The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2600 CARLSBAD BLVD; ; CB122342; Permit11-20-2012 City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Av Carlsbad, CA 92008 Retaining Wall Permit Permit No: CB122342 BuiWing Inspection Request Line (760) 602-2725 Job Address Permit Type. Parcel No Valuation Reference # Project Title' Area. 2600 CARLSBAD BL CBAD RETAIN 2030510300 Lot# 0 $111,320 00 Construction Type NEW ARMY & NAVY - RETAINING WALLS 5120 SF MASONRY RETAINING WALL PER SDRSD C-3, Status- Applied Entered By Plan Approved Issued Plan Check* ISSUED 11/06/2012 SKS 11/20/2012 11/20/2012 Inspect Applicant HOFMAN PLANNING (EDUARDO) STE 1 3156 LIONSHEAD AV CARLSBAD OA 92010 760-692-4100 Owner ARMY&NAVY ACADEMY CARLSBAD CALIFORNIA P 0 BOX 3000 CARLSBAD CA 92018 Building Permit $742 66 Add'l Building Permit Fee $0 00 Plan Check $519 86 Add'l Plan Check Fee $0.00 Strong Motion Fee $11.13 Green Bldg Standards (SB1473) Fee $4 00 Renewal Fee $0 00 Add'l Renewal Fee $0.00 Other Building Fee $9 49 Additional Fees $0 00 TOTAL PERMIT FEES $1,287.14 Total Fees $1,287 14 Total Payments To Date: $1,287 14 Balance Due: $0.00 Inspector FINALAPPROVAL Date Clearance. NOTICE Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the "Imposition" of fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to as "fees/exactions " You have 90 days from the date this permit was issued to protest imposition of these fees/exactions If you protest them, you must follow the protest procedures set forth in Government Code Section 66020(a), and file the protest and any other required information with the City Manager for processing m accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3 32 030 Failure to timely follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul their imposition You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your nght to protest the specified fees/exactions DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity changes, nor planning, zoning, grading or other similar application processing or service fees in connection with this proiect NOR DOES IT APPLY to any fees/exactions of which vou have previously been given a NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has previously othenwise expired THE FOLLOWING APPROVALS REQUIRED PRIOR TO PERMIT ISSUANCE. IZlPUNNlNG IZlENGINEERING •BUILDING •FIRE •HEALTH •HAZMAT/APCD m CITY OF CARLSBAD Building Perniit Appiication 1635 Faraday Ave , Carlsbad, CA 92008 Ph 760-602-2719 Fax 760-602-8558 email building@carlsbadca gov www.carlsbadca.gov PlanCheckNo. Cy{b>{ U^^^l-^ Est. Value \\\ Plan Ck. Deposit ^ V\ . ^-{^ Date SWPPP JOB ADDRESS Carlsbad Blvd. SUITE#/SPACE«/UNIT« 203 051 03, CT/PROJECT # CDP 12-04 # OF UNITS « BATHROOMS TENANT BUSINESS NAME CONSTR TYPE I OCC GROUP DESCRIPTION OF WORK' /nc/ude Square Feet of Affected Area(s) 5,120 SF of Masonry Retaining Walls per SDRSD C-3, C-4, C-5, C-6 690 SF of Reinforced Concrete Retaining Walls per SDRSD C-11 A EXISTING USE Athletic Facility PROPOSED USE Athletic Facility GARAGE (SF) 0 PATIOS (SF) DECKS (SF) FIREPLACE YESn# NO|X] AIR CONDITIONING YES QNO FIRE SPRINKLERS YESQNO[2I APPLICANT NAIVIE (Primary Contact) Hofman Planning (Eduardo) APPLICANTNAME (Secondary Contact) Hofman Planning (Shay) ADDRESS 3156 Lionshead Avenue, Suite 1 ADDRESS 3156 Lionshead Avenue, Suite 1 CITY Carlsbad STATE CA ZIP 92010 CITY Carisbad STATE CA ZIP 92010 PHONE 760-692-4100 FAX 760-692-4105 PHONE 760-692-4019 F/W 760-692-4105 ecadena^hofmanplanning.com EMAIL seven@hofmanplanning.com PROPERTY OWNER NAIVIE Army & Navy Academy CONTRACTOR BUS. NAME Turner Construction ADDRESS 2605 Carlsbad Blvd. ADDRESS 9330 Scranton Road CITY Carlsbad STATE CA ZIP 92008 CITY San Diego STATE CA ZIP 92121 PHONE 760-547-5233 760-720-7121 PHONE 858-320-4040 FAX dwitwer@armyandnavyacademy.org EMAIL jfalco@tcco.com ARCH/DESIGNER NAME & ADDRESS House & Dodae Desian I STATE LIC # STATE LIC # CITYBUS LIC« (Sec 70315 Business and Professions Code Any City or County which requires a permit to construct, alter, improve, demolish or repair any structure, prior to its issuance, also requires the applicant for sucti permit to file a signed statement that he is Iicensed pursuant to the provisions of the Contractor's License Law {Chapter 9, commending with Section 7000 of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code) or that he is exempt therefrom, and the basis for the alleged exemption Any violation of Section 7031 5 by any applicant for a permit subjects the applicant to a civil penalty of not more than five hundred dollars ($500)) Workers' Compensation Declaration / hereby affirm under penalty of pequry one of the following declarations 11 have and will maintain a certificate of consent to self-insure for workers' compensation as provided by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the perfonnance of the work for which this pennit is issued have and will maintain workers' compensation, as required bv Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance of the work for which this penrat is issued My workers' compensation insurance carrier and policy numberare InsuranceCo Liberty Mutual Insurance PoiicyNo . WC7.62«92815-32 Expiration Date _ 11/01/2013 This section need not be completed if the perniil is for one hundred dollars {$ 100) or less I I Certificate of Exemption I cerlify that in the perfomiance of the work for which this pennit is issued, I shall not employ any person in any manner so as to become subjecl lo the Workers' Compensalion Laws of California WARNING' Failure to secure workers' compensation coverage is unlawful, and shall subject an employerto criminal penalties and civil fines up to one hundred thousand dollars (&100,000), in addition to the cost of compensation, damaaes as orovided for in Section 3706 of the Labor code, interest and attomey's fees ^CONTRACTOR SIGNATURE [•] AGENT DATE 11/06/12 / hereby affm that I am exempt from Contractor's License Law for the following reason I [ I, as owner of the property or my employees with wages as their sole compensation, will do lhe wort and the stmcture is nol intended or offered for sale (Sec 7044, Business and Professions Code The (Ontractor's Ucense Law does not apply to an owner ol property who builds or improves thereon, and who does such work himself or through hs own employees, provided that such improvements are not intended or offered for sale If, hovnever, the building or improvement is sold within one year of completion, the owner-builder will have the burden of proving that he did not build or improve for the purpose of sale) 1, as owner of Ihe property, am exclusively contracting with licensed contractors to constnict the project (Sec 7044, Business and Professions Code The Contractor's Ucense Law does not apply lo an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and contracts for such projecls with contraclor(s) Iicensed pursuant to Ihe Contractor's License Law) I I I am exempt under Section Business and Professions Code for this reason 1 I personally plan to provide the major labor and matenals for constmction of the proposed property improvement I lYes •NO 2 I (have / have not) signed an application for a building pemiit for the proposed work 3 I have contracted with the following person (linn) to provide the proposed constmction (indude name address / phone / contractors' license number) 4 1 plan to provide portions of the work, but 1 have hired the following person to coordinate, supervise and provide the major wort (include name / address / phone / contractors' license number) 5 I will provide some of the wort, but I have contracted (hired) the following persons to provide the wort indicated (indude name / address / phone / type of work) ^gTpROPERTY OWNER SIGNATURE GENT DATE Is the applicant or future building occupant required to submit a business plan, acutely hazardous matenals registration form or nsk management and prevention program under Sections 25505,25533 or 25534 of the Presley-Tanner Hazardous Substance Account AcP Yes No Is the applicant or future building occupant required to obtain a permit from the air pollution control distnct or air quality management distncP Yes No Is the facility to be constmcted within 1,000 feet of the outer boundary of a school site Yes No IF ANY OF THE ANSWERS ARE YES, A FINAL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY MAY NOT BE ISSUED UNLESS THE APPLICANT HAS MET OR IS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES AND THE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT I hereby affirm that there is a construction lending agency for the performance of the work this permit is issued (Sec 3097 (i) Civil Code) Lender's Name Lender's Address IcertilythatI have read the application and state that the above infonnabon is conect and that the infomiaton on the plans is accuiate. I agree to com ply vvith all Qty ordinances and S I hereby authonze representative ofthe City of Cailsbad to enter upon the above mentioned property for inspection purposes I ALSO AGREE TO SAVE, INDEMNIFY AND KEEP HARMLESS THE CITY OF CARLSBAD AGAINST ALL UABILITIES, JUDGMENTS, COSTS AND EXPENSES WHICH MAY IN ANY WAY ACCRUE AGAINST SAID CITY IN CONSEQUENCE OF THE GRANTING OF THIS PERMIT OSHA An OSHA penrat is required for excavations over 5'0' deep and demolition or constmction of stmctures over 3 stones in height EXPIRATION Every penrat ssued by the Building Official under the provisions ofthis Code shall expire by limitation and become null and void if the buiUing or work authonzed by such penrat is not commenced within 180 days from the date of such pemiit or if the buiUing or wort authorized by such penrat is suspended or abandoned at any time after the wort is commenced for a penod of 180 days (Section 106 4 4 Unifomn Building Code) APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE DATE STOP: THIS SECTION NOT REQUIRED FOR BUILDING PERMIT ISSUANCE. Complete the following ONLY if a Certificate of Occupancy will be requested at final inspection. c s a'J I' J ? : Fax (760) 602-8560, Email buildinq(5)carlsbadca.qov or Mail the completed form to City of Carisbad, Building Division 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008 C0#: (Office Use Only) CONTACT NAME OCCUPANT NAME ADDRESS BUILDING ADDRESS CITY STATE CITY STATE ZIP Carlsbad CA PHONE EMAIL OCCUPANT'S BUS LIC No DELIVERY OPTIONS PICK UP: CONTACT (Listed above) OCCUPANT (Listed above) CONTRACTOR (On Pg 1) MAILTO: CONTACT (Listed above) OCCUPANT (Listed above) CONTRACTOR (On Pg 1) MAIL / FAX TO OTHER: ASSOCIATED CB#- NO CHANGE IN USE / NO CONSTRUCTION CHANGE OF USE / NO CONSTRUCTION >eS'APPLIC/\NT'S SIGNATURE DATE Inspection List Permit*: CB122342 Type: RETAIN ARMY & NAVY - RETAINING WALLS 5120 SF MASONRY RETAINING WALL PE Date Inspection Item Inspector Act Comments 08/27/2013 19 Final Structural -Rl 08/27/2013 19 Final Structural MC Fl 04/01/2013 18 Extenor Lath/Drywall MC WC 04/01/2013 66 Grout MC PA 02/06/2013 66 Grout PY AP 01/28/2013 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers PY AP 01/24/2013 11 Ftg/Foundation/Piers PY NR Wednesday, August 28, 2013 Page 1 of 1 #cir, or INSPECTION RECORD Building Dik;ision 0 INSPECTION RECORD CARD WITH APPROVED PLANS MUST BE KEPT ON THE JOB EI CALL BEFORE 3:30 pm FOR NEXT WORK DAY INSPECTION Si FOR BUILDING INSPECTION CALL: 760-602-2725 OR GO TO; www.Carisbadca.qov/BuildInq AND CLICK ON "Request Inspection" DATE: i(h-0\V2. CB122342 2600 CARLSBAD BL ARMY & NAVY - RETAINING WALLS 5120 SF MASONRY RETAINING WALL PER SDRSD C-3, C-4, C-5, C-6 690 SF REINFORCED CONCRETE WALL PER SDRSD C-11 A RETAIN Lot# HOFMAN PLANNING (EDUARDO) RECORD COPY IF 'YES' is CHECKED BELOW THAT DIVISION S APPROVAL IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO REQUESTING A FlNAL BUILDING INSPECTION. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS PLEASE CALL THE APPLICABLE DIVISIONS AT THE PHONE NUMBERS PROVIDED BELOW. AFTER ALL REQUIRED APPROVALS ARE SIGNED OFF- FAX TO 760-602-8560. EMAIL TO BLDGlNSPECTIONS@CARLSBADCA.GOV OR BRING IN A COPY OF THIS CARD TO: 1635 FARADAY AVE.. CARLSBAD. CA 92008. BUILDING INSPECTORS CAN BE REACHED AT 760-602-2700 BETWEEN 7:30 AM - 8:00 AM THE DAY OF YOUR INSPECTION. NO YES Required for Building Final If Checked YES Date Inspector Notes Planning / Landscape 760-944-8463 Allow 48 hours CM&I (Engineering Inspections) 760-438-3891 Call before 2 pm Fire Prevention 760-602-4660 Allow 48 hours OU Type of Inspection | Type of Inspection CODE # BUILDING Date Inspector CODE # ELECTRICAL Date Inspector #11 FOUNDATION #31 • ELECTRIC UNDERGROUND DUFER #12 REINFORCED STEEL / V Ax #34 ROUGH ELECTRIC #66 MASONRY PRE GROUT #33 • ELECTRIC SERVICE • TEMPORARY Nj^^ltOUT • WALL DRAINS #35 PHOTOVOLTAIC #10 TILTPANELS #39 FINAL #11 POUR STRIPS CODE # MECHANICAL #11 COLUMN FOOTINGS #41 UNDERGROUND DUCTS & PIPING #14 SUBFRAME • FLOOR •CEILING #44 • DUCT&PLENUM • REF. PIPING #15 ROOFSHEATHINQ #43 HEAT-AIR COND. SYSTEMS #13 EXT. SHEAR PANELS #49 FINAL #16 INSUUTION CODE ft COMBO INSPECTION #18 EXTERIOR lATN #81 UNDERGROUND (11,12,2M1) #17 INTERIOR LATH & DRYWALL #82 DRYWALL,EXTUTH,GASTES(17,18,23) #51 POOLEXCA/STEEL/BOND/FENCE #83 ROOFSHEATING,EXTSHEAR(13,15) #55 PREPUSTER #84 FRAME ROUGH COMBO (14,24,34,44) #19 FINAL #89 FINAL OCCUPANCY (19,29,39,49) CODE # PLUMBING Oate Inspector #22 • SEWER & BL/CO • PL/CO FIRE Date Inspector #21 UNDERGROUND DWASTE • WTR #24 TOPOUT DWASTE DWTR A/SUNDERGROUNDVISUAL #27 TUB & SHOWER PAN A/S UNDERGROUND HYDRO #23 DGASTEST D GAS PIPING A/S UNDERGROUND RUSH #25 WATERHEATER A/S OVERHEAD VISUAL #28 SOLAR WATER A/S OVERHEAD HYDROSTATIC #29 FINAL A/SFINAL CODE # STORM WATER F/AROUGH-IN #600 PRE CONSTRUCTION MEETING F/AFINAL #603 FOLLOW UP INSPECTION FIXED EXnNGUISHING S^EM ROUGH-IN #605 NOTICETO CLEAN FIXED EXTING SYSTEM HYDROSTATIC TEST #607 WRITTEN WARNING FIXED EXTINGUISHING SYSTEM RNAL #609 NOTICE OFVIOUTION MEDICAL GAS PRESSURE TEST #610 VERBALWARNING MEDICAL GAS FINAL SEE BACK FOR SPECIAL NOTES m CHKISTIAN WHEELER. ENGINEERING FIELD REPORT Project Name Army Navy Athletic Facilit)' CWE# 2120311 Date: 2-19-13 Page 1 ofl Project Address 2605 Carlsbad Boulevard Permit # 122342 Project File # Contractor Turner Construction Architect House & Dodge Design Subcontractor RC Construction Engineer DCl Reinforced Concrete [3 Vre-Sttessed Concrete • Remforced Masonry Q Epoxy Anchors Q Shop Weldinjr • Field Weldmg • High Strength Bolts • Non-Dcstmctive Tcsung • Mechanical Anchors • Firepruofing • Wood/Metal Sheat • Waterproofing 1 I Footing Observation E] Asphalt Obs/Testing • Soil Obs/ Testing Q Roofing I I Building Envelope O Matenal/Equipment: Concrete#8355P(3000psi), A615, A706 Arrived on site, as requested, to provide the following services: Performed continuous special inspecaon on the placement and consolidation of approximately 22 cubic yards of concrete placed by pump and mechanically consolidated into Press Box foundation footings for neiv CIP retaining wall Prior to concrete, checked reinforcing steel for proper sizes, grades, locations and clearances Plan did not call out longitudinal bar sizes for wing walls Contractor supphed me with approved submitals for ROHR Steel which called out 3-#5 bars Work inspected is per approved plans and submittals Fabricated one set of four concrete test cylinders for compressive strength verification Slump 4" Temp 68F NOTED DISCREPANCIES - The items noted below were observed to be in non-conformance with the approved project documents and will require correction or the design engineer's review for approval. NOTICE: Unless otherwise stated, the work observed was, to the best of my knowledge, in