The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2711 HAYMAR DR; ; CB941217; Permitr \ * 12/02/94 09:09 ck PERMIT Suite Lot#: Parcel No: Valuation: *> Construction Type: NEW Reference*: BRIDGE FOR GOLF 619 433-2607 Permit No: CB941217 Project No: A94Q1725 Development No: Status: ISSUED Applied: 09/26/94 Apr/issue: 12/02/94 Entered By: MDP STRE J.JVJ. j-i — -• OCEANSIDE, CA. M *** Fees Required Fees : Adjustments: Total Fees: Fee description Miscellaneous Fee Miscellaneous Fee * MISCELLANEOUS T 9778 12/02/94 0001 01 C-PRMT ted & Credits 02 64-00 * * * .00 41 . 00 64.00 Ext fee Data 41 00 PLANCHECK 64.00 PERMIT 105.00 2075 Las Pataas APPROVAL NSP./M DATE/ CLEARANCE (619)438-1161 City of Carlsbad Building Department 2075 Las Palms Dr., Carlsbad, CA 92009 (619) 438-1161 1. PERMIT TYPE From List 1 (see back) give code of Permit-Type: For Residential Projects Only: From Ust 2 (see back) give Code of Structure-Type: Net Loss/Gain of Dwelling Units PLAN CHECK NO. EST.VAL 1OQO PLANCKDEPOSIT t-|l_tiG VALID. BY i •f DATE 9 / -7 C 1 £ /1 M *_•/ 1 Z PROJECT INFORMATION 8790 09/26794 0001 01 02 C-PRMT 41-00 FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Address27/1 Nearest Cross Street JUYlJ LEGAL DESCRIPTION Subdivision Name/NumBer nit No.PHase NO. ECK BELOW IF SU Q 2 Energy Calcs [^Structural Gales D 2 Soils Report D1 Addressed Envelope ASSESSOR'S PARCEL DESCRIPTION OF WORK (J^Hl t *. APPLTCAirr Q CONT NAME (last name first) CITY STATEC31 57 PROPERTY OWNI NAME (last name first)ADDRESS CITY 6. CUNTHAeiUK NAME (last name first) CITY STATE STATE LIC. # DAY TELEPHONE ADDRESS ZIP CODE DAY TELEPHONE LICENSE CLASS CITY BUSINESS LIC. DESIGNfcR NAME (last name nrstj 5J| CITY SOurf./ n / <3S^1X1 STATE CL<\ ^f C? ADDRESS &Q j g /// g^g?" J"T"f ZIP CODE ^Tf / % I DAY TELEPHONE &/?-. rZft STATE UC. Workers Compensation Declaration: I hereby affirm that I nave a certificate or consent to self-insure issued bytne Director of Industrial Relations, or a certificate of Workers' Compensation Insurance by an admitted insurer, or an exact copy or duplicate thereof certifiedby the Director of the insurer thereof filed with the Building Inspection Department (Section 3800, Lab. C). INSURANCE COMPANY LICY NOyfCACAtor whic EXPIRATION DATE CerQticate of Exemption: I certify that in the performance ot the work so as to become subject to the Workers' Compensation Laws of California. icn this permit is issued, l shall not employ any person in any manner uwner-DUimer ueaarauon: i nereoy atttrm that 1 am exempt irom the Contractors ucense Lawror the roiiowing reason: I, as owner of the property or my employees with wages as their sole compensation, will do the work and the structure is not intended or offered for sale (Sec. 7044, Business and Professions Code: The Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and who does such work himself or through his own employees, provided that such improvements are not intendedor offered for sale. If, however, the building or improvement is sold within one year of completion, the owner-builder will have die burden of proving that he did not build or improve for the purpose of sale.). D I, as owner of the property, am exclusively contracting with licensed contractors to construct the project (Sec. 7044, Business and Professions Code: The Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and contracts for such projectswith contractor^) licensed pursuant to the Contractor's Ucense Law). D I am exempt under Section _ Business and Professions Code for this reason: (Sec. 7031.5 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 such permit to file a signed statement that he is licensed pursuant to the provisions of the Contractor's License Law (Chapter 9, commencing 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]). SIGNATURE DATE ) SECTION FOR NQN-RsiPENTIALJILDINC Is the applicant or future building occupant required to submit a business plan, acutely hazardous materials registration form or risk management andprevention program under Sections 25505-25533 or 25534 of the Presley-Tanner Hazardous Substance Account Act? D YES BKNO Is the applicant or future building occupant required to obtain a permit from the air pollution control district or air quality management district? D YES ITNO Is the facility to be constructed within l,OOQjeet of the outer boundary of a school site? D YES B-1TO IF ANY OF THE ANSWERS ABE YES, A FINAL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY MAY NOT BE ISSUED AFTER JULY 1, 1989 UNLESS THE APPLICANT HAS MET OR IS MEKJ1NG THE BEOUIHEMENTS OF THE OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES AND THE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT. UHiJiUmj'inJN LEHUlf'Iti AGKNCV I hereby affirm that there is a construction leasing agency tor UieT>ertonnance of the work tor which this permit is issued isec 3O97in civil code!.e> pfiJtipw c&/*fy LENDER'S N* LENDER'S ADDRESS Xlf/TiT'" * *- i cerpry tnat i nave reaa me application ana state mat the aoove information is correct. \ agree to comply with an dry ordinances and state laws relating to building construction. I hereby authorize representatives of the City of Carlsbad to enter upon the above mentioned property for inspection purposes. I ALSO AGREE TO SAVE INDEMNIFY AND KEEP HARMLESS THE CTTYOTCARISBADAGAmSTAU.UABnJlTES.JUIXJMENTS, COSTS AND EXPENSES WHICH MAY IN ANY WAY ACCRUE AGAINST SAID OTY IN CONSEQUENCE OF THE GRANTING OF THIS PERMIT. OSHA: An OSHA permit is required for excavations over 5'CT deep and demolition or construction of structures over 3 stories in height. Expiration. Every permit issuedbythe Building Official under the provisions of this Code shall expire by limitation and become null and void if thebuilding or work authorized fcy-Suclypermit is not commenced within 365 days from the date of such permit or if the building or work authorized by such permit is suspended or aband^ied at any time after the work is commenced for a period of 180 days (Section 303(d) Uniform Building Code). APPLICANTS SIGNATURE ^£, ^. *- , 1 ,7 sS DATE: WHITE: Ffle : Applicant PINK: Finance iB/05/*5 INSPECTION HISTORY LISTING FOR PERMIT* CB941217 DATE INSPECTION TYPE INSP ACT COMMENTS 12/12/94 Ftg/Foundation/Piers RI RI MW/DAVE 12/12/94 Ftg/Foundation/Piers PD AP HIT <RETURN> TO CONTINUE... ESGIL CORPORATION 9320 CHESAPEAKE DR., SUITE 208 SAN DIEGO, CA 92123 (619) 560-1468 DATE: 11/29/94 OAPPUCAbLT JURISDICTION: Carlsbad /cpLAN REVIEWER Q FILE PLAN CHECK NO.: 94-1217 SET: II PROJECT ADDRESS: 2711 Haymar Drive PROJECT NAME: Equipment Bridge The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes. X] The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes when minor deficiencies identified in the attached list are resolved and checked by building department staff. The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck. The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at Esgil Corporation until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant contact person. The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to: X] Esgil Corporation staff did not advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. Esgil Corporation staff did advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed. Person contacted: Date contacted: (by: ) Telephone #: REMARKS: By: David Yao Enclosures: \{/ Esgil Corporation * Q GA n CM n PC log tmsmtl.dot Carlsbad 94-1217 II 11/29/94 7. Note on the plan "Provide a sicyrfiear the bridge indicating that the max. allowable live load for the bridgejs'2000 Ib." City to determine if the 4x4 curbs are adequate as vehicle barriers. City to determine if the bridge needs a guardrail or not. DATE: ESGIL CORPORATION 9320 CHESAPEAKE DR., SUITE 208 SAN DIEGO, CA 92123 (619)56O-14«8 0 DAP PL JURISDICTION: PLAN CHECK NO: Cirr OP -1211 SET: PROJECT ADDRESS: PROJECT NAME: 1 1 \~i AlTCHECKER []FILE COPY jUPS ^DESIGNER The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes. The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes when minor deficien- cies identified are resolved and checked by building department staff. The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck. The check list transmitted herewith is for your information The plans are being held at Esgil Corp. until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to return to the applicant contact person. The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to: Y\\r\ . hit )-+-+ Vr\& Kjij] Esgil staff did not advise the applicant contact person that plan check has been completed. |I Esgil staff did advise applicant that the plan check has been completed. Person contacted: Date contacted: REMARKS :/£) f> Telephone f 4-* '> -f- ou By;ESGIL CORPORAT'ION" % DGA DCM DPC Enclosures DATE: JURISDICTION: PLAN CHECK NO: PROJECT ADDRESS: PROJECT NAME: ESGIL CORPORATION 9320 CHESAPEAKE DR., SUITE 208 SAN DIEGO, CA 92123 (619)560-1*68 / 4 I CITY SET: X MFMT [APPLICANT CHECKER QFILE COPY QUPS QDESIGNER The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the .jurisdiction's building codes. The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes when minor deficien- cies identified are resolved and checked by building department staff. The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck. The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at Esgil Corp. until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to return to the applicant contact person. I The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to: Lin Co I S T Esgil staff did not advise the applicant contact person that plan check has been completed. 1 Esgil staff did advise applicant that the plan check has been completed. Person contacted: Date contacted: REMARKS: Telephone # By;' "PAX/IDESGIL CORPORATION DGA DCM YAQ Enclosures: JURISDICTION: C.A R L S fcA f> PLAN CHECK NO.:~7 Date plans received by plan checker: Date plan check completed; /^f- Bvt T>>At/(O PROJECT ADDRESS: TO; PLAN CORRECTION SHEET FOREWORD: PLEASE READ Plan check is limited to technical requirements contained in the Uniform Building Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, National Electrical Code and state laws regulating energy conservation, noise attenuation and disabled access. The plan check is based on regulations enforced by the Building Inspection Department. You may have other corrections based on laws and ordinances enforced by the Planning Department, Engineering Department or other departments. The items shown below need clarification, modification or change. All items have to be satisfied before the plans will be in conformance with the cited codes and regulations. Per Sec. 303(c), of the Uniform Building Code, the approval of the plans does not permit the violation of any state, county or city law. A. FLANS —^ ( 1. jPlease make all corrections on the original I 3. ) Please indicate here if any changes have V J tracings and submit two new sets of prints, >—^ been made to the plans that are not a result and any original plan sets that may have been of corrections from this list. If there are returned to you by the jurisdiction, to: other changes, please briefly describe them and where they are located on the plans. L^ Have changes been made to the plans not resulting from this correction list? Please check.