REPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE LOT 21 OF TRACT NO.

14944 701 ROCHEDALE WAY LOS ANGELES (BRENTWOOD), CALIFORNIA

FOR MR. SHAWN ANTIN

PROJECT NO. 11-323-22 MARCH 24, 2011

March 24, 2011

11-323-22

Mr. Shawn Antin 16134 Leadwell Street Van Nuys, California 91406 Subject: Report Of Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Single Family Residence Lot 21 Of Tract No. 14944 701 Rochedale Way Los Angeles (Brentwood), California

Dear Mr. Antin: INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of a geotechnical investigation for the subject project. During the course of this investigation, the engineering properties of the

subsurface materials, soil and rock, were evaluated in order to evaluate slope stability and to provide recommendations for design and construction of temporary excavations, retaining walls, foundations, and grading. The investigation included geologic mapping, subsurface exploration, soil and rock sampling, laboratory testing, engineering and geological evaluation and analysis, consultation and preparation of this report. During the course of this investigation, a topographic survey map of the site provided by the client was used as reference. The enclosed Drawing No. 1, shows surface geology and approximate locations of the test pits in relation to the site boundaries. This drawing also shows the Drawing Nos. 2

approximate locations of the Geologic Cross Sections A-A' and B-B. and 3 show the profiles of the Geologic Cross Sections A-A' and B-B. Figure No. 1 show the Site Vicinity Map.

Figure No. 2 shows the Regional

Geologic Map by Dibblee. Figure No. 3 present the Preliminary Geologic Map prepared by the City of Los Angeles.

-2The attached Appendix I, describes the method of field exploration. Figure Nos. I-1 through I-3 present summaries of the materials encountered at the location of our exploratory test holes. Figure No. I-4 presents a key to the log of exploratory test pits. The attached Appendix II describes the laboratory testing procedures. Figure

Nos. II-1 and II-2 present the results of direct shear and consolidation tests on selected undisturbed samples.

PROJECT CONSIDERATIONS It is our understanding that the proposed project will consist of construction of a single family residence at the subject site. The proposed building is expected to be a two-story structure, with one level above grade and one level approximately below street grade. slabs. As part of the proposed project, a swimming pool may also be constructed. The proposed swimming pool depth is expected to range from about 3 to 6 feet. The The flooring systems are expected to be in a form of concrete grade

approximate location of the proposed structures are shown on the enclosed Geologic Map & Site Plan; Drawing No. 1. It is anticipated that the finished grades for the proposed project will be created through mainly cutting operations. A portion of the excavated materials would be used to backfill behind minor retaining walls along the top of the slope to further expand the building pad. It should be noted that all exposed retaining wall heights should be in full conformance to the City Ordinance 176,445 which became effective on March 9, 2005. Basically, the vertical height of a single retaining wall (including any freeboard) should be limited to 12 feet. For two walls (stacked), the vertical height of the single wall should be limited to 10 feet (20 feet total). Based on the results of our investigation, it is expected that the planned excavation will be made through mainly bedrock (with minor amount of soil cover). The bedrock consists of massive, conglomeratic sandstone with no through-going planes of weakness. On this basis, the earth-retaining structures for this project (temporary and permanent) can be designed based on normal lateral earth pressures.
APPLIED EARTH SCIENCES 11-323-22

-3Where making excavations close to the property line (within the eastern portion of the north property line where the magnitude of the cut is higher) temporary shoring should be used during the course of the site grading work. Such shoring system should consist of cantilevered soldier piles. Within the areas of low cuts and where adequate horizontal distance beyond the planned line of excavation is available,

unsupported/open excavation slopes with gradients as recommended in this report can be used. Structural loading data was not available during the course of preparation of this report. For the purpose of this investigation, however, it is assumed that maximum concentrated loads will be on the order of 60 kips, combined dead plus frequently applied live loads. The retaining wall footings are expected to have loads of on the

order of 6 kips per lineal foot.

ANTICIPATED SITE GRADING WORK It is expected that the site grading will involve mainly cutting operations in order to create the proposed finished grades. A portion of the excavated materials will be used behind the retaining walls constructed along the top of the descending slope (to the west of the lot) to further expand the building pad. As part of the site grading work, retaining walls will be constructed. The vertical heights of the retaining walls are expected to be less than 10 feet. It is anticipated that, after completion of the site grading work, materials will be exported from the site.

SITE CONDITIONS SITE LOCATION AND CONDITIONS The subject site is the existing vacant lot located at 701 Rochedale Way, in the Brentwood area of the City of Los Angeles, California. The lot spans between the western terminus of Rochedale Way and Hanley Avenue, is nearly rectangular in shape and covers a plan area of about 11,600 square feet.

APPLIED EARTH SCIENCES 11-323-22

-4The lot is bound on the north and south by existing single family residences, on the east by Rochedale Way and on the west by Hanley Avenue. See the enclosed Geologic Map & Site Plan; Drawing No. 1 for details. From the terminus of Rochedale Way, the lot descends on a relatively mild slope approximately 100 feet in the horizontal direction, to the top of a cut slope that extends to Hanley Avenue. The cut has vertical heights of 15 to 20 feet and an inclination of about 1.2:1 (horizontal:vertical). bedrock. No sign of instability was noted on the existing cut slope, except for minor erosion in local areas. No sign of tension cracks were observed along the top of the cut slope. The slope appeared to be grossly stable. The cut slope exposes coarse-grained sandstone

GEOLOGIC AND SOIL CONDITIONS The geologic investigation consisted of the excavation, inspection, sampling and geologic logging of two test pits excavated by jackhammers and one boring by a hollowstem auger; a review of published geologic maps; and on-site and near-site geologic reconnaissance and mapping. This activity indicates that the site is underlain by a thin veneer of residual soil underlain by thick-bedded, hard sandstone bedrock. A geologic map and site plan is provided in Drawing 1, and geologic cross-sections in Drawings 2 and 3. Test pit and boring logs are provided in Appendix I. A description of the units and their distribution are as follows: Residual Soil (Qrs): The surface of the site is covered by a thin veneer of residual soil composed mainly of silty fine-grained sand, slightly clayey, moderately dense, moist, and containing pebbles and some roots. This material is thought to be derived from the underlying bedrock and is an in-place native earth material.

Sandstone bedrock (Kcg): Sandstone and conglomerate bedrock underlies the entire site. In test pits, borings, and exposures, it was found to be mostly massive, orange-brown, slightly moist to moist, slightly hard to hard, well-indurated, slightly fractured, and difficult to excavate.
APPLIED EARTH SCIENCES 11-323-22

-5This bedrock unit has been classified as belonging to the Cretaceous-age Chico formation by other workers; see Figure No. 2 - Regional Geologic Map by Dibblee (1991). Bedrock onsite was found to generally be massive to thick bedded, with

east-west trending strikes and southerly dips from 30-40 degrees. These observations are in general agreement with regional geologic maps of the area. ENGINEERING-GEOLOGIC CONSIDERATIONS Groundwater was not observed in the test holes. No seeps or springs were noted on-site, nor does the site have any surface streams passing through it. The sandstone material underlying the site is generally a very good foundation material; however, it can be hard to excavate. Boring 1 was advanced with a hollow-stem auger drill rig, and was unable to penetrate even the upper layer of rock. For the basement excavation, heavy-duty equipment may be required. From an engineering-geologic point of view, the proposed new single family residence and pool project can proceed as planned, provided all new structures are founded in bedrock to sufficient depth and with proper drainage; surface water runoff on the site should be controlled; and preventive slope maintenance be regularly performed.

