GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FOR MONTEREY BAY SANCTUARY SCENIC TRAIL SEGMENT 7 SANTA CRUZ, CALIFORNIA

FOR RRM DESIGN GROUP SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA

BY PACIFIC CREST ENGINEERING INC. CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS 1566-SZ67-H42 JUNE 2017 Revised September 2017 www.4pacific-crest.com

RRM Design Group June 23, 2017 Project No. 1566-SZ67-H42 Revised September 1, 2017

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page No. LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Purpose and Scope 1 Location and Description 1 Field Investigation 2 Laboratory Investigation 3 Soil Conditions 3 Regional Seismic Setting 5 Seismic Hazards 5

DISCUSSIONS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS General 8 Primary Geotechnical Considerations 8 Site Preparation 9 Cut and Fill Slopes 11 Erosion Control 12 Foundation Recommendations 13 Retaining Walls and Lateral Earth Pressures 14 Utility Trenches 21 Infiltration Testing 22 Surface Drainage 26 Pavement Design 26 Soil Corrosivity 28 Plan Review 29

LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS

IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT…

APPENDIX A Regional Site Map 34 Site Map Showing Test Borings 35 Boring Log Explanation 39 Log of Test Borings 40 Atterberg Limits 71 Direct Shear Test Results 72 R-Value Test Results 75 Corrosivity Test Summary 79 Hydraulic Conductivity Test Results 80 Surcharge Pressure Diagram 86 Typical Retaining Wall Detail 87 Apparent Earth Pressure Diagram 88

APPENDIX B Infiltration Test Data 89

Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. www.4pacific-crest.com

444 Airport Blvd, Suite 106 Watsonville, CA 95076 Phone: 831-722-9446 Fax: 831-722-9158

June 23, 2017 Project No. 1566-SZ67-H42 Revised September 1, 2017

Mr. Mike Sherrod, Principal RRM Design Group 3765 S. Higuera Street, Suite 102 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401

Subject: Geotechnical Investigation – Design Phase Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail – Segment 7 City of Santa Cruz, California

Dear Mr. Sherrod,

In accordance with your authorization, we have performed a geotechnical investigation for Segment 7 of the Monterey Bay Scenic Trail Project, which includes the three mile stretch of rail line between Natural Bridges Drive and Pacific Avenue in the city of Santa Cruz, California.

This report was submitted in draft form in November of 2015. This final report has been modified to include subsequent review comments by the design team, revisions based on supplemental boring data, and to address emerging design issues as requested by members of the design team.

The accompanying report presents our conclusions and recommendations as well as the results of the geotechnical investigation on which they are based. If you have any questions concerning the data, conclusions or recommendations presented in this report, please call our office.

Very truly yours,

PACIFIC CREST ENGINEERING INC.

Elizabeth M. Mitchell, GE President\Principal Geotechnical Engineer GE 2718 Exp. 12/31/18

Copies: 3 to Client RRM Design Group Page 1 June 23, 2017 Project No. 1566-SZ67-H42 Revised September 1, 2017

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION

PURPOSE AND SCOPE

This report describes our geotechnical investigation and presents results, including recommendations, for the proposed development of Segment 7 of the Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail (MBSST) located in the City of Santa Cruz, California. Our scope of services for this project has consisted of:

1. Discussions with design team members, including RRM, Mesiti-Miller Engineering and the City of Santa Cruz.

2. Site reconnaissance and review of geologic and geotechnical information pertaining to the site, available in our files or provided by the design team.

3. Exploration, sampling, and classification of surface and subsurface soils by drilling 28 borings within accessible locations across the project area.

4. Excavation of six test pits and infiltration testing at seven selected locations along the proposed trail alignment.

5. Laboratory analysis of retrieved soil samples.

6. Compilation and engineering analysis of collected field and laboratory data.

7. Preparation of a geotechnical investigation report documenting our investigation and presenting our findings, conclusions and geotechnical recommendations for the design and construction of the project.

LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION

The Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail Project is a 50-mile span of pedestrian and bicycle pathway in Santa Cruz County that extends from San Mateo County to the north and Monterey County to the south. Segment 7 of the Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail Project is located entirely within the city of Santa Cruz and extends from Natural Bridges Drive to Pacific Avenue for a distance of approximately three miles. Please refer to Figure No. 1, Regional Site Map, for the general vicinity of the project site. Furthermore, the approximate center of the project area is located at the following coordinates:

Latitude = 36.96355 degrees Longitude = -122.03759 degrees

This geotechnical investigation addresses Segment 7 of the proposed project. Segment 7 will be constructed almost entirely within the coastal side of the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission (SCCRTC) rail right-of-way. However, it may transition to City streets and residential neighborhoods in select locations.

RRM Design Group Page 2 June 23, 2017 Project No. 1566-SZ67-H42 Revised September 1, 2017

Based upon our review of site plans and discussions with RRM Design Group, it is our understanding the intent of the project is to construct a bicycle and pedestrian friendly trail from Natural Bridges Drive to the intersection of Pacific Avenue and Beach Street within the SCCRTC’s rail right-of-way. The trail will consist of multi-use paved pathways, a pedestrian bridge, on-street bike routes, and at-grade crossings at the railroad tracks. Preliminary design concepts indicate that retaining walls will also be required along various portions of the trail route, particularly along the Phase 2 segment in the area below La Barranca Park and adjacent to the City of Santa Cruz Wastewater Treatment Plant.

FIELD INVESTIGATION

Twenty (20) 6-inch diameter test borings were drilled along the proposed Segment 7 Trail between August 19th and 21st, 2015. An additional eight (8) eight-inch diameter borings were drilled along the Phase 2 segment of the trail on May 9, 2017. The location of the test borings are shown on Figures No. 2A through 2D, Site Map Showing Test Borings. The drilling method used was hydraulically operated continuous flight augers. A geologist from Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. was present during the drilling operations to log the soil encountered and to choose soil sampling type and locations.

Relatively undisturbed soil samples were obtained at various depths by driving a split spoon sampler 18 inches into the ground. This was achieved by dropping a 140 pound down hole safety hammer through a vertical height of 30 inches. The number of blows needed to drive the sampler for each 6 inch portion is recorded and the total number of blows needed to drive the last 12 inches is reported as the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) value. The outside diameter of the sampler used in this investigation was 3 inches or 2 inches, and is noted as “L” or “T” on the boring logs.

All standard penetration test data has been normalized to a 2 inch O.D. sampler so as to reflect a SPT "N" value. The normalization method used was derived from the second edition of the Foundation Engineering Handbook (H.Y. Fang, 1991). The method utilizes a Sampler Hammer Ratio which is noted as either Rs for non-cohesive soils, or Rc for cohesive soils. This ratio is dependent on the weight of the hammer, height of hammer drop, outside diameter of sampler, and inside diameter of sample. Using the Sampler Hammer Ratio, the correlation can be made from the samplers used in the field to the standard SPT “N” Value.

The soils encountered in the borings were continuously logged in the field and visually described in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM D2488 (Modified), Figure No. 3). The soil classification was verified and or modified upon completion of laboratory testing in accordance with ASTM D2487.

Appendix A contains the site plan showing the locations of the test borings and the Log of Test Borings presenting the soil profile explored in each boring, the sample locations, and the SPT "N" values for each sample. Stratification lines on the boring logs are approximate as the actual transition between soil types may be gradual.

RRM Design Group Page 3 June 23, 2017 Project No. 1566-SZ67-H42 Revised September 1, 2017

LABORATORY INVESTIGATION

The laboratory testing program was developed to help in evaluating the engineering properties of the materials encountered in our borings. Laboratory tests performed include:

a. Moisture Density relationships in accordance with ASTM test D2937.

b. Unconfined Compression tests in accordance with ASTM test D2166.

c. Atterberg Limits tests in accordance with ASTM test D4318.

d. "R" Value tests in accordance with California test 301.

e. Gradation tests in accordance with ASTM test D422.

f. Hydraulic conductivity in accordance with ASTM test D5084.

g. Corrosivity testing in accordance with California Test Methods 643, 422 and 417.

The results of the laboratory tests are presented on the boring logs opposite the sample tested, and/or presented graphically within Appendix A.

SOIL CONDITIONS

Regional Geologic Maps Segment 7 transects three distinct geologic units. The Phase 1 western and central portion extending roughly between Natural Bridges Drive and Bay Street/California Avenue is mapped as Lowest Emergent Coastal Terrace deposits overlying Santa Cruz Mudstone or Purisima Formation bedrock at depth. The Phase 2 eastern leg of the alignment from approximately Bay/California to Beach Street is mapped as traversing a contact between Purisima Formation bedrock and the Basin Deposits that comprise Neary Lagoon. The native soils and bedrock encountered in our test borings were generally consistent with the USGS Geologic Map of Santa Cruz County (Brabb 1989).

The Lowest Coastal Marine Terrace Deposits are described by Brabb (1997) as generally well-sorted sand with relatively continuous layers of gravel deposited in a near shore high- energy environment. Locally includes small areas of fluvial and colluvial silt, sand and gravel. Moderately well-developed pedogenic soils were observed within approximately the upper 5 to 10 feet of the terrace deposits, consisting of sandy clay and clayey sand.

The Santa Cruz Mudstone is described as laminated, medium to thick bedded silaceous organic mudstone that contains blocky weathering.

Basin Deposits typically consist of unconsolidated, plastic clay and silty clay that is rich in organic materials, and can locally contain thin interbedded layers of silt and silty sand. The Basin Deposits were deposited in a variety of environments including estuaries, lagoons, marsh

RRM Design Group Page 4 June 23, 2017 Project No. 1566-SZ67-H42 Revised September 1, 2017

filled sloughs, flood basins and lakes. The Basin Deposits are mapped as having a high potential for liquefaction.

The Purisima Formation is described as consisting of very thick bedded, yellowish gray, tuffaceous and diatomaceous siltstone containing thick interbeds of bluish-gray, semi-friable, andesitic sandstone. We encountered Purisima Formation bedrock and noted exposures at or near the ground surface along portions of the proposed Phase 2 alignment below La Barranca Park.

Soil Borings The following briefly describes the subsurface soil conditions encountered within the test borings. The Log of Test Borings in Appendix A provide, in more descriptive terms, the soil profile encountered at each test location.

The surface soils encountered in borings B1 through B12 (roughly the Phase 1 portion of the alignment) were consistent with Lowest Emergent Coastal Terrace Deposits overlying bedrock at depth. The terrace deposits ranged from about 8 to 27 feet in depth, (generally decreasing in thickness moving from east to west) and generally consisted of gravels in a clayey sand or sandy clay matrix. The upper soils were underlain by silty sand and sand. Bedrock was encountered at depths of ranging from 8 to 27 feet below the ground surface. The clay soils were generally firm to hard, and the sandy soils were medium dense to very dense. The bedrock was moderately hard. Our laboratory testing indicates that the clay soils possess low to intermediate expansion characteristics.

Two to three feet of artificial fill consisting of gravels and cobbles was noted in borings B7 and B13. The source and/or extent of these materials is not known but similar conditions can be expected to be encountered at various locations along the alignment during construction.

The soils noted in borings B13 through B16 (adjacent to the Phase 2 portion of the rail line that runs along the south side of the wastewater treatment facility) were consistent with Purisima Formation bedrock materials, consisting of very dense, fine grained silty sand. The bedrock is overlain in some areas by a relatively thin veneer of loose to medium dense sand materials derived from weathered bedrock.

Boring 21 through 26 were drilled along the top of the coastal terrace in La Barranca Park; the materials encountered in these borings were consistent with Lowest Emergent Coastal Terrace Deposits overlying Purisima Formation Bedrock. Based on the borings we infer that the bedrock surface is gently sloping to the west before plunging below an old infilled river channel around Phase 2 Station 224+50 as discussed below.

The materials noted in borings B17 through B20, B27 and B28 were generally consistent with Basin Deposit materials, although Purisima Formation bedrock was noted at depths ranging from 4½ to 38 feet. In general we noted very loose to loose silty sand typically overlain by organic rich silt of soft to firm consistency. As the existing rail line closely follows the mapped contact between the Basin Deposits and Purisma Formation bedrock in this area, the subsurface

RRM Design Group Page 5 June 23, 2017 Project No. 1566-SZ67-H42 Revised September 1, 2017

conditions can be expected to vary accordingly along this portion of Segment 7. This area appears to be an old infilled river channel up to 38 feet in depth, possibly deeper.

Groundwater Groundwater was encountered in 11 of our 28 geotechnical test borings. The groundwater was noted at depths ranging from 6 to 18 feet below existing grades, and appears to be typically perching upon dense to hard bedrock or very dense sand strata. It should be noted that the groundwater level was not allowed to stabilize for more than a few hours; therefore, the actual groundwater level may be higher or lower than initially encountered. The groundwater conditions described in this report reflect the conditions encountered during our drilling investigation in August of 2015 and May of 2017 at the specific locations drilled. It must be anticipated that the perched and regional groundwater tables may vary with location and will fluctuate with variations in rainfall, runoff, irrigation and other changes to the conditions existing at the time our measurements were made. It should be noted that most of the groundwater measurements were taken in the summer of a drought year that was preceded by additional drought years. It should be anticipated that the groundwater may rise a foot or more in the winter of non-drought years.

REGIONAL SEISMIC SETTING

The seismic setting of the site is one in which it is reasonable to assume that the site will experience significant seismic shaking during the lifetime of the project.

Mapped active or potentially active faults which could significantly affect the site are listed in the following table. The fault distances below are approximate distances based on a review of fault maps for the Santa Cruz area (Dibblee, 1999), and the Maps of Known Active Fault Near- Source Zones in California and Adjacent Portions of Nevada (CDMG, 1998).

TABLE No. 1, Faults in the Santa Cruz Area Distance Distance Fault Name Direction (miles) (km.) Zayante – 9.1 14.7 Northeast Vergeles Monterey Bay – 5.3 8.5 Southwest Tularcitos San Andreas – 12.4 19.9 Northeast 1906 Segment San Gregorio 8.9 14.4 Southwest

SEISMIC HAZARDS

A detailed investigation of seismic hazards is beyond our scope of services for this project. In general however, seismic hazards which may affect project sites in the Santa Cruz area include ground shaking, ground surface fault rupture, liquefaction and lateral spreading, and seismically induced slope instability. Geotechnical aspects of these issues are discussed below.

RRM Design Group Page 6 June 23, 2017 Project No. 1566-SZ67-H42 Revised September 1, 2017

Ground Shaking Ground shaking will be felt on the site during seismic events. Structures founded on thick soft soil deposits are more likely to experience more destructive shaking, with higher amplitude and lower frequency, than structures founded on bedrock. Generally, shaking will be more intense closer to earthquake epicenters. Thick soft soil deposits large distances from earthquake epicenters, however, may result in seismic accelerations significantly greater than expected in bedrock.

The following seismic design parameters for Site Class D are applicable for proposed structures with a fundamental period of vibration equal to or less than 0.5s. Structures having a fundamental period of vibration greater than 0.5s will require supplemental design criteria and may require a site- response analysis. TABLE No. 2, The 2016 CBC Seismic Design Parameters1 Specific to Design Parameter Site ASCE 7-10 Site Class D – Stiff Soil Mapped Spectral Acceleration for Short Periods Ss = 1.500 g Mapped Spectral Acceleration for 1-second Period S1 = 0.600 g Short Period Site Coefficient Fa = 1.0 1-Second Period Site Coefficient Fv = 1.5 MCE Spectral Response Acceleration for Short Period SMS = 1.500 g MCE Spectral Response Acceleration for 1-Second Period SM1 = 0.900 g 5% Damped Spectral Response Acceleration for Short Period SDS = 1.000 g 5% Damped Spectral Response Acceleration for 1-Second Period SD1 = 0.600 g Seismic Design Category 2 D Note 1: Design values have been obtained by using the Ground Motion Parameter Calculator available on the USGS website at http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/usdesign.php. Note 2: The Seismic Design Category assumes structures with Risk Category I, II or III occupancy as defined by Table 1604.5 of the 2016 CBC. Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. should be contacted for revised Table 2 seismic design parameters if the proposed structure has a different occupancy rating than that assumed. The recommendations of this report are intended to reduce the potential for structural damage to an acceptable risk level, however strong seismic shaking could result in architectural damage and the need for post-earthquake repairs. It should be assumed that exterior improvements such as pavements, slabs or sidewalks will need to be repaired or replaced following strong seismic shaking. An increased depth of subgrade compaction below exterior improvements will assist in minimizing the damage to these elements.

As discussed below there are portions of the proposed alignment with a potential for liquefaction, which would result in a Site Class F designation. Section 20.3.1 of ASCE 7-10 allows the following exception for structures overlying Site Class F soils. “For structures having fundamental periods of vibration equal to our less than 0.5s, site response analysis is not required to determine spectral accelerations for liquefiable soils. Rather, a site class is permitted to be determined in accordance with Section 20.3 and the corresponding values of Fa and Fv determined from Tables 11.4-1 and 11.4-2” of ASCE 7-10.

RRM Design Group Page 7 June 23, 2017 Project No. 1566-SZ67-H42 Revised September 1, 2017

The rationale for the above exception is that during an earthquake, the soil will respond differently before and after the earthquake shaking occurs. Before the earthquake, the soil profile has not liquefied and may be considered to possess the behavioral characteristics of the Soil Profile Type that best describes the soil in its non-liquefied state. For non-liquefied soil, it is expected that short period accelerations will be quite high. After liquefaction occurs, the soil will soften and result in a reduction of the short period ground motion and spectral accelerations, whereas the longer period spectral response may increase dramatically.

Ground Surface Fault Rupture Ground surface fault rupture occurs along the surficial trace(s) of active faults during significant seismic events. Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. has not performed a specific investigation for the presence of active faults on the project site. Since the nearest known active or potentially active fault is mapped approximately 5.3 miles (approximately 8.5 km) from the site (Dibblee, 1999, and CDMG, 1998), the potential for ground surface fault rupture at this site is low.

Liquefaction and Lateral Spreading Liquefaction and lateral spreading tend to occur in loose, saturated fine grained sands or coarse silts. In order for liquefaction to occur there must be the proper soil type, soil saturation, and cyclic accelerations of sufficient magnitude to progressively increase the water pressures within the soil mass. Non-cohesive soil shear strength is developed by the point to point contact of the soil grains. As the water pressures increase in the void spaces surrounding the soil grains the soil particles become supported more by the water than the point to point contact. When the water pressures increase sufficiently, the soil grains begin to lose contact with each other resulting in the loss of shear strength and continuous deformation of the soil where the soil appears to liquefy.

The results of our study indicate that a portion of the Phase 2 Segment 7 alignment is underlain by saturated Basin Deposit materials could be subject to liquefaction during a seismic event. Portions of the pathway could therefore be subject to seismically-induced settlement and may need to be repaired or replaced following a seismic event. The foundation and site preparation recommendations provided in this report will help mitigate, but not prevent, adverse effects should liquefaction occur.

Liquefaction-induced lateral spreading occurs when a liquefied soil mass fails toward an open slope face, or fails on an inclined topographic slope. Given the relatively flat topography along the proposed alignment it is our opinion that there is low potential for lateral spreading to occur.

Landsliding Segment 7 will be situated within areas of relatively level topography and there are no mapped landslide hazards within the proposed alignment. Provided our recommendations are closely followed during the design and construction of the project, it our opinion that deep seated landsliding is a hazard with negligible potential for affecting the proposed project. We caution however, that those portions of the pathway within sloping areas can become undermined if surface runoff is not adequately controlled.

RRM Design Group Page 8 June 23, 2017 Project No. 1566-SZ67-H42 Revised September 1, 2017

DISCUSSIONS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

GENERAL

1. The results of our investigation indicate that from a geotechnical engineering standpoint the proposed trail project may be developed as proposed, provided these recommendations are included in the design and construction of the project.

2. Our laboratory testing indicates that the near-surface soils encountered in our borings are predominately intercalated and interbedded clayey and sandy materials. The clayey soils possess low to intermediate expansive properties. The expansive characteristics of the clayey soils were determined by Atterberg Limits testing.

3. Grading and foundation plans should be reviewed by Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. during their preparation and prior to contract bidding.

4. Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. should be notified at least four (4) working days prior to any site clearing and grading operations on the property in order to observe the stripping and disposal of unsuitable materials, and to coordinate this work with the grading contractor. During this period, a pre-construction conference should be held on the site, with at least the owner’s representative, the grading contractor, a city representative, and one of our engineers present. At this meeting, the project specifications and the testing and inspection responsibilities will be outlined and discussed.

5. Field observation and testing must be provided by a representative of Pacific Crest Engineering Inc., to enable them to form an opinion as to the degree of conformance of the exposed site conditions to those foreseen in this report, the adequacy of the site preparation, the acceptability of fill materials, and the extent to which the earthwork construction and the degree of compaction comply with the specification requirements. Any work related to grading or foundation excavation that is performed without the full knowledge and direct observation of Pacific Crest Engineering Inc., the Geotechnical Engineer of Record, will render the recommendations of this report invalid, unless the Client hires a new Geotechnical Engineer who agrees to take over complete responsibility for this report’s findings, conclusions and recommendations. The new Geotechnical Engineer must agree to prepare a Transfer of Responsibility letter. This may require additional test borings and laboratory analysis if the new Geotechnical Engineer does not completely agree with our prior findings, conclusions and recommendations.

