HomeMy WebLinkAboutCT 02-07; EMERALD POINTE ESTATES; UPDATE REPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL INV; 2002-04-30UPDATE REPORT OF PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL
INVESTIGATION
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates
BGS Property
APN 212-040-50
Carlsbad, California
JOB NO. 97-7189
30 April 2002
Prepared for:
Mr. Tony Hummel
BCS NATURAL RESOURCES
RECEIVED
DEPARTMENT
GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC.
SOIL & FOUNDATION ENGINEERING • GROUNDWATER
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MANAGEIVIENT • ENGINEERING GEOLOGY
30 April 2002
Mr. Tony Hummel
BCS NATURAL RESOURCES CORPORATION
1303 Avocado Avenue, Suite 245
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Job No. 97-7189
Subject: Update Reoort of Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates
BCS Property, APN 212-040-50
Carlsbad, California
Dear Mr. Hummel:
In accordance with your request and per our proposal dated April 4, 2002,
Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. has prepared this update report of geotechnical
investigation and geologic reconnaissance of the soil and geologic conditions at the
subject site. The geologic reconnaissance of the site was performed per the
requirements of the City of Carlsbad. This firm previously issued a report titled
''Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation," 6ate6 March 25, 1998. The
original field work was performed on January 23, 1998.
Present conditions at the site remain as they were at the time of our initial
investigation in 1998. It is our understanding that the site is being developed to
receive a residential project with adjacent streets and associated Improvements.
The proposed development is anticipated to include 17 residentiai lots on
approximately 18 acres at the northwest corner of Cobblestone Road and Sapphire
Drive. Grading is anticipated to involve cuts up to 18 feet and fills up to 23 feet to
create level building pads and streets. The structures are to be a maximum of two
stories in height and will be constructed of standard-type building materials utilizing
a conventional concrete slab-on-grade foundation system.
The purpose of this update report and prior subsurface investigation was to
evaluate the soil conditions In the proposed building areas, recommend any
necessary site preparation procedures, assess the allowable bearing capacity of the
on-site soils, and to provide slab and foundation design recommendations.
The accompanying report presents the results of our review of available geologic
reports and maps, fieid investigation and laboratory analysis, as well as our
conclusions and recommendations for the proposed development.
7420 TRADE STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92121 • (858) 549-7222 • FAX: (858) 549-1604 • E-MAIL: geotecti@ixpres.com
The woric performed and recommendations presented in this report are the result of
an investigation and analysis that meet the contemporary standard of care in our
profession within the County of San Diego.
This opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. Should you have any
questions concerning the following report, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Reference to our lob No. 97-7189 will expedite a response to your inquiries.
Respectfully submitted.
GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC.
Jaime A. Cerros, P.E.
Senior Geotechnical Engineer
R.C.E. 34422/G.E. 2007
te'^ne-d.'ReedrPres'^ent
C.E.G. 999[exp. 3-31-03J/R.G. 3391
JKH/JAC/LDR/pj
CERTIFIED j
Of cf-^--
TABLE OF CONTENTS
II.
IV.
SCOPE OF WORK
SITE DESCRIPTION
III. FIELD INVESTIGATION
LABORATORY TESTS
V. GENERAL GEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC GEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
VII. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS
VIII. EARTHQUAKE RISK EVALUATION
IX. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
X. LIMITATIONS
REFERENCES
PAGE
1
2
3
4
6
7
9
15
17
36
FIGURES
la. Vicinity Map
Ib. Plot Plan and Geologic f4ap
Ila-k. Trench Logs
Illa-c. Laboratory Test Results
IV. Foundation Requirements Near Slopes
V. Regional Fault Map
VI. Bench and Key Requirements
APPENDICES
A. Unified Soil Classification System
B. Seismic Data - EQFault
C. Seismic Data - EQSearch
D. Modified Mercalli Intensity Index
E. General Earthwork Specifications
UPDATE REPORT OF PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates
BCS Property
APN 212-040-50
Carlsbad, California
JOB NO. 97-7189
The following report presents the findings and recommendations of Geotechnical
Exploration, Inc. for the subject property (refer to Figure No. I for Vicinity Map
and Site Plan).
I. SCOPE OF WORK
It is our understanding, based on communications with Mr. Jack Henthorn and
Associates, and review of a Revised Tentative Map prepared by Hunsaker and
Associates, dated February 5, 2002, that the site is being developed to receive a
residential project with adjacent streets and associated improvements. The
proposed development is anticipated to include 17 residential lots on approximately
18 acres located 1/4-mile south of Palomar Airport Road, and east of Laurel Tree
Road. Grading is anticipated to involve cuts up to 18 feet and fills up to 23 feet to
create level building pads and streets. As part of this update report preparation, we
reviewed our previous report prepared for this site, dated March 25, 1998.
With the above in mind, the Scope of Work is briefly outlined as follows:
1. Identify and classify the surface and subsurface soils in the area of the
proposed construction, in conformance with the Unified Soil Classification
System (refer to Figure Nos. II and III, and Appendix A).
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates job No. 97-7189
Carlsbad, California Page 2
2. Make note of any faults or significant geologic features that may affect the
site (see Figure No. V, and Appendices B, C and D).
3. Recommend site preparation procedures, including recommendations for the
proposed grading operation and slope construction.
4. Recommend preliminary allowable bearing capacity for the on-site
formational soils or properly compacted fill soils.
5. Evaluate the settlement potential of the bearing soils under the proposed
structural loads.
6. Recommend preliminary foundation design information and provide active
and passive earth pressures to be utilized in design of any proposed retaining
walls and foundation structures.
In addition, as part of our investigation, we reviewed the preliminary grading plans
and City of Carlsbad Zone 20 Local Facilities Management Plan.
II. SITE DESCRIPTION
The property is known as: Assessor's Parcel No. 212-040-50, in the City of
Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California.
The site, consisting of approximately 18 acres, is located approximately 1/4-mile
south of Paiomar Airport Road at Cobblestone Road and Sapphire Drive, in the City
of Carlsbad. The property is bordered on the north by undeveloped land; on the
south by the Greystone/Cobblestone residential development; on the east by similar
undeveloped land and Sapphire Drive; and on the west by Cobblestone Road.
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates Job No. 97-7189
Carlsbad, California Page 3
The site is presently undeveloped, and was previously cultivated for agricultural
purposes. Access to the site is provided from the Greystone/Cobblestone
residential development on Sapphire Drive. High tension power transmission lines
extend approximately north to south through the extreme northwest portion of the
site. A large depression exists in the northwest portion of the site that may have
been a former water storage reservoir. The depression is approximately 140 feet
long by 60 feet wide and 10 feet deep. A cut was made on the uphill side and a fill
slope constructed on the downhill side. Vegetation on the site consists primarily of
wild grasses on flat areas, with some thick shrubbery and chaparral on the slope
areas.
The property slopes moderately to steeply down to the north and west from a
gently sloping ridge top in the southern portion of the property. Approximate
elevations across the site range from a high of 262 feet above mean sea level
(MSL) to a low of 100 feet MSL. Survey information concerning elevations across
the investigated portion of the site was obtained from topographic maps and
preliminary grading plans by BHA, Inc., dated November 18, 1997, and a Revised
Tentative Map prepared by Hunsaker and Associates, dated February 5, 2002.
III. FIELD INVESTIGATION
Our field investigation, conducted on January 23, 1998, consisted of a geologic
reconnaissance of the site and surrounding terrain, plus the excavation of 11
tractor-mounted backhoe trenches. The excavations were located in the field by
referring to a preliminary grading plan prepared by BHA, Inc., dated November 18,
1997. The trenches were observed and logged by our Engineering Geologist, and
samples were taken of the predominant soils throughout the field operation. Trench
logs have been prepared on the basis of our observations and the results have been
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates
Carlsbad, California
Job No. 97-7189
Page 4
summarized on Figure No. II. The predominant soils have been classified in
conformance with the Unified Soil Classification System (referto Appendix A).
IV. FIELD AND LABORATORY TESTS
Field and laboratory tests were performed on the soils in order to evaluate their
physical and mechanical properties and their ability to support the proposed
residential structures, streets and improvements. The following tests were
conducted on the sampled soils.
1. Moisture/Density Relations (ASTM Dl557-91, Method A)
2. Moisture Content (ASTM D2216-92)
3. Mechanical Analysis (ASTM D422-90)
4. Expansion Test (UBC Method 29-2)
5. Density Measurement (ASTM Dl 188-84 and D2937-83)
6. Consolidation Tests (ASTM D2435-90)
The relationship between the moisture and density of the soil gives qualitative
information regarding the soil strength characteristics and soil conditions to be
anticipated during the proposed grading operation.
The mechanical analysis and Atterberg Limit tests were used to aid in the
classification of the soils according to the Unified Soil Classification System and for
the liquefaction potential analysis.
The expansion potential of the on-site soils was evaluated utilizing the Uniform
Building Code Test Method for Expansion Soils (UBC Standard No. 29-2). In
accordance with the UBC (Table 18-1-B), expansive soils are classified as follows:
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates
Carlsbad, California
Job No. 97-7189
Page 5
EXPANSION INDEX POTENTIAL EXPANSION
0 to 20 Very low
21 to 50 Low
51 to 90 Medium
91 to 130 Hiqh
Above 130 Very high
Based on our laboratory analysis, the on-site soils tested can be classified as having
a very high expansion potential, with a maximum tested expansion index of 198. It
should be noted that the expansion potential at existing soil moisture contents is
medium, with tested expansion potential ranging from 6.5 to 9.0 percent of the
sample height, which would roughly correspond to an Expansion Index between 51
and 90. The expansive soils will require proper moisture conditioning and
compaction to help reduce expansion potential.
Consolidation tests were performed on relatively undisturbed samples of the
existing natural-ground soils. The consolidation test aids in evaluating whether
there is significant settlement potential of the existing soils under the anticipated
loads and proposed surcharge loads. Results of laboratory testirtg can be found on
Figure No. III.
Based on the above laboratory test data, observations of the primary soil types on
the project, and our previous experience with laboratory testing of similar soils, our
Geotechnical Engineer has assigned values for friction angle, coefficient of friction,
and cohesion to those soils which will have significant lateral support or bearing
functions on the project. These values are presented in Figure No. Ill and have
been utilized in the assigning the allowable bearing values, as well as active and
passive earth pressure design criteria for wall and footing designs in competent
native soils or properiy compacted fills.
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates Job No. 97-7189
Carlsbad, California Page 6
V. GENERAL GEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
The Carlsbad area is part of a seismically active region of California. It is on the
eastern boundary of the Southern California Continental Borderland, part of the
Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province. This region is part of a broad tectonic
boundary between the North American and Pacific Plates. The actual plate
boundary is characterized by a complex system of active, major, right-lateral strike-
slip faults, trending northwest/southeast. This fault system extends eastward to
the San Andreas Fault (approximately 81 miles from Carlsbad) and westward to the
San Clemente Fault (approximately 54 miles off-shore from Carlsbad) (Berger and
Schug, 1991).
During recent history, the San Diego County area has been relatively quiet
seismically. No fault ruptures or major earthquakes have been experienced in
historic time within the San Diego area. Since earthquakes have been recorded by
instruments (since the 1930s), the San Diego area has experienced scattered
seismic events with Richter magnitudes generally less than 4.0. During June 1985,
a series of small earthquakes occurred beneath San Diego Bay; three of these
earthquakes had recorded magnitudes of 4.0 to 4.2. In addition, the Oceanside
earthquake of July 13, 1986, located approximately 26 miles offshore ofthe City of
Oceanside, resulted in a magnitude of 5.3 (Hauksson, 1988).
In California, major earthquakes can generally be correlated with movement on
active faults. As defined by the California Division of Mines and Geology (Hart,
E.W., 1980), an "active" fault is one that has had ground surface displacement
within Holocene time (about the last 11,000 years). Additionally, faults along which
major historical earthquakes have occurred (about the last 210 years in California)
are also considered to be active (Association of Engineering Geologist, 1973). The
California Division of Mines and Geology defines a "potentially active" fault as one
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates Job No. 97-7189
Carlsbad, California Page 7
that has had ground surface displacement during Quaternary time, that is, during
the past 11,000 to 1.6 million years (Hart, E.W., 1980).
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC GEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
A geologic investigation of the site was conducted to evaluate the on-site geology
and potential of geologic hazards that might affect the site. Our investigation drew
upon information gathered from published and unpublished geologic maps and
reports, as well as the results of our exploratory trench excavations.
A. Stratigraphy
The subject site is located within a residential area approximately 1/4-mile south of
Palomar Airport Road at Cobblestone Road and Sapphire Drive, in the City of
Carlsbad. A review of avaiiabie geologic maps and reports, as well as our field
investigation, indicates that the subject property is located in an area underlain by
surficial topsoils and dense formational materials of the Eocene-age Del Mar/Friars
Formation (undifferentiated) and the Santiago Formation. A description of these
units, from youngest to oldest, is included herein. Refer to Figure Nos. II and III
for details.
ToDsoils: Topsoils were found overlying the formational materials on most of the
site and consist of soft to firm, moist, dark brown, silty clay with some sand and
abundant roots. The topsoils are approximately VA to IVz feet in depth and are
considered to be very highly expansive. The topsoils have been previously
disturbed by agricultural cultivation and are unsuitable to support structural loads
and compacted fill.
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates job No. 97-7189
Carlsbad, California Page 8
Santiaqo Formation (Tsa): The majority of the site is underlain by the Eocene-age
Santiago Formation, which consists of light brown and tan-gray, silty, fine to
medium sandstone with interbeds of darker-colored sandy siltstones. The
sandstones are by far the most common and typically they are moderately well-
indurated. The siltstones ofthe Santiago Formation may exist with some moderate
to high expansion characteristics.
Del Mar/Friars Formation rundifferentiated - Td/Tf): The site is mapped showing
Santiago Formation being underlain by the Eocene-age Del Mar/Friars Formation
(Eisenberg, 1983). At the site, we found this formation to be comprised of several
lithologic (material type) units. Our trenches advanced at the site revealed the Del
Mar/Friars Formation to be primarily massive, tan-gray and dark gray-green and
orange, silty sandstone,, siltstone and claystone that is dense but poorly to
moderately well-indurated. Along the perimeter of the steep slopes we
encountered approximately 2 to 4 feet of highly fractured and weathered formation.
These materials consist of medium dense to dense, dry to damp, tan-gray and light
brown, silty sandstone with some shells and caliche beds. Some ofthe caliche beds
ranged from 1 to 4 inches thick and are thought to be related to topsoil chemical
weathering processes.
B. Structure
Adjacent slopes and nearby road cuts allowed observation of bedding and geologic
structural features of the Santiago and Del Mar/Friars Formation in the vicinity of
the subject site. The observed Del Mar/ Friars formational material appears to be
massively bedded (as exposed in the relatively shallow depth exploratory
excavations). In the vicinity of the subject site, the formational materials strike
approximately N80°E and dip 2 to 3 degrees to the south (Eisenberg, 1983).
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates job No. 97-7189
Carlsbad, California Page 9
VII. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS
A. Local and Regional Faults
Reference to a geologic map for the area (Eisenberg, 1983) indicates the presence
of a northeast-trending fault less than 300 feet west of the site. The published
projection suggests that the fault displaces the Eocene-age formation but not the
Pleistocene-age terrace material and Holocene-age sediments. This fault is
considered minor and does not impact the site.
It is our opinion that a known "active" fault presents the greatest seismic risk to the
subject site during the lifetime of the proposed structures. To date, the nearest
known "active" faults to the subject site are the northwest-trending Rose Canyon
Fault, Coronado Bank Fault and the Elsinore Fault.
Rose Canvon Fault: The Rose Canyon Fault Zone (Mount Soledad and Rose Canyon
Faults), located approximately 5 miles west of the subject site, is mapped trending
north-south from Oceanside to downtown San Diego, from where it appears to head
southward into San Diego Bay, through Coronado and offshore. The Rose Canyon
Fault Zone is considered to be a complex zone of onshore and offshore, en echelon
strike slip, oblique reverse, and oblique normal faults. The Rose Canyon Fault is
considered to be capable of causing a 7.5-magnitude earthquake and considered
microseismically active, although no significant recent earthquake is known to have
occurred on the fault. Investigative work on faults (believed to be part of the Rose
Canyon Fault Zone) at the Police Administration and Technical Center in downtown
San Diego and at the SDG&E facility in Rose Canyon, has encountered offsets in
Holocene (geologically recent) sediments. These findings have been accepted as
confirmed Holocene displacement on the Rose Canyon Fault and this previously
classified "potentially active" fault has now been upgraded to an "active" fault as of
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates job No. 97-7189
Carlsbad, California Page 10
November 1991 (California Division of Mines and Geology - Fault Rupture Hazapd
Zones in California, 1994).
Coronado Bank Fault: The Coronado Bank Fault is located approximately 21 miles
southwest of the site. Evidence for this fault is based upon geophysical data
(acoustic profiles) and the general alignment of epicenters of recorded seismic
activity (Greene, 1979). An earthquake of 5.3 magnitude, recorded July 13, 1986,
is known to have been centered on the fault or within the Coronado Bank Fault
Zone. Although this fault is considered active, due to the seismicity within the fault
zone, it is significantly less active seismically than the Elsinore Fault (Hileman,
1973). It is postulated that the Coronado Bank Fault is capable of generating a 7.0-
magnitude earthquake and is of great interest due to its close proximity to the
greater San Diego metropolitan area.
Elsinore Fault: The Elsinore Fault is located approximately 25 miles northwest of
the site. The Elsinore Fault extends approximately 200 km (125 miles) from the
Mexican border to the northern end of the Santa Ana Mountains. The Elsinore Fault
zone is a 1- to 4-mile-wide, northwest-southeast-trending zone of discontinuous
and en echelon faults extending through portions of Orange, Riverside, San Diego,
and Imperial Counties. Individual faults within the Elsinore Fault Zone range from
less than 1 mile to 16 miles in length. The trend, length and geomorphic
expression ofthe Elsinore Fault Zone identified it as being a part ofthe highly active
San Andreas Fault system.
Like the other faults in the San Andreas system, the Elsinore Fault is a transverse
fault showing predominantly right-lateral movement. According to Hart, et al.
{1979), this movement averages less than 1 centimeter per year. Along most of its
length, the Elsinore Fault Zone is marked by a bold topographic expression
consisting of linearly aligned ridges, swales and hallows. Faulted Holocene alluvial
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates Job No. 97-7189
Carlsbad, California Page 11
deposits (believed to be less than 11,000 years old) found along several segments
of the fault zone suggest that at least part of the zone is currently active.
