HomeMy WebLinkAboutApp H Infiltration Report22885 Savi Ranch Parkway Suite E Yorba Linda California 92887
voice: (714) 685-1115 fax: (714) 685-1118 www.socalgeo.com
February 21, 2022
Seefried Industrial Properties, Inc.
2301 Rosecrans Avenue, Suite 1365
El Segundo, California 90245
Attention: Mr. Dan Bick
Senior Vice President
Project No.:22G101-2
Subject:Results of Infiltration Testing
Proposed Warehouse
Poplar Avenue, South of Santa Ana Avenue
Fontana, California
Reference: Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Warehouse, Poplar Avenue, South of Santa
Ana Avenue, Fontana, California, prepared by Southern California Geotechnical,
Inc. (SCG) for Seefried Industrial Properties, Inc, SCG Project No. 22G101-1,
dated February 11, 2022.
Mr. Bick:
In accordance with your request, we have conducted infiltration testing at the subject site. We
are pleased to present this report summarizing the results of the infiltration testing and our
design recommendations.
Scope of Services
The scope of services performed for this project was in general accordance with our Proposal
No. 21P489, dated November 18, 2021. The scope of services included site reconnaissance,
subsurface exploration, field testing, and engineering analysis to determine the infiltration rates
of the on-site soils. The infiltration testing was performed in general accordance with the
guidelines published in Riverside County – Low Impact Development BMP Design Handbook –
Section 2.3 of Appendix A, prepared for the Riverside County Department of Environmental
Health (RCDEH), dated December 2013. The San Bernardino County standards defer to the
guidelines published by the RCDEH.
Site and Project Description
The site is located on the east side of Poplar Avenue, 600 to 1,300± feet south of Santa Ana
Avenue in Fontana, California. The site is bounded to the north by an existing
commercial/industrial building, to the west by Poplar Avenue, to the south by an existing
commercial/industrial building, and to the east by Catawba Avenue.
The site consists of forty (40) rectangular-shaped parcels, which total 19± acres in size. The
site is bisected by Rose Avenue which trends east-west through the approximate center of the
site. Most of the parcels are developed with single-family residences (SFRs). The SFRs consist
of one- to two-story structures that appear to be of wood frame and stucco construction. We
Proposed Warehouse – Fontana, CA
Project No. 22G101-2
Page 2
assume that the existing residences are supported on conventional shallow foundations and
have concrete slab-on-grade floors. Generally, the ground surface cover surrounding the SFRs
consists of turf grass, concrete flatwork, and/or exposed soil with sparse to moderate native
grass and weed growth. Swimming pools are present in five of the parcels. Portions of some of
the lots are currently being utilized as vehicle storage. Medium-sized trees are present in some
of the parcels, especially within the southern and northeastern portions of the overall site.
Detailed topographic information was not available at the time of this report. Based on elevation
information obtained from Google Earth and visual observations made at the time of the
subsurface investigation, the site slopes gently toward the south at a gradient of about 1
percent. According to elevation information available from Google Earth, there is about 13±
feet of elevation differential throughout the site.
Proposed Development
Based on the conceptual site plan, Scheme 1, prepared by HPA Architecture, the site will be
developed with one (1) warehouse located in the north-central area of the site. The new
building will be 493,720± ft² in size. Dock-high doors will be constructed along a portion of the
south side of the building. The building will be surrounded by Portland cement concrete
pavements in the loading dock areas, asphaltic concrete pavements in the parking and drive
lane areas, concrete flatwork, and landscape planter areas throughout.
The proposed development will include an on-site stormwater infiltration system. The infiltration
system will consist of a below-grade chamber, located in the southern portion of the site. The
bottom of the below-grade chamber system will be 10± feet below existing site grades.
Concurrent Study
Southern California Geotechnical, Inc. (SCG) concurrently conducted a geotechnical
investigation at the subject site, referenced above. As a part of this study, eight (8) borings
(identified as Boring Nos. B-1 through B-8) were advanced to depths of 15 to 25± feet below
existing site grades.
Artificial fill soils were encountered at the ground surface of all eight (8) boring locations,
extending to depths of 2½ to 4½± feet below existing site grades. The artificial fill soils
consisted of very loose to medium dense silty fine sands with trace quantities of medium to
coarse sands. Native alluvium was encountered at the ground surface of all boring locations,
extending to at least the maximum depth explored of 25± feet below ground surface. The
alluvium consisted of loose to dense fine to coarse sands, medium dense to very dense gravelly
fine to coarse sands, silty fine sands, and fine sandy silts.
Groundwater
Free water was not encountered during the drilling of any of the borings. Based on the lack of
any water within the borings, and the moisture contents of the recovered soil samples, the
static groundwater table is considered to have existed at a depth in excess of 25± feet at the
time of the subsurface exploration.
