Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
PD 2021-0026; 3805 ALDER AVE; PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL ADDITION; 2022-04-20
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL ADDITION 3805 ALDER AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA Prepared for: MR. TONY JARAMILLO 3805 ALDER AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA Prepared by: CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. 1441 MONTIEL ROAD, SUITE 115 ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92026 CTE JOB NO.: 10-15939G APRIL 20, 2022 A Universal Engineering Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. Sciences Company Inspection I Testing I Geotechnical I Environmental & Construction Engineering I Civil Engineering I Surveying 1441 Montiel Road, Suite 115 I Escondido, CA 92026 I Ph (760) 746-4955 I Fax (760) 746-9806 I www.cte-inc.net TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND SCOPE OF SERVICES ................................................................... 1 1.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Scope of Services .......................................................................................................... 1 2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................................... 1 3.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION AND LABORATORY TESTING ................................................ 2 3.1 Field Investigation ........................................................................................................ 2 3.2 Laboratory Testing ........................................................................................................ 3 4.0 GEOLOGY ............................................................................................................................... 3 4.1 General Setting.............................................................................................................. 3 4.2 Geologic Conditions ..................................................................................................... 3 4.2.1 Quaternary Undocumented Fill...................................................................... 4 4.2.2 Residual Soil .................................................................................................. 4 4.2.3 Quaternary Very Old Paralic Deposits .......................................................... 4 4.2.4 Tertiary Santiago Formation .......................................................................... 4 4.3 Groundwater Conditions ............................................................................................... 5 4.4 Geologic Hazards .......................................................................................................... 5 4.4.1 Surface Fault Rupture .................................................................................... 5 4.4.2 Local and Regional Faulting .......................................................................... 6 4.4.3 Liquefaction and Seismic Settlement Evaluation .......................................... 7 4.4.4 Tsunamis and Seiche Evaluation ................................................................... 7 4.4.5 Landsliding .................................................................................................... 8 4.4.6 Compressible and Expansive Soils ................................................................ 9 4.4.7 Corrosive Soils ............................................................................................. 10 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................. 11 5.1 General ........................................................................................................................ 11 5.2 Site Preparation ........................................................................................................... 11 5.3 Site Excavation ........................................................................................................... 12 5.4 Fill Placement and Compaction .................................................................................. 12 5.5 Fill Materials ............................................................................................................... 13 5.6 Temporary Construction Slopes ................................................................................. 14 5.7 Foundation and Slab Recommendations ..................................................................... 14 5.7.1 New Foundations ......................................................................................... 15 5.7.2 Foundation Settlement ................................................................................. 16 5.7.3 Foundation Setback ...................................................................................... 16 5.7.4 Interior Concrete Slabs ................................................................................ 16 5.8 Seismic Design Criteria .............................................................................................. 18 5.9 Lateral Resistance and Earth Pressures ....................................................................... 19 5.10 Exterior Flatwork ...................................................................................................... 21 5.11 Drainage .................................................................................................................... 22 5.12 Slopes ........................................................................................................................ 22 5.13 Controlled Low Strength Materials (CLSM) ............................................................ 23 5.14 Plan Review .............................................................................................................. 24 5.15 Construction Observation ......................................................................................... 24 6.0 LIMITATIONS OF INVESTIGATION ................................................................................. 25 FIGURES FIGURE 1 SITE LOCATION MAP FIGURE 2 GEOLOGIC/ EXPLORATION LOCATION MAP FIGURE 2A CROSS SECTION A-A' FIGURE 3 REGIONAL FAULT AND SEISMICITY MAP FIGURE 4 RETAINING WALL DRAINAGE DETAIL APPENDICES APPENDIX A REFERENCES APPENDIX B FIELD EXPLORATION METHODS AND BORING LOGS APPENDIX C LABORATORY METHODS AND RESULTS APPENDIX D STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS APPENDIX E SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Addition 3805 Alder Avenue, Carlsbad, California April 20, 2022 CTE Job No. 10-15939G S:\Projects\10-15000 to 10-15999 Projects\10-15939G (Alder Ave)\House Addition Geo Report\Rpt_Geotechnical.doc Page 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND SCOPE OF SERVICES 1.1 Introduction Construction Testing and Engineering, Inc. (CTE) has completed a geotechnical investigation and report providing conclusions and recommendations for the proposed second-story residential addition. CTE has performed this work in general accordance with the terms of proposal G-5219A dated January 4, 2021. Preliminary geotechnical recommendations for excavations, fill placement, and foundation design for the proposed improvements are presented herein. 1.2 Scope of Services The scope of services provided included: Review of readily available geologic and soils reports. Coordination of USA utility mark-out and location. Excavation of exploratory borings and soil sampling utilizing limited-access manual excavation equipment. Laboratory testing of selected soil samples. Description of the site geology and evaluation of potential geologic hazards. Engineering and geologic analysis. Preparation of this preliminary geotechnical report. 2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION The subject site is located at 3805 Alder Avenue in Carlsbad, California (Figure 1). The site is bounded by Alder Avenue to the west, El Camino Real to the east, and residences to the north and south. Based on reconnaissance and review of general site topography, the proposed improvement area generally descends to the east with an approximately 85 feet high 2.5:1 (horizontal: vertical) slope descending from the eastern limit of the developed area. Overall site elevations range from Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Addition 3805 Alder Avenue, Carlsbad, California April 20, 2022 CTE Job No. 10-15939G S:\Projects\10-15000 to 10-15999 Projects\10-15939G (Alder Ave)\House Addition Geo Report\Rpt_Geotechnical.doc Page 2 approximately 295 feet above mean sea level (msl) in the west to approximately 210 feet msl at the eastern toe of slope area. The proposed site improvements are depicted on Figure 2. 3.0 FIELD INVESTIGATION AND LABORATORY TESTING 3.1 Field Investigation CTE performed a subsurface investigation for the proposed residential addition on February 10, 2022 to evaluate underlying soil conditions. This fieldwork consisted of a site reconnaissance and the excavation of six exploratory soil borings and a test pit to expose the existing foundation. The borings were excavated with a manually advanced auger, due to limited access, to a maximum depth of approximately 6.0 feet below existing ground surface (bgs) in Boring B-6. Bulk samples were collected from the cuttings. This investigation is supplemented with boring logs and lab data from a previous investigation performed at the site by CTE in 2021. The nearest boring from the previous investigation to the proposed addition was Boring B-1 which extended to a depth of approximately 51.5 feet below existing grade. Approximate locations of the current and previous exploratory soil borings and test holes are shown on the attached Figure 2. Soils were logged in the field by a CTE Engineering Geologist and were visually classified in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). The field descriptions have been modified, where appropriate, to reflect laboratory test results. Boring logs, including descriptions of the soils encountered, are included in Appendix B. Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Addition 3805 Alder Avenue, Carlsbad, California April 20, 2022 CTE Job No. 10-15939G S:\Projects\10-15000 to 10-15999 Projects\10-15939G (Alder Ave)\House Addition Geo Report\Rpt_Geotechnical.doc Page 3 3.2 Laboratory Testing Laboratory tests were conducted on selected soil samples for classification purposes, and to evaluate physical properties and engineering characteristics. Laboratory tests included: Expansion Index, Gradation, and Chemical Characteristics. Test descriptions and laboratory test results are included in Appendix C. 4.0 GEOLOGY 4.1 General Setting The City of Carlsbad is located within the Peninsular Ranges physiographic province that is characterized by northwest-trending mountain ranges, intervening valleys, and predominantly northwest trending regional faults. The San Diego Region can be subdivided into the coastal plain area, central mountain–valley area and eastern mountain valley area. The project site is located within the coastal plain area that is characterized by a locally eroded basement surface consisting of Jurassic and Cretaceous crystalline rocks overlain by Tertiary and Quaternary sedimentary deposits. 4.2 Geologic Conditions Based on the regional geologic map prepared by Kennedy and Tan (2007), the near surface geologic units underlying the site area consist of Quaternary Old Paralic Deposits and Tertiary Santiago Formation. However, based on recent explorations at the site Undocumented Fill and Residual Soil were observed overlying the Old Paralic Deposits. The Tertiary Santiago Formation was observed on Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Addition 3805 Alder Avenue, Carlsbad, California April 20, 2022 CTE Job No. 10-15939G S:\Projects\10-15000 to 10-15999 Projects\10-15939G (Alder Ave)\House Addition Geo Report\Rpt_Geotechnical.doc Page 4 the adjacent slope and in a previous deep boring at an approximate elevation of 275 feet msl. Descriptions of the geologic units encountered are presented below. Surficial geologic materials are depicted on Figure 2. 4.2.1 Quaternary Undocumented Fill Where observed, the Undocumented Fill generally consists of loose to medium dense, brown, silty fine to medium grained sand. Fill was observed to a depth of approximately 5.5 feet (bgs) in Boring B-6. The fill is generally located in the elevated eastern portion of the building pad. 4.2.2 Residual Soil Where observed, the Residual Soil generally consists of loose to medium dense, dark brown, silty to clayey fine to medium grained sand. Residual Soil was observed to depths ranging from 1.5 to 3.1 feet (bgs). This unit is relatively thin and blankets the underlying Old Paralic Deposits. 4.2.3 Quaternary Very Old Paralic Deposits Where observed, the underlying Very Old Paralic Deposits generally consist of medium dense, reddish brown, clayey to silty fine to medium grained sandstone. This unit is anticipated at depth throughout the site. 4.2.4 Tertiary Santiago Formation Where observed, the underlying Santiago Formation generally consists of dense to very dense, light olive gray to olive, clayey to silty fine-grained sandstone and sandy claystone. This unit is anticipated at depth throughout the site beneath the Very Old Paralic Deposits. Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Addition 3805 Alder Avenue, Carlsbad, California April 20, 2022 CTE Job No. 10-15939G S:\Projects\10-15000 to 10-15999 Projects\10-15939G (Alder Ave)\House Addition Geo Report\Rpt_Geotechnical.doc Page 5 4.3 Groundwater Conditions Groundwater was not encountered in the recent or previous borings that extended to a maximum depth of approximately 51.5 feet bgs. While groundwater conditions may vary, especially following periods of sustained precipitation or irrigation, it is generally not anticipated to adversely affect completed improvements, if irrigation is limited and proper site drainage is designed, installed, and maintained per the recommendations of the project civil engineer. 