The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCT 05-01; CRESCENT DEL SOL ESTATES; PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION; 2004-02-04I 1 , ~I II ·~i :i (i :- :1 1.i ~I i ' l.1 t.1 I i·1 LI :·1 February 4, 2004 Mark Petersen 185 Phoebe Street Encinitas, CA 92024 COAST GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS RE: PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Proposed Eleven (11) Unit Condominium 236 Date Avenue Carlsbad, California RECEIVED DEC 08 2005 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Dear Mr. Petersen: 01 0:;;-0 I In response to your request and in accordance with our Proposal and Agreement dated November 11, 2003, we have performed a preliminary geotechnical investigation on the subject site for the proposed eleven unit condominium project. The findings of the investigation, laboratory test results and recommendations for foundation design are presented in this report. From a geologic and soils engineering point of view, it is our opinion that the site is suitable for the proposed development, provided the recommendations in this report are implemented during the design and c'onstruction phases. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us at (858) 755-8622. This opportunity to be of service is appreciated. Respectfully submitted COAST GEOTEC 779 ACADEMY DRNE • SOLANA BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92075 (858) 755-8622 • FAX (858) 755-9126 ..... III o z ~ o w X o Z c( '..J tL. I ~I II !I rl fl ~I 11 l 'I t :1 1. [I tl LI 1.1 tl [,1 "I -, ' PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Proposed Eleven (11) Unit Condominium 236 Date Avenue Carlsbad, California Prepared For: Mark Petersen 185 Phoebe Street Encinitas, CA 92024 February 4, 2004 W.O. P-400123 Prepared By: COAST GEOTECBNICAL 779 Ac~dem.y Drive Solana Beach, California 92075 I I :1 [I [I ;1 fl ii' ~ :1 fl' I.. [,I [I f I' t :1' , L VICINITY MAP INTRODUCTION SITE CONDITIONS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT SITE INVESTIGATION LABORATORY TESTING GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS CONCLUSIONS RECOl\1l\1ENDATIONS TABLE OF CONTENTS A. BUILDING P AD-REMOV ALSIRECOl\.1P ACTION B. TEMPORARY SLOPESIEXCAVATION CHARACTERISTICS C. FOUNDATIONS D. SLABS ON GRADE (INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR) E. RETAINING WALLS F. SETTLEMENT CHARACTERISTICS G.' SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS H. SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS I. PRELIMINARY PAVEMENT DESIGN J. UTILITY TRENCH K. DRAINAGE L. GEOTECHNICAL OBSERVATIONS M. PLAN REVIEW LIMITATIONS REFERENCES APPENDIX A APPENDIXB APPENDIXC APPENDICES LABORATORY TEST RESULTS EXPLORATORY BORING LOGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP REGIONAL FAULT MAP SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS DESIGN RESPONSE SPECTRUM GRADING GUIDELINES 5 5 5 6 6 7 10 11 11 12 12 13 14 14 14 15 15 16 16 17 17 17 20 I " II '~i fi ~i (I I) II L ,I I r' :1 , . ,I fl fI' il t r" 11 ;1 :- II ~I :- II i 1 LI t.1 [,I ~.,I ,,"I Coast Geotechnical INTRODUCTION February 4, 2004 W.O. P-400123 Page 5 This report presents the results of our geotechnical investigation on the subject property. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the nature and characteristics of the earth materials underlying the property, the engineering properties of the surficial deposits and their influence on the proposed condominium project. SITE CONDITIONS The subject property is located east of Garfield Street, along the north side of Date Avenue, in the city of Carlsbad. The subject property includes nearly one (1) acre of relatively flat terrain. Two (2) single family residences and accessory structures are located in the southeastern portion of the site. Maximum relief on the property is approximately 3.0 vertical feet. Drainage is generally by sheet flow to the southwest. Vegetation in the southeastern portion of the site includes grass, a vegetable garden and several trees. The western and northern portions of the site are generally void of vegetation. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Plans for the development of the property were unavailable at the time of this study. However, it is our understanding that an eleven (11) unit condominium project with subterranean parking is planned. f ' ( . [ , II ["I if 'I l Coast Geotechnical February 4, 2004 W.O. P-400123 Page 6 It is anticipated that excavations, up to ten (10) feet, will be required for the parking structure. SITE INVESTIGATION Site exploration included four (4) exploratory borings drilled to a maximum depth of 18 feet. Earth materials encountered were visually classified and logged by our field engineering geologist. Undisturbed, representative samples of earth materials were obtained at selected intervals. Samples were obtained by driving a thin walled steel sampler into the desired strata. The samples are retained in brass rings of2.5 inches outside diameter and 1.0 inches in height. The central portion of the sample is retained in close fitting, waterproof containers and transported to' our laboratory for testing and analysis. LABORATORY TESTING Classification The field classification was verified through laboratory examination, in accordance With the Unified Soil Classification System. The final classification is shown on the enclosed Exploratory Logs. MoisturelDensity The field moisture content and dry unit weight were determined for each of the -undisturbed soil samples. This information is useful in providing a gross picture of the soil consistency or variation among exploratory excavations. The dry unit weight was determined in pounds per cubic foot. The ~'-" :1 ' , ~I il fl fl 1'1' I [I ;- il il ~I 1 , II 1 ' L.I LI 1 ' LI :,,1, Coast Geotechnical February 4, 2004 W.O. P-400123 Page 7 field moisture content was determined as a percentage of the dry unit weight. Both are shown on the enclosed Laboratory Tests Results and Exploratory Logs. Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content were determined for selected samples of earth materials taken from the site. The laboratory standard tests were in accordance with ASTM . D-1557-91. The results of the tests are presented in the Laboratory Test Results. GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS The subject property is located in the Coastal Plains Physiographic Province of San Diego. The property is underlain at relatively shallow depths by Pleistocene terrace deposits. The terrace deposits are underlain at depth by Eocene-age sedimentary rocks which have commonly been designated as the Santiago Formation on published geologic maps. The terrace deposits are covered by soil deposits and, in part, by fill deposits. A brief description of the earth materials encountered on the site follows. Artificial Fill No evidence of significant fill deposits were observed on the site. Minor fill deposits, up to 1.0 foot, appear to be located along the north and western portion of the property. Additional minor fill deposits are present in and around the existing structures_ The fill is composed of tan to brown silty fine and medium-grained sand in a moist and loose condition. ! 1 ~I r i ~I , - 1 ' 11 !I' .. Coast Geotechnical Residual Soil . February 4, 2004 w.o. P-400123 PageS Site exploration suggests the underlying terrace deposits are blanketed by approximately 12 to 18 inches of brown fine and medium-grained sand. The soil is generally moist and loose. The contact with the underlying terrace deposits is gradational and may vary across the site. Terrace Deposits Underlying the surficial materials, poorly consolidated Pleistocene terrace deposits are present. The terrace deposits are composed of reddish brown slightly clayey, fine and medium-grained sand. The sediments grade to weakly cemented, tan, fine and medium-grained sand. Regionally, the Pleistocene sands are considered flat-lying and are underlain at depth by Eocene-age sedimentary rock units. Expansive Soil Based on our experience in the area and previous laboratory testing ·of selected samples, the fill deposits, residual soil and Pleistocene sands reflect an expansion potential in th~ low range. Groundwater No evidence of perched or high groundwater tables were encountered to the depth explored. However, it should be noted that seepage problems can develop after completiol1 of construction. These seepage problems most often result from drainage alterations, landscaping and over:..irrigation. In the event that seepage or saturated ground does occur, it has been our experience that they are most effectively handled on an individual basis. I roO II :i ~i :.1 LI tl ~ .. I 1 • l"l ,·,1 Coast Geotechnical Tectonic Setting February 4, 2004 W.O. P-400123 Page 9 The site is located within the seismically active southern California region which is generally characterized by northwest trending Quaternary-age fault zones. Several of these fault zones and fault segments are classified as active by the California Division of Mines and Geology ( Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act). Based on a review of published geologic maps, no known faults transverse the site. The nearest active fault is the offshore Rose Canyon Fault Zone located approximately 4.4 miles west of the site. It should be noted that the Rose Canyon Fault is not a continuous, well-defined feature but rather a zone of right stepping en echelon faults. The complex series of faults has been referred to as the Offshore Zone of Deformation (Woodward-Clyde, 1979) and is not fully understood. Several studies suggest that the N ewport-Inglewood and the Rose Canyon faults are a continuous zone of en echelon faults (Treiman, 1984). Further studies along the complex offshore zone offaulting may indicate a potentially greater seismic risk than current data suggests. Other faults which could affect the site include the Coronado Bank, Elsinore, San Jacinto and San Andreas Faults. The proximity ofmajor faults to the site and site parameters are shown on the enclosed Seismic Design Parameters. Liquefaction Potential Liquefaction is a process by which a sand mass loses its shearing strength completely and flows. The temporary transformation of the material into a fluid mass is often associated with ground. motion resulting from an earthquake. I r-' II . rill I r-tl ;i ~I f 1 ~I LI ~ .. ,I Coast Geotechnical February 4, 2004 W.O. P-400123 Page 10 Owing to the moderately dense nature of the Pleistocene terrace deposits and the anticipated depth- to groundwater, the potential for seismically induced liquefaction and soil instability is considered low. CONCLUSIONS 1) The subject property is located in an area that is relatively free of potential geologic hazards such as landsliding, liquefaction, high groundwater conditions and seismically induced subsidence, 2) The existing fill, soil and weathered terrace deposits are not suitable for the support of proposed footings and concrete flatwork. These surficial deposits should be removed and replaced as properly compacted fill deposits in areas outside the proposed subterranean walls. 3) Disturbed soils resulting from the demolition of structures and utility lines should. be removed and replaced as compacted filL where applicable. 4) It is anticipated that the subterranean parking excavation will extend through the surficial deposits encountered on the site and into Pleistocene terrace deposits. However, if loose materials are encountered in the area of the proposed basement slab they should be compacted. All retaining wall footings should penetrate loose or weathered materials and founded the design depth into competent terrace deposits. J I , ' :1 , p II r il II f" il (I' t 1 ~I' II ~i {i 1 ' 11 :. II ~ ... , ' l·,1 Coast Geotechnical RECOMMENDATIONS Building Pad-RemovalslRecompaction February 4, 2004 W.O. P-400123 Page 11 If structural footings are planned outside the proposed subterranean walls, the existing fill, soil and weathered terrace deposits should be removed and replaced as properly compacted fill. AlLfill should be keyed and benched into the underlying terrace deposits. Removals should include the entire building pad, extending a minimum of5.0 feet beyond the building footprint, where applicable. The depth of removals are anticipated to be on the order of3. 