HomeMy WebLinkAboutCT 01-02; CALAVERA HILLS VILLAGE K; REPORT OF ROUGH GRADING; 2003-08-11I Geotechnical 'Geologic. Environmental
'. 5741 Palmer Way • Carlsbad, California 92008 • . (760) 438-3155 '. FAX (760) 931-0915
August 11,2003'
W.O.
Calaverá Hills II, LLC . • • S
2727 Hoover Avenue S -
National City, California 91950
I Attention: Mr. Don Mitchell
1
Subject: Report of Rough Grading, Calavera Hills, Village K, Building'Lots 1 through
87, Carlsbad Tract 01-02, Carlsbad, San Diego County,- California S
Dear Mr. Mitchell: S
S
This report presents asum'mari of the geoteèhnical testing and observation services.
I
.provided by GeoSoils, Inc. (GSI), during the rough earthwork construction phase of
- development at the subject site. Earthwork commenced in January, 2003, and was
generally completed in July, 2003. This report does not include utility and pavement
S
I.' construction testing and observations. A report of observation and testing services for such
S •. ' :work will be provided under separate cover when requested. .
S PURPOSE OF EARTHWORK .
The purpose of grading was to prepare relatively level pads for the, construction of.
84 residential structures, 3 Irecreation lots and access roadways. Cut-and-fill grading.and
I
. drill-and-shoot blasting techniques were utilized to attaih the desired graded configurations
Cut lots and the cut portion of transition lots were overexóavated in orderto provide for more.
uniform foundation support. Existing topsoils and colluvium were removed to suitable
I
,bedrock material and recbmpacted. The grading plan for this portion of Calavera Hills II,
°... .Village K, prepared by O'Day Consultants, dated November 6, 2002, is included with this.
report as Plates 1 and .2. . • • • •
, 1 • '. •
•
.5.
5 .
-
S •
,• •
I '. •
EARTH MATERIALS S
..
• S
Subsurface geologic conditions exposed during the, process of rough grading wee
observed by a representative of GSI. Earth materials onsite generally consist of dense I • • g ran itic/metavol can ic rock with a thin, discontinuous surlicial veneer of topsoil/colluviuni
-
• Dense surficial outcrops of granitic/volcanic bedrock were noted throughout the area.
I ..... •.
.5
.
S •',
.5 • H •"
'5.. . S
I ..,,.
1 GROUNDWATER
Naturally occurring groundwater was not encountered during rough grading of the building I . ,páds and should not affect the proposed building construction,
. provided, that the
recommendations contained in this report and/or provided by GSI are incorporated into final
..
- . design and construction, andthat prudent surface and subsurface drainage practices are
1 '
ihcorporated into the construction plans.
. .
I ' Based on the fractured and dense.nature of the granitic/metavolcanic bedrock, perched
groundwater conditions may develop in the future due to excess irrigation, homeowner.
altered drainage, or damaged utilitiO, and should be anticipated. Should manifestations
of 'perched cbnditions (i.e., eapage) develop inthe future, this'offlce could assess the
conditions and provide mitigative recommendations as necessary A discussion of near
surface slope subdrainage is presented in our referenced report on toe drains (GSI, 1998d),
I .
and is considered applicable with 'respect to this site. A disôussion of other subdrainagé
is presented in a later section of this report.
EARTHWORK CONSTRUCTION .
Earthwork operations have been completed in general accordance with the. City of Carlsbad
grading ordinance and the guidelines provided in the field by.this office: Observations
I ,
during grading includedremovals, overexcavation, and subdrain construction along with
general grading procedures and placement of compacted fills by the contractor.
I Rough Grading
a
... Preparation of Existing Ground .
. .
1. Deleterious material, such as concentrated organic matter and miscellaneous
debris, were stripped from the surface and disposed of beypnd the limitspf grading- for the subject area, prior to placing any fill.
.
. 4 . .
2. Loose surficial materials (i.e., existing topsoils, and colluvium) were removed to - expose competent bedrock in all areas to receive fill. . S
j .
. .. 3. . In orderto provide for more uniform support of structures, the cut portion of transition
lots were overexcavated to a minimum depth of 3 feet below pad grade, then
brought to grade with compacted fill: Cut lots exposing dense granitic/volcanic rock
I •'
were overexcavated a minimum of 3 feet below pad grade in order to facilitate
foundation and utility construction. Generally, an attempt was made to slope the
overexcavated bottom toward the street area. Thus, subdrainage of these areas
I - adoes not appear warranted atthis time, based on the available data.
I Calavera Hills ii, LLC . . W.O. 3459131SC • .. . CaIa,era Hills, Village K . . . , August 11, 2003 File: e:\wp9\3400\3459b1.k.ror
.. Page 2
I . .
.
. GeoSoils,Inc.
.
S '
1 4. In areas where conventional cut and fill grading techniques were not feasible due
to rock hardness, drill-and-shoot blasting techniques were utilized. These
techniques were used where dense, non-rippable rock occurred within a minimum 1 of 3 feet of finished pad grade, and above local street elevations equivalent to
approximately 1 foot below the lowest utility invert elevation. Blasting operations
I occurred throughout the project.
Subsequent to completing removals, areas to receive compacted fill were scarified
I to a minimum depth of 12 inches, moisture conditioned to at least optimum moisture S content, and then compacted to attain a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent.
These areas were then brought to grade with fill compacted to a minimum
1 90 percent relative compaction.
All processing of original ground in areas to receive fill, shown on Plates 1 and 2,
I was observed, by a representative of GSI.
Fill Placement
Fill consisted of onsite and import materials which were placed in thin lifts, approximately
4 to 8 inches in thickness, brought to at least optimum moisture content, and compacted.
to attain a minimum 90 percent relative compaction. Compaction test results on fills are
presented in the attached Table 1. Approximate as-built fill thicknesses are presented in
the attached Table 2. The preparation of some of these materials including processing of
shot rock and oversize rock through a rock crusher. This process generally produced
"6-inch minus" (in one direction) material, in accordance with guidelines presented in GSI
(2002). Rock fills were placed in the vicinity of Lots 22 through 25, 29 through 39, and 53
through 57 and routinely to no closer than about 10 feet from finish grade.
Fill materials generated onsite, or within the larger Calavera Hills development, from either
raw excavation or produced at the crusher site, have been placed in general accordance
with recommendations presented in GSI (2002). An additional criteria, developed for this
project during grading, has included gradation testing (in general accordance with
ASTM D-422) of stockpiled materials produced from the rock crusher. This testing has been
performed in order to evaluate the percentage of "fines" included in the stockpile material.
For this project, "fines" are considered to be earth materials that are 3/4 of an inch in diameter, or finer. Suitable soil fills are considered to consist of earth materials with at least
±40 percent finer than 3/4 of. an inch (GSI, 2003).
Canyon Subdrains
Prior to placement of fill, a canyon subdrain, consisting of 6-inch diameter (Schedule 40)
PVC pipe, was placed within a canyon located in the general vicinity of Lots 29,48, and 55.
Subdrain construction was performed in general accordance with GSI guidelines.
Calavera Hills II, LLC . . W.O. 3459-B1-SC Calavera Hills, Village K
, August 11, 2003 File:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1.k.ror - . Page 3
GeoSoils, Inc.
I Slopes
I
Planned Slopes
In. general, graded slopes constructed under the purview of this report should perform
I ..satisfactorily with respect to gross and surficial stability, provided that-these slopes are properly maintained, and are subject to the prevailing semi-arid climatic conditions. Fill
slopes constructed underthe purview of this.repotl were provided with a keyway excavated
I into suitable bedrock material in general accordance with GSI recommendations. Cut
slopes were constructed using cut and fill grading techniques and/or blasting, and exposed.
dene igneous and/or metavolcanic rock.
I . Temporary Slopes . .
I Temporary construction slopes may generally be constructed at a gradient of 1:1 (horizontal
to vertical) or flatter in compacted fill, and 1/2:1 (horizontal to vertical) in suitable bedrock
material (provided adverse-geologic structures are not present, as evaluated by GSI prior
to workers entering trenches). Utility trenches may be.èxcavated in accordance with
guidelines presented in Title 8 of the California Code, of Regulations for Excavation,
1
Trenches, and Earthwork with respect to Typd B soil (compacted fill) and stable rock,
(bedrock). Construction materials and/or stockpiled soil should not be stored within 5feet
from the top of any tempárary slope. Temporary/permanent provisions should be made to
I
direct any potential runoff away from the top of temporary slopes. •5'5
Natural Slopes
I . Natural slopes should generally perform satisfactorily with respect to grossandsuflcial
stability, provided they are subject to the prevailing semi-arid climatic conditions. An
I analysis of natural slope stability has been completed under separate cover (GSI, 1998c).
I
S
Field Testing
,. S
1.. . Field density tests were performed using the sand cone method (ASIM D-1556) and
nuclear method (ASTM D-2922). Tests taken for the entire Calavera Hills project
I were taken in consecutive numerical order. Only the test results for Village K are
presented in Table 1 at the end of this report. The approximate locations of field
U .
density tests are shown on the Field Density Test Location Maps, Plates 1 and 2,
.5 which utilize the 40-scale'grading plans (sheets 3 and 4), prepared by Hunsaker &
Associates, San Diego, Inc., as a base map.
. . . . •
. S
2. Field density tests were taken at periOdic intervals and random locations to check.
S the compactive effort provided by the contractor. Based on the operations observed,
I . test results presented herein are considered representative of the fills obserVed
under the purview of this report.
Calavera Hills II, LLC S • S W.O. 3459B1SC
S Calavera Hills, Village K .
••, . . August 11, 2003 Fi1e:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1.k.ror . • . S • Page 4 .5
GeoSoils, Inc.
Visual classification of the soils in the field, as well as random laboratory testing,,
was the basis for determining which maximum dry density value to use for a given
I .density test.
Rock fills were periodically inspected using dozer pits in order to verify àdequat'e
I moisture content and relative compaction
Testing and observations were performed on a full-time basis.
I .. ., .:
LABORATORY TESTING•
Moisture-Density Relations
I The laboratory maximum dry density and optWnurn moisture content for each major soil
type was determined according to Test Method ASTM D-1 557. The following table presents
the test results:' .
SOIL TYPE
MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY
(pcf)
OPTIMUM MOISTURE
CONTENT (%)
A - Dark Brown, Silty SAND 120.5 13.0
B - Light Brown, Silty SAND ' .128.0 10.0
C - Light Brown, Silty SAND 126.0 11.0
D - Light Gray, Silty SAND 126.5 . 10.5
E - Dark Brown, Silty GRAVEL 130.0 . 11.0
F - Brown, Sandy GRAVEL
(processed material)
1265 10.5
G- Brownish Gray, Gravelly SILT . . 131.0 10.0
.1 - Brown, Silty SAND wfGraveI
(processed material) 134.0
. .
8.5
i
I
Expansive Soils ) 0
0
Expansive soil conditions have been evaluated for the site. Representative samples of soil
I near pad grade were recovered for classification and expansion testing. Expansion Index
. . (E.I.) testing was performed in general accordance with Standard 18-2 of the Uniform
0 Building Code (UBC). . S
. 0•
0
I Calavera Hills II, LLC 0 0 0 W.O. 3459-B1-SC Calavera Hills, Village K 0 . August 11, 2003 FHe:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1.k.ror : . ' . Page 5
GeoSoils, Inc. ,.
I Representative expansion indices indicate that site soils near pad grade, within the subject
lots, are very low expansive (E .I. <20) A summary of soil expansion results are presented
I ' in the attached Table 2
Corrosion/Sulfate Testing
Typical samples of the site materials were analyzed for corrosion/soluble sulfate potential
Soil sulfate testing indicates that the sulfate exposure to concrete is negligible, in
I , accordance with Table 19A of the UBC (International Conference of Building Officials
[ICBO], 1997) Site soils are considered corrosive to ferrous materials when wet or
saturated While it is our understanding that standard concrete cover is sufficient mitigation,
I alternative methods and additional comments may be obtained from a qualified corrosion
engineer.
I Sieve Analysis
Sample gradation for various representative samples was determined in general
I ' accordance with ASTM Test Method D-422. Test results are presented as
Figures 1 through 8
RECOMMENDATIONS - FOUNDATIONS
-
I General
I The foundation design and construction recommendations are based on laboratory testing
and engineering analysis of onsite earth materials by GSI Minimum recommendations for
conventional or post-tension (PT) foundation systems are provided in the following sections
I The foundation systems may be used to support the proposed structures, provided they are
founded in competent bearing material The proposed foundation systems should be
designed and constructed in accordance with the guidelines contained in the UBC All,
I footing designs should be reviewed and approved by the project structural
engineer/foundation designer..Based on soil expansion potential and the as-built fill
thicknesses (i.e., differential fill thickness exceeding 3:1, maximum to minimum, across the I lot), conventional or PT foundations may be constructed
I Conventional Foundation Design
1 Conventional spread and continuous footings maybe used to support the proposed
I residential structures p!ôvided they are founded entirely in properly compacted fill
-. or other competent bearing material (i.e., bedrock) Footings should not
simultaneously bear directly on bedrock and fill soils
I
I Caiavera Hilisii, LLC W.O. 3459-B1-SC Calavera Hills, Village 'K August 11, 2003 FiIe:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1.k.ror Page 6 I GeoSoils,Inc.
Analyses indicate that an allOwable bearing value of 2,000 pounds per square foot
(psf) may be used for design of continuous footings per Table 3, and for design of
isolated pad footings 24 inches square and 18 inches deep into properly compacted
fill or bedrock. The bearing value maybe increased by one-third for seismic or other
temporary loads. This value may be increased by 20 percent for each additional
12 inches in depth, to a maximum of 2,500 psf. No increase, in bearing, for footing
width is recommended.
For lateral sliding resistance, a 0.4 coefficient of friction may be utilized for a
concrete to soil contact when multiplied by the dead load.
Passive earth pressure may be computed as an equivalent fluid having a density of
300 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) with a maximum earth pressure of 2,500 psf.
When combining passive pressure and frictional resistance, the passive pressure
component should be reduced by one-third.
Footings should maintain a horizontal distance or setback between any adjacent
slope face and the bottom outer edge of the footing. The horizontal distance may be
calculated by using h13 (where h is the height of the slope); The horizontal setback
should not be less than 7 feet, nor need not be greater than 40 feet (per code). The
setback may be maintained by simply deepening the footings. Flatwork, utilities, or
other improvements within a zone of h/3 fromthe top of slope may be subject to
lateral distortion. Footings, flatwork, and utility setbacks should be constructed in
accordance with distances indicated in this section, and/or the approved plans.
7. Provided that the recommendations contained in this report are incorporated into
final design and construction phase of development, a majority (>50 percent) of the
anticipated foundation settlement is expected to occur during construction.
Maximum settlement is not expected to exceed approximately 11/2 inches and
should occur below the heaviest loaded columns. Differential settlement is not anticipated to exceed 3/4 inch between similar elements, in a 40-foot span.
