Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCT 02-27; LA COSTA FAIRWAYS; INTERIM REPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL TESTING AND OBSERVATION SERVICES DURING EARTHEORK CONSTRUCTION; 2006-06-19C.ro•Z7 I INTERIM REPORT OF GEOTECITNICAL TES] AND OBSERVATION SERVICES DURING EARTHWORK CONSTRUCTION BUILDING Ps Al, A2 AND Bi, B2 LA COSTA FAIRWAyS ig H&T4J- EK, INC. Geotechnical Environmental Materials ARIZONA CALIFORNIA IDAHO NEVADA INTERIM REPORT OF GEOTECIThaCAL TEST G AND OBSERVATION SERVICES DURING EARTHWORK CONSTRUCTION BUILDING PADS Al, Al i'm BL B2 PREPARED FOR PAR DEVELOPMENT 421 C STREET, SUITE 300 SAN DIEGO, CA 92011 PREPARED BY GEOTEK, INC. 1384 POINSETTIA AVENUE, SUITE A VISTA, CALIFORNIA 92081-8505 PROJECT No.:2611SD3 JUNE 19. 2006 ] )1384 Poinsettia Ave., Suite A Vista, CA 92081-8505 (760) 599-0509 FAX (760) 599-0593 K, INC. ,Geotechnical Environmental Materials June 19, 2006 Project No.: 2611SD3 PAR DEVELOPMENT 421 C Street, Suite 300 San Diego CA 92101 Attention: Mr. Ruben Carillo. Subject: INTERIM REPORT OF GEOTEHNICA.L TESTING AND OBSERVATION DURING EARTHWORK CONSTRUCTION BUILDING Ps Al, A2 AND B1 B2 La Costa Fairways Carlsbad, California Dear Mr. Carillo: We are pleased to present herwith the results of our geotechnical testing and observation services during earthwork construction associated with the construction of the building pads for Buildings Al, A2 and Bi, B2 of the subject project..,. ' Grading for the subject project's building pad areas has been performed under the geotechnical observation of and with selective testing by GeoTek, Inc. In our opinion, the aforesaid work has been performed in accordance with the approved soils engineering reports and applicable provisions of the 2001 California Building Code (CBC). UT _ ••.__•..•.••._.._ a.. - L_. .t ._...... 1)1........... 4 _..... .... 4. ..11 Par Development June 19, 2006 La Costa Fairways Project: 2611SD3 Report of Earthwork Construction Page i TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION AND SCOPE OF WORK ..................................................1 SUMMARY OF GEOLOGIC AND SOILS CONDITIONS .......................... 1 FIELD AND LABORATORY TESTING ......................................................... 2 3.1. FIELD TESTING ............................................................. ......................................2 3.2. LABORATORY TESTING...................................................................................3 FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS.......................................................4 4.1. FOUNDATION SETBACKS ................................................................................4 4.2. SLAB-ON-GRADE ...............................................................................................4 4.3. SUBGRADE MOISTURE ....................................................................................... 5 4.4. CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION...........................................................................5 UTILITY TRENCH CONSTRUCTION AND BACKFILL .......................... 6 POST GRADING CRITERIA .........................................................................t6 6.1. ADDITIONAL GRADING ...................................................................................6 6.2. LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE AND PLANTING ............................................7 6.3. DRAINAGE...........................................................................................................7 6.4. FOUNDATION OBSERVATION ........................................................................7 7. REGULATORY COMPLIANCE ...................................................................... 