compliance with the approved pro|ect documents It should be noted that the work reported as being observed, tested, and opinions expressed are solely for the benefit of our client and that our presence and thc services provided do not relieve the contractor from its obligation to meet contractual regturcments Aaron Cooley Inspector/Technician Name ICC#1126489MI SD#709 Certification # Inspector/Technician'% Signature Initial Distribution: jptravis@tcco com Reviewer Name Certification # Reviewer's Signature Reviewed Distribution: 3980 Home Avenue -f San Diego, CA 9210 5 -f 619- 5 5 0-1700 -f FAX 619-5 50-1701 Febraary 11, 2013 w CHR.ISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING City of Carlsbad FEB 1 9 2013 BUILDING DIVISION Army and Navy Academy 2605 Carlsbad Boulevard Carlsbad, Califorma 92008 Attention: Lt. Col. David Witwer (Ret.) CWE 2120311.08 Subject: Conctete Masonty Unit Test Results - Sampled January 30, 2013 Athletic Facility, Anny and Navy Academy, 2605 Carlsbad Boulevard, Carlsbad, CA Building Permit #CB122342 Dear Lt. CoL Witwer, As part of special inspection and testing services bemg provided for the subject project, -we have performed compressive strength testing on two sets of three concrete masonry umts obtamed from the subject project on January 30, 2013. The test samples were obtamed from materials that were bemg used to constract the north penmeter site retaimng wall. The testing of the samples was conducted m accordance with ASTM CHO "Standard Test Methods of Sampling and Testing Concrete Masonry Umts". Three test coupons were cut and tested from each set of concrete masonry samples. The test coupons were dimensioned to have a height to thickness ratio of 2 to 1 and a length to thickness ratio of 4 to 1. The coupons were capped -with a sulfur mixmre on their bearing surfaces and then tested to determine their compressive strength. The test results are presented in the attached tables. As per Table 21-D of the 2010 Cahfornia Building Code (CBC), the concrete masonty units tested should have an minimum compressive strength of 1,900 psi, assunung a specified design masonry strength of fm= 1,500 psi. Based on the results of our testing, each of the concrete masonry units meets the specified criteria. We appreciate this opportunity to provide our Matenal Testing Services. If you should have any questions after re-viewing this report, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Respectfully subnutted, CHRISTIAN WHEEfeER ENGINEERING Charhe G. Carter Jr., Semor Engmeer cc. dwitwer@armyandnavyacademy org )ptravis@tcco com kevinhallock@houseanddodge com City of Carlsbad 3980 Home Avenue ••• San Diego, CA 92105 ••• 619-550-1 700 -f FAX 61 9-550-1 701 CWE 2120311.08 Febraary 11, 2013 Page No 2 Compressive Strength of Concrete Masonry Units North Perimeter Site Retaining Wall - Athletic Facility, Army and Navy Academy 2605 Carlsbad Boulevard, Carlshad, CA Building Permit #CB122342 Concrete Masonry Unit 8" X 8" X 16" - Open End Bond Beam A B C Date CMU Received 1-30-13 1-30-13 1-30-13 Date Tested 2-08-13 2-08-13 2-08-13 Load Area (square inches) 6.45 6.25 6.25 Total Load (pounds) 30,740 31,080 30,670 Compressive Strength (psi) 4,770 4,970 4,910 Average Compressive Strength (psi) 4,880 Concrete Masonry Unit 12" X 8" X 16" -Open-End Bond Beam A B C Date CMU Received 1-30-13 1-30-13 1-30-13 Date Tested 2-08-13 2-08-13 2-08-13 Load Area (square inches) 8 41 8.64 8.64 Total Load (pounds) 39,430 40,270 39,980 Compressive Strength (psi) 4,690 4,660 4,630 Average Compressive Strength (psi) 4,660 ^ CITY OF CARLSBAD PLAN CHECK REVIEW TRANSMITTAL Community & Economic Development Department 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 www.carlsbadca gov DATE: 11/19/12 PROJECT NAIVIE: Army & Navy Academy PROJECTID:CDP 12-04 PLAN CHECK NO: CB12-2342 SET#:[ ADDRESS: 2600 Carlsbad Bl APN: 203-051-03 VALUATI0N:$111,320 SCOPE OF WORK: 5,120 sf masonry ret wall per SDRSD C-3, C-4, C-5, C-6 690 sf of reinforced concrete ret wall per C-11 A You may have corrections from one or more the division listed in the table below/. To determine status by a specific division, please contact the Building division at either of the following numbers: 760-602-2719 | 760-602-2718 | 760-602-2717 This plan check review is complete and has been APPROVED by: LAND DEVELOPIVIENT ENGINEERING DIVISION A Final Inspection by the Construction IVIanagement Division is requi red [jVes [J No This plan check review is NOT COIVIPLETE. Items missing or incorrect are listed on the attached checklist. Please resubmit amended plans as required. Plan Check Comments have been sent to: PLANNING 760-602-4610 ENGINEERING 760-602-2750 FIRE PBEVENTION ' 760-602-4665 " Chris Sexton 760-602-4624 Chris Sextai-iiicarlsbadca.gov Gina Ruiz 760-602-4675 Giria.Ruiz@carlsbaclca.gov ' j Kathleen Lawrence 760-602-2741 Kathleen.Lawrence@carlsbadca.gov X Linda Ontiveros 760-602-2773 Linda.Ontiveros@carlsbadca.gov 1 Greg Ryan 760-602-4663 Gregory.Ryan@carlsbadca.gov ', Cindy Wong -' 760-602-4662 Cynthia.Wong(3'car!sbadca.gov Dominic Fieri • 760-602-4664 Dominic.Fieri@carlsbadca.gov For questions or clarifications on tfie attaciied checkiist piease contact the reviewer as marked above. Remarks: ***pER CLYDE WICKHAM, OKAY TO ISSUE ON UNSIGNED GRADING PLANS, DWG 476-5A, SINCE ALL WALLS ARE TO BE BUILT PER SAN DIEGO REGIONAL STANDARD DRAWINGS*** CB12-2342 Army & Navy Academy Any outstanding issues unll be matkcd ivith iX' Make the necessary con ections for compliance with applicable codes ami standards Submit corrected plans and/or specifications to the Buildmg dtvi'yion for re-submittal to tiie Engineenng division Items that conform to permit requirements are marked xvilh i / 7 1. SITE PLAN Provide a fuily dimensioned site plan drawn to scale Siiow North arrow [_/J Existing & proposed structures I 71 Property line dimensions r 1 Easements Show on site pian. |_/J Drainage patterns ' / Existing & proposed slopes I /" I Existing topography / • Retaining Walls (location and height) I / J Indicate what will happen with soil excavated from pool area Include on title sheet I [~7~j Site address / I Assessor's parcel number _J Legal descnption/lot number ,.~~| Grading Quantities of Cut Fill Import Export I Project does not comply with the following engineering conditions of approval for project no _I] Conditions were complies with by Date Lot / IVlap No Subdivision/Tract Reference No(s) DWG 476-5A E-37 Page 2 of 4 REV 6/2012 fB12-2342 Army & Navy Academy GR 12-24 PENDING 2. GRADING PERMIT REQUIREMENTS The conditions that require a grading permit are found in Section 11.06 030 of the Municipal Code Inadequate information available on site plan to make a determination on grading requirements Include accurate grading quantities in cubic yards (cut, fill, import, export and remedial) This information must be included on the plans, if no grading is proposed write: "NO GRADING" 'J Minor Grading Permit reauired NOTE: The grading permit must be issued and grading approval obtained priorto issuance ofa building permit. A separate grading plan prepared a registered civil engineer must be submitted together with the completed application form attached LJ No grading permit required 3. MISCELLANEOUS PERMITS • _/] RIGHT-OF-WAY PERiVliT is required to do work in city nght-of-way and/or pnvate work adjacent to the public nght-of-way. A separate nght-of-way issued by the engineenng division is required for the following C_J Please complete attached right-of-way application form and return to the engineenng department together with the requirements on the attached nght-of-way checklist, at the time of resubmittal Right-of-way permit and pool permit will be issued simultaneously. E-37 Page 3 of 4 REV 6/2012 CB12-2342 Army & Navy Academy 4. STORM WATER Construction Compliance L*L1 Project Threat Assessment Form complete I I Enclosed Project Threat Assessment Form incomplete [V] Requires Tier 1 Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan Please complete attached form and return (SW 12-440 ) Requires Tier 2 Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan Requires submittal of Tier 2 SWPPP, payment of processing fee and review by city Post-Development (SUSMP) Compliance /| Storm Water Standards Questionnaire complete j| Storm Water Standards Questionnaire incomplete Please make the corrections, re-sign the questionnaire and resubmit with next submittal "I Project is subject to Standard Storm Water Requirements See city Standard Urban Storm Water Management Plan (SUSMP) for reference http //www carlsbadca qov/business/buildinq/Documents/EnqStandsw-stds-vol4-ch2 pdf J Project needs to incorporate low impact development strategies throughout in one or more of the following ways r_] Rainwater harvesting (ram barrels or cistern) Vegetated Roof CZ] Bio-retentions cell/ram garden [ I Pervious pavement/pavers I I Flow-through planter/vegetated or rock dnp line I 1 Vegetated swales or rock infiltration swales r~ I Downspouts disconnect and discharge over landscape fll Other Attachments Engineering Application i "J Storm Water Form !_J Right-of-Way Application/lnfo Reference Documents I E-37 Page 4 of 4 REV 6/01/12 CITY OF CARLSBAD STORM WATER COMPLIANCE FORM TIER 1 CONSTRUCTION SWPPP E-29 Development Services Land Development Engineering 1635 Faraday Avenue 760-602-2750 www.carlsbadca.gov STORM WATER COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATE My project is not in a category of permrt types exempt from the Construcfion SWPPP requirements •r My project is not located inside or within 200 feet of an environmentally sensitive area with a significant potential for contnbuting pollutants to nearby receiving waters fay way of stomi water runoff or non-storm vrater discharge(s). My project does not require a grading plan pureuant to the Carlsbad Grading Ordinance (Chapter 15.16 ofthe Carlsbad Hflunicipal Code) My project vwll not result m 2.500 square feet or more of soils disturbance including any associated construction staging, stockpiling, pavement removal, equipment storage, refueling and maintenance areas that meets one or more of the additional following cntena. • located within 200 feet of an environmentally sensitive area or the Pacific Ocean, and/or, • disturbed area is located on a slope with a grade at or exceeding 5 horizontal to 1 vertical, and/or • disturtied area is located along or within 30 feet of a stomn drain inlet, an open drainage channel or watercourse; and/or • construction will be inrtiated dunng the rainy season or will extend into the rainy season (Oct. 1 through Apnl 30) I CERTIFY TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE THAT ALL OF THE ABOVE CHECKED STATEMENTS ARE TRUE AND CORRECT. I AM SUBMITTING FOR CWf APPROVAL A TIER 1 CONSTRUCTION SWPPP PREPARED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CITY STANDARDS I UNDERSTAND AND ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I MUST (1) IMPLEMENT BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPS) DURING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PRACTICABLE TO MINIMIZE THE MOBILIZATION OF POLLUTANTS SUCH AS SEDIMENT AND TO MINIMIZE THE EXPOSURE OF STORM WATER TO CONSTRUCTION RELATED POaUTANTS; AND. (2) ADHERE TO, AND AT ALL TIMES, COMPLY WITH THIS CITY APPROVED TIER 1 CONSTRUCTION SWPPP THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF THE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES UNTIL THE CONSTRUCTION WORK IS COMPLETE AND APPROVED BY THE CITY OF CARLSBAD. OWNpPWSy/OWNER'S AGENT NAME (PRINT) OWNER(S)/OWNER'S AGENT NAME (SIGNATURE) DATg STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION NOTES 1. ALL NECESSARY EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS SHALL BE AVAILABLE ON SITE TO FACIUTATE RAPID INSTALU\TION OF EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS WHEN RAIN IS EMINENT. 2. THE OWNER/CONTRACTOR SHALL RESTORE ALL EROSION CONTROL DEVICES TO WORKING ORDER TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE CIPi' ENGINEER AFTER EACH RUN-OFF PRODUCING RAINFALL 3 THE OWNER/CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL ADDITIONAL EROSION CONTROL MEASURES AS MAY BE REQUIRED BY THE CITY ENGINEERING OR BUILDING INSPECTOR DUE TO UNCOMPLETED GFJADING OPERATIONS OR UNFORESEEN CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH MAY ARISE 4. ALL REMOVABLE PROTECTIVE DEVICES SHALL BE IN PLACE AT THE END OF EACH WORKING DAY WHEN THE FIVE (5) DAY RAIN PROBABlLlPi' FORECAST EXCEEDS FORTY PERCENT (40%). SILT AND OTHER DEBRIS SHALL BE REMOVED AFTER EACH RAINFALL 5. ALL GRAVEL BAGS SHALL BE BURLAP TYPE WITH 3/4 INCH MINIMUM AGGREGATE 6. ADEQUATE EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL AND PERIMETER PROTECTION BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE MEASURES MUST BE INSTALLED AND MAINTAINED SPECIAL NOTES PROJECT INFORMATION Site Address 23:>'2)-ao 1-03, ere- Assessor's Parcel Number Project ID- Construction Permit No. ; Estimated Constmction Start Date Project Duration Months Emergency Contact Name^)^J^^OXf^ 24 hour Phone Perceived Threat to Storm Water Quality d Medium H Low If medium box is checked, must attach a site plan sheet showing proposed work area and location of proposed structural BMPs For City Use Only CITY OF CARLSBAD STANDARD TIER 1 SWPPP Approved By Date E-29 Page 1 of 3 REV 4/30/10 Erosion Control BMPs Sediment Control BMPs Tracking Control BMPs Non-Storm Water Management BMPs Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control BMPs Best Management Practice (BMP) Description ^ Geotextiles & Mats Wood Mulching Earth Dikes and Drainage Swales Slope Drains Silt Fence Sediment Trap Check Dam Fiber Rolls Gravel Bag Berni Street Sweeping and Vacuuming Sandbag Barrier Storm Drain Inlet Protection Stabilized Construction Ingress/Egress Stabilized Construction Roadway Water Conservation Practices Paving and Gnnding Ooerations Potable Water/Irrigation Vehicle and Equipment Cleanino Material Delivery and Material Use stockpile Management Spill Prevention and Contml Solid Waste Manaaement Hazardous Waste Mananement Concrete Waste Manaaement CASQA Designation Construction Activity EC-7 EC-8 EC-9 EC-11 SE-1 SE-3 SE-4 SE-5 SE-6 SE-7 SE-8 SE-10 TR-1 TR-2 NS-1 NS-3 NS-7 NS-8 WM-1 WM-2 WM-3 WM-4 WM-5 WM-6 WM-8 Grading/Soil Disturbance Trenching/Excavation X X Stockpiling Drilling/Bonng Concrete/Asphalt Saw cutting Concrete flatwork Paving Conduit/Pipe Installation Stucco/Mortar Work Waste Disposal Staging/Lay Down Area Equipment Maintenance and Fueling Hazardous Substance Use/Storage Dewatenng Site Access Across Dirt X Other (list). Instructions Begin by reviewing the list of construction activities and checking the box to the left of any activity that will occur during the proposed construction. Add any other activrty descriptions in the blank activity description boxes provided for that purpose and place a check in the box immediately to the left of the added activity descnption. For each activity descrnbed, pick one or more best management practices (BMPs) from the list located along the top of the form. Then place an X in the box at the place where the activity row intersects with the BMP column. Do Ihis for each activity that was checked off and for each of the selected BMPs selected from the list For Example - If the project includes site access across dirt, then check the box to the left of "Site Access Across Dirt" Then review the list for something that applies such as "Stabilized Construction Ingress/Egress" under Tracking Control. Follow along the "Site Access Across Dirt" row until you get to the "Stabilized Construction