The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCT 06-13; TABATA 10; GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION; 2014-03-04Or 0 St GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION , TABATA DEVELOPMENT : CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA .1 .. .. . . . . .. - - - • . Prepared for: . LENNAR HOMES 25 Enterprise, Suite 300 Aliso Viejo, CA 92656 GROUP Prepared by. • GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS - - 9245 Activity Road, Suite 103 San Diego, California 92126 GDC Project No SD365 :. Document No. 13-0339 • DELTA - March 4, 2014 S . - .- - .-:- - . - - - .• . ,- - :2. - - . - - I' • Ll rj . GROUP March 4, 2014 Lennar Homes DELTA 25 Enterprise, Suite 300 Aliso Viejo, California 92656 IRLEWIVINKM Geotechnical Attention: Mr. Tom Lee Engineering Geology Hydrogeology SUBJECT: GEOTECI-INICAL INVESTIGATION Earthquake Tabata Development Engineering Carlsbad, California Materials Testing & Inspection Mr. Lee: Forensic Services Group Delta Consultants (GDC) is pleased to submit this geotechnical investigation for the Tabata residential development in Carlsbad, California. The project will include the construction of 26 two-story wood framed residential buildings founded on post- tensioned slabs. Specific conclusions regarding the potential geotechnical constraints at the site, and preliminary geotechnical recommendations for grading, foundation, retaining wall and pavement design are provided in the following report. We appreciate this opportunity to be of continued professional service. Feel free to contact the office with any questions or comments, or if you need anything else. GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS Matthew A. Fagan, G.E. 2569 ames C. Sanders, C.E.G. 2258 Senior Geotechnical Engineer Senior Engineering Geologist Distribution: (1) Addressee, Mr. Tom Lee (tom.leelennar.com) (1) Addressee, Ms. Roberta Correia (robcorreiacox.net 11/4 CO- WNDERS ) fo INm 2258 (RING .' )*)OWWGIST GE2 69 I cER1'° ENGINEE \FCo OFC1\ " 9245 Activity Road, Suite 103 • San Diego, California 92126 • (858) 536-1000 voice • (858) 536-8311 fax Irvine (949) 450-2100 A Torrance (310) 320-5100 A Ontario (909) 605-6500 Sacramento (916) 302-2330 A Victorville (760) 881-3224 www.GroupDelta.com El El n U GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TABATA DEVELOPMENT CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ..........................................................................................6 1.1 Scope of Services................................................................................6 1.2 Site Description...................................................................................7 1.3 Proposed Development.......................................................................7 2.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATION.............................................8 3.0 GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ..........................................8 3.1 Santiago Formation.............................................................................9 3.2 Old Alluvium........................................................................................9 3.3 Fill ..................................................................................................... 10 3.4 Groundwater ...................................................................................... .10 4.0 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS...............................................................................11 4.1 Ground Rupture.................................................................................11 4.2 Seismicity..........................................................................................11 4.3 Liquefaction and Dynamic Settlement...............................................11 4.4 Landslides and Lateral Spreads .........................................................12 4.5 Tsunamis, Seiches and Flooding.......................................................14 5.0 CONCLUSIONS..........................................................................................15 6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS...............................................................................17 6.1 Plan Review .......................................................................................17 6.2 Excavation and Grading Observation ................................................. 17 6.3 Earthwork .......................................................................................... 17 6.3.1 Site Preparation...................................................................18 6.3.2 Compressible Soils..............................................................18 6.3.3 Building Areas .....................................................................18 6.3.4 Fill Compaction...................................................................20 6.3.5 Subgrade Stabilization .......................................................... 20 6.3.6 Surface Drainage.................................................................20 6.3.7 Slope Stability......................................................................21 6.3.8 Temporary Excavations .......................................................21 6.3.9 Bulk/Shrink Characteristics..................................................22 IGROUP rl DELTA N:\Projects\SD\SD365 Lennar, Tabata Deve!opment\13-0339\13-0339.doc 0 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TABATA DEVELOPMENT CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) 6.4 Preliminary Foundation Recommendations.......................................22 • 6.4.1 Post-Tension Slabs (Category I)...........................................22 6.4.2 Post Tensioned Slabs (Category II) ......................................23 6.4.3 Post Tensioned Slabs (Category Ill) .....................................24 6.4.4 Settlement...........................................................................24 6.4.5 Lateral Resistance................................................................24 • 6.4.6 Slope Setback .....................................................................24 6.4.7 Seismic Design....................................................................25 6.5 On-Grade Slabs ................................................................................. 25 6.5.1 Moisture Protection for Slabs...............................................25 6.5.2 Exterior Slabs ......................................................................27 • 6.5.3 Expansive Soils....................................................................27 6.5.4 Reactive Soils ......................................................................28 6.6 Earth Retaining Structures.................................................................28 6.7 Preliminary Pavement Design ............................................................29 6.7.1 Asphalt Concrete.................................................................30 6.7.2 Portland Cement Concrete ..................................................30 6.8 Pipelines............................................................................................31 6.8.1 Thrust Blocks ......................................................................31 6.8.2 Modulus of Soil Reaction.....................................................31 6.8.3 Pipe Bedding.......................................................................31 7.0 LIMITATIONS .............................................................................................31 8.0 REFERENCES ............................................................................................32 GROUP rl DELTA N:\Projects\SD\SD365 Lennar, Tabata Development\13-0339\13-0339.cioc .• GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TABATA DEVELOPMENT CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) LIST OF TABLES Table 1 —2013 CBC Acceleration Response Spectra...........................................36 Table 2— Summary of Remedial Excavations ......................................................37 . LIST OF FIGURES Figure IA - Site Location Map.............................................................................39 Figure :i B - Site Vicinity Plan...............................................................................40 Figure 2A - Exploration Plan ...............................................................................41 Figure 2B - Geotechnical Map ............................................................................42 Figure 2C - Tentative Grading Plan.....................................................................43 Figure 2D - Revised Grading Plan.......................................................................44 Figure 2E - Proposed Development .................................................................... 45 Figure 3A - Regional Geologic Map.....................................................................46 Figure 3B - Regional Topography ....................................................................... 47 Figure 3C - 100-Year Floodplain.........................................................................48 Figure 3D - Tsunami Inundation Map .................................................................49 Figure 4— Regional Fault Map.............................................................................50 Figure 5 - Wall Drainage Details..........................................................................51 • LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A - Field Exploration............................................................................52 Appendix B - Laboratory Testing.........................................................................86 Appendix C - Dynamic Settlement Analyses ...................................................... .118 Appendix D - Slope Stability Analyses ...............................................................125 IGROUPI I DELTA N:\Projects\SD\SD365 Lennar, Tabata Development\13-0339\I3-0339.doc U 10 fl GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TABATA DEVELOPMENT CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report provides geotechnical recommendations for the proposed Tabata residential development in Carlsbad, California. The approximate location of the site is shown in Figures 1A and I B. The site vicinity is shown in more detail in Figures 2A and 2B. The residential complex will include 26 wood frame buildings and an access road, as shown in Figures 2C through 2E. The objective of this study was to provide site-specific geotechnical recommendations for remedial grading and the design and construction of the proposed structures, pavements and associated surface improvements. The recommendations presented herein are based on our subsurface exploration, laboratory testing, engineering and geologic analyses, and previous experience with similar geologic conditions. 1.1 Scope of Services This report was prepared in general accordance with the provisions of the referenced proposal (GDC, 2013b). In order to develop geotechnical recommendations for the development, the following services were provided. A geologic reconnaissance of the surface characteristics of the site, and a review of the pertinent reports referenced in Section 8.0. A subsurface exploration of the site including ten hollow stem auger borings and five cone penetrometer test (CPT) soundings. The approximate locations of the explorations are shown on the Exploration Plan. Logs of the explorations are presented in Appendix A. Laboratory testing of samples collected during the field explorations. The laboratory test results are summarized in Appendix B. • Engineering analysis of the field and laboratory data to help develop recommendations for site preparation, remedial earthwork, foundation design, soil reactivity, and site drainage and moisture protection. Our analyses are summarized in Appendices C and D. GROUP • Preparation of this report summarizing our findings, conclusions and geotechnical recommendations. DELTA N:\Projects\SD\SD365 Lennar, Tabata Development\13-0339\13-0339.doc • Geotechnical Investigation GDC Project No. SD365 Tabata Development March 4, 2014 Lennar Homes Page 7 1.2 Site Description The subject site consists of the proposed Tabata residential development in the City of Carlsbad, California. The site is located immediately southeast of the intersection between El Camino Real and Camino Hills Drive, which form the northern and western property boundaries, respectively. Existing single- family residential developments bound the southern and eastern edges of the property. The approximate location of the site is shown on the Site Location Map, Figure 1A. The site vicinity is shown in more detail in Figure lB. The site slopes moderately down to the north. The elevation at the toe of the fill slope at the southeast corner of the parcel is roughly 120 feet above mean sea level (MSL). The elevation along El Camino Real in the northeast portion of the parcel is about 82 feet MSL The surface of the site has been repeatedly graded over the years, and used for agricultural purposes. Most of the site is now covered with a light growth of weeds and grass. A landscaped 2:1 (horizontal to vertical) fill slope ascends as much as 40 feet up to the residential lots along the southern and eastern edges of the site. A few trees and shrubs are also scattered across Parcel 2 (see Figures 2A and 2B). A northwesterly trending ridgeline once crossed through the southwest corner of the property. Remnants of the ridge may remain in the previously demolished residential area (Parcel 2 in Figure 2B). However, topographic indications of the ridgeline have been mostly obliterated by the previous grading activities on site. Various cuts and fills appear to have been conducted throughout Parcel 2. The slopes that now border the perimeter of Parcel 2 appear to be graded fill slopes, as indicated by Boring B-5. 1.3 Proposed Development Site development will include 26 two-story residential buildings supported by post-tension slab foundations. Other site improvements will include a new I asphalt concrete paved residential street, Portland cement concrete sidewalks, GROUP and various associated subsurface utilities. A bio-swale and detention basin is proposed along the northern edge of the site. A preliminary layout of the planned development is shown in Figures 2D and 2E. LTA " N:\Projects\SD\SD365 Lennar, Tabata Devetopment\13-0339\13-0339.doc • Geotechnical Investigation GDC Project No. SD365 Tabata Development March 4, 2014 Lennar Homes Page 8 2.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATION fl Ten hollow stem auger borings and five cone penetrometer test (CPT) soundings were advanced at the site between January 30' and February 5th 2014. The maximum depth of exploration was approximately 65 feet below surrounding grades. The approximate locations of the explorations are shown in Figures 2A through 2E. Logs describing the geologic conditions encountered are presented in Appendix A. Soil samples were collected from the borings for laboratory testing and analysis. The testing program included gradation, hydrometer analysis and Atterberg Limits to aid in material classification using the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). Expansion Index tests were conducted on remolded samples to aid in post-tension slab design. Tests were conducted on relatively undisturbed ring samples to help estimate the in-situ dry density and moisture content of the various geologic materials we encountered on site. Direct shear tests were also conducted on the ring samples to aid in strength characterization for the slope stability analyses. Corrosivity tests were conducted on bulk soil samples to evaluate the pH, resistivity, chloride and sulfate content of the on-site soils. Maximum density tests were conducted on the bulk samples to help estimate shrinkage of the compacted alluvial soil. R-Value tests were also conducted on the bulk samples to aid in preliminary pavement section design. The laboratory test results are presented in Appendix B. • 3.0 GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS The site is located within the coastal plain section of the Peninsular Ranges geomorphic province of California, which consists of subdued landforms underlain by marine sedimentary formations. As observed in our subsurface investigation, the entire site is underlain at depth by the Eocene-age Santiago Formation, which is covered with alluvial flood plain deposits associated with Agua Hedionda Creek. The approximate locations of the explorations conducted for this investigation are shown on Geotechnical Map, Figure 2B. The general geology in the site vicinity is shown on the Regional Geologic Map, Figure 3A. The regional topography is also GROUP shown in Figure 3B. Logs describing the subsurface conditions encountered in the • I explorations are presented in Appendix A. The soils encountered in our subsurface explorations are described in more detail below. DELTA N:\Projects\SD\SD365 Lennar, Tabata Development\13-0339\13-0339.doc 0 10 Ii i• i. Geotechnical Investigation GDC Project No. SD365 Tabata Development March 4, 2014 Lennar Homes Page 9 3.1 Santiago Formation Sedimentary materials associated with the Eocene-age Santiago Formation were encountered in all of our borings at depth. As observed on site, the Santiago Formation (Map symbol Tsa) most commonly consists of sandy lean or fat claystone (Unified Soil Classification CL or CH) with lesser amounts of siltstone (ML). The formation varies widely in color from olive or bluish gray to light gray and orange brown. The claystone is typically high in plasticity (the average Liquid Limit of the samples we tested was 55, with an average Plasticity Index of 33). Laboratory tests also indicate that the formational materials have a high expansion potential (an Expansion Index of 120 to 123), and are very corrosive with a severe soluble sulfate content. Our tests indicate that the Santiago Formation has an average in-situ dry density of about 105 lb/ft3, with an average moisture content of 21 percent. The corrected standard penetration test (SPT) blow counts (Nw) within the formation generally ranged from 20 to 64 and averaged 46. This indicates that the claystone is typically very stiff to hard in consistency. Pocket Penetrometer readings and CPT interpretations indicate that the formation typically has an undrained strength well above 4,000 lb/ft2. Direct shear testing suggests that the formational materials also have a drained shear strength exceeding 23° with 200 lb/ft2 cohesion, as shown in Figure B-5.6. 3.2 Old Alluvium Quaternary-age alluvial sediments associated with the Agua l-ledionda Creek and Letterbox Canyon drainages were encountered in most of the explorations conducted at the site (map symbol Qoa). Up to 65 feet of alluvium was encountered in the northwest corner of the site, with lesser alluvial depths to both the south and east. The Old Alluvium most commonly consists of sandy lean clay (CL) or clayey sand (SC). In several borings, the alluvium graded into clean sand (SP or SW) near the contact with the underlying Santiago _ Formation. The upper 10 to 15 of the alluvium was typically stiff in ICROUi1 consistency, whereas the deeper clays were very stiff to hard. Laboratory tests indicate that the alluvium is moderately expansive (an Expansion Index ranging from 66 to 91), and very corrosive with a severe soluble sulfate content. E)ELTAI N:\Projects\SD\SD365 Lennar, Tabata Development\13-0339\13-0339.doc Fi I. n Ll Geotechnical Investigation Tabata Development Lennar Homes GDC Project No. SD365 March 4, 2014 Page 10 The alluvium has an in-situ dry density ranging from about 105 to 125 lb/ft3, with an average dry density of 105 lb/ft3 and an average moisture content of 14 percent. The corrected standard penetration test (SPT) blow counts (Nw) within the alluvium ranged from 9 to 64 and averaged 31. In general, the SPT and CPT data indicate that the upper 10 to 15 feet of alluvium may be moderately compressible under the new fill and foundation loads, whereas the deeper alluvial deposits appear to be older and better consolidated. An average shear wave velocity of 288 rrils was measured in the upper 47 feet of the soil profile in CPT-3 (see Figure A-13c). This shear wave velocity (Vs0) was then extrapolated to a depth of 30 meters (Vs30) using a common formula (Vs30 .[1.45_(0.015*D)]*VsD), where D is the depth measured in meters. The average shear wave velocity for the upper 30 meters (Vs30) estimated in this manner was 356 m/s (corresponding to a 2013 CBC Site Class D). 3.3 Fill Shallow undocumented fill (2 to 7 feet deep) was encountered in all of the borings. The fill generally appears to be similar to the underlying alluvium from which it was likely derived. The fill typically consists of clayey sand (SC) with lesser amounts of sandy lean clay (CL). Approximately 15 feet of fill was also encountered at the old home site in Boring B-S. This fill included some gravel and demolition debris. The fill stockpile recently placed in the northwest corner of the site is generally composed of silty sand (SM). The existing fill is loose to medium dense, and considered potentially compressible. 