Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
CT 2021-0005; CHINQUAPIN COAST HOMES; SHORING DESIGN CALCULATIONS; 2023-10-23
SHORING DESIGN GROUP 7727 Caminito Liliana| San Diego, CA 92129| phone (760) 586-8121 Email: rreed@shoringdesign.com October 23, 2023 Mr. Mark Elliott Office (760) 722‐1400 Elliott Drilling Services, Inc. Fax (760) 722‐1404 1342 Barham Drive San Marcos, CA 92078 Re: 330 Chinquapin JOB #22‐150 Carlsbad, California Subject: Permanent Shoring Design Submittal Dear Mr. Elliott: Upon your request, please find the revised permanent shoring design calculations for the above referenced project. Should you have any additional questions or comments regarding this matter, please advise. Sincerely, SHORING DESIGN GROUP, Roy P. Reed, P.E. Project Engineer Encl: Design Calculations THESE PLANS/DOCUMENTS HAVE BEENREVIEWED FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THEAPPLICABLE CALIFORNIA BUILDING STANDARDSCODES AS ADOPTED BY THE STATE OFCALIFORNIA AND AMENDED BY THEJURISDICTION. PLAN REVIEW ACCEPTANCE OFDOCUMENTS DOES NOT AUTHORIZECONSTRUCTION TO PROCEED IN VIOLATION OFANY FEDERAL, STATE, NOR LOCAL REGULATION.BY: _________________ DATE: ________________ True North Compliance Services, Inc. THIS SET OF THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONSMUST BE KEPT ON THE JOB SITE AT ALL TIMESAND IT IS UNLAWFUL TO MAKE ANY CHANGESOR ALTERATIONS WITHOUT PERMISSION FROMTHE CITY. OCCUPANCY OF STRUCTURE(S) ISNOT PERMITTED UNTIL FINAL APPROVAL ISGRANTED BY ALL APPLICABLE DEPARTMENTS. Alex Wu 11/29/2023 CT2021-0005 SHORING DESIGN GROUP 7727 Caminito Liliana| San Diego, CA 92129| phone (760) 586-8121 Email: rreed@shoringdesign.com Permanent Shoring Design Calculations 330 Chinquapin Carlsbad, California October 23, 2023 SDG Project # 22‐150 Table of Contents: Section Shoring Plans: ........................................................................................................................... 1 Permanent Shoring Load Parameters: ..................................................................................... 2 Soldier Beam #1‐12 (H=5’ PERMANENT CONDITION, with Building & Wall Surcharge): .......... 3 Soldier Beam #13‐23, 30‐34 (H=6’, with Building & Wall Surcharge): ...................................... 4 Soldier Beam #24‐29 (H=5’, with Building & Wall Surcharge): ................................................. 5 Lagging Design: ........................................................................................................................ 6 Soldier Beam Schedule: ............................................................................................................ 7 Geotechnical Report: ............................................................................................................... 8 - Section 1 ROY P. REED R.C.E. 80503 EXP. 3-31-2025 DATE 10/23/2023 R IOFTA A NILFOEATS C N GN LANOFOP I I R R SS EE E EDERETSIGER DEREP.OR Exp. C 80503 3/31/25 LIVIC Y 7727 CAMINITO LILIANA SAN DIEGO, CA 92129, (760)586-8121 E G G S C W X XXXXXX X X XX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXX X X X X X EXISTING 2 STORY BUILDING EXISTING 2 STORY BUILDING EXISTING 2 STORY BUILDING EXISTING 2 STORY BUILDING EXISTING 2 STORY BUILDING EXISTING 1 STORY BUILDING SHED 3' WOOD FENCE 8' WROUGHT IRONFENCE6' WOOD FENCE6' WOOD FENCE6' WOOD FENCE 6' WOOD FENCE 6' WOOD FENCE 6' WOOD FENCE 3' WOOD FENCE 6' WOOD FENCE X X X X X X 53 53 52 52 52 52 52 51 51 51 5 1 51 50 50 50 50 50 49 49 49 49 49 49 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 48 47 47 47 47 47 47 47 46 46 46 46 46 45 4545 45 44 44 44 44 43 42 FL=48.27 FL=47.40 FL=46.20 FL=46.14 FL=45.30 FL=44.59 FL=44.45 FL=43.98 FL=43.34 FL=42.92 FL=42.66 FL=40.82 TC=48.74 TC=47.85 TC=46.26 TC=46.68 TC=45.38 TC=44.74 TC=44.90 TC=44.14 TC=43.48 TC=43.08 TC=43.11 TC=41.25 OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE OE COMM POST SID E W A L K DR I V E W A Y EN T R A N C E DR I V E W A Y EN T R A N C E WALKWAY PATIO 42.7 42.3 42.7 42.8 42.7 43.4 45.9 46.747.247.748.2 48.5 48.5 48.8 48.8 48.7 49.4 49.4 49.4 49.4 49.5 49.1 49.1 49.4 49.5 49.4 49.7 49.4 49.4 49.4 49.3 49.3 49.4 49.4 49.2 48.9 49.0 51.4 51.3 51.5 51.4 51.3 51.2 51.2 51.8 51.6 51.2 50.8 50.4 49.7 49.4 48.7 48.3 48.6 48.3 52.3 52.5 52.3 52.6 52.2 52.2 51.5 51.3 51.7 51.4 51.7 51.3 51.8 51.4 51.6 51.5 50.5 50.7 50.3 50.6 50.3 50.7 50.3 50.8 50.4 50.6 50.2 49.7 49.2 49.8 49.3 49.6 49.4 49.8 49.3 49.7 49.2 49.7 48.7 48.7 48.7 48.7 48.6 48.5 51.8 47.2 47.6 49.4 OE OE OE OE 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X W W W W WM WM W W W W W W SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G G S S S S S S S S S W W W SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD G G G G S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S (49.0) FG (48.8) FG (48.5) FG (48.2) FG 48.2 TW@EG 47.5 TW@FS (46.3 BW@FG) (48.7 TW@EG) 47.3 TW@FG (45.8 BW@EG) (48.4 TW@EG) 47.0 TW@FS (45.6 BW@EG) (53.4) FG (53.8) FG (54.0) FG (54.2) FG (54.3) FG (54.3) FG (54.3) FG (54.1) FG(54.3) FG GFF = 50.0 GFF = 50.0 GFF = 49.0 GFF = 49.0 GFF = 49.0 GFF = 48.2 GFF = 48.2 GFF = 48.2 UNIT 1 FF= 48.7 PAD= 48.2 UNIT 2 FF= 48.7 PAD= 48.2 UNIT 3 FF= 48.7 PAD= 48.2 UNIT 4 FF= 49.5 PAD= 49.0 UNIT 5 FF= 49.5 PAD= 49.0 UNIT 6 FF= 49.5 PAD= 49.0 UNIT 7 FF= 50.5 PAD= 50.0 UNIT 8 FF= 50.5 PAD= 50.0 UNIT 9 FF= 50.5 PAD= 50.0 49.52 FS 49.29 FS 48.5 FS 48.51 TC 48.01 FL 46.4 TC 46.4 FL 45.97 TC 45.47 FL 49.40 FL 49.17 FL 48.32 FL 49.46 FS 49.40 FS 49.31 FS 49.22 FS49.42 FL 49.55 FL 49.60 FL 49.8 FG/HP 49.6 FL 50.0 FG 50.0 FG 49.5 FG 48.8 FL 49.92 FS 49.96 FS 49.90 FS 50.00 FS 50.00 FS 49.85 FS 49.82 FS 48.81 FS 49.72 FS 48.66 FS 49.68 FS 48.42 FS 49.63 FS 49.35 FS 49.11 FS 48.84 FS 48.09 FS 48.78 FS 48.15 TC 47.65 FL 47.85 FS 48.80 FS 47.95 TC 47.45 FL 48.74 FS 48.72 FS 47.40 FS 47.3 FS 48.67 FS 48.42 FS 48.20 FS 47.94 FS 47.0 FS 46.8 FS 47.90 FS 47.89 FS 47.85 FS 46.75 FS 46.6 FS 46.5 FS 46.3 FS 47.82 FS 47.78 FS 47.55 TC 47.05 BC 3.7 % 3. 7 % 0.5 % 0.6 % 4.1 % 4.6 % 4.6 % 7. 9 % 7. 9 % 7.0 % 7.0 % 9.3 % 9.3 % 4. 0 % 4.0 % 5.1 % 5.1 % 5.4 % 5.4 % 6.5 % 6. 5 % 7.1 % 7.1 % 8.2 % 8.2 % 6.4 % 6.4 % 7.5 % 7.5 % 7.8 % 7.7 % 8.8 % 8.8 % 9.5 % 9.5 % 10 . 6 % 10 . 6 % 8.6 % 1.0% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 3.0% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 2.8% 0.3% 0.3%0.3% 0.3%4.6% 0.3% 1.5%1.5%1.0% 6.0% 1.0%1.0%1.5%1.0%1.5 % 1.5 % 1.5 % 5.0%1.3 % 1.6 %1.0 % 1. 0 % 0.9 % 1.0% 1.0 % 0.9 % 1. 0 % 1.0%1.0%1.0%1.0%1.0%1.0% 49.0 FG 49.0 FG 48.2 FG 48.2 FG 47.7 FG 46.9 TG 45.6 IE 48.50 FS 48.50 FS49.50 FS 49.50 FS 0.7 % 1.4% 2.0 % 0.4 % 1.1% 1.6 % 52.4 TW (52.0 TW@FG) 50.0 BW 49.1 TF BEGIN C-2 WALL; 53.7 TW 50.0 BW@FG 49.1 TF 53.0 TW 49.0 BW@FG 53.0 TW 52.0 TW@FG 52.00 TW 51.4 TW@FG 48.2 BW 50.0 TW 49.4 TW@FG 47.7 BW END C-2 WALL 49.1 TW 48.7 TW@FG 47.4 BW 46.3 TF BEGIN C-2 WALL 47.8 TW 47.8 BW GR A D E B R E A K 10.0' FYSB 10.0' RYSB 5. 0 ' SY S B 5.0 ' SY S B 20 . 0 ' 4.0 ' 24 . 0 ' 20 . 0 ' 8.5' 8.0'8.0' 24 . 0 ' 15 . 0 ' 24 . 0 ' 15 . 0 ' 20 . 0 ' 4.0 ' 20 . 0 ' 4.0 ' 8.0'17.0' 25.0' 5.0' 49 48 47 46 48.62 FS 5.0' EX . 6 " V C S W R @ 4 . 4 % EX . 6 " A C W T R ( D W G 1 4 6 - 6 ) EX . 1 " H P G A S 25.0' TO PL 47.1 FS 48.2 FS 48.15 FS GFF = 50.0 48.4 TW 48.3 TW@FG 47.8 BW 46.3 TF EX WALL TO REMAIN EX WALL TO REMAIN END C-2 WALL 50.0 TW 49.6 BW 49.1 TF (53.5 TW) (49.5 TW @ FG) (47.1 BW @ FG) (47.1 FS) EX WALL TO REMAIN (50.7 TW) (50.0 TW @ FG) (47.7 BW @ FG) (52.8 TW) (52.1 TW @ FG) (48.9 BW @ FG) (49.8 FS) (53.6 TW) (52.9 TW @ FG) (50.0 BW @ FG) (54.0 TW) (53.4 BW)4.7 ' 4.9 ' 10 . 0 ' 12 . 6 ' EX PCC DWY TO REMAIN EXISTING STRUCTURE TO REMAIN EXISTING STRUCTURE TO REMAIN EXISTING STRUCTURE TO REMAIN EXISTING STRUCTURE TO REMAIN EXISTING STRUCTURE TO REMAIN EXISTING STRUCTURE TO REMAIN EXISTING ASPHALT TO REMAIN EXISTING EDGE OF ASPHALT EXISTING EDGE OF ASPHALT 49.5 FG 49.0 FG 48.4 FG 48.2 FG 48.4 FG 344 CHINQUAPIN AVE APN 206-020-27-00350 CHINQUAPIN AVE APN 206-020-34-00 306 CHINQUAPIN AVE APN 206-020-12-00 EX WALL TO REMAIN EX OVERHEAD UTILITIES TO REMAIN EX OVERHEAD UTILITIES TO REMAIN PROP SSCO RIM=49.52 IE= 40.0 49.4 TG 48.5 IE 49.3 TG 48.4 IE 49.0 TG 48.1 IE 48.6 TG 47.9 IE 48.3 TG 47.7 IE 48.1 TG 47.5 IE 47.7 TG 47.1 IE 47.4 TG 46.8 IE 47.2 TG 46.2 IE 47.0 TG 45.3 IE 46.3 TG 44.9 IE IN WEST 44.6 IE OUT SIGHT DISTANCE L = 150 FT (VM = 20 MPH) CALTRANS CORNER SIGHT DISTANCE; SEE NOTE THIS SHEET 24 . 0 ' 5.0' 16.5' 0.4% MIN 50.0 FG 5.0 % MIN 52.4 TW 49.5 BW@FG 48.4 TF 3.3 ' 5.0% MIN 49.5 FG 49.3 FL 49.0 FG 5.0 % MIN 5.0 % MIN 5.0 % MI N 5.0 % MI N 5.0 % MI N 5.0 % MI N RET. WALL FOOTING (TYP.)48.5 FG 48.5 FG 5.0 % MIN 52.0 TW 51.5 TW@FG 48.5 BW 5.0% MIN 47.0 FG 50.00 TW 49.1 TW@FG 48.2 BW EX. RET. WALL TO BE REMOVED SIGHT DISTANCE L = 150 FT (VM = 20 MPH) CH I N Q U A P I N A V E (S E E D W G 5 3 8 - 7 F O R P U B L I C I M P R O V E M E N T S I N R O W ) 48.0 TW@EG 48.0 TW@FS (47.0 BW@FG) GR A D E B R E A K GR A D E B R E A K PROPOSED TRANSFORMER 50.00 TW 49.1 TW@FG 48.2 BW 5.0 ' 3.3 ' 53.0 TW 49.5 BW@FG N 34°00'09" W 274.76' N 34°00'09" W 274.78' N 5 5 ° 5 9 ' 0 3 " E 70 . 0 0 ' N 5 5 ° 5 8 ' 2 7 " E 70 . 0 0 ' 48.7 TC 48.2 FS 48.7 TC 48.2 FS48.7 TC 48.2 FS 48.7 TC 48.2 FS 48.7 TC 48.2 FS48.7 TC 48.2 FS 49.5 TC 49.0 FS 50.5 TC 50.0 FS 50.5 TC 50.0 FS 50.5 TC 50.0 FS 50.5 TC 50.0 FS 50.5 TC 50.0 FS 49.5 TC 49.0 FS49.5 TC 49.0 FS49.5 TC 49.0 FS 49.5 TC 49.0 FS 49.5 TC 49.0 FS 49.86 TC 49.36 FS 49.94 TC 49.44 FS50.43 TC 49.93 FS DEEPEN PCC C&G AS NECESSARY BENEATH EXISTING SLOPE PROPOSED WALL AND FENCE COMBINATION NOT TO EXCEED 6' PROPOSED FENCE NOT TO EXCEED 6' 50.3 FS 50.3 FS 50.3 FS 49.3 FS 49.3 FS 49.3 FS 48.7 FS 48.7 FS DESIGN BUILD PLANS: STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS DIVISION OF OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH TRENCH/EXCAVATION PERMIT NO._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Know what's below. before you dig.Call R DIG ALERT!! TWO WORKING DAYS BEFORE DIG ALL EXISTING UTILITIES MAY NOT BE SHOWN ON THESE PLANS DIG ALERT & GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL LOCATE & POTHOLE (AS NEEDED), ALL EXISTING UTILITIES BEFORE SHORING WALL CONSTRUCTION BEGINS. REVIEWED BY: DATEINSPECTOR DATE "AS BUILT" ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT RCE EXP. RPR SH O R I N G D E S I G N G R O U P CHINQUAPIN COASTAL HOMES 330 CHINQUAPIN AVENUE PUD 2021-0010 CT 2021-0005 13 538-7A GR 2022-0029 PROPERTY LINE 147101316222528313419 EXISTING APARTMENT BUILDINGEXISTING APARTMENT BUILDING RIGHT-OF-WAY PROPERTY LINE PROPOSED PERMANENT SHORING (SEE SHEET SH10 FOR PROFILE) PROPOSED PERMANENT SHORING (SEE SHEET SH9 FOR PROFILE) CH I N Q U A P I N A V E PROPOSED RESIDENCE PROPOSED RESIDENCE EXISTING APARTMENT BUILDING EXISTING APARTMENT BUILDING EXISTING APARTMENT BUILDING XX LEGEND T.O.W. = TOP OF SOLDIER BEAM WALL B.O.W. = BOTTOM OF SOLDIER BEAM WALL (P) = PROPOSED (E) = EXISTING PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENT SYMBOL TEMPORARY SOLDIER BEAM TEMPORARY TIMBER LAGGING SOLDIER BEAM COUNT x SHXDETAIL/SECTION CALLOUTS BY OTHERS = WORK OUTSIDE SHORING SCOPE DESIGNATES 6x12 PRESSURE TREATED LAGGING DF#1 DECLARATION OF RESPONSIBLE CHARGE I HEREBY DECLARE THAT I AM THE ENGINEER OF WORK FOR THE PERMANENT SHORING OF THIS PROJECT (SHEETS 8-13), AND THAT I HAVE EXERCISED RESPONSIBLE CHARGE OVER THE DESIGN OF TEMPORARY SHORING AS DEFINED IN SECTION 6703 OF THE BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS CODE, AND THAT THE DESIGN IS CONSISTENT WITH CURRENT STANDARDS. I UNDERSTAND THAT THE CHECK OF PROJECT DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS BY THE CITY OF CARLSBAD DOES NOT RELIEVE ME, AS ENGINEER OF WORK, MY RESPONSIBILITIES FOR PROJECT DESIGN. SHORING DESIGN GROUP NAME: ROY P. REED 7727 CAMINITO LILIANA SAN DIEGO, CA 92129 SIGNATURE: PH: (760)586-8121 8 SCOPE OF WORK PERMANENT SOLDIER BEAM SOLDIER BEAM & LAGGING WALL, APPROXIMATELY 267 LF AND AN EXPOSED SURFACE AREA TOTALING 1,385 SQUARE FEET, AS SHOWN ON SHEETS SH8-SH13 HEREIN. A BOUNDARY SURVEY REPORT IS REQUIRED FOR THIS PROJECT. CONCRETE PLACEMENT WILL NOT BE APPROVED UNTIL A BOUNDARY SURVEY SHOWING COMPLIANCE TO THE APPROVED PLANS IS PROVIDED TO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT. I ,, ,,, "' !"-' I' h ·,,,>' #/ V ', "-~~ 'I ' 1lt''H r--'f J\'sl °7 r::=:-J.._1 -:::::r---,=f --1:-~' ~ I J lf9 t-rr=n_ l /I ----- 0 I I I I I I I I I I II _L_--~-===--__J I I ' I' --- - - - --' ---- - -. ··1· _/ ' \ '------------------------------------------·-----------. ------------ --,q .-~-X -I I I X ' --'- ---- --_-_ -+---'--- -+ X • I \\~' ~ -=----~_:___,_--~/_) ---r1 -,}__~. ; / I" ---+ ' o-- 0 5 10 ~-20 I GRAPHIC SCALE, 1" - 1 0' I ---~- I I r I I I I j I r I I SHORING DESIGN GROUP ~------------, e ROY P. REED R.C.E. 80503 EXP. 3-31-2025 DATE 10/23/2023 R IOFTA A NILFOEATS C N GN LANOFOP I I R R SS EE E EDERETSIGER DEREP.OR Exp. C 80503 3/31/25 LIVIC Y 50.00' 40.00' 50.00' 40.00' 8 SPACES @ 8'-0" O.C. = 64'-0" "H" PERMANENT SOLDIER BEAM (SEE SCHEDULE FOR SIZE) SB#1 B.O.W.= 46.00' 48.70'49.50' SB#2 SB#3 SB#4 SB#5 SB#6 SB#7 SB#8 SB#9 SB#10 SB#11 SB#12 SB#13 SB#14 SB#15 SB#16 SB#17 9'-0"7 SPACES @ 8'-0" O.C. = 56'-0" T.O.W. = 53.00' B.O.W. = 47.00' T.O.W. = 53.00' B.O.W.= 46.00' B.O.W.= 46.00' B.O.W.= 47.00' ~ EXISTING GRADE ALONG NEIGHBORING PROPERTYEXISTING WALL (TO BE REMOVED)UNITS #1-3 FOUNDATIONPROPOSED RETAINING WALL (SEE CIVIL DRAWINGS) CAST WALL FOUNDATION INTO BEAM. DRILL/TOURCH HOLE (1" MAX.) IN SOLDIER BEAM WEB FOR TRANSVERSE FOOTING REINFORCEMENT FINISH GRADE (BEHIND WALL) DR A W I N G M A T C H L I N E (S E E S H E E T S H 1 0 ) 60.00'60.00' PROPOSED STORM DRAIN (SEE CIVIL DRAWINGS), CONNECTION PER DETAIL 3/SH12, TYPICAL"D" NEIGHBORING (EXISTING) RETAINING WALL AND FENCE (TO REMAIN)FINISH GRADE (FRONT OF WALL)T.O.W. = 53.00'T.O.W. = 53.00' FULL PEN WELD & LAG SB#1-13 TO TOP OF WALL ELEVATION SHOWN. (BACKFILL VOIDS WITH LEAN CONCRETE ADJACENT TO FOOTING) 5'-0" (FINISH) 7727 CAMINITO LILIANA SAN DIEGO, CA 92129, (760)586-8121 EG G C W XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X XXX EXISTING 2 STORY BUILDING 3' WOOD FENCE 8' WROUGHT IRON FENCE 6' WOOD FENCE 6' WOOD FENCE 5352 52 5 1 51 49 FL=48.27 FL=47.40 TC=48.74 TC=47.85 OE OE OE OE OE OE COMM POST SI D E W A L K WALKWAY PATIO 49.4 49.7 49.4 49.4 49.3 49.3 49.4 49.4 49.2 49.0 51.4 51.3 51.5 51.4 51.351.2 51.2 51.8 51.6 51.2 50.8 50.4 51.5 51.3 51.8 X X X X XX X X X X X X X X X X X X WW G G G G G G WW SD SD SD GGGG (53.4) FG (53.8) FG (54.0) FG (54.2) FG 1. 0 % 1. 0 % 1.0% 1. 0 % 1.0%1.0%1.0%1.0% 49.0 FG 49.0 FG 48.2 FG48.2 FG 47.7 FG 48.50 FS 53.0 TW 52.0 TW@FG 52.00 TW 51.4 TW@FG 50.0 TW 49.4 TW@FG 47.7 BW END C-2 WALL 49.1 TW 48.7 TW@FG 47.4 BW 46.3 TF 47.8 BW 10.0' FYSB 5. 0 ' SY S B 8.0'17.0' 25.0' 5.0' 48.62 FS 48.4 TW 48.3 TW@FG 47.8 BW 46.3 TF EX WALL TO REMAIN EXISTING STRUCTURE TO REMAIN 48.4 FG 48.2 FG 306 CHINQUAPIN AVE APN 206-020-12-00 48.6 TG 47.9 IE 48.3 TG 47.7 IE 48.1 TG 47.5 IE47.7 TG 47.1 IE 47.4 TG 46.8 IE 47.2 TG 46.2 IE 49.0 FG 5.0 % MI N 5.0 % MI N 5.0 % MI N 5.0 % MI N 5.0 % MI N 48.5 FG 48.5 FG 5.0 % MI N 52.0 TW 51.5 TW@FG 48.5 BW 5.0% MIN 50.00 TW 49.1 TW@FG 48.2 BW EX. RET. WALL TO BE REMOVEDSIGHT DISTANCE L = 150 FT (VM = 20 MPH) 50.00 TW 49.1 TW@FG 48.2 BW 3. 3 ' N 34°00'09" W 274.76' N 5 5 ° 5 8 ' 2 7 " E 70 . 0 0 ' DESIGN BUILD PLANS: REVIEWED BY: DATEINSPECTOR DATE "AS BUILT" ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT RCE EXP. RPR SH O R I N G D E S I G N G R O U P CHINQUAPIN COASTAL HOMES 330 CHINQUAPIN AVENUE PUD 2021-0010 CT 2021-0005 13 538-7A GR 2022-0029 1. SEE SOLDIER BEAM SCHEDULE ON SHEET 12 FOR SHORING ATTRIBUTES. 2. POTHOLE/FIELD VERIFY EXISTING CONDITIONS PRIOR TO SHORING INSTALLATION. 3. THE NEIGHBORING (EXISTING) WALL FOUNDATION TO REMAIN SHALL NOT BE UNDERMINED DURING EXCAVATION OR INSTALLATION OF THE PROPOSED PERMANENT SHORING. THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD POTHOLE & VERIFY THE LOCATIONS OF THE EXISTING WALL FOOTINGS TO CONFIRM THE PROPOSED TOP OF WALL AND LATERAL SUPPORT ELEVATIONS SHOWN HEREIN. NOTES: ~ NEIGHBORING (EXISTING) WALL & FENCE (TO REMAIN) 1 4 7 10 13 CH I N Q U A P I N A V E EXISTING APARTMENT BUILDING 1'-8" 4'-10"DR A W I N G M A T C H L I N E (S E E S H E E T S H 1 0 ) 1'-8" 4'-10" NEIGHBORING WALL AND STAIRS PROPOSED RETAINING WALL (SEE CIVIL DRAWINGS) CAST WALL FOUNDATION INTO BEAM. DRILL/TOURCH HOLE (1" MAX.) IN SOLDIER BEAM WEB FOR TRANSVERSE FOOTING REINFORCEMENT PROPOSED STORM DRAIN (SEE CIVIL DRAWINGS), CONNECTION PER DETAIL 3/SH12, TYPICAL EXISTING WALL (TO BE REMOVED) 20 **EXISTING WALL (TO BE REMOVED)** PROPOSED LATERAL (SEE CIVIL DRAWINGS) RIGHT-OF-WAY PROPERTY LINE PROPOSED RESIDENCE PROFILE - LOOKING SOUTHWEST SCALE: 1" = 16'/3 DESIGNATES 6x12 PRESSURE TREATED LAGGING DF#1 LEGEND: T.O.W. = TOP OF WALL B.O.W. = BOTTOM OF WALL 17 PROPOSED PERMANENT SHORING (TYPICAL) 9 3'-4" 8'-4" 3'-4"3'-4" 2 SH12 1 SH11 1 SH12 **EXISTING WALL TO BE REMOVED** DEMOLITION OF THE EXISTING WALL SHALL NOT UNDERMINE THE ADJACENT EXISTING CMU FENCE WALL TO REMAIN. CONTRACTOR SHALL DEMOLISH WALL & INSTALL SHORING IN A-B-C SLOTS, IF REQUIRED REMOVALS EXCEED DEPTH OF ADJACENT FOOTING. ONSITE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER SHALL OBSERVE ALL SHORING & DEMOLITION ACTIVITIES. UNIT 1 FF= 48.7 PAD= 48.2 UNIT 2 FF= 48.7 PAD= 48.2 UNIT 3 FF= 48.7 PAD= 48.2 UNIT 4 FF= 49.5 PAD= 49.0 SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD ·1 I A'- I I I I I I I I ""'" I y I 111 u ,,WJ, 11 I IJJ ' """' U/,/J • • I/ 1· I!, V . J2 // t ' I J -' •. ' .;; ;; / V /" j_ ' :,/f T ' ~. : v ;:;// • •• >•/·= . ~ . :J. ~ / • 2_i j "-~ ;;~~f c.LL .;;. ""--',~~ ~r -~ ~ ·~ 1; ///.;;. •. • / L -· ~ ,::,--. ·· · '=LL. --• ' ,---' ' , '1'1 ' i I ' =F -C " "' --' ' ' I I ,j I I 1 1 •= • ·, , i I I I I I I I I I /'.P I i1 L__ ii '1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I : I I I I I ~J LJIJ I I I 11 : : I I LJ'J LJIJ ~ J I LJIJ LJIJ LJIJ -'-I I I I 'f I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I lJ ',_J lJ ',_J -' A •L D --L ~ - \~\(~ : : I I I I I I I I l.Jld-----1 -::-r -----;'T' J. __J_ -I -= ----= I ~ 0 4 8 16 ... • ~ SCALE: 1" 16 / 3' I I I I I ~ _/ ,. ~ \ [g] \ -<>----I I --------'- • / I / -t-------1 / [_"--- - I \ I" I V _,_ /, . -= ----t---=":-'"= ~'"--I' , I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I LJ.JJ lJ cJ / '; 1 '._Q i \ \ \ i -/ :r -- l I ' . I I --l I I I I I II I I I I ; I I lJ UJ JJ UJ -'-~ '"'--- ------ --= ~ ' -"--= ~ ~ I ' I I I }-IJ .:"1 I -11-1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I rr- LJ.JJ LJ.JJ lJ I_J I I L: cJ - __ , L~ ----~ " ---------jQl ~ I I \ • _j_ll_l ~-r:• I~---/~'I -=----... ----I ' \ )( ----_ 1---===----- X X X XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX X X XXX EXISTING 2 STORY BUILDING EXISTING 1 STORY BUILDING 6' WOOD FENCE 6' WOOD FENCE 6' WOOD FENCE X 53 52 52 5251.2 51.8 51.6 51.2 52.3 52.5 52.3 52.652.2 52.2 51.5 51.3 51.7 51.4 51.7 51.8 X X X X X X X XXXX X X X X (54.2) FG (54.3) FG (54.3) FG (54.3) FG (54.1) FG (54.3) FG PAD= 49.0 49.8 FG/HP 49.6 FL 50.0 FG 50.0 FG 49.5 FG48.8 FL 5.0% 1. 3 % 1. 6 % 1.0% 0. 9 % 1. 0 % 1.0%1.0%1.0% 49.0 FG 49.0 FG BEGIN C-2 WALL; 53.7 TW 50.0 BW@FG 49.1 TF 53.0 TW 49.0 BW@FG53.0 TW 52.0 TW@FG 5. 0 ' SY S B (49.8 FS) (53.6 TW) (52.9 TW @ FG) (50.0 BW @ FG) (54.0 TW) (53.4 BW)4. 7 ' 4. 9 ' EXISTING STRUCTURE TO REMAIN EXISTING STRUCTURE TO REMAIN EXISTING EDGE OF ASPHALT 49.0 FG 306 CHINQUAPIN AVE APN 206-020-12-00 EX WALL TO REMAIN 49.4 TG 48.5 IE 49.3 TG 48.4 IE 49.0 TG 48.1 IE48.6 TG 47.9 IE 48.3 TG 47.7 IE MIN 50.0 FG 5.0 % MI N 52.4 TW 49.5 BW@FG 48.4 TF 3.3 ' 5.0 % MIN 49.5 FG 49.3 FL 49.0 FG 5.0 % MI N 5.0 % MI N 5.0 % MI N RET. WALL FOOTING (TYP.) 5.0 % MI N 5. 0 ' 53.0 TW 49.5 BW@FG N 34°00'09" W 274.76' PROPOSED WALL AND FENCE COMBINATION NOT TO EXCEED 6' ROY P. REED R.C.E. 80503 EXP. 3-31-2025 DATE 10/23/2023 R IOFTA A NILFOEATS C N GN LANOFOP I I R R SS EE E EDERETSIGER DEREP.OR Exp. C 80503 3/31/25 LIVIC Y 7727 CAMINITO LILIANA SAN DIEGO, CA 92129, (760)586-8121 T.O.W. = 53.00' 50.00' 40.00' 60.00' 50.00' 40.00' 60.00' SB#17 SB#18 SB#19 SB#20 SB#21 SB#22 SB#23 SB#24 SB#25 SB#26 SB#27 SB#28 SB#29 SB#30 SB#31 SB#32 SB#33 SB#34 DR A W I N G M A T C H L I N E (S E E S H E E T S H 9 ) EN D P E R M A N E N T SO L D I E R B E A M W A L L B.O.W. = 47.00' B.O.W.= 47.00' B.O.W.= 48.00' B.O.W.= 48.00' B.O.W.= 48.00' 8'-9"7 SPACES @ 8'-0" O.C. = 56'-0" 9'-0"8 SPACES @ 8'-0" O.C. = 64'-0" T.O.W. = 54.00'PROPOSED RETAINING WALL (SEE CIVIL DRAWINGS) CAST WALL FOUNDATION INTO BEAM. DRILL/TOURCH HOLE (1" MAX.) IN SOLDIER BEAM WEB FOR TRANSVERSE FOOTING REINFORCEMENT NEIGHBORING (EXISTING) RETAINING WALL AND FENCE (TO REMAIN) ~ 49.50'50.50' EXISTING GRADE ALONG NEIGHBORING PROPERTY FINISH GRADE (BEHIND WALL) FINISH GRADE (FRONT OF WALL) PERMANENT SOLDIER BEAM (SEE SCHEDULE FOR SIZE) PROPOSED STORM DRAIN (SEE CIVIL DRAWINGS), CONNECTION PER DETAIL 3/SH12, TYPICAL T.O.W. = 53.00'T.O.W. = 53.00' DESIGN BUILD PLANS: REVIEWED BY: DATEINSPECTOR DATE "AS BUILT" ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT RCE EXP. RPR SH O R I N G D E S I G N G R O U P CHINQUAPIN COASTAL HOMES 330 CHINQUAPIN AVENUE PUD 2021-0010 CT 2021-0005 13 538-7A GR 2022-0029 17 20 23 26 29 32 34 NEIGHBORING (EXISTING) WALL & FENCE (TO REMAIN) EXISTING APARTMENT BUILDING DR A W I N G M A T C H L I N E (S E E S H E E T S H 9 ) 1'-7" 4'-10" PROPOSED RETAINING WALL (SEE CIVIL DRAWINGS) CAST WALL FOUNDATION INTO BEAM. DRILL/TOURCH HOLE (1" MAX.) IN SOLDIER BEAM WEB FOR TRANSVERSE FOOTING REINFORCEMENT PROPOSED STORM DRAIN (SEE CIVIL DRAWINGS), CONNECTION PER DETAIL 3/SH12, TYPICAL **EXISTING WALL (TO BE REMOVED)**PROPERTY LINE PROPOSED RESIDENCE PROPERTY LINE1'-8" 4'-10" PROPOSED PERMANENT SHORING (TYPICAL) UNIT 5 UNIT 6 UNIT 7 UNIT 9UNIT 8 EXISTING APARTMENT BUILDING 1. SEE SOLDIER BEAM SCHEDULE ON SHEET 12 FOR SHORING ATTRIBUTES. 2. POTHOLE/FIELD VERIFY EXISTING CONDITIONS PRIOR TO SHORING INSTALLATION. 3. THE NEIGHBORING (EXISTING) WALL FOUNDATION TO REMAIN SHALL NOT BE UNDERMINED DURING EXCAVATION OR INSTALLATION OF THE PROPOSED PERMANENT SHORING. THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD POTHOLE & VERIFY THE LOCATIONS OF THE EXISTING WALL FOOTINGS TO CONFIRM THE PROPOSED TOP OF WALL AND LATERAL SUPPORT ELEVATIONS SHOWN HEREIN. NOTES: PROFILE - LOOKING SOUTHWEST SCALE: 1" = 16'/3 DESIGNATES 6x12 PRESSURE TREATED LAGGING DF#1 LEGEND: T.O.W. = TOP OF WALL B.O.W. = BOTTOM OF WALL 10 4'-4"3'-4"3'-4" 2 SH12 2 SH11 1 SH12 **EXISTING WALL TO BE REMOVED** DEMOLITION OF THE EXISTING WALL SHALL NOT UNDERMINE THE ADJACENT EXISTING CMU FENCE WALL TO REMAIN. CONTRACTOR SHALL DEMOLISH WALL & INSTALL SHORING IN A-B-C SLOTS, IF REQUIRED REMOVALS EXCEED DEPTH OF ADJACENT FOOTING. ONSITE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER SHALL OBSERVE ALL SHORING & DEMOLITION ACTIVITIES. SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD . l I I I = I I I I I I I I I I ~ -I---- a -'--- - -~~~~~~~"--. ~ . -~ ---~c---• ""'-I -, I I I I i : : , I I -' - -1 f7f t I I I I I I I __l I I I Le cJ I I \ I " ()_ I I I ' II I I I I I I I I I I I I Le cJ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I LJIJ j I I I I I I I I I I I I LJ I_J ~1 ~ [ - 11 0 [ . ---=a I I 16 SCALE: 1" 16/3' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I LJ IJ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Le I_J LJ I_J LJ I_J LJ I_J __, [QI :" ~ -IL -- -----. /,,, -.. X -- e--- ~ ·-'-I JI I 'II I I I I I I I I I Le cJ I I I I I- I I I I I I I I LJ IJ = I I : : : : : : : [1 11 /~ \ - I ~ --,_,, 1--1· I I I I I I I I LJ IJ ~ -----,-..... _JI I I I I I I I I I LJ IJ I I I : . 11 -1_[ I I I I I I I I I I LJ I_J l '--- ~ I I. ,-1 11 I I I I I I I I I I LJ I_J I x I / ~ -r/ - - I ~ ~I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I LJ I_J LJ I_J LJ I_J ~- r I 11 0 11, n r - 1/l t '-!~/~ -11~11, I I lif1:i1-==---== SHOR.GROUP ----- I SHEET 11 CITY ~8~~~~~~~~============~~1tII~El-~~ro, I t::::::i ~ , ~'"' I OF CARLSBAD I I SHEETS I i:::~~~l~~l~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~⇒~~~E~~E~~f~~ APPROVED: E 63912 EXPIRES 9/30124 DATE E~~~l~~l~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~⇒~~~~~~§;~i~~ IENGINEERING MANAGER RC Ill DRAWING NOJ Q "I PROJECT NO. I IDWN BY: --I ~=t:=t=======~~~=t~~~~~~~D~ATE~~;;,;l~NITIVALAL CHVWOKD B8Yy:_ :I LEA TE INITIAL CITY APPROVAL R * * Tl ON OlllER APPROVAL DATE INITIAL REVISION DESCRIP ENGINEER OF WORK ROY P. REED R.C.E. 80503 EXP. 3-31-2025 DATE 10/23/2023 R IOFTA A NILFOEATS C N GN LANOFOP I I R R SS EE E EDERETSIGER DEREP.OR Exp. C 80503 3/31/25 LIVIC Y DESIGN BUILD PLANS: 7727 CAMINITO LILIANA SAN DIEGO, CA 92129, (760)586-8121 SHORING SECTION ALONG SOUTH PROPERTY LINE N.T.S. NOTES: 1. POTHOLE/FIELD VERIFY ALL EXISTING & PROPOSED UTILITIES PRIOR TO SHORING INSTALLATION. 2. SEE SOLDIER BEAM SCHEDULE ON SHEET 12 FOR VARIABLES "H" & "D". "H" "D" PL 1 SH11 PROPERTY LINE PERMANENT SOLDIER BEAM (SEE SCHEDULE FOR SIZE) 40.00' 50.00' 60.00' (E) 2-STORY BUILDING 1'-8" 4'-10" NEIGHBORING (EXISTING) RETAINING WALL AND FENCE (TO REMAIN) EXISTING WALL (TO BE REMOVED) PROPOSED FOUNDATION 40.00' 50.00' 60.00' 40.00' 50.00' 60.00' SHORING SECTION ALONG SOUTH PROPERTY LINE N.T.S. NOTES: 1. POTHOLE/FIELD VERIFY ALL EXISTING & PROPOSED UTILITIES PRIOR TO SHORING INSTALLATION. 2. SEE SOLDIER BEAM SCHEDULE ON SHEET 12 FOR VARIABLES "H" & "D". "H" "D" PL 2 SH11 PROPERTY LINE PERMANENT SOLDIER BEAM (SEE SCHEDULE FOR SIZE) (E) 2-STORY BUILDING 1'-7" 4'-10" NEIGHBORING (EXISTING) RETAINING WALL AND FENCE (TO REMAIN) EXISTING WALL (TO BE REMOVED) PROPOSED FOUNDATION 40.00' 50.00' 60.00' **EXISTING WALL TO BE REMOVED** DEMOLITION OF THE EXISTING WALL SHALL NOT UNDERMINE THE ADJACENT EXISTING CMU FENCE WALL TO REMAIN. CONTRACTOR SHALL DEMOLISH WALL & INSTALL SHORING IN A-B-C SLOTS, IF REQUIRED REMOVALS EXCEED DEPTH OF ADJACENT FOOTING. ONSITE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER SHALL OBSERVE ALL SHORING & DEMOLITION ACTIVITIES. FULL PENETRATION WELD SPLICE DETAIL (SB#1-13) N.T.S. WIDE FLANGE BEAM (MATCH SECTION) NOTES: 1. FIELD TOUCH UP ALL EPOXY PAINT UPON COMPLETION. 2. SPECIAL INSPECTION IS REQUIRED FOR ALL FIELD WELDING. 3. ALL WELDS SHALL BE VISUALLY INSPECTED & NON DESTRUCTIVE TESTED BY A CERTIFIED WELDING INSPECTOR. 1/4" 45° CJP 3 SH11 REVIEWED BY: DATEINSPECTOR DATE "AS BUILT" ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT RCE EXP. RPR SH O R I N G D E S I G N G R O U P CHINQUAPIN COASTAL HOMES 330 CHINQUAPIN AVENUE PUD 2021-0010 CT 2021-0005 13 538-7A GR 2022-0029 11 1 •,~ ~ /1 I --r-7 " ' I M J \\ ~ I '.ill u ' -u::=-,_ i:;-;::i,,. _, \\~' -~~ - 't-~ (\ (\ \__,) \__,) -•... ,,, ► ·, V ~ < ~/L: -. SHOR.GROUP T ~---- I SHEET II CITY OF CARLSBAD 11 SHEETS I I 1===ro, (\ ,_~ -:..~, \__,) ,,!:-\\\\ng s~ ~,,, Q I APPROVED: JASON S. GELDER T I •'f~"E\'\ EXPIRES 9,L30/24 DATE I llz~ o -:!!ill ENGINEERING MANAGER RCE 63912 II DRAWING ::: :::J !Iii IDWN BY: _II PROJECT NO. NOJ ~~ G:I () fl \\L~ DATE INITIAL DATE INITIAL ~, ,'ft, CHKD BY: --DATE INITIAL REVISION DESCRIPTION OTHER APPROVAL CITY APPROVAL RVWD BY: '-'• ,,., ENGINEER OF WORK "'' ,,•.r -J~-- ROY P. REED R.C.E. 80503 EXP. 3-31-2025 DATE 10/23/2023 R IOFTA A NILFOEATS C N GN LANOFOP I I R R SS EE E EDERETSIGER DEREP.OR Exp. C 80503 3/31/25 LIVIC Y DESIGN BUILD PLANS: 7727 CAMINITO LILIANA SAN DIEGO, CA 92129, (760)586-8121 FINISH GRADE (SEE CIVIL) (B.O.W., SEE ELEVATION) "H" "D" Dshaft TIMBER LAGGING (SEE ELEVATION) 1.5 SACK SLURRY SHAFT BACKFILL (T.O.W. TO B.O.W.) 4,000 PSI CONCRETE SHAFT BACKFILL (BALANCE OF SHAFT) PERMANENT CANTILEVERED SOLDIER BEAM (TYP.) N.T.S. NOTES: 1. FIELD VERIFY ALL EXISTING & PROPOSED STRUCTURES PRIOR TO SHORING INSTALLATION. 2. SEE SOLDIER BEAM SCHEDULE ON SHEET 12 FOR VARIABLES "H", "D" AND "Dshaft". 3. TOP & BOTTOM OF WALL CONDITIONS VARY, SEE PLAN & ELEVATION FOR GRADE CONDITIONS. EPOXY COATED SOLDIER BEAM SEE DETAIL 3/SH12 FOR EXTENTS PERMANENT SOLDIER BEAM PLAN DETAIL (TYPICAL) N.T.S. DRILL SHAFT (SEE BEAM SECTIONS FOR BACKFILL MATERIAL) SEE ELEVATION FOR SPACING FILL VOIDS BEHIND LAGGING WITH COMPACTED SOIL AS APPROVED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER EPOXY COATED SOLDIER BEAM SEE 3/SH12 FOR EXTENTS 20d COMMON GALVANIZED NAILS FOR LAGGING INSTALLATION (TYP.) 2" (MIN.) BEARING TIMBER LAGGING (SEE ELEVATIONS) 48" 12"± MIN. SEE PROFILE TOP OF WALL (T.O.W.) SEE PROFILE VIEW DRAIN GRATE & 4" SUBDRAIN (MID-BAY, SEE DETAIL 3/SH12) PERMANENT CANTILEVERED SOLDIER BEAM DRAINAGE DETAIL N.T.S. 3" CLR 24" (MIN) 4,000 PSI CONCRETE TOE (TYP II/V, W/C = 0.50) 1.5 SACK SLURRY SHAFT BACKFILL 6x12 DF#1 PRESSURE TREATED LAGGING 4"Ø PVC PIPE CONNECTED TO SUBDRAIN (BY OTHERS) GEOTEXTILE PVC CONNECTOR PIPE SEAL CUT-IN JOINT GEOCOMPOSITE DRAIN PREFABRICATED DRAIN GRATE STRIP WITH DUCT TAPE DRAIN GRATE ISOMETRIC VIEW FINISH GRADE (PER CIVIL DWG.) 12" MIN. 48" WIDE, MIRADRAIN 6000 DRAINAGE BOARD STRIPS, CENTERED BETWEEN SOLDIER BEAMS VERTICALLY WITH 48" WIDE CONTINUOUS STRIPS CENTERED ABOUT WEEP HOLES. (PLACE GEOFABRIC SIDE AGAINST SOIL BACKFILL) EPOXY PAINT FULL SECTION EXTENDING FROM TOP OF PILE TO 24" BELOW TOP OF CONCRETE TOE 48" WIDE, MIRADRAIN 6000 DRAINAGE BOARD STRIPS, CENTERED BETWEEN SOLDIER BEAMS VERTICALLY WITH 48" WIDE CONTINUOUS STRIPS CENTERED ABOUT WEEP HOLES. (PLACE GEOFABRIC SIDE AGAINST SOIL BACKFILL) NEIGHBORING (EXISTING) RETAINING WALL AND FENCE (TO REMAIN) PROPERTY LINE PL SOLDIER BEAM SCHEDULE NOTES: 1. FIELD VERIFY ALL EXISTING & PROPOSED STRUCTURES PRIOR TO SHORING INSTALLATION. 2. FIELD SURVEY PROPERTY LINE & VERIFY ALL CLEARANCES IN THE FIELD PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. 2% INVERT PER CIVIL DWGS. SITE ADDRESS: 330 CHINQUAPIN PROJECT # 22150 BASED ON THE PROJECT SCOPE, PLEASE IDENTIFY THE ELEMENTS AND/OR CONNECTIONS THAT REQUIRE STRUCTURAL OBSERVATION. SPECIFY THE INTERVAL OR STAGE OF CONSTRUCTION. TO BE COMPLETED BY THE DESIGN ENGINEER INCLUDED ON CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS TYPE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS AND/OR CONNECTION TO BE OBSERVED STAGE OF CONSTRUCTION STRUCTURAL OBSERVATIONS FO U N D A T I O N S WA L L F A C I N G S STEEL CONFORMANCE AISC 360 MAT FOUNDATION, PRE-STRESED CONC. OTHER SHOTCRETE MASONRY SHOTCRETE & MASONRY JOINTS OTHER FINAL OBSERVATION & REPORT PILE LAYOUT/VERIFICATION OF PLACEMENT 1. STRUCTURAL OBSERVATION DOES NOT WAIVE THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE REQUIRED INSPECTION BY THE CITY OF CARLSBAD. 