©To facilitate checking, please identify, next to each item, the sheet of the plans upon which each correction on this sheet has been made and return this check sheet with the revised plans. _Yes No £>U -a-c, i K _0M_ o h ^u&r. Q H-O V\i . nvi rn r 0 A\ r DV) T&r-k-J IthfJt ffvoc^ ,', //bv-i A a &a - 111 — — • — j • — — •• — — •_r , -Ssyis-~f~ttia ^~hi.tf-~tl^rf> r & <*K A i '7/7I frtT r>p f>cl <7 i '/- 'rfiW, C i/ ? 1 '/ Form No. PCS.41390 •+h#C c/ ^ /* ?J-f -f- ex C\r^<$ Date Jurisdiction. Prepared byi ^VID VAP7 PLAN CHECK NO.. VALUATION AND PLAN CHECK FEE 94-f. Bldg. Dept, Esgil BUILDING ADDRESS _ APPLICANT/CONTACT . BUILDING OCCUPANCY hkt\t Dr. PHONE NO. DESIGNER PHONE TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR PHONE BUILDING PORTION 40lr G-r'L 'Lyi<\4 + V (/ Air Conditioning Commercial Residential Res. or Conun. Fire Si>rinklers Total Value BUILDING AREA VALUATION MULTIPLIER '@ e e VALUE 7*=-^ 7 3^OO Building Permit Fee $ Plan Check Fee $ tt> COM MEN TSt_ SHEET OF 12/87 7vv\SIMON WONG ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL & BRIDGE ENGINEERS REVISED CALCULATIONS FOR: CARLSBAD GOLF FACILITY BRIDGE SWE JOB NO. 500-011 FOR i:MARTIN HUFFMAN ~J- November 22, 1994 Design reference documents: 1991 Uniform Building Code AASHTO Bridge Design Specifications Maximum Vehicle Weight: 2,000 Ib 9968 Hibert Street, Suite 202 • San Diego, CA 92131 • (619) 566-3113 • FAX (619) 566-6844 Project: Designed : c \ Checked:9968 Hibert Street, Suite 202 San Diego, CA 92131 SIMON WONG ENGINEERING TRUCTURAL & BRIDGE ENGINEERS (619)566-3113 FAX (619) 566-6844 Page : Proj.#:5"00-o// Date: «3 Revised: 1 f) \\ %1 V N * x ^ , .. j | t C U '\ '-!) k b WT :r- "L OO 0 ON M - bis Ft u x S = A o\< \\-14- * i Project: I Designed: I Checked: 1 \<$XMOJV WONG ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL & BRIDGE ENGINEERS 9968 Hibert Street, Suite 202 San Diego, CA 92131 (619)566-3113 FAX (619) 566-6844 Page : Proj.#: $00- Date: Revised: o% o • WT • ^ o T T.W- ~ Vx/ AT&. ^ To - 4-6? (4 /Or 3 + / /-3 X - = o. °i I < 4 .6 o " 0.707' - 0.70 + 0,52- 1,22;/ ' 6 , Designed: Checked: x/vrvSIMON WONG ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL & BRIDGE ENGINEERS 9968 Hibert Street, Suite 202 San Diego, CA 92131 (619)566-3113 FAX (619) 566-6844 Page Revised 2.2$- Project O r Designed: c Checked: x/xrvS/MON WONG ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL & BRIDGE ENGINEERS 9968 Hibert Street. Suite 202 San Diego, CA 92131 (619)566-3113 FAX (619) 566-6844 Page : Proj.tf;-Oh Date: ft Revised; A V/AU- i ooo i"2- T -h /\ a5 ($,«.*)°'ot0^ £ n A t -o - ,/- 3 CP- i-S o O £il .OJ< l-o OK: NO Project: CAtU^AO GO^F rAOUTS £.0*qe Designed : Cl O Checked : /\ /\ /\ S'MOW WOWG ENGINEERING // \/ \/ \ STRUCTURAL & BRIDGE ENGINEERS 9968 Hibett Street, Suite 202 (619) 566-31 13 San Diego. CA 92131 FAX (619) 566-6844 Page : ^ Proj. #:SOQ - OM Date: g^ f Revised : -t-0 2 2 4'f ' 0- WT- =333 fLF = '52 = 5 r f~-< - /^^3 / O CK/ -t- ^ 4H-- 7/^2 10 h w-* = 427 N7 ~ Z12 -f Fo r ,25 - c 2 OU Project : c A^u5 . ^ A p ?.-, o uf~ nxccu-N e.f^e,-- Designed : ; \ o Checked : /\ /\ /\ SIMON WONG ENGINEERING // \/ \/ \ STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS 9968 Hibert Street. Suite 202 (619) 566-31 13 San Diego, CA 92131 FAX (619) 566-6844 Page : (^ Proj. # : l°n ~ Date:0/?<f Revised : V - O .V/Cto)C*6-')) 4-z_oo - V- U/AT&A- - - A ,i - - 3J7 o ,. TO 4-- F " PSF -' ^ T1 > "^/ -// . t-5(iz.j ^ /s'f-iV)4 0.52.*0,-t°|-0.%| < Project : CAftj^Atf Q * ur p/WUYN e^,\ >;>&£> Designed : > \._ Checked : /\ f\ /\ S'MOW WONG ENGINEERING // \ff \/ ^ STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS 9968 Hibert Street. Suite 202 (619) 566-3113 San Diego. CA 921 31 FAX (619) 566-6844 Page : 7 *oM:*j°- Date: 9/W Revised : p - 3, WAUU U/T- -• 122 x 1-2^7 " 338 x /y ' & 7 : 7,3 /£>.<>£./ WAU. P w w f-F- VI , 12 . 67 K s-j- .46 (/-.TT) - 7,^7 '"'-• V-7 -• * Project : CANvM^fc/^ ^ ^ -, _,> p /-V O W Y ~S O£ \ ^ C. t> Designed : C\c_ Checked : /r\~/\~f\ SIMON WONG ENGINEERING // \ff \/ \ STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS 9968 Hibert Street, Suite 202 (619) 566-3113 San Diego, CA 92131 FAX (619) 566-6844 Page : *°M:on" Date : 9/94 Revised : o/2_-f-n , , > • (b- V / 'OK Project : CALLU Designed : c \ C Checked : SIMON WONG ENGINEERING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS 9968 Hibert Street, Suite 202 San Diego, CA 92131 (619)566-3113 FAX (619) 566-6844 Page Date : Revised V -:0.:S=£_i W IJ/ wr; . V/T. ' < < STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS for HIGHWAY BRIDGES THIRTEENTH EDITION 1983 Adopted by The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Inc. With Revisions by State of California Department of Transportation Office of Structure Design Revisions are Indicated lnthemarglnsthusly: + As Amended bythe Interim Specifications — Bridges, 1984 Interim Specifications— Bridges, 1985 and Interim Specifications— Bridges, 1986 Published by the Association Executive Office 444 North Capitol Street, N.W., Suite 225 Washington, D.C. 20001 © Copyright, 1984,1985,1986 and 1987 by the American Asso- ciation of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Printed in the United States of America, This book, or parts thereof, may not be reproduced in any form without written permission of the publishers. BRIDGE DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS JUNE 1990 + + + + + + + + + + + •f + + + + Gxttmns Air Temperature Range Extreme: 120° F Certain mountain and desert locations Moderate:! 00° F Interior Valleys and most mountain locations Mild: 80° F Coastal Areas, Los Angeles, and San Francisco Bay Area Design Range Steel Rise or Fall 60° F Movement/Unit Length .00039 Rise or Fall 50° F Movement/Unit Length .00033 Rise or Fall 40° F Movement/Unit Length .00026 Concrete Rise or Fall 40s F Movement/Unit Length .00024 Rise or Fall 35° F Movement/Unit Length .00021 Rise or Fall 30° F Movement/Unit Length .00018 Provisions shall be made in concrete structures for stresses and movements resulting from shrinkage, as follows: Arches - Shrinkage Coefficient 0.0002 Prestressed Structures - See Division 1, Section 9 of this volume. Other Structures - The temperature fall from a normal temperature as given above provides adequately for stress and movement caused by shrinkage. 3.17 UPLIFT 3.17.1 Provision shall be made for adequate attachment of the superstructure to the substructure by ensuring that the calculated uplift at any support is resisted by tension mem- bers engaging a mass of masonry equal to the largest force obtained under one of the following conditions: (a) 100 percent of the calculated uplift caused by any loading or combination of loadings in which the live plus impact loading is increased by 100 percent. (b) 150 percent of the calculated uplift at working load level. (c) 100 percent of the calculated uplift for load factor design/'.: 3.17.2 Anchorboltssubjecttotensionorotherelementsof the structures stressed under the a/nnve conditions shall be designed at 150 percent of the allowable basic stress. 3.18 FORCE FROM STREAM CURRENT, FLOATING ICE AND DRIFT All piers and other portion so structures that are subject to the force of flowing water, floating ice, or drift shall be designed to resist the maximum stresses induced thereby. 3.18.1 Force of Stream Current on Piers The effect of flowing water on piers shall be calculated by the formula: where: P = V = K = (3-4) pressure in pounds per square foot; velocity of water in feet per second; a constant, being 1% for square ends, V£ for angle ends where the angle is 30 degrees or less, and % for circular piers. 3.18.2 Force of Ice on Piers Pressure of ice on piers shall be calculated at 400 pounds + per square inch. The thickness of ice and height at which it + applies shall be determined by investigation at the site of the + structure. + 3.19 BUOYANCY Buoyancy shall be considered where it affects the design of either substructure, including piling, or the superstruc- ture. 3.20 EARTH PRESSURE 3.20.1 Structures which retain fills shall be proportioned to withstand pressure as given by Rankine's formula, or any commonly recognized soil mechanics formula, using an active earth pressure coefficient of not less that K = .30, except the maximum load on the heels of wall footings shall be determined by using Kt = .225. 3.20.2 If a deflection sufficient to create an active wedge cannot occur, the pressure distribution snail be as shown in Figure 3.20.2. 3.203 For structures which retain fills that are classified as predominately cohesive soils, a special analysis is neces- sary to determine earth pressures acting on them. A good guideline is Division of Structures' Trenching and Shoring Manual. 3-12 Hydraulic and Streambank Protection Analyses Buena Vista Creek Golf Facility Upstream of Haymar Drive Carlsbad, CA September 2, 1993 Hydraulic and Streambank Protection Analyses Buena Vista Creek Golf Facility Upstream of Haymar Drive Carlsbad, CA September 2, 1993 Brian J. DoeingCJ David T. Williams 1. Project Location The Buena Vista Creek hydraulic study of the project starts at the Haymar Drive Bridge located approximately 2000 feet upstream of El Camino Real and extends 1000 feet upstream along Buena Vista Creek. A topographic map (Exhibit 1) is enclosed which shows the Haymar Road bridge and the layout of the Project, which is a Golf Practice Facility. The drainage area at Haymar Drive is approximately 17 square miles. 2. Purpose of Analysis In the project area, the floods of early 1993 caused the Buena Vista Creek to erode its banks as well as large portions of the right overbank (descriptions are looking downstream). These eroded areas are shown in Exhibit 1. Portions of the eroded material deposited in the channel just upstream of the bridge but most of it was delivered to downstream areas. A Golf Practice Facility is proposed for the location and a design for a non-eroding stable channel is part of the project. This report documents the hydraulic analysis that was performed to determine the required channel configuration and alignment. The results of the hydraulic analysis was then used to determine the bank protection required to assure stability for a flow of up to 4,000 cfs, which is the 25 year flood discharge. 