Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCDP 02-28; KIKO RESIDENCE; REPORT OF PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION; 2002-06-05I 'I I I I 1· I I I I I I I I .I I ·1 I ;I REPORT OF PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL JNVESTIGATION . Proposed Kiko Residence 2649 Ocean Street Carlsbad, Californi;:1 JOB NO. 02-8201 05 June 2002 Prepared for: Frederick and .Jessica Kiko I I ,, I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, IN.C. SOIL & FOUNDATION ENGINEERING • GROUNDWATER HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MANAGEMENT • ENGINEERING GEOLOGY 05 June 2002 Frederick and Jessica Kiko 3561 Donna Drive Carlsbad, CA 92008 Job No. 02-8201 Subject: Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation 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, Geotechnical 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 will be constructed of standard- type building materials utilizing slab-on-grade, with conventional continuous foµndations and retaining wall foundation systems. Our investigation revealed that the site is underlain by medium dense to dense terrace and formational materials overlain by approximately 1 ½ to 4½ 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 will result in the removal of all of the existing loose surface soils. In the seawall location, dense formational material was encountered at a relatively shallow depth. I 7 420 TRADE STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92121 • (858) 549-7222 • FAX: (858) 549-1604 • E-MAIL: geotech@ixpres.com I I I I I ·1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I 2 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 opportunjty to be of service is sincerely appreciated. Should you have any questions co'ncerning. the following report, please do not hesitate to contact us. Reference to our Job No. 02-8201 will expedite a response to your inquiries. Re?pectfully submitted, GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. ~2~K.2-,, ~s-~ .P. E. ( R.C.E. 34422/G.E. 2007 Senior Geotechnical Engineer JKH/JAC/LDR/pj I I ·I I I I I I I I I I I I I . I I I. I I 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 FIGURES Ia. Vicinity Map Ib. · Site Plan and Geologic Map Ic. Iia-f. III. IV. V . Cross Section A-A' Exploratory Boring and Handpit Logs Laboratory Test Results Fqundation Requirements Near Slopes Retainin·g Wall Waterproofihg and Drainage Schematic APPENDICES A. B. C. D. Unified Soil Classification System EQ Fault Tables and EQ Search Tables Modified Mercalli Index General Earthwork Specifications PAGE 1 2 3 4 6 7 10 15 17 33 34 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I REPORT OF PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Proposed Kiko Residence 2649 Ocean Street Carlsbad, California JOB NO. 02-8201 The followrng -report presents the findings and recommendations of Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. for the $Ubject project (for Vicin.ity 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*Build, that the site is intended for the construction of a two-story, single-family residence (including an attachecl 3-car g_arage, a lower-level basement area, a new seawall, a swimming pool, and ass·ociated 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 of the loose surfidal soils. The residence will utilize standard slab- on-grade foundations and retaining ,walls. With the above in mind, the scope of work is briefly outlined as follows: L 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). I I I ·I I I I I I I I I I I ·1 I I I I Proposed Kiko Residence Carlsbad, California Job No. 02-8201 Page 2 3. Evaluate the cohdition 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 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 7100.0 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. / I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Proposed Kiko Residence Carlsbad, California Job No. 02-8201 Page 3 A two-story residential structure with a partial basement currently 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 hahdpit 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 soil 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 predor:ninant 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 Fig1,.Jre 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 c1 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 I I I I I I I I I I I I ·1. I I I I I 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 req1,.1ired 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 P~netration Test and the 3-inch sampler. Soil.::· .. _·,_-:: :: : .. Density',,·.,-~_: .... ;,':--~·•.· -: .:_:z.;iricfi-;6 ::rj~7}·t· -.. _, --3-in.ch o>cf-·. '· · ·PE!sign'ati~~~ ·,r. ·>), <:s~-niPl~i((){,\_._ ·_ . ,. -'; '$a·~pie~.f;-:<_:~: . . .. "',,, ,• Sand Silt Clay _., __ ::.,, ____ -'..'.~'. ____ ·· ;ei_o\A/s/F6ot' ::·,.:-:·-... · ·_···.Blows/Feoot--_.· :: __ and Very loose 0-4 0-7 Loose 5-10 8-20 Medium 11-30 21-53 Dense 31-50 54-98 Very be.nse Over 50 -· Over 98 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 samp·leci soils: I I I I I Proposed Kiko Residence Carlsbad, California 1. Moisture/Density Relations (ASTM D1557-98, Method A) 2. Moisture Content (ASTM D22L6-92) 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 D3080-90) Job No. 02-8201 Page 5 ·1 The moisture content of a soil sample is a measure of the weight of water, I I I· I I I I I I I I I I expressed as a percentage of the dry weight of the sample. The relationship between the moisture and density of the soil gives qualitative information regarcpng the soi.I stre.ngth 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 13.0 High Above 130 Very high I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ·1 I Proposed Kiko Residence Carlsbad, Ca'lifornia Job No. 02-8201 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 ex:pansion 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, ?3nd 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 frictior:i angle, coeffici.ent 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. III 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 Geomorphie Province. This region is part of a broad tectonic beundary 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 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Proposed Kiko Residence Carlsbad, California Job No. 02-8201 Page 7 the S_an Clemente Fault (approximately 50 miles off.,.shore from Oceanside) (Berger and Sch.ug, 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.o· 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 .I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ·1 I I I :I Proposed Kiko Residence Carlsbad, California Job No. 02-8201 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 bf Carlsbad. The subject site is located in an area with moderate to high geologic risk (as identified by Map 12b of the "Shoreline Erosion Ass~ssment 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 ge_ology, inadequate setback and inadequate design." 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 1 ½ 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-browri to gray-brown, silty, fine to medium sand with roots and sandstone rock fr~gments. The fills are considered to have a very low expansion potential. Refer to Figure Nos. II and III for details. Beach Deposits (Qb): 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 4½ feet in thickness and were encountered at the western portion of the site. These soils are I I .1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Proposed Kiko Residence Carlsbad, California Job No. 02-8201 Page 9 considered to have a negligible expansion potential. Refer to Figure Nos. II and III for details. Marine-Terrace Deposits (Qt): 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 material_s 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 of the Bay Point Formation. Santiago Formation (Tsb): The site is mapped as being underlain by the l:ocene- age Santiago Formation (Weber, 1982). The encountered Santiago Formation ti. consists primarily of dense, well-cemented, tan-gray and green, silty fine sahd. The Santiago Formation is considered_ to have low expansion and consolidation potential. Refer to Figure Nos. II and III for details. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I. I I Proposed Kiko Residence Carlsbad, California VII. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS .A. Local and Regional Faults Job No. 02-8201 Page 10 lt is our opinion that ~ known "active" fau·1t 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 Canvo_n 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, ~nd obli.que normal faults. The Rose Canyon Fault is considered to be capable of causing a 7.5-magnitude earthquake and considered microseismically active, although 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 Holoc;:ene 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 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 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1· I I I Proposed Kiko Residence Carlsbad, California Job No. 02-8201 Page 11 (acoustic profiles) and the general alignment of epicenters of recorded seismic activity (Greene, 1979). An earthqu?lke of 5.3 magnitude, recorded July-13, 1986, is known to hc;1ve 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 Diego metropolitan area. Elsinore Fault: The Elsinore Fault is located approximately 24 miles northeast of the site. The Elsinore Fault extends approximately 200 km (125 miles) from the Mexican border to the northern end of the 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 Diego, 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 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. I I ·I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Proposed Kiko Residence Carlsbad, California Job No. 02-8201 -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 