ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an...
Transcript of ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an...
![Page 1: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
ATTACHMENT C
![Page 2: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
![Page 3: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE EXPANSION OF POND 30 Permanente Quarry, Lehigh Hanson Southwest Cement
Submitted To: Lehigh Hanson Southwest Cement 24001 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, CA 95014
Submitted By: Golder Associates Inc. 425 Lakeside Drive Sunnyvale, CA 94085 USA
Distribution: Lehigh Hanson (PDF e-file)
February 2015 Project No.1417878
Golder, Golder Associates and the GA globe design are trademarks of Golder Associates Corporation
Golder Associates
![Page 4: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
·- February 2015 Project No. 1417878
Table of Contents
1.0
2.0
INTRODUCTION ..... ·················· 1
SITE SETIING AND GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS .......................................................................... 2
2.1 Topography......................................... . .................................................................................. 2
2.2 Regional Geologic Setting..................................................... .. ................... . ........................ 2
2.3 Seismic Setting.................................................. ................. ........................................... . ........ 3
2.3.1 Structural and Tectonic Setting............................................................... . .................. 3
2.3.2 ················ ... 3
2.4
3.0
3.1
Geologic Hazards...... . ....................................................................................................... 4
INVESTIGATION FOR POND 30 ........................................................... . ... 5
Review of Aerial Photos .................. . .................................................................................... 5
3.2 Golder Field Exploration and Subsurface Conditions ............................ . . ........................... 5
3.3 Laboratory Testing .................................. . . .................. 6
3.3.1 Test Methods ..................................... . . .......................................................................... 6
3.3.2 Summary of Lab Test Results............. ................. ................. . ............................ 6
4.0 SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS.................. . ....................................................................... 8
4.1 Methodology.... . . ..... .. . .. .. .. . .. . . . . . .. . ... . . . .. . .. . ... . . . ..... .. ... . . .. ... . ... ... .. ... . . . .. . .. . . .. . . ............... 8
4.1.1 Static Analysis ....................................................................................................................... 8
4.1.2 Seismic Analysis. . ........... 8
4.1.3 Critical Cross Section Analyzed .......................................................................... . .... 8
4.2
4.3
Material Parameters ................................................... .
Slope Stability under Static Conditions .................................................................... .
. ........... 8
. ... 9
4.4 Slope Stability under Seismic Conditions .................................................. . ................. 9
4.4.1 Yield Coefficient for Seismic Slope Stability Analysis.............. ...................................... . .... 9
4.4.2 Seismically Induced Permanent Slope Displacement ......................................................... 10
5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................... 11
5.1
5.2
6.0
7.0
8.0
Conclusions ............................................. .
General Recommendations ..................... .
USE OF THIS REPORT..
CLOSING ........... .
REFERENCES ...................................................... .
List of Tables
.. 11
............. ·········································· .. 11
......................................................... 13
..... 14
....................... ················ .15
Table 1 Table 2
Summary of Material Parameters Used in the Stability Analyses Summary of Static and Seismic Slope Stability Analyses Results
List of Figures
Figure 1 Location Map
lehigh hanson_pond-30_gootech-report_final v1_wlf.doi::x
~£;;--
l'IAl Golder ~Associates
![Page 5: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7
February 2015
Conceptual Layout - Pond 30 Expansion Geologic Map and Locations of Test Borings Geologic Cross Section A-A'
ii Project No. 1417878
Results of Static Slope Stability Analysis, Trial Surface Terminating at the Pond Results of Static Slope Stability Analysis, Surficial Trial Surface within Existing Slope Results of Pseudo-Static Slope Stability Analysis to Estimate Yield Acceleration
List of Appendices
Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Appendix D Appendix E
Estimation of PGA and Acceleration Spectra for Maximum Credible Earthquake Test Boring Logs Laboratory Test Results Slope Stability Analysis Results Estimation of Seismically Induced Permanent Displacement
lehigh hanson_pond-30_geotech-report_final v1_wlf.docx
![Page 6: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
February 2015 Project No. 1417878
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Golder Associates Inc. (Golder) is submitting this geotechnical report for the proposed expansion of Pond
30 at Lehigh Hanson's Permanente Quarry located in Cupertino, California (Figure 1). This report
summarizes the results of our field investigation, laboratory testing, and slope stability analyses.
The location of the proposed existing Pond 30 and the proposed grading for its expansion are shown in
Figure 2. The pond is located along the southeast margin of the East Material Storage Area. Review of
historical aerial photos show that the proposed pond expansion site is located on a level bench graded for
construction of industrial buildings associated with the former Kaiser Aluminum Plant. The buildings were
demolished in 2002, and the pad was used for an equipment lay-down and staging area, stockpile for
aggregate materials, as well as for storm drainage management (i.e., existing pond 30 and associated
inlet channel). The expanded pond has a surface area of approximately 1.5 acres with a storage depth
of approximately 13 feet. The pond will be constructed entirely in excavation below existing ground
surface. The approximate storage capacity of the pond is - 7 Y, acre-feet. The conceptual design of the
pond includes a geomembrane liner to prevent infiltration.
lehigh hanson_pond-JO_geotech-report_final v1_wlf.docx
![Page 7: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
February 2015 2 Project No. 1417878
2.0 SITE SETTING AND GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS
The following sections summarize the regional topographic, geologic, and seismic setting; and describe
the specific geologic conditions in the area of Pond 30.
2.1 Topography
The Permanente Quarry and Cement Plant are situated in the foothills of the rugged, northwest-trending
Santa Cruz Mountains segment of the California Coast Ranges. Topography in the area consists of
moderately to steeply-sloped terrain with rounded ridges and drainages. Relief at the project site ranges
from about 2000 feet along the higher ridge crests to less than 500 feet mean sea level (msl) along the
eastern portions of Permanente Creek. Average natural slope angles are typically around 25". The
steepest natural slopes are on the order of 40° over smaller slope heights (100-200 feet) and generally
correspond to limestone outcrops.
At the Pond 30 expansion area, the topography is a flat and level bench (el. -560 feet amsl) created by
excavation of a cutslope to the north, and placement of fill along the outboard edge of the pad. The pad
was graded to accommodate construction of the former Kaiser Aluminum plant in the 1940's. The
building were demolished in 2002. The pad is long and narrow (-2500 feet long by -200 feet wide) and
the alignment of the pad is parallel to the alignment of Permanente Creek.
2.2 Regional Geologic Setting
The majority of the subject property is underlain by complexly deformed and faulted rocks of the
Franciscan Assemblage (Golder, 2011). The eastern portion of the site, is underlain in locations by Plio
Pleistocene rocks of the Santa Clara Formation. Overlying the bedrock are modern alluvial deposits
associated with Permanente Creek (restricted to the eastern portion of the property), and relatively
shallow surficial deposits comprised of soil and colluvium.
The Santa Clara Formation overlies the Franciscan Assemblage rocks in the central and eastern portion
of the property including the EMSA area where it occurs as remnant patches of terrane overlying the
Franciscan Assemblage and is locally in fault contact along the Sargent Berrocal fault. (Golder, 2011 ).
The Santa Clara Formation is a continental fluvial and alluvial deposit that is composed of unconsolidated
to slightly consolidated conglomerate, sandstone, siltstone, and claystone (Vanderhurst, 1981). Uplift of
the Coast Ranges during this time resulted in increased erosion of the mountains and deposition of the
Santa Clara Formation. The contact between the Franciscan rocks and Santa Clara Formation is
considered to be unconformable, with the Santa Clara Formation deposited on an eroded Franciscan
terrain (Rogers and Armstrong, 1973). Subsequent uplift of the nearby foothills along the Monte Vista
fault, which lies along the margin of the valley floor to the east of the Quarry, has resulted in deformation
of the Santa Clara Formation.
lehigh hanson_pond-30 _geotech-report_final v1 _ wlf.docx
Golder Associates
![Page 8: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
February 2015 3 Project No. 1417878
2.3 Seismic Setting
2.3.1 Structural and Tectonic Setting
The San Andreas Fault zone is located approximately 2 miles southwest of the quarry (Golder, 2011 ).
The Sargent-Berrocal Fault Zone (SBFZ), part of the Santa Cruz Mountains front-range thrust fault
system, parallels the San Andreas to the east and forms the eastern-most structural boundary to the
Permanente Terrain.
Near the Permanente Site, the SBFZ consists of two northwest-trending, sub-parallel faults, namely the
northeastern-most Monta Vista Fault Zone and the southwestern-most Berrocal Fault Zone (Sorg and
Mclaughlin, 1975). The combined fault zone is located in a complex contractional system of generally
northeastward-vergent thrust and reverse faults that bound the northeastern side of the Santa Cruz
Mountains (Mclaughlin and others, 1997). This thrust system has been described as an eastward
propagating half-flower structure that roots toward the San Andreas fault zone.
The Monte Vista strand ol the fault zone is located approximately 800 feet to the northeast of the
proposed Pond 30 expansion area. A strand of the Berrocal Fault Zone runs through the central portion
of site and about 3100 feet west of the Pond 30 area (Sorg and Mclaughlin, 1975). This fault forms a
structural boundary between Franciscan basement rocks to the west, and Franciscan rocks overlain by
Santa Clara formation rocks to the east. The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the
California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million years (CGS, 2010). However,
mapping of the Berrocal and Monte Vista faults following the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake documented
minor distributed coseismic contractional deformation in the Cupertino foothills to the northeast of the
Permanente site (Hitchcock, et al, 1994).
2.3.2 Seismicity
The Permanente Site is located within the San Francisco Bay Area, which is a region characterized by
relatively high seismicity. Golder evaluated potential seismic impacts for the project resulting from a
maximum credible earthquake (MCE) on the San Andreas Fault. The MCE is defined as "the maximum
earthquake that appears capable of occurring under the presently known tectonic framework." The MCE
would be a moment magnitude (Mw) 8 event along the San Andreas Fault, which is assumed to be slightly
higher than the Mw 7.9 San Francisco earthquake of 1906.
lehigh hanson_pond-30_geotech-report_final v1_wlt.docx
Golder .Associates
![Page 9: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
February 2015
Golder estimated the peak ground
acceleration
acceleration
using the
(PGA) and the
spectra for the MCE
Next Generation
Attenuation (NGA) relationships
developed by Abrahamson and Silva
(2008), Boore and Atkinson (2008),
Chiou and Youngs (2008), and
Campbell and Bozorgnia (2008).
The computed values from the four
relationships were equally weighted
(0.25 each) to estimate spectral
accelerations as a function of
magnitude, source-to-site distance,
and fault geometry and for an
average shear wave velocity in the
upper 30 meters (100 feet) of the soil
4 Project No. 1417878
5%-Damped Pseudo-AbsOlute Median Acceleration Response Spectrum
10
0.1
{),01
0.001 0.01
~~
0.1 10 Period{s)
column (V,30 ) equal to 760 meters per second (2,500 feet per second). The calculations are presented
in Appendix A. Golder estimates that the design PGA is 0.48g for the site. The median acceleration
spectrum is included here for reference.
2.4 Geologic Hazards
The geologic hazards evaluated for the proposed project include the potential for ground rupture, slope
instability, liquefaction and lateral spreading, consolidation settlement, and potential flooding associated
with the proposed project. The geologic hazards that could impact the proposed pond expansion are
limited to ground shaking and slope instability.
The risk associated with ground rupture is considered negligible since the project site is not situated on a
known Holocene fault. Liquefaction is not considered a hazard because of the presence of significant
fines (silts and clays) in the soil underlying the proposed project site, and the relatively shallow depth to
bedrock. Consolidation settlement is not considered a risk since the pond will be excavated and therefore
the site will be unloaded and not subject to induced settlement. The site is located approximately 35 feet
above the 100-year flood plain for Permanente Creek and therefore the risk associated with flooding is
considered low. Tsunami and Seiche are not hazards due to the site location and elevation.
Slope instability, and the relative risk to the project, is discussed in more detail in Section 4.
lehigh hanson_pond-30_geotech-report_final v1_wlf.docx
![Page 10: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
February 2015 5 Project No. 1417878
3.0 INVESTIGATION FOR POND 30
3.1 Review of Aerial Photos
A review of various stereoscopic aerial photographs and Google Earth images dating back to 1948 was
conducted to: (1) evaluate the past grading and development activities in the area, (2) prepare a geologic
map of surficial deposits and bedrock, and (3) identify any obvious signs of ground distress related to
slope instability.
The earliest set of aerial photographs (1948) show the Kaiser Aluminum buildings present on a graded
pad. There are three buildings in the general area of the proposed Pond 30 expansion. There is
relatively tall cutslope visible behind the northern two buildings. There is earthwork and grading activities
associated with development of roads up to the buildings. The slope below the pad to the north, and the
hillside above the buildings are covered with orchard and are native ground. Site conditions remain
similar until late 2002 when the buildings were demolished and the land use changed to material
stockpiles and equipment lay down. No evidence of slope instability was observed in the hillside terrain
above or below the proposed pond expansion area.
3.2 Golder Field Exploration and Subsurface Conditions
On January 8-9, 2015, Golder performed a subsurface exploration consisting of four test borings at the
proposed Pond 30 expansion site. The test borings are designated as B-1, B-2, B-3, B-4, and B-Pilot,
the locations of which are shown in Figure 3.
The borings were advanced with a truck-mounted, CME 85 drill rig turning a continuous flight, 8-inch
diameter, hollow-stem auger. During the drilling process, disturbed, but representative, soil samples were
obtained at 5-foot intervals. The samples were obtained by using a 1.5-inch (ID) Standard Penetration
Sampler and a California Modified Sampler driven by a 140-pound hammer falling freely for 30-inches.
The number of hammer blows required to drive the sampler 18-inches were recorded in 6-inch intervals.
