The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCUP 139B; St Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church; Geotechnical Report; 2010-03-08C// March 8,2010 Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church Attention: Mr, Donald E. Coleman 6628 Santa Isabel Street Carlsbad, California 92009 CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. 1441 MONTIEL ROAD, SUITE 115 I [SCOHDIDC, Ci 9JC2S I 7M.74J 49E5 I FAX 76; 7(6.9106 CTE Project No. 10-8436G RECEIVED HAY 21 2010 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Subject:Addendum 01 to On-Site Pavement Recommendations for Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church 6628 Santa Isabel Street Carlsbad, California CTE Project No.: 10-8436G, dated January 29,2010 RECORD COPY Initial Date Mr. Coleman: As requested, Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. (CTE) provides the following addendum information for the above referenced document. Recommendations contained in our January 29, 2010 document that are not specifically modified herein remain applicable without revision. In our above referenced pavement evaluation/recommendation letter, we provided recommendations that were indicated to be for the proposed pavement improvements in the southeastern most parking lot area where a fire access lane and new pavement area is proposed. However, as part of our evaluation, we also observed the existing conditions in the northwestern most parking lot area where a new designated fire access lane is proposed. Based on our observations in both of the parking lot areas, similar conditions appear present. As such, the recommendations presented in our referenced report are considered appropriate for both of the indicated parking lot areas where improvements are proposed, At this time, it appears that grinding, properly placing a tack coat and overlay fabric, and increasing the completed overlaid asphalt section by a minimum of one inch (as previously recommended) is anticipated to provide completed pavement areas that will perform adequately for the intended use and traffic. However, all pavement areas should be observed and potentially re-evaluated following building construction in an attempt to determine if heavy construction loads or traffic will produce more significant pavement breakdown areas. u>-J (VO SAN OIEBO I ESCONOIDO I RIVERSIDE I VENTURA I MERCED I TRACY I SACRAMENTO I PALM SPRINGS I PHOENIX GEOTECHNICAL I ENVIRONMENTAL I CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION AND TESTING 1 CIVIL ENGINEER ING I SURVEYIN6 Addendum 01 to On-Site Pavement Recommendations for Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church 6628 Santa Isabel Street, Carlsbad, California March 8, 2010 Page 2 CTEJobNo.: 10-84360 Where new pavements are desired or are required due to distress or pavement breakdown during pending construction, the minimum recommended pavement sections previously provided are anticipated to be adequate. However, subgrade sampling and confirmation testing should be performed during construction. Our conclusions and recommendations are based on an analysis of the observed conditions. If conditions different from those described in this report are encountered, our office should be notified and additional recommendations, if required, will be provided upon request. The recommendations herein are also subject to the limitation previously presented in our referenced documents(s). The opportunity to be of service is appreciated. If you have any questions regarding our recommendations, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Respectfully submitted, CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. ;an T. Math, GE# 2665 Principal Engineer CC: Mr. Pete Kruse, Via Email: pjkca@att.net Mr. Wayne Holtan, Via Email: wavne.holtan@domusstudio,com \\Esc_server\projects\10-8001 to 10-9000 Projects\10-8436G\Ltr_Addend 01 to Pavement Recs.doc Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church Page 1 of 5 6628 Santa Isabel Street, Carlsbad, California February 8. 2010. Revised April 8. 2010 CTEJobNo.: 10-8436G 5.8 Shoring 5.8.1 General We understand that temporary and/or permanent shoring may be necessary at the subject site. CTE should review the proposed shoring plans and calculations when available. It is anticipated that the majority of the shoring would consist of cantilevered or tied-back soldier piles, with continuous timber lagging. The shoring contractor should be experienced in the design and construction of similar shoring systems and demonstrate proven competence on projects of similar size and magnitude. Mechanical anchors and tendons extending beyond the property boundary may require special permitting from the City or governing authority, if proposed or required. Additionally, care should be taken to protect underground facilities in private property and public right-of-way areas. Although not expected, localized perched groundwater may be encountered during construction of the shoring; consequently, dewatering could be necessary to install shoring. Disposal of collected water should be performed in accordance with pertinent regulatory requirements. The shoring designer and contractor should anticipate locally saturated and/or cohesionless materials subject to sloughing. Tiebacks penetrating into the formational materials may also locally \\Esc_server\projects\10-8001 to 10-9000 Projects\10-8436G\Ltr_Temp ShoringRecs.doc Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church Page 2 of 5 6628 Santa Isabel Street, Carlsbad, California February 8. 2010. Revised April 8. 2010 CTEJobNo.: 10-8436G encounter very hard cemented sands with gravels, etc., and installation may become difficult. 5.8.2 Lateral Earth Pressures For design of braced and unbraced temporary and/or permanent shoring, we recommend the use of at-rest and active earth pressures, respectively, indicated in our previous project soils report. In addition to the recommended earth pressures, the upper 10 feet of shoring adjacent to streets or other traffic areas should be designed to resist a uniform lateral pressure of 100 pounds per square foot (psf) that results from an assumed 300-psf surcharge behind the shoring due to typical street or other traffic. For traffic that remains more than 10 feet away from shoring, surcharge loading may be neglected. Shoring designed as recommended herein should deflect less than one inch at the top of the shored embankment. These deflections should be within tolerable limits for adjacent improvements such as buried pipes and conduits, or sidewalks and streets, provided these improvements are in generally good structural condition. Additional friction tieback anchors and/or a greater active design pressure may be used to reduce the amount of deflection at the face of the shoring. CTE should review the final shoring calculations and drawings. In addition, observation by this office is recommended during shoring installation activities. \\Esc_server\projects\10-8001 to 10-9000 Projects\10-8436G\Ltr_Temp Shoring Recs.doc Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church Page 3 of 5 6628 Santa Isabel Street, Carlsbad, California February 8. 2010, Revised April 8. 2010 CTEJobNo.: 10-8436G Weekly monitoring of settlement and horizontal movement of the shoring system and adjacent improvements should be performed during construction. The number and location of monitoring points, as well as the monitoring schedule, should be indicated on the shoring plans and reviewed by CTE. 5.8.3 Design of Soldier Beams For conventional soldier beam and lagging shoring systems, soldier beams, spaced at least three diameters on center, may be designed using an allowable passive pressure of 500 psf per foot of depth, up to a maximum of 8,000 psf, for the portion of the soldier beam embedded in competent dense native materials. Provisions should be made for firm contact between the beam and the surrounding soils. Concrete placed in soldier beams below the proposed excavation should have adequate strength to transfer the imposed pressures. A lean concrete mix may be used in the soldier pile above the base of the proposed excavation. Soldier beam installations should be observed by CTE. 5.8.4 Lagging Due to the locally erodible nature of onsite materials (especially the anticipated shallow fills), continuous timber lagging between soldier beams is recommended. Lagging should be designed for the recommended earth pressures but be limited to a maximum pressure of 500 psf due to arching hi the soils. Voids created behind lagging by sloughing of locally cohesionless soil layers should be grouted or slurry filled, as necessary. In addition, generally the upper two to four feet of \\Esc_server\projects\10-8001 to 10-9000 Projects\10-8436G\Ltr_Temp ShoringRecs.doc Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church Page 4 of 5 6628 Santa Isabel Street, Carlsbad, California February 8. 2010. Revised April 8. 2010 CTEJobNo.: 10-8436G lagging should be grouted or slurry-filled to assist in diverting surface water from migrating behind the shoring walls. 5.8.5 Friction Anchor Geotechnical Design Parameters For design purposes, an average friction of 3,500 psf for the portion of a drilled friction anchor extending beyond the active wedge and embedded in the effective zone, may be assumed However, additional capacities may be developed based on the installation method. Friction anchors should extend a minimum of 20 feet beyond the active wedge. However, greater depths may be required to develop the desired capacities. The active wedge is, at a minimum, defined by a line extending up at a 45 degree angle from the bottom of the retained excavation. 5.8.6 Friction Anchor Installation Friction anchors may generally be installed at angles of 15 through 40 degrees below horizontal. Anchors should be filled from the tip outward to the approximate plane where the active wedge begins. The portion of anchor in the active wedge generally should not be bonded to concrete. Localized caving of saturated or cohesionless soils may occur during tieback drilling and the contractor should have adequate means for mitigation. 5.8.7 Friction Anchor Testing All of the anchors should, at minimum, be load tested to at least 133% of the design load and hi accordance with the Post Tensioning Institute. CTE should continuously observe the installation of the anchors and load testing. The shoring contractor should supply calibration history and capacity information on the hydraulic jacks. \\Esc_server\projects\10-8001 to 10-9000 Projects\10-8436G\Ltr_Temp ShoringRecs.doc Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church Page 5 of 5 6628 Santa Isabel Street, Carlsbad, California February 8. 2010. Revised April 8. 2010 CTEJobNo.: 10-8436G Temporary construction shoring tieback anchors that extend into the public right- of-way may require disengaging or removal following construction of the proposed improvements. Disengaging temporary shoring tieback anchors should have no adverse affects on proposed or existing improvements, provided proposed improvements are designed in accordance with the recommendations contained in the soils report. In addition, CTE must observe disengaging and/or removal of tieback anchors and provide a written report to the City at the project completion. \\Esc_server\projects\10-8001 to 10-9000 Projects\10-8436G\Ltr_Temp ShoringRecs.doc CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING. INC. 1441 MQNTIEI ROAD, sum 1151 ESCONDIOQ, CA 92026 1750.746.49551 m 760.746.980E January 29, 2010 CTE Project No. 10-8436G Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church Attention: Mr, Donald E. Coleman 6628 Santa Isabel Street Carlsbad. California 92009 Subject: On-Site Pavement Recommendations for Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church 6628 Santa Isabel Street Carlsbad. California Mr. Coleman: As requested. Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. (CTE) is pleased to provide pavement recommendations for the subject site. The following pavement recommendations are for private driveways and parking areas. In order to arrive at our recommendations, we advanced a shallow hand-auger boring, gathered a sample of the near-surface soils, and conducted laboratory tests on the sample. We analyzed the results to provide the conclusions and recommendations presented herein. 1,0 Field investigation and Laboratory Testing We advanced the boring in the area of the proposed drive and parking improvements located near the eastern corner of the site, adjacent to the intersection of Santa Isabel Street and El Fuerte Street. The approximate location of the exploration and improvements are shown on the attached Fijjure 1.•o" In addition, during our site visit we observed very little significant distress in the existing asphalt-paved parking and drive areas located just northwest of the proposed parking area. However, areas of curbs/island planters did show signs of distress typical of existing improvements. The attached Figure 2 presents photographs of some of the distressed areas. The apparent heaving/settlement and distress of curb areas could be the result of expansive soils located nearby. Another possible cause of this distress is adjacent or underlying tree roots. Although we did not observe the area during precipitation, the surface drainage of the existing paved areas appears to be adequate. Surface drainage should be maintained in existing paved areas, and built into proposed paved areas. Standing water will shorten the service life and SAH DIE60 i ESCONDIDD I RIVERSIDE I VENTURA I MERCED I TRACY I SACRAMENTO I PALM SPRINGS BEOTECKNICAL I ENVIRONMENTAL j CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION ANC TESTING I CIVIL ENGINEERING ! SURVEYING On-Site Pavement Recommendations for Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church 6628 Santa Isabel Street, Carlsbad, California January 29,2010 Page 2 CTEJobNo.:10-8436G increase maintenance costs associated with pavement. We conducted a laboratory test for resistance value, or "R" value, of the soil sample taken from the proposed pavement area. The test results indicate an "R" value of 30. 2.0 Recommendations Asphalt-paved areas should be designed and maintained in accordance with, for example, the recommendations of the Asphalt Institute, or other widely recognized authority. If you choose to use Portland cement concrete, then concrete-paved areas should be designed and maintained in accordance with, for example, the recommendations of the American Concrete Institute, the Portland Cement Association, or other widely recognized authority, particularly with regard to thickened edges, joints, and drainage. All pavement should be constructed in accordance with the current Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, also known as the "Greenbook." For the design of asphalt pavement structural sections, we typically use Traffic Indices of at least 4.5 and 5.5 for parking and drive/loading areas, respectively. The use of these Traffic Indices should be evaluated by the agency with jurisdiction, or the project civil engineer. For the asphalt pavement section, we have used the pavement design method found in the Highway Design Manual issued by the State of California Department of Transportation, revised July, 2008; this is generally referred to as the "Caltrans Method." Minimum asphalt pavement sections for new construction are provided in the following Table 1. TABLE 1 MINIMUM ASPHALT PAVEMENT SECTIONS Location Parking Areas Drive and Loading Areas Traffic Index (Assumed) 4.5 5.5 Subgrade R Value 30 30 AC Thickness (inches) 3.0 3.0 4.0 Class 2* Aggregate Base Thickness (inches) 5.0 8.0 6.0 *Caltrans Class 2 Aggregate Base, or Equivalent For new asphalt pavement construction, all aggregate base materials and the upper 12 inches of subgrade materials should be compacted to a relative compaction of at least 95 percent of the laboratory maximum, at a moisture content above the optimum, as determined by ASTM D 1557. \\Esc_server'\projects\IO-800! to 10-9000Projects\lO-8436G\Ltr_PBvementRecs.doc On-Site Pavement Recommendations for Page 3 Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church 6628 Santa Isabel Street, Carlsbad, California January 29, 2010 CTEJobNo.: 10-8436G We understand that it may be desirable to use Portland cement concrete for pavement. CTE recommends a minimum pavement section of six (6) inches of Portland cement concrete over compacted subgrade. The concrete should have a Modulus of Rupture of at least 600 pounds per square inch (psi), which corresponds to a compressive strength of approximately 4000 psi. The upper foot of subgrade should be uniformly compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum dry density, in accordance with ASTM D 1557. In addition, the subgrade should be proof rolled using a heavily loaded, wheeled vehicle (e.g., a full water truck) to evaluate yielding. If yielding subgrade is encountered, it should be excavated to firm soil or bedrock. Moisture-conditioned fill should then be placed in thin lifts and compacted, as above, in the resulting void, up to pavement subgrade elevation. For concrete pavement, consideration should be given to including Number 4 reinforcing bars placed at 24 inches on center, each way, near mid-pavement height, since it would improve pavement trafficability and pavement life with respect to the cracks that will inevitably develop. However, pavements can be constructed without reinforcement, if joints are spaced no greater than a distance equal to 24 times the pavement thickness, on center in both directions. However, without reinforcement, you should anticipate larger cracks. 2.1 Asphalt Overlay of Parking Areas The existing pavement section(s) at the site was not determined by destructive methods. Instead, pavements were visually confirmed to be performing adequately by qualitative means. In asphalt parking areas that are not excessively distressed, and located immediately adjacent to proposed pavement areas, you may grind and overlay the existing asphalt section. The grinding and overlaying should increase the current section by at least one inch, to generally enhance performance and increase performance. Overlay areas should receive a suitable tack coat (or similar) placed on the prepared pavement surface. In areas where only light to moderate distress of the existing improvements is present, a suitable tack coat and a layer of Mirapave 500 Nonwoven Asphalt Overlay Fabric (or superior), placed in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications, are recommended. Preparatory grinding of the existing asphalt surfaces, as per Greenbook specifications, is also recommended. As indicated, proper surface drainage should be maintained or provided via appropriate overlay thickness. 