERG l.IMITS
EI EXPANSION INDEX
RV R.VALUE
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
I
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-101
W;ect
'r;lIing Co.
Hole Diameter 24"
l~vation Top of Hole +/-
12-3-02
I
I 30
I
"'-
-.,
<>..,
~u..
.. .
.
-
-
I .
35
.
I -
.
I -
40-
-
I -
.-
I 45-
-
I -
-
.
I 50-
.
I -
-
-
I 55-
-
I -
-
-
lL:"TYPES:
SPLIT SPOON
"NG SAMPLE
ULK SAMPLE
UBE SAMPLE
o
:CO)
<>'0
OJ....
i5
II)
.s
o
:2
Sirml"ei
@30
1125'
-s
Harveston Phase II
Big Johnny's Drilling
Drive Weight
Location
o
:2
.,
'ii.
E
OJ
III
.<:> GJ~ 0""':"
- 'jjj
11)0 - II)lIl
;:0 1::_ ",oJ" OJ.
"0 _I:: -(,)
au- 11)" (,).
-- c<>' .-- _lIl
ID., ,., 01:: '0::1 Logged By
0.. - :;:0
c (,) cn-
Sampled By
:;-
See Below
See Map
Sheet 2
Project No.
Type of Rig
of
2
110231-017
Bucket Auger
Drop 30"
AVI
AVI
.!l
II)
.,
l-
e
.,
'"
,.,
I-
DESCRIPTION
_L,1,- \~~~': Olive-brown. moist eLA Y lens r
ML 19l30.2': OliVe to ITghfbrown: mOist SILTWitn mICas - - - - - .
Total Logged 32'
Total Depth 35'
No Groundwater Encountered
Backfilled with Native 12/3/02
G GRAB SAMPLE
C CORE SAMPLE
TYPE OF TESTS:
SU SULFATE
OS DIRECT SHEAR
MD I'MXIMUM DENSITY
eN CONSOLIDATION
CR CORROSION
HCC HYDROCOLLAPSE
HD HYDROMETER
SA SIEVE ANALYSIS
AL A TTERBERG LIMITS
EI EXPANSION INDEX
RV R.VALUE
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
,
i ).
CS CORROSION SUITE
Me MOISTURE CONTENT
MO MOISTURE & DENSITY
::<&
#l&jII
;<JJII$V:. :'
"'\it~
~~Y
?ft.
I
12-4-02
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-102
Sheet 1
Project No,
Type of Rig
of
2
110231-017
Bucket Auger
Drop 30"
_ate
roject
rilling Co.
Hole Diameter 24"
levation Top of Hole +/-
Harveston Phase II
Big Johnny's Drilling
Drive Weight
location
See Below
See Map
1140'
~ en
c:i Cll~ ui~ DESCRIPTION -
" - gj
I .l:_ :2C'J en z enO 'iii :;+01' enUl
-., ., ., ~o c_ lI!' ....
c.., C.o - .,,, _c -()
~lJ.. !!!..J 0 C. ou. oc. .!S (). '0
-~ _Ul
(!) z E mOl >. oc cb Logged By AVI [
lI! Q. ~ :;:0
Ul 0 () Ul- >.
Sampled By AVI ....
0
SP @ Surface: Red-brown, moist, clayey fine to coarse SAND
I B --- ---- I
. . . @ 2'; Olive~graY:- moi~ silty SAND:porou-;- - - - - - - - -
.: . o. SM f-"",
.' .'
::. ..:....:. @3'; Yellow-brown, moist. silty SAND with micas
I '. . .
.'.0,
S ," .'
--- ---- -':': SQm:p contact to Red-brovill.. moj~ ~~ fine to coarse SAND=
, . _ _ --SE..
.... SM Q, 5.5': Sharp contact to Yellow-brown. moist, silty SAND with micas
I '" "
'.
....
'. '. ---
---- @ 9': yrade7to Olive-bro~~oist,~layey SILT with micas and iron -
I CL-ML
10 stams
I
I 15 --- ---- @ 15': Grades to Yellow-brown, moist,~lty SAND with~jcas, iro~-
. . . '. SM
and manganese stains
'; ','
I '.
....
'" . @ 17.5': Sharp contact to Olive-brown, moist, silty fine SAND with
micas, iron and manganese stains
"
. '.
I 20 .. .:. ....
s
"
,. ....
I '.
---- (il) 22.5':Gradesto 01ive-brown,-~:;'lOist,sandy SiL T with~lay. micas, -
ML
~ manganese and iron stains
I 25 Sample 2
@2S'
I -f- ---- L2~ White. trn;ist SAND fingeril!R.into matrix - - - - - - =
~-- - - __---.SM
GL-M @28.5': Gradest9 OliVC-'6:own, mOlst,C1ayeySILT Withlron and-
manganese stams
LE TYPES: TYPE OF TESTS: HCO HYDROCOLLAPSE CORROSION SUITE
SU SULFATE CS
SPLIT SPOON G GRAB SAMPLE HD HYDROMETER Me MOISTURE CONTENT
RING SAMPLE C CORE SAMPLE DS DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANALYSIS MD MOISTURE & DENSITY
FLK SAMPLE MD MAXIMUM DENSITY AL A TTER6ERG LIMITS
BE SAMPLE CN CONSOLIDATION EI EXPANSION INDEX
CR CORROSION RV R-VALUE ?:>-6'
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
I
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-102
*ate
roject
rillingCo.
Hole Diameter 24"
levation Top of Hole +/-
12-4-02
Sheet 2
Project No.
Type of Rig
of
2
110231-017
Bucket Auger
Drop 30"
Harveston Phase II
Big Johnny's Drilling
Drive Weight
Location
See Below
See Map
1140'
u 0
I .<:- :Eo I/) z
-" $ "
"-" "-0 Q.
c3u. !!!....I 0
2 E
C) '"
en
3
- ~ ,,"': 1Ii-:-
1/)0 Iii ~ I/)en
;:0 "- ",.r '" .
"'u -" -(,)
QIJ.. 1/)'" (,).
-~ C"- .-- _en
Ill", >. 0" '0:;; Logged By
0.. ~ ::;:0
C (,) en-
Sampled By
4
I/)
-
'"
'"
f-
'0
"
"-
>.
f-
DESCRIPTION
AVI
AVI
I 35
I
I 40
II
@3~radestoOliv~bro~moi~I~SILTwithiroffid--
...1l1anggrJcse stains _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.__
@34'; GradeS to Olive-brown, moist, silty fine to coarse SAND wIth
iron and manganese stains
@31'; Grades to Olive-brown, moist, silty CLAY with iron and
manganese stains
. .
. '.
---SM
:. .: ....Sample4
:: .: '.@35'
... "
:: ',: . .
" . .
'" '.
. .
R.DPos&..o .4.
@ 38': Gmdes to Olive-brown, moist, silty medium to coarse SAND
with iron and manganese stains
',~. '.:.
" . .
',' ....
5
6
@40': Grades to Olive-brown. moist. silty SAND with clay, micas and
iron and manganese stains
:', ,.:.0.:.
'.
.,. '.
. .
.......
: .
'.
... '.
. .
I 45~.'. .......
I', :.
I
" ,. .
'" '.
. .
:', ',~. '.:.
'.
..:......
I '.
50 '., "
I
I S5
I
PLE TYPES:
SPLIT SPOON
RING SAMPLE
.ULK SAMPLE
reS SAMPLE
Total Depth Logged 47'
Total Depth 50'
No Groundwater Encountered
Backfilled with Spoils 12/4/02
G GRAB SAMPLE
C CORE SAMPLE
TYPE OF TESTS:
SU SULFATE
OS DIRECT SHEAR
Me I\IIAXIMUM DENSITY
eN CONSOLIDATION
CR CORROSION
~.
_f$ci~
tl;< ':"%4
{sq,..
2P
HCC HYDROCOLLAPSE
HD HYDROMETER
SA SIEve ANALYSIS
AL ATTERBERG L.IMITS
EI eXPANSION INDEX
RV R-VALUE
CS CORROSION SUITE
Me MOISTURE CONTENT
MO MOISTURE & DENSITY
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
I
i~7ect
'rilling Co.
Hole Diameter
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-103
12-4-02
-
levation Top of Hole +/- 1112' Location See Map
.
~ '"
ci IV~ ui~ DESCRIPTION -
" - '"
I .c:_ z "'0 u; - "'00 "
:Eo> '" c_ ","'" "'. t-
-" .s " ;=0 _c -()
c." 0..0 Q. au. "" "''' (). '5
~I.l.. l!!..J 0 co.. ,-- _00
l- e> z E iiiw '" oc '0::) Logged By AVI "
'" 0.. - :;:0 0..
00 C () 00- '"
Lv , Sampled By AVI t-
o . . SM
" .... @ Surface: Red-brown, moist, silty SAND
- .' .'
.'
I '. '.
- .: , .
....
- .' ..
.....
'. '.
I '.
" ....
5- " ..
....
0: '0'
'. . ,
....
I .'
- '.
'.
- '.
. "
" @8.5'; Grades to Yellow-brown, moist, silty fine SAND with micas
I -.'. " "
10- "
. '.
.. 1 4
-:: '. '.
I '.
. "
.'
'. '.
-:. . '. 0113.5': Grades to Yellow-brown, moist,. silty SAND, friable with
I " .' - micas, iron and manganese stains
15-:: '. '.
'. ':\', Sample 2
- '.' ',':.@15'
"
I -::' '. '.
: .
'.
,. '. --- --- --
-- -- ~-r---------------------
MlM @ 18': Sharp horizontal contact to Olive-brown, moist, sandy SILT
- .' withcJay
I '.
20-.: 3 3 @ 20'; 01ive~brown. moist, sandy SILT, porous
- .'
r - ::
- "
'.
- :.
I .'
25-,. " @25': Fingering of white sand into matrix
- :.
--- -- f-- -- -- ~~--------------------
I - ML @26.5': Sharp contact to White Bishop tuff
~'3,'~,le5 n.~ H.",
'I I'MIMl @28': Sharp contact to Olive-brown, moist, fine sandy SILT with
- .' calcium carbonate stringers
'.
'^
PLe TYPES: TYPE OF TESTS: ,4$<;.
HCO HYDRO COLLAPSE CS CORROSION SUITE "
SPLIT SPOON G GRAB SAMPLE SU SULFATE He HYDROMETER MC MOISTURE CONTENT &!\W" .
RING SAMPLE C CORE SAMPLE es DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANALYSIS Me MOISTURE & DeNSITY %; i{'
~LK SAMPLE Me MAXIMUM DENSITY AL ATTERBERG LIMITS
BE SAMPLE CN CONSOLIDATION EI EXPANSION INDEX
CR CORROSION RV R-VALUE
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. ,?1
24"
Harveslon Phase II
Big Johnny's Drilling
Drive Weight
Sheet 1 of
Project No.
Type of Rig
2
110231-017
Buckel Auger
Drop 30"
See Below
I
1i;~7ect
IIrilling Co.
Hole Diameter
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-103
12-4-02
I -
evation Top of Hole +/_ 1112' Location See Map
0 .<:- ,,~ ui-:- DESCRIPTION J!J
- CIl
I .c_ .!! CIl Z CIlO 'iij ~...r CIlen "
0." .co> .S! " ;:0 c:_ .ac: ",. t-
O.o Q. "" -() -
,," !!!-' 0 ou. 00. CIl" (). 0
ou.. aim ,-- _en
Cl z E "" Oc: '5::) Logged By AVI "
'" "- C ::EO 0.
I en () en- ""
N . Sampled By AVI t-
30 4 6 ~MIML
- . .'
I - .: '. .
- . ..
'" : Sam~le 6 @33': Olive.brown, moist, fine sandy SILT, iron and manganese
I - :. . .@33 staining
.' --
35 -- -- f-- -- -SM f-~------------------__
.. . '. @35': Sharp contact to Olive-brown, moist, silty SAND
- :.: .'
'.
I _:: ' : .
.. . '.
.. j--- t-- -- i=-MlMi f-~---------------_____
--- --
@ 38': Grode to Olive-brown. moist, sandy SILT with clay
- . .'
I " "
40-.:
.'
'.
I - ::
-::. ':. .'
- :.
I .'
45 I
- I
I - I
-
-
I 50- Total Depth Logged 43'
- Total Depth 4,'
No Groundwater Encountered
I - Backfilled with Spoils 12/4/02
-
-
I SS-
M -
-
-
.
I '^
PLE TYPES: TYPE OF TESTS: HCO HYDROCOLLAPSE CS CORROSION SUITE &if'1"
SPLIT SPOON G GRAB SAMPLE SU SULFATE HO HYDROMETER MC MOISTURE CONTENT ~..
RING SAMPLE C CORE SAMPLE OS DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANALYSIS MD MOISTURE & DENSITY
;tL~
IUlK SAMPLE MO MAXIMUM DENSITY AL AnERBERG LIMITS .~:.~W[
CN CONSOLIDATION EI EXPANSION INDeX
UB5 SAMPLE CR CORROSION RV R-VALUE
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. ~
24"
HaNeston Phase II
Big JOhnny's Drilling
Drive Weight
Sheet 2 of
Project No.
Type of Rig
2
110231-017
Bucket Auger
Drop 30"
See Beiow
I
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG 8-104
_ate
roject
rilling Co.
Hole Diarneter 24"
levation Top of Hole +/-
I' ;;dj
c."
~u.
I
I
I
110
I
115
I
I 20
I
I 2S
I
PLE TYPES:
SPLIT SPOON
RING SAMPLE
IULK SAMPLE
USE SAMPLE
12-3-02
Sheet 1
Project No.
Type of Rig
of
2
110231-017
Bucket Auger
Drop 30"
Harveston Phase II
Big Johnny's Drilling
Drive Weight
Location
See Below
See Map
1147'
u
.:E tn
ll.o
l!!..J
Cl
~ '"
6 CD~ en-:- DESCRIPTION -
- '"
z "'0 'w - - "'C/l "
" ~o 1:_ ,,- "'. I-
_I: -u
Q. ou. "u .!!!S u, '0
E iiicu ell. 01: _C/l
", 'o::i Logged By AVI "
'" Q.. c :;:0 ll.
C/l U C/l- ",
Sampled By AVI I-
SP @ Surface: Red-brown, dry, fine to coarse SAND
'"
S
o
z
o
S
Sample 1
@5'
@ 7': Gray; dry to damp, fine to coarse SAND, friable, thinly bedded
'" "
. '
SM
(aj 12':Sharp horizonUJ"contact tc;'"Brown, damp,clayey:5"ilty SAND-
'- with iron stains
,', .......
: '
" . .
",' ....
@ 14': Olive, moist, silty, fine SAND \vith micas and manganese
nodules
:', .... ":'Samp!c2
::. :. .:@15'
. '
:', .: ....
: .
'.
'" "
:': '-:,":'
'.
... '.
, '
3
4
@ 20'; Red-brown, moist, silty fine SAND with micas, iron and
manganese staining
:', .: ','
: .
'.
... "
m
:', '-:. ',:.
SP
@ 23.5':GradestoBrowtL;noist:"""fine toc~rse SAND - - - - -
SM
- - CL-M
@2Mha~onrect~live-bro~~oi~ilryfin~~D---
@2~GrodestoOliv~lOi~lay~SILGortled------
G GRAB SAMPLE
C CORE SAMPLE
TYPE OF TEST5:
5U SULFATE
OS OIRECT SHEAR
MD MAXIMUM DENSITY
CN CONSOLIDATION
CR CORROSION
HCO HYDROCOLLAPSE
HD HYDROMETER
SA SIEVE ANALYSIS
AL ATTERBERG LIMITS
EI EXPANSION INDEX
RV R.VALUE
CS CORROSION SUITE
Me MOISTURE CONTENT
MD MOISTURE & DENSITY
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
I
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-104
I ~-
-"
0."
~u.
u
:em
0.0
!l!...J
Cl
..
~
2
Sheet 2 of 2
Harveston Phase II Project No. 110231-017
Big Johnny's Drilling Type of Rig Bucket Auger
Drive Weight See Below Drop 30"
1147' Location See Map
..
ci ,., ,,~ ui-:- DESCRIPTION -
- - ..
2 ..0 u; ~ . "en "
" ;:0 c_ ,,- "'. I-
_c -()
1i ou. "u .." u. '5
E -~ co. .-- _en
ID" ,., Oc 'is::l Logged By AVI "
'" Q.. ~ ::EO 0.
en c u <1)- ,.,
Sampled By AVI I-
12-3-02
W~;ect
1;lIIng Co.
Hole Diameter 24"
evatlon Top of Hole +1-
8M @ 30'; Brown, moist, silty SAND, micas, few caliche stringers,
manganese nodules
"
I .. '.
'. . ,
....
'. '.
I "
'.
.'
35 " "
'.
: : : Sample4
':@36'
.. '.
'.
I 40 '.
S 4
~\::
@ 33'; Olive-brown, moist to very moist, silty SAND, manganese
nodules
r:'"
I
,
--MIM
@ 3~ Olive-brow~ moistsilty SAND to sandy SIt T with manganes;-
nodules
CL-M
PR.oPas;;t . v,
@41': Olive-brown. moist clayey SILT with manganese nodules
SM
@ 43': Oljve.brow~ moist, silty SAND with manganese and iron staim
I 45 '-t'T
.' .... ..@4'
I . : 'If-i. . = = = =
'[j'--- -
. , .
, .'