Proposed Warehouse – Fontana, CA
Project No. 22G101-2
Page 3
Recent water level data was obtained from the California Department of Water Resources
website, http://www.water.ca.gov/waterdatalibrary/. One monitoring well on record is located
3,550± feet north of the site. Water level readings within this monitoring well indicates a high
groundwater level of 333± feet below ground surface in October 2008.
Subsurface Exploration
Scope of Exploration
The subsurface exploration conducted for the infiltration testing consisted of three (3)
infiltration test borings, advanced to a depth of 10± feet below the existing site grades. The
infiltration borings were advanced using a truck-mounted drilling rig, equipped with 8-inch-
diameter hollow-stem augers and were logged during drilling by a member of our staff. The
approximate locations of the infiltration test borings (identified as I-1 through I-3) are indicated
on the Infiltration Test Location Plan, enclosed as Plate 2 of this report.
Upon the completion of the infiltration borings, the bottom of each test boring was covered with
2± inches of clean ¾-inch gravel. A sufficient length of 3-inch-diameter perforated PVC casing
was then placed into each test hole so that the PVC casing extended from the bottom of the
test hole to the ground surface. Clean ¾-inch gravel was then installed in the annulus
surrounding the PVC casing.
Geotechnical Conditions
Artificial fill soils were encountered at the ground surface at all of the infiltration boring
locations, extending to depths of 3 to 5½± below existing site grades. The artificial fill soils
consist of very loose to loose silty fine sands with variable quantities of medium to coarse sand
and trace quantities of fine gravel. Native alluvial soils were encountered beneath the artificial
fill soils at all of the infiltration boring locations, extending to at least the maximum explored
depth of 10± feet below existing site grades. The alluvium consists of medium dense to dense
gravelly fine to coarse sands and fine to coarse sands with trace silt content and medium dense
silty fine sands were encountered within the alluvial strata. The Boring Logs, which illustrate the
conditions encountered at the boring locations, are included with this report.
Infiltration Testing
As previously mentioned, the infiltration testing was performed in general accordance with the
guidelines published in Riverside County – Low Impact Development BMP Design Handbook –
Section 2.3 of Appendix A, which apply to San Bernardino County.
Pre-soaking
In accordance with the county infiltration standards for sandy soils, all infiltration test borings
were pre-soaked 2 hours prior to the infiltration testing or until all of the water had percolated
through the test holes. The pre-soaking process consisted of filling test borings by inverting a
full 5-gallon bottle of clear water supported over each hole so that the water flow into the hole
holds constant at a level at least 5 times the hole’s radius above the gravel at the bottom of
Proposed Warehouse – Fontana, CA
Project No. 22G101-2
Page 4
each hole. Pre-soaking was completed after all of the water had percolated through the test
holes.
Infiltration Testing
Following the pre-soaking process of the infiltration test borings, SCG performed the infiltration
testing. Each test hole was filled with water to a depth of at least 5 times the hole’s radius
above the gravel at the bottom of the test holes. In accordance with the Riverside County
guidelines, since “sandy soils” (where 6 inches of water infiltrated into the surrounding soils in
less than 25 minutes for two consecutive readings) were encountered at the bottom of the
infiltration test borings, readings were taken at 10-minute intervals for a total of at least 1 hour.
After each reading, water was added to the borings so that the depth of the water was at least
5 times the radius of the hole. The water level readings are presented on the spreadsheets
enclosed with this report. The infiltration rates for each of the timed intervals are also tabulated
on the spreadsheets.
The infiltration rates from the tests are tabulated in inches per hour. In accordance with the
typically accepted practice, it is recommended that the most conservative reading from the
latter part of the infiltration tests be used as the design infiltration rate. The rates are
summarized below:
Infiltration
Test No.
Depth
(feet)Soil Description Infiltration Rate
(inches/hour)
I-1 10 Brown Silty fine Sand, little medium Sand 3.5
I-2 10 Gray Gravelly fine to coarse Sand, trace Silt 18.7
I-3 10 Brown Gravelly fine to coarse Sand, trace Silt 17.2
Laboratory Testing
Moisture Content
The moisture contents for the recovered soil samples within the borings were determined in
accordance with ASTM D-2216 and are expressed as a percentage of the dry weight. These test
results are presented on the Boring Logs.
Grain Size Analysis
The grain size distribution of selected soils collected from the base of each infiltration test
boring have been determined using a range of wire mesh screens. These tests were performed
in general accordance with ASTM D-422 and/or ASTM D-1140. The weight of the portion of the
sample retained on each screen is recorded and the percentage finer or coarser of the total
weight is calculated. The results of these tests are presented on Plates C-1 through C-3 of this
report.
