HomeMy WebLinkAboutCT 15-01; Cascada Verde; Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation; 2015-10-27GEOTEK
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION
CASCADA VERDE
Project No.: 3440-SDl
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
FOR
IKON, LTD.
11913 OCEAN PARK BLVD.
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA
GEOTEK, INC.
Rev October 27, 20 IS
GEOTECHNICAL I ENVIRONMENTAL I MATERIALS
GeoTek, Inc.
1384 Poinsettia Avenue, Suite A, Vista, California, 92081
(760) 599-0509 Office (760) 599-0593 Fax www.geotekusa.com
Ikon, Ltd.
I 1913 Ocean Park Blvd.
Los Angeles, California 90064
Attention: Mr. Matt Nelson
Subject: Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation
Cascada Verde
APN: 215-240-36-00
Carlsbad, California
Dear Mr. Nelson:
May 20,2015
Rev October 27, 20 IS
Project No.: 3440-SD3
As requested and authorized, GeoTek, Inc. (GeoTek) performed a preliminary geotechnical
evaluation for the subject property. This purpose of the evaluation is to assess the geotechnical
conditions on the site and to provide recommendation to address those conditions. This report
has been revised based on comments received from the City of Carlsbad.
The current planned development appears suitable for the site provided the recommendations
herein, and those provided during site development, are followed during final design and
construction phases of development.
Respectfully submitted,
GeoTek, Inc.
Distribution: (2) Addressee
Project Engineer
GEOTECHNICAL I ENVIRONMENTAL I MATERIALS
Ikon, Ltd.
Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation
Cascada Verde
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Project No.: 3440-SD3
Rev October 27, 20 IS
Page i
1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES .................................................................................................... !
2. SITE DESCRIPTION AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT .................................................................... !
2.1 SITE DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................................................................................ I
2.2 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT .............................................................................................................................................. 2
3. SITE EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING ......................................................................... 3
3.1 SITE EXPLORATION ........................................................................................................................................................... 3
3.2 lABORATORY TESTING ................................................................................................................................................... 3
4. GEOLOGIC AND SOILS CONDITIONS ................................................................................................... 4
4.1 REGIONAL SETTING .................................................................................................................................................. 4
4.2 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS ................................................................................................................................................ 4
4.2.1 Earth Materials ........................................................................................................................................................................ 5
4.2.2 Expansive Soil ........................................................................................................................................................................... 5
4.3 SURFACE AND GROUND WATER .................................................................................................................................. 6
4.4 ACTIVE SEISMIC AND COSEISMIC DEFORMATION ........................................................................................................ 6
4.5 SEISMOLOGY & CALCULATION OF EARTHQUAKE GROUND MOTION .................................................................... 6
4.5.1 Historical Seismicity ................................................................................................................................................................ 6
4.5.2 CBC Site Classification ........................................................................................................................................................... 6
4.5.3 General Procedure for Ground Motion Analysis ............................................................................................................ 7
4.5.4 Uquefaction Potential ............................................................................................................................................................. 7
4.5.5 Secondary Seismic Hazard ................................................................................................................................................... 7
4.6 OTHER GEOLOGIC HAZARDS ........................................................................................................................................ 8
4.7 SLOPE STABILITY ............................................................................................................................................................... 8
5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................ 8
5.1 SITE DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS ..................................................................................................................................... 9
5.1.1 E.arthwork Design Factors .................................................................................................................................................... 9
5.2 EARTHWORK CONSIDERATIONS ................................................................................................................................... 9
5.2.1 General Grading Guidelines ................................................................................................................................................. 9
5.2.2 Removals and Corrective Grading ................................................................................................................................... I 0
5.2.3 Excavation Condition ........................................................................................................................................................... I 0
5.2.4 Fill Placement ......................................................................................................................................................................... I 0
5.2.5 Import Soils ............................................................................................................................................................................. II
5.3 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................................................................................................... II
5.3.1 Foundation Design ................................................................................................................................................................ II
5.3.2 Foundation and Structural Set Backs ............................................................................................................................. 15
5.3.3 Seismic Design Parameters ............................................................................................................................................... 15
5.3.4 Soil Sulfate Content ............................................................................................................................................................. 16
5.3.5 SHORING ............................................................................................................................................................................... 16
5.4 RETAINING WALL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION .................................................................................................... IS
5.4.1 General Design Criteria ...................................................................................................................................................... 18
5.4.2 Cantilevered Walls ............................................................................................................................................................... 18
5.4.3 Restrained Retaining Walls ............................................................................................................................................... 19
5.4.4 Surcharge Loads ................................................................................................................................................................... 19
5.4.5 Wall Back(!// and Drainage ............................................................................................................................................... 19
5.4.6 Segmental Retaining Wall Design ................................................................................................................................... 20
5.5 PAVEMENTS AND FLATWORK ....................................................................................................................................... 20
5.5.1 Asphaltic Concrete Pavement ........................................................................................................................................... 20
5.5.2 Pervious Pavements .............................................................................................................................................................. 20
5.5.3 Concrete Flatwork ................................................................................................................................................................ 21
5.5.4 Concrete Performance ........................................................................................................................................................ 21
GEOTEK
Ikon, Ltd.
Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation
Cascada Verde
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Project No.: 3440-SD3
Rev October 27, 20 IS
Pa~e ii
5.6 POST CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS ................................................................................................................. 22
5.6.1 Landscape Maintenance and Planting ........................................................................................................................... 22
5.6.2 Drainage .................................................................................................................................................................................. 22
5.7 PLAN REVIEW AND CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS ............................................................................................. 22
6. INTENT ......................... u ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 23
7. LIMITATIONS ............. o ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 23
Enclosures:
Selected References
Figure I -Site Location Map
Figure 2-Regional Geologic Map
Figure 3 -Geotechnical Map
Figures 4A and 48 -Geotechnical Cross Sections
Figure RW-1 Typical Retaining Wall Drains
Appendix A -Exploratory Logs.
Appendix B-Laboratory Test Results
Appendix C -Grading Guidelines
Appendix D -Se~ected Seismicity
GEOTEK
Ikon, Ltd.
Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation
Cascada Verde
I. PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES
Project No.: 3440-SD3
Rev October 27, 20 IS
Pa e I
The purpose of our evaluation was to determine whether the site is in an area of known or
potential geologic hazards and to address the geotechnical feasibility of proposed site
development. Services provided for this study consist of the following items, including but not
limited to:
)<;> Field reconnaissance of the site to evaluate the general surface conditions.
)<;> General research of readily available published and available in house file data.
)<;> Review of aerial photographs available through on line resources.
)<;> Geotechnical exploration of the site including both auger borings and backhoe test pits.
)<;> Laboratory analysis of samples obtained during exploration.
)<;> Review and evaluation of site seismicity.
)<;> Data compilation, geologic and engineering review.
)<;> Preparation of this geotechnical report, which summarizes our findings and addresses
general concerns that should be further evaluated.
2. SITE DESCRIPTION AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
2.1 SITE DESCRIPTION
The site is in located in the south central portion of the city of Carlsbad, generally to the
north of Alicante Road and west of Altiva Place (Aitiva) and east of Altisma Way (Aitisma).
The irregularly shaped site encompasses 3.7 acres on the lower flanks and bottom of a small
canyon. Elevations in the canyon bottom vary from about 32 feet in the south to 44 feet at
the north end. The north portion of the site extends easterly up slope from the canyon
bottom about to an elevation of approximately I OS feet. Site topography varies from gentle
to moderately steep. The enclosed Figure I -Site Location Map indicates the geographic site
location a 20 14 aerial photograph as a base. The site is approximately located at a north
latitude of 33.0935 and west longitude of I 17.2544.
GEOTEK
Ikon, Ltd.
Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation
Cascada Verde
Project No.: 3440-SD3
Rev October 27, 20 IS
Pa&e 2
The lower portions of the site are currently fenced with gated access points off of Altisma
and Altiva. Access from Altisma provides access to a small area while an unimproved road off
Altiva provides limited vehicle access through the site. Prior grading and some limited
improvements have occurred on the site. We understand that the lower portion (near
Alicante) of the site was previously rented for outdoor events (e.g. weddings, parties, etc.)
Segmental retaining walls supporting pathways, brick patio areas and other non-habitable
improvements are present. A neighbor volunteered that these improvements were installed
about I 0 years ago which is consistent with construction activity indicated aerial photographs
from 2003 to 2005. The 111eighbor also indicated that the area had previously been "swampy"
and wetter than it is currently. There is a stream channel with two branches in the canyon
bottom which has had flowing water on the several occasions we have been on site. This
water is likely the result of urban runoff rather than a natural source.
The lower portions of tlhe site are rather heavily vegetated with a mix of native and non-
native trees and brush. Three significant utility easement impact the site: I) a water easement
along the west side of the canyon, 2) a sewer easement in the east portion of the site, and 3)
an overhead power easement paralleling the north property line. There are also at least two
storm drain lines on the site: one that descends the slope from Altiva to the canyon bottom
in the north portion of the site and one that descends near the north south middle of the site
from the residential project on Altiva and east of the site. Other private storm drains may
enter the site from the west.
Based on field observation of current site topography, review of aerial photographs, review
of overlays of prior grading plans for Alicante Street provided to us by client it appears that
grading has occurred in the lower reaches of the site. This grading would include construction
of Alicante Road, the access road off of Altiva and also for Altisma. Grading was also
performed for access to the sewer mainline. The access road extends from a gated entrance
on Altiva into lower reaches of the canyon and extends up canyon to the north. In addition,
there has been grading for development of the site which included at least some fill placement
and with construction and backfill of segmental retaining walls.
2.2 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
Proposed development is to develop 35 condominium units on the site. Most of the building
would have two (2) and I or three (3) bedroom units with garages on the ground floor and
two levels above in each unit. One building in the northern portion of the site would be five
(5), one-bedroom units. It would have garages on ground level with two levels above in each
unit. Some of the lower building levels would have integrated retaining walls.
GEOTEK
Ikon, Ltd.
Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation
Cascada Verde
Project No.: 3440-SD3
Rev October 27, 20 IS
Page 3
Access would be via private driveways from both Altisma and Altiva with a connecting drive
in the north between the east and west side. For the most part the driveways are planned to
be on the canyon side of the buildings. Retaining walls up to eight (8) feet will be used to
support the drives on the canyon side. Most of the walls will be six (6) feet and shorter.
Stepped or terrace retaining walls are planned in several locations. Both masonry walls and
segmental retaining walls are planned.
Planned grading is fairly minor with cuts and fill generally less than six (6) feet and limited
areas with up to approximately ten (I 0) feet of fill. The exceptions being excavations for the
rear or uphill sides of buildings where cuts up to about 20 feet in depth are planned on Building
F, 22 feet on Building E-2. These deeper cuts are to be primarily supported by retaining walls.
Finished graded slopes are planned at 2: I or flatter.
3. SITE EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING
3.1 SITE EXPLORATION
Site conditions and environmental concerns restricted site access for exploration. These
included topography, the active channels, vegetation, the utility easements, etc. It should be
noted that neither the water not sewer mains could be accurately located by the districts and
therefore relative wide areas were restricted from exploration. To develop equipment access,
limited site clearing was performed by others prior to our work. In order to access the
southern portion of the canyon steel plates were placed to allow equipment to access the
area limiting disturbance. The plates were set using a backhoe and removed after drilling was
complete. Site exploration consisted of excavating a total of I 0 exploratory flight auger boring
utilizing two different limited access drilling machine and four (4) backhoe test trenches. The
drilling subcontractor initially felt that access would be restricted to a light weight track
mounted rig. This equipment encountered shallow refusal at seven locations and a larger track
mounted rig was used to advance three (3) borings. Additionally, four (4) backhoe trenches
were excavated along the toe of the slope on the east side sewer easement. Logs of
exploratory excavation are enclosed in Appendix A -Exploratory Logs. Locations of test
exploration are indicated on Figure 3 -Geotechnical Map.
3.2 LABORATORY TESTING
Selected supplemental laboratory testing by Geo T ek was performed on selected samples
collected during our field evaluation. The purpose of the laboratory testing was to confirm
the field classification of the soil materials encountered and to evaluate physical properties
GEOTEK
Ikon, Ltd.
Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation
Cascada Verde
Project No.: 3440-SD3
Rev October 27, 20 I 5
Page 4
for use in the engineering design and analysis. Results of testing are presented in Appendix B
-Laboratory Test Results or on the Exploration Logs in Appendix A.
4. GEOLOGIC AND SOILS CONDITIONS
4.1 REGIONAL SETTING
The subject property is situated in the Peninsular Ranges province. The Peninsular Ranges
province is one of the largest geomorphic units in western North America. Basically, it
extends from the Transverse Ranges geomorphic province and the Los Angeles Basin, 975
miles south to the tip of Baja California. This province varies in width from about 30 to I 00
miles. It is bounded on the west by the Pacific Ocean, on the south by the Gulf of California
and on the east by the Colorado Desert Province.
The Peninsular Ranges are essentially a series of northwest-southeast oriented fault blocks.
Three major fault zones are found in this province. The Elsinore fault zone and the San Jacinto
fault zone trend northwest-southeast and are found near the middle of the province. The
San Andreas Fault zone borders the northeasterly margin of the province.
4.2 GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS
Regional geologic mapping by Kennedy and Tan (2005) (see Figure 2-Regional Geologic Map)
indicates the site is underlain by sedimentary bedrock of the Tertiary Santiago Formation
(map symbol Tsa). Overlying the bedrock in the canyon bottom is young alluvium. Our
trenching along the eastern side of the canyon encountered an apparent terrace deposit,
overlying the bedrock. Although not encountered, there may be shallow meta-volcanic rock
present also. No faults are currently shown in the immediate site vicinity on the maps
reviewed for the area.
The natural conditions described above have been modified by prior site grading. This has had
the greatest impact on the southern portion of the site. The fills associated with the
construction of the adjoining streets extend into the site. This fill dates back to the 1960's
and as such are unlikely to meet current standards for structural fills. The depths and limits
of these fills are known where boring were able to penetrate them.
There are two areas in the canyon bottom that appear to have rows of very large (I 0 to I 5
feet in one dimension) boulders placed perpendicular to the canyon flow line. We suspect
that these were moved into the lower portion of the site from off site and partially buried
possibly for aesthetic purposes. It appears that the west portion of these will need to be
relocated as they will interfere with the planned development.
GEOTEK
Ikon, Ltd.
Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation
Cascada Verde
4.2.1 Earth Materials
Project No.: 3440-SD3
Rev October 27, 20 IS
Page 5
Fill is present in various locations in general these are rather minor and where explored
sourced from the adjoining native soil. The exception to this appears to be in the lower
reaches of the canyon associated with prior grading and site use circa 2005. It appears that
soils were imported to raise much of the southern portion of the site about 3 feet to possibly
4 feet. This imported is generally loose and saturated.
The alluvium on site is comprised primarily of interbedded silty clays, clay silts with variable
sand contents and lesser clay to silty fine sands. Scattered gravels and cobbles or rock
fragments were noted. The upper portion of this materials is saturated however no free water
was noted in lower samples. Blow counts indicate these soils are stiff to hard.
Terrace deposits were encountered in all four backhoe trench and in Boring B-7. This unit is
largely red brown sandy silt to silty sand with interbeds or lenses of medium to coarse sand.
There are scattered to abundant gravels and angular volcanic cobbles up to about 12 inches
in size.
Santiago Formation sandstone and siltstones were encountered in the bottoms of borings B-
8, B-9 and B-1 0. The bedrock is dense and layered although exposure were insufficient to
determine bedding orientation. Our experience and regional mapping suggests the unit is fairly
flat lying.
While not encountered nor directly observed on the site, Santiago Peak Volcanics are present
in the area and there are several very large boulders in the lower canyon as well as fairly
abundant angular rocks in several areas. As such it is possible that volcanic rock could be
encountered in the deeper cuts especially in the north portion of the site.
General Geologic conditions are indicated on Figure 2 -Geotechnical Map. Also, enclosed
are cross-sections, Figures 4A and 4B -Geotechnical Cross Sections. These sections were
prepared to depict the anticipated geotechnical conditions related to site grading, as such I I
of the 13 cross sections included in the project grading plans were modified to present
pertinent geotechnical data.
4.2.2 Expansive Soil
In general, expansive soils have a significant amount of clay particles that can give up water
(shrink) or take on water {swell), depending on the severity of expansion potential. The
change in volume exerts stress on buildings and other loads placed on these soils.
Test results indicate the onsite materials are medium expansive although it is expected that
soils might range from low to high expansive. Materials derived from the Santiago Formation
are typically classified as expansive, although the specific expansion can vary and testing is
need to quantify the potential. If import soil is used to complete the grading, these will impact
the expansion potential.
GEOTEK
_ _j
Ikon, Ltd.
Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation
Cascada Verde
4.3 SURFACE AND GROUND WATER
Project No.: 3440-SD3
Rev October 27, 20 15
Page 6
As previously indicated surface water was observed in the stream channel. Site drainage should
be reviewed and designed by the project civil engineer.
It appears that shallow perched groundwater is present in the fill overlying the alluvial materials
as it was encountered in our borings at depths of about 2.5 to 3 feet (see Borings B I through
B-6, B-8 and B9), in the lower canyon area. Based on the borings it appears that this water is
largely perched in imported sandy fill soils. While it is difficult to assess the specific zone of
water, the presence of shallow groundwater may impact site construction. Appropriate
drainage devices or other means can be developed to address this condition as found to be
appropriate.
The current plan includes areas planned for storm water retention and bio-treatment. As
currently planned they will act as treatment with impermeable liners and controlled out flows.
4.4 ACTIVE SEISMIC AND COSEISMIC DEFORMATION
The site is in a seismically active region. No active or potentially active fault is known to exist
at this site. The site is not situated within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone (Special
Studies Zone) nor any local agency zone. Nearby faults known to GeoTek are approximately
indicated on the enclosed Regional Fault Map included in Appendix D .
While some limited active seismic deformation (due to triggering faults activities) may occur
on the site, it is likely to be minor considering the distance to any currently known active
fault. On the same basis limited coseismic deformation would be anticipated.
4.5 SEISMOLOGY & CALCULATION OF EARTHQUAKE GROUND MOTION
4.5.1 Historical Seismicity
The site has been subjected to historic seismic activity. Seismic activity on nearby faults
occurs periodically and with sufficient magnitude to cause noticeable ground shaking on site.
We utilized the computer program EQSearch by Thomas Blake (Blake, T., 2000a) in order to
reasonably provide historic applicable earthquakes. This analysis, enclosed in Appendix D -
Selected Seismicity indicates that one earthquake is likely to have resulted in ground
accelerations exceeding 0.1 Og that was at an approximate distance of 6.5 km from the site
producing 0.3g.
4.5.2 CBC Site Classification
Site Class may vary for specific buildings as conditions may vary. It appears that a site class of
"D" is reasonable to address all anticipated conditions. However, buildings founded entirely
in bedrock or where fill caps less than 5 feet thick underlie the entire structure may be
GEOTEK
Ikon, Ltd.
Preliminary Geotechnical !Evaluation
Cascada Verde
Project No.: 3440-SD3
Rev October 27, 20 IS
Page 7
designed using a site class of "B". The specific site class applicable to a given building should
be determined at the completion of rough grading.
4.5.3 General Procedure for Ground Motion Analysis
At the present, the nearest known active fault appears to be the Rose Canyon-Newport
Inglewood Fault approximately 6.5 miles (i.e. I 0 km) from the site. The USGS general
procedures for ground motion analysis available through the website
(http://earthquake.usgs.gov/designmaps/us/application.php) for an applicable Risk Category
(with final determination by the project structural engineer as discussed later in this report)
appears to be considered sufficient for the ground motion analysis at the discretion of project
structural engineer, and subject to the approval of applicable agencies having jurisdiction over
this project. The methodology selected was the ASCE 7 -I 0 with March 20 13 errata. Results
are presented in Section 5.3.3 of this report and reproduced copies from USGS websites are
also presented in enclosed in Appendix B--Selected Seismicity.
4.5.4 Liquefaction Potential
Liquefaction describes a phenomenon in which cyclic stresses, produced by earthquake-
induced ground motion, create excess pore pressures in relatively cohesionless soils. These
soils may thereby acquire a high degree of mobility, which can lead to lateral movement,
sliding, consolidation and settlement of loose sediments, sand boils and other damaging
deformations. This phenomenon usually occurs below the water table and/or where the soils
are at or near their degree of saturation (State of California, 2008), but, after liquefaction has
developed, the effects can propagate upward into overlying non-saturated soil as excess pore
water dissipates.
The factors known to influence liquefaction potential include soil type and grain size, relative
density, groundwater level, confining pressures, and both intensity and duration of ground
shaking. In general, materials that are susceptible to liquefaction are loose, saturated granular
soils having low fines content under low confining pressures and some cohesive soils (silts
and lean clays), which have with specific geotechnical characteristics.
Given the generally fine grained nature of the alluvium, the apparent lack of saturation and
that it is generally stiff to hard liquefaction is not considered a significant risk. As discussed
above, there is shallow perched water which is apparently limited to the existing sandy import
material. Additionally, it is expected that the shallower less dense alluvial soils will be removed
and recompacted thus densifying them.
4.5.5 Secondary Seismic Hazard
The potential for secondary seismic hazards such as seiche and tsunami are considered to be
negligible for design purposes due to site elevation and distance from an open body of water.
GEOTEK
Ikon, Ltd.
Preliminary Geotechnical !Evaluation
Cascada Verde
4.6 OTHER GEOLOGIC HAZARDS
Project No.: 3440-SD3
Rev October 27, 20 IS
Page 8
No evidence of ancient landslides or slope instabilities at this site was observed during our
evaluation, nor did it appear during our review of pertinent geologic and geotechnical
literature. Thus, the potential for landslides appears to be very low at this site.
No evidence of other geologic hazards were observation or noted, at the time of our review
of the site.
4.7 SLOPE STABILITY
The existing slopes appear to be performing well with no indication of gross instability. Minor
cut slopes may be constructed. These might require stabilization which can be addressed at a
later date. No significant fill slopes are planned. All graded slopes should be designed at
gradients of 2: I or flatter.
The larger natural slope at the north end of the project that ascends from Altiva Place is at
an approximate gradient of 3: I and as such considered as grossly stable.
5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The proposed development of the site appears feasible from a geotechnical viewpoint
provided that our recommendations offered below and during construction, are properly
incorporated into the design and construction phases of development.
The site is underlain by fill, alluvium, terrace deposits and Santiago Formation sedimentary
bedrock. The fill and upper portion of the alluvium are considered loose and unsuitable for
structural support. Borings indicate that the alluvium becomes reasonably dense at a depth of
approximately I 0 feet below existing grades in the lower reaches of the site. Groundwater
was encountered at shallow depths although this appears to be perched water largely in loose
sandy fill. It seems reasonable that the placement of the Alicante Road fill tended to retard
the natural flow of water in the canyon. Additionally upstream development would be the
source of increased runoff. These materials are relatively loose and partial removal and
recompaction is recommended. Alluvial soils left in place may be subject to consolidation
resulting in settlements of the overlying materials and improvements. The juxtaposition of the
various units is indicated on Figure 3.
The sedimentary bedrock is considered to be stable. Bedrock should provide good structural
support.
Expansive soils are present and need to be considered in site construction.
GEOTEK
Ikon, Ltd.
Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation
Cascada Verde
Project No.: 3440-SD3
Rev October 27, 20 IS
Page 9
Shoring is anticipated to be needed to support certain cuts. These are in areas where
temporary cuts would exceed a I: I gradient to achieve required grades.
Assuming that temporary cuts do not exceed gradients of I: I without appropriate shoring
then the grading and permanent construction are not anticipated to have negative impacts on
adjacent development.
5.1 SITE DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
5.1.1 Earthwork Design Factors
Materials that are removed and recompacted are anticipated to undergo a loss of volume
from the existing condition to the compacted condition. These factors can be highly variable
and depend on existing density, the degree of compaction achieved among other factors.
While actual volume change will vary we suggest for design purposes the following values be
considered:
Existing fill and aliuvium -shrinkage 12 to 18 %
T opsoii/Coluvium (generally upper 3 feet outside alluvial areas) IS to 20%
Terrace Deposits -no significant change some bulking in deeper cuts
Santiago Formation -no significant change some bulking in deeper cuts.
Site clearing may also result in a loss of material especially around areas of larger trees. It is
very difficult to estimate this factor. It could range from an equivalent of up to '12 feet or
more.
Several factors will impact earthwork balancing on the site, including shrinkage, subsidence,
trench spoil from utilities and footing excavations, as well as the accuracy of topography.
Shrinkage and subsidence are dependent upon the degree of compactive effort achieved
during construction, depth of fill and underlying site conditions.
5.2 EARTHWORK CONSIDERATIONS
5.2.1 General Grading Guidelines
Grading and earthwork should be performed in accordance with the local grading ordinances,
applicable provisions of the 2013 (or then current) California Building Code (CBC), City of
Carlsbad, and our recommendations presented herein, and those provided by this firm during
construction. Appendix C -Grading Guidelines provides typical recommendations for site
earthwork.
GEOTEK
Ikon, Ltd.
Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation
Cascada Verde
5.2.2 Removals and Corrective Grading
Project No.: 3440-SD3
Rev October 27, 20 15
Page 10
Site preparation should start with removal of the existing vegetation, minor trash and debris.
All debris should be disposed properly off site.
Due to variations in the shallow soil it is anticipated that at least the upper 3 to 5 feet of
material should be removed and recompacted within the building footprint and extending at
least IS feet horizontally outside the perimeter of the structure excluding uphill and in all fill
areas. In the southern area and beneath the areas underlain by alluvium at least the upper five
(5) feet of alluvium should be removed in addition to any existing fill that might be present. In
general removals are expected to be on the order of I 0 feet deep in alluvial areas. Preferably
removal should extend outward from the toe of slope or base of retaining wall at a I: I
projection, if this is not feasible due to environmental or other constraints then additional
recommendations can be provided. The Geotechnical Map, Figure 3 indicates the general
limits and anticipated depth of removals. A larger scale plan was provided to the project Civil
Engineer depicting the anticipated removal.