Ingress/Egress" column and place an X in the box v^re the two meet. As another example say the project included a stockpile that you intend to cover with a plastic sheet. Since plastic sheeting is not on the list of BMPs, then wnte in 'Cover with Plastic" in fhe blank column under the heading Erosion Control BMPs Then place an X in the tiox wtiere the "Stockpiling" row intersects the new "Cover with Plastic" column To leam more about wtiaf each BMP descnption means, you may wish to review tfie BMP Reference Handout prepared to assist applicants in the selection of appropnate Best Management Practice measures The reference also explains the California Stormwater Quality Association (CASQA) designation and how to apply the vanous selected BMPs to a project E-29 Page 2 of 3 REV 4/30/10 4 ^ CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DIVISION BUILDING PLAN CHECK APPROVAL P-29 Development Services Planning Division 1635 Faraday Avenue (760) 602-4610 www rarkhadra eov DATE: 11/20/2012 PROJECT NAIVIE: Army/Navy retaining wall PROJECT ID: RP 12-13 PLAN CHECK NO: CB122342 SET#: 1 ADDRESS: 2600 Carlsbad Blvd. APN: 204-051-03 ^ This plan check review is complete and has been APPROVED by the Planning Division. By: Austin Silva A Final Inspection by the Planning Division is required • Yes ^ No you may also have corrections from one or more of the divisions listed below. Approval from these divisions may be required prior to the issuance of a building permit. Resubmitted plans shouid inciude corrections from ali divisions. • This plan check review is NOT COIVIPLETE. Items missing or incorrect are listed on the attached checklist. Please resubmit amended plans as required. Plan Check APPROVAL has been sent to: For questions or clarifications on the attached checl<list please contact the following reviewer as nnarked: PLANNING 760-602-4610 ENGINEERING 760-602-2750 FIRE PREVENTION 760-602-4665 1 1 Chris Sexton 760-602-4624 Chris.Sexton@carlsbadca.gov Kathleen Lawrence 760-602-2741 Kathleen.Lawrence@carlsbadca.gov 1 Greg Ryan 760-602-4663 Gregory.Rvan@carlsbadca.fiov 1 Gina Ruiz 760-602-4675 Gina.Ruiz@carlsbadca.gov Linda Ontiveros 760-602-2773 Linda.Ontiveros@carlsbadca.gov 1 1 Cindy Wong 760-602-4662 Cvnthia.Wong@carlsbadca.fiov X Austin Silva 760-602-4631 Austin.silva@carlsbadca.gov • [ 1 Dominic Fieri 760-602-4664 Dominic.Fieri@carlsbadca.gov Remarks: CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DIVISION BUILDING PLAN CHECK APPROVAL P-29 Development Services Planning Division 1635 Faraday Avenue (760) 602-4610 www carlsbadca sov DATE: 11/8/2012 PROJECT NAME: Army/Navy retaining wall PROJECT ID: RP 12-13 PLAN CHECK NO: CB122342 SET#: 1 ADDRESS: 2600 Carlsbad Blvd. APN: 204-051-03 Q This plan check review is complete and has been APPROVED by the Division. By: A Final Inspection by the Division is required • Yes • No you may aiso have corrections from one or more of the divisions listed beiow. Approval from these divisions may be required prior to the issuance ofa buiiding permit. Resubmitted pians should include corrections from ail divisions. ^ This plan check review is NOT COMPLETE. Items missing or incorrect are listed on the attached checklist. Please resubmit amended plans as required. Plan Check APPROVAL has been sent to: For questions or clarifications on the attached checklist please contact the following reviewer as marked: PLANNING 760-602-4610 ENGINEERING 760-602-2750 FiRE PREVENTION 760-602-4665 Chris Sexton 760-602-4624 Chris.Sexton@carlsbadca.gov 1 1 Kathleen Lawrence 760-602-2741 Kathleen.Lawrence@carlsbadca.gov 1 Greg Ryan 760-602-4663 Gregorv.Rvan@carlsbadca.gov 1 1 Gina Ruiz 760-602-4675 Gina.Ruiz@carlsbadca.gov 1 1 Linda Ontiveros 760-602-2773 Linda.Ontiveros@carlsbadca.gov 1 1 Cindy Wong 760-602-4662 Cvnthia.Wong@carlsbadca.gov X Austin Silva 760-602-4631 Austin.silva@carlsbadca.gov • Dominic Fieri 760-602-4664 Dominic.Fieri@carlsbadca.gov Remarks: Retaining wall is shown above 6 ft. in height along north property line. Wall needs to be 6 ft. or less. CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING REPORT OF PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED ATHLETIC FIELD IMPROVEMENTS ARMY NAVY ACADEMY CARLSBAD BOULEVARD CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA PREPARED FOR ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY 2605 CARLSBAD BOULEVARD CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 PREPARED BY CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING 3980 HOME AVENUE SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92105 3980 Home Avenue • San Diego, CA 92 1 05 • 61 9-550-1 700 • FAX 61 9-550-1 70 1 CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING August 6, 2012 Army and Nzvy Academy 2605 Carlsbad Boulevard Carlsbad, Cahfornia 92008 CWE 2120311 02R Subject: Report of Pteliminaty Geotechnical Investigation, Ptoposed Athletic Field Improvements, Army and Navy Academy, Carlsbad, Califomia. Ladies and Gendemen In accordance with your request and our proposal dated June 11, 2012, we have completed a prehinmary geotechnical investigation for the proposed smgle-farmly home to be constructed at die subject property It IS our opinion that no geotechnical conditions exist at the subject property that would preclude the construction of the athletic field improvements as presendy proposed The mam geotechnical condition affectmg the proposed construction consists of potentiaUy compressible fiU and native soils underlymg the site to varymg depths This condition is discussed m the attached report If you have any questions after reviewmg this report, please do not hesitate to contact our office This oppormmty to be of professional service is smcerely appreciated Respectfully submitted, CHRISTIAN \SHEELER ENGINEERING ChaBes H Chris ti; CMC DRRDBA cc (2) Addressee kevinhallock@houscanddodgc com 3980 Home Avenue • San Diego, CA 92 1 05 • 61 9-550- 1 700 • FAX 61 9-550-1 70 1 CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING November 5, 2012 Army and Nav)' Academy CWE 2120311 04 2605 Carlsbad Boulevard Carlsbad, Cahforma 92008 Subject: Grading Plan Review Pfoposed Athletic Field Improvements, Army and Navy Academy, Carlsbad, Califomia Reference 1) "Grading and Erosion Control Plans, Anny & Navy Athletic Faakty", Sheetsl through 6, 11, 13 and 14, Huffman Plannmg & Engineermg, September 13, 2012 2) Report of Prekmmar)' Geotechmcal Investigation, Proposed Athletic Field Improvements, Army and Navy Academy, Carlsbad, Cahfornia, CWE Report 2120311 02R, dated August 6, 2012. Ladies and Gentlemen' At the request of Huffman Plannmg & Engmeermg, we have performed a limited review of the referenced plans for the subject project m order to ascertam that the recommendations presented m the referenced geotechmcal report have been implemented, and that no additional recommendations are needed due to changes m the proposed construction Based on tins review, it is our opmion that the plans reflect the recommendations contamed m the referenced report However, the followmg additional recommendations are provided based on our review 1 Retammg walls are proposed adjacent to the majority of the northern and eastern property knes Site preparation recoimnended m the referenced report wiU be performed up to the propert}' hne Unsuitable sods may be encountered off-site at proposed foundation levels This condition wiU require deepenmg the proposed retammg wall footmgs or their redesign 2 An area of porous pavement is proposed for both parkmg lots (Sheet 14, detail 1) It is recommended that the gravel base under the per\ious concrete pavement be kned with a 30 mil low densitj' polyethalylene (LDPE) impermeable Imer (Layfield Emiro Lmer 4130 or equivalent) The manufacturer recommends that an 8 oz non-woven geotextlle be used as a buffer between the gravel and the hner Tlie lmer should be sealed at seams and penetrations m accordance with the manufacturers specifications. 3980 Home Avenue • San Diego, CA 92 1 05 • 6 1 9-550-1 700 • FAX 61 9-550-1 701 cwri2i2(nii 04 Novcmbei 5, 2(112 Page No 2 3 It IS recommended that potholes be performed to ascertam the soil conditions m the proposed turf field area In addition, it is recommended that the entire area be proof roUed Any zones of potentiaUy compressible matenals encountered should be removed and replaced as compacted fill If you have any questions after reviewmg this report, please do not hesitate to contact our office This opportunit)' to be of professional service is smcerely appreciated Respectfully submitted, CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING Darnel B Adler, RCE # 36037 CC (2) Addressee kcvinhflIlock@houscanddodgc com ccadena@hofminplanning com CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING October 19, 2012 Army and Nav)- Academy CWE 2120311 03 2605 Carlsbad Boulevard Carlsbad, Cahforma 92008 Subject: Allowable Soil Bearing Pressure, Proposed Stormwater FaciUty Proposed Athletic Field Improvements, Army and Navy Academy, Carlsbad, California Reference Report of Prekrmnar)' Geotechmcal Investigation, Proposed Athletic Field Improvements, Army and Nav)'Academy, Carlsbad, Cahforma, CWE Report 2120311 02R, dated August 6, 2012 Ladies and Gendemen We have prepared this report to provide aUowable sod bearing pressure recommendations for the proposed storm water faciht)' To assist us m die preparation of tins report, we have been provided with a site plan showing die location of the proposed storm water facihty and the design manual for the StormTech SC-310/SC- 740 stormwater chamber system We have also reviewed our referenced geotechnical report We understand that the proposed stormwater facihty wiU consist of a senes of chambers that are surrounded by open-graded crushed aggregate The total depth of the excavation wiU be seven feet, and fhe coverage height over the top of die storm chambers wiU be approximately four feet Our prekminar}' subsurface mvestigation did not mcluded subsurface explorations m the proposed storm water faciht}' location However, based on the findmgs of the referenced mvestigation and the proposed depth of the storm water faciht}', we anticipate that bottom of fhe excavation should be founded m older parahc deposits (Qop6 7) consistmg of a medium dense, sAxy sand (SM) or a stiff, sandy clay (CL) Tins assumption should be venfied durmg construcuon It should be noted that the recommendations of this report may be subject to change dependmg upon the geotechmcal conditions encountered durmg the construction phase Based on the anticipated soils at the proposed storm water facdit}' foundation level, it is our opimon and judgment that an aUowable sod bearmg pressure of 2,500 pounds per square foot (psf) may be assumed for the subgrade/foundation soils Based on the chart provided withm the StomiTech design manual, a storm chamber 3980 Home Avenue • San Diego, CA 92 1 05 • 61 9-550-1 700 • FAX 6 1 9-550- 1 701 CWE 2120311 03 Octobei 19, 2012 Page Ncj 2 system with 4 feet of cover and an allowable sod bearmg pressure of 2,500 psf wiU require a mmimum of 12 mches of clean, crushed angular stone below the chambers feet It should be noted that mfUttation of stormwater into younger, less consohdated sediments may cause hydro- consoUdation of these sods resulting m mmor setdement of the area around the proposed mfiltration faciUties Such setdements, should they occur, may adversely affect dramage patters witlnn the playmg field area m which the mfiltration facihties are proposed If you have any questions after reviewmg this letter, please do not hesitate to contact this office This opportumty to be of professional service is smcerely appreciated RespectfuUy subnntted, CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING Darnel E Adler, RCE #36037 DBA '1 SW ec kevinhallock@houseanddddge com ecadena@hofmanplanning com Troy S Wilson, CEG #2551 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Introduction and Project Description ... 1 Scope of Services . . ... . 2 Findmgs . ... .... . 3 Site Description. . . . .3 General, Geology and Subsurface Conditions ... ... .3 Geologic Settmg and Soil Description .. . . ..... . . 3 Artificial FUl . . . . ..3 TopsoU , ........ . . .... 3 Old ParaUc Deposits. . .. . . .... . 3 Groundwater . . . . ... .. ... ......4 Tectomc Setting ... .... . ... ... . ... .. 4 Geologic Hazards . .. .. .... ... . . ... .... 5 Slope Stabihty . . . . . ..... 5 Liquefaction ... . . . .. .5 Floodmg . . . .. .. . . . .5 Tsunarms . . ... . . 5 Seiches .... . . .. ... . 5 Other Potential Geologic Hazards . 5 Conclusions . . . ... 6 Recommendations . ..... . ... . .6 Grading and Earthwork , . . ... .6 General . . ... . .6 Pregrade Meetmg . . ... . . . ... .6 Obser\'ation of Gradmg ... ... ... 6 Clearmg and Grubbmg ... . 7 Site Preparation .... . . .. ... .... 7 Excavation Characteristics . . ... . . . . . . .7 Processmg of FiU Areas . . . . ... ... .7 Compaction and Method of FiUmg . ... ... ..8 Temporary Slopes ... .... . . . .8 Surface Drainage . . ... .... . .8 Gradmg Plan Review . . .. 9 Foundations... .. .. 9 General ...... . .. 9 Foundation Dimensions . . ... 9 Bearmg Capacity . .... ... ... 9 Footing Remforcement .... . . .10 Lateral Load Resistance . . . . ... 10 Seismic Design Factors . . ..10 Expansive Characteristics . . .... . . . 11 Setdement Characteristics . . .... 11 Foundation Excavation Observation ... . 11 Foundation Plan Review .... . ... .... . . 11 Soluble Sufates . 12 On-Grade Slabs 12 General . • 12 Interior Floor Slabs .... . . ... .... .... 12 Under-Slab Vapor Retarders ... . .. . . .12 Exterior Concrete Flatv\'ork . .. 13 2120311 02R Proposed Athletic Field Improvements Army and Navy Academy Carlsbad Boulevard Carlsbad, CaUfornia Eardi Retainmg WaUs . Foundations. Passive Pressure . .. Active Pressure . . BackfiU Prehmmary Pavement Sections Traffic Index . . R-Value Test Prehmmary Pavement Section . Lmntations ... Review, Observations and Testmg Umfomuty of Conditions .... Change m Scope . . Time Lmntations. Professional Standard .. . Chent's ResponsibUity Field Explorations . .. Laboratory Testmg . 13 . 13 13 14 14 14 14 15 .15 16 . 16 17 17 ..17 . 17 18 .18 . 