Proposed Warehouse – Fontana, CA
Project No. 22G101-2
Page 5
Design Recommendations
Three (3) infiltration tests were performed at the subject site. As noted above, the infiltration
rates at these locations vary from 3.5 to 18.7 inches per hour.Based on the infiltration test
results, we recommend an average infiltration rate of 13.1 inches per hour to be
utilized for the proposed below-grade chamber system
We recommend that a representative from the geotechnical engineer be on-site during the
construction of the proposed infiltration system to identify the soil classification at the base of
each chamber system. It should be confirmed that the soils at the base of the proposed
infiltration system corresponds with those presented in this report to ensure that the
performance of the system will be consistent with the rates reported herein.
The design of the storm water infiltration system should be performed by the project civil
engineer, in accordance with the City of Fontana and/or County of San Bernardino guidelines. It
is recommended that the system be constructed so as to facilitate removal of silt and clay, or
other deleterious materials from any water that may enter the system. The presence of such
materials would decrease the effective infiltration rates.It is recommended that the project
civil engineer apply an appropriate factor of safety. The infiltration rates
recommended above is based on the assumption that only clean water will be
introduced to the subsurface profile. Any fines, debris, or organic materials could
significantly impact the infiltration rate.It should be noted that the recommended
infiltration rates are based on infiltration testing at three (3) discrete locations and that the
overall infiltration rates of the proposed infiltration system could vary considerably.
Infiltration Rate Considerations
The infiltration rates presented herein were determined in accordance with the San Bernardino
County guidelines and are considered valid only for the time and place of the actual test.
Varying subsurface conditions will exist in other areas of the site, which could alter the
recommended infiltration rates presented above. The infiltration rates will decline over time
between maintenance cycles as silt or clay particles accumulate on the BMP surface. The
infiltration rate is highly dependent upon a number of factors, including density, silt and clay
content, grainsize distribution throughout the range of particle sizes, and particle shape. Small
changes in these factors can cause large changes in the infiltration rates.
Infiltration rates are based on unsaturated flow. As water is introduced into soils by infiltration,
the soils become saturated and the wetting front advances from the unsaturated zone to the
saturated zone. Once the soils become saturated, infiltration rates become zero, and water can
only move through soils by hydraulic conductivity at a rate determined by pressure head and
soil permeability. Changes in soil moisture content will affect the infiltration rate. Infiltration
rates should be expected to decrease until the soils become saturated. Soil permeability values
will then govern groundwater movement. Permeability values may be on the order of 10 to 20
times less than infiltration rates. The system designer should incorporate adequate factors of
safety and allow for overflow design into appropriate traditional storm drain systems, which
would transport storm water off-site.
Proposed Warehouse – Fontana, CA
Project No. 22G101-2
Page 6
Construction Considerations
The infiltration rates presented in this report are specific to the tested locations and tested
depths. Infiltration rates can be significantly reduced if the soils are exposed to excessive
disturbance or compaction during construction. Compaction of the soils at the bottom of the
infiltration system can significantly reduce the infiltration ability of the chamber. Therefore, the
subgrade soils within proposed infiltration system areas should not be over-excavated, undercut
or compacted in any significant manner.It is recommended that a note to this effect be
added to the project plans and/or specifications.
We recommend that a representative from the geotechnical engineer be on-site during the
construction of the proposed infiltration systems to identify the soil classification at the base of
each system. It should be confirmed that the soils at the base of the proposed infiltration
systems correspond with those presented in this report to ensure that the performance of the
systems will be consistent with the rates reported herein.
We recommend that scrapers and other rubber-tired heavy equipment not be operated on the
chamber bottom, or at levels lower than 2 feet above the bottom of the system, particularly
within basins. As such, the bottom 24 inches of the infiltration systems should be excavated
with non-rubber-tired equipment, such as excavators.
Infiltration Chamber Maintenance
The proposed project may include an infiltration chamber. Water flowing into chambers will
carry some level of sediment. This layer has the potential to significantly reduce the infiltration
rate of the chamber subgrade soils. Therefore, a formal chamber maintenance program should
be established to ensure that these silt and clay deposits are removed from the chamber on a
regular basis.
Location of Infiltration System
The use of on-site storm water infiltration systems carries a risk of creating adverse
geotechnical conditions. Increasing the moisture content of the soil can cause the soil to lose
internal shear strength and increase its compressibility, resulting in a change in the designed
engineering properties. Overlying structures and pavements in the infiltration area could
potentially be damaged due to saturation of the subgrade soils.The proposed infiltration
system for this site should be located at least 25 feet away from any structures,
including retaining walls.Even with this provision of locating the infiltration system at least
25 feet from the building(s), it is possible that infiltrating water into the subsurface soils could
have an adverse effect on the proposed or existing structures. It should also be noted that
utility trenches which happen to collect storm water can also serve as conduits to transmit
storm water toward the structure, depending on the slope of the utility trench. Therefore,
consideration should also be given to the proposed locations of underground utilities which may
pass near the proposed infiltration system.