--- -
I 50
'[)'---
I .~': :'.' :::: Samp!d
. .. @52'
---
I 55 8 14
)0
I
SP
@45'; Brown, moist, fine to coa~e SAND with ID;nganese -;md i~ -
stains
==~M~a~7t:Olive-brown.moi~iINS~D =========
---:-_ alA7.5': Olive-brown. mOist SILTwilh trace c..illY_ _ _ __ __
. MlM @48':Oiive-brown.- moiststltytme SAND
SP @ 4~ Rcd-brown~oistfin-;to~oars;SAND - - - - - - -
SM
@ 51 ': Olive-brown, mois~ silty SAND
SP
@ 52.5':Red-brown. moist, fine to ~arse SAND,friabl;- - - - -
rh
ML
SM
@ 54': Sharp contact to Olive-brow~ mois~sandySIL T with clay:- -
manganese and iron staining
Total Depth Logged 58'
Total Depth 60'
No Groundwater Encountered
Backfilled with Spoils 12/3/02
PLe TYPES:
SPLIT SPOON
RING SAMPLE
.ULK SAMPLE
ree SAMPLE
G GRAB SAMPLE
C CORE SAMPLE
TYPE OF TESTS:
SU SULFATE
DS DIRECT SHEAR
MD MAXIMUM DENSITY
CN CONSOLIDATION
CR CORROSION
HCO HYDROCOLLAPSe
HD HYDROMETER
SA SIEVE ANALYSIS
AL ATTERBERG LIMITS
EI EXPANSION INDEX
RV R-VALUE
CS CORROSION SUITE
MC MOISTURE CONTENT
MD MOISTURE & DENSITY
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
I
12-3-02
Ite
oject
rilling Co.
Hole Diameter 24"
evalion Top of Hole +/-
2
110231-017
Bucket Auger
Drop 30"
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-105
1127'
Harveston Phase II
Big Johnny's Drilling
Drive Weight
Location
Sheet 1
Project No.
Type of Rig
of
I "'- "
:E01 III
'Q.GI 0.0 ~
GIGI !!!...J
cLL. e> z
0
I
.' .' .
I 5
I
110
I
115
I
I 20
I
Samplel
& 3 @20'
'.
I 2S
I
'.
fL.E TYPES:
SPLIT SPOON
RING SAMPLE
.ULK SAMPLE
rBe SAMPLE
See Below
See Map
ci - Z' GI~ ui-:- DESCRIPTION
Z III 0 'iij ~ - lIlen
CI> ~o c_ ,,- ....
GI" _c -u
Q. ou. 00. IIlGl U.
E -~ .-- _en
IllGl ,., oc 'c;:; Logged By AVI
... 11. ~ :;;0
en c u en-
Sampled By AVI
SP @ Surface: Red-brown. moist, clayey fine to coarse SAND
-~---ML
@ 9': Sharp contactto Olive-bra;;". moist SILT withtraC;; c1ay- - -
@1~~d-bro~,mois~ayeyfi~~rueS~D-----
@ IF Grades to Olive-bfO\vn:- moist SILT with micas - - - - -
SP
ML
--CL-ML~~GrudesroOliv~bro~moi~lay~SIL~oistureincreasing
with depth
I
I
, I
_J____~---------------------
I ML-C @20': Grades to Olive, moist, silty CLAY, manganese nodules, micas
. and calcium carbonate stringers
M/M
@2~O]i~-b~~moistc]aycy,sandySIL~ithiro~~---
- manganese stains
CL-M
@2~Oli~-brow~oi~I~~SILTwjthmanganes~diron--
stains
SM
@2~ha~ontact~li~-browuoi~il~S~~~ic~-
nd manganese and iron stains A.
G GRAB SAMPLE
C CORE SAMPLE
TYPE OF TESTS:
SU SULFATE
OS DIRECT SHEAR
MD MAXIMUM DENSITY
CN CONSOLIDATION
CR CORROSION
CS CORROSION SUITE
MC MOISTURE CONTENT
MD MOISTURE & DENSITY
HCO HYDROCOLLAPSE
HD HYDROMETER
SA SIEVE ANALYSIS
AL ATTERBERG LIMITS
EI EXPANSION INDEX
RV R-VALUE
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
III
-
III
GI
l-
e
GI
0.
,.,
I-
I
t",,".
i:....-.
,
i::;:~::
','.
v::..
I
I
r
~\
I
I ~~~ect
lrilling Co.
Hole Diameter 24"
levation Top of Hole +/_
12-3-02
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-105
Sheet 2 of 2
Harveston Phase /I Project No. 110231-017
Big Johnny's Drilling Type of Rig Bucket Auger
Drive Weight See Below Drop 30"
1127' Location See Map
.?;- '"
0 aJ~ 1Ii--:- DESCRIPTION -
- '"
z ,"0 'iij ~ - '"Ul "
" ;:0 c_ ::1- "'. ...
_c -u
C. QU- "" ,!!l.l!! u, '0
E -~ Cl>. OC _Ul
ID" >- '0:;; Logged By AVI "
'" 0. ~ :;;0 I>.
Ul C U Ul- >-
Sampled By AVI ...
I
t
I
r
I 40
r
I
r
I
f
I
10
LE TYPES;
SPLIT SPOON
RING SAMPLE
I BULK SAMPLE
TUBE SAMPLE
.c_
-"
1>."
~u..
"
:E",
1>.0
"'..J
(;
'"
"
-
o
z
30
... '.
" '.~ ":'
',' ....
,', .......
" :.
35
... "
:". .': Sample 2
': ": '.'@35'
'.
::. '.:. ',:.
" . .
'" '.
. '.
: .
" . .
... "
....
" . "
: .
45
50
55
_ _ GL,M
SM
-~live-bro~moi~il~CL~~cl~eySIUwithiro~nd-
manganese stains /
@32.~~~~~~~stl~~~m~M~~~~a-
manganese nodules
--CLwM @3~GrndestoOliv~oi~il~CL~roclay~SIUwithiron-
and manganese stains
SM
@ 38.5':Red-olivewbrown-:1"noisGilty SAND with iron and -;anganese
stains
Total Depth 44'
Tolal Depth 45'
No Groundwater Encountered
Backfilled with Spoils 12/3/02
G GRAB SAMPLE
C CORE SAMPLE
TYPE OF TESTS:
SU SULFATE
OS DIRECT SHEAR
MD MAXIMUM DENSITY
eN CONSOLIDATION
CR CORROSION
HCC HYOROCOLLAPSe
HD HYDROMETER
SA SIEVE ANALYSIS
AL ATTERBERG LIMITS
EI EXPANSION INDEX
RV R.VAlUE
CS CORROSION SUITE
MC MOISTURE CONTENT
MD MOISTURE & DENSITY
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
4,z.-
I
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-106
Ite
oject
rilling Co,
Hole Diameter 24"
evation Top of Hole +/-
12-4-02
Harveston Phase II
Big Johnny's Drilling
Drive Weight
Location
Sheet 1
Project No.
Type of Rig
of
2
110231-017
Bucket Auger
Drop 30"
1150'
See Below
See Map
I "'-
'l::"
-"
~LL
"
:e",
0..0
l!!..J
l.?
"'
S
o
z
0 ~ Q)~ ui~ DESCRIPTION J!l
- "'
z ",0 'iij - - "'Vl "
" ~o c_ ,,- "'. t-
_c -u
Q. OLL "" "''' u. '0
E -- co.. ,-- _Vl
Ill" ,., Oc '0::; Logged By AVI "
'" 0.. C ::;::0 0..
Vl U Vl- ,.,
Sampled By AVI t-
SP @ Surface: Red-brown. moist, clayey fine to coarse SAND
0
I . .
. .
I 5
I
I 10
I
15
I
20
I
25 .. . ",
:", '.:. ',:.
'.
. . ....
I ,', .... '.:.
"
.. , ",
:', ........
PlE TYPES:
SPLIT SPOON
RING SAMPLE
IULK SAMPLE
USE SAMPLE
@7.5': Grades to Red-brown. moist. fine to coarse SAND with micas,
friable
@ 8.5': Red-brown, moist, clayey, fine to coarse SAND with micas
4
@ 10': Red.brown, moist. clayey fine to coarse SAND, porous
~--T-
_J--CL'M ~~Oli~.brow~oi"cl~~SILTpodswit~icas----
Sample 3
@15'
2
5
- - -SP @1~ Red.bfOwl1~oist~Jayey fin-;-t~oars~AND with micas and-
iron stains interbedded with olive-brown, moist, silty SAND
p
- - -8M @ 24.5':Sharp contact to Olive-brown. --U;oist. -;nty SAND withmi~,~
iron and manganese stains
@29': Grades to Yellow-brown, moist, silty SAND with micas and
G GRAB SAMPLe
C CORE SAMPLe
TYpe OF TESTS:
SU SULFATE
OS DIRECT SHEAR
MO MAXIMUM DENSITY
CN CONSOLIDATION
CR CORROSION
HCO HYDROCOLLAPSE
HD HYDROMETER
SA SIEVE ANALYSIS
AL ATTERBERG LIMITS
EI EXPANSION INDEX
RV R.VALUE
CS CORROSION SUITE
Me MOISTURE CONTENT
MD MOISTURE & DENSITY
;:$<;
.&t/1S&t
i1Jij,
%",.~
" -:%~",
4?
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
I
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-106
Ite
oject
iIIing Co.
iole Diameter 24"
evation Top of Hole +/-
12-4-02
Harveston Phase II
Big Johnny's Drilling
Drive Weight
Location
Sheet 2
Project No.
Type of Rig
of
2
110231-017
Bucket Auger
Drop 30"
1150'
See Below
See Map
I U
"'- :Em III
-01 .e
CoOl Coo
Qlu. !!!..J 0
C Cl 2:
30
"
I '.
'.
'. "
'.
35
..
I
0 .;:. Ql<;e <<Ii-:- DESCRIPTION S
- III
2: 11I0 'OJ ~ IIIVl ~
01 ~o c_ ",,",, ",.
_c -0
1i. ou. QlU 11I01 O. 'l5
-~ CCo -- _Vl
E III 01 ,., oc 'o::i Logged By AVI 01
'" D.. C ::;:0 Co
Vl 0 Vl- ,.,
Sampled By AVI I-
.;l .i.. 1M Jron stains
~03':Graaes to Ohve-brown, mOIst, sanay SILT WIth micas ana
iron stains
CL-M @ 3~ Sharp contact to Olive-brown:- moist:""""clayey SILT with - - -
manganese and iron stains and manganese nodules
I
45
Total Depth Logged 38'
Total Depth 40'
No Groundwater Encountered
Backfilled with Native 12/4/02
50
i-..:..'-
I i<.:.
..
55
I
U'LE TYPES:
SPLIT SPOON
RING SAMPLE
rLK SAMPLE
BE SAMPLE
G GRAB SAMPLE
C CORE SAMPLE
TYPE OF TESTS:
SU SULFATE
OS DIRECT SHEAR
MD MAXIMUM DENSITY
eN CONSOLlDATlON
CR CORROSION
HCO HYDROCOLLAPSE
HO HYDROMETER
SA SIEVE ANALYSIS
AL ATTERBERG LIMITS
EI EXPANSION INDEX
RV RNALUE
CS CORROSION SUITE
Me MOISTURE CONTENT
Me MOISTURE & DENSITY
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
4k
I
te 9-27-01
ject
lrillingCo.
tie Diameter 8"
ovation Top of Hole t 1086'
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-10
Sheet ~ of
Project No.
Type of Rig
Harveston
eal Pac
Drive Weight
Location
140lbs
See Map
2-
110231-004-
HSA
Drop 30"
I 0 >> ~';f. ..
en""":" DESCRIPTION. -
- - ..
u Z ..0 U; ... . "en ~
:CO> .. ~o c... =- .. .
, .. .. _c -(J
, C.o - Q. Qll. ..u Ill" (J. ...
E...J 0 -... CC. -- _en 0
z E ID.. oc o:i ..
c:l .. a. ~ :;0 Logged By AS/SER ~
en c (J en-
Sampled By AS/SER
SP ALLUVTTTM COal) ,
@ Surface: Light brown, damp, loose, fine to come SAND b
... o. 1 8 117.2 13.1 SM @ 2o,-D8rlc brown, m-;;-ist to -;,;;;; loose. silty SAND - - - - - -
'. .' Sample 3
... .: .' @0-5' SU
. :.
'.
.0. o.
. . ..
.0.00 2 59 ..SM. OLDER ALLUVTITM 10aon. Dark brown, moist to we~ dense. silty
.. 126.8 11.0 SAND with lnlces of clay ..
. . .
. ": .
'.
. . '.
000"
0: .
PAUBA FORMATION IOn) Olive. damp. very stiff, sandy SILT
4 46 ML @ 10': Olive brown, with calcium carbonate, non-po'f!Jus.
97.4 26.5
5 40 CL
86.7 29.2
@ IS: iig1ii imJw;, damo;;e;y Stiff. siltY CiA Y with ~ci';; - -
carbonate, bighly weathered.
6 43
ML @ 20' Darkbrown, dmiiP. stiff-:- SiLT - - - - - - - - - -
7 23
ML @ 25': Brown, with 1nlces of carbonate
30
~ TYPES:
UT SPOON
G SAMPLE
!UU< SAMPLE
.UBE SAMPLE
).,-)"
G GRAB SAMPLE
C CORE SAMPLE
TYPE OF TESTS:
SU SULFATE
OS DIRECT SHEAR
MD MAXIMUM DENSITY
eN CONSOLIDATION
CR CORROSION
CO COllAPSE
HD HYDROMETER
SA SIEVE ANALYSIS
AL ATTERSERG LIMITS
EI EXPANSION INDEX
RV R.VALUE
~II~~
~::;E
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIA TES, INC.
I
9-27-01
GEOTECHNICAL BORING lOG B-10
Sheet -L of
Project No.
Type of Rig
Harveston
eal Pac
Drlve Weight
Location
140lbs
See Map
-L
110231-004-
HSA
Drop 30"
I~ect
rillingCO.
.e Diameter 8"
aration Top of Hole + 1086'
>. GJ';/!.. "'
0 Ii--:- DESCRIPTION -
- - "'
u "' Z ",0 c;; .. . "'Ill t!
I .c_ :CCl c... ,,- ...
-" " " ~ _c -(.)
II~ ~ 10.0 - ii "u .." (.). ...
f!!..J 0 QCI. -- _Ill 0
Z E -.. oc
Cl Ill" ~ ::;;0 o::i Logged By AS/SER "
.. ll. CI.
III Q (.) 1Il- ~
. Sampled By AS/SER
30 8 90111" ML @30':Darkbrown,damp,hard,sandySaTtasiltyCLAY
II ~
I -
-
35- 9 60 ML @35': Olive brown, damp, hard, sandy SaT.
~ -. --- -- -- --- -- e-SM -~----------------------
. " @ 361: Olive brown, damp, very dense, silty fine to coarse sand.
- : : .'
. . : .
I -'. . '.
..
. . ..
- . .
.. . : .
40 -- 1--- -- -,--,- ~-----------------------
10 90/10" ML @40': Olive brown, damp. hard, sandy SaT. .
I ~
-
t~
I =
-
t~ Total Depth 4134'
I = No Groundwater Encountered
Bacldilled with Native 9-27-01
_5~
I =
- -
'0 - A<;o
lYPE OF TESTS: 'CO COLLAPSE
tlYPES: SU SULFATE HD HYDROMETER ~II
SPOON G GRAB SAMPU DS DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANALYSIS
SAMPLE C CORE SAMPLE MD MAXIMUM DENSITY AL ATTERBERG UMITS ~ . =-
ULK SAMPLE CN CONSOUDAnON EI EXPANSION INDEX ~~--.s
JBE SAMPLE CR CORROSION RV R.VALUE
LEIGHTON AND ASSOC1A TES, INC.
I
9-27-01
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-11
Sheet ---1- of
Project No.
Type of Rig
Harveston
Cal Pac
Drive Weight
Location
140lbs
See Map
-L
110231-004-
HSA
Drop 30"
'~ect
f..mng Co.
e Diameter
vation Top of Hole +
8"
I 0 ... ..
e'/!. h DESCRIPTION -
- - ~
u Z ..0 in ~ - =~
=- :EQl .. c... ,,-
-., ., ., ;:0 _c -(J
c.., c.o - is. QII. .,u .,., (J. ...
.,u.. E-l 0 QC. -- =rIl 0
I z E -.. oc
Q C) Ill., ~ ::;;0 0::1 Logged By AS .,
.. ~ ~
I/) Q (J 1/)-
N ~ Sampled By AS
I 0 SP ALLUVIlJM (Oa])
-'" . .' . @ Surface: Light brown, dry, loose, fine to come SAND
--:.' . . --- f- -- -- SP::SM ~-----------------------
. . 1 13 @ 2': Dark brown, damp, loose, fine to come SAND; trace of silt and
I - :: ~~ . 111.8 8.6 clay
-'. .
'.'
I 5- ::,..
-0. .
- .'
. .
.....
.. " ". 2 34 SM OLDER AI.LUVJUM (0.0])
I. - : : .. Sample3 117.3 13.0 @ 7': Dark brown, damp, medium dense, silty fine to come SAND
. . : :' @5-10'
- ::. . '.
. ..
10 ML PAUBA FORl\1.ATION (00)
II - @ ] 0': Dark brown, damp, very dense SILT
- ML @ 12': Dark brown, damp, very stiff, SILT; common fine mica CO,
4 25
II - 90.0 31.2 HCN=
0.00%
-
15-
I -
- 5 9 ML @ 17': Olive brown, damp, stiff SILT with calcium carbonate SA
I ~
! 20- ML @20': Olive brown, damp, clayey SILT with calcium carbonate
i
I -
- ML @ 22': Olive brown, damp, hard SILT with calcium carbonate stringers
6 51
-
I -
25-
I - 7 49 ML
- @27':Olivebrown,damp,stiffSILTwithcalcium.carbonate
I -
- . .:\1
1D 28.5', No GW Encountered, BF/w N.tive 9-27-01
30
IE TYPES: TYPE OF TESTS: CO COllAPSE
SU SULFATE HO HYDROMETER ~II
IT SPOON G GRAB SAMPLE OS DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANALYSIS
G SAMPLE c CORE SAMPLE MD MAXIMUM DENSITY AL ATTERBERG UMITS ~ :;=::
Jut SAMPLE CN CON5qUOATlON EI EXPANSION INDEX ~~
E SAMPLE CR CORROSION RV R.VALUE
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIA TES, INC.
1091'
I
Ite
oject
Drilling Co. .
tie Diameter 8"
vation Top of Hole + 1091'
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG 8-12
9-27-01
I 0 >> ;z,~ ..
Ii'"":' DESCRIPTiON -
- - Ul
U Z ..0 u; ... . "Ul ~
.:: :Coo Ul Co. ;,- ca.
