The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCD 2019-0016; ST ELIZABETH SETON; RESPONSE TO COMMENTS; 2021-03-10S.CTEINC March 10, 2021 Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. Inspection I Testing I Geotectinical I Environmental & Construcon Engineering I Civil Engineering I Surveying CTE Job No. 10-15840G St. Elizabeth Seton Parish Attention: Fr. Michael Robinson 6628 Santa Isabel Street San Diego, California 92009 Telephone: (760) 438-3393 Via Email: frniichaehob(àgniail.com Subject: Response to Comments Proposed Rectory at Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church 6628 Santa Isabel Street Carlsbad, California 92009 IV References: At End of Document AP R, 02 2021 LAND DEVELOPMENTLA Fr. Robinson: ENGtNEERING As requested, Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. (CTE) has reviewed the referenced plan check comments as well as the referenced structural plan sheets. CTE reproduces and provides responses to geotechnically relevant plan check comments below: Plan Check Comment 16. Provide a copy of the project soil report. The report shall include foundation design recommendations based on the engineer's findings & shall comply with Section R401.4. CTE Response 16. Please see Attachment A, which provides the updated project soils report. Plan Check Comment 17. Please update the soils report to address the new criteria as per ASCE 7-16, Section 11.4.8 regarding the Site-Specific Ground Motion Procedure as related to this project. CTE Response 17. The updated project soils report provided in Attachment A is updated to address the new criteria as per ASCE 7-16, Section 11.4.8 regarding the Site-Specific Ground Motion Procedure as related to this project. Plan Check Comment 18. Where Site Class D is selected as the default site soils, ASCE 7-16, Section 11.4.4 requires a Fa = 1.2. Show how this is reflected in the soils report and the lateral design calculations. S:\Projects\10-15000 to 10-15999 Projects\10-15840G\Ltr_Response to Comments 3-10-21.doc Cohn J. Kenny, RCE #84406 Senior Engineer ;(., No.84406 .4\ EXP. 9/30/21 ) Response to Comments Page 2 Proposed Rectory at Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church . 6628 Santa Isabel Street, Carlsbad, California 92009 March 10, 2021 CTE Job No. 10-15840G CTE Response 18. A Site Class C was determined appropriate for the site due to the presence of near-surface, very dense and hard tertiary Santiago Formation materials. Plan Check Comment 19. Site Specific Ground Motion Procedure, for Site Class D, E & F sites. ASCE 7-16, Section 11.4.8. Please provide a site response analysis, as per ASCE 7-16, Sec. 21.1. Otherwise, show compliance with one of the exceptions, as noted in ASCE 7-16, Sec. 11.4.8. CTE Response 19. A Site Class C was determined appropriate for the site due to the presence of near-surface, very dense and hard tertiary Santiago Formation materials. Plan Check Comment 21. Provide a letter from the soils engineer confirming that the foundation/grading plan and specifications have been reviewed and that it has been determined that the soils report recommendations are properly incorporated into the construction documents. CTE Response 21. CTE has reviewed the referenced structural and grading plans from a geotechnical perspective to assess conformance with our recommendations. Based on our review, the structural and grading plans are in substantial conformance with Cm's geotechnical recommendations provided in the referenced documents. The followingwas noted: On grading plan Sheet C-100, Grading Notes, Note 1, CTh's referenced updated geotechnical report should be referenced. On grading plan Sheet C-100, Grading Notes, Note 2 should also indicate that grading shall be in accordance with the project soils report (Cm, 2020). On grading plan sheet C-600, all references to compaction of the upper 12 inches of soil subgrade and aggregate base should call for 95 percent relative compaction, not 90 percent. This letter is subject to the same limitations as other CTE geotechnical documents issued for the subject project. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service on this project. Should you have any questions or need further information please do not hesitate to contact this office. CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. 2ay F. Lynch, CEG #1890 Principal Engineering Geologist CJKIJFL:cjk Response to Comments Page 3 Proposed Rectory at Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church . 6628 Santa Isabel Street, Carlsbad, California 92009 March 10, 2021 CTE Job No. 10-15840G ATTACHMENTS ATTACHMENT A Update Geotechnical Letter, CTh, 2020 (wl Update to Preliminary Geotechnical Report, CTh, 2006 attached) S:\Projects\10-15000 to 10-15999 Projects\10-15840G\Ltr_Response to Comments 3-10-21.doc Response to Comments Page 4 Proposed Rectory at Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church is 6628 Santa Isabel Street, Carlsbad, California 92009 March 10, 2021 CTh Job No. 10-15840G REFERENCES: Plan Check Comments Plan Check #.: CBR2021-0440 6620 Santa Isabel Street New Rectory for St. Elizabeth Ann Catholic Parish Prepared by EsGil, dated March 5, 2021 Structural Plans, Sheets S-100, S- 110, & S-300 Saint Elizabeth Ann Seton Catholic Church New Rectory 6628 Santa Isabel Street Carlsbad, California 92009 Prepared by George Soultanian & Associates, Inc., dated February 15, 2021 Update Geotechnical Letter Proposed Rectory at Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church 6628 Santa Isabel Street Carlsbad, California 92009 CTE Job No. 10-15840G, dated December 22, 2020 S Update Geotechnical Investigation Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church Solar Array 6628 Santa Isabel Street Carlsbad, California CTh Job No. 10-14445G, dated July 31, 2018 Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church 6628 Santa Isabel Street Carlsbad, California 92009 CTh Job No. 10-8436G, dated May 25, 2006 Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Social Hall Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church 6628 Santa Isabel Street, Carlsbad, California 92009 CTh Job No. 10-7423G, dated January 10, 2004 S S:\Projects\10-15000 to 10-15999 Projects\10-15840G\Ltr_Response to Comments 3-10-21.doc ATTACHMENT A Update Geotechnical Letter, CTE, 2020 (w/ Update to Preliminary Geotechnical Report, CTh, 2006 attached) n `or • C7 ~~INC 'E~ Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. Inspection 1 Testing I Geotethnical I Environmental & Construcon Engineering I Civil Engineering I Surveying December 22, 2020 CTE Job No. 10-15840G St. Elizabeth Seton Parish Attention: Fr. Michael Robinson 6628 Santa Isabel Street San Diego, California 92009 Telephone: (760) 438-3393 Via Email: frn'ichae1roh@,gmaii.com Subject: Update Geotechiiical Letter Proposed Rectory at Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church 6628 Santa Isabel Street Carlsbad, California 92009 References: At End of Document • Fr. Robinson: As requested, Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. (CTE) has reviewed the referenced geotechnical reports and performed a limited subsurface investigation at the subject site with respect to the proposed construction. CTE understands that currently proposed is a two-story residential structure (rectory) with attached garage. Additionally, as part of the improvements, alternate access to an existing SDGE transformer will be constructed. CTE understands from the client that no significant development has occurred at the subject site since the date of CTh's attached geotechnical reports (CTE, 2004 2006), with the exception of the recent construction of a solar parking array (CTE, 2018). Based on the proposed construction and previous investigation findings, the recommendations in the documents provided in Attachment A remain generally appropriate and applicable to the proposed project, except where superseded herein. CTE advanced one hand-augered boring on December 18, 2020. Based on that boring, the soil underlying the proposed improvement area consists of a previously placed clay fill extending to approximately eight feet below existing ground surface (bgs). Expansion Index (El) testing of a sample from the boring indicates the clay exhibits a High El (El> 90). Figure 1 provides a Site Index Map and Figure 2 provides a Geologic & Exploration Location Map. CTE's referenced 2006 report (with the 2004 report as its attachment) is provided as Attachment A, a boring log is included as Attachment B, and laboratory results are provided in Attachment C. C Update Geotechnical Letter Page 2 Proposed Rectory at Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church S 6628 Santa Isabel Street, Carlsbad, California 92009 December 22, 2020 CTE Job No. 10-15840G 1.0 SITE PREPARATION Prior to grading, the proposed improvement areas should be cleared of existing improvements that are not to remain. Objectionable materials, such as construction debris, vegetation and other materials not suitable for structural backfill should be properly disposed of off-site. Based on the estimated depth of fill and High El exhibited by site soils in the improvement area it is recommended that soil be imported to provide a cap of approved granular Low El soils (El 50) a minimum of four feet in thickness or such that a minimum of two feet of Low El fill underlies proposed building foundations. In areas to receive other distress sensitive improvements such as flatwork or pavements, existing fills and any loose or disturbed soils should be removed to a minimum depth of 18 inches below existing or proposed grade, whichever is deeper. Excavation bottoms should be observed and approved by CTh prior to scarification, moisture conditioning, and fill placement. Scarification should extend a minimum of nine inches deep. A CTh geotechnical representative should observe the exposed excavations prior to placement of fill or structural foundations, to document and verify the competency of the encountered subgrade materials. 0 2.0 CONCRETE SLABS ON GRADE Concrete slabs for lightly-loaded non-traffic areas should be designed based on the anticipated loading, but measure at least 5.0 inch thick slab reinforcement should at least consist of No. 4 reinforcing bars, placed on maximum 18-inch centers, each way, at or above mid-slab height, but with proper concrete cover. Slabs subjected to heavier loads may require thicker slab sections and/or increased reinforcement. A 125-pci uncorrected subgrade modulus is considered suitable for elastic design of minimally embedded improvements such as slabs-on-grade. Slab on grade areas should be maintained at a minimum three percent above optimum moisture content or be brought to three percent above optimum moisture content just prior to placement of underlayments or concrete. In moisture-sensitive floor areas, a suitable vapor retarder of at least 15-mil thickness (with all laps or penetrations sealed or taped) overlying a four-inch layer of consolidated crushed aggregate or gravel (with SE of 30 or more) should be installed, as per the CBC/Green Building Code. An optional maximum two-inch layer of similar material could be placed above the vapor retarder to help protect the membrane during steel and concrete placement. However, per ACI guidelines, better protection from moisture intrusion would be expected from the concrete being placed directly upon the vapor retarder. This recommended protection is generally considered typical in the industry. If proposed floor areas or coverings are considered especially sensitive to moisture emissions, additional recommendations from a specialty consultant could be obtained. S:\Projects\10-15840G\Ltr_Update Geotechnical Letter. doc Update Geotechnical Letter Page 3 Proposed Rectory at Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church . 6628 Santa Isabel Street, Carlsbad, California 92009 December 22, 2020 CTE Job No. 10-15840G CTE is not an expert at preventing moisture penetration through slabs. Therefore, a qualified architect or other experienced professional should be contacted if moisture penetration is a more significant concern. 3.0 SEISMIC PARAMETERS The seismic ground motion values listed in the table below were derived in accordance with the ASCE 7-16 Standard that is incorporated into the 2019 California Building Code. This was accomplished by establishing the Site Class based on the soil properties at the site, and calculating site coefficients and parameters using the using the SEAOC-OSHPD U.S. Seismic Design Maps application. These values are intended for the design of structures to resist the effects of earthquake ground motions for the site coordinates 33.108487° latitude and - 117.239717° longitude, as underlain by soils corresponding to site Class C. FAE3LE3.0 - SEISMIC GROUND MOTION VALUES (CODE-HASH)) 2019 CRC AND ASCE 7-16 PARAMETER VALUE 2019 CBC/ASCE 7-16 REFERENCE Site Class C ASCE 16, Chapter 20 Mapped Spectral Response 0.937 Figure 1613.2.1 (1) Acceleration Parameter, _Ss Mapped Spectral Response 0.343 Figure 1613.2.1 (2) Acceleration Parameter, _Si Seismic Coefficient, Fa 1.2 Table 1613.2.3 (1) Seismic Coefficient, F 1.5 Table 1613.2.3 (2) MCE Spectral Response 1.124 Section 1613.2.3 Acceleration Parameter, _SMS MCE Spectral Response 0.515 Section 1613.2.3 Acceleration Parameter, _SMi Design Spectral Response 0.750 Section 1613.2.5(1) Acceleration, _Parameter _SD5 Design Spectral Response 0.343 Section 1613.2.5 (2) Acceleration, _Parameter _SDI Peak Ground Acceleration 0.489 ASCE 16, Section 11.8.3 PGAM C 5:\Projects\10-15840G\Ltr_Update Geotechnical Letter.doc Update Geotechnical Letter Page 4 Proposed Rectory at Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church S 6628 Santa Isabel Street, Carlsbad, California 92009 December 22, 2020 CTE Job No. 10-15840G 4.0 LATERAL PRESSURES Lateral loads acting against structures may be resisted by friction between the footings and the supporting soil or passive pressure acting against structures. If frictional resistance is used, allowable coefficients of friction of 0.30 (total frictional resistance equals the coefficient of friction multiplied by the dead load) for concrete cast directly against compacted fill is recommended. A design passive resistance value of 250 pounds per square foot per foot of depth (with a maximum value of 1,500 pounds per square foot) may be used. The allowable lateral resistance can be taken as the sum of the frictional resistance and the passive resistance, provided the passive resistance does not exceed two-thirds of the total allowable resistance. If proposed, retaining walls up to approximately eight feet high and backfilled using granular soils may be designed using the equivalent fluid weights given in Table 4.0 below. TABLE 4.0 EQUIVALENT FLUID UNIT WEIGHTS (Uh) (pounds per cubic foot) SLOPE BACKFILL WALL TYPE LEVEL BACKFILL 2:1 (HORIZONTAL: VERTICAL) CANTILEVER WALL 60 80 (YIELDING) RESTRAINED WALL 80 115 Lateral pressures on cantilever retaining walls (yielding walls) due to earthquake motions may be calculated based on work by Seed and Whitman (1970). The total lateral thrust against a properly drained and backfilled cantilever retaining wall above the groundwater level can be expressed as: PAE = PA + APAE For non-yielding (or "restrained") walls, the total lateral earth pressure may be similarly calculated based on work by Wood (1973): PKE = PK + APKE Where: PA/b = Static Active Earth Pressure = GhH2/2 PK/b = Static Restrained Wall Earth Pressure = GhH2/2 = Dynamic Active Earth Pressure Increment = (3/8) kh yH2 5:\Projects\10-15840G\Ltr_Update Geotechnical Letter. doc Update Geotechnical Letter Page 5 Proposed Rectory at Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church S 6628 Santa Isabel Street, Carlsbad, California 92009 December 22, 2020 CTE Job No. 10-15840G APyE/b = Dynamic Restrained Earth Pressure Increment = kh yH2 b = unit length of wall (usually 1 foot) kh = 1/2* PGAm (PGAm given previously Table 3.0) Gh = Equivalent Fluid Unit Weight (given previously Table 4.0) H = Total Height of the retained soil = Total Unit Weight of Soil z 135 pounds per cubic foot *It is anticipated that the 1/2 reduction factor will be appropriate for proposed walls that are not substantially sensitive to movement during the design seismic event. Proposed walls that are more sensitive to such movement could utilize a 2/3 reduction factor. If any proposed walls require minimal to no movement during the design seismic event, no reduction factor to the peak ground acceleration should be used. The project structural engineer of record should determine the appropriate reduction factor to use (if any) based on the specific proposed wall characteristics. The increment of dynamic thrust in both cases should be distributed trapezoidally (essentially an inverted triangle), with a line of action located at 1/3H above the bottom of the wall (SEAOC, 2013). These values assume non-expansive backfill and free-draining conditions. Measures should be taken to prevent moisture buildup behind all retaining walls. Drainage measures should include free-draining backfill materials and sloped, perforated drains. These drains should discharge to S an appropriate off-site location. Figure 4 shows a conceptual wall backdrain detail that may or may not be suitable for walls at the subject site. Any waterproofing should be as specified by the project architect. 5.0 FOUNDATION RECOMIENDATIONS Following the recommended preparatory grading, continuous and isolated spread footings are anticipated to be suitable for use at this site. Foundation dimensions and reinforcement should be based on allowable bearing values of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psi) for minimum 15-inch wide footings embedded a minimum of 24-inches below lowest adjacent subgrade elevation. Isolated footings should be at least 24 inches in minimum dimension. No increase in bearing for deepening of footing is recommended. The allowable bearing value may be increased by one- third for short-duration loading, which includes the effects of wind or seismic forces. Based on the recommended preparatory grading, it is anticipated that all footings will be founded entirely in properly compacted fill materials. Footings should not span cut to fill interfaces. Minimum reinforcement for continuous footings should consist of four No. 5 reinforcing bars; two placed near the top and two placed near the bottom, or as per the project structural engineer. The structural engineer should design isolated footing reinforcement. An uncorrected subgrade modulus of 130 pounds per cubic inch is considered suitable for elastic foundation design. S:\Projects\10-15840G\Ltr_Update Geotechnical Letter.doc Update Geotechnical Letter Page 6 Proposed Rectory at Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church S 6628 Santa Isabel Street, Carlsbad, California 92009 December 22, 2020 CTE Job No. 10-15840G The structural engineer should provide recommendations for reinforcement of spread footings and footings with pipe penetrations. Footing excavations should generally be maintained above optimum moisture content until concrete placement. Exposed soils and potential expansion characteristics should be evaluated at the time of grading to verify that conditions are as anticipated by the preliminary findings. 