The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCT 03-02; CARLSBAD RANCH PA 5; GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION; 2011-11-04 (2)&ro3.o 12, GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Proposed Sales, Activity and Fitness Buildings Carlsbad Ranch, Planning Area 5 MarBrisa Phase li Carlsbad, California Prepared For Grand Pacific Resorts, Inc. 5900 Pasteur Court, Suite 200 Carlsbad, California 92008 MçGi., Inc. 6295 Feuris Square, Suite C San Dfcgn, California 92121 • Project Nfo 1916-A08 LogNoA1-l409 Geo technical Engineering Construction Inspection Materials Testing Environmental Office Locations Orange County Corporate Branch: 2992 E. La Palma Avenue Suite A Anaheim CA 92806 Tel: 714.632.2999 Fax: 714.632.2974 San Diego Imperial County 6295 Ferris Square Suite C San Diego, CA 92121 Tel: 858.537.3999 Fax: 858.537.3990 Inland Empire 14467 Meridian Parkway Building 2A Riverside, CA 92518 Tel: 951.653.4999 Fax: 951.653.4666 India 44917 Golf Center Parkway Suite 1 Indid, CA 92201 Tel: 760.342.4677 Fax: 760.342.4525 OC/LA/Inland Empire Dispatch 800.491.2990 San Diego Dispatch 888.844.5060 www.mtglinc.com November 4, 2011 Grand Pacific Resorts, Inc. 5900 Pasteur Court, Suite 200 Carlsbad, California 92008 Attention: Mr. Bruce Zelenka SUBJECT: Geotechnical Investigation ProposedSales, Activity and Fitness Buildings Carlsbad Ranch, Planning Area 5 MarBrisa Phase II Carlsbad, California Dear Mr. Zelenka: Project No. 1916-A08 Log No. 11-1409 In accordance with your request and authorization we have completed a• geotechnical investigation at the site for a proposed Sales, Activity and Fitness Buildings including two Swimming Pools at the Carlsbad Ranch, Planning Area 5, MarBrisa Phase U in Carlsbad, CA. We are pleased to present the following report with our conclusions and recommendations. The site for proposed development is located inside the MarBtisa Resort that was previously graded with an elevated pad on the cast comer wnth tennis court Our report concludes that the proposed improvement and addition would be feasible provided the recommendations presented are incorporated into the plus and specifications. Details related to s&miciilly, geo!ogjc conditions,, foundation design, and construction cousideiraticirs are included in subsequent sections Of this iteport We hock forward to providing additional cenadtiiirg services daring the planning and construdiorit Of the proecL II Sales, Activity & Fitness Buildings Project No. 1916-A08 MarBrisa Resort, Carlsbad, CA Log No. 11-1409 If you have any questions regarding our report, please do not hesitate to contact this office. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. Respectfully submitted, MTGL, inc. Eduardo C. Dizon, R(j Senior Engineer M.B. (Ben) Lo, RGE Chief Geotechnical Engineer CO No. GE rn Exp 12/31/It • OF CAft II Sales, Activity & Fitness Buildings Project No. 1916-A08 MarBrisa Resort. Carlsbad, CA Log No. 11-1409 TABLE OF CONTENTS II4r1c.D1Jc'IIoI4 ......... ... ............................................. ...._..... ......... i PROPOSEDCONSTRUCTION ................ .._._ ............1 SCOPE.... ......... en..nnn........nn..e.............a........n.n......nn ................n....................en.....n..nnen............en. 1 SITE ............. ......nnennne.e .......e.n....neneen.e ......eaten ..... ......._. 2 FIELD EXPLORATION ..m..mmn..ee..eee ............................................2 I4ABO1.4rOR1r 11 StI'ING.._..............................n..........nsn.n.....en.ae..n.enn.n..n.ee.eee.ee.n......e............3 GEOLOGY...m...eaam.n.enaa..........e.nnn..ae.menrnmeamnn.ea..a.a ea ennn .rn..aa.... 3 REGIONALGEOLOGY......................... . ...................................................................................................... 3 -1 GROUNDWATER ... I (IX[I LIe RE I)L sI1 [S1'i 'i:i i '[ii : 'J RJ S .1 'I —' IATERAL t:.::: , r' r* :: 1 SEmw Ij1LtJ'.. ---.---.--- ---.- iiJ t.' iJSJ Pt.'i [IJQ .- -•.-, ''' • i: :., ; tLU li 11 Ji ,-. ....... ...... ....... -"" -- r--- •- -I "iur1 0 i(IJit ------- - -- -----------------. -el I Ifl iIci II '7 - II - -. Sales, Activity & Fitness Buildings Project No. 1916-A08 MarBrisa Resort, Carlsbad, CA Log No. 11-1409 General Compaction Standard ........................................................................................................... 11 Import Fill Material ............................................................................................................................. 11 FOUNDATION............................................................................................................................................ 11 LATERAL RESISTANCE............................................................................................................................12 sErrwIENT............................................................................................................................................ 12 INTERIORSLAB-ON-GRADE ........................................................................... ......................................... 12 EXTERIOR CONCRETE SLABIFIATWORK ................................................................................................. 13 RETAINING w ...................................................................................................................................13 PRELIMINARY PAVEMENT ......................................................................................................................14 CONSTRUCTIONCONSIDERATIONS ................................................... ..................................................... .. 15 Moisture Sensitive Soils/Weather Related Concerns ........ ......... . ....................................................... 15 Drainage and Groundwater Considerations ............ . .......................................................................... 16 Excavations......................... ................................................................................................................. 16 Utility Trenches ............................................................................. .................................................... 