Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCT 82-25A; GRAHAM INTERNATIONAL INC.; PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION; 1982-08-18I PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION LAUREL TREE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT LAUREL TREE LANE AND PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA PREPARED FOR Agatep Corporation 2956 Roosevelt Street Carlsbad, California 92008 PREPARED BY Southern California Soil & Testing, Inc. Post Office Box 20627 6280 Riverdale Street San Diego, California 92120 SC SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC. 6280 RIVERDALE ST. SAN DIEGO, CALIF. 92120 • TELE 280-4321 • P.O. BOX 20627 SAN DIEGO, CALIF. 92120 74831 V E L I E WAY PALM DESERT, CALIF. 92260 • T E L E 346-1070 678 ENTERPRISE ST. ESCONDIOD, CALIF. 92025 • T E L E 746-4544 August 18,. 1982 Agatep Corporation SCS&T 14065 2956 Roosevelt. Street Report No. 1 Carlsbad, California 92008 SUBJECT: Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, Laurel Tree Industrial Development, Laurel Tree Lane and Palomar Airport Road, Carlsbad, California. Gentlemen: In accordance with your request and our Proposal dated May 13, 1982, we have completed a geotechnical investigation for the proposed project. We are presenting herewith our findings and recommendations. The findings of this, study indicate that the site is suitable for the proposed development provided the special site preparation and foundation recommendations presented in the attached report are complied with. If you have any questions after reviewing the findings and recommendations contained in the attached report, please do not hesitate to contact this office. This 'opportunity to be of professional service is sincerely appreciated.,. Respectfully submitted, SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL & TESTING, INC. .Russell,' 2142 RRR:cRB:rnw cc: (6) Submitted (1) SCS&T, Escondido Curtis R. Burdett, C.E.G. #1090 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTINO, INC. TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE Introduction and Project Description ......... . .. .'.. . ...... . . .. . . . . . . . .1 Project Scope ......... . . ......... . ......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . .................1 Fi ndings.. •....... . . . . . . . . . . .'. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . •....... . . . . . •....... . .2 Site Description....................... . . . . ...... .....................2 General Geblogy and Subsurface Conditions ................. ............ 3 Geologic Setting and Soil Description ............................ Santiago Formation (Ts).................. .....................3 Quaternary Al lüvi al Deposits (Qal ) . . . . . . . 3 Artificial Fill (Qaf) .......................................... Tectonic Setting ................................................. 4 Geologic Hazards ........... ....... Groundwater ....................................................... 5 Recommendations and Conclusions ......6 General DesignConsiderations ........................... .. .6 Site Preparation ................................................. Building Pad Preparation ..........................................6 Paved Areas ............................... ................- .. ......7 - - Surface. Drainage......................... ...... . . . . . . .7 Earthwork 7 Foundations 7 General ..... . ..... . ......... . . . . . . . . . ...... . . ........ .... ... . .7 Bearing Capacity 8 Pier Foundations .........• .............9 Settlement Characteristics ........ . . . . .;-. . ........... • .. . . . . . .9 Expansive Characteristics............ .............. Limitations .................... ................... Review, Observation and Testing . ................. 9 Uniformity of Conditions ............................................ 10 Change in Scope ..................................................... 10 Time Limitations........................ ...... ......................10 Professional Standards ............• ...........11 Client's Responsibility.............................................11 Field Explorations ....................................................... 11 Laboratory Testing......................................................12 ATTACHMENTS. PLATES Plate .1 Plot Plan Plate 2: ,Unified Soil Classification Chart 'Plate 3-7 Boring' Logs 'Plate ,8 Direct Shear Test Results Maximum Density and Optimum Moistrue Content ' Expansion' Test Results Plate 9-10 Consolidation Load kips/sq ft S ', S , • , • APPENDIX S • 'S ' S • ' S ' S Recommended Grading Specification and Special Provisions S S S ' ' • ' 'S . . S ", 5 S S SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC. 62e0 RIVERDALE ST. SAN DIEGO, CALIF. 92120 • TELE 2B04321 • P.O. BOX 20627 SAN DIEGO, CALIF. 92120 7483,1VELIE WAY PALM DESERT, CALIF. 92260 T E L E 346-1078 67B ENTERPRISE ST. ESCONDIDO, CALIF. 92025 T E L E 746-4644 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNI CAL INVESTIGATION LAUREL TREE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT. LAUREL TREE LANE AND PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION This report presents, the results of our preliminary geotechni'cal inves- tigation for a proposed six lot' commercial development which 'is to be located adjacent to the intersection of Palomar Airport Road and Laurel Tree Lane in Carlsbad, California. It is our understanding that six, single story, concrete tilt-up structures are planned for this site. At this time, the loading conditions for these buildings are not known. It is our understanding 'that some additional grading may be necessary to develop the site' with the maximum cut and fill slopes on the order of 5 to 10 feet in height. This information was taken from verbal conversations with the client and project civil engineer. The site configuration and exploration locations are shown on Plate Number 1 of this report. PROJECT SCOPE This investigation consisted of: surface reconnaissance; subsurface explorations; obtaining representative disturbed and undisturbed samples; laboratory testing;, analysis of the field and laboratory data; research of available geological literature pertaining to the site; and preparation of this report. Specifically, the intent of this analysis was to: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC. I SCS&T 14065 . August 18, 1982 Page 2 Explore the subsurface conditions to the depths influenced by the proposed, construction.. . , . .