Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCT 01-06; CALAVERA HILLS VILLAGE X; REPORT OF ROUGH GRADING; 2004-10-11 (2)- -' - -• -. - - -. .- ,- - - - i -- -.- .-- I. -- -; -'- --. 1 GeOteChnICal S Geologic •Environmental Geotechnucal Geologic Environmental 5741 Palmer Way • Carlsbad California 92008 • 438-3165 • FAX (760) 931-0915 1 October11, 2004 W.0. 3459-B1-SC Calavera Hills II, LLC 2727 Hoover Avenue National City, California 91950' Attention: Mr. Don Mitchell '• - S , - Subject: Report of Rough Grading, Calavera Hills 11, Village X, Lot 118 (Pump Station)', Carlsbad Tract 01-06, Drawing 405-4A, Carlsbad, San Diego County, -...;. Califôrnia 31 -- Dear Mr Mithell •• This report presents a summary of the geotechnical testing and observation services provided by GeoSoils, Inc (GS I) during the rough earthwork construction phase of development at the subject site Earthwork for the subject site was completed as part of he larger Calavera Hills development Grading for the larger development generally commenced.,,.in January 2003, 'andi was generally completed in April 2004 Unless specifically superceded in the text of this report, the findings and conclusions presented within the compaction report of rough grading for Village X, 40f which this lot is a part, emain valid and applicable PURPOSE OF EARTHWORK - 4 - The purpose of grading was to prepare a relatively level pad for the construction of a ilanned sewer pump station, servicing the surrounding residential development put-and-fill grading techniques were utilized to attain the desired graded configurations The lot is a plan transition lot, however, removal operations completed during grading resulted in an as-built fill pad Existing topsoils and colluvium were removed to suitable -. bedrock material and recompacted The grading plan for this portion of Calavera Hills II, -Village X (including Lot 118), prepared by O'Day Consultants dated December 5, 2002, is included with this report as Plate 1 EARTH MATERIALS . V Subsurface geologic conditions exposed during the process of rough grading were observed by a representative of GSI. Earth materials onsite generally consist of dense granitic/metavolcanic rock with a thin, discontinuous surficial veneer of topsoil/colluvium. Existing topsoils and cblluvium were removed to suitable bedrock material and recompaôted The lot was then brought to grade with compacted fill. It is our understanding that subsequent to the mass grading and final compaction of Lot 118, several excavations were advanced into the pad by others, then backfilled with loose soil. Their specific locations are unknown. This backfill is loose and hot suitable for the support of settlement-sensitive improvements, unless the backfill is removed and properly compacted.. V . GROUNDWATER V Naturally occurring groundwater was not encountered during rough grading of the pad and should not significantly affect the proposed building construction, provided that the V recommendations contained in this report, and/or provided by GSI, are incorporated into final design and construction, and that prudent surface and subsurface drainage practices are incorporated into the construction plans. V Based on the fractured and dense nature of the granitic/metavol can ic bedrock, perched groundwater conditions may develop in the future due to excess irrigation, homeowner altered drainage, or damaged utilities, and should be anticipated. ShouJd manifestations Of perched conditions (i.e., seepage) develop in the future, this office could assess the conditions and provide mitigative recommendations, as necessary. A discussion of near V surface slope subdrainage is presented in our referenced report on toe drains (GSI,. 2004c), and'is considered applicable with respect to this site. A discussion of other subdrainage is presented in a later section of this report V EARTHWORK CONSTRUCTION , . V Earthwork operations have been completed in general accordance with.the City grading ordinance and the guidelines provided in the field by this office Observations during grading included removals, overexcavation, and subdrain construction alongwith general grading procedures and placement of compacted fills by the contractor. Calavera Hills ii, LLC ' V V W.O. 3459-B1-SC V Calavera Hills ii, Village X, Lot 118 (Pump Station) October 11, 2004 File: e:\wp9\3400\3459b1 .x.rorl 18 . fl Page 2 GeoSoils, Inc. . Rough Grading Preparation of Existing Ground Deleterious material, such as concentrated organic matter and miscellaneous debris, were stripped from the surface and disposed of beyond the limits of grading for the subject area, prior to placing any fill. Loose surficiál materials (i.e., existing topsoils and 'collUvium) were removed to exposé competent bedrock in all areas to receive fill; Subsequent to completing removals, areas to receive compacted fill were scarified to a minimum depth of 1:2 inches, moisture conditioned to at least optimum moisture 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 90 percent relative compaction. All processing of or ground in areas to receive fill was observed by a representative of GSI. Fill Placement Fill consisted of onsite and import mätérials, 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 of fills are presented in the attached Table 1. Fill depths. across the site . generally vary from approximately .7 feet in the south, to approximately 20'feet at the north end of the pad. The preparation of some of these fill materials included processing of shot rock and oversize rock through a rock crusher. This process generally produced "4- to 5-inch minus" (in one direction) material, in general accordance with guidelines presented in GSI (2002b and 2003c). Compacted fills containing rock fragments in excess of 12 inches in diameter were placed within the lot, routinely 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 prôducéd at the crusher site, have been placed in general accordance with recommendations presented in GSI (2002b). 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 (GSI, 2003c). This testing has been performed in order to evaluate the percentage of "fines" in in the stoOkpile material. For this project, "fines" are considered to be earth materials that are 3/4 inch in diameter, or finer.. Suitable soil 'fills are considered to consist of earth materials generally with at least ±40 percent finer than 3/4 of an inch (GSI, 2002band"2003c). Based an our testing and observation, a suitable material gradation appears to have been produced and utilized onsite. Calavera Hills ii, LLC . . W.O. 3459-B1-SC Calavera Hills ii, Village X, Lot 118 (Pump Station) , October 11, 2004 Fi!e:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1 .x.rorl 18 , ' Page 3 GeoSoils, Inc. Subdrainacie Canyon Subdrains Prior to placement of fill, a canyon subdrain, consisting of 6-inch diameter (Schedule 40) PVC pipe, was placed within a canyon/natural drainage area traversing the northern end of Lot 118, and is part of a larger drain system which'extends offsite beneath College Boulevard and Village W, toa outlet on the east side of Village W. Subdrain construction was performed in general accordance with GSI guidelines. The approximate locations of all subdrains are shown on Plate 1. Toe Drains Toe drains were not warranted on Lot 118 at the time of grading. Slopes Graded Slopes In general, graded slopes constructed under the purview of this report should perform 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 under the purview of this report, were provided with a keyway excavated into suitable bedrock material in general accordance with GSI recommendations. Cut slopes are not associated with this building pad. Temporary Slopes Temporary construction slopes may generally be constructed at a gradient of 1:1 (horizontal:vertical [h:v]), or flatter, in compacted fill, and 1/2:1 (h:v) in suitable bedrock material (provided adverse geologic structures are not present, as evaluated by GSI prior to workers entering trenches). Utility trenches may be. excavated in accordance with guidelines presented in Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations for Excavation, Trenches, and Earthwork; with respect to Type B soil (compacted fill) and stable rock (bedrock). Construction materials and/or stockpiled soil should not be stored within 5 feet from the top of any temporary slope. Temporary/permanent provisions should be made to direct any potential runoff away from the top of temporary slopes. Field Testing Field density tests were performed using the sand cone method (ASTM D-1556) and 'nuclear method (ASTM D-2922). Tests taken for the entire Calavera Hills project were taken in consecutive numerical order. Only the test results for Village X (including Lot 118) are presented in Table 1 at. the end of this report. The Calavera Hills ii, LLC W.O. 3459-B1-SC Calavera Hills II, Village X, Lot 118 (Pump Station). ' . October 11, 2004 File:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1 .x.rorl 18 Page 4 GeoSoils, Inc.- , approximate locations of field density tests are shown on the Field Density Test L Location Maps, Plate 1, which utilize the 40-scale grading plans, prepared by O'Day Consultants (2003), as .a' base map ?