17 SITEDRAINAGE.......................................................................................................................................17 PLAN-REVIEW .........................................................................................................................................17 GEcTrEcIiNIcAL OBSERVATION/TESTING................................................................................................17 LI141'1'A'I'10NS .nn.en.nenns_nann_.n FIgure 1 - Site Location Map Figure 2- Boring Location Plan Appendix A - References Appendix B — Field Exploration Program Appendix C - Laboratory Testing Procedures Appendix D - Engineering Analysis Appendix E - General Earthwork and Grading Specifications liv Sales, Activity& Fitness Buildings Project No. 1916-A08 MarBrisa Resort, Carlsbad, CA Log No. 11-1409 INTRODUCTION In accordance with your request and authorization, 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 CONSTRUCIION 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, flaiworks, and underground utilities.. Future thirteen two- to three-story villas.with paved parking are planned around the swimming pools. The scope of our Geotechuical services included the following: Geoteichnical investigation consisting of drilling six borings to explore subsurface aiiadilioiiis and to obtaini sanaples for laboratory testing. (See Gectethnical Boring Location Plan, FIgure 2, for the location of borings, and Appendix B, Field Investigation, for boning logs) Labanatnay tiug of smniples (See Appendix C). Piqsnation of this neport milng our findings and pnmestfog our condurmons and nedtions for &c-pmpcwdc=zMncfium Sales, Activity & Fitness Buildings Project No. 1916-A08 MarBrisa Resort, Carlsbad. CA Log No. 11-1409 The project site is located on the northwestern portion of the existing MarBrisa Resort on Grand Pacific Drive south of Canon Road in Carlsbad, CA. Existing development at the MarBrisa Resort includes a hotel building, resort conference facility building, restaurant building, sales building, villas, paved driveway and parking, and associated retaining walls and landscaping. Mass grading for the entire MarBrisa Resort including the project site under this investigation was performed in 2005 and 2006 under the observation and testing of Leighton and Associates, Inc. The sales building site located on the southeast 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 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 1ots fl)) :*21 iW JulI The subsurface courlihtitntius at the project site were explored with six test borings. Two of the if amt boiings. 2 Sales, Activity & Fitness Buildings Project No. 1916-A08 MarBrisa Resort, Carlsbad, CA Log No. 11-1409 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 500fttol1,500fL Rocks in the ranges are dominated by Mesozoic graniltic rocks, derived from the same massive batholiuih 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 Sam Andreas Fault and Gulf of California came into being. 3 Sales, Activity & Fitness Buildings Project No. 1916-A08 MarBrisa Resort. Carlsbad, CA Log No. 11-1409 marine, lagoonal, and nonmarine origin related to two major transgressive and regressive depositional episodes. The geologic structure of southern California is dominated by right-lateral strike-slip faulting with the movement of two tectonic plates. The San Andreas fault system marks the principal boundary between the Pacific plate and the North American plate. Additional faults that affect the geologic structure of the project vicinity include the Elsinore-Julian Fault and the Rose Canyon Fault Local Geology The project site is located within a developed area with documented fill. Based upon available geologic map (Fan 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. Site Geologic Conditions A brief discussion of the earth materials encountered in the borings is presented in the following sections. Refer to the borings logs in the Appendix B for a more detailed description of these materials. WD low e ansiorr potential for tIre eitiuig on-site fill soils. 4 V Sales, Activity & Fitness Buildings Project No. I916-A08 MarBrisa Resort, Carlsbad, CA Log No. 11-1409 Terrace Deposits Underlying the fill is Terrace deposits, which extend at least to the maximum explored depth of 50 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. Groundwater Groundwater was not encountered within the maximum explored depth of 50 feet below existing grade. Geotechnical reports by Leighton. and Associates, Inc. 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 underlying Santiago Formation was not encountered. The perched groundwater would have no impact on the proposed development However, it is possible that transient 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 Faults are one of the most widespread gno!ogic hazards to development in California. Faults of most concern are those designated as active (less than about 11,000 years since last movement and potentially active (111,000 to about 750,000 years). According to Hart arid Bryant, (2007) the site is not within a designated earthquake fault zone. mnor eartbkes in tIre past, and wlfl IlIrelly ezgedem= fi= rirajor emthiijraktea. 5 V W '1 Sales, Activity & Fitness Buildings Project No. 1916-A08 MarBrisa Resort, Carlsbad, CA Log No. 11-1409 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 21.1 km to the southwest. 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 surface and loose fine sands or silts occur within that depth. Liquefaction potential decreases with increasing grain size, and 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 no mapped lavutslide within the project site.. No known active or potentially active Ifaal?ts, with known surface traces, cress the siite Therefore, the potential for ground rupture due to faulitiixrg is considered to be ng1glbie.. Seismic Settierneat Saturated andnon-saturated granular suills are subject to densiflcation under strung sliaking The lower tIre density of the soils, the IriigJiear the intensiity and duration of shaking,, results in greater degree of dernsi&atiani. The prujeet site is wrderlairr by very desire fcnrrnticirall unit that is 6 Sales, Activity & Fitness Buildings Project No. I916-A08 MarBrisa Resort, Carlsbad, CA Log No. 11-1409 considered not subject to settlement. Based on the anticipated earthquake effect and the stratigraphy of the site, seismically induced settlement is considered negligible. Lateral Spreading 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. Tsunamis and Seiches Given that the site is located a sufficient distance inland from the coast and due to its elevated location; inundation by tsunamis is considered to be nonexistent. Due to the lack of surface water impoundment in the immediate site vicinity, the seichepotentialis also considered to be very low to nonexistent. Earthquake Accelerations I CBC Seismic Parameters The computer program 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). Based upon boring data and SF1 values, the site can be classified as Site Class D. The spectral acceleration