In areas where removal are made, once an acceptable bottom has been established the surface
should be scarified to a depth of at least approximately eight (8) inches, moisture conditioned
and compacted to at least 90 percent of maximum dry density and at least above optimum
moisture content, as determined in accordance with ASTM Test Method D 1557.
5.2.3 Excavation Condition
It is generally expected that materials will be easily excavated using conventional equipment.
Shallow groundwater or wet soils may create difficult working conditions. If volcanic rock is
encountered difficult excavation would be expected. In the lower canyon bottom the upper
soils are wet and will require drying and or mixing with drier soil to obtained desired moisture
content. The soils below depths of approximately 3 to 5 feet, are apparently below the
perched water but may also require drying. Working in and below the perched water will
likely be difficult and may require special processing such as using a large excavator to complete
removals. Control I diversion of the upstream water is recommended prior to commencing
removals in the southern portion of the site. Time should be allowed for the shallow perched
water to drain. Further assessment of the groundwater conditions can be performed prior to
the start of removals.
5.2.4 Fill Placement
Prior to fill placement required removals should be completed.
Engineered fill should be placed in accordance with the project specifications. Engineered fill
should be compacted in layers no thicker than 8 inches (bulk), moisture conditioned, and
compacted to at least 90 percent of maximum dry density and at least optimum moisture
content, as determined in accordance with ASTM Test Method D 1557.
GEOTEK
Ikon, Ltd.
Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation
Cascada Verde
5.2.5 Import Soils
Project No.: 3440-503
Rev October 27, 20 15
Page II
If import soils are needed to complete grading they are subject to testing by GeoTek prior
to import. Testing should be used to assess the geotechnical, expansive nature of the material
and chemical properties potentially including but not limited to gradation, soil classification,
sulfate content, chloride, pH, soil resistivity, etc., direct shear, maximum dry density and
optimum moisture content, organic contents, and R-Value. Materials should ideally not be
expansive per the CBC, corrosive or contain high levels of sulfate or chlorides.
5.3 DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
5.3.1 Foundation Design
Geotechnical foundation design criteria may vary for different buildings and can be refined at
the completion of site grading. The structural design of all foundations should meet, or
exceed, CBC (20 13 or applicable) requirements.
In general, the foundation for a given structure should be founded in reasonably uniform
materials. For example, most of the structures will have the uphill sides founded in
sedimentary bedrock or terrace deposits, assuming those materials are reasonably uniform
then over-excavation is not needed however the downhill sides may have shallow fill under
them. In such an instance footings should extend through any fill present and at least one foot
into the bedrock.
The southernmost structure appears that it will span from bedrock on the west end into
existing fill, portions of which support Alicante Road, and then onto alluvial soils. While some
removal of the shallow soils for slab support appears feasible, removal for foundation support
appears infeasible without an extensive shoring system or partial removal of Alicante Road.
As such, this building is expected to require caisson support through at least the eastern half.
5.3.1.1 Caisson Design Parameter
Caissons should extend a minimum of three (3) feet into competent bedrock or terrace
deposits. This is expected to be into the Santiago Formation in the southern portion of the
site and terrace in the northeast. The northwest is yet to be determined. Caisson excavations
should be observed by a representative of this firm during the drilling prior to placing
reinforcement and if necessary, additional recommendations will be presented.
Based on the preceding information regarding the anticipated bedrock and soils conditions,
the following caisson design parameters are presented for a minimum 5-foot long caisson. It
is anticipated that the caissons will be on the order of 24 to 36 inches in diameter.
I. The point of fixity for the caissons will vary depending on specific location of the pile.
For preliminary design, a depth of 5 feet may be assumed. No lateral loads for soil
conditions need to be considered above that point.
GEOTEK
Ikon, Ltd.
Preliminary Geotechnical !Evaluation
Cascada Verde
Project No.: 3440-503
Rev October 27, 20 IS
Page 12
2. Passive resistance of 120 psf may be used in design of the caisson from a depth of five
(5) feet to the indicated depth of bedrock. In the bedrock caissons may be designed
using a passive resistance of 250 psf.
3. Caissons may be designed using an allowable skin friction of 275 lbs/ft2 (ignore the
upper five [5] feet) and an allowable end-bearing capacity of 4,000 psf. The end bearing
capacity assumes a minimum three (3) feet embedment into bedrock.
4. Caissons should not be spaced closer than three (3) diameters, center-to-center.
5. The need for tie beams or grade beams connecting the caissons should be addressed
by the structural engineer.
6. Concrete placed for the caissons should not be allowed to fall more than four (4) feet.
A tremie tube should be used to place concrete deeper than four (4) feet. Excavations
must be free of loose soil at the time of concrete placement.
7. The caisson excavation bottoms should be cleared of loose soil at the completion of
drilling. Prior to concrete or steel placement, the caisson excavations should be
observed a GeoTek representative to confirm the anticipated geologic conditions,
depth, and loose soil removal.
5.3.1.2 Conventional Foundation Design Criteria
Foundation design criteria for a conventional foundation system, in general conformance with
the 20 13 CBC, are presented herein. These are typical design criteria and are not intended
to supersede the design by the structural engineer.
Based on review of the referenced reports, the expansion potential of the onsite soils are
anticipate range mainly from "low" to "high" (O<EI~90) per ASTM D 4829. Although the
majority of the soils are anticipated to be in the "very low" to "low" range and, as such,
foundation parameters for such conditions are presented below.
A summary of our foundation design recommendations are presented in Table 5.3.1 below:
GEOTEK
__ :
Ikon, Ltd.
Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation
Cascada Verde
Project No.: 3440-SD3
Rev October 27, 20 I 5
Page 13
TABLE 5.3.1-MINIMUM DESIGN REQUIREMENTS
DESIGN PARAMETER O~EI~SO SI~EI~90
Foundation Depth or Minimum Supporting One Floor -12 Supporting One Floor -24
Perimeter Beam Depth (inches below Supporting Two or Three Supporting Two or Three
lowest adjacent grade) Floors -24 Floors -24
Supporting One Floor -12 Supporting One Floor-12
Foundation Width (Inches) Supporting Two Floors-15 Supporting Two Floors-IS
Supporting Three Floors -18 Supporting Three Floors -18
Minimum Slab Thickness (inches) 4 (actual) 4 (actual)
No.3 rebar No.3 rebar
Minimum Slab Reinforcing 18" on-center, placed in 16" on-center, placed in middle
middle third of slab third of slab
Two (2) No.4 Reinforcing Two (2) No.5 Reinforcing
Minimum Footing Reinforcement Bars, one (I) top one (I) Bars, one (I) top one (I)
bottom bottom
Effective Plasticity Index (assumed) 18 24
Presaturation of Subgrade Soil I I 0%112 inches 120%118 inches (Percent of Optimum/Depth in Inches)
It should be noted that the above recommendations are based on soil support characteristics
only. The structural engineer should design the slab and beam reinforcement based on actual
loading conditions.
The following criteria for design of foundations should be implemented into design:
5.3.1.3 Bearing Capacity -Engineered Fill
For foundations placed on engineered fill an allowable bearing capacity of 2,000
pounds per square foot (psf) may be used for design of continuous and perimeter
footings 12 inches deep and 12 inches wide, and pad footings 24 inches square
and 12 inches deep. This value may be increased by 250 pounds per square foot
for each additional 12 inches in depth and I 00 pounds per square foot for each
additional 12 inches in width to a maximum value of 3,000 psf. Additionally, an
increase of one-third may be applied when considering short-term live loads (e.g.
seismic and wind loads).
The passive earth pressure may be computed as an equivalent fluid having a density
of 300 psf per foot of depth, to a maximum earth pressure of 2,500 psf for footings
founded in engineered fill. A coefficient of friction between soil and concrete of
0.30 may be used with dead load forces. The upper one (I) foot of soil below the
adjacent grade should not be used in calculating passive pressure. When
combining passive pressure and frictional resistance, the passive pressure
component should be reduced by one-third.
5.3.1.4 Bearing Capacity-Bedrock and Terrace Deposits
For foundations placed on bedrock an allowable bearing capacity of 3,000 pounds
per square foot (psf) may be used for design of continuous and perimeter footings
12 inches deep and 12 inches wide, and pad footings 24 inches square and 24
GEOTEK
Ikon, Ltd.
Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation
Cascada Verde
Project No.: 3440-$03
Rev October 27, 20 IS
Page 14
inches deep. This value may be increased by 300 pounds per square foot for each
additional 12 inches in depth and I 00 pounds per square foot for each additional
12 inches in width to a maximum value of 4,500 psf. Additionally, an increase of
one-third may be applied when considering short-term live loads (e.g. seismic and
wind loads).
The passive earth pressure may be computed as an equivalent fluid having a density
of 300 psf per foot of depth, to a maximum earth pressure of 3,500 psf for footings
founded in engineered fill. A coefficient of friction between soil and concrete of
0.35 may be used with dead load forces. The upper one (I) foot of soil below the
adjacent grade should not be used in calculating passive pressure. When
combining passive pressure and frictional resistance, the passive pressure
component should be reduced by one-third.
5.3.1.5 Moisture and Vapor Retarding System
A moisture and vapor retarding system should be placed below slabs-on-grade
where moisture migration through the slab is undesirable. Guidelines for these
are provided in the 2013 California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen)
Section 4.505.2 and the 20 I 3 CBC Section 191 0.1. It should be realized that the
effectiveness of the vapor retarding membrane can be adversely impacted as a
result of construction related punctures (e.g. stake penetrations, tears, punctures
from walking on the aggregate layer, etc.). These occurrences should be limited
as much as possible during construction.
Thicker membranes are generally more resistant to accidental puncture than
thinner ones. Products specifically designed for use as moisture/vapor retarders
may also be more puncture resistant. Although the CBC specifies a 6 mil vapor
retarder membrane, it is GeoTek's opinion that a minimum 10 mil thick
membrane with joints properly overlapped and sealed should be considered,
unless otherwise specified by the slab design professional.
Moisture and vapor retarding systems are intended to provide a certain level of
resistance to vapor and moisture transmission through the concrete, but do not
eliminate it. The acceptable level of moisture transmission through the slab is to
a large extent based on the type of flooring used and environmental conditions.
Ultimately, the vapor retarding system should be comprised of suitable elements
to limit migration of water and reduce transmission of water vapor through the
slab to acceptable levels. The selected elements should have suitable properties
(i.e., thickness, composition, strength, and permeance) to achieve the desired
performance level. Consideration should be given to consulting with an individual
possessing specific expertise in this area for additional evaluation.
GEOTEK
Ikon, Ltd.
Preliminary Geotechnical !Evaluation
Cascada Verde
5.3.2 Foundation and Structural Set Backs
Project No.: 3440-503
Rev October 27, 20 IS
Page IS
Based on the proposed building locations and anticipated site design, additional set backs are
not expected to be needed at the present. As applicable, the following setbacks should apply
to all foundations. Any improvements not conforming to these setbacks may be subject to
lateral movements and/or differential settlements:
• The outside bottom edge of all footings should be set back a minimum of H/3
(where H is the slope height) from the face of any descending slope. The setback
should be at least 7 feet and need not exceed 20 feet.
• The bottom of all footings for structures near retaining walls should be deepened
so as to extend below a I: I projection upward from the bottom inside edge of
the wall stem.
• The bottom of any existing foundations for structures should be deepened so as
to extend below a I: I projection upward from the bottom of the nearest
excavation. All structures should be set back from ascending slopes a minimum of
Y'2 the height of the slope to a maximum of 15 feet unless otherwise specifically
reviewed and found acceptable by Geo T ek.
5.3.3 Seismic Design Parameters
Site spectral accelerations (Ss and S I), for 0.2 and 1.0 second periods for a Class "B" and "D"
sites, were determined from the USGS Website, Earthquake Hazards Program, U.S. Seismic
Design Maps for Risk-Targeted Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCER) Ground Motion
Response Accelerations, for two (2) percent probability of exceedance in 50 years and Risk
Categories of Ill and IV (e.g. essential facilities), for the Conterminous 48 States by
Latitude/Longitude. The results are presented in the following table:
GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR
SELECTIVE LIMITED SITE SEISMIC PARAMETERS
Site Class Site Class
Parameter B D
Mapped 0.2 sec Period Spectral Acceleration, Ss (g) 1.048 1.048
Mapped 1.0 sec Period Spectral Acceleration, S I (g) 0.405 0.405
Site Coefficient, Fa 1.00 1.081
Site Coefficient, Fv 1.00 1.595
Maximum Considered Earthquake Spectral Response Acceleration 1.048 1.132 Parameter at 0.2 Second, SMS (g)
Maximum Considered Earthquake Spectral Response Acceleration 0.405 0.646 Parameter at I second, SM I (g)
Design Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter for 0.2 Second, SDS (g) 0.698 0.755
Design Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter for 1.0 Second, SD I (g) 0.270 0.431
As indicated previously specific site class applicable to a given building should be determined
at the completion of rough grading based on the specific underlying conditions.
GEOTEK
Ikon, Ltd.
Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation
Cascada Verde
Project No.: 3440-SD3
Rev October 27, 20 IS
Pa&e 16
Seismically resistant structural design in accordance with applicable code should be followed
during the design of the structure. The California Building Code (CBC, 20 13) and ASCE (20 13)
have been generally developed to reduce, but not eliminate, the potential for structural
damage. Some level of damage as the result of ground shaking generated by nearby
earthquakes is considered likely in this general area.
5.3.4 Soil Sulfate Content
Sulfate content was determined for a sample of onsite soils with the results indicating that the
water soluble sulfate content is in the range that is considered "not applicable" (i.e.
"negligible") as per Table 4.2.1 of ACI 318. Additionally, the sulfate exposure class is SO with
respect to Tables 4.2.1 and 4.3.1 of ACI 318. Based upon the test results, no special concrete
mix design is required by Code to resist sulfate attack. It is important to realize that this may
not represent all conditions on the site and additional testing at the completion on site grading
is recommended to verify sulfate contents.
5.3.5 SHORING
It is anticipated temporary shoring will be needed to complete the excavations for four of the
structures where space is not available for properly sloped backcuts. These include the two
buildings just east of Altisma Way north of the planned entrance drive and the two
northeastern buildings. The shoring contractor should coordinate with the earth-moving
contractor regarding sequence and requirements of installing the shoring system.
Considering that the systems are likely limited to the lowermost wall cut, we anticipate that
the shoring system may include a cantilevered system that could consist of closely spaced
steel H-Pile soldier piles and wooden lagging. Preliminary design considerations are presented
in the following section for this anticipated shoring method. Please note that the method of
temporary support can impact the design earth pressures. As such, GeoTek should perform
a review of the shoring design and provide additional recommendations, as warranted.
Horizontal and vertical movements of the shoring system should be monitored by a licensed
surveyor. The construction monitoring and performance of the shoring system are ultimately
the contractor's responsibility. At a minimum, we recommend that the tops of the soldier
beams be surveyed prior to excavation and that the top and bottom of the soldier beams be
surveyed on a weekly basis until the foundation is completed. The surveyed soldier beam data
points should be located at approximately 20 feet on-center. Surveying should consist of
measuring movements in vertical and two perpendicular horizontal directions.
It is difficult to accurately predict the amount of deflection of a shored excavation. It should
be realized, however, that some deflection would occur regardless of the shoring system
used. We estimate that this deflection could be on the order of I to 2 inches at the top of
the shored excavation. If greater deflection occurs during construction, tiebacks and/or
bracing may be necessary to keep settlement of the adjacent structures and any utilities within
GEOTEK
Ikon, Ltd.
Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation
Cascada Verde
Project No.: 3440-SD3
Rev October 27, 20 15
Page 17
a tolerable range. If desired to reduce the deflection of the shoring, a greater active pressure
could be used in the shoring design. Once a method is selected, additional information
regarding the design and construction requirements of the shoring system may be provided.
Voids between the soil and lagging should be properly grouted to mitigate the potential for
the voids to propagate to the surface.
5.3.5.1 Lateral Pressures
The shoring system should be designed to resist the pressure exerted by the retained soils
plus any additional lateral forces due to loads applied near the top of the excavations. A
cantilevered shoring system supporting a level ground surface should be designed based upon
the soil parameters presented herein. Cantilevered shoring should be designed for an
equivalent fluid pressure (EFP) of 20 pcf plus the foundation loads of any adjoining structures
if it is found to be within a I: I projection upward from the base of the foundation excavation.
If there is a slope above the shoring the EFP should increase to 27pcf for a 2: I surcharge and
40pcf for a I: I surcharge.
Geo T ek should observe and document the installation of the shoring in order to verify the
anticipated geotechnical conditions.
5.3.5.2 Passive Resistance
It is recommended that the design of the shoring system incorporate a passive equivalent fluid
weight of 300 pcf for the shoring embedded within relatively competent material comprising
the paralic deposits. The soldier piles should be spaced no closer than 3 diameters on center.
The soldier piles should be drilled and backfilled with concrete to the full depth of the passive
resistance zone. The area providing the passive resistance can be assumed to have a width
equal to twice the concrete pile diameter. The recommended passive pressure for the shoring
assumes a horizontal surface for the soil mass extending at least I 0 feet in front of the face
of the shoring, or three times the height of the surface generating passive pressure, whichever
is greater. The shoring system should be embedded a sufficient depth beneath the toe of the
excavation so as to provide structural stability. We recommend that a factor of safety of at
least 1.2 be applied to the calculated embedment depth and that the passive pressure be
limited to 2,500 psf. The assumed geotechnical conditions should be verified as necessary
during shoring construction by a representative of GeoTek.
5.3.5.3 Lagging
The upper portion of the drilled shaft should be filled with a lean cement-sand slurry to
provide contact between the soil and the soldier pile. Timber lagging may be used between
the soldier piles to help support the exposed soils. If lagging is to remain after construction,
treated lumber should be used. Lagging should be designed for the full lateral pressure
recommended above. Voids between the soil and lagging should be grouted or slurried to
reduce the potential for the voids to propagate to the surface. Sufficient space should be
provided between the finished wall and shoring to allow waterproofing to the extent desired
and wall drainage using prefabricated composite drain should be considered.
GEOTEK
Ikon, Ltd.
Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation
Cascada Verde
5.4 RETAINING WALL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
5.4.1 General Design Criteria
Project No.: 3440-SD3
Rev October 27, 20 IS
Page 18
Recommendations presented herein may apply to typical masonry or concrete vertical
retaining walls to a maximum height of up to 14 feet. Additional review and recommendations
should be requested for higher walls.
Retaining wall foundations embedded a minimum of 18 inches into engineered fill should be
designed using an allowable bearing capacity of 2,500 psf. This value may be increased by 300
pounds per square foot for each additional 12 inches in depth and I 00 pounds per square foot
for each additional 12 inches in width to a maximum value of 4,500 psf. An increase of one-
third may be applied when considering short-term live loads (e.g. seismic and wind loads). The
passive earth pressure may be computed as an equivalent fluid having a density of 300 psf per
foot of depth, to a maximum earth pressure of 2,500 psf. A coefficient of friction between
soil and concrete of 0.30 may be used with dead load forces. The upper one (I) foot of soil
below the adjacent grade should not be used in calculating passive pressure. When combining
passive pressure and frictional resistance, the passive pressure component should be reduced
by one-third.
As stacked or terraced walls will be constructed it should be considered that other than for
the lowest wall, foundations will likely be founded in engineered fill.
5.4.2 Cantilevered Walls
The recommendations presented below are for cantilevered retaining walls up to 14 feet high.
Active earth pressure may be used for retaining wall design, provided the top of the wall is
not restrained from minor deflections. An equivalent fluid pressure approach may be used to
compute the horizontal pressure against the wall. Appropriate fluid unit weights are given
below for specific slope gradients of the retained material. These do not include other
superimposed loading conditions such as traffic, structures, seismic events, or adverse geologic
conditions.
TABLE 5.4.2-ACTIVE EARTH PRESSURES
Surface Slope of Retained Materials Equivalent Fluid Pressure Equivalent Fluid Pressure
(H:V) (PCF) (PCF)
Select Backfill* Native Backfill
Level 35 45
2:1 50 65
* Select backfill may cons1st of Class 2 permeable filter matenals, Class 2 aggregate base or 1mported Sand
with an SE> 30. Backfill zone includes area between back of wall to plane (I: I, h:v) up from back of wall
foundation to ground surface.
GEOTEK
Ikon, Ltd.
Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation
Cascada Verde
Project No.: 3440-503
Rev October 27, 20 15
Pa~e 19
Additional lateral forces can be induced on retaining walls during an earthquake. For level
backfill and a Site Class "C", the minimum earthquake-induced force (Feq) should be 8H2
(lbs/linear foot of wall). This force can be assumed to act at a distance of 0.6H above the
base of the wall, where "H" is the height of the retaining wall measured from the base of the
footing (in feet).
5.4.3 Restrained Retaining Walls
Any retaining walls that will be restrained prior to placing and compacting backfill material or
that have reentrant or male corners, should be designed for an at-rest equivalent fluid
pressure of 65 pcf, plus any applicable surcharge loading. For areas of male or reentrant
corners, the restrained wall design should extend a minimum distance of twice the height of
the wall laterally from the corner or as otherwise determined by the structural engineer.
5.4.4 Surcharge Loads
In addition to the loading in the prior two sections if the back of the lower wall at the top of
the footing falls within a I: I projection of the footing for the upper wall then the structural
engineer should include an appropriate surcharge load on the lower wall accounting for both
lateral and vertical forces from the upper wall.
5.4.5 Wall Backfill and Drainage
The onsite materials with "very low" to "low" expansion potential may be used for backfill
provided they are screened of greater than 3-inch size gravels. Presence of other materials
might necessitate revision to the parameters provided and modification of wall designs. The
backfill materials should be placed in lifts no greater than eight (B)-inches in thickness and
compacted at 90% relative compaction in accordance with ASTM Test Method D 1557.
Proper surface drainage needs to be provided and maintained.
Wall backfill should include a minimum one (I) foot wide section of 3/4 to I -inch clean
crushed rock (or approved equivalent). The rock should be placed immediately adjacent to
the back of wall and extend up from the backdrain to within approximately 12 inches of finish
grade. Filter fabric should be placed between the crushed rock and soil backfill. The upper
12 inches should consist of compacted onsite materials. "Panel drains" providing an equivalent
drainage flow are acceptable alternatives to crushed rock drains. The drainage system should
connect to a 4-inch diameter perforated collector pipe near the base of the wall. The drain
system should be connected to a suitable outlet. A minimum of two outlets should be
provided for each drain section. Spacing between drain outlets should not exceed I 00 feet.
Walls from 2 to 4 feet in height may be drained using localized gravel packs behind weep
holes at I 0 feet maximum spacing (e.g. approximately 1.5 cubic feet of gravel in a woven
plastic bag). Weep holes should be provided or the head joints omitted in the first course of
block extended above the ground surface. However, nuisance water may still collect in front
of the wall. Examples of wall drains are shown on Figure RW-1 Typical Retaining Wall Drains.
GEOTEK
J
Ikon, Ltd.
Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation
Cascada Verde
Project No.: 3440-SD3
Rev October 27, 20 15
Page 20
The need and extent of damp-proofing or waterproofing retaining walls should be considered
and the appropriate systems utilized.
5.4.6 Segmental Retaining Wall Design
Segmental retaining walls (SRW) are generally designed as gravity systems, consisting of a
reinforced fill mass protected by a concrete wall facing. The design utilizes the phi angle and
unit weight of the materials. Assuming the walls are placed either on compacted fill following
removals of loose soils as outlined Section 5.2.2, terrace deposit or bedrock then soils both
beneath and behind the walls should be assumed to have the following parameters:
Phi angle = 28 degrees
Wet Unit Weight = 125pcf
In the event that high strength materials are needed then use of select imported backfill should
be considered.
It should be noted that material derived for the terrace deposits is expected to contain a high
percentage of rock fragments exceeding 3 inch diameter and may not be suitable for wall fill
without screening the remove oversize rock fragments.
There are various manufactures of the geogrid and wall facing as well as various strengths of
the geogrid. The selection of the appropriate components is a function of the specific design.
The materials selected should comply with the manufactures recommended uses.
Drainage systems should generally be placed behind the fill that makes up wall system.
Although, depending on the specific soil conditions present modified locations may be
recommended.
5.5 PAVEMENTS AND fLATWORK
5.5.1 Asphaltic Concrete Pavement
R-values of subgrade soils will determine the ultimate pavement sections and on site soil may
vary considerably. For preliminary design purposes, asphaltic concrete pavements consistent
with the City of Carlsbad minimum design standards may be used. Subgrade testing at the soils
at subgrade elevations should be performed subsequent to rough grading.
5.5.2 Pervious Pavements
Pervious pavements are proposed in several locations as part of the storm water treatment
systems. These system include relatively thick gravel sections with overall thicknesses of over
12 inches. This section thickness is considered acceptable for the interior drive aisles on the
project.
GEOTEK
Ikon, Ltd.
Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation
Cascada Verde
5.5.3 Concrete Flatwork
5.5.3.1 Exterior Concrete Slabs, Sidewalks and Driveways
Project No.: 3440-SD3
Rev October 27, 20 IS
Page 21
Exterior concrete slabs, sidewalks and driveways should be designed using a four (4) inch
minimum thickness. No specific reinforcement is required due to the non-structural nature.
However, the use of some reinforcement should be considered. Recommendations can be
provided upon request. Some shrinkage and cracking of the concrete should be anticipated
as a result of typical mix designs and curing practices commonly utilized in residential
construction.
Sidewalks and driveways may be under the jurisdiction of the governing agency. If so,
jurisdictional design and construction criteria would apply, if more restrictive than the
recommendations presented herein.
Subgrade soils should be pre-moistened prior to placing concrete. The subgrade soils below
exterior slabs, sidewalks, driveways, etc. at the subject site should be pre-saturated to a
minimum of I I 0% of optimum moisture content to a depth of 12 inches for soils classified as
having "very low" or "low" expansion potential.
All concrete installation, including preparation and compaction of subgrade, should be done
in accordance with the City of Carlsbad specifications, and under the observation and testing
of GeoTek and a City Inspector, if necessary.