3. Hydrology The Corps of Engineers performed a flood plain study of the Buena Vista Creek (ref.l) and concluded that the intermediate regional flood (100 year flood) at El Camino Real was 6,900 cfs. No estimate was given for smaller floods. Nolte and Associates (ref. 3) determined that the 100 year discharge at El Camino Real was 8,500 cfs and the 10 year discharge was 2,000 cfs. Nolte said that the discharges were obtained from the San Diego County Department of Sanitation and Hood Control but did not cite a report (we believe this was ref. 2). The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in their report (ref. 4) used 8,500 cfs for the 100 year flood and 2,000 cfs for the 10 year flood between Interstate 5 (downstream of the project location) and Sunset Drive (upstream of the project). FEMA also cited discharges for the 50 and 500 year floods at the Interstate 5 location. The FEMA study obtained this information from a hydrology study by the San Diego County Department of Sanitation and Flood Control, which is probably the same document that Nolte and Associates obtained their discharge values. The 10, 50 ,100, and 500 year flood discharges at Interstate 5 (from the FEMA report) was plotted on exceedence frequency paper as shown in Exhibit 2. The project exceedence frequency curve was assumed to be the same as the Interstate 5 curve since the 100 year flood discharges were 8,500 cfs and 8,400 cfs at Interstate 5 and Haymar Drive, respectively. This curve was used to determine the associated frequency for the design discharges of the channel. 4. Geometry The existing conditions geometry for the HEC-2 analysis was developed from a combination of sources. The bridge information was obtained from the HEC-2 model developed by John Kennaly (ref. 5), which was based upon field measurements supplemented with city topographic maps. The geometric information upstream was based upon 2 foot contour interval topographic maps developed in April 1992 by Alba Engineering, Inc. This was supplemented by spot elevations measured in the field in August 1993. 5. HEC-2 Analysis HEC-2 cross sections for existing conditions were overlain on the topographic maps as shown in Exhibit 1 and flowlines drawn. Ineffective flow areas were determined and modeled by using high Manning's "n" values. Reach lengths were obtained by drawing lines from cross sections to cross section along flowline. Manning's "n" values were estimated based upon field inspection and the anticipated conditions immediately after construction completion, which is the most vulnerable condition. These values are shown on the enclosed cross sectional plots. The starting water surface elevations were determined by using the slope area method available in HEC-2. For project conditions, the same HEC-2 cross section locations were used. The placement of the proposed golf tee off area would cause the right overbank water to flow southerly to the main channel. As the water clears the tee area, it will gradually expand. The tee area thus causes what is essentially ineffective flow areas, which means that the areas may become inundated with water but does not effectively convey the water. These areas were modeled using high "n" values. The modified main channel was then drawn on the topographic map and only this portion of the geometry was adjusted in the HEC-2 model. Care was given to insure that the new channel will not significantly go beyond the location of the eroded and historic channel. The modified main channel is planned for cross section 6931 to 7387 with a transition to the natural channel at both ends. 6. Results of Hydraulic Analysis The proposed rehabilitated channel has a bottom width of 10 feet, side slopes of 1.5H:1V, and an average longitudinal slope of .007. The channel has a capacity of about 500 cfs, which is about the 2.5 year flood discharge. From cross section 6681 to 6813, the left side of the channel has been encroached by landslides and must be removed to form a more natural alignment of the channel. The right side of the designed channel has a proposed small berm 3 feet above the right overbank elevation at the upstream end and ranges from 3 feet to 1 foot above the adjacent overbank elevation throuhgh cross section 7017. The berm transitions down to the overbank elevation between cross sections 7017 and 6931. If the main channel design discharge of 500 cfs is exceeded, the left overbank will be utilized. Should the discharge cause the right berm elevations to be exceeded, the right overbank flow will occur first at the downstream area (from cross section 6931 to the bridge) and the right overbank will gradually be flooded due to relatively gentle backwater effects. As the discharge increases, the overtopping moves upstream with the backwater effects also moving upstream. This backwater effect causes on the right overbanks to act as a buffer as the water overtops the main channel, thus reducing the erosion potential in the overbank. In the early 1993 floods, the flow in the right overbank caused significant erosion. The right overbank area will flood at a discharge of approximately 1,800 cfs, which is the 9 year flood discharge. The berm at cross section 7387 must be tied to the tee off area at elevation 34.5 or higher to prevent the water from going around the berm at discharges lower than 1,800 cfs. Kennaly's (ref. 5) HEC-2 model simulated the tee area as ineffective flow area for project conditions and showed that the rise in the 100 year discharge due to the project was less than 1 foot. This means that whatever the tee area elevation is, the results will be the same, i.e., the rise will be less than 1 foot. The following table shows the water surface elevations, the elevations of the proposed berm, and the elevation difference between the water surface and the berm. This difference should be increasing in the upstream direction to assure that overtopping occurs in the upstream direction. BERM DESIGN ELEVATIONS FOR 1,800 CFS Cross section Water Surface Elevation Elevation of Berm Elevation Difference 7017 7080 7175 7247 7307 7387 31.8 32.0 32.1 32.9 33.0 33.4 32 32.3 32.5 33.5 34.0 34.5 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.6 1.0 1.1 For a discharge of 1,800 cfs and for cross sections upstream of the bridge, the HEC-2 model gave a range of channel velocities of 6.3 to 11.2 feet per second (fps) with the highest velocities at cross section 6931. Since the channel should be stable for a larger range than the channel capacity, the 25 year discharge of 4,000 cfs was chosen for the bank protection design. The HEC-2 results for a discharge of 4,000 cfs gave a maximum channel velocity of 10.8 fps, which occurs at cross section 7017. The lower velocity for the higher flow is because the higher flow uses the right overbank for flow area, thus reducing the "pressure" on the main channel. Higher velocities occur at the bridge but it is assumed that the bridge sections are adequately protected from erosion. The design of the channel protection will be based upon the channel velocities shown hi the HEC-2 output. REFERENCES 1. Floodplain Information Study. Buena Vista Creek. Pacific Ocean to Vista. San Diego County. California. Prepared for San Diego County by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Los Angeles District, CA, July 1973. 2. Hydrology. Buena Vista Creek. San Diego County, Department of Sanitation and Flood Control, 1976. 3. Final Report, for Special Flood Plain Delineation Study of Buena Vista Creek. Contract No. 9053-5884-E, George S. Nolte and Associates, San Diego, CA, February, 1978. 4. Flood Insurance Study. Citv of Carlsbad. CA. San Diego County. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington D.C., Community Number 060285, Revised September 18, 1987. 5. "Carlsbad Golf Practice Facility, Hydraulic Analysis of Buena Vista Creek Upstream of Haymar Drive," Prepared by John B. Kennaly, July 14, 1993. 50000 98 95 90 EXCEEDAWCE fREOUEWCY ]M PERCENT 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 45000. 40000. 35000. 30000. 25000. 20000. 15000. 10000. 9000. 8000. 7000. EXHIBIT 2 FREQUENCY ANALYSIS FOR BUENA VISTA CREEK AT HAYMAR DRIVE BRIDGE HEC-2 CROSS SECTIONS BUENA VISTA CREEK AT HAYMAR DRIVE BRIDGE COoo O CO LO CO & , . oo _0 ^ Q_ CM c J5.5 UJ "Sa00 I -*-co **- CO Oo ^ *— co O CM Ld CO 696s oooroom o CM OlO o LO CO"OVEoo totn o>c _3 .2 jo ,^J x co •*-* c: "enO o .c S^ g I UO o O 2 c:o o o Q5 OCO O OJ 0>c: El^i 0 om c:_ o c- >% 1 S1 O OJ-C CO UJ oCO LO in oro to CM o CM 1SW W UOJPA9Q COoOCO CO O LU .~ CO ~0 cd CD CN 00 .. o o o ~co cd CM CO oo 1 • - • • •1 •—•—L_L OCO o -* j • ' •• • ' toOOLO n>t/l o. >* c"° J-°^^ ^1/13 .Cr— ^E co oO 2E o ro CM O CO § « o>c c a v21-S o .o CT)i- tlQJ QJ> c o LO o en o ^ ^CD ^ "a3 —c ocr L> O QCJ oro O OJ 1SW W 1SW W OO ~o COoOOOO en CM LU .2 5-t—' OO OO .. co J CO -co o O oCO CO OJ LT>IDro oo enoco |oS c0) %to ooCM OT Q>j_, c c:^ .2 -^-*-•D 0) g<^ °—: -^ r1*? JD Olk_ l—<D <D O LU IC O O oo E 5 o CD "o5c o o toOJ oCM 1SW W UOJJDASQ 1SW M UO&DA9Q 1SW ooo O enH—o OO O CL_ ^ CM o CD CO OT O o ^-a 5 CD CN CO ^ CD _S2 CO . i oLOOOPO c c.2 ^"o o>O >N-e P<u a> omCN o o-»— - CJ Oce o in oo oto *. m 5 <uO D <U LL. "QC "^c co -^o ^3 c _ O o»a tn c •c 'c o003 m C3 inCM O CN U01PA8Q 1SW W U 1SW UOj}DA3|3 1SW W UOJlDAdQ HEC-2 PRINTOUT FOR BUENA VISTA CREEK AT HAYMAR DRIVE BRIDGE n »i* w " TT JT * U. UJ • I* O 111 >- <<O« at ui "-u>* « ~ ui acr-C B. oaeSat i- S —iu vi u,<o ui ms ~o. a S! °- = o•O Z •IM g O OO o o oo tno oo o •o a — z o o— • a oUJ - > <D _l < -J Vt X -JO oo go do'3?? X X X X X o o rxj o o o ajrO oS * •« I t «* ui* _iS =:; s* o.h£ S * vt * ae« ui* t-: s r- a >. s X X X X X X X X X>tXXX»t £*s: <«*: sUJK ro O o N o o NO s. *r8 "J o-J O0. a.S -o(S N «- •I W *U t- « in<o <J T- | N ON 00 •aft-in <*3*-Brtoo •*• ooo fM'OPa*• *r O ooo ooo ego• .0 •* Sooo • • • •O (MM O too oo o• • • o oSo o • •o •*KlfMtn OO o og a o • rgN-oojry o oo M m a O O - o a NIA« m ddsiXoj d OO OO O a o o o oo o o o o oo o o N m«o ro o o• •s* O ooooO'* a irt• • ' •o N »om M O O O OO. . . O (\IOCo o . • iin •- ni*- o o o Nr*oo o o. . . or-M 0 m N •p m o o fi >o m3 mooaooo mooooo o <-^ d >a N K <x odo'r^NN• m «* -o<a « No»- N o «- oo o o3 o""2 ^£ mo oo o o o -- o *- :°.°.8SSS 8^-:0.ggg*° ' ' ' ' 8SS° ' '-• OO O O OO Oh-O • ' • O O O *CO (MO"**» o Ooo ro • rw *-*- O O OO• • • O O * >f\j %0 O • • -CM H>O« O »- O rjo'-V I/SO ^ O> O• m •* »r m ino o ry f- o o o vrss,O (M O O OO OO mo o* N a o o o o ofo ••••••O CO O *~ n- Q* S[ ^ di- ^^S d2 (Moooooao o «- «-•- >-r (O<-oooog ooooomo OK'd^*'V'* ° ' '-5 ' ' NN Kl O O* O ftd-*" gOOOOOOO O OO OM OO OOOOONOO* • •oooo • • •o«-5-* • > • o o K o N*----- .-— — -. (M (M O » • i • •~~es a ^m N nj o . . _m»»-* oaooNea ^-*- sg«-»O MNI^N r- f M " ~- d ift sO(M o m o r>- m m •5 •«* m m MS 8 ~» O tn <~ K. >• O>AB9--•_••• m OOT-aeooooo O T- »- Jo' S oeae = •- fn oooo tMtqruory «o(MM (M o o o o *o oo• • • o »- > coOOO • "* •INJ miAfftT-tO KHV M ooo om in• • * O 40 •• ••*CNJlrt MMN ooooo o oo op o a oo o ooo so in ooo oo oo o ooo o oo §oo-«*- o o o g gin -" * - .<N 5*M o o oo r~ o onto* • %* oCNN. •* OJMM M maoooo in o o o o o3« • • • • ^ • • • • ••o in ao 0 m o to a *o 4 M«ir\-O M4 >ino a *• o oo orsiao• • >oco >Sry oo • • (M •»-O -* CK K1<N«M ro RJ M o.-eq-o^'Oo• -o ci & ^ in.O OJ r- (NJ CN OOO OM O O• • • o to • o•-g(M a _O o. w O U d 3 o o o o o o —• • • o tnM «*— •— M O O OO I• • *O Ml *Sin o • -M•O ^O-*io O OOQN-NO. . . SfM 00 •(N.