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 slippa_ge along an established fault and may result in displacement of the 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 grouhd rupture at the site is considered remote. Ground_ Shakin9: Structural damage caused by seismically induced ground shaking is a detrimental effect dire-ctly 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 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Proposed Kiko Residence Carlsbad, California distance from the earthquake, and local seismic condition. Job No. 02-8201 Page 13 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. Aithough the chance of such an event is low, it could occur within the useful life of the structures.. The anticipa~ed ground accelerations at the site from earthquakes on faults within 100 miles of the 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 of the geologic map (Santa Ana Sheet -1965)· and aerial photographs (4-11-53, AXN-SM-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 of the 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. I I I I I I I I .I :I. I I I I 11 i 11 I ,·1 I I I Proposed Kiko Residence Carlsbad, California Job No. 02-8201 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 compacteo 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- I I I I I I· I I I I I ·1 I I I 1· I I I Proposed Kiko Residence Carlsbad, California Job No. 02-8201 Page·15 foot MSL slope top encountered approximately 4.5 feet of artificial fill and topsoil over the terrace deposits. D. Summary It is our opinion that a .significant geologic hazard does not exist on th.e site. No ~vidence 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 d(;!gree 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. EARTHQUAKE RISK EVALUATION Evaluation of earthquake risk requires that the effect of faulting on, and the mass stability of, a site be evaluated utilizing the M10 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. Furth~r, sites are classified by USC 1997 Edition into "soil profile types SA through SF." 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 (appr(?ximately 100 feet) of the ground. These are: I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ·1 I I I Proposed Kiko Residence Carlspad, California SA => Greater than 1500 m/s Ss => 760 to 1500 m/s Sc => 360 m/s to 760 m/s · So => 180 to 360 m/s SE => Less than 180 m/s . SF=> Soil requiring specific soil evaluation Job No. 02-8201 Page 16 By utilizing an earthquake magnitude M10 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 regiona_l 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 resistcmt 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. I I I I I I I I I I I -1.· I I I I .I :1· I Proposed Kiko Residence Carlsbad, California Job No. 02-8201 Page 17 IX. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The following conclusions and recommendgtions are based upon the practical field ·investigation conducted by our firm, and resulting laboratory tests, in conjunction with our knowledge and experie171ce 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 1½ to 4½ feet of variable density fill materials. The loose $Urface soils will not provide a stable soil base for the proposed structure and assoc:iat~d 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 prop9sed 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 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 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I .1 I Proposed Kiko Residence Carlsbad, California Job No. 02-8201 Page 18 extend under the proposed structllres ·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. io 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 materia·ls 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 4½ 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 approximate_ly optimum moisture content and compacted to at least 90 percent of Maximum Dry Density, in accordance with ASTM D1557- 98 standards. Those arec;)s 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 of the grading operation. 4. Any buried objects, utility lines, abandoned irrigation lines, subsurface disposal systems, etc., which might be discovered on the site during grading, I I I I I I I I I I I ·I I I I ·1 I I I Proposed Kiko Residence Carlsbad, California Job No. 02-8201 Page 20 8. where Qa = 1000D+500W for footings in compacted fill Qa = 1500D+ 750W for footings in formation "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 of the 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 c1llowable 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. 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 l;:quivalent 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 of the foundation. An aHowable Coefficient of Friction of 0.40 times the dead load may be used between the bearing soils and c;:onc;rete foundations, walls, or floor slabs. I I I ·I I I I ·1 I I I I I ii I ·1 I I I 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-I Soil Profile ·Tvoe Sr . Table 16-J Seismic Coefficient. c,. OAONA Table.16-Q Seismic Coefficient, Cv 0.56Nv Table 16-R Near-Source Factor, N.,, f.o 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. I I I I I I I I I :1 I I I I I I I I I Proposed Kiko Residence CarI$bad, California · Job No. 02-8201 "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 t~e 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 a_re to be used, they should contain, as a mil'.limum, 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-mil, 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 ½-inch under static loading. For ?I higher degree of protection against moisture- relat~d 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. I I I I I I I I I .I I I I I I I 1· I I Proposed Kiko Residence Carlsbad, ·California Job No. 02-8201 Page 23 For exterior slabs, we recommend the project Civil/Structural Engineer incorporate isolation joints and sawcuts to at leclst 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 control jo1 nts 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 ag.gregate 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, all exterior slab joints shall be sealed with elastomeric seal material. The sealant shall be inspected every six months anci 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 5½ inches thick, with control joints no farther than 15 feet or the width of the driveway, whichever is less. Driveway subgrade soils shall be properly compacted and moisture conditioned before any base and/or concrete placement. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I- I I I Proposed Kiko Residence Carlsbad, California Job No. 02-8201 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 that all nonstructural concrete slabs (such as patios, walkways, etc.) be underlain by at least 3 inches of clean sand, include 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 reinforced slab, not more than 15 feet apart, and also at re-entrant corners. It should be noted that standard conc:rete improvements may not perform well, due to the loose surficial soil condltions. 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 soils compaction for outside improvements is also recommended. A representative of our firm shall check that within 48 hours prior to concrete pouring and before steel reinforcing placement. c. Design Parameters for Proposed Seawall and Retaining Walls bur investigation revealed that, at the location of the 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 I I I I I I I I I 1· I I I 1. I I I I I Proposed Kiko Residence Carlsbad, California Job No. 02-8201 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 fe'et 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 of the seawall foundation when founded a minimum of 4 feet into the firm natural ground, measured from the bottom of the footing to the low.est 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 fflls. All retaining walls shall be designed based·on the following soil design parameters: 15. The actjve earth pressure (to be utilized in the design of the proposed seawall and other retaining walls, etc.) utilizing the on-site materials as I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 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 block 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: *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 properly compacted fill (to be used for the design of shallow footings) should be based on an Equivalent Fll)id Weight of 300 pounds per cubic foot. I I I I I· I. I I I I I I I I I I I .1 I Proposed Kiko Residence Carlsbad, California Job No. 02-8201 Page 27 The passive earth pressure should 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. 1.7. A Coefficient of Friction of 0.4.0 times the dead load may be used between the bearing soils and concrete wall four:1dations. 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. Shot1ld water seeps be observed during grading, additional recommendations 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. Geotechnical 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). If the subdrain is to be installed on top of the foundation heel, then the interior slab shall be at least 12 inches above the footing toe. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1. I I Proposed Kiko Residence Carlsbad, California D. Slopes Job No. 02-8201 Page 28 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 landscapir,g and maintenance be effected as part of development of this site. 20. The soils that occur within 5 feet of the face of fill 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 a result of the poor lateral stability of these soils. Conventional· shallow foundations and footings of. proposed structures, walls, , 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 projected outward and downward, parallel to the face of the slope (see Figure No. IV) .. _J I I I I I I I- I I I I I ·I I I I I I I Proposed Kiko Residence Carlsbad, California E. Temporary Sloqes Job No. 02-8201 Page 29 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 thc,3t the. following temporary-slope design criteria may be considered in areas where the exc~vation 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 5 feet and at a slope ration of 0. 