The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCP 94-02; POINSETTIA SHORES; GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION; 1994-06-03GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FOR POINSETTIA SHORES CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA PREPARED FOR KAIZA POINSETTIA CORPORATION CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA PREPARED BY 1.GEOCON INCORPORATED SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 1 JUNE 1994 C, (4/del) (5/del) Addressee O'Day Consultants Attention: Mr. George O'Day GEOCON NOON INCORPORATED Geotechnical Engineers and Engineering Geologists Project No. 05318-12-01 June 3, 1994 Kaisa Poinsettia Corporation A California Corporation 7220 Avenida Encinas, Suite 200 Carlsbad, California 92009 Attention: Mr. Brian Murphy Subject: POINSETTIA SHORES CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Gentlemen: In accordance with your authorization and our proposal dated March 8, 1994, we have performed a geotechnical investigation for the subject project. The accompanying report presents the findings from our study and our conclusions and recommendations pertaining to the geotechnical engineering aspects of the project development. If you have any questions regarding this report, or if we may be of further service, please contact the undersigned at your convenience. Very truly yours, Ali 0 SAW CEO 1778 2 No. 17M 0 GECLOGST 8131191 PC 6960 Flanders Drive San Diego, CA 92121-2974 619 558.6900 FAX 619 558-6159 TABLE OF CONTENTS PURPOSE AND SCOPE ...........................................1 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION .................................2 Soil and Geologic Conditions ....................................4 Undocumented Fill (Qudf) ......................................4 Previously Placed Compacted Fill (Qpf1 and Qpf2) .......................4 Topsoil (Unmapped) ..........................................5 Terrace Deposits (Qt) .........................................6 Santiago Formation (Ts) ........................................6 GROUNDWATER...............................................7 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS ..........................................7 Landslides................................................. Faulting and Seismicity ........................................7 Liquefaction ...............................................9 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......................... 10 General..................................................10 Soil and Excavation Characteristics ................................10 Groundwater ...............................................11 Grading.................................................11 Bulking and Shrinkage Factors ....................................13 Slope Stability .............................................14 Foundations ..............................................15 Retaining Walls and Lateral Loads ................................20 Preliminary Pavement Sections ..................................22 Reactive Soil Characteristics .....................................23 Drainage.................................................23 Grading and Foundation Plan Review ..............................24 LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS MAPS AND ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 1, Vicinity Map Figure 2, Geologic Map Figure 3, Slope Stability Analysis - Cut and Fill Slopes Figure 4, Surficial Slope Stability Analysis - Fill Slopes Figure 5, Retaining Wall Draiange Detail TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) APPENDIX A FIELD INVESTIGATION Figures A-i - A-iO, Logs of Borings Figures A-il - A-22, Logs of Trenches APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTING Table B-I, Summary of Direct Shear Test Results Table B-il, Summary of Laboratory Expansion Index Test Results Table B-Ill, Summary of Laboratory Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content Test Results Figure B-i, Gradation Curves Figure B-2 - B-4, Consolidation Curves APPENDIX C. RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS Project No. 05318-12-01 June 3, 1994 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PURPOSE AND SCOPE This report presents the results of a geotechnical investigation for the Poinsettia Shores development located in the vicinity of Avenida Encinas and Windrose Circle in Carlsbad, California (see Vicinity Map, Figure 1). The purpose of the investigation was to evaluate the surface and subsurface soil and geologic conditions at the site and, based on the conditions encountered, to provide recommendations relative to the geotechnical engineering aspects of project development. The scope of the investigation included a review of the following: Tentative Maps for Poinsettia ShOres Lots 1 through 9, and 79, prepared by O'Day Consultants, print dated April 28, 1994. Untitled sheet-grading study (100-scale), prepared by O'Day Consultant, revised date March 1994: Update Soil Investigation Report for Public Access Trial, Kaiza Poinsettia (formally Batiquiros Lagoon Educational Park, Phase I), Carlsbad, California, prepared by Woodward-Clyde Consultants, dated October 24, 1991. Geotechnical Review of Slope Stability Top of Bluff Area South Site of Bariquitos lagoon at Carlsbad Tract 85-14 Public Access Trail Carlsbad, California, prepared by Woodward-Clyde, dated December 15, 1992. Final Report of Engineering Observation of Grading and Testing of Compacted Fill Lots 1 through 79, Streets, Sewer and Water Trench Backfill, Batiquitos Lagoon Education Park, Phase I, Carlsbad, California, prepared by Woodward-Clyde Consultants, dated October 27, 1986. 6. Geotechnical Investigation forProposedBatiquitos Lagoon, Educational Park - Phase II and A Portion of Phase I, Carlsbad, California, prepared by Woodward-Clyde Consultants, dated June 4, 1986. - 1 - Project No. 05318-12-01 June 3, 1994 The scope of the field investigation consisted of a site reconnaissance by an engineering geologist and the excavation of 10 exploratory borings and 12 trenches. Laboratory tests were performed on selected soil samples obtained at various depths in the excavation to evaluate pertinent physical properties. A detailed discussion of the field investigation and laboratory test results are presented in Appendices A and B. The recommendations presented herein are based on an analysis of the data obtained and experience with similar soil and geologic conditions. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION The approximately 80-acre site is located just north of the Batiquitos Lagoon and east of Carlsbad Boulevard in the City of Carlsbad, California. Interstate 5 and a residential subdivison bound the site to the east, the 'Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe (AT&SF) railroad easement borders the site to the west; a mobile home park to the north and Batiquitos Lagoon and a tributary containing a desilting basin are located to the south and southwest of the project site. It is our understanding that the south end of Avenida Encinas and the existing Windrose Circle were constructed in 1986 in conjunction with the grading of the adjacent subdivision and Navigator Circle located to the southeast of the site. The balance of the site consists of a ridge within the central portion of the site and relatively flat— lying areas at each side of the ridge. Site elevations range from a maximum of approximately 130 feet Mean Sea Level (MSL) near the eastern boundary to approximately 45 feet at the northwest corner of the property. It is evident that the majority of the site had been subject to agricultural -2- Project No. 05318-12-01 June 3, 1994 use. The existing improvements within the site, beside Avenida Encinas Sand Windrose Circle roadways and associated improvements, consist of the extension of the 12-inch-diameter sewer line to which traverses north along the western property line and a 66-inch-diameter storm drain line that traverses nOrth-south through the central portion of the site and into the desilting basin. An 8-inch water line (high lined) is also located within the west-central portion of the site along with an overhead electric power line. Based on the information provided by O'Day Consultants, the main storm drain, and that portion of the sewer line located along the railroad track, will remain in operation and the balance of the existing utilities will eventually be relocated. A review of the referenced tentative maps for all units indicates that project development will consist of mass grading the site to accommodate a large subdivision comprised of single family, condominium and multi-family residential structures. Interior streets and underground utilities including force main sewer line and a sewer lift station are also planned. Avenida Encinas is planned to be extended to Carlsbad Boulevard, including a bridge crossing the AT&SF railroad. A separate geotechnical investigation report will be submitted for the road extension and bridge. A review of the tentative maps for the project indicate that maximum cut and fill would be less than 20 feet. These maps also sho that cut and fill slopes having a maximum height of 25 feet at an inclination of 2:1 (horizontal :vertical) are planned. The base map used in this study consisted of a 100-scale conceptual sheet-grading plan, untitled, prepared by O'Day Consultants, and revise dated of March, 1994 (see Figure 2). - 3 - Project No. 05318-12-01 June 3, 1994 The above discussion is based on a site reconnaissance and a review of the referenced grading study. It is understood that, as future development and grading plans progress, Geocon Incorporated will be offered the opportunity for the review of these documents. Soil and Geologic Conditions The site was found to be underlain by undocumented fill, previously placed compacted fill, topsoils and formational soils of the Terrace Deposits and the Santiago Formation. Each of these formational and surficial units is described below. Their approximate areal extent is shown on the Geologic Map, Figure 2. Undocumented Fill (Oudf) Undocumented fill soils were encountered within the southeastern portion of the site at the desilting basin and as scattered pockets of end dump fill at different locations throughout the property. Based on our experience, it is not uncommon for old fill areas to be present in areas utilized for agriculture; however, their presence is masked by cultivation activities. Where fill soils are encountered during grading, remediation will be required by removal and compaction. Previously Placed Compacted Fill (0p f1 and Opf,) It is our understanding that the fill associated with Avendia Encinas and Windrose Circle, and associated sewer and water trench backfill, were placed in conjunction with testing and observation -.4- Project No. 05318-12-01 June 3, 1994 of Woodward-Clyde Consultants, reported in October 27, 1986 (reference No. 5). These materials are shown as "Qpf11' on Figure 2. The deepest fill* encountered during our field investigation was approximately 8 feet in Trench No. T-6 at the Windrose Circle embankment. Those portions of the previously placed fill which will not be removed by planned grading should be closely observed during earthwork operations to be determined if these materials are suitable to receive additional fill or settlement-sensitive structures. No documentation regarding the trench backfill of the main storm drain, and the sewer line located along the western property line, has been available for our use. It is assumed that the trench backfill operations were performed under testing