-0 • • «f\J h. o inp*• in ri _ _' O Kl KJ cooo^ ^ M M M o ooo mm• • • O -O • SS eo -*MV r- M M • OO i-!?S?0_: • •* a- 03 r\j in—«- MM r\j in ^O O O O O o 3 "~ ooo in o (Min in oo o o3^ M • • * V\O O O }0 ^ O .- •- CO o<voooooo•M Of *""•- »-OJ (NOOOOOk^OOro • « • o -* •- • • in m i*«o P*KIO •- »- MM SJ in •- o o _f _f _ _^ o ootn^MO oo o o a4o M ac §5 IN t*. Z 1Q B3 « £5r ui — g U uj -< uj tnu- at u.tj uUJu < o UJ O X O o oui .- VI •X U. Oota. o in u. uj LLJ OOOfVIO M K O O «-O O T- Or- . . O £33333 •- • •« • M • >" M *°--M § -- . S3 s iu w 3 3 a — — oKl UJU.< M U U Ul U . U — T- 1NM •- CM in IM'<O iTED AS A FUNCTION OFSEE DOCUMENTATION FOR3 _! u aet»— O « •c u ll 8 **"••* ^ "1— > U. X KUJ cj O Ku. U U —Of XtwS »— •.UJ • >• II UJ U)-J -Jcv ** ***Ul »fc <_i O *—as Sc ui— et a PAGEANALYSIS BY JOHN 8. KENNALYGEOMETRY SUPPLEMENTED BY DTUr CONSULTANTS, INC. 431-8113" w_» • UJSae 5a— >-u ae ea 8* y-5 uji_ i_— < in-t (NJ U UJ *< Ul Ul^ss --IG 2 5S^*UlN Q. < —>• ;•!Q i y S 5 3 SN En U> 1 Q—IN.S O— K 1^3to ^- ^- 1— 2 _j V) u ae £ ^aeH- Of o ^5 2 _ 2 MuUJ u ^•B •^ Ul3aeh- O X0 — 0 S X Ou o 3 « -o o u o 3 °. i ° o o u. o in u8UJ OU).: : x °o o uU i—Ul iX VI0 >u. oae •a. o t— -* 0-1 Oa. u.0 Oae ina. *-ae <M-s LTED AS A FUNCTION OFSEE DOCUMENTATION FORTHIS RUN EXECUTED 30AUG93 18:25:39^_J3x— 1 U33Of « *J XX Uw<UJui aeUl38OC *•* >~ •- "So < — >ae"- atf Ul Utie u. UIU t-.oe xUl 3ae»— «UJa.• ^r- I— U Ul UI a — —Ul u. <-1 O >-x oe ui — 0.0 I * « u> iUJ « *JL fC Jli 1 Zl UJ £ i(J fi < ^*5 *^"?«« ae -**Ul «! i!1 M •U k«Ul •* V) goe UJ O ae ^ U)UJt— o ^UJea s 1— UlUl Ulsocu Iko u. Ul i; « v> UJ < JJ UJ1 U Ooin VI Ul o o ^_ Ulee ik R MQ M «-O»ma o- CM &. <o o CM O>OO <O«QK N--OM«Q-M in •* -o a -j-h-o in (d T^ -00* f\ir\jf>4Ki ogoooo o O&.<M •* (>(OS.O -O sf •- (NJNN (NJ <NJ K1 ooo ooo 009ooo ooo ooo. . . ..... , O OOO OOO OOOogo ogg oooin <o o mno trt o o ooo ooo ooo a ooo ooo ooo 3§§ §§§ S8§ oo O O Qo o oooo S M4 Q« ro in rj in o flOinO- "Ot^1p«-J 3>oP- *o M M in in N in o Scj in *xi •— -* *o «* to M1fc. I oo ^o in N-1O* CO ^O IO 'KllTfc ** / i§ » ^* jhih irt O* C9 ^ff *O • P* irt fO ^" CO f* tft ^** ^* ^ B m ^C *T *O 1 f** *O O h* *O 03 N> 00 O\; - O^^l ^t*^ ^P*-O f4inKl P^12f^ fO i^ i^ *^ ^O *~ ^^ ^* •*" ^l n* to fn ESS QjSg 5(|S $5! U N- >O h» N-00 00 -o «o oo rg o c-C>«-»- CO O •- MOO O •P »M N •-!: MM MMM a OOO Oino O tO OOOO OOO OIOO M §58 S O OB O ^ ^ 1^ tMt« MN.O «-tnN- [^t0*^ S oaNtrv O>HMn OvwvPJMM P4MM P4MM g og goo ooo ooo ooooo ooo ooo ooo ooo 888 8S S o o g goo o ooo S oo oOO Oao in•-•* oooOOOmao«->* •o-o-a «-•-•- S533 OJ M 555 °og ogo ooo gooooo ooo ooo ooo ooo O K Qa. o ^ eo g 'rJcO SSS 333 SSS 333 333 S§3 3S§ SSS SSS SSS «3«oeo SOO OOO OOO QOO OOO_SS 555 955 ooo gooooo ooo ooo ooo ooo SSS ess SSS S3§ ggg §§§ o SSS SSS SSg3C OOO OOO OOO OOO ao flO CORPR u S<M in S «-o^ fNJ pJCM K SS3 o oo o in 03 O _ oooO oooX OOO M in * # * ggg ggg ggg 888 888 883 383 SSS §38 SSS pi pi a* SSS £$3 QQg sss EKE sss o in K •^ iX oin in« 000 OOO OOO OOO OOO QOQ OOP OOO OOOOOO OOO OOO OOO OOO OOO OOO OOO OOO Q0IA5> ro »-«* o o -o -*^ro •- *>•*•- o°30; fM«M HI •- O CM rviKt r«S <MI»*K> N*^ . - mKIKI(M KIM ftl K> M S K» ( SSS 883 838 SSS SSS 833 383 SSS 333 333 S O O O«OO O 4in co o if\> gfi? C3 ^p ^3 <p ^p ^p ^p ^p ^p ^p ^p O ^3 ^p o i^ S 2 9^9 OOO SvO OOO O O^j ^9 ^9 C3 O ^P CD ^5 O *D ^9 ^> ^3 CP ^3 0 C3 ' S ro M <Q«Q«o ^-^-*- mm? ^-^.^ @B33 111 sss Ssi see sli ss s SOo' O O K-h-N-oooPRC -.1 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL. & TESTING, INC. 6280 Rnerdale Street, San Diego. CA 92120 P.O. Box 600627, San Diego. CA 92160-0627 619-280-4321. FAX 619-280-4717 June 29, 1993 Mr. Martin Huffman 1901 Lincoln Street Oceanside, California 92054 SCS&T 9311121 Report No. 2 SUBJECT: Report of Geotechnical Investigation, Carlsbad Golf Practice facility, Haymar Drive, Carlsbad, California. Dear Mr. Huffman: In accordance with your request, we have completed a geotechnical investigation for the subject project. We are presenting herewith our findings and recommendations. The findings of this study indicate that the site is suitable for the proposed development provided the recommendations presented in the attached report are followed. If you have any questions after reviewing the findings and recommendations contained in the attached report, please do not hesitate to contact this office. This opportunity to be of professional service is sincerely appreciated. Respectfully submitted, LIFORN1A SOIL & TESTING, INC. fiel B. Atiler, DBA:CRB:mw cc: (6) Submitted Curtis R. Burde^ C7E.CT #1090 CERTIFIED ENGINEERING LI, TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE Introduction and Project Description . 1 Project Scope 1 Findings 2 Site Description 2 General Geology and Subsurface Conditions 2 Geologic Setting 2 Tectonic Setting 3 Groundshaking 3 Surface Rupture and Soil Cracking 4 Landslides 4 Tsunamis 4 Seiches 4 Groundwater 4 Liquefaction . . 4 Conclusions and Recommendations 5 General 5 Grading 6 Site Preparation 6 Proposed Building Area 6 Wet Soils 6 Import Fill 6.. f* Settlement Monuments 6 Surface Drainage 7 Earthwork 7 Foundations 7 General 7 Reinforcement 7 Expansive Characteristics 7 Settlement Characteristics 7 On-Grade Slabs 8 Interior Concrete Slabs-on-Grade 8 Exterior Slabs-on-Grade 8 Limitations 8 Review, Observation and Testing 8 Uniformity of Conditions 9 TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Change in Scope . . . Time Limitations . . . Professional Standard Client's Responsibility Field Explorations Laboratory Testing . . . . PAGE . . . 9 . .. 9 ...9 . . 10 . . 10 11 ATTACHMENTS FIGURE Figure I Site Vicinity Map, Follows Page I PLATES Plate Plate Plates Plate Plate Plate Plates Plate 1 2 3-8 9 10 11 12- 14 Plot Plan Unified Soil Classification Chart Trench Logs Grain Size Distribution Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content Expansion Index Test Results Direct Shear Test Results.. ff* 12-13 Consolidation Test Results Weakened Plane Joint Detail APPENDIX Recommended Grading Specifications - Special Provisions SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOU. & TESTING, INC. 6280 Riveidak Street. San Diego, CA 93120 P.O. Box 600627. San Diep>. CA 92160-0627 619-280-4321. FAX 619-280-4717 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION CARLSBAD GOLF PRACTICE FACILITY HAYMAR DRIVE CARLSBAD. CALIFORNIA INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION This report presents the results of our geotechnical investigation for the proposed Carlsbad Golf Practice Facility to be located at the eastern terminus of Haymar Drive, in the City of Carlsbad, California. The site location is illustrated on the following Figure Number 1. It is our understanding that the proposed improvements will consist of a golf shop/snack bar structure, a maintenance shed and associated paved parking. Grading will consist of fills up to three feet in height with inclinations of 1.5:1 (horizontal to vertical). To assist in the preparation of this report, we were provided with a site plan prepared by Alba Engineering, Inc. dated June 6, 1993. The site configuration, and approximate location of our borings are provided on the attached Plate Number 1. PROJECT SCOPE The investigation consisted of: surface reconnaissance, subsurface explorations, obtaining representative disturbed and undisturbed samples, laboratory testing, analysis of the field and laboratory data, research of available geologic literature pertaining to the site, and preparation of this report. More specifically, the intent of this analysis was to: a) Explore the subsurface conditions to the depths influenced by the proposed construction. b) Evaluate, by laboratory tests, the engineering properties of the various strata which may influence the proposed construction, including bearing capacities, expansive characteristics and settlement potential. CARLSBAD /V SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA *&& SOIL & TESTING, INC. GOLF PRACTICE FACILITY BY: DBA JOB Muuae*: 9311121 DATE: 06-18-93 FIGURE NO. 1 J .'.SCS&T 9311121 June 29, 1993 Page 2 c) Describe the general geology at the site including possible geologic hazards which could have an effect on the site development. d) Address potential construction difficulties that may be encountered due to soil conditions, groundwater, or geologic hazards, and provide recommendations concerning these problems. e) Develop soil engineering criteria for site grading, and provide design information regarding the stability of proposed fill slopes. f) Address potential construction difficulties and provide recommendations concerning these problems. g) Recommend an appropriate foundation system for the type of structures anticipated and develop soil engineering design criteria for the recommended foundation design. FINDINGS SITE DESCRIPTION The project site is an irregular shaped parcel of land located near the cul-de-sac terminus of Haymar Drive in Carlsbad, California. ^Jhe eastern property line is located approximately 200 feet west of the center of the cul-de-sac. Haymar Drives borders along the north property line. Undeveloped property exists to the west and east of the subject site. Residential property exists to the distant south of the subject property. Topographically the property is relatively level, vacant terrain. Moderately steep to steep hillslope terrain exists along the western and southern borders of the property. The majority of the property is flat-lying terrain located within a 100-year flood plain. In addition, a drainage feature exists along the north property line on the south side of Haymar Drive. On-site utilities include a high-pressure gas line which crosses the property in a northwesterly direction. In addition, SDG&E electric towers are located within the western slope portion of the subject site. Vegetation on-site consists of various native grasses and bushes. GENERAL GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS GEOLOGIC SETTING: The project site is located in the Coastal Plains Physiographic Province of San Diego County and is underlain by Quaternary-age sedimentary deposits. A review of geologic maps and 'SCS&T931I121 June29, 1993 Page 3 our site investigation indicate that the site is underlain by Quaternary-age alluvial deposits and associated residuum. Six exploratory backhoe trenches were excavated on the subject property to determine the existing near sub-surface soil conditions. In general, the earth material encountered within the exploratory trenches consisted of disturbed, brown, moist, soft and loose to very loose sandy, silty clay to clayey sand and silty sand topsoils within the upper six inches to one foot. Underlying the topsoils, alluvium was encountered. The alluvium varied from brown to tan, very moist to saturated, very loose to medium dense, silty to clayey sand and sand. Some of this material was friable with a high degree of caving. In addition, layers of charcoal gray, very