8 ENCLOSURES Table I - Summary of Field Density Testing Figure 1- Density Test Location Plan Par Development S June 15, 2006 - La Costa Fairways Project: 2611SD3 Report of Earthwork Construction Page 1 1. INTRODUCTION AND SCOPE OF WORK This report presents the results of our testing and observation services during earthwork construction associated with the La Costa Fairways development (Buildings Al, A2 and Bl, B2) located in the City of Carlsbad, California. Site grading for the proposed building pads was performed by Vinci-Pacific, Corp. between July 2005 and June 2006. This report provides a brief summary of soil conditions observed, results of field density tests, and provides finalized foundation design recommendations. To aid in preparing this report, we have reviewed and incorporated by reference the following reports and plans associated with the subject project: > Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation Report by GeoSoils, Inc. dated October 8, 2002. > Supplemental Geotechnical Evaluation for Proposed La Costa Fairways Residential Project, Carlsbad, California, by Geotek, Inc., dated June 10, 2005, Project No. 2611SD3. > Grading Plans for La Costa Fairways, by O'Day Consultants, approved by the City of Carlsbad February 10, 2005. > Geotechnical Review of Foundation Plan and Details for La Costa Fairways Project, Carlsbad, California by Geolek, Inc. Project NO. 2611 SD3 dated November- 17, 2005 > Interim Report of Geotechnical Testing and Observation Service during Earthwork Construction Buildings A and B for La Costa Fairways, Carlsbad, California by Geotek, Inc. Project 2611SD3 dated August 26, 2005. > Structural Calculations for La Costa Fairways Residential Units, La Costa Avenue, Carlsbad, California (Foundation Only Submittal), by Gang Engineering Project No. 2307.00, dated November 4, 2005. > Structural Plans, La Costa Fairways, La Costa Boulevard, Carlsbad, California, Sheets SN, SIA, SIB and S4, by Gang Engineering, Project No. 2307.00, dated November 4, 2005. SUMMARY OF GEOLOGIC AND SOILS CONDITIONS As per the above-referenced soils reports and based on our field testing and observations durihg site grading, we note the following: Par Development June 15, 2006 La Costa Fairways Project: 2611 SD3 Report of Earthwork Construction Page 2 > The building pad areas for Buildings Al, A2 and Bi, B2 are underlain by compacted fill, which currently varies in thickness from approximately .7 to 20 feet. > Prior to site grading, vegetation and other deleterious materials were, removed within the graded areas. > The relatively loose and compressible undocumented fill soils were removed and replaced with compacted fill in accordance with the recommendations of the referenced soils reports. > Removals extended into the underlying dense sedimentary materials of the Santiago Formation. The depth of removal typically varied from 7 to 17 feet below preconstruction grades. 3. FIELD AND LABORATORY TESTING 3.1 FIELD TESTING Field density testing was performed during the placement of fill at the subject property. We note the following regarding our field density testing: Field density tests were performed using a nuclear gauge (ASTM D-2922). The results of• the field density testing are presented in Table 1 attached. Field density tests are normally taken at periodic intervals and random locations to check the compaction efforts by the contractor. ,The results indicate that the fill materials possess a relative compaction of at least 