Loading...
640A, Variance for encroachment in , Studies & Reports• Converse Consultants Geotechnlcal Engineering and Applied Sciences GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION 2.4+ ACRE RESIDENTIAL LOT APPALOOSA LANE ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA Conducted For: MR. GEORGE T. SCHARFFENBERGER No. 4 Appaloosa Lane Rolling Hills, California 90274 Me 564 Project No. 81-02265-01 March 22, 1982 Converse Consultants, Inc. 1440 South State College Blvd. Suite 4H Post Office Box 6288 Anaheim, California 92806 Telephone 714 772-2151 • Converse Consultants Geotechnical Engineering and Applied Sciences March 22, 1982 Mr. George T. Scharffenberger No. 4 Appaloosa Lane Rolling Hills, California 90274 Subject: Geotechnical Investigation,2.4± Acre Residential Lot, Appaloosa Lane, Rolling Hills, California (81-02265-01) Dear Mr. Scharffenberger: This report presents the results of our geotechnical investigation performed for the proposed residential lot adjacent to, and west of, Appaloosa Lane, and immediately south of Tentative Tract 31836 in Rolling Hills, California. This work was performed in accordance with our proposal dated December 4, 1981, accepted by you on December 12, 1981. Thank you for this opportunity of working with you on this project. Please do not hesitate to call if we can help you further. Yours very truly, CO SULTANTS, INC. Thoma. J. Scheil, R.C.E. 31150 Mana� g Vice President RWR/MEB/TJS :bl Dist: (4) Addressee Converse Consultants, Inc. 1440 South State College Blvd. Suite 4H Post Office Box 6288 Anaheim, California 92806 Telephone 714 772-2151 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE NO. INTRODUCTION 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2 Site Description 2 3 4 Figure 1, Vicinity Map Proposed Grading FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY 'TESTING 5 Field Exploration 5 Laboratory Tests 5 GEOLOGY 6 Surficial Deposits 6 Bedrock 6 Structure 7 Faulting and Seismicity 8 Figure 2, Earthquake Epicenter and Fault Map 9 Ground Water 10 EVALUATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 11 General 11 Stability Analyses 12 Remedial Grading 14 Site Grading 15 Removal of Unsuitable Materials 15 Natural and Graded Slopes 16 Temporary Construction Slopes 17 In -Grading Observations 18 Bedrock Excavatability 18 Expansive Soils 18 Ground Water Considerations . 19 Subdrain Construction 19 Sewage Disposal 20 Lot Drainage 21 Foundation Recommendations 21 Corrosion Considerations 22 Plan Review 22 LIMITATIONS 23 REFERENCES 25 Converse Consultants, Inc. DRAWING 1 DRAWING 2 DRAWING 3 DRAWING 4 DRAWINGS 5 APPENDIX A APPENDIX B APPENDIX C APPENDIX D Geologic Geologic Remedial Remedial TABLE OF CONTENTS Continued Map Sections Grading Map Grading Section & 6 - Exploratory Trenches - Field Exploration - Sampling and Laboratory Testing - Stability Analyses - General Site Grading PAGE NO. Follows Text Follows Text Follows Text Follows Text Follows Text Al thru All Bl thru B7 Cl thru C35 D1 thru D10 Converse Consultants, Inc. INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our geotechnical investigation performed for the proposed 2.4± acre residential lot adjacent to, and west of, Appaloosa Lane in Rolling Hills, California. The purposes of this investiga- tion were to obtain surface and subsurface information, to evaluate the geotechnical feasibility of the planned development, and to provide recommendations for grading and foundation construction. An undated 'site plan prepared by South Bay Engineering, at a scale of 1"=40', was used as a reference during our investigation. Previous work on the site or contiguous areas included our geotechnical investigation of Tentative Tract No. 31836 dated December 23, 1980 (Project No. 80-02238-01), and work performed by Lockwood -Singh and Associates. The scope of services performed included: 1. Reviewing available geotechnical data per- taining to the site (see References, page 25). 2. Reviewing sequential aerial photographs dated 1927, 1928, 1945, and 1980. 3. Geologic mapping of site surface conditions at a scale of 1"=40' . 4. Drilling and logging four (4) bucket auger borings to obtain information on -subsurface conditions and obtain samples for laboratory observation and testing. Converse Consultants, Inc. • 2 5. Excavating and logging twelve (12) explora- tory trenches to observe subsurface geologic conditions. 6. Laboratory examination and testing of repre- sentative soil samples. 7. Geologic and engineering evaluations and analyses. 8. Preparation of this report which includes all field and laboratory test data, computations, figures, drawings, and our findings and recommendations. Geotechnical data obtained by other consultants at the site and contiguous areas were reviewed and considered in our evaluation of the site and the proposed development. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Site Description The 2.4± acre site is located west of Appaloosa Lane, approximately 1.1 mile southwest of Palos Verdes Drive North in Rolling Hills, California, and near the southern end of Sepulveda Canyon (see Figure 1, Vicinity Map, following page). All of the areas immediately adjacent to the subject site are undeveloped and are generally in their natural state. The topography consists of a moderately steep to Converse Consultants, Inc. • 3 FORM NO. (354A/77 ij F., r, 1 , ,...::'•,..:. f----------../.1,::5-2.7:' VT •, \ `‘. „-'.------,irr-r-•••.„ _,-•_,__/,/41,, • ) ../-,..,-----',.;.,?„° :.•.. -----1/ kit.° ‘. .'•••• „----:-... s• • " • ---.5„,,e'.: \ •••••••-' illc..1'.1'-2.11,' yii ) 1 • * , _tf"/Rolling Hi ' • . •.,%,, , \ --) . K. s•filis",:y. li a •, t f•--r-1"-::•\"4: rl• ,7,---- /it ., ' ' '' X'.'•\•,) 7 i • ..,,,-• • Wi • i • . i; •-*•440 L, N, , , w u L_.:._____, 0- • 2/'/-7 .• ---."- t, - .',....\\: -,''....'•/....:ift../.40.1.4, :‘..1..".,/,,,•• t., / `St- \ ' .: ',..---- \ -------' ,)'.. ,r),. "V. ,.,/ 17. • :: yi • ......., • - ,.-,,....•: „ .„•• \•1:-Shopping--\•-.,:tgnier..,,,' fKi,......".j. i. •,........A. •,- • , .".." .0=i;,.....• i 1 V' ,t, . . %-,.-!=. •••'- ...; ,..., .,_..i /. ., .:. //, . • ' ' /./ . •-,Lji-,,.;,,,----N_.----___,,,„,,,,) -% 1 a 0,..„ . 'It • , • '''. ---'-'.•• of, P oo ..--, : e_boy,,•"•,......,;:--,. 0 / • fi.:''''... ...''''''.....i..%., ---.'" '''n, 7 ......"Al • , t1/!','":.1. • . ,. I ) _\c,-.-A.;,- onui,cgip;1..Etat0A % \ c) .. • 7. /,.. 5-°3 • • "Ir 1:1.(\t\:\ .16*1\-:-": 1-c-ce,•e. • • Fischer Fisc • • is" c: • • sq-2/6 .'.' .--.7.-. • '7.-.•-•••• '40 ... $# :,'• . . ----- .-.•,..',.:,:•:-.4.1-' ---"'.• ..(** '-'::__?,!a-n.,,. ' • .\ • ..._:,:;-"7"..-i *.:(---•!4c,--:Fir -----tr§-qirti mil, '-.., • -----_. .........▪ , -,, ...:<. sta RESERV;ATION'•.: /1/, , "..tt,__ . ---- ....-_--,-er-----",<-, pi .• .../c.',...--...........1 1 L......__---•-•=it-1....... .,- ...............,,40.. If ) .„:-....1\-.,:::, . ' --..--'!,' I L......... • • '• ' '----B4999.skr ' o S'<\ •. ?.o., --_, 17 -----;._..---ii (---'''-------- .......,.., ii -,, •,...p • • L.. f/ - ..t.-_-_•••%•:---% .. --....,„ SPit.a..58 '-‘ / A, '' 74 :„.., ......e,-. ,\--....--.,_,../:,,,,7 ,, , ..:,::, ''.::.1,.,....:..-...,o3,4 ,.,, 7: \ .-,, I . , • ' E'\• \•'''-•-•=" C ( 1\ \--- \ -, ,-----,,,y.se, ••••• ',. ,.....:...• ,, c .i..._.., -1 m : .-----,.- --N----:• ' ' i' \.,.—..._,,,..-/./...;;4,''. (/:'' Ns.ci,6•.:---.-,..i 2.... • '--;--\\•_ "•„__ \\ : c 0-v•-•!....4 , ,.,/ 4 L.• •• .:-.---•••:\I.J., •.• 'ts•. 'T...-1•Zc'.'.' • '' ''. 1--. N'''. \ s•l•%•-•• ''.. (,./..„...."--;:":". t',, • L".•••/, I- •,, I' >\•••,.• .0 ' • r./-•••. '' .......,°: :,7, • 1 BDY . • *1......_.../-4.4,, ,...-r—.? 4. i .,,,,in.. 7..i..-----,,,:,---..„ „ •• / • , i ... ‘1,.-. •,,,,..,/ _ 1 ..,, .,.;..... • ..- - . - y --- , L... .. ...,,.7--.. (•--.... - ----- 4.1„0:7.-.....:-.,. i''',!'r: ;:./Q,'--; ,---... ;:, ., ,...‘ v•:::::';;;:'" .-•.,•-...., ,.5'..• BEAD* , ) ':','.., T .))% 7 '.1 __./ -...,-_-_ • .'---L-__ ,>.6•-• • ) V' ?z-"V.'..\-:%:,'-‘ crl,t1.rig Hills) ---i .. • ) /...z:-. --- , i"..,•-• ,. s• ... f.'it . 1i.,:-.-yr2 ',...,.. ..____% .\ ,\ :-.-4 ...)::---1--'.4) .,1!/%'•:!?‘-___,) !. , •7:-..:.; ! : . '' #$ '/' ??..././7. • • ' 7 i i'! . 7-7./;."\'• '.. c • • 1:—.J. \A: ": 1,./ •,.: ...',-,' ,,•_. . ci- •14 \ • V/ :,____;-y ...„.., • • ... (..-< -----.4.,,.., , : , • . . • . 1 , , ii,/ ,,,t- ( ', •• ",.: . fr / • -... -_____,/- \ ,, v • ,, / / \ ----• , I )) • "( ▪ • ,00 . • • • t•••-•, ( /•• 13p9, • •Ac •• •• Reference: Portion of U.S.G.S. Quadrangle, Torrance Sheet, 1972. VICINITY MAP 2.4± Acre Residential Lot Appaloosa Lane Rolling Hills, California © Converse Consultants Scale 1"=2000' Prepared by R SM Checked by 14ga Approved by plea Project No. 81-02265-01 Date 3 /2.2./7 L Figure No. 1 4 gentle southerly -facing hillside area. Elevations on the property range from approximately +900 feet (U.S.G.S. Datum) near the northerly property boundary to approximately +980 feet near the southerly property boundary. At the time of the field exploration, the site was covered with wild grasses, coastal sage scrub, and a few scattered trees. A paved road (Appaloosa Lane) exists near the eastern limits of the property. No structures or, structural remnants (i.e., concrete) were observed on the property. At the present time, surface drainage is predominantly by sheet flow across most of the property into the northerly -flowing Sepulveda Canyon. However, the property is bisected by a small tributary of Sepulveda Canyon in which a moderate amount of erosion has occurred as the result of collected storm runoff discharging from an 8-inch diameter pipe located south of the subject site. Proposed Grading We understand that the proposed development will include a 12,000 square foot level building pad with only minor northerly -facing cut and fill slopes on the order of 10 (vertical) feet high planned. The maximum slope ratio will be 2:1 (horizontal to vertical) . Minor cuts and fills will also be associated with an access road from Appaloosa Lane to the building pad. Converse Consultants, Inc. • • 5 FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING Field Exploration The field,,work for this investigation included geologic mapping, exploratory trenching and drilling conducted between February 1 and February 5, 1982. Four (4) bucket auger borings were drilled for this investigation to depths ranging from 40 to 70 feet. Twelve (12) exploratory trenches were also excavated and ranged in depth from 5 to 11 feet. The logs are presented in Appendix A of this report. Boring and trench locations, and pertinent subsur- face information obtained from this exploration are shown on Drawing l (Geologic Map, in pocket). Laboratory Tests Selected samples were tested in the laboratory to determine certain engineering properties of the subsurface materials. Laboratory tests included unit weight and mois- ture content determinations, direct shear tests, consolida- tion tests, grain size analyses, and tests to obtain infor- mation on the expansive potential. In addition, the maximum density -optimum moisture content were obtained on the most representative materials, and samples were remolded at a density equivalent to that expected for compacted fill. Tests were then performed on