HomeMy WebLinkAboutGeotechnical Investigation - Walmart 5/1999 I '
•
. lit ' 11
• 1 j 1 , I •I• I- 1 , i, 1 • . .
111 ! 111
III 1 1 1 1 1 1 LI I •1, I I -I I ;
1i1111111111111111 , Ili
- m II 11 i I, ii II 11 i 1 1 ! 1
-• :. . I I III i I LI 1! III ,ri I I !
1 III .1 WI 1 I I
. 11111 ' 1 • 1 li , • li I ,- ii ,
-- Hi 11 H111111 , 11 .
111 LI 1 11 i IiIIII III
lilt , wil. ii , ! , 11 ( . GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
. 111111 Pi ; . .!, 111 111
ill WI Hil , 11 .
. 11- 1111 ! 1, Iii111111 ! 111
• -'11 , 11111 11111. 111c11 . 11 , WALMART AT TEMECULA -
1 ' WI 1111 ' 11 1111 TEMECULA CALIFORNIA
11 HI Hill , 1
' ' ', 1 11111 ! ill i
1. [ II . . 11. 1111- 111 ' 1
tl fil 1 + 1 , 11W,
• iiiiifil.
! LH i i , 111 ;
—' 11, 111 ' I 111111
ri I ! Ili ! ii
n LW 11 11 l ' i 1
1-
I li G 1 ,9001 1 1 . 1 ., . •
! • 1 i,7 OIR, 44-filAiTiEiri I 11.
' 1, 114 I
u I I i I i i 1 1 II ;
•
Tgi-I
I NIcAti 1 1 ,
• ! • , , , • 1 1 , 1 • • PREPARED FOR
1::. - 1 tortSuil,TANrr di i
1 , 111 ii 1 1 .1 1i
, , , ,HI PRICE ENTERPRISES INCORPORATED
-‘ ji 11
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA
•- • III III WI11, 11 IIIIHII
III IIIII ; III Iii wit % • • it, % I • •
. I IIIIIIII : 111111W, . •
IIIIIIIMIIIiIIII •
—i II III ; ; I ! Iliiii . • ..
. I 1 . 111 WIi .III . • • ••
. . IIIi iIIII il- jHuiiI
•,:'% .„ 1 1 , 1 , 111, i ! „ ! !i ! '„ !
ulitillill , , , %, - ; ,, „ : , •
. 11 1 , 11111 } . ; ; ; 1 ;
HIIIIIIIIH ' HP Hi; ,
' ' ' ' Ilii• I ; iiiii, ! „ ,
- 11 il
H ; , 1 % ; i !
, : , ; III ; ! i
il .
MAY1999
1 I IIHIIIII .
- III , „ ‘ IIII1, 11 ` 11, 11
ilicili -', !
- • 1 % ; 11 ; ; I -Eil ; ; • : iI . .
, 11111 . 111 , i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE 1
2.PREVIOUS SITE DEVELOPMENT 2
3. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2
4. SOIL AND GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS 3
4.1. Compacted Fill (Qcf) 4
4.2. Recent Alluvium (Qa1) 4
• 5.GROUNDWATER •
4
6.GEOLOGIC STRUCTURE 5
7. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS 5
7.1. Faulting and Seismicity 5
7.2. Liquefaction 6
7.3. Evaluation of Liquefaction Potential 6
7.4. Effects of Liquefaction 7
8. SETTLEMENT CONSIDERATIONS 7
9. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 9
9.1. General 9
9.2. Soil and Excavation Characteristics 9
9.3. Grading
10
9.4. Foundations 11
9.5. Concrete Slabs-on-Grade 12
9.6. Retaining Walls and Lateral Loads 13
9.7. Preliminary Pavement Recommendations 14
9.8. Drainage and Maintenance 15
9.9. Grading Plan Review 15
LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS
MAPS AND ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure 1, Vicinity Map
Figure 2, Geologic Map (Map Pocket)
APPENDIX A
FIELD INVESTIGATION
Figures A-1—A-9, Logs of Borings
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
APPENDIX B
LABORATORY TESTING
Table B-I; Summary of Direct Shear Test Results
Table B-lI, Sununary of Laboratory Expansion Index Test Results
Table B-III, Summary of Laboratory pH,Resistivity,and Percent Soluble Sulfate Test Results
Table B-IV, Summary of R-Value and Sand Equivalent Test Results
Figures B-I—B-3, Gradation Curves
Figures B 1 B-5, Consolidation Curves
APPENDIX C
LIQUEFY 2 ANALYSIS
APPENDIX D
RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
LIST OF REFERENCES
•GEOCON
l INCORPORATED
GEOTEC LAICAL CONSULTANTS 4441r
Project No. 06298-42-01
May 18, 1999
Price Enterprises Incorporated
4649 Morena Boulevard
•
San Diego, California 92117-3650
Attention: Ms. Lois Miller
•
Subject . WALMART AT TEMECULA
TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
Dear Ms.Miller.
•
In accordance with authorization of our proposal dated April 2, 1999,we have performed a geotechnical
investigation for a proposed approximately 44-acre commercial development located on Highway 79
• between Redhawk Parkway and Apis road in Temecula, California. The accompanying report presents
the results of our study and our conclusions and recommendations regarding the geotechnical aspects of
developing the property as proposed. Based upon the results of this study, it is our opinion the site may
be developed as planned provided the recommendations of this report are followed.
If you have any questions regarding this report, or if we may be of further service, please contact the
undersigned at your convenience.
Very truly yours,
GEOCON INCORPORATED
/ if
James L.Brown • • - C.Copenhaver,Jr.
Mir
GE 2176 CEG 86
GCC:JLB:dmc ++/'� 5 L Bq 4
1 o� 0s .sDGF0
(� Addressee a'c fif30/�1 * �No.002176
0Eepyyl 3
\GP2 a1:0sBIA
T�TFOF FAQ CainFIED
a ENGINEERING •
6960 Mandan Drive ■ San OF 7, GEOLosisT
CAUFO
Diego, California 92121-2974 ■ Telephone (619) 558-6900 ■ Fax (619)
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE
This report presents the results of a geotechnical investigation for the proposed Walmart commercial
project located at the southeast corner of State Highway 79 and Redhawk Parkway in the City of
Temecula, California (see Vicinity Map, Figure 1). Our study was conducted to investigate the soil
•
and geologic conditions at the site and to identify geotechnical constraints (if any), that may impact
areas of proposed development This report provides recommendations relative to the geotechnical
engineering aspects of developing the project as proposed based on the conditions encountered
during this investigation and during previous development of the property.
The purpose of the update report is to provide comprehensive recommendations for the planned
regrading, to provide foundation design criteria for the buildings and structural pavement sections
for the parking lot and driveways. In particular,the major purposes of the investigation were:
• To review in-house geotechnical reports, published geologic maps, aerial photographs, and
other literature pertaining to the site.
• To evaluate the existing site soil conditions and to determine the depth to the groundwater
table.
• To perform laboratory tests on selected soil samples to determine in situ density, shear
strength, consolidation, compaction, expansion, soluble sulfate, and pH and resistivity
characteristics of the prevailing soil conditions encountered. R-value tests of the near
surface materials were also performed to determine preliminary pavement section
requirements.
• To provide specific grading specifications, foundation design criteria, preliminary pavement
sections, excavation characteristics and remedial grading measures (if required), and other
pertinent findings in the report.
The field investigation was conducted on April 23 and 26, 1999, and consisted of a site
reconnaissance by an engineering geologist,and the drilling of 8 small-diameter borings. The small-
diameter borings were excavated to examine the soil and geologic units within areas of anticipated
development and to identify surficial soils and underlying alluvial units. Details of the field
investigation as well as descriptive boring logs are presented in Appendix A.
Laboratory tests were performed on selected representative soil samples obtained during the field
investigation to evaluate pertinent physical properties of the soil conditions encountered. The
laboratory information was used in engineering analyses and to assist in providing recommendations
Project No.06298d2-01 - 1
May 18, 1999
for site grading and development Details of the laboratory tests and a summary of the test results
are presented in Appendix B.
The conclusions and recommendations presented herein are based on an analysis of the data obtained
from the exploratory field investigation, laboratory tests, and experience with similar soil and
geologic conditions on adjacent properties.
2. PREVIOUS SITE DEVELOPMENT
Previous grading occurred on the site between January and August 1994, to construct the current
sheet graded lots. The grading was performed via an assessment district established for the widening
of Temecula Creek. In general, the Vail Ranch Commercial site was selected as a disposal site for
excess materials generated from the grading and improvement to Temecula Creek. Grading
generally consisted of removal and recompaction of the upper alluvial deposits and/or moisture
conditioning and in situ densification of the upper 4 to 5 feet of alluvium prior to placement of fill.
The remedial grading was performed such that a minimum 5 foot compacted fill mat exists across
the lots. The remedial grading was performed in conjunction with our observation and compaction
testing services (See References). Fill soils placed during this operation were compacted to at least
90 percent relative compaction. The fill depths encountered during this investigation indicate that
fills on the order of 7 to 10 feet exist within the planned development area.
A portion at the southwest corner of the Vail Ranch Commercial site was left ungraded as it was
classified as a dedicated Historical Site. Several old structures from the Old Vail Ranch remain on
the site. Due to the Historic classification, no remedial grading to densify the upper alluvial deposits
was performed. Review of the proposed Site Plan indicates that the proposed approximately 132,000
square foot commercial building encroaches into the historic site. Remedial grading will be required
within this area to provide a uniform compacted fill mat
3. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The generally elongate, irregular-shaped site consists of approximately 42 acres of previously graded
land located in the City of Temecula, California. The site is bounded on the north U.S. Highway 79,
on the west by Redhawk Parkway, on the east by Apis Road and to the south by Temecula Creek
Channel (see Vicinity Map, Figure 1).
A review of the referenced Site Plan indicates that proposed site development will consist of the
construction of a commercial/retail center comprised of 8 individual building pads. A Walmart
Store with a building footprint of approximately 220,000 square feet, situated on the eastern end of
Project No. 06298-42-01 -2- May 18, 1999
"1
1 the site (see Figure 2) will be the primary tenant One 3,000 square foot building and three 5,000
square foot retail structures are planned. Additional large buildings include a 60,000 and 132,000
-1 square foot structures which are separated by a Historic Parcel. The remainder of the site will consist
of parking and paved driveways, with potential spaces for the addition of other retail shops. Existing
easements follow the outer edges of the property, with inactive stubs at various intervals around the
1 perimeter.
i
Topographically, the site is characterized by sheet-graded surfaces that slope gently southwest
toward the Temecula Creek Channel. Existing site elevations vary from a high of approximately
-1 1,080 feet above Mean Sea Level (MSL) at the northeast corner of the property to a low of
• approximately 1,060 feet MSL at the southwest corner. Vegetation consists of a sparse growth of
weeds and grasses. Several existing strictures (i.e. farmhouse, barn and associated agricultural
buildings)are situated within the Historic Parcel..
Primary access to the site will be provided by the existing surrounding streets, such as Highway 79,
Apis Road, Wolf Store Road, and Redhawk Parkway.
1
1 The locations and descriptions of the site and proposed development are based on a site
reconnaissance, a review of the referenced Site Plan and our general understanding of the project as
Ipresently proposed. If project details change significantly from those described herein, Geocon
Incorporated should be notified to review the plans and evaluate the need for additional study and/or
t possible revisions to this report.
I
-t The base map used to depict the soil and geologic conditions consisted of a reproducible copy of the
I plan entitled Site Plan, Scheme 15, prepared by Architects, McKee, dated April 29, 1999. The map
depicts the configuration of the property, underlying geologic units and the approximate locations of
the exploratory excavations(see Geologic Map, Figure 2)..
4. SOIL AND GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS
•
One surficial soil type and one geologic formation were encountered at the site. The entire site is
underlain by compacted fill soils, that are in turn underlain by recent alluvial deposits over 100 feet
thick. Previous studies indicated that recent alluvium is underlain by older alluvium that rests upon
sedimentary bedrock of the Pleistocene-age Pauba Formation (see List of References) Each of the
surficial deposits and formational units is discussed below in order of increasing age. Their mapped
extent is depicted on the Geologic Map (Figure 2, map pocket).
Project No. 06298—i2-01 May 1 S, 1999
4.1. Compacted Fill (Qcf)
Compacted fill was encountered in each of the exploratory borings and typically consists of dense,
dark brown, silty, fine- to medium-grained sands. Fill thickness varied from 7 to 10 feet as
encountered in Boring Nos. B-1 through B-8 (see boring logs, Appendix A). Field penetration-
; resistance in borings, as well as laboratory testing of the samples obtained indicated that the fill
generally has uniform density and moisture-content. The fill in it's present condition is considered
suitable for support of the planned buildings and improvements. Grading should be planned such
that the building pad elevations are not less than 2 feet below the existing round surface to ensure
that a minimum 5 foot compacted fill thickness underlies the buildings.
4.2. Recent Alluvium (Qal)
Alluvial soils underlie the above-described compacted fill and consist of medium-dense, light olive
to gray, fine- to medium-grained sands. The sand units are interbedded with micaceous silts and
sandy gravel layers typically from 1 to 4 feet thick (see Boring Nos. B-1, B-2, B-3, and B-6,
Appendix A). Boring No. 1 encountered Recent-age alluvial soils to a depth of 50 feet; previous
studies indicated the Recent Alluvium unit extends to depths on the order of 100 to 150 feet (see List
of References).
Blow counts recorded during drilling and laboratory test results indicate that the alluvium is
generally in a medium dense condition. Consolidation testing on representative samples of the
alluvium indicates that the alluvium should not experience significant volume change due to loading
provided that grades are not significantly raised. In addition, little to no collapse occurred upon
saturation indicating that the alluvium should not experience significant volume change upon
increases in soil moisture content. Results of the consolidation tests are shown graphically in
Appendix B. It should be noted that the upper portion of the consolidation curves are relatively steep
and due to sample disturbance. Each of the samples was saturated at pressures near their in.situ
overburden and the consolidation curves indicates low compressibility beyond the saturation loads.
•
5. GROUNDWATER
Wet to saturated Recent Alluvium was encountered in two exploratory borings (Boring Nos. B-1 at
approximately 30.5 feet, and B-2 at approximately 25.0 feet). These levels of groundwater are
consistent with those encountered and/or anticipated in previous studies (Geocon Incorporated
report, September, 1992). Within the general area of the site, groundwater depths are controlled by
the adjacent creek channel. Groundwater is not anticipated to adversely impact the proposed
grading.
Project No.06298-42-01 -4- May 18, 1999
6. GEOLOGIC STRUCTURE
Regionally, the site is located within a fault-basin known as the Temecula-Elsinore Basin (Larsen,
1948). This is a combined structural/topographic basin within the Peninsular Ranges of southern
California. This northwest- to southeast-trending structural basin is bounded on the west by the
Elsinore Fault Zone and on the east by the Aguanga and Lancaster faults. The Elsinore Fault Zone
includes several "active" faults, whereas the Aguanga and Lancaster faults are considered to be
"potentially" active faults (Jennings, 1994). Bedding in the alluvium units is horizontal, or nearly
horizontal, with depths estimated on the order of 600 feet
• 7. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS
7.1. Faulting and Seismicity
•
Based upon a review of published geologic literature, and observations during the site
reconnaissance, it is the opinion of Geocon Incorporated that no known active faults exist on the site.
Review of the California Division of Mines and Geology Special Studies Zones, Pechcmga
Quadrangle, indicates the nearest active faults are strands of the Elsinore Fault Zone, and are located
from 1/2 to 1 mile southwest of the site(see List of References).
The distance of known faults to the site was determined from the computer program EQFAULT
(Blake, 1989; updated 1997). A search radius of 62 miles was specified in the analysis and 32
known active faults were identified Principle references used by EQFAULT in selecting faults to be
included were Jennings (1994), Anderson (1984) and Wesnousky (1986). The program estimates
ground accelerations at the site for the maximum credible and maximum probable seismic events.
Attenuation relationships developed Geomatrix(1994) were used in the analysis.
The results of the seismicity analyses indicate that the Elsinore-Temecula Fault zone and the San
Jacinto Fault Zone are the dominant sources of potential ground motion at the site. The Elsinore-
Temecula Fault Zone having a Maximum Credible (Upper Bound) Magnitude of 6.8 and Maximum
Probable Magnitude of 6.3, respectively, is considered to be the source of the greatest seismic
ground shaking within the property. The "maximum credible earthquake" is defined as the
maximum earthquake that appears capable of occurring under the presently known tectonic
framework, while the "maximum probable earthquake" is the maximum earthquake that is
considered likely to occur during a 100-year time interval (California Division of Mines and
Geology Note, Number 43). The estimated maximum credible and maximum probable ground
accelerations were calculated to be approximately 0.460 and 0.39g,, respectively.
Project No. 06298-42-01
May 18, 1999
1
Presented in Table 7.1 are the deterministic earthquake events for selected faults and calculated peak
site accelerations for the faults considered most likely to subject the site to ground shaking.
TABLE 7.1.
DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS FOR SELECTED FAULTS
IMEIMETEI
Fault Name Distance Maximum Peak " "
From Site Credible Maximum Peak
(miles) Site Probable
(Mag) Acceleration Site
San Andreas-Southern �® (Mag) Acceleration
EMZEMIla0.09g ® .08g
20
Elsinore-Julian fl 0.168
0.13g
.. ®® 039g Mina
031g
- Illosai.. ®_ 0.46g
0.39g
O.OSg
®_ ® 0.028
0.098
MEM0.048
The site could be subjected to moderate to severe round shaking in the event of a major arthe
on any of the above. listed faults, or other regional faults in the southern California quake
respect to this hazard, the site is comparable to the adjacent with
commercial and residential
developments.
1 7.2. Liquefaction
Liquefaction is a phenomenon in which loose, saturated and relatively cohesionless soil deposits lose
strength during strong Found motions. Primary factors controlling the development of liquefaction
include density and duration of ground motion, characteristics of the subsurface soil, in situ stress
conditions and the depth to groundwater.
7.3. Evaluation of Liquefaction Potential
Evaluation of the site liquefaction potential was performed following procedures suggested by Seed
et at. (1985). Our general approach to the evaluation was to use field test data(Standard Penetration
Blow Counts)and gradation characteristics of the subsurface soils, considering a maximum probable
earthquake of Magnitude 6.3, postulated to occur on the Elsinore-Temecula Fault zone as the closest
approach to the site.