• . Evaluate, by'laboratory tests, the pertinent engineering proper- ties of the various strata which will influence the development, including their bearing capacities, expansive characteristics and settlement potential. Define the general geology at the site including possible geolo- gic hazards which could have an effect. on the site development. d) Develop soil engineering criteria for site grading. e) Determine potential construction difficulties and provide recom- mendations concerning these -problems. f) Recommend an •appropriate foundation system for the type of struc- tures anticipated and develop. soil engineering' design criteria for the recommended foundation design.' : • ' FINDINGS '' ' .. • • - a SITE DESCR IPTION The subject site is a trapezium shaped parcel of land located southeast of the intersection of 'Palomar Airport Road and Laurel Tree Road. The site is bounded on the east and south by open, undeveloped land. The southern portion of the -site is charactreized by steep canyon walls which rise on the order of 100 feet above the broad alluvial valley in which most of the site is located. A drainage channel which is approximately ten feet deep is present at the base of the hills on the southern portion of the site. Most of the site is underlain by artificial fill which attains a maximum SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING. INC. SCS&T 14065 August 18, 1982 . Page 3 thickness of approximately 10 to 12. feet. Vegetation of the lower, flat- ter portions of the site. consists of a moderate growth of grasses and shrubs. No structures currently occupy the site and no evidence of former structures was apparent at the time of our investigation. GENERAL GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS GEOLOGIC SETTING -AND SOIL DESCRIPTION: The subject site is located in the Coastal Plains Physiographic Province of San Diego County and is underlain by sedimentary deposits of both Tertiary and Quaternary age and a substan- tial amount of artificial fill. A brief description of these materials is' presented below. SANTIAGO FORMATION (Is): The oldest material exposed at the site is the Eocene-age Santiago Formation which consists predominantly of fine to medium grained, light 'gray sandstone with interbeds of mudstone and shale. The Santiago Formation is exposed in the valley walls on the southern portion of the site and underlies, the alluvium and fill in the valley at an undetermined depth. . QUATERNARY ALLUVIAL DEPOSITS (Qal): The majority of the site is in Canyon.de las Encinas which contains thick deposits of Pleistocene and. Holocene alluvium,.' These alluvial deposits consist of dark gray clays and brown to grayish brown silty sands and clayey sands. ARTIFICIAL FILL (Qaf): Most of the alluvial deposits have been capped with artificial fill which ranges in thickness from only a few feet to over ten feet. This fill 'material consists of brown to yellowish brown and light gray. silty sands, clayey sands, and sandy silt which appear to have been obtained from the native materials in the area. Most of this fill appears to be medium dense to dense but is appar- ently uncontrolled fill. 10 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING. INC. SCS&T 14065 August 18, 1982 Page 4 TECTONIC SETTING: Several small faults have been mapped in the general vicintiy of the subject site. In addition, several fratures and joints which are probably related to the strong tectonic forces that dominate Southern California are evident in the cut bank on the southern portion of the site. It is possible that some faults may be buried beneath the thick alluvial and fill soils at the site. However, if any faults 'are'present at the site, they. would'probably be classified, as. inactive according to the criteria of the California Division of Mines and Geology and should be of no consequence to -the project. A review of available geologic maps indicates the subject site to be located approximately 4.5 miles east of the Rose Canyon Fault Zone. The -. Rose. Canyon Fault Zone is a series of northwest trending faults of Quater- nary age that is currently classified as. potentially active, rather, than active. This classification is based on the lack of conclusive evidence to verify Holocene movement along this fault zone. No fault traces have been 'mapped through, or immediately adjacent to, the subject site, and examination of our exploration • trenches ' and a surface reconnaissance yielded no evidence of faulting at the site. • It should be recognized that much of Southern California is characterized by. major, '.active fault zones that could possibly affect the subject site. The nearest of these is the Elsinore Fault Zone, located approximately 25 miles to the northeast, and the San -Jacinto Fault Zone, located approxi- mately 47 miles to the northeast. GEOLOGI C HAZARDS The subject site is located in an area which is relatively free of poten- tial geologic hazards. The most likely geologic hazards to affect the site is groundshaking as a result of movement along the major, active fault zones mentioned above. Based on a maximum probable earthquake of 0 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING. INC. SCS&T 14065 August18, 1982 . Page 5 7.3 magnitude along the Elsinore Fault zone, or a maximum probable earth- quake of 7.8 along the San Jacinto Fault Zone, the maximum ground accel- eration at the site could be as high as 0.21 g. There is also a remote possibility that movement could occur along the Rose Canyon Fault zone during the life of the proposed structures. Based on a maximum 'probable earthquake of 6.0 magnitude along the Rose Canyon Fault Zone,. maximum 'ground acceleration at the-site could be on the order of 0.41 g. However, in view of the -current classification of the, Rose Canyon Fault Zone, we are of the opinion 'that it should not be used as the "design earthquake" fault for structures such as those proposed for the subject development. Construction in accordance with the minimum' standards of the most recent edition of the Uniform 'Building Code should minimize potential'.' damage' due to seismic activity. . 