The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPUD 06-06A; LA COSTA OAKS; UPDATED GEOTECHNICAL REPORT; 2008-04-21GEOCON INCORPORATED Project No. 06105-52-23 April 21, 2008 Coirich 4747 Morena Boulevard, Suite 100 San Diego, California 92117 Attention: Ms. Teri Shusterman CONSULTANTS 10> Ly c) C LU!— LJ J e? - LIJ • Lucy RECORD COPY MT "'/°! initial Date Subject: VILLAGES OF LA COSTA - THE OAKS NORTH NEIGHBORHOOD 3.7 CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA ADDITIONAL SEISMIC AND POST-TENSIONED FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS Reference: Update Geotechnical Report Villages of La Costa, The Oaks North, Neighborhood 3.7, Lots 1 through 43 and 47, Carlsbad, California, prepared by Geocon Incorporated, dated November 29, 2007 (Project No. 06105-52-23). Dear Ms. Shusterman: In accordance with your request, we have prepared this letter provide additional seismic and post- tensioned design parameters for the subject development. We understand planned structures will be designed based on the 2007 California Building Code. We used the computer program Seismic Hazard Curves and Uniform Hazard Response Spectra, provided by the USGS. Table 1 summarizes site-specific design criteria obtained from the 2007 California Building Code (CBC; Based on the 2006 International Building Code [IBC]), Chapter 16 Structural Design, Section 1613 Earthquake Loads. The short spectral response uses a period of 0.2 second. TABLE I 2007 UBC SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS Parameter Value IBC-06 Reference Site Class C D Table 1613.5.2 Spectral Response - Class B (short), Ss 1.099g 1.099g Figure 1613.5(3) Spectral Response - Class B (1 sec), S 0.414g 0.414g Figure 1613.5(4) Site Coefficient, FA 1.000 1.060 Table 1613.5.3(1) Site Coefficient, Fv 1.386 1.586 Table 1613.5.3(2) Maximum Considered Earthquake Spectral 1.099g _Response _Acceleration _(short),_SMS 1.165g Section 1613.5.3 (Eqn 16-37) Maximum Considered Earthquake _Response _Acceleration Spectral - (1_sec),_SMI 0.573g 0.656g Section 1613.5.3 (Eqn 16-38) 5% Damped Design Spectral 0.733g _Response _Acceleration _(short),_SDS 0.776g Section 1613.5.4 (Eqn 16-39) 5% Damped Design Spectral Response Acceleration (1 see), SDI 0.382g 0.437g Section 1613.5.4 (Eqn 16-40) 6960 Flanders Drive N Son Diego, California 92121-2974 U Telephone (858) 558-6900 N Fax (858) 558-6159 I Rv avo6A I I I I I I I Conformance to the criteria in Table 1 for seismic design does not constitute any kind of guarantee or assurance that significant structural damage or ground failure will not occur if a large earthquake occurs. The primary goal of seismic design is to protect life, not to avoid all damage, since such design may be economically prohibitive. The post-tensioned systems should be designed by a structural engineer experienced in post-tensioned slab design and design criteria of the Post-Tensioning Institute (PTI), Third Edition, as required by the 2007 California Building Code (CBC Section 1805.8). Although this procedure was developed for expansive soil conditions, we understand it can also be used to reduce the potential for foundation distress due to differential fill settlement. The post-tensioned design should incorporate the geotechnical parameters presented on Table 2 for the particular Foundation Category designated. The parameters presented in Table 2 are based on the guidelines presented in the PTI, Third Edition design manual. I TABLE 2 POST-TENSIONED FOUNDATION SYSTEM DESIGN PARAMETERS Post-Tensioning Institute (PT!), Third Edition Design Parameters Foundation Category 1 11 III Thomthwaite Index -20 -20 -20 Equilibrium Suction 3.9 3.9 3.9 Edge Lift Moisture Variation Distance, e (feet) 5.3 5.1 4.9 Edge Lift, YM (inches) 0.61 1.10 1.58 Center Lift Moisture Variation Distance, e (feet) 9.0 9.0 9.0 Center Lift, YM (inches) 0.30 0.47 0.66 The foundations for the post-tensioned slabs should be embedded in accordance with the recommendations of the structural engineer. If a post-tensioned mat foundation system is planned, the slab should possess a thickened edge with a minimum width of 12 inches and extend below the clean sand or crushed rock layer. If the structural engineer proposes a post-tensioned foundation design method other than PTI, Third Edition: The deflection criteria presented in Table 2 are still applicable. I . Interior stiffener beams should be used for Foundation Categories II and III. The width of the perimeter foundations should be at least 12 inches. The perimeter footing embedment depths should be at least 12 inches, 18 inches, and 24 inches for foundation categories I, II, and III, respectively. The embedment depths should be I measured from the lowest adjacent pad grade. Our experience indicates post-tensioned slabs are susceptible to excessive edge lift, regardless of the I underlying soil conditions. Placing reinforcing steel at the bottom of the perimeter footings and the interior stiffener beams may mitigate this potential. Current PTI design procedures primarily address the potential center lift of slabs but, because of the placement of the reinforcing tendons in the top of the slab, the resulting eccentricity after tensioning reduces the ability of the system to mitigate edge lift. I The structural engineer should design the foundation system to reduce the potential of edge lift occurring for the proposed structures. I During the construction of the post-tension foundation system, the concrete should be placed monolithically. Under no circumstances should cold joints form between the footings/grade beams and the slab during the construction of the post-tension foundation system. I Project No. 06105-52-23 - 2 - April 21, 2008 L Category I, II, or Ill foundations may be designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) (dead plus live load). This bearing pressure may be increased by one-third for transient loads due to wind or seismic forces. The estimated maximum total and differential settlement for the planned structures due to foundation loads is 1 inch and '/z inch, respectively. Isolated footings, if present, should have the minimum embedment depth and width recommended for conventional foundations for a particular foundation category. The use of isolated footings, which are located beyond the perimeter of the building and support structural elements connected to the building, are not recommended for Category ifi. Where this condition cannot be avoided, the isolated footings should be connected to the building foundation system with grade