none, New entry, enclose breezeway, , Studies & Reports�GeoSoils Consultants Inc.
JGEOTECHNICAL GEOLOGIC ENVIRONMENTAL
GEOLOGIC AND GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT,
REMEDIAL REPAIR OF DISTRESSED RESIDENCE,
Lot 1, Tract 29383,
27 Buggy Whip Drive,
Rolling Hills, California
for
Ms. Karen Frazier
July 15, 2016 W.O.6948
MDN 16826
GeoSoils Consultants Inc.
►G►eoSoils Consultants Inc.
\,/GEOTECHNICAL GEOLOGIC ENVIRONMENTAL
July 15, 2016
W.O. 6948
MS. KAREN FRAZIER
27 Buggy Whip Drive
Rolling Hills, California 90274..
Subject: Geologic and Geotechnical Engineering Report, Remedial
Repair of Distressed Residence, 27 Buggy Whip Drive, Lot
1, Tract 29383, Rolling Hills, California
Reference: Lockwood -Singh and Associates, dated March 3, 1981, "As -Graded Geologic
Report, Lot 1, Tract 29383, M.B. 864/12-14, No. 27 Buggy Whip Drive, Rolling
Hills, California"
Dear Ms. Frazier:
GeoSoils Consultants, Inc. (GSC) has prepared this geologic and geotechnical engineering
report to summarize our findings of the existing geologic conditions as they pertain to the
distressed residence at the subject site.
Four hand dug test pits and one boring were performed as a part of this investigation. The test
pit and boring logs and laboratory test results are provided in Appendix A. Our test pit and
boring locations are shown on the Geologic Map, Plate 1. The geologic cross sections are
shown on Plate 2.
The field exploration and laboratory test results are provided in Appendix A. The test pit logs
are included in this appendix as Plates TP-1 through TP-4. The boring logs are included asA-1
and A-2.
MDN 16826
6634 Valjean Avenue Van Nuys, California 91406 Phone: (818) 785-2158 Fax: (818) 785-1548
Page 2
July 15, 2016
W.O. 6948
SITE DESCRIPTION AND OBSERVED DISTRESS
This site is located at the end of the Buggy Whip Drive cul de sac. An easement road along the
western property line connects Buggy Whip Drive to Middleridge Lane. An ascending slope
extends from the easement road to the building pad. A paved road is located in the middle of
this slope to access the stables.
The western portion of the residence shows signs of distress with slight offset of sliding doors,
walls, and the roofiine. The homeowner informed us that there were cracks in the interior prior
to repairing and repainting of the walls. This portion of the residence is a single story and not
underlain by the partial basement.
GEOLOGY
Geologic conditions were determined through subsurface investigation and field mapping. The
subsurface exploration locations and site geology are shown on the site architectural survey
presented on Plate 1. The subsurface information is provided on two cross -sections presented
on Plate 2.
Reaional Geoloaic Settinq,
The site is located in the northern portion of the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province of
Southern California, which is characterized by northwest -southeast trending mountain ranges,
intervening valleys and fault -block complexes. These mountain ranges extend over 900 miles
from the Transverse Ranges Province (east -west trending Santa Monica and San Gabriel
Mountains) southward to the tip of Baja California, Mexico. The Peninsular Ranges include the
Santa Ana Mountains and San Jacinto Mountains of southern California, and the Sierra Juarez,
San Pedro Martir, and La Giganta mountains of Baja California. The mountain ranges are
bounded by parallel faults, such as the San Jacinto, Elsinore, Newport -Inglewood and Rose
Canyon.
The Los Angeles Basin lies at the junction of the Peninsular Ranges and the Transverse ranges
Geomorphic Provinces. The Los Angeles Basin began forming in the late Miocene; subsidence
MDN 16826
GeoSoils Consultants Inc.