PRIMARY GEOTECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS

6. Based upon the subsurface conditions noted in our borings and the setting of the proposed project, it is our opinion that the primary geotechnical issues associated with the design and construction of the proposed project are as follows:

a. Divergent Bearing Conditions And Differential Settlement: The upper soils encountered varied from firm to very stiff clays to loose medium dense sand and

RRM Design Group Page 9 June 23, 2017 Project No. 1566-SZ67-H42 Revised September 1, 2017

sandy clay. These divergent bearing conditions can result in differential settlement, which could adversely affect proposed structures planned for the alignment and lead to undesirable effects on pavement or pathway surfaces. Bridge structures should be supported by drilled pier foundations. All other structural foundations should be underlain by a uniform zone of compacted engineered fill. Subgrade and baserock sections should be adequately compacted in accordance with the recommendations of this report. b. Non-Engineered Fills: Approximately 2 to 3 feet of non-engineered fill was encountered in boring B7 and B13. It should be anticipated that other areas of non-engineered fills may be encountered during construction. Non-engineered fills are susceptible to settlement when new structure or traffic loads are applied, and will need to be completely removed from planned improvement areas. c. Seismically-induced Settlement: The Phase 2 portion of Segment 7 that will traverse the Basin Deposit materials may be subject to settlement during strong seismic shaking, requiring repair or replacement of portions of the pathway. d. Strong Seismic Shaking: The project site is located within a seismically active area and strong seismic shaking is expected to occur within the design lifetime of the project. Improvements should be designed and constructed in accordance with the most current CBC and the recommendations of this report to minimize reaction to seismic shaking. Structures built in accordance with the latest edition of the California Building Code have an increased potential for experiencing relatively minor damage which should be repairable, however strong seismic shaking could result in architectural damage and the need for post-earthquake repairs. SITE PREPARATION

7. The initial preparation of the site will consist of the removal of existing structures, foundations, concrete slabs, abandoned underground utilities, all subsurface obstructions, trees and root balls, as necessary. All debris must be completely removed. Septic tanks and leach lines, if found, must be completely removed. Soils contaminated with deleterious material should be removed from the site. The extent of this soil removal will be designated by the Geotechnical Engineer in the field.

8. All voids, including those created by the demolition of the structures, foundations, subsurface obstructions, utilities, septic tanks, leach lines, or trees and root balls must be backfilled with properly compacted non-expansive native soils that are free of organic and other deleterious materials, or with approved import fill.

9. Surface vegetation, tree roots and organically contaminated topsoil should then be removed (“stripped”) from the area to be graded. In addition, any remaining debris or large rocks must also be removed (this includes asphalt or rocks greater than 2 inches in greatest dimension). This material may be stockpiled for future landscaping. 10. It is anticipated that the depth of stripping may be 2 to 4 inches, however the required depth of stripping must be based upon visual observations of a representative of Pacific Crest Engineering Inc., in the field. The depth of stripping will vary upon the type and density of

RRM Design Group Page 10 June 23, 2017 Project No. 1566-SZ67-H42 Revised September 1, 2017

vegetation across the project site and with the time of year. Areas with dense vegetation or groves of trees may require an increased depth of stripping.

11. Approximately 2 to 3 feet of loose, non-engineered fill was encountered in boring B7 and B13. Given the history of the project area, we anticipate there will be other areas of man- made fill on the site that were not detected during our field investigation. Areas of man-made fill encountered on the project site will need to be completely excavated to undisturbed native material. The excavation process should be observed and the extent designated by a representative of Pacific Crest Engineering Inc., in the field. Any voids created by fill removal must be backfilled with properly compacted approved native soils that are free of organic and other deleterious materials, or with approved imported fill.

12. Following the stripping, the exposed soils in pavement or pathway areas should be removed to a minimum depth of 6 inches below finished subgrade or as designated by a representative of Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Any remaining fill along the base of the excavation should then be removed down to native material. The base of the excavation must be observed and approved by a representative of Pacific Crest Engineering prior to backfilling. The approved base of the excavation should be scarified, moisture conditioned and compacted. Approved excavated soil may then be replaced in maximum 8 inch lifts (before compaction). This should result in a minimum of 12 inches of compacted subgrade. Recompacted sections should extend 2 feet horizontally beyond pavement perimeter.

13. The moisture conditioning procedure will depend upon the time of year that the work is done, but it should result in the soils being 1 to 3 percent over their optimum moisture contents at the time of compaction.

Note: If this work is done during or soon after the rainy season, the on-site soils and other materials may be too wet in their existing condition to be used as engineered fill. These materials may require a diligent and active drying and/or mixing operation to reduce the moisture content to the levels required to obtain adequate compaction as an engineered fill. If the on-site soils or other materials are too dry, water may need to be added. In some cases the time and effort to dry the on-site soil may be considered excessive, and the import of aggregate base may be required.

14. Beneath pavement areas, the upper 8 inches of the soil subgrade in the pavement areas, and all aggregate base and subbase should be compacted to a minimum of 95% of its maximum dry density. All other soil on the project should be compacted to a minimum of 90% of its maximum dry density.

15. The maximum dry density will be obtained from a laboratory compaction curve run in accordance with ASTM Procedure #D1557. This test will also establish the optimum moisture content of the material. Field density testing will be performed in accordance with ASTM Test #D6938 (nuclear method).

RRM Design Group Page 11 June 23, 2017 Project No. 1566-SZ67-H42 Revised September 1, 2017

16. Native or imported soil used as engineered fill on this project should meet the following requirements:

a. non-expansive, b. free of organics, debris, and other deleterious materials, c. free of “recycled” materials such as asphaltic concrete, concrete, brick, etc., d. granular in nature, well graded, and contain sufficient binder to allow utility trenches to stand open, e. free of rocks in excess of 2 inches in size.

In addition to the above requirements, import fill should have a Plasticity Index between 4 and 12, and a minimum Resistance “R” Value of 30, and be non-expansive.

17. Samples of any proposed imported fill planned for use on this project should be submitted to Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. for appropriate testing and approval not less than ten (10) working days before the anticipated jobsite delivery. This includes proposed import trench sand, drain rock and aggregate base materials. Imported fill material delivered to the project site without prior submittal of samples for appropriate testing and approval must be removed from the project site.

18. We recommend field density testing be performed in maximum 2 foot elevation differences. In general terms, we would recommend at least one compaction test per 200 linear feet of utility trench or retaining wall backfill, and at least one compaction test per 2,000 square feet of building or structure area. This is a subjective value and may be changed by the Geotechnical Engineer based on a review of the final project layout and exposed field conditions.

19. Samples of any proposed imported fill planned for use on this project should be submitted to Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. for appropriate testing and approval not less than ten (10) working days before the anticipated jobsite delivery. This includes proposed import trench sand, drain rock and aggregate base materials. Imported fill material delivered to the project site without prior submittal of samples for appropriate testing and approval must be removed from the project site.

CUT AND FILL SLOPES

20. All fill slopes should be constructed with engineered fill meeting the minimum density requirements of this report and have a gradient no steeper than 2:1 (horizontal to vertical). Fill slopes should not exceed 15 feet in vertical height unless specifically reviewed by Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Where the vertical height exceeds 15 feet, intermediate benches must be provided. These benches should be at least 6 feet wide and sloped to control surface drainage. A lined ditch should be used on the bench.

21. Fill slopes should be keyed into existing native or fill slopes by providing a 10 foot wide base keyway sloped negatively at least 2% into the bank. The depth of the keyways will vary,

RRM Design Group Page 12 June 23, 2017 Project No. 1566-SZ67-H42 Revised September 1, 2017

depending on the materials encountered. It is anticipated that the depth of the keyways may be 3 to 6 feet, but at all locations shall be at least 2 feet into firm material.

22. Subsequent keys may be required as the fill section progress upslope. Keys will be designated in the field by a representative of Pacific Crest Engineering Inc.

23. Cut slopes shall not exceed a 2:1 (horizontal to vertical) gradient and a 15 foot vertical height unless specifically reviewed by a representative of Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Where the vertical height exceeds 15 feet, intermediate benches must be provided. These benches should be at least 6 feet wide and sloped to control surface drainage. A lined ditch should be used on the bench.

24. The above slope gradients are based on the strength characteristics of the materials under conditions of normal moisture content that would result from rainfall falling directly on the slope, and do not take into account the additional activating forces applied by seepage from spring areas or subsurface groundwater. Therefore, in order to maintain stable slopes at the recommended gradients, it is important that any seepage forces and accompanying hydrostatic pressure encountered be relieved by adequate drainage. Drainage facilities may include subdrains, gravel blankets, rock fill surface trenches or horizontally drilled drains. Configurations and type of drainage will be determined by a representative of Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. during the grading operations.

25. The surfaces of all cut and fill slopes should be prepared and maintained to reduce erosion. This work, at a minimum, should include track rolling of the slope and effective planting. The protection of the slopes should be installed as soon as practicable so that a sufficient growth will be established prior to inclement weather conditions. It is vital that no slope be left standing through a winter season without the erosion control measures having been provided.

26. The above recommended gradients do not preclude periodic maintenance of the slopes, as minor sloughing and erosion may take place.

27. If a fill slope is to be placed above a cut slope, the toe of the fill slope should be set back at least 8 feet horizontally from the top of the cut slope. A lateral surface drain should be placed in the area between the cut and fill slopes.

EROSION CONTROL

28. The surface soils are classified as having a moderate potential for erosion. Therefore, the finished ground surface should be planted with ground cover and continually maintained to minimize surface erosion. The project civil engineer or erosion control specialist should be consulted for specific and detailed recommendations regarding erosion control on and surrounding the project site.

RRM Design Group Page 13 June 23, 2017 Project No. 1566-SZ67-H42 Revised September 1, 2017

FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS Pedestrian Bridge – Drilled Pier Foundations 29. At the time we prepared this report, the site and grading plans have not been completed and the structure locations and foundation details have not been finalized. We request an opportunity to review these items during the design stages to determine if supplemental recommendations will be required.

30. Based upon the results of our investigation, in conjunction with the currently proposed pedestrian bridge location, we anticipate that the bridge abutments may be founded within the blanket of earth materials above the bedrock on both sides of the drainage.

31. It is our opinion that an appropriate foundation system to support the proposed bridge structure will consist of skin friction, cast-in-place reinforced concrete piers in conjunction with reinforced concrete grade beams.

32. Piers should be designed and constructed according to Section 1810 of the 2016 CBC as well as the following recommendations:

a. Minimum pier embedment should be 15 feet competent soil. Actual depths could depend upon a lateral force analysis performed by your structural engineer.

b. The piers should derive their capacity through friction resistance between the concrete and the surrounding soil. An allowable skin friction resistance of 350 psf of surface area should be used for design of the bridge piers.

c. Minimum pier size should be 24 inches in diameter and all pier holes must be free of loose material on the bottom.

d. A reduction for group action is not considered necessary for drilled piers unless the piers are spaced less than 3 pier diameters apart.

e. The reinforced concrete piers are considered to have sufficient durability for the proposed project, assuming they are placed according to the requirements of the geotechnical and structural engineer.

f. Active pressures from the upper 5 feet of soil against the piers is 45 psf/ft of depth and acts on a plane which is 1½ times the pier diameter.

g. Passive pressures of 350 psf/ft of depth can be developed, acting over a plane 1½ times the pier diameter. Neglect passive pressure in the top 5 feet of soil.

h. All grade beams should be embedded at least 18 inches below lowest adjacent grade.

i. All pier excavation spoils must be removed from slope areas which are steeper than 5:1 (horizontal to vertical).

RRM Design Group Page 14 June 23, 2017 Project No. 1566-SZ67-H42 Revised September 1, 2017

j. All piers must be constructed within ½ percent of a vertically plumb condition.

k. It is possible that the piers will need to be cased during drilling. This is due to the possibility of caving soils below the groundwater table, which was noted at about 13 ½ feet below the ground surface in August of 2015.

l. If the casing is pulled during the concrete pour, it must be pulled slowly with a minimum of 4 feet of casing remaining embedded within the concrete at all times.

m. If concrete is placed via a tremie, the end of the tube must remain embedded a minimum of 4 feet into the concrete at all times.

n. The Contractor should expect very hard drilling conditions beginning at an approximate depth of 20 feet based on the findings outlined in our test borings. Therefore; appropriately sized drilling equipment should be selected for these drilling conditions so that the piers may extend to the full depth outlined in the geotechnical report and the project plans and specifications.

33. Drilled Pier Field Observation and Reporting a. All pier construction must be observed by a Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Any piers constructed without the full knowledge and continuous observation of a representative from Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. will render the recommendations of this report invalid.

b. Continuous observation of pier drilling operations is required by 2016 CBC Chapter 17, Section 1705.8. The Contractor and drilling Subcontractor should be notified regarding this requirement.

c. Reporting will include a Daily Field Report (DFR) maintained by an on-site representative from Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. The DFR will maintain a record of each pier drilled, and note pier diameters, depths, plumbness, and embedment into suitable soil or bedrock bearing strata, as required by the Geotechnical Report.

34. The piers and grade beams should contain steel reinforcement as determined by the Project Civil or Structural Engineer.

RETAINING WALLS AND LATERAL PRESSURES 35. All retaining walls should be constructed with full drainage and should be designed using the criteria provided below.

36. For the design of live or dead loads which will transmit a force to the wall, refer to Figure No. 50 of our report.

37. Seismic forces should be applied to retaining walls as determined by the project structural engineer in accordance with applicable codes and standards. The lateral seismic forces listed

RRM Design Group Page 15 June 23, 2017 Project No. 1566-SZ67-H42 Revised September 1, 2017

in the following table were estimated using the Mononobe-Okabe method of analysis as modified by Whitman. The resultant seismic force should be assumed to act at a point 0.33H up from the base of the wall.

Resultant Seismic Restraint Condition Force (lbs) Flexible and Free to Yield (active pressure condition) 10 H² Rigid and Non-Yielding (at-rest pressure condition) 14 H²

Phase 1 Site Retaining Walls 38. Phase 1 site retaining walls may be founded on spread footings. We recommend a minimum footing embedment depth of 18 inches.

39. Retaining wall footings may be designed for the following allowable bearing capacities:

1,800 psf for dead plus live load a 1/3rd increase for seismic or wind load

40. We recommend the following lateral earth pressure values be used for retaining wall design with the Phase 1 alignment. Active earth pressure values may be used when walls are free to yield an amount sufficient to develop the active earth pressure condition (about ½% of height). The effect of wall rotation should be considered for areas behind the planned retaining wall (pavements, foundations, slabs, etc.). When walls are restrained at the top or to design for minimal wall rotation, use the at-rest earth pressure values.

TABLE No. 3 - Active and At-Rest Earth Pressure Values Backfill Slope Active Earth Pressure At-rest Earth Pressure (H:V) (psf/ft of depth) (psf/ft of depth) Level 45 60 3:1 50 78 2:1 60 85

Please note: Should the slope behind the retaining walls be other than shown in above table, supplemental design criteria will be provided for the active earth or at rest pressures for the particular slope angle.

41. For resisting passive earth pressure use 275 psf/ft of depth. Neglect passive pressures in the top 12 inches of footing embedment. Additionally, there must be a minimum of 5 feet of soil, measured horizontally, in front of the outside edge of the footing for passive pressures to develop.

42. Design for a “coefficient of friction” between base of foundation and soil of 0.30.

RRM Design Group Page 16 June 23, 2017 Project No. 1566-SZ67-H42 Revised September 1, 2017

43. For the design of live or dead loads which will transmit a force to the wall, refer to Figure No. 50.

Phase 2 Soldier Pile Retaining Walls 44. Soldier pile and lagging retaining walls are planned for the Phase 2 section of trail adjacent to the back side of La Barranca Park. The piles should consist of drilled, cast-in-place reinforced concrete piers that are embedded into competent soil or bedrock. Piers will either be designed as a cantilever system or possibly will incorporate tie-backs, depending on the structural design. As shown on the 60% submittal dated April 2017, wall heights could range from about 3 to 14 feet in height.

45. Based on the information obtained from our subsurface borings and our observations along the Phase 2 alignment, we have developed the following table presenting our general interpretation of the anticipated earth materials along the proposed wall alignment:

TABLE No. 4 - Anticipated Earth Materials – Phase 2 Wall Alignment Approximate Station Length Retained Conditions Pile Bearing Conditions Phase 2 Marine Terrace underlain by Purisima 201 to 204 Marine Terrace Deposits Formation at approximate Elevation 48’* 204 to 211 Marine Terrace Deposits Purisima Formation Bedrock 211to 216 Purisima Formation Bedrock Purisima Formation Bedrock 216 to 219+50 Marine Terrace Deposits Purisima Formation Bedrock 219+50 to 220+50 Purisima Formation Bedrock Purisima Formation Bedrock 220+50 to 221+50 Marine Terrace Deposits Purisima Formation Bedrock 221+50 to 224+50 Purisima Formation Bedrock Purisima Formation Bedrock 224+50 to 231 Basin Deposits Basin Deposits Basin Deposits underlain by Purisima 231 to end of wall Basin Deposits Formation at approximate Elevation 9’*

*Elevations based on topographic data from the April 2017 60% design submittal and surveyed boring locations in May of 2017.

46. We recommend the following lateral earth pressure values be used for design of soldier pile retaining walls. The active earth pressure values may be used when walls are free to yield an amount sufficient to develop the active earth pressure condition (about ½% of height). The effect of wall rotation should be considered for areas behind the planned retaining wall (pavements, foundations, slabs, etc.). When walls are restrained at the top or to design for minimal wall rotation, use the at-rest earth pressure values. For rigid walls that incorporate tie-back anchors, refer to the “Tie-Back Anchors” section below for lateral earth pressure design criteria.

47. Based on the results of our investigation, it is anticipated that the proposed wall alignment will retain either earth materials, or Purisima Formation bedrock. We have provided lateral

RRM Design Group Page 17 June 23, 2017 Project No. 1566-SZ67-H42 Revised September 1, 2017

earth pressure values below for both conditions, however in all cases it is expected that the backslope above the wall will be comprised entirely of earth materials. Where native back slopes exceed 2:1 (h:v) we recommend the wall be designed using a maximum backslope of 1½:1 (h:v), assuming that steeper slopes will eventually lay back at around 34 degrees, which is generally typical for marine terrace deposits.

TABLE No. 5 - Active/At Rest Earth Pressures For Earth-Retained Slopes Case I – Earth Retained Slopes and Backslope Backfill Slope Active Earth Pressure At-Rest Earth (H:V) (psf/ft of depth) Pressure (psf/ft of depth) Level 45 60 3:1 50 78 2:1 60 85 1½:1 77 90

TABLE No. 6 - Active/At Rest Earth Pressures For Retained Bedrock Slopes and Earth Backslope Case II –Retained Bedrock Slopes and Earth Backslope Backfill Slope Active Earth Pressure At-Rest Earth (H:V) (psf/ft of depth) Pressure (psf/ft of depth) Level 30 45 3:1 35 60 2:1 46 69 1½:1 57 80

48. Piers should be at least 2.0 feet in diameter with a pier spacing of between 3 and 4 pier diameters

49. Piers should be designed to support vertical dead plus normal live loading using the following values:

An allowable skin friction value between the pier shaft and adjacent soil of 350 pounds per square foot for Marine Terrace Deposits (approximately Station 201 to 204).

An allowable skin friction value between the pier shaft and adjacent soil of 600 pounds per square foot for Purisima Formation bedrock (approximately Station 204 to 224+50).

An allowable skin friction value between the pier shaft and adjacent soil of 200 pounds per square foot for Basin Deposits (approximately Station 224+50 to end of wall).

RRM Design Group Page 18 June 23, 2017 Project No. 1566-SZ67-H42 Revised September 1, 2017

These skin friction values may be increased by one-third when considering transient loads, such as wind and seismic loading.

50. Skin friction resistance should be neglected within the upper 10 feet of pier embedment for the segment of retaining wall parallel to the existing 66-inch pipe (approximately located from Station 234+40 to end of wall).

51. Pier embedment depth for resistance to lateral loads may be determined as follows:

Passive soil pressure simulated by an equivalent fluid pressure of 350 psf/ft of depth for Marine Terrace Deposits (approximately Station 201 to 204).

Passive soil pressure simulated by an equivalent fluid pressure of 600 psf/ft of depth for Purisima Formation bedrock (approximately Station 204 to 224+50).

Passive soil pressure simulated by an equivalent fluid pressure of 200 psf/ft of depth for Basin Deposits (approximately Station 224+50 to end of wall).

52. Passive pressures may be assumed to act on a plane which is 2.0 times the pier diameter for piers embedded into bedrock, and 1.5 times the pier diameter elsewhere. Passive resistance may be increased by one-third for short term wind and seismic loads.

53. For the segment of retaining wall parallel to an existing 66-inch pipe (approximately located from Station 234+40 to end of wall), passive resistance should be neglected for a depth of 10 feet within the zone between the face of wall and the pipe.

54. For Basin Deposit materials, currently expected to be present from approximately Station 224+50 to end of wall) we recommend a minimum pier embedment of 12 feet, or as required to resist the design lateral loads, whichever is greater. The minimum embedment depth may be reduced to 6 feet for retaining walls 4 feet or less in height. Deeper piers may be required between Stations 234+40 to end of wall due to the close proximity of an existing 66-inch pipe.

55. Embedment depths for piers to be founded entirely within Marine Terrace or Purisima Formation materials may be calculated on the basis of vertical or lateral load requirements, whichever governs, however a minimum pier embedment of 6 feet is recommended. Final required embedment depths should be determined by the structural engineer, and verified by our representative in the field.

56. The piers should contain steel reinforcement as determined by the project civil or structural designer.

57. The piers should be drilled within ½ percent of a vertically plumb condition.

58. We anticipate that perched ground water conditions may be present near the bedrock contact, or when excavating with Basin Deposit materials. If ground water is encountered

RRM Design Group Page 19 June 23, 2017 Project No. 1566-SZ67-H42 Revised September 1, 2017

during pier drilling it should be either pumped from the holes or the concrete placed via a tremie. The end of the tremie tube must remain embedded a minimum of 4 feet into the concrete at all times.

59. The base of all pier holes should be cleaned of all loose soil prior to placement of steel and concrete. All pier construction must be observed by a Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. so that we can verify that piers extend sufficiently into competent bearing materials. Any piers constructed without the full knowledge and continuous observation of a representative from Pacific Crest Engineering Inc., will render the recommendations of this report invalid.

60. The Contractor should expect hard rock drilling conditions. Therefore; appropriately sized drilling equipment should be selected so that the piers may extend to the full depth as outlined in the project plans and specifications.