beams. For Foundation Category III, consideration should be given to using interior stiffening beams and connecting isolated footings and/or increasing the slab thickness. In addition, consideration should be given to connecting patio slabs, which exceed 5 feet in width, to the building foundation to reduce the potential for future separation to occur. Special subgrade presaturation is not deemed necessary prior to placing concrete; however, the exposed foundation and slab subgrade soil should be moisture conditioned, as necessary, to maintain a moist condition as would be expected in any such concrete placement. The recommendations of this letter are intended to reduce the potential for cracking of slabs due to expansive soil (if present), differential settlement of existing soil or soil with varying thicknesses. However, even with the incorporation of the recommendations presented herein, foundations, stucco walls, and slabs-on-grade placed on such conditions may still exhibit some cracking due to soil movement and/or shrinkage. The occurrence of concrete shrinkage cracks is independent of the supporting soil characteristics. Their occurrence may be reduced and/or controlled by limiting the slump of the concrete, proper concrete placement and curing, and by the placement of crack control joints at periodic intervals, in particular, where re-entrant slab corners occur. Geocon Incorporated should be consulted to provide additional design parameters as required by the structural engineer. If you have any questions regarding this correspondence, or if we may be of further service, please contact the undersigned at your convenience. I I I I I Very truly yours, TED I Shawn Weedon GE 2714 IfSadr CEO 1778 AS:SW:dmc (2) Addressee KAL AU 0 MDR 01 tr No. T7U CL A CERTIFIED ENGINEERING GEOI.OGIST CA--" OFE8 1 ( No. 2 \2 jI EXp.O/3,09 ) \JJ I I Project No. 06105-52-23 - 3 - April 21, 2008 I FINAL REPORT OF TESTING AND OBSERVATION SERVICES PERFORMED DURING SITE GRADING VILLAGES OF LA COSTA - THE OAKS NORTH NEIGHBORHOOD 3.7 LOTS I THROUGH 43 AND 47 CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA PREPARED FOR REAL ESTATE COLLATERAL MANAGEMENT COMPANY % MORROW DEVELOPMENT INCORPORATED CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA NOVEMBER 29, 2007 PROJECT NO. 06105-52-20 GEOCON INCORPORATED GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS Project No. 06105-52-20 November 29, 2007 Real Estate Collateral Management Company % Morrow Development Incorporated 1903 Wright Place, Suite 180 Carlsbad, California 92008 Attention: Mr. Tim O'Grady I Subject: VILLAGES OF LA COSTA - THE OAKS NORTH NEIGHBORHOOD 3.7 - LOTS 1 THROUGH 43 AND 47 CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA FINAL REPORT OF TESTING AND OBSERVATION SERVICES PERFORMED DURING SITE GRADING Dear Mr. O'Grady: In accordance with your request and our proposal dated February 9, 2006, we provided compaction testing and observation services during the grading of the subject site. We performed our services during the period of March 15, 2006 through August 30, 2007. The scope of our services included: Observing the grading operations, including the removal and/or processing of topsoil, colluvium, alluvium, and undercutting lots with rock exposed at grade and cut/fill transition lots. Performing in-place dry density and/or moisture tests in fill placed and compacted at the site. I . Performing laboratory tests to aid in evaluating maximum dry density and optimum moisture content and shear strength of the compacted fill. Additionally, we performed laboratory tests on samples of soil present at finish-grade to evaluate expansion characteristics and water- soluble sulfate content. Preparing an "As-Graded" Geologic Map. I . Preparing this final report of grading. I The purpose of this report is to document that the grading for Neighborhood 3.7, which includes 43 single-family residential pads and a recreational pad, has been performed in substantial conformance with the recommendations of the project geotechnical report and that fill materials have been properly I placed and compacted. The grading operations for Neighborhood 3.7 were performed concurrently with other neighborhoods within The Oaks North project. 6960 Flanders Drive 0 Son Diego, California 92121-2974 0 Telephone (858) 558-6900 0 Fox (858) 558-6159 I I I GENERAL The grading contractor for the project was Pinnick Construction Incorporated of Lakeside, California. Grading plans for the project were prepared by Hunsaker and Associates and are entitled Rough I Grading and Erosion Control Plans for La Costa Oaks North Neighborhood 3.7, Drawing 451-8A, with City of Carlsbad approval dated November 10, 2007. We used an electronic version of the grading plans as the base map for our "As-Graded" Geologic Map (Figure 1, map pocket). The I project geotechnical report is entitled Update Geotechnical investigation, Villages of La Costa—The Oaks, Carlsbad, California, prepared by Geocon Incorporated, dated August 3, 2001 (Project i No. 06105-12-04). References to elevations and locations herein were based on surveyor's or grade-checker's stakes in 1 the field and/or interpolation from the referenced Grading Plans. Geocon Incorporated does not provide surveying services and, therefore, has no opinion regarding the accuracy of the as-graded elevations or surface geometry with respect to the approved grading plans or proper surface drainage. GRADING I Neighborhood 3.7 is located within the southeast portion of the Villages of La Costa - The Oaks North development. This neighborhood is located east of Rancho Santa Fe Road and south of San I Elijo Road. Prior to grading, the site primarily consisted of a ridge with shallow surficial deposits. Grading for the site consisted of daylight cuts and fills to achieve finish-grade elevations. Grading began with the removal and export of vegetation and constriction debris from the area to be graded. Topsoil and alluvial soil were removed to expose formational materials. Within these areas, I and prior to placing fill, the exposed (overexcavated) ground surface was scarified (where possible), moisture conditioned as necessary, and compacted. Areas of remedial grading that exposed metavolcanic and granitic rock was not scarified. Fill materials derived from on-site blasting, I excavations, and crushed material within Neighborhood 3.7 were placed and compacted in layers until the design elevations were attained. In addition, fill was placed as a result of undercutting cut- fill transition lots and lots where