5.5.4 Concrete Performance
Concrete cracks should be expected. These cracks can vary from sizes that are essentially
unnoticeable to more than 1/8 inch in width. Most cracks in concrete while unsightly do not
significantly impact long-term performance. While it is possible to take measures (proper
concrete mix, placement, curing, control joints, etc.) to reduce the extent and size of cracks
that occur, some cracking will occur despite the best efforts to minimize it. Concrete
undergoes chemical processes that are dependent on a wide range of variables, which are
difficult, at best, to control. Concrete, while seemingly a stable material, also is subject to
internal expansion and contraction due to external changes over time.
One of the simplest means to control cracking is to provide weakened control joints for
cracking to occur along. These do not prevent cracks from developing; they simply provide
a relief point for the stresses that develop. These joints are a widely accepted means to
control cracks but are not always effective. Control joints are more effective the more closely
spaced they are. Geo T ek suggests that control joints be placed in two directions and located
a distance apart roughly equal to 24 to 36 times the slab thickness.
GEOTEK
Ikon, Ltd.
Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation
Cascada Verde
5.6 POST CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS
5.6.1 Landscape Maintenance and Planting
Project No.: 3440-503
Rev October 27, 20 15
Page 22
Water has been shown to weaken the inherent strength of soil, and slope stability is
significantly reduced by overly wet conditions. Positive surface drainage away from graded
slopes should be maintained and only the amount of irrigation necessary to sustain plant life
should be provided for planted slopes. Controlling surface drainage and runoff, and
maintaining a suitable vegetation cover can minimize erosion. Plants selected for landscaping
should be lightweight, deep-rooted types that require little water and are capable of surviving
the prevailing climate.
Overwatering should be avoided. The soils should be maintained in a solid to semi-solid state
as defined by the materials Atterberg limits. Care should be taken when adding soil
amendments to avoid excessive watering. Leaching as a method of soil preparation prior to
planting is not recommended.
An abatement program to control ground-burrowing rodents should be implemented and
maintained. This is critical as burrowing rodents can decreased the long-term performance of
slopes.
It is common for planting to be placed adjacent to structures in planter or lawn areas. This
will result in the introduction of water into the ground adjacent to the foundation. This type
of landscaping should be avoided. If used, then extreme care should be exercised with regard
to the irrigation and drainage in these areas. Waterproofing of the foundation and/or
subdrains may be warranted and advisable. We could discuss these issues, if desired, when
plans are made available.
5.6.2 Drainage
The need to maintain proper surface drainage and subsurface systems cannot be overly
emphasized. Positive site drainage should be maintained at all times. Drainage should not flow
uncontrolled down any descending slope. Water should be directed away from foundations
and not allowed to pond or seep into the ground. Pad drainage should be directed toward
approved area(s).
5.7 PLAN REVIEW AND CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS
We recommend that site grading, specifications, and foundation plans be reviewed by this
office prior to construction to check for conformance with the recommendations of this
report. We also recommend that GeoTek representatives be present during site grading and
foundation construction to observe and document for proper implementation of the
geotechnical recommendations. The owner/developer should have Geo T ek's representatives
perform at least the following duties:
GEOTEK
Ikon, Ltd.
Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation
Cascada Verde
Project No.: 3440-503
Rev October 27, 20 IS
Page 23
• Observe site clearing and grubbing operations for proper removal of all unsuitable
materials.
• Observe and test bottom of removals prior to fill placement.
• Evaluate the suitability of on-site and import materials (if any) for fill placement, and collect
soil samples for laboratory testing where necessary.
• Observe the fill for uniformity during placement including utility trenches.
• Test the fill for field density and relative compaction.
• Observe shoring system placement.
• Observe and probe foundation materials, prior to rebar or form placement, in order to
confirm suitability of bearing materials.
Observe and document utility trench backfills (including but not limited to areas under slabs,
prior to rebar and form placement)
6. INTENT
It is the intent of this report to aid in the design and construction of the proposed
development. Implementation of the advice presented in this report is intended to reduce
risk associated with construction projects. The professional opinions and geotechnical advice
contained in this report are not intended to imply total performance of the project or
guarantee that unusual or variable conditions will not be discovered during or after
construction.
The scope of our evaluation is limited to the boundaries of the subject property. This review
does not and should in no way be construed to encompass any areas beyond the specific area
of the proposed construction as indicated to us by the client. Further, no evaluation of any
existing site improvements is included. The scope is based on our understanding of the
project and the client's needs, our fee estimate (Proposal No. P30100114SD) dated January
24, 2014 and geotechnical engineering standards normally used on similar projects in this
locality at the present.
7. LIMITATIONS
This report a feasibility study only. Our findings are based on site conditions observed and
the stated sources. Thus, our comments are professional opinions that are limited to the
extent of the available data. GeoTek has prepared this report in a manner consistent with
that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the engineering and science
GEOTEK
Ikon, Ltd.
Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation
Cascada Verde
Project No.: 3440-SD3
Rev October 27, 20 IS
Pa~e 24
professions currently practicing under similar conditions in the jurisdiction in which the
services are provided, subject to the time limits and physical constraints applicable to this
report.
This report should not be considered a design level study and a preliminary site study should
be undertaken to provide more detailed information regarding site conditions and to develop
appropriate recommendations for those conditions. Observations during construction are
important to allow for any change in recommendations found to be warranted. Our opinions
have been derived in accordance with current standards of practice and no warranty of any
kind is expressed or implied. Standards of care/practice are subject to change with time.
This report has been prepared for the specific site, development and purpose described to
GeoTek by the client. The factual data, interpretations and recommendations pertain to a
specific project as described in this report and are not applicable to any other project or site
location. Any change of site conditions, purpose, development plans or if the project is not
initiated within a reasonable time frame of the report may alter the validity of the report.
GeoTek cannot be responsible for use of this report, or portions thereof, unless GeoTek is
requested to review and, if necessary, revise the report.
The materials observed on the project site appear to be representative of the area; however,
soil, bedrock and groundwater conditions vary in character between excavations and natural
outcrops or conditions exposed during site construction. Site conditions may vary due to
seasonal changes or other factors. Geo T ek assumes no responsibility or liability for work,
testing or recommendations performed or provided by others.
GEOTEK
Ikon, Ltd.
Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation
Cascada Verde
Selected References
Project No.: 3440-SD3
Rev October 27,2015
Selected References
American Concrete Institute (ACI), 2006, "Guide for Concrete Slabs That Receive Moisture
Sensitive Flooring Materials," Publication 302.2R-06.
__ ,, 20 I 0, "Guide to Design of Slabs-On-Ground," Publication 360R-I 0.
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 2013, "Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and
Other Structures," ASCE/SEI 7 -I 0, Third Printing, Errata Incorporated through
March IS.
ASTM, "Soil and Rock: American Society for Testing and Materials," Vol. 4.08 for ASTM Test
Methods D-420 to D-4914, IS3 standards, I ,026 pages; and Vol. 4.09 for ASTM test
method D-4943 to highest number.
Blake, T., 2000a, "EQSEARCH, Version 3.00b," A Computer Program for the Estimation of
Peak Ground Acceleration from California Historical Earthquake Catalogs.
__ , 2000b, "EQSEARCH, Version 4.00," A Computer Program for the Estimation of
Peak Horizontal Acceleration from Southern California Historical Earthquake
Catalogs, User's Manual, 94pp, with update data, 2006.
__ , 2000c, "EQSEARCH, Version 3.00b, A Computer Program for the Deterministic
Prediction of Peak Horizontal Acceleration from Digitized California Faults, with
2003 updated fault model database.
California Code of Regulations, Title 24, 2013, "California Building Code," 3 Volumes.
GeoTek Inc. In-house proprietary information.
Google Maps, 20 IS, Google Earth, or the Google Maps/Google Earth APis.
Hart, E., and Bryant, W., 1997, "Fault Rupture Hazard Zones in California," California
Division of Mines and Geology, Special Publication 42.
__ ,, 2007, Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault
Zoning with Index to Earthquake Zones Maps with Index to Earthquake Fault Zones
Maps," California Geological Survey: Special Publication 42.
GEOTEK
Ikon, Ltd.
Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation
Cascada Verde
Project No.: 3440-SD3
Rev October 27, 20 IS
Selected References
Kennedy, M.P., and Tan, S.S., 1996, "Geologic Maps of the Northwestern Part of San Diego
County, California," California Division of Mines and Geology, Open File Report 96-
02.
--...J 2005, "Geologic Map of the 30'x60' Oceanside Quadrangle," California Department
of Conservation.
Seismic Design Values for Buildings
(http://geohazards.usgs.gov/designmaps/us/application.php).
Southern California Earthquake Center (SCEC), 20 14, Clickable Fault Map
(http://www.data.scec.org/significant/faults-socal.html),
USGS On-line Program: Seismic Design Maps
(http://earthquake.usgs.gov/designmaps/us/application.php)
GEOTEK
Imagery from Google Earth
n
GEOTEK
PN: 3440-SD3
13&4 Poinsettia Awtnue, Suite A
VIsta. California 92081-8505
March 2015
N Site Location Map
Cascada Verde
Carlsbad, California
Figure 1
Not to scale
,Q
GEOTEK
PN: 3440-SD3
1384 Poinsettia Awnue, Suite A
VIsta, California 92081-8505
March 2015
From: Geologic Map Of The Oceanside 30' X 60' Quadrangle,
California" Complied by Michael P. Kennedy and SlangS. Tan,
2005, published by. U.S. Geological Survey.
N Regional Geologic Map
Cascada Verde
Carlsbad, California
Figure 2
--~
\ \t
[ \
I I
1-I
l
.........._
l!r
_,
I ------_ ... / ~--------il ~:.;:?P95fD 2~ .. Rr.:'} so--... t~>~L A • srr Sf!L!:J 1 , ' ~-c~ PiWW::-~ ~~~~ ---~\=· ;:;· . e~ ' ~ "' 'G.\ e. · zel OlloO,
l . -~ -~ -~:-~-:c.":-·-""·:\~-~.--\::;~~ ... 4.0.
-·:·
"'
3t
"''"NIUJ I
WALe :c,!u)'j I
\
~
<.-;:
w
tAms cr
GHA~;tNG tJiiW!:!:N BU!i (),if.((;
(_i'r'PtCt.U
w
i -~ --
~
r-Z
10 to 15 feet removals expected
rn existing sewer easement
·;,-,-·~~-. '::~-, -..
9· ------. ...
~
\ ' 4 \ y . '\ . 4f.> . /
4 ' ·· I
\ I
'()
· .. -~(,;;-~ . ........__ :'~~["'o-4~1-: ,,vc _ > ~~~7'-~!'t . . ~ ., :'i;~'·:.,o < AI ' ...:., ·-.rr A-.. ~ ~·a· ~~-···.·•· .. .........._
· 1c C'<9 --It'~" ' --/-?·l'" """ sr '"'' - ----.. .. /· ':!;~~ ,,.,,;:, ~.~' /-------------/ . co~:.--=-. ~-·-·"·"·' ~. --=---~----.::;;:,...~. -':_"""-.;:;:,.-.; :...:.. ----
~~,f-'il~~z ----------Q
_..--l'l'C . --~·•,1 :)~ ~~\ (tC 4;.0·'
w
--··:,.,
'·l.L ~--
·t.;.
~ •• ·--&
w · ........
--------s -----------~-.~--· ----s------......__
-f-B-10 Exploratory Boring Location -.... ...___ -· ---------....__--~---__Q__------
--w w
Test Trench Location
·-~_ .. ,• -~: ·r;,
II)
;;
ji:' ">
--···c.-:·
\, .. "> II~~~~ ~ 0
oc 'II~ a~cS '-~-···.·-.. ,
< a:<(-
~ -~r
~~ II~~~~~
~ ~~u
• ~~~~~!!! -~u .. ~
0
_j
\/~ // .
./ .. <iP'
.,.. /·· /,-"'iP
.... sO~\
/
/ ..
/
• .?
/ _,
'II / / .,..
/ --
Cascada Verde
Carlsbad, CA
F. ·E a tj, ,.
Q) ~
~ ~ ,, ·rn f, c .t c: ~ Qj w • + • E •
C) ....... ·~ ~ 0 ii ~)2 I ~~:;; a: g·,.he
-1.,~'1! ~01~ lU
z
>-<C a:_J
....I
··-
$:
•C ::-:·
:~
.,
-~
{.3
'
I sm! Tl Oct 20 IS PN. 3446-SD3 <(CL
~0 ~z ,..
//
.0 • (
Geologic Contact (dotted where buried)
Estimated Removal Limits
Anticipated Removal Depths, (do not
account for cut depths)
o .,, "' __:r· 'W c·,;:;. "" ;r• ._____ JO' ··"'
i.~ ~· ~ ~ J..,.IV........... ./ ..........,._ ~-t
All locations are approximate +5s·....._ --jss+
E:x:-;r • t.l~}51. f·'.C.C.-·d 1 :
9DE:tif. \ 'i''' rt~· K \ ' I
·.1 "~:1::~, :=~ ~~ --~ :::: ~::-~ ==/ -~-r I . -· f~~~~: ~=~ ~~ ::: ~~ __ _::-:::~/-~<-~=J:rJ:tJ ! './~-----EXIST_/ 'I '/ -~-t>:IST_; ~x~:· _.,..r~· ' i.XIS~i~G--1 . .1\C PAV. CURB & f~tSTir"':...~ __ /.1 AC rJAli. _';.[;~~-k I
'...''..ir-:'ti, :;r._~ l it.H Ai'·:D BAS[ GtlT7ER (.iHi:IJ. C!JTit:R AND BASE ~f~;~.fi'
AN!J SJD£W/\L.' AIIO oiVUh\LK E&_~I'l$~_\f{Nf EX. 1\UCANTE RD
. .. " . . ~~·1f ''/H f;:J . t-.,,. J(J'
--''"' ........ -
I ' ' ..
J -~ !J 'J' :
• !):J~ -,
i-1"~-2'!' --cU 1'o--J
E:trST. P.C,c.11 [•"IS ... CJCC-. '
S/Cf WAI K \ .. ~ I S•DUr4,K , j'
1\ ,,~I I \.-:~ I .,.._ •-~ 1
r ;Ji -+.:~ -~~~-. ~::. ~x~~?-~~~;~:=::;f·r-i
EXJ5tl~'(;_/ AC PA~1-C:JR& & C~IPB, GU f fER
AND SiD[ liALK AND HA:Jl-Gt..;PfH
EX. ALTIVA PLACE
l NO;;; I
I ru~: Pr:s·~ILF !..: (:J?Ds:s I
t;'r: Y' .-f.' -:::-~ -!""; ) .... c.ru,S,S.c.E .... •.I.~o.. 9· 81
1'"
Geotechnical
Map
Figure 3
1."
SCALE
I
:Jo
W<( a: a: a_ a
----' DATE---~26/WI5 .•
seALS
:DflAim
f•$0
________ lji,J(~.
JOe•
L ,\W«l NO AL TISMA,
5
I I
I
·-~
~ \ !: I
I II
c·,r
~ ~
I
I
I .,
:I
;; ''j .. .i
r
.. ··· ~~I_ i ':..io:•tc-::.. _ ..... _:.=:.. _ _ _ ~-= 2~~ .L.=---= _, ________ ------r·· .... -+ ,
~ I '-....{~\.:~Temp. Cut_·--...
I "" Fill
Santiago Frnj '··•.;''-' ...... ............
I i I
Santiagi Fm i
' I
SECTION 'H -H'
~·~
~·i
''i .,
>Ei
f \
,' ... ,
Terral:e
Deposir(?)
~:-c ;,;·
l I'
"'''. ! ----} -''',_.. / --..... Fi11(1f"' . . · .. .,4. ~-"""-·..:;;;,-....._. Y·''OO'.'
·~-I
il
~,
\ I
\ J i
Terrace 1
Deposits(?) I
-~·L"
·· ·' j\, Alluvium ......
Santiago Fm(?) . ._., ·.. '' ......_ Alluvium .,.,."' Santiago Fm(?) ........ ......_ __ ___
I
...... \ ' ............. ---
SECTION 'K -K'
j
.1
ij
············"~···:.• ...... _I ~
1
I
lj ,.... ''" i--.:::.~~~E!!!W. ___ .---, 1 . . 1 /
Terrace "";"::~,7"(..:...; _ . ~----o; -/
Deposits(!) '....._ ..... ~ A11u~fl.IM ., /
. ---...?---!"
Santiago Fm(!)
SECTION 'N -N'
1: I Temp Cut
I
I
1: I Temp Cut l 1!
I\ I 1./,,,,.,,. I /t f·"'~··
·. .. . . . ~ I . . ~:~::s~~ ~-~ I • -~---·~.._.·_c:, _______ J ~~ hormg System
Santiago Fm or :
Volcanic Rock I
probable in lower
portion of excavation
required
SECTION 'M -M'
Scale I"= 40'
STAll+!
Cascada Verde
Carlsbad, CA
Sept 2015 PN. 3446-SD3
Geotechnical
Cross Section
Figure 4A
I
.;.:
Dl1',"!.!.'3J::' woo
Cut\ :i ---· ..
:·1··::.;:: .. ~. ·--... · '· . ;,2.4--~-; "• · .. ,..·· ' ,:,/ ....... ,
'~"
-,1 Terra e , /
q>eposi (1~~ 1 , _,.,,,1,_,.. •/' I -· . I
OtM
· ~Shqring System
Santiago Fm or required
Volcanic Rock
probable in lower
portion of excavation
;,: ~
SECTION '0 -0"
~I
~~
"' tl I JJ:
. ' ,I
Terra'Ce
Deposits/
Santiago Fm
SECTION '0 -0"
1'
"'· ·,,I
:I
1: 1 Temp Cri~ ~~
I
. ~ Fill~''·"'· i ···''" __ , ...... ,.,!~ .
,: .. , ... ,.. .. . ... ,x. ,, , ....... ,. , •. q .. ,.... ... -s feet h1gh ''::.';··..: ... -.~.. ·'""" I .. verticalcut -'--........ / .... , .-,,,
\ </ ....-""'! Terrace Alluviu~ __ ....-/ -1 Deposits(?) I
_...,...,.,
'';~;;·'' .. j
SECTION 'T -T'
lillY 'J !~/.'.'l .::-r.ro
I
:~'
I
}·II ..
' ~I
::r.:,
~
Alluvium ·,
::,.... • --
1
.
1
/I ~:;~;.,; T J.race
' --· -: ·· /• / De
1
• (1) ''l Terrrace-<i,;;-l i :;;>-! / pps1ts .
:Deoosits(?\ -. -:-.•··" I I ..:~-- --1~-"1-:.L-..1.----..... ..J.,---...j.. . ·'i · · . . I . ·
·:1 I Santiago Fm(?)
DmV!.l •. : I I ~w ! ,
' 0':':•
SECTION 'P -P'
I
I
ii
-1
I ' /li
ll
I~
'' I ,.··.\ I" I ·-; I~ \;~~_ ,. ... ,( /
,. I ·h·:::/ I
\ 1 \ i // : ..., . ..,.._. .. ·i!f· I T~rr.ace · • ·• . 'c. -; ·>f' i
D .c,:;. (1' ·,_,'.. /........__ I i epos1ts . /.., , ,,. :---,
.
/ :.,·_;;:: :_ 1: 1_ Temp Cut .. ,. . . / : !
-·--------I i
Santiago Fm or '
Volcanic Rock
probable in lower l
portion of excavatio~
I
;(\f ">"'•
!'!:.'•' .. '.'"'"~ · /~-.t.·:,.L,,." ; '" Terrace , .. '"· ' "''"' .,1_~~~~~=~~) / : hor~ngdSy~tem
Santiago Fm o~
Volcanic RocR
probable in lower
portion of excavation
reqwre !
Jl-i:·'iolf;},IJ.T:
SECTION "R -R"
--~
:!.'
'::
:'I
'I
1:1 TempCut~FmliJ _
A-' "' .. ' I '/..'"'' ... , ..... -,.,,. , .... , .. _, L / . "
'·; "'' ·.-... -,",-, ·~I 1' ~3' ~ ~-).1, . \
) 1 ... _j': : 1'll .··::c ay require I .. ,,>.... . ...... ';!( '
.. I ,,,;., ;._,._,.' , i Shoring ,,: . ,.,; I Alluviu~ ·'-T~rr~ce
.. ;;~/ / Deposits(?) ~'"ytfj:.C~----
SECTION 'U -U'
SECTION '8 -8'
Scale I"= 40'
Cascada Verde
Carlsbad, CA
PN. 3446-SD3
Geotechnical
Cross Section
Figure 48
Waterproofing per
specifications by others
Minimum one (1) foot
Maximum two (2) feet
Retaining Wal
Ground
Surfac\
Temporary Back Cut to
OSHA Standards
inimum 12 inch width Clean, Open
Graded Aggregate Max 1 inch
wrapped in Mirafi 140 Nor equivalent
Perforated 4" diameter Schedule 40
PVC or Equivalent. Outlet past wall via
solid pipe. Connection to be in
aggregate section.
Pipe and Aggregate System
Waterproofing per
specifications by othe
Minimum one (1) foot
Maximum two (2) feet
Retaining Wall-""
Ground
Surfac\
1384 Poinsettia Avenue, Suite A
Vista, California 92081-8505
Ditch
Temporary Back Cut to
OSHA Standards
=;;;;;;;;;;;~----Panel Drain (Mirafi 2000 or equivalent)
Installed per manufacturers specifications
3/8 to 1 inch open graded Aggregate
in filter fabric or Wash Coarse Sand
Minimum 6 inches over pipe
Perforated 4" diameter Schedule 40
PVC or Equivalent. Outlet past wall via
solid pipe. Connection to be behind
and at least 5 feet from end of wall in
aggregate section.
Panel Drain System
Typical Retaining Wall Drains
Figure RW-1
APPENDIX A· EXPLORATORY LOGS.
GEOTEK
GeoTek, Inc.
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
CLIENT: IKON Lid. DRILLER: Pacific Drilling LOGGEDB~ _________ T;;;E:.:M~-------
PROJECT NAME: ___ _..;:;ca~s;;;a:::;da=-:Vo,;e:;,rd:.:e;..__,
PROJECT NO.: 3448-SD3
DRILL METHOD: 3.25' ID Hollow Stem Auger
HAMMER: 1401bs/30in
OPERATOR: _____ C;;.;a;;;.;ra;;.rd;;.;o'-----
RIG TYPE: ____ -'M"'in"'iM.;.;.o;;.;.le'-----
LOCATION• SEE FIGURE 2A ELEVATION• DATE• 3/17/2015 .
SAMPLES 0 Laboratory Testii}Q
g ., J:l ;?: Q. .!: E BORING NO.: B-1 ~
:5 ~ CD "~ ~ ~ ~ ., !!!
Q. ~ ] Q.~ !3 s~ lii'R CD " E E ~.Ill @ c E Oj~ Ill B ~~
Ill ::J MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS c Ill
-r---Brick at surface -SM Fill: Dark Brown, loose sandy, clayey Silt moist
-----Cobbles of boulders.
-T.D. 4ft 5-Practical Refused on cobbles or Boulders -Wet at bottom --Hole Backfilled with Bentonite Chips ------
10 ----------
15 ----------
20 ----------25 ---------
30.-
jQ Sample tvPe: • Ring 1--SPT IZI---Small Bulk C8J---Large Bulk D No Recovery ::SZ --Water Table z Ill " AL = Atterberg Limits El = Expansion Index SA= Sieve Analysis RV = R-Value Test Ill Lab testing: ... SR = Sulfate/Resisillvlly Test SH = Shear Test CO = Consolidation test MD = Maximum Density
GeoTek, Inc.
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
CLIENT: IKON Ltd. DRILLER: Pacific Drilling LOGGED BY: _____ T.:..:E:::M::...,_ ___ _
PROJECT NAME: ___ __:ca:::s::a:::da=.V.:.;e::.rd::e:,___ DRILL METHOD: 3.25' ID Hollow Stem Auger OPERATOR: _______ C~a::.m::.rd:::o:__ ____ ___
PROJECT NO.: 344B-SD3 HAMMER: 1401bs/30in RIG TYPE: ______ _:M:.::i:..::niM:;;o:::le=---------
LOCATION• SEE FIGURE 2A . ELEVATION• DATE• 3/17/2015 .
SAMPLES 0 Laboratory Testing
€ ., .c ~ c. .5 E BORING NO.: 8-2 ~
'8. ~ "' CD._ (j) ... ~ ., I!!
~ 'lis c..8 ~ .!C 16'5' Q)
CD c. ~ E E ~~ Ca. :5 c E r?l~ UJ 2:'~ 0 .. iii ::J MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS 8 c UJ
-1--Brick at Surface
-Fill: Dark Brown, clayey silty SAND, very loose to loose
--@ 3 ' Grey clayey Sand, wet, very loose
---Cobbles or Boulders
-Practical Refused @ 4 ' on cobbles or Boulders
5-Wet at bottom
-Hole Backfilled with Bentonite Chips --------
10 ----------
15 ----------
20 ----------25 ---------
30 --
iCII Sample tvPe: • -Ring 1--SPT IZI---Small Bulk ~-Large Bulk D "SZ --Water Table z -No Recovery
Ill fB Lab testing: AL = Atterberg Limits El = Expansion Index SA= Sieve Analysis RV = R-Value Test .... SR = Sulfate/Resisitivity Test SH = Shear Test CO = Consolidation test MD = Maximum Density
GeoTek, Inc.
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
CLIENT: IKON Ltd. DRILLER: Pacific Drilling LOGGEDB~-------~T~EM~-------
PROJECT NAME: Casada Verde
PROJECT NO.: ---.....:::=344=B-~SD.=:.3=---,
LOCATION: SEE FIGURE 2A
DRILL METHOD: 3.25" ID Hollow Stem Auger
HAMMER: 1401bs/30in
ELEVATION·
OPERATOR: _________ C~a~~~rd~o~-------
RIG TYPE: --------~M~in;.:;:iM;.:;:oo::le:;,-------
DATE• 3117/2015 . .