90 percent (based on ASTM D1557) at the locations tested. Based on the grading operations observed, the test results presented herein are considered representative of the overall level of compactive effort used during grading. Visual classification of the soils in the field, compared to soil descriptions from laboratory testing, was the basis for determining the maximum dry density value and optimum moisture content applied to each density test. Par Development June 15, 2006 La Costa Fairways Project: 2611SD3 Report of Earthwork Construction Page 3 3.2. LABORATORY TESTING 0 Moisture-Density Relationship The laboratory maximum dry density and optimum moisture content for representative soil types were determined in general accordance with test method ASTM D-1557. Table 3.2.1 below presents the soil types tested for this project. TABLE 3.2.1 SUMMARY OF LABORATORY MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY AND OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT TEST RESULTS (ASTM D 1557) . Soil Type Description Maximum Dry Density (PCF) Optimum Moisture Content (%) A Pale olive clayey SAND with silt 122.0 11.5 B Gray-brown clayey SAND 124.0 12.0 C Olive-brown clayey SAND 123.0 12.0 Expansion Indices Expansion Index (El) testing was performed on representative samples of the finished grade soils collected from the building pads and tested in the laboratory in genral conformance with ASTM D4829. Laboratory testing of the soils representative of the building pad areas of Buildings Al, A2 and B 1, B2 indicated an El of less than 91, which is considered to have a medium expansion potential in accordance with Table 18-I-B of the 2001 CBC. Sulfate 0 Sulfate testing was performed on samples of the upper soils collected from the subject building pads in general accordance with California Test No. 417. Results of the testing indicated sulfate content of less than 0.2 percent by weight, which is considered moderate as per Table 19-A-4 of the 2001 CBC. 0 :E. - Par Development June 15, 2006 La Costa Fairways . Project: 2611 SD3 Report of Earthwork Construction . Page 4 4. FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the results of the above testing and observations, the. recommendations for foundation design included in the referenced soils engineering report by GeoSoils, Inc. generally remain applicable, with the exception being an increase in allowable bearing capacity from 1500 psf to 2000 psf. As noted in our referenced report dated August 26, 2005, removals in some areas of the site that were• associated with remedial grading did not extend a sufficient lateral distance to achieve a 1:1 projection from the bottom of proposed footing to the bottom of removal. These areas were observed to be located in the northeastern portion of Building B and the southern portion of Building A. As such, our referenced letter dated November 17, 2005 recommends that footings. in these areas either be deepened so that they extend below the 1:1 projection, or that they be designed using a reduced soil bearing value. Our review of the plans indicates that the foundation supporting the northeastern porfin of Building B Will have sufficient embedment that extends below the 1:1 projection. In addition, our review of the referenced structural calculations indicates that the foundations supporting the southern portion of Building A have been designed for an applied soil bearing value of less than 1,250 psf. Therefore, it is our opinion that the foundation design, as shown on the referenced plans, adequately accounts for the lateral extent of the remedial earthwork as discussed in our referenced reports. 