75 horizontal to 1.0 vertical for the remaining height (for an un~upported period not to exceed eight weeks). For the basement areas, the cuts shall be from the heel of the foundation and extend to at least 12 feet horizontally at the ground level. The basement wall backfill shall consist of non-expansive soil. Any plans for slopes in excess of the. assumed 22-foot maximum must be presented to our office priot to grading to allow time for' review and specific rec;ommendations, if warranted. Proper drainage away from the excavation shall be provided at aH 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 formatJonal 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. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Proposed .Kiko Residence Carlsbad, California Job No. 02-8201 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 a·n 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 10-mil in thickness. The thicker the plastic, the stronger the resistance against puncturing. 26, Although polyethylene (visqueen) products are most commonly used, products such as Vaporshield possess much higher tensile strength and are more specifically designed for and intended to retard moisture transmission into concrete slabs. The use of Vaporshield or equivalent is h_ighly recommended when a structure is intended for moisture-sensitive floor coverings or uses. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II i II, I I Proposed Kiko Residence Carlsbad, California Job No. 02-8201 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 in'ches of dean 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 pl,acement. In actual practice, stakes are 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. 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 Drainage 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 o.r 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 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Proposed Kiko Residence Carlsbad, California Job No. 02-8201 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 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, with the direction of subsurface ahd 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 30. Following placement of any concrete floor slabs, sufficient drying time should be allowed prior to placement of floor coverings. Premature placement of floor coverings could result in degradation of adhesive materials and loosening of the finish-floor tnaterrals. I I Proposed Kiko Residence Carlsbad, California Job No. 02-8201 Page 33 I 31. In order to minimize any work delays at the subject site during site I I I I I I I I I I I 11 i II I I I I 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 reinforce·ment iii 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 of the 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 Investigation." 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 gradi_ng 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 I I I I I I I I 1. I I. I I I I I I Proposed Kiko Residence ·carlsbad, California Job No. 02-8201 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 of the recommended actions presented herein to be unsafe. XI. LIMITATIONS bur 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 the 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 investigation and analysis that meet the· contemporary standard of care in our profession with the County of San Diego. No warranty is provided. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 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 Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. shall not be held responsible for changes to the physical con.dition of the property, such as addition of fill soils or ch?tnging 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 iAquiries. Respectfully submitted, GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. Ja eiser, Senior Project Geologist Jaime A. Cerros, P.E. R.C.E. 34422/G.E. 2007 Senior Geotechnical Engineer JKH/LDR/JAC/pj resident 3-31-031/R.G. 3391 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 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 of the Inner-Southern California Continental Margin in H.G. Greene and M.P: Kennedy (editors),.California Continental Margin Map Series, Map 1A, 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 Spec:ial 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, Fautt~Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Calif. Div. of Mines and Geology, Special Publication 42, Rev. March 1980, p. 25. Hileman, J.A., C.R. 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 of the 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-l0A. 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-l0B. 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/G~ophysicaljSeismological 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. 70~-722. . I I I I ·I I .I I I I I I I I I 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 of the Rose Canyon Fault Zone in San Diego, California,· Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 100, no. B-12, p. 2412i-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,, 5$9-595. Richter, C.G., 1958, Element;;iry 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. bf Mines .and Geology, Open-file Report 82.-17, Sacramento, Calif. Treiman, J.A., · 1993, The Rose Canyon Fault ?'.one, Southern California, Calif. Div. of Mines and Geology Open-file Report 93-02, 45 pp, 3 plates. I I I I I I I I I 1. I I I I I I R s \ SEE \f.! H3 v 1 VIA DIEOO 2 VIA JUDY 3 VIA rol!ERTO 4 VIA BOCAS 5 VIA SABINAS 6 VIA VERA 7 VIA CAROEL 8 VIA DENISE 9 VIA HERDE 10 VIA TONALA 11 CL HACIEl«JA 12 VIA CAJITA SITE MAP l i I I ! CARLSBA I Proposed Kiko Residence 2649 Ocean Street Carlsbad, CA. Figure No. la Job No. 02-8201 ~ ' ii ~ LEGEND , .. - r--------1 I I I I L ________ J [! ll Iii Ill I: ---z :5 u 0 EXIST, STRUCT, EXIST. STRUCT. \ ·,.. A --.. --. --·a-2 0 .. ---·--..... : ... ·-----. ··. --·: .. --· .. J \_ ~-----.........._ .............. \ . '. J LJJ IG / '; --,7 '. . .· I -------:--------.,.--,--, ---,:------------------1r 7 ,·' :r .\·;·,J, I -~--' L \ ,...;..-~··' Qaf !\ i ~-:-~~ A r:::::====:::::;-, I ,' \ ','"· / "\-··--.J._,--·:< r; i) i Q:1-,. (//\ II B-3 0 I~ · .-:;::= "~~-/ , __ // ·,<: 2;-' \ L , r.i'.:~l,--... ~--V.:( '.U (//1, ___ Proposed . ·.. _ -~, ::::-.. ~ fr-·· ~ 7:. · ;,:i,: }'< ·,':::::::..., ·, / /1 Seawall !==.::7 .. f;===r, ;\ . .,,u~----. " -------· --I \ , I .• · • .,;.,i-p·-' tiP-4. ·• !·/,! 1 ,, \ 11 '· r I ,' • \., \' Ill ' . i' / 1 \\ '-\\ ' \ t \ , HP-1 \ :/ 1 ·,\. ~:'.-I c)h:---.. ~7 '\\ ! 111 \ (Tsb) f,(i '-"'::~--,. / f 0/.r".·t····· ... '\._' \ : L \ \, 1 t"./ • ··~----::-....... ··---.. -~ , ' ' \ ·• 1.i,! I ... ,< I :.• ,. ., .. _ -: I··:,..._ IINGI.ESTOll'I' .. ~\.1,1 ); : ~ \.,,.. c' ':\\\ --, ;; HP-2 i·.-···> Qt '-·-,... w llDG •.l ·~ .. • ---/ .,.... J'· , l : ., I ,..-. , : · 1 --·J-7 J "'-. ·,, coo ,;·;:;::r:;-(!:'3' v.,ooo II! \\ '. !3\ '. Bluff Edge Ill ~, .. ··\ • 1 (under s~" w fill).,.,\, · r 1 ' DcCXI i ~P-5 \\/ B-1 ; 1 @Elev: 1 1 s• MSL ~ ;~~:~: I I r -----, -\ r· Q;,,.c 0 · . , v .. 1 I = I : \ ',,~.. I ' I / -~ HP~ : ii ; [,.<:; I I ! i ., '. J ~...,,_, --_1 .. :1 -· 1;1 Qb (/-i ' I J / \ . 11 ..---J ,. • .,~ . I I . -1, i / ,.-::.----.::.:::·.!' I L·'/.i . ------,, .. _./ ; .... -.. :~\ y ____ ... -· i L ( \\ I ( •• ·) L'.::: .-: -:--· -:--. --. ··. --. . --. . __ , . --•: i ,--• ·--·-· r \, ·, ' .... \ ·Geologic Legend ASSUMED PROPERTY BOUNDARY HP-3 1%1 EXISTING STRUCTURE B-1" APPROXIMATE LOCATION EXPLORATORY HANDPff APPROXJMA~LOCATION EXPLORATORY BORING Qaf Qb Artificial Fill Beach Deposits ff s SCALE: 1• = 2JJ NOTE: This Plot Plan is not to be used for legal purposes. Locations and dimensions are approxi- mate. Actual property dimensions and locations of utilities may be obtdined from the Approved Building Plans or the "As-Built• Grading Plans. ~FeRENCe: Thra Flot. Flan wa& prepared rram an exrat.rn9 Top,po9rapr,rc 5urve!:I Map b!:I 5an Dre90 Land 5urve!:lrne , En9rneerrn9 Inc. dated 2-14-21Z>~2 and rrom an exrat.rn9 CO!'.!cept. Flan b!:I Wolre De&r9n dated 2-28-~2 and rram on-·arte rreld reconnof&&i!ll'1C::IS perrormed b!:I Gel. Plot Plan and Geologic Map Qt Pleistocene Marine-Terrace Deposits Proposed Kiko Residence 2649 Ocean Street ·Carlsbad, CA. PROPOSED STRUCTURE ,,······---35 ---. ______________ _ EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY (Feet) (Tsb) Eocene Santiago Formation {concealed) Figure No. lb Job No. 02-8201 A A CROSS SECTION LOCATION l ____ ..,. ___ J .,... ~ Geotechnlcal •1.-,_ . Exploration, Inc. -----Geologic Contact 02-8201-p Jti/y2002 ~ I A 60 r-- ; I 50 i I. i -~ Upper Level Floor Plan Main Level Floor B-3 i I I .. I n !l j; Deck Deck CROSS SECTION A•A1 A'. 60 .,l . I 50 ----'------------------------·- 40 30 z 0 ~ ~ w ----i~ ..• 7 ... , ........ ~:.:.~ ..... : ..... :.: ... : ... : .... :::::: .. : .......... -Fill ........ ::: ................ ·.·.·.·.·.: .... .,., .................... . i Storage Terrace (Qt) Basement I Grade at South PL Elevation 20' 20 ~ ~ -·--·-· ·-·-····--~-······----. ---·---·-··· --····-··-·-····· -·1 _______ . 10 0 0 T.D. 21.5' 0.. ~ 10 20 30 NOTE: This Cross Section is not to be used for legal purposes. Locations and dimensions are approxi- matf!. Actual property dimensions and locations of utilities may be obtained fro!TI the Approved Building Plans or the "As-Built" Grading Plans. 