GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PRELIMINARY DESIGN PHASE

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION

PRELIMINARY DESIGN PHASE

FOR

MONTEREY COUNTY NEW JUVENILE HALL SALINAS, CALIFORNIA

PREPARED FOR

DLR GROUP, INC. PROJECT NO. 14-122-M

PREPARED BY

BUTANO GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING, INC. NOVEMBER 2014

B U T A N O G E O T E C H N I C A L E N G I N E E R I N G , I N C . 231 GREEN VALLEY ROAD, SUITE E, FREEDOM, CALIFORNIA 95019 PHONE: 831.724.2612

WWW.BUTANOGEOTECH.COM

November 21, 2014 Project No. 14-122-M

DLR Group, Inc. 1050 20th Street, Suite 250 Sacramento, CA 95811 ATTENTION: Darrell Stelling SUBJECT: GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION – PRELIMINARY DESIGN

PHASE Proposed New Juvenile Hall Facility 1414 Natividad Road

Salinas, California Dear Mr. Stelling: In accordance with your authorization, we have completed a geotechnical investigation for the subject project. This report summarizes the findings, conclusions, and recommendations from our field exploration, laboratory testing, and engineering analysis. It is a pleasure being associated with you on this project. If you have any questions, or if we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our office. Sincerely, BUTANO GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING, INC. Greg Bloom, PE, GE Principal Engineer R.C.E. 58819, G.E. 2691 Expires 6/30/13 Appendices Appendix A Figures and Standard Details Appendix B Field Exploration Program Appendix C Laboratory Testing Program Appendix D Percolation Testing Appendix E Corrosion Analysis Distribution: (6) Addressee

Geotechnical Investigation – Design Phase November 21, 2014 County of Monterey New Juvenile Hall Project No. 14-122-M Salinas, CA

1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our geotechnical investigation for the proposed new Monterey County Juvenile Hall (Project) at 1414 Natividad Road in Salinas, Monterey County, California. The purpose of our investigation is to provide information regarding the surface and subsurface soil conditions and provide geotechnical recommendations for the design and construction of the proposed Project. Conclusions and recommendations related to site grading, foundations, retaining walls, pavement design, corrosion protection and drainage are presented herein. This work included site reconnaissance, subsurface exploration, soil sampling, laboratory testing, engineering analyses and preparation of this report. The scope of services for this investigation is outlined in our agreement dated May 29, 2014. The recommendations contained in this report are subject to the limitations presented in Section 8.0 of this report. The Association of Engineering Firms Practicing the Geosciences has produced a pamphlet for your information titled Important Information About Your Geotechnical Report. This pamphlet has been included with the copies of your report.

2.0 FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING PROGRAMS Our field exploration program included drilling, logging, and interval sampling of 22 truck mounted solid stem auger borings advanced on September 10, September 11, and October 10, 2014. The borings were advanced to depths ranging from 3 to 61½ feet below existing grade. Details of the field exploration program, including the Boring Logs, Figures B-4 through B-25, are presented in Appendix B. Representative samples obtained during the field investigation were taken to the laboratory for testing to determine physical and engineering properties. Details of the laboratory testing program are presented in Appendix C. Test results are presented on the Boring Logs and in Appendix C. Samples for the corrosion analysis were also collected during the subsurface exploration program. The collected corrosion samples were shipped directly to JDH Corrosion Consultants, Inc. for analysis. The results of their analysis are presented in Appendix E.


3.0 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3.1 Location

The Project is located east of Highway 101 in Salinas, California. The site location is shown on the Site Location Plan, Appendix B, Figure B-1.

3.2 Surface Conditions

The proposed Project area is located within the existing Juvenile Hall property. The property is bounded by Natividad Road to the west, Chaparral Street to the south, the Monterey County Jail to the west, and an access road to the north. The Project area currently has existing one-story structures (permanent and modular), a parking area, a grass field and gravel track, and associated hardscape and landscape. The Project area has open space on the southern and western portions of the Project. There is an existing north south flowing drainage on the north eastern portion of the project that has been in-filled in the center of the Project and routed under the existing grass field and track. There are scattered trees around the site. The site generally slopes down to the east from Natividad Road at gentle gradients. The grade slopes up to a service road after a man-made drainage ditch on the eastern portion of the Project. Chaparral Street dips down then up following the same drainage valley seen on the north of the Project. The rest of Chaparral is relatively level.

3.3 Subsurface Conditions

A total of 22 borings were advanced ranging in depth from 3 to 61 ½ feet below existing grade. The Project site is mapped as being underlain by older alluvium. Locally, these native deposits consist of lean clay, sandy lean clay, fat clay, sandy fat clay, clayey sand, sandy silt and silty sand. The clays encountered were generally stiff to hard and the sands were medium dense to very dense.


Prior to development of the existing juvenile hall facility a small creek flowed through the Project site from the north to the south. The creek can be seen north of the site. The creek is approximately 65 to 80 feet wide from bank to bank and the base of the stream is approximately 10 to 20 feet below the bank. A large grading project was performed for the existing facility including minor cuts on the western side of the site and infilling of the creek. The cuts were up to 5 feet thick and the fills within the creek are up to 20 feet thick. A 48 inch diameter concrete storm drain was installed to convey water through the site. A map showing the extent of the cuts and fills is depicted in Appendix B, Figure B-26. Cross-sections showing the profile of the historic creek and its infilling are shown in Appendix B, Figures B-27 through B-29. The fill consists of sandy lean clay, clayey sand, and silty sand. In general, the fill consisted of soil with only 1 boring encountering any debris. The density of the fill soil was inconsistent ranging from loose and soft to very dense and hard. Groundwater was encountered within our deeper (61½ foot) boring. The depth to groundwater recorded was 41 feet below existing grade. Complete soil profiles are presented on the Boring Logs, Appendix B, Figures B-4 through B-17. The boring locations are shown on the Boring Location Plan, Figure B-2.

4.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

Based on our discussions with the client the Project will consist of constructing a new campus in 2 phases. The first phase will consist of 5 new structures and parking facilities in the south and eastern portions of the site. The second phase will consist of removing the center core of the facility and constructing 2 new buildings on the western side. The center of the site will consist of an outdoor athletic facility.

5.0 GEOTECHNICAL HAZARDS 5.1 General

In our opinion the geotechnical hazards that could potentially affect the proposed project are:

• Fault surface rupture

• Intense seismic shaking • Collateral seismic hazards


• Landslide • Erosion 5.2 Fault Surface Rupture

The site lies outside of the State of California, Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. The site is approximately 18 Km from the San Andreas fault. No fault traces are mapped on the subject property. It is our opinion that the potential for fault surface rupture to affect the site and/or to damage the proposed addition is low.

5.3 Intense Seismic Shaking

Intense seismic shaking may occur at the site during the design lifetime of the proposed structure from an earthquake along one of the local fault systems. Generally, the intensity of shaking will increase the closer the site is to the epicenter of an earthquake, however, seismic shaking is a complex phenomenon and may be modified by local topography and soil conditions. The transmission of earthquake vibrations from the ground into the structure may cause structural damage.

Monterey County has adopted the seismic provisions set forth in the California Building Code to address seismic shaking. The seismic provisions in the CBC are minimum load requirements for the seismic design for the proposed structure. The provisions set forth in the CBC will not prevent structural and nonstructural damage from direct fault ground surface rupture, coseismic ground cracking, liquefaction and lateral spreading, seismically induced differential compaction, seismically induced landsliding, or seismically induced inundation.

Table 1 has been constructed based on the 2013 CBC requirements for the seismic design of the proposed structure. The Site Class has been determined based on our field investigation and laboratory testing.

