The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCT 03-02; CARLSBAD RANCH PA 5; BUILDING PAD CERTIFICATION - CLUBHOUSE PAD; 2012-03-231 Construction Inspection . Geotechnical Engineering Materials Testing Environmental ()rFII:A1i'os March 23; 2012. . . '.. S' Dio Grand Pacific Resorts, Inc MTGL Project No 1916A09 i'II'tRIt (otir 5900 Pasteur Court Suite 200 MTGL Log No 12-046 629 I trns Stiu ' Carlsbad, California 92008 San Iii t!o:CA 92121 Tel: 37.3999 'Attention:, Mr.Houston Añiold . 858.537.858.537.31.J909 . . . . . . . . Subject: BUILDING PAD CERTWICATION - CLUBHOUSE PAD . •. . - • .. - 4 Marbria ResOrts . . OR,N(;I: CoIMsrY Carlsbad,Ca1ifomia . (II'ok,%TI: IIIIACII -. . . .. . . 92 EJAi Ptli,ia Aiiut. SLIIItA . : . Anhni C A i)2800 Dear . Mr. Arnold Tel: 714.632.2999 .. S . 714 62 2974 Per your request, we have prepared this letter to certify that the building pad for Clubhouse at the Marbnsa Resorts was accomplished in general accordance with the l\I NIY . EMPIRE approved plans, specifications and gcotechxucal investigation 14467 McriiIii,i Parkway Ri'.r'5ni C'\ 92.II Building 2A We observed grading at the site from February 17 2012 thru March 16,'2012. Based Tel-. 951.03.499k) on our observations and the results of our, tests the building pad construction complies 4 Fav- 95 1 ,051.4666 with the project aprôved documents. . . 44917 CrtlfC1.,tir We apreciate this opportunity to be of continued service to you Should you have any. Indio. CA 92201 questions regarding the rnfoi1mation contained herem, please contact us at your earliest 76i.342.477 l.i' 7&I14242" convenience. . . . . . . . . . S . Respectfully submitted, , : . .FES OC/LA/isuxn 1MP1RE . Dispvnn . . . . . MTGL, Inc CD - , us Pdo.C5G22G JE Cr.i& i,SI, 544 io(4J SAN DIE CO flisp,viCii - . m iI-e frltM </4 Sam E. Valdez; RCE56226, RGE 2813 OFCAU" . Vice President f Engineering www.IiiDline.cmi .- -' •- . S . - . . . . . _r S. . . . . Geo technical Engineering A Construction. Inspection Materials Testing Environmental November 4, 2011 Office Locations Grand Pacific Resorts, Inc.'; . .. .. . - . Project No. 1916-A08 Orange County 5900 Pasteur Court, Suite 200 Log No 114409 Corporate Branch: . . . . ' .. . Carlsbad, California 92008 2992 E. La Palma Avenue . . . . - . . Suite •. ' . Anaheim CA 92806,Attention Mr. Bruce Zelenka Tel: 714.632.2999 • . '. . . . . . . . . : . . . Fax: 714.632.2974,'. SUBJECT: Geotechnical 'Investigation .. .. . . • San Diego . . Proposed Sales, ActivityaridFithess Buildings: . Imperial County . . . . . . 6295 Ferns Square Carlsbad Ranch, Planning Area 5 Suite C San Diego CA 92121 MarBrisa Phase II Carlsbad, California '. . . . Tel: 858.537.3999 Fax 8585373990 ( Dear Mr Zelenka . •;0 . . .. . . . ,. . 'Inland Empire 1Building 2A 4467 Meridian Parkway In accordance with your request and authorization we have completed a geotechnical Riverside, investigation at the site for -a proposed Sales, Activity and Fitness Buildings including two Til~ 951.653'4999 Fax:'951.6514666' 4666 Swimming Pools at the Carlsbad Ranch, Planning Area 5, MarBrisa Phase II in Carlsbad, CA India . We are pleased to present the following report with our conclusions and recommendations. : . - .. . . . - 4917. Golf Center Parkway The site for proposed development is located inside the MarBrisa Resort that was previously . . . . . . . . . . : Indio, CA 92201 . graded with an elevated pad on the east corner with tennis court. . . ., . . . Tel: . 76O.2.4677 . . . . . . Fax: 760.342.4525 . Our report concludes that the proposed improvement and addition would be feasible provided OC/LAjlnland Empire the recommendations presented are incorporated into the plans and specifications Dispatch 800 491 2990 Details related to seismicity,. geologic conditions, foundation design, and construction . 0 . . •. • . .. . • San OlegoDispaich 888 844 5060 considerations are included in subsequent sections of this report We look forward to providing additional consulting services during the planning and www.mtlinc.com construction of the project * . 4 - . • . 4 -. .- . -. .,• ---S -.5 - -:- • - 4 . Sales, Activity & Fitness Buildings •. Project No; 1916-A08 MarBrisa Resort, Carlsbad. CA .• Loa No. 11-1409 ••* .. .. • TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................................ 1 ,1 '- ' - • . •- • PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION 1 SCOPE 1 SITE DESCRIPTION 2 FIELD EXPLORATION 2 LABORATORY TESTING p 3 GEOLOGY 3 REGIONAL GEOLOGY 3 LOCAL GEOLOGY...................................................................................................................................... SITE GEOLOGIC CoNDmoNs 4 Fi11. .................................... ...................................................................................................................... 4 Terrace Deposit ................................................................... . •. ................................................................... 5 ' GROUNDWATER.......................................................................................................................................5 DISCUSSION OF GEOLOGIC AND SEISMIC HAZARDS ...............................................................5.. FAULTING AND SEISMICifY...... ......................... ........................................... .... ....................... . ............... . LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL .....................................................................................................................6 LANDSLIDE, MUI)FLow AND FLOODING ........... .......................... .............................................................. 6 GROUND RUPTUREO.. ................. ................ .......................................... ..................................................... 6 SEISMIC SEULEMENT.. .......................................... ................................................................... ................ 6 LATERAL $PREADINO..............................................• ....7 TSUNAMIS AND SEICHES............................................................................. ............................................... 7 SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS 7 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS .. 8 GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS 8 EXCAVATION CHARACTERISTICS 8 Cu'r/FILLTRANSmON CONDITIONS .....................................................•....................................................8 EXPANSION...............................................................................................................................8 CORROSIVITY 1 8 . - GENERAL... ............................................................................... .................................................................... 9 SITE GRADING RECOMMENDATIONS .......... ..................... . ........... .................................. ................... ................ 9 * S Site Preparation .............................................. . ........ ...................................... - ....................9 Temporary Excavation ........................................................................................................ ...••• .9 Site Grading 10 p. 111 4 Sales, Activity & Fitness Buildings S Project No. 1916-A08 MarBrisa Resort, Carlsbad, CA Log No. 11-1409 General Compaction Standard ........................................................................................ ......................... ..11 Import Fill Material .......................................... ...................................................................................... ii FOIJNDATION................................. .............. .... ............................. . ........................................ ............ ........... .ii LATERALRESISTANCE ........................................................................................................... . ................ 12 ...12 ... 5; INTERIORSLAB-ON-GRADE ...................................................................................................................... 12 EXTERiOR CONCRETE SLAB/FLATWORK ................................... ................................................................ 13 RETAINING WALL........................................................................................................................................13 PRLIMrNARY PAVEMENT .......................................................................................................................14 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS.................................... ........... ........................................................... ..15 Moisture Sensitive SoilsfWeather Related Concerns .........................................................................15 Drainage and Groundwater Considerations ...................................................................... ................. 16 Excavations ....... ....................................................................................................................................16 UtilityTrenches................................ .................................................................................................... 17 SrrE DRAINAGE............................................................................................................................................1'l PLAN REVIEW .................................................................................................................................... GEOTECHNICAL OBSERVATION/TESTING 17 ...................................................................................................................................... .18 LINUTATIONS Figure 1 - Site Location Map Figure 2-,', Boring Location Plan .. 5 5. 5 • . S Appendix A - References S • S Appendix B.- Field Exploration Program . 