• Field density tests were taken at periodic intervals and random locations to check the compactive effort ,provided by the contractor. Based on the operations A. observed, test results presented herein are considered representative of thefills observed under the purview of this report 3.. 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 density test 41 Fills containing large amounts of rock, but suitable for placement as-en - gineered fill (GSI, 2002 and 2003c) were periodically observed using dozer pits in order to evaluate adequate moisture content and relative compaction. 5 Testing and observations were performedr on a full-time basis I LABORATORY TESTING Moisture-Density Relations - The .• . ., laboratory maximum dry density and optimum mo.isture content for each major soil type was determined according to test method ASTM D-1 557 The following table presents the. test results: , pL,1yE .. ThMb DAN óMOi'i A-Dark Brown, Silty SAND - 120.5 .. ... 13.0 Light Brown, Silty SAND .. - 128.0 . 100 C--Light Brown, Silty SAND . . 126.0 .: 11.0 D Light Gray Silty SAND 125.5 105 E -Dark Brown,. Silty GRAVEL . . . 130:0 . 11.0 F - Brown, Sandy GRAVEL (processed material) ..'126.5 , :- '-. 10.5 G -'Brownish Gray, Gravelly SILT . - . 131.0. 10.0 I -Brown, Silty SAND w/Gravei (processed material) 134.0 -- . 28.5 ..... Caiavera Hills II, LLC- Calavera Hills Ii; Village X, Lot 118 (Pump Station). Fi1:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1 .x.rorl 18 .- -. GeoSoils, ". Expansive Soils Expansive soil conditions have been evaluated for the site. A representative sample of soil near pad grade was recovered for classification and expansion- testing. Expansion Index (E.l.) testing was performed in general accOrdance with Standard. 18-2 of the Uniform Building Code ([UBC], International Conference of Building Officials [ICBO], 1997). Testing indicates that site soils near pad grade, within the subject lot, are very low expansive (E.l. <20). . . Corrosion/Sulfate Testing . . . . Typical samples of the site materials were analyzed.for corrosion/sol ubl esulfate potential. Soil sulfate testing indicates that the sulfate exposure to concrete is negligible, in accordance with Table 19-A of the UBC (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, alternative methods and additional comments should be obtained from a qualified corrosion engineer. . Sieve Analysis . Sample gradation for various representative samples was determined in general accordance with ASTM Test Method D-422 Test results generally indicated that at least 40 percent of each sample was finer than the 3/4-inch sieve in accordance with GSI (2002b and 2003c). . . . . . RECOMMENDATIONS -FOUNDATIONS General Foundation systems should be designed and constructed in accordance with the guidelines contained in the UBC (ICBO, 1997) All footing designs should be reviewed and approved bythe project structural engineer/foundation designer. Based on soil expansion potential and the as-built fill thicknesses (i.e., differential fill thickness less than 3:1, maximum to minimum, across the lot), conventional foundations may be constructed. For the purposes of preliminary design, the following design parameters are provided Construction plans should be reviewed by this office once they are developed, in order to verify that the intent of the soils report has been properly incorporated into the design and construction of any planned improvements 1 Conventional spread and continuous footings may be used to support the proposed structure(s), provided they are founded entirely in properly compacted fill or other Calavéra Hills ii, LLC . W.O. 3459-B1-SC Calavera Hills ii, Village X, Lot 118 (Pump Station) • • October 11, 2004 File:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1 .x.rorl 18 • . • • . Page 6 GeoSoils, Inc. competent bearing material (i.e., bedrock). Footings should not simultaneously bear directly on bedrock and fill soils. 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 may be 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. For lateral sliding resistance, a 0.35 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 h/3 (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 from the top of slope, maybe 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. 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 I 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 0.9 inch between similar elements in a 40-foot span Foundation plans should be reviewed by this office in order to verify that the. intent of the soils report has been properly incorporated into the design and construction of the planned structure(s) Calavera Hills ii, LLC W.O. 3459-B1-SC Calavera Hills ii, Village X, Lot 118 (Pump Station) October 11, 2004 FiIe:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1 .x.r0r1 18 . Page 7 GeoSoils, Inc. . LI EXTERIOR FLATWORK Exterior driveways, walkways, sidewalks, or patios, using concrete slab-on-grade construction, should be designed and constructed, in accordance with the following àriteria: : 1 Driveway slabs should be a minimum 4 inches in thickness, all other exterior slabs may be a nominal 4 inches in thickness; however, such nominal slabs will be at increased.risk for distress. A thickened edge should be considered for all flatwork adjacent to landscape areas. 2. Slab subgrade should be compacted to a minimum 90 percent relative compaction and moisture conditioned to at, or above, the soils optimum moisture content 3 The use of transverse and 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, W1.4xW1 .4); 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 smallest dimension of the slab, whichever is least 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 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 General Foundations may be designed using parameters provided, in the. Design section of Foundation Recommendations presented herein Wall sections should adhere to the County and/or City guidelines All wall designs should be reviewed by a qualified structural engineer for structural capacity, overturning, and seismic resistance stability per the UBC The design. parameters provided assume that onsite or equivalent low expansive soils are used to backfill retaining walls. If expansive soils are used tobackfill the proposed 'walls Caiavera Hills Ii, LLC . . W.O. 3459-B1-SC Caiavera Hills ii, Village X, Lot 118 (Pump Station) . October 11, 2004 Fi1e:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1 .x.rorl 18 . . 'Page 8 GeoSoils, Inc. r' p 8sr' rr 'r a W EIGHT QUIVAME 'PCF- RETAiNED M'ATERiAL ' H :V . (Select VeLoy.Expansive,Soil) Level 2to1 ,' ' 45: 31 p . within this wedge, increased active and at-rest earth pressures willneed to be utilized for, 'retaining wall design Heavy compaction equipment should not be used above a 1:1 projection, up and away from the bottom ofany wall. The following recommendations are not meant to apply to specialty walls (cribwalls loffel, earthstone, etc;). Recommendations for speOlalty 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 cause some, cracking dependent upon the materials used to construct the wall. To reduce wall.cracking due to settlement, wells should be internally groutéd and/or reinforced with steel. Restrained Walls . . Any retaining walls that will be restrained prior to placing and coripacting 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 twicethe 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 Cantilevered Walls These recommendations -are for cantilevered retaining 'walls up to 15,feet high. 'Active earth, pressure may be used for retaining wall design,- provided the top of the wall is not restrained from minor deflectioris An' empirical equivalent fluid 'pressure (EFP) approach may be used to compute the horizontal pressure against the wall. Appropriate fluid unit ' weights are 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. , 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 'Caiavera Hills ii, LLC - -' ' 5' " ' '- ' W. 0: 3459-B1-SC Caiavera Hills ii, Village X, Lot 118 (Pump Station) , ' ' October 11, 2004' File:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1.x.ror118 Page 9 GeoSoils, Inc. upper 5 feet of wall in uniform pressure. For preliminary design purposes, footing loads within a 1:1 backfill zone behind wall will be added to the walls as 1/3 of the bearing pressure for one footing width, along the wall alignment. Sound Walls/Top-of-Slope Walls Sound wall plans have been reviewed for this project (GSI, 2003a) and were evaluated to be in general conformation with the intent of the referenced reports (see the Appendix). Wall Backfill and Drainage All retaining walls should be provided with an adequate gravel 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. Pipeshould consist of schedule 40 perforated PVCpipe. Gravel used in the back. drain systems should be a minimum of 1 cubic foot per lineal.foot,of s/s- to 11/2-IflCh 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 backcüt. Perforations in the 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. . DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA Slope Deformation General Compacted