3.4 Groundwater Groundwater was encountered in CPT-1 and CPT-2 at depths ranging from about 34 to 36 feet below grade (or an elevation of about 49 feet MSL). This corresponds to an ultimate groundwater depth ranging from SO to 65 feet below the planned building pad elevations shown in Figure 2D. It should be noted that groundwater levels may fluctuate over time throughout the site due O1J1 to changes in the water surface elevation and flow rate within Agua Hedionda Creek, as well as variations in rainfall, irrigation, or site drainage conditions. LTA ' N:\Projects\SD\SD365 Lennar, Tabata Development\13.0339\13-0339.doc fl 41 Ll Ll Ll L i. I. I* Geotechnical Investigation GDC Project No. SD365 Tabata Development March 4, 2014 Lennar Homes Page 11 4.0 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS The subject site is not located within an area previously known for significant geologic hazards. Potential geologic hazards will generally be the result of moderate ground shaking on relatively distant active faults (the Rose Canyon fault zone is located about 11 km west of the site). Each potential geologic hazard is discussed below. 4.1 Ground Rupture Ground rupture is the result of movement on an active fault reaching the surface. Known faults within 100 km of the site are shown in the Regional Fault Map, Figure 4. The site is not located within an Aiquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, and no evidence of active or potentially active faulting was found during our site investigation or literature review. Consequently, ground rupture is not considered a significant geologic hazard at the site. 4.2 Seismicity The site is located at latitude 33.1439° north and longitude 117.2865° west. The United States Geologic Survey has developed an interactive website that provides Next Generation Attenuation (NGA) probabilistic seismic analyses based on the site location and average shear wave velocity (USGS, 2009). An average shear wave velocity (Vs30) of 356 m/s was estimated from CPT-3, as discussed in Section 3.2. The peak ground accelerations (PGA) with a 2, 5 and 10 percent probability of being exceeded in a 50 year period are estimated at 0.45, 0.33g and 0.26g, respectively. These levels of risk are often referred to as the Maximum Considered, Upper Bound and Design Basis Earthquakes, respectively. By comparison, the design level PGA from the 2013 CBC Design Response Spectrum shown in Table i is 0.31g. 4.3 Liquefaction and Dynamic Settlement Liquefaction is a process in which soil grains in a saturated deposit lose GROUP 1 contact due to earthquakes or other sources of ground shaking. liquefiable soils typically consist of cohesionless sands and silts that are loose to medium rl dense, and saturated. To liquefy, these soils must be subjected to ground shaking of sufficient magnitude and duration. DELTA i1a.iiJ.u1 N:\Projects\SD\SD365 Lertnar, Tabata Development\13-0339\13-0339.doc I* . Geotechnical Investigation GDC Project No. SD365 Tabata Development March 4, 2014 Lennar Homes Page 12 The alluvial soils are primarily clays, which are not considered susceptible to liquefaction. In addition, groundwater was only encountered in soundings CPT-1 and CPT-2, at depths of 34 to 36 feet below existing grades (more than 50 feet below proposed finish grades). The other borings and CPT soundings did not encounter groundwater. Therefore, if soil liquefaction were to occur during a large earthquake, the occurrence would be located deep below the ground surface and proposed improvements. Liquefaction at such depths would not be expected to produce surface manifestations (SCEC, 1999). Although liquefaction is not considered a significant hazard to the proposed improvements, dynamic settlement may still occur in areas where medium dense granular alluvial soils are subjected to earthquake shaking of sufficient magnitude and duration. Dynamic settlement analyses were conducted for the site using a design level PGA of 0.31g associated with the 2013 CBC Design Response Spectrum. The estimated dynamic settlements at the five CPT locations are presented in detail in the figures of Appendix C. The total dynamic settlement (including dry soil settlement above groundwater and liquefaction below) is estimated at less than 1 inch at the site. According to state guidelines, a differential settlement equal to one-half the anticipated total dynamic settlement may be conservatively assumed for structural design (SCEC, 1999). Therefore, we estimate that the dynamic differential settlement for the proposed structures will not exceed 1/2 inch in 40 feet. Dynamic differential settlements of this magnitude are not expected to result in significant damage to the proposed improvements. 4.4 Landslides and Lateral Spreads Regional geologic maps suggest the presence of an ancient landslide within the subdivision southeast of the subject site, as shown in Figure 3A. This area was previously graded, and fill slopes up to 40-feet in height were constructed over the mapped location of the landslide. No documents describing the as- graded conditions for the adjacent subdivision were found in our literature GROUP] review. However, in accordance with the standards of engineering practice, measures should have been taken during mass grading of that subdivision to remove the landslide debris and stabilize the existing fill slopes. DELTA, iii N:\Projects\SD\SD365 Lennar, Tabata Development\13-0339\13-0339.doc Geotechnical Investigation GDC Project No. SD365 Tabata Development March 4, 2014 Lennar Homes Page 13 No indications of slope failure were observed in our geologic reconnaissance. Roughly 10 feet of new fill is proposed for Lots I through 3 along the eastern edge of the site. This new fill will ultimately buttress the existing fill slope in U that area, increasing the overall slope stability. However, temporary 1:1 cut slopes up to about 20-feet high will be needed to complete the remedial earthwork and construct the proposed retaining walls along the southern and eastern portions of the site. Group Delta should observe the geology exposed U in the temporary 1:1 cuts to confirm the anticipated geotechnical conditions. The Revised Grading Plan indicates that a 2:1 (horizontal to vertical) fill slope up to about 12-feet in height will separate the lower Lots 21 to 26 from the upper Lots 14 to 20 (see Figure 2D). Roughly 6-foot high 2:1 fill slopes will also separate Lots 1, 2 and 3. Fill slope inclinations of 11/2:1 are proposed for other minor slopes (less than 2 feet high) which will separate several lots. Stability analyses were conducted using SLOPEJW with Spencer's Method of Slices, based on the geologic conditions observed in the explorations. Lower bound shear strengths were estimated for each geologic unit (see Appendix B). Our stability analyses indicate that the proposed 2:1 fill slopes will possess an adequate factor of safety against deep-seated static failure (FS> 1.5), assuming that our remedial grading recommendations are implemented during construction. Our analyses also indicate that the 1:1 cut slopes will possess an adequate safety factor for a temporary condition (FS> 1.2). The results of our slope stability analyses are presented in Appendix D. U Seismic slope stability was also analyzed using simplified methods. For the seismic analyses, estimates of Modal Magnitude (M), Distance (r) and Maximum Horizontal Acceleration (MI--IA) were developed. The Significant Duration of Shaking (D595) and Mean Period of Input Acceleration (Tm) were estimated in general accordance with the referenced guidelines (SCEC, 2002). GROUP rl DELTA ó[I1.1I1lW'li1 SEISMIC PARAMETER ASSUMED VALUES Magnitude (M) 7.2 (Rose Canyon) Distance (r) 11 km (Rose Canyon) Acceleration (MI-IA) 0.31g (Design Level PGA) Duration (D) 17 seconds Mean Period (Tm) 0.5 seconds Shear Wave Velocity (vs) 356 n-Vs N:\Projects\SD\SD365 Lennar, Tabata Development\13-0339\I3-0339.doc I . i0 i• I* Geotechnical Investigation GDC Project No. SD365 Tabata Development March 4, 2014 Lennar Homes Page 14 The seismic stability analyses indicate that the proposed slopes will have yield accelerations (Ky) that exceed 0.24g. Given a peak ground acceleration of 0.31 g, the seismic slope deformation is estimated at less than 1 inch. Seismic deformation of this magnitude is generally deemed tolerable. 4.5 Tsunamis, Seiches and Flooding The site is located about 21/2 miles from the Pacific Ocean, as shown on the Site Location Map, Figure lA. The proximity to the ocean suggests that the potential may exist for damage in the event of an earthquake induced tsunami. However, the existence of the offshore barrier islands, and the configuration of the continental shelf in San Diego County have historically provided relief from tsunamis. The five greatest tsunamis that occurred within the Pacific Ocean in the last 100 years did not significantly impact San Diego County. Studies have indicated that a 500-year tsunami within the Pacific Ocean may result in a water surface runup of about 11 feet above tidal elevations along the coast of Carlsbad (U.S. Army, 1974). Assuming a high tide of 9 feet at the time of the tsunami, the inundation zone is estimated to include areas with an elevation of about 20 feet or less. Available topographic data indicates that the subject site is located more than 80 feet above mean sea level. Given the elevation of the site, the potential for damage due to tsunamis is considered remote. The California Geologic Survey's Tsunami Inundation Map for this area suggests that the water surface runup from a tsunami would not extend beyond the eastern end of the Agua 1-ledionda lagoon (see Figure 3D). The site is not located within a FEMA 100-year flood zone or a dam inundation zone, as shown in Figure 3C. The 100-year floodplain is shown in more detail on the Site Vicinity Plan, Figure lB. The site is not located below any lakes or confined bodies of water. Consequently, the potential for earthquake induced flooding due to seiches or dam failures is considered low. IGROUP DELTA N:\Projects\SD\SD365 Lenriar, Tabata Development\13-0339\13-0339.doc I. Geotechnical Investigation GDC Project No. SD365 Tabata Development March 4, 2014 Lennar Homes Page 15 5.0 CONCLUSIONS The proposed development appears feasible from a geotechnical standpoint, provided that the following recommendations are implemented. However, there are several geotechnical constraints which will impact site development. Many of the structures will be underlain by relatively deep alluvium. We have recommended that the upper 10 or 15 feet of alluvium be excavated and compacted, which should remove the more compressible soil. With the addition of the planned fills, most of the lots will ultimately be underlain by 20 to 30 feet of compacted fill. However, up to about 20 feet of old alluvium may be left in place beneath Lots 21 to 26. We recommend that construction of settlement sensitive surface improvements be delayed for at least 4 weeks after rough grading of the site is completed, in order to allow for settlement of the remaining alluvium. Settlement monuments should be installed during grading in Lots 21 and 26 in order to confirm that settlement is completed prior to construction. The remedial grading is summarized in Table 2. Several of the proposed structures along the southern edge of the site would be directly underlain by highly expansive claystone of the Santiago Formation. We do not recommend constructing the proposed improvements directly on the highly expansive clays. For Lots 4 through 11, we recommend that the cut portions of the building pads be over-excavated at least 4-feet below finish pad grade. The over-excavation should be backfilled with low expansion imported sand (El<20). Preliminary post-tension (PT) slab design parameters are provided for these conditions in Section 6.4.3 (Category Ill). The remaining lots will be underlain by fill derived from the existing alluvium. Laboratory tests indicate that the alluvial soils at the site generally have a medium potential for expansion (an Expansion Index of 66 to 91). Preliminary PT slab design parameters are provided for moderately expansive (Category II) conditions in Section 6.4.2. As an alternative, the remaining lots may also be GROU' capped with 3-feet of low expansion sand (El <20) to reduce the potential for _______ heave and cracking to the proposed concrete sidewalks and driveways. Preliminary PT slab design parameters are also provided for Category I (low 1) expansion) conditions in Section 6.4.1. DELTA .1IJ•11 N:\Projects\SD\SD365 Lertnar, Tabata Developmertt\13-0339\13-0339.doc ie 10 I. i. I. 16 Geotechnical Investigation GDC Project No. SD365 Tabata Development March 4, 2014 Lennar Homes Page 16 . The existing fill soil throughout the site is considered to be compressible, and should be excavated and replaced as compacted fill prior to site development. Existing fills include most of Parcel 2, as well as the new fill stockpile recently placed in the northwest corner of the site. Note that the new fill stockpile appears to primarily be composed of low expansion silty sand, and may be suitable for use as a select low expansion fill on the surface of the lots. The temporary 1:1 cut slopes that will be needed to complete the remedial earthwork along the eastern and southern edges of the site should be observed by Group Delta to verify the anticipated geologic conditions. If adverse geology is observed, additional remedial grading recommendations for a stabilization fill or buttress may be provided during grading. Laboratory tests indicate that the on-site soils present a severe potential for sulfate attack. The sulfate hazard is typically mitigated by the use of Type V cement for new on-grade concrete, with a maximum water to cement ratio of 0.45 and a minimum 28-day compressive strength of 4,500 psi. Laboratory tests indicate that the on-site soils are also very corrosive to metals. Typical corrosion control measures should be incorporated into the design, such as providing adequate concrete cover or protective coatings for steel reinforcement, and providing sacrificial anodes as needed for buried metal pipes. A corrosion consultant may be contacted for specific recommendations. Shallow groundwater was not encountered during our site investigation. Groundwater was only encountered in soundings CPT-1 and CPT-2 at an elevation of about 49 feet MSL. This corresponds to a groundwater depth of about 50 to 65 feet below planned finish grades. Groundwater seepage is not anticipated within the proposed remedial excavations. However, wet soils may be generated by the proposed remedial excavations that may require extra effort to dry back to a moisture content suitable for compaction. GRO1ffi • The potential for active faults, seismic settlement or floods to impact the site is remote. Other geologic hazards that may impact development include strong I ground shaking from an earthquake on an active fault. This hazard may be mitigated by structural design in accordance with the applicable building code. N:\Projec\SD\SD365 Lennar, Tabath Development\13-0339\13-0339.doc . fl U 0 Geotechnical Investigation GDC Project No. SD365 Tabata Development March 4, 2014 Lennar Homes Page 17 40 6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS The remainder of this report presents recommendations regarding earthwork construction and design of the proposed structures. If these recommendations do not cover a specific feature of the project, please contact our office for amendments. 6.1 Plan Review We recommend that the foundation and grading plans be reviewed by Group Delta Consultants prior to construction. We anticipate that substantial changes in the development may occur from the preliminary design concepts used for our investigation. Such changes may require additional evaluation, which could result in modifications to the recommendations provided herein. 6.2 Excavation and Grading Observation Foundation and grading should be observed by Group Delta. During grading, Group Delta should provide observation and testing services continuously. Such observations are considered essential to identify field conditions that differ from those anticipated by this investigation, to adjust designs to the actual field conditions, and to determine that the grading is accomplished in general accordance with the recommendations presented in this report. Our recommendations are contingent upon Group Delta Consultants performing such services. Our personnel should perform sufficient testing of fill and backfill during grading and improvement operations to support our professional opinion as to compliance with the compaction recommendations. 6.3 Earthwork Grading and earthwork should be conducted in general accordance with the applicable local grading ordinance and the requirements of the current California Building Code. The following recommendations are provided regarding specific aspects of the proposed earthwork construction. These GROUP recommendations should be considered subject to revision based on the rl• conditions observed by our personnel during grading. DELTA 1,JIU N:\Projects\SD\SD365 Lennar, Tabata Development\13-0339\13-0339.doc • Geotechnical Investigation GDC Project No. SD365 Tabata Development March 4, 2014 Lennar Homes Page 18 6.3. 1 Site Preparation: General site preparation should begin with the removal of the deleterious materials from the site. Deleterious materials include existing structures, improvements, trees, vegetation, trash, contaminated soil and demolition debris. Existing subsurface utilities that are to be abandoned should be removed and the excavations backfilled and compacted as described in Section 6.3.4. Alternatively, abandoned pipes may be grouted with a two-sack sand- cement slurry under the observation of Group Delta Consultants. 6.3.2 Compressible Soils: The undocumented fill, stockpiled fill and surficial deposits of alluvium throughout the site are considered poorly consolidated and compressible. By comparison, the deeper deposits of Old Alluvium and the Santiago Formation are hard, and are considered much less susceptible to settlement under the new fill loads. Compressible fill and the surficial alluvial soils should be excavated and replaced as compacted fill prior to development. In general, over- excavation depths are anticipated to vary from about 10 to 15 feet across the site, as summarized in Table 2. In all areas of proposed fill placement or surface improvements such as pavements, sidewalks, exterior flatwork and buildings, the compressible soils should be excavated under our geologic observation. The actual remedial excavation depths may vary depending upon the conditions observed by our geologist during grading. Once the compressible soils have been excavated, the bottom of the excavation should be scarified, brought to slightly above optimum moisture content, and then compacted as described in Section 6.3.4. The stockpiled soils may then be replaced as a uniformly compacted fill to the plan finish grades. 6.3.3 Building Areas: In addition to remedial grading to remove and compact compressible soils throughout the building and improvement areas, many of the residential lots will be underlain by transitions ________ between fill and formational materials. Remedial grading should be GROUP . . _______ conducted so that the building foundations do not cross cut/fill transitions, due to the potential for adverse differential movement. DELTA N:\Projects\SD\SD365 Lennar, Tabata Deveiopment\13-0339\13-0339.doc • Geotechnical Investigation GDC Project No. SD365 Tabata Development March 4, 2014 Lennar Homes Page 19 The surflcial soils throughout the site are moderate to highly expansive (see Figure B-2). The use of post-tension slab foundations will help mitigate the potential for damage to the residential structures associated with moderate soil heave. However, we do not recommend constructing buildings directly on the highly expansive fat claystone of the Santiago Formation. Our site investigation indicates that Lots 4 through 11 as shown on the Revised Grading Plan may be underlain directly by the highly expansive claystone, or a transition between claystone and fill (these are the Category Ill lots described in Section 6.4). The remaining lots will be underlain by relatively deep fill. For Lots 4 through 11 (Category ill), the building pads should be over- 0 excavated to a minimum depth of 4-feet below finish pad grade in order to mitigate the presence of both the cut/fill transitions and the highly expansive fat claystone. The highly expansive clay generated by this excavation may be buried in the deeper fills in the bio-retention basin along the northern edge of the site, or removed from the property. The over-excavated areas should extend at least 5 feet horizontally beyond the heave sensitive improvements. The over-excavated areas should then be brought back to plan grades with a uniformly compacted low expansion (El<20) imported material, as discussed in Section 6.3.4. The alluvium is relatively deep throughout the remaining building pad areas (Lots I to 3, and 12 through 26). The removal and compaction of the compressible surficial soils as recommended in Section 6.3.2 is anticipated to result in a relatively uniform depth of moderately expansive soil beneath these 18 lots. Additional remedial grading is not necessary (these are Category II Lots). A summary of the anticipated - remedial over-excavation depths for each lot is presented in Table 2. Although post-tension slab foundations may be used to mitigate the potential for damage to buildings associated with moderately expansive soil heave (Category II), the surrounding sidewalks and driveways may GROUP still heave and crack over time. In order to reduce the potential for such distress, these residential lots may be capped with three feet of low expansion imported soil (Category I lots), at Lennar's discretion. DELTA IJ1lIUW'1L1 N:\Projects\SD\SD365 Lennar, Tabata Development\13-0339\13-0339.doc . El fl Geotechnical Investigation GDC Project No. SD365 Tabata Development March 4, 2014 Lennar Homes Page 20 6.3.4 Fill Compaction: All fill and backfill should be placed at slightly above optimum moisture content using equipment that is capable of producing a uniformly compacted product. The minimum recommended relative compaction is 90 percent of the maximum dry density based on ASTM D1557. Sufficient observation and testing