,. -'Iii .! GI ~o _C -(J
Co,. Coo is.. i5Il- CDU ..CD (J. ..
i GIlL. l!!...J 0 -... QCo -- _Ul 0
Q Z E 1lIG1 ~ oc 'O::i ,.
(!) ca II. ::;;0 Logged By AS ~
Ul Q (J Ul-
" Sampled By AS
0 SP ALLUVIUM 10.1)
I - ". . @ Surface: Light brown, dty, loose, fine III coarse SAND
. . '.' .}---- ---
-- t-SM r~------------------____
" . '. 1 60 115.7 2.8 @ 2': Brown III olive brown, dty, dense, silty SAND; visible porousity
I - : . .'
. .
. .
": .
'. . .
" . '.
. ..
5 . . 2 75 SM PAUBA FORMATION IOn)
I .. . '.
. . .. 116.9 13.1 @ 5': Dark brown to olive brown, moist, very dense, silty SAND;
- . . ~ .~
, common calcium carbonate stringers .
-:: . : .
. .
. '.
. , ..
I - . .
: '
--- -- -- --- -- 1--- ------------------------
10- 3 24 ML @ 10': Olive brown, moist. very stiff SILT
I -
-
I :.:/---- -- -- --- -- 1--- r---------------________
- . .'
. . .
. ": .
15-:: . SM @ 15': Olive III light brown, dty, dense, silty SAND
. '. 4 42
I . . ..----
- -- -- ~-- -- -.- ~-----------------------
ML @ 16': Olive brown, moist, very stiff SILT with muscovite
-
I -
.
I -
I 20-
5 62 ML @20':Olivebrown,moist,hardSILTwitb traces of fine sand
I -
-
-
I -
25- Total Deptb 2J.S
- No GrouiJdwater Encountered
I Backfilled witb N.tive 9-27-01
-
-
t- 4~
TYPE OF TESTS: CO COLLAPSE
lr TYPES: SU SULFATE HD HYDROMETER ~II
SPOON G GRAB SAMPLE DS DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANAl. VSIS
G SAMPLE C CORE SAMPLE MD MAXIMUM DENSITY AL ATTERSERG UMITS ;:: . =~
~ULK SAMPLE CN CONSOUDATION EI EXPANSION INDEX ~~.=
'UBE SAMPLE CR CORROSION RV R.VALUe
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIA rES, INC.
Harveston
Cal Pac
Drive Weight
Location
Sheet 1
Project No.
Type of Rig
of -L
110231-004-
HSA
Drop 30"
I
I
!
I
17ect
'rllling Co.
lie Diameter
vation Top of Hole +
9-27-01
8"
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG 8-13
Sheet -L
Project No.
Type of Rig
of --1--
110231-004-
HSA
Drop 30"
I .c_
-..
.g.;
le~
.0
- . . . .
. .
"
:E",
Cloo
E..J
C)
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I 2.0 -
I
I
I
I
- :.:
:....
-.... .
"00 ..
5
- :.,
.:....
- :'.' .
"0- ..
- .......
00.... ..
- '.:. '.
l.o-~' :
.0.. e.
- . :. ::
. '.
-.: . .
.... o.
- : '. .'
..
.
- :'. :.:
15- . :. .::
.. 0: ..
-
-
-
-
-
-
25-
-
"
-
-
3D
tLETYPES:
UT SPOON
G SAMPLE
LK SAMPLE
ruBE SAMPLE
Harveston
Cal Pac
Drive Weight
Location
140lbs
See Map
1092'
0 >- fIJ'if. ..
iii--=- DESCRIPTION -
- - en
.. Z ..0 ii .. - "C/l ~
c... =- ...
.. .. ~ _c -u
- 'E. .." .... (.). ...
0 eClo -- _C/l 0
z E -- OC
Ill.. ~ ::eo 'O::i Logged By AS ..
.. 11. Clo
C/l e u C/l- ~
Sampled By AS
SP ALLUVTIJM 10al)
@ Surface: Light brown, dry, loose, fine to coarse SAND
-- -- --- - - Si>:SM -@ 2~D~ broMi;" damp--;- ~edium d~~ to c-;;-';; SAND - - - -
1 23
118.8 9.1
.
4
-----
2
49 SP-SM OLDER ALLTTVTIJM 10ao1)
125.7 11.1 @5':Brown,moist, dense SAND with traces of silt
CO.
HCN=
-0.15%
-- 3
nl11" - - - -6.7- -SM -@ 100: BroWn, damp-;-~dense,siliYfu1etO.;o.;; sAiii5(disnllted'-
1.01.3 sample)
47 95.7 11.1 SM
-----t-Mi
@ 15': Brown, damp. dense, silty fine SAND
-~----------------------
@ 16': Brown, damp, stiff sandy SILT
CO,
HCN=
-0.31%
5
38
ML PAlffiAFORMATIONIOn\ .
@ 2.0': Olive brown, damp, stiff SILT with trace of fine sand
6
22
ML @ 25': Olive brown, damp, stiff SILT with calcium cariJonate
Total Depth 265'
No Groundwater Encountered
BacldiJled with Native 9-27-.01
4i
G GRAB SAMPLE
C CORE SAMPLE
TYPE OF TESTS:
SU SULFATE
OS DIRECT SHEAR
MD MAXIMUM DENSITY
eN CONSOUCATlON
CR CORROSION
~lil=~
::...~ 48'S ,
CO COLLAPSE
HD HYDROMETER
SA SIEVE ANALYSIS
AL ATTERBERG UMITS
EI EXPANSION INDEX
RV RNALUE
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIA TES, INC.
I
Ie
roject
eling Co.
e Diameter 8"
tion Top of Hole + 1084'
GEOTECHNiCAL BORING lOG 8-14
9-27-01
I >> ..
0 ..';/. DESCRIPTION -
- - ......,. ..
U Z ..0 Ui .. . "0 ~
.r:_ :CO> .. C... ::1- .. .
-.. .. .. ;::0 _c -t)
el... el.o - ii ~ "u VI" t). ...
..... l!!..J 0 Qel. -- _0 0
I z E -.. oc
Q Cl Ill.. ~ :;;0 'O::i Logged By AS ..
.. ll. ~
III Q t) 0-
.. . Sampled By AS
I 0 SP ALLUVTIJM IOal)
-' . .' . @ Surface: Light brown, dry, loose, fine to coarse SAND
. .
.' .
-- --- -- -SM- -~----------------------
.. . '. I 63/11" 107.3 7.7 @ 2': Light brown, dry, very dense, silty fine SAND
I - : : ..
. .
. . : .
-'. . .
.. . '.
. . .
115 . 2 70/11" 98.5 4.8 ML P A DBA FORMA nON lOp) ..
@5': Olive brown, damp, stiff sandy Sn.T
-
I .
-
10 . .1---- --- -- -SM' ~---------~-------------
I " . '. 3 31 @ 10': Olive brown, damp, very stiff to hard Sn.T with interbedderi SA
- : : .' light brown. damp, medium. dense, fine sand lenses
'. . : .
'.
" . '.
. . ..
. . .
: .
- :'. . .
. '.
. . .'
15 1---- 1--- -- -Mi' -~----------------------
4 27 @ IS': Olive brown, damp, very stiffSn.T with calcium carbonate DS
- 101.1 16.0
. -
II -
20- 5 44 70.7 49.6 ML @20':Olivebrown,moist,stiffSn.Twithcalciumcarbonate;tip:
I - Light brown, moist, hard clay
. .
I ~
25- Total Depth 21.5'
.1 - No Groundwater Encountered
Backfilled with Native 9-27.01
I ..:
I .
. ~
30
I TYPES: TYPE OF TESTS: CO COlLAPSE
SU SULFATE He "HYDROMETER ~II=~
IT SPOON G GRAB SAMPLE OS DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANALYSIS
G SAMPLE C CORE SAMPLE MD MAXlMUM DENSITY AL ATTERBERG LIMITS
ULK SAMPLE CN CONSOUDATlON EI EXPANSION INDEX ~:;~
E SAMPLE CR CORROSION RV R-VALUE
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIA TES, INC.
HarvestDn
Cal Pac
Drive Weight
Location
Sheet-L
Project No.
Type of Rig
of -L
110231-004-
HSA
Drop 30"
140lbs
See Map
I
ted
9-27-01
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG 8-15
Sheet --.L.- of
Projed No.
Type of Rig
Harveston
Cal Pac
Drive Weight
Location
140lbs
See Map
1
110231-004-
HSA
Drop 30"
'riiiing Co.
Ie Diameter
vation Top of Hole ..
B"
lOBO'
u
:Co
Q.o
E...I
Cl
III
-
o
z
ci >. fIl'#. ..
vi-:- DESCRIPTION -
- - ..
z ..0 Oi .. . "en ~
.. ;:0 C... ::l- to .
_c -(.l
Q. QI&. ..u .... (.l. '0
CQ. -- _en
E -.. oc
Ill.. ~ ::;;0 o::i Logged By AS ..
to no Q.
en C (.l en- ~
Sampled By AS
SP ALLUVITJM (Oal)
@ Surface: Light brown. dry, loose, fine to COllISe SAND
-- I
34 - - - - - - SM - -@ 2'?i.ighibr;"wii;" ~ to-m-;ist, medi~ dense,-fin-; to"c~-; SAND -
111.1 8.1
..
..00"
. '.
-.: ....
. . o.
5-.: .
. "0".
'.
'0' 00
o. 00
. .
...00
-. :. ::
-.: '.: '.
'0' o.
10- . :. ::
. ": .
2
82/11" SM
122.6 12.4
OLDER ALLUVITJM (Oaol)
@ 7': Dark brown. damp, very dease, silty fme to meduint SAND;
some coarse sand
co,
HCN=
-0.09%
- :'.. "
'. 00
- . .
. ": .
3
28
SM @ 12': Medium brown, damp, medium dense, silty fine SA.1'ID; mica
SM PAIJBA FORMATION (On)
@ 13': Olive brown. damp, medium dease, silty, fine SAND
--
..
. .
".. .
---
4
32 - - - - - r- ill - -@ 17': Light b;;;n, ~ moist, stiff, cJB.Yey SILT- - - - - - - -
@ 18': Olive brown. moist, stiff SILT with traces of clay and calcium
carbonate
-
-
20-
5
18
ML @20':Olivebrown.moist,stiffSILT
I
-
-
-
zs-
-
Total Depth 21.5'
No Groundwater Encountered
Backfilled with Native 9-27-01
I
It
w:_~~~~
aad SAMPLE
'ULK SAMPLE
ueE SAMPLE
~
-5\
G GRAB SAMPLE
C CORE SAMPLE
TYPE OF TESTS:
SU SULFATE
OS DIRECT SHEAR
MD MAXIMUM DENSITY
eN CONSOUDATlON
CR CORROSION
CO COlLAPSE
HD HYDROMETER
SA SIEVE ANALYSIS
AL ArrERBERG LIMITS
EI EXPANSION INDEX
RV R-VALUE
::;;11
;;:: -
;::L-=---=='::
~~
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIA rES, INC.
I
9-27-01
GEOTECHNICAL BORiNG LOG 8-16
Sheet ~ of
Project No.
Type of Rig
Harveston
Car Pac
Drive Weight
Location
140lbs
See Map
-----L-
110231-004-
HSA
Drop 30"
I;ect
)rilllng Co.
lie Diameter S"
vatlon Top of Hole + 1072'
, 0 >- m?ft. ..
en""':" DESCRIPTION -
- - ..
,c_ u Z ..0 0; ... " "II) ~
:e= .. c.... =- ...
-.. .. .. ~o _c -u
0... 0.0 - is. 01'- ..u .... u. ....
"II. E...I 0 co. -- _II) 0
z E -.. Oc
i c c:J m.. CO :;0 '0:) Logged By AS ..
.. II. 0.
II) C U 11)- ~
Sampled By AS
0 SP AllIN1TJM (Oa!)
I - '. . @ Surface: Light brown, dIy, loose, fine to coarse SAND with organics
. . .' . --- --- I-SM- r~--------------________
--
" . " I 11 @ 2': Dark brown, damp to moist, loose, silty fine SAND
. . .' 115.6 8.8
I - . , . .
: .
-:. , . ,
. '.
. . "
5 , . 2 71111" SM OLDER AllIN1TJM (Oaol) CO,
. '. 124.8 4.1
I . " @5': Darli: brown, damp, very dense, silty fine to coarse SAND HCN=
- . : ' . -1.48%
.. . : .
-:. . . .
. '.
- . . .'
I . .
. . : .
- :'. ' .
. '.
..
10 . . 3 86/11" SM PAUBA FORMA nON (00)
" . '.
I - : : " 108.6 8.3 @ 10'; Brown to light red brown, damp, very dense, siity fbe SAND
.. . : .
-::. . .
. '.
. . ..
- . .
I .; . : .
-:', . ,
. '.
. ..
15 -- r-- -- -.- ~-----------------------
4 34 ML @ 15': Olive, very moist, stiff SILT with calcium carbonate
II .-
-
-
I . -
120-
5 21 ML @20':Olivebrown,moist,stiffSILT
I -
-
-
I -
25-
Total Depth 21.5'
- No Groundwater Encountered
II Backfilled with Native 9-27-01
-
-
It - :5z...
TYPE OF TESTS: CO COUAPSE
IPLE TYPES: SU SULFATE HD HYDROMETER ~II
If SPOON G GRAS SAMPLE OS DIRECT SHEAR SA Sieve ANALYSIS
G SAMPLE C CORE SAMPLE MD MAXIMUM DENSITY AL ATTERBERG UMITS ~ ===
LK SAMPLE CN CONSOUDATION EI EXPANSION INDEX ~--S
iUBE SAMPLE CR CORROSION RV R.VALUE
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIA TES, INC.
I
9-27-01
GEOTECHNiCAL BORiNG lOG B-17
Sheet ~ of
Project No.
Type of Rig
Harveston
CalPac
Drive Weight
Location
140lbs
See Map
1
110231-004-
HSA
Drop 30'
Ie
ject
)rilllng Co.
lie Diameter 8"
vation Top of Hole + 1069'
, ci >. tIl~ 01
oh- DESCRIPTION -
- - m
" Z 010 ii .. . OIrn ~
r._ :E", m c... :o- m.
-.. .. .. ;;:0 _c -'"
Co.. Coo - Q. cu- .." m" ",. ...
"u. E....l 0 CCo -- _rn 0
z E -.. oc
i c. Cl Ill.. ~ :;;0 0::) Logged By AS ..
m II. Co
rn C '" rn- ~
~ Sampled By AS
0 SP ALUNTlJM lOan
I c'" . . . @ Surface: Light brown, dry, loose, fine to come SAND
. .
- . . --- f---- -- I--SM ~-----------------------
" . '. I 38 @ 2'; Dark brown, slightly damp, dense, silty fine to coarse SAND
. . .. 128.6 8.1
I -. .
c.: : .
.. . '.
. . .'
S 2 25/11" SM PAUBA FORMATION IOn) CO,
I . '. 1163 4.4
- : : .' @ 5'; Brown to olive brovm, moist, dense, silty fine to coarse SAND; HCN-
reddish veins -0.50'10
-::. : .
. '.
. . ..
I - . .
.. . : .
- ::. . '.
. ..
10 1---- -- --- -- -.- ~-----------------------
3 54 ML @ 10': Olive brown, moist, stiff, fine sandy SILT CN
I - 113.2 11.3
c
-
I -
15-
4 40 ML @ 15': Olive brown, moist, stiffSll.T with traces affine sand
I -
-
I -
20-
I -
-
-
I -
25-
Total Depth 16.5'
I - No Grouildwater Encountered
Backfilled with Native 9-27-01
-.
- .
I c 53-
30
~PLE TYPES: TYPE OF TESTS: CO COlLAPSE
SU SULFATE HO HYDROMETER .I~
IUT SPOON G GRAB SAMPLE OS DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANALYSIS
G SAMPLE C CORE SAMPLE MO MAXIMUM OENSITY AL ATTERBERG LIMITS
LKSAMPLE . CN CONSOUDATJON EI EXPANSION INDEX ~-= -.s
TUBE SAMPl.E CR CORROSION RV R.VALUE
I
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIA TES, INC.
I
9-27-01
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG 8-18
Sheet -1- of
Project No.
Type of Rig
Harveston
Gal Pac
Drive Weight
Location
140lbs
See Map
1
110231-004-
HSA
Drop 30"
teet
iIIingCo.
t Diameter S"
ation Top of Hole + 106S'
Ii;o; ~ '"
0 ~f!!. .,;-,. DESCRIPTION -
"'
u Z - OJ ... . "'Ill {!.
:Eo "' ",0 c... =- ...
.. .. ~ _c -u
c... C.o - C. ..u .... u. ...
I.~U. E....I 0 cc. -- _Ill 0
E -... oc
Cl Z ID.. 1:- ::;;0 0:) Logged By AS ..
. .. ~ c.
III C U 1Il- ?:
I I.. Sampled By AS
0 SP ALLUVIUM (Oa])
I - . . . . @ Surface: Light brown, dry, loose, fine tD come SAND
. . .' . -- --- -- f-SM' ~~----------------------
. . I 24 @ 2': Darl<: brown, moist, medium dense, silty fine tD coarse SAND
" . '.
- . . .' 105.4 7.0
I . . .
": ..
- '. . .
.. . '.
. . ..
5- . OW 0"
I - .: ": .
. .
" . '.
. . ..
.. , '. 2 62/11" 123.1 6.1 SM PAIJBA FORMATION (00\
- . . .' @ 7': Darl<: brown, moist, dense, silty fine tD coarse SAND
I . . .
.. '. .
- .: .
. .
.. . '.
. . .'
10- 0" 00
I - "0" .
'.
. '.
- . . .'
000" 78/10" SM @ 12': Brown, moist, dense, silrf fiDe to coarse SAND
0: . 3
- '. . . 106.0 2.6
I . '.
. . ..
.. 00.."
": ..
15- '. . .
. '.
. .,
I " :. 0" 0"
0: ..
- '. . .
