The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutZC 03-07; Twin D Recycled Water Pump Station; Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation; 2002-09-27' � , ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ,' G'cr�' �3- <� �C �'3�v7 G�(� � 3 23 ��I��"�'. OCT � 2 2002 KRiEGER 3� SiE'�� Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Twin "D" Recycled Water Pump Station Black Rail Road, Carlsbad September 27, 2002 Prepared For: KRIEGER & STEWART, INC. Attention: Mr. Phitip Strom 3602 Universify Avenue Riverside, California 92501-333'I Prepared By: VfNJE & MIDDLETON ENG(NEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, Suite 102 Escondido, California 92029 Job #02-204-P � ' VINJE � MIDDLETON ENC,�INEERINC�, INC. � ' �� ' ' ' ' Job #02-2Q4-P September 27, 200� Krieger & Stewart, Inc. Attention: Mr. Philip Sfirom 3602 University Avenue Riverside, California 92501-3331 2450 Vineyard Avenue,#102 Escondido, Califomia 92029-1229 Phone(760)743-1214 Fax(760)739-0343 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION, PROPOSED TWIN "D" RECYCLED WATER PUMP STATION, BLACK RAIL ROAD, CARLSBAD Pursuant to your request, Vinje & Middleton Engineering, Inc., has completed the Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Report for the proposed Twin "D" Recycled Water Pump Station at the above-referenced project site. The following report summarizes the resulfis of our field investigation, laboratory analyzes , and conclusions, and provides geotechnical recommendations for the proposed construction as understood. in our opinion, the study site is suitable for the support of fihe planned pump sfiation from a geotechnical engineeririg standpoint provided the ' recommendations presented in this report are incorporated into the final pians and implemented dur.ing the construction phase of the project. , ' ' ' ' � ' ' � Thank you for choosing Vinje & Middleton Engineering, Inc. If you have any questions concern.ing this report, please do not hesitate to call the undersigned. Reference to our Job #OZ-204-P will help to expedite our response to any inquiries. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you. VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. Dennis Middleton CEG #980 DMljt ��F� � ��n. '� -�.�.• c7•� ;1 c� Y�P:iDO� '��. V�, �-v �� "�' F�� .� r Q CF�` �� ' ,� C,;E��Tlrl�t� � ��;Gii�FEC�iI+lG s�, � B�3ilv � �r ._._..._.---r o2.,. �� r��. ' � , L_l TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE NO. I. INTRODUCTION .................................................. 1 il. SITE DESCR(PTION / PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 ' - . (I1. SITE INVEST(GATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 IiV. GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 ' A. Ear�h Mafierials ................................................ 2 B. Groundwater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 C. Faults / Seismicity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 ' D. Geofogic Hazards ...................................... ...... 5 . E. Laboratory Testing / Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 ' ' ' �l ' V. CONCLUSIONS .................................. .............. 7 VI. RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................. 8 A. Limited Ground Preparations and Remedial Grading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 B. Foundations and Slab-on-Grades . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 C. Exterior Concrete Flafworks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 D. Soil Design Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 E. General Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 VII. LIMITATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 TABLE NO. ' J ' ' ' FaultZone.......................................................... 1 Site Specific Seismic Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 SoilType........................................................... 3 Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Confient . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Moisture-Density Tests (Undisturbed Chunk Samples) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Expansionlndex Tesfi ................................................. 6 DirectShearTest .................................................... 7 ' - , i _� � ' TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) PLATE NO. ' Regionallndex Map .................................................. 1 SitePlan .� ............................................ ............. 2 � TestPitLog(with key) ................................................. 3 Fauft - Epicenter Map . . . 4 Isolation Joints and Re-entrant Corner Reinforcement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 � Retaining Watl Drain Detail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 ' � � ' ' ' r � � � � � i ' ' ' '�J , ��l , L� � � PRELIM(NARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED TWIN "D" � RECYCLED WATER PUMP STATION BLACK RAIL ROAD, CARLSBAD I. INTRODUCTION The site invesfiigated for this work includes a portion of the Twin "D" water tank facility located southeast of the intersection of Poinsettia Lane and Bfack Rail Road within the City of Carlsbad. The �site location is depicted on a Regional Index Map enclosed with this report as Plate 1. We understand that a pump station, consisting of a masonry building enclosure with associafied improvements, is planned near the existing chlorine building in the northwestern area of the Twin "D" tank site. Consequently, this investigation was initiated to determine geofiechnical conditions at the proposed pump station and their influence upon fihe planned construction. Test pit digging and sail sampling and testing were among the activities conducted in connection with this investigation which has resulted in construcfiion and development recommendations provided herein. Our scope of services were limited to the area planned for the new construction as de(ineated in this report. Other portions of the project site and exisfiing strucfiures not investigated were beyond the scope of this report. ' II. SITE DESCRIPTION / PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The project area is located in the northeastern section of the existing Twin "D" Tank Site. ' The study construcfiion site consist of a nearly level surface which presently supports asphaltic paving and landscaping. ' � C� A portion of a Sifie Plan, prepared by Krieger & Stewart, Inc., which depicts the existing site conditions and the proposed pump station has been reproduced and included wifih this report as Plate 2. As shown, an approximate 600 square foot masonry pump station building, which will house 4 vertica( turbine pumping units, is planned for the study area. Among the associated improvements are new piping units connecting the�pump sfiation to nearby reservoirs. . (!I. S1TE INVESTIGATION ' Geotechnical conditions at the study location were chiefly determined by the excavation of one hand-dug test pit. Manual hand-excavation methods were utilized in view of the existing utility lines known to cross the faci(ity. The selection of the test pit location was , also [imited by existing site structures. Subsurface