The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSDP 03-01; KELLY / JRM OFFICE BUILDING; SOIL INVESTIGATION AND GEOLOGIC RECONNAISSANCE; 2000-10-27I ' ' ~ ~ i I I I I· I I· I· I· .,. I· I· 1·. I -I ·I I· I -- REPORT OF SOIL INVESTIGATION AND GEOLOGIC RECONNAISSANCE Proposed JRM/Kelly Commercial Property Southeast of Palomar Airport Road and Aviara Parkway Intersection Carlsbad, California JOB NO. 00-7866 27 October 2000 Prepared for: Mr. James·McCann JRM REAL ESTA TE I- 1- ,,_ I I- I I- 1-,- 1 I I 27 October 2000 Mr. James Mccann J RM REAL ESTA TE 2629 Calibri Lane Carlsbad, CA 92009 6EOTECHNICAL EXPLORh, ION, INC. SOIL & FOUNDATION ENGINEERING • GR-OUNDWATER HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MANAGEMENT • ENGINEERING GEOLOGY Job No. 00-7866 Subject: Report of Soil Investigation and Geologic Reconnaissance JRM/Kelly Commercial Property Southeast of Palomar Airport Road and Aviara Parkway Intersection Carlsbad, California Dear Mr. Mccann: In accordance with your request, Geotechnica/ Exploration, Inc. has performed an investigation of the soil and geologic conditions at the location of the subject site. The field work was performed on September 20, 2000. Presently, the site consists of an undeveloped, relatively level sheet-graded pad. This pad is generally rectangular in shape, with dimensions of 505 feet by 545 feet. The site is bordered approximately to the north by Palomar Airport Road, to the south by Encinas Creek, to the east by a similar undeveloped sheet-graded pad, and to the west by Aviara Parkway. Based on our conversations with you and our review of the conceptual development plan, Scheme 3, by Smith Consulting Architects, we understand that the proposed improvements will include a three-story, 100,000-square-foot building with below grade parking. The improvements will include associated parking and landscape areas. The proposed building will be situated along the approximate northern one third of the property. We anticipate the structure will utilize either CMU or poured-in-place concrete basement walls and standard building materials for the above-grade portions of the structure. The foundation will utilize either continuous perimeter and isolated spread footings or a mat-type foundation. ---------------------------------·- The purpose of our investigation was to evaluate the soil conditions in the proposed building and parking areas, recommend any necessary site preparation procedures, assess the engineering properties of the on-site soils, and to provide foundation related design recommendations. 2 7420 TRADE STREET• SAN DIEGO. CA 92121 • (858) 549-7222 • FAX: (858) 549-1604 • E-MAIL: geoteck@pacbell~net I I I- 1- ·I, I I I· I I'- I I I t,: I I I I I 2 Our investigation revealed that the majority of the site is underlain by approximately 12 to 14 feet of fill underlain by alluvium, which is, in turn, underlain by bedrock materials of the Eocene-age Del Mar/Friars Formation at depth. Materials within the upper 2 to 2½ feet of the fill were found to be compressible and desiccated and will require removal and recompaction prior to construction of improvements. The fill soils underlying this removal and recompaction layer are considered competent and suitable for the intended construction. The underlying alluvium, however, is potentially compressible. Based on the compressibility, options are available for the structure and foundation system such that excessive total and differential settlements do not result in unacceptable differential settlement. These options include (1) deleting the below-grade parking structure; (2) designing the structure to accommodate the anticipated movement; (3) design and construction of a mat slab/foundation system; ( 4) removal and recompaction of alluvial soils to a specified depth below the proposed structure; and (5) using drilled piers supporting structural basement slab on-grade beams (it is our understanding that this last option is not being considered at this time). In our opinion, if the conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are implemented during site preparation, the site will be suited for the proposed additions and improvements. This opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. Should you have any questions concerning the following report, please do not hesitate to contact us. Reference to our Job No. 00-7866 will expedite to your inquiries. Respectfully submitted, ~IC~L EXPLORATION, INC. • t~ ~ • &,~2./1--= ~rros,P.E. R.C.E. 34422/G.E. 2007 Senior Geotechnical Engineer JKH/JAC/LDR/pj I I I· ,, I I I I· I; I· . I I- I· I· I, I I· I I TABLE OF CONTENTS I. SCOPE OF WORK II. SITE DESCRIPTION III. FIELD INVESTIGATION IV. SOIL AND GENERAL GEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION V. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS VI GROUNDWATER VII. LABORATORY TESTS AND SOIL INFORMATION VIII. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS IX. GRADING NOTES x . LIMITATIONS FIGURES Ia. Site Map Plot Plan Boring Logs Laboratory Test Results Ib. rra-e. IIIa-b. IV. V. Foundation Requirements Near Slopes Retaining Wall Subdrain Detail APPENDICES A. Unified Soil Classification System B. General Earthwork Specifications _c Ea_w.lt Tables . 4 PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 11 13 15 29 31 I I I· 1: I I· ,. I· 1.; I· I· I· I I· I· I I· I I REPORT OF SOIL INVESTIGATION AND GEOLOGIC RECONNAISSANCE ]RM/Kelly Commercial Property Southeast of Palomar Airport Road and Aviara Parkway Intersection Carlsbad, California JOB NO. 00-7866 The following report presents the findings and recommendations of Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. for the subject project. I. SCOPE OF WORK It is our understanding, based on communications with you, that the northern portion of the site is intended for the construction of a new three-story, 100,000- square-foot structure over a basement-level parking garage and associated improvements. With the above in mind, the Scope of Work is briefly outlined as follows: 1. Identify and classify the surface and subsurface soils in the area of the proposed construction, in conformance with the Unified Soil Classification System (refer to Appendix A). 2. Make note of any faults or significant geologic features that may affect the development of the site. 3. Recommend site preparation procedures. 4. Recommend the allowable bearing capacity for the on-site soils. 5. Evaluate the settlement potential of the bearing soils under the proposed structural loads. I· ·I· I! 1.: I I· I· I: ,, I· I I; I I· I· I 1, I I Proposed JRM/Kelly Commercial Property Carlsbad, California Job No. 00-7866 Page 2 6. Recommend preliminary foundation design information and provide active, at rest, and passive earth pressures to be utilized in design of any proposed retaining walls and foundation structures. II. SITE DESCRIPTION The subject site is comprised of portions of Parcels C, D and G of PM 2993, in the City of Carlsbad, California. The property is generally rectangular in shape, with dimensions of 545 feet by 505 feet. The approximate northern 375 feet of the site is a relatively flat sheet-graded pad. The southern, approximate 170 feet of the property consists of the alignment of the east to west flowing Encinas Creek. The transition from these two portions of the property is accomplished by an approximately 7-foot-high, 2.0: 1.0 (horizontal to vertical) slope. The site is bordered to the north and west by Palomar Airport Road and Aviara Parkway, respectively, to the east by similar undeveloped property, and to the south by Encinas Creek. The only constructed improvement on the site consists of a desilting basin with a vertical stand pipe at the west central portion of the pad. Vegetation on the site consists of native weeds and grasses on the pad, and riparian type species in the creek alignment. Survey information concerning actual elevations across the site was not available at the time of our investigation. Based on our conversations with you and our review of the conceptual development plan, Scheme 3, by Smith Consulting Architects, we understand that the proposed Jm.p_r:.o:-Le.m_eJJts_wjjJ_io_c.ru_d_e _§ three-story_, 100,000-square-foot building with below- --------·------------. grade parking. The improvements will include associated parking and landscape areas. The proposed building will be situated along the approximate northern one third of the property. I I ,, I· I I· I I· I· I· I· . I· I· I· I· I I· ,, I Proposed JRM/Kelly Commercial Property Carlsbad, California Job No. 00-7866 Page 3 We anticipate the structure will utilize either CMU or poured-in-place concrete basement walls and standard building materials for the above-grade portions of the structure. The foundation will utilize either continuous perimeter and isolated spread footings or a mat slab/foundation system. If drilled piers were considered as an alternate foundation system, our firm may provide detailed recommendations for their design. III. FIELD INVESTIGATION Five small-diameter auger borings were placed on the site, two in the area of the new building, two in the parking areas and one at the toe of the 7-foot-high slope to the south (see Figure No. Ib, Boring Location Map). The borings were logged by our field representative, and samples were taken of the predominant soils throughout the field operation. Boring logs have been prepared on the basis of our observations and the results have been summarized on Figure No. II. The predominant soils have been classified in conformance with the Unified Soil Classification System (refer to Appendix A) . In-place samples were obtained by driving a 3-inch outside-diameter (O.D.) by 2- 3/8-inch inside-diameter (I.D.) split-tube sampler a distance of 12 inches. Also, the Standard Penetration Test was performed by using a 140-pound weight falling 30 inches to drive a 2-inch O.D. by 1-3/8-inch I.D. sampler tube a distance of 12 inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler the given distance was recorded _fQ_r _1!_Se in density determination. The following chart provides an in-house ----------------- correlation between the number of blows and the relative density of the soil for the Standard Penetration Test and the 3-inch sampler. I I I I; I I I- I· I- 1- ·I· ,, I: I- 1- 1. I I I Proposed JRM/Kelly Commercial Property Carlsbad, California Soil Density 2-inch O.D. Designation Sampler · Blows/Foot Sand and Silt Very loose 0-4 Loose 5-10 Medium 11-30 Dense 31-50 Very Dense Over 50 Clay Very Soft 0-2 Soft 3-4 Firm 5-8 Stiff 9-15 Very Stiff 16-30 Hard 31-60 Very Hard Over 60 Job No. 00-7866 Page 4 3-inch O.D. Sampler Blows/Foot 0-7 8-20 21-53 54-98 Over 98 0-2 3-4 5-9 10-18 19-45 46-90 Over 90 IV. SOIL AND GENERAL GEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION Our investigation and review of pertinent geologic maps and reports indicate that the site is underlain by moderately dense, silty and clayey sand fill underlain by medium stiff, silty sandy clay alluvium which is, in turn, underlain by very dense formational materials of the Eocene-age Del Mar/Friars Formation. More specifically, along the upper portions of the site or the proposed building pad and parking area, the site is underlain by 12 to 14 feet of fill over approximately 43 to 45 feet of alluvium, underlain by the Del Mar/Friars Formation at depth. To the south of the pad and north of the banks of the Encinas Creek, the site is underlain by approximately 7 feet of fill underlain by alluvium. Fill Soils: The fi!l -~oils _E:_nc~~~e~~d consist of two p~i~a~y _ soil ~ypes _that ~re interbedded across the site. First, a light gray, damp, moderately dense silty sand material exists. This soil type appears to have been derived from the sandy portion of the formation material and • appears to have a very low to low expansion I I 1: 1- -1 I I- I- I; I I· ,,. I I· I I I I· I Proposed JRM/Kelly Commercial Property Carlsbad, California Job No. 00-7866 Page 5 potential. The other predominant fill soil type consists of a medium brown, damp, medium dense, clayey silty sand. This material has a low expansion potential. A third, less predominant material was encountered at the contact between the fill and alluvium. What appears to be an old pavement section was encountered and consists of a relatively thin lift of asphalt concrete and fine road base material. This condition was encountered in borings 1 through 4. In general, the fill has good load bearing characteristics with the exception of the upper 2 to 2½ feet, which will require reprocessing. Alluvium (Qal) Holocene-age alluvium was encountered under the fill at the site. The alluvium consists of a moderately stiff, dark gray-brown, silty to slightly sandy clay. Laboratory tests indicate that, to a depth of 18 feet below present grade, the ' alluvium is compressible and special design or earthwork procedures will be necessary. Del Mar/Friars Formation (undifferentiated -Td/Tf): Most of the site is mapped as being underlain by the Eocene-age Del Mar/Friars Formation (Eisenberg, 1983). At the site, we found this formation to be comprised by several lithologic (material type) units. Our borings conducted at the site revealed the Del Mar/Friars Formation to be a primarily massive, pale to light gray, silty sandstones to sandy claystones that.are dense and moderately well indurated. V. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS A. Faulting and Seismicity In California, major earthquakes can generally be correlated with movement on active faults. As defined by the California Division of Mines and Geology (Hart, E.W., 1980), an 11 active11 fault is one that has had ground surface displacement I I: I· I· I I I- I· ' ,~ I· ,, I· I· I· I I I- I I- Proposed JRM/Kelly Commercial Property Carlsbad, California Job No. 00-7866 Page 6 within Holocene time (about the last 11,000 years). Additionally, faults along which major historical earthquakes have occurred (about the last 210 years in California) are also considered to be active (Association of Engineering Geologist, 1973). The California Division of Mines and Geology defines a "potentially active" fault as one that has had ground surface displacement during Quaternary time, that is during the past 11,000 to 1.6 million years (Hart, E.W., 1980). For construction projects in California, seismologists and earthquake engineers estimate earthquake magnitudes for "upper bound earthquake" and "maximum probable earthquake" to ascertain the seismic risk involved with different faults. Greensfelder (1974) defines these as follows: The upper bound earthquake is "the maximum earthquake that appears to be reasonably capable of occurring under the condition of the present known geologic framework." While the event is highly unlikely, it is still a believable event that could occur. The maximum probable earthquake is "the maximum earthquake that appears to be reasonably expectable within a 100-year period." This is also regarded as the maximum "design" earthquake. An estimation of the peak ground acceleration and the repeatable high ground acceleration (RHGA) likely to occur at the project site by the known significant local and regional faults within 100 miles of the site is included in Tables 1 and 2 (see Appendix C). Also, a listing of the known historic seismic events that have occurred within 100 miles of the· site at a magnitude of 5.0 or greater since the year 1800, and the probability of exceeding the experienced ground accelerations in the future based upor-1 the historical record, is provided in Table 3 (see Appendix C). I .I· I; 1' I I· I 1- . 