metavolcanic and granitic rock was exposed at grade. Roadway and parkway undercuts were also performed where metavolcanic was exposed at grade. Roadway undercuts consisted of undercutting to a depth of approximately 1 foot below the deepest utility. I Parkway undercuts consisted of undercutting to a depth of approximately 6 feet below finish-grade. Lot undercuts consisted of undercutting to a depth of at least 3 feet below finish-grade. I Undocumented fill exists within the storm drain easement within the north facing slope along Avenida Soledad and will be removed during improvement phases of development. Project No. 06105-52-20 - 2 - November 29, 2007 111 Fill Materials and Placement Procedures I The on-site fill materials generally varied between angular gravels and boulders produced by blasting and crushing of hard metavolcanic and granitic rocks to clayey fine sands, and sandy to clayey I gravels. Structural fill placed and compacted at the site consists of material that can be classified into three zones: Zone A - Material placed within 3 feet from pad grade, 6 feet from parkway grade, and within roadways to at least I. foot below the deepest utility consisted of "soil" fill with a maximum particle dimension of 6-inches. Zone B - Material placed within 10 feet from pad grade and below Zone A consisted of "soil- rock" fill with a maximum particle dimension of 12 inches. In addition, material placed on the outer 6 feet of fill slopes and 2 feet below Zone A for fills in roadways and parkways consists of "soil-rock" fill with a maximum particle dimension of 12 inches. Zone C - Material placed below Zone B consisted of "soil-rock" fill with a maximum particle I dimension of 48 inches. I Placement procedures for "soil-rock" fill consisted of spreading and compacting the material with a D9 or larger Caterpillar bulldozer with a maximum lift size of approximately 3 feet. Materials placed as "soil-rock" fill were watered heavily during spreading to help properly fill voids with finer I material and "seat" the larger rocks. During the placement of each lift, the contractor applied compactive effort to the fill by wheel-rolling and compacting with loaded rock trucks. "Soil fill" was placed in lifts no thicker than would allow for adequate bonding and compaction. The soil was moisture conditioned as necessary, mixed during placement, and compacted utilizing I conventional heavy-duty compaction equipment. I We observed compaction procedures during grading operations and performed in-place density tests to evaluate the dry density and moisture content of the "soil" and "soil-rock" fill material. We performed in-place density tests in general conformance with ASTM Test Method D 2922-05 I (nuclear). The results of the in-place dry density and moisture content tests are summarized on Table I. In general, the in-place density test results indicate that the fill soil has a dry density of at I least 90 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density near to slightly above optimum moisture content at the locations tested. The approximate locations of the in-place density tests are shown on the As-Graded Geologic Map (Figure 1). I Project No. 06105-52-20 - 3 - November 29, 2007 I We performed compaction procedures during the grading of Neighborhood 3.7 concurrently with I Neighborhoods 3.1, 3.2. and 3.3 through 3.5 of the Villages of La Costa - The Oaks North development. The results presented on Table I apply to Neighborhood 3.7 only. As such, the test numbers are not in consecutive order. Any tests taken outside of the subject neighborhood will be included in reports for other neighborhoods within The Oaks North. I We corrected the laboratory maximum dry density and optimum moisture content on fill being tested containing rocks larger than ¼ inch using methods suggested by AASHTO T224-86 and others. The values of maximum dry density and optimum moisture content presented on Table I reflect these I corrections. I We tested samples of material used for fill to evaluate moisture-density relationships, optimum moisture content and maximum dry density (ASTM D 1557-02). We performed direct shear tests (ASTM D 3080-04), on samples used for within fill slopes. We tested samples within the upper 3 feet I of finish grade to evaluate the expansion index (ASTM D 4829-03) and water-soluble sulfate content (California Test No. 417). The results of the laboratory tests are summarized on Tables II through V. I Slopes I The project slopes consist of cut and fill slopes constructed at inclinations of 2:1 (horizontal: vertical) or flatter with maximum heights of approximately 40 feet. Slopes should be planted, drained, and maintained to reduce erosion. Slope irrigation should be kept to a minimum to just support the I vegetative cover. Surface drainage should not be allowed to flow over the top of the slope. Subdrains — The contractor installed a toe drain behind Lots 21 through 27 at the general locations shown on the "As-Graded" Geologic Map (Figure 1). In addition, the drain was "as-built" for location and elevation by the project civil engineer. The toe drain consists of a 4-inch diameter PVC, Schedule 40, perforated pipe placed in crushed aggregate surrounded by Mirafi 140N (or equivalent) filter fabric. The toe drain was constructed at a flow gradient of at least 1 percent. The toe drain outlets into open space on the southeastern portion of Neighborhood 3.1. The toe drain I headwall outlet should be constructed by the master developer. The toe drain should be maintained regularly to prevent sediment and debris from obstructing the free flow of water from the subdrain I system. Project No. 06105-52-20 -4 - November 29, 2007 I Finish-grade Soil Conditions I Observations and laboratory test results indicate that the prevailing soil conditions within the upper approximately 3 feet of finish-grade of the lots have an expansion potential of "very low" (Expansion I Index of 20 or less) as defined by Uniform Building Code (UBC) Table 18-I-B. Table VI presents a summary of the indicated Expansion Index of the prevailing subgrade soil conditions for each lot. Although rocks larger than 6 inches were not intentionally placed within the street undercut fill and the upper 3 feet of pad grade, some larger rocks may exist at random locations. In addition, excavations deeper than undercut depths may require blasting. We also tested samples obtained for expansion index testing to evaluate the percentage of water- soluble sulfate. Results from the laboratory water-soluble sulfate tests