the remolded samples to obtain information on their engineering properties. Converse Consultants, Inc. 6 A description and results of some of the laboratory tests are presented in Appendix B. Additional data are presented on the Boring Summary Sheets in Appendix A. The soil samples will be discarded 60 days after the date of this report, unless this office receives a specific request to retain the samples for a longer period. GEOLOGY Surficial Deposits Slopewash deposits (Qsw) representing generally silty clays and clayey silts with rock fragments were the only surficial deposits found on the property. These deposits are indicated on the Geologic Map (Drawing 1) where they are estimated to be greater than four feet in thickness. Minor amounts of generally expansive slopewash materials, ranging from about one to four feet in depth, overlie the bedrock on the remainder of the site. Other surficial deposits noted on the Geologic Map include noncompacted fill (Af), com- pacted fill (Afc) , and landslide debris (Qls) . However, these deposits are located off the property. Bedrock The property is underlain by marine sedimentary rocks of the Monterey Formation. These bedrock ,units consist of the Altamira Shale Member (Tma), and an associated deformed layer (Tmad) within this member. The Altamira Shale Converse Consultants, Inc. • • 7 Member exposed in the exploratory trenches, borings, and during the geologic mapping is composed predominantly of siltstone, shale, silty claystone, clayey siltstone, with minor amounts of dolomite, silty sandstone, siliceous silt- stone, and bentonite. These lithologic units ranged from moderately hard to very hard, thinly laminated to laminated, moderately fractured to intensely fractured, and slightly weathered to very weathered. The deformed zone (Tmad) represents a significant interval of large-scale contorted and deformed beds, and remnant blocks in a predominantly bentonitic/tuffaceous matrix, measuring approximately 20 feet thick at the site. This deformed zone is probably the result of submarine slumping and gravity sliding on a depositional paleoslope, and possibly later sliding during Pliocene -age uplift of the Palos Verdes peninsula. Generally, regular and continuous beds were observed above and below this interval. Structure The bedrock structure on the property is generally homoclinal with the beds tilted gently downward to the north and west between 10 and 25 degrees. An overall regional westerly dip is evident in this area. Variations and some reversals of this general pattern are present throughout the property, and adjacent to the property, as a result of folding and soft sediment deformation. Converse Consultants, Inc. 4• 8 A relatively large landslide at the westerly two-thirds of the property is shown on the California Division of Mines and Geology Map (Cleveland, 1976). However, no evidence to substantiate the existence of such a slide was found during the course of our investigation in this area. Faulting and Seismicity No faults were observed on the property. No active or potentially active faults are known to be present on or immediately adjacent to the site. The site is located within two miles of the Palos Verdes fault, 10 miles of the Newport -Inglewood fault, 19 miles of the Norwalk fault, 20 miles of the Santa Monica fault, 25 miles of the Raymond fault, 26 miles of the Whittier fault, 33 miles of the Sierra Madre fault, 33 miles of the San Fernando fault, 52 miles of the San Jacinto fault, and 54 miles of the San Andreas fault. These faults are considered active or potentially active and most likely to cause significant ground shaking to the site in event of a major or great earthquake origi- nating within the region (see Figure 2, following page). Only three significant epicenters have been located in the Palos Verdes Peninsula since 1933 (instrumental record) . One epicenter and associated aftershocks, between magnitude 4.5 and 5.4, was located on the Rocky Point (Palos Verdes Converse Consultants, Inc. Page 9 0 34°30' 4 ti ip'F A4LC „� `��� `��� LOS 34°0 0' i . l`� ^ A PALOS VERDES P7/NT SITE 33°30' A A 0 A `L s,00 \ O EARTHQUAKE EPICENTER AND FAULT MAP EPICENTRAL PLOTS FROM 1933 TO 1980 PASADENA• 0��. RAYMOND_i' A A A SANTA CATAL/NA /SLAND ANGELES A A A EXPLANATION SYMBOL MAGNITUDE A 3.5- 4.4 O 4.5- 5.4 5.5 - 6.4 m s. AFTERSHOCKS OF 1971 SAN FERNANDO EARTHQUAKE. O� FAULT_ NO1—?1 h FAuLr • ANAHEIM O A OLN u j /933 A A A I18'00' 0 Q� v � c.3 A DANA PO!i/T SAN CLEMENTE • 0 5 10 SCALE IN MILES A AleA O ive 0 R/V£RS/DE COUNTY • RIVERSIDE A 0 A R/VERS/D£ S4N—D/ECO-- CO�/iVpy C04477- y 117°30' Converse Consultants Figure 2 • • 10 Point) area about three miles northwest of the site. The other two epicenters, between 4.5 to 5.4 and 5.5 to 6.4, were located in the Wilmington area about six and seven miles east of the site, respectively. Based on the geologic nature of the site and locations of active or potentially active faults, ground shaking at the site as a result of earthquakes occurring during an average time period is expected to be similar to other sites within the Los Angeles area. Basic data relative to design for ground accelera- tions were not within the scope of this investigation. However, this data compilation can be provided upon request. Ground Water No free ground water was encountered in the exploratory borings which penetrated to depths up to 70 feet. No unusually moist areas or springs were observed on the surface at the site during the geologic mapping or in the recent exploratory trenches or borings (February 1982). Since seasonal variations in the ground water can be expected, late Winter and early Spring conditions may reveal the presence of moist areas and/or springs, and possibly free ground water or artesian conditions at depth. Converse Consultants, Inc. • • 11 EVALUATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS General Based on -the investigation and a review of the planned development, it is' our opinion that the site is suitable for the intended use from a geotechnical viewpoint. Further- more, the proposed construction, including the recommended remedial grading, is not expected to adversely affect the contiguous properties. However, conditions which could not be reasonably anticipated, or conditions beyond our control, were not considered in our evaluations contained herein. The recommendations presented herein should be incorporated into the design and implemented during grading. Considera- tion has been given to both the gross and surficial sta- bility of slopes. Gross stability evaluations in geotech- nical terms relate to the potential for relatively deep, arcuate -type failures in relatively homogeneous materials; e.g., man-made fills or nonlayered bedrock, or the potential for failure along bedding planes in layered bedrock. Sur- ficial stability evaluations, on the other hand, relate to the potential for relatively shallow slippage on natural or compacted fill slopes (mudflows, slumping) , or bedrock cut slopes (wedge failures, ravelling, pop -outs). Strength parameters used in the calculations are considered to be conservative. Some corrective slope stabilization measures will be needed based on our evaluation of site gross sta- blity and presently known geologic conditions. Converse Consultants, Inc. 4 12 Stability Analyses Our analyses relating to the stability of the site were' performed to satisfy the minimum requirements of the County of Los Angeles; namely, a 1.5 factor -of -safety for static loading conditions, 1.2 for temporary conditions, and 1.1 for seimic loading conditions. Strength parameters deter- mined during this investigation and used in our computations are considered to be of a generally conservative nature. Satisfying both the static and seismic loading conditions, as required by the County, has resulted in us recommending extensive remedial grading. Stability analyses were performed for the bedrock de- picted on Section A -A' included on Drawing 2. The stability calculations are presented in Appendix C. Strength para- meters used in our analyses were based on the laboratory tests performed for this investigation and on parameters used on the adjacent property to the north. Please refer to our report for Tentative Tract 31836 dated December 3, 1980 (Project No. 80-02238-01). Our analyses did not consider the presence of any free ground water. Due to the possible seasonal variation of ground -water levels, subsurface ground -water conditions might change, but such changes are not expected to adversely affect the subject property. Converse Consultants, Inc. • • 13 -• The results of our stability calculations indicate that major changes to the proposed grading plans will be required. to stabilize the existing deformed zone within the upper part of the bedrock. The remedial measures recommended will include construction of a buttress fill, and placement of additional fill (shear key) near the toe of the proposed cut slope. • The strength parameters (0=21° and C=250 psf) used in our calculations were determined from laboratory test results obtained during our investigation on the adjacent property, Tract 31836. The relatively high strength values (i.e., 0=38° and C=1220 psf) obtained during this investiga- tion appeared to be unrealistic based on our experience in the area and our familiarity with similar materials. It is our opinion that the lower strength values more closely represent the on -site generally weak bentonitic and shaley bedrock, and, therefore, these values were used in our calculations. The use of the higher strength parameters would result in an increase in the calculated factors of safety and/or a reduction in the size of needed stabili- zation fills. Additional testing and stability analyses could be performed after a final grading plan has been prepared to verify or possibly modify our present recommendations. Based on the results of our laboratory tests and stability analyses, the generally weak bedrock derived Converse Consultants, Inc. 14 material compacted to 90% maximum density, resulting in soil strength parameters of 0=21° and C=250 psf, will not result in the buttress fill slope area being grossly stable with respect to the seismic loading condition; that is, the factor of safety was computed to be less than the required 1:1. However, the use of higher strength on -site material compacted to 90% (0=38° and C=1220 psf) would have adequate calculated gross stability. Other procedures which could increase the calculated factor of safety above the minimum 1:1 would include compacting the weaker material to 95% maximum density, adding soil cement to the on -site soils, importing selected higher strength material for use as compacted fill, etc. Surficial stability was determined using analytic pro- cedures for infinite slopes under saturated conditions to a depth of four feet with seepage parallel to the slope sur- face. The results of these analyses indicate that properly constructed fill slopes will have adequate surficial stability. Remedial Grading The remedial grading measures recommended for stabili- zation of the existing deformed zone are shown on Drawing 2 which follows the report text. Our analyses indicate that this area (Section