Table 1. Seismic Design Parameters


SS

S1

Site

Class Fa

Fv SMS SM1 SDS SD1 Occupancy

Category Seismic Design

Category

1.500 0.600 D 1.0 1.5 1.500 0.900 1.000 0.600 II D


5.4 Collateral Seismic Hazards

In addition to intense seismic shaking, other seismic hazards that may have an adverse effect to the site and/or the structure are: coseismic ground cracking, seismically induced liquefaction and lateral spreading, seismically induced differential compaction, seismically induced landsliding, and seismically induced inundation (tsunami and seiche). Due to the location of the proposed development away from earthquake faults and the strength of the underlying geologic units, the potential for collateral seismic hazards to affect the site and/or to damage the proposed addition is low.

5.5 Landslide

Landslide is a general term referring to the downslope movement of soil and/or rock en masse, under the influence of gravity. The area of proposed expansion is relatively flat with very gentle gradients to the south. Due to the flat terrain and the strength of the underlying geologic units and the lack of previous landsliding in the general area, the potential for landsliding to affect the site and/or to damage the proposed addition is low.

5.6 Erosion

Erosion is the general process where surficial earth materials are loosened, dissolved or worn away and simultaneously moved from one place to another by water or wind. The area of proposed Project has been previously graded and has gentle gradients. No natural drainage courses currently cross the property on its surface. The currently proposed development does not include significant changes to the surface gradients. Given that the site is developed following our recommendations and mandated erosion control guidelines, the potential for erosion to affect the site is low.

6.0 DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

Based on our field investigation, and discussion with the owner it is proposed that the Project will consist of demolishing the existing facility in phases and constructing eight new buildings and a parking area. The in-situ foundation zone soils consist of silty sand, sandy lean clays, and lean and fat clays. The clays are stiff to very stiff and the silty sand is medium dense to dense. Expansion Index tests were performed on multiple bulk samples within the foundation


zone. The results vary between 19 and 69 indicating an expansion potential varying from low to medium. The infilled creek has been mapped by our firm. The mapping is based on a review of a historical topographic map and a review of our exploratory borings. Although it appears that some of the material has been compacted the blow counts within the fill are highly variable and we do not have any engineering records of its placement. There are also minor fill wedges located adjacent to Chaparrel Road in the proposed parking area. Our firm performed percolation tests at 4 locations within the Project site based on directions from the project civil engineer. The results of the percolation tests are attached in Appendix D.

7.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

7.1 General

Based on the results of our field investigation, laboratory testing, and engineering analysis it is our opinion that from the geotechnical standpoint, the subject site will be suitable for the proposed construction. The site is underlain by potentially expansive soil within the foundation zone in areas that consist of in-situ soil. This report provides two detailed options to mitigate the heave. This includes a structural slab-on-grade (no soil improvement) or soil improvement to alter the swelling characteristics of the soil and found the structure on a conventional shallow foundation with non-structural slab-on-grade floors. Structures that are to be placed within the infilled creek and are underlain by non-engineered fill will either need to be supported on a deep foundation or shallow foundations founded on engineered fill. The existing volume of non-engineered fill that would require mitigation is substantial if a grading option is chosen. A corrosion analysis was performed for this project. The results and recommendations of the analysis are presented in Appendix E.

7.2 Site Grading 7.2.1 Site Clearing


The site should be cleared of loose soil, organics, and debris within the project limits.

7.2.2 Preparation of On-Site Soils

General Areas that reveal non-expansive soil should be over-excavated through any non-engineered fill, moisture conditioned, and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction. All fill should be compacted by mechanical means in uniform horizontal loose lifts not exceeding 8 inches in thickness. The relative compaction and required moisture content shall be based on the maximum dry density and optimum moisture content obtained in accordance with ASTM D1557. Portions of the on-site soil may be used as engineered fill once the majority of deleterious material is removed. The portion of on-site fill that can be used depends on the foundation option chosen, see options below. All soils, both existing on-site and imported, to be used as fill, should contain less than 3 percent organics, be well mixed, and be free of debris and cobbles over 2½ inches in maximum dimension. The material should be verified by a representative of Butano Geotechnical Engineering, Inc. in the field during grading operations. The on-site expansive clayey soil may not be used as engineered fill unless it is chemically altered so it has a low expansion potential or as required by option 1.

Imported fill material should be approved by a representative of Butano Geotechnical Engineering, Inc. prior to importing. Imported fill should be primarily granular with no material greater than 2½ inches in diameter and no more than 20 percent of the material passing the #200 sieve. The fines fraction of the fill should not consist of expansive material. The Geotechnical Engineer should be notified not less than 5 working days in advance of placing any fill or base course material proposed for import. Each proposed source of import material should be sampled, tested, and approved by the Geotechnical Engineer prior to delivery of any soils imported for use on the site.


Any surface or subsurface obstruction, or questionable material encountered during grading, should be brought immediately to the attention of the Geotechnical Engineer for proper processing as required.

Option 1-Post Tensioned Slab-On-Grade

For this option only all on-site soils including lean and fat clay may be used as engineered fill per section 7.2.2-General. Lean and fat clay used during option 1 as engineered fill should be compacted with heavy vibratory equipment to 86 to 88 percent relative compaction with moisture content between 3 to 5 percent over optimum. Option 2-Conventional Shallow Foundation Conventional shallow foundations and non-structural slab-on-grades should be founded on a minimum of 24 inches of non-expansive engineered fill per section 7.2.2-General. The non-expansive fill may consist of imported soil, on-site non-expansive soil, or chemically altered on-site soil. The non-expansive fill should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction. Chemically altering the soil may consist of lime treating the soil to minimize its swell potential. If this option is chosen, testing of the soil to determine the appropriate mix ratio and ensure that the soil reacts is required. In areas where the creek has been infilled, the non-engineered fill should be over-excavated down to in-situ soil. Based on our exploratory borings the majority of the fill consists of silty sand, clayey sand, and sandy lean clay. This material may be re-used as engineered fill following section 7.2.2-General. Any potentially expansive soil encountered during grading may require chemical treatment for re-use, or be off-hauled.

Option 3- Slab-on-Grades (non-structural) Exterior slab-on-grades should be founded on a minimum of 24 inches of either chemically altered soil (lime treatment), non-expansive on-site soil, or imported engineered fill per section 7.2.2-General. Exterior slab-on-grades should be physically separated from the structure.


Paved Areas The upper 6 inches of subgrade and aggregate baserock below paved areas should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent relative compaction. This should extend a minimum of 2 feet laterally of all paved areas.

7.2.3 Cut and Fill Slopes

Significant permanent cut and fill slopes are not planned for this project.

7.2.4 Excavating Conditions

The on-site soil may be excavated and drilled with standard earthwork equipment.

7.2.5 Surface Drainage

Positive drainage should be maintained away from the structures at a minimum gradient of 5 percent for 10 feet. Roof and driveway drainage should be collected into solid plastic pipe and released at approved locations to minimize erosion.

7.2.6 Utility Trenches

Bedding material should consist of sand with a Sand Equivalent not less than 30 which may then be jetted.

The on-site expansive native soils may not be utilized for trench backfill per section 7.2.2 unless chemically altered to reduce its expansion potential. Imported fill should be free of organic material and rocks over 2.5 inches in diameter.

If sand is used, a 3 foot concrete plug should be placed in each trench where it passes under the exterior footings. Backfill of all exterior and interior trenches should be placed in thin lifts not to exceed 8 inches and mechanically compacted to achieve a relative compaction of not less than 95 percent in paved areas and 90 percent in


other areas per ASTM D1557. Care should be taken not to damage utility lines.

