The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCUP 99-30; Cannon Court; Conditional Use Permit (CUP) (10)CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. ENGINEERING, INC. SAN DIEGO, CA 2414 Vineyard Ave. Suite G Escondido, CA 92029 (7(10)746-4955 (760) 746-9806 FAX RIVERSIDE, CA 490 E. Princeland Ct. Suite 7 Corona, CA 91719 (909)371-1890 (909) 371-2168 FAX VENTURA, CA 1645 Pacific Ave. Suite 105 Oxnard, CA 93033 (661) 486-6475 (661) 486-9016 FAX TRACY, CA 242 W. Larch Suite F -I>acy,CA 95376 (209)839-2890 (209) 839-2895 FAX LANCASTER, CA 4215610th St. W. UnitK Lancaster, CA 93534 (661)726-%76 (661) 726-9676 FAX GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED CANNON COURT DEVELOPMENT CANNON COURT CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA Prepared for: MR. JOHN BUZA WEST DEVELOPMENT, INC. P O BOX 676066 RANCHO SANTE FE, CA 92067 Prepared by: CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. 2414 VINEYARD AVENUE, SUITE G ESCONDIDO, CA 92029 CTE JOB NO. 10-3715G DECEMBER 10, 1999 GEOTECHNICAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. ENGI SAN DIEGO, CA 2414 Vineyard Ave. Suite G Escondido, CA 92029 a—jgC)C)(760) 746-4955 ING.' ^ ^ ^^(760) 746-9806 FAX RIVERSIDE, CA 490 E. Princeland Ct. Suite 7 Corona, CA 91719 (909) 371-1890 (909) 371-2168 FAX VENTURA, CA 1645 Pacific Ave. Suite 105 Oxnard, CA 93033 (661)486-6475 (661) 486-9016 FAX TRACY, CA 242 W. Larch Suite F •iyacy,CA 95376 (209)835 (209)83! Job LANCASTER, CA 4215610th St. W. UnitK Lancaster, CA 93534 Mr. John Buza West Development, Inc. P O Box 676066 Rancho Sante Fe. Ca 92067 Subject: Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Cannon Court Development APN 223-051-12 Cannon Court Carlsbad, Califomia Mr. Buza: At your request, we have performed a geotechnical investigation at the referenced site to provide geotechnical recommendations for the proposed development. The attached report discusses the findings of our investigation activities and provides geotechnical recommendations for use during project design and construction. The project is considered feasible if the recommendations presented in this report are carried out. If you have any questions regarding our findings or recommendations, please do not hesitate to contact this office. The opportimity to be of service is appreciated. Respectfully submitted, CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. T). BMlard, GE #2173 Geotechnical Engineering Manager nathan Goodmacher, CEG #2136 rtified Engineering Geologist GEOTECHNICAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND SCOPE OF SERVICES 4 1.1 Introduction 4 1.2 Scope of Services 4 2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION 4 3.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS 5 3.1 Field Investigation 5 3.2 Laboratory Investigation 6 4.0 GEOLOGY 6 4.1 General Setting 6 4.2 Geologic Conditions 7 4.4 Geologic Hazards 7 4.4.1 General Geologic Hazards Observation 7 4.4.2 Local and Regional Faulting 7 4.4.3 Earthquake Accelerations 8 4.4.4 Liquefaction Evaluation 8 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 10 5.1 General 10 5.2 Grading and Earth-work 10 5.3 Site Preparation 10 5.4 Site Excavation 11 5.5 Fill Placement and Compaction 12 5.6 Fill Materials 12 5.7 Tertiporary Construction Slopes 13 5.8 Foundations and Slab Recommendations 13 5.8.1 Foundations 14 5.8.2 Foundation Settlement 14 5.8.3 Foundation Setback 15 5.8.4 Interior Concrete Slabs 15 5.9 Lateral Resistance and Earth Pressures 15 5.10 Seismic Loading Parameters 17 5.11 Exterior Flatwork 17 5.12 Drainage 17 5.13 Vehicular Pavements 18 5.13.1 Asphalt Pavement 18 5.13.2 Portland Cement Concrete Pavements 19 5.14 Slopes 19 5.15 Construction Observation 20 5.16 Plan Review 20 6.0 LIMITATIONS OF INVESTIGATION 21 C:^WINDC)WMESK'^^>^N1CX1^X^ FOLDttWT.GEOTCCHNiC.\LDOC FIGURES FIGURE 1 SITE INDEX MAP FIGURE 2 EXPLORATION LOCATION MAP FIGURE 3 RETAINING WALL DRAINAGE DETAIL APPENDICES APPENDIX AREFERENCES CITED APPENDIX B EXPLORATION LOGS APPENDIX C LABORATORY METHODS AND RESULTS C:\WINDOWSM3eEKTl )rNICOLrs F<MJJERMlPT,OEom:HNIC.VL.DOC Report of Geotechnical Investigation Page S Proposed Cannon Court Development Cannon Road, Carlsbad, Califomia December 10, 1999 CTEJobNo. 10-3715 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This investigation was performed to provide site-specific geotechnical information for the proposed commercial stmctures and associated improvements. This project is feasible from a geotechnical viewpoint if the recommendations presented in this report are implemented. Our investigation found that the proposed building pad areas are directly underlain by thin fills and topsoil which in turn is underlain by Quatemary terrace deposits. Fills and topsoil were found to consist generally of dry to moist, loose, silty sands with organic material. The terrace deposit materials consist generally of dry to moist, very dense, silty sands. Soils exposed within the upper two feet of existing grade were generally observed to be loose and dry with organic debris. Removal of these loose, organic soils will be necessary before constmction may begin. Groundwater was encountered in two of our borings at depths of approximately 16 fbg (feet below grade). Although groundwater levels will likely fluctuate during periods of precipitation, groundwater is not expected to affect the proposed development if proper drainage controls are implemented and maintained. With respect to geologic and seismic hazards, the site is considered as safe as any within the San Diego County area. San Diego County is an area of moderate to high seismic risk. Based on the geologic findings and reference review no active surface faults are known to exist at the site. C: WISIX)WS\DESKTOI»NrcOL£*S FOL0ER'RPT_C.EOTECHNK-.U.DOC Report of Geotechnical Investigation . Page 4 Proposed Cannon Court Development Cannon Road, Carlsbad, Califomia December 10, 1999 CTE Job No. 10-3715 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND SCOPE OF SERVICES 1.1 Introduction This report presents the results of our geotechnical investigation and provides conclusions and geotechnical engineering criteria for the proposed development. It is our understanding that the site is to be developed by constmcting a hotel with underground parking, a restaurant, and market/service stations and associated improvements (e.g., utilities, landscaping, and parking areas). Specific recommendations for excavations, additional fill placement, and foundation design for the proposed stmctures are presented in this report. The investigation for this report included reference review, field exploration, laboratory testing, geologic hazard evaluation, and engineering analysis. Appendix A contains a list of references cited in this report. . 