Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCT 05-10; Poinsettia Properties The Tides; Geotechnical; 2010-05-22PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INTERPRETIVE REPORT PROPOSED 29-LOT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF POINSETTIA LANE AND LOWDER LANE, CITY OF CARLSBAD, R4¥ERSmE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA BETTER PEOPLE , BETTER SERVICE . BETTER RESULTS PROJECT NO. 10707-10A _idHl Initial Bate May 11, 2010 Earth - Stratat Inc. QeotechnlCBl, Environmental and Materials Tasting Consultants BETTER PEOPLE . BETTER SERVICE . BETTER RESULTS Project No. 10707-10A Mr. Darren Bolton K. HOVNANIAN HOMES 1500 South Haven Avenue, Suite 100 Ontario, CA 91761 Subject: Preliminary Geotechnical Interpretive Report, Proposed 29-Lot Residential Development, Located on the Southwest Corner of Poinsettia Lane and Lowder Lane City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, California Earth-Strata is pleased to present our preliminary geotechnical interpretive report for the proposed 29- lot residential development, located on the southwest corner of Poinsettia Lane and Lowder Lane, in the City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, California. This work was performed in accordance with the scope of work described in our proposal, dated March 3, 2010. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the nature, distribution, engineering properties, and geologic strata underlying the site with respect to the proposed development. Earth-Strata appreciates the opportunity to offer our consultation and advice on this project. In the event that you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned at your earliest convenience. Respectfully submitted, EARTH-STRATA, Inc. ' Chad E. Welke, PG, CEG, PE Principal Geologist/Engineer \ i Stephen M. Poole, PE, GE Principal Engineer CW/SMP/am Distribution: (2) Addressee (4) Mr. Craig Kahlen - Rick Engineering Company TABLE OF CONTENTS N/OeA£**T UeQ*fy Section Page INTRODUCTION 1 SITE DESCRIPTION 1 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND GRADING 1 FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING 3 Field Exploration 3 Laboratory Testing 3 FINDINGS 3 Regional Geology 3 Local Geology 4 Geologic Structure 4 Faulting 6 Landslides 6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6 General 6 Earthwork 6 Earthwork and Grading 6 Clearing and Grubbing 7 Excavation Characteristics 7 Groundwater 7 Ground Preparation For Fill Areas 7 Wet Removals 7 Oversize Rock 7 Compacted Fill Placement 8 Import Earth Materials 8 Stabilization Fills 8 Fill Slopes 8 Cut/Fill Transitions 9 Shrinkage, Bulking and Subsidence 9 Geotechnical Observations 9 Post Grading Considerations 10 Slope Landscaping and Maintenance 10 Site Drainage 10 Utility Trenches 10 SEISMIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS 11 Ground Motions 11 Secondary Seismic Hazards 12 Liquefaction 12 TENTATIVE FOUNDATION DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS 12 General 13 Allowable Bearing Values 13 Settlement 13 Lateral Resistance 13 Structural Setbacks 14 Footing Observations IS Expansive Soil Considerations 15 Very Low Expansion Potential (Expansion Index of 20 or Less) 15 Footings 16 Building Floor Slabs 16 Low Expansion Potential (Expansion Index of 21 to 50) 16 Footings 17 Building Floor Slabs 17 Post Tensioned Slab/Foundation Design Recommendations 18 Corrosivity 19 RETAINING WALLS 20 Active and At-Rest Earth Pressures 20 Subdrain System 21 Temporary Excavations 21 Wall Backfill 21 CONCRETE FLATWORK 22 Thickness and Joint Spacing 22 Subgrade Preparation 22 PRELIMINARY ASPHALTIC CONCRETE PAVEMENT DESIGN 22 GRADING PLAN REVIEW AND CONSTRUCTION SERVICES 23 REPORT LIMITATIONS 23 Attachments: Figure 1 - Vicinity Map (Page 2) Figure 2 - Regional Geologic Map (Page 5] APPENDIX A - References (Rear of Text) APPENDIX B - Exploratory Logs (Rear of Text) APPENDIX C - Laboratory Procedures and Test Results (Rear of Text) APPENDIX D - Retaining Wall Calculations (Rear of Text) APPENDIX E - Seismicity (Rear of Text) APPENDIX F - Asphaltic Concrete Pavement Calculations (Rear of Text) APPENDIX G - General Earthwork and Grading Specifications (Rear of Text) Plate 1 - Geotechnical Map (In Pocket) EARTH-STRATA, INC. Page ii Project No. 10707-10A INTRODUCTION Earth-Strata is pleased to present our preliminary geotechnical interpretive report for the proposed development. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the nature, distribution, engineering properties, and geologic strata underlying the site with respect to the proposed development, and then provide preliminary grading and foundation design recommendations based on the plans you provided. The general location of the subject property is indicated on the Vicinity Map, Figure 1. The plans you provided were used as the base map to show geologic conditions within the subject site, see Geotechnical Map, Plate 1. SITE DESCRIPTION The subject property is located on the southwest corner of Poinsettia Lane and Lowder Lane in the City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, California. The approximate location of the site is shown on the Vicinity Map, Figure 1. The subject property is comprised of approximately 5.2 acres of undeveloped land. The site has been graded on the order of 25 years ago. Topographic relief at the subject property is moderate with the terrain being generally terraced, with two access ramps located in the central portion of the site. Elevations at the site range from approximately 100 to 133 feet above mean sea level (msl), for a difference of about 33± feet across the entire site. Drainage within the subject property generally flows to the west. The site is currently bordered by Interstate 5 to the west and residential developments around the remaining sides. Most of the vegetation on the site consists of moderate amounts of annual weeds/grasses, along with some scattered wild flowers. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND GRADING The proposed residential development is expected to consist of concrete, wood or steel framed one- and/or two-story structures utilizing slab on grade construction with associated streets, landscape areas, and utilities. The current development plans include 29 building pads positioned throughout the site. The plans provided by you were utilized in our exploration and form the base for our Geotechnical Map, Plate 1. Retaining walls up to 20 feet high are planned to support level backslope conditions. Formal plans have not been prepared and await the conclusions and recommendations of this report. IIs <-;a. i - A >v ""*&, Sr f - 5 TSL- £ __. -_.«==*-& •* il'*/c Soglh Cansnad Stile I ^J^t^sS ^"i-, !,,«.<• II TKtKfM ' r BEUEFLOHER RD ^jl ^t= BEACON MJDR-1^. <?V 110707-10A K-Hovnanian Homes - Carlsbad ^[Approximate Site Location .HICKORY' i « \°0 - ^iViv/H^rj&* \ if tV'" kftf S -===*^£., iORCHID WAV' IkOYAVg §i MRLO CT •«» 12O.' 1B(K' • -t. 4 M '••<*c SHERIDAN RD i» w ""tvl iM I CAPR1^ : -S%/,,,yiM-\ J 'i^1 X ,,i(0«11 -T • •" '. \ \\\ ?f -° 2 /.'v.U^fc^' ^ c . s j lM^51&Je_. IS ME. J BtutHEROH.AvE "© 2007 beLorme (www.delormc.com) Topo USA®" Earth = Strata,, inc.. Geotechnical, Environmental and Materials Testing Consultants BETTER PEOPLE • BETTER SERVICE . BETTER RESULTS VICINITY MAP SEE BAR SCALE MAY 2010 FIGURE 1 _ FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING m Field Exploration m*Subsurface exploration within the subject site was performed on April 15 and 16, 2010 for the m exploratory excavations. A truck mounted hollow-stem-auger drill rig was utilized to drill 8 borings throughout the site to a maximum depth of 21.5 feet and a truck mounted bucket rig was utilized to drill 3 borings to a maximum depth of 21 feet. The bucket auger borings were down hole logged by our m geologic staff. An underground utilities clearance was obtained from Underground Service Alert of Southern California, prior to the subsurface exploration. m Earth materials encountered during exploration were classified and logged in general accordance with the Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure) of ASTM D 2488. Upon completion of laboratory testing, exploratory logs and sample descriptions may have been m reconciled to reflect laboratory test results with regard to ASTM D 2487. Associated with the subsurface exploration was the collection of bulk (disturbed) samples and relatively m undisturbed samples of earth materials for laboratory testing and analysis. The relatively undisturbed samples were obtained with a 3 inch outside diameter modified California split-spoon sampler lined with 1 inch high brass rings. Samples obtained using the hollow stem auger drill rig were mechanically driven — with successive 30 inch drops of a 140-pound automatic trip safety hammer. Ring samples obtained using the bucket rig were driven with the 2,400 pound Kelly bars. The blow count per one foot increment was recorded in the boring logs. The central portions of the driven samples were placed in sealed m containers and transported to our laboratory for testing and analysis. The approximate exploratory locations are shown on Plate 1 and descriptive logs are presented in Appendix B. *- Laboratory Testing Maximum dry density/optimum moisture content, sieve analysis, 200-wash, Atterberg limits, expansion potential, shear strength, R-value, pH, resistivity, sulfate content, chloride content, and in-situ density/moisture content were determined for selected undisturbed and bulk samples of earth materials, considered representative of those encountered. An evaluation of the test data is reflected throughout •— the Conclusions and Recommendations section of this report. A brief description of laboratory test criteria and summaries of test data are presented in Appendix C. FINDINGS «* Regional Geology Regionally, the site is located in the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province of California. The M* Peninsular Ranges are characterized by northwest trending steep mountain ranges separated by sediment filled elongated valleys. The dominant structural geologic features reflect the northwest trend **" of the province. Associated with and subparallel to the San Andreas Fault are the San Jacinto Fault, »• Newport-Inglewood, and the Whittier-Elsinore Fault. The Santa Ana Mountains abut the west side of the Elsinore Fault while the Perris Block forms the other side of the fault zone to the east. The Perris Block is ** bounded to the east by the San Jacinto Fault. The northern perimeter of the Los Angeles basin forms part •» ^^^^^^^^^_^^^^^^^^^^^^_^_^—„_^...^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^_„„„_,„.^^_^^__„^^^^^^^ EARTH-STRATA, INC. 3 May 11,2010 of a northerly dipping blind thrust fault at the boundary between the Peninsular Ranges Province and the Transverse Range Province. The mountainous regions within the Peninsular Ranges Province are comprised of Pre-Cretaceous, metasedimentary, and metavolcanic rocks along with Cretaceous plutonic rocks of the Southern California Batholith. The low lying areas are primarily comprised of Tertiary and Quaternary non-marine alluvial sediments consisting of alluvial deposits, sandstones, claystones, siltstones, conglomerates, and occasional volcanic units. A map illustrating the regional geology is presented on the Regional Geologic Map, Figure 2. Local Geology The earth materials on the site are primarily comprised of artificial fill and Quaternary old paralic deposits. A general description of the dominant earth materials observed on the site is provided below: . Artificial Fill (map symbol Afj: Artificial fill materials were encountered throughout the site within the upper 5 to 16.5 feet during exploration. These materials are typically locally derived from the native materials and consist generally of orange brown to grayish brown silty sand. The deeper fills are generally consistent, well consolidated fills. . Quaternary Old Paralic Deposits (map symbol Qop]: Quaternary old paralic deposits were encountered to a maximum depth of 21.5 feet. These deposits consist predominately of interlayered moderate yellow brown to gray brown, silty sand. These deposits were generally noted to be in a slightly moist to very moist, medium dense to very dense state. Geologic Structure The paralic deposits described are common to this area and the geologic structure is generally massive to horizontally layered and lacks significant structural planes. EARTH-STRATA, INC. 4 May 11,2010 a q McCMUn-PaloM/ ="*f -f/iMjSi g-s. |2|5%i, |\ 10707 WA K-Hovnanian Homes - Carlsbad fV *>5 1^,-- - ' ffl 1§.(_, Approximate Site Location HICKORY I \ \ y-'ii.^°^ /\;;^ ^^,^•1 ill 's ^REFERNCES: Morton, D.M., Hauser, Rachel M., and Ruppert, Kelly R., 2004, Preliminary Digital Seologic Map of the Santa Ana 30' x 60' Quadrangle, Southern California, Version 2.0: U.S. geological Survey Open-File Report 99-0172. "© 2007 DeLorme (www.delorme.com) Topo USA©". Earth - Strata, Inc. Geotechnical, Environmental and Materials Testing Consultants BETTER PEOPLE . BETTER SERVICE • BETTER RESULTS K-HOVNANIAN - CARLSBAD REGIONAL GEOLOGIC MAP 10707-10A SEE BAR SCALE MAY 2010 FIGURE 2 Faulting The project is located in a seismically active region and as a result, significant ground shaking will likely impact the site within the design life of the proposed project. The geologic structure of the entire southern California area is dominated by northwest-trending faults associated with the San Andreas Fault system, which accommodates for most of the right lateral movement associated with the relative motion between the Pacific and North American tectonic plates. Known active faults within this system include the Newport-Inglewood, Whittier-Elsinore, San Jacinto and San Andreas Faults. No active faults are known to project through the site and the site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, established by the State of California to restrict the construction of new habitable structures across identifiable traces of known active faults. An active fault is defined by the State of California as having surface displacement within the past 11,000 years or during the Holocene geologic time period. Based on our review of regional geologic maps and the computer program (USGS 2002 Interactive Deaggregation), the Rose Canyon Fault with an approximate source to site distance of 6.5 kilometers is the closest known active fault anticipated to produce the highest ground accelerations, with an anticipated maximum modal magnitude of 7.0. Based on the data compiled during the preparation of this report, it is our interpretation that the potential for surface rupture to adversely impact the proposed structures is very low to remote. Landslides Landslide debris was not observed during our subsurface exploration and no ancient landslides are known to exist on the site. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS General From geotechnical and engineering geologic points of view, the subject property is considered suitable for the proposed development, provided the following conclusions and recommendations are incorporated into the plans and are implemented during construction. Earthwork Earthwork and Grading The provisions of the 2007 California Building Code (CBC), including Appendix J Grading, should be applied to all earthwork and grading operations, as well as in accordance with all applicable grading codes and requirements of the appropriate reviewing agency. Unless specifically revised or amended herein, grading operations should also be performed in accordance with applicable provisions of our General Earthwork and Grading Specifications within the last appendix of this report. EARTH-STRATA, INC. 6 May 11,2010 Clearing and Grubbing Vegetation including trees, grasses, weeds, brush, shrubs, or any other debris should be stripped from the areas to be graded and properly disposed of offsite. In addition, laborers should be utilized to remove any roots, branches, or other deleterious materials during grading operations. Earth-Strata should be notified at the appropriate times to provide observation and testing services during Clearing and Grubbing operations. Any buried structures or unanticipated conditions should be brought to our immediate attention. Excavation Characteristics Based on the results of our exploration and experience with similar projects in similar settings, the near surface earth materials, will be readily excavated with conventional earth moving equipment. Groundwater Groundwater was not observed during our subsurface exploration. It should be noted that localized groundwater could be encountered during grading due to the limited number of exploratory locations or other factors. Ground Preparation For Fill Areas For each area to receive compacted fill, the removal of low density, compressible earth materials, such as the upper artificial fill, should continue until firm competent artificial fill or paralic deposits are encountered. Removal excavations are subject to verification by the project engineer, geologist or their representative. Prior to placing compacted fills, the exposed bottom in each removal area should be scarified to a depth of 6 inches or more, watered or air dried as necessary to achieve near optimum moisture conditions and then compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density determined by ASTM D 1557. The intent of remedial grading is to diminish the potential for hydro-consolidation, slope instability, and/or settlement. Remedial grading should extend beyond the perimeter of the proposed structures a horizontal distance equal to the depth of excavation or a minimum of 5 feet, whichever is greater. For cursory purposes the anticipated removal depths are shown on the enclosed Geotechnical Map, Plate 1. In general, the anticipated removal depths should vary from 3 to 9 feet below existing grade. Oversize Rock Oversize rock is not expected to be encountered during grading. Oversize rock that is encountered (i.e., rock exceeding a maximum dimension of 12 inches) should be disposed of offsite or stockpiled onsite and crushed for future use. The disposal of oversize rock is discussed in greater detail in General Earthwork and Grading Specifications within the last appendix of this report. EARTH-STRATA, INC. 7 May 11,2010 Compacted Fill Placement Compacted fill materials should be placed in 6 to 8 inch maximum (uncompacted) lifts, watered or air dried as necessary to achieve uniform near optimum moisture content and then compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density determined by ASTM D 1557-00. Import Earth Materials Should import earth materials be needed to achieve final design grades, all potential import materials should be free of deleterious/oversize materials, non-expansive, and approved by the project geotechnical consultant prior to delivery onsite. Fill Slopes When properly constructed, fill slopes up to 20 feet high with inclinations of 2:1 (h:v) or flatter are considered to be grossly stable. Keyways are required at the toe of all fill slopes higher than 5 feet and steeper than 5:1 (h:v). Keyways should be a minimum of 12 feet wide and 2 feet into competent earth materials, as measured on the downhill side. In order to establish keyway removals, backcuts should be cut no steeper than 1:1 or as recommended by the geotechnical engineer or engineering geologist. Compacted fill should be benched into competent earth materials. Cut Slopes When properly constructed, cut slopes into older paralic deposits up to 20 feet high with inclinations of 2:1 (h:v) or flatter are considered grossly stable. Cut slopes in older paralic deposits should be observed by the engineering geologist or his representative during grading, but are anticipated to be stable. Fill Over Cut Slopes The fill portion of fill over cut slopes should not be constructed until the cut portion of the slope has been cut to finish grade. The earth materials and geologic structure exposed along the cut slope should be evaluated with regard to suitability for compacted fills or foundations and for stability. If the cut materials are determined to be competent, then the construction of the keyway and subdrain system may commence or additional remedial recommendations will be provided. Temporary Backcuts It is the responsibility of the grading contractor to follow all Cal-OSHA requirements with regard to excavation safety. Where existing developments are upslope, adequate slope stability to protect those developments must be maintained. Temporary backcuts will be required to accomplish removals of unsuitable materials and possibly, to perform canyon removals, stabilization fills, and/or keyways. Backcuts should be excavated at a gradient of 1:1 (h:v) or flatter. Flatter backcuts may be required where geologic structure or earth materials are unfavorable. It is imperative that grading schedules minimize the exposure time of the unsupported excavations. All excavations should be stabilized within 30 days of initial excavation. EARTH-STRATA, INC. 8 May 11,2010 Cut/Fill Transitions Cut/fill transitions should be eliminated from all building areas where the depth of fill placed within the "fill" portion exceeds proposed footing depths. This is to diminish distress to structures resulting from excessive differential settlement. The entire foundation of each structure should be founded on a uniform bearing material. This should be accomplished by overexcavating the "cut" portion and replacing the excavated materials as properly compacted fill. Refer to the following table for recommended depths of overexcavation. DEPTH OF FILL ("fill" portion) Up to 5 feet 5 to 10 feet Greater than 10 feet DEPTH OF OVEREXCAVATION ("cut" portion) Equal Depth 5 feet One-half the thickness of fill placed on the "fill" portion (10 feet maximum] Overexcavation of the "cut" portion should extend beyond the building perimeter a horizontal distance equal to the depth of overexcavation or a minimum of 5 feet, whichever is greater. Shrinkage. Bulking and Subsidence Volumetric changes in earth material quantities will occur when poorly consolidated earth materials are replaced with properly compacted fill. Estimates of the percent shrinkage/bulking factors for the various geologic units observed on the subject property are based on in-place densities and on the estimated average percent of relative compaction achieved during grading. GEOLOGIC UNIT Artificial Fill SHRINKAGE (%) 5 to 10 Subsidence from scarification and recompaction of exposed bottom surfaces is expected to be negligible. The estimates of shrinkage/bulking and subsidence are intended as an aid for project engineers in determining earthwork quantities. Since many variables can affect the accuracy of these estimates, they should be used with caution and contingency plans should be in place for balancing the project. Geotechnical Observations Clearing operations, removal of unsuitable materials, and general grading procedures should be observed by the project geotechnical consultant or his representative. No compacted fill should be placed without observations by the geotechnical consultant or his representative to verify the adequacy of the removals. The project geotechnical consultant or his representative should be present to observe grading operations and to check that minimum compaction requirements and proper lift thicknesses are being met, as well as to verify compliance with the other recommendations presented herein. EARTH-STRATA, INC.May 11, 2010 Post Grading Considerations Slope Landscaping and Maintenance Adequate slope and building pad drainage is essential for the long term performance of the subject site. The gross stability of graded slopes should not be adversely affected, provided all drainage provisions are properly constructed and maintained. Engineered slopes should be landscaped with deep rooted, drought tolerant maintenance free plant species, as recommended by the project landscape architect. Site Drainage Control of site drainage is important for the performance of the proposed project. Roof gutters are recommended for the proposed structures. Pad and roof drainage should be collected and transferred to driveways, adjacent streets, storm-drain facilities, or other locations approved by the building official in non-erosive drainage devices. Drainage should not be allowed to pond on the pad or against any foundation or retaining wall. Drainage should not be allowed to flow uncontrolled over any descending slope. Planters located within retaining wall backfill should be sealed to prevent moisture intrusion into the backfill. Planters located next to structures should be sealed to the depth of the footings. Drainage control devices require periodic cleaning, testing and maintenance to remain effective. At a minimum, pad drainage should be designed at the minimum gradients required by the CBC. To divert water away from foundations, the ground surface adjacent to foundations should also be graded at the minimum gradients required per the CBC. Utility Trenches All utility trench backfill should be compacted at near optimum moisture to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density determined by ASTM test method D 1557-00. For utility trench backfill within pavement areas the upper 6 inches of subgrade materials should be compacted to 95 percent of the maximum dry density determined by ASTM D 1557-00. This includes within the street right-of-ways, utility easements, under footings, sidewalks, driveways and building floor slabs, as well as within or adjacent to any slopes. Backfill should be placed in approximately 6 to 8 inch maximum loose lifts and then mechanically compacted with a hydro- hammer, rolling with a sheepsfoot, pneumatic tampers, or similar equipment. The utility trenches should be tested by the project geotechnical engineer or their representative to verify minimum compaction requirements are obtained. In order to minimize the penetration of moisture below building slabs, all utility trenches should be backfilled with compacted fill, lean concrete or concrete slurry where they undercut the perimeter foundation. Utility trenches that are proposed parallel to any building footings (interior and/or exterior trenches), should not be located within a 1:1 (h:v) plane projected downward from the outside bottom edge of the footing. EARTH-STRATA, INC. 10 May 11,2010 SEISMIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS Ground Motions Structures are required to be designed and constructed to resist the effects of seismic ground motions as provided in the 2007 California Building Code Section 1613. The design is dependent on the site class, occupancy category I, II, III, or IV, mapped spectral accelerations for short periods (Ss), and mapped spectral acceleration for a 1-second period (Si). In order for structural design to comply with the 2007 CBC, a computer program, Earthquake Ground Motion Parameters, Version 5.0.9, dated October 6, 2008, was used to compile spectral accelerations for the subject property based on data and maps jointly compiled by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) and the California Geological Survey (CGS). The data found in the following table is based on the Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE) with 5% damped ground motions having a 2% probability of being exceeded in 50 years (2,475 year return period). The seismic design coefficients were determined by a combination of the site class, mapped spectral accelerations, and occupancy category. The following seismic design coefficients should be implemented during design of the proposed structures. Summaries of the Seismic Hazard Deaggregation graphs and test data are presented in Appendix D. 2007 CBC Site Location Site Class Mapped Spectral Accelerations for short periods, Ss Mapped Spectral Accelerations for 1-Second Period, Si Site Coefficient, Fa Site Coefficient, Fv Maximum Considered Earthquake Spectral Response Acceleration for Short Periods, Sms Maximum Considered Earthquake Spectral Response Acceleration for 1-Second Period, Smi Design Spectral Response Acceleration for Short Periods, SDS Design Spectral Response Acceleration for 1-Second Period, SDI Seismic Design Category Importance Factor Based on Occupancy Category FACTOR Latitude: 33.1028°(North) Longitude: -117. 3086°(West) D 1.29 0.49 1.00 1.51 1.29 0.74 0.86 0.49 D II We performed the probabilistic seismic hazard assessment for the site in accordance with the 2007 CBC, Section 1802.2.7. The probabilistic seismic hazard maps and data files were jointly prepared by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) and the California Geological Survey (CGS) and can be found at the CGS Probabilistic Seismic Hazards Mapping Ground Motion Page. Actual ground shaking intensities at the site may be substantially higher or lower based on complex variables such as the near source directivity effects, depth and consistency of earth materials, topography, geologic structure, direction of fault rupture, and seismic wave reflection, refraction, and attenuation rates. EARTH-STRATA, INC.11 May 11, 2010 Secondary Seismic Hazards Secondary effects of seismic shaking considered as potential hazards include several types of ground failure as well as induced flooding. Different types of ground failure, which could occur as a consequence of severe ground shaking at the site, include landslides, ground lurching, shallow ground rupture, and liquefaction/lateral spreading. The probability of occurrence of each type of ground failure depends on the severity of the earthquake, distance from faults, topography, the state of subsurface earth materials, groundwater conditions, and other factors. Based on our experience, subsurface exploration, and laboratory testing, all of the above secondary effects of seismic activity are considered unlikely. Seismically induced flooding is normally a consequence of a tsunami (seismic sea wave), a seiche (i.e., a wave-like oscillation of surface water in an enclosed basin that may be initiated by a strong earthquake) or failure of a major reservoir or retention system up gradient of the site. Since the site is at an elevation of more than 100 feet above mean sea level and is located more than % mile inland from the nearest coastline of the Pacific Ocean, the potential for seismically induced flooding due to a tsunamis is considered nonexistent. Since no enclosed bodies of water lie adjacent to or up gradient of the site, the likelihood for induced flooding due to a seiche overcoming the dams freeboard is considered nonexistent. It is considered remote that any major reservoir or retention system up gradient of the site would be compromised to a point of failure. Liquefaction and Lateral Spreading Liquefaction occurs as a result of a substantial loss of shear strength or shearing resistance in loose, saturated, cohesionless earth materials subjected to earthquake induced ground shaking. Potential impacts from liquefaction include loss of bearing capacity, liquefaction related settlement, lateral movements, and surface manifestation such as sand boils. Seismically induced settlement occurs when loose sandy soils become denser when subjected to shaking during an earthquake. The three factors determining whether a site is likely to be subject to liquefaction include seismic shaking, type and consistency of earth materials, and groundwater level. The proposed structures will be supported by compacted fill and competent old paralic deposits, with groundwater at a depth of over 50 feet. As such, the potential for earthquake induced liquefaction and lateral spreading beneath the proposed structures is considered very low to remote due to the recommended compacted fill, relatively low