2. THE STRUCTURAL OBSERVER SHALL SUBMIT A WRITTEN STATEMENT TO INSPECTION SERVICES THAT THE SITE VISITS HAVE BEEN MADE AND IDENTIFYING AND REPORTED DEFICIENCIES THAT TO THE BEST OF THE STRUCTURAL OBSERVE'S KNOWLEDGE HAVE NOT BEEN RESOLVED. OBSERVATIONS NOTED IN FINAL REPORT 1 SH12 2 SH12 3 SH12 3 SH12 EXISTING GRADE ALONG NEIGHBORING PROPERTY REVIEWED BY: DATEINSPECTOR DATE "AS BUILT" ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT RCE EXP. RPR SH O R I N G D E S I G N G R O U P CHINQUAPIN COASTAL HOMES 330 CHINQUAPIN AVENUE PUD 2021-0010 CT 2021-0005 13 538-7A GR 2022-0029 12 \_,) □ □ □ □ □ □ □ □ FINAL □ \_,) IA-/~~. Xl/'/.~ -···x X X - [ From Beam 1 13 17 19 24 25 27 30 NOTE: Toe Total Toe To Beam Beam Shored Depth Beam Diameter Beam Qty Section Height Length H D H+D Dshaft i ft ft ft in 12 12 W 12 X 40 • 5.0 • 9.0 14.0 24 16 4 W 12 X 40 6.0 12.0 18.0 24 18 2 W 12 X 40 6.0 13.0 19.0 24 23 5 W 12 X 40 6.0 12.0 18.0 24 24 1 W 12 X 40 5.0 10.0 15.0 24 26 2 W 12 X 40 5.0 13.0 18.0 24 29 3 W 12 X 40 5.0 10.0 15.0 24 34 5 W 12 X 40 6.0 12.0 18.0 24 . SB#1-5 SHORED HEIGHT IS THE PERMANENT FINISHED CONDITION FROM THE RE-COMPACTED PAD GRADE. SHORING DESIGN GROUP ~----------~ e ROY P. REED R.C.E. 80503 EXP. 3-31-2025 DATE 10/23/2023 R IOFTA A NILFOEATS C N GN LANOFOP I I R R SS EE E EDERETSIGER DEREP.OR Exp. C 80503 3/31/25 LIVIC Y DESIGN BUILD PLANS: 7727 CAMINITO LILIANA SAN DIEGO, CA 92129, (760)586-8121 GENERAL NOTES 1. CONSTRUCTION PLANS AND CALCULATIONS CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE 2019 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE. 2. PERMANENT SHORING CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LATEST EDITION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA CONSTRUCTION SAFETY ORDERS (CAL-OSHA). 3. HEAVY LOADS SUCH AS CRANES OR CONCRETE TRUCKS IS PROHIBITED WITHIN 10 FEET OF THE TOP OF EXCAVATION EXCEPT WHERE THE SHORING DESIGN PROVIDES FOR THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE. 4. AN UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT MUST BE OBTAINED 2 DAYS BEFORE COMMENCING ANY EXCAVATION. 5. THE OWNER OR THE REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE ACTING AS THE OWNER'S AGENT SHALL EMPLOY ONE OR MORE APPROVED AGENCIES TO PERFORM INSPECTIONS DURING CONSTRUCTION. 6. THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL INSPECTION SERVICES, TESTING & NOTIFICATIONS. 7. ALL PERMITS SHALL BE PROCURED AND PAID FOR BY THE OWNER OR GENERAL CONTRACTOR. 8. ALL MONITORING PROVIDED IN THESE PLANS HEREIN, SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR. 9. PERMANENT SHORING IN THESE PLANS HAS BEEN ALIGNED WITH RESPECT TO THE EXISTING & PROPOSED FEATURES, AS PROVIDED. ACTUAL FIELD LOCATION OF THE SHORING WALL SHALL BE ESTABLISHED USING ACCURATE HORIZONTAL CONTROL & COORDINATED TO FOLLOW THE PLANNED LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS. REPORT ANY VARIATIONS TO THE ENGINEER OF RECORD PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. 10. THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR OR OWNER SHALL LOCATE ALL EXISTING UTILITIES AND STRUCTURES PRIOR TO EXCAVATION AND THE INSTALLATION OF SHORING. 11. THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL CONFIRM THAT THE PROPOSED SHORING DOES NOT CONFLICT WITH FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. 12. THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE MEANS TO PREVENT SURFACE WATER FROM ENTERING THE EXCAVATION OVER THE TOP OF SHORING BULKHEAD. 13. INSTALLATION OF SHORING AND EXCAVATION SHALL BE PERFORMED UNDER CONTINUOUS OBSERVATION AND APPROVAL OF THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER AND AUTHORITY HAVING JURISDICTION. 14. ALTERNATIVE SHAPES, MATERIAL AND DETAILS CANNOT BE USED UNLESS REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE SHORING ENGINEER. 15. SEE CIVIL DRAWINGS FOR FINISH SURFACE ELEVATIONS & DRAINAGE. ADDITIONALLY, THE ARCHITECT SHALL APPROVE THE TOP OF WALL ELEVATIONS SHOWN PER PLAN, PRIOR TO FABRICATION. 16. IT SHALL BE THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS, TO VERIFY CONDITIONS AT THE JOB SITE AND TO CROSS-CHECK DETAILS AND DIMENSIONS WITHIN THE SHORING PLANS WITH RELATED REQUIREMENTS ON THE ARCHITECTURAL, MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL AND ALL OTHER PERTINENT DRAWINGS BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH CONSTRUCTION. 17. ALL SOIL BACKFILL & COMPACTION SHALL BE OBSERVED & PERFORMED TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER OF RECORD. SHORING INSTALLATION PROCEDURE 1. FIELD SURVEY DRILL HOLES & SHORING ALIGNMENT ACCORDING TO WALL DIMENSIONS & DATA SHOWN OR AS DETERMINED OTHERWISE IN THE FIELD & APPROVED BY THE SHORING ENGINEER. NOTE: DEMOLITION OF THE EXISTING WALL SHALL NOT UNDERMINE THE ADJACENT CMU FENCE WALL TO REMAIN. CONTRACTOR SHALL DEMOLISH WALL & INSTALL SHORING IN A-B-C SLOTS, IF REQUIRED REMOVALS EXCEED DEPTH OF ADJACENT FOOTING. ONSITE GEOTECHNIAL ENGINEER SHALL OBSERVE ALL SHORING & DEMOLITION ACTIVITIES. 2. DRILL VERTICAL SHAFTS TO THE EMBEDMENT DEPTH AND DIAMETERS SHOWN. ALLOWABLE PLACEMENT TOLERANCE SHALL BE 2" IN OR 2" OUT OR AS OTHERWISE AUTHORIZED BY THE SHORING ENGINEER. SOLDIER BEAMS SHALL BE DRILLED & SET EVERY OTHER HOLE, UNLESS AUTHORIZED BY THE ONSITE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER. 3. INSTALL SOLDIER BEAMS ACCORDING TO THE DETAILS & SPECIFICATIONS SHOWN IN PLAN. IF NECESSARY, CASING OR OTHER METHODS SHALL BE USED TO PREVENT LOSS OF GROUND OR COLLAPSE OF THE HOLE. 4. START EXCAVATION AFTER CONCRETE HAS CURED FOR A MINIMUM OF (3) THREE DAYS. 5. INSTALL LAGGING & DRAINAGE BOARD BETWEEN INSTALLED SOLDIER BEAMS IN AN A-B-C SEQUENCE, WITH LIFTS NO GREATER THAN 5'-0", OR AS OTHERWISE AUTHORIZED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER. 6. BACKFILL ALL VOIDS BEHIND LAGGING WITH COMPACTED SOIL ACCORDING TO THE SPECIFICATIONS OF THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER OF RECORD 7. REPEAT STEPS 5-6 UNTIL BOTTOM OF EXCAVATION IS REACHED. MONITORING 1. MONITORING SHALL BE ESTABLISHED AT THE TOP OF SOLDIER BEAMS SELECTED BY THE ONSITE GEOTECHNCIAL REPRESENTATIVE AND SURVEYOR AT INTERVALS ALONG THE WALL AS CONSIDERED APPROPRIATE. 2. THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL PERFORM A PRECONSTRUCTION SURVEY INCLUDING PHOTOGRAPHS & VIDEO OF THE EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS. 3. MAXIMUM THEORETICAL SOLDIER BEAM DEFLECTION IS 0.50-INCH. IF THE TOTAL CUMULATIVE HORIZONTAL OR VERTICAL MOVEMENT (FROM START OF CONSTRUCTION) EXCEEDS THIS LIMIT, ALL EXCAVATION ACTIVITIES SHALL BE SUSPENDED AND INVESTIGATED BY THE SHORING ENGINEER FOR FURTHER ACTIONS (AS NECESSARY). 4. LONG TERM MONITORING AND MAINTENANCE OF THE WOOD LAGGING AND FUTURE REPLACEMENT THERE OF SHALL BE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE PROPERTY OWNER. MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS STRUCTURAL STEEL 1. STRUCTURAL STEEL (WIDE FLANGES) SHALL CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS ASTM A-572 OR ASTM A-992 (GRADE 50). 2. MISCELLANEOUS STEEL SHALL CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF ASTM A-36, ASTM A-572 (GRADE 50) OR ASTM A-992. 3. TRENCH PLATES (LAGGING) SHALL CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS FO ASTM A-36. STRUCTURAL & LEAN CONCRETE A. STRUCTURAL CONCRETE: 1. STRUCTURAL CONCRETE (DRILL SHAFT TOE BACKFILL) SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF 4,000PSI AT 28-DAYS, W/C=0.50, TYPE II/V CEMENT. 2. CONCRETE MIX SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH 2019CBC & ACI 318 TO MEET THE FOLLOWING: A. MAXIMUM 1-INCH HARDROCK CONCRETE CONFORMING TO ASTM C-33. B. TYPE II/V NEAT PORTLAND CEMENT CONFORMING TO ASTM C-150. C. SLUMP NO GREATER THAN 5-INCHES. B. LEAN CONCRETE (SLURRY) 1. LEAN SAND SLURRY MIX SHALL CONTAIN A MINIMUM OF 1.5 SACK TYPE II CEMENT PER CUBIC YARD. TIMBER 1. 6x12 TIMBER LAGGING SHALL BE SAWN DOUGLAS FIR LARCH NO. 1 OR BETTER. 2. TIMBER LAGGING SHALL BE PRESSURE TREATED IN ACCORDANCE WITH AWPA U1 USE CATEGORY 4B. TREAT CUT ENDS OF 6x12 LAGGING WITH WATER REPELLENCY CONTAINING NO ARSENIC OR CHROMIUM. WELDING 1. ELECTRIC ARC WELDING PERFORMED BY QUALIFIED WELDERS USING E70XX ELECTRODES OR CONTINUOUS WIRE FEED. 2. SPECIAL INSPECTION IS REQUIRED FOR ALL FIELD WELDING. GEOCOMPOSITE DRAINAGE BOARDS 1. GEOCOMPOSITE DRAINAGE BOARD SHALL BE MIRADRAIN 6000 BY MIRADRI (OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT) CORROSION PROTECTION (STEEL) 1. EPOXY PAINT: SOLDIER BEAM EPOXY COATING SHALL BE BITUMASTIC COAL-TAR EPOXY (OR EQUAL). TWO COATS SHALL BE APPLIED FOR A TOTAL DRY FILM THICKNESS OF 16 MILS. ALL STEEL SURFACES SHALL BE BLAST WITH SSPC-SP 10 (NEAR WHITE) BEFORE COATING IS APPLIED. STATEMENT OF SPECIAL INSPECTIONS DESIGN CRITERIA 1. SOIL DESIGN DATA IS BASED ON THE RECOMMENDATIONS PROVIDED IN THE FOLLOWING GEOTECHNICAL REPORTS: A. REPORT OF PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED CHINQUAPIN COAST HOMES 330 CHINQUAPIN AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA PREPARED BY: GEI, DATED 10-28-21 2. LOAD COMBINATIONS, CBC 1605.3.1 D+L+H 3. SOIL DESIGN PRESSURES A. PASSIVE EARTH PRESSURE = 275PSF/FT B. LATERAL EARTH PRESSURE = 38PSF/FT + 8H C. BUILDING SURCHARGE = 600PLF LINE LOAD D. WALL SURCHARGE = 450PLF LINE LOAD REVIEWED BY: DATEINSPECTOR DATE "AS BUILT" ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT RCE EXP. RPR SH O R I N G D E S I G N G R O U P CHINQUAPIN COASTAL HOMES 330 CHINQUAPIN AVENUE PUD 2021-0010 CT 2021-0005 13 538-7A GR 2022-0029 13 VERIFICATION AND INSPECTION 1. Verifying use of required design mix. 2. At the time fresh concrete is sampled to fabricate specimens for strength tests, perform slump and air content tests, and determine the temperature of the concrete. 3. Inspection of concrete & shotcrete placement for proper opplicatoin techniques. 4. Inspection of maintenance of specified curing temperature and techniques. 5. Material verification of structural steel a. For structural steel, identification markings to conform to AISC 360. b. Manufacturer's certified test reports 6. Material Identification of timber a. identification of perserative VERIFICATION AND INSPECTION (OTHER ITEMS) 7. Observe drilling operations and maintain complete and accurate records for each element. 8. Verify placement locations and plumbness, confirm element diameters, bell diameters (if applicable}, lengths, embedment into bedrock (if applicable) and adequate end bearing strata capacity. Record concrete ond grout values. 9. Verify excavations are extended to the proper depth. 10. Verify use of proper materials, densities and lift thickness during placement and compaction of compacted fill. 11. Verify proper corrosion protection for all steel elements CONTINOUS PERIODIC X X X X X X X X X X X X SHORING DESIGN GROUP e REFERENCE CBC 1904.1, ACl-318 26.4.3 & 26.4.4 CBC 1908.10, ASTM C172, ASTM C31 ACI 318: 26.5, 26.12 CBC 1908.6, 1908.7, 1908.8 ACI 318: 26.5 CBC 1908.9 ACI 318: 26.5.3-26.5.5 t--+----+-----------t------<,---+---+--~LII CITY OF CARLSBADILJ • Section 2 Chinquapin Coast Homes Job No. 21-13506 Carlsbad, California Page 38 surcharge loads on the adjoining retained surface. We recommend that unrestrained (cantilever) walls with level backfill be designed for an equivalent fluid pressure of 38 pcf. We recommend that restrained walls (i.e., walls with angle points or that are curvilinear that restrain them from rotation) with level backfill be designed for an equivalent fluid pressure of 38 pcf plus an additional uniform lateral pressure of 8H pounds per square foot, where H is equal to the height of backfill above the top of the wall footing in feet. 21. For seismic design of unrestrained walls if required, we recommend that the seismic pressure increment be taken as a fluid pressure distribution utilizing an equivalent fluid weight of 14 pcf. 22. The preceding design pressures assume that the walls are backfilled with low expansion potential materials (Expansion Index less than 50) and that there is sufficient drainage behind the walls to prevent the build-up of hydrostatic pressures from surface water infiltration. We recommend that drainage be provided by a composite drainage material such as J-Drain 200/220 and J- Drain SWD, or equivalent. No perforated pipes or gravel are utilized with the J-Drain system. The drain material should terminate 12 inches below the finish surface where the surface is covered by slabs or 18 inches below the finish surface in landscape areas. 23. Backfill placed behind the walls should be compacted to a minimum degree of compaction of 90 percent using light compaction equipment. If heavy equipment is used, the walls should be appropriately temporarily braced. The structural plans should indicate when the retaining wall backfill may be placed. 1 - Ii Chinquapin Coast Homes Job No. 21-13506 Carlsbad, California Page 37 NOTE: The project Civil/Structural Engineer should review all reinforcing schedules. The reinforcing minimums recommended herein are not to be construed as structural designs, but merely as minimum reinforcement to reduce the potential for cracking and separations. 18. Lateral Loads: Lateral load resistance for the structure supported on footing foundations may be developed in friction between the foundation bottoms and the supporting subgrade. An allowable friction coefficient of 0.40 is considered applicable. An additional allowable passive resistance equal to an equivalent fluid weight of 275 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) acting against the foundations may be used in design provided the footings are poured neat against the medium dense to dense formational or properly compacted fill materials. These lateral resistance value assume a level surface in front of the footing for a minimum distance of three times the embedment depth of the footing and any shear keys, but not less than 8 feet from a slope face, measured from effective top of foundation. Retaining walls supporting surcharge loads or affected by upper foundations should consider the effect of those upper loads. 19. Settlement: Settlements under structural design loads are expected to be within tolerable limits for the proposed structures. For footings designed in accordance with the recommendations presented in the preceding paragraphs, we anticipate that the total and differential static settlement for the proposed improvements should be on the order of approximately 1-inch and post- construction differential settlement angular rotation should be less than 1/240. D. Retaining Wall Design 20. Retaining Wall Design: Any required retaining walls must be designed to resist lateral earth pressures and any additional lateral pressures caused by 2 Ii Section 3 Shoring Design Group 7727 Caminito Liliana San Diego, CA 92129 330 Chinquapin Eng: RPR Sheet____of____ Date: 10/23/2023 Cantileverd Soldier Beam Design Sb_No "1-12" Soldier Beam Attributes & Properties Pile "Concrete Embed" H 5 ft= Soldier beam retained height (Permanent backfilled height) x 0 Hs 0 ft--->= Height of retained slope (As applicable) y 0 xt 8 ft= Tributary width of soldier beam dia 24 in= Soldier beam shaft diameter de' dia= Effective soldier beam diameter below subgrade dt 2 H= Assumed soldier beam embedment depth (Initial Guess) w_table "n/a"= Depth below top of wall to design ground water table 200 2010 5 0 5 10 Shoring Design Section 2019 CBC 1605A.3.1 Load Cases: D + H + L - (Eqn. 16A-9) D + H + 0.7E - (Eqn. 16A-12) D + H + 0.75(0.7E) + 0.75L (16A-14) Lateral Embedment Safety Factor FSd 1.50= Static Case FS'd 1.13= Seismic Case Cantilever H = 5' sb 1-12 with Building + Wall Surcharge_R2.xmcdz 3 -- I I I - - -- I I Shoring Design Group 7727 Caminito Liliana San Diego, CA 92129 330 Chinquapin Eng: RPR Sheet____of____ Date: 10/23/2023 Soil Parameters Pa 38 pcf= Active earth pressure Pp 275 pcf= Passive earth pressure dz 12 in= Overburden depth at subgrade Pmax "n/a"= Maximum passive earth pressure ("n/a" = not applicable) σ'133%= Passive pressure short term increase for seismic loading Pps Pp dz= Passive pressure offset at subgrade ϕ 32 deg= Internal soil friction angle be 0.08 deg 1ϕde'= Effective soldier beam width below subgrade a_ratio min be xt 1 = Soldier beam arching ratio qa 0 psf= Allowable soldier beam tip end bearing pressure fs 600 psf= Allowable soldier skin friction Bouyant Soil Properties (As applicable) γw 62.4 pcf= Unit weight of water Pp' Pp w_table "n/a"=if Pp γs γs γwotherwise Submereged Pressures (As Applicable) Pp'275 pcfPa' Pa w_table "n/a"=if Pa γs γs γwotherwise Pa'38 pcf Cantilever H = 5' sb 1-12 with Building + Wall Surcharge_R2.xmcdz 4 The shoring designs are based on 275 pcf passive soil resistance recommended by geotechnical report. Typically, the passive soil resistance pressure shall reach maximum at certain embedment depth. However, the value of maximum passive soil resistance pressure is not suggested in the geotechnical report. Consult with the project geotechnical engineer if the maximum passive soil resistance pressure should apply to the shoring designs; and evaluate if the current shoring designs are affected by this factor. ■- ■- Shoring Design Group 7727 Caminito Liliana San Diego, CA 92129 330 Chinquapin Eng: RPR Sheet____of____ Date: 10/23/2023 Lateral Live Load Surcharge Uniform Loading Full Pa 6in8 pcfH= Uniform loading full soldier beam height Partial 0 psf= Uniform loading partial soldier beam height Hpar 0 ft= Height of partial uniform surcharge loading Ps y( ) Full Partial0 ftyHparif Full Hpar yHif 0 psfotherwise Uniform surcharge profile per depth Eccentric/Conncentric Axial & Lateral Point Loading Pr 0 kip= Applied axial load per beam e 0 in= Eccentricity of applied compressive load Me Pr e xt = Eccentric bending moment Ph 0 lb= lateral pont load at depth "zh" zh 0 ft= Distance to lateral point load from top of wall Seismic Lateral Load EFP 0.70 14 pcf()= Seismic force equivalent fluid pressure Es EFP H= Maximum seismic force pressure Eq y( ) EFP yyHif 0 psfotherwise = Maximum seismic force pressure Cantilever H = 5' sb 1-12 with Building + Wall Surcharge_R2.xmcdz 5 Shoring Design Group 7727 Caminito Liliana San Diego, CA 92129 330 Chinquapin Eng: RPR Sheet____of____ Date: 10/23/2023 Boussinesq Loading Q 2 klf= Surcharge load of continous or isolated footings z'0 ft= Depth below adjacent grade to application of surcharge load x1 6.5 ft= Distance of line load from back face of wall Surcharge Coefficients ny()yz' Hmx1H 1 Boussinesq Equation Pb y()0 psf0 ftyz'if if m 0.40Q H 0.20ny() 0.16 ny()()221.28Q H m2 ny() m2 ny()()22 z' yHif 0 psfotherwise 0 50 100 1500 1 2 3 4 5 Lateral Surcharge Loading Pressure (psf) De p t h ( f t ) Maximum Boussinesq Pressure Δy 5 ft Given Δy Pb Δy()d d 0 psf= Pb Find Δy()()119.6 psf 0 H yPb y() d 0.5 klf Cantilever H = 5' sb 1-12 with Building + Wall Surcharge_R2.xmcdz 6 - ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' \ \ \ I I I I I I I I -~----=~----'/ Shoring Design Group 7727 Caminito Liliana San Diego, CA 92129 330 Chinquapin Eng: RPR Sheet____of____ Date: 10/23/2023 Resolve Forces Acting on Beam (Assume trial values) Summation of Lateral Forces PJ HD()z PE HDz() mE zD() 2 0 PE HDz() mE zD() yPEHDz()mEzD()y d HO HDz yPEy() d H HO yPEy() d 0 H yPAy() d 0 HD yPs y() d 0 HD yPb y() d 0 H yEq y() dPh xt 0= Summation of Moments PJ HD()z PE HDz() mE zD() 2 6 0 PE HDz() mE zD() yPEHDz()mEzD()yzy() d HO HDz yPEy() H Dy() d H HO yPEy() H Dy() d 0 H yPAy() H Dy() dMe 0 HD yPs y() H Dy() d 0 H yEq y() H Dy() d 0 HD yPb y() H Dy() dPh xt HDzh() = z 0 MOMENT FORCE EQUILLIBRIUM D + H + L - (Eqn. 16A-9) D 7.49 5.78 6.33 ftz 2.4 1.8 2 ftD + H + 0.7E - (Eqn. 16A-12) max D()7.5ft D + H + 0.75(0.7E) + 0.75L (16A-14) Cantilever H = 5' sb 1-12 with Building + Wall Surcharge_R2.xmcdz 7 Shoring Design Group 7727 Caminito Liliana San Diego, CA 92129 330 Chinquapin Eng: RPR Sheet____of____ Date: 10/23/2023 210311030 11032103 0 5 0 Soldier Beam Pressure Pressure (psf) De p t h ( f t ) Soil Pressures PA H()190 psf PD HD13104.3psf PE HD12098.3psf PK HD14567.3 psf PJ HD13288.4 psf 3210 1 2 0 5 0 Shear/ft width Shear (klf) De p t h ( f t ) Distance to zero shear (From top of Pile) ε aH ε Va() aa0.10 ft ε Va() ε 0while areturn ε 7.7 ft Cantilever H = 5' sb 1-12 with Building + Wall Surcharge_R2.xmcdz 8 Shoring Design Group 7727 Caminito Liliana San Diego, CA 92129 330 Chinquapin Eng: RPR Sheet____of____ Date: 10/23/2023 Determine Minimum Pile Size M 40.5 28.3 36.2 ft kipMmax max M()Mmax 40.5 kip ft AISC Steel Construction Manual 15th Edition Ω 1.67= Allowable strength reduction factor AISC E1 & F1 Δσ 1= Steel overstress for temporary loading Fb Fy Δσ Ω = Allowable bending stress Required Section Modulus: Zr Mmax FbFlexural Yielding, Lb < Lr Zr 16.2 in3 Beam "W12 x 40" Fb 29.9 ksi A 11.7 in2bf 8 inK 1Lu H Pile "Concrete Embed"=if ε otherwise d 11.9 intf 0.5 inZx 57 in3 tw 0.3 inrx 5.1 inIx 307 in4Fe π2 E KLu rx 2 Axial Stresses λ Fy Fe Fcr 0.658λ FyKLu rx 4.71 E Fyif 0.877 Fe( ) otherwise = Nominal compressive stress - AISC E.3-2 & E3-3 = Allowable concentric force - AISC E.3-1Pc Fcr A Ω Ma Zx Fb= Allowable bending moment - AISC F.2-1 Ma 142.2 kip ftInteraction Pr Pc 8 9 Mmax Ma Pr Pc 0.20if Pr 2 Pc Mmax Ma otherwise = AISC H1-1a & H1-1b Mmax 40.5 kip ftInteraction 0.28 Cantilever H = 5' sb 1-12 with Building + Wall Surcharge_R2.xmcdz 9 -F Shoring Design Group 7727 Caminito Liliana San Diego, CA 92129 330 Chinquapin Eng: RPR Sheet____of____ Date: 10/23/2023 Global Stability FS'd 1.13= Minimum embedment depth factor of safety [Seismic Load Case] Embedment depth increase for min. FS Dh' Ceil max D2 D3ft0.5 ft Slidding Forces: Fs V H O2 η H Dh' xPnx() d Dh'7.5ft Resisting Forces:Fs 3.5 klf FR HO2 η xPnx() dFR 5.2klf Overturning Moments: Mo 0 H yDh' Hy()PAy() d 0 H yDh' Hy( ) Ps y()Ud 0 H yDh' Hy() Pb y()d 0 H Dh' H( H HO2 yPEy() d Dh' O2 3 η H Dh' yPny() d H Dh'η 3MePh xt Dh' Hzh() Resisting Moments Mo 12.9 kipMR HO2 η yH Dh'y()Pny() d MR 19.4kip Factor of Safety: Slidding if FS'd FR Fs"Ok""No Good: Increase Dh" Slidding "Ok"FR Fs 1.47 Overturning if FS'd MR Mo "Ok""No Good: Increase Dh" Overturning "Ok"MR Mo 1.5 Cantilever H = 5' sb 1-12 with Building + Wall Surcharge_R2.xmcdz 10 I I I I Shoring Design Group 7727 Caminito Liliana San Diego, CA 92129 330 Chinquapin Eng: RPR Sheet____of____ Date: 10/23/2023 Global Stability FSd 1.5= Minimum embedment depth factor of safety [Eqn. 16A-9] Embedment depth increase for min. FS Dh Ceil D1 ft1 ft Slidding Forces: Fs V1 HO1 η HDh xPnx() d Dh 9 ft Resisting Forces:Fs 3.4 klf FR HO1 η xPnx() dFR 5.3klf Overturning Moments: Mo 0 H yDh Hy()PAy() d 0 H yDh Hy( ) Ps y() d 0 H yDh Hy( ) Pb y() d H HO1 yPEy() dDh O1 3 η HDh yPny() d HDhη 3MePh xt Dh Hzh() Resisting Moments Mo 14.8 kipMR HO1 η yHDhy()Pny() d MR 23.4kip Factor of Safety: Slidding if FSd FR Fs"Ok""No Good: Increase Dh" Slidding "Ok"FR Fs 1.5 Overturning if FSd MR Mo "Ok""No Good: Increase Dh" Overturning "Ok"MR Mo 1.57 Cantilever H = 5' sb 1-12 with Building + Wall Surcharge_R2.xmcdz 11 I I I I Shoring Design Group 7727 Caminito Liliana San Diego, CA 92129 330 Chinquapin Eng: RPR Sheet____of____ Date: 10/23/2023 Vertical Embedment Depth Axial Resistance qa 0 psf= Allowable soldier beam tip end bearing pressure fs 600 psf= Allowable soldier skin friction Pr 0 kip= Applied axial load per beam p'π diaPile "Concrete Embed"=if 2 bf dotherwise = Applied axial load per beam Allowable Axial Resistance Qy( ) p' fsyπ dia2qa 4 Pile "Concrete Embed"=if bf dqaotherwise Dv ε 0 ft τ Q ε() εε0.10 ft τ Pr Q ε() τ 0while εreturn Dv 0 ft Dh 9 ft Selected Toe Depth Dtoe if max Dh Dh'()Dvmax Dh Dh'()Dv() Dtoe 9 ft Maximum Deflection L' H D1 4= Effective length about pile rotation Δ xt EIx0 L' yyM'y()dΔ 0.08 in Cantilever H = 5' sb 1-12 with Building + Wall Surcharge_R2.xmcdz 12 Shoring Design Group 7727 Caminito Liliana San Diego, CA 92129 330 Chinquapin Eng: RPR Sheet____of____ Date: 10/23/2023 Design Summary: Beam "W12 x 40"Sb_No "1-12" H 5 ft= Soldier beam retained height Dtoe 9 ft= Minimum soldier beam embedment H Dtoe14ft= Total length of soldier beam xt 8 ft= Tributary width of soldier beam dia 24 in= Soldier beam shaft diameter Δ 0.08 in= Maximum soldier beam deflection Cantilever H = 5' sb 1-12 with Building + Wall Surcharge_R2.xmcdz 13 Section 4 Shoring Design Group 7727 Caminito Liliana San Diego, CA 92129 330 Chinquapin Eng: RPR Sheet____of____ Date: 10/23/2023 Cantileverd Soldier Beam Design Sb_No "13-23, 30-34" Soldier Beam Attributes & Properties Pile "Concrete Embed" H 6 ft= Soldier beam retained height x 0 Hs 0 ft--->= Height of retained slope (As applicable) y 0 xt 8 ft= Tributary width of soldier beam dia 24 in= Soldier beam shaft diameter de' dia= Effective soldier beam diameter below subgrade dt 2 H= Assumed soldier beam embedment depth (Initial Guess) w_table "n/a"= Depth below top of wall to design ground water table 200 20 10 0 10 Shoring Design Section 2019 CBC 1605A.3.1 Load Cases: D + H + L - (Eqn. 16A-9) D + H + 0.7E - (Eqn. 16A-12) D + H + 0.75(0.7E) + 0.75L (16A-14) Lateral Embedment Safety Factor FSd 1.50= Static Case FS'd 1.13= Seismic Case Cantilever H = 6' sb 13-23, 30-34 with Building + Wall Surcharge_R2.xmcdz 14 - I I I -- - -- I I Shoring Design Group 7727 Caminito Liliana San Diego, CA 92129 330 Chinquapin Eng: RPR Sheet____of____ Date: 10/23/2023 Soil Parameters Pa 38 pcf= Active earth pressure with slope Pp 275 pcf= Passive earth pressure dz 12 in= Overburden depth at subgrade Pmax "n/a"= Maximum passive earth pressure ("n/a" = not applicable) σ'133%= Passive pressure short term increase for seismic loading Pps Pp dz= Passive pressure offset at subgrade ϕ 32 deg= Internal soil friction angle be 0.08 deg 1ϕde'= Effective soldier beam width below subgrade a_ratio min be xt 1 = Soldier beam arching ratio qa 0 psf= Allowable soldier beam tip end bearing pressure fs 600 psf= Allowable soldier skin friction Bouyant Soil Properties (As applicable) γw 62.4 pcf= Unit weight of water Pp' Pp w_table "n/a"=if Pp γs γs γwotherwise Submereged Pressures (As Applicable) Pp'275 pcfPa' Pa w_table "n/a"=if Pa γs γs γwotherwise Pa'38 pcf Cantilever H = 6' sb 13-23, 30-34 with Building + Wall Surcharge_R2.xmcdz 15 ■- ■- Shoring Design Group 7727 Caminito Liliana San Diego, CA 92129 330 Chinquapin Eng: RPR Sheet____of____ Date: 10/23/2023 Lateral Live Load Surcharge Uniform Loading Full Pa 18in8 pcfH= Uniform loading full soldier beam height Partial 0 psf= Uniform loading partial soldier beam height Hpar 0 ft= Height of partial uniform surcharge loading Ps y( ) Full Partial0 ftyHparif Full Hpar yHif 0 psfotherwise Uniform surcharge profile per depth Eccentric/Conncentric Axial & Lateral Point Loading Pr 0 kip= Applied axial load per beam e 0 in= Eccentricity of applied compressive load Me Pr e xt = Eccentric bending moment Ph 0 lb= lateral pont load at depth "zh" zh 0 ft= Distance to lateral point load from top of wall Seismic Lateral Load EFP 0.70 14 pcf()= Seismic force equivalent fluid pressure Es EFP H= Maximum seismic force pressure Eq y( ) EFP yyHif 0 psfotherwise = Maximum seismic force pressure Cantilever H = 6' sb 13-23, 30-34 with Building + Wall Surcharge_R2.xmcdz 16 Shoring Design Group 7727 Caminito Liliana San Diego, CA 92129 330 Chinquapin Eng: RPR Sheet____of____ Date: 10/23/2023 Boussinesq Loading Q 2 klf= Surcharge load of continous or isolated footings z'0 ft= Depth below adjacent grade to application of surcharge load x1 6.5 ft= Distance of line load from back face of wall Surcharge Coefficients ny()yz' Hmx1H 1 Boussinesq Equation Pb y()0 psf0 ftyz'if if m 0.40Q H 0.20ny() 0.16 ny()()221.28Q H m2 ny() m2 ny()()22 z' yHif 0 psfotherwise 0 50 100 1500 2 4 6 Lateral Surcharge Loading Pressure (psf) De p t h ( f t ) Maximum Boussinesq Pressure Δy 5 ft Given Δy Pb Δy()d d 0 psf= Pb Find Δy()()127.9 psf 0 H yPb y() d 0.6 klf Cantilever H = 6' sb 13-23, 30-34 with Building + Wall Surcharge_R2.xmcdz 17 ... ',, ........... , ',, ',, ,, ........................... ',, ',, ............... ... ' I I ' I ' I I ' ' I I I ' \ \ I I I I I I I I I I Shoring Design Group 7727 Caminito Liliana San Diego, CA 92129 330 Chinquapin Eng: RPR Sheet____of____ Date: 10/23/2023 Resolve Forces Acting on Beam (Assume trial values) Summation of Lateral Forces PJ HD()z PE HDz() mE zD() 2 0 PE HDz() mE zD() yPEHDz()mEzD()y d HO HDz yPEy() d H HO yPEy() d 0 H yPAy() d 0 HD yPs y() d 0 HD yPb y() d 0 H yEq y() dPh xt 0= Summation of Moments PJ HD()z PE HDz() mE zD() 2 6 0 PE HDz() mE zD() yPEHDz()mEzD()yzy() d HO HDz yPEy() H Dy() d H HO yPEy() H Dy() d 0 H yPAy() H Dy() dMe 0 HD yPs y() H Dy() d 0 H yEq y() H Dy() d 0 HD yPb y() H Dy() dPh xt HDzh() = z 0 MOMENT FORCE EQUILLIBRIUM D + H + L - (Eqn. 16A-9) D 10.1 7.38 8.47 ftz 3.2 2.3 2.7 ftD + H + 0.7E - (Eqn. 16A-12) max D()10.1 ft D + H + 0.75(0.7E) + 0.75L (16A-14) Cantilever H = 6' sb 13-23, 30-34 with Building + Wall Surcharge_R2.xmcdz 18 Shoring Design Group 7727 Caminito Liliana San Diego, CA 92129 330 Chinquapin Eng: RPR Sheet____of____ Date: 10/23/2023 210311030 11032103 0 10 5 0 Soldier Beam Pressure Pressure (psf) De p t h ( f t ) Soil Pressures PA H()228 psf PD HD14061.4psf PE HD12453.4psf PK HD15890.1 psf PJ HD13769.7 psf 420 2 0 5 0 Shear/ft width Shear (klf) De p t h ( f t ) Distance to zero shear (From top of Pile) ε aH ε Va() aa0.10 ft ε Va() ε 0while areturn ε 9.7 ft Cantilever H = 6' sb 13-23, 30-34 with Building + Wall Surcharge_R2.xmcdz 19 Shoring Design Group 7727 Caminito Liliana San Diego, CA 92129 330 Chinquapin Eng: RPR Sheet____of____ Date: 10/23/2023 Determine Minimum Pile Size M 82.6 48.9 71.2 ft kipMmax max M()Mmax 82.6 kip ft AISC Steel Construction Manual 15th Edition Ω 1.67= Allowable strength reduction factor AISC E1 & F1 Δσ 1= Steel overstress for temporary loading Fb Fy Δσ Ω = Allowable bending stress Required Section Modulus: Zr Mmax FbFlexural Yielding, Lb < Lr Zr 33.1 in3 Beam "W12 x 40" Fb 29.9 ksi A 11.7 in2bf 8 inK 1Lu H Pile "Concrete Embed"=if ε otherwise d 11.9 intf 0.5 inZx 57 in3 tw 0.3 inrx 5.1 inIx 307 in4Fe π2 E KLu rx 2 Axial Stresses λ Fy Fe Fcr 0.658λ FyKLu rx 4.71 E Fyif 0.877 Fe( ) otherwise = Nominal compressive stress - AISC E.3-2 & E3-3 = Allowable concentric force - AISC E.3-1Pc Fcr A Ω Ma Zx Fb= Allowable bending moment - AISC F.2-1 Ma 142.2 kip ftInteraction Pr Pc 8 9 Mmax Ma Pr Pc 0.20if Pr 2 Pc Mmax Ma otherwise = AISC H1-1a & H1-1b Mmax 82.6 kip ftInteraction 0.58 