19 ATTACHMENTS TABLES Table I Seisrmc Design Parameters FIGURES Figure 1 PLATES Site Vicmity Map, FoUows Page 1 Plate 1 Plates 2-9 Plate 10 Plate 11&12 Plate 13 Site Plan & Geotechmcal Map Bormg Logs Slope Log Laboratory' Test Results Retammg WaU Subdram APPENDICES Appendix A References Appendix B Recommended Gradmg Specifications-General Provisions C\>;''E2120311.02R Proposed Athletic Field Improvements Army and Navy Academy Carlsbad Boulevard Carlsbad, Cahforma CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED ATHLETIC FIELD IMPROVEMENTS ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY CARLSBAD BOULEVARD CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION This report presents the lesults of a prehnnnary geotechmcal investigation performed for the proposed improvements to the Army and Navy Academy athletic field, located adjacent to and east of Carlsbad Boulevard, m the city of Carlsbad, Cahforma The foUowmg Figure Number 1 presents a vicmity map showmg the location of the property We understand that the proposed improvements wiU consist of an athletic complex bmldmg and an associated parkmg lot north of die field, a mamtenance buildmg and two parkmg lots south of the field, and a ticket booth, a two-stoiy press box, bleachers, and two dugouts The athletic buddmg and gym north of the field wiU be a two-story buddmg of approximately 28,000 square feet The structure wiU Ukely be of concrete tdt-up and wood-frame construction with an on-grade concrete floor slab The maintenance buildmg south of die field wdl be a two-story buddmg with storage m the lower floor level Some retainmg waUs wdl be mcorporated mto the western and southern sides of this buUdmg Tins stiiicmre wdl hkely be of wood-frame construction above grade and masonry consti-uction below grade It is assumed that gradmg wiU consist of cuts and fills of less than about ten feet fiom existing grades. To aid m the preparation of this report, we were provided widi a site plan showmg the site configuration and location of the proposed improvements prepared by House & Dodge, dated June 4, 2012 A copy of the plan has been used as the base for our Site Plan and Geotechnical Map, and is mcluded herem as Plate No 1 Tins report has been prepared for die exclusive use of die Army and Navy Academy and then; design consultants, for specific appUcation to the project described herem Should the project be modified, the conclusions and recommendations presented m dns report should be reviewed by Christian 3980 Home Avenue • San Diego, CA 921 05 • 6 1 9-550-1 700 • FAX 61 9-550- 1 701 Site Vicinity Map PROPOSED ATHLETIC FIELD IMPROVEMENTS ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA SITE CWE 2120311.02R AUGUST 2012 FIGURE 1 CWE 2120311 02R August 6, 2012 Page No, 2 Wheeler Engmeermg for conformance with our recommendations and to determme whether any additional subsurface mvestigation, laboratory testmg and/or recommendations are necessar)' Our professional services have been perfonned, om' findmgs obtamed and our recommendations prepared m accordance with generaUy accepted engmeermg prmciples and practices This warrant}' is m heu of aU odier warranties, expressed or mipUed SCOPE OF SERVICES Our prehnnnary geotechmcal mvestigation consisted of surface reconnaissance, subsurface exploration, obtammg representative soil samples, laboratory testmg, analysis of die field and laboratory data, and review of relevant geologic hterature Our scope of service did not mclude assessment of hazardous substance contamination, recommendations to prevent floor slab moisture mtrusion or the fonnation of mold withm the structures, evaluation or design of storm water mfUtration facihties, or any other services not specificaUy described m the scope of services presented below More specificaUy, the mtent of our mvestigation was to • Drdl eight small-diameter bormgs m order to explore the subsurface soil conditions and to obtam sod samples for laboratory testmg • Evaluate, by laboratory tests and our past expenence with similar sod t}'pes, the engmeermg properties of the vanous strata that may mfluence the proposed construction, mcludmg bearmg capacities, expansive charactenstics and setdement potential • Descnbe the general geology at the site mcludmg possible geologic hazards that could have an effect on the proposed consti'ucUon, and pro'vide the seisrmc design parameters as required by the 2010 edition ofthe Cahforma Bmldmg Code • Address potential constmction difficulties that may be encountered due to sod conditions, groundwater or geologic hazards, and pro'vide recommendations concernmg these problems. • Provide site preparation and gradmg recommendations • Provide foundation recommendations for the type of constmction anticipated and develop sod engmeermg design cntena for the recommended foundation designs. • Provide earth retainmg waU design cntena • Prepare a preUmmary geoteclmical mvestigation report discussmg our findmgs and geotechmcal recommendations for the proposed constmction CWE 2120311 02R August 6, 2012 Page No 3 FINDINGS SITE DESCRIPTION The subject site is located adjacent to and east of Carlsbad Boulevard m the city of Carlsbad, and is identified as Assessor's Parcel Numbers 203-051-03, 203-052-01, 203-052-02, and 203-053-01 The mam portion of the campus is located west of Carlsbad Boulevard, at 2605 Carlsbad Boulevard The property' is bounded on the west by Carlsbad Boulevard, on the east by a raUroad easement, on the south by Beech Avenue and a pubhc buddmg and associated parkmg lot, and on the north by a commercial buildmg The site is currendy used as the adiletic/parade field for die Academy Existing improvements include two dugouts, bleachers, a scoreboard, and a two-stor)' strucmre A brick retammg wall/site waU exists along the western portion of die southern property Une The wall has a maximum height of about four feet, and shows signs of structural disU'ess GENERAL GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS GEOLOGIC SETTING AND SOIL DESCRIPTION: Tlie subject site is located widnn die Coastal Plams Physiographic Pro-vmce of San Diego Count}' Based on the results of our subsurface explorations, and analysis of readdy avadable, pertinent geologic hterature, it was determmed diat die site is generaUy underlain by fiU, topsoU, and Quaternary-age old parahc (terrace) deposits These matenals are described below ARTIFICIAL FILL (Qaf): Artificial fiU was encountered m bonng B-l extendmg to a depth of about S'A feet below existing grade Tlie fiU depdi may be deeper m areas of die site not mvestigated Based on die ongmal site topography, fiU matenals are anticipated at the northeastern portion of fhe site Tlie fdl encountered consists of brown to dark brown, damp to moist, loose, sdty sands (SM) The fiU was judged to have a low Expansion Index (EI<50) TOPSOIL: A thm surfiaal veneer of topsod was encountered m bonngs B-2, B-3, B-4, and B-8, extendmg to a maximum depth of about two feet below existmg grade The topsoU consists of brown to dark brown, damp to moist, loose to medimn dense, sUty sands (SM) The topsoU was judged to have a low Expansion Index (EI<50) OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS (Qop): Quaternar}'-age old parahc (terrace) deposits were encountered underlymg the surficial sods In general, diese old parahc deposits consist of CWE 2120311 02R August 6, 2012 Page No 4 mterbedded brown to hght reddish-brown and grayish-brown, dr}' to moist, sdt}' sand (SM), shglidy sUty, poorly-graded sand (SP-SM), and sUty sand 'with clay (SM), and grayish-brown, moist, sandy clay (CL) The parahc deposits were loose to medium dense and weathered to depths ranging from approximately 2 to 9 feet below existmg grades, and medium dense to dense or stiff thereafter The sandy portions of the old parahc deposits were judged to possess a very low expansion mdex (EI<20) and the clayey portions were judged to possess a low to moderate expansion mdex (EI between 51 to 90) GROUNDWATER: No groundwater or seepage was encountered m our subsurface explorations However, it should be recognized that mmor groundwater seepage problems rmglit occur after site consttuction and landscapmg are completed, even at sites where none were present before construction These are usually mmor phenomena and are often the result of an alteration m drainage patterns and/or an mcrease m irrigation water It is further our opmion that these problems can be most effectively corrected on an mdividual basis if and when they occur TECTONIC SETTING: It should be noted that much of Southern Cahforma, mcludmg the San Diego Count}' area, is characterized by a series of Quatemary-age fault zones that consist of several mdividual, en echelon faults that generaUy sttike m a northerly to northwesterly direction Some of these fault zones (and the mdividual faults withm the zone) are classified as active wlnle odiers are classified as only potentiaUy active accordmg to the critena of the Cahforma Division of Mines and Geology Active fault zones are those which have shown conclusive evidence of faulting durmg the Hoiocene Epoch (the most recent 11,000 years) whde potentially active fault zones have demonstrated movement durmg the Pleistocene Epoch (11,000 to 1 6 nnUion years before the present) but no movement dm'mg Hoiocene time Inactive faults are diose faults that can be demonstrated to have no movement m the past 1 6 miUion years No active or potentiaUy active faults have been mapped at or m the vicimty of the subject site It shoidd be recognized that the active Newport-Inglewood Fault Zone is located approxunately IVz kdometers east of the site Other active fault zones m the region that coidd possibly affect the site mclude the Coronado Bank, San Diego Trough, and San Clemente Fault Zones to the southwest, die Earthquake VaUey and Palos Verdes Fault Zones to the north, and the Elsmore and San Jacmto Fault Zones to the northeast CWE2120311.02R August 6,2012 Page No 5 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS SLOPE STABILITY: As part of tins mvestigation we reviewed the pubhcation, "Landshde Hazards m die Northern Part of the San Diego MetropoUtan Area" by Tan and Giffen, 1995 This reference is a comprehensive smdy that classifies San Diego County mto areas of relative landshde susceptibUity The subject site is located m Area 2, which is considered to be "margmally susceptible" to slope faUures Based on our findmgs, it is our opmion that the hkehhood of slope stabUity related problems at the site is ver}' low LIQUEFACTION: Tlie earth materials underlj'mg the site are not considered subject to hquefaction due to such factors as sod density, gram-size disttibution, the absence of shaUow groundwater conditions FLOODING: The site is not located withm either the 100-year flood zone or the 500-year flood zone TSUNAMIS: Tsunamis are great sea waves produced by a submarme earthquake or volcanic eruption HistoncaUy, the San Diego area has been free of tsunarm-related hazards and tsunarms reachmg San Diego have generally been weU witlim the normal tidal range It is tiiought that the wide contmental margm off the coast acts to diffuse and reflect the wave energy of remotely generated tsunamis The largest historical tsunami to reach San Diego's coast was 4 6 feet high, generated by the 1960 earthquake m ChUe A lack of knowledge about the offshore fault systems makes it difficult to assess die risk due to locaUy generated tsunarms However, the risk associated with tsunamis m the San Diego region is considered to be generaUy low Based on the site's location and elevation, the risk potential of tsunamis affectmg the subject site is considered neghgible Fmthermore, as presented on San Lms Rey Quadrangle of the Tsunarm Inundation Map for Emergency Plannmg (CEMA, 2009), the site is not mapped 'witlnn a tsunarm mundation area SEICHES: Seiches are periodic osctUations m large bodies of water such as lakes, harbors, bays or reservoirs Due to the site's location, it is considered to have a negUgible risk potential for seiches. OTHER POTENTIAL GEOLOGIC HAZARDS: Odier potential geologic hazards such as, volcanoes or seisrmc-mduced setdement should be considered to be neghgible or nonexistent CWE 2120311 02R August 6, 2012 Page No 6 CONCLUSIONS In general, it is om professional opimon and judgment that, from a geologic and geotechmcal perspective, die subject property is smtable for die proposed construction provided die recommendations presented herem are implemented The site is underlam by potentiaUy compressible fdl, topsod, and weathered old parahc deposits raiigmg m combmed depth from about 1 foot to 9 feet below existmg grade Below said depth the old parahc deposits are medium dense to dense or stiff m consistency In order to rmtigate this condition, it is recommended that the potentially compressible materials be removed and replaced as compacted fiU Some of the old parahc deposits encountered appear to be moderately expansive However, it is anticipated that diese deposits wiU be several feet below finish pad grade elevations, and wiU not deti'imentaUy affect die proposed improvements Other dian fhe potential for seismicaUy mduced ground shakmg, as described herem, the site should be safe from geologic hazards at the conclusion of consttuction, provided the recommendations contamed herem are implemented and sound constmction practices are foUowed RECOMMENDATIONS GRADING AND EARTHWORK GENERAL: AU gradmg should conform to die gmdeknes presented m the current edition of the Cahforma Bmldmg Code, the mirummn requirements of the City of Carlsbad, and the recommended Gradmg Specifications and Special Provisions attached hereto, except where specificaUy superseded m the text of tins report PRE-GRADE MEETING: It is recommended that a pre-grade meetmg mcludmg the gradmg conttactor, die chent, and a representative from Clinstian Wlieeler Engmeermg be performed, to discuss the recommendations of dns report and to address any issues tiiat may affect gradmg operations OBSERVATION OF GRADING: Continuous observation by die Geotechmcal Consultant is essential dunng the gradmg operation to confimi conditions antiapated by our mvestigation, to aUow CWE 2120311 02R August 6, 2012 Page No. 7 adjustments m design cnteria to reflect acmal field conditions exposed, and to determme that die gradmg proceeds m general accordance widi the recommendations contamed herem CLEARING AND GRUBBING: Site preparation should begm with the demohtion of aU existing improvements Tlie resultmg debris as weU as aU vegetation and odier deletenous materials m areas of the site to receive the proposed improvements and/or fUl materials shovJd be disposed of off-site SITE PREPARATION: Existing fUl, topsoU, and potentiaUy compressible parahc deposits underlymg proposed stractures and setdement-sensitive improvements should be removed to the contact with competent native matenals Based on our subsmface explorations, the removal depth is expected to range from about 1 foot to possibly as much as 9 feet below existing grade Fiowever, deeper removals may be necessary m areas of the site not mvestigated We antiapate that the removal depths m the area of die proposed gymnasium wiU range from approximately 5 feet on the western portion of the buUdmg to approximately 8 feet on the eastern portion We antiapate tiiat the removal depths m the area of the proposed mamtenance bmlding -wiU be approximately 3 to 4 feet Tlie horizontal hmits of die removals should mclude aU areas that wdl support setdement-sensitive improvements such as stmctmes, parking lots, and hardscape, and should extend at least five feet outside the edges of such improvements or removal depth, whichever is less In proposed parking and hardscape areas, the minimum lateral removal Umits may be reduced to two feet All areas cleaned out of unsmtable sods should be approved by the geotechmcal engmeer or his representative pnor to replacmg any of the excavated sods The excavated matenals, -with the exception of the expansive subsoU, can be replaced as properly compacted fiU m accordance 'with the recommendations presented m fhe "Compaction and Metiiod of FiUuig" section of om' fortiicommg geoteclnucal report EXCAVATION CHARACTERISTICS: It is our opimon that antiapated cuts associated widi Ukely gradmg operations may be achieved with conventional hcicvy duty gradmg eqmpment and hght ttenchmg equipment m good workmg order PROCESSING OF FILL AREAS: Pnor to placmg any new fiU sods m areas that have been cleaned out to receive fiU and have been approved by the Geotechmcal Consultant or his representative, die exposed sods should be scanfied to a depth of 12 mches, moisture-conditioned, and compacted as described heremafter CWE 2120311 02R August 6, 2012 Page No 8 COMPACTION AND METHOD OF FILLING: In general, aU stincmral fdl placed at die site should be compacted to a relative compaction of at least 90 percent of its maximum laborator}' dry density as determmed by ASTM Laboratory Test Dl 557 FiUs should be placed at or sUghtiy above optimum moistiire content, m hfts