are presented in Table V and indicate the on-site material possess "negligible" sulfate exposure to concrete structures as defined by UBC Table 19-A-4. Geocon Incorporated does not practice in the field of corrosion engineering. Therefore, if improvements that could be susceptible to corrosion are planned, further evaluation by corrosion engineer should be performed. SOIL AND GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS I The soil and geologic conditions encountered during grading were found to be similar to those described in the project geotechnical report. Santiago Peak Volcanics (Jsp) were exposed at grade on cut slopes, within cleanouts in pad undercuts, and cut areas within street right-of-ways. Escondido I Creek Granodiorite (Kg[e]) was exposed within the street right-of-way at the lower portions of Avenida Soledad. Undocumented fill (Qudf) exists within the storm drain easement along Avenida Soledad. Compacted fill was placed in areas designated as Qcf on Figure 1. In addition, compacted fill placed in undercut areas is designated as Quc. Table VII presents a summary of As-Graded Building Pad Conditions for each pad. The As-Graded Geologic Map (Figure 1) depicts the general geologic conditions observed. No soil or geologic conditions were observed during grading that would preclude the continued development of I the property as planned. Project No. 06105-52-20 - 5 - November 29, 2007 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1.0 General 1.1 Based on observations and test results, it is the opinion of Geocon Incorporated that the grading to which tl report pertains has been performed in substantial conformance with the recommendations of the previously referenced project soils report and the geotechnical requirements of the grading plans. Soil and geologic conditions encountered during grading that differ from those anticipated in the project soils report are not uncommon. Where such conditions required a significant modification to the recommendations of the project soils report, they have been described herein. 1.2 No soil or geologic conditions were observed during grading that would preclude the continued development of the property as planned. Based on laboratory test results and field observations, it is the opinion of Geocon Incorporated that the fill soil observed and tested as part of the grading for this neighborhood was generally compacted to a dry density of at least 90 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density near to slightly above optimum moisture content. 2.0 Future Grading 2.1 Additional grading performed at the site should be accomplished in conjunction with our observation and compaction testing services. Grading plans for any future grading should be reviewed by Geocon Incorporated prior to finalizing. Trench and wall backfill should be compacted to a dry density of at least 90 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density near or above optimum moisture content. This office should be notified at least 48 hours prior to commencing additional grading or backfill operations. 3.0 Update Geotechnical Report 3.1 /An update geotechnical report should be prepared by Geocon Incorporated for Neighborhood 3.7. The report should include foundation recommendations for reducing the detrimental effect of expansive soil and differential fill settlement across individual structures. In addition, retaining wall recommendations and seismic design criteria should be included. 4.0 Slope Maintenance 4.1 Slopes that are steeper than 3:1 (horizontal: vertical) may, under conditions that are both difficult to prevent and predict, be susceptible to near-surface (surficial) slope instability. The instability is typically limited to the outer three feet of the slope and usually does not Project No. 06105-52-20 - 6 - November 29. 2007 I I I I L L I I I I I I H directly impact the improvements on the pad areas above or below the slope. The I occurrence of surficial instability is more prevalent on fill slopes and is generally preceded by a period of heavy rainfall, excessive irrigation, or the migration of subsurface seepage. The disturbance and/or loosening of the surficial soils, as might result from root growth, I soil expansion, or excavation for irrigation lines and slope planting, may also be a signifi- cant contributing factor to surficial instability. Therefore, to the maximum extent practical; Disturbed/loosened surficial soil should be either removed or properly recompacted. I irrigation systems should be periodically inspected and maintained to eliminate leaks and excessive irrigation, and Surface drains on and adjacent to slopes should be periodically maintained to preclude ponding or erosion. Although the incorporation of the recommendations should reduce the potential for surficial slope instability, it will not eliminate the possibility and, therefore, it may be necessary to rebuild or repair a portion of the project's slopes in the future. 50 Drainage 5.1 Adequate drainage provisions are critical to the future performance of the project. Under no circumstances should water be allowed to pond. The building pads and sheet-graded areas should be properly finish-graded so that drainage water is directed away from foundations, pavements, concrete slabs, and slope tops to controlled drainage devices. 5.2 Underground utilities should be leak free. Utility and irrigation lines should be checked periodically for leaks for early detection of water infiltration and detected leaks should be repaired promptly. Detrimental soil movement could occur if water is allowed to infiltrate the soil over a prolonged period. 5.3 Landscaping planters adjacent to paved areas are not recommended due to the potential for surface or irrigation water to infiltrate the pavement's subgrade and base course. Subdrains to collect excess irrigation water and transmit it to drainage structures or impervious above- grade planter boxes should be used. In addition, where landscaping is planned adjacent to the pavement, a cutoff wall should be constructed along the edge of the pavement that extends at least 6 inches below the bottom of the base material. LIMITATIONS The conclusions and recommendations contained herein apply only to our work with respect to grading and represent conditions at the date of our final observation on August 30, 2007. Any Project No. 06105-52-20 - 7 - November 29. 