Although the Elsinore Fault Zone belongs to the San Andreas set of active,
northwest-trending, right-slip faults in the southern California area (Crowell, 1962),
it has not been the site of a major earthquake in historic time, other than a 6.0-
magnitude quake near the town of Elsinore in 1910 (Richter, 1958; Toppozada and
Parke, 1982). However, based on length and evidence of late-Pleistocene or
Holocene displacement, Greensfelder (1974) has estimated that the Elsinore Fault
Zone is reasonably capable of generating an earthquake with a magnitude as large
as 7.5. Recent study and logging of exposures in trenches in Glen Ivy Marsh across
the Glen Ivy North Fault (a strand of the Elsinore Fault Zone between Corona and
Lake Elsinore), suggest a maximum earthquake recurrence interval of 300 years,
and when combined with previous estimates of the long-term horizontal slip rate of
0.8 to 7.0 mm/year, suggest typical earthquake magnitudes of 6 to 7 (Rockwell,
1985).
B. Other Geologic Hazards
Ground Rupture: Ground rupture is characterized by bedrock slippage along an
established fault and may result in displacement of the ground surface. For ground
rupture to occur along a fault, an earthquake usually exceeds magnitude 5.0. If a
5.0-magnitude earthquake were to take place on a local fault, an estimated surface-
rupture length 1 mile long could be expected (Greensfelder, 1974). Since a fault
does not cross the subject site, the risk of ground rupture at the site is considered
remote.
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates job No. 97-7189
Carlsbad, California Page 12
Ground Shaking: Structural damage caused by seismically induced ground shaking
is a detrimental effect directly related to faulting and earthquake activity. Ground
shaking is considered to be the greatest seismic hazard in San Dlego County. The
intensity of ground shaking is dependent on the magnitude of the earthquake, the
distance and orientation from the earthquake, and the soil and geologic structure
beneath the site. Earthquakes of magnitude 5.5 Richter scale or greater are
generally associated with significant damage. It is our opinion that the most
serious damage to the site would be caused by a large earthquake originating on a
nearby strand of the Rose Canyon Fault Zone or one of the major regional active
faults. Although the chance of such an event is low, it could occur within the
proposed development. The ground accelerations that could be reasonably
expected to occur during a major earthquake, on a fault within 100 miles of the
site, are provided in Appendix B.
Landslides: According to our geologic reconnaissance and a review of the geologic
maps (Weber 1982, and Eisenberg 1983) and aerial photographs (4-11-53, AXN-
8M-71 and 72), there are no known or suspected ancient landslides located on the
site. However, we encountered some highly fractured and weathered caliche beds
within the dense. Eocene-age formational sandstone materials in exploratory
trenches. The 1- to 4-inch-thick caliche beds were encountered along the
perimeter of the steep west-facing slopes. The beds were present within the
massive formational sandstone, but found to be moderately compressible due to the
dry condition and void space present. Due to potential slope instability, we have
recommended deeper removal and recompaction in the areas where highly
weathered formational materials exist.
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates Job No. 97-7189
Carlsbad, California Page 13
Slope Stability: The proposed cut and fill slopes should remain stable for the
proposed elevations and/or configurations shown in the preliminary plans for the
project. The slopes possess a factor of safety against deep shear failure of at least
1.5. The fill slope toe in the area along the western subdivision boundary shall be
cut below the weathered formation approximately 5 to 6 feet below existing grade.
Geological observations and further slope stability evaluations shall be provided
during grading of cut and fill slopes, as needed.
Liquefaction: The liquefaction of saturated sands during earthquakes can result in
major damage to buildings. Liquefaction is the process in which soils are
transformed into a dense fiuid, which will flow as a liquid when unconfined. It
occurs principally in loose, saturated sands and silts when they are sufficiently
shaken by an earthquake.
Although there is a potential for experiencing a seismic event that could produce
the required ground acceleration to induce liquefaction, the earthquake necessary
to cause this magnitude of acceleration has not occurred in the San Diego County
area since the year 1800 (see Appendix C). Since no submerged loose sand or silt
conditions exist at the site, the probability of occurrence of soil liquefaction is
negligible.
Flooding: Due to the site's elevation and the proposed grading, there is little risk of
flooding on the proposed site building pads. However, the natural drainage canyon
along the western portion of the site could be subject to occasional flooding.
Although the drainage of the area, in general, appears to be adequately controlled
within the existing channel and the drainage basin is relatively small, the project
civil engineer should evaluate the potential for flooding in this area.
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates Job No. 97-7189
Carlsbad, California Page 14
With the construction of an adequate on-site drainage system and proper finish
surface grades, the risk of flooding should be minimal within the proposed building
areas.
Groundwater: Groundwater was not encountered during our field investigation and
we do not expect significant groundwater problems to develop in the future — if the
property is developed as presently proposed and proper drainage is provided and
maintained.
It should be kept in mind that the proposed construction and grading on the site
may change surface drainage patterns. Such changes, plus irrigation of landscaping
or significant increases in rainfall, may result in appearance of surface or near-
surface perched water at locations where non existed previously. The damage from
such water is expected to be localized and cosmetic in nature if good positive
drainage is implemented, as recommended in this report, during and at the
completion of construction.
It must be understood, however, that unless discovered during initial site
exploration or encountered during site grading operations, it is extremely difficult to
predict if or where perched or true groundwater conditions may appear in the
future. When site fill or formational soils are fine-grained and of low permeability,
water problems may not become apparent for extended periods of time.
Whereas water conditions encountered during grading operations should be
evaluated and remedied by the project civil and geotechnical consultants, the
project developer and eventual homeowners must realize that post-construction
appearances of groundwater may have to be dealt with on a site-specific basis.
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates Job No. 97-7189
Carlsbad, California Page 15
The alternative to the possible post-construction, site-specific appearance and
resolution of subsurface water problems is the design and construction of extensive
subdrain dewatering systems during the initial site development process. This
option is usually selected when there is sufficient evidence during initial exploration
or site grading to indicate such efforts are warranted.
C. Summary
The seismic hazard most likely to impact the site is ground shaking, probably
resulting from an earthquake on the nearby Rose Canyon Fault or more distant
Coronado Bank Fault or Elsinore Fault. In the event that severe earth shaking does
occur from major faulting within the area, compliance with UBC and City of Carlsbad
Building Code requirements, and the accompanying recommendations for
construction, should help to minimize structural damage. No soil liquefaction is
anticipated to occur in the buildable areas of the site and no loss of strength or
stability is anticipated in the soils ofthe same buildable area due to seismic activity.
From a geotechnical standpoint, our investigation Indicates that the site is favorable
for the proposed development, provided the recommendations in this report are
followed.
VIII. EARTHOUAKE RISK EVALUATION
Evaluation of earthquake risk requires that the effect of faulting on, and the mass
stability of, a site be evaluated utilizing the Mio seismic design event, i.e., an
earthquake event on an active fault with less than a 10 percent probability of being
exceeded in 50 years. Further, sites are classified by UBC 1997 Edition Into "soil
profile types SA through Sp." Soil profile types are defined by their shear velocities
where shear velocity is the speed at which shear waves move through the upper 30
meters (approximately 100 feet) ofthe ground. These are:
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates Job No. 97-7189
Carlsbad, California Page 16
SA => Greater than 1500 m/s
SB => 760 to 1500 m/s
Sc => 360 m/s to 760 m/s
SD => 180 to 360 m/s
SE => Less than 180 m/s
SF => Soil requiring spedfic soil evaluation
By utilizing an earthquake magnitude Mio for a seismic event on an active fault,
knowing the site class and ground type, a prediction of anticipated site ground
acceleration, g, from these events can be estimated. The subject site has been
assigned Classification "Sc."
An estimation of the peak ground acceleration and the repeatable high ground
acceleration (RHGA) likely to occur at the project site by the known significant local
and regional faults within 100 miles of the site is included in Appendix C. Also, a
listing of the known historic seismic events that have occurred within 100 miles of
the site at a magnitude of 5.0 or greater since the year 1800, and the probability of
exceeding the experienced ground accelerations in the future based upon the
historical record, is provided in Appendix C. Both tables generated from computer
programs EQ Fault and EQ Search by Thomas F. Blake (1989) utilizing a digitized
file of late-Quaternary California faults (EQ Fault) and a file listing of recorded
earthquakes (EQSearch). Estimations of site intensity are also provided as in these
listings as Modified Mercalli Index values. The Modified Mercalli Intensity Index is
attached as Appendix D.
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates Job No. 97-7189
Carisbad, California Page 17
IX. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The following conclusions and recommendations are based upon our report and plan
reviews, the limited field investigation conducted by our flrm, and resulting
laboratory tests, in conjunction with our knowledge and experience with the soils in
this area ofthe City of Carlsbad.
Based on a review of a Revised Tentative Map for the site prepared by Hunsaker
and Associates, it is our understanding that the site is to be developed to receive a
17-lot residential development with adjacent streets and associated improvements.
Fourteen lots will be developed and three will be designated open-space areas. The
site is to be graded into relatively level building pads, resulting in cuts up to
approximately 18 feet and fills up to approximately 23 feet in depth. Final plans
should be submitted for our review as soon as they become available, so that more
specific design recommendations or needed alterations can be provided, if required.
In general, we found that the site is underlain by dense, sandy and silty formational
material of good bearing strength for support of the proposed development.
However, some soft to firm topsoil and weathered formation was found on the ridge
top and slope edges. As such, we recommend that in order to provide a more firm,
uniform soil base, the loose topsoils and weathered formation be removed and
properly compacted (to at least 90 percent per ASTM D1557-98) prior to any
addition of new fill. In cut areas, any remaining underlying loose soils should be
removed and properly compacted. In addition, on all cut/fill transition lots, where
the proposed structure is underlain by both cut and fill, the cut portion of the
building site (and up to at least 10 feet beyond the perimeter thereof), should be
undercut to at least 3 feet at the farthest shallow end and gently transition to the
deep end and replaced as compacted fill, so as to reduce the potential for
differential settlement under the proposed structures. The moisture content for the
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates job No. 97-7189
Carlsbad, California Page 18
upper 10 feet of fill shall be at least 5 percent over their Optimum Moisture Content.
If medium to highly expansive formational soils are encountered, they shall be
moisture conditioned and recompacted in a similar manner in the upper 2 feet (as a
minimum).
A. Site Grading
1. The proposed grading operations shall be performed in accordance with the
General Earthwork Specifications (Appendix E) and the requirements of the
City of Carlsbad Grading Ordinance. Geotechnical Exploration, Inc.
recommends that our firm verify the actual soil conditions revealed during
the grading to be as anticipated in this "Update Report of Preliminary
Geotechnical Investigation." In addition, the compaction of any fill soils
placed during the grading must be tested by the soil engineer. It is the
responsibility of the grading contractor to comply with the requirements of
the grading plans and the local grading ordinance. Any fill soils that are
observed to be loose or that have been placed without control or sufficient
testing shall be removed and recompacted to comply with the grading
specifications.
It is recommended that our firm review the flnal grading plans and project
soil-related speciflcations prior to the start of construction. Also, we
recommend that a pre-construction conference be held at the site with the
owner/developer, architect, civil engineer, contractor, grader, and
geotechnical engineer in attendance. Special soil handling procedures and
the grading plan requirements can be discussed at that time.
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates Job No. 97-7189
Carlsbad, California Page 19
We recommend that the entire property be cleared of all vegetation and any
other debris or rubble. The unsuitable material generated should be disposed
of off-site prior to the placing of any new fill.
Our investigation revealed that the eastern (investigated) portion of the site
is underlain by dense formational materials, with some loose (soft to firm)
topsoil and weathered formational materials ranging from IVi to 51/2 feet
deep overlying the site. Since a portion of the site is to be lowered to
achieve the finish grade, it is anticipated that dense formational materials will
be exposed over the majority of the eastern portion of the site. Some
removal and recompaction of the loose surface soils and weathered formation
will be required in the proposed fill areas and also in cut areas when the soils
are not at the adequate moisture content (as discussed previously). We
estimate that the deepest removal of loose topsoil and weathered formation
will be in the northern and western portions of the site and along the edges
of the slopes where thicker topsoils and weathered formational materials
were encountered. Also, any areas with unfavorable geologic conditions may
require special grading and drainage recommendations. The excavated, low-
expansive soils to be used as fill shall be watered to approximately optimum
moisture content and compacted to at least 90 percent of Maximum Dry
Density ASTM D1557-98.
Any soils possessing an expansion potential equal to or higher than 50 shall
be compacted with a moisture content at or higher than 5 percent over the
optimum moisture content. The relative compaction of such compacted soils
shall be at least 90 percent of the maximum obtained per ASTM D1557-98.
- Highly expansive soils shall not be overcompacted higher than 93 percent of
Maximum Dry Density.
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates
Carlsbad, California Job No. 97-7189
Page 20
4.
In addition, a deeper key will be required at the toe of the proposed fill slope
along the western subdivision boundary. Caliche beds were encountered
within the exploratory trench excavations placed in this area.
Any backfill soils placed in utility trenches or behind retaining walls, which
support structures, and other improvements (such as patios, sidewalks,
driveways, pavements, etc.) shall be compacted to at least 90 percent of
Maximum Dry Density.
5. No uncontrolled fill soils shall remain on the site after completion of site
grading. In the event that temporary ramps or pads are constructed of
uncontrolled fill soils, the loose flil soils shall be removed and/or recompacted
priorto completion ofthe grading operation.
B. Preliminarv Design Parameters
6. For preliminary foundation design of new footings, based on the assumption
that new footings will be placed on low expansive to medium expansive soils
at least 18 inches as measured from the adjacent ground surface into
medium dense to dense natural (formational) soils or properly compacted on-
site soils, we provide a preliminary allowable soil bearing capacity equal to
2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) for properly compacted flil and 3,000
pounds per square foot for dense formation. Footings resting on compacted
fill or formational soils with high to very high expansion potential shall be
embedded at least 24 inches in depth. Footing width, in all cases, shall be at
least 12 inches. For wider and/or deeper footings, the allowable soil bearing
•capacity may be calculated based on the following equation:
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates Job No. 97-7189
Carlsbad, California Pagg 21
Qa = 1000D-F500W for footings in compacted fill
Qa = 1500D-F750W for footings in formation
where
"Qa" is the allowable soil bearing capacity (in psf);
"D" is the depth of the footing (in feet) as measured from the lowest
adjacent grade; and
"W" Is the width of the footing (in feet).
The allowable soil bearing capacity may be increased one-third for analysis
including wind or earthquake loads. The maximum total allowable soil
bearing capacity for dense flIls or natural formation is 6,000 psf. We
recommend that all footings be founded either entirely in dense formation or
entirely in compacted fill. The final foundation embedment will depend on
expansion index test results obtained from representative soils obtained from
the upper 4 feet of building pads.
If imported soils are required to bring the site to grade, the imported soils
should be low expansive (EI lower than 50) and be obtained from an
approved oft^-site borrow area. Should soils with an expansion index higher
than 90 be left: at subgrade elevation in the building areas, the footing
excavations shall be deepened to at least 24 inches.
7. The passive earth pressure of the encountered dense natural-ground soils
and any properly compacted fill soils (to be used for design of shallow
foundation and footings to resist the lateral forces) shall be based on an
Equivalent Fluid Weight of 275 pounds per cubic foot. This passive earth
pressure shall only be considered valid for design if the ground adjacent to
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates
Carlsbad, California Job No. 97-7189
Page 22
the foundations structure is essentially level for a distance of at least three
times the total depth ofthe foundation.
8. A Coefflcient of Friction of 0.35 times the dead load may be used to calculate
friction force between the bearing soils and concrete wall foundations or
structure foundations and fioor slabs.
The following table summarizes site-specific seismic design criteria to
calculate the base shear needed for the design of the residential structure.
The design criteria was obtained from the Uniform Building Code (1997
edition).
Parameter Value Reference
Seismic Zone Factor, Z 0.40 Table 16-1
Soil Profile Type Sc Table 16-J
Seismic Coefficient, C^ 0.40Na Table 16-Q
Seismic Coefflcient, Cv 0.56Nv Table 16-R
Near-Source Factor, Na 1.0 Table 16-S
Near-Source Factor, Nv 1.1 Table 16-T
Seismic Source Type B Table 16-U
10. Our experience indicates that, for various reasons, footings and slabs
occasionally crack, causing ceramic tiles and brittle surfaces to become
damaged. Therefore, we recommend that all conventional shallow footings
and slabs-on-grade contain at least a minimum amount of reinforcing steel to
reduce the separation of cracks, should they occur.
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates job No. 97-7189
Carlsbad, California Page 23
10.1 A minimum of steel for continuous footings should include at least four
No. 5 steel bars continuous, with two bars near the bottom of the
footing and two bars near the top. A minimum clearance of 3 inches
shall be maintained between steel reinforcement and the top, bottom
or sides of the footing.
10.2 Isolated square footings should contain, as a minimum, a grid of No. 4
steel bars on 12-inch centers, both ways, with no less than two bars
each way.
10.3 Interior fioor slabs should be a minimum of 5 inches actual thickness
and be reinforced with at least No. 3 steel bars on 18-inch centers,
both ways, placed at midheight in the slab (or 6x6-W2.9xW2.9 welded-
wire mesh mats). Slabs shall be underlain by a 2-inch-thick layer of
clean sand (S.E. = 30 or greater) overlying a moisture retardant
membrane over 2 inches of sand. Slab subgrade soil shall be verified
by a Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. representative to have the
proper moisture content within 48 hours prior to placement of the
vapor barrier and pouring of concrete. Slab thickness may be reduced
to 4 inches if the expansion index of the soils in the upper 4 feet is 50
or lower.
As an option, post-tensioned slabs on-grade may be used in lieu of a
conventionally reinforced slab. However, the perimeter footing shall
be embedded at least 18 inches for soils with an expansion index
below 90, and 24 inches for soils with an expansion index over 90.
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates job No. 97-7189
Carlsbad, California Page 24
We recommend the project Civil/Structural Engineer incorporate
isolation joints and sawcuts to at least one-fourth the thickness of the
slab in any fioor designs. Control joints should not be spaced farther
than every 25 feet for slabs reinforced with rebars, and 15 feet for
slabs reinforced with welded wire fabric. The joints and cuts, if
properly placed, should reduce the potential for and help control floor
slab cracking. However, due to a number of reasons (such as base
preparation, construction techniques, curing procedures, and normal
shrinkage of concrete), some cracking of slabs can be expected.
Control joints shall be placed within 12 hours after concrete placement
and shall penetrate at least one-quarter the slab thickness.
Following placement of any concrete floor slabs, sufflcient drying time
must be allowed prior to placement of floor coverings. Premature
placement of floor coverings may result in degradation of adhesive
materials and loosening ofthe finish floor materials.
Tiled floors shall be provided with an approved isolation sheet to
prevent reflective shrinkage and/or control joint cracking.
NOTE: The project Civil/Structural Engineer shall review all reinforcing
schedules. The reinforcing minimums recommended herein are not to
be construed as structural designs, but merely as minimum safeguards
to reduce possible crack separations. Actual reinforcing requirements
should be provided by the project Structural Engineer for the design
loads and anticipated deflections.