6.0 CONTROLLED LOW STRENGTH MATERIALS (CLSM) Controlled Low Strength Materials (CLSM) may be used in lieu of compacted soils below foundations, within building pads, and/or adjacent to retaining walls or other structures, provided the appropriate following recommendations are also incorporated. Minimum overexcavation depths recommended herein beneath bottom of footings, slabs, flatwork, and other areas may be applicable beneath CLSM if/where CLSM is to be used, and excavation bottoms should be observed by CTE prior to placement of CLSM. Prior to CLSM placement, the excavation should be free of debris, loose soil materials, and water. Once specific areas to utilize CLSM have been determined, CTE should review the locations to determine if additional recommendations are appropriate. CLSM should consist of a minimum three-sack cement/sand slurry with a minimum 28-day S compressive strength of 100 psi (or equal to or greater than the maximum allowable short term soil bearing pressure provided herein, whichever is higher) as determined by ASTM D4832. If re-excavation is anticipated, the compressive strength of CLSM should generally be limited to a maximum of 150 psi per ACI 229R-99. Where re-excavation is required, two-sack cement/sand slurry may be used to help limit the compressive strength. The allowable soils bearing pressure and coefficient of friction provided herein should still govern foundation design. CLSM may not be used in lieu of structural concrete where required by the structural engineer. 7.0 LIMITATIONS The recommendations provided in this report are based on preliminary design information for the and the subsurface conditions observed in the previously performed exploratory borings. The extrapolated subsurface conditions should be checked in the field during construction to document that conditions are as anticipated. Recommendations provided in this report are based on the understanding and assumption that CTE will provide the observation and testing services for the project. Earthwork should be observed and tested to document that grading and excavations have been performed according to the recommendations contained within this report. A CTE geotechnical representative should evaluate all foundation excavations before reinforcing steel placement. The recommendations are provided to help mitigate the effects of soil settlement and expansive soils. However, some post- construction movement should be anticipated. S S:\Projects\10-15840G\Ltr_Update Geotechnical Letter. doe Update Geotechnical Letter Page 7 Proposed Rectory at Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church . 6628 Santa Isabel Street, Carlsbad, California 92009 December 22, 2020 CTh Job No. 10-15840G The field evaluation, laboratory testing, and geotechnical analysis presented in the geotechnical reports have been conducted according to current engineering practice and the standard of care exercised by reputable geotechnical consultants performing similar tasks in this area. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made regarding the conclusions, recommendations, and opinions expressed in this report. Variations may exist and conditions not observed or described in this report may be encountered during construction. 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 are 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. This letter is subject to the same limitations as other CTE geotechnical documents issued for the subject project. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service on this project. Should you have any questions or need further information please do not hesitate to contact this office. CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. . . Colm J. Kenny, RCE #84406 Senior Engineer Jay F. Lynch, CEG #1890 Principal Engineering Geologist CIKIJFL:ach ATTACHMENTS FIGURE 1 Site Index Map FIGURE 2 Exploration Location Map ATTACHMENT A Update to Preliminary Geotechnical Report, CTh, 2006 ATTACHMENT B Exploration Logs ATTACHMENT C Laboratory Results S:\Projects\10-15840G\Ltr_Update Geotechnical Letter.doc Update Geotechnical Letter Page 8 Proposed Rectory at Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church . 6628 Santa Isabel Street, Carlsbad, California 92009 December 22, 2020 CTE Job No. 10-15840G References: Update Geotechnical Investigation Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church Solar Array 6628 Santa Isabel Street Carlsbad, California CTE Job No. 10-14445G, dated July 31, 2018 Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church 6628 Santa Isabel Street Carlsbad, California 92009 CTE Job No. 10-8436G. dated May 25, 2006 Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Social Hall Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church 6628 Santa Isabel Street, Carlsbad, California 92009 CTE Job No. 10-7423G, dated January 10, 2004 0 S:\Projects\10-15840G\Ltr_Update Geotechnical Letter doc 9 CTE Constructbn Testing & Enieerin]. Inc. i1. 1441 Martel Rc Ste 115, Eson1ido, CA 92026 Ph 7) 7&4955 SITE INDEX MAP SCLE: 0T O!N 2/20 SAM ELIZABETH SETON CAI'EOUC CHURCH ~C~TTE JTDEB ________________ 66 SANTA ISABEL STREET NO.: R-31- RE: RLSD, CAL(RqIJ JO- 15840G 1 . . S Qppf Mzu ThD I ' L JrJrf: - EXPLANATION B-ia APPROXIMATE BORING LOCATION Qppf QUATERNARY PREVIOUSLY PLACED FILL OVER Mzu MESOZOIC METASEDIMENTARY & METAVOLCANIC ROCK, UNDIVIDED 80' 0 40' 80' 1 inch = 80 ft. ATTACHMENT A Update to Preliminary Geotechiiical Report, CTE, 2006 CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. SAN DIEGO, CA RIVERSIDE, CA VENTURA, CA TRACY, CA SACRAMENTO, CA N. PALM SPRINGS, CA 1445 Montiel Road 12155 Magnolia Ave. 1645 Pacific Ave. 242W. Larch 3628 Madison Ave. 10020 N. Indian Ave. Suite 115 Suite BC Suite 107 Suite F Suite 22 Suite 2-K Escondido, CA 92026 Riverside, CA 92503 Oxnard, CA 83033 Tracy, CA 95376 N. Highlands, CA 85660 N. Palm Springs, CA 92258 (760) 746-4055 (051) 352-6101 (805) 486-6475 (200) 839-2890 (916) 331-6030 (760) 329-4677 (160) 746-9806 FAX (051) 352-6705 FAX (805) 486-9016 FAX (209) 839-2095 FAX (916) 331-6037 FAX (760) 328-4806- FAX May 25, 2006 Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church Attention: Mr. Donald E. Coleman 6628 Santa Isabel Street Carlsbad, California 92009 CTE Project No. 10-84360 Subject: Update to Preliminary Geotechnical Report Saint Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church 6628 Santa Isabel Street, Carlsbad, California Reference: Preliminary Geotecirnical Report Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church 6628 Santa Isabel Street CTR Project No.: 10-7423G, dated January 10, 2004 Mr. Coleman: In accordance with your request, Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. (CTE) has performed a reconnaissance of the subject site, and has reviewed the previously prepared report referenced above. Based on our review, CTE has found the recommendations in the referenced report to be in compliance with common geotechnical engineering practices. Therefore, the recommendations presented in the referenced report are considered suitable and appropriate, without revision, for use during preliminary project design. However, CTE reserves the right to modify recommendations, as necessary, as project design and construction progress. CTE shall also review the precise project grading and foundation plans, as soon as available, in order to confirm foundation elements will bear in appropriate formational materials as anticipated by the referenced document. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service on this project. Should you have questions, please contact the undersigned at your convenience. Respectfully submitted, CONSTRUCTION TE Dan T. Math, GE# 2665 Principal Engineer G, INC. Al / No. 2665 Exp 12131/06 )J Martin Siem, CEG# 2311 / ).7 , ,, Certified Engineering Geologist CE 0.1 EIN lo 5i' GEOtDG11 I. .1' O GEOTECHNICAL I ENVIRONMENTAL I CO ION INSPECTION AND TESTING I CIVIL ENGINEERING I SURVEYING CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING. INC. SAN DIEGO, CA RIVERSIDE, CA VENIIJRA, CA TRACY, CA SACRAMENTO, CA N. PALM SPRINGS, CA 1441 Mantle! Road 12155 Magnolia Ave. 1645 Pacific Ave. 242W. Larch 3628 Madison Ave. 18020 N. Indian Ave. Suite 115 Suite SC Suite 107 Suite F Suite 22 Suite 2-K Escondido, CA 92026 Riverside, CA 92503 Oxnard, CA 93033 Tracy, CA 95376 N. Highlands, CA 95660 N. Palm Spdngs, CA 92256 (760) 746-4955 (951) 3524101 (005) 486-6475 (209) 839-2890 (916) 331-6030 (760) 3294677 (760) 746-9805 FAX (951) 352-6105 FAX (805) 466-9016 FAX (209) 839-2895 FAX (916) 331-6037 FAX (760) 328-4896- FAX PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REPORT PROPOSED SOCIAL HALL ST. ELIZABETH SETON CATHOLIC CHURCH 6628 SANTA ISABEL STREET CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA PREPARED FOR: CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF SAN DIEGO ATTENTION: MR. JOEL. KING . P.O. BOX 85728 SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92186 PREPARED BY: CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. 2414 VINEYARD AVENUE, SUITE G ESCONDIDO, CA 92029 CTh JOB NO. 10-7423G JANUARY 10, 2004 GEOTECHNICAL I ENVIRONMENTAL I CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION AND TESTING I CIVIL ENGINEERING I SURVEYING OF CONTENTS S TABLE SECTION ............... ................................................................................ ...... ...........................PAGE INVESTIGATIONSUMMARY .....................................................................................................1 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND SCOPE OF SERVICES ....................................................................2 1.1 Introduction....................................................................................................................2 1.2 Scope of Services...........................................................................................................2 2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION................................................................................................................3 3.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS................................................................3 3.1 Field Investigation.........................................................................................................3 3.2 Laboratory Investigation................................................................................................4 4.0 GEOLOGY................................................................................................................................4 4.1 General Setting...............................................................................................................4 4.2 Geologic Conditions ......................................................................................................5 4.2.1 Undocumented Fill................................................................................................5 4.2.2 Santiago Formation...............................................................................................6 4.2.3 Santiago Peak Volcanics.......................................................................................6 4.3 Groundwater Conditions................................................................................................7 4.4 Geologic Hazards...........................................................................................................7 4.4.1 General Geologic Hazards Observation................................................................7 4.4.2 Local and Regional Faulting.................................................................................7 4.4.3 Site Near Source Factors and Seismic Coefficients..............................................8 4.4.4 Liquefaction Evaluation and Seismic Settlement Evaluation...............................8 4.4.5 Tsunamis and Seiche Evaluation..........................................................................9 S 4.4.6 Landsliding or Rocksliding...................................................................................9 4.4.7 Compressible and Expansive Soils ......... . ..................... ... ................................... 10 4.4.8 Corrosive Soils....................................................................................................10 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS..................................................................10 5.1 General.........................................................................................................................10 5.2 Site Preparation............................................................................................................10 5.3 Site Excavation . ........................................................................................................... 11 5.4 Fill Placement and Compaction...................................................................................12 5.5 Fill Materials................................................................................................................12 5.6 Temporary Construction Slopes ..................................................................................13 5.7 Foundations and Slab Recommendations....................................................................14 5.7.1 Foundations.........................................................................................................14 5.7.2 Foundation Settlement........................................................................................15 5.7.3 Foundation Setback.............................................................................................15 5.7.4 Interior Concrete Slabs .......................................................................................15 5.8 Lateral Resistance and Earth Pressures........................................................................16 5.9 Exterior Flatwork.........................................................................................................17 5.10 Drainage.....................................................................................................................17 5.11 Vehicular Pavements .................................................................................................18 5.11.1 Asphalt Concrete Pavement..............................................................................18 5.11.2 Portland Cement Concrete Pavements..............................................................18 5.12 Slopes.........................................................................................................................20 5.13 Construction Observation..........................................................................................20 . 5.14 Plan Review .21 6.0 LIMITATIONS OF INVESTIGATION..................................................................................21 FIGURES FIGURE 1 INDEX MAP FIGURE 2 SITE MAP APPENDICES APPENDIX A REFERENCES CITED APPENDIX B EXPLORATION LOGS APPENDIX C LABORATORY METHODS AND RESULTS APPENDIX D STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS 0 Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 1 Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 4, 2004 Job No. 10-7423G INVESTIGATION SUMMARY Our investigation was performed to provide site-specific geotechnical information for the proposed Social Hall for St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church located at 6628 Santa Isabel Street, Carlsbad, California. It is our understanding that the proposed development will consist of a one- to two-story social hail structure with basement and associated improvements. Based on the results of our investigation, laboratory testing, and engineering evaluation, the proposed project is feasible provided the recommendations presented in this report are implemented. Based on our preliminary geotechnical investigation, the soils beneath the site include a thin veneer of topsoil (turf), and up to three feet of undocumented fill consisting of medium dense, yellowish gray, fine sandy silt. These soils overlie Tertiary-aged Santiago Formation deposits that consist of hard, yellowish-gray to gray, moist, clayey siltstones and silty claystones, which in turn overlie a sequence of hard, light-gray to greenish gray, fine sandy siltstones and silty sandstones interpreted to be part of the Jurassic/Cretaceous-aged Santiago Peak Volcanics. Groundwater was not observed in our excavations to the maximum explored depth of approximately 19.5 feet below existing grade (fbg). Groundwater levels may fluctuate with seasonal precipitation levels and areas of local saturation may be encountered. However, we do not anticipate that groundwater will affect the proposed development, provided appropriate surface drainage is designed, constructed, and maintained. 0 Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 2 Proposed Social Hal! St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 10. 2004 Job No. 10-7423G San Diego County is an area of known moderate to high seismic risk, but no specific significant geologic and seismic hazards to the site were identified during this investigation. Based on the geologic findings and reference review, no active surface faults are known to exist at the site. 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND SCOPE OF SERVICES 1.1 Introduction This report presents the results of our geotechnical investigation and provides conclusions and geotechnical engineering criteria for the proposed development. Proposed improvements are to consist of a one- to two-story social hail structure with a basement and associated improvements including pavement areas. Our investigation included field exploration, laboratory testing, geologic hazard evaluation, and engineering analysis. Specific recommendations for excavations, fill placement, and foundation design for the proposed improvements are presented in this report. Cited references are presented in Appendix A. 1.2 Scope of Services The scope of services provided included: A review of available geologic and soils reports pertinent to the site and adjacent areas. An exploration of subsurface conditions by excavating three exploratory borings with a hollow stem drill rig, collection of undisturbed and disturbed soil samples, and geologic logging of the borings. Laboratory testing of representative soil samples to provide data to evaluate the geotechnical design characteristics of the soils. Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 3 Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 10, 2004 Job No. 10-74230 Definition of the general geology and evaluation of potential geologic hazards at the site. Soil engineering design criteria for the proposed improvements. Preparation of this summary report of the investigations performed including geotechnical construction recommendations. 2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION The subject site currently consists of a relatively flat lawn covered lot that is surrounded by existing structures associated with the St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church. The existing sanctuary is located to the east of the subject site and is at a similar elevation. A parking lot exists to the west of the subject site at elevation approximately 10 feet lower. To the north the site is bounded by Alga Road. Figure 1 shows the general location of the subject site. The general configuration of the subject site, including purposed buildings and exploratory boring locations, are depicted on the attached Figure 2. 