0 Other potential geologic hazards such as tsunamis, seiches, liquefac- tion, or, deep-seated landslid,ing should be considered negligible or non- existent. However, it should be recognized that several shallow sur- ficial slope failures are evident in the cut bank and the, hills on the southern portion of 'the site. GROUNDWATER: No groundwater was encountered during our subsurface explor- ation and we do not anticipate any major groundwater related problems, either during or after construction. However, it, should be recognized that minor groundwater seepage problems may, occur after development of a site even where none were ,present before development. These are usually minor phenomena arid are often the result of an alteration of the perme- ability characteristics of the soil, an alteration in drainage patterns and an increase in irrigation water. Based on the permeability character- istics of the soil and the anticipated usage of the development, it is our opinion that any seepage problems which may occur will be minor in extent. It is further our opinion that these problems can be most effectively corrected on an individual basis if and when they develop. . SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC. SCS&T 14065 August 18, 1982 ' Page 6 RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS . GENERAL DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS The findings of this study indicate that with respect to geotechnical aspects, the site is suitable for the proposed development provided the recommendations contained in this, report are complied with. The settle- ment potential of the existing, apparently nonengineered, fill will how- ever require that special site preparation and foundation design be uti- lized. SITE PREPARATION BUILDING PAD PREPARATION: Due to the apparent high settlement potential of the existing fill 'soils, we recommend that they be removed to firm natural ground and stockpiled for later use. ' Firm natural ground is defined as natural soil which possesses an in-situ density equal to. or greater than 85% of its maximum dry density. The soils exposed at the base of this excavation should then be scarified to.a depth of 12 inches, watered to optimum requirements and densified to at least 90% relative compaction. The stockpiled soils may then be replaced in lifts not exceed- ing eight inches and compacted to a minimum of 90% of maximum dry density. The horizontal limits of these recommendations should include the area within the perimeter of 10 feetoutside of each proposed' building. Based upon the results of our field testing, it appears that this depth of removal and recompation will vary from 3 to 11 feet. It is further recom- mended that Southern California Soil & Testing, Inc. provide the necessary • compaction testing during grading to verify compliance with the above recommendations. As an alternative to the above recommendations, a deep foundation system may be used to support the proposed structures. These foundation rcom- mendations are provided later in this report. Provided these design features are incorporated into the building design, it is our opinion that the existing fill soils in the pad area may remain. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING. INC. SCS&T 14065 AugUst 18, 1982 . Page 7 'PAVED AREAS: It is our opinion that the existing fill in areas to be paved should be undercut to a depth of at least 3 feet and stockpiled for later use. The soils exposed in the base of these. excavations should be scarified, watered and densified to a minimum of 90% relative compaction. The stockpiled soils may then be replaced in lifts not exceeding eight inches, watered to optimum requirements and compacted. It should be recognized that due to the presence of the nonengineered fill which will underlay the paved areas some settlements may occur which could result in distress to the pavement surface. Should this condition not be accept- able, it will be necessary to remove all of the fill and replace it as a properly compacted fill beneath all areas to be paved. SURFACE DRAINAGE: We recommend that all surface drainage be directed away from structures and that ponding of water not be allowed adjacent to their foundations. EARTHWORK: All earthwork and grading contemplated for site preparation should be accomplished in accordance with the attached Recommended Grading Specifications and Special Provisions. All special site preparation recommendations presented in the sections above will supersede those in the standard Recommended Grading Specifications. All embankments, struct- ural fill, and fill should be compacted to a minimum of 90%. Utility trench backfill within 5. feet of the proposed structures and beneath asphalt pavements should be compacted to a minimum Of 90% -of its maximum dry density. The maximum dry density of each soil type should be deter- mined in accordance with A.S.T.M. Test Method 1557-78, Method A or C. - FOUNDATIONS GENERAL: Provided that the existing fill is removed and recompacted as previously discussed, it is our opinion that the proposed structure may be supported by spread footings. All footings should be founded at least 18 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING. INC. SCS&T 14065 August 18, 1982 Page 8 inches below lowest adjacent finished grade with a minimum width of 12 in- ches. It