1
1
Page 3
'• July 15, 2016
W.O. 6948
' was accommodated by extensional faults including the Whittier -Elsinore fault system. In mid
Pliocene, the tectonic plate motion shifted, causing north -south compression of the basin folding
I
the sediments and creating blind thrust faults (faults that do not reach the surface), including the
Puente Hills Thrust system. The Coyote Hills, Santa Fe Springs and Los Angeles faults are
,blind thrust faults, which make up the Puente Hills Thrust system. These three faults are east -
west striking echelon segments. It is the Puente Hilis Thrust that that is responsible for the 1987
I
Whittier Narrows earthquake. Blind thrusts produce near -surface folds that grow during
repeated earthquakes.
' The site location on regional geologic maps shows the site to be underlain by bedrock of the
Monterey Formation Altamira Shale. A buttress fill was constructed along the western portion of
' the lot and a copy of the referenced report addressing this buttress is provided in Appendix B.
An existing landslide is located to the west of the property, but was not encountered in Boring
' B-1
SEISMICITY
' The site is not within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone; however active faults are inclose
proximity to the site. This site has experienced earthquake -induced ground shaking in the past
' and can be expected to experience further shaking in the future. There are some faults in close
enough proximity to the site to cause moderate to intense ground shaking during the lifetime of
' the existing and proposed development.
' The property, as with all of Southern California, is in an area subject to periodic earthquake -
induced ground shaking. This should be considered during structural design.
2013 California Buildina Code (CBC. Seismic Desian Criteria
The 2013 CBC (California Building Code) seismic coefficient criteria are provided here for
t structural design consideration.
' Under the Earthquake Design Regulations of Chapter 16, Section 1613 of the CBC 2013, the
following coefficients apply for the site.
' MDN 16826
1
GeoSoils Consultants Inc.
Page 4
July 15, 2016
W.O. 6948
2013 CBC Section 1613. Earthquake Loads
Site Class Definition D
Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter, Sg (Figure 1613.3.1 for 0.2 second) 1.563
Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter, S1 (Figure 1613.3.1 for 1.0 second) 0.600
Site Coefficient, Fe (Table 1613.3.3(1) short period) 1.0
Site Coefficient, F(Table 1613.3.3(2) 1-second period) 1.5
Adiusted Maximum Considered Earthauake Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter SMS (Eq. 16-37) 1.563
Adjusted Maximum Considered Earthquake Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter SMI (Eq. 16-38) 0.900
Desiqn Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter, SDs (Ea. 16-39) 1.042
Design Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter, SD1 (Ea. 16-40) 0.600
Notes: Location: Longitude:-118.3547, Latitude: 34.7684
1. Site Class Designation: Class D is recommended based on subsurface condition.
2. Ss, SMs, and SDs are spectral response accelerations for the period of 0.2 second.
3. SI, SM1, and SDI are spectral response accelerations for the period of 1.0 second.
Conformance to the above criteria for seismic excitation does not constitute any kind of
guarantee or assurance that significant structural damage or ground failure will not occur if a
maximum level earthquake occurs. The primary goal of seismic design is to protect life and not
to avoid all damage, since such design may be economically prohibitive. Following a major
earthquake, a building may be damaged beyond repair, yet not collapse.
Secondary Earthauake Effects
Ground Rupture
Ground rupture occurs when movement on a fault breaks 'through to the surface.
Surface rupture usually occurs along pre-existing fault traces where zones of weakness
already exist. The State has established Earthquake Fault Zones for the purpose of
mitigating the hazard of fault rupture by prohibiting the location of most human
occupancy structures across the traces of active faults. Earthquake fault zones are
regulatory zones that encompass surface traces of active faults with a potential for future
surface fault rupture. The site is not located within a State established Earthquake Fault
Zone. Therefore, the ground rupture hazard for the site is considered to be low.
Landslidina
Earthquake -induced landsliding often occurs in areas where previous landslides have
moved and in areas where the topographic, geologic, geotechnical and subsurface
MDN 16826
GeoSoils Consultants Inc.
Page 5
July 15, 2016
W.O. 6948
groundwater conditions are conducive to permanent ground displacements. The subject
site is located in an area defined by the State for earthquake -induced landslides as
shown on the Torrance Quadrangle. As this is a remedial repair, slope stability has not
been addressed.