0 3.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS 3.1 Field Investigation Our field explorations were conducted on December 14, 2004, and included a visual site reconnaissance and the advancement of three soil borings within accessible areas to evaluate the condition of the underlying soil materials. The borings were excavated using a CME-75 Hollow - Stem drill rig with eight-inch augers. Select "undisturbed" soil samples were collected using a modified California sampler and disturbed soil samples were collected with a Standard Penetration Test (SF1') sampler, and as bulk samples that were collected from the drill cuttings and stored in burlap sample bags. 0 Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 4 Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 10, 2004 Job No. 10-7423G Soils were logged in the field by a geologist from CTE and visually classified using the Unified Soil Classification System. Samples were transported to CTE Certified Geotechnical Laboratory in Escondido, California for analysis. The field descriptions have been modified, where appropriate, to reflect laboratory test results. Exploration logs including descriptions of the soils encountered are included in Appendix B. 3.2 Laboratory Investigation Laboratory tests were conducted on representative soil samples for classification purposes and to evaluate soil physical properties and engineering characteristics. Soil samples were analyzed for Particle-Size Analysis, Modified Proctor, Direct Shear, Hydrometer, Expansion Index Testing, and Chemical Analysis. Test method descriptions and laboratory testing results are included in Appendix C. 4.0 GEOLOGY 4.1 General Setting The site lies within the Peninsular Ranges physiographic province, which is characterized by its northwest trending mountain ranges, intervening valleys, and predominately northwest trending active regional faults. The San Diego Region can be further subdivided into the coastal plain area, a central mountain—valley area and the eastern mountain valley area. The project site located at the juncture between the eastern margin coastal plain area and the central mountain area. The coastal plain subprovience ranges in elevation from approximately sea level to 1200 feet above mean sea level and is characterized by Cretaceous and Tertiary sedimentary deposits that onlap an eroded 0 basement surface consisting of Jurassic and Cretaceous crystalline rocks. The central - Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 5 Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 10, 2004 Job No. 10-7423G mountain area ranges in elevation from approximately 500 to 5000 feet above mean sea level and is characterized by Cretaceous and Jurassic crystalline ridges and mountains with intermontane basins that are generally underlain with moderate thickness of alluvium and residual soils. Specifically, the site is located in foothills of the Santa Ma Mountains at an approximate elevation of 520 feet above mean sea level. The surface gradient slopes to the west towards a southerly draining tributary canyon that feeds San Marcos Creek, which flows westward to Batiquitos Lagoon and the Pacific Ocean (Figure 2). 4.2 Geologic Conditions S By correlation to published mapping (Tan and Kennedy, 1996), site soils consist of Tertiary Santiago Formation, with adjacent undifferentiated meta-volcanics, volcaniclastic, and interbedded sedimentary rocks of the Jurassic/Cretaceous Santiago Peak Volcanics Formation, which form bedrock highs located to the east, north and south of the site. Observations from our work indicate that a thin layer of topsoil /undocumented fill overlies the Santiago Formation deposits, which in turn overlies the Santiago Peak Volcanics at this site. 4.2.1 Undocumented Fill These soils were generally encountered within the upper half foot of the existing surface to a maximum depth of three feet below existing grade. These materials generally consist of loose, moist, turf and loose to medium dense, moist, 0 Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 6 Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 10, 2004 Job No, 107423G yellowish-gray fine sandy silt topsoil deposits. These materials are not considered suitable for support of the proposed improvements primarily because of their high organic content. However, these materials are anticipated to be removed during construction grading activities for the proposed buildings. 4.2.2 Santiago Formation Claystones and siltstones of the Santiago Formation (as mapped by Tan and Kennedy, 1996) were encountered across the entire site from the near surface to depths interpreted to be approximately five to 15 fbg. The claystones and siltstones were typically, hard, moist, olive-green to yellowish gray, and massive. These materials are suitable for support of proposed improvements, as . recommended herein. 4.2.3 Santiago Peak Volcanics The Santiago Peak Volcanics were interpreted to be present at approximately five fbg in B-2 and approximately 15 fbg in B-i and B-3. This interpretation is based on the increasing percentage coarse sand to fine gravel sized angular pieces of volcaniclastics, within hard, moist, light gray to greenish—gray to yellowish-gray, fine sandy siltstone, and silty fine sandstone that is massive to weakly laminated, and fractured with occasional rust to orange staining along and adjacent to the fractures. This interpretation is consistent with observations made in a previously completed investigation for the adjacent new sanctuary. In that study, "unweathered" Santiago Peak Volcancis were identified at 7.5 fbg in the southeast corner of the sanctuary (Benton Engineering, Inc., 1993). Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 7 Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 10, 2004 Job No. 10-7423G 4.3 Groundwater Conditions Groundwater was not encountered in any of our borings to the maximum explored depth of approximately 19.5 fbg. While groundwater conditions will likely vary, especially during periods of sustained precipitation, groundwater is not expected to affect the improvements if proper site drainage is maintained. 4.4 Geologic Hazards 4.4.1 General Geologic Hazards Observation From our investigation it appears that geologic hazards at the site are primarily limited to those caused by violent shaking from earthquake generated ground motion waves. The potential for damage from displacement or fault movement beneath the proposed structures should be considered low. 4.4.2 Local and Regional Faulting Based on our site reconnaissance, evidence from our exploratory soil borings, and a review of appropriate geologic literature, it is our opinion that known active faults do not lie structurally beneath the site nor do active fault traces cross the site. Additionally, the site does not lie within a State of California Aiquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. The Rose Canyon and Elsinore Fault systems are the closest known active faults (Jennings, 1987). Other principal active regional faults include the Coronado Banks, San Clemente, Palos Verdes, San Jacinto, and San Andreas faults (Blake, 1996). According to the California Division of Mines and Geology, a fault is 0 Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 8 Proposed Social Nail St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California S January 10, 2004 Job No. 10-7423G active if it displays evidence of activity in the last 11,000 years (Hart and Bryant, 1997). 4.4.3 Site Near Source Factors and Seismic Coefficients In accordance with the Uniform. Building Code 2001 edition, Volume 2, Figure 16-2, the referenced site is located within seismic zone 4 and has a seismic zone factor of Z=0.4. The nearest active fault, the Rose Canyon Fault Zone, is approximately 11.5 kilometers to the west and is considered a Type B seismic source. Based on the distance from the site to the Rose Canyon Fault Zone, near source factors of Nv1.0 and N,=1.0 are appropriate. Based on the shallow subsurface explorations and our knowledge of the area, the site has a soil profile type of S0 and seismic coefficients of Cv=0,64 and Ca 0.44. 4.4.4 Liciuefaction Evaluation and Seismic Settlement Evaluation Liquefaction occurs when saturated fine-grained sands or silts lose their physical strengths during earthquake induced shaking and behave as a liquid. This is due to loss of point-to-point grain contact and transfer of normal stress to the pore water. Liquefaction potential varies with water level, soil type, material gradation, relative density, and probable intensity and duration of ground shaking. Because of the generally hard nature of underlying materials and the lack of an observed shallow groundwater table, it is our opinion that the potential for liquefaction damage to proposed improvements should be considered low. 0 Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 9 Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 10, 2004 Job No. 10-7423G Seismic settlement occurs when loose to medium dense granular soils densify during seismic events. As indicated in the preceding discussions, any loose surficial soils should be mitigated during recommended site grading. Therefore, in our opinion, the potential for seismic settlement resulting in damage to site improvements should be considered negligible. 4.4.5 Tsunamis and Seiche Evaluation According to McCulloch (1985), the tsunami potential in the San Diego County coastal area for one-in-100 and one-in-500 year tsunami waves are approximately four and six feet. This suggests that the site is not subject to damage due to the elevation (approximately 520 feet above msl) and distance (more than 4.5 miles) from the ocean. The site is not near any significant bodies of water that could induce seiche damage. 4.4.6 Landsliding or Rocksliding Per mapping by Tan and Griffen (1995), the site is in an area that is considered generally susceptible to landsliding. This is primarily based on the Santiago Formation being historically prone to landsliding. Several landslides within the Santiago Formation have been mapped several thousand feet to the north of the site, however no landslides are mapped at the site or in the immediate area (Tan and Griffen, 1995). In addition, no geomorphic features indicative of landsliding were recognized from existing topographic maps of the area, and during our site visits. Therefore, the potential for landsliding or rocksliding to affect the site is considered low. 0 Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 10 Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 10. 2004 Job No. 10-7423G 4.4.7 Compressible and Expansive Soils Based on our geologic observations and laboratory testing, the soil materials located at the proposed structure foundation level consist of hard siltstones and claystones that is generally non-compressible and has a medium expansion index (expansion index of alluvium is 63). Therefore, the site soils are considered suitable for support of the proposed improvements provided the recommendations presented herein are followed. 4.4.8 Corrosive Soils Based on analytical laboratory testing, onsite materials have a low potential to corrode buried concrete improvements and a moderate potential to corrode buried ferrous metals. A corrosion specialist shall be consulted for additional recommendations, if deemed necessary by the project coordinators or the governing authority. 5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 General We conclude that the proposed construction on the site is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint, provided the recommendations in this report are incorporated into the design and construction of the project. Recommendations for the design and construction of the proposed improvements are presented in the subsequent sections of this report, 5.2 Site Preparation Before any grading occurs, the site should be cleared of existing debris and other deleterious materials. In areas to receive shallow founded structures or distress-sensitive 0 Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 11 Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 10, 2004 Job No. 10-7423G improvements, all undocumented fills and expansive, surficially eroded, desiccated, burrowed, or otherwise loose or disturbed soils should be removed to the depth of the competent native materials. CTE recommends the removal of the generally loose to medium dense and unsuitable debris containing soils at the surface of the site. Organic and other deleterious materials not suitable for structural backfill should be disposed offsite at legal disposal site. Where basement improvements are proposed, overexcavation and recompaction is not required as foundations will be extended to bear at depth in competent native materials. Proposed slab-on-grade areas shall be scarified 12 inches and recompacted for uniform support at a minimum four percent above optimum moisture content. Over excavations 0 should extend a minimum of five feet laterally beyond the limits of the proposed improvements, where feasible. Organic or oversize materials (greater than three inches in maximum dimension) not suitable for structural backfill within three feet of proposed grade should be disposed of off-site or placed in non-structural planter or landscape areas. 5.3 Site Excavation Based on our observations, shallow excavations in site materials will generally be feasible with heavy-duty construction equipment under normal conditions. An engineer or geologist from CTE should evaluate the subgrade to verify that mitigative measures (removal of inadequate soils) have been properly carried out. Irreducible materials 0 Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 12 Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California S January 1O,2®4 Job No. 10-7423G greater than three inches in maximum diameter encountered during excavations should not be used in shallow fills (within three feet of proposed grades) on the site, In utility trenches, adequate bedding should surround pipes. 5.4 Fill Placement and Compaction The geotechnical consultant should verify that the proper site preparation has occurred before fill placement occurs. Following removal of loose, disturbed soils, areas to receive fills or improvements should be scarified nine inches, moisture conditioned, and properly compacted. Fill and backfill should be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent (as evaluated by ASTM D1557) at moisture contents greater than three percent above optimum. The optimum lift thickness for backfill soil will be dependent on the type of compaction equipment used. Generally, backfill should be S placed in inifonn, horizontal lifts not exceeding eight inches in loose thickness. Backfill placement and compaction should be done in overall conformance with geotechnical recommendations and local ordinances. 5.5 Fill Materials The moderately expansive index soils derived from the onsite materials are considered suitable for reuse on the site as compacted fill. If used, these materials should be screened of organic materials and materials greater than three inches in a maximum dimension. If encountered, clayey, inorganic, native soils may be blended with granular soils and reused in non-structural fill areas. Irreducible materials between three and six inches in maximum dimension may be placed, as directed by CTE, at depths greater than three feet below proposed grades. 0 S Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 13 Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 102004 Job No. 10-7423G Imported fill beneath structures, pavements and walks should have an expansion index less than or equal to 30 (per UBC 18-I-B) with less than 35 percent passing the no. 200 sieve. Imported fill soils for use in structural or slope areas should be evaluated by the soils engineer to determine strength characteristics before placement on the site. 5.6 Temporary Construction Slopes Sloping recommendations for unshored temporary excavations are provided. The recommended slopes should be relatively stable against deep-seated failure, but may experience localized sloughing. Onsite soils are considered Type B soils with recommended slope ratios as set forth in Table 1 below. TABLE I RECOMMENDED TEMPORARY SLOPE RATIOS SOIL TYPE SLOPE RATIO MAXIMUM HEIGHT (Horizontal: vertical) B (Siltstones and 1:1 (MAXIMUM) 10 Feet Claystones) B (Fractured Volcanic and I: I (MAXIMUM) 10 Feet Volcaniclastic Rock) Actual field conditions and soil type designations must be verified by a "competent person" while excavations exist according to Cal-OSHA regulations. In addition, the above sloping recommendations do not allow for surcharge loading at the top of slopes 0 Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 14 Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California . January 10, 2004 Job No. 10-7423G by vehicular traffic, equipment or materials. Appropriate surcharge setbacks must be maintained from the top of all unshored slopes. 5.7 Foundations and Slab Recommendations The following recommendations are for preliminary planning purposes only. These foundation recommendations should be reviewed after completion of earthworks. 5.7.1 Foundations Continuous and isolated spread footings are suitable for use at this site. However, footings should not straddle cut/fill interfaces; we anticipate all structural footings will be founded entirely upon competent native materials a minimum three feet below the lowest adjacent exterior grade. Foundation dimensions and reinforcement should be based on allowable bearing values of 3,000 pounds per square foot (psf. The, allowable bearing value may be increased by one third for short duration loading which includes the effects of wind or seismic forces. Footings should be at least 12 and 15 inches wide for one- and two-story improvements, and founded at least 36 inches below the lowest adjacent exterior subgrade. Reinforcement for continuous footings should consist of four #4 reinforcing bars; two placed near the top and two placed near the bottom. The structural engineer should provide recommendations for reinforcement of any deepened spread footings and footings with pipe penetrations. Foundation excavations shall be maintained at above optimum moisture content until concrete placement. fl Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 15 Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 10, 2004 Job No. 10-7423G 5.7.2 Foundation Settlement In general, for the proposed construction, the maximum post-construction compression settlement is expected to be less than 1.0 inch. Maximum differential settlement of continuous footings is expected to be on the order of 0.5 inches over a distance of approximately 50 feet. 5.7.3 Foundation Setback Footings for structures should be designed such that the horizontal distance from the face of adjacent slopes to the outer edge of the footing is a minimum of 10 feet. Excavations for utility trenches within 10 lateral feet should not encroach within a 1:1 plane extending downward from the closest bottom edge of adjacent footings. . 