and observation services of a geotechnical engineering firm. Geocon Incorporated should review any available documentation related to placing these fills. It is our understanding, however, that these lines will remain in operation and no grading is anticipated to take place with the easement of these lines. These soils are shown as "Qpf21" on Figure 2. Topsoil (Unmapped) Topsoils consisting of loose, dry to moist, silty sand and 2 to 3 feet in thickness were encountered covering the majority of the site. At least the upper 12 inches of the topsoils had been reworked Project No. 05318-12-01 June 3, 1994 by cultivation. These soils are considered unsuitable in their present conditions to receive till or settlement-sensitive structures and should be remediated in form of removal and recompaction. Terrace Deposits (Ot) Quaternary Marine Terrace Deposits comprise the entire site underlying the surficial soils. These materials consist of medium dense, damp to moist, light brown silty sand to fine to medium cohesionless sand. The upper 1 to 2 feet of these materials are relatively loose and will require remediation if not removed during, grading. Terrace Deposits possess good bearing characteristics in either a natural or properly compacted condition. Within the central portion of the project site, some moderately cemented zones within the Terrace Deposits were encountered in the exploratory excavations. These zones may require heavier than normal ripping during mass grading and trenching operations. Santiago Formation (Ts) The Eocene-age Santiago Formation underlies the entire site beneath the Terrace Deposits. The Santiago Formation consists of dense to very dense, moist, white to very light green, silty to clayey sandstones interbedded with siltstoJes and claystones. These materials were encountered in the majority of the borings within the western and southern portions of the site at the depths ranging from 8 feet (Boring B-3) to 26 feet (Boring B-7). The Santiago Formation possesses good bearing characteristic; however, a review of the referenced plans indicates that no grading is anticipated within this unit. S Project No. 05318-12-01 June 3, 1994 GROUNDWATER Perched groundwater was encountered in Boring No. B-3 at approximately 91h feet below existing surface. In most other excavations, saturated soil conditions were encountered at the contact between the Terrace Deposits and the Santiago Formation. Perched groundwater levels should be anticipated to vary seasonally, principally, as a function of the amount of rainfall. Based on the conditions encountered at the time of the field investigation, groundwater is not anticipated to significantly impact the proposed grading provided recommendations contained herein are implemented. The deeper below-grade improvements may encounter groundwater which could require modifying conventional installation/construction procedures. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS Landslides Based on a review of the aerial photographs and available geologic literatures and our field investigation, no landslides were evident within the site and immediate adjacent areas. Faulting and Seismicity Based on this field investigation, ad review of aerial photographs and published geologic maps, the site is not located on any active or potentially active fault trace as defined by the California Division of Mines and Geology. -7- Project No. 05318-12-01 June 3, 1994 The Rose Canyon and Coronado Banks Fault Zones, the closest active faults, lie approximately 5 and 18 miles to the west, respectively. As shown on Table 1, a "maximum probable" earthquake of Magnitude 6.5 occurring on the Rose Canyon Fault could result in a peak site acceleration of approximately 0.27 g. Other active faults listed on Table I are more distant from the site and, hence, ground shaking from earthquakes on those faults will be less intensive. It is our opinion that the site could be subjected to moderate to severe ground shaking in the event of a major earthquake along any of the above-mentioned faults; however, the seismic risk at the site is not considered significantly greater than the surrounding area. TABLE? DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS FOR SELECTED FAULT Maximum Credible Event Maximum Distance Fault Name : From . . ite .. Maximum Peak .. Site. Maximu (miles) Credible . . . Acceleration Probable ................. (Mag) (g)••• (Mag) Casa Loma-Clark (San Jacinto) 50 7.50 0.04 7.00 Coronado Banks Fault Zone 18 6.75 0.11 6.00 Coyote Creek (San Jacinto) 52 7.50 0.04 7.00 Elsinore 26 1 7.50 0.10 6.75 Gin. Helen-Lytle Cr-Clremnt 53 7.50 0.04 7.00 Newport - Inglewood 43 7.50 0.06 6.50 Rose Canyon 5 7.00 0.36 6.50 San Diego Trough 29 6.50 0.06 6.00 ProbableEient : Acceleraton (g)• 0.03 0.07 0.03 0.07 0.03 0.03 2027. 0.04 *Derived from Blake T. F. EQFA ULT, Computer Program for Deterministic Prediction of Peak Horizontal Acceleration from Digitized California Faults, 1989, a, updated 1991. Project No. 05318-12-01 June 3, 1994 Liquefaction In consideration of the dense formational soils underlying the site and lack of a permanent water table near the ground surface, it is our opinion that liquefaction does not present a significant geologic hazard to the proposed site development. S Project No. 05318-12-01 June 3, 1994 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS General It is our opinion that no soil and geologic conditions were encountered during the course of the investigation which would preclude the development of the property as proposed, provided the recommendations of this report are followed. No potential geologic hazards were observed or are known to exist on the site which would adversely affect the proposed project. It is our understanding that only the main north to south traversing storm drain will remain in place. The other existing utilities, including the sewer and water mains, will be replaced. Soil and Excavation Characteristics Based on field observations and laboratory tests, the prevailing soils are anticipated to be comprised of "very low" to "low" expansive, silty, fine to medium sandand relatively clean cohesionless sands of the Terrace Deposits. The cohesionless sands are generally unstable for excavations with slopes havinan inclination in excess of 2:1 (horizontal:vertical). Special consideration will be required, especially during trenching, where these soils are encountered. The siltstones and sandstones of claystones of the Santiago Formation underlying the Terrace Deposits are not anticipated to be encountered during the grading operations. The expansive 3 - 10 - Project No. 05318-12-01 June 3, 1994 character of the soil is defined in accordance with the Uniform Building Code (UBC) Table 29-C. Excavation of the surficial soils and the Terrace Deposits should be possible with light to moderate effort with conventional heavy-duty equipment. Moderate to heavy effort should be anticipated for excavation in the moderately cemented zones of the Terrace Deposits, particularly, when trenching for foundations or utility installation. Groundwater Perched groundwater may be encountered during excavation for below grade improvements. If present, the groundwater would be anticipated at the contact between the Terrace Deposits and Santiago Formations. Construction procedures may require modification. Grading All grading should be performed inaccordance with the city of Carlsbad grading ordinance and the Recommended Grading Specifications contained in Appendix C of this report. Where the recommendations of Appendix' conflict with this section of the report, the recommendations of this section shall take precedence. Project No. 05318-12-01 June 3, 1994 Prior to commencing grading, a preconstruction conference should be held at the site with the grading contractor, civil engineer, and geotechnical engineer in attendance. Special soil handling and/or the Grading Plan can be discussed at that time. Site preparation should begin with the removal and export of all deleterious material and vegetation. Existing asphalt pavement may, as an alternative and with the approval of the owner and the City of Carlsbad, be broken up for mixing with on-site soils and placed as compacted fill within planned roadway prism embankment fill. All unsuitable soils, including undocumented fill, topsoils, and upper portions of the Terrace Deposits, should be removed and the exposed natural ground surface properly moisture conditioned and recompacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent, based on ASTM Test Procedure D1557-91. Depth of removal is anticipated to be approximately 3 to 4 feet. Fill soils free of deleterious materials should then be placed and compacted to at least 90 percent of maximum dry density until finish grade is attained. Due to the potential instability of excavations within the cohesionless zones of the Terrace Deposits, special consideratiorL-T such as temporary shoring may be required. It is anticipated that these soils may also present construction difficulties where soil forming for concrete structures are planned, e.g., utilities, foundations, etc. - 12 - Project No. 05318-12-01 June 3, 1994 Where the existing sewer and water mains are planned for removal, the resulting excavations should be backfilled with properly compacted soils. To reduce the potential for differential settlement, it is recommended that structures not be placed on cut-fill transition lines. The cut portion of these building pads should be undercut at least 3 feet below the proposed finish grade; the excavated material should then be moisture conditioned and compacted as recommended above. All fill and trench and utility backfill greater than 12 inches in depth should also be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent. Bulking and Shrinkage Factors Estimates of embankment bulking and shrinkage factors are based on comparing laboratory compaction tests with the density of the material in its natural state as encountered in the exploratory excavations. It should be emphasized that variations in natural soil density, as well as in compacted fill density, render shrinkage value estimates very approximate. As an example, the contractor can ciftpact the fill soils to any relative compaction of 90 percent or higher of the maximum laboratory density. Thus, the contractor has approximately a 10 percent range of control over the fill volume. Based on the limited work performed to date, it is our opinion that the following shrinkage and bulking factors can be used as a basis for - 13 - Project No. 05318-12-01 June 3, 1994 estimating how much the on-site soils may shrink or swell (bulk) when excavated from their natural state and placed as compacted fills. TABLE II SHRINK/BULK FACTORS Soil Umt Shrink/Bulk Factor Undocumented fill and topsoil 5 to 10 percent shrink Terrace Deposits 2 to 5 percent bulk Slope Stability The stability of proposed cut and fill slopes with respect to deep-seated failure was analyzed using Janbu's method for dimensionless slopes. The results of the analysis indicate that 2:1 (horizontal to vertical) cut and fill slopes possess a calculated factor of safety in excess of 1.5 for the height of approximately 25 feet. The slope stability analysis is presented in Figure 3. All cut slopes should be observed and logged by an engineering geologist during the grading operations to verify that the soil and geologic conditions exposed do not differ significantly from those anticipated. Cohesionless sands should not be placed within the outer 15 feet of the fill slopes. If such materials are exposed within the cut slopes, mitigation measures, such as construction of a stability fill, may be considered. - 14 - Project No. 05318-12-01 June 3, 1994 Analyses of surficial slope stability is presented on Figure 4. Results of the analyses indicate that the proposed 2:1 (horizontal:vertical) cut and fill slopes have sufficient factor of safety to resist shallow failure provides proper slope maintenance occurs. All slopes should be planted, drained and properly maintained to help reduce erosion. Slope planting should consist of a drought-tolerant plants having a variable root depth. Slope watering should be kept to a minimum to just support the plant growth. Foundations The foundation recommendations that follow are for one- or two-story residential structures and are separated into categories dependent on the thickness and geometry of the underlying fill soils as well as the Expansion Index of the prevailing subgrade soils of a particular building pad (or lot). The recommended minimum foundation and interior concrete slab design criteria for each category is presented on the following page. Final design recommendations for each building will be presented in the final compaction report. Foundations for either Categoiy I, II, or m may be designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) (dead plus live load). This bearing pressure may be increased by up to one-third for transient loads such as wind or seismic forces. - 15 - Project No. 05318-12-01 June 3, 1994 TABLE III FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS BY CATEGORY Foundation Minimum Footing Depth Co ntinuous Footin g Intenor Slab Maximum Interior%Beam Category::.. .