HomeMy WebLinkAbout; Kiko Residence; Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation; 2002-06-05CITY OF CARLSBAD
GRADING INSPECTION CHECKLIST
FOR PARTIAL SITE RELEASE
PROJECT IMRPFCTOR- /Z^^^U /^.^/^q-
PROJECT \^^OF^2 '^-y
LOTS REQUESTED FOR RELEASE:.
N/A = NOT APPLICABLE
V = COMPLETE
.GRADING PERMIT HO?±^^£B&.^
1st 2nd.
1. Site access to requested lots adequate and logically grouped
2. Site erosion control measures adequate.
3. Overall site adequate for health, safety and welfare of public.
4. Letter from Owner/Dev. requesting partial release of specific lots, pads
or bidg.
5. 8V^" X 11" site plan (attachment) showing requested lots submitted.
6. Compaction report from soils engineer submitted. (If soils report has
been submitted with a previous partial release, a letter from soils
engineer referencing the soils report and identifying specific lots for
release shall accompany subsequent partial releases).
7. EOW certification ofwork done with finish pad elevations of specific lots
to be released. Letter must state lot (s) is graded to within a tenth (.1) of
the approved grading plan.
8. Geologic engineer's letter if unusual geologic or subsurface conditions
exist.
9. Fully functional fire hydrants within 500 feet of building combustibles
and an alt weather roads access to site is required.
V~p(^ Partial release of grading for the above stated lots is approved for the purpose of building
I I permit issuance. Issuance of building permits is still subject to all nonmal City
requirements required pursuant to the building pennit process.
• Partial release of the site is denied for the foilowing reasons:
Project Inspector
nstruction Manager
Date
3/^yoz
Date
, ~:LEiMASTER, FC.rNS.AFTSiTE, FRM
WOLF DESIGN»BUIL
WOLFRAM KALBER DESIGNER & GENERAL CONTRACTOR
FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL SHEET
TO: FROM:
DAVID DATES Wo^Kalber
COMPANY: DATE:
COY OF CARLSBAD MARCH/07/06
1
PHONE NUMSER: SENDeR-S RGPeRENCE NUMBER:
RE: VOUR REFERENCE NUMBER:
PAD RELEASE
Ea URGENT • FOR REVIEW • PLEASE COMMENT H PLEASE REPLY • PLEASE RECYCLE
NOTES/COIMilEfn'S:
ATTENTION DAVID DATES
CITY INSPECrrOR
CITYOFCARLSBAD
PUBLK) WORKS/ ENGINEERING DEPT.
REGARDING;
WE ARE REQUESTING FOR RELEASE ON LOT 1 OF 1. DRAWING NUMBER G1 .G2,G3
OF THE SET OF PLANS.
THE PROJECT NUMBER IS CDP 02-28
PROJECT TITLE IS WKO RESIDENCE
2640 OCEAN STREET, CARLSBAD . CA92008
APN 203140-09
THANKYOU FOR YOUR CCX)PERATiON. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, PLEASE
CALLAT619 9fl2-32Bfl.
SINCERELY,
WOLFRAM KALBER
OCEAN
-s s-
n.6% EXST.
GRADE OH CL S t\R E E T
-S--
San Diego Land Surveying and Engineering, Inc
9665 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 445, San Diego, California 92123-1354
Phone (858)-565-8362 Fax (858)-565-4354
http://www.sdlse.com e-mail: jnfo@sdlse.coni
OFFICERS & DIRECTORS
HERMAN W. BATEMAN, P.LS. 4605
ROBERT J. BATEMAN, P.L.S. 7046
MICHAEL L. SMITH, R.C.E. 35471
MEMBERS OF:
CALIFORNIA LAND SURVEYORS ASSOCIATION
AMERICAN CONGRESS ON SURVEYING & MAPPING
SAN DIEGO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
LICENSED BY THE BOARD OF REGISTRATION FOR
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS AND
LAND SURVEYORS
February 24, 2006
City of Carlsbad
Public Work-Engineering
5950 El Camino Real
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Re: 2649 Ocean Street
GR 050062
Attention: David Date, Inspection
We have taken elevations on the building pad for the above reference site on February 23, 2006 and
found it to be within plus or minus 0.10 of a foot ofthe design pad elevation of 22.70.
If you have any questions, please contact me at 858-565-8362 ext. 102.
Sincerely,
Herman W. Bateman
PARCEL MAPS • SUBDIVISIONS • CONDOMINIUM & PROPERTY SURVEYS • A.L.T.A. SURVEYS • GRADING & IMPROVEMENT PLANS
GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC.
SOIL & FOUNDATION ENGINEERING • GROUNDWATER
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS IVIANAGEMENT • ENGINEERING GEOLOGY
07 February 2006
Mr. Frederick Kiko
3561 Donna Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Job No. 02-8201
Subject: Rouoh Gradina Compietion of Building Pad
Proposed Kiko Residence
2649 Ocean Street
Carlsbad, California
Dear Mr. Kiko:
As requested, we herein confirm that rough grading has been completed at the new
residence pad location at the subject site. The recently completed rough grading
was performed under periodic observations and soil testing by representatives of
our firm. The new residence's basement subgrade elevation was cut to planned
grade and no compaction tests were performed in the dense formational soils.
Three sides of the basement excavation are protected with soldier pile and lagging
shoring.
A seawall was built under periodic observations of our field representative in the
western area of the site (rear yard and beach). The backfill soils of the seawall
consisted of crushed rock gravel (to be capped later with compacted on-site soils).
Only the upper few feet of the rear yard fiatwork improvement (deck) soils were
tested for compaction, since they were the only fill soils placed thus far. A list of
test results is attached herewith as Plate I. We are issuing this letter so that
construction for the building pad may begin.
A full detailed report will be issued after all fill and backfill for trenches, retaining
walls, driveway and exterior improvements are completed. That report will include
7420 TRADE STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92121 • (858) 549-7222 • FAX: (858) 549-1604 • E-MAIL: geotech@lxpres.eom
Kiko Residence
Carlsbad, California
Job No. 02-8201
Page 2
a detailed description of the grading performed, field and laboratory test results,
and our conclusions, recommendations, and opinions of the performed work.
Recommendations presented in our previous reports for this project remain
applicable unless superseded in writing by our firm.
If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact our office. Reference
to our Job No. 02-8201 will help expedite a response to your inquiry.
Respectfully submitted,
GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION^ INC.
JatSte^fTCerros, P.E.
R.C.E. 34422/G.E. 2007
Senior Geotechnical Engineer
COMPACTION TEST RESULTS
DEPTH/ FIELD RELATIVE
ELEVATION MOISTURE DENSITY SOIL COMPACTION
TEST DATE LOCATION OF RLL (%) fDCfl TYPE (%\
1 1/25/06 Terrace Area 16.5' 7.5 118.9 2 93%
2 1/25/06 Terrace Area 18.5' 8.2 114.8 2 90%
3 1/25/06 Terrace Area 21' 7.0 116.6 2 91%
SOIL TYPE DESCRIPTION
TYPE DESCRIPTION
1 Medium Brown, Silty Sand (SM)
PCF
129.5
OMC
9%
Job No. 02-8201
Plate I
REPORT OF PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
Proposed Kiko Residence
2649 Ocean Street
Carlsbad, California
j
JOB NO. 02-8201
05 June 2002
Prepared for:
Frederick and Jessica Kil<o
GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC
SOIL & FOUNDATION ENGINEERING • GROUNDWATER
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MANAGEMENT • ENGINEERING GEOLOGY
05 June 2002
Frederick and Jessica Kiko Job No. 02-8201
3561 Donna Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Subject: Reoort of Preliminarv Geotechnical Investiaation
Proposed Kiko Residence
2649 Ocean Street
Carlsbad, California
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Kiko:
In accordance with your request and per our proposal dated January 23, 2002,
Geoteclinical Exploration^ Inc. has performed an investigation of the soil and
geologic conditions at the subject site. The field work was performed on April 5,
2002. In addition, we previously issued a document titled, "Interim Report of Site
Conditions, 2649 Ocean Street, Carlsbad, California/' dated April 17, 2002.
Based on a review of site plans prepared by WOLF Design*Build, it is our
understanding that the site is being developed to receive a single-family residence
with a 3-car attached garage, swimming pool, and associated improvements. The
residential structure is to be a maximum of two stories in height, with a mezzanine
and below-grade basement area. The structure wiil be constructed of standard-
type building materials utilizing slab-on-grade, with conventional continuous
foundations and retaining wall foundation systems.
Our investigation revealed that the site is underiain by medium dense to dense
terrace and formational materials overlain by approximately Vh to 4V2 feet of loose
to medium dense fill soil. In order to reduce the effects of potential settlement, we
recommend that the upper 2 to 5 feet of surficial soils be removed and
recompacted to provide a more uniform, firm soil base for the proposed structure
and improvements. It is our understanding that the proposed construction of the
two basement levels wil! result in the removal of al! of the existing loose surface
soils. In the seawall location, dense formational material was encountered at a
relatively shallow depth.
J 7420 TRADE STREET • SAN DIEGO. CA 92121 • (858) 549-7222 • FAX: (858) 549-1604 • E-MAIL: geotech@ixpres.eom
J
In our opinion, if the conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are
implemented during site preparation, the site will be suited for the proposed
development.
This opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. Should you have any
questions concerning the following report, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Reference to our Job No. 02-8201 will expedite a response to your inquiries.
Respectfully submitted,
GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC.
JaHTre-ArTerros, P.E.
R.C.E. 34422/G.E. 2007
Senior Geotechnical Engineer
JKH/JAC/LDR/pj
fZ.
Sj; NO.0020C7 ,
^xZz^''''z.i:i
S:^!ie D. Reed, P^ident
C.E.G. 999cexp. 3-31-D31/R.G. 3391
J
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. SCOPE OF WORK
II. SITE DESCRIPTION
III. FIELD INVESTIGATION
IV. LABORATORY TESTS
V. GENERAL GEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC GEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
VII. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS
VIII. EARTHQUAKE RISK EVALUATION
IX. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
X. GRADING NOTES
XI. LIMITATIONS
PAGE
1
2
3
4
6
7
10
15
17
33
34
FIGURES
la. Vicinity Map
Ib. Site Plan and Geologic Map
Ic. Cross Section A-A'
Ila-f. Exploratory Boring and Handpit Logs
III. Laboratory Test Results
IV. Foundation Requirements Near Slopes
V. Retaining Wall Waterproofing and Drainage Schematic
APPENDICES
A. Unified Soil Classification System
B. EQ Fault Tables and EQ Search Tables
C. Modified Mercalli Index
D. General Earthwork Specifications
REPORT OF PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
Proposed Kiko Residence
2649 Ocean Street
Carlsbad, Caiifornia
JOB NO. 02-8201
The foliowing report presents the findings and recommendations of Geoteciinical
Exploration, Inc. for the subject project (for Vicinity Map, see Figure No. Ia).
I. SCOPE OF WORK
It is our understanding, based on communications with Mr. Wolfram Kalber, and a
review of conceptual site plans provided by Wolf Design*Buiid, that the site is
intended for the construction of a two-story, single-family residence (including an
attached 3-car garage, a lower-level basement area, a new seawall, a swimming
pool, and associated improvements (for Site Plan, see Figure No. Ib). It is our
understanding that the site will be graded to create a level building pad.
Construction of the basement levels will result in installation of permanent shoring
and the removal ofthe loose surficial soils. The residence wili utilize standard slab-
on-grade foundations and retaining walls. With the above in mind, the scope of
work is briefly outlined as follows:
1. Identify and classify the surface and subsurface soils in the area of the
proposed structures conformance with the Unified Soil Classification System
(refer to Figure No. II and Appendix A).
2. Review the site geology and make note of any faults or significant geologic
features which may affect the development of the site (refer to Appendix B).
J
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 2
i 3. Evaluate the condition of the existing fill soils, terrace deposits and
formational material.
- 4. Recommend site preparation procedures.
5. Recommend an allowable bearing pressure for the existing dense native soils
and any recompacted fill soils.
6. Evaluate the settlement potential of the existing bearing soils under the
1
]
proposed structural loads.
7. Provide preliminary foundation design information, including active and
passive earth pressures to be utilized in design of any foundation structures
and retaining walls.
II. SITE DESCRIPTION
The property is known as: Assessor's Parcel No. 203-140-09 and 10, Lots 13 and
14 of Block A, according to Map No. 1221, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San
Diego, State of California.
The site, consisting of approximately 7,000 square feet, is located at 2649 Ocean
Street, in the north Carlsbad beach area, in the City of Carlsbad, California. The
property is bordered on the north and south by developed residential properties, on
the east by Ocean Street, and on the west by the Pacific Ocean.
1
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 3
A two-story residential structure with a partial basement currentiy exists on the
site. Presently, vegetation on the site consists primarily of mature trees, decorative
shrubbery and iceplant.
The property slopes gently to moderately down to the west from Ocean Street.
Approximate elevations across the site range from a high of 40 feet above mean
sea level (MSL) near the street, to approximately 11 feet MSL in the western
portion of the site. Survey information concerning actual elevations across the site
was obtained from a "topographical survey" map by San Diego Land Surveying and
Engineers, Inc., dated February 14, 2002.
III. FIELD INVESTIGATION
Three auger borings and five exploratory handpit excavations were placed on the
site in areas where the structure, a new seawall, a swimming pool, and
improvements are to be located and where representative soi! conditions were
expected (see Figure No. Ib). The soils encountered in the exploratory borings and
handpits were observed and logged by our field representative, and samples were
taken of the predominant soils throughout the field operation. Exploratory boring
and handpit logs have been prepared on the basis of our observations and the
results have been summarized on Figure No. II. The predominant soils have been
classified in conformance with the Unified Soil Classification System (refer to
Appendix A).
In-place samples were obtained by driving a 3-inch outside-diameter (O.D.) by 2-
3/8-inch inside-diameter (I.D.) split-tube sampler a distance of 12 inches. Also, the
Standard Penetration Test was performed by using a 140-pound weight falling 30
J
Proposed Kiko Residence
Carlsbad, California
Job No. 02-8201
Page 4
inches to drive a 2-inch O.D. by 1-3/8-inch I.D. sampler tube a distance of 12
inches.
The number of blows required to drive the sampler the given distance was recorded
for use in density determination. The following chart provides an in-house
correlation between the number of blows and the relative density of the soil for the
Standard Penetration Test and the 3-inch sampler.
Soil Density 2-inch O.D. 3-inch O.D.
Designation Sampler
Blows/Foot
Sampler
Blows/Foot
Sand and Very loose 0-4 0-7
Silt Loose 5-10 8-20
Medium 11-30 21-53
Dense 31-50 54-98
Very Dense Over 50 Over 98
Clay Very Soft 0-2 0-2
Soft 3-4 3-4
Firm 5-8 5-9
Stiff 9-15 10-18
Very Stiff 16-30 19-45
Hard 31-60 46-90
Very Hard Over 60 Over 90
IV. LABORATORY TESTS
Field and laboratory tests were performed on the disturbed and relatively
undisturbed soil samples in order to evaluate their physical and mechanical
properties and their ability to support the proposed structure and improvements.
The following tests were conducted on the sampled soils:
J
Proposed Kiko Residence
Carlsbad, California
Job No, 02-8201
Page 5
1. Moisture/Density Relations (ASTM 01557-98, /Method A)
2. Moisture Content (ASTM D2216-92)
3. Standard Penetration Test and Split-Barrel Sampling
(ASTM D1586-99 and D1587-94)
4. Mechanical Analysis (ASTM D422-98)
5. Direct Shear Test (ASTM 03080-90)
The moisture content of a soil sample is a measure of the weight of water,
expressed as a percentage ofthe dry weight ofthe sample.
The relationship between the moisture and density of the soil gives qualitative
information regarding the soil strength characteristics and soil conditions to be
anticipated during any future grading operation.
The mechanical analysis was used to aid in the classification of the soils according
to the Unified Soil Classification System.
The expansion potential of soils is determined utilizing the Uniform Building Code
Test Method for Expansive Soils (UBC Standard No. 29-2). In accordance with the
UBC (Table 18-1-B), expansive soils are classified as follows:
Expansion Index Potential Expansion
0 to 20 Very low
21 to 50 Low
51 to 90 Medium
91 to 130 Hiqh
Above 130 Very hiqh
J
'^EQUIPMENT DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION DATE LOGGED
Hand Tools, Hand Auger 3' X 3' X 4' Handpit 4-5-02
• SURFACE ELEVATION GROUNDWATER DEPTH LOGGED BY
± 20' Mean Sea Level Not Encountered JKH
FIELD DESCRIPTION
AND
CLASSIFICATION
DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS
(Grain size, Density, Moisture, Color)
UJ CL
Ul S CL
c O li >-ci
S 8 o g
m o
LJJ in
—I LU
1 -
/Z<
SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, SN\ abundant
roots and sandstone fragments. Loose to medium
dense. Dry to damp. Red-brow/n and gray-brown.
FILU
TOPSOIL (Qaf)
SM
3-
FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, w/ slight silt and
some rock fragments. Medium dense (poorly
cemented). Damp. Tan-brown and orange.
TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qbp)
SW
Bottom @ 4'
5-
5 WATER TABLE
Kl LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
[H IN-PLACE SAMPLE
• DRIVE SAMPLE
H SANDCONE/F.D.T
^ ^ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
JOB NAME
Proposed Kiko Residence 5 WATER TABLE
Kl LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
[H IN-PLACE SAMPLE
• DRIVE SAMPLE
H SANDCONE/F.D.T
^ ^ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
SITE LOCATION
2649 Ocean Street, Carlsbad, Califomia
5 WATER TABLE
Kl LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
[H IN-PLACE SAMPLE
• DRIVE SAMPLE
H SANDCONE/F.D.T
^ ^ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
JOB NUMBER
02-8201
FIGURE NUMBER
Ilh
REVIEWED Br ^^^^^^
HlJ&ji C«ot»ctmlcaf
LOG No
HP-3
)
0
'^EQUIPMENT
Hand Tools, Hand Auger
DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION
3' X 3' X 3' Handpit
DATE LOGGED ^
4-5-02
SURFACE ELEVATION
?7?
GROUNDWATER DEPTH
Not Encountered
LOGGED BY
JKH
FIELD DESCRIPTION
AND
CLASSIFICATION
DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS
(Grain size, Density, Maslure, COICT)
LU SI
3 tn
LU S CL Z> 3
5: o
o s
o
oe.
< g
S 8
o
LU tn —J iU a. X
1 -
SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, w/ some roots
and rock fragments. Loose to medium dense.
Dry. Tan-gray.
FILU
WEATHERED TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qaf)
- poorly cemented.
2-
4 -
FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, w/ slight silt,
moderately well cemented. Dense. Damp.
Red-brown and orange.
^ TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qbp)
Bottom (a) 3"
SM
SM
X WATER TABLE
Kl LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
H IN-PLACE SAMPLE
• DRIVE SAMPLE
[s] SAND CONE/F.DT.
^ ^ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
JOB NAME
Proposed Kiko Residence X WATER TABLE
Kl LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
H IN-PLACE SAMPLE
• DRIVE SAMPLE
[s] SAND CONE/F.DT.
^ ^ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
SITE LOCATION
2649 Ocean Street, Carlsbad, Califomia
X WATER TABLE
Kl LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
H IN-PLACE SAMPLE
• DRIVE SAMPLE
[s] SAND CONE/F.DT.
^ ^ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
JOB NUMBER
02-8201
FIGURE NUMBER
111
REVIEWED BY ^^^^^^
illi^Ji GcoMdimcar ^iP^hrll Exptorstlon,Inc
LOG No.
HP-4
J
fEQUIPMENT DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION DATE LOGGED
Hand Tools, Hand Auger 3' X 3' X 6' Handpit 4-5-02
SURFACE ELEVATION GROUNDWATER DEPTH LOGGED BY
± 30' Mean Sea Level Not Encountered JKH
n
FIELD DESCRIPTION
AND
CLASSIFICATION
g,
LU LU CC
>- ^
CL W
a a.
UJl-JM DRY Y(pcf) ci >-ci in
o
Ci _ tl Ln DEPTH F" SYMBOL SAMPLE DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS
(Grain size, Densily, Moisture, Color) uses. IN-PLAC MOISTU IN-PLAC DENSIT' OPTIMU MOISTU MAXIML DENSIT DENSIT (%ofM. EXPAN. CONSO BLOW COUNT SAMPU (INCHE: —
1 -
2^
'ZZ
•i' ..•
•1 -^^
-•x:>,
iV--, •
'i" ?
SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, w/ abundant
roots, cobbles and rock fragments. Loose to
medium dense. Dry to damp. Gray-brown.
FILL (Qaf)
-Drain pipe encountered.
SM
3^ : -
SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, w/ some rock
fragments and large boulders (to 12" in diameter).
Medium dense. Damp. Red-brown.
SM
•
^
J' -^•^^
t;
FILL (Qaf)
4 —
J il^
SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, w/ some roots
and organics. Loose to medium dense. Dry.
Dark brown. i
SM
SM O • O
SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, w/ some roots
and organics. Loose to medium dense. Dry.
Dark brown. i
SM
SM
\ TOPSOIL /
5 -FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, w/ some coarse rock
fragments. Medium dense. Damp. Tan-brown.
c
WEATHERED TERRACE DEPOSITS
-dense Terrace Deposits encountered on the east
Ahalf of the excavation. / D
WEATHERED TERRACE DEPOSITS
-dense Terrace Deposits encountered on the east
Ahalf of the excavation. /
^ c
t-
>
r - ll
C
1 u
7 -
Bottom (g 6'
IL WATER TABLE
^ LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
[Tj IN-PLACE SAMPLE
• DRIVE SAMPLE
H SANDCONE/F.D.T.
^ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
JOB NAME
Proposed Kiko Residence IL WATER TABLE
^ LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
[Tj IN-PLACE SAMPLE
• DRIVE SAMPLE
H SANDCONE/F.D.T.
^ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
SITE LOCATION
2649 Ocean Street, Carlsbad, Califomia
IL WATER TABLE
^ LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
[Tj IN-PLACE SAMPLE
• DRIVE SAMPLE
H SANDCONE/F.D.T.
^ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
JOB NUMBER
02-8201
FIGURE NUMBER
Ilj
REVIEWED BY ^^^^^^
Ifrl^-n GeotKfmlcal MP^vU Exptoratlon,Inc.
LOG No.
HP-5
J
I
LABORATORY SOIL DATA SUMMARY
140
130
DIRECT SHEAR TEST
DATA 1 2 3
APPARENT COHESION (psf) 230
APPARENT FRICTION AXaE 39°
Gravel Sand Fines
Cofl'-se To
Medi urr, r 1 Tie
U.S. standard sieve sizes
120
110
100
90
80
SPECIFIC GRAVITY
ZERO AIR VOIDS CURVES
10 20 3D
LABORATORY COMPACTION TEST
0
a,
B
I
SOIL
TYPE SOIL CLASSIFICATION BORING
No-
TRENCH
No. DEPTH
1 FINE TO MEDIUM SAND with slight silt. Tan-
brown. TERRACE B-1 3'
2
3
SWELL TEST DATA 1 2 3
INITIAL DRY DENSITY (pcf) -
INITIAL WATER CONTENT {«) -
LOAD (psf) -
PERCENT SWELL ^, ^ <i20
FIGURE NUMBER
JOB NUMBER 02-8201
10
FOUNDATION REQUIREMENTS NEAR SLOPES
ProposBd StfuctivB
Concrete Floor Sbb
.3
J
J
0
D
Q,
.C Reinforcement of
Foundafions and Floor
Slabs Folow^ the
Reconvnendations of ttie
Arctiitect orStnjcfurol
Engineer.