fill slopes, designed using' customary factors of safety for' gross or surfibial stability and constructed in general accordance with the design specifications, should be expected,to undergo some differential vertical heave, or settlement, in combination with differential lateral movement in the out-of-slope direction, after grading. This post-construction movement occurs in two forms; slope creep and lateral fill extension (LFE). Calavera Hills II, LLC ' . W.O. 3459-B1-SC Calavera Hills II, Village X, Lot 118 (Pump Station) . . October 11, 2004 File:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1 .x.rorl 18 ' . . . ' Page 10 GeoSoils, Inc. Slope Creep Slope creep is caused by alternate wetting and drying of the fill soils, which results in slow downslope movement. This type of movement is expected to occur throughout the life of the slope, and is anticipated to potentially affect improvements or structures (i.e., separations and/or cracking), placed near the top-of-slope, generally within a horizontal distance of approximately 15 feet, measured from the outer, deepest (bottom outside) edge of the improvement to the face of slope. The actual width of the zone affected is generally dependant upon: 1) the height of the slope; 2) the amount of irrigation/rainfall the slope receives; and, 3) the type of materials comprising the slope. This movement generally results in rotation and differential settlement of improvements located within the creep zone. Suitable mitigative measures to reduce the potential for distress due to lateral deformation typically include: setback of improvements from the slope faces (per the 1997 UBC and/or CBC); positive structural separations (i.e., joints) between improvements; and, stiffening and deepening of foundations. 'Per Section 1806.5.3 of the UBC, a horizontal setback (measured from the slope face to the outside bottom edge of the building footing) of H/3 is provided for structures, where H is the height of the fill slope in feet and H13 need not be greater than 40 feet. Alternatively, in consideration ofthe discussion presented above, site conditions and Section 1806.5.6 of the UBC, H/3 generally need not be greater than 20 feet' for the Calavera Hills II development. As an alternative to a deepened footing, where the , adjacent slope is greater than 45 feet in height and the building/footing is within 20 feet from the slope face, a differential settlement of 1/2 inch (additional) 'may be applied to the design of that portion of the structure(s). Any settlement-sensitive improvements (i.e.', walls, spas, flatwork, etc.) should consider the- above. Proper disclosure to homeowners and/or homeowners associations is recommended.. Lateral Fill Extension (LFE) LFE ,occurs, due to deep wetting from irrigation and rainfall on slopes comprised of expansive materials. Based on the generally very loW expansive character of onsite soils, the potential component of slope deformation due to LFE is considered minor, but may not be totally precluded. Although some movement should be expected, long-term movement from this source may be minimized, but not eliminated, by placing the fill throughout the slope region, wet of the fill's optimum. moisture' content. During grading of the site, GSI observed fill soil moisture contents during fill placement and compaction. Our observations indicate that the moisture content of the fill is generally above the soils optimum moisture content, in accordance with our recommendations., Summary It is generally not practical to attempt to eliminate the effects of either slope creep or LFE. Suitable mitigative measures to reduce the potential of lateral deformation typically include: Calavera Hills II, LLC ' . W.O. 3459-B1-SC Calavera Hills II, Village X, Lot 118 (Pump Station) . October 11, 2004 FiIe:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1 .x.rorl 18 ' Page 11 GeoSoils, Inc. setback of improvements from the slope faces (per the 1997 UBC and/or CBC); positive structural separations (i.e., joints) between improvements; stiffening; and, deepening of. foundations. All of these measures are recommended for design of structures and improvements and minimizing the placement of "dry" fills. The ramifications of the above conditions, and recommendations for mitigation, should be provided to each homeowner and/or any homeowners association. Slope Maintenance and Planting Water has been shown to weaken the inherent strength of all earth materials. Slope stability is significantly reduced by overly wet conditions. 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 adversely affect site improvements and cause perched groundwater conditions. Graded slopes constructed utilizing onsite materials would be erosive. Eroded debris maybe minimized and surficial slope stability enhanced by establishing and maintaining a suitable 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 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, staining, mold, etc to develop. A rodent control program to prevent bufrowing should be iniplemented. 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. . Drainage Adequate lot surface drainage is:a very important factor in reducing the likelihood of. adverse performance of foundations, hardscape, and slopes. Surface drainage should be 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 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 times. Drainage should not flow 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 3 feet around a structure should slope away from the structure (GSI, 2003d). We recommend that unpaved lawn and.Iandscape areas have a minimum gradient of 1 percent sloping away from structures, and whenever possible, should be above adjacent paved areas. Consideration should be given to avoiding construction of planters adjacent to structures (buildings, pools, spas, etc). Pad drainage Calavera Hills II, LLC . W. 0. 3459-B1-SC Calavera Hills II, Village X, Lot 118 (Pump Station) . 0 October 11, 2004 'FiIe:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1 .x.rorl 18 Page 12 GeoSoils, Inc. 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 spouts, or drainage devices, should outlet a minimum of 3 feet from structures (GSI, 2003d) 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 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 geotechnical viewpoint. Landscape Maintenance 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 recommend that any open-bottom, raised box planters adjacent to proposed structures be restricted for a minimum distance of 10 feet. As an alternative, closed-bottom type raised planters could be utilized. An outlet placed in the bottOm of the planter could be installed to direct drainage awayfrom structures or any exterior concrete flatwbrk. If raised box 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. 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 planted with drought resistant vegetation. Consideration should be given to the typeof vegetation chosen 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 surface soils are processed for the purpose of adding amendments, they should be recompacted to 90 percent minimum relative compaction. Subsurface and Surface Water Subsurface and surface water are not anticipated to affect site development, provided the recommendations contained in this report are incorporated into final design and construction, and that prudent surface and subsurface drainage practices are incorporated into the construction plans. Perched groundwater conditions, along zones of contrasting permeabilities, may not be precluded from occurring in the, future due to site irrigation, poor drainage conditions, or damaged utilities, and should be anticipated. Should Perched groundwater conditions develop, this office could assess the affected area(s) and provide the appropriate recommendations to mitigate the observed groundwater Calavera Hills II, LLC W.O. 3459-B1-SC Calavera Hills II, Village X, Lot 118 (Pump Station) October 11, 2004 File: e:\wp9\3400\3459b1.x.rorl 18 Page 13 GeoSoils, Inc. conditions. Groundwater conditions may change with the introduction of irrigation, rainfall, or other factors. 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. The tile installer should consider installation methods that reduce possible cracking of the tile such as slipsheets, a vinyl crack isOlation' membrane, or other approved method. by the Tile Council of America/Ceramic Tile Institute Site Improvements . Recommendations for exterior concrete flatwork construction are provided in a previous section of this report. 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 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. Additional Gradin This office should be notified in advance of any fill placement, supplemental regrading of the site, or trench backfilling after rough grading has been completed. This includes completion of grading in the street and parking areas and utility trench and retaining wall backfills. As noted ma previous discussion, several pits have been excavated into the pad, then backfilled, by others This backfill is considered to be loose and not suitable for the support of settlement sensitive improvements, unless the backfill is removed and properly compacted. . '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. Calavera Hills ii, LLC . . .. W.O. 3459-B1-SC Caiavera Hills ii, Village X, Lot 118 (Pump Station) . ' October 11, 2004 File: e:\wp9\3400\3459b1 .x.rorl 18 Page 14 GeoSoils, Inc. 