PREVENTIVE SLOPE MAINTENANCE For the slopes in general, it is important to reduce the risk of problems relating to slope instability. It is recommended that the owners implement a program of normal slope maintenance. This maintenance program should include annual clean out of drains, elimination of gophers and earth burrowing rodents, maintaining low water consumptive, fire retardant, deep rooted ground cover and proper irrigation. Hillside properties are typically subject to potential geotechnical hazards including mudslides, spalling of slopes, erosion and concentrated flows. It must be emphasized that responsible maintenance of these slopes, and the property in general, by the owner, using proper methods, can reduce the risk of these hazards significantly.

SEISMIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

APPLIED EARTH SCIENCES 11-323-22

-6In accordance with the 2007 California Building code (CBC 2007), the project site can be classified as a C site. The mapped spectral accelerations of SS=1.729 (short period) and S1 =0.787 (1-second period) can be used for this project. These parameters correspond to site Coefficients values of Fa =1.0 and FV =1.3, respectively.

EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS GENERAL Based on the geotechnical engineering data derived during this investigation, it is believed that the proposed construction may be made as planned. It is our opinion

that when the proposed construction and grading are made, following the recommendations in this report, the site will be safe for the proposed structures against the hazard of landslide, settlement, or slippage. It is anticipated that the planned excavations will be made through minor amount of native soils and mainly rock. Therefore, rock will be exposed at the finished grades. The bedrock is expected to provide excellent support for the proposed residence and the associated retaining walls through conventional spread footings. Near the top of the descending slope, deep foundations (friction piles) should be used for support.

The resulting vertical cuts from the planned grading (excavation) work will be supported by retaining walls. The retaining wall heights supporting the vertical cuts are expected to be on the order of 10 feet. A portion of the excavated materials will be

used to backfill behind minor retaining walls along the top of the slope to further expand the building pad. For the purpose of the subject project, and due to the massive nature of the rock, and lack of through-going planes of weaknesses, all earth-retaining structures (temporary and permanent) can be designed based on normal lateral earth pressures. The vertical (exposed) heights of all retaining walls planned for this project should fully comply with the City Ordinance No. 176,445. The proposed residence should have a minimum clear horizontal distance from the retaining walls supporting the ascending slope. The minimum clear horizontal

distance would be 5 feet or of the total vertical height of the slope above the retaining
APPLIED EARTH SCIENCES 11-323-22

-7wall (whichever is greater) to a maximum value of 15 feet. For the purpose of this project, a 5 feet clear horizontal distance would be adequate. When making high cuts close to the north property line, temporary shoring should be used. Such shoring system should consist of cantilevered soldier piles. The shoring piles can then be incorporated into the retaining walls and be part of the permanent structures. The lower portions of the shoring piles (below the base of the excavation) can be used to provide vertical support through skin friction. Within the areas of low cuts and where adequate horizontal distance beyond the planned line of excavation is available, unsupported/open excavation slopes with gradients as recommended in this report can be used. The results of our analysis indicated that the subject lot, with the planned grading work, will remain grossly stable with respect to deep-seated slope instability (having a factor of safety of greater than 1.5). See the enclosed engineering calculation sheets. No significant amount of soil occurs on the existing cut slope. Therefore, surficial slope instability will not be an issue on this project. Grade slabs may be cast directly over rock, or properly compacted fill soils. Where grade slabs span between soil and bedrock, the bedrock should be over-excavated by some 12 inches and the excavated materials could be used for the compacted fill (compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction at optimum moisture content). This will create uniform subgrade conditions beneath grade slabs and reduce the chances of uneven subgrade movements. Alternatively, a cold joint should be placed near the daylight between cut and fill. Because of the granular nature of the site materials, soil expansion will not be an issue on this site. The grade slabs for this project, however, should be at least 5 inches thick and be reinforced with # 3 bars placed at every 18 inches on center. The following sections present our specific recommendations for temporary excavations, site grading, site drainage, foundations, retaining walls, and observations during construction. lateral design, grade slabs,

TEMPORARY EXCAVATION

APPLIED EARTH SCIENCES 11-323-22

-8Unshored Excavations: It is expected that temporary excavations will be made during the course of site grading work to create the proposed finished grades. The excavation will be made through minor amount of native soils and massive sandstone and/or conglomerate rock. Based upon the engineering characteristics of the subsurface materials, it is our opinion that temporary excavation slopes through soil and massive bedrock with no through-going plane of weakness may be made in accordance with the following table: -------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------Maximum Depth of Cut Maximum Slope Ratio (FT) (Horizontal:Vertical) Soil Rock 0-5 1/2:1 Vertical 5-10 3/4:1 Vertical >10 1:1 3/4:1 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------It is recommended that the Engineering Geologist inspect the cut slopes within larger scale excavations as soon as five feet of bedrock is exposed in order to confirm the results of our findings. variations are noted. Water should not be allowed to flow over the top of the excavation in an uncontrolled manner. No surcharge should be allowed within a 45-degree line drawn from the bottom of the excavation. Excavation surfaces should be kept moist but not saturated to retard raveling and sloughing during construction. It would be advantageous, particularly during wet season construction, to place polyethylene plastic sheeting over the slopes. This will reduce the chances of moisture changes within the soil banks and material wash into the excavation. Modification to our recommendations may be necessary if

Cantilevered Soldier Piles:

In

order

to

reduce

the

volume

of

over-excavation and subsequent backfill, cantilevered soldier piles should be used as a means of temporary shoring for the upper most cuts. Such shoring should also be used for cuts over 12 feet high within the structure. Soldier piles consist of structural steel beams encased in concrete below the base of the excavation and slurry mix within the exposed depths of excavation. For the purpose of this project, caisson type shoring piles with reinforcing cages can also be
APPLIED EARTH SCIENCES 11-323-22

-9used. The caissons can be incorporated into the retaining walls and be part of the permanent structures. The lower portions of the shoring piles (below the base of the excavation) can be used to provide vertical support through skin friction. The lateral resistance for cantilevered soldier piles may be assumed to be offered by available passive pressure below the basement level. An allowable passive pressure of 600 pounds per square foot per foot of depth may be used below the basement level for soldier piles having center-to-center spacing of at least 2-1/2 times the pile diameter. Maximum allowable passive pressure should be limited to 6,000 pounds per square foot. The maximum center-to-center spacing of the vertical shafts should be maintained no greater than 10 feet. For design of temporary support, active pressure on piles may be computed using an equivalent fluid density of 30 pounds per cubic foot. Uniform surcharge may be computed using an active pressure coefficient of 0.30 times the uniform load. When using cantilevered soldier piles for temporary shoring, the point of fixity (for the purpose of moment calculations), may be assumed to occur at some 12 inches below the base of the excavation. In order to limit local sloughing, it is recommended that lagging be used where soil is exposed between the soldier piles. members left in ground should be pressure treated. All wood

Lagging may also be required in

bedrock, if sloughing is experienced on the exposed granular bedrock between the piles. It should be noted that the recommendations presented in this section are for use in design and for cost estimating purposes prior to construction. The contractor is solely responsible for safety during construction.

GRADING RECOMMENDATIONS The major portion of the site grading work will involve excavation (cutting operation). Also, some wall backfilling will also be made as part of the site grading work. All wall backfill should be granular in nature. Therefore, the excavated materials from the side, broken down to acceptable sizes (less than 4 inches in diameter) can be used for wall backfilling.