groundwater level, and the dense nature of the deeper onsite earth materials. Ground Lurching The physics of ground lurching are not well understood, but it is generally thought to effect lightly loaded structures such as pavement, pipelines, and sidewalks. Heavier structures typically resist damage from ground lurching. Loose cohesionless earth materials near the surface are prone to ground lurching. Due to the recommendations herein and the lack of loose cohesionless earth materials near the surface, the potential for ground lurching is not expected to occur. Ground Subsidence Groundwater or oil withdrawal from sedimentary earth materials can cause the permanent collapse of pore space previously occupied by the fluid. The consolidation of subsurface sediments resulting from fluid withdrawal could cause the ground surface to subside. If sufficient differential subsidence occurs it EARTH-STRATA, INC. 12 May 11,2010 can significantly damage engineered structures. Since no excessive withdrawal of fluids is planned in the vicinity of the proposed project, the potential for subsidence is considered low to remote. TENTATIVE FOUNDATION DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS General Provided grading is performed in accordance with the recommendations of this report, shallow foundations are considered feasible for support of the proposed structures. Tentative foundation recommendations are provided herein and graphic presentations of relevant recommendations may also be included on the enclosed map. Allowable Bearing Values An allowable bearing value of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) is recommended for design of 24 inch square pad footings and 12 inch wide continuous footings founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. This value may be increased by 20 percent for each additional 1-foot of width and/or depth to a maximum value of 3,000 psf. Recommended allowable bearing values include both dead and frequently applied live loads and may be increased by one third when designing for short duration wind or seismic forces. Settlement Based on the settlement characteristics of the earth materials that underlie the building sites and the anticipated loading, we estimate that the maximum total settlement of the footings will be less than approximately % inch. Differential settlement is expected to be about % inch over a horizontal distance of approximately 20 feet, for an angular distortion ratio of 1:480. It is anticipated that the majority of the settlement will occur during construction or shortly after the initial application of loading. The above settlement estimates are based on the assumption that the grading and construction are performed in accordance with the recommendations presented in this report and that the project geotechnical consultant will observe or test the earth material conditions in the footing excavations. Lateral Resistance Passive earth pressure of 250 psf per foot of depth to a maximum value of 2,500 psf may be used to establish lateral bearing resistance for footings. A coefficient of friction of 0.36 times the dead load forces may be used between concrete and the supporting earth materials to determine lateral sliding resistance. The above values may be increased by one-third when designing for short duration wind or seismic forces. When combining passive and friction for lateral resistance, the passive component should be reduced by one third. In no case shall the lateral sliding resistance exceed one-half the dead load for clay, sandy clay, sandy silty clay, silty clay, and clayey silt. The above lateral resistance values are based on footings for an entire structure being placed directly against compacted fill. EARTH-STRATA, INC. 13 May 11,2010 Structural Setbacks and Building Clearance Structural setbacks are required per the 2007 California Building Code (CBCJ. Additional structural setbacks are not required due to geologic or geotechnical conditions within the site. Improvements constructed in close proximity to natural or properly engineered and compacted slopes can, over time, be affected by natural processes including gravity forces, weathering, and long term secondary settlement. As a result, the CBC requires that buildings and structures be setback or footings deepened to resist the influence of these processes. For structures that are planned near ascending and descending slopes, the footings should be embedded to satisfy the requirements presented in the CBC, Section 1805.3.1 as illustrated in the following Foundation Clearances From Slopes diagram. FOUNDATION CLEARANCES FROM SLOPES 2007 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE BUILDING SETBACK DIMENSIONS When determining the required clearance from ascending slopes with a retaining wall at the toe, the height of the slope shall be measured from the top of the wall to the top of the slope. The structural setback for pools may be reduced by one-half. EARTH-STRATA, INC.14 May 11, 2010 Foundation Observations In accordance with the 2007 CBC and prior to the placement of forms, concrete, or steel, all foundation excavations should be observed by the geologist, engineer, or his representative to verify that they have been excavated into competent bearing materials. The excavations should be per the approved plans, moistened, cleaned of all loose materials, trimmed neat, level, and square. Any moisture softened earth materials should be removed prior to steel or concrete placement. Earth materials from foundation excavations should not be placed in slab on grade areas unless the materials are tested for expansion potential and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density. Expansive Soil Considerations Preliminary laboratory test results indicate onsite earth materials exhibit an expansion potential of VERY LOW as classified in accordance with 2007 CBC Section 1802.3.2 and ASTM D4829-03. Additional, testing for expansive soil conditions should be conducted upon completion of rough grading. The following recommendations should be considered the very minimum requirements, for the earth materials tested. It is common practice for the project architect or structural engineer to require additional slab thickness, footing sizes, and/or reinforcement. The preliminary design and construction recommendations herein are intended for the various levels of expansion potential anticipated at the completion of rough grading. Very Low Expansion Potential (Expansion Index of 20 or Less) Our laboratory test results indicate that the earth materials onsite exhibit a VERY LOW expansion potential as classified in accordance with 2007 CBC Section 1802.3.2 and ASTM D4829-03. Since the onsite earth materials exhibit expansion indices of 20 or less, the design of slab on ground foundations is exempt from the procedures outlined in Section 1805.8.1 or 1805.8.2. Footings • Exterior continuous footings may be founded at the minimum depths below the lowest adjacent final grade (i.e. 12 inch minimum depth for one-story, 18 inch minimum depth for two-story, and 24 inch minimum depth for three-story construction). Interior continuous footings for one-, two-, and three-story construction may be founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. All continuous footings should have a minimum width of 12, 15, and 18 inches, for one-, two-, and three-story structures, respectively per Table 1805.4.2 of the 2007 CBC, and should be reinforced with a minimum of two (2) No. 4 bars, one (1) top and one (1) bottom. • Exterior pad footings intended to support roof overhangs, such as second story decks, patio covers and similar construction should be a minimum of 24 inches square and founded at a minimum depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. No special reinforcement of the pad footings will be required. EARTH-STRATA, INC. 15 May 11,2010 Building Floor Slabs • Building floor slabs should be a minimum of 4 inches thick and reinforced with a minimum of No. 3 bars spaced a maximum of 24 inches on center, each way. All floor slab reinforcement should be supported on concrete chairs or bricks to ensure the desired placement at mid- depth. • Interior floor slabs, within living or moisture sensitive areas, should be underlain by a minimum 10-mil thick moisture/vapor barrier to help reduce the upward migration of moisture from the underlying earth materials. The moisture/vapor barrier used should meet the performance standards of an ASTM E 1745 Class A material, and be properly installed in accordance with ACI publication 318-05. It is the responsibility of the contractor to ensure that the moisture/vapor barriers are free of openings, rips, or punctures prior to placing concrete. As an option for additional moisture reduction, higher strength concrete, such as a minimum 28-day compressive strength of 5,000 pounds per square inch (psi) may be used. Ultimately, the design of the moisture/vapor barrier system and recommendations for concrete placement and curing are the purview of the foundation engineer, taking into consideration the project requirements provided by the architect and owner. • Garage floor slabs should be a minimum of 4 inches thick and should be reinforced in a similar manner as living area floor slabs. Garage floor slabs should be placed separately from adjacent wall footings with a positive separation maintained with 3/s inch minimum felt expansion joint materials and quartered with weakened plane joints. A 12 inch wide turn down founded at the same depth as adjacent footings should be provided across garage entrances. The turn down should be reinforced with a minimum of two (2) No. 4 bars, one (1) top and one (1) bottom. • The subgrade earth materials below all floor slabs should be pre-watered to promote uniform curing of the concrete and minimize the development of shrinkage cracks, prior to placing concrete. The pre-watering should be verified by Earth-Strata during construction. Low Expansion Potential (Expansion Index of 21 to 50) Our laboratory test results indicate that the earth materials onsite exhibit a LOW expansion potential as classified in accordance with 2007 CBC Section 1802.3.2 and ASTM D4829-03. Accordingly, the CBC specifies that slab on ground foundations (floor slabs) resting on earth materials with expansion indices greater than 20, require special design considerations in accordance with 2007 CBC Sections 1805.8.1 and 1805.8.2. The design procedures outlined in 2007 CBC Section 1805.8 are based on the thickness and plasticity index of the various earth materials within the upper 15 feet of the proposed structure. For preliminary design purposes, we have assumed an effective plasticity index of 12. Footings • Exterior continuous footings may be founded at the minimum depths below the lowest adjacent final grade (i.e. 12 inch minimum depth for one-story, 18 inch minimum depth for two-story, and 24 inch minimum depth for three-story construction). Interior continuous footings for one-, two-, and three-story construction may be founded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. All continuous footings should have a minimum width of 12, 15, and 18 inches, for one-, two-, and three-story structures, respectively, and EARTH-STRATA, INC. 16 May 11,2010 should be reinforced with a minimum of two (2) No. 4 bars, one (1) top and one (1) bottom. Exterior pad footings intended to support roof overhangs, such as second story decks, patio covers and similar construction should be a minimum of 24 inches square and founded at a minimum depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent final grade. The pad footings should be reinforced with a minimum of No. 4 bars spaced a maximum of 18 inches on center, each way, and should be placed near the bottom-third of the footings. Building Floor Slabs The project architect or structural engineer should evaluate minimum floor slab thickness and reinforcement in accordance with 2007 CBC Sections 1805.8.1 and!805.8.2 based on an assumed effective plasticity index of 12. Building floor slabs should be a minimum of 4 inches thick and reinforced with a minimum of No. 3 bars spaced a maximum of 18 inches on center, each way. All floor slab reinforcement should be supported on concrete chairs or bricks to ensure the desired placement at mid-depth. Interior floor slabs, within living or moisture sensitive areas, should be underlain by a minimum 10-mil thick moisture/vapor barrier to help reduce the upward migration of moisture from the underlying earth materials. The moisture/vapor barrier used should meet the performance standards of an ASTM E 1745 Class A material, and be properly installed in accordance with ACI publication 318-05. It is the responsibility of the contractor to ensure that the moisture/vapor barriers are free of openings, rips, or punctures prior to placing concrete. As an option for additional moisture reduction, higher strength concrete, such as a minimum 28-day compressive strength of 5,000 pounds per square inch (psi) may be used. Ultimately, the design of the moisture/vapor barrier system and recommendations for concrete placement and curing are the purview of the foundation engineer, taking into consideration the project requirements provided by the architect and owner. Garage floor slabs should be a minimum of 4 inches thick and should be reinforced in a similar manner as living area floor slabs. Garage floor slabs should be placed separately from adjacent wall footings with a positive separation maintained with 3/s inch minimum felt expansion joint materials and quartered with weakened plane joints. A 12 inch wide turn down founded at the same depth as adjacent footings should be provided across garage entrances. The turn down should be reinforced with a minimum of two (2) No. 4 bars, one (1) top and one (1) bottom. The subgrade earth materials below all floor slabs should be pre-watered to achieve a moisture content that is at least equal or slightly greater than optimum moisture content, prior to placing concrete. This moisture content should penetrate a minimum depth of 12 inches into the subgrade earth materials. The pre-watering should be verified by Earth-Strata during construction. EARTH-STRATA, INC. 17 May 11,2010 Post Tensioned Slab/Foundation Design Recommendations In lieu of the proceeding foundation recommendations, post tensioned slabs may be used to support the proposed structures. We recommend that the foundation engineer design the foundation system using the Preliminary Post Tensioned Foundation Slab Design table below. These parameters have been provided in general accordance with Post Tensioned Design. Alternate designs addressing the effects of expansive earth materials are allowed per 2007 CBC Section 1805.8.2. When utilizing these parameters, the foundation engineer should design the foundation system in accordance with the allowable deflection criteria of applicable codes and per the requirements of the structural engineer/architect. It should be noted that the post tensioned design methodology is partially based on the assumption that soil moisture changes around and underneath post tensioned slabs, are influenced only by climate conditions. Soil moisture change below slabs is the major factor in foundation damages relating to expansive soil. However, the design methodology has no consideration for presaturation, owner irrigation, or other non-climate related influences on the moisture content of subgrade earth materials. In recognition of these factors, we modified the geotechnical parameters determined from this methodology to account for reasonable irrigation practices and proper homeowner maintenance. Additionally, we recommend that prior to excavating footings, slab subgrades be presoaked to a depth of 12 inches and maintained at above optimum moisture until placing concrete. Furthermore, we recommend that the moisture content of the earth