Concrete Founation
1 ff" Minimum or as Deep
as Requked for Lateral
StabiHty
TOP OF COMPACTED RLL SLOPE
(Any loose soBs on ttie slope surface
stial not be considered to provide
lateral or verticai strength for ttie
foofing or for slope stabilrty. Needed
depth of imbedment stiall be measured
from competent soi.]
COMPACTED HLL SLOPE WITH
MAXIMUM INCUNATION AS
PER SOILS RB^RT.
Total Depth of Fooling
Measured from Finish Soil
Sub-Grade
Outer Most Fcce^
of Footing
TYPICAL SECTION
(Showing Proposed Foundation Located Within 5 Feet of Top of Siope)
18" FOOTING / 5" SETBACK
Total Depth of Footing
#
1^:1.0 SLOPE Z0:1.0 SLOPE
ffi ^
p a % o
0 Sff" 48^
r 51" 42'
z 42' 36"
3' 34" 3Gr
4" 26" 24"
5"
# when applicable
Mi No. 02-8201
Gwtadinlcal
J
n
RECOMMENDED BASEMENT/SUBGRADE RETAINING
WALL/EXTERIOR FOOTING DESIGN
Proposed Exterior
Grade
Exterior /Retaining
Footing / Wall
J
Ji
1
Lower—level
Slab—on—grade
Crawlspace
Sealant
6' Min.
Jo Drain at A Min. 2%
Fall Away from Bidg
Miradrain 6000
Sealant
[]
Q
I
I
Properly
Waterproofing Compacted
To Top Of Wall Baclcfill
Perforated PVC (SDR 35)
4' pipe with 0.5% min. slope,
with bottom of pipe located 12"
below slab or Interior (crawlspace)
qround surface elevation, with 1.5
(cu.ft.) of gravel 1" diameter
max, wrapped with filter cloth
such OS Miradrain 6000
^ Between Bottom
12" of Slob and
j Pipe Bottom
Miradrain Cloth
NOTE As an option to Miradrain 6000, Gravet or
^shed rock 3/4" nraxtmum diameter may be used
with a minimum 12* tiiickrass along the Intarior
face of the mil and 2.0 cu.fL/fL of pipe
gravel envelope.
FiguFBNo.V
Job No, 02-^1
01-8130-V
APPENDIX
A
1
APPENDIX A
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART
"1
J
J
J
•I
SOiL DESCRIPTION
Coarse-grained (IVIore than half of material is larger than a No. 200 sieve)
GRAVELS, CLEAN GRAVELS
(More than half of coarse fraction
is larger than No. 4 sieve size, but
smaller than 3")
GRAVELS WITH FINES
{Appreciable amount)
SANDS, CLEAN SANDS
{More than half of coarse fraction
is smaller than a No. 4 sieve)
SANDS WITH FINES
(Appreciable amount)
GW Well-graded gravels, gravel and sand mixtures, little
or no fines.
GP Poorly graded gravels, gravel and sand mixtures, little
or no fines.
GC Clay gravels, poorly graded gravel-sand-silt mixtures
SW Well-graded sand, gravelly sands, little or no fines
SP Poorly graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines.
SM Silty sands, poorly graded sand and sllty mixtures.
SC Clayey sands, poorly graded sand and clay mixtures.
FINE-GRAINED (More than half of material is smaller than a No. 200 sieve)
SILTS AND CLAYS
Liauid Limit Less than 50
Liquid Limit Greater than 50
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS
ML Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour, sandy
silt and clayey-silt sand mixtures with a slight
plasticity.
CL Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly
clays, siity clays, clean clays.
OL Organic silts and organic silty clays of low plasticity.
MH Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine sandy
or silty soils, elastic silts.
CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays.
OH Organic clays of medium to high plasticity.
PT Peat and other highly organic soils
APPENDIX
B
1
J
J
1
J
'1
J
J
Q
Q,
Q
APPENDIX B
EQ FAULT TABLES AND EQ SEARCH
TABLES
Kiko TEST.OUT
I
******ft****************
* *
* EQFAULT *
* *
* version 3.00 *
* *
***********************
DETERMINISTIC ESTIMATION OF
PEAK ACCELERATION FROM DIGITIZED FAULTS
:0B NUMBER: 02-8201 ^ ^
DATE: 06-05-2002
DOB NAME: Kiko Test Run
CALCULATION NAME: Kiko Test Rup Analysis
FAULT-DATA-FILE NAME: CDMGFLTE.DAT
SITE COORDINATES:
SITE LATITUDE: 33.1600
SITE LONGITUDE: 117.3500
SEARCH RADIUS: 100 mi
ATTENUATION RELATION: 15) Campbell & Bozorgnia (1997 Rev.) - soft Rock
UNCERTAINTY CM=Median, s=Sigma): M Number of Sigmas: 0.0
DISTANCE MEASURE: cdiSt
SCOND: 1 , ,^ Basement Depth: 5.00 km Campbell SSR: 1 Campbell SHR: 0
COMPUTE PEAK HORIZONTAL ACCELERATION
FAULT-DATA FILE USED: CDMGFLTE.DAT
MINIMUM DEPTH VALUE (km): 3.0
EQFAULT SUMMARY
Page 1
Kiko TEST.OUT
DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS
page 1
1 ESTIMATED MAX. EARTHQUAKE EVENT
APPROXIMATE I ABBREVIATED DISTANCE MAXIMUM 1 PEAK EST. SITE
FAULT NAME mi (km) EARTHQUAKE SITE INTENSITY (km)
MAG.(Mw) ACCEL, g MOD.MERC.
NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (Offshore) 5. 0( 8. 0) 6.9 0.447 X
ROSE CANYON 5. 0( 8. 0) 6.9 0.447 X
CORONADO BANK 20. 9( 33. 6) 7.4 0.163 VIII
ELSINORE-TEMECULA 24. 4( 39. 2) 6.8 0.083 VII
ELSINORE-JULIAN 24. 7( 39. 7) 7.1 0.105 VII
ELSINORE-GLEN IVY 33. 4( 53. 8) 6.8 0.053 VI
PALOS VERDES 35. 2( 56. 6) 7.1 0.064 VI
EARTHQUAKE VALLEY 44. 5( 71. 6) 6.5 0.027 V
NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (L.A.Basin) 45. 4( 73. 0) 6.9 0.037 v SAN 3ACINT0-ANZA 46 9( 75. 5) 7.2 0.046 VI
SAN 3ACINT0-SAN JACINTO VALLEY 47 3( 76. 1) 6.9 0.035 V
CHINO-CENTRAL AVE. (Elsinore) 47 3( 76. 1) 6.7 0.029 v WHITTIER 50 8( 81. 7) 6.8 0.029 v SAN JACINTO-COYOTE CREEK 52 9( 85. 1) 6.8 0.027 V
COMPTON THRUST 55 K 88. 6) 6.8 0.025 v ELYSIAN PARK THRUST 58 0( 93 4) 6.7 0.021 IV
ELSINORE-COYOTE MOUNTAIN 58 7( 94 5) 6.8 0.023 IV
SAN JACINTO-SAN BERNARDINO 59 5( 95 8) 6.7 0.021 IV
SAN ANDREAS - San Bernardino 64 9( 104 5) 7.3 0.031 V
SAN ANDREAS - Southern 64 9( 104 5) 7.4 0.034 V
SAN JACINTO - BORREGO 66 9( 107 7) 6.6 0.016 IV
SAN JOSE 68 K 109 6) 6.5 0.014 IV
SIERRA MADRE 71 8( 115 5) 7.0 0.019 IV
PINTO MOUNTAIN 71 9( 115 7) 7.0 0.021 IV
CUCAMONGA 72 K 116 0) 7.0 0.019 IV
SAN ANDREAS - Coachel 1 a 73 .3( 117 9) 7.1 0.022 IV
NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (West) 75 .5( 121 5) 7.0 0.018 IV
CLEGHORN 77 .2( 124 2) 6.5 0.012 III
BURNT MTN. 78 .2( 125 9) 6.4 0.011 III
RAYMOND 79 .7( 128 .3) 6.5 0.011 III
NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (East) 80 .2( 129 .1) 6.7 0.013 III
SAN ANDREAS - Mojave 80 .2( 129 .1) 7.1 0.019 IV
SAN ANDREAS - 1857 Rupture 80 .2( 129 .1) 7.8 0.036 V
EUREKA PEAK 81 .0( 130 .4) 6.4 0.010 III
CLAMSHELL-SAWPIT 81 .5( 131 .2) 6.5 0.011 III
VERDUGO 82 .4( 132 .6) 6.7 0.012 III
SUPERSTITION MTN. (San Jacinto) 83 .4( 134 .3) 6.6 0.012 HI
HOLLYWOOD 84 .2( 135 .5) 6.4 0.009 III
ELMORE RANCH 87 .0( 140 .0) 1 6.6 0.011 III
LANDERS 87 .9( 141 .4) 1 7.3 0.020 IV
DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS
Page 2
ABBREVIATED
APPROXIMATE
DISTANCE
Page 2
ESTIMATED MAX. EARTHQUAKE EVENT
MAXIMUM PEAK EST. SITE
Kiko TEST.OUT
FAULT NAME
into)
mi (km)
88.0( 141.7)
88.2( 141.9)
88.9C 143.0)
90.1( 145.0)
91.4( 147.1)
92.3( 148.5)
95.6( 153.8)
95.6( 153.9)
95.9( 154.4)
96.2( 154.8)
96.2( 154.8)
96.4( 155.2)
98.0( 157.7)
;*******************
SUPERSTITION HILLS (San Jaci
HELENDALE - S. LOCKHARDT
SANTA MONICA
LAGUNA SALADA
MALIBU COAST
LENWOOD-LOCKHART-OLD WOMAN SPRGS
JOHNSON VALLEY (Northern)
NORTHRIDGE (E. Oak Ridge)
BRAWLEY SEISMIC ZONE
SIERRA MADRE (San Fernando)
EMERSON So. - COPPER MTN.
SAN GABRIEL
ANACAPA-DUME
*ir v.-******* ****ftVr******ft**ft**
-END OF SEARCH- 53 FAULTS FOUND WITHIN THE SPECIFIED SEARCH RADIUS.
EARTHQUAKE SITE INTENSITY
MAG.(Mw) ACCEL, g MOD.MERC.
6.6 0.011 Ill
7.1 0.017 IV
6.6 0.010 III
7.0 0.015 IV
6.7 0.010 III
7.3 0.019 IV
6.7 0.010 III
6.9 0.011 III
6.4 0.008 II
6.7 0.009 III
6.9 0.012 III
7.0 0.013 III
7.3 0.015 IV
A********ft***********ftftftft***rft**
THE NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (Offshore) FAULT IS CLOSEST TO THE SITE.
IT IS ABOUT 5.0 MILES (8.0 km) AWAY.
LARGEST MAXIMUM-EARTHQUAKE SITE ACCELERATION: 0.4470 g
r L
Page 3
Kiko TEST.OUT
LA
c
I
***********************
* *
* EQFAULT *
* *
* Version 3.00 *
ft *
***********************
DETERMINISTIC ESTIMATION OF
PEAK ACCELERATION FROM DIGITIZED FAULTS
JOB NUMBER: 02-8201
DATE: 06-05-2002
JOB NAME: Kiko Test Run
CALCULATION NAME: Kiko Test RuH Analysis
FAULT-DATA-FILE NAME: CDMGFLTE.DAT
SITE COORDINATES:
SITE LATITUDE: 33.1600
SITE LONGITUDE: 117.3500
SEARCH RADIUS: 100 mi
ATTENUATION RELATION: 15) Campbell & Bozorgnia (1997 Rev.) - Soft Rock
UNCERTAINTY (M=Median, s=Sigma): M Number of Sigmas: 0.0
DISTANCE MEASURE: cdiSt
SCOND: 1
Basement Depth: 5.00 km Campbell SSR: 1 Campbell SHR: 0
COMPUTE RHGA HORIZ. ACCEL. (FACTOR: 0.65 DISTANCE: 20 miles)
FAULT-DATA FILE USED: CDMGFLTE.DAT
MINIMUM DEPTH VALUE (km): 3.0
EQFAULT SUMMARY
Page 1
Kiko TEST.OUT
DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS
Page 1
ABBREVIATED
FAULT NAME
APPROXIMATE
DISTANCE
mi (km)
ESTIMATED r
MAXIMUM
EARTHQUAKE
MAG.(Mw)
^AX. EARTHQL
RHGA
SITE
ACCEL, g
JAKE EVENT
EST. SITE
INTENSITY
MOD.MERC.
NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (Offshore) 5 0( 8 0) 6 9 0 .291 IX
ROSE CANYON 5 0( 8 0) 6 9 0 .291 IX
CORONADO BANK 20 9( 33 6) 7 4 0 .163 VIII
ELSINORE-TEMECULA 24 4( 39 2) 6 8 0 .083 VII
ELSINORE-JULIAN 24 7( 39 7) 7 1 0 .105 VII
ELSINORE-GLEN IVY 33 4( 53 8) 6 8 0 .053 VI
PALOS VERDES 35 2( 56 6) 7 1 0 .064 VI
EARTHQUAKE VALLEY 44 5( 71 6) 6 5 0 .027 V
NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (L.A.Basin) 45 4( 73 0) 6 9 0 .037 V
SAN JACINTO-ANZA 46 9( 75 5) 7 2 0 .046 VI
SAN JACINTO-SAN JACINTO VALLEY 47 3( 76 1) 6 9 0 .035 V
CHINO-CENTRAL AVE. (Elsinore) 47 3( 76 1) 6 7 0 .029 V
WHITTIER 50 8( 81 7) 6 8 0 .029 V
SAN JACINTO-COYOTE CREEK 52 9( 85 1) 6 8 0 027 V
COMPTON THRUST 55 1( 88 6) 6 8 0 .025 V
ELYSIAN PARK THRUST 58 0( 93 4) 6 7 0 021 IV
ELSINORE-COYOTE MOUNTAIN 58 7( 94 5) 6 8 0 023 IV
SAN JACINTO-SAN BERNARDINO 59 5( 95 8) 6 7 0 021 IV
SAN ANDREAS - San Bernardino 64 9( 104 5) 7 3 0 .031 V
SAN ANDREAS - Southern 64 9( 104 5) 7 4 0 .034 V
SAN JACINTO - BORREGO 66 9( 107 7) 6 6 0 .016 IV
SAN JOSE 68 1( 109 6) 6 5 0 .014 IV
SIERRA MADRE 71 8( 115 5) 7 0 0 .019 IV
PINTO MOUNTAIN 71 9( 115 7) 7 0 0 .021 IV
CUCAMONGA 72 1( 116 0) 7 0 0 .019 IV
SAN ANDREAS - Coachella 73 3( 117 9) 7 1 0 .022 IV
NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (WeSt) 75 5( 121 5) 7 0 0 .018 IV
CLEGHORN 77 2( 124 2) 6 5 0 .012 III
BURNT MTN. 78 2( 125 9) 6 4 0 .011 III
RAYMOND 79 7( 128 3) 6 5 0 .011 III
NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (East) 80 2( 129 1) 6 7 0 .013 III
SAN ANDREAS - Mojave 80 2( 129 1) 7 1 0 .019 IV
SAN ANDREAS - 1857 Rupture 80 2( 129 1) 7 8 0 .036 V
EUREKA PEAK 81 0( 130 4) 6 4 0 .010 III
CLAMSHELL-SAWPIT 81 5( 131 2) 6 5 0 .011 III
VERDUGO 82 4( 132 6) 6 7 0 .012 III
SUPERSTITION MTN. (San Jacinto) 83 4( 134 3) 6 6 0 .012 III
HOLLYWOOD 84 2( 135 5) 6 4 0 .009 III
ELMORE RANCH 87 0( 140 0) 6 6 0 .011 III
LANDERS 87 9( 141 4) 7 3 0 .020 IV
DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS
Page 2
ABBREVIATED
I ESTIMATED MAX. EARTHQUAKE EVENT
APPROXIMATE I
DISTANCE ! MAXIMUM | RHGA |EST. SITE
Page 2
Kiko TEST.OUT
FAULT NAME mi (km) EARTHQUAKE SITE INTENSITY
MAG.(Mw) ACCEL, g MOD.MERC.
SUPERSTITION HILLS (San Jacinto) 88.0( 141.7) 6.6 0.011 Ill
HELENDALE - S. LOCKHARDT 88.2( 141.9) 7.1 0.017 IV
SANTA MONICA 88.9( 143.0) 6.6 0.010 III
LAGUNA SALADA 90.1( 145.0) 7.0 0.015 IV
MALIBU COAST 91.4( 147.1) 6.7 0.010 III
LENWOOD-LOCKHART-OLD WOMAN SPRGS 92.3( 148.5) 7.3 0.019 IV
JOHNSON VALLEY (Northern) 95.6( 153.8) 6.7 0.010 III
NORTHRIDGE (E. Oak Ridge) 95.6( 153.9) 6.9 O.OU III
BRAWLEY SEISMIC ZONE 95.9( 154.4) 6.4 0.008 II
SIERRA MADRE (San Fernando) 96.2( 154.8) 6.7 0.009 III
EMERSON SO. - COPPER MTN. 96.2( 154.8) 6.9 0.012 III
SAN GABRIEL 96.4( 155.2) 7.0 0.013 III
ANACAPA-DUME 98.0( 157.7) 7.3 0.015 IV
*******************************************************************************
-END OF SEARCH- 53 FAULTS FOUND WITHIN THE SPECIFIED SEARCH RADIUS.
THE NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (Offshore) FAULT IS CLOSEST TO THE SITE.
IT IS ABOUT 5.0 MILES (8.0 km) AWAY.
LARGEST MAXIMUM-EARTHQUAKE SITE ACCELERATION: 0.2905 g
Page 3
Kiko TEST.OUT
*************************
A *
* EQSEARCH *
* *
* version 3.00 *
* *
*************************
ESTIMATION OF
PEAK ACCELERATION FROM
CALIFORNIA EARTHQUAKE CATALOGS
DATE: 06-05-2002
JOB NUMBER: 02-8201
JOB NAME: Kiko Test Run
EARTHQUAKE-CATALOG-FILE NAME: ALLQUAKE.DAT
MAGNITUDE RANGE:
MINIMUM MAGNITUDE: 5.00
MAXIMUM MAGNITUDE: 9.00
SITE COORDINATES:
SITE LATITUDE: 33.1600
SITE LONGITUDE: 117.3500
SEARCH DATES:
START DATE: 1800
END DATE: 2001
SEARCH RADIUS:
100.0 mi
160.9 km
ATTENUATION RELATION: 25) Campbell & Bozorgnia (1997 Rev.) - Soft Rock
UNCERTAINTY (M=Median, s=Sigma): M Number of sigmas: 0.0
ASSUMED SOURCE TYPE: DS [SS=Strike-slip, DS=Reverse-sl 1 p, BT=Blind-thrust]
SCOND: 0 Depth Source: A
Basement Depth: 5.00 km Campbell SSR: 1 Campbell SHR: 0
COMPUTE PEAK HORIZONTAL ACCELERATION
MINIMUM DEPTH VALUE (km): 3.0
(IHI
Page 1
Kiko TEST.OUT
EARTHQUAKE SEARCH RESULTS
page 1
TIME SITE I SITE APPROX. FILEl
CODEI
LAT.
NORTH
LONG.
WEST
DATE 1 (UTC) 1
H M Seel
DEPTH 1
(km)|
QUAKE 1
MAG. 1
ACC.
g
MM 1
INT. 1
DISTANCE
mi [km]
DMG 133 OOOO 117. 3000111/22/18001 2130 0. 01 O.OI 6. 501 0. 208 Villi 11.4( 18.4)
MGI 1 33 OOOO 117. OOOO 09/21/18561 730 0.01 O.OI 5. OOI 0. 023 IV 1 23.1( 37.1)
MGI 1 32 8000 117. 1000 05/25/18031 0 0 O.OI O.OI 5.001 0. 016 IV 1 28.8( 46.3)
PAS 1 32 9710 117 8700 07/13/19861 1347 8. 21 6.01 5. 30! 0 017 IV 1 32.8( 52.8)
DMG 1 32 7000 117. 2000 05/27/18621 20 0 0. 0 O.OI 5 90' 0 028 V 1 32.9( 53.0)
T-A 1 32 6700 117. 1700 10/21/1862 0 0 0. 0 0.0 5 00 0 012 III 35.4( 57.0)
T-A 1 32 6700 117 1700 05/24/1865 0 0 0. 0 0.0, 5 00 0 012 III! 35.4( 57.0)
T-A 1 32 6700 117 1700 12/00/1856 0 0 0. 0 0.0 5 00 0 012 Ill 35.4( 57.0)
DMG 1 33 7000 117 4000 05/13/1910 620 0 0 0.0 5 00 0 Oil III 37.4( 60.2)
DMG 33 7000 117 4000 04/11/1910 757 0 0 0.0 5 00 0 Oil III 37.4( 60.2)
DMG ; 33 7000 117 4000 05/15/1910 1547 0 0 0.0 6 00 0 024 V 37.4( 60.2)
DMG 33 2000 116 7000 01/01/1920 235 0 0 0.0 5 00 0 Oil III 37.7( 60.6)
DMG 33 6990 117 5110 05/31/1938 83455 4 10.0 5 50 0 015 IV 38.3( 61.7)
DMG 32 8000 116.8000 10/23/1894 23 3 0 0 0.0 5 70 0 017 IV 40.4( 65.0)
MGI 33 2000 116 6000 10/12/1920 1748 0.0 0.0 5 30 0 Oil III 43.4( 69.9)
DMG 33 7100 116 9250 09/23/1963 144152 6 16.5 5 00 0 008 III 45.2( 72.7)
DMG 33 7500 117 OOOO 06/06/1918 2232 0 0 0.0 5 00 0 008 III 45.4( 73.1)
DMG 33 7500 117 OOOO 04/21/1918 223225 0 0.0 6 80 0 034 V 45.4( 73.1)
DMG 33 5750 117 9830 03/11/1933 518 4 0 0.0 5 20 0 009 III 46.4( 74.7)
MGI 33 8000 117 6000 04/22/1918 2115 0 0 0.0 5 00 0 008 II 46.5( 74.8)
DMG 33 6170 117 9670 03/11/1933 154 7 8 0.0 6 30 0 021 IV 47.5( 76.5)
DMG 33 8000 117 OOOO 12/25/1899 1225 0 0 0.0 6 40 0 022 IV 48.6( 78,2)
DMG 33 6170 118 0170 03/14/1933 19 150 0 0.0 5 10 0 008 II 49.7( 80.0)
DMG 33 9000 117 2000 12/19/1880 0 0 0 0 0.0 6 00 0 015 IV 51.8( 83.4)
PAS 33 5010 116 5130 02/25/1980 104738 5 13.6 5 50 0 009 III 53.7( 86.4)
DMG 33 6830 118 0500 03/11/1933 658 3 0 0.0 5 50 0 009 III 54.1( 87.1)
DMG 33 OOOO 116 4330 06/04/1940 1035 8 3 0.0 5 10 0 007 II 54.2( 87.2)
DMG 33 5000 116 5000 09/30/1916 211 0 0 0.0 5 00 0 006 II 54.4( 87.5)
DMG 33 7000 118 0670 03/11/1933 51022 0 0.0 5 10 0 006 II 55.6( 89.6)
DMG 33 7000 118 0670 03/11/1933 85457 0 0.0 5 10 0 005 II 55.6( 89.6)
DMG 34 OOOO 117 2500 07/23/1923 73026 0 0.0 6 25 0 015 IV 58.3( 93.8)
MGI 34 OOOO 117 5000 12/15/1858 10 0 0 0 0.0 7 00 0 027 V 58.6( 94.4)
DMG 33 7500 118 0830 03/11/1933 230 0 0 0.0 5 10 0 006 II 58.7( 94.4)
DMG 33 7500 118 0830 03/11/1933 910 0 0 0.0 5 10 0 006 II 58.7( 94.4)
DMG 33 7500 118 0830 03/13/1933 131828 0 0.0 5 30 0 007 II 58.7( 94.4)
DMG 33 7500 118 0830 03/11/1933 323 0 0 0.0 5 00 0 005 II 58.7( 94.4)
DMG 33 7500 118 0830 03/11/1933 2 9 0 0 0.0 5 00 0 005 II 58.7( 94.4)
DMG 33 3430 116 3460 04/28/1969 232042 9 20.0 5 80 0 010 III 59.3( 95.5)
DMG 33 9500 116 8500 09/28/1946 719 9 0 0.0 5 00 0 005 II 61.7( 99.2)
DMG 33 7830 118 1330 10/02/1933 91017 6 0.0 5 40 0 .007 II 62.3(100.3)
DMG 32 8170 118 3500 12/26/1951 04654 0 0.0 5 90 0 .010 III 62.6(100.7)
DMG 33.4000 116 3000 02/09/1890 12 6 0 0 0.0 6 .30 0 .014 III 62.8(101.1)
T-A 32 .2500 117 5000 01/13/1877 20 0 0.0 0.0 5 .00 0 .005 II 63.4(102.1)
MGI 34 .1000 117 3000 07/15/1905 2041 0 .0 0.0 5 .30 0 .006 II 65.0(104.5)
DMG 33 .4080 116 .2610 03/25/1937 1649 1 .8 10.0 6.00 0 .010 III 65.1(104.8)
DMG 33 .2000 116 .2000 05/28/1892 1115 0 .0 0.0 6 .30 0 .012 III 66.5(107.0)
DMG 33 .9760 ill6 .7210 05/12/1944 104534 .7 10.0 5 .10 0 .005 II 67.0(107.8)
DMG 33 .7830 1118 .2500 11/14/1941 84136 .3 0.0 5 .40 0 .006 II 67.4(108.4)
DMG 33 .2830 1116 .1830 03/23/1954 41450 .0 0.0 5 .10 0 .005 II 67.9(109.3)
DMG 33 .2830 1116.1830 03/19/1954 95429 .0 0.0 6 .20 0 .011 III 67.9(109.3)
DMG 33 .2830 1116 .1830 03/19/1954 102117 .0 0.0 5 .50 0 .006 II 67.9(109.3)
DMG 33 .2830 1116 .1830 03/19/1954 95556 .0 0.0 5 .00 0 .004 I 67.9(109.3)
DMG 33 .9940 1116 .7120 05/12/1944 111636 .0 10.0 5 .30 0 .005 II 68.3(109.9)
I Page 2
Kiko TEST.OUT
EARTHQUAKE SEARCH RESULTS
Page 2
TIME SITE SITE APPROX.