(iiches)... Reinforcement 12 One No. 4 bar top and bottom 6 X 6 - 10/10 welded wire - mesh at slab mid-point II 18 Two No. 4 bars top and bottom No. 3 bars at 24 inches on 20 feet center, both directions both directions III 24 Two No. 5 bars top and bottom No. 3 bars at 18 inches on 15 feet center, both directions both direction CATEGORY CRITERIA Category I: Maximum fill thickness is less than 20 feet and Expansion Index is less than or equal to 50. Category II: Maximum fill thickness is less than 50 feet and Expansion Index is less than or equal to 90. Category III: Fill thickness exceeds 50 feet, or variation in fill thickness exceeds 10 feet, or Expansion Index exceeds 90, but is less than 130. Notes: All footings should have a minimum width of 12 inches. Footing depth measured from lowest adjacent subgrade. All concrete slabs should be at least four inches thick for Categories I and II and 5 inches thick for Category III. All interior concrete slabs should b underlain by at least 4 inches (3 inches for Category III) of clean sand or crushed rock. All slabs expected to receive moisture sensitive floor coverings or used to store moisture sensitive materials should be underlain by a vapor barrier covered with at least 2 inches of the clean sand recommended in No. 4 above. Interior stiffener beams should be at least 12 inches wide, have a minimum depth of 12 inches below adjacent subgrade and be reinforced as identified for the particular Foundation Category. The location of the beams will be dependent on the building geometry and foundation loading and should be determined by the project structural engineer. - 16 - Project No. 05318-12-01 June 3, 1994 The use of isolated footings which are located beyond the perimeter of the building and support structural elements connected to the building is not recommended for Categories II and M. Where this condition cannot be avoided, the isolated footings should be connected to the building foundation system with grade beams designed by a Structural Engineer. For Foundation Categories II and 111, considerations should be given to connecting exterior slabs to the building foundation to reduce the potential for future separation to occur. In addition, the exterior slab should be underlain by two layers of visqueen ( 4 mH or greater) covered with at least 2 inches of clean sand. No special subgrade presaturation is deemed necessary prior to placing concrete, however, the exposed foundation and slab subgrade soils should be sprinkled, as necessary, to maintain a moist condition as would be expected in any such concrete placement. Where buildings or other improvements are planned near the top of a slope steeper than 3:1 (horizontal: vertical), special foundations and/or design considerations are recommended due to the tendency for lateral soil?Ttiovement to occur. a. For fill slopes less than 20 feet high, building footings should be deepened such that the bottom outside edge of the footing is at least 7 feet horizontally from the face of the slope. - 17 - Project No. 05318-12-01 June 3, 1994 Where the height of the fill slope exceeds 20 feet, the minimum horizontal distance should be increased to H/3 (where H equals the vertical distance from the top of the slope to the toe) but need not exceed 40 feet. For composite (fill over cut) slopes, H equals the verticái distance from the top of the slope to the bottom of the fill portion of the slope. An acceptable alternative to deepening the footings would be the use of a post-tensioned slab and foundation system or increased footing and slab reinforcement. Specific design parameters or recommendations for either of these alternatives can be provided once the building location and fill slope geometry has been determined. For cut slopes in dense formational materials, or fill slopes inclined at 3:1 (horizontal: vertical) or flatter, the bottom outside edge of building footings should be at least 7 feet horizontally from the face of the slope, regardless of slope height. Swimming pools located within 7 feet of the top of cut or fill slopes are not recommended. Where such a condition cannot be avoided, it is recommended that the portion of the swimming pool wall within 7 feet of the slope face be designed assuming that the adjacent soil ptoides no lateral support. This recommendation applies to fill slopes up to 30 feet in height, and for cut slopes regardless of height. For swimming pools located near the top of fill slopes greater than 30 feet in height, additional recommendations may be required and Geocon Incorporated should be contacted for a review of specific site conditions. - 18 - Project No. 05318-12-01 June 3, 1994 e. Although other improvements which are relatively rigid or brittle, such as concrete flatwork or masonry walls may experience some distress if located near the top of a slope, it is generally not economical to mitigate this potential. It may be possible, however, to incorporate design measures which would permit some lateral soil movement without causing extensive distress. Geocon Incorporated should be consulted for specific recommendations. As an alternative to the foundation recommendations for each category, consideration should be given to the use of post-tensioned concrete slab and foundation systems for the support of the proposed structures. The post-tensioned systems should be designed by a structural engineer experienced in post-tensioned slab design and design criteria of the Post-Tensioning Institute (UBC Standard No. 29-4, Part Ii). Although this procedure was developed for expansive soils, it is understood that it can also be used to reduce the potential for foundation distress due to differential fill settlement. The post-tensioned design should incorporate the geotechnical parameters presented on Table IV, entitled Post-Tensioned Foundation System Design Parameters, for the particular Foundation Category designated. UBC Standard No. 29-4 Part II uses interior stiffener beams in its structural design procedures. If the Structural Engineer proposes a post-tensioned foundation design method other than UBC Standard No. 29-4, Part II, it is recommended that interior stiffener beams be used for Foundation Categories II and III and the depth of the perimeter foundation should be at - 19 - Project No. 05318-12-01 June 3, 1994 TABLE IV POST-TENSIONED FOUNDATION SYSTEM DESIGN PARAMETERS POST TENSIONING INSTITUTE (P11) PESIGN.:PARAMETERS:.:... FOUNDATION CATEGORY S. : Thornthwaite Index -20 -20 -20 Clay Type- Montmorillornte Yes Yes Yes Clay Portion (Maximum) 30% 50% 70% Depth to Constant Soil Suction 7.0 ft. 7.0 ft. 7.0 ft. Soil Suction 3.6 ft. 3.6 ft. 3.6 ft. Moisture Velocity 0.7 inimo. 0.7 inimo. 0.7 inimo. Edge Lift Moisture Variation Distance 2.6 ft. 2.6 ft. 2.6 ft. Edge Lift 0.41 in. 0.78 in. 1.15 in. Center Lift Moisture Variation Distance 5.3 ft. 5.3 ft. 5.3 ft. Center Lift . 2.12 in. 3.21 in. 4.74 in. least 12, 18, and 24 inches for Foundation Categories I, II, and Ill, respectively. Geocon Incorporated should be consulted to provide additional design parameters as required by the Structural Engineer. 28. The recommendations of this rtipott are intended to reduce the potential for cracking of slabs due to expansive soils (if present), differential settlement of deep fills or fills of varying thicknesses. However, even with the incorporation of the recommendations presented herein, foundations, stucco walls, and slabs-on-grade placed on such conditions may still exhibit some cracking due to soil movement and/or shrinkage. The occurrence of concrete shrinkage cracks -20 - Project No. 053 18-12-01 June 3, 1994 is independent of the supporting soil characteristics. Their occurrence may be reduced and/or controlled by limiting the slump of the concrete, proper concrete placement and curing, and by the placement of crack control joints at periodic intervals, in particular, where re-entry slab corners occur. Retaining Walls and Lateral Loads Retaining walls not restrained at the top and having a level backfill surface should be designed for an active soil pressure equivalent to the pressure exerted by a fluid density of 30 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). Where the backfill will be inclined at no steeper than 2.0 to 1.0, an active soil pressure of 40 pcf is recommended. These soil pressures assume that the backfill materials within an area bounded by the wall and a 1:1 plane extending upward from the base of the wall possess an Expansion Index of less than 50. Unrestrained walls are those that are allowed to rotate more than 0.001H at the top of the wall. Where walls are restrained from movement at the top, an additional uniform pressure of 7H psf (where H equals the height of the retaining wall portion of the wall in feet) should be added to the above active soil presu. All retaining walls. should be provided with a drainage system adequate to prevent the buildup of hydrostatic forces and should be waterproofed as required by the project architect. The use of drainage openings through the base of the wall (weep holes, etc.) is not recommended where -21 - Project No. 05318-12-01 June 3, 1994 the seepage could be a nuisance or otherwise adversely impact the property adjacent to the base of the wall. The above recommendations assume a properly compacted granular (Expansion Index less than 50) backfill material with no hydrostatic forces or imposed surcharge load. A typical retaining wall drainage system is shown on Figure 5. If conditions different than those described are anticipated, or if specific drainage details are desired, Geocon Incorporated should be contacted for additional recommendations. Preliminary Pavement Sections An R-value test was performed on a material derived from the Terrace Deposits indicating an R-Value of 70. A Traffic Index of 6 has been assigned for the interior streets. Utilizing the California Flexible Pavement Design procedure, and the City of Carlsbad minimum pavement section requirements, the minimum pavement section should consist of 3 inches of asphalt concrete on 6 inches of Class II