materials around the immediate perimeter and below the slab be presaturated to at least 1% above optimum moisture content just prior to placing concrete. The pre-watering should be verified and tested by Earth-Strata during construction. The following geotechnical parameters assume that areas adjacent to the foundations, which are planted and irrigated, will be designed with proper drainage to prevent water from ponding. Water ponding near the foundation causes significant moisture change below the foundation. Our recommendations do not account for excessive irrigation and/or incorrect landscape design. Planters placed adjacent to the foundation, should be designed with an effective drainage system or liners, to prevent moisture infiltration below the foundation. Some lifting of the perimeter foundation beam should be expected even with properly constructed planters. Based on our experience monitoring sites with similar earth materials, elevated moisture contents below the foundation perimeter due to incorrect landscaping irrigation or maintenance, can result in uplift at the perimeter foundation relative to the central portion of the slab. Future owners should be informed and educated of the importance in maintaining a consistent level of moisture within the earth materials around the structures. Future owners should also be informed of the potential negative consequences of either excessive watering, or allowing expansive earth materials to become too dry. Earth materials will shrink as they dry, followed by swelling during the rainy winter season, or when irrigation is resumed. This will cause distress to site improvements and structures. EARTH-STRATA, INC. 18 May 11,2010 Preliminary Post Tensioned Foundation Slab Design PARAMETER J VALUE Expansion Index Percent Finer than 0.002 mm in the Fraction Passing the No. 200 Sieve Type of Clay Mineral Thornthwaite Moisture Index Depth to Constant Soil Suction Constant Soil Suction Moisture Velocity Center Lift Edge moisture variation distance, em Center lift, ym Edge Lift Edge moisture variation distance, em Edge lift, ym Soluble Sulfate Content for Design of Concrete Mixtures in Contact with Earth Materials Modulus of Subgrade Reaction, k (assuming presaturation as indicated below] Minimum Perimeter Foundation Embedment Under Slab Moisture/Vapor Barrier and Sand Layer Very Low1 < 20 percent (assumed] Montmorillonite (assumed] -20 7 feet P.P. 3.6 0.7 inches/month 5.5 feet 1.5 inches 2.5 feet 0.4 inches Severe 200 pci 12 Low1 < 20 percent (assumed] Montmorillonite (assumed] -20 7 feet P.P. 3.6 0.7 inches/month 5.5 feet 2.0 inches 3.0 feet 0.8 inches Severe 200 pci 18 1 0-mil thick moisture/vapor barrier meeting the requirements of a ASTM E 1 745 Class A material 1. Assumed for design purposes or obtained by laboratory testing. 2. Recommendations for foundation reinforcement are ultimately the purview of the foundation/structural engineer based upon the geotechnical criteria presented in this report, and structural engineering considerations. Corrosivity Corrosion is defined by the National Association of Corrosion Engineers (NACE) as "a deterioration of a substance or its properties because of a reaction with its environment." From a geotechnical viewpoint, the "substances" are the reinforced concrete foundations or buried metallic elements (not surrounded by concrete) and the "environment" is the prevailing earth materials in contact with them. Many factors can contribute to corrosivity, including the presence of chlorides, sulfates, salts, organic materials, different oxygen levels, poor drainage, different soil types, and moisture content. It is not considered practical or realistic to test for all of the factors which may contribute to corrosivity. The potential for concrete exposure to chlorides is based upon the recognized Caltrans reference standard "Bridge Design Specifications", under Subsection 8.22.1 of that document, Caltrans has determined that "Corrosive water or soil contains more than 500 parts per million (ppm) of chlorides". Based on limited preliminary laboratory testing, the onsite earth materials have chloride contents less than 500 ppm. As such, specific requirements resulting from elevated chloride contents are not required. Specific guidelines for concrete mix design are provided in 2007 CBC Section 1904.3 and ACI 318, Section 4.3 Table 4.3.1 when the soluble sulfate content of earth materials exceeds 0.1 percent by weight. Based on limited preliminary laboratory testing, the onsite earth materials are classified in accordance with Table 4.3.1 as having a severe sulfate exposure condition. Therefore, structural concrete in contact with EARTH-STRATA, HNC.19 May 11, 2010 onsite earth materials should utilize Type V, with a minimum water to cement ratio of 0.45 and a minimum 28-day compressive strength of 4,500 psi. Based on our laboratory testing of resistivity, the onsite earth materials in contact with buried steel should be considered mildly corrosive. Additionally, pH values below 9.7 are recognized as being corrosive to most common metallic components including, copper, steel, iron, and aluminum. The pH values for the earth materials tested were lower than 9.7. Therefore, any steel or metallic materials that are exposed to the earth materials should be encased in concrete or other measures should be taken to provide corrosion protection. If building slabs are to be post tensioned, the post tensioning cables should be encased in concrete and/or encapsulated in accordance with the Post Tensioning Institute Guide Specifications. Post tensioning cable end plate anchors and nuts also need to be protected if exposed. If the anchor plates and nuts are in a recess in the edge of the concrete slab, the recess should be filled in with a non-shrink, non-porous, moisture-insensitive epoxy grout so that the anchorage assembly and the end of the cable are completely encased and isolated from the soil. A standard non-shrink, non-metallic cementitious grout may be used only when the post tension anchoring assembly is polyethylene encapsulated similar to that offered by Hayes Industries, LTD or O'Strand, Inc. The preliminary test results for corrosivity are based on limited samples, and the initiation of grading may blend various earth materials together. This blending or imported material could alter and increase the detrimental properties of the onsite earth materials. Accordingly, additional testing for chlorides and sulfates along with testing for pH and resistivity should be performed upon completion of grading. Laboratory test results are presented in Appendix C. RETAINING WALLS Active and At-Rest Earth Pressures Foundations may be designed in accordance with the recommendations provided in the Tentative Foundation Design Recommendation section of this report. The following table provides the minimum recommended equivalent fluid pressures for design of retaining walls a maximum of 20 feet high. The active earth pressure should be used for design of unrestrained retaining walls, which are free to tilt slightly. The at-rest earth pressure should be used for design of retaining walls that are restrained at the top, such as basement walls, curved walls with no joints, or walls restrained at corners. For curved walls, active pressure may be used if tilting is acceptable and construction joints are provided at each angle point and at a minimum of 15 foot intervals along the curved segments. The retaining wall equivalent fluid pressure calculations are presented in the appendices. MINIMUM STATIC EQUIVALENT FLUID PRESSURES (pcf) PRESSURE TYPE Active Earth Pressure At-Rest Earth Pressure BACKSLOPE CONDITION LEVEL 40 60 2:1 (h:v) 76 95 EARTH-STRATA,. INC, 20 May 11, 2010 The retaining wall parameters provided do not account for hydrostatic pressure behind the retaining walls. Therefore, the subdrain system is a very important part of the design. All retaining walls should be designed to resist surcharge loads imposed by other nearby walls, structures, or vehicles should be added to the above earth pressures, if the additional loads are being applied within a 1:1 plane projected up from the heel of the retaining wall footing. As a way of minimizing surcharge loads and the settlement potential of nearby buildings, the footings for the building can be deepened below the 1:1 plane projected up from the heel of the retaining wall footing. Upon request and under a separate scope of work, more detailed analyses can be performed to address equivalent fluid pressures with regard to stepped retaining walls, actual retaining wall heights, actual backfill inclinations, specific backfill materials, higher retaining walls requiring earthquake design motions, etc. Subdrain System We recommend a perforated pipe and gravel subdrain system be provided behind all proposed retaining walls to prevent the buildup of hydrostatic pressure behind the proposed retaining walls. The perforated pipe should consist of 4 inch minimum diameter Schedule 40 PVC or ABS SDR-35, placed with the perforations facing down. The pipe should be surrounded by 1 cubic foot per foot of 3/4- or 1% inch open graded gravel wrapped in filter fabric. The filter fabric should consist of Mirafi 140N or equivalent to prevent infiltration of fines and subsequent clogging of the subdrain system. In lieu of a perforated pipe and gravel subdrain system, weep holes or open vertical masonry joints may be provided in the lowest row of block exposed to the air to prevent the buildup of hydrostatic pressure behind the proposed retaining walls. Weep holes should be a minimum of 3 inches in diameter and provided at intervals of at least every 6 feet along the wall. Open vertical masonry joints should be provided at a minimum of 32 inch intervals. A continuous gravel fill, a minimum of 1 cubic foot per foot, should be placed behind the weep holes or open masonry joints. The gravel should be wrapped in filter fabric consisting of Mirafi 140N or equivalent. The retaining walls should be adequately coated on the backfilled side of the walls with a proven waterproofing compound by an experienced professional to inhibit infiltration of moisture through the walls. Temporary Excavations All excavations should be made in accordance with Cal-OSHA requirements. Earth-Strata is not responsible for job site safety. Retaining Wall Backfill Retaining wall backfill materials should be approved by the geotechnical engineer or his representative prior to placement as compacted fill. Retaining wall backfill should be placed in lifts no greater than 6 to 8 inches, watered or air dried as necessary to achieve near optimum moisture contents. All retaining wall backfill should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 1557. Retaining wall backfill should be capped with a paved surface drain. EARTH-STRATA, INC. 21 May 11,2010 CONCRETE FLATWORK Thickness and loint Spacing Concrete sidewalks and patio type slabs should be at least S1/^ inches thick and provided with construction or expansion joints every 6 feet or less, to reduce the potential for excessive cracking. Concrete driveway slabs should be at least 4 inches thick and provided with construction or expansion joints every 10 feet or less. Subgrade Preparation In order to reduce the potential for unsightly cracking, subgrade earth materials underlying concrete flatwork should be compacted at near optimum moisture to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density determined by ASTM test method D 1557-00 and then moistened to at least optimum or slightly above optimum moisture content. This moisture should extend to a depth of at least 12 inches below subgrade and be maintained prior to placement of concrete. Pre-watering of the earth materials prior to placing concrete will promote uniform curing of the concrete and minimize the development of shrinkage cracks. The project geotechnical engineer or his representative should verify the density and moisture content of the earth materials and the depth of moisture penetration prior to placing concrete. Cracking within concrete flatwork is often a result of factors such as the use of too high a water to cement ratio and/or inadequate steps taken to prevent moisture loss during the curing of the concrete. Concrete distress can be reduced by proper concrete mix design and proper placement and curing of the concrete. Minor cracking within concrete flatwork is normal and should be expected. PRELIMINARY ASPHALTIC CONCRETE PAVEMENT DESIGN Laboratory testing of representative earth materials indicate an R-value of 57 may be used for preliminary pavement design. The following table includes our minimum recommended asphaltic concrete pavement sections calculated in accordance with the State of California design procedures using assumed Traffic Indices. Final pavement design should be based on sampling and testing of post grading conditions. Alternative pavement sections and calculation sheets have been provided within the appendices of this report. PRELIMINARY ASPHALTIC CONCRETE PAVEMENT DESIGN PARAMETERS Assumed Traffic Index Design R-Value AC Thickness (inches] AB Thickness (inches) RESIDENTIAL STREETS 5.0 50 3 4* RESIDENTIAL COLLECTOR STREETS 6.0 50 3% 4* COLLECTOR STREET 7.0 50 4 7% Notes: AC - Asphaltic Concrete AB - Aggregate Base *Denotes Minimum The subgrade earth materials immediately below the aggregate base (base) should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the maximum dry density determined by ASTM D 1557 to a minimum depth of 12 inches. Base materials should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the maximum dry density determined by ASTM D 1557. EARTH-STRATA,. KNC.22 May 11, 2010 Base materials should consist of Class 2 aggregate base conforming to Section 26-1.02B of the State of California Standard Specifications or crushed aggregate base conforming to Section 200-2 of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (Greenbook). Base materials should be compacted at or slightly below optimum moisture content. Asphaltic concrete materials and construction operations should conform to Section 203 of the Greenbook. GRADING PLAN REVIEW AND CONSTRUCTION SERVICES This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of K HOVNANIAN HOMES and their authorized representative. It likely does not contain sufficient information for other parties or other uses. Earth- Strata should be engaged to review the final design plans and specifications prior to construction. This is to verify that the recommendations contained in this report have been properly incorporated into the project plans and specifications. Should Earth-Strata not be accorded the opportunity to review the project plans and specifications, we are not responsibility for misinterpretation of our recommendations. We recommend that Earth-Strata be retained to provide geologic and geotechnical engineering services during grading and foundation excavation phases of the work. In order to allow for design changes in the event that the subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to construction. Earth-Strata should review any changes in the project and modify and approve in writing the conclusions and recommendations of this report. This report and the drawings contained within are intended for design input purposes only and are not intended to act as construction drawings or specifications. In the event that conditions encountered during grading or construction operations appear to be different than those indicated in this report, this office should be notified immediately, as revisions may be required. REPORT LIMITATIONS Our services were performed using the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable soils engineers and geologists, practicing at the time and location this report was prepared. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the conclusions and professional advice included in this report. Earth materials vary in type, strength, and other geotechnical properties between points of observation and exploration. Groundwater and moisture conditions can also vary due to natural processes or the works of man on this or adjacent properties. As a result, we do not and cannot have complete knowledge of the subsurface conditions beneath the subject property. No practical study can completely eliminate uncertainty with regard to the anticipated geotechnical conditions in connection with a subject property. The conclusions and recommendations within this report are based upon the findings at the points of observation and are subject to confirmation by Earth-Strata based on the conditions revealed during grading and construction. This report was prepared with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner or their representative, to ensure that the conclusions and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the other project consultants and are incorporated into the plans and specifications. The owners' contractor should properly implement the conclusions and recommendations during grading and construction, and notify the owner if they consider any of the recommendations presented herein to be unsafe or unsuitable. EARTH-STRATA, INC. 23 May 11,2010 -am APPENDIX A REFERENCES APPENDIX A References California Building Standards Commission, 2007,2007 California Building Code, California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 2, Volume 2 of 2, Based on 2006 International Building Code. DeLorme, 2004, (www.delorme.com) Topo USA®. Hart, Earl W. and Bryant, William A., 1997, Fault Rupture Hazard Zones in California, CDMG Special Publication 42, revised 2003. Irvine Geotechnical, 2001, Mult Calc 2000, October 10. Kennedy, M.P., et all, 2005, Geologic Map of the Oceanside 30' x 60' Quadrangle, California, U.S. Geological Survey, Department of Earth Sciences, University of California, Riverside. Lawson and Associates, Inc., 2005, Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Report, Proposed 29-Lot Residential Development, Southwest Corner ofPoinsettia Lane and Paseo Del Norte, City of Carlsbad, California, dated February 24. National Association of Corrosion Engineers, 1984, Corrosion Basics An Introduction, page 191. Southern California Earthquake Center (SCEC), 1999, Recommended Procedures for Implementation of DMG Special Publication 117, Guidelines for Analyzing and Mitigating Liquefaction Hazards in California, March. APPENDIX B EXPLORATORY LOGS SYMBOLS AND TERMS USED ON LOGS "V*1"1* The No. 200 Standard Sieve is about the smallest particle visible to the naked eye. M m= 03o »- <u</> re >Coarse-grainec>>i of materialsthan #200 siFine-grained Soils>Yi of materialssmaller than #200sieveGRAVELS Higher percentage of coarse fraction is larger than #4 sieve SANDS Higher percentage of coarse fraction is smaller than *4 sieve Clean Gravels (less than 5% fines) Gravels with fines fines PK4 Pl>7 Clean Sands (less than 5% fines) Sands with fines SILTS & CLAYS Liquid Limit Less Than 50 fines PK4 Pl>7 PI 4-7 PK4 Pl>7 PI 4-7 SILTS & CLAYS Liquid Limit Greater Than 50 Highly Organic Soils GW GP GW-GM GW-GC GP-GM GP-GC GM GC SW SP SW-SM SW-SC SP-SM SP-SC SIM SC SC-SM ML CL ML-CL MH CH OH FT Well-graded gravels, little or no fines Poorly-graded gravels, little or no fines Well-graded gravel with silt Well-graded gravel with clay Poorly-graded gravel with silt Poorly-graded gravel with clay Silty Gravels Clayey Gravels Well-graded sands, little or no fines Poorly-graded sands, little or no fines Well-graded sand with silt Well-graded sand with clay Poorly-graded sand with silt Poorly-graded sand with clay Silty Sands Clayey Sands Silty clayey sands Inorganic silts & sandy silts Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly clays, sandy clays, lean clays Silts & clays of low plasticity, sandy silty clay, Silty clay Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous silt, sandy silt Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays, sandy clays, gravelly clays Organic silts and clays of medium-to-high plasticity Peat, humus swamp soils with higher organic content 1 Symbols Ring Sample Hill SPTSamole 1 MR I No Recovery V Groundwater Grain Size Description Boulders Cobbles Gravel Sand Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Fines Sieve Size >12" 3-12" %-3" tt4-*A" #10-#4 »40-#10 #200-#40 Passing #200 Grain Size >12" 3-12" %-3" 0.19-0.75" 0.079-0.19" 0.017-0.079" 0.0029-0.017" <0.0029" Approximate Size Larger than basketball-sized Fist-sized to basketball-sized Thumb-sized to fist-sized Pea-sized to thumb-sized Rock salt-sized to pea-sized Sugar-sized to rock salt-sized Flour-sized to sugar-sized Flour-sized and smaller Consistency- Fine Grained Soils Apparent Density Very Soft Soft Medium Stiff Stiff Very Stiff Hard SPT (# blows/foot) <1 2-3 4-6 7-10 11-20 >20 Modified CA Sampler (# blows/foot) <2 3-6 7-12 13-15 16-30 >30 Field Test Easily penetrated by thumb; exudes between thumb and fingers when squeezed in hand Easily penetrated one inch by thumb; molded by light finger pressure Penetrated over 'A inch by thumb with moderate effort; molded by strong finger pressure Indented about 'A inch by thumb but penetrated only with great effort Readily indented thumbnail Indented with difficulty by thumbnail Relative Density - Coarse Grained Soils Apparent Density Very Loose Loose Medium Dense Dense Very Dense SPT (f blows/foot) <2 3-5 6-15 16-25 >25 Modified CA Sampler (ft blows/foot) <4 4-10 11-30 31-50 >50 Field Test Easily penetrated with 'A inch reinforcing rod pushed by hand Easily penetrated with X inch reinforcing rod pushed by hand Easily penetrated 1-foot with % inch reinforcing rod driven with a 5-lb hammer Difficult to penetrate 1-foot with >4 inch reinforcing rod driven with a 5-lb hammer Penetrated only a few inches with 'A inch reinforcing rod driven with a 5-lb hammer JUNE 2007, Auto Geotechnical Boring Log B-l Date; April IS, 2010 Project Name: K. Hovnanian - Carlsbad Page: 1 of 1 Project Number: 10707-10A Logged By: CW Drilling Company: Martini Drilling Type of Rig: CME-75 Drive Weight (Ibs): 140 Drop (in]: 30 Hole Diameter (in): 8 Top of Hole Elevation (ft);Hole Location: See Geotechnical Map a IDa 3 § CO a. Erato ua. c OJa oJO E MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Bagl 0-5' Artificial Fill: (Afi SM Silty SAND; dark orange brown, slightly moist to moist, medium dense, elastic silts 27 i R-l 114.5 7.6 5 - = 10 - = R-2 110.7 7.5 ! dense R-3 96.2 5.8 very dense R-4 113.4 5.7 hard drilling 15 Quaternary Old Paralic Deposits: (Qoo) 38 | R-5 114.3 3.6 SM Silty SAND; light orange to grayish brown, slightly moist to moist, dense, elastic silt 20 • = 25 -- 113.2 5.3 Total Depth @ 21.5 feet No Groundwater Fill to 14 feet 30 26047 JEFFERSON AVENUE, SUITE C, MURRIETA, CA 92562 ~ Strata, /nc. Geotechnical Boring Log B-2 Date: April 15, 2010 Project Number: 10707-10A Drilling Company: Martini Drilling Drive Weight (Ibs): 140 Top of Hole Elevation (ft): g _c Q. 0) Q 0 5 - 10 - 15 - 20 - 25 - 30 a ss ~ E 5 is s s 1 ™ 1_CDQ_ ^-"CT •*-•|| o CO 51 65 43 42 32 Sample Numberc^"u ^g 1/1c01 0£-o ' " ~T~" " R-l R-2 R-3 R-4 R-5 48 R-6 119.2 108.0 112.6 110.5 118.5 118.4 Moisture (%)6.1 5.5 5.7 5.2 7.4 4.8 j 51 ^^ — f - - 0 ^ >.102 5 SM Project Name: K. Hovnanian - Carlsbad Page: 1 of 1 Logged By: CW Type of Rig: CME-75 Drop (in): 30 Hole Diameter (in): 8 Hole Location: See Geotechnical Map MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Artificial Fill: (Afi Silty SAND; dark orange brown, moist to very moist, loose to medium dense, elastic silts very dense dense Quaternary Old Paralic Deposits: (Quo) j SM .Silty SAND; moderate yellow brown, very moist, dense to very dense, elastic silts R-y 118.3 7.9 light grayish brown, very dense 26047 JEFFERSON AVENU Total Depth @ 21.5 feet No Groundwater Fill to 16.5 feet ----- - - Rr SUITE fr MIIRRTFTAr TA 92S62 SlSLl SfES&JSSl. - ^^^ *^»* -^^.Jl,^^--!?^ MmlMMiUitf lisntt.lwTwi^ir, Geotechnical Boring Log B-3 Date: April 15, 2010 Project Number: 10707-10A Drilling Company: Martini Drilling Drive Weight (Ibs): 140 Top of Hole Elevation (ft): g Q.(UQ 0 5 - 10 - 15 - 20 - 25 - 30 S ~ s s = £ = S = ^><uQ_ +-»CT 4-» s§1 CO 21 44 43 37 27 31 72 Sample NumberBagl & 0-5' R-l R-2 R-3 R-4 R-5 ^Q. .& t/tC (U Q £• Q Moisture (%)124.3 115.7 117.6 121.0 9.3 8.1 5.0 7.2 o_Q I 1 < SM 1 : 115.2 R-6 112.3 R-7 .... 5.3 7.8 SM 120.3 6.7 Project Name: K. Hovnanian - Carlsbad Page: 1 of 1 Logged By: CW Type of Rig: CME-75 Drop (in): 30 Hole Diameter (in): 8 Hole Location: See Geotechnical Map MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Artificial Fill: (Af) Silty SAND; dark orange brown, very moist, loose to medium dense medium dense dense orange brown to grayish brown, moist dark orange brown, very moist Quaternary Old Paralic Deposits: (Qoo) Silty SAND; moderate yellow brown, slightly moist, medium dense very moist, dense light grayish brown, moist, very dense - 26047 JEFFERSON AVENU1 Total Depth @ 21.5 feet No Groundwater Fill to 12 feet Er SUITE Cr MURRIETAr CA 92562 £SS^^£fS^JSSL ^•*^*^~*H-"'*--«WM*^^^ * — " Geotechnical Boring Log B-4 Date: April 15, 2010 Project Number: 10707-10A Drilling Company: Martini Drilling Drive Weight (Ibs): 140 Top of Hole Elevation (ft): *4- .£ Q.0)Q 0 5 - 1 n1U 15 - 20 - 25 - 30 s a = = si = s - l_ 0)Q_ 4-> § o5 £ o CD 20 4 40 26 78 Sample NumberR-l R-2 R-3 R-4 R-5 71 R-6 50-6" R-7 — t3Q. £inC01 Q £•o 116.3 111.8 112.6 111.5 117.1' " " 115.0 Moisture (%)7.2 8.9 5.3 5.9 6.6 6.8 115.2 7.1 ~ -] 0JQ E>-CO 1 SM SM Project Name: K. Hovnanian - Carlsbad Page: 1 of 1 Logged By: CW Type of Rig: CME-75 Drop (in): 30 Hole Diameter (in): 8 Hole Location: See Geotechnical Map MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Artificial Fill: (Aft Silty SAND; light orange brown, slightly moist, loose moist, medium dense moist to very moist, loose Quaternary Old Paralic Deposits: (Qpp) Silty SAND; moderate yellow brown, slightly moist, dense medium dense moist, very dense hard drilling Total Depth @ 21 feet No Groundwater Fill to 7 feet H r 26047 JEFFERSON AVENU1Er SUITE C. MURRIETA. CA 92562 .f^lf£^.££SffT^"S, -*-„,,- *« Tg»~^_,n ^^^-9"^^»^^^^«^^^5^v.-^f •*-•-"'jL...a*.^. _-r- i.sv ....'.E.... . .^_l;:3jg. •%.*„.••?&. .->.'. *,^.MMJMnUflW^MlJJRMRMGKvjKnCHIIHHCtlV Geotechnical Boring Log B-5 Date: April 15, 2010 Project Number: 10707-10A Drilling Company: Martini Drilling Drive Weight (Ibs): 140 Top of Hole Elevation (ft): M- _c Q. 0)Q 0 5 - 10 - 15 - 20 - 25 - 30 s — = a s Si s - 1_OJQ_ 4->cT •*-•l§ o CO 8 3 35 24 54 44 ^^^Sample NumberBagl @ 0-5' R-l R-2 R-3 R-4 R-5 -- R-6 c-uO. £tnc0)Q £•O 114.4 116.6 111.5 109.7 113.4 112.4 - .___. —\--Moisture (%)o_Q E>-to^ to< SM 8.7 8.3 7.4 4.6 - - 6.3 6.8 SM Project Name: K. Hovnanian - Carlsbad Page: 1 of 1 Logged By: CW Type of Rig: CME-75 Drop (in): 30 Hole Diameter (in): 8 Hole Location: See Geotechnical Map MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Artificial Fill: (Af) Silty SAND; dark orange brown, moist, loose very moist, loose very loose Quaternary Old Paralic Deposits: (Qoo) Silty SAND; light orange brown to moderate yellow brown, moist, dense, oxidation zones slighty moist, medium dense b: — moist, very dense dark orange brown, dense Total Depth @ 16.5 feet No Groundwater Fill to 7.5 feet 1 f - - j 26047 JEFFERSON AVENU R. SUITE C. . MURRIETA. CA 92562 £f.™fi,l£^f£t^"f;— ?-^'t^~j«^r^"T"-^*!>*^,5Tsw •«•"»"-• '*r&itM.i*imu**u.iKTn*umin Geotechnical Boring Log B-6 Date: April 15, 2010 Project Number: 10707-10A Drilling Company: Martini Drilling Drive Weight Obs): 140 Top of Hole Elevation (ft): g Q.fl>0 0 5 - 10 - 15 - 20 - 25 - 30 — s s = B 5S - 1_0)Q_ 4-i || 0 CD 28 12 45 38 40 Sample Number"CQ. £ inc<D Q £•Q R-l R-2 R-3 ---• R-4 R-5 61 R-6 —•^ 1 1 126.2 103.7 112.5 107.1 . . 114.5 117.9 _ .Moisture (%)o_a E>-CO2 5 SM 6.6 ; 5.8 6.4 4.7 6.7 6.9 SM Project Name: K. Hovnanian - Carlsbad Page: 1 of 1 Logged By: CW Type of Rig: CME-75 Drop (in): 30 Hole Diameter (in): 8 Hole Location: See Geotechnical Map MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Artificial Fill: (Afl Silty SAND; dark orange brown, moist, loose to medium dense medium dense Quaternary Old Paralic Deposits: (Qop) Silty SAND; dark orange brown, moist, dense, oxidation zones moderate yellow brown to grayish brown very dense Total Depth @ 16.5 feet No Groundwater I FmtoTfeet — 4-- ! •• — L .- 1 "~"^~ _.... 26047 JEFFERSON AVENUE, SUITE Cr MURRIETAr CA 92562 iS^S^LSS3£isJS£i --~^~-~~»--X^^"^ts*"* ^""^*^^^^^*^"'w**'""'"""'" """"*MBI11W^BOWtf*WW)^JSWWffJKTfWIBIBHtiW Geotechnical Boring Log B-7 Date: April 15, 2010 Project Number: 10707-10A Drilling Company: Martini Drilling Drive Weight Obs): 140 Top of Hole Elevation (ft): *-M- _c Q.<D O 0 5 - 10 - 15 - 20 - 25 - 30 = = s B a = B - 1 +-•|i o CO 17 Sample NumberR-l 14 ; R-21 --I 31 41 83 71 < R-3 R-4 •cQ. £t/>c<L Q £- 0 109.4 102.8 106.4 107.2 R-5 R-6 — 114.8 111.3 Moisture (%)6.3 4.8 4.0 5.1 5.2 7.3 :r o-Q E £ 1< SM - - SM Project Name: K. Hovnanian - Carlsbad Page: 1 of 1 Logged By: CW Type of Rig: CME-75 Drop (in): 30 Hole Diameter (in): 8 Hole Location: See Geotechnical Map MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Artificial Fill: (Afi Silty SAND; dark orange brown, slightly moist to moist, loose to medium dense moist, medium dense yellow brown Quaternary Old Paralic Deposits: (Qoo) Silty SAND; moderate yellow brown to grayish brown, slightly moist, dense very dense dark orange brown, moist Total Depth @ 16.5 feet No Groundwater Fill to 8 feet 26047 JEFFERSON AVENURr SUITE Cr MURRIRTAr CA 92562 SSSA^SS&^!^ -*.-^*.-.---'*^.^^^^^^^^•0|*WJK<^«i|lfrti^ti^jiifcK*(WrlJB^Wiiltl!|t Geotechnical Boring Log B-8 Date: April 15, 2010 Project Number: 10707-10A Drilling Company: Martini Drilling Drive Weight (Ibs): 140 Top of Hole Elevation (ft): M- _c Q.4)Q 0 5 - 10 - 15 - 20 - 25 - 30 a = s s s = i_ OlQ_ 4-*c3 -l-»l§ 0 CD Sample Number53 -- 34 15 31 R-l ^"u^a 5r in 0)Q £• Q 118.7 Moisture (%)6.5 R-2J115.3 6.9 R-3 110.3 4.7 R-4 50-4" R-5 50-6" .^.^ R-6 1 .._ 110.1 6.3 99.8 94.3 8.4 8.9 0-QE>.to^ l/l< SM SM --- -'{ " - - i - - --4 • -] — - - 26047 JEFFERSON AVENU Project Name: K. Hovnanian - Carlsbad Page: 1 of 1 Logged By: CW Type of Rig: CME-75 Drop (in): 30 Hole Diameter (in): 8 Hole Location: See Geotechnical Map MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Artificial Fill: (Afi Silty SAND; dark orange brown, slightly moist to moist, medium dense very dense dense Quaternary Old Paralic Deposits: (Qop) Silty SAND; moderate yellow to grayish brown, slightly moist, medium dense moist, dense, oxidation zones very moist, very dense sample disturbed Total Depth @ 15.5 feet No Groundwater Fill to 7 feet — - -- - Rr .SUITE Cr MURRIETA, f A 92562 ^^S^'SSS^SiSi - -••-»^-^-«^3J'^WJ«pWJ**£'*W,...~s.... !*j. . ,,. > ...tJ-j-a. aa-.g.a. Tj.jLLafc.ax l%i !."•, OTBITCHfVPnAMlKflpflHpniQRMMninntMEIRKinV Geotechnical Boring Log BA-1 Date: April 16, 2010 Project Number: 10707-10A Drilling Company: Alroy Drilling Drive Weight (Ibs): 2,400 Top of Hole Elevation (ft): g Q.0)Q 0 10 - 15 - 20 - 25 - 30 ^0)Q. •MCT 4-1 |§ o CO 9 Sample NumberR-l 15 16 R-2 Bagl @ 10-15' R-3 •c Q. .$• V} C0) 0^~ 0 124.4 119.4 117.6 Moisture (%)ASTM SymbolProject Name: K. Hovnanian - Carlsbad Page: 1 of 1 Logged By: CW Type of Rig: Earthdrill Drop (in): 30 Hole Diameter (in): 24 Hole Location: See Geotechnical Map MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Artificial Fill: (Af) SM Silty SAND; dark orange brown, moist, medium dense, no caving @ 5 feet: nearly horizontal fill/native contact, no topsoil 3.8 i SM 4.4 | . . .. 5.2 Quaternary Old Paralic Deposits: (Qoo) Silty SAND; moderate yellowish brown, slightly moist, dense, slightly porous, oxidation zones nonporous below 10 feet Total Depth @ 16 feet No Groundwater Fill to 5 feet 1 1" t PV . . 26047 JFFFFRSON AVF.NIJF,r SIJITF fr MURRIETAr C A 92562 £S£f!LzJS£!!