4.4 Geologic Hazards Geologic hazards that were considered to have potential impacts to site development were evaluated based on field observations, literature review, and laboratory test results. It appears that geologic hazards at the site are primarily limited to those caused by shaking from earthquake-generated ground motions. The following paragraphs discuss the geologic hazards considered and their potential risk to the site. 4.4.1 Surface Fault Rupture In accordance with the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act, (ACT), the State of California established Earthquake Fault Zones around known active faults. The purpose of the ACT is to regulate the development of structures intended for human occupancy near active fault traces in order to mitigate hazards associated with surface fault rupture. According to the California Geological Survey (Special Publication 42, Revised 2018), a fault that has had surface displacement within the last 11,700 years is defined as a Holocene- active fault and is either already zoned or is pending zonation in accordance with the ACT. There are several other definitions of fault activity that are used to regulate dams, power Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Addition 3805 Alder Avenue, Carlsbad, California April 20, 2022 CTE Job No. 10-15939G S:\Projects\10-15000 to 10-15999 Projects\10-15939G (Alder Ave)\House Addition Geo Report\Rpt_Geotechnical.doc Page 6 plants, and other critical facilities, and some agencies designate faults that are documented as older than Holocene (last 11,700 years) and younger than late Quaternary (1.6 million years) as potentially active faults that are subject to local jurisdictional regulations. Based on the site reconnaissance and review of referenced literature, the site is not located within a State-designated Earthquake Fault Zone, no known active fault traces underlie or project toward the site, and no known potentially active fault traces project toward the site. 4.4.2 Local and Regional Faulting The United States Geological Survey (USGS), with support of State Geological Surveys, and reviewed published work by various researchers, have developed a Quaternary Fault and Fold Database of faults and associated folds that are believed to be sources of earthquakes with magnitudes greater than 6.0 that have occurred during the Quaternary (the past 1.6 million years). The faults and folds within the database have been categorized into four Classes (Class A-D) based on the level of evidence confirming that a Quaternary fault is of tectonic origin and whether the structure is exposed for mapping or inferred from fault related deformational features. Class A faults have been mapped and categorized based on age of documented activity ranging from Historical faults (activity within last 150 years), Latest Quaternary faults (activity within last 15,000 years), Late Quaternary (activity within last 130,000 years), to Middle to late Quaternary (activity within last 1.6 million years). The Class A faults are considered to have the highest potential to generate earthquakes and/or surface rupture, and the earthquakes and surface rupture potential generally increases from oldest to youngest. The evidence for Quaternary deformation and/or tectonic activity progressively decreases for Class B and Class C faults. When geologic evidence indicates Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Addition 3805 Alder Avenue, Carlsbad, California April 20, 2022 CTE Job No. 10-15939G S:\Projects\10-15000 to 10-15999 Projects\10-15939G (Alder Ave)\House Addition Geo Report\Rpt_Geotechnical.doc Page 7 that a fault is not of tectonic origin it is considered to be a Class D structure. Such evidence includes joints, fractures, landslides, or erosional and fluvial scarps that resemble fault features, but demonstrate a non-tectonic origin. The nearest known Class A fault is the Newport Inglewood Fault Zone (<15,000 years), which is approximately 9.9 kilometers west of the site. The attached Figure 3 shows regional faults and seismicity with respect to the site. 4.4.3 Liquefaction and Seismic Settlement Evaluation Liquefaction occurs when saturated fine-grained sands or silts lose their physical strengths during earthquake-induced shaking and behave like a liquid. This is due to loss of point-to-point grain contact and transfer of normal stress to the pore water. Liquefaction potential varies with water level, soil type, material gradation, relative density, and probable intensity and duration of ground shaking. Seismic settlement can occur with or without liquefaction; it results from densification of loose soils. The proposed structural improvements at site are underlain at shallow depths by medium dense to very dense Old Paralic Deposits and Tertiary Santiago Formation. Based on the noted subsurface conditions, the potential for liquefaction or significant seismic settlement at the site is considered to be low. 4.4.4 Tsunamis and Seiche Evaluation According to ASCE Tsunami Hazard Tool, ASCE Tsunami Design Geodatabase Version 2016-1.0. the site is not located within a tsunami inundation zone based on its elevation above sea level. This suggests that there is a low probability of a tsunami reaching the site Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Addition 3805 Alder Avenue, Carlsbad, California April 20, 2022 CTE Job No. 10-15939G S:\Projects\10-15000 to 10-15999 Projects\10-15939G (Alder Ave)\House Addition Geo Report\Rpt_Geotechnical.doc Page 8 based on elevation of the area. In addition, oscillatory waves (seiches) are considered unlikely due to the absence of nearby confined bodies of water. 4.4.5 Landsliding The project site is located near the top of an approximately 85 feet high 2.5:1 (horizontal: vertical) slope that descends to the northeast. According to mapping by Tan (1995), the site is located in Relative Landslide Susceptibility Area 3-1, which is described as “Generally Susceptible” to landsliding. Kennedy and Tan (2007) do not indicate the presence of mapped landslides at the subject site. However, surficial slope failures were previously observed at the base of the existing slope area, which is located a minimum of 40 feet to the east of the existing house and proposed second story addition area. The final input and output data from the limited evaluation of slope stability are presented in Appendix E. For the analysis, the existing slope to the east of the site was modeled based on topographic and geologic conditions. Based on laboratory direct shear testing, the Very Old Paralic Deposits yielded soil strength values of approximately phi = 36.4 and cohesion = 990 and the Tertiary Santiago Formation yielded soil strength values ranging from phi = 19.5 to 39.0 degrees and cohesion = 200 to 1440 psf. Direct shear testing of the Undocumented Fill was not possible due to hand auguring to clear utilities, therefore, estimated values were utilized for the analysis. To be conservative, Undocumented Fill values of phi = 25.0o and cohesion = 200 psf, Very Old Paralic Deposits values of phi = 35o and cohesion = 900 psf and Santiago Formation (sandstone) values of phi = 35o and cohesion = 700 psf, and Santiago Formation (clay) values of phi = 15o and cohesion = 500 psf were utilized for the analysis. Based on the findings, the existing slope condition is anticipated to exhibit a global Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Addition 3805 Alder Avenue, Carlsbad, California April 20, 2022 CTE Job No. 10-15939G S:\Projects\10-15000 to 10-15999 Projects\10-15939G (Alder Ave)\House Addition Geo Report\Rpt_Geotechnical.doc Page 9 factor of safety in excess of 1.5. In addition, the surficial failures and unstable portions of the existing slope are anticipated to be mitigated and protected against future failures prior to construction. Based on the noted and proposed site conditions, the potential for deep seated failures beneath the proposed second story addition area is considered to be low. 4.4.6 Compressible and Expansive Soils The Undocumented Fill, residual soil and desiccated near surface soils are considered to be compressible in their current condition. Therefore, footings should extend through these soils and into suitable formational material as recommended herein and as determined to be necessary during construction. Based on the field data, site observations, and CTE’s experience with similar soils in the vicinity of the site, medium dense to dense underlying native materials are not considered to be subject to significant compressibility under the anticipated loads. Based on laboratory analysis, geologic observation, and the generally granular nature of site soils, the near-surface materials are generally anticipated to exhibit a low expansion potential (Expansion Index of 50 or less). Medium expansion potential soils were observed in the Santiago Formation at depth beneath the proposed improvement area but are considered unlikely to be exposed during grading. Verification of expansion potential should be performed during site excavations and grading. Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Addition 3805 Alder Avenue, Carlsbad, California April 20, 2022 CTE Job No. 10-15939G S:\Projects\10-15000 to 10-15999 Projects\10-15939G (Alder Ave)\House Addition Geo Report\Rpt_Geotechnical.doc Page 10 4.4.7 Corrosive Soils Soil environments detrimental to concrete generally have elevated levels of soluble sulfates and/or pH levels less than 5.5. According to the American Concrete Institute (ACI) Table 318 4.3.1, specific guidelines have been provided for concrete where concentrations of soluble sulfate (SO4) in soil exceed 0.10 percent by weight. These guidelines include low water:cement ratios, increased compressive strength, and specific cement type requirements. A minimum resistivity value less than approximately 5,000 ohm-cm and/or soluble chloride levels in excess of 200 ppm generally indicate a corrosive environment for buried metallic utilities and untreated conduits. Based on representative area conditions, near-surface soils at the site are generally anticipated to present a negligible corrosion potential for Portland cement concrete and a low to moderate corrosivity potential to buried metallic improvements. Therefore, it may be prudent to utilize plastic piping and conduits where buried and feasible. CTE does not practice corrosion engineering. Therefore, if corrosion of metallic or other improvements is of more significant concern, a qualified corrosion engineer could be consulted. Corrosivity of site improvements should be reevaluated following completion of site-specific chemical testing. Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Addition 3805 Alder Avenue, Carlsbad, California April 20, 2022 CTE Job No. 10-15939G S:\Projects\10-15000 to 10-15999 Projects\10-15939G (Alder Ave)\House Addition Geo Report\Rpt_Geotechnical.doc Page 11 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 General CTE concludes that the proposed improvements on the site are feasible from a geotechnical standpoint, provided the preliminary recommendations in this report are incorporated into the design and construction of the project. Preliminary recommendations for the proposed earthwork and improvements are included in the following sections and Appendix D. However, recommendations in the text of this report supersede those presented in Appendix D should conflicts exist. These preliminary recommendations should either be confirmed as appropriate or updated following preparation of more precise project plans, and following required excavations, demolition of existing improvements, and observations during site preparation. 5.2 Site Preparation If grading is proposed, areas to receive distress sensitive improvements should be cleared of existing debris and deleterious materials. Objectionable materials, such as construction or demolition debris and vegetation not suitable for structural backfill should be properly disposed of off-site. Due to the anticipated differential fill depths across the structure footprint, it is recommended that foundations be extended to the depth of suitable formational material. Overexcavations for proposed surface improvement areas, such as pavement or flatwork should be conducted to a depth of two feet below proposed subgrade, or to the depth of suitable native material, whichever is shallower. Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Addition 3805 Alder Avenue, Carlsbad, California April 20, 2022 CTE Job No. 10-15939G S:\Projects\10-15000 to 10-15999 Projects\10-15939G (Alder Ave)\House Addition Geo Report\Rpt_Geotechnical.doc Page 12 If encountered, existing below-ground utilities should be redirected around proposed structures. Existing utilities at an elevation to extend through the proposed footings should generally be sleeved and caulked to minimize the potential for moisture migration below the building slabs. Abandoned pipes exposed by grading should be securely capped or filled with minimum two-sack cement/sand slurry to help prevent moisture from migrating beneath foundation and slab soils. A geotechnical representative from CTE should observe the exposed ground surface prior to placement of compacted fill or improvements, to verify the competency of exposed subgrade materials. If unsuitable material is observed at recommended excavation depths, additional excavation may be recommended during grading. After approval by this office, the exposed subgrades to receive fill should be scarified a minimum of eight inches, moisture conditioned, and properly compacted prior to fill placement. 5.3 Site Excavation Based on CTE’s observations, shallow excavations at the site should generally be feasible using well-maintained heavy-duty construction equipment run by experienced operators. 5.4 Fill Placement and Compaction Following the recommended overexcavation and removal of loose or disturbed soils, areas to receive fills should be scarified approximately eight inches, moisture conditioned, and properly compacted. Fill and backfill should be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent at above optimum moisture content (three percent above optimum for clayey soils), as evaluated by ASTM D 1557. The optimum lift thickness for fill soil depends on the type of compaction equipment used. Generally, backfill should be placed in uniform, horizontal lifts not exceeding eight inches in loose Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Addition 3805 Alder Avenue, Carlsbad, California April 20, 2022 CTE Job No. 10-15939G S:\Projects\10-15000 to 10-15999 Projects\10-15939G (Alder Ave)\House Addition Geo Report\Rpt_Geotechnical.doc Page 13 thickness. Fill placement and compaction should be conducted in conformance with local ordinances and should be observed and tested by a CTE geotechnical representative. 5.5 Fill Materials Properly moisture conditioned, low expansion potential soils derived from the on-site materials are considered suitable for reuse on the site as compacted fill. If used, these materials should be screened of organics and materials generally greater than three inches in maximum dimension. Irreducible materials greater than three inches in maximum dimension should not be used in shallow fills (within three feet of proposed grades). In utility trenches, adequate bedding should surround pipes. Imported fill beneath structures and flatwork should have an Expansion Index of 20 or less (ASTM D 4829). Imported fill soils for use in structural or slope areas should be evaluated by the soils engineer being imported to the site. If proposed, retaining walls backfill located within a 45-degree wedge extending up from the bottom of the heel foundation of the wall should consist of soil having an Expansion Index of 20 or less (ASTM D 4829) with less than 30 percent passing the No. 200 sieve. The upper 12 to 18 inches of wall backfill should consist of lower permeability soils, in order to reduce surface water infiltration behind walls. The project structural engineer and/or architect should detail proper wall backdrains, including gravel drain zones, fills, filter fabric and perforated drain pipes. A conceptual wall drainage detail is provided in Figure 4. Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Addition 3805 Alder Avenue, Carlsbad, California April 20, 2022 CTE Job No. 10-15939G S:\Projects\10-15000 to 10-15999 Projects\10-15939G (Alder Ave)\House Addition Geo Report\Rpt_Geotechnical.doc Page 14 5.6 Temporary Construction Slopes The following recommended slopes should be relatively stable against deep-seated failure, but may experience localized sloughing. On-site soils are considered Type B and Type C soils with recommended slope ratios as set forth in Table 5.6. TABLE 5.6 RECOMMENDED TEMPORARY SLOPE RATIOS SOIL TYPE SLOPE RATIO (Horizontal: vertical) MAXIMUM HEIGHT B (Very Old Paralic Deposits and Santiago Formation) 1:1 (OR FLATTER) 5 Feet C (Residual Soil and Previously Placed Fill) 1.5:1 (OR FLATTER) 5 Feet Actual field conditions and soil type designations must be verified by a "competent person" while excavations exist, according to Cal-OSHA regulations. In addition, the above sloping recommendations do not allow for surcharge loading at the top of slopes by vehicular traffic, equipment or materials. Appropriate surcharge setbacks must be maintained from the top of all unshored slopes. 5.7 Foundation and Slab Recommendations Based on site observations in accessible areas it is anticipated that the existing residence is founded on shallow formational materials in the northwestern and southwestern portions of the structure and up to approximately 1.5 feet of residual soil in other portions of the structure. Based on observations in Test Pit TP-1, the exterior conventional footing was measured to be eight inches thick and extended to a depth of 18 inches below adjacent subgrade. Based on observed and anticipated Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Addition 3805 Alder Avenue, Carlsbad, California April 20, 2022 CTE Job No. 10-15939G S:\Projects\10-15000 to 10-15999 Projects\10-15939G (Alder Ave)\House Addition Geo Report\Rpt_Geotechnical.doc Page 15 conditions, a bearing capacity of 1,500 pounds per square foot (psf) is considered appropriate for existing footings that are founded a minimum of 18 inches below adjacent subgrade that are underlain by residual soil. For existing footings that extend a minimum 18 inches below adjacent subgrade and extend into suitable formational material a bearing capacity of 2,500 psf can be utilized. Alternatively, if areas that are currently bearing in residual soil are suitably underpinned to the depth of competent formational material the bearing capacity can be increased to 2,500 psf. Recommendations for underpins can be provided if applicable to the proposed construction. 5.7.1 New Foundations If new foundations are proposed, following the recommended preparatory building pad area grading, continuous and isolated spread footings are anticipated to be suitable for use provided they are extended to bear in competent formational material. Foundation dimensions and reinforcement should be based on an allowable bearing value of 2,500 pounds per square foot (psf) for minimum 15-inch wide footings embedded a minimum of 24-inches below lowest adjacent subgrade elevation and founded in competent formational material. Isolated footings should be at least 24 inches in minimum dimension. The allowable bearing value may be increased by one-third for short-duration loading, which includes the effects of wind or seismic forces. Based on the anticipated presence of deeper surficial soil depths in the front of the site, localized deepening of footings will be necessary in order to achieve the required embedment. Recommendations for drilled piers can be provided if existing fill depths preclude the practical excavation of standard footings. Based on the recommendations provided, it is anticipated that all footings will be extended to bear in competent native material. Footings should not span cut to fill interfaces. Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Addition 3805 Alder Avenue, Carlsbad, California April 20, 2022 CTE Job No. 10-15939G S:\Projects\10-15000 to 10-15999 Projects\10-15939G (Alder Ave)\House Addition Geo Report\Rpt_Geotechnical.doc Page 16 Minimum footing reinforcement for continuous footings should consist of four No. 5 reinforcing bars; two placed near the top and two placed near the bottom or as per the project structural engineer. The structural engineer should design isolated footing reinforcement. Footing excavations should be maintained at above optimum moisture content until concrete placement. 5.7.2 Foundation Settlement The maximum total static settlement for improvements founded on properly embedded footings is expected to be on the order of one inch and the maximum differential settlement is expected to be on the order of 0.75 inch over a horizontal distance of approximately 40 feet. Due to the generally dense nature of underlying materials, dynamic settlement is not expected to significantly affect the proposed improvements. 5.7.3 Foundation Setback If new structural footings are proposed, they should be designed such that the horizontal distance from the face of adjacent slopes to the outer edge of the footing is at least 12 feet. In addition, footings should bear beneath a 1:1 plane extended up from the nearest bottom edge of adjacent trenches and/or excavations. Deepening of affected footings may be a suitable means of attaining the prescribed setbacks. 5.7.4 Interior Concrete Slabs Lightly loaded concrete slabs should be a minimum of 5.0 inches thick. Minimum slab reinforcement should consist of #4 reinforcing bars placed on maximum 18-inch centers, each way, at or above mid-slab height, but with proper cover. More stringent recommendations per the project structural engineer could be provided. Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Addition 3805 Alder Avenue, Carlsbad, California April 20, 2022 CTE Job No. 10-15939G S:\Projects\10-15000 to 10-15999 Projects\10-15939G (Alder Ave)\House Addition Geo Report\Rpt_Geotechnical.doc Page 17 In moisture-sensitive non-traffic floor areas, a suitable vapor retarder of at least 15-mil thickness (with all laps or penetrations sealed or taped) overlying a four-inch layer of consolidated aggregate base or gravel (or sand with SE of 30 or more) should be installed. An optional maximum two-inch layer of similar material may be placed above the vapor retarder to help protect the membrane during steel and concrete placement. (Please note that if the aforementioned optional layer is employed, control of the water to cement ratio will be critical to preventing excess water from pooling between the bottom of slab and vapor barrier). This recommended protection is generally considered typical in the industry. If proposed floor areas or coverings are considered especially sensitive to moisture emissions, additional recommendations from a specialty consultant could be obtained. CTE is not an expert at preventing moisture penetration through slabs. A qualified architect or other experienced professional should be contacted if moisture penetration is a more significant concern. Slabs subjected to heavier loads may require thicker slab sections and/or increased reinforcement. A 110-pci subgrade modulus is considered suitable for elastic design of minimally embedded improvements such as slabs-on-grade. Subgrade materials should be maintained or brought to a minimum of two percent or greater above optimum moisture content until slab underlayment and concrete are placed. Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Addition 3805 Alder Avenue, Carlsbad, California April 20, 2022 CTE Job No. 10-15939G S:\Projects\10-15000 to 10-15999 Projects\10-15939G (Alder Ave)\House Addition Geo Report\Rpt_Geotechnical.doc Page 18 5.8 Seismic Design Criteria The seismic ground motion values listed in the table below were derived in accordance with the ASCE 7-16 Standard that is incorporated into the 2019 California Building Code. This was accomplished by establishing the Site Class based on the soil properties at the site and calculating site coefficients and parameters using the using the SEAOC-OSHPD U.S. Seismic Design Maps application. These values are intended for the design of structures to resist the effects of earthquake ground motions for the site coordinates 33.1599° latitude and –117.3196° longitude, as underlain by soils corresponding to site Class C. TABLE 5.8 SEISMIC GROUND MOTION VALUES (CODE-BASED) 2019 CBC AND ASCE 7-16 PARAMETER VALUE 2019 CBC/ASCE 7-16 REFERENCE Site Class C ASCE 16, Chapter 20 Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter, SS 1.01 Figure 1613.2.1 (1) Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter, S1 0.368 Figure 1613.2.1 (2) Seismic Coefficient, Fa 1.2 Table 1613.2.3 (1) Seismic Coefficient, Fv 1.5 Table 1613.2.3 (2) MCE Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter, SMS 1.212 Section 1613.2.3 MCE Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter, SM1 0.552 Section 1613.2.3 Design Spectral Response Acceleration, Parameter SDS 0.808 Section 1613.2.5(1) Design Spectral Response Acceleration, Parameter SD1 0.368 Section 1613.2.5 (2) Peak Ground Acceleration PGAM 0.531 ASCE 16, Section 11.8.3 Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Addition 3805 Alder Avenue, Carlsbad, California April 20, 2022 CTE Job No. 10-15939G S:\Projects\10-15000 to 10-15999 Projects\10-15939G (Alder Ave)\House Addition Geo Report\Rpt_Geotechnical.doc Page 19 5.9 Lateral Resistance and Earth Pressures Lateral loads acting against structures may be resisted by friction between the footings and the supporting soil or passive pressure acting against structures. If frictional resistance is used, allowable coefficients of friction of 0.30 (total frictional resistance equals the coefficient of friction multiplied by the dead load) for concrete cast directly against compacted fill or native material is recommended. A design passive resistance value of 250 pounds per square foot per foot of depth (with a maximum value of 2,000 pounds per square foot) may be used. The allowable lateral resistance can be taken as the sum of the frictional resistance and the passive resistance, provided the passive resistance does not exceed two-thirds of the total allowable resistance. Proposed retaining walls backfilled using select granular soils may be designed using the equivalent fluid unit weights given in table below. Lateral pressures on cantilever retaining walls (yielding walls) over six feet high due to earthquake motions may be calculated based on work by Seed and Whitman (1970). The total lateral earth TABLE 5.9 EQUIVALENT FLUID UNIT WEIGHTS (Gh) (pounds per cubic foot) WALL TYPE LEVEL BACKFILL SLOPE BACKFILL 2:1 (HORIZONTAL: VERTICAL) CANTILEVER WALL (YIELDING) 45 55 RESTRAINED WALL 55 65 Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Addition 3805 Alder Avenue, Carlsbad, California April 20, 2022 CTE Job No. 10-15939G S:\Projects\10-15000 to 10-15999 Projects\10-15939G (Alder Ave)\House Addition Geo Report\Rpt_Geotechnical.doc Page 20 pressure against a properly drained and backfilled cantilever retaining wall above the groundwater level can be expressed as: PAE = PA + ΔPAE For non-yielding (or “restrained”) walls, the total lateral earth pressure may be similarly calculated based on work by Wood (1973): PKE = PK + ΔPKE Where PA/b = Static Active Earth Pressure = GhH2/2 PK/b = Static Restrained Wall Earth Pressure = GhH2/2 ΔPAE/b = Dynamic Active Earth Pressure Increment = (3/8) kh γH2 ΔPKE/b = Dynamic Restrained Earth Pressure Increment = kh γH2 b = unit length of wall (usually 1 foot) kh = 1/2* PGAm (PGAm given previously Table 5.8) Gh = Equivalent Fluid Unit Weight (given previously Table 5.9) H = Total Height of the retained soil γ = Total Unit Weight of Soil ≈ 135 pounds per cubic foot *It is anticipated that the 1/2 reduction factor will be appropriate for proposed walls that are not substantially sensitive to movement during the design seismic event. Proposed walls that are more sensitive to such movement could utilize a 2/3 reduction factor. If any proposed walls require minimal to no movement during the design seismic event, no reduction factor to the peak ground acceleration should be used. The project structural engineer of record should determine the appropriate reduction factor to use (if any) based on the specific proposed wall characteristics. The static and increment of dynamic earth pressure in both cases may be applied with a line of action located at H/3 above the bottom of the wall (SEAOC, 2013). Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Addition 3805 Alder Avenue, Carlsbad, California April 20, 2022 CTE Job No. 10-15939G S:\Projects\10-15000 to 10-15999 Projects\10-15939G (Alder Ave)\House Addition Geo Report\Rpt_Geotechnical.doc Page 21 These values assume non-expansive backfill and free-draining conditions. Measures should be taken to prevent moisture buildup behind all retaining walls. Drainage measures should include free- draining backfill materials and sloped, perforated drains. These drains should discharge to an appropriate off-site location. Waterproofing and drains for waterproofing may be necessary due to the descending slope to the north and anticipated irrigation runoff and accumulation. It is recommended that drains be constructed low enough so that water cannot rise above the top of interior building slab or finish floor elevation, and preferably well below the bottom of slab elevations. Waterproofing should be as specified and detained by the project architect or other specialty consultant. 5.10 Exterior Flatwork Flatwork should be installed with crack-control joints at appropriate spacing as designed by the project architect to reduce the potential for cracking in exterior flatwork caused by minor movement of subgrade soils and concrete shrinkage. Additionally, it is recommended that flatwork be installed with at least number 4 reinforcing bars at 18-inch centers, each way, at or above mid-height of slab, but with proper concrete cover, or with other reinforcement per the applicable project designer. Flatwork that should be installed with crack control joints, includes driveways, sidewalks, and architectural features. All subgrades should be prepared according to the earthwork recommendations previously given before placing concrete. Positive drainage should be established and maintained next to all flatwork. Subgrade materials should be maintained at a minimum of two percent above optimum moisture content until the time of concrete placement. Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Addition 3805 Alder Avenue, Carlsbad, California April 20, 2022 CTE Job No. 10-15939G S:\Projects\10-15000 to 10-15999 Projects\10-15939G (Alder Ave)\House Addition Geo Report\Rpt_Geotechnical.doc Page 22 5.11 Drainage Surface runoff should be collected and directed away from improvements by means of appropriate erosion-reducing devices and positive drainage should be established around the proposed improvements. Positive drainage should be directed away from improvements at a gradient of at least two percent for a distance of at least five feet. However, the project civil engineers should evaluate the on-site drainage and make necessary provisions to keep surface water from affecting the site. Generally, CTE recommends against allowing water to infiltrate building pads or adjacent to slopes. CTE understands that some agencies are encouraging the use of storm-water cleansing devices. Use of such devices tends to increase the possibility of adverse effects associated with high groundwater. 