4.1. FOUNDATION SETBACKS The outside bottom edge of all footings for settlement sensitive structures should be set back a minimum of H/3 (where H is the slope height) from the face of any descending slope. The setback should be at least seven (7) feet and need not exceed 20 feet. The bottom of all footings for structures near retaining walls should be deepened so as to extend below a 1:1 upward projection extending from the bottom inside edge of the wall stem. Any improvements not conforming to these setbacks may be subject to lateral movements and/or differential settlements 4.2. SLAB-ON-GRADE As disóussed in the referenced geotechnical report by GeoSoils, Inc., concrete slabs should be a minimum of 4 inches thick and reinforced as per structural engineer requirements. Control joints should be provided to help reduce the potential for random cracking. Where moisture condensation is undesirable, all slabs should be underlain with a minimum 10 mil polyvinyl chloride membrane, sandwiched between two layers of clean sand, S.E. 30 or greater, each being at least two inches thick. Care should be taken to adequately seal all seams and not puncture or tear the membrane. The sand should be proof rolled. Par Development La Costa Fairways Report of Earthwork Construction June 15, 2006 Project: 2611SD3 Page 5 4.3. SUB GRADE MOISTURE We recommend that the subgrade moisture content be at least 120 percent of the optimum moisture content (based on ASTM D-15 57) to a minimum depth of 1.8-inches below finish grade. Presoaking of the subgrade soils for subject building pads should be anticipated, due to the potentially expansive nature of these soils. This can require an extended period of time to achieve adequate moisture content. Moisture content should be verified by our representative prior to placing visqueen or reinforcing steel. If the vapor barrier is not placed within 24 hours and/or concrete is not poured within 96 hours of testing, the moisture tests should be considered invalid unless evaluated otherwise by this office. The foundation contractor should be responsible to request additional verification/testing. 4.4. CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION The concrete contractor should follow the most recent CBC and ACI guidelines regarding design, mix, placement, and curing of the concrete. Cement Type Results of sulfate testing indicate a water-soluble sulfate Content of less than 0.20 percent by weight, which is considered moderate as per Table 19-A-4 of the CBC. Based upon these results, Type II cement or an equivalent may be used in concrete structures that are in contact with the upper soils. These concrete structures should be constructed with a maximum water-cement ratio of 0.50. Concrete Cracking Concrete cracks should be expected. These cracks can vary from sizes that are essentially unnoticed, to more than 1/8 inch in width. Most cracks in concrete, while unsightly, do not significantly impact long-term performance. While it is possible to take measures (proper concrete mix, placement, curing, control joints, etc.) to reduce the extent and size of cracks that occur, some cracking will occur despite the best efforts to reduce it. Concrete undergoes chemical processes that are dependent on a wide range of variables, which are difficult, at best, to control. Concrete, while seemingly a stable material, is also subject to internal expansion and contraction due to external changes over time. One of the simplest means to control cracking is to provide weakened joints for cracking to occur along. These do not prevent cracks from developing; they simply provide a relief point for the Par Development June 15, 2006 La Costa Fairways * Project: 2611 SD3 Report of Earthwork Construction Page 6 stresses that develop. These joints are widely accepted means to control cracks but are not always effective. Control joints are more effective the more closely spaced. 