. '. SM @ 17': Light brown tD olive, moist, dense, fiDe tD coarse SAND with
. . . 4 38
- '. 00." calcium carbonate
'.
I -
20-
I -
-
-
I -
25-
ToW Depth 18.5'
I - No Groundwater Encountered
Backfilled with Native 9-27-01
-
-
I - 9\
30
TYPE OF TESTS: . CO COLLAPSE
.:JLE TYPES: SU SULFATE HD HYDROMETER ~UI=~
~ SPOON G GRAB SAMPLE OS DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANALYSIS
G SAMPLE C CORE SAMPLE MO MAXIMUM DENSITY AL ATTERBERG UMITS
, LK SAMPLE CN CONSOUDATlON EI EXPANSION INDEX ~~ -
use SAMPLE CR CORROSION RV R.VALUE ~ ~
I
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIA rES, INC.
I
9-27-01
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-19
Sheet ---1- of
Project No.
Type of Rig
Harveston
Cal Pac
Drive Weight
Location
140lbs
See Map
1
110231-004-
HSA
Drop 30"
tect
illing Co.
~ Diameter
~tion Top of Hole +
8"
Its- ci >. ~';1. ..
1Ii--:- DESCRIPTION -
- - ..
.. z ..0 -;; .. . ..u) .!
:ECl .. C:... :1- ...
.. .. ~ _c: -0
"," "'0 - Q. .... .... c. ...
.... e.... 0 Q'" -- _U) 0
II. Z E -.. oc:
rQ .. C) Ill.. ~ ::;;0 o::i Logged By AS ..
.. lI. '"
U) Q 0 U)~ ~
. Sampled By AS
0 SP ALLlNIUM (Oan
I - .' . . . @Surface:Lightbrown, dry, loose. fine to coarse SAND
. . .' . -- f--- -.-C- ------------------------
--
I 10 ML @2': Darl<: brown, mois~ soft, sandy Sll..T
I - 114.4 8.8
-
5 . . 2 46 SM OLDER ALLTNTllM (Oao])
'.
I - . . .' 121.0 11.7 @ 5': Darl: brown, mois~ dense, silty SAND
. .-
: ": .
'.
" . '-
- . . .'
. .'
: "."
- '. .
.. . --
'.' ..
10 3 39 SM PAUBA FORMATION (Ou)
.. . '.
I - . . .- @ 10': Olive brown, moist, dense, silty SAND with calcium carbonate
. .' '.
-
It~
II c
-
-
It~ Totl! Depth 11.5'
I: - No Groundwater Encountered
Backfilled with Native 9-27-01
-
-
I -
25-
I -
-
-
I - 5-5'
30
TYPE OF TESTS: 'CO COLLAPSE
.:lILE TYPES: SU SULFATE HO HYDROMETER
If SPOON G GRAB SAMPLE OS DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANAL VSIS
G SAMPLE C CORE SAMPLE MD MAXIMUM DENSITY AL ATTERBERG UMITS ~~ I
LK SAMPLE CN CONSOUDATION EI EXPANSION INDEX - -
use SAMPLE CR CORROSION RV R-VALUE ~ ~
1066'
I
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIA TES, INC.
I
tect
9-28-01
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG 8.20
Sheet ~ of
Project No.
Type of Rig
--L-
110231-004-
HSA
Drop 30"
rillingCo.
lDiameter
tion Top of Hole t
"
:ECI ..
co
C.o -
E...l 0
(!) z
0
. . . .
. .'
. ." 00
: ": .
". . .
'" -.
o. 00
. 0" 0"
: ': .
0, . .
...00
. . .
...00
. ..
. 000"
-. ".
0, . .
.0. _0
. .'
.000"
: ": .
"0 . .
... ".
. 00,0
: ": .
"0 . .
...0,
o. 00
. 00,"
0: ': .
'0 . .
'0' ".
. ..
. 0' 00
: ": .
", . .
...00
. ..
. 00,'
0: ": .
00 . .
...00
. .'
. 0' 0"
: ": .
", . .
... o.
'. 00
.00,0
. . .
.0.00
. 0" 00
: 0: .
'0 . .
'" o.
o. 0'
00" 00
: ": .
"0 . .
...00
P'LE TYPES:
~ SPOON
G SAMPLE
SAMPLE
use SAMPLE
I
8"
Harveston
eal Pac
Drive Weight
Location
140lbs
See Map
1059'
. '.
,., ..
ci tJJ~ ,n-: DESCRIPTION -
- - ..
z ..0 'ij ... - :lI! {!!.
co ~ c.. =-
co" -= -I.) ..
c. ..co 1.).
-... QC. -- =lI! 0
E IDco i:' oc Logged By co
co ll. :;;0 0;:) AS c.
(1,1 Q I.) (1,1- ~
Sampled By AS
SP ALLUVIUM rOal\
@ Surfiu:e: Light brown, dry, loose, fine tD coarse SAND
30 ML @ 2': Dark bro~-to oiive, moisi. Stiff SILt; parting SUrfaces - - -
90.2 12.2
2 18 SM @5': DaIk bro-;';:;- mOist;" memuniCiense;- silty finetD co&se SAND - SU
103.6 6.8
3
53 SM OLDER ALLUVlUM rOaD])
124.3 11.8 @ 10': Darl< brown, moist, dense, silty fine to ccarse SA1'l"D
.co
HeN=
-0.08%
4
27 8M @ 15': Dark brown, moist. medium dense, silty fine to coarse S;\ND
116.2 15.0 with trace of silt
CO, SA.
HCN-
-0.09% \
5
29 SM @ 20': Dark brown, moist, mediwn dense. silty fine tD C<larse SAND
120.0 12.5 with gravels
6
29
SM PAUBA FORMATION rOo)
@ 25': Olive brown, moist, dense, silty SAND
;S?;.
G GRAS SAMPLE
C CORE SAMPLE
TYPE OF TESTS:
SU SULFATE
OS DIRECT SHEAR
MD MAXIMUM DENSITY
eN CONSOUDATION
CR CORROSION
.CO COLlAPSE
HD HYDROMETER
SA SIEVE ANALYSIS
AL ATTERSERG LIMITS
EI EXPANSION INDEX
RV R.vALUE
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIA TES, INC,
I
9-28-01
GEOTECHNiCAL BORING LOG 8-20
Sheet ~ of
Project No.
Type of Rig
~
110231-004-
HSA
Drop 30"
Ie
iect
IrillingCo.
lie Diameter
vation Top of Hole +
ss
60
fTYPES:
SPOON
G SAMPLE
ULK SAMPLE
JBE SAMPLE
Harveston
Cal Pac
Drive Weight
Location
140lbs
See Map
8"
1059'
0 >. 1lJ'rft. III
1Ii-:- DESCRIPTION -
- - III
U Z 11I0 'iii .. . IIIC/l ~
:ECI III C... ,,- ca.
., .. ~ _c -(,)
Cloo - is. .,u III" (,). ...
l!!...I 0 CClo -- _C/l 0
z E -.. oc
t!) Ill., ~ :;;0 'O::i Logged By AS ..
co ll. $
C/l C (,) C/l-
Sampled By AS
7 51 ML @30': Olive, damp, stiffSll..T with iron staining
8
48
ML @35': Olive, damp, stiffSll..T with calcium caroonate
88.6 35.0
9
53
ML @40':Olive,damp, stiffSll..T with iron staining, parting s",-faces
]0
57
ML @ 45': Olive, damp, stiff Sll.. T with iron staining, parting surfac:s
11
8518"
ML @50': Olive, damp, hard Sll..T with iron staining, parting surfaces
Total Depth 51.2'
No Groundwater Encountered
Backfilled with Native 9-28-01
,..
~1
G GRAB SAMPLE
C CORE SAMPLE
TYPE OF TESTS:
SU SULFATE
OS DIRECT SHEAR
MD MAXIMUM DENSITY
CN CONSOUDATION
CR CORROSION
. CO COLLAPSE
HD HYDROMETER
SA SIEVE ANAL. YSIS
AL ATTERBERG UMlTS
EJ EXPANSION INDEX
RV R-VALUE
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIA TES, INC.
I
9-28-01
GEOTECHNICAL BORiNG LOG 8-21
Sheet ----'L-
Project No.
Type of Rig
Harveston
eal Pac
Drive Weight
Location
140 Ibs
See Map
of --L-
110231-004-
HSA
Drop 30" .
Irect
IrllUngeo.
Ie Diameter 8"
vation Top of Hole + 1061'
, ci >> (Dtf!. '"
iii"'"':'" DESCRIPTION -
- - '"
u Z Oi ... . "'Ul ~
J:_ :Co '" "'0 i-n. ::l- ea.
-.. .. .. ~o _c -(J
Co.. Coo - a. 011- "'.. (J. ...
..... l!!...J 0 ec. -- _Ul 0
z E -... oc
i e Cl Ill.. i:' ::EO 0;:) Logged By AS ..
ea II. Co
Ul. e (J Ul- ~
" , Sampled By AS
0 SP ALLUVTllM 10al\
I - ... . .' . @ SUIface: Light brown, dIy, loose, fine to coame SAND with
vegetation
- ... .' .
1 14 @ 2': Dark brown, moist, medium dense MD
. . ... : Sample 3 106.7 8.0
I - . .
. . . . .@D-S'
- . . . .
... .
5 2 19 ML OLDER ALLUVIUM 100al\
I - 116.6 13.4 @5': Dark brown, moist to wet, stiff; sandy SILT
-
I -
-
10 4 63 ML PAUBA FORMATION lOu\
I - 117.0 12.1 @ 10': Olive-brown. moist, very St4~ sandy SILT; p2rtL.,g surfaces
-
-
I -
15-
S 28 ML @ 15': Olive brown. moist, stiff, sandy Sll.T, with calcium carbonate,
I '- parting smfaces
-
I -
20-
I -
-
I -
25-
Total Depth 165'
J - No Growulwater Encountered
BackfiDec1 with Native 9-28-01
-
-
I . - ~
30
TYPE OF TESTS: CO COLl.APSE
IIPLE TYP!:S: SU SULFATE HD HYDROMETER ~III
ILIT SPOON G GRAS SAMPLE OS DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANALYSIS
NG SAMPLE C CORE SAMPLE MD MAXIMUM DENSITY AL ATTERBERG LIMITS ;::: -
LKSAMPLE CN CONSOUOATION EI EXPANSION INDEX ~~ ---=-.:
TUBE SAMPLE CR CORROSION RV R.VALUE ~ --.=
I
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIA rES, INC,
I
9-28-01
GEOTECHNICAL BORING lOG B-22
Sheet ----1- of
Project No.
Type of Rig
Harveston
CaIPac
Drive Weight
Location
1
110231-004-
HSA
Drop 30"
tect
rlJling Co.
lie Diameter
vatlon Top of Hole +
8"
I -
>. ..
0 fIJ'#. DESCRIPTION -
- - 10-:- 10
<.l Z Ui ... - IOUl ~
.r=_ ::C'" 10 100 c_ =- .. .
-" a> a> ;:0 _c -(.)
Co" Coo - 'i5. QU- a><.l lOa> (.)0 -
"II. E.J 0 QCo -- _Ul 0
I z E -... oc
Q Cl III a> ~ :;0 'O::i Logged By AS a>
.. ll. Co
Ul Q (.) Ul- ~
.. . Sampled By AS
I 0 SP ALLINlUM (Oal)
- .... . @ Surface: Brown, dry, loose, fine to coarse SAND with vegetation
- ~ '.:-: 1---- -- 1--- -- l-slVi- -~----------------------
.. . o. 1 14 @ 2': Dad<: brown, moist, medium dense, silty fine to coarse SAND
I .. 106.9 9.1
. 0- 0-
- .: "0" .
.. . '.
S- . . ..
. . . .
I .. . .. .
- '. . .
. '.
..
" . '. 2 30 SM OLDER ALLUVIUM (Ooal) CO,
I - . . 0 .. 114.7 7.0 @ 7': Dark brown, moist, medium dense, silty fine to coarse SAND HCN-
. -0.21%
.. 0
- .. .
'.
.. . '.
10- . . ..
o .
I - : .
'.
. '.
. . .'
- . 0000 @ 12': Brown. very moist, medimn dense, silty fine to coa..-se SA1""lD
: . 3 44 SM
I - o. . . 119.3 13.4
. ..
. . ..
- . . . .
.. . : .
IS- '. . .
. '.
I . . .'
'- . .
: .
'. .
4 42 ML PAUBAFORMATION (00)
I - @ 17': Olive, moist. stiff SILT with traces ofcaIcium carbonate and
-
20-
I -
I -
2S-
Total Depth 18.5'
I - No Groundwater Encountered
Backfilled with Native 9-28-01
I -
- ~
30
TYPE OF TESTS: CO COLLAPSE
ICE TYPES: SU SULFATE HO HYDROMETER sIll
LIT SPOON G GRAB SAMPLE OS DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANALYSIS
NG SAMPLE C CORE SAMPLE MO MAXIMUM DENSITY Al ATTERBERG UM!TS ;::: --
BULK SAMPLE CN CONSOUDATION El EXPANSION INCex ~d~
ruSE SAMpl I: CR COAAOSION RV R.VALUe
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIA TES, INC,
1064'
I
GEOTECHNiCAL BORING LOG 8-23
Sheet ----1- of
Project No.
Type of Rig
':ect
IrillingCb.
ale Diameter 8"
IIvatlon Top of Hole + 1167'
9-28-01
Harveston
Gal Pac
Drive Weight
Location
2
110231-004-
HSA
Drop 30"
~ 10
ci ~ q,';!. or.- DESCRIPTION -
- 10
" Z 100 jjj .. - "Ul ~
J:._ :Eel .. ~ c.... =- .. .
a" $ .. _c -(J ....
Coo C. .." .... (J.
, .... E...I .0 CD. -- _Ul 0
I c" E -.. oc
C!l Z Ill.. ~ :;:0 o:i Logged By AS ..
.. ll. D.
Ul C (J Ul- '"
Sampled By AS l-
S
I 0 SP PAUBA FORMATION (00)
- @ Surface: Light brown, dIy, loose, fine to coarse SAND with
vegetation
, - '.
I - --- -- -- --- -- I-- ~~----------------------
,. . '. @3': Light brown, moist, medium dense, silty fine to coarse SAND;
- , " visible porosity
. ,. ,
" ,
5-::. . ,
, ' '.
. , ,.
- , " ,
. '.
- ::. : . : Sample 1
I :: :' .:: @S.IO'
~: .
'.
'.
.
10-:: ." OW 2 52 SM JVID, CR
I ": .
'. . . 109.8 5.9
., '.
..
-.'. ." "
'. .
- :'.' .
I '.
.' ,
.. '.
'.
15- '.' '. @ 15': Olive brown, moist, very dense, silty SAND; parting surfaces
.' .. 3 85/9" 114.8 75 SM
I '-.; '. : .
'.
-" . '.
'.' .'
-:. .' ,
I .,
'. ,
-" . '.
. . .'
, .' ,
20 ---- --- -- 1-.- -~----------------------
4 78n" ML @20'; Olive, moist, stifISIT.T with iron staining and cleavage
I - 117.4 11.3
-
I -
-
25 -- --- -- .SM. -~----------------------
'. 5 85/11" @ 25': Light brown, moist, very dense, silty SAND
I - , ..
.' . .
.,
-.: .
'. "
. . ..
I .' .
., GP
-:'. . .
. '.
30 .' .'
~ TYPCS: TYPE OF TESTS: CO COLLAPSE
SU SULFATE HD HYDROMETER ~III==
SPOON G GRAB SAMPLE OS DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANALYSIS
G SAMPLE C CORE SAMPLE MD MAXIMUM DENSITY AL ATTERBERG UMfTS
IULK SAMPLE eN CONSOUDATION E. EXPANSION INDEX -~-
" ~-
UB~ SAMPLE
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIA rES, INC,
CR CORROSION
RV R.VALUE
~:=,
I
9-28-01
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG 8-23
Sheet -L of
Project No.
Type of Rig
Harveston
Cal Pac
Drive Weight
Location
140lbs
See Map
2
110231-004-
HSA
Drop 30"
te
~ect
Drilling Co.
tie Diameter a"
vation Top of Hole + 1167'
~ ..
ci III?/!. ui""":' DESCRIPTION -
- ..
Z 010 Ui ... . OIl/) ~
c... =- ...
.. ~ _c -u
ii .." .... u. ...
Cc. -- _I/) 0
E -... oc
Ill.. ~ 'O::i Logged By AS ..
.. D.. :;;0 c.
I/) c u 1/)- ?:
Sampled By AS
6 37 ML @ 30': Olive, mois~ stiff SaT; iron stains, parting surfaces
7
39
ML @ 35': Olive, moist, stiff SILT with calcium carbonate
8
71
SM @4~0li~~~~ist,d~0~~~~g~~~--
45
50
Total Depth 41.5'
No Groundwater Encountered
Backfilled with Native 9-28-01
55
60
ILETYPES:
UT SPOON
G SAMPLE
BULK SAMPLE
TUse SAMPLE
(9\
G GRAB SAMPLE
C CORE SAMPLE
TYPE OF TESTS:
SU SULFATE
OS DIRECT SHEAR
MD MAXIMUM DENSITY
eN CONSOUDATION
CR CORROSION
co COLlAPSE
HD HYDROMETER
SA SIEVE ANALYSIS
AL ATTERBERG UMITS
El EXPANSION INDEX
RV R.VALUE
:::;;;11
~ . ~
~~~
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIA TES, INC.
I
10-1-01
GEOTECHNICAllBORING LOG 8-24
Sheet 1
Project No.
Type of Rig
Harveston
Cal Pac
Drive Weight
Location
140lbs
See Map
of ~
110231-004-
HSA
Drop 30"
late
roject
Drilling Co.
10le Diameter
evation Top of Hole '!'
8"
1075'
, ..
,c_ :EtI) ..
-.. ..
.. c... C.o -
II. "II. l!..J 0
I e Cl z
75 0
I
: '.
..
I . .....
: ., ,
'. .
'.
. ..
70 5 .
'.
I , "
, .....
. '.
'. ,
. '.