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates Job No. 97-7189
Carlsbad, California Page 25
Based on our laboratory test results and our experience with the soil types on
the subject site, the dense natural soils and properly compacted fill soils
should experience differential angular rotation of less than 1/240 under the
allowable loads. The maximum differential settlement across the structure
and footings when founded on properly compacted fill or dense natural
formation shall be on the order of 1 inch.
11. As a minimum for protection of on-site improvements, it is recommended
that all nonstructural concrete slabs (such as patios, sidewalks, etc.), be
founded on properly compacted, moisture-conditioned and tested fill or dense
native formation and underlain by at least 12 inches of low expansive
potential, properly compacted soils, with 6x6-6/6 welded wire mesh at the
center of the slab, and contain adequate isolation and control joints.
The performance of on-site improvements can be greatly affected by soil
base preparation and the quality of construction. It is therefore important
that all Improvements are properly designed and constructed for the existing
soil conditions. The improvements should not be built on loose soils or fills
placed without our observations and testing. Any rigid improvements
founded on the existing loose surface soils can be expected to undergo
movement and possible damage and is therefore not recommended.
Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. takes no responsibility for the performance
of the improvements built on loose or inadequately compacted fills. Any
exterior area to receive concrete improvements shall be verified for
compaction and moisture within 48 hours prior to concrete placement.
-For exterior slabs with the minimum shrinkage reinforcement, control joints
shall be placed at spaces no farther than 15 feet apart or the width of the
slab, whichever is less, and also at re-entrant corners. Control joints in
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates Job No. 97-7189
Carlsbad, California Page 26
exterior slabs shall be sealed with elastomeric joint sealant. The sealant shall
be inspected every 6 months and be properly maintained. Control joints shall
penetrate at least one-quarter the thickness ofthe slab.
12. Driveway pavement, consisting of Portland cement concrete at least SVi
inches in thickness, may be placed on properly compacted and moisture
conditioned subgrade soils. The concrete shall be at least 3,500 psi
compressive strength, with control joints no farther than 15 feet apart or the
width of the slab, whichever is less, and also at re-entrant corners.
Pavement joints shall be properly sealed with pavement joint sealant, as
required in sections 201.3.6 through 201.3.8 of the Standard Specifications
for Public Work Construction, 2000 Edition. Depending upon the lateral slab
support of the drive, restraining steel dowels may be required in areas that
are not sufficiently restrained.
C. Floor Slab Vaoor Transmission
13. Vapor moisture can cause some problems on moisture sensitive floors, some
fioor sealers, or sensitive equipment in direct contact with the floor, in
addition to mildew and staining on slabs, walls and carpets.
14. The common practice in Southern California is to place vapor retarders made
of PVC, or of polyethylene. PVC retarders are made in thickness ranging
from 10- to 60-mil. Polyethylene retarders, called visqueen, range from 5- to
10-mil in thickness. The thicker the plastic, the stronger the resistance will
be against puncturing.
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates Job No. 97-7189
Carisbad, California Page 27
15. Although polyethylene (visqueen) products are most commonly used,
products such as Vaporshield possess much higher tensile strength and are
more specifically designed for and intended to retard moisture transmission
into concrete slabs. The use of Vaporshield or equivalent is highly
recommended when a structure is intended for moisture-sensitive fioor
coverings or uses.
16. The vapor retarders need to have joints lapped and sealed with mastic or
manufacturer's recommended tape for additional protection. To provide
some protection to the moisture retarder, a layer of at least 2 inches of clean
sand on top and 2 inches at the bottom shall also be provided. No heavy
equipment, stakes or other puncturing instruments shall be used on top of
the liner before or during concrete placement. In actual practice, stakes are
often driven through the retarder material, equipment is dragged or rolled
across the retarder, overlapping or jointing is not properly implemented, etc.
All these construction deficiencies reduce the retarder's effectiveness.
The vapor retarders are not waterproof. They are intended to help prevent
or reduce capillary migration of vapor through the soil into the pores of
concrete slabs. Other waterproofing systems must supplement vapor
retarders if full waterproofing is desired. The owner should be consulted to
determine the specific level of protection required.
D. Retainina Wails
17. The active earth pressure (to be utilized in the design of cantilever retaining
walls utilizing a mixture of on-site or imported, low expansive soils as
backfill) shall be based on an Equivalent Fluid Weight of 45 pounds per cubic
foot (for level backflll and properly drained retaining wall backfill only). The
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates Job No. 97-7189
Carlsbad, California Page 28
designer of the retaining walls shall specify in the retaining wall plans that the
wall backflll shall consist of soils with an expansion index less than 50. The
"wall backfill" shall be all retained material within a distance equal to its
height.
In the event that a retaining wall is surcharged by sloping backfill (of the
same soil type), the design active earth pressure shall be based on the
appropriate Equivalent Fluid Weight presented in the following table:
Height of Slope/Height of Wall*
Slope Ratio 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.0Q(+)
2.0:1.0 52 58 62 63
•Utilization of other than clean sandy soils as backfill or any
encountered adverse geologic conditions in the cut slopes behind walls
will require the use of higher equivalent fluid weights.
In the event that a retaining wall Is to be designed for a restrained condition,
a uniform pressure equal to lOxH (ten times the total height of retained wall,
considered in pounds per square foot) shall be considered as acting
everywhere on the back of the wall in addition to the design Equivalent
Fluid Weight.
Any additional load or surcharge located within a horizontal distance equal to
the height ofthe wall shall be included as extra pressure.
Any loads placed on the active wedge behind a cantilever retaining wall shall
be included in the design by multiplying the load weight by a factor of 0.45,
and 0.62 for restrained retaining walls. The temporary cuts and bottom of
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates job No. 97-7189
Carlsbad, California Page 29
excavation soils during retaining wall construction shall be maintained with
proper moisture until just prior to backfilling.
18. Due to possible buildup of groundwater (derived primarily from rainfall and
irrigation), excess moisture is a common problem in below-grade structures
or behind retaining walls that may be proposed. These problems are
generally in the form of water seepage through walls, mineral staining, mold
growth and high humidity.
Even without the presence of free water, the capillary draw characteristics,
especially of flne grained soils, can result in excessive transmission of water
vapor through walls and floor slabs. In order to reduce the potential for
moisture-related problems to develop at the site, proper and sufficient
ventilation and waterproofing shall be provided for below-ground areas and
the backfill side of all structure retaining walls should be properly
waterproofed and drained.
19. Proper subdrains and free-draining backwall material or geofabric drainage
shall be installed behind all retaining walls (in addition to proper
waterproofing) on the subject project. Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. will
assume no liability for damage to structures or improvements that is
attributable to poor drainage. The architectural plans shall clearly indicate
that the subdrains for any lower-level walls shall be placed at an elevation at
least 1 foot below the bottom of the lower-level slabs. At least 0.5-percent
fall shall be provided for the subdrain. The subdrain shall be placed in an
envelope of crushed rock gravel up to 1 inch in maximum diameter, and be
-wrapped with Mirafi 140N filter or equivalent (see Figure No. VI).
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates
Carlsbad, California
Job No. 97-7189
Page 30
In general, guidelines and requirements of Chapter 18 and its Appendix (UBC
1997 Edition) shall be followed for wall and fioor basement waterproofing.
Proper ventilation (per UBC requirements) shall be provided to the crawl
space areas.
E. Slopes
20. The preliminary grading plan (Revised Tentative Map, Emerald Pointe
Estates) calls for maximum cut and fill slopes up to approximately 30 feet
high, both at an inclination of 2:1 (horizontal to vertical). Review of the
slope stability analyses, for both surfidal and deep-seated stability, indicate
that the proposed grading slopes have factors of safety of 1.5 or greater.
These analyses assume no weak clay seams, no groundwater, and no other
adverse geologic conditions exist In the cut slopes or within the foundation of
fill slopes. In addition, the weakest soil on the slope shall possess at least
one ofthe following combinations of shear strength parameters:
Friction Angle f degrees) Cohesion fpsf)
28 300
29 260
30 225
31 185
30 150
Soil shear strength parameters shall be evaluated using representative
samples of soil composing the slopes.
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates Job No. 97-7189
Carlsbad, California Page 31
We recommend that a geologist from our firm observe all cut slopes during
grading for possible adverse conditions. Additional investigation and analyses
may be required if adverse geologic conditions such as groundwater seepage,
adversely oriented bedding, relatively weak or sheared daystone beds, or
adverse jointing or faulting are encountered. Although buttress fill slopes are
not anticipated, out-of-slope bedding or highly weathered formational
materials encountered during the grading may require the construction of
stability and/or buttress fills if needed.
21. We recommend that all faces of fill slopes be backrolled at maximum 4-foot
fill height intervals during the grading operation. Additionally, we
recommend that all faces of fill slopes be track-walked at the completion of
the rough grading operation so that a dozer track covers all surfaces at least
twice. All cut and fill slopes should be properly drained, planted, and
maintained to control erosion and surface sloughing. No pad runoff water
shall drain over the tops of slopes. All building pads shall drain toward the
front street.
22. If unshored temporary slopes are to be constructed on the site or along the
property lines, design engineers and/or excavation contractors must take into
account any adjacent utility lines or subsurface structures. Geotechnical
Exploration, Inc. has no knowledge as to the location or condition of any
such utility lines, or as to whether any such lines can tolerate slight
vibration-induced by earth movements associated with excavation and/or
shoring of temporary slopes in close proximity to any such lines.
23. -We anticipate that steep temporary slopes may be required on portions of
the site during grading. Based on the results of our fleld investigation and
laboratory tests, it is our opinion that steep temporary slopes may be
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates Job No. 97-7189
Carlsbad, California Page 32
considered in areas where the slope top will be at least 10 feet away from
any existing improvements. The existing soils may be cut to temporary slope
ratios of 1.0 horizontal to 0.75 vertical (for an unsupported period not to
exceed four weeks) for slope heights up to 18 feet.
A representative of Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. should be called to
observe all steep temporary slopes during construction. In the event that
soils and formational material comprising a slope are not as anticipated, any
required slope design changes would be presented at that time.
24. Where not superseded by spedfic recommendations presented in this report,
trenches, excavations, and temporary slopes at the subject site shall be
constructed in accordance with subparagraph (1) paragraph (f), of section
1541 of Title 8, Construction Safety Orders, issued by OSHA.
25. The soils that occur within the proximity of the rim or face of even properly
compacted fill or dense natural ground cut slopes often possess poor lateral
stability. The degree of lateral and vertical deformation depends on the
inherent expansion and strength characteristics of the soil types comprising
the slope, slope steepness and height, loosening of slope face soils by
burrowing rodents, and irrigation and vegetation maintenance practices, as
well as the quality of compaction of fill soils. Structures and other
improvements could suffer damage due to these soil movement factors if not
properly designed to accommodate or withstand such movement.
Foundations and footings of proposed structures, walls, etc., when founded 5
-feet and farther away from the top of compacted fill slopes, may be of
standard design. However, if the proposed foundations and footings are
located closer than 5 feet (or H/3 for slopes 15 feet high or greater) from the
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates job No. 97-7189
Carlsbad, California Page 33
top of compacted fill slopes (where H=height of the slope), they should be
deepened to at least Vh feet below a line beginning at a point 5 feet
horizontally and to provide a daylight distance of at least H/3 inside the fill
slopes (for slopes with heights of 15 feet or higher) and projected outward
and downward, parallel to the face of the fill slope (see Figure No. IV).
Special reinforcement and design considerations should be provided by the
Structural Engineer for all improvements within 5 feet of the top of fill slopes,
due to the anticipated "creeping" movement of the underlying fill soils. As a
general rule, the recommended setback from the slope face is a minimum of
5 feet and a maximum of H/3 for slopes 15 feet in height or higher.
26. Rigid improvements such as top-of-slope walls, columns, decorative planters,
concrete fiatwork, swimming pools and other similar types of improvements
can be expected to display varying degrees of separation typical of
improvements constructed at the top of a slope. The separations result
primarily from slope top lateral and vertical soil deformation processes.
These separations often occur regardless of being underlain by cut or fill
slope material. Proximity to a slope top is oft:en the primary factor afl^ecting
the degree of separations occurring.
Typical and to-be-expected separations can range from minimal to up to 1
inch or greater in width. In order to minimize the effect of slope-top lateral
soil deformation, we recommend that the top-of-slope improvements be
designed with fiexible connections and joints in rigid structures so that the
separations do not result in visually apparent cracking damage and/or can be
cosmetically dressed as part of the ongoing property maintenance. These
•fiexible connections may indude "slip joints" In wrought iron fendng, evenly
spaced vertical joints in block walls or fences, control joints with flexible
caulking in exterior flatwork improvements, etc.
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates job No. 97-7189
Carlsbad, California Page 34
In addition, use of planters to provide separation between top-of-slope
hardscape such as patio slabs and pool decking from top-of-slope walls can
aid greatly in redudng cosmetic cracking and separations in exterior
Improvements. Actual materials and techniques would need to be
determined by the project architect or the landscape architect for individual
properties. Steel dowels placed in flatwork may prevent noticeable vertical
dlfl^erentlals, but if provided with a slip-end they may still allow some lateral
displacement.
27. It Is recommended that all compacted fill slopes and natural cut slopes be
planted with an erosion resistant plant, in conformance with the requirements
of the City of Carlsbad.
F. Site Drainage Considerations
28. Subdrains shall be Installed under any canyon fills. The subdrains shall be
placed in an envelope of gravel and wrapped with filter doth. If stabilization
fills or buttresses are required during grading, subdrains shall also be
required where recommended by our firm.
29. Groundwater was not encountered during the course of our field
investigation, and we do not expect groundwater to cause significant
problems if the property is developed as presently designed. It should be
kept in mind, however, that any required additional grading operations may
change surface drainage patterns and/or reduce permeabilities due to the
densification of compacted soils. Such changes of surface and subsurface
•hydrologic conditions, plus irrigation of landscaping or significant increases in
rainfall, may result in the appearance of minor amounts of surface or near-
surface water at locations where none existed previously. The damage from
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates Job No. 97-7189
Carlsbad, California Page 35
such water is expected to be minor and cosmetic in nature. If good positive
drainage is implemented at the completion of construction. Corrective action
should be taken on a site-specific basis if and when it becomes necessary.
Any significant seepage observed during grading will be reported to the
contractor for corrective work. Additional recommendations will be provided
as warranted.
30. Adequate measures shall be taken to properly finish-grade the site to prevent
ponding or erosion, specifically of the slopes. Drainage waters from this site
and adjacent properties are to be directed away from building pads and
slopes, onto the natural drainage direction for this area or into properly
designed and approved drainage facilities. Roof gutters and downspouts
should be installed on all structures, with runoff directed away from the
foundations via closed drainage lines. Proper subsurface and surface
drainage will help minimize the potential for waters to seek the level of the
bearing soils under the building pads. Failure to observe this
recommendation could result in excessive uplift or undermining and
differential settlement of the future structures and improvements on the site.
We recommend that the minimum gradient around the structures be not less
than 5 percent in the nearest 5 feet to structures.
31. Appropriate erosion-control measures shall be taken at all times during
construction to prevent surface runoff waters from entering footing
excavations and ponding on finished building pads or running uncontrolled
over the tops of newly constructed cut or fill slopes. Particular care should be
taken to prevent saturation of any temporary construction slopes.
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates job No. 97-7189
Carlsbad, California Page 36
32. Sediment accumulation and standing water along street curbs is a common
occurrence after construction of a residence or subdivision, most often as a
result of excess irrigation and/or relatively level street grades. Continual
slow water fiow from yard drainage systems into street swales oftien results
In curb areas that remain wet, muddy or support moss growth and algae.
During high water flow conditions (such as during a heavy rainfall), the
velocity of the water will most likely carry the sediments and dear the curb
area. However, during low water flow (such as continual slow draining of
yard area drains Into the curb outlets), the slow velocity allows silts and fine
sands to deposit and accumulate. Heavily landscaped yards, the presence of
cut ground lots that create near-surface perched water conditions, and
relatively level streets with shallow gradients to storm drain inlets all
contribute to wet and muddy curb conditions. It is the responsibility of the
project Civil Engineer to design adequate street/curb surface drainage.
It is recommended that the future homeowners be advised as to the
irrigation-related cause(s) of persistent water and sedimentation in the street
curb areas. If street curb flow from yard area drains is not considered
acceptable, we may be contacted by the project Civil Engineer to discuss the
design ofa yard area discharge collection system.
33. Planter areas, flower beds, and planter boxes shall be sloped to drain away
from the foundations, footings, and floor slabs at a gradient of at least 5
percent within 5 feet from the perimeter walls. Any planter areas adjacent to
the building or surrounded by concrete improvements shall be provided with
suffident area drains to help with rapid runoff disposal. No water shall be
-allowed to pond adjacent to the building or other improvements. Closed
planter boxes shall be constructed with a sealed bottom and a subsurface
drain, installed in gravel, with the direction of subsurface and surface flow
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates job No. 97-7189
Carlsbad, California Page 37
away from structures, to an adequate drainage fadlity. Suffident area drains
shall be placed In landscape areas to provide a fast runoff disposal. The
landscape surface shall be provided with effective flow lines and gradients to
reduce water ponding throughout the project. Roof gutter and downspouts
shall be tied to storm drain lines.
G. General Recommendations
34. In order to minimize any work delays at the subject site during site
development, this flrm should be contacted at least 24 hours prior to any
need for observation of slopes or fleld density testing.
35. Design of the street pavement sections was not induded within the scope of
this report. Pavement sections will depend largely on the street subgrade soil
conditions exposed aflier grading and the expected traffic load, and should be
based on R-value test results. These tests should be performed aflier
completion of the rough grading operation.
X. LIMITATIONS
It should be noted that all recommendations are of a preliminary nature and subject
to change, based upon review of your flnal grading and building plans, and our
observations during grading. Our preliminary condusions and recommendations
have been based on the available data obtained from our report reviews, fleld
investigation and laboratory analysis, as well as our experience with the soils and
formation materials in this area of the City of Carlsbad.
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates job No. 97-7189
Carlsbad, California Page 38
Of necessity, we must assume a certain degree of continuity between exploratory
excavations and/or natural exposures. It is, therefore, necessary that all
obsen/ations, conclusions, and recommendations be verified at the time grading
operations begin. In the event discrepancies are noted, additionai
recommendations may be issued, if required. This report has been prepared for
design purposes only, and may not be sufficient to prepare an accurate bid for the
grading work.
The work performed and recommendations presented herein are the result of an
Investigation and analysis that meet the contemporary standard of care in our
profession within the County of San Diego. No warranty is provided.
This report should be considered valid for a period of two (2) years, and is subject
to review by our firm following that time. If significant modifications are made to
the grading plans, espedally with respect to the height and location of any proposed
cuts and fills, this report should be presented to us for immediate review and
possible revision. The firm of Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. shall not be held
responsible for changes to the physical condition of the property, such as addition
of fill soils or changing drainage patterns, which occur subsequent to Issuance of
this report.