Cantilever H = 6' sb 13-23, 30-34 with Building + Wall Surcharge_R2.xmcdz 20 -F Shoring Design Group 7727 Caminito Liliana San Diego, CA 92129 330 Chinquapin Eng: RPR Sheet____of____ Date: 10/23/2023 Global Stability FS'd 1.13= Minimum embedment depth factor of safety [Seismic Load Case] Embedment depth increase for min. FS Dh' Ceil max D2 D3ft0.5 ft Slidding Forces: Fs V H O2 η H Dh' xPnx() d Dh'9.5ft Resisting Forces:Fs 5.2 klf FR HO2 η xPnx() dFR 6.8klf Overturning Moments: Mo 0 H yDh' Hy()PAy() d 0 H yDh' Hy( ) Ps y()Ud 0 H yDh' Hy() Pb y()d 0 H Dh' H( H HO2 yPEy() d Dh' O2 3 η H Dh' yPny() d H Dh'η 3MePh xt Dh' Hzh() Resisting Moments Mo 24.3 kipMR HO2 η yH Dh'y()Pny() d MR 32.4kip Factor of Safety: Slidding if FS'd FR Fs"Ok""No Good: Increase Dh" Slidding "Ok"FR Fs 1.31 Overturning if FS'd MR Mo "Ok""No Good: Increase Dh" Overturning "Ok"MR Mo 1.33 Cantilever H = 6' sb 13-23, 30-34 with Building + Wall Surcharge_R2.xmcdz 21 I I I I Shoring Design Group 7727 Caminito Liliana San Diego, CA 92129 330 Chinquapin Eng: RPR Sheet____of____ Date: 10/23/2023 Global Stability FSd 1.5= Minimum embedment depth factor of safety [Eqn. 16A-9] Embedment depth increase for min. FS Dh Ceil D1 ft1 ft Slidding Forces: Fs V1 HO1 η HDh xPnx() d Dh 12 ft Resisting Forces:Fs 5.3 klf FR HO1 η xPnx() dFR 7.9klf Overturning Moments: Mo 0 H yDh Hy()PAy() d 0 H yDh Hy( ) Ps y() d 0 H yDh Hy( ) Pb y() d H HO1 yPEy() dDh O1 3 η HDh yPny() d HDhη 3MePh xt Dh Hzh() Resisting Moments Mo 29.9 kipMR HO1 η yHDhy()Pny() d MR 46.3kip Factor of Safety: Slidding if FSd FR Fs"Ok""No Good: Increase Dh" Slidding "Ok"FR Fs 1.5 Overturning if FSd MR Mo "Ok""No Good: Increase Dh" Overturning "Ok"MR Mo 1.55 Cantilever H = 6' sb 13-23, 30-34 with Building + Wall Surcharge_R2.xmcdz 22 I I I I Shoring Design Group 7727 Caminito Liliana San Diego, CA 92129 330 Chinquapin Eng: RPR Sheet____of____ Date: 10/23/2023 Vertical Embedment Depth Axial Resistance qa 0 psf= Allowable soldier beam tip end bearing pressure fs 600 psf= Allowable soldier skin friction Pr 0 kip= Applied axial load per beam p'π diaPile "Concrete Embed"=if 2 bf dotherwise = Applied axial load per beam Allowable Axial Resistance Qy( ) p' fsyπ dia2qa 4 Pile "Concrete Embed"=if bf dqaotherwise Dv ε 0 ft τ Q ε() εε0.10 ft τ Pr Q ε() τ 0while εreturn Dv 0 ft Dh 12 ft Selected Toe Depth Dtoe if max Dh Dh'()Dvmax Dh Dh'()Dv() Dtoe 12 ft Maximum Deflection L' H D1 4= Effective length about pile rotation Δ xt EIx0 L' yyM'y()dΔ 0.26 in Cantilever H = 6' sb 13-23, 30-34 with Building + Wall Surcharge_R2.xmcdz 23 Shoring Design Group 7727 Caminito Liliana San Diego, CA 92129 330 Chinquapin Eng: RPR Sheet____of____ Date: 10/23/2023 Design Summary: Beam "W12 x 40"Sb_No "13-23, 30-34" H 6 ft= Soldier beam retained height Dtoe 12 ft= Minimum soldier beam embedment H Dtoe18ft= Total length of soldier beam xt 8 ft= Tributary width of soldier beam dia 24 in= Soldier beam shaft diameter Δ 0.26 in= Maximum soldier beam deflection Cantilever H = 6' sb 13-23, 30-34 with Building + Wall Surcharge_R2.xmcdz 24 Section 5 Shoring Design Group 7727 Caminito Liliana San Diego, CA 92129 330 Chinquapin Eng: RPR Sheet____of____ Date: 10/23/2023 Cantileverd Soldier Beam Design Sb_No "24-29" Soldier Beam Attributes & Properties Pile "Concrete Embed" H 5 ft= Soldier beam retained height x 0 Hs 0 ft--->= Height of retained slope (As applicable) y 0 xt 8 ft= Tributary width of soldier beam dia 24 in= Soldier beam shaft diameter de' dia= Effective soldier beam diameter below subgrade dt 2 H= Assumed soldier beam embedment depth (Initial Guess) w_table "n/a"= Depth below top of wall to design ground water table 200 2010 0 10 Shoring Design Section 2019 CBC 1605A.3.1 Load Cases: D + H + L - (Eqn. 16A-9) D + H + 0.7E - (Eqn. 16A-12) D + H + 0.75(0.7E) + 0.75L (16A-14) Lateral Embedment Safety Factor FSd 1.50= Static Case FS'd 1.13= Seismic Case Cantilever H = 5' sb 24-29 with Building + Wall Surcharge_R2.xmcdz 25 -- I I I - I I Shoring Design Group 7727 Caminito Liliana San Diego, CA 92129 330 Chinquapin Eng: RPR Sheet____of____ Date: 10/23/2023 Soil Parameters Pa 38 pcf= Active earth pressure with slope Pp 275 pcf= Passive earth pressure dz 12 in= Overburden depth at subgrade Pmax "n/a"= Maximum passive earth pressure ("n/a" = not applicable) σ'133%= Passive pressure short term increase for seismic loading Pps Pp dz= Passive pressure offset at subgrade ϕ 32 deg= Internal soil friction angle be 0.08 deg 1ϕde'= Effective soldier beam width below subgrade a_ratio min be xt 1 = Soldier beam arching ratio qa 0 psf= Allowable soldier beam tip end bearing pressure fs 600 psf= Allowable soldier skin friction Bouyant Soil Properties (As applicable) γw 62.4 pcf= Unit weight of water Pp' Pp w_table "n/a"=if Pp γs γs γwotherwise Submereged Pressures (As Applicable) Pp'275 pcfPa' Pa w_table "n/a"=if Pa γs γs γwotherwise Pa'38 pcf Cantilever H = 5' sb 24-29 with Building + Wall Surcharge_R2.xmcdz 26 -■- Shoring Design Group 7727 Caminito Liliana San Diego, CA 92129 330 Chinquapin Eng: RPR Sheet____of____ Date: 10/23/2023 Lateral Live Load Surcharge Uniform Loading Full Pa 18in8 pcfH= Uniform loading full soldier beam height Partial 0 psf= Uniform loading partial soldier beam height Hpar 0 ft= Height of partial uniform surcharge loading Ps y( ) Full Partial0 ftyHparif Full Hpar yHif 0 psfotherwise Uniform surcharge profile per depth Eccentric/Conncentric Axial & Lateral Point Loading Pr 0 kip= Applied axial load per beam e 0 in= Eccentricity of applied compressive load Me Pr e xt = Eccentric bending moment Ph 0 lb= lateral pont load at depth "zh" zh 0 ft= Distance to lateral point load from top of wall Seismic Lateral Load EFP 0.70 0 pcf()= Seismic force equivalent fluid pressure Es EFP H= Maximum seismic force pressure Eq y( ) EFP yyHif 0 psfotherwise = Maximum seismic force pressure Cantilever H = 5' sb 24-29 with Building + Wall Surcharge_R2.xmcdz 27 -- Shoring Design Group 7727 Caminito Liliana San Diego, CA 92129 330 Chinquapin Eng: RPR Sheet____of____ Date: 10/23/2023 Boussinesq Loading Q 2 klf= Surcharge load of continous or isolated footings z'0 ft= Depth below adjacent grade to application of surcharge load x1 6.5 ft= Distance of line load from back face of wall Surcharge Coefficients ny()yz' Hmx1H 1 Boussinesq Equation Pb y()0 psf0 ftyz'if if m 0.40Q H 0.20ny() 0.16 ny()()221.28Q H m2 ny() m2 ny()()22 z' yHif 0 psfotherwise 0 50 100 1500 2 4 Lateral Surcharge Loading Pressure (psf) De p t h ( f t ) Maximum Boussinesq Pressure Δy 5 ft Given Δy Pb Δy()d d 0 psf= Pb Find Δy()()127.9 psf 0 H yPb y() d 0.5 klf Cantilever H = 5' sb 24-29 with Building + Wall Surcharge_R2.xmcdz 28 ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' \ \ \ I I I I I I I I I I I I Shoring Design Group 7727 Caminito Liliana San Diego, CA 92129 330 Chinquapin Eng: RPR Sheet____of____ Date: 10/23/2023 Resolve Forces Acting on Beam (Assume trial values) Summation of Lateral Forces PJ HD()z PE HDz() mE zD() 2 0 PE HDz() mE zD() yPEHDz()mEzD()y d HO HDz yPEy() d H HO yPEy() d 0 H yPAy() d 0 HD yPs y() d 0 HD yPb y() d 0 H yEq y() dPh xt 0= Summation of Moments PJ HD()z PE HDz() mE zD() 2 6 0 PE HDz() mE zD() yPEHDz()mEzD()yzy() d HO HDz yPEy() H Dy() d H HO yPEy() H Dy() d 0 H yPAy() H Dy() dMe 0 HD yPs y() H Dy() d 0 H yEq y() H Dy() d 0 HD yPb y() H Dy() dPh xt HDzh() = z 0 MOMENT FORCE EQUILLIBRIUM D + H + L - (Eqn. 16A-9) D 8.3 5.62 6.7 ftz 2.7 1.7 2.2 ftD + H + 0.7E - (Eqn. 16A-12) max D()8.3ft D + H + 0.75(0.7E) + 0.75L (16A-14) Cantilever H = 5' sb 24-29 with Building + Wall Surcharge_R2.xmcdz 29 Shoring Design Group 7727 Caminito Liliana San Diego, CA 92129 330 Chinquapin Eng: RPR Sheet____of____ Date: 10/23/2023 210311030 11032103 0 5 0 Soldier Beam Pressure Pressure (psf) De p t h ( f t ) Soil Pressures PA H()190.4 psf PD HD13401.3psf PE HD12183.4psf PK HD14867.9 psf PJ HD13310.2 psf 3210 1 2 0 5 0 Shear/ft width Shear (klf) De p t h ( f t ) Distance to zero shear (From top of Pile) ε aH ε Va() aa0.10 ft ε Va() ε 0while areturn ε 7.9 ft Cantilever H = 5' sb 24-29 with Building + Wall Surcharge_R2.xmcdz 30 Shoring Design Group 7727 Caminito Liliana San Diego, CA 92129 330 Chinquapin Eng: RPR Sheet____of____ Date: 10/23/2023 Determine Minimum Pile Size M 50.6 25 39.8 ft kipMmax max M()Mmax 50.6 kip ft AISC Steel Construction Manual 15th Edition Ω 1.67= Allowable strength reduction factor AISC E1 & F1 Δσ 1= Steel overstress for temporary loading Fb Fy Δσ Ω = Allowable bending stress Required Section Modulus: Zr Mmax FbFlexural Yielding, Lb < Lr Zr 20.3 in3 Beam "W12 x 40" Fb 29.9 ksi A 11.7 in2bf 8 inK 1Lu H Pile "Concrete Embed"=if ε otherwise d 11.9 intf 0.5 inZx 57 in3 tw 0.3 inrx 5.1 inIx 307 in4Fe π2 E KLu rx 2 Axial Stresses λ Fy Fe Fcr 0.658λ FyKLu rx 4.71 E Fyif 0.877 Fe( ) otherwise = Nominal compressive stress - AISC E.3-2 & E3-3 = Allowable concentric force - AISC E.3-1Pc Fcr A Ω Ma Zx Fb= Allowable bending moment - AISC F.2-1 Ma 142.2 kip ftInteraction Pr Pc 8 9 Mmax Ma Pr Pc 0.20if Pr 2 Pc Mmax Ma otherwise = AISC H1-1a & H1-1b Mmax 50.6 kip ftInteraction 0.36 Cantilever H = 5' sb 24-29 with Building + Wall Surcharge_R2.xmcdz 31 -F Shoring Design Group 7727 Caminito Liliana San Diego, CA 92129 330 Chinquapin Eng: RPR Sheet____of____ Date: 10/23/2023 Global Stability FS'd 1.13= Minimum embedment depth factor of safety [Seismic Load Case] Embedment depth increase for min. FS Dh' Ceil max D2 D3ft0.5 ft Slidding Forces: Fs V H O2 η H Dh' xPnx() d Dh'7.5ft Resisting Forces:Fs 3.6 klf FR HO2 η xPnx() dFR 4.7klf Overturning Moments: Mo 0 H yDh' Hy()PAy() d 0 H yDh' Hy( ) Ps y()Ud 0 H yDh' Hy() Pb y()d 0 H Dh' H( H HO2 yPEy() d Dh' O2 3 η H Dh' yPny() d H Dh'η 3MePh xt Dh' Hzh() Resisting Moments Mo 13.7 kipMR HO2 η yH Dh'y()Pny() d MR 18kip Factor of Safety: Slidding if FS'd FR Fs"Ok""No Good: Increase Dh" Slidding "Ok"FR Fs 1.3 Overturning if FS'd MR Mo "Ok""No Good: Increase Dh" Overturning "Ok"MR Mo 1.32 Cantilever H = 5' sb 24-29 with Building + Wall Surcharge_R2.xmcdz 32 I I I I Shoring Design Group 7727 Caminito Liliana San Diego, CA 92129 330 Chinquapin Eng: RPR Sheet____of____ Date: 10/23/2023 Global Stability FSd 1.5= Minimum embedment depth factor of safety [Eqn. 16A-9] Embedment depth increase for min. FS Dh Ceil D1 ft1 ft Slidding Forces: Fs V1 HO1 η HDh xPnx() d Dh 10 ft Resisting Forces:Fs 3.9 klf FR HO1 η xPnx() dFR 6.1klf Overturning Moments: Mo 0 H yDh Hy()PAy() d 0 H yDh Hy( ) Ps y() d 0 H yDh Hy( ) Pb y() d H HO1 yPEy() dDh O1 3 η HDh yPny() d HDhη 3MePh xt Dh Hzh() Resisting Moments Mo 18.8 kipMR HO1 η yHDhy()Pny() d MR 29.9kip Factor of Safety: Slidding if FSd FR Fs"Ok""No Good: Increase Dh" Slidding "Ok"FR Fs 1.5 Overturning if FSd MR Mo "Ok""No Good: Increase Dh" Overturning "Ok"MR Mo 1.59 Cantilever H = 5' sb 24-29 with Building + Wall Surcharge_R2.xmcdz 33 I I I I Shoring Design Group 7727 Caminito Liliana San Diego, CA 92129 330 Chinquapin Eng: RPR Sheet____of____ Date: 10/23/2023 Vertical Embedment Depth Axial Resistance qa 0 psf= Allowable soldier beam tip end bearing pressure fs 600 psf= Allowable soldier skin friction Pr 0 kip= Applied axial load per beam p'π diaPile "Concrete Embed"=if 2 bf dotherwise = Applied axial load per beam Allowable Axial Resistance Qy( ) p' fsyπ dia2qa 4 Pile "Concrete Embed"=if bf dqaotherwise Dv ε 0 ft τ Q ε() εε0.10 ft τ Pr Q ε() τ 0while εreturn Dv 0 ft Dh 10 ft Selected Toe Depth Dtoe if max Dh Dh'()Dvmax Dh Dh'()Dv() Dtoe 10 ft Maximum Deflection L' H D1 4= Effective length about pile rotation Δ xt EIx0 L' yyM'y()dΔ 0.11 in Cantilever H = 5' sb 24-29 with Building + Wall Surcharge_R2.xmcdz 34 Shoring Design Group 7727 Caminito Liliana San Diego, CA 92129 330 Chinquapin Eng: RPR Sheet____of____ Date: 10/23/2023 Design Summary: Beam "W12 x 40"Sb_No "24-29" H 5 ft= Soldier beam retained height Dtoe 10 ft= Minimum soldier beam embedment H Dtoe15ft= Total length of soldier beam xt 8 ft= Tributary width of soldier beam dia 24 in= Soldier beam shaft diameter Δ 0.11 in= Maximum soldier beam deflection Cantilever H = 5' sb 24-29 with Building + Wall Surcharge_R2.xmcdz 35 Section 6 Shoring Design Group 7727 Caminito Liliana San Diego, CA 92129 330 Chinquapin Eng: RPR Sheet____of____ Date: 10/21/2022 Timber Lagging Design Lagging Geometry Lagging "4x12, DF#1" L 9 ft= Soldier beam center to center space b 1 ft= Lagging width shaft 24 in= Min. drill shaft backfill diameter S L shaft= Lagging clear span S 7 ft Soil Parameters ϕ 32 deg= Internal soil friction angle c 100 psf= Soil cohesion (Conservative) γ 125 pcf= Soil unit weight ka tan 45 degϕ 2 2 = Active earth pressure coefficient area π S2 8= Silo cross sectional area (See figure) Lagging soil wedge functions Wz( ) area γz= Columnar silo vertical surcharge pressure fs z() kaγtan ϕ()zc= Soil column side friction ka 0.31 w 0 psf= Additional wedge surcharge pressure area 19.2ft2 Surcharge 127.9 psf= Lateral surcharge pressure Timber Lagging Design.xmcdz 36 Verify if seismic soil pressure (for permanent shoring) and surcharge loads in addition to static active soil pressure are considered in timber lagging designs. D w dz z Soil Wedge Geometry Shoring Design Group 7727 Caminito Liliana San Diego, CA 92129 330 Chinquapin Eng: RPR Sheet____of____ Date: 10/21/2022 Maximum Lagging Design Pressure Summing forces vertically Fv z() Wz( ) w areaπ S 2 0 z zfs z() d Summing forces horizontally Pz()ka γS 2 ckaSurchargeFv z()ka area Given , inital guess:z 3 ft Taking partial derivative with respect to z: z Pz()d d 0=D Find z() γ S4 c 4 γkatan ϕ()()4.9 ftDepth to critical tension crack & maximum lagging design pressureD4.9 ft Maximum design pressure Pmax PD()= Maximum lagging pressure 2 4 6 80 2103 4103 6103 8103 Soil Pressure Lagging Length (ft) So i l P r e s s u r e ( p s f ) Pmax 258.5 psf Sectional Properties Lagging "4x12, DF#1" d 4 in= Lagging thickness = Section modulus (Rough Sawn)Sm bd 1 4 in 2 6 Abd1 4 in = Lagging cross sectional area (Rough Sawn) Timber Lagging Design.xmcdz 37 _-r I I __ _J I I __ _J Shoring Design Group 7727 Caminito Liliana San Diego, CA 92129 330 Chinquapin Eng: RPR Sheet____of____ Date: 10/21/2022 Allowable Stress Design 0 2 4 6 82104 0 2104 4104 6104 8104 Shear & Moment Diagrams Lagging Length (ft) Maximum lagging stresses Mmax M 0.5 L()= Maximum bending moment Vmax V 0.5 shaft()= Maximum shear force Mmax 1922.4 ft lbffb Mmax Sm Vmax 603.1 lbffv 3 2 Vmax A NDS Allowable Stress & Adjustment Factors Fb 1200psi= Allowable flexural stress_NDS Table 4A Fv 180 psi= Allowable shear stress_NDS Table 4A CD 1.1= Load duration factor_NDS Figure B1, Appendix B Cr 1.15= Repetative member factor_NDS 4.3.9 Cfu 1.1= Flat-use factor CF 1.1= Size factor Ct 1= Temprature factor_NDS Table 2.3.3 Ci 1= Incising factor CL 1= Beam stability factor (Flat) CF Fb1320 psi Maximum Design Stress CM 1 CF Fb1150 psiif 0.85 otherwise = Wet service factor fb 820.2 psi fv 20.1 psi CM 0.85 Timber Lagging Design.xmcdz 38 Shoring Design Group 7727 Caminito Liliana San Diego, CA 92129 330 Chinquapin Eng: RPR Sheet____of____ Date: 10/21/2022 Tabulated Stresses Bending Stress Fb' CD CMCtCLCFCfuCiCrFb= Tabulated bending stress_NDS Table 4.3.1 Bending if fb Fb'"Ok""No Good"() Fb'1561 psi fb 820 psiBending "Ok" Shear Stress Fv' CD CMCtCiFv= Tabulated shear stress_NDS Table 4.3.1 Shear if fv Fv'"Ok""No Good"() Fv'168 psi fv 20.1 psiShear "Ok" Upsize timber lagging to 6x for durability Timber Lagging Design.xmcdz 39 Section 7 Shoring Design Group 330 Chinquapin Soldier Beam Schedule 10/23/2023 Revision 1 Toe Total Toe From To Beam Beam Shored Depth Beam Diameter Beam Beam Qty Section Height Length H D H+D Dshaft ft ft ft in 1 12 12 W 12 x 40 * 5.0 * 9.0 14.0 24 13 16 4 W 12 x 40 6.0 12.0 18.0 24 17 18 2 W 12 x 40 6.0 13.0 19.0 24 19 23 5 W 12 x 40 6.0 12.0 18.0 24 24 24 1 W 12 x 40 5.0 10.0 15.0 24 25 26 2 W 12 x 40 5.0 13.0 18.0 24 27 29 3 W 12 x 40 5.0 10.0 15.0 24 30 34 5 W 12 x 40 6.0 12.0 18.0 24 NOTE: *SB#1-5 SHORED HEIGHT IS THE PERMANENT FINISHED CONDITION, FROM THE RE-COMPACTED PAD GRADE. Section 8 RE P O R T O F P R E L I M I N A R Y G E O T E C H N I C A L IN V E S T I G A T I O N Pr o p o s e d C h i n q u a p i n C o a s t H o m e s 33 0 C h i n q u a p i n A v e n u e Ca r l s b a d , C a l i f o r n i a JO B N O . 2 1 - 1 3 5 0 6 28 O c t o b e r 2 0 2 1 Pr e p a r e d f o r : RI N C O N C A P I T A L G R O U P , L L C ii 28 October 2021 RINCON CAPITAL GROUP, LLC Job No. 21-13506 5315 Avenida Encinas, Suite 200 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Attn: Mr. Kevin Dunn Subject: Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Proposed Chinquapin Coastal Homes 330 Chinquapin Avenue Carlsbad, California Dear Mr. Dunn: In accordance with your request, and our proposal of August 23, 2021, Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. has performed a preliminary geotechnical investigation for the proposed residential project in Carlsbad, California. The field work was performed on October 5, 2021. If the conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are incorporated into the design and construction of the proposed nine (9) three-story, single family residences with ground-floor garages and associated improvements, it is our opinion that the site is suitable for the proposed project. This opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. Should you have any questions concerning the following report, please do not hesitate to contact us. Reference to our Job No. 21-13506 will expedite a response to your inquiries. Respectfully submitted, GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. _______________________________ ______________________________ Jaime A. Cerros, P.E. Leslie D. Reed, President Senior Geotechnical Engineer C.E.G. 999/P.G. 3391 R.C.E. 34422/G.E. 2007 Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. SOIL AND FOUNDATION ENGINEERING • GROUNDWATER • ENGINEERING GEOLOGY 7420 TRADE STREET• SAN DIEGO, CA. 92121 • (858) 549-7222 • FAX: (858) 549-1604 • EMAIL: geotech@gei-sd.com TABLE OF CONTENTS I. PROJECT SUMMARY .................................................................................. 1 II. SCOPE OF WORK ..................................................................................... 1 III. SITE DESCRIPTION ................................................................................ 2 IV. FIELD INVESTIGATION ............................................................................ 3 V. LABORATORY TESTING & SOIL INFORMATION ............................................. 4 VI. REGIONAL GEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION ......................................................... 7 VII. SITE-SPECIFIC SOIL & GEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION ..................................... 12 VIII. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS .......................................................................... 13 A. Local and Regional Faults ............................................................ 13 B. Other Geologic Hazards .............................................................. 19 IX. GROUNDWATER ................................................................................... 22 X. CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................... 24 A. Preparation of Soils for Site Development ...................................... 25 B. Seismic Design Criteria ............................................................... 34 C. Foundation Recommendations ..................................................... 35 D. Retaining Wall Design ................................................................. 37 E. Concrete Slab On-Grade Criteria .................................................. 39 F. Pavements ................................................................................ 43 G. Site Drainage Considerations ....................................................... 44 H. General Recommendations .......................................................... 45 XI. GRADING NOTES .................................................................................. 47 XII. LIMITATIONS ...................................................................................... 47 REFERENCES FIGURES I. Vicinity Map II. Plot Plan and Site-Specific Geologic Map IIIa-m. Exploratory Excavation Logs and Laboratory Results IV. Laboratory Test Results V. Geologic Map Excerpt and Legend APPENDICES A. Unified Soil Classification System B. Storm Water Infiltration Testing -- Group Delta C. Laboratory Tests -- Group Delta D. ASCE Seismic Summary Report REPORT OF PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION Proposed Chinquapin Coast Homes 330 Chinquapin Avenue Carlsbad, California JOB NO. 21-13506 The following report presents the findings and recommendations of Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. for the subject project. I. PROJECT SUMMARY It is our understanding, based on our review of the available conceptual site plan prepared by Kirk Moeller Architects, Inc., that the existing residential structure and associated improvements are to be entirely demolished and replaced with nine (9) three-story residential structures with ground-level garages, a shared driveway, parking areas and associated improvements. The new structures are to be constructed of standard-type building materials utilizing conventional foundations with concrete slab on-grade. Foundation loads are expected to be typical for this type of relatively light construction. When final plans are completed, they should be made available for our review. Additional or modified recommendations will be provided at that time if warranted. Based on the available information at this stage, it is our opinion that the proposed site development would not destabilize neighboring properties or induce the settlement of adjacent structures or improvements if designed and constructed in accordance with our recommendations. II. SCOPE OF WORK The scope of work performed for this investigation included a site reconnaissance and subsurface exploration program under the direction of our geologist with placement, Chinquapin Coast Homes Job No. 21-13506 Carlsbad, California Page 2 logging and sampling of thirteen (13) exploratory handpit excavations, review of available published information pertaining to the site geology, laboratory testing, geotechnical engineering analysis of the field and laboratory data, and the preparation of this report. The data obtained and the analyses performed were for the purpose of providing design and construction criteria for the project earthwork, building foundations, slab on-grade floors and associated improvements. In addition, we were provided and reviewed a previously prepared geotechnical report for a prior proposed development at the site titled “Report of Geotechnical Investigation, 330 Chinquapin Avenue, Carlsbad, California” dated November 30, 2018, by Group Delta Consultants, Inc. (their Project No. SD589). Storm Water Infiltration Testing was performed by Group Delta in 2018 and has been included as Appendix B in this report. III. SITE DESCRIPTION The lot is known as Assessor’s Parcel No. 206-020-11-00, the northeastern half of Lot 3 of Palisades No. 2 in Block S, according to Recorded Map No. 1803, with a current address of 330 Chinquapin Avenue, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California. Refer to Figure No. I, Vicinity Map, for the site location. The rectangular-shaped property is located on the north side of Chinquapin Avenue and is bordered on the north, east and west by multi-family residential developments. Refer to the Plot Plan, Figure No. II. The existing property is currently developed with a single-story, single-family residential structure, an asphalt-paved driveway, walkways, and associated improvements. Vegetation on the site primarily consists of decorative shrubbery and mature trees. The large rear yard is covered with grasses and weeds. Chinquapin Coast Homes Job No. 21-13506 Carlsbad, California Page 3 The property is relatively level with elevations on the property ranging from 50 feet above mean sea level (MSL) at the front (south) of the property adjacent to Chinquapin Avenue to an approximate elevation of 54 feet above mean sea level (MSL) across most of the property. Survey information concerning elevations across the site was obtained from topographic elevations provided on the Conceptual Site Plan prepared by Kirk Moeller Architects, Inc., dated August 18, 2021. IV. FIELD INVESTIGATION A. Subsurface Soils Investigation The field investigation was conducted on October 5, 2021, and consisted of surface reconnaissance and a subsurface exploration program utilizing hand tools to investigate and sample the subsurface soils. Thirteen (13) exploratory handpit excavations (HP-1 through HP-13) were excavated to depths ranging from 1 foot to 2.5 feet in the areas of the proposed construction and associated improvements. Excavation locations were limited to accessible areas. The handpits were continuously logged in the field by our geologist and described in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (refer to Appendix A). The approximate locations of the exploratory handpit excavations are shown on the Plot Plan, Figure No. II. In addition to our handpit excavations we reviewed five boring logs contained within the “Report of Geotechnical Investigation, 330 Chinquapin Avenue, Carlsbad, California” dated November 30, 2018, by Group Delta Consultants, Inc. (their Project No. SD589). The small-diameter borings were placed to depths ranging from 4.9 to 21.5 feet. Representative samples were obtained from the exploratory excavations at selected depths appropriate to the investigation. Relatively undisturbed drive samples and disturbed bulk samples were collected from the exploratory handpits to aid in Chinquapin Coast Homes Job No. 21-13506 Carlsbad, California Page 4 classification and for appropriate laboratory testing. The samples were returned to our laboratory for evaluation and testing. Exploratory excavation logs have been prepared on the basis of our observations and laboratory test results, and are attached as Figure Nos. IIIa-m. The exploratory excavation logs and related information depict subsurface conditions only at the specific locations shown on the plot plan and on the particular date designated on the logs. Subsurface conditions at other locations may differ from conditions occurring at the locations. Also, the passage of time may result in changes in subsurface conditions due to environmental changes. B. Storm Water Infiltration Testing Infiltration testing was previously performed at the site by Group Delta in 2018. We have included in Appendix B the results of the Infiltration testing and the Worksheet I-8: Categorization of Infiltration Feasibility Condition prepared by Group Delta. V. LABORATORY TESTING & SOIL INFORMATION Laboratory tests were performed on retrieved soil samples in order to evaluate their physical and mechanical properties. The test results are presented on Figure Nos. IIIa-e and IVa-c. The following tests were conducted on representative soil samples: Chinquapin Coast Homes Job No. 21-13506 Carlsbad, California Page 5 1. Moisture Content (ASTM D2216-19) 2. Density Measurements (ASTM D2937-17e2) 3. Laboratory Compaction Characteristics (ASTM D1557-12e1) 4. Determination of Percentage of Particles Smaller than #200 Sieve (ASTM D1140-17) 5. Standard Test Method for Expansion Index of Soils (ASTM 4829-11) 6. Resistivity and pH Analysis (Department of Transportation California Test 643) 7. Water Soluble Sulfate (Department of Transportation California Test 417) 8. Water Soluble Chloride (Department of Transportation California Test 422) Moisture content and density measurements were performed by ASTM methods D2216-19 and D2937-17e2 respectively, in conjunction with D1188-07 to establish the in-situ moisture and density of samples retrieved from the exploratory excavations. The test results are presented on the handpit logs at the appropriate sample depths and laboratory test results. Laboratory compaction values (ASTM D1557-12e1) establish the optimum moisture content and the laboratory maximum dry density of the tested soils. The relationship between the moisture and density of remolded soil samples helps to establish the relative compaction of the existing site soils and the soil compaction conditions to be anticipated during any future grading operation. The test results are presented on the handpit logs at the appropriate sample depths and laboratory test results. The particle size smaller than a No. 200 sieve analysis (ASTM D1140-17) aids in classifying the tested soils in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System and provides qualitative information related to engineering characteristics such as expansion potential, permeability, and shear strength. The test results are presented on the handpit logs at the appropriate sample depths and laboratory test results. Chinquapin Coast Homes Job No. 21-13506 Carlsbad, California Page 6 The expansion potential of soils is determined, when necessary, utilizing the Standard Test Method for Expansion Index of Soils (ASTM D4829-19). In accordance with the Standard (Table 5.3), potentially expansive soils are classified as follows: EXPANSION INDEX POTENTIAL EXPANSION 0 to 20 Very low 21 to 50 Low 51 to 90 Medium 91 to 130 High Above 130 Very high Expansion index testing of a representative sample of the sandy onsite natural soil resulted in an expansion index of 0 (Sample retrieved at the location of excavation HP-6). In addition, expansion index testing of two representative samples of the sandy onsite fill and natural soils by Group Delta in 2018 also resulted in expansion indices of 0 for both samples (refer to Appendix C for Group Delta laboratory test results). Based on our visual classification, our Expansion Index and particle-size test results, and our experience with similar soils, it is our opinion that the existing silty sand fill and the formational materials of the Old Paralic Deposits, Units 6-7, encountered in the excavations possess a negligible to very low potential for expansion (EI less than 20). Therefore, we have assigned a maximum expansion index of less than 20 to these soils. The primary cause of deterioration of concrete in foundations and other below ground structures is the corrosive attack by soluble sulfates present in the soil and groundwater. Soil with a chloride concentration greater than or equal to 500 ppm (0.05 percent) or more is considered corrosive to ferrous metals. The results of water-soluble sulfate testing performed on a representative sample of the near surface soils by Group Delta in 2018 in the general area of the proposed structures, yielded a soluble Chinquapin Coast Homes Job No. 21-13506 Carlsbad, California Page 7 sulfate content of 0.01 percent, indicating that the proposed cement-concrete structures that are in contact with the underlying soils are anticipated to not be affected by negligible sulfate exposure. As such, there is no restriction on selection of cement type (refer to Appendix C for Group Delta laboratory test results). It should be noted that Geotechnical Exploration Inc., does not practice corrosion engineering and our assessment here should be construed as an aid to the owner or owner’s representative. A corrosion specialist should be consulted for any specific design requirement. Based on the field and laboratory test data, our observations of the primary soil types, and our previous experience with laboratory testing of similar soils, our Geotechnical Engineer has assigned values for friction angle, coefficient of friction, and cohesion for those soils that will have significant lateral support or load bearing functions on the project. The assumed soil strength values have been utilized in determining the recommended bearing value as well as active and passive earth pressure design criteria for foundations, retaining walls and shoring. VI. REGIONAL GEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION San Diego County has been divided into three major geomorphic provinces: The Coastal Plain, the Peninsular Ranges and the Salton Trough. The Coastal Plain exists west of the Peninsular Ranges. The Salton Trough is east of the Peninsular Ranges. These divisions are the result of the basic geologic distinctions between the areas. Mesozoic metavolcanic, metasedimentary and plutonic rocks predominate in the Peninsular Ranges with primarily Cenozoic sedimentary rocks to the west and east of this central mountain range (Demere, 1997). Ch i n q u a p i n C o a s t H o m e s Jo b N o . 