01-8201~-2 40 50 60 7 HP-5 ........................... ··-·· .. · ... ···· ....... t .. . Fill ·· ......... .. ·•·· .................................. . Pool Deck Terrace (Qt) f'-, ; !.- J '-' 70 80 90 100 110 RELATIVE HORIZONTAL DISTANCE Ju/y2002 120 Propqsed Klko Residence 2649,0cean Street CBrlsbad, CA. Figure No. le Job No. 02-8201 40 30 20 HP-2 10 0 130 140 ~~G~~ad ··an Exploration, Inc. ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I EQUIPMENT Limited Access Au8er Drill Rig DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION 6-inch di~meter Boring SURFACE ELEVATION GROUNDWATER DEPTH at 10 feet ± 20' Mean Sea Level · _, w 0 _, cc a.. :::;; .:::;; >-. <( (J) (J) ·//-,X . ,/./".· ~[r: 2-'. 4- :·.:-1x FIELD DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS (Grain size, Dens~y, Moisture, Color) -FILL (Qaf) FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, w/ slight silt and· some roots, poorly cemented. Loose to medium dense. Dry to damp. Tan-brown. TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qt) ui 0 ui :j SP- SM -1.1~FINE TO COARSE SAND, w/ some rock ·-+-SW 6 -_··:-:_ fragments. Medium dense. Damp. Tan-gray and • •• 1 brown. ; ~ :::r. -· .. · TERRACE DEPOSITS-(Qt} .. •., 8-; ... l • l" -.. -i'";"'(> o I l ~'§: w ·w a:: w;;::-~~ C.J,-::5 en a..~ a..z ,o 'w ~:::;; ~D DATE LOGGED 4-5-02 LOGGED BY JKH ~ ~ o'[ :::;;~ :::;;~ ::) >-::) ::) :::;; !::: ;;§ t; _(J) 1--i~ a.. 0 o:::;; ¥. . 10 -;m;.1 · SILTY SANDSTONE, well cemented. Dense. SM -~ h Damp. Light tan-gray. /,_ i in f-0 (!) ..J 0.. X w I 0 w (!) ..., 0.. (!) ui (!) 9 0 :,: S2 0 "' "'' (!) 0 ..J z 0 ~ 9 0.. X w I \, ____ ....:S=A-=-N..:.:Tc:::IA..:..G~O~F-=-O.:..:R~M"--'A:.:..T:.::1O:.:..N:..Jl..,_Ts:::c:b::.,.>l __ -'--' 12-- - - 14- - !. ~ m • Ii] ~ Bottom @ 1. 1' WATER TABLE LOOSE BAG SAMPLE IN-PLACE SAMPLE DRIVE SAMPLE SAND CONE/F.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 at=·-~ ~ ~ ~ c:i ' >-0 + _j ~~ :z 0 § (J) zo z ~~ 0 C.J LOG No. ~ c:i d~ ~83 I-3:z a.. :c o:::i ~~ _,o cc C.J <JJ= 13 3" 19 2" 65/ 3" 11" B-1 I I I I I I I I I I I I ,1 I I I I I I / EQUIPMENT DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION Limited Access Auger Drill Rig 6-lnch diameter Boring SURFACE ELEVATION GROUNDWATER DEPTH z 34' Mean Sea Level at24feet f--'. LL ::c ~ w Cl _, 0 a:, ::;; >-en ,1,-'I •. -·r, t·.1: • -i-; -·.J.i.,1: ·'t _r_ I~ --J·1-~1- o ·r. 2-/rf ·f.-1;1_-.f ."I~ -·-rt--i--·:r;-l·.1: 4-\+l.i_ ··t ·. ,~ --r1 ~r-·01J .1: ~ Cl. ::;; u) FIELD DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICA l'ION DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS (Grain size, Density, Moisture, Color) FINE TO COARSE SAND, w/ slight silt and some rock fragments. Medium dense. Damp . Tan-gray and red-brown. TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qt) -I 1'· 1·1-same as above, becomes tan-gray and orange . . ·,. -1' 11 . ' t • 6-1 •.• 1. 't 11· -.. I* ·~i ~ lo -:-~-1 _ 'i.lr.1~ 'I -I' 8-+ ,I • I, i·'·1-' 1---~,.[i 'l 1· 1+1-• r • . ui cj ui ::j SW 1Q i•'•I -~ FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, poorly to moderately --SP- -/:-~--cemented. Dense. Damp. Dark gray and _ ~: . red-brown. -.. ~·-. .. . .. TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qt) 12 -~---. ·--.... : . . .. ~ -.. ii, ti -. ~·-: .. . .. :: 14 -· ~--· a.. .• ..•. ~ --~·-: o' •. _-.- DATE LOGGED ~ 4-5-02 LOGGED BY JKH ~ ::,,! fi: 'R ~ 'R g__. ~ ~ ci w Cl~ w ci f--'. ci~ w a:: w>-::;;; a:: ::.~ >-ci + _J ~ (.):::) :::) :::) :::) >-wen ~~ ::;;; !:::: I-. zO ~!z -'W ::5 I-;§ tii -::. ~~ en_ <( ~ Cl.::C Cl. S!2 Cl.Z I--zo Cl. 0 o:::, ::.u ,o :zW Cl. 0 W,s! _,o <CZ ~::;;; -Cl o::. Cl~ ~ (.) a:,(.) en= 24 3" 19 2" 52 3" ~L--..L.....:.•:..,;: 1.-J, __________________ ___,J_......L.-'--......L.--..l.--..l.----'--...L...--L---L----' ~ (!) en (!) g ~ ;,: ~ g z 0 ~ g ~ "\. _y_ WATER TABLE ~ LOOSE BAG SAMPLE m IN-PLACE SAMPLE • DRIVE SAMPLE [fil . SAND CONE/F.D.T. ~ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST JOB NAME Proposed Kiko Residence SITE LOCATION 2649 Ocean Street, Carlsbad, California JOB NUMBER REVIEWED BY LDR/JAC LOG No. 02-8201 !Ii=·~ B-2 FIGURE NUMBER lib -:1d ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l ~ (!) g z 0 ~ g ~ /EQUIPMENT DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION DATE LOGGED Limited Access Auger Drill Rig 6-lnch diameter Boring 4-5-02 SURFACE ELEVATION GROUNDWATER DEPTH LOGGED BY ± 34' Mean Sea Level at 24feet JKH FIELD DESCRIPTiON AND ~ ft:'§: ~~ CI.J\SSIFICATlbN ~ i-.: LU Cl-LU LL .J LU LU 0:::: LU>-:::;; 0:::: :::;; >- :c 0 .J DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS cri 5~ 555 :::, :::, :::, I-~t; :::;;- I-CD a.. cj ~ ffi a.. :::;; :::;; (Grainsize, Denstty, Moisture, Color) cri a.. S:Q a..z I-- LU >-c75 ,o zLU a.. 0 Cl en :::5 ~:::;; _a o:::a: :::;; Cl ,i 1 I, I FINE TO COARSE SAND, w/ some rock SW 1·:·1 fragments, poorly to moderately cemented. ,, •• C, 16.,.. !.'.I Medium dense to dense. Dry to damp. Light -1 1 I~ gray-white. ( I "r -'1 ·• TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qt) i• ·1 'f. f.,.J· ·1 1 1· 18-t I •1 ':~ t lo:> -I• I •1 ,' l • , , I -f•1•1 ·! l 1· .,. ,I; 1. 20-1·:·1 , I •. -l-1·' 'l. ,. + .I f j; -. i',:I. ·, t ,·- 22-,•,"I ·, ! 1· -x:·1. _ -,.,., ,, l • -1.,.f •~!• -- 24 -. SANDSTONE, well cemented. Dense. Damp. SM ; " 0 --.. Light tan-gray. '! !> .. r 1---- \ ·SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsb\ - 26- Bottom@25' - - 28- - - - y JOB NAME WATER TABLE Proposed Kiko Residence ~ LOOSE BAG SAMPLE. SITE.LOCATION IT] IN-PLACE SAMPLE 2649 ~cean Street, Carlsbad, California • DRIVE SAMPLE . JOBNUMBER REVIEWED BY LDR/JAC II] SAND CONE/F.D.T. 02-8201 ~-~· FIGURE NUMBER Expforatlctn, Inc. ~ St ANDARD PENETRATION TEST Ile ~ \.. """I ...... ~ ~ t;: ci ci + ci~ >-ci ..J en ~ ffl !::: ::E ·o 3: 'z ~ CJ) en_ a.. :c zo a.. z 0:::, :::;;u ~~ Ci) 8 .JO <1:Z CD (.) en= 24 2" 50+ 2" LOG No. B-2 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I N 0 ~ io I-0 C!l ...J <L X w I 0 w C!l ~ C!l -0 ...J z 0 ~ g ~ /EQUIPMENT DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION DATE LOGGED '- Limited Access Auger Drill Rig 6-lnch diameter Boring SURFACE ELEVATION GROUNDWATER DEPTH ± 39' Mean Sea Level at 16 feet - FIELD DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS ·(Grain size, Oenstty, Moisture, Color) SIL TY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, w/ some rock fragments and chunks of sandstone. Medium dense. Damp. Red-brown. ., -, ' . 1) -->, ~-, FILU 2 -~{, TERRACE (Qaf/Qt) -8 ).' -1' to 2',offill at the surface. ,o.., -K -~S 4-@: .. . - - 6- - - - 8- - - FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, poorly cemented. Medium dense. Damp. Tan-gray and orange. TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qt) ui (_) u; ::i ·SM SP 18 ->·,: . FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, w/ slight silt, -------sp.:- -· : moderately well cemented. Dense. Damp. SM _ -Red-brown and tan. ~ TERRACE D~POSITS '(Qt) - 12-· .. - -.. .. - 14- - -l JOB NAME 4-5-02 LOGGED BY JKH ~R ~R ~ ~ UJ :::;; i:g UJ a:: UJ ;;:-:::;;~ :::, >-(.):::, ~t5 :::, :::, :::;; .!::: ::i t:; ;§ t:; ~~ c...-c...Z 1--,o ' UJ c...O ~:::;; ~D 0:::;; ::ED _y_ WATER TABLE Proposed Kiko Residence ~ LOOSE BAG SAMPLE SITE LOCATION El IN-PLACE SAMPLE 2649 Ocean Street, Carlsbad, California • JOB NUMBER REVIEWED BY LDR/JAC DRIVE SAMPLE 0 SAND CONE/F.D.T. 02-8201 ;, =··"' FIGURE NUMBER ~ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST lld ~ "I ~ ~ ~ ci ti: ci ' 0~ >-ci + ..J en UJ(/) I-. z 0 3: !z ·--' UJ -::E CJ)-0: CJ) c... :c zo z o=> :::;; 0 ~e:-Ci) 0 __JQ <CZ (.) coo CJ)= 31 3" 20 2" 53 3" LOG No. B-3 ,, I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I /EQUIPMENT DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION DATE LOGGED Limited Access Auger Drill Rig 6-lnch diameter ~oring 4-5-02 SURFACE ELEVATION GROUNDWATER DEPTH LOGGED BY ± 39' Mean Sea Level at 16feet JKH FIELD DESCRIPTION AND ~ fl:'§: § '[ Clt,SSIFICATION ~ i-.: UJ Cl~ UJ UJ c:: . UJ>-::;; c:: ::;;~ LL. _J ~ ::::> >-·:c· 0 DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS uj :5~ :5t5 ::::> ::::> ::;; !=: t co a.. cj ~~ ~ as ::;; ::;; (Grain size, Denstty, Moisture, Color) uj . a.. !!2 a..Z f-- UJ fu <( ,o ' UJ a.. 0 Cl Cl) :::i ~::;; ~Cl o::;; ::;; Cl '·--~ I SP- SM 1(;>-'-' . .1 f J. .... FINE TO COARSE SAND; w/ some rock .. ----e:-sw -r·.·1 fragments, poorly to mo_derately cemented. • ! • Dense. Damp. Tan-gray and orange. 1 •• ! ,•I l 1• -'I , _(~\ TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qt) 18-r; ·: . f '· -l· .I 'I l· 1~ -+ ,i r i. i .. l 'I' 20-1.l.1 I 'I 1· . + ,if I, 1· ·1 ' I • I' I !"'1·· ·.2~- - -Bottom@21.5' 24- - - 26- - -.. 28- - - - .Y. WATER TABLE JOB NAME Proposed Kiko Residence ~ LOOSE BAG SAMPLE SITE LOCATION [I] IN-PLACE SAMPLE 2649 Ocean Street, Carlsbad, California .. • DRIVE SAMPLE JOB NUMBER REVIEWED BY LDR/JAC 0 SAND CONE/F.D.T. 02-8201 at=·-FIGURE NUMBER \. ~. STANDARD PENETRATION TEST lie # "'I ---~ e., ~ ci ci ' c:i->-c:i + ...J LU Cl) !=::::;; ·o :§: !z _JUJ Cl)-~ Cl) a.. :c zo a.. z o=> ::;;o ~~ 1i5 8 _,o uS~ coo 30 2" 54 2" LOG No. B-3 I_ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I /EQUIPMENT 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 ± 15' Mean Sea Level at 5feet JKH FIELD DESCRIPTION AND ~ ~'§: ~ ~'§: CLASSIFICATION w ::;;~ i-: WO:: w;:::-::;;- LL _, w Cl) (.) :::i :5~ :::i :::i :::i >- I 0 _, DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS ::;; !::: I-co a.. cj -'.:i ti ::;; I-i==~ i~ a.. ::;; ::;; (Grain size, Denstty, Moisture, Color) Cl) a..-a..z w >-<( i§l •w a.. 0 Cl Cf) Cf) ::5 ~Cl o::;; -, o ·o FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, w/ lenses of cobbles SP -'-.. (to 6" in diameter). Loose to medium dense. Dry ') "O ,o -.. to damp. Light gray. -,) 0 0 -.. -''. BEACH DEPOSITS (Qb} 1-b"-1i --~~", --,o,D. .. -,,., II l1 -.. -2-'' . . . -'l ,i 0 -•".' --b':-J.( /])o Q ( -b. D 3-~ -.. -. '. -·~ . -... -i-----o---;: FINE TO COARSE SAND, w/ some rock SW -'o,.D.~ -fragments, poorly cemented. Medium dense. 