Quaternary alluvial deposits encountered in Boring I
pendix A) was
analysis. For the analysis, the groundwater depth measured in the boring,
stun ad in the penetration
g standard penetration test
Project No.06298-42-01
-6-
May 18, 1999
values and gradation characteristics determined from laboratory testing were used. Materials above the
groundwater table and soils classified as silt (ML) or clay (CL) according to the Unified Soil
Classification System (USCS) were considered to be non-liquefiable, due to the high percentages of
fines. Liquefaction potential computations were performed utilizing the computer program LI UEFy2
(Blake, 1989c). The results of the computer analyses are presented in Appendix C. Q
A site acceleration of 0.39 g (Maximum Probable site acceleration) estimated from the EQFAULT
run was used in the liquefaction analysis. This acceleration assumes that the site exists on "bedrock"
or that relatively dense formational materials are present at shallow depth. Research (Seed and
Idriss, 1982), indicates that for short-period, high-frequency seismic waves (as would be produced
by the "near-field" event assumed in the analysis), the presence of deep, soft soil deposits tend to
damp the seismic waves, resulting in a reduced maximum ground acceleration at the ground surface.
Therefore, our analysis is conservative as no reduction in ground acceleration was used. The results
of the analysis indicates that a calculated factor of safety very near 1.0 exists for a layer between
30.75 feet and 34.75 feet below the existing ground surface. Although the calculated safety factors
are technically greater than 1.0, liquefaction may occur.
7.4. Effects of Liquefaction
The above tabulation indicates that liquefaction in a relatively thin discrete zone could occur for the
intense levels of ground shaking assumed in the analysis. However, the effects of liquefaction can
be mitigated by providing an increase in overburden pressure and a compacted fill mat Research
presented by Ishihara (1985) indicates that the presence of a non-liquefiable surface layer may
prevent the effects of at-depth liquefaction from reaching the surface. This can occur when the
surface layer is thick enough to resist the upward pressure of the liquefying stratum. Based on a
chart presented by Ishihara (1985), it has been determined that the previous remedial grading and
placement of additional compacted fill soils to the current sheet grade elevations reduces the
potential for the effects of soil liquefaction to be manifested at the ground surface to a point such that
probability for such manifestations is low.
8. SETTLEMENT CONSIDERATIONS
A settlement monitoring program was established at the conclusion of the mass grading operations in
1994. The program consisted of the installation of 17 settlement monuments and surveying of the
monuments between June and September 1994. Results of the analyses were reported in our report
entitled Consultation: Settlement Monitoring Results for Vail Ranch Commercial Site, Tentative
Tract No. 23172, Temecula, California dated December 5, 1997. The results of the monitoring
indicated a maximum settlement of 0.04 feet (.48 inches). The monitoring was conducted until the
Project No. 06298-42-01
May IS, 1999
•
1
•
last 2 to 3 readings indicated little to no movement. Based upon the survey results, it was
determined that settlement of the underlying alluvium due to the fill loads was essentially complete
and the lots considered suitable for continued development.
It is anticipated that the additional grading will consist of cuts and fills on the order of 3 feet or less.
As such, no significant increase in loading to the underlying alluvium should occur. Therefore,
settlement for the proposed new development should not be an adverse impact and should be within
tolerable limits for the types of structures proposed.
Project No.06298.42-01 _8-
May 18, 1999
9. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
9.1. General
9.1.1. No soil or geologic conditions were encountered during our study which would preclude
the development of the property, as presently planned, provided the recommendations of
this report are followed.
9.1.2. The compacted fill and dynamically compacted upper portions of Recent Alluvium are
considered suitable for the support of fill or conventional structural loads in their present
condition. However, it is recommended that grading be designed such that additional fill
is placed or excavations are less than 2 feet to achieve finish pad grades. This will enable
a minimum 5 foot compacted fill mat to remain beneath proposed buildings.
9.1.3. The surficial compacted fill deposits typically have sheet.graded surfaces, but have been
crossed in a number of areas with drainage ditches which divert surface runoff into
Temecula Creek. These drainage ditches will require localized remedial grading prior to
proposed development.
9.1.4. A portion of the southwestern proposed buildings are situated very near or partly within
the Historic Parcel. No remedial grading occurred during the previous mass grading
operations for this parcel. Therefore, in order to provide a dense compacted fill mat across
the entire building footprint, remedial grading in the form of a partial removal and
recompaction will be required.
9.2. Soil and Excavation Characteristics
9.2.1. The soil conditions encountered generally consist of low-expansive, silty sands in the
surficial compacted fill areas which extend over the entire site.
9.2.2. Excavation within the surficial deposits will require a light effort with conventional heavy
duty earthmoving equipment.
9.2.3. Water soluble sulfate testing was conducted on a representative sample of the site
materials to determine if the soil contains high enough sulfate concentrations that could
damage normal Portland Cement concrete. Table B- of Appendix B summarizes the
sulfate test results. The results of the test indicate a soluble sulfate concentration of 0.021
percent, thereby indicating a very low sulfate content and a corresponding negligible
Project No.06298-42-01 .9,
May 18, 1999
•
sulfate rating based upon Table 19-A-3of the 1994 Uniform Building Code. It should be
noted that the presence of water soluble sulfates is not a visually discernible characteristic.
Therefore, other soil samples from the site could yield different concentrations.
Additionally, over time landscaping activities (i.e. addition of fertilizers and other soil
nutrients) may affect the concentration.
9.3. Grading
9.3.1 All grading should be performed in accordance with the Recommended Grading
Specifications contained in Appendix D. Where the recommendations of Appendix D
conflict with this section of the report,the recommendations of this section take precedence.
9.3.2. Prior to commencing grading, a preconstruction conference should be held at the site with
the owner or developer, grading contractor, civil engineer, and geotechnical engineer in
attendance. Special soil handling and/or the grading plans can be discussed at that time.
9.33. Site preparation should begin with the removal of all deleterious material and vegetation.
The depth of removal should be such that material exposed in cut areas or soils to be used
as fill is relatively free of organic matter. Material generated during stripping and/or site
demolition should be exported from the site.
9.3.4. Within the areas of the existing drainage ditches, preparation of the surface for fill
j placement should consist of the removal of unsuitable material (i.e. the upper soft and/or
eroded areas, and/or runoff silt deposits).
93.5. It is recommended that the portions of the building pads that are within the Historic Parcel
be removed to a depth sufficient to provide a 7 foot compacted fill mat below proposed
building pad subgrade elevations. The removals should extend at least 7 feet horizontally
beyond the building footprint in the Historic Parcel and sufficiently into the previously
graded areas so that the minimum 7 foot compacted fill zone can be achieved.
9.3.6. After removal of unsuitable materials as recommended above,the base of overexcavations
and ground surfaces to receive fill should be scarified approximately 12 inches, heavily
moisture conditioned and compacted.
9.3.7. The site should then be brought to find subgrade elevations with structural fill compacted
in layers. In general, soils native to the site are suitable for re-use as fill if free from
vegetation,debris and other deleterious material. Layers of fill should be no thicker than
Project No.0629842-01 10
May 18, 1999
I
will allow for adequate bonding and compaction. All fill, including backfill and scarified
ground surfaces, should be compacted to at least 90 percent of maximum dry density at or
slightly above optimum moisture content, as determined in accordance with ASTM Test
'j Procedure D 1557-91. Fill areas with in-place density test results indicating moisture
contents less than optimum will require additional moisture conditioning prior to placing
additional fill.
9.3.8. Where practical, the upper 3 feet of all building pads (cut or fill) and 12 inches in
pavement areas should be composed of properly compacted or undisturbed formational
"very low" to "low" expansive soils. "Very low" to "low" expansive soils are defined as
those soils that have an Expansion Index of 50 or less when tested in accordance with
UBC Table 18-I-B. The more highly expansive fill soils should be placed in the deeper fill
areas and properly compacted.
9.4. Foundations
9.4.1. The foundation recommendations that follow are for one- or two-story, lightly loaded
commercial/retail structures. The recommendations are based upon a minimum
compacted fill thickness of 5 feet below building subgrade elevations and that low
expansive materials exist within the upper 3 feet of pad grade.
9.4.2. Continuous footings should be at least 12 inches wide and founded at least 2 feet below
lowest adjacent grade. Spread footings should be at least 3 feet square and founded 2 feet
below lowest adjacent grade.
9.4.3. Foundations proportioned as recommended above may be designed for an allowable soil
bearing pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf). The allowable soil bearing
pressure is for dead plus live loads only, and may be increased by up to one-third when
considering transient loads such as those due to wind or seismic forces.
9.4.4. Continuous footings should be reinforced with four No. 5 steel reinforcing bars, two
placed near the top of the footing and two near the bottom. Reinforcement for the spread
footings should be designed by the project structural engineer.
9.4.5. The above foundation dimensions and minimum reinforcement recommendations are
based upon soil conditions only and are not intended to be used in lieu of those required
for structural purposes.
Project No.0629842-01 - 71 -
May 18, 1999
i
9.4.6. Footings should not be located within 7 feet of the tops of slopes. Footings that must be
located within this zone should be deepened such that the outer bottom edge of the footing
is at least 7 feet from the face of the finished slope.
9.4.7. No special subgrade presaturation is deemed necessary prior to placement of concrete.
However, the slab and foundation subgrade should be sprinkled as necessary, to maintain a
moist condition as would be expected in any such concrete placement.
I
9.5. Concrete Slabs-on-Grade
9.5.1. Building (interior) concrete slabs-on-grade should have a minimum thickness of 5 inches
and should be reinforced with No. 3 reinforcing bars spaced 18 inches on center in both
directions and placed at the slab midpoint For slabs subjected to heavy loading (such as
forklifts, or high stacked loading), the slab should be increased in thickness to 6 inches.
The slabs should be underlain by at least 4 inches of clean sand and, where moisture
sensitive floor coverings are planned or where slab moisture would be objectionable, a
visqueen moisture barrier placed in the middle of the 4-inch sand blanket should also be
placed.
9.52. Exterior slabs should be at least 4 inches in thickness and reinforced with 6x6-6/6 welded
wire mesh. The mesh should be positioned within the upper one-third of the slab. Proper
mesh positioning is critical to future performance of the slabs. It has been our experience
1 that the mesh must be physically pulled up into the slab during concrete placement. The
contractor should take extra measures to provide for proper mesh positioning.
9.5.3. All concrete slabs should be provided with adequate construction joints and/or expansion
joints to control unsightly shrinkage cracking. The spacing should be determined by the
project structural engineer based upon the intended slab usage, thickness and
reinforcement. The structural engineer should take into consideration criteria of the
American Concrete Institute when establishing crack control spacing patterns.
9.5.4. The recommendations of this report are intended to reduce the potential for cracking of
slabs due to expansive soils (if present), differential settlement of deep fills or fills of
varying thickness. However, even with the incorporation of the recommendations
presented herein, foundations, stucco walls, and slabs-on-grade placed on such conditions •
may still exhibit some cracking due to soil movement and/or shrinkage. The occurrence of
concrete shrinkage cracks is independent of the supporting soil characteristics. Their
occurrence may be reduced and/or controlled by limiting the slump of the concrete, proper
Project No.06298.42-01 - 12-
May 18, 1999
: l
concrete placement and curing, and by the placement of crack control joints at periodic
intervals, in particular, where re-entry slab corners occur.
9J. Retaining Walls and Lateral Loads
1
9.6.1. Retaining walls not restrained at the top and having a level backfill surface should be
designed for an active soil pressure equivalent to the pressure exerted by a fluid density
of35 oundscubic foot
P per (pcf). Where the backfill will be inclined at no steeper
than 2.0 to I.0, an active soil pressure of 45 pcf is recommended. These soil pressures
assume that the backfill materials within an area bounded by the wall and a 1:1 plane
extending upward from the base of the wall possess an Expansion Index of less than 50.
For those lots with finish grade soils having an Expansion Index greater than 50 and/or
where backfill materials do not conform with the above criteria, Geocon Incorporated
should be consulted for additional recommendations.
9.6.2. Unrestrained walls are those that are allowed to rotate more than 0.001H at the top of the
wall. Where walls are restrained from movement at the top, an additional uniform
pressure of 7H psf(where H equals the height of the retaining wall portion of the wall in
feet)should be added to the above active soil pressure.
9.63. All retaining walls should be provided with a drainage system adequate to prevent the
buildup of hydrostatic forces and should be waterproofed as required by the project
architect. The use of drainage openings through the base of the wall (weep holes, etc.) is
not recommended where the seepage could be a nuisance or otherwise adversely impact
the property adjacent to the base of the wall. The above recommendations assume a
l
properly compacted granular (Expansion Index less than 50) backfill material with no
hydrostatic forces or imposed surcharge load. If conditions different than those described
are anticipated, or if specific drainage details are desired, Geocon Incorporated should be
contacted for additional recommendations.
9.6.4. In general, wall foundations having a minimum depth and width of one foot may be
designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,000 psf, provided the soil within 3 feet
below the base of the wall has an Expansion Index of less than 90. The proximity of the
foundation to the top of a slope steeper than 3:1 could impact the allowable soil bearing
pressure. Therefore, Geocon Incorporated should be.consulted where such a condition is
anticipated.
Project No.0629842-0I - [3 -
May 18, 1999
9.6.5. For resistance to lateral loads, an allowable passive earth pressure equivalent to a fluid
density of 300 pcf is recommended for footings or shear keys poured neat against properly
compacted granular fill soils or undisturbed natural soils. The allowable passive pressure
assumes a horizontal surface extending at least 5 feet or three times the surface generating
the passive pressure, whichever is greater. The upper 12 inches of material not protected
by floor slabs or pavement should not be included in the design for lateral resistance. An
allowable friction coefficient of 0.4 may be used for resistance to sliding between soil and
concrete. This friction coefficient may be combined with the allowable passive earth
pressure when determining resistance to lateral loads.
9.6.6. The recommendations presented above are generally applicable to the design of rigid
concrete or masonry retaining walls having a maximum height of 8 feet. In the event that
walls higher than 8 feet or other types of walls are planned, such as crib-type walls,
Geocon Incorporated should be consulted for additional recommendations.
9.7. Preliminary Pavement Recommendations
9.7.1. The following pavement sections are preliminary. Actual pavement sections should be
determined once subgrade elevations have been attained and R-Value testing on subgrade
1 soils is performed. Pavement thicknesses were determined using procedures outlined in
the California Highway Design Manual (Caltrans) and the Flexible Pavement Structural
Section Design Guide for Caljfornia Cities and Counties. Summarized below are the
recommended preliminary pavements sections for automobile and truck traffic areas,
respectively.
TABLE 9.6.
PRELIMINARY PAVEMENT DESIGN SECTIONS
Location Estimated Traffic Asphalt Concrete Class 2 Base
Index(TI) (inches) (=hes)
Parking Areas 4.5 3.0 5.0.
Driveways • 5 3.0 7.0
Truck Traffic Areas 7 4.0 8.0
9.72. Asphalt Concrete should conform to Section 203-6 of the Standard Specifications for
Public Works Construction (Green Book). Class 2 aggregate base materials should
conform to Section 26-1.02A of the Standard Specifications of the State of California
Department of Transportation(Caltrans).
•
Project No.06298-42-01 - 14- May 18, 1999
9.73. Prior to placing base material, the subgrade should be scarified to a depth of at least 12
inches, moisture conditioned and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent relative
compaction. The base material should also be compacted to at least 95 percent relative
compaction.
z
9.7.4. Loading aprons such as trash bin enclosures or loading docks should utilize Portland
Cement concrete. The pavement should consist of a minimum 7-inch concrete section
reinforced with No. 3 steel reinforcing bars spaced 24 inches on center in both directions
placed at the slab midpoint. The concrete should extend out from the trash bin such that
both the front and rear wheels of the trash truck will be located on reinforced concrete
pavement when loading and unloading.
9.7.5. The performance of pavements is highly dependent upon providing positive surface
drainage away from the edge of pavements. Ponding of water on or adjacent to the
pavement will likely result in saturation of the subgrade materials and subsequent
pavement distress. If planter islands are planned, the perimeter curb should extend at least
6 inches below the level of the Class 2 base.
9.8. Drainage and Maintenance
9.81 Good drainage is imperative to reduce the potential for differential soil movement, erosion
and subsurface seepage. Positive measures should be taken to properly finish grade the
building pads after the structures and other improvements are in place, so that the drainage
water from the buildings, lots and adjacent properties is directed off the lots and to the
street away from foundations and the top of the slopes. Experience has shown that even
with these provisions, a shallow groundwater or subsurface water condition can and may
develop in areas where no such water conditions existed prior to the site development this
is particularly true where a substantial increase in surface water infiltration results from an
increase in landscape irrigation.
•
9.9. Grading Plan Review
9.9.1. The soils engineer and engineering geologist should review the Grading Plans prior to
finalization to verify their compliance with the recommendations of this report and
determine the need for additional investigation, comments, recommendations and/or
analysis.
Project No. 06298-42-01 - 15- May 18, 1999
}
LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS
1. The recommendations of this report pertain only to the site investigated and are based upon
the assumption that the soil conditions do not deviate from those disclosed in the
=a investigation. If any variations or undesirable conditions are encountered during
construction, or if the proposed construction will differ from that anticipated herein, Geocon
Incorporated should be notified so that supplemental recommendations can be given. The
evaluation or identification of the potential presence of hazardous or corrosive materials was
not part of the scope of services provided by Geocon Incorporated.
2. This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or of his
•
representative, to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are
brought to the attention of the architect and engineer for the project and incorporated into the
plans, and the necessary steps are taken to see that the contractor and subcontractors carry
out such recommendations in the field.
3. The findings of this report are valid as of the present date. However, changes in the
conditions of a property can occur with the passage of time, whether they be due to natural
processes or the works of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in
applicable or appropriate standards may occur, whether they result from legislation or the
broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, the findings of this report may be invalidated
wholly or partially by changes outside our control. Therefore,this report is subject to review
and should not be relied upon after a period of three years.
Project Na.0629842-01
May 18, 1999
�3�Y ,i 4 ‘p...
%
x (• I',• ,t. A -a aPo.', �L rµtc
I
i h
.744-t-t... sicsi '4.?1,44-1'srtztt.: v , " 174.
0.
--- SC11111.4-_,—-iiiiiyas-:: :,,
mwa CC N.....PALI
IRA F \
a
4.\V,
4 / i- I r1 ce) � _ eHC '.TS ,m—
"tomii
RI--..`Gh� Et Htf F F
i I
T MECULA, - .I a� . i
r e .w __
i ' n _ ft .�, •9 yy 7•y „,. .-.1 %
,. r
',r\ E•i \ at.. \S" µle
4 .' 7
PECNANGA
r 27
\ / ZB — —' INDIAN
etscannuII:/
-/ RESERVATION •
r—
4
SOURCE: 1999 THOMAS BROTHERS MAP
SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
FdpRoovem verN PERNISICN GRANTED BY THOMAS BROTHERS MAPS.