moist to saturated, soft to medium stiff silty clay was also encountered interlayered with the aforementioned sands. Further details are noted on the field exploration logs, included within this report. TECTONIC SETTING: It should be noted that much of Southern California, including the San Diego County area, is characterized by a series of Quaternary-age fault zones which typically consist of several individual, en echelon faults that generally strike in a northerly to northwesterly direction. Some of these fault zones (and the individual faults within the zone) are classified as active while others are classified as only potentially active according to the criteria of the California Division of Mines and Geology. Active fault zones are those which have shown conclusive evidence of faulting during the Holocene Epoch (the most recent 11,000 years) while potentially active fault zones have demonstrated movement during the Pleistocene Epoch (11,000 to 2 million years before the present) but no movement during Holocene time. A review of available geologic maps indicates that the site is located approximately seven miles northeast of the active Rose Canyon Fault Zone. Other active fault zones in the region that could possibly affect . the site include the Coronado Bank and San Clemente Fault Zones to the west, the Elsinore and San Jacinto Fault Zones to the northwest, and the Agua Blanca and San Miguel Fault Zones to the south. GROUNDSHAKING: The most likely geologic hazard to affect the site is groundshaking as a result of movement along one of the fault zones mentioned above. The maximum bedrock accelerations that would be attributed to a maximum probable earthquake occurring along the nearest portion of selected fault zones that could affect the site are summarized in the following Table I. 9311121 June 29, 1993 Page 4 TABLE I Fault Zone Rose Canyon Coronado Bank Elsinore San Jacinto San Clemente Distance 7 miles 21 miles 21 miles 41 miles 60 miles Maximum Probable Earthquake 6.5 magnitude 7.0 magnitude 7.3 magnitude 7.8 magnitude 7.3 magnitude Bedrock Acceleration 0.38 g 0.21 g 0.24 g 0.15g 0.07 g Design Acceleration 0.26 g O.I4g 0.16 g 0.10 g 0.05 g SURFACE RUPTURE AND SOIL CRACKING: No faults are known to traverse the subject site so the site is not considered susceptible to surface rupture from on-site faults. The probability of soil cracking caused by shaking from distant sources is considered to be low. LANDSLIDES: As previously mentioned, moderately steep to steep hillslope terrain exists along the west and south perimeter of the subject site. The potential for lands!iding/slope failure or slope slump- ing/creeping should be considered possible. Because of the proposed subject site structure location the potential for structural damage should be considered negligible. TSUNAMIS: Tsunamis are great sea waves produced by a submarine earthquake or volcanic eruption. The potential for the site affected by this type of event should be considered negligible. SEICHES: Seiches are periodic oscillations in large bodies of water such as lakes, harbors, bays or reservoirs. This type of occurrence affecting the subject site should be considered negligible. GROUNDWATER: At the time of the site investigation, groundwater levels varied from three to six feet below the existing ground surface, between the various exploratory locations. Due to the site's location within the confines of a natural drainage feature and 100-year flood plain, the site groundwater conditions should be considered to be a potential hazard relating to flooding and/or rising groundwater levels as the result of seasonal fluctuation pertaining to rainfall. LIQUEFACTION: A liquefaction analysis was not within the scope of this investigation. However, considering the site soil conditions and groundwater conditions, the potential for liquefaction should be considered possible. The effects of liquefaction would most likely result in potential structural damage relating to the settlement of the underlying earth materials. Refer to the settlement section within the engineering recommendations of this report. SCS&T 9311121 June 29, 1993 Page 5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS GENERAL In general, no geotechnical conditions were encountered which would preclude the construction of the subject project as presently proposed provided the recommendations presented herein are followed. The main geotechnical conditions affecting the development of the proposed site are deep potentially liquefiable alluvial deposits with high consolidation potential, a shallow groundwater table, and potential flooding conditions. Each of these conditions is discussed hereinafter. 1) The site is underlain by deep, potentially liquefiable alluvial deposits with high consolidation potential. The placement of up to three feet of fill to achieve finish grade elevations will result in deep-seated settlement. The amount of time frame of this settlement is unknown. However, it is recommended that settlement monuments be placed during grading. The monuments will be monitored to determine when most of the detrimental settlements have occurred and construction may Stan. The evaluation of the liquefaction potential of the underlying alluvium was not within the scope of our work. However, it is likely that the existing alluvium is potentially liquefiable. Settlements due to the liquefaction potential of the site will be partially mitigated by the placement of a pore dissipation rock blanket under the proposed structure. In addition increased footing and slab-on-grade thickness and reinforcement is recommended. Regardless of this, some damage to the proposed improvements should be anticipated in case of a liquefaction condition. However, the collapse of the proposed structure is not anticipated. Due to the characteristics of the proposed improvements, further mitigation measures are not economically feasible. The loads from the proposed structure will be dissipated in a mat of compacted fill. The extent of this mat is defined in the site preparation section of this, report. 2) Very moist to saturated soils were encountered at or within one foot from existing grade. This condition will require special site preparation consideration and equipment as described in the site preparation section of this report. SCS&T 9311121 Iune29, 1993 Page 6 3) The majority of the site is presently subject to flooding. The following recommendations assume that the proposed finish grades, as defined by the project civil engineer, will raise the site above 100 year flood elevation. GRADING SITE PREPARATION: Site preparation should begin with the removal of any existing vegetation and deleterious matter detrimental to the proposed development. Existing topsoil and alluvial areas to receive fill should be scarified to a depth of 12 inches, moisture conditioned and recompacted to at least 90 percent as determined in accordance with ASTM D1557-78, Method A or C. Minimum horizontal limits of this operation should be two feet beyond the limits of the fill. PROPOSED BUILDING AREA: It is recommended that a five-foot-thick mat of compacted fill be constructed underneath the proposed building area. This operation may require excavating some of the existing soil. It is strongly suggested than an excavator be used for this operation. It is recommended that a pore pressure dissipation rock blanket be placed below the five foot compacted fill mat. This blanket should consist of a stabilizing fabric such as Mirafi 500X overlain by one foot of 3/4 inch crushed rock wrapped in filter fabric. The extent of this blanket should be five feet away from the perimeter of the building. WET SOILS: Wet soils are anticipated in the proposed building excavation. Furthermore, pumping may occur in areas of shallow fills. It is strongly suggested that an excavator be used when digging for the rock blanket. Furthermore, a swamp cat is strongly suggested for grading operations. Portions of the site may require aeration or mixing with dry imported fill prior to grading. IMPORT FILL: Imported fill should consist of granular nondetrimentally expansive soils. Imported fill should be approved by the geotechnical engineer prior to delivery to the site. SETTLEMENT MONUMENTS: It is recommended that at least four settlement monuments be placed during grading operations. The monuments should be read twice weekly for a period of four weeks. The reading should be submitted to the geotechnical engineer every week for evaluation. Changes in the reading schedule may be necessary depending on the evaluation. It is anticipated that the detrimental settlements due to the placement of the proposed fill will dissipate within a one-month period. SCS&T 9311121 June 29, 1993 Page 7 SURFACE DRAINAGE: It is recommended that all surface drainage be directed away from the proposed improvements and the top of slopes. Ponding of water should not be allowed adjacent to foundations. Rain gutters are recommended. EARTHWORK: All earthwork and grading contemplated for site preparation should be accomplished in accordance with the attached Recommended Grading Specifications and Special Provisions. All special site preparation recommendations presented in the sections above will supersede those in the standard Recommended Grading Specifications. All embankments, structural fill and fill should be compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction at or slightly over optimum moisture content. Utility trench backfill within five feet of the proposed structures and beneath asphalt pavements should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of its maximum dry density. The maximum dry density of each soil type should be determined in accordance with ASTM Test D-1557-78, Method A or C. FOUNDATIONS GENERAL: Shallow foundations may be utilized for the support of the proposed improvements. The footings for the proposed golf shop/snack bar structure should have a minimum depth of 24 inches below lowest adjacent finish pad grade. A minimum width of 12 inches and 24 inches is recommended for continuous and isolated footings, respectively. A bearing capacity of 2000 psf may be assumed for the recommended foundation configuration. For the proposed maintenance shed, and minor exterior improvements, a reduced footing depth of 18 inches and a bearing capacity of 1000 psf are recommended. These values may be increased by one-third when considering wind and/or seismic forces. REINFORCEMENT: Both exterior and interior continuous footings for the proposed golf shop and snack bar structure should be reinforced with at least two No. 5 bars positioned near the bottom of the footing and two No. 5 bars positioned near the top of the footing. For the maintenance shed, minimum reinforcement should be one No. 5 bar top and bottom. This reinforcement is based on soil characteristics and is not intended to be in lieu of reinforcement necessary to satisfy structural considerations. EXPANSIVE