2 1 - 1 3 5 0 6 Ca r l s b a d , C a l i f o r n i a Pa g e 8 In t h e C o a s t a l P l a i n r e g i o n , w h e r e t h e s u b j e c t p r o p e r t y i s l o c a t e d , t h e “ b a s e m e n t ” co n s i s t s o f M e s o z o i c c r y s t a l l i n e r o c k s . B a se m e n t r o c k s a r e a l s o e x p o s e d a s h i g h r e l i e f ar e a s ( e . g . , B l a c k M o u n t a i n n o r t h e a s t o f t h e s u b j e c t p r o p e r t y a n d C o w l e s M o u n t a i n ne a r t h e S a n C a r l o s a r e a o f S a n D i e g o ) . Y o u n g e r C r e t a c e o u s a n d T e r t i a r y s e d i m e n t s la p u p a g a i n s t t h e s e o l d e r f e a t u r e s . T h e s e s e d i m e n t s f o r m a “ la y e r c a k e ” s e q u e n c e of m a r i n e a n d n o n - m a r i n e s e di m e n t a r y r o c k u n i t s , w i t h s o m e f o r m a t i o n s u p t o 1 4 0 mi l l i o n y e a r s o l d . F a u l t i n g r e l a t e d t o t h e La N a c i ó n a n d R o s e C a n y o n F a u l t z o n e s h a s br o k e n u p t h i s s e q u e n c e i n t o a n u m b e r o f di s t i n c t f a u l t b l o c k s i n t h e s o u t h w e s t e r n pa r t o f t h e c o u n t y . N o r t h w e s t e r n p o r t i o ns o f t h e c o u n t y a r e r e l a t i v e l y u n d e f o r m e d by f a u l t i n g ( D e m e r e , 1 9 9 7 ) . Th e P e n i n s u l a r R a n g e f o r m t h e g r a n i t i c s p i n e o f S a n D i e g o C o u n t y . T h e s e r o c k s a r e pr i m a r i l y p l u t o n i c , f o r m i n g a t d e p t h b e n e a t h th e e a r t h ’ s c r u s t 1 4 0 t o 9 0 m i l l i o n y e a r s ag o a s t h e r e s u l t o f t h e s u b d u c t i o n o f a n o c e a n i c c r u s t a l p l a t e b e n e a t h t h e N o r t h Am e r i c a n c o n t i n e n t . T h e s e r o c k s f o r m e d t h e m u c h l a r g e r S o u t h e r n C a l i f o r n i a ba t h o l i t h . M e t a m o r p h i s m a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e i n t r u s i o n o f t h e s e g r e a t g r a n i t i c m a s s e s af f e c t e d t h e m u c h o l d e r s e d i m e n t s t h a t e x i s te d n e a r t h e s u r f a c e o v e r t h a t p e r i o d o f ti m e . T h e s e m e t a s e d i m e n t a r y r o c k s r e m a i n a s r o o f p e n d a n t s o f m a r b l e , s c h i s t , s l a t e , qu a r t z i t e a n d g n e i s s t h r o u g h o u t t h e P e n i ns u l a r R a n g e s . L o ca l l y , M i o c e n e - a g e vo l c a n i c r o c k s a n d f l o w s h a v e a l s o a c c u m u l a t e d w i t h i n t h e s e m o u n t a i n s ( e . g . , Ja c u m b a V a l l e y ) . R e g i o n a l t e c t o n i c f o r c e s a n d e r o s i o n o v e r t i m e h a v e u p l i f t e d a n d un r o o f e d t h e s e g r a n i t i c r o c k s t o e x p o s e t h e m a t t h e s u r f a c e ( D e m e r e , 1 9 9 7 ) . Th e S a l t o n T r o u g h i s t h e n o r t h e r l y e x t e n s i o n of t h e G u l f o f C a l i f o r n i a . T h i s z o n e i s un d e r g o i n g a c t i v e d e f o r m a t i o n r e l a t e d t o f a u l t i n g a l o n g t h e E l s i n o r e a n d S a n J a c i n t o Fa u l t Z o n e s , w h i c h a r e p a r t o f t h e m a j o r r e g i on a l t e c t o n i c f e a t u r e i n t h e s o u t h w e s t e r n po r t i o n o f C a l i f o r n i a , t h e S a n A n d r e a s F a ul t Z o n e . T r a n s l a t i o n a l m o v e m e n t a l o n g th e s e f a u l t z o n e s h a s r e s u l t e d i n c r u s t a l r i f t i n g a n d s u b s i d e n c e . T h e S a l t o n T r o u g h , al s o r e f e r r e d t o a s t h e C o l o r a d o D e s e r t , h a s b e e n f i l l e d w i t h s e d i m e n t s t o d e p t h o f ii Ch i n q u a p i n C o a s t H o m e s Jo b N o . 2 1 - 1 3 5 0 6 Ca r l s b a d , C a l i f o r n i a Pa g e 9 ap p r o x i m a t e l y 5 m i l e s s i n c e t h e m o v e m e n t b e g a n i n t h e e a r l y M i o c e n e , 2 4 m i l l i o n ye a r s a g o . T h e s o u r c e o f t h e s e s e d i m e n t s h a s b e e n t h e l o c a l m o u n t a i n s a s w e l l a s th e a n c e s t r a l a n d m o d e r n C o l o r a d o R i v e r ( D e m e r e , 1 9 9 7 ) . As i n d i c a t e d p r e v i o u s l y , t h e S a n D i e g o a r e a i s p a r t o f a s e i s m i c a l l y a c t i v e r e g i o n o f Ca l i f o r n i a . I t i s o n t h e e a s t e r n b o u n d a r y o f t h e S o u t h e r n C a l i f o r n i a C o n t i n e n t a l Bo r d e r l a n d , p a r t o f t h e P e n i n s u l a r R a n g e s G e o m o r p h i c P r o v i n c e . T h i s r e g i o n i s p a r t of a b r o a d t e c t o n i c b o u n d a r y b e t w e e n t h e N o r t h A m e r i c a n a n d P a c i f i c P l a t e s . T h e ac t u a l p l a t e b o u n d a r y i s c h a r a c t e r i z e d b y a c o m p l e x s y s t e m o f a c t i v e , m a j o r , r i g h t - la t e r a l s t r i k e - s l i p f a u l t s , t r e n d i n g n o r t h w e s t/ s o u t h e a s t . T h i s fa u l t s y s t e m e x t e n d s ea s t w a r d t o t h e S a n A n d r e a s F a u l t ( a p p r o x i m a t e l y 7 0 m i l e s f r o m S a n D i e g o ) a n d we s t w a r d t o t h e S a n C l e m e n t e F a u l t ( a p p r o x i m a t e l y 5 0 m i l e s o f f - s h o r e f r o m S a n Di e g o ) ( B e r g e r a n d S c h u g , 1 9 9 1 ) . In C a l i f o r n i a , m a j o r e a r t h q u a k e s c a n g e n e r a l l y b e c o r r e l a t e d w i t h m o v e m e n t o n ac t i v e f a u l t s . A s d e f i n e d b y t h e C a l i f o r n ia D i v i s i o n o f M i n e s a n d G e o l o g y , n o w t h e Ca l i f o r n i a G e o l o g i c a l S u r v e y , a n " a c t i v e " f a u l t i s o n e t h a t h a s h a d g r o u n d s u r f a c e di s p l a c e m e n t w i t h i n H o l o c e n e t i m e , a b o u t t h e l a s t 1 1 , 0 0 0 y e a r s ( H a r t a n d B r y a n t , 19 9 7 ) . A d d i t i o n a l l y , f a u l t s a l o n g w h i c h m a jo r h i s t o r i c a l e a r t h q u a k e s h a v e o c c u r r e d (a b o u t t h e l a s t 2 1 0 y e a r s i n C a l i f o r n i a ) a r e a l s o c o n s i d e r e d t o b e a c t i v e ( A s s o c i a t i o n of E n g i n e e r i n g G e o l o g i s t , 1 9 7 3 ) . T h e C a l i f o r n i a D i v i s i o n o f M i n e s a n d G e o l o g y d e f i n e s a "p o t e n t i a l l y a c t i v e " f a u l t a s o n e t h a t h a s h a d g r o u n d s u r f a c e d i s p l a c e m e n t d u r i n g Qu a t e r n a r y t i m e , t h a t i s , b e t w e e n 1 1 , 0 0 0 a n d 1 . 6 m i l l i o n y e a r s ( H a r t a n d B r y a n t , 19 9 7 ) . Du r i n g r e c e n t h i s t o r y , p r i o r t o A p r i l 20 1 0 , t h e S a n D i e g o C o u n t y a r e a h a s b e e n re l a t i v e l y q u i e t s e i s m i c a l l y . N o f a u l t ru p t u r e s o r m a j o r e a rt h q u a k e s h a d b e e n ex p e r i e n c e d i n h i s t o r i c t i m e w i t h i n t h e gr e a t e r S a n D i e g o a r e a . S i n c e e a r t h q u a k e s ha v e b e e n r e c o r d e d b y i n s t r u m e n t s ( s i n c e t h e 1 9 3 0 s ) , t h e S a n D i e g o a r e a h a s ii Ch i n q u a p i n C o a s t H o m e s Jo b N o . 2 1 - 1 3 5 0 6 Ca r l s b a d , C a l i f o r n i a Pa g e 1 0 ex p e r i e n c e d s c a t t e r e d s e i s m i c e v e n t s w i t h Ri c h t e r m a g n i t u d e s g e n e r a l l y l e s s t h a n M4 . 0 . D u r i n g J u n e 1 9 8 5 , a s e r i e s o f s m al l e a r t h q u a k e s o c c u r r e d b e n e a t h S a n D i e g o Ba y , t h r e e o f w h i c h w e r e r e c o r d e d a t M 4 . 0 t o M 4 . 2 . I n a d d i t i o n , t h e O c e a n s i d e ea r t h q u a k e o f J u l y 1 3 , 1 9 8 6 , l o c a t e d a p p r o x i m a t e l y 2 6 m i l e s o f f s h o r e o f t h e C i t y o f Oc e a n s i d e , h a d a m a g n i t u d e o f M 5 . 3 ( H a u k s s o n a n d J o n e s , 1 9 8 8 ) . On J u n e 1 5 , 2 0 0 4 , a M 5 . 3 e a r t h q u a k e o c c u r r e d a p p r o x i m a t e l y 4 5 m i l e s s o u t h w e s t o f do w n t o w n S a n D i e g o ( 2 6 m i l e s w e s t o f R o s a r i t o , M e x i c o ) . A l t h o u g h t h i s e a r t h q u a k e wa s w i d e l y f e l t , n o s i g n i f i c a n t d a m a g e w a s r e p o r t e d . A n o t h e r w i d e l y f e l t e a r t h q u a k e on a d i s t a n t s o u t h e r n C a l i f o r n i a f a u l t w a s a M 5 . 4 e v e n t t h a t t o o k p l a c e o n J u l y 2 9 , 20 0 8 , w e s t - s o u t h w e s t o f t h e C h i n o H i l l s a r e a o f R i v e r s i d e C o u n t y . Se v e r a l e a r t h q u a k e s r a n g i n g f r o m M 5 . 0 t o M 6 . 0 o c c u r r e d i n n o r t h e r n B a j a C a l i f o r n i a , ce n t e r e d i n t h e G u l f o f C a l i f o r n i a o n A u g u s t 3 , 2 0 0 9 . T h e s e w e r e f e l t i n S a n D i e g o bu t n o i n j u r i e s o r d a m a g e w a s r e p o r t e d . A M 5 . 8 e a r t h q u a k e f o l l o w e d b y a M 4 . 9 af t e r s h o c k o c c u r r e d o n D e c e m b e r 3 0 , 2 0 0 9 , c e n t e r e d a b o u t 2 0 m i l e s s o u t h o f t h e Me x i c a n b o r d e r c i t y o f M e x i c a l i . T h e s e w e r e a l s o f e l t i n S a n D i e g o , s w a y i n g h i g h - r i s e bu i l d i n g s , b u t a g a i n n o s i g n i f i c a n t d a m a g e o r i n j u r i e s w e r e r e p o r t e d . On A p r i l 4 , 2 0 1 0 , a l a r g e e a r t h q u a k e o c c u rr e d i n B a j a C a l i f o r n i a , M e x i c o . I t w a s wi d e l y f e l t t h r o u g h o u t t h e s o u t h w e s t i n c l ud i n g P h o e n i x , A r i z o n a a n d S a n D i e g o i n Ca l i f o r n i a . T h i s M 7 . 2 e v e n t , t h e S i e r r a E l M a y o r e a r t h q u a k e , o c c u r r e d i n n o r t h e r n Ba j a C a l i f o r n i a , a p p r o x i m a t e l y 4 0 m i l e s s o u t h o f t h e M e x i c o - U S A b o r d e r a t s h a l l o w de p t h a l o n g t h e p r i n c i p a l p l a t e b o u n d a r y b e t w e e n t h e N o r t h A m e r i c a n a n d P a c i f i c pl a t e s . A c c o r d i n g t o t h e U . S . G e o l o g i c a l S u r v e y t h i s i s a n a r e a w i t h a h i g h l e v e l o f hi s t o r i c a l s e i s m i c i t y , a n d i t h a s r e c e n t l y a l s o b e e n s e i s m i c a l l y a c t i v e , a l t h o u g h t h i s i s th e l a r g e s t e v e n t t o s t r i k e i n t h i s a r e a si n c e 1 8 9 2 . T h e A p r i l 4 , 2 0 1 0 , e a r t h q u a k e ap p e a r s t o h a v e b e e n l a r g e r t h a n t h e M 6 . 9 e a r t h q u a k e i n 1 9 4 0 o r a n y o f t h e e a r l y 20 th c e n t u r y e v e n t s ( e . g . , 1 9 1 5 a n d 1 9 3 4 ) i n t h i s r e g i o n o f n o r t h e r n B a j a C a l i f o r n i a . ii Ch i n q u a p i n C o a s t H o m e s Jo b N o . 2 1 - 1 3 5 0 6 Ca r l s b a d , C a l i f o r n i a Pa g e 1 1 Th e e v e n t c a u s e d w i d e s p r e a d d a m a g e t o s t r u c t u r e s , c l o s u r e o f b u s i n e s s e s , go v e r n m e n t o f f i c e s a n d s c h o o l s , p o w e r o u t a g e s , d i s p l a c e m e n t o f p e o p l e f r o m t h e i r ho m e s a n d i n j u r i e s i n t h e n e a r b y m a j o r m e t r o p o l i t a n a r e a s o f M e x i c a l i i n M e x i c o a n d Ca l e x i c o i n S o u t h e r n C a l i f o r n i a . Th i s e v e n t ' s a f t e r s h o c k z o n e ex t e n d s s i g n i f i c a n t l y t o t h e n o r t h w e s t , o v e r l a p p i n g w i t h th e p o r t i o n o f t h e f a u l t s y s t e m t h a t i s th o u g h t t o h a v e r u p t u r e d i n 1 8 9 2 . S o m e st r u c t u r e s i n t h e S a n D i e g o a r e a e x p e r i e n c e d m i n o r d a m a g e a n d t h e r e w e r e s o m e in j u r i e s . G r o u n d m o t i o n s f o r t h e A p r i l 4 , 20 1 0 , m a i n e v e n t , r e c o r d e d a t s t a t i o n s i n Sa n D i e g o a n d r e p o r t e d b y t h e C a l i f o r n i a S t r o n g M o t i o n I n s t r u m e n t a t i o n P r o g r a m (C S M I P ) , r a n g e d u p t o 0 . 0 5 8 g . On J u l y 7 , 2 0 1 0 , a M 5 . 4 e a r t h q u a k e o c cu r r e d i n S o u t h e r n C a l i f o r n i a a t 4 : 5 3 p m (P a c i f i c T i m e ) a b o u t 3 0 m i l e s s o u t h o f P a l m Sp r i n g s , 2 5 m i l e s s o u t hw e s t o f I n d i o , a n d 13 m i l e s n o r t h - n o r t h w e s t o f B o r r e g o S p r i n g s . T h e e a r t h q u a k e o c c u r r e d n e a r t h e Co y o t e C r e e k s e g m e n t o f t h e S a n J a c i n t o F a u l t . T h e e a r t h q u a k e e x h i b i t e d r i g h t la t e r a l s l i p t o t h e n o r t h w e s t , c o n s i s t e n t wi t h t h e d i r e c t i o n o f m o v e m e n t o n t h e S a n Ja c i n t o F a u l t . T h e e a r t h q u a k e w a s f e l t t h ro u g h o u t S o u t h e r n C a l i f o r n i a , w i t h s t r o n g sh a k i n g n e a r t h e e p i c e n t e r . I t w a s f o l l o w e d b y m o r e t h a n 6 0 a f t e r s h o c k s o f M 1 . 3 an d g r e a t e r d u r i n g t h e f i r s t h o u r . In t h e l a s t 5 0 y e a r s , t h e r e h a v e b e e n f o u r o t h e r e a r t h q u a k e s i n t h e m a g n i t u d e M 5 . 0 ra n g e w i t h i n 2 0 k i l o m e t e r s o f t h e C o y o t e C r e e k s e g m e n t : M 5 . 8 i n 1 9 6 8 , M 5 . 3 o n 2/ 2 5 / 1 9 8 0 , M 5 . 0 o n 1 0 / 3 1 / 2 0 0 1 , a n d M 5 . 2 o n 6 / 1 2 / 2 0 0 5 . T h e b i g g e s t e a r t h q u a k e ne a r t h i s l o c a t i o n w a s t h e M 6 . 0 B u c k R i d g e e a r t h q u a k e o n 3 / 2 5 / 1 9 3 7 . ii Chinquapin Coast Homes Job No. 21-13506 Carlsbad, California Page 12 VII. SITE-SPECIFIC SOIL & GEOLOGIC DESCRIPTION Our field investigation, reconnaissance and review of the geologic map by Kennedy and Tan, 2007, “Geologic Map of the Oceanside 30’x60’ Quadrangle, California” indicate that the site is underlain by late to middle Pleistocene-Aged Old Paralic Deposits, Units 6-7 (Qop6-7) formational materials. An excerpt of the geological map is included as Figure No. V. Our exploratory excavations indicate the formational materials are overlain across the site by shallow-depth topsoil/fill soils (Qaf). Site- specific geology is shown on the Plot Plan, Figure No. II. Topsoil/Fill Soil (Qaf): Our site investigation indicates that the lot is overlain by approximately 1 foot of topsoil/fill soil. The encountered surficial soil is generally in a loose condition and consists of moist, brown, fine- to medium-grained silty sand (SM) with some roots. In our opinion, the surficial soils are not considered suitable in their current condition to support loads from structures or additional fill. Refer to Figure Nos. IIIa-m for details. Old Paralic Deposits, Unit 6-7 (Qop6-7): The encountered formational materials are described in the literature as Quaternary (late to middle Pleistocene) Old Paralic Deposits, Units 6-7. These formational materials were encountered in all exploratory excavations underlying the topsoil/fill soil at variable depths of 1 foot or less. The formational materials are generally medium dense below the pad elevation, becoming dense at depth. The formational soils are damp, light brown, fine- to medium-grained silty sand (SM). In our opinion, the medium dense to dense nature of the Old Paralic Deposits, Units 6-7, below a depth of 3 feet makes it suitable in its current condition to support loads from structures or additional fill. Refer to Figure Nos. IIIa-m for details. Chinquapin Coast Homes Job No. 21-13506 Carlsbad, California Page 13 Based on our review of the geologic map by Kennedy and Tan, 2007, “Geologic Map of the Oceanside 30’x60’ Quadrangle, California” the Old Paralic Deposits, Units 6-7, formational materials underlie the entire site at depth. The aforementioned Old Paralic Deposit Units are described as “Poorly sorted, moderately permeable, reddish- brown, interfingered strandline, beach, estuarine and colluvial deposits composed of siltstone, sandstone and conglomerate.” According to the map, there are no faults known to pass through the site (refer to Figure No. V, Geologic Map Excerpt and Legend). VIII. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS The following is a discussion of the geologic conditions and hazards common to this area of Carlsbad, as well as project-specific geologic information relating to development of the subject property. A. Local and Regional Faults Reference to the Geologic Map and Legend, Figure No. V (Kennedy and Tan, 2007), indicates that no faults are shown to cross the site. Furthermore, our site reconnaissance presented no indications of faulting crossing the site. In our professional opinion, neither an active fault nor a potentially active fault underlies the site. A brief description of the nearby active faults including distances from the mapped fault to the subject site at the closest point (based on the USGS Earthquake Hazards- Interactive Fault Map), is presented below: Newport-Inglewood-Rose Canyon Fault Zone System: The Rose Canyon portion of the Newport-Inglewood-Rose Canyon Fault Zone is mapped approximately 4.8 miles west-southwest of the site and the offshore portion of the Newport-Inglewood portion Chinquapin Coast Homes Job No. 21-13506 Carlsbad, California Page 14 is mapped approximately 5.4 miles west-northwest of the site. The offshore portion of the Newport-Inglewood Fault Zone is described as a right-lateral; local reverse slip associated with fault steps (SCEDC, 2020); the reported length is 46.2 miles extending in a northwest-southeast direction. Surface trace is discontinuous in the Los Angeles Basin, but the fault zone can easily be noted there by the existence of a chain of low hills extending from Culver City to Signal Hill. South of Signal Hill, it roughly parallels the coastline until just south of Newport Bay, where it heads offshore, and becomes the Newport-Inglewood - Rose Canyon Fault Zone. A significant earthquake (M6.4) occurred along this fault on March 10, 1933. Since then, no additional significant events have occurred. The fault is believed to have a slip rate of approximately 0.6-mm/yr with an unknown recurrence interval. This fault is believed capable of producing an earthquake of M6.0 to M7.4 (Grant Ludwig and Shearer, 2004). Rose Canyon Fault Zone: The Rose Canyon Fault Zone is the southern section of the Newport-Inglewood-Rose Canyon Fault Zone system mapped in the San Diego County area as trending north-northwest to south-southeast from Oceanside to La Jolla and generally north-south into San Diego Bay, through Coronado and offshore downtown San Diego, from where it appears to head southward. The Rose Canyon Fault Zone system is considered to be a complex zone of onshore and offshore, en echelon right lateral, strike slip, oblique reverse, and oblique normal faults. This fault is considered to be capable of generating an M6.9 earthquake (EERI, 2020) and is considered microseismically active, although no significant recent earthquakes since 1862 (Legg and Agnew, 1979) are known to have occurred on the fault. Investigative work on faults that are part of the Rose Canyon Fault Zone at the Police Administration and Technical Center in downtown San Diego, at the SDG&E facility in Rose Canyon, and within San Diego Bay and elsewhere within downtown San Diego, has encountered offsets in Holocene (geologically recent) sediments (Singleton et al., Chinquapin Coast Homes Job No. 21-13506 Carlsbad, California Page 15 2019). These findings confirm Holocene displacement on the Rose Canyon Fault, which was designated an “active” fault in November 1991 (Hart and Bryant, 1997). Rockwell (2010) has suggested that the Rose CFZ underwent a cluster of activity including 5 major earthquakes in the early Holocene, with a long period of inactivity following, suggesting major earthquakes on the RCFZ behaves in a cluster-mode, where earthquake recurrence is clustered in time rather than in a consistent recurrence interval. With the most recent earthquake (MRE) nearly 160 years ago, it is suggested that a period of earthquake activity on the RCFZ may have begun. Rockwell (2010) and a compilation of the latest research implies a long-term slip rate of approximately 1 to 2 mm/year. Coronado Bank Fault: The Coronado Bank Fault is located approximately 20.7 miles southwest of the site. Evidence for this fault is based upon geophysical data (acoustic profiles) and the general alignment of epicenters of recorded seismic activity (Greene et al., 1979). The Oceanside earthquake of M5.3 recorded July 13, 1986, is known to have been centered on the fault or within the Coronado Bank Fault Zone. Although this fault is considered active, due to the seismicity within the fault zone, it is significantly less active seismically than the Elsinore Fault (Hileman et al., 1973). It is postulated that the Coronado Bank Fault is capable of generating a M7.6 earthquake and is of great interest due to its close proximity to the greater San Diego metropolitan area. San Diego Trough Fault Zone: The San Diego Through Fault Zone is mapped at approximately 30 miles to the west-southwest of the site at its closest point. This fault is described as a right-lateral type fault with a length of at least 93.2 miles and a slip rate of roughly 1.5 mm/yr. The most recent surface rupture is of Holocene age (SCEDC, 2020). Chinquapin Coast Homes Job No. 21-13506 Carlsbad, California Page 16 San Clemente Fault Zone: The San Clemente Fault Zone is mapped at approximately 50 miles to the southwest of the site at its closest point. This fault is described as a right-lateral and vertical offsets type fault with a length of at least 130.5 miles described as essentially continuous with the San Isidro fault zone, off the coast of Mexico and a slip rate of roughly 1.5 mm/yr. The most recent surface rupture is of Holocene age (SCEDC, 2020). Elsinore Fault: The Temecula and Julian sections of the Elsinore Fault Zone are located approximately 25 miles northeast and east of the site respectively. The Elsinore Fault Zone extends approximately 125 miles from the Mexican border to the northern end of the Santa Ana Mountains. The Elsinore Fault zone is a 1- to 4-mile- wide, northwest-southeast-trending zone of discontinuous and en echelon faults extending through portions of Orange, Riverside, San Diego, and Imperial Counties. Individual faults within the Elsinore Fault Zone range from less than 1 mile to 16 miles in length. The trend, length and geomorphic expression of the Elsinore Fault Zone identify it as being a part of the highly active San Andreas Fault system. Like the other faults in the San Andreas system, the Elsinore Fault is a transverse fault showing predominantly right-lateral movement. According to Hart et al. (1979), this movement averages less than 1 centimeter per year. Along most of its length, the Elsinore Fault Zone is marked by a bold topographic expression consisting of linearly aligned ridges, swales and hallows. Faulted Holocene alluvial deposits (believed to be less than 11,000 years old) found along several segments of the fault zone suggest that at least part of the zone is currently active. Although the Elsinore Fault Zone belongs to the San Andreas set of active, northwest- trending, right-slip faults in the southern California area (Crowell, 1962), it has not been the site of a major earthquake in historic time, other than a M6.0 earthquake near the town of Elsinore in 1910 (Richter, 1958; Toppozada and Parke, 1982). Chinquapin Coast Homes Job No. 21-13506 Carlsbad, California Page 17 However, based on length and evidence of late-Pleistocene or Holocene displacement, Greensfelder (1974) has estimated that the Elsinore Fault Zone is reasonably capable of generating an earthquake with a magnitude as large as M7.5. Study and logging of exposures in trenches placed in Glen Ivy Marsh across the Glen Ivy North Fault (a strand of the Elsinore Fault Zone between Corona and Lake Elsinore), suggest a maximum earthquake recurrence interval of 300 years, and when combined with previous estimates of the long-term horizontal slip rate of 0.8 to 7.0 mm/year, suggest typical earthquake magnitudes of M6.0 to M7.0 (Rockwell et al., 1985). The Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities (2008) has estimated that there is a 11 percent probability that an earthquake of M6.7 or greater will occur within 30 years on this fault. San Jacinto Fault: The San Jacinto Fault is located approximately 47 to 65 miles northeast of the site. The San Jacinto Fault Zone consists of a series of closely spaced faults, including the Coyote Creek Fault, that form the western margin of the San Jacinto Mountains. The fault zone extends from its junction with the San Andreas Fault in San Bernardino, southeasterly toward the Brawley area, where it continues south of the international border as the Imperial Transform Fault (Rockwell et al., 2014). The San Jacinto Fault zone has a high level of historical seismic activity, with at least 10 damaging earthquakes (M6.0 to M7.0) having occurred on this fault zone between 1890 and 1986. Earthquakes on the San Jacinto Fault in 1899 and 1918 caused fatalities in the Riverside County area. Offset across this fault is predominantly right- lateral, similar to the San Andreas Fault, although some investigators have suggested that dip-slip motion contributes up to 10% of the net slip (Ross et al., 2017). The segments of the San Jacinto Fault that are of most concern to major metropolitan areas are the San Bernardino, San Jacinto Valley and Anza segments. Fault slip rates Ch i n q u a p i n C o a s t H o m e s Jo b N o . 2 1 - 1 3 5 0 6 Ca r l s b a d , C a l i f o r n i a Pa g e 1 8 on t h e v a r i o u s s e g m e n t s o f t h e S a n J a c i n t o ar e l e s s w e l l c o n s t r a i n e d t h a n f o r t h e S a n An d r e a s F a u l t , b u t t h e a v a i l a b l e d a t a s u g g e s t s l i p r a t e s o f 1 2 ± 6 m m / y r f o r t h e no r t h e r n s e g m e n t s o f t h e f a u l t , a n d s l i p r a t e s o f 4 ± 2 m m / y r f o r t h e s o u t h e r n se g m e n t s . F o r l a r g e g r o u n d - r u p t u r i n g e a r t h q u a k e s o n t h e S a n J a c i n t o f a u l t , v a r i o u s in v e s t i g a t o r s h a v e s u g g e s t e d a r e c u r r e n c e i n t e rv a l o f 1 5 0 t o 3 0 0 y e a r s . T h e W o r k i n g Gr o u p o n C a l i f o r n i a E a r t h q u a k e P r o b a b i l i t i e s ( 2 0 0 8 ) h a s e s t i m a t e d t h a t t h e r e i s a 3 1 pe r c e n t p r o b a b i l i t y t h a t a n e a r t h q u a k e o f M 6 .7 o r g r e a t e r w i l l o c c u r w i t h i n 3 0 y e a r s on t h i s f a u l t . M a x i m u m c r e d i b l e e a r t h q u a ke s o f M 6 . 7 , M 6 . 9 a n d M 7 . 2 a r e e x p e c t e d on t h e S a n B e r n a r d i n o , S a n J a c i n t o V a l l e y a n d A n z a s e g m e n t s , r e s p e c t i v e l y , c a p a b l e of g e n e r a t i n g p e a k h o r i z o n t a l g r o u n d a c c e l e r a t i o n s o f 0 . 4 8 g t o 0 . 5 3 g i n t h e C o u n t y of R i v e r s i d e . A M 5 . 4 e a r t h q u a k e o c c u r r e d on t h e S a n J a c i n t o F a u l t o n J u l y 7 , 2 0 1 0 . Th e U n i t e d S t a t e s G e o l o g i c a l S u r v e y h a s i s s u e d t h e f o l l o w i n g s t a t e m e n t s w i t h r e s p e c t to t h e r e c e n t s e i s m i c a c t i v i t y on s o u t h e r n C a l i f o r n i a f a u l t s : Th e S a n J a c i n t o f a u l t , a l o n g w i t h t h e E l s i n o r e , S a n A n d r e a s , a n d o t h e r fa u l t s , i s p a r t o f t h e p l a t e b o un d a r y t h a t a c c o m m o d a t e s a b o u t 2 in c h e s / y e a r o f m o t i o n a s t h e P a c i f i c p l a t e m o v e s n o r t h w e s t r e l a t i v e t o th e N o r t h A m e r i c a n p l a t e . T h e l a r g e s t r e c e n t e a r t h q u a k e o n t h e S a n Ja c i n t o f a u l t , n e a r t h i s l o c a t i o n , t h e M 6 . 5 1 9 6 8 B o r r e g o M o u n t a i n ea r t h q u a k e A p r i l 8 , 1 9 6 8 , o c c u r r e d a b o u t 2 5 m i l e s s o u t h e a s t o f t h e J u l y 7, 2 0 1 0 , M 5 . 4 e a r t h q u a k e . T h i s M 5 . 4 e a r t h q u a k e f o l l o w s t h e 4 t h o f A p r i l 20 1 0 , E a s t e r S u n d a y , M 7 . 