The number of blows required to drive the sampler the final 12-inches is designated as the penetration
resistance or "blow count." The blow counts as recorded in the field are presented on the boring logs.
The samples were retained in 1.5-inch and 2.5-inch diameter by 6-inch long brass tubes contained within
the sampler. The samples were visually classified in the field by a geologist working under the direction
of a California Professional Geologist (PG). The samples were retained in the tubes, placed in a sealed
plastic bag inside a cooler, and transported to our office for sample review and selection of samples for
laboratory testing.
All samples were classified in accordance to the Unified Soil Classification System. Pertinent information
including depths, stratigraphy, soil engineering characteristics, and groundwater occurrence were
lehigh hanson_pond-30_geotech-report_final v1_wlf.docx
![Page 11: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
February 2015 6 Project No. 1417878
recorded. Stratigraphic contacts indicated on the logs represent approximate boundaries between soil
types. The soil and groundwater conditions are those recorded for the dates indicated, and may not
necessarily represent those of other times or locations.
Test borings B-1 and B-2 were extended to depths of 26.5 below ground surface (bgs) and B-3 and B-4
were drilled to 20 feet bgs. B-Pilot was drilled first to establish the general subsurface conditions and
depth to bedrock. Representative bulk samples were obtained from this boring. Borings B-1 through B-4
were sampled using standard geotechnical procedures with Standard Penetration Test (SPT) drive
samples and California Modified samples alternating every five feet.
The B-Pilot boring encountered highly weathered greenstone bedrock at approximately 30 feet below
ground surface. Water was encountered at approximately 18 - 20 feet below ground surface although
this water was possibly perched in this location. The upper four to five feet of the soil profile was
described as Clayey Gravel (GW) and was interpreted as artificial fill. The remaining profile was
described as Clayey Sand (SC) with gravel comprised of well graded, subrounded sand and gravel with
iron oxidation. The material was compact and moist. This material is interpreted as colluvium overlying
heavily weathered greenstone although it may be a mixture of artificial fill and colluvium as these earth
materials are very similar in appearance and composition.
The remaining borings encountered the same general stratigraphic profile with minor variations in the
interpreted depth of fill ranging up to about seven to eight feet in thickness. Bedrock was encountered at
approximately 15 feet in Boring B-4. Groundwater was encountered at approximately 26 feet in Boring B-
2. Logs of the test borings are included in Appendix B.
3.3 Laboratory Testing
3.3.1 Test Methods
Selected soil samples were transported to Cooper Testing Laboratories in Palo Alto, California for further
classification and geotechnical testing. This testing included the following:
Ill Particle Size Analyses (ASTM 0422)
II Atterberg Limits (ASTM 04318)
1111 Modified Proctor test (ASTM 01557)
Ill Direct shear test (ASTM 03080)
Laboratory test results are included in Appendix C.
3.3.2 Summary of Lab Test Results
The above laboratory tests were performed mainly on the colluvium samples. The colluvium classifies
generally as Lean Clayey SAND with Gravel. The particle size analysis on a composite sample from
lehigh hanson_pond-30_geotech-report_final v1_wlf.docx
Golder Associates
![Page 12: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
February 2015 7 Project No. 1417878
depth 3 to 25 feet from test boring B-1shows19.9% gravel, 48% sand, and 32.1% fines. The modified
Proctor test on this sample shows a maximum dry density of 135.8 pounds per cubic foot (pct) and an
optimum moisture content of 8.1 %.
The four Atterberg limit tests performed on four samples from various depths of the four borings show low
plasticity with the liquid limit (LL) ranging from 28 to 37, the plastic limit (PL) ranging from 13 to 19, and
the plasticity index (Pl) ranging from 14 to 18.
The three consolidated drained direct shear strength tests show significantly large effective friction angles
for the colluvium likely due to the presence of gravel. Because of the small size of the shear box relative
to the size of the gravels, the measured shear strength appears to be affected by the gravel. Therefore,
the direct shear test results are considered unconservative for the project.
lehigh hanson_pond-30_geotech-report_final v1_w[f.docx
![Page 13: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
February 2015 8 Project No. 1417878
4.0 SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS
4.1 Methodology
4. 1. 1 Static Analysis
The computer program SLOPEIW (2012 version) which uses two-dimensional, limit equilibrium method,
was used to compute the factors of safety (FS) against potential slope failure at the site. This program
allows both circular and noncircular sliding surfaces to be either defined manually or generated
automatically to search for the lowest FS values. The Morgenstern-Price method was used to compute
factors of safety.
Based on traditional geotechnical practice, a minimum FS of 1.5 is considered acceptable under static
conditions.
4.1.2 Seismic Analysis
Golder performed a rigorous seismic slope stability analysis which included estimation of yield coefficient
for the slope and estimating the seismically induced permanent displacement using a predictive model
developed by Bray and Travasarou (2007). The yield coefficient is the seismic coefficient that results in
pseudo-static FS of 1.
Based on the sate-of-practice for seismic design of earthen slopes (Duncan and Wright, 2005), 3 feet is
considered as the maximum allowable permanent of displacement during the MCE event. To be
conservative, a seismically induces permanent displacement of 1 foot (12 inches) is assumed as the
maximum allowable limit in this report.
4. 1.3 Critical Cross Section Analyzed
Based on a review of the topography of the site and interpreted subsurface conditions at the Pod 30 site,
Golder identified the most critical cross section (A-A') to analyze for stability of exiting slopes adjacent to
the pond expansion. The location of this cross section is shown Figure 3. The geologic profile along
cross section A-A' is shown in Figure 4.
4.2 Material Parameters
As shown in Figure 4, the subsurface profile along cross section A-A' consists of waste rock/artificial fill,
fill/colluvium, and greenstone. The shear strength parameters for waste rock and greenstone were
selected based on Golder's previous slope stability analyses for the East Material Storage Area in
Appendix 11 of Golder (2011). For the fill/colluvium, Golder has assumed a conservative friction angle of
28 degrees, based on the type of materials encounters (i.e., Lean Clayey SAND with GraveD and our
engineering judgment. Table 1 below summarizes the parameters used in the slope stability analyses.
lehigh hanson_pond-30_geotech-report_final v1_wlf.docx
![Page 14: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
February 2015 9 Project No. 1417878
Table 1: Summary of Material Parameters used in the Slope Stability Analyses
Unit Weight Shear Strength Parameters
Material (pcf) Cohesion Friction Angle
(psi) (degrees)
Waste Rock/Artificial Fill1 125 0 35
Fill/Colluvium2 120 0 28
Greenstone 1 165 1,440 23 Notes:
1 Based on Golder (2011) 2 Conservatively assumed value
4.3 Slope Stability under Static Conditions
The slope stability analysis was performed for two conditions using the SLOPE/W computer program.
Because the pond will he lined with a geomembrane, the analyses assume that there would be
groundwater recharge from the pond and would not raise the water table level or lead to seepage forces
on the existing slopes located to the west of the pond.
The first slope stability condition analyzed is the potential for deep-seated slope failure surfaces that
initiate near the toe of existing slope located to the west of the pond and terminating at the pond. The
result of this analysis is shown in Figure 5. The analysis shows a FS of 1.82, which is greater than the
minimum acceptable value of 1.5.
The second condition analyzed the potential for surficial sloughing of the relatively steep existing slopes
located to the west of the pond. The result of this analysis is shown in Figure 6, which shows an
acceptable FS of 1.54.
The results of SLOPE/W analyses are presented in Appendix D.
4.4 Slope Stability under Seismic Conditions
4.4. 1 Yield Coefficient for Seismic Slope Stability Analysis
The yield coefficient (or yield accelerations) for each of the two conditions discussed in Section 4.3 were
estimated from an iterative pseudo-static slope stability analysis using SLOPE/W by varying the input
seismic coefficient. The result of the final iteration for deep-seated slope failure surfaces in shown is
Figure 7, which shows an yield coefficient of 0.215g (where, g is the acceleration due to gravity).
Similarly, the result of the final iteration for surficial sloughing is shown in Figure 8, which shows a yield
coefficient of 0.17g.
le high hanson_pond-30_geotech-report_final v1_ wlf.docx
![Page 15: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
:= February 2015 10 Project No. 1417878
The results of pseudo-static slope stability analyses are also presented in Appendix D.
4.4.2 Seismically Induced Permanent Slope Displacement
The likely magnitude of permanent displacement was estimated using the Bray and Travasarou (2007)
method. The permanent displacement calculations are presented in Appendix E. The calculations for
deep-seated failure surface estimated a permeant displacement of 9.3 inches during the magnitude 8
MCE. Similarly, for surficial sloughing, the estimated permanent displacement is 4.3 inches. Both of
these values are less than the allowable limit of 12 inches discussed in Section 4.1.2.
Table 2 below presents a summary of the static and seismic slope stability analyses.
Table 2: Summary of Static and Seismic Slope Stability Analyses Results
Estimated Permanent Condition Analyzed Static FS
Yield Displacement Coefficient
(inches)
Deep-Seated Failure 1.82 0.215g 9.3
Surficial Sloughing 1.54 0.170g 4.3
lehigh hanson_pond-30 _geotech-report_final v1_ wlf.docx
![Page 16: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
February 2015 11 Project No. 1417878
5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Conclusions
It is Golder's opinion that the site is suitable for development of the proposed Pond 30 expansion project.
The results of the static and seismic slope stability analyses discussed in this report show that the
expansion of Pond 30 will not adversely impact stability of the existing slopes either above or below the
ponds. For the pond expansion itself, the static slope stability analysis shows a factor of safety of greater
than the acceptable minimum values of 1.5 for a slip circle intercepting the pond liner. Similarly, the
seismic slope stability analyses estimated seismically induced permanent displacement of less than the
maximum allowable limit of 12 inches.
Based on the encountered soil types and relatively shallow depth to bedrock, there is a low risk of
potential liquefaction. The site is situated approximately 35 feet above the 100-year flood plain for
Permanente Creek so there is a low risk offloading. Although currently deeper, there is the potential that
groundwater could rise to the proposed depth of the pond excavation (-20 feet) and should be accounted
for in the final design for the project with appropriate recommendations for underdrains.
5.2 General Recommendations
The following provide general recommendations based on our investigation and the conceptual plan for
the project. Golder will provide more detailed geotechnical recommendations and specifications in
conjunction with preparation of final designs and construction plans for the project as necessary.
Ill Construction Observation: All earthworks should be observed and tested by a qualified geotechnical engineering company. Construction observation and testing services may include, but not be limited to, foundation subgrade verification, and verification that the placement and compaction of engineered fill complies with recommendations and specifications.
1111 Site Preparation: Prior to excavation and placement of artificial fill, the project area should be stripped to remove the existing vegetation. Golder anticipates that the depth of stripping will be 4- to 6-inches or less. Stripped soils may be stockpiled for re-use as vegetative layer soils.
1111 Earthworks Grading: Site grading is anticipated to primarily consist of the excavation of site soils to create the pond expansion, with more limited placement of engineered fills to achieve desired site grades. The subgrade should be prepared to achieve a firm and unyielding condition. All exposed soil surfaces that will receive fill or pavements should be moisture conditioned as needed and compacted prior to fill placement or surfacing application. Scarification of near-surface soils may be necessary for moistureconditioning, but in no case should scarification extend deeper than 12 inches. Soil should be compacted to the densities provided in the specifications for the project.
Care should be taken to avoid disturbing subgrade soils and foundation soils that will remain in place. Areas which become softened or disturbed during construction should be moisture conditioned and recompacted or removed and replaced with properly placed
lehigh hanson_pond-30_geotech-report_final v1_wlf.docx
![Page 17: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
February 2015 12 Project No. 1417878
and compacted structural fill. Prior to fill placement, fill subgrades should be proof-rolled with a loaded water truck or dump truck to identify yielding conditions. Yielding soils should be moisture-conditioned and recompacted, or excavated and replaced with structural fill.
1111 Fill Materials and Placement: Engineered fill derived from on-site sources may be used to construct the proposed site earthworks. Engineered Fill materials should consist of well graded soils with a maximum particle size of 4 inches and free of organic material, trash or other deleterious materials. Based on the existing laboratory data, the local borrow soils will generally meet the requirements for Engineered Fill.
Engineered Fill materials should be placed in a maximum 6-inch loose thick lift thickness and be compacted to a maximum relative compaction of at least 90 percent and at a moisture content of between -1 and +4 percent of the optimum moisture content in accordance with ASTM D 1557 (Modified Proctor moisture-density relationship).
If density tests taken in the Engineered Fill indicate that compaction is not being achieved due to high or low moisture content, then the fill should be scarified, moistureconditioned, and recompacted. If the required densities cannot be met then the material should be over-excavated and replaced with a suitable material, or if the soils are excessively wet, a soil admixture used to dry the soil.
Earthwork construction during wet weather may significantly increase costs associated with off-site disposal of unsuitable excavated soils, increased control of water, and increased problems with subgrade disturbance and need for soil admixtures, geotextiles, rock working mats, or other stabilization measures to address unsuitable soil conditions. It is therefore recommended that the project earthwork be completed during the dry season (i.e., prior to November 1 annual onset of the rainy season).
Ill Temporary and Permanent Slopes: Golder recommends that permanent Engineered Fill slopes be 2.5H:1V or flatter. Proposed permanent cutslopes should be 2H:1V or flatter.
Permanently exposed slopes should be seeded with an appropriate species of vegetation or covered with an appropriate armoring to reduce erosion and improve stability of the surficial layer of soil. Slopes may experience erosion or sloughing if not well vegetated or covered. In the event that the cuts and fills exceed 20 feet in height, Golder should be contacted so that we can review and revise our recommendations if necessary.