The infiltration system designer should also give special consideration to the effect that the
proposed infiltration systems may have on nearby subterranean structures, open excavations,
or descending slopes. In particular, infiltration systems should not be located near the crest of
Proposed Warehouse – Fontana, CA
Project No. 22G101-2
Page 7
descending slopes, particularly where the slopes are comprised of granular soils. Such systems
will require specialized design and analysis to evaluate the potential for slope instability, piping
failures and other phenomena that typically apply to earthen dam design. This type of analysis
is beyond the scope of this infiltration test report, but these factors should be considered by the
infiltration system designer when locating the infiltration systems.
General Comments
This report has been prepared as an instrument of service for use by the client in order to aid in
the evaluation of this property and to assist the architects and engineers in the design and
preparation of the project plans and specifications. This report may be provided to the
contractor(s) and other design consultants to disclose information relative to the project.
However, this report is not intended to be utilized as a specification in and of itself, without
appropriate interpretation by the project architect, structural engineer, and/or civil engineer.
The design of the proposed storm water infiltration system is the responsibility of the civil
engineer. The role of the geotechnical engineer is limited to determination of infiltration rate
only. By using the design infiltration rate contained herein, the civil engineer agrees to
indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the geotechnical engineer for all aspects of the design
and performance of the proposed storm water infiltration system. The reproduction and
distribution of this report must be authorized by the client and Southern California Geotechnical,
Inc. Furthermore, any reliance on this report by an unauthorized third party is at such party’s
sole risk, and we accept no responsibility for damage or loss which may occur.
The analysis of this site was based on a subsurface profile interpolated from limited discrete soil
samples. While the materials encountered in the project area are considered to be
representative of the total area, some variations should be expected between boring locations
and testing depths. If the conditions encountered during construction vary significantly from
those detailed herein, we should be contacted immediately to determine if the conditions alter
the recommendations contained herein.
This report has been based on assumed or provided characteristics of the proposed
development. It is recommended that the owner, client, architect, structural engineer, and civil
engineer carefully review these assumptions to ensure that they are consistent with the
characteristics of the proposed development. If discrepancies exist, they should be brought to
our attention to verify that they do not affect the conclusions and recommendations contained
herein. We also recommend that the project plans and specifications be submitted to our office
for review to verify that our recommendations have been correctly interpreted. The analysis,
conclusions, and recommendations contained within this report have been promulgated in
accordance with generally accepted professional geotechnical engineering practice. No other
warranty is implied or expressed.
Closure
We sincerely appreciate the opportunity to be of service on this project. We look forward to
providing additional consulting services during the course of the project. If we may be of
further assistance in any manner, please contact our office.
Proposed Warehouse – Fontana, CA
Project No. 22G101-2
Page 8
Respectfully Submitted,
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
Ryan Bremer
Staff Geologist
Robert G. Trazo, GE 2655
Principal Engineer
Distribution: (1) Addressee
Enclosures: Plate 1: Site Location Map
Plate 2: Infiltration Test Location Plan
Boring Log Legend and Logs (5 pages)
Infiltration Test Results Spreadsheets (3 pages)
Grain Size Distribution Graphs (3 pages)
SITE
PROPOSED WAREHOUSE
SCALE: 1" = 2000'
DRAWN: RB
CHKD: RGT
SCG PROJECT
22G101-2
PLATE 1
SITE LOCATION MAP
FONTANA, CALIFORNIA
SOURCE: USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP OF THE FONTANA
QUADRANGLE, SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, 2018.
B-1
B-2
B-3
B-4
B-5
B-6
B-7
B-8
I-1 I-2 I-3
N.A.P.N.A.P.N.A.P.
N.A.P.
SCALE: 1" = 100'
DRAWN: RB
CHKD: RGT
PLATE 2
SCG PROJECT
22G101-2
FONTANA, CALIFORNIA
PROPOSED WAREHOUSE
INFILTRATION TEST LOCATION PLAN
NO
R
T
H
So
C
a
l
G
e
o
APPROXIMATE INFILTRATION TEST LOCATION
APPROXIMATE BORING LOCATION
GEOTECHNICAL LEGEND
NOTE: SITE PLAN PROVIDED BY HPA ARCHITECTURE.
AERIAL PHOTO OBTAINED FROM GOOGLE EARTH.