values for 02 second and 11 second periods obtained from, the computer program and in accordance with Section 16135 of the 2007 California Building Code are tabulated below. Nhie w'2O07WR C Q Refei fiéé 12529 Section 16135.1 St 0,473g Section 16135.11 SIteCIaSS D Table 1611352 F. 1.0 Table 1611353(1) - F 1527 Table 161353(2) 11252g Section 161333 SKI (1L722g Seetion 161353 SES (lL835g Section 16135.4 SDO 0411E 11 Section 16135A I 7 Sales, Activity & Fitness Buildings Project No. 1916-A08 MarBrisa Resort, Carlsbad. CA Log No. 11-1409 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. Specific conclusions pertaining to geologic conditions are summarized below: Excavation Characteristics The site is mantled by documented fill, underlain by terrace deposit. Excavation 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. CutJFIli Transition Conditions With the varying thickness of documented fill of between 2 and 18 feet, it is anticipated 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 compacter! filL A minimum 2 feet of compacted fill is recommended below bottom of footings This minimum 2 feet compacted fill requirement should exfrrrd across the entire building pad and at least 5 feet beyond building frolpiriat. Coarosivity Coiosiuim series tests consisting of pH, soluble sulfates, and minimm resistivity were performed on selected sample of the im-site sulk Soluble suffaw levels for the on-site soil indicate a negligible suffm exposure for concrete Structure. As arrdii,, no speciall considtuations are reçriiredl' for concrete placed in contact with the on-site suils, However, it is recommeirded that Type III to be ased for all onatret 8 Sales, Activity & Fitness Buildings Project No. 1916-A08 MarBrisa Resort, Carlsbad. CA - Loa 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 determined 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 load-deformation characteristics 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 development include tennis court, plants and underground utilities. Prior 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 genesally stable. Excavation beyond 4 feet deep should be benched or sloped back not steeper than 1:1 (bcriznrniaLirertical) up to a maximum height of 15. 1ennd 15 feet high temporary slopes should have an indinatirn of between 15:1 and 2:1. The on-site tern deposits material and fill soil should be classified as Type C srtilL Sales, Activity & Fitness Buildings Project No. 1916-A08 MarBrisa Resort, Carlsbad, CA Log No. 11-1409 Site Grading 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 2:1. 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 depth of at least 2 feet below bottom of 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 Swumrnng Pools and Villas - Likewise with the above proposed structures, entire foundations are recommended to be supported by properly compacted fill. Existing soil should be 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 day is encountered within building pads, it should be removed and replaced with available onsire soil with low expansion potentiaL The depth of removal and replacement of highly expansive day should be at least 3 feet below bottom of footing for buildings and at least 5 feet below bottom of slab for swimming paUL The removal and replacement should extend at least 5 fret beyond slinrcture footpiinL The lateral lisnitof grading for all structures should extend at least 5 feet beyond building footprint. Prior to itecompaction process, tho butrnmi of excavation to receive fill should be scarified to a depth of 6 indies, moisture conditioned and necompacteriL 10 Sales, Activity & Fitness Buildings Project No. 1916-A08 MarBrisa Resort, Carlsbad. CA 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 be allowed to dry and should be maintained in a moist condition or scarified prior 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. Backfill 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 perforrned- Rundation The i ommerrdaliena and desiga criteria are 'n ininmm", in keeping with the current standard-of- prac11ce They do not preclude more restridive criteria by the governing agency or structural considerations. The project structural engineer should evaluate the fomidsition cn rratiurrs and uárforcement requirements for actual structural loadings. Earpased structures are anticipated to, be supported by properly compacted fill. Conventional continrioriu of isolated fotingr are considered suilialale for structural support founded on engineered filL Allowable anilil bearing capacity for continumrs or isuiterl footing with a minimum width of 2 feet are the folbewing Sales, Activity & Fitness Buildings Project No. 1916-A08 MarBrisa Resort, Carlsbad, CA Log No. 11-1409 Embedment Below Lowest Adjacent Grade Allowable Soil Bearing Values 2 feet 5,000 psf 3 feet 6,500 psf 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 H/2, 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 friction on the base of foundations, and passive earth pressure on the sides of the portions of foundations or shear keys bearing against competent native formation or compacted engineered fill. The allowable base friction may be calculated using a coefficient of 033. The allowable passive pressure may be calculated as equivalent to that of a fluid weighing 350 pounds per cubic foot (pci) for foundations bearing against compacted engineered fill. For design consideration, a maximum settlement of at least 1-inch with a differential settlement of 1/24nch in a span of 40 feet should be incorporated. Juterior Slab-Om-Qiiade liiieñor slab on-grade should be designed for the actual applied loading conditions expected. The engjnecr based upon law expansion pnaL 12 Sales, Activity & Fitness Buildings Project No. 191 6-A08 MarBrisa Resort. Carlsbad, CA Log No. 11-1409 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- mll visqueen moisture bather or equivalent should be installed midheight within the capillary break material. Alternatively, a Stego Wrap moisture barrier or equivalent may be installed following 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 Slab/Flatwork Exterior slabs should be supported by at least 12 inches of properly compacted fill. Compacted fill should have at least 90 percent relative density based on Test Method AFM D1557. Exterior concrete slab/flatworks should have a nominal thickness of 4 inches. Reinforcement may be provided for stability purposes. Controlled joints should be provided to eliminate potential for For desiajw pmposes tbe recommended eçrivalent filuridi pressure for each case for walk founded above ilie static gjiound wa= table and