Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout; Cannon Road Lift Station; Cannon Road Lift Station; 2002-07-01iii FINAL REPORT ON GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CANNON ROAD LIFT STATION CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA by Haley & Aldrich, Inc. San Diego, California/Denver, Colorado Pi P for m Camp Dresser & McKee Inc. m Carlsbad, California p m File No. 26713-005 P July 2002 m HALEY&ALDRICH UNDERGROUND ENGINEERING & ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS HALEY &ALDRICH 30 July 2002 File No. 26713-005 Haley & Aldrich, Inc. 9040 Friars Road Suite 220 San Diego, CA 92108-5860 Tel: 619.280.9210 Fax: 619.280.9415 www.HalevAldrich.com Camp Dresser & McKee Inc. 1925 Palomar Oaks Way, Suite 300 Carlsbad, California 92008 Attention: Mr. Wain Cooper Subject: Final Report on Geotechnical Recommendations for Cannon Road Lift Station Carlsbad, California Dear Wain: m m mm mm OFFICES Boston Massachusetts Cleveland Ohio Dayton Ohio Denver Colorado Detroit Michigan Hartford Connecticut Los Angeles California Manchester New Hampshire Newark New Jersey Portland Maine Rochester New York San Francisco California Tucson Arizona Washington District of Columbia Haley & Aldrich, Inc is pleased to submit this report presenting the results of geotechnical engineering evaluations the proposed Cannon Road Lift Station Project in Carlsbad, California. This work was performed in accordance with Amendment No. 1 (10/26/01) to our Agreement (12/13/00) with you. This report presents the conclusions and recommendations pertaining to the project, as well as the results of field explorations and laboratory tests. We appreciate the opportunity to work with you on this project. Please contact us if you wish to discuss this report or any aspect of the project. With best regards, HALEY & ALDR Steven C. Kueh Senior Engineer IL&#~~ Tracy J. Lyman, P.E., P.O. Senior Vice President G:\PROJECTS\26713 Cannon Rd Lift Station\final report.doc TABLE OF CONTENTS * Page m LIST OF TABLES iii „ LIST OF FIGURES iii "• I. INTRODUCTION 1 "* 1.01 General 1 *• 1.02 Project Description 1 1.03 Purpose and Scope 1 *" 1.04 Elevation Datum 2 H. SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATIONS AND LABORATORY TESTING 3«• M 2.01 Subsurface Explorations by Others 3 2.02 Subsurface Explorations by Haley & Aldrich 3 « 2.03 Laboratory Geotechnical Testing 4 m 2.04 Laboratory Corrosion Testing 5 m III. SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 6 m 3.01 Physiography and Land Use 6 _ 3.02 Regional Geology 6 Ug 3.03 Regional Seismicity 6 3.04 Subsurface Conditions 7 A. Soil Units 7 ; B. Bedrock (Santiago Formation) 8 •* 3.05 Groundwater Conditions 8 3.06 Geologic Hazards 8 * A. Potential Landslide 8 * B. Expansive Soil 9 C. Liquefaction Evaluation 9 !PW it IV. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS 11 W 4.01 Landslide Concerns 11 if 4.02 Foundation Recommendations 11 4.03 Floor Slabs 12 *» 4.04 UBC Seismic Building Design Parameters 12 m 4.05 Temporary Excavations 13 4.06 Detention Basin Fill 14 ip 4.07 Pipe Trench Considerations 14 ^ A. Pipe Bedding 14 B. Trench Backfill 15 m C. Excavation Difficulties 15 ^ 4.08 Recommended Compaction Specifications 15 4.09 Lateral Earth Pressures 16 M MR HALEY &ALDRICH 4.10 Construction Dewatering 17 V. LIMITATIONS 18 REFERENCES 19 TABLES FIGURES APPENDIX A - Excerpts from Previous Site Investigations APPENDIX B - Test Boring Reports APPENDIX C -Geotechnical Laboratory Test Results APPENDIX D -Corrosion Laboratory Test Results m m mm m mm m mm m HALEY &ALDRICH m m m m m mm m LIST OF TABLES Table No. Title I Summary of Geotechnical Laboratory Test Results II Summary of Corrosion Laboratory Test Results LIST OF FIGURES m M Figure No. Title 1 Project Locus 2 Boring Location Plan 3 San Diego County Fault Map 4 Subsurface Profile H-H' 5 Design Response Spectra (1997 UBC) HALEY &ALDRICH m m m I. INTRODUCTION 1.01 General Haley & Aldrich, Inc. (Haley & Aldrich) was retained by Camp Dresser & McKee, Inc. (CDM) to conduct a geotechnical investigation at the proposed site of a new lift station along Cannon Road in the City of Carlsbad, California (Figure 1).m "* 1.02 Project Description The City of Carlsbad plans to construct the lift station at the site of an existing detention basin along the southeastern side of Cannon Road, approximately 0.3-mile southwest of the intersection of Cannon Road and El Camino Real. The proposed lift station will have dimensions of approximately 60 by 25 feet, resulting in an approximate footprint area of 1,500 sq. ft. The lift station is to be constructed within the limits of an existing detention basin, which is located at the base of a 2H:1V slope. The proposed wet well will have a depth of approximately 35 ft, and will be located along and immediately adjacent to the existing toe of the hillside. The proposed construction will also include an access road, valve vault, 20-inch diameter suction pipeline, 14-inch diameter discharge pipeline, a wet well, site development, and miscellaneous small structures associated with the lift station (Figure 2). The access road is to be located on engineered fill placed in the detention basin and will terminate on Cannon Road both north and south of the new lift station. A suspected landslide mass exists within the steep slope located above the site. Proposed grade at the location of proposed structures is approximately elevation 27. The elevations for the various proposed structures on the site are tabulated below. Structure Lift Station Wet Well Valve Vault Elevation (Estimated) 27.5 (finished floor) -3 (invert) 6 (invert) 1.03 Purpose and Scope The subsurface investigations and geotechnical engineering studies described herein were undertaken to obtain information on subsurface conditions and to provide design recommendations for the proposed structure and site improvements. The scope of work undertaken in this study was in accordance with our 10 January 2002 proposal to you as modified by subsequent discussions. The following tasks were performed: 1. Prepared, arranged and monitored a program of three subsurface explorations to obtain geologic information for project design. G:\PROJECTS\26713 Cannon Rd Lift Station\final report.doc HALEY & ALDRICH 2. Made analyses related to the geotechnical engineering aspects of foundation design, site development and construction, and prepared this engineering report summarizing our conclusions. This report does not include an assessment of the presence of oil or hazardous materials at the site, the characterization of excavated soil that may be generated as a result of planned construction activity, or an assessment of the impact that any contamination could have on the proposed construction. Additionally, the scope of our work did not include performing field investigations or slope stability analyses for the suspected landslide. 1.04 Elevation Datum All elevations in this report are based upon the Site Plan dated 2 May 2002 provided to Haley & Aldrich by CDM. Elevations refer to North American Datum 1983 (NAD83). G:\PROJECTS\26713 Cannon Rd Lift StationVfinal report.doc II. SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATIONS AND LABORATORY TESTING 2.01 Subsurface Explorations by Others The lift station site is located within the Kelly Ranch development. Geotechnical m investigations performed by other firms, for Kelly Ranch in general and more specifically for the detention basin, were reviewed by Haley & Aldrich. Some of the reports were reviewed * in their entirety, and some were only reviewed in excerpted format; pertinent excerpts from * these reports are included in Appendix A, including a geologic profile. m Pacific Soils Engineering, Inc. (PSE) performed geotechnical investigations of the project site M and reported their findings in a number of reports [PSE (April 1997), PSE (October 1997), PSE (March 1998), PSE (January 2001)]. The work by PSE was performed in conjunction m with a substantial re-grading program executed at the site, which resulted in construction of m the detention basin at the base of the slope. The studies included geologic mapping, drilling and sampling of exploratory borings, geologic analyses with respect to the possible landslide, *" and laboratory testing. Ha In general, the 1997 reports identified an ancient landslide complex on the hillside above the f~ detention basin. The landslide was identified by topographic expression, geologic mapping ^ and trenching, sheared clay stone identified in borings, and discovery of a landslide on an adjacent property. Specifically, PSE relied on two borings (B-ll and B-12) which were advanced on the project site in 1985 by Owen Geotechnical Consultants; these borings are shown on Figure 2 and are F~ included in Appendix A. These explorations were advanced using bucket augers that created i a 30-inch hole. Bucket auger holes are described by a geologist who enters the borehole and maps the sides of the holes. Boring B-ll noted shear zones, slickensided surfaces and p, landslide debris. Boring B-12 noted a "zone of slide plane". M 2.02 Subsurface Explorations by Haley & Aldrich m Haley & Aldrich conducted a subsurface exploration program consisting of three test borings (HA-101, HAB-1, and HAB-2) as shown on Figure 2. The locations of the test borings shown were determined in the field by Haley & Aldrich personnel by taping from physical « features, and should be considered approximate. The boring locations were based on a ™ proposed site layout provided by CDM; the site layout has since changed. Two borings (HAB-1 and HAB-2) were located along Cannon Road and north of the proposed lift station. * A description of the drilling and sampling procedures utilized for each boring is presented "" below. All test borings were observed in the field by trained Haley & Aldrich personnel (engineer or geologist). Test boring reports are included in Appendix B of this report. ^p • In November 2001, one test boring (HA-101) was drilled to a depth of 15.0-ft, to explore subsurface conditions at the wet well location as formerly located. The test boring was P drilled by Pacific Drilling Company of San Diego, California. The test boring was H performed with a Little Beaver tripod-mounted drill rig using solid-stem-augering techniques. m Hi ^^^^^^^ G:\PROJECTS\26713 Cannon Rd Lift Station\final report.doc HALEY& ALDRICH Soil samples were obtained at 5-ft intervals with a Standard Split-Spoon Sampler (2.0-inch O.D., 1.375-inch I.D.), in general accordance with ASTM Method D1586. Field measurement of in-situ soil properties consisted of the Standard Penetration Test (SPT). The Standard Penetration Resistance (N) is defined as the number of blows necessary to drive the Standard Split-Spoon Sampler 1-ft into undisturbed soil using a 140-pound weight falling freely for 30-inches. The tripod-mounted drill rig used during the subsurface exploration was equipped for solid- stem augering only. Performance of the Standard Penetration Test requires removal of solid- stem augers from the borehole, which leaves the sides of the test boring hi an unsupported state. For this reason, the test boring collapsed below the groundwater table when the augers were removed. All attempts to maintain the integrity of the bore hole failed and the test boring was terminated at a depth of 15 ft. In January 2002, two borings (HAB-1 and HAB-2) were drilled at the locations shown on Figure 2. The test borings were drilled by Tri-County Drilling of San Diego, California. Soil boring HAB-1 was advanced using a truck-mounted hollow-stem auger CME-95 drilling rig and soil boring HAB-2 was advanced using a track mounted all terrain limited access rig. Each soil boring was advanced to a total depth of approximately 40 ft below ground surface (bgs). Prior to drilling, the soil borings were hand augered to five ft below ground surface for utility clearances. The first soil sample was collected at a depth of two ft, the next at a depth of five ft, then at 5-ft intervals. Hollow stem continuous flight augers (4-1/4 inch I.D.) were used to drill the borehole from approximately five ft bgs to the total depth of the borehole. Using an automatic hydraulic hammer on the drill rig, samples were collected by driving 2.5-inch diameter split spoon samplers 18-inch at the specified sampling interval. Samples were retained in 6-inch long by 2.5-inch diameter stainless steel sleeves. Teflon® sheets were placed at each end of the sleeve and capped with plastic end caps. Haley & Aldrich personnel logged all soils recovered from the borings hi the field. Collected sample intervals were observed and visual-manual estimates of the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) types of soils were made in general accordance with the visual-manual procedures outlined in ASTM Standard D2488-93. In addition, grain size estimates were performed in the field using standard sieve sizes and observation to estimate grain size percentages on selected soil samples. Estimated soil types and other observations were recorded on boring logs along with the sample depth, sample type and percent recovered. Soil samples representative of the various subsurface soil types were selected and preserved from each sample interval for testing hi a laboratory to determine various geotechnical- engineering parameters. 