5 • Appendix C - Laboratory. Testing Pràcedures • . . Appendix D - Engineering Analysis S 5 Appendix E - General Earthwork and Grading Specifications S S • S • S S • • S S S S • S •W S.. Sales, Activity & Fitness Buildings Project No. I916-A08 MarBrisa Resort, Carlsbad, CA Log No. 11-1409 INTRODUCTION In accordance with your request and authonzation, MTGL Inc has completed a geotechnical Investigation for the subject site The following report presents our findings, conclusions and recommendations based on the results of our investigation, laboratory testing and engineering review. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION A sales building of two to three-story with basement is planned on elevated pad with existing tennis court Planned grading for the basement level consists of the removal of approximately 12 feet of the existing soil In addition, site grading is to include the re-construction of the elevated pad slopes to enlarge the existing pad area. The activity 'and fitness buildings including associated two swimming pools are to be constructed west of the sales building It is our understanding that the activity and fitness buildings are to include a basement level Additional related improvements include paved driveway and parking, flatworks, and underground utilities. Future thirteen two-'to three-story villas with paved parking are planned around the swimming pools SCOPE 1. The scope of our Geotechnical services included the following Geotechniàal investigation consisting 'of drilling six borings to explore subsurface' conditions and to obtain samples for laboratory testing (See Geotechnical Boring Location Plan, Figure 2, for the location of borings, and Appendix B, Field Investigation, for boring logs).- Laboratory testing of samples (See Appendix C) 1. Geotechnical engineering review of data and engineering recommendations Preparation of this report summarizing our findings and presenting our conclusions and recommndations for the proposed construction - .4.. Sales Activity & Fitness Buildings ','. Project No 1916 A08 MarBrisa Resort. Car(sbad. CA' ' - Log No.:i1i4o9; I. ,• SITE DESCRIPTION i The project site is located on the northwestern portion of the existing MarBnsa Resort on Grand Pacific Drive 'south of Canon Road in Carlsbad, CA Existing development at the MarBnsa Resort includes ahotel building, resort conference facility, building, restaurant building, sales building, villas, paied driveway and parking, and associated retaining walls and landscaping. Mass grading "for the 'entire MarBnsa Resort including the project site under this investigation was 'performed in 2005 and 2006 under the observation and tasting of Leighton and Associates, Inc The sales buildin site located bn the sàutheast corner is elevated with a ground elevation of approximately 215 feet The site for the planned activity and fitness building including two swimming pools and future villas are located on the gently slopes down to the west with elevation ranging from 198 feet to 186 feet Currently this area is tilled with partial plants within the southeast Numerous shallow underground water lines exist on the entire lot for irrigation -4- . . . ,. .. .' •1 ,. .4 purposes The As-Graded Report by Leighton and Associates, Inc dated August 2, 2006 reveals the tennis court area is mantled by approximately 14 to 18 feet of documented fill The other area of the site is mantled by varying thickness of documented fill ranging. from 2 to 13 feet Expansive clayey soil was buried at the time of mass grading within the future planned parking lots FIELD EXPLORATION The subsurface conditions at the project site were explored with six test borings Two of the borings were drilled ithin the pooi area and four of the borings were drilled within the sales building location The approximate boring locations are shown on the Boring Location Plan (Figure 2) All borings were advanced with a truck mounted drill rig equipped with an 8" diameter hollow stem auger. The borings were drilled to a depth of between 20 and 50 feet below existing site grades Samples were obtained with the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) and CAL Sampler for geotechnical testing See Appendix B for further discussion of the field exploration including logs of test borings - :- - . - -- .• . - 4 4 - . -. .. . 0• 4 - 4 . . - - 4 4.. '.4 .- 4 ' - 4 -. .- -. 4 4. .• 4- - 4' . . - .•,. . , .- - 4 4 •- - -' 4 .,. • '' - - - -- • - 4 , '- ' -- : -. . ,,-- - - ,- - - .- - . . -. • 4 - . I ,- - 4. 4 . -' - -. • . - - Sales, Activity & Fitness Buildings Project No. 1916-A08 MarBnsa Resort Carlsbad CA Log No 111409 LABORATORY TESTING• The laboratory testing included moisture content of the disturbed and undisturbed samples The maximum density was determined on selected samples of the near surface soils for compaction and shrinkage calculations Direct shear, and consolidation testing were accomplished for foundation bearing determinations Soluble sulfates were determined on selected on-site soil samples to determine its degradation on concrete structure Resistivity and pH testing were performed on representative soil for corrosion potential of buried 'metals.. Index testing including sieve analysis and expansion index were performed on selected' soil samples. R-value testing Was performed for pavement design analysis The results and expanded explanation of laboratory testing are presented in Appendix C. , , '. , .• GEOLOGY,' Regional Geology The' site lies within the Peninsular Ranges province of, Southern California. The Peninsular Ranges are a group of mountain ranges, in the Pacific Coast Ranges, which stretch 1500 km from southern California in the United States to the southern tip of Mexico's Baja California peninsula They are part of the North American Coast Ranges that run along the Pacific coast from Alaska to Mexico.. Elevations range from 500 ft to 11,500 ft. Rocks in the ranges are dominated by Mesozoic granitic rocks, derived from the same massive batholith which forms the core of the Sierra Nevada Mountains in California They are part of a geologic province known as the Salinian Block which broke off the North American Plate as the San Andreas Fault and Gulf of California came into being According to Kennedy (1975), the Peninsular Ranges province includes two principal rock units The underlying basement rocks include, igneous and metamorphic rocks and the, overlying rock units include sedimentary rocks of a, variety typë. The basement rocks are structurally complex,": metamorphosed volcanics and volcaniclastic "rocks and intrusive 'rocks related in part to' ' emplacement of the Creaceoüs àge southern ,Californià batholith which forms the, backbone of the Peninsular, Ranges province The overlying sedimentary rocks were deposited on a high relief surface. Most of the overlying sedimentary rocks are Upper Cretaceous ,age strata of • V . .4 3 1 3V .' . . - - I r 4 - - Sales, Activity & Fitness Buildings - .-., 'V '. '- Project No. 1916-A08 -. - - MarBnsa Resort. Carlsbad CA Log No 111409 marine, lagoonal, and nonmarine origin related to two major transgressive and regressive PI -- depositional episodes Tie geologic structure of southern California is dominated by right-lateral stnke-shp faulting with the movement of two tectonic plates The San Andreas fault system marks the principal boundary between 6e Pacific plate and the North American plate Additional faults that affect the geologic structure of the project vicinity include the Elsinore-Juhan Fault and the Rose Canyon Fault 4 -V I. V .V,.ç •VV 4 _V. I' 4 V _ -- 4V . . - - V . .V . 4 .V •V - . 4 - V • - - ,- Local Geology, V . - ••V _V V4 - •- . The project site is located within a developed area with documented fill Based upon available geologic map (Tan and Kennedy, 1996, Oceanside, San Luis Rey and San Marcos 7.5- Quadrangles), the underlying natural soil at the site consists of the Pleistocene-aged Terrace deposits The Terrace deposits are composed of reddish-brown, poorly bedded, poorly- to moderately-indurated sandstone, siltstone and conglomerate This unit was encountered in all borings below the fill at approximate depth of between 8 and 18 feet below existing site grades 1 . . V 13 "VVV V _ •VV Site Geologic Conditions V•4 V - A brief discussion of the earth materials dncountered in the borings is presented in the- following sections 'Refer to the bonngs logs in the Appendix B for a more ,detailed description of these materials Fill 4 Documented fill maténal was encountered in all borings 'ranging in thickness between 7 and 18 feet from the surface The encountered fill generally consists of brown to orange-brown silty sand, which was generally moist and medium dense to very dense at the time of our exploration The documented fill in it current condition,would be suitable for structural support for the proposd -, - V V •4 - - . V_V_ .4 4 •-• 4- V V - development However, for umform soil bearing support and to eliminate cut/fill transition 4 conditions within building pad it is recommended that existing soil should be excavated and recompacted to a depth of at least 2 feet below bottom of footings Lab test results indicate a very 'low expansion potential for the existing on-site fill soils V41 4V Vt V4 V V V V -" V• V V - VV 4.V -. V V V - - V V V 4V V t . •VV - V 4 ,V .. - 4 V - - • V'1 - , V - - V V VVVV V V.. 3 V V V V 1 ' •V I VV 1 4 I 4; - , -- . 4. 4 t1 4 ,, , . . • JO - 4 . .I • 4 ' Sales Activity & Fitness Buildings Project No 1916-A68 MarBrisa Resort, Carlsbad. CA - '•. Log No. 1409 : -• .. • '. 4 .-. . .4 ..- . • -' - . -• - '• -- -' 4 Terrace Deposits Underlying the fill is Terrace deposits, which extend at least to the maximum explored depth of 50 s feet below existing site grade This encountered deposits generally consists of orange-brown silty. sand At the time of exploration the deposits were moist and dense to very dense Expansion potential for this Terrace deposits is very low 4 ) •• - 4 •4 r I 4 Groundwater Groundwater was not encountered within the maximum explored depth of 50 feet below existing grade Geotechnical reports by Leighton and Associates, Jnc. reported localized perched groundwater encountered during their investigation and the subsequent mass grading at elevation between the terrace deposits and the underlying Santiago Formation During our investigation the underling Santiago F6rmation was not encountered The pekhed groundwater would have no impact on the proposed development However, it is possible that ransient oversaturated ground conditions at shallower depths could develop at a later time due to periods of heavy precipitation, landscape watering, leaking water lines, or other unforeseen causes DISCUSSION OF GEOLOGIC AND SEISMIC HAZARDS Faulting and Seismicity 4 Faults are one of the most widespread geologic hazards to development in California Faults of most.concern are those'designated as active (less than about 11,000 years since last movement and a .e - . • . • - • ......