THIS MAP Is COPYRy7HTm BY TOMAS EROS MAPS. IT IS UNLAWFUL TO COPY
OR REPRODU ALL OR ANY PART THEREOF.WIENER FOR PERSONAL USE OR r'
RESALE.WITNO T PFRW39CW
NO SCALE
GE O C ON �� VICINITY MAP
INCORPORATED
GEC'TEGiNICAL CONSULTANTS WALMART AT TEMKULA
6960 FLANDER5 DRIVE - SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92121.2974 TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA
PHONE 619 558-6900 - FAX 619 558-6159
GCC/JB/TA 1 I DSK/E0000 DATE 05-18-1999 PROJECT NO. 06298-42-01 FIG. 1
? IVICMAF
APPENDIX A
FIELD INVESTIGATION
The field investigation was performed on April 23 and April 26, 1999 and consisted of a site
reconnaissance and the excavation of 8 small diameter borings. The borings were excavated to
depths varying from 16 feet to 50 feet below the existing ground surface using an Ingersoll Rand A-
300 truck mounted drill rig equipped with an 8-inch diameter hollow stem auger. During drilling,
relatively undisturbed samples were obtained by driving a 3-inch, O.D., split-tube sampler into the
"undisturbed" soil mass with blows from a 140-pound hammer falling a distance of 30 inches.
Standard Penetration Test blowcounts were obtained by driving a 2-inch, O.D., split-tube sampler
into the "undisturbed" -soil mass with blows from a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. Bulk
samples were also obtained.
The soil conditions encountered in the borings were visually examined, classified and logged in
general accordance with American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) practice for
Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure D2844). Logs of the borings are
presented on Figures A-1 through A-9. The logs depict the soil and geologic conditions encountered
and the depth at which samples were obtained. The approximate locations of the borings are shown
i on the Site Plan,Figure 2.
•
Project No.06298-42-01 May 18, 1999
•
F=,�il` �t �'$,�yy.'Sl � ) /.4 , ,(� War.' ' r s; J La Y.• .5:.}' �'t; c,�•. {t• ". r! ."""',. y'Fk w 1•,�': r Pr +f Nit .q�S' I. 1- . a'
SPPNNr rd r$,"4' 1 ((t-
f-r't4 r4�.r fel; S";Lltler. Pr•
�!��5 FP� TIS! �`R '�rttl. •tf&} fief➢'. t '1; ;'� k ,:f tn.y pr'l „Ili, rdtr�fi -i i t. y 'A4�;S4non - . r'"• 4r L , f.:
Cj
i't.II .1 •;^ .,t 7'•..;� 7` ( - . y'. 6( ,. 4. :7 {< l' 6 l ti tt )�{t !nt l'4'1,3,4,,,,,t.,,:,,, t,•"4 a ,� . ,• ifk i_o 'bi7-"W4' Ji4444,,;'1
4.
a. . }4. ''�w 1. 6 t� r , a r ,7_• 4 -� 7l',. ) ,,,,,„, , .l i- . s{ 't �r�' r� s'., , '.4 4 ,g i• !
q iv'7 t• 1.. Ss••Jr.^v .: % 1 f G{f " t.ti t ; pp,s t:;,;. i,� -,ii:Y.t F n ff ;ktils i 4'4yAu'gq5 7 * , h tt ';Y2 i�v+ "';m:}9 '�4 kr �i-?.xGF14�•'!i1Si a�, 71 i I -
r`' r ,1{'Z) f,l Tl- {.'_IhtP grill.*
t➢. "'l.i'w4 F'}T E ,'1 I� {„ry,",,' £1!�➢Vt Y..,fJ�r }i�, J (ia „• 1 . 4 .. 11} ik. 1l 71 ' ? f e^'1 c 1• 6 f. i '� v^��f}.'•
tli ti Il 1l. 1 ., iltie ,:6 1 T:1al. (11ti :{ (t .J 1.1 l'-tr tr9 txX ii fr t 4 J ''C1 ( ( 4 q .. ,. tl'I 1 try
' G-' 1 1 )_ r ! ) � � /,�, M •i tit 1,« .- i It :"r r P (y �?t.yt vA ! f , .,�'Lt ( Rt 'r �' I � al ( 1ih.ii
•
t )' ! a 1 ' . 1 i 4 J., `, a ) ` 1 ' 4 r I "� -✓ + k. t� i
' hi t .r t }f I F 4t t -O ' Cli ''Y J .y 4 \ 1 4 I. 1 1 '+ r 1 1.' 4 1 .rj3 i 4!';:'
1' • , 11 ) is ) ✓). d Pr 4 r I r r f r f v ( ,
i -i s t : 7 } e l t 41r 4 1 x t , .a 7 .- A 'I ' ': (.tA 1j15
•r tt ' /!'&T1 r / t j(f n Vf ii t, l.: x S , 4'. i I I - i . 1 y I' 't'1r h1 4 {'. :,
tilul Orr ✓ t t h n s R r✓( 1L.I r 'J 4 r I1C t hitt -.,141 y}: a t _ y f1 s1
t.
µ 7,:•) ,.. It L r ( tL 'l1S 1 y r 77 XI) I '(.� rY. I li r 7' f 1 n.{ t $ i{.'1'' (r 1 j �.?,_��
+ ( , t1 _ I J 1 - it E , o--11 ➢ !J r. t i t!' 1 d tI. 7� r , -
S,F')11ir •t 1 4 r 1 1 :% t➢y f } [p pp ,"1*. t l' , I r v 1 q(A I : r !rl' 1' rt"
.11.)'''.:'-e.:.1!:'...:
. It� .11 D 'd,_larl 11 r .::+t jra.r1411 J ,')1'i t1 r4-'.ici 14F'�it.�Vi�'r,Y", t!1 5r i4A it'..�Y�Y! ':yt4 '" �..,! '• 4l �t�:r( /I vi YI tl^I.5) t t r rtl i. {. - A F� f d41 ''j,
/r 1) ilt! , 'Y , 1 I4 4. v : r41 . t: t l q:a ! 4{. I! y1 S`i f• v 4''ttf'If e� t _ r t S t i - r r ) vtYil� 5 e v 6�,/ f r . pll lid r . ;145
I!Cr I u. r( F f.f 1) 51.:1 ; n "1t{,.-. 541 tt 1{ J� Z + 'S}5 1 II 1,1'17 r-}I r 1 5 -r . ', if oK L^• d [ 0. i 1 (. r7 t ) d7 ITt�iYltl.::'
91 1 , 1':-: 'J { h Y '“:';• ) ! i 1's 7 e .4),(4.%/07' 4. tl^ir�t '{6,stl 4 t e } t:rirt t; !1 r 4 t %1.. (V;. ° ( •ir e. e7,? f' ¢ Y ,
1_h 9-il. FI U' 1-,'• I 4x1 ) t . )_r 1 !t(Yt � r 1- s:a �Dw'S X[ 1( ! ti. : 1,.” �:S Jrlwy [ ,!' 1 1fl vie E p• ' 7n 4Jfrt "'
,x ,i r t - 1 1 I �d l tr J J 7 ' r s 1
th i :G I ,. 1 "M1tr ? tl�! e !' F' 1 / it1 , 4 iF( }riU lltV, 1 i rN i r41 ,;• 4� '.1Sd: ' 44'+1 t 4pE(, . t.l
� r r r l . It ( �V t '' ' I L - r ( - ) rl• Jtn k rl : fit 11 dl I 'K Y I na11' r 1 1+. .c t r J4. :fi S y ! t r "i v+4 • _r
�J i ) '.)... . 1 F 7 .S +4 i'.i h-4 t. i{!11':tf 4 h •tM /6 h'.14•�FII f t'i 4- t4l lrr' '.G..,' r; ( ' :F I ,,1 Ar.'. J! + J, ,r r) f ! ! ! -1, %rn L'. ..
I t{ r lt, .i I �t i-..+ t f !-'. i ii4 �) Yti Seli,trl.l''1- yw A-. 4t - , /4'h 1 'F) C i1t' ,n s S r, -i f5il^, ,.i
r rl 1 rY.; f �. 14 h f % t i ( � 5.�'1 rt']j.. n�Vtyty� �{iS14:r ��(;�.1! t ,TI�A a.,b*� f / _. 1...r t _ NF !I Y:,j:rA t( v� ,lr 1 V, 'l: T ' t /u:. 1.LiA , y Yka.;
• i
r n' Ur.,r „4 ..S. o 4 .5h' ''• i: 51 N 1 .",it is ..1�t.:t({. 'Ji. ."" lir'')i .t1 iri. R w ( l ',,,IP,t 4j n) 1.,t 1 L. f a I: ; 4 r:.; •� .r f''S5 if; LI .Irq
It t : ,:y4 , 1 , •'S _ s t.S:.'. 1 rl {�I? r .. -:.!i ,!>i-kit Ji ,,A4,tt),sp7 f')�>.1�4(1 r 4ry� };14ir:1 ` � .w lei''.r. } ;Z `' ) --y�1:P.'.t n S r{/;".: / )i5 t-,,'i t :-fi •,:v' v 4:5.44 ir4'thfi 15,::�:j
e I C� t {';�'IJ.k �.1 lr , {{x n •/ 5 k ,01.0,:611:v i r - ( ¢T i} AiY -1 ,rJ 1 tl
t .. �,' .1.
t1 r ., � .+5 ,!.' 1 6:-,:-.:9.11.:::
Ft i E HSJ It lslTlg. • ICT {• ''S14` 1y�N t1'f 11 A:I V. MV '..NY44rr G!\ 7,- }r4x t o I.r iX..l,.iy5l{ t ^.r" . f1i't.. Jt/j na i4 4t V`}1r ,V '• 47- -
F.;<ii4 , :r ' '.1 ! r} � n t ' ltii� . fd•,�rb4 eF� li(, 1'fhY ) �t! Y'h 1,�1.Xr�r. Eki A,:� t ., fi ylffl' . ilt ,{4rR 1R'4114 .. �1,✓ rl 1' �' ! d Jt'
_•7 1 ' f ._ 11 �� i ,I,' SI.r 1414 ii ty riu ! ., - 1 r {s-"'1 r F +¢ f 41ty 4j`,;
[ r I - w rlt).'. V1 r 4JIN u rs 4 +tMJl�J 1 rr 14, t.F fit+.. �4➢it 1 A lwt 4 t - i :� / .rYT1F ' I
.,L. Y t: - v .rpt 7. 4) ,&. j (1.lith .hitt 1; 4} 4 1 ., i �i sr ti Y� tJ 4 : L 4 1 {-a { S., IXtA -�Gf . ft .',
vJ1 J4A 1St -;4i :',i i '- 14 fi Vtaf yT>p try }irl rryJr{ rf?jfO;4 'r r S ( r 1 �[' yl . 4 D=,di tr 4 •tl4ljt ¢: i . .f e r-7*.
x r 1 I":1 Y J l.t'u, /, (4 x '.I r I tg c• r I EI,'9 i ie -'7`', t e�' .-ii- Aii r ^(.lt :y, t 4t: .,, ^�i`, s,j '.. :
: t , t� (-1...1 t�I -.. 51P) '. x .rtl7 i'. Ft �a 'r4P. :Pi't 1 r y rr..A ts.,- ('' J1 J /' � t. 4.'1 J34. !7:
1. 11 t I ! 1J I 1-,f . ft•s :V li >: ) .. Y J1 1 r I fi y'.t'( ,^�'- i1 I F ikl ]•y4 i/ t1}I 11 F •S• 1 1
t t h ➢ � s"11 ny ° 1 Ihve p4+ t ,i.YJr £7red,4 �`ly + 4e 4 icJ �l ...1 / . + J. w - ' ' 7 > t ! '( it{ YTi ;S
rl �" I) ^S lGl s F.i , .I jFt h i i F< rl 7 ')'1 R,eZ s ('. .' 1,�` , t �:. 47-.17 { `f 5. {f' t r T � '4"Y T
r J r r .. I s �• , :.d1-r ,[ , .yf u.r f-. n �=t l 4 �3 '�"7 G I I { (F - I, 11 +. {
I ! n r ri ':t ri 1.• ::'� .({ t} •41�[r 1 r r. v '�. 5 4 Y'{�4'yj nA-. 111 'S 5 r rl St t 0 ."`. Fe I: 1 01.14 rl t+ !.),,,,,..0-. I' j1'jls {. ,,i
r 4 Il.,r )t ��lt i ' P 141- '1 1.' 4: t F 41 I 11 1 F'i 4]144( f. 4� . 1 <' r) i.17'�r 1 514;i ,'lt l ( 1 t 'J Jf 1l- .1`n ,{yf Tali r^(,!
+. 7rf .�f:1. crI) ! 11 r � '�, Y r s.�4 1ti_1 ..41 `Y"11 b'F ff '(ty, 9�l!iY41 iI 1 -r, }t��ti� t tlrti .5 � �),,� IM1 Jt ( 4 k1/S -I`j la lhS� t1_)�.'.
¢ y Y l} 4n1 �4 t F -0 f u3 7rd J','A. a/➢ !!I ) 1.
1 {- ^.. f kIJ , 1 -tk l`C' tl ➢ .. t:MA. ii , r ' t 1 _; 1 rY It t (1. x it A•YOli Iing?.1 ➢
, s.,� 1
i , � I tt .'1 I f l `1 t•
J '�' t ', R' '1inP ) 1 t5y AC h 1,1 Q t t c ti P:'- ),( ?f, fi J t tl `t'1\ }Yt M t! I I + ll�i( 4 1 r
r 1' ! t 1 L:--J! 4 ', r 4 ) I.l,�'1 /I 7 If>;5 1 l ].r t Y7 _ l IH r s't '( t:: ! Yl 1 'll. .1 tt�R .i
1 .I � I 11 11 Ini t '1 i ..h. S �'{. f i 4r 17.. yY`t L rl .'r � ! 5 r >
'4 r - 1 r S. 4. 1 1 w 4:. I4y} Ilf [t > _t. 1 J 7 ,i41j y I: !
r r.A ( s C 1 + r f l r rC, jr( t X t�lF
r I , - 1 't. lr,i!-; � ' 'A L74 I . YJ!'" cJ� f) tr�tAl i`i-_1 :_n rti I,li tl )t(tri' It a-'�r t i.t_.5pt tJYp�1- ri
. e r l ' I J i• I li er i. 1". S 1 t 'I i . i.. ! f : a .:v'4
t 1 4r 1 r r Y5 '.! ° 't 1 1'444 t Y' t 3 4, l "al t4i 41 ) t .Fy fy1:
S • s P t I r.. 1 ( t i L 1 ' ✓ 14 11'o r 4 tY. `.- ) r r /, sJ J t T + ', ' 4 .'�Ih S' V( 4 i
l Y r ( / tt 1.:l1 1 F tc. 1` +�! C ( f. f4 L r i 11 7 '', ti Y i r;
11 r i 5FIi '41 t^. i , r 4F ( I Yh t Y :A .1 s 1{)t pi ,
( Jt � � ) i -. 9 t � t , FI n t ) 5 'I 1 r _ fit }'_-n
! I r • ':l ",S r {7 ,?_t '.:• R f ! t. I .,(1 r ♦ '11 f j .t .kte... it f Ir •1 't t I - S 4 1 ._ U y ° 4ft f�
t � II L.t'• 1 jt'. 4,4 ) ! t.Y li t p•41 1✓: 4 7 x) n� + 5 e� l� r " Y )r(.� 4r4 I t I V e I a 5 n4 -�J
J . 4r f t' t(1. 4 1 1 i1 .. i 4i, J f rj_4`.W f: .M1 j1 ' I . r1/4�;.44f tf 4 (.. 11 /tf .V 1. 3 { ( -1 141 J }4.:2; if 1 'n �. . � ;r tl�t
II 1 + - 1 . r � r�'y.A , v >,.��� f � 7 � 4 - S 1,r,+1:d ') {'� 1 rt Y -t+i � � 7",
,r,..-6..,,,,:,..,A.3;
t4 r � � :t t +Jr (f t 1 1 I ) r f y It 1, t L4 EJB
.4v \ 411 '.-:::::,:,....,,./.;;•,;'1.-1::;::;4:.•,..:.)7
- 1: A rJ `J (1 ct-, ;;t t}n(_r I iii;i i ?7, Y + ':1f ;€ i.hr 4*il� 9 r ''f r.. -¢).r)t4 f i " 1.;' r )1 t}M1 .1 1 jr.i-rF Y34I"l ;ry
I & i ,r.1.: r , `.^. t l !I"�`i '776sj� vt tl .1tI'k 1 ✓ ){•tl r ° i.i;, r i :➢ 49 for t.. Jfi, It s F k °i P7dq Yl ).ry
1 ; ll�! 1 I S t �' � {�:+lJ 41 f G!➢L _ll 'F'}t.0 1L4f '1• � h 7 1 Y�1+1° _ "13Y b. 4) S Ili.• I M all +r Pi
I b 5 f _ S i 44a4+1 Y i. : :( yui Fpt{i9 r r rl -:17' li "7 1 • C '1 S,$ r_ H4f.1 4 4 r ?_ • ✓ .s S i �k.
p x f - G s l p. _i i t ' l ry !r 72 ° • r.. h7 1 o f r'k r: t t I? %; 4 t f ! J - �' .r j �r.1
Y 1 1 1 1-J:I i.t i i ) t* r Gl p r:( 1:4 t 111 /l pi,4d *n;, 4 1 ry s ':Z t d 1•C +. R r I t + s 1• r J (< 1 t "
.1J�1 q�� � t �'r,�:�41 z r � ff it 1742 ! f . i4
1 1 t r. 1 E y 1 '4 r .41 5 ffi_ G I ' 4 C-: 4 it . +1 Std 3 Eir ri v '`. 5
:11IF � !r J7 1, -)')f + 0 : '.nos{)¢ 7ry'S,S! r �+a 5.fi1 ..11 l 1 i Y , i 4�Y Yr
i 1 aY - 1 ti I 17 r„ r i- .^I>._41 :rIC ➢ 4 f t ?'.i i'4,� ., i ssx �p 1-sr 1411 � 9,Y € y.,i�In r 4 'f ", G 414 '-i ,,, ? f C�).'i.,tr,*,
i .,>.I E' ,� )1 .n 1-tii :-! e4 ;tf 1 d t i4 ♦'P,� :F f -i fr .? t( it ,., (✓ js `)l t'•s;tprvfj.,d.t,, Zij r..�f (. ,'i 4ir i fcq ! . 't , 4, t .. ,b. r t 'Lf >`)YYP • t7t
47 1 Sl rl..: Ci t ' �:7 11 L � ��, yy4. ,h. r1fVf$�^If ..1�1'�.itl�I„ �,fSI"'ICl{�hi(i'itf'i.,� ltk �' tr is.i\. ,S �t.1j'. .y/ -r!;lJ� ` 1�S�,v d1.St �r 11}Ct{� {h I..� S, Y �ir.yi ) J�,1,i:��5 i ky1+
i -tl •. r 7 1 ,.3 1 p i f 4 -L: Y (I rfl t ,P}yi irit3n t' �rirstY.(I✓h .{f i�i4t v 9.hSl ,...r !LAR S? li',r4 .e rtl'�;vr({ 4111;.t:''4 f EV jq:"L!l -454 i ' IF. K4i4 i�1 )(•Y
I^ It\: nri. 1 + f. . 4th yn 4 4 , 71 s{. ! h!J U' ll yR .r ll >(t. I.F . fV fl 514}r �. 4 j.i.tty r 4 •I` f{ .p", 1'?'i r4'7
! K ti V ' 4 4 , t.{ii -'11 GLYF r?(•n t'➢y u4 ( 4 ': '1 ? ;' 514171 oR4:: 'Fr. t ➢+ tI '1'- j•✓nh�.l{ "_!�f /4ti� M0 'tY1�'4F
tr r . It 4 :k t.,. I t. I•, ?R �r 1 '.e{'; f. Z I� I(la .�rt i., +i 1 n v F4 «.. l' f.•h. 1 �. L Y�
I i � �” ! , 4 i ', I i h l ;rk':. 7 r 4 t �.. �t4t 11ic r + t 4 :u� i i �>➢r Ir.• !; 4 . it t 5 MI 5 : A , �rY` -i; Pt/1�ntr�57'�r{3
rl 4 ',111. S' Ifl i+44f ••ro l' ppt) t r I '..4 1J t r„ J r r:l,� }h ,4 td}1 Y I t l: 4 tl I+r)1t4J4'Stk,\j �dv
4. r ..i r f pp Il , '_. 1 1 �1 1 1! 1 54R -. 1 11 . v , 1' Ls Ij '{r 117 ' 7 I 1 4 4114.;
1 `. J 1 r +'F '� :(" t 'I 4 ( it • tl> d I J r f a r(
1 1 • 7. . t 1 -�},1 y 42 1 � 4 r! t A '.t t ! sl t - 1 ! I , p it I ti?,
It k � - 1 l -.a 1 i 1•- nil 1"i.' > c 1 -1>Y1 J ' r( 11r, A� ; ly itr,
¢ 1 r' 1t. i' ' • r sl r irr4 1 'i t it 'r7 �Wi4 kF k'
fl,;:.:',".,:-1 .':!•;:...16::.,:::-ii.-;:i▪ i. 4 1 C:L54.>t r ."tu t r k f r r i” .2.!"772y,-,::)..r....)4.,>.„-;;....,...z,' I ! r • f rr .;h14S i .1,r
/ : I ( ( :' JY v , t l I t 4_ir14 , t r''i S " I > v ) ' $rr; t ) " ) 4 r ,
i /I + i 1 ( t 1 1 _l/r 4t4 ! 41v T��y L t �' 1 i + it 11/. .1,r 1 S .4 I ; :. f r 1 4t : .' 'f; ;.