2.03 Laboratory Geotechnical Testing Soil samples obtained during the field explorations were submitted for testing to verify field visual USCS classifications and evaluate certain engineering characteristics. Allied Geotechnical Testing of San Diego, California performed geotechnical laboratory tests. Geotechnical testing of soil samples was performed in conformance with the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) testing procedures or other generally accepted test methods as follows: |H _ G:\PROJECTSV26713 Cannon Rd Lift Station\final report.doc HALEY &ALDRICH Geotechnical Test Moisture Content Dry Density Grain Size Distribution Atterberg Limits Direct Shear Test Method ASTM D 2216 ASTM D 2937 ASTM D 422 ASTM D 43 18 ASTM D 3080 A summary of the results of geotechnical testing on soil samples is presented in Table I. The geotechnical test reports including; USCS descriptions, moisture densities, dry densities, grains size distribution graphs, Atterberg Limits graphs and direct shear graphs are included in Appendix C. 2.04 Laboratory Corrosion Testing A bulk composite sample was collected using a hand auger adjacent to the location of HAB-1 for the purpose of corrosion testing. Test PH Oxidation Reduction Potential Sat'd Resistivity As-Received Resistivity Sulfates Chlorides Sulfides As-Received moisture content Test Method ASHTO T289-91 ASTM D1498 AASHTO T288-91 AASHTO T289-91 AASHTO T290-91 AASHTO T291-91 DIPRA ASTM D2216 A summary of the results of corrosion testing on soil samples is presented in Table II. These results are provided for corrosion analysis to be performed by others. The corrosion laboratory test reports are included in Appendix D. m m m m G:\PROJECTS\26713 Cannon Rd Lift Sation\final report.doc HALEY & " III. SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS PH '"" 3.01 Physiography and Land Use The proposed site is located as shown on Figure 2. An existing detention basin is located on m the southeastern side of future Cannon Road, which is currently (July 2002) an unimproved roadway. The bottom of the detention basin is located at approximate elevation 15. Ground surface elevations begin rising immediately east of the detention basin, to a high of «• approximately 357 ft at the crest of the slope known as Mount Evans. The slope of the hillside above the detention basin is approximately 2H:1V to 1.5H:1V. The top of the wet m well will be located on the hillside at approximate elevation 27. The lower third of the •• hillside has been regraded, and is covered with erosion control mesh and surficial irrigation lines to promote re-vegetation of the slope. The upper portions of the slope are vegetated m with grasses, shrubs, and trees. The site vicinity is largely undeveloped, with the exception m of a new housing development located northeast of the site. •• 3.02 Regional Geology The regional geology consists of colluvium, alluvium, compacted and uncompacted fill and "•• also includes Eocene- to Pleistocene age sediments which comprise bedrock. The regional ta geologic units are the Bay Point Formation which overlies the Santiago Formation. The Bay Point Formation is absent at the project site. The Santiago Formation consists of interbedded, «• light to dark gray, silty sandstone, light to medium gray siltstone and variable colored m claystones. Where undisturbed, the Santiago Formation is typically hard to very hard and is moderately well bedded. M 3.03 Regional Seismicity m The Cannon Road Lift Station project is located within the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic — Province of southern California which is characterized by faults which typically display right lateral slip and have a strong northwest orientation. m The project is located on the Santa Ana sub-block, a subdivision of the Peninsular Range block, which is bounded on the northeast by the Elsinore fault and on the southwest by the Rose Canyon/Newport-Inglewood fault system. The nearest strand of the Elsinore fault, the Julian and Temecula segments zone (characteristic moment magnitude, Mw=7.1 based on *" Peterson, et al., 1996) are approximately 37 kilometers from the subject project. The nearest strand of the Rose Canyon/Newport-Inglewood fault zone (characteristic moment magnitude, Mw=6.9) is the Del Mar segment, approximately 10 kilometers west of the project area. M Both the Elsinore and the Rose Canyon/Newport-Inglewood fault systems are north and northwest striking, dominantly right lateral, strike-slip faults, showing Holocene activity. Hi Literature review, aerial photographic study, and site reconnaissance mapping indicate that active faults are not located in the project area. G:\PROJECTS\26713 Cannon Rd Lift StationVfinal report.doc IP!i HALEY &ALDRICH A regional map of active faults is shown in Figure 3. Based on probabilistic seismic hazard assessment (PSHA) mapping performed by the USGS (1996) the peak horizontal ground acceleration (PGA) expected for a free rock surface at the site with a probability of exceedance of 10 percent in 50 years (consistent with 1997 UBC requirements) is 0.26g. Deaggregation of the 10 percent-50 year event indicated that the Rose Canyon Fault (Mw=6.9) dominates the seismic hazard matrix. The corresponding PGA at ground surface for the site is 0.32g which accounts for site specific soil amplification of the bedrock acceleration determined in accordance with the recommendations of National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP 2001). It is likely that during the design life of the project, the site will be subject to strong ground accelerations generated from earthquakes produced along offsite faults. Secondary ground displacements in response to a nearby or large regional earthquake are possible in the seismically active southern California region. 3.04 Subsurface Conditions Subsurface explorations at the site indicate that both soil and bedrock units are present on-site and are expected to be encountered during construction. Soil and rock descriptions provided below are based upon the test boring reports presented in Appendix B. A geologic cross section of the site that was prepared by others is included in Appendix A of this report. All of the borings encountered interbedded fine to medium fine clayey and/or silty sands. Two of the three borings encountered bedrock classified as siltstone and medium to coarse- grained sandstone. Groundwater was also encountered in two of the three borings. Groundwater was encountered at 15 to 15.5 ft below ground surface (bgs). A. Soil Units 1. Fill (SM, SC, SP) Fill was encountered in two of the three borings at a minimum depth of 0 ft bgs and extended to a maximum depth of 15 ft bgs in HA-1 and 15.5 bgs in HA-2. The fill encountered was classified as silty clay, silty sand, and poorly-graded sand as evidenced by drill cuttings. This material was generally medium dense with standard penetration test values ranging from 12 to 24 blows per foot (bpf) where sampled. m 2. Alluvium (SC, SC/CL, SM) - Alluvium was encountered in HAB-2 at a minimum depth of 15.5 ft bgs and extended M to a maximum depth of 33 ft bgs. The sandy soils were classified as clayey sand, sandy clay, sand with silt, and silty sand. This material was generally medium dense !fl with standard penetration values ranging from 12 to 25 bpf.i M 1 |H _ G:\PROJECTS\26713 Cannon Rd Lift StationVfinal report.doc HALEY &ALDRICH "" 3. Colluvium (SM) Colluvial material was encountered in HA-101 at a minimum depth of 0 ft bgs and "* extended to a maximum depth of 15 ft bgs. The colluvium encountered was classified as silty sand as evidenced by drill cuttings. This material was loose to medium dense/stiff to very stiff with standard penetration test values ranging from 10 to 18 "• bpf where sampled. "* B. Bedrock (Santiago Formation) Bedrock was encountered in two of three borings. The bedrock samples were """ classified as sandstone, siltstone, and clay stone of the Santiago Formation with *• consistencies ranging from very dense to hard with standard penetration test values ranging from 36 bpf to 50 blows per 4 inches where sampled. mm 3.05 Groundwater Conditions "" Groundwater was encountered in borings HAB-1 and HAB-2 at depths of 15 ft and 14.5 ft m below grade, respectively. In addition, wet conditions were encountered in boring HA-101 at a depth of approximately 15 ft, resulting in collapse of the unsupported borehole. These m results indicate a groundwater table located at approximate elevation 5 at the base of the slope m in the vicinity of the proposed lift station. The groundwater table is located at higher elevations beneath the hillside, and generally represents a muted reflection of surface «• topography. Ml 3.06 Geologic Hazards m A. Potential Landslide m As described in Section 2.01, previous studies performed by others [American Geotechnical (1983), Owen Geotechnical (1985), Pacific Soils Engineering (1997)] had identified the southwest facing slope of Mount Evans as a potential landslide. In M addition, a geologic map of the project vicinity (PSE, 1997) characterizes the surficial geology of the hillside as consisting of landslide deposits. The geomorphology of the hillside is that of a classic landslide feature, with a prominent headscarp visible near the crest of the slope.^p ^From reviewing the previous studies concerning the potential presence of a landslide mass on the hillside immediately southeast of the detention basin, Haley & Aldrich W has concluded that: 1) a landslide mass did exist within the slope, 2) the landslide •* mass had the potential to move downslope and into the detention basin during or after detention pond construction, 3) the risk of such movement was impossible to quantify fl based on available information, and 4) the slope should be carefully monitored for • movement during and after excavations for the detention basin and mitigation of any landslide movement be performed immediately. The detention basin excavations 9 were successfully excavated without resultant movement in the hillside. i l G:\PROJECTS\26713 Cannon Rd Lift Station\final report.doc HALEY&ALDRICH Therefore, a landslide mass is likely to be present in the hillside immediately southeast of the existing detention basin. The potential for landslide movement and slope instability is considered real and represents a serious risk to the proposed lift station site development without mitigation measures to stabilize the landslide material. B. Expansive Soil Based on the geologic setting and subsurface conditions encountered in explorations at the site, Haley & Aldrich has determined that expansive soils are not a geologic hazard for this project. C. Liquefaction Evaluation Liquefaction susceptibility was evaluated using the simplified procedure originally developed by Seed and Idriss (1971) with procedural updates in accordance with Youd, et al. (2001). Seismically-induced settlement, which may result from the dissipation of excess pore pressure generated by earthquake shaking, was evaluated using the procedures of Tokimatsu and Seed (1987). Calculations were performed for profiles based on borings representative of conditions within the building area (HAB- 1 and HAB-2). The results of the analyses indicate that liquefiable soils are not present in boring HAB-1. Seismically induced settlements in the region of boring HAB-1 are expected to be negligible. In boring HAB-2 the analyses indicated a zone of liquefiable material is present at a depth of approximately 14 to 32 feet below ground surface. Settlements resulting from post-shaking dissipation of pore water pressure were calculated to be on the order of 3 to 4 inches in the area of HAB-2. For the purpose of foundation design, it should be assumed that the liquefiable zone varies linearly from a thickness of 18 feet at the northeast side of the site to a thickness of zero at the southwest side of the site. The bottom of the liquefiable zone is located at the bedrock interface which is at a depth of approximately 32 feet below ground surface in HAB-1 and 15 feet below ground surface in HAB-2. Figure 4 illustrates the subsurface profile beneath the structure. Post liquefaction settlement will result in the imposition of downdrag forces on deep foundations (refer to Section 4.02 of this report for further recommendations regarding seismic downdrag design). Site improvements which exist at or above liquefiable zone and which are not supported by deep foundations will be prone to settle differentially with respect to pile supported structures. Flexible connections which can tolerate 2.5 to 3.5 inches of differential settlement should be made in such cases. Hollow structures such as pipes which are located within the liquefiable zone should be designed to resist buoyancy forces equal to the unit weight of the liquefied soil (120 pcf). m JK ^^^^^^ G:\PROJECTS\26713 Cannon Rd Lift Station\final report.doc HALEY &ALDRICH The lateral support of soils that surround deep foundations can be significantly reduced if the soils undergo liquefaction. This effect can be modeled in lateral capacity analyses for piles and shafts by applying reducing p-multipliers (a value of 1/10 is typical) to p-y curves (Ishihara and Cubrinovski, 1998) or utilizing a soft clay p-y curve with a cohesion value set to the liquefied residual shear strength of the soil (Wang and Reese, 1998). The p-y curve adjustments are made only over the limited depth that would liquefy. mm i G:\PROJECTS\26713CannonRdLiftStation\finalreport.doc JQ IP HALEY <Sc AIDRICH IV. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS *" 4.01 Landslide Concerns As discussed in previous sections of this report, Haley & Aldrich has concluded that the •* hillside located above the proposed lift station includes an existing landslide mass. The presence of a landslide on this slope is a concern for this project due to potential instabilities *" caused by temporary excavations planned for the proposed site development as described HI below: *" The current project concept includes no permanent cuts. However, temporary excavations m are always required for a project of this nature. Excavations to remove Fill and Alluvium from within the detention basin and replacing them with imported fill is an alternative for *" mitigating potential liquefaction. This temporary excavation would be at the base of the ta existing landslide mass and therefore would reduce the existing equilibrium conditions in the slope. Temporary excavations will be required for construction of the influent line and force *" main. These excavations will also be at die base of the existing landslide mass and therefore — will reduce the existing equilibrium conditions in the slope. CDM is requiring the sunken caisson method of construction for the wet well and valve vault, thereby reducing the concern m associated with more traditional temporary excavations. M At this stage of the design, there is not sufficient data available to rule out the potential for pi instability within this potential landslide mass caused by temporary excavations currently planned for mis project or more adverse natural conditions than have been experienced since detention basin construction. Several steps can be taken to mitigate this potential hazard. pn However, prior to designing a mitigation scheme, a comprehensive geotechnical investigation specifically targeted to evaluate the nature, extent and configuration of the landslide would be required. Once the landslide geometry and strength properties of the basal landslide surface m are understood, landslide mitigation could be designed. Landslide mitigation could consist of: construction of a shear key at the base of the slope using large diameter drilled shafts; reducing groundwater levels in the hillside through subhorizontal drainage holes; and controlling surface water flows and infiltration. *" Haley & Aldrich believes that landslide investigation and mitigation design and construction will be costly and that the risk of potential landslide movement will not be entirely removed ^ even if such measures are implemented. Therefore, we recommend that the construction I* contract documents preclude all permanent or unbraced temporary excavations into the base of the hillside.m *• 4.02 Foundation Recommendations *" The Fill, Alluvium, and Colluvium soils vary in composition and density, are potentially HI liquefiable and are not considered appropriate foundation materials for the lift station. Typically these materials are removed and replaced with structural fill to enable the use of • shallow foundations. However, for this site, an excavation greater than 20 ft in depth would H be required at the toe of the landslide. This excavation could destabilize the landslide. HI ^^^^^^ G:\PROJECTS\26713 Cannon Rd Lift Station\final report.doc P I HALEY & IALDRICH Alternatively, ground improvement methods, such as stone columns could be implemented to enable the use of shallow foundations. However, it has been Haley & Aldrich's experience that for small projects, deep foundations are more cost effective than ground improvement. Haley & Aldrich recommends that the structures be founded on drilled shaft foundations. Drilled shafts are typically 12 inches or larger in diameter and are installed by placing concrete in the open hole after drilling. Installation of drilled shafts below the water table will require the use of a temporary casing and/or possibly drilling fluid such as bentonite. The shaft is reinforced with a steel reinforcing bar cage or with individual steel reinforcing bars. Drilled shafts should be installed through the unconsolidated soils present at the site and socketed into bedrock. The minimum recommended drilled shaft diameter is!8 inches. Drilled shaft vertical capacity is a combination of end bearing and side friction. End bearing capacity of drilled shafts is dependent on the strength of the rock mass and the depth below the ground surface. Haley & Aldrich recommends 15,000 psf for the allowable bearing capacity of the rock. The side shear of shafts socketed into rock can be included when the depth of embedment into rock equals or exceeds the pile diameter. A side shear value of 1,500 psf should be used for that portion of the pile socketed into bedrock. The shafts should be designed to withstand a downdrag load of 700 psf applied over a 15 ft thick soil column caused by potential liquefaction settlement. Based on the site geology, depth to bedrock should be assumed to be 30 ft for the purpose of foundation cost estimating. Overall pile lengths will be the depth to bedrock as determined during pile installation plus the required bedrock socket depth as determined by the structural engineer. 4.03 Floor Slabs Haley & Aldrich recommends that all floor slabs be designed as structural slabs capable of supporting all anticipated loads without the aid of soil interaction. The slab can be reinforced using conventional reinforced concrete, post-tensioned concrete, timber and/or structural steel. 4.04 UBC Seismic Building Design Parameters If the 1997 UBC is utilized for structural design of the proposed buildings, the following seismic assumptions should be made. The Rose Canyon Fault (Seismic Source Type B) is considered the critical fault segment with respect to 1997 UBC seismic design. At a distance of approximately 10 kilometers to the west of the site, with Soil Profile Type Sc, this fault generates the following values: Na=1.0; Nv=1.0; Ca=0.40; Cv=0.56; T0=0.11 and; Ts=0.56. These are minimum values. The structural designer may utilize more conservative values at his or her discretion. Figure 5 presents the computed 1997 UBC Design Response Spectra. m JH G:\PROJECTS\26713CannonRdLiftStation\finalrepon.doc HALEY &ALDRICK ** 4.05 Temporary Excavations Open cut methods for temporary excavations are not recommended because they could m destabilize the landslide. Therefore, sloped excavations and trench boxes should not be allowed. The following recommendations for temporary excavations are intended to minimize the risk of landslide movement during construction. Alternatively, for the pipeline ** excavations, microtunneling methods can be used to minimize excavation support. m The construction contract documents should require that all temporary excavations be tightly <i braced and fully sheeted such that the surrounding ground is hi intimate contact with the shored excavation at all times during shoring installation, subsequent construction and shoring * removal. The contractor should be made responsible for designing temporary excavation Mi support as part of required construction submittals and should be required to include surcharge loads due to the slope in the design. M For the wet well and valve vault, the sunken caisson method of wet well construction is feasible. Haley & Aldrich believes that the site conditions are suitable for sunken caisson *• construction. While the presence of groundwater and bedrock complicate the construction, m caissons are commonly sunk hi these conditions by qualified contractors. The caissons are typically installed without dewatering until after the bottom slab is placed. It is not p» uncommon for caissons to penetrate bedrock similar to the bedrock encountered at the site. ta However, if the surface of the bedrock is not horizontal, which is likely at this site, it may be necessary to pre-excavate the bedrock to create uniform conditions for caisson advancement. M Haley & Aldrich recommends that the sunken caisson be placed prior to construction of the m lift station structure to prevent potential damage to the building. m Temporary excavations should be kept as small as practicable in plan dimensions and only ^ one excavation should be allowed to be open at any one time. Inclinometers and surface monitoring points should be installed in the hillside above the excavations prior to _ construction and monitored at least daily during construction. The contractor should be ^ required to submit an instrumentation plan, monitoring plan and contingency plan for reacting to any measured deformation beyond threshold levels. The Contractor should become familiar with and be aware of applicable local, state, and "• federal safety regulations, including the current OSHA Excavation and Trench Safety Standards. Construction site safety is the sole responsibility of the Contractor, who shall also !n be solely responsible for the means, methods, and sequencing of construction operations. • Under no circumstances should the information provided in this section be interpreted to mean that Haley & Aldrich is assuming responsibility for construction site safety or the ^ Contractor's activities; such responsibility is not being implied and should not be inferred. m The Contractor should be aware that slope height, slope inclination, or excavation depths P should in no case exceed those specified in local, state, or federal safety regulations, e.g., HI OSHA Health and Safety Standards for Excavations, 29 CFR Part 1926, or successor regulations. Such regulations are strictly enforced and, if they are not followed the P Contractor and its subcontractors could be liable for substantial penalties. G:\PROJECTS\26713 Cannon Rd Lift StalionVfinal report.doc j 3 i The soils to be penetrated by the proposed excavations may vary significantly across the site. Haley & Aldrich's preliminary soil classification is based solely on the materials encountered in widely spaced exploratory borings. The Contractor should continually classify the soils that are encountered as excavation progresses with respect to the OSHA system. 4.06 Detention Basin Fill The lift station is located in the area of an existing stormwater detention basin. Up to 8 ft of fill will be required to achieve the floor elevation of the proposed lift station. The fill material should consist of "Structure Backfill" as specified in the "Greenbook" (Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction) and compacted according to Section 4.08 of this report, with maximum compaction loose lift thickness of 6 inches. Structure Backfill should be non-plastic, have a sand equivalent on not less than 20 and should have the following grading: Detention Basin Fill Sieve Size 4 inch No. 4 No. 30 Percent Passing 100 35-100 20-100 4.07 Pipe Trench Considerations A. Pipe Bedding Bedding should extend from 6 inches below the sewer pipeline to 12 inches above the sewer pipeline. The pipe should be bedded in %-inch crushed rock which meets the following gradation: Pipe Bedding Sieve Size % inch No. 200 Percent Passing 100 0-5 Maximum compaction loose lift thickness for the pipe bedding should be 6 inches. Pipe bedding should be wrapped in a geotextile that meets the requirements of Type 180N as specified in the Greenbook. y^i m m G:\PROJECTS\26713 Cannon Rd Lift StationVfinal report.doc 14 B.Trench Backfill P m Above the pipe bedding, on-site materials may be used for trench backfill. However, material greater than 3 inches measured in least dimension should not be placed within 1 ft of the pipe and material greater than 6 inches measured in least dimension should not be placed anywhere in the trench. Backfill should be compacted as outlined in Section 4.08 of this report. Maximum compaction loose lift thickness for the trench backfill should be 8 inches. Excavation Difficulties Bedrock was encountered in the borings within anticipated trench excavation depths. Haley & Aldrich anticipates that bedrock excavation can be performed with conventional methods without the need for extensive blasting; excavation may require the use of large excavation equipment utilizing a ripper tooth. Jack hammering, or other approved rock excavation methods may be necessary in some localized hardened bedrock areas. 