5.12 Slopes Based on anticipated soil strength characteristics minor slopes, if proposed, slopes should be constructed at ratios of 2:1 (horizontal: vertical) or flatter. These slope inclinations should exhibit factors of safety greater than 1.5. Although properly constructed slopes on this site should be grossly stable, the soils will be somewhat erodible. Therefore, runoff water should not be permitted to drain over the edges of slopes unless that water is confined to properly designed and constructed drainage facilities. Erosion-resistant vegetation should be maintained on the face of all slopes. Typically, soils along Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Addition 3805 Alder Avenue, Carlsbad, California April 20, 2022 CTE Job No. 10-15939G S:\Projects\10-15000 to 10-15999 Projects\10-15939G (Alder Ave)\House Addition Geo Report\Rpt_Geotechnical.doc Page 23 the top portion of a fill slope face will creep laterally. CTE recommends against building distress- sensitive hardscape improvements within five feet of slope crests. 5.13 Controlled Low Strength Materials (CLSM) Controlled Low Strength Materials (CLSM) may be used in deepened footing excavation areas, building pads, and/or adjacent to retaining walls or other structures, provided the appropriate following recommendations are also incorporated. Minimum overexcavation depths recommended herein beneath slabs, flatwork, and other areas may be applicable beneath CLSM if/where CLSM is to be used, and excavation bottoms should be observed by CTE prior to placement of CLSM. Prior to CLSM placement, the excavation should be free of debris, loose soil materials, and water. Once specific areas to utilize CLSM have been determined, CTE should review the locations to determine if additional recommendations are appropriate. CLSM should consist of a minimum three-sack cement/sand slurry with a minimum 28-day compressive strength of 100 psi (or equal to or greater than the maximum allowable short term soil bearing pressure provided herein, whichever is higher) as determined by ASTM D4832. If re- excavation is anticipated, the compressive strength of CLSM should generally be limited to a maximum of 150 psi per ACI 229R-99. Where re-excavation is required, two-sack cement/sand slurry may be used to help limit the compressive strength. The allowable soils bearing pressure and coefficient of friction provided herein should still govern foundation design. CLSM may not be used in lieu of structural concrete where required by the structural engineer. Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Addition 3805 Alder Avenue, Carlsbad, California April 20, 2022 CTE Job No. 10-15939G S:\Projects\10-15000 to 10-15999 Projects\10-15939G (Alder Ave)\House Addition Geo Report\Rpt_Geotechnical.doc Page 24 5.14 Plan Review CTE should be authorized to review the project grading and foundation/building plans prior to commencement of earthwork in order to provide additional evaluation and recommendations, as is anticipated to be necessary; especially for the proposed improvements at the northern limits of the site. 5.15 Construction Observation The recommendations provided in this report are based on preliminary design information for the proposed construction and the subsurface conditions observed in the soil borings. The interpolated subsurface conditions should be confirmed by CTE once more precise project plans are available and during construction with respect to anticipated conditions. Upon completion of precise grading, if necessary, soil samples will be collected to evaluate as-built Expansion Index. Foundation recommendations may be revised upon completion of grading, and as-built laboratory tests results. Additionally, soil samples should be taken in pavement subgrade areas upon rough grading to refine pavement recommendations as necessary. Recommendations provided in this report are based on the understanding and assumption that CTE will provide the observation and testing services for the project. All earthwork should be observed and tested in accordance with recommendations contained within this report. CTE should evaluate footing excavations before reinforcing steel placement. Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Addition 3805 Alder Avenue, Carlsbad, California April 20, 2022 CTE Job No. 10-15939G S:\Projects\10-15000 to 10-15999 Projects\10-15939G (Alder Ave)\House Addition Geo Report\Rpt_Geotechnical.doc Page 25 6.0 LIMITATIONS OF INVESTIGATION The field evaluation, laboratory testing, and geotechnical analysis presented in this report have been conducted according to current engineering practice and the standard of care exercised by reputable geotechnical consultants performing similar tasks in this area. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made regarding the conclusions, recommendations and opinions expressed in this report. Variations may exist and conditions not observed or described in this report may be encountered during construction. This report is prepared for the project as described. It is not prepared for any other property or party. The recommendations provided herein have been developed in order to reduce the post-construction movement of site improvements related to soil expansion and settlement. However, even with the design and construction recommendations presented herein, some post-construction movement and associated distress may occur. The findings of this report are valid as of the present date. However, changes in the conditions of a property can occur with the passage of time, whether they are due to natural processes or the works of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standards may occur, whether they result from legislation or the broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, the findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside CTE’s involvement. Therefore, this report is subject to review and should not be relied upon after a period of three years. Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Residential Addition 3805 Alder Avenue, Carlsbad, California April 20, 2022 CTE Job No. 10-15939G \\file01\CTE Share\Projects\10-15000 to 10-15999 Projects\10-15939G (Alder Ave)\House Addition Geo Report\Rpt_Geotechnical.doc Page 26 CTE’s conclusions and recommendations are based on an analysis of the observed conditions. If conditions different from those described in this report are encountered, CTE should be notified and additional recommendations, if required, will be provided subject to CTE remaining as authorized geotechnical consultant of record. This report is for use of the project as described. It should not be utilized for any other project. CTE appreciates this opportunity to be of service on this project. If you have any questions regarding this report, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Respectfully submitted, CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. Dan T. Math, GE #2665 Jay F. Lynch, CEG #1890 Principal Geotechnical Engineer Principal Engineering Geologist Aaron J. Beeby, CEG #2603 Senior Geologist AJB/DTM/JFL:ach SITE APN: 2070632500 C Eng1nee,1n9 Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. © A Unlve,sol Sciences 111Sj)OCi/on f Tasllrlg I Gecle<mlcal f EnY1""""""1l!i &Conllndon~ I Ci'IIEngineerirq I &.myrng Compony SITE INDEX DP PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL ADDITION 3805 ALDER AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA SCALE: DATE: AS SHOWN 2/22 CTE JOB NO.: FIGURE: 10-l5939G 1 B-1 B-2 A A' 1229 12 52 38 12 HB-4 HB-5 HB-3 HB-1 HB-2HB-6 Qvop Qudf Qvop QvopResidual Soil Qudf Qvop Qudf Tsa Qsw Tsa Tsa Qudf Tsa Qudf Qls Qsw TP-1 B-2 APPROXIMATE BORING LOCATION (2/21) LEGEND QUATERNARY UNDOCUMENTED FILL TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION Qudf Tsa APPROXIMATE GEOLOGIC CONTACT QUATERNARY SLOPEWASHQsw QUATERNARY VERY OLD PARALIC DEPOSITSQvop QUATERNARY LANDSLIDE DEPOSITSQls CROSS SECTION A-A'A A' APPROXIMATE JOINT ATTITUDE52 12 APPROXIMATE BEDDING ATTITUDE HB-6 APPROXIMATE HAND AUGURED BORING LOCATION TP-1 APPROXIMATE TEST PIT O'I ~ "'C N Q) I.. ::::, O'I 5 ..... I.. 0 Q. Q) e:::: 0 Q) (.!) C 0 ~ =o "'C <( Q) II) ::::, 0 I / ,...... Q) > <( I.. Q) "'C < ~ (.!) 0) I"') 0) LO ...... I 0 / II) ..... u -~ 0 I.. a.. 0) 0) 0) LO I 0 0 ..... 0 0 0 LO ...... I 0 / II) ..... u -~ 0 I.. a.. / en ~ 1--1 40' 0 20' 40' A Universal Engineering Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. SCciences Inspection I Testing I Geotechnical I Environmental & Construction Engineering I Civil Engineering I Surveying ompony GEOLOGIC/EXPLORATION LOCATION MAP trlll'll'P.-------1 PROPOSED HOUSE ADDITION 3805 ALDER AVENUE CARLSBAD CAIJFORNIA 2 100 DISTANCE (FEET) CROSS SECTION A-A' 0 50 170 160 170 160 150 200 250 300 350 400 210EL E V A T I O N ( F E E T ) 190 180 200 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 210 190 180 200 220 230 240 250 260 270 280 290 300 A A' B-1 Tsa (sand) Tsa (Clay) Tsa (sand) TD=60.5' TD=12' B-2 Qvop Qudf/Qya Existing Profile Existing Residence Qudf Qudf Qudf Tsa (Clay) Tsa (sand) LEGEND QUATERNARY UNDOCUMENTED FILL TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION Qudf Tsa APPROXIMATE GEOLOGIC CONTACT QUATERNARY VERY OLD PARALIC DEPOSITSQvop QUATERNARY YOUNG ALLUVIAL FLOODQyaPLAIN DEPOSITS O'l ~ "C ......... <( I <( C 0 :;:; (.) V) V) V) 0 I.. u ......... <( N Q) I.. ::::, O'l 5-..... I.. 0 0.. Q) 0::: 0 Q) (!) C 0 :;:; '6 "C <( Q) V) ::::, 0 3-......... Q) > <( I.. Q) "C <( ......... (!) c,, I"") c,, LO I 0 / V) ..... (.) Q) ·o I.. a.. c,, c,, c,, LO ~ I 0 0 ..... 0 0 0 LO ~ I 0 / V) ..... (.) -~ 0 I.. ~ en - - ... ~- -- ---- I I I - :z -·= -L --r I ---. - -f------- I I --J..~---/ -,_ :~ I ~ ' =-':: =----~ -- ----I--'. -· -- --------• ~----... I I / -----1--~ -,--.-- --- f----... -- I L----"" n__ -1-=-----. --1 I=--·;.__ ---· --------....__ "' "--.....1--------, --------• -----f----•--~---r--.. I A Universal . li . & E . . I Engineering Construction est1ng ngineenng, nc. Sciences Company lnspectioo I Testing I Geotechnical I Environmental & Construction Engineering I Civil Engineering I Surveying V ,, K ~ r---.. I -._1 ........ . ...... .,..__ - CROSS SECTION A-A' PROPOSED HOUSE ADDITION 3805 ALDER AVENUE CARLSBAD CALIFORNIA - APPROXIMATESITE LOCATION NOTE: Base Map by Kennedy and Tan, 2007, Geologic Map of theOceanside 30' x 60' Quadrangle, California. LEGEND Young Alluvial Flood Plain DepositsQya Qop Old Paralic Deposits Very Old Paralic DepositsQvop Torrey StandstoneTt Paralic Estuarine DepositsQpe Del Mar FormationTd Santiago FormationTsa Metavolcanic RockMzu O"I 3: "O .,..:.. a. C ~ 0 Q) c., .__.. tr) Q) I... ::J O"I G: / +-' I... 0 a. Q) 0::: 0 Q) c., C 0 +J =o "O <( Q) rn ::J 0 I / ~ <( I... Q) "O <( .__.. c., 0) tr) 0) LO ,- I 0 / rn +-' 0 -~ 0 I... a.. 0) 0) 0) LO ,- I 0 0 +-' 0 0 0 LO ,- I 0 / rn +-' 0 -~ 0 I... ~ en @ AUnlVersal C Engineering Construction Testing & E.ngineering,. Inc. ___ _ Sclel'lc.e5 f111spectiaA I TEl51ing I Geolechnical I Envilll4:lmental & ConstruOllon Engjrleellng I Civill ~ I ~ Company REGIONAL GEOLOGIC MAP PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL ADDITION 3805 ALDER AVENUE CAWBAD, CALIFORNIA SCALE: DATE: 1• ... 4,000' 2/22 CTE JOB NO.: FIGURE: 10-15939G 3 APPROXIMATE SITE LOCATION LEGEND HISTORIC FAULT DISPLACEMENT (LAST 200 YEARS) HOLOCENE FAULT DISPLACEMENT (DURING PAST 11,700 YEARS) LATE QUATERNARY FAULT DISPLACMENT (DURING PAST 700,000 YEARS) QUATERNARY FAULT DISPLACEMENT (AGE UNDIFFERENTIATED) PREQUATERNARY FAULT DISPLACEMENT (OLDER THAN 1.6 MILLION YEARS) >7.0 6.5-6.9 5.5-5.9 5.0-5.4 PERIOD 1800- 1869- 1932-1868 1931 2010 LAST TWO DIGITS OF M > 6.5 EARTHQUAKE YEAR MA G N I T U D E ......... \ ... , \ \ \ \ ~ .. \ \ -). 'I.'< \\_ \ \ "\ \\ ~~~ 1 ' \ .. ~ \'~ 0 \ ' , ,'.\ ·, \ ' \ ' \ I I \ \ ------·······?- -~ ...-. dr,1i '~ 7''°<~;.:'l~i"l:/~~~~rv: -· : • .\.., \ -------------------·---~- 1 inch = 12 mi. 0 0 0 0 • • 0 0 0 0 -.. ..., . ":!, -.J.. 4 .-,. . ·:·:\ 4 ~, •, R /. §1.__ __________ ..,___,, _ ___,;_ __ ....a.,:,,,. __ ---1,,. _ ____:,;_...,;.___c'l'.....u..---J M E X C i OTES: rAULT ACTIVlTY KAP oF CALIFORNIA, 2010. CALIFORNIA GEO10G1c DATA KAP SEms KAP No. a: ,------------------------RE-G-1-0-N-... -T-F.-,-.. -y-"-1"'-.. -~-8-1-1-8--.n-c_ITY __ u_ .. n------~ i EPICENTERS OF AND AREAS DAllAGED BY 11~5 CALIFORNIA EARTHQUAKES, 1800-1999 ADAPTED @ AUniver,;ol AJ.a AU.&.,.1. a1,u aJ. aar-mrr---------t / ".,.o.. AFTER TOPPOZADA, BRANUII, PETERSEN, IIALISl'ORII, CRAKER, AND REICHLI, 2000, C En~ineering Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL ADDITION CDKG IIAP SHEET .(,9 ~:~~";~y lnspecl~n I Teslir>J I Geotechnical I Enviroomental & Construction Engineering I Civi Engineering I Surve~r>J 3805 ALDER A VENUE u1 REFERENCE FOR ADDfflONAL EXPLANATION: IIODIFIED 1TI'H CISN AND USGS SEISIIIC KAPS CARLSBAD CALIFORNIA .(. APPENDIX A REFERENCES REFERENCES 1. American Society for Civil Engineers, 2019, “Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures,” ASCE/SEI 7-16. 2. ASCE Tsunami Hazard Tool, ASCE Tsunami Design Geodatabase Version 2016-1.0. 3. ASTM, 2002, “Test Method for Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Modified Effort,” Volume 04.08 4. California Building Code, 2019, “California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2, Volume 2 of 2,” California Building Standards Commission, published by ICBO, June. 5. California Division of Mines and Geology, CD 2000-003 “Digital Images of Official Maps of Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones of California, Southern Region,” compiled by Martin and Ross. 6. Hart, Earl W., Revised 1994, Revised 2018, “Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Alquist Priolo, Special Studies Zones Act of 1972,” California Division of Mines and Geology, Special Publication 42. 7. Jennings, Charles W., 1994, “Fault Activity Map of California and Adjacent Areas” with Locations and Ages of Recent Volcanic Eruptions. 8. Kennedy, M.P. and Tan, S.S., 2007, “Geologic Map of the Oceanside 30’ x 60’ Quadrangle, California”, California Geological Survey, Map No. 2. 9. Reichle, M., Bodin, P., and Brune, J., 1985, The June 1985 San Diego Bay Earthquake swarm [abs.]: EOS, v. 66, no. 46, p.952. 10. Seed, H.B., and R.V. Whitman, 1970, “Design of Earth Retaining Structures for Dynamic Loads,” in Proceedings, ASCE Specialty Conference on Lateral Stresses in the Ground and Design of Earth-Retaining Structures, pp. 103-147, Ithaca, New York: Cornell University. 11. Tan, S. S., and Giffen, D. G., 1995, “Landslide Hazards in the Northern Part of the San Diego Metropolitan Area, San Diego County, California: Oceanside and San Luis Rey Quadrangles, Landslide Hazard Identification Map No. 35”, California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Open-File Report 95-04, State of California, Division of Mines and Geology. 