0 feet. However, deeper removals may be necessary due to demolition of structures and removal of existing utility lines. Most of the existing earth deposits are generally suitable for reuse, provided they are cleared of all vegetation, debris and thoroughly mixed. Prior to placement of fill, the base of the removal should be observed by a representative ofthis firm. Additional overexcavation and recommendations may be necessary at that time. The exposed bottom should be scarified to a minimum depth of 6.0 inches, moistened as required and compacted to a minimum of 90 p~rcent of the laboratory maximum dry density. Fill should be placed in 6.0 to 8.0 inch lifts, moistened to approximately 1.0 -2.0 percent above optimum moisture content and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density. Fill, soil and weathered terrace deposits in areas of proposed concrete flatwork and driveways should , be removed and replaced as properly compacted fill. Imported fill, if necessary, should consist of non-expansive granular deposits approved by the geotechnical engineer. 'I , ft ' :1 , . ·1 II :1 r* il"~ i [i :* r. .' , ~I ti. :- LI La il 1 . LI :.'1 Coast Geotechnical Temporary SlopeslExcavation Characteristics .Febru3ry 4', 2004 W.O. P-400123 Page 12 Temporary excavations should be trimmed to a gradient of 3/4: 1 (horizontal to vertical) or less depending upon conditions encountered during grading. The Pleistocene' terrace deposits are generally weakly cemented but may contain hard concretion layers. Based on our experience in the ar~ea, the sandstone is easily rippable with conventional earth moving equipment 'in good working order. Foundations The following design parameters are based on footings founded into non-expansive approved compacted fill deposits or competent terrace deposits. Footings for the proposed residences should be a minimum of 12 inches wide and founded a minimum of 12 inches and 18 inches below the lower most adjacent sub grade at the time of foundation construction for single-story and two-story structures, respectively. A 12 inch by 12 inch grade beam should be placed across the garage opening. Footings should be reinforced with a minimum off our No.4 bars, two along the top of the footing and two along the base. Footing recommendations provided herein are based upon underlying soil conditions and are not intended to be in lieu of the project structural engineer's design. For design purposes, an allowable bearing value of 1500 pounds per square foot may be used for foundations at the recommended footing depths. The bearing value may be increased to 2000 pounds per square foot for subterranean retaining wall footings, .. I f. fl"" ~ , ! 1 il :. t ' ~I [. f ' ~I f ! LI , ' l··,1 r ~JI , .. I Coast Geotechnical February 4, 2004 W.O. P-400123 Page 13 The bearing value indicated above is for the total dead and frequently applied live loads. This"value may be increased by 33 percent for short durations of loading, including the effects of wind and seismic forces. Resistance to lateral load may be provided by friction acting at the base offoundations and by passive earth pressure. A coefficient of friction of 0.35 may be used with dead-load forces. A passive earth pressure of 300 pounds per square foot, per foot of depth of fill or terrace deposits penetrated to a maximum of 2000 pounds per square foot may be used. Slabs on Grade (Interior and Exterior) Slabs on grade should be a minimum of 4.0 inches thick and reinforced in both directions with No. 3 bars placed 16 inches on center in both directions. The slab should be underlain by a minimum 2.0- inch sand blanket. Where moisture sensitive floors are used, a minimum 6.0-mil Vis queen or equivalent moisture barrier should be placed over the sand blanket and covered by an additional two inches of sand. Utility trenches underlying the slab may be backfilled with on-site materials, compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density. Slabs including exterior concrete flatwork should be reinforced as indicated above and provided with saw cuts/expansion joints, as recommended by the project structural engineer. All slabs should be cast over dense compacted sub grades. f! II' I fl' , 1 ' r --i·1 ( . f ! II :i :i I ' LI , > II' t-l ! I' t _ Coast Geotechnical Retaining Walls February 4, 2004 W.O. P-400123 Page 14 Cantilever walls (yielding) retaining nonexpansive granular soils may be designed for an active- equivalent fluid pressure of 35 pounds per cubic foot. Restrained walls (nonyielding) should be designed for an "at-rest" equivalent fluid pressure of 58 pounds per cubic foot. Wall footings should be designed in accordance with the foundation design recommendations. All retaining walls should be provided with an adequate backdrainage system (Miradrain 6000 or equivalent is suggested). The soil parameters assume a level granular backfill compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density. Settlement Characteristics Estimated total and differential settlement over a horizontal distance of30 feet is expected to be on the order of 3/4 inch and Y2 inch, respectively. It should also be noted that long term secondary settlement due to irrigation and loads imposed by structures is anticipated to be 114 inch. Seismic Considerations Although the likelihood of ground rupture on the site is remote, the property will be exposed to moderate to high levels of ground motion resulting from the release of energy should an earthquake occur along the numerous known and unknown faults in the region. The Rose Canyon Fault Zone located approximately 4.4 miles west of the property is the nearest known active fault and is considered the design earthquake for the site. A maximum probable event I fI' , ,'I ~I r il I I, II :1' ~ i il ;1, :, 1 I -ll LI ~.I Coast Geotechnical February 4, 2004 W.O. P-400123 Page 15 along the offshore segment of the Rose Canyon Fault is expected to produce a peak bedrock horizontal acceleration ofO.36g and a repeatable ground acceleration ofO.23g. Seismic Design Parameters (1997 Uniform Building Code) Soil Profile Type -Sn Seismic Zone - 4 Seismic Source -Type B Near Source Factor (Nv) -1.1 Near source Acceleration Factor (Na) -l.0 Seismic Coefficients Ca = 0.44 Cv = 0.72 Design Response Spectrum Ts = 0.652 To = 0.130 Nearest Type B Fault -4.4 miles