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 45 degrees) may be 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 UtilitV 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 standard. As an alternative for shallow (12-inch to 18-inch)' under-slab trenches, sand having a sand equivalent value of 30 or greater may be utilized and jetted or flooded into place. Observation, probing and testing shou,ld be provided to verify, the desired results. . 2. 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 accompIishd to verify the desired results. All trench excavations should conform to CAL-OSHA and local safety codes. Utilities crossing grade beams, perimeter beams, or footings should either pass' 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 structural engineer. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING , GEOTECHNICAL OBSERVATION AND TESTING We recommend that observation and/or testing be performed by GSI at each of the following construction stages: ' During grading/recertification. , ., After excavation of building footings, retaining wall footings, and free standing Walls footings, prior to the placement of reinforcing steel or concrete. , Calavera Hills II, LLC W.O. 3459-B1-SC Calavera Hills Ii, Village X, Lot 118 (Pump Station) , ' October 11, 2004 File:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1 .x.rorll8 Page 15 GeoSoils, Inc. Prior to pouring any slabs or flatwork, after presoaking/presaturation 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. During placement of backfill for area drain, interior plumbing, utility line trenches, and retaining wall backfill During slope construction/repair. . . .. When any unusual soil conditions are encountered during any construction operations, subsequent to the issuance of this report. . . When any developer or homeowner improvements, such as flatwork, spas, pools, walls, etc., are constructed. . . . 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 to comply 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, incorporate these recommendations into all their respective plans, and by explicit reference, make this report part of their project plans PLAN REVIEW Any additional project plans generated for this project should be reviewed by this office, prior to construction, so that construction is in accordance with the conclusions and recommendations of this report LIMITATIONS 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 conditions may vary due to seasonal changes or Other factors. . . Calavera Hills ii, LLC W.O. 3459-B1-SC Calavéra Hills ii, Village X, Lot 118 (Pump Station) . October 11, 2004 File:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1.x.rorl 18 . Page 16 • GeoSoils, Inc. Inasmuch as our study is based upon our review and engineering analyses and laboratory, data, the conclusions and recommendations are professional opinions. These opinions have been derived in accordance with current standards of practice, and no warranty is expressed or implied. Standards of practice are subject to change with time. GSI 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 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.rnay be in place. In addition, this report may be subject to review by the controlling áuthoritiés. Thus, this, report brings to completion our scope of services for this project. ' The opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. If you should have any questions, please do not hesi to call our office. Respectfully.submitte G G. 0- ;A lo GeoSoils, Inc. ._0 UP. 1EXP 30, ec 4P Ao~ OF. AL Robert G Crisman E1 Ben Shahrvini 'Engineering Geologist,. CEG 1934 . . Geotechnical Engineer, GE 2296 RGC/JPF/BBS/jk Attachments: Table '1 - Field Density Test Results Appendix - References Plate 1- Field Density Test Location Map Distribution: (4) Addressee Calavera Hills II, LLC W.O. 3459-B1-SC Calavera Hills II, Village X, Lot 118 (Pump Station) • • • October 11, 2004 FiIe:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1 .x.rorl 18 • . . Page 17 GeoSoils, Inc. Table FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS f:TE NO .'GE ,L:i; OR DEPTH (ft lVIC,lJURE: CONTENT (%) DENSITY pcf) COMF (°J) TE:Sr: METhOD $OJL PiPE 111 12/6/02 Canyon Dr 6+00 Village 169.0 14.1 111.5 92.5 ND A", 112 12/6/02 Canyon Dr 6+00 Village 166.0 13.81 111.0 92.1 ND A 286 1/16/03 Slope Rear Lot 24 Village X 171.0 14.5 113.9 94.5 ND A 287 1/16/03 Slope Rear Lot 25 Village 175.0 _13.2 112.9 93.7 ND A 288 1/16/03 Slope Rear Lot 25 Village 176.0 - 4.4 - 19.2 98.9 ND A 390 1/27/03 Lot 25 Village 182.0 12.2 116.1 90.7 ND B 391 1/27/03 Toe Slope Lot 24 Village X 158.0 11.0 115.5 90.2 ND B 392. 1/27/03 Slope Area Lot 23 Village X 178.0 14.9. 112.2 93.1 ND A 393 '1/27/03' Slope Area Lot 25 Village 178.0 13.2' 109.4 90.8 ND. A 394 1/27/03 'LOt 26 . Village 190.0 13.9 109.8 91.1 ND A 395 1/27/03 Slope Area Lot 24 Village X 180.0 10.6 116.0 90.6 ND B. 396 1/27/03 . ' Toe Slope Rear Lot 24 Village X 163.0 10.5 . 116.9 .91.3 SC B 397 1/27/03 . Toe Slope Rear Lot 24 . Village X. 166,0 ' 11.6. P1164 90.9 ND . B 398 1/27/03 Toe Slope Rear Lot 24 Village 169.0 11.2' 116.2 90.8 ND B. 399 1/27/03 Slope Area Rear Lot 23 Village 175.0 10.1 12.1 ' 117.5 91.8 ND B 400 1/28/03 Slope Rear Lot 24 Village X: 178.0 115.7 91.8 'ND C 401 1 1/28/03 Slope Rear Lot 26 Village 184.0 11.6 116.2 92.2 ND C 402 :1/28/03 Slope Rear Lot 24 Village X 184.0 . 13.2 116.1 90.7 ND B 403 4 1/28/03 'Slope Rear Lot 23 Village 182.0 10.9. 116.9. 91.3 .ND B 404. 1/28/03 Slope Rear Lot 25 VillageX 186.0 11.8, ., 115.5 90.2 ND B 405 .1/28/03 Slope Rear Lot 23 Village 186.0. 11.9 115.7 ' 90.4 ND, B 406 '.1/28/03 Slope Rear Lot 22 Village X 1 188.0 11.1 116.5 91.0 SC B 407 1'/29/03 . . Lot 24 Village X 188.0 10.6 117.4 91.7 ND" B - 408 .1/29/03 Rear Lot 23 Village 190.0 11.4 116.7 91.2 ND B 409* 1/29/03 ' Rear'Lot26 . Village 188.0 , 8.4 111.2 86.9 ND B 409A '1/29/03 Rear Lot 26 ' Village X 188.0 10.51 116.4 90.5 ND ' B. 410 11/29/03 Lot 24 Village 191.0 ' 12.2 118.3 92.4 ND 'B 417 1/30/03 Slope Area Rear Lot 25 Village X 292.0 11.1 118.9 90.8' SC -C. .418 1/30/03 Slope Area Rear Lot 24 Village 293.0 12.2 119.1 90.9 ND ' C 419 '1/30/03 , Slope Area Rear Lot 22-23 Village X 293.0 " 10.9 , ' 120.3 91.8 ND G 420' '1/31/03 Lot 23 '. Village'X 195.0 11:9 115.7 90.4 ND B 421 1/31/03 Slope Area Lot 27 Village 194.0 12.2 121.6 92.8 ND C 422 '1/31/03 Slope Area Lot 22 Village 197.0 10.9 121.0 92.4 ND C, 423 1/31/03 Lot 21 (Canyon) Village 197.0 14.8 109.2 90.6 ND A 500 2/7/03 ' Key Rear Lot 43 VillageX 164.0 14.2 ' 108.5 90.0 ND A 501 2/7/03 Key Rear Lot 41 Village X 190.0 13.6' 109.4 ' 90.8 ND A' 502 . 2/7/03 Key Rear Lot 38 Village X 204.0 13.4 . 108.7 90.2 ND A 505 1 2/7/03 Key Rear Lot 31 Village X 203.0 13.6' 109.5 90.9 SC A 506 2/7/03 Key Rear Lot 29 Village 198.0 13.9 , 110.4 91.6 ND A 622 . 3/6/03 ' Lot 43 Village 167.0 10.6' 114.5 90.9 ND ' C 623 3/6/03 Lot 36 Village X . 206.0. 11.7, 114.3 90.7 SC C 624 , 3/6/03 Lot 43 Village 169.0 11.9 115.3 91.5 ' ND C 625 3/6/03 Lot 40 Village X. 200.8 10.5'' 114.5 90.9 ND . C 637 1'3/10/03 Slope Area Lot 43 Village X ' 170.0 11.8 118.2 1 93.8 ND 'C 638 1 3/10/03 . Lot 41 Village 192.0 13.5 116.6 1 92.5 ND C' L Calavera Hills II, LLC Calavera Hills II, Village X, Lot 118 (Pump Station) File: C:\exce\tabIes\3400\3459b1.x.ror118 GeoSoils, Inc. W.O. 3459-B 1 -SC October 2004 Page 1 Table 1 FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS NO 1,E % lLLflC OR DEPTH (It) CONTENT (%) DENSLTY (pot) 'RE'L'.::: COMP (%) METHOD $CtL. TYPE 639 3/10/03 Slope Area Lot 43 Village 180.0 12.2 114.8 91.1 ND C _640 3/10/03 Lot 43 Village 175.0 11.9 117.4 93.2' ND C 641 3/10/03 Lot 39 Village 199.0 11.8 114.4 90.8 ND C 642 3/10/03 Lot 43 Village 184.0 12.2 '114.3 90.7 ND C _ 643 3/10/03 ' Lot 42 Village 194.0 12.7 118.7 94.2 SC C 700 3/13/03 Lot 26 Village 203.0 11.5 122.3 95.5 ND B 701 3/13/03 Lot 23 Village 207.0 12.6 120.7 95.8 ND C 702 3/14/03 Lot 24 Village 210.0 11.6 119.8 93.6 ND B 703 3/14/03 Lot 21 Village 212.0 12.1 115.4 91.6 ND C 704 3/17/03 ' Lot 25 ' Village 210.0 14.1 124.1 95.5 ND E 705 3/17/03 Lot 22 Village 214.0 13.4 125.5 96.5 ND E 708 3/19/03 Lot 23 VillageX 212.0 12.1 119.8 92.2 1 'ND E 709 3/19/03 Lot 21 . VillageX 216.0 11.6 121.3 93.3 ND E 710 3/20/03 , Lot 21 VillageX 214.0 11.2 122.3 94.1 ND E 711 3/20/03 Lot 19 Village 216.0 12.1 121.7 93.6 ND E 4/1/03 Lot 19 Village 218.0 14.1 111.3 92.4 ND A _ 740 741 4/1/03 Lot 20 Village 220.0 13.8 112.3 93.2 1 ND A 744 4/2/03 Lot 43 Village 186.0. 1 11.2 120.3 92.5 ND E _745 4/2/03 Lot 43 ' Village 188.0 11.6 119.4 91.8 ND E 746 4/3/03 Lot 44 Village 186.0 11.1. 