1.2 Scope of Services The scope of services provided included: • Review of readily available geologic and soils reports pertinent to the site and adjacent areas. • Exploration of subsurface conditions to the depths influenced by the proposed constmction. • Laboratory testing of representative soil samples to provide data to evaluate the geotechnical design characteristics of the soils. • Definition of the general geology and evaluation of potential geologic hazards at the site. • Soil engineering design criteria for the proposed improvements. • Preparation of this summary report (with geotechnical constmction recommendations) of the investigations performed. 2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION The site is located west of Interstate 5 and north of Cannon Road in Carlsbad, Califomia. The site is bordered on the west by Amtrack railroad tracks, on the south by Carmon Road and Interstate 5 to C:\WlND<)WS'DESkTt)rMCtUrSfnLDEB\HPT_0EOTFCHNICAl.D<X: Report of Geotechnical Investigation Page 5 Proposed Cannon Court Development Cannon Road, Carlsbad. Califomia December 10, 1999 CTE Job No. 10-3715 the east. Currently the site is vacant vvith no existing buildings, however the site has been recently used to stockpile organic cuttings. The parcel elevations range from approximately 20 to 22 feet above mean sea level. Site drainage is to the west from a central, east-west trending, bladed swale accepting drainage from the interstate ramp. Figures 1 and 2 are maps showing the location of the site and the layout of the proposed constmction. 3.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS 3.1 Field Investigation Field exploration, conducted on November 1,1999, included site reconnaissance and the excavation of seven borings to assess the condition of shallow soil materials. Borings were excavated, using a truck mounted drilling rig, to the maximum explored depth of approximately 46 feet below grade (fbg). Soils were logged in the field by a geologist and visually classified using the Unified Soil Classification system. The field descriptions have been modified, where appropriate, to reflect laboratory test results. Soil boring logs including descriptions of the soil, field-testing data, and supplementary laboratory data are included in Appendix B. Approximate boring locations are shown on Figure 2. 3.1.1 "Undisturbed" Soil Samples "Undisturbed" soil samples were collected using a modified California-drive sampler (2.4-inches inside diameter, 3-inches outside diameter) lined with brass sample rings. Drive sampling was conducted in overall accordance with ASTM D-3550. The steel C;\WlNW>WSDe.SKTtH«NICtX£3P0liJEJl\RrT_GEOTECl[Nlt,VLIX)C Report of Geotechnical Investigation Page 6 Proposed Cannon Court Development Cannon Road, Carlsbad, Califomia December 10, 1999 CTEJobNo. 10-3715 sampler was driven into the bottom ofthe test pit with successive drops of a 30-pound weight. The soil was retained in brass rings (2.4-inches in diameter, 1.0-inches in height) and carefully sealed in waterproof plastic containers for shipment to the Constmction Testing & Engineering, Inc. ("CTE") geotechnical laboratory. 3.1.2 Disturbed Soil Samples Bulk soil samples were also collected for laboratory analysis. Bulk soil samples of boring cuttings were collected and sealed in plastic bags for transporting to the CTE geotechnical laboratory for analysis. 3.2 Laboratory Investigation Laboratory tests were conducted on representative soil samples for classification purposes and to evaluate physical properties and engineering characteristics. The following laboratory test was conducted: particle-size analysis, plasticity tests, In-Place Moisture/Density, direct shear, and modified proctor. Test method descriptions and laboratory results are included in Appendix C. 4.0 GEOLOGY 4.1 General Setting At an approximate elevation ranging from 20-30 feet above mean sea level (msl), the site lies wdthin the near shore portion of the northem San Diego County area typified by marine terraces lying perpendicular to the modem coastline. The site topography slopes do-wn to the west toward the Pacific Ocean. C:\WlND(>W!PDE.Sk'mpNlCOLE-S FnLDErRPT_OEaTICHNlCAL DOC Report of Geotechnical Investigation Page 7 Proposed Cannon Court Development Cannon Road, Carlsbad, Califomia December 10, 1999 CTEJobNo. 10-3715 4.2 Geologic Conditions Based on our investigation and geologic mapping compiled by Kennedy and Tan (1996) the site lies on Quatemary Terrace Deposits. Based on our explorations, surface and near surface soils at the site consist of very dense, silty sand terrace deposits which are overlain by intermittent piles of tree branches and other unsuitable organics. 4.3 Groundwater Conditions Groundwater was encountered at a depth of 16 feet in two of our exploratory excavations. Groundwater is not expected to affect the proposed development provided proper site drainage is provided. 4.4 Geologic Hazards 4.4.1 General Geologic Hazards Observation From our investigation it appears that geologic hazards at the site are primarily limited to those caused by violent shaking fi'om earthquake generated ground motion waves. The potential for damage from displacement or fault movement beneath the proposed stmctures should be considered low. 4.4.2 Local and Regional Faulting Based on our site reconnaissance, evidence from our exploratory soil borings, and a review of appropriate geologic literature, it is our opinion that the site is not on known fault traces. The Rose Canyon Fault, approximately 5 miles to the west, is the closest zoned active fault C:iWINDt)WjrDE.SKTt)P v-lCtX.rs FOLDERMlFT.OEOTTrHMCALDOC Report of Geotechnical Investigation Page 8 Proposed Cannon Court Development Cannon Road, Carlsbad. California December 10, 1999 CTE Job No. 10-3715 (Jermings. 1987). Other principal active regional faults include: the Coronado Banks, San Clemente, Elsinore, San Jacinto, and San Andreas faults. 