should be performed by Group Delta so that an opinion can be rendered as to the compaction achieved. Rocks or concrete fragments greater than 6 inches in dimension should not be used in structural fill. . Imported fill sources should be observed prior to hauling onto the site to determine the suitability for use. Imported fill materials should consist of granular soil with less than 35 percent passing the No. 200 sieve based on ASTM C136 and an Expansion Index less than 20 based on ASTM D4829. Samples of the proposed import should be tested by Group Delta in order to evaluate the suitability of these soils for their proposed use. During grading operations, soil types may be encountered by the contractor that do not appear to conform to those discussed within this report. Group Delta should be notified in order to evaluate the suitability of these soils for their proposed use. 6.3.5 Subgrade Stabilization: All excavations should be firm and unyielding prior to placing fill. In areas of yielding or "pumping" subgrade, a layer of geogrid such as Tensar BX-1200 or Terragrid RXI200 maybe placed directly on the excavation bottom. The geogrid should then be covered with at least 12 inches of minus 3/4-inch O aggregate base. Once the excavation is firm enough to attain the required compaction within the base, the remainder of the excavation may be backfilled using either compacted soil or aggregate base. 6.3.6 Surface Drainage: Foundation and slab performance depends greatly on how well surface runoff drains from the site. This is true both during construction and over the entire life of the structures. The ground surface should be graded so that water flows away from GROUP structures without ponding. Consideration should also be given to providing a continuous subdrain along the toe of the southern fill slope in order to intercept nuisance seepage from the back lots. DELTA N:\Projects\SD\SD365 Lennar, Tabata Development\13-0339\13-0339.doc 0 41 Geotechnical Investigation GDC Project No. SD365 Tabata Development March 4, 2014 Lennar Homes Page 21 6.3.7 Slope Stability: Various new cut and fill slopes will be constructed throughout the site. We recommend that permanent fill slopes up to 20-feet high be inclined no steeper than 2:1 (horizontal to vertical). Minor fill slopes up to 2-feet high may be inclined at 11/2:1. Our analyses indicate that the proposed slopes will have a Safety Factor above 1.5 with respect to deep-seated failure (see Appendix D). All slopes may be susceptible to surficial slope instability and erosion given substantial wetting of the slope face. Surficial slope stability may be enhanced by providing proper site drainage. The site should be graded so that water from the surrounding areas is not able to flow over the top of slopes. Diversion structures should be provided where necessary. Slopes should be planted with vegetation that will increase the surficial stability. Ice plant is generally not recommended. Vegetation should include woody plants, along with ground cover. Irrigation should be limited to the minimum needed to support the landscaping. Plants may be adapted for growth in semi-arid climates with little or no irrigation. A landscape architect should be consulted to develop a planting palate suitable for stabilization. S Where fill is to be placed on surfaces inclined steeper than 5:1 (such as up against existing slopes), these surfaces should be benched to provide a relatively level surface for fill placement. The benches should extend through the compressible materials to expose competent material as evaluated by Group Delta. The bench width should generally be adequate to expose 3 to 5 feet of competent material in the vertical wall of the bench. The exposed bench bottoms should be scarified and compacted prior to placing compacted fills. 6.3.8 Temporary Excavations: Temporary excavations will be needed at the site in order to accomplish the planned remedial excavations. All excavations should conform to Cal-OSHA guidelines. Temporary G _______ excavations should be inclined no steeper than 1:1 (horizontal to ROUI1 vertical) for heights up to 20 feet. Deeper excavations, or any excavations that encounter seepage should be evaluated by Group Delta Consultants on a case-by-case basis, or shored. DELTA N:\Projects\SD\SD365 Lennar, Tabata Development\13-0339\13-0339.doc n S Geotechnical Investigation GDC Project No. SD365 Tabata Development March 4, 2014 Lennar Homes Page 22 S 6.3.9 Bulk/Shrink Characteristics: The in-situ density of the alluvium varies from about 105 to 125 lb/ft, as shown in Appendix A. The maximum density of the fill derived from the alluvium is estimated at 125 to 126 lb/ft, as shown in Figure B-4. Assuming that the fills are compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum density as recommended, we estimate that the alluvium will shrink up 10 percent when excavated and placed as fill (5 percent average). Shrinkage may vary considerably based on variations in the alluvium density. 6.4 Preliminary Foundation Recommendations 1. The following recommendations are considered appropriate for post-tensioned slab foundations that bear entirely on compacted fill placed in accordance with our recommendations. These foundation recommendations should be considered preliminary, and subject to revision based on the conditions encountered during grading. The ultimate foundation design should incorporate the geotechnical design parameters provided in the as-graded geotechnical report. The following recommendations are considered generally consistent with methods typically used in southern California. Other alternatives may be available. They are only minimum criteria and should not be considered a structural design, or to preclude more restrictive criteria of governing agencies or the structural engineer. 6.4.1 Post-Tension Slabs (Category I): Category I foundation design conditions are applicable to tots with a low expansion potential. For Category I conditions to apply, the compressible and moderately expansive surficial soils will first need to be excavated and replaced as compacted fill, as described in Section 6.3.2. In addition, the Category I lots will also need to be capped with at least three feet of low expansion imported soil (EI<20), as discussed in Section 6.3.3. GROUP Category I conditions may apply to Lots I to 3, and 12 through 26. ri DELTA N:\Projects\SD\SD365 Lennar, Tabata Development\13-0339\13-0339.doc . I- L-1 fl fl L7 Geotechnical Investigation GDC Project No. SD365 Tabata Development March 4, 2014 Lennar Homes Page 23 . The following design parameters were developed in general accordance with the procedures described in the referenced guidelines (PT!, 2007). Post-tension slab design may be conducted by the structural engineer using the following preliminary geotechnical parameters. Moisture Variation, em: Center Lift: 9.0 feet Edge Lift: 5.0 feet Differential Swell, ym: Center Lift: 0.5 inches Edge Lift: 0.7 inches Differential Settlement: 3/4 inch in 40 feet Allowable Bearing: 2,000 psf at slab subgrade 6.4.2 Post Tensioned Slabs (Category II): Category II lots will apply to areas underlain by moderately expansive fill soil. Category II conditions are anticipated for Lots I to 3, and 12 through 26 (unless selective grading is chosen by the developer to cap these lots with 3-feet of low expansion soil and produce Category I conditions). The following preliminary foundation design parameters were also developed in general accordance with the 2013 CBC and the procedures described in the referenced guidelines (PTI, 2007). Moisture Variation, em: Center Lift: 9.0 feet Edge Lift: 4.6 feet Differential Swell, y: Center Lift: 1.2 inches Edge Lift: 1.8 inches Differential Settlement: 3/4 inch in 40 feet Allowable Bearing: 2,000 psf at slab subgrade IGROUPI (1 DELTA N:\Projects\SD\SD365 Lennar, Tabata Development\13-0339\13-0339.doc S Geotechnical Investigation GDC Project No. SD365 Tabata Development March 4, 2014 Lennar Homes Page 24 6.4.3 Post Tensioned Slabs (Category Ill): Lots 4 through 11 will be underlain by highly expansive claystone of the Santiago Formation (Category Ill). As described in Section 6.3.3, we recommend that these lots be over-excavated at least 4-feet below finish grade, and capped with 4 or more feet of low expansion import (El<20). The following preliminary design parameters would apply to these conditions. These parameters were also developed in general accordance with the procedures described in the referenced guidelines (PT!, 2007). Moisture Variation, em: Center Lift: 9.0 feet Edge Lift: 4.8 feet Differential Swell, y: Center Lift: 1.0 inches Edge Lift: 1.5 inches Differential Settlement: 3/4 inch in 40 feet Allowable Bearing: 2,000 psf at slab subgrade 6.4.4 Settlement: Provided that remedial grading is conducted within the building areas as recommended in Section 6.3, total and differential settlement of the proposed structures is not expected to exceed one inch and 3/4-inch in 40 feet, respectively. In addition, dynamic settlement of up to 1/2-inch in 40 feet may occur (see Section 4.3). 6.4.5 Lateral Resistance: Lateral loads against the structures may be resisted by friction between the bottoms of footings and slabs and the soil, as well as passive pressure from the portion of vertical foundation members embedded into compacted fill. A coefficient of friction of 0.25 and a passive pressure of 250 psf per foot of depth may be used. 6.4.6 Slope Setback: As a minimum, all foundations should be setback from any descending slope at least 10 feet. The setback _____ ROUP should be measured horizontally from the outside bottom edge of the footing to the slope face. The horizontal setback can be reduced by deepening the foundation to achieve the recommended setback if: ( distance projected from the footing bottom to the face of the slope. DELTA N:\Projects\SD\SD365 Lennar, Tabata Development\i3-0339\13-0339.doc 1-1 U 41 Geotechnical Investigation GDC Project No. SD365 Tabata Development March 4, 2014 Lennar Homes Page 25 It should be recognized that the outer few feet of all slopes are susceptible to gradual down-slope movements due to slope creep. This will affect hardscape such as concrete slabs. We recommend that settlement sensitive structures not be constructed within 5 feet of the LA slope top without specific review by Group Delta Consultants. 6.4.7 Seismic Design: The proposed structures should be designed in general accordance with the seismic provisions of the 2013 California Building Code (CBC) for Seismic Zone 4. An average shear wave velocity (Vsd) of 944 ftis was measured within the upper 47 feet of the soil profile in CPT-3, as described in Appendix A. This corresponds to an estimated value of 1,168 ftls (356 m/s) for the upper 100 feet (Vs30), as described previously. Therefore, it is our opinion that a 2013 CBC Site Class D is most applicable to the general site conditions. The USGS mapped spectral ordinates Ss and S1 equal 1.070 and i. 0.413, respectively. For Site Class D, the acceleration and velocity coefficients Fa and F equal 1.072 and 1.586, respectively. The spectral design parameters 5DS and 5D1 equal 0.765 and 0.437. The peak ground acceleration from the design spectrum may be taken as 40 percent of SDs or 0.31g. The recommended 2013 CBC Design U Spectrum for Site Class D is shown in the attached Table 1. 6.5 On-Grade Slabs i• On-grade slabs should be designed by the project structural engineer. Building slabs should be at least 51/2 inches thick, and should be reinforced with at least No. 3 bars on 18-inch centers, each way. 10 6.5.1 Moisture Protection for Slabs: Concrete slabs constructed on grade ultimately cause the moisture content to rise in the underlying soil. This results from continued capillary rise and the termination of GROUP normal evapotranspiration. Because normal concrete is permeable, the moisture will eventually penetrate the slab. DELTA ,Jl.iIJlUi N:\Projects\SD\SD365 Lennar, Tabata Development\I3-0339\13-0339.doc I Geotechnical Investigation GDC Project No. SD365 Tabata Development March 4, 2014 Lennar Homes Page 26 Excessive moisture may cause mildewed carpets, lifting or discoloration of floor tiles, or similar problems. To decrease the likelihood of problems related to damp slabs, suitable moisture protection measures should be used where moisture sensitive floor coverings, moisture sensitive equipment, or other factors warrant. The most common moisture barriers in southern California consist of two inches of clean sand covered by 'visqueen' plastic sheeting. Two inches of sand are placed over the plastic to decrease concrete curing problems. It has been our experience that such systems will transmit approximately 6 to 12 pounds of moisture per 1000 square feet per day. The architect should review the estimated moisture transmission rates, since these values may be excessive for some applications, such as sheet vinyl, wood flooring, vinyl tiles, or carpeting with impermeable backings that use water soluble adhesives. Sheet vinyl may develop discoloration or adhesive degradation due to excessive moisture. Wood flooring may swell and dome if exposed to excessive moisture. The architect should specify an appropriate moisture barrier based on the allowable moisture transmission rate for the flooring. This may require a "vapor barrier" rather than a "vapor retarder". The American Concrete Institute provides detailed recommendations for moisture protection systems (ACI 302.1 R-04). ACI defines a "vapor retarder" as having a minimum thickness of 10-mil, and a water transmission rate of less than 0.3 perms when tested per ASTM E96. ACI defines a "vapor barrier" as having a water transmission rate of 0.01 perms or less (such as a 15 mii StegoWrap). The vapor membrane should be constructed in accordance with ASTM E1643 and E1745 guidelines. All laps or seams should be overlapped at least 6 inches or per the manufacturer recommendations. Joints and penetrations should be sealed with pressure sensitive tape, or the manufacturer's adhesive. The vapor membrane should be protected __ from puncture, and repaired per the manufacturer's recommendations ROUP if damaged. The architect should review AC! 302.1 R-04 along with the ] moisture requirements of the proposed flooring system, and incorporate an appropriate level of moisture protection into the design. DELTA N:\Projects\SD\SD365 Lennar, Tabata Development\13-0339\13-0339.doc I. C 10 Geotechnical Investigation GDC Project No. SD365 Tabata Development March 4, 2014 Lennar Homes Page 27 i. The vapor membrane is often placed over 4 inches of granular material. The materials should be a clean, fine graded sandy soil with roughly 10 to 30 percent passing the No. 100 sieve. The sand should not be contaminated with clay, silt, or organic material. The sand should be proof-rolled prior to placing the vapor membrane. Based on current ACI recommendations, concrete should be placed directly over the vapor membrane. The common practice of placing sand over the vapor membrane may increase moisture transmission through the slab, because it provides a reservoir for bleed water from the concrete to collect. The sand placed over the vapor membrane may also move prior to concrete placement, resulting in an irregular slab thickness. When placing concrete directly on an impervious membrane, it should be noted that finishing delays may occur. Care should be taken to assure that a low water to cement ratio is used and that the concrete is moist cured in accordance with ACl guidelines. 6.5.2 Exterior Slabs: Exterior slabs and sidewalks should be at least 4 inches thick. Crack control joints should be placed on a maximum spacing of 10 foot centers, each way, for slabs, and on 5 foot centers for sidewalks. The potential for differential movements across the control joints may be reduced by using steel reinforcement. Typical reinforcement for exterior slabs would consist of 6x6 W2.9/W2.9 welded wire fabric placed securely at mid-height of the slab. 6.5.3 Expansive Soils: The near surface soils observed during our field investigation primarily consisted of sandy lean or fat clay (CL and CH) and clayey sand (SC) with a medium to high expansion potential based on common criteria. The Expansion Index (El) test results are shown in Figure 8-2. In general, the alluvium has a medium expansion potential, whereas the Santiago Formation is highly expansive. Due to the presence of expansive soils throughout the site, differential heave of exterior flatwork and sidewalks should be anticipated. One inch of rl GROUP differential heave is not considered unusual, and more may occur where highly expansive soils are present. DELTA I.1Iifl'lii N:\Projects\SD\SD365 Lennar, Tabata Development\13-0339\13-0339.cloc S Geotechnical Investigation GDC Project No. SD365 Tabata Development March 4, 2014 Lennar Homes Page 28 Post-tension slab foundations will be used to help reduce the potential for distress to new buildings founded over the moderately expansive clays, as discussed in Section 6.4. In order to reduce the potential for differential heave and cracking of other concrete improvements such as driveways and sidewalks, the upper two feet of on-site clayey fill may be replaced with a low expansion sand (El<20), as a minimum. 6.5.4 Reactive Soils: In order to assess the sulfate exposure of concrete in contact with the site soils, samples were tested for water soluble sulfate content (see Figure B-3). Based on these test results, some of the on-site soils appear to have a severe potential for sulfate attack based on commonly accepted criteria. It should be noted that the use of fertilizer or the presence of sulfate in the irrigation water may cause the sulfate content in the soil to increase over time. The sulfate hazard is typically mitigated by the use of Type V cement for new concrete structures, with a maximum water to cement ratio of 0.45 and a minimum 28-day compressive strength of 4,500 psi. In order to assess the reactivity of the site soils with respect to buried metals, the pH, resistivity and soluble chloride contents of selected soil samples were also determined. These test results are also shown in Figure B-3. The tests suggest that the on-site soils are very corrosive to buried metals. Typical corrosion control measures should be incorporated in the project design. These measures include providing the minimum clearances between reinforcing steel and soil as recommended in the building code, and providing sacrificial anodes (where needed) for buried metal pipes or structures. A corrosion consultant may be contacted for more specific recommendations. 6.6 Earth-Retaining Structures Backfilling retaining walls with expansive soil can increase lateral pressures well beyond normal active pressures. We recommend that retaining walls be GROUP backfllled with soil that has an Expansion Index of 20 or less. The on-site soils r do not meet this criterion. DELTA N:\Projects\SD\SD365 Lennar, Tabata Development\13-0339\13-0339.doc Geotechnical Investigation GDC Project No. SD365 Tabata Development March 4, 2014 Lennar Homes Page 29 1 Retaining wall backfill should be compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction based on ASTM D1557. Backfill should not be placed until walls have achieved adequate strength. Heavy compaction equipment, which could cause distress to the walls, should not be used. For general retaining wall design, an allowable bearing capacity of 2,000 lbs/ft2, a coefficient of friction of 0.25, and a passive pressure of 250 psf per foot of depth is recommended. Cantilever retaining walls with level granular (imported) backfill may be designed using an active earth pressure approximated by an equivalent fluid pressure of 35 lbs/ft3. The active pressure should be used for walls free to yield at the top at least ½ percent of the wall height. Walls that are restrained so that such movement is not permitted, or walls with 2:1 sloping backfill should be designed for an at-rest earth pressure approximated by an equivalent fluid pressure of 55 lbs/ft3. These pressures do not include seepage forces or surcharge loads. Surcharges within a 1:1 plane extending back and up from the base of the wall should be accounted for in the wall design. All retaining walls should contain adequate backdrains to relieve hydrostatic pressures. Typical wall drain alternatives are presented in Figure 5. 