This firm does not practice or consult in the fleld of safety engineering. We do not
direct the contractor's operations, and we cannot be responsible for the safety of-
personnel other than our own on the site; the safety of others is the responsibility
of the contractor. The contractor should notify the owner If he considers any of the
recommended actions presented herein to be unsafe.
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates
Carlsbad, California Job No. 97-7189
Page 39
It is the responsibility of the owner and/or developer to ensure that the
recommendations summarized in the report are carried out in the field operations
and that our recommendations for design of the project are incorporated in the
building and grading plans. Our firm should review the grading and the building
plans when they become available and before grading starts.
This opportunity to be of service is sincerely appredated. Should you have any
questions regarding this matter, please contact the undersigned. Reference to our
Job No. 97-7189 will help to expedite a response to your inquiries.
Respectfully submitted,
GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC.
Jay*^. Falser
Senior Project Geologist
Jaime A. Cerros, P.E.
R.C.E. 34422/G.E. 2007
Senior Geotechnical Engineer
C.E.G. 999i:exp. 3-3i-03i/R.G. 3391
JKH/JAC/LDR/pj
REFERENCES
JOB NO. 97-7189
April 2002
Association of Engineering Geologists, 1973, Geology and Earthquake Hazards, Planners Guide to the Seismic
D u Southern Califomia Section, Association of Engineering Geologists, Special Publication,
rublisned July 1973, p. 44.
Berger & Schug, 1991, Probabilistic Evaluation of Seismic Hazard in the San Diego-Tijuana Metropolitan
Region, Environmental Perils, San Diego Region, San Diego Association of Geologists.
Bryant, W.A. and E.W. Hart, 1973 (10* Revision 1997), Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in Califomia, Calif. Div. of
Mines and Geology, Special Publication 42.
California Division of Mines and Geology - Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zones Map, November 1, 1991.
City of San Diego Seismic Safety Element, revised 1995, Map Sheet 29.
Clarke, S.H., H.G. Greene, M.P. Kennedy and J.G. Vedder, 1987, Geologic Map of the Inner-Southem
California Continental Margin in H.G. Greene and M.P. Kennedy (editors),.Calif ornia Continental Margin Map
Senes, Map IA, Calif. Div. of Mines and Geology, scale 1:250,000.
Crowell, J.C, 1962, Displacement along the San Andreas Fault, Califomia; Geologic Society of America Special Paper 71, 61 p.
Gray, C.H Jr., M.P. Kennedy and P.K. Morton, 1971, Petroleum Potential of Southem Coastal and Mountain
Area, California, American Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 15, p. 372-383.
Greene, H.G., 1979, Implication of Fault Pattems in the Inner Califomia Continental Borderland between San
Pedro and San Diego, in "Earthquakes and Other Perils, San Diego Region," P.L. Abbott and W.J Elliott
editors. '
Greensfelder, R.W., 1974, Maximum Credible Rock Acceleration fmm Earthquakes in Califomia; Califomia
Division of Mines and Geology, Map Sheet 23.
Hart, E.W., D.P. Smith and R.B. Saul, 1979, Summary Report: Fault Evaluation Program, 1978 Area
(Peninsular Ranges-Salton Trough Region), Calif. Div. of Mines and Geology, OFR 79-10 SF, 10.
Hauksson, E. and L. Jones, 1988, The July 1988 Oceanside (M, = 5.3) Earthquake Sequence in the
Contenental Borderland, Southern California Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, v. 78, p. 1885-
Hileman, J.A., CR. Allen and J.M. Nordquist, 1973, Seismicity of the Southem Califomia Region, January 1
1932 to December 31, 1972; Seismological Laboratory, Cal-Tech, Pasadena, Calif.
Kennedy, M.P., 1975, Geology of the San Diego Metropolitan Area, California; Bulletin 200, Calif Div of Mines and Geology.
Kerinedy, M.P., and S.H. Clarke, 2001, Late Quatemary Faulting in San Diego Bay and Hazard to the Coronado
Bndge, California Geology, July/August 2001.
Kennedy, M.P. and S.H. Clarke, 1997A, Analysis of Late Quatemary Faulting in San Diego Bay and Hazard to
the Coronado Bridge, Calif. Div. of Mines and Geology Open-file Report 97-1 OA.
Page 2
Kennedy, M.P. and S.H. Clarke, 1997B, Age of Faulting in San Diego Bay in the Vicinity of the Coronado
Bridge, an addendum to Analysis of Late Quaternary Faulting in San Diego Bay and Hazard to the Coronado
Bridge, Calif. Div. of Mines and Geology Open-file Report 97-1 OB.
Kennedy, M.P., S.H. Clarke, H.G. Greene, R.C. Jachens, V.E. Langenheim, J.J. More and D.M. Bums, 1994, A
Digital (GIS) Geological/Geophysical/Seismological Data Base for the San Diego 30-x60' Quadrangle, California
~ A New Generation, Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 26, p. 63.
Kennedy, M.P. and G.W. Moore, 1971, Stratigraphic Relations of Upper Cretaceous and Eocene Formations,
San Diego Coastal Area, California, American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 55, p. 709-722.
Kennedy, M.P., S.S. Tan, R.H. Chapman and G.W. Chase, 1975, Character and Recency of Faulting, San
Diego Metropolitan Area, California, Calif. Div. of Mines and Geology Special Report 123, 33 pp.
Kennedy, M.P. and E.E. Welday, 1980, Character and Recency of Faulting Offshore, metropolitan San Diego
California, Calif. Div. of Mines and Geology Map Sheet 40, 1:50,000.
Kem, J.P. and T.K. Rockwell, 1992, Chronology and Deformation of Quaternary Marine Shorelines, San Diego
County, Califomia in Heath, E, and L. Lewis (editors). The Regressive Pleistocene Shoreline, Coastal Southern
California, pp. 1-8.
Lindvall, S.C. and T.K. Rockwell, 1995, Holocene Activity of the Rose Canyon Fault Zone in San Diego,
California, Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 100, no. B-12, p. 24121-24132.
McEuen, R.B. and CJ. Pinckney, 1972, Seismic Risk In San Diego; Transactions of the San Diego Society of
Natural History, Vol. 17, No. 4, 19 July 1972.
Moore, G.W. and M.P. Kennedy, 1975, Quaternary Faults in San Diego Bay, Caiifornia, U.S.Geological Survey
Journal of Research, v. 3, p. 589-595.
Richter, C.G., 1958, Elementary Seismology, W.H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco, Calif.
Rockwell, T.K., D.E. Millman, R.S. McElwain, and D.L. Lamar, 1985, Study of Seismic Activity by Trenching
Along the Glen Ivy North Fault, Elsinore Fault Zone, Southern California: Lamar-Merifield Technical Report 85-
1, U.S.G.S. Contract 14-08-0001-21376, 19 p.
Simons, R.S., 1977, Seismicity of San Diego, 1934-1974, Seismological Society of America Bulletin, v. 67, p.
809-826.
Tan, S.S., 1995, Landslide Hazards in Southern Part of San Diego Metropolitan Area, San Diego County, Calif.
Div. of Mines and Geology Open-file Report 95-03.
Toppozada, T.R. and D.L. Parke, 1982, Areas Damaged by California Earthquakes, 1900-1949; Calif. Div. of
Mines and Geology, Open-file Report 82-17, Sacramento, Calif.
Treiman, J.A., 1993, The Rose Canyon Fault Zone, Southern California, Calif. Div. of Mines and Geology Open-
file Report 93-02, 45 pp, 3 plates.
U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, 1953, Aerial Photographs AXN-8M-71 and 72.
SITE MAP
«y fiOCKi FELLER , - -"
a ;
I5f
Proposed Ennerald Pointe Estates
APN-212-040-50
Carlsbad, CA.
Figure No. la
Job No. 97-7189
LEGEND
T-11
ASSUMED SUBDIVISION BOUNDARY
APPROXIMATE EXISTING
TOPOGRAPHY (feet)
APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF
EXPLORATORY TRENCH
/
T-l
Geologic Legend
Fuvem-mw
' SanfitegoFomiaton
Eocma-a^
TH /T{ OBlMarandFrkuv
1/
-%;T-11
T-4
SCALE: r = loa
^^^^^
T-e . y
7 \
\
/V
T-3
Xj(Assumed Ceologic\fonfacf)
1 30
97-7189-P2 LAtmL Tim
REFERENCE: This Plot Pian luafi prepared from
an existing CAD dratufng file provided by
Hunsaker 4 Assocfates SP, Inc. and from on-sfte
ffeld reconnafssance performed by CiEI.
NOTE; This Plot Plon is not to be used for legoi
purposes. Locations and dimensions are approxi-
mate. Actual property dimensions ond locations
of utilities may lie obtained from tlie Approved
Building Plans or thie "As-Built" Groding Plons.
PL Of PLAN and
GEOLOGIC MAP
l^n^posBd ErrmeJd Pt^nto EstBtas
APN-212-040-S0
Carlsbad, CA.
Figure No. I
Job No. 97-7189
GootccfinlMl
Exploratton, Inc.
Apnl 2002
I
I
EQUIPMENT
Case Backhoe
DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION
2' X 10' X 6' Trench
DATE LOGGED
1-23-98
SURFACE ELEVATION
± 205' Mean Sea Level
GROUNDWATER DEPTH
Not encountered
LOGGED BY
JKH
HELD DESCRIPTION
AND
CUSSIFICATtON
DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS
(Grain size. Density, Moisture, Color) Ms
O 3
a s.
d CO Sf
Wo i5 8 m o
o o
30
2 -
SILTY CLAY with some sand and root
Stiff to firm. Moist. Dark brown
TOPSOIL
CL/
CH
3 -
7 -
18 -
SILTY SANDSTONE, highly fractured
and weathered. Medium dense to
dense. Damp. Tan-gray and
1ight brown.
WEATHERED FORMATION
SANDSTONE, well cemented wiTh same
concretions. Very dense. Damp.
Tan-gray.
FORMATION
ML
SM
Bottom of hole @ 6
I
I
y WATER TABLE
13 LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
ED IN-PUCE SAMPLE
• DRIVE SAMPLE
SAND CONE/F.D.T.
CONTINUOUS CORE SAMPLE
JOB NAME BCS Property - APN 212-040-50
SITE LOCATION East of Laurel Tree Koaa &
North of Cobblestone Road, Carlsbad, CA
JOB NUMBER
97-71.89
RGURE NUMBER
I la
REVIEWED BY
OD
LOG No.
T*1
EQUIPMENT
Case Backhoe
DIMENSION 4 TlTPE OF EXCAVATION
2' X 10' X 7' Trench
OATE LOGGED
1-23-98
SURFACE ELEVATION
± 214' Mean Sea Level
GROUNDWATER DEPTH
Not encountered
LOGGED BY
JKH
nELD DESCRIPTION
ANO
CUSSinCATION
DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS
(Grain size, Densiiy. Moisture, Color)
CO u
CO
UJ Ul
a.. " o
MS
LU
oat
o a.
to
' a
Sf
+ r
CO
oa o
o
UJ?0'
COv
SILTY CLAY with some sand and roots
Soft to firm. Moist. Dark brown.
TOPSOIL
CL/
CH
16.6 112 -198
2 -
k -
5 -
6 -
0 _
SILTY FINE SAND/SANDY SILT with
some roots and abundant caliche
beds, iron oxide staining, very
punky and porous. Medium dense.
IDry to damp. Dark gray-brown and
jwfu te.
SILTY SANDSTONE, more massive and
well indurated with 3"-4" thick
caliche beds. Medium dense. Damp.
Tan-brown and white.
WEATHERED FORMATION
SM/
ML
18.9 92.3 19.5 107 86
SM
SILTY SANDSTONE, well cemented,
Dense. Damp. Tan-gray.
FORMATION
SM
Bottom of hole @ 7'
UBC EXPANSION INDEX
i
y WATER TABLE
13 LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
[2 IN-PUCE SAMPLE
• DRIVE SAMPLE
SAND CONE/F.D.T.
CONTINUOUS CORE SAMPLE
JOB NAME BCS Property - APN 212-040-50
SITE LOCATION East of Laurel Tree Koaa &
North of Cobblestone Road, Carlsbad, CA
JOB NUMBER
97-7189
RGURE NUMBER
I Ib
REVIEWED BY
OD
LOG No.
T-2
EQUIPMENT
Case Backhoe
SURFACE ELEVATION
± 236' Mean Sea Level
DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION
2' x 20' x 7.5' Trench
GROUNDWATER DEPTH
Not encountered
OATE LOGGED
1-23-98
LOGGED BY
JKH
HELD DESCRIPTION
AND
CLASSIFICATION
DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS
(Grain size. Density, Moisture. Color)
CO o vi CL. ^
si SLiQ
'2
So
Ul
ii
o
is
= CO
o a
MS
S 8 ^ o m o
o
tlJf>)
SILTY CLAY with some sand and roots
Soft to firm. Moist. Dark brown.
TOPSOIL
CL/
CH
1
SILTY SANDSTONE, moderately well
cemented with some shell and
caliche beds (pockets). Medium
dense to dense. Damp. Tan-gray
and 1ight brown.
WEATHERED FORMATION
- becomes more dense, but caliche
beds still prsent at 5-5'
SM
6.6 84.0
8 -
•9 -
SILTY SANDSTONE, well cemented
Dense. Damp. Tan-gray and
1i ght brown.
FORMATION
SM
Bottom of hole @ 7.5
y WATER TABLE
^ LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
Q] IN-PUCE SAMPLE
• DRIVE SAMPLE
S SAND CONE/F.D.T.
^ CONTINUOUS CORE SAMPLE
JOB NAME
BCS Property - APN 212-040-50 y WATER TABLE
^ LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
Q] IN-PUCE SAMPLE
• DRIVE SAMPLE
S SAND CONE/F.D.T.
^ CONTINUOUS CORE SAMPLE
SITE LOCATION East of Laurel Tree Roaa 6
North of Cobblestone Road, Carlsbad, CA
y WATER TABLE
^ LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
Q] IN-PUCE SAMPLE
• DRIVE SAMPLE
S SAND CONE/F.D.T.
^ CONTINUOUS CORE SAMPLE
JOB NUMBER
97-71-89
REVIEWED BY LOG No.
T-3
y WATER TABLE
^ LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
Q] IN-PUCE SAMPLE
• DRIVE SAMPLE
S SAND CONE/F.D.T.
^ CONTINUOUS CORE SAMPLE
RGURE NUMBER
1 Ic
REVIEWED BY LOG No.
T-3
I
I
I
I
I
EQUIPMENT DIMENSION k TYPE OF EXCAVATION DATE LOGGED
Case Backhoe 2' X 10' x 6' Trench 1-23-98
SURFACE ELEVATION GROUNDWATER DEPTH LOGGED BY
± 230' Mean Sea Level Not encountered JKH
1
HELD DESCRIPTION
AMD
CLASSIRCATION
DESCRIPTION ANO REMARKS
(Grain size. Density, Moisture, Color)
to ci
CO
UJUJ
Q. „
" o
Ms
o'ln
So
. UJ
03
o a.
S CO
3| O
sr
SM
-I- I
S 8 O.D. 0.3:
au
CO 0
1 -
SILTY CLAY with some sand and root
Soft to firm. Moist. Dark brown.
TOPSOIL
CL/I
CH
J — SILTSTONE with some clay, slightly
weathered. Firm. Moist. Dark
gray-green and orange.
SILTSTONE/CLAYSTONE, moderately
undurated. Stiff. Damp to moist,
Dark gray-green and orange.
FORMATION
ML
ML/
MC
Bottom of hole @ 6'
UBC EXPANSION INDEX
24.4 99.9 9.5 107 93 A65
I
I
I
y WATER TABLE
^ LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
Q] IN-PUCE SAMPLE
• DRIVE SAMPLE
SAND CONE/F.D.T.
CONTINUOUS CORE SAMPLE
JOB NAME BCS Property - APN 212-040-50
SITE LOCATION East of Laurel Tree Koaa &
North of Cobblestone Road, Carlsbad, CA
JOB NUMBER
97-7T89
RGURE NUMBER
I Id
REVIEWED BY
JO
LOG No.
T-4
I
I
^ EQUIPMENT
' Case Backhoe
DIMENSION 4 TYPE OF EXCAVATION
2' X 20' c 7' Trench
DATE LOGGED ^
1-23-98
SURFACE ELEVATION
± 245' Mean Sea Level
GROUNDWATER DEPTH
Not encountered
LOGGED BY
JKH
HELD DESCRIPTION
AND
CLASSinCATIOM
DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS
(Groin size. Density, Moisture, Color)
Ul UJ
r
I o
1
§s
So
lae
ss Sf
+ I
I §8
a
ci
Q.X
a<-9
SILTY CLAY with some sand and roots
Soft. Moist. Dark brown.
TOPSOIL
Cl/
CH
-m^:^ 1
SILTY SANDSTONE with caliche beds,
moderately well cemented. Medium
dense to dense. Dry to damp.
Tan-gray and light brown.
3" to 4" thick caliche beds with
dense Sandstone layers between.
WEATHERED FORMATION
SM
14.4 111.3
SILTY SANDSTONE, moderately well
cemented. Dense. Damp. Tan-gray
and orange.
FORMATION
8 -
'9 -
0 J
Bottom of hole @ 7
b y WATER TABLE
' m LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
1 Q] IN-PUCE SAMPLE
" • DRIVE SAMPLE
• dl SAND CONE/F.D.T.
• ^ CONTINUOUS CORE SAMPLE
JOB NAMEg^g Property - APN 212-040-50 b y WATER TABLE
' m LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
1 Q] IN-PUCE SAMPLE
" • DRIVE SAMPLE
• dl SAND CONE/F.D.T.
• ^ CONTINUOUS CORE SAMPLE
SITE LOCATION East of Laurel Tree Roaa &
North of Cobblestone Road, Carlsbad, CA
b y WATER TABLE
' m LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
1 Q] IN-PUCE SAMPLE
" • DRIVE SAMPLE
• dl SAND CONE/F.D.T.
• ^ CONTINUOUS CORE SAMPLE
JOB NUMBER
97-7189
REVIEWED BY LOG No.
T-5
b y WATER TABLE
' m LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
1 Q] IN-PUCE SAMPLE
" • DRIVE SAMPLE
• dl SAND CONE/F.D.T.
• ^ CONTINUOUS CORE SAMPLE
RGURE NUMBER
1 le
REVIEWED BY LOG No.
T-5
EQUIPMENT
Case Backhoe
SURFACE ELEVATION
± 252' Mean Sea Level
DIMENSION 4 TITPE OF EXCAVATION
2' X 10' X 6' Trench
GROUNDWATER DEPTH
Not encountered
DATE LOGGED
1-23-98
LOGGED BY
JKH
HELD DESCRIPTION
ANO
CLASSIHCATIOH ^1 S.
DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS
(Grain size. Density, Moisture, Color)
CO ci I CO I I
KM
Ms
si M
UJ
O 3
s^
is
= CO
gs ,D.D.^ + 1
Sf Sf
S 8
Q
O BLOW COUNTS. SAMPLE (INCHES] 1 -/>
SILTY CLAY, with some sand and
roots. Soft to firm. Moist.
Dark brown.
- some caliche (pockets)
TOPSOIL
CL/"A" I Horizo^
CH
cu11 i vated
'B" HorizoJ
SILTSTONE with some clay, slightly
weathered and fractured. Firm.
Moist. Dark gray-green and orange
ML 19.4 92.0
wi tj
19.5
cal ic
107 86 Ago
SILTSTONE/CLAYSTONE, moderately
indurated. Stiff. Damp. Dark
gray-green and orange.
\ FORMATION
ML/
18.3 100.9 94 *70
Bottom of hole @ 6'
UBC EXPANSION INDEX
y WATER TABLE
S LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
D] IN-PUCE SAMPLE
• DRIVE SAMPLE
SAND CONE/F.D.T.
CONTINUOUS CORE SAMPLE
JOB NAME BCS Property - APN 212-040-50
SITE LOCATION East of Laurel Tree Koaa &
North of Cobblestone Road, Carlsbad, CA
JOB NUMBER
97-7189
RGURE NUMBER
I if
REVIEWED BY LOG No.
T-6
EQUIPMENT
Case Backhoe
DIMENSION 4 TYPE OF EXCAVATION
2' X 10' X 6' Trench
OATE LOGGED
1-23-98
SURFACE ELEVATION
± 256' Mean Sea Level
GROUNDWATER DEPTH
Not encountered
LOGGED BY
JKH
RELD DESCRIPTION
ANO
CUSSinCATION
DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS
(Grain size. Density, Moisture, Color)
c/1 ci ui Q. CO
f
uj"—'
MS
S.CO
IS
UJ
i
i o
s
t a
Sf
c/1 s
SM S 8 m8
o
o
UJVJ
SILTY CLAY with some sand and
roots. Soft to firm. Moist.
Dark brown.
- some caliche pockets
TOPSOIL
CL
SILTSTONE with some clay, slightly
weathered and fractured. Firm.
Moist. Dark gray-green and orange
SILTSTONE/CLAYSTONE, moderately
indurated. Stiff. Damp. Dark
gray-green and orange.
FORMATION
Bottom of hole 0 6'
ML
ML/
CL
22.2
y WATER TABLE
S LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
Q] IN-PUCE SAMPLE
• DRIVE SAMPLE
[s] SAND CONE/F.D.T.
^ CONTINUOUS CORE SAMPLE
JOB NAME BCS Property - APN 212-040-50
SITE LOCATION East of Laurel Tree Koaa 6
North of Cobblestone Road, Carlsbad, CA
JOB NUMBER
97-71«9
RGURE NUMBER
Ilg
REVIEWED BY LOG No.
T-7
EQUIPMENT
Case Backhoe
DIMENSION 4 TYPE OF EXCAVATION
2' X 10' X 6' Trench
QATE LOGGED
1-23-98
SURFACE ELEVATION
± 258' Mean Sea Level
GROUNDWATER DEPTH
Not encountered
LOGGED BY
JKH
P Q-
nELD DESCRIPTION
AND
CLASSinCATION
DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS
(Grain size. Density, Moisture, Color)
to
ci
if
Ul UJ M^
Q. .
I O E3 o —
Sc u a a.
is
S CO
gs
a o
Sf
M o Q. • Z3 O CD U
O
o
0.x ac3
1 -
2 -
-t:
_1
15 -
.6
km
Mm
SILTY CLAY with some sand. Soft
to firm. Moist. Dark brown.
TOPSOIL
CL/
CH
SILTY SANDSTONE with slight calich
fractured and weathered. Dense.
Damp. Tan-gray and light brown.
SM
WEATHERED FORMATION
f SILTY SANDSTONE, well cemented.
Dense. Damp. Tan-gray.
FORMATION
SM
7 -
8 -
Bottom of hole @ 6'
• y WATER TABLE
• 13 LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
I Q] IN-PUCE SAMPLE
' • DRIVE SAMPLE
• S SAND CONE/F.D.T.
• ^ CONTINUOUS CORE SAMPLE
JOB NAME „
BCS Property - APN 212-040-50 • y WATER TABLE
• 13 LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
I Q] IN-PUCE SAMPLE
' • DRIVE SAMPLE
• S SAND CONE/F.D.T.
• ^ CONTINUOUS CORE SAMPLE
SITE LOCATION East of Laurel Tree Koaa &
North of Cobblestone Road, Carlsbad, CA
• y WATER TABLE
• 13 LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
I Q] IN-PUCE SAMPLE
' • DRIVE SAMPLE
• S SAND CONE/F.D.T.
• ^ CONTINUOUS CORE SAMPLE
JOB NUMBER
97-71^9
REVIEWED BY LOG No.
T-8
• y WATER TABLE
• 13 LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
I Q] IN-PUCE SAMPLE
' • DRIVE SAMPLE
• S SAND CONE/F.D.T.
• ^ CONTINUOUS CORE SAMPLE
RGURE NUMBER
1 Ih
REVIEWED BY LOG No.
T-8
EQUIPMENT
Case Backhoe
DIMENSION 4 TYPE OF EXCAVATION
2' X 10' X 6' Trench
DATE LOGGED
1-23-98
SURFACE ELEVATION
± 262' Mean Sea Level
GROUNDWATER DEPTH
Not encountered
LOGGED BY
JKH
OELD DESCRIPTION
AND
CLASSIRCATION
DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS
^ (Groin size. Density, Moisture. Color)
to
^ I
3 Sa
MS a. to
I S
IS
S CO
Sf
CO o 2 8 2 O CQ O
a
UlCO"
Q.X
au
SILTY CLAY with some sand and
roots. Soft to firm. Moist.
Dark brown.
TOPSOIL
CL/
CH
»9 -
SILTSTONE with some clay, slightly
weathered and fractured. Firm.
Moist. Dark gray-green and orange
MC
10.8
SILTSTONE/CLAYSTONE, moderately
indurated. Stiff. Damp. Dark
gray-green and orange.
FORMAT I ON
MLy
CL
Bottom of hole @ 6'
I
I
I
y WATER TABLE
K LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
Q] IN-PUCE SAMPLE
• ORIVE SAMPLE
SAND CONE/F.D.T
CONTINUOUS CORE SAMPLE
JOB NAME BCS Property - APN 212-040-50
SITE LOCATION East of Laurel Tree Koaa s
North of Cobblestone Road, Carlsbad, CA
JOB NUMBER
97-71-89
RGURE NUMBER
I I i
REVIEWED BY LOG No.
T-9
I ^EQUIPMENT
Case Backhoe
DIMENSION 4 TYPE OF EXCAVATION
2' X 10' X 6' Trench
DATE LOGGED >
1-23-98
SURFACE ELEVATION
±242' Mean Sea Level
GROUNDWATER DEPTH
Not encountered
LOGGED BY
JKH
1 00
m
RELD DESCRIPTION
AND
CLASSIRCATION
DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS
(Groin size, Density. Moisture, Color)
^1 .a
<^ I Mil MS
Ui-S 4.S =3 I Sa l So
41
, UJ
i.OC
o a
:-0
! CO ; z UJ o
Sf
1/5 O £ s 2 8 2 o
CQ o
d
Q.X SO
2 -
4
5
6 ^
7 -
'8
"9 -
0 _:
SILTY CLAY with some sand and root
Soft to firm. Moist. Dark brown.
some caliche pockets
TOPSOU
CL,
CHi
SILTSTONE with some clay, slightly
weatheTed and fractured. Firm.
Moist. Dark gray-green and orange
ML
SILTSTONE/CLAYSTONE, moderately
indurated. Stiff. Damp. Dark
gray-green and orange.
FORMATION
ML/
MC
Bottom of hole @ 6'
i
I
I
y WATER TABLE
^ LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
D] IN-PUCE SAMPLE
• DRIVE SAMPLE
[E SAND CONE/F.D.T.
^ CONTINUOUS CORE SAMPLE
JOB NAME BCS Property - APN 212-040-50
SITE LOCATION East of Laurel Tree Koaa &
North of Cobblestone Road, Carlsbad, CA
JOB NUMBER
97-71-89
RGURE NUMBER
I I J
REVIEWED BY
DD
LOG No.
T-10
f EQUIPMENT DIMENSION 4 TYPE OF EXCAVATION DATE LOGGED ^
1 Case Backhoe 2' X 10' X 6' Trench 1-23-98
1 SURFACE ELEVATION GROUNDWATER DEPTH LOGGED BY
1 ± 225' Mean Sea Level Not encountered JKH
RELD DESCRIPTION
ANO
CLASSIRCATION
DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS
(Grain size. Density, Moisture, Color)
CO
o t/i
2 1
s a So
CO
s SM
o d
~cj
1 -
SILTY CLAY with some sand and root
Soft to firm. Moist. Dark brown
TOPSOIL
CL
CH
l-» —
t
6 _
SILTSTONE with some clay, slightly
weathered and fractured. Firm.
Moist. Dark gray-green and orange
ML
SILTSTONE/CLAYSTONE, moderately
indurated. Stiff. Damp. Dark
gray-green and orange.
FORMATION
ML/
MC
Bottom of hole @ 6'
y WATER TABLE
13 LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
Q] IN-PUCE SAMPLE
• DRIVE SAMPLE
[f] SAND CONE/F.D.T.
^ CONTINUOUS CORE SAMPLE
JOB NAME „
BCS Property - APN 212-040-50
STTE LOCATION East of Laurel free Koaa &
North of Cobblestone Road, Carlsbad, CA
JOB NUMBER
97-71^9
REVIEWED BY LOG No.
T-11 RGURE NUMBER
1 Ik
REVIEWED BY LOG No.
T-11
REGIONAL FAULT MAP
PACIFIC
ocEm
COMPILED FROM CDMG AND UCSD MAPS
Fault Map of southem California.
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 miles
1 \itim itmii iiiiMji
i^imi^v
mm
30 60 km
140 LABORATORY SOIL DATA SUMMARY
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
DATA 1 * 2* 3
APPARENT COHESION (psf) 260 300
APPARENT FRICTION ANGLE 29° 28'
100
SPECIFIC GRAVITY
ZERO AIR VOIDS CURVES
10 20 30
LABORATORY COMPACTION TEST
SOIL
TYPE SOIL CLASSIFICATION BORING
No.
TRENCH
No. DEPTH
1 SILTY CLAY.with some sand. Dark brown. T-2 1.5'
2 SILTSTONE with some clay. Dark gray-green. T-6 4'
3
SWELL TEST DATA 1 2a 2b
INITIAL DRY DENSITY (pcf) 98.2 92.8 100.0
INITIAL HATER CONTENT {%) 15.5 19.6 24.2
LOAD (psf) 144 144 144
UBC EXPANSION INDEX 198 90 65
FIGURE NUMBER I I la
JOB NUMBER 97-7189
4D
10
ATTERBERG LIMIT DETERMINATIONS
(ASTM D423 AND D424)
No. DESCRIPTION Liquid Limit;LL Plastic Limit,PL Plastic Index; PI
1 SILTY CLAY with some sand. Dark brown. 61.0 26.4 34.6
2 SILTSTONE with some clay. Dark gray-green. 42.0 31.0 12.0
PLASTICITY INDEX; PI=:LL-PL
50
40
30
H 20
CO
10
7
4
0
CN
*-1
CL
r,;" MHor OH
1 VLU> mL 1
_IMI1_
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
LIQUID LIMIT, LL
FIGURE NUMBER lllb
JOB NUMBER 97-7189
10
CONSOLIDATION - PRESSURE CURVE
V
10
NORMAL PRESSURE - LBS./SQ.FT.
100 1000 10.000 100.000
Trench Number 3, Depth: 5 Feet
Carved from Undisturbed Sample RING DIAMETER 2.375 (inches) FIGURE NUMBER MIc
JOB NUMBER 97-7189
emi
FOUNDATION REQUIREMENTS NEAR SLOPES
PROPOSED STRUCTURE
CONCRETE FLOOR SLAB
SETBACK
. .1 I , n-—
^\
\
\
REINFORCEMENT OF \
FOUNDATIONS AND FLOOR
SLABS FOLLOWING THE
RECONCNDATIONS OF THE
ARCHITECT OR STRUCTURAL ENGINEER
CONCRETE FOUNDATION
18- MINIMUM OR AS DEEP AS
REQUIRED FOR LATERAL
STABILITY
TOP OF COMPACTED FILL SLOPE
(Any loose soils on the slope surface
shall not be considered to provide
lateral or vertical strength for the
footing or for slope stability. Needed
depth of labedKnt shall be measured
froB coapetent soil.)
COMPACTED FILL SLOPE UITH
MAXIMUM INaiNATION AS
PER SOILS REPORT.
TOTAL DEPTH OF FOOTING MEASURED
FROM FINISH SOIL SUB-GRADE
OUTER MOST
OF FOOTING
TYPICAL SECTION
(SHOWING PROPOSED FOUNDATION LOCATED WITHIN 5 FEET OF TOP OF SLOPE)
18' FOOTING/ 5'SETBACK
TOTAL DEPTH OF FOOTING
1.5:1.0 SLOPE 2.0:1.0 SLOPE
U IL
z o
1°
r
0 58" 48"
1* 51" 42"
2' 42" 36"
3' 34" 30"
4' 26" 24"
I 5" 18" 18"
# when applicable
FIGURE NUMBER IV
JOB NUMBER 97-7189
APPENDIX
BENCH AND KEY REQUIREMENTS
REMOVE ALL TOPSOIL,
STRIP AS SPECIFIED
ORIGINAL GROUND SURFACE
SLOPE RATIO =
VERTICAL
NOTES
1.
= HORIZONTAL
= 2.0 : 1.0
(OR AS PER SOILS ENGINEER/
ENGINEERINQ GEOLOGIST)
SLOPED SUCH THAT SLOUGHING
OR SLIDING DOES NOT OCCUR
DRAINS (IF REOUIRED
SPECIFIC DESIGN CRITERIA
WILL BE ISSUED)
BOTTOM DRAIN
4.
The minimum width "B* of key shall be a minimum of 1.5 times the width of the
compaction equipment. Minimum width of benches shall be not less than three feet (or
as per Soils Engineer/Engineering Geologist). Key and benches shall be excavated to firm
dense, natural-ground and verified by a Soils Engineer/Engineering Geologist. '
The outside edge of bottom key shall be below topsoil or loose surface material: Minimum
one foot embedment Into dense material (or as per Soils Engineer/Engineering Geologist).
Key and benching required where the natural slope Is steeper than 5.0 horizontal to 1.0
vertical (5.0:1,0), or as per Soils Engineer/Engineering Geologist.
Minimum 10% fall (10.0:1.0 slope ratio) Into slope (or as per Soils Engineer/Engineering
Geologist).
SEE MOTE t SEE NOTE 2
5. Compaction test required every two (2) vertical feet from lowest fill area.
10/84
Figure No. VI
dD
10
APPENDIX A
QD
10
APPENDIX A
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART
SOIL DESCRIPTION
COARSE-GRAINED
More than half of material is larger than a No. 200 sieve
GRAVELS, CLEAN GRAVELS
More than half of coarse fraction is larger than GW Well-graded gravels, gravel and sand mix-
No. 4 sieve size, but smaller than 3" tures, little or no fines.
GP Poorly graded gravels, gravel and sand mix-
tures, little or no fines.
GRAVELS WITH FINES GM Silty gravels, poorly graded gravel-sand-siit
(appreciable amount) mixtures.
GC Clay gravels, poorly graded gravel-sand-siit
mixtures.
SANDS, CLEAN SANDS SW Well-graded sand, gravelly sands, little or no
More than half of coarse fraction is smaller than a no fines.
No. 4 sieve.
SP Poorly graded sands, gravelly sands, little or
no fines.
SANDS WITH FINES SM Silty sands, poorly graded sand and silty
(appreciable amount) mixtures.
SC Clayey sands, poorly graded sand and clay
mixtures.
FINE-GRAINED
More than half of material is smaller than a No. 200 sieve
SILTS AND CLAYS ML Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour,
sandy silt and clayey-silt sand mixtures with
a slight plasticity.
Liquid Limit Less Than 50 CL Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity,
gravelly clays, sandy clays, silty clays, clean
clays.
OL Organic silts and organic silty clays of low
plasticity.
MH Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous
fine sandy or silty soils, elastic silts.
Liquid Limit Greater Than 50 CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays,
OH Organic clays of medium to high plasticity,
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT Peat and other highly organic soils.
APPENDiX B
dD
ID
APPENDIX B
GENERAL EARTHWORK SPECIFICATIONS
General
The objective of these specifications is to properly establish procedures for the
clearing and preparation of the existing natural ground or properly compacted fill
to receive new fill; for the selection of the fill material; and for the fill
compaction and testing methods to be used.
Scope of Work
The earthwork includes all the activities and resources provided by the
contractor to construct in a good workmanlike manner ali the grades of the filled
areas shown in the plans. The major items of work covered in this section
include ail clearing and grubbing, removing and disposing of materials, preparing
areas to be filled, compacting of fill, compacting of backfills, subdrain
installations, and all other work necessary to complete the grading of the filled
areas.
Site Visit and Site Investigation
1. The contractor shall visit the site and carefully study it, and make all
inspections necessary in order to determine the full extent of the work
required to complete ail grading in conformance with the drawings and
specifications. The contractor shall satisfy himself as to the nature,
location, and extent of the work conditions, the conformation and
condition of the existing ground surface; and the type of equipment,
labor, and faciiities needed prior to and during prosecution of the work!
The contractor shall satisfy himself as to the character, quality, and
quantity of surface and subsurface materials or obstacles to be
encountered. Any inaccuracies or discrepancies between the actual fieid
conditions and the drawings, or between the drawings and specifications,
must be brought to the engineer's attention in order to clarify the exact
nature of the work to be performed.
2. A soils investigation report has been prepared for this project by GEI. It is
available for review and should be used as a reference to the surface and
subsurface soil and bedrock conditions on this project. Any
OD
]0
B2
recommendations made in the report of the soil investigation or
subsequent reports shall become an addendum to these specifications.
Authority of the Soils Engineer and Engineering Geologist
The soils engineer shall be the owner's representative to observe and test the
construction of fills. Excavation and the placing of fill shall be under the
observation of the soils engineer and his/her representative, and he/she shall
give a written opinion regarding conformance with the specifications upon
completion of grading. The soiis engineer shall have the authority to cause the
removal and replacement of porous topsoils, uncompacted or improperiy
compacted fills, disturbed bedrock materials, and soft alluvium, and shall have
the authonty to approve or reject materials proposed for use in the compacted
fill areas.