exposures within the Tesfi Pit excavation were logged by our project geologist who also retained representative soil/bedrock samples for subsequent laboratory testing. The Test Pit location is shown on � Plate 2. A detailed log of the Test Pit is enclosed with this report as Plate 3. ' VINJE cf3 MIDDLETON ENC,jINEERINCJ, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #102, Escondido, Caiifornia 92029-1Z29 • Phone (760) 743•1214 • Fax (760) 739-0343 GEOTECHN[CAL [NVESTICJATIONS GRADINC� SUPERVISION PERC TESTINCJ ENVIRONMENTAL iNVESTIC�ATIONS �J � ' ' � ' ' � , � � LJ' �� CJI� ' ' PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTtGAT10N PAGE 2 BLACK RAIL ROAD, CARLSBAD SEPTEMBER 27, 2002 IV. GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS The project area is largely natural terrain underlain by sedimentary formationaf units that are widely exposed in local areas. Significant slopes do not occur in fihe proximity to the project construction site. � A. Earth Materials The project site is underlain by a section of Pleisfiocene age Terrace Deposit soi(s which characterize much of the coastal surface� terrain in surrounding areas. Site Terrace Deposits typically consist of fine to medium grained sandstone found in a dense and moderately cemented to cemented condition overall. A thin layer of topsoil mantles project Terrace Deposits. Topsoils are silty fine sands fiypicafly found in a dry and loose condition. Site topsoils are characterized by numerous roofis and rootiets. � Project earth materiafs are sandy deposits with very low expansion potential. Details of site earth materials underlying the area are given on Plate 3. B. Groundwater Groundwater conditions were not encountered in our exploratory test excavations to the depths explored and are not expected to impacfi the proposed, construction. However, like al[ graded building sites, the proper control of surFace drainage is an important factor in the continued sta6ility of the property. [rrigation �and meteoric water should not be allowed to pond on finish surfaces, and over-watering of site vegetation should be avoided. � C. Faults / Seismicitv Fau{ts or significant shea�- zones are not indicated on or near proximity to the project site. , As with� most areas of California, the San Diego region lies within a seismically acfiive zone; however, coasta( areas of the county are characterized by low levels of seismic activity relative to inland areas to the east. During a 40-year period (1934-19.74), 37 earthquakes were recorded in San Diego coastal areas by the California lnstitute of Technology. None of the recorded events exceeded a Richter magnitude �f 3.7, nor did any of the earthquakes generate more than VINJE F� MIDDLETON ENCJINEERINCJ, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #IO2, Escondido, California 92029•1229 • Phone (?60) 743-1214 • Fax (760) 739-0343 GEOTECFfNICAL tNVESTIC�AT[ONS C�RADING SUPERVISION PERC TES'I'INC� ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTIC�AT[ONS ' ' ' PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION . PAGE 3 BLACK RAIL ROAD, CARLSBAD � SEPTEMBER 27, 2002 modest ground shaking or significant damages. Most of the recorded events ' occurred along various offshore faults� which characteristicalfy generete modest earthquakes. ' � ' ' ' � , J 1 , � � � �_ � Historically, the most significant earthquake events , which affect local areas originate afong wel! known, distant fault zones to the east and the Coronado Bank Fault to the west. Based upon available seismic data, compiled from California Earthquake Catalogs, the most significant his#orical event in the area of the study site occurred in 1800 at an estimated distance of 7.8 miles from tiie project area. This event, which is thought to have occurred along an off-shore faulfi, reached an estimated magnitude of 6.5 with estimated bedrock acceleration values of 0.116g at the project site. The following list represents the mosfi significant faults which commonly impact the region. Estimated ground acceleration data compiled from Digitized California Faults (Computer Program EQFAULT VERSION 3.00 updated) typically associated with the fault is also tabulated. TABLE 1 The location of significant faults and earthquake events relafiive to the study site are depicted on a Fau{t - Epicenter Map enclosed with this repor� as Plate 4: More recently, the number of seismic events which affect the region appears to have heightened somewhat. Nearly 40 ear�hquakes of magnitude 3.5 or higher have been recorded in coastal regions between January, 1984 and Augusfi, 1986. Most of the earthquakes are thoughfi to have been generated along offshore faults. For the most part, the recorded events remain moderate shocks which fypicalfy resu(ted in low levels of ground shaking to local areas. A notable exception to this pattern was recorded on July 13, 1986. An earthquake ofi magnitude 5.3 shook �County coastal areas with moderate to locally heavy ground shaking resulting in $700,000 in damages, one death, and injuries to 30 people. The quake occurred along an offshore fault located nearfy 30 miles southwest of Oceanside. 1 VINJE ET MIDDLETON ENCJINEERINCJ, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #102, Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743•1214 • Fax (760) 739•0343 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIC�AT[ONS GRADINC� SUPERVISION PERC TESTING ENVIROiVMENTAL INVEST[GAT10N5 � � � I �J � �� , � ' PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION . � PAGE 4 BLACK RAIL ROAD, CARLSBAD � SEPTEMBER 27, 2002 A. series of notable events shook County areas with a(maximum) magnitude 7.4 shock in the early morning of June 28, 1992. These quakes originated along related segments of the San Andreas Fault approximately 90 miles to the north. Locally high levels of ground shaking over an extended period of time resulted; however, significant damages to local structures were not reported. The increase in earthquake frequency in the region remains a subject of speculation among geologists; however, based upon empirical information and the recorded seismic history of County areas, the 1986 and 1992 events are thought to represent the highest levels of ground shaking which can be expected at fihe study site as a result of seismic acfiivity. _ � In recent years, the Rose Canyon Fault has received added �attention from geologists. �The fault is a significant structural feature in metropolitan San Diego which includes a series of parallel breaks trending southward from La Jolla Cove through San Diego Bay toward fihe Mexican border. Test trenching along the fault in Rose Canyon indicated that afi that location the fault was last active 6,000 to 9,000 years ago. More recent work suggests that segments of ttie fault are younger having been last active 1000 - 2000 years ago. Consequently; the fault has been classified as active and included within an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone established by the State of Califarnia. � ' Fault zones tabulated in the preceding table are considered most likely fio impact the region of the study site during the fifetime of the project. The faults are periodically active and capable of generating moderate to local(y high levels of ' ground shaking at the site. Ground separation as a result of seismic activity is not expected at the property. � ' � ' I I ., ' For design purposes, site specific seismic parameters were determined as part of this investigation in accordance with the Uniform Building Code. The following parameters are consistent wifih fihe indicated project seismic environment and may be utilized for project design work: - TABLE 2 � VINJE C� MIDDLETON ENCJINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #102, Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1224 • Fax (760) 739-0343 C�EOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS C�RADIN�'SUPERVISION PERC TESTING ENVIRONMENTAL INVEST[C�ATIONS C� r, .