20.5 - 92.7 ND. E 747 1 4/3/03 Lot 44 Village 190.0 11.4 119.9 92.2 ND E 748 4/3/03 Lot 19 Village 222.0 11.6 119.2 91.7 ND E. 749 4/3/03 Lot 18 Village 224.0 12.1 118.7 91.3 ND E 814 4/5/03 Lot 20 VillageX 227.0 12.2 13.3 - 90.3 ND D 815 4/5/03 Lot 19 Village 229.0 13.1 '113.1 90.1 ND D 816 4/5/03 Lot18 VillageX 229.0 11.6 14.0 - 90.8 ND D 817 4/5/03 Lot18 VillageX 233.0 11.9 14.1 - 90.9 SC D 853 4/8/03 Lot77 VillageX 233.0 11.2 121.1 93.2 ND E 857 4/7/03 Lot16 Village 226.0 12.2 119.5 91.9 ND E _858 4/7/03 Lot 17 VillageX 228.0 11.6 120.6 92.8 ND E 859 4/8/03 Lot 76 Village X 233.0 11.2 121.1 93.2 ND E 887 4/17/03 Outer Slope Lot 59 Village 233.0 4.8 - 109.3 90.7 ND A 888 4/17/03 Outer Slope Lot 57 Village 226.0 13.1 111.0 92.1 ND A 889 4/17/03 OuterSlopeLot55 VillageX 220.0 13.6 108.8 90.3 ND A 890 4/17/03 Outer SlopeLot 58 Village 232.0 13.9 109.8 91.1 ND A 891 4/17/03 Outer SlopeLot 53 Village 214.0 14.2 110.1 91.4 ND A 892 4/17/03 Outer SlopeLot56 VillageX 229.0 12.9 109.4 90.5 ND A 893 1 4/17/03 Outer Slope Lot 52 Village 205.0 13.4 111.5 92.5 ND A 894 4/17/03 Outer Slope Lot 59 Village 237.0 13.9 110.7 91.9 ND A 909 4/18/03 Rear Lots16-17 Village 232.0 10.9 116.1 90.7 ND B 910 4/18/03 Rear Lot 14 Village 239.0 11.0 118.3 92.4 ND B 1270 6/25/03 BasinRd VillageX 258.0 8.6 120.5 92.0 ND H 1271 6/25/03 Basin Rd VillageX 253.0 8.8 123.1 94.0 ND H 1272 6/25/03 BasinRd VillageX 252.0 8.7 119.2 91.0 ND H 1340 7/1/03 1 Pleasant ValeDr 20+50 Village 259.0 8.0 122.0 91.0 ND I Calavera Hills II, LLC . W.O. 3459-B1-SC Calavera Hills II, Village X, Lot 118 (Pump Station) October 2004 File: c:\exMabIes3400\3459b1.x.ror1 18 GeoSoils, Inc. Page 2 Table 1 I FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS NO 9T L lick 1lW.GE :E:LEV OR MOJSTL..RE CONTENT I DR!'k. DENSITY (pct) i.REL COMP (%) kTEST METHOD kSOIL TYPE 1341 17/1/03 Pleasant Vale Dr 20+50 Village 267.0 " 8.1 124.6 93.0 ND I 1342 '7/1/03 Pleasant Vale Dr 19+50 Village 268.0 8.3 122.0 91.0 1 ND I, 1343 .7/1/03 Gentle Knoll Rd 10+50 Village 262.0 8.3 122.0 91.0 ND 1344 7/1/03 Gentle Knoll Rd 11+50 Village 253.0 8.2 123.3. .92.0 ND 1386 7/15/03 . Lot Village 267.0 10.6 =125.3 . 93.5 ND I 1387 7/15/03 Lot Village 271.0 .9.8 123.0 91.8 ND I .1388 7/15/03 . . Lot 62 Village X 269.0 9.2 . 124.2 92.7 ND 1389 7L7115103 Lot 66 Village 268.0. 10.5 123.4 92.1 ND - 1390 17/15/03 Lot 10 Village X' 268.0 11.2W . 125.8 93.9 ND I - 1401 7/22/03 'Lot 8 . VillageX .269.0. .97' . 126.1 94.1 ND - 1402 7/22/03 .. Lot 68 . '' . Village X 267.0 9.2 .124.2 92.7 ND - - 1403 7/22/03 Basin Rd 13+50 Village 253.0 . 10.8. 122.1 91.1 'ND - - 1404 '7/22/03 Basin Rd 12+50 . Village 254.0 . ..9.6 125.7 93.8 ND . - -. 1405 .7/22/03 Basin Rd 13+30 Village 256.0 9.2 122.7 91.6 ND - 1406 7/22/03 Basin Rd 12+00 Village X 258.0 8.9 123.1 91.9 ND - - 1416 7/24/03 Basin Rd Village 259.0 10.6 123:3 92.0 ND - - 1417 7/24/03 Basin Rd . Village 258,0 . 10.9 124.6 93.0 . ND 1 - 1452 8/8/03 Pleasant Vale Dr 13+00 Village X 232.0 - . 9.2 125.8 93.9 ND l 1453 18/8/03 Pleasant Vale Dr 14+50 Village 240.0 8.6 124.2 92.7 . I 1462 8/14/03 ,Pleasa'nt Vale Dr East 12+80 Village X 234.0 9.6 . 122.7 91,13 NE - 1463 8/14/03 . Pleasant Vale Dr 15+20. Village X 246.0 10.4 126.2 94.2 ND - - p1464 8/14/03 Pleasant Vale Dr 13+40 Village X 240.0 10.1 127.4 95.1 ND - I - .1465 8/14/03 Pleasant Vale Dri1+80' Village 226.0 . 11.7 127.0 94.8 ND - 1466 8/14/03 Pleasant Vale Dr East 14+50 Village 244.0 12.2 123.3 92.0 ND - - 1467'. :8/14/03 Pleasant Vale Dr 12+30 Village 233.0! 95 122.1 . 91.1 ND ' - - 1468 8/14/03 Pleasant Vale Dr Front Lot 73 Village X ' 246.0 9.1 123.1 91.9 ND - - 1469 8/14/03 Pleasant Vale Dr 15+50 ... Village X 252.0 8.7 124.2 92.7 ND - - 1470 8/14/03 Pleasant Vale Dr Lot 72 Village 254.0 - .99 122.7 91.6 ND - 1471 8/14/03 Pleasant Vale Dr Lot 74 Village 245.0' 10.3 121.7 90.8 ND I 1479 8/19/03 . Lot 72 Village 253.0 9.9 . 124.1 92.6 ND 1480 8/19/03 Lot 13 Village 255.0 . 9.6 1 125.7 93.8 ND I 1481 8/19/03 ..Lot 15 VillageX 247.0 ' 10.2 123.4 92.1 ND I 1482 '8/19/03 Lot 17 Village 239.0 .9.0 123.7 92.3 . ND I _14_ . 8/19/03 . Lot 18 Village X 237.0 10.1 126.6 .94.5 ND = 1484 8/19/03 Lot 15 . Village ' 251.0 9.3 . - 22.9 91.7 ND - 1485 8/19/03 Lot 16 Village 246.0 8.8 - 22.2 91.2 ND l .1486 8/19/03 Lot 14 Village X 253.0 , 8.9 - 24.0 92.5 ND 1493 :8/20/03 Rear Lot 22 Village 200.0 11.8 ' 120.3 91.8 . ND ' 1494 :8/20/03 Rear Lot 23 ' Village 194.0 10.2 119.3 91.1 ND G 1495 8/20/03 Rear Lots 23-24 Village 188.0 12.4 , 118.4 90.4 ND' G 1496 8/20/03 . , ' Rear Lot 22 . Village 205.0 .11.1 121.2 92.5 ND C 1497 8/20/03 Rear Lot 23 Village 199.0 10.6 119.2 91.0 ND G. 1498 . 8/20/03 Rear Lots 23-24 Village X 193.0 10,9 ' 118.2 90.2 ND . C 1508 8/25/03 ' Lot 69 Village X ' '266.0 '8.8 126.2 .94.2 ND 1509 8/25/03 Lot 71 Village X 258.0 9.3 128.4 95.8 ND Calavera Hills II, LLC Calavera Hills II, Village X, Lot 118 (Pump Station) File: C:\exceRtables\3400\3459bl.x.ror1 18 ' GeoSoils, Inc. W.O. 3459-B1-SC October 2004 Page Table 1 FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS .................... No ....... ................... ......... ''GE ....... OR DEPTH (It) ................... ... CONTENT X. (%) ...... ............... DENSifY (pcf) COMP (%) METHOD .S.(.I.J.t: TYPE 1510 8/25/03 Lot 73 Village 250.0. 9.5. 126.0 94.0 ND I. 1511 8/25/03 Lot 75' Village 242.0 9.2 125.6 93.7 ND 1512 8/25/03 Rear Lot 76 Village 235.0 9.3. 121.8 90.9 ND I 1513 8/25/03 Rear Lot 77 . Village 231.0 10.6 121.9 91.0 ND - - 1514 8/25/03 Lot 78 Village X 230.0 8.7 124.4 92.8 ND - - 1515 8/25/03 Front Lot 79 Village 222.0.. .8.9 121.5 90.7 ND - - 1516 .8/25/03 Lots 77-78 Village X 228.0 10.3 120.9 90.2 ND - 1517 8/25/03 Lot 79. Village)( 226.0 9.1 125.3 .93.5 ,1 ND - - 1518 8/25/03 .Lot 77 Village X 234.0 9.0 '124.5 92.9 ND - - 1519 8/27/03 Front Lot 15 Village X 239.0 9.4 124.4 92.8 ND - - 1520 8/27/03 Front Lot 19 Village X 224.0 10.2 125.2 93.4 ND - 1521 1 8/27/03 Front Lots 16-17 Village X 241.0 8.7 . .122.1 .91.1 ND I - 1522 .8/27/03 .Terrace Lot 79 Village X 219.0 9.91 122.2 91.2 ND - - 1523 8/27/03 Terrace Lot 79 Village X 225.0 10.4 121.8 90.9 ND 1524 8/27/03 Terrace Lot 78 Village X 229.0 9.8 .125.4 93.6, ND -. 1525 8/27/03 Terrace Lot 77 Village X 233.0 8.6. 127.0 94.8 ND - 1526 8/27/03 Terrace Lot 76 Village X 238.0 .8.9 .123.4 ' 92.1 ND - - 1527 8/27/03 Terrace Lot 75 Village X 241.0 9.0 124.2 92.7 ND - - 1528 8/27/03 Terrace LOt 74 Village X' 1 245.0 8.7 121.4 90.6 ND - - _1529 8/27/03 Terrace Lot 73 , Village X 249.0 88 , 120.5 .90.2 ND - 1530 9/2/03 Ravine Dr 16+30 Village 228.0 9.6 . 122.6 91.5 ND - 531 9/2/03 Ravine Dr 14+50 Village X 222.0 9.1. 122.2 91.2 ND I - - 532 9/2/03 Ravine Dr 12+90 Village X 210.0 9.4 126.6 94.5 1 ND - 1533 9/2/03 Ravine Dr 11+20 . Village X 200.0 .8.7 126.0 94.0 ND .534 . 9/2/03 Ravine Dr 16+90 Village 231.0 8.8 122.2 91.2 ND 1535 9/2/03 Ravine Dr 15+20 Village X 229.0 9.3 125.6 93.7 ND ._ - _1536 9/2/03 Ravine Dr 13+50 Village X 217.0 9.9 121.7 90.8: ND - - 1537 9/2/03 . Ravine Dr 12+00 VillagO X 207.0 9.8 122.1 91.1 . ND - - 1538 9/3/03 FrontLot13 VillageX 250.0. 9.6 127.4 95.1 ND - 1539 9/3/03 . Front Lot 16 . . Village X 244.0 ... 9.9. 125.6 93.7 ND - 1540 9/3/03 FrontLot18 VillageX 234.0 9.2, 125.8 93.9 ND - - 1541 9/3/03 Front Lot 13 . Village X 256.0. 8.8 123.0. 91.8 ND - - 1542 9/3/03 FrontLot15 Village X 248.0 124.1, 92.6 .ND. - - 1543 '9/3/03 Front Lot 17 Village X 239.0 9.2 123.7 92.3 ND - _1544 9/3/03 Front Lot19 Village 231.0 8.9 125.8 93.9 ND - 1545 9/3/03 Lot74 VillageX 247.0 10.8 126.2 94.2 ND _.1546 9/3/03 Lot 73 Village 251.0 9.6 125.7 93.8 ND 1547 9/3/03 Lot72 VillageX 256.0 • 11.2 124.9 93.2 ND . - 1548 9/3/03 ' Lot 71 Village X 260.0 10.4' 125.7 93.8 ND - 1549 9/3/03 Lot 70 . Village 264.0 10.0 .126.8 94.6 ND - - _1555 9/5/03 _• .• Lot 19 . Village X 234.0 9.6 124.4 92.8. ND . - 1556. 9/5/03 Lot 18 VillageX 239.0 9.1 . 125.4 . 93.6 ND 1557 . 9/5/03 , LOt 17 Village 243.0 .9.0 126.6 94.5 ND - - 1558 .'9/5/03 Lot16 Village 247.-O__[-8.8 .' 122.1 91.1 ND 11, 1559 9/5/03 Lot 15 Village X 1 252.0 1 9.9 120.9 90.2 ND Calavera Hills II, LLC . , , W.O. 3459B1 SC Calavera Hills Il, Village X, Lot 118 (Pump Station) October 2004 File: C:\excel\tables\3400\3459b1.x.rorlla GeoSoils, Inc. ' Page 4 Table 1 FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS 1560 9/5/03 Lot 14 Village 255.0 10.2 121.7 .90.8 ND I 1.561 9/5/03 Lot 13 Village 2580 91 1221 911 ND I 1562 9/5/03 Lot 13 Village 2600 98 1218 909 Sc I 1572 9/8/03 Front Lot 95 Village X 234.0 8.6 1244 '92.8 ND 1573 9/8/03 Front Iot 90 Village X 230 .0 , 92 1242 92.7 ND 1574 9/8/03 Front Lot 87 Village X 222.0- "9.9 126.4 94.3 ND 1575 9/8/03 Front Lot 85 Village X 217.0 9.1- 124.8' 93.1 ND l 1592 9/12/03 Rear Lot 25 Village X 182.0 10A 119.1 .90 .9 ND G 1593 9/12/03 Rear Lot 24 Village 1720 109 1213 926 ND G 1594* 9/12/03 Rear Lot 24 Village 1186.0":.113 .111.1 848 ND G 1594A 9/12/03 Rear Lot 24 Village X 1860 115 1187 -.90;6, ND G 1595 9/12/03 Rear Lot 25 Village X 190 .0, 122 1225 .03 .5 ND G 1596 9/12/03 Rear Lot 24 Village 1960 120 1208 922 ND G 1597 9/12/03 Rear Lot 24 Village 1990 111 1238 945 ND G 1598 9/12/03 Rear Lot 25 Village X '201.0 10.6 1193 911 ND G 1599 9/12/03 Rear Lot 24 Village 209.0j 101 1188 907 ND G 1600 9/12/03 Lot 80 Village X 2120 108 1223 01.3 sc 1601 9/12/03 Lot 83 Village X 2090 9.1 125.8' 93.9 ND l 1602 9/12/03 Lot 85 Village X 218 .0, 86 1248 93.1 ND 1603 9/12/03 Lot 81-82 Village X 2120 99 1244 .92 .8 ND 1616* 9/16/03 Lot 86 Village 2210 67 1142 852 Sc J 1616A 9/16/03 Lot 86 Village X 221.0 93 122 1 911 Sc. J 1617 9/16/03 Lot 87 Village 2230 87 1218 909 ND J 1618 9/16/03 Lot 88 Village X 227.0 8.8" 122.2' 91 2 ND J - 1619 9/16/03 Lot 87 Village X .225.01 95 125.8 93.9 ND 1620 9/16/03 Lot 90 VillageX 2330 93 1215 907 ND J 1625 9/18/03 Lot 19 Village 2350 93 1229 9.1.7 Sc J 1626 9/18/03 Lot 92 Village 2360 87 1244 928 SC J 1627 9/18/03 Lot 93-94 Village X 237.0. 