4.08 Recommended Compaction Specifications Fill Type Recompacted native soils beneath floor slabs and pavements. Recompacted native trench foundation and placed pipe bedding. Compacted detention basin fill. Material Exhibiting a Well-Defined Moisture-Density Relationship Minimum % of Modified Proctor (ASTM D 1557) Maximum Dry Density 95% 95% 95% Moisture Content Relative to Optimum Moisture Content -2 to +2% -2 to +2% -2 to +2% Material Not Exhibiting a Well- Defined Moisture-Density Relationship Minimum Relative Density (ASTM D 4253 and D 4254) 70% 70% 70% P m PM G:\PROJECTS\26713 Cannon Rd Lift StationVfinal report.doc 15 4.09 Lateral Earth Pressures Lateral pressures will be exerted on below grade walls by backfill soils, surcharge loads, and hydrostatic pressures caused by groundwater. Lateral earth pressures on walls depend upon the type of wall, type of backfill material and allowable wall movements. For walls that are restrained at the top, lateral earth pressures should be estimated for an "at rest" condition. "Active" conditions are applicable for walls which are not fixed at the top and where approximately 1 inch of movement at the top of the wall per 20 feet of wall height is acceptable. Structures can be backfilled with on-site soils or with free draining sand and/or gravel within a zone defined by a 1:1 slope up and away from the bottom of the foundation. The following equivalent fluid pressures can be used: Native Soil Equivalent Fluid Pressures (psf per vertical foot) Case Active At-Rest Passive Static Above Groundwater 35 60 550 Static Below Groundwater 80 85 - Seismic Above Groundwater 50 75 450 Seismic Below Groundwater 85 100 - Point of Application Static 0.33H 0.33H 0.33H Seismic 0.41H 0.63H 0.33H Imported Granular Fill Equivalent Fluid Pressures (psf per vertical foot) Case Active At-Rest Passive Static Above Groundwater 35 55 550 Static Below Groundwater 80 85 - Seismic Above Groundwater 45 75 450 Seismic Below Groundwater 85 100 - Point of Application Static 0.33H 0.33H 0.33H Seismic 0.41H 0.63H 0.33H The recommended equivalent fluid pressure for foundation conditions below the water table includes hydrostatic pressure. The recommended fluid pressures assume a horizontal backfill surface and do not include any surcharge due to nearby loading from structures, floor slab live loads or traffic. G:\PROJECTS\26713 Cannon Rd Lift Station\final report.doc 16 For designing the below-grade walls, a design groundwater elevation equivalent to the maximum pool elevation of the detention basin should be used. 4.10 Construction Dewatering At the time of our investigation, groundwater was encountered within anticipated excavation depths at the site. Groundwater fluctuates seasonally and thus may increase during the wetter season. The excavations required will encounter groundwater and may require dewatering. Temporary excavations supported with tight bracing and full sheeting should remain relatively watertight and may be dewatered using internal sumps. External dewatering is anticipated to be difficult due to the fines content of the soils; an effective dewatering method may be using tightly spaced well points with vacuum-enhanced pumping. Other methods may be equally effective or more effective; in any case, the selected method should be based on an evaluation of required drawdown, subsurface conditions, and areal extent of required dewatering, among other factors. Dewatering systems should be installed well hi advance of excavation operations so that drawdown will be achieved prior to excavation. m m m ii m M ^^^^^ G:\PROJECTS\26713CannonRdLiftStation\finalreport.doc HALEY &ALDRICH m - V. LIMITATIONS ** This report has been prepared for specific application to the proposed construction associated with the Cannon Road Lift Station Project in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical "* engineering practice. The descriptions of subsurface conditions presented herein should not M. be understood or interpreted to be a guarantee or warranty that these conditions will actually be encountered during construction. No amount of investigation or analysis can precisely — predict the characteristics, quality, or distribution of subsurface and site conditions and/or the M behavior of such conditions during construction. Such behavior will vary greatly and will be dependent upon and influenced by the specific construction means and methods actually "" selected by die Contractor. Therefore, the Contractor must undertake its own independent m review and evaluation of all Contract Documents to arrive at decisions concerning the planning of the work, selection of equipment and the means and methods, techniques and *• sequences of construction and safety precautions to be used. This report was prepared in accordance with Haley & Aldrich's proposal to Camp Dresser & mm McKee. All users of this report are subject to the conditions and restrictions contained in the proposal. The observations described in this report are based solely on the scope of services provided pursuant to the proposal. Haley & Aldrich has not performed any additional «• observations, investigations, studies, or other testing not specified hi the proposal or referenced herein. Haley & Aldrich shall not be liable for the existence of any condition, the m discovery of which would have required the performance of services not included in our „„, proposed scope of services. m This report was prepared for the exclusive use of the Cannon Road Lift Station Project Team. There are no other intended beneficiaries. Haley & Aldrich shall owe no duty whatsoever to any other person or entity on account of the report. Use of this report by any person or entity •" other than the Cannon Road Lift Station Project Team for any purpose whatsoever is expressly forbidden unless such other person or entity obtains written authorization from ' Haley & Aldrich. Use of this report by such other person or entity without the written • authorization of Haley & Aldrich shall be at such other person's or entity's sole risk, and shall be without legal exposure or liability to Haley & Aldrich.n M This report reflects the subject site conditions observed and the records reviewed by Haley & Aldrich as of the date of report preparation. The passage of time may result in significant ^ changes in subject site conditions presented in this report. Accordingly, any party to whom •I the report is provided recognizes and agrees that Haley & Aldrich shall bear no liability for deviations from observed conditions or available records after the time of report preparation.m, it Use of this report by any person or entity in violation of the restrictions expressed in this report shall be deemed and accepted by the user as conclusive evidence that such use and the H reliance placed on this report, or any portions thereof, is unreasonable, and that the user H accepts full and exclusive responsibility and liability for any losses, damages or other liability that may result. mm G:\PROJECTS\26713 Cannon Rd Lift Station\final report.doc i HALEY Sc ALDRICH $M REFERENCES 1. Pacific Soils Engineering, Inc., "Supplemental Geotechnical Evaluation and Grading Plan Review Kelly Ranch, Area 'E' in the City of Carlsbad, California," April 15, 1997. 2. Pacific Soils Engineering, Inc., "Supplemental Geotechnical Evaluation and Grading Plan Review Kelly Ranch, Areas D, F, G, H, I and J, in the City of Carlsbad, California," October 17, 1997. 3. Pacific Soils Engineering, Inc., "Response to City of Carlsbad Review Comments, Kelly Ranch, Area 'E', in the City of Carlsbad, California," March 3, 1998. 4. Pacific Soils Engineering, Inc., "Geotechnical Summary for the Grading of the Desilting Basin, Adjacent to Cannon Road, Approximate Station 94+30 to 99+80, Kelly Ranch, Village E, Canterbury Project, hi the City of Carlsbad, California," January 30, 2001. 5. Ameritec Engineering, 2000, "SHAKE2000, A computer program for the 1-D analysis of geotechnical earthquake engineering problems", program and user's manual. 6. Kramer, S.L., 1996, Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering, Prentice Hall, Inc., 653m pp. H 7. Ishihara, K. and Cubrinovski, M., 1998, "Problems associate with liquefaction and PI lateral spreading during earthquakes", Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil H Dynamics III, Volume 1, ASCE Geotechnical Special Publication No. 75, pp 301- 312. H 8. NEHRP, 2001, NEHRP Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings and Other Structures, 2000 Edition, Building Seismic Safety Council for IH the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C., 2001. 9. Peterson, M.D., Bryant, W.A., Cramer, C.H., Cao, T., Reichle, M., Frankel, _ A.D., 1996, Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment for the State of California, S California Department of Mines and Geology and United States Geological Survey, accessed via the internet at http://www.consrv.ca.gov/dmg/pubs/ofr/96/08/index.htm 9 10. Seed, R.B. and Harder, L.F., Jr., 1990, "SPT-based analysis of cyclic pore pressure • generation and undrained residual strength", Proc., H. Bolton Seed Memorial Symposium, Bi-Tech Publishers Ltd., Vancouver, 351-376. • 11. Seed, H.B. and Idriss, I.M., 1971, "Simplified Procedure for evaluating soil liquefaction potential", Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, P 97(9), pp 1249-1273. G:\PROJECTS\26713 Cannon Rd Lift Sution\final report.doc HALEY &ALDRICH in m g^uj mi 12. USGS, 1996, National Seismic Hazards Mapping Project, accessed via the Internet at http: //geohazards. cr. usgs. gov/eq/index. html 13. Wang, S-T and Reese, L.C., 1998, "Design of pile foundations in liquefied soils", Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics III, Volume 2, ASCE Geotechnical Special Publication No. 75, pp 1331-1343. 14. Youd, T.L., (2001). "Liquefaction resistance of soils: summary report from the 1996 NCEER and 1998 NCEER/NSF workshops on evaluation of liquefaction resistance of soils", Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 127, No. 10, October 2001, pp 817-833. 15. Tokimatsu, K. and Seed, H.B. (1987). Evaluation of Settlement in Sands due to Earthquake Shaking. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 113, No. 8, August 1987, pp. 861-878. m niH m m G:\PROJECTS\26713 Cannon Rd Lift StationVfinal report.doc 20 HALEY&ALDRICH Pi II II ft 1 I II II II • I II 11 II II II II II II i I TABLE I SUMMARY OF GEOTECHNICAL LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Cannon Road Lift Station Carlsbad, California Boring No. HA-101 HAB-1 HAB-2 Depth in feet From 5 10 10.5 20.5 25.5 35.5 5 10 20.5 25.5 To 6.5 11.5 11 21 26 36 5.5 10.5 21 26 uses SM SM SM BR* BR BR SC SC SC ML Moisture (%) 9.7 17 13.2 13.7 15.8 16.8 19.9 17.5 24.2 26.4 Dry Density (pet) 111.7 99.7 107.8 - 115.5 111.3 123.3 112.7 Sieve Analysis (%) Gravel 0 0 0 0 Sand 78 63 56 48 Fines 22 37 75 44 52 Atterberg Limit LL 17 35 36 37 31 PL 15 26 32 21 13 PI 2 9 4 16 18 Direct Sh. (Pk) C (psf) 1097 <)> 22.7 Soil Description Silly SAND Silty SAND Silty SAND SILTSTONE/CLAYSTONE SILTSTONE/CLAYSTONE SILTSTONE/CLAYSTONE Clayey SAND ** Clayey SAND Clayey SAND ** Sandy SILT *BR: = Bedrock ** based on visual-manual field description G:\PROJECTS\26713 Cannon Rd Lift StatiomLab data\[Tables Tests Summary.xls]Geotech 7/12/2002 Page 1 of 1 • • • i ii mm ii • i ii • i ii ti ii ti 11 ii ii TABLE II SUMMARY OF CORROSION LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Cannon Road Lift Station Carlsbad, California SAMPLE LOCATION BORING NO. HAB-1A SAMPLE DEPTH (feet) 0-6 MOISTURE (%) 13.5 PH 7.6 OXIDATION REDUCTION POTENTIAL (Mv) 280 % CHLORIDE 0.0492 % SULFATES 0.040 SATURATED RESISTIVITY (ohm-cm) 483 NATURAL RESISTIVITY (ohm-cm) 1,107 SULFIDE (qualitative) Medium HALEY&ALDRICH G:\PROJECTS\26713 Cannon Rd Lift Station\Lab data\[Tables Tests Summary.xls]Corrosion 7/12/2002 Page 1 of 1 O oo <£)CM O crQ CD CM o oo LJ Q -N- U.S.G.S. QUADRANGLE: SAN LUIS REY, CA, 1975 EMVBOMMBflM, SOBBIKWS CANNON ROAD LIFT STATION CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA PROJECT LOCUS APPROXIMATE SCALE: 1:24,000 JULY 2002 FIGURE 1 I I i I II ii fi I 1 f i II II II ll f 1 II II II II II II II G:Projects\27613\drawings\26713000A02.dwg o>\\i611 ^J OSED LIFT STATlS ACCESS ROAD INFLUENT LINE VALVE VAULT \ WET WELL .HA-101 B12 .// 0 20 40 SCALE IN FEET HAB-1 HALEY AND ALDRICH BORING LOCATION B12 OWEN GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS BORING LOCATION A SECTION G-G' SEE APPENDIX A, PROFILE H-H' SEE FIGURE 4 SITE FEATURES BASED UPON SITE PLAN PROVIDED BY CAMP DRESSER & MCKEE MAY 2, 2002. WET WELL AND VALVE VAULT DIMENSIONS ARE APPROXIMATE HALEY& ALDKJCH UNDERGROUNDENGINEERING &ENVIRONMENTALSOLUTIONS CANNON ROAD LIFT STATION CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA BORING LOCATION PLAN SCALE: AS SHOWN JULY 2002 FIGURE 2 -N- ESEMS DISPLACEMENT DURING HISTORIC TIME —- DISPLACEMENT DURING HOLOCENE TIME DISPLACEMENT DURING LATE QUATERNARY TIME UNDIVIDED QUANTERNAR FAULTS REFERENCE: FAULT ACTIVITY MAP OF CALIFORNIA AND ADJACENT AREAS 10 SCALE IN MILES UNMKOtOUNDENcncatiNC* SOUHMM CANNON ROAD UFT STATION CARLSBAD. CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO COUNTY FAULT MAP SCALE: AS SHOWN JULY 2002 FIGURE 3 II 11 • I ii • • II II i i • i • • 11 •! 