3.0 Limitations The recommendations provided in this report are based on the anticipated construction and the subsurface conditions found in our exploratory boring. The extrapolated subsurface conditions should be checked in the field during construction. \\Esc_server\prqjects\10-800l lo 10-9000 Projects^0-8436G\Ltr_Pavemenl Recs.doc On-Site Pavement Recommendations for Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church 6628 Santa Isabel Street. Carlsbad, California Januarv 29, 2010 Page 4 CTEJobNo.: 10-8436G The findings of this report are valid as of the present date. However, changes in the conditions of a property can occur with the passage of time, whether they be due to natural processes or the works of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standards may occur, whether they result from legislation or the broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, the findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside our control. Therefore, this report is subject to review and should not be relied upon after a period of three years. The field evaluation, laboratory testing and geotechnicai analysis presented in this report have been conducted according to current engineering practice and the standard of care exercised by reputable Geotechnical Consultants performing similar tasks in this area. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made regarding the conclusions, recommendations and opinions expressed in this report. Variations may exist and conditions not observed or described in this report may be encountered during construction. Our conclusions and recommendations are based on an analysis of the observed conditions. If conditions different from those described in this report are encountered, our office should be notified and additional recommendations, if required, will be provided upon request. The opportunity to be of service is appreciated. If you have any questions regarding our recommendations, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Respectfully submitted, CONSIBIICOON TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. Michael Balagtas Staff Engineer Dan T. Math, GE# 2665 Principal Engineer Attachments: Figure 1 Exploration Location Map Figure 2 Site Photographs Laboratory "R" Value Result Sheet Pavement Section Design Summary Sheet \\Esc_server\projecisMQ-8001 10 10-9000 Projects\!0-8436G\Ltr_ Pavement Recs doc t i t t I • i i hi ft i I i i i fc I I i i LEGEND 6 ! $ APPROXIMATE HAND AUGER BORING LOCATION CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. PLANKING -CIVIL EK3IHEERING • tAND SURVEYING - GEQTtCHaiCH 14*1 UDNIItL 10*1, SlilE 115 EStONOIDG CA 3302S, ?K:(ffiBl HC-4ISS EXPLORATION LOCATION MAP ST. EUZABITH SETON CATHOLIC CHUBCH8628 SANTA ISABEL STREETCARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 10-0431 J2wJ| CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. PLAHKINc - CIVIL EHBINEERmS-UND SURVETMS • GfOTtCHNICAl H41 MOXTIEl IO*G. SUITE 115 EiCONIIO « S25J1 PH:(7B«! 7«MMS SITE PHOTOGRAPHS ST. ELIZABETH SETON CATHOLIC CHUTOH0826 SANTA BAHKL STRKBT CARLSBAD, CAUFOENU SCALE: NO SCALE CTE JOB NO.: 10-8436 DATE J/li RGURE: 2 REPORT OF RESISTANCE 'Rf VALUE-EXPANSION PRESSURE Job No. 10-B436G Job Name: St. Elizabeth Seton Church Lab/Invoice No. 19651 Type of Material: SM-SC Sampled By: Source of Material: B1 @ .5-3.5' T St^^ *y: w Tested/ Calc.By: Test Procedure: Cal 301 Reviewed By: Specimen/ Mold No. Compactor Air Pressure, ft.lbs. Initial Moisture. % Wet weight and Dry weight, g Water Added, ml Moisture at Compaction, % Wt. Of Btiquette and Mold, g Wt.OfMold.g Wt.OfBriquitte.g Height of Briquette, in Dry Density, pcf StabilometerPH@1000!bs Stabilometer PH @ 2000 Ibs Displacement R' Value Corrected 'R' Value Exudation Pressure, Ibs Exudation Pressure, psi Stabilometer Thickness - ft Expansion Pressure Expansion Press, Thick-R 9 350 13.3 1200.Q 1059.1 20 15.2 3222 2117 1105 2.53 114J 39 93 3.91 31 31 4750 380 0.66 0.0014 0.46 8 250 13.3 1200.0 1059.1 30 ie.1 3171 2121 1850 ; 2.44 112.3 40 96 4.02 28 27 2880 230 0.70 0.0005 0,16 7 150 13.3 1200.0 1058.1 4D 17.1 3190 2090 71100 ; 2.56 1113 5 50 119 4.31 i6 17 1910 153 6.79 0.0000 0.00 Mike Balagtas Date 1/20/10 Mike Balagtas Date: 1/20/10 Stewart Sloan Date: 1/26/10 Anthony Scott Date: 1/27/10 Exudation 30 Expansion N/A R-value 30 Tl 4.5 Expansion «VAUUS Initial Wt. Sample, g Dry wt. Sample, g Wet Wt. Sample, g 1 =• J 1 !- —i \<t i | ii 0.5 -1 —L ! i | i \ 1 1 ^1 v***^ I/ ^Tl/i I i Ki J/i !Q / i ^"P** CX 0 / l i — . — i — i .|.-~_^ : — 0.5 X 1 IX X1 X | I ! i ii l ^-r- 4 .1.5 8C — _. . — RVALUE® 300 LBS/IN2 i j 'i 1 i4"-i +~ a. - - ~t~ 1 -4...,-j-i — ~~~*— t"1 i ' ' i ' — ~T~~ i I !i ' i -' ' "I' ' i | | H* |-'t- - r — i ' i r i *1, ; | ' i r — ^Ilpti-H — 1-7- -?- ; j j l : M ( •^•f"1 1 Ol^T -^ir44--::::J:£t: a I i, T ! i ! ' • 1 f I ' 1 ] ' -_.___U~.~ Jj -_i- ^J-i-^H f-^- •H — r 1" i* • •* 't1 • I ' \\l f :"r j M •• ±ti'! 1 ! 4-4-4 z.-t-xmr- *u 1 * f 1 T'f * *• f" -^ ' J i ' ! M qci ' »jO ' i i ' ' 1 ! "" -. t . . t i { i ,~ 3D 3 35iij I* i . ! i . j- §Iw1~nd\1 _i f^T"Z 4— H-f i--.. t 1 i <- 0- K i , ' J U«g ' H\ i 5 -It-i — i T 1 1 1- tf^XL-K;~4-H-H-H K p|[|i|yH-JOfe. 15 8 ~T~~ ' i ! \ ! ' "f~'~'! ™-*-*-4-t-i i— *~|- f- * '* *• -': I I i )0 700 600 500 400 300 20 EXUDATION PRESSURE, LBS/ X_ii_LL_^J.T 10 0 100 0 1N2 Cover Thickness by Expansion Pressure-Feet | Expansion From Graph:|N/A { Anthony Scott Laboratory Manager I i Pavement Section Evaluation Calculations for: | | DESIGN DATA TRAFFIC INDEX R-VALUE ! SUBGRADE BASE REQUIRED STRUCTURAL SECTION IGETOTAL MINIMUM A.C. THICKNESS GRAVEL FACTOR GEAC+ SAFETY FACTOR MINIMUM AC REQ. SPECIFIED A.C. THICKNESS (ACTUAL AC THICKNESS JACTUAL GEAC MINIMUM BASE THICKNESS GRAVEL FACTOR GEBASE ACTUAL GEAC-GEBASE BASE 10-8436G 4.5 30 78 1.01 ft 2.54 0.52ft 2.5 in 3.0 In 0.64ft 1.1 0.37 ft 0.64ft 5.0 in i Note: Highlighted requires user input ! 5.5 30 78 1.23ft 2.32 0.59ft 3.0 in 3.0 in 0.58ft 1.1 0.65ft 0.58ft 8.0 in 5.5 30 78 1.23ft 2.32 0.59ft 3.0 in 4.0 in 0.77 ft 1.1 0.46 ft 0.77 ft 6.0 in Page 1 CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING. INC. 1441 MONTIEL ROAD, SUITE m I ESCDNDIDD, CA 92026 1 760.746.4955 1 FAX 760.?<6.9B06 September 11, 2009 CTE Project No. 10-8436G Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church Attention: Mr. Donald E. Coleman 6628 Santa Isabel Street Carlsbad, California 92009 Subject: Update 01 to Preliminary Geotechnical Report Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church 6628 Santa Isabel Street, Carlsbad, California Reference: Update to Preliminary Geotechnical Report Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church 6628 Santa Isabel Street, Carlsbad, California Preliminary Geotechnical Report CTE Project No.: 10-8436G, dated May 25, 2006 Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church 6628 Santa Isabel Street CTE Project No.: 10-7423G, dated January 10,2004 Mr. Coleman: As required and in accordance with your request, Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. (CTE) has completed our update of the above referenced report to be hi compliance with the 2007 California Building Code (CBC). This update letter includes new seismic parameters for the calculation of seismic ground motions for use in structural design. In addition, we have reiterated our previously presented lateral and earth pressures from our preliminary geotechnical report, dated January 2004, referenced above with the addition of seismic parameters and formulas for the calculation of seismically induced lateral pressures for retaining walls, which will likely be required for the subject project. Section 1.0 herein supersedes Section 4.4.3 in our original 2004 geotechnical report, and Section 2.0 herein supersedes Section 5.8 in the 2004 report. There were no other sections that required updating for compliance with the 2007 CBC. Therefore, the remaining recommendations presented in the referenced report are considered suitable and appropriate, without revision, for use during preliminary project design. However, CTE reserves the right to modify recommendations, as necessary, as project design and construction progress. CTE shall also review the precise project grading and foundation plans, as soon as available, in order to confrrnT SAN DIEGO I ESCONDIDO I RIVERSIDE I VENTURA I MERCED I TRACY I SACRAMENTO I PALM SPRINGS I PHOENIX GEOTECHNICAL I ENVIRONMENTAL | CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION AND TESTING I CIVIL ENGINEERING I SURVEYING Update 01 to Preliminary Geotechnical Report Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church 6628 Santa Isabel Street, Carlsbad, California September 11.2009 Page 2 CTEJobNo.:10-8436G foundation elements will bear in appropriate formational materials as anticipated by the referenced document. 1.0 SEISMIC GROUND MOTION VALUES The seismic ground motion values listed in Table 1 were derived in accordance with the California Building Code (CBC), 2007. This was accomplished by establishing the Site Class based on the soil properties at the site, and then calculating the site coefficients and parameters using the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Java Ground Motion Parameter Calculator- Version 5.0.9 and site coordinates of 33.10912° latitude and -117.239761° longitude. These values are intended for the design of structures to resist the effects of earthquake ground motions. TABLE 1 SEISMIC GROUND MOTION VALUES PARAMETER Site Class Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter, Ss Mapped Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter, Si Seismic Coefficient, Fa Seismic Coefficient, Fv MCE Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter, SMs MCE Spectral Response Acceleration Parameter, SM1 Design Spectral Response Acceleration, Parameter SDS Design Spectral Response Acceleration, Parameter SDI VALUE D 1.097g 0.41 4g 1.061 1.586 1.164g 0.657g 0.776g 0.438g CBC REFERENCE Table 1613.5.2 Figure 1613.5(3) Figure 1613.5(4) Table 1613.5.3(1) Table 1613.5.3(2) Section 16 13. 5. 3 Section 1613.5.3 Section 1613.5.4 Section 1613.5.4 2.0 LATERAL RESISTANCE AND EARTH PRESSURES The following recommendations may be used for shallow footings on the site. Foundations placed in firm, well-compacted fill material maybe designed using a coefficient of friction of 0.30 (total frictional resistance equals coefficient of friction multiplied by the dead load). A design passive resistance value of 300 pounds per square foot per foot of depth (with a maximum value of 1500 pounds per square foot) may be used. The allowable lateral resistance Update 01 to Preliminary Geotechnical Report Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church 6628 Santa Isabel Street, Carlsbad, California September 11,2009 Page 3 CTEJobNo.:10-8436G can be taken as the sum of the frictional resistance and the passive resistance, provided the passive resistance does not exceed two-thirds of the total allowable resistance. Though not anticipated, retaining walls up to 10 feet high and backfilled using granular soils may be designed using the equivalent fluid weights given in Table 2 below. Moderately to highly expansive site soils should not be used for wall backfill. TABLE 2 EQUIVALENT FLUID UNIT WEIGHTS (pounds per cubic foot) WALL TYPE CANTILEVER WALL (YIELDING) RESTRAINED WALL LEVEL BACKFILL 35 55 SLOPE BACKFILL 2:1 (HORIZONTAL: VERTICAL) 60 90 If required, lateral pressures on cantilever retaining walls (yielding walls) due to earthquake motions maybe calculated based on work by Seed and Whitman (1970). The total lateral thrust against a properly drained and backfilled cantilever retaining wall above the groundwater level can be expressed as: PAE = PA + APAE For non-yielding (or "restrained") such walls, the total lateral thrust may be similarly calculated based on work by Wood (1973): PKE = PK + APKE Where PA = Static Active Thrust (form Table 6) PK = Static Restrained Wall Thrust (form Table 6) APAg - Dynamic Active Thrust Increment = (3/8) kh 7H2 APxE = Dynamic Restrained Thrust Increment = kh yH2 kh = '/z Peak Ground Acceleration = J/2 (SDS/2.5) = 0.155g, H = Total Height of the Wall •y = Total Unit Weight of Soil ~ 125 pounds per cubic foot The increment of dynamic thrust in both cases should be distributed trapezoidally, with a line of action located at 0.6H above the bottom of the wall. Update 01 to Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 4 Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church 6628 Santa Isabel Street, Carlsbad, California September 11, 2009 CTE Job No.: 10-8436G The values above assume generally non-expansive backfill and free-draining conditions. Measures should be taken to prevent moisture buildup behind all retaining walls. Drainage measures should include free-draining backfill materials and perforated drains as per the project architect or structural engineer. These drains should discharge to an appropriate offsite location as per the project architect or structural engineer. "Wall waterproofing should be specified the project architect. 3.0 LIMITATIONS The field evaluation, laboratory testing and geotechnical analysis presented in our reports have been conducted according to current engineering practice and the standard of care exercised by reputable geotechnical consultants performing similar tasks in this area. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made regarding the conclusions, recommendations and opinions expressed in mis report. Variations may exist and conditions not observed or described may be encountered during construction. The findings of our reports arc valid as of the present date. However, changes in the conditions of a property can occur with the passage of time, whether they be due to natural processes or the works of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standards may occur, whether they result from legislation or the broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, the findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside our control. Therefore, this report is subject to review and should not be relied upon after a period of three years. CTE's conclusions and recommendations are based on an analysis of the observed conditions. If conditions different from those described in this report are encountered, our office should be notified and additional recommendations, if required, will be provided upon request. As indicated, the preliminary anticipated recommendations herein are based on our previous completed subsurface explorations, and the referenced documents. The anticipated conditions should be checked in the field during construction. Recommendations provided in this letter are based on the understanding and assumption that CTE will provide the observation and testing services for the project. The proj ect Geotechnical Engineer or their designated representative should evaluate all footing excavations before reinforcing steel placement. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service on this project. Should you have any questions or need further information please do not hesitate to contact this office. Update 01 to Preliminary Geotechnical Report Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church 6628 Santa Isabel Street, Carlsbad, California September 11,2009 Page 5 CTEJobNo.: 10-8436G Respectfully submitted, CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC Dan Tlath, GE# 2665 Principal Engineer Martin Siem, CEG# 2311 Certified Engineering Geologist CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING. INC. SAN DIEGO, CA 1441 Montiel Road Suite 115 Escondido.CA 92026 (760)746-4955 (760) 746-9806 FAX RIVERSIDE, CA 12155 Magnolia Ave. Suite 6C Riverside, CA 92503 (951)352-6701 (951) 352-6705 FAX VENTURA, CA 1645 Pacific Ave. Suite 107 Oxnard,CA 93033 (805)486-6475 (805) 486-9016 FAX THACY.CA 242 W. Larch Suite F Tracy, CA 95376 (209)839-2890 (209) 839-2895 FAX SACRAMENTO, CA 3628 Madison Ave. Suite 22 N. Highlands, CA 95660 (916)331-6030 (916) 331-6037 FAX N. PALM SPRINGS, CA 19020 N. Indian Ave. Suite 2-K N. Palm Springs, CA 92258 (760)329-4677 (760) 328-4896- FAX May 25, 2006 Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church Attention: Mr. Donald E. Coleman 6628 Santa Isabel Street Carlsbad, California 92009 CTE Project No. 10-8436G Subject: Reference: Update to Preliminary Geotechnical Report Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church 6628 Santa Isabel Street, Carlsbad, California Preliminary Geotechnical Report Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church 6628 Santa Isabel Street CTE Project No.: 10-7423G, dated January 10, 2004 Mr. Coleman: In accordance with your request, Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. (CTE) has performed a reconnaissance of the subject site, and has reviewed the previously prepared report referenced above. Based on our review, CTE has found the recommendations in the referenced report to be in compliance with common geotechnical engineering practices. Therefore, the recommendations presented in the referenced report are considered suitable and appropriate, without revision, for use during preliminary project design. However, CTE reserves the right to modify recommendations, as necessary, as project design and construction progress. CTE shall also review the precise project grading and foundation plans, as soon as available, in order to confirm foundation elements will bear in appropriate formational materials as anticipated by the referenced document. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service on this project. Should you have questions, please contact the undersigned at your convenience. Respectfully submitted, CONSTRUCTION TES Dan T. Math, GE# 2665 Principal Engineer RING, INC. Martin Siem, CEG# 23 11 Certified Engineering Geologist GEOTECHNICAL I ENVIRONMENTAL I CO ION INSPECTION AND TESTING I CIVIL ENGINEERING I SURVEYING CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING. INC. SAN DIEGO, CA 1441 Montiel Road Suite 115 Escomfido, CA 92026 (760)746-4955 (760) 746-9806 FAX RIVERSIDE, CA 12155 Magnolia Ave. Suite 6C RK/ecside,CA 92503 (951) 352-6701 (951) 352-6705 FAX VENTURA, CA 1645 Pacific Ave. Suite 107 Oxnart.CA 93033 (805)466-6475 (805) 486-9016 FAX TRACY, CA 242 W. Larch Suite F Tracy, CA 95376 (209)839-2890 (209) 839-2895 FAX SACRAMENTO, CA 3628 Madison Ave. Suite 22 N. Highlands. CA 95660 (916)331-6030 (916) 331-6037 FAX N. PALM SPRINGS. CA 19020 N. Indian Ave. Suite 2-K N. Palm Springs, CA 92258 (760)329-4677 (760) 328-4896- FAX PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT PROPOSED SOCIAL HALL ST. ELIZABETH SETON CATHOLIC CHURCH 6628 SANTA ISABEL STREET CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA PREPARED FOR: CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF SAN DIEGO ATTENTION: MR. JOEL KING P.O. BOX 85728 SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92186 PREPARED BY: CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. 