4-~ O(_)O Moist to wet. Tan-brown. - ~o ~·.~ --,1:::,: -~ ~ u° TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qt} -Ii,~·~ -hand-augered from 4' to 6'. --·y 5-·. 'i:)-uo -() ·c _b) o a -~.G .. .°· . ---·,c,o -l.Jl!.c -.; ,ti ·a. SANDSTONE, well cemented. Dense. Damp. SM 6-~ Light tan-gray. f ,___ ---SANTIAGO FORMATION <Tsb) --.-Bottom@6' -7-------- _y_ JOB NAME WATER TABLE Proposed Kiko Residence ~ LOOSE BAG SAMPLE SITE LOCATION III IN-PLACE SAMPLE 2649 Ocean Street, Carlsb~d, California • DRIVE SAMPLE JOB NUMBER REVIEWED BY LDR/JAC 0 SAND CONE/F.D.T. 02-8201 111=-FIGURE NUMBER ~ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST llf ?3 \.. 'I ~ e ci i-: ci d~ >-ci + ..J "= Cf) wen ~~ zg I-_,w :!: z a.. I <( z zo a.. 0 o=> ::;;u ~~ _,o <(Z i'.i'.i (.) co(.) Cfl= LOG No. HP-1 ,J I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I- I --, 0. (!) ,,; (!) 0 --' 0 ,i: 52 0 "' co (!) 0 --' z 0 ~ ·Cl: 0 --' 0. X w / EQUIPMENT DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION DATE LOGGED Hand Tools, Hand Auger 3' x 3' x 5' Handpit 4-5-02 SURFACE ELEVATION · GROUNDWATER DEPTH LOGGED BY ± 11' Mean Sea Level· Not Encountered JKH FIELD DESCRIPTION AND ~'§: ~'§: ~ ,I! CLASSIFICATION e... i-.: w Cl-:;; Ii! w c:: w>-:;; -u. _, ~ Cl) (.) ::J (.) I-::J ::J ::J >- :::c 0 QESCRIPTION AND REMARKS :;; !::: I-CD Cl.. cj ::i ti ::i ui ~ti ~~ Cl.. ::::;; ::::;; ' (Grain size, Densny, Moisture, Color). en Cl.. -o..Z 1-- W· >-<( •O •w Cl.. 0 Cl en en ::i ~:;; ~Cl O:l: :;; Cl . ' FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, w/ lenses of cobble SP _ ,O• .... "a -."(.•. (to 6" in diameter). Loose to medium dense. Dry -.~ -~· -~ to.damp . Light gray. -.... · ... .O·-_ 'a -.. ,··:.; BEACH DEPOSITS (Qb) ,o -~-. ·~ -1-. ··: .• ', ~ .0 ·o -·'!·_:.: -~ "ft . -: ...... •: -doS:-i·.( -• !::Y\ -1k.o·. 2-~ " _o '-~:~.~ -.... : ... -... .. ·. -·,·.:.: -o, -~ .o -.•-: .•. -\·-\ 3-t;.-:_;i··: -o£Y.. -[}· • -j -in~ --: .•·: .•: -,Cl• ,; •• -.•. ·.· 4--~ \· -~ -·~ .. .O· 9 '• - ~ ~-~-~-~·_; -,hand-augered from 4.5' to 5'. -h-tT-SIL TY SANDSTONE, well cemented. Dense. SM ?1.-t:J -Damp. Light tan-gray. -mi 5'-' I\ SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsb) I ------Bottom@5' --6-------- _y_ WATER TABLE JOB NAME Proposed Kiko Re~idence ~ LOOSE BAG SAMPLE SITELOCATION [TI IN-PLACE SAMPLE; 2649 Ocean Street, Carlsbad, California • DRIVE SAMPLE JOB NUMBER · REVIEWED BY LDR/JAC 02-8201 @] =1-SAND CONE/F.D.T. FIGURE NUMBER EXpfoi'atlon, Inc. ~ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST ~ . Ilg " -~ ci i-.: ci ' !.!:: ci~ >-ci + _J en ·wen I-. :z 0 :§: !z -'W ~~ <( en o..:::c Cl.. z o::J ~~ ~~ i'.iS 0 _,o (.) CD (.) en= LOG No. HP-2 I I I I I I I I I I I I I- I I I I I I j io l:i C!) ..J ~ /EQUIPMENT DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION H<;1nd Tools, Hand Auger 3' x 3' x 4' Handpit SURFACE ELEVATION GROUNDWATER DEPTH ± 20' Mean Sea Level Not Encountered I-' u. :c t w Cl ----- 1- --- - -. - 5--. --- - > ) ~ FIELD DESCRIPTION AND C!.ASSIFICATION DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS (Grain size, Densny, Moisture, Color) SIL TY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, W/ abundant roots and sandstone fragments. Loose to medium dense. Dry to damp. Red-brown and gray-browfl. FILU TOPSOIL (Qaf} FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, w/ slight silt and some rock fragments. Medium dense (poorly cemented). Damp. Tan-brown and orange. TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qbp) Bottom@4' uj 0 uj ::::i SM SW DATE LOGGED "'I 4-5-02 LOGGED BY JKH ~ ~ gi g& ~ ~ c:i ~ c:i I-' ·W :;;~ ci-WO:: w;:-:;; ->-c:i + ..J ~ U::::> ::::> ::::> ::::> >-wen 0,-:;; !::: ~~ ~ 0 ~!z ..JW :s~ :Sen ~~ -en en c.. :c c..-c..Z 1---~z zo c.. z o=> :::.u :z 0 •w c.. 0 ~~ Ci) 0 ..J 0 <CZ -:;; ~Cl 0:;; :;; ~ (.) CO(.) en= I 0 UJ C!) ...... _...J.-...:..'--1----------------------------''------'------'----'---....___ _ __,__...._ __ ,___,____, & ~ ~ 52 ~ "" C!) g z 0 ' ! •a. ?;5 '\.. _y_ ~ [TI • 0 ~ WATER TABLE LOOSE BAG SAMPLE IN-PLACE SAMPLE DRIVE SAMPLE SAND CONE/F.D.T. STANDARD PENETRATION TEST JOB NAME Propos!:!d Kiko Residi;mce SITE LOCATION 2649 Ocean Street, Carlsbad, California JOB NVMBER REVIEWED BY LDR/JAC LOG No. 02-8201 ~-HP-3 FIGURE NUMBER EXpforatlon, Inc. llh ~ ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I 1- 1 I I I I I ii: (!) rJi (!) 0 ..., 0 "' S2 0 "' a, (!) 0 ..., z 0 ~ 0 ..., a. X w EQUIPMENT Hand Tools, Hand Auger SURFACE ELEVATION ??? ....: LL ...J DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION 3' x 3' x 3' Handpit GROUNDWATER DEPTH Not Encountered FIELD DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION ~ UJ UJ 0:: UJ en <.) ::::J :c 0 ...J DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS I-a:, a.· 0 . ~ ti; a.-a. ::;; ::;; (Grain size, Denstty, Moisture, Color) en UJ >-uS ,Q Cl en ::i ~::;; -·Ii'· SIL TY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, w/ some roots SM ·1·· ., and rock fragments. Loose to medium dense. , ·!. l--1·' Dty. Tan-gray. ··1 I'.. -+ FIL,U -.r-1 ,: , •. ·1-WEATHERED TERRACE DEPOSITS.(Qaf) -. t. . f.,., . , . ,. 1 -+ .J I 1. -poorly cemented . . r· ., 'I• '··i·' . ··1 1· -··I· ·'·r ,. ,. ·1 •I• -l-1·' ~ •j . ,. 2-·I· ,I I 1. -/1'.i.--I' I 'T -·1 1· -& -,If 1: FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, w/ slight silt, SM r· ·'I· moderately well cemented. Dense. Damp . -• I • . ·1·r'-Red-brown and orange. 3.,... .1r.t r\ TERRACE DEPOSITS (Qbo) r I-- - ...,. - -Bottom@3' - - . 4- . - - - -· - - JOB NAME. y_ WATER TABLE Proposed Kiko R~sidence LOOSE BAG SAMPLE SITE LOCATION fi:S: Cl- UJ >-<.) I-~m a.z ' UJ ~Cl DATE LOGGED 4-5-02 LOGGED BY JKH ~-~ s: UJ ::;;~ ::;; 0:: ::::J ::::J ::::J >-::;; !:::: ~ti; ~ as 1--a.O o:::a: ::;; Cl ~ IT] IN-PLACE SAMPLE 2649 Ocean Street, Carlsbad, California • JOB NUMBER REVIEWED BY DRIVE SAMPLE LDR/JAC 02-8201 llJ =·-0 SAND CONE/F.D.T. FIGURE NUMBER ~ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST ~ Iii -~ ....: c:i c:i + ' k!:: ci~ >-c:i ...J en wen t::~ ~g ~!z _JUJ ~o a.:c a. z o::::J ~~ ~~ (i) 8 _,o a:,<.) <n= LOG No. HP-4 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I / EQUIPMENT 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 .. FIELD DESCRIPTION , .. AND ~'§: ~'§: CLASSIFICATION ~ ~ ti: w Cl~ ::;; ll:! w 0:: w>-::;;~ ...J ~ ::, >- :c 0 DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS cri 5~ 5$ ::, ::, ::;; t::: l:i: al a.. cj ::;; I-i~ i==~ ::;; .::;; (Grain size, Denstty, Moisture, Color) uj a..~ a..z w >-cJ5 ,o •w Cl. 0 Cl cn :=i ~::;; ~Cl o::;; -~'P SIL TY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, w/ abundant SM ----~, roots, cobbles and rock fragments. Loose to -~ -. :.'1 medium dense. Dry to damp. Gray-brown.· a f~· -~ ... ·,:j 1 -FILL (Qaf) ·I """ -t~ --\i\ - 2-~ " . -Drain pipe encounter~d . -. ' -~ SIL TY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, w/ some rock SM -. ·' fragments and large boulders (to 12" in diameter). i:.~ 3-,.Q' :i/ Medium dense. Damp. Red-brown. -~~J . ., o' FILL (Qaf) -~} -·1:)~' 4-~ ? 1··-~ SIL TY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, w/ some roots SM -i.t ~i-,;· and organics. Loose to medium dense. Dry. -~ ~ Dar.k brown. { 1SM ,;;. _'o· -~· -·:'!·,:.: - 5-::~: ~ ~ TOPSOIL O· 0 °0 FINE TO MEDIUM SAND, w/ some coarse rock -.. ·.·. fragments. Medium dense. Damp. Tan-brown. •'!. •. o. -~· .• -.. : .•: -t>· • • • WEATHERED TERRACE DEPOSITS ............ -dense Tar.race Deposits encoun\ered on the east 6-0 o: .o l"\half of the excavation. _ . r 1---- - - -. Bottom@6' 7- - - - ~ WATER TABLE JOB NAME Proposed Kiko Residence ~ LOOSE BAG SAMPLE SITE LOCATION [TI IN-PLACE SAMPLE 2649 Ocean Street, Carlsbad, California • DRIVE SAMPLE JOB NUMBER REVIEWED BY LDR/JAC ~ SAND CONE/F.D.T. 02-8201 w=·-FIGURE NUMBER '-~ STANDARD PENETRATION TEST · llj -...... ,.-. ~ ~ c:i c:i ' o ___ >-0 + ...1 ~ffi t:::~ z~ :§:!z en_ a.. :c <( z zo Cl. 0 o:::i ~~ ~~ ...JO ~ (.) al(.) cn= LOG No. HP-5 .) I I I I I I I ·I I I I I I I I 140 130 120 110 100 90 80 0 LABORATORY SOIL DATA SUMMARY --... u Q. --I-•ii .... ~ I-.... z: ::, >-IX C MAXIMllt DRY DENSITY (pcf) OPTIMlll MOISTURE 100 80 ~ 60 z -u. I-z "-' );;! 40 uJ "'- 20 0 1 2 115 CONTENT ( % ) 1 4 • 5 10 20 30 LABORATORY COMPACTION TEST SOIL SOIL CLASSIFICATION TYPE DIRECT SHEAR TEST DATA APPARENT COHESION (psf) APPARENT FRICTION ANGLE 1 2 230 39° Gravel Sand Fines .,. -. M I I I I I I I I I, I I II I 11 I 11 I Coarse To F' ,,,.,t Med.ium ,ne - U.S. standard sieve sizes 0 0 z: z: I ---., I I I I 1 I I I I I II I I I I I' I I I Ir I 0 0 0 0 ..... ~ 0 0 :z: z: I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I I I I\ I I I II I \, I I I II I I , I I _,.., 0 0\ ..... q "-1' N q-• ,...._ CO ~ .-tO 0 a o o o ..... 0 0 , GRAIN DIAMETER., MM 2.70~ 2.60 2.50 SPECIFIC GRAVITY 40 BORING TRENCH DEPTH No. No. u:, 0 0 0 Clay ,. 0 0 0 3 1 FINE TO MEDIUM SAND with slight silt. Tan- brown. 2 3 - SWELL TEST DATA INITIAL DRY DENSITY (pcf) INITIAL WATER CONTENT(%} LOAD (psf) PERCENT SWELL El= •, TERRACE 1 - - - ~ 20 2 3 _ .. , B-1 3 I FIGURE NUMBER 111 JOB NUMBER 02-8201 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 'I I I I 1 FOUNDATION REQUIREMENTS NEAR SLOPES Proposed Structure Concrete Floor Slab ReinfO('cement of Foundations and Floor Slabs Following the Recommendations of the Architect or Structural Engineer. Concrete Founation 18" Minimum or as ~P as Required for Lateral Stabmty TOP OF COMPACTED FILL SLOPE (Any loose soils on the slope surface shall not be considered to provide lateral or vertical strength for the footing or for slope stabiHty. Needed depth of imbedment shall be measured from competent soil.) COMPACTED RLL SLOPE WITH MAXIMUM INCLINATION AS PER SOILS REPORT. Total Depth of Footing Measured from Rnish SoJI Sub-Grade COMPACTED Fill ' ~ ' ' ' ' Outer Most Face'--·~-------5'·-------..... of Footing TYPICAL SECTION ( Showing Proposed Foundation Located Within 5 Feet of Top of Slope J 18" FOOTING / 5' SETBACK TQtal Depth of Footing #I 1.5:1.0 SLOPE _ 2.0:1.0 SLOPE 0 58'' 48" 1' 51" 42' 2' 42' 36" 3' 34" 30" 4' 26" 24" 5' 18'' 18" # when appficable Figure No. N Job No. 02-8201 -~3A~att!:'1nc. --------------------------~ i I I I I I I I I I I I I 1· I I I I . :I I I RECOMMENDED BASEMENT/SUBGRADE REI'AINING WALL/EXTERIOR FOOTING DESIGN Exterior/Retaining Footing Wall Lower-level Sealant Slab-on-grade Crawlspace · · · . " _,? ._ I "'"· <\. • .... . . . Proposed Exterior Grade To Drain at A Min. 2% 6n Min. / Fall Away from Bldg ~~~\_'\7\.' \_ '\ \1/'\/ /\ //~~~¼~~~ ~ . \,;&~~~'«'0 M1radra1n 600ll /\ 1//,1/ . ~ Properly ~ Waterproofing Compacted To Top Of Wall Backfill Sealant Perforated PVC (SDR 35) 4" pipe with 0.5% min. slope, with bottom of pipe located 12" J below slab or Interior (crawlspace) I 9round surface elevation, with 1.5 : \CU.ft.) of gravel 1 n diameter max, wrapped with filter cloth such as Miradrain 6000 ............................................ -1 ~ .. ~. "1 ... , .. i .. ~--:~ ·.:. _:·~ -: ._:: _· .: _· --------,.,__~ T Between Bottom 12" of Slab and 1 Pipe Bottom NOTTO SCALE NOTE: As an option to Miradrain 6000, Gravel or Crushed rock J/4• maximum diameter may be used with a minimum 12• thickness along the interior face of the wall and 2.0 cu.ft./ft. of pipe gravel envelope. 01-81.30-V Figure No. V Job No. 02-8201 ~I"' p 6-hnlcal ~I,-, Exploration, Inc. ~ I I I I I I I I I I I 1· I I I I I I I APPENDIX A .UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART SOIL DESCRIPTION Coarse-grained (More than half of material is larger than a No. 200 sieve) GRAVEL$, CLEAN GRAVELS (More than half of coarse fraction is larger than No. 4 sieve size, but smaller th~n 3") GRAVELS WITH FINES (Appreciable amount) SANOS, 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 silty 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 Liquid Limit Less than 50 Liquid Limit Greater than 50 HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS ML CL OL IVlH CH OH PT Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour, sandy silt and clayey-silt sand mixtures with a slight plasticity. Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly clays, silty clays, clean clays. Organic silts and organic silty clays of low plasticity. Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine sandy or silty soils, elastic silts. Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays. Organic clays of medium to high plasticity. Peat and other highly organic soils I I I I I I I I .I I I I ·I I I I- I I I APPENDIXB EQ FAULT TABLES AND EQ SEARCH TABLES I I I I I I I I .I I I I I I I I I I I Kiko TEST.OUT *·***********·*********** *· * -1, * -Ir EQFAULT version 3.00 * * -Ir * -Ir *********************** DETERMINISTIC ESTIMATION OF PEAK ACCELERATION FROM DIGITIZED FAULTS JOB NUMBER: 02-8201 JOB NAME: Kiko rest Run CALCULATION NAME: Kiko Test Run Analysis FAULT-DATA-FILE NAME: (DMGFLTE.DAT SITE COORDINATES: SITE LATITUDE: 33.1600 SITE LONGITUDE: 117.3500 SEARCH RADIUS: 100 mi DATE: 06-05-2002 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 PEAK HORIZONTAL ACCELERATION FAULT-DATA FILE USED: CDMGFLTE.DAT MINIMUM DEPTH VALUE (km): 3.0 EQFAULT SUMMARY Page 1 I I I I I ,I I I I I I I I I ·I I Kiko TEST.OUT DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS Page 1 --------------------------------·----' " --. -------------------------------------- ABBREVIATED FAULT NAME ================================ NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (Offshore) ROSE CANYON CORONADO BANK ELSINORE-TEMECULA ELSINORE-JULIAN ELSINORE-GLEN IVY PALOS VERDES EARTHQUAKE VALLEY NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (LA.Basin) SAN JACINTO-ANZA SAN JACINTO-SAN JACINTO VALLEY CHINO~CENTRAL AVE. (Elsinore) WHITTIER SAN JACINTO-COYOTE CREEK COMPTON THRUST ELYSIAN PARK THRUST ELSINORE-COYOTE MOUNTAIN SAN JACINTO-SAN BERNARDINO SAN ANDREAS -San Bernardino SAN ANDREAS -southern SAN JACINTO -BORREGO SAN JOSE SIERRA MADRE PINTO MOUNTAIN . CUCAMONGA SAN ANDREAS -Coachella NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (west) CLEGHORN BURNT MTN. RAYMOND NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (East) SAN ANDREAS -Mojave SAN ANDREAS -1857 Rupture EUREKA PEAK CLAMSHELL~SAWPIT VERDUGO SUPERSTITION MTN. (san Jacinto) HOLLYWOOD ELMORE RANCH LANDERS APPROXIMATE DISTANCE mi (km) ============== 5.0( 8.0) 5.0( 8.0) 20.9( 33 .6) 24.4( 39.2) 24.7( 39.7) 33.4( 53.8) 35.2( 56.6) 44.5( 71.6) 45.4( 73.0) 46.9( 75.5) 47.3( 76.1) 47.3( Z6.l) 50.8( 81.7) 52.9( 85.1) 55.1( 88.6) 58.0( 93.4) 58.7( 94.5) 59.5( 95.8) 64.5)( 104.5) 64.9( 104.5) 66. 9( 107. 7) 68.1( 109.6) 71.8( 115. 5) 71. 9( 115. 7) 72.1( 116.0) 73,3( 117.9) 75.5( 121.5) 77.2( 124.2) 78.2( 125.9) 79.7( 128.~) 80.2( 129.1) 80.2( 129.1) 80.2( 129.1) 81.0( 130.4) 81. 5 ( 131. 2) 82.4( 132.6) 83 .4( 134. 3) 84.2( 135.5) 87.0( 140.0) 87.9( 141.4) ESTIMATED MAX. EARTHQUAKE EVENT MAXIMUM EARTHQUAKE MAG. (MW) ========== 6.9 6.9 7.4 6.8 7.1 6.8 7.1 6.5 6.9 7.2 6.9 6.7 6.8 6.8 fr. 8 6.7 6.8 6.7 7.3 7.4 6.6 6. 5 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.1 7.0 6. 5 6.4 6.5 6-. 7 7.1 7.8 6.4 6.5 6.7 6.6 6.4 6.6, 7.3 PEAK EST. SITE SITE INTENSITY ACCEL. g MOD.MERC. ========== ========= 0.447 X 0.447 X 0.163 VIII 0.083 VII 0.105 VII 0.053 VI 0.064 VI 0.027 V 0.037 V 0.046 VI 0.035 V 0.029 V 0.029 V 0.027 V 0.025 V 0.021 IV 0.023 IV 0.021 IV 0.031 V 0.034 V 0.016 IV 0.014 IV 0.019 IV 0.021 IV 0.019 IV 0.022 IV 0.018 IV 0.012 III 0.011 III 0.011 III 0.013 III 0.019 IV 0.036 V 0.010 III 0.011 III 0.012 III 0.012 III 0.009 III 0.011 III 0.020 IV DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS --------------. -------------- Page 2 ----------------------------------------q------------------------------------ ABBREVIATED !ESTIMATED MAX. EARTHQUAKE EVENT APPROXIMATE I ------------------------------DISTANCE I MAXIMUM I PEAK !EST. SITE Page 2 I ·I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 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 III HELENDALE -S. LOCKHARDT 88.2( 141.9) 7.1 0.017 IV SANTA MONICA 88.9( 143.0) 6.6 0.010 III LAGUNA S.ALADA 90.1( 145.0) 7.0 0.015 IV MALIBU COAST 91.4( 147;1) 6.7 0.010 III LENWOOD-LOtKHART-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 0. 011 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-5.3 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: 0.4470 g Page 3 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ·I I I I Kiko TEST.OUT *********************** * * * * * EQFAULT version 3,00 * f, * ,~ * ****************-******* DETERMINISTIC ESTIMATION OF PEAK ACCELERATION FROM DIGITIZED FAULTS JOB NUMBER: 02-8201 JOB NAME: Kiko Test Run CALCULATION NAME: Kiko Test Run Analysis FAULT-DATA-FILE NAME: CDMGFLTE.DAT SITE COORDINATES: SITE LATITUDE: 33.1600 SITE LONGITUDE: 117.3500 SEARCH RADIUS: 100 mi DATE: 06-05-2002 ATTENUATION RELATIQN: 15) Campbell & Bozorgnia '(1997 Rev.) -soft Rock UNCERTAINTY (M=;Median, S=Sigma) :-M NLJmber of si-grnas: 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 I I I I I .I I I I I I I ·1 I I I I I I Kiko TEST.OUT DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS Page 1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ABBREVIATED FAULT NAME APPROXIMATE DISTANCE mi (km) ESTIMATED MAX. EARTHQUAKE EVENT MAXIMUM EARTHQUAKE MAG. (MW) RHGA EST. SITE SITE INTENSITY ACCEL. g MOD.MERC. =============================--= ============== ========== ========== ========= NEWPORT~INGLEWOOD (Offshore) ROSE CANYON CORONADO BANK ELSINORE-TEMECULA ELSINORE-JULIAN ELSINORE-GLEN IVY PALOS VERDES EARTHQUAKE VALLEY NEWPORT-INGLEW00D (L.A.Basin) SAN JACINTO-ANZA SAN JACINTO~SAN JACINTO VALLEY CHINO-CENTRAL AVE. (Elsinore) WHITTIER SAN JACINTO-COYOTE-CREEK COMPTON THRUST ELYSIAN PARK THRUST ELSINORE-COYOTE MOUNTAIN SAN JACINTO-SAN BERNARDINO SAN ANDREAS -San Bernardino SAN ANDREAS -southern SAN JACINTO -BORREGO SAN JOSE SIERRA MADRE PINTO MOUNTAIN CUCAMONGA SAN ANDREAS -Coachella NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (West) CLEGHORN BURNT MTN. RAYMOND NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (East) SAN ANDREAS -Mojave SAN ANDREAS -1857 Rupture EUREKA PEAK CLAMSHELL-SAWPIT VERDUGO SUPERSTITION MTN. {San Jacinto) HOLLYWOOD ELMORE RANCH LANDERS 5.0( 8.0) 6.9 5.0( 8.0) 6.9 20.9( 33.6) 7.4 14.4( 39.2) 6.8 24.7( 39.7) 7.1 33.4( 53.8) 6.8 35.2( 56.6) 7.1 44.5( 71.6) 6.5 45.4( 73.0) 6.9 46.9( 75.5) 7.2 47.3( 76.1) 6.9 47.3{ 76.1) 6.7 50.8( 81.7) 6.8 52.9( 85.1) 6.8 55.1( 88.6) 6.8 58.0( 93.4) 6.7 58.7( 94.5) 6.8 59.5( 95.8) 6.7 64.9( 104.5) 7.3 64.9( 104.5) 7.4 66.9( 107.7) 6.6 68 . 1 ( 109. 6) : 6. 5 71.8( 115.5) · 7.0 71.9( 115.7) 7.0 72.1( 116.0) 7.0 73.3( 117.9) 7.1 75.5( 121.5) 7.0 77.2( 124.2) 6.5 78.2( 125.9) 6.4 79.7( 128.3) 6.5 80.2( 129.1) 6.7 80.2( 129.1) 7.1 80.2( 129.1) 7.8 81.0( 130.4) 6.4 81.5( 131.2) 6.5 82.4( 132.6) 6.7 83.4( i34.3) 6.6 84.2( 135.5) 6.4 87.0( 140.0) 6.6 87.9( 141.4) 7.3 0.291 0.291 0.163 0.083 0.105 0.053 0.064 0.027 0.037 0.046 0.035 0.029 0.029 0.027 0.025 0.021 0.023 0.021 0.031 0.034 0.016 0.014 0.019 0.021 0.019 0.022 0.018 0.012 0.011 0.011 0.013 0.019 0.036 0.010 0.011 0.012 0.012 0.009 0.011 0.020 IX IX VIII VII VII VI VI V V VI V V V V V IV IV IV V V IV IV IV IV IV IV IV III III III III IV V III III III III III III IV DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS Page 2 ----------------------------------------.. ------------------------------------- .ABBREVIATED !ESTIMATED MAX. EARTHQUAKE EVENT APPROXIMATE !------------------------------- DISTANCE I MAXIMUM I RHGA !EST. SITE Page 2 I I . I I I I I I .I ·I I I I -1 I 'I I I I 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 III 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 Ridg~) 95.6( 153.9) 6.9 0.011 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( 15'5.2) 7.0 0.013 III ANACAPA-DUME 98. 0 ( 157. 7) 7. 3 0. 