The inclination of temporary slopes is dependent on several variables, including the height of the cut, the soil type and density, the presence of groundwater seepage, construction timing, weather, and surcharge loads from adjacent structures, roads and equipment. In no case should excavation slopes be greater than the limits specified in local, state (Cal-OSHA), and federal (OSHA) safety regulations. Safe temporary slopes are the responsibility of the contractor and should comply with all applicable OSHA and state standards.
Ill Pond Lining: To minimize the potential for damage to the geomembrane liner and consequent leakage, it is recommended that a 0.5-foot-thick bedding layer consisting of soil having particle size no greater than 4.76 millimeters (0.19 inches) be used below the geomembrane. The geomembrane should be tested for leaks and repaired if damage is detected. Underdrains should be considered for the final design as groundwater could be encountered at 20 feet bgs or less.
lehigh hanson_pond-JO_geotech-report_final v1_wlf.docx
Golder ssodates
![Page 18: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
February 2015 13 Project No. 1417878
6.0 USE OF THIS REPORT
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Lehigh Hanson Southwest Cement Company for
specific application to the proposed expansion of Pond 30. Golder is not responsible for any
unauthorized use of this report.
The findings, conclusions, and recommendations presented in this report were prepared in accordance
with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practice that exists within the area at the time of the
work. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made.
The analyses and recommendations contained in this report are based on data obtained from the results
of previous subsurface explorations by others as well as the site reconnaissance and explorations
conducted by Golder. The methods used generally indicate subsurface conditions at the time and
locations explored and sampled. In addition, groundwater conditions can vary with time.
lehigh hanson_pond-30_geotech-report_fimtl v1_wlf.docx
![Page 19: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
February 2015 14 Project No. 1417878
7.0 CLOSING
We appreciate the opportunity to support the Lehigh Hanson Southwest Cement Company on this project
Please call Bill Fowler at (408) 220-9239 if you have any questions, or require clarification of our findings
and recommendations.
GOLDER ASSOCIATES INC.
Nagesh Koragappa, P.E., G.E. Senior Consultant
lehigh hanson_pond-30_geotech-report_final v1_wlf.docx
William L. Fowler, P.G., C.E.G. Principal/Practice Leader
![Page 20: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
February 2015 15 Project No. 1417878
8.0 REFERENCES
Abrahamson, N. A. and Silva W. (2008). Summary of the Abrahamson and Silva NGA Ground-Motion Relations, Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 67-98.
Bedrossian, T.L., 1980, Berrocal fault, northern segment: California Division of Mines and Geology Fault Evaluation Report FER-98, microfiche copy in California Division of Mines and Geology Open-File Report 90-11, scale 1 :24,000.
Blake, T.F. Hollingsworth, RA, and Stewart, J.P. (2002). Recommended Procedures for Implementing CDMG Special Publication 117 - Guidelines for Analyzing and Evaluating Seismic Hazards in California: Committee organized through ASCE, Los Angeles Section Geotechnical Group, Published by the Southern California Earthquake Center, 101 p.
Boore, D. and Atkinson, G. (2008). "Ground-Motion Prediction Equations for the Average Horizontal Component of PGA, PGV, and 5%-Damped PSA at Spectral Periods between 0.01 s and 10.0 s," Earthquake Spectra, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 99-138.
Bray, J.D. and Travasarou, T. (2007). "Simplified Procedure for Estimating Earthquake-Induced Deviatoric Slope Displacements," Journal of Geotechnical and Environmental Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 133, No. 4, pp. 381-392.
California Geological Survey (2008). Special Publication 117, Guidelines for Evaluation and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California, Revised September.
Campbell, K., Bozorgnia, Y. (2008). NGA Ground Motion Model for the Geometric Mean Horizontal Component of PGA, PGV, PGD and 5% Damped Linear Elastic Response Spectra for Periods Ranging from 0.01to10 s, Earthquake Spectra, vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 139-172.
Chiou, B., Youngs, R. (2008). An NGA Model for the Average Horizontal Component of Peak Ground Motion and Response Spectra. Earthquake Spectra, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 173-215.
Duncan, J.M. and Wright, S.G. (2005). Soil Strength and Slope Stability, John Wiley & Son, Inc.
Golder Associates Inc. (2011). "Geotechnical Evaluations and Design Recommendations (Revised), Permanente Quarry Plan Update, Santa Clara County, California," November 2011.
Hitchcock, C.S., Kelson, K.I., and Thompson, S.C., 1994, Geomorphic investigations of deformation along the northeastern margin of the Santa Cruz Mountains: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 94-187, 50 p.
Mclaughlin, R.J., 1974, The Sargent-Berrocal fault zone and its relation to the San Andreas fault system in the southern San Francisco Bay region and Santa Clara Valley, California: U.S. Geological Survey Journal of Research, v. 2, no. 5, p. 593-598.
Haugerud, R.A., and Ellen, S.D., 1990, Coseismic ground deformation along the northeast margin of the Santa Cruz Mountains, in Schwartz, D.P., and Ponti, D.J., eds., Field guide to neotectonics of the San Andreas fault system, Santa Cruz Mountains, in light of the Loma Prieta earthquake: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 90-274, p. 32-37.
Hitchcock, C.S., and Kelson, K.I., 1999, Growth of late Quaternary folds in southwest Santa Clara Valley, San Francisco Bay area, California: Implications of triggered slip for seismic hazard and earthquake recurrence: Geology, v. 27, no. 5, p. 391-394.
lehlgh hanson_pond-30_geotech-report_final v1_wlf.docx
![Page 21: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
February 2015 16 Project No. 1417878
Hitchcock, C.S., Kelson, K.I., and Thompson, S.C., 1994, Geomorphic investigations of deformation along the northeastern margin of the Santa Cruz Mountains: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 94-187, 50p.
Langenheim, V.E., Schmidt, K.M., and Jachens, R.C., 1997, Coseismic deformation during the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake and range-front thrusting along the southwestern margin of the Santa Clara Valley, California: Geology, v. 25, no. 12, p. 1091-1094.
Mclaughlin, RJ., 1974, The Sargent-Berrocal fault zone and its relation to the San Andreas fault system in the southern San Francisco Bay region and Santa Clara Valley, California: U.S. Geological Survey Journal of Research, v. 2, no. 5, p. 593-598.
Mclaughlin, R.J., Langenheim, V.E., Jachens, R.C., Jayko, A.S., Stanley, RG., and Valin, Z.C., 1997, Neogene transpressional range-front deformation, southwestern Silicon Valley, San Francisco Bay region, California [abs.]: EOS, Transactions of the American Geophysical Union, 1997 Annual Fall Meeting, v. 78, no. 46, p. F436.
Mclaughlin, RJ., Sorg, DH, and Helley, E.J., 1996, Constraints on slip histories of thrust faults of the southwestern San Francisco Bay area from geologic mapping investigations: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 96-267, 65-70 p.
Petersen, M.D., Bryant, WA, Cramer, CH, Cao, T., Reichle, M.S., Frankel, AD., Lienkaemper, J.J., McCrory, PA, and Schwartz, D.P., 1996, Probabilistic seismic hazard assessment for the State of California: California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology Open-File Report 96-08 (also U.S. Geological Open-File Report 96-706), 33 p.
Rogers, TH., and Armstrong, C.F., 1971, Environmental geologic analysis, Santa Cruz Mountains study area, Santa Clara County, California: California Division of Mines and Geology Open-File Report 72-21, scale 1:24,000.
Rogers, TH, and Williams, J.W., 1974, Potential seismic hazards in Santa Clara County: California Division of Mines and Geology Special Report 107, 39 p., scale 1:62,500.
Sorg, D.H., and Mclaughlin, R.J., 1975, Geologic map of the Sargent-Berrocal fault zone between Los Gatos and Los Altos Hills, Santa Clara County, California: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Field Studies Map MF-643, scale 1 :24,000.
lehigh hanson_pond-30_geotech-report_final v1_wlf.docx
Golder ssodates
![Page 22: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Golder Associates
Golder Associates Inc. 425 Lakeside Drive
Sunnyvale, CA 94085 USA Tel: (408) 220-9223 Fax: (408) 220-9224
Golder, Golder Associatss and the GA globe design are trademarks of Golder Associates Corporation
![Page 23: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
NOTES 1, TOPOGRAPHIC MAP OBTAINED FROM THE USGS NATIONAL MAP (www.nationalrnap.org}
2. IMAGE NOT TO SCALE.
CLIENT
LEHIGH HANSON SOUTHWEST CEMENT PERMANENTE PLANT SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA CONSULTANT YYYY-MM-DD
PREPARED
DESIGN
REVIEW
APPROVED
2015-02-20
JHR
COJ
NK
WLF
LEGEND
- -? - -? - INFERRED FAULT
' ' ' ' ' ' THRUST (TEETH IN DIP DIRECTION)
••••••••••••••.,••• CONCEALEDFAULT
SITE BOUNDARY
PROJECT
GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE EXPANSION OF POND 30
TITLE
LOCATION MAP
PROJECT No
1417878 CONTROL
0002 Rev. FIGURE
0 1
![Page 24: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
+ !I
LEHIGH HANSON SOUTHWEST CEMENT PERMANENTE PLANT SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Wl<SUdAIH
~Ao":i.t.'1n P~EPA'1~D
N1943400
N 1943200
JllR
me
GENEFUlL l.EGENO
==o= EXISTIN(;l GROUND CONTOUR (It ~.OSL)
~ EXIOTIN<>RoADS
EXISTING FENCELINE
@ EXISTINi:; PO~R POLE OR POST
3600 DESIGN CONTOURS (fl -I.ISL)
EMSA BOUNDARY
~ SLOPEINDIGATOR
- PIPE - EMERGENCY SPILL"'l'<Y PIPE AilGNMEITT
3Ho1V "'~ 1V 3 HO!l!ZO>HAL TO 1 VERTICAL SLOPE
~ GRllD1'1NOICATOR
~ Cfl'\NNELFlOW
CF!OSS-SECTION CAltOlIT SECllONID DRA\MNG SHEIOTLOCATION
60 •. :!;'" SCALE FEET
GEorECHNlCAL REPORT FOR THE EXPANSION OF POND 30
TlTLE
CONCEPTUAL LAYOUT· POND 30 EXPANSION
FRO,IFCTN~
1417878 C\'.:;'IT110L
0002 FIG'JRE
2
![Page 25: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Cl IFfff
+ !I
LEHIGH HANSON SOUTHWEST CEMENT PERMANENTE PLANT SANTA CL.ARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA (.m.<·Jlf,~JI
·~ weRr;;oo
N 1"<3400
N194a:l00
GENSRALLEGENO
='6(),1= EXlSllNGGRDUNOCONTOUR~L-MSL)
~EXlSllNGROA!IB
l>RAO•SR"'°'K
@ EXISTING POWER PDLE OR POST
-$-BK-<J4 BOREHOLE LOO~TlOO
GEG<_OGIC CONTACT, APPROXIMl<TE
l>Ect.OGIC CONTACT, CONO<ALED
PERMANENTa CREEK
- PIPC - EMERGENCYSPll.1-WAYPIPEALIG~OENT
$-Qal/Af
M
KJfstiCol
EMSAAI
~""·""'
CHANNELFL0\11
CROSS-SECTION CALLOUT SECTION' ID DRA'MNG SHEET LOCATl<ON
MIXTURE OF ALLUVIUM AND ARTIFlClAL FELL ALONG EN<>INOORW PERMANENT!; CREEK AUG>JMEITT
ARTIFICIAL ml
MElAN~E OF FRANCISCAN COMPLEX ROCKS METABASAL TS (GREENSTONE), SANO.STONE (GREYWACKOI \'\ITC! VARYING THICKNESSES OF CGLLUVl\JM
OVERBURDEN ROCK FILI. MATERIAL-"
FEET
GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE EXPANSION OF POND 30
TITLE
GEOLOGIC MAP AND LOCATION OF TEST BORINGS
1417878 CC.'ITRO'
0002 FIG'JR3
![Page 26: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
(.ld)NOU\IMll'I
* ;] !;; ~_j e:_; J.o
I
T ,iJ1 I" I I ... !''"ii I I.
I
'I! " " 0 < ' 2 z 0 0 " ~ @gj l "" "o w Oz
" 88 0 '
fu Q ~ •o 0 "' " <~ u ~ Gl u
~~ ~~ " 0
" '" c ~::a ~~ •o" ~~fr'. co
___ - 1-J ··1 -------";-. I I I / I 11
I I .
/!' !/ ' ! I ' I I
/ I !~ .... /. ,} .. I i T"'."' 3 ,1 I
8 /; [ : t 1 I ---i
i i /)11 /{'' . !
' I I 11 l _f ;')1···~ 1 · ·,'
i I [ / 1 ! I I
.
'
I ~ il ' i
' 11 I . 1 I !
'
I I
~ ! ' ! ~~
i i
i / I i Q ' ! ' J
_)__£_•/'-"---- +-11-·y--·· 1 I I
Ir ~i l ;i 1' ~: !';!/
m~1T II I I I ·1 I I I I I
I . 'i: !
,. I lii!/l 1111111- i ····-~· ·-r .. n t : "' : Ii
,'l! /!11 "'I' t I ; ll 11crtr >' I. i
~JJ: :iii : f LL
___ it! ' I 1 j· I I I I
~II
"' ~NOU~/1313
I
' ' I ' ' ' I
![Page 27: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
POND 30 UPGRADE FEASIBILITY DRAWINGS
NOTE' TDP<lGRAPHIC MAP 08TAINEO FROM THE USGS NATIONAL MAP (lw>v.noiion .. mop.gO'ol).