12. Wood, J.H. 1973, Earthquake-Induced Soil Pressures on Structures, Report EERL 73-05. Pasadena: California Institute of Technology. APPENDIX B EXPLORATION LOGS DEFINITION OF TERMS PRIMARY DIVISIONS SYMBOLS SECONDARY DIVISIONS WELL GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND MIXTURES LITTLE OR NO FINES POORLY GRADED GRAVELS OR GRAVEL SAND MIXTURES,LITTLE OF NO FINESSILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND-SILT MIXTURES, NON-PLASTIC FINESCLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND-CLAY MIXTURES,PLASTIC FINESWELL GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SANDS, LITTLE OR NO FINESPOORLY GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SANDS, LITTLE OR NO FINES SILTY SANDS, SAND-SILT MIXTURES, NON-PLASTIC FINES CLAYEY SANDS, SAND-CLAY MIXTURES, PLASTIC FINES INORGANIC SILTS, VERY FINE SANDS, ROCK FLOUR, SILTYOR CLAYEY FINE SANDS, SLIGHTLY PLASTIC CLAYEY SILTSINORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO MEDIUM PLASTICITY, GRAVELLY, SANDY, SILTS OR LEAN CLAYS ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR DIATOMACEOUS FINE SANDY OR SILTY SOILS, ELASTIC SILTSINORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FAT CLAYS ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO HIGH PLASTICITY, ORGANIC SILTY CLAYSPEAT AND OTHER HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS GRAIN SIZES GRAVEL SAND COARSE FINE COARSE MEDIUM FINE 12" 3" 3/4" 4 10 40 200 CLEAR SQUARE SIEVE OPENING U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE ADDITIONAL TESTS (OTHER THAN TEST PIT AND BORING LOG COLUMN HEADINGS) MAX- Maximum Dry Density PM- Permeability PP- Pocket Penetrometer GS- Grain Size Distribution SG- Specific Gravity WA- Wash Analysis SE- Sand Equivalent HA- Hydrometer Analysis DS- Direct Shear EI- Expansion Index AL- Atterberg Limits UC- Unconfined Compression CHM- Sulfate and Chloride RV- R-Value MD- Moisture/Density Content , pH, Resistivity CN- Consolidation M- Moisture COR - Corrosivity CP- Collapse Potential SC- Swell Compression SD- Sample Disturbed HC- Hydrocollapse OI- Organic Impurities REM- Remolded FIGURE: BL1 GW SILTS AND CLAYSLIQUID LIMIT ISLESS THAN 50 SILTS AND CLAYSLIQUID LIMIT ISGREATER THAN 50 SANDSMORE THANHALF OFCOARSEFRACTION ISSMALLER THANNO. 4 SIEVE GRAVELSMORE THANHALF OFCOARSEFRACTION ISLARGER THANNO. 4 SIEVE CLEANGRAVELS< 5% FINES GRAVELS WITH FINES CLEANSANDS< 5% FINES SANDSWITH FINES CO A R S E G R A I N E D S O I L S MO R E T H A N H A L F O F MA T E R I A L I S L A R G E R T H A N NO . 2 0 0 S I E V E S I Z E GP GM GC SW SP SM SC ML CL OL MH CH OH PT FI N E G R A I N E D S O I L S MO R E T H A N H A L F O F MA T E R I A L I S S M A L L E R TH A N N O . 2 0 0 S I E V E S I Z E HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS SILTS AND CLAYSCOBBLESCOBBLESBOULDERS ~ Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. CT~c 1441 Montiel Rd Ste 115, Escondido, CA 92026 Ph (760) 746-4955 ::c < -· -~<>"ii 1~ --., .!f?'i .~.----n.-~~ ~.; ( . . "" ,011,, 0 ' :-:.-.~ ----~-:.-.-c -"'·· . "'·--~----~-_:~--C I % / r r r ~ './, ½ ~ // 1/. 0 .., ---, , % ~ ; '// ; ~ ~ I LL ~ I m T 1//,,,, ·0 ~,,, .0 % ~ ~P ,n , ~ ~1/ 1/. 1/ ~ I I I I I PROJECT:DRILLER:SHEET:of CTE JOB NO:DRILL METHOD:DRILLING DATE: LOGGED BY:SAMPLE METHOD:ELEVATION: De p t h ( F e e t ) Bu l k S a m p l e Dr i v e n T y p e Bl o w s / F o o t Dr y D e n s i t y ( p c f ) Mo i s t u r e ( % ) U.S . C . S . S y m b o l Gr a p h i c L o g BORING LEGEND Laboratory Tests DESCRIPTION Block or Chunk Sample Bulk Sample Standard Penetration Test Modified Split-Barrel Drive Sampler (Cal Sampler) Thin Walled Army Corp. of Engineers Sample Groundwater Table Soil Type or Classification Change ??????? Formation Change [(Approximate boundaries queried (?)] "SM"Quotes are placed around classifications where the soilsexist in situ as bedrock FIGURE: BL2 Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. 1441 Montiel Rd Ste 115, Escondido, CA 92026 Ph (760) 746-4955 -0 --~ -----X --- -5- -- -- ~'" -- --.... 10-- --I --- --I - -- -15- -- --~ -- --~----------------------------------------------------------------------- 20- ----------------\_ -- -- -- 25- -- I PROJECT:SHEET: of CTE JOB NO:DRILL METHOD:DRILLING DATE: LOGGED BY:SAMPLE METHOD:ELEVATION: De p t h ( F e e t ) Bu l k S a m p l e Dr i v e n T y p e Bl o w s / 6 " Dr y D e n s i t y ( p c f ) Mo i s t u r e ( % ) U. S . C . S . S y m b o l Gr a p h i c L o g DESCRIPTION SC "SC" 1536 50/5" 2245 50/5" "SC" 214250/5" "CL" "SC" 4650/5" 3 10-15939G HOLLOW-STEM AUGER 2/1/2021 JARAMILLO RESIDENCE SLOPE DRILLER: BAJA EXPLORATION 1 AJB RING, SPT and BULK ~288 FEET BORING: B-1 Laboratory Tests Asphalt: 0-3" QUATERNARY UNDOCUMENTED FILL:Loose to medium dense, slightly moist, dark reddish brown tobrown, clayey fine to medium grained SAND. MAX QUATERNARY VERY OLD PARALIC DEPOSITS:Dense to very dense, slightly moist, reddish brown, clayey fineto medium grained SANDSTONE, oxidized, massive.Roots at five feetGravel from 6.5 to 9.0 feet MD, DS TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION:Very dense, moist, light reddish gray, clayey fine to medium SANDSTONE, oxidized, mottling, abundant medium grained sand. Increased clay content Hard, moist, light olive, fine grained sandy CLAYSTONE.MD, DS Very dense, slightly moist, light olive gray, clayey fine to mediumgrained SANDSTONE, massive, abundant medium grained sand. B-1 0 5 10 15 20 25 Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. 1441 Montiel Rd Ste 115, Escondido, CA 92026 Ph (760) 746-4955 - -- -- -- -- - --I .... -- -- -- --,... --I .... -- -- -- --,... --I .... -- -- -- --~ -- -- -- -- -- I PROJECT:SHEET: of CTE JOB NO:DRILL METHOD:DRILLING DATE: LOGGED BY:SAMPLE METHOD:ELEVATION: De p t h ( F e e t ) Bu l k S a m p l e Dr i v e n T y p e Bl o w s / 6 " Dr y D e n s i t y ( p c f ) Mo i s t u r e ( % ) U. S . C . S . S y m b o l Gr a p h i c L o g DESCRIPTION 29 "SC" 50/3" "SM" 50/6" 50/5" 31 "CH"50/2" 2850/4" B-1 AL MD, DS Hard, moist, olive, CLAYSTONE, polished surfaces, high plasticity. SANDSTONE.Very dense, slightly moist, light gray, silty fine grained grained SANDSTONE, massive, abundant medium grained sand.Very dense, slightly moist, light olive gray, clayey fine to medium AJB RING, SPT and BULK ~288 FEET BORING: B-1 Laboratory Tests 3 10-15939G HOLLOW-STEM AUGER 2/1/2021 JARAMILLO RESIDENCE SLOPE DRILLER:BAJA EXPLORATION 2 25 30 35 40 45 50 Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. 1441 Montiel Rd Ste 115, Escondido, CA 92026 Ph (760) 746-4955 - --~ -- -- -- --~ -- -- -- -- --~ -- -- -- -- --~ -- -- -- -- - --~ -- -- -- --- I PROJECT:SHEET: of CTE JOB NO:DRILL METHOD:DRILLING DATE: LOGGED BY:SAMPLE METHOD:ELEVATION: De p t h ( F e e t ) Bu l k S a m p l e Dr i v e n T y p e Bl o w s / 6 " Dr y D e n s i t y ( p c f ) Mo i s t u r e ( % ) U. S . C . S . S y m b o l Gr a p h i c L o g DESCRIPTION 50/5""CH" 3250/5" "SC" 50/5" Total Depth: 60.5'No Groundwater Encountered Backfilled with Bentonite/Concrete Mix B-1 MD, DS moderately cemented.Very dense, slightly moist, gray, clayey fine grained SANDSTONE, Hard, moist, olive, CLAYSTONE, polished surfaces, high plasticity. AJB RING, SPT and BULK ~288 FEET BORING: B-1 Laboratory Tests 3 10-15939G HOLLOW-STEM AUGER 2/1/2021 JARAMILLO RESIDENCE SLOPE DRILLER:BAJA EXPLORATION 3 50 55 60 65 70 75 Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. 1441 Montiel Rd Ste 115, Escondido, CA 92026 Ph (760) 746-4955 ,.. L ,.. - ,.. - ... - ,.. - ,.. -- ... -L ... - ,.. - ,.. - ... -7 ... - ,.. - ,.. - ... - ... - ,.. - ,.. - ... - ... - ,.. - ,.. - ... - ... - ,.. - ,.. - I PROJECT:SHEET: of CTE JOB NO:DRILL METHOD:DRILLING DATE: LOGGED BY:SAMPLE METHOD:ELEVATION: De p t h ( F e e t ) Bu l k S a m p l e Dr i v e n T y p e Bl o w s / 6 " Dr y D e n s i t y ( p c f ) Mo i s t u r e ( % ) U. S . C . S . S y m b o l Gr a p h i c L o g DESCRIPTION SC "SC/SM" "CL" Total Depth: 12.0'No Groundwater Encountered JARAMILLO RESIDENCE SLOPE DRILLER:BAJA EXPLORATION 1 1 10-15939G HOLLOW-STEM AUGER 2/1/2021 AJB RING, SPT and BULK ~263 FEET BORING: B-2 Laboratory Tests QUATERNARY UNDOCUMENTED FILL:Loose to medium dense, moist, reddish brown, clayey fine tomedium grained SAND. TERTIARY SANTIAGO FORMATION:Medium dense to dense, slightly moist, light gray, clayey to siltyfine to medium grained SANDSTONE. Becomes medium dense, severely mottled. Becomes yellowish brown with a 1/4" diameter root Becomes dense, very light graywith increased cementation Becomes yellowish brown, with minor root Becomes light gray Hard, moist, olive CLAYSTONE. B-2 0 5 10 15 20 25 Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. 1441 Montiel Rd Ste 115, Escondido, CA 92026 Ph (760) 746-4955 - -- -- -- -- --- -- -- -- -- -- -- - -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- I PROJECT:EXCAVATOR: CTE JOB NO:EXCAVATION METHOD: LOGGED BY:SAMPLING METHOD:ELEVATION: Dr y D e n s i t y ( p c f ) Mo i s t u r e ( % ) U. S . C . S . S y m b o l Gr a p h i c L o g De p t h ( F e e t ) Bu l k S a m p l e Dr i v e n T y p e Laboratory Tests SM "SM""SC""SM" Total Depth: 4.6'No Groundwater Encountered FIGURE:B-1 DD BULK ~292 FEET BORING LOG B-1 DESCRIPTION ALDER AVENUE AJB/DD 10-15939G MANUAL AUGER EXCAVATION DATE:2/10/2022 0 5 10 15 QUATERNARY UNDOCUMENTED FILL:Loose to medium dense, moist, brown, silty fine to medium grained SAND, trace fine roots. QUATERNARY OLD PARALICS:Medium dense, moist, reddish brown, silty fine to medium grained SAND, oxidized, massive. Medium dense, moist, moddled reddish brown and olive gray, clayey fine to medium grained SAND. Medium dense, slightly moist, reddish brown, silty fine to medium grained SAND, oxidized, massive. ~ Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. CT~c --- 1441 Montiel Rd Ste 115, Escondido, CA 92026 Ph (760) 746-4955 -~ - - - - - ----------------- ------' ' ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ' - -' -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -I\ -- - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - I PROJECT:EXCAVATOR: CTE JOB NO:EXCAVATION METHOD: LOGGED BY:SAMPLING METHOD:ELEVATION: Dr y D e n s i t y ( p c f ) Mo i s t u r e ( % ) U. S . C . S . S y m b o l Gr a p h i c L o g De p t h ( F e e t ) Bu l k S a m p l e Dr i v e n T y p e Laboratory Tests SM "SM""SC" "SM" Total Depth: 5.2'No Groundwater Encountered FIGURE:B-2 DD BULK ~294 FEET BORING LOG B-2 DESCRIPTION ALDER AVENUE AJB/DD 10-15939G MANUAL AUGER EXCAVATION DATE:2/10/2022 0 5 10 15 RESIDUAL SOIL:Loose to medium dense, moist, brown, silty fine to medium grained SAND. QUATERNARY OLD PARALICS:Medium dense, moist, reddish brown, silty fine to medium grained SAND, oxidized, massive. Medium dense, moist, moddled reddish brown and olive gray, clayey fine to medium grained SAND. Medium dense, slightly moist, reddish brown, silty fine to medium grained SAND, moderately cemented. ~ Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. CT~c --- 1441 Montiel Rd Ste 115, Escondido, CA 92026 Ph (760) 746-4955 -~ - - - - ----------- -' ' ' ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - --, ' _\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I\ - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - I PROJECT:EXCAVATOR: CTE JOB NO:EXCAVATION METHOD: LOGGED BY:SAMPLING METHOD:ELEVATION: Dr y D e n s i t y ( p c f ) Mo i s t u r e ( % ) U. S . C . S . S y m b o l Gr a p h i c L o g De p t h ( F e e t ) Bu l k S a m p l e Dr i v e n T y p e Laboratory Tests SM "SM""SC""SM" Total Depth: 4.4'No Groundwater Encountered FIGURE:B-3 DD BULK ~295 FEET BORING LOG B-3 DESCRIPTION ALDER AVENUE AJB/DD 10-15939G MANUAL AUGER EXCAVATION DATE:2/10/2022 0 5 10 15 RESIDUAL SOIL:Loose to medium dense, moist, brown, silty fine to medium grained SAND. QUATERNARY OLD PARALICS:Medium dense, moist, reddish brown, silty fine to medium grained SAND, oxidized, massive. Medium dense, moist, reddish brown, clayey fine to medium grained SAND. Medium dense, slightly moist, reddish brown, silty fine to medium grained SAND, moderately cemented. ~ Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. CT~c --- 1441 Montiel Rd Ste 115, Escondido, CA 92026 Ph (760) 746-4955 -~ - - - - - ------------' -----------~-' ' ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------\ ' ' -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -\ - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - I PROJECT:EXCAVATOR: CTE JOB NO:EXCAVATION METHOD: LOGGED BY:SAMPLING METHOD:ELEVATION: Dr y D e n s i t y ( p c f ) Mo i s t u r e ( % ) U. S . C . S . S y m b o l Gr a p h i c L o g De p t h ( F e e t ) Bu l k S a m p l e Dr i v e n T y p e Laboratory Tests SM "SM" Total Depth: 1'No Groundwater Encountered FIGURE:B-4 DD BULK ~299 FEET BORING LOG B-4 DESCRIPTION ALDER AVENUE AJB/DD 10-15939G MANUAL AUGER EXCAVATION DATE:2/10/2022 0 5 10 15 QUATERNARY UNDOCUMENTED FILL:Loose, dry, brown, silty fine to medium grained SAND, trace fine gravel. QUATERNARY OLD PARALICS:Medium dense, slightly moist, reddish brown, silty fine to medium grained SAND, oxidized, massive. ~ Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. CT~c --- 1441 Montiel Rd Ste 115, Escondido, CA 92026 Ph (760) 746-4955 -~ ~ -\ I"-. - - - -\ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - I PROJECT:EXCAVATOR: CTE JOB NO:EXCAVATION METHOD: LOGGED BY:SAMPLING METHOD:ELEVATION: Dr y D e n s i t y ( p c f ) Mo i s t u r e ( % ) U. S . C . S . S y m b o l Gr a p h i c L o g De p t h ( F e e t ) Bu l k S a m p l e Dr i v e n T y p e Laboratory Tests SM "SC" "SM" Total Depth: 3.6'No Groundwater Encountered FIGURE:B-5 DD BULK ~298 FEET BORING LOG B-5 DESCRIPTION ALDER AVENUE AJB/DD 10-15939G MANUAL AUGER EXCAVATION DATE:2/10/2022 0 5 10 15 RESIDUAL SOIL:Loose to medium dense, slightly moist, brown, silty fine to medium grained SAND. QUATERNARY OLD PARALICS:Medium dense, moist, reddish brown, clayey fine to medium grained SAND. Medium dense, slightly moist, reddish brown, clayey fine to medium grained SAND. ~ Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. CT~c --- 1441 Montiel Rd Ste 115, Escondido, CA 92026 Ph (760) 746-4955 -~ - - - - --------= -=----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - I PROJECT:EXCAVATOR: CTE JOB NO:EXCAVATION METHOD: LOGGED BY:SAMPLING METHOD:ELEVATION: Dr y D e n s i t y ( p c f ) Mo i s t u r e ( % ) U. S . C . S . S y m b o l Gr a p h i c L o g De p t h ( F e e t ) Bu l k S a m p l e Dr i v e n T y p e Laboratory Tests SM "SC" Total Depth: 6'No Groundwater Encountered FIGURE:B-6 DD BULK ~296 FEET BORING LOG B-6 DESCRIPTION ALDER AVENUE AJB/DD 10-15939G MANUAL AUGER EXCAVATION DATE:2/10/2022 0 5 10 15 QUATERNARY UNDOCUMENTED FILL:Loose to medium dense, slightly moist, brown, silty fine to medium grained SAND. QUATERNARY OLD PARALICS:Medium dense, moist, reddish brown, clayey fine to medium grained SAND. ~ Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. CT~c --- 1441 Montiel Rd Ste 115, Escondido, CA 92026 Ph (760) 746-4955 -~ - - - - - - - - - ------- - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - I APPENDIX C LABORATORY TEST METHODS AND RESULTS (10-15939G) Appendix C (Alder Avenue) LABORATORY TEST METHODS In-situ Moisture Content and Dry Density Tests (ASTM D2216 and D2937) The in-situ moisture content and dry density of selected samples obtained during the subsurface investigations were evaluated in general accordance with the latest versions of the ASTM D2216 and D2937 test methods. The methods involve obtaining the moist weight of the sample and then drying the sample to obtain its dry weight. The moisture content is calculated by taking the difference between the wet and dry weights, dividing it by the dry weight of the sample and expressing the result as a percentage. The dry weight and the measured volume of the tested sample are then used to calculate the samples dry density. The results of the in-situ moisture content and dry density tests are presented in the following section of this appendix and on the logs of the exploratory excavations presented in Appendix B. Classification (ASTM D2487) Earth materials encountered were visually and texturally classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS/ASTM D2487) and ASTM D2488. Material classifications are indicated on the logs of the exploratory borings presented in Appendix B. No. 200 Sieve Wash Analysis (ASTM D1140) An evaluation of the fine and coarse fractions of the materials encountered was performed in general accordance with the latest version of the ASTM D1140 test method. The test method involves drying the sample to obtain its dry weight, soaking the dried sample in solution, then washing the sample over a No. 200 sieve screen to separate the fines (clays and silts) from the coarse (sands) fraction. The results are displayed as the percentage (dry weight) of particles (clays and silts) passing the No. 200 sieve. The test results are presented in the following section of this appendix. Particle-size Distribution Tests (ASTM D6913) Particle-size distribution (gradation) testing was performed on selected samples of the materials encountered in general accordance with the latest version of the ASTM D6913 test method. The test results were utilized in evaluating the soil classifications in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System and to evaluate the geotechnical engineering characteristics of the tested material. The test results are plotted on grain-size distribution graphs and are presented in the following section of this appendix. A Universal Engineering Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. Sciences Company Inspection I Testing I Geotechnical I Environmental & Construction Engineering I Civil Engineering I Surveying (10-15939G) Appendix C (Alder Avenue) Atterberg Limits Test (ASTM D4318) The Atterberg limits test was performed on selected samples of the materials encountered in general accordance with the ASTM D4318 test method. The test obtains the liquid limit and plastic index of the soil and the results are used to aid in classification of soils. The test data is also useful for purposes of evaluating expansion potential and strength characteristics of the soil. The test results are presented in the following section of this appendix. Expansion Index Test (ASTM D4829) Expansion index testing was performed on selected samples of the earth materials encountered in general accordance with the ASTM D4829 test method. The test determines the expansion potential of the materials encountered. The test results are presented in the following section of this appendix. Laboratory Compaction Characteristics Test (ASTM D1557) Laboratory compaction characteristics testing was performed on selected samples of the earth materials encountered in general accordance with the ASTM D1557 test method. The test establishes the laboratory maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of the tested materials and are also used to aid in evaluating the strength characteristics of the materials. Direct Shear Test (ASTM D3080) Direct Shear testing was performed in general accordance with the ASTM D3080 test method to aid in evaluating the soil strength characteristics of the on-site earth materials encountered. Testing is performed on undisturbed specimens obtained from drive-samples and/or on specimens remolded in the laboratory to a specific moisture content and density. The test consists of placing the specimen in a direct shearing device, applying a specified normal stress, and then shearing the sample at a constant rate under drained conditions. This is repeated under a series of specified normal stresses. The shearing resistance and horizontal displacements are measured and recorded as the soil specimen is sheared. The shearing is continued well beyond the point of maximum resistance (peak strength) to determine a constant or residual value (ultimate strength). The test results are presented in the following section of this appendix. A Universal Engineering Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. Sciences Company Inspection I Testing I Geotechnical I Environmental & Construction Engineering I Civil Engineering I Surveying (10-15939G) Appendix C (Alder Avenue) RESULTS OF THE MOISTURE CONTENT AND DRY DENSITY TESTS (ASTM D2216 and D2937) Sample Location / Depth (feet) Moisture Content (percent) Dry Density (pounds per cubic foot) B-1 @ 5 12.1 121.9 B-1 @ 15 19.2 106.3 B-1 @ 20 11.7 115.3 B-1 @ 45 21.9 99.5 B-1 @ 60 14.1 113.3 RESULTS OF THE ATTERBERG LIMITS TESTS (ASTM D4318) Sample Location / Depth (feet ) Liquid Limit Plasticity Index Classification B-1 @ 45-50 69 41 CH RESULTS OF THE EXPANSION INDEX TESTS (ASTM D4829) Sample Location Expansion Index Expansion Potential Bulk # 1 55 MEDIUM RESULTS OF THE LABORATORY COMPACTION CHARACTERISTICS TESTS (ASTM D1557) Sample Location / Depth (feet) Maximum Dry Density (pounds per cubic foot) Optimum Moisture (percent) B-1 @ 0-5 131.8 (133.6) 9.5 (8.9) A Universal Engineering Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. Sciences Company Inspection I Testing I Geotechnical I Environmental & Construction Engineering I Civil Engineering I Surveying SHEAR STRENGTH TEST - ASTM D3080 Job Name: Project Number: 10-15939 Lab Number: 31755 Sample Location: Tested by: Sample Description: B-1 @ 5' Sample Date: Test Date: 2/1/2021 Moderate Brown (SC) Angle Of Friction: 36.4 Cohesion: Alder Ave 990 psf Initial Dry Density (pcf): 121.9 Initial Moisture (%): 12.1 Final Moisture (%): 17.7 JH 2/8/2021 0.017 0.0175 0.018 0.0185 0.019 0.0195 0.02 0.0205 0.0210.1 1 10 100 ST R A I N ( i n c h e s ) TIME (minutes) PRECONSOLIDATION 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 0 2 4 6 8 101214161820 SH E A R S T R E S S ( p s f ) STRAIN (%) SHEARING DATA 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 SH E A R I N G S T R E S S ( p s f ) VERTICAL STRESS (psf) FAILURE ENVELOPE dr=0.0800 mm./min VERTICAL STRESS 1000 psf3000 psf5000 psf I -, I I I I\ I 11 I I I I ii---7 I { N I --r I - \. -'\ J - ' ~ [I J J l J l l J I I J I J 1 lJl 1 J 1 I I J l I I J J I I= _I J L-=----==----==~~==-==--~---- 1 l================================--====- I I I l 1 1 I I l I I I ~ CTE JNC ~ SHEAR STRENGTH TEST - ASTM D3080 Job Name: Project Number: 10-15939G Lab Number: 31755 Sample Location: Tested by: Sample Description: JH 2/8/2021 Angle Of Friction: 19.5 Cohesion: Alder Ave 1310 psf Initial Dry Density (pcf): 106.3 Initial Moisture (%): 19.2 Final Moisture (%): 22.9 B-1 @ 15' Sample Date: Test Date: 2/1/2021 Moderate Brown (SC) 0.026 0.028 0.030 0.032 0.034 0.036 0.038 0.040 0.0420.1 1 10 100 ST R A I N ( i n c h e s ) TIME (minutes) PRECONSOLIDATION 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 0 2 4 6 8 101214161820 SH E A R S T R E S S ( p s f ) STRAIN (%) SHEARING DATA 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 SH E A R I N G S T R E S S ( p s f ) VERTICAL STRESS (psf) FAILURE ENVELOPE dr=0.0800 mm./min VERTICAL STRESS 1000 psf3000 psf5000 psf I • I I I I 11 I I r I I I I I I I 7 ' 1, - ' - J I' J - ' , ~ J J l J l l J I I J I J 1 lJl 1 J 1 I I J l I I J J I I= _I J 1 l================================-====-L-=----==----==~~==-==-~---- I I I l 1 1 I I I l I I 7 I ~ CTE JNC ~ SHEAR STRENGTH TEST - ASTM D3080 Job Name: Project Number: 10-15939G Lab Number: 31755 Sample Location: Tested by: Sample Description: B-1 @ 20' Sample Date: Test Date: 2/2/2021 Moderate Brown (SM)Angle Of Friction: 36.3 Cohesion: Alder Ave 1440 psf Initial Dry Density (pcf): 115.3 Initial Moisture (%): 11.7 Final Moisture (%): 17.2 JH 2/19/2021 0.024 0.025 0.026 0.027 0.028 0.029 0.030 0.0310.1 1 10 100 ST R A I N ( i n c h e s ) TIME (minutes) PRECONSOLIDATION 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 02468101214161820 SH E A R S T R E S S ( p s f ) STRAIN (%) SHEARING DATA 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 SH E A R I N G S T R E S S ( p s f ) VERTICAL STRESS (psf) FAILURE ENVELOPE dr=0.0800 mm./min VERTICAL STRESS 1000 psf3000 psf5000 psf I I I -~ 1111 '-,. ,~ I 1111 r--, f\ -I. -~ ' ~ ~ "~ I I -, ,--ri ,-- -/-. '-I ~ - - f'. ' ... -wL w y -I ~ Ill~ Ill r-~ I ~ I_ I= 7 --J - u - I~ - u ~ - I --J I C _____J ,-- ~ - r-- -- ---- ----- ----- -- ~ I SHEAR STRENGTH TEST - ASTM D3080 Job Name: Project Number: 10-15939G Lab Number: 31755 Sample Location: Tested by: Sample Description: JH 2/12/2021 Angle Of Friction: 37.1 Cohesion: Alder Ave 200 psf Initial Dry Density (pcf): 99.5 Initial Moisture (%): 21.9 Final Moisture (%): 26.4 B-1 @ 45' Sample Date: Test Date: 2/1/2021 Light Gray (CH) 0.018 0.020 0.022 0.024 0.026 0.028 0.030 0.032 0.034 0.036 0.0380.1 1 10 100 ST R A I N ( i n c h e s ) TIME (minutes) PRECONSOLIDATION 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 0 2 4 6 8 101214161820 SH E A R S T R E S S ( p s f ) STRAIN (%) SHEARING DATA 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 SH E A R I N G S T R E S S ( p s f ) VERTICAL STRESS (psf) FAILURE ENVELOPE dr=0.0800 mm./min VERTICAL STRESS 1000 psf3000 psf5000 psf I I 11 I I r I I I 1 I I I 7 -I ----, " L J 1lli JIii J I J 1 lJl l I I J J l l l I I J I I= _I J L-=----==----==~~==-==--~---- 1 l================================--====- I I I I I 7 L--i--+-----t-~7~ I l 7 l 1 1 I I I ~ CTE JNC ~ SHEAR STRENGTH TEST - ASTM D3080 Job Name: Project Number: 10-15939G Lab Number: 31755 Sample Location: Tested by: Sample Description: JH 2/16/2021 Angle Of Friction: 39.1 Cohesion: Alder Ave 760 psf Initial Dry Density (pcf): 113.3 Initial Moisture (%): 14.1 Final Moisture (%): 21.3 B-1 @ 60' Sample Date: Test Date: 2/1/2021 Light Gray (CL) 0.015 0.016 0.017 0.018 0.019 0.02 0.0210.1 1 10 100 ST R A I N ( i n c h e s ) TIME (minutes) PRECONSOLIDATION 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 0 2 4 6 8 101214161820 SH E A R S T R E S S ( p s f ) STRAIN (%) SHEARING DATA 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 SH E A R I N G S T R E S S ( p s f ) VERTICAL STRESS (psf) FAILURE ENVELOPE dr=0.0800 mm./min VERTICAL STRESS 1000 psf3000 psf5000 psf ' I ~ ' , ~ ·~ L r""II "II • Ill - I J 1 1 J 1 I J 1 I I J I I J J I I I I I 7 4 ' I ' I J l 7 l 1 1 I I ' 1~ I I I I I I 7 -,~ I I - I L ,, V I- - L . "' r---- l l l l l l I I ~ CTE JNC ~ J APPENDIX D STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Appendix D Standard Specifications for Grading STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS OF GRADING Page 1 of 26 Page D-1 Section 1 - General Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. presents the following standard recommendations for grading and other associated operations on construction projects. These guidelines should be considered a portion of the project specifications. Recommendations contained in the body of the previously presented soils report shall supersede the recommendations and or requirements as specified herein. The project geotechnical consultant shall interpret disputes arising out of interpretation of the recommendations contained in the soils report or specifications contained herein. Section 2 - Responsibilities of Project Personnel The geotechnical consultant should provide observation and testing services sufficient to general conformance with project specifications and standard grading practices. The geotechnical consultant should report any deviations to the client or his authorized representative. The Client should be chiefly responsible for all aspects of the project. He or his authorized representative has the responsibility of reviewing the findings and recommendations of the geotechnical consultant. He shall authorize or cause to have authorized the Contractor and/or other consultants to perform work and/or provide services. During grading the Client or his authorized representative should remain on-site or should remain reasonably accessible to all concerned parties in order to make decisions necessary to maintain the flow of the project. The Contractor is responsible for the safety of the project and satisfactory completion of all grading and other associated operations on construction projects, including, but not limited to, earth work in accordance with the project plans, specifications and controlling agency requirements. Section 3 - Preconstruction Meeting A preconstruction site meeting should be arranged by the owner and/or client and should include the grading contractor, design engineer, geotechnical consultant, owner’s representative and representatives of the appropriate governing authorities. Section 4 - Site Preparation The client or contractor should obtain the required approvals from the controlling authorities for the project prior, during and/or after demolition, site preparation and removals, etc. The appropriate approvals should be obtained prior to proceeding with grading operations. Appendix D Standard Specifications for Grading STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS OF GRADING Page 2 of 26 Page D-2 Clearing and grubbing should consist of the removal of vegetation such as brush, grass, woods, stumps, trees, root of trees and otherwise deleterious natural materials from the areas to be graded. Clearing and grubbing should extend to the outside of all proposed excavation and fill areas. Demolition should include removal of buildings, structures, foundations, reservoirs, utilities (including underground pipelines, septic tanks, leach fields, seepage pits, cisterns, mining shafts, tunnels, etc.) and other man-made surface and subsurface improvements from the areas to be graded. Demolition of utilities should include proper capping and/or rerouting pipelines at the project perimeter and cutoff and capping of wells in accordance with the requirements of the governing authorities and the recommendations of the geotechnical consultant at the time of demolition. Trees, plants or man-made improvements not planned to be removed or demolished should be protected by the contractor from damage or injury. Debris generated during clearing, grubbing and/or demolition operations should be wasted from areas to be graded and disposed off-site. Clearing, grubbing and demolition operations should be performed under the observation of the geotechnical consultant. Section 5 - Site Protection Protection of the site during the period of