2414 VINEYARD AVENUE, SUITE G ESCONDIDO, CA 92029 P a, CTEJOBNO. 10-7423G JANUARY 10, 2004 GEOTECHNICAL I ENVIRONMENTAL I CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION AND TESTING I CIVIL ENGINEERING i SURVEYING TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE INVESTIGATION SUMMARY 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND SCOPE OF SERVICES 2 1.1 Introduction 2 1.2 Scope of Services 2 2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION 3 3.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS 3 3.1 Field Investigation 3 3.2 Laboratory Investigation 4 4.0 GEOLOGY 4 4.1 General Setting 4 4.2 Geologic Conditions 5 4.2.1 Undocumented Fill 5 4.2.2 Santiago Formation 6 4.2.3 Santiago Peak Volcanics 6 4.3 Groundwater Conditions 7 4.4 Geologic Hazards 7 4.4.1 General Geologic Hazards Observation 7 4.4.2 Local and Regional Faulting 7 4.4.3 Site Near Source Factors and Seismic Coefficients 8 4.4.4 Liquefaction Evaluation and Seismic Settlement Evaluation 8 4.4.5 Tsunamis and Seiche Evaluation 9 4.4.6 Landsliding or Rocksliding 9 ' 4.4.7 Compressible and Expansive Soils 10 4.4.8 Corrosive Soils 10 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 10 5.1 General 10 5.2 Site Preparation 10 5.3 Site Excavation 11 5.4 Fill Placement and Compaction 12 5.5 Fill Materials 12 5.6 Temporary Construction Slopes 13 5.7 Foundations and Slab Recommendations 14 5.7.1 Foundations 14 5.7.2 Foundation Settlement 15 5.7.3 Foundation Setback 15 5.7.4 Interior Concrete Slabs 15 5.8 Lateral Resistance and Earth Pressures 16 5.9 Exterior Flatwork 17 5.10 Drainage 17 5.11 Vehicular Pavements 18 5.11.1 Asphalt Concrete Pavement 18 5.11.2 Portland Cement Concrete Pavements 18 5.12 Slopes 20 5.13 Construction Observation 20 5.14 Plan Review 21 6.0 LIMITATIONS OF INVESTIGATION 21 FIGURES "MP FIGURE 1 INDEX MAP FIGURE 2 SITE MAP IP APPENDICES IF APPENDDC A REFERENCES CITED a, APPENDIX B EXPLORATION LOGS APPENDIX C LABORATORY METHODS AND RESULTS *• APPENDIX D STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS m F * Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 1 Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 4. 2004 Job No. 10-7423G INVESTIGATION SUMMARY Our investigation was performed to provide site-specific geotechnical information for the proposed Social Hall for St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church located at 6628 Santa Isabel Street, Carlsbad, California. It is our understanding that the proposed development will consist of a one- to two-story social hall structure with basement and associated improvements. Based on the results of our investigation, laboratory testing, and engineering evaluation, the proposed project is feasible provided the recommendations presented in this report are implemented. Based on our preliminary geotechnical investigation, the soils beneath the site include a thin veneer of topsoil (turf), and up to three feet of undocumented fill consisting of medium dense, yellowish gray, fine sandy silt. These soils overlie Tertiary-aged Santiago Formation deposits that consist of hard, yellowish-gray to gray, moist, clayey siltstones and silty claystones, which hi turn overlie a sequence of hard, light-gray to greenish gray, fine sandy siltstones and silty sandstones interpreted to be part of the Jurassic/Cretaceous-aged Santiago Peak Volcanics. Groundwater was not observed in our excavations to the maximum explored depth of approximately 19.5 feet below existing grade (fbg). Groundwater levels may fluctuate with seasonal precipitation levels and areas of local saturation may be encountered. However, we do not anticipate that groundwater will affect the proposed development, provided appropriate surface drainage is designed, constructed, and maintained. Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 2 Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 10. 2004 Job No. 10-7423G San Diego County is an area of known moderate to high seismic risk, but no specific significant geologic and seismic hazards to the site were identified during this investigation. Based on the geologic findings and reference review, no active surface faults are known to exist at the site. 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND SCOPE OF SERVICES 1.1 Introduction This report presents the results of our geotechnical investigation and provides conclusions and geotechnical engineering criteria for the proposed development. Proposed improvements are to consist of a one- to two-story social hall structure with a basement and associated improvements including pavement areas. Our investigation included field exploration, laboratory testing, geologic hazard evaluation, and engineering analysis. Specific recommendations for excavations, fill placement, and foundation design for the proposed improvements are presented in this report. Cited references are presented hi Appendix A. 1.2 Scope of Services The scope of services provided included: • A review of available geologic and soils reports pertinent to the site and adjacent areas. • An exploration of subsurface conditions by excavating three exploratory borings with a hollow stem drill rig, collection of undisturbed and disturbed soil samples, and geologic logging of the borings. • Laboratory testing of representative soil samples to provide data to evaluate the geotechnical design characteristics of the soils. Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 3 Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 10. 2004 Job No. 10-7423G • Definition of the general geology and evaluation of potential geologic hazards at the site. • Soil engineering design criteria for the proposed improvements. • Preparation of this summary report of the investigations performed including geotechnical construction recommendations. 2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION The subject site currently consists of a relatively flat lawn covered lot that is surrounded by existing structures associated with the St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church. The existing sanctuary is located to the east of the subject site and is at a similar elevation. A parking lot exists to the west of the subject site at elevation approximately 10 feet lower. To the north the site is bounded by Alga Road. Figure 1 shows the general location of the subject site. The general configuration of the subject site, including purposed buildings and exploratory boring locations, are depicted on the attached Figure 2. 3.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS 3.1 Field Investigation Our field explorations were conducted on December 14, 2004, and included a visual site reconnaissance and the advancement of three soil borings within accessible areas to evaluate the condition of the underlying soil materials. The borings were excavated using a CME-75 Hollow - Stem drill rig with eight-inch augers. Select "undisturbed" soil samples were collected using a modified California sampler and disturbed soil samples were collected with a Standard Penetration Test (SPT) sampler, and as bulk samples that were collected from the drill cuttings and stored in burlap sample bags. Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 4 Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 10. 2004 Job No. 10-7423G Soils were logged in the field by a geologist from CTE and visually classified using the Unified Soil Classification System. Samples were transported to CTE Certified Geotechnical Laboratory hi Escondido, California for analysis. The field descriptions have been modified, where appropriate, to reflect laboratory test results. Exploration logs including descriptions of the soils encountered are included hi Appendix B. 3.2 Laboratory Investigation Laboratory tests were conducted on representative soil samples for classification purposes and to evaluate soil physical properties and engineering characteristics. Soil samples were analyzed for Particle-Size Analysis, Modified Proctor, Direct Shear, Hydrometer, Expansion Index Testing, and Chemical Analysis. Test method descriptions and laboratory testing results are included in Appendix C. 4.0 GEOLOGY 4.1 General Setting The site lies within the Peninsular Ranges physiographic province, which is characterized by its northwest trending mountain ranges, intervening valleys, and predominately northwest trending active regional faults. The San Diego Region can be further subdivided into the coastal plain area, a central mountain-valley area and the eastern mountain valley area. The project site located at the juncture between the eastern margin coastal plain area and the central mountain area. The coastal plain subprovience ranges in elevation from approximately sea level to 1200 feet above mean sea level and is characterized by Cretaceous and Tertiary sedimentary deposits that onlap an eroded basement surface consisting of Jurassic and Cretaceous crystalline rocks. The central - Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 5 Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 10.2004 . Job No. 10-7423G mountain area ranges in elevation from approximately 500 to 5000 feet above mean sea level and is characterized by Cretaceous and Jurassic crystalline ridges and mountains with intermontane basins that are generally underlain with moderate thickness of alluvium and residual soils. Specifically, the site is located hi foothills of the Santa Ana Mountains at an approximate elevation of 520 feet above mean sea level. The surface gradient slopes to the west towards a southerly draining tributary canyon that feeds San Marcos Creek, which flows westward to Batiquitos Lagoon and the Pacific Ocean (Figure 2). 4.2 Geologic Conditions By correlation to published mapping (Tan and Kennedy, 1996), site soils consist of Tertiary Santiago Formation, with adjacent undifferentiated meta-volcanics, volcaniclastic, and interbedded sedimentary rocks of the Jurassic/Cretaceous Santiago Peak Volcanics Formation, which form bedrock highs located to the east, north and south of the site. Observations from our work indicate that a thin layer of topsoil /undocumented fill overlies the Santiago Formation deposits, which hi turn overlies the Santiago Peak Volcanics at this site. 4.2.1 Undocumented Fill These soils were generally encountered within the upper half foot of the existing surface to a maximum depth of three feet below existing grade. These materials generally consist of loose, moist, turf and loose to medium dense, moist, Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 6 Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 10.2004 . Job No. 10-7423G yellowish-gray fine sandy silt topsoil deposits. These materials are not considered suitable for support of the proposed improvements primarily because of their high organic content. However, these materials are anticipated to be removed during construction grading activities for the proposed buildings. 4.2.2 Santiago Formation Claystones and siltstones of the Santiago Formation (as mapped by Tan and Kennedy, 1996) were encountered across the entire site from the near surface to depths interpreted to be approximately five to 15 fbg. The claystones and siltstones were typically, hard, moist, olive-green to yellowish gray, and massive. These materials are suitable for support of proposed improvements, as recommended herein. 4.2.3 Santiago Peak Volcanics The Santiago Peak Volcanics were interpreted to be present at approximately five fbg in B-2 and approximately 15 fbg in B-l and B-3. This interpretation is based on the increasing percentage coarse sand to fine gravel sized angular pieces of volcaniclastics, within hard, moist, light gray to greenish-gray to yellowish-gray, fine sandy siltstone, and silty fine sandstone that is massive to weakly laminated, and fractured with occasional rust to orange staining along and adjacent to the fractures. This interpretation is consistent with observations made in a previously completed investigation for the adjacent new sanctuary. In that study, "unweathered" Santiago Peak Volcancis were identified at 7.5 fbg in the southeast corner of the sanctuary (Benton Engineering, Inc., 1993). Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 7 Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 10.2004 Job No. 10-7423G 4.3 Groundwater Conditions Groundwater was not encountered in any of our borings to the maximum explored depth of approximately 19.5 fbg. While groundwater conditions will likely vary, especially during periods of sustained precipitation, groundwater is not expected to affect the improvements if proper site drainage is maintained. 4.4 Geologic Hazards 4.4.1 General Geologic Hazards Observation From our investigation it appears that geologic hazards at the site are primarily limited to those caused by violent shaking from earthquake generated ground motion waves. The potential for damage from displacement or fault movement beneath the proposed structures should be considered low. 4.4.2 Local and Regional Faulting Based on our site reconnaissance, evidence from our exploratory soil borings, and a review of appropriate geologic literature, it is our opinion that known active faults do not lie structurally beneath the site nor do active fault traces cross the site. Additionally, the site does not lie within a State of California Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. The Rose Canyon and Elsinore Fault systems are the closest known active faults (Jennings, 1987). Other principal active regional faults include the Coronado Banks, San Clemente, Palos Verdes, San Jacinto, and San Andreas faults (Blake, 1996). According to the California Division of Mines and Geology, a fault is Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 8 Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 10.2004 Job No. 10-7423G active if it displays evidence of activity in the last 11,000 years (Hart and Bryant, 1997). 4.4.3 Site Near Source Factors and Seismic Coefficients In accordance with the Uniform Building Code 2001 edition, Volume 2, Figure 16-2, the referenced site is located within seismic zone 4 and has a seismic zone factor of Z=0.4. The nearest active fault, the Rose Canyon Fault Zone, is approximately 11.5 kilometers to the west and is considered a Type B seismic source. Based on the distance from the site to the Rose Canyon Fault Zone, near source factors of Nv=1.0 and Na=1.0 are appropriate. Based on the shallow subsurface explorations and our knowledge of the area, the site has a soil profile type of SD and seismic coefficients of Cv=0.64 and Ca=0.44. 4.4.4 Liquefaction Evaluation and Seismic Settlement Evaluation Liquefaction occurs when saturated fine-grained sands or silts lose then: physical strengths during earthquake induced shaking and behave as a liquid. This is due to loss of point-to-point grain contact and transfer of normal stress to the pore water. Liquefaction potential varies with water level, soil type, material gradation, relative density, and probable intensity and duration of ground shaking. Because of the generally hard nature of underlying materials and the lack of an observed shallow groundwater table, it is our opinion that the potential for liquefaction damage to proposed improvements should be considered low. Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 9 Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 10.2004 Job No. 10-7423G Seismic settlement occurs when loose to medium dense granular soils densify during seismic events. As indicated in the preceding discussions, any loose surficial soils should be mitigated during recommended site grading. Therefore, in our opinion, the potential for seismic settlement resulting in damage to site improvements should be considered negligible. 4.4.5 Tsunamis and Seiche Evaluation According to McCulloch (1985), the tsunami potential in the San Diego County coastal area for one-in-100 and one-in-5 00 year tsunami waves are approximately four and six feet. This suggests that the site is not subject to damage due to the elevation (approximately 520 feet above msl) and distance (more than 4.5 miles) from the ocean. The site is not near any significant bodies of water that could induce seiche damage. 4.4.6 Landsliding or Rocksliding Per mapping by Tan and Griffen (1995), the site is in an area that is considered generally susceptible to landsliding. This is primarily based on the Santiago Formation being historically prone to landsliding. Several landslides within the Santiago Formation have been mapped several thousand feet to the north of the site, however no landslides are mapped at the site or in the immediate area (Tan and Griffen, 1995). hi addition, no geomorphic features indicative of landsliding were recognized from existing topographic maps of the area, and during our site visits. Therefore, the potential for landsliding or rocksliding to affect the site is considered low. Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 10 Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 10.2004 Job No. 10-7423G 4.4.7 Compressible and Expansive Soils Based on our geologic observations and laboratory testing, the soil materials located at the proposed structure foundation level consist of hard siltstones and claystones that is generally non-compressible and has a medium expansion index (expansion index of alluvium is 63). Therefore, the site soils are considered suitable for support of the proposed improvements provided the recommendations presented herein are followed. 4.4.8 Corrosive Soils Based on analytical laboratory testing, onsite materials have a low potential to corrode buried concrete improvements and a moderate potential to corrode buried ferrous metals. A corrosion specialist shall be consulted for additional recommendations, if deemed necessary by the project coordinators or the governing authority. 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 General We conclude that the proposed construction on the site is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint, provided the recommendations in this report are incorporated into the design and construction of the project. Recommendations for the design and construction of the proposed improvements are presented in the subsequent sections of this report. 