SAMPLES 0 Laboratory Testing
g ., .1:1
Q. ·'" E BORING NO.: B-3 ~ ~ ~ ., ~ ~ [!! '& CD c..8 ~~ .,_ !6'5" ~ "lil E E Cl) -c: G) .. Q. ~ 0 ~~ c.e, = c .. :::J E UlZ Cl) ~ 0 .. iii :J MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS 8 c Cl)
Brick at Surface ---Fill: Dark Brown, clayey silty SAND, very loose to loose
SM --@ 3 'Grey clayey Sand, Wet, very loose
---cobbles or boulders
-Practical Refused @ 4 'on cobbles or boulders
5-Wet at bottom
-Boring backfilled with Bentonite Chips --------10 ----------
15 ----------
20 ----------25 ---------
30-
iCI Sample type: • -Ring 1---SPT IZI---Small Bulk ~ Large Bulk D No Recovery :SZ --Water Table z Ill
fil Lab testing: AL = Atterberg Limits El = Expansion Index SA= Sieve Analysis RV = R-Value Test .... SR = Sulfate/Resisitivity Test SH = Shear Test CO = Consolidation test MD = Maximum Density
GeoTek, Inc.
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
CLIENT: IKON Ltd. DRILLER: Pacific Drilling LOGGEDB~---------T~E::::M~-------
PROJECT NAME: ___ ___:::Ca~s::::acc:;da"-::V~e~rd:;;:e;...__
PROJECT NO.: 3448-SD3
LOCATION• SEE FIGURE 2A
DRILL METHOD: 3.25' ID Hollow Stem Auger
HAMMER: 1401bs/30in
ELEVATION·
OPERATOR: _____ ~C:;;:a:;;:~~rd:;;:o;..._ ____ _
RIG TYPE: ______ ..;.M:,:;in;;;;iM;;;;oO"Ie::,-----
DATE: 3/17/2015 . .
SAMPLES :& Laboratory Testing
II) 1j ~ !5. c. .5 E BORING NO.: 8-4 J: ~ co Gl ~ ill ~ ~ f!! c..8 a.-i'U c. ! l [13 -c: Gl
Gl E E ~~ ~.s 5 c .. :I E ~ wz (f) .. ::;) MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS 8 c (f)
-1---Fill: Brown to Grey, Clay Silt with Sand, moist, hard -SM --@ 1 1/2" Grey, clayey Sand, very moist, loose
---@ 3' Light Gray to Tan, fine to medium grained SAND, -Very moist to wet
-5--cobbles
Practical Refused at 6 ' -Wet -Boring partially caved remainder backfilled with Bentonite Chips -----
10 ----------
15 ----------
20----------25 ---------
30-
Q Sample tvPe: • --Ring I···SPT !ZI---Small Bulk IZ!--Large Bulk D -No Recovery :SZ --Water Table z Ill fil Lab testing: AL = Atterberg Limits El = Expansion Index SA= Sieve Analysis RV = R-Value Test ... SR = Sulfate/Resisitivity Test SH = Shear Test CO = Consolidation test MD = Maximum Density
GeoTek, Inc.
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
DRILLER: Pacific Drilling
DRILL METHOD: 3.25" ID Hollow Stem Auger
HAMMER: 1401bs/30in
ELEVATION•
LOGGED BY: ____ ~TE::::M~----
OPERATOR: _____ ~Ca~~~ro~o~-----
RIG TYPE: _____ -:M7.i::::ni::;M:::ol~e ___ _
DATE· 3/17/2015
CLIENT: IKON Ltd.
PROJECT NAME: ____ __:Ca=sa:.:d=..a ,:.,Ve~ro;:;e:..__
PROJECT NO.: 3448-SD3
LOCATION• SEE FIGURE 2A . .
SAMPLES 0 Testing
g ~ J:l ~ ~ .!0 E BORING NO.: 8-5 '$.
~ co Cll ~ it ~-~ -Cll 5i'tl Q. l C.J:J Cll-Q) ~~ Ul 1ii c:: Cll Q. 0 ~'* c,s @ 0 E Ul 1::' .. Ill ::J IIUni AND 8 0 Ul mAII:KIIU. lll:ll
-f--I Dark Brown Clay SILT Soft, Very Moist ---[ Ljght Brown to Tan SILT, Fine SAND loose, moist -[@-3' Gray Browning clayey SAND moist medium dense ---Letting Dark 6 ray SILT/Coarse @ 4
-i@ 5-Rocks/Cobble slowdrying 5---6/8" @6 ' Dark Grey SILT clay very moist
Medium to Coarse Gray SAND in Tip Medium to Dense
--Rock@71/2
--
110 : -
=~~;~ 16
18 No Recovery Rock @ Tip?
20 --lTD 125
No Groundwater --Water@ 115
-
15 ----------
[20 ----------
[25 --------
[30: -
Q Sample tvPe: • Ring 1---SPT IZI---Small Bulk ~ D :SZ --Water Table z Large Bulk No Recovery
Ill 5I Lab testing: AL = Atterberg Limits El = Expansion Index SA= Sieve Analysis RV = R-Value Test ... SR="'• Test SH = Shear Test CO = Consolidation test MD = Maximum Density
GeoTek, Inc.
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
CLIENT: IKON Ltd.
PROJECT NAME: Casada Verde PROJECT NO.: ___ __;.;7'344~8-':'SD~3~---
LOCATION· SEE FIGURE 2A
DRILLER: Pacific DriiYng
DRILL METHOD: 3.25" ID Hollow Stem Auger
HAMMER: 1401bs/30in
ELEVATION·
LOGGEDB~----~T~E~M~-----
OPERATOR: ____ ~C~a~~~rd~o~----
RIG TYPE: ____ """M:,:;in':"iM~o~le~----
DATE· 3/17/2015 . . .
SAMPLES 0 Laboratory Testing
g .. .c ~ ~ c. .5 E BORING NO.: B-6 .&::: ?!' "' CD~ (i; ... ~ rn (!! -CD c. .9! l c..c II) sc ~'a Q)
CD c. E E 0 ~.s Oc. @ 0 .. :::> <='~ E !l)z II) 8 ~ :::l MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS 0
-:---Alluvium: Dark Brown clayey SILT with sand, slightly moist to moist, soft
----@ 2' Dark Brown, Silty CLAY, Stiff, moist ----
5-@ 5 ' Gray to dark gray silty CLAY with sand ---@6 'cobbly -lit~'~~ 6 -8 -10 ---
10 -TO 10ft -Practical Refusal --No groundwater
-Hole Backfilled with chips ----
15 ----------
20 ----------25----------
30 -
Q Sample type: • Ring I···SPT IZI---Small Bulk ~ Large Bulk D No Recovery ~ -Water Table z w " AL = Atterberg Limits El =Expansion Index SA= Sieve Analysis RV = R-Value Test w Lab testing: ... SR = Sulfate/Resisitivity Test SH =Shear Test CO = Consolidation test MD = Maximum Density
GeoTek, Inc.
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
CLIENT: IKON Ltd. DRILLER: Pacific Drilling LOGGED BY: _____ T;;.;;E;;;.;M.;._ ___ _
PROJECT NAME: ___ __::Ca.::s~a;:=,da::.,V,::e~rd:::e;.._ __ _
PROJECT NO.: 3448-SD3
DRILL METHOD: 3.25" ID Hollow Stem Auger
HAMMER: 1401bs/30in
OPERATOR: ____ ~C7.a~m~rd~o'------
RIG TYPE: ____ _.;.;.M;;;.in"'"iM;;.;o;;.;le'------
LOCATION• North end of site . ELEVATION• . DATE• 3117/2015
SAMPLES 0 Laboratory Testing
g .. .&1 ~ a. .5 E BORING NO.: 8-7 ~ ~ ~ "' Cll ~ ~ .... ~ !!!
~ I 15.~ ~ JBC !ii'U Gl Cll E E ~~ Ca. 5 c .. "' i:'~ E enz en .. :::> MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS 8 c en
--Terrace Deposit: Red Brown, clayey sandy Silt, with gravel, medium dense -to dense, slightly moist
--Very slight porosity
-----5-l~t!1 20 thin layers sility Sand and Sand, weakly cemented, some gravels --20
---becomes very gravelly
-TO 8ft -Practical Refusal -No groundwater 10 --Hole Backfilled with Bentonite chips --------
15 ----------
20----------25 ----------
30 --
a Sample type: • -Ring 11---SPT IZI---Small Bulk z w ~ Large Bulk D No Recovery ¥ --Water Table
f5 Lab testing: AL = Atterberg Limits El = Expansion Index SA= Sieve Analysis RV = R-Value Test ... SR = Sulfate/Resisitivity Test SH =Shear Test CO = Consolidation test MD = Maximum Density
GeoTek, Inc.
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
CLIENT: IKON Ltd. DRILLER: Pacific Drilling
PROJECT NAME: Casada Verde PROJECT NO.: ___ __;::;~344===8-~S~D3:==----DRILL METHOD: 3.25' ID Hollow Stem Auger
HAMMER: 1401bs/30in
LOCATION• SEE FIGURE 2A
SAMPLES
,!;;
"' l
CD~ Q._g
E E
ELEVATION•
BORING NO.: 8-8
LOGGEDB~----~T~EM~----
OPERATOR: ____ ~C~ar~loo~----
RIG TYPE: ____ ---'F""ra"'s'"'te'------
DATE: 3/18/2015
Laboratory Testing
* ~~ .!'E
.2 Dl
.. :I V)Z ~'* r-----~M~~~~=e=R~IAL~D~E~S~C~~~p=y~IO~N~AN~D~C~O~M~M=E~N=Ts=----~ 8
-1----------5----------
10 ~~
------
15 ~~
------
20 ~)>
------
25 -", -?;l -Wt ·~~~o ------30--
7
9
7
6
6
16
11
10
10
7
8
25
Ci Sample tvPe: z Ill fa Lab testing: .... •
Brick at surface
Fill: Dark Brown, loose sandy, clayey Silt moist
Sandy coarse gravel with small coobles wet
Slow drilling
Sand layer
Brown, clayey, silty, SAND with sandy Silt, moist to very moist
Brown, clayey, silty, SAND with sandy Silt, moist to very moist
Materials is apprenUy not saturated
Grey medium to fine sandy clayey, Silt, very stiff or medium dense, moist
Weathered Bedrock
Light grey to tan, medium dense, sandy silt, some rock characteristics, moist
Bedrock Santiago Fm
Tan, buff, light grey, mottled, dense, siltstone and sandstone, dense, moist
TD 26.5ft
Practical Refusal
No groundwater
Hole Backfilled with Bentonite chips
Ring 1---SPT IZI---Small Bulk [gJ -Large Bulk D
AL = Atterberg Limits El = Expansion Index SA= Sieve Analysis
SR = Sulfate/Resisitivity Test SH = Shear Test CO = Consolidation test
No Recovery ¥ --Water Table
RV = R-Value Test
MD = Maximum Density
GeoTek, Inc.
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
CLIENT: IKON Ltd. DRILLER: --_;,P.;;a~cifi;,;,IC;,.;D::..:n,;:;·n"'in,._g __
DRILL METHOD: 3.25" ID Hollow Stem Auger
LOGGEDB~--------~T~EM~--------
PROJECT NAME: ___ __;Ca=s;:;ad:;:a:.,;Y,:,::e;::rd:::e__; __ _
PROJECT NO.: 3448-SD3
LOCATION: SEE FIGURE 2A
HAMMER: 1401bs/30in
ELEVATION:
OPERATOR: _______ ~Ca~r~lo~s ________ _
RIG TYPE: -----:-:F..:.ra:::s::te":-::------DATE: 3/18/2015
SAMPLES 0 Laboratory Testing
g ., .D ~ t a. ,!; E BORING NO.: B-9 :g_ ~ (I) ., ~ ~ ~~ !!.! c.~ .!C !ii'tl ., l E E ~ ., ., c. ~~ ~.e. @ c E Ol:i Cll "' iii ::I MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS 8 c Cll
-1--Brick at surface
-Fill: Dark Brown, loose sandy, clayey Silt moist
-----Sandy coarse gravel with small coobles wet -Slow drilling
Alluvium: -
5-Light brown to grey , clayey, silty, SAND with sandy Silt, moist to very moist
----Brown, clayey, silty, SAND with sandy Silt, moist
-----
10 -7 Brown, clayey, silty, SAND with sandy Silt, moist
9 Materials is apprently not saturated
7 ------
15 -~· 7 Grey medium to fine sandy clayey, Silt, very stiff or medium dense, moist --8
-19 ------
20-~~ 12 -14 -15 ---Weathered Bedrock? --Light grey to tan, medium dense, sandy silt, some rock characteristics, moist --Bedrock Santiago Fm 25-~}\ 10 -15 Tan, buff, light grey, mottled, dense, siltstone and sandstone, dense, moist -25
TO 26.5ft -Practical Refusal --No groundwater
-Hole Backfilled with Bentonite chips --
30-
Q Sample tvPe: • -Ring 1---SPT IZI---Small Bulk ~ z Ill Large Bulk D No Recovery ¥ Water Table
Cll AL = Atterberg Limits El = Expansion Index SA= Sieve Analysis RV = R-Value Test Ill Lab testing: .... SR = Sulfate/Resisitivity Test SH = Shear Test CO = Consolidation test MD = Maximum Density
GeoTek, Inc.
LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
CLIENT: IKON Ltd. DRILLER: Pacific Drilling LOGGEDB~---------T~E:::M~-------
PROJECT NAME: ___ __::ca:::,s:::a:::,da::.,V:.':e":rd:::e:__ __ _
PROJECT NO.: 344B-SD3
LOCATION• SEE FIGURE 2A
DRILL METHOD: 3.25" ID Hollow Stem Auger
HAMMER: 1401bs/30in
ELEVATION•
OPERATOR: ______ __::C~ar~lo=s------
RIG TYPE: -----__;_F:..::ra:::;ste:=._--------
DATE• 3/18/2015 . . .
SAMPLES 0 Laboratory Testing
g CD J:l ~ ~ a. .5 E BORING NO.: B-1 0 '8. ~ "' CD,_ (j) ... ~ I!! c..8 CD-fii'tl ~ l E E ~ -c: Q)
CD a. ~~ Ca. ~ 0 E ~ c?J~ Ul ~~
c?J :::1 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS 8 0
-i--Fill: Tan, yeUow grey, mixed, sands, silts and lesser clay, very loose damp --------
5-2
4
3 -· -
Weathered Bedrock --Light grey to tan, medium dense, sandy silt, some rock characteristics, moist --Bedrock: Santiago Fm.
10 ~~~~ 10 Yellow Grey to Buff, Siltstone and sandstone, Dense, Moist
15
18 -TO 11.5' -No Ground Water --No Caving -Backfilled with Chips
-
15 ----------
20 ----------25----------30--
Q Sample type: • -Ring 1---SPT IZI---Small Bulk ~ Large Bulk D No Recovery ¥ -Water Table z 11.1 fil Lab testing: AL = Atterberg Limits El = Expansion Index SA= Sieve Analysis RV = R-Value Test ... SR = Sulfate/Resisitivity Test SH = Shear Test CO = Consolidation test MD = Maximum Density
~ Log of Test Pit : TP -'/ GEOTEK
Oient Ikon PN 3446-503
Project tasada Verde Logedby: TEM
Location carlsbad Equipment JDS10
Elevation See Plan Date 3/12/15
Material Depth Desaiptlon Comments
A ... 0-J .... Co Uuv~ci ~ · f;.,g~ l?.f",UJn1 si l~ ~.,.A a~.t 111
~/1-/f)U,/ J..,,s# /)An?n:'
B ;;.-19 I 1;y,,.,~.e i).-;p,.ll ·16 ,' IJ,t?nl n ;?.,A' IJr~ II
~ ,/ br~fil fJrd#Jn g) }4 t\rA u.fJllJ"'
b,IAA ~~ ~~.r.J.-1 t11:?61' :tk.~ ~ "
tUfdt'/~ f~4 Z ~it/ ;ivnl~wtf "~/'mit ~
~ 2~n ..... A ~~JJ.e ~~/~--77;, J -
[ ! ! ! I
j ' I .
i i !
,' I ! I i I ! I
I I I
I ' , i
' . I
l I
j
' :/ • ' ~ ' l T ' ! ' I ' .I '
i /. 1.,....-l ,, i •! -i l : 1 l
~ log of Test Pit : TP -3 GEOTEK
CUent Ikon PN 344&-503
Project casada Verde Logedby: TEM
Location carlsbad Equipment JD510
Elevation See Plan Date 3/12/'J5
Material Depth Description Comments
A-f~y,.le.t!: S..-oM,t $41'1 j f C lf!J:/ -S u, 1' ,..;,,~ f A~ LA
'& "'le-r,..,t-4' : (J; ... t4;j ""~~1-uuJ el-;., ..5//PiJ
<-7't!IY't'-''<! s.,,~J~ .:s';j;~j_ ~t~~J'CJ' &i"'S' ~I rl r, ";!., r f!li c-. ~ ... ~., -,+P .v IQ II
"
I ! ; ! ! II ~ ': l
! ! I I ' I I i l I i I ; l
;
l .-•t--+1 --+l-!1---+! --+t-1-! -+-1---4-l-11--,1 --+----4-~ I ; l 1
' " l
IJ ) • t I ! .. l Y' )
) I I I I j I I I i t j ; l ! ; j
1 l !
i
., , ' : ' : ! r "/'.. 1 t
r , I I
I I t
' I
I I I I I
' i
I i i i i i . J L
'
' " j
l
i 1
,,
l
I l ! I !"' .. i., ./, : : : : : : : : l ! ' I : I : ' : l .
n Log of Test Pit : TP -~ GEOTEK
arent Ikon PN 3446-503
Project Casada Verde Logedby: TEM
Location Carlsbad Equipment JD510
Elevation See Plan Date 3/12/15
Material Depth Description Comments
" Terl';tlc./.' 1] ... ;_,,.,~,-;~,~ in:J"'J 6/t l?"'l~t;'P-.; ~·
77
J;..-~t~ ~ 1/~t/~,w~ .'lt'AJ.'!PII,6il/y Gl-;tJIJ
_,...
:&
MIN~ I;. J/et?& (
c, 7 ""'r4t.f f .8l"".er•vf1.zj .... .t'l'v·~~~Ai_;~ ..tAII.JD 1-cJ i ~-k ·.e. ~
1/
I I ; I ' I ~ l l v l ! + i l l i '
t ' I I I i ' I I -l
i I 1 ~ l ! ) ! V' l ~ i '
i I " j
I' ! ~~ r~t;t .:-,. ·~ ;t Sl~ ~· :?..._j y! 1 l
i i •. ' 1 ! ' ; '-'J v i~ /:
j j
I
) ~ ~i'6Si ; ~ ; ./1" ',..J-; l ; ;
1. i f-Ie "/A. ! ; Vi i ·~
i
! l I '.
i ~ ! v I } ' ' ' I I f
' ' j I i l Y• 1/ ~ ;
' t,.. l i-? ~ i-'"-~. ,, !
• ~ i • ! I
I ; l ~ l-+-1' I ! 1 I )
i ' ; ... ~
i-: I [\
; ~s ~ ~ ~ l f. '"" ; I I ~ l J I I I I I i !
I ! ! \ / ~ T
I I I ! I ' j I j I i i
~ I \ t 'j ,. ;I ! ! 1 ! ; ' I ;
l T l 1\ ! c..! i" ; l l I I i I
i l j ! i I I I j ! I • )
! 'l Yt ..J-) ' j I -'
I f ! ' l i ! ! ! -! I I I
' I !n1i·?~t J ltr ~ i I .a.k: J,,..'~'\ -'1 !
; i i J i
I 1
) ! v~ / l ' I i i
' ~ 1 ; 1 I i ;
i ; i .L i l ' I' ~
l ' i ! ! ! l t
i ; l
i
' ' ! !
T ~ I l I l ; !
I I I i I I I I I I i I ~ I i i I i
a' -1 I ' ; l 1 i i
n Log of Test Pit : TP -Lf GEOTEK
Client Ikon PN 3446-503
Project casada Verde Loged by: TEM
Location carlsbad Equipment JD510
Bevatlon See Plan Date 3/12/15
Material Depth Desalptlon Comments
fl-~l'l"dt.~ 18retal,. tf~J iJ,..pw:~,., /I"''P#kJI; ~/ett/lf'J(J
6JJ..T)"' LA ,!fr_, ;"??..t?;-,j r /hfR.))
8 A' ..,6~v-e wl f~t e:. dvr"ljJ~I4a1v~.,.
~''~/C' ~4tpr?-"rtfJ
I : I ~ i l ! l ~ ' ' ! ; I i l I I I ! ! ' I t I l 1 I l I i ~ ~ i : l l j :· l l
I ' ! ! !
i
' l ! l v I
I i j,£,k,.J~ ~lu ·/ l5~ ~ ~ y; ! ~ I
I l l ~ ' A J l ' 1\...l
I l 1 l I/. ,,_ ! 4(., ~»::>i p v f ; ! '~
1 ! ! '?,; lk;~ ~ v· I JjJ 1 ! !
• ! ; i • ,. ' i
1. RC.~ ~ . .,., ~ '· I )fiU i'T 1 ' l b_ .... ·' 1\ i
I I l i\ LA J ' ' I
i i
I ! , I ~-! l l7Lf ;./ ! ~ ! I !
~ .J l ! ~' l -I
I ! V1 y ! i~l '~ ! ! J ; i
l-" ! l j! ~ ' l l l ~ ' i
} 1'\1 ·--~ v • 1 l ! ' : .! l l ' ' "-i-I + ~ ~-fi r ( ! J ~ l I I I I I I ! I I I I _j
~ ' ~f ! l I i 1 -I I I I I i I I I ' l
I i ~~16 v· I~C 1 1 ' i
I I ' l l : "f'"" : j _l • ' ~ _I
l lV61 rt..~ J I:Cv, !7VI-I~ 1"-i., lfu ! !
! I .i I I I I I I ·,
L ! ' .J, l •V./ ,..) 1 i I I ! I I I I • i . ·'
! ! ' I I I I I ! I i ' I I i I I I I I i
I I ' ' i ! ,.
l ; ; ! I ! i
APPENDIX B-LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
GEOTEK
COMPACTION TEST REPORT
Curve No.: 1
Project No.: 3440-SD Date: 3-20-15
Project Casada Verde, Carlsbad
Location: 87@3
Elev.JDepth: 3
Remarks:
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
Description: Red Brown, Silty gravelly Sand
Classifications -uses: AASHTO:
Nat Moist= Sp.G.=
I Liquid Umlt = Plasticity Index =
%>No.4= % %< No.200=
TEST RESULTS
Maximum dJY density = 125.5 pcf
Optimum moisture = 11.5 %
140 -+"·+··+ ""-t"--l\..i '( T\. Test specification:
·+·-+--f---+-).. i\..i ASTM D 1557-91 Procedure A Modified
··+··--+---"4---4-''L 1\. " ; ; -+--i-l': 1\.
: 1\. '\.!'\. 130 ; ~~~"' ' : -+·-+···+·-+-·· ~~ '1'\. ; . -+-~:~:=:t: : -+--' ~ ~ ~ " 120 4F ~ 100% SATURATION CURVES
i + .,.,. FOR SPEC. GRAV. EQUAL TO:
··-+-·· ;· ··+--·--+-----""+'""""""+"--+" o·••+•·c-'l ~~"-.. -+··+··-t---+----t-·+--r-+· 2.8 ''l "'"i""ii 2.7
't; ! i :"'J. -,.._ 2.6 ~ 110 Q. : ; i i 'I.. ~ ~ ~ .
-+--+----+-.--+---"'i" "ii •
--+ """ l'..l""-. c: :
CD . : "-N" "C -·+---·+-----.i..----+-···-· ~ l : .... --~-·+--· XI'-"" 100 ' c : ~ ~' !--+· ---+ --+----·-t-··+·--·--+·-·-+--1-·--+ : ~"'-.!'... t---+--·-+--~-t----+--' --·+-----t---·--r-----+ ---1-· . ·-t----+-·---+-~ ,. ·x._f'.J...~ ..... ---+--l--i--+-: : i ~ ..... too...~
90 i ' : too....N..'
t--+--4-+---+---i : ; ' : : l"'l "'-,..... ' + : ' +h,r::: ~ ----··-+---+---+----+----+--+-----+----·
; i : T : ~~ ! ! : ~"'--" : . '1'oo. ........