4.4.3 Earthquake Accelerations We have analyzed the possible bedrock accelerations at the site using the computer program EQFAULT (Blake, 1996). For the intended use, it is our opinion that the most significant seismic events would be 6.9 moment magnitude earthquakes on the Rose Canyon Fault located eight (8) kilometers from the site. The Rose Canyon Fauh is considered a seismic source Type B. 4.4.4 Liquefacfion Evaluafion Liquefaction occurs when saturated fine-grained sands or silts lose their physical strengths during earthquake induced shaking and behave as a liquid. This is due to loss of point-to-point grain contact and transfer of normal stress to the pore water. Liquefaction potential varies with water level, soil type, material gradation, relative density, and probable intensity and duration of ground shaking. It is our opinion that the potential for liquefaction should be considered low in all areas of the project. This is based on the generally very dense nature of the soils and because there is apparently is no permanent shallow groundwater. C vWINWiWSVDE.Sk-niP'SICfMXS FOLDEritrr_C.E()TECIINIC.ALDOC Report of Geotechnical Investigation Page-9 Proposed Cannon Court Development Cannon Road, Carlsbad, Califomia December 10, 1999 CTE Job No. 10-3715 4.4.5 Seismic Settlement Evaluation Seismic settlement occurs when loose to medium dense granular soils densify during seismic events. Due to the very dense nature of the underlying materials, it is our opinion that the potential for seismic settlement should be considered low in all areas of the project. 4.4.6 Tsunamis and Seiche Evaluation The potential for tsunami damage at the site is very low due to the distance from the ocean (approximately 1 mile) and elevation (greater than 20 feet above mean sea level). Damage caused by oscillatory waves (seiche) is considered unlikely, as the site is not near any significant bodies of water. 4.4.7 Landsliding Active landslides were not encountered and have not been mapped in the immediate area of the site (Tan and Giffen, 1995). Additionally, the underlying site materials are typically not susceptible to landsliding. Landsliding, therefore, is not considered a significant hazard to the proposed improvements. 4.4.8 Compressible and Expansive Soils Based on geologic observation, the underlying surficial site soil materials consist generally of dense silty sands generally exhibiting low compressibility and expansion characteristics. The surficial soils extending to a depth of one foot will require removal and recompaction. Ci WINDOWSDE-SKTOPiNICtXXS FOLDEB trt GEOTECHNICAL WX: Report of Geotechnical Investigation Page 10 Proposed Cannon Court Development Carmon Road, Carlsbad, Califomia December 10,1999 CTE Job No. 10-3 715 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 General We conclude that the proposed construction of the site is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint, provided the recommendations in this report are incorporated into the design of the project. Recommendations for the design and constmction of the proposed stmcture are included below. The main factors affecting the proposed development is the presence of surficial topsoils and thin fills that are loose and contain oraanic material. 5.2 Grading and Earthwork Upon commencement of constmction, Constmction Testing and Engineering, Inc. should continuously observe the grading and earthwork operations for this project. Such observations are essential to identify field conditions that differ fi-om those predicted by this investigation, to adjust designs to actual field conditions, and to ensure that the grading is in overall accordance with the recommendations of this report. Our persoimel should perform adequate observation and sufficient testing of fills during grading to support the Geotechnical Consultant's professional opinion regarding compliance with compaction requirements and specifications contained herein. 5.3 Site Preparation Before grading, the site should be cleared of any existing debris, existing buildings, and other deleterious materials. Surficially eroded, desiccated, burrowed, or otherwise disturbed soils should C:^*lNwvws\D£sK-^)^NK•oLE^tF^JUJER^RrT.GE^TTO:n^u:.\uDoc Report of Geotechnical Investigation Page 11 Proposed Caimon Court Development Cannon Road, Carlsbad, Califomia December 10, 1999 CTE Job No. 10-3715 be renioved to the depth ofthe competent materials (estimated to be approximately two to three feet). Organic materials not suitable for stmctural backflll should be disposed of off-site or placed in non- stmctural planter or landscape areas. All organic materials excavated and removed should be disposed of at a legal disposal site. 5.4 Site Excavation Shallow excavations in site materials throughout most of the site should generally be accomplished with heavy-duty construction equipment under normal conditions, although localized dense zones may be encoimtered. It is recommended that proposed stmctures to be constmcted on site be founded entirely on non- disturbed terrace deposits or entirely on recompacted stmctural fill. If founded on recompacted stmctural fill, excavations should be conducted such that a minimum of 18 inches of newly engineered fill is provided beneath the building envelope and that cleanout of all surficial deposits above the terrace deposits is performed. Overexcavation and placement of engineered fill should be conducted laterally to a distance of 5 feet beyond building limits. If loading docks or other deepened footings are proposed, additional excavation and recompaction should be performed in these areas to provide the 18 inches of recompacted fill beneath all stmcture footings. CnWINDOW»DESkTl>r-MC(>LFS FOLDERMIPT_OEOTECHNIC,VLDOC Report of Geotechnical Investigation Page 12 Proposed Cannon Court Development Cannon Road, Carlsbad, Califomia December 10, 1999 CTE Job No. 10-3715 5.5 Fill Placement and Compaction The geotechnical consultant should verify that the proper site preparation has occurred before fill placement occurs. Following removal of loose, disturbed soils and required overexcavations, areas to receive fills or concrete slabs on grade should be scarified, moisture conditioned to above optimum moisture content, and properly compacted. Fill and backfill should be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent as evaluated by ASTM D1557 at moisture content between 0 and 2 percent above optimum. The optimum lift thickness for backfill soil will be dependent on the type of compaction equipment used. Generally, backfill should be placed in uniform lifts not exceeding eight inches in loose thickness. Backfill placement and compaction should be done in overall conformance with geotechnical recommendations and local ordinances. 