2 e a r t h q u a k e , l o c a t e d a b o u t 1 2 5 m i l e s t o t h e so u t h , w e l l s o u t h o f t h e U S M e x i c o i n t e r n a t i o n a l b o r d e r . A M 4 . 9 ea r t h q u a k e o c c u r r e d i n t h e s a m e a r e a o n J u n e 1 2 t h a t 8 : 0 8 p m ( P a c i f i c Ti m e ) . T h u s , t h i s s e c t i o n o f t h e S a n J a c i n t o f a u l t r e m a i n s a c t i v e . Se i s m o l o g i s t s a r e w a t c h i n g t w o m a j o r e a r t h q u a k e f a u l t s i n s o u t h e r n Ca l i f o r n i a . T h e S a n J a c i n t o f a u l t , t h e m o s t a c t i v e e a r t h q u a k e f a u l t i n so u t h e r n C a l i f o r n i a , e x t e n d s f o r mo r e t h a n 1 0 0 m i l e s f r o m t h e in t e r n a t i o n a l b o r d e r i n t o S a n B e r n a r d i n o a n d R i v e r s i d e , a m a j o r me t r o p o l i t a n a r e a o f t e n c a l l e d t h e I n l a n d E m p i r e . T h e E l s i n o r e f a u l t i s mo r e t h a n 1 1 0 m i l e s l o n g , a n d e x t e nd s i n t o t h e O r a n g e C o u n t y a n d L o s An g e l e s a r e a a s t h e W h i t t i e r f a u l t . T h e E l s i n o r e f a u l t i s c a p a b l e o f a ma j o r e a r t h q u a k e t h a t w o u l d s i g n i f i c a n t l y a f f e c t t h e l a r g e m e t r o p o l i t a n ii Chinquapin Coast Homes Job No. 21-13506 Carlsbad, California Page 19 areas of southern California. The Elsinore fault has not hosted a major earthquake in more than 100 years. The occurrence of these earthquakes along the San Jacinto fault and continued aftershocks demonstrates that the earthquake activity in the region remains at an elevated level. The San Jacinto fault is known as the most active earthquake fault in southern California. Caltech and USGS seismologist continue to monitor the ongoing earthquake activity using the Caltech/USGS Southern California Seismic Network and a GPS network of more than 100 stations. B. Other Geologic Hazards Ground Rupture: Ground rupture is characterized by bedrock slippage along an established fault and may result in displacement of the ground surface. For ground rupture to occur along a fault, an earthquake usually exceeds M5.0. If a M5.0 earthquake were to take place on a local fault, an estimated surface-rupture length 1 mile long could be expected (Greensfelder, 1974). Our investigation indicates that the subject site is not directly on a known active fault trace and, therefore, the risk of ground rupture is remote. Ground Shaking: Structural damage caused by seismically induced ground shaking is a detrimental effect directly related to faulting and earthquake activity. Ground shaking is considered to be the greatest seismic hazard in San Diego County. The intensity of ground shaking is dependent on the magnitude of the earthquake, the distance from the earthquake, and the seismic response characteristics of underlying soils and geologic units. Earthquakes of M5.0 or greater are generally associated with significant damage. It is our opinion that the most serious damage to the site would be caused by a large earthquake originating on a nearby strand of the Rose Canyon, Coronado Bank or Newport-Inglewood Faults. Although the chance of such an event is remote, it could occur within the useful life of the structure. Chinquapin Coast Homes Job No. 21-13506 Carlsbad, California Page 20 Landslides: Our investigation indicates that the subject site is not directly on a known recent or ancient landslide. Review of the “Geologic Map of the Oceanside 30’x60’ Quadrangle, California” by Kennedy and Tan (2007) and the USGS Landslide Hazard Program Site (US Landslide Inventory), indicate that there are no known or suspected ancient landslides located on the site. Slope Stability: Our site reconnaissance indicates that the site is relatively level and underlain by relatively stable and medium dense Old Paralic Deposits, Unit 6-7 formational materials at depths of approximately 1 to 5 feet. In our opinion, there is not a topographic slope stability issue with the site. Liquefaction: The liquefaction of saturated sands during earthquakes can be a major cause of damage to buildings. Liquefaction is the process by which soils are transformed into a viscous fluid that will flow as a liquid when unconfined. It occurs primarily in loose, cohesionless saturated silt, sand, and fine-grained gravel deposits of Holocene to late Pleistocene age and in areas where the groundwater is shallower than about 50 feet (DMG Special Publication 117) when they are sufficiently shaken by an earthquake. On this site, the risk of liquefaction of formational materials due to seismic shaking does not exist due to the dense to very dense nature of the underlying formational materials and the lack of shallow static groundwater. The site does not have a potential for soil strength loss to occur due to a seismic event. Tsunamis and Seiches: A tsunami is a series of long waves generated in the ocean by a sudden displacement of a large volume of water. Underwater earthquakes, landslides, volcanic eruptions, meteor impacts, or onshore slope failures can cause this displacement. Tsunami waves can travel at speeds averaging 450 to 600 miles per hour. As a tsunami nears the coastline, its speed diminishes, its wave length decreases, and its height increases greatly. After a major earthquake or other tsunami-inducing activity occurs, a tsunami could reach the shore within a few Chinquapin Coast Homes Job No. 21-13506 Carlsbad, California Page 21 minutes. One coastal community may experience no damaging waves while another may experience very destructive waves. Some low-lying areas could experience severe inland inundation of water and deposition of debris more than 3,000 feet inland. The site is located less than 0.25-mile from the exposed coastline and at an elevation of approximately 50 feet above MSL. Review of the Tsunami Inundation Map for Emergency Planning, Encinitas Quadrangle, the site is located outside the inundation area. There is minimal risk of tsunami inundation at the site. A seiche is a run-up of water within a lake or embayment triggered by fault- or landslide-induced ground displacement. The site is located near a coastal lagoon, that is not considered capable of producing a seiche and inundating the subject site. Flood Hazard: Review of the FEMA flood maps number 06073C0764H, effective on 12/20/2019, the project site is located within the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) X. Zone X is described as minimal flood hazard. The civil engineer should verify this statement with the City of Carlsbad and County of San Diego (FEMA, 2019). Geologic Hazards Summary: It is our opinion, based upon a review of the available maps, our research and our site investigation, that the site is underlain at shallow depth by stable Old Paralic Deposits formational materials and is suited for the proposed residential structures and associated improvements provided the recommendations herein are implemented. Furthermore, based on the available information at this stage, it appears the proposed site development will not destabilize or result in settlement of adjacent property or improvements if the recommendations presented in this report are implemented. Chinquapin Coast Homes Job No. 21-13506 Carlsbad, California Page 22 No significant geologic hazards are known to exist on the site that would prohibit the construction of the proposed residential structures, retaining walls and associated improvements. Ground shaking from earthquakes on active southern California faults and active faults in northwestern Mexico is the greatest geologic hazard at the property. Design of building structures in accordance with the current building codes would reduce the potential for injury or loss of human life. Buildings constructed in accordance with current building codes may suffer significant damage but should not undergo total collapse. In our explicit professional opinion, no active or potentially active faults underlie the project site. IX. GROUNDWATER Free groundwater was not encountered in our shallow exploratory excavations nor was it encountered in prior borings placed on the site by Group Delta in 2018 to maximum depths of approximately 21.5 feet. It is likely that groundwater depth on the site is at or slightly above the mean sea level of approximately 5 feet. It should be recognized that minor groundwater seepage problems might occur after development of a site even where none were present before development. These are usually minor phenomena and are often the result of an alteration in drainage patterns and/or an increase in irrigation water. Based on the permeability characteristics of the soil and the anticipated usage and development, it is our opinion that any seepage problems, which may occur, will be minor in extent. It is further our opinion that these problems can be most effectively corrected on an individual basis if and when they occur. Ch i n q u a p i n C o a s t H o m e s Jo b N o . 2 1 - 1 3 5 0 6 Ca r l s b a d , C a l i f o r n i a Pa g e 2 3 We d o n o t a n t i c i p a t e s i g n i f i c a n t g r o u n d w a t e r p r o b l e m s t o d e v e l o p i n t h e f u t u r e , if th e pr o p e r t y i s d e v e l o p e d a s p r o p o s e d a n d p r o p e r d r a i n a g e i s i m p l e m e n t e d a n d ma i n t a i n e d . It s h o u l d b e k e p t i n m i n d t h a t a n y r e q u i r e d c o n s t r u c t i o n o p e r a t i o n s w i l l c h a n g e su r f a c e d r a i n a g e p a t t e r n s a n d / o r r e d u c e p e r m e a b i l i t i e s d u e t o t h e d e n s i f i c a t i o n o f co m p a c t e d s o i l s . S u c h c h a n g e s o f s u r f a c e a n d s u b s u r f a c e h y d r o l o g i c c o n d i t i o n s , p l u s ir r i g a t i o n o f l a n d s c a p i n g o r s i g n i f i c a n t i n c r e a s e s i n r a i n f a l l , m a y r e s u l t i n t h e ap p e a r a n c e o f s u r f a c e o r n e a r - s u r f a c e w a t e r a t l o c a t i o n s w h e r e n o n e e x i s t e d pr e v i o u s l y . T h e d a m a g e f r o m s u c h w a t e r i s e x p e c t e d t o b e l o c a l i z e d a n d c o s m e t i c i n na t u r e , i f g o o d p o s i t i v e d r a i n a g e i s i m p l e m e n t e d , a s r e c o m m e n d e d i n t h i s r e p o r t , du r i n g a n d a t t h e c o m p l e ti o n o f c o n s t r u c t i o n . On p r o p e r t i e s s u c h a s t h e s u b j e c t s i t e w h e r e d e n s e , l o w p e r m e a b i l i t y s o i l s e x i s t a t sh a l l o w d e p t h s , e v e n n o r m a l l a n d s c a p e i r r i g a t i o n p r a c t i c e s o n t h e p r o p e r t y o r ne i g h b o r i n g p r o p e r t i e s , o r p e r i o d s o f e x t e n d e d r a i n f a l l , c a n r e s u l t i n s h a l l o w “p e r c h e d ” w a t e r c o n d i t i o n s . T h e p e r c h i n g ( s h a l l o w d e p t h ) a c c u m u l a t i o n o f w a t e r o n a l o w p e r m e a b i l i t y s u r f a c e c a n r e s u l t i n a r e a s o f p e r s i s t e n t w e t t i n g a n d d r o w n i n g o f la w n s , p l a n t s a n d t r e e s . R e s o l u t i o n o f s u c h c o n d i t i o n s , s h o u l d t h e y o c c u r , m a y re q u i r e s i t e - s p e c i f i c d e s i g n a n d c o n s t r u c t i o n o f s u b d r a i n a n d s h a l l o w “ w i c k ” d r a i n de w a t e r i n g s y s t e m s . It m u s t b e u n d e r s t o o d t h a t u n l e s s d i s c o v e r e d du r i n g s i t e e x p l o r a t i o n o r e n c o u n t e r e d du r i n g s i t e c o n s t r u c t i o n o p e r a t i o n s , i t i s ex t r e m e l y d i f f i c u l t t o p r e d i c t i f o r w h e r e pe r c h e d o r t r u e g r o u n d w a t e r c o n d i t i o n s m a y a p p e a r i n t h e f u t u r e . W h e n s i t e f i l l o r fo r m a t i o n a l s o i l s a r e f i n e - g r a i n e d a n d o f l o w p e r m e a b i l i t y , w a t e r p r o b l e m s m a y n o t be c o m e a p p a r e n t f o r e x t e n d e d p e r i o d s o f t i m e . ii Chinquapin Coast Homes Job No. 21-13506 Carlsbad, California Page 24 Water conditions, where suspected or encountered during construction, should be evaluated and remedied by the project civil and geotechnical consultants. The project developer and property owner, however, must realize that post-construction appearances of groundwater may have to be dealt with on a site-specific basis. Proper functional surface drainage should be implemented and maintained at the property. X. CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS The following recommendations are based upon the practical field investigations conducted by our firm, and resulting laboratory tests, in conjunction with our knowledge and experience with similar soils in the Carlsbad area. The opinions, conclusions, and recommendations presented in this report are contingent upon Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. being retained to review the final plans and specifications as they are developed and to observe the site earthwork and installation of foundations. Accordingly, we recommend that the following paragraph be included on the grading and foundation plans for the project. If the geotechnical consultant of record is changed for the project, the work shall be stopped until the replacement has agreed in writing to accept responsibility within their area of technical competence for approval upon completion of the work. It shall be the responsibility of the permittee to notify the governing agency in writing of such change prior to the recommencement of grading and/or foundation installation work and comply with the governing agency’s requirements for a change to the Geotechnical Consultant of Record for the project. From a geotechnical engineering standpoint, it is our opinion that the site is suitable for construction of the proposed residences and associated improvements provided the conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are incorporated into its design and construction. Chinquapin Coast Homes Job No. 21-13506 Carlsbad, California Page 25 A. Preparation of Soils for Site Development 1. General: Grading should conform to the guidelines presented in the 2019 California Building Code (CBC, 2019), as well as the requirements of the City of Carlsbad. During earthwork construction, removals and reprocessing of fill materials, as well as general grading procedures of the contractor, should be observed, and the fill placed selectively tested, by representatives of the geotechnical engineer, Geotechnical Exploration Inc. If any unusual or unexpected conditions are exposed in the field, they should be reviewed by the geotechnical engineer and if warranted, modified and/or additional remedial recommendations will be offered. Specific guidelines and comments pertinent to the planned development are provided herein. The recommendations presented herein have been completed using the information provided to us regarding site development. If information concerning the proposed development is revised, or any changes are made in the design and location of the proposed property, they must be modified or approved in writing by this office. 2. Clearing and Stripping: Complete demolition of the existing residential structures and associated improvements should be undertaken. This is to include the complete removal of all subsurface footings, utility lines and miscellaneous debris. After clearing the entire ground surface, the site should be stripped of existing vegetation within the areas of proposed new construction. This includes any roots from existing trees and shrubbery. Holes resulting from the removal of root systems or other buried obstructions that extend below the planned grades should be cleared and backfilled with suitable Chinquapin Coast Homes Job No. 21-13506 Carlsbad, California Page 26 compacted material compacted to the requirements provided under Recommendation Nos. 4, 5 and 6 below. Prior to any filling operations, the cleared and stripped vegetation and debris should be disposed of off-site. 3. Excavation: After the entire site has been cleared and stripped, the existing surficial topsoils/fill soils and the upper 2 feet of weathered terrace deposits should be removed and recompacted. It is anticipated that the depth of removals will be approximately 3 feet below existing grade and should include removal of existing foundations, utility lines, etc. Based on the results of our exploratory excavations, as well as our experience with similar materials in the project area, it is our opinion that the existing surficial soils and formational materials can be excavated utilizing ordinary light to heavy weight earthmoving equipment. Contractors should not, however, be relieved of making their own independent evaluation of excavating the on-site materials prior to submitting their bids. Contractors should also review this report along with the excavation logs to understand the scope and quantity of grading required for this project. The areal extent required to remove the surficial soils should be confirmed by our representatives during the excavation work based on their examination of the soils being exposed. The lateral extent of the excavation and recompaction should be at least 5 feet beyond the edge of the perimeter ground level foundations of the new residential structures and any areas to receive exterior improvements, where feasible, or to the depth of excavation or planned fill at that location, whichever is greater. 5. Temporary Slopes: Temporary slopes required for removal and recompaction grading operations may be cut at 1.0:1.0 (horizontal to vertical) to heights of Chinquapin Coast Homes Job No. 21-13506 Carlsbad, California Page 27 5 feet. If moderately cemented materials are encountered at depth, the lower 2 feet of the temporary slope may be cut vertical. 6. Subgrade Preparation: After the site has been cleared, stripped, and the required excavations made, the exposed subgrade soils in areas to receive new fill and/or slab-on-grade building improvements should be scarified to a depth of 6 inches, moisture conditioned, and compacted to the requirements for structural fill. While not anticipated, in the event that planned cuts expose any medium to highly expansive formational materials in the building areas, they should be scarified and moisture conditioned to at least 3 percent over optimum moisture for medium expansive soils and 5 percent for highly expansive soils (if encountered). 7. Material for Fill: Existing on-site low-expansion potential (Expansion Index of 50 or less per ASTM D4829-19) soils with an organic content of less than 3 percent by volume are, in general, suitable for use as fill. Imported fill material, where required, should have a low-expansion potential. In addition, both imported and existing on-site materials for use as fill should not contain rocks or lumps more than 6 inches in greatest dimension if the fill soils are compacted with heavy compaction equipment (or 3 inches in greatest dimension if compacted with lightweight equipment). All materials for use as fill should be approved by our representative prior to importing to the site. If encountered at the site, medium to highly expansive soils should not be used as structural fill at a depth of less than 5 feet from footing bearing surface elevation or behind retaining walls. Backfill material to be placed behind retaining walls should be low expansive (E.I. less than 50), with rocks no larger than 3 inches in diameter. Ii Chinquapin Coast Homes Job No. 21-13506 Carlsbad, California Page 28 8. Structural Fill Compaction: All structural fill, and areas to receive any associated improvements, should be compacted to a minimum degree of compaction of 90 percent based upon ASTM D1557-12e1. Fill material should be spread and compacted in uniform horizontal lifts not exceeding 8 inches in uncompacted thickness. Before compaction begins, the fill should be brought to a water content that will permit proper compaction by either: (1) aerating and drying the fill if it is too wet, or (2) watering the fill if it is too dry. Each lift should be thoroughly mixed before compaction to ensure a uniform distribution of moisture. For low expansive soils, the moisture content should be within 2 percent of optimum. Though we do not anticipate any medium to high expansive soils to be exposed during grading operations, if encountered, the compaction moisture content should be at least 3 percent over optimum for medium expansive soils and 5 percent over optimum for highly expansive soils. Any rigid improvements founded on the existing surficial soils can be expected to undergo movement and possible damage. Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. takes no responsibility for the performance of any improvements built on loose natural soils or inadequately compacted fills. Subgrade soils in any exterior area receiving concrete improvements should be verified for compaction and moisture by a representative of our firm within 48 hours prior to concrete placement. No uncontrolled fill soils should remain after completion of the site work. In the event that temporary ramps or pads are constructed of uncontrolled fill soils, the loose fill soils should be removed and/or recompacted prior to completion of the grading operation. Chinquapin Coast Homes Job No. 21-13506 Carlsbad, California Page 29 Based on the results of laboratory testing (see Section V above), the water- soluble sulfate content of the tested soils at the site yielded a negligible sulfate exposure. As such, based on table 1904.3 of the building code, there are no restrictions for cement type if on-site soils are used. If imported soils are medium to highly expansive they should be tested for soluble sulfate content and the pertinent recommendations should apply. It is recommended that after grading is completed, and if imported soils are used, a sample be obtained of the surficial soils to be in contact with the proposed concrete foundations to test for water-soluble sulfate content, and determine cement type recommended by the current edition of the California Building Code (2019). If soluble sulfate testing does not take place, and imported soils are used, it is recommended that the concrete for the footings and slabs on-grade be Type V. The structural plans should indicate that soil soluble sulfate tests be performed at rough grading completion if Type II cement is to be specified for the concrete. 9. Trench and Retaining Wall Backfill: All utility trenches and retaining walls should be backfilled with properly compacted fill. Backfill material should be placed in lift thicknesses appropriate to the type of compaction equipment utilized and compacted to a minimum degree of compaction of 90 percent based upon ASTM D1557-12e1 by mechanical means. Any portion of the trench backfill in public street areas within pavement sections should conform to the material and compaction requirements of the adjacent pavement section. Backfill soils placed behind retaining walls should be installed as early as the retaining walls are capable of supporting lateral loads. Backfill soils behind Chinquapin Coast Homes Job No. 21-13506 Carlsbad, California Page 30 retaining walls should be low expansive (Expansion Index less than 50 per ASTM D4829-19). Our experience has shown that even shallow, narrow trenches (such as for irrigation and electrical lines) that are not properly compacted can result in problems, particularly with respect to shallow groundwater accumulation and migration. 10. Observations and Testing: As stated in CBC 2019, Section 1705.6 Soils: “Special inspections and tests of existing site soil conditions, fill placement and load-bearing requirements shall be performed in accordance with this section and Table 1705.6 (see below). The approved geotechnical report and the construction documents prepared by the registered design professionals shall be used to determine compliance. During fill placement, the special inspector shall verify that proper materials and procedures are used in accordance with the provisions of the approved geotechnical report”. A summary of Table 1705.6 “REQUIRED SPECIAL INSPECTIONS AND TESTS OF SOILS” is presented below: a) Verify materials below shallow foundations are adequate to achieve the design bearing capacity; b) Verify excavations are extended to proper depth and have reached proper material; c) Perform classification and testing of compacted fill materials; d) Verify use of proper materials, densities and thicknesses during placement and compaction of compacted fill prior to placement of compacted fill, inspect subgrade and verify that site has been prepared properly Ch i n q u a p i n C o a s t H o m e s Jo b N o . 2 1 - 1 3 5 0 6 Ca r l s b a d , C a l i f o r n i a Pa g e 3 1 Se c t i o n 1 7 0 5 . 6 “ S o i l s ” s t a t e m e n t a n d T a b l e 1 7 0 5 . 6 i n d i c a t e t h a t i t i s ma n d a t o r y t h a t a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f t h i s f i r m ( r e s p o n s i b l e e n g i n e e r i n g f i r m ) , pe r f o r m o b s e r v a t i o n s a n d f i l l c o m p a c t i o n t e s t i n g d u r i n g e x c a v a t i o n o p e r a t i o n s to v e r i f y t h a t t h e r e m e d i a l o p e r a t i o n s a r e c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s pr e s e n t e d i n t h i s r e p o r t . A l l g r a d i n g e x c a v a t i o n s r e s u l t i n g f r o m t h e r e m o v a l of s o i l s s h o u l d b e o b s e r v e d a n d e v a l u a t e d b y a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f o u r f i r m be f o r e t h e y a r e b a c k f i l l e d . Qu a l i t y c o n t r o l g r a d i n g o b s e r v a t i o n a n d f i el d d e n s i t y t e s t i n g f o r t h e p u r p o s e o f do c u m e n t i n g t h a t a d e q u a t e c o m p a c t i o n h a s b e e n a c h i e v e d a n d a c c e p t a b l e so i l s h a v e b e e n u t i l i z e d t o p r o p e r l y s u p p o rt a p r o j e c t a p p l i e s n o t o n l y t o f i l l so i l s s u p p o r t i n g p r i m a r y s t r u c t u r e s ; u n l e s s s u p p o r t e d b y d e e p f o u n d a t i o n s o r ca i s s o n s , b u t a l l s i t e i m p r o v e m e n t s s u c h a s s t a i r w a y s , p a t i o s , p o o l s a n d p o o l de c k i n g , s i d e w a l k s , d r i v e w a y s a n d r e t a i n i n g w a l l s e t c . O b s e r v a t i o n a n d t e s t i n g of u t i l i t y l i n e t r e n c h b a c k f i l l a l s o r e d u c e s t h e p o t e n t i a l f o r l o c a l i z e d s e t t l e m e n t of a l l o f t h e a b o v e i n c l u d i n g a l l i m p r o v e m e n t s o u t s i d e o f t h e f o o t p r i n t o f pr i m a r y s t r u c t u r e s . Of t e n a f t e r p r i m a r y b u i l d i n g p a d g r a d i n g , i t i s n o t u n c o m m o n f o r t h e ge o t e c h n i c a l e n g i n e e r o f r e c o r d t o n o t be n o t i f i e d o f g r a d i n g p e r f o r m e d o u t s i d e th e f o o t p r i n t o f t h e p r o j e c t p r i m a r y s t r u c t ur e s . A s a r e s u l t , s e t t l e m e n t d a m a g e of s i t e i m p r o v e m e n t s s u c h a s p a t i o s , po o l a n d p o o l d e c k s , e x t e r i o r l a n d s c a p e wa l l s a n d w a l k s , a n d s t r u c t u r e a c c e s s s t a i r w a y s c a n o c c u r . I t i s t h e r e f o r e st r o n g l y r e c o m m e n d e d t h a t t h e p r o j e c t g e n e r a l c o n t r a c t o r , g r a d i n g c o n t r a c t o r , an d o t h e r s t a s k e d w i t h c o m p l e t i n g a p r o j e c t w i t h w o r k m a n s h i p t h a t r e d u c e s th e p o t e n t i a l f o r d a m a g e t o t h e p r o j e c t f r o m s o i l s e t t l e m e n t , o r e x p a n s i v e s o i l up l i f t , t o b e a d v i s e d a n d a c k n o w l e d g e t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f a d e q u a t e a n d co m p r e h e n s i v e o b s e r v a t i o n a n d t e s t i n g o f s o i l s i n t e n d e d t o s u p p o r t t h e p r o j e c t ii Ch i n q u a p i n C o a s t H o m e s Jo b N o . 2 1 - 1 3 5 0 6 Ca r l s b a d , C a l i f o r n i a Pa g e 3 2 th e y a r e w o r k i n g o n . T h e p r o j e c t g e o t e c h n i c a l e n g i n e e r s o f r e c o r d m u s t b e co n t a c t e d a n d r e q u e s t e d t o p r o v i d e t h e s e s e r v i c e s . Fa i l u r e t o c o m p l y w i t h t h i s r e c o m m e n d a t i o n c a n r e s u l t i n s e v e r a l c o s t l y a n d ti m e - c o n s u m i n g r e q u i r e m e n t s f r o m t h e g o v e r n i n g m u n i c i p a l i t y o r c o u n t y en g i n e e r i n g a n d p l a n n i n g d e p a r t m e n t s . Fo r e x a m p l e , t h e g e ot e c h n i c a l a n d / o r ci v i l e n g i n e e r o f r e c o r d m a y b e r e q u i r e d t o : Cl a r i f y i f o b s e r v a t i o n a n d t e s t i n g s e r v i c e s w e r e p e r f o r m e d f o r a l l g r a d i n g sh o w n o n t h e G r a d i n g P l a n s . I f n o t , i n d i c a t e t h e a r e a s N O T o b s e r v e d o r te s t e d o n t h e A s - G r a d e d G e o l o g i c a l M a p . A c o n s t r u c t i o n c h a n g e m u s t b e p r o c e s s e d t o i n d i c a t e t h e r e v i s e d g r a d i n g re c o m m e n d a t i o n s b y t h e g e o t e c h n i c a l e n g i n e e r o f w o r k o n t h e p l a n s . Th e g e o t e c h n i c a l e n g i n e e r m u s t s u b m i t o n a d d e n d u m l e t t e r a d d r e s s i n g th e c h a n g e t o t h e g r a d i n g p l a n s p e c i f i c a t i o n s f o r t h e e a r t h w o r k pr e s e n t e d o n t h e g r a d i n g p l a n s . Th e g e o t e c h n i c a l c o n s u l t a n t m u st e v a l u a t e t h e e x i s t i n g un o b s e r v e d / u n d o c u m e n t e d f i l l a s a n u n c o n t r o l l e d e m b a n k m e n t a n d pr o v i d e a s t a t e m e n t i n d i c a t i n g t h e u n c o n t r o l l e d e m b a n k m e n t w i l l n o t en d a n g e r t h e p u b l i c h e a l t h , s a f e t y a n d w e l f a r e . I n o r d e r t o m a k e t h i s st a t e m e n t t h e g e o t e c h n i c a l e n g i n e e r w o u l d h a v e t o c l e a r l y d e f i n e t h e po t e n t i a l p r o b l e m s s u c h a s d a m a g e t o p r o j e c t i m p r o v e m e n t s t h a t c o u l d re s u l t f r o m c o n s t r u c t i o n o n u n d o c u m e n t e d f i l l s o i l s . Th e g e o t e c h n i c a l c o n s u l t a n t m u s t i n d i c a t e i f t h e u n o b s e r v e d f i l l p l a c e d du r i n g e a r t h w o r k w i t h i n t h e l i m i t s o f w o r k i s s u i t a b l e f o r t h e i n t e n d e d ii Ch i n q u a p i n C o a s t H o m e s Jo b N o . 