11 mm mm mm mm G:Projects\2761 3\drawings\2671 3000A02.dwg \HAB-2 EL. 25 GROUNDWATlER EL 15 EL. 5 EL -5 EL -15 EXISTING GROUND HAB-1PROPOSED LIFT STATION STRUCTURE POTENTIAL LIQUEFIABLE ZONE ESTIMATED PROPOSED GRADE INTERPOLATED TOP OF BEDROCK TYPICAL DRILLED SHAFT (CONCEPTUAL) EL. 25 EL 15 EL. 5 EL. -5 EL -15 0 10 20 VERT AND HORZ SCALE IN FEET HAIEY&ALDRJCH UNDERGROUND ENGINEEHINGt ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS CANNON ROAD LIFT STATION CARLSBAD. CALIFORNIA SUBSURFACE PROFILE H-H' SCALE: AS SHOWN JULY 2002 FIGURE 4 II 11 II 11 ft • II ft i i I II If if if it || if if if if Cannon Road Lift Station Carlsbad, California U 3<(0 co 2 1.2 r 1.0 0.8 « 0.6 0)uu u0)aa) 0.4 0.2 0.0 Figure 5 Design Response Spectra (1997 UBC) 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 Period, T (seconds) 3.0 3.5 4.0 HALEY &ALDKICH G:\PROJECTS\26713 Cannon Rd Lift Station\drawings\l1997 UBC.xIsJFigure 4 UBC Spectra 7/11/2002 pi M m m m APPENDIX A Excerpts from Previous Site Investigations m m m m m Ill M m Pacific Soils Engineering, Inc.m m April 15,1997 mm m m m m mi m 1i mm PACIFIC SOILS ENGINEERING, INC. 7715 CONVOY COURT. SAN DIEGO. CALIFORNIA 9211! TELEPHONE '619)560-1713. FAX 16'Si 560-0380 KELLY LAND COMPANY m 201 1 Palomar Airport Road - Suite 206 Carlsbad, CA. 92009 April 15, 1997 Work Order 400581 tm m Attention: Mr. Curt R. Noland, Director of Operations M IP Subject: Supplemental Geotechnical Evaluation and m Grading Plan Review for Kelly Ranch, Area 'E'. in the City of Carlsbad, California m m References: See Appendix * Gentlemen: • P Presented herein are the results of Pacific Soils Engineering, Inc.'s (PSE's) supplemen-i tal geotechnical evaluation and grading plan review for Kelly Ranch, Area 'E', located in — the City of Carlsbad, California. The purpose of this supplemental geotechnical evalua- tion and grading plan review is to provide: 1) a liquefaction analysis; 2) slope stabilitym H analyses for landslide failure geometries utilizing geotechnical information recently ob- tained by PSE; 3) specific grading recommendations with respect to the latest (H 40-scale grading design as prepared by Project Design Consultants (Plates 1 and 2); H and 4) preliminary foundation design parameters. • •i PSE has identified a previously unrecognized (references) landslide that underliesn much of the southeastern portion of the site. Although PSE is in general concurrence P with much of the findings and recommendations presented in the referenced reports, the identification of this large landslide deposit does raise issues relating to the overall gross stability of the project. These issues are addressed herein, and in summary this landslide will not adversely impact the development of Area 'E'. CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS LOS ANGELES COUNTY RIVERSIDE COUNTY SOUTH ORANGE COUNTY TEL ;7i- 22C-:--: TEL 1213-, 325-272 or 775-5771 TEL •9os!S76-s<95 TEL. .7141730-2-2: FAX |7-.4 22C-35S9 FAX (7U. 22C-95B9 FAX '909' 675-'S"9 -AX . i'14) 73C-51 9' Work Order 400581 Page 2 April 15, 1997 To accomplish our40-scale study, PSE has undertaken the following scope of work: I. SCOPE OF WORK * Site geologic mapping. * Review of geologic literature and pertinent geotechnical reports (references). * Aerial photographic interpretation (references). » Limited seismic hazard evaluation. * Subsurface exploration consisting of excavation, logging and sampling of ten (10) exploratory borings (Plates A-1 through A-10) and eighteen (18) backhoe test pit excavations (Plates 5 and 6 and Table I). » In-situ density testing (Table III) of previously placed fills in selected test^ pits (Table I). | * Liquefaction analysis utilizing previous CPT data. m m * Geologic analyses with respect to the newly identified landslide. i M * Laboratory testing that included: 1) both low strain cyclic shear testing and conventional direct shear testing: 2) moisture/density; 3) laboratory * maximum density (ASTM: D1557-91); 4) hydrometer analysis. Results of this testing are summarized in Table II, Plates C-1 through C-14. 1i M PACIFIC SOILS ENGINEERING, INC. m Work Order 400581 Page 3 April 15, 1997 m » Slope stability analyses utilizing site specific geometries and shear — strengths of low strength claystone collected around the landslide basal ** rupture surface. "" * Preparation of this report and accompanying exhibits summarizing our "" findings. mm II. SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION m Kelly Ranch, Area 'E' occurs south and east of the intersection of existing El Camino Real and proposed Cannon Road (Figure 1). The southerly project ^^H boundary is formed by the base of relatively steep, northerly facing, bedrock H slopes. Carlsbad tract 91-3 (Evans Point) and the terminus of existing Frost * Street occur on the eastern project boundary. Proposed Cannon Road forms the P northwest project boundary and it occurs adjacent to the open space along the southern edge of Agua Hedionda Creek. The northeast portion of the project is 9 directly bordered by open space area of Agua Hedionda Creek and existing El Camino Real.mm The terrain over the developable portions of the site has been almost completely H modified by prior grading operations. Terrain slope angles range from flat to _ relatively steep (approximately 1:1, horizontal : vertical). Most of the site is cov- m H ered by sparse growth of annual grasses and a few shrubs. The steep, unde- p velopable, north-facing slopes along the southern boundary are covered with a Mm thick growth of native chaparral. m m m PACIFIC SOILS ENGINEERING, INC. SITE LOCATION MAP SOURCE* USGS San Luis Rey Quad RGURE 1 SCALE: 1=2000'PACIFIC SOILS ENGINEERING, INC. T7I5 CONVOY COURT SAN DIEGO. CA 72II1 (»I9) 5«0-I7!3 wo 400581 DATE 4 '15 97 Work Order 400581 Page 4 April 15, 1997 Drainage over the site is by sheet flow directed to the north and west. Access over the site can be gained by proposed Canyon Road southward on unim- proved dirt trails. A horse farm with associated structures exists in the east central part of the site. ill. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT m It is anticipated that cut/fill grading techniques will be utilized to develop Kelly ** Ranch, Area 'E' into 144 single family residential building pads, interior streets II and graded open space. As part of project development Cannon Road from EliCamino Real to the western project boundary will be completed. i Cut and fill slopes are proposed at ratios of 2 : 1 (horizontal : vertical). mm IV. SITE RESUME Geotechnical studies on Kelly Ranch, Area 'E' began with American Geotechni-P • cal (1983). Supplemental investigations were conducted by Owen Geotechnical m (1985a and b) and Geopacifica (1985). These reports were submitted to the City yj• of Carlsbad and they dealt with typical hillside grading issues, and included: 1) iNj laboratory data; 2) settlement analysis; and 3) slope stability analyses. a^ Landslide deposits in Area 'E'were not identified in these reports. m m i m PACIFIC SOILS ENGINEERING, INC. Work Order 400581 Page 5 April 15, 1997 — Site grading occurred in August through November of 1 985 under the testing and "" observation of Geopacifica (1990). This phase of grading involved the place- "* ment of embankment for Cannon Road and the area adjacent to and south of "" Cannon Road, realignment of a portion of Agua Hedionda Creek near El Camino Real and various storm drain and desilting basin improvements. Much of the embankment for Cannon Road was borrowed from the southeast portion of Area 'E'.m m Post-grading geotechnical studies for Area 'E' were completed by PSE in March II and September of 1990 (references). These studies compiled previous geotech- H nical work and performed limited subsurface investigations for the overall Kelly * Ranch (aka Villages of Cote D' Azur) project. Landsliding on Area 'E'was not up identified. m P A pertinent offsite geotechnical investigation of the adjacent Evans Point project was conducted by Geotechnics, Inc. (1993). Evans Point was graded in 1995 II under the testing and observation of Geocon, Inc. (1996). During grading opera- tions immediately adjacent to Kelly Ranch, Area 'E' a backcut failure extended •H onto Area 'E'. These areas were repaired by replacement with compacted fill, Geocon, Inc. (1996). ^P! m m The information presented herein (PSE, this report) represents a 40-scale grad- • ing plan study which incorporates all data from previous studies and supplemen- H tal information recently collected by PSE. i PACIFIC SOILS ENGINEERING, INC. l£4!*l$*Wff»B^ I Work Order 400581 Page 6 April 15, 1997 V. ENGINEERING GEOLOGY tm A. GEOLOGIC UNITS m The geologic units underlying Kelly Ranch, Area 'E' include the Eocene-age sedimentary bedrock Santiago Formation, the late Pleistocene-age Bay Point m Formation, landslide deposit, colluvium, alluvium, compacted fill and uncom- pacted fill. The following is a brief description of these units. Their distribution is P^ shown on the enclosed Plates 1 and 2. 1. Santiago Formation (Map Symbol Ts) m The lithoiogies of the Santiago Formation consists of interbedded, light m gray to dark gray, silty sandstone, light to medium gray brown siltstone M and variable colored claystones. The Santiago Formation, where undis- p turbed, is typically hard to very hard. The unit is typically moderately- to b well-bedded. The Santiago Formation, as mapped by Weber (1982), underlies the steep terrain south of the project. It is found at depth below Bay Pointm Formation and landslide deposits. ii 2. Bay Point Formation (Map Symbol Qbp) The late Pleistocene Bay Point Formation, as mapped by Weber (1982), consists of a light tan to light gray, fine- to very-coarse-grained sandstone. The unit is friable, poorly cemented, and in large diameter borings the unit often caved severely. Pebbly subunits are somewhat rare and bedding appears to be indistinct. Within the area of the landslide deposit, the Bay Point appears disturbed. mH PACIFIC SOILS ENGINEERING, INC. Work Order 400581 Page 7 April 15, 1997 „ 3. Landslide Deposit (Map Symbol Qls) «- A previously unrecognized, relatively large, ancient, landslide complex *•» has been found in the southeastern portion of the project. The presence ** of this landslide was detected in a series of deep, large diameter borings ** excavated for the purposes of this 40-scale study. The borings were tut down-hole logged where conditions allowed. Where severe caving pre- vented down-hole logging, cuttings were used to describe the materialsm penetrated by the boring. m m The presence of the large landslide complex is based upon: 1) a marked m break-in-slope that creates an accurate landform along the southeastern p subdivision boundary; 2) a consistently present, sheared, striated clay- iM stone at the base of disturbed appearing Bay Point and Santiago Forma- p tions, interpreted to be the basal rupture surface; 3) geologic mapping and backhoe trench logging of the existing cut slope; and 4) the identifi- i1 cation of landsliding on the adjacent Evans Point project.m B Mapping by Weber (1982) suggests that the sharp topographic break along the southern project boundary is attributable to the formation of an- il cient sea cliffs. Weber (1982) did not map landslides in Area 'E' or Evans Point. While this is valid for explaining the height of the steep topography m (approximately 170 feet), it does not eliminate the possibility of landsliding m enhancing the topographic break. m In Area '£' hummocky topography with closed depressions are not ob- served to be present in older, pre-borrow topographic maps. The lack of P dilated contours, which are typical of landslide terrain, is attributed to thei PACIFIC SOILS ENGINEERING, INC. Work Order 400581 Page 8 April 15, 1997 „„, ancient nature of the slide and the availability of soft material (i.e., Bay M Point Formation) for erosion and deposition. Also, much of the landslide P- headscarp area is observed to be deeply colluviated. •"• The landslide materials consist of Bay Point and Santiago Formation. "" Generally, the landslide materials were observed to be oxidized, fractured "" and sheared blocks of sandstone, siltstone and claystone. Water seep- age was common above the basal slide plane. A very marked change in •• hardness and drive energy occurs between the landslide composed of Santiago Formation and the in-place Santiago Formation below the basal m rupture surface. Below the basal rupture surface the Santiago Formation „„ was observed to be consistently very hard, well cemented, unfractured •» and gently dipping to the south. •» m The landslide deposit occurring in Area 'E' is probably a composite land- *• slide consisting of at least two separate slide masses, designated herein m as "east slide" and "west slide". The distinctions, while not specifically * mapped on Plates 1 and 2, are based upon: 1) topographic differences; 2) dip direction of basal surfaces and striation directions; and 3) the H construction of cross-sections (Plates 5 and 6) by the correlation of boring longs. WBi _ The "eastern slide" mass is located below the area of lots 82, 83, 89 mI through 92 and 100 through 107, and it extends onto the Evans Point pro- p ject. The geologic data suggests that the eastern landslide moved toward yi ™ the northeast. In contrast, the "western slide" mass is located immediately II west of the eastern slide, in the area of lots 55 through 80, 83 PACIFIC SOILS ENGINEERING, INC. Work Order 400581 Page 9 April 15,1997 ^ through 88 and 94 through 98. The geologic data suggests that the west- m ern landslide moved toward the northwest. Both slide masses probably m extend below the alluvium and artificial fill as shown on the cross-sections m (Plates 5 and 6). m 4. Colluvium (Map Symbol Qcol) m Locally derived, light to dark brown silty sands with common pebbles andm cobbles form colluvium deposits in the minor, north-flowing drainages m emanating from the steep bedrock terrain south of the project. The mate- rial is typically slightly moist, and loose to moderately dense. Thicknessm m probably exceeds twenty (20) feet. m m 5. Alluvium (map Symbol Qal) p Alluvium, associated with the Agua Hedionda drainage underlies the north ** and northwestern portion of the site. It was observed to be dark gray and P composed of silty sands, sandy to clayey silts and sandy to silty clays. M These soils are typically very moist to wet, in a loose to medium dense, " soft to firm state.m m 6. Artificial Fill (Map Symbol af,) H Compacted artificial fill, placed during the grading of Cannon Road under •• the testing and observation of Geopacifica (1990) occurs in the northern H portion of Area '£'. It consists of a light gray