. "
I . .' . .
. '. .
'.
"
..
65 10
.. '.
I "
.. '. .
,
'.
'.
. .'
I .....
'.
'.
.. '.
, ..
,0 15
I
ci ~ fI)'rft ..
eft"":,, DESCRIPTION -
..
z - 'ii ... - "lI) ~
..0
.. ~o c... =- ca.
_c -t)
is. ou.. .... .... t). ...
ec. -- _lI) 0
E -... oc
Ill.. C:' :!,!o '0:::) Logged By AS ..
ca Do ~
lI) e t) lI)-
Sampled By AS
SP ALLUVI1JM lOa))
@ Surface: Light brown, dIy, loose, fine to coarse SAND
I 16 SM @ 2~D8rlc brown, moist; mediUm dense:-silty,flne- to com;8ANi) -
with trace clay
2 15 SM OLDER ALLUVTIJM 100a))
116.5 7.3 @ 5': Dark brown, mois~ medium dense, silty fine to coarse SAND
with fine gravel
3 34 SM PAUBA FORMATION IOn) .
108.0 18.9 @ 10': Olive brown, moist to wet, medi'lhu dense, silty fine SP.l'ID 'Nith
iron staining
-4- 26 ML @ Is:ITghtolive:moiS;:-stiir-:-ciaY.;ySIi.TwifuironstainJng~d-
74.4 46.9 calcium carbonate blebs
20
5
30
ML @20': Olive. moist, stiff SILT to clayey Sll.T; parting surfaces
I
125
I
6
35
ML @ 25': Olive, mois~ stiff, clayey SILT with calcium carbonate with
parting surfaces
130
ILE TYPES:
UT SPOON
NG SAMPLE
BULK SAMPLE
TUBE SAMPLE
~z,..
G GRAB SAMPLE
C CORE SAMPLE
TYPE OF TESTS:
SU SULFATE
OS DIRECT SHEAR
MD MAXlMUM DENSITY
CN CONSOUDATION
CR CORROSION
co COlLAPSE
HD HYDROMETER
SA SIEVE ANALYSIS
AL ATTERBERG UMITS
EI EXPANSION INDEX
RV R.VALUE
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIA rES, INC.
I
10-1-01
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG 8-24
Sheet ~ of
Project No.
,Type of Rig
Harveston
eal Pac
Drive Weight
Location
140lbs
See Map
~
110231-004-
HSA
Drop 30"
Ita
Itject
)riJlingCo.
lie Diameter 8"
vation Top of Hole'!' 1075'
:>. ..
0 (D';/!. cO"",:" DESCRIPTION -
- - ..
.. z ..0 g; ... . "CI) ~
,c_ :Em .. ~ c:... ,.- ...
-., ., ., _c: -u
Q.., Q.o - Q. .,,, ..., u. ...
"1&. E...l 0 QQ. -- _rn 0
z E -... oc:
Q (!) Ill., ~ ::;;0 o::i Logged By AS .,
.. a. !
rn Q U rn-
Sampled By AS
7 20 @ 30': Olive, moist, loose. silty CLAY to CLAY with calcium
carbonate, parting surfaces and iron staining
40
Total Depth 31.5'
Groundwater Encountered @ 20'
Backfilled with Native 10-0]-0]
, 50
55
60
'PLE TYPES:
~SPOON
G SAMPLE
LK SAMPLE
'UBE SAMPLE
{p?;J
G GRAB SAMPLE
C CORE SAMPLE
TYPE OF TESTS:
SU SULFATE
OS DIRECT SHEAR
MD MAXIMUM DENSITY
eN CONSOUOATION
CR CORROSION
co COLLAPSE
HD HYDROMETER
SA SIEVEANAI.YSIS
AL ATTERBERG UMITS
EI EXPANSION INDEX
RV R.VALUE
:::;:I~I
;::11 ==:::
~--S
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIA TES, INC.
I
8"
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG 8.25
Sheet ----1- of
Project No,
Type of Rig
1
110231-004-
HSA
Drop 30"
lite 10-1-01
~ject
Jrilling Co.
lie Diameter
_ vation Top of Hole +
30
ILE TYPES:
LIT SPOON
NG SAMPLE
BULK SAMPLE
TUBE SAMPLE
Harveston
eal Pac
Drive Weight
Location
140lbs
See Map
1084'
ci >. ..
t1J';/!. cO"":,, DESCRIPTION -
- - ..
.. z Ui ... . "I/) {!.
.c_ :Eo .. ..0 ;'tt :/- ...
0.: .. .. ;:0 _c -to)
C.o - Q. QlI. .... u. ...
..... e-, 0 -... cc. -- _0 0
c z C m.. oc 0:;; ..
Cl .. ll. C;> ::'0 Logged By AS c.
0 C to) 0- ~
Sampled By AS
0 SP ALLUVIUM lOaD
. . . . @ Surface: Li!lhl brown. dxy, loose, fine to coarse SAND with roots
and vegetal10n . . ..
. . -- SM @ 2~Darl'broWn, m---;isl;" dense; silty-fine tOc~e SAND - - - -
.. , '. 46
. .. 131-1 7.7
.' , .
: " .
'. .
'.
. ..
5 . .' . .
. "
'. . .
" . '.
, ..
. 2 75 SM PAUBA FORMATION IOn)
" '.
. .' 115-5 10.7 @ 7': Olive brown, moist. very dense, silty SAND
. .....
. '. ,
'. .
" '.
. ..
10 . .' . .
. . '.
'. . .
" . '.
.' . SM @ 12': Olive brown. moist, medium dense, silty SAND with calcium
.. '. 3 23
'. . . carbonate
'. . '.
. ..
. .' . .
. '.
.
15 '.
" '.
..
. .' .
'. ,
'.
4 40 ML ~~OO~~~~~~~SaT~~~~~o~,~n-
.75.1 46.1 staining and parting surfaces
20
5 38 91.9 22.0 ML @ 22:: Olive, moist, very still; sandy SILT with calcium carbonate,
nnca
25 Total Depth 23.5'
No Groundwater Encountered
Backfilled with Native 10-01-01
~
G GRAB SAMPLE
C CORE SAMPLE
TYPE OF TESTS:
SU SULFATE
OS DIRECT SHEAR
MD MAXIMUM DENSITY
eN CONSOUDATION
CR CORROSION
::::::11
;S ;;':::
~'-.s i
CO COLLAPSE
HD HYDROMETER
SA SIEVE ANALYSIS
At ATTERBERG UMrrS
EI EXPANSION INDEX
RV R-VALUE
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIA rES, INC.
I
Ie 10-1-01
roject
"lIIng Co.
Ie Diameter
vation Top of Hole +
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG 8-26
Sheet ---1- of
Project No.
Type of Rig
Harveston
Gal Pac
Drive Weight
Location
140lbs
See Map
-1-
110231-004-
HSA
Drop 30"
8"
I ~ "'
0 ,,'#. cD""':' DESCRIPTION -
- "'
U z 'i .. . ",I/) {!.
.::- :Eel .. ..0 l:... ::1- ca.
-10 10 10 ~ _l: -(.l
ColO Coo - ii IOU ",10 (.l. ...
I IOu. E..J 0 -.. QCo -- _I/) 0
z E Ol:
Q Cl III 10 C;> :;0 'O::i Logged By AS 10
.. II.. Co
I/) Q (.l 1/)- ~
" ~ Sampled By AS
I 0 SP ALLlMUM (Oall
- . . .' . @ Surface: Li&>t brown, dIy, loose, fine to coarse SAND with roots
and vegemnon .
- :.; '.': --- --- -- rSM- ~-----------------------
. " 1 38 @ 2': Dark broWll, moist, dense, silty fine to coarse SAND
I - , .' 126.2 10.3
." 0"
. ": .
- '. . .
, '.
.
I 5 : 2 65 SM PAUBA FORMA nON (001
' '.
- . .. 117.9 7.1 @ 5': Light brown. moist, very dense, silty fine to coarse SAND
0000
.. ": .
- '.
I . ..
- .'. . .
": .
- '.
. '.
. , .'
10- .. ' . 3 43 SM @ 10': Light olive brown, moist, dense, silty very :fine SA1'4D; it-cn
I ": .
- '. staining and parting surfaces
. '.
..
- .....
. ": .
I - '. . .
. '.
..
-:. . .
": .
15 '. . -- --- -- f-.- ~-----------------------
I I -r 49 ML @ IS': Olive, moist, stiff SILT
-
-
I -
-
20-
I -
-
I -
-
25- Total Depth 16.5'
I - No Groundwater Encountered
Backfilled with Native 10-01-01
~
I - G.5
30
TYPE OF TESTS: CO COLLAPSE
IE TYPES: SU SULFATE HD HYDROMETER ~II
LIT SPOON G GRAB SAMPLE DS DIRECT SHEAR SA SIEVE ANALYSIS
G SAMPLE C CORE SAMPlE MD MAXIMUM DENSITY AL ATTERBERG UMITS ;;:::: -
IULK SAMPLe CN CONSOUDATION EI EXPANSION INDEX ~-~
BE SAMPLE CR CORROSION RV R-VALUE
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIA TES, INC.
1081'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
679204-01
EXCAV,i'.TION LOGS (Cont.)
BQri~g No.5 (Cont.)
pepth - Feet
Description
31.0
S~~d, fine to medium, some coarse, clean,
moist, light brown, dense
39.0
41.0
Silt, "7ith fine sand, moist, dark brown,
firm
42.0
Sand, fine~ trace of silt, moist, rnGdi~u
bro't-m 1 firm.
44.0
S~Jd, fine to m~di~m, so~ co~sef cle~~,
moist, light brow~, dense
H.O+
S . -.
'" C.na I r..~ne,
b,:-on"!l, firm
J:U.-edi U.i"U
~~ace of silt, mo~st,
E,orin-C! No. 6
0.0
Sand, fine, with silt, light gray, ~'y,
~oose, non-plastic
1.0
2.5
S~~d, fine to ~edi~~ trace of silt,
light bro.m, moist, l:\cderately lc.ose,
non-plastic
i.O
Sa11d, fine" tr.:-ace of Eilt, aark brot':'n,
moist, ~~er~tely firm, slightly plastic
14.0
Sand, !:J..n~, trace of silt, li.C;lit bro.~"'Zl-
gray, moict, firm, non-pla~tic
17.0
Siit, cemsn.ted fine sand, light gray and
brO\ffi, damp, firm to very hard, mediu!n
plasticity
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
679204-01
EXCAVATION LOG~_ (Cont.)
?~ring No.6 (Cont.)
D~th - Feet
Descriotion
"'---
17.0
Silt, with clay, light gray ~~d greenish
gray, damp, firm, high plasticity
21.0
28.0
Clay, ....ith silt, light gray and greenish
gray, damp, loose (h~d), high plasti-
city
34,0
Sand, fine to medium, t:ace of silt,
greenish gray, d~up, firm, slight plas-
ticity
45.0
The material is the s~.ms as the
layer except clean;: sa.na. at 44..0
....~s -~~y "'at b..t no "-0'" """"'0""
~l.oD \:'.....0:- f'f , U. A........._. "_l,....\,..._ J
sibly very close to ~ater.
c..bo'Ve
feet
pos-
Boring No. 7
0.0
Sand I fine to coarse I 'With silt and a
trace of clay, red-brc;;ll i.n color, dry,
firm, slight plasticity
7.0
10.0
Sand, fL~e to coarse, t=ace of 6ilt,
1~9ht bro'bul' Inoist, firm, ncn-plastic
14.0
Sand, fil'l; to 11l2dium, light brovm in
color, moist, firm, non-plastic
18.0
S~,d, fine to coarse, light brc~n, moist,
firm, non-plastic
32.0
Sand, fine to coarse, trace of clay,
light brOHlJ, moist, fim, nOIl-pJ."stic
, I
. ,
! I
<;',,\
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CONE PENETRoI:-1ETER
SOUNDING CPT-I
PROJECT : CONVERSE R.C. DEVE-WH
PROJECT No: 88-230-5602
TEST DATE : 06-10-1988
Assumed Depth to Water (Feet): 50
,
TEST DATA !
,
,
LCCATION : RANCHO CALIFORNIA
,
INSTRUMENT : F15CKE087 I
ELECTRoNICS; T1
OPERATOR : GB/DH I
Soil Total Unit Weight (p::f): 120 I
I
HOIlHALIZED FRfCTIOH EQUIV EQUIV EQUIV EQUIV SuI: Su2:
DRPTII rollE RATIO SOIL BEHAVIOE TYPE IlELA TlVE FIlICTIOH HI lIl' (C-TIllIe FslA
__!~Z!_ (tgf) (l) DElISITY AlIG[Jl. {ksfj (ksf)
---...-...---- -------- ---~-------------------- -..---..--... --------- ---..--- --00___--.. ---------
1.0 321.1 0,98 SAND 1'0 SILTY SAND 10-80 lH5 >100 l100
2.0 100,5 1.19 SAND 1'0 SILTY SAlIO 50-60 35040 10-60 10-60
3,0 113,0 0,51 SAND 1'0 SILTY SAND 50-60 lH2 10-60 10-60
J.O 111.6 0,99 SAllO 1'0 SILTY SAND 50-60 10-12 25040 25040
5.0 10.6 1.21 SILTY SAND-SANDY SILT 30-10 , 31-35 10-15 15-20
6,0 11.9 2,16 SANDY SILT-CLAYEY SILT 10-50 21-31 HO J5-20
1.0 U,l U8 ISANDY CLAY-SILTY CLAY 25-10 10-60 1.99 1.99
8,0 12.1 6,90 ISANDY CLAY-SILTY CLAY >100 >100 3.61 3.61
9,0 66,9 6,43 ISANDY CLAY-SILTY CLAY 80-100 80-100 3,18 3,18
10,0 16,8 2.22 SANDY SILT-CLAYEY SILT 30-10 21-31 HO 10-15
11.0 60.1 . US ISANDY CLAY-SILTY CLAY . 60-80 60-80 3.38 3,38
12.0 56,1 5031 ISANDY CLAY-SILTY CLAY 60-80 60-80 3,26 3,26
13.0 51.9 1.01 ICLAYEY S!IlD-SANDY CLAY 10-60 40-60
H,O 55.3 4.88 ISiJIDY CLAY-SILTY CLAY 40-60 60-80 3.31 3.31
15,0 11.1 5,21 ISANDY CLAY-SILTY CLAY 10-60 10-60 2.91 2,91
16,0 16,8 1,85 SANDY SILT-CLAYEY SILT lO-40 27-31 1-5 10-15
11,0 10,5 5.32 ISANDY CLAY-SILTY CLAY 10-60 10-60 2,66 2.66
18,0 88.3 3.86 ICLA m SAND-SANDY CLAY 80-100 80-100
19,0 4l,3 5,99 ISANDY CLAY-SILTY CLAY. 40-60 60-80 2.99 2.99
20,0 66.0 3.98 lcum SAND-SANDY CLAY 10-60 60-80
21.0 21.1 5,26 CLAYEY SILT-SILTY CLAY 20-25 25040 3,44 2.85
22.0 20,2 5.91 SILTY CLAY TO CLAY 20-25 25-10 2.89 2,12
~
I - IIIDICATES Ol'EllCOlISOLIDATBD DE COOlIl'ED l!ATRIlIAL
~ mL_ ..... ,. _ .
o
DEPTH I N METERS
~ m ~ m ~ 0 .~
"'
-
N
'"
..
N
-
,
In
-
,
o
DEPTH 1 N fEET
o "' 0
I ,
..
-
,
In
o
In
o
"'
o
no
"'
- - N . i . i P .. ..
14 I I I
V' Jl \
~
r , I ,
I
I^
^" l
I
-
C
-
....
cr
a:
%N
c-
-
....
w
-
a:
....
I
I
z
_no
-::>
C...J
eno
w
o
c
c
~
I
..
0 I
In
.
0
'"
0
'"
0
N .
0
-
0 A
- I~ f
~
0 ^ I ,/
j II\) \.- V iV
~
, , ,
N IV r\ ^ (~
^
\rV V- I
.. \r\ "
lQ
II
I ~
z_
crn
I ....'"
enu
-,
en'"
"'''''
a:-
....
I "'"'
Zl-
o
W
I
I
IS
....-
enn
I;;;B
""
a:t:l
""
z-
0....
-en
Ir
....
I
o
~
III
0 III 0 III C III 0
- - N N '" OJ ..
DEPTH IN fEET
, , , , , , , , , , ,
en __~. III CO) r- eD '" 0 - N OJ
- - -
DEPTH IN METERS
,
III
In
..
o
III
.,
o
I I
- uN
,
..
I-
111
UJ
I-
a:
UJ
I-
UJ
~
tJ......
a:~
.....0...
UJU
Z ..
UJW
l1..a:l
Q
a:
UJ(L
Z
tJ
U
~
~
'"
~
~
<:
-<::'"
.... -
....
~~
..::-
.;::'"
.....
'JI
t--
Nen
WOO
o(DlIJ
1Jl::.::
IU
. OlJl
uflJ~
. N U.
Cl:,
[lJ ..
1IJ a:
Ul en UJ[lJ
Cl: .. a:J[lJ
1IJ a:::em
> LU:=l1"""1
Z a:J z: I
o ~.....o
u zz"'"
.. wI
..... ..... ::e to
UU:::lO
LUl1.1a::..
.......UJ
CCU'l.....
a::a:z:a::
0-0...-0
~q
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Assumed Depth to Water (Feet)= 50
,
TEST DATA !
,
,
~ATION : RANCHO CALIFORNIA
. ,
INSTRUMENT : F15CKE087 !