5.7.4 Interior Concrete Slabs Lightly loaded concrete slabs should be designed for the anticipated loading, but be a minimum of 4.5 inches thick. Minimum slab reinforcement should consist of #4 reinforcing bars placed on 18-inch centers, respectively, each way at mid-slab height (or with equivalent prefabricated reinforcement). In moisture sensitive floor areas, a vapor barrier of ten-mil visqueen (with all laps sealed or taped), overlying a two- to three-inch layer of consolidated aggregate base (Sand Equivalent greater than 30) should be installed. A one- to two-inch layer of similar material may be placed above the visqueen to protect the membrane during steel or concrete placement. Slab areas subject to heavy loads or vehicular traffic may require increased thickness and reinforcement. This office should be contacted to provide additional recommendations where actual service conditions 0 Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 16 Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January W2004 Job No. 10-7423G warrant further analysis. Subgrade materials shall be maintained at a minimum four percent above optimum moisture Content until concrete or slab underlayment placement. 5.8 Lateral Resistance and Earth Pressures The following recommendations may be used for shallow footings on the site. Foundations placed in firm, well-compacted fill material may be designed using a coefficient of friction of 0.30 (total frictional resistance equals coefficient of friction times the dead load). A design passive resistance value of 300 pounds per square foot per foot of depth (with a maximum value of 1500 pounds per square foot) may be used. The allowable lateral resistance can be taken as the sum of the frictional resistance and the passive resistance, provided the passive resistance does not exceed two-thirds of the total allowable 'resistance. Retaining walls up to 10 feet high and backfihled using granular soils may be designed using the equivalent fluid weights given in Table 2 below. TABLE 2 EQUIVALENT FLUID UNIT WEIGHTS (pounds _per _cubicfoot) WALL TYPE LEVEL BACKFILL SLOPE BACKFILL 2:1 (HORIZONTAL: VERTICAL) CANTILEVER WALL 35 60 (YIELDING) RESTRAINED WALL 55 90 The values above assume non-expansive backfill and free draining conditions. Measures should be taken to prevent moisture buildup behind all retaining walls. Drainage 0 Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 17 Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 10, 2004 Job No. 10-7423G measures should include free draining backfill materials and perforated drains. These drains should discharge to an appropriate offsite location. 5.9 Exterior Flatwork To reduce the potential for distress to exterior flatwork caused by minor settlement of foundation soils, we recommend that such flatwork be installed with crack-control joints at appropriate spacing as designed by the project architect. Additionally, we recommend that flatwork be installed with at least minimal reinforcement. Flatwork, which should be installed with crack control joints, includes driveways, sidewalks, and architectural features. All subgrades should be prepared according to the earthwork recommendations previously given before placing concrete. Positive drainage should be established and maintained next to all flatwork. Subgrade materials shall be maintained at a minimum S four percent above optimum moisture content until concrete placement. 5.10 Drainage Surface runoff should be collected and directed away from improvements by means of appropriate erosion reducing devices and positive drainage should be established around the proposed improvements. Positive drainage should be directed away from improvements at a gradient of at least two percent for a distance of at least five feet. The project civil engineers should evaluate the on-site drainage and make necessary provisions to keep surface water from affecting the site. 0 E Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 18 Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 10, 2004 Job No. 10-7423G 5.11 Vehicular Pavements The upper twelve inches of pavement subgrade and all aggregate base materials should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the laboratory maximum at a minimum four percent above optimum moisture content as determined by ASTM D1557. 5.11.1 Asphalt Concrete Pavement Preliminary pavement sections presented below are based on an estimated Resistance "R" Value for materials on this site. The asphalt pavement design is based on California Department of Transportation Highway Manual and on traffic indexes as indicated in Table 3 on the following page. Upon completion of finish grading, "R" Value sampling and testing of subgrade soils may occur and the pavement section modified if necessary. TABLE 3 ASPHALT PAVEMENT Traffic Area Assumed Traffic Estimated AC Class 2 Index Subgrade Thickness Aggregate Base "R" Value (inches) Thickness (inches) Auto and Light 5.5 15 3.5 9.0 Truck Drive Areas Auto and Light 4.5 15 3.0 7.0 Truck Parking Areas 5.11.2 Portland Cement Concrete Pavements We understand that parking and drive areas may be paved with concrete pavements. We recommend driveway entrance aprons and trash bin loading and 0 Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 19 Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 10, 2004 Job No. 10-7423G storage areas be paved with concrete pavements. The recommended concrete pavement section for drive areas have been designed assuming light industrial/commercial traffic loads of single axle loads of 15 kips, 10 repetitions per day. Corresponding pavement designs presented in the Table 4 below may not be adequate for larger axle loads and traffic volume. Concrete used for pavement areas should possess a minimum 600-psi modulus of rupture. Pavements should be constructed according to industry standards. TABLE 4 CONCRETE PAVEMENT DESIGN Traffic Area Subgrade R-Value PCC Thickness (inches) Driveways/Trash Areas 15 7.0 Auto and Light Truck Parking and Drive Areas 15 6.0 Pavements should be constructed according to industry standards. To control the location and spread of concrete shrinkage cracks, it is recommended that crack control joints (weakened plane joints) in square or nearly square patterns be included in the design. The project civil engineer shall specify jointing and other specific details for pavement design. However unreinforced concrete pavement joints shall not be spaced more than 24 times the pavement thickness. Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 20 Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 10, 2004 Job No. 10-7423G 5.12 Slope Significant slopes are not anticipated at the site. Based on anticipated soil strength characteristics, fill slopes should be constructed at slope ratios of 2:1 (horizontal: vertical) or flatter. These fill slope inclinations should exhibit factors of safety greater than 1.5. Although properly constructed slopes on this site should be grossly stable, the soils will be somewhat erodible. Therefore, runoff water should not be permitted to drain over the edges of slopes unless that water is confined to properly designed and constructed drainage facilities. Erosion resistant vegetation should be maintained on the face of all slopes. Typically, soils along the top portion of a fill slope face will creep laterally. We do not recommend distress sensitive hardscape improvements be constructed within five feet of slope crests in fill areas or that thickened edges be employed. 5.13 Construction Observation The recommendations provided in this report are based on preliminary design information for the proposed construction and the subsurface conditions found in the exploratory boring locations. The interpolated subsurface conditions should be checked in the field during construction to verify that conditions are as anticipated. S 0 Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 21 Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 10, 2004 Job No. 10-7423G Recommendations provided in this report are based on the understanding and assumption that CTE will provide the observation and testing services for the project. All earthwork should be observed and tested to verify that grading activity has been performed according to the recommendations contained within this report. The project engineer should evaluate all footing trenches before reinforcing steel placement. 5.14 Plan Review CTB should review the project foundation plans and grading plans before commencement of earthwork to identify potential conflicts with the recommendations contained in this report. 6.0 LIMITATIONS OF INVESTIGATION The field evaluation, laboratory testing and geotechnical analysis presented in this report have been conducted according to current engineering practice and the standard of care exercised by reputable geotechnical consultants performing similar tasks in this area. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made regarding the conclusions, recommendations and opinions expressed in this report. Variations may exist and conditions not observed or described in this report may be encountered during construction. Our conclusions and recommendations are based on an analysis of the observed conditions. If conditions different from those described in this report are encountered, our office should be notified and additional recommendations, if required, will be provided upon request. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service on this project. If S S Preliminary Geotechnical Report Page 22 Proposed Social Hall St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church, Carlsbad, California January 10. 2004 Job No. 10-7423G you have any questions regarding this report, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Respectfully submitted, CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. 7 , Dan T. Math, RCE# 61013 Martin Siem, CEG# 2311 Senior Engineer Certified Engineering Geologist T. 61013 Exp. Q L2131 6 Cm. civi 0 TOPOI map printed on 01//0 from C&Iforna,tpc and"Lin titled. tpg 117117.000'W 117116.00()'W WGG64 1I791.000 W 'I, - 329 4 . >, f - \o --. 0' ) - .-.- iaç\A Gij A H/I 0 I 0 N ri 4 cn k 1Q iI' 1 r rIc). i - SITE • - :.. u. F. k Nulty Z 0 !,j '4 L 64 -. " I 6 ç \.. 1''L x/- 0 ui to j 4- ro 11717.000' W t17°16.000 W WG84 117°1S.000 W TN'I,MW 'L. MIII lob ivras Y Pu,ited iiropoi uoo Ptic4, topocom) CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. ,$IcLE\ve (SEOTECI INICM . AND CONSTRUCTION ENOINEP.RINO TESTING AND INSPECTION 2414 VINEYARD .VENUE. STE (1 ESCONDIDOCA. 91029 (750) 746-4955 ENGINIIERIXG.INC. cmjooNo: SITE INDEX MAP 10-7423G 20 FOOT CONThLJR ELEVATIONS sr. ELIZABETH SETON CATHOLIC CHURCH SCAUAS SHOWN 6628 SANTA ISABEL STREET DA fl/O a' CARLSBAD. CALIFORNIA 5 IFIGURE- - I N •1 ___ 'i.. •.L ADRA ROAD 4r•I-.,.- .. - - -... --• —--- - '. — -. -.r.__ . cm3 WA I I - •: r- • WVYL.E 1 ' Ciit t I'I I i •.i S 9IjflL $\ 'I ____________ - . •' ; • . . .- I • ..il..b -' .-.-'J .•• / ballmi : oc I . •l • \ - •:' 'p• LEGEND CIB-1 a APPROXIMATE CTE APPROXiMATE BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. T BORING LOCATION BORING LOCATION (1993) CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. EXPLORATION MAP 1/ \. GEOTECHNICAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENG1NERE'1G ThSTING AND nlspscrloN ST. ELIZABETH STON CATHOLIC CHURCH 6629 SANTA OSABEL STREET 2414 VINEYARD AVENUE, STE G ESCONDIDO CA. 02029 (760) 746-45 ENGINaIrruNc CARLSBAD. CALffORNE4 -. 10-74230 NO SCALE 01/05 FIOURE: APPENDIX A REFERENCES CITED S S 0 REFERENCES CITED Blake, T.F., 1996, "EQFAULT," Version 2.20, Thomas F. Blake Computer Services and Software. Benton Engineering, Inc. (1993), Soils Investigation for St. Elizabeth Seton Church, Proposed Sanctuary Building 6628 Santa Isabel Street, Carlsbad, California. Dated October, 1, 1993. Hart, Earl W. and Bryant, W.A., Revised 1997, "Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Aiquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act with Index to Earthquake Fault Zones Maps," California Division of Mines and Geology, Special Publication 42. Jennings, C. W., 1987, "Fault Map of California with Locations of Volcanoes, Thermal Springs and Thermal Wells." McCulloch, D.S., 1985, "Evaluating Tsunami Potential" in Ziony, J.I., ed., Evaluating Earthquake Hazards in the Los Angeles Region - An Earth-Science Perspective, U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1360. Tan, S. S., and Giffen, D.G., 1995, "Landslide Hazards in the Northern Part of the San Diego Metropolitan Area, San Diego County, California: Landslide Hazard S Identification Map", California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, Open-File Report 95-04, State of California, Division of Mines and Geology, Sacramento, California Tan, S.S., and Kennedy, M.P., 1996, "Geologic Maps of the Northwestern Part of San Diego County, California, Plate 1, Geologic Map of the Oceanside, San Luis Rey, and San Marcos 7.5' Quadrangles, San Diego County, California", State of California, Division of Mines and Geology, Open File Report 96-02. 0 APPENDIX B FIELD EXPLORATION METHODS AND BORINGS LOGS 0 S APPENDIX B FIELD EXPLORATION METHODS AND BORINGS LOGS Soil Boring Methods Relatively "Undisturbed" Soil Samples Relatively "undisturbed" soil samples were collected using a modified California-drive sampler (2.4-inch inside diameter, 3-inch outside diameter) lined with sample rings. Drive sampling was conducted in general accordance with ASTM D-3550. The steel sampler was driven into the bottom of the borehole with successive drops of a 140-pound weight falling 30-inches. Blow counts (N) required for sampler penetration are shown on the boring logs in the column "Blows/Foot." The soil was retained in brass rings (2.4 inches in diameter, 1.00 inch in height). The samples were retained and carefully sealed in waterproof plastic containers for shipment to the Construction Testing & Engineering ("CTB") geotechnical laboratory. Disturbed Soil Samplin,g Bulk soil samples were collected for laboratory analysis using two methods. Standard Penetration Tests (SPT) were performed according to ASTM D-1586 at selected depths in the borings using a standard (1.4-inches inside diameter, 2-inches outside diameter) split-barrel sampler. The steel sampler was driven into the bottom of the borehole with successive drops of a 140-pound weight falling 30-inches. Blow counts (N) required for . sampler penetration are shown on the boring logs in the column "Blows/Foot." Samples collected iii this manner were placed in sealed plastic bags. Bulk soil samples of the drill cuttings were also collected in large plastic bags. All disturbed soil samples were returned to the CTE geotechnical laboratory for analysis. 0 I I I CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. GEOTEC}INICAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION 2414 VINEYARD AVENUE, SUITS 0 ESCONDIDO CA. 92025 t7601 746.4935 DEFINITION OF TERMS PRIMARY DWISIONS SYMBOLS SECONDARY DIVISIONS GRAVELS CLEAN â? ° ' . WELL GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND MIXTURES MORE THAN GRAVELS ipl LITTLE OR NO FINES 49 GP POORLY GRADED GRAVELS OR GRAVEL SAND MIXTURES, HALF OF <5% FINES LITTLE OF NO FINES GRAVELS SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND-SILT MIXTURES, 0 0 ILl FRACTION IS N LARGERTHAN NON-PLASTIC FINES CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND-CLAY MIXTURES, NO. 4 SIEVE COARSE FK.z ~_V_ WITH FINES _____________ FINES ________PLASTIC WELL GRADED Q SANDS CL -..c SANDS, GRAVELLY SANDS, LITTLE OR NO MORETHAN 10 . SANDS FINES ••:::.:.i SP POORLY GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SANDS, LITTLE OR HALF OF <5% FINES :. COARSE _________.._________________________________________________ NO FINES SANDS :MTT1 SILTY SANDS, SAND-SILT MIXTURES, NON-PLASTIC FINES LI FRACTION IS SMALLER THAN NO.4 SIEVE WITH FINES - CLAYEY SANDS, SAND-CLAY MIXTURES, PLASTIC FINES I I I ML I INORGANIC SILTS, VERY FINE SANDS, ROCK FLOUR, SILTY SILTS AND CLAYS J OR CLAYEY FINE SANDS, SLIGHTLY PLASTIC CLAYEY SILTS f / INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO MEDIUM PLASTICITY, 0 ' W 0 'CL LIQUID LIMIT IS LESS THAN GRAVELLY, SANDY, SILTS OR LEAN CLAYS 'j -i- OL ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY 14 ZZo Ci J MH I INORGANIC SILTS. MICACEOUS OR DIATOMACEOUS FINE ui SILTS AND CLAYS SANDY OR SILTY SOILS, ELASTIC SILTS , CHV INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FAT CLAYS LIQUID LIMIT IS GREATER THAN 50 7 ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO HIGH PLASTICITY, ORGANIC SILTY CLAYS HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PEAT AND OTHER HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS GRAIN SIZES GRAVEL I SAND I BOULDERS COBBLES SILTS AND CLAYS COARSE I FINE I COARSE I MEDIUM I FINE 12" 3" 3/4" 4 10 40 200 CLEAR SQUARE SIEVE OPENING U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE ADDITIONAL TESTS (OTHER THAN TEST PIT AND BORING LOG COLUMN HEADINGS) MAX- Maximum Dry Density PM- Permeability PP- Pocket Penetrometer GS- Grain Size Distribution SG- Specific Gravity WA- Wash Analysis SE- Sand Equivalent HA- Hydrometer Analysis DS- Direct Shear El- Expansion Index AL- Atterberg Limits RDS- Repeated Direct Shear CHM- Sulfate and Chloride RV- R-Value UC- Unconfined Compression Content , pH, Resistivity CN- Consolidation MD- Moisture/Density COR - Corrosivity CP- Collapse Potential M- Moisture SD- Sample Disturbed HC- Hydrocollapse SC- Swell Compression REM- Remolded 01- Organic Impurities FIGURE:I BLI F CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. / 000TECHNICAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION 2414 VINEYARD AVENUE. SUITE 0 ESCONDIDO CA. 92029 (760) 746.4905 RRDRIEERIKOAIC. ECT: DRILLER: SHEET: of JOB NO: DRILL METHOD: DRILLING DATE: LOGGED BY: SAMPLE METHOD: ELEVATION: .5 BORING LEGEND Laboratory Tests v V c o DESCRIPTION Block or chunk Sample - - X - Bulk Sample - - - -5- Standard Penetration Test - - I- - Modified Split-Barrel Drive Sampler (Cal Sampler) - - - .- - I - - Thin Walled Army Corp. of Engineers Sample - - - 15- - - Groundwater Table -a---- - - - Soil Type or Classification Change 20- ? 7 7 ? - Fomiation Change [(Approximate boundaries queried (?)1 - SM" Quotes are placed around classifications where the soils 25- - - - - exist in situ as bedrock - FIGURE: I BL2 / %CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. GEOTECI1NICAI. AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION e 2414 VINEYARD AVENUE, SUITE 0 ESCONDIDO CA. 92029 (760) 746.4905 ERGJNERII92.O4C PROJECT: SOCIAL HALL ST. ELIZABETH DRILLER: BAJA EXPIATION SHEET: I of CTE JOB NO: I0-74230 DRILL METHOD: HOLLOW STEM AUGER DRILLING DATE: 12114/04 LOGGED BY: D. RIES SAMPLE METHOD: RING, SPT, BULK ELEVATION: r BORING: B-i Laboratory Tests DESCRIPTION 00O2'TURF 0.2'-3' FILL: - - ML Medium dense, moist, yellowish gray, fine sandy SILT (ML). U El • CHEM - SANTIAGO FORMATION: - - Hard, moist, Light yellowish gray, silty CLAYSTONE to clayey SILTSTONE (CL to ML) massive with rusty orange stained 5 - coatings. 12 CL / 24 to HA - 40 ML @ 10' With fine to very fine SAND, occasional medium grains. F 10 14 - - 19 IS 4 ML @ 15' Becomes hard, moist, light gray, very fine sandy SILTSTONE - - 13 with clay (ML), massive. L 23 [20 I 26 L 35 1 -20 Total Depth 19.5' No Groundwater Observed - Borehole Backftlled with Native Soil S ____ J 1:=j Boring B-1 I I CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. j OROTECIONICAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION 9.. 