2 1 - 1 3 5 0 6 Ca r l s b a d , C a l i f o r n i a Pa g e 3 3 us e . T o r e n d e r s u c h a n o p i n i o n t h e g e o t e c h n i c a l c o n s u l t a n t w o u l d h a v e to p l a c e a s u f f i c i e n t n u m b e r o f t e s t e x c a v a t i o n s a n d c o n d u c t e n o u g h te s t i n g t o w a r r a n t s u c h a n o p i n i o n . If t h e g e o t e c h n i c a l c o n s u l t a n t c a nn o t r e n d e r a n o p i n i o n t h a t t h e un o b s e r v e d f i l l i s s u i t a b l e f o r t h e p u r p o s e i n t e n d e d , “ T h e y m u s t i n d i c a t e if a d d i t i o n a l f i l l r e m e d i a l g r a d i n g i s r e c o m m e n d e d . ” Th e l i m i t s o f t h e “ U n o b s e r v e d f i l l / un c o n t r o l l e d e m b a n k m e n t m u s t b e sh o w n o n r e v i s e d g r a d i n g p l a n s a l o n g w i t h t h e “ U n c o n t r o l l e d Em b a n k m e n t M a i n t e n a n c e A g r e e m e n t A p p r o v a l N u m b e r . ” Th e o w n e r m u s t e x e c u t e a n “ U n c o n t r o l l e d E m b a n k m e n t A g r e e m e n t : f o r th e p o r t i o n o f t h e u n d o c u m e n t e d f i l l t o r e m a i n . T h i s m u s t b e co o r d i n a t e d w i t h t h e L D R D r a i n a g e a n d G r a d i n g r e v i e w e r . Th e t i t l e a n d d a t e o f t h e r e q u e s t e d a d d e n d u m l e t t e r o r g e o t e c h n i c a l in v e s t i g a t i o n r e p o r t m u s t b e a d d e d u n d e r n o t e n o . 1 o f t h e “ G r a d i n g a n d Ge o t e c h n i c a l S p e c i f i c a t i o n ” C e r t i f i c a t i o n a s c o n s t r u c t i o n c h a n g e “ A ” . Th e s e c h a n g e s m u s t b e m a d e o n a r e d l i n e c o p y , a n d s u b m i t t e d a s a “C o n s t r u c t i o n C h a n g e A ” f o r r e v i e w a n d a p p r o v a l b y t h e g e o l o g y s e c t i o n an d D r a i n a g e a n d G r a d e s S e c t i o n . Al l a p p r o v e d c h a n g e s w i l l t h e n b e t r a n s f e r r e d t o t h e m y l a r s f o r a p p r o v a l an d s i g n a t u r e s b y t h e D e p u t y C i t y E n g i n e e r . Th e G e o t e c h n i c a l E n g i n e e r o f R e c o r d , i n t h i s c a s e Ge o t e c h n i c a l E x p l o r a t i o n , In c . , c a n n o t b e h e l d r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e c o s t s a n d t i m e d e l a y s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h ii Chinquapin Coast Homes Job No. 21-13506 Carlsbad, California Page 34 the lack of contact and requests for testing services by the client, general contractor, grading contractor or any of the project design team responsible for requesting the required geotechnical services. Requests for services are to be made through our office telephone number (858) 549-7222 and the telephone number of the G.E.I. personnel assigned to the project. B. Seismic Design Criteria 11. Seismic Data Bases: The estimation of the peak ground acceleration and the repeatable high ground acceleration (RHGA) likely to occur at the site is based on the known significant local and regional faults within 100 miles of the site. 12. Seismic Design Criteria: The proposed structure should be designed in accordance with the 2019 CBC, which incorporates by reference the ASCE 7- 16 for seismic design. We have determined the mapped spectral acceleration values for the site based on a latitude of 33.1480 degrees and a longitude of - 117.3416 degrees, utilizing a program titled “Seismic Design Map Tool” and provided by the USGS through SEAOC, which provides a solution for ASCE 7- 16 utilizing digitized files for the Spectral Acceleration maps. See Appendix D. 13. Structure and Foundation Design: The design of the new structures and foundations should be based on Seismic Design Category D, Risk Category II for stiff soils, Class D. 14. Spectral Acceleration and Design Values: The structural seismic design, when applicable, should be based on the following values, which are based on the site location, soil characteristics, and seismic maps by USGS, as required by the 2019 CBC. The summarized seismic soil parameters are presented in Table Ii Chinquapin Coast Homes Job No. 21-13506 Carlsbad, California Page 35 I below, have been calculated with the SEAOC Seismic Design Map Tool. The complete values are included in Appendix D. The values for this property are: TABLE I Mapped Spectral Acceleration Values and Design Parameters SS S1 SMS SM1 SDS SD1 Fa Fv PGA PGAM SDC 1.092 0.394 1.161 0.751 0.774 0.501 1.063 1.906 0.483 0.539 D C. Foundation Recommendations 15. Footings: Footing configuration and reinforcement should be designed by the Project Structural Engineer. The following are provided as design minimums. We recommend that the proposed structures be supported on conventional, individual-spread and/or continuous footing foundations bearing on undisturbed medium dense to dense formational materials or on properly compacted fill soils over formational soils. No footings should be underlain by undocumented fill soils. All building footings should be built on formational soils or properly compacted fill prepared as recommended in this report. The footings should be founded at least 24 inches below the lowest adjacent finished grade when founded into properly compacted fill or medium dense to dense formational soils. Footings located adjacent to utility trenches should have their bearing surfaces situated below an imaginary 1.0:1.0 plane projected upward from the bottom edge of the adjacent utility trench. Otherwise, the utility trenches should be excavated farther from the footing locations. Chinquapin Coast Homes Job No. 21-13506 Carlsbad, California Page 36 Footings located adjacent to the tops of slopes should be extended sufficiently deep so as to provide at least 8 feet of horizontal cover between the slope face and outside edge of the footing at the footing bearing level. 16. Bearing Values: At the recommended depths, footings on formational or properly compacted fill soils may be designed for allowable bearing pressures of 2,500 psf for combined dead and live loads and 3,325 psf for all loads, including wind or seismic. The footings should, however, have a minimum width of 15 inches. An increase in soil allowable static bearing can be used as follows: 800 psf for each additional foot over 1.5 feet in depth and 400 psf for each additional foot in width to a total not exceeding 4,000 psf. The static soil bearing value may be increased one-third for seismic and wind load analysis. As previously indicated, all of the foundations for the structure should be built on medium dense to dense formational soils or properly compacted fill soils. 17. Footing Reinforcement: All footings should be reinforced as specified by the structural engineer. However, based on our field investigation findings and laboratory testing, we provide the following minimum recommendations. All continuous footings should contain top and bottom reinforcement to provide structural continuity and to permit spanning of local irregularities. We recommend that a minimum of two No. 5 top and two No. 5 bottom reinforcing bars be provided in the footings. All footings should be reinforced as specified by the structural engineer. A minimum clearance of 3 inches should be maintained between steel reinforcement and the bottom or sides of the footing. Isolated square footings should contain, as a minimum, a grid of three No. 4 steel bars on 12-inch centers, both ways. In order for us to offer an opinion as to whether the footings are founded on soils of sufficient load bearing capacity, it is essential that our representative inspect the footing excavations prior to the placement of reinforcing steel or forms. Chinquapin Coast Homes Job No. 21-13506 Carlsbad, California Page 37 NOTE: The project Civil/Structural Engineer should review all reinforcing schedules. The reinforcing minimums recommended herein are not to be construed as structural designs, but merely as minimum reinforcement to reduce the potential for cracking and separations. 18. Lateral Loads: Lateral load resistance for the structure supported on footing foundations may be developed in friction between the foundation bottoms and the supporting subgrade. An allowable friction coefficient of 0.40 is considered applicable. An additional allowable passive resistance equal to an equivalent fluid weight of 275 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) acting against the foundations may be used in design provided the footings are poured neat against the medium dense to dense formational or properly compacted fill materials. These lateral resistance value assume a level surface in front of the footing for a minimum distance of three times the embedment depth of the footing and any shear keys, but not less than 8 feet from a slope face, measured from effective top of foundation. Retaining walls supporting surcharge loads or affected by upper foundations should consider the effect of those upper loads. 19. Settlement: Settlements under structural design loads are expected to be within tolerable limits for the proposed structures. For footings designed in accordance with the recommendations presented in the preceding paragraphs, we anticipate that the total and differential static settlement for the proposed improvements should be on the order of approximately 1-inch and post- construction differential settlement angular rotation should be less than 1/240. D. Retaining Wall Design 20. Retaining Wall Design: Any required retaining walls must be designed to resist lateral earth pressures and any additional lateral pressures caused by Ii Chinquapin Coast Homes Job No. 21-13506 Carlsbad, California Page 38 surcharge loads on the adjoining retained surface. We recommend that unrestrained (cantilever) walls with level backfill be designed for an equivalent fluid pressure of 38 pcf. We recommend that restrained walls (i.e., walls with angle points or that are curvilinear that restrain them from rotation) with level backfill be designed for an equivalent fluid pressure of 38 pcf plus an additional uniform lateral pressure of 8H pounds per square foot, where H is equal to the height of backfill above the top of the wall footing in feet. 21. For seismic design of unrestrained walls if required, we recommend that the seismic pressure increment be taken as a fluid pressure distribution utilizing an equivalent fluid weight of 14 pcf. 22. The preceding design pressures assume that the walls are backfilled with low expansion potential materials (Expansion Index less than 50) and that there is sufficient drainage behind the walls to prevent the build-up of hydrostatic pressures from surface water infiltration. We recommend that drainage be provided by a composite drainage material such as J-Drain 200/220 and J- Drain SWD, or equivalent. No perforated pipes or gravel are utilized with the J-Drain system. The drain material should terminate 12 inches below the finish surface where the surface is covered by slabs or 18 inches below the finish surface in landscape areas. 23. Backfill placed behind the walls should be compacted to a minimum degree of compaction of 90 percent using light compaction equipment. If heavy equipment is used, the walls should be appropriately temporarily braced. The structural plans should indicate when the retaining wall backfill may be placed. - - Ii Chinquapin Coast Homes Job No. 21-13506 Carlsbad, California Page 39 E. Concrete Slab On-Grade Criteria Slabs on-grade may only be used on new, properly compacted fill or when bearing on dense formational soils. 24. Minimum Floor Slab Thickness and Reinforcement: Based on our experience, we have found that, for various reasons, floor slabs occasionally crack. Therefore, we recommend that all slabs on-grade contain at least a minimum amount of reinforcing steel to reduce the separation of cracks, should they occur. Slab subgrade soil should be verified by a Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. representative to have the proper moisture content within 48 hours prior to placement of the vapor barrier and pouring of concrete. All slabs should be reinforced as specified by the structural engineer. However, based on our field investigation findings and laboratory testing, we provide the following minimum recommendations. New interior floor slabs should be a minimum of 4-inches actual thickness and be reinforced with No. 4 bars on 18- inch centers, both ways, placed at mid-height in the slab. Soil moisture content should be kept above the optimum prior to waterproofing placement under the new concrete slab. Shrinkage control joints should be specified by the project structural engineer. In addition, we note that shrinkage cracking can result in reflective cracking in brittle flooring surfaces such as stone and tiles. It is imperative that if movement intolerant flooring materials are to be utilized, the flooring contractor and/or architect should provide specifications for the use of high- quality isolation membrane products installed between slab and floor materials. Chinquapin Coast Homes Job No. 21-13506 Carlsbad, California Page 40 25. Slab Moisture Emission: Although it is not the responsibility of geotechnical engineering firms to provide moisture protection recommendations, as a service to our clients we provide the following discussion and suggested minimum protection criteria. Actual recommendations should be provided by the project architect and waterproofing consultants or product manufacturer. It is recommended to contact the vapor barrier manufacturer to schedule a pre-construction meeting and to coordinate a review, in-person or digital, of the vapor barrier installation. Soil moisture vapor can result in damage to moisture-sensitive floors, some floor sealers, or sensitive equipment in direct contact with the floor, in addition to mold and staining on slabs, walls and carpets. The common practice in Southern California is to place vapor retarders made of PVC, or of polyethylene. PVC retarders are made in thickness ranging from 10- to 60-mil. Polyethylene retarders, called visqueen, range from 5- to 10-mil in thickness. These products are no longer considered adequate for moisture protection and can actually deteriorate over time. Specialty vapor retarding and barrier products possess higher tensile strength and are more specifically designed for and intended to retard moisture transmission into and through concrete slabs. The use of such products is highly recommended for reduction of floor slab moisture emission. The following American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) and American Concrete Institute (ACI) sections address the issue of moisture transmission into and through concrete slabs: ASTM E1745-17 Standard Specification for Plastic Water Vapor Retarders Used in Contact Concrete Slabs; ASTM E1643- 18a Standard Practice for Selection, Design, Installation, and Inspection of Water Vapor Retarders Used in Contact with Earth or Granular Fill Under Ch i n q u a p i n C o a s t H o m e s Jo b N o . 2 1 - 1 3 5 0 6 Ca r l s b a d , C a l i f o r n i a Pa g e 4 1 Co n c r e t e S l a b s ; A C I 3 0 2 . 2 R - 0 6 G u i d e f o r C o n c r e t e S l a b s t h a t R e c e i v e Mo i s t u r e - S e n s i t i v e F l o o r i n g M a t e r i a l s ; a n d A C I 3 0 2 . 1 R - 1 5 G u i d e t o C o n c r e t e Fl o o r a n d S l a b C o n s t r u c t i o n . 25 . 1 B a s e d o n t h e a b o v e , w e r e c o m m e n d t h a t t h e v a p o r b a r r i e r c o n s i s t o f a mi n i m u m 1 5 - m i l e x t r u d e d p o l y o l e f i n p l a s t i c ( n o r e c y c l e d c o n t e n t o r wo v e n m a t e r i a l s p e r m i t t e d ) . P e r m e a n c e a s t e s t e d b e f o r e a n d a f t e r ma n d a t o r y c o n d i t i o n i n g ( A S T M E 1 7 4 5 S e c t i o n 7 . 1 a n d s u b p a r a g r a p h s 7. 1 . 1 - 7 . 1 . 5 ) s h o u l d b e l e s s t h a n 0 . 0 1 p e r m s ( g r a i n s / s q u a r e fo o t / h o u r / p e r i n c h o f M e r c u r y ) a n d c o m p l y w i t h t h e A S T M E 1 7 4 5 - 1 7 Cl a s s A r e q u i r e m e n t s . I n s t a l l a t i o n o f v a p o r b a r r i e r s s h o u l d b e i n ac c o r d a n c e w i t h A S T M E 1 6 4 3 - 1 8 a . T h e b a s i s o f d e s i g n i s 1 5 - m i l S t e g o Wr a p v a p o r b a r r i e r p l a c e d p e r t h e m a n u f a c t u r e r ’ s g u i d e l i n e s . R e e f In d u s t r i e s V a p o r G u a r d m e m b r a n e h a s a l s o b e e n s h o w n t o a c h i e v e a pe r m e a n c e o f l e s s t h a n 0 . 0 1 p e r m s . W e r e c o m m e n d t h a t t h e s l a b b e po u r e d d i r e c t l y o n t h e v a p o r b a r r i e r , w h i c h i s p l a c e d d i r e c t l y o n t h e pr e p a r e d p r o p e r l y c o m p a c t e d s m o o t h s u b g r a d e s o i l s u r f a c e . 25 . 2 C o m m o n t o a l l a c c e p t a b l e p r o d u c t s , v a p o r r e t a r d e r / b a r r i e r j o i n t s m u s t be l a p p e d a t l e a s t 6 i n c h e s . S e a m j o i n t s a n d p e r m a n e n t u t i l i t y pe n e t r a t i o n s s h o u l d b e s e a l e d w i t h t h e m a n u f a c t u r e r ’ s r e c o m m e n d e d ta p e o r m a s t i c . E d g e s o f t h e v a p o r r e t a r d e r s h o u l d b e e x t e n d e d t o te r m i n a t e a t a l o c a t i o n i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h A S T M E 1 6 4 3 - 1 8 a o r t o a n al t e r n a t e l o c a t i o n t h a t i s a c c e p t a b l e t o t h e p r o j e c t ’ s s t r u c t u r a l e n g i n e e r . Al l t e r m i n a t e d e d g e s o f t h e v a p o r r e t a r d e r s h o u l d b e s e a l e d t o t h e bu i l d i n g f o u n d a t i o n ( g r a d e b e a m , w a l l , o r s l a b ) u s i n g t h e m a n u f a c t u r e r ’ s re c o m m e n d e d a c c e s s o r y f o r s e a l i n g t h e v a p o r r e t a r d e r t o p r e - e x i s t i n g or f r e s h l y p l a c e d c o n c r e t e . A d d i t i o n a l l y , i n a c t u a l p r a c t i c e , s t a k e s a r e of t e n d r i v e n t h r o u g h t h e r e t a r d e r m a t e r i a l , e q u i p m e n t i s d r a g g e d o r ii Chinquapin Coast Homes Job No. 21-13506 Carlsbad, California Page 42 rolled across the retarder, overlapping or jointing is not properly implemented, etc. All these construction deficiencies reduce the retarder’s effectiveness. In no case should retarder/barrier products be punctured or gaps be allowed to form prior to or during concrete placement. Vapor barrier-safe screeding and forming systems should be used that will not leave puncture holes in the vapor barrier, such as Beast Foot (by Stego Industries) or equivalent. 25.3 Vapor retarders/barriers do not provide full waterproofing for structures constructed below free water surfaces. They are intended to help reduce or prevent vapor transmission and/or capillary migration through the soil and through the concrete slabs. Waterproofing systems must be designed and properly constructed if full waterproofing is desired. The owner and project designers should be consulted to determine the specific level of protection required. 25.4 Following placement of any concrete floor slabs, sufficient drying time must be allowed prior to placement of floor coverings. Premature placement of floor coverings may result in degradation of adhesive materials and loosening of the finish floor materials. 26. Exterior Slab Thickness and Reinforcement: As a minimum for protection of on-site improvements, we recommend that all exterior pedestrian concrete slabs be 4 inches thick and be founded on properly compacted and tested fill, with No. 3 bars at 15-inch centers, both ways, at the center of the slab, and contain adequate isolation and control joints. The performance of on-site improvements can be greatly affected by soil base preparation and the quality of construction. It is therefore important that all improvements are properly designed and constructed for the existing soil conditions. The improvements Chinquapin Coast Homes Job No. 21-13506 Carlsbad, California Page 43 should not be built on loose soils or fills placed without our observation and testing. For exterior slabs with the minimum shrinkage reinforcement, control joints should be placed at spaces no farther than 15 feet apart or the width of the slab, whichever is less, and also at re-entrant corners. Control joints in exterior slabs should be sealed with elastomeric joint sealant. The sealant should be inspected every 6 months and be properly maintained. F. Pavements 27. Concrete Pavement: We recommend that driveways subject only to automobile and light truck traffic be 5.5 inches thick and be supported directly on properly prepared/compacted on-site subgrade soils. The upper 6 inches of the subgrade below the slab should be compacted to a minimum degree of compaction of 95 percent just prior to paving. The concrete should conform to Section 201 of The Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, 2018 Edition, for Class 560-C-3250. In order to control shrinkage cracking, we recommend that saw-cut, weakened-plane joints be provided at about 12-foot centers both ways and at reentrant corners. The pavement slabs should be saw-cut as soon as practical but no more than 24 hours after the placement of the concrete. The depth of the joint should be one-quarter of the slab thickness and its width should not exceed 0.02-foot. Reinforcing steel is not necessary unless it is desired to increase the joint spacing recommended above. Pavement joints should be sealed with an approved pavement joint sealer. Chinquapin Coast Homes Job No. 21-13506 Carlsbad, California Page 44 28. Interlocking Permeable Pavers: If desired, we recommend that permeable pavement pavers for the driveway, subject only to automobile and light truck traffic, be supported on a 1.5 inches of bedding sand No. 8 Sand, on 6-inch thickness of Crushed Miscellaneous Base conforming to Section 200-2 of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, 2018 Edition; or 6 inches of No.57 crushed rock gravel per ASTM D448 gradation. The upper 6 inches of the pavement subgrade soil as well as the aggregate base layer should be compacted to a minimum degree of compaction of 95 percent. Preparation of the subgrade and placement of the base materials should be performed under the observation of our representative. G. Site Drainage Considerations 29. Erosion Control: Appropriate erosion control measures should be taken at all times during and after construction to prevent surface runoff waters from entering footing excavations or ponding on finished building pad areas. 30. Surface Drainage: Adequate measures should be taken to properly finish- grade the lot after the residential structures and other improvements are in place. Drainage waters from this site and adjacent properties should be directed away from the footings, floor slabs, and slopes, onto the natural drainage direction for this area or into properly designed and approved drainage facilities provided by the project civil engineer. Roof gutters and downspouts should be installed on the residences, with the runoff directed away from the foundations via closed drainage lines. Proper subsurface and surface drainage will help minimize the potential for waters to seek the level of the bearing soils under the footings and floor slabs. Chinquapin Coast Homes Job No. 21-13506 Carlsbad, California Page 45 Failure to observe this recommendation could result in undermining and possible differential settlement of the structure or other improvements on the site or cause other moisture-related problems. Currently, the CBC requires a minimum 1-percent surface gradient for proper drainage of building pads unless waived by the building official. Concrete pavement may have a minimum gradient of 0.5-percent. 31. Planter Drainage: Planter areas, flower beds and planter boxes should be sloped to drain away from the footings and floor slabs at a gradient of at least 5 percent within 5 feet from the perimeter walls. Any planter areas adjacent to the residence or surrounded by concrete improvements should be provided with sufficient area drains to help with rapid runoff disposal. No water should be allowed to pond adjacent to the residence or other improvements or anywhere on the site. 32. Drainage Quality Control: It must be understood that it is not within the scope of our services to provide quality control oversight for surface or subsurface drainage construction or retaining wall sealing and base of wall drain construction. It is the responsibility of the contractor to verify proper wall sealing, geofabric installation, protection board (if needed), drain depth below interior floor or yard surface, pipe percent slope to the outlet, etc. H. General Recommendations 33. Project Start Up Notification: In order to reduce work delays during site development, this firm should be contacted 48 hours prior to any need for observation of footing excavations or field density testing of compacted fill soils. If possible, placement of formwork and steel reinforcement in footing excavations should not occur prior to observing the excavations; in the event Chinquapin Coast Homes Job No. 21-13506 Carlsbad, California Page 46 that our observations reveal the need for deepening or re-designing foundation structures at any locations, any formwork or steel reinforcement in the affected footing excavation areas would have to be removed prior to correction of the observed problem (i.e., deepening the footing excavation, recompacting soil in the bottom of the excavation, etc.). 34. Cal-OSHA: Where not superseded by specific recommendations presented in this report, trenches, excavations, and temporary slopes at the subject site should be constructed in accordance with Title 8, Construction Safety Orders, issued by Cal-OSHA. 35. Erosion Control: Appropriate erosion control measures should be taken at all times during and after construction to prevent surface runoff waters from entering footing excavations or ponding on finished building pad areas. 36. Construction Best Management Practices (BMPs): Construction BMPs must be implemented in accordance with the requirements of the controlling jurisdiction. Sufficient BMPs must be installed to prevent silt, mud or other construction debris from being tracked into the adjacent street(s) or storm water conveyance systems due to construction vehicles or any other construction activity. The contractor is responsible for cleaning any such debris that may be in the street at the end of each work day or after a storm event that causes breach in the installed construction BMPs. All stockpiles of uncompacted soil and/or building materials that are intended to be left unprotected for a period greater than 7 days are to be provided with erosion and sediment controls. Such soil must be protected each day when the probability of rain is 40% or greater. A concrete washout should be provided on all projects that propose the construction of any concrete Chinquapin Coast Homes Job No. 21-13506 Carlsbad, California Page 47 improvements that are to be poured in place. All erosion/sediment control devices should be maintained in working order at all times. All slopes that are created or disturbed by construction activity must be protected against erosion and sediment transport at all times. The storage of all construction materials and equipment must be protected against any potential release of pollutants into the environment. XI. GRADING NOTES Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. recommends that we be retained to verify the actual soil conditions revealed during site grading work and footing excavation to be as anticipated in this "Report of Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation" for the project. In addition, the placement and compaction of any fill or backfill soils during site grading work must be observed and tested by the soil engineer. It is the responsibility of the grading contractor and general contractor to comply with the requirements on the grading plans as well as the local grading ordinance. All retaining wall and trench backfill should be properly compacted. Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. will assume no liability for damage occurring due to improperly or uncompacted backfill placed without our observations and testing. XII. LIMITATIONS Our conclusions and recommendations have been based on available data obtained from our field investigation and laboratory analysis, as well as our experience with similar soils and formational materials located in this area of Carlsbad. Of necessity, we must assume a certain degree of continuity between exploratory excavations and/or natural exposures. It is, therefore, necessary that all observations, conclusions, and recommendations be verified at the time grading operations begin Ch i n q u a p i n C o a s t H o m e s Jo b N o . 