I:SU : • I ' i i I i 1 I ;
!---+----+--+--+-• -~-4---~-t-"" ··-+ .. ·····+· ' """ -+--"1··-~--r-· -+·-·-"' '-+·-· "-r···-+---'-
r--+---+-: I -~·-+·-+-·"'t'-·~-·....f~~ ~---~-......0.~-----+-~-+ : ; ---+-------
•
70 --·"4---·-+----t-···-·-1--·· +····+··:··--~---t~---~+~~·+·~---+-· ·-~+---+----+---+-: i --~·---+-.--..........-~-·-·~-
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Water content, %
Plate L1
GeoTek,lnc
COMPACTION TEST REPORT
Project No.: 3440-SD
Project: Casada Verde, Carlsbad
Location:
Elev./Depth: 7-8
Remarks:
Curve No.: 2
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION
Description: Brown clayey silty Sand with minor gravel
Classifications -
Nat Moist=
Liquid Limit=
%>No.4= o/o
uses:
Maximum dry density = 111 pcf
Optimum moisture = 15.5 %
AASHTO:
Sp.G. =
Plasticity Index =
%<No.200=
TEST RESULTS
Date:
140 · i"-i "t A Test specification: t--+-+~~+-+-·-+--+'-1\.~ir-1'-'11:1·~ ASTM D 1557-91 Procedure A Modified
: i i ~-i\;~ --4--~--t--f-+--t~ft~ \J'
~:' 130
! :
'R. 110 ! :
100% SATURATION CURVES
FOR SPEC. GRAV. EQUAL TO:
2.8
2.7
2.6
tsU ) ] i : ' ' i I --+---+-··+·-~ .. ---:~+-+--+-;-: ---;-"+·-·-'---+-·+-+~'f.-+--+--+----+---+-··-+--+---+--+--+·-~-·--+--+--+---+--1
1---<r--+i·-+·--+,---t----t,---t---+,-+-it---<;1--->;-·-:---t-----;--+---+---+---11---f---t-----.---~---+--+---+--1-+, -1-·-+----+--·+ -----+--+--+-
70 .. +----r-,··-1--t-+-+-+--+---+-+---+ --+---+----+-. ---+----+--t--+--+--1---+,--.---+----+--'------+----+-_,_-+-
0 5 '10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Water content, %
Plate
..._-----------------~~e·oTek,lnc-------------------'
A
B
c
D
E
F
G
H
J
K
n
GEOTEK
Project Name: Casada Verde
Project Number: 3440-SD
Project Location: Carlsbad
Ring ld: 12 Ring Dia." 4" Ring!...!:__
DENSITY DETERMINATION
Weight of compacted sample & ring
Weight of ring
Net weight of sample
Wet Density, lb I ft3 (C*0.3016)
Dry Density, lb I ft~_(D/1.F)
SATURATION DETERMINATION
Moisture Content, %
(E*F)
(E/167.232)
(1.-H)
(62.4*1)
(G/J)= L % Saturation
EXPANSION INDEX TEST
742
370
372
112.2
99.1
13.2%
13.1
0.59
0.41
25.4
51.5%
(ASTM D4829)
Tested! Checked By:
Date Tested:
Sample Source:
Sample Description:
READINGS
DATE
3/6/2015
3/7/2015
vve1gnt OT we1 sample
TIME READING
11:59 0.166
12:05 0.166
12:06 0.172
12:11 0.183
0.258
12:10 0.269
Initial
10 min/Dry
1 min/Wet
5min/Wet
Random
Final
FINAL MOISTURE
vve1gm OT ary samp1e
nt Lab No
3/6/2015
26-21
gray clayey silty sand
& tare & tare Tare %Moisture
234 202 5.6 16.3%
EXPANSION INDEX = 65
l@l49.1% SATURATION)
A
B
c
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
n
GEOTEK
EXPANSION INDEX TEST
Project Name: Casada Verde
Project Number: 3440-SD
Project Location: Carlsbad
Ring ld: 12 Ring Dia." 4" Ring'-!:._
Load in
DENSITY DETERMINATION
Weight of compacted sample & ring 770
Weight of ring 371
Net weight of sample 399
Wet Density, lb I ft3 (C*0.3016} 120.3
Dry Density, lb /_ft:3 _(I)/1.F}_ 109.7
SATURATION DETERMINATION
Moisture Content, % 9.7%
(E*F} 10.6
(E/167.232} 0.66
(1.-H} 0.34
(62.4*1} 21.5
(G/J}= L %Saturation 49.4% -----
(ASTM D4829)
Tested/ Checked By:
Date Tested:
Sample Source:
Sample Description:
READINGS
DATE
3/6/2015
3/7/2015
we1gm or wet sample
TIME READING
11:59 0.162
12:05 0.16
12:06 0.163
12:11 0.179
0.200
12:10 0.205
Initial
10 min/Dry
1 min/Wet
5min/Wet
Random
Final
FINAL MOISTURE
vve1gm or ary sample
nt Lab No
3/6/2015
26-21
gray clayey silty sand
&tare & tare Tare %Moisture
225 201 5.6 12.3%
EXPANSION INDEX = 19
APPENDIX C • GRADING GUIDELINES
GEOTEK
GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES
GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES
APPENDIXC
Page I
Guidelines presented here~n are intended to address general construction procedures for earthwork
construction. Specific situations and conditions often arise which cannot reasonably be discussed in
general guidelines, when anticipated these are discussed in the text of the report. Often unanticipated
conditions are encountered which may necessitate modification or changes to these guidelines. It is our
hope that these will assist the contractor to more efficiently complete the project by providing a
reasonable understanding of the procedures that would be expected during earthwork and the testing
and observation used to evaluate those procedures.
General
Grading should be performed to at least the minimum requirements of governing agencies, the
California Building Code, CBC (20 13) and the guidelines presented below.
Preconstruction Meeting
A preconstruction meeting should be held prior to site earthwork. Any questions the contractor has
regarding our recommendations, general site conditions, apparent discrepancies between reported and
actual conditions and/or differences in procedures the contractor intends to use should be brought up
at that meeting. The contractor (including the main onsite representative) should review our report
and these guidelines in advance of the meeting. Any comments the contractor may have regarding
these guidelines should be brought up at that meeting.
Grading Observation and Testing
I. Observation of the fill placement should be provided by our representative during grading.
Verbal communication during the course of each day will be used to inform the contractor of
test results. The contractor should receive a copy of the "Daily Field Report" indicating results
of field density tests that day. If our representative does not provide the contractor with these
reports, our office should be notified.
2. Testing and observation procedures are, by their nature, specific to the work or area observed
and location of the tests taken, variability may occur in other locations. The contractor is
responsible for the uniformity of the grading operations; our observations and test results are
intended to evaluate the contractor's overall level of efforts during grading. The contractor's
personnel are the only individuals participating in all aspect of site work. Compaction testing
and observation should not be considered as relieving the contractor's responsibility to
properly compact the fill.
3. Cleanouts, processed ground to receive fill, key excavations, and subdrains should be observed
by our representative prior to placing any fill. It will be the contractor's responsibility to notify
our representative or office when such areas are ready for observation.
4. Density tests may be made on the surface material to receive fill, as considered warranted by
this firm.
GEOTEK
GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES APPENDIXC
Page2
5. In general, density tests would be made at maximum intervals of two feet of fill height or every
I ,000 cubic yards of fill placed. Criteria will vary depending on soil conditions and size of the
fill. More frequent testing may be performed. In any case, an adequate number of field density
tests should be made to evaluate the required compaction and moisture content is generally
being obtained.
6. Laboratory testing to support field test procedures will be performed, as considered warranted,
based on conditions encountered (e.g. change of material sources, types, etc.) Every effort will
be made to process samples in the laboratory as quickly as possible and in progress
construction projects are our first priority. However, laboratory workloads may cause in
delays and some :soils may require a minimum of 48 to 72 hours to complete test
procedures. Whenever possible, our representative(s) should be informed in advance of
operational changes that might result in different source areas for materials.
7. Procedures for testing of fill slopes are as follows:
a) Density tests should be taken periodically during grading on the flat surface of the fill,
three to five feet horizontally from the face of the slope.
b) If a method other than over building and cutting back to the compacted core is to be
employed, slope compaction testing during construction should include testing the
outer six inches to three feet in the slope face to determine if the required compaction
is being achieved.
8. Finish grade testing of slopes and pad surfaces should be performed after construction is
complete.
Site Clearing
I. All vegetation, and other deleterious materials, should be removed from the site. If material is
not immediately removed from the site it should be stockpiled in a designated area(s) well
outside of all current work areas and delineated with flagging or other means. Site clearing
should be performed in advance of any grading in a specific area.
2. Efforts should be made by the contractor to remove all organic or other deleterious material
from the fill, as even the most diligent efforts may result in the incorporation of some materials.
This is especially important when grading is occurring near the natural grade. All equipment
operators should be aware of these efforts. Laborers may be required as root pickers.
3. Nonorganic debris or concrete may be placed in deeper fill areas provided the procedures used
are observed and found acceptable by our representative. Typical procedures are similar to
those indicated on Plate G-4.
Treatment of Existing Ground
I. Following site clearing, all surficial deposits of alluvium and colluvium as well as weathered or
creep effected bedrock, should be removed (see Plates G-1, G-2 and G-3) unless otherwise
specifically indicated in the text of this report.
GEOTEK
GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES APPENDIXC
Poge3
2. In some cases, removal may be recommended to a specified depth (e.g. flat sites where partial
alluvial removals may be sufficient). The contractor should not exceed these depths unless
directed otherwise by our representative.
3. Groundwater existing in alluvial areas may make excavation difficult. Deeper removals than
indicated in the text of the report may be necessary due to saturation during winter months.
4. Subsequent to removals, the natural ground should be processed to a depth of six inches,
moistened to near optimum moisture conditions and compacted to fill standards.
5. Exploratory back hoe or dozer trenches still remaining after site removal should be excavated
and filled with compacted fill if they can be located.
Subdrainage
I. Subdrainage systems should be provided in canyon bottoms prior to placing fill, and behind
buttress and stabilization fills and in other areas indicated in the report. Subdrains should
conform to schematic diagrams G-1 and G-5, and be acceptable to our representative.
2. For canyon subdrains, runs less than 500 feet may use six-inch pipe. Typically, runs in excess of
500 feet should have the lower end as eight-inch minimum.
3. Filter material should be clean, 1/2 to l-inch gravel wrapped in a suitable filter fabric. Class 2
permeable filter material per California Department of Transportation Standards tested by this
office to verify its suitability, may be used without filter fabric. A sample of the material should
be provided to the Soils Engineer by the contractor at least two working days before it is
delivered to the site. The filter should be clean with a wide range of sizes.
4. Approximate delineation of anticipated subdrain locations may be offered at 40-scale plan
review stage. During grading, this office would evaluate the necessity of placing additional
drains.
5. All subdrainage systems should be observed by our representative during construction and
prior to covering with compacted fill.
6. Subdrains should outlet into storm drains where possible. Outlets should be located and
protected. The need for backflow preventers should be assessed during construction.
7. Consideration should be given to having subdrains located by the project surveyors.
Fill Placement
I. Unless otherwise indicated, all site soil and bedrock may be reused for compacted fill; however,
some special processing or handling may be required (see text of report).
2. Material used in the compacting process should be evenly spread, moisture conditioned,
processed, and compacted in thin lifts six (6) to eight (8) inches in compacted thickness to
obtain a uniformly dense layer. The fill should be placed and compacted on a nearly horizontal
plane, unless otherwise found acceptable by our representative.
3. If the moisture content or relative density varies from that recommended by this firm, the
contractor should rework the fill until it is in accordance with the following:
GEOTEK
GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES APPENDIXC
Page4
a) Moisture content of the fill should be at or above optimum moisture. Moisture should
be evenly distributed without wet and dry pockets. Pre-watering of cut or removal
areas should be considered in addition to watering during fill placement, particularly in
clay or dry surficial soils. The ability of the contractor to obtain the proper moisture
content will control production rates.
b) Each six-inch layer should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry
density in compliance with the testing method specified by the controlling governmental
agency. In most cases, the testing method is ASTM Test Designation D 1557.
4. Rock fragments less than eight inches in diameter may be utilized in the fill, provided:
a) They are not placed in concentrated pockets;
b) There is a sufficient percentage of fine-grained material to surround the rocks;
c) The distribution of the rocks is observed by, and acceptable to, our representative.
5. Rocks exceeding eight (8) inches in diameter should be taken off site, broken into smaller
fragments, or placed in accordance with recommendations of this firm in areas designated
suitable for rock disposal (see Plate G-4). On projects where significant large quantities of
oversized materials are anticipated, alternate guidelines for placement may be included. If
significant oversize materials are encountered during construction, these guidelines should be
requested.
6. In clay soil, dry or large chunks or blocks are common. If in excess of eight (8) inches minimum
dimension, then they are considered as oversized. Sheepsfoot compactors or other suitable
methods should be used to break up blocks. When dry, they should be moisture conditioned
to provide a uniform condition with the surrounding fill.
Slope Construction
I. The contractor should obtain a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent out to the finished
slope face of fill slopes. This may be achieved by either overbuilding the slope and cutting back
to the compacted core, or by direct compaction of the slope face with suitable equipment.
2. Slopes trimmed to the compacted core should be overbuilt by at least three (3) feet with
compaction efforts out to the edge of the false slope. Failure to properly compact the outer
edge results in trimming not exposing the compacted core and additional compaction after
trimming may be necessary.
3. If fill slopes are built "at grade" using direct compaction methods, then the slope construction
should be performed so that a constant gradient is maintained throughout construction. Soil
should not be "spilled" over the slope face nor should slopes be "pushed out" to obtain grades.
Compaction equipment should compact each lift along the immediate top of slope. Slopes
should be back rolled or otherwise compacted at approximately every 4 feet vertically as the
slope is built.
4. Corners and bends in slopes should have special attention during construction as these are the
most difficult areas to obtain proper compaction.
GEOTEK
GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES APPENDIXC
PageS
5. Cut slopes should be cut to the finished surface. Excessive undercutting and smoothing of the
face with fill may necessitate stabilization.
Keyways, Buttress and Stabilization Fills
Keyways are needed to provide support for fill slope and various corrective procedures.
I. Side-hill fills should have an equipment-width key at their toe excavated through all surficial soil
and into competent material and tilted back into the hill (Plates G-2, G-3). As the fill is
elevated, it should be benched through surficial soil and slopewash, and into competent bedrock
or other material deemed suitable by our representatives (See Plates G-1, G-2, and G-3).
2. Fill over cut slopes should be constructed in the following manner:
a) All surficial soils and weathered rock materials should be removed at the cut-fill
interface.
b) A key at least one and one-half ( 1.5) equipment width wide (or as needed for
compaction), and tipped at least one (I) foot into slope, should be excavated into
competent materials and observed by our representative.
c) The cut portion of the slope should be excavated prior to fill placement to evaluate if
stabilization is necessary. The contractor should be responsible for any additional
earthwork created by placing fill prior to cut excavation. (see Plate G-3 for schematic
details.)
3. Daylight cut lots above descending natural slopes may require removal and replacement of the
outer portion of the lot. A schematic diagram for this condition is presented on Plate G-2.
4. A basal key is needed for fill slopes extending over natural slopes. A schematic diagram for this
condition is presented on Plate G-2.
5. All fill slopes should be provided with a key unless within the body of a larger overall fill mass.
Please refer to Plate G-3 for specific guidelines.
Anticipated buttress and stabilization fills are discussed in the text of the report. The need to stabilize
other proposed cut slopes will be evaluated during construction. Plate G-5 shows a schematic of
buttress construction.
I. All backcuts shouid be excavated at gradients of I: I or flatter. The backcut configuration
should be determined based on the design, exposed conditions, and need to maintain a
minimum fill width and provide working room for the equipment.
2. On longer slopes, backcuts and keyways should be excavated in maximum 250 feet long
segments. The specific configurations will be determined during construction.
3. All keys should be a minimum of two (2) feet deep at the toe and slope toward the heel at least
one foot or two (2%) percent, whichever is greater.
4. Subdrains are to be placed for all stabilization slopes exceeding I 0 feet in height. Lower slopes
are subject to review. Drains may be required. Guidelines for subdrains are presented on Plate
G-5.
5. Benching of backcuts during fill placement is required.
GEOTEK
GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES
Lot Capping
APPENDIXC
Page 6
I. When practical, the upper three (3) feet of material placed below finish grade should be
comprised of the least expansive material available. Preferably, highly and very highly expansive
materials should not be used. We will attempt to offer advice based on visual evaluations of the
materials during grading, but it must be realized that laboratory testing is needed to evaluate the
expansive potential of soil. Minimally, this testing takes two (2) to four (4) days to complete.
2. Transition lots (cut and fill) both per plan and those created by remedial grading (e.g. lots above
stabilization fills, along daylight lines, above natural slopes, etc.) should be capped with a
minimum three foot thick compacted fill blanket.
3. Cut pads should be observed by our representative(s) to evaluate the need for overexcavation
and replacement with fill. This may be necessary to reduce water infiltration into highly
fractured bedrock or other permeable zones, and/or due to differing expansive potential of
materials beneath a structure. The overexcavation should be at least three feet. Deeper
overexcavation may be recommended in some cases.
ROCK PLACEMENT AND ROCK FILL GUIDELINES
It is anticipated that large quantities of oversize material would be generated during grading. It's likely
that such materials may require special handling for burial. Although alternatives may be developed in
the field, the following methods of rock disposal are recommended on a preliminary basis.
Limited Larger Rock
When materials encountered are principally soil with limited quantities of larger rock fragments or
boulders, placement in windrows is recommended. The following procedures should be applied:
I. Oversize rock (greater than 8 inches) should be placed in windrows.
a) Windrows are rows of single file rocks placed to avoid nesting or clusters of rock.
b) Each adjacent rock should be approximately the same size (within -one foot in
diameter).
c) The maximum rock size allowed in windrows is four feet
2. A minimum vertical distance of three feet between lifts should be maintained. Also, the
windrows should be offset from lift to lift. Rock windrows should not be closer than I 5 feet to
the face of fill slopes and sufficient space must be maintained for proper slope construction (see
Plate G-4).
3. Rocks greater than eight inches in diameter should not be placed within seven feet of the
finished subgrade for a roadway or pads and should be held below the depth of the lowest
utility. This will allow easier trenching for utility lines.
4. Rocks greater than four feet in diameter should be broken down, if possible, or they may be
placed in a dozer trench. Each trench should be excavated into the compacted fill a minimum of
one foot deeper than the largest diameter of rock.
GEOTEK
GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES APPENDIXC
Page 7
a) The rock should be placed in the trench and granular fill materials (SE>30) should be
flooded into the trench to fill voids around the rock.
b) The over size rock trenches should be no closer together than I 5 feet from any slope
face.
c) Trenches at higher elevation should be staggered and there should be a minimum of
four feet of compacted fill between the top of the one trench and the bottom of the
next higher trench.
d) It would be necessary to verify 90 percent relative compaction in these pits. A 24 to 72
hour delay to allow for water dissipation should be anticipated prior to additional fill
placement.
Structural Rock Fills
If the materials generated for placement in structural fills contains a significant percentage of material
more than six (6) inches in one dimension, then placement using conventional soil fill methods with
isolated windrows would not be feasible. In such cases the following could be considered:
I. Mixes of large rock or boulders may be placed as rock fill. They should be below the depth of
all utilities both on pads and in roadways and below any proposed swimming pools or other
excavations. If these fills are placed within seven (7) feet of finished grade, they may affect
foundation design.
2. Rock fills are required to be placed in horizontal layers that should not exceed two feet in
thickness, or the maximum rock size present, which ever is less. All rocks exceeding
two feet should be broken down to a smaller size, windrowed (see above), or disposed of in
non-structural fill areas. Localized larger rock up to 3 feet in largest dimension may be placed in
rock fill as follows:
a) individual rocks are placed in a given lift so as to be roughly SO% exposed above the
typical surface of the fill ,
b) loaded rock trucks or alternate compactors are worked around the rock on all sides to
the satisfaction of the soil engineer,
c) the portion of the rock above grade is covered with a second lift.
3. Material placed in each lift should be well graded. No unfilled spaces (voids) should be
permitted in the rock fill.
Compaction Procedures
Compaction of rock fills is largely procedural. The following procedures have been found to generally
produce satisfactory compaction.
I. Provisions for routing of construction traffic over the fill should be implemented.
a) Placement should be by rock trucks crossing the lift being placed and dumping at its
edge.
b) The trucks should be routed so that each pass across the fill is via a different path and
that all areas are uniformly traversed.
GEOTEK
GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES APPENDIXC
Page 8
c) The dumped piles should be knocked down and spread by a large dozer (D-8 or larger
suggested). fNater should be applied before and during spreading.)
2. Rock fill should be generously watered (sluiced)
a) Water should be applied by water trucks to the:
i) dump piles,
ii) frornt face of the lift being placed and,
iii) surface of the fill prior to compaction.
b) No material should be placed without adequate water.
c) The number of water trucks and water supply should be sufficient to provide constant
water.
d) Rock fill placement should be suspended when water trucks are unavailable:
i) for more than 5 minutes straight, or,
ii) for more than I 0 minutes/hour.
3. In addition to the truck pattern and at the discretion of the soil engineer, large, rubber tired
compactors may be required.
a) The need for this equipment will depend largely on the ability of the operators to
provide complete and uniform coverage by wheel rolling with the trucks.
b) Other large compactors will also be considered by the soil engineer provided that
required compaction is achieved.
4. Placement and compaction of the rock fill is largely procedural. Observation by trenching
should be made to check:
a) the genera~ segregation of rock size,
b) for any unfilled spaces between the large blocks, and
c) the matrix compaction and moisture content.
5. Test fills may be required to evaluate relative compaction of finer grained zones or as deemed
appropriate by the soil engineer.
a) A lift should be constructed by the methods proposed, as proposed
6. Frequency of the test trenching is to be at the discretion of the soil engineer. Control areas
may be used to evaluate the contractor's procedures.
7. A minimum horizontal distance of I 5 feet should be maintained from the face of the rock fill
and any finish slope face. At least the outer I 5 feet should be built of conventional fill materials.
Piping Potential and Filter Blankets
Where conventional fill is placed over rock fill, the potential for piping (migration) of the fine grained
material from the conventional fill into rock fills will need to be addressed.
The potential for particle migration is related to the grain size comparisons of the materials present and
in contact with each other. Provided that I 5 percent of the finer soil is larger than the effective pore
size of the coarse soil, then particle migration is substantially mitigated. This can be accomplished with a
well-graded matrix material for the rock fill and a zone of fill similar to the matrix above it. The specific
gradation of the fill materials placed during grading must be known to evaluate the need for any type of
GEOTEK
GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES APPENDIXC
Page 9
filter that may be necessary to cap the rock fills. This, unfortunately, can only be accurately determined
during construction.
In the event that poorly graded matrix is used in the rock fills, properly graded filter blankets 2 to 3 feet
thick separating rock fills and conventional fill may be needed. As an alternative, use of two layers of
filter fabric (Mirafi 700 x or equivalent) could be employed on top of the rock fill. In order to mitigate
excess puncturing, the surface of the rock fill should be well broken down and smoothed prior to
placing the filter fabric. The first layer of the fabric may then be placed and covered with relatively
permeable fill material (with respect to overlying material) I to 2 feet thick. The relative permeable
material should be compacted to fill standards. The second layer of fabric should be placed and
conventional fill placement continued.
Subdrainage
Rock fill areas should be tied to a subdrainage system. If conventional fill is placed that separates the
rock from the main canyon subdrain, then a secondary system should be installed. A system consisting
of an adequately graded base (3 to 4 percent to the lower side) with a collector system and outlets may
suffice.
Additionally, at approximately every 25 foot vertical interval, a collector system with outlets should be
placed at the interface of the rock fill and the conventional fill blanketing a fill slope
Monitoring
Depending upon the depth of the rock fill and other factors, monitoring for settlement of the fill areas
may be needed following completion of grading. Typically, if rock fill depths exceed 40 feet, monitoring
would be recommend prior to construction of any settlement sensitive improvements. Delays of 3 to 6
months or longer can be expected prior to the start of construction.
UTILITY TRENCH CONSTRUCTION AND BACKFILL
Utility trench excavation and backfill is the contractor's responsibility. The geotechnical consultant
typically provides periodic observation and testing of these operations. While efforts are made to make
sufficient observations and tests to verify that the contractors' methods and procedures are adequate
to achieve proper compaction, it is typically impractical to observe all backfill procedures. As such, it is
critical that the contractor use consistent backfill procedures.
Compaction methods vary for trench compaction and experience indicates many methods can be
successful. However, procedures that "worked" on previous projects may or may not prove effective
on a given site. The contractor(s) should outline the procedures proposed, so that we may discuss
them prior to construction. We will offer comments based on our knowledge of site conditions and
experience.
GEOTEK
GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES APPENDIXC
Page 10
I. Utility trench backfill in slopes, structural areas, in streets and beneath flat work or hardscape
should be brought to at least optimum moisture and compacted to at least 90 percent of the
laboratory standard. Soil should be moisture conditioned prior to placing in the trench.
2. Flooding and jetting are not typically recommended or acceptable for native soils. Flooding or
jetting may be used with select sand having a Sand Equivalent (SE) of 30 or higher. This is
typically limited to the following uses:
a) shallow ( 12 + inches) under slab interior trenches and,
b) as bedding in pipe zone.
The water should be allowed to dissipate prior to pouring slabs or completing trench
compaction.
3. Care should be taken not to place soils at high moisture content within the upper three feet of
the trench backfm in street areas, as overly wet soils may impact subgrade preparation.
Moisture may be reduced to 2% below optimum moisture in areas to be paved within the upper
three feet below sub grade.
4. Sand backfill should not be allowed in exterior trenches adjacent to and within an area
extending below a I: I projection from the outside bottom edge of a footing, unless it is similar
to the surrounding soil.
5. Trench compaction testing is generally at the discretion of the geotechnical consultant. Testing
frequency will be based on trench depth and the contractor's procedures. A probing rod would
be used to assess the consistency of compaction between tested areas and untested areas. If
zones are found that are considered less compact than other areas, this would be brought to
the contractor's attention.
JOB SAFETY
General
Personnel safety is a primary concern on all job sites. The following summaries are safety
considerations for use by all our employees on multi-employer construction sites. On ground
personnel are at highest risk of injury and possible fatality on grading construction projects. The
company recognizes that construction activities will vary on each site and that job site safety is the
contractor's responsibility. However, it is, imperative that all personnel be safety conscious to avoid
accidents and potential injury.
In an effort to minimize risks associated with geotechnical testing and observation, the following
precautions are to be implemented for the safety of our field personnel on grading and construction
projects.
I. Safety Meetings: Our field personnel are directed to attend the contractor's regularly scheduled
safety meetings.
2. Safety Vests: Safety vests are provided for and are to be worn by our personnel while on the
job site.
GEOTEK
GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES APPENDIXC
Page II
3. Safety Flags: Safety flags are provided to our field technicians; one is to be affixed to the vehicle
when on site, the other is to be placed atop the spoil pile on all test pits.
In the event that the contractor's representative observes any of our personnel not following the above,
we request that it be brought to the attention of our office.
Test Pits Location, Orientation and Clearance
The technician is responsible for selecting test pit locations. The primary concern is the technician's
safety. However, it is necessary to take sufficient tests at various locations to obtain a representative
sampling of the fill. As such, efforts will be made to coordinate locations with the grading contractors
authorized representatives (e.g. dump man, operator, supervisor, grade checker, etc.), and to select
locations following or behind the established traffic pattern, preferably outside of current traffic. The
contractors authorized representative should direct excavation of the pit and safety during the test
period. Again, safety is the paramount concern.
Test pits should be excavated so that the spoil pile is placed away from oncoming traffic. The
technician's vehicle is to be placed next to the test pit, opposite the spoil pile. This necessitates that the
fill be maintained in a drivable condition. Alternatively, the contractor may opt to park a piece of
equipment in front of test pits, particularly in small fill areas or those with limited access.
A zone of non-encroachment should be established for all test pits (see diagram below). No grading
equipment should enter this zone during the test procedure. The zone should extend outward to the
sides approximately 50 feet from the center of the test pit and I 00 feet in the direction of traffic flow.
This zone is established both for safety and to avoid excessive ground vibration, which typically
decreases test results.