Tieback Anchors 61. Tie-back systems should be designed for apparent lateral earth pressure. The recommended lateral earth pressure distributions for anchored walls are presented in Figure No. 52. The following soil parameters are recommended for design:

TABLE No. 7 – Apparent Lateral Earth Coefficients

Retained Slope Materials Marine Terrace Purisima Formation Basin Deposits Deposits Bedrock Unit Soil Weight 125 pcf 110 pcf 130 pcf Level Backslope KA = .36 KA = .40 KA = .23 2:1 Backslope KA = .48 KA = .54 KA = .35 1½:1 Backslope KA = .61 KA = .70 KA = .44 Passive Earth 2.8 1.8 4.6 Pressure, KP

62. The tie-back wall design should incorporate all geotechnical design criteria outlined above, including seismic design criteria, if appropriate. Tie-back design and the construction techniques for installing them are the responsibility of the specialty tie-back contractor.

63. Tie-backs should be installed at an inclination of 15 to 20 degrees below horizontal.

64. Grouted tiebacks should be either bundles of steel tendons or solid steel bars, corrosion protected, and placed in drilled holes with a minimum diameter of 8 inches. A double corrosion protection system must be used.

65. All tiebacks must have a minimum unbonded length of 10 feet. Grouted tiebacks shall have a minimum bonded length of 12 feet, which equates to a minimum tieback embedment length of 22 feet from the face of the wall.

RRM Design Group Page 20 June 23, 2017 Project No. 1566-SZ67-H42 Revised September 1, 2017

66. It should be anticipated that the anchor installation will require advancing through hard rock in order to achieve the design bonded length.

67. The bond stress for design of anchor bond length depends upon factors such as installation technique, grouting procedures, hole diameter, etc. Preliminary design of the tie- backs may be based on an ultimate soil/grout bond value of 1500 psf. It may be necessary to construct the tiebacks as pressure grouted or post-grouted (crack-grouted) anchors to obtain this projected load transfer capacity. It is also possible that a higher load transfer capacity could be achieved. Pre-construction testing would help establish loads. It is the Contractor’s responsibility to construct tiebacks which develop the required tieback capacity.

68. Tieback ground anchors should be constructed and tested in accordance with Section 46-2 of the 2015 State of California Standard Specifications.

69. All tie-backs must be proof tested by the Contractor in the presence of the Geotechnical Engineer to 133% of their design load, with 5% of the anchors performance tested to 133% of the design load. Any tie-backs that fail during testing must be removed, reconstructed and retested at the Contractor’s expense. Testing and acceptance criteria should be based Section 46-2.01D of the 2015 State of California Standard Specifications.

70. Tie-back anchors should be locked off at a value of at least 80 to 90 percent of the design load for the tie-back anchor, or as determined by the project structural engineer.

71. Tie-back designs, construction details and corrosion protection systems must be submitted for review to the structural and geotechnical engineer minimum of three weeks in advance of the commencement of tie-back construction.

72. All tie-back anchor construction and testing must be observed by a representative from Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Any tie-back anchors constructed without the full knowledge and continuous observation of Pacific Crest Engineering Inc., will render the recommendations of this report invalid. The Contractor and drilling subcontractor should be notified regarding this requirement.

Drainage 73. The lateral earth pressure design criteria provided in this report assume fully drained conditions behind the retaining wall structure. Lagging should be installed between the soldier piers and the zone behind the lagging should be drained.

74. The above criteria are based on fully drained conditions. Therefore, we recommend that permeable material meeting the State of California Standard Specification Section 68- 1.025, Class 1, Type A, be placed behind the wall, with a minimum width of 12 inches and extending for the full height of the wall to within 1 foot of the ground surface. The permeable material should be covered with filter fabric meeting the requirements of Section 96 of the State of California 2015 Standard Specifications. Class B soils may be assumed. Compacted native soil should then be placed over the filter fabric to the ground surface. A 4- inch diameter

RRM Design Group Page 21 June 23, 2017 Project No. 1566-SZ67-H42 Revised September 1, 2017

perforated rigid plastic drain pipe should be installed within 3 inches of the bottom of the permeable material and be discharged to a suitable, approved location. The perforations should be located and oriented on the lower half of the pipe. Neither the pipe nor the permeable material should be wrapped in filter fabric. Please refer to Figure No. 51, Typical Retaining Wall Drain Detail.

75. Alternatively, the perforated pipe may be omitted and the lagging separated vertically using ¼” spacers so that water will be allowed to weep directly through the face of the wall. 76. Weepholes are also an acceptable alternative method for draining the retaining wall. If used, the weepholes should outlet at or near the base of the wall. Weepholes should consist of pipes with an inside diameter of at least 2 inches. The weepholes should extend through the wall and positively connect with the drain rock. To minimize the potential for debris to clog the pipe, the pipes should slant with a 4% downward gradient towards the outside face of the wall. Filter fabric meeting the requirements of Section 96 of the State of California Standard Specifications should be placed adjacent to the wall directly behind the weepholes. Class A soils may be assumed. The weepholes should be spaced not more than 5 feet apart. The outside end of the drain pipes should be protected with a galvanized wire mesh screen, grate cap or an equivalent system. Please refer to Figure 51, Typical Retaining Wall Drain Detail. 77. The wall must be constructed in a manner that prevents the loss of drain rock at the ends of the wall. Containment of the drain rock may be achieved by embedding the ends of the wall into solid ground. 78. The area behind the wall and beyond the permeable material should be compacted with approved material to a minimum relative dry density of 90%.

UTILITY TRENCHES 79. Utility trenches that are parallel to the sides of the structural footings should be placed so that they do not extend below a line sloping down and away at a 2:1 (horizontal to vertical) slope from the bottom outside edge of all footings.

80. Utility pipes should be designed and constructed so that the top of pipe is a minimum of 24 inches below the finish subgrade elevation of any road or pavement areas. Any pipes within the top 24 inches of finish subgrade should be concrete encased, per design by the project civil engineer.

81. For the purpose of this section of the report, backfill is defined as material placed in a trench starting one foot above the pipe, and bedding is all material placed in a trench below the backfill.

82. Unless concrete bedding is required around utility pipes, bedding material should meet Section 64-2.02B of the State of California 2015 Standard Specifications. Sand bedding should be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction.

RRM Design Group Page 22 June 23, 2017 Project No. 1566-SZ67-H42 Revised September 1, 2017

83. Approved imported clean sand meeting Section 64-2.02B of the State of California 2015 Standard Specifications or approved native silty and sandy soils may be used as utility trench backfill. Utility trench backfill in trenches located under and adjacent to structural fill, foundations, concrete slabs and pavements should be placed in horizontal layers no more than 8 inches thick. This includes areas such as sidewalks, patios, and other hardscape areas. Each layer of trench backfill should be water conditioned and compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction. Clean sand is defined as 100 percent passing the #4 sieve, and less than 5 percent passing the #200 sieve.

84. All utility trenches beneath perimeter footings or grade beams should be backfilled with controlled density fill (such as 2-sack sand\cement slurry) to help minimize potential moisture intrusion below interior floors. The length of the plug should be at least three times the width of the perimeter footing or grade beam, but not more than 36 inches. A representative from Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. should be contacted to observe the placement of slurry plugs. In addition, all utility pipes which penetrate through the footings, stemwalls or grade beams (below the exterior soil grade) should also be sealed water-tight, as determined by the project engineer or architect.

85. A representative from our firm should be present to observe the bottom of all trench excavations, prior to placement of utility pipes and conduits. In addition, we should observe the condition of the trench prior to placement of sand bedding, and to observe compaction of the sand bedding, in addition to any backfill planned above the bedding zone.

86. Jetting of the trench backfill is not recommended as it may result in an unsatisfactory degree of compaction.

87. Trenches must be shored as required by the local agency and the State of California Division of Industrial Safety construction safety orders.

INFILTRATION TESTING 88. In addition to the geotechnical investigation, our firm was asked to perform a site specific infiltration study for proposed storm-water infiltration areas along selected areas of the planned alignment. The study utilized a combination of soil exploration, grain size analysis and single- ring infiltrometer or falling head percolation testing to document the general subsurface conditions at each test location. Selected subsurface samples were also submitted to an outside laboratory for hydraulic conductivity testing in accordance with ASTM D5084.

89. A total of six percolation test pits were excavated. Due to site constraints at P15 we were not able excavate a test pit at that location, therefore a falling head percolation test was performed using a 6-inch diameter boring.

90. The test depths ranged in depth between 2½ and 5 feet. The test locations are shown on Figure No. 2A through 2D of Appendix A, and the test data and results are presented in Appendix B.

RRM Design Group Page 23 June 23, 2017 Project No. 1566-SZ67-H42 Revised September 1, 2017

91. The testing program was developed using general guidelines as outlined in “Native Soil Assessment for Small Infiltration-Based Stormwater Control Measures” dated December 2013 by Earth Systems Pacific. Six of the seven tests were conducted within the near-surface terrace deposit materials which are comprised of predominately clayey soils with varying amounts of sand and gravel, or clayey to silty sands with significant fines content. Purisima bedrock was noted at the ground surface at test location P15.

Preparation of Infiltration Test Holes 92. Test pits at locations P2, P5, P7, P12 and P19 were excavated to the planned depths with a backhoe, and measured approximately 5 by 6 feet. Upon completion of excavation, the bottom of the test pit was cleaned and leveled with a shovel. A 24-inch diameter by 20-inch tall aluminum ring was then driven approximately 4-inches into the soil at the bottom of the test pit. A pointed indicator rod was attached to the ring. This indicator was not moved throughout the duration of the test, and represented a constant elevation of 6 inches above the bottom of the test pit. A graduated Marriotte tube was then attached to the aluminum ring. The Marriotte tube and aluminum ring were then filled with water to the designated elevations.

93. The percolation test boring at location P15 was drilled using a 6-inch diameter hydraulically-operated, continuous-flight auger. Upon completion of drilling, the hole was cleaned and approximately 1 to 2 inches of clean crushed 3/8 inch diameter gravel was placed at the bottom of the each boring. A 3-inch diameter perforated pipe was then placed within the test boring.

Test Procedure – Single Ring Infiltrometer Test 94. The single ring infiltrometer test was performed in accordance with ASTM D5126. At the commencement of the test, the water level within the aluminum ring was adjusted until the pointed indicator rod broke the surface tension of the water. The initial elevation of the water within the Marriotte tube was then recorded, and the water within the aluminum ring was allowed to seep into the soil for a duration of 15 or 30 minutes. During the test interval, the water elevation within the aluminum ring was maintained at a constant head of 6 inches. This was done by releasing water from the Marriotte tube into the aluminum ring until the indicator rod again broke the surface tension of the water surface. At the end of the test interval, the final elevation of the water within the Marriotte tube was recorded. This process was repeated for a minimum test duration of 2 hours. The final reading was then used to calculate the tested infiltration rate, It in inches per hour. The tested infiltration rate is then divided by a 2.0 to obtain the measured infiltration rate, Km.

Test Procedure – Falling Head Percolation Test 95. A falling head percolation test was performed for P15 in general accordance with the shallow quick infiltration testing methodology as outlined in the Earth Systems document. At the beginning of the test, water was placed in the bore hole to the ground surface. The water level was maintained at a constant elevation and allowed to seep into the soil for a duration of 30 minutes. At the end of the 30 minute period, a falling-head percolation test was performed. An elevation datum was established from which each measurement was taken. As the water

RRM Design Group Page 24 June 23, 2017 Project No. 1566-SZ67-H42 Revised September 1, 2017

level fell, measurements from the datum to the water level were taken at suitable intervals for a minimum period of 2 hours. The time required for the water in the standpipe to drop was recorded. The final reading was then used to calculate the percolation rate in minutes per inch.

96. This test measures the length of time required for a quantity of water to infiltrate into the soil, which is often called a “percolation rate”. Percolation rate is related to, but not equal to, the infiltration rate It as determined by a single or double-ring infiltrometer test. The relationship between the values obtained by a percolation test and infiltration rate can be determined using the “Porchet Method” which is used to convert percolation rates to the tested infiltration rate It. The value of It is then divided by 2.0 to obtain the measured infiltration rate, Km.

Findings and Conclusions 97. Our findings and conclusions in regard to infiltration and the design of storm water drainage facilities for this project are provided below. 98. At the time we prepared this report, the site plans had not been completed and the locations of bioretention/detention facilities had not been finalized. We request an opportunity to review these plans during the design stages to determine if supplemental recommendations or testing will be required.

99. The table below presents a summary of infiltration rates as determined during our study. The test data and calculations for each test location is presented in Appendix B.

TABLE No. 8 - Summary of Infiltration Test Rates Measured Test Soil Test Infiltration Test Hole Date Length Classification Depth Rate, KM (hours) (in/hour) P-2 9/11/2015 CL/SC 2.5 feet 2.0 0.0 P-5 10/8/2015 CL/SC 3.0 feet 2.0 0.0 P-7 10/8/2015 SC 3.5 feet 2.0 0.0 P-9 10/9/2015 SC 3.0 feet 3.25 0.1 P-12 10/9/2015 SC 3.2 feet 2.75 0.4 P-15 10/16/2015 SM 5.0 feet 4.0 0.1 P-19 10/16/2015 SM 3.5 feet 2.75 0.2

100. The table below presents the results of hydraulic conductivity testing on selected samples. The laboratory test results are presented in Appendix A.

RRM Design Group Page 25 June 23, 2017 Project No. 1566-SZ67-H42 Revised September 1, 2017

TABLE No. 9 - Summary of Hydraulic Conductivity Testing Hydraulic Sample Soil Test Conductivity, Date Location Classification Depth cm/sec ASTM D5084 2-1-1 9/11/2015 CL/SC 2.5 feet < 1 x 10-8 5-1-1 10/8/2015 CL/SC 2.5 feet 1 x10-6 5-3-1 10/8/2015 CL 5.5 feet 2 x 10-8 9-1-1 10/9/2015 SC 1.5 feet 2 x 10-6 15-1-1 10/16/2015 Tp 2.5 feet 2 x 10-6 17-1-1 10/8/2015 SM 2.5 feet 5 x 10-5

101. The near surface soils encountered in our test borings across the site were comprised of predominately clayey soils with varying amounts of sand and gravel, clayey to silty sands with significant fines content, or bedrock. The fines content (clay and silt fraction) of these soils ranged from 39% to 72%. These divergent soil conditions are reflected in the varied percolation rates that range from nil to 0.44 inches per hour.

102. Based on the results of field and laboratory testing, it is our opinion that the near surface soils along the proposed alignment possess generally very poor infiltration and permeability characteristics.

103. In general, percolation rates tend to decrease as the percentage of fine grained soil increases. The Unified Soil Classification System defines fine grained soils as material with 50 percent or more passing the No. 200 sieve. In addition, fine grained soil can be divided into two sub-groups, silt and clay. The deviation between silt and clay is also dependent on the materials respective particle size, with silt being coarser grained than clay. Therefore, infiltration rates also tend to decrease as a soil transitions from silt to clay.

104. Percolation rates are also affected by the saturation level of the in-situ soil. As soil becomes saturated, the pore space within the soil fills with water. As a result, additional water no longer has a path to flow, rendering even the most porous materials as impermeable. Therefore, as the saturation level of an in-situ soil increases, the infiltration rates generally decrease.

105. This testing was performed during a period of relatively little rainfall across the region. As a result, the current saturation levels of the in-situ soils may be lower than normal. Generally, infiltration rates tend to decrease as the relative saturation of the soil increases. Therefore, the infiltration rates as achieved during this site specific investigation, which are already nil to very low, may decrease further during a normal or above normal rainfall event. As a result, we would recommend that the design firm apply a safety factor to the design values as a way to account for seasonal variations.

106. All bioretention/detention basin areas should include a factor of safety in their design.

RRM Design Group Page 26 June 23, 2017 Project No. 1566-SZ67-H42 Revised September 1, 2017

107. Maintenance of the storm water drainage facilities will be critical in order to maintain the design percolation rates. The storm water drainage facilities must be inspected and maintained on a routine basis. Repairs and upgrades, whenever necessary, must be made in a timely manner. We recommend routine inspections of the drainage systems prior to each rainy season, following the first significant rain, and throughout each rainy season. The civil and geotechnical engineers should be consulted if significant drainage problems occur so that the conditions can be observed and supplemental recommendations can be provided, as necessary.

SURFACE DRAINAGE 108. Surface water should not be allowed to pond on the pathway or pavement areas to the maximum extent possible.

109. The surface drainage facilities must not be altered nor any filling or excavation work performed in the area without first consulting Pacific Crest Engineering, Inc. Surface drainage improvements developed by the project civil engineer must be maintained, as improper drainage provisions can produce undesirable affects.

110. Following completion of the project we recommend that storm drainage provisions be closely observed through the first season of significant rainfall, to determine if these systems are performing adequately and, if necessary, resolve any unforeseen issues.

PAVEMENT DESIGN 111. The soils that will comprise the pavement subgrade will in all likelihood be the clayey sand soils predominating on the site. The “R” Value results ranged from 31 to 46. We used an “R” Value of 31 for design of the pavement sections noted below. This must be verified in the field and, if necessary, modifications made to these tentative sections.

112. For design purposes, the following traffic indices are suggested*:

a. Off-Street Bike Paths & Pedestrian Trails T.I. = 3 b. Residential Streets and Parking Stalls T.I. = 4 c. Street and Road Traffic Lanes T.I. = 5½ d. Truck usage areas T.I. = 6½

*Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. has not performed a site specific traffic study to determine the actual traffic indices associated with this project. These values are for general design purposes only and the values may need modification. Traffic volume and equivalent axle loads that exceed the assumed TI could be destructive to the pavement, resulting in an accelerated rate of deterioration and the need for increased maintenance.

113. The table below provides a flexible pavement design which is based on the 6th Edition of the Caltrans Highway Design Manual – Chapter 630 (last updated December 31, 2016).

114. The following pavement sections are suggested:

RRM Design Group Page 27 June 23, 2017 Project No. 1566-SZ67-H42 Revised September 1, 2017

TABLE No. 10, Recommended Pavement Sections Material Traffic Index 3 4.0 5½ 6½ Asphalt Concrete 2.0 inches 2.5 inches 3.0 inches 3.5 inches Class 2 Aggregate Base, 4.0 inches 4.0 inches 7.0 inches 9.0 inches R=78 min.

Please Note: A Traffic Index of 3 assumes loads associated with a bike lane designation such as those applied by normal bike and pedestrian traffic and the occasional light maintenance vehicle. Higher traffic indices should be applied for pavement sections subjected to regular and/or frequent vehicle traffic.

115. To have the selected pavement sections perform to their greatest efficiency, it is very important that the following items be considered:

a. The upper 8 inches of the subgrade soil should be compacted to a minimum of 95% of its maximum dry density, at a moisture content 1 to 3% over the optimum moisture content for the soil.

b. Provide sufficient gradient to prevent ponding of water.

c. Use only quality materials of the type and thickness (minimum) specified. All aggregate base and subbase must meet Caltrans Standard Specifications for Class 2 materials, and be angular in shape. All Class 2 aggregate base should be ¾ inch maximum in aggregate size.

d. Compact the base and subbase uniformly to a minimum of 95% of its maximum dry density.

e. Use ½ inch maximum, Type “A” medium graded asphaltic concrete. Place the asphaltic concrete only during periods of fair weather when the free air temperature is within prescribed limits by Cal Trans Specifications.

f. Porous pavement systems which consist of porous paving blocks, asphaltic concrete or concrete are generally not recommended due to the potential for saturation of the subgrade soils and resulting increased potential for a shorter pavement life. At a minimum, porous pavement systems should include a layer of geotextile fabric meeting Section 96 of the State of California 2015 Standard Specifications for Class A1 geotextiles placed on the subgrade soil beneath the porous paving section. These pavement systems should only be used with the understanding by the Owner of the increased potential for pavement cracking, rutting, potholes, etc.

g. Maintenance should be undertaken on a routine basis.

RRM Design Group Page 28 June 23, 2017 Project No. 1566-SZ67-H42 Revised September 1, 2017

SOIL CORROSIVITY 116. Corrosivity tests were run on four representative surface soil samples collected along the proposed alignment. TABLE No. 11, Corrosivity Test Summary Soil Sulfate Sample Resistivity Chloride (water soluble) pH Ohm-cm mg/kg mg/kg 1-1-1/1-1-2 3213 25 74 7.9 8-1-1/8-1-2 5353 6 21 8.4 10-1-1/10-1-2 6540 7 28 8.1 20-1-1/20-1-2 1725 24 123 7.8

117. Soil resistivity is a measure of the ability of a soil to conduct electrical current. Lower resistivity generally indicates higher corrosivity. Levels between 0 and 1,000 ohm-cm are correlated to very corrosive soils, while levels of 10,000 and above are considered to have a negligible degree of corrosivity. The resistivity results from the collected samples indicate the native soils to be mildly to moderately corrosive. In general, ASTM A-674 considers soils with resistivity less than 1,500 ohm-cm to be corrosive to cast iron alloys and ductile iron pipe.

118. The concentration of chloride and sulfate in soils can also have a corrosive effect on buried utilities and foundation elements. Soil chloride concentrations over 1,500 mg/kg are considered to have a severe degree of corrosivity, while levels below 300 mg/kg are considered negligible. Sulfate levels over 5,000 mg/kg are considered as having a severe degree of corrosivity, while levels below 1,000 mg/kg are considered negligible.

119. Another factor influencing corrosion potential is pH. Values below a pH of 6 indicate an increasing potential for significant acid attack on concrete and steel. Cal Trans recommends that, for highly acidic sites (pH is less than 5.5), additional concrete cover over steel reinforcement or a protective coating on concrete surfaces be used as mitigation measures.

120. CalTrans considers a site to be corrosive to foundation elements if one or more of the following conditions exist at the site:

a. The soil resistivity is less than 1,000 ohm-cm b. Chloride concentration is greater than or equal to 500 mg/Kg (ppm) c. Sulfate concentration is greater than or equal to 2000 mg/Kg (ppm) d. The soil pH is 5.5 or less

Refer to CalTrans Corrosion Guidelines, version 1.0 (September, 2003 or latest) for additional information.