5.6 Fill Materials Low expansive soils derived from the onsite fills and terrace deposits are considered suitable for reuse on the site as compacted fill. If used, these materials should be screened of organic materials and materials greater than six inches in a maximum dimension. Any imported fill beneath stmctures, pavements and walks should have an expansion index less than or equal to 30 (per UBC 18-I-B) with less than 35 percent passing the no. 200 sieve. Imported fill soils for use in stmctural or slope areas should be evaluated by the soil engineer to determine strength characteristics before placement on the site. C;lWiND<IW.SiDE.SK'n>rNlfOLFS F()LDER\RrT_aEt)TECHNIC.Vl-DIX Report of Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Cannon Court Development Cannon Road, Carlsbad. Califomia December 10, 1999 Page 13 CTE Job No. 10-3715 5.7 Temporary Construction Slopes Sloping recommendations for unshored temporary excavations are provided. The recommended slopes should be relatively stable against deep-seated failure, but may experience localized sloughing. Terrace deposit materials are generally considered Type A and onsite fill soils are considered Type B soils. Recommended slope ratios are set forth in Table I below. TABLE 1 RECOMMENDED TEMPORARY SLOPE RATIOS SOILS TYPE A (Terrace deposits) SLOPE RATIO (Horizontal: vertical) 3/4:1 (MAXIMUM) MAXIMUM HEIGHT 20 FEET B (Engineered Fills) 1:1 (MAXIMUM) 20 FEET A "competent person" must verify actual field conditions and soil type designations while excavations exist according to Cal-OSHA regulations. Also, the above sloping recommendations do not allow for surcharge loading at the top of slopes by vehicular traffic, equipment or materials. Appropriate surcharge setbacks must be maintained fi-om the top of all unshored slopes. 5.8 Foundations and Slab Recommendations The following recommendations are for preliminary planning purposes only. These foundation recommendations should be reviewed after completion of earthwork and testing of surface soils. C: WINDOW.SVDE.SKTDP'NICtXXTi FOLDCR\RfT_GEtrTECHNIC.U-DOC Report of Geotechnical Investigation Page 14 Proposed Cannon Court Development Cannon Road, Carlsbad, Califomia December 10, 1999 CTEJobNo. 10-3715 5.8.1 Foundations Continuous and isolated spread footings are suitable for use at this site. However, footings should not straddle cut/fill interfaces; we anticipate all footings for stmctures will be founded entirely in cut Quatemary Terrace Deposits or on recompacted stmctural fill. Foundation dimensions and reinforcement should be based on allowable bearing values of 3500 pounds per square foot (psf) for stmctures founded entirely on undisturbed Terrace deposits and 2500 psf for stmctures founded on recompacted stmctural fill. The allowable bearing value may be increased by one third for short duration loading which includes the effects of wind or seismic forces. Footings for the proposed stmctures should be at least 15 inches wide and installed at least 18 inches below the lowest adjacent subgrade. Footing reinforcement for continuous footings should consist of a minimum of four #4 reinforcing bars; two placed near the top and two placed near the bottom. The stmctural engineer should design isolated footing reinforcement. 5.8.2 Foundation Settlement In general the maximum post-constmction compression settlement is expected to be about 0.75 inches. Maximum differential settlement of continuous footings across the building is expected to be on the order of 0.5 inch. C:'.W!NDOVraDESKT()PNiCOL£-S FOLDERVRfT GEaTECHNICU-DOC Report of Geotechnical Investigation Page 15 Proposed Cannon Court Development Cannon Road, Carlsbad, Califomia December 10, 1999 CTE Job No. 10-3715 5.8.3 Foundation Setback Footings for structures should be designed such that the minimum horizontal distance from the face of adjacent slopes to the outer edge of the footing is a minimum of 10 feet. 5.8.4 Interior Concrete Slabs Lightly loaded concrete slabs should be a minimum of 4 inches thick for interior concrete slabs and 5 inches for all parking garage slabs. The concrete slabs can be placed directly over site granular deposits. Minimum slab reinforcement should consist of #3 reinforcing bars placed on 18-inch centers each way at mid-slab height. A vapor barrier of ten-mil visqueen overlying a two-inch layer of compacted sand should be installed beneath moisture sensitive slab areas. At a minimum, a one-inch layer of clean coarse sand should be placed above the visqueen to protect the membrane during steel and concrete placement. Areas subject to heavy loads or vehicular traffic may require increased thickness and reinforcement. 5.9 Lateral Resistance and Earth Pressures The following recommendations may be used for shallow footings on the site. Foundations placed in firm, well-compacted fill material may be designed using a coefficient of fiiction of 0.35 (total frictional resistance equals coefficient of friction times the dead load). A design passive resistance value of 350 pounds per square foot per foot of depth (with a maximum value of 1200 pounds per square foot) may be used. The allowable lateral resistance can be taken as the sum of the frictional resistance and the passive resistance, provided the passive resistance does not exceed two-thirds of the total allowable resistance. C:\W[N[)C)Wff.DESKT1H'\1COLFSRXDeR\Rrr.GEOTlCHNk:.4LDOC Report of Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Cannon Court Development Cannon Road, Carlsbad, Califomia December 10, 1999 Page 16 CTE Job No. 10-3715 Retaining walls up to ten feet high and backfllled using generally granular soils may be designed using the equivalent fluid weights given in Table 2 below. TABLE 2 EQUIVALENT FLUID UNIT WEIGHTS (pounds per cubic foot) WALL TYPE LEVEL BACKFILL SLOPE BACKFILL 2:1 (HORIZONTAL: VERTICAL) CANTILEVER WALL (YIELDING) 35 58 RESTRAINED WALL 55 85 The values above assume non-expansive backfill and free draining conditions. Measures should be taken to prevent a moisture buildup behind all retaining walls. Drainage measures should include free draining backfill materials and perforated drains. Figure 3 is recommended gravel and perforated pipe drainage system. These drains should discharge to an appropriate offsite location. C>WINIX)W»DE.SKT(JP'.VICOLE"S F()LDER>RPT_OEC)TECHMCALIXX: Report of Geotechnical Investigation Page 17 Proposed Cannon Court Development Cannon Road, Carlsbad, Califomia December 10. 