£^$^ Geotechnical Boring Log BA-2 Date: April 16, 2010 Project Number: 10707-10A Drilling Company: Alroy Drilling Drive Weight (Ibs): 2,400 Top of Hole Elevation (ft): g Q.<UQ 0 5 - 10 - 15 - 20 - 25 - 30 = s = s l_ O)Q_ 4->c-3 4-» f§ o CO e e 12 Sample NumberR-l _ .... — c-u_a £ i/ic0) 0 £- Q 122.4 R-2 114.0 R-3 Bagl @ 15- 17.5' 120.1 I---- - z:F~Moisture (%)• --1 8.4 7.4 7.7 o_Q E>-CO^s SM Project Name: K. Hovnanian - Carlsbad Page: 1 of 1 Logged By: CW Type of Rig: Earthdrill Drop (in): 30 Hole Diameter (in): 24 Hole Location: See Geotechnical Map MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Artificial Fill: (Af) Silty SAND; dark orange brown, moist, medium dense, no caving very moist dense below 7 feet increased sand content below 9 feet @ 11 feet: contact nearly horizontal, no topsoil, no organics SM 1 . - Quaternary Old Paralic Deposits: (Qop) Silty SAND; moderate yellow brown, very moist, dense Total Depth @ 17.5 feet No Groundwater Fill to 11 feet 1 26047 JEFFERSON AVENURr SI HTF fr MI IRRIFTA, fA 92562 SSS&LSS^&JSS^ '**-----*^*-r*^-»^f:;*t?t^nt*t'*T!!Ja*'t!?f*'l*> **%"* «—-*-"- "' ^^ j^^ ^^_ , _~j^^ ^^^jfc 4 ^V^^ <?".IPBwwl nKMiE wKlnR JBOHIHF " HB»««P,ilBPB6W Geotechnical Boring Log BA-3 Date: April 16, 2010 Project Number: 10707-10A Drilling Company: Alroy Drilling Drive Weight (Ibs): 2,400 Top of Hole Elevation (ft): •+^M- _c Q.0> Q 0 5 - 10 - 15 - 20 • 25 - 30 a 55 S - i_<uQ. 4-»C-3 4-» |§ 0 CO 10 11 8 20 _ :~Sample NumbertPu_tt ifin OlQ £•Q R-l Bagl @ 5-10' R-2 R-3 Bagl @ 15-20' R-4 119.0 122.3 116.8 Moisture (%)6.3 5.4 5.7 i_r 122.5 --- 6.5 o^3 E>-to^ CO< Project Name: K. Hovnanian - Carlsbad Page: 1 of 1 Logged By: CW Type of Rig: Earthdrill Drop (in): 30 Hole Diameter (in): 24 Hole Location: See Geotechnical Map MATERIAL DESCRIPTION (Artificial Fill: (Af) SM ISilty SAND; dark orange brown, moist, medium dense to dense @ 5 feet: man made plastic slightly moist, very dense below 5% feet SM @ 10 feet: man made plastic @ 13.5 feet: contact nearly level, no topsoil, possibly scarified, no organics Quaternary Old Paralic Deposits: (Qop) Silty SAND; moderate yellow brown, moist, dense to very dense Total Depth @ 21 feet No Groundwater " "" 1 Fill to 13.5 feet "" 26047 JEFFERSON AVENURr SI IITE C. MURRIETAr CA 92562 £S2JLl££2Kfc;S!£:- ^^-tir-"*i>r^w"*!r*w"»]p'»* —r'*— "*emma>u.mmi*im,mTmmniiT* , , APPENDIX C LABORATORY PROCEDURES AND TEST RESULTS APPENDIX C Laboratory Procedures and Test Results Laboratory testing provided quantitative and qualitative data involving the relevant engineering properties of the representative earth materials selected for testing. The representative samples were tested in general accordance with American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) procedures and/or California Test Methods (CTM). Soil Classification: Earth materials encountered during exploration were classified and logged in general accordance with the Standard Practice for Description and Identification of Soils (Visual-Manual Procedure) of ASTM D 2488. Upon completion of laboratory testing, exploratory logs and sample descriptions were reconciled to reflect laboratory test results with regard to ASTM D 2487. Grain Size Distribution: Select samples were tested using the guidelines of ASTM D 1140. The test results are presented in the table below. SAMPLE LOCATION B-l @ 0-5 feet B-3 @ 0-5 feet B-5 @ 0-5 feet BA-1 @ 10-15 feet BA-2 @ 15-17.5 feet BA-3 @ 15-20 feet MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Silty SAND Silty SAND Silty SAND Silty SAND Silty SAND Silty SAND % PASSING # 200 SIEVE 26 27 27 16 13 20 Atterberg Limits: The Atterberg limits of select samples were determined using the guidelines of ASTM D 4318 for engineering classification of fine materials. The test results are presented in the table below. SAMPLE LOCATION B-5 @ 0-5 feet MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Silty SAND LIQUID LIMIT 19 PLASTIC LIMIT 17 PLASTICITY INDEX 2 ASTM SYMBOL SM Moisture and Density Tests: For select samples moisture content was determined using the guidelines of ASTM D 2216 and dry density determinations were made using the guidelines of ASTM D 2937. These tests were performed on relatively undisturbed samples and the test results are presented on the exploratory logs. Maximum Density Tests: The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of representative samples were determined using the guidelines of ASTM D 1557. The test results are presented in the table below. SAMPLE LOCATION B-l @ 0-5 feet B-3 @ 0-5 feet B-5 @ 0-5 feet BA-1 @ 10-15 feet BA-2 @ 15-17.5 feet BA-3 @ 15-20 feet MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Silty SAND Silty SAND Silty SAND Silty SAND Silty SAND Silty SAND MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY (pcf) 132.0 133.0 133.0 126.0 122.5 130.0 OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT (%) 8.5 8.5 8.5 10.0 10.5 8.5 Expansion Index: The expansion potential of representative samples was evaluated using the guidelines of ASTM D 4829. The test results are presented in the table below. SAMPLE LOCATION B-5 @ 0-5 feet MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Silty SAND EXPANSION INDEX 1 EXPANSION POTENTIAL Very Low Direct Shear: Direct shear tests were performed on representative remolded and/or undisturbed samples using the guidelines of ASTM D 3080. The test results are presented in the table below and/or on the Direct Shear Plots on Sheet(s) S-*l. SAMPLE LOCATION B-l @ 15 feet (undisturbed) B-3 @ 0-5 feet (remolded) MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Silty SAND Silty SAND *FRICTION ANGLE (degrees) 21 28 *APPARENT COHESION (psf) 57 331 Peak values of samples **remolded to 90 percent of the maximum dry density. R-Value: The R-value of representative samples was determined using the guidelines of CTM 301. The test results are presented in the table below. SAMPLE LOCATION 1 B-3 @ 0-5 feet MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Silty SAND R-VALUE 57 Minimum Resistivity and pH Tests: Minimum resistivity and pH Tests of select samples were performed using the guidelines of CTM 643. The test results are presented in the table below. SAMPLE LOCATION B-5 @ 0-5 feet MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Silty SAND PH 8.1 MINIMUM RESISTIVITY (ohm-cm) 3,700 Soluble Sulfate: The soluble sulfate content of select samples was determined using the guidelines of CTM 417. The test results are presented in the table below. SAMPLE LOCATION B-5 @ 0-5 feet MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Silty SAND SULFATE CONTENT (% by weight) 0.306 SULFATE EXPOSURE Severe Chloride Content: Chloride content of select samples was determined using the guidelines of CTM 422. The test results are presented in the table below. SAMPLE LOCATION B-5 @ 0-5 feet MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Silty SAND CHLORIDE CONTENT (ppm) ND 60 50 40 f3C 1 2° 10 For classification of fine- grained soils and fine- grained fraction of coarse-grained soils ML or OL / ,,- "U" LINE CK'or OH "A" LINE 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Liquid Limit (LL) GRAVEL COARSE FINE SAND CRSE MEDIUM FINE FINES SILT CLAY U.S. STD. SIEVE OPENING U.S STANDARD SIEVE NUMBER HYDROMETER 3.0" 1 1/2" 3/4" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200 100 90 80 70 O 60 LU & 50 O W An 30 20 10 V 100.000 10,000 1.000 0100 PARTICLE - SIZE (mm) 0010 0.001 Boring Sample Depth No. No. [rt.j B-l Bag-1 0-5.0 Soil Type LL PL PI (/°) SM 0 73 26 NP NP NP Project Number: 10707-10A Material Description: Tan and Brown Silty Sand Project: Carlsbad Sheet C-l ATTERBERG LIMITS AND SIEVE ANALYSIS Mrr&R ^toptt • fterr&* sfcwwcfc • ferret* wtst/j rs 60 50 I30 o'•S 20 10 0 For classification of fjne- grained soils and fine- grained fraction of cparse-flfained soils "U" LINE ML. or OL Of or OH MH or OH 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Liquid Limit (LL) GRAVEL SAND COARSE FINE CRSE MEDIUM FINE FINES SILT CLAY U.S. STD SIEVE OPENING U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBER HYDROMETER 3.0" 1 100 90 80 70 0 60 UJ > 50 0z w 40 0. g 30 Oo:LUa 20 10 100.000 Boring No. B-3 1/2" 3/4" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200 ~ • \. • 10.000 1.000 0100 0.010 PARTICLE - SIZE (mm) Sample Depth G S F (ft.) S°"Type (%) Bagl 0-5 SM 0 66 34 LL PL NP NP 0.001 PI NP Material Description: Tan abd Brown Silty Sand Project Number: 10707-10A Project: Carlsbad SheetC-2 ATTERBERG LIMITS AND SIEVE ANALYSIS Earth - Strata, inc.. > Tuttiny &tn*tiit*nta etrrea peart t . eerreff SERVKS , BETTER RSSUL rs enou 50 E |40 — £ '•g 20 10 n For classification of fine- grained soils and fine- grained fraction of > coarse-grained soils / / .. .s /•' / / CUtsrOL Xi • ^^^<S ,.-'' ^S^ / .' Lx*^ 141 — m Z//'/.CU^MC/ / /jS' < 4> jS ,,' "U" LINE >X CKor OH S^ s' "A" LINE s/^ ./^ / MH or OH 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Liquid Limit (LL) GRAVEL i 1 SANDi iCOARSE j FINE | CRSE | MEDIUM FINES I FINE SILT | CLAY U.S. STD. SIEVE OPENING U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBER HYDROMETER 3.0' 1 1/2" 3/4" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #60 #100 #200 1fiI UU 90 80 70 I 60 ill g oo 60 Oz CO ACO 0. nJ 1 30 ocrLUa 20 10 n 100.000 ^S. 10.000 1.000 PARTICLE - Boring Sample Depth _ \_ 0100 0.010 0.001 SIZE (mm) pec No. No, [ft.) ' '}V" (%) B-5 Bag 1 0-5 SM 0 66 34 19 17 2 Project Number: 10707-10A Material Description: Tan and Brown Silty Sand Project: Carlsbad Sheet C-3 . ATTERBERG LIMITS AND SIEVE ANALYSIS £iLr^LlfIC2£i.(f!S. 6KTTKR PEone * eerrtH SKKVKS • BSTIKM RESULT* APPENDIX D RETAINING WALL CALCULATIONS RETAINING WALL JN: 10707-1OA CONSULT: SMP PROJECT: Khov/Carlsbad CALCULATION SHEET # 1 CALCULATE THE DESIGN MINIMUM EQUIVALENT FLUID PRESSURE (EFP) FOR PROPOSED RETAINING WALLS. THE WALL HEIGHT AND BACKSLOPE AND SURCHARGE CONDITIONS ARE LISTED BELOW. ASSUME THE BACKFILL IS SATURATED WITH NO EXCESS HYDROSTATIC PRESSURE. USE THE MONONOBE-OKABE METHOD FOR SEISMIC FORCES. CALCULATION PARAMETERS Compacted Fill - Silty Sand WALL HEIGHT 20 feet 1 BACKSLOPE ANGLE: 0 degrees 331 psf SURCHARGE: 0 pounds 28 degrees SURCHARGE TYPE: U Uniform 130 pcf INITIAL FAILURE ANGLE: 35 degrees 1.5 FINAL FAILURE ANGLE: 70 degrees 0 degrees INITIAL TENSION CRACK: 5 feet 220.7 psf FINAL TENSION CRACK: 100 feet PHID = ATAN(TAN(PHI)/FS) = 19.5 degrees HORIZONTAL PSEUDO STATIC SEISMIC COEFFICIENT (kh) 0 %g VERTICAL PSEUDO STATIC SEISMIC COEFFICIENT (kv) 0 %g EARTH MATERIAL: SHEAR DIAGRAM: COHESION: PHI ANGLE: DENSITY SAFETY FACTOR: WALL FRICTION CD (C/FS): CALCULATED RESULTS CRITICAL FAILURE ANGLE AREA OF TRIAL FAILURE WEDGE TOTAL EXTERNAL SURCHARGE WEIGHT OF TRIAL FAILURE WEDGE NUMBER OF TRIAL WEDGES ANALYZED LENGTH OF FAILURE PLANE DEPTH OF TENSION CRACK HORIZONTAL DISTANCE TO UPSLOPE TENSION CRACK CALCULATED HORIZONTAL THRUST ON WALL CALCULATED EQUIVALENT FLUID PRESSURE DESIGN EQUIVALENT FLUID PRESSURE 54 degrees 136.7 square feet 0.0 pounds 17774.8 pounds 3456 trials 18.7 feet 4.9 feet 11.0 feet 7486.1 pounds 37.4 pcf 40.0 pcf The calculation indicates that the proposed retaining wall may be designed for an Equivalent Fluid Pressure of 40 pounds per cubic foot(pcf). APPENDIX E SEISMICITY Page 1 of 1 Prob. Seismic Hazard Deaggregation Pbinsettia 117.308° W, 33.102 N. Peak Hodz. Ground Accel >=0 5561 g Mean Return Time 2475 years MeanfR.M.Eo) 7.7 km, 6.69. 0.77 Modal (R.M.Eo) »6.4 km, 6.93, 0.40 (from peak R.M bin) Modal (R.M,e*) = 6.5km, 7 15, 0 to I sigma (from peak R,M,s bin) Binning: DeltaR 10 km, dcltaM=0.2. DeltaE-l.O 3110AV ZZ I3:roc Qvtanc* p. n»y(tjid»«( «Hllcn<BD Cldwg V»r7«Om>IDp3OniU5as CCKT KHASOffirt UPDATE http://eqint.cr.usgs. gov/eq-men/deaggint2002//Poinsettia_6345_deaggPGA.jpg 4/22/2010 Page 1 of Poinsettia Geographic Deagg Seismic Hazard forOOO-s Spectral Accel. 0.5561 g PGA Exceodancc Return Time: 2475 years Max significant source distance 32. km. Red lines represent Quaternary fault locations Giidded-soutce haiard accum. in 45° intervals Rock site. Average \7s=760 m/s top 30 m [tlAH http://eqint.cr.usgs.gov/eq-men/deaggint2002//Poinsettia_6345 pga.jpg 4/22/2010 Page 1 of 3 *** Deaggregation of Seismic Hazard for PGA & 2 Periods of Spectral Accel. *** *** Data from U.S.G.S. National Seismic Hazards Mapping Project, 2002 version *** PSHA Deaggregation. %contributions. site: Poinsettia long: 117.308 W., lat: 33.102 N. USGS 2002-03 update files and programs. dM=0.2. Site descr:ROCK Return period: 2475 yrs. Exceedance PGA =0.5561 g. #Pr[at least one eq with median motion>=PGA in 50 yrs]=0.00084 DIST(KM) MAG(MW) ALL EPS EPSILON>2 1<EPS<2 0<EPS<1 -1<EPS<0 -2<EPS<-1 EPS<-2 5.4 12.3 5.4 12.5 5.5 12.7 5.5 12.8 5.6 12.9 5.8 13.2 5.4 13.1 4.8 12.6 22.7 6.5 12.6 22.3 6.3 13.3 22.5 6.4 13.1 21.9 6.5 13.1 6.4 13.2 31.7 5.05 5.05 5.20 5.20 5.40 5.40 5.60 5.60 5.80 5.80 6.01 6.01 6.20 6.20 6.40 6.40 6.40 6.63 6.60 6.60 6.79 6.79 6.80 6.93 6.93 6.96 7.15 7.15 7.38 7.45 7.63 1.108 0.202 2.125 0.470 2.008 0.560 1.894 0.652 1.764 0.745 2.145 0.884 2.815 1.178 2.737 1.508 0.080 9.739 1.945 0.090 9.639 3.222 0.116 20.713 4.289 0.069 20.692 4.199 2.103 0.053 0.114 0.411 0.202 0.714 0.470 0.557 0.560 0.408 0.590 0.298 0.551 0.288 0.570 0.259 0.609 0.186 0.589 0.080 0.951 0.713 0.090 1.214 1.660 0.116 1.463 1.565 0.069 1.363 1.440 0.098 0.012 0.114 0.698 0.000 1.411 0.000 1.414 0.000 1.282 0.062 1.067 0.194 1.221 0.314 1.400 0.569 1.102 0.917 0.000 4.424 1.219 0.000 5.620 1.544 0.000 9.056 2.689 0.000 8.577 2.752 0.621 0.042 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.037 0.000 0.204 0.000 0.398 0.000 0.636 0.000 1.156 0.000 1.412 0.003 0.000 4.289 0.013 0.000 2.710 0.018 0.000 10.120 0.035 0.000 10.751 0.007 1.325 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.037 0.000 0.000 0.075 0.000 0.000 0.095 0.000 0.000 0.074 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.059 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Summary statistics for above PSHA PGA deaggregation, R=distance, e=epsilon: Mean src-site R= 7.7 km; M= 6.69; epsO= 0.77. Mean calculated for all sources. Modal src-site R= 6.4 km; M= 6.93; epsO= 0.40 from peak (R,M) bin Gridded source distance metrics: Rseis Rrup and Rjb MODE R* = 6.5km; M*= 7.15; EPS.INTERVAL: 0 to 1 sigma % CONTRIB.= 10.751 Principal sources (faults, subduction, random seismicity having >10% contribution) M 6.09 6.97 Source Category: % contr. R(km) California shallow gridded 31.96 7.7 Calif b, S3 or Thrust 68.04 7.7 Individual fault hazard details if contrib.>l%: 2 Rose Canyon 42.06 2 Newport-Inglewood offshore 8.23 2 Rose Canyon GR M-distrib 16.88 ******************** southern California PSHA Deaggregation. %contributions. ROCK site: Poinsettia USGS 2002-2003 update files and programs epsilonO (mean values) 1.04 0.64 6.5 13.2 7.4 7.03 7.02 6.80 0.42 1.53 0.68 long: 117.308 d W., lat: 33.102 N. Analysis on DaMoYr:22/04/2010 Return period: 2475 yrs. 1.00 s. PSA =0.4935 g. #Pr[at least one eq with median motion>=PSA in 50 yrs]=0.00018 DIST(km) MAG(Mw) ALL EPS EPSILON>2 1<EPS<2 0<EPS<1 -1<EPS<0 -2<EPS<-1 EPS<-2 4.4 4.6 4.6 12.4 4.7 13.0 5.0 13.6 5.21 5.41 5.61 5.62 5.80 5.81 6.01 6.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .099 .198 .328 .071 .473 .174 .780 .323 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 099 189 241 071 231 174 260 320 0.000 0.010 0.087 0.000 0.242 0.000 0.521 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 >«* http://eqint,cr.usgs.gov/eq-men/deaggint2002//Poinsettia_6345_.txt 4/22/2010 Page 2 of 3 4.8 13.4 23.7 4.2 12.9 23.5 6.0 14.2 24.0 33.7 6.5 13.5 24.0 33.3 41.4 6.4 13.2 22.9 33.1 41.2 6.6 13.1 32.2 41.1 6.5 13.2 31.9 41.2 62.1 11 .1 6.4 31.8 31.7 113.2 127.8 110.0 110.5 110.0 6.20 6.21 6.21 6.40 6.41 6.41 6.58 6.62 6. 63 6.63 6.77 6.78 6.82 6.79 6.73 6.93 6.95 6.96 6.92 6.92 7.12 7.16 7.10 7.15 7.31 7.45 7.33 7.33 7.38 7.41 7.51 7.58 7.78 7.74 7.88 7.94 8.09 8.21 1 0 0 1 0 0 3 2 0 0 12 3 0 0 0 17 8 0 0 0 19 7 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 .330 .587 .081 .731 . 