ELECTRONICS: Tl 1
OPERATOR : GBIDH I
Soil Total Unit Weight (pef) = 120 I
,
CONE PENETROMETER
SOUNDING CPI'-2
PROJEcr : CONVERSE R. C. DEVE-WH
PROJEcr No: 88-230-5602
TEST DATE : 06-10-1988
NORllALIZBD FRICTION IlQUlV RQUlV RQUIV IlQUIV SuI: Su2:
DEPTH CONB RATIO SOIL BBHAVIOR TYPB RRLATlI'R FRICTION NI NI' (C-TI/Ne FsIA
(ft) (tsfl IX) DRNSITY AIIGLE (ksfl IksC)
-------- ---------- -----.... --------------------- -------- ---....--.... ---....- ..----..- ..-..-..---
I,D 283,5 1.44 SAlID 1'0 SILTY 8AND 80-90 lZ-15 HOD >l00
Z,O 255.6 1.56 SAlIO 1'0 SILTY SAND 80-90 10-42 >l00 HOD
3.0 319,5 3.88 ICLAYEY SAlID-SAlIDY CLAY HOD >lOD
4.0 231.1 3,10 ISILTY SAI/HLAYEY SAlID >l00 >l00
5,0 215,1 3,93 ICLAYEY SAJID-SAlIDY CLAY >lOD HOD
6,0 194.6 4.83 ISAlIDY CLAY-SILTY CLAY >l00 >l00 8.96 . 8,96
1,0 188,1 U9 ISAlIDY CLAY-SILTY CLAY >lDO HOD 9,08 9,08
8,0 183,1 6.23 ISAlIDY CLAY-SILTY CLAY >l00 HOD 9,26 9,26
9,0 11!.3 1,90 ISANDl CLAY-SILTY CLAY HOD >l00 5.98 5,98
10,0 131,6 US ICLAYEY SAIID-SAIIOY CLAY HOD HOD
11,0 Sl,l .8.11 ISAlIDY CLAY-SILTY CLAY HOD liDO Ul 5.H
12.0 56.Z 5,14 ISAIIOY CLAY-SILTY CLAY 60-80 60-80 3,23 3,23
13.0 65,1 6,89 ISANDY CLAY-SILTY CLAY SD-IOO SHOO 3,SO 3.S0
l!,D 50,1 6,12 ISANDY CLAY-SILTY CLAY 60-80 60-S0 3,01 3.01
IU 3&,9 6,99 ISAlIDY CLAY-SILTY CLAY 10-60 10-60 2,42 2,42
16.0 163.5 2,lS ISILTY SAlID-CLAYEY SAlID >l00 >l00
11,0 m.6 2,13 ISILTY SAlID-GLAYEY SAIIO SO-100 10-42 >l00 >l00
18.0 12,2 5,12 ISAlIDY CLAY-SILTY CLAY 80-100 SHOO 4.91 4.91
19,0 80,8 1.39 ISAlIDY CLAY-SILTY CLAY SHOO SO-I 00 5,61 Ul
20,0 181.2 UO ISILTY SAND-CLAYEY SAND >l00 HOD
21.0 146,0 3,06 ISILTY SAND-GLAYEY SAlIO >l00 1I00
22.0 111.1 2.14 ISILTY SAlID-CLAYEY SAlID >lOD >l00
23,0 56,6 5,ll ISANDY CLAY-SILTY CLAY 60-80 60-S0 UO UO
21,0 !J,I 6.21 ISAlIDY CUY-SILTY CLAY 10-60 6D-SO 3.31 3,31
25.0 67,1 5,62 ISANDY CLAY-SILTY CLAY 8HOO 80-100 5.36 5.36
26,0 Z6,O 5,65 ISAlIDY CLAY-SILTY CLAY 25-10 25-10 1.05 2,05
21.0 18.0 4.69 ISAIIOY CLAY-SILTY CLAY 10-60 10-60 3,91 3,91
28,0 16,3 8,16 ISAIIOY CLAY-SIL1Y CLAY 60-80 60-80 3,81 3,87
1.D
I - INDICATES OVERCOIlSOLlDAl'ED OR CEHEIiTED I!ATE8I!.L
o
- '"
'"
DEPTH IN HETERS
. ~ m ~ m ~ 0 ""
r "i"
DEPTH. I N FEET
~ 0 ~ 0 ~
'" '" ..
- " -
I I I
It)
I
I
" " '" ... ...
- 1\ M
~ !
A \Jj !
fJ , d\ I~ \
IV il\ u
.. r-'""' v
-
o It)
o
~
'" en
IlJ
~
ll:
IlJ
~
IlJ
.x:
t:JN
ll:~
~n..
IlJU
Z ..
IlJW
ll..CD
El
a::
c 1lJe...
c Z
~
t:J
U
!ll
~
Cl
<:
-<: .
...
~
<:
-<:Cl
...-
JJ~
..::-
~Cl
4
IJI
o
It)
o
c
~
'"
I~
-
ZN
c-
~
'"
I~
I
z
Ig~ I
enc
U
o
..
0
m
0
0;
0
'" /
0
N ~ -
0
" 'vJ \ tvv\
0
:::
0 ^ . I...
.. VI ~
,
-\
'" IA ,I
IV
.. (\ V\
f\ l---r:
Vl
'" h \A^
o
II>
o
-
'"
:r:
~
J ~
UJNcn
>00
UJtDUJ
ClUJ::.:
IU
. OUJ
U/lJ_
. N lL
0::, ..
UJCDa::
UlCDll.JCD
a:::: .. CI::l CD
UJa::~Ol
> IJ.J:::I.....
ZCD2:J
051-0
U zz""
.. L1.J'
I-I-~tD
uu;:)o
LUWa:,.
',I-ll.J
o C(f) I-
a:: a:: 2: a::
a..a...-o
'1\
I
I
I~-
a:N
'"'"
I~~
lilt!>
"",:
0:-
....
"'Ill
IB'"
I
I
'"
-~
~:r
IIlU
C~
~en
I'"
I
It)
-
o It) 0
N '" '"
DEPTH IN FEET
It)
'"
o
...
III
..
o
It)
,
o
,
-
,
'"
,
'"
,
...
,
It)
I I
'" ...
,
'"
,
..
,
o
-
,
-
-
,
'"
-
,
'"
-
,
...
,
It)
DEPTH IN HETERS
%
..JX:
-::>
I 0-1
eno
u
c
I
I
I ~-
"'"
~:::
enu
1_,
en'"
ILl>::
a:-
"-
lLIen
Z~
IB
I
I
ILl
U
I~-
en"
->::
enu
ILl'
Ia:~
%-
0"-
-en
~~
I~
I
c
DEPTH I N METERS
co r-- CD C"I
II>
~ '"
'"
~ II>
c
r
N
r
"
"
,
.,
"
,
~
-
,
c
DEPTH I N fEET
ell>"
"
"n
l-
V)
/JJ
I-
II>
c
II>
..
"
II>
" " N ... ...
I~ In' I h! ,
~.
~ II It 1 J ~ fl
I "V I ,
^ n I \,
.. .
.- V I V l, , v
-
o
-
~
or
a:
ZN
0-
-
~
u
-
a:
"-
a:
/JJ
I-
/JJ
:t:
eM
a:~
I-Q..
/JJU
Z ..
/JJW
ll..a:J
D
a:
/JJO--
Z
tJ
U
!?
'"'
:;
"
'" \~
..
c
'"
"
.::.l
" ,
'N .
~ I
-
" ~
~
"
.. \
~ '" '-V
;-
- ~
V M ,/\ /\ r
N \.
V\J If v
.
..
I ~
'" (
1!ll
~
..
JS
...
~
'"
.."..
--
~~
..~
~..
'-.i
IJJ
::c
~
I t--
WNID
woo
o(DW
lll~
Ju
'Olll
um....
'Nll..
D:: I ..
WIDer:
UJ ID WID
0:: .. cc OJ
W a:::I:0l
> l1.J;:)....
z IDZ J
O~f-O
U zz....
.. L1.J J
f-f-L(D
uu;:)o
LUWO::"
',f-lLJ
OOtl'lf-
a::a:za:
o-a...-o.
1'?
"
'"
,
"
o
-
II> " II> C In " In " In "
- ~ N N '" ., .. ~ In
DEPTH IN fEET
0 0 0 . 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 0
N '" ... In '" .... '" '" c - N '" .. In
- - - -
DEPTH IN METERS
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
""
I u
Z
er
....-
enn
-x
enu
I "'"
"'l!l
'"
z-
0"-
-'"
........
I u
-
'"
"-
I
o r4 N cr;
DEPTH IN METERS
.. on .. t- O> '" 0 .~ '" .. .. III
" ~ " ~ ~
, , , , , ,
DEPTH IN fEET
III 0 III 0 on 0 III 0
o III 0
~ ~ N .. ...
1 ~ JL ~ ! I I ~~ ~I A
IW~ 'I .!~ I ~ , r
. ,\
II v
I , '\.r.,
, v V r .
'\""
"'
o
-
....
er
a:
-
Zl<
c-
-
....
u
-
a:
"-
Z
-IX
-::>
0-1
"'0
U
o
~
c
..
..
0 .
.. /
0 I
en .1\,/
0
'" !
0
N I /
I I
0 I
~
.
0
"
.J ~ ~ Ii u }
0 (\.-,..,{
IV '/v- JVY . W v
,~ vI"
V . {(\ Af1J,
'" VJ\lc .A
- v Vv~ Ivj\ I ~'V
.. \ ~
"' U
. .
""
u
z_
ern
....x
enu
-,
I:::t::
""'"
a:;-
"-
""'"
z....
o
u
o In
0 In 0 III 0 III 0 "' 0
- " '" '" en .. ... .. In
DEPTH tHFEET
, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
'" .. .. III '" t- O> '" 0 " '" .. .. III
- " - - - -
DEPTH IN METERS
'"
C l
o _
I-
III
W
I-
0::
W
I-
W
x:
t:l"'<t
o::~
I-Q..
WU
Z ..
wW
LCD
o
a:
WCL
Z
t:l
U
~
'"
....
'"
.",
-::i
~
'"
-<::'"
--
~~
"::-
,::;:'"
...
JjJ
:r
3:
1 t'-
IlJNlD
>00
1lJ(OIlJ
o to::.::
IU
'0 to
Um...
'Nl1..
a:: , ...
IlJlDc::
Ul lD WlD
.a:: U c:JeD
IlJ c:: :>: OJ
> lLJ::J....,
z CDZ J
051-0
U Z z"""
.. LLJ J
1-1-:>:(0
uU;:JO
lL.J LlJ 0: ..
"I-W L
CCtfll- 1~ "
c::c::za:
a..~......c
I
Log of Test Pit No. TP-14
late Excavated: 4119/90
Equipment Backhoe
Iround Surface Elevation: 1079 feet
Logged by:
DCP
Checked by:
GFR
Driving Weight and Drop:
Depth to Water.
none encountered
I SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SAMPLES ~
This log is part of the report prepared by Converse for this project and X I-
~ I- 3
..., should be read together with the report. This summary applies only. at the a
... a OJ I-
~ 0 location of the test pit and at the time of excavation. Subsurface conditions .. '" H
I H may differ at other locations and may change a.t this location with the " ::J Z .
:r :r OJ "' I- :J~ '"
I- "- passage of time. The data presented is a simplification of actual conditions :> '" 3 "' ... OJ
"- <reI H ..J a H )- 0 I
OJ ",a enc.ountered. '" :J ..J a "'''- I-
a Cl..J a OJ OJ E a~ 0
I ALLUVTIJM (Qal) - SILTY SAND (SM): fine grained
sand, moist, loose, brown
I
TOPSOIL - CLAYEY SAND (SC): fine grained sand,
abundant organics, slightly moist, loose, dark brown
BEDROCK - PAUBA FORMATION (Qp)
SANDSTONE: .fine grained. moderately weathered,
massive, slightly moist, soft to moderately hard, brown
I
End of test pit at 4.5 feet
No caving
No groundwater encountered
Test pit backfileld 4/19/90
I
I
SCALE: ,'= 5' (H=V)
SKETCH
~
SS20E
I
I
. .
Qal
" ,
I
. . ." ".
. ( ~.
- --- .
/.: / !"" Topsoil"J 7:
> ~:.:... -:-::'<~:~:;':.::'~' ::.~.,,~
,," .
-- ..., ~..
.' . t.", ',"
I
Project No.
Drawing No.
1~
89-81-173-01
A-23
I
log of Test Pit No. TP-15
late Excavated: 4/19/90
Equipment~ Backhoe
lround Surface Elevation: 1079 feet
Logged by:
DCP
Checked by:
GFR
Driving WeigM and Drop:
Depth to Water:
Done encountered
r~ SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SAMPLES ~
This log is part of the report prepared by Converse for this project a.nd " l-
I- ~ 3
.... should be read together with the report. This summary applies only at the 0
... 0 OJ l-
I ~ 0 location of the test pit and at the time of excavation. Subsurface conditions .. '" H
H "- ::> z .
J: may differ at other locations and may change at this location with the OJ fJ) I- ::>~ '"
"- passage of time. The data presented is a simplification of actual conditions :> :< 3 fJ) ... OJ
<I:(!l H .J 0 H, >-0 J:
OJ "'0 encountered. '" ::> .J 0 "'rt I-
0 (!l.J 0 OJ OJ E o~ 0
I ALLUVIUM (Qal) - SILTY SAND (SM): fine grained
-- sand, moist, loose, brown .r
'-::-'
OLD ALLUVIUM (Qoal) - SILTY SAND (SM): fine
grained sand, minor open voids, rootlets to 3 feet,
\ moist, very dense, brown; near refusal with backhoe /
~ End of test pit at 4 feet
I No caving
No groundwater encountered
Test pit backfilled 4/19/90
I
I
J SCALE: "=5' (H=Vl SKETCH , SB5'w f
-
.
t .
, ' " 'Q'ai,,, ....:. V
.... .
\
. .
-- -:.-. -" :.-:- -
I .' . . .. ~ .... _.. I '.
. . . ~~aI... ::)
r
I
I
~ Converse Consultants Inland Empire
Proje'ct No.
Drawing No.
11
89-81-173-01
A-24
I
Log of Test Pit No. TP-16
Ite Excavated: 4/19/90
:quipment Backhoe
lound Surface Elevation: 1073 reet
Logged by:..
DCP
Checked by:
GFR
Driving Weight and Drop:
Depth to Water:
none encountered
I~ SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SAMPLES ~
This log is part of the report prepared by Converse for this project and ~ l-
I- ~ 3
should be read together with the report. This summary applies only at the 0
... 0 W I-
~ 0 location of the test pit and at the time of excavation. Subsurface conditions U- n: H
H "- :J Z .
I~ J: may differ at other locations and may change at this location with the W "' I- :J~ n:
[l passage of time. The data presented is a simplifieation of actual conditions :J :.: 3 "' ... W
<I <0 H ...J 0 H >-0 J:
n:o encountered. n: :J ...J 0 n:[l I-
0 "'...J 0 m m ;: o~ 0
" ALLUVIUM (Qal) - SILTY SAND (SM): fine grained
I " sand, moist, loose, brown
' , ~
,.
" TOPSOIL - SILTY SAND (SM): fine grained sand,
~. r
abundant organics, moist to very moist, loose, dark
brown I
I BEDROCK - PAUBA FORMATION (Qp)
SANDSTONE: fine to medium grained sand, clayey,
moderately weathered, massive, very moist to 4 feet,
I moist to 4.5 feet, soft to moderately hard, brown
I End of test pit at 4.5 feet
No caving
No groundwater encountered
Test pit backfilled 4/19/90
I
SCALE: 1'= 6' (H=V)
SKETCH
1
N79"W
I
I
, ,Qal,'
. - ---
..' ~ -- e',' . .
,-:- " Topsod'.,. '
.' .'. ~ ~~..."~" '\:=::~:"~'.::/
Qp ".. '".' .. , '"
. . . .....:..: ':, .:.::. ~.~.~~:. t.>
I
I
Project No.
Drawing No.
Converse Consultants Inland Empire
89-81-173-01
A-25
18!
I
Log of Test Pit No. TP-17
IDate Excavated: 4119/90
Equipment Backltoe
IGround Surface Elevation: 1103 feet
Logged by:
DCP
Checked by:
GFR
Driving Weight and Drop:
Depth to Water.
none encountered
I SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SAMPLES ^
This log is part of the report prepared by Converse for this project and >< f-
^ f- ~ 3
.... should be read. together with the report. This summary applies only at the 0
.. 0 III f-
I ~ o. location of the test pit and at the time of excavation. Subsurface conditions u. 0: H
H "- :0 Z .
J: J: may differ at other locations and may change at this location with the III tJ1 f- :o^ 0:
f- a. passage of time. The data presented is a simplification of actual conditions :> :< 3 tJ1 4- I1J
a. <1:01 H ..J 0 H ~ 0 J:
III 0:0 encountered. n: :0 ..J 0 0: a. f-
0 Cl..J " rD rD >: ,,~ 0
I f 'I: TOPSOIL - SIL IT SAND (SM): fine grained sand,
~ ;-;:.: :
abundant organics, very moist, loose, dark brown ~
I ~. BEDROCK - PAUBA FORMATION (Qp)
\ SANDSTONE: fine grained, silty, moderately /
weathered, massive, moist, mOderately hard, brown
I End of test pit at 3.5 feet
I No caving
No groundwater encountered
Test pit backfilled 4/19/90
I
.
I SCALE: ,'= 5' (H=Y) SKETCH . S45'w \
I
I , , 'To'psojf. . . -
~,.,.., f:-""~.7-:;-::; ~:\>',f"
I .,-,~.~
I '\>~.~~~;j ~:~.~~~~~ ~ "Q" ..
:'.~ : ~: :,,~;:''',:~;; .:.<;'.~.
I t
..
I I
I
t:;c;
~ Converse Consultants Inland Empire
Project No.
Drawing No.
1'\
89-81-173-01
A-26
I
Log of Test Pit No. TP-18
rat~ Excavated:
EqUIpment
4/19/90
Logged by: DCP
Checked by:
GFR
Backhoe
Driving Weight and Drop:
tround Surface Elevation: 1071 feet
Depth to Water:
none encountered
I SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SAMPLES ~
This log is part of the report prepared by Converse for this project and :< f-
~ f- ~ :3
"" should be read together with the report. This summary applies only at the 0
... 0 III f-
~ 0 location of the test pit and at the time of excavation. Subsurface conditions u. '" H
I H " ~ Z .