5. UTILITY TRENCH CONSTRUCTION AND BACKFILL Utility trench excavation and backfill is the contractor's responsibility. The geotechnical consultant typically provides periodic observation and testing of these operations. While efforts are made to make sufficient observations and tests to check that the contractor's methods and procedures are adequate to achieve proper compaction, it is typically impractical to observe all backfill procedures. As such, it is critical that the contractor use consistent backfill procedures. Trenches for all utilities should be excavated in accordance with CAL-OSHA and any other applicable safety standards. Safe conditions will be required to enable compaction testing of the trench backfill. All utility trench backfill in slopes, structural areas, streets and beneath all flat work or hardscape should be. brought to at least optimum moisture and compacted to at least 90 percent of the laboratory standard. Neither flooding nor jetting is recommended -for native soils. Flooding or jetting may be used with select sand having Sand Equivalent (S.E.) of 30 or higher in shallow (12± inches) under slab interior trenches. The .water should be allowed to .dissipate prior to pouring slabs. Sand backfill should not be allowed in exterior trenches adjacent to and within an area extending below a 1:1 projection from the outside bottom edge of a footing, unless it is similar to the surrounding soil. Where expansive soil is present care should be taken to prevent the possible intrusion of water along the utility trenches from exterior sources. Care should be taken not to place soils at high moisture content within the upper three feet of the trench backfill in street areas, as overly wet soils may impact subgrade preparation. POST GRADING RECOMMENDATION ADDITIONAL GRADING This office should be notified in advance of any additional fill placement, regrading of the site, or trench backlilling after rough grading has been completed. Footing trench spoil and any excess soils Par Development La Costa Fairways Report of Earthwork Construction June 15, 2006 Project: 2611SD3 Page 7 generated from utility trench excavations should be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent (based on ASTM D-1557) if not removed from the site. LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE AND PLANTING Water has been shown to weaken the inherent strength of soil, and slope stability is significantly reduced by overly wet conditions. Positive surface drainage away from graded slopes should be maintained and only the amount of irrigation necessary to sustain plant life should be provided for planted slopes. Over watering should be avoided. Care should be taken when adding soil amendments to avoid excessive watering. Leaching as a method of soil preparation prior to planting is not recommended. Graded slopes constructed within and utilizing onsite materials are, considered erosive. Eroded debris may be reduced and surficial slope stability enhanced by establishing and maintaining a suitable vegetation cover soon after construction. Plants selected for landscaping should be lightweight, deep-rooted types, which require little water and are capable of surviving the prevailing climate. An abatement program to control ground-burrowing rodents should be implemented and maintained. This is critical as