Utility trenches that are parallel to the sides of a building should be placed so that they do not extend below a line sloping down and away at an inclination of 2:1 H:V from the bottom outside edge of all footings.

Trenches should be capped with 1 1/2 feet of relatively impermeable material. Import material must be approved by the Geotechnical Engineer prior to its use.

Trenches must be shored as required by the local regulatory agency, the State of California Division of Industrial Safety Construction Safety Orders, and Federal OSHA requirements.

7.3 Foundations

Three options for supporting the proposed Project are provided below. Additional options can be provided if desired. Option 2 may only be used in the infilled creek area if the existing non-engineered fill is over-excavated and replaced as engineered fill per section 7.2.2. 7.3.1 Option 1 - Post-Tensioned Slab-on-Grade Foundation

This option consists of constructing a post- tensioned slab-on-grade that is designed to mitigate heave potential based on its rigidity. Post-tensioned slabs should be designed in accordance with the latest recommendations of the Post-Tensioning Institute using the following criteria. a. Depth to constant moisture= 15 feet from existing grade b. Effective Plasticity Index=50 c. Allowable Bearing Capacity=3,500 psf d. em=9.0 for center lift and 4.9 for edge lift e. ym=0.54 for center lift and 0.55 for edge lift

Where moisture sensitive floor coverings are anticipated or vapor transmission may be a problem, a waterproof membrane (Stegowrap 15 mil or equivalent) should be placed directly below the floor slab in order to reduce moisture condensation under the floor coverings. Place a six inch layer of Class II baserock below the vapor barrier, and a 4 inch minimum layer of ¾ inch drainrock below the baserock to act as a capillary break.


Footing excavations must be checked by the Geotechnical Engineer before steel is placed and concrete is poured. See section 7.2.2 for Option 1 fill requirements.

7.3.2 Option 2 - Conventional Shallow Foundations

Conventional shallow foundations may be used if the subgrade soil is altered to reduce its swell potential. Under this option the base of the foundation and slab-on-grade should be underlain by a minimum of 24 inches of non-expansive soil. The 24 inches may consists of imported engineered fill, on-site non-expansive soil, or on-site soil that has been chemically altered (lime treated) to mitigate its swell potential. This should extend a minimum of 2 feet laterally of the foundations. Footing widths should be based on the allowable bearing value but not less than 15 inches. The minimum recommended depth of embedment is 12 inches. Embedment depths should not be allowed to be affected adversely, such as through erosion, softening, digging, etc. Should local building codes require deeper embedment of the footings or wider footings, the local codes must apply.

The allowable bearing capacity used should not exceed 3,500 psf for footings bearing on engineered fill. The allowable bearing capacity may be increased by one-third in the case of short duration loads, such as those induced by wind or seismic forces. In the event that footings are founded in structural fill consisting of imported materials, the allowable bearing capacities will depend on the type of these materials and should be re-evaluated.

Friction coefficient - 0.30, between the engineered fill and rough concrete. A passive resistance of 250 pcf may be assumed below a depth of 12 inches. Where both friction and the passive resistance are utilized for sliding resistance, either of the values indicated should be reduced by one-third. Where moisture sensitive floor coverings are anticipated or vapor transmission may be a problem, a waterproof membrane (Stegowrap 15 mil or equivalent) should be placed directly below the floor slab in order to reduce moisture condensation under the floor coverings. Place a six inch layer of Class II baserock below the vapor barrier, and a 4 inch minimum layer of ¾ inch drainrock below the baserock to act as a capillary break.


Footing excavations must be checked by the Geotechnical Engineer before steel is placed and concrete is poured. See section 7.2.2 for Option 2 engineered fill requirements.

7.3.3 Option 3 - Concrete Slabs-on-Grade (non-structural)

We recommend that concrete slab-on-grades be founded on a minimum of 24 inches of either non-expansive engineered fill or chemically altered (lime treated) in-situ soil per section 7.2.2.

The subgrade should be proof-rolled just prior to construction to provide a firm, relatively unyielding surface, especially if the surface has been loosened by the passage of construction traffic. Where moisture sensitive floor coverings are anticipated or vapor transmission may be a problem, a waterproof membrane (Stegowrap 15 mil or equivalent) should be placed directly below the floor slab in order to reduce moisture condensation under the floor coverings. Place a six inch layer of Class II baserock below the vapor barrier, and a 4 inch minimum layer of ¾ inch drainrock below the baserock to act as a capillary break. See section 7.2.2 for Option 3 engineered fill requirements.

7.3.4 Option 4- Pier and Grade Beam Foundation (Infilled Creek Areas)

This option may be used to support structures located within the infilled creek if it is decided to not over-excavate the non-engineered fill and replace it with engineered fill. All slab-on-grades located on non-engineered fill should be fully supported. It should be assumed that the non-engineered fill imposes a negative skin friction upon any pier of 500 psf.

A pier and grade beam foundation may be used to support improvements. The drilled piers should be a minimum of 18 inches in diameter and have a minimum embedment depth of 6 feet below any non-engineered fill. Shafts should be spaced no closer than 3 diameters center to center. An allowable skin friction of 500 psf may be assumed below the non-


engineered fill. The non-engineered fill should be ignored for design purposes. A 1/3 increase may be assumed for short term loading. An allowable passive resistance of 150 psf/ft and 300 psf/ft over two pier diameters may be assumed within the non-engineered fill and in-situ soil, respectively. Passive resistance should not begin until below the depth of the non-engineered fill. The drilled excavations for the cast-in-place concrete shafts should be clean, dry and free of debris or loose soil. The drilled excavations should not deviate more than 1 percent from vertical. For drilled, cast-in-place concrete shaft depths in excess of 8 feet, concrete should be placed via a tremie. The end of the tube must remain embedded a minimum of 4 feet into the concrete at all times.

All shaft construction must be observed and approved by the Geotechnical Engineer. Any shafts constructed without the full knowledge and continuous observation of Butano Geotechnical Engineering, Inc. will render the recommendations of this report invalid.

7.3.5 Settlements

Total and differential settlements beneath the proposed retaining wall are expected to be within tolerable limits under static conditions. Vertical movements are not expected to exceed 1 inch. Differential movements are expected to be within the normal range (½ inch) for the anticipated loads.

7.5 Plan Review

The recommendations presented in this report are based on preliminary design information for the proposed project and on the findings of our geotechnical investigation. When completed, the Grading Plans, Foundation Plans and design loads should be reviewed by Butano Geotechnical Engineering, Inc. prior to submitting the plans and contract bidding. Additional field exploration and laboratory testing may be required upon review of the final project design plans.

7.6 Observation and Testing

Field observation and testing must be provided by a representative of Butano Geotechnical Engineering, Inc. to enable them to form an opinion regarding the adequacy of the site preparation, the adequacy of fill materials, and the extent to which the earthwork is performed in accordance with the geotechnical conditions


present, the requirements of the regulating agencies, the project specifications, and the recommendations presented in this report. Any earthwork performed in connection with the subject project without the full knowledge of, and not under the direct observation of Butano Geotechnical Engineering, Inc., will render the recommendations of this report invalid.

Butano Geotechnical Engineering, Inc. should be notified at least 5 working days prior to any site clearing or other earthwork operations on the subject project in order to observe the stripping and disposal of unsuitable materials and to ensure coordination with the grading contractor. During this period, a preconstruction meeting should be held on the site to discuss project specifications, observation and testing requirements and responsibilities, and scheduling.