6.7 Preliminary Pavement Design Alternatives are provided below for asphalt concrete and Portland cement concrete pavements. In each case, we recommend that the upper 12 inches of pavement subgrade be scarified immediately prior to constructing the pavement section, brought to about optimum moisture, and compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D1557. Aggregate base should also be compacted to 95 percent of the maximum dry density. Aggregate base should conform to the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (SSPWC), Section 200-2. Asphalt concrete should conform to Section 400-4 of the SSPWC and should be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction based on the Hveem unit weight. R-Value tests were conducted on bulk samples of the on-site soil collected GROUP during i i the site investigation, n general accordance with CTM 301. The test results are presented in Figures B-6.1 through B-6.4 of Appendix B. The tests indicated subgrade R-Values ranging from 14 to 19. DELTA .J.IIJIII1 N:\Projects\SD\SD365 Lennar, Tabata Development\i3-0339\13-0339.doc Ll Geotechnical Investigation GDC Project No. SD365 Tabata Development March 4, 2014 Lennar Homes Page 30 6.7.1 Asphalt Concrete: Asphalt concrete pavement design was conducted in general accordance with the Caltrans Design Method (Topic 608.4). Traffic Indices of 5.0, 6.0 and 7.0 were assumed for preliminary design purposes. The project civil engineer should review the assumed traffic levels to determine if and where they are appropriate. Based on the minimum R-Value of 14 determined by our laboratory tests, the following pavement sections are recommended. PAVEMENT TYPE TRAFFIC INDEX ASPHALT SECTION BASE SECTION Passenger Car Areas 5.0 3 Inches 8 Inches Truck Traffic Areas 6.0 4 Inches 10 Inches Heavy Traffic Areas 7.0 4 Inches 14 Inches 6.7.2 Portland Cement Concrete: Concrete pavement design was conducted in general accordance with the simplified design procedure of the Portland Cement Association. This methodology is based on a 20-year design life. For design, it was assumed that aggregate interlock would be used for load transfer across control joints. The subgrade materials were assumed to provide "low" subgrade support based on the minimum R-Value of 14. Based on these assumptions, and using the same traffic indices presented previously, we recommend that the PCC pavement sections at the site consist of at least 6 inches of concrete placed over 6 inches of compacted aggregate base. For heavy truck traffic areas, 7 inches of concrete is recommended over 6 inches of aggregate base. Crack control joints should be constructed for all PCC pavements on a maximum spacing of 10 feet, each way. Concentrated truck traffic areas, such as trash truck aprons and loading docks, should be reinforced with number 4 bars on 18-inch centers, each way. GROUP rl DELTA N:\Projects\SD\SD365 Lennar, Tabata Development\13-0339\13-0339.doc • Geotechnical Investigation GDC Project No. SD365 Tabata Development March 4, 2014 Lennar Homes Page 31 6.8 Pipelines It is our understanding that the development may include a variety of pipelines such as water, storm drain and sewer. Geotechnical aspects of pipeline design include lateral earth pressures for thrust blocks, modulus of soil reaction, and pipe bedding. Each of these parameters is discussed separately below. 6.8.1 Thrust Blocks: Lateral resistance for thrust blocks may be determined by a passive pressure value of 250 lbs/ft2 per foot of embedment, assuming a triangular distribution. This value may be used for thrust blocks embedded into fill soils as well as Old Alluvium. 6.8.2 Modulus of Soil Reaction: The modulus of soil reaction (E') is used to characterize the stiffness of soil backfill placed along the sides of buried flexible pipelines. For the purpose of evaluating deflection due to the load associated with trench backfill over the pipe, a value of 1,500 lbs/in2 is recommended for the general site conditions, assuming granular bedding material is placed around the pipe. 6.8.3 Pipe Bedding: Typical pipe bedding as specified in the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction may, be used. As a minimum, we recommend that pipes be supported on at least 4 inches of granular bedding material such as minus 3/4-inch crushed rock or disintegrated granite. Where pipeline or trench excavations exceed a 15 percent gradient, we do not recommend that open graded rock be used for bedding or backfill because of the potential for piping and internal erosion. For sloping utilities, we recommend that coarse sand or sand-cement slurry be used for the bedding and pipe zone. 7.0 LIMITATIONS This report was prepared using the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under GROUP similar circumstances, by reputable geotechnical consultants practicing in this or similar localities. No warranty, express or implied, is made as to the conclusions and rIprofessional opinions included in this report. DELTA N:\Projects\SD\SD365 Lennar, Tabata Development\13-0339\13-0339.doc S Geotechnical Investigation GDC Project No. SD365 Tabata Development March 4, 2014 Lennar Homes Page 32 The findings of this report are valid as of the present date. However, changes in the condition of a property can occur with the passage of time, whether due to natural processes or the work of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standards of practice may occur from legislation or the broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, the findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside our control. Therefore, this report is subject to review and should not be relied upon after a period of three years. 8.0 REFERENCES American Society for Testing and Materials (2006). Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Section 4, Construction, Volume 04.08 Soil and Rock (I); Volume 1 0 04.09 Soil and Rock (II); Geosynthetics, ASTM, West Conshohocken, PA, Compact Disk. Anderson, J. G. , Rockwell, T. K., Agnew, D. C. (1989). Past and Possible Future Earthquakes of Significance to the San Diego Region: Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 5, No. 2. pp 299-335. APWA (2006). Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, Section 200- 2.2, Untreated Base Materials, Section 400-4, Asphalt Concrete: BNI, 761 p. Boore, D.M. and G.M. Atkinson (2008). Ground-Motion Prediction Equations for the Average Horizontal Component of PGA, PGV & 5% Damped PSA at Spectral Periods between 0.01s and 10.0s, Earthquake Spectra, V.24, pp. 99-138. Bowles, J. E. (1996). Foundation Analysis and Design, 5th ed.: McGraw Hill 1175p. California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology (1992). Fault Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone Act of 1972: California Division of Mines and Geology, Special Publication 42. California Department of Transportation (2008). Caltrans ARS Online (VI.0.4), Based on the Average of (2) !'IGA Attenuation Relationships, Campbell & Bozorgnia (2008) & Chiou & Youngs (2008) from http://dap3.dot.ca.ciiov/shake stable! Campbell, K.W. and Y. Bozorgnia (2008). NQA Ground Motion Model for the ROUI Geometric Mean Horizontal Component of PGA, PGV and PGD and 5% Damped Linear Elastic Response Spectra for Periods Ranging from 0.01s 71 and lOs, Earthquake Spectra, V.24, pp. 139-172. DELTA N:\Projects\SD\SD365 Lennar, Tabata Development\13.0339\13-0339.doc U Geotechnical Investigation GDC Project No. SD365 Tabata Development March 4, 2014 Lennar Homes Page 33 0 Chiou, B. and R. Youngs (2008). An NGA Model for the Average Horizontal Component of Peak Ground Motion and Response Spectra, Earthquake Spectra, V.24, pp. 173-216. Group Delta Consultants (2013a). Geotechnical Review, Tabata 10 Subdivision, Carlsbad, CA, Project IR596, August 30. Group Delta Consultants (2013b). Proposal for Geotechnical Services, Tabata Residential Development, Carlsbad, CA, Proposal SD13-108, September 6. International Conference of Building Officials (2010). 2010 California Building Code. Jennings, C. W. (1994). Fault Activity Map of California and Adjacent Areas with Locations and Ages of Recent Volcanic Eruptions: California Division of Mines and Geology, Geologic Data Map Series, Map No. 6. Kennedy, M. P., and Tan, S. S. (2005). Geologic Map of the Oceanside 30'x60' Quadrangle, California: California Geologic Survey, Scale 1:100,000. Post-Tensioning Institute (2007). Standard Requirements for Analysis of Shallow Concrete Foundations on Expansive Soils and Addendum No. I to the 3 Edition of the Design of Post-Tensioned Slabs-on-Ground, Phoenix Arizona, May, www.post-tensionin.org. Pradel, D. (1998). Procedure to Evaluate Earthquake Induced Settlements in Dry Soils, Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 124, No. 4, pp. 364 to 368. Robertson, P.K. and Campanella, R.G. (1988). Design Manual for use of CPT and CPTu, Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, 200 p. Robertson, P.K. and Wride, C.E. (1990). Soil Classification using the CPT, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 27, No. 1, February, pp. 151 to 158. Southern California Earthquake Center (1999). Recommended Procedures for Implementation of DMG SP 117, Guidelines for Analyzing and Mitigating Liquefaction Hazards in California, University of Southern California, 60 p. Southern California Earthquake Center (2002). Recommended Procedures for Implementation of DMG SPJ 17, Guidelines for Analyzing and Mitigating cRoi51 Landslide Hazards in California, University of Southern California, 110 p. Ir United States Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station (1974). Tsunami Prediction for Pacific Coastal Communities, Hydraulics Laboratory, Vicksburg. N:\Projects\SD\SD365 Lennar, Tabata Development\13-0339\13-0339.doc Geotechnical Investigation GDC Project No. SD365 Tabata Development March 4, 2014 Lennar Homes Page 34 fl United Stated Geological Survey (2009). Earthquake Hazards Program, Based on Three NQA Relationships, Boore & Atkinson (2008), Campbell & Bozorgnia (2008) & Chiou & Youngs (2008) from http:/Ieqint.cr.usgs.qovldeaggintl2008. Vinje & Middleton Engineering, Inc. (2006). Preliminary Geotechnical investigation, Proposed 26-Lot Subdivision, Camino Hills Drive, Carlsbad, CA (APN 212- 050-32 & 33), Job No. 06-210-P, June 23. Vinje & Middleton Engineering, Inc. (2011). Geotechnical Plan Review Update, Proposed 26-Lot (Tabata 10) Subdivision, Camino Hills Drive, Carlsbad, CA (APN2J2-050-32 & 33), Job No. 11-210-P, December 13. Wesnousky, S. G. (1986). Earthquakes, Quaternary Faults, and Seismic Hazard in California: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 91, no. B12, p. 12587-1263 1. Youd, T.L. et al. (2001). Liquefaction Resistance of Soils: Summary Report from the 1996 NCEER and 1998 NCEER/NSF Workshops on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance of Soils, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, Vol. 127, No. 4, April. Youngs, R.R. and Coopersmith, K.J. (1985). Implications of Fault Slip Rates and Earthquake Recurrence Models to Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Estimates, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, vol. 75, no. 4, pp. 939-964. GROUP ri DELTA N:\Projects\SD\SD365 Lennar, Tabata Development\13-0339\I3-0339.doc Ll 49 S I. S TABLES 2 06 0 U 6) CL 0.4. 0.2 fin NZINoioiuiiuiiiori—MIDI"esign uiii il~mISUkUR.U• U•—MCE : MEN iIIII1IIIiII6ii1IIII1 I MINE 4. N 0 IIHHHhIINPJI1 IIIiiii! W, IIIA IiiINi!I lluii!!1iI!!iiiUIllhIN z C 4- 6) 0.8 S S TABLE I 2013 CRC ACCELERATION RESPONSE SPECTRA GDC PROJECT NO. SD365, Lennar Tabata Development Site Latitude: 33.1439 Site Longitude: -117.2865 - - S: S,: Site Class: F: F0 . TL S5— S,1: SoS2 ser- T0: I: 1.070 9 short period (0.2 sec) mapped spectral response acceleration MCE Site Cisc B (CBC 2010 Fig. 1613.5(3) or USGS Ground Motion Calculator) g = 1.0 sec period mapped spectral response acceleration MCE Site Class B (CBC 2010 Fig. 1613.5(4) or USGS Ground Motion Calculator) = Site Class deflntton based on CBC 2010 Table 1613.5.2 = Site Coefficient applied to S to account for soil type (CBC 2010 Table 1613.5.3(1)) = Site Coefficient applied to S1 to account for sot type (CBC 2010 Table 1613.5.3(2)) sec = Long Period Transition Period (ASCE 7.05 Figure 22.16) = site class modified short period (0.2 see) MCE spectral response acceleration F. x S. (CBC 2010 Eqn. 16-36) = site class modified 1.0 sac period MCE spectral response acceleration = F. a Si(CBC 2010 Eqn. 1647) = site class modified short period (0.2 eec) Design spectral response acceleration = 213 a Si.43 (CBC 2007 Eqn. 1648) = site class modified 1.0 sec period Design spectral response acceleration = 2/3x S 1 (CBC 2007 Eqn. 1639) sec = 0.2 SOIISOS = Control Period (loft and of peak) for ARS Curve (Section 11.4.5 ASCE 7-05) sec = SDVSOS = Control Period (right end of peek) for ARS Curve (Section 11.4.5 ASCE 7-05) 0.413 0 1.072 1.586 8.00 S 0 - 1.147 0.655 0.765 0.437 0.114 0.571 T I aeCona) Design I MCE Sa(g) j Se (g) 0.000 5114 0.306 57CR I 0.459 I 1147 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 11 Period (seconds) N:tProjecIs\SDSD365 Lerarar, Tebate Devetopmentt13-339tCaicst2013 CBC Ceicuiation.xio Lot Number Building Occupancy Type Foundation Category 23 Reference Elevation (FT] Finish Pad Elevation [FT] Elevation of Formation FF11 Over-Excavation Depth FF111 Remaining Alluvium [FT)' Total Compacted Fill Depth FF11 Expansion Potential Sulfate Exposure 1 Residential Category II > 90 102.0 -77 15 - -27 Medium Severe 2 Residential Category II > 97 108.0 -86 12 - -23 Medium Severe 3 Residential Category II > 105 113.8 -96 10 - -19 Medium Severe 4 Residential Category Ill > 112 115.0 -108 4 - -7 High Severe 5 Residential Category III >117 115.0 -118 4 - -4 High Severe 6 Residential Category III >115 114.7 -113 4 - -4 High Severe 7 Residential Category III >114 114.0 -113 4 - -4 High Severe 8 Residential Category III >114 112.3 -113 4 - -4 High Severe 9 Residential Category III >113 110.8 -114 4 - -4 High Severe 10 Residential Category III >113 109.7 -114 4 - -4 High Severe 11 Residential Category III >112 109.1 -111 4 - -4 High Severe 12 Residential Category II >111 108.5 -101 10 - -8 Medium Severe 13 Residential Category II > 109 108.0 -91 10 -8 -9 Medium Severe 14 Residential Category II >103 114.0 -96 10 - -21 Medium Severe 15 Residential Category II > 102 112.0 -90 10 -2 -20 Medium Severe 16 Residential Category II > 101 110.5 -86 10 -5 -20 Medium Severe 17 Residential Category II > 101 109.5 -82 10 -9 -19 Medium Severe 18 Residential Category II > 102 108.5 -85 10 -7 -17 Medium Severe 19 Residential Category II > 102 108.4 -88 10 -4 -16 Medium Severe 20 Residential Category II > 102 107.8 -92 10 - -16 Medium Severe 21 Residential Category II >92 98.4 -58 15 -19 -21 Medium Severe 22 Residential Category II >92 99.0 -59 15 -18 -22 Medium Severe 23 Residential Category II >91 99.7 -60 15 -16 -24 Medium Severe 24 Residential Category II >91 100.5 -62 15 -14 -25 Medium Severe 25 Residential Category II > 92 101.5 -66 15 - 11 -25 Medium Severe 26 Residential Category II >92 102.0 -72 15 -5 -25 Medium Severe NOTES: 1) As a minimum, compressible soils should be excavated and compacted throught the site as described in Section 6.3.2. Estimated over-excavation depths are below natural alluvial grades. For category II lots, if 3' of non-expansive fill is used to cap the lots as discussed in Section 6.3.3, category I conditions will apply (otherwise use Category II). Category Ill foundations will generally be founded on 4 feet of low expansion fill (El <20) overlying daystone of the Santiago Formation (see Section 6.4.3). Represents the estimated depth of Old Alluvium that will remain below the compacted fill once the surficial soil is excavated and compacted. r FIGURES . . 1• e ac / - I / - - / )t /V pr4 1 1/ • I 1 ?$ ar - - 13 -silk \\ * ' 10, SITE LOCATION MAP V * - .1IJi t- A. - . • • 4%. • p - I EXPLANATION: B-10 Approximate location of exploratory boring. CPT-5 \p' Approximate location of exploratory cone penetration test. 00 00 EXPLANATION: - TILL Approximate location of 15. previously placed fill. Approximate location of I Qoa old alluvial flood deposits (circled where buried).. 1 Approximate location of I . geologic contact (dotted where buried by fill). in 8-10 4 Approximate location - of exploratory boring. (DF- Depth to Formation) I CPT-5'7 Approximate location j.. of exploratory cone penetration test. \ :—---- 31 LOT 30 LOT 2 LOT 5 Reference Hunsaker & Associates (2013). Grading Plans for Tebala 10 Stockpile (Uncompacied Fli). Drawing No. 472-7B, August 29. - M Tebata Dnvnlopnwnt Lennar Names 2B GEOTECHNICAL MAP EXPLANATION: Approximate location of exploratory boring. CPT-5 \ Approximate location of exploratory cone penetration test. Reference: Hunsaker & Associates (2013). Grading Plans for Tubule 10, Drawing No. 472-7A. June 20. 4. 3 EXPLANATION: B-10 Approximate location of exploratory boring. A' I CPT-5 \, Approximate location of exploratory cone penetration test. Approximate location I I of slope stability cross sections in Appendix D. Reference: Kunsaker & Associates (2013). Consistency Detem,in81i0n Exhibit, Approved TM Overlay, Tabata 10. Sheet 1. September 24. EL CAM/NO REAL EXPLANATION: B.10 Approximate location of exploratory boring. CPT-5 V1 Approximate location of exploratory cone penetration test. Reference: Honsaker & Associates (2013). Consistency Determination Exhibit, Preliminary Plotting. Tebala 10, Sheet 2, September 24. 5000W DELTA cotasoLnasTs. D.C. ermInes 00000 c00150cosolseovolnol5rs SD365 naas ACTIvITY 9000.80ev rosa cola 0000. CO satan (toOt tao-leo 13-0339 Tabala 0nveiepment roeo000m Lonnor Horses 3A REGIONAL GEOLOGIC MAP -g .9. .• • .• ., •. • • A•. • • * T\c' )V TE V EXPLANATION: [] Old oltuvosl flood piolo deposits undivided (tote to middle [] S001h50O Forsnaltuo (middle Eorcon)—Nnlned by Wbwtlrioit Landslide deposils csdtvided (Htoeror sod Pldsioceee)—Floviat sediments deposited on canyon 000rs_ . ond Pop.-((945) in, liocenc deposits or nonhwesteno P(elsloeeor)—Higbly lnngmrntrd to largely coherent Connistn of etodosnlety oselt consolidated. poorly tossed. Santa Ann Moonloins. These con three distinctive pans. A landslide deponito. Unconsolidated to nsodreorrly snell prnnrnhtc, nmnoanIy nlighlty dissected groove), wood, sill, and hanoi tncntber that consists or hoff and brownish-gray. consolidated. Most mopped landslides contain warp noes as N clay-heating olloviam. Where more than One flsmiser is massive. coaese.gtnioesi. poorly nosiest aohonic saodslone and ss'etl on slide deposit. In 000te nones nearp is shown copurotely. choose (e.g.. Saoyo) hoce deposits ore cnslividnsi (Fig. 3). cnngiomet010 (sandstone gonreolty predominating). in some Many PI as landst,des onto eeoelisntesl is pats or .0. [I]. Alluvial lined dnpnrtin (hole Iloloeeor)—Actove and pinto otnas the basal nscrnbcr is overlain by grey cod booweish-gesy entirely dating late Hotoesee. Most of the landslides in the have oeeaered within the Copisttsoo Fonnstion. quadrangle eneotttty active alluvial depositsalong 000)00 i1000o.Consists (sail and (topper) central member that consists or sell. teodisns.gollned. modemirty svnti.soend orloosic sandstone. hosseses. there ore many within the Monterey and Santiago of unconettlidated sandy, silty, or clay-bcaring alluvium. ; founnallons as "]I NO SCALE Reference: Kennedy 004180(2005). Geologic Map of the Oceanside 30060' Quadrangle. California, scale 1:100.000. :71 69 • 3; •• / - _/,_t.. - • • -. I 7 % intoross Country clu SITE — . / ••_ , I \' S •'••, , EV $ / ea, - Ir, ; u '. .5_S .S ••;••• •' •/ — - qeservoir i'il'vssJ3i ! f 4ypit; v IS, 1 Fa Af rr Tank '5 ofF ): •H '? '%\ -.:•. N GROUP 13-0339 — A Tabata a I • -i NO SCALE REGIONAL TOPOGRAPHY S a ;• - -- - - -1I - 4'Th - — .Mcc .- EXPLANATION: Approximate location of the FEMNDWR 100-Year Floodplain A NO SCALE REFERENCE: California Emergency Management Agency (2013). County of San Diego, Encinitas Quadrangle, FEMA Flood Plains and California Specific Flood Areas. NO Q -- : j%der I 6. I jL4 t •J/ 0 olf Course ' •;.i 3 -tL;iJ SITE f va , z J 'z .i AV - - - 1O7 = -__j - I-I IM -/ -- p- - - H' N / / Crossings At Carls MCC — — G O()D GROUP DELTA C0030LTAOIS. INC. A ENGINEERS000 GEOLOGISTS NO SCALE . TI IkIARAI IIJI IMflI C, 2E. 0- Legoland EXPLANATION: Approximate location of the recommended CEMA Tsunami Evacuation Area REFERENCE: California Emergency Management Agency (2013). County of San Diego, Encinitas Quadrangle, CEMA Tsunami Response Emergency Planning Zone i I --- Z'\ - \T N \\\. . 5 . . .• ' SITE El" Rssnon ' 7 \ // o ' o spy9ao . + N \ I + Ali ;s1Cth/\ \ N \ \ •v \ ' ' \ \% —. '\• S j _S\" 3. J r NOTATIONS 5 t\ \" \, Z• - -., Holocene fool dlcpieoamonl (dosing pool 10,000 yearn) without historic 5. 1 .\ •S. '".rss record. G000lorphlc evidence (or Hol000ne foldIng Inctodea 009 panda, cowpn '• - chnwiflg hOto erosIon, or the following toatoren in Hofoceza 090 deponitc offset otloonc owvrnaa, itneenscenpe, shutter ndgay. and higoIos faceted sPurn. . Re ng offshore ln based on the lnterpro age oi the youngest S S I / theta dieptaced utI by tong. • Ii / s 'N_ L Let' QZic far foitd,apIo one cepi 32+ "C" 5'çk\\ (' 'c4 + teoturne 010 low distinct. Faulting may be younger, but lock otyo og esly 9 deposits precludes oe cta age classification.". Qooternony facto (age cnditforenhlatod). Moat fovEa of tiPs category show NZby auideno000diaplacenronteoreotirnodutlngthap000l.6ninffioeyeoro;poeoible excopticnaclafovdothotdinpfacorootcndotornntlotedPbo-Ptoletoceneoga. See Bulletin 201,Aypeedo D for source data. Late Canaoatc taalta within the Sloan N000da Ioctcdlng, bet not reabictad I '—w—co' eot.n to. the Faathttlo faott cyotele. Fcvfto ohow cDatsgraphic andlot geonwrphic XI GROUP EathecEnS 00,0 SEllS enidenca for displacenrent of late Mi000ne end Pfoonne deposIts. By ecology, 'o. I oaacccnrunvno.cos tote Cenozoic 10dm in thin system that hove bean investigated or detail way hove I see. DIEGO, cuacizo an been octlua in Ocotornory lone (Data how PG&E. 953.) I ranoonc,00 Pre-00010ncory fossil (oldorthoe 1.6 cr111100 p00,0) or fossil wlthoot I TchetoDeuolopr recogntaod Qcotaonaey dlaplac.wont. Sawn foists arc Ohowe In thin cotogory Lennar Kama because the catoan of etappin used was of reconooisaance nature, or was not dana thoroabjectoidot,ng outdinplooeerente. F IlnIndrIn category I NO SCALE IreOenSOnlyin001Ido. DELTA REGION? lltP01I1B . . . ROCK AND FABRIC PANEL DRAIN ALTERNATIVE DAMP-PROOFING OR WATER- ALTERNATIVE PROOFING AS REQUIRED DAMP-PROOFING OR WATER- PROOFING AS REQUIRED 12 12 . GEOCOMPOSITE I PANEL DRAIN I iEi COMPACTED . KFILL .