Conventional Foundation/Concrete Slab Construction
The following construction recommendations are based on generally very low to low
expansive bearing soils and maximum fill thicknesses of less than approximately 30 feet.
Conventional continuous footings should be constructed in accordance with
recommendations presented in Table 3, and in accordance with UBC guidelines
(1997). All footings should be reinfOrced per Table 3.
I
2. Detached isolated interior or exterior piers and columns should be founded at a
minimum depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent ground surface and tied to
I Calavera Hills H, LLC . W.O. 3459-B1-SC Calavera Hills, Village K August 11, 2003 File: e:\wp9\3400\3459b1 .k.ror Page 7
I GeoSoils, Inc.
I
I
the main foundation in at least one direction with a grade beam Reinforcement
should he properly dsigned by the project structural engineer.
. .
3. A grade beam, reinforced as above and at least 12 inches square, should be',
'provided across the garage entrances; The base of the reinforced grade beam
I ,
should be at the same elevation as bas6 of the adjoining footings.
4 The residential floor and garage slabs should have a minimum thickness of
1 4 inches, in accordance with Table 3. Concrete used in floor slab construction
should have a minimum compressive strength of 2,500 psi.
I Concrete slabs should be underlain with èminimum of 4 inches of sand. In addition,
a vapor barrier consisting of a minimum of 1 0mil, polyvinyl-chloride membrane with
- , all laps sealed, should be provided at the mid-point of the sand layer. The slab; subgrade should be free of loose and uncompacted material prior to placing
concrete
6 Concrete floor slabs (residence and garage) should be reinforced per Table 3 All
slab reinforcement ,should be suppoiled to ensure proper. mid-slab height
positioning during placerneht ofttieconcrete. "Hooking" Of reinforcement is not an
I acceptable method of positioning.
.
. .
I
-7.. . Presaturation is not considered neceàar for these soil conditiOn; however, the
moisture content of the subgrade soils should be equal to, or greaterthan, optimum
moisture to a depth of 12tô1 8 inches (depending on footing embedment) below the
I adjacent ground gradeinthe slab areas, and verified by this office within 72 hours
, . . , - of the vapor barrier placement. . . . . -.
I ' "
Soils generated from footing 'excavationsto be used onsite should be compacted to
a minimum relative compaction 90 percent of the laboratory standard, whether it is
- to be placed inside the foundation perimeter or in theyard/right-of-way areas; This
I ,-
material must not alter positive drainage patterns that direct drainage away from the
structural areas and toward the street.
: . Propsed pools and other appurtenant-structures should consider that excavation
difficulties will likely be encountered in some lots' at depths greater than'
approximately 3 feet belowexisting building pad grade due to the presence of
I - densegranitiO rock. Please refer to Table 2 for a listing of làts with relatively shallow
(i.e., <lOfeet) fills. -
10._.1 As an alternative, an engineered PT foundation system may be used
- Recommendations for PT slab design are presented iri the following section.
1
-
Caiavera Hilisii, LLC . - - W.O. 3459-B1-SC,
- . Cäiavera Hills, Village K
- ' ' - - - . - August 11, 2003
-- - FiIe:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1.k.ror ' ' ' - Page 8 -
,-.GeoSoils,.Inc. .• ..- ... -.
:•.,.'-
I PT Slab Foundation Systems *
1. PT slabs may be utilized for construction of typical one- and two- story residential
I structures onsite. The information and recommendations presented in this section
are not meant to supercede design bya registered structural ..engineer, or civil
I :'.:.
engineer familiar with PT slab design or corrosion engineering consultant.
From a soil expansion/shrinkage standpoint, a fairly common contributing factor to:
I -distress of structures using PT slabs is a significant fluctuation in the moisture
content of soils underlying the perimeter of the slab, compared to the center, causing.
a "dishing" or "arching" of the slabs. To mitigate-this possible phenomenon, a
I combination of soil presaturation (if necessary, or afterthe project has been dormant
for a period of .time) and construction of a perimeter "cut off' wall grade beam may.
I
be employed.
For veryiow.to low (E.l. 0 through 50) expansive soils, perimeter and mid span
beams should be .a-minimum 12 inches deep below the lowest adjacent pad grade.
The perimeter foundations may be.integrãted into the slab design-or independent
of the slab. The perimeter beams should be a minimum of 12 inches in width.
A vapor barrier should be utilized and be of sufficient thickness to provide an
adequate separation of foundation from soils (10 mil thick). The vapor barrier should
I -
•be adequately sealed to provide a continuous water-resistant barrier under the entire
slab. The vapor barrier should be sandwiched between two 2-inch thick layers of
sand (SE>30) 46r a total of 4 inches of sand.
I 4. Isolated piers should be incorporated into the PT slab system.
.
I , , Specific soil presaturation for slabs is not required for very, low expansive soils;
however, the moisture content of the subgrade soils should be at or above the soils'
optimum moisture content to a minimum depth of 12 to 18-inches below grade,
I depending On the footing embedment.
6: PT slabs 'should be 'designed using sound engineering practice and, be in
accordance with the Post-Tension Institute (P11), local, and/or national code criteria
-
- and the recommendations of a structural or civil engineer qualified in PT slab
design. Alternatives to PTI methodology may be used if equivalent systems can be
Proposed which accommodate the angular distortions, expansion parameters, and
'settlements noted forthis project. If alternatives to PTI are suggested by the:
designer or structural consultant, consideration should be given for additional review
by a qualified structural PT designer. Soil related parameters for PT slab design, are
- presented On the following: . '. . •.
Calavera Hills II, LLC * . W.O. 3459-B1-SC - Calavera Hills, Village K -
' • August 11, 2003 Fi1e:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1.k.ror
• . . • - Page 9
-
' GeoSoils, Inc. , . • -' -
Perimeter Footing Embedment**
CATEGORY I (PT)* CATEGORY Ii (PT)
12 inches 12 inches** Allowable bearing value 1,000 psf*** 1,000 psf* Modules of subgradé reaction 100 psi/inch 75 psi/inch Coefficient of friction , 0.35 .. 0.35 Passive pressure
, 225 pcf 225 pcf Soil Suction (Pf) * . 3.6 . 3.6 Depth to Constant Soil Suction 5 feet 5 feet Thornthwaite moisture. . . -20.0 . . -20.0 eedge 25 27 em center 5.0 5.5 Ymedge 035 05 Ym cant& .1.1 . 2.0 Minimum Slab Thickness 5 inches 5 inches
Foundation design using the spanabiiity method may also be used for Category [conditions.
** Lab data indicates E I for this site .0-50
Bearing for slab on grade only, bearing value for interior or perimeter beams should be in accordance
with parameters provided for conventional continuous and isolated spread footings..
7.' Provided the recommendations contained in this report are incorporated into final.
design and 'construction phase of development; a majority (>50 percent) of the
anticipated foundation settlement is expected to occur during construction.
.,Maximum total settlement, is not expecthd to exceed approximately 1½ inches and
r should occur below the heaviest loaded columns Differential settlement is not
anticipated to exceed 3/4 of an inch between similar elements, in a 40400t span:
Designers of PT slabs'should review the parameters provided for' PT slabs, and
compare using a span distance of 5 feet, using a modules of subgrade reaction of
125 psi in their evaluation
8 In accordance with guidelines presented in the UBC, improvements and/orfootings
should maintain a horizontal distance, X, between any adjacent descending slope
face and the bottom outer edge of the improvement and/or footing. The horizontal
distance, X, may be calculated by using X = h/3 X should not be less than 7 feet,
nor need not be greater than 40 feet. X may be maintained by deepening the
footings. Improvements constructed within a distanèe of h/3 from the top of slope
may be subject to lateral distortion
.. Foundations for any adjacent structures, including retaining walls, should be deepened (as necessary) to belowa 1:1 projection upward and away from any
proposed lower foundation system This recommendation may not be considered
valid if the additional surcharge imparted by the upper foundation on the lower
foundation has been incorporated into the design of the lower foundation. Additional
setbacks, not discussed or superceded herein, and presented in the UBC are
considered valid.
. . .
............
Caiavera Hills ii, LLC
• W.O. 3459-B1-SC Calavera Hills, Village K . ' August 11, 2003 File e \wp934OO\3459b1 k ror
*
Page 10
GeoSoils, Inc.
I t
'-EXTERIOR FLATWORK
Exterior driveways: walkways, sidewalks, or patios, using concrete ,slab-on-grade I construction, should be designed and constructed in accordance with the following criteria:. •
I ..
1. Driveway slabs should be a minimum 4 inches in thickness; all other exterior slabs
Pay be a nominal 4 inches in thickness; however, such nominal slabs will be at
L increased risk for distress. A thickened edge should be considered forall flatwork
I -adjacent to landscape areas.
-
S
Slab subgrade should be compacted to a minimum 90 percent relative compaction
I and moisture'conditioned to at, or above, the soils optimum moisture content.
The use of transverseañd
I
longitudinal control joints should be considered to help
control slab cracking due to concrete shrinkage or expansion. Two of the best ways
to control this movement are: 1) add a sufficient amount-of properly placed
reinforcing steel, increasing tensile strength of the slab'such as 6x6, Wi .4xWi .4);
I and/or, 2) provide an adequate amount of control and/or expansion joints to
accommodate anticipated concrete shrinkage and expansion. We would suggest
that the maximum control joint spacing be placed on 5- to 8-foot centers, or the I smallest dimension of the slab, whichever is least.
SI .-4. No traffic should be allowed upon the newly poured concrete slabs until they have
been properly cured to within 75 percent of design strength. ' S
I S 5 Positive site drainage should be maintained at all times. Adjacent landscaping
should be graded to drain into the street/parking area,or other approved area. All:
surface water should be appropriately directed to areas designed for site drainage.'
• 6. Concrete compression strength should be a minimum of 2,500 psi.
CONVENTIONAL RETAINING WALLS/WALLS
I General
'Foundations may be designed using parameters provided in the Design section of I . Foundation Recommendations presented herein. Wall sections should adhere to the
County of San Diego and/or City of Carlsbad guidelines. All wall designs should be'
I reviewed by qualified structural engineerforstructural capacity, overturning, and seismic
5 S • resistance stability per the.UBC.
I .
The design parameter's provided assume thatonsite or eqUivalent low expansive soils are,
• . used to backfill retaining walls. If expansive soils are used to backfill the proposed walls
I Calavera Hills II, LLC S W.O. 3459-B1-SC Calavera Hills, Village K , S S • August 11, 2003 • Fi1e:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1.k.ror S S Page 11 I . . ,• S GeoSoils, Inc.
I within this wedge, increased active and at-rest earth pressures will need to be utilized for
retaining wall design. Heavy compaction equipment should not be use.d above a
I 1:1 projection, up and away from the bottom of any wall.
The following recommendations are not meant to apply to specialty walls (cribwalls, loffel,
I earth stone, etc.). Recommendations for specialty walls will be greater than those provided
herein, and can be provided upon request. Some movement of the walls constructed
should be anticipated as soil strength parameters are mobilized. This movement could
I cause some cracking aependent upon the materials used to construct the wall. Tb reduce
a wall-cracking due to settlement, walls should be internally grouted and/or reinforced with.
steel.
I Restrained Walls
.
I Any retaining walls that will be restrained prior to placing and compacting backfill material,
or that have re-entrant or male corners, should be designed for an at rest equivalent fluid,
pressures of 60 pcf, plus any applicable surcharge loading. For areas of male or re-entrant
corners, the restrained wall design should extend a minimum distance of twice the height
of the wall (2H) laterally from the corner. Building walls below grade should be
water-proofed or damp-proofed, depending on the degree of moisture protection desired.
Refer to the following section for preliminary recommendations from surcharge loads.
I Cántilevered Walls
These recommendations are for cantilevered retaining wallsup to 15 feet high. Active earth
I ..pressure may be used for retaining wall design, provided the top of the wall is not restrained
from minor deflections. An empirical equivalent fluid pressure (EFP) approach may be
used to compute the horizontal pressure against the wall: Appropriate fluid unit weights are
I .provided for-specific slope gradients of the retained material. These do not include-other superimposed loading conditions such as traffic, structures, seismic events, or adverse
geologic conditions.
* I .
SURFACE SLOPE OF EQUIVALENT FLUID
RETAINED MATERIAL . WEIGHT P.C.F.
HORIZONTAL TO VERTICAL (Select Very Low Expansive Soil)
Level 35
2tol .45
The equivalent fluid density should be increased to 60 pcf for level backfill at the angle point
of the wall (corner or male re-entrant) and extended a minimum lateral distance of 2H on
either side of the corner. Traffic loads within a 1:1 projection up from the wall heel, due to
light trucks and cars, should be considered as a load of 100 psf per foot in the upper 5 feet
Calavera Hills II, LLC . W.O. 3459131-SC Calavera Hills, village K August 11, 2003 File: e:\wp9\3400\3459b 1. k. ror
. Page 12
GeoSoils, Inc.
I
I
I
E
I
I
I
I
I
of wall in uniform pressure. For preliminary design purposes, footing loads within a
1:1 backfill zone behind wall will be added tothe walls as 1/3 of the bearing pressure for 'one
footing width, along the wall alignment.
Sound Walls/Top-of-Slope Walls
Foundations for top of slope sound walls, using concrete block construction, may be
constructed in accordance with conventional fouhdation recommendations presented in
this report. Expansion/construction joints should not exceed 20 feet on center. Foundations
should maintain a minimum lateral distance of 7 feet from the outside bottom edge of the.
wall footing to the face of any adjacent slope.
Wall Backfill and Drainage
All retaining walls should be provided with an adequate grav'el'and pipe back drain and'
outlet system to prevent buildup of hydrostatic pressures, and be designed in accordance
with the minimum standards presented herein. Retaining wall drainage and outlet systems
should be reviewed by the project design civil engineer, and incorporated into project plans.
Pipe should consist of schedule 40 perforated PVC pipe. Gravel used in the back drain'
systems should be a minimum of 1 cubic foot per lineal foot of 3/8- to 11/2-inch clean crushed
rock encapsulated in filter fabric (Mirafi 140 or equivalent) additional gravel, may be'
warranted depending on wall height and the nature of the wall backcut. Perforations in pipe
shoUld face down. The surface of the backfill should be sealed by pavement, or the top
18 inches compacted to'90 percent relative compaction with native soil. Proper surface'
drainage should also be provided.
As an alternative to gravel back drains, panel drains (Miradrain 6000, Tensar, etc.) may be
used. Panel drains should be installed per manufacturers' guidelines. Regardless of the
back drain used, walls should be water-proofed where they would impact living areas, or
where staining would be objectionable.
Wall Footing Transitions
Site walls are anticipated to be supported on footings designed in accordance with the
recommendations in this report. Wall footings may transition from bedrock to fill. If this
condition is.preserit, the civil designer may specify either:
a) A minimum of ,a 2-foot overexcavation and recompaction of bedrock
materials, as measured for a distance of 2H from the transition in the direction
of the wall. Overexcavations should-be completed for a minimum lateral
distance of 2 feet beyond the footing, measured perpendicular to the wall.