1: I· I- I· 1: I I I I- I I Proposed JRM/Kelly Commercial Property Carlsbad, California Local Faults Job No. 00-7866 Page 7 Reference to a geologic map for the area (Eisenberg, 1983) indicates the presence of a northeast-trending normal fault whose approximate projection passes just east of the site. The published projection suggests that the fault displaces the Eocene age bedrock but not the Pleistocene-age terrace materials and Holocene-age alluvium in this area. We investigated this feature on a project south of the subject site. The exploratory trenches revealed several breaks within the Del Mar/Friars and Scripps Formations, bu~ no trace of the fault could be observed in the younger terrace deposits and no displacement of the Holocene-age sediments was observed. The general trend of the fault is Nl0 E, dipping approximately 70 degrees east. The observed faulting appeared to be minor within the Eocene-age formation (intraformational) with some additional extensive faulting/breakage within the lower stratagraphic units. However, we did not observe any displacement of the topsoil or younger formational materials or geomorphic expression that would indicate significant recent faulting on the site. It is our opinion that a known "active" fault presents the greatest seismic risk to the subject site during the lifetime of the proposed development. To date, the nearest known "active" faults to the subject site are the northwest-trending Rose Canyon Fault, Coronado Bank Fault and the Elsinore Fault. Rose Canyon Fault: The Rose Canyon Fault Zone, located less than 5 miles west of the _subject site, is mapped trending north-south from Oceanside to downtown San ----·------· --------------------·--------- Diego, from where it appears to head southward into San Diego Bay, through Coronado and offshore. The Rose Canyon Fault Zone is considered to be a complex zone of onshore and offshore, en echelon strike slip, oblique reverse, and oblique I 1- , 1: I· I I- I I· I· -1· I I· I I- I I I I I Proposed JRM/Kelly Commercial Property Carlsbad, California Job No. 00-7866 Page 8 normal faults. The Rose Canyon Fault is considered to be capable of causing a 6.9- magnitude earthquake and considered microseismically active, although no significant recent earthquake is known to have occurred on the fault. Investigative work on faults (believed to be part of the Rose Canyon Fault Zone) at the Police Administration and Technical Center in downtown San Diego and at the SDG&E facility in Rose Canyon, has encountered offset Holocene (geologically recent) sediments. These findings have been accepted as confirmed Holocene displacement on the Rose Canyon Fault and this previously classified "potentially active1' fault has now been upgraded to an "active" fault as of November 1991 (California Division of Mines and Geology --Fault Rupture Hazard Zones, 1994 ). Coronado Bank Fault: The Coronado Bank Fault is located approximately 21 miles southwest of the site. Evidence for this fault is based upon geophysical data (acoustic profiles) and the general alignment of epicenters of recorded seismic activity (Greene, 1979). An earthquake of 5.3 magnitude, recorded July 13, 1986, is known to have been centered on the fault or within the Coronado Bank Fault Zone. Although this fault is considered active, due to the seismicity within the fault zone, it is significantly less active seismically than the Elsinore Fault (Hileman, 1973). It is postulated that the Coronado Bank Fault is capable of generating a 7.0- magnitude earthquake and is of great interest due to its close proximity to the g·reater San Diego metropolitan area. Regional Faults Elsinore Fault: The Elsinore Fault is located approximately 24 miles northeast of the _sit~_. The Elsinor~ _E_ault extends approximately 200km (125 miles) from the ------~ ---------· --.. ---------- Mexican border to the northern end of the Santa Ana Mountains. The Elsinore Fault zone is a 1-to 4-mile-wide, northwest-southeast-trending zone of discontinuous and en echelon faults extending through portions of Orange, Riverside, San Diego, I I I I I I I I I I I I I- 1·- 1 I I- I I Proposed JRM/Kelly Commercial Property Carlsbad, California Job No. 00-7866 Page 9 and Imperial Counties. Individual faults within the Elsinore Fault Zone range from less than 1 miles to 16 miles in length. The trend, length and geomorphic expression of the Elsinore Fault Zone identified it as being a part of the highly active San Andreas Fault system. Like the other faults in the San Andreas system, the Elsinore Fault is a transverse fault showing predominantly right-lateral movement. According to Hart, et al. (1979), this movement averages less than 1 centimeter per year. Along most of its length, the Elsinore Fault Zone is marked by a bold topographic expression consisting of linearly aligned ridges, swales and hallows. Faulted Holocene alluvial deposits (believed to be less than 11,000 years old) found along several segments of the fault zone suggest that at least part of the zone is currently active. Although the Elsinore Fault Zone belongs to the San Andreas set of active, northwest-trending, right-slip faults in the southern California area (Crowell, 1962), it has not been the site of a major earthquake in historic time, other than a 6.0- magnitude quake near the town of Elsinore in 1910 (Richter, 1958; Toppozada and Parke, 1982). However, based on length and evidence of late-Pleistocene or Holocene displacement, Greensfelder (1974) has estimated that the Elsinore Fault Zone is reasonably capable of generating an earthquake with a magnitude as large as 7 .5. Recent ·study and logging of exposures in trenches in Glen Ivy Marsh across the Glen Ivy North Fault (a strand of the Elsinore Fault Zone between Corona and Lake Elsinore), suggest a maximum earthquake recurrence interval of 300 years, and when combined with previous estimates of the long-term horizontal slip rate of 0.8 to 7.0 mm/year, suggest typical earthquake magnitudes of 6 to 7 (Rockwell, 1_98~J. I I I I I I I I- 1- ,1. I I I- I I I I I I Proposed JRM/Kelly Commercial Property Carlsbad, California B. Other Geologic Hazards Job No. 00-7866 Page 10 Ground Rupture: Ground rupture is characterized by bedrock slippage along an established fault and may result in displacement of the ground surface. For ground rupture to occur along a fault, an earthquake usually exceeds magnitude 5.0. If a 5.0-magnitude earthquake were to take place on a local fault, an estimated surface rupture length 1 mile long could be expected (Greensfelder, 1974). Our reconnaissance indicates that the subject site is not directly on a known fault trace and, therefore, the risk of ground rupture is remote. Ground Shaking: Structural damage caused by seismically induced ground shaking is a detrimental effect directly related to faulting and earthquake activity. Ground shaking is considered to be the greatest seismic hazard in San Diego County. The intensity of ground shaking is dependent on the magnitude of the earthquake, the distance from the earthquake, and local seismic condition. Earthquakes of magnitude 5.0 Richter scale or greater are generally associated with significant damage. It is our opinion that the most serious damage to the site would be caused by a large earthquake originating on a nearby strand of the Rose Canyon Fault Zone. Although the chance of such an event is remote, it could occur within the useful life of the structure. The anticipated ground accelerations at the site from earthquakes on faults within 100 miles of the site are provfded in Tables 1 and 2, Appendix C. Landslides: According to our geologic investigation and a review of the geologic map (Eisenberg, 1983) and aerial photographs (4-11-53, AXN-SM-99 and 100), theLe are no known_or suspected ancient landslides located on the site. ----------------- Liquefaction: The liquefaction of saturated sands during earthquakes can be a major cause of damage to buildings. Liquefaction is the process in which soils are I I ,, I· I I· I· I- I· I· I I· I· I I I I I I Proposed JRM/Kelly Commercial Property Carlsbad, California Job No. 00-7866 Page 11 transformed into a dense fluid which will flow as a liquid when unconfined. It occurs principally in loose, saturated sands and silts when they are shaken by an earthquake of sufficient magnitude. On this site, the risk of liquefaction of foundation material due to seismic shaking is considered to be remote due to the stiff nature of the underlying alluvium and high clay content of the sediment. Furthermore, the anticipated differential acceleration anticipated at the site is relatively low to cause liquefaction. Summary: It is our opinion, based upon a review of the available maps and our site investigation, that the site is underlain by relatively stable fill soils, alluvium and formational materials and appears suited for the proposed development. No significant geologic hazards are known to exist on the site. No loss of soil strength or instability of the soils is anticipated due to seismic shaking at the site. VI. GROUNDWATER Free groundwater was encountered during our field investigation at a depth of 25 feet below grade. We would expect this water condition at 25 feet to maintain a relatively moisture soil condition below the proposed below-grade parking structure. If moisture-related effects (such as efflorescence or high vapor emissions in this area) are not acceptable, measures should be taken to reduce these issues. Remedial measures may include anti-vapor membranes below the slab on-grade and/or utilizing a concrete mix having a maximum water-to-cement ratio of 0.45. Additionally, a perched water condition may develop at the fill/alluvium contact once ----------~-----------·--------------------- irrigation of the site begins or heavy precipitation occurs. Design considerations should be made to alleviate this situation. Once final floor elevations and finish- I I I· I· I I· I I· I I· I I· I· I· I I I I I Proposed JRM/Kelly Commercial Property Carlsbad, California Job No. 00-7866 Page 12 grade elevations are determined, the boring logs should be referenced in evaluating the location of the fill/alluvial contact and potential perched water zone. Subsurface drainage with a properly designed and constructed french drain system will be required along with continuous back drainage behind the below-grade garage/basement walls. Furthermore, the basement/garage should be provided with the proper cross-ventilation to help reduce the potential for moisture-related problems as previously stated. Basement-level garage slabs shall also be properly protected by proper sealing and waterproofing to help reduce potential for moisture intrusion. It should also be kept in mind that any required grading operations may change surface drainage patterns and/or reduce permeabilities due to the densification of compacted soils. Such changes of surface and subsurface hydrologic conditions, plus irrigation of landscaping or significant increases in rainfall, may result in the appearance of surface or near-surface water at locations where none existed previously. It must be understood that unless discovered during initial site exploration or encountered during site grading operations, it is extremely difficult to predict if or where perched or true groundwater conditions may appear in the future. When site fill or formational soils are fine-grained and of low permeability, water problems may not become apparent for extended periods of time. Whereas water conditions encountered during grading operations should be evaluated and remedied by the project civil and geotechnical consultants, the _Rroject developer __§_nd eventual homeowners must realize that post-construction appearances of groundwater may have to be dealt with on a site-specific basis. I I· I· I· 1- I - I I I· I Proposed JRM/Kelly Commercial Property Carlsbad, California Job No. 00-7866 Page 13 VII. LABORATORY TESTS AND SOIL INFORMATION Laboratory tests were performed on the disturbed and relatively undisturbed soil samples in order to evaluate their physical and mechanical properties and their ability to support the proposed building. The following tests were conducted on the sampled soils: 1. Moisture Content (ASTM D2216-92) 2. Standard Penetration Test and Split Barrel Sampling (ASTM D1586-92 and D1587-84) 3. Expansion Test (UBC Test Method 29-2) 4. Consolidation Test (ASTM D2435-90) 5. Water Soluble Sulfate (CA Test 417) The moisture content of a soil sample is a measure of the weight of water, expressed as a percentage of the dry weight of the sample. The relationship between the moisture and density of remolded soil samples gives qualitative information regarding the soil strength characteristics and compaction soil conditions to be anticipated during any future grading operation. The expansion potential of the on-site soils was determined utilizing the Uniform Building Code Test Method for Expansive Soils (UBC Standard No. 29-2). In accordance with the UBC (Table 18-1-B), expansive soils are classified as follows: Oto 20 51 to 90 91 to 130 Above 130 Potential Expansion Very low -Low M_edium High Very high I I 1: ,~ I I I I I· I· I I I· I· I· I I· I- I; Proposed ]RM/Kelly Commercial Property Carlsbad, California Job No. 00-7866 Page 14 According to the UBC Test Method for Expansive Soils, the near-grade sampled fill soils (0 to 4 feet in boring B-1 and 1 to 4 feet in boring B-2) on the site have a low expansion potential, with a maximum measured expansion indices of 20 and 14, respectively. The alluvial soils appear to have a moderate to high expansion potential. Compression tests were performed on relatively undisturbed samples in order to evaluate the soil strength and support capacity of the proposed structure. The specimens were subjected to potential overburden loads and the resulting compressions noted. The compression test aids in estimating settlement magnitudes of the fill materials. The following table illustrates the compression potential of the fill tested. Consolidation tests were also performed on the relatively undisturbed alluvial soils to evaluate the potential settlement. The specimens were subjected to increased loads and displacements were noted. Figure Nos. IIIa and IIIb provide a plot of the results obtained. Based on the test performed, the fill materials have a low consolidation potential, and the alluvium has a moderate consolidation potential in the zone of influence. COMPRESSION POTENTIAL Sample# Depth % Compression B-1 at 8' 0.05% B-2 at 2' 0.37% B-2 at 9½' 1.34% B-4 at 2' 1.48% B-4 at 8' 0.36% Based on an evaluation of the surface soils' water soluble sulfate content, the on-. site soils are considered to be low in potential for deterioration of Portland cement concrete due to sulfate attack. The contents of water soluble sulfates is considered negligible. Either Cement Type I or II may be used in the concrete. I I 1: ,_. I I- I I I: I I I· I· I· I· 1-- I I I Proposed JRM/Kelly Commercial Property Carlsbad, California Job No. 00-7866 Page 15 Based on laboratory test data, our observations of the primary soil types on the project, and our previous experience with laboratory testing of similar soils, our Geotechnical Engineer had assigned conservative values for friction angle, coefficient of friction, and cohesion to those soils which will have significant lateral support or bearing functions on the project. VIII. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The following conclusions and recommendations are based upon the practical field investigation conducted by our firm, and resulting laboratory tests, in conjunction with our knowledge and experience with the soils in the Carlsbad area of the County of San Diego. Our investigation revealed that the building site is underlain by moderately dense fill materials underlain by moderately stiff alluvial soils that are, in turn, underlain by bedrock materials of the Del Mar/Friars Formation. In their present condition, the fill materials will not provide a stable base for the proposed structure and improve ments from the surface to a depth of 2 to 2½ feet ( due to weathering). It is our understanding that a basement-level parking garage is proposed under the new building, and much of the linear-surface loose soils are expected to be removed during the excavation process in the building area. The removal and recompaction depth may be deeper in the south half of the project ( outside the limits of the parking garage). Removal depths will vary in the area of the existing desilting basin at the approximate central west portion of the site. As such, we recommended that the loose soils be removed and recompacted as part of site preparation based on _field observations at the time of grading. -~~r _!