TEST PIT SAFETY PLAN
~ SIDE VIEW
1\
I I I Test Pit Spoil
pile
50 ftZone of Traffic Direction Non-Encroachment
"'I
Vehicle Test Pit Spoil parked here pile
~
IIIII 10 0 ft Zone of I Non-Encroachment 50 ftZone of
Non-Encroachment
.I!LAH VIEW
GEOTEK
GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES
Slope Tests
APPENDIXC
Page 12
When taking slope tests, the technician should park their vehicle directly above or below the test
location on the slope. The contractor's representative should effectively keep all equipment at a safe
operation distance (e.g. 50 feet) away from the slope during testing.
The technician is directed to withdraw from the active portion of the fill as soon as possible following
testing. The technician's vehicle should be parked at the perimeter of the fill in a highly visible location.
Trench Safety
It is the contractor's responsibility to provide safe access into trenches where compaction testing is
needed. Trenches for all utilities should be excavated in accordance with CAL-OSHA and any other
applicable safety standards. Safe conditions will be required to enable compaction testing of the trench
backfill.
All utility trench excavations in excess of 5 feet deep, which a person enters, are to be shored or laid
back. Trench access should be provided in accordance with OSHA standards. Our personnel are
directed not to enter any trench by being lowered or "riding down" on the equipment.
Our personnel are directed not to enter any excavation which;
I. is 5 feet or deeper unless shored or laid back,
2. exit points or ladders are not provided,
3. displays any evidence of instability, has any loose rock or other debris which could fall into the
trench, or
4. displays any other evidence of any unsafe conditions regardless of depth.
If the contractor fails to provide safe access to trenches for compaction testing, our company policy
requires that the soil technician withdraws and notifies their supervisor. The contractor's
representative will then be contacted in an effort to affect a solution. All backfill not tested due to
safety concerns or other reasons is subject to reprocessing and/or removal.
Procedures
In the event that the technician's safety is jeopardized or compromised as a result of the contractor's
failure to comply with any of the above, the technician is directed to inform both the developer's and
contractor's representatives. If the condition is not rectified, the technician is required, by company
policy, to immediately withdraw and notify their supervisor. The contractor's representative will then
be contacted in an effort to affect a solution. No further testing will be performed until the situation is
rectified. Any fill placed in the interim can be considered unacceptable and subject to reprocessing,
recompaction or removal.
In the event that the soil technician does not comply with the above or other established safety
guidelines, we request that the contractor bring this to technician's attention and notify our project
manager or office. Effective communication and coordination between the contractors' representative
GEOTEK
_j
__ j
GENERAL GRADING GUIDELINES APPENDIXC
Page 13
and the field technician(s) is strongly encouraged in order to implement the above safety program and
safety in general.
The safety procedures outlined above should be discussed at the contractor's safety meetings. This will
serve to inform and remind equipment operators of these safety procedures particularly the zone of
non-encroachment.
The safety procedures outlined above should be discussed at the contractor's safety meetings. This will
serve to inform and remind equipment operators of these safety procedures particularly the zone of
non-encroachment.
GEOTEK
ALTERNATES
Finish Grade
Original Ground
\__Loose Sul'face Materllllls~ .
Construct Benches ..____.....,
where slope exceeds 5:1
Bottom of Cleanout to Be At
Least 1.5 Times the Width of
Compaction Equipment
,......-r--.....J
6" Perforated Pipe in 9 cubic feet per Lineal
Foot Clean Gravel Wrapped in Filter Fabric
Finish Grade
Original Ground
Construct Benches .____.....,
where slope exceeds 5:1 Slopj.. to Drain
Bottom of Cleanout to Be At
Least 1.5 Times the Width of
Compaction Equipment
6" Perforated Pipe in 9 cubic feet
per Lineal Foot Clean Gravel
Wrapped in Filter Fabric
1384 Poinsettia Avenue, Suite A
Vista, California 92083
TYPICAL CANYON
CLEAN OUT
STANDARD GRADING
GUIDELINES
PLATE G-1
TYPICAL FILL SLOPE OVER
NATURAL DESCENDING SLOPE
Finish Grade
Min. 3 Feet
Compacted Fill
.-----------Fill Slope
· , Bedrock·
Min.2% Fall
Minimum 15 Feet Wide
or 1.5 Equipment
Widths for Compaction
DAYLIGHT CUT AREA OVER
NATURAL DESCENDING SLOPE
Structural Setback
ithout Corrective Work
Min. 3 Feet
Compacted Fill
·Bedrock
Compacted Fill
Min.2% Fall
Mlnlmum15 Feet Wide
or 1.5 Equipment
Widths for Compaction
._Q 1384 Poinsettia Avenue, Suite A
Vista, California 92081-8505
TREATMENT ABOVE
NATURAL SLOPES GEOTEK
STANDARD GRADING
GUIDELINES
PLATEG-2
4' Typical
. . . Bedrock Qr. . . . ..
· Suitabl.r :Dense·MaJ,rial· ·.
1384 Poinsettia Avenue, Suite A
Vista, California 92081-8505
TYPICAL FILL SLOPE OVER
CUT SLOPE
0111
Minimum 15 Feet Wide
or 1.5 Equipment
Widths for Compaction
TYPICAL FILL SLOPE
·Excavate key ~f width or de,_h .
lt~ss than indicated ln. tablt~ above
COMMON FILL
SLOPE KEYS
SLOPE MIN. KEY MIN. KEY
HEIGHT WIDTH DEPTH
5 7 1
10 10 1.5
15 15 2
20 15 2.5
25 15 3
>25 SEETEXT
CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY
WITH SOIL ENGINEER
PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION
STANDARD GRADING
GUIDELINES
PLATE G-3
CROSS SECTIONAL VIEW
> .. .. • • . ·.·.·•·••... NO.ROtKS IN< ··> ·~~E:{OT{i . < <THI~ ZONe< •
e • •.. ___________________ + ____________________ _
3' MIN. ""*"·.:.;...; .. .:.;.;..;..~~~-..,
------------*----------------------------.·. < ~~---------------~----------------~---
STAGGER ROWS 3• MIN. HORIZONTALLY~ +
-~-----------------~-~-------------;~
MINIMUM 15' CLEAR OR
1.5 EQUIPMENT WIDTHS
FOR COMPACTION
PLAN VIEW
FILL SLOPE
SOIL TO BE PLACE AROUND AND OVER ROCKS THEN FLOODED INTO
VOIDS. MUST COMPACT AROUND AND OVER EACH ROCK WINDROW
NOTES:
1) SOIL FILL OVER WINDROW SHOULE BE 7 FEET OR PER JURISDUICTIONAL STANDARDS AND SUFFICIENT
FOR FUTURE EXCAVATIONS TO AVOID ROCKS
2) MAXIMUM ROCK SIZE IN WINDROWS IS 4 FEET MINIMUM DIAMETER
3) SOIL AROUND WINDROWS TO BE SANDY MATERIAL SUBJECT TO SOIL ENGINEER ACCEPTANCE
4) SPACING AND CLEARANCES MUST BE SUFFICIENT TO ALLOW FOR PROPER COMPACTION
5) INDIVDUAL LARGE ROCKS MAY BE BURIED IN PITS.
1384 Poinsettia Avenue, Suite A
Vista, California 92081-8505 ROCK BURIAL
DETAILS
STANDARD GRADING
GUIDELINES
PLATE G-4
TERRACE DRAIN
AS REQUIRED
/
.15 FEET WIDE OR 1.5 EQUIPMENT
WIDTHS FOR COMPACTION
4" or 6" Perforated Pipe in 6 cubic
feet per lineal foot clean gravel
wrapped in filter fabric outlet pipe
to gravity flow at 2% min.
1384 Poinsettia Avenue, Suite A
Vista, California 92083
6" Perforated Pipe in 6 cubic
feet per lineal foot clean gravel
wrapped in filter fabric outlet
pipe to gravity flow
Typical Buttress and
Stabilization Fill PLATEG-5
Notes:
TRANSITION LOT
OVEREXCAVATION AND BENCHING NOT
TO EXCEED INCLINATION OF 3:1 (H:V)
UNDERCUT LOT
PROPSED FINISH GRADE -----------
OVEREXCAVATION TO HAVE 1%
FALL TOWARD FRONT OF LOT
PROPOSED STRUCTURE
COMPACTED FILL
OVEREXCAVATE AND
RECOMPACT
------r·
OVEREXCAVATE AND
RECOMPACT
1. Removed/overexcavated soils should be recompacted in accordance with recommendations included in the text of the report.
2. Location of cuUfill transition should verified in the field during site grading.
n
GEOTEK
1384 Poinsettia Avenue, Suite A
Vista, California 92081-8505 TRANSITION &
UNDERCUT LOTS
STANDARD GRADING
GUIDELINES
PLATE G-6
APPENDIX 0 -SELECTED SEISMICITY
GEOTEK
IIUSGS Design Maps Detailed Report
ASCE 7-10 Standard (33.0935°N, 117.2544°W)
Site Class D -"Stiff Soil", Risk Category 1/11/III
Section 11.4.1 -Mapped Acceleration Parameters
Note: Ground motion values provided below are for the direction of maximum horizontal
spectral response acceleration. They have been converted from corresponding geometric
mean ground motions computed by the USGS by applying factors of 1.1 (to obtain 5 5) and
1.3 (to obtain 51). Maps in the 2010 ASCE-7 Standard are provided for Site Class B.
Adjustments for other Site Classes are made, as needed, in Section 11.4.3.
From Figure 22-1 £11 55 = 1.048 g
From Figure 22-2£21 51= 0.405 g
Section 11.4.2-Site Class
The authority having jurisdiction (not the USGS), site-specific geotechnical data, and/or
the default has classified the site as Site Class D, based on the site soil properties in
accordance with Chapter 20.
Table 20.3-1 Site Classification
Site Class
A. Hard Rock
B. Rock
C. Very dense soil and soft rock
D. Stiff Soil
E. Soft clay soil
Vs Nor Nch Su
>5,000 ft/S N/A N/A
2,500 to 5,000 ft/s N/A N/A
' ~-~.----~--~"~~.
1,200 to 2,500 ft/s >50 >2,000 psf
600 to 1,200 ft/s 15 to 50 1,000 to 2,000 psf
<600 ft/s <15 <1,000 psf
Any profile with more than 10 ft of soil having the
characteristics:
• Plasticity index PI> 20,
• Moisture content w <:!: 40%, and
• Undrained shear strength Su < 500 psf
-----~-~----~~·-····-----~~~--~---·······················-·---~~·~--~-··· ---·-----··-----~-···
F. Soils requiring site response
analysis in accordance with Section
21.1
See Section 20.3.1
For SI: 1ft/s = 0.3048 m/s 11b/ft2 = 0.0479 kN/m2
Section 11.4.3-Site Coefficients and Risk-Targeted Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCEJ
Spectral Response Acceleration Parameters
Table 11.4-1: Site Coefficient F.
Site Class Mapped MCE R Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter at Short Period
55 :S 0.25 55 = 0.50 55 = 0.75 55 = 1.00 55 ;;:: 1.25
A 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8
B 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
c 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.0 1.0
D 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.1 1.0
E 2.5 1.7 1.2 0.9 0.9
F See Section 11.4.7 of ASCE 7
Note: Use straight-line interpolation for intermediate values of 55
For Site Class = D and 55 = 1.048 g, Fa = 1.081
Table 11.4-2: Site Coefficient Fv
Site Class Mapped MCE R Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter at 1-s Period
51 :S 0.10 51= 0.20 51= 0.30 51= 0.40 51;;:: 0.50
A 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8
B 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
c 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.3
D 2.4 2.0 1.8 1.6 1.5
E 3.5 3.2 2.8 2.4 2.4
F See Section 11.4.7 of ASCE 7
Note: Use straight-line interpolation for intermediate values of 51
For Site Class = D and 5 1 = 0.405 g, Fv = 1.595
Equation (11.4-1): SMs = FaSs = 1.081 X 1.048 = 1.132 g
Equation (11.4-2): SMl = FvSl = 1.595 X 0.405 = 0.646 Q
Section 11.4.4 -Design Spectral Acceleration Parameters
Equation (11.4-3): Sos =% SMs =%X 1.132 = 0.755 g
Equation (11.4-4): 501 =% SM1 =%X 0.646 = 0.431 g
Section 11.4.5 -Design Response Spectrum
From Figure 22-12 [3l T L = 8 seconds
Figure 11.4-1: Design Response Spectrum
S:;:,5 = 0.755
T~. = 0.511 1.000
T<T0 : S. =S00 (0.4 +0.6T ITu)
T0 sr s T3 : s. = s~>s
T5 <T:!iTL :S3=Sll1 iT
T >TL: s."" S!»TL /P
Period, T (sed
Section 11.4.6-Risk-Targeted Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCEJ Response Spectrum
The MCER Response Spectrum is determined by multiplying the design response spectrum above by
1.5.
s.~'l = o. 646
T, = 0.114 T, = 0.571 1.00(!
Period, T (sec)
Section 11.8.3 -Additional Geotechnical Investigation Report Requirements for Seismic Design
Categories D through F
From Figure 22-7 [41 PGA = 0.407
Equation (11.8-1): PGAM = FPGAPGA = 1.093 X 0.407 = 0.445 g
Table 11.8-1: Site Coefficient FPGA
Site Mapped MCE Geometric Mean Peak Ground Acceleration, PGA
Class
PGA :S PGA = PGA = PGA = PGA ~
0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50
A 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8
B 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
c 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.0 1.0
D 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.1 1.0
E 2.5 1.7 1.2 0.9 0.9
F See Section 11.4.7 of ASCE 7
Note: Use straight-line interpolation for intermediate values of PGA
For Site Class = D and PGA = 0.407 g, FPGA = 1.093
Section 21.2.1.1 -Method 1 (from Chapter 21 -Site-Specific Ground Motion Procedures for
Seismic Design)
From Figure 22-17 [51 CRS = 0.969
From Figure 22-18 [&J CRl = 1.027
Section 11.6 -Seismic Design Category
Table 11.6-1 Seismic Design Category Based on Short Period Response Acceleration Parameter
RISK CATEGORY
VALUE OF SDs
I or II III IV
SDs < 0.167g A A A
0.167g :Si SDs < 0.33g B B c
0.33g :Si SDs < O.SOg c c D
O.SOg :Si SDs D D D
For Risk Category = I and SDs = 0.755 g, Seismic Design Category = D
Table 11.6-2 Seismic Design Category Based on 1-S Period Response Acceleration Parameter
RISK CATEGORY
VALUE OF SD1 I or II III IV
SD1 < 0.067g A A A
0.067g :Si SD1 < 0.133g B B c
0.133g :Si SD1 < 0.20g c c D
0.20g :Si SD1 D D D
For Risk Category = I and SD1 = 0.431 g, Seismic Design Category = D
Note: When 51 is greater than or equal to 0.75g, the Seismic Design Category is E for
buildings in Risk Categories I, II, and III, and F for those in Risk Category IV, irrespective
of the above.
Seismic Design Category = "the more severe design category in accordance with
Table 11.6-1 or 11.6-2" = D
Note: See Section 11.6 for alternative approaches to calculating Seismic Design Category.
References
1. Figure 22-1: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/2010_ASCE-7 _Figure_22-l.pdf
2. Figure 22-2: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/2010_ASCE-7_Figure_22-2.pdf
3. Figure 22-12: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/2010_ASCE-7 _Figure_22-12.pdf
4. Figure 22-7: http:/ /earthquake. usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/2010_ASCE-7 _Figure_22-7 .pdf
5. Figure 22-17: http:/ /earthquake. usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/2010_ASCE-7 _Figure_22-17. pdf
6. Figure 22-18: http:/ /earthquake. usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/downloads/pdfs/2010_ASCE-7 _Figure_22-18. pdf
Ikon2EQF
***********************
* * * * *
E Q F A U L T
Version 3.00
* * * * * ***********************
DETERMINISTIC ESTIMATION OF
PEAK ACCELERATION FROM DIGITIZED FAULTS
JOB NUMBER: 3440-SD3
JOB NAME: Ikon-Altisma
CALCULATION NAME: IKON2
FAULT-DATA-FILE NAME: CDMGFLTE.DAT
SITE COORDINATES:
SITE LATITUDE: 33.0935
SITE LONGITUDE: 117.2544
SEARCH RADIUS: 100 mi
DATE: 10-10-2014
ATTENUATION RELATION: 12) Bozorgnia Campbell Niazi (1999) Hor.-Soft Rock-Cor.
UNCERTAINTY (M=Median, S=Sigma): M Number of Sigmas: 0.0
DISTANCE MEASURE: cdist
SCOND: 1
Basement Depth: 5.00 km Campbell SSR: 1 Campbell SHR: 0
COMPUTE PEAK HORIZONTAL ACCELERATION
FAULT-DATA FILE USED: CDMGFLTE.DAT
MINIMUM DEPTH VALUE (km): 3.0
Page 1
Ikon2EQF
EQFAULT SUMMARY
DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS
Page 1
ABBREVIATED
FAULT NAME
APPROXIMATE
DISTANCE
mi (km)
ESTIMATED MAX. EARTHQUAKE EVENT
MAXIMUM
EARTHQUAKE
MAG. (Mw)
PEAK lEST. SITE
SITE !INTENSITY
ACCEL. g MOD.MERC.
================================ ============== ========== ========== =========
ROSE CANYON 6.5( 10.5) 6.9 0.301 IX
NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (Offshore) 11.1( 17.9) 6.9 0.196 VIII
CORONADO BANK 21.5( 34.6) 7.4 0.145 VIII
ELSINORE-TEMECULA 24.1( 38.8) 6.8 0.087 VII
ELSINORE-JULIAN 24.1( 38.8) 7.1 0.106 VII
ELSINORE-GLEN IVY 38.4( 61.8) 6.8 0.053 VI
EARTHQUAKE VALLEY 39.5( 63.5) 6.5 0.043 VI
PALOS VERDES 41.8( 67.2) 7.1 0.060 VI
SAN JACINTO-ANZA 46.9( 75.5) 7.2 0.057 VI
SAN JACINTO-SAN JACINTO VALLEY 48.8( 78.5) 6.9 0.045 VI
SAN JACINTO-COYOTE CREEK 50.0( 80.5) 6.8 0.041 v
ELSINORE-COYOTE MOUNTAIN 52.4( 84.4) 6.8 0.039 v
Page 2
_j
Ikon2EQF
NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (L.A.Basin) 52.6( 84.6) 6.9 0.041 v
CHINO-CENTRAL AVE. (Elsinore) 53.5( 86.1) 6.7 0.050 VI
WHITTIER 57.0( 91.8) 6.8 0.035 v
SAN JACINTO -BORREGO 61.8( 99.5 ) 6.6 0.028 v
COMPTON THRUST 62.3( 100.2) 6.8 0.046 VI
SAN JACINTO-SAN BERNARDINO 63.8( 102.7) 6.7 0.029 v
ELYSIAN PARK THRUST 65.0( 104.6) 6.7 0.041 v
SAN ANDREAS -San Bernardino 66.8( 107.5) 7.3 0.042 VI
SAN ANDREAS -Southern 66.8( 107.5) 7.4 0.046 VI
SAN ANDREAS -Coachella 73.1( 117.7) 7.1 0.033 v
PINTO MOUNTAIN 73.4( 118.2) 7.0 0.031 v
SAN JOSE 74.4( 119.7) 6.5 0.031 v
SUPERSTITION MTN. (San Jacinto) 77.5( 124.7) 6.6 0.022 IV
BURNT MTN. 77.8( 125.2) 6.4 0.019 IV
SIERRA MADRE 77.9( 125.4) 7.0 0.041 v
CUCAMONGA 77.9( 125.4) 7.0 0.041 v
NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (West) 79.5( 128.0) 7.0 0.040 v
EUREKA PEAK 80.5( 129.6) 6.4 0.019 IV
ELMORE RANCH 81. 2( 130. 7) 6.6 0.021 IV
CLEGHORN 81. 6( 131.4) 6.5 0.020 IV
SUPERSTITION HILLS (San Jacinto) 82.2( 132.3) 6.6 0.021 IV
NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (East) 82.5( 132.8) 6.7 0.031 v
LAGUNA SALADA 83.4( 134.3) 7.0 0.027 v
SAN ANDREAS -1857 Rupture 85.6( 137.8) 7.8 0.047 VI
SAN ANDREAS -Mojave 85.6( 137.8) 7.1 0.028 v
RAYMOND 86.5( 139.2) 6.5 0.026 v
CLAMSHELL-SAWPIT 88.0( 141.6) 6.5 0.026 v
LANDERS 88.4( 142.3) 7.3 0.032 v
DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS
Page 2
ABBREVIATED
FAULT NAME
APPROXIMATE
DISTANCE
mi (km)
ESTIMATED MAX. EARTHQUAKE EVENT
MAXIMUM I PEAK lEST. SITE
EARTHQUAKE! SITE !INTENSITY
MAG.(Mw) I ACCEL. g IMOD.MERC.
================================ ============== ==========1==========1=========
VERDUGO 89.3( 143.7) 6.7 I 0.029 I v
HELENDALE -S. LOCKHARDT 91.0( 146.5) 7.1 I 0.027 I V
HOLLYWOOD 91.2( 146.8) 6.4 I 0.023 I IV
BRAWLEY SEISMIC ZONE 91.3( 146.9) 6.4 I 0.016 I IV
LENWOOD-LOCKHART-OLD WOMAN SPRGS 94.2( 151.6) 7.3 I 0.030 I v
Page 3
SANTA MONICA
EMERSON So. -COPPER MTN.
JOHNSON VALLEY (Northern)
IMPERIAL
MALIBU COAST
Ikon2EQF
96.0( 154.5)1 6.6
96.1( 154.6)1 6.9
96.7( 155.6)1 6.7
98. s < 1s8. s > 1 1. e
98.6( 158. 7) I 6.1
0.025
0.022
0.019
0.023
0.026
v
IV
IV
IV
v
*******************************************************************************
-END OF SEARCH-50 FAULTS FOUND WITHIN THE SPECIFIED SEARCH RADIUS.
THE ROSE CANYON FAULT IS CLOSEST TO THE SITE.
IT IS ABOUT 6.5 MILES (10.5 km) AWAY.
LARGEST MAXIMUM-EARTHQUAKE SITE ACCELERATION: 0.3007 g
Page 4
Ikon3EQS
*************************
*
*
*
* *
E Q S E A R C H
Version 3.00
*
*
*
*
* *************************
ESTIMATION OF
PEAK ACCELERATION FROM
CALIFORNIA EARTHQUAKE CATALOGS
JOB NUMBER: 3440-SD3
JOB NAME: Ikon-Altisma
EARTHQUAKE-CATALOG-FILE NAME: ALLQUAKE.DAT
MAGNITUDE RANGE:
MINIMUM MAGNITUDE: 4.50
MAXIMUM MAGNITUDE: 9.00
SITE COORDINATES:
SITE LATITUDE: 33.0935
SITE LONGITUDE: 117.2544
SEARCH DATES:
START DATE: 1800
END DATE: 2012
SEARCH RADIUS:
100.0 mi
160.9 km
DATE: 10-10-2014
ATTENUATION RELATION: 12) Bozorgnia Campbell Niazi (1999) Hor.-Soft Rock-Cor.
UNCERTAINTY (M=Median, S=Sigma): M Number of Sigmas: 0.0
ASSUMED SOURCE TYPE: DS [SS=Strike-slip, DS=Reverse-slip, BT=Blind-thrust]
SCOND: 0 Depth Source: A
Basement Depth: 5.00 km Campbell SSR: 1 Campbell SHR: 0
COMPUTE PEAK HORIZONTAL ACCELERATION
MINIMUM DEPTH VALUE (km): 3.0
Page 1
Ikon3EQS
EARTHQUAKE SEARCH RESULTS
Page 1
I I I
FILEI LAT. I LONG. I DATE
CODEI NORTH I WEST I
I TIME I I I SITE ISITEI APPROX.