. . b) Increase of the amount of reinforcing steel arid wall detailing (i.e., expansion..
joints or crack control joints) such that a angular distortion of 1/360 fora
Calavera Hills ii, LLC " . , ' W.O. 3459-B1-SC Calavera Hills, Village K '' . ' ' August 11, 2003'' Fi1e:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1.k.ror
.
. • Page 13
GeoSoils, Inc.
I • ..-•• ________
I
I
distance of 2H on either side of the transition may be accommodated.
Expansion joints should be sealed with a flexible grout.
C) Embed the footings entirely into' native formational. material .' If transitions
- from cut to fill transect the wall footing alignment at an angle of less than
I ' 45 degrees (plan view), the designer should follow recommendation "a"
(above,) and until such transition is between 45 and 90 degrees to the wall
alignment.
- -
I • ,''. , PAVEMENTS
I 'Pavement design for streets has not been performed to date'.
- Concrete driveway
pavements outside the public right of way may be constructed per the exterior concrete slab
I recommendations presented in this report
DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA
I
Slope Maintenance and Planting :
Water has-been shown to weaken the iliherent strength of all earth, materials. Slope
stability is significantly reduced by overly wet cohditions. Positive surface drainage away
' from slopes should be maintained and only the amount of irrigation necessary to sustain
-plant life should be provided for planted slopes.. Over-watering should be avoided as it can
I .'
adversely affect site improvements, and cause perched groundwater, conditions. Graded
slopes constructed utilizing onsite materials would be erosive. Eroded' debris may be'
minimized and surficial slope stability enhanced by establishing and maintaining asuitablé
I vegetation cover soon after construction. Compaction to the face of fill slopes would tend
to minimize short-term erosion until 'vegetation is established. Plants selected for
'landscaping should be light weight, deep rooted types. that require little water and are
I' 'capable of surviving the prevailing climate. Jute-type matting or other fibrous covers may
aid in allowing the establishment of a sparse plant cover. Utilizing plants other than those
recommended above will increase the potential for perched water to develop., an
I associated staining, mold, etc. A rodent control program to prevent burrowing should be
implemented. Irrigation of natural (ungraded) slope areas is generally not recommended.
These recommendations regarding plant type, irrigation practices, and rodent, control should be provided to each homeowner. Over-steepening of slopes should be avoided
during building construction activities and landscaping
I Drainage
I Adequate lot surface drainage is a' very important factor in reducing the likelihood of
adverse performance of foundations, hardscapè, and slopes: Surface drainage should be
I Calavera Hills ii, LLC W.O. 3459-1211-SC Calavera Hills, village K - - ' " August 11, 2003 Fi1e:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1.k.ror , ' ' ' Page 14
.osoils:Inc.:.
t - •
' •.
1 :sufficient to prevent ponding of water anywhere on a lot, and especially near structures and
tops of slopes. Lot surface drainage should be carefully taken into consideration during fine
grading, landscaping, and building construction. Therefore, care should be taken that future
I landscaping or construction, activities do not create adverse drainage conditions. Positive
site drainage within lots and common areas should be provided and maintained at all
I
times. Drainage should notflow uncontrolled down any descending slope. Water should
be directed away from foundations and not allowed to pond and/or seep into the ground.
In general, the area within 5 feet around a structure should slope away from the structure.
I We recommend that unpaved lawn and landscape areas have a minimum gradient of one
percent sloping away from structures, and whenever possible, should be above adjacent
paved areas. Consideration should be given to avoiding construction of planters adjacent
I .to structures (buildings, pools, spas, etc.). Pad drainage should be directed toward the
Street or other approved area(s). Although not a geotechnical requirement, roof gutters,
down spouts, or other appropriate means may be utilized to control roof drainage. Down
I
' spouts, or drainage devices should outlet a minimum of 5 feet from structures or into a
subsurface drainage system. Areas of seepage may develop due to irrigation or heavy
rainfall, and should be anticipated. Minimizing irrigation will lessen this potential. If areas
of seepage develop, recommendations for minimizing this effect could be provided upon
request.
Erosion Control
I
:Cut and fill slopes will be subject to surficial erosion during and after grading. Onsite earth
materials have a moderate to high erosion potential. Consideration should be given to
providing hay bales and silt fences for the temporary control of surface water, from a
I geotechnical viewpoint.
Landscape Maintenance
I Only the amount of irrigation necessary to sustain plant life should be provided.
Over-watering the landscape areas will adversely affect proposed site improvements. We
I .
would recommend that any proposed open-bottom planters adjacent to proposed structures•
be eliminated for a minimum distance of 10 feet. As an alternative, closed-bottom type
planters could be utilized. An outlet placed in the bottom of the planter, could be installed
to direct drainage away from struàtures or any exterior concrete flatwork. If planters are
constructed adjacent to structures, the sides and bottom of the planter should be provided
with a moisture barrier to prevent penetration of irrigation water into the subgrade.
I Provisions should be made to drain the excess irrigation water from the planters without
saturating the subgrade below or adjacent to the planters. Graded slope areas should be
I
.planted with drought resistant vegetation. Consideration should be given to the type of
vegetation choen and their potential effect upon surface improvements (i.e., some trees
will have an effect on concrete flatwork with their extensive root, systems). From a
geotechnical standpoint leaching is not recommended for establishing landscaping. If the.
I Calavera Hills II, LLC
• W.O. 3459-131-SC Calavera Hills, Village K August 11, 2003 Fi1e:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1 .k.ror
•,
Page 15'
I GeoSoils, Inc.
1,
I
surface soils are processed for the purpose of adding amendments, they should be
recompacted to 90 percent minimum relative compaction.
Gutters and Downspouts
t
As previously discussed in the drainage section, the installation of gutters and downspouts
should be considered to collect roof water that may otherwise infiltrate the soils adjacent
to the structures. If utilized, the downspouts should be drained into PVC collector pipes or
I
non-erosive devices that will carrythe water away from the house. Downspouts and gutters
are not a requirement; however: from a geotechnical viewpoint, provided that positive.
drainage is incorporated into project design (as discussed previously).
Subsurface and Surface Water
I.Subsurface and surface water are not anticipated to affect site development, provided that
the recommendations contained in this report are incorporated into final design and
construction and that prudent surface and subsurface drainage practices are incorpOrated
I
into the construction plans. Perched groundwater conditions along zones of contrasting
permeabilities may not be precluded fro m( occurring in the future due to site irrigation, poor
drainage conditions, or damaged utilities, and should be anticipated. Should perched
I groundwater conditions develop, this office could assess the affected area(s) and provide the appropriate recommendations to mitigate the observed groundwater conditions.
Groundwater conditions may change with the introduction of irrigation, rainfall, or other
I.. factors.
Site Improvements,
Recommendations for exterior concrete flatwork design and construction can be provided
I. .
upon request. If in the future, any additional improvements (e.g., pools, spas, etc.) are
planned for the site, recommendations concerning the geological or geotechnical aspects
of design and construction of said improvements could be provided upon request. This
I . office should be notified in advance of any fill placement, grading of the site, or trench
backfilling after rough grading has been completed. This includes any grading, utility
trench, and retaining wall backfills.
I Tile Flooring
Tile flooring can crack, reflecting cracks in the concrete slab below the tile, although small
cracks in a conventional slab may not-be significant. Therefore, the designer should
I
.consider additional steel reinforcement for concrete slabs-on-grade where tile will be
placed. The tile installer should consider installation methods that redUce possible
cracking of the tile such as slipsheets. Slipsheets or a vinyl crack isolation membrane
I..
(approved by the Tile Council of America/Ceramic Tile Institute) are recommended between
tile and concrete slabs on grade.
I Calavera Hills II, LLC
.. W.O. 3459-B1-SC Calavera Hills, Village K
.. August 11, 2003 FiIe:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1 .k.ror
. . Page 16
I . ' GeoSoils, Inc.
Additional Grading
This offic should be notified in advance of any fill placement, supplemental regrading of
the site, or trench backfihling after rough grading has been completed This includes
completion of grading in the street and parking areas and utility trench and retaining wall
backfills.
Footing Trench Excavation
All footing excavations should be observed by a representative of this firm subsequent to
trenching and prior to concrete form and reinforcement placement The purpose of the
observations is to verify that the excavations are made into the recommended bearing
material and to the minimum widths and depths recommended for construction. If loose
or compressible materials are exposed within-the footing excavation, a deeper footing or
removal and recompaction of the subgrade materials would be recommended at that time
Footing trench spoil and any excess soils generated from utility trench excavations should
be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent, if not removed from the site.
Trenching
Considering the nature of the onsite soils, it should be anticipated that caving or sloughing
could be a factor in subsurface excavations and trenching Shoring or excavating the trench
walls at the angle of repose (typically 25 to 45degrees) maybe necessary and should be
anticipated. All excavations should be observed by one of our representatives and
minimally conform to CAL-OSHA and local safety codes
Utility Trench Backfill
All interior utility trench backfill should be brought to at least 2 percent above
optimum moisture content and then compacted to obtain a minimum relative
compaction of 90 percent of the laboratory standad. As an alternative for shallow
(12-inch to 18-inch) under-slab trenches, sand having a sand equivalent value of
.30 or greater may beutilized and jetted or flooded into place: Observation, probing
and testing should be provided to verify the desired results.
Exterior trenches adjacent to, and within areas extending below a 1:1 plane
projected from the outside bottom edge of the footing, and all trenches beneath
hardscape features and in slopes, should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the
laboratory standard Sand backfill, unless excavated from the trench, should not be
used in these backfill areas Compaction testing and observations, along with
probing, should be accomplished to verify the desired results
3 All trench excavations should conform to CAL-OSHA and local safety codes
I . Caiávera Hills Ii, LLC
S W. 0. 3459B1-SC Caiavera Hills, VillageK
- . August 11, 2003 File e \wp9\3400\3459b1 k ror Page 17
I GeoSoils, Inc.
I
•
4. Utilities crossing gradé'beams, perimeter beams, or footings should either pas
below ,the footing or grade beam utilizing a hardened collar or foam spacer, or pass'
through"the footing or grade beam in accordance with the recommendations of,the
I structural engineer.
SUMMARY OF-RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING
GEOTECHNICAL OBSERVATION AND TESTING
,
I We recommend that observation and/or.-testing be 'performed 'by GSI at each 'of the'
I.' '
following construction stages:
During grading/recertification.
After excavation of building footing, retaining wall footings, and free standing walls
footings, prioto the placement of reinforcing steel or concrete.
-,
I '
Prior to pouring any slabs orflatwork, After presoaking/presituration of building pads'
and other flatwork subgrade, before the placement of concrete, reinforcing steel,
capillary break (i.e., sand, pea-gravel, etc.), or vapor barriers (i.e., visqueen, etc.).
During retaining wall subdrain installation, prior to backfill placement.
'I • During placement of backfill for area drain, interior plumbing, utility line trenches,
and retaining wall backfill.
During slope construction/repair.--
I '
When any unusual soil conditions are encountered during' any construction
operations, subsequent to the issuance of this eport.
-
When any developer or homeowner 'imrovements,'such as flatwdrk, spas, pools,
walls, etc., are constructed.
I '
• A report of geotechnical observation and testing- should be provided at the
conclusion of each of the'above stages, in order to provide concise and clear
documentation of site work, and/or tocornply with code requirements.
OTHER DESIGN' PROFESSIONALS/CONSULTANTS
,The design civil engineer, structural engineer, post-tension designer, architect, landscape
architect, wall designer, etc., should review the recommendations provided herein,
I 'Calavera Hills II, LLC
' ' - ', ' ' - W.O. 3459-B1-SC Calavera Hills, Village K ', Aug ust11, 2003 File:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1.k.ror ' - ' - '
- -Page 18 I ,
-
GeoSo Us, Inc.
1 ,.
I incorporate those recommendations into all their, respective plans, and by explicit
reference, make this report part of their project plan's. ..
PLAN REVIEW .
I
I Final project plans should 6 e reviewed by this office, prior to construction, so that
• construction is in accordance with the conclusions and recommendations of this report.
..
Based on our review, supplemental recommendations and/or further geotechnical studies
• maybe warranted.
LIMITATIONS .
I .The materials encountered on the project site and utilized for our analysis are believed.
representative of the area; however, soil and bedrock materials vary in character between:
excavations and natural outcrops or conditions exposed during mass grading. Site
1:
• conditions may vary due to seasonal changes or other factors.
Inasmuch as our study isbaséd upon our review and engineering analyses and laboratory.,, I •. data, the conclusions and recommendations are professional opinions. These opinions
have .been derived in accordance with current standards of practice, and no warranty is
I
-expressed or implied. Standards of practice are subject to change with time. GSl assumes
no responsibility or liability for work or testing performed by others, or their inaction, or work
performed when GSI is not requested to be onsite, to evaluate if our recommendations have
I . been properly implemented. Use of this report constitutes an agreement and consent by
the user to all the limitations outlined above, notwithstanding any other agreements that
may be in place. In addition, this report may be subject to review by the controlling
I authorities
I .
I
I
I .
Calavera Hills II, LLC . . . W.O. 3459-B1-SC Calavera Hills, Village K • . . August 11, 2003 FiIe:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1.k.ror . . . . . . Page 19
I . . . . • GeoSofls, Inc.
.
.
I
1
The opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. If you shôüld haveany questions,
' please do not hesitate to call our 0f11ce
I Respectfully submitted U 1Z
e
- i
6eea D
tgineering Geologist, CEG3'- Civil Engineer, RCE 47857
I
I Attachments Figures 1 through 8 - Grain Size Distribution
Table 1 - Field Density Test Results ' •
Table 2 -Lot Characteristics-
Table 3 - Foundatidn Construàtion Recbmmendatiôns -
Appendix - References
,Plates 1 and 2 - Field Density-Test Location Maps -
Distribution: (6) Addressee
(1) Jobsite, Attention Mr. Tom LaMarca and/or Mr. Brad Robbin
I
I
I• H
I
I
I
I .
Calavera Hills II,LLC W.O.-3459-B1-SC Calavera Hills, Village K - August 11, 2003
- FiIe:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1.k.ror • 'Page 20 I GeoSoIls, Inc.