APPLIED EARTH SCIENCES 11-323-22

-10Prior to placing any fill, the Soil Engineer and Engineering Geologist should observe the excavation bottoms. The areas to receive fill should be scarified and compacted in-place to a relative compaction of at least 90 percent at optimum moisture content. General guidelines regarding site grading are presented below in an itemized form which may be included in the earthwork specification. It is recommended that all

fill be placed under engineering observation and in accordance with the following guidelines: 1. All vegetation should be shaved and removed from the site before site grading work is initiated; Subdrain should be installed behind all retaining walls. All subdrain should be observed and approved by this office before backfilling; The subdrain pipes should be laid at a minimum grade of two percent for self cleaning. The excavated materials from the site may be reused in the areas of new fill. Wall backfill, however, should consist of granular materials. Rocks larger than 6 inches in diameter should be excluded from the areas of compacted fill . Fill material, approved by the Soil Engineer, should be placed in controlled layers. Each layer should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum unit weight as determined by ASTM designation D 1557 for the material used. All new fill should be benched into rock; The fill material shall be placed in layers which, when compacted, shall not exceed 8 inches per layer. Each layer shall be spread evenly and shall be thoroughly mixed during the spreading to insure uniformity of material in each layer. When moisture content of the fill material is too low to obtain adequate compaction, water shall be added and thoroughly dispersed until the moisture content is near optimum. When the moisture content of the fill material is too high to obtain adequate compaction, the fill material shall be aerated by blading or other satisfactory methods until near optimum moisture condition is achieved.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

APPLIED EARTH SCIENCES 11-323-22

-11-

10.

Inspection and field density tests should be conducted by the Soil Engineer during grading work to assure that adequate compaction is attained. Where compaction of less than 90 percent is indicated, additional compactive effort should be made with adjustment of the moisture content or layer thickness, as necessary, until at least 90 percent compaction is obtained.

SITE DRAINAGE Site drainage should be provided to divert roof and surface waters from the property through non-erodible drainage devices to the street. In no case should the surface waters be allowed to pond behind the walls or flow over the slope surfaces in an uncontrolled manner. A minimum surface slope of one and two percent should be maintained in paved and unpaved areas, respectively.

FOUNDATIONS It is anticipated that, after the planned excavation is made, rock will be exposed at the finished grades. The bedrock is expected to provide excellent support for the proposed residence and the associated retaining walls through conventional spread footing foundation system. The retaining wall footings should be at least 24 inches wide and should be established at least 24 inches into bedrock. The footings of the proposed residence should be at least 18 inches wide and should be established at least 18 inches into bedrock. All footings should be setback from the sloping bedrock surface a horizontal distance equal to 1/3 of the vertical height of slope, or 5 feet, whichever is greater. It should be noted that the above recommended foundation dimensions are the minimum required. The actual foundation dimensions may be greater depending upon the magnitude of the imposed loads. Properly designed and constructed spread footings established in rock may be based on allowable maximum bearing pressure of 4,000 pounds per square foot. For the purpose of estimating vertical capacity of individual piles, an allowable maximum skin friction value of 900 pounds per square foot may be used for the top 10 feet of the bedrock. The allowable maximum skin friction value can be increased to
APPLIED EARTH SCIENCES 11-323-22

-121,100 pounds per square foot for the portion of piles extended deeper than 10 feet into bedrock. Uplift capacity may be assumed one half of the downward capacity. The above given allowable maximum bearing and skin friction values are for the total of dead, plus frequently applied live loads. For short duration transient loading; wind or seismic forces, the given value may be increased by one third. For friction pile design, the weight of the shafts can be assumed to be taken by end-bearing, therefore, need not be added to the structural loads. All piles should be concreted as soon as they are excavated and, for safety, should not be left open overnight . During the course of our field investigation, no caving was experienced in the test holes. On this basis, caving is expected not to occur within drilled holes. If the

foundations are excavated with hand tools, proper shoring should be implemented for workmen safety where soil is exposed. Total and differential settlements of the proposed residence and the associated retaining walls (with foundations established in rock) are expected to be within tolerable limits; less than 3/8 and 1/4 of one inch, respectively. settlements are expected to occur during construction. The major portion of the

LATERAL DESIGN Lateral resistance at the base of footings in contact with bedrock may be assumed to be the product of the dead load forces and a coefficient of friction of 0.45. Passive pressure on the face of footings or developed against the vertical shafts, may also be used to resist lateral forces. For the purpose of the subject project, a passive pressure of 250 pounds per square foot at the surface of rock and increasing at a rate of 300 pounds per square foot per foot of depth to a maximum value of 4,000 pounds per square foot may be used. It should be noted that, if the individual shafts are spaced at least 2.5 times the pile diameters (isolated shafts) the above given values can be doubled. For the

purpose of moment calculations, the point of fixity of the vertical shafts on slope may be taken some 12 inches below the surface of the bedrock.

APPLIED EARTH SCIENCES 11-323-22

-13GRADE SLABS Grade slabs may be cast directly over bedrock, or properly compacted fill soils. Where grade slabs span between soil and bedrock, the bedrock should be over-excavated by some 12 inches and the excavated materials could be used for the compacted fill (compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction at optimum moisture content). This will create uniform subgrade conditions beneath grade slabs and reduce the chances of uneven subgrade movements. As an alternative to

over-excavation of the rock, a cold joint can be placed at the daylight between soil and rock. Due to granular nature, soil expansion will not be an issue at this site. For the purpose of this project, however, the slabs should be at least 5 inches thick and be reinforced with # 3 bars placed at every 18 inches on center. In the areas where moisture sensitive floor covering is used and slab dampness cannot be tolerated, a vapor-barrier should be used beneath the slabs. consists of a 6-mil polyethylene film covered with 2 inches of clean sand. This normally

RETAINING WALLS As part of the site grading work, many retaining walls will be constructed. Such walls are expected to be designed as cantilevered support system with maximum vertical heights of on the order of 10 feet. Static design of cantilevered retaining walls supporting cuts of massive bedrock may be based on an equivalent fluid pressure of 30 pounds per square foot per foot of depth. This assumes that hydrostatic pressure will be relieved from the back of the retaining walls through a properly designed and constructed backdrain system. This will require that proper subdrains be installed behind the basement walls. Subdrains

normally consist of 4-inch diameter perforated pipes encased in free-draining gravel (at least one cubic foot per lineal foot of the pipes). In order to reduce the chances of siltation and drain clogging, the free-draining gravel should be wrapped in filter fabric proper for the site soils. The back of all retaining walls should be properly waterproofed. In addition to the lateral earth pressure, the retaining walls should also be designed for any applicable uniform surcharge loads imposed on the adjacent ground.

APPLIED EARTH SCIENCES 11-323-22

-14Uniform surcharge effects may be computed using a coefficient of 0.30 times the assumed uniform loads.

EXCAVATION During the course of our field investigation, the rock was excavated with difficulty using a drill machine and power tools. Therefore, it is anticipated that jack hammer and possible ripping will be required during the course of site grading (excavation) work.

OBSERVATION DURING CONSTRUCTION The presented recommendations in this report assume that all structural foundations (spread footings and piles) will be established in rock. All foundation

excavations should be observed by a representative of this office. It is essential to assure that all excavations are made at proper dimensions, are established in the recommended bearing material and are free of loose and disturbed soils. The project engineering geologist should observe the temporary cut slopes. Modification to our recommendations may be necessary if significant variations are noted in the geologic features of the underlying bedrock. Site grading work should be made under continuous observation and testing by a representative of this firm.

CLOSURE The findings and recommendations presented in this report were based on the results of our field and laboratory investigations combined with professional engineering experience and judgment. The report was prepared in accordance with generally We make no other warranty, either

accepted engineering principles and practice. express or implied.

It is noted that the conclusions and recommendations presented are based on exploration "window" borings and excavations which is in conformance with accepted engineering practice. Some variations of subsurface conditions are common between "windows" and major variations are possible.