2414 VINEYARD AVENUE. SUITE a ESCONDIDO CA. 92029 (760) 746.4995 I EKTAKERDxVC kJECT: SOCIAL HALL ST. ELIZABETH DRILLER: BAJA EXPLATEON SHEET: 1 of CTE JOB NO: 10-7423G DRILL METHOD: HOLLOW STEM AUGER DRILLING DATE: 12114/04 LOGGED BY: D. RIES - SAMPLE METHOD: RING, SPT, BULK ELEVATION: - .2 BORING: B-2 Laboratory Tests DESCRIPTION 0- - - - - - - 0-0.2' TURF SANTIAGO FORMATION: - - Hard, moist, yellow gray, sandy SILTSTONE. ML - r 'o - I 12 Hard, moist, light yellowish gray, gray, rusty orange brown, sandy GS j 21 SILTSTONE with very hard meta-volcanic rock fragments. Rusty staining, with white fractures. powdery material within -------------------------------------------------------- 1 & 7 29 Hard, moist, greenish gray with abundant rusty brown staining, - so fine sandy SILTSTONE, fractured. 30 Becomes dark gray. 50 - Total Depth 18.5' -20 No Groundwater Observed Borehole Bacicfihled with Native Soil -25 V B-2 I I C \CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. GEOTECHNICAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION 2414 VINEYARD AVENUE, SUITE 0 ESCONDIDO CA. 02029 (760) 746.4950 ENOINEEIWIG.L'4C OJECT: SOCIAL HALL ST. ELIZABETH DRILLER: BAJA EXPLATION SHEET: I of CTE JOB NO: 10-7423G DRILL METHOD: HOLLOW STEM AUGER DRILLING DATE: 12/14/04 LOGGED BY: D. RIBS SAMPLE METHOD: RING, SPT, BULK ELEVATION: .9 'B ' ' ! BORTNG: B-3 Laboratory Tests cJ DESCRIPTION - - - - - 0-0.2' TURF 0.2-2' FILL: - Medium dense, moist, Yellowish gray, fine sandy SILT (ML). . MAX DS SANTIAGO FORMATION: - V ML A - Hard, moist, gray, SILTSTONE with clay, massive. 13 - / 44 110.5 15.0 50 .5.. 1(3 ML Hard, moist, medium gray, fine sandy SILT (ML). I 20 L29 15 23 SM Hard, moist, brown, gray, reddish gray, silty fine SANDSTONE - L 40 - to sandy SILTSTONE with meta volcanic rock fragments. ML 20 49 20 Total Depth 19' No Groundwater Observed - - Borehie Backfihled with Native Soil -2! APPENDIX C LABORATORY METHODS AND RESULTS S O APPENDIX C LABORATORY METHODS AND RESULTS Laboratory tests were performed on representative soil samples to detect their relative engineering properties. Tests were performed following test methods of the American Society for Testing Materials or other accepted standards. The following presents a brief description of the various test methods used. Classification Soils were classified visually according to the Unified Soil Classification System. Visual classifications were supplemented by laboratory testing of selected samples according to ASTM D2487. The soil classifications are shown on the Exploration Logs in Appendix B. Particle-Size Analysis Particle-size analyses were performed on selected representative samples according to ASTM D422. Modified Proctor To determine the maximum dry density and optimum moisture content, a soil sample was tested in accordance with ASTMD-1557. Expansion Index Testing . Expansion index testing was performed on selected samples of the matrix of the onsite soils accotding to Building Code Standard No. 29-2. Chemical Analysis Soil materials were collected with sterile sampling equipment and tested for Sulfate and Chloride content, pH, Corrosivity, and Resistivity. Direct Shear Direct shear tests were performed on either samples direct from the field or on samples recompacted to 90% of the laboratory maximum value overall. Direct shear testing was performed in accordance with ASTM D3080-72 to evaluate the shear strength characteristics of selected materials. The samples were inundated during shearing to represent adverse field conditions. 0 \CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. GEOTECHNICAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION 24 1 4 VINEYARD AVENUE, SUITE 0 ESCOI4DIDO CA. 91029 (760) 746-4955 EXPANSION INDEX TEST UBC 18-2 LOCATION DEPTH EXPANSION INDEX EXPANSION (feet) POTENTIAL B-i 1-4 63 MEDIUM MAXIMUM DENSITY (MODIFIED PROCTOR) LOCATION DEPTH OPTIMUM MOISTURE DRY DENSITY (feet) (%) (pef) B-3 1-4 15.0 110.5 SULFATE LOCATION DEPTH RESULTS (feet) ppm B-i 1-4 137 CHLORIDE LOCATION DEPTH RESULTS (feet) ppm B-i 1-4 45 CONDUCTIVITY CALIFORNIA TEST 424 LOCATION DEPTH RESULTS (feet) us/cm B-i 1-4 250 RESISTIVITY CALIFORNIA TEST 424 LOCATION DEPTH RESULTS (feet) ohm slcm B-i 14 3590 LABORATORY SUMMARY CTE 3013 NO. 10-7423G PRECONSOLIDATION SHEARING DATA 0.000- 0.050 - i.l50C . 0.100—- 1250 -- - - - - - 1000 -- - - - I.- 0.200 - w - - - - - - - Boo - - 0.250 --- 250 -- --- -- - - 2 4 6 8 10 IS 14 16 18 20 0.300 - - 0 - 1 - 10 100 - 0.1 1000 STRAIN [VERTICAL STRESS 1000 psf 3000 psf flflflnRI TIME (minutes) FAILURE ENVELOPE 5000- 4000 - 00 3000 ft to 'LI 0 2000- 1000 mrnirntn 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 VERTICAL STRESS (psf) SHEAR STRENGTH TEST Sample Designation Depth (ft) [Cohesion Angle of Friction Sample Description 350 Pf 3 I Remolded Light Yellowish Green Clay Initial Moisture (%): 15.0% lflilal We'Density(pol 114.4 CTB JOB NO: 10-7423 Final Moisture (%): 35.60/, Final Wet Den-shy (pcI 134.8 FIGURE No: C-2 U. S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE - fn Ir vi CN 100 70 60 ---s-- 50 ------ z 40 30 20 -----_ ---_ _ _ _ :11111 HHH HuH HHH 100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 PARTICLE SIZE (mm) PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS d CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. ° 000TECIINICAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION Saaipls Designation Sneeple Depth (feet) Symbol Liquid Limit (%) Plasticity Index Classification B-2 5.0 - - GM 2414 VINEYARD AVENUE, SUITE U ESCOND1DO CA. 92029 (760) 740-4955 ___________ CTE JOB NUMBER: 10-7423 FIGURE: C-i . . B-i @5' U. S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE 100.0 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 z 50.0 40.0 All 30.0 20.0 10.0 0.0 I i II'IItI_ 11111 1111± 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 PARTICLE SIZE (mm) PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS I sample CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INCJ °'°' I Symbol Plasticity Wax I CIiflcsXion 51 1 I ___________ 3414 V!NEYARD AVENUE. SUITE 0 ESC000IDO CA. 92021 1760) 746.4955 GEOTECHNICAI AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION cTE JOB NUIVIBER 10-7423 C-3 - APPENDIX D STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR GRADING 0 Appendix D Page D-1 Standard Specifications for Grading Section 1 - General The guidelines contained herein represent Construction Testing & Engineering's standard recommendations for grading and other associated operations on construction projects. These guidelines should be considered a portion of the project specifications. Recommendations contained in the body of the previously presented soils report shall supersede the recommendations and or requirements as specified herein. The project geotechnical consultant shall interpret disputes arising out of interpretation of the recommendations contained in the soils report or specifications contained herein. Section 2 - Responsibilities of Project Personnel The geotechnical consultant should provide observation and testing services sufficient to assure that geotechnical construction is performed in general conformance with project specifications and standard grading practices. The geotechnical consultant should report any deviations to the client or his authorized representative. The Client should be chiefly responsible for all aspects of the project. He or his authorized representative has the responsibility of reviewing the findings and recommendations of the geotechnical tonsultant. He shall authorize or cause to have authorized the Contractor and/or other consultants to perform work and/or provide services. During grading the Client or his authorized representative should remain on-site or should remain reasonably accessible to all concerned parties in order to make decisions necessary to maintain the flow of the project. The Contractor should be responsible for the safety of the project and satisfactory completion of all grading and other associated operations on construction projects, including, but not limited to, earth work in accordance with the project plans, specifications and controlling agency requirements. Section 3 - Preconstruction Meeting A preconstruction site meeting shall be arranged by the owner and/or client and shall include the grading contractor, the design engineer, the geotechnical consultant, owner's representative and representatives of the appropriate governing authorities. Section 4 - Site Preparation The client or contractor should obtain the required approvals from the controlling authorities for the project prior, during and/or after demolition, site preparation and removals, etc. The appropriate approvals should be obtained prior to proceeding with grading operations. Appendix D Page D-2 Standard Specifications for Grading Clearing and grubbing should consist of the removal of vegetation such as brush, grass, woods, stumps, trees, root of trees and otherwise deleterious natural materials from the areas to be graded. Clearing and grubbing should extend to the outside of all proposed excavation and fill areas. Demolition should include removal of buildings, structures, foundations, reservoirs, utilities (including underground pipelines, septic tanks, leach fields, seepage pits, cisterns, mining shafts, tunnels, etc.) and other man-made surface and subsurface improvements from the areas to be graded. Demolition of utilities should include proper capping and/or rerouting pipelines at the project perimeter and cutoff and capping of wells in accordance with the requirements of the governing authorities and the recommendations of the geotechnical consultant at the time of demolition. Trees, plants or man-made improvements not planned to be removed or demolished should be protected by the contractor from damage or injury. Debris generated during clearing, grubbing and/or demolition operations should be wasted from areas to be graded and disposed off-site. Clearing, grubbing and demolition operations should be is performed under the observation of the geotechnical consultant. Section 5 - Site Protection Protection of the site during the period of grading should be the responsibility of the contractor. Unless other provisions are made in writing and agreed upon among the concerned parties, completion of a portion of the project should not be considered to preclude that portion or adjacent areas from the requirements for site protection until such time as the entire project is complete as identified by the geotechnical consultant, the client and the regulating agencies. Precautions should be taken during the performance of site clearing, excavations and grading to protect the work site from flooding, ponding or inundation by poor or improper surface drainage. Temporary provisions should be made during the rainy season to adequately direct surface drainage away from and off the work site. Where low areas cannot be avoided, pumps should be kept on hand to continually remove water during periods of rainfall. Rain related damage should be considered to include, but may not be limited to, erosion, silting, saturation, swelling, structural distress and other adverse conditions as determined by the geotechnical consultant. Soil adversely affected should be classified as unsuitable materials and should be subject to overexcavation and replacement with compacted fill or other remedial grading as recommended by the geotechnical consultant. fl Appendix D Page D-3 Standard Specifications for Grading The contractor should be responsible for the stability of all temporary excavations. Recommendations by the geotechnical consultant pertaining to temporary excavations (e.g., backeuts) are made in consideration of stability of the completed project and, therefore, should not be considered to preclude the responsibilities of the contractor. Recommendations by the geotechnical consultant should not be considered to preclude requirements that are more restrictive by the regulating agencies. The contractor should provide during periods of extensive rainfall plastic sheeting to prevent unprotected slopes from becoming saturated and unstable. When deemed appropriate by the geotechnical consultant or governing agencies the contractor shall install checkdams, desilting basins, sand bags or other drainage control measures. In relatively level areas and/or slope areas, where saturated soil and/or erosion gullies exist to depths of greater than 1.0 foot; they should be overexcavated and replaced as compacted fill in accordance with the applicable specifications. Where affected materials exist to depths of 1.0 foot or less below proposed finished grade, remedial grading by moisture conditioning in-place, followed by thorough recompaction in accordance with the applicable grading guidelines herein may be attempted. If the desired results are not achieved, all affected materials should be overexcavated and replaced as compacted fill in accordance with the slope repair recommendations herein. If field conditions dictate, the geotechnical consultant may recommend other slope repair procedures. Section 6 - Excavations 6.1 Unsuitable Materials Materials that are unsuitable should be excavated under observation and recommendations of the geotechnical consultant. Unsuitable materials include, but may not be limited to, dry, loose, soft, wet, organic compressible natural soils and fractured, weathered, soft bedrock and nonengineered or otherwise deleterious fill materials. Material identified by the geotechnical consultant as unsatisfactory due to its moisture conditions should be overexcavated; moisture conditioned as needed, to a uniform at or above optimum moisture condition before placement as compacted fill. If during the course of grading adverse geotechnical conditions are exposed which were not anticipated in the preliminary soil report as determined by the geotechnical consultant additional exploration, analysis, and treatment of these problems may be recommended. Appendix D Page D-4 Standard Specifications for Grading 6.2 Cut Sloi,es Unless otherwise recommended by the geotechnical consultant and approved by the regulating agencies, permanent cut slopes should not be steeper than 2:1 (horizontal: vertical). The geotechnical consultant should observe cut slope excavation and if these excavations expose loose cohesionless, significantly fractured or otherwise unsuitable material, the materials should be overexcavated and replaced with a compacted stabilization fill. If encountered specific cross section details should be obtained from the Geotechnical Consultant. When extensive cut slopes are excavated or these cut slopes are made in the direction of the prevailing drainage, a non-erodible diversion swale (brow ditch) should be provided at the top of the slope. 6.3 Pad Areas All lot pad areas, including side yard terrace containing both cut and fill materials, transitions, located less than 3 feet deep should be overexcavated to a depth of 3 feet and replaced with a uniform compacted fill blanket of 3 feet. Actual depth of overexcavation may vary and should be delineated by the geotechnical consultant during grading. For pad areas created above cut or natural slopes, positive drainage should be established away from the top-of-slope. This may be accomplished utilizing a berm drainage swale and/or an appropriate pad gradient. A gradient in soil areas away from the top-of-slopes of 2 percent or greater is recommended. Section 7- Compacted Fill All fill materials should have fill quality, placement, conditioning and compaction as specified below or as approved by the geotechnical consultant. 7.1 Fill Material Quality Excavated on-site or import materials which are acceptable to the geotechnical consultant may be utilized as compacted fill, provided trash, vegetation and other deleterious materials are removed prior to placement. All import materials anticipated for use on-site should be sampled tested and approved prior to and placement is in conformance with the requirements outlined. Rocks 12 inches in maximum and smaller may be utilized within compacted fill provided sufficient fill material is placed and thoroughly compacted over and around all rock to Appendix D Page D-5 Standard Specifications for Grading effectively fill rock voids. The amount of rock should not exceed 40 percent by dry weight passing the 3/4-inch sieve. The geotechnical consultant may vary those requirements as field conditions dictate. Where rocks greater than 12 inches but less than four feet of maximum dimension are generated during grading, or otherwise desired to be placed within an engineered fill, special handling in accordance with the recommendations below. Rocks greater than four feet should be broken down or disposed off-site. 7.2 Placement of Fill Prior to placement of fill material, the geotechnical consultant should inspect the area to receive fill. After inspection and approval, the exposed ground surface should be scarified to a depth of 6 to 8 inches. The scarified material should be conditioned (i.e. moisture added or air dried by continued discing) to achieve a moisture content at or slightly above optimum moisture conditions and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum density or as otherwise recommended in the soils report or by appropriate government agencies. Comp.acted fill should then be placed in thin horizontal lifts not exceeding eight inches in loose thickness prior to compaction. Each lift should be moisture conditioned as needed, thoroughly blended to achieve a consistent moisture content at or slightly above optimum and thoroughly compacted by mechanical methods to a minimum of 90 percent of laboratory maximum dry density. Each lift should be treated in a like manner until the desired finished grades are achieved. The contractor should have suitable and sufficient mechanical compaction equipment and watering apparatus on the job site to handle the amount of fill being placed in consideration of moisture retention properties of the materials and weather conditions. When placing fill in horizontal lifts adjacent to areas sloping steeper than 5:1 (horizontal: vertical), horizontal keys and vertical benches should be excavated into the adjacent slope area. Keying and benching should be sufficient to provide at least six-foot wide benches and a minimum of four feet of vertical bench height within the firm natural ground, firm bedrock or engineered compacted fill. No compacted fill should be placed in an area after keying and benching until the geotechnical consultant has reviewed the area. Material generated by the benching operation should be moved sufficiently away from the bench area to allow for the recommended review of the horizontal bench prior to placement of fill. Appendix D Page D-6 Standard Specifications for Grading Within a single fill area where grading procedures dictate two or more separate fills, temporary slopes (false slopes) may be created. When placing fill adjacent to a false slope, benching should be conducted in the same manner as above described. At least a 3-foot vertical bench should be established within the firm core of adjacent approved compacted fill prior to placement of additional fill. Benching should proceed in at least 3-foot vertical increments until the desired finished grades are achieved. Prior to placement of additional compacted fill following an overnight or other grading delay, the exposed surface or previously compacted fill should be processed by scarification, moisture conditioning as needed to at or slightly above optimum moisture content, thoroughly blended and recompacted to a minimum of 90 percent of laboratory maximum dry density. Where unsuitable materials exist to depths of greater than one foot, the unsuitable materials should be over-excavated. Following a period of flooding, rainfall or overwatering by other means, no additional fill should be placed until damage assessments have been made and remedial grading performed as described herein. is Rocks, 12 inch in maximum dimension and smaller may be utilized in the compacted fill provided the fill is placed and thoroughly compacted over and around all rock. No oversize material should be used within 3 feet of finished pad grade and within 1 foot of other compacted fill areas. Rocks 12 inches up to four feet maximum dimension should be placed below the upper 5 feet of any fill and should not be closer than 11 feet to any slope face. These recommendations could vary as locations of improvements dictate. Where practical, oversized material should not be placed below areas where structures or deep utilities are proposed. Oversized material should be placed in windrows on a clean, overexcavated or unyielding compacted fill or firm natural ground surface. Select native or imported granular soil (S.E. 30 or higher) should be placed and thoroughly flooded over and around all windrowed rock, such that voids are filled. Windrows of oversized material should be staggered so those successive strata of oversized material are not in the same vertical plane. It may be possible to dispose of individual larger rock as field conditions dictate and as recommended by the geotechnical consultant at the time of placement. The contractor should assist the geotechnical consultant and/or his representative by digging test pits for removal determinations and/or for testing compacted fill. The contractor should provide this work at no additional cost to the owner or contractor's is client. Appendix D Page D-7 Standard Specifications for Grading Fill should be tested by the geotechnical consultant for compliance with the recommended relative compaction and moisture conditions. Field density testing should conform to ASTM Method of Test D 1556-82, D 2922-81. Tests should be conducted at a minimum of 2 vertical feet or 1,000 cubic yards of fill placed. Actual test intervals may vary as field conditions dictate. Fill found not to be in conformance with the grading recommendations should be removed or otherwise handled as recommended by the geotechnical consultant. 