_~e exterior _2~rking -~re~~, the anticipated depth of rework is 2 to 2½ feet. I I I: I I I· I I I- I I· 1: 11 I· I I· I I I Proposed JRM/Kelly Commercial Property Carlsbad, California Job No. 00-7866 Page 16 As previously stated, project structural plans were not available at the preparation of this report. Therefore, finish floor elevations for the basement and proposed foundation type(s) and locations are not presently known. Based on our conversation with Mr. Mccann, we understand that a below-grade parking garage will be constructed as part of the development. Based on our experience, we anticipate that the garage will extend approximately 10 to 12 feet below present grade. At this depth, the resulting foundation loads will directly load the compressible alluvium that extends to approximately 18 feet below existing grade and may encounter the pavement section that exists below grade. If the pavement is not removed as part of the basement excavation, it shall be removed below the proposed basement area and replaced with compacted fill. To reduce the potential for excessive movement resulting from compression of the underlying alluvium, • design considerations must be made. Presented herein are possible options. These options are preliminary and must be re-evaluated and finalized once the final project plans are completed. These options consist of the following: Eliminate or significantly raise the below-grade parking garage. Elimination of the garage raises the elevation of the foundation loads to near grade. Based on the fill thickness (12 to 14 feet), the resulting footing pressures are considerably reduced at the elevation of the compressible alluvium. If below-grade parking structure is required, the structural and architectural design must consider the resulting differential and total settlements. In estimating these values, the following assumptions are made: allowable bearing is 2000 psf; maximum width of continuous perimeter footings is 2 le_~t; maximum width of isolated interior _pier footings __ is 8 fe~_t. Based on these values, the resulting differential settlement between continuous and isolated foundation elements is anticipated to be I I I I· I I I· I I· I· I· I· I· I· I -I I I I Proposed JRM/Kelly Commercial Property Carlsbad, California Job No. 00-7866 Page 17 A. 1. 2. approximately 1.3 inches. Isolated footings would undergo approximately 1.8 inches of total settlement and continuous footings would undergo 0.5- inch of total settlement. Spans and architectural finishes must consider these projected movements. For construction of a below-grade parking structure, a structural mat-type foundation system can be designed utilizing an allowable (net) bearing capacity of 1,200 psf. Resulting total (not exceeding 1 inch) and differential movements will be reduced considerably. For construction of a below-grade parking structure with a conventional foundation, removal and recompaction of the compressible alluvium can be performed. We anticipate the removal depth to extend to approximately 18 feet below existing grade. The resulting total (not exceeding 1 inch) and differential movements will be reduced considerably. Preparation of Soils for Site Development Existing vegetation observed on the site must be removed prior to the preparation of the building pad and/or areas to receive structural improvements. In order to provide a uniform, firm soils base for the proposed improvements such as hardscape driveways and parking areas, the existing loose fill across the site shall be excavated to expose firm fill soils, or as per the indications of our field representative. This depth is expected to be approximately 2 to 2½ --------------------------· ---------------------~ ---- feet across the site. The excavated loose fill soils shall be cleaned of any debris and deleterious materials, watered to approximately optimum I I 1: ] Ii I 1, I· I· 1: 1-- 1 I· I I· I· I I I I Proposed JRM/Kelly Commercial Property Carlsbad, California Job No. 00-7866 Page 18 moisture content and compacted to at least 90 percent of Maximum Dry Density, in accordance with the latest revision of ASTM D1557. If the removal and recompaction option is elected for the below-grade parking structure, the removal should extend down to 18 feet below present grade and extend laterally a distance of at least 10 feet beyond the perimeter of the basement if temporary steep slopes are chosen, and at least 5 feet if shoring is used. Recompacted fill soils shall be watered to optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 90 percent of Maximum Dry Density in accordance with ASTM D1557. Areas exposing any clayey soils shall be scarified, moisture conditioned to at least 5 percent above optimum moisture content, and be compacted to between 88 and 92 percent. Any clayey fill soils shall be similarly compacted. Very low to low expansive soils shall be compacted to at least 90 percent of maximum dry density and contain a moisture content at least equal to the optimum. Those areas supporting proposed patios, walkways, driveways and parking areas should be prepared in a like manner. 3. No uncontrolled fill soils shall remain on the site after completion of any future site work. In the event that temporary ramps or pads are constructed of uncontrolled fill soils, the loose fill soils shall be removed and/or recompacted prior to completion of the grading operation. 4. Any buried objects or abandoned utility lines, etc., which might be discovered in the construction areas, shall be removed and the excavation properly backfilled with approved on-site ·or imported fill soils and compacted to at I I I I I I I I I I I- 1- 1: I I I I I· I Proposed JRM/Kelly Commercial Property Carlsbad, California Job No. 00-7866 Page 19 least 90 percent of Maximum Dry Density. The existing desilting basin has a standpipe that will require abandonment. 5. Any backfill soils placed in utility trenches or behind retaining walls that support structures and other improvements (such as patios, sidewalks1 driveways, pavements1 etc.) shall be compacted to at least 90 percent of Maximum Dry Density. 6. Pavement design will be based on anticipated traffic loading conditions and soil types utilized at final grades. Actual design should be performed once remedial grading is performed. For planning purposes1 we anticipate a section consisting of 4 inches of asphaltic concrete over 6 inches of aggregate base. B. Design Parameters for Foundation and Retaining Walls 7. The recommended basic allowable soil bearing capacity for design of continuous and isolated foundations for the proposed structure is 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) and net ( excluding soil weight being removed) 1,200 psf for a structural mat-type foundation on properly compacted fill or alluvial materials. The modulus of subgrade reaction for a settlement not to exceed 1 inch is 36 ksf. These load-bearing values may be utilized in the design of continuous foundations and spread footings when founded a minimum of 24 inches into the properly compacted fill or alluvium, measured from the lowest adjacent grade at the time of foundation construction. Three-story structures should be founded on a minimum 18-inch-wide footings. The basic load-bearing capacities may be increased one-third for structural analysis that includes wind or seismic loads. I I I I- I I l- 1· I I- I I I I I Proposed JRM/Kelly Cori 1mercial Property Carlsbad, California Job No. 00-7866 Page 20 8. The following table summarizes site-specific seismic design criteria for the calculation of seismic base shear. The design criteria was obtained from the Uniform Building Code (1997 edition) based on the soil type and the distance to the closest active fault. 9. Parameter Value Reference Seismic Zone Factor, Z 0.40 Table 16-I Soil Profile Tvoe So Table 16-J Seismic Coefficient, Ca 0.44Na Table 16-Q Seismic Coefficient, Cv 0.64Nv Table 16-R Near-Source Factor, Na 1.0 Table 16-S Near-Source Factor, Nv 1.0 Table 16-T Seismic Source Type B Table 16-U Our experience indicates that, for various reasons, footings and slabs occasionally crack, causing ceramic tiles and brittle surfaces to become damaged. Therefore, we recommend that all conventional shallow footings and slabs-on-grade contain at least a minimum amount of reinforcing steel to reduce the separation of cracks, should they occur. 9.1 A minimum of steel for continuous footings should include at least four No. 5 steel bars continuous, with two bars near the bottom of the footing and two bars near the top. 9.2 Isolated square footings should contain, as a minimum, a grid of three No. 5 steel bars on 12-inch centers, both ways, with no less than three bars each way. 9.3 Interior floor slabs ( on-grade) for the garage should be a minimum of 5 inches actual thickness and be reinforced with No. 3 bars on 18-inch I I I· 1- 'I I· I I· I- I· I, I· I- I I I I I I Proposed JRM/Kelly Con 1mercial Property Carlsbad, California Job No. 00-7866 Page 21 centers, both ways, placed at midheight in the slab. For structural mats, minimum thicknesses and steel schedules shall be provided by the project structural engineer. Slabs shall be underlain by a 4-inch thick layer of crushed rock gravel. A waterproofing membrane may be included (such as Paraseal) if s.oil moisture is a concern to the owner/developer. Slab subgrade soil shall be verified by a Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. representative to have the proper moisture content within 48 hours prior to placement of a vapor barrier and pouring of concrete. If a shallow slab on-grade is used, we recommend that the slab be underlain by. 2 inches of sand on a moisture barrier, on an additional 2 inches of sand. The visqueen layer shall have at least 6-inch-wide overlaps and be sealed with tape. Basement elevation slabs and walls shall be provided with proper drainage and waterproofing sealant to help control below-ground soil moisture. We recommend the project Civil/Structural Engineer incorporate isolation joints and sawcuts to at least one-fourth the thickness of the slab in any floor designs. The joints and cuts, if properly placed, should reduce the potential for and help control floor slab cracking. It is recommended that concrete shrinkage joints be placed no further than 20 feet, approximately. However, due to a number of reasons (such as base preparation, construction techniques, curing procedures, and normal shrinkage of concrete), some cracking of slabs can be expected. Basement garage slabs should preferably be reinforced with enough steel to eliminate control joints. If the basement garage slab is designed as a mat, control joints are ---------- anticipated to be deleted. I I I; I I I I I I I I I I· I I I I I I Proposed JRM/Kelly Con,mercial Property Carlsbad, California Job No. 00-7866 Page 22 NOTE: The project Civil/Structural Engineer shall review all reinforcing schedules. The reinforcing minimums recommended herein are not to be construed as structural designs, but merely as minimum safeguards to reduce possible crack separations. 10. As a minimum for protection of on-site improvements, it is recommended that all nonstructural concrete slabs (such as patios, sidewalks, etc.), be founded on properly compacted and tested fill or dense native formation and underlain by at least 12 inches of nonexpansive, properly compacted soils, with 6x6-6/6 welded wire mesh at the center of the slab, and contain adequate isolation and control joints. The performance of on-site improvements can be greatly affected by soil base preparation and the quality of construction. It is therefore important that all improvements are properly designed and constructed for the existing soil conditions. The improvements should not be built on loose soils or fills placed without our observations and testing. Any rigid improvements founded on the existing loose surface soils can be expected to undergo movement and possible damage and is therefore not recommended. Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. takes no responsibility for the performance of the improvements. Any exterior area to receive concrete improvements shall be verified for compaction and moisture within 48 hours prior to concrete placement. Control joints for exterior slabs shall be placed at spaces no farther than 15 feet apart, or the width of the slab, whichever is less, and also at reentrant corners. Control joints in exterior slabs shall be sealed with elastomeric joint sealant. The sealant shall be inspected every 6 months and be properly maintained by the owner. I I I- I I I I I I I I I I I. I I I I I Proposed JRM/Kelly Con,mercial Property Carlsbad, California Job No. 00-7866 Page 23 11. The active earth pressure (to be utilized in the design of any cantilever retaining walls, utilizing imported or on-site, very low expansive to low expansive soils [EI less than 50] as backfill) shall be based on an Equivalent Fluid Weight of 38 pounds per cubic foot (for level backfill only). Soils having moderate expansion (EI between 51 and 90) shall not be utilized as wall backfill within a zone horizontally equivalent to one-half the wall's height. In the event that a retaining wall is surcharged by sloping backfill, the design active earth pressure shall be based on the appropriate Equivalent Fluid Weight presented in the following table: ~-·::·.---• • .• ,, ..... ·::~;~ • : • •• · Height of Slope/Height of Wall* ·-·.· .. · . . Slope Ratio :; . 0~25 .-· 0.50 0&75 1.00(.+) 42 48 50 52 *To determine design active earth pressures for ratios intermediate to those presented, interpolate between the stated values. In the event that a retaining wall is to be designed for a restrained condition, a uniform pressure equal to 9xH (nine times the total height of retained soil, considered in pounds per square foot) shall be considered as acting everywhere on the back of the wall in addition to the design Equivalent Fluid ~ Weight. The soil pressure produced by any footings, improvements, or any other surcharge placed within a horizontal distance equal to the height of the retaining portion of the wall shall be included in the wall design pressure. Any loads placed on the active wedge behind a cantilever retaining wall shall -~-e included JD th1:= design by multiplying the load weight by a fa_c~<_?r <?f 0.32. For restrained walls, the lateral pressure factor is 0.50. I I :I- I I I- I I- I.' I I I I- I I I I I I Proposed JRM/Kelly Con 11nercial Property Carlsbad, California Job No. 00-7866 Page 24 The retaining wall and/or building retaining wall plans shall indicate that the walls shall be backfilled with very low to low expansive soils (EI=less than 50). 12. The passive earth pressure of the encountered dense natural-ground soils and any properly compacted fill soils (to be used for design of shallow foundation and footings to resist the lateral forces) shall be based on an Equivalent Fluid Weight of 250 pounds per cubic foot. This passive earth pressure shall only be considered valid for design if the ground adjacent to the foundations structure is essentially level for a distance of at least three times the total depth of the foundation into properly compacted soil or stiff alluvium. 