I (UTC) IDEPTHIQUAKEI ACC. I MM I DISTANCE
I H M Secl (km)l MAG.I g IINT.I mi [km]
----+-------+--------+----------+--------+-----+-----+-------+----+------------
DMG 133.00001117.3000 11/22/180012130 0.0 0.0 6.50 0.322 1 IX 7.0( 11.2)
DMG 133.00001117.0000 03/03/1906!2025 0.0 0.0 4.50 0.045 1 vi 16.1( 25.9)
MGI 133.00001117.0000 09/21/18561 730 0.0 0.0 5.00 0.059 1 vr 16.1( 25.9)
MGI 132.80001117.1000 05/25/18031 0 0 0.0 0.0 5.00 0.043 1 VI 22.1( 35.6)
DMG 132.70001117.2000 05/27/1862120 0 0.0 0.0 5.90 0.060 1 vi 27.3( 44.0)
T-A 132.67001117.1700 12/00/18561 0 0 0.0 0.0 5.00 0.032 1 v 29.6( 47.7)
T-A 132.67001117.1700 10/21/18621 0 0 0.0 0.0 5.00 0.032 1 v 29.6( 47.7)
T-A 132.67001117.1700 05/24/18651 0 0 0.0 0.0 5.00 0.032 1 v 29.6( 47.7)
DMG 133.50001117.0000 08/08/192511013 0.0 0.0 4.50 0.023 1 IV 31.7( 51.0)
DMG 133.20001116.7000 01/01/19201 235 0.0 0.0 5.00 0.029 1 v 32.9( 52.9)
PAS 132.62701117.3770 06/29/19831 8 836.4 5.0 4.60 0.023 1 IV 33.0( 53.1)
MGI 132.80001116.8000 08/14/192711448 0.0 0.0 4.60 0.023 1 IV 33.2( 53.5)
DMG 132.80001116.8000 10/23/1894123 3 0.0 0.0 5.70 0.043 1 vi 33.2( 53.5)
Page 2
Ikon3EQS
DMG 133.5000 116.9170111/04/1935 3ss 0.01 0.0 4.50 0.021 IV I 34.2( 55.0)
PAS 132.9900 117.8490107/13/1986 14 133.01 12.0 4.60 0.022 IV I 35.1( 56.6)
PAS 132.9710 117.8700107/13/1986 1347 8.21 6.0 5.30 0.031 v I 36.6( 58.9)
MGI 133.5000 116.8000103/30/1918 16 s 0.01 0.0 4.60 0.020 IV I 38.4( 61.8)
MGI 133.2000 116.6000110/12/1920 1748 0.01 0.0 5.30 0.029 v I 38.5( 62.0)
DMG 133.1100 116.5230101/24/1957 205449.91 3.9 4.60 0.018 IV I 42.3( 68.1)
DMG 133.7000 117.4000104/11/1910 757 0.01 0.0 s.00 0.022 IV I 42.7( 68.7)
DMG 133.7000 117.4000105/13/1910 620 0.0 0.0 s.00 0.022 IV I 42.7( 68.7)
DMG 133.7000 117.4000105/15/1910 1547 0.0 0.0 6.00 0.040 v I 42.7( 68.7)
DMG 133.7000 117.1000106/11/1902 245 0.0 0.0 4.50 0.017 IV I 42.8( 68.9)
PAS 133.1380 116.5010110/10/1984 212258.9 11.6 4.50 0.016 IV I 43.7( 70.3)
DMG 133.6820 117.5530 07/05/1938 18 655.7 10.0 4.50 0.016 IV I 44.1( 71.0)
DMG 133.6990 117.5110 05/31/19381 83455.4 10.0 s.s0 0.028 VI 44.3( 71.4)
DMG 33.54501117.8070 10/27/196911316 2.3 6.5 4.50 0.016 IV I 44.6( 71.8)
DMG 33.7250 117.4980 01/03/19561 02548.9 13.7 4.70 0.017 IV I 45.8( 73.7)
DMG 33.4670 116.5830 03/27/19371 742 0.0 0.0 4.50 0.015 IV I 46.5( 74.9)
DMG 33.4670 116.5830 01/04/19381 029 0.0 0.0 4.50 0.015 IV I 46.5( 74.9)
DMG 33.7100 116.9250 09/23/19631144152.6 16.5 5.00 0.020 IV I 46.6( 75.0)
PAS 33.5580 116.6670 06/15/19821234921.3 12.2 4.80 0.018 IV I 46.7( 75.1)
DMG 32.5830 117.8000 04/19/19391 741 0.0 0.0 4.50 0.015 IV I 47.4( 76.2)
DMG 33.7500 111.0000 06/06/1918 2232 0.0 0.0 s.00 0.020 IV I 47.6( 76.7)
DMG 33.7500 117.0000 04/21/1918 223225.0 0.0 6.80 0.060 VI 47.6( 76.7)
DMG 33.0000 116.4330 06/04/1940 1035 8.3 0.0 5.10 0.021 IV 48.0( 77.2)
DMG 33.5060 116.5850 05/21/1967 144234.4 19.4 4. 70 0.016 IV 48.0( 77.2)
DMG 33.6500 116.7500 09/05/1950 191956.0 0.0 4.80 0.017 IV 48.2( 77.5)
DMG 33.1170 116.4170 10/21/1940 64933.0 0.0 4.50 0.015 IV 48.5( 78.0)
PAS 32.7560 117.9880 01/12/1975 212214.8 15.3 4.80 0.017 IV 48.5( 78.0)
PAS 33.5200 116.5580 08/02/1975 014 7.7 13.4 4. 70 0.016 IV 49.8( 80.2)
DMG 33.3330 116.4330 02/12/1954 94428.0 0.0 4.50 0.014 IV 50.2( 80.9)
DMG 33.8000 111.0000 12/25/1899 122s 0.0 0.0 6.40 0.043 VI 50.9( 82.0)
DMG 33.48301116.5000 02/15/1951 104957.0 0.0 4.80 0.016 IV 51. 2( 82.4)
DMG 33.48301116.5000 02/15/1951 104759.0 0.0 4.80 0.016 IV 51.2( 82.4)
PAS 33.50101116.5130 02/25/1980 104738.5 13.6 s.s0 0.024 v 51.2( 82.4)
PDP 33.50801116.5140 10/31/2001 075616.6 15.0 5.10 0.019 IV 51.4( 82.8)
DMG 33.50001116.5000 09/30/1916 211 0.0 0.0 s.00 0.018 IV 51.8( 83.4)
GSP 33.62001117.9000 04/07/1989 200730.2 13.0 4.50 0.014 III 52.0( 83.7)
DMG 33.50001116.4830 02/23/1941 183614.0 0.0 4.50 0.013 III 52.6( 84.7)
MGI 33.80001117.6000 04/22/1918 211s 0.0 0.0 s.00 0.018 IV 52.7( 84.8)
DMG 33.41701116.4170 01/02/1943 141118.0 0.0 4.50 0.013 III 53.3( 85.7)
DMG 33.57501117.9830 03/11/1933 518 4.0 0.0 5.20 0.019 IV 53.6( 86.2)
EARTHQUAKE SEARCH RESULTS
Page 3
Ikon3EQS
Page 2
I I I I TIME I I I SITE ISITEI APPROX.
FILEI LAT. I LONG. I DATE
CODEI NORTH I WEST I
I (UTC) IDEPTHIQUAKEI ACC. I MM I DISTANCE
I H M Secl (km)l MAG.I g IINT.I mi [km]
----+-------+--------+----------+--------+-----+-----+-------+----+------------
DMG 133.4670 116.4330105/12/193911925 2.2 0.0 4.50
DMG 133.6170 117.9670103/11/19331 154 7.8 0.0 6.30
PAS 133.5080 118.0710111/20/19881 53928.7 6.0 4.50
DMG 133.3430 116.3460 04/28/19691232042.9 20.0 5.80
DMG 133.6000 118.0000 03/11/19331 217 0.0 0.0 4.50
DMG 132.6800 118.0770 10/28/1973122 0 2.7 8.0 4.50
DMG 133.9000 117.2000 12/19/18801 0 0 0.0 0.0 6.00
GSP 133.3990 116.3540 07/26/19971031456.0 11.0 4.80
DMG 133.6000 118.0170 12/25/193511715 0.0 0.0 4.50
DMG 133.6170 118.0170 03/15/19331111332.0 0.0 4.90
DMG 133.6170 118.0170 03/14/1933119 150.0 0.0 5.10
DMG 133.3150 116.3050 04/09/196811831 3.8 12.6 4.70
GSP 132.6810 118.1090 06/20/19971043540.5 6.0 4.70
DMG 132.9520 116.2790 09/13/19731173039.8 8.0 4.80
DMG 133.3330 116.3000 08/06/19331 332 0.0 0.0 4.70
MGI 133.80001117.8000 11/10/192611723 0.0 0.0 4.60
MGI 133.80001117.8000 11/07/192611948 0.0 0.0 4.60
MGI 133.80001117.8000 11/04/192612238 0.0 0.0 4.60
MGI 133.80001117.8000 11/09/192611535 0.0 0.0 4.60
DMG l32.9230j116.2720 10/14/19691131842.7 10.0 4.50
DMG 133.8000 116.7000 08/11/191112340 0.0 0.0 4.50
DMG 133.0500 116.2380 08/23/19611 1 047.8 11.9 4.70
DMG 133.4000 116.3000 02/09/1890112 6 0.0 0.0 6.30
DMG 132.7180 118.1720 04/28/1938 6 728.0 10.0 4.50
DMG 132.7500 118.2000 06/25/1939 149 0.0 0.0 4.50
DMG 132.8670 118.2500 02/13/1952 151337.0 0.0 4.70
T-A 132.2500 117.5000 01/13/1877 20 0 0.0 0.0 5.00
PAS 133.0580 116.2110 03/22/1982 85328.6 4.6 4.50
GSP j32.6260 118.1510 06/20/1997 080413.6 6.0 4.60
DMG 133.6830 118.0500 03/11/1933 658 3.0 0.0 5.50
DMG 133.4080 116.2610 03/25/1937 1649 1.8 10.0 6.00
DMG 133.2000 116.2000 05/28/1892 1115 0.0 0.0 6.30
DMG 133.6170 118.1170 01/20/1934 2117 0.0 0.0 4.50
DMG 132.7000 116.3000 02/24/1892 720 0.0 0.0 6.70
DMG 133.9960 117.2700 02/17/1952 123658.31 16.0 4.50
DMG 134.0000 117.2500 07/23/1923 73026.01 0.0 6.25
DMG 134.0000 117.2830 11/07/1939 1852 8.41 0.0 4.70
DMG 133.7000 118.0670 03/11/1933 51022.01 0.0 5.10
DMG 133.7000 118.0670 03/11/1933 85457.01 0.0 5.10
MGI 134.0000 117.4000 05/22/1907 652 0.01 0.0 4.60
DMG 133.2830 116.1830 03/19/1954 101522.01 0.0 4.50
DMG 133.2830 116.1830 03/19/1954 102117.01 0.0 5.50
Page 4
0.013 I !III 54.0( 86.8)
0.037 I v I s4.7( 88.1)
0.013 I !III 55.1( 88.7)
0.021 I v I 55.2( 88.9)
0.013 I IIII 55.4( 89.2)
0.013 I III 55.6( 89.4)
0.030 I v
0.015 I IV
0.013 I III
0.015 I IV
0.017 I IV
0.014 I III
0.014 I III
0.014 I IV
0.014 III
0.013 III
0.013 III
0.013 III
0.013 III
0.012 III
0.012 III
0.013 III
0.034 v
0.012 III
0.012 III
0.013 III
0.015 IV
0.012 III
0.012 III
0.020 IV
0.027 v
0.033 v
0.011 III
0.043 VI
0.011 III
0.031 v
0.012 III
0.015 IV
0.015 IV
0.012 III
0.011 III
0.019 IV
55.8( 89.7)
56.1( 90.3)
56.2( 90.4)
56. 9( 91.6)
56.9( 91.6)
56.9( 91.6)
57.1( 92.0)
57.3( 92.2)
57.6( 92.6)
58.0( 93.4)
58.0( 93.4)
58.0( 93.4)
58.0( 93.4)
58.1( 93.5)
58.3( 93.8)
58.9( 94.8)
59.0( 95.0)
59.2( 95.2)
59.7( 96.1)
59.7( 96.1)
60.0( 96.5)
60.4( 97.2)
61.2( 98.5)
61.3( 98.7)
61.3( 98.7)
61.4( 98.8)
61.5( 99.0)
61.6( 99.2)
62.3(100.3)
62.6(100.7)
62.6(100.8)
62.8(101.1)
62. 8(101.1)
63 .1(101. 6)
63.3 (101. 8)
63.3(101.8)
Ikon3EQS
DMG 133.28301116.1830103/19/19541 95556.01 0.01 5.001 0.014 IV I 63. 3(101. 8)
DMG 133.28301116.1830103/23/19541 41450.01 0.01 5.101 0.015 I IV I 63. 3(101. 8)
DMG 133.28301116.1830103/19/19541 95429.01 0.01 6.201 0.030 I VI 63. 3(101. 8)
DMG 133.28301116.1830103/20/19541 41919.01 0.01 4.901 0.014 I IIII 63. 3(101. 8)
DMG 133.28301116.1830103/19/19541 957 7.01 0.01 4.601 0.012 I IIII 63. 3(101. 8)
DMG l33.2830l116.1830l03/19/1954l101957.0l 0.01 4.501 0.011 I IIII 63. 3(101. 8)
DMG 133.95001116.8500109/28/19461 719 9.01 0.01 5.001 0.014 I IV I 63.5(102.3)
DMG 133.50001118.2500106/18/1920110 8 0.01 0.01 4.501 0.011 I IIII 63.9(102.9)
DMG l33.3490l116.1880l05/19/1969l144033.0l 8.61 4.501 0.011 I IIII 64.1(103.1)
MGI 134.00001117.5000112/16/1858110 0 0.01 0.01 1.001 0.050 I VI I 64.2(103.3)
DMG l32.6000l116.3170l06/15/1946l194653.0l 0.01 4.801 0.013 I IIII 64.2(103.3)
EARTHQUAKE SEARCH RESULTS
Page 3
I I I I TIME I I I SITE ISITEI APPROX.
FILEI LAT. I LONG. I DATE
CODEI NORTH I WEST I I (UTC) IDEPTHIQUAKEI ACC. I MM I DISTANCE
I H M Secl (km)l MAG. I g liNT. I mi [km]
----+-------+--------+----------+--------+-----+-----+-------+----+------------
PAS 134.02301117.2450 10/02/1985 234412.41 15.2 4.80 0.013 I IIII 64.2(103.3)
GSP 134.02401117.2300 03/11/1998 121851.8 14.0 4.50 0.011 I III 64.3(103.4)
DMG 134.00001117.0000 06/30/1923 022 0.0 0.0 4.50 0.011 1 III 64.3(103.4)
DMG 134.01701117.0500 02/19/1940 12 655.7 0.0 4.60 0.011 1 III 64.8(104.3)
DMG 134.03301117.3170 09/03/1935 647 0.0 0.0 4.50 0.011 1 III 65.0(104.5)
DMG 133.91701116.7000 11/17/1943 112841.0 0.0 4.50 0.011 1 III 65.2(104.9)
DMG 133.21701116.1330 08/15/1945 175624.0 0.0 5.70 0.021 1 IV 65.4(105.2)
DMG 133.19001116.1290 04/09/1968 22859.1 11.1 6.40 0.033 V 65.4(105.2)
DMG 133.11701116.1170 06/18/1943 161546.0 0.0 4.50 0.011 III 65.8(105.9)
GOP 134.04701117.2550 02/21/2000 134943.1 15.0 4.50 0.011 III 65.8(105.9)
DMG 133.75001118.0830 03/11/1933 2 9 0.0 0.0 5.00 0.014 IV 65.8(105.9)
DMG 133.7500 118.0830 03/11/1933 440 0.0 0.0 4.70 0.012 III 65.8(105.9)
DMG 133.7500 118.0830 03/11/1933 2 4 0.0 0.0 4.90 0.013 III 65.8(105.9)
DMG 133.7500 118.0830 03/11/1933 8 8 0.0 0.0 4.50 0.011 III 65.8(105.9)
DMG 133.7500 118.0830 03/11/1933 216 0.0 0.0 4.80 0.012 IIII 65.8(105.9)
DMG 133.7500 118.0830 03/12/1933 2354 0.0 0.0 4.50 0.011 IIII 65.8(105.9)
DMG 133.7500 118.0830 03/11/1933 910 0.0 0.0 5.10 0.015 IV 1 65.8(105.9)
DMG 133.7500 118.0830 03/11/1933 230 0.0 0.0 5.10 0.015 IV 1 65.8(105.9)
DMG 133.7500 118.0830 03/11/1933 259 0.0 0.0 4.60 0.011 IIII 65.8(105.9)
DMG 133.7500 118.0830 03/11/1933 221 0.0 0.0 4.60 0.011 IIII 65.8(105.9)
DMG 133.7500 118.0830 03/14/1933 1219 0.0 0.0 4.50 0.011 IIII 65.8(105.9)
DMG 133.7500 118.0830 03/11/1933 210 0.0 0.0 4.60 0.011 IIII 65.8(105.9)
DMG 133.7500 118.0830 03/11/1933 513 0.0 0.0 4.70 0.012 IIII 65.8(105.9)
Page 5
_j
Ikon3EQS
DMG 133.75001118.0830103/11/193311653 0.01 0.0 4.80 0.012 III 65.8(105.9)
DMG 133.75001118.0830103/11/19331 439 0.01 0.0 4.90 0.013 III 65.8(105.9)
DMG 133.75001118.0830103/11/19331 436 0.01 0.0 4.60 0.011 III 65.8(105.9)
DMG 133.75001118.0830103/12/19331 616 0.01 0.0 4.60 0.011 III 65.8(105.9)
DMG 133.75001118.0830103/13/19331 432 0.01 0.0 4.70 0.012 III 65.8(105.9)
DMG 133.7500 118.0830103/11/19331 323 0.01 0.0 5.00 0.014 IV 65.8(105.9)
DMG 133.7500 118.0830103/13/19331131828.0 0.0 5.30 0.016 IV 65.8(105.9)
DMG 33.7500 118.0830 03/12/193311738 0.0 0.0 4.50 0.011 III 65.8(105.9)
DMG 32.8170 118.3500 12/26/19511 04654.0 0.0 5.90 0.024 IV 66.3(106.7)
DMG 33.9760 116.7750 10/17/19651 94519.0 17.0 4.90 0.013 III 66.9(107.6)
DMG 33.1330 116.0830 05/07/193611147 0.0 0.0 4.50 0.010 III 67.8(109.1)
DMG 33.1330 116.0830 02/28/194011728 7.0 0.0 4.50 0.010 III 67.8(109.1)
DMG 33.7500 118.1330 03/11/1933111 4 0.0 0.0 4.60 0.011 III 68.0(109.4)
DMG 33.2330 116.0860 08/26/19651133814.0 -2.0 4.50 0.010 III 68.2(109.8)
DMG 33.9760 116.7210 06/12/19441104534.7 10.0 5.10 0.014 IV 68.2(109.8)
DMG 32.1670 117.6670 10/29/193511017 0.0 0.0 4.50 0.010 III 68.3(109.9)
DMG 34.0140 116.7710 06/10/19441111150.5 10.0 4.50 0.010 III I 69 .4(111. 6)
PAS 33.9790 116.6810 12/16/19881 553 5.0 8.1 4.80 0.012 III 69.5(111.8)
DMG 33.7830 118.1330 10/02/19331 91017.6 0.0 5.40 0.017 IV 69.5(111.8)
MGI 34.1000 117.3000 12/27/1901111 0 0.0 0.0 4.60 0.011 III 69.5(111.9)
MGI 34.1000 117.3000 07/15/190512041 0.0 0.0 5.30 0.016 IV 69.5(111.9)
DMG 33.9940 116.7120 06/12/19441111636.0 10.0 5.30 0.016 IV 69.6(112.0)
DMG 33.1130 116.0370 04/09/19681 3 353.5 5.0 5.20 0.014 IV 70.4(113.3)
DMG 33.1040 116.0360 04/09/19681 34810.3 4.8 4.70 0.011 III 70.5(113.4)
PAS 33.9530 116.5720 10/15/19861 22847.8 8.7 4.70 0.011 III 71. 2(114. 5)
DMG 34.1270 117.3380 02/23/19361222042.7 10.0 4.50 0.010 III 71. 5(115 .1)
DMG 33.7830 118.2000 12/27/19391192849.0 0.0 4.70 0.011 III 72.3(116.4)
DMG 34.1320 117.4260 04/15/1965120 833.3 5.5 4.50 0.010 III 72.4(116.5)
DMG 34.1000 116.8830 10/24/193511452 0.0 0.0 4.50 0.010 III 72.7(117.0)
DMG 34.1000 116.8830 10/24/193511451 0.0 0.0 4.50 0.010 III 72.7(117.0)
EARTHQUAKE SEARCH RESULTS
Page 4
I I I I TIME I I I SITE ISITEI APPROX.
FILEI LAT. I LONG. I DATE
CODEI NORTH I WEST I I (UTC) IDEPTHIQUAKEI ACC. I MM I DISTANCE
I H M Secl (km)l MAG. I g liNT. I mi [km] ----+-------+--------+----------+--------+-----+-----+-------+----+------------
PAS 133.99801116.6060107/08/19861 92044.51 11.71 5.601 0.018 IV I 72.7(117.1)
DMG 133.00001116.0000105/18/19201 625 0.01 0.01 4.501 0.010 IIII 72.9(117.3)
DMG l33.2310l116.0040l05/26/1957l155933.6l 15.11 5.001 0.012 IIII 72.9(117.3)
GSP 134.11201116.9200110/01/1998!181816.01 4.01 4.701 0.011 IIII 72.9(117.3)
Page 6
Ikon3EQS
DMG 132.96701116.0000110/30/19421 53545.0 0.0 4.50 0.009 III 73.1(117.7)
DMG 132.96701116.0000111/02/19421125942.0 0.0 4.50 0.009 III 73.1(117.7)
DMG 132.96701116.0000111/03/19421 5 629.0 0.0 4.50 0.009 III 73.1(117.7)
DMG 132.96701116.0000110/21/19421191028.0 0.0 4.50 0.009 III 73.1(117.7)
DMG 132.96701116.0000110/21/19421214928.0 0.0 4.50 0.009 III 73.1(117.7)
DMG 132.96701116.0000110/21/19421162213.0 0.0 6.50 0.031 v 73.1(117.7)
DMG 132.96701116.0000110/21/19421163439.0 0.0 4.50 0.009 III 73.1(117.7)
DMG 132.96701116.0000110/21/19421162654.0 0.0 5.00 0.012 III 73.1(117.7)
DMG 132.96701116.0000 10/29/19421162157.0 0.0 4.50 0.009 III 73.1(117.7)
DMG 132.9670 116.0000 10/21/194211638 6.0 0.0 4.50 0.009 III 73.1(117.7)
DMG 132.9670 116.0000 11/02/19431164759.0 0.0 4.50 0.009 III 73.1(117.7)
DMG 132.9670 116.0000 10/29/194211556 0.0 0.0 4.50 0.009 III 73.1(117.7)
DMG 132.9670 116.0000 11/02/19431175041.01 0.0 4.50 0.009 III 73.1(117.7)
DMG 132.9670 116.0000 10/21/19421162519.0 0.0 5.00 0.012 III 73.1(117.7)
DMG 132.9670 116.0000 10/22/19421181326.0 0.0 5.00 0.012 III 73.1(117.7)
GSP 134.1210 116.9280 08/16/19981133440.2 6.0 4.70 0.010 III 73.4(118.1)
DMG 133.0480 115.9860 04/16/19681 33029.9 8.3 4.80 0.011 III 73.5(118.2)
DMG 133.0830 115.9830 03/02/193412130 0.0 0.0 4.50 0.009 III 73.5(118.4)
DMG 133.7590 118.2530 08/31/19381 31814.2 10.0 4.50 0.009 III 73.6(118.5)
DMG 34.1000 117.6830 01/09/193411410 0.0 0.0 4.50 0.009 III 73.7(118.7)
DMG 33.9000 118.1000 07/08/1929 1646 6.7 13.0 4.70 0.010 III 74.0(119.0)
DMG 32.9830 115.9830 05/23/1942 154729.0 0.0 5.00 0.012 III 74.0(119.1)
DMG 32.2000 116.5500 11/04/1949 204238.0 0.0 5.70 0.018 IV 74.0(119.2)
DMG 32.2000 116.5500 11/05/1949 43524.0 0.0 5.10 0.013 III 74.0(119.2)
DMG 34.1000 116.8000 10/24/1935 1448 7.6 0.0 5.10 0.013 III 74.2(119.5)
DMG 33.7830 118.2500 11/14/1941 84136.3 0.0 5.40 0.015 IV 74.5(120.0)
DMG 33.8170 118.2170 10/22/1941 65718.5 0.0 4.90 0.012 III 74.6(120.1)
GSP 34.1100 117.7200 04/17/1990 223227.2 4.0 4.60 0.010 III I 75.1(120.9)
DMG 32.6000 116.1000 12/24/1941 73012.0 0.0 4.50 0.009 III I 75.1(120.9)
DMG 32.7170 116.0330 06/01/1959 163536.0 0.0 4.60 0.010 III I 75.4(121.4)
DMG 34.1670 117.5330 03/01/1948 81213.01 0.0 4.70 0.010 III I 75.8(122.0)
MGI 34.0000 118.0000 12/25/1903 1745 0.0 0.0 5.00 0.012 III I 75.9(122.1)
MGI 134.0000 118.0000 05/05/1929 1 1 0.0 0.0 4.60 0.010 III I 75.9(122.1)
DMG 133.9670 116.4500 12/11/1948 161220.0 0.0 4.50 0.009 III I 76.0(122.3)
GSP 134.1900 117.3900 12/28/1989 094108.1 15.0 4.50 0.009 III I 76.1(122.5)
DMG 132.0000 117.0670 06/23/1939 2048 0.0 0.0 4.50 0.009 III I 76.3(122.8)
GSP 134.1920 117.0950 04/06/1994 190104.1 7.0 4.80 0.011 III I 76.4(122.9)
DMG 134.1000 116.7000 02/07/1889 520 0.0 0.0 5.30 0.014 IV I 76.5(123.0)
DMG 132.7500 116.0000 02/19/19191 458 0.0 0.0 4.50 0.009 III I 76.5(123.1)
GSP 134.1400 117.6900 03/02/19901172625.4 6.0 4.60 0.010 III I 76.5(123.1)
PAS 134.1360 117.7090 06/26/1988115 458.5 7.9 4.60 0.010 III I 76.6(123.2)
DMG 133.9670 116.4330 12/05/19481 04235.0 0.0 4.60 0.010 III I 76.6(123.3)
DMG 133.9330 116.3830 12/04/19481234317.0 0.0 6.50 0.030 VI 76.7(123.4)
GSP 134.1400 117.7000 02/28/19901234336.6 5.0 5.20 0.013 III I 76.7(123.4)
DMG 132.0000 117.5000 06/24/193911627 0.0 0.0 5.00 0.012 III I 76.8(123.7)
DMG 132.0000 117.5000 05/03/193912358 0.0 0.0 4.50 0.009 III! 76.8(123.7)
DMG 132.0000 117.5000 05/01/193912357 0.0 0.0 4.50 0.009 III I 76.8(123.7)
DMG 132.0000 117.5000 05/01/193912353 0.0 0.0 5.00 0.012 III I 76.8(123.7)
Page 7
Ikon3EQS
DMG l34.2999l117.4999l97/22/1899l 946 0.01 0.01 5.591 9.916 I IV I 76.9(123.7)
EARTHQUAKE SEARCH RESULTS
Page 5
I I I I TIME I I I SITE ISITEI APPROX.