III uiiiiiiiiiiiuu___ ohIiIuI II. uiiiiuitiiiiiiii--iiiiiui liii
TEST DATE TESTLOCATION TRACT ':ELEV
OR
MOISTURE
CONTENT
DEPTH (ft
DRY
DENSITY
REL
COMP
TEST
METHOD
SOIL
TYPE
.1 11/19/02 Rear Lot 30 - Village K 346.0 12.2 115.4 91.6 ND C 2 11/19/02 "' Rear Lot 30 .. Village 350.0 .11.4 116.3 92.3 ND C 3 .11/19/02 Rear Lot 30 Village K 352.0 11.9. _116.0 92.1 ND. C 4 1/119IO2 'Rear Lot 30 VillageK 355.0 11.2. 113.8 C 5 11/19/02 Rear Lot 30 Village 351.0 12.5 _114.4 90.8 C 6 11/19/02 - Rear Lot 30 .. . Village K 360.0 12.2 _115.2
90.3jN
91.4 C 7 11/19/02 . . Lot 2930 Village K 356.0 11.1 _16.9 92.8 C 8 11/19/02 RearLot30 Village K 3580 119 .115.4 . 91.6 C 9 .. 11/19/02 Rear Lot 23 VillageK 387.0 ' 11.7 _119.1 94.5 ND - C 10 11/19/02 Rear Lot 22-23 VillageK 388.0 13.4 _113.8 90.3 ND 11 11/19/02 --Rear Lot 24 . Village K . 388.0 . 12.2 - _114.3 90.7 ND C 12 11/19/02 Rear Lot 23 Village K, 390.0 10.9 ' _114.8 91.1 ND C 13 11/20/02 Rear ...ot-31. Village K 363.0 13.9 109.9 91.2 ND A 14 11/20/02 .' Rear Lot 39 . Village K 348.0 14.2 112.9 93.7 ND .. A 15 . 11/20/02 Rear Lot 38 Village K 345.0 - .14.2 110.5 91.7 . ND .: A 16 11/20/02 . Rear Lot 39 Village K 350.0., 13.2 109.1 90.5 ND A 17 11/20/02 Rear Lot 38 -' Village K 349.0 . 13.6 109.5_ 90.9 SC A. 18 11/20/02 Rear Lot 39 - Village K 352.0 13.9 _111
-
91.4 ND A .19 . 11/20/02 Rear Lot 39 . Village 353.0 13.4 113.1 .93.9 ND A 20. ' 11/20/02 Lot 31 . Village 366.0 11.5 117.1 91.5 ND B 21 11/20/02 Lot 29 . . Village K 368.0 . 10.9 115.5 90.2 ND B 22 11/20/02 . Lot 29 Village K 360.0 11.2 1,15.0 90.6 ND 23 11/20/02 . . Rear Lot 37-38 . Village . 354.0 14.3 110.7 91.9 SC A 24' 11/20/02 Rear Lot 39 Village 357.0 14.9 112.5 93.4 . ND A- 25 . 11/20/02 Lot 30 . Village K 368.0 11.6 118.0 92.2 ND . B 26 11/21/02 Rear Lot 39 Village K 360.0 _12.2 118.8 92.8 ND . B 27 1/21/02 Rear Lot 38 Village K 362.0 _11 119.6 93.4 ND.. B 28 11/21/02 Side Lot 39 Village K 364.0 11.8 116., 91.1 ND - B 29 11/21/02 . Rear Lot 37-38 Village 361.0 _114 _11 , 91.4 ND . .8 30 11/21/02 . Rear Lot 39 VillageK 366.0 106 _116.1 90.7 ND B 31 11/21/02 Rear Lot 37-38 . . Village . 364.0 '10.9- .118.4' 92.5 ND B. 32 11/21/02 Side Lot 39. . Village K 368.0 _1j 1117.5 91.8 SC . B 33' 11/21/02 Lot 37 . Village K .367.0 .. 1.9 18.3 - 92.4 ND . B .34 11/21/02 ' Lot 39 Village K 369.0 1.2: - 19_ 90.6 ND 8 35 11/21/02 , Lot 39 . Village K 370.0 10.9 . 115.6 . 90.3 ND . B 36 11/22/02 . Rear Lot 36 Village 367.0 - 10.4 118.7 92.7 ND.. B 3. 11/22/02 Rear Lot 34 Village K ' 362.0 ' 9.8 119.6 93.4 ND B 38 11/22/02 Rear Lot 32 Village K 369.0 9.9 119.3 93.2 ND B 39 11/22/02 . Rear Lot 36 Village K 369.0 •. '10.5 116.4 90.9 ND., 40 11/22/02 Rear Lot 35 . ' • Village K 367.0 11.6 116.1 90.7. ND B 49 11/26/02 ' Slope Area To Rear Lot 55- Village K .385.0 14.6 ' 109.4 90.8 ND A 50 11/26/02 . Slope Area To Rear Lot 57 ' Village K 395.0 13.2 108.7 90.2 ND . A 51 .' 1.1/26/02 Slope Area To Rear Lot 58-59 VillageK 398.0, . 13.1. 109.7 91.0 ND A 52.- 11/26/02 Slope Area To Rear Lot 56 Village K 392.0' 12.2 120.8 92.9' ND. 53 . 11/26/02 -Slope Area To Rear Lot 55 Village 396.0 • . 11.1 121'.4-1 93.4. ND . E 54 11/26/02 Slope Area To Rear Lot 58 Village K . 399.0 10.9 120.4 92.6 .ND E 55 11/26/02 Slope Area To Rear Lot 56-57 Village K 399.0.,, 11.2 119.2 91.7 ND I E--
I
- Calávera Hills II, LLC
, . . . W.O. 3459.Bi-SC
I Calavera Hills Village K August 2003
File C \exceFtables\34OO\3456b village K GeoSoils, Inc. 'Pagel
Table I
FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS
NO.
TEST:."DATE"'...TEST LOCATION TRACT
NO.
X.
ELEV
OR
DEPTH
MOISTURE
CONTENT DENSITY
(pcf)
-REL
COMP
(%)
TEST
METHOD
SOIL
TYPE
56 11/26/02 Slope Area To Rear Lot 58 VillageK 403.0 11.4 121.9 93.8 ND E 57 11/26/02 Slope Area To Rear Lot 55-56 Village 400.0 11.9 119.9 92.2 ND E 58 11/26/02 Slope Area To Rear Lot 57 Village 402.0 .10.6 _118.3 91.0 ND E 59 11/26/02 Slope Area To Rear Lot 55 Village 404.0 11.1 118.4 91.1 Sc E 60 11/27/02 Rear Lot 55 Village K 402.0 . 14.4 109.4 90.8 ND A 61 11/27/02 Rear Lot 59 Village 406.0 13.6 109.9 91.2 ND A 62 11/27/02 Rear Lot 56 Village K 406.0 13.2 108.9 90.4 ND A 63* 11/27/02 Rear Lot 54 . Village K 407.0 8.6 103.9 86.2 ND A 63A 11/27/02 Rear Lot 54 Village K 407.0 12.9 109.2 90.6 ND A 64 11/27/02 Lot 55 Village K 410.0 11.7 117.3 90.2 Sc E 65 :11/27/02 Lot 58 Village K 410.0 12.2 121.4 93.4 ND E 66 11/27/02 Lot 54 Village K 409.0 11.9 118.3 91.0 ND E 67* 1i727/02 -/ Lot 55 Village K 412.0 9.1 115.1 188.5S ND E 67A (11/27/02 Lot 55 Village 412.0 12.5 118.7 913 ND E 68 11/27/02 Lot 56 Village 414.0 10.9 118.8 92.8 ND B 69 11/27/02 Lot 57 Village K 413.0 116 116.4 90.9 ND B 70. 11/27/02 Lot 54 Village 415.0 11.1 116.6 91.1 ND B 81 12/3/02 Lot 68 Village K 419.0 12_ 114.3 90.7 ND C 82 _12/3/02 Lot 69 Village 421.0 12.9 116.4 92.4 ND C 83 12/3/02 Lot 66 Village 419.0 134 117.8 93.5 ND C 84 12/3/02 Lot 67 Village 418.0 11.6 118.6 91.2 ND E' 85 12/3/02 Lot 67 Village K 420.0 11.7 118.4 91.1 Sc E 86 12/3/02 Slope Area Lot 52 Village K 413.0 11.9 117.3 90.2 ND E 87 12/3/02 Lot5354..t Village K 414.0 125 118.2 90.9 ND E 88* 12/3/02 Lot 52 Village K 416.0 8.4 111.3 1856 ND E 88A 12/3/02 Lot 52 Village K 416.0 11.2 118.0 90.8 ND E 89 12/3/02 Lot 54 Village 417.0 12.4 120.9 93.0 ND E 90 12/3/02 Lot 55 . Village K 416.0 12.2 119.1 91.6 ND E 91 12/3/02 Lot 54 Village _419.0 13.0 _117.5 90.4 ND E 92 12/3/02 Lot 53 Village K 418.0 12.7 118.2 90.9 ND E 94 12/4/02 Flat Rock St 13+75 Village 414.0 11.6 _117.4 90.3 ND E 95 12/4/02 Flat Rock St 13+60 Village K 416.0 12.4 _119.1 91.6 ND E
- 96
- 1214/02 Rear Lot 73 Village K 422.0 10.9 117.1 90.1 ND E
- 13 12/6/02 Rear Lot 5 Village K 404.0 11.8 118.2 93.8 ND C
- 14. 12/6/02 Rear Lot 6 Village K 406.0 12.2 113.7 90.2 ND C
- 15 1216/02 Rear Lot 4 Village K 405.0 11.4 _114.5 90.9 ND C 116 12/6/02 Rear Lot Village K 408.0 1.1 - _115.4 91.6 SC C
- 17 12/9/02 Rock Ridge Rd 11+00 Village K 368.0 1.7 - _115.3 91.9 ND D 18 12/9/02 Rock Ridge Rd 11+50 Village K 370.0 10.8 _113.7 90.6 ND D 119 12/9/02 Rock Ridge Rd, 15+40 Village K 377.0 12.4 118.4 91.1- ND E 120 12/9/02 Rock Ridge Rd 15+80 Village K 380.0 - 11.2 _119._ 91.8 ND 121 12/9/02 Rear Lot 5 Village K 408.0 10.9 120.5 92.7 ND E 122 12/9/02 Rear Lot 7 Village 410.0 11.4 121.6 93.5 ND E 300 1/17/03 Lot 25 Village 391.0 10.8 114.8 90.7 ND F 301 1/17/03 Lot 27 Village K 387.0 10.6 115.1 90.9 ND F 302 1/17/03 Lot 29 Village 382.0 11.1 115.5 91.3 ND F 303 1 1/17/03 Lot 26 Village K 389.0 11.3 114.9 90.8 ND F
Calavera Hills II, LLC W.O. 3459-B1-SC Calavera Hills, Village K August 2003 File: C:\excel\tables\3400\3456b village K GeoSoits, Inc. Page 2
I'
El
Table I
FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS
NO
.,...DATE -:.
j
...:::i:* TEST. LOCATION TRACT
tjW
ELE.:
OR
DEPTH (ft)
MOISTURE
CONTENT DENSITY
REL
COMP
:TEST,..
METHOD
SOIL
TYPE
304 1/20/03 Lot 31 Village K 376.0 _11._ 114.6 90.5 ND F 305 1/20/03 Lot 33 Village K 375.0 11.8 114.5 90.5 ND F 306 1/20/03 Lot 35 Village K 374.0 11.5 115.3 91.1 ND F 307 1/20/03 Lot 57 Village K 413.0 _11._ 115.6 91.3 ND F 308 1/20/03 Lot 56 Village 414.0 _1_._ 114.9 90.0 ND F 309 1/20/03 Lot 55 Village K 417.0 _11.4 _114.7 90.6 ND __• 310 1/20/03 Lot 59 Village 406.0 11.5 _11_ 91.2 ND F 311 1/21/03 Lot 53 Village K 420.0 11.8 115.4 91.2 ND F 312 1/21/03 Lot 54 Village 420.0 11.5 115.1 90.9 ND F 313 1/21/03 Front Lot 48 Rock Ridge Rd 15+90 Village K 378.0 _11_ _1_ 90.6 ND F 314 1/21/03 Front Lot 48 Rock Ridge Rd 16+30 Village K 380.0 11.8 115.5 91.3 ND F 317 1/22/03 Lot 39 Village 373.0 10_ 115.3 91.1 SC F 318 1/22/03 . Lot 38 Village K 374.0 11.8 115.5 91.3 ND F 319 1/22/03 Lot 37 Village K 374.0 11.4 114.9 90.8 ND F 320 1/22/03 Lot 36 Village K 378.0 11.5 _115.8 91.5 ND F 321 1/22/03 Rock Ridge Rd 17+10 Village K 378.0 1.5 115.8 91.5 ND F 326 1/23/03 Rock Ridge Rd 16+30 Village K 380.0 11 _115.2 91.0 ND F 327 1/23/03 Rock Ridge Rd 18+00 Village K 382.0 _11_ _1_ 90.6 ND F 328 1/23/03 Rock Ridge Rd 16+80 Village K 384.0 11 _114.9 90.8 ND F 331 1/24/03 Rock Ridge Rd 18+50 Village K 1 394.0 _11_ _1_ 90.7 ND F 332 1/24/03 Rock Ridge Rd 16+50 Village K 383.0 11_ 114.3 ND F 333 1/24/03 Rock Ridge Rd 17+60 Village K 386.0 11!_ _1_ 91.0 ND F 334 1/27/03 Lot 17 Village K 417.0 11.7 114.3 90.3 Sc F 335 1/27/03 Lot 20 Village K 403.0 11.2 114.9 90.8 SC F 336 1/27/03 Lot 18 Village K 412.0 11.9 115.1 90.9 ND F 337 1/27/03 Lot 22 Village K 398.0 12.1 114.5 90.5 ND F 338 1/28/03 Rock Ridge Rd 12+20 . Village K 363.0 _10.9 _14. 90.6 sc 339 1/28/03 . Rock Ridge Rd 13+00 Village K 364.0 _11.3 115.2 91.0 SC .F 340 1/28/03 Rock Ridge Rd 14+50 Village K 369.0 _11.8 114.4 90.4 ND F 341. 1/28/03 Rock Ridge Rd 13+50 Village K 366.0 11.1 _115.5 91.3 ND F 342 1/28/03 Rock Ridge Rd 12+50 Village K 365.0 11.6 _114.9 90.8 ND F 343 1/29/03 Rock Ridge Rd 12+90 Village K 370.0 11.8 _114.5 90.5 SC F 344 1/29/03 Rock Ridge Rd 15+30 Village K 378.0 _11 _115.2 91.0 Sc F 345 1/29/03 Rock Ridge Rd 13+70 Village K 373.0 11.5 _114.9 90.8 ND F 346 1/29/03 Rock Ridge Rd 14+80 . Village K 374.0 11.3 _115.5 91.3 ND F 347 1/29/03 . Rock Ridge Rd 12+20 Village K 369.0 11.0 114.3 90.3 . ND F 348 1/31/03 Rock Ridge Rd 19+50 Village K 396.0 11.4 .114.8 90.7 Sc F 349 1/31/03 Rock Ridge Rd 20+10 Village K 398.0 _11.91 _114.4 90.4 ND F 450 1/31/03 . Rock Ridge Rd2O+60 Village 412.0 12.2 115.3 91.1 ND F 451 1/31/03 Lot 51 Village 394.0 11.2 =115.1 90.9 ND F 452 1/31/03 Rock Ridge Rd 18+90 Village K 396.0 _11.1 115.4 91.2 ND - F 453 2/3/03 Rock Ridge Rd 19+50 Village K 396.0 11.3 114.8 90.7 ND F 454 2/3/03 Rock Ridge Rd 20+33 Village K . 406.0 _11.1 _115.3 91.1 ND 455 2/3/03 Rock Ridge Rd 18+70 - Village K 497.0 10.9 114.4 90.4 ND F 456 2/3/03 Rock Ridge Rd 19+20 Village K 398.0 _11.5 _5.1 90.9 ND- F 457 2/3/03 Rock Ridge Rd 21+30 Village K 417.0 1 11.7 _115.5 91..3 ND - F 458 1 2/4/03 Rock Ridge Rd Lot 20 Village K 404.0 1 11.7 _114.5 90.5 ND F
Calavera Hills II, LLC - . W.O. 3459B1-SC Calavera Hills, Village K - -. . . - - August 2003 File: C:\excel\tables\34003456b village K GeoSoils, Inc. Page 3
I
I
1
I,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Table I
FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS
TEST
NO
. DATE ,..;..:.TESfLoCATIoN :.TRACT
NO OR
: ELEV :MOISTURE
CONTENT
DEPTH (ft)
.DRY.