954 .187 .804 .027 .538 .149 .452 .314 .485 .127 .185 .597 .433 .462 .225 .513 .055 .094 .206 .822 .096 .110 .802 .387 .113 .062 .416 .350 .274 .369 .368 .106 .296 .203 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 1. 1. 0. 0. 0. 1. 2. 0. 0. 0.1. 1. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0.1. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 260 466 081 184 509 187 581 988 537 149 426 288 451 127 185 407 396 343 225 513 291 151 206 822 377 012 681 386 113 062 017 966 357 369 368 106 296 203 1.026 0.121 0.000 1.118 0.445 0.000 2.250 1.038 0.001 0.000 7.730 2.018 0.035 0.000 0.000 8.898 5.990 0.119 0.000 0.000 8.203 5.565 0.000 0.000 2.393 0.072 0.121 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.110 1.384 0.917 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.045 0.000 0.000 0.428 0.000 0.000 0.973 0.000 0.000 0.000 3.285 0.008 0.000 0.000 0.000 7.253 0.047 0.000 0.000 0.000 9.561 0.378 0.000 0.000 4.326 0.026 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.277 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .011 .000 .000 .000 .000 .039 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .011 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Summary statistics for above 1.0s PSA deaggregation, R=distance, e=epsilon: Mean src-site R= 12.2 km; M= 6.96; epsO= 0.94. Mean calculated for all sources. Modal src-site R= 6.6 km; M= 7.12; epsO= 0.44 from peak (R,M) bin Gridded source distance metrics: Rseis Rrup and Rjb MODE R*= 6.5km; M*= 7.12; EPS.INTERVAL: 0 to 1 sigma % CONTRIB.= 9.561 Principal sources (faults, subduction, random seismicity having >10% contribution) Source Category: % contr. R(km) California shallow gridded 16.51 9.2 Calif b, SS or Thrust 80.17 10.2 Individual fault hazard details if contrib.>l%: 2 2 2 2 2 2 Rose Canyon Newport-Inglewood offshore Coronado Bank Rose Canyon GR M-distrib Newport-Inglewood offshore GR Coronado Bank GR M-distrib Elsinore-18 42. 14. 4. 15. 1. 1 . 1. i f .—1 V 39 16 52 81 77 38 38 •n -i a 6. 13. 31. 8. 18. 33. 41. 5 2 7 2 1 0 1 6. 7. 7. 7. 7. 6. 6. 7. 7. M 49 04 05 04 61 83 85 30 16 epsilonO (mean values) 1.21 0.82 0 1 1 0 1 2 2 .49 .23 .69 .88 .74 .05 .43 PSHA Deaggregation. %contributions. ROCK site: Poinsettia long: 117.308 d W., lat: 33.102 N. USGS 2002-2003 update files and programs. Analysis on DaMoYr:22/04/2010 Return period: 2475 yrs. 0.20 s. PSA =1.3211 g. #Pr[at least one eq with median motion>=PSA in 50 yrs]=0.00054 DIST(km) MAG(Mw) ALL_EPS EPSILON>2 1<EPS<2 0<EPS<1 -1<EPS<0 -2<EPS<-1 EPS<-2 0.684 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1.360 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 5.6 12.4 5.7 12.5 5.05 5.05 5.20 5.20 1.076 0.234 2.037 0.552 0.392 0.234 0.677 0.552 http://eqint.cr.usgs.gov/eq-men/deaggint2002//Poinsettia_6345_.txt 4/22/2010 Page 3 of 3 5.7 12.8 5.7 12.9 5.7 13.0 21.8 5.8 13.4 22.8 5.3 13.2 23.5 4.7 12.7 23.1 6.5 13.3 23.1 6.2 13.2 22.9 6.5 13.1 22.2 6.4 13.1 6.4 13.2 31.7 31.7 5.40 5.40 5.60 5.60 5.80 5.80 5.81 6.01 6.01 6.00 6.20 6.20 6.21 6.40 6.40 6.40 6.61 6.62 6.61 6.73 6.81 6.79 6.94 6.93 6.95 7.16 7.15 7.42 7.45 7.58 7.76 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 7 2 0 8 3 0 24 5 0 17 4 1 0 0 0 .901 .665 .781 .774 .658 .876 .052 .038 .056 .067 .645 .400 .098 .526 .741 .163 .303 .946 .219 .381 .156 .218 .669 .431 .153 .762 .710 .278 .054 .154 .146 0.536 0.665 0.421 0.700 0.306 0.663 0.052 0.289 0.689 0.067 0.258 0.736 0.098 0.185 0.666 0.163 0.747 1.262 0.219 0.804 1.260 0.217 2.338 1.873 0.149 1.114 1.410 0.068 0.011 0.154 0.146 1.356 0.000 1.211 0.073 1.059 0.213 0.000 1.250 0.367 0.000 1.452 0.664 0.000 1.133 1.071 0.000 3.695 1.668 0.000 3.980 1.863 0.001 13.022 3.506 0.004 7.011 3.289 0.429 0.043 0.000 0.000 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 1. 0. 0. 2. 0. 0. 3. 0. 0. 9. 0. 0. 9. 0. 0. 0. 0. 0. 010 000 148 000 293 000 000 499 000 000 935 000 000 205 003 000 824 016 000 538 033 000 256 052 000 637 Oil 760 000 000 000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.037 0.000 0.000 0.059 0.000 0.000 0.052 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.021 0.000 0.000 0.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Summary statistics for above 0.2s PSA deaggregation, R=distance, e=epsilon: Mean src-site R= 8.1 km; M= 6.68; epsO= 0.85. Mean calculated for all sources. Modal src-site R= 6.5 km; M= 6.94; epsO= 0.58 from peak (R,M) bin Gridded source distance metrics: Rseis Rrup and Rjb MODE R*= 6.6km; M*= 6.95; EPS.INTERVAL: 1 to 2 sigma % CONTRIB.= 13.022 Principal sources (faults, subduction, random seismicity having >10% contribution) Source Category: % California shallow gridded Calif b, SS or Thrust contr. 32.57 67.43 R(km) 8.4 8.0 M 6.10 6. 97 epsilonO (mean values) 1.14 0.70 Individual fault hazard details if contrib.>l%: 2 2 2 2 Rose Canyon Newport- Inglewood offshore Rose Canyon GR M-distrib Newport-Inglewood offshore GR 39.39 9.79 16.88 1.03 \ f 1-1 1-1-1 i a 6.4 13.2 7.6 15.9 7.03 7.01 6.80 6.81 0.46 1.44 0.74 1.84 http://eqint.cr.usgs.gov/eq-men/deaggint2002//Poinsettia_6345_.txt 4/22/2010 APPENDIX F ASPHALTIC CONCRETE PAVEMENT CALCULATIONS PAVING DESIGN fJnG.,^JN: 1 0707-1 OA PROJECT: Carlsbad CALCULATION SHEET* CONSULT: IMP Residential Street CALTRANS METHOD FOR DESIGN OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT Input "R" value or "CBR" of native soil 50 Type of Index Property - "R" value or "CBR" (C or R) R R Value R Value used for Caltrans Method 50 Input Traffic Index (Tl) 5 Calculated Total Gravel Equivalent (GE) 0.8 feet Calculated Total Gravel Equivalent (GE) 9.6 inches Calculated Gravel Factor (Gf) for A/C paving 2.53 Gravel Factor for Base Course (Gf) 1 .0 Pavement sections provided below are considered equal; but, do not reflect reviewing agency minimums. Gravel Equivalent GE GE Delta (feet) (inches) (inches) INCHES A/C Section Minimum Thickness Base (inches) (inches) 0.63 7.60 2.00 3.0 1.8 0.74 8.87 0.73 0.89 10.65 -1.05 1.01 12.17 -2.57 1.27 15.21 -5.61 3.5 0.6 4.2 FEET A/C Section Minimum Thickness Base (feet) (feet) 0.25 0.15 0.29 0.05 0.35 4.8 0.40 6.0 1.48 17.74 -8.14 7.0 1.69 20.28 -10.68 8.0 1.90 22.81 -13.21 2.11 25.35 -15.75 2.32 27.88 -18.28 2.53 30.42 -20.82 9.0 ^ 10.0 11.0 12.0 0.50 0.58 0.67 0.75 0.83 0:92 1.00 •MM PAVING DESIGN ^g^AJa^^^^^^^Cf^^ra JN: 1 0707-1 OA PROJECT: Carlsbad CALCULATION SHEET # CONSULT: SMP Residential Collector CALTRANS METHOD FOR DESIGN OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT Input "R" value or "CBR" of native soil 50 Type of Index Property - "R" value or "CBR" (C or R) R R Value R Value used for Caltrans Method 50 Input Traffic Index (Tl) 6 Calculated Total Gravel Equivalent (GE) 0.96 feet Calculated Total Gravel Equivalent (GE) 1 1 .52 inches Calculated Gravel Factor (Gf) for A/C paving 2.31 Gravel Factor for Base Course (Gf) 1 .0 Pavement sections provided below are considered equal; but, do not reflect reviewing agency minimums. Gravel Equivalent GE GE Delta (feet) (inches) (inches) 0.58 6.94 4.58 0.67 8.10 3.42 INCHES A/C Section Minimum Thickness Base (inches) (inches) 3.0 4.8 3.5 3.6 0.81 9.72 1.80 4.2 1.8 0.93 11.11 0.41 1.16 13.88 -2.36 1.35 16.20 -4.68 1.54 18.51 -6.99 1.74 20.83 -9.31 4.8 0.6 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 1.93 23.14 -11.62 10.0 2.12 25.45 -13.93 11.0 2.31 27.77 -16.25 12.0 FEET A/C Section Minimum Thickness Base (feet) (feet) 0.25 0.40 0.29 0.30 0.35 0.15 0.40 0.05 0.50 0.58 0.67 0.75 0.83 0.92 1.00 PAVING DESIGN — " ~-f ~M.»-<—f. -Wfr*--^— .. -..„„, — a aJa£.^i^»m^tV^W, W*M ^* JN: 1 0707-1 OA PROJECT: Carlsbad CALCULATION SHEET* CONSULT: §MP Collector CALTRANS METHOD FOR DESIGN OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT Input "R" value or "CBR" of native soil 50 Type of Index Property - "R" value or "CBR" (C or R) R R Value R Value used for Caltrans Method 50 Input Traffic Index (Tl) 7 Calculated Total Gravel Equivalent (GE) 1.12 feet Calculated Total Gravel Equivalent (GE) 13.44 inches Calculated Gravel Factor (Gf) for A/C paving 2.14 Gravel Factor for Base Course (Gf) 1 .0 Pavement sections provided below are considered equal; but, do not reflect reviewing agency minimums. Gravel Equivalent GE GE Delta (feet) (inches) (inches) 0.54 6.43 7.01 0.62 7.50 5.94 0.71 8.57 4.87 INCHES A/C Section Minimum Thickness Base (inches) (inches) 3.0 7.2 3.5 6.0 4.0 4.8 0.75 9.00 4.44 4.2 4.2 0.89 10.71 2.73 1.07 12.85 0.59 1.25 15.00 -1.56 1.61 19.28 -5.84 1.79 21.42 -7.98 5.0 3.0 6.0 0.6 7.0 9.0 To.o 1.96 23.56 -10.12 11.0 2.14 25.71 -12.27 12.0 FEET A/C Section Minimum Thickness Base (feet) (feet) 0.25 0.60 0.29 0.50 , 0.33 0.40 0.35 0.35 0.42 0.25 0.50 0.05 0.58 i 0.75 0.83 0.92 1.00 APPENDIX G GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS EARTH-STRATA General Earthwork and Grading Specifications General Intent: These General Earthwork and Grading Specifications are intended to be the minimum requirements for the grading and earthwork shown on the approved grading plan(s) and/or indicated in the geotechnical report(s). These General Earthwork and Grading Specifications should be considered a part of the recommendations contained in the geotechnical report(s) and if they are in conflict with the geotechnical report(s), the specific recommendations in the geotechnical report shall supersede these more general specifications. Observations made during earthwork operations by the project Geotechnical Consultant may result in new or revised recommendations that may supersede these specifications and/or the recommendations in the geotechnical report(s). The Geotechnical Consultant of Record: The Owner shall employ a qualified Geotechnical Consultant of Record (Geotechnical Consultant), prior to commencement of grading or construction. The Geotechnical Consultant shall be responsible for reviewing the approved geotechnical report(s) and accepting the adequacy of the preliminary geotechnical findings, conclusions, and recommendations prior to the commencement of the grading or construction. Prior to commencement of grading or construction, the Owner shall coordinate with the Geotechnical Consultant, and Earthwork Contractor (Contractor) to schedule sufficient personnel for the appropriate level of observation, mapping, and compaction testing. During earthwork and grading operations, the Geotechnical Consultant shall observe, map, and document the subsurface conditions to confirm assumptions made during the geotechnical design phase of the project. Should the observed conditions differ significantly from the interpretive assumptions made during the design phase, the Geotechnical Consultant shall recommend appropriate changes to accommodate the observed conditions, and notify the reviewing agency where required. The Geotechnical Consultant shall observe the moisture conditioning and processing of the excavations and fill materials. The Geotechnical Consultant should perform periodic relative density testing of fill materials to verify that the attained level of compaction is being accomplished as specified. The Earthwork Contractor: The Earthwork Contractor (Contractor) shall be qualified, experienced, and knowledgeable in earthwork logistics, preparation and processing of earth materials to receive compacted fill, moisture- conditioning and processing of fill, and compacting fill. The Contractor shall be provided with the approved grading plans and geotechnical report(s) for his review and acceptance of responsibilities, prior to commencement of grading. The Contractor shall be solely responsible for performing the grading in accordance with the approved grading plans and geotechnical report(s). Prior to commencement of grading, the Contractor shall prepare and submit to the Owner and the Geotechnical Consultant a work plan that indicates the sequence of earthwork grading, the number of "equipment" of work and the estimated quantities of daily earthwork contemplated for the site. The Contractor shall inform the Owner and the Geotechnical Consultant of work schedule changes and revisions to the work plan at least 24 hours in advance of such changes so that appropriate personnel will be available for observation and testing. No assumptions shall be made by the Contractor with regard to whether the Geotechnical Consultant is aware of all grading operations. It is the sole responsibility of the Contractor to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish the earthwork operations in accordance with the applicable grading codes and agency ordinances, these specifications, and the recommendations in the approved geotechnical report(s) and grading plan(s). At the sole discretion of the Geotechnical Consultant, any unsatisfactory conditions, such as unsuitable earth materials, improper moisture conditioning, inadequate compaction, insufficient buttress keyway size, adverse weather conditions, etc., resulting in a quality of work less than required in the approved grading plans and geotechnical report(s), the Geotechnical Consultant shall reject the work and may recommend to the Owner that grading be stopped until conditions are corrected. Preparation of Areas for Compacted Fill Clearing and Grubbing: Vegetation, such as brush, grass, roots, and other deleterious material shall be sufficiently removed and properly disposed in a method acceptable to the Owner, Geotechnical Consultant, and governing agencies. The Geotechnical Consultant shall evaluate the extent of these removals on a site by site basis. Earth materials to be placed as compacted fill shall not contain more than 1 percent organic materials (by volume). No compacted fill lift shall contain more than 10 percent organic matter. Should potentially hazardous materials be encountered, the Contractor shall stop work in the affected area, and a hazardous materials specialist shall immediately be consulted to evaluate the potentially hazardous materials, prior to continuing to work in that area. It is our understanding that the State of California defines most refined petroleum products (gasoline, diesel fuel, motor oil, grease, coolant, etc.) as hazardous waste. As such, indiscriminate dumping or spillage of these fluids may constitute a misdemeanor, punishable by fines and/or imprisonment, and shall be prohibited. The contractor is responsible for all hazardous waste related to his operations. The Geotechnical Consultant does not have expertise in this area. If hazardous waste is a concern, then the Owner should contract the services of a qualified environmental assessor. Processing: Exposed earth materials that have been observed to be satisfactory for support of compacted fill by the Geotechnical Consultant shall be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches. Exposed earth materials that are not observed to be satisfactory shall be removed or alternative recommendations may be provided by the Geotechnical Consultant. Scarification shall continue until the exposed earth materials are broken down and free of oversize material and the working surface is reasonably uniform, flat, and free of uneven features that would inhibit uniform compaction. The earth materials should be moistened or air dried to near optimum moisture content, prior to compaction. Overexcavation: The Cut Lot Typical Detail and Cut/Fill Transition Lot Typical Detail, included herein provides a graphic illustration that depicts typical overexcavation recommendations made in the approved geotechnical report(s) and/or grading plan(s). Keyways and Benching: Where fills are to be placed on slopes steeper than 5:1 [horizontal to vertical units), the ground shall be thoroughly benched as compacted fill is placed. Please see the three Keyway and Benching Typical Details with subtitles Cut Over Fill Slope, Fill Over Cut Slope, and Fill Slope for a graphic illustration. The lowest bench or smallest keyway shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide (or % the proposed slope height) and