• BAC ED- . . . fll IIINL,fl . . . . -r= BAt'v' 11 IMINIMUM . I .' . . . IIui MINUS 3/4 INCH CRUSHED ROCK u- 1 CU FT PER LINEAR FOOT OF WEEP HOLE -HOLE MINUS 3/4-INCH CRUSHED . : . : ALTERNATIVE (MIRAFI 140NL SUPAC 4NP OR N ' / ALTERNATIVE ROCK ENVELOPED IN ENVELOPED IN FILTER FABRIC ' ......WEEP APPROVED SIMILAR) .... FILTER FABRIC :: / / -• / / 4-INCH DIAM. PVC DIAM. PVC PERFORATED PIPE 4-INCH °• PERFORATED PIPE - NOTES Perforated pipe should outlet through a solid pipe to a free gravity outfall. Perforated pipe and outlet pipe should have a fall of at least 1%. As an alternative to the perforated pipe and outlet, weep-holes may be constructed. Weep-holes should be at least 2 inches in diameter, spaced no greater than 8 feet, and be located just above grade at the bottom of wall. Filter fabric should consist of Mirafi 140N, Supac 5NP, Amoco 4599, or similar approved fabric. Filter fabric should be overlapped at least 6-inches. Geocomposite panel drain should consist of Miradrain 6000, J-DRain 400, Supac DS-15, or approved similar product. FIELD EXPLORATION IE i9 10 i9 i• i. n APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION Field exploration included a visual and geologic reconnaissance of the site, the drilling of 10 exploratory borings, and the advancement of 5 cone penetrometer test (CPT) soundings. The subsurface investigation was conducted by Group Delta Consultants personnel between January 30' and February 5th, 2014. The maximum depth of exploration was about 65 feet. The approximate locations of the borings and CPT soundings conducted at the site are shown on the Exploration Plan. Logs describing the subsurface conditions encountered in the borings and CPT soundings are shown in Figures A-I through A-I5, immediately following the Boring Record Legends. The 10 exploratory borings were drilled by Pacific Drilling using a 6-inch diameter, continuous flight, hollow stem, truck mounted drill rig. Drive samples were collected from the borings using an automatic hammer with an Energy Transfer Ratio (ETR) of roughly 87 percent. Disturbed samples were collected from the borings using a 2- inch outside diameter Standard Penetration Test (SPT) sampler. Less disturbed samples were collected using a 3-inch outside diameter ring lined sampler (a modified California sampler). These samples were sealed in plastic bags, labeled, and returned to the laboratory for testing. For each sample, the number of blows needed to drive the sampler 12 inches was recorded on the attached logs. The field blow counts (N) were normalized to approximate the standard 60 percent ETR as shown on the logs (N60). Bulk samples were collected from the borings at selected intervals for testing. The borings logs are presented in Figures A-I through A-lU. • The five cone penetrometer (CPT) soundings were advanced by Kehoe Testing and Engineering in general accordance with ASTM D5778. The CPT soundings were advanced using a 30-ton truck mounted rig with a 15 cm2 cone. Integrated electronic circuitry was used to measure the tip resistance (Qc) and skin friction (Fs) at 2.5 cm (1 inch) intervals while the CPT was advanced into the soil with hydraulic down pressure. A piezometer located behind the cone tip also measured transient pore GROUP j pressure (u). The CPT data is presented in Figures A-I I through A-15. , DELTA E1IiUWflI N:\Projects\SD\SD365 Lennar, Tabata Development\13-0339\I3-0339.doc 40 r.i J I,] ;q" Ll • GROUP Hi DELTA iijuw'u1 FIELD EXPLORATION (Continued) The first figure for each CPT sounding presents the raw CPT data (Figures A-11 a through A-15a). The interpreted soil profile is shown in a color-coded log in Figures A-11b through A-1 5b. The soil interpretations area function of the normalized cone resistance and friction ratio (Robertson, 1988, 1990). The interpreted Soil Behavior Type Index (Ic), and the estimated undrained shear strength (Su) for each soil profile are also shown in Figures A-11 c through A-15c. At the location of the third CPT sounding (CPT-3), shear wave velocity measurements were taken at 5 foot depth intervals using an air actuated hammer located inside the front jack of the CPT rig. The interval shear wave velocities are shown in Figure A- 13c. The average shear wave velocity for the upper 46.7 feet (Vsd) at the location of sounding CPT-3 was measured as 944 ft/s (288 m/s). Note that the CPT was unable to advance through the dense materials below that depth. However, a common extrapolation method would estimate an average shear wave velocity in the upper 100 feet (Vs30) of 356 m/s based on the following formula (Boore, 2004): Vs - 11.45— (0.015*d)I * VSd - 11.45— (0.015*46.7/3.28)] * 288 rn/s - 356 m/s. The boring and CPT locations were determined by visually estimating, pacing and taping distances from landmarks shown on the Exploration Plan. The locations shown should not be considered more accurate than is implied by the method of measurement used and the scale of the map. The lines designating the interface between differing soil materials on the logs may be abrupt or gradational. Further, soil conditions at locations between the excavations may be substantially different from those at the specific locations we explored. It should be noted that the passage of time may also result in changes in the soil conditions reported in the logs. N:\Projects\SD\SD365 Lennar, Tabata Development\13-0339\13-0339.doc fl HOLE IDENTIFICATION Holes are identified using the following convention: H - YY - NNN Where: H: Hole Type Code YY: 2-digit year NNN: 3-digit number (001-999) Hole Tvoe Code and Descriotion Hole Type Cod e Description A Auger boring (hollow or solid stem, bucket) R Rotary drilled boring (conventional) RC Rotary core (self-cased wire-line, continuously-sampled) RW Rotary core (self-cased wire-line, not continuously sampled) P Rotary percussion boring (Air) HD Hand driven (1-inch soil tube) HA Hand auger D Driven (dynamic cone penetrometer) CPT Cone Penetration Test 0 Other (note on LOTB) Description Sequence Examples: SANDY lean CLAY (CL); very stiff; yellowish brown; moist; mostly fines; some SAND, from fine to medium; few gravels; medium plasticity; PP=2.75. Well-graded SAND with SILT and GRAVEL and COBBLES (SW-SM); dense; brown; moist; mostly SAND, from fine to coarse; some fine GRAVEL; few fines; weak cementation; 10% GRANITE COBBLES; 3 to 6 inches; hard; subrounded. Clayey SAND (SC); medium dense, light brown; wet; mostly fine sand,; little fines; low plasticity. rj 10 i. 10 10 i• SOIL IDENTIFICATION AND DESCRIPTION SEQUENCE Refer to Section . . Identification Components Cr U- - 0 I Group Name 2.5.2 3.2.2 • 2 Group Symbol 2.5.2 3.2.2 • Description Components Consistency of 2.5.3 3.2.3 • Cohesive Soil Apparent Density 4 of Cohesionless 2.5.4 S Soil 5 Color 2.5.5 5 6 Moisture 2.5.6 • Percent or 2.5.7 3.2.4 . 0 Proportion of Soil Particle Size 2.5.6 2.5.8 5 o 7 Particle Angularity 2.5.9 0 Particle Shape 2.5.10 0 8 Plasticity (for fine- 2.5.11 3.2.5 grained soil) Dry Strength (for 2.5.12 fine-grained soil) 10 Dilatency (for fine- 2.5.13 grained soil) 11 Toughness (for 2.5.14 fine-grained soil) 12 Structure 2.5.15 0 13 Cementation 2.5.16 5 Percent of Cobbles and 2.5.17 . Boulders 14 Description of Cobbles and 2.5.18 • Boulders I 15 Consistency Field 2.5.3 Test Result 16 Additional 2.5.19 0 Comments Describe the soil using descriptive terms in the order shown Minimum Required Sequence: USCS Group Name (Group Symbol); Consistency or Density; Color; Moisture; Percent or Proportion of Soil; Particle Size; Plasticity (optional). = optional for non-Caltrans projects Where applicable: Cementation; % cobbles & boulders; Description of cobbles & boulders; Consistency field test result REFERENCE: Caltrans Soil and Rock Logging, Classification, and Presentation Manual (2010). (oep 'uijpJp oije) 6U!pee (eA jee wis A (6uup 6uunp) 6uupea (3A3 Jee sii S108 WAS 13A1 1131VM (spewei eec) Jet eidweS Ning 9J03 (3O I4 WOO)PON XN jaidweS eiwop(e3 pa(JJ.p0j edweg eiwo1ie3 piepueg (Ids) Isal uoRejlauad piepues 171 S108WAS 3IHdVU9 èIldVdVS WIC_Iti I # aNO1 c1d033d ONId08 SOWOH ABUU9-1 uwdoIaAoa eeqe sas ON pe1OJ IdflOTOI (oio) ienuew uoqeuasa pue 'uo!e3uJ!sseI3 '6ui660- oo pus I!OS SU5453 -s,i)suepeJctp )poi o .Jepuno9 s!isuepeieq lOS WOJ SE)SUND lePleVY tpo / HOS 5p04iew 2u11dwes pue 5u!ijJp alp JO SUOI$2!W!I JO esneaq io jel.lopepeig e3ueu,j s a3uetp eqi asneeq Jaqh!a PZ 3°I IeJae1aJ AaeJne eq joum lepajew ul aSue43 P8)$W953 pa)e3ol AIalejne eq ue a5ueuj aSuetp jo UO!S$0I aLIS pue aio io adwes eqh U! peajasqo ! Ie!Jaiew UI e8ueU3 Ie!jaielll oqwA5 uouluyeQ wiaj I I5(.i51) U! UUtQ ,JOj 5UOuhiUIJ$ (/9Jj a i'is 1U6'OM hun Mfl (099 a IVISY) esxeuj. peuiwpufl DOiOPIIOSUO3Ufl fin (9C6Z 0 '11Sv) )30 - UOt5SOJdWO3 P8UIJUO3Ufl (091 Z 0 i%LSV) lbs U0IS$0J6W03 P8U!UO3UI1 on (9t'sv 0 I%lLSv) obIUeIo 110M5 MS (LIP a II1Sv) puir, e6miuri4S ,s (OOL J. 0iI1SVv) AIJACJD ogioedS s5 (Lie ia3) juejuA!03 PUO5 3S (Lot L'iiQ) OfliOA( jejelq ejnsS9Jd INd UCLS a tjisv) X8PUI POOl IUOd id (06 1 OIHSVV '68 IOIHSW) cepul /11311$Oid 'hull DIISOI IIWfl pinbr) Id (at' a 1').LSV) SIS/hI3UV 0Z15 0I3100d Yd (Ozz i13) .h!i!qoeuued a (t,L6Z 0 i'JLSV) IUOiUOZI 311,156J0 30 (9Lh a i'usv) lUOiUOO OJflISbO W a iisv) xepui u015u0d53 13 (080c a visv) JOStIS lDaJ!a SO (L9Lt' a i'iisv) I'x°!J1 peuloipull peepposuo no (at' I'JID :L 1,t' 1.1113 CP9 11113) SOPIJO(t(3 seiohlfls 'uObs0J1O3 Ha (91 11113) OMfl3 uOli3edw03 d3 (ttcc a t11i5v) lollUolOd 9$dU1103 13 (c;ctz a i'asv) uollopliosuo3 3 NI1S3J. AO.LVO8V1 ONV 0191:1 Fl 3103 puouiela uenuapuel-Ijo auo 3iweuAC I1 6uij iceo ~ 0 6Ul(((i ie6ny a SlOB VIAS OOHJW VNIT11W3 ONUS 1D 1105 31NU0U0 A113M'D su301fl06 110$ 3INVDuO ATISAYUO StICO1IIOB P' 5319803 l3AVUD 110$ 311ui'OUO AGNYS 1105 3IHUbO AONVS H0fl0 saiaaoo 13A5519 'INU 1105 3INVONO ONUS '4l lbS OINUONO iV3d 14 110$ 31N501:10 ONUS llt IllS 2QS110 31NU0U0 ATI3AUNO 13AVUO 'WONVs A3AV13 'killS illS N$I OINYONO A113AVU0 - JII 13 YN 0 11 '' illS NJ INY9d0 AONVS ONUS A3A513 killS ITS 3USY13 !NIO AGNYS HO 111AYNO '1NU ONUS A3AV13 1CAVUO 4P- ills '1NI 3INVO0 ONUS IllS "1'1q 31N50110 3S IllS QINVO !1IO SO - ONUS AAU13 ONUS 'll" 1513 I l 31N50N0 ATAYSO 1S lUNO r' ONUS killS A513 INI3INUDNO ATIS,W11ID WS AVI lJ 3UNO AO ONUS killS A513 IVJ 31U50U0 MINUS Ho 113A550 1513 AllIS '45" 13AYUD 4" 15135! OINVDNO ONUS '111"' 1513 "4 OINVONO 3AU89 P'S 1513 ONUS p45kb Uod 3SdS -/1' 1513 "I 3INUi10 (A513 AllIS"') 1513 'II'S ONUS P°P"'1U°°d ONUS '45" illS 35"'1° kllll,WhlO 111AYUD P15 illS 155. 0145$ P°P" l'd IllS 31SI11 1113A5N0 13A550 111-111S illS lIPS. ONUS peprnallsod I11S"45IOAOSJUS Hill (13AUbO P-1513 killS /155.91115' IllS 5"SI3 ONUS Wl' illS 1315149 p11 15131455 ONUS POPth1lOM 1P1513 Ills 3!M-13 (1513 ALlIS"') 1513 IllS ONUS POP1OM ONUS '15515133; A113AUSO - isnvo e"' illS cuss PoPwS.eoui 1513111) A1l3AYb9 VISMS 131559115315131111 10us$ ills 'Ill-" 0us$ pop.u5-jio.' 15135410145$ H3 13AVU9U55ONU$PPC4d 131511194W- A513 l"i ONUS '15" 3113111,4 dS 1513 *11,4 ONUS P-P"' /41034 —.i-- ONUS '1551115 31N50140 ATIS/lUNO - 13155915'.' ONUS P°P5'81°M illS 31N50140 11131559 MS 131554941" illS 311150140101455 I 1 \ ONUS POP1P'.%5 • illS .=1t,10 101455 _10 1 1 ONUS Ills 13/45549 A31513 'ALlIS 13151401155 ills 311459140 ONUS 45 ills OINUONO ills 31N59110 13/45519 131513 'ki1lS 014554115' 1513 'Sal 3114591401113155.0 ONUs '115' 13/45519131513 —,O 1,513 'SOt 311459540 A11315519 p2" 13/45119W. 1,513 "''131145911101,0555 1315519131,513 A513 "COI 311459410 101455 10 ONUS 'P'S 13/45549 kL115 13/455191155.1513*1114 31N59140 ONUS '15" 1513 ""14 3INUOUO 1,5134514 31559140 13/45149 killS GNUS 45511151,13/45540 (ONUS P' 1513 141Is 5' ll 10 S 1,113/455.0 ONUS Pbs! 1513 111S' 13/4514-3 POPS1U l41-d 30d9 13/45549'!!i'"' illS MI NUS (1,513 AillS" l 15(345'" 13/45549 POP"'" '4'5'd IllS AON$$ 1111 ONUS illS 131550 PP0 45'°d - 13/45140 '115' illS ONUS 41'" illS 1(19-dO Ic il l s - ITS '1145' 13/45549 POP-0 I4*ood (ONUS P'S 1513 killS *11) ONUS PlC 1513 'II'S 13/4559 OPCIS-111115 1,513 AJ.115 1,113(15519 / 39-MO 13/45149 41— 1,513 AllIS 1,055$ / I ALTS ol 1513 q:— 13/4559 p3511 '/4 1313 ALlIS 10us$ 1W-13 ONUS P'S illS I1I' 13/45140 P11P5'SbbOM 13/45140 Ill'.!' 3113MlbS I GNUS 45"' 1,513 ALlIS / I I P19-MO is 1513A1lIS / IllS billS 13135.9 P°P5'1IO/4S ONUS 'I!"" 1,513 "'"1 All3AV410 - " ONUS '45" 13/4 U119POPC"AUO11d "CO 1,513 C01 1,113/45510 dO 13/451401155 A513 "Cal 10555 13/45549 POPC'Il UOOd oO 5' A513'S°IAONVS 13 ONUS 41"' 13(15549 p0p11*6hIO?.% • 1345549 112" A513 *11111 ONUS 'P'S A513 4*1101 MO 1,5131511 13/155.9 POP"'Il"M — 11usN dnoi poquolsi plqdci9 "'N dno.IO locwits ,ul'Ido S3VJVN ONV S1O8IMAS dfl0 LI CONSISTENCY OF COHESIVE SOILS Description Shear Strength (tsf) Pocket Penetrometer, PP Measurement (tsf) Torvane, TV, Measurement (tsf) Vane Shear, VS. Measurement (Os?) Very Soft Less than 0.12 Less than 0.25 Less than 0.12 Less than 0.12 Soft 0.12-0.25 0.25-0.5 0.12-0.25 0.12-0.25 Medium Stiff 0.25-0.5 0.5-1 0.25-0.5 0.25-0.5 Stiff 0.5 -1 1 - 2 0.5-1 0.5 -1 Very Stiff 1-2 2-4 1-2 1-2 Hard Greater than 2 Greater than 4 Greater than 2 Greater than 2 i• Ll C 41 APPARENT DENSITY OF COHESIONLESS SOILS Description SPT Ne (blows 112 inches) Very Loose 0 - 5 Loose 5-10 Medium Dense 10 -30 Dense 30-50 Very Dense Greater than 50 PERCENT OR PROPORTION OF SOILS Description Criteria Trace Particles are present but estimated to be less than 5% Few 5-10% Little 15-25% Some 30-45% Mostly 50-100% CEMENTATION Description Criteria Weak Crumbles or breaks with handling or little finger pressure. Moderate Crumbles or breaks with considerable finger pressure. Strong Will not crumble or break with finger pressure. REFERENCE: Caltrans Soil and Rock Logging, Classification, and Presentation Manual (2010), with the exception of consistency of cohesive soils vs. Ne. CONSISTENCY OF COHESIVE SOILS Description SPT Ne (blows/12 inches) Very Soft 0-2 Soft 2-4 Medium Stiff 4-8 Stiff 8-15 Very Stiff 15-30 Hard Greater than 30 Ref., Peck, Hansen, and Thornburn, 1974, "Foundation Engineering," Second Edition. Note: Only to be used (with caution) when pocket penetrometer or other data on undrained shear strength are unavailable. Not allowed by Caltrans Soil and Rock Logging and Classification Manual, 2010. MOISTURE Description Criteria Dry No discernable moisture Moist Moisture present, but no free water Wet Visible free water PARTICLE SIZE Description Size (in) Boulder Greater than 12 Cobble 3-12 Gravel Coarse 3/4 -3 Fine 1/5-3/4 Sand Coarse 1/16-1/5 Medium 1164 -1116 Fine 1/300-1/64 Siltand Clay Less than 1/300 Plasticity Description Criteria Nonplastic A 1,8-in, thread cannot be rolled at any water content Low The thread can barely be rolled and the lump cannot be formed when drier than the plastic limit. Medium The thread is easy to roll and not much time is required to reach the plastic limit. The thread cannot be rerolled after reaching the plastic limit. The lump crumbles when drier than the plastic limit. High It takes considerable time rolling and kneading to reach the plastic limit. The thread can be rerolled several times after reaching the plastic limit. The lump can be formed without crumbling when drier than the plastic limit. EI BORING RECORD PROJECT NAME I PROJECT NUMBER I BORING Lennar Homes SD365 B-I SITE LOCATION I START I FINISH I SHEET NO. Tabata Development, Carlsbad, CA 2/5/2014 2/5/2014 I 1 of 2 DRILLING COMPANY I DRILLING METHOD I LOGGED BY I CHECKED BY Pacific Drilling I Hollow Stem Auger TSL MAF DRILLING EQUIPMENT I BORING DIA. (in) I TOTAL DEPTH (ft) I GROUND ELEV (ft) I DEPTHIELEV. GROUND WATER (ft] CME75 6 I 41.5 94 i N/A /na SAMPLING METHOD NOTES Hammer 140 lbs., Drop: 30 in. (Automatic) ETR -87%, N60 _87/60*N_ 1.45* N z o ZW' Oo- z 0 Ui z Ui iZ <-S - i -J 5 Z,- 'D u, WI- r& :. = w _ I- I-s w DESCRIPTIONANDCLASSIFICATION Ui ci -j W < zw_j W 0 FILL: Silty sand (SM), dense, orangish brown, moist, fine to coarse grained sand, nonplastic. B-i PA OLD ALLUVIUM: Sandy lean clay (CL), very stiff to - P1 CR < )12 S- 2 18 26 CP hard, dark brown, moist, fine to medium grained sand, - El low plasticity. 9 R —90 (0% Gravel: 48% Sand: 52% Fines) —5 - LL-37, PL-14, P1-23 R-3 12 46 44 12.6 121 UW Hard, orangish brown, fine grained sand, low plasticity. - 26 M - —85 —10 - 10 Very stiff, increase in fine grained sand, low plasticity. - x S-4 18 26 10 -80 -15 - 15 R-5 13 Hard, increase in fines towards bottom of sample. - 40 39 9.4 114 uw 21 -75 -20 - 16 20 S-6 23 - - - - Lean clay (CL), reddish brown and brown, very stiff, - 10 moist, medium plasticity. PP-31/2 TSF -70 GROUP GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS INC. THIS SUMMARY APPLIES ONLY AT THE LOCATION TF I THIS BORING AND AT THE TIME OF DRILLING. I FIGURE 71 9245 Activity Road, Suite 103 ISUBSURFACE CONDITIONS MAY DIFFER AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND MAY CHANGE AT THIS LOCATION I I INTH THE PASSAGE OFTIME. THE DATA I A-i a DELTA San Diego, CA 92126 1PRESENTED IS A SIMPLIFICATION OF THE ACTUAL I CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED. I Ll . a ---. 0 0 I I I I I I GDC LOG BORING MMX SOIL SD 50365 LOGS.GPJ GDCLOG.GDT 3/3/14 tTj —r-r •1 .L I I I I I I I I (A 0 a ç B) m C 0 0 DEPTH (feet) 03 r-03 V 3 r B 3n) m ror-0 W — I. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ELEVATION Z• CD -' 6) 0 m ØC) a o 6)03 0 U) 03 (feet) 0 M. 0 ij CD co LX SAMPLE TYPE 0 iii Co Z Z ci) ______________________________________________________________ _________ - CD G) 0 SAMPLE NO. r. a r q PENETRATION () m a RESISTANCE 0 0•0 (BLOWS/61N) 00 91 90 C) 0 BLOW/FTN' C - 0 0) 0 (0 3 cf) ___ NO .2. B) —xc> 0) (D Z z MOISTURE m 0 -r r CD, C _) C) -4 - (%) rA DRY DENSITY O 0 I p (0 (Pd)OD 0r I- 0 _____ c OTHER TESTS z (D U) 0 -0 rC,,O -I O-OCmX C..) C.) . —m--t--1c— 0 . (31 0 Cii 0 DEPTH (feet) o Imz-nwK I I ______________ _____________________________ I I _________ _____________to ':•: : • . : :': :.•• i iI..I\Ii I GRAPHIC o 8o,c)z> LOG - a Zj<_D Z-I o g DCn I -30 50 ui -- 0 mogz co !D.Z 5(D CD I * I co pr"omr- - m>_I-< - CCD Cfl• 523 03 I z ° Z3 - 6) C) ca I co 0 Tl cL 0 m C - . - i rnmm 3o (D003 I (D IC I C,) C) Z m 0- > (tI U)030. CD 3o,3 - 0 0.- 29 - -O -I I 0 2 C) >> 2c. 3 o 0 mc,,i.. -I -i-1zi C IOO 0 CD z Ln z U) -o I - 303 g-aCo I 0 wCJ1Cfl -(F'.) I z C 44 (D CL Ci) 0 gD (n CL -n rn o -n (0 0)(D I coo.g I CD CL > 0 0 0 mr.)Imo Cl) =m W a) C 5 - .< I CD co a.2 C Z a 0 m' - • _ a- - I <I')Z m FL 0 =r > -I 0 I m —i--- (flC. iflC. RflRftJC, MMX Sf11 SI) Sfl3S5IffSfPi fD Of OfT 3/3114 ;, a La - 0 01 0 DEPTH (feet) fl) E K F a F ° m ELEVATION m C 0 -4 03 01 0 00 01 0 (feet) -. - CO [><( SAMPLE TYPE a: g r Z SAMPLE NO. 0 PENETRATION L, m > -..jO)(3i C))CD CT co-.1 RESISTANCE 0 Q CO (BLOWS/61N) 5 o L 0 — - BLO:FT "N" c; c CL 0) CD —i CO MOISTURE m .I5J) °' 0 (%) -'c C) Z DRY DENSITY , i I - () - ci (pci') 22 c OTHER TESTS Z C) zmz)mu)c C)(Cl DEPTH (feet) O -lmmw _______ I _______________ I I I I I ________ C0 * co IliP ' I I GRAPHIC z LOG ZO -Ioc m Z -I -u 3(/) 3-0 0 ' 0 mC)zC/)zz og - 0> CD -' I - • - m>-1-< 3 C0 C< 3 CO - -v 0) 0 3 o-> Br- 0.. 30 Z Ot><> -I J I 9. < <r 0 0 I'.> I I 9) . X Ex I -, - > gF 0CD 0. I I o.-- 5 0 g 00 oo 00. 8w - r-i (I) CI) c U) - (I) CO 0. O)< 0 ,,(.)m a '<0 CD Co..- 0 Q) CO CD -< I 0 3S CD I 0 -CLco o ii 3 0. CL o U) 0 . m gm 0.0 @ I I - )- 3 01CtI m C) -n - I CD 0. CD cl. PL SD > C) -I m - > G) Q) . 0 I I Q) C - CO -n 2 0 CD ' A) C) m P ___--i--- . GDC LOG RORING MMX SOIL SD SD365 LOGS GPJ GDCLOG GOT 3/3114 Ii I I--I T_, tpjl I U) M U, 1 0 01 0 DEPTH (feet) ü) r U) Z, —A I 3U i-rn r0rDi- co ________________________________________________________________ I I I I I I I I _________ I I I I I I I I I -4 I I I I I OD co co ELEVATION ' m 0 C) a L) U' u ° (feet) - m C SAMPLE TYPE rn (0>5 z U' = T SAMPLE NO. 0 -, C) r- 0 • —I PENETRATION m < > RESISTANCE 0 Cl) C) 0 (BLOWS/61N) __ 90 -° C) 11 0) ' BLOW/FTN . a CL c:______________________________ ____ CO I— Co rz 0) CD —4 r.) MOISTURE rn Z 0 c F) (%) rn C. Lo z DRY DENSITY 0 0 o I p r'. C) (pcf) re or =r 3 0 Ce 0 Cl)- OTHER :E C) ->a - 0 z CD Cl) O<Ce0 01 OcmI TESTS Z ocnm>cn m - 01 53 Zxöocnc o 01 0 DEPTH (feet) 8 0-Imzmw I I _________ I I __________________ _________________ ________________ _________ _________ __________ __________ __________ __________ -.4 CeD>>C)0> o * co CD GRAPHIC LOG Z rj o _____ oCfl0z>t, ______ ____________ ___________ ______ _______ ••• _______ i cn —. 0 lrmC)ö>m m Z -I - 0Ø C) - Cop- CD I 1 3i.0 °--TI CM -- mogzcnmz 09. (D. D CDB> I CD I I M 0 * z Dr11cmi- - m> -i-<00 0 I (0 (DØ) ECD I CD a.Q. I 30 CL r cn I (OW I I 2 2. CO 0 I I CD I m I I L a C~CDIC 0 m Ce ° C z - — M CD-. I I . 0 CA () I I Cl) (OW C) m > 0-tr0 I o. Ic, Cl) 00- -D r-.IO rn(J)C) Cl) Q C) >o> I 1ZJ I -•I 1° . o C OO : z I I I I .-I .< CD > — o 4m CL B @° 21 - l- D. ' co(0 0 WCl) -<I Z C I OI I 31 i w 11Q. C CL Ce > 0 - W m I I on I 0 I 0 0 . I I — cCcn - Cl) Ri U) '1 (I) I ,•C) - D I • -°-!° > C)> _ Cfl W 00 -.I (D ! ol z 0 c I C O. CD ° ° I 31 CD 0 z ° m a 1 p -I m . El Ll El BORING RECORD ILennarHomes PROJECT NAME PROJECT NUMBER BORING SD365 B-4 SITE LOCATION START FINISH SHEET NO. Tabata Development, Carlsbad, CA 2/4/2014 2/4/2014 1 of 1 DRILLING COMPANY DRILLING METHOD LOGGED BY CHECKED BY Pacific Drilling Hollow Stem Auger TSL I MAF DRILLING EQUIPMENT BORING DIA. (in) TOTAL DEPTH (ft) GROUND ELEV (ft) DEPTH IELE V. GROUND WATER (ft] CME75 6 21.5 102 X N/A /na SAMPLING METHOD NOTES Hammer: 140 lbs, Drop: 30 in. (Automatic) ETR - 87%, N60 - 87/60 * N - 1.45 * N z CL o z LU . QP: C. Z W LL C-) DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION c W < U) LU m )- 0I- o U) FILL: Clayey sand (SC), medium dense, brown, dry to - - B-i PA moist, fine to coarse grained sand, low plasticity. PI • 100 CR : ./:: (1% Gravel: 60% Sand: 39% Fines) - X S-2 10 15 22 . ::. LL-28, PL-14, PI-14 I // OLD ALLUVIUM: Clayey sand (SC), medium dense to • - R-3 16 44 43 8.7 121 uw - 25 M /7 dense, brown, moist, fine to coarse grained sand, low 19 (>/. plasticity. -10 - 10 - Medium dense, orangish brown, fine to coarse grained X S4 17 25 /7 . sand (mostly medium grained), trace gravel up to 1-inch - Q / in maximum dimension. 9 90 - 15 - Clayey sand with gravel (SC), very dense, increased - moisture, increase in coarse grained sand, gravel up to R-5 17 66 64 10.0 122 uw .. 2%-inches in maximum dimension. - 25 M A. 41 —85 -20 X / SANTIAGO FORMATION: Claystone (CL), light gray, - 26 38 20 - - - orange stains, moist, low plasticity, indurated. -80 - Total Depth: 21% feet No groundwater encountered DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. FIGURE Loup .. .SUBSURFACE 9245 Activity Road, Suite 103 CONDITIONS MAY DIFFER AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND MAY CHANGE AT THIS LOCATION WiTH ThE PASSAGE OF TIME. THE DATA A-4 San Diego, CA 92126 ESENE%ISAS1PUFICATION OF THE ACTUAL CONDITION 1 . S 0 0 GDC LOG BORING MMX SOIL SD 50365 LOGSGPJ GDcLOGGDT 3/3114 - -I ca a 0 0C 0 DEPTH (feet) D) '°r 3U - rm o w I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ELEVATION 0 n 0 O - - - (feet) - m C SAMPLE TYPE Ô z C') Ln SAMPLE NO. g 0 3u O —1 PENETRATION m t.) -14-J RESISTANCE 0 cn . C) (BLOWS / 6 IN) 5 a) Z - C) L/ I1 O 0 Q) BLOW/FTN a > (0 1 ___________________________________ —> C) MOISTURE m _________________________________________ ______ ca a)r c.) Z DRY DENSITY C) 0 I p . 