7.3 Fill Slopes Unless otherwise recommended by the geotechnical consultant and approved by the regulating agencies, permanent fill slopes should not be steeper than 2:1 (horizontal: vertical). Except as specifically recommended in these grading guidelines compacted fill slopes should be over-built and cut back to grade, exposing the firm, compacted fill inner core. The actual amount of overbuilding may vary as field conditions dictate. If the desired results are not achieved, the existing slopes should be overexcavated and reconstructed under the guidelines of the geotechnical consultant. The degree of overbuilding shall be increased until the desired compacted slope surface condition is achieved. Care should be taken by the contractor to provide thorough mechanical compaction to the outer edge of the overbuilt slope surface. At the discretion of the geotechnical consultant, slope face compaction may be attempted by conventional construction procedures including backrolling. The procedure must create a firmly compacted material throughout the entire depth of the slope face to the surface of the previously compacted firm fill intercore. During grading operations, care should be taken to extend compactive effort to the outer edge of the slope. Each lift should extend horizontally to the desired finished slope surface or more as needed to ultimately established desired grades. Grade during construction should not be allowed to roll off at the edge of the slope. It may be helpful to elevate slightly the outer edge of the slope. Slough resulting from the placement of individual lifts should not be allowed to drift down over previous lifts. At intervals not exceeding four feet in vertical slope height or the capability of available equipment, whichever is less, fill slopes should be thoroughly dozer trackrolled. 0 Appendix D Page D-8 5 Standard Specifications for Grading For pad areas above fill slopes, positive drainage should be established away from the top-of-slope. This may be accomplished using a berm and pad gradient of at least 2 percent. Section 8 - Trench Backfill Utility and/or other excavation of trench backfill should, unless otherwise recommended, be compacted by mechanical means. Unless otherwise recommended, the degree of compaction should be a minimum of 90 percent of the laboratory maximum density. Within slab areas, but outside the influence of foundations, trenches up to one foot wide and two feet deep may be backfihled with sand and consolidated by jetting, flooding or by mechanical means. If on-site materials are utilized, they should be wheel-rolled, tamped or otherwise compacted to a firm condition. For minor interior trenches, density testing may be deleted or spot testing may be elected if deemed necessary, based on review of backfill operations during construction. If utility contractors indicate that it is undesirable to use compaction equipment in close S proximity to a buried conduit, the contractor may elect the utilization of light weight mechanical compaction equipment and/or shading of the conduit with clean, granular material, which should be thoroughly jetted in-place above the conduit, prior to initiating mechanical compaction procedures. Other methods of utility trench compaction may also be appropriate, upon review of the geotechnical consultant at the time of construction. In cases where clean granular materials are proposed for use in lieu of native materials or where flooding or jetting is proposed, the procedures should be considered subject to review by the geotechnical consultant. Clean granular backfill and/or bedding are not recommended in slope areas. Section 9 - Drainage Where deemed appropriate by the geotechnical consultant, canyon subdrain systems should be installed in accordance. Typical subdrains for compacted fill buttresses, slope stabilization or sidehill masses, should be installed in accordance with the specifications. Roof, pad and slope drainage should be directed away from slopes and areas of structures to is suitable disposal areas via non-erodible devices (i.e., gutters, downspouts, and concrete swales). O Appendix D Standard Specifications for Grading Page D-9 For drainage in extensively landscaped areas near structures, (i.e., within four feet) a minimum of 5 percent gradient away from the structure should be maintained. Pad drainage of at least 2 percent should be maintained over the remainder of the site. Drainage patterns established at the time of fine grading should be maintained throughout the life of the project. Property owners should be made aware that altering drainage patterns could be detrimental to slope stability and foundation performance. Section 10 - Slope Maintenance 10.1 - Landscape Plants To enhance surficial slope stability, slope planting should be accomplished at the completion of grading. Slope planting should consist of deep-rooting vegetation requiring little watering. Plants native to the southern California area and plants relative to native plants are generally desirable. Plants native to other semi-arid and and areas may also be appropriate. A Landscape Architect should be the best party to consult regarding actual types of plants and planting configuration. . 10.2 -jigtjii Irrigation pipes should be anchored to slope faces, not placed in trenches excavated into slope faces. Slope irrigation should be minimized. If automatic timing devices are utilized on irrigation systems, provisions should be made for interrupting normal irrigation during periods of rainfall. 10.3 - Repair As a precautionary measure, plastic sheeting should be readily available, or kept on hand, to protect all slope areas from saturation by periods of heavy or prolonged rainfall. This measure is strongly recommended, beginning with the period prior to landscape planting. If slope failures occur, the geotechnical consultant should be contacted for a field review of site conditions and development of recommendations for evaluation and repair. If slope failures occur as a result of exposure to period of heavy rainfall, the failure areas and currently unaffected areas should be covered with plastic sheeting to protect against additional saturation. APPENDIX E SOILS INVESTIGATION BY BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. DATED OCTOBER 1, 1993 1] 9 11/16/2004 10:48 FAX 619 692 0394 DOMINY & ASSOCIATES J002/027 S SOILS INVESTIGATION ST. ELIZABETH SETON CATHOLIC CHURCH S PROPOSED SANCTUARY BUILDING 6628 SANTA ISABEL STREET CARLSBAD5 CALIFORNIA S PROJECT NO. BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. 93-98A OCTOBER 1, 1993 11/16/2004 10:48 FAX 619 692 9394 DOMINY & ASSOCIATES Ij003/027 S TABLE OF CONTENTS SOILS INVESTIGATION Page Introduction --------------------------------------------------1 Field investigation -------------------------------------------1 and 2 Laboratory Tests ----------------------------------------------2, 3, and 4 DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Discussion of Soil Strata -------------------------------------4 and 5 Site Preparation ----------------------------------------------5, 6, and 7 Foundation Design ---------------------------------------------7 Resistance to Lateral Loads -----------------------------------7 and 8 Concrete Slabs-On-Grade ---------------------------------------8 Retaining Walls -----------------------------------------------8 and 9 Excavation ----------------------------------------------------9 Pavement Section Recommendations ------------------------------9, 10, and 11 Inspection During Grading -------------------------------------11 DRAWING TITLE Drawing Location of Test Borings --------------------------------------1 Summary Sheets: Boring 1 -------------------------------------------------2 Boring2 -------------------------------------------------3 Boring3 -------------------------------------------------4 Boring4 ------------------------------------------------- Consolidation Curves ------------------------------------------6 Typical Fill Prism --------------------------------------------7 APPENDICES Unified Soil Classification Chart -.A Standard Specifications For Placement of Compacted Filled Ground ---------------------------------------AA Sampling, Shear Tests, Consolidation Tests and Expansion Tests -----------------------------------------------B 11/16/2004 10:48 FAX 619 692 9394 D0IfINY & ASSOCIATES . ENTON ENGINEERING, INC. APPLIED SOIL MECHANICS - FOUNDATIONS 5540 RUFFIW ROAD SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92123 ESTABLISHED 1958 IM 004/027 PHILIP KENKING BENTON CIVIL ENGINEER NO. 10332 GEOTECHMCAL ENGINEER NO. 138 SOILS INVESTIGATION TELEPHONE (6191565-1955 FAX 16191 56&8719 In This report presents the results of a soils investigation conducted at the site of the proposed Sanctuary Building for the St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church. The Sanctuary Building site is located northeasterly of the existing church. It is understood that the Sanctuary Building-will be single level with wood-frame construction and concrete slabs-on-grade. The footprint of the building is approximately 140 feet by 180 feet. It is also understood that two site retaining walls are planned at the easterly side of the proposed S parking area. In order to determine the general subsurface conditions of the site and physical properties of the soils, four (4) exploratory borings were drilled. Pertinent soil parameters will be presented for the design of the proposed building and retaining walls. Field Investigation A total of four (4) exploratory borings were drilled 30 inches in diameter, with a truck-mounted, rotary, bucket-type drill rig outside the footprint of the proposed building. The approximate locations of the borings are shown on the attached Drawing 1 entitled "Location of Test Borings." Each boring was drilled to a depth of 10 feet. A continuous log of the soils encountered in the borings was recorded by our Certified Engineering Geologist, at the time of drilling and is shown in detail on Drawings 2 through 5, each 11/16/2004 10:49 FAX 619 692 9394 DOMINY & ASSOCIATES I005/O27 0 entitled "Summary Sheet." The soils were visually classified by field identification procedures in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification Chart. An abbreviated description of this classification system is presented in Appendix A. Undisturbed soil samples were obtained at intervals of 2 to 3 feet in the soils ahead of drilling. The drop weight used to drive the sampling tube into the soils was the "Kelly" bar of the drill rig which weighed 2218 pounds and the average drop was 12 inches. The drive energies in sampling are shown on the Summary Sheets and are given in foot-kips/foot. Represen- tative loose bulk samples were also obtained including a CBR sample near the center of the proposed parking area. The general procedures used in field sampling are described under "Sampling" in Appendix B. Laboratory Tests Laboratory tests were performed on each undisturbed sample in order to determine the dry density, moisture content,, and shearing strength. The results of these tests are presented on Drawings 2 through 5. Consolidation tests were performed on representative samples in order to determine the load-settlement characteristics of the soils and the results of these tests are presented graphically on Drawing 6 entitled "Consolidation Curves." The general procedures used for the laboratory tests are described briefly in Appendix B. Expansion tests were conducted on two (2) representative clayey soil samples found near the surface to determine their vertical expansion characteristics with change in moisture content. The undisturbed samples were allowed to dry in the air at 105°C for two days, then saturated while confined under a unit load of 500 pounds per square foot. The recorded 0 Percent Percent Expansion Moisture After After Soaking Penetration 5.82 27.9 11/10/2004 10:49 FAX 619 692 9394 DO1INY & ASSOCIATES I006/027 expansions are presented below: Boring Sample Depth Percent No. No. in Feet Soil Description Expansion 1 1 2.0 Silty Clay 6.00 2 1 2.0 Clay 7.23 The clayey soil samples encountered within the upper subgrade have medium expansion potential characteristics. Direct shear tests were performed on a representative undisturbed sample in order to determine the minimum angle of internal friction and apparent cohesion of the soil. The sample was saturated and drained prior to testing. The results of the test are presented below: Maximum Angle of Normal Shearing Internal Apparent Load Load Friction Cohesion fps/Sg.Ft. jps/Sg.Ft. Degrees Lbs/Sg.Ft. Boring: 3 0.5 2.10 33.5 1400 Sample: 1 1.0 2.12 Depth: 2.0' 2.0 3.11 In addition to the above laboratory tests a California Bearing Ratio (CBR) test was conducted on a bulk soil sample obtained within the upper one foot of subgrade within the area of the planned southern parking lot. The test was performed in accordance with City of San Diego standards. The test results are tabulated below: Initial Pene- Load in Moisture tra- Pounds on CBR Content tion 3 Sq.Inch % of % Dry Wt. Inch Pjr Std. 16.2 0.1 97 3.2 0.2 169 3.8 0.3 214 3.8 0.4 252 3.7 0.5 277 3.6 Molded CBR Dry Sample Density No. Lb/Cu.Ft. 1 118.2 A CBR of 3.2 will be used for preliminary pavement design. The clayey soils encountered within the upper subgrade are unfavorable for pavement. 0 The general procedures used for the laboratory tests are described 11/16/2004 10:49 FAX 619 692 9394 D0i1INY & ASSOCIATES l0O7/027 4- in Appendix B. DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The following conclusions and recommendations are professional opinions that are based upon the above field investigation, laboratory test results, and engineering analyses and calculations. These opinions have been derived in accordance with current standards of practice. No warranty is expressed or implied. The field investigation and laboratory test results indicate thatt:h'e edi in the test borings u isatthry ftfr?1iUOWM. In addition, a'n1s'ie tta Discussion of Soil Strata Loose, silty fine to medium sand fill soils were encountered within the upper 0.5 foot at Boring L Natural, very firm, silty clay was observed below the fill soils to a depth of 5.0 feet, which was underlain by very firm silt to 10.0 feet, the depth of investigation. The log of Boring 2 Indicates that natural, medium firm, clay was encountered to a depth of 0.5 foot and underlain by very firm clay to 10.0 feet, the limit of excavation. Natural, medium firm, silty clay was logged to a depth of 0.7 foot at Boring 3. Very firm, silty clay was encountered between the depths of 0.7 foot and 8.0 feet, and was underlain by very firm clayey silt to 10.0 feet, the .depth of investigation. Fill soils were observed to a depth of 3.0 feet at Boring 4. The fill soils consisted of loose, gravelly silty fine sand to 0.6 foot, and compact clay to 3.0 feet. Natural, very firm, silty fine sand was logged below 11/18/2004 10:50 FAX 619 692 9394 DOMINY & ASSOCIATES IM 008/027 -5- 3.0 feet to a depth of 10.0 feet, the extent of excavation. The natural soils encountered within the borings appear to be products of volcanic rock. Generally, the volcanic rock has weathered. However, at Boring 4 the volcanic rock was determined to be unweathered below 7.5 feet. The borings were drilled on September 21, 1993. Free ground water was not encountered in any of the borings drilled. Site Preparation Natural, very firm soils were encountered at depths of 0.5 foot, 0.5 foot, 0.7 foot, and 3.0 feet respectively, at Borings 1 through 4. However, these soils are not suitable for support of foundations or concrete slabs-on- grade, since they possess significant expansive characteristics. These soils are described as silty clay and clay. 0 e)1idLn. T Ijza.... thak.ea. A minimum 3 foot thickness of compacted filled ground soils shall be provided throughout the building prisms. Horizontal benching is required for slopes steeper than 10 (horizontal) to I (vertical). The first bench shall have a minimum width of 15 feet and extend a minimum of 2 feet into the firm natural soils. A typical fill prism is presented on Drawing 7. It depicts the minimum key and benching requirements for slopes steeper than 10 (horizontal) to 1 (vertical). It also shows the minimum compacted 11/16/2004 10:50 FAX 619 692 9394 D0?LINY & ASSOCIATES Lj009/027 -6- filled ground thickness in the building area. The compacted fill prism includes the footprint of the building and a minimum of 8 feet beyond the perimeter footings. The excavation of the loose to medium firm soils and expansive clayey soils shall include the footprint of the building and a horizontal distance equal to 5 feet plus the depth of fill beyond