six to eight mches thick, 'widi each kft compacted by mechamcal means Fdls should consist of approved eardi matenal, free of tiash or debns, roots, vegetation, or other matenals determined to be unsmtable by the Geotechnical Consultant FiU material shoidd be free of rocks or lumps of sod m excess of three mches m maximum dimension Utikt}' ttench backfiU 'withm five feet of the proposed stractirre should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of its maximum dry densit}' TEMPORARY SLOPES: We anticipate that temporan' excavation slopes up to about 12 feet high may be required for the consttuction of the proposed mamtenance bmldmg The excavations reqiured for footmg consttuction are considered as part of the temporar}' slopes. Cohesionless sands may be encountered m some of the temporary cut slope excavations Therefore, temporary cuts should be excavated at an mchnation of 1 • 1 or flatter We recommend that our fum be contacted to have an engmeermg geologist observe die temporary cut slopes dmmg gradmg to ascertam that no unforeseen adverse conditions exist If adverse conditions are identified, it may be necessar}' to flatten die slope mchnation No surcharge loads such as sod or eqmpment stockpiles, velncles, etc should be aUowed withm a distance from the top of temporary slopes equal to half the slope height The conttactor is solely responsible for desigrung and constructing stable, temporary excavations and may need to shore, slope, or bench the sides of ttench excavations as requued to mamtam the stabiht}' of the excavation sides where the friable sands are exposed. The contiactor's "competent person", as defined m the OSHA Construction Standards for Excavations, 29 CFH, Part 1926, should evaluate die sod exposed m die excavations as part of the conttactor's safet}' process In no case should slope height, slope mchnation, or excavation depth, mcludmg utihty ttench excavauon depth, exceed those specified m local, state, and federal safet}' regulations Christian WTieeler Engmeermg should be immediately notified if zones of potential mstabUity, sloughmg or ravehng develop, and mitigation measmes should be implemented prior to continumg work SURFACE DRAINAGE: The dramage around the proposed improvements should be designed to coUect and duect surface water away from proposed improvements toward appropriate drainage faciUties Ram gutters widi downspouts that discharge ninoff away from die structiire mto conti'oUed diamage devices are recommended CWE 2120311 02R August 6, 2012 Page No. 9 The ground around the proposed improvements should be graded so that surface water flows rapidly away from the improvements without pondmg In general, we recommend that the ground adjacent to stiructiu'es be sloped away at a munmum gradient of two percent Densely vegetated areas where mnoff can be impaued should have a mmtmum gradient of five percent for the first five feet from the sttucmre It is essential that new and existmg dramage patterns be coordmated to produce proper dramage Dramage patterns pro'vided at the tune of construction should be mamtamed throughout the hfe of the proposed improvements Site irrigation should be Unnted to the mmunum necessary to sustain landscape growth Over watermg should be avoided Should excessive irrigation, impaued dramage, or unusuaUy high ramfaU occur, zones of wet or saturated sod may develop GRADING PLAN REVIEW: The final gradmg planshould be subnntted to this office for review m order to ascertam that no additional recommendations are needed due to changes m the anticipated constraction. Our firm should be notified of changes to the proposed project that could necessitate re\'isions of or additions to the mformation contamed herem FOUNDATIONS GENERAL: Based on our findmgs and engmeermg judgment, the proposed improvements may be supported by conventional shaUow contmuous and isolated spread footings This assumes that the site preparation recommendations 'wUl be adhered to The foUo'wmg recommendations are considered the minimum based on sod conditions and are not mtended to be heu of stmctural considerations AU foundations should be designed by a qualified engmeer FOUNDATION DIMENSIONS: Spread footmgs supporting the proposed athletic and mamtenance stmctures should be embedded at least 18 mches below fimsh pad grade Continuous footmgs should have a mmimmn 'width of 12 mches Isolated footmgs and retaimng waU footmgs should have a mmtmum 'width of 24 mches Continuous footmgs supporting mmor stmctures such as the proposed bleachers, press box, and dugouts, and misceUaneous extenor improvements should be embedded at least 12 mches below fimsh pad grade, and should be at least 12 mches 'Wide BEARING CAPACITY: Spread footings supportmg the proposed atiiletic and mamtenance stmcmres witii the minunum dimensions pre'viously descnbed may be designed for an aUowable sod beanng pressm-e of 2,500 pounds per square foot (psf) Tins value may be mcreased by 600 psf for each CWE 2120311 02R August 6, 2012 Page No 10 additional foot of embedment depth and 400 psf for each additional foot of'width, up to a maximum of 4,000 psf Spread foomigs for any proposed mmor stinchires and extenor rmsceUaneous improvements may be designed for an aUowable sod bearmg pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) This value may be mcreased by 600 psf for each additional foot of embedment depth and 400 psf for each additional foot of'widtii, up to a maximum of 4,000 psf The bearmg values may also be mcreased by one-dnrd for combmations of temporar}- loads such as those due to 'wmd or seisrmc loads FOOTING REINFORCING: Remforcement requuements for foundations should be provided by a stmctural engmeer However, based on the expected sod conditions, we recommend that the mimmum remforcmg for contmuous footmgs consist of at least two No 5 bars positioned near die bottom of die footmg and two No 5 bars positioned near the top of the footmg However, we recommend that die munmum remforcmg for contmuous footmgs supportmg nnsceUaneous improvements consist of at least one No 5 bar positioned near the bottom of the footmg and one No 5 bar positioned near the top of die footmg LATERAL LOAD RESISTANCE: Lateral loads agamst foundations may be resisted by friction between die bottom of die footmg and die supportmg sod, and by die passive pressure agamst die footmg The coeffiaent of fnction between concrete and sod may be considered to be 0 35 The passive resistance may be considered to be equal to an eqmvalent flmd waglit of 350 pounds per cubic foot These values are based on die assumption that the footmgs are pomed tight agamst undistiirbed sod If a combmation of the passive pressure and fnction is used, the fnction value should be reduced by one-thud SEISMIC DESIGN FACTORS: Tlie seismic design factors apphcable to die subject site are provided below. The seisrmc design factors were detemuned m accordance with the 2010 Cahforma Buildmg Code, based on die 2009 International Bmldmg Code. The site coeffiaents and adjusted maximum considered eai thquake specttal response acceleratton parameters are presented m the table proAided on die foUowmg page TABLE I: SEISMIC DESIGN FACTORS Site Coordmates Latitude Longimde 33 1624° -117 3535° Site Class D Site Coefficient F, 1 0 Site Coefficient F^ 1.5 Specttal Response Acceleration at Short Periods Ss 1 338g CWE 2120311 02R August 6, 2012 Page Noll Specttal Response Acceleration at 1 Second Period Si 0 504g SMS—FaSs 1 338g SMI=FVSI 0 756 g SDS=2/3*SMS 0 892g SDI=2/3*SMI 0 50g Probable ground shakmg levels at die site could range from shght to moderate, dependmg on such factors as the magmtude of die seisrmc event and the distance to die epicenter It is hkely that the site 'wdl expenence the effects of at least one moderate to large earthquake dunng the Ufe of the proposed improvements EXPANSIVE CHARACTERISTICS: The recommended site preparation procedmes are expected to result m the anticipated foundation sods havmg a ver}' low expansion potential (EI<20) The recommendations presented m dns report reflect tins condition. SETTLEMENT CHARACTERISTICS: The anticipated total and differential setdement is expected to be less than about one mch and one mch over fort}' feet, respectively, provided the recommendations presented m tins report are foUowed It should be recognized that mmor cracks normaUy occm m concrete slabs and foundations due to concrete sliruikage durmg curmg or redisttibution of sttesses, therefore some cracks should be anticipated Such cracks are not necessardy an indication of excessive vertical movements FOUNDATION EXCAVATION OBSERVATION: AU footing excavations should be observed by Christian Wheeler Engmeermg pnor to placmg of forms and remforcmg steel to determme whetiier die foundation recommendations presented herem are foUowed and tiiat tiie foundation sods are as antiapated m the preparation of this report AU footmg excavations should be excavated neat, level, and square AU loose or unsmtable matenal should be removed pnor to the placement of concrete FOUNDATION PLAN REVIEW: The final foundation plan and acconipanymg detads and notes should be subnntted to this office for review Tlie mtent of om' review wdl be to venfy that the plans used for constmction reflect the mmimum dunensionmg and remforcmg cntena presented m tins section and tiiat no additional critena are requued due to changes m the foundation type or layout It is not our mtent to review stmctiiral plans, notes, detads, or calculations to venf}' that the design engmeer has correctiy apphed die geotechmcal design values It is die responsibdit}' of the design engmeer to properly design/specif}' the foundations and other sttuctural elements based on the requirements of the stmcmre and considermg the mformation presented m this report CWE 2120311 02R August 6, 2012 Page No 12 SOLUBLE SULFATES: The water soluble sulfate content of a selected sod sample from the site was determmed m accordance with Cahfornia Test Method 417 The results of tins test mdicate that the sod sample had a soluble sulfate content of 0 003 percent Sods with a soluble sulfate content of less than 0 1 percent are considered to be neghgible Therefore, no special requuements are considered necessary for the concrete mix design ON-GRADE SLABS GENERAL: It is our understanding that the floor system for the proposed athletic complex bmldmg and the proposed maintenance buddmg wdl consist of on-grade concrete floor slabs Tlie foUo'wmg recommendations are considered the minimum slab requuements based on the anticipated sod conditions and are not mtended to be m keu of stmctiiral considerations. The slabs should be designed by the project engmeer INTERIOR FLOOR SLABS: The mimmum floor slab tinckness for the proposed athletic complex and mamtenance stmctures should be five mches (acmal) and the floor slab should be remforced 'with at least No 3 remforcmg bars placed at 18 mches on center each way Tlie mmimmn floor slab dnckness for the proposed rmsceUaneous stmctmes should be four mches (acmal) and the floor slab should be remforced 'with at least No 3 remforcmg bars placed at 18 mches on center each way Slab remforcement should be supported on chaus such that the remforcmg bars are positioned at rmd-height m the floor slab The slab remforcement should extend mto the pemneter foundations at least six mches UNDER-SLAB VAPOR RETARDERS: Steps should be taken to munmize die ttansmission of moisture vapor from the subsod through the mtenor slabs where it can potentially damage the mterior floor covenngs Local mdustiy standards typicaUy mclude the placement of a vapor retarder, such as plastic, m a layer of coarse sand placed cUrectiy beneadi the concrete slab Two mches of sand are t}'picaUy used above and below the plastic (fom mches total) This is the most common mider-slab vapor retarder system used m San Diego Count}' The vapor retarder should be at least 15-nnl plastic 'with sealed seams and should extend at least 12 mches down the sides of fhe mtenor and penmeter footmgs The sand should have a sand eqmvalent of at least 30, and contam less tiian 10% passmg the Nmnber 100 sieve and less than 5% passmg the Number 200 sieve It should be understood that slab concrete contams free water and should be aUowed to reach equdibrium m an envuonment smnlar to that anticipated m the completed sti'ucture prior to mstalhng CWE 2120311 02R August 6, 2012 Page No 13 floor covermgs We recormiiend that the flooring mstaller perform standard moismre vapor ermssion tests prior to die mstaUation of aU moistme-sensitive floor covermgs m accordance with ASTM Fl 869 "Standard Test Method for Measmmg Moismre Vapor Emission Rate of Concrete Subfloor Usmg Anhydrous Calcium Chloride" EXTERIOR CONCRETE FLATWORK: Extenor concrete slabs on grade should have a mmimum thickness of four mches and should be remforced with at least No 3 bars placed at 18 mches on center each way (ocew). Wliere patio slabs, walkways and porch slabs abut perimeter foundations, they should be doweled mto the footmgs Driveway slabs should have a mmimum thickness of five mches and should be remforced with at least No 4 bars placed at 18 mches on center each way (ocew) Dnveway slabs should be provided 'with a thickened edge at least 18 mches deep and 6 mches wide AU slabs should be provided with weakened plane jomts m accordance with the Amencan Concrete Instimte (ACI) guidehnes A concrete mix witii a l-mch maxunum aggregate size and a water/cement ratio of less than 0 6 is recommended for extenor slabs Lower water content wdl decrease the potential for shrmkage cracks Consideration should be given to usmg a concrete mrx for the dnveway that has a mmimum compressive sttength of 3,000 pounds per square mch This suggestion is meant to address early driveway use pnor to fuU concrete cmmg Both coarse and fine aggregate should conform to the latest edition ofthe "Standard Specifications for Pubhc Works Consttuctton" ('Greenbook"). Special attentton should be paid to the method of concrete curmg to reduce the potential for excessive shrinkage and resultant random crackmg It should be recogmzed that mmor cracks occur normaUy in concrete slabs due to shrmkage Some shrmkage cracks should be expected and are not necessanly an indication of excessive movement or stmctiiral disttess. EARTH RETAINING WALLS FOUNDATIONS: Foundations for any proposed retainmg waUs should be designed m accordance with the recommendations for shaUow foundations presented previously m tins report PASSIVE PRESSURE The passive pressure for die anticipated foundation sods may be considered to be 350 pounds per square foot per foot of deptii The upper foot of embedment should be neglected CWE 2120311 02R August 6, 2012 Page No 14 when calculating passive pressures, unless the foundation abuts a hard surface such as a concrete slab The passive pressme may be mcreased by one-dnrd for seisrmc loadmg The coefficient of friction for concrete to sod may be assmned to be 0 35 for the resistance to lateral movement When combmmg factional and passive resistance, the fnction should be reduced by one-thud ACTIVE PRESSURE: The active sod pressure for the design of "tmresttauied" and "resttamed" earth retammg stmctiires 'witii level backfiU may be assumed to be eqmvalent to the pressme of a flmd weiglnng 35 and 55 pounds per cubic foot (pcf), respectively An additional, 15 pcf may be assumed for 2.1 (honzontal to vemcal) slopmg conditions. These pressures do not consider any other smcharge If any are antiapated, tins office should be contacted for the necessary mcrease m sod pressme These values are based on a dramed backfiU