0 (pcf) Or z=r -, - OTHER TESTS G)0 C) (D OOC-nI _________________________________________________________________________________________ _____________ Z 1' _ - o CDm -I x C C, DEPTH (feet) co o O -1m zm-zm C) -CD GRAPHIC o OCfl0Z>t1 LOG Z O - cm>O217 z o o<O - o 0(1) -_0.o B°' BIr P 0 u B 0•(1) I p (71 _ - -u mogzcn:rz L & I0 CA C0I *CA DmC)mr -'< I C) ç Z 3 C) Q. Ir- -4 a) I Ir- -U ' (I) - a) R3 -4 m Cl) CD'< I .Ic T m CD — — -O 0 -Iii 11 I 30. 0, I V 0 m -4 C - I Ca'.. - — C) I - -.-. a) C) 0— m > C)'0 I Cn F" "° I Cl) a) -o m - '- o2 C) >o> I -. 0. (D I -4 5 m -1 -.l.iz 4 C 0. I -0a) I CD(D -< .. C) (0< -,c I I ia.- Z 3 I 00 I Ecn a) (D a 33 0 0 0.- cnl 0 - I a) cn CD a) 0 3 m I 0. ,o u fl1 I 0 -°- 3 CD. C) > a)15 I Co D(0 L I -.03 0 Omm_. (I) W G) I (D .0 O z C Z 00 i.o r, (fl C 0. IR OF ICL :3 Co. 2 2. . 0 M <r'JZ - C) m a) -.t . I m I I — -- i• Li I. I. is BORING RECORD ILennar PROJECT NAME IPROJECT NUMBER I BORING Homes SD365 B-5 SITE LOCATION I START I FINISH I SHEET NO. Tabata Development, Carlsbad, CA 2/4/2014 2/4/2014 2 of 2 DRILLING COMPANY I DRILLING METHOD I LOGGED BY I CHECKED BY Pacific Drilling Hollow Stem Auger TSL MAF DRILLING EQUIPMENT I BORING DIA. (in) TOTAL DEPTH (ft) l GROUND ELEV (ft) I DEPThIELEV. GROUND WATER (ft] CME75 6 I 36.5 I 117 !L N/A/na SAMPLING METHOD NOTES Hammer 140 lbs., Drop: 30 in. (Automatic) ETR -87%, N50 _87/60*N_ 1.45* N z ZW 0- Z - .2 Q >- W z w -j co ._. I — ...-. wi- -J o_ (n___ W I- 0 DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION O w W -J Q. >.. 0'- - O W < C)EL m 0 R 54 52 17.4 114 UW SANTIAGO FORMATION: Lean claystone (CL), light — 20 M gray with orange staining, moist, low plasticity, strongly 34 indurated, hard. —90 PP>4Y2TSF 30 _ X Siltstone (ML), light gray with orange staining, moist, low S-9 30 44 — — . plasticity, strongly indurated, hard. 18 —85 -35 — 35 - N R-10 36 35 26.1 97 Uw — 22 —80 — Total Depth: 36% feet No groundwater encountered -40 — 40- -75 -45 — 45- -70 ROT OUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. THIS SUMMARY APPLIES ONLY AT THE LOCATION OF THIS BORING AND AT THE TIME OF DRILLING. FIGURE 71 G 71 9245 Activity Road, Suite 103 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS MAY DIFFER AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND MAY CHANGE AT THIS LOCATION WITH WITH THE PASSAGE OF TIME. THE DATA A-5 b San Diego, CA 92126 PRESENTED IS A SIMPLIFICATION OF THE ACTUAL CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED. S 0 S S BORING RECORD PROJECT NAME I PROJECT NUMBER I BORING I Lennar Homes I SD365 B-6 SITE LOCATION I START FINISH SHEET NO. Tabata Development, Carlsbad, CA 2/4/2014 I 2/4/2014 I 1 of 1 DRILLING COMPANY I DRILLING METHOD LOGGED BY I CHECKED BY Pacific Drilling Hollow Stem Auger I TSL MAF DRILLING EQUIPMENT I BORING DIA. (in) I TOTAL DEPTH (ft) I GROUND ELEV (ft) I DEPTHELEV. GROUND WATER (ft] CME75 I 6 I 21.5 109 I1 N/A /na SAMPLING METHOD NOTES Hammer 140 lbs., Drop: 30 in. (Automatic) ETR _87%,N60 87I60*N_ 1.45* N 2 Q W >- . 0 z z 00- Z Z W w 1- Ui -J w -j 0. 1- z—. w wi- I C)) I-Ui I DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION 0. LU w -J 0. < w5 Zjjj -J > 01- o 0 LU < Cl)IL U 0 0 - - :7. EJ.hh Clayey sand (SC), loose to medium dense, I PA . moderately brown, dry to moist, fine to coarse grained P1 El . .. sand, low plasticity. N / OLD ALLUVIUM: Sandy lean day (CL), very stiff, light R-2 17 16 15.6 108 R UW • - M gray, dry to moist, low plasticity. PP-4% TSF - —105 (0% Gravel: 47% Sand: 53% Fines) —5 - - LL-44, PL-18, P1-26 - S-3 11 16 6 - Lean clay (CL), very stiff, darkbrown, moist, fine to medium grained sand, low plasticity. PP-4V2 TSF —100 —10 - 10 Trace coarse to fine sand, low plasticity. N R-4 31 30 14.4 118 UW - 18 M SANTIAGO FORMATION: Lean claystone (CL), light / blueish gray, moist, low plasticity, moderately weathered, very stiff to hard. —15 - 15 - / PP-21,4 to 4Y2 TSF - >( S-5 14 20 8 —90 —20 - 20 Orange and light gray, dry to moist, strongly indurated, - IHI R-6 11 20 53 51 13.5 120 LIW - hard. 33 - Total Depth: 21%feet No groundwater encountered —85 GROUP UP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. THIS SUMMARY APPLIES ONLY AT THE LOCATION OF THIS BORING AND AT THE TIME OF DRILLING. FIGURE 71 71 DELTJ 9245 Activity Road, Suite 103 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS MAY DIFFER AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND MAY CHANGE AT THIS LOCATION WiTH THE PASSAGE OF TIME. THE DATA A-6 San Diego, CA 92126 PRESENTED IS A SIMPLIFICATION OF THE ACTUAL CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED. 0 BORING RECORD ~Lpnnar PROJECT NAME I PROJECT NUMBER I BORING I B-7 Homes SD365 SITE LOCATION I START I FINISH I SHEET NO. Tabata Development, Carlsbad, CA 2/4/2014 2/4/2014 1 of 2 DRILLING COMPANY I DRILLING METHOD I LOGGED BY I CHECKED BY Pacific Drilling I Hollow Stem Auger TSL MAF DRILLING EQUIPMENT I BORING DIA. (in) I TOTAL DEPTH (ft) l GROUND ELEV (ft) I DEPTHiELEV. GROUND WATER (ft] CME75 6 31.5 I 108 1 N/A Ina SAMPLING METHOD NOTES Hammer: 140 lbs., Drop: 30 in. (Automatic) ETR _87%, N60 87/60*N 1.45 * N z W a- 0 o— z - .! 2 W -j z W J a_ Z - I- — '- ZC w ô&I-W WI- I (I) = I- 2: (9 o DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION a. W -J a. < ZW W 0:9 9 QI- a-- W (9 a W < Ci) U) a- ca - - fILL Clayey sand (SC), loose to medium dense, B-i PA brown, moist, fine to coarse grained sand, low plasticity. P1 CR X OLD ALLUVIUM: Sandy lean day (CL), stiff to very —105 2 10 15 El stiff, brown, moist, fine to coarse grained, low plasticity. (0% Gravel: 42% Sand: 58% Fines) - - LL-46, PL-16, P1-30 - R-3 16 15 10.3 110 UW Orangish brown, few cobbles. 8 —100 - —10 - 10 S-4 13 19 Lean clay (CL), very stiff, dark brown, moist, low - 8 plasticity. PP-11h to 3 TSF —95 I —15 - 15 _ - Lean clay with sand (CL), hard, orangish brown, moist, - H R-5 32 31 18.7 111 U W trace fine to coarse grained sand, low plasticity. 20 M SANTIAGO FORMATION: Claystone (CL), light gray —90 and orangish brown, moist, low plasticity, weakly to moderately indurated, very stiff. —20 - 20 - - S-6 14 20 9 —85 GuOUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC.'F THIS SUMMARY APPLIES ONLY AT THE LOCATION THIS BORING AND AT THE TIME OF DRILLING. FIGURE GRO I 9245 Activity Road, Suite 103SUBSURFACECONDITIONSMAYDIFFERATOTHER LOCATIONS AND MAY CHANGE AT THIS LOCATION I NTH THE PASSAGE OF TIME. THE DATA A-7 a DELT San Diego, CA 92126 PRESENTED IS A SIMPLIFICATION OF THE ACTUAL CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED. 0 . . o GDC LOG BORING MMX SOIL SD SD365 LOGS.GPJ GDCLOG.GDT 3/3/14 r o DEPTH (feet) W co r- m cr - -4 co ci ci ELEVATION ' Ui 0 C, 0 0 (ii 0 Ui 0 (feet) —. 0 x__________ SAMPLE TYPE 0 Z C -I CD 0 0 SAMPLE NO. 0 co _____ 2 . ! PENETRATION m QJ RESISTANCE 0 g. C) (BLOWS/61N) 5 B) -rL L) > C C) 0 Ui BLOW/FT'N' 0 0 r co 4 - No —> 0) (D F' 0) MOISTURE Z m 0 CD; .)CI) (%) () Z o co DRY DENSITY W 0) 0 0 • (pcf) z 0 3 - OTHER TESTS 0 z C) CD Cl Q OCmI ____________________________________________________________ Z Ui 0 Ui o DEPTH (feet) 1 -I 3 xo > O-4 mzmW I I I I I I I I I I I I c - GRAPHIC LOG Z --I / cm>oZt, 0 z tJ o<Q!: - m - lr- --nO>m Z-I C/) B)(/, u -U _ - M OK Z U)TZ (a og . - c> - a o ca * I - m>-< 0-1 00 Z 0. =r Cfl0 i °-90 a m C Z - m A U)0 - m 0— - > 0-FO 8p. - -1 r- O C) >0!:> M - c 3 =1 00 ö Z xC)O z z I- CD . > z z - 44 m0 - 5C) a -<3I Er (n > . - w m am U) x C) CID 'Ti - > 0 C,-- ca W 0— cl(a Z c -4 C 0 CD z z 0 W -. -ml 4Z C) m > p -4 ___--i-- S BORING RECORD ILennar PROJECT NAME I PROJECT NUMBER I BORING Homes SD365 B-8 SITE LOCATION I START I FINISH SHEET NO. Tabata Development, Carlsbad, CA 2/4/2014 2/4/2014 I 1 of 1 DRILLING COMPANY DRILLING METHOD LOGGED BY I CHECKED BY Pacific Drilling Hollow Stem Auger I TSL MAF DRILLING EQUIPMENT I BORING DIA. (in) I TOTAL DEPTH (ft) l GROUND ELEV (ft) I DEPTHIELEV. GROUND WATER (ft CME75 6 I 21.5 116 I Y N/A /na SAMPLING METHOD NOTES Hammer: 140 lbs., Drop: 30 in. (Automatic) ETR _87%, N80 87/60*N 1.45 N z a. o ZW Oo— z LU £ Ui z W -j zco <- - I- 0 ° '. & Z' WI- _ 0_ -j 0_ LLJ u)cO.__ I- w' & - I- DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION W -J >- 0I- 0- LLJ 0 o W < C/) j, CL 0 ..-115 - - - FILL: Sandy lean clay (CL), stiff, brown, moist, low PA plasticity. P1 El SANTIAGO FORMATION: Sandy fat claystone (CH), S-2 16 23 gray and orangish brown, moist, few fine grained sand, high plasticity, weathered. PP-21/2 1SF 00( - (0% Gravel: 32% Sand: 68% Fines) —5 - 5 - _ LL-55, PL-20, P1-35 _110 R-3 14 32 31 23.5 98 DS 18 - Interbedded with clayey sandstone (SC), dark orange brown, moist, very fine grained, low plasticity. —10 - 10 X —105 16 23 Blueish gray and orange lean claystone (CL), medium 9 plasticity, slightly indurated, very stiff to hard. PP-21/2 TSF 15 15— —100 R-5 11 40 39 23.8 102 uw 22 —20 - 20 Blueish gray, strongly indurated, hard. g s-S 26 18 65 94 - • 39 PP>4% 1SF - Total Depth: 211,4 feet - No groundwater encountered GROUP1 G O (JP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. THIS SUMMARY APPLIES ONLY AT THE LOCATION OF THIS BORING AND AT THE TIME OF DRILLING. FIGURE 71 9245 Activity Road, Suite 103 DELTJ TJ San SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS MAY DIFFER AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND MAY CHANGE AT THIS LOCATION WiTH THE PASSAGE OF TIME. THE DATA A-8 Diego, CA 92126 PRESENTED IS SIMPLIFICATION OF THE ACTUAL CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED. fl 10 GDC_ LOG _BORING MMX SOIL SO 50365 LOGS.GPJ OOCLOG.GDT 3/3/14 I I Cl) 0 0 Cl) 0 0 DEPTH (feet) 0) - ) - 0) m 3D _rm 0)oW rO0- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I - I I I ELEVATION m 0 0 (7. (feet) m c c° I x1J I SAMPLE TYPE Er 0 rn 4.tJ g) ci 0 4 CD SAMPLE w NO. . 0 -, G) a o PENETRATION m 000 RESISTANCE C) Cl) (BLOWS /6IN) 5 0) - L) 0 0 (() _ M BLOW/FT "N" > C) ••T CL c: o 3 a (0 NJQ)1 - M - - NO -xc> - O)CD-I Z CD MOISTURE rTi 0 (%) - -l rn z p -. DRY DENSITY OD W 0) 0 0 0 0 (pcf) 3 0 0 OTHER TESTS C) CD ' Q-OCmI z CD m -rn--i-Ic-0' !ZXI0C I',) - 0 DEPTH (feet) OD - -I 3i o l O-rnzmw I I I I I I I -1 >0 m5cn zmEm \\\\\\\\ :Ni1\ GRAPHIC * QCl)C)z>o LOG Z C7l II_mC)ö>m m -. r, 0 I I Co (DC) On -- CD 0) -D o w 1 V '" 0 32I 5"< r I j- w'F air * x prTlornr - rn> --< - 0 I Q I " Z M -' CD CD 0 0)0) I '<C) -°' I I M-10 -1 -I I 03 m - - 2.L O 3D. -D MO CD - irnmrn 0' m -w I Cn'< M CD rn 0 OC Z I> Or m I I 1 03 (p I T 0 m _CD - -. -L I J P-0) 1 0 2 C c - iI0 CD 0.1 3E 0 <rC) ,1cm zz CD 2. I Iz 53 I (7IQ > z 0 1m ;13 I CD z I - <3I c mO) QJI I - 'ii 3I ,-' c-I (p - 2. I - 3 23 Z3 m c, 0) CD'< . I 11 53 CD 0 3" rn-Io ce Ill >0 CD C 31 m CD P -C) CL - o 0 M m CDI 30.1 'co El 31 - J-I 3" -I I m I I GDC LOG RORIF4G MMX SOIL SO 50355 LOGS GPJ GOCLOG GOT 313114 I I Cfl 0 0 CS DEPTH (feet) 0 - rr- n - F 0 m _________ 3 , , w — I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ELEVATION 0 0 L/ - - 0 0 1 CD 0 (fl 0 (fl (feet) m c [)X( [)x( SAMPLE TYPE CD 5 z Z a' 11) ci SAMPLE NO. 0 O PENETRATION 91) . m < FD-> 0 C) . 001 0 M J 0 c000i RESISTANCE 0 . C) U (BLOWS/61N) 5 0. L/ 90 Z C) C) 0 W 46 CD rL "N" BLOW/FT . ______________________________ ____ 0 co I- :1 c > 0) CD —4 - co MOISTURE — Z m 0 CD C/) CO (°"°) — D C a) W 0) 0 0 I -'1 p DRY DENSITY _ (pcf) oF - 0 3; C" - -> _ OTHER TESTS C) CD CS QOCmI _____________________________________________________________________________________ Z (31 0 3 i DEPTH (feet) CID o O mzmw I I 0 Ca GRAPHIC LOG -CID o * m Z-t 31 - lrmC)ö>m -u D U i " XCI) aim a, -- mogzcnm z og cc a; a 5 U C o -> I -z 21r Ir * Pmomr- - m>-1-< 0 0 -,ci. I CO - C) 2: Z C) - CCD a. 2 CD -1 3 -I morn CL CD 0) -n cn 0 corn -"< a to 0 0 - . I o' .1(5 m (I) C) Z r 0— — i> mo,- I -o SID (DD m m 5> 22 o > 0-Il-C) I - , Tcn3 a) o. >oE> -1 -.I.tz 1 C I - EL - 0 r" 2 s ..- z C CD I I CO _' Z 3_ 0 z W ( Z 0 CL c" @aI CD a .(3I CD C 0 1 I m QO3 CD 0 (P - m - -ca C) '1 col CD a) a) 5•o ö C1 W ° z — r 0 o _wI -<__ m I -I m _____---i--- . . . S * - • -. - _ _ ___ OF ——. - OEM M- LIENIMEENE I __ ____ w _ M ELIMMEMIN 10 F14M E09=01MOMMIN Kim J§;=7--~MNNNNN MC-ME -ii•_ H 1 0 ql' M MEMIN ____ Er4d _ ag WAGON WINIMEMEMIN MW ME M MOMINOMMIN NOME GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS,INC. Document .13-0339 ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 CONEPENETOMETERDATA I a 100 10 1,000 Normalized Friction Ratio, F ----- _________________ I 'iini I, Gravelly JTT dense isand - .- baLe _. •••i _.iuuu uuii iIIPIIU!UIIII ' L L _ • ), ~AbL~MFMMWRMM ____________ (6) Clean to silty sand - p ti1b Milli "_(5)1!!IIi1III ---- - . . •Ir - 1I L~~ensilh,,e,JIIIIILMIIII hull I•.iiii P—. Pda Soil Type (SBT) 0 2 4 6 8 10 U 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 p 65 Sondy Silt Sand Mix Silt Mix Silt M(x Silty Sand Clay VS Fine Gr Silty Sand Silty Clay Sand Silt Mix :Silt Mix SIltMix Silty Clay Silt Mix Silty Clay 0.1 GROUP GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS ) 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 9! SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 10 70 F I I I I I Document No. 13-0339 SOIL CLASSIFICATION (CPT-1) Project No. SD365 FIGURE A-llb - --. - S • MEN N~W:11110 ME I--- ME== ME NEM N No ______ ME _ 111110—— - __ _ Ill _u__ - W=-02111111MMMM ENUilm mot - - __ ___ WOMEN WOMIMMMMM ___ MEMM= ___ II ______ ONEPIM mow: No Ml Mr.___ _ __ in Ill Ill 1IJ GR O UP . 'g- ' • CONSULTANTS, Document -' I 13-0339 ENGI ESTIMATED ST i ie i: 1(CPT-1)I Skin Friction (Fs) [TSF] Tip Resistance (Qc) [TSF] Friction Ratio (FR) [%J 0 2 4 6 8 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0 2 4 6 8 :iii 104 10 15 —k ------ __ __ __ 15 20 __ ________ _ 20 LLJ p w 25 ---------- -ii 25 I I- a. _____ 30 ----- ;— 30 35 35 _______ 40 - ____ 1 40 45 i— 45 50—---- ---- 50 r 55 55 GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Document No. 13-0339 ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS 1, 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 CONE PENETOMETER DATA (CPT-2) Project No. SD365 J& SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 FIGURE A-12a p 0 u 100 10 .•. .. . f- • • .. -- - - — -s -' - .._-.,.•4 ._-3- -S. •-. --- -_$___ !'fl ;. •'-••-=- -- -+-.---- ... -..,'. -- 1,000 ____ -- ----- -..-.--- ... - . ----••----- r'-' Gravelly and to dense sand AM _•lul_.-uI -iIIII-i'.v'IuIII 9v'i ----r---•-- __u . — zwji *r'•• "nd to sandy silt (5~ ~11 I I ~ys r ;-did __p•____T.• V ---- — __•ii ...:z_juIflI_luII LL I I' 11111 Soil Type (SBT) 0 2 4 6 8 10 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Sand Mix Silty Sand Sandy Silt Clay Sandy Silt Sand Silt Mix Sand Silty Sand Silty Clay Clay VS-Sandy 0.1 GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Y' ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 I& SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 tu -- - Document No. 13-0339 SOIL CLASSIFICATION (CPT-2) . Project No. SD365 FIGURE A-12b Strength (Su) [PSF] Tip Resistance (Qc) [TSFJ Soil Type [Ic] 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0 1 2 3 4 0 - - - - - - - - 0 5 ---s;--- 10 ______ __ - 10 15 - - ---- - 15 20 - - —1 20 P7LU - S W 25 - :__ ____________ ____________ ____________ - 25 - •1 CL I ____ __ • I-. — _____ - ____________ _____________ - - w 30 - o 1 - 4 30 ____________ - 35 -- - --------i:— - 35 -,- - 40 - = 40 ____! ____ - __________ ___________ __________ __________ - F 45 - 50 - I— - - 50 55 55 GROUP GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC.. Document No. 13-0339 7 ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS ESTIMATED STRENGTH (CPT-2) Project No. SD365 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 J SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 FIGURE A-12c Skin Friction (Fs) [TSF] Tip Resistance (Qc) [TSF] Friction Ratio (FR) [%] 0 2 4 6 8 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0 2 4 6 8 0 - ... - .. .... .. .. 0 -f Sw 10 - 10 15 20 _-t - 15 _ - - 20 w 25 25 a- Ui ___________ =1- ___________ ___________ ___________ - 30 30------ _ - -- ____E 35 _______ _______ _______ _______ - 40 __________-- __________ __________ __________ 45 .4 - I 50 L 50 GR0UP GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Document No. 13-0339 , ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 CONE PENETOMETER DATA (CPT-3) Project No. SD365 ,L'& SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 FIGURE A-13a II • _______ • fliIJThl I ______________ NONE -_ - GROuPi GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Document No. 13-0339 1 ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 FIGURE A-13b ;.] :.i [.1t(PT-3) Project No. SD365 [.i I ______________ (7) Gravelly sand to dense sand _____ ______ 0_____ ___ ______________ Ah. V(6- - _ r Wmr --- -- V - U milli _ I! F. Mpg iui•wiui I I h1 11111 LIII Velocity (Vs) [FPS] Tip Resistance (Qc) [TSF] Soil Type [Ic] 0 500 1000 1500 2000 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0 1 2 3 4 0 - -j-.-.. - ____________ - 0 - - 701 3 __ __ I 776 10 10 - ______ 627 C 15 15 -1 - 1000 - - 20 -j - - w W 1116 ----er-- 25 25 a- LU 934 30 30 909 1175 40_----- 40 1551 45 45 - -i V8d 56 V830 - 1,168 ft/s —356 mIs - 2013 CBC Site Class D 50 ___ I I I I I 50 P1 GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Document No. 13-0339 ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS SHEAR WAVE VELOCITY DATA (CPT-3) Project No. SD365 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 ___ SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 FIGURE A-13c Skin Friction (Fs) [TSF] Tip Resistance (Qc) [TSF] Friction Ratio (FR) [%] 0 4 8 12 16 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0 2 4 6 8 0 - __________ ____________ ____________ 5 : 10 ----- ___- __ _ 15 20 20 __ p - Ui LLJ 25 - - —s 25 a. w 30 I- ______ _________ Th - k— 30 - 35 35 -- 40 - - 40 45 __ __ -_____ c-45 - 5 50 0 55 ---- ____________ — 55 GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC.. Document No. 13-0339 ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS ) 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 CONE PENETOMETER DATA (CPT-4) Project No. SD365 ,RJ& SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 FIGURE A-14a -- ._ f Normalized Friction Ratio, F Soil Type (SBT) 0 2 4 6 8 10 I 1,000 0 a 100 10 0.1 GROUP GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS ) ' 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 £& SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 Silty Sand 5ang Interbedded S1 Ix I= Ell Ix Sand Si M VS Fine Gr lu Document No. 13-0339 SOIL CLASSIFICATION (CPT-4) . Project No. SD365 FIGURE A-14b ----- ___________________ j MIN (7) Gravelly sand to dense sand EVA Elopp,dol MENEM IN mom ~w_F---PdPwPP-- 5111NI~WIEFAIIII iIIIIiY1II _jI'_&4- g• 6) Clean to silty sand - .IIIH wailull "Ity sand to sandy silt --p..--.-------- - - . V (1) Sensitive, fine g _______i•uu •uriuu ••iii ••IIII d Room - POA Fra_n2_wM_w 45 U 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 :: Strength (Su) [PSF] Tip Resistance (Qc) [TSF] Soil Type [IC] 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0 1 2 3 4 0 - - - - - - - - 0 5 -- --c- - 5 = ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ - 10 10 — = 15 - 15 ;- F- 20 - k— 20 p - L UJ 25 U 25 -- _ I - I- a- LU 30 - - - - 30 ______ I 35 35 40------40 - ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ - 45 45 -; - 50 50 5;7- 55 _______ 41 L 55 GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Document No. 13-0339 ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS ESTIMATED STRENGTH (CPT-4) Project No. SD365 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 FIGURE A-14c Skin Friction (Fs) [TSF] Tip Resistance (Qc) [TSF] Friction Ratio (FR) [%J 0 4 8 12 16 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0 2 4 6 8 : __ ________ - -f-.- 0 I 5 10 10 I I __ - - _______ _______ l _______ _______ _______ 15__________> 15 -20 - ILl - w 25 --------- 25 001- - w 30 30 35 35 40 40 45 I :45 50 50 GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Document No. 13-0339 ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 CONE PENETOMETER DATA (CPT-5) Project No. SD365 JII& SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 FIGURE A-15a Soil Type (SBT) 0 2 4 6 8 10 Normalized Friction Ratio, F 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 I VS FlneGr I VS Fine Gr 0.1 GROUP GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. ) ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS ) 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 9I SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 10 50 I I1 I Document No. 13-0339 SOIL CLASSIFICATION (CPT-5) Project No. SD365 FIGURE A-15b .0 ----- I K (7) Gravelly sand to dense sand ..----------- 011011 - --- kw -.-..ul _.luuI i•uuui iIIII IlIIUUII iIIIH!!lI - .. (5) Silty sand to sandy silt _-!----- -. .- .