� � �_� � ' ' � C� � i ' � 'u PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 5 BLACK RAfL ROAD, CARLSBAD � � SEPTEMBER 27, 2002 D. Geologic Hazards Geo(ogic hazards are nofi presently indicated at the project site. Minor exposed siopes do not indicate gross geologic instability. The most significant geologic hazards afi the property will be those associated with ground shaking in the event of a major seismic event. Liquefaction or re(ated ground rupture failures are not anticipated. E. Laboratory Testing / Results Earth deposits encountered in our exploratory test excavations. were closely examined and sampled for laboratory testing. Based upon our test trench data and field exposures, site soils have been grouped into the follawing soil types: TABLE 3 1. Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisfiure Content: The maximum dry ' density and optimum mois#ure content of Soil Type 1 was determined in accordance with the ASTM D-1557. The test result is presented in Tab(e 4. � � ' ' ' � TABLE 4 2. Moisture-Density Tests (Undisturbed Chunk Samples�: In-place dry density and moisture content of representative soil deposits beneath the site were determined from relatively .undisiurbed chunk samples using the water displacement test method. The test results are presented in Table 5 and tabulated on the enclosed Test Pit Log. � VINJE £� MIDDLETON EN('jINEERINCJ, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #102, Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 • Fax (760) ?39-0343 �EOTECHN[CAL[NVESTIC�ATIONS C�RADINC�SUPERVlS[ON PERC TESTINCJ ENVIRONMENTAL [NVESTICJATIONS The following tests were conducted in support of this investigation: ' 1 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 6 � BLACK RAIL ROAD, CARLSBAD � SEPTEMBER 27, 2002 , . ' , ' � � ' � ' � TABLE 5 3. Ex�ansion Index Test: One expansion index test was performed on a representative sample of Soil Type 1 in accordance with the Uniform Building � Code Standard 18-2. The #est result is presented in Tabie 6. TABLE 6 � 4. Direct Shear Test: One direct shear test was performed on a representative sample of Soil Type 2. The prepared specimen was soaked overnight, loaded � with normal loads of 1; 2, and 4 kips per square foot respectively, and sheared , to failure in an undrained condition. The test resuft is presented in Table 7. ' � � � TABLE 7 ' VINJE f� MIDDLETON ENCjINEERINCJ, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #102, Escondido, Ca[ifomia 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-2214 • Faz (760) 739-0343 CJEOTECHN[CAL INVESTIGATIONS � C�RADINCI SUPERV[SION PERC TESTiNC� ENVIRONMENTAL INVEST[CTATIONS � � � ' � � � � PREL1MtNARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 7 BLACK RA(L R�AD, CARLSBAD . SEPTEMBER 27, 2002 V. CONCLUSIONS Based upon the foregoing investigation, development of the project construction site for a pump station is feasible from a geotechnical viewpoint. The properEy is underiain by dense, stable terrace deposits at very shallow depths whicfi will provide adequate support for the planned pump stafiion. Geologic instability or adverse geotechnical conditions are not indicated at the project construction site. The following factors are unique to the study construction site and wil! mosfi impact its development from a geotechnical viewpoint: � Exposed surf'ace areas of the project site are mantled by a thin cover of natural topsoil. These are shallow, sandy deposits which occur in a loose condition overall. � Removal and recompaction of existing topsoils and upper weathered terrace ' deposits will be necessary in order to construcf stable ground suitable for the support of the proposed structures and improvements. , ' ' ' , * Generated soils will predominantly be granular, non-expansive to very low expansive sands which work well in compacted fills. Unusual grading problems, including hard excavations or trenching difficulties, are not expected. * Final bearing and subgrade soils are anticipated to consist of silfiy sands (SM) wifih . very low expansion potential (EI less than 21), according to the Uniform Building Code classification. Actual cfassification and expansion characteristics of the finish grade soil mix can only be provided in the final as-graded compaction report based upon proper testing of foundation bearing soils when rough finish grades are achieved. * Natural groundwater was not encountered and is not expected to impact project .grading or #he long term sfiability of the developed construction site. � * Adequate�site surface drainage confirol is a crifiical factor in the future stability of fihe. developed property as planned. Drainage facilities shou(d be designed and installed for proper control and disposal of surFace runoff. J � � Liquefaction and seismically induced sefit(ements will not be a factor in the development of the proposed construction site. � VINJE cS3 MIDDLETON ENCJINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #102, Escondido, Catifornia 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743•1214 • Fax (760) ?39•0343 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTICIATIONS C�RADING SUPERVISION PERC Y'ESTINC� ENV[RONMENTAL INVESTICJATIONS � � , PRELIMINi4RY GEOTECH,NICAL INVESTIGATION � PAGE S BLACK RAtL RtaAD, CARLSBAD SEPTEMBER 27, 2002 * Pbst construction settlements wilf not be a factor in the development of the project � construction site, provided our remedial grading and foundation recommendations are implemented during the construction phase of the project. � ' * Soii collapse wi(I not be a factor in development of the study site, provided our recommendations for site development are foilowed: VI. RECOMIVIENDATIONS I Recommendations given below are consistent with the indicated geotechnical conditions at the study construction site and should be incorporated into final plans and .implemented during the construction phase of the project: , , � ' �J r� � � �J ' � � A. Limited Ground Pre�arations and Remedia( Gradina 1. Existing Un�derground Utilities: All existing underground utilities and facilities to remain at or nearby the project construction site should be identified and marked prior to the initiation of the actual ground preparations and remedial grading works. Specific geotechnical engineering recommendations should be given at the time of ear�hwork operations based on the actual exposures in fihe event of a conflicfi. � � 2. Clearing and Grubbing: The existing asphalt and landscaping should be neat(y saw cut and/or removed from the proposed pump sfiation building and improvement areas plus a minimum of 3 feet, where possible, and as approved in the field. Excess debris and other unsuitable materials should be removed from within the specified areas. The prepared ground should be inspected and approved in the fie{d by the project geotechnical engineer or his representative. 