APPLIED EARTH SCIENCES 11-323-22

SLOPE STABILITY FOR SECTION A-A'/Static /11-323-22/ROCHEDALE WAY

740 e:\ara\roche-1.p12 Run By: AES 3/24/2011 04:21 PM

# FS

a 2.11

Soil Soil Total Saturated Cohesion Friction Piez. Desc. Type Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Surface No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg) No. Aniso Aniso 0 bedrock 1 130.0 130.0

Load
L I L2 L3

Value

400 psf 600 psf 400 psf

720

700

680 4
15

17

620

600 0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

GSTABL7 v.2 FSmin=2.11 Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method

SLOPE STABILITY FOR SECTION A-A'/Static /11-323-22/ROCHEDALE WAY

\ara\roche-1.plt Run By: AES 3/24/2011 04:21 PM
1

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

E:\ara\roche-1.0UT Page 1

*** GSTABL7 *** ** GSTABL7 by Garry H. Gregory, P.E. ** ** Original Version 1.0, January 1996; Current Version 2.004, June 2003 ** (All Rights Reserved-Unauthorized Use Prohibited) ********************************************************************************* SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS SYSTEM Modified Bishop, Simplified Janbu, or GLE Method of Slices. (Includes Spencer & Morgenstern-Price Type Analysis) Including Pier/Pile, Reinforcement, Soil Nail, Tieback, Nonlinear Undrained Shear Strength, Curved Phi Envelope, Anisotropic Soil, Fiber-Reinforced Soil, Boundary Loads, Water Surfaces, Pseudo-Static & Newmark Earthquake, and Applied Forces. ********************************************************************************* Analysis Run Date: 3/24/2011 Time of Run: 04:21PM Run By: AES Input Data Filename: E:\ara\roche-l.in Output Filename: E:\ara\roche-1.0UT Unit System: English Plotted Output Filename: E:\ara\roche-1.PLT PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: SLOPE STABILITY FOR SECTION A-A'/Static /11-323-22/ROCHEDALE WAY BOUNDARY COORDINATES 17 Top Boundaries 17 Total Boundaries Boundary X-Left Y-Left X-Right Y-Right Soil Type No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Below Bnd 1 0.00 634.00 17.00 634.00 1 2 17.00 634.00 27.00 640.00 1 3 27.00 640.00 42.00 649.00 1 47.00 4 42.00 649.00 652.00 1 5 47.00 652.00 53.00 654.00 1 53.00 654.00 53.01 651.00 1 6 7 53.01 651.00 66.00 651.00 1 8 651.00 66.01 657.00 1 66.00 9 66.01 657.00 94.00 657.00 1 94.01 10 94.00 657.00 660.00 1 11 94.01 660.00 121.00 660.00 1 12 121.00 660.00 121.01 670.00 1 121.01 670.00 140.00 670.00 13 1 670.00 149.00 665.00 14 140.00 1 665.00 164.00 15 149.00 665.00 1 16 164.00 665.00 164.02 660.00 1 17 164.02 660.00 1 660.00 199.99 User Specified Y-Origin = 600.00(ft) Default X-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) Default Y-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS 1 Type(s) of Soil Pore Pressure Piez. Soil Total Saturated Cohesion Friction Type Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Pressure Constant Surface Param. (psf) (deg) (psf) No. No. (pcf) (pcf) 37.0 0.00 0.0 0 1 130.0 130.0 500.0 ANISOTROPIC STRENGTH PARAMETERS 1 soil type(s) Soil Type 1 Is Anisotropic Number Of Direction Ranges Specified = 3 Cohesion Friction Counterclockwise Direction Direction Limit Intercept Angle Range (psf) (deg) No. (deg) 500.00 37.00 24.0 1 180.00 25.00 2 26.0 500.00 37.00 3 90.0 ANISOTROPIC SOIL NOTES: (1) An input value of 0.01 for C and/or Phi will cause Aniso C and/or Phi to be ignored in that range.

E:\ara\roche-1.OUT Page 2

(2) An input value of 0.02 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with no water weight in the tension crack. (3) An input value of 0.03 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with water weight in the tension crack. BOUNDARY LOAD(S) 3 Load(s) Specified Load X-Left X-Right Intensity Deflection No. (ft) (psf) (deg) (ft) 53.01 66.00 400.0 0.0 1 2 94.01 121.00 600.0 0.0 3 121.01 140.00 400.0 0.0 NOTE - Intensity Is Specified As A Uniformly Distributed Force Acting On A Horizontally Projected Surface. A Critical Failure Surface Searching Method, Using A Random Technique For Generating Sliding Block Surfaces, Has Been Specified. 400 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated. 2 Boxes Specified For Generation Of Central Block Base Length Of Line Segments For Active And Passive Portions Of Sliding Block Is 5.0 Y-Left X-Right Y-Right X-Left Box Height (ft) (ft) No. (ft) (ft) (ft) 630.00 25.00 630.00 6.00 1 15.00 2 70.00 652.00 90.00 652.00 8.00 Following Are Displayed The Ten Most Critical Of The Trial Failure Surfaces Evaluated. They Are Ordered - Most Critical First. * * Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method * * Total Number of Trial Surfaces Attempted = 400 Number of Trial Surfaces With Valid FS = 400 Statistical Data On All Valid FS Values: 5.635 FS Max = FS Min = 2.109 FS Ave = 3.956 Standard Deviation = 0.678 Coefficient of Variation = 17.15 % Failure Surface Specified By 5 Coordinate Points Y-Surf Point X-Surf No. (ft) (ft) 634.551 1 17.919 633.627 2 18.859 631.306 3 23.288 4 75.629 655.691 5 76.403 657.000 Factor of Safety *** 2.109 *** 11 slices Individual data on the Water Water Tie Tie Earthquake Force Force Force Surcharge Force Force Hor Load Ver Bot Norm Tan Top Slice Width Weight (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) No. (ft) 0.0 0. 0. 0.0 0.0 0.0 91.0 0.0 1 0.9 0.0 0. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0. 0.0 4.4 2289.9 2 0.0 0. 0.0 0.0 0. 3 3.7 0.0 0.0 3240.6 0.0 0. 0. 0.0 0.0 0.0 4 15.0 15541.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0. 0. 5 5.0 6052.4 0.0 0. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0. 6.0 7214.2 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0. 0. 0.0 0.0 7 0.0 9.6 0. 0. 0.0 0.0 5196.0 0.0 0.0 4763.5 8 13.0 0.0 0. 0. 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.6 0.0 9 0.0 0.0 0. 0. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10 9.6 4438.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0. 0. 0.0 0.0 0.8 65.9 11 Failure Surface Specified By 5 Coordinate Points Y-Surf Point X-Surf (ft) No. (ft) 634.000 16.612 1 631.754 18.877 2 630.985 3 23.818 654.529 4 73.759