r I ) . ( I:c h „} 0 7if i i1P ..!:•;;;. ::.i' 4t it s (1 3It 'Y 1. ' 1 rn 3:
.i -i1 A 4 4 r1 i 1r` r , r i i s. t , - s
i _ �T , !' , I . ! (c. lerfi - err .:r 4' 4 irr-1 ! t 1 it r) i . . 1 ,: {It 7 i._,
I II 1I 1 Ir a r 1 _
f. i 1 I� rtf r4 X i \ R.:ii 4 f{ 1' Il i I r t 1 l'i , 4 tl,
r I ( i :;1 I '" .l 4 r .t J 1 Y )ll• it 1 t i t {. i r 1 t�
7 t tI n ( 1 i fit f Y •} J10 / ryY e v 4 1 /1_. { It .'
i , . ' J t Ir 1.i „i4 14 t.1 +Rh t .Aho fT 1 c, s ) 4 4 -z 'tti r 1 JI 1 I i r I{ I f
r I t t { ri ! I r ! { ..1 u c ri s r Iiy 421'
Y / I 1 ' IylY +tl-' • 1 1 t + ( i 7.1.1.„..::c.:.!..3-, ,.;7/74:.7-?,•p%
2ti • ]Y I0.]➢ lirlll.
+ 7 1 r I }rx P {( , i i I L .▪ I +a y �. J Il t f i + 4 7 / r L 1 r r 1+ r' .r ,r -;4!,:...•t ;• r 1.1 711 t _i
L
. I Illr 1/ }r �.)t •�1 f} Its u 7rt%:1 J I r :r� tiftfl..•
:.:'• ' ! l Yi: .v 3: ..,. Jr !f r.; r i r. . :.IS ' r .[:. •,i Sc .; jll tQ irk;
I%I 7.
t
.. .: ..
•
•
APPENDIX B
• LABORATORY TESTING
Laboratory tests were performed in accordance with generally accepted test methods of the
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) or other suggested procedures. Selected
samples were tested for their in-place density and moisture content, direct shear strength, expansion,
gradation, consolidation and water soluble sulfate characteristics. An R-Value test was also
performed on a sample of the near surface materials. The results of the tests are summarized on
Tables B-I through B-IV. The in-place dry density and moisture content of the samples tested are
presented on the Boring Logs in Appendix A. Gradation and consolidation test data are shown
graphically on figures B-1 through B-5.
TABLE B-I
SUMMARY OF DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS
Sample No. Dry Density Moisture Content Unit Cohesion Angle of Shear
(pcf) (%) (psi) Resistance (degrees)
B2-1 93.4 8.1 400 34
•
TABLE B-II
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY EXPANSION INDEX TEST RESULTS
Sample Moisture Content Dry Expansion
No. Before Test(%) After Test(%) Density(pcf) Index
82-2 9.2 24.2 1133 43
83-2 9.1 18.8 114.0 20
TABLE B-III
SUMMARY OF LABORATORY POTENTIAL OF
HYDROGEN (pH) AND RESISTIVITY TEST RESULTS
Sample No: pg Resistivity Soluble Sulfate
(ohm centimeters) (%)
B2-2 9.49 667 0.021
TABLE S-IV
SUMMARY OF R-VALUE AND SAND EQUIVALENT TEST RESULTS
Sample No. Location R-Value
B1-2 Southwest Corner of Walmart Building Pad 54
• Project No. 06298-42-01 May 13, 1999
) PROJECT NO. 06298-42-01
i
IGRAVEL SAND
COARSE I FINE COARSd MEDIUM I FINE SILT OR CLAY
1
U. S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE
lee i-UT 3/4' 3/8'� a 10 ti Zo 30 506111 t
10 II' I l 11
— 90
1 80 ,
H 70 1
o
H
x
H
W
z a 60 1 I I l i
>o 1
— z 50 ; ., _
ea
II
H11
V. '
Z 40
W
ace 11
30
? 20
l
10
H
0
10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
GRAIN SI7F IN MILLIMETERS
SAMPLE Depth (ft) CLASSIFICATION NAT WC LL PL PI
• B1-10 31.0 (SP-SM) SAND-Silty SAND
GRADATION CURVE
WALMART AT TEMECULA
TE1VIECULA. CALIFORNIA
UMTEM
Figure B-I
1 •
1 •
PROJECT NO. 06298-42-01
•
GRAVEL SAND
COARSE FINE ICOARS MEDIUM I FINE SILT OR CLAY
U. S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE
•
8
.1 3" 1-12' 3/4' 3/8" 4 IIP lI 20 30 40 5060 100 200
1001 . f
90 -
80 r•
70 -
s 60
}
m
cc
w 50
L
• z 40
w
r" U
•
d 30
20
.
10
i ` 0
10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
•
• GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIME IJ•.'RS
SAMPLE Depth (ft) CLASSIFICATION VAT WC LL PL PI
• 61-12 45.0 (SP-SM) SAND-Silty SAND
GRADATION CURVE
WALMART AT TEMECULA
TEMECULA, CALIFORNL4
4MTEM
•
Figure B-2
j
PROJECT NO. 06298-42-01
GRAVEL SAND
COARSE 1 FINE COARSE MEDIUM I FINE SILT OR CLAY
U. S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE
816 30 50
3' 1-1R' 3/4' 3/8' 4 10 20 I 40 60 100 200
100 � I f TI i
90
80 ICI
} r 70 I -
H IW
>-
60 I I
m
cc
Z 50
1
H ii
H
Z 40
r
w 30
i o-
20 I
10
0 I III
• 10 1 0. 1 0.01 0.001
' GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS
SAMPLE Depth (ft) CLASSIFICATION VAT WC LL PL PI
• B2-6 25.0 (SP-SM) SAND-Silty SAND 16.7
•
GRADATION CURVE
WALMART AT TEIECULA
TEIIECULA, CALIFORNIA
WMTEM
Figure B-3
PROJECT NO. 0629842-01
SAMPLE NO. B3-6
-4
—2
0
z -
2
H
0
1-4
-J
• 0
O 4
U
H
W
U
w B
e
12
0.1 1 10 100
APPLIED PRESSURE (lot)
Initial Dry Density (pcf) 81.9 Initial Saturation (%) I 100+
Initial Water Content(%) 43.7 Sample Saturated at (ksf) I 1.0
CONSOLIDATION CURVE
WAL1VIART AT TEMECULA
TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA
WMTEM
Figure BS
PROJECT NO. 06298-42-01
SAMPLE NO. B2-4
-4
-2
0
O
J
O
Z
4
h-
-.
cc
6
a
8
10
12
0.1 1 10 100
APPLIED PRESSURE (Itst)
Initial Dry Density (pcf) 105.5 Initial Saturation (%) 100
Initial Water Content (%) 23.8 Sample Saturated at (kst) 1
CONSOLIDATION CURVE
WALMART AT TEMECULA
TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA
UMTEM
Figure 34
APPENDIX C
LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS
Included herewith are the results of the liquefaction analysis performed for the project The analysis
was performed using LIQUEFY2 (Blake, 1989) a computer program that calculates factors-of-safety
against liquefaction using procedures suggested by Seed et aL, standard penetration blow counts
recorded during drilling and gradation characteristics determined from laboratory testing.
Project No.06298-42-01 May 18, 1999
*******************
* *
* L I Q U E F Y 2 *
*
EMPIRICAL PREDICTION OF
EARTHQUAKE-INDUCED LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL
JOB NUMBER: 6298-42-01 DATE: MAY 14, 1999
JOB NAME: WALMART - TEMECULA
LIQUEFACTION CALCULATION NAME: BORING 1 - MAXIMUM PROBABLE
SOIL-PROFILE NAME: BORING 1
GROUND WATER DEPTH: 30 .5 ft
DESIGN EARTHQUAKE MAGNITUDE : 6.30
SITE PEAK GROUND ACCELERATION: 0 .390 g
K sigma BOUND: M
rd BOUND: M
N60 CORRECTION: 1. 00
FIELD SPT N-VALUES < 10 FT DEEP ARE CORRECTED FOR SHORT LENGTH OF DRIVE RODS
NOTE: Relative density values listed below are estimated using equations of
Giuliani and Nicoll (1982) .
LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS SUMMARY
Seed and Others [1985] Method PAGE 1
I CALCI TOTAL! EFF. IFIELD IEst.D I I CORR. ILIQUE. I IINDUC. ILIQUE.
SOILI DEPTHISTRESSISTRESSI N I rl C ! (N1) 60ISTRESSI r ISTRESSISAFETY
NO. 1 (ft) I (tsf) I (t-sf) I (B/ft) I (%) I N l (S/ft) I RATIO! d I RATIOIFACTOR
-+ + + + + + + + + + +
1 0 .25 0 .016 0 . 016 40 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @
1 0 . 75 0 . 046 0 . 046 40 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @
1 1.25 0 . 077 0 . 077 40 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @
1 1 .75 0 .108 0 .108 40 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @
1 2 .25 0 .139 0 . 139 40 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @
1 2 .75 0 . 170 0 . 170 40 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @
1 3 .25 0 . 201 0 .201 40 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @
1 3 . 75 0 .232 0 .232 40 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @
1 4 .25 0 .263 0 .263 40 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @
1 4 . 75 0 .294 0 .294 40 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @
2 5 .25 0 .326 0 .326 60 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @
I 2 5 . 75 0 .359 0 .359 60 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @
2 6 .25 0 .393 0 .393 60 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @
2 6 . 75 0 .426 0 .426 60 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @
2 7 .25 0 .459 0 .459 60 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @
2 7 .75 0 . 492 0 .492 60 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @
2 8 .25 0 . 526 0 .526 60 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @
2 8 . 75 0 .559 0 .559 60 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @
2 9 .25 0 .592 0 .592 60 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @
3 9 . 75 0 . 624 0 . 624 15 - l @ @ @ @ @ @ @
3 10 .25 0 . 654 0 .654 15 - @ @ @ - @ @ @ @
3 10 .75 0 . 684 0 . 684 15 - @ . @ • @ @ @ @ @
3 11 .25 0 . 714 0 .714 15 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @
3 11. 75 0 . 744 0 . 744 15 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @
3 12 . 25 0 . 774 0 . 774 15 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @
3 12 . 75 0 . 804 0 . 804 15 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @
3 • 13 .25 0 . 834 0 . 834 15 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @
3 13 . 75 0 . 864 0 . 864 15 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @
3 14 . 25 0 . 8941 0 . 894 15 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @
3 14 .75 0 . 924 0 . 924 15 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @
3 15.25 0 . 954 0 . 954 15 - @ a @ @ a @ @
3 15. 75 0 . 984 0 . 984 15 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @
3 16 . 25 1 . 014 1 . 014 15 - @ a @ @ @ @ @
3 16 . 75 1 . 044 1 . 044 15 - a @ @ a a @ @
3 17 .25 1 . 074 1 . 074 15 - @ a @ @ @ @ @
3 17 . 75 1 . 104 1 . 104 15 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @
d.5. After areas to receive fill have been cleared, plowed or scarified, the surface should be
disced or bladed by the Contractor until it is uniform and free from large clods. The area
should then be moisture conditioned to achieve the proper moisture content, and compacted
as recommended in Section 6.0 of these specifications.
5. COMPACTION EQUIPMENT •
5.1. Compaction of soil or soil-rock fill shall be accomplished by sheepsfoot or segmented-steel
wheeled rollers, vibratory rollers, multiple-wheel pneumatic-tired rollers, or other types of
acceptable compaction equipment Equipment shall be of such a design that it will be
capable of compacting the soil or soil-rock fill to the specified relative compaction at the
specified moisture content
5.2. Compaction of rock fills shall be performed in accordance with Section 6.3.
6. PLACING, SPREADING AND COMPACTION OF FILL MATERIAL
6.1. Soil fill, as defined in Paraa'aph 3.1.1, shall be placed by the Contractor in accordance with
the following recommendations:
6.1.1. Soil fill shall be placed by the Contractor in layers that, when compacted, should
generally not exceed 8 inches. Each layer shall be spread evenly and shall be
thoroughly mixed during spreading to obtain uniformity of material and moisture
in each layer. The entire fill shall be constructed as a unit in nearly level lifts.
Rock materials greater than 12 inches in maximum dimension shall be placed in
accordance with Section 6.2 or 6.3 of these specifications.
6.1.2. In general, the soil fill shall be compacted at a moisture content at or above the
optimum moisture content as determined by ASTM D1557-91.
' 6.1.3. When the moisture content of soil fill is below that specified by the Consultant,
water shallbe added by the Contractor until the moisture content is in the range
specified. •
6.1.4. When the moisture content of the soil fill is above the range specified by the
Consultant or too wet to achieve proper compaction, the soil fill shall be aerated by
the Contractor by blading/mixing, or other satisfactory methods until the moisture
content is within the range specified.
GI rev. 3;93
6.1.5. After each layer has been placed, mixed, and spread evenly, it shall be thoroughly
compacted by the Contractor to a relative compaction of at least 90 percent.
Relative compaction is defined as the ratio (expressed in percent) of the in-place
dry density of the compacted fill to the maximum laboratory dry density as
determined in accordance with ASTM D1557-91. Compaction shall be continuous
over the entire area,and compaction equipment shall make sufficient passes so that
the specified minimum relative compaction has been achieved throughout the
entire fill.
6.1.6. Soils having an Expansion Index of greater than 50 may be used in fills if placed at
least 3 feet below finish pad grade and should be compacted at a moisture content
generally 2 to 4 percent greater than the optimum moisture content for the material.
6.1.7. Properly compacted soil fill shall extend to the design surface of fill slopes. To
achieve proper compaction, it is recommended that fill slopes be over-built by at
least 3 feet and then cut to the design grade. This procedure is considered
preferable to track-walking of slopes, as described in the following paragraph.
•
6.1.3. As an alternative to over-building of slopes, slope faces may be back-rolled with a
heavy-duty loaded sheepsfoot or vibratory roller at maximum 4-foot fill height
I j
intervals. Upon completion, slopes should then be track-walked with a D-8 dozer
or similar equipment, such that a dozer track covers all slope surfaces at least
•
twice.
6.2. Soil-rock fill, as defined in Paragraph 3.1.2, shall be placed by the Contractor in accordance
with the following recommendations:
6.2.1. Rocks larger than 12 inches but less than 4 feet in maximum dimension may be
incorporated into the compacted soil fill, but shall be limited to the area measured
15 feet minimum horizontally from the slope face and 5 feet below finish grade or
3 feet below the deepest utility, whichever is deeper.
6.2.2. Rocks or rock fragments up to 4 feet in maximum dimension may either be
individually placed or placed in windrows. Under certain conditions, rocks or rock
fragments up to 10 feet in maximum dimension may be placed using similar
methods. The acceptability of placing rock materials greater than 4 feet in
maximum dimension shall be evaluated during. grading as specific cases arise and
shall be approved by the Consultant prior to placement.
GI rev.3/93
6.2.3. For individual placement, sufficient space shall be provided between rocks to allow
for passage of compaction equipment.
6.2.4. For windrow placement, the rocks should be placed in trenches excavated in
properly compacted soil fill. Trenches should be approximately 5 feet wide and 4
feet deep in maximum dimension. The voids around and beneath rocks should be
filled with approved granular soil having a Sand Equivalent of 30 or greater and
should be compacted by flooding. Windrows may also be placed utilizing an
"open-face" method in lieu of the trench procedure, however, this method should
first be approved by the Consultant
6.2.5. Windrows should generally be parallel to each other and may be placed either
parallel to or perpendicular to the face of the slope depending on the site
geometry. The minimum horizontal spacing for windrows shall be 12 feet
center-to-center with a 5-foot stagger or offset from lower courses to next
overlying course. The minimum vertical spacing between windrow courses shall
be 2 feet from the top of a lower windrow to the bottom of the next higher
windrow.
•
6.2.6. All rock placement, fill placement and flooding of approved granular soil in the
windrows must be continuously observed by the Consultant or his representative.
6.3. Rock fills, as defined in Section 3.1.3., shall be placed by the Contractor in accordance with
the following recommendations:
6.3.1. The base of the rock fill shall be placed on a sloping surface (minimum slope of 2
percent, maximum slope of 5 percent). The surface shall slope toward suitable
subdminage outlet facilities. The rock fills shall be provided with subdrains during
construction so that a hydrostatic pressure buildup does not develop. The
subdrains shall be permanently connected to controlled drainage facilities to
control post-construction infiltration of water.