Seiches and Tsunamis
A seiche is the resonant oscillation of a body of water, typically a lake or swimming pool
caused by earthquake shaking (waves). The hazard exists where water can be splashed
out of the body of water and impact nearby structures. No bodies of constant water are
near the site, therefore, the hazards associated with seiches are not considered a
hazard.
c
Tsunamis are seismic sea waves generated by undersea earthquakes or landslides.
When the ocean floor is offset or tilted during an earthquake, a set of waves are
generated similar to the concentric waves caused by an object dropped in water.
Tsunamis can have wavelengths of up to 120 miles and travel as fast as 500 miles per
hour across hundreds of miles of deep ocean. Upon reaching shallow coastal waters,
the once two -foot high wave can become up to 50 feet in height causing great
devastation to structures within reach. Tsunamis can generate seiches as well. The site
is not located near the shoreline. Therefore, the tsunami hazard is considered low.
Liquefaction
Liquefaction describes a phenomenon where cyclic stresses, which are produced by
earthquake -induced ground motions, creates excess pore pressures in cohesionless soils. As a
result, the soils may acquire a high degree of mobility, which can lead to lateral spreading,
consolidation and settlement of loose sediments, ground oscillation, flow failure, loss of bearing
strength, ground fissuring, and sand boils, and other damaging deformations. This
phenomenon occurs only below the water table, but after liquefaction has developed, it can
propagate upward into overlying, non -saturated soil as excess pore water escapes.
MDN 16826
GeoSoils Consultants Inc.
Page 6
July 15, 2016
W.O. 6948
The site is not located in a State defined zone having a potential for liquefaction and is underlain
by shallow bedrock. Therefore, the potential for liquefaction at this site is considered to be low.
EARTH MATERIALS
Artificial Fill (afl
Artificial fill was encountered in both the test pits and boring performed on -site. The boring
encountered fill to a depth of 20 feet and a portion of the buttress key backdrain was
encountered. This fill material was placed in 1980/81 as a buttress fill by Lockwood -Singh and
Associates. It is our opinion that the fill has settled over time and should not be used for the
support of the proposed remedial foundation repair.
Bedrock: Monterev Formation Altamira Shale (Tmat)
Bedrock of the Monterey Formation was observed in the boring. The bedrock is suitable for
structural support providing that the following recommendations are adhered to during design
and construction. The portion of the bedrock encountered in the boring was observed to be
intact with no disturbed or pulverized zones. The bedrock observed was not landslide debris.
LANDSLIDING
No evidence of landsliding was observed on the subject site; however, the limits of an existing
landslide are mapped within the easement road and west of the easement road as shown on the
enclosed map obtained from the Lockwood -Singh and Associates report. The site is located in
a State -defined earthquake -induced landslide area. However, as discussed above, slope stability
analyses have not been performed due to the nature of the intended repair.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The proposed remedial repair of the residence is feasible from a geologic and geotechnical
engineering perspective, provided the recommendations contained herein are followed.
MDN 16826
GeoSoils Consultants Inc.
1
1
Page 7
' July 15, 2016
W.O. 6948
' The recommendations provided in this report are applicable provided the structure is
constructed with roof gutters and downspouts and the yard areas have positive drainage that is
' maintained away from the structure and adjacent landslide. Therefore, it is important that
information regarding drainage and site maintenance be passed on to future homeowners.
1
As in most of Southern California, the site lies within a seismically -active area, therefore
' earthquake resistant structural design is recommended.
The following geotechnical recommendations for underpinning should be incorporated into final
design and construction. All such work and design shall be . in conformance with local
governmental regulations or the recommendations contained herein, whichever is more
Irestrictive.
tENGINEERING CRITERIA
It is recommended that all proposed remedial foundations be founded into bedrock. The
' foundation recommendations provided should be considered. Prior to underpinning, the existing
foundation system should be evaluated by a structural engineer. The on -site materials have a
medium to high expansion index. In addition, the proposed underpinning should be designed so
as not to impact/surcharge the existing basement.