the perimeter footings of the building. Once the removal of the upper three (3) feet of soils is performed, then the exposed soils in the bottom of the excavation shall be scarified to a depth of 6 inches. These scarified soils shall be dried or moistened to achieve optimum moisture content. Then the exposed soils shall be compacted in-place to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum dry density as determined by ASIM 0 1557-78. Select, nonexpansive imported silty sand soils shall be placed and compacted within the upper three (3) feet of subgrade. It is recommended that all filled ground be placed and compacted in accordance with the "tandard Specifications For Placement of Compacted Filled Ground" in Appendix AA. The maximum vertical thickness of lifts shall be 6 inches after compaction. All compaction shall be done under continuous engineering inspection with reliable field density tests taken at intervals not to exceed 1.0 foot vertically and 100 feet horizontally. All field density tests shall verify that the soils are uniformly compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum drydensity. Select, imported nonexpansive silty sand soils shall be used to cap the upper three (3) feet of suhgrade which meet the following specifications: Gradation: 100 percent passing the 3-inch sieve. At least 50 percent passing the No. 4 sieve. Not more than 40 percent passing the 200 sieve. Angle of Internal Friction: Not less than 35 degrees. Apparent Cohesion: Not less than 250 pounds per square foot. 11/10/2004 10:50 FAX 619 892 9394 DOIHNY & ASSOCIATES IM 010/027 Expansion: Less than 2.0 percent. Maximum Dry Density: Not less than 118 pounds per cubic foot. Note: The angle of internal friction and apparent cohesion of the soils are determined in direct shear tests of samples remolded to 90 percent of maximum dry density, and saturated and drained prior to testing. The expansion is determined by remolding a soil sample to 92 percent of maximum dry density at optimum moisture content, air-dried for two days, then subjecting the sample to a vertical load of 500 pounds per square foot and saturating it. Foundation Design the lowest adjacent compacted filled ground surface 2Q1J10 npsuaee;4io the lowest adjacent compacted filled ground surface may be designed using an allowable soil bearing value of 2600m twpieerw bot. The allowable bearing values are for live and dead loads and may be increased one-third for combined live, dead, wind or seismic loads. The values above assume that select imported soils will be provided as fill. The settlement of a one foot wide continuous footing founded as recommended above, is estimated to be on the order of 1/8 to 1/4 inch under a load of 2000 pounds per square foot. The estimated settlement of a 4 foot wide square footing founded in the same manner and loaded to 2500 pounds per square foot is on the order of 1/4 to 3/8 of an inch. Resistance to Lateral Loads Lateral forces may be resisted by the passive soil pressure against the poured in-place vertical faces of the footings and by the sliding friction of the bottom of the footings. The passive soil reaction may be computed by assuming an equivalent fluid density of 250 pounds per cubic foot for the compacted filled ground soils. The resistance to sliding friction may be determined by assuming a slidin friction of 0.40 for the select compact filled ground soils. 11/16/2004 10:51 FAX 619 692 9394 DOMINY & ASSOCIATES 16011/027 Passive and sliding resistance may be used together, but it is recommended that the sliding coefficient be reduced to 0.27 when combined with passive soil pressures. Concrete Slabs-On-Grade Concrete slabs-on-grade shall have reinforcement as recommended by the Structural Engineer. A four-inch (4J1) thickness of clean sand shall underlay the slab and a suitable vapor barrier shall be placed at midheight within the sand. Regular control joints shall be provided to minimize shrinkage cracking. Retaining Walls Cantilever retaining walls backfilled with the select, imported silty sand soils and placed and compacted to a minimum 90 percent of maximum dry density, in accordance with the methods and inspection methods described in the uSite Preparation' section of this report, may be designed using S an equivalent fluid density of 35 pounds per cubic foot. A three (3) foot wide minimum width of select silty sand or pea gravel must be provided behind the wall in order to use this equivalent fluid density. The soil parameter given is for a level backfill condition and must be increased for sloping backfill conditions. If a 2 (horizontal) to 1 (vertical) sloping condition exists,then an equivalent fluid density of 50 pounds per cubic foot shall be used for design. To ensure that hydrostatic pressures do not develop behind the walls, an adequate drainage system must be installed behind the walls. This may be done by placing perforated pipe drains behind the wall and at least 1.0 foot below the proposed lowest adjacent finished elevation. The perforated pipe should be hackfilled with gravel a minimum of 1.0 foot around the pipe horizontally and 2.0 feet above the pipe vertically. A geotextile fabric is recommended to surround the gravel and drainage pipe. The drain system 11/16/2004 1051 FAX 619 692 9394 DOM]iNY & ASSOCIATES lj012/027 0 should discharge into a suitable outfall or drain. Weep holes at minimum intervals of 5 feet and pea gravel backfill may be used for exterior retaining walls if drainage can be appropriately controlled. The active pressures for the retaining walls shall be increased if the drainage provisions described above are not included. The above pressures for design of retaining walls must be increased if surcharge loads are caused by placement of stockpiled materials, equipment, or building loads near the top of the retaining wall that are located a horizontal distance from the top of the wall that is less than 1.5 times the height of the wall, or if the soil becomes saturated. Excavation It is recommended that temporary excavations be sloped at a ratio not exceeding 3/4 (horizontal) to 1 (vertical) up to a height of 8 feet from the bottom of the excavation. Safety requirements established by 051-IA or other reguhtory agencies may limit the type of excavation. It is assumed that no surcharge loads, such as stockpiled materials, equipment or crane loads will be placed closer to the top of any slope than a horizontal distance equal to the depth of excavation during construction. It is also assumed that the excavated slope will be prevented from being saturated during construction, and that free surface water will not be allowed to drain across the face of the slopes. Any field conditions deviating from these assumptions may require shoring. Pavement Section Recommendations A California Bearing Ratio (CBR) test was conducted on a representative subgrade soil sample in the area of the planned parking lot. The CBR test results indicated a design value of 3.2. The clayey soils do not possess favorable subgrade characteristics. The recommended asphaltic concrete pavement and base sections for proposed paved areas are based on a CBR value 11/16/2004 10:51 FAX 619 692 9394 DOMINY & ASSOCIATES 11013/027 _10- of 3.2 or greater. The pavement design for the automobile parking areas will be based on a wheel load of 4000 pounds. A design wheel load of 10,000 pounds is assumed for the traffic lane where heavy loads are anticipated. Light Auto Traffic Lane Design Wheel Load - Pounds 4,000 - 10,000 Asphaltic Concrete 2k" Base Course Materials 11" (Caltrans Class II aggregate base grada- tion with a minimum CBR of 80 at 95 percent of maximum dry density). On-site soils having a 611 6" minimum CBR of 6.0 excavated and recompacted to at least 95 percent of maximum dry density. During construction, the proposed paving areas should be uniformly . excavated to a depth equal to the combined total thicknesses of Lines (a), (b), and (c) shown above. The exposed surface should then be scarified to a depth of 6 inches, moistened or dried as necessary to an optimum moisture content and uniformly compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum dry density as determined by the ASIM 0 1557-78 method. All compaction shall be done under continuous engineering inspection, with reliable field density tests taken at intervals not to exceed 1.0 foot vertically and 100 feet horizontally. All field density tests shall verify that the soil is compacted to the specified minimum requirements. The maximum vertical thickness of lifts shall be 6 inches after compaction. Next, the on-site soils shall be placed as described above and each layer shall be uniformly compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum dry density up to the base course level. The base course shall then be imported and compacted at optimum moisture content to at least 0 11/16/2004 10:52 FAX 619 692 9394 DOMINY & ASSOCIATES JO14/O27 95 percent of maximum dry density, prior to the placement and compaction of the asphaltic concrete. Inspection During Grading During the grading of the site, the field conditions encountered may differ from those encountered in the limited locations explored and sampled in this investigation. It is important to anticipate that the conditions and soil types encountered in the course of construction may differ from those encountered in this investigation. It is, therefore, necessary that all footing excavations be inspected before placement of reinforcement to verify that soil types encountered are similar to those described in this investigation, and to verify that footings are placed to adequate depths in suitable bearing soils that are described in this report. If you have any questions regarding this report please contact us. Respectfully Submitted, BENTON ENGINEERING, INC- By nn H. Benton / No. 7.72 Reviewed by Sru H. Shu, Civil Engineer or Choi RL Geotechnical Engineer No. 772 Distribution: (2) St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church Attention: Mr. Ron Larose (4) Dominy and Associates JHBJSHS/jer Mr. Wayne Holtan 0 S S 11/16/2004 10:52 FAX 619 692 9394 DOMINY & ASSOCIATES EJ015/027 0 11/16/2004 10:52 FAX 619 692 9394 DOMINY & ASSOCIATES IJ016/027 12181 11/16/2004 10:53 FAX 619 692 9394 DOMINY & ASSOCIATES [1 Ui SUMMARY SHEET SHEET — __}-. sornNG NO.2 m co .to >o 060 cc Z Dry, Medium Firm - - 1 Merges Olive, Moist, Very Fircn Ifl 2 Maroon Color Streaks 4.4 26.6 97.4 0.98 6.7 24.0 O45 2.65 5- 6- : 7- iLl 19-8108.0 2.54 10- IPL.Q 2..63 Stop at 10' ..... PROJEW BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. - J=3 DnAWINQ NO. 121813 11/16/2004 10:53 FAX 619 692 9394 DOMINY & ASSOCIATES FJo18/027 0 ul JW SUMMARY SHEET ul A. m CD Ou. GORING NO. 3 WD Oo I- -- -, 0 OZ > w°- ftg 0 1- 2® 3- 5- ::® 8— 9 - - 10•- Gray Brown, Dry, Medium Fim Slightly Moist, Very Finn Moist Gray Brown, Moist, Very FInD, Some Very Fine Sand Size Grains Stop at 10' 4.41 22.61 96.915.72 SILTY CLAY I 5.712181100.71 3.93 8.9131-2196.812-99 CLAYEY SILT 4 .45 PROJECT NO. I L._I3ENTON ENGINEERIWG,1NC,L.. DRAWING NO. _j 11/16/2004 10:53 FAX 619 692 9394 DOLINY & ASSOCIATES 0019/021 0 S ....,.. . TYPICAL FILL PRISM FOR CUE/FILL CUNDITION SELECT ON-SITE SILTY SAND (SM) SOILS UPPER 3 FEET COMPACTED 13' Fill. i tFill / / 2 -y -: - whichever is PROJECTED PLANE __•____•__•_•____•_• greater I to 1 Maximum from Toe of Slope to Approved Ground \. REMOVE - .---.----- - UNSUITABLE NATURAL "- ç;i . MATERIAL GROUND 4 A MIN. BENCH BENCH HEIGHT VARIES 21 MIN I 15' MIN. SUIT-ABLE BEARING SOILS KEY . r LOWEST BENCH ' DEPTH (KEY) PROJECT NO. BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. DRAWING iot Laboontora C111tt,oO Corrects Cr - - GIctotci than 4 ((in)2 0 C ' IltIn I and 3 S x Do 0 Idol mectonO all yrodatbeal T10I)iiitsaist1150 for G W Arloltlma 101,1102 below Above. A l, A' Irac. or I'1 mo mint Pt bolero 9 lhorm 4 nnd 7 nrc 0 — #siicrber01lIn,ubosrc bed t'l oar - nequilny use or duel lmn04,Il 5eolcrth:ti7 rZ cc 0 C - C-re.atcr lIlac 6 - 11 C -i? Beiween I mmmd 3 S — Not rmelii3O xii a4stion ,n110ilwmenu for 3W — S iv.smtamc hm,10 tedow Abotsc A lisle to 10; yu AlIncoo PJicnl cr1311 with Pt bronco 4 and 7 are AIIIbcle bouts twifrse of br,thrloorr ccs Irosr o00h Ft Coal 1)-Ibo) 0,50111 tiri .— Conizoong 004111 It Ocitat lmt's'l 1,4114 = 77 ltsit4nr11 and d121.lm)ma all, E. "."t at -!or 0001 -- =t.=4= = oil 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Liquid 1lmi Plasticity chart bU 50 Lei >< FE S Unified Soi Classification lian Jeecccu:nc Sici4 Idonil50 ,717:5-5., (EXCIU01Wt p larger 1114fl3 00.004 bcOo11U ZC1kWI on Symbol Typical Nilitien 141 - to) 10 tired Inc all- .0 Wide, range in Brain ncc and substantial VOCII traded irmveto, nrecl- toed oniziurct. little or no C 0 00000)011 01 011 101001J0edl0tc pfl2l$tic 01000 GP Ibm Give typical name: Indicate ap Ii . proxámole pcecclouiccc CI 50111 0 — .E and tve1: mmm e: 0ta5oa10ru, narfoce condition. Pia4ommnUy cite nice or 0 inlays of atom — Poorly y,aa141 nVCL11. rnocI- .w . with tome inisrinediam niom ntoiauis candndxturcl,flhtfeorncofone11 end hardness of the coaree rirt local or ok,oic name N cp- 0rt'°° — GM Silty 0 00404Infor-hilnis: c! H And other pertinent VcLcTiTIlIvc and syla"14 In ! 2, 5 pbrenthasea Plo ctlnth.ridcciiitcn1ionprcolinto, Clove, nveto, nrly articled .5° For undl11lurbndele add tto)0m0 see CL iteiaw CC gin'sl.saod.cfeym,ximeo ticrn on tlraLjzlcntloll. CIiiree of toomr0100inom. c00010Itianlm. 111111001110 tolidllilflis slid sards, fit if. or so , :; :: -Amounts OF all intermediate ji~ticia SW Dn :5tcuY 11 $trr:orod, 5r vcjly about 20% hard. angular rnccP ponds, nmslinun, tounded -ln. sac: --.-.- ?ndnfltnflriflhly one sizr era mane at Sizes SP Peony anile1 sand,. stonily (in)0 OublinlolOr OOIIII and nraont a 11 with 5.01000 ICLCImed,IiIe oem roads. little or no nitouilio.io'ullS%nnn. Nonp14icr,ec lIt' Ic lana.oi pm. Oh eanao,piolv 0101 1 mod- ::t'°:'11,tc:11 Gp:;d:.: (SM) - - E PlasticIbrin.c(InrIdeeliIicatrcsnprocndui Clayey starlds. poorly 0r012r.d nec CL bcIoa) SC nd.v x,ixlors, 2 Jcicnhif,catinn mucedOrts on Fraction Stroller 11,00 No. 411 Shoe Site Dry Strenlh Dito 70081r04on lCrUthIn lc0140nterlry c10rtcIr. tb01 0501 piande 1011cd limit) — a .0 Non, lii . O,nCI to 1500000115 111t, cod Vssr roe Qj"e iodiciti0dctrvc 11 Misfit jJo)* None ML 00141k. ii001, lltocr, itr.1_v i slayry Ole 110002 0011hz ihkhl 54,4 :llxrad101 Ut PLO.tiil.il), ,i,i,oa 11403 It150,,flhitil 11310 oh ht' - 0, ___________ - Pl5lii1t)4 _.____._ COz1100 ararr,t COlour 14 0003 Medium to Nast to I ion 540111 of laos or. xocd,w•n pla.st,14l. Starchy 0 0 .0 - etindbiltic. iltlour if 31117, nod or OcobDais earns. end 0011cr p0011. .9 high very itto clays. sandy clay). silly clays, 45110 der.carperve ifllortt..ori, lean clays and symbol on porenahenea ;1 For Unditrurbed soils .111 l,ilc. 51"Rin to Tried-.- -Slow Ohinlal OL 1, jr silts slid twgubi' sill. Organ Q. c onladin or structure. 3102l,t,04. 5Jgl.l to medium Slew to font Slight nmctiign — MM -'-------r gill', r2401011051 Or d,armmocrot1 line tardy or ra,rnultli1'inlC0. moisture - slur,. C0004r4tn5v In undinluibed sill), WiA. clavic gifts and dralisega conditions Ihlyhia None . 10 .... - T,frA0ic clays of l.,ah 750$- a S 'Cry liit, — tidily. jet cltoyo . 101t'0 5xamph C14soro aPr h,nfl slightly -C 01 lt,xtitr C'tsanic Seth .00100101510 I None CO ill$1ll 5(0 hoyti I cry- &ion rmcdlurr R&hily lde,uii,ed by colao,. Odus. spongy ftC) tad (rs.loenlly by flbrtorae I I5110to On Pa U;gunitclays Or lfl011tUII5 ID 1410 plastic ly Peat nod nih-s hialily organic solo ,,mPfltuctoutC5O rtical root hIlls,: 11cr,. itol dry in place: lone;: 4PIIL) 101 laboratory classification 01 fine grained S011a f,oros1,r rl,.a0ino ct000. SiiL poinanlhrif d,arncueriniies of two wouirls are designated fp combbnolions of snoop nymobcolt. For cazanple C li-CC. well nrnded ymsel-astod mixture with Char butler. All title Si)0S 011 this, 54,001 are U.S. 550.00004. fkld idno,ltotromioo prnrclurc for non 0rinrd Sells or Farsioqj Tlmesn pt,ccllIite$ 01000 be perboramad on the tonal No. 411 lien sift parliclm.opproxomaiehy t, in. For lie) claslEical ion purpc110t. 050250100 is not intended. Ilorbply by basIl ,h,c,,acct poriklco that iDlttfnrn with lion Costa. Dl)u,aurr I ltcal:i ire Ill 51130.00): ),-f .Plrtoo-rh (Crushing çlr000clent11Cn) Too,vlcaa., (Cn.ltis.acetors near plaStiC limit): ,111150 si.i; p311ic100 oar cor than No. 40 noose size.. pietistic a pal of .Aftor romoylnr. particles larger than No. 40 sleoc 41120. Mould in 71050111011 Allen srr,.d'110I00 710115100 loroco 11100 111: No. 05 size. n spccirnzn or mtlli still 011th 4 volume of nboUl OIitttahf "We inch. Add Cfli2uClt 50 tile sonh.ticn r at ploily. Sliding 2101cr II necnl$0r.s. Allow the 7531 to loll Obeiti olto.ln,l( tort cribs in ores, to moulded bathe ci,lotoslsrocv or 11)11011 ,,r105130v Ill antic 114711011 soft but n0l.lid)ey. Irs- cr100ptcicle tso OrsOn. sun an air Irving. end alien lest its slrer.itth by 7110U1. If trio It'). women arsisot be odOr) and it ltiliy. lhc mpec,mr,on 3'120e his 7,34 41010 0 ,5.' palrnot ate hsrOl nn,ldhin lrorrzanlfthiy.eirluiill5 tircaki,mg 01111 crinnoDlrn) between the knees,. lint slrenoh IS )o1051010 tI,criilll be tprcnd 41010050 hun ht'ct arid nhl0ad to ititc 20.1,15 :,rc,r.,ure r,o,r.nsI tc2rl,Sl the t,11onr hand .srvtral liens,, A 10o)Iiee 1)0511100 Cl Clot eha,051er nnd qilutllile of (I.' colloidal basSoon 0051010CC In the by ssAponaubnts. 7hsrs lIon 1171)010055 in rolled Out bv hood on a 511,00(11 00,1141015 0,1 Ills npt'cssrun)0 or was" on she surlr.tn of Cut pal 'blob Soil. The dr-o S,r,01I,t)i increases 'slob irlcrea51t00 plaslidil_y. turti,te at betace, the pIinO •nio o hhrsad about anr-elzhil inch in rl,nnoern to .5 l,Sorr 010115r3tdney or,.1 br:crmm glitnl,. WOos,. (tic eamplc Ifioli dry nl,to,011, iv chtonc,omislix for clans or the CII oroup. A typical ftnarnrosep . The ;t,mcu,t lu il,sn (rrldod and in-nailed rejocatrdls. bacon1 squeezed lnlwrrn use40ere. 1150 OOICS and ghost dierppoat lit,.', hl,c i0000nnie 0111 romotsoces only very,ltitil sirs strength. Silly blast sands this olr0tclpulatinln Its mfmi5151ee ror.lsrin it gradually rn'.lutied and lIt tllrlala. she pill ililJelll and 01531y It crocks at cos:nibIc. The rophitcy anti oil 111,5cc nt,oul jilt 1011110 Slight L1r7 iOcrtl,, but can be ,'liiir,;uisttod nPcCirO0l' irfltrlt. finally lose, its plasticity. and crurrtbics v.1,cn tIc 01 optaolmuurlld of water duringshatutse and of its dmsapj'carallze during by she Ice) s'llsn powcleliny (he nibicd specnnrics. Pine send Seth gritty 71120110 limit is readied. 