- -- V . - ___r __. (1) Sensitive, fine grained ru------Fall FA' mill I 11111 ... I Interbedded I 1,000 0) c.) 100 10 S •S S S S - . Strength (Su) (PSFJ Tip Resistance (Qc) [TSF] Soil Type [Id 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0 1 2 3 4 0 - - - - - 0 5 , - - - 5 10 10 15 ae 15 77 20 20 LU LU 25 -- 25 a. LU 30 30 35 - - 35 40 -' 40 45 45 ::iiii 1111: GROUP GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Document No. 13-0339 ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS ESTIMATED STRENGTH (CPT-5) Project No. SD365 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 P!J SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 FIGURE A-15c APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTING APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTING Laboratory testing was conducted in a manner consistent with the level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions and in the same locality. No warranty, express or implied, is made as to the correctness or serviceability of the test results, or the conclusions derived from these tests. Where a specific laboratory test method has been referenced, such as ASTM or Caltrans, the reference only applies to the specified laboratory test method, which has been used only as a guidance document for the general performance of the test and not as a "Test Standard". A brief description of the various tests performed for this project follows. Classification: Soils were classified visually according to the Unified Soil Classification System as established by the American Society of Civil Engineers. Visual classification was supplemented by laboratory testing and classification using ASTM D2487. The soil classifications are shown on the boring logs in Appendix A. Particle Size Analysis: Particle size analyses were performed in general accordance with ASTM D422, and were used to supplement visual soil classifications. The test results are summarized in Figures B-I.1 through 13-1.12. Atterberq Limits: ASTM D4318 was also used to determine the liquid limit and plasticity index of selected soil samples. The Atterberg limits were used to refine the soil classifications as shown in Figures B-LI through B-1.12. . Expansion Index: The expansion potential of selected soil samples was estimated in general accordance with the laboratory procedures outlined in ASTM test method D4829. The test results are summarized in Figure B-2. Figure B-2 also presents common criteria for evaluating the expansion potential based on the expansion index. Sulfate Content: To assess the potential for reactivity with concrete, selected soil samples were tested for water soluble sulfate. The sulfate was extracted from the soil cROTJi under vacuum using a 10:1 (water to dry soil) dilution ratio. The extracted solution was tested for water soluble sulfate in general accordance with ASTM D516. The test results are presented in Figure B-3. Figure B-3 also presents common criteria for rl evaluating soluble sulfate content. :\Projec\SD\SD365 Lennar, Tabath DeveIopment\3-0339\13-0339.doc S LABORATORY TESTING (Continued) PH and Resistivity: To assess the potential for reactivity with metal, selected samples were tested for pH and resistivity using Caltrans method 643. The test results are also shown in Figure B-3. Chloride Content: Soil samples were also tested for water soluble chloride. The chloride was extracted from the soil under vacuum using a 10:1 (water to dry soil) dilution ratio. The extracted solution was then tested for water soluble chloride using a calibrated ion specific electronic probe. The test results are shown in Figure B-3. Maximum Density/Optimum Moisture: The maximum density and optimum moisture content of selected soil samples were determined using ASTM D1557 (modified Proctor). The results were corrected for over-size material using ASTM D4718 as a guideline. The test results are summarized in Figure B-4. Direct Shear: The shear strengths of selected samples of the on-site soils were assessed using direct shear testing performed in general accordance with ASTM D3080. These test results are shown in Figures B-5.1 through B-5.5. The shear test results are summarized in Figure B-5.6. R-Value: R-Value tests were performed on a sample of the on-site soils in general accordance with CTM 301. The results are shown in Figures B-6.1 through B-6.4. iS GROUP iS DELTA N:\Projects\SD\SD365 Lennar, Tabata Development\13-0339\13-0339.doc . . 0 0 I I I I 0 I I U.S. Standard Sieve Sizes 218"#100 #00_j'iQrtL 100 90 80 1 78 270 iZ 50 240 30 -2Z5 20 10 - 4-0% Gravel - 48% Sand -+ - - - - - - t-[ - - - 52% Fines—' I I I I - __________ 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 Grain Size in Millimeters COARSE I FINE COARSE I MEDIUM FINE I SILT AND CLAY GRAVEL SAND SAMPLE UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION: CL ATTERBERG LIMITS SAMPLE ID: B-i LIQUID LIMIT: 37 SAMPLE LOCATION: V-51 DESCRIPTION: SANDY LEAN CLAY PLASTIC LIMIT: 14 PLASTICITY INDEX: 23 GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Document No. 13-0339 j ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS Il) 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 SOIL CLASSIFICATION Project No. 5D365 PJJ& SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 - FIGURE B-1.1 U.S. Standard Sieve Sizes #8 #16 #__.#Q #100 #2flft_Jitt_ 100 90 80 -- .70 a, -- -------\ 60 iZ 50 INS (t) I-,u 30 ---- ___ -243 20 10 - ___ ----- ___ ___ - - +-3% Gravel - 52% Sand - - 45% Fines--- - - - - - - - - - ______ - 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 Grain Size in Millimeters COARSE I FINE COARSE MEDIUM FINE SILT AND I CLAY GRAVEL SAND SAMPLE UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION: SC ATTERBERG LIMITS SAMPLE ID: B-2 LIQUID LIMIT: 36 SAMPLE LOCATION: 0.-5. DESCRIPTION: CLAYEY SAND PLASTIC LIMIT: 16 PLASTICITY INDEX: 20 GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Document No. 13-0339 ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS SOIL CLASSIFICATION Project No. SD365 9 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 t' SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 FIGURE B-1.2 S S S S S S 0 9 S S U.S. Standard Sieve Sizes #100 2O0jHvdLn 100 IIIiii4° 90 80 Z 70 71 .000 i50 ci) ' e40 30 20 10 ----- - - +-2% Gravel - 36% Sand -+ - --'-62% - - - - ______ Fines--+ 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 Grain Size in Millimeters COARSE I FINE COARSE MEDIUM FINE SILT AND I CLAY GRAVEL SAND SAMPLE UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION: CL ATTERBERG LIMITS SAMPLE ID: B-3 LIQUID LIMIT: 48 SAMPLE LOCATION: 0.-5. DESCRIPTION: SANDY LEAN CLAY PLASTIC LIMIT: 18 PLASTICITY INDEX: 30 FGROUP GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Document No. 13-0339 L'7SAN ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS SOIL CLASSIFICATION Project No. 5D365 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 DIEGO, CA 92126 FIGURE B-1.3 . . . 0.9 0 0. U.S. Standard Sieve Sizes ioo *4 #8 #16 ##Q #100 #200_C1tL 90• 80 .70 --——-65 60 ----N i50 40 30 20 17 11 10 - 4-1% Gravel - 60% Sand - - - - - - - - - - 39% Fines---* I 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 Grain Size in Millimeters COARSE FINE COARSE MEDIUM FINE SILT AND I CLAY GRAVEL SAND SAMPLE UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION: SC ATTERBERG LIMITS SAMPLE ID: B-4 LIQUID LIMIT: 28 SAMPLE LOCATION: 0-5 DESCRIPTION: CLAYEY SAND PLASTIC LIMIT: 14 PLASTICITY INDEX: 14 GROUP GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Document No. 13-0339 ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS SOIL CLASSIFICATION Project No. SD365 P 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 J?JE& SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 FIGURE B-1.4 U.S. Standard Sieve Sizes 100 s"— - - #8 #16 #30- - #50 #100 2flQ - H &OmL ___ :: .070 50 '47 a) E?40 a) 0 )ri QV 20 1'4117 10 Gravel - 59% Sand - 36% Fines— - - ______ - 0 - 1 I I - II I - I - - - - 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 Grain Size in Millimeters I COARSE I FINE COARSE I MEDIUM I FINE I SILT AND I I CLAY I I GRAVEL I SAND SAMPLE UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION: Sc ATTERBERG LIMITS SAMPLE ID: 8-5 LIQUID LIMIT: 32 SAMPLE LOCATION: 0' -5' DESCRIPTION: CLAYEY SAND PLASTIC LIMIT: 14 PLASTICITY INDEX: 18 GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Document No. 13-0339 ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS SOIL CLASSIFICATION Project No. SD365 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 ___ SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 FIGURE B-1.5 S S • S S 5 0 • S U.S. Standard Sieve Sizes Hvdr 100 3'14 IR t4 #8 ft200 Jçt I TI 90 80 '70 a) >60' E50 30 __ 16 20 10 - +—O% Gravel - 38% Sand - 0 - - - - - -.---- - - - ________________ —#--L - - - 62% Fines--+- - - - - - - - - - - - - - I I III 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 Grain Size in Millimeters COARSE I FINE COARSE MEDIUM FINE SILT AND CLAY GRAVEL SAND SAMPLE UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION: CL ATTERBERG LIMITS SAMPLE ID: B-5 LIQUID LIMIT: 36 SAMPLE LOCATION: 10'- 15 DESCRIPTION: SANDY LEAN CLAY PLASTIC LIMIT: 15 PLASTICITY INDEX: 21 GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Document No. 13-0339 ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS SOIL CLASSIFICATION Project No. SD365 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 FIGURE 6-1.6 U.S. Standard Sieve Sizes ;-_J8#16 #30 #50 #100 #200 H rometer _3181 _ 100 90 80 .70 "K 67 E50 —11 44 40 30 111111 hull 11111 11111 __ __ __ __ 20 10 - 4—O% Gravel : - - 47% Sand i-* - 53% - - - - - - - Fines--+ I II 0 - - - - liii - - 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 Grain Size in Millimeters COARSE FINE COARSE MEDIUM FINE SILT AND CLAY GRAVEL SAND SAMPLE UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION: CL ATTERBERG LIMITS SAMPLE ID: B-6 LIQUID LIMIT: 44 SAMPLE LOCATION: 01-6 DESCRIPTION: SANDY LEAN CLAY PLASTIC LIMIT: 18 PLASTICITY INDEX: 26 ROUP GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Document No. 13-0339 ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS SOIL CLASSIFICATION Project No. 5D365 L'7' 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 FIGURE B-1.7 U.S. Standard Sieve Sizes #0ft50#100 #2 0 _ Hvdrometer 100 90 82 80 nc >-60 -- -- C E50 ___ 40 ---- ___ ___ - -- ---- ___ ___ ----- ___ ___ 111111 11111 11111 __ NZ 7--lito __ 3 30 __ __ __ 20 ---- ___ - -- ___ ___ 10 ----- ___ - -- -- ___ ----- ___ ---- ___ - +—O% Gravel - 42% Sand - 58% - - - - - - - - Fines--* 0 - - - - - - - - - 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 Grain Size in Millimeters COARSE I FINE COARSE MEDIUM I FINE SILT AND CLAY GRAVEL SAND SAMPLE UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION: CL ATTERBERG LIMITS SAMPLE ID: B-7 LIQUID LIMIT: 46 SAMPLE LOCATION: 01 -51 DESCRIPTION: SANDY LEAN CLAY PLASTIC LIMIT: 16 PLASTICITY INDEX: 30 GROUP GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Document No. 13-0339 ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS SOIL CLASSIFICATION Project No. SD365 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 FIGURE B-1.8 U.S. Standard Sieve Sizes '-- 11/2 3/4' #4 #8 #_ #100 #2PQ_Jyriitt _#Q_ 100 90 80 :---- ____ 8 .60 _ _ _ ----- H -----_ u50 240 30 20 - - - - - 10 - —0% Gravel - 32% Sand -+ - - - - 68% Fines-4' 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 Grain Size in Millimeters COARSE FINE COARSE MEDIUM FINE SILT AND CLAY GRAVEL SAND SAMPLE UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION: CH ATTERBERG LIMITS SAMPLE ID: B-8 LIQUID LIMIT: 55 SAMPLE LOCATION: 0'-5- DESCRIPTION: SANDY FAT CLAY PLASTIC LIMIT: 20 PLASTICITY INDEX: 35 GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Document No. 13-0339 ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 SOIL CLASSIFICATION Project No. SD365 J \ SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 FIGURE B-1.9 U.S. Standard Sieve Sizes #8 #16 #30 #50 #100 #200_rcmtr 100 ., 90 :7 80 070 66 E50 47 3 40 30 20 10 - —0% Gravel - 45% Sand - 55% Fines— - - - - - - - I I I 0 - - - - - 'iii - 'iii - - - - - - - - 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 Grain Size in Millimeters COARSE I FINE COARSE MEDIUM FINE SILT AND I CLAY GRAVEL SAND SAMPLE UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION: CL ATTERBERG LIMITS SAMPLE ID: B-9 LIQUID LIMIT: 45 SAMPLE LOCATION: 0' -5' DESCRIPTION: SANDY LEAN CLAY PLASTIC LIMIT: 18 PLASTICITY INDEX: 27 GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Document No. 13-0339 ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 SOIL CLASSIFICATION Project No. SD365 SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 FIGURE B-1.10 . . I U.S. Standard Sieve Sizes 100 134 g416 3'B" I #8 # #100 #200FLrLtt IL 92 90 - -,'---Pi 80 .970 w '8 >60 iZ 50 125 240 30 20 10 - .—O% Gravel - 32% Sand - - - - - - - - - 68% Fines--+ 0 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 Grain Size in Millimeters COARSE FINE COARSE MEDIUM FINE SILT AND CLAY GRAVEL SAND SAMPLE UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION: CH ATTERBERG LIMITS SAMPLE ID: B-9 LIQUID LIMIT: 51 SAMPLE LOCATION: 51-10, DESCRIPTION: SANDY FAT CLAY PLASTIC LIMIT: 20 PLASTICITY INDEX: 31 GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Document No. 13-0339 ! ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS Il) 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 SOIL CLASSIFICATION Project No. 5D365 PJ& SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 FIGURE B-1.11 0 0 0 U.S. Standard Sieve Sizes 3'__1/'4' 4"#Q_ #100 #200 Hvdrc meter 100 .- N 90 - 80 60 a) E50C _____ _____ _____ _____ 1.52 240 30 20 10 - 4-0% Gravel - 30% Sand - - - - - - - - - - - 70% Fines--+ I 0 - - - - - - - liii - 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 Grain Size in Millimeters COARSE FINE COARSE MEDIUM FINE SILT AND CLAY GRAVEL SAND SAMPLE UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION: CH ATTERBERG LIMITS SAMPLE ID: B-b LIQUID LIMIT: 59 SAMPLE LOCATION: 0' -5' DESCRIPTION: SANDY FAT CLAY PLASTIC LIMIT: 25 PLASTICITY INDEX: 34 GROUP GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Document No. 13-0339 ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS SOIL CLASSIFICATION Project No. SD365 1,1 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 JL SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 FIGURE B-1.12 Ll EXPANSION TEST RESULTS (ASTM D4829) SAMPLE DESCRIPTION EXPANSION INDEX B-i @ 1'— 5' Old Alluvium: Dark reddish brown sandy lean clay (CL). 66 B-3 @ 0'— 5' Old Alluvium: Light olive gray sandy lean clay (CL). 91 B-4 @ 0'— 5' Fill: Dark yellow brown clayey sand (SC). 16 B-6 @ 0'— 5' Old Alluvium: Yellow brown sandy lean clay (CL). 77 B-7 @ 0'— 5' Old Alluvium: Dark yellow brown sandy lean clay (CL). 76 B-8 @ 0'— 5' Santiago Formation: Olive sandy fat claystone (CH). 120 B-9 @ 0'— 5' Fill: Light gray sandy lean clay (CL). 78 B-10 @ 0'- 5' Santiago Formation: Olive sandy fat claystone (CH). 123 EXPANSION INDEX POTENTIAL EXPANSION 0 to 20 Very low 21to50 Low 51 to 90 Medium 91 to 130 High Above 130 Very High ,UROUP GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS LABORATORY TEST RESULTS 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 Document No. 13-0339 Project No. SD365 FIGURE B-2 11 . fl CHEMISTRY TEST RESULTS (ASTM D516, CTM 643) SAMPLE RESISTIVITY [OHM-CM] SULFATE CONTENT [%] CHLORIDE CONTENT [%] B-i @ 1'-5' 7.7 560 <0.01 0.06 B-3 @ 0'— 5' 7.0 350 0.90 0.06 B-4@0'-5' 6.5 1,740 <0.01 0.03 B-7 @ 0'— 5' 6.3 450 0.65 0.04 B-10 @ 0'— 5' 7.0 320 0.23 0.06 SULFATE CONTENT [%] SULFATE EXPOSURE CEMENT TYPE 0.00 to 0.10 Negligible - 0.10 to 0.20 Moderate II, lP(MS), IS(MS) 0.20 to 2.00 Severe V Above 2.00 Very Severe V plus pozzolan SOIL RESISTIVITY [OHM-CM] GENERAL DEGREE OF CORROSMTY TO FERROUS METALS 0 to 1,000 Very Corrosive 1,000 to 2,000 Corrosive 2,000 to 5,000 Moderately Corrosive 5,000 to 10,000 Mildly Corrosive Above 10,000 Slightly Corrosive CHLORIDE (Cl) CONTENT [%] GENERAL DEGREE OF CORROSMTY TO METALS 0.00 to 0.03 Negligible 0.03 to 0.15 Corrosive Above 0.15 Severely Corrosive El GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS LABORATORY TEST RESULTS 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 ff&16 SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 Document No. 13-0339 Project No. SD3,65 FIGURE B-3 Ll Ll L7 MAXIMUM DENSITY & OPTIMUM MOISTURE (ASTM D1557) SAMPLE ID DESCRIPTION MAXIMUM DENSITY [lb/ft3] OPTIMUM MOISTURE [%] B-I @ 1'— 5' Old Alluvium: Yellow brown sandy lean clay (CL). 126 9 B-2 @ 0'— 5' Old Alluvium: Dark yellow brown clayey sand (SC). 125 10 B-5 @ 0'— 5' : Dark yellow brown clayey sand (SC). 1281/2 81/2 I GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Document No. 13-0339 I ~U , 17R-O-UPI ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Project No. SD365 I 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 I ll SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 FIGURE B-4 1-1 i. 10 i0 i• i• 4000 3000 eL U) U) 2000 1000 0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 STRAIN (%1 4000 Peak Strength Test Results 3500 —23 Degrees, 250 PSF Cohesion - Ultimate Strength Test Results 3000 - 23 Degrees, 200 PSF Cohesion - 2500 U) U) W 2000 U) < 1500 W U) 1000 500 0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 NORMAL STRESS [PSF] SAMPLE: B-3 @ 2' - 31,4 PEAK ULTIMATE OLD ALLUVIUM (Qoa): I I ' 23 0 I 230 I Yellow brown sandy lean clay (CL). I I C' 250 PSF I 200 PSF I IN-SITU AS-TESTED ___ STRAIN RATE: I 0.0007 IN/MIN _ I I Yd 106.3 PCF 1 I 106.3 PCF (Sample was consolidated and drained) I Wr 18.0% J I 21.7% GROuP GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Document No. 13-0339 ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Project No. SD365 é . 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 DEll SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 FIGURE B-5.1 I* i• I* I* i• I. i• 4000 LL 3000 cL U) 2000 I— U) 1000 : :___ I 0 w 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 STRAIN (%J 4000 Peak Strength Test Results 3500 —25 Degrees, 350 PSF Cohesion - Ultimate Strength Test Results 3000 - —25 Degrees, 150 PSF Cohesion 2500 U) 2000 1500 I I 1000 500 0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 NORMAL STRESS [PSF] SAMPLE: B-3 © 15'- 161W PEAK ULTIMATE 'SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa): I 4' 25 0 I 25 0 I IMottled sandy lean claystone (CL). I C. 350 PSF I 150 PSF I IN-SITU AS-TESTED STRAIN RATE: I 0.0002 IN/MIN I Id 102.4 PCF I 102.4 PCF I (Sample was consolidated and drained) WC 23.4 % I 23.9 % I GROUP GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Document No. 13-0339 ell ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Project No. SD365 DELTAI SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 FIGURE B-5.2 I. nLA Ll 10 40 4000 LL 3000 iL U) 2000 Cl) 1000 W Cl) 0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 STRAIN (%J 4000 I Peak Strength Test Results 3500 —25 Degrees, 400 PSF Cohesion - Ultimate Strength Test Results 3000 - 25 Degrees, 300 PSF Cohesion 5 2500 U) LU 2000 I.- U) - 1500 1-3 1000 500 0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 NORMAL STRESS (PSF] SAMPLE: B-8 @ 5' - 6%' PEAK ULTIMATE 'SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa): 4)' 25 0 I I 25 0 ILight olive sandy fat claystone (CH). I C 400 PSF I I 300 PSF I IN-SITU AS-TESTED ___ STRAIN RATE: I 0.0007 IN/MIN I Id 98.1 PCF I I 98.1 PCF (Sample was consolidated and drained) w, 23.59/6 I I 26.6 % GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Document No. 13-0339 ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS el 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Project No. SD365 1) 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 d?LI SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 FIGURE B-5.3 I-L-1 I* I . I. I. 4000 LL 3000 cL U) U) 2000 I— Cl) 1000 W = 0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 STRAIN (%] 4000 UI Peak Strength Test Results 3500 —25 Degrees, 300 PSF Cohesion - Ultimate Strength Test Results 3000 - —25 Degrees, 250 PSF Cohesion 5 2500 U) U) 2000 I— U) I 1500 U) 1000 500 0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 NORMAL STRESS [PSF] SAMPLE: B-9 @ 10- 111,6 PEAK ULTIMATE —1 E'SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa): 25 0 I 25 0 IDark brown sandy fat claystone (CH). C 300 PSF I 250 PSF I IN-SITU AS-TESTED STRAIN RATE: I 0.0002 IN/MIN I Yd 112.7 PCF I 112.7 PCF (Sample was consolidated and drained) W1. 