3. Over=excavations/Removals: The project construction site is covered with a shallow mantle of loose topsoils on the order of 1-foot thick. Existing_topsoils and upper weathered Terrace Deposits beneatti the planned structures and improvement areas plus 3 feet , where possible, and as approved in the field, should�be over-excavated and recompacted. Forthis purpose, limited removafs and ground preparations will be required. Removal depths will be on the order of �'!-foot with the bottom of over-excavations additionally ripped and recompacted in-place to a minimum depth of 6 inches. Deeper removals and soil densification beneath fihe planned structures and improvements may also . be necessary based on actual field exposures and should be anticipated as directed in the fiefd by the project geotechnical engineer. VINJE � MIDDLETON ENGINEERINCI, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #102, Escondido, Califomia 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 • Faz (760) 739•0343 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTICrATIONS GRAD[NG SUPERVIS[ON PERC TESTING ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTiC�ATIONS � � , � ' ' ' PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 9 BLACK RAiL ROAD, CARLSBAD _ SEPTEMBER 27, 2002 4. Fill Materials and Compaciion: Removed soils may be reused as site compacted fills and backfilis provided all unsuitable materials .and vegetation are selectively separated and removed to the safiisfaction of the project geotechnical engineer: Fiff soils should be clean deposits free of vegetation, roots, debris, delefierious matter or rock sizes greater than 6 inches in maximum diameter. � Import soils, if used to complete grading or achieve design grades, should be non-expansive sandy granular soifs {expansion index less than 21), inspected, tested as necessary and approyed by the project geotechnical consultant prior to the delivery to the site. � - ' Unifiorm bearing soil conditions should be constructed at the site by the rernedial grading and ground preparation operations. Site fills/backfills should -� be adequately processed, thoroughly mixed, moisiure conditioned� to near ' optimum moisture levels, placed in thin.uniform horizontal lifts and mechanically compacted to a minimum of 90% of the corresponding laboratory maximum dry densify (ASTM D-1557) unless otherwise specified. _ ' ' IJ L_J C J � � ' ' ' 5. Surface Drainage and Erosion Controt: A critical element to the continued stability of the graded building surfaces is an adequate drainage system. This can most effectively be achieved by installation of appropriate drainage facilities, per the project civil engineer/architect design. Building pad surface run-off should be collecied and directed to a selected location in a controlled manner. Area drains should be installed. In no case should water be al(owed to pond or accumulate adjacent to the improvements and structures. Site drainage over the fnished surfaces should flow away onto suitable locations in a positive manner. Care shoufd be taken during the construction, improvements, and final construction phases not to disrupt the designed drainage patterns. � 6. Engineering Inspections: All remedia! grading and ground preparations including removals, suitability of earth deposits used as compacted fil(/backfill and corripaction procedures should be continuously inspected an.d tested by the . project geotechnical consultant and presented in the final as-graded compaction report. The nature of finish foundation bearing and subgrade soils should also be confirmed in the final compaction report at the comp(etion of grading. . . VINJE fd MIDDLETON ENC�INEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #102, Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 • Faz (760) ?39-0343 C�EOTECHNICAL INVESTI�jATIONS GRADINC� SUPERVISION PERC TESTINC� ENVIRONMENTAL INVEST[CJATIONS S � , ' ' � u � ' ' � � � ' ' , M ' ' 1 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL (NVESTIGATION PAGE 10 BLACK RAIL ROAD, CARLSBAD SEPTEMBER 27, 2002 Geotechnical engineering inspections shall include but not (imited to the following: � * Initial lnspection - After the grading/brushing limits have been staked, but before grading/brushing sfarts. � * Bottom of over-excavafiion inspection - After Terrace Deposits or firm native ground (in-place densities above 90%) is exposed and prepared to receive fill, but before fill is placed. Exposed bottom of all removals and over-excavations . should be additionally prepared as directed in the field. Fill/backfill inspection - After the filf/backfill placement is started, but before the vertical height of fifl/backfifl exceeds 2 feei. A minimum of one tesf shaf( be required for each 100 lineal feet maximum, with the exception of wall backfills where a minimum of one test shaff be required for each 25 lineal feefi maximum. FinisP� rough and final pad grade tesfs shal( be required regardless of fill thickness. * Foundation trench inspection - After the foundation trench excavations, but before sfieel pfacement. * Foundation bearing/slab subgrade soils inspection - Within 72 hours prior to the placement of concrefie for proper moisture and specified compaction levels. * Geotechnical foundation/slab steel inspection - After steel placement is completed, but 24 hours before the scheduled concrete pour. * Subdrain/wall back drain inspection - After the firench excavation, but during the actual placement. All material shall conform to the project material specifications and be approved by the project geotechnical engineer. * Underground utility trench inspection - After the trench excavations, but before installation of the underground facilities. Local and CAL-OSHA safety requirements for open excavations app(y. Inspection of the bottom of the trench and pipe bedding may also be required by the project geotechnical engineer. * Underground utility trench backfill inspection - After the backfill placement is started above the pipe zone, but before the vertical heighi of backfi(I exceeds 2 feet. Testing of the backfill within the pipe zone, may also be required by the VINJE Fa MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #IO2, Escondido, California 92029-2229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 • Fax (760) 739-0343 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIC�ATIONS C�RADINC� SUPERVIS[ON PERC TESTINC� ENVIRONMENTAL INVEST'IC�ATIONS � � ' ' � r , � ' ' ' PRELIMtNARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATtON PAGE 11 BLACK RAIL ROAD, CARLSBAD � SEPTEMBER 27, 2002 governing agencies. Pipe bedding and backfill materials shall conform to the governing agencies requirements and project soils report if applicab(e. Alf trench backfills shall be mechanicafly compacted to a minimum of 90% compaction leve(s unless otherwise specified. Al! trenches over 12 inches deep maximum under the interior floor slabs should also be mechanically compacted and tested for a minimum of 90% compaction levels. Flooding or jetting techniques as a means ofi compaction method shall not be allowed. '� � Improvement subgrade inspections - Within 72 hours prior to the placement of finish surface for proper moisture and specifiiec! compaction levels. B. Foundations and S(ab-on-Grades The following recommendations are consistent with very low expansive (EI less than 21) silty sand (SM) bearing soil expected at finish grades. Final designs should be confirmed andlor revised as necessary in the rough grading .compaction report based on site as-graded geotechnical condifiions and actual fiesting of the foundation bearing and subgrade soils. 