DENSITY
REL.
COMP
.TEST
METHOD
SOIL
TYPE
459 2/4/03 Rock Ridge Rd Lot 23 Village K 397.0 11.1 115.2 91.0 ND F 460 2/4/03 Rock Ridge Rd Lot 21 Village K 400.0 10.9 114.8 90.7 ND F 461 2/4/03 ' Rock Ridge Rd Lot 22 Village K 399.0 _11.3 114.6 90.5 ND F 462 2/5/03 Flat Rock St 11+90 Village K 397.0 11.7 _114.9 90.8 ND F 463 2/5/03 Flat Rock St 13+10 Village K 407.0 _11 _115.3 91.1 ND F 464 2/5/03 Flat Rock St 12+40 Village 400.0 _IOL_ _115.5 91.3 ND 465 2/5/03 Flat Rock St 12+10 Village K 399.0 _10 _115.5 90.5 ND F 466 2/6/03 Flat Rock St 10+70 Village K 397.0 _11!_ 115.3 91.1 ND F 467 2/6/03 Flat Rock St 12+60 Village K 402.0 115 _114.7 90.6 ND F 468 2/6/03 FlatRockSt11+30 Village 404.0 10.9 _115.5 91.3 ND F 469 2/6/03 Lot 55 Village 419.0 10.5 114.4 90.4 ND F 470 2/6/03 . Lot 53 . Village 422.0 10.7 114.9 1 90.8 ND F 471 2/6/03 . Front Lot 25 Village 389.0 11.1 115.1 90.9 NO F 472 2/6/03 Front Lot 28 . Village K 385.0 10.6 115.4 91.2 ND F 473 2/7/03 Lot 51 Village K 396.0 11.2 114.6 90.5 ND F 474 2/7/03 Lot 48 Village K 386.0 10.9 _114.9 90.8 NO F 475 2/7/03 Lot 50 Village 392.0 10.8 _115.5 91.3 ND F 476 2/7/03 Lot 49 Village K 389.0 11.3 115.1 90.9 ND F 477 2/10/03 . Lot 47 Village K 384.0 10.9 114.9 90.8 ND F 478 2/10/03 Lot 41 Village K 375.0 11.2 _115.3 91.1 ND F 479 2/10/03 Lot 44 Village 377.0 _10.7 _115.2 91.0 1 NO F 480 2/10/03 Lot 46' Village K 381.0 11.5 _114.4 90.4 ND .F 481 2/10/03 Lot 42 Village 377.0 11.7 114.7 90.6 ND F 482 2/10/03 Lot 45 Village 380.0 10.8 114.5 90.5 NO F 483 2/10/03 Lot 43 Village K 378.0 11.4 114.9 90.8 ND F 484 2/12/03 Lot 60 Village K 401.0 1 11.1 14.4 - 90.4 ND F 485 2/12/03 Lot75 Village 422.0 10.8 _112 91.0 ND F 486 2/12/03 Lot 60 Village K 403.0 11.5 14.7 - 90.6 ND F 487 2/12/03 Lot 75 Village K 425.0 10.9 115.4 91.2 ND F
488 Test Number Not Used
489 2/14/03 Lot 75 Village K 424.0 11.1 15.2 - 91.0 ND F 490 2/14/03 Lot 74 Village 425.0 10.9 141 - 90.6 ND F 491 2/14/03 Lot 75 Village K 427.0 11.3 15.1 - 90.9 ND F 492 2/14/03 Lot 74 Village K 427.0 11.1 15.0
- 90.9 ND F 493 2/14/03 Lot 76 Village K 424.0 _11.5 14.9
- 90.8 ND F 494 2/14/03 Lot 77 Village K 426.0 _11.3 14.7 - 90.6 ND F 495 2/18/03 Lot 87 . Village 408.0 _11.8 115.2 91.0 ND F 496 2/18/03 Lot 87 Village K 410.0 11.5 14.6 - 90.5 ND F 497 2/18/03 Lot 87 - Village K 412.0 _11.3 14.9 - 90.8 ND F 498 2/19/03 Lot 63 Village K 410.0 11.3 15.2 - 91.0 ND F 499 2/19/03 Lot 84 Village K 420.0 11.5 114.7 90.6 ND F 550 2/29/03 Lot 78 Village K 425.0 11.1 15.0 - 90.9 ND F 551 2/29/03 Lot 84 Village K 422.0 11.5 114.5 90.5 ND F 552 2/29/03 Lot 78 Village K 427.0 10.8 114.8 90.7 ND F 553 2/29/03 Lot 84 Village K 424.0 10.8 15.3 - 91.1 ND F 554 2/20/03. Lot 62 Village K 407.0 11.2 115.2 91.0 ND F 555 2/20/03 Lot 61 Village K 405.0 11.6
- 14.8 90.7 ND F
Calavera Hills II, LLC W.O. 3459-B1-SC Calavera Hills, Village K AUgust 2003 File: C:\excel\tables\3400\3456b village K ,GeoSoils, Inc. Page 4
Table I
FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS
..TEST:.
NO
DATE . .,...'...'TEST LOCATION . TRACT
NO OR
.
..ELEV.. MOISTURE
CONTENT
DEPTH (ft)
DRY
DENSITY
REL..
COMP
TEST
METHOD
SOIL
TYPE
633 3/10/03 Lot Village K 413.0 14.9 110.0 91.3 ND A 634 3/10/03 Lot Village K 415.0 16.2 114.0 94.6 ND A 635 3/10/03 Lot Village K 416.0 114 119.9 92:2 ND E 636 3/10/03 Lot Village 418.0 _11..9 _117.7 90.5 Sc 681 3/12/03 . Lot 76 Village K 426.0 _11.4 _117.5 92.9 ND F 682 3/12/03 Lot 61-62 Village 406.0 12.2 .118.2 93.4 ND F 683 3/12/03 Lot 62 Village K 408.0 12.0 116.1 91.8 ND F 720 3/26/03 Lot 54 Village K FG 13.7 115.3 91.2 ND F 721 3/26/03 Lot 39 Village K FG 9.1 118.9 94.0 ND F 722 3/26/03 Lot 24 Village K FG . 9.1 _1_ 96.9 ND F 723 3/27/03 Lot 25 Village K FG 16.7 _1_ 94.7 ND F 724 3/27/03 Lot 26 Village K FG 9.6 119.2 94.2 . ND F 725 3/27/03 Lot 27 Village K FG 15.1 120.1 95.0 ND F 726 3/27/03 Lot 28 Village K FG 16.2 118.6 93.8 ND F 727 3/27/03 Lot 29 Village K FG 9.5 119.1 94.2 ND F 728 3/27/03 . Lot 30 Village K FG 9.7. . 118.7 93.8 ND F 729 3/27/03 Lot 31 Village K FG 16.7 119.8 94.7 ND F 730 3/27/03 Lot 32 Village K FG 16.3 120.0 94.9 ND F 731 3/27/03 _0t33 Village FG 16.8 118.6 93.8 ND 732 3/27/03 Lot 34 Village K FG, 9.1 _1_ 92.3 ND F 733 3/27/03 . Lot 35 Village K FG 16.6 _117.2 92.6 ND F 734 3/27/03 Lot 36 Village K FG 15.8 . 117.9 93.2 ND F. 735 3/27/03 Lot 37 Village K FG 16.1 . 116.2 91.9 ND F 736 3/27/03 . Lot 38 Village K FG 16.9 _1_ 93.5 ND F 737 3/28/03 Rec Lot 86 Village 388.0 12.6 _1_ 93.5 ND .F 738 3/28/03 Rec Lot 86 Village 391.0 11.5 119.1 94.2 ND F 739 3/28/03 Lot 17 Village 420.0 10.8 119.8 94.7 ND F 753* 3/18/03 . Lot 7-8 Village K 409.0 19.8 101.1 83.9 Sc A 753A 3/18/03 Lot 7-8 Village K 409.0 14.6 109.4 90.8 ND A 754 3/18/03 Lot 7-8 Village K 411.0 15.9 106.8 8$.61 Sc . A 754A 3/18/03 Lot 7-8 Village K . 411.0 14.1 109.1 90.5 ND A 755 3/18/03 Lot 7 Village K 412.0 102 123.8 94.5 ND G 756 3/19/03 - Lot Village K 415.0 11.1 121.2 93.2 ND E 757 3/19/03 . Lot Village 417.0 _110 120.6 92.8 ND E 758 3/19/03
- Lot Village 418.0 _11_ 118.4 93.6 ND. F 759 1 3/20/03 - Lot Village 419.0 _12.6 _1_ 92.8 ND F 760 3/20/03 Lot 8-9 Village K 421.0 11.2 118.4 93.6 ND F 761 3/20/03 . Rec Lot 85 Village K 416.0 11.9 _11 . 94.2 ND F 762 3/20/03 Rec Lot 85 Village K 419.0 11.3 115.7 91.5 ND F 763 3/20/03 Lot 83 Village K 422.0 11.1 . 116.6 92.2 SC F 764 3/20/03 Lot 83 Village K 423.0 10.5 118.2 93.4 Sc F 800 4/2/03 Lot 17 Village K FG 9.9 118.7 93.8 ND F 801 4/2103 .0t 18 Village K FG 10.1 _118.8 93.9 ND F 802 4/2/03 Lot 19 Village K FG 10.2 119.8 94.7 ND F 803 4/2/03 Lot 20 Village K FG 9.6 121.7 96.2 ND F 804 4/2/03 Lot 21 Village K FG 9.7 112.0 92.5 ND F 805 1 4/2/03 Lot 22 Village K FG 10.3 114.2 90.3 ND F
Calavera Hills II, LLC W.O. 3459-B1-Sc calavera Hills, Village K August 2003 File: C:\excel\tables\3400\3456b village K GeoSoils, Inc. Page 5
Table I
FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS
TEST
NO.
DATE TEST LOCATION TRACT
NO.
ELEV
OR
DEPTH (ft)
MOISTURE
CONTENT
DRY
DENSITY
REL
COMP
(pcf)
JEST
METHOD
SOIL
TYPE
806 4/2/03 Lot 23 Village K FG 11.4 _120.7 95.4 ND F 807 4/2/03 Lot 51 Village K FG _105 119.2 94.2 ND F 808 4/2/03 Lot 50 Village FG _11.0 _17.• 92.7 ND _L 809 4/2/03 Lot 49 Village K FG _11.9 _122.1_ 96.5 ND .F 810 4/2/03 Lot 48 Village K FG 10.7 _117._ 93.0 ND F 811 4/2/03 Lot 47 Village K FG 10.2 119.9 94.8 ND F 812 4/2/03 Lot 46 Village K FG 9.9 _11_ 93.5 ND F 813 4/2/03 .I Lot 45 Village K FG 10.7 119.0 94.1 ND F 818 4/5/03 Lot 44 VillageK FG 10.1 _11 93.5 ND F 819 4/5/03 Lot 43 Village K FG 9.8 _17 94.6 ND F 820 4/5/03 Lot 42 Village K FG 9.3 117.0 92.5 ND F 821 4/5/03 Lot 41 Village K FG 10.3 _11 95.7 ND _L. 822 1 4/5/03 Rec Lot.86 Village K FG 10.6 _118.2 93.4 ND F 823 4/5/03 Lot 40 Village K FG 10.0 _121.2 95.8 ND F 831 4/7/03 Lot 52 Village K FG 10.4 116.6 92.2 ND F 832 4/7/03 Lot 53 Village K FG 11.2 _1_ 95.9 ND F 833 4/7/03 Lot 54 Village K FG . 9.6 _119.3 94.3 ND F 834 417/03 Lot 55 . Village K FG .9.2 119.0 94.1 ND F 835 4/7/03 Lot 56 Village K FG 8.4 . 116.8 92.3 ND .F 836 4/7/03 Lot 57 Village FG 9.9 _118.7 93.8 ND F 837 4/7/03 Lot 58 Village K FG 103 _118.9 94.0 ND F 842 4/8/03 Rear Lot 39 Village K 370.0 14.8 _112.8 93.6 ND A 843 4/8/03 Rear Lot 39 . Village K 355.0 13.2 109.9 91.2 ND A 844 4/8/03 Rear Lot 36 Village K 370.0 10.8 _114.0 90.8 ND D 845 4/8/03 Rear Lot 35 Village K 372.0 11.2 _114.3 91.1 ND D 846 4/8/03 Rear Lot 34 Village K 365.0 12.9 122.1 93.9 ND E 847 4/8/03 Rear Lot 32 Village K 373.0 13.6 119.0 91.5 ND E 848 4/8/03 Rear Lot 30 Village K 367.0 10.8 119.6 92.0 ND E 849 4/8/03 Rear Lot 30• Village K 354.0 11.1 118.4 91.1 ND E 875 4/15/03 Side Lot 1 Village K 370.0 12.2 118.8 91.4 ND .E 876 4/15/03 Side Lot I Village K 380.0 11.0 117.8 90.6 ND E 877. 4/15/03 Side Lot I Village K 373.0 10.9 121.8 93.7 ND E 878 4/15/03 Side Lot 1 Village K 388.0 11.4 . 121.2 .93.2 ND E 879 4/15/03 Side Lot 1 Village K 376.0 12.2 117.5 90.4 ND E 880 4/15/03 Side Lot I Village K 390.0 11.6 122.9 94.5 ND E 881 4/15/03 Side Lot Village K 382.0 12.0. 122.1 93.5 ND E 882. 4/15/03 Side Lot Village K 386.0 11.9 118.3 91.0 ND E 883 4/15/03 Side Lot 1 Village K 390.0 11.8 _117.9 907 ND E 901 4/18/03 Lot 1 South Side Village K 364.0 10.8 _117.1 90.1 Sc E 902 4/18/03 Lot 1 Canyon Village .K 390.0 11.3 121.7 93.6 ND E 911 4/21/03 Rear Lot 2 Village 392.0 14.6 110.6 91.8 ND A 912 4/21/03 Rear Lot 394.0 . .13.3 112.2 93.1 ND A 1108 5/27/03 Rock Ridge Rd 27+10 404.0 12.4 119.5 91.9 SC E 1109 5/27/03 Rock Ridge Rd 27+30 E1111 396.0 13.0 122.5 94.2 sc 5/28/03 Rock Ridge Rd 28+60
gVillageK
388.0 9.6 123.5 92.2 SC 1112 5/28/03 Rock Ridge Rd 27+50 400.0 9.8 126.8 94.6 ND 1113 5/28/03 Rock Ridge Rd 30+10 390.0 9.2 125.8 93.9 ND
- -
Calavera Hills II, LLC W.O. 3459-B1-SC Calavera Hills, Village K August 2003 File: C:\exceRtables\3400\3456b village 1< GeoSoils, Inc. Page 6
Table I
FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS
TEST
NO.