-4 potentially. active (11,000 to about 750,000 years)..According to Hart and Bryant, (2007) the site is not within a designated earthquake fault zone I . . 4 - -. • - .4 1 - ,-. •• In the event of an earthquake, the closest active fault likely to g&nerate the highest ground accelerations at the site is the Rose Canyon Fault, which runs parallel to and Just offshore of the • coast from-north of Carlsbad to iouth of Lindbergh Field.. The Rose Canyon Fault with a maximum earthquake magnitude (Mw) of 7 2 is located approximately 8 5 km southwest of the project site A number of other sigiiificant faults also occur in the. San Diègó metropolitan area suggesting that the regional faulting pattern is very complex Faults such as those offshore are known to be active and any, could cause a damaging earthquake The San Diego metropolitan area has experienced some major earthquakes in the past, and will likely experience future major earthquakes . . 4 . I • •• 4 - )'• . 4 • 4• - --.4 4• - -4 .4- 4 - • • 4 • . ..: •. • • 4 - • . • - - 4 - . •'a , .• 4 • -4 4'...- a a • - . . . ' . 1 4 4 4 -• 4 • .a - • - a. r I... -. .. - Sales, Activity & Fitness Buildings .. Project No. 1916-A08 MarBrisa Resort, Carlsbad. CA -- Lo No.. 11-1409 0•• . 0 ._ S. 0S •0! - •0 . •0 4 •, . - S. ,- 0, Other active faults which could cause ground shaking at the site include the offshore Newport Inglewood Fault, located approximately 11 .6 km to the northwest and the offshore Coronado Bank Fault, located approximately 211 km to the south 'est. 0 Liquefaction Potential Liquefaction involves the substantial loss of shear strength in saturated soil, when subjected to impact by seismic or dynamic loading This usually occurs within a uniform fine-grained soil, with loose relative density, and low confining pressures Liquefaction potential has been found to be greatest when the groundwater level is within 50 feet from the surfae and loose fine sands or silts occur I within that depth Liquefaction potential decreases with increasing grain size, aid clay and gravel content, but increases as the ground acceleration and duration of shaking increase The On-site documented fill is underlain by terrace deposits, in turn, underlain by.. Santiago formation. Due to the medium dense to very dense nature of the documented fill and the 'underlying formation unit, liquefaction potential at the site is negligible Landslide Mudflow and Flooding - Landslide, mudflow and flooding are not considered a significant hazard at the site due to the absence of ascending slopes, valleys and rivers in the vicinity area A review of the available Landslide Hazard Maps (DMG Open 'File Report 95-04) indicates to mapped landslide within the project site ' Ground Rupture .. . - - • - 0 -. -. - No known active or potentially active faults, with known surface traces, cross the site.,Therefore, the potential for ground rupture due to faulting is considered to be negligible 4 0d Seismic Settlement ' 5 0 t. - - -1 _ _ - S Saturated and non-saturated granular 'soils are subject to densification under strong shaking The lower the density of the soils, the higher the intensity and duration of shakingT results in greater degree of densification The project site is underlain by very dense formational unit that is 50 S • .-• • - S • 0 6-- 5 5 - - • - .: -.. • - - - - S . - .. S - .• • .- . - - S 5 5 0_ - • S • •0 - • S '- S S - - • -- -SS - 0,, - • S 71 BMW I M0690 -7 '0 ':O'"n 1 [" b9l;l er , P147-MMOR F, _________ 4;," N, c j_t1W`_'~-e"6RF;:enee S5 .-'.' ? - 1.2529 . •. . Section.4613.5.1 .- 0.473g. •' -4 Section 1613.5.1 - - : Site Class . .': -'.. D :: -. ..-Table.1613.5.2 -. ' ' . .' 1.0' : ,. Table 1613 .5.3(l) F'4 - '. . : . ' 1.527 : Table 1613.5.3(2)' . •SMS., .'. 4--. 1-252g' . ... : -. Section 1613.5.3 SMI. .• i-.. -.722g -: ' Section. 1613.5.3.' 4 - S - 0.835g' .: . Section 1613.5.4 ' - .- SD! - ...- '.,• 0.481g.,. ., ,. - Section 1613.5.4..' •2 - "di' - . - •. . . •- I •.. . . . - . 4* - -. --r4 • .. . . ---4. f 4 . ''. - . 44 'I .4 - - -* 4• - 4 .! ,, ' . .4 4 -.'. ., 4. 1 Sales Activity & Fitness Buildings . Project No 1916-A08 MarBrisa Resort, Carlsbad. CA . H'' '.. ' '. Log No. 11-1409 " '4 cons not subject to settlement Based on the anticipated earthquake effect and the, stratigraphy of the site, seismically induced settlement is considered negligible .4 .4 4 44 5.4 Lateral Spreading 4 Lateral spreading may occur where liquefaction occurs at depth and there is either a nearby free face or there is a general slope of the terrain The overlying non-liquefiable soils tend to break into blocks: which -then may tilt and move laterally over the liquefiable soils Given the stated low risk potential for liquefaction, we consider the potential for lateral spreading to be negligible Tsunanus and Seicles 4. -4 I 4 1 44 4,4 . - . 4 . 4 4. . 4. . - .,4. ., •' - : -- Given that the site islocaed a sufficient distance- inland from the coast and due t0 its elevated. location, inundation by tsunamis is considered to be nonexistent Due to the lack of surface water impoundment in the immediate site vicinity, .he seiche potential is also considered to be very lov to 1 - ''4 -'-.: I ' •#-. 5. . . nonexistent. - - , '.. Earthquake Accelerations / CBC Seisnik Parameters . , ' .'t... ;. - ••. i. -.4 4 4 .,, 4. . 44.' 4.44 -: --- ' 4 - .4 •.-, 4 .;.. The computer pogram Earthquake Ground Motion Parameters Version 5 1 0 was used to calculate the CBC site specific design parameters as required by the 2010 California Building Code (CBC) 4 Based upon 1onn data and SPIT values, the site can be classified as Site Class D.- The spectral acceleration values fof 02 second and 1 second periods obtaitied from the computer program and in accordance with Section 16115 of the 2007 ,California Building Code are tabulated below .. •P . •,. •.* •(!4.'4 .4 ,..4, ',44 - - .4.*. ..........4 •..,' • ., .4- .:-:.: -'-":,..' --' •I , - .: • 4,. 4.. . ••f • 4 '... 4 4. . .'-,,••, ,••• -4 , 4 4. ' :- .4 _1-•- . . 4 4 - - ' .4,. - , •,7. '' .4' .- .1g.' ' .4 4' 4 ,-'. - .4 - . .4, - . 1, •' - . - -5 , ,.''- ' : - - . . - . -4. - . .4- . 4 2 4. 4 44 '4. 4.4 .' . - . 1, - -iJ - - .• -- 4. - - - - 4 I - ...• - .4 - .. •..%I - ..-• -4. - •. . I -I. -- •4_ - -4 1 ,• .. Sales Activity & Fitness Buildings Project No 1916-A08 MarBrisa Resort Carlsbad CA Lo No 111409 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS General Considerations - Given the findings of the investigation, the proposed project appears to be feasible from a geologic and geotechnical standpoint, provided the recommendations presented in this report are fully incorporated into the design and construction of the project.4Specific conclusions pertaining to 4 1 geologic conditidns are summarized below Excavation Characteristics The site is mantled by documented fill, underlain by terrace deposit Ecavafton on these materials can be accomplished with the use of conventional construction equipment Expansion Potential Generally, the engineered fill and terrace deposits possess a very low expansion potential As a result, the on-site soils are considered suitable for use as compacted fill within the project site Cut/Fill Transition Conditions 4 4 With the varying thickness of documented fill of between 2 and 18 'feet, it is anticipatd that proposed buildings and other, structures to have cut/fill transition conditions In order to minimize the potential for differential settlement in areas of cut/fill transitions, it is recommended that all proposed buildings and, settlement"sensitive structures to be entirely supported by properly compacted fill A minimum 2 feet of compacted fill is recommended below bottom of footings This minimum 2 feet compacted fill requirement should extend acfross the entire building pad and at least 5 feet beyond building footprint. :r Corrosivity Corrosion series tests consisting of pH, soluble sulfates, and minimum resistivity were performed on selected sample of the on-site soils Soluble sulfate levels for the on-site soil indicate a negligible sulfat exposure for concrete structure As such, no special considerations are required for concrete placed in contact with the on-site soils However, it is recommended that Type II 1. * cement to be used for all concrete. S • . : - . • • - . 4 . .- 4. ,- . ,I_ - - I - • I •? . -. - - .- .. . . -- • I • - - * I- •1 - . * • . . -- I - I - . 5• I •*• . -. . : -. . - . * • -- . - 4 4 r 4 Sales Activity & Fitness Buildings Project No 1916-A08 MarBrisa Resort, Carlsbad; CA Log No: 11-1409 The corrosion potential of the on-site soil is moderate',to high and considered to impact underground ferrous metals The actual corrosive potential is deternuned by many factors in addition to those presented herein MTGL, Inc does not practice corrosion engineering. Underground metal conduits in contact with the soil need to be protected. We recommend that a corrosion engineer be consulted RECOMMEMDATIONS General The recommendations presented herein are considered minimum and may be superseded by more conservative requirements of the architect, structural engineer, building code, or governing agencies; The foundation recommendations are based on the loaddefoation charactëstics and shear strength of the onsite soils In addition to the recommendations in this section, additional general earthwork and grading specifications are included in Appendix E. Site Grading Recommendations - Site Preparation Current improvements within proposed dëveiópment include tennis court, plants and underground utilities Pnor to the start of any grading, all of these existing improvements should be removed and utilities be relocated TeMporary Excavation. •• We anticipate temporary excavation for the basement level would not exceed 15 feet below existing grade Temporary vertical excavations of up to 4 feet deep for the on-site fill and terrace deposits would be. generally stable. Excavation beyond 4 feet deep should be benched or sloped back not steeper than l:l.