5.2 Site Preparation Before any grading occurs, the site should be cleared of existing debris and other deleterious materials. In areas to receive shallow founded structures or distress-sensitive Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 11 Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 10.2004 Job No. 10-7423G improvements, all undocumented fills and expansive, surficially eroded, desiccated, burrowed, or otherwise loose or disturbed soils should be removed to the depth of the competent native materials. CTE recommends the removal of the generally loose to medium dense and unsuitable debris containing soils at the surface of the site. Organic and other deleterious materials not suitable for structural backfill should be disposed offsite at legal disposal site. Where basement improvements are proposed, overexcavation and recompaction is not required as foundations will be extended to bear at depth in competent native materials. Proposed slab-on-grade areas shall be scarified 12 inches and recompacted for uniform support at a minimum four percent above optimum moisture content. Over excavations should extend a minimum of five feet laterally beyond the limits of the proposed improvements, where feasible. Organic or oversize materials (greater than three inches in maximum dimension) not suitable for structural backfill within three feet of proposed grade should be disposed of off-site or placed in non-structural planter or landscape areas. 5.3 Site Excavation Based on our observations, shallow excavations in site materials will generally be feasible with heavy-duty construction equipment under normal conditions. An engineer or geologist from CTE should evaluate the subgrade to verify that mitigative measures (removal of inadequate soils) have been properly carried out. Irreducible materials Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 12 Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 10.2004 Job No. 10-7423G greater than three inches in maximum diameter encountered during excavations should not be used in shallow fills (within three feet of proposed grades) on the site. In utility trenches, adequate bedding should surround pipes. 5.4 Fill Placement and Compaction The geotechnical consultant should verify that the proper site preparation has occurred before fill placement occurs. Following removal of loose, disturbed soils, areas to receive fills or improvements should be scarified nine inches, moisture conditioned, and properly compacted. Fill and backfill should be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent (as evaluated by ASTM D1557) at moisture contents greater than three percent above optimum. The optimum lift thickness for backfill soil will be dependent on the type of compaction equipment used. Generally, backfill should be placed in uniform, horizontal lifts not exceeding eight inches in loose thickness. Backfill placement and compaction should be done in overall conformance with geotechnical recommendations and local ordinances. 5.5 Fill Materials The moderately expansive index soils derived from the onsite materials are considered suitable for reuse on the site as compacted fill. If used, these materials should be screened of organic materials and materials greater than three inches in a maximum dimension. If encountered, clayey, inorganic, native soils may be blended with granular soils and reused in non-structural fill areas. Irreducible materials between three and six inches in maximum dimension may be placed, as directed by CTE, at depths greater than three feet below proposed grades. Preliminary Geotechnical Report Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 10. 2004 Page 13 Job No. 10-7423G Imported fill beneath structures, pavements and walks should have an expansion index less than or equal to 30 (per UBC 18-I-B) with less than 35 percent passing the no. 200 sieve. Imported fill soils for use in structural or slope areas should be evaluated by the soils engineer to determine strength characteristics before placement on the site. 5.6 Temporary Construction Slopes Sloping recommendations for unshored temporary excavations are provided. The recommended slopes should be relatively stable against deep-seated failure, but may experience localized sloughing. Onsite soils are considered Type B soils with recommended slope ratios as set forth in Table 1 below. TABLE 1 RECOMMENDED TEMPORARY SLOPE RATIOS SOIL TYPE B (Siltstones and Claystones) B (Fractured Volcanic and Volcaniclastic Rock) SLOPE RATIO (Horizontal: vertical) 1:1 (MAXIMUM) 1:1 (MAXIMUM) MAXIMUM HEIGHT 10 Feet 10 Feet Actual field conditions and soil type designations must be verified by a "competent person" while excavations exist according to Cal-OSHA regulations. In addition, the above sloping recommendations do not allow for surcharge loading at the top of slopes Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 14 Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 10.2004 Job No. 10-7423G by vehicular traffic, equipment or materials. Appropriate surcharge setbacks must be maintained from the top of all unshored slopes. 5.7 Foundations and Slab Recommendations The following recommendations are for preliminary planning purposes only. These foundation recommendations should be reviewed after completion of earthworks. 5.7.1 Foundations Continuous and isolated spread footings are suitable for use at this site. However,» footings should not straddle cut/fill interfaces; we anticipate all structural footings will be founded entirely upon competent native materials a minimum three feet below the lowest adjacent exterior grade. Foundation dimensions and reinforcement should be based on allowable bearing values of 3,000 pounds per square foot (psf). The allowable bearing value may be increased by one third for short duration loading which includes the effects of wind or seismic forces. Footings should be at least 12 and 15 inches wide for one- and two-story improvements, and founded at least 36 inches below the lowest adjacent exterior subgrade. Reinforcement for continuous footings should consist of four #4 reinforcing bars; two placed near the top and two placed near the bottom. The structural engineer should provide recommendations for reinforcement of any deepened spread footings and footings with pipe penetrations. Foundation excavations shall be maintained at above optimum moisture content until concrete placement. Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 15 Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 10.2004 Job No. 1Q-7423G 5.7.2 Foundation Settlement In general, for the proposed construction, the maximum post-construction compression settlement is expected to be less than 1.0 inch. Maximum differential settlement of continuous footings is expected to be on the order of 0.5 inches over a distance of approximately 50 feet. 5.7.3 Foundation Setback Footings for structures should be designed such that the horizontal distance from the face of adjacent slopes to the outer edge of the footing is a minimum of 10 feet. Excavations for utility trenches within 10 lateral feet should not encroach within a 1:1 plane extending downward from the closest bottom edge of adjacent footings. 5.7.4 Interior Concrete Slabs Lightly loaded concrete slabs should be designed for the anticipated loading, but be a minimum of 4.5 inches thick. Minimum slab reinforcement should consist of #4 reinforcing bars placed on 18-inch centers, respectively, each way at mid-slab height (or with equivalent prefabricated reinforcement). In moisture sensitive floor areas, a vapor barrier of ten-mil visqueen (with all laps sealed or taped), overlying a two- to three-inch layer of consolidated aggregate base (Sand Equivalent greater than 30) should be installed. A one- to two-inch layer of similar material may be placed above the visqueen to protect the membrane during steel or concrete placement. Slab areas subject to heavy loads or vehicular traffic may require increased thickness and reinforcement. This office should be contacted to provide additional recommendations where actual service conditions Preliminary Geotechnical Report Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 10.2004 Page 16 Job No. 10-7423G warrant further analysis. Subgrade materials shall be maintained at a minimum four percent above optimum moisture content until concrete or slab underlayment placement. 5.8 Lateral Resistance and Earth Pressures The following recommendations may be used for shallow footings on the site. Foundations placed in firm, well-compacted fill material may be designed using a coefficient of friction of 0.30 (total frictional resistance equals coefficient of friction times the dead load). A design passive resistance value of 300 pounds per square foot per foot of depth (with a maximum value of 1500 pounds per square foot) may be used. The allowable lateral resistance can be taken as the sum of the frictional resistance and the passive resistance, provided the passive resistance does not exceed two-thirds of the total allowable resistance. Retaining walls up to 10 feet high and backfilled using granular soils may be designed using the equivalent fluid weights given in Table 2 below. TABLE 2 EQUIVALENT FLUID UNIT WEIGHTS (pounds per cubic foot) WALL TYPE CANTILEVER WALL (YIELDING) RESTRAINED WALL LEVEL BACKFILL 35 55 SLOPE BACKFILL 2:1 (HORIZONTAL: VERTICAL) 60 90 The values above assume non-expansive backfill and free draining conditions. Measures should be taken to prevent moisture buildup behind all retaining walls. Drainage Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 17 Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 10.2004 Job No. 10-7423G measures should include free draining backfill materials and perforated drains. These drains should discharge to an appropriate offsite location. 5.9 Exterior Flatwork To reduce the potential for distress to exterior flatwork caused by minor settlement of foundation soils, we recommend that such flatwork be installed with crack-control joints at appropriate spacing as designed by the project architect. Additionally, we recommend that flatwork be installed with at least minimal reinforcement. Flatwork, which should be installed with crack control joints, includes driveways, sidewalks, and architectural features. All subgrades should be prepared according to the earthwork recommendations previously given before placing concrete. Positive drainage should be established and maintained next to all flatwork. Subgrade materials shall be maintained at a minimum four percent above optimum moisture content until concrete placement. 5.10 Drainage Surface runoff should be collected and directed away from improvements by means of appropriate erosion reducing devices and positive drainage should be established around the proposed improvements. Positive drainage should be directed away from improvements at a gradient of at least two percent for a distance of at least five feet. The project civil engineers should evaluate the on-site drainage and make necessary provisions to keep surface water from affecting the site. Preliminary Geotechnical Report Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 10.2004 Page 18 Job No. 10-7423G 5.11 Vehicular Pavements The upper twelve inches of pavement subgrade and all aggregate base materials should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the laboratory maximum at a minimum four percent above optimum moisture content as determined by ASTM D1557. 5.11.1 Asphalt Concrete Pavement Preliminary pavement sections presented below are based on an estimated Resistance "R" Value for materials on this site. The asphalt pavement design is based on California Department of Transportation Highway Manual and on traffic indexes as indicated in Table 3 on the following page. Upon completion of finish grading, "R" Value sampling and testing of subgrade soils may occur and the pavement section modified if necessary. TABLE 3 ASPHALT PAVEMENT Traffic Area Auto and Light Truck Drive Areas Auto and Light Truck Parking Areas Assumed Traffic Index 5.5 4.5 Estimated Subgrade "R" Value 15 15 AC Thickness (inches) 3.5 3.0 Class 2 Aggregate Base Thickness (inches) 9.0 7.0 5.11.2 Portland Cement Concrete Pavements We understand that parking and drive areas may be paved with concrete pavements. We recommend driveway entrance aprons and trash bin loading and Preliminary Geotechnical Report Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 10. 2004 Page 19 Job No. 10-7423G storage areas be paved with concrete pavements. The recommended concrete pavement section for drive areas have been designed assuming light industrial/commercial traffic loads of single axle loads of 15 kips, 10 repetitions per day. Corresponding pavement designs presented in the Table 4 below may not be adequate for larger axle loads and traffic volume. Concrete used for pavement areas should possess a minimum 600-psi modulus of rupture. Pavements should be constructed according to industry standards. TABLE 4 CONCRETE PAVEMENT DESIGN Traffic Area Driveways/Trash Areas Auto and Light Truck Parking and Drive Areas Subgrade R- Value 15 15 PCC Thickness (inches) 7.0 6.0 Pavements should be constructed according to industry standards. To control the location and spread of concrete shrinkage cracks, it is recommended that crack control joints (weakened plane joints) in square or nearly square patterns be included in the design. The project civil engineer shall specify jointing and other specific details for pavement design. However unreinforced concrete pavement joints shall not be spaced more than 24 times the pavement thickness. Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 20 Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 10.2004 Job No. 10-7423G 5.12 Slopes Significant slopes are not anticipated at the site. Based on anticipated soil strength characteristics, fill slopes should be constructed at slope ratios of 2:1 (horizontal: vertical) or flatter. These fill slope inclinations should exhibit factors of safety greater than 1.5. Although properly constructed slopes on this site should be grossly stable, the soils will be somewhat erodible. Therefore, runoff water should not be permitted to drain over the edges of slopes unless that water is confined to properly designed and constructed drainage facilities. Erosion resistant vegetation should be maintained on the face of all slopes. Typically, soils along the top portion of a fill slope face will creep laterally. We do not recommend distress sensitive hardscape improvements be constructed within five feet of slope crests in fill areas or that thickened edges be employed. 5.13 Construction Observation The recommendations provided in this report are based on preliminary design information for the proposed construction and the subsurface conditions found in the exploratory boring locations. The interpolated subsurface conditions should be checked in the field during construction to verify that conditions are as anticipated. Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 21 Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 10.2004 Job No. 10-7423G Recommendations provided in this report are based on the understanding and assumption that CTE will provide the observation and testing services for the project. All earthwork should be observed and tested to verify that grading activity has been performed according to the recommendations contained within this report. The project engineer should evaluate all footing trenches before reinforcing steel placement. 5.14 Plan Review CTE should review the project foundation plans and grading plans before commencement of earthwork to identify potential conflicts with the recommendations contained in this report. 6.0 LIMITATIONS OF INVESTIGATION The field evaluation, laboratory testing and geotechnical analysis presented in this report have been conducted according to current engineering practice and the standard of care exercised by reputable geotechnical consultants performing similar tasks in this area. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made regarding the conclusions, recommendations and opinions expressed in this report. Variations may exist and conditions not observed or described in this report may be encountered during construction. Our conclusions and recommendations are based on an analysis of the observed conditions. If conditions different from those described in this report are encountered, our office should be notified and additional recommendations, if required, will be provided upon request. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service on this project. If Preliminary Geotechnical Report Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 10.2004 Page 22 Job No. 10-7423G you have any questions regarding this report, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Respectfully submitted, CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. DanT. Math, RCE# 61013 Senior Engineer Martin Siem, CEG# 2311 Certified Engineering Geologist Ik IP m m p m W m p TOF'O! m-sp prinnrJ on Oi-\ "i^ n :-m T- - .;• v f- •-•:-:..\ c*i_ .* \^ :~±r~,---'Jlji ci S^', CAH'iJ§fr6"--v]j "' ^/ i CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC i ,I:<>!'I:J HMfM. ANIlf INSTRUCT ION ENGINEER ING TESTING AND INSPECTION Ml J VIMiY AKD AVRNI.iE. STL G ESCONDIDO TA. 92019 (7W1I 74O-J955 21) f-( )i >T f< )N'I"( >t l!< Ki .i;V A I'll i SITE INDEX MAP NT. K!,r/,AB!"ni SKTON CATIIOIJC rj- fift2X SANTA ISABKI. STREET C.\K>.S«AU, ('\1JFORN1A ICTEJOBNO:10-74230 "AS SHOW^ I • X .'.---^s •"~ '.**•„,• j -. .--. ; EL FUERTE STREET r^—.»<* ^r .„—~-^~ Jj'*>../jgt APPENDIX A REFERENCES CITED REFERENCES CITED 1. Blake, T.F., 1996, "EQFAULT," Version 2.20, Thomas F. Blake Computer Services and Software. 2. Benton Engineering, Inc. (1993), Soils Investigation for St. Elizabeth Seton Church, Proposed Sanctuary Building 6628 Santa Isabel Street, Carlsbad, California. Dated October, 1,1993. 3. Hart, Earl W. and Bryant, W.A., Revised 1997, "Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act with Index to Earthquake Fault Zones Maps," California Division of Mines and Geology, Special Publication 42. 4. Jennings, C. W., 1987, "Fault Map of California with Locations of Volcanoes, Thermal Springs and Thermal Wells." 5. McCulloch, D.S., 1985, "Evaluating Tsunami Potential" in Ziony, J.I., ed., Evaluating Earthquake Hazards in the Los Angeles Region - An Earth-Science Perspective, U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1360. 