FILE LAT. LONG. DATE (UTC) DEPTH QUAKE ACC. MM DISTANCE
CODEI NORTH ] WEST | | H M Sec1 (km) MAG. g lINT. mi [km]
DMG 32 70001116. 3000 02/24/1892! 720 0 --1
0 0 —1
0 6 70 0 016 -1
IV 58.6( 110. 5)
MGI 34 OOOO 118. OOOO 12/25/1903 1745 0.0 0 0 5 00 0 004 I 69.0{ 111. 0)
DMG 33 2170 116. 1330 08/15/1945 175624 0 0 0 5 70 0 007 II 70.4( 113. 3)
GSP 34 1400 117. 7000 02/28/1990 234336 6 5 0 5 20 0 005 II 70.6( 113. 6)
DMG 33 1900 116. 1290 04/09/1968 22859 1 11 1 6 40 0 012 III 70.6( 113. 6)
DMG 33 8500 118. 2570 03/11/1933 1425 0 0 0 0 5 00 0 004 I 71.1( 114. 4)
DMG 34 2000 117. 4000 07/22/1899 046 0.0 0 0 5 50 0 006 II 71.9( 115. 6)
PAS 33 9980 116. 6060 07/08/1986 92044 5 11 7 5 60 0 005 II 72.0( 115. 8)
DMG 34 1000 115.8000 10/24/1935 1448 7 6 0 0 5 10 0.004 I 72.2( 116. 2)
DMG 34 2000 117. 1000 09/20/1907 154 0 0 0 0 6 00 0 008 III 73.2( 117. 8)
DMG 34 1800 115. 9200 01/16/1930 034 3 6 0 0 5 10 0 004 I 74.6( 120. 1)
DMG 34 1800 116. 9200 01/16/1930 02433 9 0 0 5 20 0 004 I 74.6( 120. 1)
GSP 34 1630 116. 8550 06/28/1992 144321.0 6 0 5 30 0 005 II 74.9( 120. 5)
DMG 34 1000 116. 7000 02/07/1889 520 0 0 0 0 5 30 0 005 II 74.9( 120. 5)
PAS 34 0610 118. 0790 10/01/1987 144220 0 9 5 5 90 0 007 II 75.0( 120. 7)
DMG 33 1130 116. 0370 04/09/1968 3 353 5 5 0 5 20 0 004 I 76.0{ 122. 3)
PAS 34 0730 118. 0980 10/04/1987 105938 2 8 2 5 30 0 004 I 76.3{ 122. 8)
DMG 34 0170 116. 5000 07/26/1947 24941 0 0 0 5 10 0 004 I 75.8 :i23. 5)
DMG 34 0170 116. 5000 07/25/1947 61949 0 0 0 5 20 0 004 I 76.8 ;i23. 5)
DMG 34 0170 116. 5000 07/25/1947 04631.0 0 0 5 00 0 003 I 76.8 :i23. 5)
DMG 34 0170 116. 5000 07/24/1947 221046 0 0 0 5 50 0 005 II 76.8 :i23. 5)
GSP 34 1950 116. 8620 08/17/1992 204152 1 11 0 5 30 0 004 I 76.8 :i23. 5)
DMG 33 9330 116. 3830 12/04/1948 234317 0 0 0 6 50 0 012 III 77.1 ;i24. 1)
DMG 34 2700 117. 5400 09/12/1970 143053 0 8 0 5.40 0 005 II 77.4 :i24. 6)
T-A 34 OOOO 118. 2500 09/23/1827 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 00 0 003 I 77.7 ;i25. 1)
T-A 34 OOOO 118. 2500 03/26/1860 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 00 0 003 I 77.7 ;i25. 1)
T-A 34 OOOO 118. 2 500 01/10/1856 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 00 0 003 I 77.7 :i25. 1)
MGI 34 1000 118. 1000 07/11/1855 415 0 0 0 0 6 30 0 010 III 77.9 :i25. 4)
DMG 33 2310 115.0040 05/25/1957 155933 6 15 1 5 00 0 003 I 77.9 :i25. 4)
GSN 34 2030 115. 8270 05/28/1992 150530 7 5 0 5 70 0 013 III 78.0 :i25. 6)
DMG 34 2000 117. 9000 08/28/1889 215 0 0 0 0 5 50 0 005 II 78.4 :i26. 2)
DMG 34 3000 117. 5000 07/22/1899 2032 0 0 0 0 6 50 0 Oil III 79.2 :i27. 4)
DMG 32 9670 116 OOOO 10/22/1942 181326 0 0 0 5 00 0 003 I 79.2 ;i27. 5)
DMG 32 9670 116 OOOO 10/21/1942 162519 0 0 0 5 00 0 003 I 79.2 :i27. 5)
DMG 32 9670 116 OOOO 10/21/1942 162554 0 0 0 5 00 0 003 I 79.2 :i27. 5)
DMG 32 9670 116 OOOO 10/21/1942 162213 0 0 0 6 50 0 on III 79.2 :i27. 5)
DMG 34 2670 116 9670 08/29/1943 34513 0 0 0 5 50 0.005 II 79.5 :i28. 0)
GSP 33 8760 116 2670 06/29/1992 160142 8 1 0 5 20 0 004 I 79.6 ;i28. 0)
MGI 34 OOOO 118 3000 09/03/1905 540 0 0 0.0 5 30 0.004 I 79.7 :i28. 2)
GSP 33 9020 116 2840 07/24/1992 181436.2 9 0 5 00 0 003 I 79.9 ;i28 6)
DMG 34 3000 117 5000 07/30/1894 512 0 0 0 0 6 00 0.007 II 80.0 :i28 8)
DMG 32 9830 115 9830 05/23/1942 154729.0 0 0 5.00 0 003 I 80.0 :i28 8)
GSP 34 2390 116 8370 07/09/1992 014357 6 0 0 5 30 0 004 I 80.1 :i28 9)
DMG 32 OOOO 117 5000 05/24/1939 1627 0 0 0 0 5 00 0 003 I 80.6 C129 6)
DMG 32 OOOO 117 5000 05/01/1939 2353 0 0 0 0 5 00 0 003 I 80.6 C129 6)
DMG 32 2000 115 5500 11/05/1949 43524 0 0 0 5 10 0.003 I 81.0 C130 3)
DMG 32 2000 116 5500 11/04/1949 204238 0 0 0 5 70 0 .006 TI 81.0 C130 3)
GSP 33 9610 116 3180 04/23/1992 045023 0 12 0 6 10 0 .008 II 81.1 C130 6)
PDG 34 2900 116 9450 02/10/2001 210505 8 9 0 5 10 0 .003 I 81.4 (131 0)
MGI 34 .0800 118 2600 07/16/1920 18 8 0 0 0 0 5 00 0 .003 I 82.3 (132 4)
DMG 32 .5000 118 5500 02/24/1948 81510 0 0 0 5 30 0 .004 I 83.2 (133 9)
GSP 34 .0290 115.3210 08/21/1993 014638 4 9 0 5 00 0 .003 I 84.3 (135 6)
DMG 32 .0830 116 6670 11/25/1934 818 0.0 0.0 5 00 0 .003 I 84.3 (135 7)
Page 3
n.
Proposed Kiko Residence job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 23
For exterior slabs, we recommend the project Civil/Structural Engineer
incorporate isolation joints and sawcuts to at least one-fourth the thickness
of the slabs. The joints and cuts, if properly placed, should reduce the
potential for random exterior shrinkage cracking. In no case, however, shall
controi joints be spaced farther than 15 feet apart. Re-entrant corners shall
also be provided with control joints or additional steel reinforcing. Due to a
number of reasons (such as base preparation, construction techniques,
curing procedures, and normal shrinkage of concrete), some cracking of slabs
can still be expected. Control joints shall be placed within 12 hours after
concrete placement or as soon as the concrete sets and may be cut without
aggregate ravelling. Reinforced slabs on-grade shall have every other bar
interrupted 3 inches before crossing control joints for an effective weak plane
result. To prevent moisture infiltration, a!! exterior slab joints shall be sealed
with elastomeric seal material. The sealant shall be inspected every six
months and be properly maintained.
Due to the proximity of the ocean, the structural engineer should consider
the use of concrete with Cement Type II and a water-cement ratio no higher
than 0.40 due to sea water chlorides.
For concrete pavement, we recommend that the compressive strength f'c be
at least 4,500 psi at 28 days of age and the slab thickness be not less than
SV2 inches thick, with control joints no farther than 15 feet or the width ofthe
driveway, whichever is less. Driveway subgrade soils shall be properiy
compacted and moisture conditioned before any base and/or concrete
placement.
J
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 24
NOTE: The project Civil/Structural Engineer shall review all reinforcing
schedules. The reinforcing minimums recommended herein are not to be
construed as structural designs, but merely as minimum safeguards to
reduce possible crack separations.
12. As a minimum for protection of on-site improvements, it is recommended
1 that all nonstructural concrete slabs (such as patios, walkways, etc.) be
underlain by at least 3 inches of dean sand, inciude No. 3 steel bars spaced
every 18 inches apart at the center of the slab, and contain adequate
isolation and control joints spaced no farther than twice the width of the
i reinforced slab, not more than 15 feet apart, and also at re-entrant corners.
^ It should be noted that standard concrete improvements may not perform
j well, due to the loose surficial soil conditions. As such, each improvement
should be designed to tolerate the on-site conditions. The performance of
on-site improvements can also be greatly affected by soil base preparation
and the quality of construction, and is therefore the responsibility of the
designer and the contractor installing the improvements. Moisture content
and verification of subgrade soiis compaction for outside improvements is
aiso recommended. A representative of our firm shall check that within 48
hours prior to concrete pouring and before steel reinforcing placement.
C. Desian Parameters for Proposed Seavtfall and Retainina Wails
Our investigation revealed that, at the location ofthe proposed seawall, the site is
underlain by dense formational materials with a surface layer of beach sand
deposits that typically range from 2 to 5 feet below the existing beach grade. This
loose surface soil will not provide a stable soil base for the proposed seawall. As
such, recommendations have been made to embed the seawall foundation into the
1
1
J
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 25
underlying formational materials. We also recommend that the fill/backfill soils
placed behind the seawall and patio/terrace area consist of beach/terrace sand-type
material.
13. The seawall foundation shall be embedded a minimum of 4 feet into dense
formational material due to concern for potential scouring by storm surf
action. This depth is approximately 3 feet above mean sea level (depending
on the beach sand thickness) and is expected to be approximately 14 feet
below the adjacent western patio/terrace area.
14. The recommended allowable load-bearing value (at a minimum depth of 4
feet into the dense native materials) is 3,500 pounds per square foot for a
minimum footing width of 4 feet. This load-bearing value may be utilized in
the design ofthe seawall foundation when founded a minimum of 4 feet into
the firm natural ground, measured from the bottom of the footing to the
lowest adjacent grade at the time of foundation construction. This load-
bearing value may be increased one-third for design loads that include wind
or seismic analysis. The soil bearing capacity may be increased 1,000 psf for
each additional foot of embedment over 4 feet, and 750 psf for each
additional foot in width over 4 feet. The total maximum soil end-bearing
capacity shall not exceed 6,000 psf.
All other proposed retaining walls to be constructed should be founded on firm
natural ground or properly compacted fills. All retaining walls shall be designed
based on the following soil design parameters: 0
Q 15. The active earth pressure (to be utilized in the design of the proposed
seawall and other retaining walls, etc.) utilizing the on-site materials as
I
Proposed Kiko Residence
Carlsbad, California
Job No. 02-8201
Page 26
backfill should be based on an Equivalent Fluid Weight of 38 pounds per
cubic foot (for level backfill only). Any surcharge pressures applied within the
potential failure biock shall also be added to the soil lateral pressures.
In the event that a retaining wall is surcharged by sloping backfill, the design
active earth pressure shall be based on the appropriate Equivalent Fluid
Weight presented in the following table:
Slope Ratio
Height of Slope/Heiglit of Wall*
0.25 0.50 0.75 l.OO(-l-)
1^ 44 48 50 52
*To determine design active earth pressure for ratios intermediate to those
presented, interpolate between the stated values.
In the event that a retaining wall is to be designed for a restrained condition,
a uniform pressure equal to 9xH (nine times the total height of retained soil,
considered in pounds per square foot) should be considered as acting
everywhere on the back of the wall in addition to the design Equivalent
Fluid Weight.
Any surcharge applied within the failure block behind the retaining wall shall
be considered in the wall design. For cantilever retaining walls, the lateral
load conversion factor is 0.32. For restrained retaining walls, the lateral load
conversion factor is 0.53.
16. The passive earth pressure of the encountered dense natural-ground soils or
properiy compacted fill (to be used for the design of shallow footings) should
be based on an Equivalent Fluid Weight of 300 pounds per cubic foot.
J
T
I
I
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 27
The passive earth pressure shouid oniy be considered vaiid for design if the
ground adjacent to the foundation structure is essentially level for a distance
of at least three times the total depth of the foundation.
17. A Coefficient of Friction of 0.40 times the dead load may be used between
the bearing soils and concrete wall foundations.
18. Due to the possible buildup of groundwater (derived primarily from rainfall
and irrigation), excess moisture is a common problem in below-grade
structures or behind proposed retaining walls. These problems are generally
in the form of water seepage through slabs and/or walls, mineral staining,
mildew growth and high humidity. In order to minimize the potential for
moisture-related problems to develop at the site, proper ventilation and
waterproofing must be provided for below-ground areas and the backfill side
of all structure retaining walls must be adequately waterproofed and drained.
^ Should water seeps be observed during grading, additional recommendations
J will be provided by our firm, as warranted.
\^ Proper waterproofing, protection board, subdrains and free-draining backwall
material such as gravel or geocomposite (Miradrain 6000 or equivalent) shall
^ be installed behind all retaining walls on the subject project. Geotecbnical
Exploration, Inc. will assume no liability for damage to structures, which is
attributable to poor drainage. Subdrain shall be placed at least 12 inches
below the surface elevation being protected (interior slab), Ifthe subdrain is
U to be installed on top ofthe foundation heel, then the interior slab shall be at
rj least 12 inches above the footing toe.
1
•i
I
I
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 28
0. Slopes
19. The existing slopes on the site appear to be relatively stable. However, it is
our opinion that the new cut and fill slopes may be subject to future erosion
and surficial failure if left unprotected.
In order to reduce the risk of future slope stability problems, we recommend
that a program of proper landscaping and maintenance be effected as part of
development of this site.
20. The soils that occur within 5 feet of the face of fiil slopes often possess poor
lateral stability and structures and other improvements (such as walls,
fences, patios, sidewalks, swimming pools, driveways, etc.) that are located
within 5 feet of the edge of any slopes could suffer differential movement as
J a result of the poor lateral stability of these soils.
1
J Conventional shallow foundations and footings of proposed structures, wails,
, etc., when founded 5 feet and farther away from the top of allowable slopes,
•.^ may be of standard design in conformance with the recommended load-
bearing value. If the proposed foundations and footings are located closer
^ than 5 feet inside the top of allowable slopes, they shall be deepened to 1.5
feet below a line beginning at a point 5 feet horizontally inside the slopes and
Li projected outward and downward, parallel to the face ofthe slope (see Figure
No. IV).
1
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 29
J E. Temporarv Slopes
21. We anticipate that temporary slopes into the terrace material of
^ approximately 10 to 22 feet in height may be required during excavation of
the lower-level living areas. Based on the results of our field investigation, it
^ is our opinion that the following temporary-slope design criteria may be
J considered in areas where the excavation slope top will be at least 18 feet
^ away from any existing structures:
-J
^ The existing cemented formation materials may be cut vertical for the lower
J 5 feet and at a slope ration of 0.75 horizontal to 1.0 vertical for the remaining
height (for an unsupported period not to exceed eight weeks). For the
J basement areas, the cuts shall be from the heel ofthe foundation and extend
to at least 12 feet horizontally at the ground level. The basement wall
backfill shall consist of non-expansive soil.
1
J Any plans for slopes in excess of the assumed 22-foot maximum must be
presented to our office prior to grading to allow time for review and specific
J recommendations, if warranted. Proper drainage away from the excavation
- shall be provided at all times. Soil stockpiles shall not be placed within 6 feet
*J from the top ofthe cuts.
A representative of Geotecbnical Exploration, Inc. must observe any
B steep temporary slopes during excavation. In the event that soils and
formational material compnsing a slope are not as anticipated, any required
a slope design changes would be presented at that time. If the temporary
slopes as recommended herein are not developed, then shoring will be
required.
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 30
22. Where not superseded by specific recommendations presented in this report,
trenches, excavations and temporary slopes at the subject site shall be
constructed in accordance with Title 8, Construction Safety Orders, issued by
OSHA.
23. It is recommended that all compacted fill slopes and natural cut slopes be
planted with an erosion resistant plant, in conformance with the requirements
of the City of Carlsbad.
F. Floor Slab Vapor Transmission
24. Vapor moisture can cause some problems to moisture sensitive floors, some
floor sealers, or sensitive equipment in direct contact with the floor, in
addition to mildew and staining on slabs, walls and carpets.
25. The common practice in Southern California is to place vapor retarders made
of PVC, or of polyethylene. PVC retarders are made in thickness ranging
from 10- to 60-mil. Polyethylene retarders, called visqueen, range from 5- to
i-M 10-mil in thickness. The thicker the plastic, the stronger the resistance
against puncturing.
26. Although polyethylene (visqueen) products are most commonly used,
Li products such as Vaporshield possess much higher tensile strength and are
r,^ more specifically designed for and intended to retard moisture transmission
into concrete slabs. The use of Vaporshield or equivalent is highly
B recommended when a structure is intended for moisture-sensitive floor
coverings or uses.
1
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 31
J 27. The vapor retarders need to have joints lapped and sealed with mastic or
manufacturer's recommended tape for additional protection. To provide
some protection to the moisture retarder, a layer of at least 2 inches of clean
sand on top and 2 inches at the bottom shall also be provided. No heavy
equipment, stakes or other puncturing instruments shall be used on top of
_j the liner before or during concrete placement. In actual practice, stakes are
J often driven through the retarder material, equipment is dragged or rolled
^ across the retarder, overlapping or jointing is not properly implemented, etc.
^ All these construction deficiencies reduce the retarder's effectiveness.
S The vapor retarders are not waterproof. They are Intended to help prevent
^ or reduce capillary migration of vapor through the soil into the pores of
ij concrete slabs. Other waterproofing systems must supplement vapor
retarders if full waterproofing is desired. The owner should be consulted to
determine the specific level of protection required, especially for basement-
level areas.
G. Site Drainaae Considerations
28. Adequate measures shall be taken to properly finish-grade the site after the
structures and other improvements are in place. Drainage waters from this
site and adjacent properties are to be directed away from foundations, floor
slabs, footings, and slopes, onto the natural drainage direction for this area
or into properly designed and approved drainage facilities. Roof gutters and
downspouts should be installed on all structures, with runoff directed away
from the foundations via closed drainage lines. Proper subsurface and
surface drainage will help minimize the potential for waters to seek the level
of the bearing soils under the foundations, footings, and floor slabs. Failure
1
1
1
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 32
to observe this recommendation could result in undermining and differential
settlement ofthe structure or other improvements on the site.
The ground surface adjacent to building foundations shall be sloped at a
gradient of at least 5 percent within 10 feet, draining away from the
^ foundations.
_ In addition, appropriate erosion-control measures shall be taken at all time
J, during construction to prevent surface runoff waters from entering footing
^ excavations and ponding on finished building pads or running uncontrolled
i over the tops of newly constructed cut or fill slopes. Particular care should be
taken to prevent saturation of any temporary construction slopes.
29. Planter areas, flower beds, and planter boxes shall be sloped to drain away
from the foundations, footings, and floor slabs. Planter boxes shall be
constructed with a sealed bottom and a subsurface drain, installed in gravel,
J with the direction of subsurface and surface flow away from the foundations,
^ footings, and floor slabs, to an adequate drainage facility. All landscaped
^ areas shall be provided with proper area drains.
H. General Recommendations
J 30. Following placement of any concrete floor slabs, sufficient drying time should
um be allowed prior to placement of floor coverings. Premature placement of
floor coverings could result in degradation of adhesive materials and
m loosening ofthe finish-floor materials.