The soils engineer shall have, in conjunction with the engineering geologist, the
authority to approve the preparation of natural ground and toe-of-fill benches to
receive fill material. The engineering geologist shall have the authority to
evaluate the stability of the existing or proposed slopes, and to evaluate the
necessity of remedial measures. If any unstable condition is being created by
cutting or filling, the engineering geologist and/or soils engineer shall advise the
contractor and owner immediately, and prohibit grading in the affected area until
such time as corrective measures are taken.
The owner shall decide all questions regarding: (1) the interpretation of the
drawings and specifications, (2) the acceptable fulfillment of the contract on the
part of the contractor, and (3) the matter of compensation.
Clearing and Grubbing
1. Clearing and grubbing shall consist of the removal from all areas to be
graded of all surface trash, abandoned improvements, paving, culverts,
pipe, and vegetation (including ~ but not limited to - heavy weed growth!
trees, stumps, logs and roots larger than 1-inch in diameter).
2. All organic and inorganic materiais resulting from the clearing and
grubbing operations shall be collected, piled, and disposed of by the
contractor to give the cleared areas a neat and finished appearance.
Burning of combustible materials on-site shall not be permitted unless
allowed by local regulations, and at such times and in such a manner to
OD
10
83
prevent the fire from spreading to areas adjoining the property or cleared
area.
It is understood that minor amounts of organic materials may remain in
the fill soils due to the near impossibility of complete removal. The
amount remaining, however, must be considered negligible, and in no
case can be allowed to occur in concentrations or total quantities
sufficient to contribute to settlement upon decomposition.
Preparation of Areas to be Filled
1. After clearing and grubbing, ail uncompacted or improperly compacted
fills, soft or loose soils, or unsuitable materials, shall be removed to
expose competent natural ground, undisturbed bedrock, or properly
compacted fill as indicated in the soiis investigation report or by our field
representative. Where the unsuitable materials are exposed in final
graded areas, they shall be removed and replaced as compacted fill.
2. The ground surface exposed after removai of unsuitable soils shall be
scarified to a depth of at least 6 inches, brought to the specified moisture
content, and then the scarified ground compacted to at least the specified
density. Where undisturbed bedrock is exposed at the surface,
scarification and recompaction shall not be required.
3. All areas to receive compacted fill, including ail removai areas and toe-of-
fiil benches, shall be observed and approved by the soiis engineer and/or
engineering geologist prior to placing compacted fill.
4. Where fills are made on hillsides or exposed slope areas with gradients
greater than 20 percent, horizontal benches shall be cut into firm,
undisturbed, natural ground in order to provide both lateral and vertical
stability. This is to provide a horizontal base so that each layer is placed
and compacted on a horizontal plane. The initial bench at the toe of the
fill shall be at least 10 feet in width on firm, undisturbed, natural ground
at the elevation of the toe stake placed at the bottom of the design siope.
The engineer shall determine the width and frequency of all succeeding
benches, which will vary with the soil conditions and the steepness of the
slope. Ground slopes flatter than 20 percent (5.0:1.0) shall be benched
when considered necessary by the soils engineer.
OD
ID
84
Fill and Backfill Material
Unless otherwise specified, the on-site material obtained from the project
excavations may be used as fill or backfill, provided that all organic material,
rubbish, debris, and other objectionable material contained therein is first
removed. In the event that expansive materiais are encountered during
foundation excavations within 3 feet of finished grade and they have not been
properly processed, they shall be entirely removed or thoroughly mixed with
good, granular material before incorporating them in fills. No footing shall be
allowed to bear on soiis which, in the opinion of the soils engineer, are
detrimentally expansive ~ unless designed for this clayey condition.
However, rocks, boulders, broken Portland cement concrete, and bituminous-
type pavement obtained from the project excavations may be permitted in the
backfill or fill with the following limitations:
1. The maximum dimension of any piece used in the top 10 feet shall be no
larger than 6 inches.
2 Clods or hard lumps of earth of 6 inches in greatest dimension shall be
broken up before compacting the material in fill.
3. If the fill material originating from the project excavation contains large
rocks, boulders, or hard lumps that cannot be broken readily, pieces
ranging from 6 inches in diameter to 2 feet in maximum dimension may
be used in fills below final subgrade if ail pieces are placed in such a
manner (such as windrows) as to eliminate nesting or voids between
them. No rocks over 4 feet wiil be allowed in the fili.
4. Pieces larger than 6 inches shall not be placed within 12 inches of any
structure.
5. Pieces larger than 3 inches shall not be placed within 12 inches of the
subgrade for paving.
6. Rockfills containing less than 40 percent of soil passing 3/4-inch sieve
may be permitted in designated areas. Specific recommendations shall be
made by the soils engineer and be subject to approvai by the city
engineer.
7. Continuous observation by the soiis engineer is required during rock
piacement.
OD
ID
85
8. Special and/or additional recommendations may be provided in writing by
the soils engineer to modify, clarify, or amplify these specifications.
9. During grading operations, soil types other than those analyzed in the soil
investigation report may be encountered by the contractor. The soils
engineer shall be consulted to evaluate the suitability of these soils as fill
materials.
Placing and Compacting Fill Material
1. After preparing the areas to be filled, the approved fill material shall be
placed in approximately horizontal layers, with lift thickness compatible to
the material being placed and the type of equipment being used. Uniess
otherwise approved by the soils engineer, each layer spread for
compaction shall not exceed 8 inches of loose thickness. Adequate
drainage of the fill shall be provided at all times during the construction
period.
2. When the moisture content of the fill material is below that specified by
the engineer, water shall be added to it until the moisture content is as
specified.
3. When the moisture content of the fill material is above that specified by
the engineer, resulting in inadequate compaction or unstable fill, the fill
material shall be aerated by blading and scarifying or other satisfactory
methods until the moisture content is as specified.
4. After each layer has been placed, mixed, and spread evenly, it shall be
thoroughly compacted to not iess than the density set forth in the
specifications. Compaction shall be accomplished with sheepsfoot rollers,
multiple-wheei pneumatic-tired rollers, or other approved types of
acceptable compaction equipment. Equipment shall be of such design
that it will be able to compact the fill to the specified relative compaction.
Compaction shall cover the entire fill area, and the equipment shall make
sufficient trips to ensure that the desired density has been obtained
throughout the entire fill. At locations where it would be impractical due
to inaccessibility of rolling compacting equipment, fill layers shall be
compacted to the specified requirements by hand-directed compaction
equipment.
5. When soii types or combination of soil types are encountered which tend
to develop densely packed surfaces as a result of spreading or
OD
ID
86
compacting operations, the surface of each layer of fill shali be
sufficientiy roughened after compaction to ensure bond to the succeeding
layer.
6. Unless otherwise specified, fill slopes shall not be steeper than 2.0
horizontal to 1.0 vertical. In general, fill slopes shall be finished in
conformance with the lines and grades shown on the plans. The surface
of fill slopes shall be overfilled to a distance from finished slopes such
that it will ailow compaction equipment to operate freely within the zone
of the finished slope, and then cut back to the finished grade to expose
the compacted core. Alternate compaction procedures inciude the
backrolling of slopes with sheepsfoot rollers in increments of 3 to 5 feet
in elevation gain. Alternate methods may be used by the contractor, but
they shall be evaluated for approvai by the soils engineer.
7. Unless otherwise specified, ail allowed expansive fill material shall be
compacted to a moisture content of approximately 2 to 4 percent above
the optimum moisture content. Nonexpansive fill shali be compacted at
near-optimum moisture content. All fili shall be compacted, unless
otherwise specified, to a relative compaction not less than 95 percent for
fill in the upper 12 inches of subgrades under areas to be paved with
asphait concrete or Portland concrete, and not less than 90 percent for
other fill. The relative compaction is the ratio of the dry unit weight of
the compacted fill to the laboratory maximum dry unit weight of a sample
of the same soii, obtained in accordance with A.S.T.M. D-1557 test
method.
8. The observation and periodic testing by the soiis engineer are intended to
provide the contractor with an ongoing measure of the quality of the fill
compaction operation. It is the responsibility of the grading contractor to
utilize this information to establish the degrees of compactive effort
required on the project. More importantly, it is the responsibility of the
grading contractor to ensure that proper compactive effort is applied at all
times during the grading operation, including during the absence of soiis
engineering representatives.
Trench Backfill
1. Trench excavations which extend under graded lots, paved areas, areas
under the influence of structural loading, in slopes or close to slope areas,
shall be backfilled under the observations and testing of the soils
engineer. All trenches not failing within the aforementioned locations
OD
3D
87
shall be backfilled in accordance with the City or County regulating
agency specifications.
2. Unless otherwise specified, the minimum degree of compaction shall be
90 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density.
3. Any soft, spongy, unstable, or other similar material encountered in the
trench excavation upon which the bedding material or pipe is to be
placed, shall be removed to a depth recommended by the soiis engineer
and replaced with bedding materiais suitably densified.
Bedding material shaii first be placed so that the pipe is supported for the
full length of the barrel with full bearing on the bottom segment. After
the needed testing of the pipe is accomplished, the bedding shall be
completed to at least 1 foot on top of the pipe. The bedding shall be
properly densified before backfill is placed. Bedding shall consist of
granular material with a sand equivalent not less than 30, or other
material approved by the engineer.
4. No rocks greater than 6 inches in diameter will be allowed in the backfill
placed between 1 foot above the pipe and 1 foot beiow finished
subgrade. Rocks greater than 2.5 inches in any dimension wiil not be
allowed in the backfill placed within 1 foot of pavement subgrade.
5. Material for mechanically compacted backfill shall be placed in lifts of
horizontai layers and properly moistened prior to compaction. In addition,
the layers shall have a thickness compatibie with the material being
placed and the type of equipment being used. Each layer shall be evenly
spread, moistened or dried, and then tamped or rolled until the specified
relative compaction has been attained.
6. Backfill shall be mechanically compacted by means of tamping rollers,
sheepsfoot rollers, pneumatic tire rollers, vibratory rollers, or other
mechanical tampers. Impact-type pavement breakers (stompers) will not
be permitted over ciay, asbestos cement, plastic, cast iron, or
nonreinforced concrete pipe. Permission to use specific compaction
equipment shall not be construed as guaranteeing or implying that the use
of such equipment will not result in damage to adjacent ground, existing
improvements, or improvements installed under the contract. The
contractor shall make his/her own determination in this regard.
7. Jetting shall not be permitted as a compaction method unless the soils
engineer allows it in writing.
OD
ID
88
8. Clean granular material shali not be used as backfill or bedding in trenches
located in slope areas or within a distance of 10 feet of the top of slopes
unless provisions are made for a drainage system to mitigate the potential
buildup of seepage forces into the siope mass.
Observations and Testing
1. The soils engineers or their representatives shall sufficiently observe and
test the grading operations so that they can state their opinion as to
whether or not the fill was constructed in accordance with the
specifications.
2. The soiis engineers or their representatives shall take sufficient density
tests during the piacement of compacted fill. The contractor should
assist the soils engineer and/or his/her representative by digging test pits
for removai determinations and/or for testing compacted fill. In addition,
the contractor shouid cooperate with the soils engineer by removing or
shutting down equipment from the area being tested.
3. Fill shall be tested for compliance with the recommended relative
compaction and moisture conditions. Field density testing should be
performed by using approved methods by A.S.T.M., such as A.S.T.M.
D1556, D2922, and/or D2937. Tests to evaluate density of compacted
fill shouid be provided on the basis of not less than one test for each 2-
foot vertical iift of the fill, but not less than one test for each 1,000 cubic
yards of fill placed. Actual test intervals may vary as field conditions
dictate. In fill slopes, approximately half of the tests shall be made at the
fill siope, except that not more than one test needs to be made for each
50 horizontai feet of slope in each 2-foot vertical lift. Actual test
intervals may vary as field conditions dictate.
4. Fill found not to be in conformance with the grading recommendations
should be removed or otherwise handled as recommended by the soiis
engineer.
Site Protection
It shall be the grading contractor's obligation to take all measures deemed
necessary during grading to maintain adequate safety measures and working
conditions, and to provide erosion-control devices for the protection of
OD
ID
89
excavated areas, slope areas, finished work on the site and adjoining properties,
from storm damage and flood hazard originating on the project. It shall be the
contractor's responsibiiity to maintain slopes in their as-graded form until ail
slopes are in satisfactory compiiance with the job specifications, ail berms and
benches have been properly constructed, and ail associated drainage devices
have been instaiied and meet the requirements of the specifications.
All observations, testing services, and approvals given by the soiis engineer
and/or geologist shall not relieve the contractor of his/her responsibilities of
performing the work in accordance with these specifications.
After grading is completed and the soils engineer has finished his/her
observations and/or testing of the work, no further excavation or filling shall be
done except under his/her observations.
Adverse Weather Conditions
1. Precautions, shall be taken by the contractor during the performance of
site clearing, excavations, and grading to protect the worksite from
flooding, ponding, or inundation by poor or improper surface drainage.
Temporary provisions shall be made during the rainy season to adequately
direct surface drainage away from and off the worksite. Where low areas
cannot be avoided, pumps should be kept on hand to continually remove
water during periods of rainfall.
2. During periods of rainfall, plastic sheeting shall be kept reasonably
accessible to prevent unprotected slopes from becoming saturated.
Where necessary during periods of rainfall, the contractor shall install
checkdams, desilting basins, rip-rap, sandbags, or other devices or
methods necessary to controi erosion and provide safe conditions.
3. During periods of rainfall, the soiis engineer should be kept informed by
the contractor as to the nature of remedial or preventative work being
performed (e.g. pumping, placement of sandbags or plastic sheeting,
other labor, dozing, etc.).
4. Following periods of rainfall, the contractor shall contact the soils
engineer and arrange a walk-over of the site in order to visually assess
rain-related damage. The soils engineer may also recommend excavations
and testing in order to aid in his/her assessments. At the request of the
soils engineer, the contractor shall make excavations in order to evaluate
the extent of rain-reiated damage.
OD
1
810
5. Rain-related damage shall be considered to include, but may not be limited
to, erosion, silting, saturation, swelling, structural distress, and other
adverse conditions identified by the soiis engineer. Soil adversely
affected shaii be classified as Unsuitable Materiais, and shall be subject to
overexcavation and replacement with compacted fill or other remedial
grading, as recommended by the soiis engineer.
6. Relatively level areas, where saturated soils and/or erosion gullies exist to
depths of greater than 1.0 foot, shall be overexcavated to unaffected,
competent material. Where less than 1.0 foot in depth, unsuitable
materials may be processed in place to achieve near-optimum moisture
conditions, then thoroughly recompacted in accordance with the
applicable specifications. If the desired results are not achieved, the
affected materials shall be over-excavated, then replaced in accordance
with the appiicable specifications.
7. In slope areas, where saturated soiis and/or erosion gullies exist to depths
of greater than 1.0 foot, they shall be overexcavated and replaced as
compacted fill in accordance with the applicable specifications. Where
affected materials exist to depths of 1.0 foot or less beiow proposed
finished grade, remedial grading by moisture-conditioning in place,
followed by thorough recompaction in accordance with the appiicable
grading guideiines herein presented may be attempted, if materials shall
be overexcavated and replaced as compacted fill, it shaii be done in
accordance with the slope-repair recommendations herein. As field
conditions dictate, other slope-repair procedures may be recommended by
the soils engineer.
OD
ID
APPENDIX C
OD
ID
TABLE 1
DATE: Thursday, March 26, 1998
* *
* EQFAULT *
* *
* Ver. 2.00 *
* *
* *
(Estimation of Peak Horizontal Acceleration
From Digitized California Faults)
SEARCH PERFORMED FOR: JAY
JOB NUMBER: 97-7189
JOB NAME: BCS PROPERTY
SITE COORDINATES:
LATITUDE: 33.12 N
LONGITUDE: 117.3 W
SEARCH RADIUS: 100 mi
ATTENUATION RELATION: 1) Campbell (1991) Horiz. - Deep Soil & Soft Rock
UNCERTAINTY (M=Mean, S=Mean+l-Sigma): M
SCOND: 0
COMPUTE PEAK HORIZONTAL ACCELERATION
FAULT-DATA FILE USED: CALIFLT.DAT
SOURCE OF DEPTH VALUES (A=Attenuation File, F=Fault Data File): A
I
I
I
II
I
ll
DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS
ABBREVIATED
FAULT NAME
APPROX.
DISTANCE
mi (km)
MAX,
MAX.
CRED.
MAG.
CREDIBLE EVENT!I MAX.
I I
SITE i i MAX
PROBABLE EVENT
PEAK
SITE
ACC. g
INTENSIIPROB.
MM Ij MAG.
PEAK
SITE
ACC. g
SITE
INTENS
MM
I I
i
'BLUE CUT 81 131) 7.00 0.011 III
III
6.25 0.006 II
IBORREGO MTN. (San Jacinto) 65 104) 6.50 0.012 I r
' 6.25 0.010 III
I CAMP ROCK - EMERSON 100 160) 7.50 0.010 III
V
I I t I I I 6.00 0.003
ICASA LOMA-CLARK (S.Jacin.)
^CHINO
48 77) 7.50 0.039 I I
II 7.00 0.028 V
II 49 79) 7.00 0.032 V
II
I I r I I I 4.75 0.007
i
I
i
i
1 r
TT •
CLEGHORN
CORONADO BANK
80 128) 6.50 0.008
I I
j 6.25 0.007 II
VI 21 34) 7.00 0.090 VII
V
i I
I I I I 6.50 0.066
COYOTE CREEK (San Jacinto) 51 81) 7.50 0.036
I I
I I 6.00 0.013 III
III CUCAMONGA 73 118) 7.00
7.50
0.016 IV
VII
I I I I i I 6.75 0.013
ELSINORE 25 40) 0.100 I I I I 6.75 0.063 VI
V GLN.HELEN-LYTLE CR-CLREMNT 51 82) 7.50
7.50
0.035 V
IV
I I
I I I I 7.00 0.025
HELENDALE 85 137) 0.014
I I I I I i 6.25 0.006 II
IV
I
OT S-BUCK RDG.(S.Jacinto) 51 82) 7.50
7.25
0.036 V
III
I I
I I 6.25 0.015
fLENWOOD
JMALIBU COAST
94 152) 0.009 6.00 0.004
96 154) 7.50
7.00
0.013 III
III
5.00 0.002
!MOJAVE RIVER (Ord Mtn.)