is further recommended that all continuous footings be rein- forced with at least one No. 4 bar top •and bottom. BEARING CAPACITY: The allowable soil bearing pressure for the soils prepared as recommended herein Js expressed by the following formulas for continuous, square, and circular spread footings: Continuous Footings q= 1.80 + 0.21 D + 0.158. Square Footings q = 2.16 + 0.21 D + 0.12'B Circular Footings q = 2.16 + 0 21 D + 0.09 B Where: . .. . = Allowable soil bearing pressure. as limited in shear in' kips per square foot for full live and dead .1 oads D = Footing depth below adjacent grade in feet. B = Footing width or diameter in feet The above allowable stresses may be increased by one-third for wind and/or n seismic loading and should be decreased by one-fourth for dead load only. The allowable bearing pressure in kips per 'square foot, for live and dead loads for the minimum size footings recommended above are as follows: Continuous Fo.otings 2.26 ' Square Footings 2.49 Circular Footings '2.46 The allowable, bearing pressures for other size footings may be computed from the above formulas. It is recommended, however, that the maximum allowable soil bearing pressure be limited to 3.0 kips per square foot in order to control settlements. 0 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING. INC. SCS&T 14065 August 18, 1982 . . Page 9 PIER FOUNDATIONS: Should the existing fill soils not be removed and properly recompated, it is our opinion that pier footings should be used to support the proposed structures. It is our opinion that. these pier footings should have a minimum diameter of 12 inches and extend to a depth of at least two feet into the firm natural soil. Provided this condition is met, an allowable soil bearing pressure of 3000 psf may be. used' for design. It is further recommended that properly designed grade beams and slabs be utilized to span the region between adjacent piers. SETTLEMENT CHARACTERISTICS: Provided that, the recommendations contained in this report are, followed, it is our opinion that the resuling settle- ments should be within tolerable limits. EXPANSIVECHARACTERISTICS: The 'encountered soils at the subject site were determine-to vary in expansive potential from -very low to low. It is our opinion that the recommendations previously presented in this report should mitigate the possible distress resulting from expansion. O .. LIMITATIONS REVIEW, OBSERVATION AND TESTING The recommendation,s presented in this report are contingent upon 'our 'review of final plans and specifications. The.soil engineer and engineer- ing geologist should review and verify the compliance of the final grading plan. with this report and with Chapter 70 of the Uniform Building Code.- It is recommended that Southern California Soil & Testing, Inc. be re- tainned to provide continuous soil engineering services during the earth- work operations.' This' is to observe compliance with the design concepts, specifications or recommendations and to allow design changes in the event that subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to start of construction. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC. SCS&T 14065 August 18, 1982 '' Page 10 UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS 0 The.recomendations and opinions expressed in this report reflect our best estimate of the project requirements based on an evaluation of the subsur- face sail conditions encountered at the subsurface exploration' locations. and the, assumption that the soil conditions do not deviate appreciably from those encountered. It should be recognized that the performance of - the 'foundations and/or cut and fill slopes may be influenced by undis- closed or unforeseen variations in the soil conditions that may occur in the intermediate and unexplored areas. Any unusual conditions not covered in this report that may be encountered during site development should be brought to the attention of the 'soils engineer so that he may 'make modifi- cations if necessary. ' CHANGE IN SCOPE This office should be advised of any changes in the project scope or proposed 'site grading so that it maybe determined if the recommendations contained herein are appropriate. This should be verified in writing or modified by a written addendum. ' TIME LIMITATIONS The findings of this report are valid as of this date. Changes in the condition of a property can, however, occur with the passage of time, whether, they ' be due to natural processes or the work of man on this' or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in the State-of-the-Art and/or' Government' Codes may occur. Due to such changes, the findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or in part by changes beyond our control. Therefore, this report should not be relied upon after a period of two years without a review by us verifying the suitability of the conclusions and recommendations. • SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING. INC. SCS&T 14065 August 18, 1982 Page 11 PROFESS! ONAI. STANDARDS In the performance of our professional services, 'we comply with that' level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of our profession cur- rently practicing under similar conditions and in the same locality. The client recognizes that subsurface conditions may vary from those encoun-, tered at the locations where our borings, surveys, and explorations are made, and that our data, interpretations, and recommendations are based solely on the information obtained by us. We will be responsible for those data, interpretations, and recommendations, but shall not be respon- sible for the interpretations by others of the information developed. Our services consist of professional consultation and observation only, and no warranty of any kind whatsoever, express or implied, is made or intended in connection with the work performed or to be performed by us,' or by our proposal for consulting or other sevices, or by our furnishing of oral or written reports or findings. - ' CLIENTS RESPONSIBILITY It is the responsibility of Agatep,Corporation, or their representatives to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of. the engineer and architect for the project and incorporated into the project's plans and specifications. It is further their responsibility to take the necessary measures to ensure that the contractor and his subcontractors carry out such recommendations during construction. FIELD EXPLORATIONS Five subsurface explorations were made at the locations indicated on the attached Plate Number 1 on July 28, 1982. These explorations consisted of borings made by a truck mounted auger. The field work was conducted under the observation of our engineering geology personnel. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL' AND TESTING. INC. SCS&T 14065 ' August 18, 1982 Page 12 The explorations were carefully logged when made. These logs are presen- ted on the following Plate Numbers 3 through 7. The soils are described in accordance with the Unified Soils Classification System as illustrated on the attached simplified chart on Plate Number 2. In addition, a verbal textural description, the wet color, the apparent moisture and the density or consistency are provided. The density of granular soils is given as either very loose, loose, medium dense, dense, or very dense. The con- sistency of. silts or clays is given as either very soft, soft, medium stiff, stiff, very stiff, or hard. Disturbed and "undisturbed" samples of typical and representative soils were obtained and returned to the laboratory for testing. Representative core samples were obtained by means of a 2 3/8" 1.0. split tube sampler driven into the soil by means of a 140 pound weight free falling a dis- tance of .30 inches. The number of blows required to drive the split tube sampler is indicated on the boring logs as "penetration resistance" (E). The core samples were carefully removed, sealed, and returned to the laboratory for testing. LABORATORY TESTING Laboratory tests were performed in accordance, with the generally accepted American Society for Testing and Materials (A.S.T.M.) test methods or suggested procedures. . A brief description .of the tests performed is presented below: a) MOISTURE-DENSITY: Field moisture content and dry density were determined for representative samples obtained. This information was an aid to classification and permitted recognition of varia- tions in material consistency with depth. The dry unit weight is determined in pounds per cubic foot, and the field moisture con- tent is determined -as a percentage of the soil's dry weight.• The results are summarized in the trench logs. 0 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING. INC. SCS&T 14065 August 18, 1982 Page 13 b) CLASSIFICATION: Field classifications were verified in the laboratory by visual examination. -The final soil classifications are in accordance withthe Unified Soil Classification System. DIRECT SHEAR TESTS: Direct shear tests were performed to deter-: mine the failure envelope based on yield, shear strength. The shear box was designed to accomodate a sample having a diameter S of 2.375 inches or 2.50 inches and a height of 1.0 inch. Samples were tested at different vertical loads and at saturated moisture content The shear stress was applied at a constant rate of strain, of approximately .0.05 inches per minute.' The results of 'these tests are presented on attached Plate Number 8. COMPACTION TEST: The maximum dry: density and optimum moisture content of typical soils were determined in the laboratory in accordance with A S I M Standard Test D-1557-789 Method A The results of'these tests are presented on the attached Plate No. 8. EXPANSION TEST. The expansive'.potential of clayey soils was determined in: accordance with the following test procedures and the results of these tests appear on Plate No. 8. S Allow the trimmed, undistrubed or remolded sample to air dry to a constant moisture content, at a temperature of 100 degrees F. Place the dried sample in the consolidometer and LIM allow to compress under a load of 150 psf. Allow moisture to contact the sample and measure its expansion from an air dried to saturated 'condition. S 5 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC. C- SCS&T 14065 August 18, 1982 Page 14 f) CONSOLIDATION TEST: Consolidation tests were performed on a selected "undisturbed"' samples. The consolidation apparatus was designed to accomodate a 1. inch high by 2.375. inch or 2.500 inch diameter soil sample laterally confined by 'a brass ring. Porous stones were placed in contact with the top and bottom of the sample to permit the addition or release of pore fluid during testing.' Loads were applied to the sample in a geometric pro- gression after vertical movement ceased, and the resulting defor- mations were recorded. The percent consolidation for each load • cycle is reported as the ratio of, the amount of vertical . compres- sion to the original one-inch, sample height. The' test samples were inundated at. some point in the test cycle todetérmine their behavior under' -the anticipated footing load as soil moisture ' increases. The results' of 'these tests are presented in the form of a curve on Plate,Nurnbers 9 and 10. 0. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING. INC. _______ _____________ _____________ ____________ ____________ __________ - 0_• __________ - .- __________ --------------- <:z . . ____ • - .1__ --- — / Oaf_ ( •B5 I ) B4 . eB1 •B2 CA------------- SI •. • /• .' ; ;• -; -.-.--- . - .----------- - LEGEND. BORING LOCATION -. . Oaf-ARTIFICIAL FILL I Gal-ALLUVIUM L / Is-SANTIAGO FORMATION - -L • • - SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA - • •• - \\ -- . . SOIL & TESTING, INC. - .. •........... -..•.. .•. .