99 - 240 .92 .5 Sc J 1628 9/18/03 Lot 95 Village X 239.0 9.3 = 125.3 93.5 Sc J 1629 9/18/03 Rear Lot 24 Village X 2,10 .0 9.9 - 121.4 92.7 ND G 1630 9/19/03 Lot 76 Village X FG 94 26 8 - 946 ND J- 1631 9/19/03 Lot 75 Village X FG 9.9 1276 95.2 ND J 1632 9/19/03 Lot 74 Village X FG .8 .6 126.1 94 1 ND J 1633 7 9/19/03 Lot 73 Village X FG 82 1262 942 ND J 1634 9/19/03 Lot 72 Village X FG 104 1234 '92.1 ND J 1635 9/19/03 Lot 71 Village X FG 93 125 .7, 93 B. ND J 1636 9/19/03 Lot 17 Village X FG 8.7 1272 94.9: NDr J 1637 r9/19/03 Lot 16 Village X FG 86 1222 91.2 ND J 1638 9/19/03 Lot 15 Village X FG 80 122.1 911 ND J 1639 9/19/03 Lot 14 Village X FG 92 1254 '93.6 ND J 1640 9/19/03 Lot 13 Village X FG 84 1233 92 0 ND J 1641 9/22/03 Lot 22 Village X 210.0 8.9 1245 92.9 ND J 1642 9/22/03 Lot 21 Village X' 2320 106 1221 911 ND J 1643 9/22/03 Lot 24 Village X 212.0 8 7 125.6 93.7 rND J CaIvera Hills II, LLC W.O. 3459-Bi -SC Calavera Hills II Village X Lot 118 (Pump Station) October 2004 Fife: \excel\tables\3400\3459b1 x ron 18 GeoSoils, Inc. Page 1644 9/22/03 Lot 22 Village X 217.0' 93 121.4 90 6 ND J 1645 9/22/03 Lot 23 Village X '216.0 9.9 122.1 911 ND J 1646 9/22/03 Lot 25 Village X 2160 __6 9.7 1235 '92.2 ND J 1647 9/22/03 Lot 24 . Village 2150 8.9..1209 902 ND J 1648 9/22/03 Rear Lot 21 Village X 205.0 8.2 124.6 93.0 ND J 1649 9/22/03 Rear Lot 20 Village X 220.0 '8.1 -.122.7 91.6 ND J 1650 9/22/03 Rear Lot 19 Village X 227.0 9.3' 121.9 91.0 ND J .1651 9/22/03 . Rear Lot 18-19 Village 213.0 9.6 124.4 92.8 ND J. 1652 9/22/03 Rear Lot 18 Village X 1 230.0 .8.7, 12.7 .8 95.4 ND J 1653 9/22/03 Rear Lot 16 Village X 240.0 8.0 1223 91'.3 ND J 1654 9/22/03 Rear Lot 17 Village X 2250 8.5 1229 91.7 ND J 1666 9/23/03 Rear Lot 22 Village X 2000 8.0 1209 902 ND J 1667 9/23/03 Rear Lot 23 Village X 210 0 8.2.' 120.7 90.1 ND J 1668 9/23/03 Rear Lot 23 Village X 2040 83 120 7 90 1 ND J 1669 9/24/03 Rear Lot 14 Village 2510 92 1227 916 ND J 1670 9/24/03 Rear Lot 15 Village X 245.0 8.6:,- 124.0 92.5 ND J 1671 9/24/03 Rear Lot 117 Recreation Lot Village 1450 113 1156 903 ND B 1672 9/24/03 Rear Lot 117 Recreation Lot Village X 162.0- 10.5 116.4 90.9 ND B 1673 9/24/03 Rear Lot 117 Recreation Lot Village X 150.0 13.6 111.7 92.7 ND A 1674 9/24/03 Rear Lot 117 Recreation Lot Village X 172.0 10 .9 , 117.1. .91 .5 ND B 1707 9/29/03 Slope Rear Lot 24 Village X 193.01 8.7 125.6 93 7 ND J 1708 9/29/03 Slope Rear Lot 25 Village X 203.0 8.2 - 122.5 91.4 ND J 1709 9/29/03 Slope Rear Lot 25 Village X 210'0 9.8 - 23 1 91 9 ND J 1710 9/29/03 Slope Rear Lot 26 Village X 195.0 9.9 - 124.0 .92 .5 ND J 1711 9/29/03 Slope Rear Lot 27 Village X 205.0 10.2. 121.7 90.8 ND J 1712 9/29/03 Slope Rear Lot 28 Village X 202.0. 9.8 121.8 90.9 ND J 1713 9/29/03 Slope Rear Lot 77 Village X 230 0 10.2 122.1 911 ND Jc 1714 9/29/03 Slope Rear Lot 76 Village X 233.0 9.0 12Z7 91.6 ND J 1715 9/29/03 Slope Rear Lot 75 Village X .239.0,- 8 6 121.8 90.9 ND J 1725 10/6/03 Lot 19 Village X 2350 9.8 1242 92.7 ND J 1726 10/6/03 Lot 21 Village X 2250 102 123.0' 91.8 ND J 1727 10/6/03 Lot 23 Village X 2190 9.1- 1249 932 ND J 1728 10/6/03 1 Lot 24 Village 2170 86 1213 905 ND J 1729 10/6/03 Lot 20 Village 2300 82 1221 911 ND J' 1730 10/6/03 Lot 22 Village X 2220 95 121.5 - 907 ND J 1731 10/6/03 Lot 24 VillageX 2190 99 1218 909 ND J 1732 11 10/6/03 Lot 25 Village X 2.17.0. 9.4. 125.2 93 4 ND J 1733 1 10/6/03 Lot 26 Village X 2120 10.0 120.7 90.1 ND J 1734 10/8/03 Lot 77 Village X FG 9.61 1254 93.6 ND J 1735 10/8/03 Lot 18 Village X FG 82 1262 942 ND J 1736 10/8/03 Lot 19 Village X FG 8.8 :128.0 95.5- ND J 1737 10/8/03 Lot 95 Village X FG 9.9 1262 942 ND J 1738 10/8/03 Lot 94 Village X FG 94 127.0 94.8 ND J 1739 10/8/03 Lot 93 Village X FG 10'.6 1223 91.3- ND J 1740 10/8/03 Lot 92 Village X FG 10.1 1253 93.5 ND JI Calavera Hills II, LLC W.0. 3459 Bi SC Calavera Hills II Village X Lot 118 (Pump Station) October 2004 File \excei\tabies3400\3459161 x rorll8 GeoSoils, Inc. Page 6 Table FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS 1.741 10/8/03 Lot 22 Village 212.0 : 8.1 122.1 91.1 ND J 1742 10/8/03 Lot 24 Village X 211.0 83 12111 908 ND J 1743 10/9/03 Lot 91 Village X FG 9.0; 1245 929 ND J 1,744 10/9/03 Lot 90 Village X FG 8.7 125 .7, 93 8 ND J1 1745 10/9/03 Lot 89 Village X FG 8 8 125.4. 93 6 ND J 1746 10/9/03 Lot 88 Village X FG .-8.9' 127.8 95 4 ND J 1747 10/9/03 Lot 87 Village FG 103 1269 947 ND J 1748 10/9/03 Lot 86 Village X FG .9 .61 128.5 .95 .9 ND J 1749 10/9/03 Lot 85 Village X FG 9.0-L i 124 6 93 0 ND J 1750 10/9/03 Lot 84 Village X FG 8'.3, 123 5 92.2 ND J _1.751 10/9/03 Lot 83 Village X FG '8.1 128.1 95.6 ND J 1752 10/9/03 Lot 82 Village X FG 8.0. 1262 942 ND ill 1753 10/13/03 Lot 55 Village X 2380 10.8 .127.0 948 ND J 1754 10/13/03 Lot 55 Village X 240 .0, 9.9. 1246 93.0 ND J 1755 10/13/03 Lot 56 Village 2440 96 1241 926 ND J 1756 10/13/03 Lot 56 Village X 245.0 10.8 124.9 932 ND J 1757 10/13/03 Lot 57 Village 2470 113 1270 948 ND J 1758 10/13/03 Lot 58 Village 2530 96 1268 946 ND J 1759 10/13/03 Lot 57 Village X .249.0- 8.71 128.15 95.9 ND J4 1760 10/13/03 Lot 58 Village X 253.0 93 125.8. 93 9 ND J 1761 10/13/03 .. Lot 59 - Village X. 57.0, 9.8 124.8 93.1 ND J, 1762 10/13/03 Lot 59 Village 2590 91 1241 926 ND J 1763 10/13/03 Lot 60 Village X ., 2610 100 1234 921 ND Ji 1793 10/20/03 Lot 20 Village X FG 9.8 1227 91.6 ND J 1794 10/20/03 Lot 21 Village FG 91 1249 932 ND J 1795 10/20/03 Lot 22 Village FG 100 1260 940 ND J 1796 10/20/03 Lot 23 Village X FG 9.7 122.1 911 ND J 1797 10/20/03 Lot 24 Village X FG 94 123.01 91.8. ND J 1798 10/20/03 Lot 25 Village X FG 9.9 1245 .92 .9 Sc 1799 10/21/03 Lot 54 Village 2350 96 1249 932 ND J 1800 10/21/03 Lot52 Village 2250 91 1227 916 ND J 1801 4 110/21/03 Lot 64 Village 2620 90 1240 925 ND J 1802 i 10/21/03 Lot 60 Village 2620 104 1241 926 ND J 1803 10/21/03 Lot 64 Village 2640 102 1258 939 ND J 1804 i 10/21/03 Lot51 Village 2220 109 120.9 902 ND J 1805 1 10/21/03 Slope Fill to Rear Lot 51 Village X 2040 9.0 122.7 .91 .6 ND J 1806 10/21/03 Slope Fill to Rear Lot 50 Village X 206.0 9.9 1207 90.1 ND J 1807 10/21/03 Slope Fill to Rear Lot 51 Village X 210.0 94 126 9 947 ND J ------------ 1808 10/21/03 Slope Fill to Rear Lot 51 Village X 213.0 10.8 128.0 955 ND J 1809 , 10/21/03 Slope Fill to Rear Lot 50 Village X 215.0 10.6 121.8 909 ND J 1810 1 10/21/03 Slope Fill to Rear Lot 52 Village X 219.0 94 1244 92.8 ND Ji 1811 j 10/22/03 Lot 50 VillageX 1 2180 101 1235 922 ND J 1812 4 10/22/03 Lot 48 Village 2150 91 1225 914 ND jr 1813 10/22/03 Lot 53 Village 2310 93 1226 915 ND J I 1814 10/22/03 Lot 52 Village X 227.0 1 9.0 1, 125.7. 93 8 f ND J Calavera Hills II, LLC W 0 3459B1 SC Calavera Hills II, Village X Lot 118 (Pump Station) October 2004 File C \excetables\34OO\3459b1 x ron 18 GeoSoils, Inc. Page 7 Table l FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS TEST NO. DATE TEST LOCATION VILLAGE ELEV OR DEPTH (ft) MOISTURE CONTENT (%) DRY DENSITY (pcf) REL COMP (%) TEST METHOt, SOIL VPE 1815 10/22/03 Lot 54 Village 236.0 10.8 124.0 92.5 ND J FS-1843 11/3/03 Rear Lot 60 Village 254.0 . 9.1 . 122.1 91.1 ND J FS-1844 f 11/3/03 Rear Lot 59-60 Village 259.0 8.4 127.0 94:8 ND J. FS-1845 11/3/03 . Rear Lot 59-60 . Village X 248.0': 8.9 126.9 94.7 ND' J. FS-1846 11/3/03 ' Rear Lot 58 Village 250.0 ' 8.8 'T '123.7 92.3 ND J FS-1847 11/3/03 Rear Lot 57 Village X 236.0 9.3 .124.6. 93.0 . ND J, FS-1848 11/3/03 Rear Lot 56 . Village 240.0 9.9: 129.6 96.7 1 ND J FS-1849 11/3/03 Rear Lot 54-55 ' Village 226.01 8.4k ' . 122.6 91.5 ND J FS-1850 11/3/03 Rear Lot 53 Village X 227.0 8.9 ' 123.0 1. 91.8. ND' J FS-1851 11/3/03 . Rear Lot 52 , Village ' 219.0 8.3 , '124.0 .92.5 , ND J 1903 , 11/21/03 . Lot 98 Village X ,236.0 8.0 127.2' 94.9 ND J 1904 11/21/03 ' . Lot 101 Village X' 231.0 8.2 125.6' '93.7 1 ND J 1905 11/21/03 ' Lot 103 . Village . 224.0 . 8.4' . .124.5 93.2 ,ND J 1910 11/26/03 Lot 105 ' Village 215.0' 8.2 122.7 91.6 ND J 1911 11/26/03 ' Lot 107' , Village X. 21,1.0 ' 9.11 124.5 ' 92.9 ND J' 1912, 11/26/03 Lot 99 . Village 238.0 . 9.2 , 125.2 93.4 'ND J 1913 11/26/03 Lot 102 Village 229.0 9.6 122.1 91.1 ND. J- 191.4 11/26/03 Lot 104 ' Village 219.0 . '9,4' ' 121.7 90.8 ND J'' 1915 11/26/03 ' Lot 106 . ' Village 213.0'. 9.0 '. 122.6 91.5 ND ' J 1916 12/1/03 . Lot 100 Village 235.0.'. 82 . 126.2 .94.2 ND 1917 12/1/03 . Lot 101 Village 234.0 8.9 ' 122.7 91.6 ND 1918 12/1/03 . ' Lot 103 ' . Village 226.0 9.6 124.2 92.7 ND J 1919 12/1/03 , ' Lot 107 Village 213.0 9.11 .,- 124.6 93.0 . ND' J. 1920 12/1/03 Gentle Knoll Rd 12+90 VillageX .249.0 8.2 1 123.8 92.4 ND J 1920' .12/1/03 Lot 105 ' Village 216.0 ' 9.1 ' . 122.2 91.2 . ND . J' 1921 12/1/03 Gentle Knoll Rd 14+50 Village 234.0.-.8.7 , 129.3 96.5 ND , 1922 P 12/1/03 ' Gentle Knoll Rd 16+50 Village 221.0'' 8.1' 127.0 94.8 ND ,:J 1922' 12/1/03 .Crater Rim Rd Village X 206.0 . 