at least 2 feet into competent earth materials as advised by the Geotechnical Consultant. Typical benches shall be excavated a minimum height of 4 feet into competent earth materials or as recommended by the Geotechnical Consultant. Fill placed on slopes steeper than 5:1 should be thoroughly benched or otherwise excavated to provide a flat subgrade for the compacted fill. Evaluation/Acceptance of Bottom Excavations: All areas to receive compacted fill (bottom excavations), including removal excavations, processed areas, keyways, and benching, shall be observed, mapped, general elevations recorded, and/or tested prior to being accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant as suitable to receive compacted fill. The Contractor shall obtain a written acceptance from the Geotechnical Consultant prior to placing compacted fill. A licensed surveyor shall provide the survey control for determining elevations of bottom excavations, processed areas, keyways, and benching. The Geotechnical Consultant is not responsible for erroneously located, fills, subdrain systems, or excavations. Fill Materials General: Earth material to be used as compacted fill should to a large extent be free of organic matter and other deleterious substances as evaluated and accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant. Oversize: Oversize material is rock that does not break down into smaller pieces and has a maximum diameter greater than 8 inches. Oversize rock shall not be included within compacted fill unless specific methods and guidelines acceptable to the Geotechnical Consultant are followed. For examples of methods and guidelines of oversize rock placement see the enclosed Oversize Rock Disposal Detail. The inclusion of oversize materials in the compacted fill shall only be acceptable if the oversize material is completely surrounded by compacted fill or thoroughly jetted granular materials. No oversize material shall be placed within 10 vertical feet of finish grade or within 2 feet of proposed utilities or underground improvements. Import; Should imported earth materials be required, the proposed import materials shall meet the requirements of the Geotechnical Consultant. Well graded, very low expansion potential earth materials free of organic matter and other deleterious substances are usually sought after as import materials. However, it is generally in the Owners best interest that potential import earth materials are provided to the Geotechnical Consultant to determine their suitability for the intended purpose. At least 48 hours should be allotted for the appropriate laboratory testing to be performed, prior to starting the import operations. Fill Placement and Compaction Procedures Fill Layers: Fill materials shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill in nearly horizontal layers not exceeding 8 inches in loose thickness. Thicker layers may be accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant, provided field density testing indicates that the grading procedures can adequately compact the thicker layers. Each layer of fill shall be spread evenly and thoroughly mixed to obtain uniformity within the earth materials and consistent moisture throughout the fill. Moisture Conditioning of Fill: Earth materials to be placed as compacted fill shall be watered, dried, blended, and/or mixed, as needed to obtain relatively uniform moisture contents that are at or slightly above optimum. The maximum density and optimum moisture content tests should be performed in accordance with the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM test method D1557-00). Compaction of Fill: After each layer has been moisture-conditioned, mixed, and evenly spread, it should be uniformly compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum dry density as determined by ASTM test method D1557-00. Compaction equipment shall be adequately sized and be either specifically designed for compaction of earth materials or be proven to consistently achieve the required level of compaction. Compaction of Fill Slopes: In addition to normal compaction procedures specified above, additional effort to obtain compaction on slopes is needed. This may be accomplished by backrolling of slopes with sheepsfoot rollers as the fill is being placed, by overbuilding the fill slopes, or by other methods producing results that are satisfactory to the Geotechnical Consultant. Upon completion of grading, relative compaction of the fill and the slope face shall be a minimum of 90 percent of maximum density per ASTM test method D1557- 00. Compaction Testing of Fill: Field tests for moisture content and relative density of the compacted fill earth materials shall be periodically performed by the Geotechnical Consultant. The location and frequency of tests shall be at the Geotechnical Consultant's discretion based on field observations. Compaction test locations will not necessarily be random. The test locations may or may not be selected to verify minimum compaction requirements in areas that are typically prone to inadequate compaction, such as close to slope faces and near benching. Frequency of Compaction Testing: Compaction tests shall be taken at minimum intervals of every 2 vertical feet and/or per 1,000 cubic yards of compacted materials placed. Additionally, as a guideline, at least one (1) test shall be taken on slope faces for each 5,000 square feet of slope face and/or for each 10 vertical feet of slope. The Contractor shall assure that fill placement is such that the testing schedule described herein can be accomplished by the Geotechnical Consultant. The Contractor shall stop or slow down the earthwork operations to a safe level so that these minimum standards can be obtained. Compaction Test Locations: The approximate elevation and horizontal coordinates of each test location shall be documented by the Geotechnical Consultant. The Contractor shall coordinate with the Surveyor to assure that sufficient grade stakes are established. This will provide the Geotechnical Consultant with sufficient accuracy to determine the approximate test locations and elevations. The Geotechnical Consultant can not be responsible for staking erroneously located by the Surveyor or Contractor. A minimum of two grade stakes should be provided at a maximum horizontal distance of 100 feet and vertical difference of less than 5 feet. Subdrain System Installation Subdrain systems shall be installed in accordance with the approved geotechnical report(s), the approved grading plan, and the typical details provided herein. The Geotechnical Consultant may recommend additional subdrain systems and/or changes to the subdrain systems described herein, with regard to the extent, location, grade, or material depending on conditions encountered during grading or other factors. All subdrain systems shall be surveyed by a licensed land surveyor (except for retaining wall subdrain systems) to verify line and grade after installation and prior to burial. Adequate time should be allowed by the Contractor to complete these surveys. Excavation All excavations and over-excavations for remedial purposes shall be evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant during grading operations. Remedial removal depths indicated on the geotechnical plans are estimates only. The actual removal depths and extent shall be determined by the Geotechnical Consultant based on the field evaluation of exposed conditions during grading operations. Where fill over cut slopes are planned, the cut portion of the slope shall be excavated, evaluated, and accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to placement of the fill portion of the proposed slope, unless specifically addressed by the Geotechnical Consultant. Typical details for cut over fill slopes and fill over cut slopes are provided herein. Trench Backfill 1) The Contractor shall follow all OHSA and Cal/OSHA requirements for trench excavation safety. 2) Bedding and backfill of utility trenches shall be done in accordance with the applicable provisions in the Standard Specifications of Public Works Construction. Bedding materials shall have a Sand Equivalency more than 30 (SE>30). The bedding shall be placed to 1 foot over the conduit and thoroughly jetting to provide densification. Backfill should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum dry density, from 1 foot above the top of the conduit to the surface. 3) Jetting of the bedding materials around the conduits shall be observed by the Geotechnical Consultant. 4) The Geotechnical Consultant shall test trench backfill for the minimum compaction requirements recommended herein. At least one test should be conducted for every 300 linear feet of trench and for each 2 vertical feet of backfill. 5) For trench backfill the lift thicknesses shall not exceed those allowed in the Standard Specifications of Public Works Construction, unless the Contractor can demonstrate to the Geotechnical Consultant that the fill lift can be compacted to the minimum relative compaction by his alternative equipment or method. •• •• •• •• II ••• Earth - Strata, Inc. Geotechnical, Environmental and Materials Testing Consultants STABILIZATION FILL TYPICAL &ETAIL BETTER PEOPLE . BETTER SERVICE . BETTER RESULTS MIN. OF 5 FEET DEEP COMPACTED FILL, BUT VARIES AS RECOMMENDED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT -15 FEET MI 4 INCH PERFORATED PROPOSED GRADE—. PVC BACKDRAIK 4 INCH SOLID PVC OUTLET TYPICAL BENCHING INTO EARTH MATERIALS PICAL BENCHINS INTO EARTH MATERIALS 4 INCH SOLID PVC OUTLET. GEOFABRIC (MIRAFI WON OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT -15.0 FEET KEYWAY BOTTOM SHOULD DESCEND INTO SLOPE KEVWAY DIMENSIONS PER SEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT / SEOLOSIST (TYPICALLY H/2 OR 15 FEET MIN.) PERFORATED PVC PIPE WITH PERFORATIONS FACING DOW! 12 INCH MIN. OVERLAP, SECURED EVERY 6 FEET' SCHEDULE 40 SOLID PVC OUTLb'T PIPE, SURROUNDED By COMPACTED FILL. OUTLETS TO BE PLACED EVERY 100 FEET OR LESS 5 CUBIC FEET / FOOT OF % INCH -1 % INCH OPEN GRADED ROCK I I I Earth ~ Stjrat,3if Inc* Geotechnical, Environmental and Materials Testing Consultants BETTER PEOPLE , BETTER SERVICE . BETTER RESULTS BUTTRESS TYPICAL DETAIL MIN. OF 5 FEET DEEP COMPACTED FILL, BUT VARIES AS- RECOMMENDED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT PROPOSED 6RADE 4 INCH SOLID PVC OUTLET 4 INCH PERFORATED PVC BACKDRAII TYPICAL BENCHING INTO COMPETENT EARTH MATERIALS 4 INCH SOLID PVC OUTLET 2 FEET MIN 5 FEE 'ICAL BENCHING INTO COMPETENT EARTH MATERIALS GEOFABRIC (MIRAFI 140N OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT -15.0 FEET- KEYWAV DIMENSIONS PER GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT / GEOLOGIST (TYPICALLY H/2 OR 15 FEET MIN.) KEYWAY BOTTOM SHOULD DESCEND INTO SLOPE PERFORATED PVC PIPE WITH PERFORATIONS FACING DOWI 12 INCH MIN. OVERLAP, SECURED EVERY 6 FEET SCHEDULE 40 SOLID PVC OUTLET PIPE, SURROUNDED By COMPACTED FILL. OUTLETS TO BE PLACED EVERY 100 FEET OR LEiS 5 CUBIC FEET / FOOT OF 3/4 INCH -1 J£ INCH OPEN GRADED ROCK Earth = Strata, Inc. Geotechnical, Environmental and Materials Testing Consultants CANYON SUBDRAIN SYSTEM TYPICAL DETAIL BETTER PEOPLE . BETTER SERVICE . BETTER RESULTS CONTACT BETWEEN SUITABLE AND UNSUITABLE MATERIAL TO BE REMOVED PROPOSED GRADE EXISTING NATURAL GRADE UNSUITABLE MATERIALS TO BE REMOVED TYPICAL BENCHING INTi COMPETENT EARTH MATERIALS SEOFABRIC (MIRAFI WON OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT) 6 INCH COLLECTOR PIPE (SCHEDULE 40 PERFORATED PVC PIPE WITH PERFORATIONS FACINS DOWN) 12 INCHES MIN. OVERLAP. SECURED EVEIiV 6 FEET- 9 CUBIC FEET / FOOT OF % INCH -\%~ INCH CRUSHED ROCK COMPETENT EARTH MATERIALS;*. .. 'XX xx x v v v NOTES: 1 - CONTINUOUS RUNS IN EXCESS OF 500 FEET LONG WILL REQUIRE AN 8 INCH DIAMETER PIPE. 2 - FINAL 20 FEET OF PIPE AT OUTLET WILL BE SOLID AND BACKFILLED WITH COMPACTED FINE-GRAINED EARTH MATERIALS. 6 INCH Mil CANYON SUBDRAIN TYPICAL OUTLET -200 FEET WIN TYPICALLV 10 0 FEET BUT VARIE: 6 INCH SOLID PVC PIPE 6EOFABRIC (MIRAFI 140N OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT), PROPOSED SRACE—v \ -6 INCH SOLID PVC PIPB -35 INCH - % INCH CRUSHED ROCK INCH PERFORATED SCHEDULE 40 PVC PIPE •• mm mm m mm mm mm i i Ceotechnical, Environmental and Materials Testing Consultants BETTER PEOPLE . BETTER SERVICE . BETTER RESULTS CUT LOT TYPICAL DETAIL REMOVE UNSUITABLE MATERIALS 1:1 PROJECTION TO COMPETENT EARTH MATERIALS OVEREXCAVATE AND RECOMPACT COMPETENT EARTH MATERIALS1.1 PROJECTION TO COMPETENT- EARTH MATERIALS NOTE; REMOVAL BOTTOMS SHOULD BE GRADED WITH A MINIMUM 2% FALL TOWARDS STREET OR OTHER SUITABLE AREA (AS DETERMINED BY THE SEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT) TO AVOID PONDINS BELOW THE BUILDING NOTE: WHERE DESISN CUT LOTS ARE EXCAVATED ENTIRELY INTO COMPETENT EARTH MATERIALS. OVEREXCAVATION MAY STILL BY NEEDED FOR HARD-ROCK CONDITIONS OR MATERIALS WITH VARIABLE EXPANSION POTENTIALS mm m Esi nth ~ Strat<aif line, Geotechnlcal, Environmental and Materials Testing Consultants BETTER PEOPLE . BETTER SERVICE . BETTER RESULTS CUT / FILL TRANSITION LOT TYPICAL DETAIL PROPOSED GRADE 1:1 PROJECTION TO COMPETENT EARTH MATERIALS -TYPICAL BENCHING INTO COMPETENT EARTH MATERIALS NOTE; REMOVAL BOTTOMS SHOULD BE GRADED WITH A MINIMUM 2% FALL TOWARDS STREET OR OTHER SUITABLE AREA (AS DETERMINED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT) TO AVOID PONDING BELOW THE BUILDING NOTE: WHERE DESIGN CUT LOTS ARE EXCAVATED ENTIRELY INTO COMPETENT EARTH MATERIALS, OVEREXCAVATTON MAY STILL BY NEEDED FOR HARD-ROCK CONDITIONS OR MATERIALS WITH VARIABLE EXPANSION POTENTIALS 191 I I I I •El Earth - §trait<aif Inc, Geotechnical, Environmental and Materials Testing Consultants BETTER PEOPLE . BETTER SERVICE , BETTER RESULTS KEY WAV & BENCHING TYPICAL DETAILS CUT OVER FILL SLOPE PROPOSED GRADE- CONTACT BETWEEN SUITABLE AND UNSUITABLE MATERIALS TO BE REMOVED EXISTING NATURAL GRADE OVERBUILD AND CUT BACK TO THE PROPOSED GRADE COMPACTED FILL TO BE CUTBACK 1:1 PROJECTION TO COMPETENT EARTH MATERIAL. TEMPORARY 1:1 CUT 2.0 FEET MI -KEVWAV BOTTOM SHOULD DESCEND INTO SLOPE KEYWAY DIMENSIONS PER SEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT / GEOLOGIST (TYPICALLY H/2 OR 15 FEETMIN.) NOTE: NATURAL SLOPES STEEPER THAN 5:1 (H:V) MUST BE BENCHED INTO COMPETENT EARTH MATERIALS I I I 1B1 •• I I Geotechnical, Environmental and Materials Testing Consultants BETTER PEOPLE • BETTER SERVICE . BETTER RESULTS r KEY WAY A BENCHING TYPICAL DETAILS FILL OVER CUT SLOPE CONTACT BETWEEN SUITABLE AND UNSUITABLE EARTH MATERIALS TO BE REMOVE -KEYWAV BOTTOM SHOULD DESCEND INTO SLOPE KEYWAY DIMENSIONS PER SEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT / SEOLOeiST (TYPICALLY H/Z OR 15 FEET MIN.) NOTES: NATURAL SLOPES STEEPER THAN 5:1 (H:V) MUST BE BENCHED INTO COMPETENT EARTH MATERIALS THE CUT SLOPE MUST BE CONSTRUCTED FIRST ma ma •• mm mm • E,31 rich - Strata, Inc, Geotechnical, Environmental and Materials Testing Consultants BETTER PEOPLE . BETTER SERVICE . BETTER RESULTS KEY WAV A BENCHING TYPICAL DETAILS FILL SLOPE PROPOSED 6RADE a.OFEETM —VARIES (8 FEET TYPICAL)— CONTACT BETWEEN SUITABLE AND UNSUITABLE MATERIALS TO BE REMOVE! 1:1 PROJECTION TO COMPETENT EARTH MATERIALS FROM PROPOSED TOE OF SLOPE—, TEMPORARY 1:1 CUT—, -15,0 FEET -KEYWAY BOTTOM SHOULD DESCEND INTO SLOPE KEVWAV DIMENSIONS PER SEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT / SEOLOSIST (TYPICALLY H/2 OR 15 FEET MIN.) NOTES. NATURAL SLOPES STEEPER THAN 5:1 (H:V) MUST BE BENCHED INTO COMPETENT EARTH MATERIALS II ft i • i Earth - Strata? Inc.. Geotechnical, Environmental and Materials Testing Consultants BETTER PEOPLE . BETTER SERVICE . BETTER RESULTS OVERSIZE ROCK TYPICAL DETAIL PROPOSED SLOPE FACE COMPACTED FILL 10 Q FE NOTES' OVERSIZE ROCK IS LARSER THAN 8 INCHES IN MAX DIAMETER JETTT.NS OF APPROVED GRANULAR MATERIAL EXCAVATED TRENCH OR DOZER V-CUT