1999 CTE Job No. 10-3715 5.10 Seismic Loading Parameters In accordance with the 1997 UBC the site is located within seismic zone 4 with factor z = 0.40. The Rose Canyon Fault, a class B seismic source type, is located eight (8) kilometers from the site. Therefore the site has a near surface source factor Ny —l.l and N., — 1.0. Based on our subsurface exploration and our knowledge of site area geology, the site has a soil profile type of S^ and therefore the site has seismic coefficients Cy = 0.70 and C^ = 0.44. 5.11 Exterior Flatwork To reduce the potential for distress to exterior flatwork caused by minor settlement of foundation soils, we recommend that such flatwork be installed with crack-controljoints at appropriate spacing as designed by the project architect. Flatwork, which should be installed with crack control joints, includes driveways, sidewalks, and architectural features. All subgrades should be prepared according to the earthwork recommendations previously given before placing concrete. Positive drainage should be established and maintained next to all flatwork. 5.12 Drainage Surface mnoff should be collected and directed away from improvements by means of appropriate erosion reducing devices and positive drainage should be established around the proposed improvements. Positive drainage should be directed away from improvements at a gradient of at C:»limDl)WS\DE!iK-r(-)rNICOLE:SK<)LDER'RrT_OEOTECHNICAL[XX; Report of Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Cannon Court Development Cannon Road, Carlsbad, California December 10, 1999 Page 18 CTEJobNo. 10-3715 least 2 percent for a distance of at least five feet. The project civil engineers should evaluate the on- site drainage and arrange to keep surface water from affecting the site. 5.13 Vehicular Pavements Preliminary pavement sections presented below are based on an assumed Resistance "R" Value testing of representative surficial materials on nearby sites. 5.13.1 Asphalt Pavement The asphalt pavement design is based on Califomia Department of Transportation Highway Manual and on traffic indexes as indicated in Table 3 below. Upon completion of finish grading, "R" Value sampling and testing of subgrade soils should occur and the pavement section modified if necessary. TABLES ASPHALT PAVEMENT Traffic Area Assumed Traffic Index Subgrade "R" Value AC Thickness (inches) Class II Aggregate Base Thickness (inches) Light Tmck Drive/ Loading Areas 6.0 50 5 Auto Parking Areas 4.5 50 2.5 4 C:>WINrK)W.SOESK-n>PNIf(>LFS FtHDER'RPT UEOTECHNlC.VLtKX: Report of Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Cannon Court Development Cannon Road, Carlsbad, Califomia December 10, 1999 Page 19 CTE Job No. 10-3715 5.13.2 Portland Cement Concrete Pavements We understand that parking and light tmck drive areas may be paved with concrete pavements. The recommended concrete pavement section for drive areas has been designed assuming light industrial traffic loads of single axle loads of 15 kips, 10 repetitions per day. Corresponding pavement designs presented in the table below may not be adequate for larger axle loads and traffic volume. Concrete used for pavement areas should possess a minimum 600 psi modulus of mpture. Pavements should be constmcted according to industry standards. TABLE4 CONCRETE PAVEMENT DESIGN Traffic Area Subgrade R-Value PCC Thickness (inches) Tmck Drive/ Loading Areas 50 6.0 Auto Parking Areas 50 5.5 5.14 Slopes Based on anticipated soil sfrength characteristics, fill slopes should be constmcted at slope ratios of 2:1 (horizontal: vertical) or flatter. These fill slope inclinations should exhibit factors of safety greater than 1.5. Although graded and existing slopes on this site should be grossly stable, the soils will be somewhat erodible. Therefore, runoff water should not be permitted to drain over the edges of slopes unless that water is confined to properly designed and constmcted drainage facilities. Erosion resistant vegetation should be maintained on the face of all slopes. CiWINDOWS^OE-StTHrMCtJirs R»LM:R\Rrr_GEc)TECllNICALDOC Report of Geotechnical Investigation Page 20 Proposed Cannon Court Development Cannon Road, Carlsbad, Califomia December 10, 1999 CTE Job No. 10-3715 Typically soils along the top portion of a fill slope face will tend to creep laterally. We do not recommend distress sensitive hardscape improvements be constmcted within five feet of slope crests in fill areas. 5.15 Constmction Observation The recommendations provided in this report are based on preliminary design information for the proposed constmction and the subsurface conditions found in the exploratory boring locations. The interpolated subsurface conditions should be checked in the field during constmction to verify that conditions are as anticipated. Recommendations provided in this report are based on the understanding and assumption that CTE will provide the observation and testing services for the project. All earthwork should be observed and tested to verify that grading activity has been performed according to the recommendations contained within this report. The project engineer should evaluate all footing frenches before reinforcing steel placement. 5.16 Plan Review CTE should review the project foundation plans and grading plans before commencement of earthwork to identify potential conflicts with the recommendations contained in this report. CimiNDOW-POtSKTOp-NICOLE^FOLDERyUT GEtrrEtHNK-.VLDOC Report of Geotechnical Investigation Page 21 Proposed Cannon Court Development Cannon Road, Carlsbad, Califomia December 10, 1999 CTE Job No. 10-3715 6.0 LIMITATIONS OF INVESTIGATION The field evaluation, laboratory testing and geotechnical analysis presented in this report have been conducted according to current engineering practice and the standard of care exercised by reputable geotechnical consultants performing similar tasks in this area. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made regarding the conclusions, recommendations and opinions expressed in this report. Variations may exist and conditions not observed or described in this report may be encountered during constmction. Our conclusions and recommendations are based on an analysis of the observed conditions. If conditions different from those described in this report are encountered, our office should be notified and additional recommendations, if required, will be provided upon request. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service on this project. Respectfully submitted, CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. Jallard, GE #2173 Jonathan Goodmacher, CEG #2136 Geotechnical Engineering Manager Engineering Geologist LEGEND \/ I I iJ^T/^) I// i \ APPROXIMATE LOCATION Y/////////////A OF FAULT TRENCII < > APPROXIMA I E LOCA I ION OF BORING PARKING AND DRIVE AREAS OUTLINE OF PROPOSED STRUCTURES CANNON ROAD CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. Sffy^^.f CiEOTKCIINICAL AND (-ONSIRUC-I'ION ENGINliEkING ll-STINO AND INSPECTION •3r CJ Uix 2414 VINEYARD AVENUE, STEG ESCONDIDO CA. 92029 (760) 746.4<)55 ENOINEERINCINC EXPLORATION LOCATION MAP I'KOI'OSEI) CANNON COURT DEVKI.OPMENT CANNON COURT CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA CTE IOB NO ,0.37,5 CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. Sffy^^.f CiEOTKCIINICAL AND (-ONSIRUC-I'ION ENGINliEkING ll-STINO AND INSPECTION •3r CJ Uix 2414 VINEYARD AVENUE, STEG ESCONDIDO CA. 92029 (760) 746.4<)55 ENOINEERINCINC EXPLORATION LOCATION MAP I'KOI'OSEI) CANNON COURT DEVKI.OPMENT CANNON COURT CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA NO SCALL CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. Sffy^^.f CiEOTKCIINICAL AND (-ONSIRUC-I'ION ENGINliEkING ll-STINO AND INSPECTION •3r CJ Uix 2414 VINEYARD AVENUE, STEG ESCONDIDO CA. 92029 (760) 746.4<)55 ENOINEERINCINC EXPLORATION LOCATION MAP I'KOI'OSEI) CANNON COURT DEVKI.OPMENT CANNON COURT CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA DATE ,2/99 flCURE 2 RETAINING WAL WALL BACKFILL COMPACTED TO 90% RELATIVE DENSITY 3/4" GRAVEL SURROUNDED BY FILTER FABRIC (MIRAFI 140 N, OR EQUIVALENT) FINISH GRADE 4" DIA. PERFORATED PVC PIPE (SCHEDULE 40 OR EQUIVALENT). MINIMUM 1% GRADIENT TO SUITABLE OUTLET WALL FOOTING MINIMUM 6" LAYER OF FILTER ROCK UNDERLYING PIPE E^GINEERtKGJNC CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. GEOTECHNICAL .AND CONSTRUCTION ENaNEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION 2414 VINEYARD AVENUE STEG ESCOWXDOCA. 92029 (760174«-»95S RETAINING WALL DRAINAGE DETAIL PROPOSED CANNON COURT DEVELOPMENT CANNON COURT CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA C'l£Jll)bN(i: 10-3715 OTIE NO SCALE DATE: IFIGURE: 12/99 \\F:\PRQIECrS\IO-3300«ErAININGWALLCNV APPENDIX A REFERENCES CITED C:*WINDOWS-DESKTOP NICOLET! FDLDHMtfT.GEOTtCHNICALDOC REFERENCES CITED 1 Tan, S.S., and Kennedy, M.P, 1996, "Geologic Maps of the Oceanside, San Luis Rey, and San Marcos 7.5' Quadrangles, Northwestem Part of San Diego County, Califomia," Califomia Division of Mines and Geology, Open File Report 96-02. Tan, S.S. and Giffen, D.G., 1995, "Landslide Hazards in the Northem Part of the San Diego Metropolitan Area, San Diego County, Califomia," Landslide Hazard Identification Map No. 35, Califomia Division of Mines and Geology, Open File Report 95-04. C:\WINDOWS\DESKTXir NICOLFS HJLMRVRFT.GEOTECHNICAL DOC CAWINDOWSvneSKTtir.SlCOLE^ FOLDe>\RrT_OK)TKHMC.\LDOC CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC, OEOTECHNICAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENOINEERINO TESTINO AND INSPECTION 2414 VINEYARD AVENUE. SUITE 0 ESCONDIDO CA. 92029 (760) 746-49JJ ENdNEOKUNC 3 CQ o 2 •J) CJ o BORING LEGEND DESCRIPTION Laboratory Tests 1 -5- -10- -1.5- -20- -25- "SM" Block or Chunk Sample Bulk Sample Standard Penetration Test Modified Split-Barrel Drive Sampler (Cal Sampler) Thin Walled Army Corp. of Engineers Sample Groundwater Table Formation Change [(Approximate boundaries queried (?)] ? _ Soil Type or Classification Change [Approximate boundaries queried(?)] Quotes are placed around classifications where the soils exist in situ as bedrock FIGURE: | BL2 ^^CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. ^ OEOTECHNICAL ANO CONSTRUCTION ENOINEERING TESTINO AND INSPECTION 24 14 VINEYARD AVENUE, SUITE G ESCONDIDOCA 1 : 0 2 9 r 60 i " 4 6 .4 < .< EKCINEERIKCJNC DEFINITION OF TERMS PRIMARY DIVISIONS SYMBOLS SECONDARY DIVISIONS 5 a u z o I z < X r* a Q 2 GRAVELS MORE THAN HALF OF COARSE FRACTION IS LARGER-rHAN NO. 4 SIEVE SANDS MORE THAN HALF OF COARSE FRACTION IS SMALLER THAN NO. 4 SIEVE CLEAN GRAVELS < 5% FINES WELL GRADED GRAV ELS, GRAVEL-SAND MIXTURES Ll-fTLE OR NO FINES .•Jf M %^ GP POORLY GRADED GRAVELS OR GRAVEL SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OF NO FINES SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND-SILT MIXTURES, NON-PLASTIC FINES CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND-CLAY MIX-FURES, PLASTIC FINES CLEAN SANDS < 5% FINES SW iJi^i SANDS WITH FINES SP WELL GRADED SANDS. GRAVELLY SANDS, LITTLE OR NO FINES POORLY GRADED SANDS. GRAVELLY SANDS, LITTLE OR NO FINES SILTY SANDS, SAND-SILT MIXTURES, NON-PLASTIC FINES CLAYEY SANDS, SAND-CLAY MIXTURES, PLASTIC FINES d o -1 lA •i ^ S tu ^ So 22 o o SILTS AND CLAVS LIQUID LIMIT IS LESS THAN 50 INORGANIC SILTS, VERY FINE SANDS, ROCK FLOUR, SILTY OR CLAYEY FINE SANDS. SLIGHTLY PLAS-HC CLAYEY SIL-TS INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO MEDIUM PLASTICrTY, GRAVELLY, SANDY, SILTS OR LEAN CLAYS ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICI-TY SILTS AND CLAVS LIQUID LIMIT IS GREATERTHAN 50 EMM INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR DIATOMACEOUS FINE SANDY OR SILTY SOILS, ELASTIC SILTS INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY. FAT CLAYS HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS ORGANIC CLAYS OF .MEDIUM TO HIGH PLASTICI-TY, ORGANIC SILTY CLAYS PEAT AND OTHER HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS GRAIN SIZES BOULDERS COBBLES GRAVEL COARSE FINE SAND COARSE MEDIUM FINE SILTS AND CLAYS 12" 3" 3/4" CLEAR SQUARE SIEVE OPENING 4 10 40 200 U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE ADDITIONAL TESTS (OTHER THAN TEST PIT AND BORING LOG COLUMN HEADINGS) MAX- Maximum Dry Density GS- Grain Size Distribution SE- Sand Equivalent EI- Expansion Index CHM- Sulfate and Chloride Content, pH, Resistivity COR - Corrosivity PM- Permeability SG- Specific Gravity HA- Hydrometer Analysis AL- Atterberg Limits RV- R-Value CN- Consolidation PP- Pocket Penetrometer W.A.