9.2. ' 125.7 93.8. ND J. 1923 12/1/03 , . Lot 50 ' Village 214:0 8.2 ' 127.4 .95.1 ND J 1924 . r12/3/03' Crater Rim Rd 13+75 Village 206.0 ' 9.2 123.4 92.1 'ND 1925 12/3/03 ' Crater Rim Rd 11+60 Village 209.0 , 8.7 '. 129.3 96.5 ND " 1926 12/3/03 ,Crater Rim Rd 12+90 Village 210.0 . 10.3 124.6 93.0 ND 1927 12/3/03 Crater Rim Rd 15+00 Village 205.0 9.1 124.0 92.5 ND J', 1928 12/3/03 Crater Rim Rd16+00 Village 204.0 9.8 122.1 91.1 ND J 1929 12/3/03 Between Lots 45 & 46 Village X 194.0 8.9 125.7 93.8 ND .J 1940 :12/16/03 'Lot 115 . Village 220.0 . 8.5 . 121.7 90.8 , ND . J , 1941 ,? 2/16/03 Lot 113 Village 214.0 9.6 122.5 91.4 'ND 1942 12/16/03 .. Lot 111 ' Village 210.0 9.1 ' 122.2 91.2 ND , ' 'Jr 1943 ' 12/16/03 Lot 109 Village X 208.0 9.0 .121.4 90.6 . ND J' 1944 12/16/03 ' . 'Lot 109 . ' Village 207.0 . ' 8.7 ..- 120.7 .90.1 ND . 1945 f 12/16/03 ' . Lot 110 ' . Village 210.0 ' 9.9 - 121.8 .90.9 . ND . J 1946 12/16/03 Lot i 12 Village X 212.0 10:2 . 124.0 92.5 ND J 1947 12/16/03 . Lot 1.15 Village X .223.0 . 8.5. 126.9 94.7 ND ' J 1948 12/16/03 Lot 115 'Village X' 226.0 8.2 . 125.4 1' 93.6' ND ' J 1949 , 12/16/03 Lot 114 , . Village 219.0 , 9.4 121.3 . 90.5 ND J., Calavera Hills II, LLC .. ' '. . . ' .,W.0. 3459-B1-SC Calavera Hills II, Village X, Lot 118 (Pump Station) ' . ' F ' October 2004 . File: ,C:\excei\tables\3400\3459b1.x.rorll8 GeoSofls, Inc.Page 8 Table 1' FIELD DENSITY, TEST RESULTS E T L( .t I V LAG DEr iii ft) MOI iRE Co. 1 NT i DI -y c : #o, 1 1 ME x OIL ry E - 1950 12/16/03 Gentle Knoll Rd 16+00 Village X 225.0 8.1'- 124.8 93.1 ND J 1951 12/16/03 Gentle Knoll Rd 19+00 Village 209.0 8.0 124.2 92.7 ND J 1952 12/16/03 . Gentle Knoll Rd 20+30 Village X 205.0 8.6 123.5 . . 92.2 ND J. 1953 12/18/03 Pump Station . Village 201.0 " 8.4 _125.7 93.8 ND J 1954, 12/18/03 RecreationLot117 Village 197.0,'9.9 124.2" 92.7 .ND. J 1955 12/18/03 PumpStation VillageX 203.0 .10.2 126.6 94.5 ND 1956 12/18/03 Recreation Lot _117 Village 200.0 .98' _. 128.9 1 96.2 ND J 1957 12/18/03 Choker Rift Rd 13+00 Village X 190.0 11.3 122.1 91.1 . ND J 1958 12/18/03 Choker Rift Rd 11+00 'Village 194.0 8.7, 121.3, 90.5. ND J' 1959 12/18/03 Choker Rift Rd 11+50 Village 1096.0 9.& - 125.2 . 93.4 ND. J 1960 12/18/03 Choker Rift Rd 10+50 Village 199.0. 9.9, 124.2 92.7 ND J 1961 12/18/03 Choker Rift Rd 11+75 .. Village 200.0 .. 9.8 128.6 96.0 ND J 1962 12/18/03 Choker Rift Rd 10+75 Village . 204.0 8.9' .127.4 ' 95.1 ND . 1963 12/18/03 Gentle Knoll Rd 19+50 Village . 206.0 8.4 . 126.5 . 94.4 ND J1 1964 12/19/03 . Lot 45 Village 195.0 9.3 122.7 91.6 ND 'J- 1965 12/19/03 Lot 43 Village 192.0. 9.2 124.9. 93.2 ND J. .1966 12/19/03 ' Lot 42 . . Village 196.0 8.7. 122.1. 91.1 ND J. 1967 12/19/03 Lot 45 Village 196.0. . 10.4. 122.5 91.4 ND J' 1968 12/19103 . Lot 44 ' , ' Village 195.0 ' 9.9 ' '. 129.6 96.7 ND ' J 1969 , 12/19/03. Lot 43 '. Village )ç 195.0 , 8:4 . 130.7 97.5 ND J 1970 12/19/03 Lot 41 Village 196.0 • 9.6 127.6, 95.2 ND J 1971 12/19/03 . Recreation Lot-116 Village 204.0 9.1. . 127.0 94.8 ND 1972 12/19/03 Lot 46 Village X 199.0 ' ' 8.5 " 131.6 98,2 ND J' 1973 . 12/19/03 Lot 47 ' Village 203.0 ' 8.1 128.8' 96.1 ND ' 'J'. 1974 12/19/03 Lot 46 ' . Village X 201.0 8.2 - 124.2 92.7 . ND .J' 1975' 12/19/03 Recreation Lot 116' Village 208:0 9.6. 122.6' 91.5' . ND . J-'.' 1976 .12/19/03 Lot 48 . ' Village 206.0 8.8 . 124.8.' 93.1 ' ND 'J 1977 :12/19/03 . . Lot 47 Village 204.0 8.9 . - 23.5= 92.2 ND J 1978 '12/19/03 " Recreation Lot 116 Village '211.0 . 10.0' ' .127.4. 95.1 ND J' 1979 . .12/22/03 Rift Rd 13+00 Village X 190.0 . 8.2. - 24;2 92.7 ND .J 1980 p12/22/03 , ' Rift Rd 11+20 Village X 203.0 9.7 ... 23.7 92.3 ND J. 1981 12/22/03 .Rift Rd12+60 Village X 193.0 .. 9.9 127:0 94.8 .ND J 1982 _. 12/22/03 .Rift Rdl0+50 ' Village 205.0 8.4. 122.1 '91.1 .ND J, 1983 , '12/22/03 Side Lot 45 _. Village 195.0 8.7 121.4 90.6 .ND 1984 __. .12/22/03 ,- Gentle Knoll Rd17+50'' Village X, 213.0 8.2 ' 129.2 . 96.4' ND J .1985 12/23/03 Crater RimRd17+50 Village 201.0 5,9 123.3 .92.0 'ND J, 1986 1 12/23/03 'Crater Rim Rd18+60' Village 194.0 9.7 .123.7 92.3 ND . J 1987 12/23/03 Crater Rim Rd End Culde_Sac VillageX 191.0 9.2 .122.9 91.7 ND J, 1988 12/23/03 Crater Rim Rd18+50 . Village 1 196.0 10.4 129.2 96,4. ND J 1989 12/23/03 Gentle_KnollRd12+50 Village 251.0 8.5.._ 126.1 94.1 ND. .J - 1090 1 '12/23/03 Gentle Knoll Rd.14+00' VillageX 236.0 8.1 125.3 .93.5 ND Y 1991 12/23/03 GentleKnollRd15+50 .Village 228.0 9.3 . 121.5 90.7 ND J' 1992 _I 12/23/03 Gentle Knoll.Rd13+30 ' VillageX .246.0' .8.7 ' '.121.4 90.6 ND J'. '19931 12/23/03 Gentle Knoll Rd 15+00 ' Village X1 235.0 8.8, 122.1 91.1' ' ND J. 1994 j 12/23/03 Gentle Knoll Rd 13+50 Village X 1 244.0 ' 9.0, 124.0 . .92.5 ND J Calavera Hills II, LLC W.O. 3459-B1-SC Calavera Hills Il, Village X, Lot 118 (Pump Station)' October 2004 File: F:\e.xcel\tables\3400\3459b1 .x.rorl 18 GeoSoils, Inc.. Page .9 Table 1 FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS :1ES1 NO OR DEPTH (ft) I i(.S.JS1URE: CONTENT (%) . DENSITY (pct) . RE'L: COMP (%) '1E METHOD ;SCILI TYPE 2015 12/29/03 Slope Rear Lot 71-72 Village X 237.0 8.8 122.1 91.1 ND. J. 2016* . 12/29/03 Slope Rear Lot 70 Village X 240.0 '9.7 117.9 88.0 ND J 2016A 12/29/03 Slope Rear Lot 70 Village X 240.0 9.4 121.8 90.9 ND J 2017 12/29/03 Slope Rear Lot 71 . Village X 241.0 9.2 124.9 93.2 ND J 2018 ' 12/29/03 . Slope Rear Lot 68-69 Village X. 244.0 9.6, 122.6 91.5 ND J' 2019 12/29/03 Slope Rear Lot 70 Village X 246.0 8.8: 120.7 90.1 ND J 2020 12/29/03 Slope Rear Lot 67 Village 260.0 .. 8.2 122.9 91.7 ND J 2029 12/30/04 Lot 96 Village 256.0 9.8 124.9 93.2 ND J 2030 12/30/04 Lot 96 Village X 258.0 . 9.6 121.8 90.9 'ND J 2031 12/30/04 Lot 100 Village FG 8.2 128.5 95.9 ND J 2032 12/30/04 Lot 101 Village FG 8.4 129.0 96.3 ND 2033 12/30/04 Lot 102 Village X FG . 8.2 ' 128.4 95.8 ND ' J 2034 12/30/04 .. Lot 103 ' . Village X . FG 8.1 . .130.4 97.3 ND J 2035 1/2/04 . Lot 78 Village I FG 8.4 125.8 . 93.9 ND 2036 1/2/04 Lot 79 Village FG 9.6. 122.9 91.7 ND J. 2037 1/2/04 Lot 80 Village X FG 8.7 129.2. 96.4. 'ND J 2038 1/2/04 Lot 81 ' Village X ' FG 8.2 124.0 92.5 ND J 2039 1/2/04 Lot 60 ' Village X FG 8.0 122.1 91.1 ND J 2040 1/2/04 . Lot 59 Village I FG , ' 7.8 125.6 . 93.7 ND J 2041 . , 1/2/04 Lot 58 Village X FG 8.9. 125.2 93.4 ND, J' 2042 1/2/04 Lot 57 Village X FG 9.3 ' 125.7 93.8 ND J' 2043 1/2/04 Lot 56 Village X FG ' 9.1 127.8 95.4 ND J 2044: '1/2/04 . Lot 55 . Village X FG 8.4 126.9 947 ND J 2045 1/2/04 Lot 54- Village FG 9.1 127.3 95.0 ND J 2046 1/2/04 Lot 53 ' Village FG . 8.0 126.1 94.1 ND J 2047 . 1/2/04 Lot 52 Village X . FG 8.8 126.9' 94.7 ND J 2048 1/2/04 Lot 98 Village FG . . 8.2 129.6 96.7 ND J 2049 1/2/04 Lot 99 Village FG . 8.9 . 130.5 97.4 ' ND J 2050 1/2/04 . ' Lot 51 Village X .' FG 8.2 124.9 93.2 ND J 2051 :1/2/04 Lot 50 Village FG 8:3 125.2 93.4 ND J 2052 1/2/04. Lot 49 ' Village FG 8.7 126.8 94.6 ND. J, 2053 , 1/2/04 ' Lot 104 Village X FG 8.5 128.5 95.9 ND J 2063 '. 1/7/04 Lot 27 Village 212.0 8.2 127.5 '93.4 'ND N 2064 1/7/04 Lot 29 Village 210.0 8.9 126.7 92.8 ND N 2065 1/7/04 . . Lot 31 Village 210.0 9.6 ' ' 126.8 92.9 ND N 2066 1/7/04 Lot 33 Village 209.0 9.2 .125.2 91.7 ND N 2067 1/7/04 Lot 26 Village 214.0. 8.4 126.4 92.6 ND N 2068 11 '1/7/04 Lot 28 Village 212.0 8.9 129.0 94.5 ND N 2069 1/7/04 Lot 30 ' Village 211.0 9.9 127.5 93.4 ND N 2070 1/7/04 Lot 32 Village 210.0 9.3 ' 123.7 90.6 ND N 2071 1/7/04 Lot 34 Village 209.0 .9.7 124.4 911 ND N 2075 . 1/8/04 Lot 42 Village FG 9.3 123.0 91.8 ND J' 2076 1/8/04 Lot 43 .VillageX FG.. 8,6 .128.9 96.2 ND J 2077 1/8/04 . Lot 44 ' Village X FG 8.2 126.1 94.1 ND J 2078 1/8/04 . Lot 45 Village X FG '8.9 126.4 94.3 ND J Calavera Hills II, LLC W.O. 3459-B1-SC Calavera Hills II, Village X, Lot 118 (Pump Station) October 2004 File: C:\exceRtables\3400\3459bl.x.ror1 18 GeoSoils, Inc. Page 10 Table FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS 2079'. iH1/8/04 Lot 46, Village FG 94 124.5 92.9 ND J' 2080 1/8/04 Lot 47 Village X FG 8 7 125 6 93.7 ND J 2081 1/8/04 Lot 48 Village X FG 82 125.2 93.4 ND J 2082 1/8/04 Recreation Lot 116, Village FG ' 8.5 129.6. 96.7 ND .J. 2083 1/8/04 Recreation Lot 117 . Village FG 9.9 126.6 . 94.5 ND 2084 1/8/04 Recreation Lot 105 Village X FG 8.1, 126.9 93.3 ND N' 2085 1/8/04 Recreation Lot 106 Village X FG 8.0r 134 2 98.7' ND N 2086 1/8/04 Recreation Lot 107 Village X FG 7.9 130.6. 96.0 ND N 2087. c 1/8/04 Recreation Lot. 108 .VUlageX FG' . 8.3 129.7 95.4 ND N 2088 1/8/04 Recreation Lot 115 ' Village X FG 8.5 128.2 94.3' ND N 2098 1/12/04 Lot 114 Village X FG 7.9 126.1 - 92.7 ND N 2099 1/12/04 Lot 113 Village FG 82 1268 932 ND N 2100 1/12/04 Lot 112 Village FG 84 1312 965 ND N 2101 1/12/04 Lot 111 Village FG 83 1281 942 ND N 2102 1/12/04 Lot 110 ' Village FG 8.1 123.5 90.8 ND N 2103 1/12/04 Lot 109 Village X FG '80.0 125.0.- 91.9 ND N- 2104 1/12/04 Lot 34 Village FG 86 1232 906 ND N 2105' 11/12/04 ' Lot 33 '' Village FG ' . 8.7 ' 131.5. 