8.0 LIMITATIONS

The recommendations contained in this report are based on our field explorations, laboratory testing, and our understanding of the proposed construction. The subsurface data used in the preparation of this report was obtained from the borings drilled during our field investigation. Variation in soil, geologic, and groundwater conditions can vary significantly between sample locations. As in most projects, conditions revealed during construction excavation may be at variance with preliminary findings. If this occurs, the changed conditions must be evaluated by the Project Geotechnical Engineer and the Geologist, and revised recommendations be provided as required. In addition, if the scope of the proposed construction changes from the described in this report, our firm should also be notified. Our investigation was performed in accordance with the usual and current standards of the profession, as they relate to this and similar localities. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is provided as to the conclusions and professional advice presented in this report. This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the Owner, or of his Representative, to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the Architect and Engineer for the project and incorporated into the plans, and that it is ensured that the Contractor and Subcontractors implement such recommendations in the field. The use of information contained in this report for bidding purposes should be done at the Contractor’s option and risk. This firm does not practice or consult in the field of safety engineering. We do not direct the Contractor's operations, and we are not responsible for other than our own


personnel on the site; therefore, the safety of others is the responsibility of the Contractor. The Contractor should notify the Owner if he considers any of the recommended actions presented herein to be unsafe. The findings of this report are considered valid as of the present date. However, changes in the conditions of a site can occur with the passage of time, whether they be due to natural events or to human activities on this or adjacent sites. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate codes and standards may occur, whether they result from legislation or the broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, this report may become invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside our control. Therefore, this report is subject to review and revision as changed conditions are identified. The scope of our services mutually agreed upon did not include any environmental assessment or study for the presence of hazardous to toxic materials in the soil, surface water, or air, on or below or around the site. Butano Geotechnical Engineering, Inc. is not a mold prevention consultant; none of our services performed in connection with the proposed project are for the purpose of mold prevention. Proper implementation of the recommendations conveyed in our reports will not itself be sufficient to prevent mold from growing in or on the structures involved.

REFERENCES

ASTM International (2006). Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Section Four,

Construction. Volume 4.08, Soil and Rock (I): D 430 - D 5611. ASTM International (2006). Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Section Four,

Construction. Volume 4.09, Soil and Rock (II): D 5714 - Latest. California Building Code (2013). Geologic Map of the Monterey Peninsula and Vicinity by Thomas W. Dibblee, Jr., 1999, Map #DF-71

APPENDIX A FIGURES AND STANDARD DETAILS

Surcharge Pressure Diagram Figure A-1

REFERENCE: NAVFAC Design Manual 7.2

Figure 11, Page 7.2-74

FIGURE

A-1

BUTANO

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING, INC.

SURCHARGE PRESSURE DIAGRAM

APPENDIX B

FIELD EXPLORATION PROGRAM

Field Exploration Procedures Page B-1

Site Location Plan Figure B-1

Boring Site Plan Figure B-2 Key to the Logs Figure B-3

Logs of the Borings Figures B-4 through B-25 Existing Cut/Fill Thickness Figure B-26 Cross-Sections Figures B-27 through B-29

Geotechnical Investigation – Design Phase November 21, 2014 Monterey County New Juvenile Hall Project No. 14-122-M Salinas, CA Page B-1

FIELD EXPLORATION PROCEDURES

Subsurface conditions were explored by advancing 22 borings below existing grade. All borings were advanced using a six inch solid stem truck mounted auger. The Key to The Logs and the Logs of the Borings are included in Appendix B, Figures B-3 through B-25. The approximate locations of the borings are shown on the Boring Site Plan, Figure B-2. The drill holes were located in the field by tape measurements from known landmarks. Their locations as shown are therefore within the accuracy of such measurement. The soils encountered in the borings were continuously logged in the field by a representative of Butano Geotechnical Engineering, Inc. Bulk and relatively undisturbed soil samples for identification and laboratory testing were obtained in the field. These soils were classified based on field observations and laboratory tests. The classification is in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (Figure B-3).

E

L

a

u

r

e

l

D

r

.

E

B

o

r

o

n

d

a

R

d

.

H

a

r

d

e

n

P

k

w

y

.

E

.

A

lv

in

D

r

.

N

a

t

i

v

i

d

a

d

R

d

C

o

n

s

t

i

t

u

t

i

o

n

B

l

v

d

.

N

. M

ain S

t.

N

D

a

v

is

R

d

.

N

.

M

a

in

S

t

.

S

h

e

r

w

o

o

d

D

r

.

N

.

S

a

n

b

o

r

n

R

d

.

W

i

l

l

i

a

m

s

R

d

.

E

B

o

r

o

n

d

a

R

d

.

N

a

n

t

u

c

k

e

t

B

lv

d

.

In

d

e

p

e

n

d

e

n

c

e

B

lv

d

.

N

a

tiv

id

a

d

R

d

.

E

l D

o

ra

d

o

D

r.

M

c

K

i

n

n

n

S

t

.

A

d

a

m

s

S

t

.

N

a

t

i

v

i

d

a

d

R

d

E

L

a

u

r

e

l

D

r

.

Medical Center Dr.

Monterey County S Jail Dr.

BUTANO


SITE LOCATION PLAN

Juvenile Hall

FIGURE

B-1

BUTANO


BORING SITE PLAN

Juvenile Hall

FIGURE

B-2

Scale: 1" = 100'

* Number of blows of 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches to drive a 2 inch O.D. (1 3/8 inch I.D.) split spoon (ASTM D-1586).

HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS

MH

CH

OH

Pt

SILTS AND CLAYS

Liquid limit less than 50

SILTS AND CLAYS

Liquid limit greater than 50

ML

CLFINE

GRAINED

SOILS

More than half of

the material is

smaller than the

No. 200 sieve

Organic silts and organic silty clays of low plasticity

FIGURE

B-3

BUTANO GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING, INC.

GRAIN SIZE LIMITS

BOULDERSCOBBLES

GRAVEL

COARSE FINE COARSE

Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines

GRAVELS

More than half of

the coarse fraction

is larger than the

No. 4 sieve

SANDS

More than half of

the coarse fraction

is smaller than the

No. 4 sieve

Well graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines

Poorly graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines

Inorganic silts and very fine sands, silty or clayey fine sands

or clayey silts with slight plasticity

Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly clays,

sandy clays, silty clays, lean clays

GP

KEY TO LOGS

SW

SP

SM

CLEAN GRAVELS

(Less than 5% fines)

GRAVEL

WITH FINES

CLEAN SANDS

(Less than 5% fines)

SAND

WITH FINES

GW

Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures, non-plastic fines

UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM

GROUP

SYMBOLPRIMARY DIVISIONS SECONDARY DIVISIONS

Well graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines

Poorly graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no

fines

SILT AND CLAY

Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomacaceous fine sandy or

silty soils, elastic silts

Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures, plastic finesSC

Peat and other highly organic soils

US STANDARD SIEVE SIZE

COARSE

GRAINED

SOILS

More than half of

the material is

larger than the

No. 200 sieve

GM

GC

Silty gravels, gravel-sand-silt mixtures, non-plastic fines

CONSISTENCY MOISTURE CONDITION

BLOWS/FT*SILT AND CLAY

OL

FINE MEDIUM

SAND

Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays

Organic clays of medium to high plasticity, organic silts

SAND AND GRAVEL

OVER 50

VERY LOOSE

BLOWS/FT*

0 - 4

RELATIVE DENSITY

DRY

S

A

N

DSATURATEDHARD

0 - 2

VERY DENSE

LOOSE 4 - 10

10 - 30

30 - 50

OVER 32

SOFT

FIRMMEDIUM DENSE

VERY SOFT

DENSE STIFF

VERY STIFF

MOIST

SATURATED

DRY

DAMP

WET

2 - 4

4 - 8

8 - 16

16 - 32

C

L

A

Y

No. 200 No. 40 No. 10 No. 4 3/4 in. 3 in. 12 in.