backlilledi with nm-site snaiLs (exprnsion iindx less than 2 is povr&d beltw. Rdaiithmg wall UaeklIlll slinuild be compacted to at least 90 peircemit itthliive 13 Sates, Activity & Fitness Buildings Project No. 1916-A08 MarBiisa Resort. Carlsbad, CA Log No. 11-1409 compaction (based on ASTM Test Method D1557). Recommended pressures are tabulated below. - Equivalent Fluid Weight (yrfl Condition Level 2:1 (H:V) Slope Active 33 60 At-Rest 55 80 Passive 350 150 (Maximum of 3 ksf) (Sloping Down) Soil resistance developed against lateral structural movement can be 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 provided by a vertical layer of Miradrain 6200 with Mlrafl 140 (3eofabric, or equivalent, placed at the back of the wall; or by a minimum 12-inch width of 3/4 inch open-graded crushed gravel enveloped in Mirafi 140 Geofabric. Subdraiias should consist of 4-Inch diameter Schedule 40, PVC pipe or equivalent, embedded in apjiwxiunately 1 ft3/lineair foot of 3/4-inch down open-graded gravel, enveloped in Mirafi 140 Geofabric Filter or equivalent, with the pipe being 3± inches above the trench bottom; a gradient of at least 1% being provided tothe pipe and trendi bottom; discharging into suitably protected outlets. Ahernalively low-retaining walls (less than 5 feet retained) may use weep holes. isnimTy Pavement 14 Sales, Activity & Fitness Buildings Project No. 19 16-A08 MarBrisa Resort, Carlsbad, CA Log No. 11-1409 NI jr hent ;AC', Class II Base <4 t''diflgCffl'difiOn. .Trãfflcliide* , Thicknes'. Thkkiess". Auto 4.5 4.0 inches 4.0 inches Parking Areas Auto . 5.0 4.0 inches 4.0 inches Driveways Light Duty Truck 6.0 4.0 inches 9.0 inches Driveways Moderate Duty 7.0 4.0 inches 11.0 inches Truck Driveways All fill under pavement should be compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction with exception of the upper 12 inches. Prior to the placement of base material, the upper 12 inches of pavement subgrade should be scarified; moisture conditioned and compacted to a minimum 95 percent relative.compaction based on Test Method ASTh4 D1557. Aggregate base material should conform to Caltrans Standard Specifications Section 26 (Class 2) or the Standard Specification for 'Public Works Construction (Crushed Aggregate Base or Crushed Miscellaneous Base) and should be compacted to a minimum 95 -percent relative compaction based On Test Method ASTM D1557 prior to placement of the asphaltic concrete. Portland cement concrete pavement sections may incorporate steel reinforcement and to be provided with crack control joints as designed by the project structural engineer. Recommended concrete mix should be at least 3,500 psi It is recommended that Portland cement concrete swales to be designed and constructed within asphalt pavement areas for drainage of surface wait. Fill soils under curb and gutter should be compacted to a minimum 90 percent relative compaction based on Test Method AS'Thl D1557. Construction Considerations The soils encountered at the site may be sensitive to dlsiMrrbarzces caused by construction equipment and to diaxrgçs in nioisiwte cuntent 'Thnninig wet weather perieda, increases 'in the moisture content of the soil can cause signiillcant red½rctiorr in the soul silitengjh and support capahilitie& hri arMitiorr, soils that become wet may be slaw to dry and thas sigtilcautly retard the progens of gmaMg and Sales. Activity & Fitness Buildings Project No. 1916-A08 MarBnsa Resort. Carlsbad. CA Log No. 11-1409 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 result, 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 encountered within the maximum explored depth of 50 feet below existing grade. It should be noted, however, that variations in the ground water table may 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 - - - 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 urdessitanding that OSHA regulations are being strictly enforced and if not closely fOIIOWCdL the owner and the contractor could be liable for'substantial penalties.. 16 Sales, Activity & Fitness Buildings Project No. 1916-A08 MarBnsa 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 backfilled and compacted. 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 may be 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 under structure and pavement) of maximum dry density (based on A5TMD1557). Site Drainage Drainage should be designed to collect and direct surface waters away from structures to approved drainage facilities. Dowuspouts, 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 swales 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 gctecIfrnicaI1 and geological consultants sliouM be uetained to review grading and foundation plans and specifkalioris to ascertain conlonnance with site conditions and recommendations 17 Sales, Activity & Fitness Buildings Project No. 1916-A08 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: During site grading and overexcavation. During foundation excavations and placement. - During excavation and backfllling of all utility trenches Upon completion of any foundation and retaining wall footing excavation prior to placing concrete During processing and compactiàn of the subgrade for the access and parking areas and prior to construction of pavement sections. It is the responsibility of the contractor to coordinate all inspections and testing required by this finn or by other regulatory agencies. LIMITATIONS The analyses, conclusions,, and recommendations contained in this report are based on site conditions as they existed at the time of our investigation and further assume the explorations to be representative of the subsurface conditions throughout the site If different subsurface conditions are observed during construction, we should be promptly notified for review and reconsideration of our recommendations. This report was prepared for the exclusive use and benefit of the owner, architect, and engineer for evaluating the design of the facilities as it relates to geotedmical aspects. It should be made available to prospective contractors for information on factual data only, and not as a wasusty of subsurface conditions irxdiaried in this report [•3TI 0176i i it it [oil IF 17 -71 IMU to Mtosoll ijii is N. 0 nk t*1 k4\1t\ cZ2r \? ?rT. 4L ) )/ Magnol jJ\J ,4 veI vaug ft .12 0. IV 10 pit A 7 4Pq / t Agua D 357 J. ( \ L \ ç eservor-." \ sruLOCATIONI Ll - . 9 47 (() \ \. SITE WCATION MAP SALES, AC'I £ MNESS Bt1LIi1NtS NOY.I1 I flGIJA1 A\ MTG4lNC- ----- 4 - I ( b I - 4 > t t ( B1) fT I 6 1 \ _v_ .•\ ----.,.- - ° B6 B-3 Legid :. 