aggregate base material. It should be noted that this pavement section is preliminary. The final pavement recommendations will be provided after finish subgrade is achieved and R-Value tests are performed on the actual subgrade soils. Base course material should consist of Class 2 Aggregate Base and be properly moisture conditioned and compacted to a minimum relative compaction (ASTM D1557-91) of 95 percent at or above optimum moisture content. The upper• 12 inches of subgrade should also be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 95 percent. -22 - - ---. QnsuItants TO 4512tW2 P. I Project No. 05318-12-01 June 3, 1994 Class 2 Aggregate ease should conform to Section 26-1 Or-78 of the Standard Specifications of California, Department of Tran$porrarion (Caitrans). The asphalt concrete should conform to Section 203-6 of the Standard Specflcarions for Public Works Consrrucnon (Green Book). Reactive Soil Characteristics Reactive soil characteristics as indicated by pH and resistivity rests were not within the scope of work for this study. Geocon does not practice in the field of corrosion engineering. Therefore, this information, if required. should be provided by other qualified consultants and ftirnished to those responsible for below grade improvements to evaluate potential adverse effect. Draina2e Adequate drainage provisions are imperative. Under no circumstances should water be allowed to pond adjacent to footings. The building pads should be properly finish graded after the buildings and other improvements are in place so that drainage water is directed away from foundations, pavements, concrete slabs, and slope tops to controlled drainage devices. Experience has shown that eves with these provisions, a shallow groundwater or subsurface water condition can and may develop in areas where no such water conditions existed prior to site development; this is particularly true where a substantial increase in surface water infiltration results from an increase in landscape irrigation. 01-06-1997 01:06PM FROM O'Day Consultants TO 4512502 P.03 01-06-1997 1:06PM FROM O'Day Consultants TO 412502 P.03 - p Project No. 05318-12-01 June 3, 1994 Grading and Foundation Plan Review 37 Gèocon Incorporated should review the grading and foundation plans prior to final design submittal to determine if additional analysis or recommendations are required. - 24 - TOTAL P.e3 - Project No. 05318-12-01 June 3, 1994 LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS The recommendations of this report pertain only to the site investigated and are based upon the assumption that the soil conditions do not deviate from those disclosed in the investigation. If any variations or undesirable conditions are encountered during construction, or if the proposed construction will differ from that anticipated herein, Geocon Incorporated should be notified so that supplemental recommendations can be given. The evaluation or identification of the potential presence of hazardous materials was not part of the scope of services provided by Geocon Incorporated. This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or of his representative, to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the architect and engineer for the project and incorporated into the plans, and the necessary steps are taken. to see that the contractor and subcontractors carry out such recommendations in the field. 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. PROJECT No. 05318-12-01 ASSUMED CONDITIONS: Slope Height Slope Inclination Total Unit Weight of Soil Angle of Internal Friction Apparent Cohesion No Seepage Forces H = 25 feet 2:1 (Horizontal: Vertical) = 125 pounds per cubic foot 4) = 28 degrees C = 400 pounds per square foot ANALYSIS: 'c4 = yHtanb C FS = = 4.1 = 16 FS = 2.0 Equation (3-3), Reference 1 Equation (3-2), Reference 1 Calculated Using Eq. (3-3) Determined Using Figure 10, Reference 2 Factor of Safety Calculated Using Eq. (3-2) REFERENCES Janbu, N., Stability Analysis of Slopes with Dimensionless Parameters, Harvard Soil Mechanics, Series No. 46, 1954. Janbu, N., Discussion of J.M. Bell, Dimensionless Parameters for Homogeneous Earth Slopes, Journal of Soil Mechanics and Foundation Design, No. SM6, November 1967. SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS - CUT AND FILL SLOPES POINSETTIA SHORES CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA FIGURE 3 PROJEcT No. 05318-12-01 ASSUMED CONDITIONS: Slope Height Depth of Saturation Slope Inclination Slope Angle Unit Weight of Water Total Unit Weight of Soil Angle of Internal Friction Apparent Cohesion H = Infinite Z = 3feet 2:1 (Horizontal:Vertical) = 26.5 degrees = 62.4 pounds per cubic foot- 125 pounds per cubic foot 4) 28 degrees C = 400 pounds per square foot Slope saturated to vertical depth Z below slope face. Seepage forces parallel to slope face. ANALYSIS: C+(71 -',ç)Zcos2 itanl FS= , Z sin cosi = 3.2 REFERENCES Haefeli, R. The Stability of Slopes Acted Upon by Parallel Seepage, Proc. Second International Conference, SMFE, Rotterdam, 1948, 1, 57-62. Skempton, A. W., and F. A. Delory, Stability of Natural Slopes in London Clay, Proc. Fourth International Conference, SMFE, London, 1957, 2, 378-81.. SURFICIAL SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS - FILL SLOPES I POINSETTIA SHORES CARLSBAD,. CALIFORNIA FIGURE 4 PROJECT NO. 05318-12-01 PROPERLY NPAcrw ACXFIU. UNED DRAINAGE DITCH PROPOSED RETAINING WAU.. 4.9 . I I Ii.• •.o•• fr- IO •. •• PROPOSED GRACE PA— ..g APPROVED FILTER FABRIC OPEN GRACED I MAX. AGGREGATE 5'MAX. 4.z._ 4' CIA. PERFORATED PVC PIPE MIN. FALL. TO APPROVED OUTLET PROPOSED FOOTING NO SCALE NOTES: Prefabricated drainage panels such as Miradrain 7000 or equivalent may be used in lieu of placing gravel to a height of 2/3 the total wall, height. Drain should be uniformly sloped and must lead to a positive gravity outlet or to a sump where water can be removed by pumping. RETAINING WALL DRAINAGE DETAIL POINSETTIA SHORES CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA FIGURE 5 - - - - S * S.- .-* - ( I .') • r . - S .- S 55 5 S - - S - .4 1• / , - t 4 r - I -:A - - .....,APPENDIX;. - - - / -. S S S. .. 1 4 S. -- 4- 4 - .1 Project No. 05318-12-01 June 3, 1994 APPENDIX A FIELD INVESTIGATION The field investigation was performed on May 4 through May 13, 1994, and consisted of the excavation of 10 small-diameter borings and 12 backhoe trenches. The approximate locations of the exploratory excavation are shown on Figure 2: The small-diameter borings were advanced to depths of 16 to 32 feet below existing grade using a Mobile Drill B-61 truck-mounted drill rig equipped with an eight-inch-diameter hollow stem auger. Relatively "undisturbed" samples were obtained by driving a 3-inch, split-tube sampler into the "undisturbed" soil mass with blows from a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches. The sampler was equipped with a 1-inch by 2%-inch-diameter, brass sampler rings to facilitate removal and laboratory testing. Disturbed bulk samples were also obtained at selected depths. The trenches were advanced to depths of 6 to 14 feet below existing grade using an Case 580K backhoe equipped with a 24-inch bucket. Disturbed bulk samples were obtained at selected locations in the trenches for laboratory testings. The soils encountered in the borings and trenches were visually examined, classified, and logged. Logs of the borings and trenches are presented on Figures A-i through A-22. The logs depict the soil and geologic conditions encountered and the depth at which samples were obtained. PROJECT N0 05319-I2-01 BORING B 1 DEPTH SAMPLE 0 C3 SOIL H IN ' H- FEET (USCS) ELEV. (MSL.) 91 DATE COMPLETED 5/4/94 :3 EQUIPMENT B-61 MOBILE DRILL waica 0: 1:0 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION T1 . A _ I TERRACE DEPOSiTS Loose to medium dense, damp, dark orangish brown, 2 BI-1 SM Silty fine to medium SAND 15 ht. - BI-2 -Becomes reddish brown BI-3 -Becomes dense, light orangish brown 30 105.8 4.2' . .. 8 - • :4 - B14 Lj _ -- -Becomes dense to very dense 51 • - 12 - BI-5 --------------------------------------- Dense to very dense, damp, light grayish brown, fine -. - - .. ..-. to medium SAND - - 14 - - B1-6 .. SP ' - 59 99.7 2.1 - 16 - .. ... . - - - :: •• -Becomes very light grayish brown, cohesionless - 18 - :•i. •i- -.. .. ' - - 20 BORING TERMINATED AT 21.5 FEET Figure A-i Log of Boring B 1, page 1 of 1 PS SAMPLE SYMBOLS 0 SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL El ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST I •.. DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE 10 ... CHUNK SAMPLE •.. WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TINES. PRC)1FCT N( 05IIR-12-01 -; - BORING >_ ___ ___ DEPTH SAMPLE (D SOIL 0 I-I IL NO CLASS ELEV. (MSL.) 68 DATE COMPLETED 5/4/94 ________ _______ FEET (USCS) Z cn HW EQUIPMENT B-61 MOBILE DRILL WWCQ -e ) Cr. CL 0 U MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 0 - .1.1.1 SM TOPSOIL Loose, moist, medium brown, Silty, fine to medium 2 SAND with little rootlets - TERRACE DEPOSITS Medium dense to dense, moist, dark orangish brown, .- 4 mottled, Silty fine to medium SAND B2- SM 62 115.5 7.8- 8 - B2-2 -------------------------------------- Becomes dense, moist, grayish brown to orangish Ti- - Ei i brown, slightly Silty, fine to medium SAND 10 - B2-3 :1 SP-SM 43 12 14 - : B24 -Becomes dark gray, micaceous, cohesionless in places 58 116.8 5.0 - 16 BORING TERMINATED AT 16 FEET Figure A-2 Log of Boring B 2, page 1 of 1 PS 0 SAMPLE SYMBOLS ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL El ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST I . .. DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE ... CHUNK SAMPLE ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TINES. 'RC)WCT NO ()5IR12-flI I BORING B 3 ZUj^>. DEPTH SAMPLE 3 SOIL 1)— W '.# I ELEV. (MSL.) 46 DATE COMPLETED 5/4/94 FEET EQUIPMENT B-61 MOBILE DRILL I MATERIAL DESCRIPTION ____ -0 - - - :':i. SM TOPSOIL - I I Loose,dry to damp, light brown, Silty fine to medium F- 2 - B3-1 SAND with rootlets ---i- - 54 116.2 4.4 TERRACE DEPOSITS - 1:1.I - I SM Medium dense, damp, medium brown, Silty fine to b ' - - I medium SAND --------------------------------------- - - - 6 B3-2 Becomes loose, very moist to nearly saturated, i'--8 .. - I L. SM medium grayish brown, slightly Silty, fine to medium SAND - -8 - SANTIAGO FORMATION Very dense, very moist, greenish gray, Clayey, fine to 10 - B3 :•• :.. C medium SANDSTONE -Water table stabilized at 9.5 feet 50/4" . 123.3 11.8 12 :•.••: 14 ::E•:: -Scattered gravels from 13 to 15 feet :j: SM Becomes very light gray to white Silty SANDSTONE 50/6" 16 B3 4 --------------------------------------- Becomes slightly Silty fine to coarse SANDSTONE 18 SP-SM -20- BORING TERMINATED AT 21.5 FEET Figure A-3 Log of Boring B 3, page 1 of 1 Ps SAMPLE SYMBOLS 0 ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL IJ ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST I ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE ... CHUNK SAMPLE ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. ROJECT NO- 05318-I2-01 I CD BORING B 4 z w^ >. DEPTH SAMPLE SOIL W X NO. ELEV. (MSL.) 53 DATE COMPLETED 5/4/94 FEET EQUIPMENT B-61 MOBILE DRILL CL 0 I MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 0 • TI - TERRACE DEPOSIT - SM Medium dense, damp to moist, dark brown, Silty, fine 2 i .1 to medium SAND - - - B4 I-I -Becomes light orangish brown at 2 feet 14 .i11• B4-2 26 106.4 4.6 r6 - - xt.' 1 .•I- - 8 -Becomes light brown, Silty fine SAND - 10 B4-3 .• SM -Becomes orangish brown at '10 feet 29 I- -12- - :•i. •.i• - 1.