Project No.: Boring:

Project: Location:

Elevation:

Date: Method of Drilling:

Logged By:

Sw

ell

(psf

)

26 13 101.7 14.9 1900

CH

25 21 11.2

9.8

5

CL 51 19 96.2 12.5

25 21 11.7

10

40 15 98.5 11.9

15

16 13 19.0

20

48 44 87.5 27.8

25

30

35

FIGURE

B-4

BUTANO GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING, INC.

Boring terminated at 21 1/2 feet.

No groundwater encountered.

Tan fat CLAY with calcification, stiff to very stiff, moist

Tan sandy lean CLAY, very stiff, moist

N6

0

Dry

Den

sity

(p

cf)

Mo

istu

re C

on

ten

t (%

)

Ex

pan

sio

n I

nd

ex

Un

con

fin

ed C

om

p.

(psf

)

Par

ticl

e S

ize

September 10, 2014 6 inch diameter solid stem truck

PE mounted auger

Other Tests

Dep

th (

ft.)

So

il T

yp

e

Un

dis

turb

ed

Bu

lk

Description

Blo

ws

/ F

oo

t

LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING

14-122-M B1

Monterey County Juvenile Hall

2" Ring

Sample

2.5" Ring

Sample

Bulk

Sample

Terzaghi Split

Spoon Sample

Static Water

Table


Project: Location:

Elevation:


Logged By:

Sw

ell

(psf

)

CL

49 23 109.4 10.4

hard, damp

45 41 17.9

5

SC 67 24 113.7 5.5

CL 29 25 17.1

10

46 22 102.5 14.1

23 16 18.4

15

SC Brown clayey SAND, medium dense, moist 42 26 118.1 9.6

SM

20

50/5" 114.1 5.2

25

30

35


14-122-M B2


Dep

th (

ft.)

So

il T

yp

e

Un

dis

turb

ed

Bu

lk

Description

Blo

ws

/ F

oo

t

Par

ticl

e S

ize


PE mounted auger

Other Tests

Brown sandy lean CLAY, very stiff, moist

N6

0

Dry

Den

sity

(p

cf)

Mo

istu

re C

on

ten

t (%

)

Ex

pan

sio

n I

nd

ex

Un

con

fin

ed C

om

p.

(psf

)

Clayey SAND, medium dense

Tan lean CLAY with fine grained sand, stiff, moist

decreasing sand

Brown silty SAND with gravel up to 1/2" diameter,

very dense, damp



BUTANO GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING, INC. FIGURE

B-5

2" Ring

Sample

2.5" Ring

Sample

Bulk

Sample

Terzaghi Split

Spoon Sample

Static Water

Table


Project: Location:

Elevation:


Logged By:

Sw

ell

(psf

)

CH 44 21 104.8 16.7 49 3100

34 31 14.2

5

50/6" 113.2 14.2

34 31 18.3

10

CL 43 16 101.3 9.7

15

15 12 13.9

20

22 18 20.4

25

30

35



14-122-M B3


PE mounted auger

Other Tests

Dep

th (

ft.)

So

il T

yp

e

Un

dis

turb

ed

Bu

lk

Description

Blo

ws

/ F

oo

t

N6

0

Dry

Den

sity

(p

cf)

Mo

istu

re C

on

ten

t (%

)

Ex

pan

sio

n I

nd

ex

Un

con

fin

ed C

om

p.

(psf

)

Par

ticl

e S

ize

Light brown fat CLAY with sand, very stiff, moist

Tan, with white calcium

Tan SANDY LEAN CLAY, very stiff, slightly damp,

fine grained, moist




B-6

2" Ring

Sample

2.5" Ring

Sample

Bulk

Sample

Terzaghi Split

Spoon Sample

Static Water

Table


Project: Location:

Elevation:


Logged By:

Sw

ell

(psf

)

CL 50/6" 106.1 9.1

coarse grained

40 36 6.2

5 45 16 119.8 11.8 7225

CL 25 21 16.6

10

39 19 98.5 21.2

15

36 18 97.5 22.4

20

25 25 15.5

25

30

35

Blo

ws

/ F

oo

t


14-122-M B4



PE mounted auger

Other Tests

Dep

th (

ft.)

So

il T

yp

e

Un

dis

turb

ed

Bu

lk

Description

N6

0

Dry

Den

sity

(p

cf)

Mo

istu

re C

on

ten

t (%

)

Ex

pan

sio

n I

nd

ex

Un

con

fin

ed C

om

p.

(psf

)

Par

ticl

e S

ize

Brown sandy lean CLAY, very stiff, slightly damp,

increasing clay

Light brown sandy lean CLAY, very stiff, moist

seam of water @ 12 feet


Perched groundwater encountered at a depth of 12 feet.


B-7

2" Ring

Sample

2.5" Ring

Sample

Bulk

Sample

Terzaghi Split

Spoon Sample

Static Water

Table


Project: Location:

Elevation:


Logged By:

Sw

ell

(psf

)

CL 47 23 104.0 8.3

34 31 11.1

SC

5

46 22 104.6 8.3

SC

13 10 3.4

10

15 12 3.9

15

26 22 4.7

20

17 13 5.8

25

30

35



14-122-M B5


PE mounted auger

Other Tests

Dep

th (

ft.)

So

il T

yp

e

Un

dis

turb

ed

Bu

lk

Description

Blo

ws

/ F

oo

t

N6

0

Dry

Den

sity

(p

cf)

Mo

istu

re C

on

ten

t (%

)

Ex

pan

sio

n I

nd

ex

Un

con

fin

ed C

om

p.

(psf

)

Par

ticl

e S

ize

Brown sandy lean CLAY, stiff, slightly moist

Tan clayey SAND, medium dense, slightly moist,

fine grained sand

Tan clayey SAND, loose, slightly damp, medium grained

medium dense, coarser grained




B-8

2" Ring

Sample

2.5" Ring

Sample

Bulk

Sample

Terzaghi Split

Spoon Sample

Static Water

Table


Project: Location:

Elevation:


Logged By:

Sw

ell

(psf

)

SC

(Fill) 69 25 113.5 7.8

dense, with quartz gravel, loose matrix (fill)

38 34 7.0

5

24 13 113.1 11.6

19 15 10.9

10

31 16 144.5 13.0

14 11 14.1

15 CL Brown sandy lean CLAY, very stiff, moist, gravel up to

1 inch in diameter 35 17 121.3 12.3 8244

20 SM

50/6" 5.7

25

CL 19 15 30.2

30

increased moisture @ 33 feet

35

stiff 16 13 37.3


14-122-M B6 (1 of 2)


Dep

th (

ft.)

So

il T

yp

e

Un

dis

turb

ed

Bu

lk

Description

Blo

ws

/ F

oo

t

Par

ticl

e S

ize


PE mounted auger

Other Tests

Brown clayey SAND, medium dense, slightly damp (fill)

N6

0

Dry

Den

sity

(p

cf)

Mo

istu

re C

on

ten

t (%

)

Ex

pan

sio

n I

nd

ex

Un

con

fin

ed C

om

p.