14.lecZinI 041151 it. banonlisoing One chatoCe, of the (ones 115 a soil. wbscces a typical eilt has the smooch Joel or floor. After lie lbortad crumbles, the pieces aliotilll be 1000pm5 1000110cr and a Vcry lins clean nandt cisc tht quickest and iho051.d.utijrm5l W5chbo)n h.creaS Might tlsesdir0 action coal issued until the lump crumbles- is 'I4s5Iit cmv boo, ne. macnon. lnor50tlic sills. each odd typical rock Tilt milliner (Cm llonnool 0,00, tIne plastic tumit and (ho sliCer thollnrop when nosy. lIon- a rtosilnrntely quick reactions. It tiulilly err.nibls.c, lint more pots.'5 II rirs colloidal cloy hash014 in (be "Ill. Wknsva of the truc3a or the p100ibe limit and quick t,n or crihcnenlOn nf the lump bolos she plastic 11,nin indhnln :lOret inorganic clxv (if low pbanmielmy. or nomirrlabs ouch its kuohinm.typs tiny, and organic CmoS ,vliheb Occur bohr's tIme A-lice. lushly ,nilnrtit Clays have 0 sorry ucCOlt and 07,0010 (rot at the plrlslkli,nIL 11/16/2004 10:55 FAX 610 692 0394 DOMINY & ASSOCIATES Ij023/027 ENTQN ENGINEERING, INC. APPLIED SOIL MECHANICS- FOUNDATIONS 5540 RIJFFIN ROAD SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92123 ESTABLISHED 1956 APPENDIX AA PHILIP HENKIWGGENTON CIVIL ENGINEER NO 10332 STANDARD SPECIFICATI ONS FOR PLACEMENT TELEPHONE i819 565-1955 FAX (619) 56S-671 9 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER NO. 138 OF COMPACTED FILLED GROUND General Description - The objective is to assure uniformity and adequate internal strength in filled ground by proven engineering procedures and 4. tests so that the proposed structures may be safely supported. The procedures include the clearing and grubbing, removal of existing structures, preparation of land to be filled, filling of the land, the spreading, and compaction of the filled areas to conform with the lines, grades, and slopes as shown on the accepted plans. The recommendations contained in thee preliminary Soils Investigation report for this site and/or in the attached special provisions are a part of these specifications and shall supersede the provisions contained hereinafter in the case of a conflict. The owner shall employ a qualified soils engineer to inspect and test the filled ground as placed to verify the uniformity of compaction of filled ground to the specified 90 percent of maximum dry density. The grading contractor shall have the responsibility of notifying the soils engineer 48 hours or more in advance of the start of any clearing or site preparation so that the soils engineer and/or his field representative will be able to schedule the manpower for the required S inspections. The soils engineer shall advise the owner and grading contractor immediately if any unsatisfactory, conditions are observed to exist and shall have the authority to reject the compacted filled ground until such time that corrective measures are taken necessary to comply with the specifications. It shall be the sole responsibility of the grading contractor to achieve the specified degree of compaction. No deviation from these specifications will be allowed, except if amended by written instructions signed by the responsible soils engineer. Clearing, Grubbing, and Preparing Areas to be Filled All brush, vegetation and any rubbish shall be removed, piled and disposed of either off site in a legal disposal pit or in a sDecified permanent approved landscape area so as to leave the areas to be filled for approved structural support free of vegetation and debris. Any soft, swampy or otherwise unsuitable areas shall be corrected by draining or removal, or both. All loose fill, topsoil, alluvial deposits or other unsatisfactory soil shall be removed to the limits determined by the soils engineer. Subdrainage systems shall be installed In the bottom of all canyon areas and in areas whenever ground water conditions are likely to develop beneath the compacted fill soils. 0 (8/27/87) S 11/16/2004 10:56 FAX 619 692 9394 DOTiLINY & ASSOCIATES Q024/027 APPENDIX AA -2- The natural ground which is determined to be satisfactory for the support of the filled ground shall then be plowed or scarified to a depth of at least six inches (6"), and until the surface is free from ruts, hummocks, or other uneven features which would tend to prevent uniform compaction by the equipment to be used. Where fills are made on hillsides or exposed slope areas, greater than 10 percent, horizontal benches shall be cut into firm undisturbed natural ground in order to provide both lateral and vertical stability. This is to provide a horizontal base so that each layer is placed and compacted on a horizontal plane. The initial bench at the toe of the fill shall be at least 10 feet in width on firm undisturbed natural ground at the elevation of the design toe stake placed at the natural angle of repose or design slope. Offset stakes shall be provided to leave in as reference stakes for the construction of the filled ground slopes. The soils engineer shall determine the width and frequency of all succeeding benches which will vary with the soil conditions and the steepness of slope. After the natural ground has been prepared, it shall then be brought to a moisture content at a few percent above optimum moisture and compacted to not less than ninety (90%) percent of maximum density in accordance with ASTM D 1557-78 method that uses 25 blows of a 10 pound rammer falling from 18 inches on each of 5 layers in a 4-inch diameter cylindrical mold of a 1/30th cubic foot volume. 3. Fill Materials and Special Requirements - The fill soils shall consist of select materials so graded that at least 40 percent of the material passes a No. 4 sieve. This may be obtained from the excavation of banks, borrow pits or any other approved sources and by mixing soils from one or more sources. The material used shall be free from vegetable matter, and other deleterious substances, and shall not contain rocks, or lumps, or cobbles of greater than 8 inches in diameter. If excessive vegetation, larger diameter cobbles, rocks and boulders, or soils with inadequate strength or other unacceptable physical characteristics are encountered, these shall be disposed of in waste areas as shown on the plans or as directed by the soils engineer. If, during grading operations, soils not encountered and tested in the preliminary investigation are found, tests on these soils shall be performed to determine their physical characteristics. Any special treatment recommended in the preliminary or subsequent soil reports not covered herein shall become an addendUm to these specifications. The testing and specifications for the compaction of subgrade, subbase, and-base materials for roads, streets, highways, or other public property or rights-of-way shall be in accordance with those of the governmental agency having jurisdiction. (8/27/87) BENTON ENGINEERING. INC. 11/10/2004 10:66 FAX 619 692 9394 DOMINY & ASSOCIATES j025/027 APPENDIX AA -3- 4. Placing, Spreading, and Compacting Fill Materials (a) For mass grading, suitable fill material shall be placed in loose layers, moistened to 2 to 4 percent above optimum moisture content, and which, when compacted, shall not exceed six inches (6"). Each layer shall be spread evenly and shall be thorougly mixed during the spreading to ensure uniformity of material and moisture in each layer. For compacted filled ground placed and compacted for subgrade support, for base and pavement under roadways and parking areas, the 6-inch thick layers of compacted filled ground to be placed and compacted within the upper 2 feet of finished grade shall be moistened to optimum moisture content, based on the ASTh D 1557-78 method and each layer shall be compacted to at least either 90 or 95 percent of maximum dry density as specified in the accompanying soils investigation report or specific project specifications, or as specified by the governmental agency. When the moisture content of the fill material is below that specified by the soils engineers water shall be added until the moisture content is at the moisture as specified by the soils engineer to assure thorough bonding and uniform densification during the compacting process S (d) When the moisture content of the fill material is above that specified by the soils engineer, the fill material shall be aerated by blading and scarifying or other satisfactory methods until the moisture content is at the moisture as specified by the soils engineer. After each layer has been placed, mixed and spread evenly, it shall be thoroughly compacted to not less than ninety (90%) percent of. maximum density in accordance with ASTM 0 1557-78 method as described in 2(e) above. Compaction shall be accomplished with sheepsfoot rollers, multiple-wheel pneumatic-tired rollers, or other apprOved types of compaction equipment, such as vibratory equipment that is specially designed for certain soil types. Rollers shall be of such design that they will be able to compact the fill material: to the specified density. Rolling shall be accomplished while the: fill material is at the specified moisture content. Rolling of- each layer shall be continuous over its entire area and the roller shall make sufficient trips to ensure that the desired density has been attained. The entire areas to be filled shall be compacted. Fill slopes shall be compacted by means of sheepsfoot rollers or other suitable equipment. The sloping surface shall be cat-tracked daily while the fill soils are still at field moisture conditions, 2 to 4 percent above optimum. Compacting operations shall be continued until materials within the outer 1.5 feet are uniformly compacted to 85 percent of maximum dry density or greater, unless . (8/27/87) 8NTON ENGINEERING. INC. 11/16/2004 10:57 FAX 619 692 9394 DOMINY & ASSOCIATES EjO26/o27 APPENDIX AA .4- a different relative degree of compaction is specified by the local governing agency. Compacting of the slopes shall be accomplished by backrolling the slopes in increments of 3 to 5 feet in elevation gain or by other methods producing satis- factory results. Field density tests shall be taken by the soils engineer for approximately each foot in elevation gain after compaction, but not to exceed two feet in vertical height between tests. Field density tests may be taken at intervals of 6 inches in elevation gain if required by the soils engineer. The location of the tests in plan shall be so spaced to give the best possible coverage and shall be taken no farther apart than 100 feet. Tests shall be taken on corner and terrace lots for each two feet in elevation gain. The soils engineer will take additional tests as considered necessary to check on the uniformity of compaction of the exposed slope areas as well as in the building prism areas.. Where sheepsfoot rollers are used, the tests shall be taken in the compacted material below the disturbed surface. No additional layers of fill shall be spread until the field density tests indicate that the specified density has been attained. The fill operation shall be continued in six inch (6") compacted layers as specified above, until the fill has been brought to the finished slopes and grades as shown on the accepted plans. . 5. Inspection - Sufficient inspection by the soils engineer shall be maintatned during the filling and compacting operations so that the specified inspection and field density tests can be reported to the governmental agencies upon the completion of grading. Seasonal Limits - No fill material shall be placed, spread, or rolled if weather conditions increase the moisture content above permissible limits. When the work is interrupted by rain, fill operations shall. not be resumed until field tests by the soils engineer indicate that the moisture content and density of the fill are as previously specified- All reconuiendations presented in the "Conclusions" section of the attached (preliminary) soils report are a part of these specifications. 0 (8/27/87) BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. 11/10/2004 1057 FAX 819 692 9394 DOIIIINY & ASSOCIATES BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. . APPLIED SOIL MECI-IANICS -FOUNDATIONS 5540 RUFFIN ROAD SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92123 ESTABLISHED 1956 PHILIP HENKING9ENTON APPENDIX B CIVIL ENC1INEERNO. 10332 GEOTECI4I4ICAL ENGINEER NO, 138 Sampling Q027/027 TELEPHONE (619) 565.1956 FAX (619) 565-8719 The undisturbed soil samples are obtained by forcing a special sampling tube into the undisturbed soils at the bottom of the boring at frequent intervals below the ground surface. The sampling tube consists of a steel barrel 3.0 inches outside diameter, with a special cutting tip on one end and a double-ball valve on the other and with a lining of twelve thin brass rings, each one inch long by 2.42 inches inside diameter. The sampler, connected to a twelve inch long waste barrel, is either pushed or driven approximately 18 inches into the soil and a six-inch section of the center portion of the sample is taken for laboratory tests the soil being still confined in the brass rings, after extraction from the sampler tube. The samples are taken to the laboratory in close-fitting waterproof containers in order to retain the field moisture until completion of the tests. The driving energy is calculated as the average energy in foot-Ups required to force the sampling tube through one foot of soil at the depth at which the sample is obtained, Shear Tests S The shear tests are run using a direct shear machine of the strain control type in which the rate of deformation is approximately 0.05 inch per minute. The machine is so designed that the tests are-made without removing the samples from the brass liner rings in which they are secured. Each sample is sheared under a normal load equivalent to the weight of the soil above the point of sampling. In some instances, samples are sheared under various normal loads in order to obtain the internal angle of friction and cohesion. Where considered necessary, samples are saturated and drained before shearing in order to simulate extreme field moisture conditions. Consolidation Tests The apparatus used for the consolidation tests is designed to receive one of the one-inch high rings of soil as it comes from the field. Loads are applied in several increments to the upper surface of the test specimen and the resulting deformations are recorded at selected time intervals for each increment. Generally, each increment of load is maintained on the sample until the rate of deformation is equal to or less than 1/10000 inch per hour. Porous stones are placed in contact with the top and bottom of each specimen o permit the ready addition or release of water, Exoansion.Tests One-inch high samples confined in the brass rings are permitted to air dry at 105° F for at least 48 hours prior to placing into the expansion apparatus. A unit load of 500 pounds per square foot is then applied to the upper porous stone in contact with the top of each sample. Water is permitted to contact both the top and bottom of each sample through porous stones. Continuous observations are made until downward movement stops. Therdia) reading is recorded and expansion is recorded until the rate of upward movement is less than 1/10000 'inch per hour. ATTACHMENT B Exploration Logs 0 S n S Co ........... Testing & Engineering, Inc. .. nstruction CT 121 . . .......... . 1441 Moritiel Rd Ste 115, Escondido, CA 92026 Ph (760) 746-4955 DEFINITION OF TERMS PRIMARY DIVISIONS SYMBOLS SECONDARY DIVISIONS GRAVELS CLEAN 1' 'j LVV WELL GRADED GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND MIXTURES LITTLE ORNO FIN ES 'GRAVELS 'r .. FOORLY GRADED GRAVELS OR GRAVEL SAND MIXTURES, z HALF OF MTN <5%F COARSE LITTLE OF NO FINES FRACTION ir-11 SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND-SILT MIXTURES, 0 0 Is -J °) LARGER THAN NO. 4 SIEVE GRAVELS WITH FINES NON-PLASTIC FINES CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND-CLAY MIXTURES, PLASTIC FINES __________ SANDS ______ CLEAN _______ .. WELL GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SANDS, LITTLE OR NO 12 < Q_j 0 wMORE THAN FINES SANDS POORLY GRADED SANDS GRAVELLY SANDS LITTLE OR <Owz COARSE 1111 SILTY SANDS SAND-SILT MIXTURES, NON-PLASTIC PINES 8 FRACTION IS SMALLER THAN SANDS WITH FINES NO. 4 SIEVE NO. SANDS, SAND-CLAY MIXTURES, PLASTIC FINES 1W 1111 INORGANIC SILTS, VERY FINE SANDS ROCK FLOUR, SILTY o ILTS AND CLAY OR CLAY EYFINE SANDS, SLIGHTLY PLASTIC CLAYEY SILTS CL INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOWTO MEDIUM PLASTICITY 0 LL _J LU LIQUID LIMIT IS GRAVELLY, SANDY, SILTSORLEAN CLAYS I ORGANIC SILTSANDORGANICCLAYSOFLOWFLASTICITY LLJ Of U) Fn zZ2o I INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUSOR DIATOMACEOUSFINE SILTSANDCLAYS I LC SANDYOR SILTYSOILS,ELA&IC SILTS LIQUID LIMIT IS INORGANIC CLAYSOF HIGH PLASTICITY, FAT CLAYS zo~— z u G ATE RE R THAN 50 ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO HIGH PLASTICITY, ORGANIC SILTYCLAYS HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS ___ PEAT AND OTHER HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS GRAIN SIZES I SAND BOULDERS L COBBLES . GRAVEL SILTS AND CLAYS COARSE I FINE COARSE I MEDIUM I FINE CLEAR SQUARE SIEVE OPENING U.S STANDARD SIEVE SIZE ADDITIONAL TESTS (OTHER THAN TEST PIT AND BORING LOG COLUMN HEADINGS) MAX- Md mum Dry Deity PM- P&miIity PP- Pocket Penetrometer GS- Gran SIze Diribution SO- Specific Graiity WA- W Anyas SE- Said Equivalent HA- Hydrometer DS- Direct SheEr El- Expand on Index AL-Attateg Limits UC- Unconfined Compression CHM- Sulfate and Chloride RV- R-Value MD- Moiure'Dty Content, pH, Resistivity CN- Consolidation M- Moisture COR- Corroavity CP- Col l apse Potential SC- Swel Compression SD- SanpleDiurbai HG- HydrocoIIse 01- Organic Impurities REM- Remolded FIGURE:I BLI I I Construction Testing & Engineering, inc. CTEINc 1441 Monti Rd Ste 115, Escondido, CA 92026 Ph (760) 746-4955 FROECT: DRILLER: -IEET: of CTEJ3B NO: DRILL METHOD: DRILLING DATE: LOGGED BY: SAMPLE METHOD: ELEVATION: o m o m Fa o a . o Cl) !• 0 BORING LEGEND Laboratory Tests DESCRI P11 ON - 1 0 — — - Block or Chunk Sample - - - Bulk Sanpie — — .5- - — — - Stadad Penetration Test 10- - - / - - ModifieJ Split-Bard Drive Sampler (Cal Sanpia) — — - I — - Thin WdledArmy Corp. of Encn -sSanple — — 15- - - Groundwater Table — - IMF - --------------------------------------------------------------------------— Soil Type or Classification Change 20- 1 Fornion Chaicie [(Approxime boundaries queried (?)1 — - SM Quotes are pIaed wound dficionswhe-e the mils 25- Existin situ as bedrock FIGU RE: I BL2 I I I 49~~- Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. CT:E 1441 Montiel Rd Ste 115, Escondido, CA 92026 Ph (760) 7464955 PROJECT: SAINT ELIZABETH DRILLER: BAJA EXPLORATION SHEET: 1 of CTE JOB NO: 1O-15840G DRILL METHOD: HOLLOW-STEM AUGER DRILLING DATE: 12/18/2020 LOGGED BY: A,B SAMPLE METHOD: RING, SPT and BULK ELEVATION: -516 FEET -9 - I I 0 BORING: B-i Laboratory Tests 6 c' 0 B - pp DESCRIPTION 0- - - - - - - Gravel: 0-6 CL QUATERNARY PREVIOUSLY PLACED FILL: - Stiff, slightly moist, olive brown, fine grained sandy CLAY. El - - - - - MESOZOIC METASEDIMENTARY AND METAVOLCANIC R - \Very dense, slightly moist, olive brown, metavolcanic rock that • - excavates to silty fine to medium grained SAND, severely weathered. Total Depth: 8.2' (Refusal on bedrock) -10 - - No Groundwater Encountered -15 -26 - 2 I B-i ATTACHMENT C Laboratory Results [1 0 '2~~ CmrEi,,, Job Name: Job No: 10-15840G Lab No: 31613 Soil Location: B-i @ 0-5' Soil Description: CL St. Elizabeth Tested By: KN Date Sampled: 12/18/2020 Date Tested: 12/21/2020 LAB WORK SHEET EXPANSION INDEX TEST ASTM D 4829 TEST RESULTS Initial Final WET WEIGHT (g) 185.6 352.0 DRY WEIGHT (g) 163.5 277.0 % MOISTURE (%) 13.5 27.1 WEIGHT OF RING & SOIL (g) 7293 WEIGHT OF RING (g) 365.3 WEIGHT OF SOIL (lbs.) 0.8025 VOLUME OF RING (ft. 3) 0.0073 WET DENSITY (pcf) 110.4 DRY DENSITY (pcf) 1 97.2 % SATURATION (%) 1 50.0 EXPANSION READING DATE TIME: INITIAL READINGINCH 10.01181 VERY LOW 0-20 LOW 21-50 MEDIUM 51 -90 FINAL READING HIGH 91-130 10.11011 VERY HIGH 130> EXPANSION INDEX______ I 98 I NOTES: Equipment Id: 2A El at saturation between 48-52% Measured El: 98.3 Measured Saturation: 50.0 El at 48-52% Saturation:I 98 1 0