DATE
.
TEST LOCATION
. '•
TRACT
NO.
ELEV
OR
MOISTURE
CONTENT
DEPTH PC
DRY
DENSITY COMP
REL'
..
TEST
METHOD
SOIL
TYPE
1_ 6/4/03 Lot Village K 405.0 10.9 115.6 91.4 ND F
_1_ 6/4/03 Lot Village 413.0 10.6 114.1 90.2 NO F 1181 6/4/03 Lot 3 Village 401.0 11.4 118.3 93.5 ND F 1182 6/4/03 Lot 5 Village K 410.0 11.5 119.2 94.2 NO F
_1_ 6/4/03 Lot Village K 415.0 10.7 115.2 91.1 NO F _14_ 6/4/03 Lot Village K 412.0 10.6 114.6 90.6 NO F 1185 6/3/03 Lot Village K 396.0 10.9 _1_ 90.8 NO F _1186 6/3/03 Lot 4 Village K 404.0 11.3 _114.1 90.2 NO _1187 6/4/03 Lot 1 Village K 391.0 11.3 _114.9 90.8 NO F 1188 6/4/03 Lot Village 393.0 10.8 _1_ 90.9 NO F 1189 6/4/03 Lot Village 399.0 12.2 _1_ 92.5 NO F 1199 6/5/03 Lot 8 Village K FG 10.8 _116.3 91.9 NO F 1200 6/5/03 Lot 7 Village K FG 10.9 _117.1 92.6 NO F 1201 6/5/03 Lot Village FG 11.8 _1_ 93.5 NO F 1202 6/5/03 Lot VillageK FG 11.2 115.4 91.2 NO F 1203 6/5/03 Lot Village K FG 11.1 _114 94.4 Sc F 1204 6/5/03 Lot 3 Village K FG 10.6 _117.4 92.8 NO F 1205 6/5/03 Lot Village FG 10.2 _1_ 93.0 NO F 1206 6/5/03 Lot Village K FG 10.5 115.2 91.1 Sc F 1207 6/5/03 Lot 10 Village K 422.0 11.8 114.9 90.8 NO F 1208 6/5/03 Lot 10 Village K 421.0 12.4 114.1 90.2 NO F' 1209 6/5/03 Lot 11 Village 423.0 12.5 _115.9_9_ 91.6 ND 'F 1210 6/6/03 Lot 70 Village K 424.0 10.2 _115.2 91.1 NO F 1211 6/6/03 Lot 69 Village 424.0 10.9 115.5 91.3 NO F 1212 6/6/03 Lot 72 Village K 424.0 11.8 114.6 90.6 NO . F 1213 6/6/03 . Lot 71 Village 425.0 10.7 114.1 90.2 NO F 1214 6/6/03 Pebble Stll+00 Village 417.0 10.6 _1_1 91.0 NO _L 1215 6/6/03 Rec Lot 87 Village K 412.0 11.2 _11_ 91.2 NO. F 1233 6/11/03 Lot 79 Village 425.0 10.9 120.1 92.4 NO E 1234 6/11/03 Lot 80 Village 425.0 12.2 119.7 92.1 NO E 1235 6/11/03 Lot 79 Village 426.0 11.4 121.9 93.8 NO E 1236 6/11/03 ' Lot 81 Village K 425.0 10.9 120.4 92.6 NO .E 1237 6/11/03 Lot 82 Village 423.0 11.2 118.3 91.0 NO E 1265 6/25/03 Sand Ct 12+60 Village K 416.0 10.9 118.6 91.2 NO E 1266 6/25/03 Sand Ct 11+70 Village K 419.0 11.8 120.0 92.3 NO E 1267 6/25/03 Rock Ridge Rd 23+60 Village K 418.0 11.2 119.3 91.8 NO E 1268 1 6/25/03 Rock Ridge Rd 22+40 Village K 420.0 12.3 118.2 90.9 NO E 1269 6/25/03 Rock Ridge Rd 22+90 Village K 422.0 11.4 _118.4 91.1 NO E 1273 6/26/03 Sand Ct 10+20 . Village K 420.0 11.8 _118.4 91.1 NO E 1274 6/26/03 Sand Ct 10+60 Village K 421.0 _11.6 _119.3 91.8 NO E 1275 6/26/03 Sand Ct 9+90 Village K 423.0 12.0 117.4 90.3 NO E 1276 . 6/26/03 Lot 73 Village K 425.0 11.2 120.3 92.5 NO E 1277 6/26/03 Lot 72 ' Village 426.0 11.4 118.8 91.4 NO E 1281 6/27/03 Lot 69 Village FG _11.6 118.0 90.8 NO E 1282 6/27/03 Lot 70 Village K FG , 12.2 122.5 94.2 NO E 1283 6/27/03 Lot 71 Village K FG 10.5 121.7 93.6 NO E 1284 6/27/03 Lot 72 Village K FG .10.2 119.7 92.1 NO E
Calavera Hills II, LLC W.O. 3459B1SC Calavera Hills, Village K
. ' August 2003 File: C:excettabIes3400\3456b village K GeoSoils, Inc. ' Page 7
Table I
FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS
TEST
NO.
DATE TEST LOCATION TRACT
NO.
ELEV
OR
MOISTURE
CONTENT
DEPTH (ft)
DRY
DENSITY COMP
-.REL..TEST
METHOD
SOIL
TYPE
1285 6/27/03 Lot 73 Village K FG 10.7 120.6 92.8 ND E 1286 6/27/03 Lot 74 Village K FG 11.3 122.1 93.9 ND E 1287 6/27/03 Lot 75 Village K FG 10.8 123.2 94.8 ND . E 1288 6/27/03 Lot 76 . Village K FG 10.9 123.8 95.2 ND .E 1289 6/27/03 Lot 77 Village K FG 10.0 118.4 91.1 ND E 129 6/27/03 Lot 78 Village K FG 11.3 118.7 91.3 ND E 1309 6/30/03 Rec Area Lot 87 Village K FG 10.7 _1_ 90.9 ND E 1310 6/30/03 Lot 79 Village K FG 9.3 121.9 93.8 ND E 1311 6/30/03 Lot 80 Village K FG '10.8 122.5 94.2 ND E 1312 6/30/03 Lot 81 - Village K FG 11.6 119.9 92.2 ND E 1313 6/30/03 Lot 82 Village K FG 12.3 119.0 91.5 ND E 1314 6/30/03 Lot 83 Village K FG 10.9 119.3 91.8 ND E 1315 6/30/03 Lot 84 Village K FG 10.5 . 120.8 92.9 ND. E 1316 6/30103 Rec Area Lot 85 Village K FG 10.7 1_ 91.0 ND E 1324 7/1/03 Lot 16 Village K 424.0 11.1 14.7 - 90.7 SC F 1325 7/1/03 Lot 14 Village K 426.0 10.6 16.9 - 92.4. ND ' F 1326 7/1/03 Lot 13 Village K 425.0 10.2 115.0 90.9 ND , F 1327 7/1/03 Lot 15 Village K 426.0 12.8 18.4 - 91.1 ND E 1328 7/1/03 Lot 65 Village K 418.0 12.1 18.8 - 91.4 . ND E 1329 7/1/03 Lot 64 Village K 414.0 13.2 120.4 92.6 ND 1330 7/1/03 Lot 60 Village K 405.0 10.9 193 - 918 ND E' 1331 7/1/03 Lot 68 Village K 422.0 10.3 16.6 - 92.2 ND F 1357 7/2/03 Lot 61 Village K FG 9.7 121.9 93.8 ND E 1358 7/2/03 Lot 62 Village K FG 10.0 119.1 91.6 ND E 1359 7/2/03 Lot 63 Village K FG 9.8 122.5 94.2 ND E 1360 7/2/03 . Lot 64 - Village K . FG 10.2 123.9 95.3 ND E 136.1 7/2/03 Lot 65 Village K FG 10.1 _121.7 93.6 ND E 1362 7/2/03 Lot 66 Village K FG 11.2 21.2 - 93.2 ND E 1363 7/2/03 . Lot 67 Village K FG 10.5 18.2
- 90.9 ND E 1364 7/2/03 Lot 68 Village K FG 9.5 121.9 93.8 ND E 1365 7/2/03 , . Lot Village K FG 11.4 _1_ 92.5 ND F 1366 7/2/03 . Lot 10 Village K FG 10.6 1_ 92.2 ND F 1367 7/2/03 Lot 11 . Village K FG 10.9 117.6 93.0 ND F 1368 7/2/03 -- Lot 16, Village K FG 9.0 120.0 94.9 ND F 1369 7/2/03 Lot 15 Village K FG 10.3 118.9 94.0 ND F 1370 7/2/03 . Lot 14 - Village K FG 9.7 _118.5 93.7 ND F 1371 7/2/03 Lot 59 Village K - FG 10.9 120.5 92.7. ND E 1372 1 7/2/03 Lot 60 Village K FG 11.0 120.3 92.5 ND E 1377 7/3/03 Lot 12 Village K FG 10.4 115.2 91.1 ND F 1378 7/3/03 Lot 13 Village K FG 10.6 11.6.3 91.9 ND F
Legend:
* = Indicates Failed Test
A = Indicates Re-test
FG = Finish Grade
ND = Nuclear Densometer
SC = Sand Cone
Calavera Hills II, LLC W.O. 3459-B1-SC Calavera Hills, Village K August 2003 File: C:\excel\tables\3400\3456b village K GeoSoils, Inc. Page 8
LOT CHARACTERISTICS
LOT
EXPANSION
INDEX
(per UBC'
Standard 18-2)
EXPANSION
POTENTIAL111
SOLUBLE
SULFATE
(Weight %)
SULFATE
EXPOSURE12
DEPTH
OF FILL
(Range
in Ft.)
FOUNDATION
CATEGORY (3),
1 <5 Very Low 0.007 Negligible 3-4 I
2 - <5 Very Low 0.007 Negligible 3.4 I'
3 <5 Very Low 0.007 Negligible 3-4 I
4 <5 Very Low 0.007 Negligible 3-7 I
5 <5 Very Low 0.0064 Negligible 3-9 I
6 <5 Very Low 00064 Negligible 412 I
7 <5 Very Low 00064 Negligible 1011
8 <5 Very Low 0.0064 Negligible 8-13
9 <5 'Very Low 0.0064 Negligible 7-12 I
10 <5 Very Low 0.0064 Negligible 4-12
11 <5 Very Low 0.0061 Negligible .3-8 I
12 <5 Very Low 0.0061 Negligible 3-4 I
13 <5 Very Low 0.0061 Negligible 3-4 I
14 <5 Very Low 0.0045 Negligible 3-4 I
15 <5 Very Low 00045 Negligible 3-4 I
16 <5 Very Low 0.0045 - Negligible 3-4 I
17 - 12 Very Low 0.0045 Negligible 3-4 I
18 12 Very Low 00045 Negligible 3-4 I
19 <5 Very low 0.0070 Negligible, 3-4
20 - <5 Very low 0.0070 Negligible 3-4 .1
21 <5 Very low 00070 Negligible 3-9
22 <5 Very low 0.0070 Negligible. 6-14 I
23 <5 - Very low 0.0070 Negligible 4-12
24 <5 Very low 0.0070 Negligible 5-15 I
25 <5 Very low. 00070 Negligible 515
26 <5 Very low 0.0070 Negligible 3-5 I
27 <5 Very low 00070 Negligible 3-7 I
28 <5 Very low 0.0070 Negligible 3-19 I (PT)
29 <5 Very low 0.0064 Negligible 16-33 II
I GeoSoils, Inc.
LOT CHARACTERISTICS
LOT
EXPANSION
INDEX
(per UBC
Standard 18-2)
EXPANSION
P6TENTIALt1
SOLUBLE
SULFATE
(Weight %)
SULFATE
EXPOSURE(2)
DEPTH
OF FILL
(Range
' in Ft.)
FOUNDATION
CATEGORY
30 <5 Very low 0.0064 Negligible 10-30 II
31 <5 Very low 0.0064 Negligible 4-14 I (PT)
32 <5 Very low 0.0064 Negligible 3-14 - I (PT)
33 <5 Very low 0.0064 Negligible 4-14 l(PT)
34 <5 . Very low 0.0064 Negligible 6-17
35 <5 . 'Very low 0.0064 Negligible, 9-16
36 <5' Very low ' 0.0064 Negligible -. 8-14. I
37• <5 Very kw 0.0064 Negligible 16-23
38 <5 Very Low 0.0064 Negligible 12-22 II
39 <5 . Very Low 0.0064 Negligible 9-19
40 <5 Very Low 0.0064 Negligible 3-4 I
41 <5 Very Low ' 0.0061 - Negligible 3-4 I
42 <5 Very Low . 0.0061 Negligible 3-4
43 <5 - Very Low 0.0061 Negligible 3-4 I
44 . <5 Very Low 0.0061 Negligible 3-4 * I
45 <5 , Very Low 0.0061 Negligible 3-4
46 <5 ' Very Low ' 0.0061 Negligible 3-4 I
47 <5 Very Low 0.0061 Negligible 3-4, I
48 <5 Very Low 0.0061 Negligible 3-4 I
49 <5 ' Very Low ' 0.0061 Negligible -3-4 't I
50 . <5 Very.Low ' 0.0061 Negligible . 3-4
51 - <5 Very Low 0.0061 Negligible 3-4' '
52 <5 ' - Very Low 0.0061 Negligible 8-10 I'
53 -<5 Very Low 0.0061 Negligible 6-13 I
54 <5 Very Low 0.0061 Negligible '12-18 I '
55 <5 Very Low 0.0061 Negligible 18-22 . II
55 <5 Very Low 0.0061 Negligible '8-15 I
57 <5- , . Very Low 0.0061 Negligible 6-18 I
58 ' <5 Very Low 0.0061 * Negligible 6-15
Calavera Hills 11,11-C .. . . - ' Table 2 File:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1.k.ror . Page 2
I .-. .
.'
- -
'GeoSoils, Inc. .
LOT CHARACTERISTICS
LOT
EXPANSION
INDEX
(per UBC
Standard 18-2)
EXPANSION
POTENTIAL')
SOLUBLE
SULFATE
(Weight %)
SULFATE
EXPOSURE 2
DEPTH
OF FILL
(Range
in Ft.)
