The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCT 83-04; WINDSONG SHORES PHASE 1; GRADING PLAN REVIEW; 1989-07-14~. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND 62BO RIVERDAL.E ST. SAN DIEGO, CAL.IF'. 92120 • TEL.E 2BO-4321 • P.O. BOX 20627 SAN DIEGO, CAL.IF'. 921·20 6 7 BEN T E R P R I S EST. ESC 0 N C leo, CAL I F". 9 2 C 2 5 July 14, 1989 Marlborough Developrrent Corporation ·28751 Rancho California Road, #208 Rancho California, California 92390 ATI'ENTION: Mr. Leonard Bedolla TELE 746-4544 SCS&T 8821027 Report No. 5 SUBJECT: Grading Plan Review, Windsong Shores, Harbor Drive, Carlsbad, California. REFERENCES: 1. "Rough Grading Plan for Windsong Shores", CMB & Associates; undated. 2. "Report of Geotechnical Investigation, wihdsong Shores"; Gentleman: ~~ cfSOil run ~3:'~O~ In accordance with a request from Mr. Kim Post, wa have reviewed. the rough grading plan for the subject proj~ct. The plan was found to be in corrpliance with the recomnendations provided in our referenced report. In addition, wa have perforrred a site reconnaissance which indicated that the site rerrains essentially unchanged from the ti.ma when our geotechnical investigation was performed. It is therefore our opinion that the SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING. INC. \ -J · , .t SCS&T 8821027 July 14, 1989 Page 2 recOJ1ll)3ndations provided in the referenced report are still applicable and should be .i.nplerrented. To the best of our lmowledge, these recomrendations are in confonrance with the current city code. If you have any questions regarding this letter, please do not hesitate to contact our office. Respectfully submitted, SOUTHERN Daniel B. Adler, R.C.E. #36037 DBA:jek cc: ( 3) Su1:mi tted ( 1) Crosby Mead Benton and Associates ( 1) Iorimar-Case Architects (1) SCS&T, Escondido i)t:N I tH i i:iU I.IAL. wUJ.L. (\I I C:w I J.1~\:l , O-a-btl ! 4;. 40~J'/I , o I ~4"o I" ,U d' " eCUTHERN CAL.IF"CRNIA SCIL. A..-NO TESTING. INC. &IIBD "IVI!!~D"I.E S,.. _AN CI&:IiIC, CAl.IF'. "':Z120 • 'I"i:L.i: .11I!0-4:521 • P.C. IiCX lIe';':Z7 !iAN DIEIiC, CAL.IF'. 91lae • "1 l!I I: N 't a: Ii P R I iI E: e·T. E • C gNP I g Q, CAL I... !;I a g a 5 • ,. C I. a: 7 4 & • 4 5 .... .August ~~, 1989 Mar1l::lOmugh Deve1opn:mt COl."pOration 28751 Rancho CalifoDlia Road, #208 Rancho california, California 92390 SCS&T 8821027 Report. No. 6 SUl3JECTl Additional 'I'elTporary CUt Slope Recormendations, Wind80ng Shores, Ht!lroor Drive, Carlsbad, califomia. REFERENCE: "Report of Geotechnical Investigation, Wi.ndeong Shores II; Southern california Soil ~ Testing, Inc.; March 15, 1988. Gentlerrenl In accordance with a .request from Mr. Dale Mitchell, we are providing herein aqditional tenporal:y cut slope recomrendations for the subject project. It is our understanding that in aarre areas along the northern propert.y line the top of proposed temporary cut slopes will be located right ~t the property line. An existing' access :road for the adjoining cond.omiIlium pl:Ojedt. is located along said property line. The referenced report reconmmded t::m;lt no surcharge loads be placed within ten feet :f:z:Qm the top of teztpor~ elopes. The intent of thie :reconrrendation was to avo~d surcharging, the slope with large sailor material stockpiles or heavy construction equipteI).t. It is anticipated that traffic or parking along the existing access .road will only consist of light to moderately heavy vehicles. In this case the surcharge setback may l::e reduced to four feet from the top of the slope. If you have any questions :regarding this letter, please do not hesitate to contact our office. DBA:mw cc: ( 3) Sul:rnitted ( 1) Crosby Mead :Benton and Assoc:ia-ces ( 1) Iorilre:r-Case Al:Chi tects . ( 1) SCS&T, Escondido aCUiHERN CALIf'CRNIA SOIL. ANC iESTJN~. .' I N c', . i SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND T:ESTING, INC. 6280 RIVERDALE ST. SAN DIEGO, CALIF. 92120 • TELE 280-4321 P.O. 80X 20627 SAN DIEGO, CALIF. 92120 678 ENTERPRISE ST. ESCONDIDO, CALIF. 92025 TEI.E 746-4544 June 15, 1989 Marlborough Developrrent Corporation 28751 Rancho California Road, #208 Rancho California, California 92390 m'ENTION: Mr. Leonard Bedolla SCS&T 8821027 Report No. 4 SUBJEcr: Off-Site Grading, Windsong Shores, Carlsbad Tract No. 83-4, Harbor Drive, Carlsbad, California. REFERENCE: "Report of Geotechnical Investigation, Windsong Shores"; Southern California Soil and Testing, Inc.; March 15, 1988. Gentlerren: In accordance with your request, this letter to provide site preparation recommendations for off-site grading required as part of the construction of an alternative access road for the subject site. PROJEX:T DESCRIPl'ION It is our understanding that the proposed area to be graded extends east from the existing railroad tracks from the intersection of Chinquapin Avenue and Long Place to the northwestern corner of the site. Two access points will be constructed. One will consist of a fill rarrp and one of a cut rarrp. Grading will consist of fills up to 20 feet deep except for the cut ramp SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC. SCS&T 8821027 June 15, 1989 Page 2 where cuts up to eight feet deep are anticipated. Proposed cut and fill slopes will be constructed at a 2: 1 (horizontal to vertical). These slopes will be minor and not exceed 15 feet and ten feet in height, respectively. To prepare this report we were provided with an undated grading plan entitled "Construction Access Road in .AT&SF Railroad Rig;ht of Way" and an Erosion Control Plan dated June 6, 1989 both prepared by Crosby Mead Benton and Associates. SITE AND son. DESCRIPl'IOO The subject area consist of a flat-lying access road and a small southwesterly trending gully. Existing fill is associated with the access road and the railroad ernbankmant. These deposits as well as undisturbed areas of the site appear to be underlain by terrace deposits and possible minor alluvium and topsoil. Several utility lines traverse the site in a southwesterly direction underneath and easterly from the existing access road. It is our opinion that the proposed grading nay be perfonred provided that the following reconnendations are .i.nplerrented. The following. reconnendations assume that the proposed fill will be considered a nonstructural fill and, it will not be used for the support of permanent settlement-sensitive improvements. It is also assumed that the loads resul ting from the additional fill or vehicular traffic on existing utility lines h.ave been accounted for. srm PREP.ARATICN: Site preparation should begin with the renoval from the areas to be developed of any deleterious natter or vegetation. Existing surface soils should be scarified to a depth of 12 inches, watered thoroughly and compacted to at least 90 percent as detennined in accorcla.nCe with ASTM D-1557-78, Method A or C. SCS&T 8821027 June 15, 1989 Page 3 SURFACE I>RAIm!GE: It is recOlTllIEnded that all surface drainage be directed away from the top of proposed pe:rmanent slopes. Ponding of water should not be allowed adjacent to the foundations. EAR:ImIJRK: All earthv;ork and grading contemplated for site preparation should be accomplished in accordance with the Recommended Grading Specifications and Special Provisions provided in the referenced report. All special site preparation recormendations presented in the sections above will supersede those in the Standard Recorrrcended Grading Specifications. If you should have any questions after reviewing this letter, please do not hesitate to contact our office. Respectfully submitted, SO FORNIA SOIL & DBA:nw cc: ( 3) Submitted ( 1) Crosby Mead Benton and Associates ( 1) Lor.i.mar-Case Architects ( 1) SCS&T, Escondido If ~ ?' • • 1 ;1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I ..... ' -l- e' '" REPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION WINDSONG SHORES SOUTHERN TERMINUS OF HARBOR DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA PREPARED FOR: Sears Savings Bank 701 North Brand Boulevard Glendale, California 92103 PREPARED BY: Southern California Soil & Testing, Inc. Post Office Box 20627 6280 Riverdale Street San Diego, California 92120 I 'I -I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC. 6280 RIVERDALE ST. SAN DIEGO, CALIF. 92120 • TELE 280-4321 • P.O. 80X 20627 SAN DIEGO, CALIF. 92120 6 7 BEN T E R P R I S EST. ESC 0 N 0 I 0 0, CAL I F. 9 2 0 2 S • TEL E 7 4 6 • 4 S 4 4 March 15, 1988 Sears Savings Bank 701 North Brand Boulevard Glendale, California 92103 SCS&T 8821027 Report No. 1 SUBJECT: Report of Geotechnical Investigation, Windsong Shores, Southern Terminus of Harbor Drive, Carlsbad, California. Gentlemen: In accordance wi th your request, we have completed a geotechni cal investigation for the subject project. The findings and recommendations of our study are presented herewith. In general, we found the site suitable for the proposed develQpment provided the recommendations presented in the attached report are followed. If you have any questions after reviewing the findings and recommendations contained in the attached report, please do not hesitate to contact this office. This opportunity to be of professional service is sincerely appreciated. Daniel B. Adler, R.C.E. #36037 DBA:GS:CRB:mw cc: (2) Submitted (3) Lorimer Case (1) Lyons, Warren & Associates (1) SCS&T, Escondido SOUTHERN INC. Gordon Seitz, Project Geologist Curtis I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE Introduction and Project Description •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1 Project Scope •••••••••••••.•••••..••••.••.•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 2 Fi ndi ngs .......................................................................... 4!i •••••••• 3 Site Description ••••••••••••••••••.••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 3 Genera 1 Geology and Subsurface Condi ti ons ............................. 3 Geologic Setting and Soil Description •••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 3 Tectonic Setting .•••••••••..•••••••••••..•••••••••••••••••••••••• 4 Groundwater ..•••.•••••.•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••.•••• 4 Geologic Hazards ....•.•.••••..•••••.•••.•••••••••••••••••••••.•.....•• 5 Genera 1 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ' •••••••••••• 5 Groundshaking •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ~~ •••• 5 Conclusions and Reconmendations •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ' ••• 7 Genera 1 .......................................................................• , ••••• ," •••• 7 Grading ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 8 Site Preparation ••••••••••••••••••••• ~ ••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 8 Surface Drainage ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ,8 Ea rthwork .. " . " .. " " .••.•..••..•.•••• " .............................. 8 Slope Stability ••.•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 9 Genera 1 ••.• " ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• " •••••••• " •••. ~ ••••• 9 Temporary Slopes ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ~.9 Foundati ons" " •••••• " " •• " " ••••••• " ••• " ••••••••••••••••••••••• " ••••••••.•. 9 Genera 1 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 9 Reinforcement ••.•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 10 Foundation Excavation Observation ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 10 Concrete Slabs-on-Grade •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ~ •••• 10 Settlement Characteristics •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• , •••••••• 11 Expansi ve Characteri sti cs •••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ' ••••••••••• 11 Foundation and Grading Plan Review ••••••••••••••••••••••••• ~ ••••••••• 11 Earth Retaining Structures ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 11 Passive Pressure •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••.•••••••••• '.' •• ,' •• , •• 11 Act; ve Pressure .... " ..........................•................•. 11 Backfill •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 12 Factor of Safety •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ~ ••• 13 Limitations •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 13 Review, Observation and Testing ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ~13 I I I I I I' I I I I I I I I I I I I I TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) AAGE Uniformity of Conditions ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 13 Change in Scope •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••.•••••••••••••••••••••••• 14 Time Limitations ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 14 Professional Standard •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 14 Client1s Responsibility •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 15 Field Explorations ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 15 Laboratory Testing •.••..••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• · •••• 16 ATTACHMENTS FIGURES Figure 1 Site Vicinity Map, Follows Page 1 Figure 2 Active Pressure Diagram, Page 12 PLATES Plate 1 Plate 2 Plot Plan Subsurface Exploration Legend Plate 3-12 Trench Logs Plate 13 Grain Size Distribution Plate 14 Expansion Index Test Plate 15-16 Direct Shear Summary Plate 17-18 Single Point Consolidation Tests Plate 19 Plate 20 Plate 21 APPENDICES Consolidation Test' Slope Stability Calculations Retaining Wall Subdrain A-Previous Site Investigation Plates B-Recommended Grading Specification and Special Provisions I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC. 6280 RIVERDALE ST. SAN DIEGO, CALIF. 92120 • TELE 280-4321 P.O. 80X 20627 SAN DIEGO, CALIF. 92120 678 ENTERPRISE ST. ESCONDIDO, CALIF. 92025 • TELE 746-4544 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION WINDSONG SHORES SOUTHERN TERMINUS OF HARBOR DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION This report presents the results of our geotechnical investigation for the subject project to be located at the southern terminus of Harbor Drive in the City of Carlsbad, California. The site location is shown on the vicinity map provided on the following Figure Number 1. It is our understanding that the site will be developed to receive a condominium complex consisting of two-story and three-story structures over single level underground parking garages. Shallow foundations as well as conventional slab-on-grade floor systems are anticipated. From conversations with the project1s structural engineer, it is our understanding that maximum column loads will be in the order of 470 kips. Maximum perimeter and i nteri or conti nuous footi ngs wi 11 be approximately 8,700 plf and 14,400 p1f, respectively. Masonry retaining walls up to 12 feet high are proposed. With the exception of cuts for the underground parking garage, grading will be minor and consist of cuts and fills less than five feet deep. To assist in the preparation of this report, we were provided with a set of undated architectural drawings prepared by Lorimer Case Architects. In addition we have reviewed the following reports: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I .-___________________ ............ 'fl: ~ SOUTH.RN CALIFORNIA 7 SOIL,. TIl.TINQ,INe. ~Ji ndsong Shores IIY: DBA 8821027 / DATE: 3-14-88. Plate No. 1 L'· JOII NUMIIER: ... _-----------_ ....... ------.... _--------_ .. ',' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I' I I I I I SCS&T 8821027 March 15, 1988 Page 2 1) "Up-Dated Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Windsong Shores"; Southern California Soil and Testing, Inc.; November 4, 1983'. 2) Phase II Soils Investigation for the Proposed Carlsbad Condominium Villas, Prepared by Southern California Testing Laboratory, Inc., dated July 25, 1972. 3) Geologic Hazards Report, Papagayo Subdivision, Carlsbad Tract 72-13; Prepared by Southern California Testing Laboratory, Inc.; dated March 24, 1975. Where appropriate, findings presented in said reports were incorporated to this study. The site configuration and approximate locations of our subsurface explorations are shown on Plate Number 1 of this report. PROJECT SCOPE The i nvesti gati on consi sted of: surface reconnai ssance, subsurface explorations, obtaining representative disturbed and undisturbed samples, laboratory testing, analysis of the field and laboratory data, research of available geological literature pertaining to the site, and preparation of this report. More specifically, the intent of this analysis was to: a) Explore the subsurface conditions to the depths influenced by the'- proposed construction. b) Evaluate, by laboratory tests, the pertinent engineering properti es of the vari ous strata whi ch wi 11 i nfl uence the development, including their bearing capacities, expansive characteristics, settlement potential. c) Describe the general geology at the site including possible geologi c hazards whi ch coul d have an effect on the si te development. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SCS&T 8821027 March 15, 1988 Page 3 d) Develop soil engineering criteria for site grading. e) Address potential construction difficulties and provide recommendations concerning these problems. f) Recommend an appropriate foundation system for the type of structure anti ci pated and develop soi 1 engi neeri ng desi gn criteria for the recommended foundation design. FINDINGS SITE DESCRIPTION The project site consists of a nearly rectangular shaped parcel of land, approximately ten acres in size, that is located in Carlsbad, California. The si te is bounded on the north by resi denti a 1 property and the Harbor Drive cul-de-sac, on the east by Interstate 5, on the south by Agua Hedionda Lagoon, and on the west by the A.T. and S.F. railroad tracks. The site consists of an essentially level northern portion ranging from 125 to 230 feet in width bounded by the south-facing slope which has a slope ratio of approximately 2 to 1 (horizontal to vertical distance) and a maximum hei ght of 50 feet. On-si te el evati ons range from 10 feet (MSL) along Agua Hedionda lagoon to approximately 60 feet (MSL) on the level northern portion. A small cut and fill pad has been graded at the top of the eastern portion of the slope. This has resulted on a 1.5:1 fill slope extending to an estimated height of ten feet. There are soil stockpiles up to five feet in height located along the top of the slope east of Harbor Drive and on the eastern portion of the si tee Vegetation consi sts of alight to heavy growth of grasses, a fruit and palm tree orchard with bamboo on the western porti on and a heavy growth of shrubs and a few trees on the south faci ng slope. GENERAL GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS GEOLOGIC SETTING AND SOIL DESCRIPTION: The subject lot is located in the Coastal Plains Physiographic Province of San Diego County and is underlain I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SCS&T 8821027 March 15, 1988 Page 4 by deposits of sedimentary origin. The sediments in the area of the proposed buildings consist of Quaternary marine terrace deposits comprised of reddish brown and yellowish brown, humid, to moist, medium dense, silty sands, slightly silty sands and sands. Tertiary-age sediments of the Santiago Formation underlie the Quaternary materials at a depth of 14.5 to 17.5 feet. The Santiago Formation consists of tan-gray, humid, dense to very dense, silty sandstone. End-dumped fill stockpiles exist along the top of the slope east of Harbor Drive. In addition, a minor fill slope exists at the top of the eastern slope portion of the slope. TECTONIC SETTING: No faults are known to shoul d be noted that much of Southern County,. is characteri zed by a seri es of typically consist of several individual, traverse the subject site but it California, including San Diego Quaternary-age fault zones which en echelon faul ts that generally strike ina northerly to northwesterly di recti on. Some of these faul t zones (and the individual faults within the zones) are classified as active while others are classified as only potentially active according to the criteria of the California Division of Mines and Geology. Active fault zones are those which have shown conclusive evidence of faulting during the Holocene Epoch (the most recent 11,000 years) whil e potenti ally active fault zones have demostrated movement during the Pleistoce~e Epoch. (11,000 to two milli on years before the present) but no movement duri ng Holocene time. A review of available geologic maps indicate that the site is 0.25 mile southeast of a small unnamed faul t. In addi ti on, the Rose :Canyon Faul t Zone is located 5-1/2 miles to the west. Recent earthquake activit¥ along' faul ts in the southern extensi on of the Rose Canyon Faul t Zone indi cates that thi s zone coul d be cl assi fi ed as active. The recent sei smi c events along a small portion of the Rose Canyon Fault Zone generated earthquakes of magnitude 4.0 or less. Other active fault zones in the region that could possibly affect the site include the Coronado Banks and San Clemente Fault Zones to the west, the Elsinore and San Jacinto Fault Zones to the northeast, and tha Agua Blanca and San Miguel Fault Zones to the south. I I I I I I I I I I I ,I I I I I I' I I SCS&T 8821027 March 15, 1988 Page 5 GROUNDWATER: No groundwater was encountered in our exploratory trenches but perched water has previ ously been noted to occur along 1 ow-pe,rmeabil ity layers in the Santiago Formation during ,previous investigations. No major groundwater problems are anticipated either during or after construction. However, it shoul d be recogni zed that mi nor groundwater seepage probl ems may occur after development of a site even where none were present before development. These are usually minor phenomena and are often the result of an 'alteration of the permeability characteristics of the soil, an alteration in drainage patterns and an increase in irrigation water. Based on the permeability characteristics of the soil and the anticipated usage of the development, it is our opinion that any seepage problems which may Occur will be minor in extent. It is further our opinion that these probl ems can be most effecti vely corrected on an i ndivi dua 1 'basi s, if and when they develop. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS GENERAL: The site is located in an area which is relatively free of potential geologic hazards. Hazards such as tsunamis, seiches, liquefac- tion, or deep-seated landsliding should be considered negligible or nonexistent. GROUNDSHAKING: One of the most likely geologic hazards to affect the site is 'groundshak i ng as a result of movement along one of thefaul t zones menti oned above. The maximum bedrock accel erati ons that woul d be attributed to a maximum probable earthquake occurring along the nearest portion of selected fault zones that could affect the site are summarized in the following table. TABLE I Maximum Probable Bedrock Desi9n Fault Zone Distance Earthquake Acceleration Acceler~tion Rose Canyon 5.5 miles 6.0 magnitude 0.37 9 0.25 g Elsinore 23 miles 7.3 magnitude 0.23 g 0.15 g Coronado Banks 20 miles 6.0 magnitude 0.13 g 0.09 g San Jacinto 43 miles 7.8 magnitude 0.14 g 0.09 9 San Clemente 55 miles 7.3 magnitude 0.08 g 0.05'9 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SCS&T 8821027 March 15, 1988 Page 6 Earthquakes on the Rose Canyon or Coronado Banks Fault Zones are expected to be rel atively minor. Major seismic events are 1 ikely to .be the resul t of movement along the Elsinore, San Jacinto or San Clemente Fault Zones. In addition, we have analyzed the fault zones which could affect the project site in order to determine the probabil ity of groundshaking of any given level. The individual faults and different fault zones have slip rates which have been calculated to range from very low to very high rates of activity. The foll owi ng chart sumari zes our opi ni on of the probabil i ty of events which would result in associated maximum and "design" bedrock accelerations. Peak Acceleration Design Acceleration Probability of Occurrence 0.30 g 0.20 g 1 x 10 -3 0.25 g 0.17 g 1 x 10 -2 0.20 g 0.13 g 1 x 10 -1 0.15 g 0.10 g 5 x 10 -1 0.10 g 0.07 g 1 x 10 -0 Probability of occurrence is defined as the probability of any given event occurring during the assumed life of the proposed structures (50 years) which would occur in accelerations of that level. Experi ence has shown that structures that are constructed in accordance with Uniform Building Code Standards are fairly resistant to seismic related hazards. It is, therefore, our opinion that structural damage is unlikely if such buildings are designed and constructed in accordance with the mi nimum standards of the most recent edi ti on of the Uni form Buil di ng Code. I I I I I I I I I I I I , 1 I SCS&T 8821027 March 15, 1988 Page 7 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS GENERAL In general, no geotechnical soil conditions were encountered which would preclude the development of the site as presently proposed, provided the recommendations presented herein are followed. The main geotechnical consideration of site development is the cohesionless nature of the bulk of existing terrace deposits underlying the site at depths ranging from two feet to ten feet. This condition will affect the stability of temporary slopes as well as footing and utility line excavations. The terrace deposits at foundation levels have moderately to good foundation support characteristics. The Santiago Formation sandstones encountered at an average depth of 15 feet below existing grades have excellent foundation characteristics. Therefore, a substantial bearing capaci ty increase coul d be real i zed if the footi ngs woul d be founded in said sandstones. This will substantially reduce the footing sizes. However, the increase 1n footing depth may result in increas'ed sloughing of the excavations. Recommendations for both alternatives are provided herein. An additional consideration is our experience with similar soil conditions which indicates that terrace deposits are highly heterogeneous and that zones of porous material should be anticipated. Slightly porous deposits were encountered at proposed foundati on 1 evel s in only Bori ng Number 2. However, all footi ngs shoul d be observed by a representati ve from thi s office. If porous soils are encountered, deeper footings will be necessary. The site is underlain by topsoils and/or loose terrace deposits extending to a depth of one foot. In addition relatively minor end-dumped fill and a . small fill slope exist at the eastern portion of the site. This· material is considered unsuitable, in its present condition, for foundation support and will require removal and replacement as compacted fill. Since most of the proposed improvements will be founded below grade, the extent of this operation will be very minor. I I I I I I I I I I I I I ] ] r , SCS&T 8821027 March 15, 1988 Page 8 GRADING SITE PREPARATION: Site preparation should begin with the removal from the area of the site to be developed of existing deleterious' matter and vegetati on. Exi sti ng topsoi 1 s fill and loose terrace deposi ts shoul d be removed to firm natural ground. It is estimated that the average r.emova1 depth will be one foot. Firm natural ground is defined as undi-sturbed soil having a minimum in-place density of 85 percent as determined in accordance with ASTM 01557-78 Method A or C. The bottom of the excavations should be scarified to a depth of 12 inches, watered thoroughly and recompacted to at least 90 percent. The stockpiled soils should then be placed in thin compacted 1 ayers (uncompacted thi ckness of si x inches . to ei ght inches) until desired elevations are reached. The existing minor fill slope at the eastern portion of the site should be removed or replaced as compacted fill or they should be restored to its original inclination. SURFACE DRAINAGE: It is recommended that all surface drainage be di rected away from the proposed structures and the top of slopes. Water ponding should not be allowed adjacent to foundation. EARTHWORK: All earthwork and grading contemplated for site preparation should be accomplished in accordance with the attached Recommended Grading Specifications and Special Provisions. All special site preparation. recommendations presented in the sections above will supersede those in the standard Recommended Grading Specifications. All embankments, structural fill and fill should be compacted to at least 90~ relative ·compaction at or slightly over optimum moisture content. Utility trench backfill within five feet of the proposed structures and beneath aspha1 t pavements shoul d be compacted to mi nimum of 90~ of its maximum dry densi ty. The upper twe1 ve inches of subgrade beneath paved areas shou1 d be compacted to 95~ of its maximum dry density. This compaction should be obtained by the paving contractor just prior to placing the aggregate base material and should not be part of the mass grading requirements. The maximum dry dens·ity of each soil type shou1 d be determined in accordance with A.S. T .M. Test Method 0-1557-78, Method A or C. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 SCS&T 8821027 March 15, 1988 Page 9 SLOPE STABILITY GENERAL: The subject site is bounded to the south by a natural slope extending to a maximum height of 50 feet with an average inclination of 2:1 (horizontal to vertical). Our findings indicate that soils exposed on the slope consist of terrace deposits and Santiago Formation deposits. The latter consist predominan~ly of massive very dense sandstones .with very minor, hard claystone and siltstone lenses and comprises approximately the lower two-thirds of the slope. Our findings indicate that no evidence exists 'of slope instability. Based on this and a slope stability analysis assuming homogeneous soil conditions, it is our opinion that the existing sl oJ.~e possesses an adequate factor of safety with;, respect to deep seated ~-'. rotational failure (see Plate Number 20). It is our understanding that a 25 . . foot structural setback from the top of this slope will be maintained. A minor 1.5:1 fill slope extending to an estimated height of ten feet exists at the top of the natural slope east from Harbor Drive. This slQpe will be removed or replaced as a compacted fill slope with a 2:1 inclination. Furthermore, it is our opi ni on that cut and fi 11 slopes constructed at a 2:1 (horizontal to vertical) inclination will also possess adequate factors of safety to heights of at least ten feet. TEMPORARY SLOPES: A large portion of existing terrace deposits was found to consist of cohesionless, friable, slightly silty sand and sands. This condition will require flatter than usual temporary slopes. It is recommended that temporary cut slopes up to a maximum height of 15 feet be <;onstruc~ed at .. ~_. contin~~u~ ~ 1:1 . .:!!t..:!2.~ationJ·Furthermo;e~-~o surcharge loads should be placed within a di~tance from the top of temporary slopes ~~g"6C"O ~'!II • f;e ___ -__ ~ equa 1 to ten feet. All temporary slopes shoul d be observed by a ~--------~ representative from our office to ascertain that no adverse conditions 1 ? exist. ~~:~-~:6~lN_" Pt4n0 .t.6No~ ~~ Ct;nl m ~T" f'it:1.='D Lt-rr~ ~ SO/t-S ~ re. oiL fZ.,f"V l S E G-~ I N-b p(,.{trrJ "- GENERAL: Shallow foundations 'may be utilized for the support of the FOUNDATIONS proposed structures. The footings should have a minimum depth of 24 inches I ,I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SCS&T 8821027 March 15, 1988 Page 10 below lowest adjacent finish grade. A minimum width of 12 inches and 24 inches is recommended for continuous and isolated footings, respectively. A beari ng capaci ty of 4000 psf and 7000 psf may be assumed for footi ngs founded interrace deposi ts or Santi ago Formati on deposi ts, respectively. Mi nimum embedment in Santi ago Formati,on deposi ts shoul d be si x inches._ In thi s case the zone between the bottom of the footi ng and the bottom of conventional footings (24 inches below lowest adjacent finish grade) may be backfilled with a lean (three sack) concrete mix. This bearing capacity may be increased by one-third when c~nsidering wind and/or seismic forces. The foundation excavations bearing on terrace deposits should be flooded prior to concrete placement. REINFORCEMENT: Both exteri or and i nteri or conti nuous footi ngs shoul d be reinforced with two #4 bars positioned near the bottom of the footing and two #4 bars positioned near the top of the footing. This reinforcement is based on soil characteristics and is not intended to be in lieu of reinforcement necessary to satisfy structural considerations. FOUNDATION EXCAVATION OBSERVATION: All foundation excavations shoul dbe observed by a representative from this office prior to the placement of forms or reinforcement steel. The purpose of this is to ascertain that the footings extend into a suitable bearing stratum. CONCRETE SLABS-aN-GRADE: Concrete slabs-on-grade should have a minimum thickness of four inches and be underlain by a four-inch blanket of clean, poorly grade'd, coarse sand or crushed rock. The slab should be reinforced with No.3 reinforcing bars placed at 36 inches on center each way. A 6I x6"-W1.4xW1.4 welded wire mesh may be utilized in lieu of the rebars. Special care should be exercised so that the mesh is placed near the middle of the slab. Where mositure sensitive floor coverings are planned, a visqueen barrier should be placed over the sand layer. To allow for proper concrete curing, the visqueen should be overlain by at least two inches of sand. It is suggested that 3000 psi concrete be utilized. This is not a structural consideration. Therefore, no special inspection is necessary. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ,I I I I SCS&T8821027 March 15, 1988 Page 11 SETTLEMENT CHARACTERISTICS: The anticipated total and/or differential settlements of the proposed structure may be considered to be within tolerable limits provided the recommendations presented in this report are followed. It should be recognized that minor hairline cracks on concrete due to shri nkage of constructi on materi a1 s or redi stri buti on of stresses are normal and may be anticipated. EXPANSIVE CHARACTERISTICS: The foundati on soi 1 s were found to be nondetrimentallyexpansive. The recommendations of this report reflect this condition. FOUNDATION AND GRADING PLAN REVIEW The foundati on and gradi ng pl an shoul d be submi tted to thi s· offi ce for review to ascertain that the recommendations provided in this report have been followed and that the assumptions utilized in its preparation are' still valid. EARTH RETAINING STRUCTURES PASSIVE PRESSURE: The passi ve pressure for the prevaili ng soil conditi ons may be considered to be 425 pounds per square foot per foot of depth. This pressure may be increased one-third for seismic loading. The coefficient of friction for concrete to fill or terrace deposits may be assumed to be 0.3 for the resistance to lateral movement. This value may be increased to 0.4 for footings founded on Santiago Formation deposits. When combining fri cti ona 1 and passi ve resi stance, the 1 atter shoul d be reduced by one-third. When calculating passive pressures on exterior retai.ning walls, the u'pper 12 inches of soil shou1 d not be consi dered. ACTIVE PRESSURE: The active soil pressure for the design of unrestrained earth retaining structures with level backfills may be assumed to be equivalent to the pressure of a fluid weighing 31 pcf. For restra·ined walls, 50 pcf should be assumed. Alternative design values for restrained conditions are provided in the following Figure 2. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SCS&T 8821027 March 15, 1988 O.1H H O.7H Y o.2H PSF FIGURE 2, ACTIVE PRESSURE DETAIL No Scalle H -- --- --- 20H PSF Page 12 These pressures do not consi der any surcharge. I f any are anti ci pated, this office should be contacted for the necessary increase in soil pressure. All earth retaining structures should have adequate weep holes or a subdrain system to prevent the build-up of hydrostatic pressure behind the walls. A suggested wall drainage detail is provided on Plate Number 21. Waterproofing details should be provided by the project architect. , . .-.'--'-........ -"---........ -~.,..-.... l(. __ ..... _ ..... ~~~~~~ ... _ .... _~ BACKFILL: 11 backfill soils should be compacted to at least 90~ re1atiVEf')-~ compacti on. Expansi ve or cl ayey soil s shoul d not be used for backfi 11 materi··a 1 • The wall shou1 d not be backfill ed unti 1 the masonry has reached an adequate strength. Ir'~~ III. \ --, ......... , -.. _-_ ... -......... ""'.......... -=--.~- L)1\V" ..... 6tJ pt,..;~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SCS&T 8821027 March 15, 1988 Page 13 FACTOR OF SAFETY: The above values, with the exception of concrete to soils friction coefficient do not include a factor of safety. Appropriate factors of safety should be incorporated into the design to prevent the walls from overturning and sliding. LIMITATIONS REVIEW, OBSERVATION AND TESTING The recommendations presented in this report are contingent upon our review of final plans and specifications. The soil engineer and engineering geologist should review and verify the compliance of the final grading plan with this report and with Chapter 70 of the Uniform Bui1ding.Code. It is recommended that Southern California Soil & Testing, Inc. be retained to provide continuous soil engineering services during the earthwork operations. This is to observe compliance with the design concepts, specifications or recommendations and to allow design changes in the event that subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to start of construction. UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS The recommendations and opinions expressed in this report reflect our· best estimate of the project requirements based on an evaluation of the subsurface soil conditions encountered at the subsurface exploration locations and the assumption that the soil conditions do not deviate appreciably from those encountered. It shou1 d be recognized that the. performance of the foundations and/or cut and fill slopes may be influenced by undisclosed or unforeseen variations in the soil conditions that may occur in the intermediate and unexplored areas. Any unusual conditions hot covered in thi s report that may be encountered duri ng si te development shou1 d be brought to the attenti on of the soi 1 sengi neer so that he may make modifications if necessary. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SCS&T 8821027 March 15, 1988 Page 14 CHANGE IN SCOPE This office should be advised of any changes in the project scope or proposed site grading so that it may be determined if the recommendations contained herein are appropriate. This should be verified in writing or modified by a written addendum. TIME LIMITATIONS The findings of this report are valid as of this date. Changes in the condition of a property can, however, occur with the passage of time, whether they be due to natural processes or the work of: man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in the State-of-the-Practice and/or Government Codes may occur. Due to such changes, the findf-ngs of this report may be invalidated wholly or in part by changes beyond our' control. Therefore, thi s report shoul d not be re'l i ed upon after a peri od of two years without a review by us verifying the suitability of the conclusions and recommendations. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD , In the performance of our professional services, we comply with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of our profession currently practicing under similar conditions and in the same locality. The client recognizes that subsurface conditions may vary from those encountered at the locations where our borings,surveys, and explorations are made, and that our data, interpretations, and recommendations are based solely on the information obtained by us. We will be responstble for those data, interpretations, and recommendations, but shall not be responsible for the interpretations by others of the information developed. Our services consist of professional consultation and observation only, and no warranty of any kind whatsoever, express or implied, is made or intended in connecti on wi th the work performed or to be performed by us, or by,. our proposal for consulting or other services, or by our furnishing of oral or written reports or findings. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ·1 SCS&T 8821027 March 15, 1988 Page 15 CLIENT'S RESPONSIBILITY It is the responsibility of Sears Savings Bank or their representatives to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the engineer and architect for the project and incorporated into the project's plans and specifications. It is further thei r responsi bi li ty to take the necessary measures to insure that the contractor and thei r subcontractors carry out such recol1l1lenda ti ons duri ng construction. FIELD EXPLORATIONS Ten subsurface explorations were made at the locations indicated on the attached Plate Number 1 on March 2 and 4, 1988. These explorations consisted of borings drilled utilizing a drill rig equipped with a continuous flight auger. The field work was conducted under'the observation of our engineering geology personnel. The explorations were carefully logged when made. These logs are presented on the, fo11 owi ng P1 ates Number 3 through 12. The logs of subsurfa'ce explorations performed in conjunction with previous site investigations are presented on the attached Appendix A. The soils are described in accordance with the Unified Soils Classification System as illustrated on the attached simplified chart on Plate 2. In addition, a verbal textural description,' the wet color, the apparent moi sture, and the densi ty or consi stency are provided. The density of granular soils is given as either very loose, loose, medium dense, dense, or very dense. The consistency of silts or clays is given as either very soft, soft, medium stiff, stiff, very stiff, or hard. Disturbed and undisturbed samples of typical and representative soils were obtained and returned to the laboratory for testing. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I' I I I I SCS&T 8821027 March 15, 1988 Page 16 LABORATORY TESTING Laboratory tests were performed in accordance with the gen~ra11y accepted American Society for Testing and Materials (A.S.T-M.l test methods or suggested procedures. A brief description of .the tests performed is presented below: a) CLASSIFICATION: Field classifications were verified in the laboratory by visual examination. The final soil classifications are in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System. b) MOISTURE-DENSITY: Field moisture content and dry density were· c) d) determined for representative samples obtained. This information was an aid to classification and permitted recognition of variations in material consistency with depth. The dry unit weight is determined in pounds per cubic foot, and the field moisture content is determined as a percentage of the soil's dry weight. The resu1 ts are summarized in the boring logs. GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION: The grain size distribution was determined for representative samp1 es of the native soil s in accordance with A. S. T .M. Standard Tes't D-422. The resul ts of these tests are presented on Plate Number 13. EXPANSION INDEX TEST: An expansi on index test on remol ded· samples was performed on representative samples of soils likely to be used as compacted fill. The test was performed on the portion of the sample passing the #4 standard sieve. The sample was brought to optimum moi sture content then dri ed back to a constant moi sture content for 12 hours at 230 +/-9 degrees Fahrenheit. The specimen was then compacted in a 4-inch-diameter mold in two equal layers by means of a tamper, then trimmed to a fi na 1 hei ght of 1 inch, and brought to a saturati on of I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ,I SCS&T 8821027 March 15, 1988 Page 17 e) f) approximately 50%. The specimen was p1 aced in a consol i-dometer with porous stones at the top and bottom, a total normal load of 12.63 pounds was placed (144.7 psf), and the sample was allowed to consolidate for a period of 10 minutes. The sample was allowed to become saturated, and the change in vertical movement was recorded unti 1 the rate of expansi on became norili naT. The' expansion index is reported on the attached Plate Number 14 as the total vertical displacement times the fraction of the sample passing the #4 sieve times 1000. CLASSIFICATION OF EXPANSIVE SOIL EXPANSION INDEX 1-20 21-50 51-90 91-130 Above 130 POTENTIAL EXPANSION very low low medium high very high DIRECT SHEAR TESTS: Direct shear tests were performed to determine the fail ure en vel ope based on yi el d shear strength. The shear box was desi gned to accomodate a sampl e havi ng , diameters of 2.375 inches or 2.50 inches and a height of 1.0 inch. Samples were tested at different vertical loads and a saturated moisture content. The shear stress was appl ied at a constant rate of strain of approximately 0.05 inch per mi-nute. The resu1 ts of these tests are presented on attached Pl ates Number 15 and 16. CONSOLIDATION TEST: Single point consolidation te,sts were performed on selected "undisturbed" samples. The consolidation apparatus was designed to accomodate a I-inch high by 2.375-inch or 2.500-inch diameter soil sample laterally confined by a brass ri ng. Porous stones were p1 aced in contact wi th the top and bottom of the sample to permit the addition or release of pore fl ui d duri ng testi ng. Sel ected loads were ,appl i ed to the I I I I I I I I I I I I ,I J I I I I 'I SCS&T 8821027 March 15, 1988 P~ge 18 g) sampl es and the resul ti ng deformati ons were recorded. Th,e percent consol i dati on for each load cyc1 e is reported as the ra ti 0 of the -amount of verti ca 1 compressi on to the ori gi na 1 one-inch sample height. The test samples were inundated to determi ne thei r behavi or under the antici pated footi ng load as soi 1 moi sture increases. The resu1 ts of these tests are presented on Plates Number 17 and 18. CONSOLIDATION TEST: A consolidation test was performed on a se1 ected lIundi sturbedll samp1 e. The con sol i dati on apparatus was designed to accomodate a l-inch-high by 2.37S-inch or 2.S00-inch diameter soil sample laterally confined by a brass ring. Porous stones were pl aced in contact with the top and' bottom of the sampl e to perm; t the add; t; on or re1 ease of pore f1 ui d duri ng testing. Loads were applied to the sample in a geometric progression after vertical movement ceased, and resulting deformati ons were recorded. The percent consoli dati, on for each load cyc 1 e is reported as the ra ti 0 of the amount of verti ca 1 compression to the original one-inch sample height. The test sample was inundated at some pOint in the test cycle to determine its behavior under the anticipated footing load as soil moisture increases. The results of this test are presented, in the form of a curve on Plate Number 19. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ...Y._ SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LEGEND UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART SOIL DESCRIPTION GROUP SYMBOL I. COARSE GRAINED, more than half of material is larger than No. 200 sieve Slze. GRAVELS CLEAN GRAVELS GW MOre than half of coarse fraction is 1 arger than No. 4 GP sieve size but smaller than 3M • GRAVELS WITH FINES GM (Appreciable amount of fines) GC SANDS CLEAN SANDS SW SP More than hal f of coarse fraction is smaller than No.4 sieve size. SANDS WITH FINES SM (Appreciable amount of fines) SC II. FINE GRAINED, more than half of material is smaller than No. 200 sieve Slze. SILTS AND CLAYS ML liquid limit Cl less than 50 ot. SILTS AND CLAYS MH liquid limit CH greater than 50 OH HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT 'Water level at time of excavation or as indicated TYPiCAL NAMES Well graded gravels, grave~ sand mixtures, little or .no. fines. Poorly graded gravels, gravel sand mixtures, little or no fines. Silty gravels, poorly graded gravel-sand-silt mixtures. Clayey gravels, poorly graded gravel-sand, clay mixtures. Well graded sand, gravelly sands, little or no fines. Poorly graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines. Silty sands, poorly graded sand and silty mixtures. Clayey sands, poorly graded sand and clay mixtures. Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour, sandy silt or clayey-silt-sand mixtures with slight plas- ticity. Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity. gravelly clays. sandy clays, silty cl ays, 1 ean clays. Organic silts and organic silty clays or low plasticity. Inorganic silts. micaceous or diatomaceous fine sandy or silty soils. elastic silts. Inorganic clays of high plasticity. fat clays. Organic clays of medium to high plasticity. Peat and other highly organic soil s. CK -l,jndisturbed chunk s~mple BG -Bulk sample us -Undisturbed, driven ring sample or tube sample SP -Standard penetration sample ~ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ~ SOIL" TESTING,INC. Windsona Shores BY: DBA JOB NUMBER: 8821027 DATE: 3-14-88 Plate No. 2 .. . , I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I . 1 I w Z Q. 0 ,. Z • ,. --,. BORING NUMBER 1 ,() ,. 0 W ~ I--iIt -l-I-I-W I-ZI-() ': w ~ Z --c z II: zw-I-Z 'a 0 II: -W :z:: w ..J () ELEVATION w :::I W' 0 ~ ~ '0 Z :::I I-> 0 I-..J --II: I-II:I-Z - Q. ou.. ~~W lit· I-. W ;: I-Z l-I- Q. ~ 0 o :: ::E 0t;; I-0 u 0 W ~ () W Q. -Q.00 W -" a. , 0 ~ 0 Q. 0 Q.Z Z 0 • -0 I-..J ~ ,0 ~ ::E ~ 0 II: ,. Z W Q. ~ W w J 11:: :liE II: ::E ..J DEseR IPTION o· Q. lit .2 0 () 0 () .a () 0 0 0 SM Orange Brown, SILTY SAND Moist Loose -(TERRACE DEPOSITS) --Medium . - 2 ---Dense US . Humid 29 118.3 -8.6. -BAG - 4 -~ -US SP/ Orange Brown & Yellow 26 6 -SM Brown, SLIGHTLY SILTY -' -. SAND, Fri ab 1 e ---Dense 8 -- -- 10 US Light Tan 50 95.4 3.9 - BAG - 12 - -- 14-.- -US 33/fill .- 16 l-SM Tan Grey, SILTY SAND Humid Very 72/6 11 - BAG (SANTIAGO FORMATION) Dense - 18 -' , -- 20 -- -US 78/9 11 - 22 -- --' 24 -. - -- 26 -.- ~ - 30 -SM/ US SP 50/5 11 - .. ~ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SUBSUR FACE EXPLO'RATION LOG ~ SOIL &TESTING, INC • LOGGED BY: GS DATE LOGGED: 3-2-88 ... JOB NUMBER: 8821027 Plate No. 3 ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I - 11.1 Z 0 > . Z • --D. BORING NUMBER 2 11.1 ~ > ~ ...: > '(J > 0 I-- l-I-11.1 I-ZI-(J .. ~ ... I-Z -11.1 11.1 Z -00( II: Zw-I-Z '0 0 II: - :I: 11.1 ..J (J ELEVATION 11.1 ;:) 11.11-0 C C '0 Z ;:) I-> 0 I-..J - - II: I-- D. o II. 1I:0 Z lie I-• 11.1 ... I-Z l-I- D. C 0 C -11.1 - 11.1 ::E 00 D. -D.0Q I-o -Q Q 0 11.1 C (J 11.1 -...... a. -..J Q C 0 D. 0 D.Z 0 • -I-C -!/) C C ::E COli: Z J > 0 Z 11.1 D. 11.1 11.1 II: ::E II: ..J OEseR IPTION (JO D. II: .2 Q 0 ::E (J .a (J 0 (J 0 SM Orange Brown, SILTY SAND. Moist Medium -(TERRACE DEPOSITS) Dense - 2 -- ----SP/ Tan, SLIGHTLY SILTY SAND Moist Medium 4 -SM Friable Dense - -to -Dense 6 -- -.- 8 -- -- 10-US Light Tan -?--. Dense 50/5" 100.0 11.3 -- 12-- -- 14-- -Gravel - US Humid 28 104.9 1.8 16 -- -SM Grey, SILTY SAND Humid Very (SANTIAGO FORMATION) -- 18 -Dense - -- 20 -~ 50/6" - -~. Boring ended at 20.5 1 -- -- -- -- -.-. -- -- -- ~ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG ~ SOIL &TESTING, INC. LOGGED BY: GS DATE LOGGED: 3-2-88 JOB NUMBER: 8821027 Plate No. '4 '. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -11.1 Z Ci. 0 >-' Z • >-.. >-BORING NUMBER 3 '(J >-0 11.1 • I--att. !: l-I-I-11.1 I-ZI-(J -;: -11.1 ~ 4( Z II: zlI.I_ I-Z '0 en II: -11.1 Z X 11.1 ...I (J ELEVATION 11.1 ::) II.II-en ~ ~ '0 Z ::) I-> 0 I-...I --- a. o LL. II: I-lI:enZ .: I-. 11.1 ;: I-Z l-I- a. ~ (I) ~-II.I .. :E (I) en I-en -Q u en 11.1 ~ (J 11.1 a. -o..enQ 11.1 -" Q. -I-...I ~ Q ~ (I) a. 0 o..z Z (I) • >--0 Z 11.1 0.. ,(I) ~ ~ :E ~ 0 II: 11.1 11.1 I II: :E 0 II: :I ...I OEseR IPTION (JO a. II: .2 Q (J .a (J 0 (J 0 BAG SM Brown, SILTY SAND (TOPSOI ) Moist Loose S~1 Orange Brown, SILTY SAND Humid Medium 2 -(TERRACE DEPOSITS) Dense - -- 4 -- -- 6 ---SPI Yellow Tan & Orange Tan, 8 BAG SM SLIGHTLY SILTY SAND, - Friable - 10 US -33 102.1 3.9 -- 12 --' , -- 14 -US' 18/6" - -SM Grey Tan, SILTY SAND Humid Very 45/6" (SANTIAGO FORMATION) Dense - 16-- -- 18 -- -- 20-US 85 - " -Boring ended at 211 - -- -- -- -,- -- -- -- ~ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SUBSU,RFACE EXPLORATION LOG' ~ SOIL &TESTING, INC. LOGGED BY: GS DATE LOGGED: 3-2-88 w JOB NUMBER: 8821027 Plate No. 5 " I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -w z a. 0 >" Z • > - .... > BORING NUMBER 4 ,() > 0 w ~ I-"""-CIt. .:: l-I-I-W I-ZI-() 0-W CIt. - -c z -W Z a: zw-I-Z " ", a: - ::c w ...I () ELEVATION w ::::I wI-'" C c '0 Z I-> 0 I-...I - - ::::I a. o II. a: I-a:",Z a:" I-0" W ;: I-Z l-I- a. c ", c-w I-", :: w ~ ", Ci.i a. -a.(I)Q Q u ", w "C" () Q C ", a. 0 a.z w -..... a. -I-...I -c Z ", • > -0 !/l c c :IE COa: w w J: z w a. ...I OEseR IPTION ()O a. a: ,2" a: :IE 0 a: :IE Q () .a () 0 0 -() SM Brown, SILTY SAND Humid Loose -~ (TOPSOIL) to 2 -Mni c::t US SM Orange Brown, SLIGHTLY Humid Medium 88/11" SILTY SAND (TERRACE Dense BAG 4 DEPOSITS) Friable to Dense US 51 6 - - 8 - - 10-US 58 100.8: 4.1 - 12 - - 14 - -US 41 105.2 5.3 16 - -COBBLES 18 -SM Grey Tan, SILTY SAND Humid Very (SANTIAGO FORMATION) -Dense 20 -US 50/511 - 22 - - 24"- - 26- ~~ 30-US Grev 56 Borinq ended at 3.11 ~ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG ~ SOIL ATESTING, INC. LOGGED BY: GS DATE LOGGED: ~-2-88 JOB NUMBER: 8821027 Plate No. 6 - -" - - - - - - - - - - "- ....: - - - - - - - - - - .- - - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I o -... ::c I- Q, 'w Q z o -- BORING NUMBER 5 ELEVATION 011.. o 0 r---------------------~ o e ...I o OEseR IPTION I-W Z II: W ;:) II: l-e 0 Q, Q, 0 e :I Z w ~ ~ 0 .. I-Z " e e '0 II: I-. I-0 :: w -...... o • Z w Q, w J II: 0 .A >-I--o z w ;: , Q u Q. >--II: Q w ~ II: - ;:) l- I-Z o w o I- :I ~ o w z .> 0 I-I-eo ...I e w Q, II: :I o o _~ SM Brown, SILTY SAND (TOPSOI ) Humid Loose lI<s~pl;/-t70~r~a~ng~e~T~an~,~sfL~IG~H~T+L~y·~~hH~u=m7i~d~M~ed~i~u~m~-----+-----4------~----~ 2 -SM SILTY SAND Dense - 4 - - 6 - - 8 - - 10----+----1-US SP Grey Tan SAND, Friable -?-Medium - 12 ~ Tan COARSE SAND, Pebbles Dense ,to Dense - - - - --- - -70 103.0 , 5.0 - - - -, ..., 16 -US .~~1-;;::::-~~~~---~--:-.:-+:;--+3~9!.!-/6~"-I----+---~---I SM Grey, SILTY SAND Humid Very 50/4" -(SANTIAGO FORMATION) Dense - - -- 20 -~ 50/4" -.,.~~~~~~--~~~~~~--~ - Boring ended at 20.5 1 - - - - - - - ~ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA 7 SOIL &TESTING,INC. - - - - -- - SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIO.N'LOG " LOGGED BY: GS DATE LOGGED: 3-4-88 1-------------1---------..;;.