RRM Design Group Page 29 June 23, 2017 Project No. 1566-SZ67-H42 Revised September 1, 2017

121. Based on the results of the chloride, sulfate and pH, it appears that the near surface native soils may be assumed to be non-corrosive based on CalTrans guidelines. The corrosion potential for any imported select fill should also be checked for corrosivity.

122. Please refer to Figure No. 43 in Appendix A for the specific corrosivity results by the analytical laboratory.

PLAN REVIEW 123. We respectfully request an opportunity to review the project plans and specifications during preparation and before bidding to ensure that the recommendations of this report have been included and to provide additional recommendations, if needed. These plan review services are also typically required by the reviewing agency. Misinterpretation of our recommendations or omission of our requirements from the project plans and specifications may result in changes to the project design during the construction phase, with the potential for additional costs and delays in order to bring the project into conformance with the requirements outlined within this report. Services performed for review of the project plans and specifications are considered “post-report” services and billed on a “time and materials” fee basis in accordance with our latest Standard Fee Schedule.

RRM Design Group Page 30 June 23, 2017 Project No. 1566-SZ67-H42 Revised September 1, 2017

LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS

1. This Geotechnical Investigation was prepared specifically for RRM Design and for the specific project and location described in the body of this report. This report and the recommendations included herein should be utilized for this specific project and location exclusively. This Geotechnical Investigation should not be applied to nor utilized on any other project or project site. Please refer to the ASFE “Important Information about Your Geotechnical Engineering Report” attached with this report.

2. The recommendations of this report are based upon the assumption that the soil conditions do not deviate from those disclosed in the borings. If any variations or undesirable conditions are encountered during construction, or if the proposed construction will differ from that planned at the time, our firm should be notified so that supplemental recommendations can be provided.

3. This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or his representative, to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are called to the attention of the Architects and Engineers for the project and incorporated into the plans, and that the necessary steps are taken to ensure that the Contractors and Subcontractors carry out such recommendations in the field.

4. The findings of this report are valid as of the present date. However, changes in the conditions of a property can occur with the passage of time, whether they are due to natural process or the works of man, on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standards occur, whether they result from legislation or the broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, the findings of this report may be invalidated, wholly or partially, by changes outside of our control. This report should therefore be reviewed in light of future planned construction and then current applicable codes. This report should not be considered valid after a period of two (2) years without our review.

5. This report was prepared upon your request for our services in accordance with currently accepted standards of professional geotechnical engineering practice. No warranty as to the contents of this report is intended, and none shall be inferred from the statements or opinions expressed.

6. The scope of our services mutually agreed upon for this project did not include any environmental assessment or study for the presence of hazardous or toxic materials in the soil, surface water, groundwater, or air, on or below or around this site.

Important Information About Your Geotechnical Engineering Report

Subsurface problems are a principal cause of construction delays, cost overruns, claims, and disputes.

The following information is provided to help you manage your risks.

Geotechnical Services Are Performed for • elevation, configuration, location, orientation, or weight of the Specific Purposes, Persons, and Projects proposed structure, Geotechnical engineers structure their services to meet the specific needs of • composition of the design team, or their clients. A geotechnical engineering study conducted for a civil engi- • project ownership. neer may not fulfill the needs of a construction contractor or even another civil engineer. Because each geotechnical engineering study is unique, each As a general rule, always inform your geotechnical engineer of project geotechnical engineering report is unique, prepared solely for the client. No changes—even minor ones—and request an assessment of their impact. one except you should rely on your geotechnical engineering report without Geotechnical engineers cannot accept responsibility or liability for problems first conferring with the geotechnical engineer who prepared it. And no one that occur because their reports do not consider developments of which — not even you — should apply the report for any purpose or project they were not informed. except the one originally contemplated. Subsurface Conditions Can Change Read the Full Report A geotechnical engineering report is based on conditions that existed at Serious problems have occurred because those relying on a geotechnical the time the study was performed. Do not rely on a geotechnical engineer- engineering report did not read it all. Do not rely on an executive summary. ing report whose adequacy may have been affected by: the passage of Do not read selected elements only. time; by man-made events, such as construction on or adjacent to the site; or by natural events, such as floods, earthquakes, or groundwater fluctua- A Geotechnical Engineering Report Is Based on tions. Always contact the geotechnical engineer before applying the report A Unique Set of Project-Specific Factors to determine if it is still reliable. A minor amount of additional testing or Geotechnical engineers consider a number of unique, project-specific fac- analysis could prevent major problems. tors when establishing the scope of a study. Typical factors include: the client's goals, objectives, and risk management preferences; the general Most Geotechnical Findings Are Professional nature of the structure involved, its size, and configuration; the location of Opinions the structure on the site; and other planned or existing site improvements, Site exploration identifies subsurface conditions only at those points where such as access roads, parking lots, and underground utilities. Unless the subsurface tests are conducted or samples are taken. Geotechnical engi- geotechnical engineer who conducted the study specifically indicates oth- neers review field and laboratory data and then apply their professional erwise, do not rely on a geotechnical engineering report that was: judgment to render an opinion about subsurface conditions throughout the • not prepared for you, site. Actual subsurface conditions may differ—sometimes significantly— • not prepared for your project, from those indicated in your report. Retaining the geotechnical engineer • not prepared for the specific site explored, or who developed your report to provide construction observation is the • completed before important project changes were made. most effective method of managing the risks associated with unanticipated conditions. Typical changes that can erode the reliability of an existing geotechnical engineering report include those that affect: A Report's Recommendations Are Not Final • the function of the proposed structure, as when it's changed from a Do not overrely on the construction recommendations included in your parking garage to an office building, or from a light industrial plant report. Those recommendations are not final, because geotechnical engi- to a refrigerated warehouse, neers develop them principally from judgment and opinion. Geotechnical engineers can finalize their recommendations only by observing actual subsurface conditions revealed during construction. The geotechnical have led to disappointments, claims, and disputes. To help reduce the risk engineer who developed your report cannot assume responsibility or of such outcomes, geotechnical engineers commonly include a variety of liability for the report's recommendations if that engineer does not perform explanatory provisions in their reports. Sometimes labeled "limitations" construction observation. many of these provisions indicate where geotechnical engineers’ responsi- bilities begin and end, to help others recognize their own responsibilities A Geotechnical Engineering Report Is Subject to and risks. Read these provisions closely. Ask questions. Your geotechnical Misinterpretation engineer should respond fully and frankly. Other design team members' misinterpretation of geotechnical engineering reports has resulted in costly problems. Lower that risk by having your geo- Geoenvironmental Concerns Are Not Covered technical engineer confer with appropriate members of the design team after The equipment, techniques, and personnel used to perform a geoenviron- submitting the report. Also retain your geotechnical engineer to review perti- mental study differ significantly from those used to perform a geotechnical nent elements of the design team's plans and specifications. Contractors can study. For that reason, a geotechnical engineering report does not usually also misinterpret a geotechnical engineering report. Reduce that risk by relate any geoenvironmental findings, conclusions, or recommendations; having your geotechnical engineer participate in prebid and preconstruction e.g., about the likelihood of encountering underground storage tanks or conferences, and by providing construction observation. regulated contaminants. Unanticipated environmental problems have led to numerous project failures. If you have not yet obtained your own geoen- Do Not Redraw the Engineer's Logs vironmental information, ask your geotechnical consultant for risk man- Geotechnical engineers prepare final boring and testing logs based upon agement guidance. Do not rely on an environmental report prepared for their interpretation of field logs and laboratory data. To prevent errors or someone else. omissions, the logs included in a geotechnical engineering report should never be redrawn for inclusion in architectural or other design drawings. Obtain Professional Assistance To Deal with Mold Only photographic or electronic reproduction is acceptable, but recognize Diverse strategies can be applied during building design, construction, that separating logs from the report can elevate risk. operation, and maintenance to prevent significant amounts of mold from growing on indoor surfaces. To be effective, all such strategies should be Give Contractors a Complete Report and devised for the express purpose of mold prevention, integrated into a com- Guidance prehensive plan, and executed with diligent oversight by a professional Some owners and design professionals mistakenly believe they can make mold prevention consultant. Because just a small amount of water or contractors liable for unanticipated subsurface conditions by limiting what moisture can lead to the development of severe mold infestations, a num- they provide for bid preparation. To help prevent costly problems, give con- ber of mold prevention strategies focus on keeping building surfaces dry. tractors the complete geotechnical engineering report, but preface it with a While groundwater, water infiltration, and similar issues may have been clearly written letter of transmittal. In that letter, advise contractors that the addressed as part of the geotechnical engineering study whose findings report was not prepared for purposes of bid development and that the are conveyed in this report, the geotechnical engineer in charge of this report's accuracy is limited; encourage them to confer with the geotechnical project is not a mold prevention consultant; none of the services per- engineer who prepared the report (a modest fee may be required) and/or to formed in connection with the geotechnical engineer’s study conduct additional study to obtain the specific types of information they were designed or conducted for the purpose of mold preven- need or prefer. A prebid conference can also be valuable. Be sure contrac- tion. Proper implementation of the recommendations conveyed tors have sufficient time to perform additional study. Only then might you in this report will not of itself be sufficient to prevent mold be in a position to give contractors the best information available to you, from growing in or on the structure involved. while requiring them to at least share some of the financial responsibilities stemming from unanticipated conditions. Rely, on Your ASFE-Member Geotechncial Engineer for Additional Assistance Read Responsibility Provisions Closely Membership in ASFE/The Best People on Earth exposes geotechnical Some clients, design professionals, and contractors do not recognize that engineers to a wide array of risk management techniques that can be of geotechnical engineering is far less exact than other engineering disci- genuine benefit for everyone involved with a construction project. Confer plines. This lack of understanding has created unrealistic expectations that with you ASFE-member geotechnical engineer for more information.

8811 Colesville Road/Suite G106, Silver Spring, MD 20910 Telephone: 301/565-2733 Facsimile: 301/589-2017 e-mail: [email protected] www.asfe.org

Copyright 2004 by ASFE, Inc. Duplication, reproduction, or copying of this document, in whole or in part, by any means whatsoever, is strictly prohibited, except with ASFE’s specific written permission. Excerpting, quoting, or otherwise extracting wording from this document is permitted only with the express written permission of ASFE, and only for purposes of scholarly research or book review. Only members of ASFE may use this document as a complement to or as an element of a geotechnical engineering report. Any other firm, individual, or other entity that so uses this document without being an ASFE member could be commiting negligent or intentional (fraudulent) misrepresentation.

IIGER06045.0M RRM Design Group Page 33 June 23, 2017 Project No. 1566-SZ67-H42 Revised September 1, 2017

APPENDIX A

Regional Site Map Site Map Showing Test Borings Boring Log Explanation Log of Test Borings Atterberg Limits Direct Shear Test Results R-Value Test Results Corrosivity Test Summary Hydraulic Conductivity Test Results Surcharge Pressure Diagram Typical Retaining Wall Detail Options Apparent Earth Pressure Diagram

Page 34

Proposed Segment 7 Alignment

0 1440 ft. Base Map from Google Earth Approximate Scale N Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Regional Site Map Figure No. 1 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 35 EXPLANATION

Boring Location

Percolation Test Location

SWIFT STREET

NATURAL BRIDGES DRIVE B-5

P-2

B-1

P-5 B-3 B-4

B-2

N

SIte Map: 0 200 400 Santa Cruz Rail Trail Segment 7 W E Boring Locations Exhibit Prepared by rrm Design Group Scale: 1 inch = 200 feet June 30, 2017, 1” = 200’ S

Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Site Map Showing Test Boring Locations Figure No. 2A 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 36 EXPLANATION PALM STREET Boring Location

Percolation Test Location

DUFOUR STREET

B-9 B-8 BELLEVUE STREET P-9

YOUNGLOVE AVENUE

RANKIN STREET

ALMAR AVENUE

P-7

B-6

FAIR STREET

B-7

N

SIte Map: 0 200 400 Santa Cruz Rail Trail Segment 7 W E Boring Locations Exhibit Prepared by rrm Design Group Scale: 1 inch = 200 feet June 30, 2017, 1” = 200’ S

Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Site Map Showing Test Boring Locations Figure No. 2B 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17

Page 37 CALIFORNIA STREET CALIFORNIA SIte Map: Santa Cruz Rail Trail Segment 7 Boring Locations Exhibit Prepared by rrm Design Group June 30, 2017, 1” = 200’

B-10 P-12

B-21 BAY STREET B-13

B-11

B-12 B-22 PALM STREETLENNOX STREET

REDWOOD STREET B-14

CALIFORINA AVENUE B-23

EXPLANATION

Boring Location B-16 B-15 P-19

Percolation Test Location CONTINENTAL STREET

COLUMBIA STREET

NATIONAL STREET N

0 200 400 W E B-24 B-25 Scale: 1 inch = 200 feet S

CENTENNIAL STREET

LIBERTY STREET LAGUNA STREET

Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Site Map Showing Test Boring Locations Figure No. 2C 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 38

SIte Map: Santa Cruz Rail Trail Segment 7 N Boring Locations Exhibit Prepared by rrm Design Group June 30, 2017, 1” = 200’ W E

S

P-19

B-28 B-19 B-27

B-18

B-20

B-17

EXPLANATION

Boring Location B-26 0 200 400

Percolation Test Location Scale: 1 inch = 200 feet

Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Site Map Showing Test Boring Locations Figure No. 2D 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 39

UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM - ASTM D2488 (Modified) GROUP PRIMARY DIVISIONS SYMBOL SECONDARY DIVISIONS CLEAN GRAVELS GW Well graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines GRAVELS (LESS THAN 5% FINES) COARSE MORE THAN HALF OF GP Poorly graded gravels or gravels-sand mixtures, little or no fines COARSE FRACTION IS GM Silty gravels, gravel-sand-silt mixtures, non-plastic fines GRAINED LARGER THAN #4 SIEVE GRAVELS SOILS (MORE THAN 12% FINES) GC Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines MORE THAN HALF OF CLEAN SANDS SW Well graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines MATERIAL IS SANDS (LESS THAN 5% FINES) LARGER THAN MORE THAN HALF OF SP Poorly graded sands or gravelly sands, little or no fines #200 SIEVE SIZE COARSE FRACTION IS SMALLER THAN #4 SIEVE SANDS SM Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures, non-plastic fines (MORE THAN 12% FINES) SC Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines ML Inorganic silts and very fine clayey sand silty sands, with slight plasticity SILTS AND CLAYS CL Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly, sand, LIQUID LIMIT IS LESS THAN 35% silty or lean clays FINE OL Organic silts and organic silty clays of low plasticity GRAINED MI Inorganic silts, clayey silts and silty fine sands of intermediate SOILS LOGGED DATE plasticity BORING MORE THAN BORING SILTS AND CLAYS CI Inorganic clays, gravelly/sandy clays and silty clays of HALF OF LIQUID LIMIT IS BETWEEN 35% AND 50% MATERIAL IS intermediate plasticity SMALLER THAN #200 SIEVE SIZE OI Organic clays and silty clays of intermediate plasticity MH Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine sandy or silty soils, elastic silts SILTS AND CLAYS LIQUID LIMIT IS GREATER THAN 50% CH Organic clays of high plasticity, fat clays OH Organic clays of medium to high plasticity, organic silts HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT Peat and other highly organic soils BORING LOG EXPLANATION

MISC. SOIL DESCRIPTION LAB RESULTS Unified Soil Classification Plasticity Index Dry Density, p.c.f. Moisture % Wt. of Dry Depth, ft. Symbol Sample No. Type and SPT "N" SPT Value

1 Ground water elevation NOTE: All blows/foot are normalized to 2” outside diameter sampler size 2 1-1 Soil Sample Number L Soil Sampler Size/Type 3 L = 3” Outside Diameter M = 2.5” Outside Diameter T = 2” Outside Diameter 4 ST = Shelby Tube BAG = Bag Sample 5 6 RELATIVE DENSITY CONSISTENCY SANDS AND GRAVELS BLOWS/FOOT SILTS AND CLAYS BLOWS/FOOT 7 VERY SOFT 0-2 0-4 VERY LOOSE SOFT 2-4 8 LOOSE 4-10 MEDIUM DENSE 10-30 FIRM 4-8 30-50 STIFF 8-16 9 DENSE VERY STIFF 16-32 VERY DENSE OVER 50 HARD OVER 32 10 Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Boring Log Explanation Figure No. 3 44411 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 12 Page 40

LOGGED BY______CLA DATE DRILLED______8/19/15 BORING DIAMETER______6” SS BORING NO._____1

Misc. Soil Description Lab Results Unified Soil Classification Plasticity Index Depth (feet) Symbol Dry Density (pcf) Sample No. Type and SPT "N" SPT Value Moisture % of Dry Wt. Mottled grayish brown and dark grayish brown Sandy CL CLAY, very fine to fine grained sand with trace medium 1 1-1 grains, quartz rich, massive, friable, poorly graded, trace L rounded sandstone gravels up to 1/4 inch in diameter, 111.4 8.9 2 damp, very stiff 20 107.5 11.1 1-2 Trace oxidation patches, trace mica flakes scattered 3 T throughout the sample, slight increase in moisture content, damp to moist, very stiff 18 11.3 4 Mottled brown and strong brown Clayey SAND, fine SC 5 1-3 grained with trace medium grains, poorly graded, angular L to sub-angular shaped mudstone clasts up to 2 inches in 21% Passing 6 diameter scattered throughout the sample, quartz rich, 50/5” 88.7 24.5 #200 Sieve massive, friable, trace mica flakes randomly distributed 7 throughout the sample, damp, very dense

8 Brown SAND with Silt SP- SM 9

10 1-4 Fine grained with trace medium grains, poorly graded, T clean, massive, friable, quartz rich, damp, dense 11 34 9.3 12

13 14

15 1-5 Significant increase in coarseness of sand, medium to L coarse grained, sub-rounded shaped, moist, very dense 50/6” 104.1 16.3 16 Boring terminated at 16 feet. No groundwater 17 encountered. 18 19 20 21 22

23 24 Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Log of Test Borings ��� Figure No. 4 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 41

LOGGED BY______CLA DATE DRILLED______8/19/15 BORING DIAMETER______6” SS BORING NO._____2

Misc. Soil Description Lab Results Unified Soil Classification Plasticity Index Depth (feet) Symbol Dry Density (pcf) Sample No. Type and SPT "N" SPT Value Moisture % of Dry Wt. Mottled dark gray, yellowish red, brown, and white Sandy CL/SC CLAY/Clayey SAND, very fine grained sand, angular 1 2-1 clasts up to 2 inches in diameter, damp to dry, hard, K=1 x 10-8 cm/sec L (conglomerate, clasts embedded in a clay matrix) 52% Passing 2 32 93.6 12.8 #200 Sieve 2-2 Slight increase in clay content, massive, friable, damp to 3 T dry, very hard 50/5” 18.7 4 Yellowish brown SAND, fine to medium grained, sub- 5 SP- 2-3 angular to sub-rounded shaped, poorly graded, massive, SC 50/6” 81.9 23.7 L friable, quartz rich, trace silt, trace very small mica flakes, 6 and trace sub-rounded coarse grained sandstone and siltstone clasts randomly distributed throughout the 7 sample, trace clay near 5 1/2 feet, gravel content and size increases with depth to 1/4 inch in diameter, damp, very 8 dense 2-4 9 Mottled brown and reddish brown SAND, trace binder, SP T fine to medium grained, sub-angular to sub-rounded 65 12.5 10 shaped, poorly graded, trace charcoal streaks, quartz rich, massive, slightly indurated but friable, damp, very dense 11 Boring terminated at 10 feet. No groundwater encountered. Converted to a percolation test hole. 12

13 14

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

23 24 Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Log of Test Borings ��� Figure No. 5 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 42

LOGGED BY______CLA DATE DRILLED______8/19/15 BORING DIAMETER______6” SS BORING NO._____3

Misc. Soil Description Lab Results Unified Soil Classification Plasticity Index Depth (feet) Symbol Dry Density (pcf) Sample No. Type and SPT "N" SPT Value Moisture % of Dry Wt. Black Clayey SAND, very fine grained, poorly graded, SC massive, friable, quartz rich, trace rootlets randomly 1 3-1 distributed throughout the sample, damp, medium dense Direct Shear L c = 290 psf 2 12 95.3 17.6 o = 30 o 3-2 Color change to mottled dark brown and black, slight 3 T decrease in clay content, trace iron oxide nodes randomly 44% Passing distributed throughout the sample, damp, medium dense 15 11.6 #200 Sieve 4 Brown Gravelly SAND, trace silt, fine grained, poorly SP 5 3-3 graded, quartz rich, massive, friable, angular to sub- L rounded shaped oxidized to brown siltstone clasts and 26% Passing 6 gravels up to 1 1/2 inch in diameter, damp, medium dense 12 75.8 37.2 #200 Sieve 7 8

9 Brown Clayey SAND, fine grained with trace medium SC 10 3-4 grains, trace oxidation patches and trace mica flakes T scattered throughout the sample, quartz rich, massive, 11 friable, moist, medium dense 14 16.8 12

13 14 Brown SAND SW

15 3-5 No Sample Recovered L 16 35 3-6 Fine to very coarse grained sand, sub-angular to sub- 17 T rounded shaped, well graded, predominately quartz with trace chert and sandstone grains, massive, friable, 21 16.3 18 micaceous, wet, medium dense 19 20 3-7 No Sample Recovered - slough present in the liners. 50/4” L Slough consisted of medium to coarse grained, well 21 graded sand 22

23 24 Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Log of Test Borings ��� Figure No. 6 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 43