A -A') may be stabilized by a combination of a buttress fill' to support the lower portion and a fill shear key for the upper portion. Converse Consultants, Inc. • • Site Grading 15 J The contract specifications for grading of this parcel should include, but not be limited to, provisions for: 1. Vegetation removal; 2. Removal of existing soft or unsuitable surficial deposits (slopewash); 3. Preparation of areas prior to fill placement; 4. Method of placement of soils as compacted fill; 5. Compaction requirements for the fill materials; and 6. Tests and observations by the Soil Engineer and Engineering Geologist. All excavated materials placed in the areas which are to be used for structural support'should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum laboratory density based on ASTM.D1557-70, or other acceptable procedures, where applic- able. It is particularly important that satisfactory place- ment and compaction of materials be attained in fill slope areas. Such filled ground should be compacted to the slope surface to a minimum of 90 percent of the ASTM D1557-70 maximum dry density. Removal of Unsuitable Materials Varying depths of unsuitable surficial deposits (Qsw) were encountered below the natural ground surface across the site. These materials should be removed to the limits and Converse Consultants, Inc. 16 depths as determined by the geologist during grading in areas for support of fills or structures. The excavated materials, including the surficial deposits, are expected to be suitable for placement in compacted fill areas. Approximately one to four feet of removal should be anticipated in those areas not designated as Qsw (slopewash) on the Geologic Map (Drawing 1). It is expected that most of the required removals can be accomplished by normal 'stripping or benching procedures. Prior to filling, stand- ing water should be removed to allow placement and compac- tion of new fill under relativelydry conditions. All non - organic surficial soils are expected to be suitable for use as properly compacted fill material. Natural and Graded Slopes The bedrock in the natural slope areas, within and abutting the site, is considered to be favorably bedded. These natural slopes are expected to remain grossly stable following the site grading, provided the drainage from the proposed graded area is adequately controlled. The planned fill slopes also are expected to be grossly stable once planting has been adequately established, provided there is proper surface moisture control. Our evaluation of the cut slope gross stability,based on presently known geologic conditions, indicates that some remedial stabilization will probably be needed due to the inherent weakness of the bentonitic/tuffaceous matrix within the deformed zone (see Drawings 2 and 4, Geologic Sections and Remedial Grading Section A -A') . Converse Consultants, Inc. • • 17 Fill slopes should be planted and maintained to retard erosion and reduce the potential, for surficial distress during periods of heavy or prolonged rainfall. Rodent activity should be controlled because such activity loosens the surficial soils and provides avenues for water infil- tration during heavy rains. Gross stability and surficial stability analyses are presented in Appendix C. Due to the observed presence of slopewash materials on the natural slopes, there is a potential for surficial instability or mudflows in the natural slope areas during periods of prolonged or heavy rainfall. Such mudflows may impact the level pad. To mitigate this potential hazard, we recommend construction of drains and diversion walls at the top of such cut slopes bordering natural areas. Temporary Construction Slopes Where stabilization measures are recommended, there is always some risk of failure during construction. This potential hazard is greater where prestabilization cuts are carried below potential slide rupture surfaces or are exca- vated at steep angles. The risk of in -grading failure can be reduced by: segmental construction in weak bedrock areas, rapid construction practices, and avoidance of prestabiliza- tion cutting during the seasonal rainfall period. Stability analyses indicate adequate stability of the recommended construction excavations, based on our existing knowledge of the geologic conditions. If significantly more adverse Converse Consultants, Inc. 18 conditions are revealed, incremental construction (slot cut) procedures may be required to maintain adequate stability during construction. In -Grading Observations Frequent in -grading observations and geologic mapping by the Engineering Geologist are essential during site grad- ing. Cut slopes should be observed at a frequency necessary to provide reasonable geologic evaluation of the exposed materials and bedding orientations. The observations should be made to substantiate geologic conditions . interpolated between or extrapolated beyond exploratory borings and. trenches, and to reasonably take account of the actual sub- surface conditions which may be exposed. Bedrock Excavatability Most of the excavated bedrock at the site is expected to break into sizes which can be incorporated in the com- pacted fill using normal handling procedures; however, some oversized rock should be anticipated which will need special handling. Expansive Soils The shale and siltstone bedrock and most of the clayey soils encountered in the area are considered as being moderately to highly expansive with respect to moisture content and volume -change characteristics. Converse Consultants, Inc. • • 19 A classification of expansion characteristics should be made during and after rough grading using laboratory tests, as necessary, to determine the volume -change characteristics of the sub grade materials. Specific foundation recommenda- tions should then be made based on the test results and construction observations. Ground Water Considerations As previously indicated, ground water was not encoun- tered in any of the borings or trenches. However, it should be noted that the possiblity exists that the underlying water surface could be higher during different times of the year, especially after prolonged rainfall, but such condi- tions are not likely to adversely affect the subject' pro- perty. Subdrain Construction Installation of subdrains is recommended beneath all proposed or recommended remedial fills (see Drawing 2) A four -inch diameter perforated pipe (Schedule 40 PVC or ABS Class SDR 35) surrounded by an adequate filter is recom- mended, such as a sand/pea gravel mixture, or an equivalent, and a filter fabris (i.e., Poly -Filter X, Mirafi, etc.) designed to prevent clogging. We recommend that three cubic feet of filter material be placed per lineal foot of sub drain installed. Converse Consultants, Inc. • Recommendations for adjustments based upon field moisture conditions be made by the Engineering Geologist performed. Sewage Disposal The proposed lot is underlain by a zone within the Monterey formation. If 20 in length of subdrains, and other factors, may as the excavations are deformed bedrock a cesspool is planned, the specific subsurface conditions on the property should be considered in design. To eliminate any potential adverse effect on site stability, we recommend that the cesspool be placed to the north or west of the building site, extending to below the bottom of the canyon grade and into at (vertical) feet of in -place bedrock. Based on field observations and exploratory a depth least 25 borings, the bedrock at the site is generally very fractured (one to six-inch spacing) to intensely fractured (less than one inch spacing), except in areas where relatively thick dolomite, siliceous siltstone, or sandstone beds were encountered. This bedrock is expected to have relatively good permeability and should be adequate for independent disposal system. The bedrock found on this property the purposes of an is similar in nature to that bedrock encountered in the developed areas of Rolling Hills. We understand that no major problems with Converse Consultants, Inc. • 21 the existing sewage -disposal systems in Rolling Hills have been reported to date based on past conversations with the City. Construction of a cesspool would involve difficult excavation of some bedrock, especially the dolomite and sandstone. We recommend that percolation tests be conducted on the lot prior to cesspool installation. Lot Drainage Positive drainage should be provided to the driveway and street (Appaloosa) from the lot where possible. Flaw over the graded or natural slopes should be avoided. Sufficient gradient on the lot should be provided to assure that the water will be controlled to an approved disposal area. Foundation Recommendations Footings for the planned residential structure may be founded on relatively undisturbed bedrock or properly com- pacted fill. Foundations for a single -story structure should be at least 12 inches wide and should be founded at least 24 inches below the lowest adjacent grade. Prelimi- nary design may be based on an allowable bearing value of 1500 pounds per square foot on competent natural soil or properly compacted fill, and 3000 pounds per square foot may be used for footings on competent bedrock. Detailed foundation recommendations can be provided for a specific structure at the completion of grading. Converse Consultants, Inc. 22 If floor coverings that would be critically affected by moisture, such as vinyl tile, are to be used, slabs should be protected by a polyethylene plastic vapor barrier of at least six -mil thickness or by a minimum four inches of clean, free -draining gravel or crushed rock. If the barrier is used, it should be covered with at least two inches of sand to prevent punctures and to aid in the concrete cure. Corrosion Considerations Limited laboratory test results (presented in Appendix B) indicate that the on -site soils tested have moderate to severe corrosive potential for both concrete and steel. Considering these results, it is recommended that Type II cement be used for concrete in contact with the on -site soils. Based on the test results, corrosion protection is needed for exposed steel or iron. Additional testing for corrosion potential may be warranted at the, completion of grading. Plan Review It is recommended that we be permitted to make a' general review of the final grading plans and specifications to confirm that the earthwork and foundation recommendations of this report have been properly interpreted and used in the design and specifications. It is further recommended that our firm be afforded the opportunity;to provide observation and geotechnical services during the rough Converse Consultants, Inc. 23 grading and foundation phases of work. This will permit us to observe that the design concepts, the specifications, and recommendations have been followed, and will enable us to consider and evaluate modifications in the event that subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated earlier. LIMITATIONS The findings and recommendations of this report are based on the results of the field exploration and laboratory tests combined with an interpolation and extrapolation of soil and bedrock conditions between and beyond the borings. The recommendations represent our best professional judgment as to the procedures to be followed in design and construc- tion, based on the data obtained and the planned land use. Professional services in connection with this geotechnical report have complied with generally accepted practice in the fields of soil mechanics, foundation engineering, and engi- neering geology. We make no other warranty, either express or implied. If conditions are encountered during construc- tion that appear to be different from those found during our Converse Consultants, Inc. 24 subsurface exploration, we should be notified immediately so that appropriate modifications of recommendations can be provided, if needed. Respectfully. submitted, CONVERSE CONSULTANTS, INC. tetio-?