6.3.2. Rock fills shall be placed in lifts not exceeding 3 feet Placement shall be by rock
trucks traversing previously placed lifts and dumping at the edge of the currently
placed lift. Spreading of the rock fill shall be by dozer to facilitate seating of the
' rock. The rock fill shall be watered heavily during placement. Watering shall
consist of water trucks traversing in front of the current rock lift face and spraying
water continuously during rock placement. Compaction equipment with
compactive energy comparable to or greater than that of a 20-ton steel vibratory
roller or other compaction equipment providing suitable energy to achieve the
GI rev.3/98
I
_ I
required compaction or deflection as recommended in Paragraph 6.3.3 shall be
utilized. The number of passes to be made will be determined as described in
Paragraph 6.3.3. Once a rock fill lift has been covered with soil fill, no additional
rock fill lifts will be permitted over the soil fill.
63.3. Plate bearing tests, in accordance with ASTM D1196-64, may be performed in
both the compacted soil fill and in the rock fill to aid in determining the number of
passes of the compaction equipment to be performed. If performed, a minimum of
three plate bearing tests shall be performed in the properly compacted soil fill
(minimum relative compaction of 90 percent). Plate bearing tests shall then be
performed on areas of rock fill having two passes, four passes and six passes of the
compaction equipment, respectively. The number of passes required for the rock
fill shall be determined by comparing the results of the plate bearing tests for the
soil fill and the rock fill and by evaluating the deflection variation with number of
passes. The required number of passes of the compaction equipment will be
performed as necessary until the plate bearing deflections are equal to or less than
that determined for the properly compacted soil fill. In no case will the required
-- number of passes be less than two.
6.3.4. A representative of the Consultant shall be present during rock fill operations to
verify that the minimum number of "passes" have been obtained, that water is
being properly applied and that specified procedures are being followed. The
actual number of plate bearing tests will be determined by the Consultant during
1 grading. In general, at least one test should be performed for each approximately
5,000 to 10,000 cubic yards of rock fill placed.
6.3.5. Test pits shall be excavated by the Contractor so that the Consultant can state that,
in his opinion, sufficient water is present and that voids between large rocks are
properly filled with smaller rock material. In-place density testing will not be
required in the rock fills.
•
6.3.6. To reduce the potential for "piping" of fines into the rock fill from overlying soil
fill material, a 2-foot layer of graded filter material shall be placed above the
uppermost lift of rock fill. The need to place graded filter material below the rock
should be determined by the Consultant prior to commencing grading. The
gradation of the graded filter material will be determined at the time the rock fill is
being excavated. Materials typical of the rock fill should be submitted to the
Consultant in a timely manner, to allow design of the graded filter prior to the
commencement of rock fill placement.
GI rev. 3;98
i
6.3.7. All rock fill placement shall be continuously observed during placement by
representatives of the Consultant
7. OBSERVATION AND TESTING
7.1. The Consultant shall be the Owners representative to observe and perform tests during
i
clearing, grubbing, filling and compaction operations. In general, no more than 2 feet in
vertical elevation of soil or soil-rock fill shall be placed without at least one field density
test being performed within that interval. In addition, a minimum of one field density test
shall be performed for every 2,000 cubic yards of soil or soil-rock fill placed and
compacted. '
7.2. The Consultant shall perform random field density tests of the compacted soil or soil-rock
fill to provide a basis for expressing an opinion as to whether the fill material is compacted
as specified. Density tests shall be performed in the compacted materials below any
• disturbed surface. When these tests indicate that the density of any layer of fill or portion
thereof is below that specified, the particular layer or areas represented by the test shall be
reworked until the specified density has been achieved.
7.3. During placement of rock fill, the Consultant shall verify that the minimum number of
fpasses have been obtained per the criteria discussed in Section 6.3.3. The Consultant shall
' ` request the excavation of observation pits and may perform plate bearing tests on the
i placed rock fills. The observation pits will be excavated to provide a basis for expressing
( 1 an opinion as to whether the rock fill is properly seated and sufficient moisture has been
applied to the material. If performed, plate bearing tests will be performed randomly on
the surface of the most-recently placed lift. Plate bearing tests will be performed to provide
a basis for expressing an opinion as to whether the rock fill is adequately seated. The
maximum deflection in the rock fill determined in Section 6.3.3 shall be less than the
maximum deflection of the properly compacted soil fill. When any of the above criteria
indicate that a layer of rock fill or any portion thereof is below that specified, the affected
layer or area shall be reworked until the rock fill has been adequately seated and sufficient
moisture applied.
7.4. A settlement monitoring program designed by the Consultant may be conducted in areas of
rock fill placement. The specific design of the monitoring program shall be as
recommended in the Conclusions and Recommendations section of the project
Geotechnical Report or in the final report of testing and observation services performed
during grading.
GI rev. 3,93
7.5. The Consultant shall observe the placement of subdrains, to verify that the drainage devices
have been placed and constructed in substantial conformance with project specifications.
7.6. Testing procedures shall conform to the following Standards as appropriate:
7.6.1. Soil and Soil-Rock Fills:
7.6.1.1. Field Density Test, ASTM DI556-82, Density of Soil In-Place By the
Sand-Cone Method.
7.6.1.2. Field Density Test,Nuclear Method, ASTM D2922-81,Density of Soil and
Soil-Aggregate In-Place by Nuclear Methods (Shallow Depth).
7.6.1.3: Laboratory Compaction Test, ASTM D1557-91, Moisture-Density
Relations of Soils and Soil-Aggregate Mrxtures Using 10-Pound Hammer
and 18-Inch Drop.
7.6.1.4. Expansion Index Test, Uniform Building Code Standard 29-2, Expansion
Index Test.
7.6.2. Rock Fills
7.6.2.1. Field Plate Bearing Test, ASTM D1196-64 (Reapproved 1977) Standard
Method for Nonrepresentative Static Plate Load Tests of Soils and Flexible
Pavement Components, For Use in Evaluation and Design of Airport and
Highway Pavements.
•
8. PROTECTION OF WORK
8.1. During construction, the Contractor shall properly grade all excavated surfaces to provide
positive drainage and prevent ponding of water. Drainage of surface water shall be
controlled to avoid damage to adjoining properties or to finished work on the site. The
Contractor shall take remedial measures to prevent erosion of freshly graded areas until
such time as permanent drainage and erosion control features have been installed. Areas
subjected to erosion or sedimentation shall be properly prepared in accordance with the
• Specifications prior to placing additional fill or structures.
8.2. After completion of grading as observed and tested by the Consultant, no further
excavation or filling shall be conducted except in conjunction with the services of the
Consultant.
GI rev. 3/98
9. CERTIFICATIONS AND FINAL REPORTS
9.1. Upon completion of the work, Contractor shall furnish Owner a certification by the Civil
Engineer stating that the lots and/or building pads are graded to within 0.1 foot vertically of
elevations shown on the grading plan and that all tops and toes of slopes are within 0.5 foot
horizontally of the positions shown on the grading plans. After installation of a section of
subdrain, the project Civil Engineer should survey its location and prepare an as-built plan
of the subdrain location. The project Civil Engineer should verify the proper outlet for the
subdrains and the Contractor should ensure that the drain system is free of obstructions.
9.2. The Owner is responsible for furnishing a final as-graded soil and geologic report
satisfactory to the appropriate governing or accepting agencies. The as-graded report
should be prepared and signed by a California licensed Civil Engineer experienced in
geotechnical engineering and by a California Certified Engineering Geologist, indicating
that the geotechnical aspects of the grading were performed in substantial conformance
with the Specifications or approved changes to the Specifications.
r S
3
GI rev. 8/98
i
1
t
i
1 CALC. ' TOTAL EFF. ' FIELD 'Est.D I I CORR. 'LIQUE. I IINDUC. 'LIQUE.
SOIL' DEPTHISTRESSISTRESSI N 1 r' C I (N1) 60ISTRESSI r ' STRESS ' SAFETY
NO. 1 (it) 1 (tsf) I (tsf) 1 (B/ft) 1 (%) ' N 1 (B/ft) I RATIO' d 1 RATIOIFACTOR
----+ + + + + + + + + + +
3 18 . 25 1. 134 1 . 134 15 - I @ @ @ @ @ @ @
3 18 . 75 1.164 1 . 164 15 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @
3 19 .25 1. 194 1. 194 15 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @
3 19 . 75 1.224 1 . 224 15 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @
3 20 . 25 1 .254 1 .254 15 - @ @ @ @ @ @ @
' 4 20 .75 1.284 1 .284 30 72 @ @ @ @ @ @ @
' 4 21 .25 1.315 1.315 30 72 @ @ @ @ @ @ @
4 21. 75 1 .347 1.-347 30 72 @ @ @ @ @ @ @
4 22 .25 1.378 1.378 30 72 @ @ @ @ @ @ @
4 22. 75 1 .409 1.409 30 72 @ @ @ @ @ @ @
4 23 . 25 1 .440 1.440 30 72 @ @ @ @ @ @ @
4 23 . 75 1. 472 1 . 472 30 72 @ @ @ @ @ @ @
4 24 . 25 1 . 503 1 .503 30 72 @ @ @ @ @ @ @
4 24 . 75 1.534 1. 534 30 72 @ @ @ @ @ @ @
4 25 .25 1 . 565 1 . 565 30 72 @ @ @ @ @ @ @
4 25 .75 1 . 597 1.597 30 72 @ @ @ @ @ @ @
4 26.25 1. 628 1. 628 30 72 @ @ @ @ @ @ @
'. ; 4 26 . 75 1. 659 1. 659 30 72 @ @ @ @ @ @ @
4 27 .25 1 . 690 1. 690 30 72 @ @ @ @ @ @ @
4 27 . 75 1. 722 1. 722 30 72 @ @ @ @ @ @ @
! 4 28 .25 1. 753 1. 753 30 72 @ @ @ @ @ @ @
I4 28 .75 1. 784 1. 784 30 72 @. @ @ @ @ @ @
4 29 . 25 1 . 815 1. 815 30 72 @ @ @ @ @ @ @
4 29 . 75 1. 847 1. 847 30 72 @ @ @ @ @ @ @
5 30 .25 1 . 878 1. 878 23 60 @ @ @ @ @ @ @
5 30 . 75 1. 910 1. 903 23 60 0 . 693 15 . 9 0 .244 0. 916 0 .233 1. 05
5 31.25 1 . 942 1. 919 23 60 0 .693 15 .9 0.244 0 .913 0 .234 1. 04
5 31.75 1 . 974 1. 935 23 60 0 . 693 15 . 9 0 .244 0. 910 0 .235 1 . 04
5 32 .25 2 . 006 1 . 952 23 60 0 . 693 15 . 9 0 .244 0 .907 0 .236 1. 03
5 32 . 75 2 . 038 1. 968 23 60 0 . 693 15 . 9 0 .243 0 . 904 0 .237 1. 03
5 33 .25 2 . 070 1. 985 23 60 0 . 693 15 . 9 0 .243 0.902 0 .238 1_02
5 33 . 75 2 . 102 2 . 0011 23 60 0 . 693 15 . 9 0.243 0 . 899 0 .239 1. 02
5 34 . 25 2 . 134 2 . 017 23 60 0 . 693 15 . 9 0 .243 0 .896 0 .240 1. 01
5 34 .75 2 . 166 2 . 034 23 60 0 . 693 15 . 9 0 .242 0. 893 0 .241 1. 01
6 35 .25 2 . 198 2 . 049 28 62 0 . 684 19 . 2 0.289 0. 890 0 .242 1 .20
6 35 . 75 2 . 228 2 . 065 28 62 0 . 684 19 . 2 0 .289 0 . 886 0 .242 1. 19
6 36 .25 2 . 259 2 . 080 28 62 0 .684 19 . 2 0 .289 0. 882 0 .243 1 . 19
' 6 36 . 75 2 . 290 2 . 095 28 62 0 . 684 19 . 2 0 .288 0 . 878 0 .243 1 . 19
6 37 . 25 2 . 321 2 . 110 28 62 0 . 684 19 . 2 0.288 0 . 874 0 .2441 1 . 18
6 37 . 75 2 . 351 2 . 125 28 62 0 . 684 19 . 2 0 . 288 0 . 870 0 .2441 1 . 18
6 38 . 25 2 . 382 2 . 140 28 62 0 . 684 19 . 2 0 . 287 0. 866 0 .2441 1 . 18
6 38 . 75 2 . 413 2 . 156 28 62 10 . 684 19 . 2 0 . 287 0 . 862 0 .2451 1.17
6 39 . 25 2 .444 2 . 171 28 62 10 . 684 19 . 2 0.287 0 . 858 0.2451 1. 17
6 39 .75 2 . 474 2 . 186 28 62 10 . 684 19 . 2 0 .287 0 . 855 0 .2451 1.17
• 6 40 .25 2 . 505 2 . 201 28 62 10 . 684 19 .2 0 .286 0 . 850 0 .2451 1 . 17
t
i
1
I
CALC_ I TOTAL EFF. IFIELD Est .D CORR. ILIQUE. I IINDUC. ILIQUE-
SOIL DEPTHISTRESSISTRESS1 N rC (N1) 60ISTRESSI r 1STRESSISAFETY
NO. 1 (ft) I (tsf) I (tsf) I (B/ft) I (%) N (B/ft) I RATIO d 1 RATIOIFACTOR
-+ + + + + + + + + + +
6 40 . 75 2 .536 2 .216 28 62 0. 684 19.2 0 .286 0 . 845 0 .245 1. 17
6 41. 25 2 .567 2 .231 28 62 0 . 684 19 .2 0 .286 0 . 840 0 .245 1. 17
6 41. 75 2 .597 2 .246 28 62 0 . 684 19.2 0.285 0 . 836 0 .245 1. 17
' 6 42 . 25 2 . 628 2 .262 28 62 0 . 684 19.2 0 .285 0 . 831 0 .245 1.17
$ 6 42. 75 2 . 659 2.277 28 62 0 . 684 19.2 0.285 0 .826 0 .245 1. 17
6 43 . 25 2 . 690 2 .292 28 62 0 . 684 19. 2 0 .285 0 . 821 0 .244 1. 17
i 6 43 . 75 2 . 720 2 .307 28 62 0 . 684 19 .2 0 .284 0 . 816 0 .244 1. 17
' 6 44. 25 2. 751 2 .322 28 62 0 . 684 19 .2 0.284 0 . 811 0 .244 1. 17
6 44. 75 2 . 782 2 .-337 28 62 0. 684 19.2 0.284 0 .806 0 .243 1. 17
6 45.25 2 . 813 2 .352 28 62 0 . 684 19.2 0.283 0 . 801 0 .243 1. 17
6 45 . 75 2. 843 2 .368 28 62 0 . 684 19 . 2 0 .283 0 .796 0 .242 1. 17
6 46 .25 2 . 874 2 .383 28 62 0 . 684 19.2 0.283 0 . 791 0 .242 1. 17
6 46.75 2 . 905 2 .398 28 62 0 . 684 19.2 0.282 0 . 786 0 .241 1 . 17
6 47 .25 2 . 936 ' 2 .413 28 62 0 . 684 19 .2 0.282 0 . 781 0 .241 1. 17
6 47. 75 2 .966 2 .428 28 62 0 . 684 19 .2 0 .282 0 .776 0 .240 1. 17
6 48 .25 2 .997 2 .443 28 62 0 . 684 19.2 0.281 0 . 771 0 . 240 1 . 17
6 48 .75 3 . 028 2 .459 28 62 0 . 684 19 .2 0 .281 0 . 765 0 .239 1. 18
6 49 .25 3 . 059 2 .474 28 62 0 . 684 19.2 0.281 0 . 760 0 .238 1. 18
. . 6 49 .75 3 . 089 2 .489 28 62 0 . 684 19.2 0.280 0 . 755 0 .238 1. 18
.
�Avue2
Ya
11
l }
P _ •
•
xG>
4'FT
�S
i. Y..
T."
M1vy xlt.
Y
_ � t '� � 1 d t E( J L Y• vim:
y c
1ti Tn�
•
1 F'ar T
i
r A:
. _•
x v" xf
Yy
t L "•a t } 2
x :•
.[, f,f +f+t;-fir w r f `
r
� a.. v .J.
r.., ... . . .. ._ .... _w _.. _ ...-,. . s. +.. r, `rfr •
APPENDIX D
RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
for
WALMART AT TEMECULA
I TEMECULA, CALIFORNIA
PROJECT NO. 06298-42-02
1
1
RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
1. GENERAL
LI. These Recommended Grading Specifications shall be used in conjunction with the
Geotechnical Report for the project prepared by Geocon Incorporated. The recom-
mendations contained in the text of the Geotechnical Report are a part of the earthwork and
grading specifications and shall supersede the provisions contained hereinafter in the case
of conflict.
1.2. Prior to the commencement of grading, a geotechnical consultant (Consultant) shall be
employed for the purpose of observing earthwork procedures and testing the fills for
substantial conformance with the recommendations of the Geotechnical Report and these
specifications. It will be necessary that the Consultant provide adequate testing and
observation services so that he may determine that, in his opinion, the work was performed
in substantial conformance with these specifications. It shall be the responsibility of the
Contractor to assist the Consultant and keep him apprised of work schedules and changes
so that personnel may be scheduled accordingly.
1.3. It shall be the sole responsibility of the Contractor to provide adequate equipment and
•
methods to accomplish the work in accordance with applicable PP grading codes or agency
•
ordinances, these specifications and the approved grading plans. If, in the opinion of the
Consultant, unsatisfactory conditions such as questionable soil materials, poor moisture
condition, inadequate compaction, adverse weather, and so forth, result in a quality of work
not in conformance with these specifications, the Consultant will be empowered to reject
• the work and recommend to the Owner that construction be stopped until the unacceptable
•
conditions are corrected.
2. DEFINITIONS
2.1. Owner shall refer to the owner of the property or the entity on whose behalf the grading
work is being performed and who has contracted with the Contractor to have grading
performed.
2.2. Contractor shall refer to the Contractor performing the site grading work.
•
2.3 Civil Engineer or Engineer of Work shall refer to the California licensed Civil Engineer
or consulting firm responsible for preparation of the grading plans, surveying and verifying
as-graded topography.
G[rev. 3/98
i
2.4. Consultant shall refer to the soil engineering and engineering geology consulting firm
1
retained to provide geotechnical services for the project
2.5. Soil Engineer shall refer to a California licensed Civil Engineer retained by the Owner,
who is experienced in the practice of geotechnical engineering. The Soil Engineer shall be
responsible for having qualified representatives on-site to observe and test the Contractor's'
work for conformance with these specifications.
2.6. Engineering Geologist shall refer to a California licensed Engineering Geologist retained
by the Owner to provide geologic observations and recommendations during the site
grading.
2.7. Geotechnical Report shall refer to a soil report (including all addenda) which may include
a geologic reconnaissance or geologic investigation that was prepared specifically for the
development of the project for which these Recommended Grading Specifications are
intended to apply.
3. MATERIALS
3.1. Materials for compacted fill shall consist of any soil excavated from the cut areas or
imported to the site that, in the opinion of the Consultant, is suitable for use in construction
of fills. In general, fill materials can be classified as soil fills,soil-rock fills or rock fills, as
defined below.
3.1.1. Soil fills are defined as fills containing no rocks or hard lumps greater than 12
inches in maximum dimension and containing at least 40 percent by weight of
material smaller than 3/4 inch in size.