(horizontal:vertical) up to a maximum height of 15. Beyond 15 feet high temporary slopes should have an inclination of between 1:5:1. and 2 1 The on-site terrace deposits material and fill soil should be classified as Type C soil • • Sates Activity & Fitness Buildings Project No 1916-A08 MarBnsa Resort Carlsbad CA Log No .'1 11409 Site Grading ow Sales Building - Grading of the-,pad includes cutting approximately 12 feet of the existing soil and the construction of new fill slopes The materials anticipated to be used in new fill slope grading consist of the onsite soil derived from the cutting of the site It is anticipated that the finish fill slope for the building pad to be approximately 10 to 25 feet high For slope stability purposes, the finished fill slope should have an inclination not steeper than .1 1 Construction of the new fill slope should include the excavation of key at the toe with a width of at least 8 feet and minimum depth of 2 feet below lowest adjacent grade into firm soil Benching into the existing slope should be performed simultaneously during the fill slope construction at a vertical interval' of 2 to 4 feet Additional grading recommendations within proposed building pad is to excavate and recompact the existing soil to a dpth of at least 2 feet below bottom M footings for uniform soil bearing support and eliminate cut/fill transition condition Activity and Fitness Buildings - A cut/fill transition condition could be anticipated within building pads For uniform soil bearing support and to eliminate cut/fill transition condition, it is recommended that grading for the building to include removal and recompaction of the existing soil to a depth of at least 2 feet below bottom of footing elevation Future Swirnnung Pools and Villas - Likewise with the above proposed strucures, entire foundations are recommended to be supported by properly compacted fill Existing soil should be 4 removed and recompacted to a depth of at least 2 feet below bottom of footing elevation for uniform soil bearing and eliminate cut/fill transition condition If highly expansive clay is encountered within building pads, it should be removed and replaced with available onsite soil with low expansion potential The depth of removal and replacement of highly expansive clay should be at least 3 feet below bottom of footing for buildings and at least 5 feet below bottom of slab for swimming pool The removal and replacement should extend at least 5 feet beyond structure footprint. 1• -, .- - -, - The lateral limit of grading for all structurs should extend at least 5 feet beyond building footprint. Prior to recompaction process, the bottom of excavation to receive fill should be scanfied to a depth of 6 inches; moisture conditioned and recompacted. ,- '3 • -- '• • •. • - - - 4 4 • - V 10 Ar '.7 • . • - . . • . - . . ' -, . • • - . . - . .4 7 • - I . • •. . 3 . . - . - Sales, Activity & Fitness Buildings Project No. 19 16-A08 MarBrisa Resort, Carlsbad, CA 0 Log No. 11-1409 General Compaction. Standard All fills, should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction. All fill materials should be placed in thin lifts not more than 8' inches and compacted. Material should be moisture- conditioned and processed as necessary to achieve a uniform moisture content at near optimum moisture to achieve adequate bonding between lifts and compaction. Fill surfaces and finished subgrades should not bç allowed to dry and should be maintained in a moist condition or scarified pnor to placing additional fill Fill soils outside structure and under vehicular pavement should be compacted to at least 90 percent. relative compaction. However, the top 12 inches of subgrade under all vehicular pavement should be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction Bac fill of utilities should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction. All compaction shall be based on Test Method ASTM D1557. Moisture content of all fill and backfill soil should be at least 2 percent above optimum moisture content Import Fill Material. . . .'. ., If required, import fill should consist of non-expansive granular soils, and have a maximum particle' size of 1 inch. Import material should have an expansion index (El) of 20 or less. Where import,. soils will be in contact with concrete or buried metal pipes a standard corrosion series test should be performed. . . . . . Foundation The recommendations and design criteria are "minimum", in keeping with the current standard-of- practice They do not preclude more restrictive criteria by the governing agency or structural 0 • 'considerations. The project structural. engineer should evaluate the foundation configurations and 0 reinforcement 'requirements for actual, structural loadings; Proposed structures are' anticipated to be supported by properly compacted fill. Conventional continuous or isolated footings are considered suitable for structural support founded on engineered fill.. Allowable soil bearing capacity for continuous or isolated footing with ,a nünimum width of 2 feet are' the following:' - - I p --• ;- _ - ': - .- Sales, Activity.& Fitness Buildings , Project No. 1916-A08 MarBnsa Resort, Carlsbad CA Log No 11-1409 Embedment Below Lowest Adjacent Grade Allowable Soil 'Bearing Values 2feet 5,000psf 0 •- •.- '-- 3 feet , 6,500 psf 4 P 4 feet 8,000 psf (maximum) - The above allowable bearing values may be increased by one-third where wind or seismic loads are + considered'in combination with dead and/or live loads - Minimum horizontal setback distance from the face of slopes for all building footings should be H12, where H is the slope height, with a maximum of 15 feet along 2 1 slopes.,This distance is measured from the outside edge of the footing, horizontally to the face of slope Lateral Resistance Lateral forces may be resisted by fnction on the base of foundations, and passive earth pressure on the sides of the portions of foundations or shear, keys be'iring against competent native formation or compacted engineered fill The allowable base fnction may be calculated using a coefficient of 0,31 The allowable passive pressure may be calculated as equivalent to that of a fluid weighing * 350 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) for foundations bearing against compacted engineered fill (S * - •. .• Settlement .5 5 For design consideration, a maximum settlement of at least 1-inch with a differential settlement of 1/2-inch in a span of 40 feet should be incorporated Interior Slab-On-Grade . Intenor slab-on-grade should be designed for the actual applied loading conditions expected The * structural engineer should size and reinforce slabs to support the expected loads utilizing accepted methods of pavement design, such as those provided by the Portland Cement Association or the American Concrete Institute A modulus of subgrade reaction of 200 pounds per cubic inch (pci) could be utilized in design Based on geotechnical consideration, interior slab should be a minimum of 5 inches Appropriate, slab reinforcement should be designed by the project structural engineer based upon low expansion potential - 4 Sales, Activity & Fitness Buildings:' Project No. 191 6-A08 MarBnsa Resort Carlsbad CA Log No 111409 Floor slabs should be underlain by a capillary break material consisting of at least 4 inches thick clean sand In moisture sensitive flooring areas, such as carpeted or linoleum covered areas, a 10- mu visqueen moisture barrier or equivalent should be installed inidheight within the capillary break material Alternatively, a Stego Wrap moisture barrier or equivalent may be installed following 4 manufacturers recommendations. The sand should be moistened Just prior to the placing of concrete Concrete is a rigid brittle material that can 'withstand very little strain before cracking Concrete, particularly exterior hardscape is subject to dimensional changes due to variations in moisture of the concrete, variations in temperature and applied loads It is not possible to eliminate the potential for cracking in concrete, however, cracking can be controlled by use of Joints and reinforcing Joints provide a pre-selected location for concrete to crack along and release strain and reinforcement provides for closely spaced numerous cracks in lieu of few larger visible cracks Exterior Concrete SlabfFlatwork Exterior slabs should be supported by. at least 12 inches of properly compacted fill. Compacted fill • should have at least 90 percent 'reiative density based on Test Method ASTM D1557 Exterior concrete slab/fiatvvo'rks should have a nominal thickness' of 4 inches: Reinforcement may be provided for stability purposes Controlled Joints should be provided to eliminate potential for cracking Retaining Wall Embedded structural walls should be designed for lateral earth pressures exerted on them The magnitude of these pressures depends on the amount of deformation that the wall can yield under load. If the wall can yield enough to. mobilize the full shear strength of the soil, it can be designed for "active" pressure If the wall cannot yield under the applied load, the shear strength of the soil cannot be mobilized and the earth pressure will be higher..Such walls as basement and swimming pools should be designed for the "at rest" conditions. If a structure moves towardth soils, the resulting resistance developed by the soil is the "passive" resistance For design purpoes, the recommended equivalent fluid pressure for each case for walls founded above the static ground water table and backfilled iith on-site soils (expansion index less than 20) is provided below..:Retaining wall backfill should be compacted to at least 90 percent relative 13 •-• - • - :- - I • . - :. • : : : Condition - Level 2 1 (H V) Sloi,e :Acthie- .. . 33 . -60 - - At-Rst - . 55 - . - 80. Passive . "' . 350 . .. 44, .' • , 150 4 .-.. . . • - (Maximum of 3 kst). . . . (Sloping Down). 4-. 44 4 • 4. 3, I 4' .4 - .4-. • ., .. - a..-- - - .,, p * -3. - 5-3 S S 4 • ' 4 4 . a '-• ,, '... , t - -?, - .4. . .' - 4' . •. . .• -.. . •' 3'._ - Sales Activity & Fitness Buildings Project No 19161A.08 MarBrisa Resort, Carlsbad CA' *. , p..' .'