1. Continuous strip foundations should be a minimum of 15 inches wide and 18 inches deep. Spread pad foundations, if any, shoufd be a minimum of 24 inches square and 12 inches deep. Exfierior confiinuous footings should enclose the eniire building perimeter. ' . 1 2. Continuous interior and exterior foundations should be reinforced wifih a minimum of 4-#4 reinforcing bars. Place 2-#4 bars 3 inches above the bottom of the footing and 2-#4 bars 3 inches below the top of the footing. ' � Reinforcement details for spread pad footings should be provided by the projeci architect/structural engineer. J � J ' ' L_J 3. Commercial/industrial floors on very low expansive subgrade soils which support machinery loads should be a minimum of 5 inches in thickness, reinforced with #4 reinfor'cing bars spaced 18 inches on center each way, placed mid-height in the slab. The s(abs may be underlain by 4 inches of clean sand (SE 30 or greater) and provided with a 6-mil plastic moisture barrier placed mid-height in the sand. In the case of good qualify sandy subgrade soils and as approved by the project geotechnica( engineer, the 6-mil plastic moisture barrier may be laid directly over the slab subgrade and covered with a minimum of 2 inches of clean sand as specified. The sand underlayment and/or plastic moisture may be deleted in the case of non-moisture sensitive floors. VINJE d MIDDLETON ENCJINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #102, Escondido, Califomia 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 • Faz (760) ?39-0343 GEOTECHN[CAL INVESTIGATIONS C�RADINC� SUPERVISION PEAC TESTINC� ENVIRONMENTAL [NVEST'IC�ATIONS � � � PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 12 BLACK RAIL ROAD, CARLSBAD SEPTEMBER 27, 2002 Acfual slab design shoufd be evaluated, confirmed or revised as necessary by rthe project structural engineer based on the design loads. A soil module of , subgrade reaction of 200 pci may be considered. , r 1 r 4. Contro( joints in corrimercial/industrial fioor slabs should be provided, per the structural design. In general, slabs may be provided with "soft-cut" contractionJcontrol joints consisting of sawcuts spaced 10 feet on center maximum each way for all interior slabs. Cut as soon"as fihe slab will support the weight of the saw, and operate without disturbing the final.finish which is normally within 2 hours after finaf finish at each control joint location, or 150 psi to 800 psi. The softcuts should be a minimum of 1-inch in depth, but not to exceed 1 �/4-inches. Anti-ravel skid plates should be used and replaced with each blade fo avoid spalling and raveling. , Avoid wheeled equipment across cuts for at least 24 hours. � ' S. Provide re-entrant corner reinforcemenfi for all interior s(abs. Re-entrant corners will depend on sfab geometry and/or interior column locations. Plate 5 may be used as a general guideline. � ' r- � �. r 6. Foundation trenches and slab subgrade soils should be inspected and tested for proper moisture and specified compaction levels, and approved by the project geotechnical consultant within 72 hours prior to the pfacement of concrete. . C. Exterior Concrete Flatworks 1. All exterior slabs (walkways, and patios) should be a minimum of 4 inches in � thickness, reinforced with 6x6/10x10 welded wire mesh -carefully placed mid- height in the slab. ' �J ' ' , i 2. Provide "tool joint" or "soft-cut" contraction/control joints spaced 10 feet on center maximum each way. Tool or cut as soon as the slab will support weight, and operate without disturbing the final finish which is normally within 2 hours after final finish at each contro( joint location or 150 psi to 800 psi. The tool or softcut joints should be a minimurn of 1-inch in depth but not to exceed 1 �/4- inches. In case of softcut joints, anti-ravel skid plates should be used and replaced with each blade to avoid spalling and raveling. Avoid wheeled equipments across cuts for afi least 24 hours. 3. Subgrade soi(s should be tested for proper moisture and a minimum of 90% compaction leve{s, and approved by the project geotechnica( consultant within 72 hours prior to the placement of concrete. VINJE f� MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #IO2, Escondido, Caiifomia 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743•1214 • Fax (760) 739-0343 CJEOTECHNICAL [NVESTIC�ATIONS C�RADINC� SUPERVISION PERC TESTINC� ENVIRONbfENTAL INVESTIC�ATIONS � � , r , i �, '� ' :__J ' ' � u �J ' u � ,� �J ' PRELIMtNARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 13 BLACK RAIL ROAD, CARLSBAD SEPTEMBER 27, 2002 D. Soil-Design Paramefiers The foflowing site specific soil design parameters are based upon characteristics of tested soil samples and our experience with similar deposits. All parameters should be confirmed when the characteristics of the final as-graded soils have been specifically determined: � * Design wet density of soil = 129.4 pcf. ' * Design angle of internal friction of soil = 31 degrees. '� Design active soif pressure for retaining structures = 40 pcf (EFP), level backfifl, cantilever, unrestrained walls. . * Design at-rest soil pressure for retaining structures = 62 pcf (EFP), non- yielding, restrained walls. � * Design passive soil pressure for retaining structures = 414 pcf (EFP), level surFace at the toe. *�Design coefficient of friction for concrete on soi! = 0.38. * Net a(lowable foundation pressure = 2000 psf, minimum 15 inches wide by 18 inches deep footings. * Design allowable lateral bearing pressure (all strucfiures except retaining walls) = 200 psf/ft . Notes: 1. Use a minimum safety factor of 1.5 for wall over-turning and sliding stability. ' However, because [arge movements must take place before maximum passive resistance can be developed, a minimum safety factor of 2 may be considered for sliding stability particuiarly where sensitive structures and improvements are planned near or on top of retaining walls. 