13. An allowable Coefficient of Friction of 0.40 times the dead load may be used between the bearing soils and concrete wall foundations or structure foundations and floor slabs. C. Floor Slab Vapor Transmission 14. Vapor moisture can cause some problems on moisture sensitive floors, some floor sealers, or sensitive equipment in direct contact with the floor, in addition to mildew and staining on slabs, walls and carpets. 15. The common practice in Southern California is to place vapor retarders made of PVC, or of polyethylene. PVC retarders are made in thickness ranging from 10-to 60-mil. Polyethylene retarders, called visqueen, range from 5-to ------------• ---- 10-mil in thickness. The thicker the plastic, the stronger the resistance against puncturing. I I I: I I I· I I· I I I I I I I I I I I Proposed JRM/Kelly Cori ,mercial Property Carlsbad, California Job No. 00-7866 Page 25 16. Although polyethylene (visqueen) products are most commonly used, products such as Vaporshield possess much higher tensile strength and are more specifically designed for and intended to retard moisture transmission into concrete slabs. The use of Vaporshield or equivalent is highly recommended when a structure is intended for moisture-sensitive floor coverings or uses. 17. The vapor retarders need to have joints lapped and sealed with mastic or manufacturer's recommended tape for additional protection. To provide some protection to the moisture retarder, a layer of at least 4 inches of clean sand on top and 2 inches at the bottom shall also be provided. No heavy equipment, stakes or other puncturing instruments shall be used on top of the liner before or during concrete placement. In actual practice, stakes are often driven through the retarder material, equipment is dragged or rolled across the retarder, overlapping or jointing is not properly implemented, etc. All these construction deficiencies reduce the retarder's effectiveness. The vapor retarders are not waterproof. They are intended to help prevent or reduce capillary migration of vapor through the soil into the pores of concrete slabs. Other waterproofing systems must supplement vapor retarders· if full waterproofing is desired. The owner. should be consulted to determine the specific level of protection required. D. Slopes 18. The soils that occur within 5 feet of the face of any slopes often possess poor lateral stability and structures and other improvements could suffer differential movement as a result of the poor lateral stability of these soils. I I· I· I· I I I· I· I· ' ,, 1: I· I· I· I· I I I I Proposed JRM/Kelly Car .. mercial Property Carlsbad, California Job No. 00-7866 Page 26 Shallow footings of proposed structures, walls, fences, parking areas, driveways, walkways, etc., when founded 5 feet and farther away from the top of slopes, may be of standard design in conformance with the recommended load-bearing value. If the proposed improvements are located closer than 5 feet inside the top of slopes, they shall be deepened to 2 feet below a line beginning at a point 5 feet horizontally inside the slopes and projected outward and downward, parallel to the face of the slope and into firm soils (see Figure No. IV). 19. We anticipate that temporary slopes into the surface fill soils and alluvial material of approximately 10 to 15 feet in height may be required during the excavation process and construction of the basement-level garage. Based on the results of our field investigation, it is our opinion that the following temporary-slope design criteria may be considered in areas where the excavation slope top will be at least 10 feet away from any existing structures. The existing alluvial materials may be cut vertical for the lower 3 feet and at a slope ratio of 1.0 horizontal to 1.0 vertical for the remaining height (for an unsupported period not to exceed eight weeks). Fill soils may be cut at a slope ratio of 1.0: 1.0 (horizontal to vertical) for an unsupported period not to exceed 8 weeks. After that time, a slope condition evaluation shall be provided by our firm. No soil stockpiles or surcharge may be placed within a horizontal distance equal to the height of the excavation. Any plans for slopes in excess of the anticipated 15-foot maximum must be presented to our office prior to grading to allow time for review and specific recommendations, if warranted. Proper drainage away from the excavation -------------------------- shall be provided at all times. I I· I; ' I; ' I- 1- 1: I· 1~ I· I· ,, 1: I· I I- I I I- Proposed JRM/Kelly Con 1mercial Property Carlsbad, California Job No. 00-7866 Page 27 A representative of Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. must observe any steep temporary slopes during construction. In the event that soils comprising a slope are not as anticipated, any required slope design changes would be presented at that time. Where not superseded by specific recommendations presented in this report, trenches, excavations and temporary slopes at the subject site shall be constructed in accordance with Title 8, Construction Safety Orders, issued by OSHA. 20. It is recommended that all compacted fill slopes and natural cut slopes be planted with an erosion resistant plant, in conformance with the requirements of the City of Carlsbad. E. Site Drainage Considerations 21. Adequate measures shall be taken to properly finish-grade the building site after the structure and other improvements are in place. Drainage waters from this site and adjacent properties are to be directed away from the foundations, floor slabs, footings, and slopes, onto the natural drainage direction· for this area or into properly designed and approved drainage facilities. Roof gutters and downspouts should be installed on the structure, with the runoff directed away from the foundations via closed drainage lines. Proper subsurface and surface drainage will help minimize the potential for waters to seek the level of the bearing soils under the foundations, footings and floor slabs or further erosion of the adjacent natural slope. Failure to observe this recommendation could result in undermining and possible differential settlement of the structure or other improvements on the site. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Proposed JRM/Kelly Commercial Property Carlsbad, California Job No. 00-7866 Page 28 In addition, appropriate erosion control measures shall be taken at all times during construction to prevent surface runoff waters from-entering footing excavations, ponding on finished building pad areas or running over the existing cut slopes. 22. Due to the buildup of groundwater (derived primarily from rainfall and irrigation), excess moisture is a common problem in below-grade structures or behind retaining walls. These problems are generally in the form of water seepage through walls, mineral staining, mold growth and high humidity. Even without the presence of free water, the capillary draw characteristics, especially of fine grained soils, can result in excessive transmission of water vapor through walls and floor slabs. In order to minimize the potential for moisture-related problems to develop at the site, proper ventilation and waterproofing shall be provided for below-ground areas and the backfill side of all structure retaining walls should be properly waterproofed and drained (see Figure No. V). As shown on Figure No. V, the bottom of the perforated drain line should be at least 12 inches below the bottom of the interior floor slab. 23. Proper subdrains and free-draining backwall material or geocomposite drainage shall be installed behind all retaining walls (in addition to proper waterproofing) on the subject project. Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. will assume no liability for damage to structures or improvements which is attributable to poor drainage. Storm drain lines shall not discharge into perforated subdrain lines. It is likely that proper site grading and recompaction will reduce the potential for perched water conditions such as those encountered during site I I I· I- I I I I I· I I I I I· I· I I 1· 1: Proposed JRM/Kelly Commercial Property Carlsbad, California Job No. 00-7866 Page 29 exploration. Due to the potential for the fill/alluvial contact to yield continued perched water flow, however, proper subdrain installation is mandatory. 24. Planter areas, flower beds and planter boxes shall be sloped to drain away from the foundations, footings, and floor slabs at a gradient of at least 5 percent within 5 feet from the perimeter walls. Planter boxes shall be constructed with a closed bottom and a subsurface drain, installed in gravel, with the direction of subsurface and surface flow away from the slopes, foundations, footings, and floor slabs, to an adequate drainage facility. Sufficient area drains and proper surface gradient shall be provided throughout the project. Roof gutter and downspouts shall be tied to storm drain lines. F. General Recommendations 25. Following placement of any concrete floor slabs, sufficient drying time must be allowed prior to placement of floor coverings. Premature placement of floor coverings may result in degradation of adhesive materials and loosening of the finish· floor materials. 26. • In order· to minimize any work delays at the subject site during site development, this firm should be contacted 24 hours prior to any need for observation of footing excavations or field density testing of compacted fill soils. If possible, placement of formwork and steel reinforcement in footing excavations should not occur prior to observing the excavations; in the event that our observations reveal the need for deepening or redesigning foundation structures at any locations, any formwork or steel reinforcement in the affected footing excavation areas would have to be removed prior to I I I· I: I I· I I· I· I· I· I I- I I I I· ,.· I Proposed JRM/Kelly Con1mercial Property Carlsbad, California Job No. 00-7866 Page 30 correction of the observed problem (i.e., deepening the footing excavation, recompacting soil in the bottom of the excavation, etc.) IX. GRADING NOTES Any required grading operations shall be performed in accordance with the General Earthwork Specifications (Appendix B) and the requirements of the City of Carlsbad Grading Ordinance. 27. Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. recommends that we be asked to verify the actual soil conditions revealed during site grading work and footing excavation to be as anticipated in the "Report of Soil Investigation and Geologic Reconnaissance" for the project. In addition, the compaction of any fill soils placed during site grading work must be tested by a soil engineer. It is the responsibility of the grading contractor to comply with the requirements on the grading plans and the local grading ordinance. All retaining wall and trench backfill that will support structures or rigid improvements shall be properly compacted. Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. will assume no liability for damage occurring due to improperly or uncompacted backfill placed without our observations and testing. 28. It is the responsibility of the owner and/or developer to ensure that the recommendations summarized in this report are carried out in the field operations and that our recommendations for design of this project are incorporated in the structural plans. We shall be provided with the opportunity to review the project plans once they are available, to see that our recommendations are adequately incorporated in the plans. I I I· I· I I I I I I I I· I· I· I I I I I Proposed JRM/Kelly Con1mercial Property Carlsbad, California Job No. 00-7866 Page 31 29. This firm does not practice or consult in the field of safety engineering. We do not direct the contractor's operations, and we cannot be responsible for the safety of personnel other than our own on the site; the safety of others is the responsibility of the contractor. The contractor should notify the owner if he considered any of the recommended actions presented herein to be unsafe. X. LIMITATIONS Our conclusions and recommendations have been based on all available data obtained from our field investigation and laboratory analysis, as well as our experience with the soils and formational materials located in the City of Carlsbad. Of necessity, we must assume a certain degree of continuity between exploratory excavations and/or natural exposures. It is, therefore, necessary that all observations, conclusions, and recommendations be verified at the time grading operations begin or when footing excavations are placed. In the event discrepancies are noted, additional recommendations may be issued, if required. The work performed and recommendations presented herein are the result of an investigation and analysis which meet the contemporary standard of care in our profession within the County of San Diego. No warranty is provided. This report should be considered valid for a period of two (2) years, and is subject to review by our firm following that time. If significant modifications are made to the building plans, especially with respect to the height and location of any proposed structures, this report must be presented to us for immediate review and possible revision. I I I I I I I I I I- I I I I I I I I I Proposed JRM/Kelly Commercial Property Carlsbad, California Job No. 00-7866 Page 32 The firm of Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. shall not be held responsible for changes to the physical condition of the property, such as addition of fill soils or changing drainage patterns, which occur subsequent to issuance of this report and the changes are made without our observations, testing, and approval. Once again, should any questions arise concerning this report, please feel free to contact the Project Coordinator. Reference to our Job No. 00-7866 will expedite a reply to your inquiries. Respectfully submitted, GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. ~-~ ?:__i.( ' . /1"---.. /-' . ; / -, _,. --~ 1-C,. '<-__ , _ L,.·•----· -- Jay'K;fieiser s@~ Jaime A. Cerros, P.E. R.C.E. 34422/G.E. 2007 Senior Geotechnical Engineer JKH/LDR/JAC/pj - L: D. Reed, President C.E.G. 999[exp. 3-31-□1J/R.G. 3391 I I 1- 1· I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I REFERENCES JOB NO. 00-7866 October 2000 Association of Engineering Geologists, 1973, Geology and Earthquake Hazards, Planners Guide to the Seismic Safety Element, Southern California Section, Association of Engineering Geologists, Special Publication, Published July 1973, p. 44. California Division of Mines and Geology -Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zones Map, November 1, 1991. Crowell, J.C., 1962, Displacement along the San Andreas Fault, California; Geologic Society of America Special Paper 71, 61 p. Greene, H.G., 1979, Implication of Fault Patterns in the Inner California Continental Borderland between San Pedro and San Diego, in "Earthquakes and Other Perils, San Diego Region," P.L. Abbott and W.J. Elliott, editors. Greensfelder, R.W., 1974, Maximum Credible Rock Acceleration from Earthquakes in California; California Division of Mines and Geology, Map Sheet 23. Hart, E.W., D.P. Smith and R.B. Saul, 1979, Summary Report: Fault Evaluation Program, 1978 Area (Peninsular Ranges-Salton Trough Region), Calif. Div. of Mines and Geology, OFR 79-10 SF, 10. Hart E.W., 1980, Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Calif. Div. of Mines and Geology, Special Publication 42, Rev. March 1980, p. 25. Hileman, J.A., C.R. Allen and J.M. Nordquist, 1973, Seismicity of the Southern California Region, January 1, 1932 to December 31, 1972; Seismological Laboratory, Cal-Tech, Pasadena, Calif. Kennedy, M.P., 1975, Geology of the San Diego Metropolitan Area, California; Bulletin 200, Calif. Div. of Mines and Geology, 1975. McEuen, R.B. and C.J. Pinckney, 1972, Seismic Risk in San Diego; Transactions of the San Diego Society of Natural History, Vol. 17, No. 4, 19 July 1972. Richter, C.G., 1958, Elementary Seismology, W.H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco, Calif. Rockwell, T.K., D.E. Millman, R.S. McElwain, and D.L. Lamar, 1985, Study of Seismic Activity by Trenching Along the Glen Ivy North Fault, Elsinore Fault Zone, Southern California: Lamar-Merifield Technical Report 85-1, U.S.G.S. Contract 14-08-0001-21376, 19 p. Toppozada, T.R. and D.L. Parke, 1982, Areas Damaged by California Earthquakes, 1900-1949; Calif. Div. of Mines and Geology, Open-file Report 82-17, Sacramento, Calif. I I I I· I· I I- 1- r L :..1 .