NEWPORT - INGLEWOOD
82 132) 0.013 ii 6.25 0.007 II
42 68) 7.50
7.50
0.048 VI
IX
ii 6.50 0.025 V
VII
I
III
II
I
IX
Tb:
FFSHORE ZONE OF DEFORM. 15) 0.274
I I I I I I 6.00 0.121
LD WOMAN SPRINGS 92 148) 7.00
7.00
0.008 III
V
I I I I
I I 5.75 0.003
jj^ALOS VERDES HILLS
I PINTO MOUNTAIN - MORONGO
41 67) 0.035
I I I I I I 5.50 0.013
74
RAYMOND
j KOSE CANYON
. AN ANDREAS (Mojave)
119) 7.50
7.50
0.019 IV
IV
I I I I I I 6.00 0.006
82 132) 0.018
I I
! 5.50 0.004
8) 7.50
8.50
0.422 X
V
I 6.25 0.250
81 131) 0.0321 Ii 8.25! n 097!
SAN ANDREAS (Southern) 69 (111) 8.00 0.030 7.25 0.018 IV
DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS
Page
j!
i APPROX.
1 DISTANCE
1 mi (km)
IMAX. CREDIBLE EVENT! !MAX. PROBABLE EVENT
1 ABBREVIATED
FAULT NAME
i APPROX.
1 DISTANCE
1 mi (km)
! MAX.
ICRED.
1 MAG.
PEAK !
SITE i
ACC. g!
SITE !
INTENS i
MM !
i MAX.
!PROB.
! MAG.
! PEAK !
! SITE !
|ACC. g!
SITE
INTENS
MM
iSAND HILLS 1 94 (151) ! 8.00 0.017! IV 1 ! 7.00 ! 0.008! III
ISAN CLEMENTE 1 54 ( 87) 7.50! 0.032! V 1 ! 6.25 1 0.014! III
jjSAN GABRIEL 86 (139) 7.501 0.014! IV ! ! 6.25 i 0.0051 II
ISAN GORGONIO - BANNING 62 (100) 8.001 0.036! V 1 ! 7.00 ! 0.018! IV
|| SANTA MONICA - HOLLYWOOD 87 (141) 7.501 0.0161 IV 1 i 6.00 1 0.005! II 1
1 SIERRA MADRE-SAN FERNANDO 76 (123)! 7,501 0.021! IV 1 1 6.50 I 0.010! III 1
[SUPERSTITION HLS.(S.Jacin) 84 (136)1 7.00! 0.010! III ! I 5.75 0.004! I 1
JSUPERSTITION MTN.(S.Jacin) 79 (127)i 7.00! 0.011! Ill ! 6.00 0.006! II 1
!VERDUGO 1 84 (136)i 7.00! 0.012! Ill i 4.50 0.002! 1
WHITTIER - NORTH ELSINORE | 47 ( 76)! 7.50! 0.040! V i 6.25 0.017! IV !
END OF SEARCH- 35 FAULTS FOUND WITHIN THE SPECIFIED SEARCH RADIUS,
HE ROSE CANYON FAULT IS CLOSEST TO THE SITE.
T IS ABOUT 5.1 MILES AWAY.
LARGEST MAXIMUM-CREDIBLE SITE ACCELERATION: 0.422 g
IARGEST MAXIMUM-PROBABLE SITE ACCELERATION: 0.250 g
TABLE 2
DATE: Thursday, March 26, 1998
**********
* *
* EQFAULT *
* *
* Ver. 2.00 *
* *
* *
***********************:t,i^t:^^^:t,^it'*****
(Estimation of RHGA Horizontal Acceleration
From Digitized California Faults)
SEARCH PERFORMED FOR: JAY
JOB NUMBER: 97-7189
JOB NAME: BCS PROPERTY
SITE COORDINATES:
LATITUDE: 33.12 N
LONGITUDE: 117.3 W
SEARCH RADIUS: 100 mi
ATTENUATION RELATION: 1) Campbell (1991) Horiz. - Deep Soil & Soft Rock
UNCERTAINTY (M=Mean, S=Mean+l-Sigma): M
SCOND: 0
COMPUTE RHGA HORIZ. ACCEL. (FACTOR: 0.650 DISTANCE: 20.0 mi)
FAULT-DATA FILE USED: CALIFLT.DAT
SOURCE OF DEPTH VALUES (A=Attenuation File, F=Fault Data File): A
I
I
I
i
ll
i
I
i
I I
I
I
I
DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS
ABBREVIATED
FAULT NAME
APPROX.
DISTANCE
mi (km)
MAX. CREDIBLE EVENT!IMAX. PROBABLE EVENT
I I
MAX
CRED
MAG
RHGA
SITE
ACC. g
SITE I! MAX
INTENSIIPROB
MM I I MAG
RHGA
SITE
ACC. g
SITE
INTENS
MM
BLUE CUT 81 (131) 7.00 0.011 III
III
I I I I I I 6.25 0.006 II
BORREGO MTN. (San Jacinto) 65 (104) 6.50 0.012
I I I I I I 6.25 0.010 III
I CAMP ROCK - EMERSON 100 (160) 7.50 0.010 III
V
I I I I I I 6.00 0.003
[CASA LOMA-CLARK (S.Jacin.) 48 ( 77) 7.50 0.039 I I
I! 7.00 0.028 V
II CHINO 49 ( 79) 7.00 0.032 V
II
I I I 1 I I 4.75 0.007
CLEGHORN 80 (128)
21 ( 34)
6.50 0.008 6.25 0.007 II
VI CORONADO BANK 7.00 0.090 VII
V
I 6.50 0.066
COYOTE CREEK (San Jacinto) 51 ( 81)
73 (118)
7.50 0.036
I I I I I i 6.00 0.013 III
III CUCAMONGA 7.00 0.016 IV
VII
I I 6.75 0.013
ELSINORE 25 ( 40)
51 ( 82)
7.50 0.100 I I I I 6.75 0.063 VI
V GLN.HELEN-LYTLE CR-CLREMNT
f
7.50 0.035 V
IV
I! 7.00 0.025
LENDALE 85 (137)
51 ( 82)
7.50
7.50
0.014
I I I I I I 6.25 0.006 II
IV
I
OT S-BUCK RDG.(S.Jacinto)
ENWOOD
0.036 V
III
I I 6.25 0.015
94 (152)
96 (154)
7.25
7.50
0.009 I I I I 6.00 0.004
^LIBU COAST
!MOJAVE RIVER (Ord Mtn.)
0.013 III
III
I I
I I 5.00 0.002
82 (132)
42 ( 68)
7.00
7.50
0.013 I! 6.25 0.007 II
EWPORT - INGLEWOOD
FFSHORE ZONE OF DEFORM.
0.048 VI
VIII
I I
I! 6.50 0.025 V
VII I
I _
9 ( 15)
92 (148)
7.50
7.00
0.178 ii 6.00 0.079
LD WOMAN SPRINGS 0.008 III
V
5.75 0.003 I
III ALOS VERDES HILLS 41 ( 67)
74 (119)
7.00
7.50
0.035
I I I I i I 5.50 0.013
!PINTO MOUNTAIN - MORONGO 0.019 IV
IV
t r I I 6.00 0.006 II
I YMOND 82 (132)
5 ( 8)
81 (131)
7.50
7.50
8.50
0.018 i i 5.50 0.004
I OSE CANYON
AN ANDREAS (Mojave)
0.274 IX
V
i i 6.25 0.162 VIII
0.032 1 I! 8.2.=;! n n971
SAN ANDREAS (Southern) 69 (111) 8,00 0.030 7.25 0.018 IV
DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS
Page
i APPROX.
!DISTANCE
! mi (km)
!MAX. CREDIBLE EVENT! IMAX. PROBABLE EVENT
! ABBREVIATED
1 FAULT NAME
i APPROX.
!DISTANCE
! mi (km)
1 MAX,
ICRED,
1 MAG.
1 RHGA !
1 SITE 1
!ACC. g!
SITE !
INTENS!
MM !
! MAX,
!PROB.
! MAG.
! RHGA !
! SITE !
!ACC, g!
SITE
INTENS
MM
ISAND HILLS 1 94 (151) 1 8.00 ! 0,017! IV ! ! 7,00 ! 0.008! III
!SAN CLEMENTE 1 54 ( 87) 7,50 ! 0.032! V ! ! 6,25 ! 0,014! III
ISAN GABRIEL 1 86 (139) 7.50 ! 0.014! IV ! ! 6.25 ! 0,005! II
ISAN GORGONIO - BANNING 62 (100) 8.00 ! 0,036! V ! ! 7.00 i 0,018! IV
SANTA MONICA - HOLLYWOOD 87 (141) 7,50 ! 0.016! IV ! 1 6.00 ! 0,005| II
SIERRA MADRE-SAN FERNANDO 76 (123) 7,50 ! 0.021! IV ! ! 6,50 1 0,0101 III
SUPERSTITION HLS.(S.Jacin) 84 (136) 7,00 1 0.010! Ill 1 ! 5,75 1 0,004! I
SUPERSTITION MTN.(S.Jacin) 79 (127) 7,00 1 0.011! III 1 ! 6.00 0,006! II 1
VERDUGO 84 (136)1 7,00 1 0,012! III ! 1 4,50 0.002! 1
WHITTIER - NORTH ELSINORE 47 ( 76)1 7.50 1 0.040! V ! 1 6,25 0.017! IV !
***********************************************^i^^iiliititti^ilf4fiiil,ili^1tJtfiti^it:il!^i^i^4ii^^idl,it.itii^i.
END OF SEARCH- 35 FAULTS FOUND WITHIN THE SPECIFIED SEARCH RADIUS,
HE ROSE CANYON FAULT IS CLOSEST TO THE SITE,
T IS ABOUT 5.1 MILES AWAY.
LARGEST MAXIMUM-CREDIBLE SITE ACCELERATION: 0,274 g
ARGEST MAXIMUM-PROBABLE SITE ACCELERATION: 0.162 g
TABLE 3
DATE: Thursday, March 26, 1998
*************************4iitit^i^^t:t:^it,^^^^
* *
* EQSEARCH *
*
* Ver. 2.00 *
* *
* *
***********************4i;^*4,it:i^it:i:^,^:^,^.i^^^,^
(Estimation of Peak Horizontal Acceleration
From California Earthquake Catalogs)
pEARCH PERFORMED FOR: JAY
JOB NUMBER: 97-7189
LOB NAME: BCS PROPERTY
ITE COORDINATES:
LATITUDE: 33.12 N
LONGITUDE: 117.3 W
HYPE OF SEARCH: RADIUS
SEARCH RADIUS: 100 mi
JiEARCH MAGNITUDES: 5.0 TO 9.0
SEARCH DATES: 1800 TO 1997
ATTENUATION RELATION: D Campbell (1991) Horiz. - Deep Soil & Soft Rock
I UNCERTAINTY (M=Mean, S=Mean+l-Sigma): M
SCOND: 0
I FAULT TYPE ASSUMED (DS=Reverse, SS=Strike-Slip): DS
COMPUTE PEAK HORIZONTAL ACCELERATION
IARTHQUAKE-DATA FILE USED: ALLQUAKE.DAT
(IME PERIOD OF EXPOSURE FOR STATISTICAL COMPARISON: 25 years
OURCE OF DEPTH VALUES (A=Attenuation File. E=Earthquake Catalog): A
I
I
I
*age
:ODE
LAT.
NORTH
LONG.
WEST
1 DATE
! TIME !
1 (GMT) I
1 H M See!
DEPTH
(km)
QUAKE
MAG.
i SITE
i ACC.
i g
iSITE
! MM
i INT.
i 11/22/1800 !2130 0 .01 3 .0 6 .50 i 0 .219 i IX
5/25/1803 ! 0 0 0 .0! 3 .0 5 .00 i 0 .024 i IV
12/ 8/1812 !15 0 0 .0! 3 .0 7 .00 i 0 .011 i III
9/23/1827 ! 0 0 0 .01 3 ,0 5 .00 1 0 ,003 ! I
7/11/1855 1 415 0 ,0! 3 .0 6 .30 ! 0 ,008 ! II 1/10/1856 10 0 0 ,0! 3 .01 5 .00 i 0 ,003 i I 9/21/1856 1 730 0 .0! 3 .0 5 .00 i 0 .034 i V
12/ 0/1856 I 0 0 0 .01 3 ,0| 5 .00 I 0 .017 i IV 1
12/16/1858 110 0 0 .0 1 3 .01 7 .00 1 0 .022 i IV !
3/26/1860 ! 0 0 0 • 0! 3 ,0| 5 .00 i 0 .003 ! I 1 5/27/1862 120 0 0 .0! 3 ,0! 5 ,90 i 0 .034 1 V 1
10/21/1862 1 0 0 0 .0! 3 .0! 5 .00 ! 0 ,017 i IV i
5/24/1865 ! 0 0 0 .0! 3 ,0! 5 .00 ! 0 .017 i IV i
5/ 0/1868 ! 0 0 0 .01 3 ,0! 6 ,30 i 0 .006 1 II i 1/13/1877 120 0 0 .0! 3 ,0| 5 .00 i 0 .005 i II i 12/19/1880 ! 0 0 0 .0! 3 ,0| 6 .00 1 0 .014 i III!
2/ 7/1889 1 520 0 .0! 3 .0! 5 .30 i 0 -004 i I i 8/28/1889 I 215 0 .0! 3 .0! 5 .50 i 0 .004 1 I i 2/ 9/1890 !12 6 0 .0! 3 ,0! 6 .30 1 0 ,014 ! III!
2/24/1892 ! 720 0 .0! 3 .0! 6 .70 I 0 ,016 IV !
5/28/1892 ! 1115 0 .0! 3 • 0! 6 .30 i 0 .012 III!
7/30/1894 ! 512 0 .0! 3 •0| 6 .00 0 .006 II i 10/23/1894 !23 3 0 •0| 3 .0! 5 .70 0 ,022 IV !
7/22/1899 ! 046 0 0! 3 0! 5 50 0 .005 II i 7/22/1899 12032 0 0! 3 .01 6 .50 0 .009 III!
12/25/1899 i 1225 0 0! 3 0| 6. 40 0 021 IV i
12/25/1903 ! 1745 0 0! 3 Oi 5 00 0 .004 I i
7/15/1905 12041 0. 0| 3, 0! 5, 30 0, 005 1 II i 9/ 3/1905 1 540 0. Oj 3. 0| 5 30 0 003 I i
9/20/1907 ! 154 0, 0! 3. 0! 6. 00 i 0. 007 1 II 1 4/11/1910 ! 757 0. Oj 3. 0| 5. 00 i 0. 012 1 III i
5/13/1910 ! 620 0, 0! 3. 0! 5. 00 ! 0. 012 1 III!
5/15/1910 ! 1547 0. 0! 3. 0! 6. 00 1 0. 022 1 IV !
9/30/1916 ! 211 0, 0! 3. Oi 5. 00 ! 0. 007 i II ! 4/21/1918 122322 •5. 0! 3, Oi 6. 80 ! 0. 030 1 V 1 4/22/1918 [2115 0. 0! 3, 0! 5. 00 ! 0. 008 i III!
6/ 6/1918 12232 0, 0! 3. 0! 5, 00 i 0. 009 ! III!
11/19/1918 2018 0, 0| 3, Oi 5. 00 ! 0. 002 !
1/ 1/1920 ! 235 0. 0| 3. 0! 5. 00 ! 0. 014 ! IV i
7/16/1920 18 8 0, 0| 3. Oi 5, 00 i 0. 003 !
10/12/1920 1748 0. 0| 3. Oi 5, 30 i 0, 014 ! IV i
7/23/1923 73026. 0| 3. 0! 6. 25 ! 0, 013 i III!
4/ 3/1926 20 8 0. Oj 3. Oi 5. 50 i 0, 003 i I i
8/ 4/1927 1224 0, 0! 3. 0! 5, 00 1 0, 002 ! _ 1
9/ 5/1928 1442 0. Oj 3. Oi 5. 00 ! 0. 002 ! _ 1
10/ 2/1928 19 1 0, 0! 3, Oi 5, 00 ! 0. 002 i — 1
1/16/1930 02433. 0! 3. Oi 5, 20 i 0. 004 i I i 1/16/1930 1 034 3, 6! 3. Oi 5. 10 i 0. 004 ! I !
8/31/1930 04036. 0| 3. Oi 5. 20 ! 0. 002 ! — 1
3/11/1933 1 154 7, 8! 3. 01 6. 30 ! 0. 018 ! IV i
3/11/1933 i 2 9 0, Oj 3. Oi 5. 00 ! 0, 005 i II i 3/11/1933 1 230 0, 0| 3. Oi 5. 10 ! 0. 006 i II i 3/11/1933 1 323 0. 0! 3. 0! 5. 00 ! 0. 005 ! II !
APPROX.
DISTANCE
mi [km]
33.000
32.800
34,370
34.000
34.100
34.000
33.000
32.670
34.000
34.000
32.700
32.670
32.670
33,500
32,250
33.900
34.100
34.200
33.400
32,700
33.200
34.300
32.800
34.200
34,300
33,800
34,000
34.100
34.000
34,200
33.700
33,700
33.700
33.500
33.750
33.800
33.750
34.000
33.200
34,080
33,200
34.000
34.000
34.000
34,000
32.900
34.180
34,180
33,950
33.617
33.750
33.750
33.750
117.300
117.100
117
118
118
118,
117
117,
117,
118.
117.
117.
117.
115,
117.
117.
116.
117.
116.
,650
,250
,100
250
000
170
500
250
200
170
170
820
500
200
700
900
300
116,300
116.200
117.600
116,800
117,400
117
117
118
117
118
117,
117,
117,
117,
116.
117.
117.
117.
118,
116.
118.
116.
117.
116.
118,
500
000
000
300
300
100
400
400
400
500
000
600
000
500
700
260
600
250
000
500
116,000
115.700
116,
116,
118.
117.
118.
118.
118.
920
920
632
967
083
083
083
8
25
89
82
82
82
19
32
62
82
30
32
32
89
61
54
76
82
61
65
64
83
36
75
82
50
73
68
84
75
40
40
40
53
47
50
47
92
35
86
41
61
96
92
96
94
76
76
96
52
63
63
fi.? r
13]
40]
143]
132]
132]
132]
31]
51]
100]
132]
48]
51]
51]
144]
98]
87]
122]
132]
98]
104]
103]
134]
59]
120]
132]
81]
117]
109]
135]
121]
65]
65]
65]
85]
75]
81]
75]
148]
57]
139]
66]
98]
155]
148]
155]
151]
123]
123]
154]
83]
101]
101]
1 ni 1
IDMG
DMG
DMG
IDMG
DMG
33.700
33.575
33.683
33.700
33.750
118.0671 3/11/1933
117.983! 3/11/1933
118.050! 3/11/1933
118.067! 3/11/1933
118.083! 3/11/1933
51022.0!
518 4.0!
658 3.0i
85457.0!
910 0,01
3,0
3.0
3,0
3.0
3.0
5.10
5.20
5.50
5.10
5.10
0.006
0,009
0,009
0.006
0,006
II
III
III
II
II
60
50
58
60
63
96]
81]
94]
96]
101]
iPage
'ILE
:ODE
LAT.
NORTH
LONG,
WEST
I TIME i SITE ISITE
! DATE ! (GMT) DEPTH 1 QUAKE i ACC. i MM
! H M Sec (km) i MAG, i g ilNT.