CHARACTERISTICS: It is anticipated that the prevailing foundation soils will be nondetrimentally to moderately expansive. The recommendations of this report reflect this condition. SETTLEMENT CHARACTERISTICS: The anticipated total and/or differential settlements for the proposed structures may be considered to be within tolerable limits provided the recommendations SCS&T 9311121 June 29, 1993 Page 8 presented in this report are followed. It should be recognized that minor cracks normally occur in concrete slabs and foundations due to shrinkage during curing or redistribution of stresses and some cracks may be anticipated. Such cracks are not necessarily an indication of excessive vertical movements. ON-GRADE SLABS INTERIOR CONCRETE SLABS-ON-GRADE: Interior concrete slabs-on-grade should have a minimum, actual thickness of five inches and be reinforced with at least No. 3 reinforcing bars placed at 12 inches on center each way. For the maintenance shed, a four-inch-thick slab reinforced with No. 3 bars placed at 24 inches each way is recommended. It is imperative that the reinforcing steel be placed near the middle of the slab. The slab should be underlain by a four-inch-blanket of clean, poorly graded,' coarse sand or crushed rock. If sand is used, it should consist of 100 percent material passing the half- inch screen and no more than ten percent and eight percent passing the #100 sieve and #200 sieve, respectively. Where moisture sensitive floor coverings are planned, a visqueen barrier should be placed on top of the sand or rock layer and a one-inch-thick layer of clean sand should be placed over the visqueen to allow proper concrete curing. EXTERIOR SLABS-ON-GRADE: Exterior slabs should have a minimum thickness of four inches. Walks or slabs five feet in width should be reinforced with No. 3 bars at 24 inches on center each way or 6"x6"-W2.9xW2.9 (6"x6"-6/6) welded wire mesh, and should be provided with weakened plane joints. Slabs between five and ten feet should be provided with longitudinal weakened plane joints at the center lines. Slabs exceeding ten feet in width should be provided with a weakened plane joint located three feet inside the exterior perimeter as indicated on attached Plate Number 14. Both traverse and longitudinal weakened plane joints should be constructed as detailed in Plate Number 14. Exterior slabs adjacent to doors and garage openings should be connected to the footings by dowels consisting of No. 3 reinforcing bars placed at 24-inch intervals extending 12 inches into the footing and 24 inches into the slab. LIMITATIONS REVIEW, OBSERVATION AND TESTING The recommendations presented in this report are contingent upon our review of final plans and specifications. Such plans and specifications should be made available to the geotechnical engineer and engineering geologist so that they may review and verify their compliance with this report and with Chapter 70 of the Uniform Building Code. 'SCS&T 9311121 June 29, 1993 Page 9 It is recommended that Southern California Soil and Testing, Inc. be retained to provide continuous soil engineering services during the earthwork operations. This is to verify compliance with the design concepts, specifications or recommendations and to allow design changes in the event that subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to start of construction. UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS The recommendations and opinions expressed in this report reflect our best estimate of the project requirements based on an evaluation of the subsurface soil conditions encountered at the subsurface exploration locations and on the assumption that the soil conditions do not deviate appreciably from those encountered. It should be recognized that the performance of the foundations and/or cut and fill slopes may be influenced by undisclosed or unforeseen variations in the soil conditions that may occur in the intermediate and unexplored areas. Any unusual conditions not covered in this report that may be encountered during site development should be brought to the attention of the geotechnical engineer so that he may make modifications if necessary. CHANGE IN SCOPE This office should be advised of any changes in the project scope or proposed site grading so that we may determine if the recommendations contained herein are appropriate. This should be verified in writing or modified by a written addendum. TIME LIMITATIONS The findings of this report are val id as of this date. Changes in the condition of a property can, however, occur with the passage of time, whether they be due to natural processes or the work of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in the Standards-of-Practice and/or Government Codes may occur. Due to such changes, the findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or in part by changes beyond our control. Therefore, this report should not be relied upon after a period of two years without a review by us verifying the suitability of the conclusions and recommendations. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD In the performance of our professional services, we comply with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of our profession currently practicing under similar conditions and in the same L'l ' SCS&T 9311121 June 29, 1993 Page 10 locality. The client recognizes that subsurface conditions may vary from those encountered at the locations where our borings, surveys, and explorations are made, and that our data, interpretations, and recommendations be based solely on the information obtained by us. We will be responsible for those data, interpretations, and recommendations, but shall not be responsible for the interpretations by others of the information developed. Our services consist of professional consultation and observation only, and no warranty of any kind whatsoever, express or implied, is made or intended in connection with the work performed or to be performed by us, or by our proposal for consulting or other services, or by our furnishing of oral or written reports or findings. CLIENT'S RESPONSIBILITY It is the responsibility of Mr. Martin W. Huffman, or his representatives to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the structural engineer and architect for the project and incorporated into the project's plans and specifications. It is further his responsibility to take the necessary measures to insure that the contractor and his subcontractors carry out such recommendations during construction. HELD EXPLORATIONS Six subsurface explorations were made at the locations indicated on the attached Plate Number 1 on May 19, 1993. These explorations consisted of backhoe trenches. The field work was conducted under the observation of our engineering geology personnel. The explorations were carefully logged when made. These logs are presented on the following Plates Number 3 through 8. The soils are described in accordance with the Unified Soils Classification System as illustrated on the attached simplified chart on Plate Number 2. In addition, a verbal textural description, the wet color, the apparent moisture and the density or consistency are provided. The density of granular soils is given as either very loose, loose, medium dense, dense or very dense. The consistency of silts or clays is given as either very soft, soft, medium stiff, stiff, very stiff, or hard. Disturbed and "undisturbed" samples of typical and representative soils were obtained and returned to the laboratory for testing. SCS&T 9311121 June 29, 1993 Page 11 LABORATORY TESTING Laboratory tests were performed in accordance with the generally accepted American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) test methods or suggested procedures. A brief description of the tests performed is presented below: a) CLASSIFICATION: Field classifications were verified in the laboratory by visual examination. The final soil classifications are in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System. b) MOISTURE-DENSITY: In-place moisture contents and dry densities were determined for representative soil samples. This information was an aid to classification and permitted recognition of variations in material consistency with depth. The dry unit weight is determined in pounds per cubic foot, and the in-place moisture content is determined as a percentage of the soil's dry weight. The results are summarized in the trench logs. c) GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION: The grain size distribution was determined from representative samples of the native soils in accordance with ASTM D422. The results of these tests are presented on Plate Number 9. d) COMPACTION TEST: The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of typical soils were determined in the laboratory in accordance with ASTM Standard Test D- 1557-78, Method A. The results of these tests are presented on Plate Number 10. e) EXPANSION INDEX TEST: An expansion index test on remolded samples was performed on representative samples of soils likely to be present at finish grade. The test was performed on the portion of the sample passing the #4 standard sieve. The sample was brought to optimum moisture content then dried back to a constant moisture content then dried back to a constant moisture content for 12 hours at 230 +_ 9 degrees Fahrenheit. The specimen was then compacted in a 4-inch-diameter mold in two equal layers by means of a tamper, then trimmed to a final height of 1 inch, and brought to a saturation of approximately 50 percent. The specimen was placed in a consolidometer with porous stones at the top and bottom, a total normal load of 12.63 pounds was placed (144.7 psf), and the sample was allowed to consolidate for a period of 10 minutes. The sample was allowed to become saturated, and the change in vertical movement was recorded until the rate of S'CS&T 9311121 June 29, 1993 Page 12 expansion became nominal. The expansion index is reported on the attached Plate Number 10 as the total vertical displacement times the fraction of the sample passing the #4 sieve times 1000. CLASSIFICATION OF EXPANSIVE SOIL EXPANSION INDEX POTENTIAL EXPANSION 1-20 very low 21-50 low 51-90 medium 91-30 high Above 130 very high f) DIRECT SHEAR TESTS: Direct shear tests were performed to determine the failure envelope based on yield shear strength. The shear box was designed to accommodate a sample having a diameter of 2.375 inches or 2.50 inches and aheight of 1.0 inch. Samples were tested at different vertical loads and a saturated moisture content. The shear stress was applied at a constant rate of strain of approximately 0.05 inch per minute. The results of these tests are presented on the attached Plate Number 11. g) CONSOLIDATION TEST: Consolidation tests were performed on selected "undisturbed" samples. The consolidation apparatus was designed to accommodate a 1-inch-high by 2.375- inch or 2.500-inch diameter soil