The Quarry may be divided into four main features that surrounded a large flat zone, referred to as ‘the courtyard’, which was connected to a ‘corridor’ in the southwest that reached or provided access to a possible tomb.
In the southeastern section of the quarry, five steps of quarried stones occupied more than a quarter of the explored area (elevation 764.64–761.76 m; Fig. 2). The extracted stones of various sizes were smaller on the two upper steps, where limestone was hard and breakable. The limestone in the three lower steps was smoother and more even and some of the largest stones were found fully dressed and still in situ, separated by deep severance channels and ready for extraction (Fig. 3).
In the northeastern section of the quarry, only the edges of a step with traces of stone extraction were uncovered, south and west of an unexcavated fill ramp, kept to allow access to the excavated area from the Nisan Beck street (elevation 762.24–761.76 m;  Fig. 4).
In the northwestern section and west of the ramp, part of three steps of quarried stones of uneven sizes, due to the different qualities of bedrock, were uncovered (763.49–761.84 m; see Fig. 4). On the upper step was a structure that consisted of a quarried quadrangular space (depth 0.6 m), partly hidden below the ramp and the limit of the excavation, whose function could not be identified (Fig. 5).
The highest remains of the quarry were uncovered in the southwestern section, where traces of six rather high steps of removed stones, with two large ones still in situ (height c. 4 m; 765.84–761.85 m; Fig. 6) were preserved.
The courtyard and the corridor covered over one third of the explored quarry.
The courtyard occupied the whole center (c. 5.0 × 5.7 m; elevation 761.76 m; Fig. 7), where a small squarish zone of the fill was not excavated due to lack of time. It was covered with hardened limestone chips and powder resulting from the quarrying activities. Although the surface was neatly flattened, perhaps as preparation for the quarrying of a lower step, white traces of severance channels for the separation of stone rows were still visible, showing regular sizes of the stones. To the west, close to the boundary of the excavated area, some shallow severance channels indicated that quarrying below the level of the courtyard had already begun (Fig. 8).
West of the southeastern steps of the quarry, a corridor (c. 3.6 × 5.7 m) prolonged the courtyard to the south, toward the section in the fill between the southeastern and southwestern sections of the quarry (see Fig. 6).
The fill consisted of a lower high layer of fieldstones mixed with some earth that was probably deposited in two conical piles (height 1.8 m) and an upper layer of terra rossa (thickness 0.6 m). Since the whole Sanhedriya neighborhood is known to be a necropolis that took advantage of the space created by the quarry, such a possibility was considered for this specific location, although the fill was not investigated. In any event, it is possible that the tomb, if indeed it was one, was situated below the plot to the south of the excavated area. Contrary to what was exposed below a nearby house (HA-ESI 119), well-preserved vessels typical of a funerary context were not found close to the section. In the middle of the corridor, two very big stones appeared to be resting on a layer of earth (thickness c. 0.2 m), indicating that they were put there after the abandonment.
The Quarried Stones and their variety of types and sizes, as well as the extent of the excavation, allow some remarks on the quarrying methods. The fully quarried non-extracted stones showed that the severance channels were generally 0.10–0.13 m wide, with a few down to 0.07–0.09 m and some up to 0.14–0.17 m, especially those between rows. A wedge-shaped groove (height c. 0.10–0.12 m) was carved at the bottom of one long face of each stone to facilitate the extraction (see Fig. 3). Some of the stones were broken when the channels were carved and the bottom face of a few stones was unevenly pulled out (see Fig. 2).
The extraction was organized in rows of stones of given sizes, in relatively small groups of stones, which were bigger in the deeper steps where bedrock quality was more homogenous. This is especially the case in the courtyard where traces of four rows of stones, oriented east–west, were identified (see Fig. 7). The measurements of the stones (length 1.3–1.5 m, width 0.85 m) could also be restored on part of the step above, to the south. The stones of an east–west oriented row to the south of the corridor were longer and had various widths (length 1.65–1.70 m, width 0.9–1.5 m). Out of 78 measured stones, 78% were 1.0–1.7 m long, 46% were over 0.8 m wide and only 9% were over 1 m wide. It can be concluded that this quarry was intended for the extraction of relatively large stones.
The analysis of the stone measurements did not draw clear-cut conclusions as the metric standard that may have been used to measure the stones prior to quarrying. Most of the measures may be related to a cubit of c. 0.425 m, although this is shorter than any identified contemporary one, especially the Roman cubit of c. 0.4436 m, which is the shortest of them all. Beside the need for specific measures of stones that conformed to the courses of a given wall, the length of a step and the number of stones that could be cut was also determined by the number of previously extracted stones and the quality of bedrock (cf. Figs. 1 and 7).