6. Tan, S. S., and Giffen, D.G., 1995, "Landslide Hazards in the Northern Part of the San Diego Metropolitan Area, San Diego County, California: Landslide Hazard Identification Map", California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Open-File Report 95-04, State of California, Division of Mines and Geology, Sacramento, California 7. Tan, S.S., and Kennedy, M.P., 1996, "Geologic Maps of the Northwestern Part of San Diego County, California, Plate 1, Geologic Map of the Oceanside, San Luis Rey, and San Marcos 7.5' Quadrangles, San Diego County, California", State of California, Division of Mines and Geology, Open File Report 96-02. APPENDIX B FIELD EXPLORATION METHODS AND BORINGS LOGS APPENDIX B FIELD EXPLORATION METHODS AND BORINGS LOGS m • •< Soil Boring Methods Relatively "Undisturbed" Soil Samples *•* Relatively "undisturbed" soil samples were collected using a modified California-drive *, sampler (2.4-inch inside diameter, 3-inch outside diameter) lined with sample rings. Drive sampling was conducted in general accordance with ASTM D-3550. The steel ~m sampler was driven into the bottom of the borehole with successive drops of a 140-pound *, weight falling 30-inches. Blow counts (N) required for sampler penetration are shown on the boring logs in the column "Blows/Foot." The soil was retained in brass rings (2.4 *" inches in diameter, 1.00 inch in height). The samples were retained and carefully sealed *• in waterproof plastic containers for shipment to the Construction Testing & Engineering ("CTE") geotechnical laboratory. "' HI Disturbed Soil Sampling Bulk soil samples were collected for laboratory analysis using two methods. Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) were performed according to ASTM D-1586 at selected depths "" in the borings using a standard (1.4-inches inside diameter, 2-inches outside diameter) split-barrel sampler. The steel sampler was driven into the bottom of the borehole with successive drops of a 140-pound weight falling 30-inches. Blow counts (N) required for fc sampler penetration are shown on the boring logs in the column "Blows/Foot." Samples collected in this manner were placed in sealed plastic bags. Bulk soil samples of the drill cuttings were also collected in large plastic bags. All disturbed soil samples were 1' returned to the CTE geotechnical laboratory for analysis. p tk ^CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. •JSfc OEOTECHN1CAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION EKGINEERIKOJNC GEOTECHN1CAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION 2414 VINEYARD AVENUE. SUITE G ESCONDIDO CA. 92U2S (7Mli 746.4VJ5 DEFINITION OF TERMS PRIMARY DIVISIONS SECONDARY DIVISIONS zVI < O O *- § < 2 W BJ < <~<S*|Q GRAVELS MORETHAN HALF OF COARSE FRACTION IS LARGER THAN NO. 4 SIEVE SANDS MORETHAN HALFOF COARSE FRACTION IS SMALLER THAN NO. 4 SIEVE CLEAN GRAVELS < 5% FINES WELL GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND MIXTURES LITTLE OR NO FINES GRAVELS WITH FINES POORLY GRADED GRAVELS OR GRAVEL SAND MIXTURES, LITTLE OF NO FINES SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND-SILT MIXTURES, NON-PLASTIC FINES CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND-CLAY MIXTURES, PLASTIC FINES CLEAN SANDS < 5% FINES WELL GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SANDS, LITTLE OR NO FINES POORLY GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SANDS, LITTLE OR NO FINES SANDS WITH FINES SILTY SANDS, SAND-SILT MIXTURES, NON-PLASTIC FINES CLAYEY SANDS, SAND-CLAY MIXTURES, PLASTIC FINES «« U. §J Nd o -3 5;O u. -J tu ll-l*- *•• —. Oi = ^° o^2§w 2 ta z z o 5 5E2 $ S SILTS AND CLAYS LIQUID LIMIT IS LESS THAN 50 INORGANIC SILTS, VERY FINE SANDS, ROCK. FLOUR, SILTY OR CLAYEY FINE SANDS. SLIGHTLY PLASTIC CLAYEY SILTS INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO MEDIUM PLASTICITY, GRAVELLY. SANDY. SILTS OR LEAN CLAYS ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY SILTS AND CLAYS LIQUID LIMIT IS GREATER THAN 50 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. ORGANIC SILTY CLAYS HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PEAT AND OTHER HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS GRAIN SIZES BOULDERS COBBLES GRAVEL SAND COARSE FINE COARSE I MEDIUM | FINE SILTS AND CLAYS 12" 3" 3/4" CLEAR SQUARE SIEVE OPENING 4 10 40 U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE 200 ADDITIONAL TESTS (OTHER THAN TEST PIT AND BORING LOG COLUMN HEADINGS) MAX- Maximum Dry Density GS- Grain Size Distribution SE- Sand Equivalent El- Expansion Index CHM- Sulfete and Chloride Content, pH, Resistivity COR - Corrosivity SD- Sample Disturbed PM- Permeability SG- Specific Gravity HA- Hydrometer Analysis AL- Atterberg Limits RV- R-Value CN- Consolidation CP- Collapse Potential HC- Hydrocollapse REM- Remolded PP- Pocket Penetrometer WA- Wash Analysis DS- Direct Shear RDS- Repeated Direct Shear UC- Unconfined Compression MD- Moisture/Density M- Moisture SC- Swell Compression 01- Organic Impurities FIGURE:j BL1 ^^CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. - I ffo~T~ff& GEOTECHNICAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION (JyCJ K,\ 2414 VINEYARD AVENUE. SUITE G ESCONDIDO CA. 92029 (7601 746-4955 EKfflHEEUKSJMC. IOJECT: DRILLER: SHEET: of ICTEJOBNO: DRILL METHOD: DRILLING DATE: 'OGGEDBY: SAMPLE METHOD: ELEVATION: 1 If • & 1 ^1 1 -1 , 1-5- *"- 0- h- P- t5" I-- |- - »• !"] r rt TS 03C/3 ""3 DO _ 1 s • Ho u]5~" I •• 1 mm I ^•s 0m crg. 1 ^Q i E Q S . ^ 5E en U CO3 "SM" 5 .O no V BORING LEGEND DESCRIPTION — Block or Chunk Sample — Bulk Sample — Standard Penetration Test — Modified Split-Barrel Drive Sampler (Cal Sampler) - Thin Walled Army Corp. of Engineers Sample — Soil Type or Classification Change n r\ n o n n o ^ Formation Change [(Approximate boundaries queried (?)1 Quotes are placed around classifications where the soils exist in situ as bedrock Laboratory Tests | FIGURE: I BL2 ^^CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. Sf~T~n\f GEOTECHNICAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION <y C- JL\ 24H VINEYARD AVENUE. SUITE G ESCONDIDO CA. 9201 9 (760) 746-4955 ENQMEBUKGJNC PROJECT: SOCIAL HALL ST. ELIZABETH DRILLER: BAJA EXPLATION SHEET: 1 of 1 CTEJOBNO: 10-7423G DRILL METHOD: HOLLOW STEM AUGER DRILLING DATE: 12/14/04 LOGGED BY: D. RIES SAMPLE METHOD: RING, SPT, BULK ELEVATION: I .CO.& 0 _ - - -5- - - -10- - - -15- - - -20- - - -25- O O* CO ffl ~l\IA I g. c 1 7 oo « oca 12 '24 40 to 14 19 4 13 23 20 26 35 ^ c D Q 1 (A 1 o.cE en ori Oen D ML CL to ML ML BO2o1. o BORING: B-l DESCRIPTION 0-0.2' TURF 0.2'-3' FILL: vledium dense, moist, yellowish gray, fine sandy SILT (ML). SANTIAGO FORMATION: •lard, moist, Light yellowish gray, silty CLAYSTONE to clayey SILTSTONE (CL to ML) massive with rusty orange stained coatings. @ 10' With fine to very fine SAND, occasional medium grains. @ 1 5' Becomes hard, moist, light gray, very fine sandy SILTSTONE with clay (ML), massive. Total Depth 19.5' No Groundwater Observed Borehole Backfilled with Native Soil Laboratory Tests El CHEM HA | B-l Boring B-l .^^CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. &fc~r*Wffaf GEOTECHNICAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION &/\S JL\ 2414 VINEYARD AVENUE. SUITE 0 ESCONDIDO C A. 51029 H60) 146-4953 ENOINEEIBfCJNC PROJECT: SOCIAL HALL ST. ELIZABETH DRILLER: BAJA EXPLATION SHEET: 1 of 1 CTEJOBNO: 10-7423G DRILL METHOD: HOLLOW STEM AUGER DRILLING DATE: 12/14/04 LOGGED BY: D.RIES SAMPLE METHOD: RING, SPT, BULK ELEVATION: 1 1 "^I u 1 C^1 L. -5- L. U -19- L- r- r- -29- r- itn g ffl 3 Q J I T Blows/Foot10 12 21 29 50 30 50 50/6"Dry Density (pcf)Moisture (%)•U.S.C.S. SymbolML ML Graphic LogBORING: B-2 DESCRIPTION -0.2' TURF ANTIAGO FORMATION: Hard, moist, yellow gray, sandy SILTSTONE. SANTIAGO PEAK VOLCANICS Q): lard, moist, light yellowish gray, gray, rusty orange brown, sandy SILTSTONE with very hard meta-volcanic rock fragments. Rusty staining, with white powdery material within fractures. Hard, moist, greenish gray with abundant rusty brown staining, fine sandy SILTSTONE, fractured. Becomes dark gray. Total Depth 18.5' No Groundwater Observed Borehole Backfilled with Native Soil Laboratory Tests GS | B-2 fIk hi W p * p b , ^^CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. 1 ^r^l^V1 GEOTECHNICAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION ' ^L\s tl\ 24M VINEYARD AVENUE. SUITE G ESCON DIDO C A. 9 202 9 (760) 746 .49SS EKGlWaUKGJNC PROJECT: SOCIAL HALL ST. ELIZABETH DRILLER: BAJA EXPLATION SHEET: 1 of 1 JCTEJOBNO: 10-7423G DRILL METHOD: HOLLOW STEM AUGER DRILLING DATE: 12/14/04 LOGGED BY: D. RIES SAMPLE METHOD: RING, SPT, BULK ELEVATION: L UULi. • -s 1 °" 1 D 1 " 1 1L5- u ^I h- Lie. J1" |- - - - , -26- I-- r r25'r— u c. nCO ffl /wvA s. cU Q / T L TI o c CQ 13 44 50 U 20 29 15 23 40 20 49 O 2- c: Q 110.5 g¥= "5 15.0 o "1 q ML ML SM ML CDq I BORING: B-3 DESCRIPTION 0-0.2' TURF 0.2'-2' FILL: vledium dense, moist, Yellowish gray, fine sandy SILT (ML). SANTIAGO FORMATION: iard, moist, gray, SILTSTONE with clay, massive. Hard, moist, medium gray, fine sandy SILT (ML). SANTIAGO PEAK VOLCANICS: Hard, moist, brown, gray, reddish gray, silty fine SANDSTONE to sandy SILTSTONE with meta volcanic rock fragments. Total Depth 19' No Groundwater Observed Borehle Backfilled with Native Soil Laboratory Tests MAX DS | B-3 APPENDIX C LABORATORY METHODS AND RESULTS APPENDIX C LABORATORY METHODS AND RESULTS Laboratory tests were performed on representative soil samples to detect their relative engineering properties. Tests were performed following test methods of the American Society for Testing Materials or other accepted standards. The following presents a brief description of the various test methods used. Classification Soils were classified visually according to the Unified Soil Classification System. Visual classifications were supplemented by laboratory testing of selected samples according to ASTM D2487. The soil classifications are shown on the Exploration Logs in Appendix B. Particle-Size Analysis Particle-size analyses were performed on selected representative samples according to ASTM D422. Modified Proctor To determine the maximum dry density and optimum moisture content, a soil sample was tested in accordance with ASTMD-1557. Expansion Index Testing Expansion index testing was performed on selected samples of the matrix of the onsite soils according to Building Code Standard No. 29-2. Chemical Analysis Soil materials were collected with sterile sampling equipment and tested for Sulfate and Chloride content, pH, Corrosivity, and Resistivity. Direct Shear Direct shear tests were performed on either samples direct from the field or on samples recompacted to 90% of the laboratory maximum value overall. Direct shear testing was performed in accordance with ASTM D3080-72 to evaluate the shear strength characteristics of selected materials. The samples were inundated during shearing to represent adverse field conditions. ^^CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. QEOTECHN1CAL AND COM STS'JC TION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION 2414 VINEYAKD AVENUE. SUITE G ESCONOIDO CA. 52021 (760) 746.41)5 EKOINEEIUNGJNC LOCATION EXPANSION INDEX TEST UBC 18-2 DEPTH EXPANSION INDEX (feet) EXPANSION POTENTIAL B-l 1-4 63 MEDIUM LOCATION MAXIMUM DENSITY (MODIFIED PROCTOR) DEPTH (feet) OPTIMUM MOISTURE DRY DENSITY (pcf) B-3 1-4 15.0 110.5 SULFATE LOCATION DEPTH (feet) RESULTS B-l 1-4 137 CHLORIDE LOCATION DEPTH (feet) RESULTS PP"i B-l 1-4 45 LOCATION CONDUCTIVITY CALIFORNIA TEST 424 DEPTH (feet) RESULTS uS/cm B-l 1-4 250 LOCATION RESISTIVITY CALIFORNIA TEST 424 DEPTH (feet) RESULTS ohms/cm B-l 1-4 3590 LABORATORY SUMMARY CTE JOB NO. 10-7423G 100 -r - 90 • •- 80 - - 70 - £ 60 • U £ 50 - - U a 40 • -fi. 30 - - 10 ... 100 -- -- *, t •»-=• L. • *, ;» C* 3° U. S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE _ \ *X __ X ----- N, -- *" -^ - r*. — ~-^, — "->, ----- i - —- Xx \ 10 i PARTICLE SIZE (nun) .... ----- - ----- 0.1 — -- _.. —-- 0.01 0.001 PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS AfmamumnK- NSTRUCT10N TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. OEOTBl'HNICAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION >4IJ VINEYARD AVENUE. SUITE G ESCONDIDO CA 92039 (760) 7<«-<»5J Sample Designalion B-2 Sample Depth (feel) 5.0 CTE JOB NUMBER: Symbol • Liquid Limil - 10-7423 (%) I'lasliciCy Indei - ClHssificalion GM FIGURE: C-l i r i t i r i PI I § i i i 11 PRECONSOUDATiON ^ J 1g i ~" 0.150 -• 1 — ^-\- | j !t ii i '! i ; i i ! I | i| ! ! i i! l| ! ! ! !I : i1 i •! ill! ; |[| ! ! | M i i'.\ *i! • i! i ! ! | i 1 I II I i i i j j ji i i i i 0.1 1 10 TIME (minutes) 1 100 1000 VERTICAL STRESS SHEAR STRESS (psf)•HUMMUS tmmmm HXX> 1750 I5CO 1250 tax) 750 SCO 250 0 SHEARING DATA ! | i i! \f-+-^* — T ^ — «M— — H— 1 1 / i im^, i . —. 1M^^H j \ i j i ! I 0 2 4 - 1000 psf — 3000 psf • Knmn«f 6 B 10 12 U 16 18 20 STRAIN (%) FAILURE ENVELOPE I RING STRESS§ £I g1 iHI <li ii 1 » i d^O.12 tnm-/min i i 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 VERTICAL STRESS (psf) SHEAR STRENGTH TEST Sample Designation I>-3 Initial Moisture {%): Final Moisture (%): Depth (ft] 1-4" 15.0% 35.6% Cohesion Angle of Friction ;?50psi: I2..3 'nitlai Wei Density (pc Final Wet Denstiy (pc i 114.4 t 134.8 Sample Description Remolded Light Yellowish Green Clay CTEJOBNO: 10-7423 FIGURE No: C-2 B-1 @ 5' U. S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE O.i PARTICLE SIZE (mm) 0.01 0.001 PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS ^^CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. J®L^L^8> GEOTECMN1CAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION (y f, KJ\ 3414 VINEYARD AVENUE. SUITE 0 ESCONOtDO CA. 9207* (760) 746-4955 EKdHEERIKOJNC. Sample Designation B-l Sample Depth (feet) 5' Symbol • Plasticity Index Classification ML CTE JOB NUMBER: 10-7423 C- 3 PI r i ri PI PI p i 11 PI PI PI ii i" PI PI APPENDIX D STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING Appendix D Page D-l Standard Specifications for Grading Section 1 - General The guidelines contained herein represent Construction Testing & Engineering's standard recommendations for grading and other associated operations on construction projects. These guidelines should be considered a portion of the project specifications. Recommendations contained in the body of the previously presented soils report shall supersede the recommendations and or requirements as specified herein. The project geotechnical consultant shall interpret disputes arising out of interpretation of the recommendations contained in the soils report or specifications contained herein. Section 2 - Responsibilities of Project Personnel The geotechnical consultant should provide observation and testing services sufficient to assure that geotechnical construction is performed in general conformance with project specifications and standard grading practices. The geotechnical consultant should report any deviations to the client or his authorized representative. The Client should be chiefly responsible for all aspects of the project. He or his authorized representative has the responsibility of reviewing the findings and recommendations of the geotechnical consultant. He shall authorize or cause to have authorized the Contractor and/or other consultants to perform work and/or provide services. During grading the Client or his authorized representative should remain on-site or should remain reasonably accessible to all concerned parties in order to make decisions necessary to maintain the flow of the project. The Contractor should be responsible for the safety of the project and satisfactory completion of all grading and other associated operations on construction projects, including, but not limited to, earth work in accordance with the project plans, specifications and controlling agency requirements. Section 3 - Preconstruction Meeting A preconstruction site meeting shall be arranged by the owner and/or client and shall include the grading contractor, the design engineer, the geotechnical consultant, owner's representative and representatives of the appropriate governing authorities. Section 4 - Site Preparation The client or contractor should obtain the required approvals from the controlling authorities for the project prior, during and/or after demolition, site preparation and removals, etc. The appropriate approvals should be obtained prior to proceeding with grading operations. Appendix D Page D-2 Standard Specifications for Grading Clearing and grubbing should consist of the removal of vegetation such as brush, grass, woods, stumps, trees, root of trees and otherwise deleterious natural materials from the areas to be graded. Clearing and grubbing should extend to the outside of all proposed excavation and fill areas. Demolition should include removal of buildings, structures, foundations, reservoirs, utilities (including underground pipelines, septic tanks, leach fields, seepage pits, cisterns, mining shafts, tunnels, etc.) and other man-made surface and subsurface improvements from the areas to be graded. Demolition of utilities should include proper capping and/or rerouting pipelines at the project perimeter and cutoff and capping of wells in accordance with the requirements of the governing authorities and the recommendations of the geotechnical consultant at the time of demolition. Trees, plants or man-made improvements not planned to be removed or demolished should be protected by the contractor from damage or injury. Debris generated during clearing, grubbing and/or demolition operations should be wasted from areas to be graded and disposed off-site. Clearing, grubbing and demolition operations should be performed under the observation of the geotechnical consultant. Section 5 - Site Protection Protection of the site during the period of grading should be the responsibility of the contractor. Unless other provisions are made in writing and agreed upon among the concerned parties, completion of a portion of the project should not be considered to preclude that portion or adjacent areas from the requirements for site protection until such time as the entire project is complete as identified by the geotechnical consultant, the client and the regulating agencies. Precautions should be taken during the performance of site clearing, excavations and grading to protect the work site from flooding, ponding or inundation by poor or improper surface drainage. Temporary provisions should be made during the rainy season to adequately direct surface drainage away from and off the work site. Where low areas cannot be avoided, pumps should be kept on hand to continually remove water during periods of rainfall. Rain related damage should be considered to include, but may not be limited to, erosion, silting, saturation, swelling, structural distress and other adverse conditions as determined by the geotechnical consultant. Soil adversely affected should be classified as unsuitable materials and should be