(SCG PROJECT NO. 22G101-1)
PROPOSED INFILTRATION SYSTEM
BORING LOG LEGEND
SAMPLE TYPE GRAPHICAL
SYMBOL SAMPLE DESCRIPTION
AUGER SAMPLE COLLECTED FROM AUGER CUTTINGS, NO FIELD
MEASUREMENT OF SOIL STRENGTH. (DISTURBED)
CORE ROCK CORE SAMPLE: TYPICALLY TAKEN WITH A DIAMOND-TIPPED CORE BARREL. TYPICALLY USED ONLY IN HIGHLY CONSOLIDATED BEDROCK.
GRAB 1
SOIL SAMPLE TAKEN WITH NO SPECIALIZED
EQUIPMENT, SUCH AS FROM A STOCKPILE OR THE GROUND SURFACE. (DISTURBED)
CS CALIFORNIA SAMPLER: 2-1/2 INCH I.D. SPLIT BARREL SAMPLER, LINED WITH 1-INCH HIGH BRASS RINGS.
DRIVEN WITH SPT HAMMER. (RELATIVELY UNDISTURBED)
NSR
NO RECOVERY: THE SAMPLING ATTEMPT DID NOT RESULT IN RECOVERY OF ANY SIGNIFICANT SOIL OR
ROCK MATERIAL.
SPT STANDARD PENETRATION TEST: SAMPLER IS A 1.4 INCH INSIDE DIAMETER SPLIT BARREL, DRIVEN 18 INCHES WITH THE SPT HAMMER. (DISTURBED)
SH SHELBY TUBE: TAKEN WITH A THIN WALL SAMPLE
TUBE, PUSHED INTO THE SOIL AND THEN EXTRACTED. (UNDISTURBED)
VANE VANE SHEAR TEST: SOIL STRENGTH OBTAINED USING A 4 BLADED SHEAR DEVICE. TYPICALLY USED IN SOFT CLAYS-NO SAMPLE RECOVERED.
COLUMN DESCRIPTIONS
DEPTH: Distance in feet below the ground surface.
SAMPLE: Sample Type as depicted above.
BLOW COUNT: Number of blows required to advance the sampler 12 inches using a 140 lb
hammer with a 30-inch drop. 50/3” indicates penetration refusal (>50 blows)
at 3 inches. WH indicates that the weight of the hammer was sufficient to
push the sampler 6 inches or more.
POCKET PEN.: Approximate shear strength of a cohesive soil sample as measured by pocket
penetrometer.
GRAPHIC LOG: Graphic Soil Symbol as depicted on the following page.
DRY DENSITY: Dry density of an undisturbed or relatively undisturbed sample in lbs/ft3.
MOISTURE CONTENT: Moisture content of a soil sample, expressed as a percentage of the dry weight.
LIQUID LIMIT: The moisture content above which a soil behaves as a liquid.
PLASTIC LIMIT: The moisture content above which a soil behaves as a plastic.
PASSING #200 SIEVE: The percentage of the sample finer than the #200 standard sieve.
UNCONFINED SHEAR: The shear strength of a cohesive soil sample, as measured in the unconfined state.
SM
SP
COARSE
GRAINEDSOILS
SW
TYPICAL
DESCRIPTIONS
WELL-GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL -
SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OR NOFINES
SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL - SAND -
SILT MIXTURES
LETTERGRAPH
POORLY-GRADED GRAVELS,
GRAVEL - SAND MIXTURES, LITTLEOR NO FINES
GC
GM
GP
GW
POORLY-GRADED SANDS,
GRAVELLY SAND, LITTLE OR NOFINES
SILTSAND
CLAYS
MORE THAN 50%
OF MATERIAL ISLARGER THANNO. 200 SIEVE
SIZE
MORE THAN 50%OF MATERIAL IS
SMALLER THANNO. 200 SIEVESIZE
MORE THAN 50%OF COARSEFRACTION
PASSING ON NO.4 SIEVE
MORE THAN 50%OF COARSE
FRACTIONRETAINED ON NO.4 SIEVE CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL - SAND -
CLAY MIXTURES
FINEGRAINED
SOILS
SYMBOLSMAJOR DIVISIONS
SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART
PT
OH
CH
MH
OL
CL
ML
CLEAN SANDS
SC
SILTY SANDS, SAND - SILTMIXTURES
CLAYEY SANDS, SAND - CLAY
MIXTURES
INORGANIC SILTS AND VERY FINESANDS, ROCK FLOUR, SILTY OR
CLAYEY FINE SANDS OR CLAYEYSILTS WITH SLIGHT PLASTICITY
INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO
MEDIUM PLASTICITY, GRAVELLYCLAYS, SANDY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS,LEAN CLAYS
ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANICSILTY CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY
INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR
DIATOMACEOUS FINE SAND ORSILTY SOILS
INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH
PLASTICITY
ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO
HIGH PLASTICITY, ORGANIC SILTS
PEAT, HUMUS, SWAMP SOILS WITHHIGH ORGANIC CONTENTS
SILTS
AND
CLAYS
GRAVELS WITH
FINES
SAND
AND
SANDY
SOILS (LITTLE OR NO FINES)
SANDS WITH
FINES
LIQUID LIMITLESS THAN 50
LIQUID LIMIT
GREATER THAN 50
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS
NOTE: DUAL SYMBOLS ARE USED TO INDICATE BORDERLINE SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS
GRAVEL
AND
GRAVELLYSOILS
(APPRECIABLE
AMOUNT OF FINES)
(APPRECIABLE
AMOUNT OF FINES)
(LITTLE OR NO FINES)
WELL-GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLYSANDS, LITTLE OR NO FINES
CLEAN
GRAVELS
8
7
3
2
FILL: Brown Silty fine Sand, trace medium to coarse Sand,
trace fine Gravel, loose to medium dense-moist
@ 3½', little to some medium to coarse Sand, little fine Gravel
ALLUVIUM: Brown fine to coarse Sand, trace fine to coarse
Gravel, trace Silt, medium dense-damp
Brown Silty fine Sand, little medium Sand, medium dense-dry
Boring Terminated at 10'
9
14
22
11 39
FIELD RESULTS
WATER DEPTH: Dry
CAVE DEPTH: ---
READING TAKEN: At Completion
GR
A
P
H
I
C
L
O
G
BORING NO.