sample laterally confined by a brass ring. Porous stones were placed in contact with the top and bottom of the sample to permit the addition or release of pore fluid during testing. Loads were applied to the sample in a geometric progression after vertical movement ceased, and resulting deformations were recorded. The percent consolidation is reported as the ratio of the amount of vertical compression to the original sample height. The test sample was inundated at some point in the test cycle to determine its behavior under the anticipated loads as soil moisture increases. The results of this test are presented in the form of a curve on Plates Number 12 and 13. SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LEGEND ' UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART SOIL DESCRIPTION GROUP SYMBOL TYPICAL NAMES I. COARSE GRAINED, more than half of material is 1 arger than No. 200 sieve size. GRAVELS CLEAN GRAVELS More than half of coarse fraction is larger than No. 4 sieve size but smaller than 3". GRAVELS WITH FINES (Appreciable amount of fines) SANDS CLEAN SANDS Hore~~than half of coarse fraction is smaller than No. 4 sieve size. SANDS WITH FINES (Appreciable amount of fines) II. FINE GRAINED, more than half of material is smaller than No. 200 sieve sue. SILTS AND CLAYS Liquid Limit less than 50 SILTS AND CLAYS Liquid Limit greater than 50 HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS -J- — Water level at time of excavation or as indicated US — Undisturbed, driven ring sample or tube sample y\SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA N™T^ SOIL A TESTING, INC. ^iS GW Well gradei gravels, gravel- sand mixtures, little or no fines. GP Poorly graded gravels, gravel sand mixtures, little or no fines. GM Silty gravels,, poorly graded gravel-sand-silt mixtures. GC Clayey gravels, poorly graded gravel-sand, clay mixtures. SW Well graded sand, gravelly sands, little or no fines. SP Poorly graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines. SM Silty sands, poorly graded sand and silty mixtures. SC Clayey sands, poorly graded Sand and clay mixtures. ML Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour, sandy silt or clayey-silt-sand mixtures with slight plas- ticity.CL Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly clays, sandy clays, silty clays, lean clays. OL Organic silts and organic silty clays or low plasticity. MH Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine sandyor silty soils, elastic silts. CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays. OH Organic clays of medium to high plasticity. PT Peat and other highly organic soils. CK — Undisturbed chunk sample BG — Bulk sample SP — Standard penetration sample GOLF PRACTICE FACILITY BY: DBA DATE: 06-18-93 JOB NUMBER: 9311121 Plate No. 2 \ ^ X -ft.UJO 1. 2- ™_ 4- 5- 6- 7- ^ MB ^ •X •I • •1 ^H SAMPLE TYPEBG SOILCLASSIFICATION |SM TRENCH NUMBER 1 ELEVATION DESCRIPTION ALLUVIUM, Brown SILTY SAND v ~ Trench Ended at 8' Due to Caving APPARENTMOISTUREWet — __ Saturated APPARENTCONSISTENCYOR DENSITYLoose >- H 35z =UJ oQ a >•ccQ MOISTURECONTENT IZIRELATIVE 1COMPACTION(X). - : -_ - - - j : : ,/^v SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ^=r=yN.T/^ SOIL & TESTING, INC.v MOJECT: GOLF PRACTICE FACILITY LOGGED BY: RF DATE LOQQED:05- 19-93 JOB NUMBER: 9311121 PLATE NUMBEHt 3 **? X UJo 1 - - 2 - 3- 4 - 5 - 6 — 7 - 8 - 9 - 10- 11- 12- . 13- 14-SAMPLE TYPE\ BG V BG BG SOILCLASSIFICATIONsc ' SP CL SC/ SM TRENCH NUMBER 2 ELEVATION DESCRIPTION TOPSOIL, Brown VERY CLAYEY SAND ALLUVIUM, Tan SAND, Caving — j'- -Uator Tahlo Dark Grey SILTY CLAY Brown CLAYEY VERY SILTY SAND Trench Ended at 15'APPARENTMOISTUREMoist Wet Satur- ated Satur- ated APPARENTCONSISTENCYOR DENSITYVery Loose Loose Soft to Medium Stiff Medium Dense DRY DENSITY(pcf)84.6 MOISTURECONTENT (X)34.6 RELATIVECOMPACTIONS— — _ - - - - — . - - : - - . - - - y^X SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA MOJECT: GOLF PRACTICE FACILITY N^X SOIL 8. TESTING. INC.LOGGED «Y: ^ DATE LOGGED: 05-19-93 1 ^S JOB NUUBEM: 9311121 PLATE NUMBER: 4 r^ *••»• I -<LUl O 1- - 3- 4- 5- MI 6- 7- 8- 9- 10- 11- ^m 12- 13- ^ 14-SAMPLE TYPE\ 'SOILCLASSIFICATION |SM SM/ SP CL SM TRENCH NUMBER 3 ELEVATION DESCRIPTION TOPSOIL, Brown VERY SILTY SAND ALLUVIUM, Tan SLIGHTLY SILTY SAND, Caving v. — — .:. Seepage Dark Green SILTY CLAY Brown SILTY SAND Trench Ended at 15'APPARENTMOISTUREMoist Wet Satur- ated Satur- ated APPARENTCONSISTENCYOR DENSITYVery Loose Loose to Medium Dense Soft to Medium Stiff Medium Dense >t CO 2 Ctu o Q B->DCo MOISTURECONTENT (XIRELATIVECOMPACTIONtXI_ ~ - - ~ — . • - - - : . : />w SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA MOJICT> GOLF PRACTICE FACILITYx^scX 1 ^3/ SO<L. & TESTING, INC. LOdQCO BY: Rr DATE LOQQIO: 05-19-93 1 ^ JOB NUMBER: 9311121 PLATE NUMBEIi: 5 \ I Ulo • 1 - - 2 - 3 - 4 - «i 5 - ^m fi - M 7 - 8 - *n 9 - «v 10- •M ^B •m ^ ^SAMPLE TYPEBG \SOILCLASSIFICATION |SM SC/ CL SM/ SC TRENCH NUMBER 4 ELEVATION DESCRIPTION ALLUVIUM, Tan Brown VERY SILTY SAND Grey VERY CLAYEY SAND/VERY SANDY CLAY V Heavy •=- Seepage Grey CLAYEY SILTY SAND, Caving Trench Ended at 11'APPARENTMOISTUREWet Wet to Satur- ated Satur- ated APPARENTCONSISTENCYOR DENSITY^oose Loose to Medium Dense Loose to Medium Dense i- co UJ ? oco MOISTURECONTENT V/.}^RELATIVE 1COMPACTION!/)"• • . - - - ™ w _ " - - - - " y£X SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA «O«CT: GOLF PRACTICE FACILITY ^3/ SOIL 1 TESTING, INC.LOOQKD BY: RF DATE LOQQED: 05-19-93 N^ JOB NUMBER: 9311121 PLATE NUMBER: 6 I UJ Q 1, 2- 3- — , 4- 5- *• 6 < « 7- « 8- ^ 9- 10- 11- 12- ^ 13- ^ 14-SAMPLE TYPE IBGw CK \ CK • CK B SOIL 1CLASSIFICATION 1SM sc/ CL CL& SC TRENCH NUMBER 5 ELEVATION DESCRIPTION TOPSQIL, Brown SILTY SAND ALLUVIUM, Brown, Mottled CLAYEY SAND/SANDY CLAY V-~ Seepage Dark Grey SILTY CLAY to CLAYEY SAND, Intermixed ' Trench Ended at 15'APPARENTMOISTURElumid to Moist Wet to Satur- ated Saturated APPARENTCONSISTENCYOR DENSITYLoose Loose to Medium Dense and Soft to Medium Stiff Soft to Medium Stiff and Loose to Medium Dense H coZ cuj 75Q 5- cro 84.1 89.8 •MOISTURECONTENT (XI35.2 31.1 RELATIVE 1COMPACTIONl/l 1" « ^ . . - - - - - - - — - - - ,^w SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA MOJECT: GOLF PRACTICE FACILITY \Ss SOIL & TESTING, INC. LOQOED BY: RF DATE LOOQED: 05-19-93 ^^ JOB NUMBER: 9311121 PLATE NUMBER: 7 :i -ft.LUa n i. 2- 3- 4- 5- 6- 7 - 8- 9- 10- ^m ^m ^ •• ^SAMPLE TYPE^ \SOILCLASSIFICATION |SM SM/sc CL TRENCH NUMBER 6 ELEVATION DESCRIPTION TOPSOIL, Brown SILTY SAND ALLUVIUM, Mottled Brown Grey CLAYEY SILTY SAND ^11 " i.— Seepage— — Dark Brown SANDY SILTY CLAY Trench Ended at 11'APPARENTMOISTUREMoist Very Moist to Wet Satur- ated APPARENTCONSISTENCYOR DENSITYVery Loose Loose to Medium Dense Soft to Medium Stiff ^\ Medium Stiff - H 55 IU IS cca 95.7 MOISTURECONTENT (XI27.2 RELATIVE ICOMPACTION!/)J . ™ - - - - - - « : y^V SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ^^X SOIL & TESTING. INC. PROJECT: GOLF PRACTICE FACILITY lOaOED «Y: RF DATE LOOQEO: 05-19-93 JOB NUMBER: 9311121 PLATE NUMBER! & *SCALE CORRECTION*i \ i S IUJ «LU o I S | «1 X" « —o UlN Z ? o o o o o o <3 o o o*" PERCENT FINER tft U (A U O oc £ d S (A UJ 81. UJ fiOU (S*iO<&If) Ul 55 9 uj> ac M 3 .^v SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA KJ^ SOIL AND TESTING PROJECT: GOLF PRACTICE FACILITY BY: DBA JOB NUMBER: 9311121 DATE: 06-21-93 Plate No. 9 MAXIMUM DENSITY ft OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT ASTM D1557-78 METHOD A SAMPLE DESCRIPTION Maximum Density (pet) Optimum Moisture ContC/.J T5 3 0~ll Brown Silty Sand 114.7 12.7 EXPANSION INDEX TEST RESULTS SAMPLE T5 9 O-l1 CONDITION Remolded NITIAL M.C.CV.)11.9 INITIAL DENSITY (POT 102.3 FINAL M.C. ('/.)21.8 NORMAL STRESS CPSF)144.7 EXPANSION INDEX 37 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL & TESTING, INC. GOLF PRACTICE FACILITY BY:DBA JOB NUMBER: DATE . 06-21-91 DIRECT SHEAR SUMMARY LL CO (0Uicc en LU SAMPLE 1 2M L (0.518) (1.036) 2 2L (2.070) NORMAL STRESS, KSF {2 Viw SAMPLE) DESCRIPTION ANGLE OF INTERNAL FRICTION COHESION INTERCEPT (PSF) T5 g 0-1'Remolded to 90%34 200 PROVING RING No. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL & TESTING, INC. GOLF PRACTICE FACILITY BY:DBA JOB NUMBER; 9311121 DATE: 06-21-93 PLATE No.: 11 CONSOLIDATION percentfo£ovoOo--Jcncji-t>(jjr>3i— oO . . -^— WATER ADDED I . . , , i i 1 <d£> ^k-. , t . ' 'f i ' N^ — X r ' , 1 . "S^ 1 , ! . t , "s. >,,_ V X "S Ss. \\\\ \ VS,S \N • ""v^ Hs."-N^ 1 1 1 , ,* v , V\ \S\, \\ \ * ^^ i "*v^ 1 , \\\V\\ \\\ i ^ • i i i\\\\ *\\1 I ^ 1 i 0.5 1.0 LOAD kips /sq. ft. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ,r i * ! - I , \ \ 1 ', i1 , t , , , • > , 5 10 ' 12 e e1 50 GOLF PRACTICE FACILITY SOIL & TESTING LAB, INC. «a«O RIVKRDAL.C BTREKT • AN OIBdO. CALIFORNIA 0B1BO 3Y JOB DBA NO.9311121 D*16 06-21-93 Plate No.12 0' 1 2 3 4 5 c 6o>o 0)a 7 zo o O« OU 0 .*-- — WATER ADDEDj~— t. 1 • i ~~- i i ! ,i i1 . i . i < '.i • .1 1 <$> ' t i ' ^ Ij i i 1 i , < • , •^ h- , , t I -"=: ^v ""s ^ ""s, s ' i "\"x. I "V "S. S . I ! i *^. "X*^" I^»^^ "*> I , , , s.\iX\\^ ^ """••L^ i ' 1 • , \ i s\sis1 \ 1^-^l , I • • \\1v>, i ^ i i 1 0.5 1.0 LOAD kips/sq. ft. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA t , < • • ! r 1 , . 1 , 5 10 * T5 @ 7' 1 ' 1 1 1 . 1 1 I | 50 GOLF PRACTICE FACILITY SOIL. & TESTING LAB, INC. •••O RIVERDAUE BTRBKT SAfSl DICOO. CALIFORNIA BB18O BY JOB NO. DBA 9311121 DATE 06-21-93 . Plate No.13 JOMTS — — -.-A ^^L><C\^^^~\ \ TRANSVERSE CONTROL JOWTS / LONdTUDMALCONTROL-- TRANSVERSE COKTWJOKTS 3'W(U)-JOMTSPACMG W/2 W/2 W/2 SLAB ON GRADE 10 FEET OR GREATER IN WIDTH SLAB ON GRADE 5 FEET TO 10 FEET IN WIDTH NOTE: 1. -W SHOULD NOT EXCEED 15 FEET. 2. JOMT PATTERN SHOULD BE NEARLY SQUARE. T/2 LTOOLED OR SAWED JOMT LJ* - "/— j REt*=ORCEMENT PER REPORT (T MN. COVER) *T * TWCKNESS PER REPORT CONTROL JOINT DETAIL NO SCALE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL & TESTING, INC. PROJECT:GOLF PRACTICE FACILITY BY:DBA JOB NUMBER:9311121 DATE: 06-29-93 Plate No. 14 APPENDIX A -If •- '•!