condition Seisrmc lateral eartii pressmes may be assumed to equal an mverted tnangle starting at the bottom of tiie waU with the maximum pressme equal to 7H pounds per square foot (where H = waU height m feet) occurnng at die top of the waU WATERPROOFING AND WALL DRAINAGE SYSTEMS: The need for waterproofing should be evaluated and designed by others If requued, the project arclntect should provide (or coordinate) waterproofing detads for the retammg walls The design values presented above are based on a dramed backfiU conchtion and do not consider hydrostatic pressures Unless hydrostatic pressures are mcorporated mto die design, the retammg waU designer should provide a detad for a waU dramage system. Typical retainmg waU dram system detads are presented as Plate No 13 of this report for mformational purposes Additionally, oudets pomts for the retammg waU dram system should be coordmated witii tiie project ci'vd engineer BACKFILL: AU backfdl sods should be compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction Expansive or clayey sods should not be used for backfiU matenal The waU should not be backfiUed until die masoru}' has reached an adequate sttength PRELIMINARY PAVEMENT SECTIONS TRAFFIC INDEX: It is om' assumed that the proposed paved areas wdl mclude parkmg areas and access dnveways to the site for aU velncles mcludmg ttash tmcks In consideration of this ttaffic condiUons we have assumed a Traffic Index of 4 5 for die proposed parkmg areas and 5.0 for die mam CWE 2120311 02R August 6, 2012 Page No 15 access dnveways The project chent and/or avd engmeer should determme if these assumptions are appropnate, and if revised Traffic Indexes are warranted R-VALUE TEST: Based on om findmgs, it is om opimon that fhe on-site sods have relatively good pavement support charactenstics (estimated R-Value=30) The foUowmg pavement sections should be considered prehmmary and should be used for plannmg purposes only Fmal pavement designs should be determmed after R-value tests have been performed m the acmal subgrade matenal PREUMINARY STRUCTURAL SECTION: It is our miderstandmg tiiat die pavmg matenals have not yet bemg detennmed, and may consist of asphalt conciete, Portiand cement concrete (PCC), and/or pervious pavers Based on the above parameters, the foUowmg munmum prelumnar}' pavement sections are recommended TABLE II: PRELIMINARY ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVEMENT SECTION Proposed Use R-Value Traffic Index Asphalt Concrete Base Parkmg Lots 30 45 4 0 mches* 4.0 mches Mam Driveways 30 50 4 0 mches* 4 0 mches *Mirumiim City of Carlsbad Standard TABLE III: PRELIMINARY PCC PAVEMENT SECTIONS Proposed Use R-Value Portiand Cement Concrete* Base Parkmg Lots 30 6 0 mches N/A Mam Dnveways 30 7 0 mclies N/A * Remforcement per stmctiiral engmeer recommendations Concrete sections for stamped concrete should be measured below the stamped depth TABLE IV: PREUMINARY PAVER PAVEMENT SECTION Proposed Use R-Value Paver/Sand Base Parking Lots 30 3 0 mches*/1 0 mch 4 5 mches Mam Dnvewa}'s 30 3 0 mches*/1 0 mch 5 5 mches *Assmned Concrete pads should be constmcted m front of die ttash dumpster storage areas where die tiash ttncks 'wdl stop and pick up the dumpsters The concrete pads should be at least seven mches thick If tiie CWE 2120311 02R August 6, 2012 Page No 16 subgrade sod consists of unported soil, the concrete pads may be placed duectiy on the subgrade sod (no base necessary) Minimum remforcement should consist of No 4 bars placed at 12 mches on center each way Prior to placmg the base material, the subgrade sods should be scarified to a depth of 12 mclies, moistme conditioned and compacted to at least 95 percent of its maximum dry density The base material could consist of Cmshed Aggregate Base (CAB) or Class II Aggregate Base The Cmshed Aggregate Base should conform to the requuements set foitii m SecUon 200-2 2 of the Standard Specifications for Pubhc Works Constmction. The Class II Aggregate Base should conform to requirements set forth m Section 26-1 02A of tiie Standard Specifications for Cahfomia Departinent of Transportation As an alternate, die base material for the pavements may consist of Crushed MisceUaneous Base (recycled base matenal) winch conforms to the requuements set forth m Section 200-2 4 of the Standard Specifications for Pubhc Works Constmction It should be noted, however, that Cmshed MisceUaneous Base material has lower durabdity charactenstics than Cmshed Aggregate Base or Class II Aggregate Base, winch may result m a shorter pavement hfe As such, the owner of the project should approve the use of this material for the pavement base Concrete pavements constiuction should comply with the requuements set fourth m Sections 201-1 1 2 and 302-6 ofthe Standard Specifications for Pubhc Works Consttuction (concrete Class 520-A-2500) All pa'vmg methods and materials should conform 'with good engmeermg and pavmg practices and to the requuements of the City of Carlsbad LIMITATIONS REVIEW, OBSERVATION AND TESTING The recommendations presented m this report are contmgent upon our review of final plans and specifications Such plans and specifications should be made avadable to the geotechmcal engmeer and engmeermg geologist so that they may review and venfy theu comphance with dns report and witii the Cahforma Buddmg Code It is recommended that Christian Wheeler Engmeermg be retamed to provide contmuous sod engmeermg services durmg die earthwork operations Tins is to venfy comphance with die design concepts, specifications or recommendations and to allow design changes m the event that subsmface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to start of constmction CWE 2120311 02R August 6, 2012 Page No 17 UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS The recommendations and opunons expressed m this report reflect our best esmnate of the project requuements based on an evaluation of the subsmface sod condiUons encountered at the subsmface exploration locations and on the assumption that the sod conditions do not deviate appreciably from those encountered It should be recogmzed that the performance of die foundations and/or cut and fdl slopes may be mfluenced by undisclosed or unforeseen vanations m the sod conditions that may occur m the mtermediate and unexplored areas Any unusual conditions not covered m this report that may be encountered durmg site development should be brought to the attenuon ofthe geotechnical engmeer so that he may make modifications if necessary. CHANGE IN SCOPE This office should be advised of any changes m the project scope or proposed site gradmg so that we may determme if the recommendations contained herem are appropriate This should be verified m writmg or modified by a written addendum TIME LIMITATIONS The findmgs of tins report are vakd as of tins date. Changes m the condition of a property can, however, occur with the passage of tune, whether they be due to natmal processes or the work of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes m the Standards-of-Practice and/or Government Codes may occur Due to such changes, the findings of this report may be mvahdated wlioUy or m part by changes beyond om' conttol Therefore, tins report should not be rehed upon after a penod of two years without a review by us verifying the smtabdit}' of the conclusions and recommendations PROFESSIONAL STANDARD In the performance of our professional services, we comply with that level of care and skiU ordinarily exercised by members of our profession currendy practicmg under smnlar conditions and m the same locaht}' The chent recognizes that subsurface conditions may var}' from those encountered at the locations where om bormgs, sur\'eys, and explorations are made, and that our data, mterpretations, and recommendations be based solely on the mformation obtamed by us We wdl be responsible for those data, mterpretations, and recoinmendations, but shaU not be responsible for die mterpretations CWE 2120311 02R August 6, 2012 Page No 18 by others of the mformation developed Om services consist of professional consultation and observation only, and no warranty of any kmd whatsoever, express or imphed, is made or mtended m connection with the work performed or to be performed by us, or by our proposal for consultmg or other services, or by om fumishmg of oral or wntten reports or fmdmgs CLIENT'S RESPONSIBILITY It is the responsibihty of the Ckents, or theu representatives, to ensure that the mformation and recoinmendations contained herem are brought to the attenuon of the stmctiiral engmeer and architect for die project and mcorporated mto the project's plans and specifications It is fuither theu responsibUity to take the necessary measmes to msure that the conttactor and his subconttactors carry out such recommendations durmg constmctton FIELD EXPLORATIONS Eight subsurface explorations were made on July 5, 2012 at the locations mdicated on the Site Plan and Geoteclmical Map mcluded herewith as Plate No 1 These explorations consisted of bormgs drdled utilizmg a tmck-mounted dnU ng and loggmg an existmg slope Tlie fieldwork was conducted under die observation and duection of our engmeermg geology personnel. The explorations were carefuUy logged when made The bonng logs and slope log are presented on Plate Numbers 2 tiirough 10 The sods are descnbed m accordance witii tiie Umfied Sods Classification In addition, a verbal texmral descnption, the wet color, the apparent moistiire, and the density or consistency is provided The density of granular sods is given as very loose, loose, medium dense, dense or very dense The consistency of sdts or clays is given as either very soft, soft, medium stiff, stiff, ver}' stiff, or hard Relatively undisturbed drive samples were collected usmg a modified Cahforma sampler The sampler, with an external diameter of 3 0 mches, is hned with 1 -mch long, tlim, brass nngs with mside diameters of approximately 2 4 inches. The sample barrel was driven mto the ground 'with the weight of a 140-pound hammer fallmg 30 mches m general accordance with ASTM D 3550-84 The drivmg weight is permitted to faU freely. The number of blows per foot of drivmg, or as mdicated, is presented on the bormg logs as an mdex to the relative resistance of the sampled materials The samples were removed from the sample barrel m the brass rmgs, and sealed Bulk samples of the CWE 2120311 02R August 6, 2012 Page No 19 encountered earth materials were also coUected Samples were transported to our laboratory for testmg LABORATORY TESTING Laboratory tests were performed in accordance with die generally accepted American Society for Testmg and Materials (ASTM) test metiiods or suggested procedures A brief description of the tests performed is presented below a) CLASSIFICATION: Field classifications were verified m the laboratory by visual exammation. The fmal sod classifications are m accordance with the Unified Sod Classifica- tion System b) MOISTURE-DENSITY: In-place moisture contents and dry densities were determmed for selected sod samples m accordance with ATM D 2937 The results are summarized m the bormg logs c) MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY AND OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT: The maxmium dry densit}' and optimum moisture content of selected sod samples were determmed m the laboratory m accordance with ASTM D 1557, Method A The results of this test are presented on Plate Number 11 d) DIRECT SHEAR TEST: A duect shear test was performed on selected samples of die on- site sods m accordance with ASTM D 3080 The results of these tests are presented on Plate Number 11 e) GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION: The gram size disttibutton of selected sod samples was determmed m accordance with ASTM D 422 The results of these tests are presented on Plate Number 11 f) COLLAPSE POTENTIAL TEST: CoUapse potenual tests were performed on selected undistmbed sod samples The tests were generally perfonned m accordance with ASTM D 5333 The test results are presented on Plate Nmnber 12 CWE 2120311 02R August 6, 2012 Page No 20 g) SOLUBLE SULFATES: The soluble sulfate content of a selected sod sample was determmed m accordance with Cahforma Test Method 417 The test results are presented on Plate Number 12 ll) R-VALUE TEST: An R- Value test was performed on a selected sod sample Tlie test was generaUy performed m accordance 'with Cahforma Test Method 301 The results ofthe test are presented on Plate Number 12. ^-12-13 / CDP 12-04 CWE LEGEND AI'I'HOMMA 1 f. BORING IX )C \ IION ^SL-1 AI>PR()\I.\WTI-' .SLOPE I.OG 1 OCATION rj APPROMWMF l.rol CX,I( (.ONI ACI Qaf Qopn AR 1IFIU Al. rili LMJrRLAIN BY Ol D p,\RAi IC nrposiii Qop. 7 Ol D p\RAi irnrposii-s •Norr loi'soir.SM)! M.^PPPO 75' SCALE-1" = 75' LUgg < a o zo;3 a:' < PREUMIMARV NOT FOO CONSTRUCnON SCAtE I 130-0' ATPLETIC FACILITY STTE PIAN SCHEkUTIC PLA'4 A1.1 SITE PLAN AND GEOTECHNICAL MAP PROPOSED ATHLETIC FIELD IMPRO\TEMENTS ^RMYAXDNAX'^ ACADfM^ CARI-Sli\D,CM irORNIA Aufii^t 2012 DB\/TS\V/1DB ires/ C HRISriA\' WHI li I K FNJr I \ r r Tv iMf, LOG OF TEST BORING B-l Date Drilled 7/5/2012 Logged by TSW Existing EievaQon 39 feet Proposed Elevation 39 5 feet Equipment Unimog Marl M5 Auger Type Hollow Stem DnveT>pe 140 lb/30 in Depth to Water N/A Sample Type and Laboratory Test Legend Cal Modified Califomia Sampler SP'I Standard Pencil ation Tc^l ST SliclhjTubc CK Chunk Sample DR DLnsit\ Ring MD S04 SA HA SP Pl Maximum Densm Soluble Sulfates Sic% e Ana]^ sis I lydroineter Sand Et^uixalent Plasticity Tnde\ DS Con EI R-Val Chi Res Direct Sheai Consolidation Kxpansion Index Resistance Value Soluble Chlorides & Rcsistivm O pa o p SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS (based on Umfied SoJ Classification System) 2 O W 3 Z S u Z o a • 5 o ^ t« 5 f- 39 SM Artificial Fill (Qaf): Brown to dark brown, damp to moist, loose, fine- to medium-graincd, SILTY SANDj'with minor debris MD DS Cil 34 SM Old Patalic Deposits (Oop6-71: Rc rlHisli-hrown^ moist, loose to medium dense, fme- to coarse-grained, SILTV' SAND Cal CL Graj'ish-brown, moist, stiff, SANDY CI^\Y EI 10-29 25 Cal 281 94 6 SP-SM Reddish-brown and gray, moist, medium dense, POORLY GRADED SAND with silt Enable 15' 24 2(1-19 Becomes moist to very moist at 20 feet 37 47 Cal Cal 46 108 3 Boring terminated at 20 feet 25-14 30 ' Symbol Leg-end ^ Gioundwater ^ apparent Seepage * No Sampie Recoveiy ** Erroneous Blow Count (rocks present) m CHRISTIAN W'HEELER LNGIN EERING PROPOSED ATHLETIC FIELD IMPROVEMENTS Army and Navy Academy, Carlsbad, Califomia Symbol Leg-end ^ Gioundwater ^ apparent Seepage * No Sampie Recoveiy ** Erroneous Blow Count (rocks present) m CHRISTIAN W'HEELER LNGIN EERING BY MAH DATE August 2012 Symbol Leg-end ^ Gioundwater ^ apparent Seepage * No Sampie Recoveiy ** Erroneous Blow Count (rocks present) m CHRISTIAN W'HEELER LNGIN EERING JOB NO 2120311 02R PI^\TE NO 2 LOG OF TEST BORING B-2 Date Drilled 7/5/2012 Logged by TSW Existing Elevation 40 5 feet Proposed Elevation 39 5 feet Equipment Unimog Marl M5 Auger Type Hollow Stem DnveT)pe 140 lb/30 in Depth to Water N/A Sample Type and Laboratory Test Legend Cal Modified California Sampler SP'I Standard Penctranon Test ST SheibyTuhe CK Chunk Sample DR Densit\ Ring MD S04 SA MA SP Pl Maximum Dcnsin Soluble Sulfates Sieve Anah sis I l\dromctcr Sand Fquivalent Plasticm Index DS Diiict .Sheai Con Consohdaaon El Expansion Index R-'Val Resistance Value Chi Soluble Chlondes Res pH & Rcsistivm' Z O h o pa SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS (based on Umfied Soil Classification System) z o sl z w p.. g Z 2 o z