8-6 Aroxiimate LcatIiIim of Boring WRING LOCATION PLAN SALWS, ACI1VfJY & mrfr BIDILDINGS NOV.. 2111 I FIGURE 2 ___ MTG, INC.. APPENDIX A REFERENCES 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 Official Maps of Aiquist-Priolo Zones. Bryant, WA. and Hart, E.W.,2007, Fault Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Aiquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act with Index to Earthquake Fault Zones Maps, California Department of Conservation, California Geological Survey, Special Publication 42. Jennings, C.W., 1994, Fault Activity Map of California and Adjacent Areas, California Division of Mines and Geology. Scale 1:750,000. California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Geologic Map of the Northwestern Part of San Diego County, California, DMG Open-File Report 964Y2. Scale 1:24,000. California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Recent Failures, Ancient Landslides, and Related Geology of the North-Central Coastal Area, San Diego County, 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 Roy Quadrangle, California-San Diego County, 75-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-F11e Report 95-04, LarNWide Hazard Identification Map No. 35. California Dc,tiiitiit of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, The Rose Canyon Fault Zone , Southom California, 1993, DMG Open-File Rcrrt 934)2. California Building Stanrlards Commission, 2007 California Building Code, California Code of Reaflations, Tale 24, Part 2 Volume 2 of 2. Uepartmt of the Navy, Naval Farifiiiiiies Engineering Conimarid, 1982, Fo thllinm and Earth Strnetmes, NAVFAC DM-72.. Department of the Navy, Naval Fadlities Ergiineering Command, 1982, Soil Medianies NAVFAC DM-7.L 1nigin and Aanudat, im, 20. Geoóakal hwyWggxf=v Prnpoan 53-Acne Resrmt Dembpom - Phase 1,, Carbfradl Ra'ndr,, PIE mg Anna Not. 5, Cad'tharlL C& fl't Not. 040675-0)3, April 11, 200& Leighton and Associates, Inc., 2006, As-Graded Geotechnical Report of Rough and Fine Grading, Hotel One, Resort and Conference Facilites, Sales Building, and Villas No. 53 through 56, Lots 10, 11 and A Portion of Lot 1, Grand Pacific Carlsbad, Carlsbad, CA, Project No. 040575-005, August 2, 2006. APPENDIX B FIELD EXPLORATION PROGRAM On October 6, 2010, six exploratory borings were drilled utilizing 6-inch diameter hollow stem auger drilled to a depth of between 20 and 50 feet below existing site grade. Samples were obtained with the Standard Penetration Test (SF!) sampler, CAL Sampler and a. bulk sample, as appropriate. The approximate location of the borings are shown on the Boring Location Plan, Figure 2, attached. The field exploration was performed under the supervision of our Geologist/Engineer who maintained a continuous log of the subsurface soils encountered and obtained samples for laboratory testing. The soils encountered were classified in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (see Key to Logs, Figure B-0). Subsurface conditions are summarized on the Boxing Logs, Figures B-i and B-5. The soils were classified based on field observations and laboratory test& DEFINITION OF TERMS PRIMARY DIVISIONS SYMBOLS SECONDARY DIVISIONS GRAVELS CLEAN • (3W Well graded gravel*. gravel-sand mixtures, little or no MORE THAN GRAVELS . Poorly graded gravels or gravel-sand mixtures, Old* or W0 HALF OF (LESS THAN ea 5% FINES) . rn no fines. 0 COARSE FRACTION IS If 8flty gravels. gravel-sand-sit mixtures. non-plastic LARGER THAN GRAVEL WITH FINES 177 Clayey gnysla, gravel-sand-clay, mixtures, plastic NO.4 SIEVE f fl X SANDS CLEAN SANDS • SW well graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no z U1 MORE THAN HALF OF (LESS THAN 5% FINES) p Poorly graded sends or gravelly sands, little or no tines COARSE FRACTION IS SANDS WC Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures, non-plastIc fines. 0 cc - SMALLER THAI WITH FINES NO. 4 SIEVE Clayey sand. sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines. • i Inorganic ellts and voryflflesands,rack flaiw,slltyoi fine clayey sands or claysy silts with sd plasticity. 50 SILTS AND CLAYS LIQUID LIMIT IS 0/2 L clays of low to medIum plastIcIty, gravelly clays, sandy clays, lean clays. LESS THAN 50% 1 Organic silts end organic silty clay, of low plasticity.X mm Z Zmo I r -o slits, AND CLAYS or°?ofls, inicacesue or dlstoaacscus fin, sandy<X.jVd SILTS elastic sits. H inorganic clays of high plasticity, fit clays. Ix 'Ii LIQUID LIMIT IS E 2 -C OREATERTHAN5O% Organic clays of msdkmi to IIgh plasticity, organic 1-1 • 0, silts. HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS --- Pt Peat and other hIghly organic soils. GRAIN SIZES SILTS AND CLAYS SAND j- I GRAVEL COBBLES I FINE MEDIUM COARSE FINE I COARSE 200 40 10 4 are as U.S. ffrANDAR13 SERES SIEVE CLEAR SQUARE SEW OPBINGS GROUND WATER LEVEL OR GROUND WATER SEEPAGE. LOCATION OF SAMPLE TAKEN USING A STANDARD SPLIT TUBE SAMPLER. 2-INCH 0.0, 1-318-INCH I.D. DRIVEN WITH A 140 POUND HAMMER FALLING 30-INCHES. Z 3-1Ie-INCH LOCATION OF SAMPLE TAKEN USING A MODIFIED CALIFORNIA SAMPLER. 0.0.. WITH 2-112-INCH LD. LINER RINGS. DRIVEN USING THE WEIGHT OF KELLY BAR (LARGE DIAMETER BORINGS) OR USING A 140 POUND HAMMEØ FALLING 30-INCHES (SMALL DIAMETER 8011111.): LOCATION OF SAMPLE TAKEN USING A 3-INCH O.D. THIN-WALLED TUBE SAMPLER IA (SHELBY TUBE) HYDRAULICALLY PUSHED. LOCATION OF BULK SAMPLE TAKEN FROM AUGER CUTTINGS. KEY TO LOGS - UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIICATION SYSTEM CASTE D-2487) lO0 NO.: 1DATE iov. nil 1FISIME DATE OBSERVED: Oct. 6, 2011 METHOD OF DRILLING: 8" Hollow Stem Auger LOGGED By:ECD GROUND ELEVATION: 88 LOCATION: See Figure 2 — BORING NO. B-i SOIL TEST on z ,n 8 w DESCRIPTION SB-I S13-2 — 36 52 = 13.5 12.5 122.9 120.4 FILL, Silty Sand (SM), orange-brown. moist, medium dense, trace day. Grades to dense. Cormslvlty R-value Gradation Difect Shear - - E - TERRACE DEPOSITS: Silty Sand (SM). orange-brown. 93 124.1 moIst, very dense. nthc yellow-brown color, trace day. SS-1I 54 11.8 with mat gray color. 10.4 with duk bruan color 13.4 to I SS-41 55 10.4 pndEs bwnyrree aft Feet on 1t1. --- :r• "Z': :' ii.'• DATE OBSERVED: Oct 0, 2011 METHOD OF DRILLING: 9fl Hollow Stem Auger LOGGED YCD GROUND ELEVATION: ±190 LOCATION: See Figure 2 - 0. (ft cl - * H Z ., Tj H ,Cfl BORING NO. B-2 DESCRIPTION SOIL TEST 0 SBA SB-2 S13-3 SS-1 SS-2 - 38 48 65 24 37 - - 12.1 13.5 13.2 10.2 8.2 124.8 1 123.8 flJ Silty Sand (SM), orangebrovm. moist, medium dense to dense, trace clay. Grades to mix orange-brown Silty Sand. Max. Density Expansion index CorrosMty Dked Show Ccnsdaon - - - 7; = x TERRACE DEPOSiTS: Silty Sand (SM), orange-brown, moist, dense, mix with re&bown ator. Grades to medium dense Grades to dense. O is I) - Doing Tei..id at 0 Feet No GrramdwaterEncourtmed. Borekde Bar*0Eed on 11t S oJ rao..:MUM LM OP' EOG - Figoze 3-2 DATE OBSERVED: Oct. 6, 2011 METHOD OF DRILLING: 80 Hollow Stem Auger LOGGED BY: ECD GROUND ELEVATION: *215' LOCATION: See Figure 2 — (a (a (a (a (a - r BORING NO. B-3 DESCRIPTION SOIL TEST L — S13-1 SB-2 S13-3 SB-I SS-11 55-2 55-3 39 105 36 80 48 45 2r. 14.3 9.1 11.7 9.4 1IL1 R3 123 132.8 125.8 131.9 fjj Silty Sand (SM), orange-brown. moist. medium dense, trace clay. Mix vdih dark brown color. very dense. Grades to medium dense. 