FOUNDATION
CATEGORY (3)
59 <5 Very Low 0.0061 Negligible 3-7 I
60 <5 Very Low 0.0061 Negligible 3-5 I
61 <5 Very Low 0.0061 Negligible 34 I
62 <5 Very Low 0.0070 Negligible 34 I
63 <5 Very Low 0.0070 Negligible 34 I
64 <5 Very Low 0.0070 Negligible .3-4 I
65 <5 Very Low 0.0070 Negligible 3-7 I
66 <5 Very Low 0.0070 Negligible 3-8 I
67 <5 - - Very Low 0.0070 Negligible 7-10
68 <5 Very Low 0.0070 Negligible 6-10 I
69 <5 Very Low 0.0070 Negligible 4-7 I
70 <5 Very Low 0.0070 Negligible 3-8 I
71 <5 Very Low 0.0070 Negligible 3-6 I
-
72 <5 - Very Low 0.0070 Negligible . 3-4 I
73 <5 Very Low 0.0070 Negligible 3-4 I
74 <5 Very Low 0.0070 Negligible 3-4 I
75 <5 Very Low 0.0070 Negligible 34
76 <5 Very Low 0.0070 Negligible 3-4 I
77 <5 Very Low 0.0070 Negligible 3-4 I
78 <5 Very Low 0.0070 Negligible 3-4
79 <5 Very Low 0.0070 Negligible 3-4 I
80 <5 Very Low 0.0070 Negligible 3-4 I
81 <5 Very Low 0.0070 Negligible 3-4 I
82 <5 Very Low 0.0070 Negligible 34 I
83 <5 Very Low 0.0070 Negligible 3-4 I
84 <5 Very Low 0.0070 Negligible 3-4 I
85 ----t-<5 Very Low 0.0070 Negligible 3-5
Calavera Hills II, LLC Table 2 FilO:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1.k.ror Page 3
GeoSoils, Inc.
)
I
I
- LOT CHARACTERISTICS
EXPANSION DEPTH .
INDEX SOLUBLE . OF FILL •
- (perUBC' -EXPANSION SULFATES SULFATE (Range FOUNDATION
LOT Standard 18-2) POTENTIAL') (Weight %) EXPOSURE 2 in FtY CATEGORY (3)
86 <5 Very Low 0.0070 Negligible 35 I
(Rec Lots)
87 <5 • Very Low: 0:0070 Negligible 3-7 - - I (Rep Lots)
Per Table 18-I-B of the Uniform Building Code (1997ed.) ., . •
(2 Per Table 19-A-4 of the Uniform Building Code (1997 ed.),- • -• (3) Foundations should be constructed in accordance with recommerdations for the specific categories noted above and
presented in Table 3. • - . . ..• .. .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
TABLE 3
CONVENTIONAL PERIMETER FOOTINGS, SLABS. AND
EXTERIOR FLATWORK FOR CALAVERA HILLS, VILLAGE K V
MINIMUM INTERIOR . INTERIOR UNDER- GARAGE EXTERIOR FOUNDATION FOOTING SLAB REINFORCING SLAB •' SLAB SLAB FLATWORK CATEGORY SIZE THICKNESS '' STEEL REINFORCEMENT TREATMENT V REINFORCEMENT REINFORCING
I 12" Wide 4° Thick #4 Bar Top and #3 Bars @ 2° Sand Over 6° x 6° None x Bottom 24' o.c. 10-Mit Polyvinyl (10/10)
12" Deep' V Both Directions Membrane Over V WWF
-
- - 2' Sand Base - V
12° Wide 4" Thick 2 #4 Bars Top and #3 Bars @. 2° Sand Over 6"x 6° 6'x 6' x V Bottom 18" o.c. 10-Mil Polyvinyl V (6/6) (10/10)
V 18" Deep V Both Directions Membrane Over V WWF WWF
2' Sand Base V
III V - 12° Wide 4" Thick #5 Bars Top and V #3 Bars @ V 2' Sand Over V Same as 6 x 6° x Bottom V 18° o.c. 10-Mil Polyvinyl Interior Slab - (6/6)
V 24' Deep -° ., Both Directions V Membrane Over - WWF V
2' Sand Base
-Category Criteria
Category I: V Max. Fill Thickness is less than 20' and Expansion Index is less then or equal to 50 and Differential Fill Thickness is less than 10' (see note 1). V V V
Category II: Max. Fill Thickness is less than 50' and Expansion Index is less than or equal to 90 or Differential Fill Thickness is between 10 and 20' (see note 1).
Category Ill: Max. Fill Thickness exceeds 50', or Expansion Index exceeds 90 but is less than 130, or Differential Fill Thickness exceeds 20' (see note 1). V
V Notes: 1. V Post tension (PT) foundations are required where maximum fill exceeds 50g, the ratio of the maximum fill thickness to the minimum fill thickness exceeds 3:1. V Consideration should be given to using post tension foundations where the expansion index exceeds 90. V 2. Footing depth measured from lowest adjacent subgrade.
• V - -
V 3 Allowable soil bearing pressure is 2,000 PSF. •V V V
V 4 Concrete for slabs and footings shall have a minimum compressive strength of 2,000 PSI (2,500 PSI for exterior flatwork), or adopted UBC mm., at 28 days. using V
V 5 sacks of cement. Maximum Slump shall be 5". V V V
• V V
. 5.. Visqueen vapor barrier not required under garage slab. However, -consideration should be given to future uses of the slab area, such as room conversion arid/or V
storage of moièture-sensitive materials. V • V • V
• V 6. lsblated footings shall be connected to foundations per soils engineer's recommendations (see report).
7 V V Sand used for base under slabs shall be very low expansive, and have SE> 30. V
V V
V
V 8. Additional exterior flatwork recommendations are presented in the text of this report.
- 9. AIIsiabs should be provided with weakened plane joints to control cracking. Joint spacing should be In accordance with correct industry standards and reviewed
V V
V
by the project structural engineer. V
V
V
V
V
V V V V
i - - -
I -
-
U -
- I
'F
4 : •
4
/
APPENDIX I F
REFERENCES
-
I
A
-
I -
II/ -
/ I -
I -
I -
I
I * APPENDIX
' REFERENCES
GeoSoils, Inc., 2003; Memorandum:general discussion of fill quality, Calavera Hills II,
I '•
Carlsbad, California, W.O. 3459-132-SC, dated May. 20. '
2002, Review of grading and trench backfill recommendations,' Calavera Hills II,
I . Carlsbad tract 00.02, Drawing 390-90, City of Carlsbad, San Diego County,
California, W.O. 2863-A-SC, August16
1998a, Lack of pàleontological resources, Carlsbad tract nos. 83-19, PUD 56, and
* '83-32, PUD 62, Carlsbad, San Diego County, California, W.O. 2393-B-SC, dated;
January 21.
198b; Preliminary. review of slope stability, Calavera Hills, Villages 'Q" and
'T', City of Carlsbad, California, W.O. 2393-B-SC, dated February 16.
: -
. S • .'
'
. • 1998c, Review of slope stability, Calavera Hills, Villages "Q" and "T," City of
Carlsbad, Califorhia, W.O. 2393-B-SC, dated June 24.
'
1998d, Toe. drain recommendations, 'Calavera Hills, Village 1, City of Carlbad,
SI
California, W.O. 2393-B-SC, dated September 30.,
O'Day Consultants, 2002, Grading plans for Village K, Carlsbad Tract 0l-02, November 17.
Southern 'California Soiland Testing, Inc., 1992, Interim report of as built geology field
observations and relative' compaction tests, 'proposed 1CbIlege Boulevard.
I .
imprOvements and Village El, Carlsbad, California, SCS&T 9121081
1988, Supplemental soil investigation, Calavéra Hills Village .Q and 1, College
I ' Boulevard, Carlsbad, 'California, Job no. 8821142, Report no.1, dated October 6.
,
. , 1984, Report of geotechnical investigation for Village Q, Calavera HillssubdMsion,.
I' . •'
Carlsbad, Job no. 14112, Report no4 dated January 10.
' S'
- •, - • . _____, 1983a, Report of geotechnical investigation for Village Q, Calavera Hills subdivision, I . Carlsbad, Job no. 14112, Report no.4, dated January 10.
S.
•
1983b, Report of prelimihary geotechnical investigation for the Calavera Hills areas
' " El, E2, H, I, K, and P through Z2, Carlsbad, Job no. 14112, Report no.1, dated
July 29. .: It
•
. ''
•
GeoSoils, 'Inc.
VILLAGE 'K' CUL-DE-SAC
TO TAMARACK AVE.
SIDEWALK TRANSITION
SCALE- I"= 10'
ij!J iii,.!
_____________ __________ -- - - __=__ - - ----- - - - --
i'
I . , 9 Q ~, , - I : . . ; I _-1, ~ \\ . ,,, \, , ." . . I - 9 1 !,? .......... --_ ., I I . I \ ,_~ / :
f
I 11 ',,,--
I . z / XNX 11 \ I.
I I ; , .. \ ~, 1-1\, 1~~
I / /' ; ~ - /,.. / , /
I
~E ~;Zll ::~~ I ~ ,
, ~ //
9 1,
\> ;
_
_ 1/ / II1 _ — — Y u/ / (
/
- - N\ / / \ / I .11 --
, ~ . I . / ,,,,.,_, , I I I A/ ~ ,~;,
n \ 1 / 1 A 1----11
- / N '2O' PlPEL/NEASrnENT
/ /
-
_\ %
'4068 l f / \ I N \N\ 1 jI 7 29'P/PEIEEASEMENr
- 41
.
// 4 \ f i' N-} 43177 'I J/ / / / / \ /N\ 11 P4VROFCWJRECORDED
(t1 i -IL - - —\ - V \ 1/288/ ,qqq C 0 X /////~' / -
/ /l // JAM .9, 1.67,4S )'LE No 2638
.. I" i ";
\
\75 T 4276 I/,, " '8'9' / /
/ /
,
_7 I
62 x \
/ iA / /
-11
"I . '. ,~V. : ,41.11 I .., - . , , , . " ~ . ........... . .... ~ _4~ , :::::i
I
~ .,h -i-
I 1 -7-7—j - ~ X.-6.5 0 __"_ , ,o
,
// ~ ~ , , - '" 1 / ,
,---
X-/29 \x-/275 42/1 /11 e \ -
fli\ 63 / 4273
X290 i12 / %/
/
I'2/' '7', SECTION B-B
. 11
. I I I I -,~~ \ \/ ' / -- - f
X-/3O 64 46 / 27V
- _-
57 \ \\ 4/5 5' I 44 7 \Ft X 7 / ___
I 8 A
N.42 X-/212 " \ '
/ i 7 -
I ~ ! .3 / 4! 1 1 1 1 . ~ / , ~, ,X
~ Ill
r - - Xi2875413th,
\X/277
_ 41 2s 4
/
/w 12 CA I~
234 3
X-/2 /5
/ Ic I 1 1 IX11939M7
It "C
X87
56 4194 IT
/ \
\
/
/
c
V — — \x-ii'a H oJaX-8 X 8 7
I . .(08 , FIX -
-
- 1, I I.. .. .
'
I f ldq3 \ N 1~_,, 1-1 .1
~. I I 1 X-04, / C ~ 1 88 1 ~ I ~ "I V 11
,-- 11\ "X: '. "I -, I ~~ 'k ~ 11
,:,~ , . ~Xt .
-X-"/ - / / X 85 / X/282 70 'J90 425 1!9 — \ x- "8'/ \ 4 X-/2O3 - - \ \ \ - / N
) \ \ \\ N
11. / / 4`1 F /\ F11!
425
\
\ x-i '
-p' i )
/\ x /
4067 \ \ X- /
7 2O ST01 RA;N /
I - 11 I 1 1 I ~
/ /. - - 7,2 6 I/ L363 ' . -_ - -\-
_~)
,---\ \ /
/ , ~
m/ I 4 `;Y.':-.,*,,' .1 ,
/
/ . , I I 'i I . . 54 X \ ~\t $' -6 '/
I ~L r—
11 I
! x-
81
Cr) 4250 rx,z, -~.- ~ -
9- / \
\\
\\ X
-/22
/ XJL8 9- X9/2X)
j,
1 i
/ /
/ // : :
~41 /
/ /
I
- IN
-
1 — — 8 -73,A 52' 1
//
/ / I / / 3 (
- / // IJ /
I j: 0, -- 'r, ,z.3 X_
i /
__w_ ~... __Ij ______ ~ A ~, --- .1", I I ~ 4 70 -;::~ -j 9 .~ k -~, "~ ,-.,.,.,.,,.. \ " 'I" \`~,.,`~~--,, , 1-1 I- _,..,__1__- /: V ! I 1 ; ?, ,;"
~ ~
I I I ~t\
~__
. A_
` ~
A
-
_~ - ! ."— ~_ — — I I ~ 4222 i — - t_ I" ...... t__VLZ~ ... I..." __ Q5 "T4 __.. _.---__1`-"' I/ , j i i ; \:~
.,. ". \,~,',%~,, I,., 11"), _1'.\11,"11'.\, '.. I . 11, .-;-~_ ,1
S,
.
I 411 i~
— . rof~l_-__~ I ,_,~ . - " \ ~;, ;
11 1sX/282?_
T X-/208
.1 / / r".
X/207
Limvtè11 fV
/
/
// / / // )
N
1. : / ',
/\\
/
/ ~~` / I
I / - 12 4242 / ' \ 1 - -
/ / /
-'
' / / / / / /
1.
/ 3 11 11 -- / / 1 , 11
_—t_ ..
.
X
, I //
,
X-/370 13 X-/209 .
.0;~11
'...../ . .. 5
,,,
N
. 1 t",\ "i:....-/....................- ,'____2___;......:'VV'/- // /J //5'. \.. \.'11 \ \ \ 1': 7/I ( //,,
/
1.
. , ) /// Ar , , _:,~_ v
. z " " i ! ~ \ , ~ . li, . ,. V , ~.~ I .,.; ~... "..._-_ ... ~ .... . ..... __._1._-..1.._
~ " ,. '. Z,./ ,. , , __
X i ", _- )~_ 'I'. ""' ~ j . .3(
1 __ ti. 11 ~~ C~10 ill \ , ,
I ~-.`-,,.._ I I I, 1 1 ., ~, ,~ , ".., , . --~~ ,. ,-,%"---_ , ,
-
I
. 1 4278 . )(- 13 M .\ X Z )111 ,
le
! 16 p426 1.i. NO UII0N 1•1
/ i
i) // //
/ 23' 2 3
1
3 3
/ 92
~ I . I : 44. \1 ,Y- 132 7 1 1'1~ t\1 "'.. --,.,,.,. . . ! ( ;*
/
It --
-% ____________, ) 98
'2 /
;;/,/
// —
, C pt
w 8
31
/
/
3
3 \ I.3
1
-- SCALE 1 = 4O
, I I A / _1?t -3 1~i ~Z&!,~? .. `~ ., _ ~ ~ 1 I
- ; I ~ ."", I ' 'd Pt* SPACE , ,
. / f7///Y,./
/~/ / // /., ,
//
,.r\1.0 7T + .....................' 1 ......H'
1
11 / IECTROMC DATA F1LESAREFOR REFERENCE ONLY
~ - ) ,
%T3 - (J 21 N
- /)'ll I AND ARE NOT TO BE USED FOR HORIZONTAL
1.'\ .