96.7 ND 2106 1/12/04 Lot 32 Village X FG 8_0 123_6 90_9 ND N 2107 1/12/04 Lot 31 Village FG 85 1284 944 ND N 2108 1/12/04 Lot30 Village _X FG 7_9 1277 93_9 ND N 2109 1/12/04 Lot 29 Village FG 84 1234 907 ND N 2110 1/12/04 'Lot 28 VillageX FG 83 126_1 92_7 ND N 2111 1/12/04 Lot 27 Village FG 89 1263 929 ND N 2112 1/12/04 Lot 26 Village X FG 84 1255 923 ND N 2137 1/21/04 Lot 35 VillageX FG 88 1262 928 ND N 2138 1/21/04 Lot 38 Village 2050 96 1263 929 ND N 2139 1/21/04 ' Lot 37__'' Village 207.0 9.9 130.2 ' 95.7 .ND N. 2140 1/21/04 Lot 41 Village FG 82 1314 966 ND N 2141 1/21/04 Lot 36 Village FG 80 1296 953 ND N 2142 1/21/04 Lot37 Village FG 89 1336 982 ND 2143 1/21/04 Lot 38 Village FG 97 1244 915 ND N 2144 1/21/04 Lot39 VillageX FG 9_0 128_2 94_3 ND N 2145 1/21/04 Lot40 VillageX FG 8_8 129_2 95_0 ND N 2146 1/22/04 Lot 66 Village 2690 89 1280 948 ND N 2396 3/17/04 Lot Village X FG 82 123_9 924 ND J 2397 3/17/04 Lot9 Village X FG 8_6 1242 92_6 ND J 2398 3/17/04 Lot10 VillageX FG 84 1250 932 ND J 2399: 3/17/04 Lot11 __, Village FG ' 8.8 123.1 91.8 .ND J 2402 3/18/04 Lot65 VillageX 268_0 8_2 1264 943 ND J 2403 3/22/04 Lot 61 Village FG 8_1 126_4 943 ND J 2404 3/22/04 Lot62 VillageX FG 8_0 1244 92_8 ND J V 2405 3/22/04 Lot63 VillageX FG 8_8 124 1 92_6 ND J 2406 3/22/04 Lot 64 VillageX FG 8_6 123_1 91.9 ND J 2407 3/22/04 Lot65 VillageX FG 8_2 126_0 94_0 ND J Calavera Hulls II, LLC W.0. 3459-B 1 SC Calavera Hills II Village X Lot 118 (Pump Station) October 2004 File \excel\tables\3400\3459b1 x rorll8 GeoSoils, Inc. Page 11 Table 1 FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS NO OR DEPTH (ft) 1l1iS1.LJRE CONTENT (%) DENSITY (pcf) COMP (%) METHOD sct. TYPE 2408 3/22/04 Lot 66 Village FG 9.0 129.6 96.7 ND _J_ 2409 3/22/04 Lot 67 Village X FG 9.1 123.5 92.2 ND J - 2410 3/22/04 Lot 68 Village FG 8.7 125.3 93.5 ND 2411 3/22/04 Lot 69 Village X FG 9.3 132.1 98.6 ND J 2412 3/22/04 Lot 70 Village X FG 9.2 127.8 95.4 ND J 2413 3/22/04 Lot 96 Village FG 8.0 125.6 93.7 ND J 2414 3/22/04 Lot 97 Village X FG 8.2 124.9 93.2 ND J 2415 3/23/04 Lot 12 Village X FG 8.8 126.2 92.8 ND N 2416 3/23/04 Lot 7 Village X FG. 8.1 128.7 94.6 ND .N 2417 3/23/04 Lot 6 Village X FG 8.9 129.5 95.2 ND N 2418 3/23/04 Lot 5 Village X FG 8.2 126.3 92.9 ND N 2419 3/23/04 Lot Village FG 8.0 125.7 92.4 ND N 2435 3/25/04 Lot 1 . Village X FG . 8.9 128.9 94.8 ND N 2436 3/25/04 Lot Village FG 9.2 126.8 932 ND N 2437 3/25/04 Lot Village FG 9.1 125.3 921 ND N 2438 3/25/04 Rear Lot 79 (At Rear Wall) Village 216.0 10.1 123.9 91.1 ND N 2439 3/25/04 Rear Lot 79 (At Rear Wall) Village X 219.0 9.6 124.8 f91.8 ND N LEGEND: '= Indicates Repeated Test Number * = Indicates Failed Test A = Indicates Retest FG = Finish Grade FS= ND = Nuclear Densometer SC Sand Cone Calavera Hills II, LLC . W.O. 3459B1 .SC Calavera Hills II, Village X, Lot 118 (Pump Station) October 2004 File: C:\excel\tables\3400\3459b1.x.ror1 18 GeoSoils, Inc. Page 12 F 'S - - - r - 4_. -S 5- . S S ... • 1,_ 5 k - - .: . S •t. . ..-. . - . . 'I- . -- - f S • 5- 3 APPENDIX*5, REFERENCES 5 555 5-.- .5- 5 . .5 :- ...' . '- --- , ,.' ,-.-- ...----: - -•..• 5_,5• - - • S 4 5 5 . S •S . 55 5 5 3 '.' 5 r ' - p . . - S S I - S • - ;' 5 5, __5 - .5 - - .-. ••. .,. - . -. 5 - --5 - - - -- . ..- ,. S - .5 .5- .5. - -55-S ... 4 -_S. - ' - S - f* 5_ - -. -S . •,• -. .. 5.._. -- .3 • .5 3 _ -.. '.;.' .'- . . 55 -. --•.- - ,_ - .• - S-S • ,:- ;.. --.- ..- :.: -- . - .:, --- - .:, • . 's' IS -S -S r S Ii APPENDIX REFERENCES California Building Standards Commission, 2001, California building code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2, Volume 2, Adopted November 1, 2002. GeoSoils, Inc., 2004a, Report of rough grading, Calavera Hills Village X, Building Lots 1 through 115, and Recreation Lots 116 and 117, Carlsbad tract 01-06, Drawing 4054A, Carlsbad, L San Diego County, California, W.O. 3459-B1-SC, dated August 4. 2004b, Development criteria for Calavera Hills II, City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, California, W.O. 3459-B1-SC, dated March 29. 2004c Geotechnical review of documents, Village X of.Càlavera Hills II, Carlsbad, San Diego County, California, W.O. 3459-131-SC, dated January 7. 2004d, Revised' pavement design report, Calavera Hills II, Village X, City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, California,. W.O. 3459-E-SC, dated May 3. 2004e, Revised toe drain recommendations, Calavera Hills Il, Village X; Carlsbad, San Diego County, California, W.O. 3459-Bi -SC, dated March 5. 2003a, Geotechnical plan review, Wall construction plans for Calavera Hills II, Village X, City of Carlsbad, San Diego County; California, W.O. 3459-Bi -SC, dated December 23. ' 2003b, Supplemental evaluation of allowable bearing value, Calavera Hills ll City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, California,.W.0 3459-131-SC, dated July 1. 2003c, Memorandum: general discussion of fill 'quality, Calavera HiI!s'll, Carlsbad, California, W.O. 3459-132-SC, dated May 20. . 2003d, Recommendations regarding sideyard drainage swales, Villages E-1, H, K, L-2, U, W, X, V and Z, Calavera Hills II, City of Carlsbad,. San Diego County,. California, W.O. 3459-131-SC, dated June 18 2002a, Preliminary segmental retaining wall soil parameters and wall design criteria, Calavera Hills II, City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, California, W.O. 3459-Bi -SC, dated November 27 2002b Review of grading and trench backfill recommendations, Calavera Hills II, Carlsbad tract 00-02,' Drawing 390-90, City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, California, W.O. 2863-A-SC, August 16. . GeoSoils, Inc. 1999, Update of geotechnical report, Calavera Hills, Village X, City of Carlsbad, California, W.0 2751 -A-SC, dated October 22. _____, 1998a, Lack of paleontological 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. 1,098b. Preliminary, review of slope stability, Calavera Hills, Villages "Q" and "1", City of Carlsbad, California, W.O. '2393-137SC, dated February 16. 1998c, Review of slope stability, Calãvera Hills, Villages "Q" and "1," City of Carlsbad, California, W.O. 2393-B-SC, dated June 24. International Conference of.Building Officials, 1997, Uniform building code . O'Day Consultants, .2003, Grading plans for: Calavera Hills II, Village X, Carlsbad tract C.T. 01-06, Job No. 9820, Drawing No. 405-4A, print date August 22. Southern California Soil and Testing, Inc., 1990, Interim report of geotechnical investigation, Calavera Heights, Village W-X-Y, Tamarack. Avenue and College Boulevard,. Carlsbad, California, W.G. 9021049, dated May .15.. 1984 Summary of geotechnical ihvestigationfor Lake dalavera Hills, Villages 'E-1, E-2, H, K, L-2, L73, Q, R, S, 1, U and W-X, Carlsbad, California, W.O. 14112, report no. 6., dated August 6. Southern California Soil and Testing, 'Inà., 1992, Interim :report:of as built geology field observations and. relative compaction tests, proposed College Boulevard improvements and Village El, Carlsbad, California, SCS&T 9121081 , .. . 1988, Supplemental soil investigation, Calavera Hills Village Q and 1, College Boulevard, Carlsbad, California, Job no. 8821,142; Report no. 1, dated October 6. 1984, Summary of geotechnical investigation for Lake Calavera Hills, Villages E-1, E-2, H, K, L-2, L-3, Q, ft S, T, U, and W-X, Carlsbad, California," W.O. 14112, Report' No. 6., dated August 6. . . •,: S ...S 1983, Report of preliminary 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. Calavera Hills II, LLC , 55 • S S • . Appendix S Fi1e:e:\wp9\3400\3459b1 .x.rorl 18 Page 2 GeoSoils, Inc. 031 u. I v; L. . ? ( . - . . (T ORANGF. CO. s I ! / • . Y .\ t . \ V \\ ' \ N CAN;D11300 CO, "41TY TEST \\ 'Y ATIOV Kq. Olt, I L D E FIE phit Qjjj8(JJVIjSiJAJ..i )!,*, w 0 I4Q-Q DATE _J0/04_ SCAL 141L el A 8 e5i LEG D -1jq af Artificial fill ndifforantlated Cretaceous granitic bodrock and ~/Crl o Kgr/ h1v u All A917 1p Approximate location of geologic contact 99, Joint attitude with 'dip In dogroas r, Approximato location of subdraln with flow direction Approximate looatibn of too drain with flow direction L 0 7 , / - All t 14~ r ? /' • ,r 10 7 A i A r r 1 --i r . /,/l\ ,_ . I. z..... \ \ • •-•- \ j / / v ' .; .•. 96 3 31 o 03 /97 761 19 76) lit 1 . i •.IT \:,, • I I I •i . . v < \ \ ..\ - ///\ \ / •14/,Y . ol lo, K 1o8 11 1I%f*Q I I I4I4 I I 1 41 ç11 I_' I, / 1\ 37 t II •' I I -L 4c- - 14 • •4.11• 1111 • •• • ... - S ...• •• •• S • I'41 I.l4. I 4...1 • SII4!11S1'. I / I7TIlI114IVII14 S • 111 1 I II . .I14... IIj I S •• • - V - ri$ iVt; 1 tL pr1 I 10 / 1 /NN ( r f J Of £01 L;'\ .', \ \ i ... . . ...... /A/' /7I I I I 1 t 4 5' 4I441 144 '4 4 II4 _14 44411144 44' 4 44 4441 I 41*444 44•-'1 I81*WI'445-_41 '4 '441 '411*I144 4411*41 4 4441 3 1 4444 441*4I I 441 4414414441444 44 44144444444144 444141114411444 4404 441444444 1*4I44 4411* 5 lit S S . -"555.-' ' - - - -, - S -. ENG1tNO DEPAfTMENT J L 11 I 1441 44'.' 444 44 44 41 44 44 41445-4144 44441 414 44444444 — I - - - * - - - - - - -, Dl J NI I lfl -14---- /4441 DWVN ( StI'4 I SSI '1II Ic4 r 1ICA} 1 .. -. - -. I - - - — - - - - PROJECT N40 o I 1 DATE 41 f1i Sri 4114V - - - --- - - - - - --- S 171 Aitz a! i/)4 d >1 (1 ir /\IflIII 1f f 1Ifl lIlrtfl) (JI \1(')UII - 4 -'--- —'-•----•--'—'---- --------- ---- * 100 Mormiliq WED BY: PROJECT NO. DRAW114G 1,40., DATE 45-1;S14-.SSS 1450*lllSO4S 144 5 p4 4PA 344 r' fl' r — -r F'4 T"4 nq I r L 913 0u 1 t IJ I (I )( qIt) i i II i II 1( O '1 ir F3 20(R(; 0XU1t Jr32() 1P03- A -I. ij•- -. • •. .• . -. . • I • /17