3.1.2. Soil-rock fills are defined as fills containing no rocks or hard lumps larger than 4
feet in maximum dimension and containing a sufficient matrix of soil fill to allow
for proper compaction of soil fill around the rock fragments or hard lumps as
specified in Paragraph 6.2. Oversize rock is defined as material greater than 12
inches.
3.1.3. Rock fills are defined as fills containing no rocks or hard lumps larger than 3 feet
in maximum dimension and containing little or no fines. Fines are defined as
material smaller than 3/4 inch in maximum dimension. The quantity of fines shall
be less than approximately 20 percent of the rock fill quantity.
GI rev. 3/93
3.2. Material of a perishable. spongy, or otherwise unsuitable nature as determined by the
Consultant shall not be used in fills.
3.3. Materials used for fill, either imported or on-site, shall not contain hazardous materials as
defined by the California Code of Regulations. Title 22, Division 4. Chapter 30, Articles 9
and 10; 40CFR; and any other applicable local, state or federal laws. The Consultant shall
not be responsible for the identification or analysis of the potential presence of hazardous
materials. However, if observations, odors or soil discoloration cause Consultant to
suspect the presence of hazardous materials, the Consultant may request from the Owner
the termination of grading operations within the affected area. Prior to resuming grading
operations, the Owner shall provide a written report to the Consultant indicating that the
suspected materials are not hazardous as defined by applicable laws and regulations.
3.4. The outer 15 feet of soil-rock fill slopes, measured horizontally, should be composed of
properly compacted soil fill materials approved by the Consultant. Rock fill may extend to
the slope face, provided that the slope is not steeper than 2:1 (horizontal:vertical) and a soil
layer no thicker than 12 inches is track-walked onto the face for landscaping purposes.
This procedure may be utilized, provided it is acceptable to the governing agency, Owner
and Consultant.
3.5. Representative samples of soil materials to be used for fill shall be tested in the laboratory
by the Consultant to determine the maximum density, optimum moisture content, and,
where appropriate, shear strength, expansion, and gradation characteristics of the soil.
3.6. During grading, soil or groundwater conditions other than those identified in the
Geotechnical Report may be encountered by the Contractor. The Consultant shall be
notified immediately to evaluate the significance of the unanticipated condition
4. CLEARING AND PREPARING AREAS TO BE FILLED
4.1. Areas to be excavated and filled shall be cleared and grubbed: Clearing shall consist of
complete removal above the ground surface of trees, stumps, brush, vegetation, man-made
structures and similar debris. Grubbing shall consist of removal of stumps, roots, buried
logs and other unsuitable material and shall be performed in areas to be graded. Roots and
other projections exceeding 1-1/2 inches in diameter shall be removed to a depth of 3 feet
below the surface of the ground. Borrow areas shall be grubbed to the extent necessary to
provide suitable fill materials.
GI rev. 8/93
4.2. Any asphalt pavement material removed during clearing operations should be properly
disposed at an approved off-site facility. Concrete fragments which are free of reinforcing
steel may be placed in fills, provided they are placed in accordance with Section 6.2 or 6.3
of this document.
• 4.3. After clearing and grubbing of organic matter or other unsuitable material, loose or porous
soils shall be removed to the depth recommended in the Geotechnical Report. The depth of
• removal and compaction shall be observed and approved by a representative of the
• Consultant. The exposed surface shall then be plowed or scarified to a minimum depth of
6 inches and until the surface is free from uneven features that would tend to prevent
uniform compaction by the equipment to be used.
• 4.4. Where the slope ratio of the original ground is steeper than 6:1 (horizontal:vertical), or
where recommended by the Consultant, the original ground should be benched in
accordance with the following illustration.
TYPICAL BENCHING DETAIL
Finish Grade Original Ground
2
Finish Slope Surface
•
Remove All
•
•
Unsuitable Material _ \
As Recommended By
Soil Engineer Slope To Be Such That _
Sloughing Or Sliding ��-�
Does Not Occur Vanes I-
eeee, ote 1 See Note 2
•
No Scale
DETAIL NOTES: (1) Key width "B" should be a minimum of 10 feet wide, or sufficiently wide to.
permit complete coverage with the compaction equipment used. The base of the
key should be graded horizontal, or inclined slightly into the natural slope.
(2) The outside of the bottom key should be below the topsoil or unsuitable surficial
material and at least 2 feet into dense formational material. Where hard rock is
exposed in the bottom of the key, the depth and configuration of the key may be
modified as approved by the Consultant.
GI rev. 3/98
APPENDIX C
1
J
i
PETRA
EXPLOIRATION LOG
PROJECT: PROJECT NAME BORING NO.: B-1
LOCATION: PROJECT ADDRESS ELEVATION: MSL
JOB NO.: PETRA JOB NO. CLIENT: CLIENTS NAME DATE: DATE DRILLED
EQUIPMENT: TYPE DRIVE WEIGHT: LOGGED BY: PROFESSIONAL
W SAMPLES LABORATORY TESTS
A Blows C B MOISTURE DRY OTHER
DEPTH 1_111-1- MATERIAL DESCRIPTION T Per o U CONTENT DENSITY LAB
(FEET) OLOGY R Foot E K (%) (PCF) TESTS
Symbol indicates silt material.
— 1 —
Bulk sample ► _:::::
— 2 -
— 3 � Dashed line denotes graduational change or litologic
change within same unit
— 4
1.1 Symbol indicates clay material
— 5
Relatively undisturbed ring sample
- 6
I
Solid line denotes foation change
g —
water table or as noted
Symbol indicates sand material
— 11
— 12 •♦♦
Standard Penetration Test sample
• — 13
Symbol indicates bedrock material
— 14 ♦•
— 15 Standard Penetration Test or
�♦ Relatively undisturbed ring sample
• no recovery :...,
16
Bottom of excavation (may be practical refusal;
, 17— Total Depth -total depth of excavation
Caving-noted areas of caving within the excavation
— 18— Ground Water- depth of ground water and/or perched
water encountered.
— 1g_ Other notes as needed.
PLAT'S
•
•
KEY TO SOIL SYMBOLS AND TERMS
SOIL DESCRIPTION GROUP SYMBOL TYPICAL NAMES
I. COARSE GRAINED.more than half of material
is larger than No.200 sieve size.
GRAVELS CLEAN GRAVELS GW Well graded gravels,gravel-
•
, More than half of coarse sand mixtures,little or no fines
fraction is larger than No.4 GP Poorly graded gravels,gravel-
sieve size but smaller than t sand mixtures,little or no fines.
GRAVELS WITH FINES GM Silty gravels,poorly graded
(Appreciable amount gravel-sand-slit mixtures
of fines) GC Clayey gravels,poorly graded
• gravel-sand-clay mixtures.
•
• SANDS CLEAN SANDS SW Well graded sands,gravelly
Mare than half at coarse sands,little or no fines.
fractions smaller than No.4 SP Poorly graded sands,gravelly
sieve size. sands,little or no fines.
SANDS WITH FINES SM Silty sands,poorly graded sand-
(Appreciable amount silty mixtures.
of fines)
SC Clayey sands,poorly graded sand-
clay mixtures.
II. FINE GRAINED,more than half of material
is smaller than No.200 sieve size.
SILTS AND CLAYS ML Inorganic silts and very fine sands,
Liquid Limit less rock flour,sandy silt or clayey-
than 50 silt-sand mixtures with slight plasticity.
CL Inorganic clays of low to medium
plasticity,gravelly days,sandy clays,
silty clays,lean days.
OL Organic silts and organic silty days
of low plasticity.
SILTS AND CLAYS MH Inorganic silts,micaceous or diatomaceous
Liquid Umit greater fine sandy or slltys soils,elastic silts.
than 50 CH Inorganic days of high plasticity,
• fat clays.
OH Organic clays of medium to high plasticity.
•
•
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT Peat and other highly organic soils
y Waterlevel at time of
excavation or as indicated.
WAL-MART AT REDHAWK TOWNE CENTER
PETRA GEOTECHNICAL, INC. DWG. BY: RJR DATE: 05-30-00
JOB NO. 208-00 PLATE B-2
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B- 1
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1071
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/22100
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry RedoLa
Samples Laboratory Tests
W -
Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lith- a Per ° Content Density Lab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pcf) Tests
PIIl
— 1 — Silty Sand(SM)• Dark brown; slightly moist; loose to
medium dense. II
_ 2
50/16" '
— 3 — @ 2.5 Feet: Gray brown. 6.2 114.4
— 4 — II
— 5 — II
39 I• 50/5"
•
AT.LAYI[TM
I: Silty Sand (SM)• Gray-brown; slightly moist to moist; 8 I 5.8 98.3 COL
_ 8 —
medium dense to dense; fine grained. 24
@ 7.5 Feet: Dark gray-brown; medium grained. 36
9 @ 8.0 Feet: Light gray; dense; fine grained.
r. 10 —' '. .
10 II
_ 1 . ISand (SP)• Light gray; slightly moist; medium dense to 14
dense; fine to medium grained. 31
— 13 — I
1— 14 — •
II
15 —. SiltySand/Sandi Silt SM/MI Dark grayish brown; moist 26.3 94.5
Y ( J
to wet; medium dense/firm; fine grained. 4
6
7
17 —
— 18 —
— 19 —
Continued Next Page PLATE B- 3
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B- 1.
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1071
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/22/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi
Samples Laboratory Tests
Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lith- a Per ° 1 . Content Density Lab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k
(%) (pct Tests
3 44.4 76.8
3
—21 — 10
—22 —
—23 — —
—24 — —
25 @ 25 Feet: Light gray; wet; medium dense to dense; fine to 12
medium grained. 23
—26 27
27 —
28 —
—
I
—30 .;`
" Sand (SW)• Light gray; wet; medium dense; fine grained. 10
14
—31 —�: :n 14
Total Depth = 31.5 Feet
Ground Water at 24.0 Feet
Other Laboratory Tests:
Collapse Potential
PLATE B- 4
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-2
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1067
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/22/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 140Ibs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi
i - W Samples Laboratory Tests
Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lith- e Per ° 1 Content Density Lab
( (Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pcf) Tests
1
— 1 — Silty Sand (SM)• Dark gray to gray; slightly moist; loose to
medium dense. 11
— 2 — 9
— 3 — 37
@ 3.0 Feet: Becomes dense to very dense. 50/5"
— 4 — �1
— 5 — 11 .
14 1 5.9 112.1
6 25
i. . • A1.i.T1VIITM 35 1
Sandy Silt/Silty Sand (MTJSM)- Dark gray to gray; slightly U
— 7 —• • _ moist; dense to hard. 7
_ 9 /
— 8 Sand (SP)- Light gray; Blighty moist; medium dense; 12 yds
. 9 — medium to coarse grained.
L — II
• 5 1 26.8 81.3
Silt (MT)• Dark gray brown; very moist; very stiff. 11
— 11 — 13
12 — U1
— 13 — 11
14 — II
11— 15 —
— 16 — @ 15.5 Feet: grades to interbedded silt and silty sand. 44 I
7
— 17 — ;
— 18 — II
— 19 —
Continued Next Page PLATE B- 5
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart.at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B- 2
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1067
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/22/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving.Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolff
Samples Laboratory Tests
Material Description a Blows CC B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lith- Perr l Content Density Lab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pct) Tests
@ 20 Feet: Wet to saturated; dark gray silt. 2
Sand (SW)• Light gray; moist; dense. 6
—21 36
4
—22 — .'' —
g. T
—23 --.
:
—24 —�
—25 ;
17
— 26 @ 25.5 Feet: Saturated; fine to medium grained. = 28
s+ = 42
—28 — : :
—29 —o-:'
r—30 'r:
20
— 31 35
Total Depth = 31.0 Feet
Ground Water at 26.0 Feet
PLATE B- 6
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-3
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1071
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/22/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi
Samples Laboratory Tests
w
Material Description a Blows CB Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lith- a Per (31.
r t Content Density Lab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pcf) Tests
FII.'
- 1 - Silty Sand (SM)• Dark brown; slightly moist; loose.
- 2 - 1
II
3 til
0 3.0 Feet: Becomes dense to very dense. 50 V
- 4 - �,
- g - u
6 ' :: : 11
AT.IJTVITTM 12
"' Sand (SP)- Light gray; slightly moist; medium dense; fine to 11
All
7 J- " medium grained; grades into very silty fine sand at 6.5 feet. II
6 71
I. .f ,„ 0 8 Feet: Loose to medium dense; slightly silty. 6
— 10 �.
11
7
- 11 — :
13
9 U
1
-
- 12 ' : i 1
r- 13 - = '-` '
14 -
II
- 15 6
,T• . @ 15.5 Feet: Dark gray; moist; very silty fine sand. 7 A
- 16 -¢:
_� III
111
- 13 %'
- 17 •
18 -
Ill19 - :
C!Th
Continued Next Page PLATE B- 7
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
U
U
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B- 3
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1071
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/22/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi
Samples Laboratory Tests
Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lith- a Per r I Content Density Lab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k (90) (pcf) Tests
Clayey Silt (MI)• Dark gray; wet; firm. 3 V
— 21 — 5
— 22 —
—23 — —
—24 — —
— 25 — 13
• Sand (SP)• Light gray; moist; dense; slighty silty; fine to 17 %%�
—26 — medium grained. 22 YG1
—27 — —
i. : —28 — —
-
- 30 -
13 SA
@ 30.5 Feet: Gray; saturated. 15 j
— 31
20 f
Total Depth = 31:5 Feet
Ground Water at 29.0 Feet
Other Laboratory Tests:
Sieve Analysis
PLATE B- 8
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
U
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B- 4
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1074
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/22/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi
Samples Laboratory Tests
Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
Material Description
Depth Lith- a o
Per r 1 Content Density Lab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pd) Tests
FIr.I
1 — Silty Sand (SM.) Dark gray brown; slighty moist; dense.
— 2 — 2927.0 94.4
— 3 — 50 111E
— 4 —
— 5 —: :
19
23
— 6 —
23
— 7 : ALIdbITIIM
— 8 — Silty Sand (SM)• Light gray brown; lightly moist to moist; 719.7 93.5
medium dense. 9 Ii
16
— 9 —
4 r
10.5 Feet: Slightly moist; more fine to medium grained 8
— 11 — sand. 11 A
13 —
14 — -
— 15 -
16
-. .
Sand (SP/SW)- Light gray; slightly moist; dense; medium to 15
— 16 —_ coarse grained; low cohesion. 16
— 17 $: '
- 18 =* .—
— 19 —
Continued Next Page PLATE B- 9
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B- 4
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1074
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/22/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi
Samples Laboratory Tests
Material Description a Blows c B Moisure Dry Other
Depth Lith- t Per ° ° Content DensityLab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k
(%) (pct Tests
2 V
—21 — Clayey ,Silt(MI )• Dark brown; very moist to wet; soft. 3
3
— 22 —
—23 -
-24 —
— 25 — 10
Silty Sand (,SM)• Light gray; wet; medium dense. = 13
— 26 — 11
— 28
—29 —
J
L 30 — :_ _'
Silt (MI)• Dark gray; wet; firm. 4 7
8 ,
Sand (SP)' Gray; saturated; medium dense. trace to little silt; 17
r f
1 medium grained.
Total Depth = 31.5 Feet
Ground Water at 25.5 Feet
•
PLATE B- 10
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B- 5
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1075
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/22/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 140lbs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry RedolS
Samples Laboratory Tests
Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lith- a Per r I ContentqDensity Lab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k (70) (pet) Tests
FUJ
— 1 — Sand (SP)• Gray brown; slightly moist; dense; medium
grained.
— 2 —
32 I_
37
— 4 —
— 5 Silty Sand (.SM)• Gray brown; slightly moist to moist; 12
medium dense to dense. 19
6 —. . . . 20
ALLUVIUM Silty Sand (SM)• Light gray; slightly moist to
18 — moist; medium dense to dense.
— 9 —
- 10 — 6 7.2 94.4
@ 10.5 Feet: Moist; medium dense. 15
— 11 — 22
— 12
— 13 —
— 14
— 15 @ 15 Feet: Gray brown; fine grained. 5
Sand (SP)- Light gray; moist; medium dense; trace silt;
10
— 16 — medium grained. 13 A
— 17 -
— 18 —
Continued Next Page PLATE B- 11
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B- 5
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1075
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/22/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi
Samples Laboratory Tests
Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lim- t Per ° u Content DensityLab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k
(%) (pcf) Tests
5
— 21 — 7
9
Total Depth = 21.5 Feet
No Ground Water
PLATE B- 12
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B- 6
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1070
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/23/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi
Samples Laboratory Tests
Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lith- a Per r 1 Content Density Lab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pcf) Tests
: FTI J
— 1 — : Silty Sand (MT)• Dark brown; slightly moist; dense. —
— 2 — —
38
— 3 50/4" F 6.1 112.1
— 4 —
Q 4.5 Feet: Reworked Alluvium:firm to stiff sandy silt.
5 A1IJJXIi_ TM 8 15.8 104.0
6 — Sand (SP)• Light gray brown; moist; dense; medium 28
grained. 30/4"
— 7 — —
14
cfgA- 9 —: :. .> 19
- 10 —
10 Ir
® 10.5 Feet: Light gray; medium to coarse grained. 22
11 20
— 12 — —
— 13 — —
14 — —
I - 15 —
. Silty Sand (SM). Light gray; moist; medium dense; fine 4 7—
• grained. 8
-16 —
— 17 —
18 .: .: —
— 19 — —
Continued Next Page PLATE B- 13
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B- 6
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1070
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/23/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401hs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi
Samples. Laboratory Tests
Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lith- t Per o
Feet e r 1 n Content Density Lab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pcf) Tests
3
Q 20.5 Feet: Moist to very moist; more silt. 5 19.4 106.8 SA
12
Total Depth = 21.5 Feet
No Ground Water
•
PLATE B- 14
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
EXPLORATION LOG
,.. Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B- 7
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1069
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/23/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi
Samples Laboratory Tests
' W
Material Description aBlows CC B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lith- Per l Content Density Lab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k
(%) (pct) Tests
•
FIT J
— 1 — Silty Sand (SM)• Dark brown; slightly moist; dense. —
— 2 — —
23
- 3 50/5" 177
— 4 —
— 5 ALLTWIT TM 9 16.3 90.5
— 6 — Sandy Silt (SM)- gray brown; moist; stiff to hard; porous to 11
8.0 feet. 18
— 7 — —
f: 8 '1,"
— 8 — 4
9 _ @ 8.5 Feet: moist to very moist. 8 74.
I Sand (SP) Light gray; slightly moist; dense; medium
grained. 9 —
18 2.3 102.8
T' - 11 — 20 II-
12 — —.
. .
• — 14 — —
— 15 — Clayey Silt (MT,)- Gray brown; very moist; firm.