-t- te-64 Robert W. Ruff, Staff Geologist 111A L E. Mark E. Bryant, C.E.G. 1046 Senior Geologist RWR/MEB/TDL/TJS :bl 1/6\ Thomas D. Lake, eC.E. 14721 Principal Engineer Converse Consultants, Inc. • • REFERENCES Aerial Photographs, 1927, 1928, 1"=2000' (Fairchild Aerial Surveys); 1945, 1"=2000' (Geotronics); 9/17/80, normal and infrared color aerial obliques. Converse Ward Davis Dixon, December 23, 1980, Geotechnical Investigation, Tentative Tract No. 39136, Rolling Hills, California (Project No. 80-02238-01) Cleveland, G.B., 1976, Geology of the Northeast part of the Palos Verdes Hills, California, California Division of Mines and Geology, Map Sheet 27. Lockwood -Singh & Associates, March 2, 1976, Geotechnical Investigation, Portion of Lot 106 at the Rolling Hills Tract MB 201/29-35, No. 8, Quailridge Road, Rolling Hills, California (Project Reference 510-62). Lockwood -Singh & Associates, August 27, 1976, Addendum - Geotechnical Investigation, Portion of Lot 106 at the Rolling Hills Tract MB 201/29-35, No. 8 Quailridge Road, Rolling Hills, California (Project Reference 510-62). Lockwood -Singh & Associates, September 23, 1976, Pad Infil- tration, No. 8 Quailridge Road, Rolling Hills, California (Project Reference 510-62). Lockwood -Singh & Associates, June 1, 1977, Final Compaction Report, Portion of Lot 106 of the Rolling Hills Tract MB 201/29-35, No. 8 Quailridge Road, Rolling Hills, California (Project Reference 510-64). Converse Consultants, Inc. Al HARDNESS STRATIFICATION FRACTURING WEATHERING • TERMS USED FOR THE PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION OF BEDROCK SOFT - Can be dug by hand and crushed by fingers MODERATELY - Friable, can be gouged deeply with knife and HARD will crumble readily under light hammer blows HARD - Knife scratch leaves dust trace, will with- • stand a few hammer blows before breaking VERY HARD - Scratched with knife with difficulty, diffi- cult to break with hammer blows THINLY LAMINATED - less than 1/10". LAMINATED - 1/10" to 1/2" VERY THINLY BEDDED - 1/2" to 2" THINLY BEDDED - 2" to 2 feet THICKLY BEDDED - more than 2 feet INTENSELY FRACTURED VERY FRACTURED MODERATELY FRACTURED SLIGHTLY FRACTURED - less than 1" spacing - 1" to 6" spacing' - 6" to 12" spacing - 12" to 36" spacing VERY - Abundant fractures coated with oxides, car - WEATHERED bonates, sulphates, mud, etc., through dis- coloration, rock disintegration, mineral de- composition MODERATELY - Some fracture coating, moderate or localized WEATHERED discoloration, little to no affect on cemen- tation, slight mineral decomposition SLIGHTLY A few stained fractures, slight discolora- WEATHERED tion, little to no affect on cementation, no mineral decomposition FRESH - Unaffected by weathering agents, no appreciable change with depth • • A2 MAJOR DIVISIONS s • n 0 -.. • + . . o t 0 w a n 0 a. o r 1 e 0 • n i ` . + re ✓ : w a s n' uft n o oo w ▪ w ✓ M a wa 7 z > O +0 0 w o o 0 Mil; 4Stn SISAL'S a :Lela putt MIS x 21. KEY TO SOIL SYMBOLS AND TERMS TERNS USED IN THIS REPORT FOR DESCRIBING SOILS ACCORDING TO THEIR TEXTURE OR GRAIN SiZE DISTRIBUTIONS ARE GENERALLY IN ACCORDANCE WiTH THE UNIFIED SOiL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM. GROUP SYMBOLS TYPICAL NAMES 6W Well -graded gravels, gravel - sand mixtures, little or no fines GP Poorly -graded gravels. gravel -sand mixtures, little or no fines 6M Silty gravels. gravel -sand - silt mixtures GC Clayey gravels, gravel -sand - clay mixtures .SW Well -graded sands. gravelly ,sands, little or no fines SP Poorly -graded sands. gravelly sands. little or no fines SM Silty sands. sand -silt mixtures $C Clayey sands. sand -clay mixtures Inorganic silts and very ML fine sands, rock flour. silty or clayey fine sands, or clayey silts with slight plasticity Inorganic clays of low to CL medium plasticity, gravelly clays. sandy clays. silty clays. lean clays DI Organic tilts and organic silty clays of low plasticity Inorganic silts. micaceous NH or diatomaceous fine sandy or silty soils, elastic silts CH inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays 0H Organic clays of medium to high plasticity, organic silts Pt Peat and other highly organic soils I4-- CLAY SIIC .61 TILT TERMS DESCRIBING CONDITION, CONSISTENCY AND HARDNESS COARSE GRAINED SOILS (major portion retained on No. 200 sieve): Includes (T) clean gravels. (2) silty or clayey gravels, and (3) silty. clayey or gravelly sands. Consistency 1s rated according to relative density, as determined by laboratory tests. Descriptive Term Very loose Loose Medium dense Dense Very dense Relative Density 0 to 15 to 40 to 70 to 155 40% 705 85% 85 to 100% FiNE GRAINED SOiLS (major portion passing No. 200 sieve): includes (1) inorganic and organic silts and clays, (2) gravelly. sandy or silty clays, and (3) clayey silts. ,Consistency is rated according to shearing strength, as indicated by penetrometer readings or by direct shear tests. Descriptive Term Shear Strength (ksf) Very soft Soft Firm Stiff Very stiff Hard less than 0.25 0.25 to 0.50 0.50 to 1.00 1.00 to 2.00 2.00 to 4.00 4.00 and higher ROCK: Includes gravels, cobbles, rock, caliche and bedrock materials. Hardness is related to field identification procedures described below. Descriotive Term Field Identification Test Soft Can be dug by hand and crushed by fingers Friable. can be gouged deeply with knife and will crumble readily under light h blows Mod ly hard Hard Very hard Knife scratch 1 dust trace. w111 withstand a few h blows before breaking Scratched with knife with difficulty. difficult to break with h blows SOIL MOISTURE From low to high the soil moisture is indicated by: Dry Slightly moist Moist Very moist Wet Designation Trace Little Some And GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION SIZE PROPORTIONS Percent by Weight 0 to 10 10 to 20 20 to 35 35 to So fAND rlNr ►�. axaum� MAKEnN[ NUMMI 270 200 140 100 CO 40 20 10 1 % .61 01 OS IA SO 100 PARTICLE DIAMETER IN MILUMETERS GRAVEL+1 r lW- r r sea ConverseWardDavisDixon A3 Approved for publication FORM NO. 04/77 DATE DRILLED: 2-1 -82 DEPTH IN FEET 0 1 SUMMARY BORING NO. 1 THIS SUMMARY APPLIES ONLY AT THE LOCATION OF THIS BORING AND AT THE TIME OF DRILLING. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS MAY DIFFER AT OTHER LOCATIONS fj AND MAY CHANGE AT THIS LOCATION WITH THE PASSAGE OF TIME. THE DATA Qv4' 0" PRESENTED IS A SIMPLIFICATION OF ACTUAL CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED. �1 0 yP y y� ELEVATION: 9751± C L moist very dk gray SLOPEWASH (Qsw) 1 stiff to brown Silty Clay black porous & many rock frags slightly mod dusky BEDROC K-MontereFormation _ moist hard yellow Deformed Zone (Tmad)Y to Shale & Siltstone gray intensely fractured orange some Clay matrix 5 very weathered minor amounts of Bentonite 2 slightly soft gray Altered Tuff moist to yellow intensely fractured 2 to mod very weathered 10 3 moist hard few Shale & Tuffaceous Shale lenses & interbeds (very contorted) few angular blocks of Shale & Siltstone in white Clayey Bentonite/Tuff & matrix gray 3 yellow 15 moist dark yellow orange to gray orange 4 slightly mod yellow BEDROCK --Monterey (Tma) 20 moist hard gray Siltstone & Shale to moderately weathered moist very fractured thinly laminated to 4 laminated few fish scales 5 25 Indicates number and ranee of bulk sample (Continued) 26.4 24.7 87 2.30 2.79 4.32 12.0 41.4 68 12.0 26.1 81 7.2 12.0 45.1 70 *Sample remolded to 90% maximum dry density before shearing progressively at 0.5,1.0 & 2.0 ksf 2.4± ACRE RESIDENTIAL LOT Converse Consultants Project No. 81-02265-01 !�l (JSue11d1iM4D� A4 0 co 7 O. w 0 a a n n a 6 2 CC 0 U. DEPTH IN FEET 25 O" 4 1. 4,4 6 30 35 — 40 7 8 45 SUMMARY BORING NO. 1 (Continued) THIS SUMMARY APPLIES ONLY AT THE LOCATION OF THIS BORING AND AT THE TIME OF DRILLING. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS MAY DIFFER AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND MAY CHANGE AT THIS LOCATION WITH THE PASSAGE OF TIME. THE DATA PRESENTED IS A SIMPLIFICATION OF ACTUAL CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED. slightly mod dark moist hard yellow to gray moist to light brown slightly very moist hard slightly moist to moist mod hard to hard yellow gray to olive gray light olive gre dark yellow orange to light brown no free groundwater encountered BEDDING ATTITUDES: N55°E/16°NW at 20' N30°E/15°NW at 28' N50° E/9° NW at 33' N35°E/10°NW at 34' BEDROCK (Tma) Siltstone & Shale moderately weathered very fractured thinly laminated to laminated few fish scales intensely fractured moderately weathered some fish scales Dolomite, mod-v fractured thinly laminated -laminated. clicjhtly weathered Shale & Siliceous Siltstone thinly laminated moderately weathered very fractured few fish scales Shale & Clayey Siltstone thinly laminated very to intensely fractured moderately weathered few layers of Siliceous Shale & Siltstone end of boring at 45' 2.4± ACRE RESIDENTIAL LOT Converse Consultants 18.6 40.3 33.2 81 30.6 Project No. 81-02265-01 DATE DRILLED: 2-2-82 THIS SUMMARY APPLIES ONLY AT THE LOCATION OF THIS BORING AND AT THE TIME OF DRILL ING. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS MAY DIFFER AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND MAY CHANGE AT THIS LOCATION WITH THE PASSAGE OF TIME. THE DATA DEPTH ' V PRESENTED IS A SIMPLIFICATION OF ACTUAL CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED. IN �P Q" 00 FEET 960 f 5y ELEVATION: I 0 CL moist very dark stiff gray to dark gray 1 brown mod orange hard gray to 5 2 mod yellow - brown 1 SUMMARY A5 BORING NO.2 SLOPEWASH (Qsw) Silty Clay numerous rock fragments porous BEDROC K-MontereyFormation Deformed Zone (Tmad) Silty Clay numerous small to large rock fragments soft dusky Altered Tuff to yellow ,with some Bentonite mod to hard gray old root holes & yellow weathering features 10 — occasional hard (cemented:; Altered Tuff layers 4 7.2 7.2 25.4 76 9.6 2.9 52.9 62 0.89 0.30 0.60 1.07 1.36 2.39 3.6 43.9 63 2.69 6 2.9 20 - 25 Indicates number and range of bulk sample 2.9 60.3 62 mod gray BEDROCK (Tma) hard orange Si Itstone & Silty C laystone to (Bentonite) dark with minor Shale & yellow recrystallized Tuff orange intensely fractured moderately to very weathered *Sample soaked and sheared pro- **Sample remolded to 90% max dry gressively at 0.5,0.5,1.0 & 2.0 ksf density before shearing at 0.5,1.0 & Project No. 2,4± ACRE RESIDENTIAL LOT 81-02265-01 Converse Consul rc4i its the+ 4�'y+Sj IL'r.4i�iia>•s:tldJ.ca*A� AI;A abw,laVwS^:tuw�•pv,,�f4��'Gli'�t�,a�r3,.