burrowing rodents can decrease the long-term performance of slopes. DRAINAGE The need to maintain proper surface drainage and subsurface systems cannot be overly emphasized. Positive site drainage should be maintained at all times. Drainage should not flow uncontrolled down any descending slope. Water should be directed away from foundations and not allowed to pond or seep into the ground. Pad drainage should be directed toward approved area(s). FOUNDATION OBSERVATION All footing excavations should be observed by a representative of this office to check for, compliance with the recommendations prior to the placement of reinforcement. It would likely be necessary to perform this observation following compaction of the interior utility trenches. Par Development June 15, 2006 La Costa Fairways Project: 2611SD3 Report of Earthwork Construction Page 8- 7. REGULATORY COMPLIANCE Cuts, fills, and processing of original ground under the purview of this report, have been completed under the observation of, and with selective testing by GeoTek, Inc. and are found to be in compliance with the Grading Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad, California. Our findings were made, and recommendations prepared in conformance with generally accepted professional engineering practices and no further warranty is implied nor made. This report is subject to review by the controlling authorities for this project. GeoTek, Inc. accepts neither responsibility nor liability for work, testing or recommendations performed or provided by others. Par Development Appendix A La Costa Fairways Project: 2611 SD3 Interim Report of Earthwork Construction Page A-I SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TESTING Classification Soils were classified visually according to the Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM Test Method D2487). Sulfate Content Analysis to determine the water-soluble sulfate content was performed in general accordance with California Test No. 417. Results of the testing indicated less than 0.2% sulfate by weight, which is considered negligible as per Table 19-A-4 of the CBC. The results of the testing are included herein, Plate SL-1. Expansion Index Expansion Index testing was performed on representative near-surface samples. Testing was performed.in general accordance with ASTM Test Method D4829. The results are included herein, Plates El-i and EI-2. APPENDIX A RESULTS OF LABORATORY TESTING La Costa Fairways Carlsbad, California Project Number 2611SD3 LI GeoTek, Inc. 8/2205 PAR DEVELOPMENT La Costa Fairways Project No.: 2611-S03 Page 1 of 3 Carlsbad, CA TABLE I SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS (radinci DATE Test. Location Lot D Moisture Content Dry Den:lty - Type Maximum Density - Type Test Relative Compaction 1/14/05 1 NW portion of bldg 81 10.0 19.1 108.9 A 122.0 N 89 2 Northern portion of bldg BI 10.0 18.7 107.7 A. 122.0 N 88 3 Western portion of bldg B1 10.0 17.6 109.0 A 122.0 N 89 7/15/05 1A Retest: 10.0 17.6 110.8 A 122.0 N 91 2A Retest 10.0 17.5 109.9 A 122.0 N 90 3A Retest 10.0 17.1 110.2 A 122.0 N 90 7/18/05 4 Bldg BI 12.0 17.6 110.8 A. 122.0 N 91 5 North of bldg BI 14.0 17.5 110.7 A 122.0 N 91 6 NW corner of bldg BI 12.0 17.2 110.5 A 122.0 N 91 7/19/05 7 W portion of bldg B1 13.0 16.1 114.1 A 122.0 N 93 8 Bldg B2 10.5 17.6 111.1 A 122.0 N 91 9 Bldg B2 13.0 18.3 108.3 A 122.0 N 89 9A Retest 13.0 . 