or brown silty to clayey sand m 1M PACIFIC SOILS ENGINEERING, INC. Work Order 400581 Page 10 April 15, 1997 and sandy clay. These soils are typically moist, in a moderately dense to „. medium dense, firm to stiff state. A non-woven geotextile fabric was ob- — served to occur at the fill/alluvium contact in test pits T-11, T-14, T-16 and T-18. KM 7. Artificial Fill (Map Symbol af0) Compacted artificial fill, placed during the grading of the adjacent Evans Point project under the testing and observation of Geocon, Inc. (1996) oc- m curs in the western portion of Area 'E'. As observed in boring B-1, it con- m sists of a multicolored clayey sand which is moist and moderately dense. m m 8. Artificial Fill (Map Symbol afu) ** Uncompacted artificial fill occurs most notably in the central portion of the il project. Its limits are approximated on Plates 1 and 2. Some test pit ex- it cavations exposed buried "brush" at the alluvium contact. The uncom- P pacted fill consisted of silty sand, and thicknesses range from three (3) to twelve and one-half (12.5) feet. •1 |&k| B. STRUCTURE i _ Undisturbed Santiago Formation was observed to dip gently five (seven degrees)™ • in the southeast to southwest direction. Numerous joints and shears, attributed • to landsliding, were observed in the Santiago and Bay Point Formation. Several iaaam shears limited to the Santiago Formation are attributed to tectonic faulting. The H contact between the Santiago and Bay Point within the landslide deposit was ob-i served to be unconformably depositional and locally sheared. The sheared m 1m PACIFIC SOILS ENGINEERING, INC. Work Order 400581 Page 11 April 15, 1997 contact is attributed to landsliding. Bedding dips in the Santiago and Bay Point Formation within the landslide deposit are predominantly to the south ranging from approximately 25 to 60 degrees (Plates 5 and 6). C. GROUNDWATER The current groundwater surface, as observed in test pits T-1 1 through T-1 8 (Ta- ble I) occurs at elevations ranging from 16 to 26 in alluvial soils along Cannon mH Road. The groundwater surface was observed in Bay Point Formation in boring B-9 (Plate A-9) at elevation 19.PI m p. Perched groundwater, as observed in borings B-1 and B-4 through B-10 (Plates M A-2 and A-4 through A-10), occurs several inches to several feet above the land- p slide basal rupture surface. This water appears to be perched on the relatively ^impermeable claystone at the base of the landslide and the underlying, very hard m Santiago Formation. ta "* VI. LIMITED SEISMICITY- m The Kelly Ranch, Area 'E' project is located within the Peninsular Ranges of southern California which is characterized by faults with a strong northwest ori- ^^f m entation. These faults typically display right lateral slip. • Area 'E' is located on the Santa Ana sub-block, a subdivision of the Peninsular m Range block, which is bounded on the northeast by the Elsinore fault zone andHi on the southwest by the Rose Canyon/Newport-lngiewood fault system. The * nearest strand of the Elsinore fault, the Julian and Temecula segmentsi 1i PACIFIC SOILS ENGINEERING, INC. Pacific Soils Engineering, Inc. October 17,1997 mm m m m mi ii i '.2/31/2339 13:30 -AGE 22/32 frMLTMgccwMi* *; Q a.i*2 a SOIL DESCRIPTION BORING MO. U SC ( 2.0* SUsy/ cl*y«ry, fin*-^r«iawi <J«IM« pogrom •lightly K>iAC. 40M , oUv» brwra. 5 — 5-0- to • o.S' sacu>i seeU*i HTUW BBPi 10 . ^. « 9.2* Sliduo «ld»d wv^ MirtAC*. aenlMr. li«ht ad duk , clffrr, t\n»-*o imlliM iji«1n"i1 Mn4. «ei«r. d«n««. pototu. teoclvca CV9C • 22.0< noulM to \J «o4 Sr»m. fine MOOT <=l*y. v«ry IS- SC t 13.5' SUcJun Bidvd «ixfac»( K3N, MrtlcU • 15.5- « 17.0' MDlL, Mt ^caly 17.0* Ground wstac 20 — • 21.0* 3rovn elmyvy. fia« C0 mdluvgsttitMd wn4, Mtimttad, tenu 25 — « 27.0' NO iveanay 91 (Sanci»9o ro»aucion!; Litjnt gray »iley ft»e—^rxuwd denies coCOiva «a 3 iactwa la <ttu»f.r BORING L.OG Jfi9-3-2 FIGURE NO OW£N C£OTECHN/C*t CONSULTANTS, IHC.Plate A-49 '. • 11/31/2000 12:20 COMPANY: M.-ROY 3RZLLIHC BIG/4-25-35 -OPING ; 30*DRIVE HEIGHT; <XS NOTED I SLiVATICN: 23. aiUl 2*•a. O --30- 35- 40- 45— 03. _ ». a5 o< £<a S ^r tiasoj Ul ~ 03> a li<n ui§5 (J3QJEC7NO. *«'.3- SOIL DESCRIPTION BORING gray lilcy la taul Depot 33.a' 17.0' (bariaf £tll»Caving Ore* 17.0* a» 20.0* tC diKMXIMd. nay &• » BORING LOG XC.LV A~38 OWEN CSOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS, INC.A-4 9 12/31/2000 12:20 S132S5E G COMPANY: AX.-ROTJ DRI^LrNG "" RIG: aucXET MJGSS DATE: 5.75. ?< ^AMfTER: 30* OR1VS WEIGHT: AS NCTSO DROP: 12" ELSVATlON: 60. a -*v i pj«J < mma OT • Mil i o2 0^ i^ Ul ?> O5 j 0° ^m •• — Jl C21SC5 •• DM •. «• • Mi •• 1 • - — — (2150) •/ii 3 •NJI tsiso)"~T» p p H - T-J_-, __ 1 3P • (2150) * O - m i I - 1[J i H:«," B (USfl) > (O (U ^ V *" Ca . « — — •• «MH^^^ •••••M •* ««^^^ ^^^^ uj X W UJ 2 2S o ° - — — -. —^ w> _j *| 5 2.S ~° sc/c. ^to ••••• SC - SK SOIL DESCRIPTION BORING NO. i2- TAWiSTJOE aeaittS: 0*cX brown «««dy slay/d«y«y Mad. moiM to very IBOiSt* MD^S3TA*>£Xy (in^JW .* 2.0- ^c-.,^,. « 4.0* Mottled, iifhe and <J*r* brown, porou« \ < 6.0* Cr»y brown fiity day, Bolic, fini « $.2' Cray drown alley clay, wsirt, fir» •"«-.---—--.--.- • > 14. S' Silty, tin. to Mdiw-9rJkia*d «*nd - - •• ™ - - - - M V MI VI -31.' 2208 13: 00 ALDRIC:-'- INC oarT:nc sucxsr AUGES DATE: DRIVE WEIGHT: AS NCTSD DROP ELEVATION; 60.0 (AWS.ir.ss-- f J S i •H ^vi 2 0 (/» l« IU ? •j J a *c •" • 7 - r Mi ^ (13SO) •• !•"• — • Hit /TB 20 _ •(1350) Mmjj 1 H •i • 1 • •j | IP M M 1 •M •Pi , " (So, ZOO (SSO) •h il i- ?= H Ul2 -. UJ ~O^ cc0 •!•... ..-I. • \ >u H § K U3 UJ o£ s Li-32 Pl-18 * - • 10 —5"*-U 9 52to SH a "" c^AW SOIL DESCRIPTION BORING NO. 12 ^Cancinu«2) * 32.0' light qrxy, fina-graiaed swadflton*, aoiac. wuy dense 0 36.0' to 38.0' - Zen* of «U.<te pl«a*, *lZty fJUM-7C*ia*d caad with pocinu «T **it», »«y plaacic, clay, »«y BoUt «o »«t. •oder.taly 4«n«*. V«in« ot wtaitM cA«y to l/4«iach thick dipping «t 22» Scr4Ji»i 0512 0X9 1 54" (vkrlobl* ••ctiTnrta} • 3fl.O' BEO9OGC fS*nti*oo Tacmacionit Plfte-^rain^d MadiznM. v«rv 0 42.0* b«cao*« wet to sa^uxatcd • 47.0* So r»co«*ry, ha*vy a««p*9a of w«<otz iaca barin9 * 47. a* cteaad wacaz a«w»i 4 SO y fttcooM Kkn cl4 /«li rh*n 1 200 jl«v« • TGCjul D»pcS. S&.O' Hacnr 3uri*CB « 47.0' Mo Csvxog - _ - — - - - V M - M MMI Pacific Soils Engineering, Inc. * March 3, 1998 mm p H M m i I PACIFIC BOILS ENGINEERING, INC. 7715 CONVOY COURT. SAN DIEGO. CALIFORNIA 921 1 1 TELEPHONE: (619) 560-1713. FAX: (619) 560-0380 SHEA HOMES 10721 Treena Street - Suite 200 San Diego, CA 92131 March 3,1998 Work Order 400625 Attention: Mr. Russel Haley, Project Manager Subject Response to City of Carlsbad Review Comments. KeOy Ranch, Area F, in the City of Carlsbad, CA Reference: Supplemental Geotechnical Evaluation and Grading Plan Review for Kelly Ranch, Area '£', City of Carts- bad, CA., dated April 15,1997 by Pacific Soils Engineering, Inc. (Work Order 400581) Gentlemen: Presented herein are Pacific Soils Engineering, Inc.'s (PSE's) response to hand written review comments by the City of Carlsbad for the Kelly Ranch, Area F, in the City of Carlsbad, California. COMMENT W "Provide letter from soils engineer stating that anticipated settlement will not impact construction of storm drains or should there be a waiting period prior to construction of B underground facilities". | RESPONSE As previously presented (PSE, 1997) settlement of left-in-place saturated alluvium • could take one (1) to three (3) months after rough grade is achieved. These areas of p left-in-place saturated alluvium are programmed to undergo settlement monitoring. It is • PSE's recommendation that construction of storm drain and underground facilities not P begin until time-dependent primary settlement is complete. Determination of the com-i B CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS LOS ANGELES COUNTY RIVERSIDE COUNTY SOUTH ORANGE COUNTY • TEL: (7U) 220-0770 TEL 1213) 325-7272 or ""5-5— TEL: 19091 67S-8'95 'EL 7**'"TC-2'22 m Work Order 400625 Page 2 March 3,1998 I* pletion of primary settlement will be provided by PSE based on settlement monitoring. p, PSE will provide a letter when this settlement is complete and when underground utility *• and storm drain construction can begin. mm m COMMENT *• "Provide a letter from soils engineer stating that the grading for this [desilting] basin, will m be stable after cut slope grading'. mm RESPONSE mm m A suspected landslide deposit occurs adjacent to the proposed desilting basin along the south side of Cannon Road (sheet 3). This landslide has been identified by American |BP| m Geotechnical (1983) and Owen Geotechnical Consultants, Inc. (1985). Their subsur- m face excavations do not appear to conclusively identify a landslide deposit or a basal m rupture surface. A bucket auger boring recently excavated by PSE also proved to be n inconclusive. The existence of this landslide is largely based on geomorphic expres- m sion. • m Owing to the uncertainty of this landslide, PSE recommends that the slope be cut to de- ll sign grade and then be finally evaluated for stabfltty. • If PSE assumes the existence of the landslide and a geometry depicted on cross- _. section G-G1 (Figure 1) then a buttress or stabilization fill backcut behind the cut slope * would likely result in a failure of the entire landslide area. The failure would extend well m beyond the limits of a proposed backcut. This would result in disturbance and neces- 1 sary grading in the open space above top of slope. Considering the above if p m Work Order 400625 March 3,1998 Page 3 m <Ka mm l m I i m instability is detected during design cutting, it is recommended that the landslide area be removed and a stabilization fill be constructed whose width is one half the slope height "ProvWe revised sois report ptetes to caver [desfflng basin] and to match current street and totting pattern. RESPONSE These plans are enclosed herein (sheets 3 through 6). RespectfuBy PACIl DAVID A. Engtneenng G A. HANSON, President Oist (2) Addressee (3) Project Design Consultants, Attn: Ms. Marina Wurst JAOOAMMAHMOD02 I PACIFIC SOILS ENQINEEPINO, INC. ft i 1 i mm mm •• • i i i i i i i i i i i t i i • i i i NORTHWEST G 1*0 120- 40- PROPOSED GRADE EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY Tsa To-sr SOUTHEAST G1 r200 -100 -120 -40 CROSS-SECTION G-G' SCALE: V-40- HAV Tsa FIGURE 1 FACIFIC SOILS ENdNEEUNG. INC. nn CONVOY COUIT 1ANMOO.CA fllll Ml« Mt-ITI) WO: 40062S DATE: »-»••• Pacific Soils Engineering, Inc. January 30, 2001 m tt 19 H 1i m I NOV-09-01 I1:53AM FROM-Camp Drasssr 4 McKsa Inc. 7BO 438 7411 T-477 P.002/004 F-553 PACIFIC SOILS ENGINEERING, INC. 771S CONVOY COURT. SAN OlEGO, CALIFORNIA 921 H TELEPHONE: (858) 560-1713. FAX: 1858) SSO-8380 SHEA HOMES »„ 10721 Treena Street-Suite 200 San Diego, CA 92131-1039 January 30,2001 - s ~ Work Order 400625G Attention: Mr, Greg Ponce IW '"" - Subject: Geotechnical Summary for the Grading of the Desilting Basin. Adjacent to Cannon Road, Approximate Station " 94+30 to 99+80, Kelly Ranch, Village E, Canterbury Project, m in the City of Carlsbad. California ** References: See Appendix • . Gentlemen:mm Presented herein Is Pacific Soils Engineering, Inc.'s (PSE) geotechnical summary for m the grading associated with the desitting basin adjacent to Cannon Road, approximate ^ station 94*30 to 99*60. Kelly Ranch, Village E, Canterbury project, located in the City m of Carlsbad, California. This report represents a summary of the as-graded geologic and geotechnical conditions associated with the basin and adjacent cut slope. ^fw, ^^ • m _ Project grading occurred in 1999 and consisted of the excavation of the desilting basin flPJ Ml and adjacent cut slopes. Very minor amounts of compacted fill were placed along the _ southern edge of Cannon Road during project grading. The materials encountered dur- ttl ing the excavation were observed to consist of colluvium and weathered bedrock. Evi- _ dence for landsliding. which is discussed in PSE (1998). was observed to be not pre- Ww?. Ml sent Accordingly, based upon our recent observations and our observations during H grading the slopes associated with "(he desilting basin are considered to be grossly and • surficially stable. l|m ^^ LOSAKaELESOOUMTT U1VE1KIOECOUKTYsxssss ~"«BSsaiiMm stsass JflN.31.2001 12=07PM CnMP DRESSER MCKEE-CfiRLSBfiDii-i» (~in ur - Work Order 400625G January 30.2001 Page 2 tf It is our understanding that the City of Carlsbad proposes to infill the basin and create a pad for a sewer pump station. It is PSE opinion that this is likely to be feasible without significant remedial grading. Geotechnlcal review of the proposed design of the sewer pump station pad should be undertaken prior to grading, particularly if additional cuts are proposed for the adjacent slopes. The opportunity to be of service is appreciated, and should you have any questions please contact the undersigned. Respectfully submitted, PACIFIC SOILS ENGINEERING, INC. Reviewed by: By:, I Engineering Geologist Dist; (3) Addressee HANSON, ident mm JAC/DAM/JAH:KR/GQ24 •Ii PACIFIC VOH.O BNBMBEIIINa, IMC. JflN.31.2001 12:07PM CflMP DRESSER MCKEE-CflRLSBflD Tgg N0.984sg P.435/05.ji-ii i—-jj.— ^-EJCJJ. j.j.1 j.