.i - . . Loa No. 11-1409. 4 3 44 4 44 — .,, '. '.; compaction (based on ASTM Test-Method D1557): Recommended pressures are tabulated below. I..- .. 8 --. ... . - -. ". -' .. -. - .,,': . - •- 4' - . . .'. .' ' .,.. ; 5 " -. . _- -- . •:-. 4 -• .,;.- . . :- f. Soil resistance developed againateral structural movement can be st l obtained from the passive ( pressure value provided above Further, for sliding . resistance, a friction' coefficient of 0.33,may be, used at the concrete and soil interface The passive pressure and the friction of resistance could be combined without reduction In addition, the lateral passive resistance is taken into account only if' it is ensured that the soil against embedded structures will 'remain, intact with time ' • . Drainage of backfill behind walls may. be by a vertical layer of Miradrain 6200 with , .provided -Mirafi- 140 Geofabric, or equivalent, at the back or b a minimurn;12-inch width,,, - ' placed 9fthéall; of 3/4 inch open-graded crushed gravel enveloped in Mirafi 140 Geofabric Subdrains should 44, • S .— -. S '4 ., Sj-' .' .• sI 1 . • . .4 47 4 consist of 4-inch diameter Schedule 40, PVC pipe or equivalent, embedded in approximately I. ft3/linear foot of 3/4-inch downopn-gradedgavel, enveloped in Mirafi 140 Geofabnc Filter or equivalent, with the pipe being 3± inches above the trench bottom, a gradient of at least 1% being provided to the pipe and trench bottom, discharging into suitably protec'ted outlets rn Alteatively low-retaining walls (less than '5 feet retained) may use weep holes 4 4 4 44 t p Prehnunary Pavement 4' "p :,.. --_- _c , 5 .44 ,, p.4 4' 5 . •_•_' 4 --.S , 4 The preliminary pavement sections presented bel6w1 are based on the R-value of the upper on-site soil (R-value of 25), assumed Traffic Index, and minimum pavement section bsed on the Citj of . . . 5 .i ......' . - .,,t• Carlsbad Supplemental Standard GS717 Final pavement designs should be evaluated based on R- value tests of the actual subgrade material after completion of grading Where the pavement is subject to repeated turning stress (i e Trash Enclosures Aprons) the pavement should be Portland 1 -.5. 'S ,. 4. •-I ' - •' .- . . cement concrete.- 44 i 4 S••• 5 -. . .. ,45 4 . S ,, S L' . •. P * 4 . S 5,.4 - , ' . ¶. -.5 - 4 •4 , 4 .4 . ', . 4 45 T..4"_._ ,. '4 S 3 •4'' . .. , 5- . - . . . .. -- . . . -, _5_._ 44 44 ': 5 . ' ;, -. .4 44 5 ..5 •_t. -4 3 . .4 , •,. .-_ . '. r 1- 4 4 44 _*.,_* Pavement 117 ioadmg€onditiont IassIPBase ET'06e .Trafflcindexc - iJI-bickness.l ssu Auto 45 40 inches 40 inches - . Parking Areas -- : ,Auto . --i. - , 5:0, - 4.0 ihche 4.0 inches- ,Driveways Light Duty Truck 60 4.0 'in 9.0 inches Driveways -.- Moderate Duty -'7.Q,,' :" 4.0 inchs . ' 11.0 inches Truck Driveways -, - - -'1- 4 - 3 t 4 1 .9 .. 3 3- . . . . 3 .. - 13 •1. 4 5. . 4 . - . 3. 3 - - I S ,• -3.. 4* Sales, Activity & Fitness Buildings Project No 1916-A08 - 3- MarBrisa Resort. Carlsbad. CA . - : -; Log No. 11-1409 . •' 4* .. I * $ - - All fill under pavement should be compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction with - . - S - ''4-- •na' --:-. . -exception I of the upper 12 inches'Prior to the placement• . ofbase matel, the upper 12-inches- of, - pavementsubgrade should be scarified, moisture conditioned and compacted to a minimum 95 percent relative compaction based on Test Method ASTM D1557 Aggregate base material should) :" -: - conform to Caltrans Standard Specifications Section'26(Claàs 2) or the Standard Specification for -.,, •-, -' Public Works Construction (Ciushed Aggregate Base or Crushed Miscellaneous Base) and should be compacted to a minimum 95 pdrceht relative compaction based on Test Method ASTM D1557 prior to placement of the asphaltic concrete '4 3. 1 I Portland cement concrete pavement sections may incorporate steel reinforcement and to be , V . provided with crack control joints as designed by the project structural engineer Recommended -"3.' concrete mix should be at least 3,500 psi...*,.. 43 $1 I -t 4., •44 It is recommended that Portland cement concrete swales to be designed and constructed within asphalt pavement areas for drainage of surface water. Fill' soils under curb and gutter should be - 3 3- compacted to a minimum 90 percent relative compaction based on Test Method AM D1557 3- - --. ConstructionConsiderations - 3- _4' V Moisture _Sensitive Soils/Weather RelatedConcerns I The soils encountered at the site may be sensitive to disturbances caused by construction equipment and to changes in 'moisture content Dunng wet weather penods, increases in the moisture content of the soil can cause significant reduction in the soil strength and support capabilities In addition, - - 4 soils that become wet may be slow to dry and thus significantly retard the - I .*. progress of grading and -3 1 15 3- - r • . - •- -. Sales, Activity & Fitness Buildings Project No 1916 A08 .''' MarBrisa Resort, Carlsbad, CA * -' • Log No. 11-1409 4 compaction 'activities..It will, therefore, be advantageous to perform earthwork and foundation construction activities during dry weather. Much of the on-site soils may be susceptible to erosion during periods ,of inclement weather. As a resulOt the project Civil Engineer/Architect and Grading Contractor should take appropriate precautions to reduce the potential for erosion during '.and after construction Drainage and Groundwater Considerations - . .' •: No groundwater was encontered within the maximum explored depth of 50 feet below existing grade It should benoted, however, that variations in the ground water table niay result from fluctuation in the ground surface topography, subsurface stratification, precipitation, irrigation, and other factors that may not have been evident at the time of our. exploration Seepage sometimes occurs where relatively impermeable and/or cemented formational materials are overlain by fill soils..We should be consulted to evaluate areas of seepage during construction Positive site drainage should be designed to reduce infiltration of surface water. around and underneath the building Finish grades should be sloped away from the building Excavations .•• .. .--• -' •- '1 It is mandated by federal regulation that excavations, like utility trenches, basement excavation or foundation excavations, be constructed in accordance with the new OSHA guidelines It is our, understanding that OSHA regulations are being strictly enforced and if not closely followed, the owner and the contractor could be liable for substantial penalties • • • The contractor is solely responsible for designing and constructing stable, temporary, excavations and should shore, slope, or bench the sides of the excavations as required to maintain stability, of both the excavation sides and bottom The contractor's "responsible person", should evaluate the soil exposed in the excavations as part of the contractor's safety procedures In no case, should slope height, slope' inclination, or excavation depth, including utility, trench çxavãtion &pth-,,. exceed those specified in local, state, and federal safety regulations - 16 : Sales, Activity & Fitness Buildings S Project No. 1916-A08 MarBrisa'Resort, Carlsbad, CA -Log No., 11-1409 Utility Trenches Except where extending perpendicular, under proposed foundations, utility trenches should be constructed outside a 1 1 proJection from the base-of-foundations Trenches for utility lines under structures should be properly backfiiled and conipacted. .. Utilities should be bedded and backfilled with approved sand or, granular material to a depth of at least 1-foot over the pipe Sand bedding material should be moisture conditioned and properly compacted.' Compaction by jetting is not allowed. The remainder of the backfill maybe typical on- site soil or imported soil which should be placed in lifts not exceeding 8 inches in thickness, watered or aerated close to optimum moisture content, and mechanically compacted to at least 95 percent (under structure and pavement) and '90 percent (not understructure- and pavement) of maximum dry density (based on ASTM D1557). ' Site Drainage S • Drainage should be designed to collect and direct surface waters away from structures to approved drainage facilities. Downspouts, berms, area drains-,and other. drainage controls should be included in construction considerations to minimize discharging or ponding of water near the foundation line For earth areas, a minimum gradient of 1 percent should be maintained and drainage should be directed toward. -approved swa1es5 or drainage facilities. Positive drainage with a minimum: gradient of 2 percent away from all structures should be provided and maintained within at least 5 feet from structure to reduce any runoff from infiltrating the soil beneath structural foundation Plan Review The geotechmcal and geological consultants should be retained to review grading and foundation plans and specifications to ascertain conformance with site conditions and recommendations,. presented herein. S - • S • • S • ' S Geotechnical Observation/Testing The geotechrncal and geological consultants should be retained to perform on-site construction observations and testing to ascertain that conditions correspond to the findings and conclusions presented herein and that construction conform generally 'to the recommendations presented herein.. 