E:\ara\roche-1.0UT Page 3

75.792 657.000 Factor of Safety *** 2.120 *** Failure Surface Specified By 6 Coordinate Points Point Y-Surf X-Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 17.215 634.129 18.966 2 632.622 23.449 630.407 3 4 73.217 653.273 76.551 656.998 5 6 76.553 657.000 Factor of Safety *** *** 2.127 Failure Surface Specified By 5 Coordinate Points X-Surf Y-Surf Point No. (ft) (ft) 17.662 634.397 1 18.860 633.354 2 3 23.488 631.462 4 652.929 71.420 5 72.941 657.000 Factor of Safety *** *** 2.153 Failure Surface Specified By 6 Coordinate Points Point X-Surf Y-Surf (ft) No. (ft) 1 13.641 634.000 631.825 2 16.454 3 21.054 629.866 652.849 4 70.887 5 73.925 656.820 6 73.969 657.000 Factor of Safety *** 2.162 *** Failure Surface Specified By 5 Coordinate Points Point X-Surf Y-Surf (ft) (ft) No. 1 16.374 634.000 633.850 2 20.076 630.950 3 24.150 655.607 4 78.485 5 79.609 657.000 Factor of Safety *** 2.175 *** Failure Surface Specified By 5 Coordinate Points Y-Surf X-Surf Point (ft) No. (ft) 14.097 634.000 1 633.186 2 14.940 3 630.924 19.399 72.030 654.416 4 74.545 657.000 5 Factor of Safety *** *** 2.185 5 Coordinate Points Failure Surface Specified By X-Surf Y-Surf Point (ft) No. (ft) 17.425 634.255 1 633.592 19.379 2 630.347 3 23.183 654.115 4 72.958 5 75.714 657.000 Factor of Safety *** *** 2.190 Failure Surface Specified By 6 Coordinate Points


Point No. 1 2 3 4 5 6

E:\ara\roche-1.OUT Page 4

X-Surf Y-Surf (ft) (ft) 13.501 634.000 14.376 633.382 18.538 630.612 628.005 22.805 82.865 654.945 83.830 657.000 Factor of Safety *** *** 2.192 Failure Surface Specified By 7 Coordinate Points Point X-Surf Y-Surf No. (ft) (ft) 14.320 634.000 1 633.555 2 14.978 3 630.852 19.185 4 23.571 628.453 5 72.601 651.199 655.257 6 75.522 657.000 7 76.101 Factor of Safety *** 2.193 *** **** END OF GSTABL7 OUTPUT ****

SLOPE STABILITY FOR SECTION A-A'/Seismic/11-323-22/ROCHEDALE WAY

e:\ara\roche-2.p12 Run By: AES 3/24/2011 04:22PM Soil Soil Total Saturated Cohesion Friction Piez. Desc. Type Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Surface No. (psf) (deg) (pcf) No. (pcf) 0 Aniso Aniso 130.0 130.0 bedrock 1 Load Peak(A) kh Coef.
L1 L2 1,3

Value

400 psf 600 psf 400 psf

0.500(g) 0.150(g)<

20

40

60

80

100

120

160

180

200

GSTABL7 v.2 FSmin=1.58 Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method

SLOPE STABILITY FOR SECTION A-N/Seismic/11-323-22/ROCHE DALE WAY

740 I I I e:\ara\roche-2.plt Run By: AES 3/24/2011 04:22PM I I I I I I

720

700

680

660

640

620

600

I 40

I 60

I 80

I 100

I 120

I 140

I 160

1 180 200

20

E:\ara\roche-2.OUT Page 1

*** GSTABL7 *** ** GSTABL7 by Garry H. Gregory, P.E. ** ** Original Version 1.0, January 1996; Current Version 2.004, June 2003 ** (All Rights Reserved-Unauthorized Use Prohibited) ********************************************************************************* SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS SYSTEM Modified Bishop, Simplified Janbu, or GLE Method of Slices. (Includes Spencer & Morgenstern-Price Type Analysis) Including Pier/Pile, Reinforcement, Soil Nail, Tieback, Nonlinear Undrained Shear Strength, Curved Phi Envelope, Anisotropic Soil, Fiber-Reinforced Soil, Boundary Loads, Water Surfaces, Pseudo-Static & Newmark Earthquake, and Applied Forces. ********************************************************************************* 3/24/2011 Analysis Run Date: 04:22PM Time of Run: AES Run By: E:\ara\roche-2.in Input Data Filename: E:\ara\roche-2.0UT Output Filename: English Unit System: Plotted Output Filename: E:\ara\roche-2.PLT PROBLEM DESCRIPTION: SLOPE STABILITY FOR SECTION A-A'/Seismic /11-323-22/ROCHEDALE WAY BOUNDARY COORDINATES 17 Top Boundaries 17 Total Boundaries X-Left Y-Left X-Right Y-Right Soil Type Boundary Below Bnd (ft) (ft) No. (ft) (ft) 1 17.00 634.00 1 0.00 634.00 27.00 2 17.00 1 634.00 640.00 3 27.00 640.00 42.00 649.00 1 649.00 47.00 652.00 4 42.00 1 5 47.00 654.00 1 652.00 53.00 6 53.00 654.00 53.01 651.00 1 651.00 66.00 651.00 1 7 53.01 8 66.00 651.00 66.01 657.00 1 9 66.01 657.00 94.00 657.00 1 10 94.00 657.00 94.01 660.00 1 94.01 660.00 121.00 660.00 1 11 1 121.00 660.00 121.01 670.00 12 140.00 670.00 1 670.00 13 121.01 149.00 665.00 1 14 140.00 670.00 665.00 665.00 164.00 1 15 149.00 660.00 1 164.00 665.00 164.02 16 660.00 199.99 660.00 1 17 164.02 User Specified Y-Origin = 600.00(ft) Default X-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) Default Y-Plus Value = 0.00(ft) ISOTROPIC SOIL PARAMETERS 1 Type(s) of Soil Pore Pressure Piez. Soil Total Saturated Cohesion Friction Type Unit Wt. Unit Wt. Intercept Angle Pressure Constant Surface No. Param. (pcf) (psf) (deg) (psf) No. (pcf) 0 500.0 37.0 0.00 0.0 1 130.0 130.0 ANISOTROPIC STRENGTH PARAMETERS 1 soil type(s) Soil Type 1 Is Anisotropic Number Of Direction Ranges Specified = 3 Cohesion Friction Direction Counterclockwise Direction Limit Intercept Angle Range (psf) (deg) (deg) No. 500.00 37.00 24.0 1 180.00 25.00 26.0 2 500.00 37.00 3 90.0 ANISOTROPIC SOIL NOTES: (1) An input value of 0.01 for C and/or Phi will cause Aniso C and/or Phi to be ignored in that range.