•I•I 1-14 --------------------------------------- - - I- 16 - B4-4 Becomes dense to very dense, very moist to wet, very . - . . 56 106.0 4.1 SW light orangish brown, fine to coarse SAND - - - 20 - . SANTIAGO FORMATION - B4-5 I-i. I SM Very dense, damp, very light gray to white, Silty fine 82 1- - SAND - 22 Irn-- BORING TERMINATED AT 22 FEET Figure A-4 Log of Boring B 4, page 1 ot 1 PS SAMPLE SYMBOLS SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL IJ ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST I ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE ... CHUNK SAMPLE ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. 'PCilPCT NC) 05119-I2-01 CD • BORING B 5 DEPTH SAMPLE SOIL LL 1 LL IN NO. ELEV. (MSL.) 73 DATE COMPLETED 5/4/94 FEET J a: w ino EQUIPMENT 8-61 MOBILE DRILL W MCD 0: 01 S MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 0 - ):i., TERRACE DEPOSIT I Dense, dry, light brown to medium brown, Silty, fine 1- 2 - to medium SAND - B51 . SM -Becomes moist, dark orangish-brown at 2 feet 29 108.3 4.3 .•I1. - - B5-2 • -Becomes dense, moist to wet, orangish brown, Silty - 25 6 L t. fine to medium SAND - 8 - :•i. ••i. - F :141 - 10 B5-3 : - 38 102.5 4.6 - 12 -B54 . -Becomes medium brown 14 B5-5 : 34 16 - - - 1.. -Becomes light grayish brown, Silty, fine to medium I . SAND at 16 feet 18 1 :•i.i• _____ - 20 - BS6 4-s- Becomes very dense, grayish brown, fine to medium : :• - SP 59 98.3 3.3 SAND 22- BORING TERMINATED AT 22 FEET Figure A-5 Log of Boring B 5, page 1 of 1 Ps 0 •.. SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL IJ ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST I ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) SAMPLE SYMBOLS DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE ... CHUNK SAMPLE T ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. PRflTFCT Nfl fl1R-I-fl1 BORING B 6 DEPTH SAMPLE 3 o 0 SOIL W X FE IN ET NO. X Z CLASS ELEV. (MSL.) 52 DATE COMPLETED 5/5/94 EQUIPMENT B-61 MOBILE DRILL WOO W_ raL MATERIAL DESCRIPTION -0• . -:':i: SM TOPSOIL Loose, dry, medium brown, Si1ty fine to medium 2B61 _SAND 31 TERRACE DEPOSITS • -.': . SM Medium dense to dense, moist, dark reddish brown, - 4 - j Silty, fine to medium SAND 6 - - B6-2 -Becomes moist to wet, Clayey, fine to medium .././. 2/ 38 116.8 8.2. - - . SAND . - 10 - - B6 3 Becomes light orangish brown, Silty fine SAND --& :t l - 44 12- ..1. SM 14- :4I B64 :1 1. -Becomes Silty fine to medium SAND - 78 103.6 5.0 16 - -.::i. _ -_ BORING TERMINATED AT 17 FEET Figure A-6 Log of Boring B 6, page 1 of 1 Ps SAMPLE SYMBOLS 0 ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL IJ ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST I ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE 10 •.. CHUNK SAMPLE •.. WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. 'RflTFC'T NC fl6112-.1-fl1 BORING B 7 DEPTH SE SOIL C • l-4l- H WX F IN ELEV. (MSL.) 65 DATE COMPLETED 5/5/94 T CUSCS) EQUIPMENT B-61 MOBILE DRILL MATERIAL DESCRIPTION - Tri SM TOPSOIL - 1.. I Loose, dry, light to medium brown, Silty, fine to 2 B7-1 -ri-i-mediumSAND 35 TERRACE DEPOSIT - :1•' - SM Dense, moist to wet, dark reddish brown, Silty, fine 4 - -I - to medium SAND - B7-2 19 - - . Becomes orangish brown, Clayey fine to medium SC SAND -8 - 1 •; - 10 B7-3 --------------------------------------- 113.9 7.5 12 - 12 - Becomes very light orangish brown, Silty fine SAND - 14 - 1374 Y. SM 29 - 16 : -- - - 20 B7-5 ----------------- - Becomes dense, orangish brown, fine to medium - -- 76 108.2 8.2 SAND with trace of fine gravel - -22 SP - 24 - .• : - - - B7-6 .- . -Becomes gravelly 79/11" -26 - - :7-,---- Sc SANTIAGO FORMATION Becomes dense, wet to saturated, light grayish brown, fine SAND _Clayey BORING TERMINATED AT 27 FEET Figure A-7 Log of Boring B 7, page 1 of 1 ps 0 SAMPLE SYMBOLS ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL U .. STANDARD PENETRATION TEST I •.. DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE ... CHUNK SAMPLE .. WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES )QnTrcT Nfl flUR..I-fl1 BORING B 8 DEPTH SAMPLE SOIL I NO. ELEV. (MSL.) 118 DATE COMPLETED 5/6/94 FEET EQUIPMENT B-61 MOBILE DRILL WOO a: MATERIALDESCRIPTION - 0 TOPSOIL -. :• . \ Loose, damp, light brown to medium brown, b 2 - B8-1 .- SP fine to medium SAND fL 77 TERRACE DEPOSIT -. .•... L ..-.... Dense to very dense, damp to moist, orangish brown, -. . slightly Silty fine to medium SAND B8-2 :. -Becomes damp to humid :50/5" 113.9 5.7 6 10 138-3 51 12 - : .• .• - 14 - . .... . - B8-4 :•:- 50/5" 109.5 6.8 16 18 - -: . . - -------------------------------------- Becomes fine to coarse SAND SW 20 138-5 -:::1 :51 22 - .•. •• 24 Becomes light orangish brown, coarse SAND with few .•1.i- B8-6 '_fIe_&r!ve[!t2_4_f.e_t -I 50/5" 114.1 8.5 26 • I SM Becomes moist to wet, dark orangish brown, Silty fine 1 . to coarse SAND with little fine gravel 28 :•1.I. - -30- - B8-7 --. Becomes light grayish brown, Silty fine SAND -4 SM -32- BORING TERMINATED AT 32 FEET Figure A-8 LoLy of Boring B 8, page 1 of 1 PS SAMPLE SYMBOLS 0 .. SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL LI ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST I ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE ... CHUNK SAMPLE ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. 'RCTFCT Nfl flclIR-I-flI - ce BORING B 9 Zw^ >. DEPTH SAMPLE SOIL ' IN NO. x z CLASS ELEV. (MSL.) 126 DATE COMPLETED 5/6/94 FEET EQUIPMENT B-61 MOBILE DRILL zcna MATERIALDESCRIPTION :Tfl- TOPSOIL - - . 11 SM Loose, damp, medium brown, Silty fine to medium I- - 2 SAND with few shells I. B9-1 j4 -Becomes dark brown at2feet 44 111.6 4.5 : 1. TERRACE DEPOSITS - . L I L. Dense, moist, orangish brown, Silty fine to medium r - B9-2 I SM SAND 62 - 6 8 10 - - B9-3 .1. I 50/4" 112.8 6.9 -12- 14 B9-4 44 16 B9-5 B9-5 18 - -: :• SW Becomes dense, moist, light brown, cohesionless - 1 20 B9-6 -Becomes light orangish brown at 20 feet 84 105.5 6.9 22 - - 24 B9-7 -.• 61 26 - .. 28 - B9-8 -. -Becomes fine to coarse SAND with little gravels at - - ..... 28 feet -Becomes gravelly fine to coarse SAND at 29 feet - 30 - - - B9-9 -.•. - _____ ___________________________________________________ 50/5" BORING TERMINATED AT 31 FEET Figure A-9 Log of Boring B 9, page 1 of 1 PS 0 SAMPLE SYMBOLS .. SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL El ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST 1 ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE ... CHUNK SAMPLE .. WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TINES. 'R(UFCT NO 1151I-12-0I - cc w " BORING B 1 )- _ DEPTH SAMPLE (j ° I— SOIL — H)WX NO FE IN ET CLASS ELEV. (MSL.) 61 DATE COMPLETED 5/6/94 ' Z d _J (USCS) EQUIPMENT B-61 MOBILE DRILL WHO W H OZ MATERIALDESCRIPTION - - SM TOPSOIL Loose, damp, medium brown, Silty fine to medium - 1-2- SAND \_-Becomes wet, dark brown TERRACE DEPOSiT. SM - Medium dense to dense, wet orangish brown, Silty, - fine to medium SAND BIO-1 .iJI. -Becomes dense, few medium size cobbles 44 117.6 9.2. - . I -Becomes light grayish brown, Silty fine SAND at 6 SM feet 8 10 - B10-2 11 Becomes fine to medium SAND with a trace of clay . •• . . - SP-SC 75 117.6 9.2 12- Becomes grayish brown, Clayey fine SAND - - SC -- -14- - - BI0-3 50/5" 16 - SC SANTIAGO FORMATION - Becomes very dense, dry to damp, light grayish \_brown, Clayey fine SAND BORING TERMINATED AT 17 FEET Figure A-10 Log of Boring B 10, page 1 of 1 ps 0 SAMPLE SYMBOLS ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL IJ ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST I ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE ... CHUNK SAMPLE X ....WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. RflIPCT NO n51la-I2-01 I- TRENCH T1 ZW^(D DEPTH SAMPLE 0 C SOIL W X IN Z CLASS CUSCS) ELEV. (MSL.) 71 DATE COMPLETED 5/13/94 ________ _______ FEET _J EQUIPMENT CASE 580K a. MATERIALDESCRIPTION SM-SC TOPSOIL Medium dense, damp, dark brown, Silty, fine to - I- 2 - medium SAND with little clay with little rootlets / SM TERRACE DEPOSITS Medium dense, moist, dark brown, Silty, fine to• : medium SAND -Becomes dense, medium brown and slightly cemented -- - ISP-SM 6 Becomes very moist, light brown, slightly Silty fine to medium SAND to poorly graded sand with tracej. of silt-cohesionless TRENCH TERMINATED AT 7 FEET Figure A-il, Log of Trench T 1 Ps 0 SAMPLE SYMBOLS ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL IJ ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST I ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE ... CHUNK SAMPLE- X ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. ROJECT NO 051-I2-01 )- Ui TRENCH T 2 DEPTH SAMPLE SOIL -iI_ ..4 U Ui." FEET CLASS (USCS) NO . _ ELEV. (MSL.) 62 DATE COMPLETED 5/13/94 wCfl Z )(. C LO EQUIPMENT CASE 580K Ix'S CL C C.) MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 0. TOPSOIL T2-1 - SM Loose dry to damp, grayish brown, Silty, fine to 2 - medium SAND - TERRACE DEPOSiTS jj - SM Medium dense, damp, grayish brown, Silty fine to • medium SAND slightly cemented c - jl 8_i!1h) at 3.5 feet - T22 .1 - SM Dense, to very dense, damp, greenish brown, 6 mottled moderately cemented, Silty fine to medium - - SANDSTONE TRENCH TERMINATED AT 7 FEET Figure A-12, Log of Trench T 2 PS 0 SAMPLE SYMBOLS ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL NJ ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST I ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) I ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE ... CHUNK SAMPLE ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. )RflTP(T Nfl flIR-1—fll ce TRENCH T 3 DEPTH SAMPLE 3=1 0 0 SOIL W X FE IN ET ELEV. (MSL.) 51 DATE COMPLETED 5/13/94 EQUIPMENT CASE 580K MATERIALDESCRIPTION SM TOPSOIL - -' Loose to medium dense, dry to damp, medium 1- 2 - .1 \ brown, Silty, fine to medium SAND with little rootlets and burrows _clay, TERRACE DEPOSITS - T.. SM - : -. Medium dense to dense, damp, orangish brown, - Silty, fine to medium SAND, slightly cemented, I. I pinholes and rootlets to approximately 4 feet 6 ----------------- -- . . SP-SM Becomes very moist, yellowish brown and slightly • Silty SAND Cohesionless in places TRENCH TERMINATED AT 8 FEET. Figure A-13, Log of Trench T 3 Ps D SAMPLE SYMBOLS ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL El ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST a ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE ... CHUNK SAMPLE ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. PROJFcT IsIO 05319-I2-01 ca 1—TRENCH DEPTH SAMPLE 9 SOIL ELEV. (MSL.) 52 DATE COMPLETED 5/13/94 FEET WHO H ca EQUIPMENT CASE 580K MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 0 - ____ ____ ____________________________________ ____ ____ ____ . :!4J. - SM TOPSOIL ••1. ••I• Medium dense, dry to damp, orangish brown, 2 - T4- i1 i SM _Silty,fine_tomediumSANDwithlittlerootlets FILL .• j1I. Medium dense, moist, orangish brown, Silty to 4 - . \ slightly Silty fine to medium SAND • \_-Becomes dark brown at3feet 4•• SM TERRACE DEPOSITS Dense, damp to moist, orangish brown, Silty, to • -:' slightly Silty fine to medium SAND . . -Pockets of light grayish brown, fine to medium 8 - -SAND with trace of silt from 6feet _____ - TRENCH TERMINATED AT 8 FEET Figure A-14, Log of Trench T 4 PS SAMPLE SYMBOLS 0 ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL IJ •.. STANDARD PENETRATION TEST I •.. DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE ... CHUNK SAMPLE . .. WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. ROJECT NO. 05318-12-01 CDI- TRENCHT5 DEPTH SAMPLE SOIL ,... u,• I FEET NO. CLASS. ELEV. (MSL.) 56 DATE COMPLETED 5/13/94 ,c wt; Cn (USCS) EQUIPMENT CASE 580K S U MATERIALDESCRIPTION SM TOPSOIL Loose to medium dense, dry to damp, dark brown, 2 - - Silty,finetomediumSANDwithrootlets j-- - TERRACE DEPOSITS Medium dense to dense, damp, medium brown, 'I ••i• Silty, fine to medium SAND slightly cemented I -Becomes moist at 3 feet SM -Rootlets to approximately 4 feet 6 - -Pockets of light brown, slightly Silty fine to I -medium SAND from 5feet TRENCH TERMINATED AT 6.5 FEET. Figure A-15, Log of Trench T 5 PS SAMPLE SYMBOLS 0 ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL El ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST I ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE Ll ... CHUNK SAMPLE -... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. ROJECT NO. 05318-12-01 I )- w TRENCH T 6 zw•_ - DEPTH SAMPLE ( cc I- SOIL H01- I_ZLI_ " Cfl Ix U. W I FEET CLASS. ELEV. (MSL.) 55 DATE COMPLETED 5/13/94 (USCS) _J EQUIPMENT CASE 580K w 2 _I WWC0 0 >. U MATERIAL DESCRIPTION • ••hl •' FILL I- 2 • t.. I 1.1. SM Medium dense, dry to damp, dark brown, Silty fine to medium SAND - - - L 6 - T6-1 Ei.1.i. -Becomes moist, interbedding o f dark and lighter brown -Becomes dark brown, moist to very moist - :l: SM TERRACE DEPOSITS Dense, moist, light brown, Silty fine to medium SAND -10 - - TRENCH TERMINATED AT 10 FEET Figure A-16. Log of Trench T 6 . ps 0 ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) SAMPLE SYMBOLS DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE ... CHUNK SAMPLE ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. )RflIFCT W( nciiR- 1,-ni - w TRENCH T 7 Z w^ >- DEPTH SAMPLE 0 SOIL H NO CLASS ELEV. (MSL.) 52 DATE COMPLETED 5/13/94 cn w d FEET (USCS) Z EQUIPMENT CASE 580K Ui CL C MATERIAL DESCRIPTION - - SM TOPSOIL oose to medium dense, dry, medium brown, Silt to~Jine 2 mediumSANDwithsomerootlets SM TERRACE DEPOSiTS Medium dense to dense, damp, medium brown, - 4 - :1•i- Silty fine to medium SAND - trace of rootlets at 3 ____ feet 1 '., - 6 - SPSM Medium dense, damp, slightly Silty fine to medium SAND TRENCH TERMINATED AT 7 FEET Figure A-17, Log of Trench T 7 Ps 0 SAMPLE SYMBOLS SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL U ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST I ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE ... CHUNK SAMPLE ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. ROJECT NO. 05318-12-01 ix TRENCH TO Zw )- W X DEPTH SAMPLE .j a a SOIL Hz -LL. Cfl. FEET NO.'LASS ELEV. (MSL.) 56 DATE COMPLETED 5/13/94 EQUIPMENT CASE 580K wcr a • O _'-' a [ MATERIAL DESCRIPTION 0 - - SM FILL t. .1 ______ Loose, dry, light brown, Silty, fine to medium 2 - - - SAND with rootlets, pieces of plastic and debris - - - _____ - -: SM Loose to medium dense, moist to very moist, light - I grayishbrown,Silty,finetomediumSAND TERRACE DEPOSITS SP-SM Very dense, damp, greenish gray, moderately to 6 well cemented, slightly Silty, fine to coarse r well -1--1 :j - SM mottled Becomes orange and gray, slightly cemented, Silty, \_fine to medium SANDSTONE TRENCH TERMINATED AT 7 FEET Figure A-18, Log of Trench T 8 PS SAMPLE SYMBOLS SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL El ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST I ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) • DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE ... CHUNK SAMPLE ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. DEPTH SAMPLE IN NO. - I FEET 318-12-01 - w TRENCH T-9 >. SOIL . '-' cn w5 CLASS ELEV. (MSL.) 60 DATE COMPLETED 5/13/94 wj (USCS) EQUIPMENT CASE 580K zw_J - CL C., MATERIAL DESCRIPTION FILL .. ,.1- SM Loose, damp to moist, medium brown, Silty fine to / — -medium _with. rootlets acid concrete _ chunks ec m me )' f1.Boes loose to diu dense, wet, dark : orangish brown, Silty fine SAND ••1•1•l ______ J. l . TERRACE DEPOSITS 1. I SM Medium dense to dense, wet, light orangish brown, - Silty fine to medium SAND \ -Becomes dense to very dense at 7 feet TRENCH TERMINATED AT 8 FEET Figure A-19. Log of Trench T 9 Ps SAMPLE SYMBOLS SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST I ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE ... CHUNK SAMPLE ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. ROJECT NO I I DEPTH SAMPLE IN I - NO. FEET 318-12-01 - cc Ii TRENCH T 10 (D 0 _I SOIL CLASS ELEV. (MSL.) 56 DATE COMPLETED 5/13/94 IOt (USCS) i -- WHJ A EQUIPMENT CASE 50K - MATERIAL DESCRIPTION - SM TOPSOIL \ Medium dense, dry, light orangish brown, Silty, SP \_fine to medium SAND with little rootlets _/T TERRACE DEPOSiTS Dense, moist to wet, dark brown, fine to medium , SM 'SAND ----------------------------------- Becomes dense to very dense, moist, light grayish orange, Silty fine SAND - -Becomes medium dense, light orangish brown at 5 \ feet TRENCH TERMINATED AT 6 FEET I i I I •II II I Figure A-20, Log of Trench T 10 0 ... SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL El ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST I ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) SAMPLE SYMBOLS IM ... DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE ... CHUNK SAMPLE ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. 318-12-01 >- 3 w S0IL TRENCH T11 w•_' I-4I- - W X CLASS ELEV. (MSL.) 80 DATE COMPLETED 5/13/94 (USCS) EQUIPMENT CASE 580K zw _j x:z ca 'S MATERIAL DESCRIPTION A. J1.1. - SM TOPSOIL T1- SM \ Loose, dry, light to medium brown, Silty, fine to - _mediumSANDwithfewrootlets TI1-1 •:I .I \ FILL SM \ Becomes medium dense, wet, dark reddish brown, Ti , _Silt y,fine to medium SAND . TERRACE DEPOSITS Medium dense to dense, moist to wet, grayish brown, Silty fine SAND -Becomes medium dense, wet, oi:angish brown at 3 feet \_-Becomes light orangish brown at5feet TRENCH TERMINATED AT 7 FEET DEPTH I SAMPLE IN FEET Figure A-21, Log of Trench T 11 PS SAMPLE SYMBOLS 0 ", SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL U... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST I ... DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE ... CHUNK SAMPLE ... WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. PCTFCT 1sJCi flc1L.r-fl1 TRENCH T 12 DEPTH SAMPLE 3 o a son. Cfl NO. ELEV. (MSL.) 84 DATE COMPLETED 5/13/94 FEET WHO H - EQUIPMENT CASE 580K CL U MATERIAL DESCRIPTION .. - FILL Medium dense, moist to wet, medium brown, Silty 2 fine to medium SAND •. SM .4- TERRACE DEPOSITS Medium dense to dense, moist to wet, orangish 10 - ..- .- brown, fine to medium SAND 12 - .•. 14 - - _____ -Becomes dense to very dense, light grayish orange, _____ TRENCH TERMINATED AT 14 FEET Figure A-22, Log of Trench T 12 PS U SAMPLE SYMBOLS .. SAMPLING UNSUCCESSFUL EJ ... STANDARD PENETRATION TEST I . DRIVE SAMPLE (UNDISTURBED) DISTURBED OR BAG SAMPLE ... CHUNK SAMPLE •.. WATER TABLE OR SEEPAGE NOTE: THE LOG OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS SHOWN HEREON APPLIES ONLY AT THE SPECIFIC BORING OR TRENCH LOCATION AND AT THE DATE INDICATED. IT IS NOT WARRANTED TO BE REPRESENTATIVE OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND TIMES. APPENDIX B Project No. 05318-12-01 June 3, 1994 APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTING Laboratory tests were performed in accordance with generally accepted test methods of the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) or other suggested procedures. Selected samples were tested for their maximum dry density and optimum moisture content, in-place density, moisture content, expansion and gradation consolidation characteristics. The results of these tests are summarized on Tables B-I through B-ffl and Figures B-i through B-4. The results of in-place density and moisture content are shown on the boring logs, Figures A-i through A-22. Project No. 05318-12-01 June 3, 1994 TABLE B-I SUMMARY OF DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS Angle of Dry Moisture Unit Shear Density Content Cohesion Resistance Sample No. (pcf) (%) (psf) (degrees) B8-4 109.5 6.8 400 28 B9-6 105.5 5.0 475 28 B112* 117.6 8.4 290 32 Sample remolded to 90 percent of maximum dry density at near optimum moisture content. TABLE B-il SUMMARY OF LABORATORY EXPANSION INDEX TEST RESULTS Moisture Content Before After Dry Density Sample No. Test Test • (pcf) Expansion Index (%) (%) B1-2 8.6 16.9 115.7 1 16-1 7.0 14.1 122.2 0 T12-1 8.3 15.3 118.0 0 Project No. 05318-12-01 June 3, 1994 TABLE B-il! SUMMARY OF LABORATORY MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY AND OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT TEST RESULTS ASTMD1557-91 Maximum Optimum Sample Dry Density Moisture Content No. Description (pcf) (% Dry Weight) BI-2 Dark orangish-brown, Silty, fine to medium SAND 130.0 7.6 T6-1 Dark brown, Silty, fine to medium SAND 134.1 7.6 T11-2 Orangish-brown, Silty, fine to medium. SAND 131.0 8.2 PROJECT NO. 05318-12-01 ,, •1 iJI I ION CURVE cj POINSETTIAiSHORESi I,I .I 'XCALIFORNIA) 4 4 1Ih PS Figure B-i I GRAVEL SAND SILT OR CLAY 1 COARSE FINE 1COARSd MEDIUM FINE - :: nluhvai!IuuIuuuh• iiiui___ 11111111 111111 11111111 IllilVill IHlLIlI 11111111 ; 11111_Ililnhl___ ___iuiuiu___ 111111--- liii_11111111_IlIlILI_11111111_11111111 .: au ____IIuIIhl -lIIlIIit HIll._11111111 iiul_iiuniu_iioiirioiiuiu_11111111 oiiiiii :iiiii OlIUikI!llhl 11111111 hOhlL—IlIllIhl iuiiuruiiiiiuia--oiuiiu___ 111111 luAu llllIIhI,j!!IlhI Jillihl SAMPLE Depth (ft) CLASSIFICATION NAT WCI LL PL P1 B5-2 5.0 (SM) Silty fine to medium SAND B7-4 15.0 (SW) Fine to medium SAND Ti 1-2 4.0 (SM) Siiry fine to medium SAND PROJECT NO. 05318-12-01 SAMPLE NO. B4-2 -C. 2 - J - - C 4 C-, I- z w C-, lU 6 a- 6 10 121 - - - - - - 1. - - - - - - 10 - -. - - - - 100 0. APPLIED PRESSURE (ksf) Initial Dry Density (pcf) 106.4 ___ Initial Saturation (%) 21.9 Initial Water Content (%) 4. Sample Saturated at (ksf) 0.5 CONSOLIDATION CURVE POINSETTIA SHORES CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 6 PS Figure B-2 PROJECT NO. 05318-12-01 SAMPLE NO. B6-2 -4 -a : __-- 4 - - - - .: U I- z w U ce Ui a. C l .1 ____•.. 1 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE (ksf) Initial Dry Density (pcf) I 116.8 Initial Water Content (%) 8.2 CONSOLIDATION CURVE POINSETTIA SHORES CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA PS Figure B-3 Initial Saturation _(%) 51.8 Sample Saturated at (ksf) 0.5 PROJECT NO. 05318-12-01 SAMPLE NO. BI0-2 -4 2 - z 2- -j C C., I- z LU Ci a- IC 12 - - - - - - 0.1 10 100 APPLIED PRESSURE (ksf) Initial Dry Density (pcf) I 117.6 Initial Saturation (%) 59. ___ Initial Water Content (%) I 9.2 Sample Saturated at (ksf) 0.5 CONSOLIDATION CURVE POINSETTIA SHORES CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA PS Figure B-4 - . - •. .• . . . . - ... . •. •.. - - - - - 5 5 -S 1' - 'C- f -C - / S - . S - - .... . .- .. 5 .... . ... - ..-.. . -. S.. - I.. I.- - .. • S - .. .. • - - . • . •. . .. . .. . . .. . - 5/ ••••• -I. .5.. APPENDIX C RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS FOR POINSETTIA SHORES CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA Project No. 053318-12-01 RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS 1 GENERAL 1.1 These Recommended Grading Specifications shall be used in conjunction with the Geotechnical Report for the project prepared by Geocon Incorporated. The recom- mendations contained in the text of the Geotechnical Report are a part of the earthwork and grading specifications and shall supersede the provisions contained hereinafter in the case of conflict. 1.2 Prior to the commencement of grading, a geotechnical consultant (Consultant) shall be employed for the purpose of observing earthwork procedures and testing the fills for substantial conformance with the recommendations of the Geotechnical Report and these specifications. It will be necessary that the Consultant provide adequate testing and observation services so that he may determine that, in his opinion, the work was performed in substantial conformance with these specifications. It shall be the responsibility of the Concractor to assist the Consultant and keep him apprised of work schedules and changes so that personnel may be scheduled accordingly. 