I-1
PO
C
K
E
T
P
E
N
.
(T
S
F
)
DRILLING DATE: 1/11/22
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger
LOGGED BY: Ryan Bremer
OR
G
A
N
I
C
CO
N
T
E
N
T
(
%
)
DR
Y
D
E
N
S
I
T
Y
(P
C
F
)
DE
P
T
H
(
F
E
E
T
)
MO
I
S
T
U
R
E
CO
N
T
E
N
T
(
%
)
JOB NO.: 22G101-2
PROJECT: Proposed Warehouse
LOCATION: Fontana, California
PLATE B-1
5
10
LABORATORY RESULTS
CO
M
M
E
N
T
S
TEST BORING LOG
PA
S
S
I
N
G
#2
0
0
S
I
E
V
E
(
%
)
BL
O
W
C
O
U
N
T
DESCRIPTION
SURFACE ELEVATION: MSL LI
Q
U
I
D
LI
M
I
T
PL
A
S
T
I
C
LI
M
I
T
SA
M
P
L
E
TB
L
2
2
G
1
0
1
-
2
.
G
P
J
S
O
C
A
L
G
E
O
.
G
D
T
2
/
2
1
/
2
2
6
5
3
5
FILL: Brown Silty fine Sand, trace medium to coarse Sand,
trace fine Gravel, very loose-damp
@ 3½', little medium to coarse Sand, medium dense
ALLUVIUM: Gray Gravelly fine to coarse Sand, trace Silt,
medium dense to dense-damp
Boring Terminated at 10'
2
21
26
32 6
FIELD RESULTS
WATER DEPTH: Dry
CAVE DEPTH: ---
READING TAKEN: At Completion
GR
A
P
H
I
C
L
O
G
BORING NO.
I-2
PO
C
K
E
T
P
E
N
.
(T
S
F
)
DRILLING DATE: 1/11/22
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger
LOGGED BY: Ryan Bremer
OR
G
A
N
I
C
CO
N
T
E
N
T
(
%
)
DR
Y
D
E
N
S
I
T
Y
(P
C
F
)
DE
P
T
H
(
F
E
E
T
)
MO
I
S
T
U
R
E
CO
N
T
E
N
T
(
%
)
JOB NO.: 22G101-2
PROJECT: Proposed Warehouse
LOCATION: Fontana, California
PLATE B-2
5
10
LABORATORY RESULTS
CO
M
M
E
N
T
S
TEST BORING LOG
PA
S
S
I
N
G
#2
0
0
S
I
E
V
E
(
%
)
BL
O
W
C
O
U
N
T
DESCRIPTION
SURFACE ELEVATION: MSL LI
Q
U
I
D
LI
M
I
T
PL
A
S
T
I
C
LI
M
I
T
SA
M
P
L
E
TB
L
2
2
G
1
0
1
-
2
.
G
P
J
S
O
C
A
L
G
E
O
.
G
D
T
2
/
2
1
/
2
2
6
5
3
5
FILL: Brown Silty fine Sand, trace medium to coarse Sand,
loose-damp
ALLUVIUM: Brown fine to coarse Sand, trace fine to coarse
Gravel, trace Silt, medium dense-damp
Brown Gravelly fine to coarse Sand, trace Silt, dense-damp
Boring Terminated at 10'
9
15
30
40 6
FIELD RESULTS
WATER DEPTH: Dry
CAVE DEPTH: ---
READING TAKEN: At Completion
GR
A
P
H
I
C
L
O
G
BORING NO.