•dLAiadlc'„5&ll;a&•vY'1hI..M':L:.�s�-�:,.1':rr.,i.io�.,' n•g44.1.xin"SC'rSct.% • ttirV.E...lfd.). It�1144,i, •c+ ;}µ]-k>53',�cr1 i'Narr+,*va�h,�ia. `uJi'r.�:a.5:�'i:: ,b:k'4 A6 4 DEPTH wy V IN V O FEET p}Q, yNt, y 25 8 30 9 10 35 — 2. 11 • 40 " 45 — UMMARY ORING NO. 2 (Continued) THIS SUMMARY APPLIES ONLY AT THE LOCATION OF THIS BORING AND AT THE TIME OF DRILLING. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS MAY DIFFER AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND MAY CHANGE AT THIS LOCATION WITH THE PASSAGE OF TIME, THE DATA PRESENTED IS 'A SIMPLIFICATION OF ACTUAL CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED. moist mod gray BEDROCK (Tma) hard orange Si Itstone & Silty C laystone to (Bentoni te) yellow intensely fractured gray moderately to very weathered many interbedded Tuff & Bentonite layers with minor Shale & recrystallized Tuff yellow Shale, & Siltstone gray thinly laminated to & laminated Tight intensely fractured brown moderately to very to weathered light few fish scales gray few thin slightly Silicified orange Siltstone layers Shale & Clayey Siltstone thinly laminated intensely fractured moderately to very weathered slightly very It olive Dolomite moist hard gray moist mod gray Shale & Clayey Siltstone hard orange thinly laminated to intensely fractured dark moderately to very yellow weathered orange 0 1 50Indicates number and range of bulk sample 6.2 0.391 0.12 0.46 14.0 46.5 67 0.89�, 10.9 12.4 36.9 85 (Continued) *Sample soaked and sheared progressively at 0.5, 0.5,1.0 and 2.0 ksf Project No. 2.4± ACRE RESIDENTIAL LOT R1-02965-01 Converse Consultants 'r''y,,°��+.,,�.�•••,v_amID' 'ws['Pubkur�iva�"M+dru.i DEPTH 4, V IN V O FEET co {0 y 50 12 moist mod gray BEDROCK (Tma) hard orange Shale & Clayey Siltstone to thinly laminated dark intensely fractured yellow slightly very orange Dolomitic Silty Sandstone moist hard moist mod gray Shale & Clayey Siltstone hard orange thinly laminated 55 & intensely fractured 13 yellow moderately to very gray weathered occasional thin Dolomite layers (2-6") 'VNmiINI'lcy:MLa'�iY,'lwv�y',�y,ge'K.YL�NY,�'N tinuli+4kaUlr"�WWuytLd+ulu"+s"1�4,M;+LiNId SUMMARY BORING NO. 2 (Continued) THIS SUMMARY APPLIES ONLY AT THE LOCATION OF THIS BORING AND AT THE TIME OF DRILLING. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS MAY DIFFER AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND MAY CHANGE AT THIS LOCATION WITH THE PASSAGE OF TIME. THE DATA PRESENTED IS A SIMPLIFICATION OF ACTUAL CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED. 60 14 65 -- 15 70 — BEDDING ATTITUDES: N05°W/48°W at 19.5' E-W/20°S at 19.5' N-S/40°W at 20' N15°W/31°W at 21' E-W/41°S at 24' N82°W/17°S at 27' N60°W/12°SW at 29' N80°E/14°S at 32' N80°W/24°S at 35' E-W/25°S at 36' N32°W/11 °S at 46.5' N20°E/22°SE at 51' N05°E/15°E at 65' no free groundwater end of boring at 70' encountered 2.4± ACRE RESIDENTIAL LOT Converse Consultants A 22.1 27.3 97 22.1 23.8 37.3 83 34.9 Project No. 81-02265-01 �6VL"�.��il3.f!6�('�Inl�.'T�A�4�4�:41R13+t'A Yi ��.Yr.�AiJ.1wrW[P4rt �iu'�lii;:1R!�A:f ,74:.fi�•� WM4:��"V•i�tie`IW'§�iNw'A�,�4�cll,.�.•.,I+i:�di�,. A8 ioNatirfrY.,1# vaxw.hAfGttitsiY++t Y.f.rl4nv+y''�,1c`,i•`eHS�'ti.A +n fikUMMARY., t:v:�•��•:rvyl ORING NO. 3 •DATE DRILLED: 2-3-82 THIS SUMMARY APPLIES ONLY AT THE LOCATION OF THIS BORING AND AT THE TIME OF DRILLING. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS MAY DIFFER AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND MAY CHANGE AT THIS LOCATION WITH THE PASSAGE OF TIME. THE DATA DEPTH 4., N.,PRESENTED IS A SIMPLIFICATION OF ACTUAL CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED. IN v O FEET gyp. 4 0 5 ELEVATION: 9441± 10 2 15 20 25 3 4 C L moist very dk gray stiff brown very to dark moist yellow brown moist pale yel mod brown BEDROCK (Tma) 1 slightly hard to gray Shale & Siltstone,thin lam 12.0 10.8 96 moist orange int fractured,v weathered hard dusky Silty Sandstone & Siltstone yellow moderately to very to fractured gray Si Itstone - orange very to intensely fractured some Sandstone & Shale interbeds mod gray Shale & Si Itstone hard orange thinly laminated to to very to intensely fractured hard pale moderately weathered yellow few fish scales brown SLOPEWASH (Qsw) Silty Clay some small rock fragments 26.4 23.5 92 1" Bentoni to layer at 1612.0 27.3 88 (soft & moist) slightly soft Silty Claystone & Shale moist to intensely fractured to mod very weathered moist hard very contorted with few shear zones (Bentoni te) (Continued) 2.4± ACRE RESIDENT ILA LOT 9.6 Project No. 81-02265-01 Converse Consultants p6+tt4:4,,;Ac;.uria ,..,t aj.,a4tijskom :rdstYbk,tiicti t,4. vJC+ addAVAWyWuawae' etokr >Krr.M+deintili.X, ::1%1d' ]itYwi.ilatIk.FMit'<as4�Raw,arrdilkk4u�av i&n&&s�+c up:�'.ILL'aF�.',r+te {04,44.tutjmaikar5r',L.r, 6P id,Mtiwrda DEPTH IN FEET �QV �0" cp'e0'�� 25 5 30 ---- 6: 35 --- 40 ---" 8 1 457 50 0Indicates number and no free groundwater 1 range of bulk sample encountered r 11/P ON „iut 2xXar,+'rr:unnw watirswt,g4Avyto' laweKw e&l..nAs2uit4 SUMMARY A9 BORING NO. 3 (Continued) THIS SUMMARY APPLIES ONLY AT THE LOCATION OF THIS BORING AND AT THE TIME OF DRILLING. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS MAY DIFFER AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND MAY CHANGE AT THIS LOCATION WITH THE PASSAGE OF TIME. THE DATA PRESENTED IS A SIMPLIFICATION OF ACTUAL CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED. slightly soft moist to to mod moist hard slightly mod moist hard very hard mod hard to hard very hard gray orange to yellow gray dark yellow orange It gray to olive gray BEDROC K Silty Claystone & Shale Bentoni to shear zones very soft & moist, cut across beds Siltstone & Clayey Siltstone thinly laminated moderately weathered intensely fractured Dolomite mod -very fractured. slightly weathered Shale & Silty Claystone (slightly Benton; tic) thinly laminated moderately weathered very to intensely fractured few fish scales Clayey Siltstone & Shale (Bentoni tic) thinly laminated very to intensely fractured few slightly Siliceous Siltstone interbeds Dolomite moderately fractured slightly weathered BEDDING ATTITUDES: N05°E/23°W at 9.5' NO3°E/22°W at 18' N13°W/20°W at 20' N10°E/14°W at 32.5' N 10° E/20°W at 11' N07°E/18°W at 18.5' N50°W/48°SW at 28' N10°E/20°W at 36.5' 2.4± ACRE RESIDENTIAL LOT 9.6 35.1 84 23.3 36.2 81 33.5 43.6 76 32.6 36.8 81 N16°W/40°W at 5.5' N05°E/20°W at 16.5' N-S/24-26°W at 19.5' N20°E/13°W at 32' ' N-S/13-15°W at 37' end of boring at 47' Project No. 81-02265-01 Converse Consul^ !#s 0 0 U 0 0 0 a 4 FORM NO. D4/77 DEPTH IN FEET 0 UMMARY DATE DRILLED: 2-4-82 BORING NO.4 THIS SUMMARY APPLIES ONLY AT THE LOCATION OF THIS BORING AND AT THE TIME OF DRILLING, SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS MAY DIFFER AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND MAY CHANGE AT THIS LOCATION WITH THE PASSAGE OF TIME, THE DATA QV� 0v PRESENTED IS A SIMPLIFICATION OF ACTUAL CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED. yP y{ ELEVATION:9121± C L moist stiff gray - to brown very to moist dark ll very brown stiff - to hard 5- 1 10 15- 20 2 SLOPEWASH (Qsw) Silty Clay porous many rock fragments few rootlets moist hard mod yel few rock fragments brown slightly soft yellow BEDROCK -Monterey Formation moist to gray (Tma) to mod to Shale & Clayey Siltstone moist hard dusky thinly laminated to yellow laminated intensely fractured very weathered few thin Sandstone interbeds some Calcium deposits contorted bedding few fish scales slightly moist 25 Indicates number and 1 range of bulk sample dusky yellow to gray orange (Continued) 2.4± ACRE RESIDENTIAL LOT eConverse Consultants Al 7.2 27.4 90 12.0 23.3 90 Project No. 81-02265-01 �:yyy;n;;01,21N AS4 ��.;.Y'i4 Y vx+tin'e'tri4 ��4Mpiux.++,J;p'{.`'iL�' �.%i;Nf 11.n1dA�JGhItL$H,LY:'�I.+yLY.'v✓1�6]i�d1�'Nt:' itva41tM19 4'rri1"L1i4ii8t, iii4•1C:klii1+1'i.Y.tiLSY k%'sM.A+Ai�� SUMMARY BORING NO. 4 (Continued) THIS SUMMARY APPLIES ONLY AT THE LOCATION OF THIS BORING AND AT THE TIME OF DRILLING. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS MAY DIFFER AT OTHER LOCATIONS DEPTH v�y Ov AND MAY CHANGE AT THIS LOCATION WITH THE PASSAGE OF TIME. THE DATA IN ? PRESENTED IS A SIMPLIFICATION OF ACTUAL CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED. FEET p� 0 5 25 3 30 ----- 35- 40 slightly soft dusky BEDROCK (Tma) moist to yellow Shale & Clayey Siltstone mod to thinly laminated to hard gray laminated orange intensely fractured very weathered numerous thin Sandstone interbeds some Calcium deposits thin lense of soft Bentonite at 29' slightly moist to moist mod hard no free groundwater encountered BEDDING ATTITUDES: N40°E/73°NW at 11.5' N30°E/40°NW at 13' N65°E/87°NW at 17' N45° E/33° NW at 19,5' N-S/15°W at 22' N75°W/14°S at 28' N20°E/71°W at 35' end of boring at 40' 2.4f ACRE RESIDENTIAL LOT All' 7.8 26.1 91 14.0 30.1 86 Project No. 81-02265-01 Converse Consultants • • APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTING Converse Consultants, Inc. APPENDIX B SAMPLING AND LABORATORY TESTING Sampling Field exploration was performed using a truck -mounted, bucket auger with a drilling bucket of 18 to 24 inches in diameter, and a track -mounted backhoe. The bedrock and subsoils were continuously logged by our field personnel and classified by visual examination in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System and standard geologic terminology., Relatively undisturbed samples of soils were obtained at frequent intervals in the boring excavations by driving a thin -walled steel sampler with successive drops of the drilling bar. The driving energy required for one foot of penetration is shown on the boring summary sheets, in the column "Drive Energy". The soil was retained in brass rings of 2.50 inches in diameter and 1.00 inch in height. Nor- mally, the central portion of the sample was retained in waterproof plastic containers for shipment to the labora- tory. Representative bulk soil samples were obtained and shipped to the laboratory in polyethylene bags. Sample Disposal The soil samples will be discarded 60 days after the date, of this report, unless a specific request is made to retain the samples for a longer period. Converse Consultants, Inc. • • B2 Laboratory Testing and Classification The field classification was verified in the laboratory by visual examination and ASTM test methods, in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System. The classifi- cation tests included grain -size analyses. The final soil classification is shown on the boring, summary sheets. Moisture Content and Dry Density Moisture content and dry density tests were performed on relatively undisturbed samples obtained from the field. This data is used to aid in the classification and corre- lation of the soils and to provide qualitative information regarding soil strength and compressibility. Where applic- able, density test results aid in estimating compaction characteristics of the soil or rock materials. The results of the moisture and density tests are presented on the boring summary sheets of Appendix A. Maximum Density - Optimum Moisture Content Representative soil samples were tested in the labora- tory for maximum dry density and