17.6 110.1 A 1220 N 90 7/20/05 10 Bldg 82 11.0 17.8 110.7 A 122.0 N 91 11 N. portion of bldg B2 13.0 17.6 110.8 A 122.Q N 91 12 W. of bldg B2 16.0 18.3 109.3 A 122.0 N 89 13 SEofbldg Bi 15:0 18.3 108.3 A 122.0 N 89 12A Retest 16.0 17.6 109.9 A 122.0 N 90 XX .13A etest 15.0 17.4 110.1 A 122.0 N 90 7/21/05 22 Bldg B1 16.0 17.8110.7 A 23 NE portion of Bldg B1 17.0 17.8 110.6 A 122.0 N 91 24 Bldg Bi 18.0 17.3 111.1 A 122.0 N 91 25 S Bldg B2 15.0 15.0 109.9 A 122.0 N 90 7/22105 26 Eportlon of Bldg B1 18.0 17.8 110.7 A 122.0 N 91 27 Bldg B2 18.0 17.4 108.9 A 122.0 N 89 27A Retest 18.0 15.6 109.9 A 122.0 N 90 28 SE Corner of Bldg B2 17.0 16.8 112.2 1 A 122.0 N 92 29 S portion ofB2 18.0 16.2 112.4 A 122.0 N 92 7/25/05 30. SE Comer of Bldg B2 19.0 13.5 115.3 A 122.0 N 94 31 SW Comer of Bldg BI 19.0 15.5 112.5 A 122.0 1 N 92 32 Bldg B2 Southside 20.0 16.8 110.6 A 122.0 N 91 7/26/05 33 Cul-de-sac area 20.5 17.4 110.6 A 122.0 N . 91 34 E. of cul-de-sac 18.0 16.8 1 109.9 A 122.0 N 90 35 Cul-de-sac area 18.0 17.0 109.9 A 122.0 N. 90 36 Btwn bldg B2 &A2 20.0 16.6 110.6 A 122.0 N 91 37 Cul-de-sac area 19.0 16.9 111:2 A. 122.0 N 91 7/27/05 38 Cul-de-sac area 23.0 14.0 114.0 A 122.0 N 93 39 NE portlont of bldg A2 22.0 17.1 110.6 1 A 122.0 N 90 40 Nof bldg A2 24.0 15.3 113.0 1 A 122.0 N 93 41 Bldg A2 21.0 17.5 110.1 A 122.0 N 90 42 Cul-de-sac area 23.0 17.1 110.7 A 122.0 N 91 43 Bldg. B1& B2 Send 23.0 16.8 112.2 A 122.0 N 91 44 Btwn bldg A2 & B2 24.5 17.1 110.7 A 122.0 N 91 7/27/05 45 NE portion of bldg A2 27.5 16.5 109.9 A 122.0 N 90 46 Bldg A2 25.0 16.5 110.6 A 122.0 NJ 91 47 W. of bldg A2 27.0 17.4 110.8 A 122.0 N 91 7/29/05 48 Camino Abierto 27.0 14.3 114.1 A 122.0 N . 93 49 NW Comer ofBldg.A2 27.5 14.0 110.5 A 122.0 N 90 50 Btwn B2 &A2 27.5 15.0 110.4 A 122.0 N 90 51 Camino Abierto. 22.0 16.5 112.2 A 122.0 N 92 52 Slope side of bldg A2 22.0 16.0 111.2 A 122.0 N 91 8/1/05 .53 Slope Wof bldg A2 24.0 17.5 110.6 A 122.0 N 90 54 Camino Abierto 1 26.0 1 17.2 112.2 A 122.0 N 92 55 Camino Abierto 28.0 1 17.1 113.2 A 122.0 N 93 N = Nuclear Gauge Test FG = Finished Grade Test All elevations are approximate Geolek, Inc. PAR DEVELOPMENT 872205 P La Costa Fairways Project No.: 2611-SD3 Page 2 of 3 Carlsbad, CA TABLE I SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS Gradirm DATE Test Location Moisture Content Dry Density - °r Maximum Density - Test Relative Compaction 56 CamlnoAbierto 26.0 17.2 113.1 A 122.0 N 93 57 Camino Abierto 27.0 16.6 114.1 A 122.0 N 93 8/2/05 58 CamlnoAbierto 29.0 16.8 111.2 1 A 122.0 N 91 59 Camino Abierto, 29.0 16.5 110.8 1 A 122.0 N 90 60 CaminoAbierto 29.0 16.5 111.6 A 122.0 N 90 61 Camino Abierto 29.0 16.0 112.2 A 122.0 N 91 62 Wof bldg. A1 . 23.0 15.9 111.7 A 122.0 N 91 63 1 Bldg. Al 24.0 16.7 110.9 A 122.0 N 91 64 CaminoAbierto 34.5 16.0 111.2 A 122.0 N 91 8/3/05 65 Slope W of bldg Al 16.0 16.2 112.1 A 122.0 N 91 66 Btwn bldg Bl& B2 28.0 15.8 110.9 A 122.0 N 90 67 Slope W side bldg Al 18.0 16.4 110.8 A 122.0 N 90 68 W. Side Bldg. Al 21.0 16.2 110.9 A 122.0 N 90 69 1 Slope W side bldg Al 25.0 17.1 111.7 A 122.0 N 91 70 JW. Side Bldg. Al 26.0 17.6 . 110.7 A 122.0 N 90 8/4/05 71 Slope W. Side of Bldg Al 29.0 17.6 109.6 A 122.0 N 89 71A Retest 29.0 17.5 110.7 A 122.0 N. 90 72 S. Side Bldg. B2 28.0 16.4 111.7 A 122.0 N 91 Sot Bldg A2 . 30.0 16.4 111.2 A 122.0 N 91 74 W. Side of Bldg Al 34.0 A 122.0 N 90 75 Slope W. Side of Bldg Al 32.0 18.4 109.5 A 122.0 N 88 75A Retest 32.0 17.6 110.6 A 122.0 N 90 76 SW Comer of Bldg Al 35.0 .109 16.8 111.1 A 122.0 NJ 91 8/5/05 77 NW. portion of Bldg Al 24.0 17.2 110.8 A 122.0 N 90 78 Bldg Al 25.0 16.7 111.2 A 122.0 ,j 91 79 Bldg Al 27.0 17.8 108.2 A 122.0 ,j_ . 88 80 1 Bldg Al . 27.0 19.3 108.7 A 122.0 N 88 8/8/05 79A Retest 27.0 16.5 110.7 A 122.0 1 N 90 BOA Retest 27.0 17.2 110.6 A 1220 N 90 L Bldg Al 28.0 17.6 108.2 A 122.0 N 88 81A Retest 28.0 17.5 110.7 A 122.0 N 90 82 Bldg Al 30.0 19.1 108.1 A 122.0 N 88 62A Retest 30.0 17.6 110.9 A 122.0 N 90 83 Bldg Al . 