14.0% I 18.3% I GROUP GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Document No. 13-0339 ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Project No. SD365 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 FIGURE B-5.4 S 4000 LL 3000 U) 2000 I- U) 1000 Ui 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 STRAIN (%J 4000 Peak Strength Test Results 3500 —25 Degrees, 300 PSF Cohesion - Ultimate Strength Test Results 3000 - 25 Degrees, 200 PSF Cohesion - LL 2500 IL U) 2000 U) LU 1500 x U) 1000 500 0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 NORMAL STRESS [PSF] SAMPLE: B-10 @ 5' - 6/' PEAK ULTIMATE 'SANTIAGO FORMATION (Tsa): 4)' 25 0 25 0 IOlive gray sandy fat claystone (CH). I I C 300 PSF I 200 PSF I IN-SITU AS-TESTED STRAIN RATE: I 0.0002 IN/MIN I Yd 102.8 PCF I 102.8 PCF (Sample was consolidated and drained) I w 19.9% I 23.7% I GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Document No. 13-0339 ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Project No. SD365 SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 FIGURE B-5.5 19 i. 4000 Ultimate Values 3500 • Peak Values - Ultimate Strength —Peak Strength 3000 2500 IL U) 0. U) U) 2000 I— U) w 1500 500 all 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 NORMAL STRESS [PSF] ALLUVIUM IA summary of 5 direct shear tests on I PEAK ULTIMATE Isamples of the on-site clays (CL & CH). IAII 5 samples were tested at the in-situ I I I 24 0 I I 23 0 I I density under saturated conditions. I I C. 300 PSF I I 200 PSF I GR00 GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Document No. 13-0339 ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 DIRECT SHEAR TEST SUMMARY Project No. 8D365 IDELTAl SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 FIGURE B-5.6 BORING NO.: B-i SAMPLE DATE: 2/5/14 SAMPLE LOCATION: 1' -5' TEST DATE: 2/10/14 SAMPLE DESCRIPTION: Dark reddish brown sandy lean clay (CL) LABORATORY TEST DATA TEST SPECIMEN A COMPACTOR PRESSURE B INITIAL MOISTURE C BATCH SOIL WEIGHT D WATER ADDED E WATER ADDED (D*(100+B)/C) F COMPACTION MOISTURE (B+E) G MOLD WEIGHT H TOTAL BRIQUETTE WEIGHT I NET BRIQUETTE WEIGHT (H-G) J BRIQUETTE HEIGHT K DRY DENSITY (30.3*I/((100+F)*J)) L EXUDATION LOAD M EXUDATION PRESSURE (L/12.54) N STABI LOMETER AT 1000 LBS 0 STABILOMETER AT 2000 LBS P DISPLACEMENT FOR 100 PSI Q R VALUE BY STABILOMETER R CORRECTED R-VALUE (See Fig. 14) S EXPANSION DIAL READING T EXPANSION PRESSURE (S*43,300) U COVER BY STABILOMETER V COVER BY EXPANSION 1 2 3 4 5 140 100 70 7.3 7.3 7.3 1200 1200 1200 1 65 77 89 5.8 6.9 8.0 13.2 14.2 15.3 2114.6 2113.2 2108.1 3188.8 3185.5 3177.7 1074.2 1072.3 1069.6 2.38 2.41 2.45 120.9 118.0 114.7 8424 5208 2248 672 415 179 36 44 54 97 112 127 4.43 4.84 5.10 27 18 ii 25 17 ii 0.0074 0.0040 0.0021 320 173 91 0.82 0.91 0.98 2.47 1.33 0.70 [PSI] [%] [G] [ML] [%] [%] [G] [G] [G] [IN] [PCF] [LB] [PSI] [PSI] [PSI] [Turns] [IN] [PSF] [Fl] [FT] L TRAFFIC INDEX: 5.0 GRAVEL FACTOR: 1.46 UNIT WEIGHT OF COVER [PCF]: 130 R-VALUE BY EXUDATION: 14 R-VALUE BY EXPANSION: 15 R-VALUE AT EQUILIBRIUM: 14 *Note: Gravel factor estimated from pavement section using CTM 301, Section C, Part b. GROUP GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Document No. 13-0339 I ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 R-VALUE TEST RESULTS Project No. 5D365 I LT! SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 FIGURE B-6.1a Sample: B -I @ I' -5' R-Value at Equilibrium: 14 _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ 100 90 ____ 80 p 70 U- 2.0 E 60 1.5 fA / ________ 40 Af 1.0 _ 7 _ 30 20 0.5 10 3.0 800 700 2.5 0 100 600 500 400 300 200 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 1.5 2.0 Exudation Pressure(psi] Cover Thickness by Expansion FF11 GRouP GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Document No. 13-0339 ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS COVER AND EXUDATION CHARTS Project No. SD365 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 1?I SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 FIGURE B-6.1b TEST SPECIMEN A COMPACTOR PRESSURE B INITIAL MOISTURE C BATCH SOIL WEIGHT D WATER ADDED E WATER ADDED (D*(100+B)IC) F COMPACTION MOISTURE (B+E) G MOLD WEIGHT H TOTAL BRIQUETTE WEIGHT I NET BRIQUETTE WEIGHT (H-G) J BRIQUETTE HEIGHT K DRY DENSITY (30.3*1/((100+F)*J)) L EXUDATION LOAD M EXUDATION PRESSURE (U12.54) N STABILOMETER AT 1000 LBS 0 STABILOMETER AT 2000 LBS P DISPLACEMENT FOR 100 PSI Q R VALUE BY STABILOMETER R CORRECTED R-VALUE (See Fig. 14) S EXPANSION DIAL READING T EXPANSION PRESSURE (S*43,300) U COVER BY STABILOMETER V COVER BY EXPANSION 10 I. is ie BORING NO.: B-2 SAMPLE DATE: 2/5/14 SAMPLE LOCATION: 0' -5' TEST DATE: 2/10/14 SAMPLE DESCRIPTION: Dark yellow brown clayey sand (SC) LABORATORY TEST DATA 1 2 3 4 5 120 70 170 3.9 3.9 3.9 1200 1200 1200 112 120 102 9.7 10.4 8.8 13.6 14.3 12.7 2113.2 2114.3 2108.3 3207.9 3202.1 3207.5 1094.7 1087.8 1099.2 2.47 2.48 2.46 118.2 116.3 120.1 3680 2363 4656 293 188 371 45 55 39 112 128 100 4.54 4.87 4.40 19 11 25 19 11 25 0.0022 0.0010 0.0041 95 43 178 0.87 0.96 0.81 0.73 0.33 1.37 [PSI] [%] [G] [ML] [%] [%] [G] [G] [G] [IN] [PCF] [LB] [PSI] [PSI] [PSI] [Turns] [IN] [PSF] FF11 [Fl] TRAFFIC INDEX: 5.0 GRAVEL FACTOR: 1.49 UNIT WEIGHT OF COVER [PCF]: 130 R-VALUE BY EXUDATION: 19 R-VALUE BY EXPANSION: 22 R-VALUE AT EQUILIBRIUM: 19 *Note: Gravel factor estimated from pavement section using CTM 301 Section C, Part b. I CROUI GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Document No. 13-0339 I pl 1 ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 R-VALUE TEST RESULTS Project No. 5D365 I ELTA SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 FIGURE B-6.2a i• . I - - 0.5 Sample: B-2 @ 0'- 5' 3.0 1 I 0.0• 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 Cover Thickness by Expansion [Fl] R-Value at Equilibrium: 19 100 90 80 70 60 0 40 30 20 10 0 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Exudation Pressure [psi] 6ROUP", GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. 1MINUINMr-MO bkl'JU UMULUt~10 I 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 COVER AND EXUDATION CHARTS 1I9 SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 Document No. 13-0339 Project No. SD365 FIGURE B-6.2b BORING NO.: B-5 SAMPLE DATE: 2/4/14 SAMPLE LOCATION: 0' -5' TEST DATE: 2/12/14 SAMPLE DESCRIPTION: Dark yellow brown clayey sand (SC) LABORATORY TEST DATA F-1 i0 i. i. 10 TEST SPECIMEN A COMPACTOR PRESSURE B INITIAL MOISTURE C BATCH SOIL WEIGHT D WATER ADDED E WATER ADDED (D*(100+B)IC) F COMPACTION MOISTURE (B+E) G MOLD WEIGHT H TOTAL BRIQUETTE WEIGHT I NET BRIQUETTE WEIGHT (H-G) J BRIQUETTE HEIGHT K DRY DENSITY (30.3*II((100+F)*J)) L EXUDATION LOAD M EXUDATION PRESSURE (L/12.54) N STABILOMETER AT 1000 LBS 0 STABILOMETER AT 2000 LBS P DISPLACEMENT FOR 100 PSI Q R VALUE BY STABILOMETER R CORRECTED R-VALUE (See Fig. 14) S EXPANSION DIAL READING T EXPANSION PRESSURE (S*43,300) U COVER BY STABILOMETER V COVER BY EXPANSION I. 1 2 3 4 5 80 120 170 0.9 0.9 0.9 1200 1 1200 1200 120 112 104 10.1 9.4 8.7 10.9 10.3 9.6 2004.6 2017.1 2010.5 3110.2 3118.8 3109.0 1105.6 1101.7 1098.5 2.46 2.44 2.40 122.8 124.1 126.5 3016 3955 5522 241 315 440 51 49 46 120 113 106 4.59 4.43 4.37 15 19 23 15 18 22 0.0003 0.0009 0.0010 13 39 43 0.91 0.88 0.84 0.10 0.30 0.33 1 [PSI] [%] [G] [ML] [%] [%] [G] [G] [G] [IN] [PCF] [LB] [PSI] [PSI] [PSI] [Turns] [IN] [PSF] [FT] [FT] i. TRAFFIC INDEX: 5.0 GRAVEL FACTOR: 1.49 UNIT WEIGHT OF COVER [PCF]: 130 R-VALUE BY EXUDATION: 17 R-VALUE BY EXPANSION: 22 R-VALUE AT EQUILIBRIUM: 17 *Note: Gravel factor estimated from pavement section using CTM 301, Section C, Part b. GROUV GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Document No. 13-0339 ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 R-VALUE TEST RESULTS Project No. 5D365 I 1 SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 FIGURE B-6.3a i. 10 Sample: B-5 - 5 R-Value at Equilibrium: 17 _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ 100 90 ____ 80 p 70 U- I-2.0 / 60 1.5 50 C 40 1.0 30 / 20 0.5 000 10 0.0 0.0 0.5 800 700 3.0 0 100 600 500 400 300 200 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 Exudation Pressure [psi] Cover Thickness by Expansion [FT] GROUP,, GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Document No. 13-0339 ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS COVER AND EXUDATION CHARTS Project No. SD365 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 RThJ SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 FIGURE B-6.3b BORING NO.: B-6 SAMPLE DATE: 2/4/14 SAMPLE LOCATION: 0' -5' TEST DATE: 2/12/14 SAMPLE DESCRIPTION: Dark yellow brown sandy lean clay (CL) LABORATORY TEST DATA 1 2 3 4 5 140 100 70 7.1 7.1 7.1 1200 1200 1200 102 115 130 9.1 10.3 11.6 16.2 17.3 18.7 2111.7 2112.5 2100.6 3153.3 3126.2 3133.2 1041.6 1013.7 1032.6 2.40 2.39 2.48 113.2 109.5 106.3 8427 5126 2899 672 409 231 38 46 58 103 115 131 4.37 4.60 5.04 24 18 10 22 17 10 0.0081 0.0067 0.0027 351 290 117 0.84 0.89 0.97 2.70 2.23 1 0.90 1 Ll TEST SPECIMEN A COMPACTOR PRESSURE B INITIAL MOISTURE C BATCH SOIL WEIGHT D WATER ADDED Ll E WATER ADDED (D*(100+B)IC) F COMPACTION MOISTURE (B+E) G MOLD WEIGHT H TOTAL BRIQUETTE WEIGHT I NET BRIQUETTE WEIGHT (H-G) J BRIQUETTE HEIGHT K DRY DENSITY (30.3*II((100+F)*J)) L EXUDATION LOAD M EXUDATION PRESSURE (L/12.54) N STABI LOMETER AT 1000 LBS 0 STABILOMETER AT 2000 LBS P DISPLACEMENT FOR 100 PSI Q R VALUE BY STABILOMETER Ll R CORRECTED R-VALUE (See Fig. 14) S EXPANSION DIAL READING T EXPANSION PRESSURE (S*43,300) U COVER BY STABILOMETER V COVER BY EXPANSION [PSI] [%] [G] [ML] [%] [%] [G] [G] [G] [IN] [PCF] [LB] [PSI] [PSI] [PSI] [Turns] [IN] [PSF] [FT] [FT] TRAFFIC INDEX: 5.0 GRAVEL FACTOR: 1.49 UNIT WEIGHT OF COVER [PCF]: 130 R-VALUE BY EXUDATION: 14 R-VALUE BY EXPANSION: 14 R-VALUE AT EQUILIBRIUM: 14 *Note: Gravel factor estimated from pavement section using CTM 301, Section C, Part b. GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Document No. 13-0339 I ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS R-VALUE TEST RESULTS Project No. SD365 I 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 ELTA. SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 FIGURE B-6.4a Sample: B-6 @ 0'- 5' R-Value at Equilibrium: 14 _________ 3.0 _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ 100 2.5 ____ 90 80 p / 70 2.0 5) E .2 60 U) 5) 50 >, 1.5 0, 0, 40 ________ 1.0 ____ ____ ____ ____ ___ ____ ____ ____ 30 5) > 0 __ S C.) / - 20 0.5 / 10 0.0 800 700 0 100 100 600 0 600 0 500 500 400 400 300 200 300 200 . Exudation Pressure [psi] Cover Thickness by Expansion [FT] GRcUI' GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Document No. 13-0339 ~ ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS COVER AND EXUDATION CHARTS Project No. SD365 7 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 PJI& SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 FIGURE B-6.4b APPENDIX C DYNAMIC SETTLEMENT ANALYSES . ri I. i• I* Is Ll APPENDIX C DYNAMIC SETTLEMENT ANALYSES Liquefaction and dynamic settlement analyses were conducted using the data gathered from the CPT soundings. Note that the CPT soundings were conducted within the deepest deposits of the alluvium along the northern edge of the site. The analyses were based on the simplified procedures originally developed by Seed and Idriss, and were conducted in general accordance with the recommended procedures for implementation of DMG special publication 117 (SCEC, 1999). The tip resistance (Qc) was normalized for overburden pressure and corrected for fines content using the procedures described in the referenced document (Youd et al., 2001). The resulting "Normalized Clean Sand Equivalent Tip Resistance" is designated by the symbol Q1N(cs) in the following figures. Note that the CPT fines correction was based on the Soil Behavior Type Index (Ic). For each sounding, both the Normalized Tip Resistance and Soil Behavior Type Index are plotted as a function of depth for the upper 50 feet of the soil profile. The liquefaction analyses are shown in Figures C-I through C-5. The central chart for each CPT sounding shows the estimated seismic settlement due to a Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) of 0.31 g from the 2013 CBC Design Spectrum provided in Table 1. The groundwater table was assumed to be at a depth of 35 feet below grade for our analyses, based on the conditions encountered in CPT-1 and CPT-2. Fine-grained soils with an Ic value greater than 2.6 were considered to be too clayey to liquefy. Similarly, granular soils with a normalized clean sand equivalent tip resistance (Q1N()) greater than 160 were considered too dense to liquefy. Only those soil zones that were both loose enough and sandy enough to liquefy contributed to the estimated post-liquefaction settlement. Seismic settlement was also estimated for dry soils above the groundwater table using the referenced procedure (Pradel, 1998). Our dynamic settlement analyses suggest that the deeper alluvial deposits along the northern edge of the site may experience total dynamic settlements of up to about I inch due to the Design Basis earthquake. According to state guidelines, a differential settlement equal to about one-half of the anticipated total liquefaction settlement may be conservatively assumed for structural design (SCEC, 1999). Consequently, we estimate that differential seismic settlement in some portions of the site may approach ½ inch in 40 feet. Seismic settlement of this magnitude is generally deemed tolerable GROUP for structures founded on post-tension slabs. DELTA N:\Projects\SD\SD365 Lennar, Tabata Development\13-0339\13-0339.doc • . . . Qlw(cs) Total Seismic Settlement [IN] Soil Type (Ic) 0 0100 200 300 400 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 012 34 0 - J Total Settlement = 0.6 [IN] 5---------- 1 -—----5 10 5 - -- 10 .1• _______ _______ _______ _______ _______ _______ 15 - - - s- --- 15 20 20 25 X 25 -______ 30 —i - - - _________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ - - 30 J 35 - - _________ ____________ ____________ ____________ ____________ ____________ - 35 40 40 45 45 50 - - _______ _______ _______ _______ _______ _______ - - 50 GROUP GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Document No. 13-0339 ENGINEERS ANDO AD GOIES3 TS DYNAMIC SETTLEMENT (CPT-1) Project No. SD365 9245 ACTIVITY R, ___ SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 FIGURE C-I QC1N(cs) Total Seismic Settlement [IN] Soil Type (Ic) 0 100 200 0 300 400 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 0 1 2 3 4 0 - - - J Total Settlement = 0.7 [IN] 5 - ____________ 5 ____________ ____________ ____________ ____________ ____________ - 10 10 ...- 15 15 20 LU LLJ 20 X 25 LU 30 25 30 :iL __ __r 35 40 40 45 - ( .1___ 45 50 _L - 50 - - - CROUP GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Document No. 13-0339 ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS DYNAMIC SETTLEMENT (CPT-2) Project No. SD365 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 DEEJF SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 FIGURE C-2 QCIN(cs) Total Seismic Settlement [IN] Soil Type (Ic) 0 0100 200 300 400 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 012 0 : Total Settlement = a i [IN] - 10i 10 15 15 .2O w w LI. — 20 -----1—---- 25 a. .uJ 0 25 30 ____________ 30 - ____________ ____________ ____________ ____________ ____________ - - - 35 tq 35 40 40 45 45 50 JT- 50 GROUP GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Document No. 13-0339 ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS f 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 DYNAMIC SETTLEMENT (CPT-3) Project No. SD365 T& SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 FIGURE C-3 Total Seismic Settlement [IN] Soil Type (Ic) 0 100 200 300 400 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 0 1 2 3 4 0 - Total Settlement = 0.2 [IN] 6f 10 10 15 - - __________ - 15 Q __________ ___________ __________ ___________ - .2O --------20 LU .. ........ 0 25 25 a. LU 30 30 35 35 7t ____________ I 40 45 45 50 M 50 ROUP1 GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Document No. 13-0339 ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS DYNAMIC SETTLEMENT (CPT-4) Project No. SD365 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 9I& SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 FIGURE C-4 QCIN(cs) Total Seismic Settlement [IN] Soil Type (IC) 0 100 200 300 400 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 0 1 2 3 4 Total Settlement 0. 1 [IN] 10 10 15 15 p 20 - LU LU ____ 20 ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ X 25 25 30 30 35 35 40 ___ ________ 40 - - ________ ________ ________ ________ ________ - 45 45 ____ 50 ______ ROUP GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS, INC. Document No. 13-0339 ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS DYNAMIC SETTLEMENT (CPT-5) Project No. SD365 9245 ACTIVITY ROAD, SUITE 103 £LJ SAN DIEGO, CA 92126 FIGURE C-5 SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSES APPENDIX D fl SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSES Slope stability analyses were conducted using the program SLOPEJW for the four cross section locations shown on the Revised Grading Plan, Figure 2D. Spencer's Method of Slices was used for all of the analyses. Spencer's method satisfies both force and moment equilibrium. All of the critical failure surfaces were optimized. The geology of each section was characterized using the general geotechnical conditions encountered in nearby subsurface explorations, as well as our previous experience with similar conditions. Our slope stability analyses for Cross Sections A-A' through D-D' are summarized in Figures D-1 through D-4, respectively. Laboratory tests were used to approximate the lower bound shear strengths of the various geologic materials encountered at the site. Direct shear tests were conducted on relatively undisturbed samples of the on-site soils in general accordance with ASTM D3080. The test results were summarized in Appendix B (see Figure B-5.6). Based on these test results and our experience with similar soils, the Santiago Formation and Old Alluvium were both estimated to have shear strengths that generally exceed 23° with 200 lb/ft2 cohesion. A shear strength of 340 with 100 lb/ft2 was assumed for the imported select fill soil. The existing compacted fill within the slope along the southern and eastern edges of the property was assumed to have a shear strength exceeding 300 with 200 lb/ft2 for the stability analyses. Three cases were evaluated for each cross section: temporary, static and seismic stability. Our temporary stability analyses (Case 1) indicate that the temporary 1:1 cut slopes that will be needed to complete the recommended remedial earthwork and construct the proposed retaining walls will possess an adequate factor of safety for a . temporary sloping condition (FS >1.2) as shown in Figures D-1.1 through D-3.1. Our static stability analyses (Case 2) indicate that the proposed 2:1 slopes and retaining walls will possess an adequate factor of safety against long-term deep-seated failure (FS> 1.5) as shown in Figures D-1.2 through D-3.2. Our seismic stability analyses (Case 3) indicate that the proposed slopes may experience up to about I inch of lateral deformation given the design level peak ground acceleration of 0.31 g presented in Table 1. Seismic slope deformations of this magnitude would generally be considered tolerable. The seismic stability analyses are summarized in Figures D- GROUP 1.3 through D-3.3. For Cross Section D-D', our analyses indicate that the proposed minor 11/2:1 fill slopes (up to about 2-feet high) will possess an adequate factor of safety against long-term failure (FS> 1.5), as shown in Figure D-4. DELTA N:\Projects\SD\SD365 Lennar, Tabata Development\I3-0339\13-0339.doc • 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 170 I I I I I I •I I I I I I I 160 - EXISTING CONDITIONS 150 - 181 CF 140 130 Existing Fill (300, 200 PSF) 120 cc 110 • Santiago Formation (230, 200 PSF) 100 90 GROTTO 0000000LTA005SULTAOTS.DIC. ENGINEERS MID GEOLOGISTS SR45ACOVOV ROAD. SUITE 103 SD365 13-0339 TobotoDovolop,noot I TISUIDISOGAR CROSS SECTION A-A' DELTA p'CIIINDIN 4 -. '0 • . 1 • • _• - - = -- = -- -- - 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 170 I I I • I I I I I I I 160 - Case I - Temporary Stability (FS> 1.2) 150- 1.30 130 I Existing Fill (30*, 200 PSF) lo W Santiago Formation (23°, 200 PSF) 100 90 - .-- I GROUP :E:= 13-0339 TbOevnent 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 170 160 Case 3 - Seismic Stability (Ky — 0.34g) 150- - 1.00 140'- 130 Existing Fill (30*, 200 PSF) Import Fill 100 Santiago Formation (23°, 200 PSF) 100 90 GROUP o r TobatDov&opn,nt DELTA o..flJ* CROSS SECTION g I!,lV(30°, 200 PSF) 30 Santiago Formation (23°, 200 PSF) 1 . 0 0 0. • - - 4,,- ---.---4.- -----=- - ____________ -- -.-------- - - - -;-- - '•_•___•_5_•__ - ---i ----i- - -.- - .- - -a---- _-_ -_ ----- - - .----,----- -i- -.- -.--- - - 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 -130 140 150 - - - -. - •,.-'_ - - - - - -- - -.- .- - - p.- - - VV •V • V •• • •V • .. V - V • . VI - - 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 170 V V V V V Case I Temporary Stability (FS > 1.2) V 1.54 V V CF- 150 V V V• 140 - — Exi (30°, 200 PSF) 120 T V LV V Santiago Formation (23°, 200 PSF) V100 .90 V V . GROUP GESUC03500 0245 ACTIViTY ROAD. SUITE 503 Soc 3-0339 V .10 a Oevelopment Lennar Ho— V V V V RORO D-2.1 CROSS SECTION B-B' V — V - V DELTA V • .V. - V - V -, - . . V - - -_ V V - V V V -- V• V VV - - V - - • • - V V V V V V V • 4V V V 11 A V - - 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 170 160 150 140 - 130 LL 120 0 .1-i CD 110 LLJ 100 go • . • • • . . • • . -.-S- J,•J_ - .- --, 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 170, I 160 Case 3 - Seismic Stability (Ky-0.24g) - 140 / E ist n Fif1(300, 200 PSF) 110 W Santiago Formation (23°, 200 PSF) 100 90 GROUP GROUP DELTA COIJOULTASITS, DIE. ENGINEERS GOD GEOLOGISTS 9245 ACTiVITY ROAD. SAnE 203 0500229(000IEAN-TGR PROJECT 1910100 SD365 13-0339 TObATA DOVObDICEnt Lennar Homes - 'ENGR 'ERODE D-2.3 CROSS SECTION B-B' DELTA ffi EGO - * - - -- ,- ---- T_ - - - •,A*. I - C £ - *- . - - ' - ---.,- -- * I- * - ,,_ ,=*(• S - 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 130 120 - EXISTING CONDITIONS 110 8.26 07 100 90 Fx 'Watl OIL! Santiago Formation (230, 200 PSF) LL 80 70 60 50 GROUP GROUP DELTA 0003*JLT*OTD IRE. - • ENGIIIEERS MID GEOLOGISTS O =D=O Tabata v:=nI OGi - - DELTA IPOLIG CROSS SECTION C 5- A • - -. - 4 4 -- 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 hO 100 90 F- 80 C 0 -70 60 50 - -.-: •-- - - - - I — t_- ,_as_., ,-_J.•- -- - - - -- -- :,-.—-- :- A• ------ 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 JV __ I I I Case 2 - Static Stability (FS> 1.5) 20 2.46 Lf Fill (30°, 200 PSF) 30 — Old Alluvium (23°, 200 PSF) Santiago Formation (23°, 200 PSF) I 30- ro 30 50 SINEERS MID GEOLOGISTS SD365 SACTMTY ROAD. SUITE 103 ?,CUOAI0A (AM) S3&IRO (AbaTE DAVRIOp(flenl TTEUIOIMIDTE Lannar HOmes 0-3.2 CROSS SECTION C-C' 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 130 I I I I I I I I Case 3 -Seismic Stability (Ky 0.57g) 120 1.00 110 10 - Fill (30°,200PSF) 100 - 80 j 1230200 santIaoFormatIonc230$2ooPsF 70 w 60 50 - . GROUP oemmocoss03.esmr03C. 92450010111V ROAD. SUITE ¶03 13.0339 SesO03cCU92I26cosEs3e-I030 Toboto D000topnlent Lonnar Homes - - -. ?I SUAOOIOAIOIT D-3.3 CROSS SECTION C-C' . DELTA L • .:.• • • • • . 'A - 7 - 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 170 i •. I i I I I F Static Stability (FS> 1.5) - 150 -- - - a _P . 1.,140 - AN 130 - - - Minor i'/2:1 Fill Slope LL 120 46 . . Select Fill (34°00 PSF) - 07 I • Santiago Formation (23°, 200 PSF) -N- .100 90 - • GROUP GROUP DELTA CONSULTANTS. INC. PROJTCTIOJIIINA ENGINEERS MPG GEOLOGISTS S0365. 9248 CAlMlY ROOD. SUnG IDA C542b20b958544-I 13-0339 -S. V - - [71 lebotp OevelOpfllent Lennar Homes IN USD40 D-4 CROSS SECTION D-D'