subject to overexcavation and replacement with compacted fill or other remedial grading as recommended by the geotechnical consultant. Appendix D Page D-3 Standard Specifications for Grading The contractor should be responsible for the stability of all temporary excavations. Recommendations by the geotechnical consultant pertaining to temporary excavations (e.g., backcuts) are made in consideration of stability of the completed project and, therefore, should not be considered to preclude the responsibilities of the contractor. Recommendations by the geotechnical consultant should not be considered to preclude requirements that are more restrictive by the regulating agencies. The contractor should provide during periods of extensive rainfall plastic sheeting to prevent unprotected slopes from becoming saturated and unstable. When deemed appropriate by the geotechnical consultant or governing agencies the contractor shall install checkdams, desilting basins, sand bags or other drainage control measures. In relatively level areas and/or slope areas, where saturated soil and/or erosion gullies exist to depths of greater than 1.0 foot; they should be overexcavated and replaced as compacted fill in accordance with the applicable specifications. Where affected materials exist to depths of 1.0 foot or less below proposed finished grade, remedial grading by moisture conditioning in-place, followed by thorough recompaction in accordance with the applicable grading guidelines herein may be attempted. If the desired results are not achieved, all affected materials should be overexcavated and replaced as compacted fill in accordance with the slope repair recommendations herein. If field conditions dictate, the geotechnical consultant may recommend other slope repair procedures. Section 6 - Excavations 6.1 Unsuitable Materials Materials that are unsuitable should be excavated under observation and recommendations of the geotechnical consultant. Unsuitable materials include, but may not be limited to, dry, loose, soft, wet, organic compressible natural soils and fractured, weathered, soft bedrock and nonengineered or otherwise deleterious fill materials. Material identified by the geotechnical consultant as unsatisfactory due to its moisture conditions should be overexcavated; moisture conditioned as needed, to a uniform at or above optimum moisture condition before placement as compacted fill. If during the course of grading adverse geotechnical conditions are exposed which were not anticipated in the preliminary soil report as determined by the geotechnical consultant additional exploration, analysis, and treatment of these problems may be recommended. Appendix D Page D-4 Standard Specifications for Grading 6.2 Cut Slopes Unless otherwise recommended by the geotechnical consultant and approved by the regulating agencies, permanent cut slopes should not be steeper than 2:1 (horizontal: vertical). The geotechnical consultant should observe cut slope excavation and if these excavations expose loose cohesionless, significantly fractured or otherwise unsuitable material, the materials should be overexcavated and replaced with a compacted stabilization fill. If encountered specific cross section details should be obtained from the Geotechnical Consultant. When extensive cut slopes are excavated or these cut slopes are made in the direction of the prevailing drainage, a non-erodible diversion swale (brow ditch) should be provided at the top of the slope. 6.3 Pad Areas All lot pad areas, including side yard terrace containing both cut and fill materials, transitions, located less than 3 feet deep should be overexcavated to a depth of 3 feet and replaced with a uniform compacted fill blanket of 3 feet. Actual depth of overexcavation may vary and should be delineated by the geotechnical consultant during grading. For pad areas created above cut or natural slopes, positive drainage should be established away from the top-of-slope. This may be accomplished utilizing a berm drainage swale and/or an appropriate pad gradient. A gradient in soil areas away from the top-of-slopes of 2 percent or greater is recommended. Section 7 - Compacted Fill All fill materials should have fill quality, placement, conditioning and compaction as specified below or as approved by the geotechnical consultant. 7.1 Fill Material Quality Excavated on-site or import materials which are acceptable to the geotechnical consultant may be utilized as compacted fill, provided trash, vegetation and other deleterious materials are removed prior to placement. All import materials anticipated for use on-site should be sampled tested and approved prior to and placement is in conformance with the requirements outlined. Rocks 12 inches in maximum and smaller may be utilized within compacted fill provided sufficient fill material is placed and thoroughly compacted over and around all rock to Appendix D Page D-5 Standard Specifications for Grading effectively fill rock voids. The amount of rock should not exceed 40 percent by dry weight passing the 3/4-inch sieve. The geotechnical consultant may vary those requirements as field conditions dictate. Where rocks greater than 12 inches but less than four feet of maximum dimension are generated during grading, or otherwise desired to be placed within an engineered fill, special handling in accordance with the recommendations below. Rocks greater than four feet should be broken down or disposed off-site. 7.2 Placement of Fill Prior to placement of fill material, the geotechnical consultant should inspect the area to receive fill. After inspection and approval, the exposed ground surface should be scarified to a depth of 6 to 8 inches. The scarified material should be conditioned (i.e. moisture added or air dried by continued discing) to achieve a moisture content at or slightly above optimum moisture conditions and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum density or as otherwise recommended in the soils report or by appropriate government agencies. Compacted fill should then be placed in thin horizontal lifts not exceeding eight inches in loose thickness prior to compaction. Each lift should be moisture conditioned as needed, thoroughly blended to achieve a consistent moisture content at or slightly above optimum and thoroughly compacted by mechanical methods to a minimum of 90 percent of laboratory maximum dry density. Each lift should be treated in a like manner until the desired finished grades are achieved. The contractor should have suitable and sufficient mechanical compaction equipment and watering apparatus on the job site to handle the amount of fill being placed in consideration of moisture retention properties of the materials and weather conditions. When placing fill in horizontal lifts adjacent to areas sloping steeper than 5:1 (horizontal: vertical), horizontal keys and vertical benches should be excavated into the adjacent slope area. Keying and benching should be sufficient to provide at least six-foot wide benches and a minimum of four feet of vertical bench height within the firm natural ground, firm bedrock or engineered compacted fill. No compacted fill should be placed in an area after keying and benching until the geotechnical consultant has reviewed the area. Material generated by the benching operation should be moved sufficiently away from the bench area to allow for the recommended review of the horizontal bench prior to placement of fill. Appendix D Page D-6 Standard Specifications for Grading Within a single fill area where grading procedures dictate two or more separate fills, temporary slopes (false slopes) may be created. When placing fill adjacent to a false slope, benching should be conducted in the same manner as above described. At least a 3-foot vertical bench should be established within the firm core of adjacent approved compacted fill prior to placement of additional fill. Benching should proceed in at least 3-foot vertical increments until the desired finished grades are achieved. Prior to placement of additional compacted fill following an overnight or other grading delay, the exposed surface or previously compacted fill should be processed by scarification, moisture conditioning as needed to at or slightly above optimum moisture content, thoroughly blended and recompacted to a minimum of 90 percent of laboratory maximum dry density. Where unsuitable materials exist to depths of greater than one foot, the unsuitable materials should be over-excavated. Following a period of flooding, rainfall or overwatering by other means, no additional fill should be placed until damage assessments have been made and remedial grading performed as described herein. Rocks 12 inch in maximum dimension and smaller may be utilized in the compacted fill provided the fill is placed and thoroughly compacted over and around all rock. No oversize material should be used within 3 feet of finished pad grade and within 1 foot of other compacted fill areas. Rocks 12 inches up to four feet maximum dimension should be placed below the upper 5 feet of any fill and should not be closer than 11 feet to any slope face. These recommendations could vary as locations of improvements dictate. Where practical, oversized material should not be placed below areas where structures or deep utilities are proposed. Oversized material should be placed in windrows on a clean, overexcavated or unyielding compacted fill or firm natural ground surface. Select native or imported granular soil (S.E. 30 or higher) should be placed and thoroughly flooded over and around all windrowed rock, such that voids are filled. Windrows of oversized material should be staggered so those successive strata of oversized material are not in the same vertical plane. It may be possible to dispose of individual larger rock as field conditions dictate and as recommended by the geotechnical consultant at the time of placement. The contractor should assist the geotechnical consultant and/or his representative by digging test pits for removal determinations and/or for testing compacted fill. The contractor should provide this work at no additional cost to the owner or contractor's client. Appendix D Page D-7 Standard Specifications for Grading Fill should be tested by the geotechnical consultant for compliance with the recommended relative compaction and moisture conditions. Field density testing should conform to ASTM Method of Test D 1556-82, D 2922-81. Tests should be conducted at a minimum of 2 vertical feet or 1,000 cubic yards of fill placed. Actual test intervals may vary as field conditions dictate. Fill found not to be in conformance with the grading recommendations should be removed or otherwise handled as recommended by the geotechnical consultant. 7.3 Fill Slopes Unless otherwise recommended by the geotechnical consultant and approved by the regulating agencies, permanent fill slopes should not be steeper than 2:1 (horizontal: vertical). Except as specifically recommended in these grading guidelines compacted fill slopes should be over-built and cut back to grade, exposing the firm, compacted fill inner core. The actual amount of overbuilding may vary as field conditions dictate. If the desired results are not achieved, the existing slopes should be overexcavated and reconstructed under the guidelines of the geotechnical consultant. The degree of overbuilding shall be increased until the desired compacted slope surface condition is achieved. Care should be taken by the contractor to provide thorough mechanical compaction to the outer edge of the overbuilt slope surface. At the discretion of the geotechnical consultant, slope face compaction may be attempted by conventional construction procedures including backrolling. The procedure must create a firmly compacted material throughout the entire depth of the slope face to the surface of the previously compacted firm fill intercore. During grading operations, care should be taken to extend compactive effort to the outer edge of the slope. Each lift should extend horizontally to the desired finished slope surface or more as needed to ultimately established desired grades. Grade during construction should not be allowed to roll off at the edge of the slope. It may be helpful to elevate slightly the outer edge of the slope. Slough resulting from the placement of individual lifts should not be allowed to drift down over previous lifts. At intervals not exceeding four feet in vertical slope height or the capability of available equipment, whichever is less, fill slopes should be thoroughly dozer trackrolled. r r Appendix D Page D-8 Standard Specifications for Grading For pad areas above fill slopes, positive drainage should be established away from the top-of-slope. This may be accomplished using a berm and pad gradient of at least 2 percent. Section 8 - Trench Backfill Utility and/or other excavation of trench backfill should, unless otherwise recommended, be compacted by mechanical means. Unless otherwise recommended, the degree of compaction should be a minimum of 90 percent of the laboratory maximum density. Within slab areas, but outside the influence of foundations, trenches up to one foot wide and two feet deep may be backfilled with sand and consolidated by jetting, flooding or by mechanical means. If on-site materials are utilized, they should be wheel-rolled, tamped or otherwise compacted to a firm condition. For minor interior trenches, density testing may be deleted or spot testing may be elected if deemed necessary, based on review of backfill operations during construction. If utility contractors indicate that it is undesirable to use compaction equipment in close proximity to a buried conduit, the contractor may elect the utilization of light weight mechanical compaction equipment and/or shading of the conduit with clean, granular material, which should be thoroughly jetted in-place above the conduit, prior to initiating mechanical compaction procedures. Other methods of utility trench compaction may also be appropriate, upon review of the geotechnical consultant at the time of construction. In cases where clean granular materials are proposed for use in lieu of native materials or where flooding or jetting is proposed, the procedures should be considered subject to review by the geotechnical consultant. Clean granular backfill and/or bedding are not recommended in slope areas. Section 9 - Drainage Where deemed appropriate by the geotechnical consultant, canyon subdrain systems should be installed in accordance. Typical subdrains for compacted fill buttresses, slope stabilization or sidehill masses, should be installed in accordance with the specifications. Roof, pad and slope drainage should be directed away from slopes and areas of structures to suitable disposal areas via non-erodible devices (i.e., gutters, downspouts, and concrete swales). Appendix D Page D-9 Standard Specifications for Grading For drainage in extensively landscaped areas near structures, (i.e., within four feet) a minimum of 5 percent gradient away from the structure should be maintained. Pad drainage of at least 2 percent should be maintained over the remainder of the site. Drainage patterns established at the time of fine grading should be maintained throughout the life of the project. Property owners should be made aware that altering drainage patterns could be detrimental to slope stability and foundation performance. Section 10 - Slope Maintenance 10.1 - Landscape Plants To enhance surficial slope stability, slope planting should be accomplished at the completion of grading. Slope planting should consist of deep-rooting vegetation requiring little watering. Plants native to the southern California area and plants relative to native plants are generally desirable. Plants native to other semi-arid and arid areas may also be appropriate. A Landscape Architect should be the best party to consult regarding actual types of plants and planting configuration. 10.2 - Irrigation Irrigation pipes should be anchored to slope faces, not placed in trenches excavated into slope faces. Slope irrigation should be minimized. If automatic timing devices are utilized on irrigation systems, provisions should be made for interrupting normal irrigation during periods of rainfall. 10.3 - Repair As a precautionary measure, plastic sheeting should be readily available, or kept on hand, to protect all slope areas from saturation by periods of heavy or prolonged rainfall. This measure is strongly recommended, beginning with the period prior to landscape planting. If slope failures occur, the geotechnical consultant should be contacted for a field review of site conditions and development of recommendations for evaluation and repair. If slope failures occur as a result of exposure to period of heavy rainfall, the failure areas and currently unaffected areas should be covered with plastic sheeting to protect against additional saturation. APPENDIX E SOILS INVESTIGATION BY BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. DATED OCTOBER 1,1993 SOILS INVESTIGATION F Ik ST. ELIZABETH SETON CATHOLIC CHURCH PROPOSED SANCTUARY BUILDING 6628 SANTA ISABEL STREET CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA F Ik PROJECT NO. BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. 93-9-8A OCTOBER 1, 1993 TABLE OF CONTENTS SOILS INVESTIGATION Page Introducti on 1 Field Investigation 1 and 2 Laboratory Tests 2, 3, and 4 DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Discussion of Soil Strata 4 and 5 Site Preparation 5, 6, and 7 Foundation Design 7 Resistance to Lateral Loads 7 and 8 Concrete Slabs-On-Grade 8 Retaining Walls 8 and 9 Excavation 9 Pavement Section Recommendations 9, 10, and 11 Inspection During Grading 11 DRAWING TITLE Drawing Location of Test Borings 1 Summary Sheets: Boring 1 2 Boring 2 3 Boring 3 4 Boring 4 5 Consolidation Curves 6 Typical Fill Prism 7 APPENDICES Unified Soil Classification Chart -. A Standard Specifications For Placement of Compacted Filled Ground AA Sampling, Shear Tests, Consolidation Tests and Exnansion Tests B BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. APPLIED SOIL MECHANICS - FOUNDATIONS 5540RUFFIN ROAD SAN DIEGO. CALIFORNIA S2123 ESTABLISHED 1956 PHILIP HENKING BENTON TELEPHONE (6191565-1955 CIVIL ENGINEER NO 10332 SOILS INVESTIGATION FAX (619) 555-o?