(psf

)

Layers of light brown sandy lean CLAY, dark brown sandy

lean CLAY, tan clayey SAND, stiff, fine gravel

with concrete (fill)

Gray silty SAND, very dense, moist, with gravel

Tan lean CLAY, stiff, moist


B-9a

2" Ring

Sample

2.5" Ring

Sample

Bulk

Sample

Terzaghi Split

Spoon Sample

Static Water

Table


Project: Location:

Elevation:


Logged By:

Sw

ell

(psf

)

40

45 CL 24 23 16.1

50

55

60 SP-SC

53 65 20.6

Boring terminated at a depth of 61 1/2 feet.

65

70


14-122-M B6 (2 of 2)


Dep

th (

ft.)

So

il T

yp

e

Un

dis

turb

ed

Bu

lk

Description

Blo

ws

/ F

oo

t

Par

ticl

e S

ize


PE mounted auger

Other Tests

N6

0

Dry

Den

sity

(p

cf)

Mo

istu

re C

on

ten

t (%

)

Ex

pan

sio

n I

nd

ex

Un

con

fin

ed C

om

p.

(psf

)

Tan sandy lean CLAY, very stiff, saturated


B-9b

Groundwater encountered at a depth of 41 feet.

Tan POORLY GRADED SAND WITH CLAY, very dense,

saturated

2" Ring

Sample

2.5" Ring

Sample

Bulk

Sample

Terzaghi Split

Spoon Sample

Static Water

Table


Project: Location:

Elevation:


Logged By:

Sw

ell

(psf

)

SC

(Fill) (fill)

5 7.2

19 15 10.6

10

CL 21 17 16.3

15

with coarse sand and fine gravel, hard 38 34 9.3

20

25

30

35


14-122-M B7


Dep

th (

ft.)

So

il T

yp

e

Un

dis

turb

ed

Bu

lk

Description

Blo

ws

/ F

oo

t

Par

ticl

e S

ize


PE mounted auger

Other Tests

N6

0

Dry

Den

sity

(p

cf)

Mo

istu

re C

on

ten

t (%

)

Ex

pan

sio

n I

nd

ex

Un

con

fin

ed C

om

p.

(psf

)

Light brown clayey SAND, loose, damp,

Dark brown with gravel (fill)

Tan lean CLAY, very stiff, moist




B-10

2" Ring

Sample

2.5" Ring

Sample

Bulk

Sample

Terzaghi Split

Spoon Sample

Static Water

Table


Project: Location:

Elevation:


Logged By:

Sw

ell

(psf

)

5 CL 30 26 9.8

(Fill)

10

17 13 12.5

15

(fill) 30 15 110.9 12.6

20

CL 24 20 12.5

25

37 34 23.8

30

35


14-122-M B8


Dep

th (

ft.)

So

il T

yp

e

Un

dis

turb

ed

Bu

lk

Description

Blo

ws

/ F

oo

t

Par

ticl

e S

ize


PE mounted auger

Other

Tests

N6

0

Dry

Den

sity

(p

cf)

Mo

istu

re C

on

ten

t (%

)

Ex

pan

sio

n I

nd

ex

Un

con

fin

ed C

om

p.

(psf

)

Dark brown sandy lean CLAY, stiff, moist, with fine gravel

(fill)

(fill)

Light brown and gray lean CLAY with sand, very stiff, moist

6 inches of rounded gravel and sand in sample




B-11

2" Ring

Sample

2.5" Ring

Sample

Bulk

Sample

Terzaghi Split

Spoon Sample

Static Water

Table


Project: Location:

Elevation:


Logged By:

Sw

ell

(psf

)

CL 30 15 107.5 10.1

decreasing sand and gravel 10 8 15.3

5

CL 17 9 114.3 12.4

10

CL 5 4 12.0

15

CL Brown sandy lean CLAY, stiff 16 13 12.4

20

25

30

35


14-122-M B9


Dep

th (

ft.)

So

il T

yp

e

Un

dis

turb

ed

Bu

lk

Description

Blo

ws

/ F

oo

t

Par

ticl

e S

ize


PE mounted auger

Other Tests

Light brown sandy lean CLAY with gravel, stiff

N6

0

Dry

Den

sity

(p

cf)

Mo

istu

re C

on

ten

t (%

)

Ex

pan

sio

n I

nd

ex

Un

con

fin

ed C

om

p.

(psf

)

Brown lean CLAY with lenses of coarse sand, stiff

Dark brown sandy lean CLAY, soft




B-12

2" Ring

Sample

2.5" Ring

Sample

Bulk

Sample

Terzaghi Split

Spoon Sample

Static Water

Table


Project: Location:

Elevation:


Logged By:

Sw

ell

(psf

)

CL 21 11 97.7 22.3 2610

(Fill)

15 12 18.5

5

24 13 101.9 15.8

10

8 6 17.1

15

20

25

30

35


14-122-M B10


Dep

th (

ft.)

So

il T

yp

e

Un

dis

turb

ed

Bu

lk

Description

Blo

ws

/ F

oo

t

Par

ticl

e S

ize


PE mounted auger

Other Tests

Light brown sandy lean CLAY with lenses of sand,

N6

0

Dry

Den

sity

(p

cf)

Mo

istu

re C

on

ten

t (%

)

Ex

pan

sio

n I

nd

ex

Un

con

fin

ed C

om

p.

(psf

)

Brown sandy lean CLAY, firm, moist (Fill)

stiff, moist (Fill)




B-13

2" Ring

Sample

2.5" Ring

Sample

Bulk

Sample

Terzaghi Split

Spoon Sample

Static Water

Table


Project: Location:

Elevation:


Logged By:

Sw

ell

(psf

)

CL 8 5 107.4 20.2 19 290

(Fill)

6 4 19.9 32

5

11 6 107.0 17.5

10 CL 16 9 111.2 14.6 1496

15

Gray sandy lean CLAY, stiff 16 9 21.2

20

25

30

35


14-122-M B11


Dep

th (

ft.)

So

il T

yp

e

Un

dis

turb

ed

Bu

lk

Description

Blo

ws

/ F

oo

t

Par

ticl

e S

ize


PE mounted auger

Other Tests

Light brown sandy lean CLAY, lenses of increased sand,

N6

0

Dry

Den

sity

(p

cf)

Mo

istu

re C

on

ten

t (%

)

Ex

pan

sio

n I

nd

ex

Un

con

fin

ed C

om

p.

(psf

)

firm, moist (Fill)


B-14

Brown lean CLAY with sand, stiff, moist



2" Ring

Sample

2.5" Ring

Sample

Bulk

Sample

Terzaghi Split

Spoon Sample

Static Water

Table


Project: Location:

Elevation:


Logged By:

Sw

ell

(psf

)

CL 23 12 112.9 13.6 9167

(Fill)

12 9 13.6

5

13 7 105.8 22.5

10

9 7 18.8

15 CL Lean CLAY with trace sand, grades to a 104.7 20.8

sandy lean CLAY, very stiff 41 20 101.8 22.2

20

25

30

35


14-122-M B12


Dep

th (

ft.)

So

il T

yp

e

Un

dis

turb

ed

Bu

lk

Description

Blo

ws

/ F

oo

t

Par

ticl

e S

ize


PE mounted auger

Other Tests

Light brown lean CLAY with sand, very stiff, moist

N6

0

Dry

Den

sity

(p

cf)

Mo

istu

re C

on

ten

t (%

)

Ex

pan

sio

n I

nd

ex

Un

con

fin

ed C

om

p.

(psf

)

(Fill)

stiff

dark brown




B-15

2" Ring

Sample

2.5" Ring

Sample

Bulk

Sample

Terzaghi Split

Spoon Sample

Static Water

Table


Project: Location:

Elevation:


Logged By:

Sw

ell

(psf

)

SM Brown silty SAND, medium dense, dry

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


B-16


Set percolation pipe.

Boring terminated at 7 feet.