optimum moisture content using the ASTM D1557-70 compaction test method. The results of the tests are: Maximum Dry Sample Unit Weight Optimum Moisture Boring Depth Soil (Pounds Per Content (Percent No. (Feet) Description Cubic Foot) of Dry Weight) BH-1 0-2 CLAY 92 22 BH-1 6-8 SILTSTONE/ 87 28 SHALE BH-2 13-15 Altered TUFF 77 33 Converse Consultants, Inc. • B3 Shear Tests Shear tests were made with a direct shear machine at a constant rate of strain. The machine is designed to test the soils without completely removing the samples from the brass rings. Tests were performed on undisturbed specimens and on samples which were remolded to 90 percent of the maximum dry density, the latter at a moisture content near the optimum as determined from the maximum density -optimum moisture content tests. All samples were water soaked before being tested in the direct shear under progressively higher internal angle of friction machine. Specimens were tested normal loads to determine the and coulomb cohesion. The results of the tests are presented below: Boring Depth Soil/Bedrock No. (feet) Description * BH-1 BH-2 * BH-2 BH-2 6-8 8.5 13-15 30 * Remolded to 90 Consolidation SILTSTONE/ SHALE Altered TUFF Altered TUFF BENTONITE Coulomb Cohesion (lb./sq.ft.) 1540 70 1220 200 percent of maximum density. Angle of Internal Friction (Degrees) 53 26 38 20 The apparatus used for the consolidation tests is designed to receive the brass ring of soil as it comes from the field. Loads were applied to the test specimen in several increments, and the resulting deformations were r-- Converse Consultants, Inc. B4 • recorded at selected time intervals. Porous stones were placed in contact with the top and bottom of the specimen to permit the ready addition or release of water. Samples were tested at increased moisture contents to simulate the most adverse future conditions. The test results are shown on the . following sheets entitled "Consolidation Tests". Swell Tests A swell test was performed on one typical sample. This is expected to represent material at finished pad grade. The procedure followed is set forth in UBC Standard 29-2. The test result is as follows: Boring No. B H-2 Sample Depth (Feet) Chemical Test 8.5 Soil Description Altered TUFF Sample Soluble Boring Depth Sulphates No. (Feet) pH (Calif. 417A) BH-1 13-15 7.2 460 ppm Soluble Chlorides 604 ppm Percent Swell 22 Resistivity (Calif. 643C) 800 'ohm cm Converse Consultants, Inc. LOAD IN KIPS PER SQUARE FOOT _ �:'wW�'wu.�4wuueceeiwrw�au�uu,,.�,�u,�urrvee+a,W,r`gytll B5 CONSOLIDATION — PER CENT OF SAMPLE THICKNESS FORM NO. DI6/77 Approved for publication 1 + 1 0.5 1,0 I- i --- - 1t 4 5 e 7 8 91) I f . -- 4. i 20 , Boring 1 i Sample 1 ! , Depth 4.5' } 30 L Ii_II. f II 1. HI I Boring +.. f II Sample 2 . Depth 9.5' II L _t- 111 ,[..1 I ;III READINGS AFTER SATURATION WITH WATER -I- 1 — 'I — Boring 2 �IL Sample 3 `-t-• Depth 8.5' 1-T- CONSOLIDATION TESTS 2.4± ACRE RESIDENTIAL LOT Converse Consultants 1 Project No. 81-02265-01 4e.1 V '}\[IJ.Jff�%!'tiCie1�!!'M^.;JIL:tYI.M.a kiXfl:MAL�WM\,1211%-tS;-r.vl.iku. X.'.a1'f, VLe,.,�u+e.f �.... •l.i� FORM NO. 0z2i77 Approved for publication .4--CLAY w N_ U) w > 80 U) z 0 z aa.. 60 N -• O U z Q 40 I- w z I- z 20 w U cc w - SIEVE Boring 1 Bag 1 Depth 0-2' -.1 SIZE by SILT NUMBER ea 200 FINE 100 SAND MEDIUM 50 40 30 16 GRAIN -SIZE ANALYSIS OF SOILS ASTM DESIGNATION: 0422 -I- COARSE T FINE .05 0.1 0.5 10 PARTICLE DIAMETER IN MILLIMETERS GRAIN -SIZE DISTRIBUTION CHART 10 8 4 GRAVEL ►I� COARSE '/' '/" 1 1/2" 2.4± ACRE RESIDENTIAL LOT Converse Consultants Project No. 81-02265-01 v.� — — . NO. —. 77 to. ,—..catiot. by CILT NUMBER -4--CLAY PERCENT FINER THAN CORRESPONDING SIEVE SIZE SIEVE -:7: 80'• • ; : ••: .;" ; 40 t • 20 ! FINE 200 100 SIZE :...Lr. .I....o.....!-- .;-- ---!--,1---i-t-i- .,- ; ,:i. ,-,, i ,,, .. 1 — .-: — - -,--- , -" --1-,---- -:: ,t- it '' .;!. --..!. '' ! - ' I Li!' 1 I 4 !4U -• , ' ; ' I ;1•4 ; '•' -4:- ::- ::: -: ;; 4:: -:: --. -1-----t--i-f- t i i . --!'" MIi, i ii• !•• :•• :-- !!'. : : ! - I: :•,.• ii:l: -!'-:: - i.,-- :::; - __Lai j_1.11 -i--, •:-•••!, ,,,-• -:.-1t,i, ••••!-- -71. r-,.-- t-.7-1— -I-1"-r -1-11-7 'Hfi-I-. 1 60-;-• 4—i- •-• ' ”i,". -.1-- .:7' '7. '7' 7-1-- ---riTt -. :7 , . . • ; • r , - _ .,, , , i -7! TT —77 SAND Pt-- MEDIUM 50 40 30 16. .005 .01 .05 0.1 0.5 1 0 PARTICLE DIAMETER IN MILLIMETERS Boring 2 Bag 1 Depth 13-15' GFent;•:-..s.E ANA...V.1S OF SOILS ASTM DESIGNATION: 0422 --I-; COARSE 4 T FINE 10 8 4 l!ii1411,:-: 5.0 GRAVEL 10.0 GRAIN -SIZE DISTRIBUTION CHART COARSE 4" 11/2" 3' 50.0 2.4± ACRE RESIDENTIAL LOT Project No. 81-02265-01 Converse Consultants • APPENDIX 'C STABILITY ANALYSES Converse Consultants, Inc. FORM NO. F-19/78 COBY ' ' DATE 2/2%/t/ � 'LIENT SHEET NO. OF OHKD. BY ___/e DATE �� '/ fL PROJECT NO. &/-0,9 , 6 PROJECT SC /V P/' C k Alf S 7A 4// / ry CA LCGI 14 7/ rNS DE7F/I111/V/4-7f0A/ of G/7QS: 57A////r)' (post//.its" /J FP/7/At FA/< SEC 7/ ON A --A STre NG7N p4/fEr;/f ppt/2 wFAK zo/yE <f?FMraN174 d- / 7.c/r/"I' C0N0f77oN r-N7//fr S`/ hI/N E a PSG 13 0 zoNE l i oNG /9F/,p///G (oM/'/ c 7r F/ F/z_t G psr- .z. / o. A C Ross 13 I /2p/Nf /Corr( 11 6 L (47/ /' • S7/(U/ItGr 5/pm, Ck CoN V/7irrN s L / iJ,F p// /1P. A/otf . GF/2/2/A/t CoM /0Ac7Fd A/// / c/« grP/.7/11 (/\/qr'/) T. ,�c0PSf- S�0 PSF /a6opsr 2.o ° 1 /'3 ° (Q,r:-C. yr p• c. f (y� �� CG.71/2 c,y/a/f) ConverseWardDavisDixon SIGNED REG. NO. SHEET NO. BY I''(' DATE 2/'�%4•CLIENT CHKO. BY 919r.11 DATE .7. 44' PROJECT .`•• (/1 / //F/'/= /{/{'N 1'71 G F„ 110SS .574.4/2 17 y (p1_-/= r,', 37• >� 5o' w L=7L' • SHEET NO. Z OF 3� PROJECT NO. S.- G' ' C.f : I s L /Df P14/YF) ..._..see-7r%'/v ,4 -/,. / F_ y (.5 7pVG GfOi//V/) Of? PA CF U f//, i7 S FC 7t J JV O F Sc tr l -C - l2/1 SFC7fa/Y 4 -A p' (3-o) (io) = /00 z 7(' sGf17)(/0 -) i 76 = SS =�l1=/3° /vY ,s-1 f 7G) .Iv 0 q. - 7d ConverseWard Davis Dixon SIGNED REG. NO. SHEET NO. FORM NO. F.19/78 BY rS,/Z CHKD. BY PROJECT 4 — 70 Ou L 70 DATE 2-4 V.P. \ •LIENT "'- DATE 'r/?f $C/l/1/ t /VfsE/t !y? frtitrZ 11a L = GOirz. SF(7(O/N o/ A _.A Scu/f. / ri. L0 QHEET NO. 3 OF 3r PROJECT NO. ,- /- 47' % (77R' (/o?) = (G 2, 4/4) pas-) ') /z - // //.2 ) ConverseWard Davis Dixon SIGNED REG. NO. /2 0( = U 6 L= 7' ,5- ° L=/Y)' SHEET NO. 3 FORM NO. F-19/78 BY 11. % I DATE / 2 ' CLIENT CHKD. BY 1 DATE PROJECT -S c 1//1 hrl. f///1 /W t; • SHEET NO. OF 3C-- PROJECT NO. 'o 2 2 G S 0% S L / C E' fry' 04- /.ram ?-t2' 04. r fi.,-e.-;1 a.<, r , a< l (Gb SJ o , 2. 7 `f,q 4 x = ��7 / 3 ° 3 %% 76,ff I-: 3 7H z i G S'Fi 9/, 7 I S. 3-0 p S,a C. 0 ,U X p _^ / 2 S- ,?-� G !r1 % 7 7f, 7 L7o.-.i °/ STA 7fC CONY)/7iO4/ 14, +yY • 1 P<_ S- 0 % 14/ G�L 04- i" C .4 ) 4- jp 2 3 7 -� -n o "if- (2) i4 s-7) ", -I- z C 4 x 1 =61-is_ 4.)Y 7( /00, 4L 7 (s �:�) 2 0-2) 1.7 z,p l,s o K ConverseWard Davis Dixon SIGNED REG. NO. SHEET NO. L(' FORM NO. F-19/78 BY 1I,14. CRKD. BY I FC PROJECT DATE:"/.) '' `• •IENT DATE ' 114' 1 /9YA14 /i/C ' Am v� /S ° . IEET N0. S- OF 3 C PROJECT NO. Q ^ - ` 9/ (, /t. b FPI.s7 fig 71/l/7/41 z J ,,a1 -,-- ikz 17 ,77 V" (.-•*,- P', i- , /5-b7 S 0 / , f- (/J-) 23 70 S0/ 15-- erG 2 cp ?37O 2 ,1 zo (“..2 I 1. - 4/, ffly SLr/ r pt iv/> kt/s/.2-1 hr,,,-1 OS) 41 -1- (Pp) 5 p/ , 2 7, 3 .77 `'`) pfi F5.= 77$, — /,144 / l 0 k. ConverseWard Davis Dixon SIGNED REG. NO. SHEET NO. BY g yc •2�.< DATE �!! i CLIENT CHKD. BY E DATE ''�"s''" PROJECT FORM NO. F-19/78 SCH,f?FF FN l3/ /r' G F;( SGi /? f /C M ! S 7A L'// (7'/ 117 uppri4 sec7,ON aF A --A SC/4 / :, / "s a 1- - (l ) (`/a&) = /0/ l/S (/ .6) (/o?)� ConverseWard Davis Dixon /9f SIGNED REG. NO. SHEET NO. U OF f PROJECT NO. G ` ' /4° /7 L--II'1 SHEET NO. BY '13 ' `� DATE 2/2 94SO CLIENT *SHEET NO. 7 OF 3 CHKD. 8Y V DATE 2.124' . PROJECT NO. k /‘ (.). 2) (t. G PROJECT S C f'f4 /'(/. f r n/ 4» F /r G F �r /G FORM NO. F-19/78 LO1' iz/? S FC7ftn! OF A SCA I 1 /C i3O' J2 (/a. 2) (,io ) W4e. - _ (2.2 4 ,G) (. toa.) 7-7 S' (! () (, /c?) ConverseWardDavisDixon SIGNED REG. NO. /2,-11 SHEET NO. BY '1% DATE 2,,4/21??440 CLIENT CHKD. BY 11,1tC) DATE-14 PROJECT 5cl/ AA' f:icrAlf J ,4/7 4110 SHEET NO. e • OF PROJECT NO. g"-/--. 0 -1 --)r; • 0 1 PAP t•IFT/7..1 G( 5 A /Y St /Pi" S- 1.- / C e: _ IX/ <,<, 14% I 101 17° Z I q7 / 4 $-54 / 4 ° 23 5- (17 •l' 195- I6 6 7 if5 47 / C (o A,1 /7/ AI Py i kr, .5- Pr? 1 7W /, -A (Is ) 6,rw 2) q-c -= ty F Y ei) / C Ofi cfs 24146 if, 2.- 7 / 73 /, S X „S" 0 2. ad ei(afc.. ConverseWard Davis Dixon SHEET SIGNED NO. REG. NO. BY if,' iv CIIKD. BY.. '� PROJECT IS DATE?/'s/1' ` •LIENT DATE Wd4' s c/Mier/c N/iTM' " ((SHEET NO. / OF 3 C PROJECT NO. /` G U? C S — C/-1FC/< ra`' FA /Lbw /1 r j 4st' OF Cur S op,f Low E lG/l'7tU/'f 0t secr./cart A-/1 tea pficipriSr/' CUT I luI /7 ? z 7 9‘. If7 /1/ 117 -�7 3 6-5- !l" S1 / `-f If sr fG I ems~ 1 l6 i ..5S ii /US` q (G-iJe) (Poe) _. SS = a 0�a/6a60- sy wh _ 4__(-3)000 + it (7) (.16-) - , 2 LL O .2 . LL va ConverseWard Davis Dixon c) PR GPO SFFI P/1.< L<,= 30/ /-� C SHEET SIGNED NO. REG. NO. i FORM NO. F-19/78 BY / ' rC DATE-1 ? s 6 CLIENT CHKO. BY 1 DATE .1 . PROJECT S CHAfiiI »fV/(G Fre 574 7/C co/4/9/7/0N FX _ g:g,i +Lrs,J / Y� 13J.7 L win-, -mot-. oC I 0 -S- i (A4..2 '41. LP C Q X f rp ir 4-6/s)Pi) 3 • z + 1 05) G (s Er..f) f 1.o 4/. SHEET NO. / a • OF / s PROJECT NO. k/ 022 C r`-( _ / I 3 < 1, S' ConverseWard Davis Dixon SIGNED REG. NO. c p SHEET NO. 10 BY CHKD. BY A, DATE M 4 PROJECT Pt DATE2/4) `.. WENT HA/(Pr i A11:.E'GE/( prs/ct / C T7/IFSS Tot' cc T s'o/F A/3O'E pg /76S//j /aAD G f / /-= C/C ,C /? ,CA /z GI /; /_' / ( a t/ ? a/V 741 /> 77//' Y/ G/e/ /= / L L *SHEET NO. // OF 3� PROJECT NO. 5/ O2 2 G f'-Gj/ Lou.F_'%r PaP7/0/'✓ SECT/ON /4 -4 0, To S L lc e W ' oC W .� �C Vl/ vyt .<. G-1- 1 !a/ 17 q2 B91 ,4 /77 4 7 3 q. s� I s- g , y � , �. Y-0, /J' _37,C /o,/ w3_ z (/6)(,/o,)= 9,s- W W- u t web It 2 07) , a t,P y- - (17) , /Gs z74,3 , 2 (/7) ,G? 3' .c.(-22- _ �J LL' O Z ConverseWardDavisDixon SIGNED REG. NO. Xs = II- '2 • SHEET NO. 1� FORM NO. F-19/78 BY ' %l DATE`s/ CLIENT CHKD. BY i :), . ? d::c' DATE PROJECT SC /it, rFE/V /.1e/K /. /! J TA 7/ C (0Al4117/7A.l r PI 2YNA P-f/c v rr � SHEET NO. / 2 OF .rs' PROJECT NO, k/"" U 2 .1 1'T -oj (iv-r 0,4 `.4. . .Yr f + c ,� L .X 71- ws- TG2� o 4'�,ir '` , �, s mel 3a4. .z`fvn ! PS) 2.E G) ( 3 S` /2 / t 2,5).2 ) -= ) /,c1 > /, s- C a iv19/7' 7A) 2-6-4 . lS r7 t(/) 3 ,. /3& 2. frfr- C l? F� = Gti z � =�z� --- , / s' w 2�r' IC -cam' D , .-.� cb - / ;0 7 /3 Ws- ���, Re:.-rv! .-c -r: f C /, x (�(/S 2�fl2 aC -�!` art - a rtiI P, fr s' fNl _ 32G /.?�� 13 --(/S� 97 441 0 + r• 1_S) S '6111 / -- 0 -I- (, a r) 1-14 /3 L ConverseWard Davis Dixon SHEET SIGNED. NO. REG.NO. /Z' • FORM NO. F.19/78 BY 8 '1z DATE?/6 C/f-" (''. •LIENT CHKD. BY c) ` DATE _ PROJECT SC//A /r' F FF/V 1't. /f' /-' 1NC/'FASf tur7`?Fs5 s/2r r0 S77` CUT ?.f`sfyc/v/ h/t0/'' L/NE -- CNFC/l TG/f F///'G///I` H0»/?MNT/�'/// THp F//e IC 9 Nit) /iLE 120/f ('D/'/ OF sPCrio// 4-4 ' r /" - o' \ HEET NO. / 3 OF 3 PROJECT NO. cP/- G S Ll C E I/v of 12'-x,M • 2 e4P !/lid.- 44- 1 (U/ 17 qz Fl (7c 1 /, r' 141 . 3 37 IS, 3 s y w_ rz '(141-/G) '/off = 17( 2. (l7) 0' 9s' �`' l G . /01%= 37 / Y/DNA/1/C CO/VP/7/OA/ 9-7 V1/9. = 3 (l71 /.) < G ? ' - 2 ws -4((7) e°?t•r 2r 2�Gv 21�. = �s� �r • fD d Fy sI 1 (/ s) 29/ 2.f 17. _[ 3 9 %li.�.„ : / — o S`) 3-0 /G G f �7....