^9 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER NO 1M Introduction This report presents the results of a soils investigation conducted at the site of the proposed Sanctuary Building for the St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church. The Sanctuary Building site is located northeasterly of the existing church. It is understood that the Sanctuary Building will be single level with wood-frame construction and concrete slabs-on-grade. The footprint of the building is approximately 140 feet by 180 feet. It is also understood that two site retaining walls are planned at the easterly side of the proposed parking are'a. In order to determine the general subsurface conditions of the site and physical properties of the soils, four (4) exploratory borings were drilled. Pertinent soil parameters will be presented for the design of the proposed building and retaining walls. Field Investigation A total of four (4) exploratory borings were drilled 30 inches in diameter, with a truck-mounted, rotary, bucket-type drill rig outside the footprint of the proposed building. The approximate locations of the borings are shown on the attached Drawing i entitled "Location of Test Borings." Each boring was drilled to a depth of 10 feet. A continuous log of the soils encountered in the borings was recorded by our Certified Engineering Geologist, at the time of drilling and is shown in detail on Drawings 2 through 5, each entitled "Summary Sheet." The soils were visually classified by field identification procedures in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification Chart. An abbreviated description of this classification system is presented in Appendix A. Undisturbed soil samples were obtained at intervals of 2 to 3 feet in the soils ahead of drilling. Tne drop weight used to drive the sampling tube into the soils was the "Kelly" bar of the drill rig which weighed 2218 pounds and the average drop was 12 inches. The drive energies in sampling are shown on the Summary Sheets and are given in foot-kips/foot. Represen- tative loose bulk samples were also obtained including a CBR sample near the center of the proposed parking area. The general procedures used in field sampling are described under "Sampling" in Appendix B. Laboratory Tests Laboratory tests were performed on. each undisturbed sample in order to determine the dry density, moisture content, and shearing strength. The results of these tests are presented on Drawings 2 through 5. Consolidation tests were performed on representative samples in order to determine the load-settlement characteristics of the soils and the results of these tests are presented graphically on Drawing 6 entitled "Consolidation Curves." The general procedures used for the laboratory tests are described briefly in Appendix B. Expansion tests were conducted on two (2) representative clayey soil samples found near the surface to determine their vertical expansion characteristics with, change in moisture content. The undisturbed samples were allowed ro dry in tne air at 105°C for two cays, then saturated while confined uncer a unii load of 500 pounds per square foot. The recorded -3- expansions are presented below: Boring No. 1 2 Sample No. 1 1 Depth in Feet 2.0 2.0 Soil Descriotion Silty Clay Clay Percent Expansion 6.00 7.23 The clayey soil samples encountered within the upper subgrade have medium expansion potential characteristics. Direct shear tests were performed on a representative undisturbed sample in order to determine the minimum angle of internal friction and apparent cohesion of the soil. The sample was saturated and drained prior to testing. The results of the test are presented below: Boring: Sample: Depth: 3 1 2.0' Normal Load Kips/Sq.Ft. 0.5 1.0 2.0 Maximum Shearing Load Kips/Sq.Ft. 2.10 2.12 3.11 Angle of Internal Friction Deqrees 33.5 Apparent Cohesion Lbs/Sq.Ft. 1400 In addition to the above laboratory tests a California Bearing Ratio (CBR) test was conducted on a bulk soil sample obtained within the upper one foot of subgrade within the area of the planned southern parking lot. The test was performed in accordance with City of San Diego standards. The test results are tabulated below: CBR Sample No. i Molded Dry Density Lb/Cu.Ft. 118.2 Initial Moisture Content % Dry Wt. 16.2 Pene- tra- tion Inch 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 Load in Pounds on 3 Sq.Inch Plunder 97 169 214 252 277 CBR % of Std. 3.2 3.8 3.8 3.7 3.6 Percent Expansion After Soaking 5.82 Percent Moisture After Penetration 27.9 A CBR of 3.2 will be used for preliminary pavement design. The clayey soils encountered within the upper subgrade are unfavorable for pavement. The general procedures used for the laboratory tests are described 4- in Appendix B. .DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The following conclusions and recommendations are professional opinions that are based upon the above field investigation, laboratory test results, and engineering analyses and calculations. These opinions have been derived in accordance with current standards of practice. No warranty is expressed or imp!led. The field investigation and laboratory test results indicate that-^ftfee t^ew&^p&e^^^e&i^^^riii'^^&rzl soTTs* and fiYI solts^enc'ountefed in the test borings a$|^un|££fe{^ei&T$^ In addition,-seacparass-if^e cli$!iYfi£0iiii^ ^6t^^»»®iS!t3tiitigritlfa ,^jj^^ expan:S3isre?sJro^••'-• r- -• r- - -' -• "r Discussion of Soil Strata Loose, silty fine to medium sand fill soils were encountered within the upper 0.5 foot at Boring 1. Natural, very firm, silty clay was observed below the fill soils to a depth of 5.0 feet, which was underlain by very firm silt to 10.0 feet, the depth of investigation. The log of Boring 2 indicates that natural, medium firm, clay was encountered to a depth of 0.5 foot and underlain by very firm clay to 10.0 feet, the 1imit of excavation . Natural, medium firm, silty clay was logged to a depth of 0.7 foot at Boring 3. Very firm, silty clay was encountered between the depths of 0.7 foot and 8.0 feet, and was underlain by very firm clayey silt to 10.0 feet, the .depth of investigation. Fill soils were observed to a depth of 3.0 feet at Boring 4. The fill soils consisted of loose, gravelly silty fine sand to G.6 foot, and compact clay to 3.0 feet. Natural, very firm, silty fine sand was logged below -5- 3.0 feet to a depth of 10.0 feet, the extent of excavation. The natural soils encountered within the borings appear to be products of volcanic rock. Generally, the volcanic rock has weathered. However, at Boring 4 the volcanic rock was determined to be unweathered below 7.5 feet. The borings were drilled on September 21, 1993. Free ground water was not encountered in any of the borings drilled. Site Preparation Natural, very firm soils were encountered at depths of 0.5 foot, 0.5 foot, 0.7 foot, and 3.0 feet, respectively, at Borings 1 through 4. However, these soils are not suitable for support of foundations or concrete slabs-on- grade, since they possess significant expansive characteristics. These soils are described as silty clay and clay. .ftegg^expaMSsbvl'sefl-Sfe^Sstia^s ffi^ls?6P«^ . I^^dd^imj3^^!*asi«ss:peGionimende.d* s^h^rj*^ A minimum 3 foot thickness of compacted filled ground soils shall be provided throughout the building prisms. Horizontal benching is required for slopes steeper tnan 10 (horizontal) to 1 (vertical). The first bench shall have a minimum width of 15 feet and extend a minimum of 2 feet into the firm natural soils. A typical fill prism is presented on Drawing 7. It depicts the minimum key and benching requirements for slopes steeper than 10 (horizontal) to I (vertical). It also shows tne minimum comnacted -6- filled ground thickness in the building area. The compacted fill prism includes the footprint of the building and a minimum of 8 feet beyond the perimeter footings. The excavation of the loose to medium firm soils and expansive clayey soils shall include the footprint of the building and a horizontal distance equal to 5 feet plus the depth of fill beyond the perimeter footings of the building. Once the removal of the upper three (3) feet of soils is performed, then the exposed soils in the bottom of the excavation shall be scarified to a depth of 6 inches. These scarified soils shall be dried or moistened to achieve optimum moisture content. Then the exposed soils shall be compacted in-place to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 1557-78. Select, nonexpansive imported silty sand soils shall be placed and compacted within the upper three (3) feet of subgrade. It is recommended that all filled ground be placed and compacted in accordance with the "Standard Specifications For Placement of Compacted Filled Ground" in Appendix AA. The maximum vertical thickness of lifts shall be 6 inches after compaction. All compaction shall be done under continuous engineering inspection with reliable field density tests taken at intervals not to exceed 1.0 foot vertically and 100 feet horizontally. All field density tests shall verify that the soils are uniformly compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum dry density. Select, imported nonexpansive silty sand soils shall be used to cap the upper three (3) feet of subgrade which meet the following speci fications: Gradation: 100 percent passing the 3-inch sieve. At least 50 percent passing the No. 4 sieve. Not more than 40 percent passing the 200 sieve. Angle of Internal Friction: Not less than 35 degrees. Apparent Cohesion: Not less than 250 pounds per square foot. -7- Expansion: Less than 2.0 percent. Maximum Dry Density: Not less than 118 pounds per cubic foot. Note: The angle of internal friction and apparent cohesion of the soils are determined in direct shear tests of samples remolded to 90 percent of maximum dry density, and saturated and drained prior to testing. The expansion is determined by remolding a soil sample to 92 percent of maximum dry density at optimum moisture content, air-dried for two days, then subjecting the sample to a vertical load of 500 pounds per square foot and saturating it. Foundation Design ^s ^^w: the lowest adjacent compacted filled ground surface nj^jijgyrrj^^^ the lowest adjacent compacted filled ground surface may be designed using an allowable soil bearing value of 2&008sfWitt$'P:^^^ The allowable bearing values are for live and dead loads and may be increased one-third for combined live, dead, wind or seismic loads. The values above assume that select imported soils will be provided as fill. The settlement of a one foot wide continuous footing founded as recommended above, is estimated to be on the order of 1/8 to 1/4 inch under a load of 2000 pounds per square foot. The estimated settlement of a 4 foot wide square footing founded in the same manner and loaded to 2500 pounds per square foot is on the order of 1/4 to 3/8 of an inch. Resistance to Lateral Loads Lateral forces may be resisted by the passive soil pressure against the poured in-place vertical faces of the footings and by the sliding friction of the bottom of the footings. The passive soil reaction may be computed by assuming an equivalent fluid density of 250 pounds per cubic foot for the compacted filled ground soils. The resistance to sliding friction may be determined by assuming a sliding friction of 0.40 for the select compact filled ground soils. -8- Passive and sliding resistance may be used together, but it is recommended that the sliding coefficient be reduced to 0.27 when combined with passive soil pressures. Concrete Slabs-On-Grade Concrete slabs-on-grade shall nave reinforcement as recommended by the Structural Engineer. A four-inch (4") thickness of clean sand shall underlay the slab and a suitable vapor barrier shall be placed at midheight within the sand. Regular control joints shall be provided to minimize shrinkage cracking. Retaining Walls Cantilever retaining walls backfilled with the select, imported silty sand soils and placed and compacted to a minimum 90 percent of maximum dry density, in accordance with the methods and inspection methods described in the "Site Preparation" section of this report, may be designed using an equivalent fluid density of 35 pounds per cubic foot. A three (3) foot wide minimum width of select silty sand or pea gravel must be provided behind the wall in order to use this equivalent fluid density. The soil parameter given is for a level backfill condition and must be increased for sloping backfill conditions. If a 2 (horizontal) to 1 (vertical) sloping condition exists,then an equivalent fluid density of 50 pounds per cubic foot shall be used for design. To ensure that hydrostatic pressures do not develop behind the walls, an adequate drainage system must be installed behind the walls. This may be done by placing perforated pipe drains behind the wall and at least 1.0 foot below the proposed lowest adjacent finished elevation. The perforated pipe should be backfilled with gravel a minimum of 1.0 foot around the pipe horizontally and 2.0 feet above the pipe vertically. A geotextile fabric is recommended to Surround the gravel and drainage pipe. The drain system -9- should discharge into a suitable outfall or drain. Weep holes at minimum intervals of 5 feet and pea gravel backfill may be used for exterior retaining vails if drainage can be appropriately controlled. The active pressures for the retaining walls shall be increased if the drainage provisions described above are not included. The above pressures for design of retaining walls must be increased if surcharge loads are caused by placement of stockpiled materials, equipment, or building loads near the top of the retaining wall that are located a horizontal distance from the top of the wall that is less than 1.5 times the height of the wall, or if the soil becomes saturated. Excavation It is recommended that temporary excavations be sloped at a ratio not exceeding 3/4 (horizontal) to 1 (vertical) up to a height of 8 feet from the bottom of the excavation. Safety requirements established by OSHA or other regulatory agencies may limit the type of excavation. It is assumed that no surcharge loads, such as stockpiled materials, equipment or crane loads will be placed closer to the top of any slope than a horizontal distance equal to the depth of excavation during construction. It is also assumed that the excavated slope will be prevented from being saturated during construction, and that free surface water will not be allowed to drain across the face of the slopes. Any field conditions deviating from these assumptions may require shoring. Pavement Section Recoiranendations A California Bearing Ratio (CBR) test was conducted on a representative subgrade soil sample in the area of the planned parking lot. The CBR test results indicated a design value of 3.2. The clayey soils do not possess favorable subgrade cnaracteristics. The recommended asphaltic concrete pavement and base sections for proposed paved areas are based on a CBR value -10- of 3.2 or greater. The pavement design for the automobile parking areas will be based on a wheel load of 4000 pounds. A design wheel load of 10,000 pounds is assumed for the traffic lane where heavy loads are anticipated. Light Auto Traffic Lane Design Wheel Load - Pounds 4,000 1G,000 a) Asphaltic Concrete 2k" 3^" b) Base Course Materials ll>j" 16*;" (Caltrans Class II aggregate base grada- tion with a minimum CBR of 80 at 95 percent of maximum dry density). c) On-site soils having a 6" 6" minimum CBR of 6.0 excavated and recornpacted to at least 95 percent of maximum dry density. During construction, the proposed paving areas should be uniformly excavated to a depth equal to the combined total thicknesses of Lines (a), (b), and (c) shown above. The exposed surface should then be scarified to a depth of 6 inches, moistened or dried as necessary to an optimum moisture content and uniformly compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum dry density as determined by the ASTM D 1557-78 method. All compaction shall be done under continuous engineering inspection, with reliable field density tests taken at intervals not to exceed 1.0 foot vertically and 100 feet horizontally. All field density tests shall verify that the soil is compacted to the specified minimum requirements. The maximum vertical thickness of lifts shall be 6 inches after compaction. Next, the on-site soils shall be placed as described above and each layer shall oe uniformly compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum dry density up to the base course level. The base course shall then be imported and compacted at oDLimum moisture content to at least -11- 95 percent of maximum dry density, prior to the placement and compaction of the asphaltic concrete. Inspection During Grading During the grading of the site, the field conditions encountered may differ from those encountered in the limited locations explored and sampled in this investigation. It is important to anticipate that the conditions and soil types encountered in the course of construction may differ from those encountered in this investigation. It is, therefore, necessary that all footing excavations be inspected before placement of reinforcement to verify that soil types encountered are similar to those described in this investigation, and to verify that footings are placed to adequate depths in suitable bearing soils that are described in this report. If you have any questions regarding this report please contact us. Respectfully- Submitted, BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. By ~^0rhn H. Benton Reviewed by Distribution: JHB/SHS/jer j^_____ _ "~^ T_ r^ J*_ _ Shti H. 5hu, Ci^il Engineer Geotechnical Engineer No. 772 (2) St. Elizabetn Seton Catholic Church Attention: Mr. Ron La rose (4) Dominy and Associates Mr. Wayne Hoi tar, •AL HO i i 1 i . t K-5 DEPTH/FEEU 1- 2 3- 4- — 6- 7- 8- 9-SAMPLENUMBER(T) © 0) (D zo SOILCLAS8IFICATISYMBOLf£&£[ *vn! *f> (VXVXVr I iw 10 o D iQ/ v? J?•ywi SUMMARY SHEET BORING NO. 1 Brown, Dry, Loose \ Light Olive, Slightly Moist, Very Firm Hoist, Maroon Color Streaks Gray Brown, Hoist, Very Firm Olive SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM / SAND / SILTY CLAY SILT 5 •DRIVE ENERFT. KIPS/F6.7 8.9 13.3 20.0 ill 25.3 28.0 18.2 16.3 > ^ Q 0 >• COc eoD -1 98.2 94.4 111.2 112.1 3HEARRESISTANCIKIPS/SQ. F10.76 1.64 3.04 3.71 Stop at 10' Indicates Undisturbed Drive Sample Indicates Loose Bulk Sample Pg°jgfgAN°- BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. DRAWING NO. 2 1 Fill1 131813 DEPTH/FEETItjCC O.CQss002 SUMMARY SHEET BORING NO. 2 DRIVE ENERGYFT. KIP8/FT.DRY DENSITYLB3/CU. FT,'id -D8/8dl>lSONViSISSbUV3H81- 2- 3- 4- 5- 6- 7- 8- g- 10- tiry, tedium Firm Heroes Olive, Moist, Very Firm, Maroon Color Streaks 4.4 6.7 CLAY 26.6 97.4 24.0 104.5 0.98 2.65 11.1 19.8108.0 2.54 8.9 107.0 2.63 Stop at 10' CJ <stsl J/1 Pg°_J|_C^N°-BENTON ENGINEERING, INC.DRAWING NO. 3 iPTH/FEETO 1- 2- 3- 4- 5- 6- 7- 9- £Lffl 22Ocor ^(D © ^^^ © (4) z SOIL98IFICATIOSYMBOL< O $$yvO'V fvyy1 6wrjfotyJf V \* VvV ii. n P^T wfi (.in iff MR J^jr^lt*^rri/rry\t*rv\f *r\f&v\f\* * )r\f ' r ' tt f ' , ' t '. • f ' ' • • / '•j, f '- • / ' ' '. / ' ' SUMMARY SHEET BORING NO. 3 Gray Brown, Dry, Medium -FirmI Slightly Moist, Very Firm Moi St Gray Brown, Hoist, Very Firm, Some Very Fine Sand Size Grains SILTY CLAY CLAYEY SILT j,VE ENERQ. KIPO/FT.it 4 4" • T" 6.7 8.9 39.9 •% cz ^^ 2^ ?? fi£.