1 3/11/1933 11425 0.0! 3,0 5,00 ! 0.004 i I
I 3/13/1933 1131828.0 3,0 5.30 ! 0.006 i II 3/14/1933 il9 150.01 3.0 5.10 i 0.007 i II 10/ 2/1933 i 91017.61 3.0 5,40 i 0.006 i II 11/25/1934 ! 818 O.OI 3.0 5,00 i 0.003 ! I
10/24/1935 11448 7.6] 3.0 5,10 ! 0.004 i I
2/27/1937 i 12918.4! 3.0 5,00 ! 0.002
3/25/1937 !1649 1.8! 3.0 6.00 i 0.010 i III
5/31/1938 ! 83455,4! 3.01 5,50 i 0.015 i IV
5/ 1/1939 i2353 0,0! 3.0] 5,00 ! 0.003 ! I
6/24/1939 11627 0.0! 3.01 5.00 i 0.003 ! I
5/18/1940 ! 5 358.5! 3.0| 5.40 ! 0.003 i I
5/18/1940 i 55120.2! 3.0! 5.20 i 0,003 ! I
5/18/1940 i 72132.7! 3.0! 5.00 ! 0.003
6/ 4/1940 il035 8.3! 3.0! 5.10 1 0,008 i III 11/14/1941 i 84136.3! 3,0! 5.40 1 0,005 i II 5/23/1942 !154729,0! 3,0! 5.00 0.003 1 I
10/21/1942 il62213.0! 3.0! 6.50 \ 0.010 1 III
10/21/1942 !162519,0! 3.0! 5.00 0.003 I ; 10/21/1942 il62654.0! 3.0! 5.00 0.003 I I
10/22/1942 ! 15038,0! 3.0| 5. 50 0.003 I 1
10/22/1942 !181326,0! 3,0! 5.00 0.003 I 1
8/29/1943 1 34513,0! 3,0i 5,50 0.004 I i
6/12/1944 1104534,7! 3.0! 5,10 0.005 II i 6/12/1944 !111636.0! 3.0! 5,30 j 0.005 II i 8/15/1945 !175624.0i 3,0! 5.70 0.007 II i 1/ 8/1946 i185418.0! 3,0! 5.40 1 0.004 1 I !
9/28/1946 ! 719 9.0! 3,0! 5.00 ! 0.005 i II i
7/24/1947 1221046,0! 3.0! 5.50 1 0.005 1 II i 7/25/1947 i 04631,0! 3.0! 5.00 1 0.003 1 I i
7/25/1947 i 61949.0! 3,0! 5.20 i 0,004 1 I i
7/26/1947 i 24941.0! 3,0! 5.10 i 0.004 ! I I
2/24/1948 i 81510,0! 3,0! 5.30 ! 0.003 i I i
12/ 4/1948 1234317,0! 3.0! 6.50 i 0.010 i III i
11/ 4/1949 I 204238,Oi 3.0! 5.70 ! 0.006 i II i 11/ 5/1949 I 43524.0! 3.01 5,10 ! 0.004 i I !
1/24/1951 717 2.6! 3.0! 5,60 ! 0.004 ! I i
12/26/1951 04654.0! 3.0! 5,90 ! 0.009 ! III!
6/14/1953 41729.9! 3.0! 5,50 1 0.003 ! I i
3/19/1954 95429.0! 3.01 6.20 ! 0.011 ! III!
3/19/1954 95556,0! 3,01 5,00 ! 0.005 i II i 3/19/1954 102117.0! 3.0! 5,50 i 0.007 ! II i 3/23/1954 41450.0! 3.0! 5,10 ! 0.005 i II i 4/25/1957 215738.7! 3.0! 5.20 i 0.003 ! I !
4/25/1957 1 222412.0! 3.0! 5,10 i 0.003 ! I i
5/26/1957 i 155933.6! 3.0! 5.00 ! 0.004 i I !
9/23/1963 1 144152.6! 3.0! 5.00 i 0.009 i Ill!
12/22/1964 1 205433.2! 3.0! 5.60 ! 0.004 ! I !
4/ 9/1968 1 22859.1! 3.0! 6.40 ! 0.012 i III!
4/ 9/1968 ! 3 353.5! 3,01 5.20 1 0.004 1 I !
APPROX.
DISTANCE
mi [km]
33.850
33.750
33,617
33.783
32,083
34.100
31,867
33,408
33.699
32,000
32,000
34.083
34,067
34,067
33.000
33,783
32,983
32.967
32.967
32.967
33,233
32,967
34.267
33.976
33,994
33,217
33.000
33,950
34,017
34.017
34,017
34.017
32,500
33.933
32.200
32.200
32.983
32.817
32.950
33,283
33,283
33,283
33.283
33.216
33.183
33.231
33.710
31.811
33.190
33.113
118,267
118,083
118,017
118.133
116.667
116
116,
116,
117,
800
571
261
511
117.500
117.500
116,300
116.333
116.333
116,433
118,250
115,983
116.000
116.000
116.000
115.717
116,000
116,967
116,721
116,712
116.133
115,833
116.850
116
116
116
116
118,
116,
116.
116,
115.
118.
115,
116.
116.
500
500
500
500
550
383
550
550
733
350
717
183
183
116.183
116.183
115,808
115,850
116.004
116,925
117,131
116,129
116,037
75
63
54
66
81
74
96
63
42
78
78
88
86
86
51
71
77
76
76
76
92
76
81
68
69
68
85
63
77
77
77
77
84
77
77
77
91
64
92
66
66
66
66
86
84
75
46
91
68
73 r
121]
101]
86]
107]
130]
118]
155]
102]
67]
126]
126]
141]
138]
138]
82]
115]
124]
122]
122]
122]
148]
122]
131]
109]
111]
109]
137]
101]
124]
124]
124]
124]
136]
124]
124]
124]
147]
104]
149]
105]
105]
105]
105]
139]
135]
121]
74]
146]
109]
lift!
I DMG
DMG
DMG
•PAS
•PAS
^AS
_PAS
•PAS
33,343
34.270
33.033
33.944
34,327
33,501
33.098
33.998
116.346
117.540
115.821
118.681
116.445
116,513
115,632
116,606
4/28/1969
9/12/1970
9/30/1971
1/ 1/1979
3/15/1979
2/25/1980
4/26/1981
7/ 8/1986
232042
143053,
224611
231438,
21 716,
104738.
12 928.
92044.
3.0
3.0
3.0
3,0
3.0
3,0
3.0
3.0
5
5,
5
5.
5
5.
5,
5,
80
40
10
00
20
50
70
60
0.011
0.004
0.003
0.002
0.002
0.010
0.003
0.006
III
I
I
III
I
II
57 [ 92]
81 [ 130]
86 [ 138]
98 [ 157]
97 [ 156]
52 [ 84]
96 [ 155]
73 [ 117]
E age
! i TIME i SITE ISITE! APPROX.
f ILE LAT. LONG. ! DATE ! (GMT) DEPTH QUAKE ACC. ! MM i DISTANCE
pODE NORTH WEST i ! H M Sec (km) MAG. g ilNT.i mi [km]
PAS
ft>AS
ft'AS
PAS
P>AS
B>AS
GSP
(SP
SP
SN
GSP ftSP
KSP
GSN
tfSP
BSP
"sp
XSP
KSP
IJSP
GSP
BSP
•SP
GSP ISP ****
-END
32.971
34.061
34.073
33,082
33.013
33.919
34.140
34,262
33.961
34.201
34.139
34.341
34.163
34.203
34,108
33.876
34.332
34.239
33,902
34,195
34.064
34,340
34.369
34,029
34.268
117.870
118,079
118,098
115,775
115.839
118,627
117.700
118,002
116.318
116.436
116,431
116,529
116,855
116,827
116,404
116.267
116,462
116.837
116.284
116.862
116,361
116.900
116.897
116.321
116.402
OF SEARCH- 14
7/13/1986 11347 8.2
10/ 1/1987 i144220.0
10/ 4/1987 1105938.2
11/24/1987 i 15414.5
11/24/1987 1131556.5
1/19/1989 i 65328.8
2/28/1990 i234336,6
6/28/1991 i144354.5
4/23/1992 i045023.0
6/28/1992 i115734.1
6/28/1992 !123640.6
6/28/1992 1124053.5
6/28/1992 i144321.0
6/28/1992 i150530.7
6/29/1992 {141338.8
6/29/1992 i160142.8
7/ 1/1992 1074029.9
7/ 9/1992 1014357.6
7/24/1992 1181436,2
8/17/1992 !204152,1
9/15/1992 1084711,3
11/27/1992 !160057.5
12/ 4/1992 i020857.5
8/21/1993 1014638,4
6/16/1994 1162427,5
********ilf1f*^i*4!t*******
1 RECORDS FOUND
3.0! 5.30 i 0.018 i IV
3.0! 5.90 ! 0.006 ! II
3.0! 5,30 ! 0.004 i I
3.0! 5.80 ! 0,004 ! I
3.0! 6.00 i 0,006 ! II
3.0! 5.00 ! 0,002 i -
3.0! 5.20 ! 0.004 i I
3.0! 5.40 ! 0.003 ! I
3.0! 6.10 i 0.007 i II
3,0! 7.60 ! 0,016 ! IV
3.0! 5.10 i 0.003 i I
3.0! 5.20 ! 0.002 i -
3.01 5.30 i 0.004 ! I
3,0! 6,70 ! 0,011 ! Ill
3.0! 5.40 i 0.004 I I
3.0! 5.20 ! 0.004 ! I
3.0i 5.40 i 0.003 i I
3.0! 5.30 ! 0,004 ! I
3.0i 5.00 i 0.003 ! I
3,0! 5.30 ! 0,004 ! I
3.0i 5,20 I 0,003 ! I
3,0! 5.30 ! 0.003 i I
3.0| 5,30 i 0,003 i I
3,0! 5,00 ! 0,003 i I
3.0! 5.00 i 0.002 ! -
*******nm*iti*)ti*1f4t*****i^*iH^H:*
35
79
80
88
85
94
74
89
81
90
86
95
76
80
85
79
97
82
80
78
85
87
89
84
95 ******
56]
127]
129]
142]
137]
152]
119]
143]
130]
144]
139]
153]
123]
128]
138]
127]
155]
132]
128]
126]
136]
141]
144]
136]
152]
****
JOMPUTER TIME REQUIRED FOR EARTHQUAKE SEARCH: 0,4 minutes
MAXIMUM SITE ACCELERATION DURING TIME PERIOD 1800 TO 1997: 0.219g
IAXIMUM SITE INTENSITY (MM) DURING TIME PERIOD 1800 TO 1997: IX
:IMUM MAGNITUDE ENCOUNTERED IN SEARCH: 7.60
lEST HISTORICAL EARTHQUAKE WAS ABOUT 8 MILES AWAY FROM SITE,
JUMBER OF YEARS REPRESENTED BY SEARCH: 198 years
gAXI>
IEARI
I
I
RESULTS OF PROBABILITY ANALYSES
IriME PERIOD OF SEARCH: 1800 TO 1997
TLENGTH OF SEARCH TIME: 198 years
ATTENUATION RELATION: 1) Campbell (1991) Horiz.
•*** TIME PERIOD OF EXPOSURE FOR PROBABILITY: 25
PROBABILITY OF EXCEEDANCE FOR ACCELERATION
- Deep Soil
years
& Soft Rock
^CC
NO.OF
TIMES
EXCED
AVE.
OCCUR.
#/yr
RECURR.
INTERV.
years
COMPUTED PROBABILITY OF EXCEEDANCE
in
0.5 yr in
1 yr
m
10 yr
m
50 yr
in
75 yr
in
100 yr in
*** yr
0.01
B.02
m.03
0.04
K .05
,06
0,07
(,08
,09
,10
0,11
1 ,12
.13
0,14
t ,15
.16
,17
(,18
.19
.20
0,21
33
9
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0,
0.
0,
0.
0.
0,
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0,
0.
0,
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
,167
045
,020
005
005
005
005
005
005
005
005
005
005
005
005
005
005
005
005
005
005
6.000
22.000
49.500
198.000
198,000
198,000
198.000
198.000
198.000
198.000
198,000
198.000
198,000
198,000
198,000
198.000
198.000
198,000
198,000
198.000
198.000
0,0800
0.0225
0,0101
0,0025
0.0025
0.0025
0.0025
0.0025
0.0025
0.0025
0,0025
0.0025
0,0025
0,0025
0,0025
0.0025
0.0025
0,0025
0.0025
0.0025
0.0025
0.1535
0.0444
0,0200
0.0050
0,0050
0.0050
0.0050
0.0050
0.0050
0.0050
0.0050
0.0050
0.0050
0.0050
0.0050
0.0050
0.0050
0.0050
0.0050
0,0050
0,0050
0.8111
0,3653
0,1829
0.0493
0.0493
0.0493
0,0493
0,0493
0,0493
0,0493
0.0493
0.0493
0.0493
0.0493
0.0493
0,0493
0.0493
0,0493
0.0493
0.0493
0.0493
0.9998
0.8970
0.6358
0.2232
0.2232
0.2232
0,2232
0.2232
0.2232
0.2232
0.2232
0.2232
0.2232
0.2232
0.2232
0.2232
0.2232
0.2232
0.2232
0.2232
0,2232
1.0000
0.9669
0.7802
0.3153
0.3153
0.3153
0.3153
0.3153
0,3153
0,3153
0.3153
0.3153
0,3153
0,3153
0.3153
0,3153
0.3153
0.3153
0.3153
0.3153
0.3153
1.0000
0.9894
0.8674
0,3965
0.3965
0.3965
0,3965
0,3965
0,3965
0,3965
0,3965
0.3965
0.3965
0.3965
0.3965
3965
3965
3965
3965
0.3965
0.3965
0
0
0
0,
0.
0.
0,
0,
0.
0,
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
9845
6790
3965
1186
1186
1186
1186
1186
1186
1186
1186
1186
1186
1186
1186
1186
1186
1186
1186
1186
1186
I
I
I
PROBABILITY OF EXCEEDANCE FOR MAGNITUDE
! NO. OF AVE. iRECURR.
MAG. TIMES OCCUR. INTERV. in
EXCED #/yr ! years 0. 5 yr
'5,00 141, 0.712 1.404 !0. 2996
5.50 49 1 0.247 4.041 0. 1164
|6.00 26! 0.131 7.615 0. 0635
l6,50! 10| 0.051 19.800 0. 02491
7.00! 3| 0.015 66.000 0. 0075
|7.50| 1! 0.005j 198.000 0. 0025!
COMPUTED PROBABILITY OF EXCEEDANCE
in in in in I in in
1 yr 10 yr 50 yr 75 yr iioo yr !*** yr
io. 5094 0 ,9992 1 ,0000 1 .0000 1.0000 1. OOOO
0. 2192 0 ,9158 1 .0000 1 .0000 1.0000 0. 9979
0. 1231 0 .7310 0 .9986 0 .9999 1.0000 0. 9625
0. 0493 0 ,3965 0 .9200 0 .9774 0.9936 0, 7171
0. 0150 0 .1406 0 .5312 0 .6790 0,7802 0. 3153
0. 0050! 0 .04931 0 .22321 0 .3153! 0,3965! 0. 1186
GUTENBERG & RICHTER RECURRENCE RELATIONSHIP:
a-value= 3.493
b-value= 0.734
beta-value= 1,691
05/22/22105 12:10 8585491B04 PAGE 02
^IH^I GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC.
SOIL & FOUNDATION ENGINEERING • GROUNDVtfATER
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MANAGEMENT • ENGINEERING GEOLOGY
23 May 2005
RWR HOMES, INC.
2710 Loker Avenue West, Suite 350
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Attn: Mr. Klaus Mendenhall
RECEIVED
JUN 2 3 2005
ENGINEERJNiG
DEr'Ari.TiVichT
Job No. 97-7189
Subject: Gradinq Plan Review and Response to City Report Review
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates Subdivision
APN 212-040-50
Northwest of Cobblestone Drive, East of Laurel Tree Road
Carlsbad, California
Dear Mr. Mendenhall:
As requested, we have reviewed the latest version of the grading pians for the
project. The reviewed plans (6 sheets) were prepared by Hunsaker and /Associates,
are print dated April 15, 2005. The plans have been reviewed from a geotechnical
engineering viewpoint to verify their adequate compliance with the intent of our
recommendations presented in our "Updated Report of Preliminary Geotechnical
Investigation, Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates, BCS Property, APN 212-040-50,
Carlsbad, Calffornia," Job No. 97-7189, dated April 30, 2002. In addition, we
herein respond to red-lined comments made by the City of Carlsbad's reviewer of
an updated report dated April 30, 2005.
COINMENTS ON THE GRADING PLAN
The reviewed grading plans. In our opinion, are in general compiiance with the
recommendations presented in our updated report dated April 30, 2002. However,
we emphasize that due to fractured formational soils, and the expansive nature of
the encountered on-site soils, the soils be prepared with the proper moisture
7420 TRADE STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92121 • (858)549-7222 • FAX: (868) 549-1604 • E-MAIL: geotech@lxpres.com
05/22/2005 12:10 8585491604 GEI PAGE 03
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates Job No. 97-7189
Carlsbad, Caiifornia Page 2
content and under continued observations and soil testing. In addition, a geologist
from our firm shouid provide observations of the exposed cut bottoms before any
fill or additional grading Is performed on the formational soils. Because of the fill
thickness anticipated in the western end lots, we aiso recommend that a subdrain
be instaiied in the keyway of the fiir embankment, and an intermediate subdrain
placed in a bench located at approximately midheight of the fill depth. Other
recommendations may be issued, as warranted, during the grading observations of
the subdivision.
Proposed retaining walls should be backfilled with imported low expansive soils. On
site soils are typically classified as medium to highly expansive, and may not be
used as wall backfill material.
All other recommendations presented in our previous reports on the project remain
applicable unless superseded in writing by our firm.
RESPONSE TO CITY COMMENTS ON REPORT REVIEW
A red-line comment by the City of Carisbad's reviewer of our updated report dated
April 30, 2002, refers to our comment in the report's transmittal letter indicating
that the proposed development Includes 17 residential iots. In fact, the number of
lots where homes wiil be built is only 14, as shown In the current grading plan.
Other comments by the City's reviewer Is a highlighted copy of a folded Plot Pian
(incomplete copy), Rgure No. I. Attached herewith, we include a complete copy of
Rgure No. I for the April 30, 2002, report.
05/22/2005 12:10 8585491504
Proposed Emerald Pointe Estates
Carlsbad, California
GEI PAGE 04
Job No. 97-7189
Page 3
If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact our office. Reference
to our Job No. 97-7189 will help expedite a response to your inquiry.
Respectfully submitted,
GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC.
Jaime A. Cerros, P.E.
R.C.E. 34422/G.E.2007
Senior Geotechnical Engineer