*. SCS&T 9311121 June 29, 1993 Appendix A, Page 1 CARLSBAD GOLF PRACTICE FACILITY, HAYMAR DRIVE, CARLSBAD RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS - GENERAL PROVISIONS GENERAL INTENT The intent of these specifications is to establish procedures for clearing, compacting natural ground, preparing areas to be filled, and placing and compacting fill soils to the lines and grades shown on the accepted plans. The recommendations contained in the preliminary geotechnical investigation report and/or the attached Special provisions are a part of the Recommended Grading Specifications and shall supersede the provisions contained hereinafter in the case of conflict. These specifications shall only be used in conjunction with the geotechnical report for which they are a part. No deviation from these specifications will be allowed, except where specified in the geotechnical report or in other written communication signed by the Geotechnical Engineer. OBSERVATION AND TESTING Southern California Soil & Testing, Inc., shall be retained as the Geotechnical Engineer to observe and test the earthwork in accordance with these specifications. It will be necessary that the Geotechnical Engineer or his representative provide adequate observation so that my may provided his opinion as to whether or not the work was accomplished as specified. It shall be the responsibility of the contractor to assist the Geotechnical Engineer and to keep him appraised of work schedules, changes and new information and data so that he may provided these opinions, in the event that any unusual conditions not covered by the special provisions or preliminary geotechnical report are encountered during the grading operations. The Geotechnical Engineer shall be contacted for further recommendations. If, in the opinion of the Geotechnical Engineer, substandard conditions are encountered, such as questionable or unsuitable soil, unacceptable moisture content, inadequate compaction, adverse weather, etc.; construction should be stopped until the conditions are remedied or corrected or he shall recommended rejection of this work. Tests used to determine the degree of compaction should be performed in accordance with the following American Society for Testing and Materials test methods: 1J " ' SCS&T 9311121 June 29, 1993 Appendix A, Page 2 Maximum Density & Optimum Moisture Content - ASTM D-1557-82 Density of Soil In-Place - ASTM D-1556-64 or ASTM D-2922 All densities shall be expressed in terms of Relative Compaction as determined by the foregoing ASTM testing procedures. PREPARATION OF AREAS TO RECEIVE FILL All vegetation, brush and debris derived from clearing operations shall be removed, and legally disposed of. All areas disturbed by site grading should be left in a neat and finished appearance, free from unsightly debris. After clearing or benching the natural ground, the areas to be filled shall be scarified to a depth of 6 inches, brought to the proper moisture content, compacted and tested for the specified minimum degree of compaction. AH loose soils in excess of 6 inches thick should be removed to firm natural ground which is defined as natural soils which possesses an in-situ density of at least 90 percent of its maximum dry density. When the slope of the natural ground receiving fill exceeds 20 percent (5 horizontal units to 1 vertical unit), the original ground shall be stepped or benched. Benches shall be cut to a firm competent formational soils. The lower bench shall be at least 10 feet wide or 1-1/2 times the equipment width, whichever is greater, and shall be sloped back into the hillside at a gradient of not less than two (20 percent. All other benches should be at least 6 feet wide. The horizontal portion of each bench shall be compacted prior to receiving fill as specified herein for compacted natural ground. Ground slopes flatter than 20 percent shall be benched when considered necessary by the GeotechnicaJ Engineer. Any abandoned buried structures encountered during grading operations must be totally removed. All underground utilities to be abandoned beneath any proposed structure should be removed from within 10 feet of the structure and properly capped off. The resulting depressions from the above described procedure should be backfilled with acceptable soil that is compacted to the requirements of the Geotechnical Engineer. This includes, but is not limited to, septic tanks, fuel tanks, sewer lines or leach lines, storm drains and water lines. Any buried structures or utilities no to be abandoned should be brought to the attention of the Geotechnical Engineer so that he may determine if any special recommendation will be necessary. SCS&T 9311121 June 29, 1993 Appendix A, Page 3 All water wells which will be abandoned should be backfilled and capped in accordance to the requirements set forth by the Geotechnical Engineer. The top of the cap should be at least 4 feet below finish grade or 3 feet below the bottom of footing whichever is greater. The type of cap will depend on the diameter of the well and should be determined by the Geotechnical Engineer and/or a qualified Structural Engineer. FILL MATERIAL Materials to be placed in the fill shall be approved by the Geotechnical Engineer and shall be free of vegetable matter and other deleterious substances. Granular soil shall contain sufficient fine material to fill the voids. The definition and disposition of oversized rocks and expansive or detrimental soils are covered in the geotechnical 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 fill material, but only with the explicit consent of the Geotechnical Engineer. Any import material shall be approved by the Geotechnical Engineer before being brought to the site. PLACING AND COMPACTION OF FILL Approved fill material shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill in layers not to exceed 6 inches in compacted thickness. Each layer shall have a uniform moisture content in the range that will allow the compaction effort to be efficiently applied to achieve the specified degree of compaction. Each layer shall\be uniformly compacted to the specified minimum degree of compaction with equipment of adequate size to economically compact the layer. Compaction equipment should either be specifically designed for soil compaction or of proven reliability. The minimum degree of compaction to be achieved is specified in either the Special Provisions or the recommendations contained in the preliminary geotechnical investigation report. When the structural fill material includes rocks, no rocks will be allowed to nest and all voids must be carefully filled with soil such that the minimum degree of compaction recommended in the Special Provisions is achieved. The maximum size and spacing of rock permitted in structural fills and in non- structural fills is discussed in the geotechnical report, when applicable. Field observation and compaction tests to estimate the degree of compaction of the fill will be taken by the Geotechnical Engineer or his representative. The location and frequency of the tests shall be at the , SCS&T 9311121 June 29, 1993 Appendix A, Page 4 Geotechnical Engineer's discretion. When the compaction test indicates that a particular layer is at less than the required degree of compaction, the layer shall be reworked to the satisfaction of the GeotechnicaJ Engineer and until the desired relative compaction has been obtained. Fill slopes shall be compacted by means of sheepsfoot rollers or other suitable equipment. Compaction by sheepsfoot rollers hall be at vertical intervals of not greater than four feet. In addition, fill slopes at a ratio of two horizontal to one vertical or flatter, should be trackrolled. Steeper fill slopes shall be over- built and cut-back to finish contours after the slope has been constructed. Slope compaction operations shall result in all fill material six or more inches inward from the finished face of the slope having a relative compaction of at least 90 percent of maximum dry density or the degree of compaction specified in the Special Provisions section of this specification. The compaction operation on the slopes shall be continued until the Geotechnical Engineer is of the opinion that the slopes will be surficiaJIy stable. Density tests in the slopes will be made by the Geotechnical Engineer during construction of the slopes to determine if the required compaction is being achieved. Where failing tests occur or other field problems arise, the Contractor will be notified that day of such conditions by written communication from the Geotechnical Engineer or his representative in the form of a daily field report. \ If the method of achieving the required slope compaction selected by the Contractor fails to produce the necessary results, the Contractor shall rework or rebuild such slopes until the required degree of compaction is obtained, at no cost to the Owner or Geotechnical Engineer. CUT SLOPES The Engineering Geologist shall inspect cut slopes excavated in rock or lithified formationaJ material during the grading operations at intervals determined at his discretion. If any conditions not anticipated in the preliminary report such as perched water, seepage, lenticular or confined strata of a potentially adverse nature, unfavorably inclined bedding, joints or fault planes are encountered during grading,, these conditions shall be analyzed by the Engineering Geologist and Soil Engineer to determine if mitigating measures are necessary. i Unless otherwise specified in the geotechnical report, no cut slopes shall be excavated higher or steeper than the allowed by the ordinances of the controlling governmental agency. SCS&T 9311121 June 29, 1993 Appendix A, Page 5 ENGINEERING OBSERVATION Field observation by the Geotechnical Engineer or his representative shall be made during the filling and compaction operations so that he can express his opinion regarding the conformance of the grading with acceptable standards of practice. Neither the presence of the Geotechnical Engineer or his representative or the observation and testing shall not release the Grading Contractor from his duty to compact all fill material to the specified degree of compaction. SEASON LIMITS Fill shall not be placed during unfavorable weather conditions. When work is interrupted by heavy rain, filling operations shall not be resumed until the proper moisture content and density of the fill materials can be achieved. Damaged site conditions resulting from weather or acts of God shall be repaired before acceptance of work. RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS - SPECIAL PROVISIONS RELATIVE COMPACTION: The minimum degree of compaction to be obtained in compacted natural ground, compacted fill, and compacted backfill shall be at least 90 percent. For street and parking lot subgrade, the upper six inches should be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction. EXPANSIVE SOILS: Detrimentally expansive soil is defined as clayey soil which has an expansion index of SO or greater when tested in accordance with the Uniform Building Code Standard 29-C. OVERSIZED MATERIAL: Oversized fill material is generally defined herein as rocks or lumps of soil over 6 inches in diameter. Oversized materials should not be placed in fill unless recommendations of placement of such material is provided by the geotechnical engineer. At least 40 percent of the fill soils shall pass through a No. 4 U.S. Standard Sieve. TRANSITION LOTS: Where transitions between cut and fill occur within the proposed building pad, the cut portion should be undercut a minimum of one foot below the base of the proposed footings and recompacted as structural backfill. In certain cases that would be addressed in the geotechnical report, special footing reinforcement or a combination of special footing reinforcement and undercutting may be required.