1. Conventional Foundations
I
It is anticipated that deepened foundations will be required. However, the following
recommendations are provided for convenience.
' A. Allowable soil bearing pressures of 3,000 pounds per square foot for bedrock
materials, including dead and real live loads, can be used for the proposed
' footings/underpinning. The proposed underpinning should be founded a
minimum depth of 24 inches into bedrock material. Isolated footings should be
' designed by the Structural Engineer. The above bearing value may be increased
by one-third when considering short duration seismic or wind loads.
' MDN 16826
1
GeoSoils Consultants Inc.
Page 8
July 15, 2016
W.O. 6948
B. A friction coefficient for concrete on bedrock of 0.4 may be used. A lateral
bearing value of 350 pounds per square foot, per foot of depth, for bedrock may
be employed to resist lateral loads. When combining passive pressure and
frictional resistance, the passive pressure component should be reduced by one-
third.
C. All foundations must satisfy current slope setback requirements.
2. Deepened Foundations
The following parameters may be used for preliminary pile design, if needed.
A. Foundation support may be derived by drilled cast -in -place, reinforced concrete
piles designed for frictional resistance.
B. Piles should be designed, by a Structural Engineer. Piles should have a minimum
embedment depth of five (5) feet into bedrock. However, pile depths may not be
less than the depth required to resist the lateral load by passive resistance or to
satisfy the slope setback guidelines. All foundations must satisfy current setback
requirements.
C. Piles should be tied together with grade and/or tie beams.
D. Piles may be assumed to be fixed five feet below pile cap or grade beam or
existing or proposed grade, whichever is deeper.
E. In determining allowable lateral bearing capacity, all existing fill should be
assumed not to have any lateral support. Passive earth pressures may be
computed as an equivalent fluid having a density of 350 pounds per cubic footfor
bedrock material, with.a maximum earth pressure of 3,500 pounds per square
foot.
MDN 16826
GeoSoils Consultants Inc.
1
1
Page'9
' July 15, 2016
W.O. 6948
I
For design of isolated piles, the allowable passive pressure may be increased by
100 percent. Piles spaced more than 2.5 pile diameters on center may be
considered isolated.
F. The allowable frictional resistance to be used for pile design is 750 pounds per
1 square foot, per foot of depth, into bedrock. The existing fill may not be used for
structural support.
' existing fill is subject to creep and settlement. Pile shafts should be
G. The g � p
' designed for a lateral load of 1000 pounds per linear foot for each foot of shaft
exposed to this material.
' H. All surface water should be collected and conducted to the street'or approved
water course via non -erosive devices.
1
I. All drilling should be observed and approved by the Geotechnical Engineer or
1 Engineering Geologist before .placing steel or pouring concrete. The City
Inspector should also observe the foundation excavations.
' J. Should groundwater be encountered during pile excavations, all groundwater
should be pumped from the excavations prior to pouring concrete, or the
1 concrete should be tremied into the excavation.
1 K. The proposed piles should be designed so as not to impact/surcharge the
existing basement.
ITemnorary Excavations
' All unsurcharged excavations may have vertical cuts to a maximum height of five feet in the fill
and bedrock materials with any portion above five feet trimmed back at a gradient of 1:1.
1
1 MDN 16826
1
GeoSoils Consultants Inc.
Page 10
July 15, 2016
W.O.6948
In areas where soils with little or no binder are encountered, shoring or flatter excavation slopes
shall be made.
These recommended temporary excavation slopes do not preclude local ravelling or sloughing.
All applicable requirements of the California Construction and General Industry Safety Orders,
the Occupational Safety and Health Act, and the Construction Safety Act should be met.
Where sloped embankments are used, the top of the slope should be barricaded to prevent
equipment and heavy storage loads within five feet of the top of the slope. If the temporary
construction embankments are to be maintained for long periods, berms should be constructed
along the top of the slope to prevent runoff water from eroding the slope faces. The soils
exposed in the temporary backcut slopes during excavation should be observed by our
personnel so that modifications of the slopes can be made if variations in the soil conditions
occur.