Preliminary Pavement Design The following pavement section is recommended for proposed driveways: 4.0 inches of asphaltic paving or 4.0 inches of concrete on 6.0 inches of select base (Class 2) on 12 inches of compacted subgrade soils Sub grade soils should be compacted to the thickness indicated in the structural section and left in a condition to receive base materials. Class 2 base materials should have a mini:rnum R-value of78 and I fl :1 fl ft~ ;1 11 t [I :1 [I :1 [I 11 :1 fl L ; (I' L' : I' L 1 'It l., Coast Geotechnical February 4, 2004 W.O. P-400123 Page 16 a minimum sand equivalent of 30, -Subgrade soils and base materials should be compacted to a minimum of95 percent of their laboratory maximum dry density, The pavement section should be protected from water sources, Migration of water into subgrade deposits and base materials could result in pavement failure, Utility Trench We recommend that all utilities be bedded in clean sand to at least one foot above the top of the conduit. The bedding should be flooded in place to fill all the voids around the conduit. Imported or on-site granular material compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction may be utilized for backfill above the bedding, The invert of subsurface utility excavations paralleling footings should be located above the zone of influence of these adjacent footings, This zone of influence is defined as the area below a 45 degree plane projected down from the nearest bottom edge of an adjacent footing, This can be accomplished by either deepening the footing, raising the invert elevation of the utility, or moving the utility or the footing away from one another. Drainage Specific drainage patterns should be designed by the project architect or engineer. However, in general, pad water should be directed away from foundations and around the structure to the street. , il t i f, ~I fl' r'· ~I , ~* f . II , [, ~Ii f I 'I ('- ;, :. II il LI 1:1 l J I ' l.ll ~'il ·,·1 Coast Geotechnical February 4, 2004 W.O. P..,400123 Page 17 Roof water should be collected and conducted to the street, via non-erodible-devices. Pad water should not be allowed to pond. Vegetation adjacent to foundations should be avoided, Ifvegetation in these areas is desired, sealed planter boxes or drought resistant plants should beconsideted. Other alternatives may be available, however, the intent is to reduce moisture from migrating into foundation subsoils. Irrigation should be limited to that amount necessary to sustain plant life. All drainage systems should be inspected and cleaned annually, prior to winter rains. Geotechnical Observations Structural footing excavations should be observed by a representative of this ·firm, prior to the placement of steel and forms. All fill should be placed while a representative of the geotechnical engineer is present to observe and test. Plan Review A copy of the final plans should be submitted to this office for review prior to the initiation of construction. Additional recommendations may be necessary at that time. LIMITATIONS This report is presented with the provision that it is the responsibility of the owner or the owp,er's representative to bring the information and recommendations given herein to the attention of the project's architects and/or engineers so that they may be incorporated into plans. fl" " \ l r" II rl :a 1* ;- :i, i, :. [I , 'I' L 11 i I L LI' .~ :,·,1 Coast Geotechnical February 4, 2004 W.O. P-400123 Page 18 If conditions encountered during construction appear to differ from those described in this report, our office should be notified so that we may consider whether modifications are needed. No responsibility for construction compliance with design concepts, specifications or recommendations given in this report is assumed unless on-site review is performed during the course of construction. The subsurface conditions, excavation characteristics and geologic structure described herein are based on individual exploratory excavations made on the subject property. The subsurface conditions, excavation characteristics and geologic structure discussed should in no way be con~trued to reflect any variations which may occur among the exploratory excavations. Please note that fluctuations in the level of groundwater may occur due to variations in rainfall, temperature and other factors not evident at the time measurements were made and reported herein. Coast Geotechnical assumes no responsibility for variations which may occur across the site. The conclusions and recommendations of this report apply as of the current date. In time, however, changes can occur on a property whether caused by acts of man or nature on this or adjoining properties. Additionally, changes in professional standards may be brought about by legislation or the expansion of knowledge. Consequently, the conclusions and recommendations of this report may be rendered wholly or partially invalid by events beyond our control. This report is therefore subject to review and should not be relied upon after the passage of two years. The professional judgments presented herein are founded partly on our assessment of the technical I 'I ! f' :1 Coast Geotechnical February 4, 2004 W.O. P-400123 :1 Page 19 II data gathered, partly on our understanding of the proposed construction and partly on our general [I f I il fl ~i [I t \ II ~* :. r' LI LI LI .... -... I . ·,1 experience in the geotechnical field. However, in no respect do we guarantee the outcome of the project. This study has been provided solely for the benefit of the client and is in no way intended to benefit or extend any right or interest to any third party. This study is not to be used on other projects or extensions to this project except by agreement in writing with Coast Geotechnical. Cl I [I ;1' t, ii'" i ' [I :, !I ~* :, ~I f ' ~I II' l ' ii' L ' LI r ' 1.1 :,,'1 Coast Geotechnical REFERENCES February 4, 2004 W.O. P-400123 Page 20 2. Hays, WalterW., 1980, Procedures for Estimating Earthquake Ground Motions, Geological Survey Professional Paper 1114, 77 pages. 