11-value x - 0 TERRACE DEPOSITS- Ity Sand (SM), orange-brawn. n1 very denso.bmc eclay. Grades todense. Grades to morfrmu dorwn. IS :c 9-7 20 0 - - 5 Boring Twnijtfl at 20 Fest. an ioii. 0 Pect TAW CIF 30i3 FI 3-3 DATE OBSERVED: Oct. 8, 2011 METHOD OF DRILLING: 8 Hollow Stem Auger LOGGED BY: ECD GROUND ELEVATION: 1215' LOCATION: See Figure 2 PC to BORING NO. B-4 ca to SOIL TEST ra vc M 8 to a " DESCRIPTION L E!LLi Silly Sand (SM), brown, moist, medium dense. - haceday. SS-1 15 J_ 10.3 max Dandy EVansion stex - 0 SS-2 22 11.2 3iades to mix yeUow.brown and crange-twoan color. Coirosivily SS-3 5W 7.4 Grades to very dense. TERRACE DEPOSUS: Say Sand (SM), moist. - cev very dense, hene clay. !SS472I as SS-6 37 8.7 Comfin to dense. 25 ] SS-6 41 102 SS-7 4rr 5.5 is SS6 45 as ri am Rpm 04A project MM..- 11916MS Lao OP MCMING Fiiate —4 ATE OBSERVED: Oct. 6, 2011 ROD OF DRILLING: 90 Hollow Stem Auger LOGGED BY:ECD GROUND ELEVATION: ±216' LOCATION: See Figure 2 — r4 cn 0 - 0 BORING NO. 13-4 DESCRIPTION SOIL TEST 40 SS-8 SS-9 55-10 57 5O - 95 9.8 5.7 TERRACE DEPOSITS; S8ty.Sand (SAM. orange-brown, moist, dense, trace clay. Grades to gravel inclusions, very dense. - S Bating Terminated at 50 Feet No Gratirwtnater Encmirdlered BoteIde 8addled an 121O0. - S so 75 PJ ,..: IA LGG or zcMxW I1U 4A UUItL 1L" h., I I L I DPW S-6 D=msu EOE cc AEP aq AM 2J3 1SW An sij 3 w3c-Bs 104 IC I•P-OSISI1 JDø3UMWqWEpX!WOm19 Vtl I 9CI 6C IC-ES loll Voluoqwwo CL IP 39s SI To 2 til i-os - Aup oei osuap - umew 1S!OW iq-e5uwo (v4s) pueg Aws ILT4ISaa .sai.'iios to n Q 9-9 0N 9NWJO8. - L'i M e.an6j 99S :KOIIWJM UNflOO — Q33XeOHOO1 - £o6ny W8S MOIIOH 3 fiNITflQ dO QOHJ2W LlO 'o aiasao aLY ATE OBSERVED: Oct. 0, 2011 METHOD OF DRILLING: 8" Hollow Stem Auger LOGGED BY: ECD GROUND ELEVATION: ±215' LOCATION: See Figure 2 . § dp a BORING NO. B-6 ta m SOIL TEST 8 ta z a H DESCRIPTION Iq - I I I I I I Silty Sand (SK). orange-brown, moist, medium dense to dense, trace clay. 15 I SB-I I 53 11.2 1 128.3 IMixvvithdivicbrown-lor. Density cn hex 101 58-21 43 12.9 I 122.1 15158-31 35 10.8. I 121.4 00 IS8-4I go 92 125.4 7n=wMst BEPO Hy Sand (SM wange-te d trace dW. 58-il 37 LB I lGrfesfo dWom 8.6 Graifes toy de. Boftg Tuted at30 F Pb ,uhi 1NI cii APPENDIX C LABORATORY TESTING PROCEDURES The results of laboratory testing are discussed and presented in this appendix. MOISTURE/DENSiTY Determinations of in situ moisture content and dry density 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 samples 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. CLASSIFICATION The Unified ,Soil Classification System was utilized for visual (ASTM D2488) and laboratory (ASTM D2487) classifications of soils encountered. GRADATION The sieve analysis of selected soil samples was performed in accordance with ASTM D422 and results are presented in Figures C-i to C-s MAXIMUM DENSITY A maximnunir density test was performed on a representative bag sample of the near surface soils in accordanmwilh ASIM D11557. The test results are shown below. Location MixirnumDry OpthñumMoistwre 3-2 @ 8'- IT 1305 83 3-4@)8'-112' 1342 85 1313 92 DIRECT SHEAR Direct shear tests were performed in general accordance with ASTM D3080-98. Direct shear tests were performed on undisturbed soil samples. Test results are as follows. Location Cohesion ' Angle of Internal B-1@5' - .435 38 B-2 @ 10' 1.003 40 B-5@15' .1004 .35 B-6@15' 66 44 EXPANSION INDEX Expansion Index testing was completed in accordance with ASTM D4829. Test results are presented in the following table. CORROSIVITY Corrosivity; Testing in compliance with Câitrans Test Method 417,. 422,; &. 643.. Thst results, are presented below.. Sample Location' PH ._. Soluble Sulfates;Miii ________••,.. Resistivity _4ohin-cm. B- 11. @ 11."- 5" 0.032 . 11,460 B2@8'-12" 6.7/ &.02.1 1,694 B4@8"-i2" • 6.6 0011 1,781 B-6 @' 5" -9)' 6.7/ 0010) 280) N CONSOLIDATION Consolidation test was performed on representative, relatively undisturbed sample of the underlying soil to determine compressibility characteristics in accordance with ASTM D2435. Test result is presented on Figure C-6 to C-9. R-VALUE R-value testing was performed on existing upper on-site soil within proposed pavement areas. California Department of Transportation (Càltrans) Test Method 301 was used to determine exudation and expansion values. Location R- Value B-l@ P-5' 25 B-3@1'-5' 49 - irr r1ft.i i]IT1 TI11i.i ii ;ci.i.i 11111111 IHIUIIRIIHIUhI 11111111 'IIIIlNIIIHhIIIHIUHhI _"I1IIIffIIUII1IINIIHII IHIIII1IIIIUIIIII 11111111 11111111 T:h'IIIIIIuuIItIIIIIlI IIIUiIIIIIIHUIII ;'hliulllliullulllhlHll INIHlIIIIllhIIII_11111111 IIIIIIIlIUlNItIUIIII_INIIIUIlIIIIIUIII__11111111 IHIIIIIIIIIiii1IIIIUI 11111111 iIIUIUhIHIIUIIIIHIU INIllUIlIllItlUIlI 11111111 iIIlIIIlUHhUILlUIHhI p; IT' II I -. I. .1 'IIIC1 F1's._ . 1____________________________________________________________ __I:!:t_* _P.I Tested B LHI Checked B iit r1Ii ')1 Tflhroiii ;[ 'iIII1IIUIIII1IIiiiii!!.UII1IIIIIIIIUIIlUIII_11111111 "IIII1UIIIHUItIIINIIUiI!IIIIIII1IINIIII_11111111 "IIIIIIilhIHhlItlIUIIII_IHi!UIlIIlIIIIIIII 11111111 _IIluuHuIaIIaoIHu._IlIIIIIIftIHhiiII 11111111 ___"IiiIflhIIHhlIIUHIHll_IIlIIIIlilIlIINIIIII 11111111 'IIII1IIIIlIIIIt1NIIIII IHIII1IiIIIIIIIII__11111111 T;"IiiuIIuiuIUuiIIuUIU_i011llllltiiIiIiiUi_11111111 :'IIIIaIuuhlNIiIoIHII_IHIII1IIII11IIIIUhII_11111111 'IlIUINIUIIIIiIIIIHIU__IIIIIIIIIIIIIUIIIUhU__11111111 :iiiiuoinmiiiiiiiii iiuuluhuutlllul• iiiiiiva II IT' ji Atherbeirgirm. -. Ii caefflicteaft 02934 Et~(F .1 . . 1, .r'.. •. I I iii - 'kJf" -- Tested By: M. Checked Sr.E) 1 Particle Size Distribution Report 1FJ% - 911191. %Gravel %Sand %Flnes Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay 0.0 0.0 01) 16.6 49.0 34.4 Material Description Atterberci Limits PL= 11= PI= Coeffients Eg 05153 D 0.4421 Dgj 02545 D5g 1958 D DjOF classification USCS= MSIWO= Remarks fps spedfkatEom Sample NaTIfrer. 