-~ SITE MAP . " --' . :._, .· ... ~J ·:. • _ _.:·\.\,·_·· .. ·:· •• •-··IY,··-E· . ~~-.· . :;_Cd., .. '-\.,QGG.,........----~·: -··. ... ~;-~-. ,u.. ~. --• . ' . '. : : _,·'.' ,' c:;,...,i;;; • .. ·, --.' -,,,. ·'" •• • ' • . .. ., . , • ./10"· .": :: ·:.:-. \v -: ~,-'1 \,,_ PALOMA.fr_.·_ .---.·._-:-::•;: --~, .... -'. _ -, ~~<:_iC ' Io. T!i(}() _ . . • • · •• ---· _. f -• , -· ·'j;:;;:--.. ; --r-, _ J:$/:?r--:iL; .~ ~---·:_-._:::-_~_;t~\:"'~-1 --~---• ~<S"iS l ·_.n.f}l(kt-: -... _ .. :T\-; 3l; :'r_··.--_·:--··· ... s. r '-,~"-! .)~l:g,:Jo·· .:_[i/~1-·..-··, • • :.:';-lJ;~c,,' m: ••. '\\\R'AA ···· ".~ · : ~--_: • · • /"--..,:.,_'/;;,.. ·,,; '•;_ · (' .... • ·':~-·:/···t-<·.;-t··ffi; . ~+~ ·. -~)-.~ .~ .. -.. -....:J~i. -~✓~---! -,.;.,,_~' • ~~ .;.,, __ __ iii' · _-. "~·•·-.. -· -· ; ~rCI!¼-{ .:\"I. ~-•,o.'1.0\\'t..:_·::--~.•-<' ~/. ·\ .. _ ·.·.,,_.,. --:::::;---~•-,;;::------:,,.._ /J ·1 -__ --\\_;;· .•., ~!}JJ,. ·V,-'t~t:-1£1£ .) .. J~~~·-, ~=-------~ ---... --1 .-i , .-:-;.:. "\ ---~-----~',_-;a·, •• ~ i-1Ji-',\1+i. ,\-:;r;,< \~W\«p_')i \-... J:i~ .. .If.,_ €;t,,.. •13· .. _, ... 11.,·. • .... \ .• ,,.,,O;~.J'&~--,·-~~-SAPP,\,', \ .._\~':!:, _ l·-. . "-"-"' -\.:? ,a-... ,'..r-j,.1'!' . . . .. . ' : •• ,i:::,. ·•. ~~r . "-<_(,l>~ • '<':1_, < •o'-' -,,. •1"-\, .. '-.•'l";~-:> .. -\ .• _._-.•·•'@····-· -~~":~ • ~--.,_ v\ JRM/Kelly Property Southest Corner Palomar Airport Road and Aviara Parkway Carlsbad, CA. Figure No. la Job No. 00-7866 I I I· I- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I / ! l I I I I I I \ I \ I \~ I\ I \ 1 \ I \ 1 \\ f \ I \ I I I I . t:._ J_~ ·-·--·-._ -----E-NGI-Nt;S L __________ _ 00-7866-P ASSUMED PROPERTY BOUNDARY EXISTING SLOPE LOCATION APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF EXPLORATORY BORING PROPOSED STRUCTURE NOTE: This Plot Plan is not to be used for legal purposes. Locations and dimensions are approxi mate. Actual property dimensions and locations of utilities may be obtained from the Approved Building Plans or the "As-Built" Grading Plans. REFERENCE, THIS PLOT PLAN \./AS PREPARED FROM AN EXISTING SITE PLAN BY SMITH CONSUL TING ARCHITECTS DATED 7/22/2000 AND FROM ON-SITE FIELD RECONNAISSANCE PERFORMED BY GEL PLOT P 1 AIM JRM/Kelly Property Southeast Comer Palomar Airport Road and Avlara Parkway -Garlsbad,-GA.-- FIGURE No. lb JOB No. 00-7866 Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. I I- I I I- I· ' l- 1. l- 1. I I I I I I r EQUIPMENT DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION DATE LOGGED ""' Ingersoll Rand Hollw Stem Drill Rig 811 diameter hollow stem SURFACE ELEVATION GROUNDWATER DEPTH ±100 1 MSL -25' below adjacent grade FIELD DESCRIPTION AND t;:: CLASSIFICATION _J w'---------'--------------...; trn:! 26 o:: DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS 0 ~ §; :r: ti:: w Cl ~ l (Grain size, Density, Moisture, Color) ~ ~ § I r I ~ -111111 I I I(\ I 111111 2 __,I I I I 11 11 I ·1 --j I r I rI I II I I ~ '1'1'1 I I I 4 I I r11 I I I· r 0-2' MEDIUM TO COARSE GRAINED SILTY SAND. Loose to medium dense. Damp. Light yellow to pale gray. At 2' material becomes medium brown, same as@ 0-2'. -11, i)p,? i 1,~~ 1 @ 5 1 MEDIUM TO COARSE SIL TY SAND. Medi um 6 _ii:,:,: dense. Damp to slightly moist. Pale gray ~:,:,:1 (mottled/multi-colored@ 61). Slight clay j Ir I 111111 binder. 1111 1 11 8 j: t: l: '· @ 8' MEDIUM COARSE SIL TY SAND. Medi um I I I :,:1 11 dense. Moist. Mottled. Olive, gray, 10 ~1:~~ brown, orange-brown. Few decomposed clast ~~~1 1 to ½11 • Driller reports gravel/rock 11111] materials@ 10'±. 1,1~, 121::::1-J @ 10.611 Asphalt concrete encountered in ~~ fill with fine angular road base matrix. -t .. ~_::•·~:-14, ··.,>,., ~ 13' FINE TO MEDIUM SANDY CLAY. Medium -l_.:··::<-.1 stiff. Mei st. Dark brown with darker 1:/~-;;1 brown laminations. Few rootlets, smal 1. 16 _,,,._.,:_.·. \ FILL 1 B ~~.J.~,-:·_•:_·_:..'_:~.:_~.1,_:_,_'. @ 17 ' 6" FINE TO MEO!UM SANOY CLAY. Med fom _ .-_,. stiff. Very moist. Medium brown. 20lii1 22-, a/.>:,.•J 1{tf) 24--1 ,_,;·., j:\J 26~0iJ---1 . ·' ,· ,,, 1; ·:,:;.-·1 7:•-:~~;~:1 SM 8.8 CL-CH 16_6 19.8 116.7 112.1 106.1 V WATER TABLE JOB NAME JRM/Kelly Property -SITE LOCATION w :::;; 0::: :::, :::, :::;; f---(/) f------o_o O:::E 9-20-00 LOGGED BY SCB ~ ci ci ~:i cno :z: w~ c,.___, + I -~ z (/) 0: :z: xo w u '-.05 t;:: ---- (/) f--> :z: o=i _JQ CDU 43 48 44 ci ci ~ wVl _J w o_ :r: :::;;u -<Z l/1.;:::., 3 3 3 50+ 3 20 3 18 3 ~ LOOSE BAG SAMPLE S.E. Comer Palomar Airport Road and Aviara Pkwy, Carlsbad, CA. [I] IN-PLACE SAMPLE ■ JOB NUMBER REVIEWED BYJAC/LDR LOG No. DRIVE SAMPLE 00-7866 ;,==-B-1 0 SAND CONE/F.D.T. FIGURE NUMBER ~ STANDARD PENCTRATION TEST Ila ~ ... I I I I I I I I I- I· I- I I I- I r EQUIPMENT DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION DATE LOGGED "' Ingersoll Rand Hollow Stem Drill Rig 811 diameter boring 9-20-00 SURFACE ELEVATION GROUNDWATER DEPTH LOGGED BY ±100 1 MSL -25' below adjacent grade SCB FIELD DESCRIPTION .,........ AND g ..-.. .......... >-..-.. ..-.. ~ u ~ o:::-ci □3 t:: c::i t:: CLASSIFICATION C. ci + I ci WW w"-' w s~ -------' w uo::: u~ :::,;o::: ~:::,; __J .--. :c 0 -' c.n :s~ ::::i ::::i :z: 0 C/1 ::Jt3 f-CD CL DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS :S-:::,; I-:::;:-v50 I- ~ CL C/1 -VJ <( C/1 ;;:::z: QI 0.. :::;: :::;: (Grain Color) CL C/1 -C/1 xz z CL :z: o::::i :::::;;;u w in <( size. Density, Moisture, ~ 1-I :z: 1--<Cw 0 Cl z:o z:W 0.. 0 w~ X _iO <Z VJ ::::i _:::,; -□ o:::. :::EO □-w u CDU c.n= 1T-~-1 -fl L.,fJ -JL-1 '. ,-·l f1J-~_: .. r.: _J;.: f ~-r i_ 28 1,.,.,11 1 -J'.;11,f~l jf ,• .. , -1 ,,jl'1~ -1,1 (h.-1 CL-Cl-3Q-J1>1'.!-~ @ 30' FINE TO MEDIUM SANDY CLAY. Medium 20 2 'L .,J-,.,J 1, !~.,_::·: 11 stiff. Wet. Medium brown. -p-:.r•-1~ i ,_, ,11• •• , 1•1 r 32-J/cfti --i1'1·1Ji 11 1·\ "I· l 7l-1J-il;l -l!·'V!:;l 34-1i :·i-::.-· 1!:,r:-r''I 7,. ·•',('( ~lr'f•i t J<r.rh 35_Jd·th tl·fJ·i,~-, -JI·· k ~, -ll ~:~tt~ J!-~:-~' r1 38 l:-:l1·tl , .. , -1~·( .J' r1,('rt ~ ·1 ,' • -l1"!-(}"1..I l·VVI 11.,1,i.1' @ 40' TO 4Q--i1}~-JJ 7, FINE MEDIUM SANDY CLAY. Medium 18 2 -li !··., .~ 1/, • L•' ••• 1/, stiff. Wet. Gray with orange and tan _) ... v .. ,.,.1 ·•·'(1·~ '~";; i' (L sands. -t.r-f,.(\-1 I -;'. (1,( tjl J'.(l.1,-t•tl 11 Lr·1Yci ALLUVIUM -~-t0L,;I -11.!-,.,. ·l 5 0 7; E}~:;11 ~~J\f 1 -J ,f~ fl,~ -l~-((i},11 ,1 ·-t-· L0 I ~•1-i•l ll·f,ltYp -'Pffl,..:.,.J,., ' •• ',, J -.::.;,.;\•,-. ~ @55' FINE TO MEDIUM CLAYEY SAND. Medium 2 --~tii.~~ 28 -dense. Wet. Light gray with orange-brown. so-@ 59' Gravel/rock material encountered. --· --DEL MAR/FRIARS FORMATION -I - ~ ----------------· ----·------- Bottom @ 59' Groundwater @ 25'± - v WATER TABLE JOB NAME JRM/Kelly Property ~ LOOSE BAG SAMPLE SITE LOCATION S.E. Comer Palomar Airport Road and Aviara Pkwy, Carlsbad, CA. [I] IN-PLACE SAMPLE ■ JOB NUMBER REVIEWED BYJAC/LDR LOG No. DRIVE SAMPLE 00-7866 ;,~-B-1 m SAND CONE/F.D.T. FIGURE NUMBER ~ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST lib cont. "- I I I I I I I I- I I I l'- 1-.,~ I I EQUIPMENT Ingersoll Rand Hollow Stem Drill Rig DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION 811 diameter hollow stem SURFACE ELEVATION ±100' MSL GROUNDWATER DEPTH N/E t;: :::r: f-0... w Cl -- -- ---- = - FIELD DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION w w _J w f--------------------,--.----l u 0::: @ O:: DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS 0 ~ ~ ~ } (Grain size, Density, Moisture, Color) ~ J ~ I -- @ 0-1' MEDIUM TO COARSE, SILTY SAND. Loose. Dry. Medium brown. @ 1-2' MEDIUM TO COARSE, SILTY SAND. Medium dense. Damp. Orange brown with clay binder. @ 3-5' Material becomes light gray. MEDIUM TO COARSE, SILTY SAND. Medium dense Damp. Pale light-orange (derived from Ts). @ 5-8' 1' of medium brown SILTY SAND. @ 9-10' MEDIUM TO COARSE, SILTY SAND. Medium dense. Damp. Mottled light gray, orange-brown-tan. @ 11.5' Asphalt encountered with fine agggregate base. FILL @ 13.6" FINE TO MEDIUM, SANDY CLAY. Medium stiff. Moist. Dark brown. @ 17.611 No recovery @ 20' MEDIUM FINE SANDY CLAY. Moist. Stiff. Dark brown. ALLUVIUM Bottom@ 20' No groundwater SM 9.9 SM-SC SM 9.0 CL CH 117 .4 114.0 V WATER TABLE JOB NAME JRM/Kelly Property SITE LOCATION w :::l: 0::: :::::> :::::> ::le f -t/1 f--o... O O:::l: DATE LOGGED 9-20-00 LOGGED BY SCB >--,....... o::-0 g_ ..__., 3i:'.= ::le-U1 xz <:w :::l:O ,....... q 0 i:'.=:::l: uio z w~ o..__., + I _j ·o z U1 cf:z xo w u 0.37 -1.34 t;: ~ f-3:: z a:::> _JQ CDU 27 33 22 35 44 22 20 - 3 3 2 3 2 3 2 IZ] LOOSE BAG SAMPLE OJ IN-PLACE SAMPLE ■ DRIVE SAMPLE S.E. Comer Palomar Airport Road and Aviara Pkwy, Carlsbad, CA. [I] SAND CONE/F.D.T. ~ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST JOB NUMBER REVIEWED BYJAC/LDR LOG No. 00-7866 FIGURE NUMBER lie ;;&===·-B-2 I I I I I I I I· I· I I- I I I I I r EQUIPMENT DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION Ingersoll Rand Hollow Stem Drill Rig 811 diameter hollow stem SURFACE ELEVATION GROUNDWATER DEPTH ±100 1 MSL -25' below adjacent grade t: 16---- 18- --20- - - ----= - FIELD DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION ....J w 1-------------------.----l t3 ~ 0 ....J (/) ::5:::, ~ ~ DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS ~ a... ti=i &i ui (Grain size, Density, Moisture, Color) en 4: o @ 0-1.5' MEDIUM TO COARSE, SILTY SAND. Loose to medium dense. Damp. Pale gray to light yellowish-tan. Rock materials encountered a l.811 @ 1.5-2.5' FINE TO MEDIUM. Medium dense. Damp. Pale gray to light brown. Rock materials encountered@ 5'. @ 4-5' MEDIUM TO COARSE SILTY SAND. Medium dense. Damp. Orange brown and light brown. @ 5-6' MEDIUM TO COARSE, FINE TO MEDIUM. Medium dense. Damp. Pale gray. Driller reports "tight drilling"@ 6-10'. @ 12.5' angular gravels encountered @ 13-14'± fine granular rock base @ 14'± alluvium encountered Bottom@ 14.6' No groundwater FILL :::i _::::;; SM 7.5 SM 10.3 ..---.. ..... u a.. w..___,.. 0~ ::S-a... VJ 1Z zW _Cl 109.0 122.3 V WATER TABLE JOB NAME JRM/Kelly Property SITE LOCATION w ::::;; 0::: :::, :::, ::;;1--(/) 1--a... o O::::E DATE LOGGED 9-20-00 LOGGED BY SCB ,,....,_ Cl ci ~:::i V50 z w~ o..___,.. + I -~ z VJ 0: z xo Lu 0 t: --........ (/) 1-3:= z o=> ....JO mo 35 20 42 28 " c::i c:i w'cn _,w 0... :r: ::a;o <(Z tn.:::- 3 2 3 2 cg] LOOSE BAG SAMPLE [I] IN-PLACE SAMPLE ■ DRfVE SAMPLE S.E. Comer Palomar Airport Road and Aviara Pkwy, Carlsbad, CA. JOB NUMBER REVIEWED BYJAC/LDR LOG No. 0 SAND CONE/F.D.T. ~ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST 00-7866 ~==='- FIGURE NUMBER -,-- lld B-3 I I Ii I I I I I I I I I I I \.. , EQUIPMENT DIMENSION & 1YPE OF EXCAVATION Ingersoll Rand Hollow Stem Drill Rig 811 diameter hollow stem SURFACE ELEVATION GROUNDWATER DEPTH ±100 1 MSL -25' below adjacent grade t:: ::r: I-0.... w Cl - 18--- 20--- - - -- v ~ ....J ~ 0 rn 0.... ::;;; ::::E >--<( C/) C/) FIELD DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS (Grain size, Density, Moisture, Color) @ 0-1.5' FINE TO MEDIUM, SILTY SAND. Loose. Damp. Light gray. @ 1.5-2.5' MEDIUM TO COARSE, SILTY SAND. Medium dense. Damp to slightly moist. Brown gray (mottled). @ 4-5' MEDIUM TO COARSE, SILTY SAND. Medium dense. Damp to slightly moist. Light pale gray. @ 7.5-8.5' MEDIUM TO COARSE, SILTY SAND. Medium dense. Slightly moist. Pale gray and orange brown. @ 8.5-10' Same as 7.5-8.5' @ approximately 13.5' fine road base and pieces of asphalt encountered. FILL C/) ~ U1 :::, SM ~M-SC @ 14' FINE TO MEDIUM SANDY CLAY. Medium ~L-CH stiff to stiff. Moist. Red gray. Organic: (wood chips) in sample. ALLUVIUM Bottom@ 16.6" No groundwater ~ ~ u 0.. WW w---- (.)Cl::'. (.) ?= :s:::, :S-a.. t; a.. C/) 1Z 1-zo :zW _:::;; _Cl 8.0 116.9 13.5 118.2 9.9 113.8 WATER TABLE JOB NAME JRM/Kelly Property LOOSE BAG SAMPLE SITE LOCATION DATE LOGGED 9-20-00 LOGGED BY SCB g >--~ ~ IY u C, Cl ._::; ci w 3~ ::::E IY r=::::E :::, :::, ::;;; I-::;;;-1no -C/) -C/) xz z I--0... 0 <( w W!,-s! O::::E :;;; Cl □- E + I I:: ..._____ _j C/) :z: 0 I- <( C/) 3:z 0... z o:::, X 0 ....JO w (.) rn u 24 -1.48 11 28 -0.36 17 26 16 25 16 "' c:i ci wui' ....JW o..::r: ::::e:u <CZ (./).::=, 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 OJ IN-PLACE SAMPLE S.E. Comer Palomar Airport Road and Aviara Pkwy, Carlsbad, CA. ■ JOB NUMBER REVIEWED BYJAC/LDR LOG No. DRIVE SAMPLE 00-7866 ;;a==IK B-4 0 SAND CONE/F.D.T. FIGURE NUMBER ~ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST lie I I I· I· I I ·1- I I I- 1- 1· I I I I I "- , EQUIPMENT DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION DATE LOGGED Ingersoll Rand Hollow Stem Drill Rig 811 diameter hollow stem SURFACE ELEVATION GROUNDWATER DEPTH ±100 1 MSL -25' below adjacent grade FIELD DESCRIPTION AND :i:: CLASSIFICATION a ::J 1---------=---------------,---1 tnt:! m a.. DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS j ~ ~ ti:: w Cl ~ ~ (Grain size, Density, Moisture, Color) ~ ~ ~ -I I l ! I I I I I -111111 FINE TO MEDIUM, SIL TY SAND. Loose to -l r I I I I 2 --11 1111-1 medium dense. Damp to dry. Medium brown. _f I I i: :·: :·: @ 2-3' MEDIUM TO COARSE, SILTY SAND. 4 ~:::.::: Medium dense to dense. Damp. Medium -f:·1 :1/i~ brown. Rock material/debris encountered @ 11 f I 3 5' , ,,.1, 1 • • I I I 6 _}11111 No recovery@ 4.5'-5.5' ~/I) I r1 FILL -l+~.:-\ B -f:;t{;; @ 7' FINE TO MEDIUM SANDY CLAY. Stiff. Moist. Dark to medium gray. Few cobbles/ febris@ contact. - - 10-- - - 12-- - 14-- 16-- - 18- - 20- - - - - - - \ ALLUVIUM Bottom@ 8' No groundwater at time of drilling (Debris/rock materials made sampling difficult) SM CL-Cf ,--... u 0.. w~ '-'"?:: ::5_ 0... tn I :z: :z:W -□ v WATER TABLE JOB NAME JRM/Kelly Property lZ] LOOSE BAG SAMPLE SITE LOCATION w :::::;; 0::: =:) :::J ::::;, >-tn f--o...O O:::l: 9-20-00 LOGGED BY SCB ,--... ci ci '?=::a: c:no z w~ o~ + I _j ·o :z: tn c\:::z: XO w u 41 3 55 3 []] IN-PLACE SAMPLE S.E. Comer Palomar Airport Road and Aviara Pkwy, Carlsbad, CA. ■ JOB NUMBER REVIEWED BYJAC/LDR LOG No. DRIVE SAMPLE 00-7866 at==-B-5 0 SAND CONE/F.D.T. FIGURE NUMBER ~ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST llf -..... I I· I I I I I I· I- I I I ------------------------------------ 140 130 120 110 100 90 80 0 LA5-.JRATORY SOIL DATA S'-jv1MARY ~,, 100 '+-u C. 80 1--rs -u.J e'; 6C =-:z 1--.... -z ,-. ~ z Lu >-~ 40 c:: Lu 0 a. 20 0 MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY 1 2 (pcf) OPTIM\M MOISTURE CONTENT ( % ) 10 20 30 LABORATORY COMPACTION TEST SOIL SOIL CLASSIFICATION TYPE 1 MEDIUM TO COARSE SILTY SAND. Medium FILL DIRECT SHEAR TEST 1 -·-,. DATA APPARENT COHESION {psf) 150 APPARENT FRICTION ANGLE 32 ° Assi ned Value Gravel Sand Coarse Tc F1;ie 5~1t Medium U.S. standard sieve sizes I 2.60 0 0 0 ._,,. .-. N ,q- <..) 0 0 0 N .::, d z z: I I I I I I I II I I 11 I II I I I 0 0 z z I I I I I I I I I I I' Ii I I 11 I 11 11 I I I I t, Ii I I " II " I I 'I I 0 0 :z: :z: I I I I I I 11 I I I I I Ii I I I II I I I I 11 I I I II I I I II / I I I I -.... C::> Q"I .... ~ "'l' N q-• ,-CO ~ .-.o 0 0 0 O 0 GRAIN DIAMEEe, MM -0 0 2.70~ 2.50 SPECIFIC GRAVITY 2 _,_ ,. 200 29° Fines ,n 0 0 0 Cl a,:, 0 0 0 ZERO AIR VOIDS CURVES 40 BORING TRENCH DEPTH No. No. brown. B-1 2' 2 FINE TO MEDIUM SANDY CLAY. Dark brown. 3 .. . ------------------- SWELL TEST DATA INITIAL DRY DENSITY (pcf) INITIAL WATER CONTENT(%) LOAD {psf) PERCENT SWELL El= ALLUVIUM 1 a lb 107.0 103.2 1 0. 1 12. 