Drainage
Surface runoff should be collected and disposed of in such a manner as to prevent concentrated
erosion. Pad drainage should be directed toward an approved watercourse swale via non -
erosive channel, pipe and/or dispersion devices.
All surface runoff shall be transferred to an approved drainage channel via a non -erosive
drainage device. Leakage from any of the appurtenant plumbing will create an artificial
groundwater condition which could create stability/settlement problems. It is imperative that all
plumbing features be tested and be absolutely leak free.
We recommend that site drainage be verified after construction. At no time should drainage be
directed toward any descending slope or allowed to pond. Water should not be allowed to stand
and seep into the ground. Pad drainage should be directed towards the street or to any
approved non -erosive channel or pipe.
MDN 16826
GeoSoils Consultants Inc.
Page 11
July 15, 2016
W.O. 6948
Inspection
It is recommended that all foundation excavations be inspected by the Geologist or
I
Geotechnical Engineer prior to placing forms, concrete, or steel. Any fill which is placed should
be tested, and certified if used for engineered purposes. Footing excavations should be
observed by the Geologist or Geotechnical Engineer. Should the observation reveal any
unforeseen hazard, the Geologist or Geotechnical Engineer will recommend treatment. Please
inform us at least 24 hours prior to any required site observation. The City/County Inspector
should also inspect the excavations.
Construction Considerations
A. Erosion control measures, when necessary, should be provided by the Contractor during
grading and prior to the completion and construction of permanent drainage controls.
B. Upon completion of grading and termination of inspections by the Geotechnical
Engineer, no further filling or excavating, including that necessary for footings,
foundations, retaining walls, or other features should be performed without the approval
and observation of the Geotechnical Engineer or Engineering Geologist.
C. Care should be taken by the Contractor during grading to preserve any berms, drainage
terraces, interceptor swales, or other devices of a permanent nature on or adjacent to
the property.
D. Care should be taken not to, disturb any existing site improvements. The existing
residence should not be undermined or lateral support removed during removal of the
existing pool shell, if the existing pool shell is replaced.
"111" STATEMENT
The grading of the subject site was performed in accordance with the recommendations of this
office and the grading specifications of the County of Los Angeles. It is our professional opinion
MDN 16826
GeoSoils Consultants Inc.
Page 12
July 15, 2016
W.O. 6948
that the area included in this report is safe from landslide, settlement, or slippage. Grading
and/or building will not adversely affect the stability of offsite development.
INVESTIGATION LIMITATIONS
The materials addressed herein are believed representative of the indicated areas covered by
this report; however, soil materials vary in character between excavations.
Since our investigation is based upon the site materials observed and explored, the conclusions
and recommendations are professional opinions. These opinions have been derived in
accordance with current standards of practice, and no warranty is expressed or implied.
Please note the scope of services included herein were for remedial repair of the distressed
residence only.
If you have any questions regarding this report, or if we may be of additional service, please do
not hesitate to contact us.
Very truly yours,
GEOSOILS CON
KAREN L. MILLE
GE 2257
KLM.JLV.W:G&G En
Encl: Plate 1, Geologic Map
Plate 2, Geologic Cross -Sections
Appendix A, Field Exploration and Laboratory Test Results
Plates TP-1 through TP-4, Test Pit Logs
Plates A-1 and A-2, Boring Logs
Plates SH-1 and SH-2, Shear Test Diagrams
Appendix B, Lockwood -Singh and Associates Report dated March 3, 1981
cc:
AMES L. VA
CEG 2031
(5) Addressee
MDN 16826
GeoSoils Consultants Inc.
APPENDIX A
FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TEST RESULTS .
July 15, 2016
W.O.6948
MDN 16826
July 15, 2016
W.O. 6948
APPENDIX A
FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
A total of four hand dug test pits and one boring were excavated by GSC as a part of this study
in strategic locations on the subject site. The locations of the subsurface explorations are
shown on the Geologic Map, Plate 1. The test pits were continuously logged and classified by
one of our geologists by visual examination in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification
System. The test pit logs are included as Plates TP-1 through TP-4 and boring logs, Plates A-1
and A-2. The soil samples were retained in a series of brass rings, each having an inside
diameter of 2.36 (6.0 centimeters) and a height of 1.00 (2.54 centimeters). The central portions
of the samples were retained in close -fitting, moisture -tight containers for shipment to our
laboratory.