2. When combining passive pressure and frictional resistance, the passive component should be reduced by one-third. - 3. The tndicated net allawable foundation pressure provided herein was determined based on the specified foundation width and depth and may be increased by 20% for each additional foot of depth and width to a maximum of 4500 psf. The net allowable foundation pressure provided herein also appfies to dead plus live loads and may be' increased by one-third for wind and seismic loading. � , � 4. The lateral bearing earth pressures may be increased by the amount of the designated value for each additional foot of depfih to a maximum of 1500 pounds per square foot. � VINJE � MIDDLETON ENCJINEERINCJ> INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #102, Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 • Fax (760) 739•0343 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTICIATIONS C�RADINC� SUPERV[S[QN PERC TESTINC� ENV(RONMENTAL INVESTIGATIONS LJ � �I ' � � LJ � u � � � � � ' ' � � �J PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL iNVESTIGAT(ON BLACK RAIL ROAD, CARLSBAD E. General Recommendations PAGE 14 SEPTEMBER 27, 2002 1. The minimum foundation/slab design and steei reinforcement provided herein is based upon soil characteristics only and is not intended to be in fieu of reinforcement necessary for structural considerations. All recommendations should be evafuated and confirmed by the project architect/structural engineer. 2. Adeq�aate staking and grading control is a crifiical facfior�in properly comp(eting the recommended remedial and site grading operations. Grading controf and staking should be provided by the project grading contractor or surveyor/civil engineer and is beyond the geotechnical engineering services. Inadequate staking and/or lack of grading _control may result in unnecessary additionaf grading which will increase construction costs. 3. Final plans should reflect preliminary recommendations given in this report. Final plans may be submitted to the project geotechnical consu(tant for review and conformance with the soils report. Additional recommendations should be provided at that time if it becomes necessary. 4. Afl foundation trenches should be inspected to ensure adequate footing embedment and confirm competent bearing soils. Foundation and slab reinforcements should be inspected and approved by the project geotechnical consultant. 5. All underground utility trenches should be mechanically compacted to a minimum of 90% of the maximum dry density of the soil unless otherwise specified. Care should be taken not to crush the utilities or pipes during the compaction of the soil. Non-expansive, granular backfill soi(s should be used. 6. Expansive clayey soils should not be used for backfilfing of any retaining strucfiure. All retaining walls should be provided with a 1:1 wedge of granufar, compacted backfill measured from the base of the wall footing to the finished surface. Retaining walls should be provided with a back drainage in general accordance with the enclosed Plate 6. 7. Site drainage should flow away from sfiructures in a posifiive manner. Care should be taken during fihe construction, improvement, and fine grading phases not to disrupt the designed drainage patterns. Rooflines of the building should be provided with roof gutters. Roof water should be collected and directed away from the buildings to a suitable location. V1NJE �7 MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #102, Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) ?43•1214 • Fax (760) 739•0343 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIC�ATIONS C�RADINC� SUPERVISION PERC TESTING ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTICIATIONS C 1 � � ' ' 1 , , � , ' , ' ' t � ' , PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION . PAGE 15 BLACK RAIL ROAD, CARLSBAD SEPTEMBER 27, 2002 S. The amount of shrinkage and related cracks that occurs in the concrete slab- on-grades and f(aiworks depends on many factors, the most important of which is the amount of water in a concrete mix. The purpose of the slab reinforcement is to keep normal concrete shrinkage cracks closed tightly. The amount of concrete shrinkage can be minimized by reducing the amount of wafier in the mix. To keep shrinkage to a minimum, the following should be consi�ered: * Use the stiffest mix that can be handled and consolidated satisfactorily. Use the largest maximum size of aggregate that is practical, (for example, concrete made with 3/8-inch maximum size aggregate usually requires about� 40 Ibs more (nearly 5 gal.) water per, cubic yard than concrete with 1-inch aggregate). * Cure the concrete as long as practical. The amount of slab reinforcement provided for conventional slab-on-grade construcfiion considers that good quality concrete materia(s, proportioning, craftsmanship, and control fiesfis where appropriate and applicable are provided. 9. A preconstruction meeting befiween representative's of this office and the property owner or planner, as well as the general/grading contractor, is recommended in order�to discuss gradinglconstructibn details associated with , proposed development. , VII. LIMITATIONS The conclusions and recommendations provided herein have been based on a review of pertinenfi reports ans plans, all available data obtained from our field� investigation and (aboratory analyzes, as well as our experience with the soils and formational materials located in fihe general area. The materials encountered on the project site and utilized in our laboratory testing are believed represeritative of the total area; however, earth mafierials may vary in characteristics between excavations. Of necessity we must assume a certain degree of continuity beiween exploratory excavations andlor natural exposures. lt is necessary, therefore, that all observations, conc{usions, and recommendations be field verified during the grading operation. fn the event discrepancies are noted, we should be contacted immediately so that an inspection can be made and additional recommendations issued if required. The recommendations made in this report are applicable io the site at the time this report was prepared. It is the responsibility of the owner/developer to ensure that these recommendations are carried out in the field. VIN1E �3 MIDDLETON ENCJINEERINCJ, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #102, Escondido, California 92029•1229 • Phone (760) 743-2214 • Faz (760) 739•0343 C�EOTECHN[CAL INVESTIC�ATIONS GRADINC� SUPERVISION PERC TESTING ENVIRONMENTAL INVEST[C�ATIONS ' ' ' PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL tNVESTIGATION PAGE 16 BLACK RAIL ROAD, CARLSBAD SEPTEMBER 27, 2002 It is almost impossible to predict with certainty the future performance of a property. The ' future.behavior of the site is also dependent on numerous unpredictable variables, such as earthquakes, rainfall, and on-site drainage patterns. � '� ' ' ' The firm of VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGlNEERING, INC. sha[I not be held responsib(e for changes to the physical conditions of fihe proper�y such as addition of fill soils, added cut slopes, or changing drainage patterns which occur without our inspection or control. This report should be considered valid for a period of one year and is subject to review by our firm following that time. If significant modifications are made to your fientaiive development plan, especially with respect fio the heighfi and location of cut and fill slopes, this report must be presented to us for review and possible revision. Vinje & Middleton Engineering, (nc. warrants that this report has been prepared within the limits prescribed by oUr client with the usual thoroughness and competence of the engineering profession. No other warranty or representation, either expressed or implied, is included or infiended. � � Once again, ifi any quesfiions arise concerning this report, please do not hesifiate to contact ' this office. Ref�rence to our Job #02-204-P will hefp fio expedite our response to your inquiries. ' ' ' We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you. VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. ' Dennis Middleton CEG #980 DM/SMSS/SJM/jfi ' , � c�'� S��'i/o,3 �r �T� �; � �fi Cr'�L.1C,'�� ,,% �`�` , . ' Steven J. Melzer � RG#6953 .