E:\ara\roche-2.OUT Page 2

(2) An input value of 0.02 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with no water weight in the tension crack. (3) An input value of 0.03 for Phi will set both Phi and C equal to zero, with water weight in the tension crack. BOUNDARY LOAD(S) 3 Load(s) Specified X-Right Intensity Deflection Load X-Left No. (ft) (ft) (psf) (deg) 66.00 400.0 1 53.01 0.0 2 94.01 121.00 600.0 0.0 3 121.01 140.00 400.0 0.0 NOTE - Intensity Is Specified As A Uniformly Distributed Force Acting On A Horizontally Projected Surface. Specified Peak Ground Acceleration Coefficient (A) = 0.500(g) Specified Horizontal Earthquake Coefficient (kh) = 0.150(g) Specified Vertical Earthquake Coefficient (kv) = 0.000(g) Specified Seismic Pore-Pressure Factor = 0.000 A Critical Failure Surface Searching Method, Using A Random Technique For Generating Sliding Block Surfaces, Has Been Specified. 400 Trial Surfaces Have Been Generated. 2 Boxes Specified For Generation Of Central Block Base Length Of Line Segments For Active And Passive Portions Of Sliding Block Is 5.0 Box X-Left Y-Left X-Right Y-Right Height No. (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) 1 15.00 630.00 25.00 630.00 6.00 70.00 652.00 90.00 652.00 8.00 2 Following Are Displayed The Ten Most Critical Of The Trial Failure Surfaces Evaluated. They Are Ordered - Most Critical First. * * Safety Factors Are Calculated By The Simplified Janbu Method * * 400 Total Number of Trial Surfaces Attempted = Number of Trial Surfaces With Valid FS = 400 Statistical Data On All Valid FS Values: FS Ave = 1.585 2.753 FS Max = FS Min = 4.124 0.416 Coefficient of Variation = 15.13 % Standard Deviation = Failure Surface Specified By 6 Coordinate Points Y-Surf Point X-Surf (ft) (ft) No. 634.129 1 17.215 632.622 18.966 2 630.407 3 23.449 73.217 653.273 4 656.998 5 76.551 657.000 6 76.553 Factor of Safety *** 1.585 *** 12 slices Individual data on the Earthquake Tie Tie Water Water Surcharge Force Force Force Force Force Ver Load Hor Tan Norm Bot Top Weight Width Slice (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (lbs) (ft) No. 0.0 0.0 43.7 0. 0. 0.0 0.0 291.3 1.8 1 0.0 0.0 0. 438.0 0. 0.0 0.0 2919.7 4.5 2 0.0 0.0 0. 534.0 0. 0.0 0.0 3560.1 3 3.6 0.0 0.0 2637.1 0. 0. 0.0 0.0 17580.6 15.0 4 0.0 0.0 0. 1016.1 0. 0.0 0.0 6773.7 5 5.0 0.0 0.0 1216.1 0. 0. 0.0 0.0 8107.4 6.0 6 0.0 0.0 1.7 0. 0. 0.0 0.0 11.1 7 0.0 5196.0 0.0 1020.0 0. 0. 0.0 0.0 6800.3 13.0 8 0.0 0.0 0.8 0. 0. 5.3 0.0 0.0 9 0.0 0.0 0.0 756.4 0. 0. 0.0 0.0 5042.7 10 7.2 0.0 0.0 121.2 0. 0. 0.0 0.0 808.2 3.3 11 0.0 0.0 0.0 0. 0. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12 Failure Surface Specified By 5 Coordinate Points

Point No. 1 2 3 4 5

E:\ara\roche-2.OUT Page 3

X-Surf Y-Surf (ft) (ft) 17.919 634.551 18.859 633.627 23.288 631.306 75.629 655.691 76.403 657.000 Factor of Safety *** *** 1.587 Failure Surface Specified By 5 Coordinate Points Point X-Surf Y-Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 17.662 634.397 18.860 2 633.354 3 23.488 631.462 4 71.420 652.929 5 72.941 657.000 Factor of Safety *** 1.596 *** Failure Surface Specified By 5 Coordinate Points Point X-Surf Y-Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 16.612 634.000 2 18.877 631.754 3 23.818 630.985 4 73.759 654.529 5 75.792 657.000 Factor of Safety *** 1.601 *** 6 Coordinate Points Failure Surface Specified By Point X-Surf Y-Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 634.000 13.501 2 14.376 633.382 3 18.538 630.612 4 22.805 628.005 5 82.865 654.945 6 657.000 83.830 Factor of Safety *** 1.604 *** Failure Surface Specified By 5 Coordinate Points Point X-Surf Y-Surf (ft) No. (ft) 1 16.374 634.000 633.850 2 20.076 630.950 3 24.150 4 78.485 655.607 5 79.609 657.000 Factor of Safety *** 1.616 *** 6 Coordinate Points Failure Surface Specified By X-Surf Y-Surf Point (ft) No. (ft) 634.000 1 13.641 16.454 631.825 2 21.054 629.866 3 70.887 652.849 4 656.820 5 73.925 73.969 657.000 6 Factor of Safety *** 1.619 *** Failure Surface Specified By 6 Coordinate Points Y-Surf Point X-Surf (ft) No. (ft) 634.000 10.740 1 632.042 2 15.115


3 4 5 6

E:\ara\roche-2.OUT Page 4

20.101 631.672 629.575 24.641 78.412 654.789 80.270 657.000 Factor of Safety *** *** 1.620 Failure Surface Specified By 7 Coordinate Points Y-Surf Point X-Surf No. (ft) (ft) 1 14.320 634.000 2 633.555 14.978 630.852 3 19.185 4 23.571 628.453 5 72.601 651.199 6 75.522 655.257 7 76.101 657.000 Factor of Safety *** 1.620 *** Failure Surface Specified By 6 Coordinate Points Y-Surf Point X-Surf (ft) No. (ft) 1 12.841 634.000 631.771 2 15.243 19.939 630.054 3 628.002 4 24.499 79.926 653.035 5 657.000 6 80.776 Factor of Safety *** *** 1.638 **** END OF GSTABL7 OUTPUT ****

'' ,/.9f CIL.-

O'
n-' =,'

_,

STATE PARK , !?,6, LAND ... .

o . LIA ,..) "

(
It

[...0 A N GA' F -)
,
\'' '

,_,5. ,. E c,).
r ,

n ,

,. , ,
,.

f.,.
L, ii.9, t
it..

co -%.
a,

NIL '

,i-, i. :

i,:, 00
,

E.$

,,
t,

<4N.

'

Cr
c

, , , , , I-.)- 0-,.-,'
,r

4-<i-

Cy

MOUNT ,S, INT MARYS CO LEGE- \-\--, \ BE L f.,, c$42 Lo n c (4Pus -, 6' TER' 'fir N'''' - , Al ,--1 ''' ,, , Coo , \ I.T.,
,,M, , ),,, , ,, ,

, ) TA

',

31

A Th:9';,6. 5'11---ili ,_::;

,n WORAG

-,-,,,

,,,s,/ STA ,1% 1

gi I
n

":

,c.

.('

'1,. . SO' DQW

-..

'
,

(..

11 5

,-',

)A

S U B J\E C
o

op 4'1)es -9(

.0\co
O'R- O
1

A41,

-, ,. ;_.j:,
,....,,t.

( cm
-' (?)

scoSITE leo \, (-,1 4* \' , , 41

'I (t,._,

De,...

''''' 4 c 4,

;iF
ir^

, .12.. , 4 \ s \ ' . p 4z,, 001- .4",,',, ', \..tk iv ' i 'r7 _ 4

, 0, - .

- .' , c'

, sls -., s 0- -- .
1

, ( 9' a I,

.1gi( -,'
\-'-' .

- - -- ---v 1,,, ,-- ,', ,,) ,(1,

GR VE

`, i

i #ee-, Fr ... \., \ .,,, , ,.

''' -a, t, ,,,, ( ,:,'

IS ,

)f

.: ct., 5., 4 '' '

4gti1 \.0., , , s
,) ,

PON 6 E% ,) ' ).- 4, )

1 CARRARA PL iiO4,&

4. ' -'24. c. o ,,A

(, 'c ,., .,

sx

_o
....

' \,r; ' a -47t,r \P: I, /P'P1, ..:, 'c''' -:_iti, .,_
Pm ' ,

't ' `,''' e -, , e,- I'.i, - -, i) ,z ;?e, , - ' \P o \"- 1. 30 cAi.-,, '0 \ s , ,Boc4 . .CAN
elOp

r'73- ', to
i

--p
a .., -

1,.._

1000

4-ti ESTONf: R4ss

.

IC- `(g

,i-

' --!, -

S, W ,...,, - .0,

el 4 \ / i3Y0 I )-0

, 0 .