3. Kennedy, M.P., and Peterson, G.L., 1975, Geology of the San Diego Metropolitan Area, California: California Division of Mines and Geology, Bulletin 200, Plate 1A. 3. Seed, H.B., and Idriss, I.M., 1970, A Simplified Procedure for Evaluating Soil Liquefaction Potential: Earthquake Engineering Research Center. 4. Tan, S. S., and Giffen, D. G., 1995, Landslide Hazards in the Northern Part of the San Diego Metropolitan Area, San Diego County, Plate 35A, Open-File Report 95-04, Map Scale 1:24,000. 5. Treiman, lA., 1984, The Rose Canyon Fault Zone, A Review and Analysis, California Division of Mines and Geology. MAPS/AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS 1. Aerial Photograph, 1982, Foto-Map D-7, Scale 1"=2000'. 2. California Division of Mines and Geology, 1994, Fault Activity Map of California, Scale 1"=750,000'. ' 3. Conway and Associates, 2003, Topographic Map, 236 Date Avenue, Scale 1"=20'. 4. Geologic Map of the Oceanside, San Luis Rey and SanMarcos 7.5' Quadrangles, 1996, DMG Open File Report 96-02. 5. U.S.G.S., 7.5 Minute Quadrangle Topographic Map, Digitized, Scale Variable. I' I' I :1 . ii,' " ',I 'I "I . , I I I APPENDIX A I . 'I ,I ' I . I ,I ,1 I ' I I II f' il fl' ~ [I (I- t ~I {I ~I II ! ' il t. tl LABORATORY TEST RESULTS TABLE I Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content (Laboratory Standard ASTM D-1557-91) Sample Location B-1 @ 0.5'-3.0' Field Dry Sample Location B-1 @ 2.0' B-1 @ 4.0' B-1 @ 6.0' B-1 @ 8.0' B-1 @ 10.0' B-1 @ 12.0' B-1 @ 15.0' B-2 @ 1.5' B-2 @ 3.0' B-2 @ 5.0' B-2 @ 8.0' B-2 @ 10.0' B-2 @ 12.0' B-3 @ 3.0' B-3 @ 6.0' B-3 @ 9.0' B-3 @ 12.0' B-4 @ 2.0' B-4 @ 4.0' B-4 @ 6.0' B-4 @ 8.0' B-4 @ 10.0' B-4 @ 12.0' Max. Dry Density (pcf) 128.4 TABLE II Density and Moisture Field Dry Density (pcf) 91.4 100.0 97.2 104.4 95.3 107.5 108.1 100.7 123.7 118.1 116.3 104.7 105.1 120.9 106.1 108.2 107.8 97.6 117.2 98.1 106.1 106.3 104.0 Optimum Moisture Content 10.2 Content Field Moisture Content 9,-...2.. 10.2 8.7 9.0 7.5 5.6 4.7 4.2 5.1 8.0 7.3 8.5 7.9 6.9 6.0 6.7 5.1 4.6 5.3 7.9 6.9 5.4 5.6 7.4 P-4 0 0123 LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING NO. 1 DRILL RIG: PORTABLE BUCKET AUGER BORING DIAMETER: 3.5" SURFACE ELEV.: 47' (Approximate) ,-.. ~ ~ ~ I a ,-.. Q Cf.l () ~ E=! u .e ~ ~ :>< C!:l p;.:j 0 en E-t u U p;.:j ~ ~ ~ ....:I ....:I Cf.l i p;.:j u ~ --~ ~ u ~ Cf.l Cf.l 8 6 ~ j:l., 0 ~ Cf.l ~ C!:l Cf.l 91.4 10.2 100.0 8.7 97.2 9.0 104.4 7.5 95.3 5.6 107.5 4.7 108.1 4.2 SHEET 1 OF 1 PROJECT NO. P-400123 DA TE DRILLED: 12-11-03 LOGGED BY: MB GEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION From 9' Grades to weakly cemented tan fine and med.-grained sand End of]3oring @ 18' COAST Gf;OTi::CHNICAL LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING NO.2 DRILL RIG: PORTABLE BUCKET AUGER BORING DIAMETER: 3.5" SURFACE ELEV.: 47' (Approximate) ,-.. ~ e...-~ r-t B ,..... Q ~ CIl Q ~ ...... u p.. r-t 2-'-' ~ C!? ~ U ~ ~ 0 [Jj CIl ~ < ....:l CIl ffi ~ ~ ~ u j ---~ 0 ~ gJ u ~ CIl CIl ~ 8 <5 g3 p., 0 ~ CIl CIl ~ CIl 100.7 5.1 123.7 8.0 118.1 7.3 '"0 <I) ~ $ 0 :a ~ 116.3 8.5 ~ § ~ 0 104.7 7.9 Z 105.1 6.9 SHEET) OF) Slightly clayey PROJECT NO. P-400123 DATE DRILLED: 12-11-03 LOGGED BY: MB GEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION From 16.5' Grades to weakly cemented tan fine and med.-grained sand End of Boring @ 17' COAST GEOTECHNICAL LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING NO.3 DRILL RIG: PORTABLE BUCKET AUGER BORING DIAMETER: 3.5" SURFACE ELEV.: 47' (Approximate) ,.... ::R ~ ~ I 6 ,..., Q r/) <> ~ !=1 u -e ~ C!:l e, >< !:: u ~ ~ 0 lZi ....:I r/) r/) ~ ! u j ~ i --~ ~ u ~ r/) § Cl §l. ~ t=I ::21 r/) r/) l:l C!:l r/) 120.9 6.0 ~ (\) ~ 00 ~ 106.1 6.7 to 1U ~ § 8 " 0 Z 108.2 5.1 107.8 4.6 SHEET 1 OFl Slightly clayey PROJECT NO. P-400123 DATE DRILLED: 12-11-03 LOGGED BY: MB GEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION Grades to weakly cemented tan fine and med.-grained sand End of Boring @ 14' COAST G.EOTECHNICAL LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING NO.4 DRILL RIG: PORTABLE BUCKET AUGER BORING DIAMETER: 3.5" SURFACE ELEV.: 47' (Approximate) ---. ::R ~ ~ I 5 ---. Q {/J C) ~ ~ u -e {/J >< ~ C!:> 2- p;:j 0 rI.i t:: u u ~ {/J ~ j H {/J ~ ~ u d -.. ~ ~ {/J ~ gJ 8 s ~ ~ Cl ~ {/J C!:> {/J 97.6 5.3 117.2 7.9 98.1 6.9 106.1 5.4 106.3 5.6 104.0 7.4 SHEET I OF 1 PROJECT NO. P-400123 DATE DRILLED: 12-18-03 LOGGED BY: MB GEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION Slightly moist to 3', slighty clayey and moist below From 7' Gra!ies to weakly cemented greyish tan fine and med. ~grained sand . End ofBori~g @ 14' COAST G.~OTECHNICAL / 20 10 0 20 40 Conway &. Associates. Inc. J5II PIe PIe. _ • 1011.0 loa • CorlHo4. CA _ '" "" "" '" f: ~NO_ 1~7 '" 1'~ '" ", '" \ \ Att-.o.o_ .-11"11 lcrj \ /''< LOT 5 \ \ // \ /' V/ ) /' /' /' / /' /' /' \ ~ -:. !:. , I , \1 I ! I I (I I II 1 I :1 ~ I :1 \ r I r fl/ ~.. § r- ~ I ~ ~ ~ 01 U\ ~ U\ "" ---;--------, --- :1 \ Qt (COVERED BY ar & QS) • B-1 1 I I . -TOP9'GRAPHIC MAP I ) I ' SCALE: REDUCED I 2 ~, B- • PARCEL 1 /#IIIiA..~3a.n. . I I I LEGEND "=:------l . r!, L + BORING LOCATION (approx.) I A ------jlJ ( Ir--GEOLOGIC UNITS I ; . ~11~XISTING RESIDENC\E~ ,af ARTIFICIAL FILL ) ,,-/,,--y f--\ llL--------r [1 'Qs RESIDUAL SOIL ..:! ~.-.-. l--:--=-=-;-1 1\ • II Qt TERRACE DEPOSITS J..B 3 --~ . : 'I I T ./ I II N 1 I I I . t: I •• .. 8 i r! I,. i ,I! \ , . Qt "1 ~. t:~ ,,' (COVERED BY QS) ! i: : \ I : U : L ___ , , , . , , , , Ii, .a!--l COAST GEOTECHNICAL P-400123 , , , , . , , . , , ~J ~~-,_____ I r ~ ~ r ~ Ol ------ --1--- - - - - - -T - ---, - - --1-- ----- I 'I I I ; I I I : I I ~ ....... <:, a.u ~/","-/_01 JacIa-Iaf ~ .lJt1J4U . 1 l~ fflOfiU-14O:I • 111 (710) __ I , I I . , ,I t: ~, I . ' I: I I ,I ·1 I, APPENDIXB I ·1 I ·1.' I" ,:1· I ·1 ~i it fI it ;1 {I fl' l f ' ~I f 1 )1 i I ' II ~-.I l_:1 ··1 ~ < ~ ~ :z ~ 0 -;;;J ~ < :z -< ~ ...:l ~ >:: ~ ~ < Z 0 )oooooj " ~ ~ HP~~ H',! !I Ul no]l' 0 8i IJlfH "" ~ 9 u o ~ U;:i jjh~J z-o 0 ~) fj sf ~AP~ !li"" G1r 1 ~ "''' '" c !l ]j~ jH ~~ ~ .. § r = ]1~jrj ;:,- ~ gj£]1~ ~~ r n.a~ ~. ;; !j~ ii ~ .! ~ ~ Ht~: i l ' 1 fa ~) .1 lHt !t i f H~n . 1 1 §l~ d .j r ,!.Jl Ji~l J t I nlJ ~ :rtJ" I I IhH ." !l 1.:Ffj 1 ! ~~jl ~ L p~ ~j , j .a .S .l.' i ~ r l~ IlJal! i J ~J I ·h ~hld ~ ~§ .. " I ~ • I ~ ] • ~ ! .. j Z ~ • .. ~ j 9 '< i • 15 E i z ..J ~ -< &1 ~ • i ... ~ en ~ { ~ • f. ~ t 1 3 • 1 ! 