^j 1—1 i i <_ir --rTrM-Junu row TWJI «• i o-* • •"—""-• m m m m m •jrn ( Work Order 400625C APPENDIX January 30,2001 REFERENCES Pacific Soils Engineering, Inc., 1999, Project Grading Report for Lots 1 through 144. inclusive, and Lot 153, Kelly Ranch, Village E, City of Carlsbad, CA, dated April12,1999, (Work Order 4C0625G). Pacific Soils Engineering, Inc., 1998, Response to City of Carlsbad Review Comments, Kelly Ranch, Area 'E', In the City of Carlsbad, CA, dated March 3,1998. (Work Order 4006250). PACIFIC man.m ENOWWXBINO, INC. TOTflL P,05 APPENDIX B Test Boring Reports m m m m m m Pii •ii I I i I I I 0 i I I I I m&& • m | I DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION OF SUBSURFACE MATERIALS SOIL Soil description on logs of subsurface explorations are based on Standard Penetration Test results, visual-manual examination of exposed soil and soil samples, and the results of laboratory tests on selected samples. The criteria, descriptive terms and definitions are as follows: DENSITY OR CONSISTENCY Modified CA Density of SPT Sampler Consistency of SPT Cohesionless Soils (Blows per ft) CBIows per ft) Cohesive Soils ("Blows Qgr ft} Very Loose 0-4 0-4 Very Soft 0-2 Loose 5-10 5-12 Soft 3-4 Medium 11-30 13-35 Medium 5-8 Dense 31-50 36-60 Stiff 9-15 Very Dense over 50 over 60 Very Stiff 16-30 PENETRATION RESISTANCE Hard °™ 3° Standard Penetration Test (ASTM D— 1586) — Number of blows required to drive a standard 2 in. O.D. split spoon sampler 1 ft. with a 140 Ib. weight falling freely through 30 in. COLOR: Basic colors and combinations: black, brown, gray, yellow— brown, etc. MOISTURE CONTENT: Dry — Absence of moisture, dusty, dry to the touch Moist - Damp but no visible water Wet — Visible free water, usually soil is below water table SUPPLEMENTAL SOIL TERMINOLOGY: Bed - A sedimetary layer bounded by depositional surfaces Blocky - A characteristic in which cohesive soil can be broken down into small angular lumps which resist further breakdown Bonded - Attached or adhering Fissured — Broken along definite planes of fracture Foliated — Planar arrangement of textural or structural features Frequent — More than one per 12 in. of thickness Homogeneous — Same color and appearance throughout Interbedded — Alternating soil layers of differing composition Lamina — 0 to 1/16 in. thick (cohesive) Layer - 1/2 to 12 in. thick Lens - Lenticular deposit larger than a pocket Mottled - Variation of color Occasional — One or less per 12 in. of thickness Parting - 0 to 1/16 in. thick (granular) Pocket - Small, erratic deposit less than 12 in. size Seam - 1/16 to 1/2 in. thick Stratified — Alternating layers of varying material or color Stratum - > 12 in. thickVarved — Annually alternating thin seams of silt and clay GEOLOGIC INTERPRETATION Deposit type - GLACIAL TILL, ALLUVIUM. FILL.... The natural soils are identified by criteria of Unified Soil Classification System (USCS), with appropriate group symbol in parenthesis for each soil description. Fill materials may not be classified by USCS criteria. U.S. Standard Series Seive Clear Square Sieve Openings 12" 3" 3/4" 4 10 40 200 .... Gravel Sanduouiaers ouuuico _ _ , , _,. r- oil IS Gnu UICWSCoarse | Fine Coarse | Medium Fine 305 mm 76 mm 19 mm 4.75 mm 2.00 mm 0.43 mm 0.074 mm GENERAL NOTES ROCK Rock descriptions noted on logs of subsurface explorations are based on visual— manual examination of exposed rock outcrops and core samples. The criteria, descriptive terms and definitons used are as follows: RQP: Ri?ckn.Quali!y Designation-Sum of the length of recovered core pieces greater than or equal to 4 inches divided bythe theoretical length of rock cored. ' fiE£-L Recovery Ratio-length of core recovered divided by the theoretical length of rock cored. FIELD HARD.NE.SSj. A measure of resistance to scratching Very Hard Cannot be scratched with a knife point or sharp pick. Breaking of hand specimen requires several hard blows of geologist's pick. Hard Can be scratched with a knife point or pick only with difficulty. Hard blow of hammer required to detach hand specimen. Moderately Hard Can be readily scratched with a knife or pick. Gouges or grooves 1/4 in. deep can be excavated by hard blow of point of geologist's pick. Hand specimens can be detached by moderate blow. Medium Hard Can be grooved or gouged 1/16 in. deep by firm pressure on knife or pick point. Can be excavated in small chips to pieces about 1— in. maximum size by hard blows of the point of a geologist's pick. Soft Can be grooved or gouged easily with a knife or pick point. Can be excavated in chips to pieces several inches in size by moderate blows of a pick point. Small thin pieces can be broken by finger pressure. Very Soft Can be carved with a knife and excavated with a pick point. Pieces 1-in. or more in thickness can be broken with finger pressure. Con be scratched easily by fingernail. WEATHERING: The action of organic and inorganic find rhemiral nnd physical processes resulting in alteration of color, texture and composition. Fresh— FR No visible sign of alteration, except perhaps slight discoloration on major discontinuity surfaces. Slight— SL Discoloration of rock material and discontinuity surfaces. Moderate— MOD Less than half the rock material decomposed to soil. Some fresh rock; continuous "framework". High— HIGH More than half the rock material decomposed and/or disintegrated to soil. Fresh rock corestones or discontinuous "framework". Complete— COMP All rock material disintegrated to soil, but mass still intact. Residual Soil All rock material converted to soil. Volume of mass changed, but material has not been significantly transported. COLOR: Basic colors and combinations: gray, light gray, brown, red— brown. TEXTURED Size, shape and arrangements of constituents. Aphanitic Individual grains invisible (igneous/metamorphic only). Fine— grained Grains barely visible to the unaided eye, up to 1/16 in. diameter. Medium— grained Grains between 1/16 and 3/16 in. diameter Coarse— grained Grains between 3/16 and 1/4 in. diameter Very Coarse- Grains larger than 1/4 in.grained BEDDING: Term Inches Term Inches Extremely thin < 0.75 Thick 24-80 Very thin 0.75-2.5 Very thick 80-240 Thin 2.5-8 Extremely thick >240 Medium 9-24 ^•^M^HHUKBfflHI1. Logs of subsurface explorations depict soil, rock and groundwater conditions only at the locations specified on the dates indicated. Subsurface conditions may vary at other locations and at •^UUUUI other times. ^^^^SS^g 2. The stratification lines designating the interface between soil types on the logs of borings and on the subsurface profile represent approximate boundaries. The transition between material may be gradual. 3. Water levels noted on the logs were measured at the times and under the conditions indicated. During test borings, these water levels could have been affected by the introduction of water TEST BORING KEY into the borehole, extraction of tools o other procedures and thus may not reflect actual groundwater level at the test boring location. Groundwater level fluctuations may also occur as a result of variations in precipitation, temperature, season, adjacent construction activities and pumping of water supply wells and construction dewatering systems. UUJHWMUMD ENQNGBONC* SaunoM USCS_TB3 USCSLIB3GLB USCSTBC3-GDT G:\PROJECTS\26713C~1\LOGS\26713.GPJ Jul11.02•MiiHia TEST BORING REPORT Project Cannon Road Lift Station Cannon Rd. Extension, Carlsbad, California Client Camp Dresser & McKee Inc. Contractor Pacific Drilling Casing Type NA Inside Diameter ( n.) Hammer Weight (Ib.) Hammer Fall (in.) £Q. 8 -15- 1 7 9 9 5 5 5 <B ^ ~°-m S-l 18 S-2 18 Q.£E o.CO (BCOD 5.0 6.5 10.0 11.5 Well DiagramLL INSTALLEDNO WESampler S 1 3/8 140 30 Elev./Depth(ft.)20.0 15.0 USCS SymbolSM SM Barrel - Drilling Equipment and Procedures Rig Make & Model: Tripod Bit Type: Cutting Head Drill Mud: None Casing: Hoist/Hammer: Cat-Head Doughnut Hammer Visual-Manual Identification and Description (Density/consistency, color, GROUP NAME, max. particle size**, structure, odor, moisture, optional descriptions, geologic interpretation) Solid stem auger advanced to 5 ft. Medium dense, light brown to brown, silty SAND (SM), dry, no odor, MPS= 1 mm. -COLLUVIUM- Loose, light brown to brown, silty SAND (SM), moist, no odor, MPS = 1 mm. Solid stem augers advanced to 15 ft. Augers wet at a depth of 12-ft. \Boring collapsed at 12 ft. / End of exploration at 15 ft. Hole backfilled with cuttings. Water Level Data Date 11/12/01 Time 0845 Elapsed Time (hr. 0 Depth (ft.) to: Bottom of Casino Bottom ... . of Hole Water 12 11.5 Sample Identification O Open End Rod T Thin Wall Tube U Undisturbed Sample S Split Spoon G Geoprobe Boring No. HA-101 File No. 26713-005 Sheet No. 1 of 1 Start November 12, 2001 Finish November 12, 2001 Driller Gordie/Andreas H&A Rep. B. Barry Elevation 35.0 Datum Location See Boring Location Plan Gravel % Coarse% FineSand 2 S ! 15 u. 60 78 VIIDcIT 25 22 Field Test DilatancyToughnessPlasticityO)c(D 55 Well Diagram Summary LUJ Riser Pipe Overburden (lin. ft.) 151 3 1 Screen v ' E3 Filter Sand Rock Cored (lin. ft.) EyZ] Cuttings Samples 2 [Max Giuut EZD concrete Boring No. HA-101 ^S Bentonite Seal Field Tests: Dilatancy: R-Rapid, S-Slow, N-None Plasticity: N-Nonplastic, L-Low, M-Medium, H-High Toughness: L-Low. M-Medium. H-High Dry Strength: N-None. L-Low. M-Medium. H-Hiah. V-Very Hiah "SPT = Sampler blows per 6 in. "Maximum particle size (mm) is determined by direct observation within the limitations of sampler size (in millimeters). Note: Soil identification based on visual-manual methods of the USCS as practiced bv Halev & Aldrich. Inc. TEST BORING REPORT m m mm 1i BORING NO. HAB-1 PROJECT LOCATION CLIENT CONTRACTOR DRILLER Cannon Road Carlsbad. California Camp Dresser & McKee Tri-Counry Drilling Daniel H&A FILE NO. PROJECT MGR. FIELD REP. DATE STARTED DATE FINISHED 26713-005 G. Raines 1/22/2002 Elevation Inildei Diameter lin.l Hammer Weiohtllb.1 Hammer Fall lln.l Depth (ft.) - 15 - - 20 - - 25 - - 30 - Sampler Blows per 6 in. 8 10 14 16 46 50/3" 40 50/4" 34 50/5" Date 1/22/2002 Casin tl. iDatui 30 Sample No. 1 Recovery (in.) S-l 18" S-3 18" S-4 16" S-5 14" S-6 14" Elapsed Time (hr.) Samoler Core Barrel 2.5" Sample Depth (ft.) 5 65 10 11.5 15 16.5 20 21.5 25 26.5 Rio Make & Model Well Diagram gscuttg backfillednstalled, borNo weBorino Location CME-95 (3 Truck Q Tripod D ATV d Geoprobe D Track D Air Track D Skid D Stratum Chang* (ft.) Water Level Data Depth in feet to: Bottom of Casing Bottom or Holt uses Symbol D Cat-Head D Winch D Roller Bit 3 Culling Head Hammer TVM D Safety D Doughnut B Automatic Drlllino Mud Bentonile Polymer None Casino Advance Tvoe Method Deoth Drilling Notes: Visual-Manual Identification & Description (density/consistency, color. GROUP NAME « SYMBOL, maximum particle size'. structure. odor, moisture, optional descriptions, geologic interpretation) Soil surface • hand auger to 0-2* FILL mixed with weathered sandstone and claystone, tight brown fine grain, moist (1.5- 2') gray FILL silty sand mixed with clay weathered clasts some oxidation staining (2-3.5') medium dense, brown FILL some gray weathered clasts of sandstone (5-6.5) medium dense, mottled dark gray and black FILL interbedded clayey sand - very moist, some wood fragments weathered clasts of silty sandstone (10-11.5') medium dense, mottled olive brown, FILL Fine to medium grained, very moist, weathered formation ctasts oxidation staining (note: percentages based on laboratory test results) approx depth to water 15' (1 5 - 16.5) very dense, very dark brown weathered SANDSTONE coarse to medium grain sand with silt at 15.5-16' color contact light gray grades into SILTSTONE/CLAYSTONE very fine grained, powder like, at about 16.25' dry. BEDRCK (20-21.5') same as above, very dense, light gray, moist SILTSTONE/CLAYSTONE breaks along relatively lohzontal bedding plane - appears crystalline when moist, powder like when dry (25-26.5') same as above SILTSTONE/CLAYSTONE except some fine fractures, oxidation stained, very fine grained cuttings - dark grey "plastic" Sample ID 0 Open End Rod T Thin Wall Tube U Undisturbed Sample s Split Spoon Sample G Geoprobe Dilatancy: Toughness: R- Rapid S-Slow N-None L - Low M - Medium H - High Well Diagram LllLl Riser Pipe LM] Screen EH Filter Sand E3 Cuttings CD Grout CD Concrete ES3 Bentonite Seal Summary Overburden (Linear ft) Rock Cored (Linear ft.) Number of Samples BORING NO.HAB-1 Plasticity: N-Nonplastic L-Low M - Medium H - High Dry Strength: N - None L - Low M - Meduim H - High V - Very High •NOTE: Maximum Particle Size is determined bv direct observation within the limitations of samoler size. NOTE: Soil identifications based on visual-manual methods of the USCS svstem as oracticed bv Halev & Aldrich. Inc. • m m mM mI 1i |^}yg£j] TEST BORING REPORT — Depth (ft.) _ 30 — - 35 - - 40 - - - - Sampler Blows per 6 in. 36 50/4" 45 50/4" 50/5" Sample No. & Recovery (In.) S-7 14" S-8 12" S-9 6" Sample Depth (ft.) 30 31 5 35 36.5 40 40.5 Well Diagram onbOC 3 O 4-1 T3 O 03JD bO.fi O r\ T3Qi ^34-> W.s 13 0 Stratum Change USCS Symbol BEDRCK BEDHCK BEDRCK BEDRCK Visual-Manual Identification & Description (density/consistency, color. GROUP NAME & SYMBOL, maximum particle size*, structure, odor, moisture, optional descriptions, geologic interpretation) (30-31 .5) very dense, dark olive gray clay® 30.5 - very moist to wet some oxidation stained in fractures at 31' SILTSTONE - dark gray, very fine grained, moist cutttings * very dark gray, "clayey material" medium low plasticity SANTIAGO FORMATION (35-36') very dense dark bluish gray SILTSTONE - "slary" cleavage, very fine grained (36- 36.4') contact, light yellowish brown SILTSTONE/CLAYSTONE fine grained dry to slightly moist very dense, gray