1: 1: may differ at other locations and may change at this location with the III (I) f- ~~ '"
f- c. passage of time. The data. presented is a simplification of actual conditions :> " :3 (I) ... III
C. <1:" H -' 0 H >-0 1:
III "'0 encountered. '" ~ -' 0 "'Q. f-
0 ,,-' 0 '" '" :E o~ 0
I l" :!: ALLUVIUM (Qal) - SILTY SAND (SM): fine grained
. ...... : r
j. \ sand, moist, loose, brown
I BEDROCK - PAUBA FORMATION (Qp)
SANDSTONE: medium grained, silty, moderately
\ weathered, massive, dry to slightly moist, moderately
hard, brown; scour and fill channel features I
I . .
End of lest pit at 4 feet
I No caving
No groundwater encountered
Test pit backfilled 4/19/90
I
II
I~ SCALE: ,"= 5' (H=Y) SKETCH . 'S4o"E
II
t . ...Qal " .fj
~..~ +-.....:.. >.~..~ -.,~
f:-:.,. ".,
.:,,:1:..1....,. >:);.~~.;>{i ~'
I '<~rD;) :./7:::':':
I
I
It--. Project No. lJrawmg .No.
I,.'
l:::
Converse Consultants Inland Empire
I
I
8o!
89-81-173-01
A-27
I
Log of Test Pit No. TP-20
iDat~ Excavated:
~qUlpment:
4/20/90
Logged by: DCP
Checked by: .
GFR
Backhoe
Driving Weight and Drop:
tround Surface Elevation:
1080 feet
Depth to Water.
none encountered
SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SAMPLES
This log is part of the report prepared by Converse for this project and >< f-
~ f- 3
., should be read together with the report. This summary applies only at the 0
4- 0 UJ f-
a location of the test pit and at the time of excavation. Subsurface conditions .. I:< H
H "- ~ Z ~
J: J: may differ at other locations and may ehange at this location with the UJ III f- ~~ I:<
f- a. passage of time. The data presented is a simplification of actual conditions ~ '" 3 Ul 4- UJ
.. <ICJ H ..J 0 H >-U J:
UJ 1:<0 encountered. I:< :;) ..J 0 I:< a. f-
0 CJ..J 0 In In I: O~ 0
ALLUVIUM (Qal) - SILTY SAND (SM): fine grained
sand, abundant organics, moist, loose, brown
..
5
OLD ALLUVIUM (Qoal) - SILTY SAND (SM): fine
grained sand, rootlets and organics to 4 feet, minor
pinhole voids, dry, very dense, brown
End of test pit at 6 feet
No caving
No groundwater encountered
Test pit backfilled 4/19/90
SCALE: 1'= 5' (H=V)
SKETCH
.
ssiJ"w
:... Qoal
.,'
I
Qal
---
I
I
Converse Consultants Inland Empire
Project No.
Dro.wing No.
,
I
s\, I
89-81-173-01
A-29
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I 25
I
~
l;l."l. ,.,"""..,.~=-.."."'""" _"'_"~_'~"'~"''''' ~
'-"',=".. ~'''~~.....,.".~'''~... ~"~~.,..,=- "-''- .""-"""""''''''''.....'~.....;.''''''''''''''~_~ -""""""1'_""'",,-.,...,...,.~ ."",,..,_~_...._~ "..~,:;;
CAT
SUMMARY
BORING NO.1
E DRILLED 6-7-"~~~~\
~...~ 0
THIS SUMMA"Y ......PLIES ONI.'!' AT THE LOCATIOM or THIS BORING AND AT THE -*-:!"t.. <0 <~J..
TIMfOf"ORILl..ING. SUBSUA"....CECONDITIONSMAYDIl""FER...TDTHERl..OCATIOHS . ~ O-J:l-t, ~ 0 ..
~f"li;I 0" AHD MAY CHANGE....T THIS 1.0CATIOH WITH THE PASSAGE OF' TIME, THE DATA of;~ J.. 0 ~~ ,,".1':1-..
H PRESENTED IS A SIMPLlf'lCA-TION or ACTUAL COHOITIONS ENCOUNTERED. ~1-~ 'i~"'1S' '-1-"" 01."'7>
T ~. ~'" ~'f.I "').c,. ~;. .
111't- ~.J.. ELEVATION 1 060f:' ~C'"L "-s.",,1lo~ J-
SM de<' loose light !,
- 1
brown SILTY SAND
- 7 fine to medium sond, slightly
1 silty 5.4 3.0 107
- -
- . 7
slightly brown
;- Imoist I
SC medium dark CLAYEY SAND
very dense brown I fi ne sandi large amount of 10
. moist clay
2"
I 12 11.9 122
. t--
,-
- I 12
-
I . 17
-
- I 15
- 14
3 brown 7.8 13.6 115
- r--
-
CL moist very brown/ CLAY
- stiff olive I silty
@
-. 19
-
-
SC very very olive- CLAYEY SAND
- moist dense brown fine to medium sandi small
amount of clay
OEPT
IN
,..
o
5
10
15
20
30
CD Indicates range and number of bulk sample
LIQUEFACTION EVALUATION
Winchester HiJrs, Rancho CafifomiCJf Californio
for: Rancho California Development Compony
Project No.
88-81-117-01
3~
Drawing No.
Converse Consultants Inland Empire
A-1
-""~-"""~I!Il.:"~
-. -
I "".~"'~-='=~~=~'."~,"" .n_.~,,,=._ ~g~~i~~:~ ~~~n:;~:::.;~ h._.__ - - ,-~.--.,.~",..~.".
CATECRILLEC, 6-7-88 .' . .~~~~~
o '!'...~ 0
THIS SUMM....Ry "''''PLIES ONLY AT THE LOCATION or THIS BORING AND AT THE ~1l...L.. <0 <"So
TlMEOf'"ORtlLIHG. SUllSURF...CECOHOITlOHS""....YDIF"1'ERATOTHERLOCATlOHS ~ ~ 0.,:. '1,. $,.1....... ..
'"" AND MA'" CHANGE AT THIS LOCATtON WITH THE PA.SSAGE Of' TIME. THE DATA +,.~ J- 0 ._"'~ 1-J'1-..
H <ltV~ 0"" PRESENTEe IS A SIMPLlf'IC....TION or ACTUAl. CONDITIONS ENCOUNTEREO. ~1-~ ~...>S\ C',,~ ~1.~
+ ~<(/j. ~~ ~.).'" .-:..;.. .
t()"" .t()4. ~C>J- C'-S-;.."Jl~ ~ J- .
I CEPT
IN
FEET,
30
I
-
SC very very olive- CLAYEY SAND (cont.)
moist dense brown
seepaae at contact
I BEDROCK - PAUBA
FORMATION
SANDSTONE .
Fine to medium grained
I 17.6 14.3 114
I
End of boring at 41.5'
Seepage at 32.5'
I No caving, boring backfilled
33
I
I
35
-..i-
-
I
I
. .
40-
-
-
75
I
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
I
-
-
I
-
-
I
~ Converse Consultants Inland Empire
~'M~ '__..__" _ ..~!<c,,'
L1QUEF ACTION EV ALUA TI ON
Winchester Hi"~, Rancho California, California
for: Rancho California Development Company
Project No.
88-81-117-01
A-2
I
I
~~
Drawing No.
.~=.
.......,....,.-
- ~~~~-=-""--'.- - -,.,
1:I=:'~,"'_'.n.
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I 20- 3
I
-
I 25-
I
I
I
I
I@
_r....",..>.;_...-:o-.. - '_"_~'c"'"""";"'::_ ~.. ... ~~_~ . _ ,
,. ..,"".,,~, ...
"" -~ """'""-J-!'.~="",~"""""_.",,, ~..,.,_""~.".'''''''''. '" .t>!i",.''''' .____.~ , .....J """\:.;~9""___.... ru ~.." ',U,
""--~~4
SUMMARY
BORING NO 2
OAT ''i~''~~~
THIS SUMMARY APPl..fES ONLY AT THE lOCATION OF' THfS BORING AND AT THE *;""'L,.. <0 (1)"L.
E CRICLEC. 6-7 -8~M'" ."",,,. SUBSu'''Cte...,n...'MH. "", AT .'",".cm.., 0.. ~:.. ~ .. 0 "
Ib ....NO MAY CHANGE AT THfS LOCATION WITH THE P....SSAGE OF TIME. THE DATA +...~"L. 0 ~f' t..r~..
OEPTH ...,(;; 0" PRESEHTED IS A SIMPllrICA.TION OF' ACTUAL CONDITIONS ENCOUHTERED. ~1-\" 'i~ C;-1->S' o~
IN ~t? ~~ '"';..,~~ ~C';'c. ......;.
FEET Ib'r" 1b4. ELEVATION' 10621 ~ "L. "S-;.1)\" ;.. "L.
o
I
SCt: L dry
dense
Iiqht.
b~wn
CLAYEY SAND
fine sand, quite clayey
moist
dork
brown
I
I~rading to~ndy clay --
9
5
1
-
7.8
13.3 122
sti ff
.
-f--
-~
I
15
10-
11.3
12.2 119
-
15-
BEDROCK- - PAUBA
FORMATION
SANDSTONE
with some claystone
15
-
23
.
35
16.9
19.3 101
-
End of boring at 21'
No groundwater encountered
No caving, boring backfilled
-
.'
I
.
.
30
LIQUEFACTION EVALUATION
Winchester Hills, Rancho California, California
for: Rancho California Development Company
Project No.
88-81-117-01
Converse Consultants Inland Empire
Drawing No.
A-3
~
-
~ --~
.-:.g-=
"'~'.aor,__
~ ...""'"'~~~~~.~- -
I
Log of Boring No. BH-7
IDrilled: 4/24/90
ipment , Bucket AUl!er
Id Surface Elevation: 1069 feet
Logged by:
DCP
Checked by:
140 Ib 1 30 in
GFR
Driving Weight and Drop:
Depth to Water:
none encountered
I
J
I
J
l
SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
This log is part of the report prepared by Converse for this project and
should be read together with the report. This summary applies only at the
location of the boring and at the time of drilling. Subsurface conditions
may differ at other locations and may change at this location with the
passage of time. The data presented is a simplification of actual conditions
encountered.
SAMPLES
~
X
v
f-
3
f-
I-<
Z
::J~
\-
>- u
"'''-
Ov
f-
o
o
u.
"-
(J)
3
o
-'
"
()
I-<
J:
"-
<tel
0:0
el-'
UJ
0:
::J
f-
(J)
I-<
o
"
.
0:
UJ
J:
f-
o
UJ
:> "
I-< -'
0: ::J
o "
I
ALLUVIUM (Qal) - SILTY SAND (SM): fine grained
sand, brown
I
---------------------------------------
CLAYEY SAND (SC): fine grained sand, abundant
organics, dark brown
24 No Re overy
I
22
OLD ALLUVIUM (Qoal) - CLAYEY SAND (SC): fine
grained sand, micaceous, dark brown
I
I
34
II 120 c
I
26
14 10] c
29 17 ]03
31 29 93
I
End of boring at 30 feet
No groundwater encountered
Boring backfilled 4/24/90
*c ~ Consolidation Test
Project No.
Drawing No.
Converse Consultant Inland Empire,
€C'
----------------;
89-81-173-01
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
110231-017
January 17, 2003
APPENDIX D
Laboratory Testina Procedures and Test Results
Atterberg Limits: The Atterberg limits were determined in general accordance with AS1M Test
Method D4318 for engineering classification of the fine-grained materials and presented in the
table below:
Sample Location liquid Limit (%) Plastic Plastic USCS
limit (%) Index (%) Soil Classification
B-102 @ 25' 24 18 6 SC-SM
B-103 @ 27' - - NP SM
B-105 @ 20' 32 16 16 CL
B-106 @ 15' 26 19 7 SC
NP = Non Plastic
Consolidation Tests: Consolidation tests were performed on selected, relatively undisturbed ring
samples in general accordance with AS1M test method D2435. Samples were placed in a
consolidometer and loads were applied in geometric progression. The percent consolidation for
each load cycle was recorded as the ratio of the amount of vertical compression to the original 1-
inch height. The consolidation pressure curves are presented in the test data (attached).
Expansion Index Tests: The expansion potential of the selected material was evaluated by the
Expansion Index Test, AS1M D4829. The specimen was molded under a given compactive
energy to approximately the optimum moisture content and approximately 50 percent saturation or
approximately 90 percent relative compaction. The prepared I-inch thick by 4-inch diameter
. specimen was loaded to an equivalent 144 psf surcharge and inundated with tap water until
volumetric equilibrium is reached. The results of this test is presented in the table below:
Compacted Expansion Expansion
Sample Location Sample Description Dry Density
(pct) Index Potential
B-102 @ 25' Dark olive silty, clayey 112.3 30 Low
sand, SC-SM
B-103 @ 27' Dark brown silty sand, SM 110.6 0 Very Low
B-105 @ 20' Olive brownlean clay, CL 107.3 59 Medium
B-I06 @ 15' Dark olive clayey sand, 115.2 5 Very Low
SC
D-1
gp
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
110231-017
January 17, 2003
LaboratolY Testina (continued)
Direct Shear Tests: Direct shear tests were performed on selected undisturbed and remolded
samples which were soaked for a minimum of 24 hours under a surcharge equal to the applied
normal force during testing. Samples were then transferred to the shear box, reloaded, and pore
pressures set up in the sample (due to transfer) were allowed to dissipate for' a period of
approximately one-hour. Following pore pressure dissipation, samples were subjected to shearing
forces. The samples were tested under various normal loads by a motor-driven, strain-controlled,
direct-shear testing apparatus at a strain rate of less than 0.001 to 0.5 inches per minute (depending
upon the soil tvoe). The test results are Dresented in the test data.
Friction Apparent
Sample Location Sample Description Angle (degrees) Cohesion (pst)
Peak Relaxed Peak Relaxed
B-101 @ 15' Brown lean Silt with Sand (ML)s 28 25 450 350
B-101 @ 30' Brown Silty Sand, SM 42 34 930 870
B-102 @ 40' Brown Sandy lean Clay, (CL)s 33 28 2150 1950
B-104 @ 40' Brown Sandy lean Silt (ML)s 27 24 620 570
B-106 @ 20' Brown Silty Sand with Gravel 45 42 500 450
(SM)g
B-104 @ 36' Brown Sandy lean Silt, ML 30 26 420 330
HS-101 @ 15-20' Olive Silty-Clayey Sand, SC-SM 37 33 400 330
HS-101 @ 15' Brown Silty Sand, SM 38 36 610 500
Maximum Densitv Tests: The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of typical
materials were determined in accordance with ASTM Test Method D1557. The results of these
tests are Dreseritedin the table below:
Maximum Optimum
Sample Location Sample Description Dry Density Moisture Content
(pct) (%)
B-101 @ 15' Brown lean silt with sand, (ML)s 125 12.0
B-104 @ 36' Brown sandy lean silt, (ML)s 128.5 10.5
HS-lOl @ 15-20' Olive silty, clayey sand, SC-SM 136.5 7.5
Moisture and Densitv Determination Tests: Moisture content and dry density determinations were
performed on relatively undisturbed samples obtained from the test borings and/or trenches. The
results of these tests are presented in the Doring logs. Where applicable, only moisture content was
determined from "undisturbed" or disturbed samples.
e,1
D-2
/,
j
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3030.1094
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, lNC
GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS FOR ROUGH GRADING
1.0
General
1.1 Intent: These General Earthwork and Grading Specifications are for the grading and
earthwork shown on the approved grading plan(s) and/or indicated in the geotechnical
report(s). These Specifications are a part of the recommendations contained in the
geotechnical report(s). In case of conflict, the specific recommendations in the
geotechnical report shall supersede these more general Specifications. Observations of the
earthwork by the proj ect 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 The Geotechnical Consultant of Record: Prior to commencement of work, the owner shall
employ the Geotechnical Consultant of Record (Geotechnical Consultant). The
Geotechnical Consultants shall be responsible for reviewing the approved geotechnical
report(s) and accepting the adequacy of the preliminary geotechnical findings, conclusions,
and recommendations prior to the 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.
1.3 The Earthwork Contractor: The Earthwork Contractor (Contractor) shall be qualified,
experienced, and Imowledgeable 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
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Leighton and Associates, Inc.
GENERAL EARTIfWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
Page 2 of6
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, Wlsatisfactory 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 Preoaration of Areas to be Filled
2.1 Clearing and Grubbing: Vegetation, such as brush, grass, roots, and other deleterious
material shaH be sufficiently removed and properly disposed of in a method acceptable to
the owner, governing agencies, and the Geotechnical Consultant.
The Geotechnical Consultant shaH evaluate the extent of these removals depending on
specific site conditions. Earth fiH material shaH not contain more than I percent of organic
materials (by vohune). No fill lift shaH contain more than 5 percent of organic matter.
Nesting of the organic materials shaH not be aHowed.
If potentially hazardous materials are encoWltered, the Contractor shaH stop work in the
affected area, and a hazardous material specialist shall be informed immediately for proper
evaluation and handling of these materials prior to continuing to work in that area.
As presently defmed by the State of California, most refmed 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 groWld may constitute a misdemeanor, pWlishable by fmes and/or imprisonment,
and shaH not be aHowed.
3030.1094
~<1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Leighton and Associates, Inc.
GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
Page 3 of6
2.2 Processing: Existing ground that has been declared satisfactory for support of fill by the
Geotechnical Consultant shall be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches. Existing
ground that is not satisfactory shall be overexcavated as specified in the following section. . .
Scarification shall continue until soils are broken down and free of large clay lumps or
clods and the working surface is reasonably unifonn, flat, and free of uneven features that
would inhibit uniform compaction.
2.3 Overexcavation: In addition to removals and overexcavations reconnnended in the
approved geotechnical report(s) and the grading plan, soft, loose, dry, saturated, spongy,
organic-rich, highly fractured or otherwise Wlsuitable ground shall be overexcavated to
competent ground as evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant during grading.
2.4 Benching: Where fills are to be placed on ground with slopes steeper than 5: I (horizontal
to vertical units), the ground shall be stepped or benched. Please see the Standard Details
for a graphic illustration. The lowest bench or key shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide and
at least 2 feet deep, into competent material as evaluated by the Geoteclmical Consultant.