1 < ' \~ i ~] ~ ~l i JiI ...J ~ oC c'a (,) S HI, z 11 = ~ • orj . (,). 1 1 ~ ~~ t5 j 'aH ~ n-a w .2 ~H f " r J III ,:... 1 HI" III en • " ~ oC j 8-g !is 1 ~ .... 0 0 a Co) i ~1~t ~ .... j j :. ~ j ~ :i '" • • -; ~ § ~ , ~ .l! ijH CII ~ li • ~ ...1 ~ ~ t ~ · • • J! ~ 1 ' 8. 5 ] ~ -= G • ~ i~ q ~ '" U -3 .• ~ i ~ ~ ~ ] j I -.... ;; " ! M ~ if 1 i ~'H j s $ ~ ~ 1 lH! " l7 0 I I ~I II fl fl') 1 i ", II fl II f ; 11 ~I :1 ~I III I ,-, tl :.-1 I • 'I I . l .. JOB NUMBER: P-400123 JOB NAME: PETERSON *********************** * * * * * U B C S E I S Version 1.03 * * * * * *********************** COMPUTATION OF 1997 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS FAULT-DATA-FILE NAME: CDMGUBCR.DAT SITE COORDINATES: SITE LATITUDE: 33.1465 SITE LONGITUDE: 117.3410 UBC SEISMIC ZONE: 0.4 UBC SOIL PROFILE TYPE: SD NEAREST TYPE A FAULT: NAME: ELSINORE-JUL~AN DISTANCE: 39.9 km NEAREST TYPE B FAULT: NAME: ROSE CANYON DISTANCE: 7.0 km NEAREST TYPE C FAULT: NAME: DISTANCE: 99999.0 km SELECTED UBC SEISMIC COEFFICIENTS: Na: 1. 0 Nv: 1.1 Ca: 0.44 Cv: 0.72 Ts: 0.652 To: 0.130 DATE: 01-13-2004 :1 II fl il r il ~I :1 il II : I, LI II 1 ' .. L.I --------------------------- SUMMARY OF FAULT PARAMETERS --------------------------- Page 1 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------1 APPROX.ISOURCE 1 MAX. 1 SLIP 1 FAULT ABBREVIATED 1 DISTANCE 1 TYPE 1 MAG. 1 RATE 1 TYPE FAULT NAME 1 (kIn) 1 (A,B,C) 1 (Mw) 1 (mm/yr) I (SS,DS,BT) ==================================1========1=======1==~===I=========I========== I 6.9 1 I 6.9 I I 7.4 I I 6.8 I I 7.1 I 1 6.8 1 1 7.1 I 1 6.5 1 I 6.9 1 1 7.2 I I 6.9 1 1 6.7 I 1 6.8 I I 6.8 1 I 6.8 I I 6.7 1 1 7.4 I I 6.6 1 I 6.5 I I 7.0 I 1 7.0 1 I 7.0 1 I 7.0 I I 6.5 1 1 6.5 I I 6.5 1 I 6.5'1 1 7.8 I 1 6.5 I I 6.·7 1 1. 50 1 1.50 1 3.00 I 5.00 1 5.00 I 5.00 I 3.00 1 2.00 I 1.00 I SS SS SS SS SS SS S'S SS SS SS SS DS SS SS SS 5S SS SS DS DS DS SS DS SS SS DS DS SS SS DS DS SS DS SS SS SS SS SS DS DS SS SS DS SS SS DS ROSE CANYON NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (Offshore) CORONADO BANK ELSINORE-TEMECULA ELSINORE-JULIAN ELSINORE-GLEN IVY PALOS VERDES EARTHQUAKE VALLEY NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (L.A. Basin) SAN JACINTO-ANZA SAN JACINTO-SAN JACINTO VALLEY CHINO-CENTRAL AVE. (Elsinore) ELSINORE-WHITTIER SAN JACINTO-COYOTE CREEK ELSINORE-COYOTE MOUNTAIN SAN JACINTO-SAN BERNARDINO SAN ANDREAS -southern SAN JACINTO -BORREGO SAN JOSE ,CUCAMONGA SIERRA MADRE (Central) PINTO MOUNTAIN NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (West) CLEGHORN BURNT MTN. RAYMOND CLAMSHELL-SAWPIT SAN ANDREAS -1857 Rupture EUREKA PEAK NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (East) VERDUGO SUPERSTITION MTN. (San Jacinto) HOLLYWOOD ELMORE RANCH SUPERSTITION HILLS (San Jacinto) LANDERS HELENDALE -S. LOCKHARDT ELSINORE-LAGUNA SALADA SANTA MONICA MALIBU COAST LENWOOD-LOCKHART-OLD WOMAN SPRGS BRAWLEY SEISMIC ZONE SIERRA MADRE (San Fernando) JOHNSON VALLEY (Northern) EMERSON So. -COPPER MTN. ANACAPA-DUME I 7.0 I 8.3 1 33.1 I 39.6 I 39.9 I 55.2 I 57.6 1 70.8 1 74.4 I 76.0 1 76.9 I 77.1 I 83.4 I 84.9 I 93.4 I 97.1 1 105.4 1 107.0 I 110.4 I 114.7 1 114.8 1 116.6 I I 123.6 I I 125.7 1 I 126.3 1 I 129.2 I I 129.8 1 1 130.6 1 I 130.8 I 1 132.1 1 1 133.1 1 I 133.2 I I 136.2 I I 139.0 I I 140.7 I 1 142.1 I I 143.0 I I 143.7 1 1 143.8 I I 148.2 I I 149.5 1 1 153.8 I I 154.0 I 1 154.6 1 I 155.3 I I 156.8 1 B B B B A B B B B A B B B B B B A B B A B B B B B B B A B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B 6.7 I 6.6 1 6.5 I 6.6 1 6.6 I 7.3 1 7.1 I 7.0 1 6.6 1 6.7 I 7.3 1 6.5 1 6.7 I 6.7 1 6.9 1 7.3 1 12.00 1 12.00 1 1.00 I 2.50 1 4.00 1 4.00 1 12.00 I 24.00 I 4.00 1 0.50 I 5.00 1 3.00 1 2.50 I 1. 00 I 3.00 1 0.60 I 0.50 I 0.50 1 34.00 1 0.60 I 0.50 I 0.50 1 5.00 1 1. QO I 1.00 I 4.00 I 0.60 I 0.60 I 3.50 1 1. 00 I 0.30 I 0.60 I 25.00 I 2.00 I 0.60 I 0.60 I 3.00 I I fil-I :1 il fl [I fl ~I, :1 !I· l . :1 i ' LI ~ .. I --------------------------- SUMMARY OF FAULT PARAMETERS --------------------------- Page 2 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------1 APPROX. rSOURCE 1 MAX. 1 SLIP FAULT ABBREVIATED 1 DISTANCE 1 TYPE 1 MAG. 1 RATE TYPE FAULT NAME 1 (km) 1 (A,B,C) 1 (Mw) 1 (rom/yr) 1 (SS,DS,BT) SS 5S 5S 5S DS DS DS D$ DS 5S SS DS SS DS DS DS 5S DS 5S 5S DS DS 5S DS SS SS 5S DS 5S DS D5 DS DS S5 DS SS DS 5S SS DS SS SS DS SS SS DS ==================================1========1=======1======1=========1'========== 1 156.9 1 1 165.7 1 1 167.0 1 1 168.0 1 1 169.4 1 1 178.3 1 1 185.9 1 1 186.7 1 1 195.1 1 1 195.9 1 1 211.0 1 1 214.1 1 1 214.9 1 1 223.1 1 1 224.8 1 1 228.2 1 1 231.2 1 1 236.5 1 1 242.3 I B B A B B B B B B B B B B B B B A B B A B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B A B B B B 1 7.0 1 1 7.1 1 1. 00 1 0.60 1 SAN GABRIEL PISGAH-BULLION MTN.-MESQUITE LK IMPERIAL CALICO -HIDALGO 5ANTA SUSANA HOLSER SIMI -.SANTA ROSA OAK RIDGE (Onshore) 5AN CAYETANO GRAVEL HILLS -HARPER LAKE BLACKWATER VENTURA -PITAS POINT SANTA YNEZ (East) SANTA CRUZ ISLAND M.RIDGE-ARROYO PARIDA-SANTA ANA RED MOUNTAIN GARLOCK (West) PLEITO THRUST BIG PINE GARLOCK (East) WHITE WOLF SANTA ROSA ISLAND SANTA YNEZ (West) SO. SIERRA NEVADA LITTLE LAKE OWL tAKE PANAMINT VALLEY TANK CANYON DEATH VALLEY (South) LOS ALAMOS-W. BASELINE LIONS HEAD DEATH VALLEY (Graben) SAN LUIS RANGE (S. Margin) SAN JUAN CASMALIA (Orcutt Frontal Fault) OWENS VALLEY LOS OS OS HOSGRI HUNTER MTN. -SALINE VALLEY INDEPENDENCE RINCONADA DEATH VALLEY (Northern) BIRCH CREEK SAN ANDREAS (Creeping) WHITE MOUNTAINS DEEP SPRINGS 246.1 I 257.1 1 258.0 I 260.1 1 270.6 1 275.4 1 276.9 r 277.1 1 277.6 1 286.5 1 302.4 I 319.9 1 327.2 1 1 329.5 I 1 330.1 I 1 337.9 1 I 343.7 I 1 359.6 1 1 365.7 I 1 370.4 1 1 379.6 1 1 380.4 1 I 380.5 1 1 435.8 1 1 436.6 1 1 440.4 1 1 459.0 1 1 7.0 1 1 7.1 1 I 6.6 I I 6.5 1 1 6.7 1 1 6.9 I 1 6.8 I I 6.9 1 1 6.9 1 1 6.8 1 1 7.0 1 1 6.8 1 1 6.7 1 1 6.8 1 1 7.1 1 1 6.8 1 1 6.7 1 1 7.3 1 1 7.2 1 I 6.9 I 1 6.9 1 1 7.1 1 1 6.7 I 1 6.5 r 1 7.2 1 1 6.5 1 1 6.9 1 1 6.8 1 I 6.6 1 1 6.9 I 1 7 .. 0 1 1 7.0 1 1 6.5 1 1 7.6 1 1 6.8 1 1 7.3 1 1 7.0 1 1 6.9 1 1 7.3 1 1 7.2 I 1 6.5 1 I 5.0 1 1 7.1 1 1 6.6 1 20.00 1 0.60 1 5.00 1 0.40 I 1.00 1 4.00 1 6.00 1 0.60 1 0.60 1 1. 