-..... JOB NUMBER: 8821027 Plate No. 7 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -w z A. 0 >-. Z • >-- BORING NUMBER 8· '0 >-w ~ -"at .... >-l-I-W I-ZI-0 o -.: I-~ - !: I- W 4( Z II: Zw-I-Z 'tJ en II: -W Z ::t: W ...I 0 ELEVATION w :) wI-en c c '0 Z :) .... > 0 I-...I --II: .... lI:enZ lie I-• W ;: Z I- A. A. ou. c en c_w .... .... l- I-en -Q IJ en w c 0 w ::IE en en A. -A.enQ w -...... a. -I-...I Q C en A. 0 A.z en • -0 c z >-z W A. -$I) C c ::IE c 0 IX W W ~ IX ::IE 0 II: ::IE ...I DESeR IPTION o 0 A. IX 0 Q 0 .a 0 0 0 0 SM/ Brown, SLIGHTLY SILTY Humid Loose -~ SP SAND (TOPSOIL) 2 SP/ Orange Tan, SLIGHTLY Humid Medium SM SILTY SAND (TERRACE Dense 4 BAG DEPOSITS) 6 - SP Tan Brown SAND, Friable 8 BAG 10 US Bl ack Tan 30 104.5 5.3 - 12 ,.. BAG 14 COBBLE, Friable -US 66 16 - SM Grey Tan, SILTY SAND Humid Very BAG (SANTIAGO FORMATION) - Dense 18 20-~ 50/5.5 11 - Boring ended at 20.5 i - - - - - - - - ~ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG ~ SOIL ATESTING, INC. LOGGED BY: GS DATE LOGGED: 3-4-88 JOB NUMBER: 8821027 Plate No. 8 - -. --- - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- .- -- - "" Jr I I I I ,I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w z - CI. 0 >-Z • >--- -: BORING NUMBER 7 '0 >-w ~ -?It. ->-l-I-W I-ZI-0 o ~ I-?It. -... I---w iii -< Z a: z w -I-Z 'U (/) -Z :c 'w -I 0 W :::I wI-(/) <C <C '0 a: > 0 ELEVATION' Z :::I l- I--I --a:, I-a:(/)Z 111:' I-...: -- CI. CI. o LI. <C (/) w ... I-Z l-I- :I en en <c_w I-(/) ... 0 (J (/) w <C 0 w CI. CI.(/)O W -....... a. ,0 <C CI. 0 Cl.z -I--I, '<C (/) Z (/) • >--0 ,(/) <C :I <C 0 a: z w CI. <C W w J a: :I a: :I -I OESeR IPTION 0 0 CI. a: .2 p 0 0 .a 0 0 -0 0 SM Orange Brown, SILTY Humid Medium SAND (TERRACE DEPOSITS) Dense ' 2 BAG 4 - - 6 - SP Tan SAND, Friable 8 - - 10-US 53 106.1 6.6 ....; 12- - l4- 16-US SM Grey, SILTY SAND ~1oi st Very 50/611 111.6 13.1 (SANTIAGO FORMATION) Dense - 18- - 20-~ 50/511 -,- - - - - - - - - ~ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA 5 U B 5 U R FA C E'E X P LOR A TI O-N LO-G ~ SOIL ATESTING, INC. LOGGED BY: GS DATE LOGGED: 3-4-88 JOB NUMBER: 8821027 Plate No. 9 - - - - -- - -' - - - - - - - - - - - - . - - - - ,- -- - I I I I I I I' I I I I I I I I I I I I o -..: ... -:r:: I-~ III Q - 2 - - 4 - - 6 - - 8 - - z ~ BORING NUMBER 8 0( ..1(,) ELEVATION ou. (/) 0 ~--------------------~ (/) e ..I OEseR IPTION (,) SM Orange Tan, SILTY SAND (TERRACE DEPOSITS) 10 ..... --1--SP , Tan SAND, Friable - 12 14 US BAG US SM Grey, SILTY SAND (SANTIAGO FORMATION) I-III Z II: III ::::I II: l-e (/) ~ ~ 0 e :I Humid Humid Loose i~o edium Dense Medium Dense Very Dense z • o III !: (,) ... I-Z '0 e e '0 II: I-. I-(/) ::: III -'- Z ,0 • III III J ~ ex: 0 .a 52 > I--(/) Z III -;: Q u a. > -II: Q III (II!. II: - ::::I ~ I-Z (/) III o ~ 2, 0 (,) III Z > 0 I-l-e (,) ..I e III ~ II: :I o (,) - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - -20 -i ~ 50/411 -~~~~~-+--~~~--~~~ I Boring ended at 10.5 1 -- -- -- -'- - - - - ~ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA 7 SOIL &TESTING, INC. - - - - SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION ,LOG LOGGED BY: GS DATE LOGGED: 3-4-88 JOB NUMBER: 8821027 Plate No. 10 I I I I I I I I I I ',1 I I I I I I I I , -'W Z -Ao 0 >-Z • >--, ...: >-BORING NUMBER 9 'CJ >-0 W !! ... -~ ... ... ... W I-ZI-CJ 0-W ~ -I-0( Z a: zw-... z " U) -W.Z II: :z: W ..J CJ ELEVATION W :;:) w ... U) C c '0 z :;:) I->0 I-..J - - II: --.- I-II:U)Z 11:' ... ...: W z I- Ao Ao 011. ... I-... ::I U)u; c U) C_W I-U) ... 0 C,) U) W C CJ W Ao AoU)O W -...... a. -I-..J 0 C U) Ao 0 AoZ U) • >--0 <C !J) c c ::I COli: Z W i: Z W Ao II: ::I II: ::I ..J OEseR IPTION o· ~ II: .2 0 CJ ·0 0 0 CJ .c CJ 0 SPI Orange Brown, SLIGHTLY Humid Medium -SM SILTY SAND (TERRACE Dense - 2 -DEPOSITS) - -- 4 -- -- 6 -- -- 8 -- -- 10 US - -SP Tan SAND, Friable 64 101.7 4.7 - 12 -- -- 14--. SM Grey Tan, SILTY SAND Humid Very - US (SANTIAGO FORMATION) 16 Dense 50/6 11 - - 18 BAG - - 20 ~ 50/5 11 - -'r -Boring ended at 20.5' - -- -- -- -.-- -- ---.- ~ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SUBSUR FACE EXPLORATION LOG ~ SOIL &TESTING, INC. LOGGED BY: GS DATE LOGGED: 3-4-88 - JOB NUMBER: 8821027 Plate No. 11 ,,' " I I I I I I 'I I I I I I I I I I I I I .. -:z: f-a. w Q w a. >-f- W ... a. 2 c .(1) Z ~ BORING NUMBER 10 f-W f-'~ ~ ~ ~~. ~ w lilt c z a: zw-f-Z" (I) a: w z >0 = ~ ELEVATION LLI;:) LLI f-(I) 0< 0< '0 Z ;:) ~ o LL. a: f-a: (I) Z a: f-..: LLI;: f-Z f-f-. (I) (1)_ ~-----------I 0< (I) 0< -W f-(I) -Q U (I) W 0< (J a. D.(I)Q W-...... Q. -f-",-' (I) a. 0 a.z Z(l)->--0 Z .... 0< 0<2 0<0a: wL!lJ a: 2 ~Q. ... OESeR IPTION CJ 0 a. a:.5! Q 0 2 CJ ~ (J 0 01r-;~-M~~~~~~~~~~~~~--~~--4---~--~O~ SM Brown, SILTY SAND (TOPSOI )Humid Loose 2 BAG SM Orange Brown, SILTY SAND Humid Medium (TERRACE DEPOSITS) Dense 4 - - 6 - - 8 - - 10 US SP Tan SAND, Friable 12 BAG 14 - 16 -US - SM Grey Tan, SILTY SAND (SANTIAGO FORMATION) Humid Very Dense - - --- - - - -62 102.1 6.5 - - - - - 54 103.9 2.9 - - - ...,. -, 20 -~ 50/4" -~~~~~~r-~~~4-~--~~ Boring ended at 20.5 1 -- ----.' -- -,- -- '-- -- SUBSUR FACE EXPLORATION LOG DATE LOGGED: 3-4-88 I----------+------~...;....;;..;;;. ....... -. GS LOGGED BY: ~ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA T SOIL &TESTING, INC. JOB NUMBER: 8821027 Plate No. 12 ___________ --L.;:;.:...:.;~~~~~~~....J .. ~ - ------.-----.-...... ------- (j) I~ ::0 !! z ra C/) ra D N DC --I (TI r-I .. m 52 ... D ~ =2 ::0 :t~ ID C 2,- -i GJ-_ 11 0 z -D 2D p~ ,. 61 UI ~I ::E: ex> ex> jl ~ , 0 N "'-J (/) :::s-o ~ ro ih'~ s:» m C"+ ro w :z I 0 '""" . .J::> ...... I W ~ -------_. -,' .. ---. -~'~-... BIO@lO'-14 1 B4@5.5 1 u.s Standard Sieves 36" 18" 2" I" Y2" \4" #to #20 li40 #60 (Minutes) / Hydrometer 10 24" 12" 6" ~" I !1:>" ~u 3,-s" ~ #8, #16 'i 0 ~;:,lI.. #T imp! I 2 5 II T 180 14180 (506fT!,} , , , .y, 90 90 i l ,I J ~: 1\ : 80 JJ~_ 1 ". i '\ V 80 70 , 1\: /: 70 ~ 60 I 1\:' ~: ~~ I ~p I~O I~~ .... (100GM,) .~ : \ .1i-!:!!::: ~ 4... : if': ~ f: f f j f i i:;:: ..... 50 ,:\: . : ! . j . : : i , : 50 .... _ I:: 40 ~ \ 1 t : ,: . f . : , . :: 401::_~ ~ I \'\ \ i:i :!:; Ib ~ ~30 i :'\\\ !:/: . :[ :1 30~-~ n ! ' " , .' " , ., .. Ib !> .... "\. :.:.: : .: ,: ~ <S 2 I : ~ !:[:[ ! :! :! 20 _ 10111111'1 11 111'111 1~'I'III'lrl I I 1I'lItl'l~1 ~ ~:f! i I{ 10 11 . 1 '1 i l ' I' 1 I ,I I . I H I f I ,I ,I ~ II 1:1 r i If ~1.96765 4 3 2 ~!96765 43 2 ,1,987654 3 2 !967654 3 '/ !967654 3 2 967654 3 2 ).0 1000 100 10 I. .1 .01 .001 (Jrain Size (mm) PARTICLE I . I BOULDER I COBBLES GRAVEL I Coar.. Fine (12 in,) 3in. 3/4 in. U. S. Bl@5.5 1 SIZE LIMITS SAND Coar .. I Mediul'(! Fin. No.4 No.lO No. 40 STANDARD SI E VE No. 200 SIZE SILT OR CLAY ~ -~ . I I I I I I I I I I I I· I I I I I I I EXPANSION INDEX TEaT RlaUL TI SAMPLE B10@10'-141 CONDITION Remolded INITIAL M.C. (·1.) 10.2 INITIAL DENSITY (PCF' 108.3 FI NAL M.C. N.) 16.6 NOR MAL STRESS (PSF) 144.7 EXPANSION INDEX 0 ~ SOUTH.RN CALIFORNIA SOIL & T.STING, INC. . . Windsong Shores ay: DBA DATI: 3-14-88 Joa MUMal .. : 8821027 Plate No. 14 I I I I I I I I I I' I I I I I I I I I DIRECT SHEAR SUMMARY !) , , ! , i ! , " ! , : , , , , , , ! , I ; : 4 , , , , : I , , I , , : ! , , : : , U. ! , , ! 1/ , , , 0 , I , I '~ , , , I I .. 0 3 I I /' , ./' 'I 0 , , , ./ , ! i : I ./ , W ./. , . , .:c , ./ i I-, I y , I i . , 0 I ./, : ,.1 , ./ -, : , : : a: 2 :/: I ! , ./ C ./ , I W , : I' , : I I : i :c ' L ' , ./ : , 0 , I ./ " 'I' : , I 'I , : , ,y, , 1 i , ./ , , , , , ; : I : ! i I , ./ : : I , I I : ; , , : , , , ; , , ; I , , , : I ! 0 , I 1 2 3 4 !) 2M L 2L NORMAL STRESS,KSF ANGLE OF INTERNAL COHESION INTERCEPT SAMPLE DESCRIPTION FRICTION {Ol {I!sfl B1@2.5 ' Undi sturbed 36 208 ~ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA WindsonCJ Shores . ~lc; SOIL & TESTING, I Ne. BY: DBA DATE: 3-14-88 8821027 Plate 15 JOB NUMBER: No. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I , DIRECT SHEAR SUMMARY 5 , ! I I i I I , ; , I I , I , , ; -, I , , 4 , , , I I , ; , i I : I i , : : , ! ; , I Vi b... I '..I' I 3 , Vol I ! V) ;,-: : ~ , I I l/ I : ; .. , I , ' .Y I ! I ! C/) I , : I ! , tf1 : I ! I I , I ; /I I I ! : , , : , I , , : , ,f , , I I I , , , : j/[' : : , , ; , a::: : i , I I , , , J(' ! ! I I , , I-, I : i : . i t..-, ! ' : I I , C/) 2 i I I ,y, : : , I ./. : : : I , , I IT I , './1 , , I 1 ,.' I ~ 1 ; ! : l/, I ! ! , : i , , ! , Y , : , : W I , I I 1/, i : I , , : , I : V I J . : ; J: , I ! , ! , I , : : , C/) : , 1 y T ! I , , , I I , : , I ! I AI I I ! ! : ! i I ! I i"[ I , ! I I 1 , I i , I , i : ; I/l' I : ; ! , . I L 1 , ,f I , , I ! ! I , LA' , I I I ""', , , , I : I , i , I L.-< ! : , I , V , , i I I -I I I , , / ! ! , , ! ! I : I I , : "'" ! I I '1 _l I 0 : , 2M , 1. 2 2L 3 ... 5 NORMAL STRESS, KSF ANGLE OF INTERNAL COHESION INTERCEPT SAMPLE DESCRIPTION FRICTION {el h!sfl B9@10.5 1 Undisturbed 35 150 ~ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL & TESTING. INC • ••• a RIV.RDAL. .TR •• T .AN DI.ClD, CALI .. DRNIA •• 1.a Windsong Shores BY DATE DBA 3-14-88 JOB NO. - 8821027 Plate No. 16 -. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SINGLE POINT CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULT SAMPLE NO. B2@10.5 1 B2@15.5 1 B3@1O.5 1 B4@10.5 1 -INITIAL MOISTURE, % 11.3 1.8 3.9 4.1 -INITIAL DENSITY, PCF 100.0 104.9 102.1 100.8 - % CONSOLIDATION BEFORE WATER ADDED 4.3 2.1 1.8 2.5 - % CONSOLIDATION AFTER WATER ADDED 5.8 2.2 2.0 3.5 -FINAL MOISTURE, % 16.3 19.4 19.7 20.1 -AXIAL LOAD, KSF 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 SAMPLE NO. B4@15 1 B6@10.5 1 B7@1O.5 1 B7@15 1 -INITIAL MOISTURE, % 5.3 5.3 6.6 13.1 -INITIAL DENSITY, PCF 105.2 104.5 106.1 111.6 - % CONSOLIDATION BEFORE WATER ADDED 2.3 2.9 2.3 2.7 - % CONSOLIDATION AFTER WATER ADDED 2.4 3.4 2.6 2.8 -FINAL MOISTURE, % 19 0 22 1 194 .16 3 -AXIAL LOAD, KSF 4.17 5.7 5.7 5.7 ~ SOUTH.RN CALIFORNIA Windsong Shores ~ SOIL & TBSTING,INC. BY: DBA DATE: 3-14-88 JOB NUMBER: 8821027 Pl ate No. 17 I I I I I I I I' I I I I I I I I I I I SINGLE POINT CONSOLIDATION TE'ST RESULT' " SAMPLE NUMBER B9@1O.5 1 BI0@1O.5 1 BI0@15.5 1 -INITIAL MOISTURE, % 4.7 6.5 3.9 -INITIAL DENSITY, PCF 101.7 102.1 103.9 -% CONSOLIDATION AFTER WATER ADDEO 2.2 2.5 3.3 ' -% CONSOLIDATION BEFORE WATER ADDEO 2.4 2.9 3.6 -FINAL MOISTURE, % 21.1 20.1 19.5 -AXIAL LOAD, KSF 5.73 5.73 5.73 • ~ IOUTH.RII CALIFORNIA Windsonq Shores ~ .Ol~ a T •• TING.INC. I': DBA DATI: 3-14-88 JOI NUMIIII: 8821027 Plate No. 18 0 1 2 3 -c Q) () '-Q) 0. Z 0 .. ~ Cl :::J 0 (f) Z 0 () 0.1 1 I I I t--I-... , T 1 1 , I I I I I I r I , I 1 -r I -1 I T I 1 , , I I I I I ·1 I 0.5 1.0 LOAD kiPS/sq. ft. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL & TESTING LAB J INC. eReo RIVERDALE STREET SAN DIEBO, CALIFORNIA IiIR1ao BY DBA JOB NO. 882 I -r -1 I I 1 I , , -, .... ...... --... ... oR, • " ... .. -::J: ~ -" . ,-..... "-.. -..... ~-_.It_ -, .:;0: ~ ~ . • • L6-10.1" -".1 " . i I I I . -, ., " -.J. I , -i - 1 .. I , I T 1 I ...l 1 I -r , , I :i ~1 .1 :"cL T -, ::.L I I I ~ i 1 " I :::J: I I 1 -1 ] -; 5 10 -(-50 Shores DATE 3-14-88 7 Pl ate No. 19 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SLOPE STABILITY CALCULATIONS Janbu's Simplified Slope Stability Method , FS:Ncf( iH ) Assume Homogeneous Strength Parameters throughout the slope C(psf) Incl. Existing Slope 37 300 108 2:1 Temporary Cut Slope 36 200 128 1:1 Where: H. • Angle of Internal Friction C • Cohesion (psf) Ws • Unit weight of Soil (pef) H = Height of Slope (ft) FS = Factor of Safety H (ft) 50 15 - FS 2.3 1.7 .' , i. ~1 : II-~-~-.-O-U-T-H-.-R-.-C-A-L-I-'-O-R-N-IA---W-IN-D-SO-NG-SH-O-RE-S-----------f·· I ~ SOIL & T.n ING,I Ne. ~I:.:.:Y::-.:;D;;.;.B~A ____ -+=D:.::;;A~T.:;.;.:-..;.3...;-1-4...;-8-8--..... " JOI NUMI.It: 8821027 Plate No. 20 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I: • • )C : 1." --- WATIR'ROOf lACK Of WALL 'IR ARCHITICT'I I'ICI'ICATIONI 1/4 INCH CRUIHED ROCK OR MIRADRAIN eooo OR EQUIVALENT IITWIIN ROCK AND lOlL .. " DIAMETER 'IR'ORATID PIPI· SLAB-ON-GRADI RETAINING WALL SUBDRAIN DETAIL NO ICALI .£. SOUTH.RN CALIFORNIA ~ SOIL a TI!STING,INC. . Windson Shores I': DBA DA'TI: 3-14-88. JOI NUMII .. : 8821027 Plate NO. 21 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I APPENDIX A SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL & TESTING, INC. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w Q. -: >--~ --1: W ..J ~ Q. Q. ~ UJ 0 c( (/) - 1 _ - 2 _ -3 _ - 4_ - 5 - - 6- - 7- - 8_ - 9_ - 10 _ - 11- - 12 - - - - - ~ z 0 TRENCH NUMBER ~ 1 c( ..J U 0 u. ELEVATION -(/) (/) (/) c( ..J (,) DESCRIPTION SM REDDISH BROWN, SILTY SAND (Terrace Deposits) YELLOW BROWN" SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL & TESTING,INC. - >-<I!. ~ (,) >->--- W ~ ~ Z 0:: Z Z ~ W * Z W -(/) -w "0 :;:) W W (/) 0:: > 0:: ~ 0:: ~ Z Z -:;:) ~ I- c( (/) (/) w -I-Z I-"(,) c( W Q. Q. Q Q u (/) W ~ c( 0 (/) a. Q. Q. -~ ..J Q. c( ~ c( Z 0:: >-0 Z w 2 0 0 .0:: ~ 0 0:: (,) Q 0 (,) (,) . MOIST DENSE TO - VERY - DENSE -" --. - - -- --- - --- --- -- - - . - - - - - - ... - SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG LOGGED BY: JH DATE LOGGED: 10-21-83 -" JOB NUMBER: 13935 Plate No. 3 , I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I w Q. -: > -I---w :I: ..J I- Q. Q. ~ w a < en - 1 - - 2 - - 3 - - 4 - - 5 - - 6 - 7 - - 8 - - 9 - - 10 - - 11- - 12 - - - - - ~ z 0 TRENCH NUMBER I-2 < ..J () ELEVATION 0 u.. -en en en < ..J () DESCRIPTION SM REDDISH BROWN, SILTY DAND (Terrace Deposits) SM TAN, FRIABLE SILTY SAND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL & TESTING,INC. - > ~ I-U > > --W l-I-Z a: z z I--W ~ Z w rJ) -W 0 ;:, W W rJ) a: > a: l-I-Z ;:, l-I-a: z -- < rJ) < rJ) W W -I-Z 'I-·u Q. r::a. 0 0 () rJ) W' < 4( 0 rJ) a. r::a. r::a. -I-..J r::a. < ~ < z a: > 0 z w :E 0 0 a: ::E 0 IX () 0 u 0 u ,., MOIST DENSE .... - - - - - - -- - - - MOIST DENSE -_. ,'-.J" \~" C' - -- - - - - -- " ~ -. -- -- c . SUBS URFACE EXPLORATION LOG LOGGED BY: JH DATE LOGGED: 10-21-83 JOB NUMBER: 13935 Plate No. 4 I I I I I I I ,I I I I I I· J I I I I I I I 0 z 0 H 8 .:x: u 0 10 H rx:l H p.. ~ CJ) ~ t"i rx:l i"~ ~ z H rx:l () .:x: ~ p::; :::> (/) ... ~ .:;.. 0 }-~~ >.::I ~ t-1 ...... E-' [:.1 rx:l Q .,.1,1. '1"'/' :1:1:1: 'l'j·l· :1:1:1: '1'1'" :,:Il '1'1'1' : j: I: I : , ·1·1· 'I~i. '1'",. · ., 'I' '1'1' . ' . '1' .1, J. . '1' I' J. 'll' ··1· T · ., .. r r . ~I; r· ~ . "I'I:~ . " " .1.. '1: t f'· : • :1' '1 t '. :i ~ , . :"J'+. · ·r.f· 'J ·{.I:. rl·l: .1 ., ~ . 'r l " r t· .1: rr: Sl1 SP I.(IRING No. 3 Descri tion Dk. Erown, Dry, Loose Silty Sand. Cultivated Ok. Grey Brown, Humid to Moist, Dense Slightly Silty Sand ----------- Yellowish Brown S11 Lt. Grey Brown, Humid to Moist, Stv Very Dense Slightly Silty Sand (Very Hard, Siltstone lenses) E y 12.0 112.4 12.0 102.9 37.5 120.9 37.5 120.1 37.5 1,17.2 FOR LEGEND SEE PLATE 3 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA TESTING LABORATORY, INC. 6280 RIVERDALE STREET' SAN DIEGO. CALIFORNIA 92120 114-280-4321 BORING LOG CARLSBAD CONDOMINIUM VILLAS IV MRF W DATE Drill JOB NO, 13935 Plate 5 . 4.1 3.1 12.4 12.3 12.9 z o H 8 t<J:; U o H W H ~ (1) <.<l [-f lil '"-1 f.r.l :s o 1-1 : ',1 a:l .<$> Bc)J"<[W; No.3 (Cont'd) Class Descri tion LEGEND: (Very Hard Siltstone lenses) Lt. Grey Brown, Humid to Moise, Slightly Silty Sand, Very Dense (Increasing Moisture, Hoist to Wet) Gray-Brown, Saturated, Very Dense, Slightly Silty Sand ~ ~ Sample location E 37.5 6'0.0 65.0 65.0 75.'0 y 111.1 102.3 112.'0 118.1 E = Sample Penetration Resistance (Ft. Kips/Ft.) Y = Natural Dry Density (pef) M = Natural Moisture Content (% of Y) SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA TESTING LABORATORY, INC. 6280 RIVERDALE STREET SAN DIEGO. CALIFORNIA 92120 714,280-4321 CARLSBAD CONDOMINIUM VILLAS M LL6 6.'0 13.8 12.2 BY MRF/W DATE Drilled 7-5-72 I BORING LOG 1~ ______________________________________ .. JO_B __ N_O_·1_3_9_3_5~ _________ p __ la_t __ e __ 6 __________ ~ :z; o H 8 ~ U o H 1J.1 H ~ (I) «I. Z H BORING No. 5 E Dk. Brown, Dry, Loose Slightly Silty c Brown, Humid to Moist, Dense, Slightly Silty Sand 13.5 Gray Brown, Humid to Moist, Very Dense, Slightly Silty Sand 15.0 Lt. Gray & Tan, Moist, Very Dense, Slightly Silty Sand 19.5 Grey, Moist to Wet, Very Dense, Slightly Silty Sand (Random Siltstone lenses) 40.5 y M 109.8 3. T 117.9 5.1 117.0 6.3 120.0 12.1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 30--~~~-------------------------- :~ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA TESTING LABORATORY, INC. 6280 RIVERDALE STREET SAN DIEGO. CALIFORNIA 92120 114·280·4321 BORING LOG FOR LEGEND SEE PLATE 3 CARLSBAD CONDOMINIUM VILLAS BV MRF/W DATE Drill.ed 7-6-72· I~ __________________________________ ~_J_O_._N_O_. ~1_3~_3_5 __________ p_la_t_e __ 7 __________ ... I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 'I I I - z 0 H 8 r<t; u 0 H ril H III ~ Ul «l 8 ril ril ~ :z; H Jil u r<t; ~ p:: ~ Ul ~ 0 H ril /Xl ::r: 8 III ril Cl .... , BORING No. S (CONT!NUED) 30 Class Description E y tJ[ 'I :~ '!' J' ,sN Grey, Moist to Wet, Very Dense, -:1',1 1 SW Slightly Silty Sand -~ Lt. Gray, Saturated, Very Hard CL C'lrlV 351 rfr-SM Tan, Moist, Very Dense, Slightly 37.5 103.2 10.4 -i. :1 ',t· sw Silty Sand 'J'~ : ,,' I ,I, -~ CL Lt. Gray, Moist, Very Hard Clay -':J'~:r . l~ t: sw Lt. Gray, Moist, Very Dense -, 'j l' 8M Slightly Silty Sand .I,: 'r' 40-j, ,l'r -• t .1, 't ' 'I.} : -.1' ,I, 'I', , , -.. " .. -, .' SM Lt. Gray=green, Humid, Very Dense, · . 451 · . Silty Sand F-: · . 75.0 108.9 8.S' · · . · · -· . · . · , · -· · . ~ . '. \ -' .. · . -50-· . · . . , · , , · " · FOR LEGEND SEE PLATE 3 LABORATORY, INC. CARLSBAD CONDOMINIUM VILLAS 6280 RIVERDALE STREET SAN DIEGO. CALIFORNIA 92120 ~ SOUTHERN CAUFORNIA TESTING I ~ ____________________ /l_4_'2_80_'4_3_2_1 ___________ -+ ____________________ -r _____________ ~ ____ -1 IY MRF/w BORING LOG I JOI NO.' 13935 '"------------""---~-....... -----------., DATE Drilled 7-:-5-72 Plate 8 BORING NO.7 o r.LASt DESCRIPTION . . · .. . SM Reddish-Brown, Dry 2-: SILTY SAND . . " · \ 4 " . . . · · · . 6 t . · 8 · J-" . 10 .. I • 12 14 . ". -SM Light Gray, Moist, 16 SAND P.r)f-i-f'"'Im SOUTHERN CALIFDRNIA SOIL Be TESTING LAB, INC • ••• a IIIIV.IIIDAL •• TIII •• T .AN DI.caa, CALI .. DIIINIA •• 1.a BORING LOG to Moist, Dense Very Dense, SIL TY Papagayo Condominium Development Carlsbad, California BY CRB DATE 7-28-78 JOB NO, 13935 Plate 9 ' BORING NO, 8 o CLASS DESCRIPTION I SM Reddish Brown, Dry to r1oist, 2 " . ~1edium Dense to Dense, SILTY SAND , I . ' · .. 4 6 I-: . , . . \, I 8 · . , , 10 / .. " · . 12 ; SM Light Gray, Moist, Very Dense -, , SILTY SAND 14 , . 'Rf'lt-t-f'lm ;. 16 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL "TESTING LAB. INC. ••• a IIluv."aAL. .T" •• T .AN 01."0, CALI .. OJIINIA ..... 0 Papagayo Condominium Development Carlsbad, California BORING LOG BY ' CRB JOB NO. DATE Plate 10' BORING NO. 10 o DESCRIPTION -. SM Reddish Brown, Dry to Moist 2 · . Medium Dense to Dense, SILTY SAND . · . 4 -· 6 · 8 , " · 10 , " · , 12 · . 14 ." · . 16 · . -, 8M Light Gray, Moist, Very Dense, SILTY SAND Hrd-i-nm 18 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL & TESTING LAB. INC. Papagayo Condominium Beve10pment Carlsbad, California ••• 0 "IV."OAL. .T" •• T .AN OI.ClO, CALI .. OANIA •• 1.0 BORING LOG BY CRB JOB NO. DATE 7- 13935 Plate 11 ------------------------------------~------------------~--------~------~~ f! --------------- -I DIRECT SHEAR .ST RESULTS (SAMPLES SA. RATED & DRAINED) . . -.. -, , : I I I Angle of Cohesion' SAMPLE DESCRIPTION interna J .. in~ercept frict ionC 0) (osf) 1 B3 @6 Undisturbed, DenseL Sliahtlv Sil~v Sand .3.3 3 300 I' B33@ 31 'Undisturbed, Hard Siltstone 39· 4 7fiO B3 @ 41 " Very Dense Slightly Si1tv Sane 37.2 300 , I B55@ 46 " .. .. 'Si1ty Sand 44.0 70' , B3 @ 5-6 Slightly Silty Sand, Remolded· to 90% 32° 200 I· B5 @ 34-35 " .. " " " " 36°' 260 I I I MAXIMUM DENSITY & OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT AS T M : .. l.~~Z_ METHOD; .... A ....... I Maximum optimu m SAMPLE DESCRIPT ION De-ns ity Moisture (pct) Cont(%) I B3 @ 5-6 Dk. Grey-Brown Slightly Silty Sand 122.5 9.6 - B5 @ 34-35 Tan Slightly Silty Sand 120.0 12.3 I· I 'I I . I SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA TESTING LABORATORY, INC. 6280 RIVERDALE STREET SAN DIEGO. CALIFORNIA 92120 714·283·6134 BY CHW DATE 7-25-72 . I JOB NO. 139J5 Plate l2 ,--- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I APPENDIX B SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL & TESTING, INC. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I . 