4 7
4
— 16 — 5
— 17 —
— 18 — —
— 19 — —
Continued Next Page PLATE B- 15
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
EXPLORATION LOG •
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B- 7
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1069
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/23/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi
Samples Laboratory Tests
Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lith- t Per ° ° Content DensityLab
k
(Feet) ology r Foot e
(%) (pct) Tests
5
@ 20.5 Feet: Dark gray brown; sandy. 8
Silty Sand (,SM)- gray brown; moist; medium dense. 19 f
Total Depth = 21.5 Feet
No Ground Water
PLATE B- 16
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B- 8
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1068
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/23/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolti
Samples Laboratory Tests
Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lith- a Per or j Content Density Lab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k %
( ) (pct) Tests
FRJ
1 — Silty Sand (SM)• Dark gray brown; moist; dense.
— 2 — :
25 Ir— 3 50 7.4 115.7
— 4 -
— 5 _,
lx IL— 6 — • @ 5.5 Feet: slightly moist to moist. 25
— 7 — : ALIJTVTITM
Silty Sand(,SM)• light gray; slightly moist to moist; medium
dense; clean sand; low cohesion. 11
17
18
•
— 10 —: ' : '. :
3
11 —' 4
11.0 Feet: Interbedded clayey silt and silty sand; very 11 A
moist
— 12 —:
— 13 —
14 —: H :
— 15 @ 15.0 Feet: Medium dense to dense; fine grained. 12
12 10.0 103.0
— 16 —• 13
— 17
— 18 —
- 19
Continued Next Page PLATE B- 17
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
U
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B- 8
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1068
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/23/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 140lbs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redoln
Samples Laboratory Tests
Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lith- e Per ° Content Density Lab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pct) Tests
Clayey Silt(MI.)• Dark gray brown; very moist to wet; stiff. 5
— 21 —
8
9Total Depth = 21.5 Feet
No Ground Water
•
.
•
PLATE B- 18
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
•
EXPLORATION LOG
•
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B- 9
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1068
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/23/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 140Ibs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi
Samples Laboratory Tests
Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lith- Per ° Content Density Lab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pct) Tests
FHJ
1 — Silty Sand (SM)- Dark brown; slightly moist; very dense.
— 2 — —
— 3 36 IF
50/4"
36
50 E
— 5 • AI.1 MTHTM 11 r— 6 • Silty Sand (SW. Light gray; slightly moist to moist; medium 11 6.0 98.4
dense; medium grained. 10
— 7 — i0 4
13
.
14 C
• Sand (SP)- Light gray; slightly moist; dense; very low 22
— 11 — •• cohesion. 26 g
— 12 — —
I— 13 • —
Sandy Silt(MI)• Dark gray brown; very moist; soft to firm. 4 7-
— 16 — 3
— 17 — —
— 18 — —
— 19 — —
•
• Continued Next Page PLATE B- 19
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
U
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: 13-9
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1068
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/23/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi
Samples Laboratory Tests
Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lith- e Per °° 1 Content Density Lab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k
(%) (pcf) Tests
Silty Sand (SM)- Light gray; wet; medium dense. 5
7 28.4 93.9
—21 — 16
Total Depth = 21.5 Feet
No Ground Water
PLATE B-20
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-10
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1070
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/23/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 140Ibs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi
Samples - Laboratory Tests
Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lith- a Per r I Content Density Lab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pct) Tests
ELL
1 — Silty Sand and Sandy Silt (SM/ML)- Dark brown; moist;
medium dense to dense/hard.
— 2
— 3 17
44
— 4 — 5
10
5 — 12
1113.1 113.0
6 — 21 '
23
•
— 7 — AIJJIVHIM 5
Sandy Silt (M1.)- Dark gray brown; very moist; stiff. 11
— 8 — 13
y
•
— 10 —_—.-. .
Sand (SP)- Light gray; moist; medium dense to dense; 10 '
medium grained; low cohesion. 19
25
— 12 —
13 — . .r. ,:
10 2— 16 — 27 r
— 17 —
— 18 — -T..
Sandy .Silty/Silty Sand (MI./SM)- Dark gray brown; very
moist; medium dense to dense/hard.
Continued Next Page PLATE B- 21
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-10
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1070
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/23/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi
Samples Laboratory Tests
Material Description a Blows C
B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lith- a Per 1 Content Density Lab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pcf) Tests
10
—21 — 19
25
— 22 —: : '
—23 Sand (SP)_:Light brown; moistto very moist; dense; medium
grained.
—25 —
1017
—26 — 26
27 — > . :
—28 —I: : —
I
—29Silt(MI.) Dark gray; wet; firm.
CJI :
Sand (SP)• Light gray; very moist to wet; dense; medium 19
— 31 grained. 47 j
Total Depth = 31.0 feet
No Standing Ground Water
PLATE B-22
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
U
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-11
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1069
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/23/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 140 lbs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi
Samples Laboratory Tests
Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
o Depth Lith- e Per r Content Density Lab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k
(%) (pd) Tests
FTT.T
1 — Silty Sand (SM)• Dark brown; slightly moist to moist; dense
to very dense.
— 2 —
— 3 — 25
35
— 4 —: ® 3.7 Feet: Dark gray; moist. 15
20
— 5 —
18 11.9 120.8
— 6 — 21
29
— 7 — AI.I.T!VII IM 8
Silt(MT.) Dark brown; slightly moist to moist; hard. 10
•— 8 — 15
— 9 — .—
j':. Sand (SP)• Light gray; slightly moist; medium dense to
dense; low cohesion. 8
• 12
— 11 — 16
— 12 —
— 13 -
— 14 —
— 15 -- - .
Silt (MT.)- Dark gray; wet; soft. 5 U
— 16 — 2
— 17 — —
— 18 — -
- 19 —
Continued Next Page PLATE B-23
Petra Geotechnical, Inc. 0
U
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-11
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway IF Elevation: 1069
Job No.: 208-00 I Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/23/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 140 lbs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi
Samples Laboratory Tests
Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lim- e Per ° I Content Density Lab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pct) Tests
Silty Sand (SM)- Gray brown; very moist to wet; medium 6 V
dense. 10 /
• 15
Total Depth = 21.5 Feet
No Ground Water
1
I
PLATE B- 24
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
w
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-12.
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1070
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/24/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi
Samples Laboratory Tests
Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lith- a Per ° y Content Density Lab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pet) Tests
FTT.T
1 — Silty Sand/Sandy Silt (SM/MT.)• Dark brown; slightly moist
to moist; medium dense to dense/very stiff.
— 2 — ._.
— 3 13 pi
12
— 4 21
— 5 — —
— 6 — 16
12
— 7 — AT7.TTVTTTM
Sand (SP)• Light gray; slightly moist to moist; medium 13 Ir
8 — dense.
15
9 — —,
r- 11 —:
13
15
— 13 —
- 15 — 6
14
-
- 16 —
— 17 — 19
— 18 : .`. Silty Sand/Sandy Silt (SM/MT.)• Gray brown; very moist to
: wet; medium dense/stiff.
— 19 —
rti 6
Continued Next Page PLATE B-25
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
U
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-12
Location: SEC Highway 79 &Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1070
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/24/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 140Ibs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi
Samples Laboratory Tests
Material Description a Blows I C B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lith- Per ° 1 Content Density Lab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pct) Tests
6
—21 — 8
Total Depth = 21.5 Feet
No Ground Water
PLATE B-26
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-13
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1069
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/24/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30'Drop Logged By: Jerry Redoln
Samples Laboratory Tests
Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lith- a Per ° y Content Density Lab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k
(%) (pcf) Tests
FIIJ
— 1 — Silty Sand (SM)• Gray brown; slightly moist; dense.
— 2 —
— 3 23
38
— 4 —
•
• — 5 ALLUVIUM 24 13.0 101.3
6 — Sand (,SP)- Light gray; moist; medium dense; lens of dark 25
brown silt.
13 3.4 101.2
— 7 —
20
27
�- 8 —
•
9 —
•
®10.5 Feet: Silty. 190
— 11 15 o
— 12 -
— 13 —
— 15 — -t Sand (SW)- Light gray; moist; medium dense; medium to
: e coarse grained; low cohesion. 15 V.
18
— 16 - 10
— 17 . :
— 18 :
19 —
Continued Next Page PLATE B-27
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring gNo : B-13
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1069
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/24/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 140Ibs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolli
Samples Laboratory Tests
Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lith- a Per ° I Content Density Lab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pct) Tests
Silt (MT.): Dark gray brown; very moist; firm. 3
— 21 — 0
fiilty ,band ZSM):Gray brown; very moist; medium dense. r
Total Depth = 21.5 Feet
No Ground Water
•
PLATE B-28
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
w
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-14
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1066
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/24/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi
Samples Laboratory Tests
W
Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lith- a Per ° 1 Content Density Lab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k
(%) (pct) Tests
: FiTJ
1 —: Silty Sand (SM)- Dark gray brown; slightly moist to moist;
— dense to very dense.
— 2 —
27 7.4 123.9
• 50/5" 11
— 4 — 22 %gi
23
20 1— 5 —:
11
- 6 — 32
51
41
. . ATJJJVITIM
10t Sand (,SW)• Light gray brown; slightly moist to moist; 8
— 8 medium dense to dense, trace to little silt. 20 '
:' 25
- 10 — : . 6
j
- 11 Silt (MT.)• Dark gray;moist; firm to stiff. 7
l` Sand (SW)• light gray brown; slightly moist to moist; 15 A
� r medium dense to dense; trace to little silt.
12 — _
- 13 —C:
i — 14 =:
r15 -
-_ 36.0 88.2
Silt (MT.). Dark gray brown; wet; firm to stiff. 11
— 16 — 9
8
— 17 —
— 18 —
— 19 —
Continued Next Page PLATE B-29
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
U
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-14
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1066
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/24/00
Method: Hollow Stem I Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Terry Redolfi
Samples Laboratory Tests
Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lith- t Per ° ° Content Density Lab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pct) Tests
2 'l
_ 2
21 • Silty Sand (SM) Dark gray; very moist; medium dense. 11
•
—24 — '. .
— 25 — •• @ 25 Feet: Light gray; dense; less silt. 10
—26 — 22 4
25
27
Sand (SP): Light gray; saturated; medium dense to dense;
H 30 medium grained.
—
6
15
•
— 31 — 23
Total Depth = 31.5 Feet
Ground Water at 28.0 Feet
PLATE B- 30
Petra Geotechnical, Inc. 0
U
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-15
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1065
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/24/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi
Samples Laboratory Tests
Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lith- e Per ° Content Density Lab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k
(%) (pcf) Tests
ELL
Silty Sand (SM)• Dark gray brown; moist; medium dense.
— I -
- 2 -
9 11.2 120.9
— 3 — 15
!['
24
— 4 —
— 5 @ 5.0 Feet: More sand.
— 6 146
j
_ 7 — AI.IJIVIIIM
Sandy Silt/Silty Sand (ML/SM)• Gray brown; very moist to
wet; very stiff/medium dense to dense. 8 16.9 96.0 COL
10
14
- 9 —
10 — 11 7
Sand (SP)• Light gray; moist; medium dense to dense. 21
19
— 12 —
14 —
15 —‘ 7
Sandy silt(MT )• Gray brown; very moist to wet; firm. 5
-- 16 —
— 17 --
— 18 Silty Sand (SM): Gray brown; very moist; medium dense.
— 19
•
Continued Next Page PLATE B- 31
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-15
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1065
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/24/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30'Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi
Samples Laboratory Tests
' w
Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lith- a Per ° Content Density Lab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k
(90) (pct) Tests
—21 — 6 f
11
Total Depth = 21.5 Feet
No Ground Water
Other Laboratory Tests:
Collapse Potential
•
I
PLATE B- 32
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
U
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-16
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1064
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/24/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401b8/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry RedoIn
Samples Laboratory Tests
r a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
Material Description o u
.ab Depth Lith- a Per Content Density Lab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pct) Tests
Fill
1 _ Silty Sand (SM)- Dark brown; slightly moist to moist;
medium dense to dense.
— 3 — 16 •
17
— 4 —
111
5 • @ 5.0 Feet: Gray brown; dense.
23
— 6 — 30 di
— 7 ALIJIVITIM
Sand (SP)• Gray brown; slightly moist to moist; medium 11 '
dense to dense; little silt. 14 V
— 9 — @ 7.5 Feet: Medium dense to dense. 17 I
- 10 - 4 111
10
Ii
12 v
Total Depth = 11.5 Feet
No Ground Water
32
PLATE B-33
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
•
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-17
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1065
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/24/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi
Samples Laboratory Tests
W _
Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lith- a Per ° y Content Density Lab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pct) Tests
• Fin
1 — Silty Sand/Sandy Silt(SM/MI.)• Dark gray; moist; medium
— dense/very stiff; interlayered silty sand and sandy silt.
— 2 —: :
116 '1 %
�
17 ,
— 4 —
•
•
— 5 @ 5.0 Feet: Less silt; dense silty sand. 18 "
— 6 —: ' 30An"
7 AIJ.IIVIIIVI
— 8 — Sand (SP)- Light gray brown; moist; medium dense; trace to
little silt. "
— 9 •
—
611 i.:
•
11 —: ' .: '.:: 13 Al
•
14 v
Total Depth = 11.5 Feet
No Ground Water
PLATE B- 34
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
••
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-18
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1066
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/24/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 140lbs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi
Samples Laboratory Tests
Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lith- a Per ° y Content Density Lab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pct) Tests
FnJ
— 1 — Silty Sand (SM)• Gray brown; moist; medium dense to
dense; little to some mixed silt.
— 2 —
— 3 — 14
22
— 4 — 18
— 5 Q 5.0 Feet: Dark brown; dense. 13
— 6 — 26
7 AT.LTTVTIJM
— 8 — Sand (SP):Light gay brown; very moist; medium dense; 7 g
little silt. 7 V
9 10
-- 10 — @ 10.0 Feet: Light gray; moist to very moist. 6 /
�—
— 11 — 9
8
Total Depth = 11.5 Feet
No Ground Water
PLATE B-35
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
•
U
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-19
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1070
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/24/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi
Samples Laboratory Tests
Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lith- a Per r I Content Density Lab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pcf) Tests
• FTT T 1
— 1 — Silty Sand (SM)• Dark gray; moist; medium dense.
— 2 — Q 2.0 Feet to 3.0 Feet: Rocks.
—.3 -
- 4 —
27 r
_ 44
— 6 Sand (SP)- Gray brown; moist; medium dense to dense;
— 7 trace to little silt.
— 8 — 7
17
— 9 r- ALLIBERI ti
Sand (SP)- Light gray; moist; medium dense; medium
grained.• 6
11 — 8
Total Depth = 11.5 Feet
No Ground Water
PLATE B- 36
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: 11-20
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1070
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/24/00
Method: Hollow Stem I Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolf
Samples Laboratory Tests
Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lith- t Per r o Content Density Lab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pct) Tests
Fill
1 — Silty Sand (SM)- Dark brown; moist; medium dense.
2 ALL[TVTHTM
Sandy Silt (MT)• Dark gray brown; moist; firm to stiff.
6
— 3 —
7
— q — 7 4-
— 5 Sand (SP). Light gray brown; moist; medium dense; 11
— 6 _ occasional thin silt lens. 11
17
— 7 — —
9 —
Y
Silty Sand (SM)• Gray brown; very moist to wet; loose.
— 10 -
3
11 — 5
Total Depth = 11.5 Feet
No Ground Water
PLATE B- 37
•
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-21
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1070
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/24/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi
Samples Laboratory Tests
W -
Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lith- t Per o u Content DensityLab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k
(%) (pcf) Tests
PILI
1 — Sandy Silt/Silty Sand (MT./SM)• Dark gray brown; moist;
firm/medium dense.
— 2 —
•
— 3 — 4
9
— 4 — AIJJIVITTM 13
Sand (SP)• Light gray brown; moist; medium dense; medium
5 — grained.
4 •
— 6 — 4
— 7 — —
@ 7.5 Feet: Gray brown; very moist; loose; some silt. 3
r 8 6
— 9 — 12
f. @ 9.0 Feet: Light gray; slightly moist; medium dense.
H- 10 -
8 7-
11
— 11 —:� : :.' 14
Total Depth = 11.5 Feet
No Ground Water
PLATE B- 38
Petra Geotechnical, Inc. •
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-22
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1077
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/24/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi
Samples Laboratory Tests
Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lith- a Per ° Content Density Lab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pcU Tests
Fn.T
— 1 — Silty Sand (SM)• Dark gray brown; slightly moist to moist;
•
medium dense to dense.
2 — —
6
— 3 — 21 7
2614
— 5 — 'V
— 6 — I 19
24 f
I— 7 —
- 8 —: . : :. : 18
rg
9 — —
•
— 10 -
8
11 — 12 j
10
AT.TJJVITTM
Silt (MT )• Gray brown; very moist; stiff.
Total Depth = 11.5 Feet
No Ground Water
•
PLATE B-39
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-23
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1077
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/24/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi
Samples Laboratory Tests
Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lith- a Per r I Content Density Lab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pcf) Tests
III.L
— 1 — Silty Sand (SM)• Gray brown; slightly moist to moist;
medium dense to dense. 17 %AI
"
■
— 3 16
26 '
— 4 —
5
11 A'— 6 — 13 j
1.
18 't '
— 7 _ ■
— 8 —
1'
L
r 10 —
13
19 %1
21
Total Depth = 11.5 Feet
No Ground Water
PLATE B- 40
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-24
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1075
_ Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/24/00
•
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi
Samples Laboratory Tests
• Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lith- a Per ° Content Density Lab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k
(%) (pcf) Tests
' FIT.I
1 — Silty Sand (SM)• Gray brown; slightly moist to moist;
medium dense to dense.
— 2 — SE
— 3 11 .
13
— 4 — 15
— 6 — 9
22
— 7 —
i
- 8
_ 9 AIJIJVBJM
( Silt (MI)- Dark gray brown; moist; stiff.
( . — 10 —
7 V
— 11 —
8
Total Depth = 11.5 Feet .
No Ground Water
Other Laboratory Tests:
Sand Equivalent
t I 1
PLATE B-41
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-25
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1073
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/24/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi
Samples Laboratory Tests
Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lith- a Per ° I Content Density Lab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k (%) (pcf) Tests
FIT.11
1 _ Silty Sand (SM)• Dark gray brown to gray brown; slightly
moist to moist; dense; occasional thin layers of silt.
— 2 —
•
- 3 _ 1Q
228 '
— 4 1'5
14 A
24 M
— 6 —: : : : :
31 /'7
14
— 8 27
9 —
•
— 10 — . . .• 5 12 %'
— 11 — •
18
Total Depth = 11.5 Feet
No Ground Water
•
•
PLATE B-42
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-26
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1071
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/25/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi
Samples Laboratory Tests
Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lith- a Per l Content Density Lab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k
(%) (pcf) Tests
FIT.1
— 1 — Silty Sand (SM)• gray brown to dark gray brown; slightly
moist to moist; medium dense to dense; with thin layers of
— 2 —
silt.