2007 II I subsequent grading should be done in conjunction with our observation and testing services. As used herein, the term 'observation" implies only that we observed the progress of the work with which we agreed to be involved. Our services did not include the evaluation or identification of the potential presence of hazardous materials. Our conclusions and opinions as to whether the work essentially complies with the job specifications are based on our observations, experience and test results. Subsurface conditions, and the accuracy of tests used to measure such conditions, can vary greatly at I any time. We make no warranty, expressed or implied, except that our services were performed in accordance with engineering principles generally accepted at this time and location. I We will accept no responsibility for any subsequent changes made to the site by others, by the uncontrolled action of water, or by the failure of others to properly repair damages caused by the I uncontrolled action of water. The findings and recommendations of this report may be invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside our control. Therefore, this report is subject to review and should not be relied upon after a period of three years. Should you have any questions regarding this report, or if we may be of further service, please I contact the undersigned at your convenience. Very truly yours, I I GEOCON INCORPORATED Michael C. Ert4n Senior Staff Geologist d .iq F A'li Sadr Shawn Weedon CEG 1778 \GE 2714 MCE:AS:SW:dmc (6/del) Addressee NAL AU SADR No. 1T70 IL CERTIFIED j -4 ENGIEER1NG GEOLOGIST oESSIQ JA WE c, No. 14 c. Exp. 06130/09 W. *1 OFC Project No. 06105-5220 - 8 - November 29, 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - TABLE I SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS Elcv, Plus Field Field Field Reqd. or 3/4" Adj. Adj. Dry Moist. Rd. Rd. Depth Curve Rock MDD OMC Dens. Cont. Comp. Comp. Test No. Date Location (ft) No. (%) (pci) (%) (pci) (%.) (%) (%) SZ 1 03/15/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 35 606 1 10 132.9 8.6 120.2 10.3 90 90 SZ 2 03/16/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 34 610 I 0 130.9 9.3 118.9 10.8 91 90 SZ 3 03/16/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 36 612 2 10 141.1 6.8 130.4 6.9 92 90 SZ 4 03/16/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 34 615 2 30 143.5 6.1 130.8 7.7 91 90 SZ 5 03/16/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 33 617 1 0 130.9 9.3 122.6 10.7 94 90 SZ 6 03/16/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 36 618 2 20 142.3 6.4 127.3 3.8 89 90 SZ 6 A 03/16/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 36 618 2 20 142.3 6.4 128.8 6.5 91 90 SZ 7 03/16/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 35 620 2 20 142.3 6.4 131.6 8.4 92 90 SZ 8 03/17/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 34 623 2 0 139.9 7.2 126.3 8.0 90 90 9 03117/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 36 624 2 30 143.5 6.1 134.6 6.7 94 90 SZ 10 03/17/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 34 627 1 0 130.9 9.3 117.7 10.3 90 90 SZ 11 03/17/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 36 620 2 20 142.3 6.4 134.8 6.5 95 90 SZ 12 03/17/06 Unit 3.7; Corte Vino 20+90 626 1 0 130.9 9.3 121.4 11.6 93 90 13 03/17/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 35 630 1 0 130.9 9.3 118.8 9.5 91 90 SZ 14 03/20/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 36 - 632 - 1 10 132.9 8.6 1206 10.8 91 90 15 03/20/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 34 633 2 40 144.7 5.7 130.6 6.8 90 90 16 03/20/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 36 634 1 10 132.9 8.6 122.6 10.6 92 90 SZ 17 03/20/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 37 629 2 30 143.5 6.1 129.5 7.0 90 90 18 03/20/06 Unit 3.7; Sitio Montillo 13+90 635 1 0 130.9 9.3 117.5 12.5 90 90 19 03/20/06 Unit 3.7; Corte Vino 21+00 632 1 0 130.9 9.3 119.2 11.1 91 90 20 03/21/06 Unit 3.7; Corte Vino 13+50 637 1 0 130.9 9.3 118.4 12.6 90 90 21 03/21/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 34 .639 1 20 135.0 7.9 123.8 7.7 92 90 22 03/21/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 36 637 1 20 135.0 7.9 125.3 9.1 93 90 SZ 23 03/21/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 39/40 625 2 30 143.5 6.1 130.3 6.5 91 90 SZ 24 03/21/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 38 636 1 10 132.9 8.6 119.5 11.2 90 90 SZ ..03/21/06 Unit 3.7; Cone Vino 20+60 631 2 40 144.7 5.7 132.0 7.0 91 90 26 03/22/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 37 634 2 40 144.7 5.7 134.4 5.9 93 90 SZ 27 03/22/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 39 630 1 10 132.9 8.6 126.0 9.4 95 90 28 03/22/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 37 637 2 30 143.5 6.1 134.6 5.8 94 90 29 .............. 03/22/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 39 634 2 50 145.9 5.4 136.2 5.8 93 90 30 03/22/06 SZ - Unit 3.7; Lot 40 628 2 20 142.3 6.4 130.9 6.7 92 90 Project No. 06105-52-20 November 29, 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - TABLE I SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS Elev. Plus Field Field Field Reqd. or 3/4 Adj. Adj. Dry Moist. Re!. Rel. Depth Curve Rock MDD OMC Dens. Cont.Comp. Comp. Test No. Date Location (t) No. (°k) pcO (%) (pet) (%) %) 31 03/29/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 33 638 1 10 132.9 8.6 120.1 12.1 90 90 32 03/29/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 35 640 1 10 132.9 8.6 122.5 10.8 92 90 33 04/17/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 37; Avenida Soledad 20+50 592 1 0 130.9 9.3 124.6 9.9 95 90 34 04/17/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 39; Avenida Soledad 21+95 604 1 20 135.0 7.9 122.3 9.0 91 90 35 04/17/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 41; Avenida Soledad 19+50 587 2 0 139.9 7.2 125.8 7.9 90 90 36 04/18/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 47 596 1 10 132.9 8.6 124.0 12.2 93 90 37 04/18/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 8 600 1 10 132.9 8.6 121.2 9.3 91 90 38 04/18/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 9 604 1 10 132.9 8.6 121.8 9.9 92 90 39 04/18/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 9 607 2 0 139.9 7.2 130.1 8.0 93 90 SZ 48 04/25/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 1 580 2 20 142.3 6.4 134.6 6.6 95 90 SZ 49 04/25/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 2 588 2 40 144.7 5.7 134.0 7.1 93 90 SZ 50 04/25/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 1 585 2 40 144.7 5.7 132.8 6.3 92 90 51 04/25/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 