1 144 144 20 14 B-2 14 I FIGURE NUMBER 111 JOB NUMBER 3 1-:z: ~ ffi ll. I :z: 0 I< 0 5 1/) :z: 0 0 ; CJO r 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 I -- I I ' : I i I I ! ' I i I I Bl @ 13 -13.5' -----CONSOLIDATION PRESSURE CURVE NORMAL PRESSURE -LBS./SQa FT. IO IOO IOOO ~ i'c.)__ ~ 0 ORIGINAL MOISTURE • SATURATED ~ CONSOLIDATION 0.000 lnn(VV'\ . t--{M .... ,_ REBOUtl> RING DIAMETER: 2.375 Inches FIGURE NO. IIIa JOB NO. 00-7866 _.. -~~~-----~~~~~~~---~ CONSOLIDATION -PRESSURE CURVE ... :z: ~ ffi Q. ~ .... < 0 5 (I) :z: a u I 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 I I I ' I : ' I I i I I I I ' i ' ; ' I I Bl @ 18 -".18.5' NORMAL PRESSURE -LBS./SQ. FT. IO IOO K>OO l0,000 ~-~:--.-..- i I'"" ~ N_ i 0 ORIGINAL l«>ISTURE • CONSOLIDATION .... REBOUt,D SATURATED -"'-,_ RING DIAJJETER: 2.375 Inches FIGURE NO. IIIb -- JOO NO. 00-7866 --------------------------...... ?-"'A<=..w.:x:,,,,..,,.:a..rm-...:.ai~,,..,_-----------------------' I I I I I I I I I I -~ ~ FOUNDATION REQUIREMENTS NEAR SLOPES PROPOSED STRUCTURE TOP OF COMPACTED FILL SLOPE CONCRETE FLOOR SLAB SETBACK 5' ----- (Any loose soils on the slope surface shall not be considered to provide lateral or vertical strength for the footing or for slope stability. Needed depth of imbedment shall be measured from competent soil.) REINFORCEMENT OF FOUNDATIONS AND FLOOR SLABS FOLLOWING THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE ARCHITECT OR STRUCTURAL ENGINEER CONCRETE FOUNDATION ' ' ' " COMPACTED FILL ~ " ' COMPACTED FILL SLOPE WITH MAXIMUM INCLINATION AS PER SOILS REPORT. TOTAL DEPTH OF FOOTING MEASURED FROM FINISH SOIL SUB-GRADE 2 4 " MINIMUM OR AS DEEP AS REQUIRED FOR LATERAL STABILITY. OUTER MOST FACE ,_ _____ _ OF FOOTING TYPICAL SECTION (SHOWING PROPOSED FOUNDATION LOCATED WITHIN FEET OF TOP OF SLOPE} 24" FOOTING I 5.' SETBACK TOT AL DEPTH OF FOOTING 1.5:1.0 SLOPE # 2. 0: 1. 0 SLOPE ~ UJ 0 64 11 5411 0 Q. 0:: 0 1' 57 11 48 11 LJ.. .J --w•-(/-) ---------·---~----------------u u.. 2' 48 11 42 11 z 0 < Q. 3' 4011 36 11 I-V'l 0 Cl I-4' 3211 30 11 I when applicable ~ FIGURE NUMBER IV I JOB NUMBER 00-?866 ------------------~~®=u□ -- I· , I; I· I- Foundation/Garage Retaining Wall Waterproofing and Drainage Schematic Exterior/Retaining Footing Wall Lower-level Slab-on-grade Sealant Sealant Proposed Exterior Grade Perforated PVC Schedule 40, 4" pipe with 0.5% min. slope, with bottom of pipe located 12" below slab ground surface elevation, with 1.5 (cu.ft) of gravel 1" diameter max. wrapped with filter cloth such as Miradrain 6000 or Mirafi 140N I: ,x::~;>,2,:s~~~;;;>;~;t5,5v . •. •. •. •. •. • .. • ... m::., ... · . · .. ·.:_·/::-\)}\//_\:)\ -:-:-:-:-:-.-:-:-·-:-·-:-:-:-:-·-:-:-:-:-:-·-:-:-:·.·>:-:-.·.·. T Between Bottom I : w~ :-.---:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:: :-:-:-·-:. :-:-· :-:-·. :-·. ·.·:··· 12" o'. Slab and W/$/½1/ .·.·.· .. ·.·.· ·.· .... ·.· .. ·.· · · .. · .·.·.·.· .· · .. · · l Pipe Bottom I· I· --I· I I I 60. Miradrain Cloth NOTTO SCALE NOTE: As o.n option to Miro.drain 6000, Gro. vel or Crushed rock 3/4' MaXiMUl'l ciio.Meter MO.Y Joe usecl with o. Min!MUM 12' thickness o.long the interior fo.ce of the wall and 2.0 cu.ft,/ft. of pipe gravel envelope. FIGURE NUMBER V JOB NUMBER 00-7866 4~~=··~ 00-7759-VII ____.✓. --------------------~ I I I: I: 1- ··I I· I I I- 1- 1: I'. 1: I I: I I· - I I - APPENDIX A I I I- I I 1- , 1-- I I I- I I- I- -I I APPENDIX A UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART SOIL DESCRIPTION Coarse-grained {More than half of material is larger than a No. 200 sieve) GRAVELS, CLEAN GRAVELS (More than half of coarse fraction is larger than No. 4 sieve size, but smaller than 3") GRAVELS WITH FINES (Appreciable amount} SANDS, CLEAN SANDS (More than half of coarse fraction is smaller than a No. 4 sieve) SANDS WITH FINES (Appreciable amount) GW GP GC SW SP SM Well-graded gravels, gravel and sand mixtures, little or no fines. Poorly graded gravels, gravel and sand mixtures, little or no fines. Clay gravels, poorly graded gravel-sand-silt mixtures Well-graded sand, gravelly sands, little or no fines Poorly graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines. Silty sands, poorly graded sand and silty mixtures. SC Clayey sands, poorly graded sand and clay mixtures. FINE-GRAINED (More than half of material is smaller than a No. 200 sieve) SILTS AND CLAYS Liquid Limit Less than 50 Liquid Limit Greater than 50 HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS ML CL OL MH CH OH PT Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour, sandy silt and clayey-silt sand mixtures with a slight plasticity. Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly clays, silty clays, clean clays. Organic silts and organic silty clays of low plasticity. Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine sandy or silty soils, elastic silts. Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays. Organic clays of medium to high plasticity. I I I· ·I: I I I· I· I· 1, I I; I· I- I· I I I I· • I , APPENDIX B I I I I I- I I I- I I· I I I- I -I I I APPENDIX B GENERAL EARTHWORK SPECIFICATIONS General The objective of these specifications is to properly establish procedures for the clearing and preparation of the existing natural ground or properly compacted fill to receive new fill; for the selection of the fill material; and for the fill compaction and testing methods to be used. Scope of Work The earthwork includes all the activities and resources provided by the contractor to construct in a good workmanlike manner all the grades of the filled areas shown in the plans. The major items of work covered in this section include all clearing and grubbing, removing and disposing of materials, preparing areas to be filled, compacting of fill, compacting of backfills, subdrain installations, and all other work necessary to complete the grading of the filled areas. Site Visit and Site Investigation 1. 2. The contractor shall visit the site and carefully study it, and make all inspections necessary in order to determine the full extent o.f the work required to complete all grading in conformance with the drawings and specifications. The contractor shall satisfy himself as to the nature, location, and extent of the work conditions, the conformation and condition of the existing ground surface; and the type of equipment, labor, and facilities needed prior to and during prosecution of the work. The contractor shall satisfy himself as to the character, quality, and quantity of surface and subsurface materials or obstacles to be encountered. Any inaccuracies or discrepancies between the actual field conditions and the drawings, or between the drawings and specifications, must be brought to the engineer's attention in order to clarify the exact nature of the work to be performed. A soils investigation report has been prepared for this project by GEi. It is available for review and should be used as a reference to the surface and subsurface soil and bedrock conditions on this project. Any recommendations made in the report of the soil investigation or subsequent reports shall become an addendum to these specifications. Authority of the Soils Engineer and Engineering Geologist The soils engineer shall be the owner's representative to observe and test the construction of fills. Excavation and the placing of fill shall be under the observation of the soils engineer and his/her representative, and he/she shall give a written opinion regarding conformance with the specifications ·upon completion of grading. The soils engineer shall have the authority to cause the removal and replacement of porous topsoils, uncompacted or improperly compacted fills, disturbed bedrock materials, and soft alluvium, and shall have the authority to approve or reject materials proposed for use in the compacted fill areas. The soils engineer shall have, in conjunction with the engineering geologist, the authority to approve the preparation of natural ground and toe-of-fill benches to receive fill material. The engineering geologist shall have the authority to evaluate the stability of the existing or proposed slopes, and to evaluate the necessity of remedial _m_e_asures. If any unstable condition is being created by cutting or filling, the engineering geologist and/or soils engineer shall advise the contractor ·aria ownef7mmeaiarely, -and -prohibit gr-ad~ng-in thB .aff-ecte.d _ar_e_a .uotil ~\d.~~ time as corrective measures are taken. The owner shall decide all questions regarding: (1 l the interpretation of the drawings and specifications, (2) the acceptable fulfillment of the contract on the part of the contractor, and (3) the matter -of compensa_tion. I I· Appendix B Page 2 I Clearing and Grubbing 2. Clearing and grubbing shall consist of the removal from all areas to be graded of all surface trash, abandoned improvements, paving, culverts, pipe, and vegetation (including --but not limited to --heavy weed growth, trees, stumps, logs and roots larger than 1-inch in diameter}. All organic and inorganic materials resulting from the clearing and grubbing operations shall be collected, piled, and disposed of by the contractor to give the cleared areas a neat and finished appearance. Burning of combustible materials on-site shall not be permitted unless allowed by local regulations, and at such times and in such a manner to prevent the fire from spreading to areas adjoining the property or cleared area. I 3. It is understood that minor amounts of organic materials may remain in the fill soils due to the near impossibility of complete removal. The amount remaining, however, must be considered negligible, and in no case can be allowed to occur in concentrations or total quantities sufficient to contribute to settlement upon decomposition. I I· I- I· I· I· I· I I· I I I I Preparation of Areas to be Filled 1 . 2. 3. 4. After _clearing and grubbing, all uncompacted or improperly compacted fills, soft or loose soils, or unsuitable materials, shall be removed to expose competent natural ground, undisturbed bedrock, or properly compacted fill as indicated in the soils investigation report or by our field representative. Where the unsuitable materials are exposed in final graded areas, they shall be removed and replaced as compacted fill. The ground surface exposed after removal of unsuitable soils shall be scarified to a depth of at least 6 inches, brought to the specified moisture content, and then the scarified ground compacted to at least the specified density. Where undisturbed bedrock is exposed at the surface, scarification and recompaction shall not be required. All areas to receive compacted fill, including all removal areas and toe-of-fill benches, shall be observed and approved by the soils engineer and/or engineering geologist prior to placing compacted fill. Where fills are made on hillsides or exposed slope areas with gradients greater than 20 percent, horizontal benches shall be cut into firm, undisturbed, natural ground in order to provide both lateral and vertical stability. This is to provide a horizontal base so that each layer is placed and compacted on a horizontal plane: _ The initial bench at the toe of the fill shall be at least 10 feet in width on firm, undisturbed, natural ground at the ·elevation of the toe stake placed at the bottom of the design slope. The engineer shall . determine the width and frequency of all succeeding benches, which will vary with the soil conditions and the steepness of the slope. Ground slopes flatter than 20 percent (5.0:1.0) shall be benched when considered necessary by the soils engineer. Fill and Backfill Material Unless otherwise specified, the on-site material obtained from the project excavations may be used as fill or _g_ackfill, provided that all organic material, rubbish, debris, and other objectionable material contained therein is first removed~ the evenftliaf expa-nsive-materials -are encountered .dudog_f_o_u_oda_ti_qn excavations within 3 feet of finished grade and they have not been properly processed, they shall be entirely removed or thoroughly-mixed ~with good, granular material before incorporating them in fills. No footing shall be allowed to bear on soils which, in the opinion of the soils engineer, are detrimentally expansive --unless designed for this clayey condition. However, rocks, boulders, broken Portland cement concrete, and bituminous-type pavement obtained from the project excavations may be permitted in the backfill or fill with the following limitations: I I I· I I I I Appendix B Page 3 1 . 2 3. 4. 5. 6. The maximum dimension of any piece used in the top 10 feet shall be no larger than 6 inches. Clods or hard lumps of earth of 6 inches in greatest dimension shall be broken up before compacting the material in fill. If the fill material originating from the project excavation contains large rocks, boulders, or hard lumps that cannot be broken readily, pieces ranging from 6 inches in diameter to 2 feet in maximum dimension may be used in fills below final subgrade if all pieces are placed in such a manner {such as windrows) as to eliminate nesting or voids between them. No rocks over 4 feet will be allowed in the fill. Pieces larger than 6 inches shall not be placed within 12 inches of any structure. Pieces larger than 3 inches shall not be placed within 12 inches of the subgrade for paving. Rockfills containing less than 40 percent of soil passing 3/4-inch sieve may be permitted in designated areas. Specific recommendations shall be made by the soils engineer and be subject to approval by the city engineer. 7. Continuous observation by the soils engineer is required during rock placement. 8. Special and/or additional recommendations may be provided in writing by the soils engineer to modify, clarify, or amplify these specifications. 9. During grading operations, soil types other than those analyzed in the soil investigation report may be encountered by the contractor. The soils engineer shall be consulted to evaluate the suitability of these soils as fill materials. Placing and Compacting Fill Material 1. After preparing the areas to be filled, the approved fill material shall be placed in approximately horizontal layers, with lift thickness compatible to the material being placed and the type of equipment being used. Unless otherwise approved by the soils engineer, each layer spread for compaction shall not exceed 8 inches of loose thickness. Adequate drainage of the fill shall be provided at all times during the construction period. I I· I· I I I· I I· I . 2. When the moisture content of the fill material is below that specified by the engineer, water shall be added • to it until the moisture content is as specified. 3. 4. I I I When the moisture content of the fill material is above that specified by the engineer, resulting in inadequate compaction or unstable fill, the fill material shall be aerated by blading and scarifying or other satisfactory methods until the moisture content is as specified. After each layer has been placed, mixed, and spread evenly, it shall be thoroughly compacted to not less than the density set forth in the specifications. Compaction shall be accomplished with sheepsfoot rollers, multiple-:.wheel pneumat1c-=-foea roil•ers,· or-other-approved -t-y.pes _o.f .ac.c.eptable compaction equipment. Equipment shall be of such design that it will be able to compact the fill to the specified relative compaction: Compaction shall cover the entire fill area, and the equipment shall make sufficient trips to ensure that the desired density has been obtained throughout the entire fill. At locations where it would be impractical due to inaccessibility of rolling compacting equipment, fill layers shall be compacted to the specified requirements by hand-directed compaction equipment. I I 1: I I I I I I I· I I I I I I I I I Appendix B Page 4 5. 6. 7. 