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 33
31. In order to minimize any work delays at the subject site during site
development, this firm should be contacted 24 hours prior to any need for
observation of footing or caisson excavations or field density testing of
compacted fill soils. If possible, placement of formwork and steel
reinforcement in footing excavations should not occur prior to observation of
the excavations; in the event that our observation reveals the need for
deepening or redesigning foundation structures at any locations, any
formwork or steel reinforcement in the affected footing excavation areas
would have to be removed prior to correction of the observed problem (i.e.,
deepening the footing excavation, recompacting soil in the bottom of the
excavation, etc.).
X. GRADING NOTES
Any required grading operations shall be performed in accordance with the General
Earthwork Specifications (Appendix B) and the requirements ofthe City of Carlsbad
Grading Ordinance.
32. Geotecbnical Exploration, Inc. recommends that we be asked to verify the
actual soil conditions revealed during site grading work and footing
excavations to be as anticipated in this "Report of Preliminary Geotechnical
InvestigationZ In addition, the compaction of any fill soils placed during site
grading work must be tested by the soil engineer. It Is the responsibility of
the grading contractor to comply with the requirements on the grading or
building plans and the local grading ordinance.
33. It is the responsibility of the owner and/or developer to ensure that the
recommendations summarized in the report are carried out in the field
I
I
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 34
operations and that our recommendations for design of the project are
incorporated in the building and grading plans. Our firm should review the
grading and foundation plans when they become available.
34. This firm does not practice or consult in the field of safety engineering. We
do not direct the contractor's operations, and we cannot be responsible for
the safety of personnel other than our own on the site; the safety of others is
the responsibility of the contractor. The contractor should notify the owner if
he considers any ofthe recommended actions presented herein to be unsafe.
XI. LIMITATIONS
Our conclusions and recommendations have been based on all available data
obtained from our field Investigation and laboratory analysis, as well as our
experience with the soils and native materials located in the City of Carlsbad. Of
necessity, we must assume a certain degree of continuity between exploratory
excavations and/or natural exposures. The actual soil conditions between
exploratory excavations may differ. It is, therefore, necessary that all
observations, conclusions, and recommendations be verified at tbe time
grading operations begin or wben footing excavations are placed. In tbe
event discrepancies are noted, additional recommendations may be issued,
if required.
The work performed and recommendations presented herein are the result of an
investigation and analysis that meet the contemporary standard of care in our
profession with the County of San Diego. No warranty is provided.
Proposed Kiko Residence
Carlsbad, California
Job No. 02-8201
Page 35
This report should be considered valid for a period of two (2) years, and is subject
to review by our firm following that time. The firm of Geotecbnical Exploration,
Inc. shall not be held responsible for changes to the physical condition of the
property, such as addition of fill soils or changing drainage patterns, which occur
subsequent to issuance of this report.
Once again, should any questions arise concerning this report, please feel free to
contact the undersigned. Reference to our Job No. 02-8201 will help to expedite
a reply to your inquiries.
Respectfully submitted,
GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC.
Senior Project Geologist
Jaime A. Cerros, P.E.
R.C.E. 34422/G.E. 2007
Senior Geotechnical Engineer
JKH/LDR/JAC/pj
4.^fTiebrRee^^esi ident
C.E.G. 999cexp. 3-31-D33/R.G. 3391
I
I
(IHI
REFERENCES
JOB NO. 02-8201
June 2002
Association of Engineering Geologists, 1973, Geology and Earthquake Hazards, Planners Guide to the
Seismic Safety Element, Soutliern California Section, Association of Engineering Geologists, Special
Publication, Published July 1973, p. 44.
California Division of Mines and Geology - Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zones Map, November 1,
1991.
Clarke, S.H., H.G. Greene, M.P. Kennedy and J.G. Vedder, 1987, Geologic Map ofthe Inner-Southern
California Continental Margin in H.G. Greene and M.P. Kennedy (editors),.California Continental Margin
Map Series, Map lA, Calif. Div. of Mines and Geology, scale 1:250,000.
Crowell, J.C, 1962, Displacement along the San Andreas Fault, California; Geologic Society of America
Special Paper 71, 61 p.
Greene, H.G., 1979, Implication of Fault Patterns in the Inner California Continental Borderland
between San Pedro and Oceanside, in "Earthquakes and Other Perils, Oceanside Region," P.L. Abbott
and W.J. Elliott, editors.
Greensfelder, R.W., 1974, Maximum Credible Rock Acceleration from Earthquakes in California;
California Division of Mines and Geology, Map Sheet 23.
Hart, E.W., D.P. Smith and R.B. Saul, 1979, Summary Report: Fault Evaluation Program, 1978 Area
(Peninsular Ranges-Salton Trough Region), Calif. Div. of Mines and Geology, OFR 79-10 SF, 10.
Hart E.W., 1980, Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Calif. Div. of Mines and Geology, Special
Publication 42, Rev. March 1980, p. 25.
Hileman, J.A., CR. Allen and J.M. Nordquist, 1973, Seismicity of the Southern California Region,
January 1, 1932 to December 31, 1972; Seismological Laboratory, Cal-Tech, Pasadena, Calif.
Kennedy, M.P., 1975, Geology ofthe Oceanside Metropolitan Area, California; Bulletin 200, Calif. Div.
of Mines and Geology, 1975.
Kennedy, M.P., and S.H. Clarke, 2001, Late Quaternary Faulting in San Dlego Bay and Hazard to the
Coronado Bridge, California Geology, July/August 2001.
Kennedy, M.P. and S.H. Clarke, 1997A, Analysis of Late Quaternary Faulting in San Diego Bay and
Hazard to the Coronado Bridge, Calif. Div. of Mines and Geology Open-file Report 97-lOA.
Kennedy, M.P. and S.H. Clarke, 1997B, Age of Faulting in San Diego Bay in the Vicinity of the
Coronado Bridge, an addendum to Analysis of Late Quaternary Faulting in San Diego Bay and Hazard
to the Coronado Bridge, Calif. Div. of Mines and Geology Open-file Report 97-lOB.
Kennedy, M.P., S.H. Clarke, H.G. Greene, R.C Jachens, V.E. Langenheim, J.J. More and D.M. Burns,
1994, A Digital (GIS) Geological/Geophysical/Seismological Data Base for the San Diego 30-x60'
Quadrangle, California — A New Generation, Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v.
26, p. 63.
Kennedy, M.P. and G.W, Moore, 1971, Stratigraphic Relations of Upper Cretaceous and Eocene
Formations, San Diego Coastal Area, California, American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin,
v. 55, p. 709-722.
Page 2
Kennedy, M.P., S.S. Tan, R.H. Chapman and G.W. Chase, 1975, Character and Recency of Faulting,
San Diego Metropolitan Area, California, Calif. Div. of Mines and Geology Special Report 123, 33 pp.
Kennedy, M.P. and E.E. Welday, 1980, Character and Recency of Faulting Offshore, metropolitan San
Diego California, Calif. Div. of Mines and Geology Map Sheet 40, 1:50,000.
Kern, J.P. and T.K. Rockwell, 1992, Chronology and Deformation of Quaternary Marine Shorelines, San
Diego County, California in Heath, E. and L. Lewis (editors). The Regressive Pleistocene Shoreline,
Coastal Southern California, pp. 1-8.
Lindvall, S.C. and T.K. Rockwell, 1995, Holocene Activity ofthe Rose Canyon Fault Zone in San Diego,
California, Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 100, no. B-12, p. 24121-24132.
McEuen, R.B. and C.J. Pinckney, 1972, Seismic Risk in Oceanside; Transactions of the Oceanside
Society of Natural History, Vol. 17, No. 4, 19 July 1972.
Moore, G.W. and M.P. Kennedy, 1975, Quaternary Faults in San Diego Bay, California, U.S.Geological
Survey Journal of Research, v. 3, p. 589-595.
Richter, C.G., 1958, Elementary Seismology, W.H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco, Calif.
Rockwell, T.K., D.E. Millman, R.S. McElwain, and D.L. Lamar, 1985, Study of Seismic Activity by
Trenching Along the Glen Ivy North Fault, Elsinore Fault Zone, Southern California: Lamar-Merifield
Technical Report 85-1, U.S.G.S. Contract 14-08-0001-21376, 19p.
Simons, R.S., 1977, Seismicity of San Diego, 1934-1974, Seismological Society of America Bulletin, v.
67, p. 809-826.
Tan, S.S.,, 1995, Landslide Hazards in Southern Part of San Diego Metropolitan Area, San Diego
-i County, Calif. Div. of Mines and Geology Open-file Report 95-03.
Toppozada, T.R. and D.L. Parke, 1982, Areas Damaged by California Earthquakes, 1900-1949; Calif.
Div. of Mines and Geology, Open-file Report 82-17, Sacramento, Calif.
Treiman, J.A., 1993, The Rose Canyon Fault Zone, Southern California, Calif. Div. of Mines and
n Geology Open-file Report 93-02, 45 pp, 3 plates.
n
I
I
SITE MAP
•il!' wniv
Proposed Kiko Residence
2649 Ocean Street
Carlsbad, CA.
Figure No. la
Job No. 02-8201
J
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 6
Based on our experience with similar soils and our visual classification, it is our
opinion that the on-site soils have a very low expansion potential, with an
expansion Index of less than 20.
A direct shear test was performed on relatively undisturbed sample in order to
evaluate the soil strength and support capacity of the existing dense natural soils.
The shear test was performed with a constant strain rate direct shear machine. The
test specimen was saturated and then sheared under various normal loads at a slow
rate to allow for drainage of the sample.
Based on laboratory test data, our observations of the primary soil types on the
project, and our previous experience with laboratory testing of similar soils in this
area of the County of San Diego, our Geotechnical Engineer has assigned
conservative values for friction angle, coefficient of friction, and cohesion to those
soils that will have significant lateral support or bearing functions on the project.
The assigned values are presented in Figure No. Ill and have been utilized in
determining the recommended soil bearing capacity, as well as active and passive
earth pressure design criteria for retaining wall and foundation design.
V. GENERAL GEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
The San Diego County area is part of a seismically active region of California. It is
on the eastern boundary of the Southern California Continental Borderland, part of
the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province. This region is part of a broad tectonic
boundary between the North American and Pacific Plates. The actual plate
boundary is characterized by a complex system of active, major, right-lateral strike-
slip faults, trending northwest/southeast. This fault system extends eastward to
the San Andreas Fault (approximately 70 miles from Oceanside) and westward to
1
J
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 7
the San Clemente Fault (approximately 50 miles off-shore from Oceanside) (Berger
and Schug, 1991).
During recent history, the San Diego County area has been relatively quiet
seismically. No fault ruptures or major earthquakes have been experienced in
historic time within the San Diego area. Since earthquakes have been recorded by
instruments (since the 1930s), the San Diego County area has experienced
scattered seismic events with Richter magnitudes generally less than 4.0. During
June 1985, a series of small earthquakes occurred beneath San Diego Bay; three of
these earthquakes had recorded magnitudes of 4.0 to 4.2. In addition, the
Oceanside earthquake of July 13, 1986, located approximately 26 miles offshore of
the City of Oceanside, resulted in a magnitude of 5.3 (Hauksson, 1988).
In California, major earthquakes can generally be correlated with movement on
active faults. As defined by the California Division of Mines and Geology (Hart,
E.W., 1980), an "active" fault is one that has had ground surface displacement
within Holocene time (about the last 11,000 years). Additionally, faults along which
major historical earthquakes have occurred (about the last 210 years in California)
are also considered to be active (Association of Engineering Geologist, 1973). The
California Division of Mines and Geology defines a "potentially active" fault as one
that has had ground surface displacement during Quaternary time, that is, during
the past 11,000 to 1.6 million years (Hart, E.W., 1980).
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC GEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
A geologic investigation of the site was conducted to evaluate the on-site geology
and potential of geologic hazards that might affect the site. Our investigation drew
J
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carisbad, California Page 8
upon information gathered from published and unpublished geologic maps and
reports, as well as the results of our recent exploratory excavations.
The subject site is located within a residential area along the west side of Ocean
Street, along the edge of the coastal bluff in the City of Cartsbad. The subject site
is located in an area with moderate to high geologic risk (as identified by Map 12b
of the "Shoreline Erosion Assessment and Atlas of the San Diego Region — Volume
II" [California Department of Boating and Waterways and San Diego Association of
Governments]) due to conditions identified as ^"unprotected, unfavorable geology,
inadequate setback and Inadequate designZ' No faults were shown to cross the
site. The Rose Canyon Fault is located approximately 5 miles west of the subject
site.
Our field investigation and review of pertinent geologic maps and reports indicate
that the site is underiain by a limited amount of artificial fill soils, marine terrace
deposits and the Santiago Formation.
Artificial Fill (Oaf): A limited amount of fill (approximately IV2 to 4 feet) was
encountered on the surface mostly in the western portion of the site. The fill is
loose to medium dense and consists of red-brown to gray-brown, sllty, fine to
medium sand with roots and sandstone rock fragments. The fills are considered to
have a very low expansion potential. Refer to Figure Nos. II and III for details.
Beach Deposits (Ob): The beach deposits encountered at the site consist of loose
to medium dense, dry to damp, light gray, fine to medium sand with lenses of
cobble 1 to 6 inches in diameter. These materials range from 4 to 4V2 feet in
thickness and were encountered at the western portion of the site. These soils are
J
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, Caiifornia Page 9
considered to have a negligible expansion potential. Refer to Figure Nos. II and III
for details.
Marine-Terrace Deposits (Ot): The major portion of the site is underlain by
Pleistocene-age marine-terrace deposits. These materials are medium dense to
dense and consist of tan-gray to dark gray and red-brown, fine- to medium-grained
and fine- to coarse-grained sand. These materials are pooriy to moderately well
cemented and susceptible to some caving. Due to the variable degree of
cementation in the terrace materials, any temporary slopes should be cut back to a
safe gradient. Some of the terrace materials are relatively low density, but have a
low consolidation potential. The terrace deposits are considered to have a very low
expansion potential.
A review of several geologic maps for this area indicates that the marine-terrace
deposits occur as thin, very gently dipping, mantle-like deposits within 2 to 3 miles
of the coast. One of the older maps (Wilson, 1972) shows these deposits as part of
the Lindavista Formation. However, a more recent map (Weber, 1982) includes
these deposits as part ofthe Bay Point Formation. Review ofthe Shoreline Erosion
Assessment report also indicates that these deposits are mapped as part ofthe Bay
Point Formation.
Santiago Formation (Tsb): The site is mapped as being underlain by the Eocene-
age Santiago Formation (Weber, 1982). The encountered Santiago Formation
consists primarily of dense, well-cemented, tan-gray and green, silty fine sand. The
Santiago Formation is considered to have low expansion and consolidation potential.
Refer to Figure Nos. II and III for details.
J
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carisbad, California Page 10
VII. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS
A. Local and Reaionai Faults
It is our opinion that a known "active" fault presents the greatest seismic risk to the
subject site during the lifetime of the proposed structures. To date, the nearest
known "active" faults to the subject site are the northwest-trending Rose Canyon
Fault, Coronado Bank Fault and the Elsinore Fault.
Rose Canvon Fault: The Rose Canyon Fault Zone (Mount Soledad and Rose Canyon
Faults), located approximately 5 miles west of the subject site, is mapped trending
north-south from Oceanside to downtown San Diego, from where it appears to head
southward into San Diego Bay, through Coronado and offshore. The Rose Canyon
Fault Zone is considered to be a complex zone of onshore and offshore, en echelon
strike slip, oblique reverse, and oblique normal faults. The Rose Canyon Fault is
considered to be capable of causing a 7.5-magnitude earthquake and considered
microselsmically active, although no significant recent earthquake is known to have
occurred on the fault. Investigative work on faults (believed to be part ofthe Rose
Canyon Fault Zone) at the Police Administration and Technical Center in downtown
San Dlego and at the SDG&E facility in Rose Canyon, has encountered offsets in
Holocene (geologically recent) sediments. These findings have been accepted as
confirmed Holocene displacement on the Rose Canyon Fault and this previously
classified "potentially active" fault has now been upgraded to an "active" fault as of
November 1991 (California Division of Mines and Geology — Fault Rupture Hazard
Zones in Caiifornia, 1994).
Coronado Bank Fault: The Coronado Bank Fault is located approximately 20 miles
southwest of the site. Evidence for this fault is based upon geophysical data
J
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 11
(acoustic profiles) and the general alignment of epicenters of recorded seismic
activity (Greene, 1979). An earthquake of 5.3 magnitude, recorded July 13, 1986,
is known to have been centered on the fault or within the Coronado Bank Fault
Zone. Although this fault is considered active, due to the seismicity within the fault
zone, it is significantly less active seismically than the Elsinore Fault (Hileman,
1973). It is postulated that the Coronado Bank Fault is capable of generating a 7.0-
magnitude earthquake and is of great interest due to its close proximity to the
greater San Dlego metropolitan area.
Elsinore Fault: The Elsinore Fault is located approximately 24 miles northeast ofthe
site. The Elsinore Fault extends approximately 200 km (125 miles) from the
Mexican border to the northern end ofthe Santa Ana Mountains. The Elsinore Fault
zone is a 1- to 4-mile-wide, northwest-southeast-trending zone of discontinuous
and en echelon faults extending through portions of Orange, Riverside, San Dlego,
and Imperial Counties. Individual faults within the Elsinore Fault Zone range from
iess than 1 mile to 16 miles in length. The trend, length and geomorphic
expression of the Elsinore Fault Zone identified it as being a part of the highly active
San Andreas Fault system.
Like the other faults in the San Andreas system, the Elsinore Fault is a transverse
fault showing predominantly right-lateral movement. According to Hart, et al.
(1979), this movement averages less than 1 centimeter per year. Along most of its
length, the Elsinore Fault Zone is marked by a bold topographic expression
consisting of linearly aligned ridges, swales and hallows. Faulted Holocene alluvial
deposits (believed to be less than 11,000 years old) found along several segments
of the fault zone suggest that at least part of the zone is currently active.
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 12
Atthough the Elsinore Fault Zone belongs to the San Andreas set of active,
northwest-trending, right-slip faults in the southern California area (Crowell, 1962),
it has not been the site of a major earthquake in historic time, other than a 6.0-
magnitude quake near the town of Elsinore in 1910 (Richter, 1958; Toppozada and
Parke, 1982). However, based on length and evidence of late-Pleistocene or
Holocene displacement, Greensfelder (1974) has estimated that the Elsinore Fault
Zone is reasonably capable of generating an earthquake with a magnitude as large
as 7.5. Recent study and logging of exposures in trenches in Glen Ivy Marsh across
the Glen Ivy North Fault (a strand of the Elsinore Fault Zone between Corona and
Lake Elsinore), suggest a maximum earthquake recurrence interval of 300 years,
and when combined with previous estimates of the long-term horizontal slip rate of
0.8 to 7.0 mm/year, suggest typical earthquake magnitudes of 6 to 7 (Rockwell,
1985).
B. Other Geologic Hazards
Ground Rupture: Ground rupture is characterized by bedrock slippage along an
established fault and may result in displacement ofthe ground surface. For ground
rupture to occur along a fault, an earthquake usually exceeds magnitude 5.0. If a
5.0-magnitude earthquake were to take place on a local fault, an estimated surface-
rupture length 1 mile long could be expected (Greensfelder, 1974). Our
investigation indicates that the subject site is not directly on a known fault zone,
and, therefore, the risk of ground rupture at the site is considered remote.
Ground Shaking: Structural damage caused by seismically induced ground shaking
is a detrimental effect directly related to faulting and earthquake activity. Ground
shaking is considered to be the greatest seismic hazard in San Diego County. The
intensity of ground shaking is dependent on the magnitude of the earthquake, the
J
J
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 13
distance from the earthquake, and local seismic condition. Earthquakes of
magnitude 5.0 Richter scale or greater are generally associated with significant
damage. It Is our opinion that the most serious damage to the site would be
caused by a large earthquake originating on the nearby Rose Canyon Fault Zone.
Although the chance of such an event is low, it could occur within the useful life of
the structures. The anticipated ground accelerations at the site from earthquakes
on faults within 100 miles ofthe site are provided in Tables 1 and 2, Appendix B.
Llauefaction: The liquefaction of saturated sands during earthquakes can result in
major damage to buildings. Liquefaction is the process in which soils are
transformed into a dense fluid that will flow as a liquid when unconfined. It occurs
principally in loose, saturated sands and silts when they are shaken by an
earthquake of sufficient magnitude. On this site, the risk of liquefaction of
foundation material due to seismic shaking is considered to be remote due to the
density of the natural-ground material. No loss of soil strength is anticipated to
occur at the site due to the design seismic event.
Landslides: According to our geologic reconnaissance and a review ofthe geologic
map (Santa Ana Sheet - 1965) and aerial photographs (4-11-53, AXN-8M-99 and
100), there are no known or suspected ancient landslides located on the site.
Tsunami: The site is located at an elevation between 11 feet above mean sea level
(MSL) and 40 feet MSL immediately east ofthe active beach. Based upon historical
information on tsunami activity in Southern California, it is our opinion that the risk
to the site from a tsunami is minimal. In addition, since a vertical concrete seawall
is proposed, adequate protection should be provided.
il
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No, 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 14
Groundwater: No groundwater problems were encountered during the course of
our field investigation and we do not expect significant problems to develop in the
future — if the property is developed as planned and proper drainage is provided.
It should be kept in mind, however, that the proposed grading operations may
change surface drainage patterns and/or reduce permeabilities due to the
densification of compacted soils. Changes of surface and subsurface hydrologic
conditions, plus irrigation of landscaping or significant increases in rainfall, may
result in the appearance of surface or near-surface water at locations where none
existed previously.
Positive drainage measures should be constructed to intercept and divert all surface
runoff waters away from the structure and improvements planned for the site. The
damage from such water is expected to be minor and cosmetic in nature, if good
positive drainage is implemented and maintained at the completion of construction.
Corrective action should be taken on a site-specific basis, If and when it becomes
necessary.
C Bluff Edge Evaluation
As part of our geotechnical investigation, we excavated five test pits to help locate
the existing coastal terrace bluff edge. As indicated on the geologic cross-section
A-A', we determined that the bluff edge is located along contour elevation 18 feet
above mean sea level (MSL). This point on the site is where the marine terrace
deposits slope steeply down to the west and come in contact with the relatively flat
surface of beach sand deposits. The bluff face is currently covered with iceplant, so
it is not visible. We understand that the City of Carlsbad's preliminary assessment
determined the bluff edge to be at approximately elevation contour 30 feet above
MSL along the west side ofthe existing wood deck. However, our test pit at the 30-
J
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, Califomia Page 15
foot MSL slope top encountered approximately 4.5 feet of artificial fill and topsoil
over the terrace deposits.
D. Summarv
It is our opinion that a significant geologic hazard does not exist on the site. No
evidence of faulting or landslide activity was encountered during our investigation of
the site. The site is situated in a developed neighborhood of Carlsbad and in the
event that severe earth shaking does occur from major faulting within the area,
compliance with Uniform Building Code requirements for construction should help
reduce structural damage to a degree considered acceptable by the UBC.
From a geotechnical standpoint, our investigation indicates that the proposed
residence can be constructed at the site provided the recommendations in this
report are followed.