1 591 2 30 143.5 6.1 130.0 6.8 91 90 52 04/25/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 3 594 2 40 144.7 5.7 134.8 7.0 93 90 53 04/26/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 1 595 1 0 130.9 9.3 118.1 9.3 90 90 54 04/26/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 3 597 1 10 132.9 8.5 124.7 9.6 94 90 58 04/26/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 11 619 1 0 130.9 9.3 120.4 10.7 92 90 59 04/26/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 12 620 1 0 130.9 9.3 118.2 12.1 90 90 SZ 69 04/28/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 43 607 4 50 138.4 7.5 128.7 8.0 93 90 SZ 70 04/28/06 Unit 3,7; Lot 43 611 4 40 136.0 8.4 124.6 10.2 92 90 SZ 71 04/28/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 43 614 4 40 136.0 8.4 126.3 8.5 93 90 SZ 74 05/01/05 Unit 3.7; Lot 42 614 4 60 140.9 6.8 134.3 7.0 95 90 75 05/01/05 Unit 3.7; Lot 43 617 4 60 140.9 6.8 130.6 6.6 93 90 214 05/25/06 Unit 3.7; Avenida Soledad 19+25 578 2 40 144.7 5.7 131.6 6.3 91 90 215 05125/06 Unit 3.7; Avenida Soledad 16+90 556 2 30 143.5 6.1 132.0 6.6 92 90 216 05/25/06 Unit 3.7; Avenida Soledad 18+55 570 2 30 143.5 6.1 137.7 5.5 96 90 217 05/26/06 Unit 3.7; Avenida Soledad 17+90 563 2 30 143.5 6.1 137.1 6.9 95 90 218 05/26/06 Unit 3.7; Avenida Soledad 18+90 576 2 50 145.9 5.4 135.2 5.1 93 90 219 05/26/06 Unit 3.7; Avenida Soledad 18+65 574 2 30 143.5 6.1 131.2 7.0 91 90 227 05/30/06 Unit 3.7; Avenida Soledad 23+10 605 9 20 142.5 6.0 130.0 6.3 91 90 228 05/30/06 Unit 3.7; Avenida Soledad 24+90 612 9 40 144.9 5.3 130.8 6.7 90 90 Project No. 06105-52-20 November 29, 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - TABLE I SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS Elev. Plus Field Field Field Reqd. or 3/4 Adj. Adj. Dry Moist. Rd, Rel. Depth Curve Rock MOD OMC Dens. Cont. Comp Comp. Test No. Date Location (1t) No. (%) (pci) (%) (pci) (%) (%) (%) 229 05/30/06 Unit 3.7; Avenida Soledad 23+60 607 9 40 144.9 5.3 130.3 5.9 90 90 243 05/31/06 Unit 3.7; Corte Casera 10+55 590 9 40 144.9 5.3 137.2 5.8 95 90 244 05/31/06 Unit 3.7; carte Casera 11+50 594 9 40 144.9 5.3 133.6 7.0 92 90 245 05/31/06 Unit IT, Corte Casera 10+95 592 9 40 144.9 5.3 134.8 5.7 93 90 249 06/01/06 Unit 3.7; Corte Casera 11+15 596 9 40 144.9 5.3 130.2 5.6 90 90 250 06/01/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 4 599 9 40 144.9 5.3 133.3 6.1 92 90 255 06/01/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 6 598 9 50 146.1 4.9 134.4 5.0 92 90 256 06/01/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 6 600 9 40 144.9 5.3 131.1 5.6 90 90 266 06/05/06 Unit 3.7; Avenida Soledad 2&+60 621 9 30 143.7 5.6 131.8 5.3 92 90 267 06/05/06 Unit 3.7; Avenida Soledad 24+95 . 614 9 50 146.1 4.9 133.0 5.8 91 90 268 06/05/06 Unit 3.7; Avenida Soledad 25+70 618 9 40 144.9 5.3 131.5 5.0 91 90 292 06/07/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 7 602 9 30 143.7 5.6 134.1 5.0 93 90 293 06/07/06 Unit 3.7; Sitio Castano 11+25 611 9 50 146.1 4.9 138.2 4.7 95 90 298 06/08/06 Unit 3.7; Sitio Castano 10+90 613 9 40 144.9 5.3 138.2 5.7 95 90 299 06/08/06 Unit 3.7; Sitio Castano 12+00 615 9 30 143.7 5.6 131.1 5.0 91 90 300 06108/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 26 619 9 30 143.7 5.6 130.2 7.0 91 90 301 06/08/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 24 620 9 30 143.7 5.6 134.0 5.1 93 90 302 06/08/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 11 615 9 50 146.1 4.9 133.2 5.6 91 90 777 08/24/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 40 636 9 40 144.9 5.3 133.2 6.7 92 90 778 08/24/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 41 635 9 40 144.9 5.3 130.5 7.3 90 90 779 08/24/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 38 638 9 40 144.9 5.3 131.3 6.1 91 90 780 08/24/06 Unit 3.7; Sitio Montillo 11+00 630 9 30 143.7 5.6 135.4 6.9 94 90 781 08/24/06 Unit 3.7; Sitio Montillo 12+10 633 9 30 143.7 5.6 132.0 7.7 92 90 782 08/24/06 Unit 3.7; Sitio Montillo 11+75 634 9 40 144.9 5.3 130.9 6.8 90 90 784 08/25/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 604 6 0 121.9 12.5 111.7 13.3 92 90 785 08/25/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 47 600 9 30 143.7 5.6 130.9 6.1 91 90 786 08/25/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 1 596 9 30 143.7 5.6 132.5 6.9 92 90 787 08/28/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 28 634 9 30 143.7 5.6 131.0 6.2 91 90 788 08/28/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 30 637 9 30 143.7 5.6 133.7 6.8 93 90 789 08/28/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 31 637 9 20 142.5 6.0 133.5 7.4 94 90 810 08/28/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 35 639 9 30 143.7 5.6 132.1 6.5 92 90 Project No. 06105-52-20 November 29. 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - TABLE I SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS Elev. Plus Field Field Field Req'd. or 3/4 Adj. Adj. Dry Moist. Rel. Rel. Depth Curve Rock MOD OMC Dens. Cont. Comp. Coirip. Test No. Date Location (ft) No. (') (Pct) (%) (pcf) (%) (%) (%) 811 08/28/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 607 9 20 142,5 6.0 120.1 2.9 84 90 811 A 09/01/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 607 9 20 142.5 6.0 128.0 9.4 90 90 FG 923 09/13/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 29 637 9 30 143.7 5.6 130.6 4.6 91 90 FO 924 09/13/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 30 638 9 30 143.7 5.6 136.1 5.1 95 90 FG 925 09/13/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 31 640 9 30 143.7 5.6 135.4 4.8 94 90 FG 926 09/13/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 32 641 9 40 144.9 5.3 135.3 4.7 93 90 10 927 09/13/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 33 642 9 40 144.9 5.3 133.8 5.4 92 90 RI 928 09/13/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 34 643 9 30 143.7 5.6 131.9 5.7 92 90 FG 929 09/13/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 35 640 9 30 143.7 5.6 130.9 6.2 91 90 RI 930 09/13/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 36 641 - 9 30 143.7 5.6 134.6 5.8 - 94 90 ST 931 09/13/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 35 633 9 30 143.7 5.6 131,1 4.9 91 90 ST 932 09/13/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 36 622 9 30 143.7 5.6 129.7 4.6 90 90 ST 933 09/13/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 37 623 9 30 143.7 5.6 129.4 5.0 90 90 ST 934 09/13/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 38 630 9 40 144.9 5.3 133.1 4.6 92 90 ST 935 