grading should be the responsibility of the contractor. Unless other provisions are made in writing and agreed upon among the concerned parties, completion of a portion of the project should not be considered to preclude that portion or adjacent areas from the requirements for site protection until such time as the entire project is complete as identified by the geotechnical consultant, the client and the regulating agencies. Precautions should be taken during the performance of site clearing, excavations and grading to protect the work site from flooding, ponding or inundation by poor or improper surface drainage. Temporary provisions should be made during the rainy season to adequately direct surface drainage away from and off the work site. Where low areas cannot be avoided, pumps should be kept on hand to continually remove water during periods of rainfall. Rain related damage should be considered to include, but may not be limited to, erosion, silting, saturation, swelling, structural distress and other adverse conditions as determined by the geotechnical consultant. Soil adversely affected should be classified as unsuitable materials and should be subject to overexcavation and replacement with compacted fill or other remedial grading as recommended by the geotechnical consultant. Appendix D Standard Specifications for Grading STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS OF GRADING Page 3 of 26 Page D-3 The contractor should be responsible for the stability of all temporary excavations. Recommendations by the geotechnical consultant pertaining to temporary excavations (e.g., backcuts) are made in consideration of stability of the completed project and, therefore, should not be considered to preclude the responsibilities of the contractor. Recommendations by the geotechnical consultant should not be considered to preclude requirements that are more restrictive by the regulating agencies. The contractor should provide during periods of extensive rainfall plastic sheeting to prevent unprotected slopes from becoming saturated and unstable. When deemed appropriate by the geotechnical consultant or governing agencies the contractor shall install checkdams, desilting basins, sand bags or other drainage control measures. In relatively level areas and/or slope areas, where saturated soil and/or erosion gullies exist to depths of greater than 1.0 foot; they should be overexcavated and replaced as compacted fill in accordance with the applicable specifications. Where affected materials exist to depths of 1.0 foot or less below proposed finished grade, remedial grading by moisture conditioning in-place, followed by thorough recompaction in accordance with the applicable grading guidelines herein may be attempted. If the desired results are not achieved, all affected materials should be overexcavated and replaced as compacted fill in accordance with the slope repair recommendations herein. If field conditions dictate, the geotechnical consultant may recommend other slope repair procedures. Section 6 - Excavations 6.1 Unsuitable Materials Materials that are unsuitable should be excavated under observation and recommendations of the geotechnical consultant. Unsuitable materials include, but may not be limited to, dry, loose, soft, wet, organic compressible natural soils and fractured, weathered, soft bedrock and nonengineered or otherwise deleterious fill materials. Material identified by the geotechnical consultant as unsatisfactory due to its moisture conditions should be overexcavated; moisture conditioned as needed, to a uniform at or above optimum moisture condition before placement as compacted fill. If during the course of grading adverse geotechnical conditions are exposed which were not anticipated in the preliminary soil report as determined by the geotechnical consultant additional exploration, analysis, and treatment of these problems may be recommended. Appendix D Standard Specifications for Grading STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS OF GRADING Page 4 of 26 Page D-4 6.2 Cut Slopes Unless otherwise recommended by the geotechnical consultant and approved by the regulating agencies, permanent cut slopes should not be steeper than 2:1 (horizontal: vertical). The geotechnical consultant should observe cut slope excavation and if these excavations expose loose cohesionless, significantly fractured or otherwise unsuitable material, the materials should be overexcavated and replaced with a compacted stabilization fill. If encountered specific cross section details should be obtained from the Geotechnical Consultant. When extensive cut slopes are excavated or these cut slopes are made in the direction of the prevailing drainage, a non-erodible diversion swale (brow ditch) should be provided at the top of the slope. 6.3 Pad Areas All lot pad areas, including side yard terrace containing both cut and fill materials, transitions, located less than 3 feet deep should be overexcavated to a depth of 3 feet and replaced with a uniform compacted fill blanket of 3 feet. Actual depth of overexcavation may vary and should be delineated by the geotechnical consultant during grading, especially where deep or drastic transitions are present. For pad areas created above cut or natural slopes, positive drainage should be established away from the top-of-slope. This may be accomplished utilizing a berm drainage swale and/or an appropriate pad gradient. A gradient in soil areas away from the top-of-slopes of 2 percent or greater is recommended. Section 7 - Compacted Fill All fill materials should have fill quality, placement, conditioning and compaction as specified below or as approved by the geotechnical consultant. 7.1 Fill Material Quality Excavated on-site or import materials which are acceptable to the geotechnical consultant may be utilized as compacted fill, provided trash, vegetation and other deleterious materials are removed prior to placement. All import materials anticipated for use on-site should be sampled tested and approved prior to and placement is in conformance with the requirements outlined. Appendix D Standard Specifications for Grading STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS OF GRADING Page 5 of 26 Page D-5 Rocks 12 inches in maximum and smaller may be utilized within compacted fill provided sufficient fill material is placed and thoroughly compacted over and around all rock to effectively fill rock voids. The amount of rock should not exceed 40 percent by dry weight passing the 3/4-inch sieve. The geotechnical consultant may vary those requirements as field conditions dictate. Where rocks greater than 12 inches but less than four feet of maximum dimension are generated during grading, or otherwise desired to be placed within an engineered fill, special handling in accordance with the recommendations below. Rocks greater than four feet should be broken down or disposed off-site. 7.2 Placement of Fill Prior to placement of fill material, the geotechnical consultant should observe and approve the area to receive fill. After observation and approval, the exposed ground surface should be scarified to a depth of 6 to 8 inches. The scarified material should be conditioned (i.e. moisture added or air dried by continued discing) to achieve a moisture content at or slightly above optimum moisture conditions and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum density or as otherwise recommended in the soils report or by appropriate government agencies. Compacted fill should then be placed in thin horizontal lifts not exceeding eight inches in loose thickness prior to compaction. Each lift should be moisture conditioned as needed, thoroughly blended to achieve a consistent moisture content at or slightly above optimum and thoroughly compacted by mechanical methods to a minimum of 90 percent of laboratory maximum dry density. Each lift should be treated in a like manner until the desired finished grades are achieved. The contractor should have suitable and sufficient mechanical compaction equipment and watering apparatus on the job site to handle the amount of fill being placed in consideration of moisture retention properties of the materials and weather conditions. When placing fill in horizontal lifts adjacent to areas sloping steeper than 5:1 (horizontal: vertical), horizontal keys and vertical benches should be excavated into the adjacent slope area. Keying and benching should be sufficient to provide at least six-foot wide benches and a minimum of four feet of vertical bench height within the firm natural ground, firm bedrock or engineered compacted fill. No compacted fill should be placed in an area after keying and benching until the geotechnical consultant has reviewed the area. Material generated by the benching operation should be moved sufficiently away from Appendix D Standard Specifications for Grading STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS OF GRADING Page 6 of 26 Page D-6 the bench area to allow for the recommended review of the horizontal bench prior to placement of fill. Within a single fill area where grading procedures dictate two or more separate fills, temporary slopes (false slopes) may be created. When placing fill adjacent to a false slope, benching should be conducted in the same manner as above described. At least a 3-foot vertical bench should be established within the firm core of adjacent approved compacted fill prior to placement of additional fill. Benching should proceed in at least 3-foot vertical increments until the desired finished grades are achieved. Prior to placement of additional compacted fill following an overnight or other grading delay, the exposed surface or previously compacted fill should be processed by scarification, moisture conditioning as needed to at or slightly above optimum moisture content, thoroughly blended and recompacted to a minimum of 90 percent of laboratory maximum dry density. Where unsuitable materials exist to depths of greater than one foot, the unsuitable materials should be over-excavated. Following a period of flooding, rainfall or overwatering by other means, no additional fill should be placed until damage assessments have been made and remedial grading performed as described herein. Rocks 12 inch in maximum dimension and smaller may be utilized in the compacted fill provided the fill is placed and thoroughly compacted over and around all rock. No oversize material should be used within 3 feet of finished pad grade and within 1 foot of other compacted fill areas. Rocks 12 inches up to four feet maximum dimension should be placed below the upper 10 feet of any fill and should not be closer than 15 feet to any slope face. These recommendations could vary as locations of improvements dictate. Where practical, oversized material should not be placed below areas where structures or deep utilities are proposed. Oversized material should be placed in windrows on a clean, overexcavated or unyielding compacted fill or firm natural ground surface. Select native or imported granular soil (S.E. 30 or higher) should be placed and thoroughly flooded over and around all windrowed rock, such that voids are filled. Windrows of oversized material should be staggered so those successive strata of oversized material are not in the same vertical plane. It may be possible to dispose of individual larger rock as field conditions dictate and as recommended by the geotechnical consultant at the time of placement. Appendix D Standard Specifications for Grading STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS OF GRADING Page 7 of 26 Page D-7 The contractor should assist the geotechnical consultant and/or his representative by digging test pits for removal determinations and/or for testing compacted fill. The contractor should provide this work at no additional cost to the owner or contractor's client. Fill should be tested by the geotechnical consultant for compliance with the recommended relative compaction and moisture conditions. Field density testing should conform to ASTM Method of Test D 1556-00, D 2922-04. Tests should be conducted at a minimum of approximately two vertical feet or approximately 1,000 to 2,000 cubic yards of fill placed. Actual test intervals may vary as field conditions dictate. Fill found not to be in conformance with the grading recommendations should be removed or otherwise handled as recommended by the geotechnical consultant. 7.3 Fill Slopes Unless otherwise recommended by the geotechnical consultant and approved by the regulating agencies, permanent fill slopes should not be steeper than 2:1 (horizontal: vertical). Except as specifically recommended in these grading guidelines compacted fill slopes should be over-built two to five feet and cut back to grade, exposing the firm, compacted fill inner core. The actual amount of overbuilding may vary as field conditions dictate. If the desired results are not achieved, the existing slopes should be overexcavated and reconstructed under the guidelines of the geotechnical consultant. The degree of overbuilding shall be increased until the desired compacted slope surface condition is achieved. Care should be taken by the contractor to provide thorough mechanical compaction to the outer edge of the overbuilt slope surface. At the discretion of the geotechnical consultant, slope face compaction may be attempted by conventional construction procedures including backrolling. The procedure must create a firmly compacted material throughout the entire depth of the slope face to the surface of the previously compacted firm fill intercore. During grading operations, care should be taken to extend compactive effort to the outer edge of the slope. Each lift should extend horizontally to the desired finished slope surface or more as needed to ultimately established desired grades. Grade during construction should not be allowed to roll off at the edge of the slope. It may be helpful to elevate slightly the outer edge of the slope. Slough resulting from the placement of individual lifts should not be allowed to drift down over previous lifts. At intervals not Appendix D Standard Specifications for Grading STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS OF GRADING Page 8 of 26 Page D-8 exceeding four feet in vertical slope height or the capability of available equipment, whichever is less, fill slopes should be thoroughly dozer trackrolled. For pad areas above fill slopes, positive drainage should be established away from the top-of-slope. This may be accomplished using a berm and pad gradient of at least two percent. Section 8 - Trench Backfill Utility and/or other excavation of trench backfill should, unless otherwise recommended, be compacted by mechanical means. Unless otherwise recommended, the degree of compaction should be a minimum of 90 percent of the laboratory maximum density. Within slab areas, but outside the influence of foundations, trenches up to one foot wide and two feet deep may be backfilled with sand and consolidated by jetting, flooding or by mechanical means. If on-site materials are utilized, they should be wheel-rolled, tamped or otherwise