1.3 It shall be the sole responsibility of the Contractor to provide adequate equipment and methods to accomplish the work in accordance with applicable grading codes or agency ordinances, these specifications and the approved grading plans. If, in the opinion of the Consultant, unsatisfactory conditions such as questionable soil materials, poor moisture condition, inadequate compaction, adverse weather, and so forth, result in a quality of work not in conformance with these specifications, the Consultant will be empowered to reject the work and recommend to the Owner that construction be stopped until the unacceptable conditions are corrected. 2 DEFINITIONS 2.1 Owner shall refer to the owner of the property or the entity on whose behalf the grading work is being performed and who has contracted with the Contractor to have grading performed. 2.2 Contractor shall refer to the Contractor performing the site grading work. 2.3 Civil Engineer or Engineer of Work shall refer to the California licensed Civil Engineer or consulting firm responsible for preparation of the grading plans, surveying and verifying as-graded topography. 2.4 Consultant shall refer to the soil engineering and engineering geology consulting firm retained to provide geotechnical services for the project. 2.5 Soil Engineer shall refer to a California licensed Civil Engineer retained by the Owner, who is experienced in the practice of geotechnical engineering. The Soil Engineer shall be responsible for having qualified representatives on-site to observe and test the Contractor's work for conformance with these specifications. 2.6 Engineering Geologist shall refer to a California licensed Engineering Geologist retained by the Owner to provide geologic observations and recommendations during the site grading. 2.7 Geotechnical Report shall refer to a soil report (including all addendums) which may include a geologic reconnaissance or geologic investigation that was prepared specifically for the development of the project for which these Recommended Grading Specifications are intended to apply. 3 MATERIALS 3.1 Materials for compacted fill shall consist of any soil excavated from the cut areas or imported to the site that, in the opinion of the Consultant, is suitable for use in construction of fills. In general, fill materials can be classified as soil fills, soil-rock fills or rock fills, as defined below. 3.1.1 Soil fills are defined as fills containing no rocks or hard lumps greater than 12 inches in maximum dimension and containing at least 40 percent by weight of material smaller than 3/4 inch in size. 3.1.2 Soil-rock fills are defined as fills containing no rocks or hard lumps larger than 4 feet in maximum dimension and containing a sufficient matrix of soil fill to allow for proper compaction of soil till around the rock fragments or hard lumps as specified in Paragraph 6.2. Oversize rock is defined as material greater than 12 inches. 3.1.3 Rock fills are defined as fills containing no rocks or hard lumps larger than 3 feet in maximum dimension and containing little or no fines. Fines are defined as material smaller than 3/4 inch in maximum dimension. The quantity of fines shall be less than approximately 20 percent of the rock fill quantity. 3.2 Material of a perishable, spongy, or otherwise unsuitable nature as determined by the Consultant shall not be used in fills. 3.3 Materials used for fill, either imported or on-site, shall not contain hazardous materials as defined by the California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Division 4, Chapter 30, Articles 9 and 10; 40CFR; and any other applicable local, state or federal laws. The Consultant shall not be responsible for the identification or analysis of the potential presence of hazardous materials. However, if observations, odors or soil discoloration cause Consultant to suspect the presence of hazardous materials, the Consultant may request from the Owner the termination of grading operations within the affected area. Prior to resuming grading operations, the Owner shall provide a written report to the Consultant indicating that the suspected materials are not hazardous as defined by applicable laws and regulations. 3.4 The outer 15 feet of soil-rock fill slopes, measured horizontally, should be composed of properly compacted soil fill materials approved by .the Consultant. Rock fill may extend to the slope face, provided that the slope is not steeper than 2:1 (horizontal:vertical) and a soil layer no thicker than 12 inches is track-walked onto the face for landscaping purposes. This procedure may be utilized, provided it is acceptable to the governing agency, Owner and Consultant. 3.5 Representative samples of soil materials to be used for fill shall be tested in the laboratory by the Consultant to determine the maximum density, optimum moisture content, and, where appropriate, shear strength, expansion, and gradation characteristics of the soil. 3.6 During grading, soil or groundwater conditions other than those identified in the Geotechnical Report may be encountered by the Contractor. The Consultant shall be notified immediately to evaluate the significance of the unanticipated condition. 4 CLEARING AND PREPARING AREAS TO BE FILLED 4.1 Areas to be excavated and filled shall be cleared and grubbed. Clearing shall consist of complete removal above the ground surface of trees, Stumps, brush, vegetation, man-made structures and similar debris. Grubbing shall consist of removal of stumps, roots, buried logs and other unsuitable material and shall be performed in areas to be graded. Roots and other projections exceeding 1-1/2 inches in diameter shall be removed to a depth of 3 feet below the surface of the ground. Borrow areas shall be grubbed to the extent necessary to provide suitable fill materials. 4.2 Any asphalt pavement material removed during clearing operations should be properly disposed at an approved off-site facility. Concrete fragments which are free of reinforcing steel may be placed in fills, provided they are placed in accordance with Section 6.2 or 6.3 of this document. 4.3 After clearing and grubbing of organic matter or other unsuitable material, loose or porous soils shall be removed to the depth recommended in the Geotechnical Report. The depth of removal and compaction shall be observed and approved by a representative of the Consultant. The exposed surface shall then be plowed or scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches and until the surface is free from uneven features that would tend to prevent uniform compaction by the equipment to be used. 4.4 Where the slope ratio of the original ground is steeper than 6:1 (horizontal:vertical), or where recommended by the Consultant, the original ground should be benched in accordance with the following illustration. TYPICAL BENCHING DETAIL FINISH- CR4 CE - CRCUNO =13C SURFAC: ufavca3accNNo.o(o By Sall. 0CMCM Be ILCUG:a. NG CM ::r" I more 4O SC.LZ NOTES: (1) Key width "B" should be a minimum of 10 feet wide, or sufficiently wide to permit complete coverage with the compaction equipment used. The base of the key should be graded horizontal, or inclined slightly into the natural slope. (2) The outside of the bottom key should be below the topsoil or unsuitable surficial material and at least 2feet into dense formational material. Where hard, rock is exposed in the bottom of the key, the depth and configuration of the key may be modified as approved by the Consultant. 4.5 After areas to receive fill have been cleared, plowed or scarified, the surface should be disced or bladed by the Contractor until it is uniform and free from large clods. The area should then be moisture conditioned to achieve the proper moisture content, and compacted as recommended in Section 6.0 of these specifications. 5 COMPACTION EQUIPMENT 5.1 Compaction of soil or soil-rock fill shall be accomplished by sheepsfoot or segmented- steel wheeled rollers, vibratory rollers, multiple-wheel pneumatic-tired rollers, or other types of acceptable compaction equipment. Equipment shall be of such a design that it will be capable of compacting the soil or soil-rock fill to the specified relative compaction at the specified moisture content. 5.2 Compaction of rock fills shall be performed in accordance with Section 6.3. 6 PLACING, SPREADING AND COMPACTION OF FILL MATERIAL 6.1 Soil fill, as defined in Paragraph 3. 1.1, shall be placed by the Contractor in accordance with the following recommendations: 6.1.1 Soil fill shall be placed by the Contractor in layers that, when compacted, should generally not exceed 8 inches. Each layer shall be spread evenly and shall be thoroughly mixed during spreading to obtain uniformity of material and moisture in each layer. The entire fill shall be constructed as a unit in nearly level lifts. Rock materials greater than 12 inches in maximum dimension shall be placed in accordance with Section 6.2 or 6.3 of these specifications. 6.1.2 In general, the soil fill shall be compacted at a moisture content at or above the optimum moisture content as determined by ASTM D1557-91. 6.1.3 When the moisture content of soil fill is below that specified by the Consultant. water shall be added by the Contractor until the moisture content is in the range specified. 6.1.4 When the moisture content of the soil fill is above the range specified by the Consultant or too wet to achieve proper compaction, the soil fill shall be aerated by the Contractor by blading/mixing, or other satisfactory methods until the moisture content is within the range specified. 6.1.5 After each layer has been placed, mixed, and spread evenly, it shall be thoroughly compacted by the Contractor to a relative compaction of at least 90 percent. Relative compaction is defined as the ratio (expressed in percent) of the in-place dry density of the compacted fill to the maximum laboratory dry density as determined in accordance with ASTM D1557-91. Compaction shall be continuous over the entire area, and compaction equipment shall make sufficient passes so that the specified minimum density has been achieved throughout the entire fill. 6.1.6 Soils having an Expansion Index of greater than 50 may be used in fills if placed at least 3 feet below finish pad grade and should be compacted at a moisture content generally 2 to 4 percent greater than the optimum moisture content for the material. 6.1.7 Properly compacted soil fill shall extend to the design surface of fill slopes. To achieve proper compaction. it is recommended that fill slopes be over-built by at least 3 feet and then cut to the design grade. This procedure is considered preferable to track-walking of slopes, as described in the following paragraph. 6.1.8 As an alternative to over-building of slopes, slope faces may be back-rolled with a heavy-duty loaded sheepsfoot or vibratory roller at maximum 4-foot fill height intervals. Upon completion. slopes should then be track-walked with a D-8 dozer or similar equipment, such that a dozer track covers all slope surfaces at least twice. 6.2 Soil-rock fill, as defined in Paragraph 3.1.2, shall be placed by the Contractor in accordance with the following recommendations: 6.2.1 Rocks larger than 12 inches but less than 4 feet in maximum dimension may be incorporated into the compacted soil fill, but shall be limited to the area measured 15 feet minimum horizontally from the slope face and 5 feet below finish grade or 3 feet below the deepest utility, whichever is deeper. 