LOGGED BY______CLA DATE DRILLED______8/19/15 BORING DIAMETER______6” SS BORING NO._____3

Misc. Soil Description Lab Results Unified Soil Classification Plasticity Index Depth (feet) Symbol Dry Density (pcf) Sample No. Type and SPT "N" SPT Value Moisture % of Dry Wt. Dark brown Clayey SAND, fine grained with trace SC medium and coarse grains, sub-angular to rounded 25 3-8 shaped, poorly graded, predominately quartz with a trace 50/2” 35.6 T amount of sandstone and chert, massive, friable, small 26 mica flakes scattered throughout the sample, wet, very dense 27 WEATHERED SANTA CRUZ MUDSTONE BEDROCK; 28 Described as dark grayish brown SILT with trace very fine grained sand, massive, friable, micaceous, damp, 29 very hard

30 3-9 50/6” 35.3 T 31 Boring terminated at 30 1/2 feet. Groundwater initially encountered near 14 feet. Groundwater measured at 13 1/2 feet at the end of drilling activities. 32

33 34 35 36

37 38

39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46

47 48 Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Log of Test Borings ��� Figure No. 7 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 44

LOGGED BY______CLA DATE DRILLED______8/19/15 BORING DIAMETER______6” SS BORING NO._____4

Misc. Soil Description Lab Results Unified Soil Classification Plasticity Index Depth (feet) Symbol Dry Density (pcf) Sample No. Type and SPT "N" SPT Value Moisture % of Dry Wt. Mottled dark brown and dark reddish brown Silty CLAY, CL-ML low plasticity, and content is very fine grained, poorly 1 4-1 graded and quartz rich, trace rootlets scattered 67% Passing L throughout the sample, damp, very stiff #200 Sieve 2 24 7 92.9 17.4 Qu = 5.4 ksf 4-2 Slight increase in rootlet content, slight decrease in sand 3 T content, trace tan to reddish brown sub-angular shaped coarse grained siltstone to sandstone clasts, damp, very 24 14.8 4 stiff

5 4-3 Mottled gray, dark gray, and brown Clayey SAND, very SC Direct Shear L fine to fine grained, poorly graded, quartz rich, massive, 50/6” 99.7 18.5 c = 360 psf 6 friable, trace angular to sub-angular shaped siltstone o = 41 o gravels up to 1/2 inch in diameter, trace oxidation patches 7 randomly distributed throughout the sample, damp, very dense 8

9 Mottled black, reddish yellow, and tan Gravelly CLAY, CL 10 4-4 angular shaped siltstone clasts embedded in a clay matrix, T clay has intermediate plasticity, clasts up to 2 inches in 11 diameter, micaceous, damp to dry, hard 42 37.1 12 Drillling resistance eased from 13 to 15 feet 13 14 Brown SAND SW

15 4-5 No Sample Recovered L 16 29 4-6 Fine to coarse grained, sub-angular to sub-rounded shaped, 17 T well graded, predominately quartz sand with trace chert and sandstone grains, massive, friable, mica flakes 25 19.7 18 scattered throughout the sample, wet, medium dense 19 Very dark gray SAND with Silt, sand fines with depth, fine SM- 20 4-7 to medium grained sub-rounded shaped, poorly graded, SP T wet, dense 21 WEATHERED SANTA CRUZ MUDSTONE BEDROCK; 36 34.1 Described as olive brown SILT, trace amount of very fine 22 grained sand, massive, friable, micaceous, slightly damp, hard 23 24 Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Log of Test Borings ��� Figure No. 8 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 45

LOGGED BY______CLA DATE DRILLED______8/19/15 BORING DIAMETER______6” SS BORING NO._____4

Misc. Soil Description Lab Results Unified Soil Classification Plasticity Index Depth (feet) Symbol Dry Density (pcf) Sample No. Type and SPT "N" SPT Value Moisture % of Dry Wt. Slow hard drilling to 25 feet SANTA CRUZ MUDSTONE BEDROCK; Described as 25 4-8 brown SILT, trace very fine grained sand, massive, friable, 50/5” 47.2 T micaceous, damp, very hard 26 Boring terminated at 25 1/2 feet. Groundwater initially encountered near 14 feet. Groundwater measured at 13 27 1/2 feet at the end of drilling activities. 28

29 30

31 32

33 34 35 36

37 38

39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46

47 48 Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Log of Test Borings ��� Figure No. 9 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 46

LOGGED BY______CLA DATE DRILLED______8/19/15 BORING DIAMETER______6” SS BORING NO._____5

Misc. Soil Description Lab Results Unified Soil Classification Plasticity Index Depth (feet) Symbol Dry Density (pcf) Sample No. Type and SPT "N" SPT Value Moisture % of Dry Wt. Black Clayey SAND/Sandy CLAY, organic rich, very fine SC/ R-Value = 31 grained, poorly grade, trace sub-angular shaped granitic, CL 1 sandstone, and siltstone gravels up to 1/4 inch in diameter, trace rootlets, micaceous, damp, very stiff/medium dense K=1.1 x 10-6 cm/sec 2 5-1 Direct Shear L c = 360 psf 3 14 104.5 17.8 o = 41 o 5-2 No Sample Recovered; Slough present in the sample, 1/2 4 T inch sub-angular shaped granitic gravels, dry 7 8.2 5-3 Mottled grayish brown, gray, reddish yellow, and white CL K=2 x 10-8 cm/sec 5 L Sandy CLAY, fine grained, poorly graded, quartz rich, 52% Passing massive, friable, mica flakes scattered throughout the 14 104.1 20.7 #200 Sieve 6 sample, trace sub-angular to rounded shaped siltstone and sandstone gravels up to 1/2 inch in diameter, damp, 7 stiff 8 5-4 Color change to mottled brown and reddish yellow, slight 9 T increase in clay content, soil fines with depth, damp, medium dense 28 31.1 10 Boring terminated at 10 feet. No groundwater 11 encountered. Converted to a percolation test hole. 12

13 14

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

23 24 Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Log of Test Borings ��� Figure No. 10 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 47

LOGGED BY______CLA DATE DRILLED______8/20/15 BORING DIAMETER______6” SS BORING NO._____6

Misc. Soil Description Lab Results Unified Soil Classification Plasticity Index Depth (feet) Symbol Dry Density (pcf) Sample No. Type and SPT "N" SPT Value Moisture % of Dry Wt. Mottled black, light brown, and yellowish red CL/SC Sandy CLAY/Clayey SAND with gravel, angular clasts 1 6-1 embedded in a clay matrix, low plasticity, trace very fine L grained sand, trace rootlets, damp, very hard/very dense 22.4 52% Passing 2 Light grayish brown Silty SAND, trace binder, very fine SM 50/5” 102.8 16.2 #200 Sieve 6-2 to fine grained, poorly graded, quartz rich, massive, 3 T friable, trace angular to sub-angular shaped siltstone gravels and clasts up to 1/4 inch in diameter, damp, very 68 10.8 4 dense Decrease in gravel content, damp, very dense 5 6-3 Mottled brown and strong brown Clayey SAND, fine SP L grained with trace medium grains, poorly graded, angular 50/6” 77.0 33.6 6 to sub-angular shaped mudstone clasts up to 2 inches in diameter scattered throughout the sample, quartz rich, 7 massive, friable, trace mica flakes randomly distributed throughout the sample, damp, very dense 8 Brown SAND SW 9

10 6-4 Fine to coarse grained, sub-rounded shaped, well graded, T predominately quartz with a trace amount of chert and 11 sandstone, trace rounded to sub-rounded sandstone gravels 29 32.8 up to 1/2 inch in diameter, massive, friable, wet, medium 12 dense Drilling resistance increases significantly at 13 feet 13 SANTA CRUZ MUDSTONE BEDROCK; Described as olive brown SILT, trace very fine grained sand, massive, 14 friable, damp, very hard, (No Sample Recovered)

15 6-5 50/1” 19.3 T 16 Boring terminated at 15 1/2 feet. Groundwater initially encountered at 8 feet. Measured at 8 feet at the end of drilling activities. 17 18 19 20 21 22

23 24 Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Log of Test Borings ��� Figure No. 11 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 48

LOGGED BY______CLA DATE DRILLED______8/20/15 BORING DIAMETER______6” SS BORING NO._____7

Misc. Soil Description Lab Results Unified Soil Classification Plasticity Index Depth (feet) Symbol Dry Density (pcf) Sample No. Type and SPT "N" SPT Value Moisture % of Dry Wt. FILL; Drain Rock GW 1 2

3 NATIVE; Mottled brown and dark brown Clayey SAND, SC R-Value = 44 7-1 very fine to fine grained, poorly graded, clay exhibits low 4 L to medium plasticity, quartz rich, massive, friable, trace 117.1 14.1 43% Passing rootlets and trace coarse grains, moist, medium dense 27 106.5 16.8 #200 Sieve 5 7-2 Trace mudstone clasts up to 1 inch in diameter, damp, T very dense 6 Mottled brow, dark brown, tan, and reddish yellow CL 57 21.2 Gravelly CLAY, mudstone clasts embedded in a clay 7 matrix, angular shaped clasts up to 2 inches in diameter, damp, hard 8 7-3 SANTA CRUZ MUDSTONE BEDROCK; Described as 50/5” 54.7 39.5 9 L olive brown SILT, trace very fine grained sand, micaceous, blocky, fractured, friable, damp, very dense 10 Boring terminated at 10 feet. No groundwater 11 encountered. Converted to a percolation test hole. 12

13 14

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

23 24 Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Log of Test Borings ��� Figure No. 12 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 49

LOGGED BY______CLA DATE DRILLED______8/20/15 BORING DIAMETER______6” SS BORING NO._____8

Misc. Soil Description Lab Results Unified Soil Classification Plasticity Index Depth (feet) Symbol Dry Density (pcf) Sample No. Type and SPT "N" SPT Value Moisture % of Dry Wt. Olive brown Sandy CLAY, sand is fine to medium CL grained, sub-rounded shaped, poorly graded, slightly 1 8-1 cemented, massive, friable, quartz rich, trace rootlets, L trace quartz gravels up to 1/4 inch in diameter, slightly 9.4108.3 2 damp, hard 32 8.2116.5 8-2 Sample appears to be slough; 1-inch granitic drain rock 3 T and brown Sandy CLAY, similar to material at the ground surface, dry, very hard 56 2.8 4 Yellowish brown Clayey SAND, fine grained, clay SC 5 8-3 exhibits low plasticity, micaceous, trace rootlets randomly Qu = 5.8 ksf L distributed throughout the sample, quartz rich, massive, 100.9 16.2 41% Passing 6 friable, damp, medium dense 18 108.7 16.9 #200 Sieve 7 8

9

10 8-4 SANTA CRUZ MUDSTONE BEDROCK; L Described as olive brown SILT, trace very fine grained 50/6” 84.7 32.1 11 sand, weathered, massive, friable, micaceous, moist, very hard 12

13 14 More competent than the previous sample, damp, very 15 8-5 hard 50/6” 34.3 T 16 Boring terminated at 15 1/2 feet. Groundwater encountered at 10 feet. 17 18 19 20 21 22

23 24 Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Log of Test Borings ��� Figure No. 13 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 50

LOGGED BY______CLA DATE DRILLED______8/20/15 BORING DIAMETER______6” SS BORING NO._____9

Misc. Soil Description Lab Results Unified Soil Classification Plasticity Index Depth (feet) Symbol Dry Density (pcf) Sample No. Type and SPT "N" SPT Value Moisture % of Dry Wt. Mottled reddish brown and dark brown Clayey SAND, SC fine to medium grained, sub-angular to sub-rounded K=2 x 10-6 cm/sec 1 9-1 shaped, poorly graded, quartz rich, massive, friable, damp, 41% Passing L very dense 50/6” 94.5 8.8 #200 Sieve 2 9-2 Slight increase in clay content, trace oxidation patches and T trace rootlets scattered throughout the sample, damp, 3 dense 44 9.5 4 Color change to reddish brown, decrease in clay content, 5 9-3 increase in coarseness of sand and moisture content, L moist, very dense 50/6” 96.8 10.9 6

7 8

9 Brown SAND, fine to coarse grained, sub-angular to SW rounded shaped, well graded, quartz, sandstone, 10 9-4 and chert, massive, friable, mica flakes, wet, very dense L PURISIMA FORMATION BEDROCK; Described as gray 50/5” 54.2 11 Sandy SILT, very fine grained, massive, friable, weathered, trace mica flakes, trace thin, discontinuous lenses of fine 12 to medium grained sand, damp, very dense Boring terminated at 11 feet. Groundwater encountered 13 at 10 feet. 14

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

23 24 Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Log of Test Borings ��� Figure No. 14 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 51

LOGGED BY______CLA DATE DRILLED______8/20/15 BORING DIAMETER______6” SS BORING NO._____10

Misc. Soil Description Lab Results Unified Soil Classification Plasticity Index Depth (feet) Symbol Dry Density (pcf) Sample No. Type and SPT "N" SPT Value Moisture % of Dry Wt. Mottled grayish brown, brown, and strong brown Sandy CL CLAY, sand is fine grained, poorly graded, rootlets 1 10-1 scattered throughout the sample, quartz rich, massive, L friable, damp, very stiff 2 5.3 27 6.3112.1 10-2 Color change to brownish gray, decrease in coarseness of 3 T sand, very fine to fine grained, significant increase in rootlet content, damp, hard 44 12.8 4 Reddish brown Clayey SAND, very fine to fine grained, SC 5 10-3 poorly graded, trace medium grains, quartz rich, Qu = 6.4 ksf L approximately 30% lithics, massive, friable, damp, dense 106.0 18.8 41% Passing 6 41 25 109.5 18.7 #200 Sieve 7 8

9

10 10-4 PURISIMA FORMATION SANDSTONE T BEDROCK; Described as olive Silty SAND, very fine to 50/6” 36.9 11 fine grained, poorly graded, small mica flakes scattered throughout the sample, massive, friable, weathered, 12 quartz rich, damp to moist, very dense 13 14 Color change to gray more competent than the previous 15 10-5 sample, fractured, thinly bedded, damp, very dense 50/6” 42.4 T 16 Boring terminated at 15 1/2 feet. Groundwater encountered at 10 feet. 17 18 19 20 21 22

23 24 Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Log of Test Borings ��� Figure No. 15 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 52

LOGGED BY______CLA DATE DRILLED______8/20/15 BORING DIAMETER______6” SS BORING NO._____11

Misc. Soil Description Lab Results Unified Soil Classification Plasticity Index Depth (feet) Symbol Dry Density (pcf) Sample No. Type and SPT "N" SPT Value Moisture % of Dry Wt. Mottled brown, dark reddish brown, and reddish brown SM Silty SAND, fine to medium grained, sub-angular to R-Value = 46 1 11-1 sub-rounded shaped, poorly graded, massive, friable, L quartz rich, trace oxidation patches randomly distributed 99.1 12.0 2 throughout the sample, mica flakes scattered throughout 9 114.4 13.0 the sample, damp to moist, loose 3 11-2 Color change to mottled yellowisyh brown and brown, 4 T decrease in clay content, soil coarsens with depth, damp to moist, loose 10 17.5 5 Boring terminated at 5 feet. No groundwater 6 encountered.

7 8

9 10 11 12

13 14

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

23 24 Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Log of Test Borings ��� Figure No. 16 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 53

LOGGED BY______CLA DATE DRILLED______8/20/15 BORING DIAMETER______6” SS BORING NO._____12

Misc. Soil Description Lab Results Unified Soil Classification Plasticity Index Depth (feet) Symbol Dry Density (pcf) Sample No. Type and SPT "N" SPT Value Moisture % of Dry Wt. Reddish brown Clayey SAND, fine to medium grained, SC sub-angular to sub-rounded shaped, poorly graded, clay 1 12-1 exhibits low plasticity, quartz rich, massive, friable, small L mica flakes scattered throughout the sample, damp, 105.7 14.4 2 medium dense 15 14.0112.5 12-2 Color change to mottled reddish brown and dark reddish 3 T brown, slight increase in coarseness of sand, medium 19% Passing grained, trace medium to coarse grained feldspar sand, 13 11.9 #200 Sieve 4 damp to moist, medium dense

5 12-3 No Sample Recovered L 6 9 12-4 Color change to mottled brown and dark yellowish brown SP- 7 T as soil grades to SAND with Clay, very fine to fine grained, SC poorly graded, mica flakes, trace rootlets, trace sub-angular 8 16.9 8 shaped sandstone gravels up to 1/4 inch in diameter, damp, loose, (drilling resistance increased near 8 feet) 9 PURISIMA FORMATION SANDSTONE BEDROCK; Described as gray Silty SAND, very fine to fine grained, 10 12-5 poorly graded, mica flakes scattered throughout the 50/6” 68.5 45.6 L sample, weathered, massive, friable, quartz rich, 11 damp, very dense 12

13 14

15 12-6 Damp, very dense T 50/4” 43.2 16 Boring terminated at 16 feet. Groundwater initially encountered at 8 feet and measured at 11 feet at the end 17 of drilling activities. 18 19 20 21 22

23 24 Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Log of Test Borings ��� Figure No. 17 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 54

LOGGED BY______CLA DATE DRILLED______8/20/15 BORING DIAMETER______6” SS BORING NO._____13

Misc. Soil Description Lab Results Unified Soil Classification Plasticity Index Depth (feet) Symbol Dry Density (pcf) Sample No. Type and SPT "N" SPT Value Moisture % of Dry Wt. Gravels and cobbles to 2 feet. GP 1

2 PURISIMA FORMATION SANDSTONE BEDROCK; 13-1 Described as mottled gray and strong brown Silty SAND, 3 L very fine to fine grained, poorly graded, massive, friable, 50/6” 72.6 39.4 13-2 quartz rich, mica flakes scattered throughout the sample, 4 T weathered, damp, very dense 50/6” 36.1 Color change to olive brown near 4 feet, more competent 5 13-3 than the previous sample, slightly indurated, damp, very T dense 50/6” 40.8 6 Slightly mottled, thinly bedded, damp, very dense 7 8

9

10 13-4 Color change to gray, slightly more weathered than the T previous sample, damp, very dense 50/6” 42.3 11 Boring terminated at 11 feet. No Groundwater 12 encountered.

13 14

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

23 24 Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Log of Test Borings ��� Figure No. 18 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 55

LOGGED BY______CLA DATE DRILLED______8/21/15 BORING DIAMETER______6” SS BORING NO._____14

Misc. Soil Description Lab Results Unified Soil Classification Plasticity Index Depth (feet) Symbol Dry Density (pcf) Sample No. Type and SPT "N" SPT Value Moisture % of Dry Wt. WEATHERED PURISIMA FORMATION SANDSTONE SM BEDROCK; Described as mottled olive brown and strong 1 brown Silty SAND, very fine to fine grained, poorly 14-1 graded, mica flakes scattered throughout the sample, trace 2 L rootlets randomly distributed throughout the sample, 62.4 41.1 quartz rich, massive friable, damp, very loose 3 62.0 48.6 3 14-2 Color change to bluish gray, more competent and less T weathered than the previous sample, micaceous, damp, 4 medium dense 24 38.2 5 PURISIMA FORMATION SANDSTONE BEDROCK; 14-3 Described as mottled olive brown and brownish yellow L 50/6” 74.3 39.3 6 SAND with Silt, very fine to fine grained, poorly graded, micaceous, quartz rich, fractured, massive, slightly 7 indurated, friable, damp, very dense Slow, dense drilling to 10 feet 8

9

10 14-4 Color change to bluish gray, damp, very dense T 50/6” 41.7 11 Boring terminated at 11 feet. No Groundwater 12 encountered.

13 14

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

23 24 Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Log of Test Borings ��� Figure No. 19 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 56

LOGGED BY______CLA DATE DRILLED______8/21/15 BORING DIAMETER______6” SS BORING NO._____15

Misc. Soil Description Lab Results Unified Soil Classification Plasticity Index Depth (feet) Symbol Dry Density (pcf) Sample No. Type and SPT "N" SPT Value Moisture % of Dry Wt. PURISIMA FORMATION SANDSTONE BEDROCK; Described as mottled gray and strong brown Silty SAND, 1 very fine to fine grained, poorly graded, mica flakes 15-1 scattered throughout the sample, quartz rich, massive, K=2 x 10-6 cm/sec 2 L friable, damp, very dense 38% Passing 3 50/3” 81.0 28.2 #200 Sieve 15-2 Slightly indurated, damp, very dense 4 T 50/6” 26.0 Drilled bore hole to 5 feet to convert to a percolation hole 5 Boring terminated at 5 feet. No Groundwater 6 encountered.