� /27,3- //o2/ < / l / .2 3.,. ConverseWard Davis Dixon ) r-n 07 adefct a 7'e • SIGNED REG. NO. SHEET NO. S1oj�F Nzil OF �u of°� r oS Losr, . a ol�r7�Nr Ty ..y7l:iUpi a t�f 11 a ,J S i ��N�� 0 PE65161 4117 SL Pf ew. GSSd N rr01 slope FORM NO. F-19/78 BY /%' / /. DATE 2/ (lf • CHKD. BY 1✓ c_ DATE114 PROJECT SC // PO- f /(/ j'. F /(G / f CLIENT S rA 71c /l /YALYf/s Fy /G S' i ` G ,// z/ 3 , (11) G G) i '8' 37 f (? i7 �4- S) k 5: 2 • y) 1/1/ SHEET NO. / G " OF ?C- PROJECT NO. . / O ; 2 ; ,% G/ //,S "- s (iS- ) L 2 (..) / Z /♦7 'f' 6 / S / 0.K, k,YA/A/1/C bFX Ca/V/7i7r 0/VJ 1_4 6 (a$' 4 •/j- (54eo) 16 ?' n l x _ ( r. '-'2' "...-7 ; 6 ---- - / 1 , U/�, ,.-? .7,w a: Z 0 )- C 4 X ( .1 V.,e--z-2.2 pe... .r. - a) ---( i 41(1/1/. ..vY1 04. % .- .. -2:.c%-t CY 1-• C j 4 (3216 -7-`?, /3 —Ps) Tff .. / 3 , c/S1 •2- G G ) = z. -e.7.1 -- (.� �) .2 o, r ,,t 2 / f (2 r) `/ 5) �- 2.7 / �- Lf/J— /7G Fs, {/74 (;q ,- 22,7 -.-z°14-) < ConverseWard Davis Dixon r vt a de .;r q 71-t SHEET SIGNED NO. REG. NO. FORM NO. F-19/78 BY CHKD. BY PROJECT DATE -3///kf DATE W14 C if( PI FA/ t" fir° I Am WHEET NO. / 7 OF PROJECT NO, /Ncl? ASE 1:1077/e, fss S/Ze ryreN/.2 ri AeovE p/ray', L//V.f CPI c r p UF 1? 4".•( H SS/ vfr 1 0 0 p po/e77oN OF SFc7ON / i" p = it- 0 / C I;fr2 _Lot (16-iv() 17 14c:3 = = 07. 21) -01g. /08 vvs- -(42 = z17) 0 ric• (j/) , 0 7S' ConverseWard Davis Dixon PL 1<-• -2- .> 1,1,, C4-. ;V' re:`,20,10,2 04.-. I 1 f , /....2. pe..... eCe:/...2. X.,. / 101 17 9 .2 .2 1 V... 17. /3" 1 6 . 4-3 1 1 7 if 3 1 9' / 0 ? i `f (02. 2 .."- Z X ...... • i•;9e if4 / 5 `6 V. zi .5- — L. Igi, , 4 ?c - 13' s . , I 6 X z• 2 3r 2 3 1,fr...24:71 04_ 04_ - w, SIGNED. REG. NO. 6 g 2 $13 eo 1 2 0 SHEET NO. 7 FORM NO. F-19/78 BY �1' DATE �/1 740• CLIENT CHKD. BY 1�.,� -_, a _ DATE PROJECT S CNA%?F% '/V `fffi(Ffr h Y/V,a M / & ANAL'/ S/J bFi _ �y /S- s ° 9 7L IS) 2-/- 0 4C" I 7 0 1 FF _`0-2 =,& -1 4% — iS k/Cs-Loe--- 2-71, CP — SHEET NO. * OF 3 y PROJECT NO. S. /" 0 2 ' .. �-O/ "2-e--7OG -C' Ca< i F/ri 611% * C. 4/ /- 3 44-s O-S — (i) e. o f (i S) % (i; 0 - / -- (is) z 9• 2 / (ad) ) ‘i'/9 0 74- / /6 / a.�. /by /7a ConverseWard Davis Dixon SIGNED ,REG. NO. 0 /. SHEET NO. 3 F fr G E �� rrrM oA�E � N , aY � '•J�t,�. pATE��-- r� yr�F � t,� � rat coo BY ilex S, rofe U bpi rILG PROJECT PO SlG�1 FAIL tiler T �r� r cal rGt..r FORM NO. F-19/78 BY ' DATE//''/2/ • CLIENT ' CHKD. BY 6- DATE. PROJECT SC N FFENI? ,E f(G F /� 17--7/C roNv/7/9"/ 6/ SHEET NO. •OF 3f PROJECT NO. s G ) /_ -2413 n 13 f(/-5) /p7) f( /, .et'rl a / (asS7) 72 6S- 1/ 7 r-..5_ _ 7/7 /// F2 j �JYNA/11 c (oNd/7(aN / (lS-) 24`-� d 1{ Ric-? ; -, (i w -, (-.12 ,.,&. ,�Yr (/) — al !il/'-�. n .0 -G�'4 f. '? 0) Y- C ,a x ) -A -s ( GZ/ .6i..`.2 0<.. "LGvrl di -- ,/S' G, i!.e , o! -CC'2 li-ri 0 C A )rill 4 a�13:-61S) G/-e,� /3 FOs-) v_/ .0 + (.2s,) 6/ • G /.f G i lT. ConverseWard Davis Dixon /a ) SHEET SIGNED NO. REG. NO. 2- a BY /3 ' n DATE1•2 F 9 (' 11111.1ENT CHOCD. BY Ji (- DATE PROJECT S C HA f//' F F_ /'/R ,f'f Ed? QHEETNO. .2 / . OF 35- PROJECT NO. /-U 2 G C'! 4 C,'' Aso'? /A /l 6'Re 4 l ON G- (O/V 7/NG/ti, 1ti't4/C Z oN� 1-0 kr r, /' 0/r 7e OH OF SFC7'ON A 5L/CF W A. W-G(i•-2` 1,- v71 Tci2 C. I `f 60,'3 /5. G !� r1.0 /_ 0 44- /Az IIX aci,s /a s' SAU lt- .37.7 9,54. 6 E7, r rz el ,7 / 8 7 ;/.cif -7 31/3. ,g s 7,S. 7 7,4,.. i .130 • f g L ?; (f -17) ,07Y 31 Ufa._ (7) ,lay = 7,5- ConverseWard Davis Dixon SAS 7 7 G-7 Pt 237 SHEET SIGNED NO. REG. NO. ?_ ' t / BY /2 ' > 1 DATE '/.'/ • WENT `j)411: / %14, CHKD. BY ! DATE PROJECT ScHA /'?1=FFA/// F/(t rf b >'N/I /•4/6 <(iil/2/7(OA/ pFx -' g I (IS) •36y /3 Pry U. 0 z 0 U- lei'-c,'.2 - %.,>ri s C14/ G_7 �.37 -?ter /3 - (/ � J`•1 /3 f OS) /2 I r � . ( I/ �/ — ('/s> 2z-e4-7.1 a / C•��1 ��� 7/. 7 s- SHEET NO, Z Z' • . OF 3 PROJECT NO, gJ`O 9, ; S _U/ ep j- 14/ 4,;•71 ZLe'z,ri "I" X )--1 ConverseWardDavtsDixon SIGNED REG. NO. SHEET NO. FORM NO. F-19/78 BY ij I��111 DATE 3 h AP:J. ` CLIENT y CHKD. BY C' DATE r'314 PROJECT S C fl FF f'AIt t( \ •HEET NO. 2. 3 OF ' PROJECT NO. e/s.U a) / y /vA H l c Co // a /,/ A G A /A/ A F 7/t /Ai r z -w. SL/c,F c /N70 /r/L 1 57 //YNAM/c rO/ / /7/✓N 14/ --C-G"‹ .�..= / 2. -Z. R 'Y — . / S wil :r �c� -�`� `' C X 4 s /—s k vG r I C A X -es: / 3 — / s' / 3 -7/ ) ) C 67 67 131' 4` < ,71/r714- (A-G6-2fa (7'7-6 ConverseWard Davis Dixon SIGNED REG. NO. SHEET NO. 23 c 0 Z BY A '/' DATE 3/3Ai CLIENT CHKD. BY \lie DATE PROJECT SC,f4/tF/-'N,1.-/?�Fii 1/1/1 w3 SHEET NO. 2 y OF 3-c PROJECT NO. c/• '' 4: 0/ INcaFAsc i3Gr77/TfsS s/zF cNFck' / o/t FAR. q/(F' TNfOC?G// SEA/{ 20//e • 3E 33 aq 64o kz o<. w , o- " 4 . ! IF,7 !S 17.E 3 7q,7 OA 7s•0 37 r'f- . 3 4f• `I s .�q,s ,q. . 17,2. G ,9;, .. I,,, FI,.. 7 L O.0 7 ti-o (1,4) ,0 ? e (/.2.) ,/oy z q- 7 =-° (3 o) , 09 -� �° (2) .log, - 7 r, 7 L'Vy. = !? (� 0+33) , 4F,? = 37 WS = 13 (33 4-,9) o7f . 3 W7 , ! (0 id�G • L-o.(, • 37 PL. 0 L ?< = 7J ' ,Q X = /oE 4" 7 kirtG� 0( .C. �-0--V .3£ dam. .t C.<1. , 0 ConverseWardDavisDixon SIGNED REG. NO. SHEET NO. �Z Y FORM NO. F-19/78 BY ' i " DATE :3! l /s • 9 \ 0LIENT - ` HEET NO. 2 S" OF ?S' CMKD. BY _`_ = DATE -'3' ,. � PROJECT NO. el- P .2 ,2 P- 0/ PROJECT S c NAJ FF,E N i1 /7? l- TY hYNAll ie coN//T"Uil/ (/f) 3 y-s, /30 Fy- <z — --e(Z-v1 s(P C X ) 7 7 �-7 _ (1 sl %r` 13 — 3 NJ') 7?) ((q 174 -nn / —C'I6-) zb)/0?/ z f 9r-/ (`f 3 F-5110 ConverseWard Davis Dixon SIGNED REG. NO. SHEET NO. c. FORM NO. F-19/78 BY v'n_ DATE"'ll CLIENT CHKD. BY Pe(--- DATE '-14- PROJECT SC///!/IFFFA//' E/r, , /r cg,-Cx FOR F/'llt &/lc F j1E'l a//r./ UP/'i/ S/IFAjz X Y SHEET N0. .2 6 OF 3'5-- . PROJECT NO. (/0 / S rf([`N G T// (-,4/?%J /Jr7d .!".l O1,1/9/7( a/Y kteE_Ag Gt/pF/l ?GNF / SO /3 % 40wF'/? 7.. ewe. ; Q0 a U Pi_Co/1`)/Crfl7 A/tz p s0 2 /0 JC` ars C E=/7/7/N 4 (4ow/.=/z) I. zoo /3 I , P/'oros4D £'-/ A`e X 'Y y ,'I 15° -r----„,./.,g..... 0 --7___.,-,__(.. , M 2, 26 �2.3.— 7 I��, . g°_ t-- r �� 33 _Sr. ..SL-1 C. E ' /4/ o4... __...1/G!7 f1 L.._1 a ,"Y'..._..< .Cis.2. j /0/ /7 q 2Y;-;,_ 9.. ttts If 1 s se 3 3. . 3 3 .7414 30 71,1 /.a 7o. z 6 ., ' 9.7 3 0`.1 14Y ,39'% 13,0 6 V a-3 60,z .7.3`<S 7 .) l.1. G .? r-. 0 L i-e f i /.s 47( Iva 5 .(/G*/r) ,lob - (ij 3 — 3�/ (1 h f ? 7) , / ° i .7(4 = ,' ( t f27),a��= V(,( (27 t 2.3) o `l7 / frrf7 -- 33 1-.2 9 07e — 7-I ConverseWard Davis Dixon o x 3-7 t• o, • X Pz 1'f/)fs/6NF/J cur y�S —3 Se.., \rs Mot Vp! — (T(2.21-16) ll.oPs)4-( (7)-lQ =17-1 fr ). o 7t (�2 (/) ,/o ')z 1 a ' C SHEET SIGNED NO. REG. NO. iC BY g'{, CHKD. BY d /l. PROJECT DATE 'VW O. DATE TENT S C//AA//1,F%TG �j h/rz 2.4 = 3 O lx,4 y1 T.0-1 4 - 6 5-7A 7/c Fy FORM NO. F-19/78 •EETNO. ? 7 OF 3 f PROJECT NO. N- C 2 2 l S',. a/ 1/1/.Z0..2- 2 v<" .= 1'V,2-,e)-". 't r/., .ram l 0 9 C d x J 7( wz-M 2 -7 %rt C� f' C 4 x ) * / id /-2 7 3 7 % (2,21 7`' l /.S' y f �� �. 2 G l -eP9n 2 6 7L (, 2) // ) eP l wp, 'p 4- 2 gyp, 1_ 17. 9 0,2) .� /7,� - -U f - a.c7 l 7 4- 2 ConverseWard Davis Dixon SIGNED REG. NO. + CQ1/4 7L 2 (/S) / 3 SHEET NO. 27 FORM NO. F .19/78 jai BY f- ' DATE.-VIAW CLIENT CHKD. BY `'� DATE ='__ PROJECT C f✓ / /T r/r/.'/V%f ffr (,/ /? YYNA/`1/c C. oN/2/7'ON 7 f ,1f SHEET NO. 2 7 , . OF 35- . �f /.- 0 PROJECT NO. t/try;.-1 c X ) 5L -66%4. ";,,e-,71 , /5" c X ) 19, 7 -7 7 (.7 /3 -�/ r) G Ss ,ett,rt / (. ) / �) ( IV ;a11 ? )-eY1 • ( (f- 71%F f //3.7 1-/9/ 1 ll ? . 1 fr'p c Q X'�' 1- ? C ,,,,T -1{ (./t(,),1 / 92, 7 - z 0 F S. _; vi 7 /2:2J -> , / ConverseWard Davis Dixon C I< SHEET SIGNED NO. REG. NO. Z FORM NO. F-.19/78 BY fi DATE/0.LIENT C OSHEET NO. 2-ct OF 3r CHKD. BY :ePt-- DATE PROJECT NO. 0/ % " 0 / PROJECT (/V4ii't/W1/1 Z 5/ opr Atm/ y.5/1 si-<7/o/v A-4 5 L pi 7, 0 EfO't 7 / A PZ-1/7 Y /1-1/1 7.r I Y 5'.0 / 12ApAHE7e./?," 23 0 CIF 2 I L Tr" (7P )7?7 155-1 ° 9.1 • \ 5s°• L OW t72foqgze F IC 7/ ON A--4' NAvrAC P/1-7). rfoy. 7-f- X C 9? (50) F/ 25.0 iS6 es- -1. 7 ,Ss ConverseWardDavisDixon 5 N7 g — 2 SIGNED REG. NO. \— 74. — a. Jo, V I/ / SHEET NO. , 2. BY ij ' 1? DATE/4/"I CLIENT CHKO. BY -bit DATE PROJECT cI-1 4.7-7- F Ai 12 1: 7K .5-7A 77 C ro Al I 7i' 0 14/ (2 s) 2_ W.9 • 21: S' ) • 0 Ff -=-• TS, (47- 7/ 24 .07i oc. • SHEET NO. ° • OF ?S-- PROJECT NO. g k a 2 z-:14(7<F-• H7) S7.• (/7 *) 14/-6 = (//) ,Opt • 14/ p(.A fr .-r- (1-'1 2 e< 1 2-,2 SP 7 . 2 1 0 • 3 3 7, 3 .. 3 S-5% i-- 2 S' I t Ss' 1 2/ •171. Lr S-7,, 5- S-6-2- 7 s IC,,S- -.) 14 , - , .5" 7 C P., C -/ 3 ,-, .2 . / • 7 /if — 6 3 ft Q Y- Y .$) oz. FS. 714 - 7, S ' /, a (:3 0 tr; ConverseWardDavisDixon /3 / (14 SHEET SIGNED NO. • REG. NO. FORM NO. F-19/78 BY 1= '/?. DATE ( 7/, /-2 •IENT •EET NO. 1 OF 35- I) CHKD. BY V p`, DATE 3/2 " PROJECT NO. /. if ? ' , .f G / PROJECT SCN/3 grit / //f'i /(Gkft nY/'J/►/'1/C A/+// L Ys/f p f y = jiri:2, - ryl 04, 04, 63 7 'fs(/7/) / 7 / .GtZ-,-? / — (. /f') 61 r 2 / )1- 624 // f. f. s - qo11, 021 K 1- I /21/-( 1 n egi5/nt: 5 l- grit 55X6.1(6 ri.S % . S /f/, ' , CMPJt✓c? ConverseWard Davis Dixon gyp, ` / �' - /, ,S SIGNED REG. NO. SHEET NO. 3j SHEET NO. 32 OF 3C- BY A ' `� DATE 3//'�(/ fb CLIENT • CHKD. BY E- DATE 3/ r`•� PROJECT NO. P-/!( 2. - { i J f PROJECT SCff/7 y FfF/'!I'Fiafie • ,5 7/J `'// / 7 y Uf" 12040 ("'ct j' PL 636 H lP// -E' Po/77/0N OF Sf C7rO/`l f.?-Ii ' 1r= It frt/ - (if) , /0e C� I 3 FORM NO. F.19/78 I I o .• (/t/3 _ a (L f //) r /0(f 7e,7 w s`i (ii) .10k = V.: 0 u = Z z7 ?7' 75_, 7 /s' 7).14 e3S-D 1/ 33.7 ConverseWardDavisDixon ,ZlX= 1I/f� ?7 .0 SIGNED REG. NO. SHEET NO. 32 FORM NO. F-19/78 BY "/ Z DATE •JENT •HEETNO. 3 OF CHKD. BY 1/1j�' DATE PROJECT NO. -7`6 J C f,o/ PROJECT cc: HA /7/r, /= //J /.Efr'' S74-7/C Fs.= CONi2/77ON 7 .2- 'N., 2_ / 3 s' 7 7 tf -Z ..0 (z) 1174u / , g- J`-I y/VA MW c (C A/ /7t O'V I/ ?. , Z. 7 (. / � l 3 -s- 7 z. nF y. 1I .(/) -- 43- Wrr... u -64-77 C-4 x / 3 s, 7 2 — (if) ? , z 2 0 �- (2-) / /74 7s i S. - 7S- ConverseWard Davis Dixon SIGNED REG. NO. SHEET NO. 33 BY U ' y DATE 3 J `4 CLIENT CHKD. BY )�,r�e. DATE '144 PROJECT SC/VA ,F'Y f /f /7/ .SC4/?/-/C/4t S7r.' '//iTy • OF F/I-ts /a 55,5a I/a-rt `rr' 44 pt r a -77, e i C /, c.. T — - / C _ Sp?SF FS Fs • SHEET NO. OF 3� PROJECT NO. /. G "� ( f -O/ T h %)" ? 4-tih -e . , ° s/op e .s-Q/4wra dep7;42) r ?,sQ f ( 9G~-- G2. > rz-74) . G,J-2?�/ so -7L @3-&) (/%37) /7S= //1 7/ - z q6P, F 175 4 1W ConverseWard Davis Dixon a /-> SHEET SIGNED NO. REG. NO. S v FORM NO. F-19/78 BY /' '/(' DATE T_ 9.IENT 4111,1EET NO. _l OF CHKD. BY I,.{ DATE 'e/�/11 PROJECT NO. ;:j/-c:;'• ` Ci/ PROJECT SC N/ /r/'/' FAH1 / 1,' cf /.' 6'j pF7FI?M/NF S7A/J// /rY Co s7/(ac7t'A/ Fo/e u P/> F %i' %°o /2 7/0 N O i %J F f r/7 /> Ell 2 o.N.F A IS' G G ,f' ,:Wei .•'v _re,-/. ? /9AD b Fy F� -= F, S. / 0 0 --_-> tilvP44- Po/270N OF ''S Pr7,0AI A -A i if.O p, pGJFO rONJTH (7(€2 N St O/J.E ton u `O/2f/? /'e Yw4Y zeF Z-7G, 41 7C • 4- Cp -1< C L3 ? 