6.2.2 Rocks or rock fragments up to 4 feet in maximum dimension may either be individually placed or placed in windrows. Under certain conditions, rocks or rock fragments up to 10 feet in maximum dimension may be placed using similar methods. The acceptability of placing rock materials greater than 4 feet in maximum dimension shall be evaluated during grading, as specific cases arise and shall be approved by the Consultant prior to placement. 6.2.3 For individual placement, sufficient space shall be provided between rocks to allow for passage of compaction equipment. 6.2.4 For windrow placement, the rocks should be placed in trenches excavated in properly compacted soil fill. Trenches should be approximately 5 feet wide and 4 feet deep in maximum dimension. The voids around and beneath rocks should be filled with approved granular soil having a Sand Equivalent of 30 or greater and should be compacted by flooding. Windrows may also be placed utilizing an 'open-face' method in lieu of the trench procedure, however, this method should first be approved by the Consultant. 6.2.5 Windrows should generally be parallel to each other and may be placed either parallel to or perpendicular to the face of the slope depending on the site geometry. The minimum horizontal spacing for windrows shall be 12 feet center-to-center with a 5-foot stagger or offset from lower courses to next overlying course. The minimum vertical spacing between windrow courses shall be 2 feet from the top of a lower windrow to the bottom of the next higher windrow. 6.2.6 All rock placement, fill placement and flooding of approved granular soil in the windrows must be continuously observed by the Consultant or his representative. 6.3 Rock fills, as defined in Section 3.1.3, shall be placed by the Contractor in accordance with the following recommendations: 6.3.1 The base of the rock till shall be placed on a sloping surface (minimum slope of 2 percent. maximum slope of 5 percent). The surface shall slope toward suitable subdrainage outlet facilities. The rock fills shall be provided with subdrains during construction so that a hydrostatic pressure buildup does not develop. The subdrains shall be permanently connected to controlled drainage facilities to control post-construction infiltration of water. 6.3.2 Rock fills shall be placed in lifts not exceeding 3 feet. Placement shall be by rock trucks traversing previously placed lifts and dumping at the edge of the currently placed lift. Spreading of the rock fill shall be by dozer to facilitate seating of the rock. The rock fill shall be watered heavily during placement. Watering shall consist of water trucks traversing in front of the current rock lift face and spraying water continuously during rock placement. Compaction equipment with compactive energy comparable to or greater than that of a 20-ton steel vibratory roller or other compaction equipment providing suitable energy to achieve the required compaction or deflection as recommended in Paragraph 6.3.3 shall be utilized. The number of passes to be made will be determined as described in Paragraph 6.3.3. Once a rock fill lift has been covered with soil fill, no additional rock fill lifts will be permitted over the soil fill. 6.3.3 Plate bearing tests, in accordance with ASTM Dl 196-64, may be performed in both the compacted soil fill and in the rock fill to aid in determining the number of passes of the compaction equipment to be performed. If performed, a minimum of three plate bearing tests shall be performed in the properly compacted soil fill (minimum relative compaction of 90 percent). Plate bearing tests shall then be performed on areas of rock fill having two passes, four passes and six passes of the compaction equipment, respectively. The number of passes required for the rock fill shall be determined by comparing the results of the plate bearing tests for the soil fill and the rock fill and by evaluating the deflection variation with number of passes. The required number of passes of the compaction equipment will be performed as necessary until the plate bearing deflections are equal to or less than that determined for the properly compacted soil fill. In no case will the required number of passes be less than two. 6.3.4 A representative of the Consultant shall be present during rock fill operations to verify that the minimum number of "passes' have been obtained, that water is being properly applied and that specified procedures are being followed. The actual number of plate bearing tests will be determined by the Consultant during grading. In general, at least one test should be performed for each approximately 5.000 to 10.000 cubic yards of rock fill placed. 6.3.5 Test pits shall be excavated by the Contractor so that the Consultant can state that, in his opinion, sufficient water is present and that voids between large rocks are properly filled with smaller rock material. In-place density testing will not be required in the rock fills. 6.3.6 To reduce the potential for ' of fines into the rock fill from overlying soil fill material, a 2-foot layer of graded filter material shall be placed above the uppermost lift of rock fill. The need to place graded filter material below the rock should be determined by the Consultant prior to commencing grading. The gradation of the graded filter material will be determined at the time the rock till is being excavated. Materials typical of the rock fill should be submitted to the Consultant in a timely manner, to allow design of the graded filter prior to the commencement of rock fill placement. 6.3.7 All rock fill placement shall be continuously observed during placement by representatives of the Consultant. 7 OBSERVATION AND TESTING 7.1 The Consultant shall be the Owners representative to observe and perform tests during clearing, grubbing, filling and compaction operations. In general, no more than 2 feet in vertical elevation of soil or soil-rock fill shall be placed without at least one field density test being performed within that interval. In addition, a minimum of one field density test shall be performed for every 2,000 cubic yards of soil or soil-rock fill placed and compacted. 7.2 The Consultant shall perform random field density tests of the compacted soil or soil-rock fill to provide a basis for expressing an opinion as to whether the fill material is compacted as specified. Density tests shall be performed in the compacted materials below any disturbed surface. When these tests indicate that the density of any layer of fill or portion thereof is below that specified, the particular layer or areas represented by the test shall be reworked until the specified density has been achieved. 7.3 During placement of rock fill, the Consultant shall verify that the minimum number of passes have been obtained per the criteria discussed in Section 6.3.3. The Consultant shall request the excavation of observation pits and may perform plate bearing tests on the placed rock fills. The observation pits will be excavated to provide a basis for expressing an opinion as to whether the rock fill is properly seated and sufficient moisture has been applied to the material. If performed, plate bearing tests will be performed randomly on the surface of the most-recently placed lift. Plate bearing tests will be performed to provide a basis for expressing an opinion as to whether the rock fill is adequately seated. The maximum deflection in the rock fill determined in Section 6.3.3 shall be less than the maximum deflection of the properly compacted soil fill. When any of the above criteria indicate that a layer of rock fill or any portion thereof is below that specified, the affected layer or area shall be reworked until the rock fill has been adequately seated and sufficient moisture applied. 7.4 A settlement monitoring program designed by the Consultant may be conducted in areas of rock fill p[aement. The specific design of the monitoring program shall be as recommended in the Conclusions and Recommendations section of the project Geotechnical Report or in the final report of testing and observation services performed during grading. 7.5 The Consultant shall observe the placement of subdrains, to verify that the drainage devices have been placed and constructed in substantial conformance with project specifications. 7.6 Testing procedures shall conform to the following Standards as appropriate: 7.6.1 Soil and Soil-Rock Fills: 7.6.1.1 • Field Density Test, ASTM D1556-82, Density of Soil In-Place By the Sand-Cone Method. 7.6.1.2 Field Density Test, Nuclear Method, ASTM D2922-81, Density of Soil and Soil-Aggregate In-Place by Nuclear Methods (Shallow Depth). 7.6.1.3 Laboratory Compaction Test, ASTM D1557-91, Moisture-Density Relations of Soils and Soil-Aggregate Mixtures Using 10-Pound Hammer and 18-Inch Drop. 7.6.1.4 Expansion Index Test, Uniform Building Code Standard 29-2, Expansion Index Test. 7.6.2 Rock Fills: 7.6.2.1 Field Plate Bearing Test, ASTM D1196-64 (Reapproved 1977) Standard Method for Nonrepresentative Static Plate Load Tests of Soils and Flexible Pavement Components, For Use in Evaluation and Design of Airport and Highway Pavements. 8 PROTECTION OF WORK 8.1 During construction. the Contractor shall properly grade all excavated surfaces to provide positive drainage and prevent ponding of water. Drainage of surface water shall be controlled to avoid damage to adjoining properties or to finished work on the site. The Contractor shall take remedial measures to prevent erosion of freshly graded areas until such time as permanent drainage and erosion control features have been installed. Areas subjected to erosion or sedimentation shall be properly prepared in accordance with the Specifications prior to placing additional fill or structures. 8.2 After completion of grading as observed and tested by the Consultant. no further excavation or filling shall be conducted except in conjunction with the services of the Consultant. 9 CERTIFICATIONS AND FINAL REPORTS 9.1 Upon completion of the work, Contractor shall furnish Owner a certification by the Civil Engineer stating that the lots and/or building pads are graded to within 0.1 foot vertically of elevations shown on the grading plan and that all tops and toes of slopes are within 0.5 foot horizontally of the positions shown on the grading plans. After installation of a section of subdrain, the project Civil Engineer should survey its location and prepare an as-built plan of the subdrain location. The project Civil Engineer should verify the proper outlet for the subdrains and the Contractor should ensure that the drain system is free of obstructions. 9.2 The Owner is responsible for furnishing a final as-graded soil and geologic report satisfactory to the appropriate governing or accepting agencies. The as-graded report should be prepared and signed by a California licensed Civil Engineer experienced in geotechnical engineering and by a California Certified Engineering Geologist, indicating that the geotechnical aspects of the grading were performed in substantial conformance with the Specifications or approved changes to the Specifications. Gc Ixpowi Fonn. Rcvsioa daze 0V93 ¼# I ,J 'J L... 1 11 t J V L-. ____________ lU RLOPJ JiPiiL 1ñ1\(\ LLI LJ1JI 7220 Avenida Enemas civil Ligineering ENGINEER OF WORK: r CENTERLINE or NORTH SOUND CARLSBA Suite 204 Planning p 'r I l ( D('IT/ J( A7Q') I J Li , iL I IL/V -) Il. Carlsbad, California 92009 619-931--7700 Procrssin Surveying - -f -- - - - - - FV WPM C() -'' ((- Fox619-931-8680 ( DATE RMO1}IY 0 CARRCLL ROE 55381 I DATE i \1"T( O Xrefs 961FCRU 6 9PSTR H'D9 / ,CULim /I -: - Cl 913l9'D