• -•.3y SMS - 1DA 8-13-82 - . - • . lO19 NO. 14065 L PLATE NO. 1 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LEGEND UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART SOIL DESCRIPTION GROUP SYMBOL. TYPICAL, NAMES 1. COARSE GRAINED, More than half of material is larger than No. 200 sieve size. GRAVELS CLEAN GRAVELS More than half of coarse fraction is larger than No. V. sieve size but smaller than 3. GRAVELS WITH FINES (Appreciable amount of fines) SANDS CLEAN SANDS More than half of coarse fraction is smaller than No. 4 sieve' size. SANDS WITH FINES (Appreciable amount of fines) 11. PINE GRAINED; More than half of material is smaller than No. 200 sieve size. SILTS AND CLAYS Liquid Limit . CH greater than 50 OH HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT Well graded gravels, gravel-. sand mixtures, little or no fines. GP Poorly graded gravels, gravel sand mixtures, little or no fines. GM Silty gravels, poorly graded gravel-sand-silt mixtures. GC Clayey gravels, poorly graded gravel-sand, clay mixtures. SW Well graded sand,gravelly sands; little or no fines. SP Poorly graded sands,gravelly sands, little or no fines. SM Silty sands, poorly graded sand and silt mixtures. SC Clayey sands, poorly graded sand and clay. mixtures. ML Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour, sandy silt or clayey-silt-sand mixtures with slight plast- 'icity Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity,gravelly clays, sandy clays,silty clays, lean clays. - Organic silts and organic silty clays of low plasticity Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine sandy or silty soils, elastic silts. Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays. Organic clays of medium to high plasticity. Peat and other highly organic- soils. Liquid Limit CL less than 50 OL SILTS AND CLAYS '.MH - Water level at time of excavation or as indicated US - Undisturbed, driven ring sample or tube sample CK - Undisturbed chunk sample BG - Bulk sample . SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL & TESTING, INC. ...o PIVEPOALS STREET CAN OISO, CALIFORNIA CRIED Laurel Tree & Palomar Airport Road San Diego, California BY DATE - RR . . .. ' 8-18-82 J08 NO. 14065 Plate No. 2 () C) U C) DEPTH (FEET) B> SAMPLE TYPE U) In (A U) CT U) Ul (-)U) 11 SOtL C) I- C) U) U) • C) CLASSIFICATION w C U) m o fl • r _ m D r- 0 — - C) fli C) C) (I) -j - 0 ci- (1 0 _1, -< :n Z in. m •• I I- -< rn - • -< -< - -I C) • sp •• •••• ________ __ ___ C) • - Iri COLOR S co -< L r 0 0 co G) 0 C) C) C) Z APPARENT MOISTURE W (DC (n C) U) m -1 mr-n APPARENT - C) I- - U) '-I - (I)-I CONSISTENCY • ZI m -17I r-n OR DEN SIT V C) _____________ ___________ U, m -S - °' all PENETRATION 0) - N) C) RESISTANCE — rn (BLOWS/FT OF DRIVE) 0 11 • • • STANDARD > r • PENETRATION rn 0 • RESISTANCE o • (BLOWS/FTOFDRIvE) -. -J C) C) -1 C) DRY DENSITY r • 01 -j 0 . . . (PCF) rt S. • - S. N) - C) CD . - • -.i r N) -. .j MOISTURE F 0 0 " ul CONTENT (°Io) r SQ)00 '-0 • - N) • RELATIVE — — _______ I I • I I I -I I • -t I I I l - I I I I I I COMPACTION (°Io) _______________________ z BORING NUMBER 2 2 '3 w w 0 >- z ELEVATION u I Y _________________________ Zil Z W 0 - : a (I) 0 4(1) 4W0 WU) ° w <a o -' a6 az za o4züi0 > Er u DESCRIPTION 0.11 (D 3 - SM! SILTY CLAYEY SAND (FILL) BRN MOIST MEDIUM YSsc I DENSE 17 109.4 16.2 15-1 US 45 I 1106.91 14.5 SC! SANDY CLAY GRY MOIST MEDIUM CL (NATIVE ALLUVIUM) STIFF 10 US • •. 18 112.3 14.6 US 15— S M/ SILTY CLAYEY SAND - SC (ALLUVIUM) I 20----- BRN -IMOIST I DENSE 30 • SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA LOGGED BY: DATE DRILLED: • SOIL S. TESTING, INC. CRB 7-28-82 JOB NUMBER: 14065 Plate No. 4 • z BORING NUMBER 3 W. Uw EL 0 - ELEVATION I— a -j w U 0 • - DESCRIPTION SM! . SILTY -CLAYEY SAND - * Sc (FILL) US SC! SANDY CLAY 5 - CL (NATIVE ALLUVIUM) - BG US w > >- z. a 0 z - -' a U Z >. i-. O o ow o > 0 a- - Z 0 z 1 WJ Z(J) 4z LqZ Z a o 11 cl U wW w 0 En 2 0 az0 a o za 04Zw0 ww.J-ww.j o O o U 400 aa.owaaw O u au YEL-BRN MEDIUM MOIST • DENSE 32 106.31 10.7 DRK-BRN MOIST MEDIUM STIFF 21 103.8 20.6 10 SM! SILTY CLAYEY SAND SC BRN IMOIST . DENSE I / 'I US 20 t• SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA LOGGED BY: JOATE DRILLED: CR8 72882 SOIL & TESTING, INC. JOB NUMBER:I 14065 f Plate No. 5 zBORING NUMBER 4. w w 0 0 a ELEVATION L I Y _________________ Z Zwth W U. WJ .WF < .... < Z z >u 0. _ W.pW Lu (1) o. - o —J a - .aZ zwQ Zno - -Z DESCRIPTION S ;c/ SAND AND CLAY MIXTURE BRN MOIST MEDIUM CL (FILL) DENSE US 34 9.3 23.9 5 - .us 23 10 LI SANDY CLAY DRK-GRY MOIST STIFF - (NATIVE ALLUVIUM) - - MI SILTY CLAYEY SAND BRN MOIST DENSE - - C (ALLUVIUM) 15 - SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LOG• SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA LOGGED BY: bATE DRILLED: SOIL & TESTING, INC. • CRB 7-28-82 JOB NUMBER: I 14065 Plate No. 6 - OEcDTI_I(FEET) SAMPLE TYPE V) (I1L) SO L CD - CLASSIFICArioN w (J) r 2 rn m C) . V- () (1) -J -1 TI c i- z Z - -< r--< -< :D Z rn m I- I1 - (1) -I - — - 0 m 33 01 33 _____________ __________ 2 -<co C, .rn - COLOR ____ -< - ----- . . . o 0 (B G) Z . . APPARENT o 0) . MOISTURE co (BC U) C . P1 -I - ri-Il-ri APPARENT B . -i-i cj- CONSISTENCY m OR DEN SIT Y m PENETRATION 01 RESISTANCE m U (BLOWS/FT OF DRIVE) — 0 STANDARD ' r . PENETRATION o RESISTANCE a B . . (BLOWS/FT OF DRIVE) rD {F r -I -' DRY DENSITY m 0 0 . . . 01 (PCF) MOISTURE .- 0 0 -4 0 CONTENT (°Io) 0 co 0 0 - 0 0 RELATIVE N) - COMPACTION (°I.) [1 0 SAMPLE DESCRIPTION ANGLE OF INTERNAL FRICTION(0) COHESION INTERCEPT (psf) B-i @ 2-6 Remolded to 90% 28 250 B-3 @ 8 Undisturbed 20 700 B-5 @ 5 Undisturbed 32 150 MAXIMUM DENSITY & OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT A.S.T.M.: 1557-78 METHOD: A SAMPLE i DESCRIPTION MAXIMUM DENSITY(pcf) OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT(%) B-i @ 2-6 Silty Clayey Sand 124.0 11.2 EXPANSION TEST RESULTS SAMPLE B-2 @ 1O5 B-4 @4 CONDITION Undisturbed Air-Dried Undisturbed Air- Dried INITIALM.C.(%) 2.3 3.3 INITIAL DENSITY(pcf) 112.3 99.3 FINAL M.C.