00 1 2.00 I 1.00 1 0.40 1 2.00 I 6.00 1 2.ob I 0.80 I 7.00 1 2.00 1 1.00 I 2.00 I 0.10 1 0.70 I 2.00 1 2.50 1 1. 00 1 4.00 1 0.70 1 0.02 I 4.00 1 0.20 1 1.00 1 0.25 1 1.50 I 0.50 1 2.50 1 2.50 L 0.20 1 1. 00 1 5.00 1 0.70 1 34.00 1 1.00 1 0.80 I I [I fl il t il [I :1 II (I :1 ii' t tl 'I' t :1' l, LI :,1 --------------------------- SUMMARY OF FAULT PARAMETERS --------------------------- Page 3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I APPROX.ISOURCE I MAX. I SLIP FAULT ABBREVIATED I DISTANCE I TYPE I MAG. I RATE TYPE FAULT NAME I (km) I (A,B,C) I (Mw) 1 (mm/yr) 1 (SS,DS,BT) ===~==============================I========I=======I======1=========1========== , 7.0 I I 6.8 1 , 6.6 I I 6.7' 1 6.9 I I 6.6' , 6.2 1 , 7.1 I I 7.0 1 I 6.5 1 , 6.6 1 1 6.8 1 1 7.9 I , 6.8 1 I 6.5 1 I 7.3 1 , 6.9 1 1 6.5 I I 6.5 1 I 6.7' 1 7.1 I , 6.8 I , 6.9 I , 6.9 1 I 7.0 1 1 6.5 1 , 6.8 1 1 6.9' 1 6.9' 1 6.5 I I 7.1 1 , 7.1 1 1 7.1 1 , 6.8' I 6.5 1 , 6.7 1 , 6.9 I 1 7.4 I 'I 7.0 1 1 7.1' I 8.3 I 1 7.0 I , 7.3 1 1 6.9' 1 7.0' , 7.1 1 5.00 1 1.00 1 0.20 1 2.50 , 1.00 1 0.50 1 SS DS DS DS SS DS SS DS SS SS DS 5S SS SS DS SS SS DS SS DS SS S3 DS SS SS SS DS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS DS ,SS SS DS DS DS DS DS DS DS DS DS DEATH VALLEY (N. of Cucamongo) ROUND VALLEY (E. of S.N.Mtns.) FISH SLOUGH HILTON CREEK ORTIGALITA HARTLEY SPRINGS CALAVERAS (So.of Calaveras Res) MONTEREY BAY -TULARCITOS PALO COLORADO -SUR QUI EN SABE MONO LAKE ZAYANTE-VERGELES SAN ANDREAS (1906) SARGENT ROBINSON CREEK SAN GREGORIO GREENVILLE MONTE VISTA -SHANNON HAYWARD (SE Extension) ANTELOPE VALLEY HAYWARD (Total Length) CALAVERAS (No.of Calaveras Res) GENOA CONCORD -GREEN VALLEY RODGERS CREEK WEST NAPA POINT REYES HUNTING CREEK -BERRYESSA MAACAMA (South) COLLAYOMI BARTLETT SPRINGS MAACAMA (Central) MAACAMA (North) ROUND VALLEY (N. S.F.Bay) BATTLE CREEK LAKE MOUNTAIN GARBERVILLE-BRICELAND MENDOCINO FAULT ZONE LITTLE SALMON (Onshore) MAD RIVER CASCADIA SUBDUCTION ZONE McKINLEYVILLE TRINIDAD FICKLE HILL TABLE BLUFF LITTLE SALMON (Offshore) 1 464.3 1 1 470.8' , 478.7 1 1 496.9 I 1 521.0 1 1 521.2 1 1 526.6' , 529.2 1 , 530.3 1 I 539.8' , 557.1' , 558.3' , 563.5 1 1 563.6 1 I 588.4 I 1 604.6 1 I 613.4 1 1 613.7 1 1 613.8 I I 628.7 I 1 633.5 1 , 633.5 I 1 654.0 1 1 681.3 I 1 720.0 1 I 720.9 I I 738.9' 1 743.4 1 I 782.8 I 1 799.7 I 1 803.2 1 1 824.4 1 1 883.9 1 1 890.1 I 1 913.7 1 1 948.5 1 , 965.6' 1 1021.9 1 i 1028.6 1 11031.41 1 1035.6 1 1 1041.8 I 1 1043.3 1 , 1043.8 1 1 1049.2 1 1 1062.5 I A B B B B B B B B B B B A B B A B B B B A B B B A B B B B B A A A B B B B A A B A B B B B B 15.00 1 0.50 1 3.00 1 1. 00 1 2.50 I 0.10 I 24.00 1 3.00 1 0.50 1 5.00 1 2.00 1 0.40 1 3.00 1 0.80 1 9.00 1 6.00 1 1. 00 1 6.00 1 9.00 1 1.00 1 0.3,0 1 6.00 1 9.00 I 0.60 I 6.00 I 9.00 , 9.00 , 6.00 I 0.50 I 6.00 , 9.00 I 35.00 I 5.00 , 0.70 I 35.00 1 0.60 I 2.50 I 0.60 1 0.60 1 1.00 I r'" .... ,......... i""" ... •• ... 4 ,...,... ............. "'-"........... P" •• '....-~ """"""" _,' ..... .......,. ........... -~.-. ----~ ~--.~. --.• ---':"; .~--'~ ~ ~ -~~ ~ DESIGN RESPONSE SPECTRUM 2.5 . Seismic Zon'e: 0.4 Soil Profile: SD I-- I-- I-- I-- Oi 2.0 "-"" I-- c:: I-- 0 I--.-+-' I--co 1.5 "-CD I---()) I- 0 ,.-- 0 « 1.0 -m "-......., 0 (() ~ 0.5 1--. \ I-: \ " - I--~ I--~ I-- 0.0 1--, 1 1 I 1 I I I I I I 1 I I 1 I J 1 I 1 I· 1 I I . 1 I I I I I I I I I J I I I '1 I 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 .5.0 '. Period Seconds ;'1 [I: ~I· -;" fl' [I ~. ~;. :, ~'"I ~l- --- ~I, . -1 J ~I -I -I ~~. JI 11 , ,. " -. . . . ' . SPiNlllXC . '" ':.',' : :., :" " : .... -:: '" \ . ' . ;~.,': . . .... :,~ " ',' " " " .>. '.; .. ' " :.~ .'. . " ,' . ." ,', I l' :1 II I II e ,I [I :1 fl :1' , ' [I ( , il ;1 , LI LI LI ;'1' L.J fiRADINfi fiUIOl:UNI:5 (jradlng should be performed to at least the minimum requirements of the governing agencies, Chapter SS of the Uniform Building Code, the geotechnical report and the guidelines presented below. All of the guidelines may not apply to a specific site and additional recommendations may be necessary during the grading phase. ' Site Clearing Trees, dense vegetation, and other deleterious materials should be removed from the site. Non-organic debris or concrete may be placed In deeper fill areas under dlrectlQn of the Soils engineer. Subdralnage 1. During grading, the fieologist and Soils fnglneer should evaluatethe necessity of placing additional drains (see Plate A). 2. All subdrainage systems should be observed by the fieologist and Soils I:nglneer during construction and prior to covering with compacted fill. S. Consideration should be given to having subdralns located by the project surveyors. Outlets should be located and protected. Treatment of [xlstlng (jround 1. All heavy vegetation, rubbish and other deleterious materials should be. disposed of off site. 2. All surfi~lal deposits including alluvium and colluvium should be removed unless otherwise Indicated in the text of this report. "roundwater existing In the alluvial areas may make excavation difficult. Deeper removals than I .. dlc~ted In the text of the report may be necessary due to saturation during wl~ter months. S. Sqbsequent to removals, the natural gro~nd S~9uld be processed to a depth of six inc",es, moistened to near optimum moisture conditions and compacted to fill standards. fill Placement 1. ~ost site soil and ~edrock may be reused for compa~ed ,flll; however, some speel~1 processing or handling may be requlr~d (see report). Highly organic or cOlital)Jl~ated soi'l s ... ould not be used for compa(!ted flll. (1) I I :1 II I t , il f' I JI' ~ :, ~i f I [I ;1' :.- (I I ' LI f I' L 1'1 t. LI [-~I 2. 3. 4. S. 6. 