7 8

9 10 11 12

13 14

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

23 24 Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Log of Test Borings ��� Figure No. 20 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 57

LOGGED BY______CLA DATE DRILLED______8/21/15 BORING DIAMETER______6” SS BORING NO._____16

Misc. Soil Description Lab Results Unified Soil Classification Plasticity Index Depth (feet) Symbol Dry Density (pcf) Sample No. Type and SPT "N" SPT Value Moisture % of Dry Wt. Very dark brown Silty SAND, very fine grained, poorly SM graded, micaceous, rootlets scattered throughout the 1 16-1 sample, damp, loose L 86.1 26.8 2 38% Passing PURISIMA FORMATION SANDSTONE BEDROCK; 8 87.5 30.8 #200 Sieve 16-2 Described as mottled bluish gray and strong brown Silty 3 T SAND, very fine to fine grained, poorly graded, micaceous, quartz rich, massive, slightly indurated, friable, damp, 29 32.1 4 medium dense More competent than the previous sample, damp, medium 5 16-3 dense L Color change to bluish gray, damp, very dense 50/4” 79.7 34.8 6

7 Slow, very dense drilling to 10 feet 8

9

10 16-4 Color change to gray, more weathered than the previous T sample, damp, very dense 11 61 33.3 12 Boring terminated at 11 1/2 feet. No Groundwater encountered. 13 14

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

23 24 Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Log of Test Borings ��� Figure No. 21 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 58

LOGGED BY______CLA DATE DRILLED______8/21/15 BORING DIAMETER______6” SS BORING NO._____17

Misc. Soil Description Lab Results Unified Soil Classification Plasticity Index Depth (feet) Symbol Dry Density (pcf) Sample No. Type and SPT "N" SPT Value Moisture % of Dry Wt. Mottled yellowish brown, brown, and dark brown Silty SM SAND, very fine to fine grained, poorly graded, massive 1 17-1 friable, mica flakes scattered throughout the sample, L quartz rich, thinly bedded, trace sub-angular shaped silt- K=5.5 x 10-5cm/sec 2 stone gravels up to 1/2 inch in diameter, damp, loose 5 17-2 Slight increase in silt content, slight decrease in 3 T coarseness of sand, slight increase in moisture content, 28.6% Passing damp, very loose 4 21.8 #200 Sieve 4

5 17-3 Trace manganese oxide staining, soil continues to fine L with depth, soil grades to Sandy SILT near 6 feet, trace 84.7 26.0 28.8% Passing 6 rootlets near 6 1/2 feet, damp, soft ML 4 83.7 25.6 #200 Sieve 7 8

9 ML 10 Black Sandy SILT, very fine to fine grained, poorly 17-4 graded, soil fines with depth, mica flakes scattered T throughout the sample, organic rich, damp, stiff 11 11 28.1 12

13 14

15 17-5 Trace oxidation patches randomly distributed throughout L B the sample, increase in moisture content, moist to slightly 33.4 16 wet, firm 8 97.5 26.6 17 Boring terminated at 16 1/2 feet. No Groundwater encountered. 18 19 20 21 22

23 24 Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Log of Test Borings ��� Figure No. 22 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 59

LOGGED BY______CLA DATE DRILLED______8/21/15 BORING DIAMETER______6” SS BORING NO._____18

Misc. Soil Description Lab Results Unified Soil Classification Plasticity Index Depth (feet) Symbol Dry Density (pcf) Sample No. Type and SPT "N" SPT Value Moisture % of Dry Wt. Brown Silty SAND,very fine to fine grained, SM poorly graded, gravelly, trace binder, massive, friable, 1 18-1 sub-angular shaped granitic gravels up to 1/2 inch in L diameter, trace rootlets, dry, loose 110.1 6.6 2 Yellowish brown Silty SAND, fine grained with trace SM 6 98.0 14.9 18-2 medium grains, sub-rounded shaped, poorly graded, clean, 3 T quartz rich, massive, friable, slightly cemented, mica flakes, 27.8% Passing damp, loose 5 14.1 #200 Sieve 4 Color change to reddish brown and dark yellowish brown, sub-vertical brown intermediate plastic clay lens from 3 1/2 5 18-3 to 4 feet, damp, loose L Black Sandy SILT, organic rich, very fine to fine grained ML 98.8 24.9 43.1% Passing 6 sand, poorly graded, very small mica flakes scattered 6 93.6 27.8 #200 Sieve throughout the sample, trace rootlets randomly distributed 7 throughout the sample, moist, firm 8

9 10 PURISIMA FORMATION SANDSTONE BEDROCK; 18-4 Described as mottled strong brown, yellowish red, and T 50/6” 42.6 11 light gray Silty SAND, fine grained, poorly graded, quartz rich, massive, friable, small mica flakes scattered through- 12 out the sample, trace pockets of weathered siltstone and trace moderately indurated siltstone clasts up to 1/2 inch 13 in diameter, damp to moist, very dense 14 Weathered, fractured, slightly more indurated 15 18-5 B than the previous sample, damp, very dense 50/4” 55.7 L 16 Boring terminated at 15 1/2 feet. Groundwater encountered at 14 1/2 feet. 17 18 19 20 21 22

23 24 Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Log of Test Borings ��� Figure No. 23 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 60

LOGGED BY______CLA DATE DRILLED______8/21/15 BORING DIAMETER______6” SS BORING NO._____19

Misc. Soil Description Lab Results Unified Soil Classification Plasticity Index Depth (feet) Symbol Dry Density (pcf) Sample No. Type and SPT "N" SPT Value Moisture % of Dry Wt. Brown, dark brown, and reddish brown Silty SAND, fine SM grained, poorly graded, trace binder, trace rootlets, mica R-Value = 43 1 19-1 flakes scattered throughout the sample, quartz rich, L massive, friable, damp, loose 2 93.5 11.3 6 94.9 14.5 19-2 Decrease in rootlet content, trace oxidation patches, sub- 3 T vertical lenses of black silt near 4 feet, silt content increases with depth, damp, loose 6 17.4 4 PURISIMA FORMATION SANDSTONE BEDROCK; 5 19-3 Described as mottled olive brown and strong brown Silty 50/6” 72.8 40.7 L SAND, very fine to fine grained, poorly graded, mica 6 flakes, quartz rich, slightly indurated, massive, friable, damp, very dense 7 Boring terminated at 5 1/2 feet. No Groundwater 8 encountered.

9 10 11 12

13 14

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

23 24 Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Log of Test Borings ��� Figure No. 24 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 61

LOGGED BY______CLA DATE DRILLED______8/21/15 BORING DIAMETER______6” SS BORING NO._____20

Misc. Soil Description Lab Results Unified Soil Classification Plasticity Index Depth (feet) Symbol Dry Density (pcf) Sample No. Type and SPT "N" SPT Value Moisture % of Dry Wt. FILL; Yellowish brown Sandy SILT, very fine grained ML sand, poorly graded, quartz rich, resembles weathered 1 20-1 bedrock, blocky, fractured, small mica flakes, trace L angular shaped black porcelanite gravels, damp, very stiff 13.5104.3 2 Increase in sand content as soil grades to yellowish brown CL 29 28.673.7 20-2 3 and black Sandy CLAY with trace gravel, sand is very fine T to fine grained with trace medium grains, angular shaped 14 12.8 4 siltstone and porcelanite clasts up to 1/2 inch in diameter, damp, stiff

5 20-3 Mottled grayish brown and strong brown Silty SAND, SM L very fine to fine grained, poorly graded, quartz rich, 88.1 28.1 6 massive, friable, small mica mica flakes scattered 10 89.7 28.7 throughout the sample, thin clayey sand lenses with 7 sub-rounded shaped siltstone gravels near 5 1/2 and 6 feet, blocky, sample resembles weathered 8 Purisima Bedrock, damp, loose 9 SP 10 Gray and dark yellowish brown SAND, medium grained, 20-4 sub-rounded shaped, poorly graded quartz rich, massive, T 11 friable, mica flakes scattered throughout the sample, clean, moist to wet, dense 33 22.4 12

13 14 Dark gray SILT, organic rich, trace very fine to medium ML 15 20-5 grained sand, mica flakes scattered throughout the sample, T moist to wet, firm 16 5 40.4 17 Boring terminated at 16 1/2 feet. Groundwater encountered at 7 1/2 feet. 18 19 20 21 22

23 24 Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Log of Test Borings ��� Figure No. 25 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 62

LOGGED BY______CLA DATE DRILLED______5/9/17 BORING DIAMETER______8” HS BORING NO._____21

DRILL RIG______EGI Truck Mounted B-53 Red Mobile HAMMER TYPE______140 lb Down-Hole Safety Hammer

Additional Soil Description Lab Results Sample Field Blow Counts Pocket Pen. (tsf) % Passing #200 Sieve Dry Density (pcf) Moisture Content (%) USCS "N" SPT Value Depth (feet) Type Sample CLAYEY SAND: Very dark grayish brown (10YR SC 3/2), sand content increases with depth, fine grained 1 21-1 with trace medium grains, poorly graded, quartz rich, poorly indurated, clay appears to exhibit low plasticity, 13 L 2 2 slightly damp, medium dense 10 1 13 12 111.5 14.1 21-2 CLAY WITH SAND: Olive brown (2.5Y 4/4), very fine 3 CI/ 4 T to fine grained quartz rich sand, clay appears to display SC intermediate plasticity, sand content increases with depth 5 4 as soil grades to CLAYEY SAND, poorly graded, fine 9 14 21.6 to medium grained sand, quartz rich, poorly indurated, 5 moist, stiff/medium dense 21-3 SAND: Strong brown (7.5YR 4/6 & 5/8), very grained, SP 17 L 2 sub-rounded shaped, poorly graded, quartz rich, poorly 6 19 1 indurated, clean, approximately 10% lithics, moist, medium dense 30 26 109.4 17.4 7

8 21-4 Olive brown (2.5Y 4/4), fine grained with trace 9 T medium grains, poorly graded, micaceous, 5 approximately 5% lithics, wet, loose 5 10 5 10 31.5

11 Increase in drilling resistance at 11 feet PURISMA SANDSTONE BEDROCK: 12

13 21-5 Dark gray (5Y 4/1), weathered to SILTY SAND, fine 14 T 17 grained, poorly graded, quartz rich, massive, friable, 75.0 mica flakes scattered throughout the sample, slightly 50/6” 50/6” 42.0 15 damp, soft rock hardness

16

17

18 21-6 Slightly damp, soft rock hardness 19 T 17 23 20 40 63 43.0 Boring terminated at 20 feet. No free-standing 21 groundwater. Seep zone encountered near 8 ½ feet.

22

23 Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Log of Test Borings Figure No. 26 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566.1 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 63

LOGGED BY______CLA DATE DRILLED______5/9/17 BORING DIAMETER______8” HS BORING NO._____22

DRILL RIG______EGI Truck Mounted B53 Mobile Red HAMMER TYPE______140 lb Down-Hole Safety Hammer

Additional Soil Description Lab Results Sample Field Blow Counts Pocket Pen. (tsf) % Passing #200 Sieve Dry Density (pcf) Moisture Content (%) USCS "N" SPT Value Depth (feet) Type Sample CLAYEY SAND: Very dark grayish brown (10YR SC 3/2), fine grained with trace medium grains, poorly 1 22-1 graded, quartz rich, poorly indurated, slightly moist, medium dense 12 L B 2 CLAYEY SAND: Yellowish brown (10YR 5/4), fine to SC 16 B medium grained, sub-rounded shaped, poorly graded, 17 17 11.2 22-2 quartz rich, poorly indurated, slightly moist, medium 3 T dense 7 SANDY CLAY GRADING TO CLAYEY SAND: 12 CL/ 17 29 15.5 4 Yellowish brown (10YR 5/4) and pale brown (10YR SC 6/3), clay appears to exhibit low plasticity, fine to medium grained sand, sub-rounded shaped, poorly 5 22-3 graded, poorly indurated, mica flakes, slightly moist, 11 L 2 very stiff/medium dense 6 23 1 SAND: Light yellowish brown (10YR 6/4), fine to SP 29 27 100.3 11.6 medium grained, sub-rounded shaped, poorly graded, 7 quartz rich, clean, poorly indurated, slighty moist, medium dense 8

22-4 Dark yellowish brown (10YR 4/4), slight decrease in 27.9 9 T coarseness of sand, mica flakes, trace silt, moist, dense 6 13 PURISMA SILTY SAND: Strong brown (10YR 5/6) 45 58 38.1 10 and light olive brown (2.5Y 5/3), fine grained, poorly graded, quartz rich, poorly indurated, mica flakes, 11 slightly moist, dense

12

13 22-5 Dark gray (2.5Y 4/1), weathered to a silty sand, fine to 14 L 37 medium grained, sub-rounded shaped, massive, friable, 50/3” sligtly moist, soft rock hardness 78.3 37.9 15

16

17

18 22-6 Slightly moist, soft rock hardness 19 T 23 31 20 50/5” 41.6 Boring terminated at 20 feet. No free-standing 21 groundwater encountered.

22

23 Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Log of Test Borings Figure No. 27 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566.1 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 64

LOGGED BY______CLA DATE DRILLED______5/9/17 BORING DIAMETER______8” HS BORING NO._____23

DRILL RIG______EGI Truck Mounted B53 Mobile Red HAMMER TYPE______140 lb Down-Hole Safety Hammer

Additional Soil Description Lab Results Sample Field Blow Counts Pocket Pen. (tsf) % Passing #200 Sieve Dry Density (pcf) Moisture Content (%) USCS "N" SPT Value Depth (feet) Type Sample SILTY SAND: Brown (7.5YR 5/4), fine to medium SM grained, sub-rounded shaped, poorly graded, quartz 1 23-1 rich, poorly indurated, trace oxidation patches, moist, loose, (trace rootlets) 4 L 2 2 6 11.295.9 1 7 7 116.6 11.3 23-2 Slight decrease in silt content, slightly moist, loose 3 T 4 4 4 6 10 17.7 SP 5 23-3 Dark yellowish brown (10YR 4/4), decrease in silt L content as soil grades to SAND WITH SILT, slight 6 6 increase in rootlet content, moist, medium dense 13 1 20 17 101.3 20.0 7

8 SAND: Dark yellowish brown (10YR 4/4), fine to SP 23-4 medium grained, sub-rounded shaped, poorly graded, 9 T quartz rich, less than 5% lithics, poorly indurated, 7 micaceous, moist, medium dense 7 10 10 17 19.1

11

12

13 23-5 PURISMA SANDSTONE BEDROCK: Olive brown 14 L (2.5Y 4/4), weathered to a SAND, fine grained, poorly 13 2 graded, quartz rich, massive, fraible, mica flakes, 25 1 15 slightly moist, soft rock hardness 43 35 79.8 38.4 23-6 Dark gray (2.5Y 4/1), weathered to a SILTY SAND, 19 T more competent than previous sample, slightly moist, 25 16 soft to medium rock hardness 50/5” 39.7 17 Boring terminated at 16 ½ feet. No free-standing groundwater encountered. 18

19

20

21

22

23 Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Log of Test Borings Figure No. 28 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566.1 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 65

LOGGED BY______CLA DATE DRILLED______5/9/17 BORING DIAMETER______8” HS BORING NO._____24

DRILL RIG______EGI Truck Mounted B53 Mobile Red HAMMER TYPE______140 lb Down-Hole Safety Hammer

Additional Soil Description Lab Results Sample Field Blow Counts Pocket Pen. (tsf) % Passing #200 Sieve Dry Density (pcf) Moisture Content (%) USCS "N" SPT Value Depth (feet) Type Sample CLAYEY SAND: Strong brown (7.5YR 5/6) and dark SC brown (7.5YR 3/4), fine to medium grained, sub- 1 24-1 rounded shaped, poorly graded, quartz rich, poorly indurated, mica flakes, slightly moist to moist, loose, 6 L 2 2 (trace weathered CS gravel to ½ inch) 8 1 11 10 103.8 17.9 24-2 CLAYEY SAND: Dark yellowish brown (10YR 4/6), SC 3 T fine to medium grained, poorly graded, sub-rounded 2 shaped, quartz rich, poorly indurated, mica flakes, trace 3 4 rootlets, moist, loose 5 8 19.5

5 24-3 Strong brown (7.5YR 4/6), trace very coarse grained 6 L 2 quartz and chert sand, sub-rounded to rounded shaped, 6 trace rounded sandstone gravels up to 1 inch in diameter, 10 1 moist, medium dense 21 16 101.9 23.2 7

8 SAND: Dark yellowish brown (10YR 4/4), medium SP 24-4 28.0 9 T grained, sub-rounded shaped, poorly graded, quartz rich, 7 poorly induated, micaceous, moist, medium dense 10 10 SAND WITH SILT: Olive brown (2.5Y 4/4), fine to SP 15 25 30.5 medium grained, sub-rounded shaped, poorly graded, quartz rich, poorly indurated, slightly cemented at 10 11 feet, mica flakes, trace very coarse grains, moist, medium dense 12

13 PURISMA SANDSTONE BEDROCK: Gray (2.5Y 24-5 4/1), weathered to a SILTY SAND, fine grained, poorly 50/6” 50/6” 83.3 35.5 14 L graded, quartz rich, massive, friable, mica flakes, slightly moist, soft rock hardness 15

16

17

18 24-6 Slightly more competent at 20 feet, slightly moist, soft 19 T rock hardness 23 40 20 50/3” 50/3” 29.8 Boring terminated at 20 feet. No free-standing 21 groundwater encountered. Seep zone near 8 feet.

22

23 Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Log of Test Borings Figure No. 29 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566.1 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 66

LOGGED BY______CLA DATE DRILLED______5/9/17 BORING DIAMETER______8” HS BORING NO._____25

DRILL RIG______EGI Truck Mounted B-53 Mobile Red HAMMER TYPE______140 lb Down-Hole Safety Hammer

Additional Soil Description Lab Results Sample Field Blow Counts Pocket Pen. (tsf) % Passing #200 Sieve Dry Density (pcf) Moisture Content (%) USCS "N" SPT Value Depth (feet) Type Sample SANDY CLAY/CLAYEY SAND: Black (10YR 2/1), SC/ organic rich, clay appears to exhibit low plasticity, CL 1 25-1 fine grained, poorly graded, quartz rich, poorly indurated, mica flakes, slightly moist, loose/very stiff 5 L 2 2 7 1 CLAYEY SAND: Strong brown (7.5YR 4/6) and dark SC brown (7.5YR 3/3), fine grained, poorly graded, quartz 13 10/16 109.7 16.5 25-2 rich, poorly indurated, clay appears to exhibit low 3 T 7 plasticity, mica flakes, moist, loose, 7 Clay content decreases significantly at 3½ feet as soil 11 18 4 grades to SAND WITH CLAY, moist, medium dense

5 25-3 Slight increase in clay content, trace coarse to very coarse 6 L 2 quartz and chert sand, sub-rounded shaped, micaceous, 6 8 1 vertical bore hole within the sample from 5 to 6 feet, unknown orgin (root?), moist, loose 12 10 99.8 18.9 7

8 SAND: Dark yellowish brown (10YR 4/4) fine SP 25-4 to medium grained, poorly graded, sub-rounded 9 T shaped, quartz rich, poorly indurated, mica flakes, trace 6 silt, wet, medium dense 8 10 11 19 31.3

11

12

13 25-5 PURISMA SANDSTONE BEDROCK: Olive brown (2.5Y 4/4), weathered to a SILTY SAND, fine grained, 14 L 50/6” 50/6” 83.3 36.1 25-6 poorly graded, quartz rich, massive, friable, mica flakes, T slightly moist, soft rock hardness 25 15 43 50/3” 50/3” 36.1 -- 16 Boring terminated at 15 ½ feet. No free-standing groundwater encountered. Seep zone near 8 feet. 17

18

19

20

21

22

23 Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Log of Test Borings Figure No. 30 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566.1 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 67

LOGGED BY______CLA DATE DRILLED______5/9/17 BORING DIAMETER______8” HS BORING NO._____26

DRILL RIG______EGI Truck Mounted B-53 Mobile Red HAMMER TYPE______140 lb Down-Hole Safety Hammer

Additional Soil Description Lab Results Sample Field Blow Counts Pocket Pen. (tsf) % Passing #200 Sieve Dry Density (pcf) Moisture Content (%) USCS "N" SPT Value Depth (feet) Type Sample Straight drill to 11½ feet Cuttings: CLAYEY SAND: Strong brown (7.5YR 4/6), 1 fine to medium grained, poorly graded, quartz rich, poorly indurated, clay appears to display low to medium 2 plasticity

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11 26-1 Increase in drilling resistance at 11½ feet 12 T Attempted to sample with a “L” and “T”, no recovery Attempted to drill out to 13½ feet, cobbles (gravels in 50/0" 13 sampler, sub-angular to rounded up to 1 inch) 50/0" 35.7 26-2 PURISMA SANDSTONE BEDROCK: Pale olive (5Y 50/3" 14 T 6/3), weathered to a SILTY SAND, fine grained, poorly graded, quartz rich, massive, friable, mica flakes, moist, 15 soft rock hardness Boring terminated at 14 feet. Groundwater 16 encountered at 11 feet.