1 I I I I WINDSONG SHORES, SOUTHERN TERMINUS HARBOR DRIVE, SAN DIEGO RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS -GENERAL PROVISIONS GENERAL INTENT The intent of these speCifications is to establish procedures for clearing, compacting natural ground, preparing areas to be filled, and plaCing and compacting fill soil s to the 1 ines and grades shown on the accepted plans. The recommendations contained in the preliminary geotechnical investigation report and/or the attached Special Provisions are a part of the Recommended Gradi ng Speci fi cati ons and shall supersede the provi si ons contai ned hereinafter in the case of conflict. These specifications shall only be used in conjunction with the geotechnical report for which they are a part. No deviation from these specifications will be allowed, except where specified in the geotechnical soil report or in other written communication signed by the Soil Engineer. OBSERVATION AND TESTING Southern California Soil and Testing, Inc., shall be retained as the Soil Engineer to observe and test the earthwork in accordance with these specifications. It will be necessary that the Soil Engineer or his representative provide adequate observation so that he may provide an opinion that the work was or was not accomplished as specified. It shall be the responsibility of the contractor to assist the soil engineer and to keep him appraised of work schedules, changes and new information and data so that he may provide these opinions. In the event that any un~sual conditions not covered by the speCial provisions or prelfminary soil report are encountered during the grading operations, the Soil Engineer shall be contacted for further recommendations • If, in the opinion of the Soil Engineer, substandard conditions are encountered, such as; questionable or unsuitable SOil, unacceptable (R-8/87) I· I I I I· I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SCS&T 8821027 March 15, 1988 moisture content, inadequate compaction, adverse construction should be stopped until the conditions corrected or he shall recommend rejection of this work. Appendix B,page' 2 weather, etc., are. remedied or Test methods used to determine the degree of compaction should be performed in accordance with the following American Society for Testing and Materials test methods: Maximum Density & Optimum Moisture Content -A.S.T.M. 0-1557-78. Density of Soil In-Place -A.S.T.M. 0-1556-64 or A.S.T.M. 0-2922. All densities shall be expressed in terms of Relative Compaction as determined by the foregoing A.S.T.M. testing procedures. PREPARATION OF AREAS TO RECEIVE FILL All vegetation, brush and debris derived from clearing operations shall be removed, and legally disposed of. All areas disturbed by site grading should be left in a neat and finished appearance, free frbm unsightly debris. After clearing or benching, the natural ground in areas to be filled shall be scarified to a depth of 6 inches, brought to the proper moisture content, compacted and tested for the minimum degree of compaction i.n the' Special Provisions or the recommendation contained in the preliminary geotechnical investigation report. All loose soils in excess of 6 inches thick should be removed to firm natural ground which is defined as natural soils which possesses an in-situ density of at least 90~ of its maximum dry density. When the slope of the natural ground recel Vl n.g fill exceeds 20~ (5 horizontal units to 1 vertical unit), the original ground shall be stepped (R-8/87) I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SCS&T 8821027 March 15, 1988 Appendix B, page 3 or benched. Benches shall be cut to a firm competent soil condition. The lower bench shall be at least 10 feet wide or 1 1/2 times the t~e equipment width which ever is greater and shall be sloped back into the hillside at a gradi ent of not 1 ess than two (2) percent. All other benches shoul d be at least 6 feet wide. The horizontal portion of each bench shall be cQmpacted prior to receiving fill as specified herein for compacted natural ground. Ground slopes f1 atter than 20% shall be benched when consi dered necessary by the Soil Engineer. Any abandoned buri ed structures encountered duri ng gradfng operati ons must be totally removed. All underground utilities to be abandoned beneath any proposed structure should be removed from within 10 feet of the structure and properly capped off. The resu1 ti ng depressi ons from the above descri bed procedures shoul d be backfi 11 ed wi th acceptabl e soi 1 that is compacted to the requirements of the Soil Engineer. This includes, but is not limited to, septic tanks, fuel tanks, sewer lines or leach lines, storm drains and water 1 ines. Any buried structures or utilities not to be abandoned should be brought to the attention of the Soil Engineer so that he may determine if any special recommendation will be necessary. All water wells which will be abandoned should be backfilled and capped in accordance to the requirements set forth by the Soil Engineer. The top of the cap should be at least 4 feet below finish grade or 3 feet below the bottom of footing whichever is greater. The type of cap will depend on the- diameter of the well and should be determined by the Soil Engineer and/or a qualified Structural Engineer. FILL MATERIAL Materials to be placed in the fill shall be approved by the Soil Engineer and sha 11 be free of vegetabl e matter and other del eteri ous substances. Granular soil shall contain sufficient fine material to fi'll the voids. (R-8/87) -I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SCS&T 8821027 March 15, 1988 Appendix B, page 4 The definition and disposition of oversized rocks, expansive and/or detrimental soils are covered in the geotechnical report 9r Special Provisions. Expansive soils, soils of poor gradation, or soils with low strength characteristics may be thoroughly mixed with other soils to provide satisfactory fill material, but only with the explicit consent of the soil engineer. Any import material shall be approved by the Soil Engineer before being brought to the site. PLACING AND COMPACTION OF FILL Approved fill material shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill in layers not to exceed 6 inches in compacted thickness. Each layer shall have a uniform moisture content in the range that will allow the compaction effort to be efficiently applied to achieve the specified degree of compaction. Each layer shall be uniformly compacted to a min·imum specifi~d degree of compaction with equipment of adequate size to economically compact the layer. Compaction equipment should either be specifically designed for soil compaction or of proven reliability •. The minimum degree of compaction to be achieved is specified in either the Special Provisions or the recommendations contained in the preliminary geotechnical investigation report. When the structural fill material includes rocks, no rocks will be allowed .to nest and all voids must be carefully filled with soil such that the tni nimum degree of compacti on recol11Dended in the Speci al Provi si ons is achieved. The maximum size and spacing of rock permitted in structural fills and in non-structural fills is discussed in the geotechnical report, when applicable. Field observation and compaction tests to estimate the degree of compaction of the fill will be taken by the Soil Engineer or his representative. The location and frequency of the tests shall be at the Soil Engineer's (R-8/87) I I I I I I I I I I I I I I t I I I I SCS&T 8821027 March 15, 1988 Appendix B, page 5 discretion. When the compaction test indicates that a particular layer is less than the required degree of compaction, the layer shall be reworked to the satisfaction of the Soil Engineer and until the desired relative compaction has been obtained. Fill slopes shall be compacted by means of sheepsfoot roll ers or other sui tab1 e equi pment. Compacti on by sheepsfoot roll ers shall be at ve·rti cal intervals of not greater than four feet. In addition, fill slopes at ratios of two horizontal to one vertical or flatter, should be trackro1led. Steeper fill slopes shall be over-built and cut-back to finish contours after the slope has been constructed. Slope compaction operations shall result in all fill material six or more inches inward from the finished face of the slope having a relative compaction of at least 90% of maximum dry density or that specified in the Special Provisions section of this speci~ication. The compaction operation on the slopes shall be continued until the Soil Engineer is of the opinion that the slopes will be stable in regards to surficial stability. Slope tests wi 11 be made by the Soi 1 sEngi neer duri ng constructi on of the slopes to determine if the required compaction is being achieved. Where failing tests occur or -other field problems arise, the Contractor will be notified that day of such conditions by written communication from the Soil Engineer or his representative in the form of a daily field report. If the method of achi evi ng the requi red slope compacti on sel ected by the Contractor fail s to produce the necessary resul ts, the Contractor shall rework or rebuild such slopes until the required degree of compaction is obtained, at no cost to the Owner or Soils Engineer. (R-8/87) I I I I I I I I I· 'I I I I '1 I I I I I SCS&T 8821027 March 15, 1988 Appendix B, page 6 CUT SLOPES The Engineering Geologist shall inspect cut slopes excavated tn rock Qr lithified formational material during the grading operations at intervals' determined at his discretion. If any conditions not anticipated in the preliminary report such as perched water, seepage, lenticular or confined strata of a potentially adverse nature, unfavorably inclined bedding, joi·nts or fault planes are encountered during grading, these conditi:ons shall be analyzed by the Engineering Geologist and Soil Engineer-to determine if mitigating measures are necessary. Unless otherwise specified in the geotechnical report, no cut slopes shall be excavated higher or steeper than that allowed by the ordinances of the controlling governmental agency. ENGINEERING OBSERVATION Field observation by the Soil Engineer or his representative shall be made during the filling and compacting operations 'so that he can express his opinion regarding the conformance of the grading with acceptable standards of practice. The presence of the Soil Engineer or his representative or the observation and testing shall not release the Grading Contractor from his duty to compact all fill material to the specified d~gree· of compaction. SEASON LIMITS Fill shall not be placed during unfavorable weather conditions. When work is interrupted by heavy rain, filling operations shall not be resumed until the proper moi sture content and densi ty of the fi 11 materi a1 s can be achieved. Damaged site conditions resulting from weather or acts of God shall be repaired before acceptance of work. (R-8/87) [ I I I' I il II' I I I' I I' I I I I SCS&T 8821027 March 15, 1988 Appendix B, page 7 RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS -SPECIAL PROVISIONS RELATIVE COMPACTION: The minimum degree of compaction to be obtained in compacti ng natural ground, in the compacted fill, and in the compacted backfill shall be at least 90 percent. For street and parking lot subgrade, the upper six inches should be compacted to at least 95% relative compaction. EXPANSIVE SOILS: Detrimentally expansive soil is defined as clayey soil whi ch has an expansi on index of 50 or greater when tested in accordance with the Uniform Building Code Standard 29-C. OVERSIZED MATERIAL: Ove.rsized fill material is generally defined herein as rocks or 1 umps of soi lover 6 inches in di ameter. Oversi ze materi a] s should not be placed in fill unless recommendations of placement of such material is provided by the soils engineer. At least 40 percent of the fill, soils shall pass through a No.4 U.S. Standard Sieve. TRANSITION LOTS: Where transitions between cut and fill occur within the proposed building pad, the cut portion should be undercut a minimum of one foot below the base of the proposed footings and recompacted as structural backfill. In certain cases that woul d be addressed in the geotechnical report, special footing reinforcement or a combination of special footing reinforcement and undercutting may be required. I (R-8/87) I I