(%) 15.5 22 .9 NORMAL STRESS(psf) 150 150 EXPANSION (%) 1.4 4.8 -I SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA <*> SOIL & TESTING LAB, INC. 9290 RIVEROALE STREET SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92120 Laurel Tree & Palomar Airport Road San Diego, California BY DATE RR 8-18-82 JOB NO. 14-65 Plate No. 8 SCS&T 14065 August 18, 1982 Appendix'A, Page 1 LAUREL TREE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS - GENERAL PROVISIONS GENERAL INTENT The intent of these specifications is to establish procedures for clear ing, compacting natural ground, preparing areas to be filled, and placing and compacting fill soils to the lines and grades shown on the accepted plans. The recommendations contained in the preliminary soil irivestiga.- tion report and/or the attached Special Provisions are a part of the Recome'nded Grading Specifications and shall supersede the provisions contained hereinafter in the case of conflict. These specifications shall only be used in conjunction with the soil report for which they are' a part. No deviation from these specifications will be allowed,' except. where specified in the soil report or in other written communication signed by the Soil, Engineer. OBSERVATION AND TESTING Southern California Soil' & Testing, Inc. shall be retained as the Soil Engineer to observe and test the earthwork' in accordance with these speci- fications. It will be necessary that the Soil Engineer. 'or his representa- tive provide adequate observation so that he may provide an opinion that the work was or was not accomplished as specified. It shall be' the 're- sponsibility of the contractor to assist the soil engineer and to keep him apprised of work schedules, changes and new information and data so that he may provide these opinions. In the event that any unusual conditions not covered by the special provisions or preliminary soil report are encountered during the grading operations, the Soil' Engineer shall be contacted for further recommendations. - r' L4 SCS&T 14065 August. 18, 1982 Appendix A, Page 2 If, in the opinion of the Soil Engineer, substandard conditions are en- countered, such as; questionable or unsuitable soil, unacceptable moisture content, inadequate compaction, adverse weather, etc., he will be empower- ed to either stop construction until the conditions are remedied or cor- rectedor recommend rejection of this work. Test methods used to determine the degree of compaction should be per- formed in accordance with the following American Society for Testing and Materials test methods: Maximum Density & Optimum Moisture Content - A.S.T.M.D-1557-78. Density of Soil In-Place - A.S.T.M. D-1556-64 or A.S.T.M. D-2922. All densities shall be expressed in terms of Relative Compaction as deter- mined by the foregoing A.S.T.M. testing procedures. PREPARATION OF AREAS TO RECEIVE FILL All vegetation, brush and debris derived from clearing peratiohs shall be removed, and legally disposed of. All areas disturbed by site grading should be left in a neat and finished apperance, free from unsightly debris Any abandoned buried structures encountered during grading operations must be totally removed. All underground utilities to be abandoned beneath any proposed structure should be removed from within 10 feet of the structure • and properly capped off. The resulting depressions from the above des- cribed procedures should be backfilled with acceptable soil that is com- pacted to the requirements of the Soil Engineer. This includes, but is not limited to, septic tanks, fuel tanks, sewer lines or leach )'ines, SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING. INC. SCS&T 14065 August 18, 1982 Appendix A, Page 3 storm drains and water lines. Any buried structures or utilities not to be abandoned should be investigated by the Soil Engineer to determine if any special recommendation will be necessary. All water wells which will be abandoned should be backfilled and capped in accordance to the requirements set forth in the Geotechnical Report. The top of the cap should be at least 4 feet below finish grade or 3 feet below the bottom of footing whichever is greater. The type of cap will depend on the diameter of the well and should be determined by. the Soil. Engineer and/or a qualified Structural Engineer. When the slope of the natural ground receiving fill exceeds 20% (5 hori- zontal units to 1 vertical unit), the original ground shall be stepped or benched.' Benches shall be cut to a firm competent soil condition. The lower bench shall be at least 10 feet wide or '1 1/2 times the equipment width which ever is greater and shall be sloped back into the 'hillside at a gradient of not less than two (2) percent. All other benches should be at least 6 feet wide. The horizontal portion of each bench shall be compacted' prior to receiving fill as specified here'inbefore for compacted natural ground. Ground slopes flatter than 20% shall be benched when considered necessary by the Soil Engineer. After clearing or benching, the natural ground in areas to be filled shall be scarified to a depth of 6 inches, brought' to the proper moisture con- tent, compacted and tested for the minimum degree of compaction in the- Special Provisions or the recommendation contained in the preliminary soil investigation report. All' loose soils in excess of 6 inches thick should be removed to firm natural ground which is defined as natural soil which possesses an in-situ density of at least 85% of its maximum dry density. SOUTHERN CALIFORN$A SOIL AND TESTING. 