015 IV *********************************************** ******************************* -END OF SEAR~H-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 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Kiko, TEST.OUT JOB NUMBER: 02-8201 ************************* * * * * * E Q S E· A R C H version. 3.00 * * * * * ************************* ESTIMATION OF PEAK ACCELERATION FROM CALIFORN~A EARTHQUAKE CATALOGS DATE: 06-05-2002 JOB NAME: Ki-ko 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: ioo.o mi 160.9 km ATTENUATION RELATION: 25) Campbell & Bozorgnia (1997 Rev.) - UNCERTAINTY (M=Median, S=Sigma): M Number of Sigmas: ASSUMED SOURCE TYPE: DS [SS=Strike-slip, DS=Reverse-slip, Soft Rock 0.0 BT=Blind-thrus:t] SCQND: O Depth source: A Basement Depth: 5.00 km Campbell SSR: 1 0 Campbell SHR: · --~OMPUTE PEAK HORIZONTAL ACCELERATION MINIMUM DEPTH VALUE (km): 3.0 •' Page 1 I ·1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Kiko TEST.OUT EARTHQUAKE SEARCH RESULTS Page 1 -.-------------------------------------------------.----·----------------------I I TIME I I I SITE ISITEI APPROX. FILE! LAT. I LONG. I DATE I (UTC) IDEPTHIQUAKEI ACC. I MM I DISTANCE CODE I NORTH I WEST I I H M sec I (km) I MAG. I g I INT. I mi [km] ----+------+--------+----------+----·---+----+-----+-------+----+------------DMG 33.0000 117.3000 11/22/1800 2130 0.0 0.0 6.50 0.208 VIII 11.4( 18.4) MGI 33.0000 117.0000 09/21/1856 730 0.0 0.0 5.00 0.023 IV 23.1( 37.1) MGI 32.8000 117.1000 05/25/1803 0 0 0.0 0.0 5.00 0.016 IV 28.8( 46.3) PAS 32.9710117.8700 07/13/1986 1347 8.2' 6.0 5.30 0.017 IV 32.8( 52.8) DMG 32.7000 117.2000 05/27/1862 20 0 0.0 0.0 5.90 0.028 V 32.9( 53.0) T-A 32.6700 117.1700 10/21/1862 0 0 0.0 0.0 5.00 0.012 III 35.4( 57.0) T-A 32.6700 117.1700 05/24/1865 0 0 0.0 0.0 5.00 -0.012 III 35.4( 57.0) T-A 32.6700 117.1700 12/00/1856 0 0 0.0 0.0 5.00 0.012 III 35.4( 57.0) DMG 33.7000-117.4000 05/13/1910 620 0.0 0.0 5.00 0.011 III 37.4( 60.2) DMG 33.7000 117.4000 04/11/1910 757 0.0 0.0 5.00 0.011 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 0.011 III 37.7( 60.6) DMG 33.E990 117.5110 05/31/1938 83455.4 10.0 5.50 0.016 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 0.011 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 117.0000 06/06/1918 2232 0.0 0.0 5.00 0.008 III 45.4( 73.1) DMG 33.7500 117.0000 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 04/2i/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 117.0000 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 33.9000117.2000 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 33.0000-116.4330 06/04/1940 1035 8.3 0.0 5.10 0~007 II 54.2( 87.2) DMG 33.5000116.5000 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 0.006 II 55.6( 89.6) DMG 34.0000 117.2500 07/23/1923 73026.0 0.0 6.25 0.015 IV 58.3( 93.8) MGI 34.0000 117.5000 12/16/1858. 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 33.7500118.0830 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 33L7500 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 71g 9.0 0.0 5.00 0.005 II 61.7( 99.2) DMG 33.7830 118.1330 10/02/1933 91017.& 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 Q.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 1:i,.6.2000 05/28/1892 -1115 0.0 0.0 6.30 0.012 III 66.5(107.0) DMG 33.9760 116.7210 06/12/1944 '104534.7 10.0-5.10 0.005 II 67.0(107.8) DMG 33.7830 118.2500 11/14/1941 84136,3 0.0 5.40 0.006 II 67.4(108.4) DMG 33.2830 116.1830 03/23/1954 41450.0 0.0 5.10 0.005 II 67.9(109.3) DMG 33.2830 116.1830 03/19/1954 95429.0 0.0· 6.20 0.011 III 67.9(109.3) DMG 33.2830 116.1830 03/19/1954 102117.0 0~0 5.50 0.006 II 67.9(109.3) DMG 33.2830 116.1830 03/19/1954 95556.0 0.0. 5.00 0.004 I 67.9(109.3) DMG .33.9940 llp.7120 06/12/1944 111636.0 10.0 5.30· 0.005 II 68.3(109.9) Page 2 I Kiko TEST.OUT I I -------------------------EARTHQUAKE SEARCH RESULTS -------------------------I Page 2 -----------·-------'------------------------·---------·. ------------------------- I I TIME I I I SITE ISITEI APPROX. -1 FILE! LAT. I LONG. I DATE I (UTC) IDEPTHIQUAKEI ACC. I MM I DISTANCE CODE I NORTH I WEST I I HM Seel (km) I MAG. I g !INT. I mi [km] ----+-------+--------+---------+--------+-----+-----+-------+----+------------DMG 32.7000 116.3000 02/24/1892 720 0.0 0.0 6.70 0.016 IV 68.6(110.5) I MGI 34.0000 · 118.0000 12/25/1903 1745 0.0 0.0 5.00 0.004 I 69.0(111.0) DMG 33.2170 . ll(;i.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 118.2670 03/11/1933 1425 0.0 0.0 5.00 0.004 I 71.1(114.4) I 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 il6.6060 07/08/1986 92044.5 11.7 5.60 0.006 II 72.0(115.8) DMG 34.1000 116.8000 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) I DMG 34.1800 116.9200 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) I 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 76.8(123.5) DMG 34.0170 116.5000 07/25/1947 61949.0 0.0 5.20 0.004 I 76.8(123.5) I DMG 34.0170 116. 5000· 07/25/1947 04631. 0 0.0 5.00 0.003 I 76.8(123.5) DMG 34.0170 116.5000 07/24/1947 221046.0 0.0 5.50 0.005 II 76.8(123.5) GSP · 34.1950 116.8620 08/17/1992 204:l.52.1 11.0 5.30 0.004 I 76.8(123.5) DMG 33.93'30 116.3830 12/04/l.948 234317 .0 0.0 6.50 0.012 III 77.1(124.1) DMG 34.2700 117.5400 09/12/1970 143053.0 8.0 5.40 0.005' II 77 .4(124. 6) I T-A 34.0000 118.2500 09/23/1827 0 0 0.0 0.0 5.00 6.003 I 77. 7(125 .1) T-A 34.0000 118.2500 03/26/1860 0 0 0.0 0.0 5.00 0.003 I 77.7(125.1) T-A 34.0000 118.2500 Ql/10/1856 6 0 ·0.0 0.0 5.00 0.003 I 77.7(125.1) MGI 34.1000 118.1000 07/11/1855 415 O.b 0.0 6.30 0.010 III 77.9(125.4) I DMG 33.2310 116.0040 05/26/1957 155933.6 15.1 5.00 0.003 I 77.9(125.4) GSN 34.2030 116.8270 06/28/1992 150530.7 5.0 6.70 0.013 III 78.0(125.6) DMG 34.2000 117.9000 08/28/1889 215 0.0 0.0 5.50 0.005 II 78.4(126.2) DMG 34.3000 117.5000 07/22/1899 2032 0.0 · 0.0 6. 50 0.011 III 79.2(127.4) DMG 32.9670 116.0000 10/22/1942 181326.0 0.0 5.00 0.003 I 79.2(127.5) I DMG 32.9670 116.0000 10/21/1942 162519.0 o .. o 5.00 0.003 I 79 .2(127. 5) DMG 32.9670 116.0000 10/21/1942 162654.0 0.0. 5.00 0.003 I 79.2(127.5) DMG 32.9670 116.0000 10/21/1942 162213.0 0.0 6. 50 0.011 III 79.2(127.5) DMG 34.2670 116.9670 08/29/1943 34513 .o· 0,.0 5.50 0.005 II 79.5(128.0) I GSP 33.8760 116.2670 06/29/1992 160142.8 1.0 5 . .20 0.004 I 79.6(128.0) MGI 34.0000 li8.3000 09/03/1905 540 0.0 0,.6 5.30 0.004 I 79.7(128.2) GSP 33.9020 116.2840 07/24/1992 181436.2 9.0 5.00 0.003 I 79.9(128.6) DMG 34. 3000· 117.6000 07/30/1894 512 0.0 0.0 6.00 0.007 II 80.0(128.8) DMG 32.9830 115.9830 05/23/1942 154729.0 0.0 5.00 0.003 I 80.0(128.8) I GSP , 34. 2390 116.8370 07/09/1992 .014357. 6 0.0 5.30 0.004 I 80.1(128.9) DMG 32.0000 117.5000 06/24/1939 1627 0.0 0.0 5.00 0.003 I 80.6(129.6) DMG 32.0000 117.5000 05/01/1939 2353 0.0 0.0 5.00 0.0.03 I 80.6(129.6) DMG 32.2000 116.5500 11/05/1949 43524.0 0.0 5.10 0.003 I 81.0(130.3) I DMG 32.2000 116.5500 11/04/1949 204238.0· o.o. 5.70 0.006 II 81.0(130.3) GSP 33.9610 116.3180 04/23/1992 045023.0 12.0 6.10 0.008 II 81.1 (130. 6) PDG 34.2900 116.9460 02/10/2001. 210505.8 9.0 5.10 0.003 I 81.4(131.0) MGI 34.0800 1).8.2600 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) I GSP 34.0290 116.3210 08/21/1993 014638.4 9.0 5.00 0.003 I 84.3(:l.35.6) DMG 32. 0830 116. 66.70 11/25/1934 818 0.0 0.0 5.00 0.003 I 84.3(135.7) I 4w4tl I Page 3 ~z I .1 I I I I I I ·1 I I I I I I ·1 I I I Kiko TEST.OUT EARTHQUAKE SEARCH RESULTS Page 3 -------------------------------------------·------------------------------------I I TIME I I I SITE !SITE! APPROX. FILE I LAT.. I LONG. I DATE I (UTC) I DEPTH I QUAKE I ACC. I MM I DISTANCE CODE I NORTH I WEST I I H M sec I (km) I MAG. I g I INT. I mi [km] ---+-------+--------+----------+--------+-----+-----+-------+----+------------GSP 34.0640 1+6.3610 09/15/1992 084711.3-9.0 5.20 0.003 I 84.4(135.9) GSP 34.2620 118.0020 06/28/1991144354.5 11.0 5.40 0.004 I 84.8(136.5) GSP 34.1080 116.4040 06/29/1992 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.Q 5.10 0.003 I 85.8(138.0) DMG 33.1830 115.8500 04/25/1957 2~2412.0 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 116.3000~5/18/1940 5 358.5 0.0. 5.40 0.004 I 87.8(141.3) MGI 34.0000 118.5000 11/19/1918 2018 0,0 0.0 5.00 0.003 I 88.0(141.6) DMG 34.0000 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 33.0000 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 06/28/1992 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 ll~.6320 08/31/1930 04036.0 0.0 5.2Q 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 Q.002 93.9(151.1) DMG 31.8110 117.1310 12/22/1964 205433.2 2.~ 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 10/22/194l 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 34.0000 +16.0000 04/03/1926. 20 8 0.0 0.0 5.50 0.004 I 96.9(156.0) DMG 34.0000 116.0000 09/05/1928 1442 Q.0 0.0 5.00 0.002 96.9(156.0) DMG 32.9000 115.7000 10/02/1928 1~ l 0.0 0.0 5.0~ 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 04/26/198i 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) ******************************************************************************* -END OF SEARCH-143 EARTHQUAKES FOUND WITHIN THE.SPECIFIED SEARCH AREA. TIME PERIOD OF SEAR~H: 1800 TO 2001 LENGTH OF SEARCH TIME: 202 years THE EARTHQUAKE CLOSEST TO THE SITE IS ABOUT 11.4 MILES (18.4 km) AWAY, ~ARGEST 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 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I :Kiko TEST.OUT TABLE OF MAGNITUDES AND EXCEEDANCES: -----------------------------~------ Earthquake I Number of Tim~s I cumulative Magnitude I Exceeded I No./ Year --------+--------·----·---+--------L•--4.0 143 0.70792 4. 5 143 0. 70792 5 .o 143 0. 70792 5.5 50 0.24752 6.0 27 0.13366 6.5 11 0.05446 7.0 3 0.01485 7. 5 1 0.00495 Page 5 I I I I .I ·1 I I I I I ·1 I I I I ·I I I APPENDIX C MODIFIED MERCALLI INDEX ·I I I I I I I I I I I I I . I I I I I I APPENDIXC- MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE OF 1931 (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 Fore! of Switzerland, in the 1.880s, and is known as the Rossi-Fore! 