SITE VICINITY MAP NQTTO~"M""
ISSUED FOR FIW\l REPDRT
ISSUED FOR CUEITTREVIEW
ESSUED FOR INTERNAC REVIEW
YVVY~~tMm [)ESCRIPTION
LEHIGH SOUTHWEST CEMENT CO. PERMANENTE PLANT
SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA FEBRUARY 2015
INOEX OF SHEETS GEIJE"AL ""'E"ENCE
No IDRA\MNGTITtE CD>llRACTOR iS RESPONSCBLE FOR APPRDPRlATE ON-CALL UTILITY LOCATE 1 TOPOGRAPHY USED IN THE GENERAL SITE U\YOUT REPRESENTS AERll\L SURVEYs
lllLE SHEET
GENERAL ARRANGEMENT
C"'lCC1 P~VIEW
C<Jco> S!'_CTIQl.IS
NIL C[}J
PREPARED DESIGN REVIEW
CENORAl
cwn.
$EAL
Me
Me
APPHOVED
PROCEDURES PRIOR m EXCAVATION- IF A SUBSURFACE um11Y lS E~COUNTERED IN BElVllEEN 2009 TO JIJNE 2013 PROVIDED BY LE~JGH SOUT!--M!'STCEMENT co
T1"E EXCAVATION. IMJRK IN THAT AREA \MLL BE STOPPED MD LSCC"S PRD.IECT l.tl\NAGER VJ.ILL BE NOTIFIED IMMEDIATE'-Y. WORK IN TI<AT AREA VJ.ILL NOT RESUME EXISllNG GROUND TCf'OORAPfN USED IN DESl~N GF POND JG FROM A JANUARV7,
UflTlL DIRECTED 6Y LEHIGH'S PROJECTMAW\GER.
EXCAVATION SLOPE CALlOUTS ILllJSTRATEO ON ORA\MN<;;S ARE CONSIDEREO
'n"PICAL
CONTRACIDR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SLOPING EXCAVATIONS TO MAINTAIN SAFE
WClRKING C0NOl110NS IN ACCOROANCE'Mll-1 APPLICABLE STAN!JAJIDS.
TEMP{JRMY EROSJON CONTROL SYBTEMS ME TO BE Pl]\CEO Ai', FIElD DETERMINED oY CDNlf!ACTOR AND CONSTRUCTIDN i.tl\NAGER TO PROTEOT ERLESION PRONE
Tl-lE MAXIMUM (}ROSS WEIGHTOFEQ\JIPMEITTDESIGNEO AT THE POND OD UPGRADE FACIU'rf IS ac,ooo PDUNOS A>JO 1HE MAXlMUM "'1DTI< IS BElVllEEN 12 AND 15 FEET OEPENOINI> ON 1HE MSl!A REQUIRED SAFE'rf BERM HSGifT.
LEHIGH SOUTHWEST CEMENT CO. PERMANENTE PLANT SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA COflW,TANT
<Ii~ lUCSON OFFICE
4730 N. ORACLE ROAD $UITE 210
TUCSON, ARIZONA UNITED STATES ARIZONA J<1](5'0)&lB'81a
l\wu .• o!U0<.oom
201S SURVEY PROVIDED BY LEHIGH SOUTHWEST CEMENT CO.
COORDINATE SYSTEM IS IN CAUFORNIA STATE P~E ZONE 3 NAO '3 (201').
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PROJECT
PONO 30 UPGRADE FEASIBILITY DRAWINGS
m TITLE SHEET
PROJECTJfo.
1417878 CctlTRDL
0001 1ol< G-oOGo;E
![Page 28: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
z 0 ;:: u
~ "
'I' °' " '
~ f-0 j "' ! ' z § l ' 0 s u ' i
9 r
! I i 8 i °' 0 i z 0 w
I I 0 0 • ' ~ z w
! ~ ! ' ~~ 0
I i ~ ' f- z 0 « ~ ' ' z "" on "
II \\//
11 I
~~ <
l ~ " \' ,I 0" <
!1 1/ • i t~ ~ " w ,,
1 c ~6 ~ cZ
/; '" Jl' 0. LL "° I
I 000f0~9 3
'~
' ' !
' i
' ' ' ! i
![Page 29: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
ii !
\
~000
l0!5-0l·l7 ISWED FOR FJ~L REPORT NIL COJ
2015-ilt-13 [SSUED FORGLIEITTREVIEW """ CSSUED FOR INTERNAL REV[EW
YivY-MWJD OEocRleTION PREPARED DCSIGCI
CDJ \'\1-F
RF,VIOW APPROVOJ>
I
CUE>IT
LEHIGH SOUTHWEST CEMENT CO. PERMANENTE PLANT SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA CONSULTANT
·~ lUCSON OFFICE 4130 N. ORACLE ROAO SUITE 2rn TUCSON, ARIWNA UNITED STATES ARIZOr-IA.
[•1](520)8'88"'8
V·'M''S"l"".cam
GENERAL LEGENO
=""°= EXISllNGGROUNOCONTOUR(fi-MSL)
2::::::::::::::._~ EXISTINGROAllS
i!lt EXJSTING PO'J\ER POLE OR POST
-3600- DESIGNCONTOURS(rr-MSL)
GRADO "REAK
II>---- SLOPEINDl"l\TOR
EMERGENCY SPILLWAY PIPE ALiG""ENT
JH:1V ot ~ 1V J HDRiW>rtAL TO 1 VER•ICAULOPE
~ GRADE INDICATOR
_/,:, ~'.'.tf-
CliANNELFlOW
GRDSS.SECTION GllLLDUT SEC110NIO DRA'MNG SHEET LOCATION
NOT FOR CONSTHUCTION
SCALE
PROJECT
PONO 30 UPGRADE FEASIBILITY DRAWINGS
~= PLAN VIEW
PRO.JEOTNo.
1417878 CCNTRct
0001
FEET
FIGUPE
C-0001
![Page 30: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
:1015-02-27 ISSUED FOR HNAL REP~T
2015-01-13 ISSUEDFORCLIEITTREVIEW
2015-01-12 ISSUED FOR INTERNAL REVIEW
DESCRIPTION
. -~:r:=: ~ ., . . .· """;:~~"':~:~·:{cii'""""j:~;;~~~;::.:.m t:- .
4<00
Sr:ALEA f"A", CROSS-SECTION A --·,0-0002
'_.
0•00
{; ~7' - l,.---EXISllNG GROUND : ii;
~ ~~,~~~~'·'mgEt~E~~;v,- ~ ! 0•00 1<00 2•00
SCALE A /--s~. CROSS-SECTION B <_C-0002 --
6+00
I ;--"---- - ~" I ··' :---"'" ' j__ :~~'""~~-- ---- :: j
-;5"0~ e+oo o'" 8•00
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
"" '"'
JKR CDJ ~'
PREPARED DESIO~ REVIEW APPROVED
CUENT
LEHIGH SOUTHWEST CEMENT CO. PERMANENTE PLANT SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA CDNSULTANT
·~ TUCSON OFFICE 4730 N. ORACl.E ROAD SUITE 210 TUCSON, AAIWNA UNITTD STATES ARIZONA 1•1](520)8'8881"
WWW.goklo<.ootn
SCALE A fEET
PROJECT
POND 30 UPGRADE FEASIBILITY DRAWINGS
"~ CROSS-SECTIONS
PROJECT No. CONTROL
1417878 0001 "·· 4of4 FIGURE
C-0002
![Page 31: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
1/13/2015 1417878
Pond 30 Information Pond 30 Capacity Information Pond Floor Elevation 542.10 ft amsl Title 27 Freeboard 0.00 7.55 7.55 551.00 551.00 543.00 Downstream Toe Elevation 550.03 ft amsl Dam Freeboard 0.00 10.28 10.28 553.00 553.00 543.00 Spillway Invert Elevation 553.00 ft amsl Spillway Crest 0.00 10.28 10.28 553.00 553.00 543.00 Embankment Crest Elevation 555.00 ft amsl Embankment Crest 0.00 13.32 13.32 555.00 555.00 543.00
Sta• e-Storage Curve Information Elevation Pond Surface Area Capacity I, POND 30 STAGE-STORAGE CURVE
If!\ lsauare-ft\ I acres\ lacre-ft\ ~ 557 ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' 542.10 328 0.01 0.00 y = -5E-05:x6 + 0.0023x5 -0.0388x4 + 0.3132x3 -1.2817x2 + 3.4181x + 542.44 [
R' = 0.9987 543.00 8,814 0.20 0.09 ' ' 544.00 22,784
555
I I 0.52 0.46 ~
545.00 37,258 0.86 1.15 L,..A 546.00 40,220 0.92 2.04 -_553 547.00 43,252 0.99 2.99
.,_ I
I/ z ~ 548.00 46,351 1.06 4.02 0 549.00 49,520 1.14 5.12 ~ 551 - --" ---· ~- ,
550.00 52,757 1.21 6.30 w I W"
551.00 56,063 1.29 ..J
7.55 w ./ 552.00 59,438 1.36 8.87 ffi 549 v 553.00 62,881
I-1.44 10.28 ~
554.00 66,393 1.52 11.76 Cl / 555.00 69,974 1.61 13.32 z 547 --
0 / a.
,/ 545
fl 543
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
POND STORAGE VOLUME (acre-ft)
~Dam Freeboard ""'4= Title 27 Freeboard
-spillway Crest .............,Embankment Crest -e-Stage-Storage Curve Information --Log. (Stage-Storage Curve Information) --Power (Stage-Storage Curve Information) --Poly. (Stage-Storage Curve Information}
K:\2014 Projects\1417878 Lehigh Pond 30\CIVlL 30\IN PROGRESS (TEMPORARY)\CDJ\20150113_Pond30.xlsx/Stage-Storage Curve Golder Associates
![Page 32: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
1/13/2015 1417878
Pond 30 (EMSAl catchment parameters
Area Area Curve lft2 l (acres) Number
s 4,454,059 102.3 70 4.29
Month Average Unit Runoff, Incremental Runoff Cumulative Runoff Pond Stage
Precip1 (in) Q (in) Volume (ac-ft) Volume (ac-ft) (ft)
October 0.89 0.00 0.00 0.00 542.45
November 2.92 0.67 5.71 5.71 549.46
December 4.25 1.50 12.77 18.49 Overflow
January 3.37 0.93 7.91 26.40 Overflow
February 5.59 2.48 21.16 47.57 Overflow
March 2.90 0.66 5.62 53.18 Overflow
April 1.68 0.13 1.13 54.31 Overflow
May 0.46 0.04 0.35 54.66 Overflow
June 0.08 0.17 1.47 56.13 Overflow
July 0.00 0.00 0.00 56.13 Overflow
August 0.01. 0.21 1.78 57.91 Overflow
September 0.06 0.18 1.55 59.46 Overflow
Notes:
1 Average annual precipitation data from Los Altos Hills weather station (1999-2006 & 2009).
K:12014 Projects\1417878 Lehigh Pond 301c1v1L 30\IN PROGRESS (TEMPORARY)ICDJ120150113_Pond30.x1sx1storm season Filling (Simple) Golder ASSOCiates
![Page 33: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
'"-'L=ab~o'-'-r=at=o-'-'r1=·es==L-=-=-n=c.-----1ll~V~. ______________ _ Environmental Testing Laboratory Since 1949
Date of Report: 02/26/2015
George Wegmann
Golder Associates
425 Lakeside Drive Sunnyvale, CA 94085
Client Project:
BCL Project:
BCL Work Order:
Invoice ID:
063-7109-916
Lehigh NPDES
1503204
8196722
Enclosed are the results of analyses for samples received by the laboratory on 2/9/2015. If you have any questions concerning this report, please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
Contact Person: Vanessa Sandoval
Client Service Rep
Authorized Signature
Certifications: CA ELAP #1186; NV #CA00014; OR ELAP #4032-001; AK UST101
711e results in this report apply lo rhe samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of cus1ody docume11/. This a11a!ytical report must be reproduced in its entirely. All results listed in this report are for the exclusive use of the submitting party. BC LabGratorics, Inc. assumes no responsibility for report alteration, separation, detachment or third party interpretation
Report ID: 1000328743 4100 Atlas Court Bakersfield, CA 93308 (661) 327-4911 FAX (661) 327-1918 www.bclabs.com Page 1 of27
![Page 34: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
"' • 15 " q
g ~ D • w ' ~ ~ ~
t * ~ s: ~ 2': ::t ~ ~ 0 ' 0 0
!] ~ ~~ g~~ > Q. Q
~ §. ;f 0 ~ ~ g ~ ~ ;:::i. ...., cc . ~ ro ~ § ~ §. 8..
~ ~:l w· ,g ::·
~J~ )> ' ~
" " '° (J ~ ~ ~ R Do_.
il~ :; ~ ~ t:l ~ s l. ~ ~ m' o ~ ~ s.
0 c 'I]..,~
S<~ ~ -on Ol gl. :::
~ E ~ :;~~ t:l f=l ~ .'..,. _fg ~· mo c ..... ;i:::
~~ii o· 2. _o ' g- .g "§
iii'"~ '.:1.
[ ~· ~ 3 ~ g-
o ' ~~ 0 0
~ ~ & 2.. a. ::J' ]. ~ < 0 - 0
~ ~· ~~ ~· g
,, 0
• 'iii w Q.
!ol
Golder Associates (jiGolder :Associates CHAIN OF CUSTODY 15-o;,z.o'{
Page ( of f Quotation No. -. -J-
PROJECT NO.: ANALYSES
/1;'! 1 /1/I I /.