N6

0

Dry

Den

sity

(p

cf)

Mo

istu

re C

on

ten

t (%

)

Ex

pan

sio

n I

nd

ex

Un

con

fin

ed C

om

p.

(psf

)

Par

ticl

e S

ize

October 10, 2014 6 inch diameter solid stem truck

GB mounted auger

Other Tests

Dep

th (

ft.)

So

il T

yp

e

Un

dis

turb

ed

Bu

lk

Description

Blo

ws

/ F

oo

t


14-122-M B13


2" Ring

Sample

2.5" Ring

Sample

Bulk

Sample

Terzaghi Split

Spoon Sample

Static Water

Table


Project: Location:

Elevation:


Logged By:

Sw

ell

(psf

)

CL Light brown sandy lean CLAY, very fine sand, slightly moist

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


B-17



Other Tests


N6

0

Dry

Den

sity

(p

cf)

Mo

istu

re C

on

ten

t (%

)

Ex

pan

sio

n I

nd

ex

Un

con

fin

ed C

om

p.

(psf

)

Par

ticl

e S

ize


GB mounted auger

Dep

th (

ft.)

So

il T

yp

e

Un

dis

turb

ed

Bu

lk

Description

Blo

ws

/ F

oo

t


14-122-M B14


2" Ring

Sample

2.5" Ring

Sample

Bulk

Sample

Terzaghi Split

Spoon Sample

Static Water

Table


Project: Location:

Elevation:


Logged By:

Sw

ell

(psf

)

Dark brown lean CLAY (fill)

CL

(fill)

SM

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


B-18

Brown silty SAND, medium dense




N6

0

Dry

Den

sity

(p

cf)

Mo

istu

re C

on

ten

t (%

)

Ex

pan

sio

n I

nd

ex

Un

con

fin

ed C

om

p.

(psf

)

Par

ticl

e S

ize


GB mounted auger

Other Tests

Dep

th (

ft.)

So

il T

yp

e

Un

dis

turb

ed

Bu

lk

Description

Blo

ws

/ F

oo

t


14-122-M B15


2" Ring

Sample

2.5" Ring

Sample

Bulk

Sample

Terzaghi Split

Spoon Sample

Static Water

Table


Project: Location:

Elevation:


Logged By:

Sw

ell

(psf

)

SM Brown silty SAND (Fill)

CL

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


B-18

Dark brown lean CLAY




N6

0

Dry

Den

sity

(p

cf)

Mo

istu

re C

on

ten

t (%

)

Ex

pan

sio

n I

nd

ex

Un

con

fin

ed C

om

p.

(psf

)

Par

ticl

e S

ize


GB mounted auger

Other Tests

Dep

th (

ft.)

So

il T

yp

e

Un

dis

turb

ed

Bu

lk

Description

Blo

ws

/ F

oo

t


14-122-M B16


2" Ring

Sample

2.5" Ring

Sample

Bulk

Sample

Terzaghi Split

Spoon Sample

Static Water

Table


Project: Location:

Elevation:


Logged By:

Sw

ell

(psf

)

SM Brown silty SAND, loose, dry (fill) 8 6 13.7

(Fill)

CL

(Fill) 6 4 15.3

5

10

9 7 19.0

15

20

25

30

35


B-20

Dark brown lean CLAY, firm, moist (Fill)



N6

0

Dry

Den

sity

(p

cf)

Mo

istu

re C

on

ten

t (%

)

Ex

pan

sio

n I

nd

ex

Un

con

fin

ed C

om

p.

(psf

)

Par

ticl

e S

ize


GB mounted auger

Other Tests

Dep

th (

ft.)

So

il T

yp

e

Un

dis

turb

ed

Bu

lk

Description

Blo

ws

/ F

oo

t


14-122-M B17


2" Ring

Sample

2.5" Ring

Sample

Bulk

Sample

Terzaghi Split

Spoon Sample

Static Water

Table


Project: Location:

Elevation:


Logged By:

Sw

ell

(psf

)

SM Silty SAND with gravel (fill)

(Fill)

SM

(Fill)

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


B-21

Brown silty SAND (Fill)



N6

0

Dry

Den

sity

(p

cf)

Mo

istu

re C

on

ten

t (%

)

Ex

pan

sio

n I

nd

ex

Un

con

fin

ed C

om

p.

(psf

)

Par

ticl

e S

ize


GB mounted auger

Other Tests

Dep

th (

ft.)

So

il T

yp

e

Un

dis

turb

ed

Bu

lk

Description

Blo

ws

/ F

oo

t


14-122-M B18


2" Ring

Sample

2.5" Ring

Sample

Bulk

Sample

Terzaghi Split

Spoon Sample

Static Water

Table


Project: Location:

Elevation:


Logged By:

Sw

ell

(psf

)

CL 12 7 109.6 16.4

(Fill) 7 5 21.2

5 (fill)

CL 6 4 18.2

10

19 15 16.3

15

SM Brown silty SAND, medium dense, damp 20 16 17.1

20 14 11 11.3

25

30

35


B-22

coarse sand



Black lean CLAY with fine sand, firm, very moist

stiff

Brown sandy lean CLAY, firm, moist, fine to coarse sand

N6

0

Dry

Den

sity

(p

cf)

Mo

istu

re C

on

ten

t (%

)

Ex

pan

sio

n I

nd

ex

Un

con

fin

ed C

om

p.

(psf

)

Par

ticl

e S

ize


AP mounted auger

Other Tests

Dep

th (

ft.)

So

il T

yp

e

Un

dis

turb

ed

Bu

lk

Description

Blo

ws

/ F

oo

t


14-122-M B19


2" Ring

Sample

2.5" Ring

Sample

Bulk

Sample

Terzaghi Split

Spoon Sample

Static Water

Table


Project: Location:

Elevation:


Logged By:

Sw

ell

(psf

)

CL 10 6 91.3 17.3

(Fill) (Fill) 8 6 19.0

5 4 4 20.0

CL Brown lean sandy CLAY, firm, moist (Fill)

10

10 8 18.9

15

CL Black lean CLAY with sand, firm, very moist 8 6 15.8

20 CL 29 25 18.5

25

30

35


B-23

Brown sandy lean CLAY with fine to coarse sand,

very stiff, moist



Brown sandy lean CLAY, firm, moist, fine to coarse sand

N6

0

Dry

Den

sity

(p

cf)

Mo

istu

re C

on

ten

t (%

)

Ex

pan

sio

n I

nd

ex

Un

con

fin

ed C

om

p.

(psf

)

Par

ticl

e S

ize


AP mounted auger

Other Tests

Dep

th (

ft.)

So

il T

yp

e

Un

dis

turb

ed

Bu

lk

Description

Blo

ws

/ F

oo

t


14-122-M B20


2" Ring

Sample

2.5" Ring

Sample

Bulk

Sample

Terzaghi Split

Spoon Sample

Static Water

Table


Project: Location:

Elevation:


Logged By:

Sw

ell

(psf

)

SC 33 12 102.4 12.6

(Fill) medium dense, slightly damp, trace organics (fill) 29 25 14.0

5 dry to slightly damp

coarse sand layer, calcification 29 25 8.7

10

CL 22 18 9.5

15

SP Brown SAND, medium dense, slightly damp, poorly graded 16 13 6.4

20

38 34 5.6

25

30

35


B-24

dense



Dark brown sandy lean CLAY, very stiff, slightly moist

Brown clayey SAND with coarse sand and gravel,

N6

0

Dry

Den

sity

(p

cf)

Mo

istu

re C

on

ten

t (%

)

Ex

pan

sio

n I

nd

ex

Un

con

fin

ed C

om

p.