8. When soil types or combination of soil types are encountered which tend to develop densely packed surfaces as a result of spreading or compacting operations, the surface of each layer of fill sha_ll be sufficiently roughened after compaction to ensure bond to the succeeding layer. Unless otherwise specified, fill slopes shall not be steeper than 2.0 horizontal to 1.0 vertical. In general, fill slopes shall be finished in conformance with the lines and grades shown on the plans. The surface of fill slopes shall be overfilled to a distance from finished slopes such that it will allow compaction equipment to operate freely within the zone of the finished slope, and then cut back to the finished grade to expose the compacted core. Alternate compaction procedures include the backrolling of slopes with sheepsfoot rollers in increments of 3 to 5 feet in elevation gain. Alternate methods may be used by the contractor, but they shall be evaluated for approval by the soils engineer. Unless otherwise specified, all allowed expansive fill material shall be compacted to a moisture content of approximately 2 to 4 percent above the optimum moisture content. Nonexpansive fill shall be compacted at near-optimum moisture content. All fill shall be compacted, unless otherwise specified, to a relative compaction not less than 95 percent for fill in the upper 12 inches of subgrades under areas to be paved with asphalt concrete or Portland concrete, and not less than 90 percent for other fill. The relative compaction is the ratio of the dry unit weight of the compacted fill to the laboratory maximum dry unit weigGt of a sample of the same soil, obtained in accordance with A.S.T.M. D-1557 test method. The observation and periodic testing by the soils engineer are intended to provide the contractor with an ongoing measure of the quality of the fill compaction operation. It is the responsibility of the grading contractor to utilize this information to establish the degrees of compactive effort required on the project. More importantly, it is the responsibility of the grading contractor to ensure that proper compactive effort is applied at all times during the grading operation, including during the absence of soils engineering representatives. Trench Backfill 1. Trench excavations which extend under graded lots, paved areas, areas under the influence of structural loading, in slopes or close to slope areas, shall be backfilled under the observations and testing of the soils engineer. All trenches not falling within the aforementioned locations shall be backfilled in accordance with the City or County regulating agency specifications. 2. 3. 4. Unless otherwise specified, the minimum degree of compaction shall be 90 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density. Any soft, spongy, unstable, or other similar material encountered in the trench excavation upon which the bedding material or pipe is to be placed, shall be removed to a depth recommended by the soils engineer and replaced with bedding materials suitably densified. Bedding material shall first be placed so that the pipe is supported for the full length of the barrel with full bearing on the bottom segment. After the needed testing of the pipe is accomplished, the bedding shall be completed to at least 1 foot on top of the pipe. The bedding shall be properly densified before backfill is -placed:-Beddingsnall -c·on-sfarof·granular ma-te~ial -with -a sand .eq.ulvaLeQt not less than 30, or other material approved by the engineer. ----------------- No rocks greater than 6 inches in diameter will be allowed in the backfill placed between 1 foot above the pipe and 1 foot below .finished subgrade. Rocks greater than 2.5 inches in any dimension will not be allowed in the backfill placed within 1 foot of pavement subgrade. • I I I· Appendix B Page 5 5. Material for mechanically compacted backfill shall be placed in lifts of horizontal layers and properly moistened prior to compaction. In addition, the layers shall have a thickness compatible with the material being placed and the type of equipment being used. Each layer shall be evenly spread, m.ciistened or dried, and then tamped or rolled until the specified relative compaction has been attained. I I I· I I- I I I- I I I I I I 8. Backfill shall be mechanically compacted by means of tamping rollers, sheepsfoot rollers, pneumatic tire rollers, vibratory rollers, or other mechanical tampers. Impact-type pavement breakers (stampers) will not be permitted over clay, asbestos cement, plastic, cast iron, or nonreinforced concrete pipe. Permission to use specific compaction equipment shall not be construed as guaranteeing or implying that the use of such equipment will not result in damage to adjacent ground, existing improvements, or improvements installed under the contract. The contractor shall make his/her own determination in this regard. Jetting shall not be permitted as a compaction method unless the soils engineer allows it in writing. Clean granular material shall not be used as backfill or bedding in trenches located in slope areas or within a distance of 10 feet of the top of slopes unless provisions are made for a drainage system to mitigate the potential buildup of seepage forces into the slope mass. Observations and Testing 1. 2. 3. 4. The soils engineers or their representatives shall sufficiently observe and test the grading operations so that they can state their opinion as to whether or not the fill was constructed in accordance with the specifications. The soils engineers or their representatives shall take sufficient density tests during the placement of compacted fill. The contractor should assist the soils engineer and/or his/her representative by digging test pits for removal determinations and/or for testing compacted fill. In addition, the contractor should cooperate with the soils engineer by removing or shutting down equipment from the area being tested. Fill shall be tested for compliance with the recommended relative compaction and moisture conditions. Field density testing should be performed by using approved methods by A.S.T.M., such as A.S.T.M. D1556, D2922, and/or D2937. Tests to evaluate density of compacted fill should be provided on the basis of not less than one test for each 2-foot vertical lift of the fill, but not less than one test for each 1,000 cubic yards of fill placed. Actual test intervals may vary as field conditions dictate. In fill slopes, approximately half of the tests shall be made at the fill slope, except that not more than one test needs to be made for each 50 horizontal feet of slope in each 2-foot vertical lift. Actual test interv_als may vary as field conditions dictat_e. Fill found not to be in conformance with the grading recommendations should be removed or otherwise handled as recommended by the soils engineer. Site Protection It shall be the grading contractor's obligation to take all measures deemed necessary during grading to maintain adequate safety measures and working conditions, and to provide erosion-control devices for the protection of. _excw_ate.d areas, slopa area_§_, fini~l]_ed work on the site and adjoining properties, from storm damage and flood hazard originating on the project. It shall be the contractor'sresponsibility To maintafnslopes mth·e,r·as-gra-ded form until all slopes are in satisfactory compliance with the job specifications, all berms and benches have been properly constructed, and all associated drainage devices have been installed and meet the requirements of the specifications. I Appendix 8 Page 6 I· I I· I- I- I- I- I All observations, testing services, and approvals given by the soils engineer and/or geologist shall not relieve the contractor of his/her responsibilities of performing the work in accordance with these specifications. After grading is completed and the soils engineer has finished his/her observations and/or testing of the work, no further excavation or filling shall be done except under his/her observations. Adverse Weather Conditions 1 . 2. 5. 6. Precautions shall be taken by the contractor during the performance of site clearing, excavations, and grading to protect the worksite from flooding, ponding, or inundation by poor or improper surface drainage. Temporary provisions shall be made during the rainy season to adequately direct surface drainage away from and off the worksite. Where low areas cannot be avoided, pumps should be kept on hand to continually remove water during periods of rainfall. During periods of rainfall, plastic sheeting shall be kept reasonably accessible to prevent unprotected slopes from becoming saturated. Where necessary during periods of rainfall, the contractor shall install checkdams, desilting basins, rip-rap, sandbags, or other devices or methods necessary to control erosion and provide safe conditions. During· periods of rainfall, the soils engineer should be kept informed by the contractor as to the nature of remedial or preventative work being performed (e.g. pumping, placement of sandbags or plastic sheeting, other labor, dozing, etc.). Following periods of rainfall, the contractor shall contact the soils engineer and arrange a walk-over of the site in order to visually assess rain-related damage. The soils engineer may also recommend excavations and testing in order to aid in his/her assessments. At the request of the soils engineer, the contractor shall make excavations in order to evaluate the extent of rain-related damage. Rain-related damage shall be considered to include, but may not be limited to, erosion, silting, saturation, swelling, structural distress, and other adverse conditions identified by the soils engineer. Soil adversely affected shall be classified as Unsuitable Materials, and shall be subject to overexcavation and replacement with compacted fill or other remedial grading, as recommended by the soils engineer. Relatively level areas, where saturated soils and/or erosion gullies exist to depths of greater than 1 .0 foot, shall be overexcavated to unaffected, competent material. Where less than 1.0 foot in depth, unsuitable materials may be processed in place to achieve near-optimum moisture conditions,_ then thoroughly recompacted in accordance with the applicable specifications. If the desired results are not achieved,· the affected materials shall be over-excavated, then replaced in accordance with the applicable specifications. I-7. In slope areas, where saturated soils and/or erosion gullies exist to depths of greater than 1 .0 foot, they shall be overexcavated and replaced as compacted fill in accordance with the applicable specifications. Where affected materials exist to depths of 1 .0 foot or less below proposed finished grade, remedial grading by moisture-conditioning in place, followed by thorough recompaction in accordance with the applicable grading guidelines herein presented may be attempted. If materials shall be overexcavated and replaced as compacted fill, it shall be done in accordance with the slope-repair recommendations herein. As field conditions -dictate, other slope-repair procedures-maTbe re-corrfrnenaea by·tm:fso11sengin·eer .--- I -- I I 1- I· 1· I I: I: I ··I I- I· 1 APPENDIX C I- I- I- I I I I I . I I I l,:DATE: Tuesday, October l0, 2000 ************************************* * * * * * * E Q F A U L T Ver. 2.20 * * * * * * ************************************* (Estimation of RHGA Horizontal Acceleration From Digitized California Faults) I- .SEARCH PERFORMED FOR: SCB ,I· JOB NUMBER: 00-7866 JOB NAME: JRM/KELLY I-SITE COORDINATES: I· LATITUDE: 33.1236 N LONGITUDE: ll7.3027 , SEARCH RADIUS: 100 mi w I-ATTENUATION RELATION: 1) Campbell & Bozorgnia (1994) Horiz. -Alluvium I I- UNCERTAINTY (M=Mean, S=Mean+l-Sigma): M SCOND: 0 COMPUTE RHGA HORIZ. ACCEL. (FACTOR: 0.650 FAULT-DATA FILE USED: CDMGSCE.DAT DISTANCE: 2 O. O mi) I· SOURCE OF DEPTH VALUES (A=Attenuation File, F=Fault Data File): A I I I I I I I 11 DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS I: I I· I· I· I- I· I -Page l ABBREVIATED FAULT NAME SAN ANDREAS -Coachella SAN ANDREAS -San Bernardi SAN ANDREAS -Southern SAN ANDREAS -Mojave SAN ANDREAS -1857 Rupture SUPERSTITION HILLS (San Ja SUPERSTITION MTN. (San Jae SAN JACINTO -BORREGO I.~~-~~~=~=~=~~=~=~-~~~~~--SAN JACINTO-ANZA I I I SAN JACINTO-SAN JACINTO VA SAN JACINTO-SAN BERNARDINO LAGUNA SALADA ELSINORE-COYOTE MOUNTAIN ELSINORE-JULIAN I ~~~=~~~~~=~~~~~~~ _-_ ------- ELSINORE-GLEN IVY BRAWLEY SEISMIC ZONE I -------------------------- ' CHINO-CENTRAL AVE. (Elsino I EARTHQUAKE VALLEY APPROX. DISTANCE mi (km) 73 (118) 66 (106) 66 (106) 83 (133) 83 (133) 85 (137) 81 (130) 64 (104) 51 ( 83) 47 ( 76) 48 ( 77) 62 ( 99) 87 (140) 56 ( 90) 24 ( 3 9) --------- 36 ( 58) --------- 54 ( 87) --------- 94 ( 151) --------- 51 ( 82) --------- 42 ( 68) MAX. CREDIBLE EVENT MAX. RHGA CRED. SITE MAG. ACC. g SITE INTENS MM 7.10 0.032· V 7. 3 0 0. 044 VI 7.40 0.048 VI 7.lO 0.027 V 7.80 0.05l VI 6.60 0.017 IV 6.60 0.018 IV 6.60 0.024 V 6.80 7.20 6.90 6.70 7.00 6.80 7.10 ----- 6.80 ----- 6.80 ----- 6.40 ----- 6.70 ----- 6.50 0.039 0.062 0.047 0.028 0.023 0.035 0.129 ------ 0 .062 ------ 0.037 ------ 0 .012 ------ 0 .036 ------ 0.039 V VI VI V IV V VIII -V-I-I-- ------ VI ------ V ------ III ------ V ------ V MAX. PROBABLE EVENT MAX. PROB. MAG. 7.10 7.30 RHGA SITE ACC. g ------ 0.032 ------ 0.044 SITE INTENS MM ------ V ------ VI 7.30 0.044 VI 7.10 0.027 V 7.50 0.039 V 5.90 0.009 III 6.lO 0.012 III 6.lO 0.016 IV 6.20 6.90 6.80 6.70 6.30 6.20 6.40 0.023 0.048 0.043 0.028 0.012 0.021 0.072 6 .-30-G. 0"66- 6.30 0.040 IV VI VI V III IV VI ¥I - V 5 .. 90 0.016 IV 6.40 0.012 III 5.50 5.70 I -------------------------- ELMORE RANCH -------------------------- 84 ( 13 6) 6. 60 0. 017 IV 1 CORONADO BANK -------------------------- 21 ( 34) 7.40 0.190 VIII -------------------------- NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (Offshor I .-------------------------- ROSE CANYON 8 ( 12) 6.90 0.212 VIII -------------------------- 5 ( 8) 6. 90 0.259 IX -------------------------- I· I DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS 2 I ABBREVIATED FAULT NAME I--------------------------- CLAMSHELL-SAWPIT I,-------------------------- CUCAMONGA I HOLLYWOOD • -------------------------- MALIBU COAST ,-~~~~~~===~~~~~~~~-~~~~~~:: PALOS VERDES I,-------------------------- • RAYMOND I ' SAN GABRIEL I-------------------------- SAN JOSE I·~~=~-~~~=~~--------------SIERRA MADRE (San Fernando I·~~;;~-~;;;-------------- APPROX. DISTANCE mi (km) MAX. CREDIBLE EVENT MAX. RHGA CRED. SITE MAG. ACC. g SITE INTENS MM 83 (133) 6.50 0.015 IV 73 (118) 7.00 0.027 V 87 (140) 6. 40 0. 013 III 94 (152) 6.70 0.015 IV 4 9 ( 7 9) 6 . 9 0 0 . 0 4 5 VI 3 8 ( 6 2 ) 7 . 10 0 . 0 7 4 VI I 8 2 ( 13 3 ) 6 . 5 0 0 . 0 15 IV 100 (160) 7. 00 0. 020 IV 71 ( 114 ) 6 . 5 0 0 . 0 19 IV 92 (148) 6.60 0.014 IV 98 (157) 6.70 0.014 IV 73 (118) 7.00 0.027 V ----------------- 5 . 40 0 006 II ----------------- 6. 30 0 079 VII ----------------- 5 80 0 104 VII ----------------- 5. 70 0. 135 VIII ----------------- MAX. PROBABLE EVENT MAX. RHGA SITE PROB. SITE INTENS MAG. ACC. g MM 5.00 0.005 II 6.10 0.013 III 5.30 0.005 II 4.90 0.003 I 5.60 0.014 IV 6.20 0.033 V 5.00 0.005 II 5.60 0.006 II 5.00 0.006 II 5.50 0.006 II 5.60 0.006 II 6.20 0.014 IV --VERDBGG I ---------------------------85 {·1·39-)· ·6.-70 -0.01-7-IV ---5.-20 0.00-5--II -- COMPTON THRUST I ELYSIAN PARK THRUST -------------------------- ANACAPA-DUME I -------------------------- BURNT MTN. I CLEGHORN 59 ( 94) 6.80 0.048 VI 5.80 0.021 IV 61 ( 98) 6.70 0.041 V 1 0 0 ( 161 ) 7 . 3 0 0 . 0 2 2 IV 7 8 ( 12 5 ) 6 . 4 0 0 . 0 16 IV 7 9 ( 12 8) 6 . 5 0 0 . 01 7 IV 5.80 6.30 5.10 6.00 0.020 IV 0.010 III -~~~ Pi=-- 0. =;:=;;~ I I I 1 ---------------------------------------------------- EUREKA PEAK 81 ( 13 0) 6.40 0. 015 IV I ---------------------------------------------------- HELENDALE -s. LOCKHARDT 89 (144) 7.10 0. 025 V ---------------------------------------------------- JOHNSON VALLEY (Northern) 96 (154) 6.70 0.016 IV I ---------------------------------------------------- LANDERS 88 ( 141) 7.30 0. 