� �p�� ' ' ' Distribution: Addressee (5) VIN1E � MIDDLETON ENCjINEERINCJ, INC. 2450 Vineyard �q;<.D ' �v �;y�- --4�` � `� � ehdi S. Shari � G; No:4$174 G`� c�� o �' E #46174 � �;�. �z-a,-o1 � cr_�r��r�a �, � �fVGINE��=iiiV^ , .a. � � �,�a�� ; JAY �� Rl�. ��3 �� up,��3//� �F,� _ _ . .G� ►� ,� Catifornia 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 • Fax (760) 739•0343 CJEOTECHNiCAL INVESTIC�ATIONS CJRADINC� SUPERVIS[ON PFRC TESTINCJ EIVVIRONMENTAL INVESTICIATIONS � , ' ' ' ' �_ J ' , , ' ' �'1 J � ' , ' � �I PRIMARY DIVISIONS GRouP SECONDARY DIVfSIONS SYMBOL ' ¢ GRAVELS CLEAN GW Weii graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines. o� o MORE THAN HALF GRAVELS ' Q¢ N OF COARSE (LESS THAN G� Poorly graded gravels or gravel-sand mixtures, Iittle or no fines. 5% FINES) rq � p FFiACT10N IS GRAVEL GM Silty graveis, gravei-sand-silt mixtures, non-plastic fines. o �- Z W LARGER THAN WITH ?�¢ u) NO. 4 SIEVE FINES GC Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines. a¢C ¢ tT-� j SANDS CLEAN S W y�/ell graded san ds, graveliy sands, Ilttle or no fines. C'3 S � W SANDS w z W�n MORE THAN HALF (LESS THAN O�C = o�C OF COARSE 5% FINES) SP Pooriy graded sands or gravelly sands, little or no fines. p~� FRACTION IS SANDu SM Siity sands, sand-siit mixtures, non-plastic fines. v � � SMALLER THAN WITH � NO. 4 SIEVE FINES SC Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines. � Inor anic siits and very fine sands, rock flour, silty or clayey fine �� N M� sands or clayey silts with slighf plasticity. � � w� SILTS AND CLAYS O� Q> LIQUID LIMIT 1S CL Inorgays, silty clays, ie n ceaysm plasticity, gravelly ciays, sandy o z�� LESS THAN 50% � Z�.o OL Organic sllts and organic silty clays of low plasticity. z ��¢N MH Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine sandy or silty �� SILTS AND CLAYS soils, elastic silts. W�� Z � LIQUID LIMIT IS CH inorganic ciays of high piasticity, fat clays. tZ—i g� z GREATER THAN 50% OH Organic clays of inedium to high piasticity, organic silts. HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS� PT Peat and other highly organic soils. GRAIN�SIZES U.S. STANDARD SERIES SIEVE CLEAR SQUARE SIEVE OPENINGS 200 • 40 10 4 3/4" 3,� 12•� SAND GRAVEL SILTS AND CLAYS COBBLES BOULDERS FINE MEDIUM COARSE FINE COARSE RELATIVE DENSITY CONSISTENCY AND5, GRAVELS AND gLOWS/FOOT CLAYS AND STRENGTH BLOWS/FO�T � NON-PLASTIC SILTS PLASTIC SILTS VERY SOFT 0-'/< 0- 2 VERY LOOSE 0 - 4 • SOF"f Y4 - '/� 2 - 4 LOOSE 4-10 • FIRM '/s-1 4-8 . MEDIUM DENSE 10 - 30 STIFF 1 -2 8-16 DENSE 30 - 50 VERY STIFF 2- 4 16 - 32 VERY DENSE OVER 50 ' HARD OVER 4 OVER 32 1. Blow count, 140 pound hammer falling 3� inches on 2 inch O.D. split spoon sampier (ASTM D-1586) 2. Unconfined compressive strength per SOILTEST pocket penetrometer CL-700 � Sand Cone Test � Bulk Sample � 246 - Standard Penetration.Test (SPT) (ASTM D-1586) with blow counts per 6 inch�s ❑ Chunk Sample C,� Driven Rings ' I 246 = California Sampler with biow counts per 6 inches VINJE & MCDDLETON KEY TO EXPLORATORY BORING LOGS U n i f ied Soii Ciassifiication S ystem (ASTM D-2487) ENGINEERING, INC. � 2450 Vineyard Ave., #102 Escondido, QA 92029-1229 ' • -�- - • - �-• • . PROJECT NO. KEY , Tr3P0! map printed on 09/09/02 from "SanDiego.tpo" and "tJntitled.tpg" 117.30000� W 117.28333° W WGS84 217.Z6667° W , J ji �' � " .r,�; , . { . �;. " l • ., ' �\;f l, 'rt�� ' �r r`L, ^. ti .'.�' .'l' ,q .i 'I.. � •�' � r 1 • �_ ::i`.:,F 1 ___ __ :i\, _ . _ � . r'.%'Y '.' :. __ ,/ . ,! : ___ _ ` , _ l�. ' r �� : .�...; .�.� +- : ��_: :�.. , .- < <. ��. z z {; M1� ' ` -y `-. .:.%� • r;r:' `' ...,:, ' s` ; ; \c• , .:j� o l+� r . �' - ' } � , � ;:-� _ - � � PL 4'i'E 1 . . - -_ - . + . ,\ : J -- � P'� }: �'�. ''�. M iM , �,: ,, ;:�+� ` - ; f��a-'ti �,, . y/ ._' ,Cf2ypii�S : '�v :-' `% � 1 M •�s. _ . . ,' : ` � � _ .. � ' � . -' . . , 3/'. i: ' . . tM ,-, �r. +�,, .-• �;, r�. �' �i' m mI,: �'�v. �.. � ' , f � t ..� t �, \ r'_ � �� `: � �: � �_ _ _ `�, ,,.� GI�NAL INI�Ek 11�P �`� - --- -� � . .�;�� ' ' t� :,, • ``: - . _._ : .,;_ _ 1�`z., ' (' � ;�': %' `.'- �-.'- _� - :- � � ��- ' :'vai�T� t �� '. `- . - � _:__ _- . �� _ � ,' , .. . � . __- J , '. . �,,, 7 �;,�-. 7ank�. :.;• '�� ` .�• , , . �� - p�R� . p�RQOa # ,; �; �,�'• � �._ 's �`>--`-' +A18 _. ----_: - -__�_� r' ..� � L; .:,., _-_, - - _'-_- � - . : .,.-- pR.__--- __ _- :-�- - ,.-�.,ya. - �: .. ��l` - �_-�� - J�S #(}2-20=�-P � _ _ _ - : =:' --- �`� " rQ�� , _ _ _ - ' , ' -'----�'` ��' �, ' ` �c.--• �� _�.. ' ; ! ' � ... _ `�� . . --'--'� ' _ ,1� _ ...!'i"'��ii �.�`' : ... � �� -, I ',:" :�`� - _ _'; � . ''•��__ J--_-- �' t f `"1._. y, . �'•. __ . �- ..-. ?aterr•ar ._,1X;s^x._.r__.....�._ C, ��='c: �, + ,.' _C��R :"' . ' � -' - - .. � t,�Dc't'C. - ': y/�: ti �'�' �. .•_ _ :� , �, fl�� :,� .�. �,,�,,; r.iRp kt �. "- � � -� " . r , - ' i:• . . .r- - E__- n :3. �; _�� =,v�y= " ' - ^ r` • - : _ . . _ _ ��-, _ . �. ' �.��,� -�}- �.; �r�:$� �=:��. =�G��'=,�i_ :.,�� . .x�-�� z:.°r�� ,lv,::�,z�;. ��::. . �� a.ciy�o�';.�.., �� F; . .- ,. ,i� � .., .,.��_ � � : ::� �`�'` • .. __...,.�_3 . _'. ;;'•�� ,•� :,i:�'�__/R---OF_U -__ - _ - ='i� • . . -r�'; ' ..l �t . ' ' �.. _ _•-.r' �"a:^?'' . �%��" _ _�""-- ._.. `{�.: � f_.:.�-�� ` '• • -' '�' _. . ' - r- ' � -t ` _.. . � � A a�'. �`:%o-�-: ('P�`�' � ` � Z Z � - � • �. . -�r�-�' - - - � �� ,. .._. q � ' : :,` �� - ' `'�� ., . . '.. ,,,..._.Y,.'��_ -• _ . , __... . : �_��` -- � ' -;: . � ' ' ,-+ - . . ---- �+-;-- T,..- -- . '__--= • - . `; � •"" , : _ •-� .+ • . � ��'� - - . .. t • � �`...,- ai M- . ,_'-. . . '.-- . _ ; . , ' c ' m m. . ,.... �� ....i" _ ._�_'.R -�''�;y'�, . . ^' • , C., . 4'� ;., :Yc-'`.t � _"'_._-. -... \: _ . , 4: � . • � _ . ; �\... _ '. �k , I ' - � "� = ` � . 'Y _ . {_�: .i�` - ~ -=-----_rL� _ -_� t. .� ''. r`a •2�4� ,. .� �uatCr ,.. _ .. I. - ;t ,. - . . . S�•L4Il..til1� an%, ;i , ' ' v �•/ . - y • . f"it�� . � .S�-ti !�� . , ,�� 4� Y- -� . ' , , _.... ;_.... .`.. ___ �-_-- 'e �-•'-� I .-- -.. , �: ,� --- -- i ��. ; .l , . ;�,r. -tii-"'� -- -'...-_'g �' `' irt `�--- - 'k:' ,; ' � �! ,` - ' � -- - ' � �'` t _ _ : _ „ _ e �` � - ' - ' . • _ �ti'a�; _ .�. ,��.�.___._.. - _-,,r . -- �- ./;' �- � � . � . j . . • i - , � : . ,i' I • ' Ii' . - ' . } � . . ' ' , . i�� -�.� `' ��°,`� �i - �• ;'l . �_' . .`.... . � - ' `� !_; ., f ' -� f - . ..f s,�� =� `' ' � � _ . :� ''S • `k:� , . � _.� ,- ' !t� ' -i: ' . 1' ' �t . ^L'� � �J..� . � � �!,fi . . . i ..-' '+.:;,:g. ` ." � ,. % . ; , . ' . , . � if �. . ;�� . ' ' � V •_'- . . � ::.'•`-<g � . ' . _ y. - ` . 't3t`:: q::, i '� ; f • �' r ` i / _Z . `k:,s'. .;,�c�.:;-: � ...-�', '�r. �'y '"= i ; tA, iF:� Yi �,�F .,:. ;�:y� � -� . 'i � y,; - `, � _,2t'�p�il427� , �l ^ Jh»'f1j ;�,�:,t.'j:''; i. ,' • . , `� r :f`" - r' •�c�' ; • ' fr' - ' ' I _ " _,r_.-^ , :.e[2,. � ; : ';: ',�� Y__��-"� '_` i ' •+` . � �•♦_ f�• � ` . . 