I-3
PO
C
K
E
T
P
E
N
.
(T
S
F
)
DRILLING DATE: 1/11/22
DRILLING METHOD: Hollow Stem Auger
LOGGED BY: Ryan Bremer
OR
G
A
N
I
C
CO
N
T
E
N
T
(
%
)
DR
Y
D
E
N
S
I
T
Y
(P
C
F
)
DE
P
T
H
(
F
E
E
T
)
MO
I
S
T
U
R
E
CO
N
T
E
N
T
(
%
)
JOB NO.: 22G101-2
PROJECT: Proposed Warehouse
LOCATION: Fontana, California
PLATE B-3
5
10
LABORATORY RESULTS
CO
M
M
E
N
T
S
TEST BORING LOG
PA
S
S
I
N
G
#2
0
0
S
I
E
V
E
(
%
)
BL
O
W
C
O
U
N
T
DESCRIPTION
SURFACE ELEVATION: MSL LI
Q
U
I
D
LI
M
I
T
PL
A
S
T
I
C
LI
M
I
T
SA
M
P
L
E
TB
L
2
2
G
1
0
1
-
2
.
G
P
J
S
O
C
A
L
G
E
O
.
G
D
T
2
/
2
1
/
2
2
INFILTRATION CALCULATIONS
Project Name
Project Location
Project Number
Engineer
Test Hole Radius 4 (in)
Test Depth 10.00 (ft)
Infiltration Test Hole I-1
Interval
Number Time Time Interval
(min)
Water Depth
(ft)
Change in
Water Level
(in)
Did 6 inches of water
seep away in less than
25 minutes?
Sandy Soils or Non-
Sandy Soils?
Initial 9:00 AM 7.20
Final 9:25 AM 9.24
Initial 9:25 AM 7.20
Final 9:50 AM 9.17
Interval
Number Time Time Interval
(min)
Water Depth
(ft)
Change in
Water Level
(ft)
Average Head Height
(ft)
Infiltration Rate Q
(in/hr)
Initial 9:50 AM 7.20
Final 10:00 AM 8.02
Initial 10:00 AM 7.20
Final 10:10 AM 7.99
Initial 10:10 AM 7.20
Final 10:20 AM 7.97
Initial 10:20 AM 7.20
Final 10:30 AM 7.96
Initial 10:30 AM 7.20
Final 10:40 AM 7.95
Initial 10:40 AM 7.20
Final 10:50 AM 7.95
Per County Standards, Infiltration Rate calculated as follows: Where:
Q = Infiltration Rate (in inches per hour)
∆H =Change in Height (Water Level) over the time interval
r = Test Hole (Borehole) Radius
∆t =Time Interval
Havg = Average Head Height over the time interval
6 10.00 0.75 2.43 3.47
Test Data
4 10.00 0.76 2.42 3.53
5 10.00 0.75 2.43 3.47
2 10.00 0.79 2.41 3.69
3 10.00 0.77 2.42 3.58
1 25.00 24.48 YES
2
Soil Criteria Test
SANDY SOILS25.00 23.64 YES
1 10.00 0.82 2.39 3.85
Proposed Warehouse
Fontana, California
22G101-2
Caleb Brackett
SANDY SOILS
)2Ht(r
H(60r)Q
avg
)2Ht(r
H(60r)Q
avg
INFILTRATION CALCULATIONS
Project Name
Project Location
Project Number
Engineer
Test Hole Radius 4 (in)
Test Depth 10.00 (ft)
Infiltration Test Hole I-2
Interval
Number Time Time Interval
(min)
Water Depth
(ft)
Change in
Water Level
(in)
Did 6 inches of water
seep away in less than
25 minutes?
Sandy Soils or Non-
Sandy Soils?