7. ~aterial used in the compacting process should be evenly spread., moisture conditioned, processed, and compacted In thin lifts not to exceed six inches In . thickness to obtain a uniformly dense layer. The fill should be plQ(!ed and compacted on a horizontal plane, unless otherwise found acceptable by the Soils I:nglneer. . If the moisture content or relative density varies from that acceptable to the Soils engineer, the Contractor should rework the fill until it is in accordance with the following: a) ~oisture content of the fill should be at or above optimum moisture. ~oisture sho-..ld be evenly distributed without w~t and dry pockets. Pre- watering of cut or removal areas should be considered in addition to watering during fill placement, particularly in clay or dry surfiCial soils. b) I:ach six inch layer should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum density in compliance with the testing method specified by the controlling governmental agency. In this case, the testing method Is AST~ Test Designation 0-1 SS 7-91. Side-hili fills should have a minimum eqUipment-width key at their. toe exc~vated through all surficial soil and Into competent materlQI (see report) and tilted back into the hill (Plate A). As the fill is elevated, it should be benched through surficial deposits and into competent bedrock or other material deemed suitable by the Solis I:ngineer. Rock fragments less than six inches in diameter may be utilitedin t~e fliI, provided: a) They are not placed in concentrated pockets; b) c) There is a sufficient percentage of fine-grained material to surround the rocks; The distribution of the rocks is supervised by the Solis I:nglneer. Rocks greater than six inches In diameter should be taken .off.slte, or placed In accQrdance with the recommendations of tbe Solis [nglneer I.. areas designated as suitable for rock (lisposal. In clay soli large chunks or blocks are common; If In excess of six (6) inches m.nlmum dimension then they are con$ldered .as over~lzed. Sheepsfoot compactors or other suitable methods should be used to break the up ~Iocks. (2) il fl :1: II r-I', , :1 fl' i ~I :1 II ;,1 :1 il :1 tl LI :,' , l. LI 8. The Contractor should be required to obtain a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent out to the finished slope face offill slopes. This may be achieved by either overbuilding the slope and cutting back to the compacted core, or by direct compaction of the slope face with suitable equipment. If fill slQpes are built "at gradell using direct compaction methods then the ", slope construction should be performed so that a constant gradient Is mal,ntalned throughQut construction. Soil should not be "spilled" over the slope face nor should slopes be "pushed oue to obtain grades. Compaction . equipment should compact each 11ft along the Immediate top of slope. S'opes should be back rolled approximately every 4 fe~t vertl~allY asthe slope is built. Density tests should be taken perlodlc;ally during gr'ld~ng on the Oat surface of the fill three to five feet horizontally from the face of the slope. In addition, if a method other than over building and cutting back to the compacted core Is to be employed, slope cOlm~actlon testing durlng construction should Include testing the outer six Inch~s to three feet In the slope face to determine If the required compaction is being achieved. rl,nish grade testing ofttle slope should be performed ~fter con~tructlon is complete. ~ach day the Contractor should receive a copy of the Solis ,~nglneer's "Dally rleld ~ngineering Repore which would Indicate the results offield density tests that day. 9. rill over cut slopes should be constructed In the following manner~ a) All surficial soils and weathered rock materials should be removed at the cut-fin interface. b) A key at least 1 equipment width wide (see report) and tipped at least 1 foot into slope should be excavated 'Into co,mpetent materials and observed by the Solis ~nglneer or his representQtlve. c) The cut portion of the slope should be constructed prior to fiU placement to evaluate if stabilization is n~ssary, the contractor' should be responsible for any additional earthwork created by placing fill prior to cut excavation. 10. Transition 19ts (cut and flll) and lots above stablUz~tl()n "lis should be capped with a four foot thick compacted fill blanket (or as Indl~ated In the report). 11. Cut pads ~hould be ofjserved by the (ieol()glst to ev~lu~te the need for overexcavatlon and repla<;~ment with flU. This may be necessary to redl,ice water infiltration loto ,highly fractured ,bedrock or Qt,her permeable zooes,and/or (Jue to ~Iffering expansive po:t~i1:tial of mater'als beneath a structure. The Qverexcavatlon sh~ .. ld be ~t .least three feet. ,Deeper overexcavatlon may be recommended In some cases. (3) ~I :1 ~I fl' fI [I f.1 :1 ~I' , , , [I ~"I l' , LI ~,"I ~>I ~-"I ~ ... I 1 2. bploratory backhoe or dozer trenches stili remaining after site removal sh9Uld be excavated and filled with compacted fill if they can be located. firadlng Observation and Testing. 1. Observation of the fill placement should be provided by the Solis I:nglneer during the progress of grading. 2. In general, density tests would be made at intervals not exceeding two feet of fill height or every 1,000 cubic yards of fill placed. This criteria will vary depending on soil conditions andthe size of the fill. In any event, an adequate num~er of field density tests should be ma~e to evaluate if the required compaction afld moisture content Is generally .belng obtained. S. Density tests may be made on the surface material to receive fill, as required by the Solis I:ngineer. 4. Cleanouts, processed ground to receive fill, key excavations,subdrains and'rock disposal shoul~ be observed by the Soils I:ngineer prior to placing any fill. -It will be the Contractor's responsibility to notify the Soils I:nglneer when such areas are ready for observation. 5. A fieologist should observe subdrain construction. 6. A fieologlst should observe benching prior to and during placement of fill. Utility Trench Backfill Utility trench backfill should be placed to the following standards: 1. Ninety percent of the laboratory standard If native material Is used as backfill. 2. AS an alternative, clean sand'may be utlUzed a,nd flooded Into place. No specific relative compaction would be requlr~d; Jjowever, observation, probing, and if deemed necessary, testing may be required. S. bterlor trenches, paralleling a foot~ng and ~~endi~g belQw a 1: 1 pl~ne projected from the outside bottom edge of ~he .footiflg, should be compacted to 90 percent of the laboratory standard. Sand ba~kfill, unless It is similar to the Inplace fill, should not be allowed In these trench backfill are~s. Density testing alongwith probing should be accomplished to verity the desired results. (4)