09/13/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 39 627 9 40 144.9 5.3 130.8 4.8 90 90 ST 936 09/13/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 42 626 9 30 143.7 5.6 129.4 4.6 90 90 FO 937 09/13/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 28 636 9 30 143.7 5.6 130.7 6.3 91 90 FG 938 09/13/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 37 640 9 30 143.7 5.6 131.0 7.1 91 90 FG 939 09/13/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 38 640 9 40 144.9 5.3 133.9 5.8 92 90 FG 949 09/13/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 39 439 9 30 143.7 5.6 129.8 6.1 90 90 9 60 09/15/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 17 614 9 0 140.2 6.7 130.2 6.9 93 90 961 09/15/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 20 616 9 20 142.5 6.0 128.6 8.8 90 90 FG 980 09/18/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 40 638 9 30 143.7 5.6 136.4 5.7 95 90 FO 981 09/18/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 41 637 9 40 144.9 5.3 136.9 6.3 94 90 RI 982 09/19/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 42 636 9 40 144.9 5.3 134.8 5.5 93 90 983 09/19/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 21 620 9 30 143.7 5.6 132.9 7.4 92 90 984 09/19/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 23 621 9 30 143.7 5.6 135.0 6.6 94 90 ST 1000 09/21/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 584 1 20 135.0 7.9 121.6 9.8 90 90 1023 09/22/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 19 624 9 40 144.9 5.3 133.6 6.9 92 90 1034 09/26/06 Unit 3.7; Corte Segura 19+85 515 1 30 137.0 7.2 124.7 8.4 91 90 1035 09/26/06 Unit 3.7; Corte Casera 11+60 595 1 30 137.0 7.2 123.1 9.6 90 90 Project No. 06105-52-20 November 29, 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - TABLE I SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS Elev. Plus Field Field Field Rcq'd. or 3/4" Adj. Adj. Dry Moist. Re!. Rel. Depth Curve Rock MDD OMC Dens. Cont. Comp. Comp. Test No. - Date - - Location t) No. (%) (pcf) (%) (put) (%) (%) (%) 1052 09/27/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 25 620 9 30 143.7 5.6 133.6 7.2 93 90 1053 09/27/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 22 622 9 30 143.7 5.6 134.2 6.6 93 90 1054 09/27/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 17 624 9 30 143.7 5.6 133.1 6.4 93 90 1055 09/27/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 20 626 9 30 143.7 5.6 135.9 5.8 95 90 1056 09/27/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 15 618 9 30 143.7 5.6 132.6 6.3 92 90 1057 09/28/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 6 596 9 30 143.7 5.6 130.6 5.9 91 90 1077 10/03/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 17 620 9 30 143.7 5.6 131.6 7.3 92 90 1078 10/03/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 10 615 9 30 143.7 5.6 132.5 6.8 92 90 FG 1079 10/05/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 9 609 9 30 143.7 5.6 130.2 6.1 91 90 FG 1110 10/05/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 606 3 20 133.4 8.0 121.7 8.2 91 90 PG liii 10/05/06 Unit3.7;Lot47 602 9 30 143.7 5.6 133.9 7.8 93 90 1112 10/05/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 12 619 4 30 133.5 9.2 120.6 10.2 90 90 1113 10/05/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 16 621 4 30 133.5 9.2 122.4 9.3 92 90 PG 1114 10/06/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 7 604 9 20 142.5 6.0 131.9 6.6 93 90 FG 1115 10/06/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 6 603 9 20 142.5 6.0 134.2 7.8 94 90 FG 1116 10/06/06 Unit 3.7;Lot5 602 9 20 142.5 6.0 133.5 6.2 94 90 PG 1117 10/06/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 4 601 9 20 142.5 6.0 136.1 6.6 96 90 FG 1118 10/06/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 3 599 9 20 142.5 6.0 132.5 7.1 93 90 FG 1119 10/06/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 2 598 9 20 142.5 6.0 132.6 7.0 93 90 PG 1120 10/06/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 1 597 9 20 142.5 6.0 133.2 6.8 93 90 FG 1121 10/10/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 27 620 9 20 142.5 6.0 132.9 6.4 93 90 PG 1122 10/10/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 26 621 9 30 143.7 5.6 131.0 6.2 91 90 PG 1123 10/10/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 25 621 9 30 143.7 5.6 136.3 5.5 95 90 FG 1124 10/10/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 24 622 9 20 142.5 6.0 130.8 6.7 92 90 FG 1125 10112/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 23 622 9 30 143.7 5.6 129.7 6.0 90 90 FG 1126 10/12/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 22 623 9 40 144.9 5.3 134.8 5.5 93 90 PG 1127 10/12/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 2l 623 9 20 142.5 6.0 128.0 5.8 90 90 PG 1128 10/12/06 Unit 3.7; Lot l7 625 9 20 142.5 6.0 130.2 7.2 91 90 FG 1129 10/12/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 18 626 9 40 144.9 5.3 130.9 5.1 90 90 FO 1139 10/12/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 19 627 9 40 144.9 5.3 137.6 5.5 95 90 FG 1140 10/12/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 20 628 9 40 144.9 5.3 133.9 5.7 92 ---90 Project No. 06105-52-20 November 29, 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - TABLE I SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS Elev. Plus Field Field Field Req'd. or 3/4 Adj. Adj. Dry Moist. Rel. Rel. Depth Curve Rock MDD OMC Dens. Cont. Comp. Comp. Test No. Dale Location t) No. (q) (pcf) (%) (pet) (%) (%) (%) FG 1141 10/13/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 10 620 1 30 137.0 7.2 123.1 8.4 90 90 FG 1142 10/13/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 11 621 I 50 141.1 5.9 127.2 5.9 90 90 FG 1143 10/13/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 12 622 1 30 137.0 7.2 126.8 7.5 93 90 FG 1144 10/13/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 13 622 1 30 137.0 7.2 123.5 8.1 90 90 FG 1145 10/13/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 14 623 1 30 137.0 7.2 125.6 7.0 92 90 PG 114610/13106 Unit 3.7; Lot 16 623 1 40 139.0 6.5 126.8 - 7.7 91 90 FG 1147 10/13/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 16 624 1 30 137.0 7.2 128.2 7.4 94 90 1152 10/16/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 43 633 1 50 141.1 5.9 128.7 6.0 91 90 1164 10/19/06 Unit 3.7; Corte Segura 21+40 618 1 30 137.0 7.2 125.0 10.3 91 90 1165 10/19/06 Unit 3.7;Corte Segura 20+95 620 1 10 132.9 8.6 120.4 10.8 91 90 ST 1173 10/24/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 43 623 3 30 135.6 7.2 122.5 10.1 90 90 FG 1174 10/24/06 Unit 3.7; Lot 43 635 3 10 131.2 8.8 124.0 11.6 95 90 SZ 1794 08/30/07 Unit 3.7; Lot 2l 624 18 30 142.8 6.4 128.8 6.9 90 90 SZ 1795 08/30/07 Unit 3.7; Lot 24 625 18 10 140.2 7.2 132.6 7.0 95 90 SZ 1796 08/30/07 Unit 3.7; Lot 22 628 18 10 140.2 7.2 130.0 8.5 93 90 Project No. 06105-52-20 November 29. 