/ 1 /,1111;·
~AMP_LER(~l~ ------ - -- - ' ---- .g I I I I I ! ! I i _____ ip.,.,,,_,.-W"-lkx: __ ~t;:l-_;::QE__ /"' ; / I 1 i'- I / I 1 /
fpnnt I (s/gna!ure) - 't / · f J ,....,. / ( I ! / I I~ I .L I ""' I j ... , ' I I ' I
CONTRACT LABORATORY: f5i!,__LJ€ ___ Container /VJifl/ :f/" / 1 .Ji./ / / / / TURN-AROUND TIME: s.±r,,., du_l____ Info /"kf:/ o/ 0 / ~7 ~7 I I I I I
EDD required?
l~s ONo 6b3-7/o9- 9/6
EDF required?/
OYes ~No
TypeN01. ~ 1 I 1 b · 1--, 1 ' I ---[ Collection -------- J-~--il~- ;~!'It n;,..,1 I&'~~- I i _
Sample Lab . Filter /./ 1 I I ,- · -1--r-
l.D. I l.D. Date Time Matnx I Depth I Preserv -+t'_-j~ f--"'--).±"__f--+.. I I +--t· __ J Cont. Remarks • - I f/t!L!gtAWi - llfM5! i---+ I I I Qty.
L ----.- - I
, Lw i I _______ J_j_j __ J_t' L(_J __ ~_J 1--- I I + s ---------~ £EE:o!'.l:i __ _:j_ l.:i-7--1s: tqac_l __ il ___ [ __ _J_J_ _1 _1_: '---1---Lf--H---~--H --s r:- -----le:Ff-o•.& I -L_f----J-~t'- -F--l ____ I l DJ_J:L-~-'-r-,'-- I 1 j' - _ _ _____ __
!!~~~-:61~~~!--.; ~=-~~=1 --- -1-; ~[--t--+~-1--- --j _=-~'-=~_t--t-__i _ f -- - ----- --------
!-'--- __ i!if,_1-----
1
- 1 J' 1 ___ , -----1--1---t---1----- --i 1 r 1 1 _____________ , j_ ~ -----1-- I I I I ___j____J ---+ -------- -- _____ I ___ I -- ! ' +--_j __ f---+-- I '1- ,- I '
I __J_ ---1-- ---+------+---- i I j ----l ---
---------t-- ---- t=1 -- 1 I I -----'----1--~1 - ·0~-H--LDING TtME I I =i- __ , -l-- -l - --r--~ I • • I I _1 --t----
--- ----1 -r-- ---- -- I I -- __ l=t __ -r--- Gr • .- -wo -- l'l0;- OP ' I --·------- ---1---------+--- -r----r-- T I __ 1 ___
0
__ ~-Loot-Ma -q:G'F 1 ---r--- I I ' __J_ ____ , - - ---1--------t- ID ' ' p ' ' ' _____,_ - ' I I ' --------l--- - I ------1---1--- ' i · ---------1-+ -'--I -I I J__J -1 -1 -l------i------1-_---j_-±=--~~=--11 _____ -t--~ 11~1! ·~'~ ,-t- ------· ---11 -- I I j -1---t-------- , ---
-- - -- - -r-- ---i-- j - __[.=J=----~=-r--+-t - : -w!L~" ~ - - -_________ , -----t- 1-- , __ J_ 1________ j___ ~- - ~1 --n 1 I -----+--·- ' _. -------:-- I -- ---i I I I I I , ' ------!-----· I I ' i
I I I I _t_
Rellnquishadby:(sig u/)-1 ''~ / J Dtila!Tf!.na~ SEND RESULTS TO:
_ -- C.... ///M.,'f--- / /).4 (Q(JQ Attn: Ge11~ W'$i>'0.••1 6-r:J knllfr?I R!l!inq(rh;/iad by: (s1grraturo) oeteffime: Golder Associates Inc. f"\J . IA
425 Lakeside Drive '-"'\Ow l ill"
Relinquished oy: rsrgrramrw
while: lab copy yellaw: project file
Sunnyvale, CA 94085 Recoivadby:(signa/Uro) Daterrime: Phone (408) 220-9223
Fax (408) 220-9224
J~~PU.1!6).:
(") ,,-~ ~-
0 -(") m ~ c 0
~ S. ~ - a
0 0 1:::1-c. 3 '< • ~ "
0
" ![ ....
c. ii ~ (") g
~ 0 0 0 ©
~ :;; .... " i ~ (l)
" (l)
~ Sf -a· -.,, ~ ~ 0
3 m A
O' ©
~
~
~ "' c c._ '"' N c ... ,, ~
"' (l)
~
0 -N
![Page 35: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE EXPANSION OF POND 30 Permanente Quarry, Lehigh Hanson Southwest Cement
Submitted To: Lehigh Hanson Southwest Cement 24001 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, CA 95014
Submitted By: Golder Associates Inc. 425 Lakeside Drive Sunnyvale, CA 94085 USA
Distribution: Lehigh Hanson (PDF e-file)
February 2015 Project No. 1417878
Golder, Golder Associates and the GA globe design are trademarks of Golder Associates Corporation
(!/)1 Golder Associates
![Page 36: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
February 2015 Project No. 1417878
Table of Contents
1.0
2.0
2.1
2.2
2.3
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 1
SITE SETTING AND GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS .......................................................................... 2
2.3.1
2.3.2
Topography ................................................................................................................................ 2
Regional Geologic Setting............................ . ............................................................. 2
Seismic Setting.......... ................ . ..................................... 3
Structural and Tectonic Setting ..................... . . ........................................................... 3
Seismicity ............................................................................................................................... 3
2.4 Geologic Hazards ......................................................................................................................... 4
3.0 INVESTIGATION FOR POND 30 .................................................................................................... 5
3.1 Review of Aerial Photos ............................................................................................................... 5
3.2 Golder Field Exploration and Subsurface Conditions ................................................................. 5
3.3 Laboratory Testing................... .................... ..... ................. ............. . .............. 6
3.3.1 Test Methods................................................................................... .............. .. 6
3.3.2 Summary of Lab Test Results.............. ................ . ............................................................. 6
4.0 SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS............. ..................... .... ......... ............. . .. 8
4.1 Methodology ............................................................................................................................... 8
4.1.1 Static Analysis............................ . ....................................................................... 8
4.1.2 Seismic Analysis ...................................................................................................................... 8
4.1.3 Critical Cross Section Analyzed ............................................................................................... 8
4.2 Material Parameters ...................................... . ......................................................... 8
4.3 Slope Stability under Static Conditions ........................................................................................ 9
4.4 Slope Stability under Seismic Conditions .................................................................................... 9
4.4.1 Yield Coefficient for Seismic Slope Stability Analysis .............................................................. 9
4.4.2 Seismically Induced Permanent Slope Displacement ........................................................... 10
5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................. 11
5.1 Conclusions ................................................................................................................................ 11
5.2 General Recommendations ...................................................................................................... 11
6.0 USE OF THIS REPORT ................................................................................................................. 13
7.0 CLOSING ...................................................................................................................................... 14
8.0 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................... 15
List of Tables
Table 1 Table 2
Summary of Material Parameters Used in the Stability Analyses Summary of Static and Seismic Slope Stability Analyses Results
List of Figures
Figure 1 Location Map
le high hanson_pond-30_geotech-report_final v1_wlf .docx • lflA; Golder 'BAssociates
![Page 37: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
---------------------·----•) Y--- ---·-·---·--~ .- ---~--~~:---=-=---=--~-----=-
February 2015
Conceptual Layout - Pond 30 Expansion Geologic Map and Locations of Test Borings Geologic Cross Section A-A'
ii Project No. 1417878
Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7
Results of Static Slope Stability Analysis, Trial Surface Terminating at the Pond Results of Static Slope Stability Analysis, Surficial Trial Surface within Existing Slope Results of Pseudo-Static Slope Stability Analysis to Estimate Yield Acceleration
List of Appendices
Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Appendix D Appendix E
Estimation of PGA and Acceleration Spectra for Maximum Credible Earthquake Test Boring Logs Laboratory Test Results Slope Stability Analysis Results Estimation of Seismically Induced Permanent Displacement
lehigh hanson_pond-30_geotech-report_final v1_wlf.docx
.Golder .Associates
![Page 38: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
February 2015 1 Project No. 1417878
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Golder Associates Inc. (Golder) is submitting this geotechnical report for the proposed expansion of Pond
30 at Lehigh Hanson's Permanente Quarry located in Cupertino, California (Figure 1). This report
summarizes the results of our field investigation, laboratory testing, and slope stability analyses.
The location of the proposed existing Pond 30 and the proposed grading for its expansion are shown in
Figure 2. The pond is located along the southeast margin of the East Material Storage Area. Review of
historical aerial photos show that the proposed pond expansion site is located on a level bench graded for
construction of industrial buildings associated with the former Kaiser Aluminum Plant. The buildings were
demolished in 2002, and the pad was used for an equipment lay-down and staging area, stockpile for
aggregate materials, as well as for storm drainage management (i.e., existing pond 30 and associated
inlet channel). The expanded pond has a surface area of approximately 1.5 acres with a storage depth -·· ---·-"-·----- •"'-"''"'-'' ________ ,, _________ _
of approximately 13 feet. The pond will be constructed entirely in excavation below existing ground -----------~-------
surface. The approximate storage capacity of the pond is - 7_Y, acre-feet. The conceptual design of the
pond incl~des a geomembrane liner to prevent i~ltratio~. , , yt L I ( _,' 7 c /) ,, ,.7 I""' L ' 7 t c '
J T ( [ · .-, c} n le'"V' ( • '7~ ('/ ..j..
CJ t I
lehigh hanson_pond-30_geotech-report_final v1_wlf.docx
7
<JI' Golder Associates
![Page 39: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
February 2015 2 Project No. 1417878
2.0 SITE SETTING AND GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS
The following sections summarize the regional topographic, geologic, and seismic setting; and describe
the specific geologic conditions in the area of Pond 30.
2.1 Topography
The Permanente Quarry and Cement Plant are situated in the foothills of the rugged, northwest-trending
Santa Cruz Mountains segment of the California Coast Ranges. Topography in the area consists of
moderately to steeply-sloped terrain with rounded ridges and drainages. Relief at the project site ranges
from about 2000 feet along the higher ridge crests to less than 500 feet mean sea level (msl) along the
eastern portions of Permanente Creek. Average natural slope angles are typically around 25'. The
steepest natural slopes are on the order of 40' over smaller slope heights (100-200 feet) and generally
correspond to limestone outcrops.
At the Pond 30 expansion area, the topography is a flat and level bench (el. -560 feet amsl) created by
excavation of a cutslope to the north, and placement of fill along the outboard edge of the pad. The pad
was graded to accommodate construction of the former Kaiser Aluminum plant in the 1940's. The
building were demolished in 2002. The pad is long and narrow (-2500 feet long by -200 feet wide) and
the alignment of the pad is parallel to the alignment of Permanente Creek.
2.2 Regional Geologic Setting
The majority of the subject property is underlain by complexly deformed and faulted rocks of the
Franciscan Assemblage (Golder, 2011 ). The eastern portion of the site, is underlain in locations by Plio
Pleistocene rocks of the Santa Clara Formation. Overlying the bedrock are modern alluvial deposits
associated with Permanente Creek (restricted to the eastern portion of the property), and relatively
shallow surficial deposits comprised of soil and colluvium.
The Santa Clara Formation overlies the Franciscan Assemblage rocks in the central and eastern portion
of the property including the EMSA area where it occurs as remnant patches of terrane overlying the
Franciscan Assemblage and is locally in fault contact along the Sargent Berrocal fault. (Golder, 2011).
The Santa Clara Formation is a continental fluvial and alluvial deposit that is composed of unconsolidated
to slightly consolidated conglomerate, sandstone, siltstone, and claystone (Vanderhurst, 1981). Uplift of
the Coast Ranges during this time resulted in increased erosion of the mountains and deposition of the
Santa Clara Formation. The contact between the Franciscan rocks and Santa Clara Formation is
considered to be unconformable, with the Santa Clara Formation deposited on an eroded Franciscan
terrain (Rogers and Armstrong, 1973). Subsequent uplift of the nearby foothills along the Monte Vista
fault, which lies along the margin of the valley floor to the east of the Quarry, has resulted in deformation
of the Santa Clara Formation.
lehigh hanson_pond-30_geotech-report_final v1_wlf.docx
c Golder Associates
![Page 40: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
February 2015 3 Project No. 1417878
2.3 Seismic Setting
2.3.1 Structural and Tectonic Setting
The San Andreas Fault zone is located approximately 2 miles southwest of the quarry (Golder, 2011 ).
The Sargent-Berrocal Fault Zone (SBFZ), part of the Santa Cruz Mountains front-range thrust fault
system, parallels the San Andreas to the east and forms the eastern-most structural boundary to the
Permanente Terrain.
Near the Permanente Site, the SBFZ consists of two northwest-trending, sub-parallel faults, namely the
northeastern-most Monta Vista Fault Zone and the southwestern-most Berrocal Fault Zone (Sorg and
Mclaughlin, 1975). The combined fault zone is located in a complex contractional system of generally
northeastward-vergent thrust and reverse faults that bound the northeastern side of the Santa Cruz
Mountains (Mclaughlin and others, 1997). This thrust system has been described as an eastward
propagating half-flower structure that roots toward the San Andreas fault zone.
The Monte Vista strand of the fault zone is located approximately 800 feet to the northeast of the
proposed Pond 30 expansion area. A strand of the Berrocal Fault Zone runs through the central portion
of site and about 3100 feet west of the Pond 30 area (Sorg and Mclaughlin, 1975). This fault forms a
structural boundary between Franciscan basement rocks to the west, and Franciscan rocks overlain by
Santa Clara formation rocks to the east. The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the
California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million years (CGS, 2010). However,
mapping of the Berrocal and Monte Vista faults following the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake documented
minor distributed coseismic contractional deformation in the Cupertino foothills to the northeast of the
Permanente site (Hitchcock, et al, 1994).