03 0 V ---------------------------------------------------- I LENWOOD-LOCKHART-OLD WOMAN 93 ( 150) 7.30 0. 028 V ---------------------------------------------------- NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE ( 88 (142) 6.70 0.016 IV I ---------------------------------------------------- / NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE ( 81 ( 131) 7.00 0.023 IV ---------------------------------------------------- I I DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS ----------------- 5.10 0.005 II ----------------- 5.40 0. 005 II ----------------- 5.20 0.004 I ----------------- 5.20 0.005 II ----------------- 5.50 0. 006 II ----------------- 5.20 0.005 II ----------------- 5.60 0.008 II ----------------- l .?age 3 --------·-------------------------------------------------------------------- MAX. CREDIBLE EVENT MAX. PROBABLE EVENT I-APPROX. -------------------------------------- ABBREVIATED DISTANCE MAX. RHGA SITE MAX. RHGA SITE FAULT NAME mi (km) CRED. SITE INTENS PROB. SITE INTENS 1, MAG. ACC. g MM MAG. ACC, g MM --------------------------------------------------------------------- PINTO MOUNTAIN 72 ( 11 7) 7.00 0.030 V 6.10 0.013 III ---------------------------------------------------------------------I-EMERSON So. -COPPER MTN. 96 (154) 6.90 0.019 IV 5.30 0.004 I --------------------------------------------------------------------- : ***************************************************************************** l~END OF SEARCH-52 FAULTS FOUND WITHIN THE SPECIFIED SEARCH RADIUS. lrHE ROSE CANYON FAULT rs CLOSEST TO THE SITE. IT IS ABOUT 5.0 MILES AWAY. LARGEST MAXIMUM-CREDIBLE SITE ACCELERATION: ,,LARGEST MAXIMUM-PROBABLE SITE ACCELERATION: I I I 0.259 g 0.135 g I I I ?ATE: Tuesday, October 10, 2000 *************************************** I· * * * * * * E Q S E A R C H Ver. 2.20 * * * * * * I· I *************************************** (Estimation of RHGA Horizontal Acceleration From California Earthquake Catalogs) I ·SEARCH PERFORMED FOR: SCB I _JOB NUMBER: 00-7866 JRM/KELLY JOB NAME: I-SITE COORDINATES: LATITUDE: 33.124 N • LONGITUDE: 117. 3028 W l·TYPE OF SEARCH: RADIUS SEARCH RADIUS: 100 mi I· .SEARCH MAGNITUDES: 5.0 TO 9.0 I-SEARCH DATES: 1800 TO 1995 1) Campbell & Bozorgnia (1994) Horiz. -Alluvium ATTENUATION RELATION: I UNCERTAINTY (M=Mean, S=Mean+l-Sigma): M I SCOND: 0 FAULT TYPE ASSUMED (DS=Reverse, SS=Strike-Slip): DS I COMPUTE RHGA HORIZ. ACCEL. (FACTOR: 0.650 DISTANCE: 20.0 mi) EARTHQUAKE-DATA FILE USED: ALLQUAKE.DAT 1·;~-ME PERIOD OF EXPOSURE FOR STATISTICAL COMPARISON: 50 years ISOUR~E OF DEPTH VALUES (A=Attenuation File, E=Earthquake Catalog): A I I ~ ~ I I I· ?age 1 IF ILE ("1 _ODE ----In MG M GI MG -A GI I~ M t -A GI -A I~ M GI ,~ .T T 1-T T D 1-g -D ,_g D D l,g D -A MG -A -A -A -A MG MG MG MG MG MG MG MG MG MG MG GI I 1-~G MG 1-DM ·DM DM DM I DM DM MG I G G G G G G I ---,-~~ DM I MG MG DM DM I DM DM DM G I G I I G G G G G IDM G LAT. NORTH ------ 33.000 32.800 34.370 34.000 34.100 34.000 33.000 32.670 34.000 34.000 32.70.0 32.670 32.670 33.500 32.250 33.900 34.100 34.200 33.400 32.700 33.200 34.300 32.800 34.200 34.300 33.800 34.000 34.100 34.000 34.200 33.700 33.700 33.700 33.500 33.750 33.800 -I3--:-1so 34.000 33.200 34.080 33.200 34.000 34.000 34.000 34.000 32.900 34.180 TIME LONG. DATE (GMT) WEST HM Sec --------------------------- 117.300 11/22/1800 2130 0.0 117.100 5/25/1803 0 0 0.0 117.650 12/ 8/1812 15 0 0.0 118.250 9/23/1827 0 0 0.0 118.100 7/11/1855 415 0.0 118.250 1/10/1856 0 0 0.0 117.000 9/21/1856 730 0.0 117.170 12/ 0/1856 0 0 0.0 117.500 12/16/1858 10 0 0.0 118.250 3/26/1860 0 0 0.0 117.200 5/27/1862 20 0 0.0 117.170 10/21/1862 0 0 0.0 117.170 5/24/1865 0 0 0.0 115.820 5/ 0/1868 0 0 0.0 117.500 1/13/1877 20 0 0.0 117.200 12/19/1880 0 0 0.0 116.700 2/ 7/1889 520 0.0 117.900 8/28/1889 215 0.0 116.300 2/ 9/1890 12 6 0.0 116.300 2/24/1892 720 0.0 116.200 5/28/1892 1115 0.0 117.600 7/30/1894 512 0.0 116.800 10/23/1894 23 3 0.0 117.400 7/22/1899 046 0.0 117.500 7/22/1899 2032 0.0 117.000 12/25/1899 1225 0.0 118.000 12/25/1903 1745 0.0 117.300 7/15/1905 2041 0.0 118.300 9/3/1905 540 0.0 117.100 9/20/1907 154 0.0 117.400 4/11/1910 757 0.0 117.400 5/13/1910 620 0.0 117.400 5/15/1910 1547 0.0 116.500 9/30/1916 211 0.0 117.000 4/21/1918 223225.0 117.600 4/22/1918 2115 0.0 117-. oocr -6"/ -6/I918 --Z232 1) -:o- 118.500 11/19/1918 2018 0.0 116.700 1/ 1/1920 235 0.0 118.260 7/16/1920 18 8 0.0 116.600 10/12/1920 1748 0.0 117.250 7/23/1923 73026.0 116.000 4/3/1926 20 8 0.0 118.500 .8/ 4/1927 1224 0.0 116.000 9/ 5/1928 1442 0.0 115.700 10/2/1928 19 1 0.0 116.920 1/16/1930 02433.9 SITE SITE APPROX. DEPTH QUAKE ACC. MM DISTANCE (km) MAG. g INT. mi [km] --------------------------------- 3.0 6.50 0.193 VIII 9 [ 14] 7.3 5.00 0.024 V 25 [ 41] 3.0 7.00 0.021 IV 88 [ 142] 7.3 5.00 0.005 II 81 [ 131] 3.0 6. 30 0.013 III 82 [ 131] 7.3 5.00 0.005 II 81 [ 131] 7.3 5·. 00 0.023 IV 20 [ 31] 7.3 5.00 0.017 IV 32 [ 52] 3.0 7.00 0.035 V 62 [ 9 9] 7.3 5.00 0.005 II 81 [ 131] 4.0 5.90 0.040 V 30 [ 48] 7.3 5.00 0.017 IV 32 [ 52] 7.3 5.00 0.017 IV 32 [ 52] 3.0 6.30 0.012 III 89 [ 144] 7.3 5.00 0.007 II 61 [ 99] 3.5 6.00 0.019 IV 54 [ 8 7] 6.5 5.30 0.007 II 76 [ 122] 5.8 5.50 0.007 II 82 [ 132] 3.0 6.30 0.020 IV 61 [ 98] 3.0 6.70 0.025 V 65 [ 105] 3.0 6.30 0.019 IV 64 [ 103] 3.5 6.00 0.010 III 83 [ 134] 5.0 5.70 0.026 V 37 [ 5 9] 5.8 5.50 0.008 III 75 [ 120] 3.0 6.50 0.015 IV 82 [ 132] 3.0 6.40 0.029 V 50 [ 8 0] 7.3 5.00 0.005 II 73 [ 117] 5;5 5.30 0.008 II 67 [ 108] 6.5 5.30 0.006 II 83 [ 134] 3.5 6.00 0.012 III 75 [ 121] 7.3 5.00 0.013 III 40 [ 65) 7.3 5.00 0.013 III 40 [ 65] 3.5 6.00 0.029 V 40 [ 65) 7.3 5.00 0.009 III 53 [ 85] 3.0 6.80 0.044 VI 47 [ 75) 7.3 5.00 0.009 III 50 [ 8 0] 4-7 -[ _7_5_] -7. 3--5 .-eo --0 . 0:1.-0 ---I-I I- 7.3 5.00 0.004 I 92 [ 148] 7.3 5.00 0.015 IV 35 [ 57] 7.3 5.00 0.004 I 86 [ 138] 6.5 5.30 o .. 016 IV 41 [ 66] 3.0 6.25 0.020 IV 61 [ 97] 5.8 5.50 0.005 II 96 [ 155) 7.3 5.00 0.004 I 92 [ 148] 7.3 5.00 0.004 I 4~eii~~~j 7.3 5.00 0.004 I 6.8 5.20 0.006 II 23) IDMG ")MG I )MG DMG DMG I )MG DMG DMG )MG l _)MG DMG I Page FILE I I- CODE ---- DMG DMG DMG MG MG MG MG MG MG MG MG MG MG MG MG MG MG MG MG MG MG MG MG MG MG MG MG MG MG MG -MG MG MG MG G G G G G G G 34.180 116.920 33.950 118.632 33.617 117.967 33.750 118.083 33.750 118.083 33.750 118.083 33.700 118.067 33.575 117.983 33.683 118.050 33.700 118.067 33.750 118.083 2 LAT. LONG. NORTH WEST ------------- 33.850 118.267 33.750 118.083 33.617 118.017 33.783 118.133 32.08,3 116.667 34.100 116.800 31.867 116.571 33.408 116.261 33.699 117.511 32.000 117.500 32.000 117.500 34.083 116.300 34.067 116.333 34.067 116.333 33.000 116.433 33.783 118.250 32.983 115.983 32.967 116.000 32.967 116.000 32.967 116.000 33.233 115.717 32.967 116.000 34.267 116.967 33.976 116.721 33.994 116.712 33.217 116.133 33.000 115.833 33.950 116.850 34.017 116.500 34.017 116.500 ---• ---------34.017 116.500 34.017 116.500 32.500 118.550 33.933 116.383 32.200 116.550 32.200 116.550 32.983 115.733 32.817 118.350 32.950 115.717 33.283 116.183 33.283 116.183 1/16/1930 034 3.6 7.1 8/31/1930 04036.0 6.8 3/11/1933 154 7.8 3.0 3/11/1933 2 9 0.0 7.3 3/11/1933 230 0.0 7.1 3/11/1933 323 0.0 7.3 3/11/1933 51022.0 7.1 3/11/1933 518 4.0 6.8 3/11/1933 658 3.0 5.8 3/11/1933 85457.0 7.1 3/11/1933 910 0.0 7.1 TIME DATE (GMT) DEPTH HM Sec (km) ------------------------- 3/11/1933 1425 0.0 7.3 3/13/1933 131828.0 6.5 3/14/1933 19 150.0 7.1 10/ 2/1933 91017.6 6.2 11/25/1934 818 0.0 7.3 10/24/1935 1448 7.6 7.1 2/27/1937 12918.4 7.3 3/25/1937 1649 1.8 3.5 5/31/1938 83455.4 5.8 5/ 1/1939 2353 0.0 7.3 6/24/1939 1627 0.0 7.3 5/18/1940 5 358.5 6.2 5/18/1940 55120.2 6.8 5/18/1940 72132.7 7.3 6/4/1940 1035 8.3 7.1 11/14/1941 84136.3 6.2 5/23/1942 154729.0 7.3 10/21/1942 162213.0 3.0 10/21/1942 162519.0 7.3 10/21/1942 162654.0 7.3 10/22/1942 15038.0 5.8 10/22/1942 181326.0 7.3 8/29/1943 34513.0 5.8 6/12/1944 104534.7 7.1 6/12/1944 111636.0 6.5 8/15/1945 175624.0 5.0 1/ 8/1946 185418.0 6.2 9/28/1946 719 9.0 7.3 7/24/1947 221046.0 5.8 7/25/1947 04631.0 7.3 -7-;-25719 4-7 --o194-9-. o-6 -:-s- 7/26/1947 24941.0 7.1 2/24/1948 81510.0 6.5 12/4/1948 234317.0 3.0 11/4/1949 204238.0 5.0 11/ 5/1949 43524.0 7.1 1/24/1951 717 2.6 5.4 12/26/1951 04654.0 4.0 6/14/1953 41729.9 5.8 3/19/1954 95429.0 3.0 3/19/1954 95556.0 7.3 5.10 0.006 II 76 [ 123] 5.20 0.004 I 95 [ 154] 6.30 0.026 V 51 [ 8 2] 5.00 0.007 II 62 [ 10 O] 5.10 0.007 II 62 [ 10 OJ 5.00 0.007 II 62 [ 10 O] 5.10 0.008 III 59 [ 9 6 J 5.20 0.011 III 50 [ 81] 5.50 0.011 III 58 [ 93] 5.10 0.008 III 59 [ 9 6 J 5.10 0.007 II 62 [ 10 O] SITE SITE APPROX. QUAKE ACC. MM DISTANCE MAG. g INT. mi [km] ---------------------------- 5·. 00 0.005 II 75 [ 120] 5.30 0.009 III 62 [ 10 OJ 5.10 0.009 III 53 [ 8 6] 5.40 0.009 III 66 [ 10 6J 5.00 0.005 II 81 [ 13 O] 5.10 0.006 II 73 [ 118] 5.00 0.004 I 97 [ 15 6] 6.00 0.015 IV 63 [ 102] 5.50 0.018 IV 41 [ 6 7] 5.00 0.005 II 78 [ 126J 5.00 0.005 II 78 [ 126] 5.40 0.006 II 88 [ 141] 5.20 0.005 II 86 [ 13 8] 5.00 0.004 I 86 [ 13 8] 5.10 0.010 III 51 [ 82] 5.40 0.008 II 71 [ 114] 5.00 0.005 II 77 [ 124] 6.50 0.017 IV 76 [ 123] 5.00 0.005 II 76 [ 123] 5.00 0.005 II 76 [ 123] 5.50 0.006 II 92 [ 148] 5.00 0.005 -II 76 [ 123] 5.50 0.007 II 81 [ 131] 5.10 0.007 II 68 [ 109] 5.30 0.008 II 69 [ 111] 5.70 0.011 III 68 [ 109] 5.40 0.006 II 85 [ 13 8] 5.00 0.007 II 63 [ 101] 5.50 0.008 II 77 [ 124] 5.00 0.005 II 77 [ 124] -[ 124-] s. 20 -o.-ee6 -I-I -77 5.10 0.005 II 77 [ 124] 5.30 0.006 II 84 [ 136] 6.50 0.017 IV 77 [ 124] 5.70 0.009 III 77 [ 125] 5.10 0.005 II 77 [ 125J 5.60 0.006 II 91 [ 147] 5.90 0.014 III 64 [ 103] 5.50 0.006 II ◄~~;~~ 6.20 0.017 IV 5.00 0.006 II 06] IDMG ,MG I )MG DMG DMG I )MG 0MG DMG )MG 1-)MG DMG ":JMG l ?AS PAS l?AS l ?AS ?AS l?age :<'ILE CODE ---- ?AS PAS I I I PAS !?AS !?AS PAS r, ..:rSP 3SP SP SN SP SP SP SN SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP G SP --- 33.283 116.183 33.283 116.183 33.216 115.808 33.183 115.850 33.231 116.004 33.710 116.925 31.811 117.131 33.190 116.129 33.113 116.037 33.343 116.346 34.270 117.540 33.033 115.821 33.944 118.681 34.327 116.445 33.501 116.513 33.098 115.632 33.998 116.606 3 LAT. LONG. NORTH WEST ------------- 32.971 117.870 34.061 118.079 34.073 118.098 33.082 115.775 33.013 115.839 33.919 118.627 34.140 117.700 34.262 118.002 33.961 116.318 34.201 116.436 34.139 116.431 34.341 116.529 34.163 116.855 34 •. 203 116.827 34.108 116.404 33.876 116.267 34.332 116.462 34.239 116.837 33.902 116.284 34.195 116.862 34.064 116.361 34.340 116.900 34.369 116.897 34.029 116.321 -------·------- 3/19/1954 102117.0 5.8 3/23/1954 41450.0 7.1 4/25/1957 215738.7 6.8 4/25/1957 222412.0 7.1 5/26/1957 155933.6 7.3 9/23/1963 144152.6 7.3 12/22/1964 205433.2 5.4 4/9/1968 22859.1 3.0 4/9/1968 3 353.5 6.8 4/28/1969 232042.9 4.5 9/12/1970 143053.0 6.2 9/30/1971 224611. 3 7.1 1/1/1979 231438.9 7.3 3/15/1979 21 716.5 6.8 2/25/1980 104738.5 5.8 4/26/1981 12 928.4 5.0 7/8/1986 92044.5 5.4 TIME DATE (GMT) DEPTH HM Sec (km) ------------------------- 7/13/1986 1347 8.2 6.5 10/ 1/1987 144220.0 4.0 10/ 4/1987 105938.2 6.5 11/24/1987 15414.5 4.5 11/24/1987 131556.5 3.5 1/19/1989 65328.8 7.3 2/28/1990 234336.6 6.8 6/28/1991 144354.5 6.2 4/23/1992 045023.0 2.9 6/28/1992 115734.1 3.0 6/28/1992 123640.6 7.1 6/28/1992 124053.5 6.8 6/28/1992 144321.0 6.5 6/28/1992 150530.7 3.0 6/29/1992 141338.8 6.2 6/29/1992 160142.8 6.8 7/ 1/1992 074029.9 6.2 7/ 9/1992 014357.6 6.5 7/24/1992 181436.2 7.3 8/17/1992 204152.1 6.5 9/15/1992 084711.3 6.8 11/27/1992 160057.5 6.5 12/4/1992 020857.5 6.5 8/21/1993 014638.4 7.3 5.50 0.010 III 66 [ 10 6] 5.10 0.007 II 66 [ 10 6] 5.20 0.005 II 87 [ 13 9] 5.10 0.005 II 84 [ 135] 5.00 0.005 II 75 [ 121] 5.00 0.011 III 46 [ 74] 5.60 0.006 II 91 [ 14 7] 6.40 0.019 IV 68 [ 10 9] 5.20 0.006 II 73 [ 118] 5.80 0.015 IV 57 [ 92] 5.40 0.007 II 80 [ 12 9] 5.10 0.005 II 86 [ 13 8] 5.00 0.004 I 97 [ 157] 5.20 0.004 I 97 [ 155] 5.50 0.013 III 52 [ 84] 5.70 0.006 II 97 [ 156] 5.60 0.009 III 72 [ 11 7] SITE SITE APPROX. QUAKE ACC. MM DISTANCE MAG. g INT. mi [km] ---------------------------- 5.30 0.020 IV 34 [ 55] 5.90 0.010 III 79 [ 127] 5.30 0.006 II 80 [ 129] 5.80 0.008 II 88 [ 142] 6.00 0.010 III 85 [ 13 7] 5.00 0.004 I 94 [ 151] 5.20 0.006 II 74 [ 119] 5.40 0.006 II 88 [ 142] 6.10 0.011 III 81 [ 13 O] 7.60 0.033 V 90 [ 144] 5.10 0.005 II 86 [ 13 9] 5.20 0.004 I 95 [ 153] 5.30 0.007 II 76 [ 123] 6.70 0.019 IV 79 [ 128] 5.40 0.006 II 85 [ 13 7] 5.20 0.006 II 79 [ 127] 5.40 0.005 II 96 [ 155] 5.30 0.006 II 82 [ 131] 5.00 0.005 II 80 [ 128] 5.30 0.006 II 78 [ 12 6] 5.20 0.005 II 85 [ 136] 5.30 0.005 II 87 [ 140] 5.30 0.005 II 89 [ 143] 5.00 0.004 I 84 [ 13 6] 6/16/1994 --1·5-24-27 .-5-7.T 5~00 ---o. 0·04 -94 -[ j:5-'2·] -SP 34.268 116.402 T - ,~****************************************************************************** -END OF SEARCH-141 RECORDS FOUND ICOMPUTER TIME REQUIRED FOR EARTHQUAKE SEARCH: 0.1 minutes MAXIMUM SITE ACCELERATION DURING TIME PERIOD 1800 TO 1995: 0.193g LIMUM SITE INTENSITY (MM) DURING TIME PERIOD 1800 To 1995: VIII rIMUM MAGNITUDE ENCOUNTERED IN SEARCH: 7.60 I UEAREST HISTORICAL EARTHQUAKE WAS ABOUT 9 MILES AWAY FROM SITE. l~WMBER OF YEARS REPRESENTED BY SEARCH: 196 years I; I I I I 1- 1- I· I I I I I I I I I I RESULTS OF PROBABILITY ANALYSES ITIME PERIOD OF SEARCH: ::::--~~--::::----------------- ~ENGTH OF SEARCH TIME: 196 years I \TTENUATION RELATION: 1) Campbell & Bozorgnia (1994) Horiz. *** TIME PERIOD OF EXPOSURE FOR PROBABILITY: 50 years l ?ROBABILITY OF EXCEEDANCE FOR ACCELERATION • ----------------------------------------- -Alluvium I-NO.OF AVE. RECURR. COMPUTED PROBABILITY OF EXCEEDANCE \CC. TIMES OCCUR. INTERV. in in in in in in in g EXCED #/yr years 0.5 yr 1 yr 10 yr 50 yr 75 yr 100 yr *** yr ---------------------------------------------------------------- ).01 47 0.240 4.170 0.1130 0.2132 0.9091 1.0000 1.0000 1. 0000 1.0000 .02 15 0.077 13.067 0.0375 0.0737 0.5348 0.9782 0.9968 0.9995 0.9782 .03 5 0.026 39.200 0.0127 0.0252 0.2252 0.7207 0.8524 0.9220 0.7207 .04 3 0.015 65.333 0.0076 0.0152 0.1419 0.5:348 0.6827 0.7836 0.5348 .05 1 0.005 196.000 0.0025 0.0051 0.0497 0.2252 0.3180 0.3996 0.2252 .06 1 0.005 196.000 0.0025 0.0051 0.0497 0.2252 0.3180 0.3996 0.2252 .07 1 0.005 196.000 0.0025 0.0051 0.0497 0.2252 0.3180 0.3996 0.2252 .08 :l 0.005 196.000 0.0025 0.0051 0.0497 0.2252 0.3180 0.3996 0.2252 .09 1 0.005 196.000 0.0025 0.0051 0.0497 0.2252 0.3180 0.3996 0.2252 .10 1 0.005 196.000 0.0025 0.0051 0.0497 0.2252 0.3180 0.3996 0.2252 .11 1 0.005 196.000 0.0025 0.0051 0.0497 0.2252 0.3180 0.3996 0.2252 .12 1 0.005 196.000 0.0025 0.0051 0.0497 0.2252 0.3180 0.3996 0.2252 .13 1 0.005 196.000 0.0025 0.0051 0.0497 0.2252 0.3180 0.3996 0.2252 .14 1 0.005 196.000 0.0025 0.0051 0.0497 0.2252 0.3180 0.3996 0.2252 .15 1 0.005 196.000 0.0025 0.0051 0.0497 0.2252 0.3180 0.3996 0.2252 .16 1 0.005 196.000 0.0025 0.0051 0.0497 0.2252 0.3180 0.3996 0.2252 .17 1 0.005 196.000 0.0025 0.0051 0.0497 0.2252 0.3180 0.3996 0.2252 .18 1 0.005 196.000 0.0025 0.0051 0.0497 0.2252 0.3180 0.3996 0.2252 .19 1 0.005 196.000 0.0025 0.0051 0.0497 0.2252 0.3180 0.3996 0.2252 I ·1 I I -I I I ,~s-u I ~ I PROBABILITY OF EXCEEDANCE FOR MAGNITUDE I·-------------------------------------- NO.OF AVE. RECURR. COMPUTED PROBABILITY OF EXCEEDANCE -'lAG. TIMES OCCUR. INTERV. in in in in in in in I----~~~~~-~~~=--~=:::_ ~~=-~= --=-~= -=~-~= -=~-~= -~=-~= =~~-~= :::_~= ,.00 l4l 0.719 1.390 0.3021 0.5129 0.9992 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 I i.50 49 0.250 4.000 0.1175 0.2212 0.9179 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 6.00 26 0.133 7.538 0.0642 0.1242 0.7346 0.9987 l.0000 1.0000 0.9987 6.50 10 0.051 19.600 0.0252 0.0497 0.3996 0.9220 0.9782 0.9939 0.9220 7.00 3 0.0l5 65.333 0.0076 0.0l52 0.14l9 0.5348 0.6827 0.7836 0.5348 l!~=~-----=--~~~~=-==~~~~~-~~~~==-~~~~==-~~~~=~-~~====-~~==~~-~~===~-~~====- 1 .GUTENBERG & RICHTER RECURRENCE RELATIONSHIP: I a-value= 3. 498 b-value= 0.734 I I I· I I' 1: 1: I· I -· 1· I beta-value= 1.691