FILEI LAT. I LONG. I DATE
CODEI NORTH I WEST I
I (UTC) IDEPTHIQUAKEI ACC. I MM I DISTANCE I H M Sec I (km)l MAG. I g liNT. I mi [km]
----+-------+--------+----------+--------+-----+-----+-------+----+------------
DMG 34.2999l117.1999l99/29/1997l 154 0.0 0.0 6.99 0.021
DMG 33.86791118.2179196/19/19441 0 333.9 0.0 4.59 9.999
DMG 34.1839 117.5489 99/91/19371163533.5 10.0 4.59 9.999
DMG 34.9179 116.5999 97/24/19471221946.9 0.0 5.59 9.916
DMG 34.9179 116.5999 97/25/19471 61949.9 0.0 5.29 9.913
DMG 34.9179 116.5999 97/25/19471161453.9 0.0 4.59 9.999
DMG 34.9179 116.5999 97/26/19471 24941.9 0.0 5.19 0.012
DMG 34.9179 116.5999 97/25/1947 15647.9 0.0 4.69 9.999
DMG 34.9179 116.5999 97/25/1947 94631.9 0.0 5.99 0.012
DMG 34.9179 116.5999 97/24/1947 225426.9 0.0 4.99 0.011
DMG 34.9179 116.5999 97/26/1947 23 425.9 0.0 4.59 9.999
DMG 33.7839 116.2999 19/31/1943 131219.9 0.0 4.59 9.999
DMG 133.9339 116.3679 12/95/1948 0 121.0 0.0 4.99 0.011
GSP 34.1789 116.9229 96/28/1992 179131.9 13.9 4.79 0.010
GSP 34.1639 116.8559 96/28/1992 144321.9 6.9 5.39 9.914
DMG 34.1899 116.9299 91/16/1939 934 3.6 9.9 5.19 9.912
DMG 34.1899 116.9299 91/16/1939 92433.9 9.9 5.29 9.913
DMG 32.9839 117.8339 99/13/1949 144548.9 0.0 4.59 9.999
GSP 34.1399 116.7349 96/39/1992 212254.4 12.0 4.89 0.010
DMG 32.9839 116.6679 11/25/1934 818 0.0 0.0 s.00 0.012
DMG 34.2999 117.5999 96/14/1892 1325 0.0 0.0 4.99 0.011
GSP 34.1599 111.1200 93/01/1999 932393.9 11.0 4.79 0.010
MGI 33.9999 118.2999 19/08/1927 1914 0.0 0.0 4.69 9.999
DMG 33.8599 118.2679 93/11/193311425 0.0 0.0 5.99 0.012
DMG 31.9929 116.9279 94/19/19681194237.81 10.0 4.59 9.999
GSP 33.8769 116.2679 96/29/19921169142.81 1.9 5.29 9.913
DMG 34.2119 117.5399 99/01/193711348 8.21 10.0 4.59 9.999
GSP 33.9959 116.2889 95/07/19951119333.91 19.9 4.89 9.919
GSP 33.9929 116.2849 97/24/19921181436.21 9.9 5.99 0.011
GSP 33.9519 116.3389 95/18/19921154418.91 7.9 4.99 0.011
GSP 34.1959 116.8629 98/17/19921294152.11 11.9 5.39 9.914
GSP 33.9439 116.3159 95/06/19921923843.31 7.9 4.59 9.999
PDP 33.9379 116.3969 97/25/19921943169.91 5.9 4.99 0.011
Page 8
IV 76.9(123.8)
III 77.9(123.9)
III 77.1(124.1)
IV 77.1(124.1)
III 77.1(124.1)
III 77.1(124.1)
III 77.1(124.1)
III 77.1(124.1)
III 77.1(124.1)
III 77.1(124.1)
III 77.1(124.1)
III 77.2(124.2)
III 77.3(124.3)
III 77.3(124.4)
IV 77.3(124.4)
III 77.4(124.6)
III 77.4(124.6)
III 77.5(124.7)
III 77.6(124.8)
III 77.7(125.9)
III 77.7(125.9)
III 77.7(125.9)
III 77.9(125.3)
III 78.3(126.9)
III 78.4(126.2)
III 78.4(126.2)
IIII 78.8(126.8)
IIII 79.9(127.1)
IIII 79.9(127.1)
IIII 79.3(127.6)
!III 79.3(127.7)
IIII 79.8(128.4)
IIII 79.8(128.5)
Ikon3EQS
GSP 133.9420 116.3040105/04/1992 161949.71 12.0 4.80 0.010 I III I 80.2(129.0)
DMG 132.1670 116.4170109/17/1950 194330.01 0.0 4.50 0.009 I III I 80.4(129.4)
GSP 133.9570 116.3170104/23/1992 022529.91 11.0 4.60 0.009 I IIII 80.4(129.4)
GSN 134.2030 116.8270106/28/1992 150530.71 5.0 6.70 0.032 I VI 80.4(129.5)
GSP 133.9610 116.3180104/23/1992 045023.01 12.0 6.10 0.022 I IV I 80.6(129.7)
DMG 133.0450 115.8630112/17/1968 225351.21 8.0 4.70 0.010 I IIII 80.6(129.7)
DMG 133.9850 116.3400102/01/1957 75215.41 11.0 4.60 0.009 I IIII 81. 0(130. 3)
GSP 134.0040 116.3610106/30/1992 143811.61 0.0 4.80 0.010 I IIII 81.2(130.7)
DMG 133.1830 115.8500 04/25/1957 222412.01 0.0 5.10 0.012 I IIII 81.4(131.0)
MGI 134.1000 118.0000 01/27/1930 2026 0.01 0.0 4.60 0.009 I IIII 81. 7(131.4)
PAS 134.0770 118.0470 02/11/1988 152555.71 12.5 4.70 0.009 I IIII 81.8(131.6)
PAS 134.0520 118.0900 10/01/1987 151231.81 10.8 4. 70 0.009 I IIII 81.8(131.6)
PAS 134.0610 118.0790 10/01/1987 144220.01 9.5 5.90 0.019 I IV I 81. 9(131. 8)
DMG 133.8830 118.3170 03/11/1933 1457 0.01 0.0 4.90 0.010 I IIII 81. 9(131. 9)
PAS 134.2430 116.8960 06/30/19791 03411.61 5.8 4.90 0.010 I IIII 82.0(131.9)
PAS 134.0490 118.1010 10/01/19871144541.51 13.6 4.70 0.009 I IIII 82.0(132.0)
PAS 133.0130 115.8390 11/24/19871131556.51 2.4 6.00 0.020 I IV I 82.1(132.1)
DMG 132.0000 116.7000 12/02/192911124 0.01 0.0 4.50 0.008 I IIII 82.1(132.1)
PAS 134.2460 116.9010 06/29/19791 55320.51 5.7 4.60 0.009 I IIII 82.1(132.2)
GSP 134.2110 116.7600 06/28/19921152429.31 6.0 4.50 0.008 I IIII 82.2(132.3)
EARTHQUAKE SEARCH RESULTS
Page 6
I I I I TIME I I I SITE ISITEI APPROX.
FILEI LAT. I LONG. I DATE
CODEI NORTH I WEST I
I (UTC) IDEPTHIQUAKEI ACC. I MM I DISTANCE
I H M Secl (km)l MAG. I g liNT. I mi [km]
----+-------+--------+----------+--------+-----+-----+-------+----+------------
PAS 134.24901116.9000 06/30/1979 7 353.0
DMG 133.00001115.8330 01/08/1946 185418.0
PAS 134.06001118.1000 10/01/1987 1449 5.9
GSP 134.25601116.9120 06/28/1992 170557.5
GSP 134.23901116.8370 07/09/1992 014357.6
DMG 134.26701116.9670 08/29/1943 34513.0
DMG 134.22901116.7950 05/11/1956 163050.5
DMG 134.27001117.5400 09/12/1970 143053.0
MGI 134.00001118.2000 06/26/1917 2115 0.0
MGI 134.00001118.2000 02/13/1917 13 5 0.0
MGI 134.00001118.2000 06/26/1917 2130 0.0
MGI 134.00001118.2000 06/26/1917 2120 0.0
GSG 134.01201116.3250 04/23/1992 051009.4
DMG 133.03301115.8210 09/30/1971 224611.3
5.6 4.50 0.008
0.0 5.40 0.014
11.7 4.70 0.009
8.0 4.60 0.009
0.0 5.30 0.013
0.0 5.50 0.015
13.3 4.70 0.009
8.0 5.40 0.014
0.0 4.60 0.009
0.0 4.60 0.009
0.0 4.60 0.009
0.0 4.60 0.009
3.0 4.60 0.009
8.0 5.10 0.011
Page 9
III
IV
III
III
III
IV
III
III
III
III
III
III
III
III
82.3(132.5)
82.5(132.8)
82.6(132.9)
82.6(133.0)
82.6(133.0)
82.7(133.1)
82.7(133.1)
82.9(133.4)
82.9(133.5)
82.9(133.5)
82.9(133.5)
82.9(133.5)
83.0(133.5)
83.0(133.6)
Ikon3EQS
PAS 133.0360 115.8200111/24/1987 21435.5 4.7 4.50 0.008 III 83.1(133.7)
DMG 133.7670 118.4500110/11/1940 55712.3 0.0 4.70 0.009 III 83.1(133.8)
PAS 34.0730 118.0980110/04/1987 105938.2 8.2 5.30 0.013 III 83.2(133.9)
PAS 32.9960 115.8160111/27/1987 11010.5 6.0 4.70 0.009 III 83.5(134.4)
PAS 33.0400 115.8120111/24/1987 253 0.7 3.5 4.70 0.009 III 83.5(134.4)
GSP 34.0950 116.4270106/28/1992 211316.5 3.0 4.60 0.009 III 83.9(135.1)
GSP 34.0290 116.3210108/21/1993 014638.4 9.0 5.00 0.011 III 84.0(135.2)
DMG 33.2160 115.8080104/25/1957 215738.7 -0.3 5.20 0.012 III 84.0(135.2)
GSP 34.0620 116.3660 05/14/1999 075403.2 1.0 4.90 0.010 III 84.2(135.4)
PAS 33.0480 115.7980 11/24/1987 21523.2 5.0 4.80 0.010 III 84.3(135.7)
GSP 34.0880 116.4020 08/15/1992 082414.7 0.0 4.80 0.010 III 84.4(135.8)
GSP 34.0640 116.3610 09/15/1992 084711.3 9.0 5.20 0.012 III 84.4(135.9)
DMG 34.3000 117.5000 07/22/1899 2032 0.0 0.0 6.50 0.027 v 84.5(136.0)
GSP 34.2900 116.9460 02/10/2001 210505.8 9.0 5.10 0.011 III 84.5(136.0)
MGI 34.1000 118.1000 07/11/1855 415 0.0 0.0 6.30 0.023 IV 84.8(136.5)
T-A 34.0000 118.2500 01/10/1856 0 0 0.0 0.0 5.00 0.011 III 84.8(136.5)
T-A 34.0000 118.2500 09/23/1827 0 0 0.0 0.0 5.00 0.011 III 84.8(136.5)
T-A 34.0000 118.2500 03/26/1860 0 0 0.0 0.0 5.00 0.011 III 84.8(136.5)
DMG 34.2000 117.9000 08/28/1889 215 0.0 0.0 5.50 0.014 IV 84.9(136.7)
DMG 34.2000 117.9000 07/13/1935 105416.5 0.0 4.70 0.009 III 84.9(136.7)
GSP 34.1120 116.4150 07/28/1992 182703.9 0.0 4.60 0.008 III 85.3(137.3)
GSP 34.10601116.4020 06/29/19921140837.7 11.0 4.90 0.010 III I 85.4(137.4)
GSP 34.11101116.4100 06/28/1992 135045.7 0.0 4.90 0.010 III 85.4(137.4)
GSP 34.10801116.4040 06/29/1992 141338.8 9.0 5.40 0.013 III 85.4(137.5)
GSP 34.25001116.7190 06/29/1992 164141.9 1.0 4.90 0.010 III 85.6(137.7)
PAS 33.08201115.7750 11/24/1987 15414.5 4.9 5.80 0.017 IV 85.6(137.7)
DMG 34.06701116.3330 05/18/1940 72132.7 0.0 5.00 0.011 III 85.6(137.7)
DMG 34.0670 116.3330 05/18/1940 55120.2 0.0 5.20 0.012 III 85.6(137.7)
DMG 32.5000 118.5500 02/24/1948 81510.0 0.0 5.30 0.012 III 85.6(137.8)
DMG 34.3000 117.6000 07/30/1894 512 0.0 0.0 6.00 0.019 IV 85.6(137.8)
GSP 34.0920 116.3690 07/06/1992 120059.2 1.0 4.50 0.008 III 85.7(137.9)
J DMG 34.0670 116.3170 05/18/1940 6 430.6 0.0 4.60 0.008 III 86.2(138.7)
GSP 34.1390 116.4310 06/28/1992 123640.6 10.0 5.10 0.011 III 86.3(138.9)
DMG 34.0830 116.3330 06/01/1940 527 1.2 0.0 4.70 0.009 III 86.5(139.1)
DMG 34.0830 116.3330 06/02/1940 61310.2 0.0 4.50 0.008 III 86.5(139.1)
DMG 34.0500 116.2830 05/19/1940 226 2.0 0.0 4.50 0.008 III 86.5(139.2)
DMG 34.0500 116.2830 05/19/1940 22730.0 0.0 4.50 0.008 III 86.5(139.2)
DMG 34.0500 116.2830 05/18/1940 134719.0 0.0 4.50 0.008 III 86.5(139.2)
MGI 34.0000 118.3000 09/03/1905 540 0.0 0.0 5.30 0.012 III 86.8(139.7)
_j
EARTHQUAKE SEARCH RESULTS
Page 7
Page 10
J
Ikon3EQS
I I I I TIME I I I SITE ISITEI APPROX.
FILEI LAT. I LONG. I DATE
CODEI NORTH I WEST I
I (UTC) IDEPTHIQUAKEI ACC. I MM I DISTANCE
I H M Secl (km)l MAG.I g IINT.I mi [km]
----+-------+--------+----------+--------+-----+-----+-------+----+------------
PAS 132.9420 115.7630 11/24/19871133439.9 14.0
T-A 133.5000 115.8200 05/00/18681 0 0 0.0 0.0
MGI 134.2000 118.0000 01/09/19211 530 0.0 0.0
DMG 134.0830 116.3000 05/18/19401 5 358.5 0.0
DMG 132.3830 116.0000 01/03/195611424 1.0 0.0
DMG 134.3250 116.8650 10/29/19621 24253.9 8.6
GSP 34.3230 116.8440 10/27/1998 010840.7 5.0
DMG 32.0250 116.4240 08/20/1961 42843.0 12.6
DMG 34.3330 116.8830 10/14/1943 142844.0 0.0
DMG 32.9830 115.7330 01/24/1951 717 2.6 0.0
DMG 34.3060 116.7590 03/16/1956 202933.6 1.3
GSP 34.3400 116.9000 11/27/1992 160057.5 1.0
GSP 34.1620 116.4050 06/28/1992 132605.1 6.0
PAS 34.1490 118.1350 12/03/1988 113826.4 13.3
DMG 33.8870 116.0400 01/23/1969 23 1 1.0 17.7
DMG 31.81101117.1310 12/22/1964 205433.2 2.3
DMG 32.8330 115.7500 02/24/1933 1933 0.0 0.0
MGI 34.0800 118.2600 07/16/1920 18 8 0.0 0.0
DMG 33.2330 115.7170 10/22/1942 15038.0 0.0
DMG 33.2330 115.7170 10/26/1942 3 215.0 0.0
DMG 33.2330 115.7170 10/26/1942 615 4.0 0.0
DMG 32.9500 115.7170 06/14/1953 41729.9 0.0
DMG 32.9500 115.7170 06/14/1953 42958.0 0.0
DMG 34.3500 116.8670 10/15/1943 1650 1.0 0.0
DMG 32.1020 116.2580 05/07/1966 32657.4 12.7
GSN 34.2010 116.4360 06/28/19921115734.1 1.0
PAS 31.7940 117.4100 03/31/19791213656.7 5.0
DMG 33.2330 115.7000 08/30/19461111645.0 0.0
GSP 34.3690 116.8970 12/04/19921020857.5 3.0
GSP 34.3770 116.9180 12/04/19921052511.2 2.0
MGI 34.0000 118.4000 10/01/19301 040 0.01 0.0
MGI 34.0000 118.4000 02/07/19271 429 0.01 0.0
MGI 34.0000 118.4000 02/22/192011610 0.01 0.0
DMG 32.8560 115.7100 09/18/19361144032.11 10.0
DMG 32.9000 115.7000 10/02/1928119 1 0.01 0.0
DMG 134.3700 117.6500 12/08/1812115 0 0.01 0.0
DMG 133.0270 115.6810 05/23/196311553 1.81 0.4
GSP 134.2620 118.0020 06/28/19911144354.51 11.0
PAS 132.9140 115.6840 01/28/19881 254 2.41 5.9
MGI 134.1000 118.3000 07/16/192012130 0.01 0.0
MGI 134.1000 118.3000 07/16/192012022 0.01 0.0
MGI 134.1000 118.3000 07/16/192012127 0.01 0.0
DMG 134.4000 116.9170 02/01/1942116 334.01 0.0
Page 11
4.80
6.30
4.60
5.40
4.70
4.80
4.90
4.60
4.50
5.60
4.80
5.30
4.90
4.90
4.80
5.60
4.50
5.00
5.50
4.50
4.50
5.50
4.80
4.50
4.50
7.60
4.70
4.60
5.30
4.80
4.60
4.60
4.60
4.50
5.00
7.00
4.80
5.40
4.70
4.60
4.60
4.60
4.50
0.009
0.023
0.008
0.013
0.009
0.009
0.010
0.008
0.008
0.014
0.009
0.012
0.010
0.010
0.009
0.014
0.008
0.010
0.013
0.008
0.008
0.013
0.009
0.008
0.008
0.055
0.008
0.008
0.012
0.009
0.008
0.008
0.008
0.008
0.010
0.035
0.009
0.012
0.008
0.008
0.008
0.008
0.007
III 87.0(140.0)
IV 87.4(140.7)
III 87.6(141.0)
III 87.6(141.0)
III 87.8(141.3)
III 87.9(141.5)
III 88.1(141.8)
III 88.2(141.9)
II 88.2(141.9)
IV 88.4(142.2)
III 88.4(142.3)
III 88.4(142.3)
III 88.5(142.4)
III 88.7(142.8)
III 88.8(143.0)
IV 88.8(143.0)
II I 89.0(143.2)
III 89.4(143.8)
III 89.4(143.8)
II 89.4(143.8)
II 89.4(143.8)
III 89.5(144.1)
III 89.5(144.1)
II 89.6(144.1)
II 89.7(144.3)
VI 89.8(144.5)
III 90.2(145.1)
III 90.4(145.4)
III 90.4(145.5)
III 90.7(146.0)
III 90.9(146.3)
III 90.9(146.3)
!III 90.9(146.3)
II I 90.9(146.4)
I IIII 91.0(146.4)
I v I 91.0(146.5)
I !III 91.2(146.7)
I !III 91.4(147.1)
I IIII 91.8(147.7)
I II I 91.9(147.9)
I II I 91.9(147.9)
I II I 91.9(147.9)
I II I 92.3(148.5)
Ikon3EQS
DMG l34.4000l116.9170l02/01/1942l151828.0l 0.01 4.501 0.007
DMG 131.86701116.5710102/27/19371 12918.41 10.01 5.001 0.010
PAS 133.09801115.6320104/26/1981112 928.41 3.81 5.701 0.014
DMG 134.17401116.2570102/15/19381 74539.81 10.01 4.501 0.007
DMG 134.15401116.2100107/30/19631 63457.31 12.91 4.701 0.008
GSP 134.26801116.4020106/16/19941162427.51 3.01 5.001 0.009
DMG 134.23301116.3330105/11/19471 5 620.01 0.01 4.901 0.009
DMG 134.00001118.5000111/08/191411140 0.01 0.01 4.501 0.001
DMG 134.00001118.5000106/22/19201 248 0.01 0.01 4.901 0.009
MGI 134.00001118.5000111/19/191812018 0.01 0.01 5.001 0.009
EARTHQUAKE SEARCH RESULTS
Page 8
II I 92.3(148.5)
IIII 93.6(150.6)
IV I 93.8(151.0)
II I 94.1(151.4)
IIII 94.7(152.4)
IIII 94.7(152.4)
IIII 94.8(152.6)
II I 95.2(153.1)
IIII 95.2(153.1)
IIII 95.2(153.1)
I I I I TIME I I I SITE ISITEI APPROX.
FILE I LAT. I LONG. I
CODEI NORTH I WEST I
DATE I (UTC) IDEPTHIQUAKEI ACC. I MM I DISTANCE
I H M Secl (km)l MAG.I g IINT.I mi [km]
----+-------+--------+----------+--------+-----+-----+-------+----+------------
DMG
DMG
DMG
GSP
DMG
DMG
PAS
DMG
GSP
PAS
PAS
PAS
DMG
DMG
DMG
DMG
DMG
DMG
DMG
DMG
DMG
DMG
DMG
DMG
34.00001118.5000 08/04/1927 1224 0.01
34.00001116.0000 04/03/1926 20 8 0.0
34.0000 116.0000 09/05/1928 1442 0.0
34.3410 116.5290 06/28/1992 124053.5
34.4360 116.8340 07/14/1973 8 020.1
32.0500 116.1670 02/06/1958 111530.0
34.3090 116.4400 03/15/1979 201749.9
34.3000 116.4170 08/07/1942 11533.0
34.3320 116.4620 07/01/1992 074029.9
34.3270 116.4450 03/15/1979 21 716.5
34.3300 116.4430 03/15/1979 23 758.2
33.9190 118.6270 01/19/1989 65328.8
33.1170 115.5670 07/28/1950 1727 0.0
33.1170 115.5670 07/29/1950 011 0.0
33.1170 115.5670 07/29/1950 1843 0.0
33.1170 115.5670 07/28/1950 175812.0
33.1170 115.5670 07/28/1950 175048.0
33.1170 115.5670 07/28/1950 325 0.0
33.1170 115.5670 08/01/1950 83720.0
33.1170 115.5670 07/27/1950 2251 0.0
33.1170 115.5670 07/29/1950 15 9 0.0
33.1170 115.5670 08/14/1950 1916 0.0
33.1170 115.5670 07/27/1950 112926.0
33.1170 115.5670 07/29/1950 143632.0
0.0 5.00 0.009
0.0 5.50 0.013
0.0 5.00 0.009
6.0 5.20 0.010
8.0 4.80 0.008
0.0 4.50 0.001
2.0 4.90 0.009
0.0 4.50 0.001
9.0 5.40 0.012
2.5 5.20 0.010
2.8 4.80 0.00a
11.9 5.00 0.009
0.0 4.70 0.008
0.0 4.50 0.001
0.0 4.70 0.008
0.0 4.80 0.008
0.0 5.40 0.012
0.0 4.70 0.008
0.0 4.70 0.008
0.0 4.50 0.001
0.0 4.50 0.001
0.0 4.70 0.008
0.0 4.80 0.008
0.0 5.50 0.012
Page 12
III
III
III
III
III
II
III
II
III
III
III
III
II
II
II
III
III
II
II
II
II
II
III
III
95.2(153.1)
95.5(153.7)
95.5(153.7)
95.7(154.0)
95.8(154.1)
95.9(154.3)
96.1(154.6)
96.2(154.8)
96.9(155.9)
97.0(156.1)
97.3(156.5)
97.4(156.8)
97.6(157.1)
97.6(157.1)
97.6(157.1)
97.6(157.1)
97.6(157.1)
97.6(157.1)
97.6(157.1)
97.6(157.1)
97.6(157.1)
97.6(157.1)
97.6(157.1)
97.6(157.1)
Ikon3EQS
DMG 32.8830 115.5830104/13/193811929 0.0 0.0 4.50 0.007 II I 97.9(157.5)
DMG 32.9820 115.5660 05/23/19631 9 6 4.7 25.4 4.60 0.007 II I 98.0(157.7)
PAS 34.3480 116.4530 03/15/19791213425.6 1.5 4.50 0.007 II I 98.1(157.8)
PAS 34.2900 116.3220 12/14/19751181620.1 1.8 4.70 0.008 II I 98.5(158.4)
DMG 31.9670 116.2170 02/18/19551152728.0 0.0 4.70 0.008 III 98.5(158.5)
PAS 33.0140 115.5550 10/16/19791 65842.8 9.1 5.50 0.012 III I 98.5(158.5)
PAS 32.9070 115.5660 10/16/19791114655.3 11.4 4.80 0.008 III I 98.6(158.7)
PAS 34.3040 116.3410 11/15/19751 61327.6 5.8 4.60 0.007 III 98.7(158.8)
PAS 32.9500 115.5570 10/16/19791 33934.3 12.1 4.50 0.007 III 98.8(158.9)
DMG 33.9500 118.6320 08/31/19301 04036.0 0.0 5.20 0.010 III I 98.9(159.2)
PAS 32.9600 115.5440 10/16/19791 31047.1 9.4 4.50 0.007 III 99.4(160.0)
DMG 34.3810 116.4740 01/06/19641234712.8 12.3 4.50 0.007 III 99.5(160.2)
PAS 132.9270 115.5400 10/16/19791 54910.2 10.4 5.10 0.009 !III 99.9(160.8)
PAS 132.9280 115.5390 10/16/19791 61948.7 9.2 5.10 0.009 IIII100.0(160.9)
*******************************************************************************
-END OF SEARCH-409 EARTHQUAKES FOUND WITHIN THE SPECIFIED SEARCH AREA.
TIME PERIOD OF SEARCH: 1800 TO 2012
LENGTH OF SEARCH TIME: 213 years
THE EARTHQUAKE CLOSEST TO THE SITE IS ABOUT 7.0 MILES (11.2 km) AWAY.
LARGEST EARTHQUAKE MAGNITUDE FOUND IN THE SEARCH RADIUS: 7.6
LARGEST EARTHQUAKE SITE ACCELERATION FROM THIS SEARCH: 0.322 g
COEFFICIENTS FOR GUTENBERG & RICHTER RECURRENCE RELATION:
a-value= 3.072
b-value= 0.660
beta-value= 1.519
TABLE OF MAGNITUDES AND EXCEEDANCES:
Earthquake I Number of Times I Cumulative
Magnitude I Exceeded I No. I Year
-----------+-----------------+------------
4.0 I 409 1.92019
4.s I 409 1.92019
s.0 1 147 0.69014
s.s I s1 0.23944
6.0 I 26 0.12201
6.s I 10 0.04695
1.0 I 3 0.01408
Page 13
7.5 1
Ikon3EQS
0.00469
Page 14