34 Depth 001. Daft=24JJ11II 0.0 SEW SIZE PERCENT SPEC. PERCENT FINER PASS? "01 #4 100.0 #10 100.0 #20 9&9 #40 83.4 #60 592 #100 42.3 #200 34.4 • MTGL Inc LU 1restedB)w JH Checkedi E)9r. 81)) rti •JI'1 .T11 Ir.i 'i ; •i.i ':'IIiiIIIlIIoNIulIuIiuiiiii!iunhuIii1iIIii_11111111 "lllllillflhlllilhlHll -iHlIiIIIIIIIflhIIl_11111111 INI1I11IhlIIIlIIIII 11111111 - hhhulllllltlllllllltlolllll _ff"IlIIIIIIIUIIIIIIINIIII INIUi11Oh1IIIII__11111111 ___:"iiiaiiuuiuiiiiiiiiu IHIIlflhIIlIllll 11111111 11111111 'II111II1IlII1IIL1IIIlIII_IuIIIIlIIiIIII1IIIuI • hiIIIUI1UIuIIINHhI iiiiiuiiuiigiiiii_11111111 11111111_ItIIIIII1l11III1IIIII_11111111 :'IIII.HIUIHNIi iiiauiuiiiuiiiniuii__IiIIUIII1llhIllII_11111111 ilililli mill I I•ti lxIi c;1.1 I1P4ii1ii, Ix' Mau" Qggqdpgm I, 993 99.4 912 —. 59 II 43-44 Cadrwhuft :i33.6 0-5460 D 0.1925 OL4645 02546 1: I!! Tested Byi: Jfl Checked B_________________ fl'iT t p'4iJ1Ui1 .1!1IT.] ii [1 si.) i -- 'Ill All E'l GIl] (I[• - II 'Ji IX'['I Ii el P..(lIdlt I 011 J 0 Il III ii q It II Tesw i;r- ( 11 iejI1It Or. 11 checkE*1 By ['Isi IIIIUIlIlIHIIIINIlOIliIRi!Ii11IIIILIIIIlIIIINIIIU___ IIIIIIIhINI1Ii1OIIIlI IHIIIIIIIIEIIIII 11111111 III1IllhINIlIiilNIIII_IHIIiI1IlIINIIIII_11111111 IIII1IlIIlHlIIIIIIIHhI IIIIUIIIOhIIIIIl 11111111 UIIUhllNIlUIIUHII_IlIllif11111111111_11111111 III11IIIIlHl1iIIIUIU__ItIIIlI1IKUIIIIIIIII__11111111__ IIIaIflIUII1I1IHIIIII IIIIIII1IIILIIHhIUII 11111111 N iii I1IIUIIIIIlI1flhIIHhI 111111111111 IllIUlIll III SIEVE SIZE PECEIfl FINER SPEC PERCENT PASS? (X--AO) #4 WO.0 #110 996 #20 98A) #40 775 #60 523 #1100 35.1) #2110 252 II alnini I iiuiiiiiuiiiuiiii IIlIIA!iiIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I NONE MEN I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIiI!IIIIIIIIIIIII • IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIiIHIIIIIIIII • IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIH!iIIIIII I IhIIIflhIIIIIIiiIIIIIIIIiIIII • IhIIIIIIIIIIIIIIliiiii!i!!iIII • IIIIIuIIuIIIIuuIIIIIIIuIuIIuiiII I11UIIIIIIIIII!IIIIIIIIIIIlIIII• __________________ N • I': c)jIjP•SO • "•t. !. * • II1IIIiii!!iIIIIIIIIIIIlIIIIUII • IIIIIT MEN UIlI i.11 moll UhIIIIIIIIIIIIi!iIIIIIIIIIIIII • IIIuIIIIuIIIIIIIIIhiiuIIIIIIIII • uIIIIIIIIuIIuIIIIIIIIuiiIuIIIIII I1IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIi!IIIIII • II1IIUIIIIIIIIIiH!iIIIIAHIII. IIIIIflhIIIIIIIIIIIIiiiii!!!iI ulluiuuhuiuulliuull!uIIIuiuIIII Li E:..I .! _ :IIP) . ,.'-• * -:-?j V I IIIIIiiMIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIUIII IIIIIIIIIIi!iIIIIuIIIIIuhIIIII IIIIIIIIiP!JhiHIIIIIIIIIIIII • nhllllujlluluullllii.iuuIIIIIuII I II1IIIIIIIIIUhIIIIIIIiiIIIIIIII • HuIIIIIIIIIuIIIuIIIIIIKIIIIII • uhuIIIIIIIIIIIi!iuIIIIuIIiIuII HlIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIii!iIIIiIII liii UI liii UhlIllIlIllI M=J2Fir a ___________________ '.I:; !iT I "'31 :1 •: * I. :7 Y [: I IIIIIIIIH!!iIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 'I11IIiii.iiiH!IIIIIflhIIIIIIII I1IIIIIIIIIIIIIIii!!IIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIuIIIIIuuIIIIIIIuuhIIIIuuI I11IIIIIIIIIIIIiIIIII1IIh!flhll I1IIIIIIIIIIIIIIiHi!!!IIIIiIII I uI1IiIIIIIiIII".u Mimi Iuu!uuiiiiu:II'. i __________________ 7. 1:.''!I •:;i'.i: MIMI I 411,11 1 WN Mill -. APPENDIX D ENGINEERING and SEISMIC ANALYSIS General The details of the engineering analyses performed as part of this investigation are discussed in this section. Seismicity Seismic design values were computed based on site coordinates of N33.13199 and W117.31241. The nearest active fault computed by the Thomas Blake EQFAULT program is the Rose Canyon Fault, located approximately 8.5 km southwest of the site. The deterministic analyses are attached. The ground.motion values derived from the 2010 California Building Code (CBC), Title 24 were obtained from the Java Ground Motion Parameter Calculator, Version 5.1.0 and is attached. Based upon the results of the exploratory borings, the project site is assigned to Site Class D. CALIFORNIA FAULT MAP Test Run 1100 1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 too -1100 -4100 -300 -200 -1100 0 100 200 300. 400 SOlD) 600 TEST . OUT * * * E Q F A U L T * * * * Version 3.00 * * * * *** * * * ** ** * **** *** ** * DETERMINISTIC ESTIMATION OF PEAK ACCELERATION FROM DIGITIZED FAULTS JOB NUMBER: 1916-A08 DATE: 10-21-2011 JOB NAME: Sales, Activity & Fitness Buildings CALCULATION NAME: Test Run Analysis FAULT-DATA-FILE NAME: CDMGFLTE.DAT SITE COORDINATES: SITE LATITUDE: 33.1320 SITE LONGITUDE: 117.3124 SEARCH RADIUS: 100 ml ATTENUATION RELATION: 17) Campbell & Bozorgni a (1994/1997) - All uvi tim UNCERTAINTY (1=Median, S--sigma): N Number of Sigmas: 0.0 DISTANCE MEASURE: cdi St SOON!): 0 Basement Depth: 5.00 km Campbell SSR: 0 Campbell SHR: 0 COMPUTE PEAK HORIZONTAL ACCELERATION FAULT-DATA FILE USED: CVMGFLTE .DAT r4IMIMJJM DEPTH VALUE (km): 3.0 Pa9e 1 TEST. OUT EQFAULT SUMMARY ----------------------------- DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS ----------------------------- Page 1 ABBREVIATED FAULT NAME . APPROXIMATE DISTANCE I mi (1cm) J EARTHQUAKE1 ESTIMATED MAXIMUM I MAG.(Mw) MAX. EARTHQUAKE PEAK J EST. SITE ACCEL. g EVENT SITE INTENSITY MOD..MERC. ROSE CANYON . 5.3( 8.5)1 7.2 0.435 x NEWPORT-INGLEW000 (Offshore) . .7.2 ( 11.6)1 7.1 1 0.373 IX CORONADO BANK 21.1( 33.9)1 7.6 1 0.218 VIII ELSINORE-TEMECULA 1 24.3( 39.1)1 6.8 0.101 . vii ELSINORE-JULIAN 1 24.3( 39.1)1 7.1 0.129 1 VIII ELSINORE-GLEN IVY I 35.4( 57.0)1 6.8 1 0.063 I VI PALOS VERDES 1 37.8( 60.8)1 7.1 1 0.075 1 VII EARTHQUAKE VALLEY 1 42.4( 68.3)1 6.5 1 0.038 1 V SAN JAaNTo-ANzA 1 47.0( 75.6) 7.2 0.062 VI SAN JACINTO-SAN JACINTO VALLEY 47..8( 77.0)1 6.9 1 0.047 1 VI NEWPORT-INGLEOOD (L.A.Basin) I 48.3( 77.7)1 7.1 1 0.055 1 VI CHINO-CENTRAL AVE. (Elsinore) 1 49.8( 80.2)1 6.7 1 0.037 1 V SAN )AcINTO-COYOTE CREEK 51.7( 83.2)1 6.8 1 0.039 1 V WHInIER 1 53.3( 85.8)1 6.8 1 0.037 1 V ELSINORE--coYoTh MOUNTAIN 1 56.2( 90.5)1 6.8 1 0.035 1 V COMPTON THRUST 1 58.0( 93.3)1 6.8 1 0.032 1 V ELYSIAN PARK THRUST 1 60..9( 98.0)1 6.7 1 0.028 1 V SAN JACINTO-SAN BERNARDINO 61.3( 98J5)J 6.7 1 0.028 1 V SAN •JAaNTO - BORREGO 1 64.9( 104.5)1 6.6 1 0.024 1 V SAN ANDREAS - San Bernardino 1 65.7( 105.7)1 7.5 1 0.053 1 VI SAN ANDREAS - Southern 65.7( 105.7)1, 7.4 1 0.048 1 VI SAN JOSE 1 70.6( 313.7)1 6.5 0.019 1 Iv Pirm imiN . 72.5( 116.7) 7.0 0.030 1 V SAN ANDREAS - Coachella 1 73.3( M.9)1 7.2 1 0.035 1 V SIERRA MADRE 1 74.3( 319.6)1 7.0 1 0.027 1 V co 74.6( 120.1)1 7.0 1 0.026 1 V NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (West) 1 77.2( IL24-2)1 7.0 1 0.025 1 V BURNT MIJL 1 78.0( 125.6) 6..4 1 0.016 Iv CLEQIJORN 1 79.0( 127.2)1 6.5 1 0.017 Iv EUREKA PEAK 80.8( 130.1) 6.4 0.015 1 Iv slwEgsrrrion ririii. (San Jacinto) 81..0( 130.4) 6.6 0.01 IV NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZJQPIE (East) 81.2( 130.6) 6.7 0.013 IV SAN ANDREAS - 1857 Rupture 82..4( 132.6) 7.8 0.051 VI SAN ANDREAS - ojave 1 82.4( 132.6)P 7.4 0.036 V RAVMND 82.5( 132.8) 6.5 0.015 Iv CLA6HEL.L-SAprr 84.2( 1355) 65 0.015 IV 84.7( 136.3) 6.6 0.017 iv 35..2( 137.1)0 6.7 1 0.017 P Iv s'esrinoN HEIELLS (San Jadnta) P 85..7( 1300) 6.6 0.017 IV NE1LLVWJO 0 87.1( 140.1) 6.4 0.013 m Page 2 TEST OUT ----------------------------- DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS ----------------------------- Page 2 ABBREVIATED FAULT NAME APPROXIMATE DISTANCE mi (km) 1 ESTIMATED MAX. MAXIMUM I EARTHQUAKE I MAG.