VIII. EARTHOUAKE RISK EVALUATION
Evaluation of earthquake risk requires that the effect of faulting on, and the mass
stability of, a site be evaluated utilizing the Mio seismic design event, i.e., an
earthquake event on an active fault with less than a 10 percent probability of being
exceeded in 50 years. Further, sites are classified by UBC 1997 Edition into "soil
profile types SA through Sp." Soil profile types are defined by their shear velocities
where shear velocity is the speed at which shear waves move through the upper 30
meters (approximately 100 feet) ofthe ground. These are:
J
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 16
SA Greater than 1500 m/s
SB => 760 to 1500 m/s
Sc 360 m/s to 760 m/s
SD => 180 to 360 m/s
SE Less than 180 m/s
SF => Soil requiring specific soil evaluation
By utilizing an earthquake magnitude Mio for a seismic event on an active fault,
knowing the site class and ground type, a prediction of anticipated site ground
acceleration, g, from these events can be estimated. The subject site has been
assigned Classification "Sc."
An estimation of the peak ground acceleration and the repeatable high ground
acceleration (RHGA) likely to occur at the project site by the known significant local
and regional faults within 100 miles of the site is included in Appendix B. Also, a
listing of the known historic seismic events that have occurred within 100 miles of
the site at a magnitude of 5.0 or greater since the year 1800, and the probability of
exceeding the experienced ground accelerations in the future based upon the
historical record, is provided in Appendix B. Both tables generated from computer
programs EQ Fault and EQ Search by Thomas F. Blake (1989) utilizing a digitized
file of late-Quaternary California faults (EQ Fault) and a file listing of recorded
earthquakes (EQSearch). Estimations of site intensity are also provided in these
listings as Modified Mercalli Index values. The Modified Mercalli Intensity Index
follows the EQ Fault and EQ Search tables of Appendix B.
For earthquake resistant design, the Uniform Building Code requires that the design
earthquake acceleration correspond to the one produced by an event with a 10
percent probability of exceedance in 50 years, and that is 0.28g.
J
]
J
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 17
IX. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The following conclusions and recommendations are based upon the practical field
investigation conducted by our firm, and resulting laboratory tests, in conjunction
with our knowledge and experience with the soils in this area of the City of
Carlsbad.
Our investigation revealed that the site is underlain by medium dense to dense
terrace and formational materials with approximately IV2 to 4V2 feet of variable
density fill materials. The loose surface soils will not provide a stable soil base for
the proposed structure and associated improvements. As such, we recommend
that these loose surface soils be removed and recompacted as part of the site
preparation prior to the addition of any proposed fill and/or structural
Improvements. It is our understanding that the site will be cut down to create the
lower-level storage and basement areas. As such, the loose surface soils should be
removed during the excavation process. Due to the poor cementation in the
terrace materials, temporary cut slopes may have to be laid back to a safe gradient.
Some of the deeper terrace materials may have some low in-place densities and
require additional removal during the grading operation. The seawall location was
found to be underlain by dense formational materials at a relatively shallow depth.
Because of the depth of the basement level and the proximity to the property line
improvements, it is very likely that shoring will be required.
A. Preparation of Soils for Site Development
1. The existing structures and vegetation observed on the site should be
J removed prior to the preparation of areas to receive new fill and/or structural
1 improvements. This includes any roots from trees and shrubbery that might
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carisbad, Caiifornia Page 18
extend under the proposed structures or improvements. Large roots have
been known to cause significant damage to foundations. All roots over 1/2-
Inch in diameter shall be removed from soils to be recompacted.'
2. To provide a uniform soils base for the proposed structures and rigid
Improvements (such as the swimming pool, patios, walkways, decking,
driveway, etc.), the existing loose fill materials across the site, should be
excavated to expose firm native soil, or as per the indications of our field
representative. Any other areas observed to include loose soils during
grading shall be excavated to expose firm native soil. The depth of removal
Is expected to be approximately 2 to 4V2 feet over most of the site. The
bottom of the excavation should be scarified to a depth of at least 12 inches,
watered to approximately optimum moisture content, and compacted to at
least 90 percent of Maximum Dry Density. The excavated fill materials to be
used as fiil should be cleaned of any debris and deleterious materials,
watered to approximately optimum moisture content and compacted to at
least 90 percent of Maximum Dry Density, in accordance with ASTM D1557-
98 standards. Those areas supporting proposed improvements or retaining
structures should be prepared in a like manner.
3. No uncontrolled fill soils should remain on the site after completion of any
future site work. In the event that temporary ramps or pads are constructed
of uncontrolled fill soils, the loose fill soils should be removed and/or
recompacted priorto completion ofthe grading operation.
4. Any buried objects, utility lines, abandoned irrigation lines, subsurface
disposal systems, etc., which might be discovered on the site during grading.
J
]
I
J
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, Califomia Page 19
should be removed and properly backfilled with approved on-site or imported
fill soils and compacted to at least 90 percent of Maximum Dry Density.
5. Any backfill soils placed in utility trenches or behind retaining walls that
support structures and other improvements (such as patios, sidewalks,
driveways, pavements, etc.) should be compacted to at least 90 percent of
Maximum Dry Density for low-expansive soils.
Note: Due to the generally poor cementation of the terrace matenals and
the potential for caving, special care should be taken during excavation of
utility trenches and temporary slopes. Because of the depth and
configuration of proposed temporary slopes, shoring will most likely be
required. As a minimum, Cal-OSHA safety standards shall be followed.
B. Design Parameters for Foundations
6. The recommended allowable bearing value for design of foundations for the
proposed residential structure is 2,000 pounds per square foot. This load-
bearing value may be utilized in the design of continuous foundations and
spread footings when founded a minimum of 18 inches (for the proposed
structure) into dense natural ground or properly compacted fill, measured
from the lowest adjacent grade at the time of foundation construction. We
recommend that three-story portions of the structure be founded on at least
24-inch-deep footings. For wider and/or deeper footings, the allowable soil
bearing capacity may be calculated based on the following equation:
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 20
Qa = 1000D-1-500W for footings in compacted fill
Qa = 1500D-I-750W for footings in formation
where
"Qa" is the allowable soil bearing capacity (in psf);
"D" is the depth of the footing (in feet) as measured from the lowest
adjacent grade; and
"W" is the width ofthe footing (in feet).
This load-bearing value may be increased one-third for design loads that
include wind or seismic analysis. In fill soils, an increase of 500 psf in the
allowable bearing value may be allowed for every 1 foot of embedment and
for every additional 1 foot in width over the minimum dimensions indicated
above, up to a maximum of 5,000 psf. Foundations in formational soils may
have an allowable bearing increase of 1,500 psf for each addittonal foot in
depth, and 750 psf for each additional foot in width. The maximum bearing
capacity shall not exceed 6,000 psf.
7. The passive earth pressure of the dense natural-ground soils (to be used for
design of shallow foundations and footings to resist the lateral forces) shall
be based on an Equivalent Fluid Weight of 300 pounds per cubic foot.
This passive earth pressure shall only be considered valid for design if the
ground adjacent to the foundation structure is essentially level for a distance
of at least three times the total depth of the foundation and Is comprised of
properly compacted fill within the depth ofthe foundation.
8. An allowable Coefficient of Friction of 0.40 times the dead load may be used
between the beanng soils and concrete foundations, walls, or floor slabs.
Proposed Kiko Residence
Carlsbad, California
Job No. 02-8201
Page 21
9. The following table summarizes site-specific seismic design criteria to
calculate the base shear needed for the design of the residential structure.
The design criteria was obtained from the Uniform Building Code (1997
edition) based on the soil characteristics and distance to the closest fault.
Parameter Value Reference
Seismic Zone Factor, Z 0.40 Table 16-1
Soil Profile Type Sr Table 16-J
Seismic Coefficient, C?, 0.40NA Table 16-0
Seismic Coefficient, Cv O.SSNv Table 16-R
IMear-Source Factor, Na 1.0 Table 16-S
Near-Source Factor, Nv 1.14 Table 16-T
Seismic Source Type B Table 16-U
10. Based upon our previous laboratory test results and our experience with the
soil types on the subject site, the underlying properly compacted fill and/or
dense natural soils should experience a total settlement of less than 1 inch
and a differential settlement in the magnitude of approximately 1 inch, under
a structural static load within the allowable bearing capacity. The angular
rotation due to static differential settlement is anticipated to be less than
1/240.
11. Our experience indicates that for various reasons, footings and slabs
occasionally crack causing ceramic tiles and other brittle surfaces to become
damaged. Therefore, all footings and slabs should contain at least a nominal
amount of reinforcing steel to reduce the separation of cracks, should they
occur.
J
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 22
11.1 A minimum of steel for continuous footings should include at least four
No. 4 steel bars continuous, with two bars near the bottom of the
footing and two bars near the top. For footings up to 24 inches in
depth, the minimum reinforcement shall consist of four No. 5 bars.
11.2 If isolated square footings are to be used, they should contain, as a
minimum, a grid of No. 4 steel bars on 12-inch centers, both ways,
with no less than three bars each way.
11.3 Interior floor slabs on-grade on properly compacted soil should be a
minimum of 5 inches actual thickness and be reinforced with at least
No. 3 steel bars on 18-inch centers, in both directions, placed
midheight In the slab. Slabs should be underlain by a 3-inch-thick
layer of clean sand (S.E. = 30 or greater) overlying a vapor retardant
such as Vapor Shield (3-mi!, high density, cross laminated) or
equivalent. Slab subgrade soil shall be properly moistened prior to
placement of the vapor retardant and pouring of concrete. It is
recommended that the moisture content of subgrade soil for slabs and
footings be checked within 48 hours prior to concrete placement.
Building slabs may be thicker and more heavily reinforced if the
alternative structural mat slabs are utilized. If this option is chosen,
the allowable bearing capacity for mat design may be 400 pci modulus
of subgrade reaction for soil settlement not exceeding V2-inch under
static loading. For a higher degree of protection against moisture-
related problems, the basement level slab shall preferably be protected
by a waterproof membrane (such as Paraseal) placed as indicated by
the manufacturer. Paraseal membranes are usually placed on a gravel
bas layer.
J
j
Kiko TEST.OUT
EARTHQUAKE SEARCH RESULTS
Page 3
rs
1 1 1 TIME 1 1 1 SITE SITEl
FILE LAT. 1 LONG. 1 DATE 1 (UTC) 1 DEPTH 1 QUAKE 1 ACC. MM 1
CODE NORTH 1 WEST 1 1 H M secl (km)| MAG. 1 g INT. 1
GSP 134.06401 116.3610109/15/19921 084711. 31 9.01 5.201 0. 003 I 1
GSP 34.26201 118.0020106/28/1991|144354. 51 11.01 5.401 0. 004 I 1
GSP 34.1080!116.4040106/29/19921141338. 8 9.01 5.40 0. 004 I
DMG 34.3700 117.65001 12/08/18121 15 0 0. 0 0.01 7.00 0. 015 IV
GSP 34.3400 116.9000111/27/19921 160057. 5 1.01 5.30 0. 004 I
DMG 34.0670 116.3330105/18/19401 55120. 2 0.01 5.20 0. 003 I
DMG 34.0670 116.3330105/18/19401 72132. 7 O.OI 5.00 0. 003 I
GSP 34.1390 116.4310106/28/19921 123640. 6 10.01 5.10 0. 003 I
DMG 33.1830 115.8500104/25/19571 222412. 0 0.0 5.10 0 003 I
GSP 34.3690 116.89701 12/04/19921 020857. 5 3.0 5.30 0 004 I
DMG 34.0830 116.3000105/18/19401 5 358 5 0.0 5.40 0 004 I
MGI i 34.OOOO 118.5000111/19/19181 2018 0 0 0.0 5.00 0 003 I
DMG 134.0000 118.5000108/04/19271 1224 0 0 0.0 5.00 0 003 I
PAS 133.0130 115.8390111/24/19871 131556 5 2.4 6.00 0 006 II
DMG 133.0000 115.8330101/08/1946^ 185418 0 0.0 5.40 0 004 I
DMG 133.0330 115.8210109/30/1971 224611 3 8.0 5.10 0 003 I
GSN 134.2010 116.4360106/28/1992 115734 1 1.0 7.60 0 022 IV
DMG 133.2160 115.8080104/25/1957 215738 7 -0.3 5.20 0 003 I
PAS 133.9190 118.6270101/19/1989 65328 8 11.9 5.00 0 003 I 1
PAS 1 33.0820 115.7750111/24/1987 15414 5 4.9 5.80 0 005 II 1
T-A 133.5000 115.8200105/00/1868 0 0 0 0 0.0 6.30 0 007 II t
DMG 133.9500 118.6320108/31/1930 04036 0 0.0 5.20 0 .003 I i
PAS 133.9440 118.6810 01/01/1979 231438 9 11.3 5.00 0 .003 - 1
GSP 134.2680 116.4020 06/15/1994 162427 5 3.0 5.00 0 .002 - 1 DMG 131.8110 117.1310 12/22/1964 205433 .2 2.3 5.60 0 .004 I 1 GSP 134.3410 116.5290 06/28/1992 124053 .5 6.0 5.20 0 .003 I i DMG 132.9830 115.7330 01/24/1951 717 2 .6 0.0 5.60 0 .004 I i DMG 133.2330 115.7170 10/22/1942 15038 .0 0.0 5.50 0 .004 I
DMG 132.9500 115.7170 06/14/1953 41729 .9 0.0 5.50 0 .004 I
GSP 134.3320 116.4620 07/01/1992 074029 .9 9.0 5.40 0 .003 I
PAS 134.3270 116.4450 03/15/1979 21 716.5 2.5 5.20 0 .003 I
DMG 134.0000 116.0000 04/03/1926 20 8 0 .0 0.0 5.50 0 .004 I
DMG 134.0000 116.0000 09/05/1928 1442 0 .0 0.0 5.00 0 .002 -DMG 132.9000 115.7000 10/02/1928 19 1 0 .0 0.0 5.00 0 .002 -
GSP 134.2310 118.4750 03/20/1994 212012 .3 13.0 5.30 0 .003 I
PAS 133.0980 115.6320 04/26/1981 12 928 .4 3.8 5.70 0 .004 I
GSP 134.2130 118.5370 01/17/1994 123055 .4 18.0 6.70 0 .009 III
v.- iV * * * •ir J^- J< Jm .l'p ^^J^JM ft ft * i: ft ft ft fr ff ft * ftftftftfti
APPROX.
DISTANCE
mi [km]
84.4(135.9)
84.8(136.5)
85.1(136.9)
85.3(137.3)
85.5(137.5)
85.7(137.9)
85.7(137.9)
85.8(138.0)
86.7(139.5)
87.4(140.7)
87.8(141.3)
88.0(141.6)
88.0(141.6)
88.0(141.6)
88.5(142.3)
88.9(143.0)
89.0(143.2)
89.2(143.5)
90.3(145.2)
91.2(146.8)
91.3(147.0)
91.7(147.6)
93.8(150.9)
93.9(151.1)
94.0(151.3)
94.2(151.6)
94.3(151.8)
94.5(152.0)
95.6(153.9)
95.6(153.9)
95.9(154.3)
96.9(156.0)
96.9(156.0)
97.2(156.4)
98.2(158.0)
99.4(160.0)
99.7(160.4)
-END OF SEARCH- 143 EARTHQUAKES FOUND WITHIN THE SPECIFIED SEARCH AREA.
TIME PERIOD OF SEARCH: 1800 TO 2001
LENGTH OF SEARCH TIME: 202 years
THE EARTHQUAKE CLOSEST TO THE SITE IS ABOUT 11.4 MILES (18.4 km) AWAY.
LARGEST EARTHQUAKE MAGNITUDE FOUND IN THE SEARCH RADIUS: 7.6
LARGEST EARTHQUAKE SITE ACCELERATION FROM THIS SEARCH: 0.208 g
COEFFICIENTS FOR GUTENBERG & RICHTER RECURRENCE RELATION:
a-value= 1.518
b-va1ue= 0.381
beta-value= 0.877
(IHI
I Page 4
Kiko TEST.OUT
TABLE OF MAGNITUDES AND EXCEEDANCES:
Earthquake 1 Number of Times 1 Cumulative
Magnitude j Exceeded 1 No. / Year
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
143
143
143
50
27
11
3
1
0.70792
0.70792
0.70792
0.24752
0.13366
0.05446
0.01485
0.00495
1
J
1
I
I Page 5
APPENDIX C
MODIFIED MERCALLI INDEX
I
APPENDIX
C
APPENDIX C
MODIFIED l\//ERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE OF 7931
(Excerpted from the California Division of Conservation Division of Mines
and Geology DMG Note 32)
The first scale to reflect earthquake intensities was developed by deRossi of Italy, and Forel of Switzerland, in the
1880s, and is known as the Rossi-Forel Scale. This scale, with values from I to X, was used for about two decades.
A need for a more refined scale increased with the advancement of the science of seismology, and in 1902, the
Italian seismologist Mercalli devised a new scale on a I to Xll range. The Mercalli Scale was modified in 1931 by
American seismologists Harry 0. Wood and Frank Neumann to take into account modern structural features.
The Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale measures the intensity of an earthquake's effects in a given locality, and is
perhaps much more meaningful to the layman because it is based on actual observations of earthquake effects at
specific places. It should be noted that because the damage used for assigning intensities can be obtained only from
direct firsthand reports, considerable time -- weeks or months - is sometimes needed before an intensity map can be
assembled for a particular earthquake.
On the Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale, values range from I to Xll. The most commonly used adaptation covers the
range of intensity from the conditions of "I - not felt except by very few, favorably situated, ""^o "Xll — damage total,
lines of sight disturbed, objects throv\/n into the air." While an earthquake has only one magnitude, it can have many
intensities, which decrease with distance from the epicenter.
It is difficult to compare magnitude and intensity because intensity is linked with the particular ground and structural
conditions of a given area, as well as distance from the earthquake epicenter, while magnitude depends on the energy
released at the focus of the earthquake.
1 Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable circumstances.
•] Felt only by a few persons at rest, especially on upper floors of buildings. Delicately suspended objects may swing.
III Felt quite noticeably indoors, especially on upper floors of buildings, but many people do not recognize it as an
earthquake. Standing motor cars may rock slightly. Vibration like passing of truck. Duration estimated.
IV During the day felt indoors by many, outdoors by few. At night some awakened. Dishes, windows, doors disturbed;
walls make cracking sound. Sensation like heavy truck striking building. Standing motor cars rocked noticeably.
V Felt by nearly everyone, many awakened. Some dishes, windows, etc., broken; a few instances of cracked plaster;
unstable objects overturned. Disturbances of trees, poles, and other tall objects sometimes noticed. Pendulum clocks
may stop.
VI Felt by all, many frightened and run outdoors. Some heavy furniture moved; a few instances of fallen piaster or
damaged chimneys. Damage slight.
Vil Everybody runs outdoors. Damage negligible in building of good design and construction; slight to moderate In well-
built ordinary structures; considerable In poorly built or badly designed structures; some chimneys broken. Noticed
by persons driving motor cars.
VIII Damage slight in specially designed structures; considerable in ordinary substantial buildings, with partial collapse; great
in pooriy built structures. Panel walls thrown out of frame structures. Fal! of chimneys, factory stacks, columns,
monuments, walls. Heavy furniture overturned. Sand and mud ejected in small amounts. Changes in well water.
Persons driving motor cars disturbed.
IX Damage considerable in specially designed structures; well-designed frame structures thrown out of plumb; great in
substantial buildings with partial collapse. Buildings shifted off foundations. Ground cracked conspicuously.
Underground pipes broken.
X Some well-built wooden structures destroyed; most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations; ground
badly cracked. Rails bent. Landslides considerable from river banks and steep slopes. Shifted sand and mud. Water
splashed (slopped) over banks.
f Few, if any, masonry structures remain standing. Bridges destroyed. Broad fissures in ground. Underground
pipelines completely out of service. Earth slumps and land slips in soft ground. Ralls bent greatly.
XII Damage total. Practically all works of construction are damaged greatly or destroyed. Waves seen on ground surface.
Lines of sight and level are distorted. Objects thrown upward into the air, <•
e
B
I
APPENDIX
D
APPENDIX D
GENERAL EARTHWORK SPECIFICATIONS
0
I
APPENDIX D
GENERAL EARTHWORK SPECIFICATIONS
General
The objective of these specifications is to properly establish procedures for the clearing and preparation of the
existing natural ground or properly compacted fill to receive new fill; for the selection of the fill material; and for
the fill compaction and testing methods to be used.
Scope of Work
The earthwork includes all the activities and resources provided by the contractor to construct in a good
workmanlike manner all the grades of the filled areas shown in the plans. The major items of work covered in this
section include all clearing and grubbing, removing and disposing of materials, preparing areas to be filled,
compacting of fill, compacting of backfills, subdrain installations, and all other work necessary to complete the
grading of the filled areas.
Site Visit and Site Investigation
1. The contractor shall visit the site and carefully study it, and make all inspections necessary in order to
determine the full extent of the work required to complete al! grading in conformance with the drawings and
specifications. The contractor shall satisfy himself as to the nature, location, and extent of the work
conditions, the conformation and condition of the existing ground surface; and the type of equipment, labor,
and facilities needed prior to and during prosecution of the work. The contractor shall satisfy himself as to
the character, quality, and quantity of surface and subsurface materials or obstacles to be encountered. Any
inaccuracies or discrepancies between the actual field conditions and the drawings, or between the drawings
and specifications, must be brought to the engineer's attention in order to clarify the exact nature of the
work to be performed.
2. A soils investigation report has been prepared for this project by GEL It is available for review and should be
used as a reference to the surface and subsurface soil and bedrock conditions on this project. Any
recommendations made in the report of the soil investigation or subsequent reports shall become an
addendum to these specifications.
Authoritv of the Soils Enqineer and Engineering Geologist
The soils engineer shall be the owner's representative to observe and test the construction of fills. Excavation and
the placing of fill shall be under the observation of the soils engineer and his/her representative, and he/she shal!
give a written opinion regarding conformance with the specifications upon completion of grading. The soils
engineer shall have the authority to cause the removal and replacement of porous topsoils, uncompacted or
improperly compacted fills, disturbed bedrock materials, and soft alluvium, and shall have the authority to approve
or reject materials proposed for use in the compacted fill areas.
The soils engineer shall have, in conjunction with the engineering geologist, the authority to approve the
preparation of natural ground and toe-of-fill benches to receive fill material. The engineering geologist shall have
the authority to evaluate the stability of the existing or proposed slopes, and to evaluate the necessity of remedial
measures. If any unstable condition is being created by cutting or filling, the engineering geologist and/or soils
engineer shall advise the contractor and owner immediately, and prohibit grading in the affected area until such
time as corrective measures are taken.
The owner shall decide all questions regarding: {1} the interpretation of the drawings and specifications, (2} the
acceptable fulfillment of the contract on the part of the contractor, and (3) the matter of compensation.
I
Appendix D
Page 2
Clearing and Grubbing
1. Clearing and grubbing shall consist of the removal from all areas to be graded of all surface trash, abandoned
improvements, paving, culverts, pipe, and vegetation {including - but not limited to - heavy weed growth,
trees, stumps, logs and roots larger than 1-inch in diameteri.
2. All organic and inorganic materials resulting from the clearing and grubbing operations shall be collected,
piled, and disposed of by the contractor to give the cleared areas a neat and finished appearance. Burning of
combustible materials on-site shall not be permitted unless allowed by local regulations, and at such times
and in such a manner to prevent the fire from spreading to areas adjoining the property or cleared area.
3. It is understood that minor amounts of organic materials may remain in the fill soils due to the near
impossibility of complete removal. The amount remaining, however, must be considered negligible, and In no
case can be allowed to occur in concentrations or total quantities sufficient to contribute to settlement upon
decomposition.