Initial 7:00 AM 7.20
Final 7:25 AM 10.20
Initial 7:25 AM 7.20
Final 7:50 AM 10.20
Interval
Number Time Time Interval
(min)
Water Depth
(ft)
Change in
Water Level
(ft)
Average Head Height
(ft)
Infiltration Rate Q
(in/hr)
Initial 7:50 AM 7.20
Final 8:00 AM 9.89
Initial 8:00 AM 7.20
Final 8:10 AM 9.85
Initial 8:10 AM 7.20
Final 8:20 AM 8.93
Initial 8:20 AM 7.20
Final 8:30 AM 9.81
Initial 8:30 AM 7.20
Final 8:40 AM 9.80
Initial 8:40 AM 7.20
Final 8:50 AM 9.80
Per County Standards, Infiltration Rate calculated as follows: Where:
Q = Infiltration Rate (in inches per hour)
∆H =Change in Height (Water Level) over the time interval
r = Test Hole (Borehole) Radius
∆t =Time Interval
Havg = Average Head Height over the time interval
Proposed Warehouse
Fontana, California
22G101-2
Caleb Brackett
Soil Criteria Test
1 25.00 36.00 YES SANDY SOILS
2 25.00 36.00 YES SANDY SOILS
Test Data
1 10.00 2.69 1.46 19.91
2 10.00 2.65 1.48 19.37
3 10.00 1.73 1.94 9.88
4 10.00 2.61 1.50 18.85
5 10.00 2.60 1.50 18.72
6 10.00 2.60 1.50 18.72
)2Ht(r
H(60r)Q
avg
)2Ht(r
H(60r)Q
avg
INFILTRATION CALCULATIONS
Project Name
Project Location
Project Number
Engineer
Test Hole Radius 4 (in)
Test Depth 10.00 (ft)
Infiltration Test Hole I-3
Interval
Number Time Time Interval
(min)
Water Depth
(ft)
Change in
Water Level
(in)
Did 6 inches of water
seep away in less than
25 minutes?
Sandy Soils or Non-
Sandy Soils?
Initial 10:00 AM 6.00
Final 10:25 AM 10.20
Initial 10:25 AM 6.00
Final 10:50 AM 10.20
Interval
Number Time Time Interval
(min)
Water Depth
(ft)
Change in
Water Level
(ft)
Average Head Height
(ft)
Infiltration Rate Q
(in/hr)
Initial 10:50 AM 6.00
Final 11:00 AM 9.56
Initial 11:00 AM 6.00
Final 11:10 AM 9.55
Initial 11:10 AM 6.00
Final 11:20 AM 9.53
Initial 11:20 AM 6.00
Final 11:30 AM 9.49
Initial 11:30 AM 6.00
Final 11:40 AM 9.49
Initial 11:40 AM 6.00
Final 11:50 AM 9.48
Per County Standards, Infiltration Rate calculated as follows: Where:
Q = Infiltration Rate (in inches per hour)
∆H =Change in Height (Water Level) over the time interval
r = Test Hole (Borehole) Radius
∆t =Time Interval
Havg = Average Head Height over the time interval
5 10.00 3.49 2.26 17.29
6 10.00 3.48 2.26 17.21
3 10.00 3.53 2.24 17.64
4 10.00 3.49 2.26 17.29
1 10.00 3.56 2.22 17.90
2 10.00 3.55 2.23 17.81
2 25.00 50.40 YES SANDY SOILS
Test Data
Proposed Warehouse
Fontana, California
22G101-2
Caleb Brackett
Soil Criteria Test
1 25.00 50.40 YES SANDY SOILS
)2Ht(r
H(60r)Q
avg
)2Ht(r
H(60r)Q
avg
Sample Description I-1 @ 8½ to 10'
Soil Classification Brown Silty fine Sand, little medium Sand
Proposed Warehouse
Fontana, California
Project No. 22G101-2
PLATE C- 1
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.0010.010.1110100
Percent
Passing
by
Weight
Grain Size in Millimeters
Grain Size Distribution
Sieve Analysis Hydrometer Analysis
US Standard Sieve Sizes
Coarse Gravel Fine Gravel Crs. Sand Med. Sand Fine Sand Fines (Silt and Clay)
2 1 3/4 1/2 3/8 1/4 #4 #8 #10 #16 #20 #30 #40 #50 #100 #200
Sample Description I-2 @ 8½ to 10'
Soil Classification Gray Gravelly fine to coarse Sand, trace Silt
Proposed Warehouse
Fontana, California
Project No. 22G101-2
PLATE C- 2
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.0010.010.1110100
Percent
Passing
by
Weight
Grain Size in Millimeters
Grain Size Distribution
Sieve Analysis Hydrometer Analysis
US Standard Sieve Sizes
Coarse Gravel Fine Gravel Crs. Sand Med. Sand Fine Sand Fines (Silt and Clay)
2 1 3/4 1/2 3/8 1/4 #4 #8 #10 #16 #20 #30 #40 #50 #100 #200
Sample Description I-3 @ 8½ to 10'
Soil Classification Brown Gravelly fine to coarse Sand, trace Silt
Proposed Warehouse
Fontana, California
Project No. 22G101-2
PLATE C- 3
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.0010.010.1110100
Percent
Passing
by
Weight
Grain Size in Millimeters
Grain Size Distribution
Sieve Analysis Hydrometer Analysis
US Standard Sieve Sizes
Coarse Gravel Fine Gravel Crs. Sand Med. Sand Fine Sand Fines (Silt and Clay)
2 1 3/4 1/2 3/8 1/4 #4 #8 #10 #16 #20 #30 #40 #50 #100 #200