&. - U 21.8 31.2 8.4 z . >- 5cc ^^0 -1 QC Q./u . :? LOO. 7 96.8 130.0 UJK_ ou.5z 5<d i2"wmw LU ^"Cx; c 773 . / c 3.93 2.99 7.45 Stop at 10' PROJECT NO. 93-9-8A BENTON ENGINEERING, INC.DRAWING NO. 4 ,P> Ml UK pp ifc - jfc Hi IP to J* h IP M, MM pw Hi pp b. W * Wh wn w h P to, P k ft •I1 ' DEPTH/FEETu 1- — 2- 4- S- 6- 7- 8- -IUJ (LCD 0»z ,—, H) (2) ,_ ©SOILCLASSIFICATIONSYMBOLw£//xJ /W ;|ipp|.i SI •0f:%^:§5|: iT'v. $*.$*$£9SB :l:^j||.f; i^i « •«t"<.1'.V»>iV« SUMMARY SHEET BORING NO. 4 Gray Brown, Dry, Loose, 1 40S Gravel to 3/4" I•t] Olive, Slightly Moist, Compact Moist Light Brown to Gray Brown, Hoist, Very Firm, Volcanic Rock leathered In-Place 30-40% Unweathered Fragments of In-Place Weathered Volcanic Rock GRAVELLY SILTY , FINE SAND CLAY SILTY FINE SAND fDRIVE ENERGYFT. KIPS/FT.4.4 11.1 22.2 3g DRY DENSITYLBS/CU. FT.1 22.4 21.9 34.0 7.6 91.8 95.2 97.5 133.5 SHEARRESISTANCEKIPS/SQ. FT.2.53 1.55 1.38 7.45 Stop at 10' P"°J!°DTft N°- BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. 3 J— y— O/i DRAWING NO. 5 1I Fill 1 APPENDIX A UuiRed Soil Classification1 fltC Laborauirv ClanCriteriaIlcUttimation Required lorL)c!tciibinff Soils'fyplciil NatnciGroupSymbol*gs ilIs lla 111 li i 5s 1 1 r»1 5 8o „!** !;|x«•» "Ss *aid" {a u u s i 13 I 5 1 a 1 3-SSg- 13 "S AueJtvrB liiui"A1' line, olinn <AiicitTrp h?r»!i> above"A" !»'= -"'if' *"/pieatcr ih*n ?•o I 1 nA S B o o iO U 1 gradation requirements lor AM'Nol me* imp aljo sen aufjffibaj RSCJ jmtuvtug X£l - If *AUrtttcis luniU ticlo»-"A" line oi /'/IMS man5oi XC •0V ueqj j^||Ctut uutiou'}) i^uy j^ 3K*f|Ui>iU uu KuipusU UOM^.I^P, P,*, »p Wit tjfli Kill ifa'liiiil jifll iiui»O u. uj Well arftdcd frraveli, tr»vel-tand inlxtutes. llule or nofmaiO 1!if Is Ii WMc rxnie Iimpumi €«i«j1Poorly fttadcil (travels, Sia^cl-uuid mixtures, tiitlcor tiofmci0,y one me or a iajiRC D( tiuajniermediAie sues mtsttnx5 " E0UV ou 10 api||>Slliv prtvrli, po«lt.v Riadedtrnvcl-s.aml-3111 inixiitrriO Nonplasilc bucs (f«r Identirtcailon pn>ctiiutca trs Afl. below)Clayey ft r a veil. po«t1y BradedIciavet'Sniid-cla/ inixuitcsS nr ItJeOI ifitaiion procedures,JW)riAiiictmciK»ec CL hcijo lunoiua taut)Well pr*0cd Mtritli, pfavc.Hycands, (ittjc or 110 huesi i plain ititj 6n:i uilmnntialf «ll intcrincdtaie particle= 5 III '* ^ •* M• S I| K "". > "C— cc 2 ft s«c S* t, il c 5G gj > •" C C E 1* "? '* DO JO 3[|||{) cv pxn aq Atu: 3:11 -«i : 4M1. •uo^c^tj Vicp IL tlfjl ISHJCI 11 U.-.-I.1CIJ ! UtV: 13tll-.!li i !.»(< i*jn oc: <'•: aim mil-, 5^- ill - * t- E e "" £ ~ ' !° SEii hi iT j r^rT'-'^'-p'^T^"-']'''----"-!""-'-''[; Uoitur^e wiu il touAl It-gut] lim<!e liiliililill Hliiiliiliil I£i|iil IjiiiiR jil'slf! lit I ijjs'.i- il ill Hii |ni ]jT$ tes\\ Ho•"T*» 01 _.! o^r oo LJO .- o- S t S 1 * - Sj!i||0 i J/ !• *.n..'o ^ n \ " = Qrr -n:j 2 C. o p o o o o o Xapui Xipiisey . |1||Sihy sntidJi. pnoily praded «and-sili tnii litres1 Nont'lJuUc fines (lor identiftcaiion pto-Ccd lifts. »ce ML hclp*v)Is fisiV9Stts-1 CJ O Plastic fines llnr Ideniilitanun proccdurrs.t-tx. CL. |ielf.iwj^3=, * l1 '**N t/i y 2 3' ••• *? S H *? ™Ji w C J o —Z u'= 5 5 -2 ~ ^Give |ypir:nl nanie; indicate tfcRtrcand ciiai-aciet ol pintttui),anuittnt nnd iiin«iiniiin mr (tf£•=" 1 *g-| § , £ i j 5 " £ -5 c i ^ a 5•o tili ; i i ~ rt ••• i - «„«- «««,V,:!«condition, mlinif It ait/, local <Mp colon Ic nainr. anJ oiner peiii-iicni (Jc.sc npttvc iril*if tna non,and t%rnbol in patcrutte^csFur uridiMtirKd soils add Jnlcii,rnntinn cm structure, junl.hc*.tiun. connsieiity MI undinut l-f4anO icrnituldrd «inci. moiciureand drai unite ctmdmotismedium ptasiiciu, gravrllyclays, samly clayS. siHjr clays,lean ctayiti Medium?.- f | ^ •^ " s o 1 -; -5 — I; "MS CMpanic sins anJ otg&nic tili-CJavs of !(>» plB*(icil>Inuipnnic silt r.. iiticiiccoul orai4tninaceuu» fine sandy orsilly UMIS. el*siic siltsO < " E Ml 3=2 =~ =1 -3 5« 5|£ 5 S = M for fnboratory classification of fine grained soiJT'E'S ;o Ul Innriaiiic cii.vi of lilih pl"-licily, lat clayi£ I s c "i r: —Organic clnxi ot medium to Juithp|ist icily§ S^££ 3 £ o "^ Ci UBMl JJIf£ll] • iiaiii i::iinif ".S pSU>!l8-3ij:j OK ^ •t o IE j; I1 s llil x 5 "*S X S ^ ~&K •5 ? • e i -J' •c £ iq* u if 5 a n « 5 13 G u "a.EaMU o 1 c. 0 c 1 5 S •o 5 siitri fit IV.Q proupi are desiM « - ; U C. "5 I 3 ! - .a i ' ! li^il1!!!s •ss=5js'5;»-- •S^falS"S^ ¥c" e ^ x-S » i 3 2 •= »!««!«i^ni?-' ...,•?;-." i"sse:;a«;igsjisJil;in.. * •• S - 5£;lHaB' It555.|i: 3 - ^ j;I =s««• ..s ^.3JS i{ l!li«|I §: Si's!-^s ••- tUUs*«lis2|Ss? rflji:*:ssiuii!^ ~ t <xIss J 11 U^JSi^Ow= " C il - « y T. BENTON ENGINEERING. INC. APPLIED SOIL MECHANICS — FOUNDATIONS 5540 RUFFIN ROAD SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92123 ESTABLISHED 1956 APPENDIX AA STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR PLACEMENT TELEPHONE(e ta i. w — f ** '-•• 660TECHHIC«. ENGINEER NO. 1M OF COMPACTED FILLED GROUND r^,Dl 1. General Description - The objective is to assure uniformity and adequate internal strength in filled ground by proven engineering procedures and tests so that the proposed structures may be safely supported. The procedures include the clearing and grubbing, removal of existing structures, preparation of land to be filled, filling of the land, the spreading, and compaction of the filled areas to conform with the lines, grades, and slopes as shown on the accepted plans. The recommendations contained in the preliminary Soils Investigation report for this site and/or in the attached special provisions are a part of these specifications and shall supersede the provisions contained hereinafter in the case of a conflict. The owner shall employ a qualified soils engineer to inspect and test the filled ground as placed to verify the uniformity of compaction of filled ground to the specified 90 percent of maximum dry density. The grading contractor shall have the responsibility of notifying the soils engineer 48 hours or more in advance of the start of any clearing or site preparation so that the soils engineer and/or his field representative will be able to schedule the manpower for the required inspections. The soils engineer shall advise the owner and grading contractor immediately if any unsatisfactory conditions are observed to exist and shall have the authority to reject the compacted filled ground until such time that corrective measures are taken necessary to comply with the specifications. It shall be the sole responsibility of the grading contractor to achieve the specified degree of compaction. No deviation from these specifications will be allowed, except if amended fay written instructions signed by the responsible soils engineer. 2. Clearing, Grubbing, and Preparing Areas to be Filled (a) All brush, vegetation and any rubbish shall be removed, piled and disposed of either off site in a legal disposal pit or in a specified permanent approved landscape area so as to leave the areas to be filled for approved structural support free of vegetation and debris. Any soft, swampy or otherwise unsuitable areas shall be corrected by draining or removal, or both. (b) All loose fill, topsoil, alluvial deposits or other unsatisfactory soil shall be removed to the limits determined by the soils engineer. Subdrainage systems shall be installed in the bottom of all canyon areas and in areas whenever ground water conditions are likely to develop beneath the compacted fill soils. (8/27/87) APPENDIX AA -2- (c) The natural ground which is determined to be satisfactory for the support of the filled ground shall then be plowed or scarified to a depth of at least six inches (6°), and until the surface is free fros ruts, hummocks, or other uneven features which would tend to prevent uniform compaction by the equipment to be used. (d) Where fills are made on hillsides or exposed slope areas, greater than 10 percent, horizontal benches shall be cut into firm undisturbed natural ground in order to provide both lateral and vertical stability. This is to provide a horizontal base so that each layer is placed and compacted on a horizontal plane. The initial bench at the toe of the fill shall be at least 10 feet in width on firm undisturbed natural ground at the elevation of the design toe stake placed at the natural angle of repose or design slope. Offset stakes shall be provided to leave in as reference stakes for the construction of the filled ground slopes. The soils engineer shall determine the width and frequency of all succeeding benches which will vary with the soil conditions and the steepness of slope. (e) After the natural ground has been prepared, it shall then be brought to a moisture content at a few percent above optimum moisture and compacted to not less than ninety (90%) percent of maximum density in accordance with ASTM D 1557-78 method that uses 25 blows of a 10 pound rammer falling from 18 inches on each of 5 layers in a 4-inch diameter cylindrical mold of a l/30th cubic foot volume. Fill Materials and Special Requirements - The fill soils shall consist of select materials so graded that at least 40 percent of the material passes a No. 4 sieve. This may be obtained from the excavation of banks, borrow pits or any other approved sources and by mixing soils from one or more sources. The material used shall be free from vegetable matter, and other deleterious substances, and shall not contain rocks, or lumps, or cobbles of greater than 8 inches in diameter. If excessive vegetation, larger diameter cobbles, rocks and boulders, or soils with inadequate strength or other unacceptable physical characteristics are encountered, these shall be disposed of in waste areas as shown on the plans or as directed by the soils engineer. If, during grading operations, soils not encountered and tested in the preliminary investigation are found, tests on these soils shall be performed to determine their physical . characteristics. Any special treatment recommended in the preliminary or subsequent soil reports not covered herein shall become an addendum to these specifications. The testing and specifications for the compaction of subgrade, subbase, and base materials for roads, streets, highways, or other public property or rights-of-way shall be in accordance with those of the governmental agency having jurisdiction. (8/27/87)3EN7ON ENGINEERING. APPENDIX AA -3- 4. Placing, Spreading, and Compacting Fill Materials (a) For mass grading, suitable fill material shall be placed in loose layers, moistened to 2 to 4 percent above optimum moisture content, and which, when compacted, shall not exceed six inches (6"). Each layer shall be spread evenly and shall be thorougly mixed during the spreading to ensure uniformity of material and moisture in each layer. (b) For compacted filled ground placed and compacted for subgrade support, for base and pavement under roadways and parking areas, the 5-inch thick layers of compacted filled ground to be placed and compacted within the upper 2 feet of finished grade shall be moistened to optimum moisture content, based on the ASTK D 1557-78 method and each layer shall be compacted to at least either 90 or 95 percent of maximum dry density as specified in the accompanying soils investigation report or specific project specifications, or as specified fay the governmental agency. (c) When the moisture content of the fill material is below that specified by the soils engineer, water shall be added until the moisture content is at the moisture as specified by the soils engineer to assure thorough bonding and uniform densification during the compacting process. (d) When the moisture content of the fill material is above that specified by the soils engineer, the fill material shall be aerated by blading and scarifying or other satisfactory methods until the moisture content is at the moisture as specified by the soils engineer. (e) After each layer has beer, placed, mixed and spread evenly, it shall be thoroughly compacted to not less than ninety (90*) percent of maximum density in accordance with ASTM D 1557-78 method as described in 2(e) above. Compaction shall be accomplished with sheepsfoot rollers, multiple-wheel pneumatic-tired rollers, or other approved types of compaction equipment, such as vibratory equipment that is specially designed for certain soil types. Rollers shall be of such design that they will be able to compact the fill material to the specified density. Rolling shall be accomplished while the fill material is at the specified moisture content. Rolling of each layer shall be continuous over its entire area and the roller shall make sufficient trips to ensure that the desired density has been attained. The entire areas to be filled shall be compacted. (f) Fill slopes shall be compacted by means of sheepsfoot rollers or other suitable equipment. The sloping surface shall be cat-tracked daily while the fill soils are still at field moisture conditions, 2 to 4 percent above optimum. Compacting operations shall be continued until materials within the outer 1.5 feet are uniformly compacted to 85 percent of maximum dry density or greater, unless (8/27/87) 3ENTON ENGINEERING. INC APPENDIX AA - -4- """ a different relative degree of compaction is specified by the local governing agency. Compacting of the slopes shall be m accomplished by backrolling the slopes in increments of 3 to 5 feet in elevation gain or by other methods producing satis- ** factory results. (g) Field density tests shall be taken by the soils engineer for •*• approximately each foot in elevation gain after compaction, but not to exceed two feet in vertical height between tests. Field •» density tests may be taken at intervals of 6 inches in elevation gain if required by the soils engineer. The location of the tests "* in plan shall be so spaced to give the best possible coverage and shall, be taken no farther apart than 100 feet. Tests shall be *" taken on corner and terrace lots for each two feet in elevation fc- gain. The soils engineer will take additional tests as considered necessary to check on the uniformity of compaction of the exposed pp slope areas as well as in the building prism areas. Where sheepsfoot . rollers are used, the tests shall be taken in the compacted material below the disturbed surface. No additional layers of fill shall be spread until the field density tests indicate that the specified ^ density has been attained. ^ (h) The fill operation shall be continued in six inch (6") compacted -p layers as specified above, until the fill has been brought to the finished slopes and grades as shown on the accepted plans. •* 5. Inspection - Sufficient inspection by the soils engineer shall be ** maintained during the filling and compacting operations so that the fcspecified inspection and field density tests can be reported to the governmental agencies upon the completion of grading. 6. Seasonal Limits - No fill material shall be placed, spread, or rolled te if weather conditions increase the moisture content above permissible limits. When the work is interrupted by rain, fill operations shall pr not be resumed until field tests by the soils engineer indicate that ^ the moisture content and density of the fill are as previously specified. 7. All recommendations presented in the "Conclusions" section of the fcl attached (preliminary) soils report are a part of these specifications. if PP ft (S/27/S7)ENGINEERING. INC. BENTON ENGINEERING. INC. APPLIED SOIL MECHANICS — FOUNDATIONS 5540 RUFFIN ROAD SAN DIEGO. CALIFORNIA 92122 ESTABLISHED 1956 PHILIP HENKING BENTCN APPENDIX B TELEPHONE (619)565-1955 CIVIL ENGINEER NO. 10332 FAX {6191565-8716 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER NG !3S Sampling The undisturbed soil samples are obtained by forcing a special sampling tube into the undisturbed soils at the bottom of the boring at frequent intervals below the around surface. The sampling tube consists of a steel barrel 3.0 inches outside diameter, with a special cutting tip on one end and a double-ball valve on the other and with a lining of twelve thin brass rings, each one inch long by 2.42 inches inside diameter. The sampler, connected to a twelve inch long waste barrel, is either pushed or driven approximately IS inches into the soil and a six-inch section of the center portion of the sample is taken for laboratory tests, the soil being still confined in the brass rings, after extraction from the sampler tube. The samples are taken to the laboratory in close-fitting waterproof containers in order to retain the field moisture until completion of the tests. The driving energy is calculated as the average energy in foot-kips required to force the sampling tube through one foot of soil at the depth at which the sample is obtained. Shear Tests The shear tests are run using a direct shear machine of the strain control type in which the rate of deformation is approximately 0.05 inch per minute. The machine is so designed that the tests are-made without removing the samples from the brass liner rings in which they are secured. Each sample is sheared under a normal load equivalent to the weight of the soil above the point of sampling. In some instances, samples are sheared under various normal loads in order to obtain the internal angle of friction and cohesion. Where considered necessary, samples are saturated and drained before shearing in order to simulate extreme field moisture conditions. Consolidation Tests The apparatus used for the consolidation tests is designed to receive one of the one-inch high rings of soil as it comes from the field. Loads are applied in several increments to the upper surface of the test specimen end the resulting deformations are recorded at selected time intervals for each increment. Generally, each increment of load is maintained on the sample until the rate of deformation is equal to or less than 1/10000 inch per hour. Porous stones are placed in contact with the top and bottom of each specimen to permit the ready addition or release of water. Expansion Tests One-inch high samples confinea in the brass rings are permitted to air dry at 105° F for at least 48 hours prior to placing into the expansion apparatus. A unit load of 500 pounds per square foot is then applied to the upper porous stone in contact with the too of each sample. Water is permitted to contact both the top and bottom of each, sample througn porous stones. Continuous observations are made until downward movement stops. The dial reading is recorded and expansion is recorded until the rate of upward movement is less than 1/10000 -inch per hour-.