Preparation of Areas to be Filled
1. After clearing and grubbing, all uncompacted or improperly compacted fills, soft or loose soils, or unsuitable
materials, shall be removed to expose competent natural ground, undisturbed bedrock, or properly compacted
fill as indicated in the soils investigation report or by our field representative. Where the unsuitable materials
are exposed in final graded areas, they shall be removed and replaced as compacted fill.
^1. The ground surface exposed after removal of unsuitable soils shall be scarified to a depth of at least 6
" fll inches, brought to the specified moisture content, and then the scarified ground compacted to at least the
_ specified density. Where undisturbed bedrock is exposed at the surface, scarification and recompaction shall
not be required.
3. All areas to receive compacted fill, including all removal areas and toe-of-fill benches, shall be observed and
approved by the soils engineer and/or engineering geologist prior to placing compacted fill.
4. Where fills are made on hillsides or exposed slope areas with gradients greater than 20 percent, horizontal
benches shall be cut into firm, undisturbed, natural ground in order to provide both lateral and vertical
stability. This is to provide a horizontal base so that each layer Is placed and compacted on a horizontal
plane. The initial bench at the toe of the fill shall be at least 10 feet in width on firm, undisturbed, natural
_ ground at the elevation of the toe stake placed at the bottom of the design slope. The engineer shall
" determine the width and frequency of all succeeding benches, which will vary with the soil conditions and
the steepness of the slope. Ground slopes flatter than 20 percent (5.0:1.0) shall be benched when
considered necessary by the soils engineer.
Fill and Backfill IVlaterial
Lli Unless otherwise specified, the on-site material obtained from the project excavations may be used as fill or
backfill, provided that all organic material, rubbish, debris, and other objectionable material contained therein is first
pr removed. In the event that expansive materials are encountered during foundation excavations within 3 feet of
^ finished grade and they have not been properly processed, they shall be entirely removed or thoroughly mixed with
good, granular material before incorporating them in fills. No footing shall be allowed to bear on soils which, in the
opinion of the soils engineer, are detrimentally expansive ~ unless designed for this clayey condition.
tl^^However, rocks, boulders, broken Portland cement concrete, and bituminous-type pavement obtained from the
^^project excavations may be permitted in the backfill or fill with the following limitations:
Appendix D
Page 3
1. The maximum dimension of any piece used in the top 10 feet shall be no larger than 6 Inches.
2 Clods or hard lumps of earth of 6 inches in greatest dimension shall be broken up before compacting the
material in fill.
3. If the fill material originating from the project excavation contains large rocks, boulders, or hard lumps that
cannot be broken readily, pieces ranging from 6 inches in diameter to 2 feet in maximum dimension may be
used in fills below final subgrade If ail pieces are placed in such a manner (such as windrows) as to eliminate
nesting or voids between them. No rocks over 4 feet will be allowed in the fill.
4. Pieces larger than 6 inches shall not be placed within 12 inches of any structure.
5. Pieces larger than 3 inches shall not be placed within 1 2 inches of the subgrade for paving.
6. Rockfills containing less than 40 percent of soil passing 3/4-inch sieve may be permitted in designated areas.
Specific recommendations shall be made by the soils engineer and be subject to approval by the city
engineer.
7. Continuous observation by the soils engineer is required during rock placement.
8. Special and/or additional recommendations may be provided in writing by the soils engineer to modify,
clarify, or amplify these specifications.
During grading operations, soil types other than those analyzed in the soil investigation report may be
encountered by the contractor. The soils engineer shall be consulted to evaluate the suitability of these soils
as fill materials.
Placina and Compacting Fill Material
1. After preparing the areas to be filled, the approved fill material shall be placed in approximately horizontal
layers, with lift thickness compatible to the material being placed and the type of equipment being used.
Unless otherwise approved by the soils engineer, each layer spread for compaction shall not exceed 8 inches
of loose thickness. Adequate drainage of the fill shall be provided at all times during the construction period.
^ 2. When the moisture content of the fill material is below that specified by the engineer, water shall be added
to it until the moisture content is as specified.
3. When the moisture content of the fill material is above that specified by the engineer, resulting in inadequate
" compaction or unstable fill, the fili material shall be aerated by blading and scarifying or other satisfactory
methods until the moisture content is as specified.
U 4. After each layer has been placed, mixed, and spread evenly. It shall be thoroughly compacted to not less
than the density set forth in the specifications. Compaction shall be accomplished with sheepsfoot rollers,
p multiple-wheel pneumatic-tired rollers, or other approved types of acceptable compaction equipment.
^ Equipment shall be of such design that it will be able to compact the fill to the specified relative compaction.
Compaction shall cover the entire fill area, and the equipment shall make sufficient trips to ensure that the
^ desired density has been obtained throughout the entire fill. At locations where it would be impractical due
to inaccessibility of rolling compacting equipment, fill layers shall be compacted to the specified requirements
by hand-directed compaction equipment.
B
B
Appendix D
Page 4
When soil types or combination of soil types are encountered which tend to develop densely packed surfaces
as a result of spreading or compacting operations, the surface of each layer of fill shall be sufficiently
roughened after compaction to ensure bond to the succeeding layer.
6. Unless otherwise specified, fill slopes shall not be steeper than 2.0 horizontal to 1.0 vertical. In general, fill
slopes shall be finished in conformance with the lines and grades shown on the plans. The surface of fill
slopes shall be overfilled to a distance from finished slopes such that it will allow compaction equipment to
operate freely within the zone of the finished slope, and then cut back to the finished grade to expose the
compacted core. Alternate compaction procedures include the backrolling of slopes with sheepsfoot rollers
in increments of 3 to 5 feet in elevation gain. Alternate methods may be used by the contractor, but they
shall be evaluated for approval by the soils engineer.
7. Unless otherwise specified, all allowed expansive fill material shall be compacted to a moisture content of
approximately 2 to 4 percent above the optimum moisture content. Nonexpansive fill shall be compacted at
near-optimum moisture content. All fill shall be compacted, unless otherwise specified, to a relative
compaction not less than 95 percent for fill in the upper 12 inches of subgrades under areas to be paved
with asphalt concrete or Portland concrete, and not less than 90 percent for other fill. The relative
compaction is the ratio of the dry unit weight of the compacted fill to the laboratory maximum dry unit
weight of a sample of the same soil, obtained in accordance with A.S.T.M. D-1557 test method.
8. The observation and periodic testing by the soils engineer are intended to provide the contractor with an
ongoing measure of the quality of the fill compaction operation. It is the responsibility of the grading
contractor to utilize this information to establish the degrees of compactive effort required on the project.
More importantly, it is the responsibility of the grading contractor to ensure that proper compactive effort is
applied at all times during the grading operation, including during the absence of soils engineering
_ representatives.
Trench Backfill
1. Trench excavations which extend under graded lots, paved areas, areas under the influence of structural
loading, in slopes or close to slope areas, shall be backfilled under the observations and testing of the soils
engineer. All trenches not falling within the aforementioned locations shall be backfilled in accordance with
the City or County regulating agency specifications.
2. Unless otherwise specified, the minimum degree of compaction shall be 90 percent of the laboratory
maximum dry density.
3. Any soft, spongy, unstable, or other similar material encountered in the trench excavation upon which the
bedding material or pipe is to be placed, shall be removed to a depth recommended by the soils engineer and
— replaced with bedding materials suitably densified.
" Bedding material shall first be placed so that the pipe is supported for the full length of the barrel with full
bearing on the bottom segment. After the needed testing of the pipe is accomplished, the bedding shall be
completed to at least 1 foot on top of the pipe. The bedding shall be properly densifled before backfill is
ri placed. Bedding shall consist of granular material with a sand equivatent not less than 30, or other material
^ approved by the engineer.
4. No rocks greater than 6 inches in diameter will be allowed in the backfill placed between 1 foot above the
|5 pipe and 1 foot below finished subgrade. Rocks greater than 2.5 inches in any dimension will not be allowed
in the backfill placed within 1 foot of pavement subgrade.
B
Appendix D
Page 5
Materiai for mechanically compacted backfill shall be placed in lifts of horizontal layers and properly
moistened prior to compaction. In addition, the layers shall have a thickness compatible with the material
being placed and the type of equipment being used. Each layer shall be evenly spread, moistened or dried,
and then tamped or rolled until the specified relative compaction has been attained.
6. Backfill shall be mechanically compacted by means of tamping rollers, sheepsfoot rollers, pneumatic tire
rollers, vibratory rollers, or other mechanical tampers. Impact-type pavement breakers (stompers) will not be
permitted over clay, asbestos cement, plastic, cast iron, or nonreinforced concrete pipe. Permission to use
specific compaction equipment shall not be construed as guaranteeing or implying that the use of such
equipment will not result in damage to adjacent ground, existing improvements, or improvements installed
under the contract. The contractor shall make his/her own determination in this regard.
7. Jetting shall not be permitted as a compaction method unless the soils engineer allows it in writing.
8. Clean granular material shall not be used as backfill or bedding in trenches located in slope areas or within a
distance of 10 feet of the top of slopes unless provisions are made for a drainage system to mitigate the
potential buildup of seepage forces into the slope mass.
Observations and Testinq
1. The soils engineers or their representatives shal! sufficiently observe and test the grading operations so that
they can state their opinion as to whether or not the fill was constructed in accordance with the
specifications.
The soils engineers or their representatives shall take sufficient density tests during the placement of
compacted fill. The contractor should assist the soils engineer and/or his/her representative by digging test
pits for removal determinations and/or for testing compacted fill. In addition, the contractor should cooperate
with the soils engineer by removing or shutting down equipment from the area being tested.
3. Fill shall be tested for compiiance with the recommended relative compaction and moisture conditions. Field
density testing should be performed by using approved methods by A.S.T.M., such as A.S.T.M. D1556,
D2922, and/or D2937. Tests to evaluate density of compacted fill should be provided on the basis of not
less than one test for each 2-foot vertical lift of the fill, but not less than one test for each 1,000 cubic yards
of fill placed. Actual test intervals may vary as field conditions dictate. In fill slopes, approximately half of
the tests shall be made at the fill slope, except that not more than one test needs to be made for each 50
horizontal feet of slope in each 2-foot vertica! lift. Actual test intervals may vary as field conditions dictate.
4. Fill found not to be in conformance with the grading recommendations should be removed or otherwise
handled as recommended by the soils engineer.
Site Protection
tt shall be the grading contractor's obligation to take all measures deemed necessary during grading to maintain
adequate safety measures and working conditions, and to provide erosion-control devices for the protection of
excavated areas, slope areas, finished work on the site and adjoining properties, from storm damage and flood
hazard originating on the project. It shall be the contractor's responsibility to maintain slopes in their as-graded
form until all slopes are in satisfactory compliance with the job specifications, all berms and benches have been
properly constructed, and all associated drainage devices have been installed and meet the requirements of the
specifications.
B
Appendix D
Page 6
observations, testing services, and approvals given by the soils engineer and/or geologist shall not relieve the
contractor of his/her responsibilities of performing the work in accordance with these specifications.
After grading is completed and the soils engineer has finished his/her observations and/or testing of the work, no
further excavation or filling shall be done except under his/her observations.
Adverse Weather Conditions
1. Precautions shall be taken by the contractor during the performance of site clearing, excavations, and
grading to protect the worksite from flooding, ponding, or inundation by poor or improper surface drainage.
Temporary provisions shall be made during the rainy season to adequately direct surface drainage away from
and off the worksite. Where low areas cannot be avoided, pumps should be kept on hand to continually
remove water during periods of rainfall.
2. During periods of rainfall, plastic sheeting shall be kept reasonably accessible to prevent unprotected slopes
from becoming saturated. Where necessary during periods of rainfall, the contractor shall Install checkdams,
desilting basins, rip-rap, sandbags, or other devices or methods necessary to control erosion and provide safe
conditions.
3. During periods of rainfall, the soils engineer should be kept informed by the contractor as to the nature of
remedial or preventative work being performed (e.g. pumping, placement of sandbags or plastic sheeting,
other labor, dozing, etc.).
4. Following periods of rainfall, the contractor shall contact the soils engineer and arrange a walk-over of the
site in order to visually assess rain-related damage. The soils engineer may also recommend excavations and
testing in order to aid in his/her assessments. At the request of the soils engineer, the contractor shall make
excavations in order to evaluate the extent of rain-related damage.
5. Rain-related damage shall be considered to include, but may not be limited to, erosion, silting, saturation,
swelling, structural distress, and other adverse conditions identified by the soils engineer. Soil adversely
affected shall be classified as Unsuitable Materials, and shall be subject to overexcavation and replacement
with compacted fill or other remedial grading, as recommended by the soils engineer.
6. Relatively level areas, where saturated soils and/or erosion gullies exist to depths of greater than 1.0 foot,
shall be overexcavated to unaffected, competent material. Where less than 1.0 foot in depth, unsuitable
materials may be processed in place to achieve near-optimum moisture conditions, then thoroughly
recompacted in accordance with the applicable specifications. If the desired results are not achieved, the
affected materials shall be over-excavated, then replaced in accordance with the applicable specifications.
„ 7. in slope areas, where saturated soils and/or erosion gullies exist to depths of greater than 1.0 foot, they shall
be overexcavated and replaced as compacted flli in accordance with the applicable specifications. Where
affected materials exist to depths of 1.0 foot or less below proposed finished grade, remedial grading by
moisture-conditioning in place, followed by thorough recompaction in accordance with the applicable grading
guidelines herein presented may be attempted. If materials shall be overexcavated and replaced as
compacted fill, it shall be done in accordance with the slope-repair recommendations herein. As field
conditions dictate, other slope-repair procedures may be recommended by the soils engineer.
1
B
B
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 29
J E, Temporary Slopes
21. We anticipate that temporary slopes into the terrace material of
approximately 10 to 22 feet in height may be required during excavation of
the lower-level living areas. Based on the results of our field investigation, it
is our opinion that the following temporary-slope design criteria may be
_j considered in areas where the excavation slope top will be at least 18 feet
^ away from any existing structures:
^ The existing cemented formation materials may be cut vertical for the lower
i 5 feet and at a slope ration of 0.75 horizontal to 1.0 vertical for the remaining
^ height (for an unsupported period not to exceed eight weeks). For the
J basement areas, the cuts shall be from the heel ofthe foundation and extend
to at least 12 feet horizontally at the ground level. The basement wall
a backfill shall consist of non-expansive soli.
1
J Any plans for slopes in excess of the assumed 22-foot maximum must be
^ presented to our office prior to grading to allow time for review and specific
J recommendations, if warranted. Proper drainage away from the excavation
— shall be provided at ali times. Soil stockpiles shall not be placed within 6 feet
^ from the top of the cuts.
A representative of Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. must observe any
steep temporary slopes during excavation. In the event that soils and
formational material comprising a slope are not as anticipated, any required
slope design changes would be presented at that time. If the temporary
slopes as recommended herein are not developed, then shoring will be
required.
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 30
22. Where not superseded by specific recommendations presented in this report,
trenches, excavations and temporary slopes at the subject site shall be
constructed in accordance with Title 8, Construction Safety Orders, issued by
OSHA.
23. It is recommended that all compacted fill slopes and natural cut slopes be
planted with an erosion resistant plant, in conformance with the requirements
of the City of Carlsbad.
F. Floor Slab Vapor Transmission
24. Vapor moisture can cause some problems to moisture sensitive floors, some
floor sealers, or sensitive equipment in direct contact with the floor, in
addition to mildew and staining on slabs, walls and carpets.
25. The common practice in Southern California is to place vapor retarders made
of PVC, or of polyethylene. PVC retarders are made in thickness ranging
from 10- to 60-mil. Polyethylene retarders, called visqueen, range from 5- to
i-M 10-mil in thickness. The thicker the plastic, the stronger the resistance
against puncturing.
26. Although polyethylene (visqueen) products are most commonly used,
Li products such as Vaporshield possess much higher tensite strength and are
n more specifically designed for and intended to retard moisture transmission
M into concrete slabs. The use of Vaporshield or equivalent is highly
a recommended when a structure is intended for moisture-sensitive floor
coverings or uses.
B
B
1
1
rii
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 31
27. The vapor retarders need to have joints lapped and sealed with mastic or
manufacturer's recommended tape for additional protection. To provide
some protection to the moisture retarder, a layer of at least 2 inches of clean
sand on top and 2 inches at the bottom shall also be provided. No heavy
equipment, stakes or other puncturing instruments shall be used on top of
the liner before or during concrete placement. In actua! practice, stakes are
often driven through the retarder material, equipment is dragged or rolled
across the retarder, overtapping or jointing is not properly implemented, etc.
All these construction deficiencies reduce the retarder's effectiveness.
The vapor retarders are not waterproof. They are intended to help prevent
or reduce capillary migration of vapor through the soil Into the pores of
concrete slabs. Other waterproofing systems must supplement vapor
retarders if full waterproofing is desired. The owner should be consulted to
determine the specific level of protection required, especially for basement-
level areas.
G. Site Drainaae Considerations
28. Adequate measures shall be taken to properly finish-grade the site after the
structures and other improvements are in place. Drainage waters from this
site and adjacent properties are to be directed away from foundations, floor
slabs, footings, and slopes, onto the natural drainage direction for this area
or into properly designed and approved drainage facilities. Roof gutters and
downspouts should be installed on all structures, with runoff directed away
from the foundations via closed drainage lines. Proper subsurface and
surface drainage will help minimize the potential for waters to seek the level
of the bearing soils under the foundations, footings, and floor slabs. Failure
B
B
1
1 1 . i
0
B
B
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 32
to observe this recommendation could result in undermining and differential
settlement of the structure or other improvements on the site.
The ground surface adjacent to building foundations shall be sloped at a
gradient of at least 5 percent within 10 feet, draining away from the
foundations.
In addition, appropriate erosion-control measures shall be taken at all time
^ during construction to prevent surface runoff waters from entering footing
^ excavations and ponding on finished building pads or running uncontrolled
. j over the tops of newly constructed cut or fill slopes. Particular care should be
^ taken to prevent saturation of any temporary construction slopes.
J
29. Planter areas, flower beds, and planter boxes shall be sloped to drain away
from the foundations, footings, and floor slabs. Planter boxes shall be
^ constructed with a sealed bottom and a subsurface drain, installed in gravel,
J with the direction of subsurface and surface flow away from the foundations,
^ footings, and floor slabs, to an adequate drainage facility. All landscaped
'J areas shall be provided with proper area drains.
J H. General Recommendations
30. Following placement of any concrete floor slabs, sufficient drying time should
a be allowed prior to placement of floor coverings. Premature placement of
floor coverings could result in degradation of adhesive materials and
loosening ofthe finish-floor materials.
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 33
31. In order to minimize any work delays at the subject site during site
devetopment, this firm should be contacted 24 hours prior to any need for
observation of footing or caisson excavations or field density testing of
compacted fill soils. If possible, placement of formwork and steel
reinforcement in footing excavations should not occur prior to observation of
the excavations; in the event that our observation reveals the need for
deepening or redesigning foundation structures at any locations, any
formwork or stee! reinforcement in the affected footing excavation areas
would have to be removed prior to correction of the observed problem (i.e.,
deepening the footing excavation, recompacting soli in the bottom of the
excavation, etc.).
X. GRADING NOTES
Any required grading operations shall be performed in accordance with the General
Earthwork Specifications (Appendix B) and the requirements ofthe City of Carlsbad
Grading Ordinance.
32. Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. recommends that we be asked to verify the
actual soil conditions revealed during site grading work and footing
excavations to be as anticipated In this "Report of Preliminary Geotechnical
InvestigationZ In addition, the compaction of any fill soils placed during site
grading work must be tested by the soil engineer. It is the responsibility of
the grading contractor to comply with the requirements on the grading or
building plans and the local grading ordinance.
33. It is the responsibility of the owner and/or developer to ensure that the
recommendations summarized in the report are carried out In the field
B <rr<
B 1
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 34
operations and that our recommendations for design of the project are
Incorporated in the building and grading plans. Our firm should review the
grading and foundation plans when they become availabte.
34. This firm does not practice or consult in the field ofsafety engineering. We
do not direct the contractor's operations, and we cannot be responsible for
the safety of personnel other than our own on the site; the safety of others is
the responsibility of the contractor. The contractor should notify the owner if
he considers any ofthe recommended actions presented herein to be unsafe.
XI. LIMITATIONS
Our conclusions and recommendations have been based on all available data
obtained from our field investigation and laboratory analysis, as well as our
experience with the soils and native materials located in the City of Carlsbad. Of
necessity, we must assume a certain degree of continuity between exploratory
_ excavations and/or natural exposures. The actual soil conditions between
^ exploratory excavations may differ. It is, therefore, necessary tbat all
observations, conclusions, and recommendations be verified at tbe time
grading operations begin or when footing excavations are placed. In the
^ event discrepancies are noted, additional recommendations may be issued,
if required.
The work performed and recommendations presented herein are the result of an
L Investigation and analysis that meet the contemporary standard of care in our
profession with the County of San Diego. No warranty is provided.
0
B
B
Proposed Kiko Residence
Carlsbad, California
Job No. 02-8201
Page 35
This report should be considered valid for a period of two (2) years, and is subject
to review by our firm following that time. The firm of Geotecbnical Exploration,
Inc. shall not be held responsible for changes to the physical condition of the
property, such as addition of fill soils or changing drainage patterns, which occur
subsequent to issuance ofthis report.
Once again, should any questions arise concerning this report, please feel free to
contact the undersigned. Reference to our Job No. 02-8201 will help to expedite
a reply to your inquiries.
Respectfully submitted,
GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC.
Jay-<. hfeiser. Senior Project Geologist
Jaime A. Cerros, P.E.
R.C.E. 34422/G.E. 2007
Senior Geotechnical Engineer
3KH/LDR/JAC/pj
C.E.G. 999cexp. 3-31-D33/R.G. 3391
B
B
B
B
REFERENCES
JOB NO. 02-8201
June 2002
Association of Engineering Geologists, 1973, Geology and Earthquake Hazards, Planners Guide to the
Seismic Safety Element, Southern California Section, Association of Engineering Geologists, Special
Publication, Published July 1973, p. 44.
California Division of Mines and Geology - Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zones Map, November 1,
1991.
Clarke, S.H., H.G. Greene, M.P. Kennedy and J.G. Vedder, 1987, Geologic Map ofthe Inner-Southern
California Continental Margin in H.G. Greene and M.P. Kennedy (editors),.California Continental Margin
Map Series, Map lA, Calif. Div. of Mines and Geology, scale 1:250,000.
Crowell, J.C, 1952, Displacement along the San Andreas Fault, California; Geologic Society of America
Special Paper 71, 61 p.
Greene, H.G., 1979, Implication of Fault Patterns In the Inner California Continental Borderland
between San Pedro and Oceanside, in "Earthquakes and Other Perils, Oceanside Region," P.L. Abbott
and W.J. Elliott, editors.
Greensfelder, R.W., 1974, Maximum Credible Rock Acceleration from Earthquakes In California;
California Division of Mines and Geology, Map Sheet 23.
Hart, E.W., D.P. Smith and R.B. Saul, 1979, Summary Report: Fault Evaluation Program, 1978 Area
(Peninsular Ranges-Salton Trough Region), Calif. Div. of Mines and Geology, OFR 79-10 SF, 10.
Hart E.W., 1980, Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Calif. Div. of Mines and Geology, Special
Publication 42, Rev. March 1980, p. 25.