7� wr7 / 3 �- (Lc) 14.z . ; 9y,3 y�-r 76,`- .3 > l.2N" OK ConverseWard Davis Dixon .LAX =2u. /-1� SHEET SIGNED NO. REG. NO, 3 C • APPENDIX D' GENERAL SITE GRADING Converse Consultants, Inc. • • APPENDIX D GENERAL SITE GRADING Scope of Work The work includes all labor, machinery, and equipment required to construct in a workmanlike manner all earthwork shown on the drawings and herein specified. The major items ofwork covered in this section include the following:. Site Clearing Preparation of Fill Areas Placement of Excavated Materials Compaction of Fill Materials Subdrains Trench Backfills Observations of Site Grading Contractor's Responsibility Site Investigation 1. The Contractor shall carefully examine the site and make all inspections necessary to determine the full extent of work required to make the completed work conform to the drawings and specifications. The Contractor shall 'satisfy himself as to the nature and location of the work, conditions, the confirmation and condition of the existing ground surface and the character of equipment and facilities needed prior to and during execution of the work. The Contractor shall satisfy himself as to the character, quality and quan- tity of surface and subsurface materials or obstacles to be encountered.' Any inaccuracies or discrepancies between the actual field conditions and the drawings, Converse Consultants, Inc. • • 11: D*2 or between the drawings and specifications shall be brought to the Engineer's attention in order to clarify the exact nature of the work to be performed. 2. A geotechnical report for this project has been pre- pared by Converse Ward Davis Dixon and is available for review. This "Geotechnical Report" may be used as a general guide to the surface and subsurface soil and bedrock conditions likely to be encountered on this project. The accuracy of the boring and trench logs included in the geotechnical report is limited to the actual location and time of the field exploration. The Role of the Soil Engineer and Engineering Geologist The Soil Engineer will observe the placement of com- pacted fill and backfill and will take sufficient tests to provide an opinion on the uniformity and degree of compac- tion being obtained. The Soil Engineer will evaluate and recommend, as necessary, the removal and replacement of porous topsoils, noncompacted fills, disturbed bedrock materials and soft slopewash deposits, and will approve or reject materials proposed for use in compacted fill areas in accordance with the specifications. The Soil Engineer, in conjunction with the Engineering Geologist, will analyze the stability of existing or pro- posed slopes and make recommendations for.,remedial measures, if judged necessary. If any unstable condition is being Converse Consultants, Inc. • D 3- created by cutting or filling, the Engineering Geologist and/or Soil Engineer will recommend to the Contractor and Owner to immediately cease grading in the affected area until such time as corrective measures are taken. The Owner will decide all questions regarding: (1) the interpretation of the drawings and specifications, (2) the acceptable fulfillment of the contract on the part of the Contractor, and (3) the matter of compensation. Site Clearing 1. Clearing and grubbing shall consist of the removal from all areas to be graded of all surface trash, abandoned improvements, paving, culverts, pipe, and vegetation (including, but not limited to, heavy weed growth, trees, stumps, logs, and roots larger than one inch in ,diameter). 2. Organic and inorganic materials resulting from the clearing and grubbing operations shall be hauled from the proposed areas. Burning of combustible materials on -site shall not be permitted. Preparation of Fill Areas 1. All uncompacted fills and porous slopewash materials or unsuitable alluvium in the canyon bottoms which are not excavated during normal benching operations, shall be removed to expose competent natural ground or suitable bedrock. Where these unsuitable materials are exposed in final graded areas, they shall be removed and replaced as a compacted fill. Converse Consultants, Inc. • r D4' 2. The ground surface exposed after removal of unsuitable soils shall be scarified to a depth of at least six inches and the scarified ground compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum laboratory density. Where suitable bedrock is exposed at the surface, scarifica- tion and recompaction will not be required. 3. All areas to receive compacted fill, including all removal areas and toe -of -fill benches, will be observed and evaluated by the Soil Engineer and/or Engineering Geologist prior to placing compacted fill. Placement of Excavated Materials 1. Fill, consisting of excavated materials approved by the "Soils Engineer, shall be placed in compacted layers and compacted with approved compaction equipment. 2. The moisture content of all fill soils shall be brought to or slightly above optimum moisture content by watering or drying, as necessary, and by mixing to produce a uniform moisture condition. 3. Rock may be used in compacted fill areas under the following conditions: (a) The upper four feet of compacted fill shall contain rock no larger than about six inches in diameter. Converse Consultants, Inc. • • D5 (b) Cobbles larger than 12 inches in diameter may be used in fills below ten feet from final grade if all are placed in such a manner to eliminate nesting or voids between adjacent rocks. (c) Boulders larger than 24 inches in diameter shall not be used in compacted fill, except as follows: Boulders shall be individually placed in preformed depressions having a depth equal to 1/3 the size of the boulder. As the adjacent fill rises in elevation, the fill immediately adjacent to the boulder shall be compacted by hand -operated, or other appropriate equipment which will result in uniformly high compaction against the boulder. 4. Placement of fill near the top of slopes shall be done in such a manner that loose soils do not slough over the slope or build up on the slope surface. Compaction of Fill Materials All fill shall be compacted to the degree specified below for each designated area. The maximum laboratory dry density shall be determined by the ASTM D11557-70 compaction method. (a) All compacted fill areas, including building pads, roadways, and parking areas'- minimum 90 percent. Converse Consultants, Inc. • • D6� (b) Upper 12 inches of all fill soils in proposed street subgrade areas - minimum 90 percent just prior to paving. (c) Utility trench backfills - minimum 90 percent. (d) Moisture content - at or slightly above optimum. Subdrains 1. All material used in the construction of the subdrain systems shall be of the required kinds and sizes shown on the drawings and discussed in the "Geotechnical Report". 2. All drain pipes shall be installed to conform to the grades and alignments shown on the drawings. Modifica- tions of the subdrain layout as may be required in the field must be approved by the Soil Engineer or Civil Engineer. 3. The subdrain pipe (perforated and nonperforated) shall consist of corrugated metal pipe, Type 1 ABS plastic pipe (ASTM D2751) or an equivalent subdrain pipe approved by the Soil Engineer. If the diameter pipe called for on the drawing is not available in the material chosen by the Contractor, the next size larger pipe available shall be used in its place at no additional cost to the Owner. Converse Consultants, Inc. • • f D7 4. Prior to backfilling, the locations of all drains shall be surveyed by the Civil Engineer. It is imperative that the subdrain outlets be kept clear during and after grading to avoid damage to the exposed pipe. These subdrain outlets should be screened to prevent plugging or nesting by rodents. 5. Filter material for the subdrain system shall be composed of materials approved by the Soils Engineer (see Appendix B, Grain Size Distribution Chart and Appendix C). Trench Backfills 1. Trench excavations for utility pipes which extend under graded lots or slope areas shall be backfilled under engineering observation. All trenches not affecting potential building pads or graded slope areas shall be backfilled at least to Los Angeles County backfill specifications. 2. After the utility pipe has been laid, the space under and around the pipe shall be backfilled with clean sand or approved granular soil to a depth of at least one foot over the top of the pipe. Converse Consultants, Inc. • D8 3. The onsite materials, or other soils approved by the Soil Engineer, shall be watered and mixed as necessary prior to placement in lifts over the sand backfill. Clean sand shall not be used as backfill within ten feet of the top of slopes or in trenches which extend over the slope. 4. The backfill shall be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum laboratory density as determined by the ASTM compaction method specified for this project. 5. Field density tests and inspection of the backfill procedure will be made by the Soil Technician acting under the direction of the Soil.Engineer during back - filling to see that proper moisture content and uniform compaction are being maintained. Observations of Site Grading 1. Observations and field density tests will be performed during grading by the Soil Technician acting under the direction of the Soil Engineer to provide a basis for an opinion on the degree of compaction being obtained. Where the degree of compaction is less than specified, additional compactive effort shall be made with adjust- ment of the moisture content as necessary until the required degree of compaction is obtained. Converse Consultants, Inc. 4 2 The Grading Contractor shall provide test holes and exploratory pits as required by the Soil Engineer and/or Engineering Geologist to enable sampling and testing. 3. Observation of graded cut slopes on this project will be performed by the Engineering Geologist to provide an opinion on the stability of the excavated slopes. The Grading Contractor shall provide exploratory pits as required by the Engineering Geologist to enable obser- vation of geologic conditions. Contractor's Responsibility It shall be the Grading Contractor' s obligation to take all measures deemed necessary during grading:' (a) To provide and maintain adequate safety measures and working conditions; and (b) To provide erosion control devices for the protection of on -site slope areas and adjacent properties from storm damage and flood hazard originating on this project. It shall be the Contractor's responsibility to maintain slopes in their as -graded form until all slopes are in satisfactory compliance with the job specifications, all berms and benches have been properly constructed, and all associated drainage devices meet the requirements of the Civil Engineer. Converse Consultants, Inc. • D-13 Approved for publication FINISHED GROUND SURFACE SUgFP.CE„y%- - - Npe min.' , • ! O 1 • .:1 A COMPACTED / D See Drain Detail • . FILL • /.�,- e►-- 2% y_ :n�q�awN� 2"/o min.' / 2% TYPICAL BUTTRESS SECTION A- Buttress slope to have a bench at every 25' of vertical elevation (nominal). B- Buttress key depth varies. C- Buttress key width varies. D- Backdrains and lateral drains located at every 25' of vertical elevations (nominal). Stagger lateral ,drains. , Fill • '2%min.-'- 15' min. Finished Grade - Compacted SCH40 PVC or ABS Class SDR35 Pipe or Equivalent Placed in 5 cu. ft, per linear ft. of graded. filter materials. :4' Pipe to extend.;' full length of buttress. (2% min. gradient).-...‹.:;_. µr- ') 9 4" nonperforated • • ••1- i"�"'`''"" pipe lateral to . '.Pipe 1" ' slope to face at • •• above 100' intervals. r bench . •(2% min. gradient) , ' ' . .___.with • • perforation pi,,u:,si,/r�,v '`facing -�� down DRAIN DETAIL _5 Dip of Bedding TYPICAL STABILIZATION FILL SECTION 2.4± ACRE RESIDENTIAL LOT Rolling Hills, California 81-02265-01 Converse Consultants a Engineering \r/ andd AApppplieed d Sciences Project No.