1NC. S • SCS&T' 14065 August 18, 1982 Appendix A, Page 4 FILL MATERIAL Materials placed in the fill shall be approved by the soil engineer and shall be free of vegetable matter and other deleterious substances. Gran- ular soil, shall contain sufficient fine material to fill the voids. The definition and disposition of, oversized rocks, expansive and/or detrimen- tal soils are covered in the soils report or Special Provisions'. Expan- sive soils, soils of poor gradation, or soils with low strength character- istics may be thoroughly 'mixed with other soils to provide satisfactory fill material, but only 'with the explicit consent of the soil engineer. Any import. material shall be approved by the Soil Engineer before being brought to the site. PLACING AND COMPACTION OF FILL Approved fill material shall be placed in areas prepared to receive, fill in layers not to exceed 6 inches in compacted thickness. Each layer shall have a uniform moisture content in the range that will allow the compac- tion effort' to be efficiently applied to 'achieve the specified degree of compaction. Each layer shall be uniformly compacted to the minimum speci- fied degree of compaction with equipment of'adequate size to economically compact the layer'. Compaction, equipment should either be specifically designed for soil compaction or of proven' reliability. The minimum degree of compaction to be achieved is specified in either the Special Provisions or the recommendations contained in the preliminary soil' investigation report. When the structural fill, material includes rocks, no rocks will be allowed to nest and all voids must be carefully filled with soil such that the minimum ' degree of compaction recommended in the Special Provision's is SOUTHERN CALIFRNIA SOIL AND TESTING. INC. SCS&T 14065 August 18, 1982 Appendix A, Page 5 achieved. The maximum size and spacing of rock permitted in structural fills and in non-structural fills is discussed in the soil report, when applicable. Field observation and compaction tests to estimate the degree of, compac- tion of the fill will be taken by the Soil Engineer or his representativé The location and frequency of the tests shall be at the Soil Engineer's discretion. When the compaction test indicates that a particular layer is less than the required degree of compaction, the layer shall be reworked to the satisfaction of the Soil Engineer and until the desired relative compaction has been obtained. Fill slopes shall be compacted by means of sheepsfoot rollers or other suitable equipment. Compaction by sheepsfoot rollers shall be at vertical intervals of not greater than four feet. In addition, fill slopes at, ratios of two horizontal to one. vertical or flatter, should be track- rolled. Steeper, fill slopes shall be over-built and cut-back to finish contours. Slope compaction operations shall result in all fill material six or more inches inward from the finished face of the slope having a relative compaction of at least 90% of maximum dry density or that speci-. fled in the Special Provisions section of this specification. The compac- tion operation on the slopes shall be continued until the Soil Engineer is satisfied that the slopes will be stable in regards to surficial stabil- ity. . Slope tests will be made by the Soils Engineer during construction of the slopes to determine if the required compaction is being achieved. Where failing tests occur or other field problems arise, the Contractor will be notified that day of such conditions by written communication from the Soil Engineer in the form of a daily field report. LM . SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING. INC. S .5 SCS&T 14065 August 18, 1982 Appendix A, Page 6 If the method of achieving the required slope compaction selected by the Contractor fails to produce the necessary results, the Contractor shall rework or rebuild such slopes until the required degree of compaction is obtained, at no additional cost to the Owner or Soils Engineer. CUT SLOPES The Engineering Geologist shall inspect all cut slopes excavated in rock or lithified formational material during the grading operations at inter- vals determined at his discretion. If any conditions not anticipated in the preliminary report such as perched water, seepage, leñticular or confined strata of a potentially adverse nature, unfavorably inclined bedding, joints or fault planes are encountered during grading, these conditions shall be analyzed by the Engineering Geologist and Soil Engi- neer to determine if mitigating measures are necessary. 71 .Unless otherwise specified in the soil and geological report, no cut slopes shall be excavated higher - or steeper than that allowed by the ordinances of the controlling governmental agency. ENGINEERING OBSERVATION p . Field observation by the Soil Engineer or his representative -shall be made during the filling and compacting operations so that he can express his opinion regarding the conformance of the grading with acceptable standards of practice. The presence of the Soil Engineer or.his representative or the observation and testing shall not release the Grading Contractor from his duty to compact all fill material to the specified degree of compac- tion. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING. INC. O • SCS&T 14065 August 18, 1982 Appendix A, Page.7 SEASON LIMITS Fill shall not be placed, during unfavorable weather conditions. When work is interrupted by heavy rain, filling operations shall not be resumed until the proper moisture content and density of the 'fill materials can be achieved. Damaged site conditions resulting from weather or acts of God shall be repaired before acceptance of work. , a RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS-SPECIAL PROVISIONS' The minimum degree of compaction to be obtained in compacting natural, ground, in the compacted fill, and in' the compacted backfill shall be at least 90 percent. Detrimentally expansive soil is defined as soil which will swell more than 3 percent against a pressure of 150 pounds per square 'foot from .a condi- tion of 90 percent of maximum dry density and air 'dried moisture content to saturation. Oversized fill material 'is defined as rocks or lumps over 6 inches in 'diameter. At least 40 percent of the fill soils shall pass through a No. 4 U.S. Standard Sieve. 0 Transition Lots: Where transitions between cut and fill occur within the proposed building pad, the cut portion should be undercut a minimum of one foot below the base of the proposed footings and recompacted as structural backfill. ' S SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA 5OIL AND TESTING. INC.