2.3.2 Seismicity
The Permanente Site is located within the San Francisco Bay Area, which is a region characterized by
relatively high seismicity. Golder evaluated potential seismic impacts for the project resulting from a
maximum credible earthquake (MCE) on the San Andreas Fault. The MCE is defined as "the maximum
earthquake that appears capable of occurring under the presently known tectonic framework." The MCE
would be a moment magnitude (Mw) 8 event along the San Andreas Fault, which is assumed to be slightly
higher than the Mw 7.9 San Francisco earthquake of 1906.
lehigh hanson_pond-30_geotech-report_final v1_wlf.docx
(I"\ Golder Associates
![Page 41: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
February 2015
Golder estimated the peak ground
the acceleration
acceleration
using the
(PGA) and
spectra for the MCE
Next Generation
Attenuation (NGA) relationships
developed by Abrahamson and Silva
(2008), Boore and Atkinson (2008),
Chiou and Youngs (2008), and
Campbell and Bozorgnia (2008).
The computed values from the four
relationships were equally weighted
(0.25 each) to estimate spectral
accelerations as a function of
magnitude, source-to-site distance,
and fault geometry and for an
average shear wave velocity in the
upper 30 meters (100 feet) of the soil
c 0
" e 0
J ~ • 0.
"'
4 Project No. 1417878
5%-Ilamp-ed Pseudo-Absolute Median Acceleration Response Spectrum
10 . ..
~
0.1
0.01
0.001 0.01
' i .
I
0.1
I .
.. I
.....
.
Period (s)
column (V,30 ) equal to 760 meters per second (2,500 feet per second). The calculations are presented
in Appendix A. Golder estimates that the design PGA is 0.48g for the site. The median acceleration
spectrum is included here for reference.
2.4 Geologic Hazards
The geologic hazards evaluated for the proposed project include the potential for ground rupture, slope
instability, liquefaction and lateral spreading, consolidation settlement, and potential flooding associated
with the proposed project. The geologic hazards that could impact the proposed pond expansion are
limited to ground shaking and slope instability.
The risk associated with ground rupture is considered negligible since the project site is not situated on a
known Holocene fault. Liquefaction is not considered a hazard because of the presence of significant
fines (silts and clays) in the soil underlying the proposed project site, and the relatively shallow depth to
bedrock. Consolidation settlement is not considered a risk since the pond will be excavated and therefore
the site will be unloaded and not subject to induced settlement. The site is located approximately 35 feet
above the 100-year flood plain for Permanente Creek and therefore the risk associated with flooding is
considered low. Tsunami and Seiche are not hazards due to the site location and elevation.
Slope instability, and the relative risk to the project, is discussed in more detail in Section 4.
lehigh hanson_pond-30_geotech-report_final v1_wlf.docx
Golder · Associates
![Page 42: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
February 2015 5 Project No. 1417878
3.0 INVESTIGATION FOR POND 30
3.1 Review of Aerial Photos
A review of various stereoscopic aerial photographs and Google Earth images dating back to 1948 was
conducted to: (1) evaluate the past grading and development activities in the area, (2) prepare a geologic
map of surficial deposits and bedrock, and (3) identify any obvious signs of ground distress related to
slope instability.
The earliest set of aerial photographs (1948) show the Kaiser Aluminum buildings present on a graded
pad. There are three buildings in the general area of the proposed Pond 30 expansion. There is
relatively tall cutslope visible behind the northern two buildings. There is earthwork and grading activities
associated with development of roads up to the buildings. The slope below the pad to the north, and the
hillside above the buildings are covered with orchard and are native ground. Site conditions remain
similar until late 2002 when the buildings were demolished and the land use changed to material
stockpiles and equipment lay down. No evidence of slope instability was observed in the hillside terrain
above or below the proposed pond expansion area.
3.2 Golder Field Exploration and Subsurface Conditions
On January 8-9, 2015, Golder performed a subsurface exploration consisting of four test borings at the
proposed Pond 30 expansion site. The test borings are designated as B-1, B-2, B-3, B-4, and B-Pilot,
the locations of which are shown in Figure 3.
The borings were advanced with a truck-mounted, CME 85 drill rig turning a continuous flight, 8-inch
diameter, hollow-stem auger. During the drilling process, disturbed, but representative, soil samples were
obtained at 5-foot intervals. The samples were obtained by using a 1.5-inch (ID) Standard Penetration
Sampler and a California Modified Sampler driven by a 140-pound hammer falling freely for 30-inches.
The number of hammer blows required to drive the sampler 18-inches were recorded in 6-inch intervals.
The number of blows required to drive the sampler the final 12-inches is designated as the penetration
resistance or "blow count." The blow counts as recorded in the field are presented on the boring logs.
The samples were retained in 1.5-inch and 2.5-inch diameter by 6-inch long brass tubes contained within
the sampler. The samples were visually classified in the field by a geologist working under the direction
of a California Professional Geologist (PG). The samples were retained in the tubes, placed in a sealed
plastic bag inside a cooler, and transported to our office for sample review and selection of samples for
laboratory testing.
All samples were classified in accordance to the Unified Soil Classification System. Pertinent information
including depths, stratigraphy, soil engineering characteristics, and groundwater occurrence were
lehigh hanson_pond-30_geotech-report_final v1_wlf,docx
<ft Golder Associates
![Page 43: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
February 2015 6 Project No. 1417878
recorded. Stratigraphic contacts indicated on the logs represent approximate boundaries between soil
types. The soil and groundwater conditions are those recorded for the dates indicated, and may not
necessarily represent those of other times or locations.
Test borings B-1 and B-2 were extended to depths of 26.5 below ground surface (bgs) and B-3 and B-4
were drilled to 20 feet bgs. B-Pilot was drilled first to establish the general subsurface conditions and
depth to bedrock. Representative bulk samples were obtained from this boring. Borings B-1 through B-4
were sampled using standard geotechnical procedures with Standard Penetration Test (SPT) drive
samples and California Modified samples alternating every five feet.
The B-Pilot boring encountered highly weathered greenstone bedrock at approximately 30 feet below
ground surface. Water was encountered at approximately 18 - 20 feet below ground surface although
this water was possibly perched in this location. The upper four to five feet of the soil profile was
described as Clayey Gravel (GW) and was interpreted as artificial fill. The remaining profile was
described as Clayey Sand (SC) with gravel comprised of well graded, subrounded sand and gravel with
iron oxidation. The material was compact and moist. This material is interpreted as colluvium overlying
heavily weathered greenstone although it may be a mixture of artificial fill and colluvium as these earth
materials are very similar in appearance and composition.
The remaining borings encountered the same general stratigraphic profile with minor variations in the
interpreted depth of fill ranging up to about seven to eight feet in thickness. Bedrock was encountered at
approximately 15 feet in Boring B-4. Groundwater was encountered at approximately 26 feet in Boring B-
2. Logs of the test borings are included in Appendix B.
3.3 Laboratory Testing
3.3.1 Test Methods
Selected soil samples were transported to Cooper Testing Laboratories in Palo Alto, California for further
classification and geotechnical testing. This testing included the following:
Ill Particle Size Analyses (ASTM 0422)
Ill Atterberg Limits (ASTM 04318)
Ill Modified Proctor test (ASTM 01557)
Ill Direct shear test (ASTM 03080)
Laboratory test results are included in Appendix C.
3.3.2 Summary of Lab Test Results
The above laboratory tests were performed mainly on the colluvium samples. The colluvium classifies
generally as Lean Clayey SANO with Gravel. The particle size analysis on a composite sample from
lehigh hanson_pond-30 _geotech-report_final v1_wlf.docx
(fjjtGolder .Associates
![Page 44: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
February 2015 7 Project No. 1417878
depth 3 to 25 feet from test boring B-1 shows 19.9% gravel, 48% sand, and 32.1% fines. The modified
Proctor test on this sample shows a maximum dry density of 135.8 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) and an
optimum moisture content of 8.1%.
The four Atterberg limit tests performed on four samples from various depths of the four borings show low
plasticity with the liquid limit (LL) ranging from 28 to 37, the plastic limit (PL) ranging from 13 to 19, and
the plasticity index (Pl) ranging from 14 to 18.
The three consolidated drained direct shear strength tests show significantly large effective friction angles
for the colluvium likely due to the presence of gravel. Because of the small size of the shear box relative
to the size of the gravels, the measured shear strength appears to be affected by the gravel. Therefore,
the direct shear test results are considered unconservative for the project.
lehfgh hanson_pond-30_geotech-report_final v1_wlf.docx
.Golder Associates
![Page 45: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
February 2015 8 Project No. 1417878
4.0 SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS
4.1 Methodology
4. 1. 1 Static Analysis
The computer program SLOPE/W (2012 version) which uses two-dimensional, limit equilibrium method,
was used to compute the factors of safety (FS) against potential slope failure at the site. This program
allows both circular and noncircular sliding surfaces to be either defined manually or generated
automatically to search for the lowest FS values. The Morgenstern-Price method was used to compute
factors of safety.
Based on traditional geotechnical practice, a minimum FS of 1.5 is considered acceptable under static
conditions.
4.1.2 Seismic Analysis
Golder performed a rigorous seismic slope stability analysis which included estimation of yield coefficient
for the slope and estimating the seismically induced permanent displacement using a predictive model
developed by Bray and Travasarou (2007). The yield coefficient is the seismic coefficient that results in
pseudo-static FS of 1.
Based on the sate-of-practice for seismic design of earthen slopes (Duncan and Wright, 2005), 3 feet is
considered as the maximum allowable permanent of displacement during the MCE event. To be
conservative, a seismically induces permanent displacement of 1 foot (12 inches) is assumed as the
maximum allowable limit in this report.
4.1.3 Critical Cross Section Analyzed
Based on a review of the topography of the site and interpreted subsurface conditions at the Pod 30 site,
Golder identified the most critical cross section (A-A') to analyze for stability of exiting slopes adjacent to
the pond expansion. The location of this cross section is shown Figure 3. The geologic profile along
cross section A-A' is shown in Figure 4.
4.2 Material Parameters
As shown in Figure 4, the subsurface profile along cross section A-A' consists of waste rock/artificial fill,
fill/colluvium, and greenstone. The shear strength parameters for waste rock and greenstone were
selected based on Golder's previous slope stability analyses for the East Material Storage Area in
Appendix 11 of Golder (2011). For the fill/colluvium, Golder has assumed a conservative friction angle of
28 degrees, based on the type of materials encounters (i.e., Lean Clayey SAND with Grave~ and our
engineering judgment. Table 1 below summarizes the parameters used in the slope stability analyses.
lehigh hanson_pond-30_geotech-report_flnal v1_wlf.docx
Golder Associates
![Page 46: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
February 2015 9 Project No. 1417878
Table 1: Summary of Material Parameters used in the Slope Stability Analyses
Unit Weight Shear Strength Parameters
Material (pcf) Cohesion Friction Angle
{psi) (degrees)
Waste Rock/Artificial Fill1 125 0 35
Fill/Colluvium2 120 0 28
Green stone 1 165 1,440 23 Notes:
1 Based on Golder(2011) 2 Conservatively assumed value
4.3 Slope Stability under Static Conditions
The slope stability analysis was performed for two conditions using the SLOPE/W computer program.
Because the pond will be lined with a geomembrane, the analyses assume that there would be
groundwater recharge from the pond and would not raise the water table level or lead to seepage forces
on the existing slopes located to the west of the pond.
The first slope stability condition analyzed is the potential for deep-seated slope failure surfaces that
initiate near the toe of existing slope located to the west of the pond and terminating at the pond. The
result of this analysis is shown in Figure 5. The analysis shows a FS of 1.82, which is greater than the
minimum acceptable value of 1.5.
The second condition analyzed the potential for surficial sloughing of the relatively steep existing slopes
located to the west of the pond. The result of this analysis is shown in Figure 6, which shows an
acceptable FS of 1.54.
The results of SLOPE/W analyses are presented in Appendix D.
4.4 Slope Stability under Seismic Conditions
4.4.1 Yield Coefficient for Seismic Slope Stability Analysis
The yield coefficient (or yield accelerations) for each of the two conditions discussed in Section 4.3 were
estimated from an iterative pseudo-static slope stability analysis using SLOPE/W by varying the input
seismic coefficient. The result of the final iteration for deep-seated slope failure surfaces in shown is
Figure 7, which shows an yield coefficient of 0.215g (where, g is the acceleration due to gravity).
Similarly, the result of the final iteration for surficial sloughing is shown in Figure 8, which shows a yield
coefficient of 0.17g.
lehigh hanson_pond-30_geotech-report_final v1_wlf.docx:
--~-
1'141 Golder '2.:i'Associates
![Page 47: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
February 2015 10 Project No. 1417878 -- - - - ------
:: -::- ::::_':C::::_·:'::::::::::C':=-·::c:_ -- - - - - - -- - -- - ---
The results of pseudo-static slope stability analyses are also presented in Appendix D.
4.4.2 Seismically Induced Permanent Slope Displacement
The likely magnitude of permanent displacement was estimated using the Bray and Travasarou (2007)
method. The permanent displacement calculations are presented in Appendix E. The calculations for
deep-seated failure surface estimated a permeant displacement of 9.3 inches during the magnitude 8
MCE. Similarly, for surficial sloughing, the estimated permanent displacement is 4.3 inches. Both of
these values are less than the allowable limit of 12 inches discussed in Section 4.1.2.
Table 2 below presents a summary of the static and seismic slope stability analyses.
Table 2: Summary of Static and Seismic Slope Stability Analyses Results
Condition Analyzed Static FS
Deep-Seated Failure 1.82
Surficial Sloughing 1.54
lehigh hanson_pond-30_geotech-report_final v1_wlf.docx
Yield Coefficient
0.215g
0.170g
Estimated Permanent Displacement
(inches)
9.3
4.3
Golder Associates
![Page 48: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
February 2015 11 Project No. 1417878
5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Conclusions
It is Golder's opinion that the site is suitable for development of the proposed Pond 30 expansion project.