.. ...................- ,.. .7 /' .'
' L OR RIIAL SURWY CONTROL
13
1SSIo 0,00^
DESIGNED BY KH DATE JULY 2002 "AS-BUILT " BENCIIM:ARK:
.
11
,
" •.,
DRAWN BY: J.S.. N.C. SCALE: r = .
. DESCRIPTION: STANDARD /1-10 STREET CENTERLINE
________________________ __________ PROJECT MGR K.H. ioe wo 98-1020
K2L MONUMENT
NO. 60223 C 0 N S U L T N T S ______________________________ P.E. EXP. ________ DATE LOCATION. CENTERLINE OFEZ CAM/NO REAL
. '
P. 6/30/04 2710 Loker Avenue West Civil Engineering _______________________________________________
ATENNEER'S STAIION 45492
* * Suite 100 PlOnning LIWIILLR Or WORK. . DEII'3AICI .,
PER R.S 1500-1
Carlsbad, California 92008 Processing . I\LVILVVLL) Dl.
1, IVPI . 760-931-7700 Surveying _________
Op ct-' Fax: 760-931-8680 DATE: _________________________ _____________ RECORD FROM: COUNTY BENCI-/ LEkElS (NO. COUNTY kER1
______
11 I DATE __________________________________ ________________________________ ________________________________________ ELEVATION: 65.479.. DA W/1 NG'kV OF /92,9
SHEET CITY OF CARLSBAD SHEETS
____ ____ ____ ______ ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
H 7
GRADING PLANS FOR: V/LL4CE 'K'
___ GRADING' PLAN
I
__ APPROVED
______ LLOYD B. HUBBS ________ -
_____ _____
_ RCE_23889 EXPIRES _12-31-05 CITY _ENGINEER DATE
DWN BY: . II PROJECT NO. II DRAWING NO. DATE INITIAL DATE INITIAL DATE INITIAL CHKD BY: _________ ENGINEER OF WORK REVISION DESCRIPTION OTHER APPROVAL CITY APPROVAL RVWD BY: II C. i 01-02 l 4037A
I I T I I
1. ~, . .11 - ~ I
.. ~. . I
I
~ I . I ___ . ...... -
It 1-1 I - , ; I ....... ...I.. I ~ 1
5> CN
11 I Lill,,, /Vl
~
~*~E%~~z
ef Artif,c:atfdl
JI
\: 'O1E
I I ~ I- ; 4 ~ " 11
yr-4 ,--422-Jv V
I - I . I I I I , 11 .. I q~" " \ , X %oy I
____~ /
\ I
X- /378 tion of
ELEC17?OMC DATA fiLES ARE FOR REFERENcE ONLY 1
1
(((( ~ \~_ f il 'I
-
'cy~4
\\xç4
I 11
Approximte location f
OTE
/
lod .
.
K £*I*%U \
N
,/ //' /
/' ////
1 11
T,
IMPROVEUTNTS FOR TAYAR4CK AVENUE, HARWICH DRIVE 7 i ; 4068 X- Y_5~,~l
I I I "'IM111twill : EW COURT , -C-410. Z 1 I ."' / I ~ f 404.71 P, 4P ~~
I I ~ , I >~! BLUFF COURT, TALUS WAY, C4 Y DRIVE AND COA57WL
~_ "I'l __1 I
,
__.~_ X f
~ ~~4RE P " "I"..-I ), "
____ 4UON II
.'... 'c("). ///' X/
\
t
, I ~ \~~ - 1~ 4,
,
I -
\\
//
CW
11
\\ \\
EA7SIINGiOT ?ENH
%
', irniio/I
56
a f \
--a I ~ - it~-,, /
/
________________
'! ,
~ I 0 I
/
X-837 F" 4175
A
41430 \ \ \ /
\\
/
1!0.1 If
Ink
V .
1 I
i.
/
/ I i / I /
r
E ~._do
1.
\'
/
/
'///7] i
4/0
4153
g /-7o / & /
\\ \
4\ /
I
L4 I
_j 15Q /-,4 - I ,
-, ) i i j, " / /;'
0 10' 40' / / //
/ /
-
1 -
'or
lz~ . I/
- _\
412 1
.56
SCALE 140'
80'
/
47' -
- I X.52 \1 I ii~I ~ \- 7)y "
\
N
-/ // / /1
\\
X-s/
41 N
/ //
, __ ~ "or-, . \.) \ i\ = \~_ ~
I r,
21
I . 11 ~ ,~' I.-I-11-, " /,~ .- X- #7 __-, vv', ,,~) ~<
N /
,//'N/ P
I I . , 1. ~ " , .! \ - '.." _ , :. , '67 X
/I ~ , ~ ~ ,., ., , , V
gO
49
X-q52
X-qo /
// /
\
<N -:
//fNx -
I ~
.",
'X 6,Z2 ,*_~' f- /_3 b 9 N:6 , 7)(9 - C -::4
-
'
'I 3910
X8O 11 J2
x-
01.
I /( 7
3799
- - t
B rp
,2
y ,.,- -80( /11
I -.. 1. I /N __q: _X-_ 3 2 o ~O ;:! ,- \
\\ . .. .
.
., /
37Z9 o
.. ..: .
- \
X-722 23
i/i
-
/ - "
Al-82
\
/ q
\ \ 24
4OO 0 /
/ I /
/
' / / / /2 ';"'7 /
/
.1 ~ \ \ 28 _~-z I "
, . /I /
- X It - ~0 X..\;~..~ "I - / ~. ,. / /
. . ~ - ~ \ \ 4T~~If -.,- _____ ~;~~~~~
74 z \ _? 29 X- 72 J~~7_6 a f~ ~ 9 "" __-1
,:, 1-FI/ .. X ,
- '.1 * ".
il
( - I
.
-
(()--- I"
X27\Y
\ X-3'7
3q2 Kio \ 7W381.3 4\
. I
- -
. .,,.:, -%%"z~11) ~, \ 1 E 50
// //
///\/// /
-
- I ,
X/9
\
SW J78 5 - ______
_111
//
/ /
/ / / / A / z / / /
. - . 11 . .1 . - - 11 , ~T
-Ixr
L -
/ x
37460 "
/ x
X-z5 4
/
\
Limits of ft /
/// / //
/
/
/
/ //: / 2 //(
it
It_
7F J78, 0
;I - X I , 1 20 - 60 /V
-
-
I
-
3
1-1
\ ---:
370 ---- * __
//
/ /
//' 'rk
g1 - // // -
1.
V'~" , _--:". . <. . ~ f
.305
1
\
\
~~i\<<~ -- a f. ,
I/ I :/, , , ,J.-:~~, . . . . . .1,
.,",\,\\\ 1*
I i
.
10 I I
*
/I ~
I'll.
,
.I-,,. . . _.. , -.t
- " I , ", _-,
"~~:;, >,,,, .::~ ,
I'll ~,\~\... '. I
...... ; '~ 'S :, I .,- I I,/
_., ... ~ - - , ."'." ,,, - -
1
- .. I. -
".~'
- , -117 \ \" \ , '* - ,~-, I ~ \ I " I / - If
; -N ,
. ,
N .W \ - , ~ ..", . / I 1. ': ( I - ~ X ; . , , ,
; : .-
, -
3- \ I ,~ /
, "
. ,**
; -.1....- 1, QC~ 11 1,,~~ .,
,,,, ', :
-.1 -, ! . I . , 11 ~
-
/
...,., .~, -_
-, " " V , ,\\ ~ I * I ~ . M , I I " ..
.. 1,
~ .
I " 1~. \ I I I ..." . \ I \ , \,\,
;
:
~ I \ ,\\ 11, , I .
1i :
-1
.1 Yl !" I ~
1 1 'I I\ \ ~_ . I ,,, ~ ...... .
~ , 1. 11 I ~ " 0 I . ,
- ~ I,
, . ,, -_ %
. 11 Ix . \~ 1. , - I . I ",.:"\. it 1A : . I ! " ~: , t . I
,':_ ~,
-_ ., i .
I ,~..
- . 'J :1 . ~ * V,.'., , ~ ,
/ .
, \ \ , ~ % .... I
. ,. "'. e,~~; -
,!,~ / .__ :
....- - - ............ ... ...... I \ I , , ,i, I I I /
~ ......
~ -f*:~,.:X:.,.1 , . ,.. ;1 I ~
I ;
.."
...... ..... - ... ~
. -
\ 11 . I 11 \ 11 , .- .. . I " I., h
~ 1 %
, . I . ~: ,
. I : .~\ ~ - '. , , , , / 11
~, -
. . , ,,~,, 1* . \ i I / . 11., j ;, I. ".
~ " ~~ 1 . `~\
.
~ : 1, .
.,;
.
. .
/ I
, I....., __
'~\'1%11"\
I ~~
; ..,
_:,;:,~,
1.
1.
iA
. ,,,, I, \ \\,, -
\ \ \\ N
//
/ /
84 -
/// //// /
$
\
/
1,
\, .
\
p 11 I . -;.1 , - ': , 1. ~
/I /
/ X 122 -
/
$/
I
/
1
I ,.q
__- - ------
"..'."", -- I
\\ /\
\\ g\ \
1 1.
;.,
___ - , -
, ", ~, ~, ! __
I, 1.'.
. '.
11 -
, , \ ! ; / . , I
.... .., ...:V'.. ~ i / . .. .......... __._.__ ... ... _-_, .. . .... ~ ... ~ ... ~ ........ ~ ...
I ... I.." ......................
.,. :. . I ; ...
. I . ; !.,
........ _,.r---
__
_~~ __
, , ? f I ";.""I",' " " . .
I -1
\ : ~ I., ~
SAN DIEGO CO. . C ~~
-1. M.Mlwwlo
\
\ N
I /
(;~,ft
/
//
//
X85 /
_5
: --'
HAH DR/ /
,:,. .".
~ __~-- "
- __
I ...... ---
\
\ \\ \ .k
\\ \
/
I / fl,/
N
/_
-- ---- - - - - - - -
* _:----- -
I .1
N
N
/
( ;\
xr +
--
- f - - -
1
\ /
-
-
I ;
v
& PLATE OF 2
.11 - I ~ -1 , " ~, I ~1":"' " I-SC,
~._, "I , .-F " - - ~ S . I
~ ~ --;1 ....... I' , I I .
V9 _1 , .1f- __< . " , .. ,':,-.1` ,.,,, ,. f - 11 I I .., - ~~ - -'.) 1, "~,"
N \\ ~
1
.. I I. , ~,~; ~_ ~, I: I. I, ';'~-.. "', ,_ ~ "'.1111 "
,
~ I , . * ~ i i
, '. \ . \ , _-.11
. r
,
. , . . , ..." 1,1,~ ,
, , \ , , , .\ . .". ., ~ ."....~;, , - ~ '04"
_:~'-'. .1 ~ , ." ,~,
- - ,
, I
__
" ~'.,. .I , . I ~ ;I, .", ,.,'.,,.
I \ '-; . , ~ , , , " -.- , "I '1~ '1/ , I ., ~ , ,\., \~ I I " 1, ..\ , _- - - I- -- ... ~, ,"I. ,,", 1-,;;~ I ,,,, I . ,~,, " %., I.,
!. "I 11" \
,
~ , ;;.~ ,
,;~:.,; ,".."
.1 I`-
:'.,-..-, .~-~~'~'_'..A ., " "
I
. . . I - ,
, "
I
. , 11 , - ",
,
, ", ,,,,,, I ~ , .1 " I - 1- ,1 ., . ~ 11 . '~ ,,,
,
, I
,
. ,:~ ,
"' " ""' -
,
, .1 1: I
""
, \ ,
~
I \ ,
" , ,
, , - ., "
. ,,, ,
~. , I . ". I ~,,, I
"'
, " ,
, ~ :,/ \. -,~~: ..... - / : , 11 -1 ,,, k~ 1'1~'---- I I I, I I - . .
..
11~ I.` - I _11-I"', I I : I e ..
~,~ '\ ,\ , -,. ~.. ,
- 1, - "
.1, . I ~,
I
. . ",
I I .1
I .
I
,1~ ..
- -
I . %1\ \ .
- I- - I-,--.
, . ~ ., - I ~ . . :1
-,
I ,.., ".., _, ~ .
, ,
- - - .1-1-t-
. "
I
I
'.
\ -
I
_~ ,1~ .11 _,._,,__-, , " - " .1 ~ - -, I .~ . , ", ,_-1, " 1111"\ 'I"i ~.,\ ~
" . I - I ~ I
I I
I I I I ~ . Cl) .-
I 0~_" 1 7 'PROJECT MGR.: K.H. JOB NO.:_98-1020 . .
Fax 760-931-8680
surveying
EXP._________ DATE LOCATION:
HELL MONUMENT SEET
CENRL/NE
I I I %P Carlsbad, California 92008 Processing I . I -REVIEWED BY:
. CENRL/NE OF EL _____
I -I'., ~. ~ ~ I I i 0!~ 'b 2710 Loker Avenue West I , Civil Engineering : ENGINEER OF WORK: I . PER RS 1800-1
________________
KE W. HANS RCE: 60223 iNSPECT
ATENNEERYSTAllON45492
_______________________________
DATE ELEVATION:
CON TR01 DA TA)
(Na COUNTY ER
_____
,- ... -
' '' I_._ _-
________ ISHEET H CITY OF CARLSBAD IJSHEETS
3 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 7
GRAD/MG
-____
PLAN
____________________APPROVED
_________CRADING
PLANS FOR: VILLAGE 'K'
_________________________
___
LLOYD 13. HUBBS
_______RCE 23889 EXPIRES 12-31-05. CITY ENGINEER DATE
_______
DWN BY:
IL C RVWD BY: T 0102 II 40J7A
tNIIIAL RD FROM: COUNTY _______
65.479 DATUM: NCM) OF 1929 ____
REVISION DESCRIPTION
INITIALDATE PROJECT NO. JIDRAWING NO.
ENGINEER
INAL
____ DATE DATE
OF WORK APPROVAL
D BY: _______
OTHER - CFF APPROVAL
- -, , _- I I-.-.-,--.-.-- - --.-------.----.-----.--.------ - .. ________ _ ..- _____ -- _-----------_--- ___________________-------_____--.. __----.--.--.--_ _.: ____________________I__ _____________________________________ ______ - _- --
C: \SDSK\PROJ\981020\DWC\CALAVERA\9820K0030W0 2-13-2003 2:47: 45 pm
XREFS: 98207ut1; YB2OKSTR; 982OKUTL; 9820KG; 9820kgrd; 982OKMAP: 98207S1R; 98201P05A