111
3 15
15 '
— 5 • :
6 — 9 /
I1
— 8 — AI.I.ITVIIIM 11
Sand (SP)- gray brown; slightly moist to moist; medium 10
dense; medium grained. 11 ,
— 9 —
6 VI"
@ 10.5 Feet Light gray; slightly moist. 8
12 V
Total Depth = 11.5 Feet
No Ground Water
PLATE B- 43
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
U
U
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-27
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1068
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/25/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 140Ibs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi
Samples Laboratory Tests
Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lith- e Per ° l Content Density Lab
... (Feet) ology r Foot e k
(%) (pct) Tests
I: FIi.T
— 1 — Silt (MT )• Dark gray brown; moist; stiff.
— 2 — SE
— 3 — 11
15
— 4 —
5
6
— 6 — ATJ.LTVTLIM 5
Silt (M1.)• Dark gray brown; very moist to wet; firm to stiff. 7
— a - - 3
Sand (.SP) Light gray; slightly moist; medium dense. 8
11
10
11 — 14
Total Depth = 11.5 Feet
No Ground Water
• Other Laboratory Tests:
Sand Equivalent
PLATE B- 44
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: 13-28
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1072
lob No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/25/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi
Samples Laboratory Tests
. W
Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lith- t Per o ° Content DensityLab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k
(%) (pcf) Tests
Fri.I
— 1 — Silty Sand (SM)• Gray brown; slightly moist to moist;
medium dense to dense; occasional thin layer of silt.
— 2 — . :i:
- 3 — 33 F
34 g
— 4 —
— 5 —{: : ; ' : 10
r
— 6 — 18 f
8 y Ai.IJ1VIUM 3 f
Silt (ML)• Dark gray brown; moist; firm. , 10
— 9 _ Sand (,SP)- Light gray brown; slightly moist; medium dense;
is • medium grained.
is
10 — 5
6 4,
— 11 — 7
Total Depth = 11.5 Feet
No Ground Water
•
PLATE B- 45
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
U
U
•
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-29
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1073
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/25/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 140Ihs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi
Samples Laboratory Tests
Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lith- Per I Content Density Lab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k (9) (pcf) Tests
_ 1 — Silty Sand (SM)• Gray to light gray; moist; dense.
6 /1
16
— 5
6 — 12
12 V
.
— 7 — ■
— 8 — A1.i.L1ViiTM 6 III
Silt (MT.): Dark brown; very moist; stiff. 7 5)
9 — Sand (SP)• Light gray; slightly moist; medium dense; trace 12 '
to little silt; medium grained sand.
10 —
0
— 11 — 10 r
Total Depth = 11.5 Feet
No Ground Water
PLATE B- 46
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
EXPLORATION LOG
Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-30
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1077
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/25/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 140Ibs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi
Samples Laboratory Tests
Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lith- t Per o o Content DensityLab
(Feet) ology r Foot e k
(%)) (pct Tests
FTT.T
1 — Silty Sand (SM)• Gray brown; slightly moist to moist;
medium dense to dense. ,
— 2 —
— 3 — 17 1
25
— 4 —
- 5
1VE
— 6 20
26 VA'
— 7 — @ 6.8 Feet: Moist; medium dense; fine grained sand.
_ 8 10
ALT.TJVTIIM 10 ,
Sandy Silt (MI,) Dark gray brown; very moist; stiff. 11 %11
— 9 —
• :T Sand (SP)• Light gray brown; moist; medium dense; little to 8 V
some silt; medium grained sand. 108 �'
— 11 —
r'
Total Depth = 11.5 Feet
No Ground Water
•
PLATE B- 47
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
•
EXPLORATION LOG
• Project: Wal-Mart at Redhawk Towne Center Boring No.: B-31
Location: SEC Highway 79 & Redhawk Parkway Elevation: 1075
Job No.: 208-00 Client: Excel Legacy Corporation Date: 5/25/00
Method: Hollow Stem Driving Weight: 1401bs/30"Drop Logged By: Jerry Redolfi
Samples. Laboratory Tests
Material Description a Blows C B Moisture Dry Other
Depth Lich- t Per oI Content DensityLab
(Feet) ology r Foot e (%) (pcf) Tests
Fa.1
1 _ Silty Sand (SM)• Gray brown; slightly moist to moist;
medium dense to dense. '
— 2 —
9
3 — •'
28 VA
— 4 — n
— 5 —
4.25 Feet: Dark gray brown; moist. 10— ,
6 17
A1.1JIVIIYMge
1'
- 8 — • Silty Sand (SM)• Gray brown; moist to very moist; medium 6
dense.
— 9 — 8 ,
— 10 — 4 "
— 11 • @ 10.5 Feet: Light gray; medium grained. 6 '
9
Total Depth = 11.5 Feet
No Ground Water
•
[ PLATE B- 48
Petra Geotechnical, Inc.
i .
Va13d
C:
r:
a XIaN3ddd
*****************************
* *
* L I Q U E F Y 2 *
* *
* Version 1.50
EMPIRICAL PREDICTION OF
EARTHQUAKE-INDUCED LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL
JOB NUMBER: 208-00 DATE: 06-29-2000
JOB NAME: Redhawk Towne C
SOIL-PROFILE NAME: 20800i.LDW
BORING GROUNDWATER DEPTH: 16.00 ft
CALCULATION GROUNDWATER DEPTH: 16.00 ft
DESIGN EARTHQUAKE MAGNITUDE: 6.50 Mw
SITE PEAK GROUND ACCELERATION: 0.550 g
BOREHOLE DIAMETER CORRECTION FACTOR: 1.00
SAMPLER SIZE CORRECTION FACTOR: 1.00
N60 HAMMER CORRECTION FACTOR: 1.00
MAGNITUDE SCALING FACTOR METHOD: Idriss (1998)
Magnitude Scaling Factor: 1.442
rd-CORRECTION METHOD: Seed (1985)
FIELD SPT N-VALUES ARE CORRECTED FOR THE LENGTH OF THE DRIVE RODS.
Rod Stick-Up Above Ground: 3.0 ft
CN NORMALIZATION FACTOR: 1.044 tsf
MINIMUM CN VALUE: 0.6
.NCEER (1997] Method _ LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS SUMMARY PAGE 1
File Name: 208001.OUT
CALC. TOTAL EFF. FIELD FC CORR. LIQUE. ' INDUC. LIQUE.
SOIL DEPTH STRESS STRESS N DELTA C (N1)60 RESIST r STRESS SAFETY
NO. (ft) (tsf) (CO) (B/ft) N1_60 N (B/ft) RATIO d RATIO FACTOR
+ a + + + +
0.25 0.016 0.016 50 - * * * * * **
0.75 0.047 0.047 50 * * * * * **
1.25 0.078 0.078 50 * * * * * *•
1.75 0.109 0.109 50 * * * • * **
2.25 0.141 0.141 50 * * * * * **
2.75 0.172 0.172 50 * * * * * **
3.25 0.203 0.203 50 - * * * * * **
3.75 0.234 0.234 50 * * * * * **
4.25 0.266 0.266 50 - * * * * * **
4.75 0.297 0.297 50 * * * * * **
5.25 0.328 0.328 50 * * * * * **
5.75 0.359 0.359 50 * * * * * **
6.25 0.391 0.391 50 * * * * * **
6.75 0.422 0.422 50 * * * * * **
7.25 0.453 0.453 50 * * * * * **
7.75 0.484 0.484 50 * * * * * **
8.25 0.516 0.516 50 * * * * **
8.75 0.547 0.547 50 * * * * • **
9.25 0.576 0.576 15 2.00 * * * * * **
9.75 0.602 0.602 15 2.00 * * * • * **
2 10.25 0.628 0.628 15 2.00 * * * * * **
2 10.75 0.654 0.654 15 2.00 * * * * * **
2 11.25 0.681 0.681 15 2.00 * * * * • **
2 11.75 0.707 0.707 15 2.00 * * • * * **
2 12.25 0.733 0.733 15 2.00 * * * * * **
2 12.75 0.759 0.759 15 2.00 * * * * * **
2 13.25 0.786 0.786 15 2.00 * * * * * **
2 13.75 0.812 0.812 15 2.00 * * * * * **
2 14.25 0.838 0.838 15 2.00 * * * * * **
2 14.75 0.864 0.864 15 2.00 * * * * * **
2 15.25 0.891 0.891 15 2.00 * • * * * **
2 15.75 0.917 0.917 15 2.00 * * * * * **
2 16.25 0.943 0.935 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.966 0.348 0.73
2 16.75 0.969 0.946 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.965 0.353 0.72
2 17.25 0.996 0.957 / 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.964 0.359 0.71
2 17.75 1.022 0.967 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.963 0.364 0.70
2 18.25 1.048 0.978 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.961 0.368 0.69
2 18.75 1.074 0.989 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.960 0.373 0.68
2 19.25 1.101 0.999 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.959 0.378 0.67
2 19.75 1.127 1.010 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.958 0.382 0.67
2 20.25 1.153 1.021 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.956 0.386 0.66
2 20.75 1.179 1.031 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.955 0.391 0.65
2 21.25 1.206 1.042 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.954 0.395 0.64
NCEER [19977 Method LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS SUMMARY PAGE 2
L,. File Name: 20800i.0UT
CALC. TOTAL EFF. FIELD FC CORR. LIQUE. INDUC. LIQUE.
SOIL DEPTH STRESS STRESS N DELTA C (N1)60 RESIST r STRESS SAFETY
NO. (ft) (tsf) (tsf) (B/ft) N1_60 N (8/ft) RATIO d RATIO FACTOR
----+ + + . + + + + + + + +
2 21.75 1.232 1.052 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.952 0.399 0.64
2 22.25 1.258 1.063 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.951 0.402 0.63
2 22.75 1.284 1.074 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.949 0.406 0.63
2 23.25 1.311 1.084 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.948 0.410 0.62
2 23.75 1.337 1.095 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.946 0.413 0.62
2 24.25 1.363 1.106 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.945 0.416 0.61
2 24.75 1.389 1.116 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.943 0.420 0.61
2 25.25 1.416 1.127 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.941 0.423 0.60
2 25.75 1.442 1.138 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.939 0.426 0.60
2 26.25 1.468 1.148 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.938 0.428 0.59
2 26.75 1.494 1.159 15 2.00 1.014 16.2 0.176 0.936 0.431 0.59
3 27.25 1.522 1.171 20 0.53 0.916 18.9 0.199 0.934 0.434 0.66
3 27.75 1.551 1.184 20 0.53 0.916 18.9 0.199 0.931 0.436 0.66
3 28.25 1.579 1.197 20 0.53 0.916 18.9 0.199 0.929 0.438 0.65
3 28.75 1.608 1.210 20 0.53 0.916 18.9 0.199 0.927 0.440 0.65
3 29.25 1.637 1.223 20 0.53 0.916 18.9 0.199 0.925 0.442 0.65
3 29.75 1.666 1.237 20 0.53 0.916 18.9 0.199 0.922 0.444 0.65
3 30.25 1.694 1.250 20 0.53 0.916 18.9 0.199 0.920 0.446 0.64
3 30.75 1.723 1.263 20 0.53 0.916 18.9 0.199 0.917 0.447 0.64
3 31.25 1.752 1.276 20 0.53 0.916 18.9 0.199 0.914 0.449 0.64
3 31.75 1.781 1.289 20 0.53 0.916 18.9 0.199 0.912 0.450 0.64
3 32.25 1.809 1.302 20 0.53 0.916 18.9 0.199 0.909 0.451 0.64
3 32.75 1.838 1.316 20 0.53 0.916 18.9 0.199 0.906 0.452 0.63
�,. 4 33.25 1.866 1.328 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.903 0.453 0.37
I.._ 4 33.75 1.894 1.340 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.899 0.454 0.37
�.. 4 34.25 1.921 1.352 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.896 0.45 0.37
4 34.75 1.949 1.364 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.893 0.456 0.37
4 35.25 1.976 1.376 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.889 0.45 0.37
4 35.75 2.004 1.388 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.886 0.45 0.37
4 36.25 2.031 1.399 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.882 0.45+ 0.37
4 36.75 2.059 1.411 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.878 0.45: 0.37
4 37.25 2.086 1.423 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.874 0.45: 0.37
4 37.75 2.114 1.435 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.871 0.45: 0.37
4 38.25 2.141 1.447 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.866 0.45: 0.37
4 38.75 2.169 1.459 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.862 0.45: 0.37
4 39.25 2.196 1.471 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.858 0.45. 0.37
4 39.75 2.224 1.483 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.854 0.45. 0.37
4 40.25 2.251 1.495 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.849 0.45 0.37
4 40.75 2.279 1.507 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.845 0.45 0.37
4 41.25 2.306 1.518 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.840 0.456, 0.37
4 41.75 2.334 1.530 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.836 0.456 0.37
4 42.25 2.361 1.542 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.831 0.455 0.37
4 42.75 2.389 1.554 13 0.44 0.837 11.3 0.116 0.826 0.454 0.37
5 43.25 2.418 1.567 26 0.13 0.803 21.0 0.213 0.822 0.453 0.68
�/
t'
NCEER (1997] Method LIQUEFACTION ANALYSIS SUMMARY PAGE 3
File Name: 20800i.OUT
CALL. TOTAL EFF. FIELD FC CORR. LIOUE. INDUC. LIQUE.
SOIL DEPTH STRESS STRESS N DELTA C (N1)60 RESIST r STRESS SAFETY
NO. (ft) (tsf) (tsf) (B/ft) N1_60 N (8/ft) RATIO d RATIO FACTOR
--+ + + + + + + + + + +
5 43.75 2.448 1.582 26 0.13 0.803 21.0 0.213 0.817 0.452 0.68
5 44.25 2.478 1.596 26 0.13 0.803 21.0 0.213 0.812 0.450 0.68
5 44.75 2.508 1.610 26 0.13 0.803 21.0 0.213 0.807 0.449 0.68
5 45.25 2.538 1.625 26 0.13 0.803 21.0 0.213 0.802 0.448 0.69
5 45.75 2.568 1.639 26 0.13 0.803 21.0 0.213 0.797 0.446 0.69
5 46.25 2.598 1.654 26 0.13 0.803 21.0 0.213 0.792 0.445 0.69
5 46.75 2.628 1.668 26 0.13 0.803 21.0 0.213 0.787 0.443 0.69
5 47.25 2.658 1.683 26 0.13 0.803 21.0 0.213 0.782 0.441 0.70
5 47.75 2.688 1.697 26 0.13 0.803 21.0 0.213 0.776 0.440 0.70
6 48.25 2.717 1.711 20 1.20 0.765 16.5 0.164 0.771 0.438 0.54
6 48.75 2.746 1.725 20 1.20 0.765 16.5 0.164 0.766 0.436 0.54
6 49.25 2.776 1.738 20 1.20 0.765 16.5 0.164 0.761 0.434 0.54
6 49.75 2.805 1.752 20 1.20 0.765 16.5 0.164 0.756 0.433 0.55
6 50.25 2.834 1.766 20 1.20 0.765 16.5 0.164 0.751 0.431 0.55
6 50.75 2.863 1.779 20 1.20 0.765 16.5 0.164 0.746 0.429 0.55
6 51.25 2.893 1.793 20 1.20 0.765 16.5 0.164 0.741 0.427 0.55
6 51.75 2.922 1.806 20 1.20 0.765 16.5 0.164 0.736 0.425 0.55
6 52.25 2.951 1.820 20 1.20 0.765 16.5 0.164 0.731 0.424 0.56
6 52.75 2.980 1.834 20 1.20 0.765 16.5 0.164 0.726 0.422 0.56
6 53.25 3.010 1.847 20 1.20 0.765 16.5 0.164 0.721 0.420 0.56
6 53.75 3.039 1.861 20 1.20 0.765 16.5 0.164 0.716 0.418 0.56
. 7 54.25 3.069 1.876 50 - - - - --
7 54.75 3.100 1.891 50 - - - - --
7 55.25 3.132 1.907 50 - - - - --
7 55.75 3.163 1.923 50
7 56.25 3.194 1.938 50 - - - - - --
7 56.75 3.225 1.954 50 - - - - --
7 57.25 3.257 1.970 50 - - - - - --
(i 7 57.75 3.288 1.985 50 - - - - --
7 58.25 3.319 2.001 50 - - - - --
7 58.75 3.350 2.017 50 - - - - --
7 59.25 3.382 2.032 50 - - - - - --
7 59.75 3.413 2.048 50 - - - --
7 60.25 3.444 2.064 50 - - - - --
7 60.75 3.475 2.079 50 - - - - --
j 0
I
Layer 2 SETTLEMENT DUE TO EARTHQUAKE SHAKING
(N1)60 = G
Thickness of 16.2
Induced stress yer=
ratio = Top of layer Feet
Bottom of layer= 0.348 LIQUIFY2 Program
•
(From
Using9e of layer= 0.431
Figure 5, Tokimateau 0.39 output)
and Seed, 1887:
V(s) 1.42%
Settlement=
(V(s)/100)•T(15)
0.0014 Feet
•
Layer 3 00170 Inches
(N1)60 =
Thickness of L18.9
ayer= -
Induced stress ratio= Top of la
7 Feet
Bottom of
0=
UsingAverage ofaayer= 0.43 (From LIQUIFY2 Program output)
,
Tokimateau and
Seed,
1987:
V(s) _ '
1.33%
Settlement= r
(V(s)/100)+T(15)
_
i
0.0009 Feet
0.0112 Inches
Layer 3
(N1)60=
Thickness of 18.9
Induced Layer=
stress ratio= Top of layer7 Feet
Bottom = .
oflayer= 0.434 (From LIQUIFY2 Program
Average of layer= 0.452
Using Figure 5, 0.443 output)
Tokimateau and Seed 1987
V(s)
1.33%
Settlement=
(V(s)/100)+T(15)
•
0.0009 Feet
0.0112 Inches
Layer 4
' . (N1)60 = 11.3
Thickness of Layer= 10 Feet
Induced stress ratio = Top of layer= 0.453 (From LIQUIFY2 Program output)
Bottom of layer= 0.454
Average of layer= 0.4535
Using Figure 5, Tokimateau and Seed, 1987:
V(s) = 2.25%
•
Settlement= (V(s)/100)*T(15)
0.0023 Feet
0.0270 Inches
Layer 5
(N1)60 = 21
Thickness of Layer= 4 Feet
Induced stress ratio = Top of layer= 0.453 (From LIQUIFY2 Program output)
Bottom of layer= 0.44
Average of layer= 0.4465
Using Figure 5, Tokimateau and Seed, 1987:
V(s) = 1.29%
Settlement= (V(s)/100)*T(15)
0.0005 Feet
0.0062 Inches
Layer 6
(N1)60 = 16.5
Thickness of Layer= 6 Feet
Induced stress ratio = Top of layer= 0.438 (From LIQUIFY2 Program output)
Bottom of layer= 0.418
Average of layer= 0.428
Using Figure 5, Tokimateau and Seed, 1987:
V(s) = 1.42%
( Settlement= (V(s)/100)'T(15)
0.0009 Feet
0.0102 Inches Total Settlement= 0.0828 Inches
t.
0