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 ne.w scale on a I to XII 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 firsth-and reports, considerable time --weeks or months --is sometimes needed before an intensity map can be ass(;lmbled for a particular earthquake. On the Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale, values range from I to XII. The most commonly used adaptation covers the range of intensity from the conditionl? of "I --not felt except by very few, favorably situated," to "XII --damage total, lines of sight disturbed, objects thrown 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 cQnditions 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. I Not felt except by a very few under esoecially favorable circumstances. II Felt only by a few per~ons at rest, especially on upper floors of bu_ildings. Delicately suspended objects may swing. III Felt quite noticeably indoors, especially on upper floors of buildings, but many peopl_e 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 buiJding. 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 plaster or damaged chimneys. Damage slight. VII Everybody runs outdoors. Damage negligible in building of good design and construction; slight to moderate in well- built ordinary structures; considerable in p.oorly built or badly designed structures; some chimneys broken. Noticed by p·ersons driving motor cars . VIII Damage slight in specially designed structures; considerable ih ordinary substantial buildings, with partial collapse; great in poorly built structures. Panel walls thrown out of frame structures. Fall 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 spla~hed (slopped) over banks. XI 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. Rails 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. .. .... , .... , ~,.,.-i, -" ~~ ~zv I I I I I I I -I I I I I. I I I I ,1 1 .. I I APPENDIXD GENERAL EARTH-WORK SPECIFICATIONS I I .I I I I I I I ·I I I I I I I 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 grour.id 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 fL1II extent of the work required to complete all 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, aAd facilities needed prior to and during prosecution of the work. The contractor shall satisfy himself as to the character, qUc1lity, and quantity of surface arid subsurfc;1ce 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 GEi. 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. Authority of the Soils Engineer and Engineering Geologist The soils enginei,3r 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 shall give a written opinion regarding conformc;1nce 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 siopes, and to evaluate the necessity of remedial measu'res. 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 qontractor, and (3) the matter of compensation. I I I ·1 I I I I I I I I .1 I I I I I 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 diamet.er). 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 unsuitabl~ materials are exposed in final graded areas, they shall be removed and. replaced as compacted fill. 2. The ground surface exposed after removal of unsuitable soils shall be scarified to a depth of at least 6 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· bot.tom of the design slope. The engineer shall determine the width arid 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 Material Unless otherwise specified, the on-site material obtained from the prqject excavations may be used as fill or bac,kfill, provided that all organic material, rubbish, debris, and other objectionable material contained therein is first 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 remo_ved 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. 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: ·1 I I I I I I I I I I I I -I I I I I I Appendix D Page 3 1 . 2 3. 4. The maximum dimension of any piece used in the top 10 feet shall be no larger than 6 inches. Clods or hard lumps of earth of 6 inches in greatest dimension shall be broken up before compacting the material in fill. 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 all 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. 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 12 inches of the subgrade for paving. 6. 7. 8. 9. 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. Continuous observation by the soils engineer is required during rock placement. Special and/or additional recommendations may be provided in writing by the soils engineer to modify, clarify, or amplify these specifications. During grading oper.ations, 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. Placing and Compacting Fill Material 1. After preparing the areas to be filled, the approved fill material ·$hall 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 tl:ie flll 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 fill material shall be aerated by blading and scarifying or other satisfactory methods until the moisture content is as specified. 4. After each layer has been placed, mixed, and sprec1d evenly, it shall be thoroughly compacted to not less than the density set forth in the specifications. Compaction shall be accomplished with sheepsfoot rollers, 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. · I I I I I I I I I I ·I I I I I I I I I Appendix D Page 4 5. 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 o·f 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, cind 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 tE!sting by the $Oils 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 eontractor 'to ensure that proper compactive effort is applie.d at all times during , the-grading operation, including during the absence of soils engineering representatives. Trench Backfill 1. Trench excavations which exteind 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 degre_e 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 r_emoved to a depth recommended by the soils engineer and replaced with bedding materials suitably densified. 4. 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 complett;ld to at least 1· foot on toP of. the pipe!. The bedding shall be properly densified before backfill is _placed. Bedding shall consist of granular material _with a sand equivalent not less than 30, or other material approved by the engineer. No rocks greater than 6 inches in diameter will be allowed in the backfill placed between 1 foot above the 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. I. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Appendix D Page 5 5. Material ·for mechanically compacted backfill shall be placed in lifts of horizontal layers and properly moistened prior to compaction. ·1n 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. Backfi,11 shall be mechanically compacted by means of tamping rollers, sheepsfoot rollers, pneumatic tire rollers, vibratory rollers, or other mechanical tampers. Impact-type pavement breakers (stampers) 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 i111plying 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 Testing , 1. The soils engineers or their representatives shall 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. 2. The soils engineers or their representatives shall take sufficient density tests during the placement of compacted fi.11. 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 compliance, 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 eac_h 50 horizontal feet of slope in each 2-foot vertical lift. Actual test intervals may vary as field conditions dictate. 4. Fill found not to be in conformance with the grading recommendations ~hould be removed or otherwise handled as recommended by the soils engineer. Site Protection It 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 ·untif 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. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Appendix D Page 6 All 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 excavat!dn 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 seas.on 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 o.f 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. 5. 6. 7. 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 soil's engineer, the contractor shall make excavations in order to evaluate the extent of rain-related damage. 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. 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 ih 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. 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 fill in accordance with the applicable specifications. Where af.fected materials exist to depths of 1.0 foot or less below pr:oposed finished grade, remedial grading by moisture-conditioning in place, followed by thorough recompac;:tion 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. A CROSS SECTION A•A1 A• M l ----· 607 11 11 Upper Level Floor Plan Dacie d so 111 I 11 40 30 20 10 0 0 Main Level Floor B-3 I ~~-AAA•• " • H ;-• l'"T~~=::·:·::1~~~~:·~ ,)~:~-::~~~--~-~~::~~T~~~~~--~~~~~Filf~~~~~ .. ::::::~:-.~~~:::::1~i:::::~~~~~~J~:~:J.::,;,J: .. :;}.~ ~ j::, ~ rd i ~ Storage Terrace (Qt) Basement T.D.21.51 I Grade at South PL Elevafion 20' Grade at North PL 11 Deck ~ HP-5 Terrace (Qt) Pool Deck a.. ..... 777 · 11.,·~1~ ,o; . TD,11' • ~ '7/7; '// ~ / / / / lO 20 30 NOTE: This Cro!IS Section is not to be used for legal purposes. Locations anc::I dimensions are appro1<l- mate. Actual property dimensions and locations of utilities may be obtained from the Approved Building Plans or the "As-Built" Grading Plans. 40 50 60 70 80 90 RELATIVE HORIZONTAL DISTANCE 100 no :1 Ii I/ :1 i 120 Pro~ Kiko Residence 2649 Qcean Street Carlsbad, CA. Figure No. le 01-8201-AA-2 Ju/y2002 Job No. 02-8201 60 l~ 40 30 20 HP-2 10 0 130 140 •P:' • Geotechnlcal •lln Exploration, Inc. ~