ai Q Z O !5 '.X « O 9 H 40 5 SM TopsoU: Brown to dark brown, damp to moist, loose to medium dense, fme- to medium-CTamcd. SILTY SAND SM 35 5 10" 30 5 Old Parahc Deposits (Qop6-7): RpHHish-l-irown moist, loose to medium dense, fine- to coarse-grained, SILTY SAND 20 Cal 62 115f SM Rcddish-brown, moist, medium dense, fine- to coarse-grained, SILTY SAND with clay 33 Cal CP 42 Cal 11 2 1172 Becomes light reddish-brown 15 • 25 5 SP-SM Dght reddish-brown, moist, dense, medium- to coatsc-grained, POORLY GRADED SAND wth silt Fnable Cal 115.8 Boring terminated at 16 feet 20-20 5 25-155 30 ' 105 Svmbol Lep-cnd I Groundwater ^ Apparent Seepage No Sample Reco\er)' ** Erroneous Blow Count (rocks picsent) m CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERIN G PROPOSED ATHLETIC FIELD IMPROVEMENTS Army and Navy Academy, Carlsbad, California Svmbol Lep-cnd I Groundwater ^ Apparent Seepage No Sample Reco\er)' ** Erroneous Blow Count (rocks picsent) m CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERIN G B^' MAH DATE August 2012 Svmbol Lep-cnd I Groundwater ^ Apparent Seepage No Sample Reco\er)' ** Erroneous Blow Count (rocks picsent) m CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERIN G JOBNO 2120311 02R PLATE NO 3 LOG OF TEST BORING B-3 Date Dniled 7/5/2012 Logged by TSW Exisung Elevation 39 feet Pioposed Elevation 40 5 feet Equipment Unimog Marl ]\f5 Auger Type Hollow Stem DnveT)-pe 140 lb/30 m Depth to Water N/A Sample Type and Laboratory Test Legend Cal Modified CsJifomia Sampler SFT Standard Penctt ation Tc^t ST ShdbyTube CK Chunk SsmpJc DR Dcnsin Ring MD S04 s\ UA sn PT ^^a^lmum Dcnsm Soluble Sulfites Sic\-c Analysis I lydrometcr Sand Ft|uivalent Plasticity Index DS Con u R-Val Chi Res DiiLct Shear Con>ohdauon Expansion (ndcx Resistance Value Soluble Chlondes pH & Resi<;t]\ar\' z o H w w o 03 SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS (based on Umfied SoJ Classification System) z o If z a a. ^z Z o 5 pa o 39 SM Topsoil: Brown to dark brown, moist, loose to medium dense, fine- to medium-jtraincd. SILTY SAND SM Old Parahc Deposits (Qop6-7): Rrrldish-brown moist, loose to medium dense, fine- to coarse-grained, SILT^' SAND 10 Cal • 34 SM 10-29 15-24 Reddish-brown, moist, medium dense to dense, fine- to coarse-grained, SILTY SAND with clay Cal 105 127 5 SA El S04 59 Cal CP Light reddish-brown SP-SM Light reddish-brown and dark gray, moist, dense, medium- to coarse- grained, POORLY GRADED SAND with silt Fnable 42 Cal 106 6 Boring terminated at 16 feet 20-19 25-14 30 • Symbol Legend I Groundwatei ^ Apparent Seepage * No Sample Recoveiy ** ELrroneous Blow Count (iock<; picJcnt) m CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING PROPOSED ATHLETIC FIELD IMPROVEMENTS Army and Navy Academy, Carlsbad, Califomia Symbol Legend I Groundwatei ^ Apparent Seepage * No Sample Recoveiy ** ELrroneous Blow Count (iock<; picJcnt) m CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING BY MAH DATE August 2012 Symbol Legend I Groundwatei ^ Apparent Seepage * No Sample Recoveiy ** ELrroneous Blow Count (iock<; picJcnt) m CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING JOBNO- 2120311 02R PLATE NO • 4 LOG OF TEST BORING B-4 Date Drilled 7/5/2012 Logged by TSW Existing Elevation 47 feet Proposed Elevation 46 feet Equipment Unimog Marl M5 Auger Type. Hollow Stem Dnve Type 140 lb/30 in Depth to Water N/A Sample Type and Laboratory Test Legend Cal Modified California Sampler SPT Standard Pcneti ation Test ST Shelby Tube MD S04 SA MA S)l Pl Maximum Dcnsir\ Soluble Sulfates Sic\e Analysis I lydroineter Sand Equivalent Plasticity' Index CK Chunk Sample DR Densitv Rmj^ DS Direct Shear Con Consolidation El Expansion Index R-Val Resistance ^'alue Chi Soluble ChNjndes Res pH &. Re-sisnvit)' z o Is a o CQ U v: SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS (based on Umfied Soil Classification System) z o If H-2 Sz S u z OS Q Z o I 5 PS o O H pa c/3 3 W 47 SM Topsoil: Brown to dark brown, moist, loose to medium dense, fine- to medium-gtamed, SILTY SAND _L5. HaL SM Old ParaUc Deposits (Oop6-71: Rprlrlish-hrnwn moist, loose to medium dense, fine- to coarse-grained, SILTY SAND 42 19 Cal 97 122 3 10-37 SP-SM Light to medium reddish-brown, moist, medium dense, medium- to coarse grained, POORLY GRADED SAND with silt Fnable 34 Cal 111 1 ill 15' 32 Lght rcddisli-brown to dark gray at 15 feet 29 Cal Boring terminated at 16 feet 20-17 25-12 30 ' Symbol Legend I Groundwatei ^ Apparent Seepage * No Sample Recover)' ** Erroneous Blow Count (rocks present) m CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING PROPOSED ATHLETIC FIELD IMPROVEMENTS Army and Navy Academy, Carlsbad, Califomia Symbol Legend I Groundwatei ^ Apparent Seepage * No Sample Recover)' ** Erroneous Blow Count (rocks present) m CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING BY MAH DATE August 2012 Symbol Legend I Groundwatei ^ Apparent Seepage * No Sample Recover)' ** Erroneous Blow Count (rocks present) m CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING JOBNO 2120311 02R PLATE NO 5 LOG OF TEST BORING B-5 Date Drilled 7/5/2012 Logged by TSW Existing Elevation 39 5 feet Proposed Elevation 39 feet Equipment Unimog Marl M5 Auger Type Holkiw Stem Dnve Tj-pe 140 lb/30 in Depth to Water N/A Sample Type and Laboratory Test Legend Cal Modified California Sampler SPTStandard Penctranon Test ST Shelby Tube CK Chunk Sample DR Dcnsm Ring MD S04 SA llA SE PI MaMmum Dcnsir Soluble Sulfates S!C\'c Anah sis Hydrometer Sand 1-quivalcnt PlasticitA' IndcN DS Con Fl R-Val Chi Res Direct Shear Consolldauon Expansion lndc\ Resistance Value Soluble Chlondes pH & Resisnvit)' z o H < C > W O pa u P SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS (based on Unified Soil Classification System) z o If h-2 S2 Z z 0 I 5 >• Bi o H 39 5 • 34 5 SP-SM 10-29 5 Old Paralic Deposits (Qop6-7V Rrddish-hrown moist, loose to medium dense, fine- to coarse-giained, SILTY SAND Medium dense to dense 52 Cal 50 102 3 Reddish brown and gray, moist, medium dense to dense, medium- to coarse-grained, POORLY GRADED SAND, with silt Fnable 39 Cal 38 100 2 Bonng terminated at 16 feet 15 • 24 5 20-195 25-145 30 ' 95 S\Tnbol Legend I Groundwater ^ Apparent Seepage * No Sample Recoveiy Erroneous Blow Count (rocks present) m CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING PROPOSED ATHLETIC FIELD IMPROVEMENTS Army and Navy Academy, Carlsbad, Califomia S\Tnbol Legend I Groundwater ^ Apparent Seepage * No Sample Recoveiy Erroneous Blow Count (rocks present) m CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING BY MAH DATE August 2012 S\Tnbol Legend I Groundwater ^ Apparent Seepage * No Sample Recoveiy Erroneous Blow Count (rocks present) m CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING JOBNO 2120311 02R PLATE NO 6 LOG OF TEST BORING B-6 Date Drilled 7/5/2012 Logged by TSW Existing Elevaaon 49 5 feet Ptoposed Elevation 39 5 feet Equipment Unimog Marl M5 Auger Type Hollow Stem Dnve T\'pe 140 lb/30 in Depth to Water N/A Sample Type and Laboratory Test Legend Cal Modified California Sampler SPTStandard Penctiallon Tcst ST Shelby Tube CK Chunk Sample DR Densitv Ring MD S04 SA llA SE Pl MaMmum Dcnsm Soluble Sulfates Sieve Anah sis 1 lydroineter Sand Rquivalent PlastlclU' lnde\ DS Con hi R-Val Chi Res Direct Shear Consolidation Expansion Index Resistance Value Soluble Chlondes & Resisnvm z o Is H a o CO P SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS (based on Umfied Soil Classification System) z O If z w 3 H g Z ^Z S u a, o 5 H 49 5 SM Old Paralic Deposits (Oop6-7): Reddish-hrown, damp to moist, loose to medium dense, fine- to coarse-grained, SlLT*i' SAND Moist 44 5 Mediu Dense dense 46 55 Cal Cal SA MD DS 40 1149 10-39 5 SP-SM Light reddish brown and gray, moist, dense, medium- to coarse- grained, POORLY' GRADED SAND, with silt Fnable 50 Cal CP 15 • .34 5 62 Cal 3 2 107 5 Bormg terminated at 16 feet 20-29 5 25-24 5 30 • 19 5 Symbol Legend I Groundwater ^ Apparent Seepage * No Sample Recover)- ** F.noncous Blow Count (locks present) m CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING PROPOSED ATHLETIC FIELD IMPROVEMENTS Army and Navy Academy, Carlsbad, Califomia Symbol Legend I Groundwater ^ Apparent Seepage * No Sample Recover)- ** F.noncous Blow Count (locks present) m CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING BY MAH DATE August 2012 Symbol Legend I Groundwater ^ Apparent Seepage * No Sample Recover)- ** F.noncous Blow Count (locks present) m CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING JOBNO 2120311 02R P1J\TE NO. 7 LOG OF TEST BORING B-7 Datc:DriUcd 7/5/2012 Logged by TSW Existing Elevanon 41 0 feet Proposed Elevation 45 5 feet Equipment Unimog Marl M5 Auger Type Hollow Stem DnveTjpe 140 lb/30 in Depth to Water N/A Sample Type and Laboratory Test Legend Ca] Modified California Sampler SFEStandatd Penctranon Test ST Shelby Tube CK Chunk Sample DR Dcnsm Rmg MD S04 SA HA SE Pl Maximum Dcnsm Soluble Sulfates Siex'c Anah sis Hydrometer Sand Equivalent Plasncitv Index DS Con El R-Val Chi Res Direct .Shear Consohdation Expansion Index Resistance Value Soluble Chlondes pH & Resisnvm z O is w •J O u P SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS (based on Umfied Soil Classification System) z O If Hp " z Oo S u z OS Q Z 0 k 5 o O H 41 36 SM Old Parabc Deposits (Oop6-7):l .ight reddish-brown, damp to moist, loose to medium dense, fine- to medium-grained, SILT^' SAND Moist and medium dense 25 49 Cal Cal Boring terminated at 6 feet 10" 31 15 < 26 20-21 25-16 30 • 11 Symbol Legend ^ Groundwater ^ Apparent Seepage * No Sample Reco\ er)- ** Erroneous Bkjw Count (rocks present) m CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING PROPOSED ATHLETIC FIELD IMPROVEMENTS Army and Naxy Academy, Carlsbad, Califomia Symbol Legend ^ Groundwater ^ Apparent Seepage * No Sample Reco\ er)- ** Erroneous Bkjw Count (rocks present) m CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING BY MAH DATE August 2012 Symbol Legend ^ Groundwater ^ Apparent Seepage * No Sample Reco\ er)- ** Erroneous Bkjw Count (rocks present) m CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING JOBNO 2120311 02R PLATE NO. 8 LOG OF TEST BORING B-8 Date Drilled 7/5/2012 Logged b> TSW Existing Elevanon 40 0 feet Pioposed Elevation 39 5 feet Equipment Unimog Marl M5 Auger Type Hollow Stem Dnve T\pe 140 lb/30 in Depth to Water N/A Sample Type and Laboratory Test Legend Cal Modified California Sample SPTStandard Pcnetianon Test ST Shelby Tube CK Chunk Sample DR Dcnsm Ring MD S04 SA HA SF Pl ^^axlmum Dcnsm' Soluble Sulfates Sieve yXmlysis 1 lydrometcr Sand Equivalent Plasticitt Index DS Con El R-Val Chi Res Direct Shear Consohdation Expansion Index Resistance Vaiue .Soluble Chlondes & Resisovity z o le a o tfi P SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS (based on Umfied Soil Classification System) z O If z w g z - z So z o P «i 5 >< PS O \ O H 40 SM Topsoil): Brown, moist, loose to medium dense, fine- to medium-grained, SILTV' SAND R-Val 20 Cal SM Old Parabc Deposits (Cope-?): Rrrldish-hroxvn moist, loose to medium dense, fine- to medium-grained, SILT\' SAND 35 Giavish-hrnwn ninlsr snff SANDY CT AY 22. _CaL_ Boring terminated at 6 feet 10-30 15" 25 20-20 25-15 30 • 10 Svmbol Legend 5 Groundwater ^ Apparent Seepage * No Sample Recover}- ** l'!tTonc(jus Blow C<junt (rocks picscnt) m CHRISTIAN WHEELER E NGINEERING PROPOSED ATHLETIC FIELD IMPROVEMENTS Army and Navy Academy, Carlsbad, Califomia Svmbol Legend 5 Groundwater ^ Apparent Seepage * No Sample Recover}- ** l'!tTonc(jus Blow C<junt (rocks picscnt) m CHRISTIAN WHEELER E NGINEERING BY MAH DATE August 2012 Svmbol Legend 5 Groundwater ^ Apparent Seepage * No Sample Recover}- ** l'!tTonc(jus Blow C<junt (rocks picscnt) m CHRISTIAN WHEELER E NGINEERING JOBNO 2120311 02R PLATE NO 9 SLOPE LOG SL-1 DateDriUed 7/5/2012 Eogged by TSW Existing Elevation 45 0 feet Proposed Elcx'ation 45 5 feet Equipment Unimog Marl M5 Auger Type Hollow Stem Dnve T)pe 140 lb/30 m Depth to Water N/A Sample Type and Laboratory Test Legend Cal Modified California Sampler .SPTStandard Penetration Tcst ST Shelby Tube CK Chunk Sample DR Dcnsm Ring MD S04 SA IIA SE PI Maximum Dcnsm Soluble Sulfates Sieve Analysis Hydroineter Sand Equivalent Piastlcltv Index DS Con El R-Val Chi Res Diiect Shcai Consolidation 1 xpansion Index Resistance Value Soluble Chlondes -iH & ResisUMH' z O H K •4 W O pa u P SUMMARY OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS (based on Unified Soil Classification System) z o If z w PS -7 Sz Oo z o H p' 5 o 9 ^ P3 v: < W 45 • 40 SM Old Paralic Deposits (Oop6-7):RpHrlish-hrown^ moist, loose to metiium dense, fine- to medium-gramed, SILTV' SAND Minor roots ^ 0-18 inches Medium dense to dense Log terminated at 5 feet 10" 35 15 • 30 20-25 25-20 30 -15 Svmbol Legend 3^ Groundwater ^ Apparent Seepage * No Sample Recoveiy ** Lrroneous Blow Count (locks pjescnt) m CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING PROPOSED ATHLETIC FIELD IMPROVEMENTS Army and Navy Academy, Carlsbad, CaUfomia Svmbol Legend 3^ Groundwater ^ Apparent Seepage * No Sample Recoveiy ** Lrroneous Blow Count (locks pjescnt) m CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING BY MAH DATE August 2012 Svmbol Legend 3^ Groundwater ^ Apparent Seepage * No Sample Recoveiy ** Lrroneous Blow Count (locks pjescnt) m CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING JOBNO 2120311 02R PLATE NO 10 LABORATORY TEST RESULTS PROPOSED ATHLETIC FIELD IMPROVEMENTS ARMY NAVY ACADEMY CARLSBAD BOULEVARD CARLSBAD. CALIFORNIA MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY AND OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT (ASTM D1557) Sample Location Sample Description Maximum Density Optimum Moisture Boring B-l @ Light Brown Silty Sand, SM 1315pcf 82 % Boring B-6 @ 0-5' Orangish- Brown Silty Sand, SM 135.9 pcf 74% DIRECT SHEAR (ASTM D3080) Sample Location Sample Type Friction Angle Cohesion Boring B-l @ O-S'A' Remolded to 90 % 34° 200 psf Boring B-6 @ 0-5' Remolded to 90 % 30° 150 psf EXPANSION INDEX TEST (ASTM D4829) Sample Location Initial Moisture. Initial Dry Density Final Moisture Expansion Index. Boring B-l @ 7'- 1' 10 4% 104 1 pcf 27 2 % 82 (Medium) Boring B-3 @ 4'-9' 79% 1088pcf 18 1 % 1 (Very Low) GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION (ASTM D422) Sample Location Siem Si^^e #4 #8 #16 #30 #50 #100 #200 Boring B-4 (a Percent Passing 100 98 96 90 66 47 27 4'- 9' Boring B-6 (S Percent Passing 100 99 99 93 63 36 26 0-5' CWE2120311.02R August 6, 2012 Plate No 11 LABORATORY TEST RESULTS (CONTINUED) COLLAPSE POTENTIAL (ASTM D 5333) Sample Location Boring B-2 @ 6' Boring B-3 @ 11' Initial Moisture Content 8 5 % 9 3 % Initial Density- 129 0 pcf 1115 pcf Consohdation Before Water Added 1 7 % 2 0 % Consolidation After Water Added 1 8% 2.7 % Final Moisture 9 3 % 14 4 % SOLUBLE SULFATES (CALIFORNIA TEST METHOD 417) Sample Location Boring B-3 @ 4'- 9' Soluble Sulfate 0 003 % (SO4) R-VALUE (CALIFORNIA TEST METHOD 301) Sample Location R-Value Boring B-8 @ @ 0-5' 57 CWE 2120311 02R August 6, 2012 Plate No 12 mm DETAIL 6" MIN 6" MIN m i 3 DETAIL 4 DETAIL NOTES AND DETAILS GENERAL NOTES 1) THE NhhD FOR W AThRPROOnNG SHOULD BE EVALUATED BY OTHERS 2) W ATERPROOFING TO BE DESIGNED Bl' OTHERS (CWE CAN PROVIDE A DbSIGN II- REQUESTED) 3) EXTEND DRAIN TO SUITABLE DISCHARGh POINT PFR CIVIL ENGINEER 4) DO NOT CONNECT SURl-ACE DRJMNS TO SUBDRjMN SYSThM DETAILS 0 © © © 4-INCH PERFOR/\l ED PVC PIPF. ON TOP Of FOO IING, HOLES POSITIONED DOWNWARD (SDR 35, SCHEDULE 40, OR EQUIVALRNT) -y, INCH OPEN-GRADED CRUSHED AGGREGATE GEOPARBRIC VCRAPPED COMPLbTELY AROUND ROCK