17

18

19

20

21

22

23 Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Log of Test Borings Figure No. 31 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566.1 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 68

LOGGED BY______CLA DATE DRILLED______5/9/17 BORING DIAMETER______8” HS BORING NO._____27

DRILL RIG______EGI Truck Mounted B-53 Mobile Red HAMMER TYPE______140 lb Down-Hole Safety Hammer

Additional Soil Description Lab Results Sample Field Blow Counts Pocket Pen. (tsf) % Passing #200 Sieve Dry Density (pcf) Moisture Content (%) USCS "N" SPT Value Depth (feet) Type Sample Straight drill to bedrock 1 Very soft, easy drilling to 18½ feet

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18 27-1 SANDY FAT CLAY: Black (2.5Y 2.5/1), clay appears to 19 CH 5 T 2 exhibit high plasticity, fine grained quartz rich sand, moist, stiff 5 1 20 6 9 75.3 47.1

21

22

23 Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Log of Test Borings Figure No. 32 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566.1 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 69

LOGGED BY______CLA DATE DRILLED______5/9/17 BORING DIAMETER______8” HS BORING NO._____27

DRILL RIG______EGI Truck Mounted B-53 Mobile Red HAMMER TYPE______140 lb Down-Hole Safety Hammer

Additional Soil Description Lab Results Sample Field Blow Counts Pocket Pen. (tsf) % Passing #200 Sieve Dry Density (pcf) Moisture Content (%) USCS "N" SPT Value Depth (feet) Type Sample Straight drill to 11½ feet 24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37 27-2 L Increase in drilling resistance at 37 feet 50/6" 50/6" 81.3 35.7 38 PURISMA SANDSTONE BEDROCK: Greenish gray 27-3 23 T (GLEY1 5/5GY), weathered to a SILTY SAND, fine 39 grained, poorly graded, quartz rich, massive, friable, 50/6" 50/6" 41.1 mica flakes, trace mottling, slightly moist, medium rock 40 hardness Mottled greenish gray and yellowish brown (10YR 5/8), moist, soft rock hardness 41 Boring terminated at 39 feet. Groundwater initially measured at 18 feet. Measured at 14 feet at the end of 42 drilling. 43

44

45

46 Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Log of Test Borings Figure No. 33 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566.1 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 70

LOGGED BY______CLA DATE DRILLED______5/9/17 BORING DIAMETER______8” HS BORING NO._____28

DRILL RIG______EGI Truck Mounted B53 Mobile Red HAMMER TYPE______140 lb Down-Hole Safety Hammer

Additional Soil Description Lab Results Sample Field Blow Counts Pocket Pen. (tsf) % Passing #200 Sieve Dry Density (pcf) Moisture Content (%) USCS "N" SPT Value Depth (feet) Type Sample SILTY SAND: Dark yellowish brown (10YR 3/4), SM fine to medium grained with trace coarse to very coarse 1 28-1 grains, sub-angular to sub-rounded shaped, poorly indurated, trace sub-angular shaped granitic gravels up 10 L 2 2 to 1 inch in diameter, slightly moist to dry, loose 9 1 10 10 119.7 3.6 3

4

5

6

7

8 28-2 Increase in drilling resistance at 8 feet L PURISMA SANDSTONE BEDROCK: Mottled light 50/5” 78.0 34.9 9 28-3 brownish gray (2.5Y 6/2) and yellowish brown (10YR T 5/8), weathered to a SILTY SAND, fine grained, poorly 23 10 graded, quartz rich, massive, friable, mica flakes, 50/4” 43.9 slightly moist, soft rock hardness 11 Slightly moist, soft rock hardness ------Boring terminated at 10 feet. No groundwater 12 encountered. 13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23 Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Log of Test Borings Figure No. 34 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566.1 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 71

ATTERBERG LIMITS - ASTM D4318

PLASTICITY CHART

60

50

CH 40

A LINE 30 UPPERCI LIMIT LINE

20

PLASTICITY INDEX PLASTICITY CL MH & OH 10 MI & OI CL - ML ML & OL 0 10 1009080706050403020 LIQUID LIMIT (%) *This chart has been modified to include the intermediate classifications CI, MI and OI for clays and silts with liquid limits between 35 and 50. SYMBOL SAMPLE # LL (%) PL (%) PI

4-1-2 24 17 7

10-3-1 43 18 25

Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Atterberg Limits Figure No. 35 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 72

Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. www.4pacific-crest.com DIRECT SHEAR TEST - ASTM D3080 Direct Shear Test for Soils Under Consolidated Drained Conditions PROJECT NO. 1566 DATE: 10/1/15 PROJECT: MBSST TESTED BY: SK

3500

PEAK 3000 ULTIMATE

2500

2000

1500

1000 SHEAR STRESS (psf) STRESS SHEAR 500

0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 NORMAL STRESS (psf)

SAMPLE: 3-1-1 USCS: SM  C (psf) SAMPLE TYPE: Undisturbed Saturated PEAK 30 290 SOIL TYPE: Dark brown Clayey SAND ULTIMATE 31 230

2500 Initial Sample Data: Wet Density (pcf) 112.1 Moisture Content: 17.6% 2000 Dry Density (pcf) 95.3 % Saturation 63.5%

1500

Sample Data At-Test: SHEAR STRESS (psf) STRESS SHEAR 1000 Displacement Rate (mm/min): 0.2 Moisture Content: 24.7%

500 Sample:123

1000 psf Normal Stress: 1000 2000 3000 2000 psf 3000 psf Peak Stress: 815 1575 1983 0 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% Ultimate Stress: 778 1557 1983 STRAIN Figure No. 36

444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 • Watsonville, CA 95076 • 831.722.9446 Page 73

Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. www.4pacific-crest.com DIRECT SHEAR TEST - ASTM D3080 Direct Shear Test for Soils Under Consolidated Drained Conditions PROJECT NO. 1566 DATE: 10/1/15 PROJECT: MBSST TESTED BY: SK

3500

PEAK 3000 ULTIMATE

2500

2000

1500

1000 SHEAR STRESS (psf) STRESS SHEAR 500

0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 NORMAL STRESS (psf)

SAMPLE: 4-3-1 USCS: SM  C (psf) SAMPLE TYPE: Undisturbed Saturated PEAK 41 360 SOIL TYPE: Dark Grey/Brown Clayey SAND ULTIMATE 41 250

3500 Initial Sample Data: Wet Density (pcf) 118.2 3000 Moisture Content: 18.5% Dry Density (pcf) 99.7 2500 % Saturation 74.4%

2000

Sample Data At-Test:

SHEAR STRESS (psf) STRESS SHEAR 1500 Displacement Rate (mm/min): 0.2 Moisture Content: 25.6% 1000

Sample:123 500 1000 psf Normal Stress: 1000 2000 3000 2000 psf 3000 psf Peak Stress: 1316 1946 3058 0 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% Ultimate Stress: 1242 1761 2984 STRAIN Figure No. 37

444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 • Watsonville, CA 95076 • 831.722.9446 Page 74

Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. www.4pacific-crest.com DIRECT SHEAR TEST - ASTM D3080 Direct Shear Test for Soils Under Consolidated Drained Conditions PROJECT NO. 1566 DATE: 10/1/15 PROJECT: MBSST TESTED BY: SK

3500

PEAK 3000 ULTIMATE

2500

2000

1500

1000 SHEAR STRESS (psf) STRESS SHEAR 500

0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 NORMAL STRESS (psf)

SAMPLE: 5-1-2 USCS: SC  C (psf) SAMPLE TYPE: Undisturbed Saturated PEAK 30 290 SOIL TYPE: Dark Brown Clayey SAND ULTIMATE 31 230

2000 Initial Sample Data: Wet Density (pcf) 123.1 Moisture Content: 17.8%

1500 Dry Density (pcf) 104.5 % Saturation 81.0%

1000 Sample Data At-Test:

SHEAR STRESS (psf) STRESS SHEAR Displacement Rate (mm/min): 0.2 Moisture Content: 22.1%

500 Sample:123

1000 psf Normal Stress: 1000 2000 3000 2000 psf 3000 psf Peak Stress: 815 1575 1983 0 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% Ultimate Stress: 778 1557 1983 STRAIN Figure No. 38

444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 • Watsonville, CA 95076 • 831.722.9446 Page 75

R-value Test Report (Caltrans 301)

Job No.: 416-541 Date: 09/03/15 Initial Moisture, 15.4% Client: Tested R-value by Pacific Crest Engineering MD 44 Project: 1566 Reduced RU Stabilometer Sample R-1 from B-7 Checked DC Expansion 0 psf Soil Type:Dark Brown Clayey SAND Pressure Specimen Number A BCD Remarks: Exudation Pressure, psi 198 643 446 Prepared Weight, grams 1200 1200 1200 Final Water Added, grams/cc 45 25 35 Weight of Soil & Mold, grams 3145 3010 2298 Weight of Mold, grams 2012 2106 2099 Height After Compaction, in. 2.55 2.32 2.31 Moisture Content, % 19.7 17.8 18.7 Dry Density, pcf 112.4 100.2 22.0 Expansion Pressure, psf 0.0 0.0 0.0 Stabilometer @ 1000 Stabilometer @ 2000 90 30 36 Turns Displacement 4.9 5.15 5.1 R-value 28 64 58

100 1000 R-value

90 Expansion 900 Pressure, psf 80 800

70 700

60 600

50 500 R-value 40 400

30 300 Expansion Pressure, psf Pressure, Expansion

20 200

10 100

0 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Exudation Pressure, psi

Figure No. 39 Page 76

R-value Test Report (Caltrans 301)

Job No.: 416-541 Date: 09/02/15 Initial Moisture, 18.8% Client: Tested R-value by Pacific Crest Engineering MD 46 Project: 1566 Reduced RU Stabilometer Sample R-2 from B-11 Checked DC Expansion 20 psf Soil Type:Brown Silty SAND (slightly plastic) Pressure Specimen Number A BCD Remarks: Exudation Pressure, psi 289 121 524 Prepared Weight, grams 1200 1200 1200 Final Water Added, grams/cc 40 56 17 Weight of Soil & Mold, grams 3038 3091 3019 Weight of Mold, grams 2106 2101 2106 Height After Compaction, in. 2.46 2.57 2.34 Moisture Content, % 22.7 24.3 20.5 Dry Density, pcf 93.5 93.8 98.1 Expansion Pressure, psf 17.2 0.0 51.6 Stabilometer @ 1000 Stabilometer @ 2000 62 102 30 Turns Displacement 4.83 4.08 4.5 R-value 45 27 68

100 1000 R-value

90 Expansion 900 Pressure, psf 80 800

70 700

60 600

50 500 R-value 40 400

30 300 Expansion Pressure, psf Pressure, Expansion

20 200

10 100

0 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Exudation Pressure, psi

Figure No. 40 Page 77

R-value Test Report (Caltrans 301)

Job No.: 416-541 Date: 09/03/15 Initial Moisture, 16.8% Client: Tested R-value by Pacific Crest Engineering MD 31 Project: 1566 Reduced RU Stabilometer Sample R-3 from B-5 Checked DC Expansion 25 psf Soil Type:Dark Brown Clayey SAND Pressure Specimen Number A BCD Remarks: Exudation Pressure, psi 160 350 630 Prepared Weight, grams 1200 1200 1200 Final Water Added, grams/cc 41 15 0 Weight of Soil & Mold, grams 3125 3094 3115 Weight of Mold, grams 2084 2098 2098 Height After Compaction, in. 2.52.452.36 Moisture Content, % 20.8 18.3 16.8 Dry Density, pcf 104.4 104.1 111.7 Expansion Pressure, psf 0.0 47.3 86.0 Stabilometer @ 1000 Stabilometer @ 2000 122 80 48 Turns Displacement 4.38 4.19 3.75 R-value 15 36 57

100 1000 R-value

90 Expansion 900 Pressure, psf 80 800

70 700

60 600

50 500 R-value 40 400

30 300 Expansion Pressure, psf Pressure, Expansion

20 200

10 100

0 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Exudation Pressure, psi

Figure No. 41 Page 78

R-value Test Report (Caltrans 301)

Job No.: 416-541 Date: 09/03/15 Initial Moisture, 13.3% Client: Tested R-value by Pacific Crest Engineering MD 43 Project: 1566 Reduced RU Stabilometer Sample R-4 from B-19 Checked DC Expansion 0 psf Soil Type:Dark Brown Silty SAND Pressure Specimen Number A BCD Remarks: Exudation Pressure, psi 186 489 365 Prepared Weight, grams 1200 1200 1200 Final Water Added, grams/cc 54 29 38 Weight of Soil & Mold, grams 3009 3046 3061 Weight of Mold, grams 2077 2089 2083 Height After Compaction, in. 2.31 2.32 2.41 Moisture Content, % 18.4 16.0 16.9 Dry Density, pcf 103.2 107.6 105.1 Expansion Pressure, psf 0.0 0.0 0.0 Stabilometer @ 1000 Stabilometer @ 2000 84 46 66 Turns Displacement 5.53 5.01 3.38 R-value 26 50 49

100 1000 R-value

90 Expansion 900 Pressure, psf 80 800

70 700

60 600

50 500 R-value 40 400

30 300 Expansion Pressure, psf Pressure, Expansion

20 200

10 100

0 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 Exudation Pressure, psi

Figure No. 42 Page 79

Corrosivity Test Summary

CTL # 416-542 Date: 10/6/2015 Tested By: PJ Checked: PJ Client: Pacific Crest Engineering Inc Project: MBSST Proj. No: 1566 Remarks: Sample Location or ID Resistivity @ 15.5 oC (Ohm-cm) ChlorideSulfate pH ORP Moisture Boring Sample, No. Depth, ft. As Rec. Minimum Saturated mg/kg mg/kg % (Redox) At Test Soil Visual Description Dry Wt. Dry Wt. Dry Wt. mv % ASTM G57 Cal 643 ASTM G57 Cal 422-mod. Cal 417-mod. Cal 417-mod. Cal 643 SM 2580B ASTM D2216

1-1-1/1-1-2 - - - 3213 - 25 74 0.0074 7.9 - 12.4 Very Dark Brown Sandy CLAY w/ Gravel

Light Olive Gray Sandy CLAY/ Olive Brown 8-1-1/8-1-2 - - - 5253 - 6 21 0.0021 8.4 - 6.1 Sandy CLAY

10-1-1/10-1-2 - - - 6540 - 7 28 0.0028 8.1 - 5.7 Light Olive Brown Sandy CLAY

20-1-1/20-1-2 - - - 1725 - 24 123 0.0123 7.8 - 20.9 Dark Grayish Brown Sandy CLAY

Figure No. 43 Page 80 Hydraulic Conductivity ASTM D 5084 Method C: Falling Head Rising Tailwater

Job No: 416-542 Boring: 2-1-1 Date: 10/12/15 Client: Pacific Crest Engineering Sample: By: MD/PJ Project: 1566 Depth, ft.: Remolded: Visual Classification: Dark Brown Sandy CLAY w/ Claystone fragments Max Sample Pressures, psi: B: = >0.95 ("B" is an indication of saturation) Cell: Bottom Top Avg. Sigma3 Max Hydraulic Gradient: = 24

74 70 68 5 1.0E-08 Date Minutes Head, (in) K,cm/sec 10/6/2015 0.00 70.38 Start of Test 9.0E-09 10/7/2015 1470.00 69.68 9.3E-09 8.0E-09 10/8/2015 2855.00 68.98 9.4E-09 10/8/2015 3611.00 68.58 9.6E-09 7.0E-09 10/9/2015 4287.00 68.28 9.5E-09 6.0E-09

5.0E-09 Permeability

4.0E-09

3.0E-09

2.0E-09

1.0E-09 0 10002000300040005000 Time, min.

Average Hydraulic Conductivity: < 1E-08 cm/sec Sample Data: Initial (As-Received) Final (At-Test) Height, in 2.84 2.92 Diameter, in 2.40 2.42 Area, in2 4.51 4.58 Volume in3 12.81 13.38 Total Volume, cc 209.9 219.2 Volume Solids, cc 121.3 121.3 Volume Voids, cc 88.6 97.9 Void Ratio 0.7 0.8 Total Porosity, % 42.2 44.7 Air-Filled Porosity (θa),% 11.6 0.3 Water-Filled Porosity (θw),% 30.6 44.3 Saturation, % 72.5 99.3 Specific Gravity 2.70 Assumed 2.70 Wet Weight, gm 391.8 424.7 Dry Weight, gm 327.5 327.5 Tare, gm 0.00 0.00 Moisture, % 19.6 29.7 Wet Bulk Density, pcf 116.5 120.9 Dry Bulk Density, pcf 97.4 93.2 3 Wet Bulk Dens.ρb, (g/cm ) 1.87 1.94 3 Dry Bulk Dens.ρb, (g/cm ) 1.56 1.49 Remarks: Figure No. 44 Page 81 Hydraulic Conductivity Figure No. 36 ASTM D 5084 Method C: Falling Head Rising Tailwater

Job No: 416-542 Boring: 5-1-1 Date: 10/08/15 Client: Pacific Crest Engineering Sample: By: MD/PJ Project: 1566 Depth, ft.: Remolded: Visual Classification: Very Dark Gray Sandy CLAY w/ Gravel near Clayey SAND w/ Gravel Max Sample Pressures, psi: B: = >0.95 ("B" is an indication of saturation) Cell: Bottom Top Avg. Sigma3 Max Hydraulic Gradient: = 15 74 69.5 68.5 5 Date Minutes Head, (in) K,cm/sec 9.1E-06 10/5/2015 0.00 42.69 Start of Test 10/5/2015 32.00 41.69 1.0E-06 8.1E-06 10/5/2015 85.00 40.09 1.0E-06 7.1E-06 10/5/2015 108.00 39.29 1.1E-06 10/5/2015 150.00 37.89 1.1E-06 6.1E-06 10/5/2015 276.00 34.39 1.1E-06 5.1E-06

Permeability 4.1E-06

3.1E-06

2.1E-06

1.1E-06

1.0E-07 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 Time, min.

Average Hydraulic Conductivity: 1.E-06 cm/sec Sample Data: Initial (As-Received) Final (At-Test) Height, in 2.84 2.84 Diameter, in 2.38 2.38 Area, in2 4.45 4.45 Volume in3 12.64 12.63 Total Volume, cc 207.2 207.0 Volume Solids, cc 127.8 127.8 Volume Voids, cc 79.3 79.2 Void Ratio 0.6 0.6 Total Porosity, % 38.3 38.2 Air-Filled Porosity (θa),% 13.2 1.7 Water-Filled Porosity (θw),% 25.1 36.5 Saturation, % 65.4 95.5 Specific Gravity 2.70 Assumed 2.70 Wet Weight, gm 397.0 420.7 Dry Weight, gm 345.1 345.1 Tare, gm 0.00 0.00 Moisture, % 15.0 21.9 Wet Bulk Density, pcf 119.6 126.8 Dry Bulk Density, pcf 103.9 104.0 3 Wet Bulk Dens.ρb, (g/cm ) 1.92 2.03 3 Dry Bulk Dens.ρb, (g/cm ) 1.67 1.67 Remarks: Cluster of gravel noted in middle of specimen after test. Figure No. 45 Page 82 Hydraulic Conductivity ASTM D 5084 Method C: Falling Head Rising Tailwater

Job No: 416-542 Boring: 5-3-1 Date: 10/12/15 Client: Pacific Crest Engineering Sample: By: MD/PJ Project: 1566 Depth, ft.: Remolded: Visual Classification: Grayish Brown Clayey SAND, trace Gravel & Claystone fragments Max Sample Pressures, psi: B: = >0.95 ("B" is an indication of saturation) Cell: Bottom Top Avg. Sigma3 Max Hydraulic Gradient: = 28

63.5 59.5 57.5 5 1.2E-07 Date Minutes Head, (in) K,cm/sec 10/5/2015 0.00 78.88 Start of Test 1.0E-07 10/6/2015 773.00 78.08 1.7E-08 10/6/2015 1463.00 77.38 1.7E-08 10/7/2015 2254.00 76.38 1.9E-08 8.0E-08 10/8/2015 3642.00 74.98 1.8E-08 10/8/2015 4397.00 74.48 1.7E-08 6.0E-08 10/9/2015 5075.00 73.78 1.7E-08 Permeability

4.0E-08

2.0E-08

0.0E+00 0 100020003000400050006000 Time, min.

Average Hydraulic Conductivity: 2.E-08 cm/sec Sample Data: Initial (As-Received) Final (At-Test) Height, in 2.83 2.81 Diameter, in 2.40 2.40 Area, in2 4.52 4.52 Volume in3 12.80 12.71 Total Volume, cc 209.7 208.3 Volume Solids, cc 128.9 128.9 Volume Voids, cc 80.8 79.4 Void Ratio 0.6 0.6 Total Porosity, % 38.5 38.1 Air-Filled Porosity (θa),% 4.5 1.9 Water-Filled Porosity (θw),% 34.1 36.2 Saturation, % 88.4 95.0 Specific Gravity 2.70 Assumed 2.70 Wet Weight, gm 419.5 423.5 Dry Weight, gm 348.1 348.1 Tare, gm 0.00 0.00 Moisture, % 20.5 21.7 Wet Bulk Density, pcf 124.8 126.9 Dry Bulk Density, pcf 103.6 104.3 3 Wet Bulk Dens.ρb, (g/cm ) 2.00 2.03 3 Dry Bulk Dens.ρb, (g/cm ) 1.66 1.67 Remarks: Figure No. 46 Page 83 Hydraulic Conductivity ASTM D 5084 Method C: Falling Head Rising Tailwater

Job No: 415-542 Boring: 9-1-1 Date: 10/08/15 Client: Pacific Crest Engineering Sample: By: MD/PJ Project: 1566 Depth, ft.: Remolded: Visual Classification: Yellowish Brown Clayey SAND (Cemented) Max Sample Pressures, psi: B: = >0.95 ("B" is an indication of saturation) Cell: Bottom Top Avg. Sigma3 Max Hydraulic Gradient: = 15 64 59.5 58.5 5 Date Minutes Head, (in) K,cm/sec 9.1E-06 10/6/2015 0.00 43.79 Start of Test 10/6/2015 71.50 40.19 1.6E-06 8.1E-06 10/6/2015 120.50 37.79 1.6E-06 7.1E-06 10/6/2015 139.50 36.99 1.6E-06 10/6/2015 196.50 34.69 1.6E-06 6.1E-06

5.1E-06

Permeability 4.1E-06

3.1E-06

2.1E-06

1.1E-06

1.0E-07 0 50 100 150 200 250 Time, min.

Average Hydraulic Conductivity: 2.E-06 cm/sec Sample Data: Initial (As-Received) Final (At-Test) Height, in 2.83 2.83 Diameter, in 2.40 2.40 Area, in2 4.52 4.52 Volume in3 12.79 12.80 Total Volume, cc 209.7 209.8 Volume Solids, cc 139.5 139.5 Volume Voids, cc 70.2 70.3 Void Ratio 0.5 0.5 Total Porosity, % 33.5 33.5 Air-Filled Porosity (θa),% 16.1 1.1 Water-Filled Porosity (θw),% 17.3 32.4 Saturation, % 51.8 96.8 Specific Gravity 2.70 Assumed 2.70 Wet Weight, gm 413.0 444.7 Dry Weight, gm 376.7 376.7 Tare, gm 0.00 0.00 Moisture, % 9.6 18.1 Wet Bulk Density, pcf 122.9 132.3 Dry Bulk Density, pcf 112.1 112.0 3 Wet Bulk Dens.ρb, (g/cm ) 1.97 2.12 3 Dry Bulk Dens.ρb, (g/cm ) 1.80 1.79 Remarks: Figure No. 47 Page 84 Hydraulic Conductivity ASTM D 5084 Method C: Falling Head Rising Tailwater

Job No: 416-542 Boring: 15-1-1 Date: 10/07/15 Client: Pacific Crest Engineering Sample: By: MD/PJ Project: 1566 Depth, ft.: Remolded: Visual Classification: Grayish Brown Silty SAND (slightly Cemented) Max Sample Pressures, psi: B: = >0.95 ("B" is an indication of saturation) Cell: Bottom Top Avg. Sigma3 Max Hydraulic Gradient: = 19 73.5 69 68 5 Date Minutes Head, (cm) K,cm/sec 9.1E-06 10/5/2015 0.00 97.33 Start of Test 10/5/2015 33.50 92.23 1.9E-06 8.1E-06 10/5/2015 41.50 91.03 2.0E-06 7.1E-06 10/5/2015 46.50 90.43 1.9E-06 10/5/2015 56.00 88.93 2.0E-06 6.1E-06

5.1E-06

Permeability 4.1E-06

3.1E-06

2.1E-06

1.1E-06

1.0E-07 0 102030405060 Time, min.