Moisture-Densitv
The field moisture content and dry unit weights were determined for the undisturbed ring
samples obtained from our subsurface exploration. The results are shown on the test pit and
boring logs.
Shear Tests
Two shear test of the bedrock was performed in a strain -control type Direct Shear Machine. The
sample was sheared under varying continued loads in order to determine the Coulomb shear
strength parameters: Cohesion and angle of internal friction. All samples were tested in an
artificially -saturated condition. The results are plotted on the Shear Test Diagram included with
this report as Plate SH-1 and SH-2.
Compaction Tests
Two compaction tests were performed to determine the moisture density relationships of the
soils encountered on the site. The laboratory standard used was in accordance with ASTM Test
Designation D-1557-12. A summary of the compaction test results is shown on Table A-1.
1 Test Pit and Sample Depth
TP-1 5 4'
Description
Brown, clavey SILT
oranqe SILT with siltstone
Maximum Dry Density (pcf)
90.0
95.5
Optimum Moisture (%)
22.0
21.5
MDN 16826
r - r - - i - - - - - _ - - -
TEST PIT LOG 1
GEOSOILS CONSULTANTS, INC.
CLIENT:
ADDRESS:
Depth
0-5'
Karen Frazier
Material Type
Artificial Fill (Af)
ELEVATION:
LOGGED BY: JLV
Material Description
WORK ORDER NO.: 6948
DATE: 7/6/16
Comments
0-3', Light orange brown, clayey, silty, fine to medium SAND with abundant rock fragments, @ 2', moisture=25.6%, dry
moderately moist, slightly to moderately firm density= 71.4 pcf
@ 3-5', Medium brown, clayey, silty, fine SAND with occasional rock fragments, moderately most, @ 5', moisture=27.7%, dry
moderately firm to firm density=75.8 pcf
Scale: H: 1"= 2' V: 1n=2' Pit Orient.: N-S Natural Slope: Angle T. D. 5'
Illustration
0.
.00 aBop
p 'p 4 .
o.o a o 0
• , c' •o o
o o D
!9
O
J
Plate TP-1
TEST PIT LOG 2
GEOSOILS CONSULTANTS, INC.
CLIENT: Karen Frazier ELEVATION: WORK ORDER NO.: 6948
ADDRESS: LOGGED BY: JLV DATE: 7/6/16
Depth Material Type Material Description Comments
0-5' Artificial Fill (Af) Orange brown to medium brown, silty, fine to medium SAND with rock fragments, moderately, @ 2', moisture=30.0%, dry
moderately firm to firm density= 67.4 pcf
@ 5', moisture=33.5%, dry
density=64.5 pcf
Scale: H: 1"= 2'
V: 1n=2' Pit Orient.: N-S Natural Slope: Angle T. D. 5'
Illustration
.0
.o
d
O
•. 0
O
Plate TP-2
TEST PIT LOG 3
GEOSOILS CONSULTANTS, INC.
CLIENT: Karen Frazier ELEVATION: WORK ORDER NO.: 6948
ADDRESS: LOGGED BY: JLV DATE: 7/6/16
Depth Material Type Material Description Comments
0-3' Artificial Fill (Af) Medium brown, silty, fine to medium SAND with rock fragments, slightly moist, moderately firm @ 3', mo1sture=24.8%, dry
density= 73.6 pcf
Scale: H: 1 "= 2'
V: 1"=2' Pit Orient.: N-S Natural Siope: Angle T. D. 3'
Illustration
O
Plate TP-3
r — — s — — — — — — — — — —
TEST PIT LOG 4
GEOSOILS CONSULTANTS, INC.