(4w) I 7.0 EARTHQUAKE PEAK SITE ACCEL. g 0023 EVENT JEST. SITE I INTENSITY IMOD.MERC. IV LAGUNA SALADA 87.4( 140.7) LANDERS 88.1( 141.8)1 7.3 1 0.030 V HELENDALE - S. LOCKIIARDT 1 89.4( 141.8)1 7.1 1 0.025 1 V SANTA MONICA 1 91.8( 147.7)1 6.6 1 0.014 1 IV LENW000-LOCKHART--OLD WOMAN SPRGS 93.1( 149.8)1 7.3 1 0.028 1 V BRMILEY SEISMIC ZONE 1 94.1( 151.0 6.4 1 0.012 1 III MALIBU COAST 1 94.3( 151.8)1. 6.7 1 0.015 1 IV JOHNSON VALLEY (Northern) 96.1( 154.6) 6.7 0.016 1 IV EMERSON So. copp MiN. 1 96.2( 154.8) 6.9 1 0.019 1 IV NORTHRIDGE (E. oak Ridge) 1 98.5( 158.5)1 6.9 1 0.016 1 IV SIERRA MADRE (San Fernando) 1 99.0( 159.3)1 6.7 1 0.014 1 IV SAN GABRIEL 1 99.2( 159.7)1 7.0 1 0.020 1 IV ********** ********t ******** -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 kin) AWAY. LARGEST MAXIMUM-EARTHQUAKE SITE ACCELERATION: 0.4353 g Paige 3 Conterminous 48 States 2005 ASCE 7 Standard Latitude =33.13199 Longitude = -117.31241 Spectral Response Accelerations Ss and Si Ss and Si = Mapped Spectral Acceleration Values SiteClassB - Fa=1.0Fv=1.0 Data are based on a 0.01 deg grid spacing Period Sa (sec) (g) 0.2 1.252 (Ss, Site Class B) 1.0 0.473 (Si, Site Class B) Conterminous 48 States 2005 ASCE 7 Standard Latitude = 33.13199 Longitude = -117.31241 Spectral Response Accelerations SMs and SM1 SMs = Fa x Ss and SM1= Fvx Si SiteClassD - Fa=1.0Fv=1.527 Period Sa (sec) (9) 02 1.252 (SMs, Site Ctass D) 1.0 0.722 (SM1, Site Class D) Perad Sa (eec) (9) 02 0.235 (Sfls, Site Crass D) 1.0 0A81 (SDI, Site Ciss D) APPENDIX E GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS APPENDIX E GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS 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 subd rains, 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. EARTHWORK OBSERVATION AND TESTING Prior to the start of grading, a qualified Geotechnical Consultant (Geo technical Engineer and Engineering Geologist) shall be employed for the purpose of observing earthwork procedures and testing the fills for conformance with-the recommendations 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 Consultant and keep them apprised of work schedules and changes.so Chat-he may schedule his personnel accordingly. It shall be the sole responsibility of the Contractor to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish the work in, accordance withapplicable grading codes or agency ordinances, these specifications and the approved grading plans. Maximum dry density tests used to 'determine the degree of compaction will be performed' in accordance with the American.Sàciety for Testing and MaterialsTést Method (ASTM) D1557-91 or later revision. PREPARATION OF AREAS. TO BE 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 satisfactory for support of fill shall: be scarified to a minimum depth. of 6 inches. Existing, ground, which is not satisfactory, shall beoverexcavatCd as, specified in the following section.. Overexcavation:. Soft, dry, spongy, highly' fractured or otherwise unsuitable groundi extend ing. to such a depth that surface processing cannot: adequately improve, the condition, shall be overexcava ted: down to fiirn ground, approved by the COnsultant Moisture. conditionhjig,: Overexcavated and processed soils shall be watered,. driéd..back,.blended, and mixed as: requiredto:havea relatively unif6rmi moisture-content near the optimum: moisture content:as determined! by' AS:' ! D1557. RecompactiOn:: O'erexcavatedI and: processedi soil,. which have: been: mixed, and) moisture: conditiOned unifOrthlyshalIIbe:recompacted to:a;miniinum: relative: compactiOn of 90) percent: of ASTM: D1557. Benching:. Where:soiI: are: placed oni ground with: slopes: steeper than: 51 (horizontalI tOvertical), the: groundl shall' be: step pedlorbenchedL BCnches;shaIilbe:excavated! in:firinmaterinlfora:miniinumwidth:oft feet 41 FILL MATERIAL Generak. Materiálltbbe:plàcedlas full shafli be free: ofiorganic:matter andl other Aeléteribussubstances,: and) shall be: approved by the: Consultänt.. Oversize, Oversized material defined as rock, or other irreducible material with a maximum dimension 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. Import If importing of fill material is required for grading, the import material shall meet the general requirements. FILL PLACEMENT AND COMPACFION 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 a moisture content less than optimum shall be watered and mixed, and wet fill layers shall be aerated 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 o,ptimum. 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 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 bacicrolling of slopes with sheepsfoot rollers at frequent increments' of 2 to 3 feet as the fill is placed, or by other methods producing satisfactory. results. At thécomplètion of grading, the relative compaction of the slope out to the slope face shall beat least 90 percent inaccordance with AST, M D1557. 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 beat the consultant's discretion. In general, these. tess will betake at ani 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 testshallbe taken for each 5,000! square feet of slope face. and/or each 10 feet of vertical height:of slope. SUBDRAININSTALLA11ON Subd'raini,systems, if required, shall, beiiistalléd in approved ground to: conform to the:approxiinate alignment. and! details shown! on the plans or herein.. The subdrainlOcatiOn:ormateriáls:shallnot,be, changed or modified without the approval of the Consultant The.Cbnsultant,, however; may recommend and~ upon approval; direct changes in subdrain line,, grade or material.: AllJsubdraiiis. shouldi be: surveyed :for line and: grade after installatiOn and' sufficient time shall: be allowed! for the, surveys, prior to commencement olfill over, the subd'raüt. E'XCAVATlONi Excavations: and cut slpes. will! beexamined during. grad ing,. Ifd.irecled by. the:ConsulLant,further: excavation or overexcavatibril and refilling, of t. areas, and/or remedial grading of cut slbpesshallbe: perfórme&. Where!fillovercut::slopesare'tobegraded,.unlessothelwiseiapproved, the cut:, portiOn: of the'slópe:shall{.bemadè:andapproved by- the; Consultant .prior placement: ofmateriä1 for, cons&uction of thefill portiOn of the.-slope.