'r}, `_ �')' � ',;,' ,ts � � `ti %� � - _ �: .. r ; �.� , � ',, "r , : � c � ' '� • � 9�� Yy' . Z ' Z iEt �' • . ' _ . ' ` ' •ti ' : . �r __ : � : ' _t�-' �',..t f Bt%' o � `�' t �' •.�a%1 �o�r. O Cy `� ••F ' . ', ' 1 .4 - ''1 ' . . . . P .. t,�+� O i.F� 'i•,, . `1 � f ' g��1 O O .. ".. � "� ' ' I� . � � }t , � w 1 � ri � �� ; ':. _ , ' � ; ' _ . . � . , t�.` _. . t- s"�`,��w M ' M .. , ,�-- - .. , . ' � ' ``, ` • . f ' ' � ^ :+ 't �: ' '. $ s°'�',`' t� m ` .'_ �• �"� t r' • � ' ; � ;" '. � F.;f ;; "�i, i y 3 f n� l � . .,r��6 �., � µ- ��'`�''- � ! i� �. 4• i '•. __�i' . '. � /� i: �a0006 •. ��", ""�:T' `l t ✓ .. t _ F . • ' i � +t ,,^. ` 4 I�p� :.y�� ,5 `,` 3 , .��.�i �,.` ` '1, ��e�� Va.?. Q ' � •'. � _ � `:`; ' ` � :� ,'"' �,�" �.? • i `i •.a y' ^ �i -.�4 �1�� .l . _. ..'� �'+` . _..,..�.~-'-�--' 't' -- i� .�.._ ��i.�l'--'..._'•---' i rarL,' �- ' '_'_ --_- \ `,7 ._._.,,_i�.. �� ...:r. . . �.rYiw�ao'�;; ��y, z t,t._,.,... -"j.";4_.__..._�..5......-.�._� - � ' �, 4 \ ' �., , `z . . a- . ' i y .,�� .; ' t_ 3.� � s�x "`ti , . --j - , .. . ., s",,. - _ -'-- --= �,� � ^Reo '; p� . , +. ' o� ,? ;.4 r._ . " tr:, '�t `�"• � , b � c . ....l� . . - - " ' -f" .. �\i.:'._, _ � �i9 . . �� •: 't.4'; ' __=__-a_" _'_" r. _ ; . i1 ' •1. .}. `:,,';: . ___ _- _ -- ` ' . . --,.-. �� '" .. ' ;.\ :�i�� ` - � `,`4 . �f'` . . . ! t ,• �;` •)'� ��plh.i:..J , . . �. . _: ....i ., _ ' . . '. � • _-�. _ ` C�v - v��, � �.��, _ � $.Y �y` �_J � �"•' ' �� •f:^' 6. ' �� .L;; G D 0 �'tr �. . ;,: , �,,: �•t . � � . .. � , �. : ......, . . . �` . .,::. �,, ;;�o Y . . �,Q� . . . . ____ .; . � . �,� BA ��4U.I . ; . � . �Y=: ` � _ . �� -- -� r � - .. �1s ' . •� . ��, . � . ..._.._.. � : a��E,a`,,�-.: � ' . •'. '_ �--- - ��` ,�� . ! „ : � r � . _�A. ��s : A� . - . � ��,;y.: _:___ �, �. ` :35 ,� � �:r �a.' -- --_�: .�. _�.�,.`::., �:,s�. �r 117.30000O1.N I 117.28333° W WGS$4117.26G67°'AI , � /� _._._. _. -,.. IM _ _.. SMLE {(i�i � �. D ._.....- __. ..�m _.�. _�. - IOOOm t� Pimiedfiom TOPO! �1999 F�ildtFower Pxodnciiou. (wwvr.topo.cora) � , Lo ed b SJM ate: 8-28-02 _ g9 y� T�,� FIELD USCS FIELD DRY RELATIVE DEPTH SAMPLE SYMBOL 'MOISTURE DENSITY COMPACTION �ft� DESCRIPTION I%) �P�fl �%) - � TOPSOIL: , ~ 1 Silty fine sand. Red-brown color. Dry to moist. Loose. SM - ❑ Abundant rootlets. ST-1 _ 2 _ 3.0 123.9 - � TERRACE DEPOSITS: � 3- ❑ Sandstone. Fine to medium grained. Red-brown color. 3.7 118.2 - ❑ Dry to moist. Dense. Weathered friable. Cemented. No SW _ 4_ � apparent struc#ure. Scaftered pebbles. 4.8 117.9 - ST-2 5- - End Test Trench at 3%'. -6- - No caving. No groundwater. -7- -8- Date: Logged by: FIELD USCS FIELD DRY RELATIVE DEPTH SAMPLE SYMBOL MOfSTURE DENSITY COMPACTION �ft) . DESCRIPTION (%� (pc� (%) -1- -2- . -3- -4- -5- -6- -7- -8- t ;r,Y `�.:.� ;a� i;'�;i:z ' �i:!a�lt:..c:i>aa;;�L" - �•,`i 'n;te: ;•_a..i=ajti --. .. , .. �. ,. �:?:, i,?i%�t-: � : �.`�;' n�-'s:�'io>. "� _•c fi`.�'Zi��_t:°•�.�:YT,`��:•:`.3 LETON ENGINEERING INC ,~�:-�:.;E��= _ =;^:= �=�,-- VINJE & MIDD , � .:�� .�«;,;;�;ro�;�TE'S;1�rPIT��LQG�;>�r,n�� ;,, G:;c _F� ...:<.s�; r ^%=.�s�: - _ .._:•:��.;:- > :.::'E' _.�: •.:>:. _ � >•:...:.... w._..�.�.,:::>�.'.�.;•-:. �_. _ 2450 Vineyard Avenue, Suite 102 K&S BLACK RAIL ROAD Escondido, California 92029-'1229 Office 760-743-1214 Fax 760-739-0343 pROJECT NO. 02-204-P PLATE 3 �I Sand Cone Test ■ Bulk Sam le ❑ Chunk Sam le O.Driven Rin s� ' ' O �� r � � ,o o ,a -. � . �_� ' -- . r?; � ••, o ,� . �g��. •; .._�` . . - -- -----� , . -� :; ,. .;., �.� •, D `�` ,�� ' � � ` � O� . ,�' �J ' ', • ' T �. �,. . -�-.: -..� - .. � ,.. �_ . +��. � �n�\ � • �_ \ • O Q O �_, ��.'.-- \ o • � �- '-- • , � . - � �i7l�i `:J �30 20 10 0 30 MIL�'S �..�- -- � � � �'AULT - �PIC�IVT�R NIAP � SAN DIEGC? C�UNTY REG10N � . INDICATED EARTHQUAKE EVENTS THROUGH 75 YEAR PERIOD (190Q-1974) � This Map. dafa is compilec! from various sources including the California Division of Mines and Geology, California lnstiieite of Technology, aa�d the Naiional Oceanic antl Atmospheric '� Acirr�inistration. This Map is reproduced from the Catifornia Divisian of Mines anci Geotogy, "Earthquake Epicenter Map of California; Map Sheet 39." �hQuak� iV�agnitude :. ............ � 4' . 0 �"� � . 3 ..........� 5.Q Tt� 5.9 ' ..........� 6.Q i0 fi.9 , ..--�.., 7. di i i3 7.3 �. .....�. Faa�� .\ PROJECT: Job #02-304-P ' BLACK RAIL ROAD. CARLSBAD PLATE: 4 l ..1J � •� .� . \ '\ � ' � • , • `'` ^�� \y��\ � � i `' \l\ �i,;` , '••� .'` 1,\ ' � 1 ` �� \ �� • =,, �ti, o., k, '• �� \`� ��•�� O ) ,�'k � �� :. \ ' � i �• �. � 1 \, . -: � '''.`•,�, - ''� l. ' �''•• �\\ �� . .�'` '': J� ••.,� � •. �i `.O \ � � � _ ��.,� i _r _._.�... � ��- - � ' ' ' 1 , , ' ' ' , ' ' ' ' ' ' ' 1 ' lSOLATIOtV�JOINTS AND RE-�NTFZ4NT CORNER R�i1VF�RCEMENT � � Typical - no scale (a) ISOLATION JOINTS CONTRACTION JOIN" (C) RE-ENTRANT Ct RElNFORCEMEN' N0. 4 BARS Pl BELOW TOP OF (b) ENTRANT NER CRACK NOTES: � 1. isolation joints around the columns should be either circular as shown in (a) or diarnond shaped as shown in (b). if no isolation joints are used around columns, or if the corners of the isolation joints do not meet the contraction joinis, radia( cracking as shown in (c)may occur (reference ACI). 2. In order to control cracking at the re-entrant corners (±270 ° corners), provide reinforcement as shown in (c). 3. Re-entrant corner reinforcement shown herein is provided as a general guideline only and is subject to verification �I and changes by the project architecfi and/or structural engineer based upon slab geometry, locairon, and other ', engineeririg and construcfwn factors. � ��i�J� � i��L��'OI� ��6��E��, 9��. PLATE 5 r-, J ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' JL , , ' ' ' 1 ' ' Waterproofing RETAINING WALL DR,AtN DETAIL Typicai - no scafe � draina e —r— ' Granular,.non-expansive� . " � backfiil, Compacied.:' ' � . � ,� : . �. . . , �' , r-1'—.--►j .' . .��..;:..: : f=: � Filfer Materiai. Crushed rock (wrapped in filter .fabrici or Class 2 Permeable Material Perforafed droin pipe '�=: �'� � � . ��2 (see specifiications below) ; ,_:.......... _ .._. � , , - ; �� Competent, approved soils or bedrock � CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS: � � 1. Provide granular, non-expansive backfiil soil in 1:1 gradient wedge behind wall. Compact backfiii to minimum 9Q°/a of laboratory standard. " . 2. Provide back drainage for wall to prevent build-up of hydrostatic pressures. Use drainage openings along base of wall or back drain system as outlined below. 3. Backdrain should consist of 4" diameter PVC pipe (Schedule 40 or equivalent) with pertorations down. Drain to suitable outlet at minimum 1%. Provide'/" - 1'/" crushed gravel filter wrapped in fiiter fabric (Mirafi 140N or equivalent). Delete filier fabric wrap if Caltrans Class 2 permeable materiai is used. Compact Ciass 2 material to minimum 90% of laboratory standard. 4. Seal back of wall with waterproofing in accordance with architect's specifications. . 5. Provide positive drainage to disallow ponding of water above wall. Lined drainage ditch to minimum 2% flow awayfrom wall is recommended. * Use 1'/: cubic foot per foot with granular backfill soil and 4 cubic foot per foot if expansive backfil( soil is used. VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. PLATE 6