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - TABLE I EXPLANATION OF CODED TERMS - TEST SUFFIX A, B, C,...: Retest of previous density test failure, following moisture conditioning and/or recompaction. -STPdKE-OUT Fill in area of density test failure was removed and replaced with properly compacted fill soil. - PREFIX CODE DESIGNATION FOR TEST NUMBERS FG - FINISH GRADE MT - MOISTURE TEST ST - SLOPE TEST SZ - SLOPE ZONE - CURVE NO. Corresponds to curve numbers listed in the summary of laboratory maximum dry density and optimum moisture content test results table for selected fill soil samples encountered during testing and observation. - ROCK CORRECTION For density tests with rock percentage greater than zero, laboratory maximum dry density and optimum moisture content were adjusted for rock content. For tests with rock content equal to zero, laboratory maximum dry density and optimum moisture content values are unadjusted. - TYPE OF TEST SC: Sand Cone Test (ASTM D1556) NU: Nuclear Density Test (ASTM D2922) OT: Other - ELEVATION/DEPTH Test elevations/depths have been rounded to the nearest whole foot. Project No. 06105-52-20 November 29, 2007 TABLE II SUMMARY OF LABORATORY MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY AND OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT TEST RESULTS ASTM D 1557-02 Sample Maximum Optimum Description Dry Density Moisture Content (pcI) (% dry weight) 1 Olive brown, Silty SAND with trace of clay 130.9 9.3 2 Olive brown, Clayey, fine to coarse SAND 139.9 7.2 3 Dark brown, Clayey, fine to coarse SAND 129.0 9.6 4 Grayish brown, Clayey, fine to coarse SAND 126.0 12.0 6 Reddish brown, Silty to Clayey, fine to medium 121.9 12.5 SAND 9 Dark olive brown, Sandy GRAVEL trace silt 140.2 6.7 18 Light reddish brown, Silty to Clayey, fine to 138.9 7.6 coarse SAND I I TABLE III SUMMARY OF LABORATORY EXPANSION INDEX TEST RESULTS ASTM D 4829-03 Sample No. Moisture Content (%) Dry Density (pci) Expansion Index UBC Classification Before Test After Test El-H 8.2 13.3 118.1 0 Very Low El-1 8.1 14.1 117.9 2 Very Low El-J 7.7 14.2 118.4 3 Very Low El-K 7.8 13.8 118.4 0 Very Low El-L 7.8 14.2 118.3 2 Very Low El-M 7.9 13.7 118.4 0 Very Low El-N 8.7 15.8 113.4 1 Very Low EI-O 7.4 13.0 118.7 0 Very Low El-P 7.8 12.8 118.7 0 Very Low El-Q 8.0 13.3 118.3 1 Very Low El-T 8.2 14.7 114.9 0 Very Low El-U 1 8.6 16.1 113.9 0 Very Low El-V 1 8.6 13.9 113.7 0 Very Low Project No. 06105-52-20 November 29. 2007 III I I I I I I I I I I I I TABLE IV SUMMARY OF LABORATORY DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS ASTM D 3080-04 Sample No. Dry Density (pet) Moisture Content M Unit Cohesion (psf) Angle of Shear Resistance (degrees) Before Test After Test 1 117.2 9.9 15.3 650 38 2 126.1 7.1 11.7 520 44 3 115.5 10.2 18.0 520 39 4 114.3 11.1 17.0 490 38 Samples remolded to a dry density of approximately 90 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density near to slightly above optimum moisture content. TABLE V SUMMARY OF LABORATORY WATER-SOLUBLE SULFATE TEST RESULTS CALIFORNIA TEST NO. 417 Sample No. Water-Soluble Sulfate (%) Sulfate Exposure El-Fl 0.008 Negligible E1-J 0.006 Negligible EI-L 0.015 Negligible EI-O 0.007 Negligible EI-Q 0.004 Negligible El-T 0.019 Negligible El-V 0.015 Negligible TABLE VI SUMMARY OF FINISH-GRADE EXPANSION INDEX TEST RESULTS VILLAGES OF LA COSTA —THE OAKS NORTH, NEIGHBORHOOD 3.7 LOTS 1 THROUGH 43 AND 47 Lot No. Sample at Finish Grade Expansion Index UBC Classification Lots 1 through 3 EI-L 2 Very Low Lots 4 through 7 El-M 0 Very Low Lots 8 and 9 El-N 1 Very Low Lots 10 through 13 E1-T 0 Very Low Project No. 06105-52-20 November 29, 2007 TABLE VI (Continued) SUMMARY OF FINISH-GRADE EXPANSION INDEX TEST RESULTS VILLAGES OF LA COSTA —THE OAKS NORTH, NEIGHBORHOOD 3.7 LOTS 1 THROUGH 43 AND 47 Lot No. Sample at Finish Grade Expansion Index UBC Classification Lots 14 through 16 El-V 0 Very Low Lots 17 through 20 El-Q I Very Low Lots 21 through 23 El-P 0 Very Low Lots 24 through 27 EI-O 0 Very Low Lots 28 through 30 El-K 0 Very Low Lots 31 through 34 El-J 3 Very Low Lots 35 through 38 El-1 2 Very Low Lots 39 through 42 El-H 0 Very Low Lot 43 El-U 0 Very Low Lot 47 El-N 1 Very Low I TABLE VII I SUMMARY OF AS-GRADED BUILDING PAD CONDITIONS VILLAGES OF LA COSTA —THE OAKS NORTH, NEIGHBORHOOD 3.7 LOTS 1 THROUGH 43 AND 47 Lot No. Pad Condition Approximate Maximum Depth of Fill Approximate Depth of Differential Fill 1 Undercut due to cut/fill transition 19 14 2 Undercut due to cut/fill transition 20 15 3 Undercut due to cut/fill transition 20 14 4 Undercut due to cut/fill transition 20 15 5 Undercut due to cut/fill transition 6 2 6 Undercut due to rock 9 2 7 Undercut due to rock 9 1 8 Undercut due to rock 5 1 9 Undercut due to rock 8 4 io Undercut due to rock 5 1 11 Undercut due to rock 5 1 12 Undercut due to rock 5 1 13 Undercut due to rock 6 1 14 Undercut due to rock 6 1 L Project No. 06105-52-20 November 29, 2007 I I I TABLE VII (Continued) SUMMARY OF AS-GRADED BUILDING PAD CONDITIONS VILLAGES OF LA COSTA —THE OAKS NORTH, NEIGHBORHOOD 3.7 LOTS 1 THROUGH 43 AND 47 Lot No. Pad Condition Approximate Maximum Depth of Fill Approximate Depth of Differential Fill 15 Undercut due to rock 6 1 16 Undercut due to rock 7 2 17 Undercut due to rock 13 9 18 Undercut due to rock 14 8 19 Undercut due to rock 14 8 20 Undercut due to rock 15 9 21 Undercut due to rock 9 4 22 Undercut due to rock 7 3 23 Undercut due to rock 5 2 24 Undercut due to rock 5 1 25 Undercut due to rock 5 2 26 Undercut due to rock 5 1 27 Undercut due to rock 5 1 28 Undercut due to rock 5 1 29 Undercut due to rock 5 2 30 Undercut due to rock 12 8 31 Undercut due to rock 5 1 32 Undercut due to cut/fill transition 7 2 33 Fill Lot 8 2 34 Fill Lot 19 10 35 Fill Lot 31 16 36 Fill Lot 34 14 37 Undercut due to cut/fill transition 18 14 38 Undercut due to cut/till transition 25 20 39 Undercut due to cut/fill transition 22 17 40 Undercut due to cut/fill transition 18 12 41 Undercut due to cut/fill transition 12 7 42 Undercut due to cut/fill transition 16 7 43 Undercut due to cut/fill transition 28 22 Rec Lot, 47 Undercut due to rock 8 1 II Project No. 06105-52-20 November 29, 2007 I I] U L I I I I 2. 24X36.DWGILADRJLLONO U Jr