17 • S • • 'S • 5 , - : • S 5 5 ' 5 5 S • S • '• I 5 •• Sales, Activity &Fitness Buildings V Project No. 1916-A08 V MarBrisa ResOrt, Carlsbad, CA: Log No. 11-1409 The geotechnical and geological consultants' should be called upon for testing and observations as indicated in this report and at least for the following: V During site grading and overexcavation. .. During foundation excavations and placement. V V V • During excavation and backflllingVof all utility trenches V V V V V V Upon completion of any foundation and retaining wall footing excavation prior to placing V V V concrete V V V V V V ' V V V V' V• ' V V V V ' During processing and compaction of the subgrade for the access and parking areas and - .,Prior to construction of pavement sections. V It is the responsibility of the contractor to coordinate all inspections and testing required by this firm V V or by other regulatory agencies. V V V V V V V V V V V LIMITATIONS V V V V V VV V V V V V V V V V V V The analyses, conclusions, and recommendations contained in this report are based on Site V V V V V V V V conditions as they existed at the time of our investigation and further assume the explorations to be V V V V V V representative of the subsurface conditions throughout the site. !fdifferent subsurface conditions V V V V are observed during construction, we should be promptly notified for review and reconsideration of V V V V V V our recommendations.. V This report was prepared for the exclusive use and benefit of the owner, architect, and engineer for V V V V V V V evaluating the design Of the facilities as it relales to geotechnical aspects. V It should be made V V available to prospective contractors for information on factual data only, and not as a warranty of V V subsurface conditions included in, this. report. V V V V V V V V V V V V Our Vinvestigation was performed using the standard of care and level of skill ordinarily'exerciSed V V V V V under similar circumstances by reputable sOil engineers and geologists currently practicing in this or V V V V V similar localities. No other warranty, express or implied, is made as to the conclusions and V V V V V professional advice included in this report.. V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V VV V V VVV VV V 18 VV V V V V 1á\i \\55 0 Yk Gravoil JrHihSch$ -. -. S • .J - •Jf •'. '•' : ja 30 cl - - EJasP lnt' • ( 7 ,AgUa - % eservos<" ç/ "fv..'j t \ (. p SITE LO( ATION A. Ya fz Tat; r ' SITE LOCATION MAP 'SALES, ACTIVITY & FITNESS BUILDINGS Project No: 1916A08 :.J Date:, ,NOV. 2011 FIGURE 1 .9, MTGL, INC.,,' ' / ;---c ,— -. ,> 1I 41 q / ri1 1\ ) . \. R uf ..i -./ / il_i I LI 1 I . - \ -- -. •1 LP / e-7LfL$' / C' :•'. -. (: sy 7 ( •jls I Lr/\.. '-' II - - -U B-3 . Legend: - S B-6 Approximate Location of Boring BORING LOCATION PLAN SALES, ACTIVITY & FITNESS BUILDINGS Project No. 1916..A08 Date: NOV. 2011 FIGURE 2 ____ MTGL, INC. S - - V 5, 1 V • * - - V V . . P - APPENDIX A REFERENCES S . • • V V 55 - ••: VS5V V,V4 V V Blake, Thomas F, 2000, "EQFAULT, A Computer Program for the Deterministic Prediction of Peak Horizontal Acceleration From Digitized California Faults CDMG, California Division of Mines and Geology, 2000, DMG CD 2000-003, Digital Images of V V V Official Maps of Aiquist-Priolo Zones. VV V V • V Bryant, W.A. and Hart, E W.,2007,.-Fault Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Alquist-Pnolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act with Index to Earthquake Fault Zones Maps, California Department of Conservation, California Geological Survey, Special Publication 42 Jennings, lbw, 1994, Fault Activity Map of California and AdjacentlAreas, California Division of Mines and Geology Scale 1 750,000 California Department of Conervatión, Division of Mines and Geology, Geologic Map of the Northwestern Part of Skin Diego County, California, DMG Open-File Report 96-02 Scale 124,000 4 V V .•. - - V 4 California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Recent Failures, Ancient V V Landslides, and Related -Geology of the North-Central Coastal Area, San Diego County, V California by F Harold Weber, Jr, 1982, DMG Open-File Report 82-12, Scale 1:24,000 U.S. Geological Survey, Topographic Map of the San Luis Rey Quadrangle, California-San Diego County, 7.5-Minute Series (Topographic), 1997, Scale 1 24,000 California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, 1995, Landslide Hazards in the Northern Part of the San Diego Metropolitan Area, San Diego County, CA, DMG Open-File Report 95704, Landslide Hazard Identification Map No 35 - V - . V S S • • V. - . .5. California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, The Rose Canyon Fault Zone , Southern California, 1993, DMG Open-File Report 91-02 California Building Standards Commission, 2007 California 'Building Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2, Volume 2 of 2 V 55 4 - V • • V V V * Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, 1982, Foundations and Earth Structures, NAVFAC DM-7 2 Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering Command, 1982, Soil Mechanics NAVFAC DM-71 Leighton and Associates, Ind., 2005, Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed 53-Acre Resort Development Phase 1, Carlsbad Ranch, Planning Area No. 5, Carlsbad, CA, Project No. 040575-003, April 11, 2005 V V 5 -. • V V - .5 5 •V V S V • •_5 DEFINITION OF TERMS PRIMARY DIVISIONS SYMBOLS SECONDARY DIVISIONS -J GRAVELS CLEAN .0••••• GW Well graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no MORE THAN GRAVELS fines. : GP Poorly graded gravels or gravel-sand mixtures. little or .-Jo - W 0 HALF OF (LESS THAN 0 ,-c • COARSE 6% FINES) _____________ ________ no fines. GRAVEL GM Silty gravels, gravet-sand-eilt mixtures, non-plastic fines. - 0 o IL Z w TIN FRACTION IS UI 0 z LARGER THAN NO.4 SIEVE WITH FINES - GC clayey gravels, gravei-sand-clsy mixtures, plastic fines. U. X ______________ SANDS ______________ CLEAN SANDS SW Well graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no floss. ox MORE THAN HALF OF (LESS THAN SP - 5% FINES) ' . Poorly graded sands or gravelly sands, littis or no fins.. COARSE FRACTION IS SANDS SM Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures, non-p lastic fines. - SMALLER THAN WITH FINES NO. 4 SIEVE SC Cl) W Clayey sandq, sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines. U. N ML Inorganic elite and very fine sands rock flour, silty or clayey fine sands or clayey slits with slight plasticity. 3 o SILTS AND CLAYS U) LIQUID LIMIT IS CL inorganic clays of low tá medium plasticity, gravelly clays, sandy clays, lean clays. LESS THAN 60% LU 01 Organic elite and organic silty clays of low plasticity. ZZo0 —<-0 X . I MH Inorganic elIte, mlcaceous or dIatomacsous fine sandy or silty soils, elastic silts. ' øwz SILTS AND CLAYS - UI cc iu z LIQUID LIMIT IS -- ; CH Inorganic clays of high plasticIty, fat clays, zc< GREATER THAN 50% OH clays of medium to high plasticity, organic elite. HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS - Pt Peat and other highly * organic soils. GRAIN SIZES SAND i GRAVEL I SILTS AND CLAYS COBBLES IBOULDERS FINE MEDIUM COARSE I FINE COARSE I 200 40 10 4 314 3' 12' U.S. STANDARD SERIES SIEVE CLEAR SQUARE SIEVE OPENINGS GROUND WATER LEVEL OR GROUND WATER SEEPAGE. Eli 2 LOCATION OF SAMPLE TAKEN USING A STANDARD SPLIT TUBE SAMPLER, -INCH O.D., 1-318-INCH I.D. DRIVEN WITH A 140-POUND HAMMER FALLING 30-INCHES. Z 3 LOCATION OF SAMPLE TAKEN. USING A MODIFIED CALIFORNIA SAMPLER, -1/8-INCH 0.0.. WITH 2-1/2-INCH I.D. LINER RINGS. DRIVEN USING THE WEIGHT OF KELLY BAR (LARGE DIAMETER BORINGS) OR USING A 140 POUND HAMMER FALLING 30-INCHES (SMALL DIAMETER BORING): LOCATION OF SAMPLE TAKEN USING A 3-INCH O.0..THIN-WALLED TUBE SAMPLER (SHELBY TUBE).HYDRAULICALLY PUSHED. LOCATION OF BULK SAMPLE TAKEN FROM AUGER CUTTINGS. KEY TO LOGS - UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (ASTM D-2487) JOB NO.: 1916A08 1DATE: NOV. 2011 1FIGURE: B-0 DATE OBSERVED Oct. 6, 2011 METHOD OF DRILLING 8 Hollow Stem Auger LOGGED BY:ECD .. GROUND ELEVATION: ±188' . LOCATION: See Figure 2 - In .H , 14 U) — C -. - 8 - s . 0 BORINGNO B-i , ,-, -- ,.. -- .- DESCRIPTION. SOIL TEST SB1 SB-2 SB-3 'SS-1- SS -2 - : SS -4 . .-. 36 52. 76 54 56 S. 55 - .. 135 12.5 9.3 118 S 134 104 - -- - - 1229 S. 124.1 -- - , -.10.4-1 Grades 120.4-'Grades.todense., ELW Silty.Sand (SM), orange-brown, moist, medium dense, trace clay. -. -'. ,. -; -• ..: CorrosMty Rvalue Gradation Direct Shear Consolidation . - S t - - - S — TERRACEDEPOSITS: Silty Sand (SM), orange-brown, noist, very dense, mix yellow-brown color, trace clay. I . •_ Grades with mix greycolor. with dark brown color. * S S Grades to dense - Grades to very dense 10 — 15 J : 20 - . • — : 0 - - -- -., Boring Terminated at 30 Feet. No Groundwater Encountered.. Borehole Backlilled on 10/6/2011. - - -- : :. . -: -. •- 40 -- 35 - Project No 1916A08 LOG OF BORING F].gure B-i I " - ' ''I' • r - DATE OBSERVED: Oct. 6, 2011 METHOD OF DRILLING: 8" Hollow Stem Auger 4.- LOGGED BY: ECD GROUND ELEVATION: ±190 •.. LOCATION: See Figure 2 - N S N W min N 14 BORING NO. B-2 DESCRIPTION SOIL TEST o SB-i SB-3 8S-1, SS -2 . 38 65 24 37 . ' 12.1 13.2 102 82 , - 5SB-248,...'13.5126.2 30 123.8 ' ' . ,.124.8 FILL: Silty Sand (SM)j orange-brown, moist, medium dense to dense, trace clay. Grades to mix orange-brown Silty Sand , Mix. Density' Expansion Index' corrosMty Direct Shear Consolidation * ' . - 7! - TERRACE DEPOSITS: Silty Sand (SM), orange-brown, moist, dense, mix 'with red-brown color.' - . ' Grades to medium dense ' Grades to dense 10 - ' 15 20 . - 45• Boring Terminated at 20 Feet. -- No Groundwater Encountered. Borehole BacktillOd.on 10/6/2011. - - - - S. - ' ' - .. .• - - 25 35 40 Project No.: 1916A08 . ',- LOG OF BORING - - re B-72 DATE OBSERVED Oct 6, 2011 METHOD OF DRILLING 8 Hollow Stem Auger LOGGED BY: ECD -GROUND ELEVATION: ±21 LOCATION: See Figure 2' - m , C') a W. .- -cc r cc I - 8- z- ' - BORING NO. B-3 . - ' , •- DESCRIPTION SOIL TEST o SB1 SB 2 SB-3 SB-4 SS -11. SS-2 SS-3 39 105 36 80 4 48 45 25 = : 143 81 11.7 94 10.1 97 9.3 - ' 123 1328 125.8 131.9 3 ' 35 FILL: Silty Sand (SM), orange-brown, moist, medium dense, trace clay. , Mix with dark brown color very dense Grades to medium dense Rvalue - -- - _-' 10 - TERRACE DEPOSITS: Silty Sand (SM), órangi-brown, moist very dense trace clay Grades to dense Grades to medium dense. 15 - 20 25 30 Boring Terminated at 30 Feet. No Groundwater Encountered. Borehole Backfllled on 10/6/2011.' 40 - Project No 1916A08 LOG OF BORING.'Figure B-3 4 - t .-. * • 1. I 'r Location "c Maximum Dryrç OptnnumMoisture9.4 fl 449 I ' B2@8'123 : ' -' 130.5' - B4@8' 12" -: 131-2 - -- '- ' 85 - - B-6@5'-9' 1313-,97 .4 •3 ' . . . , , . '.4 . 9••, 4' -. APPENDIX _ - . . .' . . . . . . -• .- 4 .4-. . *d - . 4 • ' '. . S. ' 4' LABORATORY TESTING PROCEDURES * '4 GENERAL;4 4 44 The results of 1abortory testing re discussed and presented in this appendix - 3 . MOISTURE/DENSITY -4 •4 4 .9 4.. .4- .... .9 '4' 4, ' . - . . .. .. ,•,• 4 Determinations of in situ moisture content and dry denity were performed on selected undisturbed samples Soil moisture content determinations were performed according to the ASTM D 2216 - The dry density of soil was determined on CAL sampJes in. general accordance with ASTM D2937 ' Results of these tests are presented on the boring logs, Figures B-i through B-2, in Appendix B ,4. .'