34.0 16.4 112.2 A 122.0 1 N 91 8/9/05 84 Bldg Al . 36.0 16.0 111.4 A 122.0 1 N 91 85 Bldg Al 38.0 17.6 110.8 A 122.0 N 90 86 Bldg Al 40.0 16.0 110.7 A 122.0 N 90 87 Bldg Al 42.0 16.7 113.3 A 122.0 N 92 88 Bldg Al 45.0 16.4 113.1 A 122.0 N 92 8/10/05 89 Bldg. Al 42.0 14.1 118.8 B 124.0 N 95 90 Bldg Al . 28.0 15.7 115.5 B 124.0 N 93 91 Bldg Al 30.0 16.1 113.7 B 124.0 N 91 92 E of Bldg Al 32.0 15.2 114.6 B 124.0 N 92 93 Slope E of Bldg Al . 33.0 16.3 113.6 B 124.0 N 91 8/11/05 94 E. End of Bldg Al 33.0 15.2 113.3 B 124.0 N 91 95 E. of Bldg Al 32.0 15.7 113.7 B 124.0 N 92 96 Bldg Al 33.0 16.2. 112.7 B 124.0 N 91 97 J South of Bldg Al 34.0 15.5 1 112.5 B 124.0 N 91 98 E. of Bldg Al 35.0 15.8 112.3 1 B 124.0 N 90 8/12/05 99 Bldg. Al 34.0 15.4 114.5 B 124.0 N 92 100 Driveway BTWN. Bldg A2 &82 28.5 14.7 116.2 B 124.0 N 94 8/15/05 101 N of Bldg. Al 35.0 14.6 115.1 B 124.0 N 93 102 NE of Bldg. Al 33.0 13.2 116.9 B 124.0 N 94 103 1 Bldg. Al FG 13,7 1 116.8 B 124.0 N 94 Note: N = Nuclear Gauge Test FG = Finished Grade Test All elevations are approximate - PAR DEVELOPMENT GeoTek, Inc. 8,2205 La Costa Fairways Pmject No.: 2611-S03 Carlsbad, CA Page 3of3 TABLE I SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS Grading - Location Lot No. Sta No. TestDATE Eiev/ TypeMo. Depth (pcf) Moisture Content =RelativeTust Dry Density Soil Type Maximum Density (pcf) 104 Between Bldg. Al &A2 26.0 13.6 115.6 B 124.0 N 93 105 Between Bldg. A1&A2 27.0 14.1 117.3 B 124.0 N 94 106 Bldg. A2 FG 15.3 117.9 B 124.0 N 95 107 Bldg. A2 FG 14.7 118.4 B 124.0 N 95 8/16/05 108 Area of Bldg. B2 FG 14.2 118.9 B 124.0 N 95 109 Area of Bldg. 82 FG 11.6 116.3 B 124.0 N 94 110 Area of Bldg. Bi FG 16.1 118.4 B 124.0 N 95 Ill Area of Bldg. Bi FG 11.9 117.3 B 1 124.0 N 94 6/01/06 112 Center of Al FG 14.3 114.1 B 123.0 N 93 6/05/06 113 SE Side of Lot A-I 36.0 16.3 111.1 B . 123.0 N 90 114 ESide of Lot A-i 38.0 14.3 112.8 B 123.0 N 92 115 SE Side of Lot A-i 40.0 136 112.4 B 123.0 N 91 116 SE Side of Lot A-i 42.0 14.4 107.6 B 123.0 N 87 6/06/06 1 16 SE Side of Lot A-i . 42.0 14.6 115.3 1 B 123.0 N 94 117 SE Side of Lot A-i 44.0 15.0 113.5 B 123.0 N 92 118 SE Side of Lot A-1 45.0 13.2 111.6 B 123.0 N. 91 119 SE Side of Lot A-i . 46.0 14.4 114.4 B 123.0 N 93 XX. - tests numbers 114- 121 ..Note never used Q1 N = Nuclear Gauge Test FG = Finished Grade Test All elevations are approximate MP Eg \ FF 19 QO e — — • g: :'• - - 5 -ic-- fl Q,. . •- - - • -L -. r x 7-7 — - lkb r ' ,SU/L 31.7 j 05 1 PA CJ -- 1 TW P2 9, .'1 . -- -. •IO , 03D ( 9 — - ,4PN 21 'S1O4 • I .T - P27O 275I3. i :' cD c-t ( PROP0 s Fw " 8 _t'haw I I ' , 2. xg \j1 OBSCUED' I ngAg 1t / iTgiv \ - --- - / / • / — — -. — -- -- - — - / PER 72 o -. CLO 2 jWN '411 V 4, 4 OF J92 ud BS 0 (x292 I X J96 I I " 911PIN? 4PJ1 I I 5NEZ f // RED A -- cuED -- Il , i'..'_.•' - --_- _-- -- ..- -.. -- - . — - - .- , / ., IN - - iv 252 4701 AY..ThP - _> - '' / - - / // - ... 4(--- - / - ,; 7__ - - --,- -- A. II, ER £11N9rnEEs/meER 0I&2AN . I - / - - R911LAcI7 AS aep/clED 0 MPLDCPPE PLAN 11 4 . 1-19734- - - SCALE: 1 20' / .1 . / A fy)ç A A ENUE , LEGEND ii • I .1 019• Approximate location ofdenItest I!o1a:Map prepared byo'Day Consultants, February 2004. Approximate ulevation of bottom of excaviiion - , PAR DEVELOPMENT . . •. I -. - -. - . La Costa Fairways . . Figure 1 ' to La Costa Avenue •. . ,• - - . Density Test -- - Carlsbad, California • Location' . - - "JEK, INC. - . . - . 1384 Poinsettia Avenue, Suite A GeoTek PN: 2611SD3 I - June 2006 . Plan - .. Vista, California 92081 -. •. - - . - . -, - .- , - .. r (•4 1 41 - -