- Wash Analysis DS- Direct Shear UC- Unconfined Compression MD- Moisture/Density M- Moismre SC- Swell Compression 01- Organic Impurities FIGURE:! BLl ^CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. GEOTECHNICAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERINO TESTINO AND INSPECTION 2414 VINEYARD AVENUE. SUITE G ESCONDIDO CA 92029 (760 ) 746.493J EKCINEEIUKOJNC PROJECT: CTE JOB NO: LOGGED BY: Cannon Court 10-37I5G DU DRILLER: West Hazmat DRILL METHOD: 8" HollowStem Auger SAMPLE METHOD: Drive SHEET: 1 of I DRILLING DATE: 11/1/99 ELEVATION: S o 2" Q ir. U lfl 00 o -I BORING: B-l DESCRIPTION Laboratory Tests -0-Gravel, concrete chunks, leaves at siulace TOPSOIL/DISTURBED SOIL: - ? ? ? ? ? OUATERNARTY TERRACE DEPOSITS -5- 110/6" 25 25 25 17 17 40-25 50/6" 45- 50/6" 50- 55- SM SM 106.7 5.2 SM SM Very dense, dry, brown, silty fine SAND Dense, moist, orange to brown, silty SAND Very dense, moist, orange tan, with some dark mineral grains, silty fine SAND with decreasing fines. MD Very dense, moist, light brown to tan, silty fine SAND, with trace roui gravel in top 6" of sampler Very dense, moist to wet, orange to tan, GRAVEL with coarse sand and trace silt in bottom 6 " WA GS TotalDepth: 16 feet No refusal Water table at approximately 16 feet Borring Backfilled with soil cuttings FIGURE:| ^CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. OEOTECHXICAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION EKOmUKCJNC 2414 TINEYARD AWENUE. SUITE 0 ESCONDIDO C A. 9202 9 (760) 746-4935 PROJECT: CTE JOB NO: LOGGED BY: Cannon Court 10-3715G DU DRILLER: West Hazmat DRILL METHOD: 8" HollowStem Auger SAMPLE METHOD: Drive SHEET: 1 DRILLING DATE: ELEVA-nON: Of 1 11/1/99 o ffl o a Q Q o :/) lfl CJ lA BORING: B-2 DESCRIPTION Laboratorv Tests - 0-Gravel, leaves, debns on surtace TOPSOIL/DISTURBED SOIL: 7 7 7 7 OUATERNARTY TERRACE DEPOSITS 7 56 45 SM Very dense, moist, brown, silty fine SAND :';7 50 50 50 120.6 6.0 SM Very dense, moist, orange to light brown, silty SAND MD 40-25 30 40 SM Very dense, moist, orange to tan, silty SAND WA 45- :: Z 35 50/6" 115.2 11.5 SM Very dense, wet, light gray to light tan, silty SAND with mjca^Mediumto^coaree^gram^ MD -1^ Total depth: 17 feet No refiisal Water table at approximately 16 to 16.5 feet below grade. Borring Baclcfilled with soil cuttings 55- FIGURE:| JT%CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. \fe - — EKGDIEBUKCJNC GEOTECHNICAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENOINEERING TESTINO AND INSPECTION 2414 VINEYARD AVENUE. SUITE 0 ESCONDIDO CA. 92029 (760) 746-4955 PROJECT: Cannon Court CTEJOBNO: 10-3715G LOGGED BY: DU DRILLER: West Hazmat DRILL METHOD: 8" HollowStem Auger SAMPLE METHOD: Drive SHEET: 1 DRILLING DATE: ELEVA-nON: of I 11/1/99 s ffl Q ri a. o BORING: B-3 DESCRIPTION Laboratory Tests 0-Gravel at surface TOPSOIL/DISTURBED SOIL: -5- 40- ^0- 55- / 28 47 30 22 17 14 16 21 30 OUATERNARTY TERRACE DEPOSITS SM Very dense, moist to dry, dark brown, silty fine SAND Composite Sample EPA 8150, 8081 116.0 5.3 SM Dense, moist, orange to light tan, silty SAND MD SP-SM Medium dense, moist, light gray to white, medium to fine SAND occasional iron staining WA SM Very dense, moist, light gray to white,silty SAND with gravel Increased moisture WA,GS Total depth: 16.5 feet No refiisal No groundwater Boring Backfilled with soil cuttings FIGURE:! MISCONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. EKGINEEJUKCJNC OEOTECHNICAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENOINEERINO TESTING AND INSPECTION 24 14 VINEYARD AVENUE. SUITE 0 ESCONDIDO C A, 92029 (760) 746.4 9 53 PROJECT: CTE JOB NO: LOGGED BY: Cannon Court 10-3715G DU DRILLER: West Hazmat DRILL METHOD: 8" HollowStem Auger SAMPLE METHOD: Drive SHEET: 1 DRILLING DATE: ELEVATION: of 1 11/1/99 S o ffl c o a Q £< Q o 43 e >, 1/1 1/1 CJ 75 3 BORING: B-4 DESCRIPTION Laboratory Tests -0-Gravel and debns on surtace _ 7 9 9 _ 5- -10- 15- -20- 25 60/6" 25 27 37 27 40 50 OUATERNARTY TERRACE DEPOSTIS SM Very dense, dry, dark brown, silty fine SAND SM SM Very dense, moist, orange to brown, silty SAND Very dense, moist, brown, silty SAND MAX 117.2 5.8 SM Very dense, moist, dark reddish brown to orange, silty SAND with mica. Medium to coarse grained sand, decreased fines. MD,DS Total depth 11.5 feet No refusal No groundwater Borring Backfilled with soil cuttings FIGURE:) #r%.CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. GEOTECHNICAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERINO TESTING AND INSPECTION 24 14 VINEYARD AUENUE. SUITE 0 ESCONDIDOCA 9 2029 (760) 746-4955 EKCINFEIIIKGJNC PROJECT: CTE JOB NO: LOGGED BY: Cannon Court I0-37I5G DU DRILLER: West Hazmat DRILL METHOD: 8" HollowStem Auger SAMPLE METHOD: Drive SHEET: I DRILLING DATE: ELEVATION: of 2 11/1/99 tt. •a i o 5 a Q E u l/i BORING: B-5 DESCRIPTION Laboratorv Tests 1 all grasses, some gravel and debris on surtace TOPSOIL/DISTURBED SOIL: -5- 40- 45- 50- 55- 34 38 40 30 40 40 10 15 20 SM SM SM SM SM SP CH OUATERNARTY TERRACE DEPOSTIS Very dense, moist, dark brown, silty fine SAND Very dense, moist, orange to brown, silty SAND Grades to light brown light tan, silty SAND Very dense, moist, orange to tan, silty SAND Very dense, moist, light gray, silty SAND Very dense, moist,orange to white-tan, mottled coarse SAND Hard , moist, gray-orange mottled, CLAY AL FIGURE:! Jf^^CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC, OEOTECHNICAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERINO TESTING AND INSPECTION EKCINEEKIKCJNC 2414 VINEYARD AVENUE. SUITE 0 ESCONDIDO CA 92029 (760) 746-4955 PROJECT: CTE JOB NO: LOGGED BY: Cannon Court 10-3715G DU DRILLER: West Hazmat DRILL METHOD: 8" HollowStem Auger SAMPLE METHOD: Drive SHEET: 2 DRILLING DATE: ELEVATION: of 2 111/99 "a s o in CJ yi BORING: B-5 DESCRIPTION Laboratorv Tests -2S-Z Hard, moist, gray-orange mottled, CLAY -30- ^5- 40- 45- -50- 30 50/6" 20 40 50 20 70/6" 45 60/6" I 35 CH SM Very dense, nioist, light gray with occasional orange, silty bANU decreased fines SP No recovery Very dense, light gray to white, medium to coarse SAND 108.5 5.3 SM SP-SM Very dense, moist, light tan to gray with orange, silty SAND Cuttings are wet at about 38 feet Very dense, wet, white-gray with orange staining medium to coarse with silt. MD WA SM Very dense, wet, Ught gray, silty SAND WA Total depth: 46 feet No refusal Groimdwater at about 38 feet Borring Backfilled with soil cuttings FIGURE:! .ffj>%CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC, ^^-^'^r^.f OEOTECHNICAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTINO AND INSPECTION £7%.] VJ\ 2414 VINEYARD AVtNUE. SUITE 0 ESCONDIDO CA 92029 (760) 746-4955 EKGWEERIKCJNC PROJECT: CTEJOBNO: LOGGED BY: Cannon Court 10-3715G DU DRILLER: West Hazmat DRILL METHOD: 8" HollowStem Auger SAMPLE METHOD: Drive SHEET: 1 DRILLING DATE: ELEVATION: of I 1I/I/99 S o ffl c- a Q l/l U l/l Z) BORING: B-6 DESCRIPTION Laboratory Tests -0-l all grasses, some gravel and debris on surf ace 9 9 9 9 9 OUATERNARTY TERRACE DEPOSTIS -5- 40- 45- 50- 55- 87/6" 21 42 50 z 34 50/6" SM Very dense, dry, orange brown, silty SAND with minor organic roode SM SM Very dense, moist, orange to brown, silty SAND Grades to tan, silty SAND SM Very dense, moist, orange brown, silty SAND DS SM Grades to light brown to tan, silty SAND with minor gravel 96.0 7.8 SP/SM SM