Hileman, J.A., CR. Allen and J.M. Nordquist, 1973, Seismicity of the Southern California Region,
January 1, 1932 to December 31, 1972; Seismological Laboratory, Cal-Tech, Pasadena, Calif.
Kennedy, M.P., 1975, Geology ofthe Oceanside Metropolitan Area, California; Bulletin 200, Calif. Div.
of Mines and Geology, 1975.
Kennedy, M.P., and S.H. Clarke, 2001, Late Quaternary Faulting In San Diego Bay and Hazard to the
Coronado Bridge, California Geology, July/August 2001.
Kennedy, M.P. and S.H. Clarke, 1997A, Analysis of Late Quaternary Faulting in San Diego Bay and
Hazard to the Coronado Bridge, Calif. Div. of Mines and Geology Open-file Report 97-lOA.
Kennedy, M.P. and S.H. Clarke, 1997B, Age of Faulting in San Diego Bay in the Vicinity of the
Coronado Bridge, an addendum to Analysis of Late Quaternary Faulting in San Diego Bay and Hazard
to the Coronado Bridge, Calif. Div. of Mines and Geology Open-file Report 97-lOB.
Kennedy, M.P., S.H. Clarke, H.G. Greene, R.C. Jachens, V.E. Langenheim, J.J. More and D.M. Burns,
1994, A Digital (GIS) Geological/Geophysical/Seismological Data Base for the San Diego 30-x50'
Quadrangle, California — A New Generation, Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v.
26, p. 63.
Kennedy, M.P. and G.W. Moore, 1971, Stratigraphic Relations of Upper Cretaceous and Eocene
Formations, San Dlego Coastal Area, California, American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin,
V. 55, p. 709-722.
' 1
Li
Q
B
1
Page 2
Kennedy, M.P., S.S. Tan, R.H. Chapman and G.W. Chase, 1975, Character and Recency of Faulting,
San Diego Metropolitan Area, California, Calif. Div. of Mines and Geology Special Report 123, 33 pp.
Kennedy, M.P. and E.E. Welday, 1980, Character and Recency of Faulting Offshore, metropolitan San
Diego California, Calif. Div. of Mines and Geology Map Sheet 40, 1:50,000.
Kern, J.P. and T.K. Rockwell, 1992, Chronology and Deformation of Quaternary Marine Shorelines, San
Diego County, California in Heath, E. and L. Lewis (editors). The Regressive Pleistocene Shoreline,
Coastal Southern California, pp. 1-8.
Lindvall, S.C. and T.K. Rockwell, 1995, Holocene Activity ofthe Rose Canyon Fault Zone in San Diego,
California, Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 100, no. B-12, p. 24121-24132.
McEuen, R.B. and CJ. Pinckney, 1972, Seismic Risk in Oceanside; Transactions of the Oceanside
Society of Natural History, Vol. 17, No. 4, 19 July 1972.
Moore, G.W. and M.P. Kennedy, 1975, Quaternary Faults in San Diego Bay, California, U.S.Geological
Survey Journal of Research, v. 3, p. 589-595.
Richter, C.G., 1958, Elementary Seismology, W.H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco, Calif.
Rockwell, T.K., D.E. Millman, R.S. McElwain, and D.L. Lamar, 1985, Study of Seismic Activity by
Trenching Along the Glen Ivy North Fault, Elsinore Fault Zone, Southern California: Lamar-Merifield
Technical Report 85-1, U.S.G.S. Contract 14-08-0001-21376, 19p.
Simons, R.S., 1977, Seismicity of San Diego, 1934-1974, Seismological Society of America Bulletin, v.
67, p. 809-826.
Tan, S.S., 1995, Landslide Hazards in Southern Part of San Diego Metropolitan Area, San Diego
County, Calif. Div. of Mines and Geology Open-file Report 95-03.
Toppozada, T.R. and D.L. Parke, 1982, Areas Damaged by California Earthquakes, 1900-1949; Calif.
Div. of Mines and Geology, Open-file Report 82-17, Sacramento, Calif.
Treiman, J.A., 1993, The Rose Canyon Fault Zone, Southern California, Calif. Div. of Mines and
Geology Open-file Report 93-02, 45 pp, 3 plates.
SITE MAP
\ \ X \ • v^ '
At K
: VP ?is^fi:.
, vi-\ r.VM'i-v'
• Vi- -R.'. • ••
. IS'!! A'
\ VI-'
1 im'TWv
BUEHA PL
KNOMLES -i)
90C >ti
r^w MS • • Xr'
5M
Site
Proposecl Kiko Residence
2649 Ocean Street
Carisbad, CA.
Figure No. la
Job No. 02-8201
J
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 6
Based on our experience with similar soils and our visual classification, it is our
opinion that the on-site soils have a very low expansion potential, with an
expansion index of less than 20.
A direct shear test was performed on relatively undisturbed sample In order to
evaluate the soil strength and support capacity of the existing dense natural soils.
The shear test was performed with a constant strain rate direct shear machine. The
test specimen was saturated and then sheared under various normal loads at a slow
rate to allow for drainage of the sample.
Based on laboratory test data, our observations of the primary soil types on the
project, and our previous experience with laboratory testing of similar soils in this
area of the County of San Diego, our Geotechnical Engineer has assigned
conservative values for friction angle, coefficient of friction, and cohesion to those
soils that will have significant lateral support or bearing functions on the project.
The assigned values are presented in Figure No. Ill and have been utilized in
determining the recommended soil bearing capacity, as well as active and passive
earth pressure design criteria for retaining wall and foundation design.
V. GENERAL GEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
The San Dlego County area is part of a seismically active region of California. It is
on the eastern boundary of the Southern California Continental Borderland, part of
the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province. This region is part of a broad tectonic
boundary between the North American and Pacific Plates. The actual plate
boundary is characterized by a complex system of active, major, right-lateral strike-
slip faults, trending northwest/southeast. This fault system extends eastward to
the San Andreas Fault (approximately 70 miles from Oceanside) and westward to
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 7
the San Clemente Fault (approximately 50 miles off-shore from Oceanside) (Berger
and Schug, 1991).
During recent history, the San Diego County area has been relatively quiet
seismically. No fault ruptures or major earthquakes have been experienced in
historic time within the San Diego area. Since earthquakes have been recorded by
instruments (since the 1930s), the San Diego County area has experienced
scattered seismic events with Richter magnitudes generally less than 4.0. During
June 1985, a series of small earthquakes occurred beneath San Diego Bay; three of
these earthquakes had recorded magnitudes of 4.0 to 4.2. In addition, the
Oceanside earthquake of July 13, 1986, located approximately 26 miles offshore of
the City of Oceanside, resulted in a magnitude of 5.3 (Hauksson, 1988).
In California, major earthquakes can generalty be correlated with movement on
active faults. As defined by the California Division of Mines and Geology (Hart,
E.W., 1980), an "active" fault is one that has had ground surface displacement
within Holocene time (about the last 11,000 years). Additionally, faults along which
major historical earthquakes have occurred (about the last 210 years In California)
are also considered to be active (Association of Engineering Geologist, 1973). The
California Division of Mines and Geology defines a "potentially active" fault as one
that has had ground surface displacement during Quaternary time, that is, during
the past 11,000 to 1.6 million years (Hart, E.W., 1980).
VI. SITE-SPECIFIC GEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION
A geologic investigation of the site was conducted to evaluate the on-site geology
and potential of geologic hazards that might affect the site. Our Investigation drew
J
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 8
upon information gathered from published and unpublished geologic maps and
reports, as well as the results of our recent exploratory excavations.
The subject site is located within a residential area along the west side of Ocean
Street, along the edge of the coastal bluff in the City of Carlsbad. The subject site
is located in an area with moderate to high geologic risk (as Identified by Map 12b
of the "Shoreline Erosion Assessment and Atlas of the San Diego Region — Volume
II" [California Department of Boating and Waterways and San Diego Association of
Governments]) due to conditions identified as '"unprotected, unfavorable geology,
inadequate setback and inadequate deslgnZ' No faults were shown to cross the
site. The Rose Canyon Fault is located approximately 5 miles west of the subject
site.
Our field investigation and review of pertinent geologic maps and reports indicate
that the site is underlain by a limited amount of artificial fill soils, marine terrace
deposits and the Santiago Formation.
Artificial Fill (Oaf): A limited amount of fill (approximately IVz to 4 feet) was
encountered on the surface mostly in the western portion of the site. The fill is
loose to medium dense and consists of red-brown to gray-brown, silty, fine to
medium sand with roots and sandstone rock fragments. The fills are considered to
have a very low expansion potential. Refer to Figure Nos. II and III for details.
Beach Deposits (Ob): The beach deposits encountered at the site consist of loose
to medium dense, dry to damp, light gray, fine to medium sand with lenses of
cobble 1 to 6 inches in diameter. These materials range from 4 to 4V2 feet In
thickness and were encountered at the western portion of the site. These soils are
J
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 9
considered to have a negligible expansion potential. Refer to Figure Nos. II and III
for details.
Marine-Terrace Deposits (Ot): The major portion of the site is underlain by
Pleistocene-age marine-terrace deposits. These materials are medium dense to
dense and consist of tan-gray to dark gray and red-brown, fine- to medium-grained
and fine- to coarse-grained sand. These materials are poorly to moderately well
cemented and susceptible to some caving. Due to the variable degree of
cementation in the terrace materials, any temporary slopes should be cut back to a
safe gradient. Some of the terrace materials are relatively low density, but have a
low consolidation potential. The terrace deposits are considered to have a very low
expansion potential.
A review of several geologic maps for this area indicates that the marine-terrace
deposits occur as thin, very gently dipping, mantle-like deposits within 2 to 3 miles
of the coast. One of the older maps (Wilson, 1972) shows these deposits as part of
the Lindavista Formation. However, a more recent map (Weber, 1982) includes
these deposits as part of the Bay Point Formation. Review of the Shoreline Erosion
Assessment report also indicates that these deposits are mapped as part ofthe Bay
Point Formation.
Santiago Formation (Tsb): The site is mapped as being underlain by the Eocene-
age Santiago Formation (Weber, 1982). The encountered Santiago Formation
consists primarily of dense, well-cemented, tan-gray and green, silty fine sand. The
Santiago Formation is considered to have low expansion and consolidation potential.
Refer to Figure Nos. II and III for details.
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 10
VII, GEOLOGIC HAZARDS
A. Local and Reaionai Faults
It is our opinion that a known "active" fault presents the greatest seismic risk to the
subject site during the lifetime of the proposed structures. To date, the nearest
known "active" faults to the subject site are the northwest-trending Rose Canyon
Fault, Coronado Bank Fault and the Elsinore Fault.
Rose Canvon Fault: The Rose Canyon Fault Zone (Mount Soledad and Rose Canyon
Faults), located approximately 5 miles west ofthe subject site, is mapped trending
north-south from Oceanside to downtown San Diego, from where It appears to head
southward Into San Dlego Bay, through Coronado and offshore. The Rose Canyon
Fault Zone is considered to be a complex zone of onshore and offshore, en echelon
strike slip, oblique reverse, and oblique normal faults. The Rose Canyon Fault is
considered to be capable of causing a 7.5-magnitude earthquake and considered
microselsmically active, atthough no significant recent earthquake is known to have
occurred on the fault. Investigative work on faults (believed to be part of the Rose
Canyon Fault Zone) at the Police Administration and Technical Center in downtown
San Diego and at the SDG&E facility in Rose Canyon, has encountered offsets in
Holocene (geologically recent) sediments. These findings have been accepted as
confirmed Holocene displacement on the Rose Canyon Fault and this previously
classified "potentially active" fault has now been upgraded to an "active" fault as of
November 1991 (Catifornia Division of Mines and Geology — Fault Rupture Hazard
Zones in California, 1994).
Coronado Bank Fault: The Coronado Bank Fault is located approximately 20 miles
southwest of the site. Evidence for this fault is based upon geophysical data
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 11
(acoustic profiles) and the general alignment of epicenters of recorded seismic
activity (Greene, 1979). An earthquake of 5.3 magnitude, recorded July 13, 1986,
is known to have been centered on the fault or within the Coronado Bank Fault
Zone. Although this fault is considered active, due to the seismicity within the fault
zone, it is significantly less active seismically than the Elsinore Fault (Hileman,
1973). It is postulated that the Coronado Bank Fault Is capable of generating a 7.0-
magnltude earthquake and is of great interest due to its close proximity to the
greater San Diego metropolitan area.
Elsinore Fault: The Elsinore Fault Is located approximately 24 miles northeast ofthe
site. The Elsinore Fault extends approximately 200 km (125 miles) from the
Mexican border to the northern end ofthe Santa Ana Mountains. The Elsinore Fault
zone is a 1- to 4-mile-wide, northwest-southeast-trending zone of discontinuous
and en echelon faults extending through portions of Orange, Riverside, San Dlego,
and Imperial Counties. Individual faults within the Elsinore Fault Zone range from
less than 1 mile to 16 miles in length. The trend, length and geomorphic
expression of the Elsinore Fault Zone identified it as being a part ofthe highly active
San Andreas Fault system.
Like the other faults in the San Andreas system, the Elsinore Fault is a transverse
fault showing predominantly right-lateral movement. According to Hart, et al.
(1979), this movement averages less than 1 centimeter per year. Along most of its
length, the Elsinore Fault Zone is marked by a bold topographic expression
consisting of linearly aligned ridges, swales and hallows. Faulted Holocene alluvial
deposits (believed to be less than 11,000 years old) found along several segments
of the fault zone suggest that at least part of the zone is currently active.
J
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 12
Although the Elsinore Fault Zone belongs to the San Andreas set of active,
northwest-trending, right-slip faults in the southern California area (Crowell, 1962),
it has not been the site of a major earthquake in histonc time, other than a 6.0-
magnitude quake near the town of Elsinore in 1910 (Richter, 1958; Toppozada and
Parke, 1982). However, based on length and evidence of late-Pleistocene or
Holocene displacement, Greensfelder (1974) has estimated that the Elsinore Fault
Zone is reasonably capable of generating an earthquake with a magnitude as large
as 7.5. Recent study and logging of exposures in trenches in Glen Ivy Marsh across
the Glen Ivy North Fault (a strand of the Elsinore Fault Zone between Corona and
Lake Elsinore), suggest a maximum earthquake recurrence interval of 300 years,
and when combined with previous estimates of the long-term horizontal slip rate of
0.8 to 7.0 mm/year, suggest typical earthquake magnitudes of 6 to 7 (Rockwell,
1985).
6. Otber Geologic Hazards
Ground Rupture: Ground rupture is characterized by bedrock slippage along an
established fault and may result in displacement ofthe ground surface. For ground
rupture to occur along a fault, an earthquake usually exceeds magnitude 5.0. If a
5.0-magnItude earthquake were to take place on a local fault, an estimated surface-
rupture length 1 mile long could be expected (Greensfelder, 1974). Our
investigation indicates that the subject site is not directly on a known fault zone,
and, therefore, the risk of ground rupture at the site is considered remote.
Ground Shaking: Structural damage caused by seismically induced ground shaking
is a detrimental effect directly related to faulting and earthquake activity. Ground
shaking is considered to be the greatest seismic hazard in San Diego County. The
intensity of ground shaking is dependent on the magnitude of the earthquake, the
J
]
1
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 13
distance from the earthquake, and local seismic condition. Earthquakes of
magnitude 5.0 Richter scale or greater are generally associated with significant
damage. It is our opinion that the most serious damage to the site would be
caused by a large earthquake originating on the nearby Rose Canyon Fault Zone.
Although the chance of such an event is low, it could occur within the useful life of
the structures. The anticipated ground accelerations at the site from earthquakes
on faults within 100 miles ofthe site are provided in Tables 1 and 2, Appendix B.
Liquefaction: The liquefaction of saturated sands during earthquakes can result in
major damage to buildings. Liquefaction is the process in which soils are
transformed into a dense fluid that will flow as a liquid when unconfined. It occurs
principally in loose, saturated sands and silts when they are shaken by an
earthquake of sufficient magnitude. On this site, the risk of liquefaction of
foundation material due to seismic shaking is considered to be remote due to the
density of the natural-ground material. No loss of soil strength Is anticipated to
occur at the site due to the design seismic event.
Landslides: According to our geologic reconnaissance and a review ofthe geologic
map (Santa Ana Sheet - 1965) and aerial photographs (4-11-53, AXN-8M-99 and
100), there are no known or suspected ancient landslides located on the site.
Tsunami: The site is located at an elevation between 11 feet above mean sea level
(MSL) and 40 feet MSL immediately east ofthe active beach. Based upon historical
information on tsunami activity in Southern California, it is our opinion that the risk
to the site from a tsunami is minimal. In addition, since a vertical concrete seawall
is proposed, adequate protection should be provided.
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 14
Groundwater: No groundwater problems were encountered during the course of
our field investigation and we do not expect significant problems to develop in the
future — if the property is developed as planned and proper drainage is provided.
It should be kept in mind, however, that the proposed grading operations may
change surface drainage patterns and/or reduce permeabilities due to the
densification of compacted soils. Changes of surface and subsurface hydrologic
conditions, plus irrigation of landscaping or significant increases in rainfall, may
result in the appearance of surface or near-surface water at locations where none
existed previously.
Positive drainage measures should be constructed to intercept and divert all surface
runoff waters away from the structure and improvements planned for the site. The
damage from such water is expected to be minor and cosmetic in nature, if good
positive drainage is implemented and maintained at the completion of construction.
Corrective action should be taken on a site-specific basis, if and when it becomes
necessary.
C. Bluff Edge Evaluation
As part of our geotechnical Investigation, we excavated five test pits to help locate
the existing coastal terrace bluff edge. As indicated on the geologic cross-section
A-A', we determined that the bluff edge is located along contour elevation 18 feet
above mean sea level (MSL). This point on the site is where the marine terrace
deposits slope steeply down to the west and come in contact with the relatively flat
surface of beach sand deposits. The bluff face is currently covered with iceplant, so
it is not visible. We understand that the City of Carlsbad's preliminary assessment
determined the bluff edge to be at approximately elevation contour 30 feet above
MSL along the west side of the existing wood deck. However, our test pit at the 30-
J
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, Califomia Page 15
foot MSL slope top encountered approximately 4.5 feet of artificial fill and topsoil
over the terrace deposits.
D. Summarv
It is our opinion that a significant geologic hazard does not exist on the site. No
evidence of faulting or landslide activity was encountered during our investigation of
the site. The site is situated in a developed neighborhood of Carlsbad and In the
event that severe earth shaking does occur from major faulting within the area,
compliance with Uniform Building Code requirements for construction should help
reduce structural damage to a degree considered acceptable by the UBC.
From a geotechnical standpoint, our investigation indicates that the proposed
residence can be constructed at the site provided the recommendations in this
report are followed.
VIII. EARTHOUAKE RISK EVALUATION
Evaluation of earthquake risk requires that the effect of faulting on, and the mass
stability of, a site be evaluated utilizing the Mio seismic design event. I.e., an
earthquake event on an active fault with less than a 10 percent probability of being
exceeded in 50 years. Further, sites are classified by UBC 1997 Edition into "soil
profile types SA through Sp." Soil profile types are defined by their shear velocities
where shear velocity Is the speed at which shear waves move through the upper 30
meters (approximately 100 feet) ofthe ground. These are:
J
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No, 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 16
SA => Greater than 1500 m/s
SB => 760 to 1500 m/s
Sc => 360 m/s to 760 m/s
SD => 180 to 360 m/s
SE => Less than 180 m/s
Sp => Soil requiring specific soil evaluation
By utilizing an earthquake magnitude Mio for a seismic event on an active fault,
knowing the site class and ground type, a prediction of anticipated site ground
acceleration, g, from these events can be estimated. The subject site has been
assigned Classification "Sc."
An estimation of the peak ground acceleration and the repeatable high ground
acceleration (RHGA) likely to occur at the project site by the known significant local
and regional faults within 100 miles of the site is included in Appendix B. Also, a
listing of the known historic seismic events that have occurred within 100 miles of
the site at a magnitude of 5.0 or greater since the year 1800, and the probability of
exceeding the experienced ground accelerations in the future based upon the
historical record, is provided in Appendix B. Both tables generated from computer
programs EQ Fault and EQ Search by Thomas F. Blake (1989) utilizing a digitized
file of late-Quaternary California faults (EQ Fault) and a file listing of recorded
earthquakes (EQSearch). Estimations of site intensity are also provided in these
listings as Modified Mercalli Index values. The Modified Mercalli Intensity Index
follows the EQ Fault and EQ Search tables of Appendix B.
For earthquake resistant design, the Uniform Building Code requires that the design
earthquake acceleration correspond to the one produced by an event with a 10
percent probability of exceedance in 50 years, and that is 0.28g.
J
]
J
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 17
IX. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The following conclusions and recommendations are based upon the practical field
investigation conducted by our firm, and resulting laboratory tests, in conjunction
with our knowledge and experience with the soiis in this area of the City of
Carlsbad.
Our investigation revealed that the site is underlain by medium dense to dense
terrace and formational materials with approximately IV2 to 4^/2 feet of variable
density fill materials. The loose surface soils will not provide a stable soil base for
the proposed structure and associated improvements. As such, we recommend
that these loose surface soils be removed and recompacted as part of the site
preparation prior to the addition of any proposed fill and/or structural
improvements. It is our understanding that the site will be cut down to create the
lower-level storage and basement areas. As such, the loose surface soils should be
removed during the excavation process. Due to the poor cementation in the
terrace materials, temporary cut slopes may have to be laid back to a safe gradient.
Some of the deeper terrace materials may have some low in-place densities and
require additional removal during the grading operation. The seawall location was
found to be undertain by dense formational materials at a relatively shallow depth.
Because of the depth of the basement level and the proximity to the property line
improvements, it is very likely that shoring will be required,
A. Preparation of Soils for Site Development
1. The existing structures and vegetation observed on the site should be
removed prior to the preparation of areas to receive new fill and/or structural
improvements. This includes any roots from trees and shrubbery that might
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 18
extend under the proposed structures or improvements. Large roots have
been known to cause significant damage to foundations. All roots over 1/2-
inch in diameter shalt be removed from soils to be recompacted."
2. To provide a uniform soils base for the proposed structures and rigid
improvements (such as the swimming pool, patios, walkways, decking,
driveway, etc.), the existing loose fill materials across the site, should be
excavated to expose firm native soil, or as per the indications of our field
representative. Any other areas observed to include loose soils during
grading shall be excavated to expose firm native soil. The depth of removal
Is expected to be approximately 2 to 472 feet over most of the site. The
bottom of the excavation should be scarified to a depth of at least 12 Inches,
watered to approximately optimum moisture content, and compacted to at
least 90 percent of Maximum Dry Density. The excavated fill materials to be
used as fill should be cleaned of any debris and deleterious materials,
watered to approximately optimum moisture content and compacted to at
least 90 percent of Maximum Dry Density, in accordance with ASTM D1557-
98 standards. Those areas supporting proposed improvements or retaining
structures should be prepared In a like manner.
3. No uncontrolled fill soils should remain on the site after completion of any
future site work. In the event that temporary ramps or pads are constructed
of uncontrolled fill soils, the loose fill soils should be removed and/or
recompacted prior to completion ofthe grading operation.
4. Any buried objects, utility lines, abandoned irrigation lines, subsurface
disposal systems, etc., which might be discovered on the site during grading.
J
]
i
J
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carisbad, Califomia Page 19
should be removed and properly backfilled with approved on-site or imported
fill soils and compacted to at least 90 percent of Maximum Dry Density.