CLIENT: Karen Frazier ELEVATION: WORK ORDER NO.: 6948
ADDRESS: LOGGED BY: JLV DATE: 7/6/16
Depth Material Type Material Description Comments
0-5' Artificial Fill (Af) Light orange to medium brown, clayey, silty, fine to medium SAND with rock fragments, moderately @ 2', mo1sture=31.8%, dry
moist, moderately firm density= 70.8 pcf
@ 5', moisture=28.2%, dry
dens1ty=76.9 pcf
Scale: H: 1 "= 2'
V: 1"=2' Pit Orient.: N-S Natural Slope: Angle T. D. 5'
I Ilustration
0
0
•o
00
J
Plate TP-4
1
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
PROJECT NAME
DRILLING COMPANY
TYPE OF DRILL RIG
DRILLING METHOD
DIAMETER OF HOLE
BORING LOCATION:
H
a
w
❑
10-
20
25-
w
1 w
as
O?
m tD
Frazier
RC Drillinq
Limited Access
Auger
24
DATE STARTED: 7-6-16
LOGGED BY JLV
HAMMER WEIGHT (LBS)
DROP (IN)
GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION
0-20', FILL (aft
W.O. NO. 6948
BORING NO B-1
SHEET 1 OF 2
GROUND ELEVATION (FT)
GW ELEVATION
w�
yLu o�
oo >v
V ❑
12 @ 5', Light orange brown, clayey, silty, fine to medium SAND with rock 22.1 94.5
fragments, slightly moist, moderately firm
22 @ 10', Orange brown, silty, fine SAND with small rock fragments,
slightly moist, moderately firm
J 16
r'
50 for 8"
40
Standard
Penetration Test
California Ring
Rock Core
Bulk Sample
@ 17', Orange brown, silty, fine to medium SAND with rock fragments,
slightly moist, moderately firm
@ 17.5', Perforated drain pipe with coarse sand around pipe
20-30'1BEDROCK: Monterev Formation Altamira Shale (Tmatl
@ 20-22', Hard SANDSTONE layer
@ 21', No recovery
@ 22', Bedding: N80W, 6SW
@ 22', Yellowish -brown, clayey, fine SANDSTONE, slightly moist,
dense
@ 23', Bedding: N80W, 76E in sandstone
@ 24', Shear: N40W, 40SW
@ 25', Bedding: N75W, 5NE on pink bentonite layer, 1/4-1/2" thick
@ 26', Bedding: E-W, 10NE, siltstone layer
LEGEND
Shelby Tube
Water Seepage
Groundwater
SIEVE:
MAX:
DS:
CONS:
I-IYDR:
EXPAN:
CHEM:
GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS
MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY
DIRECT SHEAR
CONSOLIDATION
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS
EXPANSION INDEX
CHEMICAL TESTS
OTHER TESTS
13.5 100.9 --
14.0 94.3
5.4 90.3
PLATE A-1
GeoSoils Consultants, Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL * GEOLOGIC * ENVIRONMENTAL
GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG
PROJECT NAME Frazier
DRILLING COMPANY RC Drillinq
TYPE OF DRILL RIG Limited Access
DRILLING METHOD Auaer
DIAMETER OF HOLE 24
BORING LOCATION:
E
H
a
w
G
35-
40-
45-
50
55-
a
N
0 Z
m tO
DATE STARTED: 7-6-16
LOGGED BY JLV
HAMMER WEIGHT (LBS)
DROP.(IN)
GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION
W.O. NO
6948
BORING NO B-1
SHEET 2 OF 2
GROUND ELEVATION (FT)
GW ELEVATION
j 50 for 11" @ 30', Dark yellowish brown, fine SANDSTONE and bentonite
siltstone, moderately moist, dense
TD @ 30'
No water seepage
No caving
Hole backfilled
Standard
Penetration Test
California Ring
Rock Core
Bulk Sample
LEGEND
Shelby Tube
Water Seepage
= Groundwater
SIEVE:
MAX:
DS:
CONS:
HYDR:
EXPAN:
CHEM:
GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS
MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY
DIRECT SHEAR
CONSOLIDATION
HYDROMETER ANALYSIS
EXPANSION INDEX
CHEMICAL TESTS
w�
��
o0
5o >.v
V p
23.0 94.4
OTHER TESTS
PLATE A-2
GeoSoils Consultants, Inc.