SILTSTONE same as 35-36', "SLATY" cleavage, moist End of exploration @40.5' NOTES: Gravel s a |1 uf BORING NO. HAB-t paae 2 of 2 and | * . * i f Field Test S 1 N \ | 3 1 M 1 1 M FILE NO. 26713-005 BORING NO. HAB-1 •NOTE: Maximum Particle Size is determined bv direct observation within the limitations of samoler size. NOTE: Soil Identifications based on visual-manual methods of the USCS svstem as oracticed bv Halev & Aldrfch. Inc. mm m M 1i 3 I M m mi M IMMMB TEST BORING REPORT PROJECT LOCATION CLIENT CONTRACTOR DRILLER Cannon Road Carlsbad, California Camp Dresser & McKee Tri-County Drilling Mike Elevation 26 « JDatum Borina Location lt*m Tvo* Inside Diameter lln.l Hammer W*taht lib.) Hammer Fall lln.l Depth (ft.) _ 0 - - S - - 10 - - 15 - - 20 - - 25 - - 30 - Sampler Blows per 6 in. 10 10 12 4 8 13 5 8 12 4 5 7 4 5 7 3 5 8 Dal* Tim* 1/23/2002 Casino Samoler Cora Barrel Rio Make & Model NA D Truck D Tripod 2.5" 0 ATV D Geoprobe 140 D Track D Air Track 30 D Skid D Sample No. & Recovery (In.) S-I 18" S-2 15" S-3 14" si NR S-5 12" S-6 18" Water L Elapsed Tim* (hr.) Sample D*pth(ft.) 2 3.5 5 6.5 10 11.5 15 16.5 20 21.5 25 26.5 Well Diagram No well Installed, boring backfilled with cuttingsStratum Chang* (ft.) 5.0 15.5 25.0 jvelData Depth In feet to: Bottom of Casing Bottom of Hole Water 14.5 USCS Symbol SM SC SC SM SC/CL SC ML H Cat-Head D Winch Q Roller Bit U Cutting Head H&A FILE NO. PROJECT MGR. FIELD REP. DATE STARTED DATE FINISHED Hammer Tvo* O Safety D Doughnut [21 Automatic BORING NO. HAB-2 Paae 1 Of z 26713-005 G. Raines J. Blackman 1/23/2002 1/23/2002 Drillina Mud Q Bentonite D Polymer 3 None Cas no Advance Tvoe Method Deoth HAS Drilling Notes: Visual-Manual Identification & Description (density/consistency, color. GROUP NAME & SYMBOL, maximum particle size*, structure, odor, moisture, optional descriptions, geologic kiterpretation) Hand Auger to 2.5 ft, then drove sampler for first sample medium dense, brown, FILL, silty sand, fine to medium sand, dry to moist, oxidation staining FILL (5-6.5') medium dense, brown, FILL clayey sand, very fine to medium sand, very moist (10-1 1 .5') medium dense, light brown to brown, FILL, clayey SAND very fine to fine sand, traces of non plastic fines. (note: percentages based on laboratory test results) approx depth to water 14.5' (15-16.5) loose to medium dense, light brown, silty SAND, very fine to fine sand, saturated medium dense, grayish to dark brown, clayey SAND/ sandy CLAY, very fine sand, traces of non plastic silts ALLUVIUM (20-21.5') loose to medium dense, medium to light brown, clayey SAND, moist. At 20.5 poorly graded SAND with silt, medium to fine sand, wet. 125-26.5') loose to medium dense.dark olive brown, sandy SIILT medium to coarse sand, very moist to wet. (note: percentages based on laboratory test results) in tip of sample, dark brown, coarse sand, wet. Loose to medium dense, dark brown, sandy CLAY, very fine to tine sand Sample ID O Open End Rod T Thin Wall Tube U Undisturbed Sample S Split Spoon Sample G Geoprobe Field Tests Oilatancy: R - Rapid S - Slow N - None Plasticity: Toughness: L - Low M - Medium H - High Dry Strength: N Well Diagram LLl!l Riser Pipe CHD Screen EZU Filter Sand EZ3 Cuttings O Grout G3 Concrete fS Bentonite Seal Qnwe*KJBOO %1 Sand j 5 I s 15 : 20 48 20 U. 65 5 20 70 35 I 20 44 30 10 52 40 FWd Test OilatancyS S s" R S s 1 L L L L L L f 1 L L N H N N N i L L Summary Overburden (Linear ft.) Rock Cored (Linear ft.) Number of Samples BORING NO.HAB-2 N - Nonplastic L - Low M - Medium H - High -None L-Low M-Meduim H-High V- Very High •NOTE: Maximum Particle Size is determined bv direct observation within the limitations of samoler size. NOTE: Soil identifications based on visual-manual methods of the USCS svstem as practiced bv Halev i Aldrich. Inc. m P m m Pi pi 1jj^^j IplrMKNIH gj|jgg[SJJ TEST BORING REPORT — Depth (ft.) - 30 - - 35 - _ 40 - — - - Sampler Blows per 6 in. 4 9 16 50V5.5- 50/4- Sample No. & Recovery (in.) S-7 14" S-8 5.5" S-9 0" Sample Depth (ft.) 30 31.5 35 36.5 40 .'.. . Well Diagram onbO.S 3O o JD S 'C0 — •)->co .S 13 0 Stratum Change (ft.) USCS Symbol SM SP/SM BEDRCK BEDRCK Visual-Manual Identification 4 Description (density/consistency, color. GROUP NAME & SYMBOL, maximum particle size', structure, odor, moisture, optional descriptions, geologic interpretation) (30-31 5') @" 30.0--medium dense, light brown, sitly SAND, very tine 10 fine sand.very moist, SANDSTONE ©"30-5- medium dense, brown, poorly grade SAND with silt. fine to medium sand, very moist to wet. ALLUVIUM sand coarse, saturated. Started drilling harder approx. 33.5' SANDSTONE (35-36.5') hard, tan, poorly graded SAND, line to coarse sand. moist, SANDSTONE SANTIAGO FORMATION weathered bedrock Appears to be same as above SANDSTONE No Recovery End of exploration 040.5 NOTES:RLENO- 26713^)05 Gravel io 5u. BORING NO. HAB-2 paae i nt i Sand S E 1 10 5 LL 60 85 | 30 10 Field Test DllauncyS R 1 L L a. N N SS BORING NO. HA&-2 'NOTE: Maximum Particle Size is determined bv direct observation within the limitations of samoler size. NOTE: Soil identifications based on visual-manual methods of the USCS system as oractlced bv Halev & Aldrich. Inc. APPENDIX C Geotechnical Laboratory Test Results 4.0 SHEAR STRESS IN KSFf\3b o4.0 Et, CO ' 2 COCOw 2.0 E-CO w XCO .00 .( ^ ^] 1 .0 2.0 4 j .0 6 NORMAL STRESS f JX*£&>*--rG i .^L-&-&~s rg^-^e-f 4""^-I L— I "ar f^ ^-\ -S r=n^-: h n n r,' O w ^ r^= A - X r-l [-1 r DO .06 .12 j i i .0 8.0 10.0 IN KSF ^ A A 9-B-E35~0^)| i i • 8 .24 .30 : HORIZONTAL DEFORMATION IN INCH i BORING/SAMPLE : HAB2-51 DESCRIPTION : STRENGTH INTERCEPT (C) : FRICTION ANGLE (PHI) : MOISTURE DRY DENSITY SYMBOL CONTENT ($) (pcf) O 18.7 116.3 . D 20.2 113.1 A 20.7 117.0 Remark : DEPTH (ft) : 5' | i 1 097 KSF • ??'7 DEG (PEAK STRENGTH) ; i VOID NORMAL PEAK RESIDUAL ; RATIO STRESS (ksf) SHEAR (ksf) SHEAR (ksf) • .395 .434 .387 1.00 1.59 1.45 ! 2.00 1.79 1. 68 3.00 2.43 2.42 Pro], 071 mts-02 Cannon 'Road Lift Station ALLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS, INC. DTP]FTT SHE AR TEST FLaurp No ALLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS, INC. GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION JOB SAMPLE JOB NO.. BY i <3L 36' 18" "•" 24" '2- <?• IP* ' M70 • ^nW. Vs^^ ^^BO " •10 • mSt mm IS 7 8 S 4 i 2 90 IOC _ * 2 J.1n v»- ^i- : a 7 S S 4 3 2 c /4- ?i _ »i •% 0 t-. it Of 1 S' S 4 J 2 1 Grain Siz 20 98 £ MC •"0 V *1\\ I 7" ( 1 . <77 v: , > * \ \ : «o 2 ! A _«,OQ_ «2 | [ \ X 1 > 4 J 2 m) 9 CX) ' j. 2~~ 1 I i I: i 2 (Minutes) S 30 ISO : 1 5 ; ; •I : 478 5 «' 3 2 01 r 1 it j •i i "s • 1 11 -80 : / : f ' :i •; i : i4• • 1 -! i .; 412 .oc 90 80 70 :50^ 40C 20 10 0 31 XCO1<r LUH-LL H CD HI $ 1-Hl ^ Xtoi _ BEFOREH- XCD HI HHl X CO 1cc LU LL Xg HI £ •^£ a XCO1 HI CC OLL HI CD 5 <r- X CD HI ^a:Q LU 0. 7 CO 5 CO Q. LU-JQ. S CO 3 CO 32i Q CO cn CO CO ^Q. ^a LUK S? LU H ^ COCO Q. 3? 1- LUir 3? HI £ 3 LU LU 55 H LU >| TOTAL DF: : : ^ ': - : , ' ' : • i : i 1 . i i ' < : i - ; : . ; . : j • i : • • I [ : : ' , | ; ; : . 1 ; - : ' •. i , ! ! : j . '. : 1 '. : . • : ' ; : : : i ; ' ; ; i ; : : • i i : ; '• i S i : : . ; ' ' ' ; i '• '' : ; : • ; i : • ' . '. : t 1 • : > : \ M '^ (T^'D-'O^ ^~^ ; ; i ' j £'£r^ '^(dc^-v^ ^\ ^ ill' | - ! • ! ' ! 1 ; ' fc^ ^^ ^^^ • ' p"^ CN *~" ,*_.! ! : ; , >v . _ Ooi i-* -> , C° 1 ' 1 ' ' \ J* ' X ** ! ^ ! • " \^\i i i | . • . - ^, ^ - c< vr : ; 1 i . I ^ ^ * ^ *i ' ' 1 - ' ' ^ INJ ' ^^ ' ^*> ^^ 1 • ; i ' CO ! U3 [ ^f !cO C4lT*'^"iO OjO;%;^ % 3fc : % ' % • afc ; S ' S r~z 0 LU 2>irQ oZ tz LUHIII 1 HYDROMLU H 0z Q£ < <n CO 0 o CLOf •»| HYGROSt11 1- LU OV.LUQ. -1 S HO trX.oo Q LU IT LUS CO Q. _1 LU Q i ' • : , ( 1 t ', , : • : : 1 Z;ziz'iz"z:z Z z !*" M"* 1 1 ' 1 ' ' i | : i ' : : i i ALLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS, INC. GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION JOB SAMPLE JOB NO. BY _ 36- 18- v2' 1' kz' c" 24' 12- §' 3" 1^' V *V id PM ' H70 - m- i P Hj. If * Pbc> •M i . : ;l •\ BS 7 6 5 4 i 2 98 7 5 5 4 J 2 1 0 0 100 IO V** « —« II 6 " ^ i" 1 4 £ «i -1«^v3 0 ^ »c JMg 3 MO "SO "JO »SO «IQO a?CX) ' >i | c ^s \ ,III; i i \ Sss >*, i i 2 as 7 6 S 4 i 2 Frt?//? >S/^tf ^/77/ny i ; •«!* j 9 •; I 't '" ,.- 1 2 ~ (Minutes) S 3O 180 >4 ': 1 . 2! s // 1 J ! : 1 * i 2 011* 1 ' 3 r ^ ," KO / 1 I : 1 ; 1 • . ' • ;i 1 1 '-' II | ; 4 3 2 .0 405 •» 30^' 10 UJ a.< CO*t% CO 3 a. UJ-ia. < CO ^3 CO i Q CO c/i d COCO<a. *? HUJ K 3? L^ UJ K C •^ COCOrf £ ^ H UJ Of ^ H 11 1 OS H ? UJ UJ CO H X UJ Vrr Q _i < O : ; ' i : : : '• \ • i . i 1 : . i , | •; , ' ; : S ! ' ' '•• i : ; . , i : ! • <v ^ jl^aoi^^ ^^*- ^M'» - ' . -t • XCKfN^Tta «SorK«Xv v\: ^* ; . 1 : • ^ v. :^- in ' > .^ "s <» : >J, . * . , . . , . -^ -*>ro.>!fH>ri:^^^«p ; ; .. •: -?^;^-^ •; '$:'" .v'.i v^.^1^ ^ vo•1^ ^i^ ^;(M>^ > . \ • ' s j iio : i • j | - !- <!. ,. . ;«.. SiUJlrt „!— °|^ 2i2 S °'°«J;«i^r|co c< T-: r- d:did %;%%!% %j5 % 5t'% : i | ! i • ; 1 ! '• | 1 ; ! | i 1 ! O UJ >K.Q d Z ccIII HIII-s.oEC Q X UJ5 021 £< CO t/1 0 O Q. On COO£ (3 X Is §5 1-z UJ 0cc UJ Q. _1 <3 0 < od IToo Q< UJir UJ5 H CO 0.< UJ < Q 1 , z z z z z z'z z 5 15 5 SS |S 2 - ™ * « S S'3'°^ n " S:5 i ' 1 ! ! ; . : i : CO1tr LUi_u.< h- O LU 1— LU WASHK LU r~u.< t- O LU CC Q X CO LUccou. LU CD CO< LU ECOLL LU CD H |_ o o LU LU % § LU QC Q ALLIED GEOTECHN1CAL ENGINEERS, INC. GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION JOB SAMPLE JOB NO. BY , 24" 12" 6" 3" \\ m \t \ mPtVOOC r •2' Kz" ^' 1 7 6 S 4 J 2 9S 7 6 5 4 3 Z 0 100 0 1 /i " ^M . ... "1 »l) ~>; 3 — — , »2 -*-. 1 2 3 *JO »60 *30 *50 fc • «>">" sx,• \ JLflQ..." i \ < \ J J 4 1 2 a (X) ' • 87t i"3 1 • T 2 2 S (Minutes) 10 I«O 14 5 1 1 2 ^ oiJ i « 7 Q r >" 1 wo . : ,. I '-: 1?i! 4 J 2 .0 90 SO 70 40 C 20 10 O 31 (mm) *™ •« _ — i» •w -•I •1 H M •1 *• •• CO 1 QC UJt Io UJ UJ XCO1 EFORECD H- 0 UJ UJ XCO1o:Ul u. X0 HI ono xCO1 UJtr0u. UICO?l 1 XCD UJ onQ UJ 0. ^to CO 3a. UIjQ.g <CO 3 CO z i COCO a.^p°s H- UJ OL ul(Z• t > COCO a. 3? HUJtr UJa: ^^ Q CO UJ CO UJ f WEIGHT/y r^| TOTAL ICD I »,CM "S • I in o tn o % . in CO o ^ ^ ^ ^ (ft * tv. ^t 00 M ^ < bo 8 5. •s. ; 1 ?w <3 cn ^*, X. ^0 >> ^ O (O of*>o «^rv >i ^ om K. Vo ci da 0o IV en . 5j V, c 0 RY WEIGH!a Oz OLMi III 25 UJ I— O _ STAR™(Oo oa.O( >to 1HYDROHYGRO<f Q^ H-ZUJ Oa UJa. _, ^ ^o Q£ OO O 55a: UlS LAPSEUJH Q Z Z i CM 1 Zi m Z V) Z oCO 1 Z O(0 z E oinCM 1 Z c ~ I i ALLIED GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS, INC. GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION SAMPLE JOB NO. BY 6 S 4 3 ; • 2 98 78543 2 0100 0 ' S1 S 4 i 2 Grain X CO<£ a: UJ LL ^ H- o UJ£ LU X CO<£ UJ LT 0LL UJ CQ K X O UJ 1- LU x CO ^QL UJ LL t- o LU OLQ CO ^LUtroa.LU CQ Xo LU ce Q UJ a.& (0 en 3 a. UJ a. S CO 3 CO3 2i (OCO ^a.^Ps^ HUJ K UJ c^^ COCO a. °* HLUIT 35 UJ H Q CO UJ co ujd co *Y WEIGHTQ 0 1 •1 16 5/^ff 7 S S i 43 2 i»»78 S .: T I 1 1 ' ' 2 o j i r 7 6 S 4 J i ? li 40 1 0 2 U .001 f/7?/77// : i , • • • . : ' ! ' : •'•'.!• • 'i : •• : ; illJgS^ 1 <0 « Tf CO <NT^ V- O' O "^ v <S. * < 1 S* ^ ^ f ^ iS V« * ' <v<* \ ^ <? ' /d ^^ r v^ -.Vi 4 ", i>4 ->. i~'\-^.. ' *^^ N- X 0 <tO : : i i* * CD UJ KQ 0 (£. UJ 111 1 HYDROMUJ5 ^0 Z QC « COo S O 0r ^| HYGROStQ 5. HZUloct UJQ. D 0 o:a:Oo a UJX UJ«:i LAPSEUJ O !• *z iN z ; t '• •! " ! ^2:' S ," . ^ . ^« • m m APPENDIX D Corrosion Laboratory Test Results ii mm mi m mm m m Colorado Analytical laboratories. Inc.LABORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT REPORT TO: MINAL PAREKH BILL TO: HALEY & ALDRICH 110 16TH STREET, SUITE 900 DENVER, CO 80202 PROJECT: CANNON ROAD LIFT STATION 26713-005 LAB NO: DATE RCVD: REPORTED: PO NO.: 9157 5/31/02 6/11/02 VERBAL m m m """PARAMETER RESISTIVITY •"kEDOX POTENTIAL MOISTURE """SULFATE •"^H SULFIDE ""CHLORIDE METHOD REFERENCE AASHTOT288-91 ASTM D1498 ASTMD2216 ASHTO T290-91 ASHTOT289-91 DIPRA AASHTOT291-91 MINIMUM REPORTING LIMIT 1 1 0.1 0.001 0.1 0.0001 REPORTING UNITS OHM.CM mv DRY WT. % PERCENT UNITS QUALITATIVE PERCENT 'METHOD REFERENCE: AASHTO = "STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR TRANSPORTATION MATERIALS AND METHODS OF SAMPLING AND TESTING"; 16TH EDITION, 1993; AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF STATE HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION OFFICIALS. ASTM = "1992 ANNUAL BOOK OF ASTM STANDARDS"; VOL. 04.08 AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR TESTING & MATERIALS; 1992; R.A. STORER DIPRA = "DUCTILE IRON PIPE RESEARCH ASSOCIATION HANDBOOK OF DUCTILE IRON PIPE"; 6TH EDITION; 1982; AWWA. A/K- "ANALYSIS SUPERVISED BY m m m mhi TA APPROVED FOR RELEASE BY /. _;.,-,—. A —n-"-<~ c "~ ' — ' i —•* *~1 V *~i i i/; —' 1. i!_ *—v ^. ^_. — i — . . . '• • • — *J A ^^ -—J • Page 1 of3 , Colorado 30301-0507 / 3G3-S59-2313 :o-:. CoioPado 3G501-G5G7 / -ax: 3G3-S5S-23' Colorado Analytical Laboratories, Inc. & ALDR1CH MINAL PAREKH ««5/l1/02 PROJECT: CANNON ROAD LIFT STATION 26713-005 «" SATURATED NATURAL „, pH CHLORIDE SULFATE RESISTIVITY RESISTIVITY SAMPLE ID (UNITS1 (%) (%) (OHM.CM^ (OHM.CM) •i [AB-1AS-1/S-2/S-3/S-4COMP 7.6 0.0492 0.040 483 1,107 m m m m Page 2 of3 South Man Street / Brighton, Colorado 30501 -0507 / 303-659-2313 Colorado Analytical • ^Laboratories, Inc.HALEY & ALDR1CH "MINAL PAREKH ,6/11/02 PROJECT: CANNON ROAD LIFT STATION 26713-005 •SAMPLE ID 'HAB-IA s-i/s-2/s-3/s-4 COMP REDOX POTENTIAL (mv) 280 SULFIDE (QUAD medium MOISTURE 13.5 P m m m m mm Page 3 of3 m 4G Soucn Main 5-reet; / =-:cTCon, Colorado 3DSG1-G5G7 / 303-555-23"< 3 .C Ac^-esE: P.D. 3^x 5G7 B^shto1-., ColGreoc 3053' -G5G7 / Fax: 3G3-55S-S3