. 6, OA'

<,, ,,,,,,
/,,:pec,,, ,, G

c, Imo
STIPA
P1" i)R.,

kelilo

r
-.n

_.,

C5- ---, F; ril ` -

'- '

\'

sit

't\i$ \--* c61\,,. ..to '94) , ' , 1/ . Th 412.<4 -Th 5 ,E )1g e'er _ T a7 ,.. 4, s ')..-.. , ,g :ir ..., ,c. z ti * i' ,, m 5!ii \ N C ;', to/4NT 19 0, c-, LN
Fr . ( ,,,,,,
111 ;

NI!!' EsTRELL/7., R WO 4i,,,. -, . ....s I, A+ cg. TIAN O Da 51,A ,,, e' ', 5- ..ar, , , w '-' 0 : 6,3 ,4 :, THE \* ( I:4, <- S L I ,, LN ig \ I*, It_01, GETTY N,:. , ( - ' c. o ,5 c) -, F.' -13 I s G J> kis `' `I CENTER ,% 1 S t ,,'- '''. o , ,iso, \ ",. ',..,:tc,(I."' g( , , rn if ce \ C .,-4-, . --I-IALLI),4 g, z., i:,- _,-; :, , 'f' -I I7' r , '4 , 0,4 . ,,,
%R., 4 T

z.,

-,, ,

3 . 'r
,,,,

\''
(..,

on

,-

,,,, 12 00

P -

'

,,Ns-A

., i, / - (

9 ' r.,

\,,,
\

`"---...

'

i'

1 ci, \-

.0

c`f , ',P ` - i `3*-4- i 5Sc -4 *

.A
m: r

ER 1- .#

',,. s i e, , ,z- i, -!.... . 2,,7,1Pi... \ r-4_, , ,,,,, , , rn ,4,..

\ ,,,

' ' F. R'', / ,,

.11. I

,: ,,,, ,
qi
i,,'"- `

ry,,

11-,

cN Esc

6,,po

,7 , ,s, ' , , .
s ,f, I

, -,'

iiit
F, - i 04

, , ,
iik ,14

..,
e
2 -7

%-g,

WI ,.,
'

cS

t'c'd: I" 7,
2, .

'-

;i-P r , lt,i,
, I!P

i :. - '

p off.

If0,s ----1:9
a -

'9111 4

if . 4, o

. ,
s t.

' 0' ' 4 4?

0'4 0 c" co-

-' \. .

,..-- 0,\...C.<L '

.'Ck

, c, ,:,. '3=1 I'4 ko HP ,

.--)

:''

A,

tIP

ROES -
II 5

1' \iy. ,o

GREE OCK LN i . ' , ,le- eks'"I , ., . 4. , C ARCHER: i ' r 0 _ , . , 1? Qi; HS IN LEVEN LN ,.,

c c, 4 `-' 4<1` s. ... ,,,.. , , r.,,,,,,,

iipe.

,,,

, .

SCC kv *,,../ oc,o , 0 d \i-

it

0 ,
py^.. .Wit. ; Z.,

' .7.74,, ,9.,'' ''c.. / 9Of" Li A e- ., ,,k,, , , $ RI ),,,../ ,$) ) ... a.,,S,/<,, V ,s?,- ,I 7 / s e
' z j

) A, 0 3.), ,..--",cs-f-

N... /

= ...1 0

4..

3-

.
.,^ 0
/.',, .

.1. c,-,

.,
'2-4 a ..r ' ' 94.0,
0\5S

ORD ASHFORD

. ,.c..\s,

E r- v il
BOti
' '

' ', .'

cl 4,
' >.

'*.
*,
TA

''''' ' EtARRINGT ---" RECREATI CEXR , , E

01_,

\,

, -.Ap,
V
1

4,

R
RD

& ,x, , PARKI N '

..P

\,'...,

041
s
0

, -. -

,),. \ ; .

,t, T s,

4 ,, ,.), 1,. /,01= I- .

,7,,, a

9 p0.,,.
i-A..9-.-

t :1-.-P.Q.* P
. (4 ' '

I,
1 . )11' .

s, ' 56') b------.......PR EsTE

( ', , -
_

. o \. ,. .,. __,

, ,,
OR

4oo
5

2.-,

s
BLV t.
i

' -4 FS

' I 3 5 00 - k

ESTCOVE (

,,,

1.

,, D1 ; 4.-17 ,`/;;,>.
f .., \c

TO'. COYN E ..P,9,.ji1,, 'cks, _ " s-c .4 . .6

trp

o9-0 (30 \gege :4-(- 0 - , , NTMI I's SN' I-

Cn;, ei

,4

\ "

s *, -,7".4

-' ;IN(-.

c; ?3,

70

2000 .11,

2000 I

4000 nn1

6000

Scale: 1" = 2000' Reference: Portion of Thomas Bros. Maps of Los Angeles County Page # 631-F1

SITE VICINITY MAP

Proposed Single Family Residence Lot 21 of Tract # 14944 701 Rochedale Way Los Angeles (Brentwood), California

FOR.

Mr. Shawn Antin

DATE

3/24/2011

PROJECT No. FIGURE No.

11-323-22
1

APPLIED EARTH SCIENCES GEOTECHNICAL . GEOLOGY ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS

sms
SITIS

-r30
22

30

36

'

15 Tjtni --45? 20' -"T". 40

Tlnu 3
40

Kss

Qoa
fht:

GEOLOGIC MAP OF THE BEVERLY HILLS & VAN NUYS (SOUTH 1 / 2) QUADRANGLES
LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA BY

THOMAS W. DIBBLEE, JR., 19 91

2000 0 2000 4000 6000

Scale: 1" 2000'

REGIONAL GEOLOGIC MAP

Proposed Single Family Residence Lot 21 of Tract # 14944 701 Rochedale Way Los Angeles (Brentwood), California DATE 3/24/2011 PROJECT No. FIGURE No.
APPLIED EARTH SCIENCES GEOTECHNICAL . GEOLOGY . ENVIRONMENT AL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS

FOR.

Mr. Shawn Antin

11-323-22 2

,, .)

,/,.....

).,

634 \ --- . / 7

...

r
l

/
3ms

..-.

(
,

'

',

at!

1 .
1. :',.
h4t l }

44,
'

ps. SO
yao

...,4

40., ,.

, ...`- /

1 .1.-

,
__ ) '

LiB

I
/

f'

4(

fi.
,
l'

,>
- 44.7 -11 7"..7
'1 I

\SITE' 2

A
) [ i

7.

( , 1

o 1 1

SA

t --piif [1.1-2 or \-) 1\

I t:

\ . , , _,... Z.1\ ''I 1 -.J \\:

, ,, ,
I Il i

'

(1

n ,..

.
-.) 110,1

"Ilkb y

.? , nil 1 4 ',
$ t

. .\,\---- ,

--

' . ....

% t1 1 ;./ .

\ 1 .

..

\
,

d
,
.

_.-"'

-
P

i : . ,

OW 3

.-

,. .

\.

a, ',.. .,7 ,

i
.1

.,

'

. II

n 1\ '., ' ..-

J -s,
5

'.
n ---

.i
I

r ,-, , .,. -,, - ---, , . '

) o.

..

/ t ts

\Ir\
11 .4

1._
\

6
\I . i!

(- 4.,

1 I

11V. . 300 I ind 0 - 300 I . ,

600

900

,I
300'

Scale: 1" =

Preliminary Geologic Maps of Santa Monica Mountains Map # 265

Proposed Single Family Residence Lot 21 of Tract # 14944 701 Rochedale Way Los Angeles (Brentwood), California FOR. Mr. Shawn Antin DATE 3/24/2011 PROJECT No. FIGURE No. 11-323-22

APPLIED EARTH SCIENCES GEOTECHNICAL GEOLOGY . ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS

-16-

APPENDIX I

METHOD OF FIELD EXPLORATION

In order to define the subsurface conditions, two test pits and one boring were excavated on the site. The test pits were excavated using power tools. The boring was drilled with hollow stem drilling machine. The approximate location of the

exploratory test holes are shown on the enclosed Geologic Map & Site Plan; Drawing No. 1. Continuous logs of the subsurface conditions, as encountered in the test pits, were recorded during the field work and are presented on Figure Nos. I-1 through I-4 within this Appendix. These figures also show the number and approximate depths of each of the recovered soil and rock samples. With hollow stem drilling, relatively undisturbed samples were obtained by driving a steel sampler with successive drops of a 140-pound sampling hammer free-falling a vertical distance of about 30 inches. In the test pits, relatively undisturbed samples of the subsurface materials were obtained by driving successive drops of a 50-pound metal weight free-falling a vertical distance of about 30 inches. The relatively

undisturbed soil and bedrock samples were retained in brass liner rings 2.5 inches in diameter and 1.0 inch in height. Field investigation for this project was performed on March 4, 2010. The material excavated from the test pits was placed back and compacted upon completion of the field work. Such material may settle. The owner should periodically inspect these areas and notify this office if the settlement creates a hazard to persons or property.