The results of the static and seismic slope stability analyses discussed in this report show that the
expansion of Pond 30 will not adversely impact stabUi!Y of the existing slopes either above or below the -- -··------------------"""--~··- --" -- -,,-·-------~------------------------.
ponds. For the pond expansion itself, the static slope stability analysis shows a factor of safety of greater
than the acceptable minimum values of 1.5 for a slip circle intercepting the pond liner. Similarly, the
seismic slope stability analyses estimated seismically induced permanent displacement of less than the
maximum allowable limit of 12 inches.
Based on the encountered soil types and relatively shallow depth to bedrock, there is a low risk of
potential liquefaction. The site is situated approximately 35 feet above the 100-year flood plain for
Permanente Creek so there is a low risk of flooding. Although currently deeper, there is the potential that
groundwater could riseio tlie proposed depth of the pond excavation (-20 feet) and should be accounted
for in the final design for the project with appropriate recommendations for underdrains.
5.2 General Recommendations
The following provide general recommendations based on our investigation and the conceptual plan for
the project. Golder will provide more detailed geotechnical recommendations and specifications in
conjunction with preparation of final designs and construction plans for the project as necessary.
II Construction Observation: All earthworks should be observed and tested by a qualified geotechnical engineering company. Construction observation and testing services may include, but not be limited to, foundation subgrade verification, and verification that the placement and compaction of engineered fill complies with recommendations and specifications.
Ill Site Preparation: Prior to excavation and placement of artificial fill, the project area should be stripped to remove the existing vegetation. Golder anticipates that the depth of stripping will be 4- to 6-inches or less. Stripped soils may be stockpiled for re-use as vegetative layer soils.
Ill Earthworks Grading: Site grading is anticipated to primarily consist of the excavation of site soils to create the pond expansion, with more limited placement of engineered fills to achieve desired site grades. The subgrade should be prepared to achieve a firm and unyielding condition. All exposed soil surfaces that will receive fill or pavements should be moisture conditioned as needed and compacted prior to fill placement or surfacing application. Scarification of near-surface soils may be necessary for moistureconditioning, but in no case should scarification extend deeper than 12 inches. Soil should be compacted to the densities provided in the specifications for the project.
Care should be taken to avoid disturbing subgrade soils and foundation soils that will remain in place. Areas which become softened or disturbed during construction should be moisture conditioned and recompacted or removed and replaced with properly placed
lehigh hanson_pond-30__geotech-report_final v1_wlf.docx
{fj~Golder .Associates
![Page 49: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
-::_c'c;:·-,-.~~-:~
.;'.._,;~t~;·:-:?:;,;:::--- February 2015 12 Project No. 1417878
and compacted structural fill. Prior to fill placement, fill subgrades should be proof-rolled with a loaded water truck or dump truck to identify yielding conditions. Yielding soils should be moisture-conditioned and recompacted, or excavated and replaced with structural fill.
1111 Fill Materials and Placement: Engineered fill derived from on-site sources may be used to construct the proposed site earthworks. Engineered Fill materials should consist of well graded soils with a maximum particle size of 4 inches and free of organic material, trash or other deleterious materials. Based on the existing laboratory data, the local borrow soils will generally meet the requirements for Engineered Fill.
Engineered Fill materials should be placed in a maximum 6-inch loose thick lift thickness and be compacted to a maximum relative compaction of at least 90 percent and at a moisture content of between -1 and +4 percent of the optimum moisture content in accordance with ASTM D 1557 (Modified Proctor moisture-density relationship).
If density tests taken in the Engineered Fill indicate that compaction is not being achieved due to high or low moisture content, then the fill should be scarified, moistureconditioned, and recompacted. If the required densities cannot be met then the material should be over-excavated and replaced with a suitable material, or if the soils are excessively wet, a soil admix1ure used to dry the soil.
Earthwork construction during wet weather may significantly increase costs associated with off-site disposal of unsuitable excavated soils, increased control of water, and increased problems with subgrade disturbance and need for soil admixtures, geotextiles, rock working mats, or other stabilization measures to address unsuitable soil conditions. It is therefore recommended that the project earthwork be completed during the dry season (i.e., prior to November 1 annual onset of the rainy season).
1111 Temporary and Permanent Slopes: Golder recommends that permanent Engineered Fill slopes be 2.5H:1V or flatter. Proposed permanent cutslopes should be 2H:1V or flatter.
PeITTlanently exposed slopes should be seeded with an appropriate species of vegetation or covered with an appropriate armoring to reduce erosion and improve stability of the surficial layer of soil. Slopes may experience erosion or sloughing if not well vegetated or covered. In the event that the cuts and fills exceed 20 feet in height, Golder should be contacted so that we can review and revise our recommendations if necessary.
The inclination of temporary slopes is dependent on several variables, including the height of the cut, the soil type and density, the presence of groundwater seepage, construction timing, weather, and surcharge loads from adjacent structures, roads and equipment. In no case should excavation slopes be greater than the limits specified in local, state (Cal-OSHA), and federal (OSHA) safety regulations. Safe temporary slopes are the responsibility of the contractor and should comply with all applicable OSHA and state standards.
1111 Pond Lining: To minimize the potential for damage to the geomembrane liner and consequent leakage, it is recommended that a 0.5-foot-thick bedding layer consisting of soil having particle size no greater than 4.76 millimeters (0.19 inches) be used below the geomembrane. The geomembrane should be tested for leaks and repaired if damage is detected. Underdrains should be considered for the final design as groundwater could be encountered at 20 feet bgs or less.
lehigh hanson_pond-30_geotech-report_final v1_wlf.docx
_Golder Associates
![Page 50: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/50.jpg)
February 2015 13 Project No. 1417878
6.0 USE OF THIS REPORT
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Lehigh Hanson Southwest Cement Company for
specific application to the proposed expansion of Pond 30. Golder is not responsible for any
unauthorized use of this report.
The findings, conclusions, and recommendations presented in this report were prepared in accordance
with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practice that exists within the area at the time of the
work. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made.
The analyses and recommendations contained in this report are based on data obtained from the results
of previous subsurface explorations by others as well as the site reconnaissance and explorations
conducted by Golder. The methods used generally indicate subsurface conditions at the time and
locations explored and sampled. In addition, groundwater conditions can vary with time.
lehigh hanson_pond-3D_geotech-report_final v1_wlf.docx
(jtGolder .Associates
![Page 51: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/51.jpg)
February 2015 14 Project No. 1417878
7.0 CLOSING
We appreciate the opportunity to support the Lehigh Hanson Southwest Cement Company on this project.
Please call Bill Fowler at (408) 220-9239 if you have any questions, or require clarification of our findings
and recommendations.
GOLDER ASSOCIATES INC.
Nagesh Koragappa, P.E., G.E. Senior Consultant
lehigh hanson_pond-30_geotech-report_final v1_wlf.docx
sioNAL Gt: y_,S 0(
(;- 00 ({ WILLIAM L. FOWLER °0,
William L. Fowler, P.G, C.E.G. Principal/Practice Leader
Golder Associates
![Page 52: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/52.jpg)
February 2015 15 Project No. 1417878
8.0 REFERENCES
Abrahamson, N. A. and Silva W. (2008). Summary of the Abrahamson and Silva NGA Ground-Motion Relations, Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 67-98.
Bedrossian, T.L., 1980, Berrocal fault, northern segment: California Division of Mines and Geology Fault Evaluation Report FER-98, microfiche copy in California Division of Mines and Geology Open-File Report 90-11, scale 1:24,000.
Blake, T.F. Hollingsworth, R.A., and Stewart, J.P. (2002). Recommended Procedures for Implementing CDMG Special Publication 117 - Guidelines for Analyzing and Evaluating Seismic Hazards in California: Committee organized through ASCE, Los Angeles Section Geotechnical Group, Published by the Southern California Earthquake Center, 101 p.
Boore, D. and Atkinson, G. (2008). "Ground-Motion Prediction Equations for the Average Horizontal Component of PGA, PGV, and 5%-Damped PSA at Spectral Periods between 0.01 s and 10.0 s," Earthquake Spectra, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 99-138.
Bray, J.D. and Travasarou, T. (2007). "Simplified Procedure for Estimating Earthquake-Induced Deviatoric Slope Displacements," Journal of Geotechnical and Environmental Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 133, No. 4, pp. 381-392.
California Geological Survey (2008). Special Publication 117, Guidelines for Evaluation and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California, Revised September.
Campbell, K., Bozorgnia, Y. (2008). NGA Ground Motion Model for the Geometric Mean Horizontal Component of PGA, PGV, PGD and 5% Damped Linear Elastic Response Spectra for Periods Ranging from 0.01 to 10 s, Earthquake Spectra, vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 139-172.
Chiou, B., Youngs, R. (2008). An NGA Model for the Average Horizontal Component of Peak Ground Motion and Response Spectra. Earthquake Spectra, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 173-215.
Duncan, J.M. and Wright, S.G. (2005). Soil Strength and Slope Stability, John Wiley & Son, Inc.
Golder Associates Inc. (2011). "Geotechnical Evaluations and Design Recommendations (Revised), Permanente Quarry Plan Update, Santa Clara County, California," November 2011.
Hitchcock, C.S., Kelson, K.I., and Thompson, S.C., 1994, Geomorphic investigations of deformation along the northeastern margin of the Santa Cruz Mountains: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 94-187, 50 p.
Mclaughlin, R.J., 1974, The Sargent-Berrocal fault zone and its relation to the San Andreas fault system in the southern San Francisco Bay region and Santa Clara Valley, California: U.S. Geological Survey Journal of Research, v. 2, no. 5, p. 593-598.
Haugerud, R.A., and Ellen, S.D., 1990, Coseismic ground deformation along the northeast margin of the Santa Cruz Mountains, in Schwartz, D.P., and Ponti, D.J., eds., Field guide to neotectonics of the San Andreas fault system, Santa Cruz Mountains, in light of the Loma Prieta earthquake: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 90-274, p. 32-37.
Hitchcock, C.S., and Kelson, K.I., 1999, Growth of late Quaternary folds in southwest Santa Clara Valley, San Francisco Bay area, California: Implications of triggered slip for seismic hazard and earthquake recurrence: Geology, v. 27, no. 5, p. 391-394.
lehigh hanson_pond-30_geotech-report_final v1_wlf.docx
(j'Golder Associates
![Page 53: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/53.jpg)
.. _,,,<~\'----
:;:.:f::_~~:i~:f'L~Yj)E :::!.~::~;~:;~~~~_;~~~~~; ==~~;1~:_4i~~~i~~~:;;;;_;;::::-~~~-~;~~-;;;~
February 2015 16 Project No. 1417878
Hitchcock, C.S., Kelson, K.I., and Thompson, S.C., 1994, Geomorphic investigations of deformation along the northeastern margin of the Santa Cruz Mountains: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 94-187, 50 p.
Langenheim, V.E., Schmidt, K.M., and Jachens, R.C., 1997, Coseismic deformation during the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake and range-front thrusting along the southwestern margin of the Santa Clara Valley, California: Geology, v. 25, no. 12, p. 1091-1094.
McLaughlin, R.J., 1974, The Sargent-Berrocal fault zone and its relation to the San Andreas fault system in the southern San Francisco Bay region and Santa Clara Valley, California: U.S. Geological Survey Journal of Research, v. 2, no. 5, p. 593-598.
McLaughlin, R.J., Langenheim, V.E., Jachens, R.C., Jayko, A.S., Stanley, R.G., and Valin, Z.C., 1997, Neogene transpressional range-front deformation, southwestern Silicon Valley, San Francisco Bay region, California [abs.]: EOS, Transactions of the American Geophysical Union, 1997 Annual Fall Meeting, v. 78, no. 46, p. F436.
McLaughlin, R.J., Sorg, D.H., and Helley, E.J., 1996, Constraints on slip histories of thrust faults of the southwestern San Francisco Bay area from geologic mapping investigations: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 96-267, 65-70 p.
Petersen, M.D., Bryant, WA, Cramer, C.H., Cao, T., Reichle, M.S., Frankel, AD., Lienkaemper, J.J., McCrory, PA, and Schwartz, D. P., 1996, Probabilistic seismic hazard assessment for the State of California: California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology Open-File Report 96-08 (also U.S. Geological Open-File Report 96-706), 33 p.
Rogers, T.H., and Armstrong, C.F., 1971, Environmental geologic analysis, Santa Cruz Mountains study area, Santa Clara County, California: California Division of Mines and Geology Open-File Report 72-21, scale 1 :24,000.
Rogers, T.H., and Williams, J.W., 1974, Potential seismic hazards in Santa Clara County: California Division of Mines and Geology Special Report 107, 39 p., scale 1:62,500.