Average Hydraulic Conductivity: 2.E-06 cm/sec Sample Data: Initial (As-Received) Final (At-Test) Height, in 2.00 2.00 Diameter, in 2.42 2.42 Area, in2 4.59 4.59 Volume in3 9.19 9.16 Total Volume, cc 150.5 150.2 Volume Solids, cc 77.9 77.9 Volume Voids, cc 72.6 72.3 Void Ratio 0.9 0.9 Total Porosity, % 48.2 48.1 Air-Filled Porosity (θa),% 8.2 2.0 Water-Filled Porosity (θw),% 40.0 46.1 Saturation, % 82.9 95.8 Specific Gravity 2.70 Assumed 2.70 Wet Weight, gm 270.6 279.6 Dry Weight, gm 210.4 210.4 Tare, gm 0.00 0.00 Moisture, % 28.6 32.9 Wet Bulk Density, pcf 112.2 116.2 Dry Bulk Density, pcf 87.2 87.4 3 Wet Bulk Dens.ρb, (g/cm ) 1.80 1.86 3 Dry Bulk Dens.ρb, (g/cm ) 1.40 1.40 Remarks: Figure No. 48 Page 85 Hydraulic Conductivity ASTM D 5084 Method C: Falling Head Rising Tailwater

Job No: 416-542 Boring: 17-1-1 Date: 10/08/15 Client: Pacific Crest Engineering Sample: By: MD/PJ Project: 1566 Depth, ft.: Remolded: Visual Classification: Dark Grayish Brown Clayey SAND w/ organics Max Sample Pressures, psi: B: = >0.95 ("B" is an indication of saturation) Cell: Bottom Top Avg. Sigma3 Max Hydraulic Gradient: = 5 74 69 69 5 Date Minutes Head, (cm) K,cm/sec 9.0E-05 10/5/2015 0.00 27.00 Start of Test

10/5/2015 3.50 23.20 5.3E-05 8.0E-05 10/5/2015 9.00 18.40 5.2E-05 7.0E-05 10/5/2015 14.50 14.20 5.4E-05 10/5/2015 30.00 7.40 5.3E-05 6.0E-05

5.0E-05

Permeability 4.0E-05

3.0E-05

2.0E-05

1.0E-05

1.0E-07 0 10203040 Time, min.

Average Hydraulic Conductivity: 5.E-05 cm/sec Sample Data: Initial (As-Received) Final (At-Test) Height, in 2.00 1.98 Diameter, in 2.41 2.40 Area, in2 4.55 4.51 Volume in3 9.12 8.92 Total Volume, cc 149.4 146.2 Volume Solids, cc 74.1 74.1 Volume Voids, cc 75.3 72.1 Void Ratio 1.0 1.0 Total Porosity, % 50.4 49.3 Air-Filled Porosity (θa),% 25.2 2.0 Water-Filled Porosity (θw),% 25.2 47.3 Saturation, % 49.9 95.9 Specific Gravity 2.70 Assumed 2.70 Wet Weight, gm 237.7 269.2 Dry Weight, gm 200.1 200.1 Tare, gm 0.00 0.00 Moisture, % 18.8 34.5 Wet Bulk Density, pcf 99.3 114.9 Dry Bulk Density, pcf 83.6 85.4 3 Wet Bulk Dens.ρb, (g/cm ) 1.59 1.84 3 Dry Bulk Dens.ρb, (g/cm ) 1.34 1.37 Remarks: Figure No. 49 Page 86

LINE LOAD POINT LOAD 0 0 m = 0.1

0.2 0.2 m = 0.5 m = 0.6 m = 0.7 m = 0.2 Z / H 0.4 Z / H 0.4 m = 0.3

m = 0.4 0.6 0.6 VALUE OF n = VALUE VALUE OF n = VALUE P ( H ) m R mH QP R 0.8 0.1 0.60H 0.8 0.2 0.78 0.59H 0.3 0.60H 0.4 0.78 0.59H 0.5 0.56H 0.6 0.45 0.48H 0.7 0.48H 1.0 1.0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 1.00.8 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 H H2 VALUE OF o ( ) VALUE OF o ( ) H QL H QP

QP X = mH QL X = mH FOR m<= 0.4: Z = nH H 0.20 n P o ( Q ) = 2 2 H H L (0.16 +n ) A A1 Z = nH oH H P Q P H = 0.55 L H oH R FOR m<= 0.4: 2 2 H H 0.28 n o ( Q ) = 2 3 FOR m> 0.4: H P (0.16 +n ) R 2 H 1.28 m n o ( Q ) = 2 2 2 FOR m 0.4: H L (m +n ) > 2 1.77 m2 n2 H = 0.64 Q o Q o ( Q ) 2 2 3 L H P H P (m +n ) RESULTANT P = 2 θ

H WALL (m + 1) 1 oH 1 2 oH = oH cos (1.1 θ) PRESSURES FROM LINE LOAD Q L X = mH (BOISSINESQ EQUATION MODIFIED BY EXPERMENT) SECTION A-A1

REFERENCE: Design Manual PRESSURES FROM POINT LOAD Q NAVFAC DM-7.02 P Figure 11 (BOISSINESQ EQUATION MODIFIED Page 7.2-74 BY EXPERMENT)

Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Surcharge Pressure Diagram Figure No. 50 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 12” Soil

Compacted Backfill 12" Mirafi 140 Filter Fabric or Equivalent Permeable Material Retaining Cal-Trans Section Retaining 68-1.025, Class I Wall Type A Permeable 4% Material Cal-Trans Section 68-1.025, Class 1, Type A

3” rigid pipe Filter Perforated Fabric 4" Pipe Mirafi 180 3” rigid pipe (Perforation or Down) Equivalent

3" 4%

(12" min.) 12” (minimum)

Not to Scale Not to Scale

Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Figure No. 51

Typical Retaining Wall Drain Detail Options Page 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566 Date: 6/23/17 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California 87 Page 88

2/3H1 2/3H1 H1 H1 T Th1 h1 p H p 1/3H 2 T H h2

Hn

Th n

2/3(H-H1) Hn+1 2/3Hn+1 R R

TOTAL LOAD p = TOTAL LOAD p = ≈ KAγH 2/3H H - 1/3H1 - 1/3Hn+1 Walls with one level Walls with multiple levels of ground anchors of ground anchors

2 TOTAL LOAD = 0.65 KAγH

H1 = Distance from ground surface to uppermost ground anchor

Hn+1 = Distance from base of excavation to lowermost ground anchor

Th1 = Horizontal load in ground anchor 1 R = Reaction force to be resisted by subgrade (i.e.; below base of excavation) p = Maximum ordinate of diagram

Recommended Soil Parameters Marine Terrace Purisima Formation Basin Deposits Deposits Bedrock Unit Soil Weight 125 pcf 110 pcf 130 pcf Level Backslope KA = .36 KA = .40 KA = .23 2:1 Backslope KA = .48 KA = .54 KA = .35 1½:1 Backslope KA = .61 KA = .70 KA = .44 Passive Earth 2.8 1.8 4.6 Pressure, KP

Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Apparent Earth Pressure Diagram Figure No. 52 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 9/1/2017 RRM Design Group Page 89 June 23, 2017 Project No. 1566-SZ67-H42 Revised September 1, 2017

APPENDIX B

Infiltration Test Data

Page 90

SINGLE RING INFILTROMETER TEST ASTM D-5126

Test Information Test No.: P-2 Test Date: 9/11/2015 Test By: MG, DO, & CA Job No.: 1566 Location of Test: Adjacent to B-2, off of Natural Bridges Drive Infiltration Data Interval Flow Readings Infiltration Actual Time Infiltration Interval Time Water Elev. Change in Volume (hr:min) Rate (in/hr.) (min) (in) Elev (in) (in3) Start 10:48 AM 27.0 1 0:30 0.0 0.0 0.0 End 11:18 AM 27.0 Start 11:18 AM 27.0 2 0:30 0.0 0.0 0.0 End 11:48 AM 27.0 Start 11:48 AM 27.0 3 0:30 0.0 0.0 0.0 End 12:18 PM 27.0 Start 12:18 PM 27.0 4 0:30 0.0 0.0 0.0 End 12:48 PM 27.0 Soil Information % Gravel % Sand 48 % Silt/Clay 52 USCS Classification: Sandy CLAY/Clayey SAND Ground Temp. (˚F) 75.5 Test Configuration & Constants Test Depth (ft.) 2.5 Ring Penetration (in) 4.0 Area of Ring (in2) 443.0 Marriotte Unit Vol. (in3/in) 24.6 Depth of Water (in) 4.0 pH of Water 6.77 Test Results

Infiltration Rate, It (in/hr): 0.0 Measured Infiltration Rate, Km (in/hr): 0.0

Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Infiltration Test Data & Results Test Location P-2 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 91

SINGLE RING INFILTROMETER TEST ASTM D-5126

Test Information Test No.: P-5 Test Date: 10/8/2015 Test By: MG & DO Job No.: 1566 Location of Test: Adjacent to B-5, off of Swift Street Infiltration Data Interval Flow Readings Infiltration Actual Time Infiltration Interval Time Water Elev. Change in Volume (hr:min) Rate (in/hr.) (min) (in) Elev (in) (in3) Start 10:20 AM 25.9 1 0:15 1.3 32.0 0.1 End 10:35 AM 24.6 Start 10:35 AM 24.6 2 0:15 0.0 0.0 0.0 End 10:50 AM 24.6 Start 10:50 AM 27.0 3 0:15 0.0 0.0 0.0 End 11:05 AM 27.0 Start 11:05 AM 27.0 4 0:15 0.0 0.0 0.0 End 11:20 AM 27.0 Start 11:20 AM 24.6 5 0:15 0.0 0.0 0.0 End 11:35 AM 24.6 Start 11:35 AM 24.6 6 0:15 0.0 0.0 0.0 End 11:50 AM 24.6 Start 11:50 AM 24.6 7 0:15 2.0 49.3 0.2 End 12:05 PM 22.6 Start 12:05 PM 22.6 8 0:15 0.0 0.0 0.0 End 12:20 PM 22.6 Soil Information % Gravel % Sand % Silt % Clay USCS Classification: Clayey SAND/Sandy CLAY Ground Temp. (˚F) Test Configuration & Constants Test Depth (ft.) 3.0 Ring Penetration (in) 3.5 Area of Ring (in2) 443.0 Marriotte Unit Vol. (in3/in) 24.6 Depth of Water (in) 4.0 pH of Water Test Results

Infiltration Rate, It (in/hr): 0.0 Measured Infiltration Rate, Km (in/hr): 0.0

Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Infiltration Test Data & Results Test Location P-5 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 92

SINGLE RING INFILTROMETER TEST ASTM D-5126

Test Information Test No.: P-7 Test Date: 10/8/2015 Test By: MG & DO Job No.: 1566 Location of Test: Adjacent to B-7, between Fair Street and Almar Street Infiltration Data Interval Flow Readings Infiltration Actual Time Infiltration Interval Time Water Elev. Change in Volume (hr:min) Rate (in/hr.) (min) (in) Elev (in) (in3) Start 2:10 PM 23.4 1 0:15 0.0 0.0 0.0 End 2:25 PM 23.4 Start 2:25 PM 23.4 2 0:15 0.0 0.0 0.0 End 2:40 PM 23.4 Start 2:40 PM 23.4 3 0:15 0.7 17.2 0.1 End 2:55 PM 22.7 Start 2:55 PM 22.7 4 0:15 0.0 0.0 0.0 End 3:10 PM 22.7 Start 3:10 PM 22.7 5 0:15 0.3 7.4 0.0 End 3:25 PM 22.4 Start 3:25 PM 22.4 6 0:15 0.0 0.0 0.0 End 3:40 PM 22.4 Start 3:40 PM 22.4 7 0:15 0.4 9.9 0.0 End 3:55 PM 22.0 Start 3:55 PM 22.0 8 0:15 0.0 0.0 0.0 End 4:10 PM 22.0 Soil Information % Gravel % Sand 57 % Silt/Clay 43 USCS Classification: Clayey SAND Ground Temp. (˚F) Test Configuration & Constants Test Depth (ft.) 3.5 Ring Penetration (in) 3.5 Area of Ring (in2) 443.0 Marriotte Unit Vol. (in3/in) 24.6 Depth of Water (in) 4.0 pH of Water Test Results

Infiltration Rate, It (in/hr): 0.0 Measured Infiltration Rate, Km (in/hr): 0.0

Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Infiltration Test Data & Results Test Location P-7 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 93

SINGLE RING INFILTROMETER TEST ASTM D-5126

Test Information Test No.: P-9 Test Date: 10/9/2015 Test By: MG & DO Job No.: 1566 Location of Test: Adjacent to B-9, near Dufour Street Infiltration Data Interval Flow Readings Infiltration Actual Time Infiltration Interval Time Water Elev. Change in Volume (hr:min) Rate (in/hr.) (min) (in) Elev (in) (in3) Start 9:52 AM 22.0 1 0:15 8.3 204.4 0.9 End 10:07 AM 13.7 Start 10:07 AM 26.5 2 0:15 3.8 93.6 0.4 End 10:22 AM 22.7 Start 10:22 AM 22.7 3 0:15 2.8 69.0 0.3 End 10:37 AM 19.9 Start 10:37 AM 19.9 4 0:15 1.8 44.3 0.2 End 10:52 AM 18.1 Start 10:52 AM 18.1 5 0:15 2.2 54.2 0.2 End 11:07 AM 15.9 Start 11:07 AM 15.9 6 0:15 2.9 71.4 0.3 End 11:22 AM 13.0 Start 11:22 AM 13.0 7 0:15 0.9 22.2 0.1 End 11:37 AM 12.1 Start 11:37 AM 12.1 8 0:15 0.5 12.3 0.1 End 11:52 AM 11.6 Start 11:52 AM 11.6 9 0:15 1.8 44.3 0.2 End 12:07 PM 9.8 Start 12:07 PM 9.8 10 0:15 0.9 22.2 0.1 End 12:22 PM 8.9 Start 12:22 PM 8.9 11 0:15 1.2 29.6 0.1 End 12:37 PM 7.7 Start 12:37 PM 7.7 12 0:15 0.9 22.2 0.1 End 12:52 PM 6.8 Start 12:52 PM 6.8 13 0:15 1.1 27.1 0.1 End 1:07 PM 5.7 Soil Information % Gravel % Sand 59 % Silt/Clay 41 USCS Classification: Clayey SAND Ground Temp. (˚F) 64.0 Test Configuration & Constants Test Depth (ft.) 3.0 Ring Penetration (in) 3.0 Area of Ring (in2) 443.0 Marriotte Unit Vol. (in3/in) 24.6 Depth of Water (in) 4.0 pH of Water 6.72 Test Results

Infiltration Rate, It (in/hr): 0.1 Measured Infiltration Rate, Km (in/hr): 0.06

Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Infiltration Test Data & Results Test Location P-9 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 94

SINGLE RING INFILTROMETER TEST ASTM D-5126

Test Information Test No.: P-12 Test Date: 10/9/2015 Test By: MG & DO Job No.: 1566 Location of Test: Adjacent to B-12, near entrance to the Wastewater Treatment Plant Infiltration Data Interval Flow Readings Infiltration Actual Time Infiltration Interval Time Water Elev. Change in Volume (hr:min) Rate (in/hr.) (min) (in) Elev (in) (in3) Start 3:22 PM 25.6 1 0:15 16.9 416.2 1.9 End 3:37 PM 8.7 Start 3:37 PM 27.5 2 0:15 12.8 315.3 1.4 End 3:52 PM 14.7 Start 3:52 PM 28.4 3 0:15 10.6 261.1 1.2 End 4:07 PM 17.8 Start 4:07 PM 17.8 4 0:15 10.2 251.2 1.1 End 4:22 PM 7.6 Start 4:22 PM 27.7 5 0:15 9.0 221.7 1.0 End 4:37 PM 18.7 Start 4:37 PM 18.7 6 0:15 8.7 214.3 1.0 End 4:52 PM 10.0 Start 4:52 PM 19.1 7 0:15 8.6 211.8 1.0 End 5:07 PM 10.5 Start 5:07 PM 24.9 8 0:15 8.5 209.4 0.9 End 5:22 PM 16.4 Start 5:22 PM 16.4 9 0:15 8.3 204.4 0.9 End 5:37 PM 8.1 Start 5:37 PM 20.9 10 0:15 8.0 197.0 0.9 End 5:52 PM 12.9 Start 5:52 PM 22.3 11 0:15 8.0 197.0 0.9 End 6:07 PM 14.3 Soil Information % Gravel % Sand 81 % Silt/Clay 19 USCS Classification: Clayey SAND Ground Temp. (˚F) 70.0 Test Configuration & Constants Test Depth (ft.) 3.2 Ring Penetration (in) 4.5 Area of Ring (in2) 443.0 Marriotte Unit Vol. (in3/in) 24.6 Depth of Water (in) 4.0 pH of Water 6.43 Test Results

Infiltration Rate, It (in/hr): 0.9 Measured Infiltration Rate, Km (in/hr): 0.4

Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Infiltration Test Data & Results Test Location P-12 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 95 SHALLOW QUICK INFILTROMETER TEST Native Soil Assessment for Small Infiltration Based Stormwater Control Measures

Test Information Test No.: P-15 Test Date: 10/9/2015 Test By: MG & DO Job No.: 1566 Location of Test: Adjacent to B-15 Soil Information % Gravel % Sand 62 % Silt & Clay 38 USCS Description: Purisma Sandstone USCS Classification: Test Configuration & Constants ).tf( noitavelE ecafruS gnitsixE ecafruS noitavelE ).tf( A/N gniroB htpeD ).ni( 0.06 Bioswale Invert Elevation (ft.) A/N Diameter of Test Boring (in.) 0.6 Bottom of Boring Elevation (ft.) A/N Cross-Section Area of Boring (in 2 ) 3.82 Constant Head Infiltration Data Interval Initial Fill Final Fill Actual Time Water Head Infiltration Interval Time Volume Volume (hr:min) (in) Rate (in/hr.) (min) (in 3 ) (in 3 ) Start 9:40 AM 0 30 4.32 70482.37 71363.40 16.07 End 10:10 AM Falling Head Infiltration Data Interval Flow Readings Infiltration Actual Time Infiltration Interval Time Water Head Change in Volume (hr:min) 3 Rate (in/hr.) (min) (in) Elev (in) (in ) Start 10:20 AM 53.40 01 39.3302.1 0.20 End 10:30 AM 52.20 Start 10:30 AM 52.20 01 42.027.0444.1 End 10:40 AM 50.76 1 Start 10:40 AM 50.76 01 23.098.0508.1 End 10:50 AM 48.96 Start 10:50 AM 48.96 01 31.063.0227.0 End 11:00 AM 48.24 Start 11:00 AM 48.24 03 86.7540.2 0.13 End 11:30 AM 46.20 Start 11:30 AM 46.20 03 41.070.1661.2 End 12:00 PM 44.04 2 Start 12:00 PM 44.04 03 21.098.0508.1 End 12:30 PM 42.24 Start 12:30 PM 42.24 03 31.098.0508.1 End 1:00 PM 40.44 Test Results

Infiltration Rate, It :)rh/ni( 31.0 derusaeM noitartlifnI ,etaR K m (in/hr): 60.0 Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Infiltration Test Data & Results Test Location P-15 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17 Page 96

SINGLE RING INFILTROMETER TEST ASTM D-5126

Test Information Test No.: P-19 Test Date: 10/9/2015 Test By: MG & DO Job No.: 1566 Location of Test: Adjacent to B-19, near the trestle and railroad junction Infiltration Data Interval Flow Readings Infiltration Actual Time Infiltration Interval Time Water Elev. Change in Volume (hr:min) Rate (in/hr.) (min) (in) Elev (in) (in3) Start 11:08 AM 27.2 1 0:15 12.6 310.3 1.4 End 11:23 AM 14.6 Start 11:23 AM 28.3 2 0:15 10.6 261.1 1.2 End 11:38 AM 17.7 Start 11:38 AM 17.7 3 0:15 6.4 157.6 0.7 End 11:53 AM 11.3 Start 11:53 AM 11.3 4 0:15 6.4 157.6 0.7 End 12:08 PM 4.9 Start 12:08 PM 27.8 5 0:15 5.1 125.6 0.6 End 12:23 PM 22.7 Start 12:23 PM 22.7 6 0:15 4.9 120.7 0.5 End 12:38 PM 17.8 Start 12:38 PM 17.8 7 0:15 4.5 110.8 0.5 End 12:53 PM 13.3 Start 12:53 PM 13.3 8 0:15 4.0 98.5 0.4 End 1:08 PM 9.3 Start 1:08 PM 9.3 9 0:15 3.9 96.1 0.4 End 1:23 PM 5.4 Start 1:23 PM 17.2 10 0:15 3.3 81.3 0.4 End 1:38 PM 13.9 Start 1:38 PM 13.9 11 0:15 4.1 101.0 0.5 End 1:53 PM 9.8 Soil Information % Gravel % Sand % Silt % Clay USCS Classification: Silty SAND Ground Temp. (˚F) 72.6 Test Configuration & Constants Test Depth (ft.) 3.5 Ring Penetration (in) 4.5 Area of Ring (in2) 443.0 Marriotte Unit Vol. (in3/in) 24.6 Depth of Water (in) 4.0 pH of Water 6.68 Test Results

Infiltration Rate, It (in/hr): 0.5 Measured Infiltration Rate, Km (in/hr): 0.2

Pacific Crest Engineering Inc. Infiltration Test Data & Results Test Location P-19 444 Airport Blvd., Suite 106 MBSST - Segment 7 Project No. 1566 Watsonville, CA 95076 Santa Cruz, California Date: 6/23/17