(psf

)

Par

ticl

e S

ize


AP mounted auger

Other Tests

Dep

th (

ft.)

So

il T

yp

e

Un

dis

turb

ed

Bu

lk

Description

Blo

ws

/ F

oo

t


14-122-M B21


2" Ring

Sample

2.5" Ring

Sample

Bulk

Sample

Terzaghi Split

Spoon Sample

Static Water

Table


Project: Location:

Elevation:


Logged By:

Sw

ell

(psf

)

CL 11 6 101.6 21.8 1643

(Fill) coarse sand layers up to 2 inches 4 3 15.7

5

CL Dark brown lean CLAY with fine to coarse sand, stiff, moist 12 9 17.3

10

CL 27 23 17.6

15

12 9 22.7

20 SC 17 13 16.7

25

30

35


B-25

Brown clayey SAND, medium dense, damp



Brown lean CLAY with fine sand, very stiff, moist

Brown sandy lean CLAY, firm, moist, trace organics (fill)

N6

0

Dry

Den

sity

(p

cf)

Mo

istu

re C

on

ten

t (%

)

Ex

pan

sio

n I

nd

ex

Un

con

fin

ed C

om

p.

(psf

)

Par

ticl

e S

ize


AP mounted auger

Other Tests

Dep

th (

ft.)

So

il T

yp

e

Un

dis

turb

ed

Bu

lk

Description

Blo

ws

/ F

oo

t


14-122-M B22


2" Ring

Sample

2.5" Ring

Sample

Bulk

Sample

Terzaghi Split

Spoon Sample

Static Water

Table

BUTANO


CUT/FILL THICKNESS

Juvenile Hall

FIGURE

B-26

Scale: 1" = 100'

BUTANO


CROSS SECTIONS U & V

Juvenile Hall

FIGURE

B-27

BUTANO



Juvenile Hall

FIGURE

B-28

BUTANO



Juvenile Hall

FIGURE

B-29

APPENDIX C LABORATORY TESTING PROGRAM

Laboratory Testing Procedures Page C-1

Particle Size Analysis Figure C-1 through C-6 Swell Test Figures C-7 through C-9

Geotechnical Investigation – Design Phase November 21, 2014 Monterey County New Juvenile Hall Project No. 14-122-M Salinas, CA Page C-1

LABORATORY TESTING PROCEDURES

Classification Soils were classified according to the Unified Soil Classification System in accordance with ASTM D 2487 and D 2488. Moisture content and dry density determinations were made for representative, relatively undisturbed samples in accordance with ASTM D 2216. Results of moisture-density determinations, together with classifications, are shown on the Boring Logs, Figures B-4 through B-17. Particle Size Analysis Six sieves were performed on representative samples in accordance with ASTM D 422. The grain size distributions from the result of the particle size analysis are presented in Figures C-1 through C-6. Expansion Index Three expansion index tests were performed on representative bulk samples of the foundation zone soil in accordance with ASTM D 4829-03. The results are shown on the Boring Logs, Figures B-4 through B-25.

Swell Test Three one-dimensional swell tests were performed on representative relatively undisturbed samples in accordance with ASTM D-4546. The results are presented in Figures C-7 through C-9 and shown on the boring logs Figures B-4 through B-25.

Unconfined Compression Unconfined compression tests were performed in accordance with ASTM D 2166. The results are shown on the boring logs Figures B-4 through B-17.

FIGURE

C-1

BUTANO


5.0

PERCENT

PASSING No. 4

B2-3 PERCENT

PASSING No. 200

BORING:

DEPTH (ft):

SOIL TYPE (USCS):

GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION

Juvenile Hall

97.0%SC 12.8%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0.0010.0100.1001.00010.000100.000

PE

RC

EN

T P

AS

SIN

G

GRAIN DIAMETER (mm)

FIGURE

C-2

PERCENT PERCENT

DEPTH (ft): 12.0 PASSING No. 4 PASSING No. 200

BORING: B3-6

98.9%

BUTANO

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING, INC. Juvenile Hall

73.6%SOIL TYPE (USCS): CL


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

0.0010.0100.1001.00010.000100.000

PE

RC

EN

T P

AS

SIN

G

GRAIN DIAMETER (mm)

FIGURE

C-3

BORING: B4-1 PERCENT PERCENT


SOIL TYPE (USCS): SC 100.0% 54.7%


BUTANO GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0.0010.0100.1001.00010.000

PE

RC

EN

T P

AS

SIN

G

GRAIN DIAMETER (mm)

FIGURE

C-4


100.0% 33.2%


SOIL TYPE (USCS): SC



BUTANO

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

0.0010.0100.1001.00010.000

PE

RC

EN

T P

AS

SIN

G

GRAIN DIAMETER (mm)

Cu = 3.1

Cc = 0.4

FIGURE

C-5



PASSING No. 200

SOIL TYPE (USCS): SP-SC 97.7% 7.0%

PERCENT

DEPTH (ft): 60.0 PASSING No. 4

BORING: B6-12 PERCENT

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0.0010.0100.1001.00010.000100.000

PE

RC

EN

T P

AS

SIN

G

GRAIN DIAMETER (mm)

D60

D30

D10

FIGURE

C-6



SOIL TYPE (USCS): CL 100.0% 62.4%



0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

0.0010.0100.1001.00010.000100.000

PE

RC

EN

T P

AS

SIN

G

GRAIN DIAMETER (mm)

FIGURE

C-7Juvenille Hall

BUTANO


CL

DEPTH (ft): 1.0

SWELL TEST RESULTS

BORING: B1-1

14.9%SOIL TYPE (USCS): FIELD MOISTURE:

FINAL MOISTURE: 23.2%

-5.0

-4.0

-3.0

-2.0

-1.0

0.0

1.0

100 1000 10000 100000

% S

TR

AIN

NORMAL LOAD (psf)

1900 psf

FIGURE

C-8Juvenille Hall

BUTANO


CH

DEPTH (ft): 1.0

SWELL TEST RESULTS

BORING: B3-1



-5.0

-4.0

-3.0

-2.0

-1.0

0.0

1.0

100 1000 10000 100000

% S

TR

AIN

NORMAL LOAD (psf)

3100 psf

FIGURE

C-9Juvenille Hall

BUTANO


CL

DEPTH (ft): 1.0

SWELL TEST RESULTS

BORING: B11-1



-1.0

0.0

1.0

100 1000 10000 100000

% S

TR

AIN

NORMAL LOAD (psf)

290 psf

APPENDIX D

PERCOLATION TESTING PROCEDURES Constant head percolation tests were performed at four location on the parcel (B13 through B16). The holes were filled with water to a height of approximately 12 inches from the base of the hole. The approximate locations of the test holes are shown on the boring site plan in Appendix B, Figure B-2 The holes were logged in the field during the drilling process. Test holes were drilled with 6-inch diameter solid stem truck mounted equipment. Perforated pipe was inserted to prevent potential collapse of the test holes and approximately 2 to 3 inches of clean, crushed ⅜” gravel was placed at the bottom of the holes as well as around the annulus of the pipe. The test holes were pre-soaked 24 hours prior to percolation testing. The percolation rates for B14 and B16 were recorded every 30 minutes and every 10 minutes for B13 and B15. The following rate reports the average of 3 consecutive measurements within 10% of each other.

Percolation Test Hole Depth (in) Percolation Rate (in/hr)

B-13 84 78 B-14 36 5 B-15 62.5 30 B-16 64 5

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PRELIMINARY DESIGN PHASE

Documents

Transcript of GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PRELIMINARY DESIGN PHASE