5. Any backfill soils placed in utility trenches or behind retaining walls that
support structures and other improvements (such as patios, sidewalks,
driveways, pavements, etc.) should be compacted to at least 90 percent of
Maximum Dry Density for low-expansive soils.
Note: Due to the generally poor cementation of the terrace materials and
the potential for caving, special care should be taken during excavation of
utility trenches and temporary slopes. Because of the depth and
configuration of proposed temporary slopes, shoring will most likely be
required. As a minimum, Cal-OSHA safety standards shall be followed.
B. Desiqn Parameters for Foundations
6. The recommended allowable bearing value for design of foundations for the
proposed residential structure is 2,000 pounds per square foot. This load-
bearing value may be utilized in the design of continuous foundations and
spread footings when founded a minimum of 18 inches (for the proposed
structure) into dense natural ground or properly compacted fill, measured
from the lowest adjacent grade at the time of foundation construction. We
recommend that three-story portions of the structure be founded on at least
24-inch-deep footings. For wider and/or deeper footings, the allowable soil
bearing capacity may be calculated based on the following equation:
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carlsbad, California Page 20
Qa = 1000D-(-500W for footings in compacted fill
Qa = 1500D-I-750W for footings in formation
where
"Qa" is the allowable soil bearing capacity (in psf);
"D" is the depth of the footing (in feet) as measured from the lowest
adjacent grade; and
"W" is the width ofthe footing (in feet).
This load-bearing value may be increased one-third for design loads that
include wind or seismic analysis. In fill soils, an increase of 500 psf in the
allowable bearing value may be allowed for every 1 foot of embedment and
for every additional 1 foot in width over the minimum dimensions indicated
above, up to a maximum of 5,000 psf. Foundations in formational soils may
have an allowable bearing increase of 1,500 psf for each additional foot in
depth, and 750 psf for each additional foot in width. The maximum bearing
capacity shall not exceed 6,000 psf.
7. The passive earth pressure of the dense natural-ground soils (to be used for
design of shallow foundations and footings to resist the lateral forces) shall
be based on an Equivalent Fluid Weight of 300 pounds per cubic foot.
This passive earth pressure shall only be considered valid for design if the
ground adjacent to the foundation structure is essentially level for a distance
of at least three times the total depth of the foundation and is comprised of
properly compacted fill within the depth ofthe foundation.
8. An allowable Coefficient of Friction of 0.40 times the dead load may be used
between the bearing soils and concrete foundations, walls, or floor slabs.
j
Proposed Kiko Residence
Carisbad, California
Job No. 02-8201
Page 21
9. The following table summarizes site-specific seismic design criteria to
calculate the base shear needed for the design of the residential structure.
The design criteria was obtained from the Uniform Building Code (1997
edition) based on the soil characteristics and distance to the closest fault.
Parameter Value Reference
Seismic Zone Factor, Z 0.40 Table 16-1
Soil Profile Type Sr Table 16-J
Seismic Coefficient, Ca 0.40NA Tabte 16-Q
Seismic Coefficient, Cv O.SSNv Table 16-R
Near-Source Factor, 1.0 Table 16-S
Near-Source Factor, Nv 1.14 Table 16-T
Seismic Source Type B Table 16-U
10. Based upon our previous laboratory test results and our experience with the
soil types on the subject site, the underiying properiy compacted fill and/or
dense natural soils should experience a total settlement of less than 1 inch
and a differential settlement in the magnitude of approximately 1 inch, under
a structural static load within the allowable bearing capacity. The angular
rotation due to static differential settlement is anticipated to be less than
1/240.
11. Our experience indicates that for various reasons, footings and slabs
occasionally crack causing ceramic tiles and other brittle surfaces to become
damaged. Therefore, all footings and slabs should contain at least a nominal
amount of reinforcing steel to reduce the separation of cracks, should they
occur.
J
Proposed Kiko Residence Job No. 02-8201
Carisbad, California Page 22
11.1 A minimum of steel for continuous footings should include at least four
No. 4 steel bars continuous, with two bars near the bottom of the
footing and two bars near the top. For footings up to 24 inches in
depth, the minimum reinforcement shall consist of four No. 5 bars.
11.2 If isolated square footings are to be used, they shouid contain, as a
minimum, a grid of No. 4 steel bars on 12-inch centers, both ways,
with no less than three bars each way.
11.3 Interior floor slabs on-grade on properiy compacted soil should be a
minimum of 5 inches actual thickness and be reinforced with at least
No. 3 steel bars on 18-inch centers, in both directions, placed
midheight in the slab. Slabs should be underiain by a 3-inch-thick
layer of clean sand (S.E. = 30 or greater) overiying a vapor retardant
such as Vapor Shield (3-mil, high density, cross laminated) or
equivalent. Slab subgrade soil shall be properiy moistened prior to
placement of the vapor retardant and pouring of concrete. It is
recommended that the moisture content of subgrade soil for slabs and
footings be checked within 48 hours prior to concrete placement.
Building slabs may be thicker and more heavily reinforced if the
alternative structural mat slabs are utilized. If this option is chosen,
the allowable bearing capacity for mat design may be 400 pci modulus
of subgrade reaction for soil settlement not exceeding y2-inch under
static loading. For a higher degree of protection against moisture-
related problems, the basement level slab shall preferably be protected
by a waterproof membrane (such as Paraseal) placed as indicated by
the manufacturer. Paraseal membranes are usually placed on a gravel
bas layer.
J
Kiko TEST.OUT
EARTHQUAKE SEARCH RESULTS
Page 3
TIME SITE SITE APPROX.
FILE LAT. LONG. DATE (UTC) DEPTH QUAKE ACC. MM DISTANCE
CODE NORTH WEST H M sec Ckm) MAG. g INT. mi [km]
GSP 34 0640 116.3610109/15/1992 084711 3 9.0 5 20 0 003 I 84.4(135.9)
GSP 34 2620 118.0020106/28/1991 144354 5 11.0 5.40 0 004 I 84.8(136.5)
GSP 34 1080 116.4040106/29/1992 141338 8 9.0 5 40 0 004 I 85.1(136.9)
DMG 34 3700 117.6500 12/08/1812 15 0 0 0 0.0 7 00 0 015 IV 85.3(137.3)
GSP 34 3400 116.9000 11/27/1992 160057 5 1.0 5 30 0 004 I 85.5(137.5)
DMG 34 0670 116.3330 05/18/1940 55120 2 0.0 5 20 0 003 I 85.7(137.9)
DMG 34 0670 116.3330 05/18/1940 72132 7 0.0 5 00 0 003 I 85.7(137.9)
GSP 34 1390 116.4310 06/28/1992 123640 6 10.0 5 10 0 003 I 85.8(138.0)
DMG 33 1830 115.8500 04/25/1957 222412 0 0.0 5 10 0 003 I 86.7(139.5)
GSP 34 3690 116.8970 12/04/1992 020857 5 3.0 5 30 0 004 I 87.4(140.7)
DMG 34 0830 116.3000 05/18/1940 5 358 5 0.0 5 40 0 004 I 87.8(141.3)
MGI 34 OOOO 118.5000 11/19/1918 2018 0 0 0.0 5 00 0 003 I 88.0(141.6)
DMG 34 OOOO 118.5000 08/04/1927 1224 0 0 0.0 5 00 0 003 I 88.0(141.6)
PAS 33 0130 115.8390 11/24/1987 131556 5 2.4 6.00 0 006 II 88.0(141.6)
DMG 33 OOOO 115.8330 01/08/1946 185418 0 0.0 5 40 0 004 I 88.5(142.3)
DMG 33 0330 115.8210 09/30/1971 224611 3 8.0 5 10 0 003 I 88.9(143.0)
GSN 34 2010 116.4360 05/28/1992 115734 1 1.0 7 60 0 022 IV 89.0(143.2)
DMG 33 2160 115.8080 04/25/1957 215738 7 -0.3 5 20 0 003 I 89.2(143.5)
PAS 33 9190 118.6270 01/19/1989 65328 8 11.9 5 00 0 003 I 90.3(145.2)
PAS 33 0820 115.7750 11/24/1987 15414 5 4.9 5 80 0 005 II 91.2(146.8)
T-A 33 5000 115.8200 05/00/1868 0 0 0 0 0.0 6 30 0 007 II 91.3(147.0)
DMG 33 9500 118.6320 08/31/1930 04036.0 0.0 5 20 0 003 I 91.7(147.6)
PAS 33 9440 118.6810 01/01/1979 231438 9 11.3 5 00 0 003 -93.8(150.9)
GSP 34 2680 116.4020 06/16/1994 162427 5 3.0 5 00 0 002 -93.9(151.1)
DMG 31 8110 117.1310 12/22/1964 205433 2 2.3 5 60 0 004 I 94.0(151.3)
GSP 34 3410 116.5290 06/28/1992 124053 5 6.0 5 20 0 003 I 94.2(151.6)
DMG 32 9830 115.7330 01/24/1951 717 2 6 0.0 5 60 0 004 I 94.3(151.8)
DMG 33 2330 115.7170 10/22/1942 15038 0 0.0 5 50 0 004 I 94.5(152.0)
DMG 32 9500 115.7170 06/14/1953 41729 9 0.0 5 50 0 004 I 95.6(153.9)
GSP 34 3320 116.4620 07/01/1992 074029 9 9.0 5 40 0 003 I 95.6(153.9)
PAS 34 3270 116.4450 03/15/1979 21 716 5 2.5 5 20 0 003 I 95.9(154.3)
DMG 34 OOOO 116.0000 04/03/1926 20 8 0.0 0.0 5 50 0 004 I 96.9(156.0)
DMG 34 oooo 116.0000 09/05/1928 1442 0 0 0.0 5 00 0 002 -96.9(156.0)
DMG 32 9000 115.7000 10/02/1928 19 1 0 0 0.0 5.00 0 002 -97.2(156.4)
GSP 34 2310 118.4750 03/20/1994 212012 3 13.0 5 30 0 003 I 98.2(158.0)
PAS 33 0980 115.6320 04/26/1981 12 928 4 3.8 5 70 0 004 I 99.4(160.0)
GSP 34 2130 118.5370 01/17/1994 123055 4 18.0 6 70 0 009 III 99.7(160.4)
•i!i.-i:i--i':**-i!-i!-i!-i!'A'i!'{:'i:i!i:-l:i!'i;-l;'i!-i\'A-itic-/!'i!-i!***i;itiric-^
-END OF SEARCH- 143 EARTHQUAKES FOUND WITHIN THE SPECIFIED SEARCH AREA.
TIME PERIOD OF SEARCH: 1800 TO 2001
LENGTH OF SEARCH TIME: 202 years
THE EARTHQUAKE CLOSEST TO THE SITE IS ABOUT 11.4 MILES (18.4 km) AWAY.
LARGEST EARTHQUAKE MAGNITUDE FOUND IN THE SEARCH RADIUS: 7.6
LARGEST EARTHQUAKE SITE ACCELERATION FROM THIS SEARCH: 0.208 g
COEFFICIENTS FOR GUTENBERG & RICHTER RECURRENCE RELATION:
a-value= 1.518
b-value= 0.381
beta-value= 0.877
Page 4
Kiko TEST.OUT
TABLE OF MAGNITUDES AND EXCEEDANCES:
Earthquake 1 Number of Times | Cumulative Magnitude 1 Exceeded | No. / Year
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
143
143
143
50
27
11
3
1
0.70792
0.70792
0.70792
0.24752
0.13366
0.05446
0.01485
0.00495
1
J
1
"I
i
Page 5
•^EQUi PMENT DIMENSION & TYPEOF EXCAVATION DATE LOGGED
Limited Access Auger Drill Rig 6-inch diameter Boring 4-5-02
SURFACE ELEVATION
± 20' Mean Sea Level
GROUNDWATER OEPTH
at 10 feet
LOGGED BY
JKH
FIELD DESCRIPTION
AND
CLASSIFICATION
DESCRIPTION ANO REMARKS
(Grain size, Density, Masture, ColCT)
UJ liJ CL <D ZD
li
tD O,
UJ •>_
-> £2
LU S CL •D Z)
QI O o s
ii
a
m O
b „
LU tf)
in —
FILL (Qaf)
2-
4 -
6-
FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, w/ slight silt and
some roots, poorly cemented. Loose to medium
dense. Dry to damp. Tan-brown.
TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qt)
SP-
SM
13
FINE TO COARSE SAND, w/ some rock
fragments. Medium dense. Damp. Tan-gray and
brown.
TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qt)
SW
12-
14-
SILTY SANDSTONE, well cemented. Dense.
Damp. Light tan-gray.
SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsb)
Bottom® 11"
SM
19
65/
11"
J WATER TABLE
LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
• IN-PLACE SAMPLE
• DRIVE SAMPLE
Is] SAND CONBF.D.T.
^ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
JOB NAME
Proposed Kiko Residence
SITE LOCATION
2649 Ocean Street, Carlsbad, California
JOB NUMBER
02-8201
.FIGURE NUMBER
Ila
REVIEWED BY LDR/JAC
GeotKtinlcal EKplflfatlon. Inc.
LOG No.
B-1
'^EQUIPMENT
Limited Access Auger Drill Rig
DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION
6-inch diameter Boring
DATE LOGGED ^
4-5-02
SURFACE ELEVATION
± 34' Mean Sea Level
GROUNDWATER DEPTH
at 24 feet
LOGGED BY
JKH
2 -
4 -
6 -
I
1
10
12 I
14 -
FIELO DESCRIPTION
AND
CLASSIFICATION
DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS
(Grain size, Densily, Moisture, Color)
FINE TO COARSE SAND, w/ slight silt and
some rock fragments. Medium dense. Damp.
Tan-gray and red-brown.
TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qt)
- same as above, becomes tan-gray and orange.
FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, poorly to moderately
cemented. Dense. Damp. Dark gray and
red-brown.
TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qt)
o
CO
SW
SP
LU LU o n
5?
LU
S CL D D
ai O O S
o 8.
il
< LU
o
>-ci O
X O
LU CJ 28
cn o
24
19
52
Q o _
LU tn
3"
3"
51 WATER TABLE
^ LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
(T] IN-PU\CE SAMPLE
• DRIVE SAMPLE
[s] SANDCONE/F.D.T.
^ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
JOB NAME
Proposed Kiko Residence
SITE LOCATION
2649 Ocean Street, Carlsbad, California
JOB NUMBER
02-8201
FIGURE NUMBER
lib
REVIEWED BY LDR/JAC
Geotech nfcaf
EKplofatfon. Inc.
LOG No
B-2
'^EQUIPMENT
Limited Access Auger Drill Rig
DIMENSION & Ti'PE OF EXCAVATION
6-Inch diameter Boring
DATE LOGGED ^
4-5-02
SURFACE ELEVATION
± 34' Mean Sea Level
GROUNDWATER DEPTH
at 24 feet
LOGGED BY
JKH
o
FIELD DESCRIPTION
AND
CLASSIFICATION
DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS
(Grain size, Density, Moisture, Color)
lU LU CL CJ D
is
^£
Zl tn 0- z QI O o s < LU 2 Cl
Q
LU^ £5
o
98
m o
(D
b _
LU tn -1 UJ 9: X
IB-
IS-
20-
22-
i I
FINE TO COARSE SAND, w/ some rock
fragments, pooriy to moderately cemented.
Medium dense to dense. Dry to damp. Light
gray-white.
TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qt)
SW
24 2"
24 1 SANDSTONE, well cemented. Dense. Damp.
Light tan-gray.
\ SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsb)
SM
50+ 2"
26-
28-
Bottom @. 25'
5. WATER TABLE
K! LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
[T] IN-PLACE SAMPLE
• DRIVE SAMPLE
[s] SANDCONE/F.D.T.
m STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
JOB NAME
Proposed Kiko Residence 5. WATER TABLE
K! LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
[T] IN-PLACE SAMPLE
• DRIVE SAMPLE
[s] SANDCONE/F.D.T.
m STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
SITE LOCATION
2649 Ocean Street, Carlsbad, Califomia
5. WATER TABLE
K! LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
[T] IN-PLACE SAMPLE
• DRIVE SAMPLE
[s] SANDCONE/F.D.T.
m STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
JOB NUMBER
02-8201
FIGURE NUMBER
llc
REVIEWED BY ,
LDR/JAC
||li^-£ GeotKftmcal WW^W^ Explerjrtlofv Inc
LOG No,
B-2
'^EQUIPMENT
Limited Access Auger Drill Rig
DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION
6-inch diameter Bonng
DATE LOGGED ^
4-5-02
SURFACE ELEVATION
± 39' Mean Sea Level
GROUNDWATER DEPTH
at 16 feet
LOGGED BY
JKH
2 -
6 -
10
12
14 -
FIELD DESCRIPTION
AND
CLASSIFICATION
DESCRiPTiON ANO REMARKS
(Grain size, Densily, Moisture, Cola)
SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, w/ some rock
fragments and chunks of sandstone. Medium
dense. Damp. Red-brown.
I ~rto 2' of
FILU
TERRACE (Qaf/Qt)
at the surface.
1 FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, poorly cemented.
Medium dense. Damp. Tan-gray and orange.
TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qt)
I FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, w/ slight silt,
moderately well cemented. Dense. Damp.
Red-brown and tan.
TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qt)
SM
SP
SP-
SM
LU LU CL <D ZD
ii •: o
o s
28
m CJ
31
20
53
o
o _ LU CO —1 LU
3"
J WATER TABLE
^ LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
|Tj IN-PLACE SAMPLE
• DRIVE SAMPLE
[s] SANDCONE/F.D.T.
^ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
JOB NAME
Proposed Kiko Residence J WATER TABLE
^ LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
|Tj IN-PLACE SAMPLE
• DRIVE SAMPLE
[s] SANDCONE/F.D.T.
^ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
SITE LOCATION
2649 Ocean Street, Carlsbad, Califomia
J WATER TABLE
^ LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
|Tj IN-PLACE SAMPLE
• DRIVE SAMPLE
[s] SANDCONE/F.D.T.
^ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
JOB NUMBER
02-8201
FIGURE NUMBER
Ild
REVIEWED BY ^^^^^^
Ifv4^-fi GcotvctfRlcal ^IW ¥ Exploratfon,. Inc.
LOG No
B-3
J
'^EQUIPMENT
Limited Access Auger Drill Rig
DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION
6-Inch diameter Boring
DATE LOGGED
4-5-02
SURFACE ELEVATION
± 39' Mean Sea Level
GROUNDWATER DEPTH
at 16 feet
LOGGED BY
JKH
FIELD DESCRIPTION
AND
CLASSIFICATION
OESCRIPTION AND REMARKS
(Grain size, Densrty, Moisture, Color)
LU
5;o
UJ >-
3 eg D. Z -L LU
S CC
QI O O S
it Q
S = z o LUsP 2 ii
tn CD
b „
LU tn —I LU 9: X
16
18-
20-
4
SP-
SM 30 2"
FINE TO COARSE SAND, w/ some rock
fragments, poorly to moderately cemented.
Dense. Damp. Tan-gray and orange.
TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qt)
SW
I 54 2"
22-
24 -
26-
28-
Bottom (S 21.5'
I WATER TABLE
^ LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
H IN-PLACE SAMPLE
• DRIVE SAMPLE
[i] SANDCONE/F.D.T.
^ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
JOB NAME
Proposed Kiko Residence I WATER TABLE
^ LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
H IN-PLACE SAMPLE
• DRIVE SAMPLE
[i] SANDCONE/F.D.T.
^ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
SITE LOCATION
2649 Ocean Street, Carlsbad, Califomia
I WATER TABLE
^ LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
H IN-PLACE SAMPLE
• DRIVE SAMPLE
[i] SANDCONE/F.D.T.
^ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
JOB NUMBER
02-8201
FIGURE NUMBER
lie
REVIEWED BY ^^^^^^
IflJ^-S Gcotvctmlcil
JS Exptoratlon, Inc.
LOG No,
B-3
J
"^EQUIPMENT
Hand Tools, Hand Auger
DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION
3' X 3' X 6' Handpit
DATE LOGGED
4-5-02
SURFACE ELEVATION
±15' Mean Sea Level
GROUNDWATER DEPTH
at 5 feet
LOGGED BY
JKH
o
FIELD DESCRIPTION
AND
CLASSIFICATION
DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS
(Grain size. Density, Moisiure, Color)
LU LU CL CJ Z)
ii
UJ S CL D D
^«
•: o
o s is
O tn
li
CQ <J
o„
LU CO —I LU
a- X
1 -
FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, w/ lenses of cobbles
(to 6" in diameter). Loose to medium dense. Dry
to damp. Lighl gray.
BEACH DEPOSITS (Qb)
SP
h z^
2-
FINE TO COARSE SAND, w/ some rock
fragments, poorly cemented. Medium dense.
Moist to wet. Tan-brown.
TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qt)
—hand-augered from 4' lo 6'.
5-
SANDSTONE, well cemented. Dense. Damp.
Light tan-gray.
\ SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsb)
Bottom @ 6'
7-
SW
SM
5 WATER TABLE
LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
[T] IN-PLACE SAMPLE
• DRIVE SAMPLE
[s] SANDCONE/F.D.T.
^ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
JOB NAME
Proposed Kiko Residence 5 WATER TABLE
LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
[T] IN-PLACE SAMPLE
• DRIVE SAMPLE
[s] SANDCONE/F.D.T.
^ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
SITE LOCATION
2649 Ocean Street, Carisbad, Califomia
5 WATER TABLE
LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
[T] IN-PLACE SAMPLE
• DRIVE SAMPLE
[s] SANDCONE/F.D.T.
^ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
JOB NUMBER
02-8201
FIGURE NUMBER
llf
REVIEWED BY
LDR/JAC
GffotKfinical
LOG No.
HP-1
J
'^EQUIPMENT
Hand Tools, Hand Auger
DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION
3' X 3' X 5' Handpit
DATE LOGGED ^
4-5-02
SURFACE ELEVATION
±11' Mean Sea Level
GROUNDWATER DEPTH
Not Encountered
LOGGED BY
JKH
1 -
3-
4-
6 -
FIELD DESCRIPTION
AND
CLASSIFICATION
DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS
(Grain size, DensSy, Moisture, Color)
FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, w/ lenses of cobble
(to 6" in diameter). Loose to medium dense. Dry
to damp. Light gray.
BEACH DEPOSITS (Qb)
-hand-augered from 4.5' lo 5'.
SILTY SANDSTONE, well cemented. Dense.
Damp. Light tan-gray.
\ SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsb)
Bottom @ 5'
SP
SM
UJ
^ z
< lU S Cl
LU^s
o
S8 CQ O
b „
LU tn LU Q- ZC
u
I WATER TABLE
LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
[T| IN-PLACE SAMPLE
• DRIVE SAMPLE
[s] SANDCONE/F.D.T.
^ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
JOB NAME
Proposed Kiko Residence I WATER TABLE
LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
[T| IN-PLACE SAMPLE
• DRIVE SAMPLE
[s] SANDCONE/F.D.T.
^ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
SITE LOCATION
2649 Ocean Street, Carlsbad, Califomia
I WATER TABLE
LOOSE BAG SAMPLE
[T| IN-PLACE SAMPLE
• DRIVE SAMPLE
[s] SANDCONE/F.D.T.
^ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST
JOB NUMBER
02-8201
FIGURE NUMBER
llg
REVIEWED BY ^^^^^^
Ifli&JK GMtKftnlol MW^mj Exptoratfon, inc.
LOG No.
HP-2
J