Other benches shall be excavated a minimum height of 4 feet into competent material or as
otherwise reconnnended by the Geotechnical Consultant. Fill placed on ground sloping
flatter than 5: I shall also be benched or otherwise overexcavated to provide a flat subgrade
for the fill.
2.5 Evaluation! Acceptance of Fill Areas: AIl 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 Geoteclmical 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
. detennining elevations of processed areas, keys, and benches.
3.0 Fill Material
3. I General: Material to be used as fill shall be essentially free of organic matter and other
deleterious substances evaluated and accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to
placement. Soils of poor quality, such as those with unacceptable gradation, high
expansion potential, or low strength shall be placed in areas acceptable to the Geotechnical
Consultant or mixed with other soils to achieve satisfactory fill material.
3.2 Oversize: Oversize material defined as rock, or other irreducible material with a maximum
dimension greater than 8 inches, shall not be buried or placed in fill unless location,
materials, and placement methods are specifically accepted by the Geoteclmical 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 W vertical feet of finish grade or within 2 feet
of future utilities or undergrOlmd construction.
3.3 IillJ:1Qr!: If importing offill material is required for grading, proposed import material shall
3030.1094
C\o
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Leighton and Associates, Inc.
GENERAL EARTIlWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
Page 4 of6
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 detennined and appropriate tests performed:
4.0 Fill Placement and Cornoaction
4.1 Fill Lavers: 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 unifonnity of material and moisture throughout.
4.2 Fill Moisture Conditioninll: 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
DI557-91).
4.3 Compaction of Fill: After each layer has been moisture-conditioned, mixed, and evenly
spread, it shall be unifonnly compacted to not less than 90 percent of maximum dry density
(ASTM Test Method DI557-91). Compaction equipment shall be adequately sized and be
either specifically designed for soil compaction or of proven reliabiIit'j to efficiently
achieve the specified level of compaction with unifonnity.
4.4 Cornoaction 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 Geoteclmical 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 verity adequacy of compaction levels in areas that are judged to be prone to
inadequate compaction (such as close to slope faces and at the fill1bedrock benches).
4.6 FreQuencv of Compaction Testinll: Tests shall be taken at intervals not exceeding 2 feet in
vertical rise and/or 1,000 cubic yards of compacted fill soils embanlanent. 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 iertical height of slope. The Contractor shall assure that fill
construction is such that the testing schedule can be accomplished by the Geoteclmical
Consultant. The Contractor shall stop or slow down the earthwork construction if these
minimum standards are not met.
3030.1094
Y.\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Leighton and Associates, Inc.
GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
Page 5 of6
4.7 Compaction Test Locations: The Geoteclmical 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
Geoteclmical 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 sha11 be installed in accordance with the approved geoteclmical report( s), the
grading plan, and the Standard Details. The Geoteclmical Consultant may reconnnend additional
subdrains and/or changes in subdrain extent, location, grade, or material depending on conditions
encountered during grading. All subdrains shall be surveyed by a land surveyor/civil engineer for
line and grade after installation and prior to burial.. Sufficient time should be allowed by the
Contractor for these surveys.
6.0 Excavation
Excavations, as well as over-excavation for remedial purposes, shall be evaluated by the
Geotechnical Consultant during grading. Remedial removal depths shown on geotechnical plans
are estimates only. The actual extent of removal shall be detennined 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
Geoteclmical Consultant prior to placement of materials for construction of the fill portion of the
slope, unless otherwise reconnnended by the Geotechnical Consultant.
7.0 Trench Backfills
7.1 The Contractor shall follow all OHSA and Cal/OSHA requirements for safety of trench
excavations.
7.2 All bedding and backfill of utility trenches shall be done in accordance with the applicable
provisions of Standard Specifications of Public Works Construction. Bedding material
shall have a Sand Equivalent greater than 30 (SE>30). The bedding shall be placed to I
foot over the top of the conduit and densified by jetting. Backfill shall be placed and
densified to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum from I foot above the top of the conduit
to the surface.
7.3 The jetting of the bedding around the conduits shall be observed by the Geotechnical
Consultant.
7.4 The Geotechnical Consultant shall test the trench backfill for relative compaction. At least
one test should be made for every 300 feet of trench and 2 feet of fill.
3030.1094
'\'Z-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Leighton and Associates. Inc.
GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
Page 6 of6
7.5 Lift thickness of trench backfill shall not exceed those allowed in the Standard
Specifications of Public Works Construction unless the Contractor can dernonstrate to the
Geotechnical Consultant that the fill lift can. be compacted to the minimum. relative
compaction by his alternative equipment and method.
3030.1094
'\2>
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
NATURAL
GROUND
-----
--:"'-:"'~lW'Ac:r::!l=--=
_~ ~ :LL-Z ~
------
- - - -====--:..._-
--..2:.
--=:
--=:;- - --
---
---::;;z::: "
:;;z:: BENQI
'l-,
ReiOVE
IlNSUITABLE
llA1allAL
,
~ 7'1P!CAL
LSElICH
HEIGHT
~~"
--
-
NATURAL
GROUND
'\..-
-
-
-
ASIlCve
NSUTTASLE
MAr.;;;lAI.
2'IIIIli.
Kl:'f De:>Tli
c:.rr l'~
Sl-'.AU.. s: ~ l'fiIOA
. TO FiJ.. F'.....a;:WOrrTO ASSURE
AI:S:l.JA. " GC-::l.CelC =cITlCNS
c:.rr ..~
TO ec CCNSTF.lJCTE:) i"l'JCl'!
TO FlU. F!.ACaleIT
"'"
FiLL SLO~E
FIU-oVEl'i-CUT
Sl.OPE
CUT -OVER-FlU.
SL.OPE
For Subdrains See
Standard DetaIl C
IIS1lOVE
UNSUITABLE
1AAr.;;;IAL
-~iiiN~--
~ .~
1~ IiIN.
LOWEST eEllCll
(!<EY)
eEllCH HEGHT '
eedC:-itNG sw.u.. ee CONE WHEi SLOPES
ANGLE lS ECUAl. TO OR GREAr.;;; WAN 5:1
MINIMUM BENQi HCGHT SHAll. BE 4 r=l
MINIMUM FlU. 'MOTH SHALL ee 9 r= ,
ING AND BENCHING
GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING
SPECIFICATIONS
STANDARD DE:l"AILS A
q-\
Rev. 7 no
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
NATURAL
GROUND
~
c'
----------------------
---------------------
TYPICAL
BENCHING
SUBDRAIN
(See Altemates A and B)
SUBDRAIN ALTERNATE A
PERFORATED PIPE SLRRDltlDel
WITH F1LTER MATERIAL
FD..1ER MA1ERlAl
fILTER MATERlALSHAl1. BE CLASS 2 P8U>lEABLEMATBUALPERsrATEOF
CALIFORNIA STANDARD SPEOFICA.llON, OR APPROVEO ALTERNATE.
ClASS 2 GRADING AS FOu.oWS:
Sieve Size Perrent Passll"Q
--p-- 100
3/4- 90~100
3/8- 4O~lOO
No.4 25-40
No.8 18-33
No. 30 5-15
No. 50 0.7
No. 200 0-3
FaTER MATERIAL (9FT 1FT)
^
SUBDRAlN ALTERNATE A-l
SUBDRAIN ALTERNATE A-2
SUB DRAIN ALTERNATE B
DETAIL OF CANYON SUBDRAIN TERMINAL
ces=.
FlMSHEDGII,l,DS.
Fl1.TCR.FAeRll:
(MlRAFI l'101CR
Afl>ICIVED EQUIVAlmTJ
ALTERNATE B-1
~lS~.
! Na1-l'mfOlll,lBl
.4 6"0 MIN.
3/4" MAX. GAAva OR
APPROVED EQUIVAilllT ALTERNATE B-2
(9FT 'IFf)
o PERFORATED PIPE IS 0l'T10NAL PER
GOVERNING AGENCY'S REQJ!REMENTS
'MlN.
PSU'ORAlEP
.......
JJ4"O'ENGAAOEDGRAVB.
ORN'FROVED EQUNAl.ENr
'.D<
CANYON
SUBDRAIN
GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING
SPECIFICJ\ nONS
STANDARD DerAILS C
'\~
Rev.l/lJU
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
- - - - - - -10'- - - - COMPACTEDFIU__-_-_-___-_ -_-
- -==-=::::::::====:::::::::::::==:::::t--=:::: ::::::::::::- =-=-::::- ::::-::::-:::: - ::::-::::-::::-=-=-=-
----------
--::::-::::::::::::::::::::::::~~::::-=S:::::==-::::::::::::::::~=~::::::::::::::::::::==::::D?~'
- --------_"/..-_-_-J-..t_-_-___-_-_-c2-!-_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
- -,.::::-=-:::: -::::-::;0---::::-::::-::::-=-:::: -::::-n-- - -:::: - ::::-::::-:::: - ~~:::: ~ -:::: - ==::::::::::::--
. - _-::::-::::-::::_::::-~::::-::::~_::::-::::-::::-r-:::: ::::-::::-::::---::::-::::-:::t-/:-::::---
- - 10'- - - 7"- - - _~V'L _ :...::::..!::.. -<> _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ _ _ _ _
- - - - -,- - - - - - - - - -, . - - :J=.,=..-l5'MIN =,.o::l.
- - -l~Y---::::-::::-::::-::::-::::-::::_::::---~~:"'::::-::::+::::-::::----"':'::=-=::::I=-=::::--:-'
--- ---- -_-___-K ---l1::::-::::--------~D-...r--- -_-_-___-.:____-. -
-=-::::_::::-::::--~-::::_::::-::::~~~~---=__-::::-::::..c::::-::::_::::-::::-::_.:----- -
-------L-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-WlNDROl/C__-___--' - -. JFTTED OR FLOODED
-= -;..;;;'- - - - - - - - - - - - - - APPROVED SOIL
FINISH GRADE
-------
I . Oversize rod< Is larga-than B Ind1es
In largest dimension.
I . 8acktill wfth approved soli jetted or
flooded in place to fill all the voids.
· Do not bury rod< withIn 10 feet of
I finish grade.
Q Windrow of buried rock shall be
parallel to the finished stope Face.
I
I
I
I
I
I
SECTION A-A'
.,
PROFILE ALONG WINDROW
-----
------ -----------------~-----------A- .------------------::::-::::--- - - ---,
-----------------------------------. ~ -- ----------:=-:=-------:=-=-=----
------
_~::::~::::::::::::=_==~:::::::::::::::::::: ~::::::::~::::i=::::::::::::::::j AI :::::::::_~::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::i=::::::::i=::::___---------.
JFTTED OR FLOODED
APPROVED SOIL
I
OVERSIZE ROCK DISPOSAL
GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING
SPEOFICA TrONS
STANDARD DETAILS B
qc,
Rei. 7/UO
I
I
I
I
I
I
1':1:
I J _:::-==~~~Io=MiiC'="-----
I -.L::i -=3=-:::::~:;:~~iN~::::::::=-:::::::::-:::::::::--:::-
KEY~I" K~~~iH ~I
I 2' MIN,
SUBDRAIN ALTERNATE A
I
OlffiET PIPES
4"' NON-PERFORATED PIPE,
100' MAX. O.C, HORIZONTALLY
30' MAX, O.c. VERTICALLY
I p9MINj,1
BACKClJT
SUBDRAIN ALTERNATE B
1
I
INO~~~~) .' :_: .;. ~E MIN.
\ :;;---' '. L ~'MlN.
:;;---
OUT1ET PIPE
(NON-PERFCAATE:l) ~
~
.//
FIL1ER FABRIC
(MlRAFII40 CR
APFROVEQ
EQUIVI'Wl1)
P05lTIVE SEAL 9-ICULD BE
PROVIDED AT l1iE JOINT
CAL TRANS <lASS 2
mTER M'\TERlAL(3FT.3/FTl
3/4' ROO< (3FT.'/F1)
WRAFI'ED IN FILT81. FABRIC
T -ccNNEcrION FROo1
COlI.ECTION PIPE TO ClJI1.Er PIPE
I. SUBDRAIN INSTAl!J\TION - Subdrain collector pipe shall be Installed wiil1 perforations down or,
unless otherwise designated by the geotechnical consultant Outlet pipes shall be non-perforated
pipe. The sub drain pipe shall have at least 8 perforations uniformiy spaced per foot Perforation shall
1 be 1/'f' to 1/2" if drilled holes are used. All subdrain pipes shall have a gradient at least 2 % towards the
outiet
.
1 SUBDRAIN PIPE - Subdrain pipe shall be ASTM D2751, ASTM D1527 (Scheduie 40) or SDR 23.5 ABS pipe
or ASTM D3034 (Schedule 40) or SDR 23,5 PVC pipe.
. ~
All outlet pipe shall be placed in a trench and, after fill is placed above it, radded to verify' Integrit}l,
BUTIRESS OR
I-REPLACEMENT FILL
SUBDRAINS
GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING
SPECIFICA nONS
STANDARD DETAlLS D
q,
Rev.
I
CUT-FILL TRANSITION LOTOVEREXCAVATION
REMCTI/E
UISJITABLe \.
GROUND - V"""'-
-
-
-
-
-
-
.-
-
--""-- ~- -
--ccMPAcrEDFIU. ~ -?:.~,..~...' _-::. _~_
- - - -;.. - - - --- - - -- - - - -~ - -
~ = -.;~-~ --- -- - ----.z-.e - ------
-:~----~ -- -...--:: - "-- .( /.'"'
~----~--- ,,~~
_ _ ~,,<:;c-' BENCHING
~L UNWEA1liERED BEDIlOOC OR MA11!RlAlAPPflO\IEO
," ." 1 ~ BY1lieGEOfECHNICAlCCUSULTANT ~
OVEREXCAVATE .
AND RECC>1PACl"
SIDE HIll. FILL FOR CUT PAD
DVeRfXCAVA11!
AND RECCMPAcr
(REPUCeMeNTFlU)
~.
-
/'
/'
/'
.....-
/'
/'
/'
NATURAl.
GROUND ~ __
-
-
.
Re5TRlmD USEAAEA
/'
-
/'
/'
/' FlNl5HEDClIrPPD
/'
OVERBURDeN
DR UNSUITABLe
MATIR1Al
.", " ^ ......
I
I
SEE STANDARD DETAIL FOR SUBDAAINS
WHeN llf<;lJlRED BY GEOfECHNIC.'L CCNSULlJlNT
I
TRANsmON lOT FILLS
AND SIDE HILL ALLS
GENERAl EARTHWORK AND GRADlNG
5PEClFl~110NS
STANDARD DETAILS E
'\co
RE'!. 7 00
SUBDRAIN OPTIONS AND BACKALL WHEN NATIVE MATERIAL HAS EXPANSION INDEX OF <;50
I
I
I WATERPROOFING
(SEJ: GENERAl. NOTES)
I
OPTION 1: PIPE SURROUNDED WrnI
ClASS 2 PERMEABLE MA1ERIAL
OPTION 2: GRAVEL WRAPPED
IN FlL TER FABRIC
SWP!:
ORlE'IEl.
SWP!:
ORlE'IEl. .
WEEP HOLE
I (~E NOTE 5)
lEVEL OR
SWP!:
WATERPROOFING
'&,!',' (SEE GENERAl. NOTES) FalER FABRIC
'. , 12" MINIMUM ~:'4:.. ,(SEE NOTE 4)
~ . , U" MINIMUM
, ClASS 2 PERMEABlE ' "
FILlER MAlERIAl. WEEP HOLE '.. V4 10 l1f.z mOt SIZE
':..... (SEE GRADATION) (SEE NOTE 5) " GRAVEL WRAPPED IN Fn.TER
.., FABRIC
4 INCH DlAMmR '"
PERFORATED PIPE lEVELDR
(SEE NOTE 3) SLOP!:
I
I
I
I
Class 2 Filler Penneable Matena! Gradallol1
Per Caltrans Speciflcatlons
SleveSIle
I"
3/4"
3/8"
No.4
No.8
No. 30
No. 50
No. 200
Percent Passino
100
90-100
40-100
25-40
18-33
5-15
0-7
0-3
RAL NOTES:
lerprOOfing should be provided where moisture nuisance problem through the wall is undesirable.
er proofing of the walls Is not under purview of the geotechnical engineer
rains should have a gradient of 1 percent minimum
Jtiet portion of the subdrain should have a 4-inch diameter solid pipe discharged Into a suitable disposal area designed by the project
I. eer. The subdrain pipe should be accessible for, maintenance (rodding)
r subdrain backfill options are subject to the review by the geotechnical engineer and modification of design parameters.
tes:
I' nd shouid have a sand equivalent of 30 or greater and maybe densified by water jetting. .
u. ft. per ft. of 1/4- to 1112-inch size gravel wrapped in filter fabric
Ipe type should be ASlM 01527 AcryionltIile Butadiene Slyrene (ASS) S0R35 or A51M 01785 Polyvinyl Chloride plastic (PVC), Schedule
Annco A2000 PVC, or approved equivalent. Pipe should be installed with perforations down. Perforations should be 3/8 Inch in
Iter placed at the ends of a 120-degree arc In two rows at 3-lnch on center (stlggered)
er fabric should be Mlrafi 140NC or approved equivalent.
Neephole should be 3-inch minimum diameter and provided at 1 O-foot maximum InteJvals. If exposure Is pennltted, weepholes should
Eted 12 inches above. finished grade. If exposure Is not pennitted such as for a wall adjacent to a sidewalk/curb, a plp~ under the
alk to be discharged through the curb face or eqUivalent should be provided. For a basement-type wall, a proper subdraln outlet
should be provided. "
Retaining wall plans should be reviewed and approved by the geotechnical engineer.
ails over six feet In height are 5ubject to a special review by the geotechnical engineer and modifications to the above requirements.
I RETAINING WALL BACKFILL AND SUBDRAIN DETAIL
FOR WALLS 6 FEET OR LESS IN HEIGHT
WHEN NATIVE MATERIAL HAS EXPANSION INDEX OF <50
q,\
ReV:-1IXf
Figura \110.