Grades to silty, medium to coarse SAND Very dense, moist, light gray to white, silty SAND MD Total depth 21 feet No refiisal No groundwater Borring Backfilled with soil cuttings FIGURE:! ^^CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC CP. GEOTECHNICAL A N D C 0 N ST R UC TIO N ENOINEERINO TESTINO AND INSPECTION EKOINEHUKCJNC 2414 VINEYARD AVENUE. SUITE G ESCONDIDOCA 9 2 0 2 9 (760) 746.4955 PROJECT: CTE JOB NO: LOGGED BY: Cannon Court I0-37I5G DU DRILLER: West Hazmat DRILL METHOD: 8" HollowStem Auger SAMPLE METHOD: Drive SHEET: I DRILLING DATE: ELEVATION: of I 11/1/99 o s Q fr Q 1/1 l/l CJ yi BORING: B-7 DESCRIPTION Laboratory Tests -0-I all grasses, some gravel, and debns on surfiaee 9 9 9 9 9 OUATERNARTY TERRACE DEPOSTIS 100/6' SM Very dense, dry, brown, silty SAND -5-SM Very dense, moist, orange, silty SAND SM Very dense, moist, dark brown, silty SAND, with clay. WA 45- 50- 55- Z 40 50/6" 95.2 3.8 SM SP Grades to tan, silty SAND Very dense, moist, white to light gray with orange blotches, coarse SAND MD Total depth 16 feet No refiisal No groimdwater Borring Backfilled with soil cuttings FIGURE:! APPENDIX C LABORATORY METHODS AND RESULTS E;M0-)T13UU»T_0BOraniNICALDOC APPENDIX C LABORATORY METHODS AND RESULTS Laboratory Testing Program Laboratory tests were performed on representative soil samples to detect their relative engineering properties. Tests were performed following test methods of the American Society for Testing Materials or other accepted standards. The following presents a brief description of the various test methods used. Classification Soiis were classified visually according to the Unified Soil Classification System. Visual classifications were supplemented by laboratory testing of selected samples according to ASTM D2487. The soil classifications are shown on the Exploration Logs in Appendix B. Particle-Size Analysis Particle-size analyses were performed on selected representative samples according to ASTM D422. The particle-size distribution curves are in Appendix C. Atterberg Limits The procedure of ASTM D4318-84 vvas usedto measure the liquid limit, plastic limit and plasticity index of represeritative samples. These values are reported on the particle distribution curve sheets in Appendix C. In-Place Moisture/Density The in-place moisture content and dry unit weight of selected samples were determined using relatively undisturbed chunk soil samples. The dry unit weight and moisture content are shown on the attached exploration logs and are shown in Appendix C. Direct Shear Direct shear tests were performed on either samples direct from the field or on samples recompacted to 90% of the laboratory maximum value overall. Direct shear testing was performed in accordance with ASTM D3080-72 to evaluate the shear strength characteristics of selected materials. The samples were inundated during shearing to represent adverse field conditions. Modified Proctor Laboratory compaction tests were performed according to ASTM D1557, Method A. A mechanically operated rammer was used during the compaction process. Modified Proctor analysis curve is presented in Appendix C. C: WINDOWSVDFJiK-nifNICOLTS FOLDEH\RPT_OEaTECHNIC.\LIXlC #i%CONSTRUCTrON TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC, GEOTECHNICAL ANO CONSTRUCTION ENOINEERING TESTINO AND INSPECTION 2414 VINEYARD AVENUE, SUITE 0 ESCONDIDO C A. 92029 (-I6fl) 746.4955 EKCINEIUNGJNC MODIFIED PROCTOR RESULTS LOCATION DEPTH (feet) MAXIMUM DENSITY (psf) OPTIMUM MOISTURE (%) B-4 LOCATION 4-9 138 UNDISTURBED MOISTURE AND DENSITY TEST ASTM D2216 DEPTH MOISTURE CONTENT (feet) (%) 8.3% DRY DENSITY (pcf) B-l B-2 B-2 B-3 B-4 B-5 B-6 B-7 LOCATION 10-11 5.5-6.5 16-17 5.5-6.5 10.5-11.5 35-36 20-21 15-16 5.2 6.0 11.5 5.3 5.8 5.3 7.8 3.8 200 WASH ANALYSIS DEPTH (feet) 106.7 120.6 115.2 116 117.2 108.5 96 95.2 PERCENT PASSING (%) B-l B-2 B-3 B-5 B-5 B-7 LOCATION 15-15.5 10.5-11.5 10.5-11.5 40-41 45-46 10-12 ATTERBERG LIMITS ASTM D4318 DEPTH (feet) LIQUID LIMIT 21% 18% 11% 11% 31% 32% PLASTICITY INDEX B-5 20.5-21.5 82.6 39.2 CTE JOB NO.: 10-3715 LAB SUMMARY 5000 4000 ^ 3000 ts. u ae f- cn CJ z < ^ 2000 1000 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 SHEAR STRENGTH TEST Sample Designation Depth (ft) Cohesion Angle of Friction Sample Description B-4 10.5-11.5 Opsf 32° Light Brown, Sandy SILT JJV^C ON STRUC TION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC ,^?pfljj& GEOTECHNICAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTINO AND INSPECTION 2414 VINEYARD AVENUE. SUITE 0 ESCONDIDO CA. 92029 (760) 746.4955 ENCINEERIKGJNC CTEJOBNO: 10-3715 FIGURE: C-1 5000 4000 ^ 3000 El. t/1 m ae u in z < <» 2000 1000 1000 2000 3000 4000 50OO SHEAR STRENGTH TEST Sample Designation Depth (ft) Cohesion Angle of Friction Sample Description B-6 10.5-11.5 Opsf 34° Tan, Silty SAND ^CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC, GEOTECHNICAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION 2414 VINEYARD AVENUE. SUITE 0 ESCONDIDO CA. 92029 (760) 746-4955 EKCWEQUKCJNC CTEJOBNO: 10-3715 FIGURE: C-2 U. S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE 5 rj 50 m — rn I 0.1 PARTICLE SIZE (mm) 0.001 PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS Sample £}esitination Sample Depth (feet) Symbol Liquid Limil (%) Plaslicily Index Clas&ificaiion JIV^i..CON STRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. (H 0 1 1. tu NK-Ai AND C O N S 1 K U f 1 H» N i; N (i IN i: K R 1 N (i lliS 1 INti AND 1 N S 1* li L T 1 () N > ViNlYAHO AVI NUI , slIIM. i: ON D ID l> t'A 7202^ (7<.(ll 7-J t. --1') S .S B-l 15.5-16 • ---JIV^i..CON STRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. (H 0 1 1. tu NK-Ai AND C O N S 1 K U f 1 H» N i; N (i IN i: K R 1 N (i lliS 1 INti AND 1 N S 1* li L T 1 () N > ViNlYAHO AVI NUI , slIIM. i: ON D ID l> t'A 7202^ (7<.(ll 7-J t. --1') S .S B-3 15.5-16.5 • --- EKOINTEBn^ii r*-CTE JOB NUMBER: 10-3715 l-lGURE: C-3 w a. H SB O Cd H Z >« 145 1 40 135 130 125 120 1 1 5 1 1 0 105 100 95 90 85 •V-\-'--A-\ 10 15 20 25 30 PERCENT IVIOISTURE (%) 3 5 ASTMD1557 METHOD El A • B • C MODIFIED PROCTOR RESULTS LAB NUMBER SAMPLE NUMBER DEPTH (FEET) SOIL DESCRIPTION MAXIMUM DRV DENSITV (PCF) OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT (•/.) 9806 B-4 7-9 BROWN SILTY SAND 137.5 8.5% CTE JOB NO: 10-3715 #T%. CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. ^Xr^V\t (JEOTECHNICAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING -TES-TING AND INSPECTTON EN01NEERLN0.1NC 2414 VINEYARD AVENUE, STE G ESCONDIDO CA. 92029 (760) 746-4955 DATE: 12/99 FIGURE: C-4