GEOTECHNICAL * GEOLOGIC * ENVIRONMENTAL
Frazier
W.O.: 6948
Date of Test: 7/16
Sample: B-1 @ 22.0'
3.00
2.50
GeoSoils Consultants, Inc.
Geotechnical Engineering * Engineering Geology
Shear Test Diagram
Peak
C(psf): 0 Phi.(degrees): 41.0
Reshear
C(psf): 0 Phi (degrees): 37.0
/ /.
�/�7
/. )f
1.00` /
/ 7
/)
0.50 , �
I1 ✓'"
0.00 }�
0.00 0.50 1.00
1.50 2.00
Normal Pressure (ksf)
Direct Shear, Peak / Reshear Speed:.001 In./min.
• Peak Values O Reshear Values
Undisturbed Natural Shear -Saturated
Light orange -brown, sandy SILT, w/ siltstone.
36.3% Saturated Moisture Content
2.50 3.00
PLATE SH-1
6948.1.xis
Frazier
W.O.:6948
Date of Test: 7/16
Sample' B-1 @ 30.0'
Shearing Strength (ksf
3.00
2.50
2.00
1.50 -
- _.y 0
GeoSoils Consultants, Inc.
Geotechnical Engineering * Engineering Geology
Shear Test Diagram .
Peak
C(psf): 1000 Phi (degrees): 23.5
Reshear
C(psf):.870 Phi (degrees): 20.5
0.50
0.00 '
0.00
I
I
I
I
0. =0
0
1.00 1.50
2.00
Normal Pressure (ksf)
Direct Shear, Peak / Reshear Speed:.001 inimin.
•Peak Values OReshear Values
Undisturbed Natural Shear -Saturated
Orange -brown, clayey, sandy SILT, w/ siltstone.
41.2% Saturated Moisture Content
2.50 3.00
PLATE SH-2
6948.2.xis
APPENDIX B
LOCKWOOD -SINGH AND ASSOCIATES REPORT
DATED MARCH 3,1981
July 15, 2016
W.O. 6948
MDN 16826
R. DRUCE LOCKWOOD. R E.O.
AWTAR SINOH. C.E.
March 3, 1981
Lockwood --Singh & Associates
A CORPORATION
Consulting Foundation Engineers and Geologists
1944 Cotner Avenue • Los Angeles, Callfornla 90025
Telephone: (213)870-7335; (213)477-8208
Project Ref. 2032-14
Dr. & Mrs. George Stefanik
9229 Buell Street
Downey, California 90241
SUBJECT: AS -GRADED GEOLOGIC REPORT
LOT:1, TRACT 29383, M.B. 864/12-14
NO. 27 BUGGY WHIP DRIVE
ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA
Dear Dr. & Mrs. Stefanik:
This report is submitted at the request of your general
contractor, Jim Fuller. This facility has conducted
geologic inspection of grading operations at the subject
site. Grading included construction of a compacted fill
buttress in addition to cut and fill to create a level
building pad. Geologic data obtained during grading are
shown on Plate A, herein.
Geologic conditions noted confirmed preliminary findings
given in our Geotechnical Investigation Report of
July 24, 1980, and addendum dated December 3, 1980. No
significant deviations were observed.
Compaction of the fill was discussed in our Interim Compaction
Report dated February 26, 1981.
�h
Proj. Ref. 2032-14 -2- March 3, 1981
STEFANIK - Buggy Whip
It is our professional opinion that geologic conditions
at the subject site are satisfactory and we'therefore
recommend that the County of Los Angeles approve the
grading insofar as geologic conditions are concerned.
Thank you for this opportunity to be of professional service.
If you should have any questions concerning this report,
please feel free to contact the undersigned.
Very truly yours,
LOCKWOOD-SINGH ASSOCIATES.
Bruce Lockwood
f CEG 204
RBL/SMD:jmf