compacted to a firm condition. For minor interior trenches, density testing may be deleted or spot testing may be elected if deemed necessary, based on review of backfill operations during construction. If utility contractors indicate that it is undesirable to use compaction equipment in close proximity to a buried conduit, the contractor may elect the utilization of light weight mechanical compaction equipment and/or shading of the conduit with clean, granular material, which should be thoroughly jetted in-place above the conduit, prior to initiating mechanical compaction procedures. Other methods of utility trench compaction may also be appropriate, upon review of the geotechnical consultant at the time of construction. In cases where clean granular materials are proposed for use in lieu of native materials or where flooding or jetting is proposed, the procedures should be considered subject to review by the geotechnical consultant. Clean granular backfill and/or bedding are not recommended in slope areas. Section 9 - Drainage Where deemed appropriate by the geotechnical consultant, canyon subdrain systems should be installed in accordance with CTE’s recommendations during grading. Typical subdrains for compacted fill buttresses, slope stabilization or sidehill masses, should be installed in accordance with the specifications. Appendix D Standard Specifications for Grading STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS OF GRADING Page 9 of 26 Page D-9 Roof, pad and slope drainage should be directed away from slopes and areas of structures to suitable disposal areas via non-erodible devices (i.e., gutters, downspouts, and concrete swales). For drainage in extensively landscaped areas near structures, (i.e., within four feet) a minimum of 5 percent gradient away from the structure should be maintained. Pad drainage of at least 2 percent should be maintained over the remainder of the site. Drainage patterns established at the time of fine grading should be maintained throughout the life of the project. Property owners should be made aware that altering drainage patterns could be detrimental to slope stability and foundation performance. Section 10 - Slope Maintenance 10.1 - Landscape Plants To enhance surficial slope stability, slope planting should be accomplished at the completion of grading. Slope planting should consist of deep-rooting vegetation requiring little watering. Plants native to the southern California area and plants relative to native plants are generally desirable. Plants native to other semi-arid and arid areas may also be appropriate. A Landscape Architect should be the best party to consult regarding actual types of plants and planting configuration. 10.2 - Irrigation Irrigation pipes should be anchored to slope faces, not placed in trenches excavated into slope faces. Slope irrigation should be minimized. If automatic timing devices are utilized on irrigation systems, provisions should be made for interrupting normal irrigation during periods of rainfall. 10.3 - Repair As a precautionary measure, plastic sheeting should be readily available, or kept on hand, to protect all slope areas from saturation by periods of heavy or prolonged rainfall. This measure is strongly recommended, beginning with the period prior to landscape planting. If slope failures occur, the geotechnical consultant should be contacted for a field review of site conditions and development of recommendations for evaluation and repair. If slope failures occur as a result of exposure to period of heavy rainfall, the failure areas and currently unaffected areas should be covered with plastic sheeting to protect against additional saturation. Appendix D Standard Specifications for Grading STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS OF GRADING Page 10 of 26 Page D-10 In the accompanying Standard Details, appropriate repair procedures are illustrated for superficial slope failures (i.e., occurring typically within the outer one foot to three feet of a slope face). FINISH CUT SLOPE ---- 5'MIN ---------- BENCHING FILL OVER NATURAL FILL SLOPE 10' TYPICAL SURFACE OF FIRM EARTH MATERIAL 15' MIN. (INCLINED 2% MIN . INTO SLOPE) BENCHING FILL OVER CUT FINISH FILL SLOPE SURFACE OF FIRM EARTH MATERIAL 10' TYPICAL 15' MIN OR STABILITY EQUIVALENT PER SOIL ENGINEERING (INCLINED 2% MIN. INTO SLOPE) NOTTO SCALE BENCHING FOR COMPACTED FILL DETAIL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 11 of 26 --- -- MINIMUM DOWNSLOPE KEY DEPTH TOE OF SLOPE SHOWN ON GRADING PLAN FILL __ -------------------------:"\fc.~\J)-\.. --- -----1c. fc.J)-~'\r\ ~~-- - - -~ J)-~\.: ---~su' ~------------ ---\J ----1 O' TYPICAL BENCH / ---WIDTH VARIES ~1 ---/ 1 ---COMPETENT EARTH / --MATERIAL -- 2% MIN --- 15' MINIMUM BASE KEY WIDTH TYPICAL BENCH HEIGHT PROVIDE BACKDRAIN AS REQUIRED PER RECOMMENDATIONS OF SOILS ENGINEER DURING GRADING WHERE NATURAL SLOPE GRADIENT IS 5:1 OR LESS, BENCHING IS NOT NECESSARY. FILL IS NOT TO BE PLACED ON COMPRESSIBLE OR UNSUITABLE MATERIAL. NOT TO SCALE 4' FILL SLOPE ABOVE NATURAL GROUND DETAIL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 12 of 26 C/l ~ z CJ )> ll CJ C/l iJ iJ m Ill(') (C - Cl) :I! ...I.(") w )> 0 :::! ..... 0 NZ (j') C/l 'Tl 0 ll G> ll )> CJ z G> REMOVE ALL TOPSOIL, COLLUVIUM, AND CREEP MATERIAL FROM TRANSITION CUT/FILL CONTACT SHOWN ON GRADING PLAN CUT/FILL CONTACT SHOWN ON "AS-BUILT" NATURAL TOPOGRAP~Y _ ----------------CUT SLOPE* --FILL ----------'t:. ----x:.wi.o\J --------€.'t:.f>-~ ---... \oC~ -----\)W\ f>-\'< ---\.u\J' -~~,--------1 --:So\\.., co\:. ---4' TYPICAL ,Or --------2% MIN --1 0' TYPICAL 15' MINIMUM NOTTO SCALE BEDROCK OR APPROVED FOUNDATION MATERIAL *NOTE: CUT SLOPE PORTION SHOULD BE MADE PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF FILL FILL SLOPE ABOVE CUT SLOPE DETAIL [ SURFACEOF COMPETENT MATERIAL --~-------------~ -....... ' /,,,,. ,'\ COMPACTED FILL /'/ '' // ' / \' / '' / / TYPICAL BENCHING ....___ ' / ,c..._.,._ SEE DETAIL BELOW MINIMUM 9 FT3 PER LINEAR FOOT OF APPROVED FILTER MATERIAL CAL TRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL FILTER MATERIAL TO MEET FOLLOWING SPECIFICATION OR APPROVED EQUAL: -'\. / REMOVE UNSUITABLE DETAIL 14" MATERIAL INCLINE TOWARD DRAIN AT 2% GRADIENT MINIMUM MINIMUM 4" DIAMETER APPROVED PERFORATED PIPE (PERFORATIONS DOWN) 6" FILTER MATERIAL BEDDING SIEVE SIZE PERCENTAGE PASSING APPROVED PIPE TO BE SCHEDULE 40 POLY-VINYL-CHLORIDE (P.V.C.) OR APPROVED EQUAL. MINIMUM CRUSH STRENGTH 1000 psi 1" ¾" ¾" NO.4 NO.8 NO. 30 NO. 50 NO. 200 100 90-100 40-100 25-40 18-33 5-15 0-7 0-3 PIPE DIAMETER TO MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA, SUBJECT TO FIELD REVIEW BASED ON ACTUAL GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED DURING GRADING LENGTH OF RUN NOTTO SCALE INITIAL 500' 500' TO 1500' > 1500' PIPE DIAMETER 4" 6" 8" TYPICAL CANYON SUBDRAIN DETAIL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 14 of 26 TYPICAL BENCHING CANYON SUBDRAIN DETAILS --....... ,,... ....... ' // [ SURFACE OF COMPETENT MATERIAL ,'' COMPACTED FILL / '/ '' // ' / \' / ,, // --,_,,,, __ ..._ ' / REMOVE UNSUITABLE MATERIAL SEE DETAILS BELOW TRENCH DETAILS 6" MINIMUM OVERLAP INCLINE TOWARD DRAIN AT 2% GRADIENT MINIMUM OPTIONAL V-DITCH DETAIL MINIMUM 9 FT3 PER LINEAR FOOT OF APPROVED DRAIN MATERIAL MIRAFI 140N FABRIC OR APPROVED EQUAL 6" MINIMUM OVERLAP --------0 24" MINIMUM MIRAFI 140N FABRIC OR APPROVED EQUAL APPROVED PIPE TO BE SCHEDULE 40 POLY- VINYLCHLORIDE (P.V.C.) 24" MINIMUM MINIMUM 9 FT3 PER LINEAR FOOT OF APPROVED DRAIN MATERIAL OR APPROVED EQUAL. MINIMUM CRUSH STRENGTH 1000 PSI. DRAIN MATERIAL TO MEET FOLLOWING SPECIFICATION OR APPROVED EQUAL: PIPE DIAMETER TO MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA, SUBJECT TO FIELD REVIEW BASED ON ACTUAL GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED DURING GRADING SIEVE SIZE 1 ½" 1" ¾" ¾" NO. 200 PERCENTAGE PASSING 88-100 5-40 0-17 0-7 0-3 LENGTH OF RUN INITIAL 500' 500' TO 1500' > 1500' NOT TO SCALE GEOFABRIC SUBDRAIN STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 15 of 26 PIPE DIAMETER 4" 6" 8" FRONT VIEW 6" Min. SUBDRAIN PIPE 6" Min. 24" Min. 6" Min. SIDE VIEW ~ 12" Min.~ 6" Min. CONCRETE CUT-OFF WALL __ __.,•.,..-.'!--.. · . ' .... ' 6" Min . -.. -... . . -, ." SOILD SUBDRAIN PIPE ... ~ ... PERFORATED SUBDRAIN PIPE _·.;._·; ...... . ------,~fflr---7 ... ;·.~ ... ;·.rT---iarm:w----- .... '1;• . NOT TO SCALE RECOMMENDED SUBDRAIN CUT-OFF WALL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 16 of 26 FRONT VIEW SUBDRAIN OUTLET PIPE (MINIMUM 4" DIAMETER) SIDE VIEW ALL BACKFILL SHOULD BE COMPACTED IN CONFORMANCE WITH PROJECT SPECIFICATIONS. COMPACTION EFFORT SHOULD NOT DAMAGE STRUCTURE -►. -'►. -'►. _.,, 'b."'b."'b.' ~-'~.,.o.., I . ' ' -9 • I ► -'► -'►-, ,·b.. ,·b.. ,·b. • .iib. . ' .6. • ' ~ • ' ► -'► -'►-, ,, • b. • ' • b. • ' • b. • .o..,~.,-A ., -•· -··-.. ► - , ► - , ►-., • b. • •' • b. • ' • b. • .0. • ' .0. . ' ~ . ' 1---24" Min. >----24" Min. NOTE: HEADWALL SHOULD OUTLET AT TOE OF SLOPE OR INTO CONTROLLED SURFACE DRAINAGE DEVICE ALL DISCHARGE SHOULD BE CONTROLLED THIS DETAIL IS A MINIMUM DESIGN AND MAY BE MODIFIED DEPENDING UPON ENCOUNTERED CONDITIONS AND LOCAL REQUIREMENTS NOT TO SCALE 24" Min. 12" TYPICAL SUBDRAIN OUTLET HEADWALL DETAIL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 17 of 26 4" DIAMETER PERFORATED PIPE BACKDRAIN 4" DIAMETER NON-PERFORATED PIPE LATERAL DRAIN SLOPE PER PLAN FILTER MATERIAL BENCHING AN ADDITIONAL BACKDRAIN AT MID-SLOPE WILL BE REQUIRED FOR SLOPE IN EXCESS OF 40 FEET HIGH. KEY-DIMENSION PER SOILS ENGINEER (GENERALLY 1/2 SLOPE HEIGHT, 15' MINIMUM) DIMENSIONS ARE MINIMUM RECOMMENDED NOT TO SCALE TYPICAL SLOPE STABILIZATION FILL DETAIL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 18 of 26 4" DIAMETER PERFORATED PIPE BACKDRAIN 4" DIAMETER NON-PERFORATED PIPE LATERAL DRAIN SLOPE PER PLAN FILTER MATERIAL 2%MIN 1 1 ' ........,.._I I I 111 I 11- 1 I ' BENCHING H/2 ~1 ===.. ~. IFF.:,=, ,:rr· 1 "'T""'!, ........ , • ,......,_JI" I · ADDITIONAL BACKDRAIN AT MID-SLOPE WILL BE REQUIRED FOR SLOPE IN EXCESS OF 40 FEET HIGH. KEY-DIMENSION PER SOILS ENGINEER DIMENSIONS ARE MINIMUM RECOMMENDED NOTTO SCALE TYPICAL BUTTRESS FILL DETAIL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 19 of 26 20' MAXIMUM FINAL LIMIT OF EXCAVATION OVEREXCAVATE OVERBURDEN (CREEP-PRONE) DAYLIGHT LINE FINISH PAD OVEREXCAVATE 3' AND REPLACE WITH COMPACTED FILL COMPETENT BEDROCK TYPICAL BENCHING LOCATION OF BACKDRAIN AND OUTLETS PER SOILS ENGINEER AND/OR ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST DURING GRADING. MINIMUM 2% FLOW GRADIENT TO DISCHARGE LOCATION. EQUIPMENT WIDTH (MINIMUM 15') NOTTO SCALE DAYLIGHT SHEAR KEY DETAIL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 20 of 26 NATURAL GROUND PROPOSED GRADING ------------------COMPACTED FILL ----------------------------------------------- PROVIDE BACKDRAIN, PER BACKDRAIN DETAIL. AN ADDITIONAL BACKDRAIN AT MID-SLOPE WILL BE REQUIRED FOR BACK SLOPES IN EXCESS OF BASE WIDTH "W" DETERMINED BY SOILS ENGINEER NOTTO SCALE 40 FEET HIGH. LOCATIONS OF BACKDRAINS AND OUTLETS PER SOILS ENGINEER AND/OR ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST DURING GRADING. MINIMUM 2% FLOW GRADIENT TO DISCHARGE LOCATION. TYPICAL SHEAR KEY DETAIL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 21 of 26 FINISH SURFACE SLOPE 3 FT3 MINIMUM PER LINEAR FOOT APPROVED FILTER ROCK* CONCRETE COLLAR PLACED NEAT A COMPACTED FILL 2.0% MINIMUM GRADIENT A 4" MINIMUM DIAMETER SOLID OUTLET PIPE SPACED PER SOIL ENGINEER REQUIREMENTS 4" MINIMUM APPROVED PERFORATED PIPE** (PERFORATIONS DOWN) MINIMUM 2% GRADIENT TO OUTLET DURING GRADING TYPICAL BENCH INCLINED TOWARD DRAIN **APPROVED PIPE TYPE: MINIMUM 12" COVER SCHEDULE 40 POLYVINYL CHLORIDE (P.V.C.) OR APPROVED EQUAL. MINIMUM CRUSH STRENGTH 1000 PSI BENCHING DETAIL A-A OMPACTE BACKFILL 12" MINIMUM TEMPORARY FILL LEVEL MINIMUM 4" DIAMETER APPROVED SOLID OUTLET PIPE *FILTER ROCK TO MEET FOLLOWING SPECIFICATIONS OR APPROVED EQUAL: SIEVE SIZE 1" ¾" ¾" N0.4 NO. 30 NO. 50 NO. 200 PERCENTAGE PASSING 100 90-100 40-100 25-40 5-15 0-7 0-3 NOTTO SCALE TYPICAL BACKDRAIN DETAIL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 22 of 26 FINISH SURFACE SLOPE MINIMUM 3 FT3 PER LINEAR FOOT OPEN GRADED AGGREGATE* TAPE AND SEAL AT COVER CONCRETE COLLAR PLACED NEAT COMPACTED FILL A 2.0% MINIMUM GRADIENT A MINIMUM 4" DIAMETER SOLID OUTLET PIPE SPACED PER SOIL ENGINEER REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM 12" COVER *NOTE: AGGREGATE TO MEET FOLLOWING SPECIFICATIONS OR APPROVED EQUAL: SIEVE SIZE PERCENTAGE PASSING 1 ½" 100 1" 5-40 ¾" 0-17 ¾" 0-7 NO. 200 0-3 TYPICAL BENCHING DETAIL A-A OMPACTE BACKFILL 12" MINIMUM NOT TO SCALE MIRAFI 140N FABRIC OR APPROVED EQUAL 4" MINIMUM APPROVED PERFORATED PIPE (PERFORATIONS DOWN) MINIMUM 2% GRADIENT TO OUTLET BENCH INCLINED TOWARD DRAIN TEMPORARY FILL LEVEL MINIMUM 4" DIAMETER APPROVED SOLID OUTLET PIPE BACKDRAIN DETAIL (GEOFRABIC) STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 23 of 26 SOIL SHALL BE PUSHED OVER ROCKS AND FLOODED INTO VOIDS. COMPACT AROUND AND OVER EACH WINDROW. 10' i FILL SLOPE 1 CLEAR ZONE __/ EQUIPMENT WIDTH STACK BOULDERS END TO END. DO NOT PILE UPON EACH OTHER. 0 0 0 0 ~ 10' MIN O NOT TO SCALE 0 ROCK DISPOSAL DETAIL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 24 of 26 STAGGER ROWS STREET 10' 5' MINIMUM OR BELOW DEPTH OF DEEPEST UTILITY TRENCH (WHICHEVER GREATER) FINISHED GRADE BUILDING 0 NO OVERSIZE, AREA FOR FOUNDATION, UTILITIE~~l AND SWIMMING POOL:_i 0 0 1--d 4•L-. WINDROW~ 0 TYPICAL WINDROW DETAIL (EDGE VIEW) GRANULAR SOIL FLOODED TO FILL VOIDS HORIZONTALLY PLACED COMPACTION FILL PROFILE VIEW NOT TO SCALE ROCK DISPOSAL DETAIL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 25 of 26 GENERAL GRADING RECOMMENDATIONS CUTLOT ------------ ------, --UNWEATHERED BEDROCK OVEREXCAVATE AND REGRADE COMPACTED FILL ----TOPSOIL, COLLUVIUM --AND WEATHERED ... BEDROCK _,,,.. _,,,.. _,,,.. _,,,.. _,,,.. _,,,.. _,,,...,. CUT/FILL LOT (TRANSITION) UNWEATHERED BEDROCK NOT TO SCALE TRANSITION LOT DETAIL STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Page 26 of 26 3'MIN OVEREXCAVATE AND REGRADE APPENDIX E SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS 2.538Name: QudfModel: Mohr-CoulombUnit Weight: 125 pcfEffective Cohesion: 200 psfEffective Friction Angle: 25 °Phi-B: 0 °Piezometric Line: 1 Name: QvopModel: Mohr-CoulombUnit Weight: 125 pcfEffective Cohesion: 900 psfEffective Friction Angle: 35 °Phi-B: 0 °Piezometric Line: 1 Name: Tsa (sand)Model: Mohr-CoulombUnit Weight: 125 pcfEffective Cohesion: 700 psfEffective Friction Angle: 35 °Phi-B: 0 °Piezometric Line: 1 Name: Tsa (sand)Model: Mohr-CoulombUnit Weight: 125 pcfEffective Cohesion: 700 psfEffective Friction Angle: 35 °Phi-B: 0 °Piezometric Line: 1 Name: Tsa (clay)Model: Mohr-CoulombUnit Weight: 125 pcfEffective Cohesion: 1,000 psfEffective Friction Angle: 19 °Phi-B: 0 °Piezometric Line: 1 File Name: A-A'.gszMethod: SpencerDirection of movement: Left to RightSlip Surface Option: Entry and ExitFactor of Safety: 2.538 □ .- □ ~ ~ ~ ... ~~ l"o ......... r- □ ... \ □ ~~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~ ... ~ ~ ...