. ' ". ., .4 .4 ' . . -,•, - . ., ., -.. - "CLASSIFICATION ,'• . . ' . . .% 9 4 - 1 . 4 - . 4 .4.- 4 .4 — The Unified '.Soil Classification System was 46tilized for visual (ASTM D2488) and laboratory (ASTM D2487) classifications of soils encountered.,,'4. GRADATION The sieve analysis of selected soil'samples was performed in1a6cordance with ASTM D422 and - results are presented in Figures C-i to C-5 '4 MA.XllvIUIvI DENSITY A maximum denity test was performed on a representative bag sample of the near surface soils in accordance with ASTM Dl 557 The test results are shown below 4- 4- - . - • I £ DIRECT SHEAR - • .:- - Direct shear tests were performed in'general accor1ane with ASTM D308008 Direct shear tests - - - were performed on undisturbed soil samples Test results ar&as follows - hiion-F9 US quinte B-1@5' 435 38 B-2@10' 40 B-5 @ 15' 1004k 35 ' B-6@15' 66 ' 44 :1 * EXPANSION INDEX 2 .4 Expansion Index testing was completed in accordance with ASTM D4829 Test results are presented in the following table., - - - f -Bog JNRI Dp: 'iLJM(E;I 71 dJ - ~xan 1B-2 1 8'- 12' •- • () • -, - Very Low B4 8'-12' ,0 Very Low B-6 5' -9' '5 Very Low -• *• - I •- -_•_ 4 . - • . -•)•_ , .• . . . • -I * .4. . .. ..• CORROS1V1TY -_ p Corrosivity Testing in compliance with Caltrans Test Method 417,422, & 643 Test results are presented below - -• - - . - (li ty B-i @ P-5' 68 0.032 1,460 B-2®8'-12' 67 0.021 1,694 B4 @ 8'42'r 66 " :001.1 - 1,781 B-6 @ 5' -9' 6.7 0*010 2,080 • •;_ I 1 1f ..- - * >1 #- t CONSOLIDATION * * . •:- • - -- Consolidation test was perform&I on representative, relatively undisturbed sample of the underlying I- I. -. - . . .. •.. . soil to determine compressibility charactenstics in accordance with ASTM D2435 Test result is presented on Figure C-6 to C-9 ' R-VALUE,. .9-:value testing was performed on existing upper on-site soil within proposed pavement areas. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Test Method 301 was used to determine exudation and expansion values * - ..- * f •- •• ,* I . - - - .. - - - -. * - - - • . ............* ...................... ., ,. ..................... - . - . I.. -- . V..•• * *_* 4 -. -. *.-.• •8, tRjei 25 - B3 @Y -5' '. 48 * •- I - , 4 1* 4 - 4 '_ * • - * ,. . . 5 . . -V - _•V - - - •,.. •• - - . _ . - . . • *1 _*,• * . 4 . . - V .1 ,_ * • S *4• - • • * * • V - ; • - * go IIII1IUIIHhIIIHIIIHhI-IOIIUIUUHIUI_IIIIIuII___ 11111 70 WUIHh1IilIIIIIII_IHI1IuIIIuIIOIlIl_11111111 60 lIIIIIuh'HII'IIIIHhi-I'IIIIiI'IIIIlIuIII.'-N'IIlIi-- U. IIIIIUIIHhII1IHIHIU I— z 50 IlIIlI1IlIIIIflhIIII_11111111- IIIIIIUIUIlIItIIIIIIII IOhIIiIlIIIHIUtllhIIIII___ IIIIIEIIflI1UIIIIIII IHIIEIIIIIIIllhIIIU 11111111-- 11111 20 WIIIHUIINIIIIIII INIUhIlIllflhIIIIMIIOIIIRR 100 10 1 0.1 r0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE - mm. % Gravel % Sand % Fines Coarse Fine , Coarse [:151 dim Fine Silt Clay '0.0 0.0 0.6 0.9 46.4' 16.4 Particle Size Distribution Report 100 80 w cc C.) w 40 a- 30 ' 10 0 SIEVE SIZE ' PERCENT FINER SPEC? PERCENT PASS? (X=NO) .375 100.0 #4 ' 99.4 #10 98.5 #20 94.9 #40 ' '62.8 #60 37.2 #100 24.2 #200 . 16.4 Material Description t Atterberg Limité PL= LL= P1= 'CoefficientS D90= 0.7318 ' D85= 0.6501 '060=0.4038 D50= 0.3338 30 0.1986 ' .0= 015= 010= . Classification- USCS= • AASHTO= Remarks g • (no specification provided) Sample Number: B-I Depth: 5 Date: 10/14/11. MTGL, Inc. Project: SALES /FITNES BUILDING -MARBRISA PHASE 2 Anaheim; CA • Project No: 1916-A08 ' ' Figure C-i Tested By: 'JH Checked By: ED SIEVE SIZE PERCENT FINER SPEC. PERCENT PASS? (X=NO) #4 100.0 #10 100.0 #20 98.9 #40 -. 83.4 #60 59.2 #100 42.8 #200 34.4 Material Description Afterberg Limits PL= LL= - P1= Coefficients D90= 0.5158 085= 0.4427 D60= 0.2545 D50= 0.1958' . 030= D15= D10= C= • Classification USCS= - AASHTO= Remarks - - Particle Size Distribution Report S =1111111IM11111111011111111 =1111111IM11111110111111111 ____"IIIIIHhIHIIIilOIHhU_INIIUI1I .1 IIIIIHIUIIlI1!IIIHII_IIlIIIUiil [,J1111hh1"u1_II1OII1Il1! !!!!jiiiuiiHhiIiiiIiHiI_IHIlIUlIlI :iiiiniiiii.utiiiiiii_iiiiiiii• 1lllllllilhlflhlilNlllll_IIIIUIIII :iiiiuiItiiulNIitIIInuI-IiiuuInI -D1' MEMO %Flnes Silt • I Clay 34.4 (no specification provided) Sample Number: 8-4 Depth: 10' Date: 10/24/11. MTGL, Inc. Project SALES /FITNESS BUILDING -MARRJSAPHAE2 Anaheim, CA Project No: 1916.A08 Figure C4 Tested By: JH - - Checked By: ED Tested By JH Checked By ED I - [--] I IIIiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiuiuuiii I • mill-malhimi'lIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII :iiiiiiiuii • II1IIIIIIIIIIIIi!IIIIIIIIIIIII • II1IIIIINhIINhuIIii,iuIIIIIIuuI • IIlIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIUIIIii!iIIII1I IIIIIIIuIIIIuIIiiuIIIIIlIi!III1 • II1uIuIuIIIIIIIIIiiiii:!'Ji!II • IIIIIIuIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIuIuIIIIiII II1IIIuhIIIIuIIIIIIIIIIIuIIIIII II II II III II., 1•11 Overburden MATERIAL DESCRIPTION i• Client: Source: Sample No.: B- I ElevJDepth: 5' -I 1 'i I (c: -Anaheimi CA Figurel - CONSOLIDATION TEST REPORT - I - - 0 • ppitea rressure - psi Natural Dry Dens. (pcf) LL -Sp. Gr.. Overburden (psf) . (psf) c C r Cr weliPress. (psi) Clpse. % ' at Sat. oist Moist. 1249 1 IFO.2 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION USCS AASHTO Project No. 1916-A08 ,- Client: Project SALES I FITNESS BUILDING MARBRJSA PHASE 2 Source - Sample No.: 8-2 ElevJDepth: 10 Remarks: - - FigürC-7 MTGL, Inc - - Anaheim, CA 0 0 • 0 - - 0 I I I II1IIHI!UhIIIIIIIIIIIII1IIIIII I IIIlIIIIIIi!iiIIIIIIflhIIIIIIA IIIIIIIIPiI!IJPIHIIIIIIIIUIII • IIII1IIIIIIIIuIIIIIiiiuhuIIIuuI I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIHiIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIKIIIIII • IIIuIIIuIIIuIIIi!!IIIflhIIiIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIiiiiNIIIiIII IIlIIIIIIuIuuIIIIIIIIIIiiriiiII • II II II III III III - -- - - MATERIAL DESCRIPTION lnull liax11sJ, i E:i.iii&i•j —.-1r: I CONSOLIDATION TEST REPORT I I I I • iiiiiuiiiiiiiiiuiiiiiiiiiiii I I IIIIIiiiflH!IIIUhIIIIIIIIII • IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIii!!IlIIIIIIIIII 'IIuuIuIIuIIIIIuIuhhiiIIIluhlI IIIIIIIuIIIIIIIIuIIuIIiIIIIuuI I IIlIIIIIIIIIIIIiIIIIIIIIii!iIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIiii!!iIIIIiIIII 'IIIIIIIIIIIIAhIIIIIIIIii1iiIII II II II III III III Overburden - - MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 1te1i1i. :. • ..- ..V - V - TEST0LJT -1 4- 4 . V •• ***********************V V - * * EQFAUI2T * - S * ' Version 3.00 .*• -- "4 • -. V.', * •• 'V ' •' -V DETERMINISTIC ESTIMATION OF, I. PEAK ACCELERATION FROM DIGITIZED FAULTS * . 4 .• • 'V 4 ,• •••, -44 ,. ,• '_• - JOB NUMBER 1916-A08' • c DATE: 10-21-2011 ,• • -'- • .• '- JOB NAME Sales, Activity Fitness Buildings '. ' CALCULATION"NME Test Run Analysis t FAULT-DATA-FILENAME CDMGFLTE DATVP - .•• • •,q -',•• - . S V SITE COORDINATES I I SITE LATITUDE 33.1320 - '- SITE.LONGITUDE:. 117.3124L. SEARCH RADIUS 100 • ATTENUATION RELATION: 17) campbell -& BoZdrgniaV (-1994/1997),- Alluvium '• V UNCERTAINTY (M=Mediah-, SSigma): M . Number of Sigmas:0.0 DISTANCE MEASURE cdist SCOND 0 4. Basement Depth 5 00 km Campbell SSR 0 Campbell SHR 0 COMPUTE PEAK HORIZONTAL ACCELERATION , FAULT-DATA FILE USED CDMGFLTE DAT • 4 . ' . V .' V '' 1.. 4 - V MINIMUM DEPTH VALUE (km) 3 01 V - •4 V • •4 4 •. •- V * V I . .. . Vt V4 V V - . . V - • •. V - . .-. V • V V V V •V V_' V • V • V -• V V 4 1 4. .•. * V •V _V : '.. V V • _: - ••V V H V VV?t, - V• V ' V V• V. VV,4 VV.VVV -. V• -. V :VV p.V •V 4V ' V' ;V V ' V 4 • V ,V V ,VVV - V . - - V • V IV • V , :._ V.. V . . V V V •" V p. V ,. V V V •1 V * V 4 •p.. , , .4 ':' - - . V V V * V.•I V V V 4 ,4 •••V V V . VpV V . V V - V -V. V - 4 4 - Vp. - - V V - ,, •VV •V . V V• 44 V V• .r ,V.. . .V . V V V '• 44'5 •*V • V•VVV9.VI V ' V-V '• V V •VV V V V V • -. - V V • V V V ' -.: - . . V• • V V Pagel , I *4. 4. V , ,V - V V . . • .4 V V . V,V - .4-V • V VV. V •• - V V , •V - 4.V • V V VV _V V•VP 4. - . • V - V V 44 V V V '. V V V 4- VV '• V - 'P4- •4 'P V V P. .4- 4 V I V •• V V • . * r 4 I I ¶ ' : - •1• - . .-. ' TEST-.OUT EQFAULT SUMMARY -, - DETERMINISTIC -----------------------SITE PARAMETERS :- ------------------ '1• •. • .- 1.,• I. S Page ' S.. '. ESTIMATED MAX. EARTHQUAKE EVENT' - -' APPROXIMATE 'ABBREVIATED I DISTANCE MAXIMUM PEAK lEST. SITE FAULT. NAME 1 , mi (km) EARTHQUAKE SITE- INTENSITY ----l-- -------------------------------------------------- ROSE CANYON - . . 5.3( 8.5) 7.2. - ,O.435 x" NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (offshore) 7.2( 11.6) 7.1 O.373 Ix CORONADOBANK . ' 21.1( 33.,9)1 .7.6 1 0.218 1 VIII ELSINORE-TEMECULA. . 24.3(.'39.1) '6.8,. .0.101 ''VII ELSINORE-JULIAN . 24.3( 39, 1) 7..1, 0.129 VIII.. ELSINORE-GLEN IVY - . . 35.4( .570) 6.8. 0.063 . VI. PALOS VERDES . . . • 37.8( ,6018)1 7.1 , 0.075 1 VII EARTHQUAKE VALLEY •. -. 42.4( 68.3) 6.5 ' '0.038 1 V ' SAN JACINTO-ANZA .. . 47.0( 75.6) 7.2 ' 0.062. 1 VI SAN'JACINT0-SAN.ACINTOVALL:EY- - 47..8( 77.0) 6.9 1 0.047 1 VI NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (LA.Basin) 48.3( 77.7) 7.1 0.055 VI- CHINO-CENTRAL AVE. (Elsinore) . 49.8( _80.2) 67 .. 0.037 1 V SAN JACINTO-COYOTE CREEK 51.7( 83.2) 6.8 0.039 ' V WHITTIER.' . . . .53.3( 85.8)1 6.8 - - 0.037 v ELSINORE-COYOTE MOUNTAIN . .' 56.2( 90.5) . 6.8 1 •. 0.035 . .v .... COMPTON THRUST . . . ... 58.0( 93.3) 6.8 ..- 0.032 .... V /ELYSIANPARK THRUST - . 60.9(. 98.0) 6.7 1 0.028 V. SAN .JACINTO-SAN BERNARDINO . 61.3( 98.6)1 6.7. . .0.028 V SAN JACINTO - BORREGO , ,'64.9( 104.5) 66 ' . 0.024 -V : . . 'SAN ANDREAS - San Bernardino" , 65.7( 105.7) . 7.5 ' 0.053 . VI '- SAN ANDREAS - Southern . 65.7( 105'.7)1 7.4 1 0.048 . vi SAN JOSE'. - '70.6( 113.7) 6.5 0.019 Iv.. PINTO MOUNTAIN . . 72.5( 116.7) 7:0 0.030 . V . SANANDREAS- coachella- . . . 73.3(,117.9) 7.2 •. , 0.035 . V SIERRAMADRE ............. 74:3( 119.6) 70'. 1 0.027 •• v CUCAMONGA •, : ' ' '74.6( 120.1) '7.0 .' 0.026 V :--' NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE -(west) 1 77.2( 1242) 7.0 I 0.025 V . . BURNT' MTN. . . - ' 78.0( 125.6) 64: '. I 0.016 1 IV .CLEGHORN . . -79.0(.127.2) -0.017 . IV EUREKA PEAK ' . 