PROPERLY' COMPACTED BACKFILL SOIL WALL DRAINAGfc PANELS (MIRADRAIN OR EQUIVALENT) PIECED PER MANUFACTURER'S REC'S © © UNDERLAY SUBDRAIN WITH AND CUT FABRIC BACK FROM DRAINAGE PANELS AND WRAP FABRIC AROUND PIPE COLLECTION DRAIN (TOTAL DRAIN OR EQUIVALEN-T) LOCATED AT BASE OF WALL DRAINAGE PANEL PER MAN U FACTU R ER'S R ECOMM EN DATI ONS CANTILEVER RETAINING WALL DRAINAGE SYSTEMS PROPOSED ATHLETIC FIELD IMPROVEMENTS ARi\n' AND NAW ACADEi\I\- CARISBAD, CALIFORNIA DATE August 2012 S'l' MAH JOBNO 2120311 02R PLATE NO 13 CHRISTIAN W HFTiLER r. N G1N n r. R i N G CWE 2120311 02R August 6, 2012 Appendix A, Page A-l REFERENCES Anderson, J G , Rockwell, R K and Agnew, D C , 1989, Past and Possible Future Earthquakes of Sigmficance to the San Diego Region, Earthquake Spectra. Volume 5, No 2, 1989 Cahfornia Division of Mmes and Geolog}', 1997, Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigatmg Seismic Hazards m Cahfornia, CDMG Special Pubhcation 117, adopted March 17, 1997 California Division of Mines and Geology, 1998, Maps of Known Active Fault Near Source-Zones tn Cahforma and Adjacent Portions of Nevada Cahforma Emergency Management Agency, 2009, Tsunami Inundation Map for Emergency Planning, San Luis Rey Quadrangle, scale 1 24,000, June 1, 2009 Hart, E W and Bryant, W. A , 1997, Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in Cahforma, Cahfornia Division of Mmes and Geolog)' Special Pubhcation 42 Jennings, C W, 1975, Fault Map of Califorma, Cahforma Dmsion of Nlines and Geology, Map No 1, Scale 1 750,000 Kenned}', M P and Tan, S.S , 2005, Geologic Map of the Oceanside 30' X 60' Quadrangle, Cahforma; Cahforma Department of Conservation and Cahforma Geological Survey Kern, P , 1989, Earthquakes and Faults m San Diego County, Pickle Press, 73 pp Tan, S S , 1995, Landshde Hazards m the Northern Part of the San Diego Metropohtan Area, San Diego County, Cahforma, Cahforma Dmsion of Mmes and Geology Open-File Report 95-04. Tan, S S and Kennedy, M.P , 1996, Geologic Map of the Oceanside, San Luis Rey, and San Marcos 7 5' Quadrangles, San Diego County, Cahforma, Cahforma Dmsion of Mmes and Geology Open-File Report 96-02 United States Geologic Survey, Seisrmc Design Values for Buildmgs, Java Ground Motion Calculator Version 510 Wesnousky, S G , 1986, "Eardiquakes, Quaternar)' Faults, and Seisrmc Hazards m Cahforma," in Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol 91, No. B12, pp 12,587 to 12, 631, November 1986 TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS San Diego Count)', 1975, Map Sheet 362-1659; Scale 1 mch - 200 feet Umted States Geological Sur\'ey, 1967, San Lms Rey Quadrangle; Scale 1 mch = 2000 feet CWE 2120311 02R August 6, 2012 Appendix A, Page A-2 United States Geological Survey, 1975, San Lms Rey Quadrangle, Scale 1 mch = 2000 feet PHOTOGRAPHS Lenska's Aenal Adas, 1994, The Thomas Gmde, Sheet 1106 San Diego Count)', 1928, Fhght 22A, Scale 1 mch = 1000 feet (approximate) San Diego Count)', 1970, Fhght 2, Photographs 2 through 4, Scale 1 mch = 1500 feet (approximate) San Diego County, 1973, Fhght 37, Photographs 1 and 2; Scale. 1 mch = 1000 feet (approximate) San Diego Count)', 1978, Fhght 12B, Photographs 2 and 23, Scale 1 mch = 1000 feet (approximate). San Diego County, 1983, Photographs 254 and 255, Scale 1 mch = 2000 feet (approximate) USDA, 1953, Fhght 14M, Photographs 21 and 22, Scale: 1 mch = 1700 feet (approximate) CWE 2120311 02R August 6, 2012 Appendix B, Page B-l RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS - GENERAL PROVISIONS PROPOSED ATHLETIC FIELD IMPROVEMENTS ARMY NAVY ACADEMY CARI,SBADBOULEVARD CARLSBAD. CALIFORNIA GENERAL INTENT The mtent of tiiese specifications is to estabhsh procedures for clearmg, compactmg natural ground, preparmg areas to be filled, and placmg and compactmg fiU soils to the hnes and grades shown on the accepted plans The recommendations contamed m die prehimnary geotechnical mvestigation report and/or the attached Special Provisions are a part of the Recommended Gradmg Specifications and shall supersede the provisions contamed heremafter m the case of conflict These specifications shall only be used m conjunction 'with die geotechmcal report for which they are a part No deviation from these specifications WlU be allowed, except where specified m the geotechmcal report or m other written commumcation signed by the Geoteclmical Engineer OBSERVATION AND TESTING Christian Wheeler Engmeermg shall be retamed as the Geotechmcal Engmeer to observe and test the earthwork m accordance with these specifications It wdl be necessary that the Geotechmcal Engmeer or his representative provide adequate observation so that he may provide his opinion as to whether or not the work was accomphshed as specified. It shall be the responsibihty of the contractor to assist the Geotechmcal Engmeer and to keep him apprised of work schedules, changes and new information and data so that he may provide these opimons In the event that any unusual conditions not covered by the special provisions or prehmmary geotechnical report are encountered durmg the gradmg operations, the Geotechmcal Engmeer shall be contacted for further recommendations If, m the opmion of the Geotechmcal Engmeer, substandard conditions are encountered, such as questionable or unsmtable soli, unacceptable moisture content, madequate compaction, adverse weather, etc , construction should be stopped until the conditions are remedied or corrected or he shall recommend rejection of this work Tests used to determme the degree of compaction should be performed tn accordance 'with the foUo'wmg Amencan Societ)' for Testmg and Materials test methods CWE 2120311 02R August 6, 2012 Appendex B, Page B-2 Maximum Density & Optimum Moismre Content - ASTM D-1557-91 Densit)' of Soil In-Place - ASTM D-1556-90 or ASTM D-2922 AU densities shaU be expressed m terms of Relative Compaction as determined by the foregomg ASTM testmg procedures PREPARATION OF AREAS TO RECEIVE FILL AU vegetation, brush and debris derived from clearmg operations shaU be removed, and legaUy disposed of AU areas dismrbed by site gradmg should be left m a neat and fmished appearance, free from unsighdy debris After clearmg or benchmg the namral ground, the areas to be filled shaU be scarified to a depth of 6 mches, brought to the proper moismre content, compacted and tested for the specified mmimum degree of compaction AU loose soUs m excess of 6 mches thick should be removed to firm namral ground wluch is defmed as natural soU wluch possesses an m-sim density of at least 90 percent of its maximum dry density When the slope ofthe namral grotmd receivmg fill exceeds 20 percent (5 horizontal units to 1 vertical unit), the ongmal ground sliaU be stepped or benched Benches shaU be cut to a firm competent formational sod The lower bench shaU be at least 10 feet wide or 1-1/2 times the eqmpment 'width, whichever is greater, and shaU be sloped back mto the hiUside at a gradient of not less than two (2) percent AU other benches should be at least 6 feet wide The horizontal portion of each bench shaU be compacted pnor to receivmg fUl as specified herem for compacted natural ground Ground slopes flatter than 20 percent shaU be benched when considered necessar)' by the Geotechnical Engmeer Any abandoned buned strucdjres encountered durmg gradmg operations must be totaUy removed AU underground utUities to be abandoned beneath any proposed structure should be removed from withm 10 feet of the stmcmre and properly capped off The resultmg depressions from die above described procedure should be backfiUed 'with acceptable soil that is compacted to the requirements of the Geotechnical Engmeer This mcludes, but is not hmited to, septic tanks, fuel tanks, sewer hnes or leach hnes, storm drams and water hnes Any buned structures or utihties not to be abandoned should be brought to the attention of the Geotechmcal Engmeer so that he may determme if any special recommendation wUl be necessary AU water weUs which wdl be abandoned should be backfiUed and capped m accordance to the requirements set forth by the Geotechmcal Engmeer The top of the cap should be at least 4 feet below fmish grade or 3 CWE 2120311 02R August 6, 2012 Appendix B, Page B-3 feet below the bottom of footmg whichever is greater The type of cap wiU depend on the diameter of the weU and should be determmed by the Geotechmcal Engineer and/or a quahfied Structaral Engmeer FILL MATERIAL Materials to be placed m the fiU shaU be approved by the Geotechmcal Engmeer and shaU be free of vegetable matter and other deleterious substances Granular soil shaU contam sufficient fine material to fiU the voids The defimtion and disposition of oversized rocks and expansive or detrimental soils are covered m the geotechmcal report or Special Provisions Expansive soils, soils of poor gradation, or soils with low strength characteristics may be thoroughly mixed 'with other soils to provide satisfactory fiU material, but only with the exphcit consent of the Geotechmcal Engmeer Any import material shaU be approved by the Geotechnical Engmeer before bemg brought to the site PLACING AND COMPACTION OF FILL Approved fdl material shaU be placed m areas prepared to receive fUl m layers not to exceed 6 mches m compacted thickness Each layer shaU have a umform moistm'e content m the range that 'wUl aUow the compaction effort to be efficiently apphed to achieve the specified degree of compaction Each layer shaU be umformly compacted to the specified mmimum degree of compaction with eqmpment of adequate size to economicaUy compact the layer Compaction eqmpment should either be speaficaUy designed for sod compaction or of proven rehabUity The mimmum degree of compaction to be achieved is specified m either the Special Provisions or the recommendations contamed m the prehmmary geotechmcal mvestigation report When the structural fdl matenal mcludes rocks, no rocks 'wiU be aUowed to nest and aU voids must be carefully filled with soil such that the mmtmum degree of compaction recommended m the Special Provisions is achieved The maximum size and spacmg of rock perimtted m structural fiUs and m non- structural fdls IS discussed m the geotechmcal report, when apphcable Field obser\'ation and compaction tests to estimate the degree of compaction of the fdl wdl be taken by die Geotechmcal Engmeer or his representative The location and frequency of the tests shaU be at the Geotechmcal Engmeer's discretion When the compaction test indicates that a particular layer is at less than the required degree of compaction, the layer shaU be reworked to the satisfaction of the Geotechmcal Engmeer and until the desired relative compaction has been obtamed CW^ 2120311.02R August 6, 2012 Appendix B, Page B-4 FUl slopes shall be compacted by means of sheepsfoot roUers or other suitable equipment Compaction by sheepsfoot roUer shaU be at vertical mtervals of not greater than four feet In addition, fiU slopes at a ratio of two horizontal to one vertical or flatter, should be trackroUed Steeper fUl slopes shaU be over-budt and cut- back to fmish contours after die slope has been constructed Slope compaction operations shaU result m aU fJl material six or more mches mward from the finished face of the slope havmg a relative compaction of at least 90 percent of maximum dry densit)' or the degree of compaction specified m die Special Provisions section of tins specification The compaction operation on the slopes shaU be continued until the Geotechnical Engmeer is of the opmion that the slopes wUl be smficiaUy stable. Densit)' tests m the slopes wdl be made by the Geotechmcal Engmeer durmg construction of the slopes to determme if the required compaction is bemg acliieved Where faihng tests occur or other field problems arise, the Contractor wiU be notified that day of such conditions by wntten commumcation from the Geotechnical Engmeer or his representative m the form of a daily field report If the method of acliievmg the required slope compaction selected by the Contractor fads to produce the necessary results, the Contractor shaU rework or rebuild such slopes untd the required degree of compacOon is obtained, at no cost to the Owner or Geotechmcal Engmeer CUT SLOPES The Engmeermg Geologist shaU inspect cut slopes excavated m rock or hdiified formational material dm'mg the gradmg operations at mtervals determmed at his chscretion If any conditions not anticipated m the prehmmar)' report such as perched water, seepage, lenticular or confined strata of a potentiaUy adverse namre, unfavorably mchned beddmg, jomts or fatdt planes are encountered dunng gradmg, these conditions shaU be analyzed by the Engmeermg Geologist and Geotechmcal Engmeer to determme if mitigatmg measures are necessar)' Unless otherwise specified m the geotechnical report, no cut slopes shaU be excavated higher or steeper than that aUowed by the ordmances of the controUmg governmental agency ENGINEERING OBSERVATION Field observation by the Geotechmcal Engmeer or his representative shaU be made dmmg the filling and compaction operations so that he can express his opimon regardmg the conformance of the gradmg with acceptable standards of practice Neither the presence of the Geotechnical Engmeer or his representative or CWE 2120311 02R August 6, 2012 Appendrx B, Page B-5 the observation and testmg shaU release the Gradmg Contractor from his duty to compact aU fiU matenal to the specified degree of compaction SEASON LIMITS FiU shaU not be placed durmg unfavorable weather conditions. Wlien work is mterrupted by hea'vy ram, flUmg operations shaU not be resumed until the proper moisture content and densit)' of the fiU materials can be achieved. Damaged site conditions resultmg from weather or acts of God shaU be repaired before acceptance of work RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS - SPECIAL PROVISIONS RELATIVE COMPACTION: The minimum degree of compaction to be obtamed m compacted natural ground, compacted fUl, and compacted backfiU shall be at least 90 percent. For street and parkmg lot subgrade, die upper six mches should be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction. EXPANSIVE SOILS: DetnmentaUy expansive sod is defmed as clayey sod which has an expansion mdex of 50 or greater when tested m accordance widi the Umform Buddmg Code Standard 29-2 OVERSIZED MATERIAL: Oversized fiU material is generaUy defined herem as rocks or lumps of sod over 6 mches m diameter Oversized materials should not be placed m fdl unless recommendations of placement of such material should be provided by the Geotechmcal Engmeer. At least 40 percent of the fUl sods shaU pass through a No 4 U S Standard Sieve. TRANSITION LOTS: Wliere transitions between cut and fdl occur 'witiim the proposed buddmg pad, the cut portion should be undercut a mmimum of one foot below the base of the proposed footmgs and recompacted as strucmral backfiU In certam cases that would be addressed m the geotechmcal report, special footmg remforcement or a combmation of special footmg remforcement and imdercuttmg may be required CB122342 2600 CARLSBAD BL ARMY & NAVY - RETAINING WALLS 5120 SF MASONRY RETAINING WALL PER SDR.sn r.-l No Y&C^?hyO • cv Final Insp. Approved Oate By BUILDING PLANNING •f, IZO(j7^ ENGINEERING 11/19//-Z. FIRE Expedite? Y N <c_ AFS Checked by HazMat APCD Health Forms/Fees Sent Reed Due? By Encina 1 N Fire Y N HazHealthAPCD Y N PE&M Y N School Y N Sewer Y N Stormwater Y N Special Inspection Y N CFD Y N LandUse Density ImpArea FY Annex Factor PFF Y N Comments Date Date Date Date Building Planning Engineering Fire Need? . / ^ • Done / • Done -^Q^ixji/fi^ ac tUeJ^