Sorg, D.H., and McLaughlin, R.J., 1975, Geologic map of the Sargent-Berrocal fault zone between Los Gatos and Los Altos Hills, Santa Clara County, California: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Field Studies Map MF-643, scale 1 :24,000.
lehigh hanson_pond-30_geotech-report_final v1_wlf.docx
![Page 54: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/54.jpg)
Golder Associates Inc. 425 Lakeside Drive
Sunnyvale, CA 94085 USA Tel: (408) 220-9223 Fax: (408) 220-9224
Golder, Golder Associates and the GA globe design are trademarks of Golder Associates Corporation
![Page 55: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/55.jpg)
NOTES
TOPOGRAPHIC MAP OBTAINED FROM THE USGS NATIONAL MAP (www.nationalmap.org)_
2. IMAGE NOT TO SCALE.
CLIENT
LEHIGH HANSON SOUTHWEST CEMENT PERMANENTE PLANT SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA CONSULTANT YYYY-MM-DD
PREPARED
<llG:t.r DESIGN
Ass ates REVIEW
2015-02-20
JHR
CDJ
NK
LEGEND
--?--?- INFERREDFAULT
& • & & & & THRUST (TEETH IN DIP DIRECTION)
.,., .............. , CONCEALEDFAULT
SITE BOUNDARY
PROJECT
GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE EXPANSION OF POND 30
TITLE
LOCATION MAP
PROJECT No CONTROL Rev FIGURE
APPROVED WCF !._~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1_4_17_8_7_8~~~0_0_02~~~~~~~~0~~~~~~-1'"--L
![Page 56: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/56.jpg)
CLJEfIT
LEHIGH HANSON SOUTHWEST CEMENT PERMANENTE PLANT SANTA CL.ARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
"ENEllAL LE«END
='"°"= EXISTINOOROLINPCONT<JlJR(ft.MSL)
~ EXISTINOROAOS
$-
f'•OJO<'..r
Cl<OSS-SECTION cALlOUT SECTION ID ORAIMllG SHEEHOCAllON
GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE EXPANSION OF POND 30
f'YY·M"'"bD ;<"15-<l2-'1<l Wl5
·~ ~RePARL~ JHR CONCEPTUAL LAYOUT· POND 30 EXPANSION
~f,51<,I<
RE'/12"' "' Pk"~N:1'No "" llP'-'~<l>'E" WLF 1417878 0002 0 n:>URO
2
![Page 57: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/57.jpg)
CUE'IT
LEHIGH HANSON SOUTHWEST CEMENT PERMANENTE PLANT SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
<l'~.le. RE'J<Ew
1,pp~rNl·ll
GrnEML LEGEND
=o<;oo= EXCSTING GROUND CONTOUR (0 .,,,SL)
~ EXISTINGRDADS
EXISTINGFENCELINE
Gf>ADEBREAJ<
!Iii EXISTIN~ POW'ER POLE OR POST
-$-BH-04 BOREHOLE LDCAllON
GEOLOGIC CONTACT, APPROXIMATE
GEOLOGIC CONTACT. CONCEAi.ED
PERMANENTE CREEK
- PIPE - EMERGENCYSPILLWAYPIPEALIGNMENT
~ CKO.NNELfl.OW
CROSS-"ECllON CALLOUT SECTION ID ORAIMNG SHEET LOCATION
Oal/Af
A<
MIX11JRE Of ALLWllJM AND ARTlflCIAL FILL ALONG ENmNEEREO PERMANENTE CREEK ALIGNMENT
KJfsz/Col
EMSA Af
?ROO'GT
ARTlRCIAL RLL
MELANGE OF FRANCISCAN COMPLEX ROCKS METABASALTS (GREEf<ST~E). SANDSTONE (GRECIWACKE) \'>\TH VARY1NG TH•CKNESSES OF COLLUVIUM
OVERBURDEN ROCK FILL MATERIALS
SCALE
GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE EXPANSION OF POND 30
TITLE
GEOLOGIC MAP AND LOCATION OF TEST BORINGS
PROJECT~'~
1417878 CCflCROL
0002 '"'· FIGIJ3
![Page 58: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/58.jpg)
-----
'T~T f , i ~ I ~I
'
I
I
I :
I
'
'I I :'f ! I '
1
j 1: J'
'
I
' ! ~/ ······,··,I. ii L,r- -, , -. , : I
! '/
I ! J I !
l/''f11 '
-- ': !,*-,-,,}, f11nl/1 I ' , _____ -i---1 I
I I i I I I __ !_ -- ' ' i/; ~1/f i
J /j/ ~/, I ---
' ! ! OG-H~ I 11 ___ [ __ --
------'---Ii -- -- -
!
-- ~
Q 1\1\
' I 11 '-, + llr 1
1
•/ .' I( I; I
' - I Ill.
I .. ..'- .. !
I ! I I
+' -- --, '
-- --- ,. ' I i
' '
......... , .. !
I
'
' I ~~ ' ' ' ! ' ' illlNDU-\IA"10
:1: " ~
i ' ' ! ~ " • !
g
~ 0
" "" •o Oz ~~ ~z
~~ Zw
~~ ~b~ ow 0 IE C!l u.
' ! !i ~ §
1 I i I 11 I I I I I I
~o
" <
~ d 0
~ "N
~8 • 0
" 0 0
" ,_ g
~~ =i@ Joo ,,
I ~ 8 ' l i
![Page 59: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/59.jpg)
en (!) z -~ <( ct: c > 0 ..... 0 - I-..J z - w ca ::2:
w - 0 en <( ~ ww LL~ w~ co <( (f)
ct: 6 (!) 0.. => 0 (II')
c z 0 0..
I w _J
<(
z O:::'. 0 LL
I- _J z <( <( 0 L{) _J ...-0... >- 0
N w I- >-I- z z ::J O:::'.
WO <(
zo ::J
<( <( O:::'. f1l
::2: O:::'. w O:::'. <( LL w _J
0... 0 <( I-z <( (f)
' ~t~ ~ ~~a~
~~§~ ! ~i c'f:."leli ! ~~!~ i~ i ,,.1 ~ §'.!'.! ,l!i; " I " "'=>"' ~ ~~:::J>'~ ~~ •lih ~i e~~~~ i~~~~ ! •! R i:? ~~¥
g
~~ ii1 5 ~ g ~ i
;"'i ~ •C
i~ l~~i~ ' '" ~I ~~ 8~~§~ " 8!
" 0
I ~
1! ' c ~~ ' I ~~ ~~ "' § g !! ' II
I is " '5
!I •g
'" ~I ~~ ,, >! 8~ ,. "' i! " " 12 8 ~ "!
~tu oe ~ :e
§! .,
ih ~ ~ ffi .,. i-"'~ 5~~ ~ ~ tl! ~g~ §~; ~~~ 8·· f!i ~ ~ ~go -"'~ii ~r:_o
e~I
z 0 ;:: 0 :0
"' t; z 0 0
"' 0
" ti z
• 0 z
~~ ffi ~
" ~~ w w
"" " ~§ ~ • w
~ 0 L5 ~~ """ ""
$,
l
' ' '
i i 0
' ~~
g
l l I 8 '
" r
' !
i i 8 ~
' ~
![Page 60: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/60.jpg)
2016-02·21 ISSUCD FOR FINAL REPCflT NIL CDJ CDJ WLF
2015-01-13 ISSUEDFORCUEITTREVIEW """ "" 2015-01-12 ISSUED FOR INTERNAL RE\1EW ow COJ W\.f
Y\'YY ..... MJO OESCRl~TION PREPAREO DESIGN RO\lll':W APPRLNrn
CLIENT
LEHIGH SOUTHWEST CEMENT CO. PERMANENTE PLANT SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA GONSULTANT
TUCSONOFFlCE
-rs~
I
ct'~ <730 N, ORACLE RoAD SUITE 210 TUCSON, ARIZONA UNITED STATES ARIZONA [+1] (521l) 8800810 www.gol'or.oom
GENEFUIL lEGEJ\ID
-o-==3500=== l':XlSTING GROONO C<JNTOUR (fi .,,,SL)
::::::;___-:o:::_~ EXlSTINGRoADS
- X EXISTING FENCEUNE
& EXJSllNG PCWER PO\.E OR POST
~ DESl<>NGONTOURs {fl-MSL)
~ SLOPEINDICATOR
3H:1Vor~ 1V O HOF<IZONTAL TO 1 VERTICAL SLOPE
_::...
~\ ~511~
CROSS-SECTION CALLOITT SECllLlNIO DRA~NG SHEHLOCAllON
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
'" SCAl.E FEET
PROJECT
POND 30 UPGRADE FEASIBILITY DRAWINGS
"'" GENERAL ARRANGEMENT
PRQJOC<No 1417878
CONTROL
0001 R~I, 2o<4 Fl<>URE
G-0002
![Page 61: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/61.jpg)
z 0
t3 => "' ti z 0 u
"' ii' 5 z
,0
OODC0~9 3
![Page 62: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/62.jpg)
:l01"-'l2.:t7 ISSUED FOR Fl""L REPOlH
2016-<lH~ ISSUEDFORCUEITTREVIEW
ISSUED FOR INTERNAL RE\IJEW
YYYY~,<M.DD DESCRIPTION
58 EXlsiJNG GROUND I ' : l.E: I ~o •• ·- -~ L. ,- -.~w~ -~:~ .c;:~-"-·· £::-~::-:·:~:~;...,.-i6'•"'········ :. r·---·~: "'""'i~- .. ,, j I ~ - - - - -
SCALE A ./"A\ CROSS-SECTION A
f:"_"'.'~
~ ~;;L ;= EXIST1NG GROUND i ~ ~ 15 5001 '- ·IJv:~~ _____ ,, ___ : . J~o ti ~ "°j____c,~~: -"'~ -- I " ~ ~: - 1• . ' . .,.Tmrsl:r1~L~,, :13~ ~
0-HJO 1+00 ;l<OO
SCALE A ,/"fi'. CROSS-SECTION B
·~
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
N" CDJ COJ 'M.F
JKR CDJ CDJ Wl.F
""' PREPARED DliSIGN REVIEW APPROVED
CLIENT
LEHIGH SOUTHWEST CEMENT CO, PERMANENTE PLANT SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA CONSULTANT
·~ TUCSON OFFICE
4nO N. ORACLE ROAD SUITE 210 TUCSON, Al<IWNA
UNITED STATES ARIZOWI [•1]i520)81l09"10 www.go.,oc.rom
SCALE A FEET
PROJECT POND 30 UPGRADE FEASIBILITY DRAWINGS
m CROSS-SECTIONS
PROJECTi.o.
1417878 COITTROL
0001 0• •ol• fl"URE
C-0002
![Page 63: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/63.jpg)
1/13/2015 1417878
Pond 30 Information Pond 30 Capacity Information Pond Floor Elevation 542.10 ft ams I Title 27 Freeboard 0.00 7.55 7.55 551.00 551.00 543.00 Downstream Toe Elevation 550.03 ft amsl Dam Freeboard 0.00 10.28 10.28 553.00 553.00 543.00 Spillway Invert Elevation 553.00 ft amsl Spillway Crest 0.00 10.28 10.28 553.00 553.00 543.00 Embankment Crest Elevation 555.00 ft amsl Embankment Crest 0.00 13.32 13.32 555.00 555.00 543.00
Stage-Storage Curve Information POND 30 STAGE-STORAGE CURVE Elevation Pond Surface Area Capacity
(ft) (s<1uare-ftl (acres) (acre-ft) 557 ' 542.10 328 0.01 0.00 y = -5E-05x6 + 0.0023x5 - 0.0388x4 + 0.3132x3 - 1.2817x2 + 3.4181x + 542.441
w = 0.9987 543.00 8,814 0.20 0.09 544.00 22,784
555 0.52 0.46 v
545.00 37,258 0.86 1.15 ~ 546.00 40,220 0.92 2.04 ~
- 553' I .. --------- --· -----
547.00 43,252 0.99 2.99 ;:. l/ z ,!./ 548.00 46,351 1.06 4.02 0 549.00 49,520 1.14 5.12 ~ 551
550.00 52,757 1.21 6.30 > ~ ... w 551.00 56,063 1.29
...J 7.55 w /
552.00 59,438 ffi 549 1.36 8.87 .
62,881 I- v 553.00 1.44 10.28 ~
554.00 66,393 1.52 11.76 Cl i/ 555.00 69,974 1.61 13.32 z 547
0 t"' 0.
,/ 545 ~
I 543
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
POND STORAGE VOLUME (acre-ft)
~Dam Freeboard _.,_Title 27 Freeboard ~Spillway Crest ......,.....Embankment Crest
-e-Stage-Storage Curve Information --Log. (Stage-Storage Curve Information) --Power (Stage-Storage Curve Information) --Poly. (Stage-Storage Curve Information)
K:\2014 Projects\1417878 Lehigh Pond 30\CIVIL 30\IN PROGRESS (TEMPORARY)\CDJ\20150113_Pond3D.xlsx/Stage-Storage Curve Golder Associates
![Page 64: ATTACHMENT C - sccgov.org€¦ · 23/04/2015 · The Berrocal Fault Zone is not considered an active fault by the California Geologic Survey, it is classified as older than 1.6 million](https://reader035.fdocuments.in/reader035/viewer/2022071607/61458e2c07bb162e665fc299/html5/thumbnails/64.jpg)
1/13/2015 1417878
Pond 30 (EMSA) catchment parameters Area Area Curve s lft2l (acres) Number
4,454,059 102.3 70 4.29
Month Average Unit Runoff, Incremental Runoff Cumulative Runoff Pond Stage
Precip1 (in) Q (in) Volume (ac-ft) Volume (ac-ft) (ft)
October 0.89 0.00 0.00 0.00 542.45 November 2.92 0.67 5.71 5.71 549.46 December 4.25 1.50 12.77 18.49 Overflow
January 3.37 0.93 7.91 26.40 Overflow
February 5.59 2.48 21.16 47.57 Overflow
March 2.90 0.66 5.62 53.18 Overflow
April 1.68 0.13 1.13 54.31 Overflow
May 0.46 0.04 0.35 54.66 Overflow
June 0.08 0.17 1.47 56.13 Overflow
July 0.00 0.00 0.00 56.13 Overflow
August 0.01 .. . 0.21 '
. 1J8 ... 57.91 Overflow
September 0.06 0.18 1.55 59.46 Overflow
Notes:
1 Average annual precipitation data from Los Altos Hills weather station (1999-2006 & 2009).
K:\2014 Projects\1417878 Lehigh Pond 30\CIVIL 3D\tN PROGRESS (TEMPORARYJ\CDJ\201so113_Pond30.xlsx/Storm season Filling (Simple) Golder ASSOC iates