80.8( 130.1) 1 6.4 1 0.015 Iv SUPERSTITION MTN.,,(San Jacinto), I.. 81.O( 130.4) .6.6 - 0.018 IV NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (East)' I 81.2(-.1. 0. 6) 6.T - 0"018 IV SAN ANDREAS - 1857 Rupture. . I 82.4( 132.6) 7.8 0.051; VI .. SAN ANDREAS--MOjaVe . ¶ 82.4( 132.6) 7.4 - 0:036 V - ¶ RAYMOND . ¶ 82.5( 132.8) • 6.5 'O.QlS' Iv. CLAMSHELL-SAWPIT . I 84.2( 135.5)1 6.5 0.015 1 IV ELMORE, RANCH ' I 84.7( 136.3) -. 6_6 ; 0.017 IV ' VERDUGO ' 5, 85.2( 137.1) .6.7 0.017 IV SUPERSTITION HILLS (San Jacinto) 85.7( 138.0) '- 6.6 • 0.017 Iv' HOLLYWOOD .87..1( 140.1)1 0 p13 III r ¶ - . . 4- - .. S , • - 7 Page 2 4,--t' - . ' . , . . . St ' • r ., .- ¶ . . 54 * - p •,' - V •' _• V a •' V .. , .' -, • ., V. *A*'' £ VVV V.• - - - . V . . - -.*' V LI' ' - V TEST.OUT.. 'V '.• 'V V 'I, . .- - .,•'V -. -. - V - - - V " . DETERMINISTICSITE PARAMETERS. V , V -------------------- .— .. V S V -- Page 2 V V 'V_ " -..• :-- V V V A •V V V V S V V J ESTIMATED MA(. EARTHQUAKE EVENT ' V• V ' APPROXIMATE ------------------ ---V V V 'ABBREVIATED V DISTANCE MAXIMUM .1. PEAK VV 'EST. SITE V FAULT NAME. .•.. ml (frj)VVV EARTHQUAKE SITE' INTENSITY MAG.(MW).l ACCEL g JMOD.MERC. . LAGUNA SALADA. :- V , 874(1407) 7•0 V - 0.023' ' • • LANDERS . ' .. V881( 141.8) 7.3 0.030: V V. V ' HELENDALE - S. LOCKHARDT 'V 89.4( 143.8) V 7.1k V.0.025. ,, 'V -• SANTA MONICA ' -' 91.8( 147.7) - 6.6 ' '0.014. IV ,' V LENWOOD-LOCKHART-OLD WOMAN 'SPRGS V 93.1( 149.8) V 7.3 V V ',.0.028 1:v a.; BRAWLEY SEISMIC 'ZONE .: 94.1( '151.4) 6.4 -- 0.012 MALIBU COAST • ' V , 1943( 151.8) ' -. 6.7. .0.015 'IV V V V JOHNSON VALLEY (Northern) .. .1 . 96.1( 154.,6) 1 .,. 6.7 .0.016 IV So. '- COPPER MTN. ' 96.2(-154.8)1 .6.9 , '.0.019 ' -IV V / NORTHRIDGE (E. Oak1Ridge) ' • . 98.5( 158.5) 6:9 ' . . 0. 016 ' IV- V V V SIERRA 'AMADRE (San Fernando) j- .99.0( 159.3) 6.7 ' 0.014 I IV V '• ,'SAN GABRIEL . . 99.2(.'159'.7)1 7.0 I 0.020 I '.-IV - V . •'V , V V -END-OF SEARCH- 52 FAULTS FOUND WITHIN THE SPECIFIED SEARCH RADIUS THE ROSE CANYON FAULT IS CLOSEST TO THE SITE .-.IT IS ABOUT 5.3 MILES (8.5 km) AWAY.,, V V ' V • V : LARGEST MAXIMUM-EARTHQUAKE SITE ACCELERATION 0.4353 g A -V... * V V _ . ' 'V , .. V ' •V . II VV A * - A - A V V , , A , ' ' * 'V : •, ''.'•. . ''V - a a. a ,_ A ' a Va a a. A a j VV a' 'A I V • V A. ' I' V ,*' , ', V ' 'V , V V• ,' •V Page V ' V' , , V ' •'•' " V ' - * 'a , V , V ' V V . '.' V. A., V , . V V • ,. 1 " 'a a APPENDIX GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS.' re or Si .5- . - ;-1- S , •S ' t. --'5 - 5. -5 - APPENDIX GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS , I GENERAL ,. These specifications present general procedures and requirements for grading and earthwork as shown on : the approved grading plans, including preparation of areas to be filled, placement of fill, installation of - subdrams and excavations The recommendations contained in the attached geotechnical report are a part of the earthwork and grading specifications and shall supersede the provisions contained herein in the case of conflict Evaluations performed by the Consultant during the course of grading may result' in new recommendations, which could supersede these specifications, or the recommendations of the ' geotechnical report - 5 .-. ' , S . : ,- $ 2 EARTHWORK OBSERVATION AND TESTING Prior to the start of grading, a qualified Geotechmcal Consultant (Ceotechnical Engineer and Engineering Geologist) shall be employed for the purpose of observing earthwork procedures and testing the fills for conforniañce with the recoinineñdations of the geotechnical report and these specifications. It will be - necessary that the Consultant provide adequate testing and observation so that he may determine that the work was accomplished as specified. It shall -be the responsibility of the Contractor to assist the 1 • Consultant and keep them apprised of work schedules and changes so that he may schedule his . personnel accordingly. ' ' •. - • - + - '. . ' - •51 -. . It shall b the sole responsibility of the Contractor to provide adequate equipment and methods to grading - accomplish the work in accordance with applicable ading codes or agency ordinances these specifications and the approved grading plans Maximum dry density tests used to determine the-degree of coniaction wifl be periormed iri accordance with the American Society for Testing and Materials Test Method (ASTM) D1557-91 or later revision ' 4 •S+ .- . . S 3 PREPARATIONOF AREAS TOBE FILLED Clearing and Grubbing All brush, vegetation and debris shall be removed or piled and otherwise disposed of , * Processing The existing ground which is determined to be atisfactory for support of fill shall be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches Existing ground, which is not satisfactory, shall be overecavated as specified in the follos ing section a. ' .- -'S.-- 5., -5- •5 5. 'S . - .5 5 5 5. - ' .,Overexcavation: Soft, dry, spogy, highly fractured or otherwise unsuitable round. extending to siiëh, a depth that sukface processing cannot adequately improve the condition, shall be overexcavä ted down to firm ground approved by the Consultant. Sc Moisture conditioning: Overexcavated and processed soils shall be watered, dried back blended and mixed as required to have a relatively uniform moisture content near the optimum moisture content as •.' determined by ASTM 1)1557 Recompaction Overexcavated and processed soils which have been mixed, and moisture conditioned - - uniformly shall be recompacted to a minimuin relative compaction of 90 percent of ASTM D1557.'- 4 - -, - S ',• - -5. - • •-, ' . -. * Benching Where soils are placed on ground with slopes steeper than 51 (horizontal to vertical) the ground shall be stepped or benched Benches shall be excavated in finn material for a mi.rnmum width of 4 feet 4 FILL MATERIAL' - General Material to be placed as fill shall be free of organic matter and other deleterious substances and shall be approved by the Consultant . S - . 4- -.5 . S •.' -S -- - . . 5. . - . . '.. a - -. . -: •--. a - . •.. . . - . _• - '4 *4 1 .-- 4' • 4k 1 .- 't $ Oversize Oversized material defined as rock, or other irreducible material with a maximum dimension P. greater than 12 inches, shall not be buried or placed in fill, unless the location, material and disposal methods are specifically approved by the Consultant Oversize disposal operations shall be such that nesting of oversized material does not occur, and such that the oversize material is completely • . " surrounded by compacted or densthed fill. Oversize material shall not be placed within 10 feet . - vertically of finish grade or within the range, of future utilities or underground construction, unless - specifically approved by the Consultant - 4 1 • . . .,. . * 4* Import If importing of fit material' is required for grading the import material shall meet the general , requirements. • • . . 4 '.4 ,. .. . . 1 S. FILL PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION . 4. -.' . .0 • , s, Fill Lifts: 'Approved fill material shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill in near-horizontal layers not exceeding 6 inches in compacted thickness The Consultant may approve thicker lifts if testing indicates the grading procedures are such that adequate compaction is being achieved with lifts of greater - • thickness Each layer shall be spread evenly and shall be thoroughly mixed during spreading to attain uniformity of material and moisture in each layer • Fill Moisture: Fill layers at amoisture content less than optimum shall be watered and mixed, and wet fill . - +. ' . layers shall be aerat d by scarification or shall be blended with drier material. Moisture conditioning. and mixing of fill layers shall continue until the fill material is at uniform moisture content at or near Optimum Compaction of Fill. After each layer has been evenly spread moisture conditioned, and mixed it shall be' uniformly compacted to not less that 90 percent of maximum dry density in accordance ,with' ASTM L D1557 Compaction equipment shall be adequately sized and shall be either specifically designed for soil compaction or of proven reliability, to efficiently achieve the specified degree of compaction Fill Slopes. Compacting on slopes shall be accomplished in addition to normal compacting procedures by backrollmg of slopes with sheepsfoot rollers at frequent increments of 2 to 3 feet as the fill is placed or by other methods producing satisfadory.results. At the completion of grading, the relative compaction of the slope out to the slope face shall be at least 90 percent in accordance with ASTM 01557 Compaction Testing Field tests to check the fill moisture and degree of compaction will be performed by the - consultant The location and frequency of tests shall be at the consultant's discretion.".In general these tests will be take at an interval not exceeding 2 feet in vertical rise, and/or 1,000 cubic yards Of fill placed In addition on slope faces at least one test shall be taken for each 5080 square feet of slope face and/or each 10 feet of vertical height of slope 6 SUBDRAIN INSTALLATION ' Subdrazn systems, if required, shall be installed in approved ground to conform to the approximate 4 ' - -alignment arid details shOwn on the plans or herein. .The subdmain location or materials shall not be 4, '*changed or modified without the approval of the Consultant. The Consultant, however, may . ' •. -4 recommend and, upon approval direct changes in subdrain line grade or materials All subdrains should be surveyed for line and grade after installation and sufficient time shall be allowed for the surveys prior to commencement of fill over the subdrain 7 EXCAVATION Excavations and cut slopes will beexamined during If directed by the Consultant, furth ' grading. excavation or overexcavatlon and refilling of cut areas and/or remedial grading of cut slopes shall be performed. Where fill over cut slopes are to be graded, unless otherwise approved; cut portioii of the slope shall be made and approved by the Consultant prior to placement of materials for construction : 'of the fill portion of the slope • I ,1 _.J . ' 4_c £ .• • _ .. 1. -- 4 . 4 • ' • t. 4 4 '4 - ' + - .4 ' 4. *# 00 - ' H '' , ' • , • -, 0 a ' 4. - . . . /4 1 -. ' . •' -• .,' •• 4 4..