2 1 - 1 3 5 0 6 Ca r l s b a d , C a l i f o r n i a Pa g e 4 8 or w h e n f o o t i n g e x c a v a t i o n s a r e p l a c e d . I n t h e e v e n t d i s c r e p a n c i e s a r e n o t e d , ad d i t i o n a l r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s m a y b e i s s u e d , i f r e q u i r e d . Th e w o r k p e r f o r m e d a n d r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s p r e s e n t e d h e r e i n a r e t h e r e s u l t o f a n in v e s t i g a t i o n a n d a n a l y s i s t h a t m e e t t h e c o n t e m p o r a r y s t a n d a r d o f c a r e i n o u r pr o f e s s i o n w i t h i n t h e C o u n t y o f S a n D i e g o . N o w a r r a n t y i s p r o v i d e d . As s t a t e d p r e v i o u s l y , i t i s n o t w i t h i n t h e sc o p e o f o u r s e r v i c e s t o p r o v i d e q u a l i t y co n t r o l o v e r s i g h t f o r s u r f a c e o r s u b s u r f a c e d r a i n a g e c o n s t r u c t i o n o r r e t a i n i n g w a l l se a l i n g a n d b a s e o f w a l l d r a i n c o n s t r u c t i o n . I t i s t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y o f t h e c o n t r a c t o r to v e r i f y p r o p e r w a l l s e a l i n g , g e o f a b r i c i n s t a l l a t i o n , p r o t e c t i o n b o a r d i n s t a l l a t i o n ( i f ne e d e d ) , d r a i n d e p t h b e l o w i n t e r i o r f l o o r o r y a r d s u r f a c e s ; p i p e p e r c e n t s l o p e t o t h e ou t l e t , e t c . Th i s r e p o r t s h o u l d b e c o n s i d e r e d v a l i d f o r a pe r i o d o f t w o ( 2 ) y e a r s , a n d i s s u b j e c t t o re v i e w b y o u r f i r m f o l l o w i n g t h a t t i m e . I f s i g n i f i c a n t m o d i f i c a t i o n s a r e m a d e t o t h e bu i l d i n g p l a n s , e s p e c i a l l y w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e h e i g h t a n d l o c a t i o n o f a n y p r o p o s e d st r u c t u r e s , t h i s r e p o r t m u s t b e p r e s e n t e d t o u s f o r i m m e d i a t e r e v i e w a n d p o s s i b l e re v i s i o n . It i s t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y o f t h e o w n e r a n d / o r d e v e l o p e r t o e n s u r e t h a t t h e re c o m m e n d a t i o n s s u m m a r i z e d i n t h i s r e p o r t a r e c a r r i e d o u t i n t h e f i e l d o p e r a t i o n s an d t h a t o u r r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s f o r d e s i g n o f t h i s p r o j e c t a r e i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t h e pr o j e c t p l a n s . W e s h o u l d b e r e t a i n e d t o r e v i e w t h e p r o j e c t p l a n s o n c e t h e y a r e av a i l a b l e , t o v e r i f y t h a t o u r r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s a r e a d e q u a t e l y i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t h e pl a n s . A d d i t i o n a l o r m o d i f i e d r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s m a y b e i s s u e d i f w a r r a n t e d a f t e r p l a n re v i e w . ii Chinquapin Coast Homes Job No. 21-13506 Carlsbad, California Page 49 This firm does not practice or consult in the field of safety engineering. We do not direct the contractor's operations, and we cannot be responsible for the safety of personnel other than our own on the site; the safety of others is the responsibility of the contractor. The contractor should notify the owner if any of the recommended actions presented herein are considered to be unsafe. The firm of Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. shall not be held responsible for changes to the physical condition of the property, such as addition of fill soils or changing drainage patterns, which occur subsequent to issuance of this report and the changes are made without our observations, testing, and approval. Once again, should any questions arise concerning this report, please feel free to contact the undersigned. Reference to our Job No. 21-13506 will expedite a reply to your inquiries. Respectfully submitted, GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. _______________________________ ______________________________ Jaime A. Cerros, P.E. Leslie D. Reed, President R.C.E. 34422/G.E. 2007 C.E.G. 999/P.G. 3391 Senior Geotechnical Engineer _______________________________ Cathy K. Ganze, Project Coordinator Senior Project Geologist nrc -:,,1,1,,trc ,nn, Cathy K. an , Project Coordinator Senior Project Geologist REFERENCES JOB NO. 21-13506 October 2021 2007 Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities, 2008, The Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast, Version 2 (UCERF 2), U.S Geological Survey Open-file Report 2007-1437 and California Geological Survey Special Report 203. Association of Engineering Geologists, 1973, Geology and Earthquake Hazards, Planners Guide to the Seismic Safety Element, Association of Engineering Geologists, Southern California Section. Berger, V. and Schug, D.L., 1991, Probabilistic Evaluation of Seismic Hazard in the San Diego-Tijuana Metropolitan Region, Environmental Perils, San Diego Region, Geological Society of America by the San Diego Association of Geologists, October 20, 1991, p. 89-99. Crowell, J.C., 1962, Displacement Along the San Andreas, Fault, California, Geological Society of America, Special Papers, no. 71. Demere, T.A. 1997, Geology of San Diego County, California, San Diego Natural History Museum, http://archive.sdnhm.org/research/paleontology/sdgeol.html, accessed July 30, 2020. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute (EERI), 2020, San Diego Planning Scenario, Magnitude 6.9 on the Rose Canyon Fault. Google Earth, 2021, historic aerial images of area. Grant Ludwig, L.B. and Shearer, P.M., 2004, Activity of the Offshore Newport-Inglewood Rose Canyon Fault Zone, Coastal Southern California, from Relocated Microseismicity. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, 94(2), 747-752. Greene, H.G., Bailey, K.A., Clarke, S.H., Ziony, J.I. and Kennedy, M.P., 1979, Implications of fault patterns of the inner California continental borderland between San Pedro and San Diego, in Abbott, P.L., and Elliot, W.J., eds., Earthquakes and other perils, San Diego region: San Diego Association of Geologists, Geological Society of America field trip, November, 1979, p. 21–28. Greensfelder, R.W., 1974, Maximum Credible Rock Accelerations from Earthquakes in California, California Division of Mines and Geology. Hart E.W. and Bryant, W.A., 1997, Fault-Rupture Hazard Zones in California, California Division of Mines and Geology, Special Publication 42. Hart, E.W., Smith, D.P. and Saul, R.B., 1979, Summary Report: Fault Evaluation Program, 1978 Area (Peninsular Ranges-Salton Trough Region), California Division of Mines and Geology, Open-file Report 79-10 SF, 10. Hauksson, E. and Jones, L.M., 1988, The July 1986 Oceanside (ML=5.3) Earthquake Sequence in the Continental Borderland, Southern California Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, v. 78, p. 1885-1906. Hileman, J.A., Allen, C.R. and Nordquist, J.M., 1973, Seismicity of the Southern California Region, January 1, 1932 to December 31, 1972; Seismological Laboratory, Cal-Tech, Pasadena, California. Ii REFERENCES/Page 2 Jennings, C.W., and Bryant, W.A., 2010, Fault Activity Map of California, California Geological Survey Geologic Data Map No. 6 Kennedy, M.P. and Tan, S.S., 2007, Geologic Map of the Oceanside 30’x60’ Quadrangle, California, California Geological Survey, Department of Conservation. Legg, M., and Agnew, D., 1979, The 1862 Earthquake in San Diego, in Earthquakes and Other Perils: San Diego Region (Abbott, P.L., Elliott, W.J., eds.), San Diego Association of Geologists, San Diego, CA 139-141. Richter, C.F., 1958, Elementary Seismology, W.H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco, California. Rockwell, T.K., 2010, The Rose Canyon Fault Zone in San Diego, Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Recent Advances in Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics. Paper No. 7.06C. Rockwell, T.K., Dawson, T.E., Young Ben-Horin, J. and Seitz, G., 2014, A 21-Event, 4,000-Year History of Surface Ruptures in the Anza Seismic Gap, San Jacinto Fault, and Implications for Long-term Earthquake Production on a Major Plate Boundary Fault. Pure and Applied Geophysics, v. 172, 1143– 1165 (2015). Rockwell, T.K., Millman, D.E., McElwain, R.S. and Lamar, D.L., 1985, Study of Seismic Activity by Trenching Along the Glen Ivy North Fault, Elsinore Fault Zone, Southern California: Lamar-Merifield Technical Report 85-1, U.S.G.S. Contract 14-08-0001-21376, 19 p. Ross, Z.E., Hauksson E. and Ben-Zion Y., 2017, Abundant Off-fault Seismicity and Orthogonal Structures in the San Jacinto Fault Zone, Science Advances, 2017; 3(3): e1601946. Published 2017 Mar 15. Singleton, D.M., Rockwell, T.K., Murbach, D., Murbach, M., Maloney, J., Freeman, T., Levy, Y., 2019, Late-Holocene Rupture History of the Rose Canyon Fault in Old Town, San Diego: Implications of Cascading Earthquakes on the Newport-Inglewood-Rose Canyon Fault System, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 109, 855-874. Tan, S.S. and Giffen, D.G., 1995, Landslide Hazards in the Northern Part of San Diego Metropolitan Area, San Diego County, California, Landslide Hazard Identification Map No. 35, California Division of Mines and Geology, Open-file Report 95-04, Map Sheet 35H. Toppozada, T.R. and Parke, D.L., 1982, Areas Damaged by California Earthquakes, 1900-1949, California Division of Mines and Geology, Open-file Report. 82-17. Ii VICINITY MAP Chinquapin Coast Homes 330 Chinquapin Avenue Carlsbad, CA. Figure No. I Job No. 21-13506 SITESITE Thomas Bros Guide San Diego County pg 1106-F6 Carls St Bea ): ;.,.\,_'y_ R--,,,s:s t,._~\:I • -~ er -~. ,~'r-~ ~~ Geotechnlcal ~•~ I Exploration, Inc. ~ HP-13 Approximate Location of Exploratory Handpit HP-2 HP-3 HP-1HP-4HP-5 HP-6 HP-7 HP-8 HP-9HP-10 HP-11 HP-12 HP-13 October 2021 Chinquapin Coast Homes 330 Chinquapin Avenue Carlsbad, CA. Figure No. II Job No. 21-13506 21-13506-p.ai LEGEND PLOT PLAN REFERENCE: This Plot Plan was prepared from and existing CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN by KIRK MOELLER ARCHITECTS, INC. dated 8-18-21 and from on-site field reconnaissance with subsurface investigation performed by GEI. REFERENCE: This Plot Plan is not to be used for legal purposes. Locations and dimensions are approximate. Actual property dimensions and locations of utilities may be obtained from the Approved Building Plans or the “As-Built” Grading Plans. CH I N Q U A P I N A V E N U E GRAPHIC SCALE ( 1” = 20’ ) N 0 10 20 3020 Quaternary Old Paralic Deposits (unit 7) GEOLOGIC LEGEND Qop 7 Qop 7 Qop 7 Qop7 A 1.1 SITE PLAN CHINQUAPIN COAST HOMES 330 CHINQUAPIN AVE. CARLSBAD, CA I I ~ : V I I ~~=sroov M 1"-- 1 I --~ ~V I L= I ==--,r,~ ·"' I \ 1 \ In :::!°~! J =--~ I ) u / ~, ~"-, ~ ~ ; -I '',:,_ , __ ,_, ___ ): ~ -~~--,~-.---/._....----,1--1-----/\ "-~-:~ '\,----- \ I \ \ ~--.,.,., \ --~ 1--x~ ·!------------------~---------~ -~v ----------i -\., I,----,. X • X " =----~ / r r ~ -~~: ~~-~-~--:=~~~-~--------~~=-~-1.:---------------~-----------------:-i--------,~-~~~,------:-'---=.----'--; ____ :?_1 :\~ ___ -_ I ·11 -----------_.. --a:] !( i 1•~~ ~I r•~-,-1 r =--, -11 -;Ir----, I r--~,L 11 ~-~1-r---, t1·--____ L ' ,. ½ _L L-_J ~ ' " l 'J --{_-) {_---.__--tlt---:l,:-----i I I e,mn, I~ ~ 11\ JI I 11\ JI In ii I ENTRY 11\ JI I ~ -II EHTRV ~ emr,-I,......---.-, Hi'---, I : i\---(1 : e,mn, : n---1: )i---]: OORY ~ ElfT1IY i i\---7-al r--~~~-IJ I n 9i? n I ~ : n---(1: 1\--] : e,mn, I 11~ill l1 111 111 11 111 111 lJ 111 11 111 11 -OP1=/m,i :l\ /il 1, -M .1...11 11 1 LJ 111 11 111 11 1 ,srroo ~ 111 1 111 111 11111 ill 111 11 111 ill lJi P.--.J..J. I I i I I I I \ i I I I I II I I I I i I I I \ II LJ j\_ I I I 11 I I I i I 1 1 1111" I I ~ ! ! I I \ 11 I I I I I f fi O~ACT I I I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11 11 I I I I I I I '-.. I I \ r---/. LL I I \ I I I I \ I I I I I \ I I I I \ I I I I I i I I I \ I I I ,. ~ I I I I I I I \ I I L/ I P~tfll I I \ I I I I I I I I I \ I I I I I I I I I I \ t 11 11 10'-0' I I I I I 111 !N'l,..,__l I1 1 1 1 11 t t I 11 11 1 1 1 ~i.--......-11 1 /_I ll _\ 11 1 I I I 11 1 Tri t--1+1 I-,, I I ~-~ 1111 1 , ... ,. I II \ 1 1111 11 1 ,!.'.,l, FVSB 11 \ I 11 11 I T ~ I I 11 ~ /~I I I -II I I ~ I I 11 I I G.\RAGlt 11 11 \ I G.!",1(/E \ I 11 -lll--U,-.......,n:,w,•-=--..,_,_.,._,_,-LJt 11 \ I "'lfl"iE I I 11 11 I I "'!"M" I .. , 11 ' ''' I I I I 11 I I I I I I I 'I I I I I I 11 \ I I / 11 \ I I 11 I I I I I I Ip,!! I I I I \ I I I I \ I I I \ "7 I I I I 111 I I I I I I \ I I I I \ I I I I I \ I I I I \ !ai I I 11 II 11 1 II 11 11 \/ 111 1-,...IJ.. 1 1 I ll II I I I II 11 1 \I 11 11 \I 11 11 \I 111 II I I '-/II \I 111 \I 11 11 II 111 II 11 11 \I 111 II 11 I : L_L J: L_LJ: : L_LJ: L_)L_J: -----_J: L_L J / : L_)L_J: L_LJ : 11 1~ 11 : L_)L_J: L_)L_ J: : L _LJ : L_L J: : L_)L_J: L_LJ : IL )L ~~~ ~I 11 L ____ J.. ____ ..J L ____ J.. ____ ..J I ,_ ____ ..J:::""_=---, -L ____ J.. ____ ..J L ____ .J 11 L ____ J.. ___ .J L ___ J.. ____ .J L ____ J.. ____ .J L ____ J.. --_.J 11 UNIH UNITS r--.._ 3STORIES I ...._ --._ 3 B£0ROOM --./-~SO.FT. I ---------- -- -I UNIT7 JSTORIES 3BEOROOM +/. 2,300 SQ. FT. --. -rlllL UNIT6 U---- JSTORIEf 3BEOROO ♦/.2,30050.FT. --.-1:•--• I r-,==------IT~. --i=::,---' U • 3 STORIES 3 STORIES +1-1,500 ~ FT. 3 BEDROOM I 8EO~~M ♦/· 2,300 SO. FT.~ AFFORDAIIU\ UNIT . - UNIT3 JSTORIES 38EDROOM /. 2.300 SQ. FT. UNIT2 JSTORIES r3 BEOROOl,t-- t/. 2.300 SQ. FT. uu,;11 ~ JSTpRlES 38EI llOOM lAN!lSCAPE ♦1.2,x sa.r c./ ~ : I L ____ -L I ----1 I \ I I I I I t--------, I -_ r--------'---, s--------, I I ~--.---,-----''---_.._--, _,,_-;·---+---, :-i r--------l--------, -_J_______________ J UNE OF SIRUCT\JRf NN. _/ ~ i "' g .__,_ fffi:TEYAADS ____ L _______ _J ______ ~~~~-.J--~YAADS ----~-----~-----11 t-----~~-S~CT\JRf~NN-,_/--,,---~.f'W~,:lE-,_·Y-AADS---~ --L i~---~ w:~--~-----==--=:===~~~w~~~~-~-~-~-~-~~~-~,=~=-¥-~~-~~~-~,~~~/===,~1~,=-====1~~,~~~/~~/==~-==,~~~~-~~,~/~---~::-~-~~~.~,cw.~-~.~~~",._=;~M=i~~~~r:oo~=~~-~~~"~~-~===~~~~~::::;;;;;;;;~j~~~,~-_;;;;~~~~I ~:,,, l-o .....J CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN HI' 20' : ~ lr .-, ~f!.4~-Geotechnical ~1,-,.il Exploration, Inc. ~ SY M B O L BL O W S / 6" SM SM 1 H No Groundwater, No Caving, Backfilled with Cuttings3 2 1 SILTY SANDSTONE, fine to medium grained, medium dense to dense, damp, light brown to light red-brown, some roots. Topsoil/Artificial Fill (Qaf) Formation (Qop7) EX P A N S I O N IN D E X % P A S S I N G # 2 0 0 SI E V E EQUIPMENT: Hand Tools DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION: 2.0'x2.0'x2.0' DATE LOGGED: October 5, 2021 LOGGED BY: HE SURFACE ELEVATION: ±49' Above Mean Sea Level SA M P L E O . D . ( i n ) DE P T H (f e e t ) SA M P L E DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS (Grain Size, Density, Moisture, Color) REVIEWED BY: GROUNDWATER/SEEPAGE DEPTH: Not Encountered FIELD DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION U. S . C . S IN - P L A C E MO I S T U R E ( % ) IN - P L A C E D R Y DE N S I T Y ( p c f ) OP T I M U M MO I S T U R E ( % ) MA X I M U M D R Y DE N S I T Y ( p c f ) DE N S I T Y ( % o f MD D ) SILTY SAND, fine to medium grained, medium dense, moist, brown, some roots, porous. EX P A N ( + % ) CO N S O L ( - % ) Bottom of Excavation at 2.0 ft. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 MODIFIED CALIFORNIA SAMPLE SITE LOCATION: 330 Chinquapin Ave Carlsbad, CA FIGURE NO. IIIaIN-PLACE HAND-DRIVE SAMPLE STANDARD PENETRATION TEST JOB NUMBER: 21-13506 LOG NO. HP-1BULK BAG SAMPLE JOB NAME: Chinquapin Coast HomesIN-PLACE SAMPLE PERCHED WATER TABLE * DISTURBED BLOWCOUNT ◄~~I ~ Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - SY M B O L BL O W S / 6" SM SM 1 H SILTY SAND, fine to medium grained, medium dense, moist, brown, some roots. Topsoil/Artificial Fill (Qaf) 3 2 1 No Groundwater, No Caving, Backfilled with Cuttings % P A S S I N G # 2 0 0 SI E V E EQUIPMENT: Hand Tools DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION: 2.0'x2.0'x1.0' DATE LOGGED: October 5, 2021 LOGGED BY: HE SURFACE ELEVATION: ±49' Above Mean Sea Level SA M P L E O . D . ( i n ) DE P T H (f e e t ) SA M P L E DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS (Grain Size, Density, Moisture, Color) REVIEWED BY: GROUNDWATER/SEEPAGE DEPTH: Not Encountered FIELD DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION U. S . C . S IN - P L A C E MO I S T U R E ( % ) IN - P L A C E D R Y DE N S I T Y ( p c f ) OP T I M U M MO I S T U R E ( % ) MA X I M U M D R Y DE N S I T Y ( p c f ) DE N S I T Y ( % o f MD D ) EX P A N ( + % ) CO N S O L ( - % ) EX P A N S I O N IN D E X Bottom of Excavation at 1.0 ft. 4 Formation (Qop7) 5 6 7 8 9 10 SILTY SANDSTONE, fine to medium grained, medium dense to dense, damp, light brown to light red-brown, some roots in the upper 6-inches. MODIFIED CALIFORNIA SAMPLE SITE LOCATION: 330 Chinquapin Ave Carlsbad, CA FIGURE NO. IIIbIN-PLACE HAND-DRIVE SAMPLE STANDARD PENETRATION TEST JOB NUMBER: 21-13506 LOG NO. HP-2BULK BAG SAMPLE JOB NAME: Chinquapin Coast HomesIN-PLACE SAMPLE PERCHED WATER TABLE * DISTURBED BLOWCOUNT ◄~~I ~ Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. - -11 111 \ J - -\ I - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - SY M B O L BL O W S / 6" SM SM 2.2 112.9 1 H No Groundwater, No Caving, Backfilled with Cuttings3 2 1 1 Topsoil/Artificial Fill (Qaf) SILTY SANDSTONE, fine to medium grained, medium dense to dense, damp, light brown to light red-brown, some roots. Formation (Qop7) EX P A N S I O N IN D E X % P A S S I N G # 2 0 0 SI E V E EQUIPMENT: Hand Tools DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION: 2.0'x2.0'x2.0' DATE LOGGED: October 5, 2021 LOGGED BY: HE SURFACE ELEVATION: ±49' Above Mean Sea Level SA M P L E O . D . ( i n ) DE P T H (f e e t ) SA M P L E DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS (Grain Size, Density, Moisture, Color) REVIEWED BY: GROUNDWATER/SEEPAGE DEPTH: Not Encountered FIELD DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION U. S . C . S IN - P L A C E MO I S T U R E ( % ) IN - P L A C E D R Y DE N S I T Y ( p c f ) OP T I M U M MO I S T U R E ( % ) MA X I M U M D R Y DE N S I T Y ( p c f ) DE N S I T Y ( % o f MD D ) SILTY SAND, fine to medium grained, medium dense, moist, brown, some roots, porous. EX P A N ( + % ) CO N S O L ( - % ) Bottom of Excavation at 2.0 ft. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 MODIFIED CALIFORNIA SAMPLE SITE LOCATION: 330 Chinquapin Ave Carlsbad, CA FIGURE NO. IIIcIN-PLACE HAND-DRIVE SAMPLE STANDARD PENETRATION TEST JOB NUMBER: 21-13506 LOG NO. HP-3BULK BAG SAMPLE JOB NAME: Chinquapin Coast HomesIN-PLACE SAMPLE PERCHED WATER TABLE * DISTURBED BLOWCOUNT ◄~~I ~ Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - SY M B O L BL O W S / 6" SM SM 1.7 109.5 1 H MODIFIED CALIFORNIA SAMPLE SITE LOCATION: 330 Chinquapin Ave Carlsbad, CA FIGURE NO. IIIdIN-PLACE HAND-DRIVE SAMPLE STANDARD PENETRATION TEST JOB NUMBER: 21-13506 LOG NO. HP-4BULK BAG SAMPLE JOB NAME: Chinquapin Coast HomesIN-PLACE SAMPLE PERCHED WATER TABLE * DISTURBED BLOWCOUNT 10 9 8 7 5 6 EX P A N ( + % ) CO N S O L ( - % ) Bottom of Excavation at 2.5 ft. 4 EX P A N S I O N IN D E X % P A S S I N G # 2 0 0 SI E V E EQUIPMENT: Hand Tools DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION: 2.0'x2.0'x2.5' DATE LOGGED: October 5, 2021 LOGGED BY: HE SURFACE ELEVATION: ±49' Above Mean Sea Level SA M P L E O . D . ( i n ) DE P T H (f e e t ) SA M P L E DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS (Grain Size, Density, Moisture, Color) REVIEWED BY: GROUNDWATER/SEEPAGE DEPTH: Not Encountered FIELD DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION U. S . C . S IN - P L A C E MO I S T U R E ( % ) IN - P L A C E D R Y DE N S I T Y ( p c f ) OP T I M U M MO I S T U R E ( % ) MA X I M U M D R Y DE N S I T Y ( p c f ) DE N S I T Y ( % o f MD D ) SILTY SAND, fine to medium grained, medium dense, moist, brown, some roots, porous. No Groundwater, No Caving, Backfilled with Cuttings 3 2 1 1 SILTY SANDSTONE, fine to medium grained, medium dense to dense, damp, light brown to light red-brown, some roots. Topsoil/Artificial Fill (Qaf) Formation (Qop7) ◄~~I ~ Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - SY M B O L BL O W S / 6" SM SM 1 H SILTY SAND, fine to medium grained, medium dense, moist, brown, some roots, porous. No Groundwater, No Caving, Backfilled with Cuttings3 2 1 SILTY SANDSTONE, fine to medium grained, medium dense to dense, damp, light brown to light red-brown, some roots.1 Topsoil/Artificial Fill (Qaf) Formation (Qop7) EX P A N S I O N IN D E X % P A S S I N G # 2 0 0 SI E V E EQUIPMENT: Hand Tools DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION: 2.0'x2.0'x1.5' DATE LOGGED: October 5, 2021 LOGGED BY: HE SURFACE ELEVATION: ±50' Above Mean Sea Level SA M P L E O . D . ( i n ) DE P T H (f e e t ) SA M P L E DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS (Grain Size, Density, Moisture, Color) REVIEWED BY: GROUNDWATER/SEEPAGE DEPTH: Not Encountered FIELD DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION U. S . C . S IN - P L A C E MO I S T U R E ( % ) IN - P L A C E D R Y DE N S I T Y ( p c f ) OP T I M U M MO I S T U R E ( % ) MA X I M U M D R Y DE N S I T Y ( p c f ) DE N S I T Y ( % o f MD D ) EX P A N ( + % ) CO N S O L ( - % ) Bottom of Excavation at 1.5 ft. 4 1.9 5 6 112.6 7 8 9 10 MODIFIED CALIFORNIA SAMPLE SITE LOCATION: 330 Chinquapin Ave Carlsbad, CA FIGURE NO. IIIeIN-PLACE HAND-DRIVE SAMPLE STANDARD PENETRATION TEST JOB NUMBER: 21-13506 LOG NO. HP-5BULK BAG SAMPLE JOB NAME: Chinquapin Coast HomesIN-PLACE SAMPLE PERCHED WATER TABLE * DISTURBED BLOWCOUNT ◄~~I ~ Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. - - - -11111 -\ I - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - SY M B O L BL O W S / 6" SM SM 2.2 103.9 8.0 125.0 0.0 18.0 1.8 109.5 1 H SILTY SAND, fine to medium grained, medium dense, moist, brown, some roots, porous. No Groundwater, No Caving, Backfilled with Cuttings 3 2 1 H/1 Topsoil/Artificial Fill (Qaf) Formation (Qop7) SILTY SANDSTONE, fine to medium grained, medium dense to dense, damp, light brown to light red-brown, some roots. EX P A N S I O N IN D E X % P A S S I N G # 2 0 0 SI E V E EQUIPMENT: Hand Tools DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION: 2.0'x2.0'x2.5' DATE LOGGED: October 5, 2021 LOGGED BY: HE SURFACE ELEVATION: ±51' Above Mean Sea Level SA M P L E O . D . ( i n ) DE P T H (f e e t ) SA M P L E DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS (Grain Size, Density, Moisture, Color) REVIEWED BY: GROUNDWATER/SEEPAGE DEPTH: Not Encountered FIELD DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION U. S . C . S IN - P L A C E MO I S T U R E ( % ) IN - P L A C E D R Y DE N S I T Y ( p c f ) OP T I M U M MO I S T U R E ( % ) MA X I M U M D R Y DE N S I T Y ( p c f ) DE N S I T Y ( % o f MD D ) EX P A N ( + % ) CO N S O L ( - % ) Bottom of Excavation at 2.5 ft. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 MODIFIED CALIFORNIA SAMPLE SITE LOCATION: 330 Chinquapin Ave Carlsbad, CA FIGURE NO. IIIfIN-PLACE HAND-DRIVE SAMPLE STANDARD PENETRATION TEST JOB NUMBER: 21-13506 LOG NO. HP-6BULK BAG SAMPLE JOB NAME: Chinquapin Coast HomesIN-PLACE SAMPLE PERCHED WATER TABLE * DISTURBED BLOWCOUNT ◄~S-f 1• Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. ~~ - - - - -~ -X - -~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - SY M B O L BL O W S / 6" SM SM 1 H SILTY SANDSTONE, fine to medium grained, medium dense to dense, damp, light brown to light red-brown, some roots.1 SILTY SAND, fine to medium grained, medium dense, moist, brown, some roots. Topsoil/Artificial Fill (Qaf) Formation (Qop7) 2 1 EX P A N S I O N IN D E X % P A S S I N G # 2 0 0 SI E V E EQUIPMENT: Hand Tools DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION: 2.0'x2.0'x1.5' DATE LOGGED: October 5, 2021 LOGGED BY: HE SURFACE ELEVATION: ±50' Above Mean Sea Level SA M P L E O . D . ( i n ) DE P T H (f e e t ) SA M P L E DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS (Grain Size, Density, Moisture, Color) REVIEWED BY: GROUNDWATER/SEEPAGE DEPTH: Not Encountered FIELD DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION U. S . C . S IN - P L A C E MO I S T U R E ( % ) IN - P L A C E D R Y DE N S I T Y ( p c f ) OP T I M U M MO I S T U R E ( % ) MA X I M U M D R Y DE N S I T Y ( p c f ) DE N S I T Y ( % o f MD D ) EX P A N ( + % ) CO N S O L ( - % ) Bottom of Excavation at 1.5 ft. 4 3 5 6 105.11.8 No Groundwater, No Caving, Backfilled with Cuttings 7 8 9 10 MODIFIED CALIFORNIA SAMPLE SITE LOCATION: 330 Chinquapin Ave Carlsbad, CA FIGURE NO. IIIgIN-PLACE HAND-DRIVE SAMPLE STANDARD PENETRATION TEST JOB NUMBER: 21-13506 LOG NO. HP-7BULK BAG SAMPLE JOB NAME: Chinquapin Coast HomesIN-PLACE SAMPLE PERCHED WATER TABLE * DISTURBED BLOWCOUNT ◄~~I ~ Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. - \ J - - \ J - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - SY M B O L BL O W S / 6" SM SM 1 H SILTY SAND, fine to medium grained, medium dense, moist, brown, some roots, porous. No Groundwater, No Caving, Backfilled with Cuttings 3 2 1 SILTY SANDSTONE, fine to medium grained, medium dense to dense, damp, light brown to light red-brown, some roots in the upper 6-inches. H Topsoil/Artificial Fill (Qaf) EX P A N S I O N IN D E X % P A S S I N G # 2 0 0 SI E V E EQUIPMENT: Hand Tools DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION: 2.0'x2.0'x2.5' DATE LOGGED: October 5, 2021 LOGGED BY: HE SURFACE ELEVATION: ±50' Above Mean Sea Level SA M P L E O . D . ( i n ) DE P T H (f e e t ) SA M P L E DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS (Grain Size, Density, Moisture, Color) REVIEWED BY: GROUNDWATER/SEEPAGE DEPTH: Not Encountered FIELD DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION U. S . C . S IN - P L A C E MO I S T U R E ( % ) IN - P L A C E D R Y DE N S I T Y ( p c f ) OP T I M U M MO I S T U R E ( % ) MA X I M U M D R Y DE N S I T Y ( p c f ) DE N S I T Y ( % o f MD D ) EX P A N ( + % ) CO N S O L ( - % ) Bottom of Excavation at 2.5 ft. 4 Formation (Qop7) 5 6 7 8 9 10 2.0 101.6 MODIFIED CALIFORNIA SAMPLE SITE LOCATION: 330 Chinquapin Ave Carlsbad, CA FIGURE NO. IIIhIN-PLACE HAND-DRIVE SAMPLE STANDARD PENETRATION TEST JOB NUMBER: 21-13506 LOG NO. HP-8BULK BAG SAMPLE JOB NAME: Chinquapin Coast HomesIN-PLACE SAMPLE PERCHED WATER TABLE * DISTURBED BLOWCOUNT ◄~~I ~ Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - SY M B O L BL O W S / 6" SM SM 1 H SILTY SAND, fine to medium grained, medium dense, moist, brown, some roots, porous. Bottom of Excavation at 1.5 ft. 3 2 1 1 SILTY SANDSTONE, fine to medium grained, medium dense to dense, damp, light brown to light red-brown, some roots in the upper 6-inches. EX P A N S I O N IN D E X % P A S S I N G # 2 0 0 SI E V E EQUIPMENT: Hand Tools DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION: 2.0'x2.0'x1.5' DATE LOGGED: October 5, 2021 LOGGED BY: HE SURFACE ELEVATION: ±50' Above Mean Sea Level SA M P L E O . D . ( i n ) DE P T H (f e e t ) SA M P L E DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS (Grain Size, Density, Moisture, Color) REVIEWED BY: GROUNDWATER/SEEPAGE DEPTH: Not Encountered FIELD DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION U. S . C . S IN - P L A C E MO I S T U R E ( % ) IN - P L A C E D R Y DE N S I T Y ( p c f ) OP T I M U M MO I S T U R E ( % ) MA X I M U M D R Y DE N S I T Y ( p c f ) DE N S I T Y ( % o f MD D ) EX P A N ( + % ) CO N S O L ( - % ) 4 Topsoil/Artificial Fill (Qaf) 5 6 7 8 9 10 1.9 112.6 Formation (Qop7) No Groundwater, No Caving, Backfilled with Cuttings MODIFIED CALIFORNIA SAMPLE SITE LOCATION: 330 Chinquapin Ave Carlsbad, CA FIGURE NO. IIIiIN-PLACE HAND-DRIVE SAMPLE STANDARD PENETRATION TEST JOB NUMBER: 21-13506 LOG NO. HP-9BULK BAG SAMPLE JOB NAME: Chinquapin Coast HomesIN-PLACE SAMPLE PERCHED WATER TABLE * DISTURBED BLOWCOUNT ◄~~I ~ Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. - - - -1111 -\ I - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - SY M B O L BL O W S / 6" SM SM 1 H MODIFIED CALIFORNIA SAMPLE SITE LOCATION: 330 Chinquapin Ave Carlsbad, CA FIGURE NO. IIIjIN-PLACE HAND-DRIVE SAMPLE STANDARD PENETRATION TEST JOB NUMBER: 21-13506 LOG NO. HP-10BULK BAG SAMPLE JOB NAME: Chinquapin Coast HomesIN-PLACE SAMPLE PERCHED WATER TABLE * DISTURBED BLOWCOUNT 10 9 8 Bottom of Excavation at 2.0 ft. 7 5 6 4 EX P A N S I O N IN D E X % P A S S I N G # 2 0 0 SI E V E EQUIPMENT: Hand Tools DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION: 2.0'x2.0'x2.0' DATE LOGGED: October 5, 2021 LOGGED BY: HE SURFACE ELEVATION: ±51' Above Mean Sea Level SA M P L E O . D . ( i n ) DE P T H (f e e t ) SA M P L E DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS (Grain Size, Density, Moisture, Color) REVIEWED BY: GROUNDWATER/SEEPAGE DEPTH: Not Encountered FIELD DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION U. S . C . S IN - P L A C E MO I S T U R E ( % ) IN - P L A C E D R Y DE N S I T Y ( p c f ) OP T I M U M MO I S T U R E ( % ) MA X I M U M D R Y DE N S I T Y ( p c f ) DE N S I T Y ( % o f MD D ) EX P A N ( + % ) CO N S O L ( - % ) Topsoil/Artificial Fill (Qaf): SILTY SAND, fine to medium grained, medium dense, moist, brown, abundant roots, porous. No Groundwater, No Caving, Backfilled with Cuttings SILTY SANDSTONE, fine to medium grained, medium dense to dense, damp, light brown to light red-brown, some roots. Formation (Qop7) Topsoil/Artificial Fill (Qaf) 3 2 1 ◄~~I ~ Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - SY M B O L BL O W S / 6" SM SM 1 H SILTY SAND, fine to medium grained, medium dense, moist, brown, some roots, porous. No Groundwater, No Caving, Backfilled with Cuttings 3 2 1 SILTY SANDSTONE, fine to medium grained, medium dense to dense, damp, light brown to light red-brown, some roots. H Topsoil/Artificial Fill (Qaf) Formation (Qop7) EX P A N S I O N IN D E X % P A S S I N G # 2 0 0 SI E V E EQUIPMENT: Hand Tools DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION: 2.0'x2.0'x2.5' DATE LOGGED: October 5, 2021 LOGGED BY: HE SURFACE ELEVATION: ±51' Above Mean Sea Level SA M P L E O . D . ( i n ) DE P T H (f e e t ) SA M P L E DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS (Grain Size, Density, Moisture, Color) REVIEWED BY: GROUNDWATER/SEEPAGE DEPTH: Not Encountered FIELD DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION U. S . C . S IN - P L A C E MO I S T U R E ( % ) IN - P L A C E D R Y DE N S I T Y ( p c f ) OP T I M U M MO I S T U R E ( % ) MA X I M U M D R Y DE N S I T Y ( p c f ) DE N S I T Y ( % o f MD D ) EX P A N ( + % ) CO N S O L ( - % ) Bottom of Excavation at 2.5 ft. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 2.2 105.1 MODIFIED CALIFORNIA SAMPLE SITE LOCATION: 330 Chinquapin Ave Carlsbad, CA FIGURE NO. IIIkIN-PLACE HAND-DRIVE SAMPLE STANDARD PENETRATION TEST JOB NUMBER: 21-13506 LOG NO. HP-11BULK BAG SAMPLE JOB NAME: Chinquapin Coast HomesIN-PLACE SAMPLE PERCHED WATER TABLE * DISTURBED BLOWCOUNT ◄~~I ~ Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - SY M B O L BL O W S / 6" SM SM 1 H MODIFIED CALIFORNIA SAMPLE SITE LOCATION: 330 Chinquapin Ave Carlsbad, CA FIGURE NO. IIIlIN-PLACE HAND-DRIVE SAMPLE STANDARD PENETRATION TEST JOB NUMBER: 21-13506 LOG NO. HP-12BULK BAG SAMPLE JOB NAME: Chinquapin Coast HomesIN-PLACE SAMPLE PERCHED WATER TABLE * DISTURBED BLOWCOUNT 10 9 8 7 5 6 1.6 108.0 No Groundwater, No Caving, Backfilled with Cuttings Bottom of Excavation at 2.0 ft. 4 18.0 EX P A N S I O N I N D E X % P A S S I N G # 2 0 0 SI E V E EQUIPMENT: Hand Tools DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION: 2.0'x2.0'x2.0' DATE LOGGED: October 5, 2021 LOGGED BY: HE SURFACE ELEVATION: ±51' Above Mean Sea Level SA M P L E O . D . ( i n ) DE P T H (f e e t ) SA M P L E DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS (Grain Size, Density, Moisture, Color) REVIEWED BY: GROUNDWATER/SEEPAGE DEPTH: Not Encountered FIELD DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION U. S . C . S IN - P L A C E MO I S T U R E ( % ) IN - P L A C E D R Y DE N S I T Y ( p c f ) OP T I M U M MO I S T U R E ( % ) MA X I M U M D R Y DE N S I T Y ( p c f ) DE N S I T Y ( % o f MD D ) EX P A N ( + % ) CO N S O L ( - % ) Topsoil/Artificial Fill (Qaf) SILTY SANDSTONE, fine to medium grained, medium dense to dense, damp, light brown to light red-brown, some roots. Formation (Qop7) 3 2 1 1 SILTY SAND, fine to medium grained, medium dense, moist, brown, some roots, porous. ◄~S-f 1• Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. ~~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - SY M B O L BL O W S / 6" SM SM 1 H MODIFIED CALIFORNIA SAMPLE SITE LOCATION: 330 Chinquapin Ave Carlsbad, CA FIGURE NO. IIImIN-PLACE HAND-DRIVE SAMPLE STANDARD PENETRATION TEST JOB NUMBER: 21-13506 LOG NO. HP-13BULK BAG SAMPLE JOB NAME: Chinquapin Coast HomesIN-PLACE SAMPLE PERCHED WATER TABLE * DISTURBED BLOWCOUNT 10 9 8 7 5 6 EX P A N ( + % ) CO N S O L ( - % ) Bottom of Excavation at 2.0 ft. 4 EX P A N S I O N IN D E X % P A S S I N G # 2 0 0 SI E V E EQUIPMENT: Hand Tools DIMENSION & TYPE OF EXCAVATION: 2.0'x2.0'x2.0' DATE LOGGED: October 5, 2021 LOGGED BY: HE SURFACE ELEVATION: ±51' Above Mean Sea Level SA M P L E O . D . ( i n ) DE P T H (f e e t ) SA M P L E DESCRIPTION AND REMARKS (Grain Size, Density, Moisture, Color) REVIEWED BY: GROUNDWATER/SEEPAGE DEPTH: Not Encountered FIELD DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION U. S . C . S IN - P L A C E MO I S T U R E ( % ) IN - P L A C E D R Y DE N S I T Y ( p c f ) OP T I M U M MO I S T U R E ( % ) MA X I M U M D R Y DE N S I T Y ( p c f ) DE N S I T Y ( % o f MD D ) SILTY SAND, fine to medium grained, medium dense, moist, brown, some roots, porous. No Groundwater, No Caving, Backfilled with Cuttings3 2 1 Topsoil/Artificial Fill (Qaf) SILTY SANDSTONE, fine to medium grained, medium dense to dense, damp, light brown to light red-brown, some roots. Formation (Qop7) ◄~~I ~ Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120 125 130 135 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 WATER CONTENT, % MOISTURE-DENSITY RELATIONSHIP TEST RESULTS Maximum Dry Density Optimum Water Content 0 8.0 Source of Material Description of Material DR Y D E N S I T Y , p c f SILTY SANDSTONE (SM), Brown ASTM D1557 Method A HP-6 @ 1.5' 125.0 PCF % Curves of 100% Saturationfor Specific Gravity Equal to: 2.80 2.70 2.60 Test Method Expansion Index (EI) Figure Number: IV Job Name: Proposed Chinquapin Coast Homes Site Location: 330 Chinquapin Avenue, Carlsbad, CA Job Number: 21-13506CO M P A C T I O N + E I D A R K G R I D 1 3 5 0 6 C H I N Q U A P I N . G P J G E I F E B 0 6 . G D T 1 0 / 2 5 / 2 1 I\ ' \ \ \ \ \ ' \ \ \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ ' I\ ' ..... "' \ \ \. \ 1 ., \ \ ' I\ ' ' I\ ' ' \ \ I\ \ \ \ \ I\ \ \ \ \ \ , \ \ \ ' \ \ \ , \ \ I\ \ ' \ I\ I\ \ \ I\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ '\ \ \ ' \ I'\ I\. \ \ '\. \ \ ' \ I\. '\ \ lo. \ ' \ I\. \ \ \. \ I\ ' \ \ \. \ \. \ '\ I\. '\ \ ' ' I\'-'\ " 1, \ ' I"' ' I\.. "' '\ '\ .. "' \ "r... I'-I"' ....... '\ " ........ 1"-"' ~ " " "', ' "' " " "" 4~e--a Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. ',~~~ ~ Tt chinquapin-OC-geo.ai SITE Qop Quartenary Old Paralic Deposits (unit 6-7)6-7 Chinquapin Coast Homes 330 Chinquapin Avenue Carlsbad, CA. DESCRIPTION OF MAP UNITS PACIFIC OCEAN EXCERPT FROM October 2021 Figure No. V Job No. 21-13506 ......... On5hon, base (h:,i,50;r.1,phy, hvdrogr.Jphy, and Uan!iporte!lon) from U.S.G.S. digital lliRi!i gniph IOLG, data. San Diego JO' :ic 50' metric q~le Shaded topogrophle bHO r,om u $.G.S digl1~ eievalicn models (OEM'&.) Offshore batnyme1ric contou" and shaded ~~)'mt~ rrom N,Q.A.A $tfiglt ond mi.,~ "'3U ProjecdonJBUTM,ZOOl!I 11.NortnAmencanDatum 1927. Thia map WBa funded ,In part by tne U.S. Geologlcal Svr;ey Na~I CooptqJ,we Goo\ogtC Mei~ Program, STATEMAP Awam no 9flHOAG2049 Prep3red 1n eoope,allon will'! the U.S. Geok,glcet Survey, Sooeham Cahfomla Areal Mapping ProJeci;. Cop:,,ighl 02008 by the c,1rroml\ll Oeportmen1 of Con,erv;iiilOn JUI ngh1s re!ieM!d. Na pan or !hi& pubicallOn may be reprochKJ!d witl'tii!M Whlton con&ent or the Cslifomiai Goo1evlc31 Survt:, TJ'le Oopar1mont or Cona.&iva!iol'I m.akes "° warra1111H ilS 10 lhe suit.ability ol lM p,odud k>f any pa,llcular purpose 70 GEOLOGIC MAP OF THE OCEANSIDE 30' x 60' QUADRANGLE, CALIFORNIA Compiled by Michael P. Kennedy1 and Siang S. Tan1 2007 Digital preparation by Kelly R. Bovard2, Rachel M. Alvarez2, Michael J. Watson2, and Carlos I. Guti11rrez1 1 DtlpaM'!CtAt of CCIMetvatiOn, Calilornsa Goolagical Survey 2. U.S. Geologx:aJ Survey, Department ol Earth Sciences, UnM9rsity al Caiforma, Rr.'tuslde ONSIHORE MAP SYMBOLS Contact -Contact between geologic units: dotted where concealed. __L_~_,,, .. , ...... Fault -Solid where accurately located: dashed where approximately located; dotted where concealed. U = upthrown block, D = downthrown block. Arrow and number indicate direction and angle of dip of fault plane. D ~ --.......... Anticline -Solid where accurately located; dashed where 70 _.__ 60 --a-- approximately located; dotted where concealed. Arrow indicates direction of axial plunge. Syncline -Solid where accurately located: dotted where concealed. Arrow indicates direction of axial plunge. Landslide -Arrows indicate principal direction of movement. Queried where existence is questionable. Strike and dip of beds Inclined Strike and dip of igneous joints Inclined Vertical Strike and dip of metamorphic foliation Inclined Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. APPENDIX A UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART SOIL DESCRIPTION Coarse-grained (More than half of material is larger than a No. 200 sieve) GRAVELS, CLEAN GRAVELS GW Well-graded gravels, gravel and sand mixtures, little (More than half of coarse fraction or no fines. is larger than No. 4 sieve size, but smaller than 3”) GP Poorly graded gravels, gravel and sand mixtures, little or no fines. GRAVELS WITH FINES GC Clay gravels, poorly graded gravel-sand-silt mixtures (Appreciable amount) SANDS, CLEAN SANDS SW Well-graded sand, gravelly sands, little or no fines (More than half of coarse fraction is smaller than a No. 4 sieve) SP Poorly graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines. SANDS WITH FINES SM Silty sands, poorly graded sand and silty mixtures. (Appreciable amount) SC Clayey sands, poorly graded sand and clay mixtures. Fine-grained (More than half of material is smaller than a No. 200 sieve) SILTS AND CLAYS Liquid Limit Less than 50 ML Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour, sandy silt and clayey-silt sand mixtures with a slight plasticity CL Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly clays, silty clays, clean clays. OL Organic silts and organic silty clays of low plasticity. Liquid Limit Greater than 50 MH Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine sandy or silty soils, elastic silts. CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays. OH Organic clays of medium to high plasticity. HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT Peat and other highly organic soils Ui APPENDIX B Storm Water Infiltration Testing— Group Delta (2018) Report of Geotechnical Investigation GDC Project No. SD589 330 Chinquapin Avenue November 30, 2018 Mr. Jeff Galizio Page 10 6.3.6 Surface Drainage Slope, foundation, and slab performance depends greatly on how well surface runoff drains from the site. This is true both during construction and over the entire life of the structure. The ground surface should be graded so that water flows rapidly away from the structures and slope tops without ponding. The surface gradient needed to achieve this may depend on the prevailing landscaping. Planters should be built so that water will not seep into the foundation, slab, or pavement areas. If roof drains are used, the drainage should be channeled by pipe to storm drains, or discharge at least ten feet from buildings. Irrigation should be limited to the minimum needed to sustain landscaping. Excessive irrigation, surface water, water line breaks, or rainfall may cause perched groundwater to develop within the underlying soil. 6.3.7 Temporary Excavations Temporary excavations are anticipated for the construction of the proposed utilities. All excavations should conform to Cal-OSHA guidelines. Temporary slopes should be inclined no steeper than 1:1 for heights up to ten feet. Higher temporary slopes, or any excavations which encounter seepage, should be evaluated by the geotechnical consultant on a case-by-case basis. 6.4 Storm Water Infiltration Our investigation included a feasibility study of storm water management in accordance with the Design Manual. The evaluation consisted of test borings, laboratory testing, infiltration testing, and an evaluation of feasibility for on-site storm water infiltration. Group Delta advanced six borings (B-1 through B-5 and I-1) to a maximum depth of 21½ feet to evaluate soil characteristics and the depth of groundwater across the site. Figures 2A and 2B show the locations of these borings. Based on observations and sampling blow counts, the density of the soils varied from loose to very dense. Groundwater was not encountered in our investigation. A descriptive log for each boring is shown in Appendix A. A disturbed soil sample was obtained from the infiltration test boring for particle size distribution testing to evaluate the physical characteristics of the soils. The soils tested were classified as silty sand (SM) per ASTM D2487. The test results are presented in Appendix A and B. Group Delta performed field testing using the Borehole Percolation Test referenced in the Design Manual. We completed a field test (I-1) that is discussed in detail in Appendix C, and the results are shown in Figures C-1.1 and C-1.2. The site and subsurface conditions, including our field testing, were reviewed relative to the criteria stated in Worksheet I-8: Categorization of Infiltration Feasibility Condition. The soils tested appeared to be relatively permeable. The granular nature of the on-site soils are believed to be associated with the relatively high infiltration rate we measured at the site. J GR□UP DEL Tl\ Report of Geotechnical Investigation GDC Project No. SD589 330 Chinquapin Avenue November 30, 2018 Mr. Jeff Galizio Page 11 Based on the preliminary test results, infiltration at the test location would be feasible. A detailed study of the BMP location with respect to existing and planned utilities, walls, and other improvements should be considered during the design development stage. In addition, storm water contaminants and water balance issues should be considered in the BMP design. Due to variability of the soil at the project site, design of the BMP’s should consider the location and results of the preliminary infiltration test. The conclusion and recommendations for storm water infiltration are based on the assumption that soil and groundwater conditions do not deviate appreciably from those locally observed by Group Delta. If remedial grading results in different soil conditions in proposed infiltration zones, further testing may be warranted. The results should only be considered valid for the design assumptions used for testing, including the location and elevation of the soils tested, and the amount of pressure head in the test. These results may not be applicable if significant changes to the design occur. A detailed account of the test method, including the assumptions made, is presented in Appendix C. 6.5 Foundation Recommendations The foundations for the new buildings should be designed by the project structural engineer using the following geotechnical parameters. These are only minimum criteria, and should not be considered a structural design, or to preclude more restrictive criteria of governing agencies or the structural engineer. All foundations for the new structures are anticipated to bear within compacted fill. 6.5.1 Conventional Slab-on-Grade Foundation Recommendations Allowable Bearing: 2,000 lbs/ft2 (allow a ⅓ increase for short-term wind (Compacted Fill) or seismic loads). Minimum Footing Width: 12 inches Minimum Footing Depth: 18 inches below lowest adjacent soil grade Minimum Reinforcement: Two No. 4 bars at top and bottom 6.5.2 Post-Tension Slab Foundations Provided that remedial grading is conducted per our recommendations, most of the residential lots at the site will be underlain by compacted fill with a low expansion potential (EI<50). The following preliminary post-tension slab foundation design parameters are considered applicable to buildings that will be underlain by such conditions. Note that these recommendations should be considered preliminary, and subject to revision based on the conditions observed by the geotechnical J GR□UP DEL Tl\ APPENDIX C STORM WATER INFILTRATION ASSESSMENT J GR□Ufl DEL T .l\ INFILTRATION TESTING Each proposed storm water infiltration BMP requires exploratory borings and in situ testing to justify an infiltration recommendation. During the planning phase, City of Carlsbad, BMP Design Manual dated February 16, 2016 (referred to hereon as Design Manual) recommends a feasibility screening to assess the site conditions and potential for infiltration. Our investigation included test borings at least ten feet below the potential BMP elevations, and one infiltration test to assess preliminary infiltration rates. The results of our field tests are shown in Figures C-1.1 and C-1.2. The test results are considered preliminary and are not based on a specific site plan. Our preliminary conclusions about storm water infiltration BMPs, based on the requirements of the Design Manual, are attached in the completed Worksheet I-8. The factor of safety applied for planning phase feasibility screening is 2.5 and shown attached in the completed Worksheet I-9. The Borehole Percolation Test was used to help approximate infiltration rates of the soils near the proposed infiltration zones. The test was set up by excavating a six-inch diameter test hole using a hand-operated power auger (Appendix A). The hole was cleaned of loose material down to the desired test depth. Perforated PVC casing was placed in the open hole. Open-graded gravel was used to fill the annular space between the casing and the sidewalls of the test hole to support the sidewalls of the test hole and prevent sloughing during saturation of the soil. Each hole was pre- soaked prior to testing to more closely model saturated conditions and to achieve a stabilized percolation rate. The Borehole Percolation Test requires the hole to be filled with water to the test depth and the rate of fall of water (percolation rate) to be measured periodically. To measure the percolation rate, the drop of water in the hole (ΔH) is measured at regular time intervals (Δt). After each reading, or a number of readings, when the water column has measurably dropped from the desired test depth, water is added to the hole to maintain a relatively constant column of water in the test hole (Havg). During the test, water percolates into the surrounding ground both horizontally through the side walls of the hole and vertically through the bottom of the hole. To more accurately approximate the desired vertical infiltration rate (It), the percolation rate is modified mathematically. The Design Manual recommends using a formula called the simplified Porchet method, shown below in Equation 1. The simplified Porchet method assumes an open hole is used to measure the percolation rate (ΔH/Δt). Our hole was cased with perforated PVC pipe and gravel to stabilize the hole. The measured drop in water (ΔH) is amplified by the fact that some space in the hole was occupied by gravel, and not water. To account for this, the corrected drop in water (ΔHc) is calculated by reducing the measured drop in water by the ratio of the area of the hole occupied by water to the total area of the hole. The porosity of the gravel was assumed to be 0.4 based on laboratory testing of similar gravel. J GR□UP DEL T .L\ The percolation rate, and in turn, the infiltration rate, generated from the field tests are dependent on the head pressure present during the tests. The percolation tests were run with approximately 13 inches of water (head pressure, Havg), as shown in Figure C-1.1. If the BMP is designed to accommodate significantly different head pressures, the infiltration rate provided based on these field tests may not be applicable. Equation 1 (simplified Porchet method): Where: J GR□UP DEL T .L\ Ti = b.H nr-60 = ~H 60 r --) - ~r(1tc+21trH,,v8) ~t(r+2H.,,8) 11 = tested infiltration rate, inches/hour l-.H = change in head over the time interval, inches ~t = tune interval, minutes • r = effective radius oftest ho1e H~v~ = average head over the t ime interval, inches Project Name: 330 Chinquapin - Multi Family Residence Date Drilled: 10/10/2018 Borehole Radius (*r):3 in. Project Number: SD589 Logged By:TSL Depth of Hole as Drilled: 4.9 ft Test Hole No: I-1 Date Tested: 10/11/2018 Depth of Hole as Tested:4.9 ft Drilling Method: Hand Auger Tested By:TSL Test Depth:3.5' - 5.1' Reading Number Initial Depth of Water (ft.) Final Depth of Water (ft.) Measured Drop in Water Level (in.) Corrected Drop in Water Level1 (in.) Corrected Percolation Rate1 (in./hour) Measured Infiltration Rate2 (in./hour) ΔH ΔHc ΔHc/Δt It Project No. SD589 Document No. 18-0136 FIGURE C-1.1 2: Porchet method used to convert percolation rate to infiltration rate. See text of Appendix C for details. 1: Porosity of gravel assumed to be 0.4 to correct drop in water. See text of Appendix C for details. -- 3 BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST Data Sheet Stabilized Infiltration Rate2: I-1 4.30 12.12 13.26 13.02 12.66 13.3210 7.08 7.44 Pre-Soak 3.39 4.20 3.55 4.14 Pre-Soak 28.32 1 3.51 4.12 2 9.72 7.3210 -- 9.84 3.48 4.10 6.96 3.44 4 3.48 30.24 29.76 13.26 5 7.56 7.4413.08 10 109 29.76 3.01 13.08 13.02 13.92 28.80 2.80 12.96 2.77 8 3.54 4.09 10 6 6.72 6.60 26.40 10 4.11 4.04 3.50 4.12 10 3.53 4.1110 Time Interval (min.) 100 13 (<25) -- 6.56 Average Head of Water (in.) Havg Δt 14 Pre-Soak 3.00 -- 3.04 -- 3.10 29.28 -- 2.76 inch/hour 26.88 2.73 7 3.53 4.09 7.20 4.48 4.40 4.80 (<25)3.48 4.72 4.96 28.11 4.88 10 3.00 5.04 4.96 4.64 2.89 3.02 29.91 3.06 27.84 3.07 6.48 GR□UP DEL TA *Reference: The City of Carlsbad, BMP Design Manual (2016). Project No. SD589 Document No. 18-0136 FIGURE C-1.2 Feasibility Screening Factor of Safety, F.S.* = 2.5 Design Condition* No Infiltration Partial Infiltration Full Infiltration I-1 BOREHOLE PERCOLATION TEST Measured Infiltration Rates During Test Preliminary Factored Infiltration Rate: 1.1 in./hr. 0.05 to 0.5 Above 0.50 Factored Infiltration Rate* Below 0.05 1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2 2.25 2.5 2.75 3 3.25 3.5 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Fa c t o r e d I n f i l t r a t i o n R a t e ( i n . / h o u r ) Duration of Test (minutes) Measured Infiltration Rate2 (in./hour) Average Infiltration Rate: 2.76 in./hour I -- ............... I ............... ~ ............... ~ .............................................................. ~ .. -..__~····~·~··----= - - GR□UPDELTA Appendix I: Forms and Checklists I-3 February 2016 Categorization of Infiltration Feasibility Condition Form I-8 Part 1 - Full Infiltration Feasibility Screening Criteria Would infiltration of the full design volume be feasible from a physical perspective without any undesirable consequences that cannot be reasonably mitigated? Criteria Screening Question Yes No 1 Is the estimated reliable infiltration rate below proposed facility locations greater than 0.5 inches per hour? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.2 and Appendix D. Provide basis: Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability. 2 Can infiltration greater than 0.5 inches per hour be allowed without increasing risk of geotechnical hazards (slope stability, groundwater mounding, utilities, or other factors) that cannot be mitigated to an acceptable level? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.2. Provide basis: Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability. Results should be confirmed or revised, as necessary, based on more detailed design-level investigation and analysis during BMP design. See Section "Storm Water Infiltration" of this report (Group Delta Consultants - Report of Geotechnical Investigation, 330 Chinquapin Avenue, dated November 15, 2018). Results should be confirmed or revised, as necessary, based on more detailed design-level investigation and analysis during BMP design. See Section "Storm Water Infiltration" of this report (Group Delta Consultants - Report of Geotechnical Investigation, 330 Chinquapin Avenue, dated November 15, 2018). ✓ ✓ Appendix I: Forms and Checklists I-4 February 2016 Form I-8 Page 2 of 4 Criteri a Screening Question Yes No 3 Can infiltration greater than 0.5 inches per hour be allowed without increasing risk of groundwater contamination (shallow water table, storm water pollutants or other factors) that cannot be mitigated to an acceptable level? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.3. Provide basis: Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability. 4 Can infiltration greater than 0.5 inches per hour be allowed without causing potential water balance issues such as change of seasonality of ephemeral streams or increased discharge of contaminated groundwater to surface waters? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.3. Provide basis: Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability. Part 1 Result * If all answers to rows 1 - 4 are “Yes” a full infiltration design is potentially feasible. The feasibility screening category is Full Infiltration If any answer from row 1-4 is “No”, infiltration may be possible to some extent but would not generally be feasible or desirable to achieve a “full infiltration” design. Proceed to Part 2 *To be completed using gathered site information and best professional judgment considering the definition of MEP in the MS4 Permit. Additional testing and/or studies may be required by the City to substantiate findings. YES Results should be confirmed or revised, as necessary, based on more detailed design-level investigation and analysis during BMP design. See Section "Storm Water Infiltration" of this report (Group Delta Consultants - Report of Geotechnical Investigation, 330 Chinquapin Avenue, dated November 15, 2018). Results should be confirmed or revised, as necessary, based on more detailed design-level investigation and analysis during BMP design. See Section "Storm Water Infiltration" of this report (Group Delta Consultants - Report of Geotechnical Investigation, 330 Chinquapin Avenue, dated November 15, 2018). ✓ ✓ Appendix I: Forms and Checklists I-5 February 2016 Form I-8 Page 3 of 4 Part 2 – Partial Infiltration vs. No Infiltration Feasibility Screening Criteria Would infiltration of water in any appreciable amount be physically feasible without any negative consequences that cannot be reasonably mitigated? Criteria Screening Question Yes No 5 Do soil and geologic conditions allow for infiltration in any appreciable rate or volume? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.2 and Appendix D. Provide basis: Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability and why it was not feasible to mitigate low infiltration rates. 6 Can Infiltration in any appreciable quantity be allowed without increasing risk of geotechnical hazards (slope stability, groundwater mounding, utilities, or other factors) that cannot be mitigated to an acceptable level? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.2. Provide basis: Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability and why it was not feasible to mitigate low infiltration rates. Appendix I: Forms and Checklists I-6 February 2016 Form I-8 Page 4 of 4 Criteria Screening Question Yes No 7 Can Infiltration in any appreciable quantity be allowed without posing significant risk for groundwater related concerns (shallow water table, storm water pollutants or other factors)? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.3. Provide basis: Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability and why it was not feasible to mitigate low infiltration rates. 8 Can infiltration be allowed without violating downstream water rights? The response to this Screening Question shall be based on a comprehensive evaluation of the factors presented in Appendix C.3. Provide basis: Summarize findings of studies; provide reference to studies, calculations, maps, data sources, etc. Provide narrative discussion of study/data source applicability and why it was not feasible to mitigate low infiltration rates. Part 2 Result* If all answers from row 5-8 are yes then partial infiltration design is potentially feasible. The feasibility screening category is Partial Infiltration. If any answer from row 5-8 is no, then infiltration of any volume is considered to be infeasible within the drainage area. The feasibility screening category is No Infiltration. *To be completed using gathered site information and best professional judgment considering the definition of MEP in the MS4 Permit. Additional testing and/or studies may be required by the City to substantiate findings. Appendix I: Forms and Checklists I-7 February 2016 Factor of Safety and Design Infiltration Rate Worksheet Form I-9 Factor Category Factor Description Assigned Weight (w) Factor Value (v) Product (p) p = w x v A Suitability Assessment Soil assessment methods 0.25 Predominant soil texture 0.25 Site soil variability 0.25 Depth to groundwater / impervious layer 0.25 Suitability Assessment Safety Factor, SA = p B Design Level of pretreatment/ expected sediment loads 0.5 Redundancy/resiliency 0.25 Compaction during construction 0.25 Design Safety Factor, SB = p Combined Safety Factor, Stotal= SA x SB Observed Infiltration Rate, inch/hr, Kobserved (corrected for test-specific bias) Design Infiltration Rate, in/hr, Kdesign = Kobserved / Stotal Supporting Data Briefly describe infiltration test and provide reference to test forms: 2 0.5 1 0.25 1 0.25 1 0.25 1.25 2 1 2 0.5 2 0.5 2 2.5 2.76 1.1 See Section "Storm Water Infiltration" of this report (Group Delta Consultants - Report of Geotechnical Investigation, 330 Chinquapin Avenue, dated November 15, 2018). APPENDIX C Laboratory Tests – Group Delta (2018) B-2 @ 0'-5'0 B-5 @ 0'-5'0 Expansion Index 0 to 20 21 to 50 51 to 90 91 to 130 Above 130 Project No. SD589 Document No. SD18-0136 Figure B-2 LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Potential Expansion Very Low Low Medium High FILL: Red-Brown Silty Sand (SM) FILL/Formation Blend: Red-Brown Silty Sand / Poorly-graded Sand with Silt (SM/SP-SM) Very High EXPANSION INDEX (ASTM D4829) Sample Number Expansion IndexSoil Description [%] B-3 @ 0'-5'<0.01 Project No. SD589 Document No. SD18-0136 Figure B-3 0.01 CORROSIVITY (ASTM D516, CTM 643) Sample Number 7075 SULFATE CONTENT CHLORIDE CONTENT [%] RESISTIVITY [OHM-CM] LABORATORY TEST RESULTS Above 10,000 Above 0.15 0 to 1,000 0.00 to 0.10 Negligible - SULFATE CONTENT [%]SULFATE EXPOSURE CEMENT TYPE 0.20 to 2.00 Severe pH 7.58 0.10 to 0.20 Moderate II, IP(MS), IS(MS) V 2,000 to 5,000 Moderately Corrosive 5,000 to 10,000 Mildly Corrosive Above 2.00 Very Severe V plus pozzolan SOIL RESISTIVITY GENERAL DEGREE OF CORROSIVITY TO FERROUS METALS Severly Corrosive Slightly Corrosive CHLORIDE (Cl) CONTENT [%]GENERAL DEGREE OF CORROSIVITY TO METALS 0.00 to 0.03 Negligible 0.03 to 0.15 Corrosive Very Corrosive 1,000 to 2,000 Corrosive B-4 @ 0'-5'Proposed Drive/Parking Area 70 Project No. SD589 Document No. SD18-0136 Figure B-4 LABORATORY TEST RESULTS FILL: Orange-Brown Silty Sand (SM) R-VALUE (CTM 301) Sample Number Location of Sample Sample Description R-Value 330 Chinquapin Avenue, Carlsbad, CA Latitude, Longitude: 33.1480, -117.3416 Date 10/27/2021, 8:07:00 AM Design Code Reference Document ASCE7-16 Risk Category II Site Class D - Stiff Soil Type Value Description SS 1.092 MCER ground motion. (for 0.2 second period) S1 0.394 MCER ground motion. (for 1.0s period) SMS 1.161 Site-modified spectral acceleration value SM1 null -See Section 11.4.8 0.751 Site-modified spectral acceleration value SDS 0.774 Numeric seismic design value at 0.2 second SA SD1 null -See Section 11.4.8 0.501 Numeric seismic design value at 1.0 second SA Type Value Description SDC null -See Section 11.4.8 Seismic design category Fa 1.063 Site amplification factor at 0.2 second Fv null -See Section 11.4.8 1.906Site amplification factor at 1.0 second PGA 0.483 MCEG peak ground acceleration FPGA 1.117 Site amplification factor at PGA PGAM 0.539 Site modified peak ground acceleration TL 8 Long-period transition period in seconds SsRT 1.092 Probabilistic risk-targeted ground motion. (0.2 second) SsUH 1.224 Factored uniform-hazard (2% probability of exceedance in 50 years) spectral acceleration SsD 1.5 Factored deterministic acceleration value. (0.2 second) S1RT 0.394 Probabilistic risk-targeted ground motion. (1.0 second) S1UH 0.436 Factored uniform-hazard (2% probability of exceedance in 50 years) spectral acceleration. S1D 0.6 Factored deterministic acceleration value. (1.0 second) PGAd 0.591 Factored deterministic acceleration value. (Peak Ground Acceleration) CRS 0.892 Mapped value of the risk coefficient at short periods CR1 0.904 Mapped value of the risk coefficient at a period of 1 s APPENDIX D D OS H PD \\ q El.in Tamarack ft\ \ Carlsbad Vacation Shores Apartments T \ \ \\ Mama's Cookie Jar f ' '\\\',,, ,,... Vigilucci's S'e.afpod ' v & Steakhouse , ~ \ \ Daly & Associates \ \ \ \ ~e Real Estate Group \ \fl. \ _ se°'.,i,,~'r-q \\Harbor Drive Trail ' Go gle Tower 34 , ,3957-3999 Carlsbad ,:,\Untethered ~l'o~,.ers _ Blvd Parkinq T _ Map data ©2021