APPLIED EARTH SCIENCES 11-323-22

Date: March 21, 2011 Project No: 11-323-22

Fi ure No. I-1

EXPLORATORY TEST PIT NO. 1

PROJECT LOCATION: 701 Rochedale Way, LA DATE LOGGED: March 4, 2011 >IL-1o '.... 0 I W LLI CI W ,. Z/5 Co z CI: CI Ce m 7 " I''. o uj 0 Cr) sr _, 2 p eL El D la, 1.._ I 1-_0
>_ CC "-. LI

PROJECT TYPE: New SFR LOGGED BY: R. Crook, CEG 924

(f)

o 112

5w

>.

F-

0 I'L

20

--/ co

0 7 W

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION (USCS)

11

Residual Soil (Qrs)

0' - 1.5': Residual Soil, fine sand (SM), silty, clayey with scattered pebbles, brown, dense, porous, fine roots.

109

16

N80E 45 S approx

Sandstone 1.5' - 3.75': sandstone, fine-grained, massive with 10" thick (Kcg) conglomerate bed, orange brown, moderately hard, well-indurated, unfractured, moderately weathered. Approximate 45 degree south dip

Total Depth 3.75 Feet. No groundwater, no caving. Test Pit backfilled to surface level after logging.

Scale 1"=1'

1 1

I-

. .... . _ . _ _ 0rS _, _ _ -r..

G

..

kc , .

. _

- ,

4---- --- .

Applied Earth Sciences

Date: March 21, 2011 Project No: 11-323-22

Fig ure No. 1-2

EXPLORATORY TEST PIT NO. 2

PROJECT LOCATION: 701 Rochedale Way, LA DATE LOGGED: March 4, 2011 >;,-,z, p re
2
C15 IT:

PROJECT TYPE: New SFR LOGGED BY: R. Crook, CEG 924

CI

C 1-

w g -

LLI CI-

r1 L=1 2 }

rz

'-` CI) }

0
105

5 Ix
7

E H

cn

1.-

20

0 0
-I
03

LI-

o "-_1 E o D

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION (USCS)

0' - 1': Residual Soil, fine sand (SM), silty, clayey with scattered pebbles, brown, slightly to medium dense, porous, fine roots.

(9 Residual Soil (Qrs)

L1J

Sandstone 1' - 5.5': sandstone, fine-grained, with pods of gravel, red-brown, (Kcg) slightly to moderately hard, massive, well-indurated, slightly fractured, moderately to highly weathered.

Total Depth 5.5 Feet. No groundwater, no caving. Test Pit backfilled to surface level after logging.

Scale 1"=2'
-r-I I !
7 1

1n1 ' ,

- f

II

-=

a.

. .
r- .0

-, .,... ,

-,-- II i

. 1

_ .,

-
1

. . - -a

. .,
a lo &

___I I , --L

1 __

a 0 0 d

---I

)1 :

4
,

, ,
Applied Earth Sciences

Date: March 21, 2011 Project No: 11-323-22

Fi ure No. 1-3

EXPLORATORY BORING NO. 1

PROJECT LOCATION: 701 Rochedale Way, LA DATE LOGGED: March 4, 2011 >, . 1.:_ ce 10 ---- m w w L.L, 0 Q 0_ i_ &5 3 z ir 121WmF.. 0 Iuj o d m .. (.0 0 _1 2 0 I0a 0 = >. IL CI) } I 0 LL L11 5 cc a I cc 0 m
0

PROJECT TYPE: New SFR LOGGED BY: R. Crook, CEG 924

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION (USCS)

20

114

Residual Soil (Qrs)

0' - 2.5': Residual Soil, fine sand (SM), silty, clayey with scattered pebbles, brown to dark brown, moist, moderately dense.

Sandstone 2.5' - 5': sandstone, fine-grained, massive, orange brown, hard, well(Kcg) indurated, unfractured, too hard to sample.

Total Depth 5 Feet. No groundwater, no caving. Boring backfilled to surface level after logging.

Scale 1"=2' ,
1

I T-t-'
l 1
1

---F +

,--,

ll
.

. n '- . to " .:. 6

I 1

I I

I ----
r

--t . _

Applied Earth Sciences

-17APPENDIX II LABORATORY TESTING PROCEDURES MOISTURE DENSITY The moisture-density information provides a summary of soil consistency for each stratum and can also provide a correlation between soils found on this site and other nearby sites. The dry unit weight and field moisture content were determined for each undisturbed sample, and the results are shown on the log of exploratory borings.

DIRECT SHEAR TESTS After the samples are pre-soaked overnight under initial confining pressure, a range of normal stresses are applied vertically, and the shear strengths are progressively determined under each load in order to determine the internal angle of friction and the cohesion of the sample. After application of each of the confining

pressures, and before the shearing tests, sufficient amount of time is allowed for any excess pore pressure to dissipate. During the course of shear test, the sample is

allowed to undergo volume change under a given confining pressure. Under each load, the direct shear tests are continued until the ultimate strength or about 3 percent strain (whichever is lower) is reached. The sample is then allowed to relax to remove the major portion of the viscous component of the shear strength. It should be noted that due to normal disturbance during sampling and laboratory extruding, the measured bedrock strengths are normally significantly lower than the actual values.

CONSOLIDATION The apparatus used for the consolidation tests is designed to receive the undisturbed 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 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. Undisturbed specimens were tested at the field and added water conditions. The test results are shown on Figure No. II-2 within this Appendix.

APPLIED EARTH SCIENCES 11-323-22

NORMAL STRESS IN KIPS/SQUARE FOOT

7

SHEAR STRENGTH IN KIPS/SQUARE FOOT

TP-1 @ 5' (Bedrock) TP-1 @ 5' (Reshear)

= 37 d = 109 pcf M = 16 % C = 500 psf = 130 pcf M = 20 %

S

= 25 d = 109 pcf M = 16 % psf = 130 pcf M = 20 % C = 180

S

0 0

4 WATER ADDED

FIELD MOISTURE

DIRECT SHEAR TESTS

JOB NAME: 701 Rochedale Way, Los Angeles, CA
C M

JOB NO. 11-323-22 FIGURE NO. II-1

APPLIED EARTH SCIENCES GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS

PRESSURE IN KIPS/SQUARE FOOT

0.2 0.5 1 2 5
10

20

-1 0

--------.. 11.....-n

IP

TP-1 @ 5'

LTJ I W -..1 4 a.

< co

Li... 5

0 I Z W66 CL W 0_ 7

10

11

12

0 FIELD MOISTURE

WATER ADDED

SWELL-CONSOLIDATION TESTS
JOB NAME: 701 Rochedale Way, Los Angeles, CA JOB NO. 11-323-22 FIGURE NO. 11-2
APPLIED EARTH SCIENCES GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS