Loading...
1997-5046 I Street Address ~1(a2____- Category / tJdli {~ Serial # So4Co Name ¿:r Description Year Plan cK. # r~"~""""'" , . - Review of Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Proposed United States Postal Service(USPS) Main Post Office Encinitas, CA By Krazan & Associates, Inc., dated Feb. 21,1997 A review of the geotechnical report prepared for the proposed post office has revealed some discrepencies and inconsistencies between what has been reported and recommended for adjacent parcels and what was revealed in the field during the grading of the adjacent parcels. The report prepared by the soils consultant and its recommendations for grading and foundations are not acceptable until the differences in soils reports and recommendations are resolved to the satisfaction of the City of Encinitas. The following items need to be addressed prior to approval. 1. Reports prep¥ed for the Encinitas Ranch Project by Leighton and Associates and for the California Traditions residential project indicated over 40 feet of alluvial soils underlain by sandstone bedrock. It was determined that some of the alluvial soils were subject to hydroconsolidation and would need to be removed completely or removals and surcharging would be required. No indications or soil types or any borings drilled to a depth sufficient to penetrate the alluvial soil were performed as part of the soils investigation for the post office site. No description of the geologic soil types were given. No testing of the deeper alluvium was performed nor was bedrock encountered. The soils consultant for the post office site should review the soils reports for the adjacent parcels(available at the City of Encinitas) and explain the descrepencies between the reports. 2. No recommendations for removals of unsuitable soil or removals of any type were presented in the soils report for the post office. During grading of the sites to the west and north of the project over 40 feet of alluvial soil was removed and recompacted. These properties border this site. Please explain why no removals are recommended for the site. 3. Statements regarding testing for corrosivity of the soils at the site were made. No test results were provided. , . - 1 . . GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INVEsTIGATION PROPOSED UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE (USPS) MAIN POST OFFICE ENCINlTAS, CALIFORNIA PROJECT No. 022-97030 FEBRUARY 21, 1997 Prepared for: MR. emus STOCKTON URS GREINER 100 CALIFORNIA STREET, STE. #500 SAN FRANCISCO, CAlIFORNIA 94111-4529 Prepared by: KRAzAN & AsSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING DIVISION 215 WEST DAKOTA A VENUE CLOVIS, CALIFORNIA 93612 (209) 348-2200 ...",~ If- '-~ .'-1. azarl & ASSOCIATES. INc. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION TESTING AND INSPECTION ~KrazaI1. & ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION February 21, 1997 Mr. Chris Stockton URS Greiner 100 California Street, Ste. #500 San Francisco, California 94111-4529 ,.. KA Project No. 022-97030 Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Proposed United States Postal Service (USPS) Main Post Office Garden View Road and El Camino Real Encinitas, California RE: Dear Mr. Stockton: In accordance with your request, we have completed a Geotechnical Engineering Investigation for the above- referenced site. The results of our investigation are presented in the attached report. If you have any questions, or if we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our office at (209) 348-2200 or (800) 800-0711. DA:kd ) Respectfully submitted, KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INc. ~~ ~O(v-~ Dean Alexander Geotechnical Engineer RGE #002051/RCE #34274 Offices Serving The Westem United States 215 West Dakota Avenue. Clovis CA 93612. (209) 348.2200. (800) 8~711 . Fax: (209) 348-2201 " . ~~ Krazan &ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION TABLE OF CONTENTS IN1'RODUCTION................................................................................. ...................... .... .... ........1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE........ ............. ............. ................ .............. ............ ..... ........... ............. ......1 PROPOSED C ONSTR.UCTION ................................ ............... ..................... ...................... ....... ....2 Sl'I'E DESCRIPI'ION ..... ..... ......... ...................... .......... ..................... ............. ................... ....... ...2 GEOLOGIC SETIING........................ .......................................... ...................................... ........2 FIELD AND LABORATORY OO'ESfIGATIONS ........ ........... ......... ................................. ................3 SOn.. PROFn..E AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS.............................. ........... .......... .... ..... ..............J GRO'UNDW A TER ................................................................................................. ..... ......... ..... ..3 C ONCL USI eNS AND RECOl\ߌND A TIONS ............................................................................ ..... 4 Administrative Summary .............................................................................................................4 Groundwater Influence on Structures/Construction............................................................. "" ............. 4 Site Preparation ..................................................................................................................... ...5 Engineered Fill........... .............................................................................................................. 6 Drainage and Landscaping ...........................................................................................................6 Utility Trench Backfill................................................................................................................ 7 Foundations..... ................................... ............. """ .... .... ..... ................... ........... ....................... 7 Floor Slabs and Exterior Flatwork........... ...........................................................;............. ..............8 Lateral Earth Pressures and Retaining Walls ......................................................................................9 Slope Stability Analysis ........ .......................................... ...... ........... ............................ ............. 10 R- Value Test Results and Pavement Design.................... .............. .......... ....................... ........ .......... 10 Site Coefficient..... ........................................................................................ ................ .......... 11 Soil Cement Reactivity ................................... ............... ........ ............ ...... ............ ...... ............... 11 Compacted Material Acceptance ..................... ................... ............ ............ ...... ... ......................... 12 Testing and Inspection..............................................................................................................12 LThfiT A TIONS ............................... ............... ..... .......................... ........ ......... .... ........ ..... ......... 12 SITE PLAN............................... ............. .............. ............................ ................. .................. .... ................... 14 LOGS OF BORINGS (1 THRU 12).......................................................................................... Appendix A GENERAL EARTHWORK SPECIFI CA TI 0 NS ................................................................... Appendix B GENERAL PAVING SPECIFICA TIONS .............................................................................. Appendix C Offices Serving The Western United States 215 West Dakota Avenue. Clovis CA 93612. (209) 348.2200 . (800) 800-0711 . Fax: (209) 348-2201 I. ~ . ~~KrazaIl & ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION February 21, 1997 . KA Project No. 022-97030 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INVESTIGATION PROPOSED UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICES (USPS) MAIN POST OmCE GARDEN VIEW ROAD AND EL CAMINO REAL ENCINlTAS, CALIFORNIA INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our Geot~chnical Engineering Investigation for the proposed United States Postal Services (USPS) Main Post Office, to be located in Encinitas, California. Discussions regarding site conditions are presented herein, together with conclusions and recommendations pertaining to site preparation, Engineered Fill, utility trench backfill, drainage and landscaping, foundations, concrete floor slabs and exterior flatwork, retaining walls, slope stability, soil corrosivity, and pavements. A site plan showing the approximate boring locations is presented following the text of this report. A description of the field investigation, boring logs, and the boring log legend arc presented in Appendix A. Appendix A contains a description of laboratory testing phase of this study; along with laboratory test results. Appendices B and C contain guides to earthwork and pavement specifications. When conflicts in the text of the report occur with the general specifications in the appendices, the recommendations in the text of the report have precedence. PURPOSE AND SCOPE This investigation was cond'Jcted to evaluate the soil and groundwater conditions at the site, to make geotechnical engineering recommendations for use in design of specific COnstruction elements, and to provide criteria for site preparation and Engineered Fill COnstruction. Our scope of services was outlined in our proposal, dated January 14, 1997, (KA Proposal No. PO06-97) and included the following: . A site reconnaissance by a member of our engineering staff to evaluate the surface conditions at the project site. . A field investigation consisting of drilling 12 borings, to depths ranging from approximately 20 to 40 feet, for evaluation of the subsurface conditions at the project site. Offices Servina The Western United States 215 West Dakota Avenue. Clovis CA 93612. (209) 348-2200 . (SOO) Soo.o711 . Fax: (209) 34S-2201 cm9'1QJa.DOC ICA No. 022-97030 Pap No.2 . f PeIÍomúng laboratory tests on representative soil samples obtained from the borings to evaluate the physical and index properties of the subsurface soils. Evaluation of the data obtained from the investigation and an engineering analysis to provide recommendations for use in the project design and preparation of consttuction specifications. . . Preparation of this report summarizing the results. conclusions, recommendations and findings of our investigation. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION We understand that design of the proposed development is currently underway, and structural load information and other final details pertaining to the structures are unavailable. On a preliminary basis. it is understood development will consist of a primary post office building, with associated parking for customers, carriers, and employees. The project will also include the construction of retaining walls along the south and west sides of the site; construction of Garden View Road along the north side of the site; and the construction of an underground drainage structure along the east side of the site. The building will be a single-story structure, with concrete slab-on-grade. F oaring loads are anticipated to be light to moderate. On-site landscaping is also planned. In the event these structural or grading details are inconsistent with the final design criteria, the Soils Engineer should be notified so that we may update this writing as applicable. i SITE DESCRIPTION The site is irregular in shape and encompasses approximately 5.63 acres. The site is located on the west side of EI Camino Real, south of Garden View Road, in Encinitas, California. The site is predonùn3ntly surrounded by residential and commercial developments. According to the US Geologic Survey, 7.5 minute, California Topographic Quadrangle Map, the site occupies a portion of the north one-half of Section 11, Township 13 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Baseline and Meridian. Presently, the site is vacant. Several trees are located within the site. The majority of the site is covered by a medium dense weed growth, and the surface soils have a loose consistency. The site slopes northeast with approximately 50 feet of relief across the site. GEOLOGIC SETTING The subject site is located west of the Peninsular Range Geomorphic Province. The Peninsular Range Geomorphic Province is characterized by northwest-trending mountain ranges separated by sub-parallel fault zones. The mountain ranges are underlain by basement rocks consisting of Jurassic metavolcanic and metasedimentary rock and Cretaceous igneous rock of the Southern California Batholith. Surface and near- surface deposits composed of late Cretaceous, Tertiary. and Quaternary sediments flank the mountain ranged to the northeast and southwest. Kruan " Associates. Ine. Offices Serving The Western Urút.ed States CI:!29'1IDD.J'IOC CALIFORNIA DIVISION OF MIl\'ES AND GEOLOGY ~ ~ miles -g~;~?- - - - - - - - - - -l ~;IOL ~~:~~ FAULT ¡ SISCI'OU I' IIOOOC I .och ' I A ""'h . L, B Brawiey , ./'L I IV B- Vista ;; f'..~ " ----r-----:C Calaveras " _! 'I CH Cleveland HiD e .: ) s.. . ST. I ~. S S ! - CU CucunlOllgCl , . ¡ ';. 'I E Ellinore ( ~ I ..., --.-J-l I FS Fort Sage '..t.. ~:;> i ; !¡r"'-- ~ of', FS, I G Goriodt '~ : - \ T E .. . II . --1 "-., " GV G- Vall.y and c-con¡ ~---., ...r' . ~~UII.S '\ H Hayward . , ~ - '\ I I ---:"1 ' e \----\... LI I Ilftt"""'- : ,'" L.,GLE-"'IUTTE\,'/;,'Z;;. I KF Kem.FrantandEdison ' ... f ' '-:CH-I ,-'" ( ,'"L. -- M Man ( . c .L - - - -'""'7:.-r-:' .. - . MA Maacama . ( , .' . Q ----1 ~ 0 ,r '::...,0", ,~. ;, ( \. -::/ t . I NI N~nglewoad . ~ , . '" ./' 4 \:.~.. ,.. '. to --""\. . OV O.ens Valley - ~... \ - ~ fA' ,,:/",J 10 J' R Raymond HiD S.- - ~';A I~, ' 0 ( .... -';' 1)0.. Q , ~). RH Rogers Creek-Healdsburv ./'g~r~~g.. ;?\,l~ ,..rf"..{'- RM RedMtn. + ~'\ -'? "'XJ - ....... ,'- 0 ." _"i......~ ,.. J '\ SA Son Andreal '..... """"-"r'-y '\ ,"""".. "",," ~'~...", " SF SonFemando ~ ' ;GY/';'y" ! r .,," I..\. "'-...,' " SG San Gregorio ... ~:";;,t.... g' S. '+ o. ~ 0 \, l' ,,\) )2 +, SJ an JaCInto . . C ~ ~ ff. : "<....:.°,-,,,__.., - g" SH Supentitian Hills ~'. . .0"CI5CO I ..."'-"" ,," '..:; .," ^r-' V Ventura 1.."/' "............ ,,0 , , o~¥,.,"".. ,...."'; ----". WW White Wolf ':../'. C, .....+ r Q \ ' J', " W Whit1ier SG -,,+ +~. \.~' \...t.\.~-~\...:.. ~~ ",- ".. . ". '" , '\ v' /" \ OY "- /\ I -\' '\ ',/ '-'---.. Q - ... " #(' " ., r-r- .. " c + '\. \.. " " ' '" t" A \ " ~".. '\ go ¡-'or TUL.~E ~) '" - ... , 10 I \ ' f',. SA ,/.," J.- --I. ---~---'~ --. -- ----- T " ""$ '): G "" 0#'$ BY K E~ I " -0 ' - -ww. .. ') "f'-.......... I :-E.N.~DINO \ 5:_TA '~------1 5.- '\ 1..1... I fA I +.. " .- .. v . I,. , a .50 100 ~ ~--...J - FaultS zoned through January 1. 1980. for which official maps Ire available. NOTE: Otber r,ulu may be zoned ÍJI the rutURo aød - of the existinc zones may be I'eYised ..bCII "'&mInted by new fault data. Faulh in Califamia zOMd for special studiel under the Alquist"'"010 Special Studies Zonel Act of 1972. KA No. 022-970~O Page No.3 There are no active fault traced in the project vicinity. Accordingly, the project area is not within an Earthquake Fault Zone (Special Studies Zone) and will not require special site investigation by an Engineering Geologist. FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS Subsurface soil conditions were explored by drilling 12 borings, to depths ranging from approximately 20 to 40 feet below existing site grade (BSG), using a truck-mounted drill rig. In addition, 4 bulk subgrade soil samples were obtained from the pavement area for laboratory R-value testing. The approximate boring sample locations are shown on Figure No.1. During drilling operations, penetration tests were performed at regular intervals to evaluate the soil consistency, obtain information regarding the engineering properties of the subsoils, and to retain soil samples for laboratory testing. The soils encountered were continuously examined and visually classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System. A more detailed description of the field investigation is presented in Appendix A. Laboratory tests were performed on selected soil samples to evaluate their physical characteristics and engineering properties. The laboratory testing program was formulated with emphasis on the evaluation of natural moisture, density, gradation, shear strength, consolidation potential, and moisture-density relationships of the materials encountered. In addition, chemical tests were performed to evaluate the corrosivity of the soils to buried concrete and metal. Details of the laboratory test program and the results of laboratory test are summarized in Appendix A. This information, along with the field observations, was used to prepare the final boring logs in Appendix A SOIL PROFILE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ) Based on our findings, the subsurface conditions encountered appear typical of those found in this geologic region of the site. The upper soils within the site consisted of 6 to 12 inches of loose to very loose silty sand. These soils are disturbed, have low strength characteristics, and are highly compressible when saturated. Beneath the loose to very loose surfàce soils, 2 to 6 feet of loose to medium dense silty sand was encountered. Field and laboratory tests suggest that these soils are moderately strong and slightly compressible. Penetration resistance ranged from 10 to 50 blows per foot. Dry densities ranged from 97 to 114 pcf. Representative soil samples consolidated 2'l'2 to 3 percent under a 2 ksf load when saturated. Representative soil samples had angles of internal friction of33 and 34 degrees. Below 3 to 7 feet. predominantly silty sand, silty sand/sand, or sand were encountered. These soils had similar strength characteristics as the upper soils and extended to the termination depth of our borings. For additional information about the soils encountered, please refer to the logs of borings in Appendix A. GROUNDWATER Test boring locations were checked for the presence of groundwater during and immediately fol1owing the drilling operations. Free groundwater was encountered at 11 to 23'l'2 feet below sumce grade. Krazan & Associates, IDe. Offices Serving The Western United States -~ t. ~ KA No. 022-97030 Page No.4 It should be rccognized that water table elevations may fluctuate with time, being dependent upon seasonal precipitation, irrigation, land use, and climatic conditions as well as other factors. ~ore, water l~el observations at the time of the field investigation may vary from those encountered dunng the COnstrucnon phase of the project. The evaluation of such factors is beyond the scope of this report. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the findings of our field and laboratory investigations, along with previous geotechnical experience in the project area, the following is a summary of our evaluations, conclusions and recommendations. Administrative SummarY In brief, the subject site and soil conditions, with the exception of the loose surface soils and the moderate slope, appear to be conducive to the development of the project. The majority of the site is covered by a moderate weed growth and the surface soils have a loose consistency. These soils are disturbed, have low strength characteristics, and are highly compressible when saturated. Accordingly, it is recommended that the surface soils be recompacted. This compaction effort should stabilize the surface soils and locate any unsuitable or pliant areas not found during our field investigation. The site is located on a sloping ground. It is recommended that the proposed cut and fill slopes be constructed to 2 horizontal to 1 vertical. In lieu of these slopes, a retaining waIl may be used. Cut and fill slopes for the building pad should not exceed 2 horizontal to 1 vertical. Cut and fill slopes may be revised as recommended by the Soils Engineer upon his review of a more definitive site plan. Sandy soil conditions were encountered throughout the site. These cohesionless soils have a tendency to cave in trench excavations. Shoring or sloping back trench sidewalls may be required within these sandy soils. After completion of the recommended site preparation, the site should be suitable for shallow footing support. The proposed structure footings may be designed utilizing an allowable bearing pressure of 2,500 psf for dcad- plus-live loads. As an alternative, the allowable bearing pressure for a shallow foundation system may be increased to 4,000 psf for dead-plus-live loads, provided that the structure footings are supported by 2 feet of Engineered Fill. Footings should have a minimum embedment of 18 inches. Groundwater Influence on Structures/Construction During our field investigation, groundwater was encountered at depths ranging from 11 to 23 Y: feet below site grade. If groundwater is encountered, our firm should be consulted prior to de-watering the site. Installation of a standpipe piezometer is suggested prior to construction, should groundwater levels be a concern. One aspect in the preparation of this property for COnstruction is the determination of areas of possible seasonal springs and the placement of subsurface drainage systems to intercept groundwater away from the planned area of construction. It is recommended that the site be observed by a member of our engineering staff following completion of the site clearing and stripping, to evaluate the need for sub-drainage systems. Evaluation should Krazan &. Associates, loe. Offices Serving The Western United States 0229'1UJI .DOC KA No. 022-970: Page No. aJso be ¡>erÍonned fbUowiug completion of rough site grading. This is particuJa,¡y important for use i evaluating the lICe<! for sub-drains for pa1ll:lllelll!. This office should be c:ontacted regarding any futuno seopag on the property so appropriate mitigation measures can be recommended. In addition to groundwater levoJ, if earthwork is performed during or soon after periods of preciPitation. the subgrade soils may become saturated, pump, or not res¡xmd to deusiñcatian teåmiques. T ypica! rcmcdia] measures iDc1ude discing and aerating the soil during dzy Wtather; mixing the soil with dryer materials; remov;"g ami '"Placing the soil with an approved fill material; or mixing the soil with an apProved lime or œmem Product. Our firm should be consulted prior to implementing remedial measures to observe tbe WlStabI. subgrade conditions and provide appropriate recommendations. v.. Site Preoaration Genenù site clearing should include removal of concrete, vegetarion. existing utilities, structures including foundatioas, basement waIls and flOOß, existing stockpiled soil, trees and assoc:iared root SJ'Stcms. rubble, rubbish and any loose and/or satu13tcd materials. 8m, stripping sbouId extend to a minimum depth of two to four inches, or until .11 <»¡¡anjcs in excess of 3 pen:cnt by volume are mnovcd. Deeper stripping may be required in Jocalized Iloas. These materiaJs will Dot be suitable fur use as Eo8ineered Fill. However, stripped topsoil may be stockpiled and reused in landscape or non-structural areas. AJIa- stripping OPerations, the exposed subgrnde in building pad, exterior flatwork, aud pavement areas should be excavated/scarified to a depth of at least 12 inches, worlced until unifonn and fi-ee ñ-om large clods, moisturc-<:onditioned as necessary, and recompacted to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum density based on ASTM Test Method D1557. It is lCCOnunendcd that slopes be ConstruCted 2 horizontal to I vertical. In lieu of the recommended slope, a retaining wall may be used. If a IUgIIer bearing pressure is utilized. the Proposed structure foundation should be supponed by 2 feet of Engineered Fill Therefore, if the fcoângs are 18 inches deep, the tDtaI depth of re-<:ompaotion within the proposed footing area and 3 feet beyond should be 3 Y: feet. Several trees were encountered throughout the site. If not Utilized for the proposed deveJopment, these trees should be removed. T reo removal operations should iocIude roots greater than 1 inch in diameter. Resulting excavations should be bacldillcd with Ensineered Fill and re-<:ompacte( to a minimum of 90 Percem of maximum density based on ASTM Test Method D1557. The upper soils, during wet winter months, become vety moist due to the absmption characteristics of the soil Earthworic OPerations perfonncd during winter months may enCOUnter very moist unstable soils, MUch may require removal to grade a stable building foundation. Project site winterization consisting of Placement of aggr.gare base and Protecting exposed soils during !be construction pbase should be Pc:rÍÒnned. Excavations, depressions, or soft and pliant areas extending below Planned finished subgrade levels should be cleaned to ñnn. undisturbed soil and bacldiUed with Engineere<f Fill. Any buried struCtUres enCOUntered during COnstruction should be properJy removed and bacláilled. In general, any septic tanks, debris pits, cesspools, or Krazan " A18oc:iates, Ine. Offices Sen.ing The Western United States .. ( , KA No. 022-97030 Page No.6 similar structures should be entirely removed. Concrete footings should be removed to an equivalent depth of at least 3 feet below proposed footing elevations or as recommended by the Soils Engineer. Any other buried structureS should be removed in accordance with the reconunendations of the Soils Engineer. Resulting excavations should be backfilled with Engineered Fill. A representative of our firm should be present during all site clearing and. grading operations to test and observe: earthwork construction. This testing and observation is an integral part of our service as acceptance of earthwork construction is dependent upon compaction of the material and the stability of the material. The Soils Engineer may reject any material that does not meet compaction and stability requirements. Further recommendations of this report are predicated upon the assumption that earthwork COnstruction will conform to recommendations set forth in this section and the Engineered Fill section. En~neered fiJI The organic-free, on-site, native soils are predominantly silty sand, silty sand/sand, and sand. These soils are suitable for reuse as non-expansive Engineered Fill. The preferred materials specified for Engineered Fill are suitable for most applications with the exception of exposure to erosion. Project site winterization and protection of exposed soils during the Construction phase should be the sole responsibility of the Contractor, since he has complete control of the project site at that time. Imported fill material should be predominantly non-expansive granular material with a plasticity index less than 10 and a UBC Ð..-pansion Index less than 15. Imported fill should be free from rocks and lumps greater than 4 inches in diameter. All import fill material should be submitted for approval to the Soils Engineer at least 48 hours prior to delivery to the site. Fill soils should be placed in lifts approximately 6 inches thick, moisture-conditioned as necessary and compacted to achieve at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D1S57. Additional lifts should not be placed if the previous lift did not meet the required dry density or if soil conditions are not stable. Draina2e and Landscaoin2 Within building and paved areas, cut and fill slopes should not exceed 2 horizontal to 1 vertical. The ground surface should slope away from building pad and pavement areas toward appropriate drop inlets or other surface drainage devices. It is recommended that adjacent exterior grades be sloped a minimum of 2 percent for a minimum distance of 5 feet away from structures. Subgrade soils in pavement areas should be sloped a minimum of 1 percent and drainage gradients maintained to carry all surface water to collection facilities and off site. These grades should be maintained for the life of the project. Grade the site to prevent water/run-offflow over the face of cut and fill slopes. To accomplish this, use asphalt berms, brow ditches, or other measures to intercept and slowly re-direct flow. Plant all disturbed areas with erosion-resistant vegetation suited to the area. As an alternative, june netting or geotextile erosion control mats may be considered for control of erosion. Slopes should be inspected periodically for erosion and repaired Krazan " Associates, Ine. Offices Serving The Western United Staœs CI2291IDO.ÐOC KA No. 022-97030 - Page No.7 immediately if detected. To control surface drainage and debris, paved drainage areas should be provided on all cut and fill slopes that are 30 feet of greater in height. The drainage terraces should be a minimum of 6 feet in width and placed at intervals no greater than 20 feet. Where only one drainage terrace is necessary, it should be located at mid-height of the slope. Brow ditches and drainage terraces should be cleaned before the start of each rainy season., and if necessary, after each rainstorm. Utilitv Trench Backfill Utility trenches should be excavated according to accepted engineering practice following OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) standards by a contractor experienced in such work. The responsibility for the safety of open trenches should be borne by the contractor. Traffic and vibration adjacent to trench walls should be minimized and cyclic wetting and drying of excavation side slopes should be avoided. Depending upon the location and depth of some utility trenches, groundwater flow into open excavations could be experienced, especially during or shortly following periods of precipitation. Sandy soil conditions were encountered throughout the site. These cohesionless soils have a tendency to cave in trench wall excavations. Shoring or sloping back trench sidewalls may be required within these sandy soils. Utility trench backfill placed in or adjacent to buildings and exterior slabs should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density (ASTM D1557). The upper two feet of the utility trench backfill placed in pavement areas should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dzy density (ASTM DI557). Pipe bedding should be in accordance v,ith pipe manufacturer's recommendations. ) The contractor is responsible for removing all water sensitive settlement from the trench regardless of the backfill location and compaction requirements. The contractor should use appropriate equipment and methods to avoid damage to the utilities and/or structures during fill placement and compaction. Foundations The proposed structures may be supported on a shallow foundation system bearing on undisturbed native soil or on Engineered Fill. Spread and continuous footings can be designed for the following maximum allowable soil bearing pressures: ': :::::¡'::}(.:(:U:i:¡¡::::::jU::::::t::j' LOäd:Jt::::::::U.!::::{¡:::::j:;::tr'j::::H+:): r::::\.:'\11 ow åb lê::IJo å d i 02 r:t:: Dead Load Only 1 , 875 psi Dead-Plus-Live Load 2,500 psf Total Load, including wind or seISmIC loads 3.325 psf Kraz.an " Associates, Ine. Offices Serving The Western United States CJ%!9'1IDO.DOC I. . KA No. 022-97030 Page No.8 As an alternative, a higher bearing pressure may be used, provided that the proposed structures are supported by 2 feet of Engineered Fill. Spreading continuous footings, supported by 2 feet of Engineered Fill, can be designed for the following maximum allowable soil bearing pressures: . :::jtfw~:::r: :Hf:fj~:Ht:r;(t{M~Lo lid :H:i:j::::jjjjt;;t::~;:f::=j#¡JWj::\¥W {):jAnowåb~fUoådm2Wt:: Dead Load Only 3 ,000 psi Dead-Plus-Live Load 4, 000 psi Total Load, including \\ind or selSIlUC loads 5,334 psi The footings should have a minimum depth of 18 inches below pad subgrade (soil grade) or adjacent e;\:terior grade, . which!=Ver is lower. Footings should have a minimum width of 12 inches regardless of load. The total settlement is not e~:pected to exceed I inch. Differential settlement should be less than Y: inch. Most of the settlement is expected to occur during construction as the loads are applied. However, additional post- construction settlement may occur if the foundation soils are flooded or saturated. Resistance to lateral footing displacement can be computed using an allowable friction factor of 0.4, acting between the base of foundations and the supporting subgrade. Lateral resistance for footings can alternatively be developed using an allowable equivalent fluid passive pressure of 350 pounds per cubic foot acting against the appropriate vertical footing faces. The frictional and passive resistance of the soil may be combined without reduction in detemúning the total lateral resistance. A one-third increase in the above value may be used for short duration, \\ind or seismic loads. Floor Slabs and Exterior Flatwork Slab-on-grade construction should be appropriate for this project. Slab-on-grade construction should have a moisture barrier incorporated into the floor slab design. Interior slabs-on-grade should have at least 2 inches of clean free-draining concrete sand placed below the floor slab. The sand should conform to ASTM C33 requirements for fine aggregate. An impervious membrane (vapor barrier) should be placed under the 2 inches of sand. This system of 2 inches of sand and a vapor barrier should be underlain by an additional 2 inches of clean concrete sand to prevent capillary moisture rise. Prior to pouring concrete, the sand should be thoroughly consolidated. The exterior slabs should be poured separately in order to act independently of the walls and foundation system. All fills required to bring the building pads to grade should be Engineered Fills. Krazan " Associates, Inc. Offices Serving The Western United States CI229'1'IDI.DQC KA No. 022-97030 Pagc No.9 Lateral Earth Pressures and Retainin2 Walls WaIls retaining horizontal backfill. and capable of deflecting a minimum of 0:1 percent of its height at the top, may be designed using an equivalent fluid active pressure of 32 pounds per square foot per foot of depth. WaIls retaining backfill material, sloped 2 horizontal to 1 vertical, may be designed using an equivalent fluid active pressure of 46 pounds per square foot per foot of. depth. Wal1s retaining horizontal backfill and incapable of this deflection or are fully constrained walls against deflection may be designed for an equivalent fluid at-rest pressure of 56 pounds per square foot per foot of depth. Walls retaining sloped backfill and incapable of this deflection or are fully constrained walls against deflection may be designed for an equivalent fluid at-rest pressure of 80 pounds per square foot per foot of depth. Expansive soils should not be used for backfill against walls. The wedge of non-expansive backfill material should extend from the bottom of each retaining wall outward and upward at a slope of 2:1, horizontal to vertical, or flatter. The stated lateral earth pressures do not include the effects of hydrostatic water pressures generated by infiltrating surface water that may accumulate behind the retaining walls; or loads imposed by construction equipment, foundations or roadways. During gradiIig and' backfilling operations adjacent to any walls, heavy equipment should not be allowed to operate within a lateral distance of 5 feet from the wall, or within a lateral distance equal to the wall height, whichever is greater, to avoid developing excessive lateral pressures. Within this zone, only hand operated equipment ("whackers", vibratory plates, or pneumatic compactors) should be used to compact the backfill soils. Retaining and/or below grade walls should be drained with either perforated pipe encased in free draining gravel or a pre-fabricated drainage system. The gravel zone should have a minimum width of 12 inches wide and should extend upward to within 12 inches of the top of the wall. The upper 12 inches of backfill should consist of native soils, concrete, asphalt-concrete or other suitable backfill to minimize surface drainage into the wall drain system. The aggregate should confonn to Class n penneable materials graded in accordance with Section 68-1.025 of the CalTrans Standard Specifications (January 1988). Pre-fabricated drainage systems, such as Miradrain, Enkadrain or an equivalent substitute, are acceptable alternatives in lieu of gravel provided they are installed in accordance with the manufacturers recommendations. If a pre-fabricated drainage system is proposed, our finn should review the system for final acceptance prior to installation. Drainage pipes should be placed with perforations down and should discharge in a non-erosive manner away from foundations and other improvements. The pipes should be placed no higher than six inches above the heel of the wall in the center line of the drainage blanket and should have a minimum diameter of four inches. Collector pipes may be either slotted or perforated. Slots should be no wider than lI8-inch, while perforations should be no more than 1/4-inch in diameter. If retaining walls are less than 6 feet in height, the perforated pipe may be omitted in lieu of weep holes on 4 feet maximum spacing. The weep holes should consist of 4 inch in diameter holes (concrete walls) or umnortared head joints (masonry walls) and not be higher than 18 inches above the lowest adjacent grade. Two eight-inch square overlapping patches of geotextile fabric (conforming to Section 88-1.03 of the CalTrans Standard Specifications for "edge drains") should be affixed to the rear wall opening of each weep hole to retard soil piping. Kraz.an 8£ Associates, Ine. Offices Serving The Western United States ~.DOC . KA No. 022-97030 Page No. 10 SlaDe Stability Analvsis Side slopes of 2 horizontal to 1 vertical are anticipated behind the retaining waIls. The proposed slopes were evaluated for slope stability. The stability of the slopes were analyzed.. Slope stability analysis performed on the proposed slope had a minimum faCtor of safety of 1.5. The slope stability analysis indicates that a major slope stability failure is not anticipated. It is therefore recommended that the side slope be 2 horizontal to 1 vertical or fIattcr. R-Value Test Results and Pavement Desi2l1 Four R-Value samples were obtained from the project site at the location shown on the attached site plan. The samples were tested in accordance with the State of California Materials Manual Test Designation 301. Results of the test are as follows: :5amólê;( ::);fDeothtt:: :::¡::¡¡j:i::fr:::::::;i:':+:t::::::::::;:;:DêSèdétiôiìn:::::::i:::::)::::::::):::::;::::::::n: r::::iR4Vålûe:åtiEåûìbñ nam:W::: 1 12-1 8" Silty Sand (SM) 47 2 12-1 8" Silty Sand with Clay (SM) 23 3 12-1 8" Silty Sand with Clay (SM) 29 4 12-1 8" Silty Sand with Clay (SM) 23 These test results are low to moderate and indicate fair subgrade support characteristics under dynamic traffic loads. The following table shows the recommended pavement sections for various traffic indexes. . . ...... ..... .. . .... . .¡i¡¡¡i¡"¡;~~!¡I~¡i~1111¡~II I¡i¡¡. ¡¡fJl¡¡:II~!i~~¡:ð!~~~!'¡:::¡¡.¡:: ;1:¡fl.i¡.I~~~I~!I~ I.!¡I'¡¡!! i Ii If ¡i ¡Ii ¡ I~!~~.: ~ ~~~~i I ~l ~ 1,,1I1! 4 0 2 5 " 5 .5 " 1 2 .0" 4 .5 2 .5 " 6 5 " I 2 0 " 5 .0 2.5 " 8 0 " 1 2. 0" 5 .5 3 0" 8 .5 " 1 2 0 " 6 0 3 0" I 0 0" 1 2 0" 6 .5 3 .5 " 1 0.5 " 12 .0" 7.0 4 .0" 1 1 .5 " 1 2 0" 7 .5 4 .0" 1 3 0" 1 2 .0" . 9S~ compactIon based on ASTM Test Method DlSS7 or C4L 216 .. 90~ compaction based on ASTM Test Method D1SS7 or C4L 216 Krazan & Associates, Ine:. Offices Serving The Western United States CI'%29'1IIDD.DOC KA No. 022-97030 Page No. 11 If traffic indexes are not available, an estimated (typical value) index of 4.5 may be used for light automobile traffic, and an index of7.0 may be used for light truck traffic. The following recommendations are for light-duty and heavy-duty Portland Cement Concrete pavement sections. :1 .i:¡:'~~I~'i~I!li!! 1:!!:JI:il~_~rl'i :;I¡!¡¡.¡!:I:~!~lm!~~¡::¡I::¡I:il .1¡¡I~!~!.I!~~;1iW~~:~¡¡'¡ 4.5 5 .0" 4 0" 12.0" PORTLAND CEMENT PAVEMENT LIGHT DUTY 1¡¡!rll:~~~~1¡1:¡I!¡:¡: :il:l:fl!JI;li~~~IIM!~~¡:;i:¡~¡:!: .. . ¡:¡:!:!~J~I~I!~~:II!rl I 1 ..'.'...."""'.".'......'.'...'....."'.""".." ..................,.. ...............,................,.........................,.,... .!¡¡ð~!~!!!::Š~~~;~~~;~¡:! 7. 0 6.5" 6. 0" 12.0" HEA VY DUTY * 95" compllCtion based onASTM D1557 Dr C4L 216 .. 90~~ compllCtion based on ASTM D1557 Dr C4L 216 * * *Mininuun compressive strength of J 000 psi ) Site Coefficient The site coefficient, per Table 16-1, California Building Code, is based upon the site soil conditions. It is our opinion that a site coefficient of soil type S2 (S factor = 1.2) is appropriate for building design at this site. Soil Cement Reactivitv Excessive sulfate in either the soil or native water may result in an adverse reaction between the cement in concrete (or stucco) and the soil. HUDIFHA and UBC have developed criteria for evaluation of sulfate levels and how they relate to cement reactivity with soil and/or water. Soil samples were obtained from the site and tested in accordance with State of California Materials Manual Test Designation 417. The sulfate concentrations detected in these soil samples were less than 0.02 percent and are below the maximum allowable values established by HUDIFHA and UBC. Therefore, no special design requirements are necessary to compensate for sulfate reactivity with the cement. Kruan & Associates, Inc. Offices Serving The Western United States 0Z291II30.DOC /"". { '. . KA No. 022-97030 Page No. 12 Comoacted Material Acceotance Compaction specifications are not the only criteria for acceptance of the site grading or other such activities. The compaction test is the most universally recognized test method for assessing the performance of the Grading Contractor. However, the nwnerica1 test results from the compaction test cannot be used to predict the engineering performance of the compacted material. Therefore, the acceptance of compacted materials will also be dependent on the stability of that material. The Soils Engineer has the option of rejeCting any compacted material regardless of the degree of compaction if that material is considered to be unstable or if future instability is suspected. A specific example of rejection of fill material passing the required percc:nt compaction is a fill which has been compacted with an in-situ moisture content significantly less than optimum moisture. This type of dry fill (brittle fill) is susceptible to future settlement if it becomes saturated or flooded. Testin2 and Insoection A representative of Krazan & Associates, Inc., should be present at the site. during the earthwork activities to confinn that actual subsuIfàce conditions are consistent with the exploratory field work. This activity is an integral part of our services as acceptance of earthwork construction is dependent upon compaction testing and stability of the material. This representative can also verify that the intent of these recommendations is incorporated into the project design and construction. Krazan & Associates, Inc., will not be responsible for grades or staking, since this is the responsibility of the Prime Contractor. LIMIT A nONS Soils Engineering is one of the newest divisions of Civil Engineering. This branch of Civil Engineering is constantly improving as new technologies and understanding of earth sciences improve. Although your site was analyzed using the most appropriate current techniques and methods, undoubtedly there will be substantial future improvements in this branch of engineering. In addition to improvements in the field of Soils Engineering, physical changes in the site either due to excavation or fill placement, neW agency regulations or possible changes in the proposed structure after the time of completion of the soils report may require the soils report to be professionally reviewed. In light of this, the Owner should be aware that there is a practica11imit to the usefulness of this report without critical review. Although the time limit for this review is strictly arbitrary, it is suggested that two years be considered a reasonable time for the usefulness of this report. Foundation and earthwork construCtion is characterized by the presence of a calculated risk that soil and groundwater conditions have been fully revealed by the original foundation investigation. This risk is derived from the practical necessity of basing interpretations and design conclusions on limited sampling of the earth. The recommendations made in this report are based on the assumption that soil conditions do not vary significantly from those disclosed during our field investigation. If any variations or undesirable conditions are encountered during construction, the Soils Engineer should be notified so that supplemental recommendations can be made. The conclusions of this report are based on the infonnation provided regarding the proposed construction. If the proposed COnstruction is relocated or redesigned, the conclusions in this report may not be valid. The Soils Engineer should be notified of any changes so the recommendations can be reviewed and reevaluated. Knwua &. Associates, Ine. Offices Serving The Western United States ann:DO.DOC leA No. 022-97030 ' Pa¡e No. 13 ' This report is a geoteChnical engineering investigation with the purpose of evaluating the soil conditions in :, terms of foundation design. The scope of our services did not include any environmental site assessment for the presence or absence of hazardous and/or toxic materials in the soil, groundwater or a1m.osphere, or the presc:nce of wetlands. Any statements, or absence of statements, in this report or on any boring log regarding odors, unusual or suspicious items, or conditions observed are strictly for descriptive purposed and are not intended to convey engineering judgment regarding potential hazardous and/or toxic assessment. The geotechnical data presented herewith is based upon professional interpretation utilizing standard engineering practices and a degree of conservatism deemed proper for this project. It is not warranted that such data and interpretation cannot be superseded by future geotechnical developments. We emphasize that this report is valid for this project as outlined above, and should not be used for any other site. If there are any questions, or if we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our office at (209) 348-2200 or (800) 800-0711. RSS/DA:kd Respectfully submitted, KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ~i~~tLO Project Engineer ~~2 ~Q-e1~ D BAN ALEXANDER Geotechnical Engineer RCE No. 002051IRCE No. 34274 j Kruan &. Associates, Inc. Offices Serving The Western United States ont?II3D.DOC " ... API'ROXlMA11!! R-VJ'LlI~ t...OCAf10N .~ API'ROXIMA11!! ClOIó?I,.. Q t...OCAl1ON ~~ ., "b "I~ NOt' 1"0 5CJ'Le -~. -~ --~- -..... ~-~-r-:::J oj ~'f;.-------- .--- I ---.. ~-'" i - -- - ----[ (----------- ~ ,,~ 6 ~6 -~- ~--- i -,r C!ÐŒP- PfÐ:~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ti 1 [ ~-I -¥'" rr.œO5fD I'lLPN/::í _~~B -~~ J:J:f.AJNNa w,u. ~ PROPO5E:1? U5P5 MAIN PO5í" OFFICE: Scale: AS 5HOWN IJrawll b)': CW Project No. 022-91OXJ t:=NCINI-rA5.. CA +,,1 /Jale: 2/97 Approved by: f'¿5 Figure No. --h___- -- ~ ~ 1'7 ~ -~- ~ ===> ~ ~ id à ~-I i ~ ~ ------------- - ------- ---- --- --- ~Krazan ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIAUSTS Offices Serving tlte Western United Statu Appeadix A Pap A.l / , í . APPENDIX A FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS , Field I nvestintion The field investigation consisted of a surfAce reconnaissance and a subsurface exploratory program. Twelve 4- inch exploratory borings were advanced. The boring locations are shown on the site plan. The soils encountered were logged in the field during the exploration and, with supplementary laboratory test data. are described in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System. Modified standard penetration tests were performed at selected depths. This test represents the resistance to driving a 2 Vz-inch diameter core barrel. The driving energy was provided by a hammer weighing 140 pounds falling 30 inches. Relatively undisturbed soil samples were obtained while performing this test. Bag samples of the disturbed soil were obtained from the auger cuttings. All samples were returned to our Fresno laboratory for evaluation. . Laborato", Investi2ation The laboratory investigation was programmed to determine the physical and mechanical properties of the foundation soil underlying the site. Test results were used as criteria for determining the engineering suitability of the surfAce and subsurface materials encountered. In-situ moisture content, dry density, consolidation, and direct sieve analysis tests were determined for the undisturbed samples representative of the subsurface material. These tests, supplemented by visual observation, comprised the basis for our evaluation of the site material. The logs of the exploratory borings and laboratory determinations are presented in this Appendix. Krazan & Associates, Ine. Offices Serving The Westcm United States --- Ul'-I.lr J..t..u ~Ul.1J "-1..A.:Iò:J.&.r J."-^ J. J.V1" .;) J. OJ ... '&;'.l.u. MAJOR.DIVISIONS,:': SYMBOLS' TYPICAL NAMES COARSE GRAINED SOILS (More than Yz or soil> no. 200 sieve size) GW Well-2rnded 2ravels or 2r:1vel-sand mixtures. little or no fines Lo- GRAVELS GP Poorlv-t!r3ded 2r3vels or 2ravel-sand mixtures. little or no fines ' (More than Yz or coarse GM Silty ¡ravels, ¡ravel-sand-silt mixtures rraction > no. 4 sieve size) GC Clavev uavels. 2ravel-sand-dav mÌ%tures SW Well-2raded sands or 2ravelv sands. little or no fines SANDS SP Poorlv-uaded sands or 2ravelv sands. little or no fines (More than Yz or coarse SM Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures fractiòn < no. 4 sieve size) J SC Clavev sands. sand-dav mÌ%tures FINE GRAINED SOILS (More than Yz of soil < no. 200 sieve size) SIL TS & CLAYS ML I Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour, silty or clayey fine sands or clavev silts with sli2ht elasticitY LL<SO CL Inor¡anic clays onow to medium plasticity, ¡ravely clays, sandy clays, siltY clays. lean clavs OL Or2:mic silts and orunic siltY clavs of low Dlasticitv SILTS & CLAYS MH Inorganic silts, micaceous or dintomnceousfine sAndy or silty soils, elastic silts LL>50 CH Inor!anic clnvs of hi!h elasticitv. fat clays OH Organic clnys of medium to hi~h plasticity, organic silty clays, organic silts HIGHLY ORGANIC SOn..S Pt Peat and other hi2hlv-Or2:1nic soils CONSISTENCY CLASSIFICATION ) COHESIVE SOILS I GRANULAR SOILS ,', ' ": ,'" DescrietÎon Blows/ft. I Descrietion B lows/ft~ ':::;-::>t':::::;:\?':: Very Soft \ <3 Very Loose <5 Soft 3-5 Loose 5-15 Medium (Finn) 6-10 Medium Dense 16-40 Stiff 11-20 Dense 41-65 Very Stiff 21-40 Very Dense >65 Hard >40 GRAIN SIZE CLASSIFICA nON ,CLASSIFICA nON" RANGE OF GRAIN SIZES "",., ".. ,'~,Grain'Tyee I U.S. Standard Sieve Size Grain Size inMillimeterS'::::?;;::\:::::\) Boulders above 12" I above 305 Cobbles 12" to 3" 305 to 76.2 Gravel 3" to no. 4 76.2 to 4.76 coarse (c) 3" to 3/4" 76.2 to 19.1 fine (0 1/4" to no. 4 19.1 to 4.76 Sand no. 4 to no. 200 4.76 to 0.074 coarse (c) no. 4 to no. 10 4.76 to 2.00 medium (m) no. 10 to no. 40 2.00 to 0.420 fine CO no. 40 to no. 200 0.420 to 0.074 Silt & Clav below no. 200 below 0.074 DHILL HOLE LOu BORING NO.: Bl PROJECT: Prop. USPS Main Post Office - Encinitas CLIENT: URS Greiner LOCATION: Garden View Rd./EI Camino Real, Encinitas, CA DRILLER: Jim Watts DRILL RIG: CME45 DEPTH TO WATER> ( ~ ELEVATION/ WELL DEPTH DETAIL 0 + 5 10 15 ," 20 ¡ i , .j 25 . I . 30 SOIL SYMBOLS, SAMPLERS AND TEST DATA 9/6 to . .. . : 14/6 t::::: 15/6 .. . .. . t . . . . ¡oW . .. PROJECT NO.: 022-97030 DATE: 2/12/97 ELEV A TJON: LOGGED BY: Dave Jarosz INITIAL: 23-1/2 ft AT COMPLETION: 23-1/2 ft Water Dry PENETRATION TEST Content Density CUR V E ","pet DEPTH N Description .......... ..... .... ......... .....,. ................ Loose fine to coarse SILTY SAND ISM); medium brown, moist, drills easy. Tan at 2 feet. 1.6-3 15.2 101.1 Medium dense, medium brown at 5 feet. 4.5-6 13.1 106.9 With a trace of CLAY at 11 feet. Loose, no CLAY, light brown at 1 5 feet. 9.5.1 1 Medium dense, less SILT, wet at 20 feet. 11.5 120.5 Saturated at 23-1 /2 feet. 14.5-1614 10.4 105.2 f9.5-21 31 17.7 110.1 "MëéÚ~~'dè'rïsë'fi~'è'tö"cö~'~së""" 24.5-26 29 SAND IS?); with SILT, medium 24.5 104.0 brown. saturated, drills easy. This information pertains only to this boring end should not be interpreted as being indieftive of the site. Figure A-1 PAGE 1 of 2 Krazan and Associates Krazan and Associates 10 30 5 10 19 31 DRILL HOLE LOG BORING NO.: Bl PROJECT: Prop. USPS Main Post Office - Encinitas CLIENT: URS Greiner LOCATION: Garden View Rd./EI Camino Real, Encinitas, CA DRILLER: Jim Watts DRILL RIG: CME45 DEPTH TO WATER> PROJECT NO.: 022-97030 DATE: 2/12/97 . ELEVATION: LOGGED BY: Dave Jarosz I ~ ; . I I ¡ 10 PENETRA nON TEST ELEVATION! WELL SOIL SYMBOLS, Water Dry SAMPLERS Description Content Density CURVE DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA '" pet. DEPTH N --\- &. 10 30 SO .... --35 .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... "" ¡1m - -40 ..:..:..:.:.. Bottom of Boring I - -45 ) - ~50 I - -55 - - -60 r INITIAL: 23-1/2 ft AT COMPLETION: 23-1/2 ft This infonmation pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indicitive of the site. Figure A-1 PAGE 2 of 2 Krazan and Associates Krazan and Associates 1J81ILL HULt: LUü BORING NO.: B2 PROJECT: Prop. USPS Main Post Office -Encinitas CLIENT: URS Greiner . LOCATION: Garden View Rd./EI Camino Real, Encinitas, CA DRILLER: Jim Watts DRILL RIG: CME45 DEPTH TO WATER> PROJECT NO.: 022-97030 DATE: 2/12/97 ELEVATION: LOGGED BY: Dave Jarosz c , I ! F 1 , I ~ ELEVATION/ WELL SOIL SYMBOLS. Wlter Dry PENETRATION TEST SAMPLERS Description Content Density CURVE DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA % . pet DEPTH N -.-0 - ................................................... 10 30 5 loose fine to coarse Sil TV 11./6 SAND (SM); medium brown, moist. drills easy. 1.5-3 13 6/6 7/6 Orange-brown at 3 feet. 14.4 104.1 - ~5 16/6 Medium dense, less SILT (SMt 4.5-6 15 ¡ 1/6 SP); at 4 feet. - 8/6 9.1 114.2 I Increased SilT at 10 feet. With a trace of CLAY at 1 6 feet. -10 18/6 9.5-1 1 22 10/6 12/6 10.5 120.5 - I- 15 13/6 14.5-16 27 11/6 16/6 11.0 110.6 I - ~20 Bottom of Boring - 1-25 1.30 t INITIAL: AT COMPLETION: i ¡ . . ..! ¡his information pe~tlins only to this bo~ing and should not be interp~eted I' being indicitive of the site. Figure A-2 PAGE 1 of 1 Krazan and Associates Krazan and Associates . . DHILL HOLE LOG BORING NO.: B3 PROJECT: Prop. USPS Main Post Office - Encinitas CLIENT: URS Greiner . LOCATION: Garden View Rd./EI Camino Real, Encinitas, CA DRILLER: Jim Watts DRILL RIG: CME45 DEPTH TO WATER> ELEVATION! WELL SOIL SYMBOLS. SAMPLERS AND TEST DATA DEPTH DETAIL 0 5 10 15 . I I . . I II 20 10/6 '0/6 15/6 25 r INITIAL: Description ................................................... Very loose fine to coarse Sil TV SAND (SM); medium brown, moist, drills easy. Loose below 6 inches. Medium dense. red-brown-white at 5 feet. Loose at 1 0 feet. With a trace of GRAVEL at 15 feet. Medium dense, increased SilT, yellow-orange-brown at 1 6 feet. ... ....... ......................................... 8.6 Medium dense fine to coarse SAND (SP); with a trace of SILT, light brown, moist, drills easy. Bottom of Boring PROJECT NO.: 022-97030 DATE: 2/12/97 ELEVATION: LOGGED BY: Dave Jarosz AT COMPLETION: Water Dry Content Denaity % pet PENETRATION TEST CURVE i DEPTH N I 10 30 50 I 1.5-3 10 14.6 103.7 4.6-6 28 6.8 9.1 13 101.4 9.5-1' 115.7 14.6-16 24 13.4 104.2 , 9.5-21 25 110.5 This information pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted a. being indicitiye of the .ite. Figure A-3 PAGE 1 of 1 Krazan and Associates Krazan and Associates , , ) 'PROJECT: Prop. USPS Main Post Office - Encinitas CLIENT: URS Greiner LOCATION: Garden View Rd./EI Camino Real, Encinitas, CA DRILLER: Jim Watts I DRILL RIG: CME45 I' E~~::fT~ A TE:~ SYM.o~~ITIAL: SAMPLERS I DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA I 0 I 5 10 15 20 25 30 ( DRILL HOLE LOG BORING NO.: B4 PROJECT NO.: 022-97030 DATE: 2/12/97 ELEVATION: LOGGED BY: Dave Jarosz DescriPtion AT COMPLETION: W:ter Dry PENETRA TION TEST Content Density CUR V E '" pet DEPTH N ,.................................................. 10 sc 30 Very loose fine to coarse SILTY SAND (SM); medium brown, moist, drills easy. Loose below 6 inches. 1.5-3 13 13.0 109.0 , Medium dense, orange-brown ".,t;>.~!~~. .~. .~~.~~:............................. 7 6 Medium dense fine to coarse . SAND (SP); orange-brown, moist, drills easy. ". ....... ................,........ """""""" Medium dense fine to coarse SILTY SAND (SM); medium brown, moist, drills easy. Orange-brown at 1 6 feet. 4.5-6 16 102.1 9.5-11 18 11.0 112.2 14.5-16 17 13.3 109.1 Bottom of Boring This information pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indicitive of the site. Figure A-4 PAGE 1 of 1 Krazan and Associates Krazan and Associates PROJECT: Prop. USPS Main Post Office - Encinitas CLIENT: URS Greiner LOCA TION: Garden View Rd .lEI Camino Real, Encinitas, CA DRILLER: Jim Watts DRILL RIG: CME45 i DEPTH TO WATER> 'I ELEVATION' WELL SOIL SYMBOLS. SAMPLERS I DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA -""0 . , 1 I í , I I r .. 17/6 10/6 17/6 .. -1-5 16/6 9/6 18/6 I- .. -1-10 . 18/6 10/6 10/6 -I- 1S I- 18/6 .;:;:; ~;~: . . .. . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . - -1-20 , I- ~ : : : : . .. . . . .. . . ~ : : : : . . . . . . .. . . L..:.:.. -1-25 I- I- -'-30 t- .t- &.InlLL nULE: LVU BORING NO.: B5 PROJECT NO.: 022-97030 DATE: 2/12/97 ELEVATION: LOGGED BY: Dave Jarosz INITIAL: AT COMPLETION: Description Water Dry Content DeMity % pef PENETRATION TEST CURVE DEPTH N - ................................................... Very loose fine to coarse SIL TV SAND (SM); medium brDwn, moist, drills easy. Medium dense below 6 inches. 10 30 5C 1.5.3 27 11.8 107.2 Orange-brown-white at 5 feet. Orange-brown at 10 feet. 4.5-6 27 4 6.4 113.6 With a trace of CLA V, increased SILT at 13 feet. 9.5-11 20 I 10.1 , 17.8 \ \ - ..........................,...................,.... Medium dense fine to coarse' 0.3 104.0 SAND (SP}; with a trace of SILT, tan, moist, drills easy. 14.5-16 32 ~ Bottom of Boring This information pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indieitive of the site. Figure A-5 PAGE 1 of 1 Krazan and Associates Krazan and Associates I UHILL HOLE LUG BORING NO.: B6 PROJECT: Prop. USPS Main Post Office - Encinitas CLIENT: URS Greiner . LOCATION: Garden View Rd./EI Camino Real, Encinitas, CA DRILLER: Jim Watts DRILL RIG: CME45 DEPTH TO WATER> PROJECT NO.: 022-97030 DATE: 2/12/97 ELEVATION: LOGGED BY: Dave Jarosz t : & I . , I , , ELEVATION/ WEll. SOIL SYMBOLS. Water Dry PENETRATION TEST SAMPLERS Description Content Density CURVE DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA % pet DEPTH N -.-0 - ................................................... 10 30 sc Very loose fine to coarse SIL TV 18/6 SAND (SM); medium brown, , moist, drills easy. 1.5-3 22 10/6 12/6 Medium dense below 6 inches. 11.0 96.6 --5 15/6 Medium brown-white-orange at 4.5-6 16 ~ 7/6 3 feet. 9/6 6.4 105.6 Less SILT below 5 feet. Medium brown at 10 feet. - -10 112/6 With a trace of CLA Y at 1 2 9.5-11 27 13/6 feet. 14/6 Increased SILT at 16 feet. - --15 110/6 14.5.16 25 I~ 12/6 13/6 13.5 103.0 - - -20 Bottom of Boring , I I - f-25 - -30 I- INITIAL: AT COMPLETION: This infoMmation pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted 8S being indicitive of the site. Figure A-6 PAGE 1 of 1 Krazan and Associates Krazan and Associates PROJECT: Prop. USPS Main Post Office - Encinitas CLIENT: URS Greiner LOCATION: Garden View Rd./EI Camino Real, Encinitas, CA DRILLER: Jim Watts DRILL RIG: CME45 DEPTH TO WATER> ELEV A TlONI WELL SOIL SYMBOLS, Water Dry SAMPLERS Description Content Denlity DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA % pet 0 . ............................... ..... ......... ..... Very loose fine to coarse SILTY SAND (SM); medium brown, , moist, drills easy. I 9.5 108.2 I Medium dense at 6 inches. I With a trace of CLAY at 4 feet. Loose, no CLAY at 5 feet. 13.2 106.8 I f ! Orange-brown at 5-1/2 feet. , ! I Saturated at 11 feet. : 10 Medium brown at 14 feet. 20.3 110.6 15 .r +" ¡3D UtULL HULE LUl:ì BORING NO.: B7 PROJECT NO.: 022-97030 DATE: 2/12/97 ELEVATION: LOGGED BY: Dave Jarosz INITIAL: 1 1 feet. AT COMPLETION: 11 feet. PENETRATION TEST CURVE DEPTH N 10 30 SO 1.6-3 24 4.5-6 14 9.5-11 17 Bottom of Boring This infonmBtion pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indicitive of the site. Figure A- 7 PAGE 1 of 1 Krazan and Associates Krazan and Associates DRILL HOLE LOG . BORING NO.: B8 PROJECT: Prop. USPS Main Post Office - Encinitas CLIENT: URS Greiner LOCATION: Garden View Rd./EI Camino Real, Encinitas, CA DRILLER: Jim Watts DRILL RIG: CME45 DEPTH TO WATER> ELEVATION! WELL SOIL SYMBOLS. SAMPLERS DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA 0 3/6 6/6 716 5 j t , I I ! r I I I I 15 f , f , . ,! 20 f . J t 2S 30 I t PROJECT NO.: 022-97030 DATE: 2/12/97 ELEVATION: LOGGED BY: Dave Jarosz INITIAL: AT COMPLETION: Water Dry PENETRATION TEST Description Contant Density CURVE '" .pet DEPTH N . , . .. .. , . .. .. .. . , .. .. .. , .. .. . .. .. .. . . .. , .. .. . .. .... 10 30 5 Very loose fine to coarse SILTY SAND (SM/SP); medium brown, moist, drills easy. 1.5-3 13 ': Loose at 6 inches. 4.1 104.6 ~9.~Q~,I:'!~ ß~.t?r.i~ .~.~ .~,f~~~.,....".",., 4.5-6 32 Loose fine to coarse SILTY 9.2 109.1 SAND (SM); medium brown, moist, drills easy. Medium dense, increased SILT at 5 feet. 9.5-11 18 Orange-brown at 6 feet. 6.5 103.8 With a trace of GRAVEL, medium brown-white at 10 feet. Orange-brown at 13 feet. 14.5-16 54 Dense. orange-brawn-white at 5.2 106.8 1 6 feet. Very dense. cemented at 18 feet. 19.5-21 68 s 5.5 104.1 Bottom of Boring This information pertains only to this borin; and should not be interpreted as bein; indicitive of the site. Figure A-a PAGE 1 of 1 Krazan and Associates Krazan and Associates LltULL HULt: LU\:i BORING NO.: B9 PROJECT: Prop. USPS Main Post Office - Encinitas CLIENT: URS Greiner LOCATION: Garden View Rd .lEI Camino Real, Encinitas, CA DRILLER: Jim Watts DRILL RIG: CME45 DEPTH TO WATER> ELEVATIONI WELL SOIL SYMBOLS, SAMPLERS DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA I 0 --\- I 10/6 I 20/6 30/6 5 10 15 20 25 30 INITIAL: Description .. .. .. .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. , .. . , . .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. . .. .. . .. . Very loose fine to coarse SIL TV . SAND (SM); with GRAVEL, ~ medium brown, moist, drills :easy. 'Dense at 6 inches. ,...... ,....,. "........." ............,. """" Dense fine to coarse SIL TV SAND (SM); yellow-brown, damp, drills easy. Very dense, medium brown-red at 5 feet. Dense, brown-red-white at 10 feet. Orange-brown at 16 feet. Medium brown at 1 8 feet. Medium dense, orange-brown at 21 feet. Increased SILT at 28 feet. Yellow-tan, drills firm at 32 feet. PROJECT NO.: 022-97030 DATE: 2/12/97 ELEVATION: LOGGED BY: Dave Jarosz AT COMPLETION: Water Dry PENETRATION TEST Contant DensitY. N CURVE % pef DEPTH 10 30 50 1.5-3 50 9.8 116.6 4.5-6 67 11.6 119.2 9.5-11 39 9.6 114.7 14.5-16 40 \ I 6.2 114.6 19.5-21 31 7.7 117.0 This information pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indicltive of the site. Figure A-9 PAGE 1 of 2 Krazan and Associates Krazan and Associates DHILL HULl: LU\:ì BORING NO.: B9 . PROJECT: Prop. USPS Main Post Office - Encinitas CLIENT: URS Greiner LOCATION: Garden View Rd./EI Camino Real, Encinitas, CA DRILLER: Jim Watts DRILL RIG: CME45 DEPTH TO WATER> PROJECT NO.: 022-97030 DATE: 2/12/97 ELEVATION: LOGGED BY: Dave Jarosz INITIAL: AT COMPLETION: i ELEVATION! WELL SOIL SYMBOLS. Water Dry PENETRATION TEST SAMPLERS Description Content Density CURVE DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA % pet DEPTH N --1y- 10 30 50 -1-35 - ......... ............. ...... .......... ............. Medium dense fine to medium SANDY SILT (ML); with a trace of CLAY, tan, damp, drills easy. - --40 Bottom of Boring . - -45 - -50 - 1-55 ! - -60 - -65 \, This information pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indicitive of the site. Figure A-9 PAGE 2 of 2 Krazan and Associates Krazan and Associates unlLL nULl: LV\.:! BORING NO.: BIO PROJECT: Prop. USPS Main Post Office - Encinitas CLIENT: URS Greiner LOCATION: Garden View Rd./EI Camino Real, Encinitas, CA DRILLER: Jim Watts DRILL RIG: CME45 DEPTH TO WATER> ELEVATION/ WELL SOIL SYMBOLS. SAMPLERS AND TEST DATA DEPTH DETAIL --0 . 15/6 6/6 [ 6/6 16/6 10/6 12/6 ---5 - - -10 19/6 14/6 16/6 - -15 i- --20 I --25 --30 INITIAL: Description - ................................................... Very loose fine to coarse SILTY SAND (SM); dark brown, moist, drills easy. - :Loose, medium brown at 6 '-jnches. '.. ................................,.. """"'" Loose fine to coarse SILTY SAND (SM/SP); orange-brown, moist, drills easy. Increased SILT at 4 feet. With a trace of CLAY, medium brown at 8 feet. No CLAY at 10 feet. Medium brown at 13 feet. Less SILT at 16 feet. Bottom of Boring PROJECT NO.: 022-97030 DATE: 2/12/97 ,~ ELEVATION: LOGGED BY: Dave Jarosz AT COMPLETION: Water Dry PENETRATION TEST Content Density CUR V E % pef DEPTH N 10 50 I I 30 1.5-3 12 ~ \ \ 6.4 109.6 4.5-6 . 22 5.7 100.9 9.5-11 30 9.4 } / This information pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indicitive of the site. Figure A- 10 PAGE 1 of 1 Krazan and Associates Krazan and Associates , I ! . ...,. u... ... . -. v ...... ... v \,,;a BORING NO.: Bll PROJECT: Prop. USPS Main Post Office - Encinitas CLIENT: URS Greiner . LOCATION: Garden View Rd./EI Camino Real, Encinitas, CA DRILLER: Jim Watts . DRILL RIG: CME45 DEPTH TO WATER> PROJECT NO.: 022-97030 DATE: 2/12/97 ELEVATION: LOGGED BY: Dave Jarosz INITIAL: AT COMPLETION: ELEVATION/ WELL SOIL SYMBOLS. Water Dry PENETRATION TEST SAMPLERS Description Content Density CURVE DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA % pet DEPTH N -,...0 - ....,....,......,..,...."..,........,..,....,..,.. 10 30 5 - Very loose fine to coarse SILTY ': SAND (SM); medium brown. 14/6 : moist. drills easy. 1.5-3 19 . 616 . 13/6 :With a trace of CLAY, black at 9.8 100.9 \ I :3 inches. \ I --5 18/6 4.5-6 32 ~ 1616 M.~.~!~~, .~,~~~~, .~~, .($, .i~~~.~~:.".,... \ I 1616 4.5 106.2 Medium dense fine to coarse \ to SIt TV SAND (SM); medium brown. moist. drills easy. No CLAY. orange-brown at 2 - -10 18/6 feet. 9.5-11 44 Þ 18/6 2616 Medium brown at 5 feet. 18.7 112.5 -', ': Dense. increased SILT, medium '.Þr.C?~~~Q.~~'y' .~~..~ .~ ,!~~~:... .., .. , '.. ... to - ': Dense fine to medium SANDY - ~15 18/6 : SILT (ML); with a trace of 14.5-16 43 2016 :CLAY. medium brown. moist. 2316 '~~i.I,I~.~,a~y,.",.,..".."".,..".,.".,.,." Dense fine to coarse SIt TV SAND (SM); medium brown. moist. drills easy. - ~20 Bottom of Boring - ~25 - - -30 J ¡ 1 , . I I . , ! I I ¡ S : r - j This information pertains only to this boring end should not be interpreted 8S being indicitive of the site. Krazan and Associates Figure A-11 PAGE 1 of 1 Krazan and Associates unlLL nULE: L.VU BORING NO.: B12 PROJECT: Prop. USPS Main Post Office - Encinitas CLIENT: URS Greiner I LOCATION: Garden View Rd./EI Camino Real, Encinitas, CA DRILLER: Jim Watts ¡ DRILL RIG: CME45 ¡ DEPTH TO WATER> I I PROJECT NO.: 022-97030 DATE: 2/12/97 ELEVATION: LOGGED BY: Dave Jarosz INITIAL: AT COMPLETION: DEPTH DETAIL SOIL SYMBOLS. SAMPLERS AND TEST DATA Description Water . Dry PENETRATION TEST Content Density CUR V E % pet DEPTH N ELEVATIONI WELL 18/6 15/6 1716 - ................................................... Very loose fine to coarse SILTY SAND (SM); medium brown, moist. drills easy. Medium dense. orange-brown- white at 2-1/2 feet. 10 30 so ........0 f- 1.5-3 32 ~ I / ~ 5.6 105.3 --5 - 15/6 816 916 4.5.6 17 Orange-brown at 5 feet. Increased SILT at 10 feet. 6.3 105.8 - --10 Less SILT, medium brown at 14 feet. 1916 10/6 12/6 9.5-11 22 t 15.1 110.6 --15 f / --20 Bottom of Boring --25 -- --30 This information pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indicitive of the site. Figure A-12 PAGE 1 of 1 Krazan and Associates Krazan and Associates Consolidation Test Date 2117/97 Soil Classification SM 0.1 0 ~I ~r--.. ~ '~ Load in Kips per Square Foot 10 100 r , % Consolidation @ 2 Ksf : 2.4 % I Iii Iii i I ¡ I I I I ; I I II 2 I ~~I c .2 ,. :sæ õ '" S 3 u - c ., 1.1 ~ ., Q. . I \ \ ~ \ 4 5 , ' ~ , ~ , , I ¡ V ".,1, \ r "l 6 Krazan Testing Laboratory Consolidation Test Date 2117/97 Soil Classification SM 0.1 0 ~'rn'II'1 I I I I'" ~~I~ I ~d in Kips per Square Foot 10 100 % Consolidation @ 2 Ksf: 2.9% III I ! ! I 2 . ' I 3 5 r-. , , , , , I ì' , \ I\~ \ . I c .5! ¡¡ :E C 011 5 4 (,) ë u t, .. u Q, 7 1"'I'",l \ I \ \ 6 , , , , ~ . , 8 Krazan Testing Laboratory Shear StrenQth DiaQram (Direct Shearl ASTM D. 3080 I AASHTO T - 236 Soil T e SM. Date 2117/97 3.00 I . I I I ; Cohesion . 0.1 Ksf I I . I " I i Angle of Internal Friction: 34 0 , , 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 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 ¡ ' : I I I , , : I , I .- I I I , /' I I I I I I ! ./ I I I I I I Y 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 I : I , I I I ' " I I I I I I I , " -- , : I I , I /' , , , I I : I 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 V 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 : I ; I /' I I ' I ./' ! , I ..-o'! I I I I " I " I I I I /' I ' : I I , ' /' I I I , i /' I I I I , I J' ' 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 'Vi 2.00 ::.:: ¿ '5t c 1/ .. ¡¡; "- " ! iñ 1.00 0.00 0.0 1.0 Nannal Load, Ksf 2.0 3.0 Krazan Testing Laboratory '; 2.00 :.: - ÕI = ! ¡;; .. .. ! cñ Shear Stren~th Dia~ram (Direct Shear! ASTM D. 3080 I AASHTO T. 236 e ~ Shear StrenQth DiaQram (Direct Shearl ASTM D - 3080 I AASHTO T - 236 Soil T pe SM Date 2/17/97 3.00 I , I : I ! Cohesion . 0.1 Ksf , I I ' I I . I I I ¡ , ; I Angle of Internal Friction: 34 0 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 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 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' : I I I ./ I I 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 T I I L' I : I ; : I /" I I / I I I ! I I I 1/ I I ; I /' I I I "' I I I I /' I : : I I I I I /' I I ! I / ! I I V I I I ¡ ! I .7 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 V" ¡ I : , I /'i T I : i I I / , I 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 1 I , I , "1ft 2.00 :.:: '51 c ! ¡¡; ... ... !! ¡¡; 1.00 0.00 0.0 1.0 Normal LoiId. Ksf 2.0 3.0 Krazan Testing Laboratory Grain Size Analysis Sieve Openings In Inches 1-1/2 1 314 1/2 3/8 4 8 U.S. Standard Sieve Numbers 16 30 50 100 Hydrometer 200 r r r -.... I ""\ " " ' ~ \ \ ' \ \ , 00 90 80 70 C) z 6O¡;j (I) ~ SO... ffi «J~ W a. 30 20 10 100 10 1 Q1 Grain Size in Millimeters 0.01 0 0.001 Gravel Sand Silt or Clay Coarse I Ftne Coarse I .Medlum I Fine Project Name Project Number Soil Classification Sample Number Prop. USPS 2297030 Silty Sand (SM) 81 @ 2-3 ., Krazan Testing Laboratory ,.,~ , r r ~ r-- 4... ~ I " \ \ \. !\ \ \ \ " 11 Sieve Openings In Inches 1-1/2 1 314 112 318 100 10 '--' Gravel coarse~ Fine Project Name Project Number Soli Classification Sample Number Prop. USPS 2297030 Silly Sand (SM) 89 @ 2-3 Grain Size Analysis 4 u.S. Standard Sieve Numbers 16 30 50 100 200 Hydrometer 8 1 0.1 Grain Size in Millimeters 0.01 -I ~ilt or Clay I Sand Coarse l Medium I Fine ---'. .. 100 90 80 70 C) z 6Oii) :l IL SOt- i5 40~ W IL 30 20 10 0 0.001 Krazan Testing laboratory R - VALUE TEST ASTM D - 2844/ CAL 301 PROJECT NUMBER: PROJECT NAME: DATE: SAMPLE LOCATION/CURVE NUMBER: SOn.. CLASSIFICATION: 2297030 PROPOSED USPS 2/17/97 #1 (SM), F/M, 83.6% SAND -- " ¡ TEST A 8 C Percent Moisture @ Compaction. % 15.2 14.2 13.2 Drv Density. Ibm/cu.ft. 119.0 122.3 125.4 Exudation Pressure, psi 210 330 470 Expansion Pressure, (Dial Readina) 0 0 0 Expansion Pressure, pst 0 0 0 Resistance Value R 14 57 79 R Value at 300 PSI Exudation Pressure R Value by Expansion Pressure (TI =): 5 4.0 ! i ! I ¡I; I I 1/ i i I ! Iii I i [7¡ 3.6 I I V I I I I ! I I , I ¡ I I ! I : /i i 3.2 I I I ! ! I : V! I ;: i I I I ! I I VI I i .:2.6 ~ I!! i i ! \I! I I g I Ii! I i f¡ I ! I :Ë 2.4 ~ ¡ I I I I V I I I I ~2.0 I ! I i I /i ! : I I :: I! I ! II I ! i I ! c ~1.6 I i f /i i I I I I ~ I I f II I I I I ! I 81.2 I I I l I I i I I I i ill: I I I I I ! 0.6 ! : /i , : I I i I : I II I I I ì I ! I I 0.4 I VI I : I : ! I I I II I Iii I I I I /! ! ! ¡Ii I I , I 0.0 0 . ~ N ~ 0 ~ ~ N ~ 0 000 ~ ~ N N N M M ~ Cover Thickness Exp. Pressure,ft (47) Expansion Pressure Nil 300 PSI I I I I I I I I I 100 I I I I I I I I I 90 I I I I I I , I I I I I I I I ! so I I I I ~I ¡ I I I I I \ I I I 70 I I I I I ~ I I I I. I I I \' I i I I I I I I I It I I I 60 I I I ! I I I I I I I I I I ! I I 50~ > I I I I I I I 1\ I I I 40C:: I I I I I I I I I I I I 'I' I 30 i I I I I I i I I I I I ¡ I I I I I I I I 1 I 20 I I I I I I I I ! ! 10 I I I I ! I I I I I I I I I ¡ T I 0 § § 8 888 8 8 8 8 0 Exudation Pressure, PSI Krazan Testing Laboratory R - VALUE TEST ASTM D - 2844/ CAL 301 ,( PROJECT NUMBER: PROJECT NAME: DATE: SAMPLE LOCATION/CURVE NUMBER: SOIL CLASSIFICATION: 2297030 PROPOSED USPS 2/18/97 #12 (SM), w/CLAY, FIM, 85.2% SAND TEST A 8 C Percent Moisture Câ>. Comcaction, % 14.0 15.0 13.0 Drv Density, Ibm/cu.ft. 121.2 118.0 124.5 Exudation Pressure, psi 350 180 750 Expansion Pressure, (Dial Readina) 0 0 0 Expansion Pressure, pst 0 0 0 Resistance Value R 26 15 47 R Value at 300 PSI Exudation Pressure R Value by Expansion Pressure crl =}: 5 ( 4.0 Ii: I I I I I ~ I ¡ I I I i I I Jí 3.6 I I I I I I I I ) I I ! I I I I ., 71 3.2 I ' i I I I I 11 i :: I 1 I I I I I l/¡ I .:2.8 ~ I I I I I Ill! I ã I I ! I I 'l/¡ I I ~2.41111 11111 CI) ~ ! I I VI I , I lit 2.0 :: I ¡ ¡ I 1I I I I c ~1.6 ! I I I Ii I I i I ': I I I V I , I ¡ I II 81.2 I I I Ii ! I I I I I I I 1I I I I I I I I I !.Ií ! ! I ! I I 0.8 I 1I I I I I I I I I Ví I I , , 1 I 0,4 1I I I I I I I i I Vi i I I I I I I I I 0.0 0 ~ ~ N ~ 0 ~ ~ N ~ 0 000 ~ ~ N N N M M ~ Cover Thickness Exp. Pressure,ft (23) Expansion Pressure Nil 300 PSI 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 80 I I , Ii! I j ¡ 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 50! I ... I I I I I I ¡ ii > I ! 't I I I 40~ I I 'l I I I ¡ I I I I~ I I I I I I I I r. I I I 30 I I ¡ I ¡ ,I ¡ ¡ i I I I I i I f\ ¡ ! 20 I ¡ i I I I I -, I I I I 10 ¡ I I I I I I I 100 90 70 I I 60 0 § 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 0 Exudation Pressure, PSI Krazan Testing Laboratory R - VALUE TEST ASTM D. 2844 I CAL 301 PROJECT NUMBER: PROJECT NAME: DATE: SAMPLE LOCATION/CURVE NUMBER: SOIL CLAsSIFICATION: 2297030 PROPOSED USPS 2117/97 #3 (SM), w/CLAY, FIM, 79.4% SAND: TEST A B C Percent Moisture @. Compaction. % 15.8 16.8 14.7 Dry Density, Ibm/cu.ft. 117.4 113.9 121.7 Exudation Pressure, psi 440 210 650 Expansion Pressure, (Dial Readina) 0 0 0 Expansion Pressure, pst 0 0 0 Resistance Value R 53 12 76 R Value at 300 PSI Exudation Pressure R Value by Expansion Pressure (TI =): 5 4.0 I I ¡ I I I ! i ~ 3.6 I I I I ¡ I I /1 I I ¡ I I I V ! I I I I I I Ii 3.2 I ¡ ¡ ! I I I V = ¡ I I I I Ií .:2.8 ~ I! I I ¡ i / I I g I I I I I ¡ II I ~2.41111 VIII ~ I I I I Ii I I I ",2.0 :: I I ¡ I I I ¡ c: ¡1.6 I I I I VI I I I : ': I I 1I I! I I III 51.2 I I I Vi I I , I I ! I V I I i I I I I 0.8 I 1.11 I I I I ¡ I I II I I I I i I 1/1 I I ! I ! I i 0.4 V I ! I I I Ii! ! 0.0 Ii I ¡ I I ~ I I I I 0 ~ ~ N ~ 0 ~ ~ N ~ 0 00 0 ~ ~ N N N M M ~ Cover Thickness Exp. Pressure,ft (29) Expansion Pressure Nil 300 PSI 100 I I I I I i I ¡ I I I I I I I I ¡ I I I I I I I I I 90 ¡ I I , I I I j I I so I I l I I I ¡ I I I 1\ i I I ¡ I I 70 I I I ! \l I ¡ I i I , I I i 1\ I I I I i 60 I I I I 'I I I I I I T 1\ I T i i I I 1 ¡I' I ! I SO¡ > I I I I ¡ 1\: I i I . 40C:: I I I 1 i , I I I ¡ I I ! ' " i I i 30 ¡I! I I I i I ! Iii I ¡ \ ¡ I 20 I I I I I I ~ I I I i I I ¡ I I \ I ¡ 10 ¡ I I i I I I : I I i I I I ¡ I I I 0 § § 8 88 § 8 8 8 § 0 Exudation Pressure, PSI Krazan Testing Laboratory R - VALUE TEST ASTM D - 2844/ CAL 301 Project Number Project Name Date Sample Location/Curve Number: Soil Classification 2297030 PROPOSED USPS 2/17/97 #4 (SM), F/M, w/clay, 80.6% SAND TEST A 8 C Percent Moisture (â). Compaction. % 15.0 16.0 14.0 Dry Density, Ibm/cu.ft. 120.8 117.4 123.9 Exudation Pressure, psi 390 240 700 Expansion Pressure, (Dial Readino) 0 0 0 Expansion Pressure, pst 0 0 0 Resistance Value R 35 15 62 , 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 r\ I i ! I I \ I I , I I I ¡ I \! ¡ I 40C: I I I I \ I I I! I I ,\ I I ! i I I ~ I , 30 ¡ I I i I \ i I I I I I I '- I I 20 I I I I , I i I I I I I I 10 0.0 ! I I I I I I c ~ ~ N ø c ~ ~ N ~ C 0 000 ~ ~ N N N M M ~ § 8 8 8 8 8 8 888 c Cover Thickness Exp. Pressure,ft Exudation Pressure, PSI R Value at 300 PSI Exudation Pressure R Value by Expansion Pressure crl =): 5 4.0 ( I I I I I I I I 1I i I I I I I Ví I I I I I I I I , j I I i I I I I ! I Ii I i i ! ! I I V I I I I I I I I I I /1 I , I I I I I V I I I I , I I I I Vi I I I I I I I 1I I I I ' I Ii 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 V ! I I I ! I i I I 1I1 I I I I I I I I 1I I I ' I I I i I VI I I I I I I I I ! I II I I I I I I I Ii I I I I I I T 1I I I I I I I Ii I I , I I I I I I 3.6 3.2 :: .:2.8 GI ãi E 0 :E :2,4 ~ - CI') >. -: :2.0 1/1 GI c: "" :Ë 1.6 Þ- .. GI > <31.2 0.8 0.4 (23) Expansion Pressure Nil 300 PSI 100 , . I I , I I I I I , I , / I ! I I I 90 I ¡ I I I , I I 80 70 60 50! 'ii > . Krazan Testing Laboratory Appeadix B Page B.t APPENDIX B EARTHWORK SPECIFICATIONS GENERAL SCOPE OF WORK: These specifications and applicable plans pertain to and include all earthwork associated with the site rough grading, including but not limited to the furnishing of all labor, tools, and equipment necessary for site clearing and grubbing, stripping, preparation of foundation materials for receiving ñll, excavation, processing, placement and compaction of fill and backfill materials to the lines and grades shown on the project grading plans, and disposal of excess materials. PERFORMANCE: The Contractor shall be responsible for the satisfactory completion of all earthwork in accordance with the project plans and specifications. This work shall be inspected and tested by a representative ofKrazan and Associates, Inc., hereinafter known as the Soils Engineer and/or Testing Agency.. Attainment of design grades when achieved shall be certified to by the project Civil Engineer. Both the Soils Engineer and the Civil Engineer are the Owner's representatives. If the Contractor should wI to meet the technical or design requirements embodied in this document and on the applicable plans, he shall make the , necessary readjustments until all work is deemed satisfactory as determined by both the Soils Engineer and the Civil Engineer. No deviation from these specifications shall be made except upon written approval of the Soils Engineer, Civil Engineer or project Architect. No earthwork shall be performed without the physical presence or approval of the Soils Engineer. The Contractor shall notify the Soils Engineer at least two (2) working days prior to the commencement of any aspect of the site earthwork. . The Contractor agrees that he shall assume soil and complete responsibility for job site conditions during the course of construction of this project, including safety of all persons and property; that this requirement shall apply continuously and not be limited to normal working hours; and that the Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold the Owner and the Engineers harmless from any and all liability, real or alleged, in connection with the performance of work on this project, except for liability arising from the soil negligence of the Owner or the Engineers. TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS: All compacted materials shall be densified to a density not less that 90 per cent relative compaction based on ASTM Test Method D1557-78, UBC or CAL-2l6, as specified in the technical ponion of the Soil Engineer's report. The location and frequency of field density tests shall be as determined by the Soils Engineer. The results of these tests and compliance with these specifications shall be the basis upon which satisfactory completion of work will be judged by the Soils Engineer. SOILS AND FOUNDATION CONDITIONS: The Contractor is presumed to have visited the site and to have fanúliarized himselfwith existing site conditions and the contents of the data presented in the soil report. The Contractor shall make his own interpretation of the data contained in said report, and the Contractor shall not be relieved of liability under the contractor for any loss sustained as a result of any variance between conditions indicated by or deduced from said report and the actual conditions encountered during the progress of the work. Krazan & Associates, Ine. Offices Serving The Wcstcm United States CI229'1IIX1.DOC AppeDdix B Page B.2 DUST CONTROL: The work includes dust ccmtrOl as required for the alleviation or prevention of any dust nuisance on or about the site or the borrow area., or off-site if caused by the Contractors operation either during the performance of the earthwork or resulting ftom the conditions in which the Co~r leaves the site. The Contractor shall assume all liability, including court costs of codefendants, for all claims related to dust or windblown materials attributable to his work. < \ SITE PREPARATION Site preparation shall consist of site clearing and grubbing and the preparations of foundation materials for receiving fill. CLEARING AND GRUBBING: The Contractor shall accept the site in this present condition and shall demolish and/or remove from the area of designated project, earthwork all structures, both surface and subsurface, trees, brush, roots, debris, organic matter, and all other matter detennined by the Soils Engineer to be deleterious. Such materials shall become the property of the Contractor and shall be removed from the site. Tree root systems in proposed building areas should be removed to a minimum depth of three (3.0) feet and to such a extent which would pennit removal of all roots larger than one (1) inch. Tree root removed in parking areas may be limited to the upper one and one-half (1-112) feet of the ground surface. Backfill or tree root excavation should not be pemútted until all exposed surfaces have been inspected and the Soils Engineer is present for the proper control of backfill placement and compaction. Burning in areas which are to receive fill materials shall not be pennitted. SUB GRADE PREPARATION: Surfaces to receive Engineered Fill, building or slab loads shall be prepared as outlined above, scarified to a depth of six (6) inches, moisture-<:onditioned as necessary, and compacted to 90 % relative compaction. Loose and/or areas of disturbed soils shall be moisture conditioned and compacted to 90% relative compaction. All ruts, hummocks, or other uneven surface features shall be removed by surface grading prior to placement of any fill material. All areas which are to receive fill materials shall be approved by the Soils Engineer prior to the placement of any of the fill material. EXCAVATION: All excavation shall be accomplished to the tolerance normally defined by the Civil Engineer as shown on the project grading plans. Allover excavation below the grades specified shall be backfilled at the Contractor's expense and shall be compacted in accordance with the applicable technical requirements. FILL AND BACKFILL MATERIAL: No material shall be moved or compacted without the presence of the Soils Engineer. Material from the required site excavation may be utilized for construction site fills provided prior approval is given by the Soils Engineer. All materials utilized for constructing site fills shall be free from vegetable or other deleterious matter as detennined by the Soils Engineer. PLACEMENT, SPREADING AND COMPACTION: The placement and spreading of approved fill materials and the processing and compaction of approved fill and native materials shall be the responsibility of the Contractor. However, compaction of fill materials by flooding, ponding, or jetting shall not be pennitted unless specifically approved by local code, as well as the Soils Engineer. Kruan & Associates, Inc. Offices SC1"'Îng The Western United States Im9"QJO.DOC ~ / ( . Appead.ix B Pale B.3 Both cut and fill shall be surface compacted to the satisfaction of the Soils Engineer prior to final acceptance. SEASONAL LIMITS: No fill material shall be placed, spread, or rolled while it is frozen or thawing or during unfavorable wet weather conditions. When the work is mtemJpted by heavy rains, fill operations shall not be resumed until the Soils Engineer indicates that the moisture content and density of previously placed fill are as specified. Krazan & Associates, Ine:. Offices Serving The Western United States O229'1O3O.DOC . I { \ ~ AppeDdix C Page C.! APPENDIX C PA VEMENT SPECIFICATIONS 1. DEFINITIONS - The term "pavement" shall include asphalt concrete surfacing, untreated aggregate base, and aggregate subbase. The term "subgrade" is that portion of the area on which surfacing, base, or subbase is to be placed. . The term "Standard Specifications": hereinafter referred to is the January 1991 Standard Specifications of the State of California, Department of Transportation, and the "Materials Manual" is the Materials Manual of Testing and control Procedures, State of California, Department of Public Works, Division of Highways. The term "relative compaction" refers to the field density expressed as a percentage of the maximum laboratory density as defined in the applicable tests outlined in the Materials Manual. 2. SCOPE OF WORK - This portion of the work shall include all labor, materials, tools and equipment necessary for and reasonable incidental to the completion of the pavement shown on the plans and as herein specified, except work specifically notes as "Work Not Included." 3. PREPARA nON OF THE SUBGRADE - The Contractor shall prepare the surface of the various subgrades receiving subsequent pavement courses to the lines, grades, and dimensions given on the plans. The upper six (6) inches of the soil subgrade beneath the pavement section shall be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90%. The finished subgrades shall be tested and approved by the Soils Engineer prior to the placement of additional pavement courses. 4. UNTREATED AGGREGATE BASE - The aggregate base course shall be spread and compacted on the prepared subgrade in conformity with the lines, grades, and dimensions shown on the plans. The aggregate base material shall conform to the requirements of Section 26 of the Standard Specifications for Class 2 material, 1-1/2 inches maximum size. The base course material shall be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 95%. The base material shall be spread and compacted in accordance with Section 26 of the Standard Specifications. The material shall be spread in layers not exceeding 6 inches and each layer of base course shall be tested and approved by the Soils Engineer prior to the placement of successive layers. 5. AGGREGATE BASE - The aggregate subbase shall be spread and compacted on the prepared subgrade in conformity with the lines, grades, and dimensions shown on the plans. The aggregate subbase material shall conform to the requirements of Section 25 of the Standard Specifications for Class 2 material. The subbase material shall be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of95%, and it shall be spread and compacted in accordance ....ith Section 25 of the Standard Specifications. Each layer of subbase shall be tested and approved by the Soils Engineer prior to the placement of successive layers. 6. ASPHALTIC CONCRETE SURFACING - Asphaltic concrete surfacing shall consist of a mixture of mineral aggregate and paving grade asphalt, mixed at a central mixing plant and spread and compacted on a prepared base in conformity with the lines, grades, and dimensions shown on the plans. The viscosity grade of the asphalt shall be AR-4000. The mineral aggregate shall be Type B, !t2 inch maximum size, medium grading, and shall conform to the: requirements set forth in Section 39 of the Standard Specifications. The drying, proportioning, and mixing of the materials shall conform to Section 39. Krazan & Associates, loc. Offices Serving The Western United States o:mmo.DOC Appendix C Page ~.2 The prime coat, spreading and compacting equipment, and spreading and compacting the mixture shall confonn to the applicable chapters of Section 39, with the exception that no surlàcc course shall be placed when the atmospheric temperature is below 50 degrees F. The surfacing shall be rolled with a combination steel-wheel and pneumatic rollers, as described in Section 39-6. The surlàcc course shall be placed with an approved self- propelled mechanical spreading and finishing machine. 7. FOG SEAL COAT - The fog seal (mixing type asphaltic emulsion) shall confonn to and be applied in accordance with the requirements of Section 37. Krazan " Associates, Ine. Offices Serving The Western United States cmnno.DOC (f!1Krazarl & ASSOCIATES, INC. , . ... GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION March 26, 1997 KA Project No. 022-97030 Mr. Chris Stockton URS Greiner 100 California Street, Ste. #500 San Francisco, California 94111-4529 RE: Pavement Design Recommendations Proposed United States Postal Service (USPS) Main Post Office Garden View Road and El Camino Real Encinitas, California Dear Mr. Stockton: ( As requested, we are providing Pavement Design Recommendations for the above-referenced site. We have previously conducted a Geotechnical Engineering Investigation, dated February 21, 1997. Our report provided recommended pavement sections for traffic indexes ranging from 4 to 7.5. The pavement design recommendations presented herein are for traffic indexes ranging from 8 to 9.5. TrafficÏridex . .A~~häIt¡èêóh~ët~ ,: .: :!.~!~~~~~~~I"~ .. :':~j~~~d~dSill)2råd~.~'> 8 0 45" 13.5" 12.0" 85 90 5 0" 140" 150" 120" - -II .)..) 120" 95 5 5" 165" 120" . 95% c:ompaaion based on ASTM TI!St Method D1557 Dr C4L 216 .. 90~¡' c:ompaaion based on ASTM Test Method D1S57 Dr C4L 216 Offices Serving The Western United States 215 We:st Dakota Ave:nue:. Clovis CA 93612. (209) 348-2200. (800) 8~711 . Fax; (209) 348-2201 D22Ø7C30.L TR KA No. 022-97030 Page No.2 If you have any questions, or if we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our office at (209) 348-2200 or (800) 800-0711. RIFAAT S. SALEM Project Engineer RCE No. 52762 êC) Qo- ~ a-cL- DEAN ALEXANDER Geotechnical Engineer RGE No. 002051/RCE No. 34274 RSS/DA:rs Kraz.an & Associates, lne. Offices Serving The Western United States D2287D30.L TR CiI.Krnzar1 & ASSOCIAT :S. INC. , . . GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION : ,- ( April 23, 1997 KA Project No. 022-97030 Mr. Chris Stockton URS Greiner 100 California Street, Ste. #500 San Francisco, California 94111-4529 RE: Portland Cement Pavement Daip Recommendations Proposed United States Postal Service (USPS) Main Post Office Garden View Road and El Camino Real Encinitas, California Dear Mr. Stockton: ( At your request, we are providing additional Portland Cement Pavement Design Recommendations for the above-referenced site. Krazan & Associates, Inc. previously conducted a Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Report. dated February 21, 1997, (KA Project No. 022-97030). Our report provided recommended pavement sections for traffic indexes of 4.5 and 7.0. The pavement design recommendations presented herein are for a traffic indexes ranging from 8 to 9.5. :nnn:::::??:::::¡?rr::?:::::!:::::Y::::':r:::¡:(portJå#~:~t::::r::f::;::::::œ}imf¡:"::ÇlâSS!n:-::::::::::::ß::tt:: :.:.'..'" ... .. .:.... ...:..: Traffic Index ..::. Concrete"". ... ..: .:..:Aürei!atèBsSe'" :.. :... Como8cted Sub2radeu 80 8.5 7.0" 6.5" 12.0" 12.0" 7.5" 7.0" 9.0 9.5 8.0" 7.5" 12.0" 8.5" 8.0" 12.0" . 9j" COIfl HldíDII baed DII ASTM Tøt MdhtHl DJjj7 or C4L 216 .. 90~~ COmplldio1l bared 011 ASTM Tøt Mdhod DJjj7 0' C4L 216 ... MÙIÚnIun Comprøs;w:St,ellgth olJ,OOO psi <>mce. Servin¡ The Watem United State. 21S West Dakota Avenue. Clovis CA 93612. (209) 341-2200. (800) ~711 . Fax: (209) 348-2201 02287030.LT2 KA No. 022-87030 Page No.2 If you have any questions, or if we may be of further usistaDce. please do DOt hesitate to contact our office at (209) 348-2200 or (800) 800-0711. .'~ Respectfully submitted, KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. /! RlFAAT S. SALEM Project PJ\gjneer RCE No. 52762 ~t2~ - ~O ~.¿ DEAN ALEXANDER GeotecluticaI P.l\gincer ROE No. 00205 l/RCE No. 34274 - RSS/DA:kd Kruan & Aaaociatea, lac. Offices Serving The Western United States CJZ287O3O.L T2 . r . - 5(;- t/3! -n- _.._n______----------- ----------- --.---.--- ~-.--IT - - - -.------______n___¿O¡Z!-'il~ --------------------- ------ ---- --f1-:Jj)~-L4-~--~:Z. u_- - --- ---------------~- éd~ /4~-~~t-om~~ ---- -- - ---- *~¿\-r--t ó~~L~~rdJ~-- .. ~Lc2~-12~-~_-/DcL I P -;::;. b£) 1) :=:; !2~Q t -- ------- ~ ----.- lt5J-~---2--_L2 ~------______n___- -------------------------------_____---Le__u___=------- - -----7--- ---------------------- -- ---------- -- - --------______d_- -_U~-____--n- - --------- __e~_~--G~zßVÞ~ -W£tØ-~JH~J.Ç?J At-L)------- - ~ =n .--..=~~~- .-.~- ~=-:~:~~:~~Œ1.~ ~::&-~-~~¡;;&; ~-~ ,- ! ----- -------------------- ----------------- -----_-:Jóþ1-62?'_Z--LlÞ<» -t:j7J.q¿:I::;g-- ---- ------------ - -----n--------______n______----------------------------------___-_0-___-------------- ___0______----- ------ _0_--_._------ ---~- ~~P-r-i--&£:----f?~f~ep---l~~/clY{ p/¿ '- -------- ---- . _----0__- -- -------- ----- ------------ _--_--__n______-------------- --- ____on_un. --------------- -__-0_- - ----- _.___0--_-_- - - ---.-_u_-- -0 ---- --- ------ ---------------------------.--- ! no - ... - ----- - - - _o------_u --kGA~2~-J;2tEf!¡'4-._~___I..!-2.J_o~------------- ---. -__-0--- --__n___--_-.- --------------- ---------n---------¡Z_;¿-7-~/~___- =-~ t:> ~--------- - ----- - --_o_---------------------------~ok/-rz_n_~- ~--:=:=:;.--I-~~ø ------- - -- ----.-- ------------v-n----------- -___---_06______---------_____0 - -- - - -----------------_u -- ------------------- ----------- - --- --- ------- - n_t? :É;:th--CtfN--r-- -- ----------- __nn- -__n___----- ---- ----- - 0_-- --------- ----- - --no. -'_.---n-12(~1#4p::.--6? .:::; - --'!J~Çl--(/&----_._--------------- -(rOTAL ~ ~ t. L~~ó) v:= 77'oqY/-o~Q~ vêt] . ,r ~ ~.¡ [1 ':~ 11-67 ¡ . . ~ 180 10.000 168 8.000 EXAMPLE ( I) (2) (3) 0.42 inch.. (3.:1 '"'I 6. 156 6,000 6. 0.120 cIs 144 5,000 5. 4,000 ~. HW 6. 5. 132 0 ,.., 4. 3.000 (II 2.:1 8.8 5. 4. 120 (21 2.1 7.4 2,000 (31 2.2 7.7 4. 3. '0 in 'n' 3. 3. ;~. 1,000 I. 800 --- --- 84 /"' 2. 2:- 600 500 /" / 72 400 ~ tJ) IIJ ~ 1.5 :I: 1.5 u tJ) ~ a: IIJ 1.5 z ~ IIJ ê 54 ::I: ~ I- 0 a: // IIJ 100 ~ IIJ 48 ,/ ~ > 80 :I: ~ /' <t ::> / :I: ~ u /42 u 60 a.. 1.0 1.0 IIJ u. !!? 50 .t!1! SCALE ENTRANCE 0 0 0 1.0 40 D TYPE a: a:: 1IJ .9 IIJ 36 .... .9 .... 30 (I) Square .dQ' .ith <t IIJ h.ad.all ~ .9 ::I: 33 0 ~ <[ 20 (21 Graa.. .nd Wllh IIJ .8 0 h.ad.all :I: .8 30 .8 (31 Groo.. .nd 27 pro¡.etinQ 10 .7 .7 24 8 .7 6 To us. .eal. (2) or (3) proj.el 21 5 horizan,ally to seal. (I). Ih.n 4 u.. ...aIQhl in.lin.d lift. IhrouQh 0 ond Q scollS, or ".".. os .6 .6 3 ill.slra..d. .6 18 2 15 .5 .5 \,0 .5 12 HEADWATER DEPTH FOR CONCRETE PIPE CULVERTS WITH INLET CONTROL BUREAU OF PUal..lC ROAOS JAN 1963 1~ Jj ¡~ , t ; ~ . i :¡I ,\. q , ~ !,¡~. !,',':: ",; ,.~ : .0;;' j~. !¡: ;' L: ¡ i j. j J;jj ;~ .' .~ ll-70 " \: , , f t t: if ,'" i- :i' ," ',¡ ".. ;~i: ~~'" \ ':, m'~ ',' ',',' ~'.':,:;,'".:, ',"- ¡ .j~ "l~;' j $::~ v.;:h ~~ ¡~; Pi ~¡ :~ ':;-¡ ;\ 180- 10,000 ( I) 168 8,000 EXAMPLE 6,000 Oa36 inch.. (3.0 hol) 6. (2) 156 5,000 Q. 66 cis (3) 144 4,000 5. 6. 2. HW 3,000 0 (1001) 6. 5. II) 1.8 5.4 2.000 (2) 2.1 6.3 5. 4. (3) 2.2 6.6 108 3. 4. 00 in hot .', 96 \.000 3. 800 3. 84 600 2. !SOO 2. 2. (f) 300 ,../' â \oJ ,../' ~ :I: ,../ 1.5 0 :I: ~ 200 1I"'~"'/ \.5 60 (f) \.5 z ",toy 0:::- --> \oJ Õ 54 .... ,../' \oJ .... \oJ 100 /"" ~ 0::: C) 80/ ~ \oJ 48 0::: c > <I: / ...J :1> Z :;) /~ 60 1.0 1.0 0 42 50 :I: ~ / õ .... 0 40 a.. 1.0 ,../' \oJ 0::: C \oJ ~6 30 .!f!'! SCALE ENTRANCE 0::: .... TYPE \oJ \oJ D .... .9 ~ 33 <I: ~ 20 (I) Hlod.oll ~ .8 .8 c c 30 [2) "'i"rod 10 conform <I: :i \oJ .8 10 slopo ::I: U Q 27 10 (3) Projoclint a: .7 .7 « 8 Q z 24 .7 « 6 ¡ ... '" 5 To uoo Icoll (21 or (3) projlct 2\ 4 horilonflily 10 Icoll (I), thin .6 us. Ilrol,M inclinod li.o throu,1I .6 3 0 and Q Ical.., or ro.o... 01 .6 \8 illuslroted. 2 15 .5 1.0 .5 .12 HEADWATER DEPTH FOR C. M. PIPE CULVERTS WITH INLET CONTROL BUREAU OF PUBLIC ROADS JAN. 1963 / \t~ . .f' ~~E"'~~ tÇ!...;:,JlC/~ J <;<;; (£ (Ç' ¡} ( ~ k ttf!D Cc;>V11M'Efo/ r<, ..' , , GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INVEsTIGATION PROPOSED UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE (USPS) MAIN POST OFFICE ENCINlTAS, CALIFORNIA PROJECT No. 022-97030 FEBRUARY 21, 1997 Prepared for: MR. emus STOCKTON URS GREINER 100 CALIFORNIA STREET, STE. #500 SAN FRANCIScO, CAlIFORNIA 94111-4529 Prepared by: KRAzAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING DIVISION 215 WEST DAKOTA A VENUE CLOVIS, CALIFORNIA 93612 (209) 348-2200 --~ If - é.~ ,'-1. azarl & ASSOCIATES, INc. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION TESTING AND INSPECTION F~. '!!!., ~az~""" ~==l'il c::u...L &ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION February 21, 1997 Mr. Chris Stockton URS Greiner 100 California Street, Ste. #500 San Francisco, California 94111-4529 ." KA Project No. 022-~7030 Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Proposed United States Postal Service (USPS) Main Post Office Garden View Road and El Camino Real Encinitas, California RE: Dear Mr. Stockton: In accordance with your request, we have completed a Geotechnical Engineering Investigation for the above- referenced site. The results of our investigation are presented in the attached report. If you have any questions, or if we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our office at (209) 348-2200 or (800) 800-0711. DA:kd ) Respectfully submitted, KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ~eDn- ~~~ Dean Alexander Geotechnical Engineer RGE #002051/RCE #34274 Offices Serving The Westem United States 21S West Dakota Avenue. Clovis CA 93612. (209) 348-2200. (800) 8~711 . Fax: (209) 348-2201 ^^ . , \, ~~Krazan &ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION.................................................................................. ......................... ............! PURPOSE AND SCOPE... ........... ....... ............. .......... .......... .......... ...... ...... ...... ....... ......................! PROPOSED CONSTR.UCTION .......... ....... ...... ......... ....... ..... ....... .... .... ........ .............. ........... ......... 2 SII'E DESCRIPTION. ........... ........ .................. ........................... ....... ........ ............. ....... ...... ........2 GEOLOGIC SL II ING .. ............... ..... .................... ........................ ............. ............ .... .................2 FIELD AND LABORATORY ~'ES1'IGA nONS................................... .................................. ........3 SOIL PROFILE AND SUBStJRF ACE CONDITIONS..... ................ ........ .................... .........................3 GROUNDW A TER .............. ................................ ................................................... ....... ........... ...3 CONCLUSIONS AND REC Ol\ߌND A nONS................................... ............. ................. ....... ......... 4 Administrative Summary . .................. """" '" ..... ....... ""'" ..... ......... .... ....... ........ ... ........................ 4 Groundwater Influence on Structures/Construction....... ........................... ..... ...................... ......... ........ 4 Site Preparation ........ ........ ........... ............... ....... ............................... .... ... ....... ""'" ""'" ............5 Engineered Fill....... ................................................................................................. ........... ......6 Drainage and Landscaping ...........................................................................................................6 Utility Trench Backfill.................... .... ... .... ...... .... ..... ......... .................. ........ ....... .... .................... 7 Foundations......... ............................................................................. .................................. ..... 7 Floor Slabs and Exterior Flatwork........................................... """'" ..................;............. """ ........8 Lateral Earth Pressures and Retaining Walls ...................................................................................... 9 Slope Stability Analysis ...... ..... ................. .............. ........ ..;......... ................ ............. ............. .... 10 R- Value Test Results and Pavement Design...... ""'" ......................... "'" ........................ ....... ........... 10 Site Coefficient...... .......................................................... ............... .......................... .............. 11 Soil Cement Reactivity ............................ ........................ ...... ........... ..... .............. ...... ............... 11 Compacted Material Acceptance..... ....................................................... .......................... ............ 12 Testing and Inspection. ...................................................... .... ..... ..... ... .......... ........ .................... 12 Lß1IT A TIONS ................. ...... ....................... ..... ................... .......... ......... ......... ............... ....... 12 SITE PLAN............... ............................. .......................................... ....... ......... ........... ........... .................... 14 LOGS OF BORINGS (1 THRU 12).......................................................................................... Appendix A GENERAL EAR THW 0 RK SPE CIF! CA TI 0 NS ................................................................... Appendix B GENERAL PAVING SPECIFICA TIONS .............................................................................. Appendix C Offices Serving The Western United States 215 West Dakota Avenue. Clovis CA 93612. (209) 348-2200. (800) 80~711 . Fax: (209) 348-2201 -, , , ':\ ~:=IKrazaIl & ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION February 21, 1997 KA Project No. 022-97030 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INVESTIGATION PROPOSED UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICES (USPS) MAIN POST OmCE GARDEN VIEW ROAD AND EL CAMINO REAL ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA INTRODUcrrON This report presents the results of our Geot~chnical Engineering Investigation for the proposed United States Postal Services (USPS) Main Post Office, to be located in Encinitas, California. Discussions regarding site conditions are presented herein, together with conclusions and recommendations penaining to site preparation. Engineered Fill, utility trench backfill, drainage and landscaping, foundations, concrete floor slabs and exterior flatwork. retaining walls, slope stability, soil corrosivity, and pavements. A site plan showing the approximate boring locations is presented following the text of this report. A description of the field investigation. boring logs, and the boring log legend are presented in Appendix A Appendix A contains a description of laboratory testing phase of this study; along with laboratory test results. Appendices B and C contain guides to earthwork and pavement specifications. When conflicts in the text of the report occur with the general specifications in the appendices, the recommendations in the text of the report have precedence. PURPOSE AND SCOPE This investigation was cond'Jcted to evaluate the soil and groundwater conditions at the site, to make geotechnical engineering recommendations for use in design of specific construction elements, and to provide criteria for site preparation and Engineered Fill COnstruction. Our scope of services was outlined in our proposal, dated January 14, 1997, (KA Proposal No. PO06-97) and included the following: . A site reconnaissance by a member of our engineering staff to evaluate the surface conditions at the project site. . A field investigation consisting of drilling 12 borings, to depths ranging from approximately 20 to 40 feet, for evaluation of the subsurface conditions at the project site. Offices Servinl The Western United States 215 West Dakota Avenue. Clovis CA 93612. (209) 348-2200. (800) 8~711 . Fax: (209) 348-2201 CI22m3O.DOC KA No. 022-97030 Pace No.2 . Performing laboratory tests on representative soil samples obtained from the borings to evaluate the physical and index properties of the subsurface soils. Evaluation of the data obtained from the investigation and an engineering analysis to provide recommendations for use in the project design and preparation of construction specifications. . . Preparation of this report summarizing the results, conclusions, recommendations and findings of our investigation. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION We understand that design of the proposed development is currently underway, and structural load information and other final details pertaining to the structures are unavailable. On a preliminary basis, it is understood development will consist of a primary post office building, with associated parking for customers, carriers, and employees. The project will also include the construction of retaining walls along the south and west sides of the site; construction of Garden View Road along the north side of the site; and the construction of an underground drainage structure along the east side of the site. The building will be a single-story structure, with concrete slab-on-grade. F coring loads are anticipated to be light to moderate. On-site landscaping is also planned. In the event these structural or grading details are inconsistent with the final design criteria, the Soils Engineer should be notified so that we may update this writing as applicable. SITE DESCRIPTION The site is irregular in shape and encompasses approximately 5.63 acres. The site is located on the west side of El Camino Real, south of Garden View Road. in Encinitas, California. The site is predominantly surrounded by residential and commercial developments. ' According to the US Geologic Survey, 7.5 minute, California Topographic Quadrangle Map, the site occupies a portion of the north one-half of Section II, To\\'I1Ship 13 South. Range 4 West, San Bernardino Baseline and Meridian. Presently, the site is vacant. Several trees are located within the site. The majority of the site is covered by a medium dense weed growth, and the surface soils have a loose consistency. The site slopes northeast with approximately SO feet of relief across the site. GEOLOGIC SETTING The subject site is located west of the Peninsular Range Geomorphic Province. The Peninsular Range Geomorphic Province is characterized by northwest-trending mountain ranges separated by sub-parallel fault zones. The mountain ranges are underlain by basement rocks consisting of Jurassic metavolcanic and metasedimentary rock and Cretaceous igneous rock of the Southern California Batholith. Surface and near- surface deposits composed oflate Cretaceous, Tertiary, and Quaternary sediments flank the mountain ranged to the northeast and southwest. Krazan " Assoc:iàtes, IDe. Offices Serving The Western United States ='""!n !'VV" \ , ¿, CALIFORNIA DIVISION OF MINES AND GEOLOGY , , miles I g~;~?------I-----l ~;80L ~~b:FAULT I SISOlrou I' "OOOC I ':-..1. ' I A An........ . 1.., I Brawley ~ ,./'L__--1T--~-- 8V I-Villa 0 ~ '-~ " :C Cola-I - \ ~ ..1 'I CH CI-'and Hi. 0 .: . Is", S T , I ~'s S ! I CIJ Cucumongo . . i ';. 'I E Elsi- l ~ I ... ~ .--1.- I FS Fcwt Sage ... .:> I' ; ¡¡.,-,--- ~ 1..;-, FS, I G GCIriodt '. . ,~\ T [ " , .. ,...-) "--. 'I GV G- Valley and c-o.d ~ - - ~ 1'" . . ~ U .. 's \; to! Hayward . I ~- -' '\ I I I ----. . 0 \" - -. -I.,., ........ L' m,....- : ,'" L.,G,[I "-'UTT['~'SI';;;'1 ICF K_.FrontanclEdilOft . ... f. '-;CH-I ,J( -'Î-_- M M- : c r-.----~. ',~ ~- --1 MA M- ~ 0 ,~'::""O'" ~ ~.( ,,~/' t. I NI Newport- ngIewood . ~ ~' +.. \ ~ 4 \:.~. 1+ '.;:. r-~ . OV OW8ft1 Volley r - .;:.¡".. - ......... '-' 0 R R-"" Hill ,.. ""\ . .. .' 0, -7"-- S - ~A I ,'0 ( . . / 00". , ,,} RH Rogers Creek-Healdshurv ~ø+~, s \ ~ ~ .7;1. t~ -,-'1...", \"- RM Red Mtn. DJ'- ¡"""-ol ¿ "'Moi...-~ ~ J , SA S- Andreal ~'\,",,: \ .... ?. .~""r '-' y , \P~.. ....'...+ ~~ 04\.'" ." SF SOft Femando ~ ' ;Gy¡;r-- ! r ....' I .. \. '-..., ~ " SG San Gr.;orio .. ~,:> t. ',¡" )ø , SJ S J . '+ 0" ~ 0 \. 1" ... +, on aantD . c:'...\ ff. : ~~~o.."..-_./ - ø '" SH SupentitionHiIIl ~'. ""'CISCO '.../", ,," ~ .,..~' V \l8fttura 0 I.."~' ...'...-"\ ,80, , . ~¥..", - 'II'" J -~ WW Wh,teWoH ';. 3., C' ..,+ r 0 \ ' J' . , " W Whittier SG'" +.>., \.~' ..t.\....--~ ""~,, ~~ ", ~"..... . ". +\. ,,\ ,..0,- \ OV , /' I -\ ~ , ',--< '-'-.. 0 - + ' c . (' . \." r-r- Þ " 0 ' +, '\ ",4'- \ ø , s '\: '0. ~ J-"""l, '\ " "'", " .. f T U ~ . ~ t \ " - .. , 10 I \ " "' o SA ,/.,+ J... ~- ---~---~ --- -- ----- T " '" , KF G "" '3 ).. 0.'3 BV a ! "'l.. I " "0 ' - ,-~ II ') ~'..........." - J S ." :'"! .. I . .. 0 I II 0 \, sa'" TA ~ -----\ \ I t" ... ,þ " .. .., V . " D . 50 100 ~~_-..J - Faults zoned tnrougn Januaf\¡f 1. 1980. for wnicn official ma!)s are available. NOTE: Other flullS may be zœed ill the fut\ft. lAd some øt the wsUnc zones may be rnised when ....rnnted by new fault clata. Faults in California zOMd for special studi.s under the Alquilt-Priola Special Studies Zon.1 Act of 1972. KA No. 022-97030 Page No.' 3 There are no active fault traced in the project vicinity. Accordingly, the project area is not withm an Earthquake Fault Zone (Special Studies Zone) and will not require special site investigation by an Engineering Geologist. FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS SubsurDce soil conditions were explored by drilling 12 borings, to depths ranging from approximately 20 to 40 feet below existing site grade (BSG), using a truck-mounted drill rig. In addition, 4 bulk subgrade soil samples were obtained from the pavement area for laboratory R-value testing. The approximate boring sample locations are shown on Figure No.1. During drilling operations, penetration tests were performed at regular intervals to evaluate the soil consistency, obtain information regarding the engineering properties of the subsoils, and to retain soil samples for laboratory testing. The soils encountered were continuously examined and visually classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System. A more detailed description of the field investigation is presented in Appendix A. (' ~ , Laboratory tests were performed on selected soil samples to evaluate their physical characteristics and engineering properties. The laboratory testing program was formulated with emphasis on the evaluation of natural moisture, density, gradation, shear strength, consolidation potential, and moisture-density relationships of the materials encountered. In addition, chemica! .te5qwere RCrfon:m:d to evaluate the corrosivity of the soils to buried concrete and metal.-D~aÚ;-~fthe laboratory test program and' the results'~'test are ."..y'i;iÛnmarized in Appendix A. This information, along with the field observations, was used to prepare the final boring logs in Appendix A. í~ I; '~) ~) ~ .X SOIL PROf1LE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS / Based on our findings, the subsurface conditions encountered appear typical of those found in this geologic region of the site. The upper soils within the site consisted of 6 to 12 inches of loose to very loose silty sand. These soils are disturbed, have low strength characteristics, and are highly compressible when saturated. Beneath the loose to very loose surface soils, 2 to 6 feet of loose to medium dense silty sand was encountered. Field and laboratory tests suggest that these soils are moderately strong and slightly compressible. Penetration resistance ranged from 10 to 50 blows per foot. Dry densities ranged from 97 to 114 pc£. Representative soil samples consolidated 2~ to 3 percent under a 2 ksf load when saturated. Representative soil samples had angles of internal friction of 33 and 34 degrees. Below 3 to 7 feet, predominantly silty s:md, silty sand/sand, or sand were encountered. These soils had similar strength characteristics as the upper soils and extended to the tennination depth of our borings. For additional information about the soils encountered, please refer to the logs of borings in Appendix A. GROUNDWATER Test boring locations were checked for the presence of groundwater during and immediately following the drilling operations. Free groundv.'ater was encountered at 11 to 23~ feet below sumce grade. Krazan & AJlociates, Ine. Offices Serving The Western United States -~ , , , ~\ KA No. 022-97030 Page No.4 It should be recognized that water table elevations may fluctuate with time, being dependent upon seasonal precipitation, irrigation, land use, and climatic conditions as well as other factors. Therefore, water level observations at the time of the field investigation may vcuy from those encountered during the construction phase of the project. The evaluation of such fl1ctors is beyond the scope of this repon. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDA nONS Based on the findings of our field and laboratory investigations, along with previous geotechnical experience in the project area, the following is a summary of our evaluations, conclusions and recommendations. Administrative Summarv In brief: the subject site and soil conditions, with the exception of the loose surface soils and the modeIõlte slope, appear to be conducive to the development of the project. The majority of the site is covered by a modcIõlte weed growth and the surface soils have a loose consistency. These soils are disturbed, ~ve low strenjth ~~cs, and arc highly compressible when saturated. Accordingly, it is recommended that the surface soils be recompacted. This compaction effon should Stabilize the surftce soils and locate any unsuitable or pliant areas not found during our field investigation. The site is located on a sloping ground. It is recommended that the proposed cut and fill slopes be constructed to 2 horizontal to 1 vertical. In lieu of these slopes, a retaining wall may be used. Cut and fill slopes for the building pad should not exceed 2 horizontal to 1 vertical. Cut and fill slopes may be revised as recommended by the Soils Engineer upon his review of a more definitive site plan. Sandy soil conditions were encountered throughout the site. These cohesionless soils have a tendency to cave in trench excavations. Shoring or sloping back trench sidewalls may be required within these sandy soils. After completion of the recommended site preparation, the site should be suitable for shallow footing support. The proposed structure footings may be designed utilizing an allowable bearing pressure of 2,500 psi for dead- plus-live loads. As an alternative, the allowable bearing pressure for a shallow foundation system may be increased to 4,000 psf for dead-plus-live loads, provided that the structurc footings are supported by 2 feet of Engineered Fill. Footings should have a minimum embedment of 18 inches. Groundwater Influence on Structures/Construction During our field investigation, groundwater was encountered at depths ranging from 11 to 23 Yz feet below site grade. If groundwater is encountered, our firm should be consulted prior to de-watering the site. Installation of a standpipe piezometer is suggested prior to construction, should groundwater levels be a concern. One aspect in the preparation of this property for construction is the detennination of areas of possible seasonal springs and the placement of subsurftce drainage systems to intercept groundwater away from the planned area of construction. It is recommended that the site be observed by a member of our engineering staff following completion of the site clearing and stripping, to evaluate the need for sub-drainage systems. Evaluation should Krazan " Associates, Ine. Offices Serving !he Western United States II:!29XDII.DOC KA Nd. 022-970: Pap No. also be perbmed following compJetion of rough site gmdiag. This is particularly inIpona¡,r for use I evaJuaIiDg the needJDr sub-drains JDr pa=. This office should beCODtacted rosanIing any IiII1ue seepag on the property so appropriate mitigation measures can be recommended. In addition to ~ Jeve1, if oarthworlc is pedòrmcd during or SOOI1 after periods of Pn:cipitazioo. tJ¡, subgnde soils may become saturated, pump, or DOt respcmd to deusificatioo tecImiques. Typical remedial measuœs include disciDg and aerating the soil during dry weather; mixing the soil with dryer mareriaIs; RmoviDg ODd replaciag !be soil with an approved fill material; or mixiDg !be soil with an approved lime or -- product Our firm should be consulted prior to implementing remedial measures to observe !be WlStabIe subgrade conditions and provide appropriate recommendations. , .. Site PreDaration General site clearing should include removal of concme, vegetation, existing Utilities, structures including foundalions, basement walls and tJoors, exisIing stockpiled soiJ. trees and associated root systems, rubble, rubbish and Illy loose and/or saturated materials. Site strippiDg should c:xteDd to a minimum depth of two to four iacbes, or until all organics in ""= of 3 p= by volume am 1'Cmovcd. Deeper stripping may b. requim! in localized areas. These mareriaJs will DOt be suitable for use as Ensin=ed Fill. However, stripped topsoil may be stockpiled and reused in landscape or non-StrUctural areas. After stripping operations, the exposed subgzade in building pad, exterior fIatworlc. and paVement areas sbouJd be """"vated/scariñed to a depth of at least 12 inches, worlccd untiJ unifonn and free ftom IarBe clods, moisture-conditioned as necessary, and recompacted to a minimum of 90 Percent of maximum density based on ASTM Test Method D1557. It is rccommeadcd that slopes be construCted 2 horizontaJ to I vertical. In lieu of the recommended slope, a retaining waIl may be used. 1£ a higher bearing Pressure is utilized, the plUpOscd structure foundation should be supported by 2 feet of En8in=:d Fill. Therefore, if the footings... 18 inches deep, the total depth of re-<:ompaction within the proposed footing area and 3 feet beyond should be 3 Yz feet. Several trees were encountered throughout the site. If not utilized for the Proposed development, these trees should b. removed. Tree remova¡ oper¡ujoos should include roots - than I inch in diameter. Resuhing excavations should be bacldillcd with Ensin=rcd Fill and 1'C-COmpacted to a minimum of 90 Percent of maximum density based on ASTM Test Method D1557. The upper soils, during - winter months, become very moist due to the absorption cl=u:teristics of the soil. Earthwork 0J><rati- pertònned during winter months may =unter very moist unstable soils, which may require removal to grade a stable building foundation. Project site wioterization consisting of Placement of aggregate base and Protecting exposed soils during the constructioo phase should be performed. Exc.vations. depn:ssioJls. or soft and pliant areas extending beJow Planned finished subgrade levels sbould be cleaned to finn, undisturbed soil and backfilled with Enginccrcd Fill. Any buried struCtUres C1COUntered during construction should be properly removed and bacldiJled. In g=r:ù, any septic tanks, debris pits, cesspools, or Krazan &: Allodates, Ine. Offices Scning The Western United States , , , , ,\ K.A No. 022-97030 Page No.6 similar structures should be entirely removed. Concrete footings should be removed to an equivalent depth of at least 3 feet below proposed footing elevations or as recommended by the Soils Engineer. Any other buried structureS should be removed in accordance with the recommendations of the Soils Engineer. Resulting excavations should be backfilled with Engineered Fill. A representative of our firm should be present during all site clearing and. grading operations to test and observe earthwork construction. This testing and observation is an integral part of our service as acceptance of earthwork construction is dependent upon compaction of the material and the stability of the material. The Soils Engineer may reject any material that does not meet compaction and stability requirements. Further recommendations of this report are predicated upon the assumption that earthwork construction will conform to recommendations set forth in this section and the Engineered Fill section. En~neered Fill The organic-free, on-site, native soils are predominantly silty sand, silty sand/sand, and sand. These soils are suitable for reuse as non-expansive Engineered Fill. The preferred materials specified for Engineered Fill are suitable for most applications with the exception of e":posure to erosion. Project site winterization and protection of exposed soils during the construction phase should be the sole responsibility of the Contractor, since he has complete control of the project site at that time. Imported fill material should be predominantly non-expansive granular material with a plasticity index less than 10 and a UBC B.:pansion Index less than 15. Imported fill should be free from rocks and lumps greater than 4 inches in diameter. All import fill material should be submitted for approval to the Soils Engineer at least 48 hours prior to delivery to the site. Fill soils should be placed in lifts approximately 6 inches thick, moisture-conditioned as necessary and compacted to achieve at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D1557. Additional lifts should not be placed if the previous lift did not meet the required dry density or if soil conditions are not stable. Draina!!e and Landsc8oin!! Within building and paved areas, cut and fill slopes should not exceed 2 horizontal to I venica1. The ground surface should slope away from building pad and pavement areas toward appropriate drop inlets or other surface drainage devices. It is recommended that adjacent exterior grades be sloped a mînimum of 2 percent for a minÌmum distance of 5 feet away from structures. Subgrade soils in pavement areas should be sloped a minimum of 1 percent and drainage gradients maintained to carry all surface water to collection facilities and off site. These grades should be maintained for the life of the project. Grade the site to prevent water/run-offflow over the face of cut and fill slopes. To accomplish this, use asphalt berms, brow ditches, or other measures to intercept and slowly re-direct flow. Plant all disturbed areas with erosion-resistant vegetation suited to the area. As an alternative, jutte netting or geotextile erosion control mats may be considered for control of erosion. Slopes should be inspected periodically for erosion and repaired Krazan " Auociates, Ine. Offices Serving The Western United States Cl229'llDDJ:IOC KA No. 022-97030 Page No.7> , immediately if detected. To control surface drainage and debris, paved dr3inage areas should be provided on all cut and fin slopes that are 30 feet of greater in height. The drainage terraceS should be a minimum of 6 feet in width and placed at intervals no greater than 20 feet. Where only one drainage terraee is necessary, it should be located at mid-height of the slope. Brow ditches and drainage terraces should be cleaned before the start of each rainy season., and if necessary, after each rainstorm. Utilitv Trench Backfill Utility trenches should be excavated according to accepted engineering practice following OSHA (Occupational Safcry and Health Administration) standards by a conttactor experienced in such work. The responsibility for the safety of open trenches should be borne by the contractor. Traffic and vibration adjacent to trench walls should be minimized and cyclic wetting and drying of excavation side slopes should be avoided. Depending upon the location and depth of some utility trenches, groundwater flow into open excavations could be C>..-perienced, especially during or shonly following periods of precipitation. Sandy soil conditions were encountered throughout the site. These conesionless soils have a tendency to cave in trench wall excavations. Shoring or sloping back trench sidewalls may be required within these sandy soils. Utility trench backfill placed in or adjacent to buildings and exterior slabs should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density (ASTM D1557). The upper two feet of the utility trench backfill placed in pavement areas should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density (ASTM D1S57). Pipe bedding should be in accordance váth pipe manufacturer's recommendations. The contractor is responsible for removing all water sensitive settlement from the trench regardless of the backfill location and compaction requirements. The contractor should use appropriate equipment and methods to avoid damage to the utilities and/or structures during fill placement and compaction. Foundations The proposed structures may be supported on a shallow foundation system bearing on undisturbed native soil or on Engineered Fill. Spread and continuous footings can be designed for the following maximum allowable soil bearing pressures: .: :Ht:t:";:::¡EY:jEj::;¡:1Y:Mj'MU j' LO äd:::I:::'E:.:.':\::::):mm:E:EEE:EH:( I )):::Allowåble::L'öadiiïi> t'E? Dead Load Only 1 ,875 psf Dead-Plus-Live Load 2,500 psf Total Load, including wind or selsrmc loads 3 ,325 psf Krazan &: Associates, IDe. Offices Serving The Western United States 0%29'1IIn0.DOC , , . , ,\ KA No. 022-97030 Page No.8 As an altemarive, a higher bearing pressure may be used, provided that the proposed structures arc supported by 2 feet of Engineered Fill. Spreading continuous footings, supported by 2 feet of Engineered Fill, can be designed for the following maximum allowable soil bearing pressures: . :jjn.jj:jh~.:)j.E:j::.~njt:j:~::i;:~):~i)::Lååd jtjEjjjj.{j:,:::::::~:jMiNEj,¡j}ŒjW %¥{AUôw å ble:Lôåd m 2.~MjjH Dead Load Only 3 ,000 psf Dead-Plus-Live Load 4,000 psi Total Load, including \\ind or seIsmIC loads 5,334 psf The footings should have a minimum depth of 18 inches below pad subgrade (soil grade) or adjacent e>..-œrior grade, .which~er is lower. Footings should have a minimum width of 12 inches regardless of load. The total settlement is not e>..-pected to exceed 1 inch. Differential settlement should be less than Y% inch. Most of the settlement is expected to occur during construction as the loads arc applied. However, additional post- construction settlement may occur if the foundation soils arc flooded or saturated. Resistance to lateral footing displacement can be computed using an allowable friction factor of 0.4, acting between the base of foundations and the supporting subgrade. Lateral resistance for footings can alternatively be developed using an allowable equivalent fluid passive pressure of 350 pounds per cubic foot acting against the appropriate vertical footing faces. The frictional and passive resistance of the soil may be combined without reduction in determining the total lateral resistance. A one-third increase in the above value may be used for short duration, wind or seismic loads. FJoor Slabs and Exterior FJatwork Slab-on-grade construction should be appropriate for this project. Slab-on-grade construction should have a moisture barrier incorporated into the floor slab design. Interior slabs-on-grade should have at least 2 inches of clean free-draining concrete sand placed below the floor slab. The sand should conform to ASTM C33 requirements for fine aggregate. An impervious membrane (vapor barrier) should be placed under the 2 inches of sand. This system of 2 inches of sand and a vapor barrier should be underlain by 'an additional 2 inches of clean concrete sand to prevent capillary moisture rise. Prior to pouring concrete, the sand should be thoroughly consolidated. The exterior slabs should be poured separately in order to act independently of the walls and foundation system. All fills required to bring the building pads to grade should be Engineered Fills. Kruan " AJlociat~ Inc. Offices Serving The Western United States 1I22nI3D.DOC KA No. 022-97030 . Pale No.9' Lateral Earth Pressures and Retaininl! Walls Walls retaining horizontal bacldill, and capable of deflecting a minimum of 0~1 percent of its height at the top, may be designed using an equivalent fluid active pressure of 32 pounds per square foot per foot of depth. Walls retaining backfiI1 material, sloped 2 horizontal to 1 vertical, may be designed using an equivalent fluid active pressure of 46 pounds per square foot per foot of depth. Walls retaining horizontal backfill and incapable of this deflection or are fully constrained walls against deflection may be designed for an equivalent fluid at-rest pressure of 56 pounds per square foot per foot of depth. Walls retaining sloped backfill and incapable of this deflection or are fully constrained walls against deflection may be designed for an equivalent fluid at-rest pressure of 80 pounds per square foot per foot of depth. Expansive soils should not be used for backfill against walls. The wedge of non-expansive backfill material should extend from the bottom of each retaining wall outward and upward at a slope of 2:1, horizontal to vertical, or flatter. The stated lateral earth pressures do not include the effectS of hydrostatic water pressures generated by infilttating surface water that may. accumulate behind the retaining walls; or loads imposed by construction equipment, foundations or roadways. During gradiIig and' backfilling operations adjacent to any walls, heavy equipment should not be allowed to operate within a lateral distance of 5 feet from the wall, or within a lateral distance equal to the wall height, whichever is greater, to avoid developing excessive lateral pressures. Within this zone, only hand operated equipment ("whackers", vibratory plates, or pneumatic compactors) should be used to compact the backfill soils. Retaining and/or below grade walls should be drained with either perforated pipe encased in free draining gravel or a pre-fabricated drainage system. The gravel zone should have a minimum width of 12 inches wide and should extend upward to within 12 inches of the top of the wall. The upper 12 inches of backfill should consist of native soils, concrete, asphalt-concrete or other suitable backfill to minimize surface drainage into the waIl drain system. The aggregate should conform to Class n permeable materials graded in accordance with Section 68-1.025 of the CalTrans Standard Specifications (January 1988). Pre-fabricated drainage syStemS, such as Miradrain, Enkadrain or an equivalent substitute, are acceptable alternatives in lieu of gravel provided they are installed in accordance with the manufactUrers recommendations. If a pre-fabricated drainage system is proposed, our firm should review the system for final acceptance prior to installation. Drainage pipes should be placed with perforations down and should discharge in a non-erosive manner away from foundations and other improvements. The pipes should be placed no higher than six inches above the heel of the wall in the center line of the drainage blanket and should have a minimum diameter of four inches. Collector pipes may be either slotted or perforated. Slots should be no wider than lI8-inch, while perforations should be no more than lI4-inch in diameter. If retaining walls are less than 6 feet in height, the perforated pipe may be omitted in lieu of weep holes on 4 feet maximum spacing. The weep holes should consist of 4 inch in diameter holes (concrete walls) or unmortared head joints (masonry walls) and not be higher than 18 inches above the lowest adjacent grade. Two eight-inch square overlapping patches of geotextile fabric (confonning to Section 88-1.03 of the CalTrans Standard Specifications for "edge drains") should be affixed to the rear wall opening of each weep hole to retard soil piping. Krazan " Auociates, Ine. Offices Serving The Western United States cm9'1IDD.DOC , , , . KA No. 022-97030 Page No. 10 SlaDe StabilitY Analvsis Side slopes of 2 horizontal to 1 vertical are anticipated behind the retaining walls. The proposed slopes were evaluated for slope stability. The stability of the slopes were analyzed.. Slope stability analysis performed on the proposed slope had a minimum factor of safety of 1.5. The slope stability analysis indicates that a major slope stability failure is not anticipated. It is therefore recommended that the side slope be 2 horizontal to 1 vertical or flatter. R-Value Test Results and Pavement Desi2ll Four R-Value samples were obtained from the project site at the location shown on the attached site plan. The samples were tested in accordance with the State of California Materials Manual Test Designation 30l. Results of the test are as follows: :Sämrile::: nn~~:DèDthtn: !:~~~!:j:~i~(:::: ::¡~!:::::: :::::¡~:~::~~~ :Deš ë Ii I') tíônm~:nj::: ~:~::::: :~'¡::!!nw:~:~:~j::: !~~ :y¡n::Rl;¡Vàlue :åfEåÛJùñ rii:imT{~:: 1 12-18" Silty Sand (SM) 47 2 12-1 8" Silty Sand with Clay (SM) 23 3 12-18" Silty Sand with Clay (SM) 29 4 12-18" Silty Sand with Clay (SM) 23 These test results are low to moderate and indicate fair sub grade support characteristics under dynamic traffic loads. The following table shows the recommended pavement sections for various traffic indexes. /6 . .. . ' . ... . .... .. . ..........,.........................,......"... ;~¡!!I:i:~!~!~~~!¡èW~¡~~I:I:¡¡!t: ':'¡¡;!!'¡'I~~I~!I~;lflll'iJ tr¡! I !!rlrl!~~.l~ ~~~ ~~! ~~'~III II .... ............. '.. ........... . .::.I:i¡~:i':~;iRi~¡"!!ã!¡:!tl:III:¡ 4 0 2 .5 " 5 .5 " 1 2 0" r- l I ¡U 4 .5 2 .5 " 6 .5 " 1 2 0" r? 5 0 2.5 " 8 0" 12. 0" 5 .5 3 0" 8 .5 " 1 2.0" 6. 0 3 0 " 1 0 0" 1 2 0" 6 .5 3 .5 " 1 0 .5 " 12.0" Wl ./ 7.0 4 .0 " 1 1 .5 " 1 2 0" 7 .5 4 0" 1 3 0" 1 2 .0" . 95% compactIon based on ASTM Tat Method D1557 Dr C4L 216 .. 90% compa.ction based on ASTM Tat Method D1SS7 Dr C4L 216 Krazan " Associates, Ine. Offices Serving The Westen United States annDII.DOC leA No. 022-97030 . Pap No. 11' If traffic indexes are not available, an estimated (typical value) index of 4.5 may be used for light automobile traffic, and an index of7.0 may be used for light truck traffic. The following recommendations are for light-duty and heavy-duty Portland Cement Concrete pavement sections. fl¡l,i~~~I!~~~I'ljll 11!'I;:~~~¡:f¡ i:¡¡¡I¡¡:I~!~?~~!~~jml!II'lt ¡1'§ï~'I.~!~~;~jNrIDW¡¡¡ 4.5 5 .0" 4. 0" 12. 0" PORTLAND CEMENT PAVEMENT LIGHT DUTY ----,. HEA VY DUTY '.:'I,!.~J~æ~I!~~~II!~I'Ii!¡lr[~i:1~~~1¡III' :¡ ¡¡ll¡¡!I!~l¡:~¡¡:¡!~':~i~~J~I~¡li.¡¡; .¡II¡~~!'¡::i'!!,¡~~t::.:f~J~~~:¡1 7.0 6.5" 12.0" ~' /J;{?(/V . 9S" compøaioll based 011 or C4L 216 .. 90~~ compøaioll based ollASTM DlSS7 or C4L 216 ...Mininuun compressive strength of JOOO psi -t</ ~ VJtZ( 7 ~I\ Oé- S-cJ ) Site Coefficient The site coefficient, per Table 16-1, California Building Code, is based upon the site soil conditions. It is our opinion that a site coefficient of soil type S2 (S factor = 1.2) is approoriate for building design at this site. Soil Cement Reactivitv Excessive sulfate in either the soil or native water may result in an adverse reaction between the cement in concrete (or stucco) and the soil. HUDIFHA and UBC have developed criteria for evaluation of sulfate levels and how they relate to cement reactivity with soil and/or water, Soil samples were obtained from the site and tested in accordance with State of California Materials Manual Test Designation 417. The sulfate concentrations detected in these soil samples were less than 0.02 percent and are below the maximum allowable values established by HUDIFHA and UBC. Therefore, no special design requirements are necessary to compensate for sulfate reactivity with the cement. Kruan & Associates, Ine. Offices Serving The Western United States onnDD.DOC , , ,. . , KA No. 022-97030 Page No. 12 Comoacted Material Ac:c:eotanc:e Compaction specifications are not the only criteria. for acceptance of the site grading or other such activities. The compaction test is the most universally recognized test method for assessing the performance of the Grading Contractor. However, the nwnerical test results from the compaction test cannot be used to predict the engineering performance of the compacted material. Therefore, the acceptance of compacted materials will also be dependent on the stability of that material. The Soils Engineer has the option of rejecting any compacted material regardless of the degree of compaction if that material is considered to be unstable or if future instability is suspected. A specific example of rejection of fill material passing the requÏrcd percent compaction is a fill which has been compacted with an in-situ moisture content significantly less than optimum moisture. This type of dry fill (brittle fill) is susceptible to future settlement if it becomes saturated or flooded. Tertin!! and InsoectÏon A representative of Krazan & Associates, Inc., should be present at the site during the earthwork activities to confirm that actual subsurlàce conditions are consistent with the exploratory field work. This activity is an integral part of our services as acceptance of earthwork construction is dependent upon compaction testing and stability of the material. This representative can also verify that the intent of these recommendations is incorporated into the project design and construction. Krazan & Associates, Inc., will not be responsible for grades or staking, since this is the responsibility of the Prime Contractor. LIMIT A TIONS Soils Engineering is one of the newest divisions of Civil Engineering. This branch of Civil Engineering is constantly improvirig as new technologies and understanding of earth sciences improve. Although your site was analyzed using the most appropriate current techniques and methods, undoubtedly there will be substantial future improvements in this branch of engineering. In addition to improvements in the field of Soils Engineering, physical changes in the site eimer due to excavation or fill placement, neW agency regulations or possible changes in the proposed structure after me time of completion of the soils report may require the soils report to be professionally reviewed. In light of this, the Owner should be aware that there is a practical1imit to the usefulness of this report without critical review. Almough the time linùt for this review is strictly arbitrary, it is suggested that two years be considered a reasonable time for the usefulness of this report. Foundation and earthwork construction is characterized by the presence of a calculated risk that soil and groundwater conditions have been fully revealed by the original foundation investigation. This risk is derived from the practical necessity of basing interpretations and design conclusions on limited sampling of me earth. The recommendations made in this report are based on the assumption that soil conditions do not vary significantly from those disclosed during our field investigation. If any variations or undesirable conditions are encountered during construction, the Soils Engineer should be notified so that supplemental recommendations can be made. The conclusions of this report are based on the infonnation provided regarding the proposed construction. If the proposed construction is relocated or redesigned, me conclusions in this report may not be valid. The Soils Engineer should be notified of any changes so the recommendations can be reviewed and reevaluated. Krazan " Associates, Ine. Offices Serving The Western United States 0'%291II30.D0c: KA No. 022-97030 Page No. 13. This report is a geotechnical engineering investigation with the purpose of evaluating the soil conditions in ; terms of foundation design. The scope of our services did not include any environmental site assessment for the presence or absence of hazardous and/or toxic materials in the soil, groundwater or atmosphere, or the prcsc:nce of wetlands. Any statements, or absence of statements, in this report or on any boring log regarding odors, unusual or suspicious items, or conditions observed are strictly for descriptive purposed and are not intended to convey cugjneering judgment regarding poœntial hazardous and/or toxic assessment. . The geotechnical data. presented herewith is based upon professional interpretation utilizing Standard cugineering practices and a degree of conservatism deemed proper for this project. It is not warranted that such data. and interpretation cannot be superseded by future geotechnical developments. We emphasize that this report is valid for this project as outlined above, and should not be used for any other site. If there are any questions, or if we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our office at (209) 348-2200 or (800) 800-0711. RSS/DA:kd Respectfully submitted, KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. R.{ rMi- r.J tLO RIF KAT S. SALEM - Project Engineer ~~2 ~~ alV'- DEAN ALEXANDER Geoteclm.ica1Engineer RCE No. 002051IRCE No. 34274 j Knzan & Aslodaœs, Inc. Offices Scning The Western United StAtes o:2f?II3O.DOC " J ~ ;i ~ 81 Å APPRo)(l~1'~ R-Vx..U~ I-OC^f10N -~- APPRo)(l~re I'ORlt-Iú I-OC^f1ON ~~ (!~ /;\ ç~~O-b ~ NOr 1"0 5Cx..~ { I "J _~~II - -- Plql.. !' ---~L-~ ,~---. ---------. .,,- --.. 1'12----- ~f -----  -1-- ] 1------ Å ;-2 [] -------[ ---- ~-.. .--------- ~ ---- . f<j(~ ] ( II..:.~,-V(" \,~\.¿" ~ , I, ~~ ~ -f'6 ú'f.U'P. PMIt-1'.4 -,r ----- IU ~-I ß: fAlNNú Wit-I- ~ 1 l ~ ~7 ~ -~. ~ ~ -,~" :~I ] J -;211 rr.œoSfP IU-PNú _~~B [J -¥~ ,QJr  ~-I ------ --- i ~ ~ ~ ~ ïd ------.---------- --------------- -. -- .1 I j ¡: I¡.?s- Scale: Dale: I AS :SHOWN 2/ 97 PROPO5E:t? U5P5 MAIN PO5-r OFF ICE: IJrawn b)': Approved by: CW ~5 'Project No. FI~'lre No. CA- 022-91OXJ I::: NC 1 N l-r AS.. ~Krazan ENGiNEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMF.NTAL SPECIAUSTS Offices Serving tile "'estern United St'ltes , , . , / - , , , , AppaIdix A Pap A.l APPENDIX A FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS Field Investi~ltion The field investigation consisted of a sumce reconnaissance and a subsurface exploratory program. Twelve 4- inch exploratory borings were advanced. The boring locations are shown on the site plan. The soils encountered were logged in the field during the exploration and, with supplementary laboratory test data, are described in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System. Modified standard penetration tests were performed at selected depths. This test represents the resistance to driving a 2 Va-inch diameter core barrel. The driving energy was provided by a hammer weighing 140 pounds f.ùling 30 inches. Relatively undisturbed soil samples were obtained while performing this test. Bag samples of the disturbed soil were obtained from the auger cuttings. All samples were returned to our Fresno laboratory for evaluation. Laboratorv Investintion The laboratory investigation was programmed to detcnninc the physical and mechanical properties of the foundation soil underlying the site. Test results were used as criteria for determining the engineering suitability of the surface and subsurface materials encountered. In-situ moisture content, dry density, consolidation, and direct sieve analysis tests were determined for the undisturbed samples representative of the subsurface material. These tests, supplemented by visual observation, comprised the basis for our evaluation of the site material. The logs of the exploratory borings and laboratory determinations are presented in this Appendix. Krazan &. AJloc:Îates, Ine. Offices Serving The Wesrcm United States --- U~J.1" .lJ:..&J ~Ul.1J \..!..A.':)ò:).&..r .&.\..ð..&. .&.V¡,' .::J.&..::J I. ,¡;"..'I. MAJOR.DIVISIONS --:-:.: SYMBOLS . TYPICAL NAMES i COARSE GRAINED SOILS (More than Yz of soil> no. %00 sieve size) GW Well-2raded 2ravels or 2r:1vel-sand mixtures. little or no fines --- GRA VELS GP Poorlv-2raded 2ravels or ~r3vel-sand mixtures. little or no fines ' i (More than Yz of coarse GM Silty ¡ravels, ¡ravel-sand-silt mixtures fraction> no. 4 sieve size) GC Clavev mvels. 2r3vel-sand-dav mixtures SW Well-2raded sands or 2r3VeJV sands. little or no fines SANDS SP Poorlv-mded sands or ~ravelv sands. little or no fines (More than Yz of coarse SM Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures fractiån < no. 4 sieve size) J SC Clavev sands. sand-dav mixtures ¡ FINE GRAINED SOILS (More than Yz of soil < no. 200 sieve size) I SIL TS & CLAYS ML I Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour, silty or clayey fine sands or clayey silts with sli2ht elasticity LL<SO CL Inor¡anic days onow to medium plasticity, ¡r3veJy days, sandy days, silty davs. lean davs OL Or2l1nic silts and ol'2anic silty davs of low elasticity SIL TS & CLAYS MH Inor¡anic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine sandy or silty soils, elastic silts LL>50 CH Inol'fZanic days of hi!h Dlasticirv. fat clavs OH Orzanic clays of medium to hiZh plasticity, or¡anic silty clays, organic silts HIGH!. Y ORGANIC sones Pt Peat and other hi2hlv-or2anic soils CONSISTENCY CLASSIDCA nON ) COHESIVE SOILS I GRANULAR SOILS ..::.:_. -.:::':.:: -.". DescriDtion -.- Blows/ft. I DescriDtion Blows/ft~ :::::;-:.:Y:::::'=":::::\:':::::. Very Soft , <3 Very Loose <5 Soft 3-5 Loose 5-15 Medium (Finn) 6-10 Medium Dense 16-40 Stiff 11-20 Dense 41-65 Very Stiff 21-40 Very Dense >65 Hard >40 GRAIN SIZE CLASSIDCA TION . CLASSIFICATION-> . - Gr21ÌnTvDe I Boulders Cobbles Gravel I I ..- coarse (c) fine (0 RANGE OF GRAIN SIZES . -.-.... U.S. Standard Sieve Size Grain Size inMillimeterS'::::;:::::':} above 12" I above 305 12" to 3" 305 to 76.2 3" to no. 4 76.2 to 4.76 3" to 3/4" 76.2 to 19.1 1/4" to no. 4 19.1 to 4.76 no. 4 to no. 200 4.76 to 0.074 no. 4 to no. 10 4.76 to 2.00 no. 10 to DO. 40 2.00 to 0.420 no. 40 to no. 200 0.420 to 0.074 below no. 200 below 0.074 . Sand coarse (c) medium (m) : fine (£) Silt & Clav ,. , . DHILL HOLE LOu BORING NO.: Bl . , ' PROJECT: Prop. USPS Main Post Office - Encinitas CLIENT: URS Greiner . LOCATION: Garden View Rd./EI Camino Real, Encinitas, CA DRILLER: Jim Watts DRILL RIG: CME45 DEPTH TO WATER> PROJECT NO.: 022-9703C DATE: 2/12/97 ELEVATION: LOGGED BY: Dave Jarosz ELEVATION! WEU. INITIAL: 23-1/2 ft DEPTH DETAIL SOIL SYMBOLS, SAMPLERS AND TEST DATA 0 + 5 616 916 10/6 10 J i t . L 20 ¡ i , ./ 25 916 . . .. .. 14/6 c::::: 15/6 ~~ ~} u:1 30 . .. AT COMPLETION: 23-1/2 ft Water Dry PENETRATION TEST Content Density CUR V E % .pcf DEPTH N Description .................................,................. Loose fine to coarse SIL TV SAND (SM); medium brown, moist, drills easy. Tan at 2 feet. 1.6-3 15.2 101.1 Medium dense, medium brown at 5 feet. 4.5-6 13.1 106.9 With a trace of CLAY at 11 feet. Loose, no CLAY, light brown at 15 feet. 9.5- 1 1 Medium dense, less SILT, wet at 20 feet. 11.5 120.5 Saturated at 23-1/2 feet. 14.5-1614 10.4 105.2 t9.5-21 31 17.7 110.1 .....................................,............. 24.5-26 29 Medium dense fine to coarse SAND (SP); with SILT, medium brown. saturated, drills easy. 24.5 104.0 This information pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted.. being indicftive of the site. Figure A-1 PAGE 1 of 2 Krazan and Associates Krazan and Associates 10 30 10 19 31 DRILL HOLE LOG BORING NO.: Bl PROJECT: Prop. USPS Main Post Office - Encinitas CLIENT: URS Greiner LOCATION: Garden View Rd./EI Camino Real, Encinitas, CA DRILLER: Jim Watts DRILL RIG: CME45 DEPTH TO WATER> PROJECT NO.: 022-97030 DATE: 2/12/97 . ELEV A TJON: LOGGED BY: Dave Jarosz INITIAL: 23-1/2 ft DEPTH DETAIL SOIL SYMBOLS. SAMPLERS AND TEST DATA Description AT COMPLETION: 23-112 ft Water r Dry PENETRA TlON TEST Content Den8ity CUR V E % pet DEPTH N ELEV A TlONI WELL I- -""'35 ~ & 10 30 so .... - - ... . ... . .. .. ... . --40 mil -.:..:..:..:... Bottom of Boring !- /" ) --50 !- - --55 - --60 !- T65 + This infonmation pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted a. being indicitive of the .ite. Figure A-1 PAGE 2 of 2 Krazan and Associates Krazan and Associates , . . . PROJECT: Prop. USPS Main Post Office -' Encinitas CLIENT: URS Greiner . LOCATION: Garden View Rd./EI Camino Real, Encinitas, CA DRILLER: Jim Watts I DRILL RIG: CME45 EDLEEVAPTITOHN,TOWELLWATER> INITIAL: SOIL SYMBOLS. SAMPLERS DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA . . I ! F 'i I I ¡ ~ 0 1.16 6/6 716 5 ---10 , ! ; i . -. 15 10 25 t" -, LJHILL HULt: LOu BORJNG NO.: B2 PROJECT NO.: 022-97030 DATE: 2/12/97 ELEVATION: LOGGED BY: Dave Jarosz AT COMPLETION: Description Water Dry Content Density % -pet PENETRA TlON TEST CURVE DEPTH N 10 30 I 1.5-3 13 ........ ....... ............ ........................ Loose fine to coarse SIL TV SAND (SM); medium brown, moist, drills easy. Orange-brown at 3 feet. 14.4 104.1 Medium dense, less SILT (SMI SP); at 4 feet. Increased SILT at 10 feet. 4.5.6 15 9.1 114.2 With a trace of CLA Y at 1 6 feet. 9.5-11 22 10.5 120.5 14.5-16 27 11.0 11 0.6 Bottom of Boring ¡his infoMmition pert.ins only to this boring .nd should not be interpreted.s being indieitive of the site. Figure A-2 PAGE 1 of 1 Krazan and Associates Krazan and Associates DHILL HOLE LOG BORING NO.: B3 PROJECT: Prop. USPS Main Post Office - Encinitas CLIENT: URS Greiner . LOCATION: Garden View Rd./EI Camino Real, Encinitas, CA DRILLER: Jim Watts DRILL RIG: CME45 DEPTH TO WATER> I ELEVATION! WELL DEPTH DETAIL SOIL SYMBOLS. SAMPLERS AND TEST DATA 0 5 10 15 20 10/6 10/6 I"'. 25 r PROJECT NO.: 022-97030 DATE: 2/12/97 ELEVATION: LOGGED BY: Dave Jarosz INITIAL: AT COMPLETION: Description Water Dry Content D.".ity % pet PENETRATION TEST I CURVE DEPTH N ¡ 10 30 SO I ..... .............................................. Very loose fine to coarse SILTY SAND (SMI; medium brown. moist. drills easy. Loose below 6 inches. Medium dense. red-brawn-white at 5 feet. Loose at 1 0 feet. With a trace of GRAVEL at 1 5 feet. Med'ium dense, increased SILT. yellow-orange-brown at 1 6 feet. ....,.............................................. 8.6 Medium dense fine to coarse SAND (SPI; with a trace of SILT. light brown. moist. drills easy. Bottom of Boring 14.6 103.7 1.5-3 4.5-6 6.8 9.1 101.4 9.5-11 115.7 13.4 104.2 14.5-16 24 19.5-21 25 110.5 This information pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted a. being indicitive of the site. 10 Figure A-3 PAGE 1 of 1 Krazan and Associates Krazan and Associates 28 13 , , ,1 'l . PROJECT: Prop. uSPS Main Post Office - Encinitas , CLIENT: URS Greiner LOCATION: Garden View Rd./EI Camino Real, Encinitas, CA DRILLER: Jim Watts I DRILL RIG: CME45 ,. E~~::,T~ A TE: SYM80~~111 AL: SAMPLERS I DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA I 0 I 5 10 15 20 25 30 DRILL HOLE LOG BORING NO.: B4 PROJECT NO.: 022-97030 DATE: 2/12/97 ELEVATION: LOGGED BY: Dave Jarosz AT COMPLETION: Description W¡ter Dry PENETRA TlON TEST Content Density CUR V E "" pet DEPTH N """""""""""""""" .......... """'" 10 E 30 Very loose fine to coarse SILTY SAND ISM); medium brown, moist. drills easy. Loose below 6 inches. 1.5-3 13 13.0 109.0 . Medium dense. orange-brown "'.below 4 feet. "~i~d¡~'~'d~~~~'fi~~t~'~'öä~~~""" 7.6 SAND (SP); orange-brown, moiSt. drills easy. . . .. . . . . .. .. . .. . . .. .. .. .. .. . .. . .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. . Medium dense fine to coarse SILTY SAND ISM); medium brown. moist. drills easy. Orange-brown at 1 6 feet. 4.5-6 16 102.1 9.5-11 18 11.0112.2 14.5-16 17 13.3109.1 Bottom of Boring This infonmation pe~tains only to this bo~ing and should not be inte~p~.ted 8S being indieitive of the site. Figure A-4 PAGE 1 of 1 Krazan and Associates Krazan and Associates 8..IniLL nULl: LUU BORING NO.: B5 PROJECT: Prop. USPS Main Post Office - Encinitas CLIENT: URS Greiner LOCATION: Garden View Rd./EI Camino Real, Encinitas, CA DRILLER: Jim Watts DRILL RIG: CME45 i DEPTH TO WATER> ¡ ELEVATION/ WELL I DEPTH DETAIL -.-0 , I , I , PROJECT NO.: 022-'97030 DATE: 2/12/97 ELEVATION: LOGGED BY: Dave Jarosz INITIAL: AT COMPLETION: SOIL SYMBOLS. SAMPLERS AND TEST DATA Description Water I Dry Content Denaity % pcf PENETRA TlON TEST I CURVE DEPTH N I i , , I , 17/6 1016 17/6 - ..........................., "" """ ............. Very loose fine to coarse SIL TV SAND (SM); medium brown, moist, drills easy. Medium dense below 6 inches. 10 30 5C . 1.5-3 27 . 11.8 107.2 -1....5 16/6 916 18/6 Orange-brown-white at 5 feet. Orange-brown at 10 feet. 4.5-6 27 6.4 113.6 ~ With a trace of CLA V, increased SILT at 13 feet. ... --10 ~ 18/6 10/6 1016 9.5-11 20 I- 10.1 117.8 1\ 1 - --15 \ , -'-20 .;;:;;Ir~~: - ................................................... 14.5-16 32 t:::: Medium dense fine to coarse 10.3 104.0 ::::: SAND (SP); with a trace of ~: : : : SILT, tan, moist, drills easy. " .. . . ~: : : : ."" . . .. . . . . .. ~ . Bottom of Boring - --25 - -'-30 This info~tion pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted 8S being indicitive of the site. Figure A-5 Krazan and Associates I PAGE 1 of 1 Krazan and Associates , . UHILL HOLE LUG BORING NO.: B6 , , PROJECT: Prop. USPS Main Post Office - Encinitas CLIENT: URS Greiner . LOCATION: Garden View Rd./EI Camino Real, Encinitas, CA DRILLER: Jim Watts DRILL RIG: CME45 DEPTH TO WATER> PROJECT NO.: 022-97030 DATE: 2/12/97 ELEVATION: LOGGED BY: Dave Jarosz INITIAL: AT COMPLETION: , ELEVATION/ WEU, SOIL SYMBOLS. Water Dry PENETRATION TEST SAMPLERS Description Content Density CURVE DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA % pet DEPTH N --0 - """""". "."..'."."'.."" """.""...'" 10 30 5( Very loose fine to coarse SIL TV I i 18/6 SAND (SM); medium brown. , I moist. drills easy. 1.5-3 22 10/6 12/6 Medium dense below 6 inches. 11.0 96.6 I - -5 15/6 Medium brown-white-orange at 4.5-6 16 ~ I 716 3 feet. I 916 6.4 105.6 Less SILT below 5 feet. Medium brown at 10 feet. - ~10 112/6 With a trace of CLAY at 12 9.5-11 27 13/6 feet. 14/6 Increased SILT at 1 6 feet. - -15 110/6 14.5-16 25 . 12/6 13/6 13.5 103.0 -20 Bottom of Boring ~ - -25 - -30 ! í I . I , , This information pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indieitive of the site. Figure A-6 PAGE 1 of 1 Krazan and Associates KIazan and Associates PROJECT: Prop. USPS Main Post Office - Encinitas CLIENT: URS Greiner LOCATION: Garden View Rd .lEI Camino Real, Encinitas, CA DRILLER: Jim Watts DRILL RIG: CME45 DEPTH TO W A TEA> ELEV A TlONI WELL SOIL SYMBOLS. SAMPLERS AND TEST DATA DEPTH DETAIL 0 8/6 12/6 12/6 5 10 1S 1-20 'j +" I I 30 T f UtULL HULE LUu BORING NO.: P;¡ PROJECT NO.: 022-97030 DATE: 2/12/97 ELEVATION: LOGGED BY: Dave Jarosz INITIAL: 1 1 feet. AT COMPLETION: 11 feet. Water Dry PENETRATION TEST Content Den8Ïty I CUR V E " pet. DEPTH N Description ......... ..... ................... .................. 10 so 30 Very loose fine to coarse SILTY SAND (SM); medium brown. moist, drills easy. 24 1.5-3 Medium dense at 6 inches. 9.5 108.2 With a trace of CLAY at 4 feet. Loose. no CLAY at 5 feet. 4.5-6 14 13.2 106.8 Orange-brown at 5-1 12 feet. Saturated at 11 feet. Medium brown at 1 4 feet. 9.5-11 17 20.3 110.6 Bottom of Boring This information pertains only to this boring end should not be interpreted es being indicitive of the site. Krazan and Associates Krazan and Associates Figure A- 7 PAGE 1 of 1 , , DRILL HOLE LOG . BORING NO.: B8 , 'PROJECT: Prop. USPS Main Post Office - Encinitas CLIENT: URS Greiner LOCATION: Garden View Rd./EI Camino Real, Encinitas, CA DRILLER: Jim Watts DRILL RIG: CME45 DEPTH TO WATER> 30 I t PROJECT NO.: 022-97030 DATE: 2/12/97 ELEVATION: LOGGED BY: Dave Jarosz INITIAL: AT COMPLETION: ELEVATION/ WEll. SOIL SYMBOLS. Water Dry PENETRA TlON TEST SAMPLERS Description Content Density CURVE DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA % .pet DEPTH N 0 ,."..,....",......,.........."" """""""" 10 30 Very loose fine to coarse SIL TV 3/6 SAND (SM/SP); medium brown, moist. drills easy. , .5-3 13 616 716 ': Loose at 6 inches. 4.1 104.6 5 ':9~~~.':',i~ ,~~.~~,i~.~.~ ,~.f~~~....,...,..... 4.5-6 32 Loose fine to coarse SIL TV 9.2 109.1 SAND ISM); medium brown. I moist, drills eásy. r ¡ Medium dense. increased SILT , I at 5 feet. I ! r 9.5-11 18 Orange-brown at 6 feet. 6.5 103.8 I I I With a trace of GRAVEL, medium brown-white at 10 feet. 15 Orange-brown at 13 feet. " 14.5-16 54 I Dense. orange-brown-white at 5.2 106.8 I 16 feet. I Very dense. cemented at 18 I feet. I ; 20 19.5-21 68 s¡ , ,! 5.5 104.1 ,I ~ t" I Bottom of Boring This infonmation pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indieitive of the site. Figure A-a PAGE 1 of 1 Krazan and Associates Krazan and Associates UtULL HULl: LU\:i BORING NO.: B9 PROJECT: Prop. USPS Main Post Office - Encinitas CLIENT: URS Greiner LOCATION: Garden View Rd./EI Camino Real, Encinitas, CA DRILLER: Jim Watts DRILL RIG: CME45 DEPTH TO WATER> ELEVATION/ WELL SOIL SYMBOLS. SAMPLERS DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA I TO -^r I 10/6 ¡ 20/6 I 30/6 5 10 15 20 25 30 PROJECT NO.: 022-97030 DATE: 2/12/97 ELEVATION: LOGGED BY: Dave Jarosz INITIAL: AT COMPLETION: Description ..... ....................... """"""""""'" Very loose fine to coarse SILTY . SAND (SM); with GRAVEL. :. medium brown, moist. drills :easy. 'Dense at 6 inches. .............. """""'" ............. ......... Dense fine to coarse SILTY SAND (SM); yellow-brown, damp, drills easy. Very dense. medium brown-red at 5 feet. Dense. brown-red-white at 10 feet. Orange-brown at 16 feet. Medium brown at 1 8 feet. Medium dense. orange-brown at 21 feet. Increased SILT at 28 feet. Yellow-tan. drills firm at 32 feet. Water Dry PENETRATION TEST Content Density IN CURVE % pef DEPTH 10 30 50 I 1.5-3 50 9.8 116.6 4.5-6 67 11.6 119.2 6.2 7.7 9.6- 1 1 39 9.6 114.7 14.6-16 40 I I 114.6 19.5-21 31 117.0 This information pe~tains only to this bo~ing and should not be int.rp~.ted a. being indicftive of the site. Figure A-9 PAGE 1 of 2 Krazan and Associates Krazan and Associates . , DHILL HULt: LU\:i BORING NO.: B9 . 'PROJECT: Prop. USPS Main Post Office - Encinitas CLIENT: URS Greiner LOCATION: Garden View Rd./EI Camino Real, Encinitas, CA DRILLER: Jim Watts DRILL RIG: CME45 DEPTH TO WATER> PROJECT NO.: 022-97030 DATE: 2/12/97 ELEVATION: LOGGED BY: Dave Jarosz INITIAL: AT COMPLETION: DEPTH DETAIL SOIL SYMBOLS. SAMPLERS AND TUT DATA Description Weter Dry PENETRATION TEST Content Density CUR V E % pet DEPTH N ELEVATION/ WELL +- -!\,- 10 30 5 -1-35 - ................................................... Medium dense fine to medium SANDY SILT (ML); with a trace of CLAY, tan, damp, drills easy. !- .:. --100 Bottom of Boring .~ -1-1.5 !- .f --50 ~ --55 --60 -""65 !- I \. This information pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted IS being indicitive of the site. Figure A-9 PAGE 2 of 2 Krazan and Associates Krazan and Associates unlLL MULC LU\:! BORING NO.: BIO PROJECT: Prop. USPS Main Post Office - Encinitas CLIENT: URS Greiner LOCATION: Garden View Rd./EI Camino Real, Encinitas, CA DRILLER: Jim Watts DRILL RIG: CME45 DEPTH TO WATER> INITIAL: ELEVATION/ WELL SOIL SYMBOLS. SAMPlERS AND TEST DATA Description DEPTH DETAIL --0 f- - ................................................... Very loose fine to coarse SIL TV SAND (SM); dark brown, moist, drills easy. - '. ~Loose. medium brown at 6 ..j~~~~~:...................................... Loose fine to coarse SIL TV SAND (SM/SP); orange-brown. moist, drills easy. Increased SILT at 4 feet. 15/6 6/6 6/6 --5 - 16/6 10/6 12/6 - -10 19/6 14/6 16/6 With a trace of CLAY, medium brown at 8 feet. No CLAY at 10 feet. Medium brown at 1 3 feet. Less SILT at 1 6 feet. - -15 I --20 Bottom of Boring f- --25 -f-30 - PROJECT NO.: 022-97030 DATE: 2/12/97 r ELEVATION: LOGGED BY: Dave Jarosz AT COMPLETION: Water Dry PENETRATION TEST Content Den8ity CUR V E '" pet DEPTH N 10 50 I , 30 1.5.3 12 ~ \ 6.4 109.6 4.5.6 22 5.7 100.9 9.5- 1 1 30 9.4 ) I This infonmation pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indieitive of the site. Figure A-10 PAGE 1 of 1 Krazan and Associates Krazan and Associates . , .. tJI U~L. .ï\J~'" L.U~ BORING NO.: Bll '.' , PÀOJECT: Prop. USPS Main Post Office - Encinitas CLIENT: URS Greiner . LOCATION: Garden View Rd./EI Camino Real, Encinitas, CA DRILLER: Jim Watts . DRILL RIG: CME45 DEPTH TO WATER> PROJECT NO.: 022-9703C DATE: 2/12/97 ELEVATION: LOGGED BY: Dave Jarosz INITIAL: AT COMPLETION: I . . ! ¡ ¡ ¡ : I . - i ELEVATION/ WELL SOIL SYMBOLS. Water Dry PENETRATION TEST SAMPLERS Description Content Den8ity CURVE DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA % pet DEPTH N -.-0 - """""""" ,.,.' .... ,.,....... """""""" 10 30 - Very loose fine to coarse Sil TV 14/6 ': SAND (SM); medium brown, 1.6.3 19 . 616 : moist, drills easy. . 13/6 9.8 100.9 \ :With a trace of CLAY, black at '\ :3 inches. - -5 18/6 4.6-6 32 . 1616 Medium dense at 6 inches. \ - 1616 """""""""""""""""""""""'" 4.5 1 06.2 Medium dense fine to coarse \ ~ SilTY SAND ISM); medium brown, moist, drills easy. No CLAY, orange-brown at 2 - -10 18/6 feet. 9.6-11 44 18/6 2616 Medium brown at 5 feet. 18.7 112.5 -'. ': Dense, increased SilT, medium "Þr~~~~g.~~.Y..~~..1.1.!~~~:......... '.. ... - ': Dense fine to medium SANDY - ~15 18/6 : SilT IML); with a trace of 14.5-16 43 20/6 :CLAY, medium brown, moist, 2316 '~.~i.I!~,~,~~Y:,.,.,...".".,.,..".....,.,.,., Dense fine to coarse SILTY 1" SAND ISM); medium brown, moist, drills easy. Bottom of Boring - - :-25 :.. - -30 I í I . ! This in1onmation pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted.s being indicitive 01 the site. Figure A-11 PAGE 1 of 1 Krazan and Associates Krazan and Associates LI nl LL n U"'I: L. V \:I BORING NO.: B12 PROJECT: Prop. USPS Main Post Office - Encinitas CLIENT: URS Greiner lOCATION: Garden View Rd./EI Camino Real, Encinitas, CA DRILLER: Jim Watts DRILL RIG: CME45 DEPTH TO WATER> PROJECT NO.: 022-97030' DATE: 2/12/97 ' ELEVATION: LOGGED BY: Dave Jarosz EL.EVATION/ I WEll. SOIL SYMBOLS. Water -Dry PENETRATION TEST SAMPlERS Description Contant Density CURVE DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA % pet DEPTH N -' -,...0 - ...........,... .........". .,.. ...........,.... .... 10 30 SO :. I Very loose fine to coarse SILTY 18/6 SAND ISM); medium brown, ~ moist, drills easy. 1.5-3 32 15/6 17/6 Medium dense, orange-brown- 5.6 105.3 / / white at 2-112 feet. I --5 15/6 4.5.6 17 II 8/6 Orange-brown at 5 feet. ¡ 9/6 6.3 105.8 I - Increased SILT at 10 feet. Less SILT, medium brown at 14 feet. - -10 19/6 9.5-1 1 22 ~ 10/6 - 12/6 15.1 110.6 - - -15 ; / - -20 I Bottom of Boring - -25 - - 1-30 .. ~ INITIAL: AT COMPLETION: This information pertains only to this bori"9 8nd should not be interpreted 8S being indicitive of the site. Figure A-1 2 PAGE 1 of 1 Krazan and Associates Krazan and Associates . . " .. , . . Consolidation Test c .2 '; :S! Õ .. § 3 (J ë II CoI .. II Q. 0.1 0 ~I II "', "i'~ 2 I . 4 .. .. .. T'1"1""'I"" 5' , I .. 6 Date 2117/97 Load in Kips per Square Foot ~~I 10 ¡ r I I I Soil Classification SM 100 % Consolidation @ 2 Ksf : 2.4 % \ \ \ \ ~ .. .. I I \1 ,.. .. . .. I r . . '~I I Iii I ¡ I ! I I I I I I I I ¡ ¡ I ! I Krazan Testing Laboratory Consolidation Test Date 2/17/97 Soil Classification SM 0.1 0 "'~II'I I ~I~ I . ,'...... I LlMd in Kips per Square Foot 10 100 % Consolidation @ 2 Ksf : 2.9 % I I ' I , ! II I I I I . ¡ ~~ I ! ! I , I i I 2 6 .. I: I .. ,..1 1 ì'ì, I I I I I ~ \ \ \ \ I I I ! 3 c .2 ;; := ë .. g 4 (,) ë u C, .. u CI. 5 ~ 7 ¡' , .. I I I 1 ' ".. I : ..l \ I 1\ \ 1 1 I 8 .. .. '.. .. ~ .. I I Krazan Testing Laboratory , , "M 2.00 :.:: ¿ ÕI c ! êñ ... .. !! êñ Shear StrenQth DiaQram (Direct Shear! ASTM D. 3080 I AASHTO T - 236 Soil T e SM. Date 2117/97 1.00 I I I I ; Cohesion . 0.1 Ksf I . , I I , I I ; Angle of Internal Friction: 34 0 , I I I , I I I I I I I ; I I I I I " " I t -, I I I I I I 1 I , I I I I I I I 1 I I I i I 1 I I 1 I I I ¡ 1 I I I I I I t I 1 , I I 1 I I 1 I I I I I : I , , I , I I I , I , I I , " I I I I I ; I : 1 , I I I I : ' -- 1 : : I / I I I I I I , I ! / I I I I I I I I .JIll" I ! 1 I I I I I , I ! I I /' I I I I I ' T I 1/ I I I I , I I ", 1 I 1 I I 1 ; I / I , I I I I I I ,/' I I I I , I I I , / , I ' : " I I I I I I , I ' -7 I I I I I I I -" , I I 1 /', I , I I : I I 7 I : I I , I I / ' I , I I I I I /' -, I I I t I I , " I I ' I I I I I I '" I I : I I ' v 1 I I ! I I I I "I ' " I , I I I / ! , 1 I I I I I '" i 1 I I I / I j I , " I I I 1 ./ I , ' : , .,. -, I I I I I ' " , I : I I I / I I ," I I I " 1 I /' I I I I "" I ' I : ' ./ I , I I "'" t 1 i/ ' I I I I "", " I , I I I / I I I I , "" I , I ' I I I I I I 1 I ' , i , I I I ' I I I I I I " I 3.00 0.00 0.0 1.0 Normal Load, Ksf 2.0 3.0 Krazan Testing Laboratory Shear Strength DiaQram (Direct Shearl ASTM D. 3080 I AASHTO T. 236 Soil T SM e Date 2117/97 1.00 , I , I I ' T Cohesion . 0.1 Ksf , . , I I I ' Angle of Internal Friction: 33 0 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 I , I 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 ¡ .;r I I ' : 1 ' I /' I I I I I I : ! I ""'" I , I I /, I I ' : 1 : ./ ' I " I ' I ! I / I I I ' : : - I I I I ' 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 t I I I I / I I I I : ¡ , _... I I J I I : , / I I I I I I I I¿I' I 1 I , , I , -, I I I I I I , / I I I I 1 : I I I / i I I I : I : I : ..11': I I , I I I /' I I I . /' I I 1 I I /' I I I ' I I 1 ; " 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 1 " I I : I I : 1 : : I I I , , /' : I I ' ¿I' I I I I I ' I , ..,, ! " I .." I ! I , I I 1 ! I .;r I .". . I 1 " I r I , ' I I I r I , I , I , , I I , I I ¡ , " I I , r ) 3.00 - .. :I: 2.00 - -;, = " .. iñ .. .. !! iñ 0.00 0.0 1.0 Normal Load, Ksf 2.0 3.0 Krazan Testing Laboratory , , . , Shear Stren~th Dia~ram (Direct Shearl ASTM D - 3080 I AASHTO T - 236 Soil T pe SM Date 2/17/97 Vi 2.00 ~ I I ; I Cohesion . 0.1 Ksf I I I I I . , I I I I ' : ' I I I Angle of Internal Friction: 34 0 : I I ! , i I 1 I I I I I I , , " 1 I " I I I I i 1 I I i , , I I I I , I 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 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 I /' I I I : I 1 '1 I I I I I /' I I , I I , ; ' I J', I " I /' I I , I I ' /' I I I I I í I L I : I , : " I I I I I I , /' I I I I ' 1/ 1 I , I I I , 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 Y , " I , ' I /'; I I I /' I ~ , I I I , : J': ì 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 , /' 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 3.00 ët c ! iñ ... .. !! iñ 1.00 0.00 0.0 1.0 Normal Load. Ksf 2.0 3.0 Krazan Testing Laboratory Grain Size Analysis 8 U.S. Standard Sieve Numbers 16 30 50 100 Hydrometer Sieve Openings In Inches 1-112 1 314 1/2 3/8 4 200 r T r -....~ I r\ , \ ' \ \ \ ' \ \ " 00 90 80 70 0 z 6Oii) en ~ SO... ffi «)~ W Q. 30 20 10 100 10 1 Q1 Grain Size in Millimeters 0.01 0 0.001 Gravel Sand Silt or Clay Coarse I Fine Coarse I MedlOO1 I Fine Project Name Project Number Soil Classification Sample Number Prop. USPS 2297030 Silty Sand (SM) 81 @ 2-3 Krazan Testing Laborator:y . ") Grain Size Analysis Sieve Openings In Inches 1-1/2 1 314 112 318 r r -.. ~ ~ I ~ \ \ \ \ \ ' \ " 100 4 U.S. Standard Sieve Numbers 16 30 50 100 Hydrometer 8 200 10 1 0.1 Grain Size In Millimeters 0.01 --- '--a-- -- --' [ Gravel Sand Coarse I Fine --- - Colrse l Medium ] Fine --~- Project Name Project Number Soli Classification Sample Number ~lIt o;Clay I Prop. USPS 2297030 Silly Sand (8M) 89 @ 2-3 r ~ ' 100 90 80 70 ð z 6Oii) :l CL SOt- i5 40° ffi Q. 30 20 10 0 0.001 Krazan Testin~ Laboratory R - VALUE TEST ASTM D - 2844/ CAL 301 PROJECT NUMBER: PROJECT NAME: DATE: SAMPLE LOCATION/CURVE NUMBER: Son. CLASSIFICATION: %%97030 PROPOSED USPS 2/17/97 #1 (SM), F/M. 83.6% SAND -- ,. TEST A 8 C Percent Moisture @. Compaction. % 15.2 14.2 13.2 Dry Density, Ibm/cuJt. 119.0 122.3 125.4 Exudation Pressure. psi 210 330 470 Expansion Pressure. (Dial ReadinQ) 0 0 0 Expansion Pressure. pst 0 0 0 Resistance Value R 14 57 79 R Value at 300 PSI Exudation Pressure R Value by Expansion Pressure CTI =): 5 4.0 ! : I I i I ¡ I I 1/ I I I ! Iii I I Vi 3.6 I I I I I I ! I II I I I i I ¡ ! ~ i ~ I 3.2 I I ! ¡ ! I ¡ 1/ I I :. 2.8 ¡ I I I : I i VI I i ~ Iii!! lI! I I ~ i I I ! i I If I ! I :Ë 2.4 ~ ¡ I I ! I 1I ¡ I I I en >. !! I ii/I! : ! I -: 2.0 :: I!!! 1I I ! : ! ! ~ I!:: 7! I I ! I I :æ 1.6 ': I I r V I ¡ I I I I ... 81.2 I I ! l I I ¡ I , I I ill; I ! 1 ! I ! I : Vi ': i ¡ I : 0.8 I 1I ¡ I I ! I ! ¡ I I V! I : I ' i i I I 0.4 17 I ! I I ! i I I I 0.0 /t! I! ¡¡I I I 0 ~ ~ N ~ 0 ~ ~ N ~ 0 000 ~ ~ N N N MM. Cover Thickness Exp. Pressure,ft (47) Expansion Pressure Nil 300 PSI 100 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 I I r~1 I I I I I I I I 1\ I I I I I I I I I \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 I I I I I I I I I I I 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 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 90 80 70 60 SO! ¡¡ > . 400:: 30 20 10 0 § § 88888 8 880 Exudation Pressure. PSI Krazan Testing Laboratory , , ( . , . R - VALUE TEST ASTM D. 2844/ CAL 301 PROJECT NUMBER: PROJECT NAME: DATE: SAMPLE LOCATION/CURVE NUMBER: SOIL CL\SSIFICATION: 2297030 PROPOSED USPS 2/18/97 #2 (SM), W/CLAY. FIM, 85.2% SAND TEST A 8 C Percent Moisture (fÐ Compaction, % 14.0 15.0 13.0 Dry Density, Ibm/cu.ft. 121.2 118.0 124.5 Exudation Pressure, psi 350 180 750 Expansion Pressure, (Dial Readinq) 0 0 0 Expansion Pressure, pst 0 0 0 Resistance Value R 26 15 47 R Value at 300 PSI Exudation Pressure R Value by Expansion Pressure (TI =): 5 (23) Expansion Pressure Nil 4.0 300 PSI 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 80 I I I I : ! Iii 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 1...11111 I 150~ > ! ! N.. I I I I : ' 40a:: I I 1 'l I I I I ¡ , I ! No. : I I I I I I ~ I , 30 I I ! ¡ ì t\.! i ¡ I I I ¡ f\ ¡ I 20 ¡ I I I I I r-I ¡ I I Iii I I I 10 I I I i I I 100 3.2 I I ' I I I I I I 1I I I ¡ I i I i I I i Ii I I I I , I I I I 1/ I I I I I I I I Ii I I ' , I I I 1/ i I I I I I I I 1 Ii I I I , I I I I I 1I I I I I ! I ¡ , I I I Ii I I I : I I I I I 1 1I I I I I I ! I I I I ~ I I I I I ! I 1I I I 1 I I I I ! I I I /i I I I I I I I I 1I I , I ' I I I I I I I Vi I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I , I 1 I I I I I !/¡ I ! I : I I I ! ! ! I 1I I I I I I I I I I I I Ii I I ! I I I I I I I V I I I I I I ; I I I I Ii ¡ i I I I I I I I 70 I I 60 3.6 90 - :'2.8 II - II E 0 ~ 2.4 1'1 - en >- -: 2.0 III II I: .-: :Ë 1.6 ~ "- II > 81.2 I I I i I ! I I I QO I I 0 . ~ N ~ 0 . ~ N ~ 0 OOO":":NNNMM..; §§§ Cover Thickness Exp. Pressure,ft 0.8 0.4 0 8 8888880 Exudation Pressure, PSI Krazan Testing Laboratory R - VALUE TEST ASTM D - 2844/ CAL 301 PROJECT NUMBER: PROJECT NAME: DATE: SAMPLE LOCATION/CURVE NUMBER: SOn. CLASSIFICATION: 2297030 PROPOSED USPS 2/17197 #3 (SM), w/CLAY, FIM, 79.4°/. SAND: TEST A B C Percent Moisture ~ Compaction. % 15.8 16.8 14.7 Drv Density, Ibm/cu.ft. 117.4 113.9 121.7 Exudation Pressure. psi 440 210 650 Expansion Pressure, (Dial Readina) 0 0 0 Expansion Pressure, pst 0 0 0 Resistance Value R 53 12 76 R Value at 300 PSI Exudation Pressure R Value by Expansion Pressure (TI =): 5 4.0 ! I i I I I ! ¡ 1I 3.6 1 I I I I I I /1 I I i I I I I 1I I I I I I I I Ii 3.2 I ! I i I I I 1I :. 2.8 ¡ I I! I /1 ~ I!! I ¡ I 1I I I g i I I I I i VI I ~ 2.4 I I I I I V I I I ~ I I I I I /Í I I I .. 2.0 =: I I ¡ : 1I Iii I c ~ I I I ! /1 I I I I i :E 1.6 : I I 1I I I ¡ ! I I III 81.2 I I I /i I I ! I I I I ! 1I I I ¡ I I I I I : J1 I I I I Ii! 0.8 I II 11 ! I ! I I I ! 11 I I !! I I : 0.4 1I! I I I I Ii! i 0.0 /i I ¡ I , ~ ; I i I 0 . ~ N ø 0 . ~ N ø 0 00 0 ~ ~ N N N M M ~ Cover Thickness Exp. Pressure,ft (29) Expansion Pressure Nil 300 PSI 100 I I I ¡¡I I I I I I I I I ¡ I ¡ 90 I I I I I I I I I i I I I ! ! í I I I BO I I I 1 I I ! ! I I I 1\ i I I i I I 70 i I I !.'\. ¡¡I I i ! I I ¡ 1\ I I I I i 60 I I I I \1 I I I I I I I ~ I I T i i I I I ¡I' I I ! i 50~ > I I I!: \i I ii' 40== I I I I I i I I I I ¡ I I ! "I I ¡ 30 ¡ I ! I I I ~ i 1 ! I ¡¡I i I \ ¡ I 20 I I I I I I \ I I ¡ I I ¡ I \ I I 10 ¡ I I ! I ¡I: i i ! I I: ¡ I I I . 0 § ~ 8 8 8 § 8 8 8 8 0 Exudation Pressure, PSI Krazan Testing Laboratory . , R - VALUE TEST ASTM D - 2844/ CAL 301 Project Number Project Name Date Sample Location/Curve Number: Soil Classification 2297030 PROPOSED USPS 2/17/97 #4 (SM), F/M, w/clay, 80.6% SAND TEST A B C Percent Moisture @ Compaction, % 15.0 16.0 14.0 Dry Densitv, Ibm/cu.ft. 120.8 117.4 123.9 Exudation Pressure, psi 390 240 700 Expansion Pressure, (Dial Readino) 0 0 0 Expansion Pressure, ost 0 0 0 Resistance Value R 35 15 62 R Value at 300 PSI Exudation Pressure R Value by Expansion Pressure (TI =): 5 (23) Expansion Pressure Nil ( 300 PSI 4.0 1111111111I 11'11 i III 100 3.6 ¡ I I I I j I Ii . I I I I I I I I I I I , I , / I I I I I I I 90 3.2' ¡ IIII! II! I T. II ¡ II ¡ ¡ 80 Ii! ! I I ¡ 1I I I I I I I ¡ I , ~ 2.8 I I I I I I I /1 I I , I ¡ I T i ~ I I I , I : 1I I I I I I I I I 70 ~2.4 ¡III IVi II III I I II I a I' II III II I 'II'\. II ,so ~ 2.0 I , I I 71 'I I I I I \ I I , I i 1III LlIIII! ¡!! I ~1111150~ ~,.61 ¡ II V! II: II I I i IÎ\! I I I ~ ~ ¡ ¡ I Vi III I II I I 1\1 1¡40C: 8,.2! 117I! II ¡I!! I I \ I II II Ili I ¡ II I I! I I I I f\ 1/30 0.8 i I Vi I I I I ! I I! I i I I I I I I 1I I I I I I I I I I I I I \ I I 20 0.41Vi III III I T I II Ilìll 1I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 10 0.0 VI ! i I I I I I ¡ I ! I I I I I I 0 ~ m N W 0 ~ m N WoO 000 ~ ~ N N N M M ~ § 8 8 8 8 8 8 8880 Cover Thickness Exp. Pressure,ft Exudation Pressure, PSI Krazan Testing Laboratory , . ,. AppaJdix B Page B.t APPENDIX B EARTHWORK SPECIFICA nONS GENERAL SCOPE OF WORK: These specifications and applicable plans pertain to and include all earthwork associated with the site rough grading, including but not limited to the furnishing of all labor, tools, and equipment necessary for site clearing and grubbing, stripping, preparation of foundation materials for receiving fill, excavation, processing, p1ac:ement and compaction of fill and backfill materials to the lines and grades shown on the project grading plans, and disposal of excess materials. PERFORMANCE: The Contractor shall be responsible for the satisfactory completion of all earthwork in accordance with the project plans and specifications. This work shall be inspected and tested by a representative ofKrazan and Associates, Inc., hcreinaftcr known as the Soils Engineer and/or Testing Agency.. Attainment of design grades when achieved shall be certified to by the project Civil Engineer. Both the Soils Engineer and the Civil Engineer are the Owner's representatives. If the Contractor should fiLii to meet the technical or design requirements embodied in this document and on the applicable plans, he shall make the I necessary leadjusnnents until all work is deemed satismctory as determined by both the Soils Engineer and the Civil Engineer. No deviation from these specifications shall be made except upon written approval of the Soils Engineer, Civil Engineer or project Architect. No earthwork shall be perfonned without the physical presence or approval of the Soils Engineer. The Conttactor shall notify the Soils Engineer at least two (2) working days prior to the commencement of any aspect of the site earthwork. . ' The Contractor agrees that he shall assume soil and complete responsibility for job site conditions during the course of construction of this project, including safety of all persons and property; that this requirement shall apply continuously and not be limited to nonnal working hours; and that the Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold the Owner and the Engineers harmless from any and all liability, real or alleged, in connection with the performance of work on this project, except for liability arising from the soil negligence of the Owner or the Engineers. TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS: All compaCted materials shall be densified to a density not less that 90 per cent relative compaCtion based on ASTM Test Method DI557-78, UBC or CAL-216, as specified in the technical ponion of the Soil Engineer's report. The location and frequency of field density tests shall be as detennined by the Soils Engineer. The results of these tests and compliance with these specifications shall be the basis upon which satisfactory completion of work will be judged by the Soils Engineer. SOILS AND FOUNDATION CONDITIONS: The Contractor is presumed to have visited the site and to have familiarized himself with existing site conditions and the contents of the data presented in the soil report. The ContraCtor shall make his 0\\'Il interpretation of the data contained in said report, and the Contractor shall not be relieved of liability under the contraCtor for any loss sustained as a result of any variance between conditions indicated by or deduced from said report and the actual conditions encountered during the progress of the work. Kruan & Associates, Ine. Offices Serving The Wcsrcm United States CIZ2m3O.DOC AppeDdix B Page B.'. DUST CONTROL: The work includes dust control as required for the alleviation or prevention of any dust nuisance on or about the site or the borrow area., or oft'-site if caused by the Conttaetors opcntion either during the perfonnance of the earthwork or resulting from the conditions in which the ContraCtOr leaves the site. The Contractor shall assume all liability, including court costs of codefendants, for all claims related to dust or windblown materials attributable to his work. SITE PREPARATION Site preparation shall consist of site clearing and grubbing and the preparations of foundation materials for receiving fill. CLEARING AND GRUBBING: The Contractor shall accept the site in this present condition and shall demolish and/or remove from the area of designated project, earthwork all structures, both surface and subsurface, trees, brush, roots, debris, organic matter, and all other matter determined by the Soils Engineer to be deleterious. Such materials shall become the property of the Contractor and shall be removed from the site. Tree root systems in proposed building areas should be removed to a minimum depth ofthrcc (3.0) feet and to such a extent which would permit removal of all roots larger than one (1) inch. Tree root removed in parking areas may be limited to the upper one and one-half (1-112) feet of the ground surface. Backfill or tree root excavation should not be permitted until all exposed surfaces have been inspected and the Soils Engineer is present for the proper conttol of bacldill placement and compaction. Burning in areas which are to receive fill materials shall not be pennitted. SUB GRADE PREPARATION: Surfaces to receive Engineered Fill, building or slab loads shall be prepared. as outlined above, scarified to a depth of six (6) inches, moisture-conditioned as necessary, and compacted to 90 % relative compaction. Loose and/or areas of disturbed soils shall be moisture conditioned and compacted to 90% relative compaction. All ruts, hummocks, or other uneven surface features shall be removed by surface grading prior to placement of . any fill material. All areas which are to receive fill materials shall be approved by the Soils Engineer prior to the placement of any of the fill material. EXCAVATION: All excavation shall be accomplished to the tolerance normally defined by the Civil Engineer as shown on the project grading plans. Allover excavation below the grades specified shall be backfilled at the Contractor's expense and shall be compacted in accordance with the applicable technical requirements. FILL AND BACKFILL MATERIAL: No material shall be moved or compacted without the presence of the Soils Engineer. Material from the required site excavation may be utilized for construction site fills provided prior approval is given by the Soils Engineer. All materials utilized for constructing site fills shall be free from vegetable or other deleterious matter as detennined by the Soils Engineer. PLACEMENT, SPREADING AND COMPACTION: The placement and spreading of approved fill materials and the processing and compaction of approved fill and native materials shall be the responsibility of the Contractor. However, compaction of fill materials by flooding, ponding, or jetting shall not be pennitted unless specifically approved by local code, as well as the Soils Engineer. Krazan &. Associates, Inc. OfIiecs Serving The Western United States CI229'1UJO.DOC " . . . .. Appeadix B Pa¡e B.3 Both cut and fill shall be sur&ce compacted to the !atis:6Iction of the Soils Engineer prior to final acceptance. SEASONAL LIMITS: No fill material shall be placed, spread, or rolled while it is frozen or thawing or during unfavorable wet weather conditions. When the work is interrupted by heavy rains, .fill operations shall not be resumed until the Soils Engineer indicates that the moisture content and density of previously placed fill are as specified. Krazan & Associates, Inc. Offices Serving The Western United States 0229'1030.DOC . . , ... Appcadix C Pale C.! . , . APPENDIX C PA VEME~ SPECIFIC A TJONS 1. DEFINITIONS - The tcnn "pavement" shall include asphalt concrete surfacing. untreated aggregate base, and aggregate subbase. The tenn "subgrade" is that portion of the area on which surfacing, base, or subbase is to be placed. . The tenn "Standard Specifications": hereinafter referred to is the January 1991 Standard Specifications of the State of California, Department of Transportation, and the "Materials Manual" is the Materials Manual of Testing and control Procedures, State of California, Department of Public Works, Division of Highways. The tenn "relative compaction" refers to the field density expressed as a percentage of the maximum laboratory density as defined in the applicable tests outlined in the Materials Manual. 2. SCOPE OF WORK - This portion of the work shall include all labor, materials, tools and equipment necessary for and reasonable incidental to the completion of the pavement shown on the plans and as herein specified, except work specifically notes as "Work Not Included." ( 3. PREPARATION OF THE SUBGRADE - The Contractor shall prepare the surface of the various subgrades receiving subsequent pavement courses to the lines, grades, and dimensions given on the plans. The upper six (6) inches of the soil subgrade beneath the pavement section shall be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90%. The finished subgrades shall be tested and approved by the Soils Engineer prior to the placement of additional pavement courses. 4. UNTREATED AGGREGATE BASE - The aggregate base course shall be spread and compacted on the prepared subgrade in conformity with the lines, grades, and dimensions shown on the plans. The aggregate base material shall confonn to the requirements of Section 26 of the Standard Specifications for Class 2 material, 1-1/2 inches maximum size. The base course material shall be compacted to a minimum relative compaCtion of 95%. The base material shall be spread and compacted in accordance with Section 26 of the Standard Specifications. The material shall be spread in layers not exceeding 6 inches and each layer of base course shall be tested and approved by the Soils Engineer prior to the placement of successive layers. 5. AGGREGATE BASE - The aggregate subbase shall be spread and compacted on the prepared subgrade in conformity with the lines, grades, and dimensions shown on the plans. The aggregate subbase material shall confonn to the requirements of Section 25 of the Standard Specifications for Class 2 material. The subbase material shall be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of95%, and it shall be spread and compacted in accordance v.'Ìth SeCtion 25 of the Standard Specifications. Each layer of subbase shall be tested and approved by the Soils Engineer prior to the placement of successive layers. 6. ASPHALTIC CONCRETE SURFACING - Asphaltic concrete surfacing shall consist of a mixture of mineral aggregate and paving grade asphalt, mixed at a central mixing plant and spread and compacted on a prepared base in conformity with the lines, grades, and dimensions shown on the plans. The viscosity grade of the asphalt shall be AR-4000. The mineral aggregate shall be Type B, Y2 inch maximum size, medium grading, and shall confonn to thê requirementS set forth in SeCtion 39 of the Standard Specifications. The drying, proportioning, and mixing of the materials shall confonn to Section 39. Kraz.an & Associates, Ine. Offices Serving The Western United States G::291O3O.DOC A ppeDdix C Page C.::: The prime coat, spreading and compacting equipment, and spreading and compacting the mixture shall conform . to the applicable chapters of Section 39, with the exception that no surface course shall be placed when the atmospheric temperature is below SO degrees F. The suri3cing shall be rolled with a combination steel-wheel and pneumatic rollers, as described in Section 39-6. The surlàce course shall be placed with an approved self- propelled mechanical spreading and finishing machine. 7. FOG SEAL COAT - The fog seal (mixing type asphaltic emulsion) shall conform to and be applied in accordance with the requirements of Section 37. Knwut &. Associates, Ine:. Offices Serving The Western United States 0%29'XD0.DOC , -., €fi1I<razar1 & ASSOCIATES, INC. , . . GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION March 26, 1997 KA Project No. 022-97030 Mr. Chris Stockton URS Greiner 100 California Street., Ste. #500 San Francisco, California 94111-4529 RE: Pavement Design Recommendations Proposed United States Postal Service (USPS) Main Post Office Garden View Road and EJ Camino Real Encinitas, California Dear Mr, Stockton: As requested, we are providing Pavement Design Recommendations for the above-referenced site. We have previously conducted a Geotechnical Engineering Investigation, dated February 21, 1997. Our report provided recommended pavement sections for traffic indexes ranging from 4 to 7.5. The pavement design recommendations presented herein are for traffic indexes ranging from 8 to 9.5. Traffic Index~ . "'A~DhaIti~;co~~àe~ .' !:,m!~!~~~~~Wil"':" :i¡¡':::~J~h~~~Ji~~~]~~Wii:..!T:, 8 0 4.5" 13.5" 12.0" 85 90 50" 14.0" 15.0" 12.0" 12.0" - -II ).) 95 55" 16.5" 120" . 95% compaaion based on ASTM Tut Method DlSS7 Dr C4L 216 .. 90~~ compaaion based on ASTM Tl!St Ml!thod DlSS7 Dr C4L 216 Offices Serving The Western United States 215 West DakotaAvenue. CloVIs CA 93612. (209)348-2200. (800) 8~711. Fax: (209)348-2201 D221mXSC.L m KA No. 022-97030 Page No.2 If you have any questions, or if we may be of further assistance, pac do not hesitate to contact our office at (209) 348-2200 or (800) 800-0711. RlFAAT S. SALEM Project Engineer RCE No. 52762 ~QG- ~~ DEAN ALEXANDER Geotechnical J:.ngjnecr RGE No. 002051/RCE No. 34274 RSS/DA:rs Krazan & Associates, me. Offices Serving The Western United States C22D7D30.l TR ,~ " CilKrnzaIJ. & ASSOCIATf=S. INC. , . ~ GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION /- Apri123, 1997 KA Proj= No. 022-97030 Mr. Chris Stockton URS Greiner 100 California Street, Ste. #500 San Francisco, California 94111-4529 RE: Portland Cement Pavement Desip Recommendations Proposed United States Postal Service (USPS) Main Post Office Garden View Road and El Camino Real Encinitas, California Dear Mr. Stockton: ( At your request, we are providing additional Portland Cement Pavement Design Recommendations for the above-referenced site. Krazan &, Associates, Inc. previously conducted a Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Report, dated February 21, 1997, (KA Project No. 022-97030). Our report provided recommended pavement sections for traffic indexes of 4.5 and 7.0. The pavement design recommendations presented herein are for a traffic indexes ranging from 8 to 9.S. , ::::n:;>:::::n::;n'Tn:¡::;::r:?:i¡H}¡[l:JQrll8#~:(2~t:¡;imm::i:::¡J:ntr::(::ÇiâS$;nn:;:i::,:n::::¡'?::: ...:. . ...: .':",:: Traffic Index .. " Concrete"'" .. ..AureuteBase* ." .'. Compacted Sub2radeu 80 8.5 7.0" 6.5" 120" 120" 7.5" 7.0" 90 9.5 8.0" 8.5" 7.5" 12.0" 8.0" 120" . 9S" CIlIn HIdÜH8 baftl",. J4STM Tat Ml!tlttHl DlSS711r C4L 216 .. 90~~ compø.ctiø" bar.d II" ASTM Tat Ml!tltlld DlSS7 IIr C4L 216 ... MÙIÙrIluIt Cllmpressi". Slr."gtlt of J,OOO psi omce8 Servin¡ The Wuee1'1l United States 215 West Dakota Avenue. Clovis CA 93612. (209) 341-2200. (100) ~711 . Fax: (209) 348-2201 C2287030.L.T2 KA No. 022-87030 Pag. No. 2 If you have any questions, or if we may be of fUrther usistaDce. please do DOt bcsitat.e 10 contact our office at (209) 348-2200 or (800) 800-0711. .r~ RespectÑ 11y submitted, KRAZAN " ASSOCIATES, INC. i! RIFAAT S. SALEM Project Pngj~ RCE No. 52762 c,..}eQ.. - ~a ~ D BAN ALEXANDER Gcot~"ica1 Pngj~ ROE No. 00205 llRCE No. 34274 ~ RSS/DA:kd f;JI ;;'" ;f~ Y:. ~ ~~ .ê '!.~' .f1J ¡, t. ....~JI rr~, ~ i' F,,~ M! L:;~.:":),,",,...,..x,.,..-r', >--~I"'I~~ NOV .. 5 1997 a. M I '¡\~ ". . - -" '~r-:91""1" 1!)-t ('¡,,',':If7:).:: ~'""'~I..I, !(o!.,I..~.,--¡._.V'::: Krazaa " A..odata, IDe. Offices Serving The Wcst.c:m United States DZZ87'Oi3O.LT2 Street Address Category Senal # Name Description Plan ck. # Year \ , • - ... ,.. x ., �.• w'G i y. 'ts M h r +/`\ ,y . r n ' �i C , . / i` M1 \ Dr O. \ a }a ' 16 TW 4; \ 8 ) FL \ < e c> 63.3) GND t 161 \ 1 T. 187 /8) ,62.15 \ '.. • ., , 168.6 TW / 13 \ \ \ 168.1 TF 112 \\ (164.8) GND 161.62 f,5. \ \ L S.C. - q : ,... 162.28 T.W.- 0.24' FROM F.C. •� 160. 19 T.C. , • , 162.78 EL T.C. • 161. }1 16608 [.S. 161.31 F.GO� 160.85 T. r. `.'•. 8.97 Fl. 171.8 TW 160 �F 4 .35 F.S \ 171.3 FL 16 7 76. HYDROLOGY STU 168.4 GND `58. F.L I TC \ •� ,,. I60. T.C. .� :�. 57.64 F.1, \\ \ , 768.16 T.W.- 2 -0e FROM i.c. I�• . A � \ \ .. �• �Do 16660 FL HP.) 159.69 7 .0.15676 F.L , \\ \ f {� / 159.79 FS. 4 a 0 5 20 50 x . 15831 T.G r. 7 •\h �`?' . 15721 F ¢ SCALE: 7:20 1 �. \`A�'�' �t4'� \ :. 156.75 T.C. t• \ 165.19 T. N.- 1.47 FROM F8 56 `\` \b l -25. EL _- 165.69 F.L \� ti?+ \\ `''' 2J•� `t ` s 15972 F.C. ,�'jr �.. \5 \� • �\ \ \ 4 r ' r Al T.C. " 1 \ ` O 3 154.91 F.L • �- ♦ \ O 154.87 T.. \\ \ Q .. �• • a . xz- .r 177.3 TW 178.8) FL \ ♦ .`. \ \ \ 173.3) GND - - 15617 t G 155.57 tG ` . . 157.67 F.S. `'f tiL G '�'6` 155.07 E5. `�••.. Sir ) -' ��I •� 6 x 7.46 .503 /s `` �pfy \``rtfy E '.., \ \ J�a _ \ , .1 n n I n 157.49 T.C. /3?�J \•f''1,� `'�' 7 : ', . \ \ \ \ 27 •• [� _� oo' e \� �\ •- o'; (128.88 1788 ¢ 783 L -„� r:, 128.79 FL , y . \ TBC 1. F / 152.51 r.. \\ i ! 129.48) TBW b r 151.707.0. ..� ' 149.76 T.C. \ i Y , 174,8 GND 9 1 152.ot Fs ) �`• _ ' . •• •1st � FL 71� � �, .2e FL \\ ____ _ _.� ;�,, 152.17 T. \ •, \ \ \ \ 3 -_ 24 ,28 /'' CO• .�)' ,:,` ,.. 151.61 S f �• " , , 146.47 T.C. fi 1y 9 `4 /1 1 \5`. \ f y 7 FS. 145.96 \ \ \ V �• •.. , ¢gyL i •6c � y1 c4♦ \ /. ' +I \ �9 \19�' ►5f ' 1 2 LW \ \ Illnnn \ • _� _ _ ^... _ - _ pd� _ r• 1 6 - - �. \9 s ��1��3 • \� s 18 1 T w .. 63.25 .N. IAt' FROM i.G I .° �. ... f a•. 163.75 F.A. \°!° 75721 F.G ` /y 5 �b y 1 ,•' . • r \ � ': a ' `' a ✓ ''\ •q • _. ! ,e• . z O 1 \ 4 `7 1.005 •b�� . : \ \\ \ ` ` N rw *= fg. �lb � = � � 781.0 Tw q 180.5 ' �g ; L o' �+� J• 'a $ 3 F ��� i a 178.3; F GND J `y1 a`' / °� I +• -- 4 14 3 ��._ �S I1/ 2% a , a • _\ � ►��_ t ti Wi z. 166.16 T°N66.6.47LFROM F.G. I C. _ • -a.' ..,+ 19 ` `� _1 / - O A , ' } 15647 FG• z 1 • \� .,r \e lF � •� � / , . a,, , T.: .. 13 �� 6aJ I J 130.10 ' y> 9 , 12 W I �'•� F '.t.' 65 � fy > l 4 • 1 7.79}f , / ``, '� , \G \S' �� S A • _� 4 I ` �• ' � ` 1� : I • .. � k ♦ .. -``.�; 13 r - 4 4 �i •°'/ 3 f5• O 110' ,�" '� •' \•� •a a • ••• :4 . I t - t .07 T.N. 3°36' FROM F.C. g. 'S � / ''{7�i 6.3215 \,'lp'.. \7bg f r•....� ~ . a :;. .•a <. 4 • '. 169.57 EL \" ',(♦ 4 �)• 1 C. ' � ►1 ` ra• 155p5F.G 150. U. •a ,• 144 ,1°j f , G ••• 185.8 rw 1 ``� �, 1 +'� 3 . � 44 \ \ \�+ f� 1 184.9) FL }1°�.f�NK 7. \ " 182.8) GND \� , 9 a _ I O • + U1 7.50E }`��5+ 17 130.E LIP 1 L� 130.89 f 30' • 13 • ��. 1 I I ) L j 171.01 T.N.- J. %' F1iO4 EG •' ' 1351! F.L 7 /37 ?7 s i (� 3 0 1 . p •�` \�, \S 121. L II ; 131.41 TBC 0 0V 1r/ pi �� a t0of �+ T• 4 TBW /3J / 1 l,OJ /tg a .. , $ E n o t4. /� 1f J 'JS /.0635♦ 1 C;' - , • • ° _r. /f1 t� J � s JFs c / F 'c , • 6°of. ` � g e��`� <b 6 ` Jg � . � � ' � E 04 1S192 M LL: Tr 1 p , 133.42 f.A 9 • g .. :. -•+ .t ., ,, 771.96 T.W.- 1.03' FROM f.G s d ° , �' . O'. 1� .il 1 4e FL Ka. .•. /J 'o, / +s 5 O J - \ ° , ? •� ��„pF�� / �` g � ' C q'�,♦ 3 �'��'f° �• *�, ( (7 30.91 ) FL s•a. a �-+ I ( 131.65) T 3 v t S. O , O 3l rn I �� \ (� I 131.7 TBW c r 188 °0 TW 3 '� _ \�'' 3 . j 187 FL T• 149.01 T. . / t4' o 9 184.8 GND 171 u . W 1884 TW 187 166.66 FL ''♦d •t' d• • �� +wX'. H.P. iSS.95FG "'J �� 6' • 1� °j• 4 1N� �cb .� •,,�> I t I J .at. 8 FL 1566 T.W- 1.43' FROM iG. 4' A\�r ` 1`+; <P s, s J ' F 1 V r 185.23 GND 156.90 F.L ' t 15L69 FA 7 6 , t •• �� i t Ij 1y' i�• 1 �. ,�� ��,. Tf 65 \ � V f� 6� 1 1 ) �` ' j .r , • r• 152.56 T.N.- 0.71' FROM \' tP \• \`.'�' . `•' 'y I /' �i `3 „ h• \f'" 5 753.08 FL 9• ♦ �' a �•,' J w�♦` f 1 " ' 7 ` ,�4 '�'\" 149.71 F.C. ♦ p. 1 U 0 \. ♦ ;�8 1 ♦ ` 4, '[ 1 V / 60 l F n _ ., 1 T.N.- 0.76' FROM F. •� ,LG• Zr 9 m op '1 if �y1; jl' �� f� 1f ' 'J ' \ � a 1.0635 133.27 1.0. = I I •d ,' r � 151.06 F.L • \ 0�' 7 ♦ �,. Q , q' `�' U2,7J FL 149.16 F G 16 5 ` rP ' 2 ` cr 1 • Y 4 �•�• 5 T� I 1 I \ ,819 m 131.) L 187.5 TW F. 87.0 FL t`' 9 I�`f �/ , 2Co>, • • �� 15 � s 11 1 �'� t'o �I ©• I �� / 5 I 131.52 F r`�. 186 1c, 3 . I ri �,� �+ • Y j 15 `"' ~ �� 0 3 / � II ' (132. ) Tr z <4 to ` ` ' (!7 ` � t ` 1`' ♦ I 1� 4• ' .. i I id ` •+• .�'. WR 162.26 T.W. - 114' FROM F.C. �- - - � �•I � ` : �Q �- \`�• f`+ � .`� d° I 0 �1 \• ��. I � �!�• i \\ � ` \ � ' 'e /i p , � � ' ��.�z • f 162.78 F.L ►9 ` �5� . f ` ' �`.� et l I I .� :.+ ; • ? / 149.73 F.C. a - - 187 7 ) TOP , + 186 5 FL I Q v t 4• 4 G• � ���' 1 L _ .�' Q S 191.2 TOP \ \\ N 89'41 '49" t2• � \ ~• `` \ w 190.0 fL - _ -, -, rn m 4n rn - - - - - - , \\ • - -- - - -- - -- - -- - -- - - ,T,- - 722.00 lo th 1sT 1 ' N 't T _ \ N _ - ► w T 132.6; to Vk ,. e • i l ` 4 . _ _ { . , e ♦ ,♦.__•..: _.. - n :. .fir) �• > t !..• e. - wM.Pdll Tr di,w�;iY ". _:..x�... _.r.:_. -. ... ... '.. ..... _. ° _ .. ..._r..._ - .. _. .. .. -. __... - :- ..__ -: '..:... r.; ',:.r :. -. ..._. _ &_5.9ia..ru.11J.w.u.= Y�:c 1_. ._.0 - .':.iV J•r6....= i .. .. .... .. ..: .. _ .. :, ...... . , ,. �, , :..r,� . arm ' .... *PRr;,.. _ ._- ,._.: - '' - 1rr r or Y' m r " o .. i �. _ CORPORATION 100 90U'Pii �o� 911oi VSli M 1 A pAsAi 1B - 1I L4.W (816) 70A —eiol 1 4� - -9 yMMyyy WRITTEN D.E71510 011 ,NESS DRAWINGS �` .. SHALL HAVE PREE CEDENCE OVER S CALED CONTRACT VERIFY DIMENSION S: ORS SHALL VERIFY AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL DI MENSIONS _ AND CONDITIONS ON THE JOB AND THIS OFFICE MUST BE NOTIFIED OF ANY VARIATIONS 2f BY THE DWENSIONS R CONDITIONS SHOWN T N, T'1 BY THESE DRAWINGS S HOP DETR MUST BE { M � • , { J - -. S BEFORE E P FOR ROCEEDNG WITH FABRICATION. APPROVAL ARCHITECT SEAL A via V55 7 6 f 5B - 14.0 z , 4A 7� u 3 p. 1 '` - - " ENGINEER SEAL IS x � VHC `.Jt_1 7B f V12 or CAL 1 119 t• f• Z 46.E CONS B ' ULTANT 4 d 7 t rRUbk1UNT CC TROLLER Q va I IN BUILDI GS & GROUNDS UB �i 1894 NEW BUILDING TRU - �i 78.16 . I t I L FINISH FLOOR +7.0" Li V37 V3 , W ., • V1 t r.- H 7 r r r r r r r r = r .;• 1 _N M . r N w 4J a0 co CO T 7 Cj U C.1 N •— N O W W W i 1 � �1 19.61 � � , • U y y 1 + r N E - I K I U V U tY D: K W if r= >♦ 1 O R - } r) 16.0 '�' ? -- .``r` _.._.r. l.F 1,20 l_ scA r , Z REVISIONS — GA/0C APPROVAL �. DElCRATON DATE M M J OWU DE" CM CU p• UNM STATES POSTAL SERVICE ' daww PRalrcr R LC 98 ENCINtTAS MAIN OFFICE "IE�e y RLC ENCINRAS, CALIFORNIA • �`le ., F�ww+EO� �Pr�aMm _ ocgal carn�cT ra, w+�r DA71 use PWIX&CT NO DRAWNG 40. oTrr�N�¢ r I RRIGATION PLAN 5046'1 !r 12/15/4 a J2 OATr So" - 1:20 S+,EET a e. . .. "Fur - ... s _ - - - ' -s.. . - 1 . . .- k M y: - - - a _ Y '. ,'# 14;1; 1. M P . IRRIGATION LEGEND t , . ,,. 4 a _ - ,.„ ' r . . •.Art ' - .M w SYM DESCRIPTION . y - z . . r:.. ® 2 -1/2" IRRIGATION METER MIN. 50 G.P.M., 60 P.S.I. ^, - . CLASS 200 PVC IARERAIL LINE USE ALTERLiNE PURPLE PIPE Pr . ,- -. 4 , ._ -,-_ _ H. 4 I AIN INE U A ERT INE PIPE — PURPLE PIPE � . SC 0 PVC P PE M L SE L L '. �"'_ . - — — CORPORATION CAL SENSE ET i 12 R CONTROLLER W/ EXTERIOR POLE MOUNT ANTENA 12 . ., . . - RB ESP —B+ 32 STATION WALL MOUNT CONTROLLER MODEL NO. ESP -32MC `' ' . yl rt " °, FEBCO 825Y REDUCED PRESSURE BACKFLOW wllt �..� . _ - In soya HUDO x AVOM - - - - . p RB 1812 SAM 8H PCS 040 - rs.n coas� suoi - - _ #- . — — — CS -02 } v RB 1812 SAM 8Q P 0 gaw vw —sim -_ .. RB 1812— SAM -12F .: _. . a RB 1812 — SAM -12H I 1. :,% Mf >- . QJ RB 1812- SAM -12Q -.. . . m RB 1812 — SAM —I5EST - �. . - 11 , y- . - RB 1812 — SAM -15F I NOTEi SYSTEM HAS BEEN DESIGNED FOR RECLAIMED WATER, - e RB 1812 — SAM -15H . O RB i 812— SAM -15Q - _ . Is RB 1812 —SAM —I5SST } O RB 1812— SAM -15T vE - SK&I -. - . 6 RB 1812— SAM -8H —FLT A O CONDBIION 7W " � - , ,_ - - i RB TBRID T— S— F— T40 -60 FIRM oRAMM SH OP s` K . ,'� suerrnw ,� >va o� FUR APPR� — — — - aEroRE r�oc®nc aRnl flrea�wnow _ E RB TBIRD T S T40 15 . . — — —30 9 RB TBIRD T 5 T40 CONNECT INTO . EXISITNG 2 -1/2' MAIN LINE ® >RB 1804 - SAM -15F ARCHITECT SEAL 1. _ . RB 1804— SAM -15H . RB 1804— SAM -150 . . . , , ,'' 11 . . ,, — — — — I - ': RB T BIRD T 4FC T30 5.0 ;' : RB T —BIR T -4P — T30 -1.0 V D C _ - RB T —BIRD T- 4PC— T30 -2.5 . : . . A RB T —BIRD T- 4PC— T30 -4.0 "lf' 1. ` ~' -- k RB EFB —CP SERIES PRESSURE REDUCING ELETRIC REMOTE CONTROL VALVE 11 . - : j. I IN D IRRIGATION N PRODUCTS `` = RA BIR GATIO 11 . J 1 . . IRRIGATI N NOTES T 1. . - . . a ...: . _ t S R ATIC r . -- ,<, INFORMATION DEPICTED ON THIS SHEET I DIAG AMM ONLY 1 . - ' . m ENGfNEER SEAL - ALL VALVES ARE TO BE IN SHRUB AREAS .. -- - ALL VALVES ARE TO BE PLACED IN A BROOKS VALVE BOX OR EQUAL 9 .,t _ (UNLESS VALVE IS AN AVB TYPE) :' . _--_ 0 BE ON TRIPLES U NOT 11 AL HEADS AR L E T WING JOINTS NLESS OTHERWISE ED .. -__ - - -- - - - - . E �,� __...�. OR SPECIFIED 4 . # � SYSTEM IS DESIGNED FOR 100X COVERAGE #' . FINAL PLACEMENT OF LATERAL LI NES, MAIN LINES AND VALVES IS TO BE _ 97 `{ k . -`-� B 2B coNNECT INTO :: .: Q DETERMINED IN THE FIELD BY THE IRRIGATION CONTRACTOR 11 �r4 Q 1 9 2U I �C EXISITNG 2 -1/2' MAIN LINE J SYSTEM I S DESIGNED FOR 50 P. S. I. OPERATING PRESSURE UNLESS `�`` "� �� ll : �: -- a STATED OTHERWISE - 1. W — I PRIOR f TEST ALL PRESSURE AND NON PRESSURE LINES @ 125 P.S. ( I I SPECIFICATION) CONSULTANT '. 0 COVERING SEE GERERAL RR GATION S : Y Q LL PRESSURE LINES ARE TO BE FLUSHED PRIOR TO INSTALLATION . y Z F VALVES s "` f' LL LATERAL LINES ARE TO BE FLUSHED PRIOR TO INSTALLATION Ir . { - �- -" 7 DB Q F HEADS I 2 9 7 , U LL LINES UNDER PAVING ARE TO BE PLACED IN SLEEVES TWO - � F W :.. r } iMES LINE SIZE UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED OR DEPICTED ' , } w ONTRACTOR IS TO VERIFY ALL GRADE CHANGES, WATER PRESSURES AND LOW AND LINE SIZING 6.0� LL DISCREPANCIES ARE TO BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE +; - �` - _QT W W + ANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO HARDSCAPE INSTALLATION AND OR PLANTING ` .. . . - A Y DISCREPANCIES NOT BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE LANDSCAPE _ . 14B E42 A CHITECT IN A TIMELY FASHION WILL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE . . . . . LL� I RIGATION CONTRACTOR (5EE GENERAL IRRIGATION SPECIFICATION ii ryrypp C La9� i . z I p AI t_- r` .. 1 , v x 1. . w no z Z 1 - i 2fi .. ... f' %t h . EMPLOYEE PARKING 'z. y/ ' "" N '' r. . I:.33 . DS '3 - ' �� urley �C.h : .. �' � � N � �, ,5: r7 .'' w { f 7 _ �, . ,' - - a,. 11 uaN -. �'.. _ - f 0 . F t:' r A114 16B Yr r - - - . .. . � - ' SCALE: 1.20 :. _.. ,., , I REVISIONS - CA/QC APPROVAL . - , „ �CPW"" DATE > �«�R Pr.�PA �. �. CD. UI�I'1'ED STATES POSTAL SERVICE _ - x - -..-, �-.-- I -� -�-, r DRAM PROW . NIT AS MAIN OF 11 . ENCNN CA LIFORNIA 11 RLC ENCI FACE crlEC�co . , . RLC ITAS, CAU 4, , . , _ - - RD. i _ _ [NG�IEOR APPROVED 4/s OdOP - - - YRILT 11 • DATE ups . oRAWW ml[ . . ' . oRAwINC ro. . - N - .' . IRwGATIO FLAN ,2�,s�9 5046 -1 . : ;. . 9 12 wh sou¢ �:2o sN¢r oP _ ; . Y �' . *: . _ , I - • .' .. w- . r r . a . ::i - i -. " .. :., : : -., s.l - _. _ -.. 'i .: Y ':.� a , gin - -. .. i .. ... ... a . .. n n. .: -' ., -' -..': _ '. ... -. '.. ... . -.. - . .. �:.. - "W' .. ,.. +.nr. ..,.. .. .. .. .. ,r. ... _ .. .!r -. � _ .• .r r- .a.... ..•. r ..,. .. w .... a.. «v .. ...M -..s .. _,. .. : ,. .:.4Y se. f 1. :.. a .,y r.. !:4.p+j:.. , .. , , ..ti+ , .,e.:r.�+n >rv. ..d..�....a x.grtYw.. +u..:.......:x'rYr :.- , rvw , ... , r . � , . � _ .. ..n _ _ ..:.eLt_ . -.e _ . �'" .. -..:. .. ,..,_ .�,'.. -._: .., ._ ..: ', -.... � .-.[ r:. i,: ..*.dx:..i•es..iS't�.�,- .r -..kw w. 'w'h:,:.?4i. ,'R«..ba3k, .. :- .. ..'.. -.. m ..: � iA, a .. .: _ .. , ... -. 1;; . .. - .. .,one' r , • Ct+� i v, W� i v Cu ,, PQ -+ L (IO)Platanus racemosa 36" - Box n (326)Trachetospermum ,jasminoides c o ftpo xAWrIo W 1 7Gat, over seed with white Alyssum , STAMPED CONCRETE PAVING (8)Prunus cerasifera `Vesuvius' INSTALL AND MATCH CITY STANDARD DETAIL 199 eoTm xvw9 °x "vxxvt 24' -Box PABADCR& CAIZ!'ORN7A 91101 (125)Juniperus virginiana `Silver Spreader' fk (aIe) �9e -uol ' r } 1 -Gat — • ! ! ! - /�, - - - WRITTEN OD 31SKWS ON THESE DRAWINGS :, ♦ + - 1 r • • - /� - • ♦ \ SHAH HAVE PR OVER DIM ENSIONS. CDWrRACTNTRACTORS SHALL VERIFY _ # • .. - / \ , _ - .. - AND D THIS OFFICE MUST OF ANY DIMENSIONS - ` ♦ • : - - FROM THE DIIE11510NS h CONDR10N5 SHOWN - .�' ! # • * - .. - �/ •\ (21 )Nerium oleander 'Casablanca' BE FO R P THIS OFFICE MR APPROVAL ~r BEFORE PROO B>7111G WITH FABRICATION. # ! 5 -Gal • ! - . * • # # « — ARCHITECT SEAL (5)Podocarpus henkelii r • ! • ' .,;; , - � 36" -Box • Zff • « # » r • • (61 ) .Os parvif olia « . ♦�« # V V18 4' —BOX r x «. ! » ! . # w • ! (3) Lo rive boulders _ � S th g 3' -5 ', � burry 50% 7- # » ! ♦ ! + « r » # r arathon 11 - Sod « • �j # (5)Prunus er s ra `Vesuvius' « w�• » r 24' -Bo r » r r • '; # » » ! (70) rach sper jasmin 10 * # ! » » ! « # ! -Gal, ove se th white Aly o f / + - # ! < ocal aver bou - « Smoo gr 3,_ 5,.� burr i -. - ENGINEER SEAL « » ! # # H12 \ T DSCAp 0 url • « « ! • » ! # # ! VHC Marathon II �b•I (U r� , « # » ! ! Ajuga rep Sod I « ! ! # tats on cen C4 ocnl river boulders _ « ♦ » # v12 Smooth gray, 31_51% burry 50% -3 «! # # »!� ♦ ` (150)Gardenia jasminoides `August Beauty' CALTF`p ♦ ! • ! ♦ 1 -Gal . • » ♦ # ! ♦!!! W « # ♦ # # CONSULTANT * * ♦ w ♦ !� # ♦ (40)Trachelospermum ,Jasminoides . - -- - -- - -- - - W 1 -Gat, over seed with white Alyssum 1 « r ♦ ! ! se w w ! * (3)Prunus cerasif era `Vesuvius' - # * * w�► ► • 24' — BOX TRUCK 1 fi # # » • • (21) ba o uriculata • ! ♦ « # s NEW BUILDING (2wtmus r if6lit�C W « r » ®r 1 -Gal Box (4)Ulmus arvifotla « • r • » * r + ! • FINISH FLOOR +7.0 W ! a w • (57)1-I - nsis `Lipstick' • a » ! w -Gal _ ! ! # » r (65)Trachelospermum jasminoides )ITrachelospiermum jasminoides V37 V36 1 -Gat, over seed with white Alyssum Alyssum « r # ♦ # « ♦ ! ! • (41)Hibiscus rosa- sinensis `Lipstick' # • i # ♦ # # 1 - Gat « r w r r r w w vi Y 1 r i w w a ♦! • r i w r ♦ a ♦ ♦ r ♦ • x 1XI ! # w ♦ r ♦ •! ! w # M N O O O W W W W W 9l +: « ♦ # w • r i ♦ ♦ r i i ♦ a w • ! i w l r r �ppDSCAPf h to ♦ r w # a . # w # # i ! (4)Pinus hatepen �QEC� 'Ik) •_ 24 Box. C4 C4 )A FC U U Q Cr Ir Cr Of W ' 111111 MINI in ♦ ♦ # a ! ! ♦ w ♦ # ♦ ! ♦ i # ♦ r w i ♦ • • • # a w # ♦ ! w ♦ w ♦ # w # • ! t a ♦ ! ! w # # ! ! r w ♦ # r r • • w ! ♦ w i • # w ! w ! • r • ♦ • • ! • • w ♦ • r a • • • t a ! w r • ♦ # ! w a t • • ♦ r r • ♦ r • • w ♦ • • • °• :.. �e�I " # # w # ♦ r ♦ r # a ♦ w ♦ ♦ w ! # i i # ♦ # a ♦ ! ♦ ♦ a i i w w i w a • # # ! ! i • w ! ♦ ♦ ♦ ! • • i • ! • t • w ! • a w • w ! • ! ♦ w ♦ t • r ♦ ♦ • ♦ a w r • i • w t ♦ i • ♦ • • ! �,{: ,:;¢ - z,�:;. r ! # # ♦ # • ♦ i ♦ ♦ # ♦ r !. • r w #! i ♦ ♦ ♦ i ! r • ! i i w # ! ! w • ♦ • • a • • i ♦ • # i # # ! ! ! • # # r i i r r ! • ♦ ! r ♦ w i ♦ r r ! i ♦ # r • • # ! w w w w ! ! # a a •` -,." . i : # ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ w r # ! • ♦ ! i # i ! i ♦ ♦ ! r ! • ! ! ♦ ! i ♦ w ! ! # # ♦ # ! ! ♦ • ! • • r ! w ! • i ♦ • t • • • ♦ ♦ w # ! • ♦ ! i ♦ • w • w • ! r w ♦ • ! i ♦ ♦ • ! ! ! w ! ♦ • ♦ ! w ,x: .. i - ! ♦ ! • ♦ ! R ♦ ! ! ! w a ♦ • • ! ! w r ♦ ! ! ♦ ♦ ♦ a ! ♦ • ! ♦ • ♦ # • i w • ! ! ! w i ♦ • • • ♦ • i • • i • • ! • i ! f w ! ♦ w R • w w ♦ ♦ ♦ w ! ! ♦ w ♦ w r ♦ ♦ • t w ! ! ! ♦ ♦ • • � - . - # ! ! ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ i ♦ ! ♦ i ! • • i ! # i i • ♦ t w ♦ # ! w ! w w i i ♦ • r • ♦ • ! ! • • • ♦ • • ! ► i • • w ♦ i i ♦ i i i • ♦ w i i w ♦ r r i r ♦ ♦ • • i • w • • w • • • ! r ♦ ! .�:t. " - - - SCALE: 1:20 # w i ! ♦ ♦ ! • • • • ! r # ♦ i • • ♦ ! w ! ! ! w • ♦ i • ♦ w # a a i r i ♦ i • • i • ! i • i # ♦ ! ! ♦ i • • i • ! ! w ♦ i ! ! • • • w w i a # w ♦ ! ! • • ! • • • • i w w ♦ i ♦ • • ♦ t - # ♦ # • ! r r i • ! i r • ! ! ♦ ! i i ♦ • w ♦ ♦ i • ! ! i i r • • ! r r • • w • r ♦ • r • • ! i • ! ♦ w r • ♦ ! ! ♦ ! w • ! i ♦ ♦ • w ♦ • • • # i r • • w ♦ • • • w ♦ ♦ w • ♦ • a • i ♦ ! i r # • # # # # a w r w ♦ i ♦ • • • # ♦ • • ! ♦ i ♦ w ! r • ♦ i • • • • • • ! • • • ! • • • • • • t i ! • # w i ♦ • ! w • w • • ♦ • • ! # • w w • ! • • • • ! ♦ w t a ! • • • • REVISIONS - OA/OC APPROVAL ! w # ♦ ! ♦ • ! • w • ! ! • ♦ w w w w r • • ! • • ♦ ! w ! t • ♦ t ! • •aR r r • r a ! • • • w • • • • • • r s w • • ♦ t t r r w ♦ w ♦ t r ♦ • ♦ • • * ♦ • w w ♦ w • • t O�pN D„n D� pip ra , rc/►A orn►. oa % w /9TATM POSTAL SERWCE --, ---• •n � — •- -•-- -• --•—•--•—•--•--.-- ,-- �-- •••--- •'— «.�— ..._..._.. —.._ OMMI vROILR .ate r I c L ENCINITAS. CAUFORNW NCINITAS MAIN OFFICE ., R LC (59 >Flcus puroiln a+l•Iwt _ j �� on" Ns _ , A -Gal. traln on watt, one per panel EXISTING TREES-ND CUT / NG FILL wM• + `us" PM= NO' GRAWNG NO. 12�I PlJWT14G PLAN 5046-1 M 10 12 -> oAA salt t:,Q . ., . ._ . _._. - ::. . b _ .... '. .r '. .. . -r'.': :.., -' '... n. '. -.,., . ,. v :..r r. .x Ca -.', ., e .q:... .r:. _ _, u- ,: _ -. v. #. der 11 w , '. - - 11 5 , ,.. �. - ., .nJ r ".1 - .. - _ :: - . v t .. . . v , v 4_ , - :. I F - �- I .: 4f'; it " :�'. .' _ - .,,,e 11 ,.. ° 8,, •..,; e. I :, r , r:,; r J i. wta 11 . _. .. 2 i ,.. :. - - I • "... , p,a, „ya'YAII`, S ,,,y:e,4 - :n .. - .. na:v i e .1' a >kt : M� g - y „ _,” v I } a ,< .k I .. .. -. ,- w. r , £ PLANT LEGEND - - A F HEMEROOCALIS HYBRID 'SUNDIAL 1 GAL. 30" O.C. ti , c o RIO o �xa•r =o iv 11 , _ I +.. M, - - . t n. ' Q . . , •, r ROSMARINUS OFF. HUNT. BLUE ® 1 GAL. 24" O.C. 11 1 66 MOWN HUDSON A vsNUS . ^� :.:- - _ . . . , , 7 ,, r�wDSxw cAzgoaxz.► 6u01 i - . • : = ; . Ws) ewe -6101 ; TULBAGHIA VIOLACEA 1 GAL. O 30" O.C. tr ,. w t b . . - . . APTENIA CORDIFOLIA FLATS 0 10" O.C. ,: , . e: . ; ; '.: f= .. 4 '.. - • 4 - ' t . ' yam . 11, . - ' A ' ♦ • i i i i i i A IA REDOLENS QUARTS ® 12" O.C. . 11 I . CAC Q . x , ;I;'I''''r ;',',, - wRrnEN DMIE/SIONS ON THESE DRAwNIGS t ;,;, ,', , SHALL HAVE PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED "' ;';'' "'''';';' ROSMARINUS OFF. 'PROSTRATA' FLATS 0 8" O.C. y . " �, ,',,;',',',',[,',',�, DIMENSIONS: CONTRACTORS ffiALL VERIFY - - - ^'.�: - ,', , �'�',',', , , - AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL DIMENSIONS - - '... u. - .. AND CONDITIONS ON THE JOB AND THIS - . OFFICE MUST BE NOTIFlED OF ANY VAR NOTE ALL ON SITE SHRUBS SHALL RECEIVE A 1',,,°�,,,s . - - - . - SU MMED TO THIS OFFICE FOR APPROVAL . ., ' LAYER OF FINE WOOD BARK MULCH UNLESS A BEFORE WITH TION. : GROUND COVER HAS BEEN SPECIFIED. FABRICA .. • i . I ARCHITECT SEAL .. . . - . . : .. vv . _' • , STAMPED CONCRETE PAVING ,1 % . INSTALL AND MATCH CITY S A R D I . ' . t I ,• :.:' , - _ .. .. I .1 . , - ' . - _ _ _ . - , - .. ., - - ' . '._ , - _" ": 11 . l „ . d, , .> \ - �[' .`r t I , . r , \ .. ., , . '• , .• _ I Af _ . . . J : _ I , • - "' , : .. . ♦ : , I • ENGINEER .: SEAL . ' 11 . _ — . . ,_ - —� f .. -_ .. > i. J AP ��_ . 1 ' Y .y _ o ' r — _ . . ,. . ., . . I I , - � (11)Platanus racemosa J rf Dr CALLF r .- - 36" -Box W — w L1— CONSULTANT o ! 1 1 8 . .. q T T d „ 2 . r . i 0 Z 6 v . . . .� . ' - - i . ',. Q _ _ l ' J I - _ .. i ' .:O , ,, U F W . IE µ t/) . a n w 1 1 C4 Ulro s ry f oil ,., /1111 - L' � I . _1 � �� III' I 'A �,_ -t 4/A - .: ,., . , I I - , I' . 2 >Ulr�us pa vif lia ,. . -Cl I 36' -Box :P4:. Marathon II ,. - 1. ;., Sod , . `I . 1. . 7 ,>: - 1. , . F H---i (70)Hlbiscus rosa- sinensis `L 'Lipstick' . . _> . I -Gal , . , ,. . J . . 2x4 dwood : . m co H ypica1) (� t, W - . w ,r, . Z ,'' `White' ' : I `,. . (� 1 -Gal ,, 11 W .� - 1- al, over r Bed wit w Ite Al i slu� p J y . .. ..r, 11 Q EMPLOYEE PARKING . :,. ,� �{' : X33 ,,,� I� i r .. - - i , ,y - i s SCAPr �A,n � 0 r ♦ # ��E �D� f9 u1y . . ... .. - - • ♦ Mr r r r r r r r r r r r ♦ ♦ . t r r r i i # i i i i ` 11 IW : , t _ Sf�INF .0 . . 7 +� — . . r r ♦ ♦ ♦ r r r ♦ r r r # r r • • • r r ♦ ♦ ♦ r ♦ • r r ♦ • ~ r # r ♦ r ♦r ♦irri ♦♦•• . ft-1F� ?:. ft � � _— zr, . / : 12 >PI us al pensis .: c�L : :: ♦ r t ♦ r t • # # • • r r r ♦ • r ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ r ♦ # ♦ ♦ ♦ r !!` 4' — B X ,, - ` . ' r ! t • ♦ t # • r • # r ♦ r • r r ♦ r # • i ♦ r # # • ♦ # JJJ f ,. - p • ♦ • i i • t r. • ♦ ♦ i r t • r i i # # M ♦ ♦ • • ♦ i ♦ • ._. . i :`. SCALE: 1:20 ` . r • r ♦ • • ♦ • r • r ♦ r ♦ r • r ♦ • ♦ • • # '► ♦ r ♦ r ♦ i - ;'. 1 ♦ r ♦ r i r r t r • ♦ t • r t • r I r i • • ♦ ♦ ♦ r ♦ ♦ i . • r t • • ♦ ♦ r • t r r ♦ r • r r ♦ r • r ♦ ! ♦ ! ♦ ♦ ♦ • • - REVISIONS - OA /OC APPROVAL> e *' r i • i i r ♦ • • ♦ r ♦ • ♦ • • ♦ r • r • • ♦ r r ♦ ♦ • • � ;::'t DElCItlPrIDN DATE DESIGN aEdIEIt K /PA DEPT. OFS. W. ' HMI x" :: �, ,a .1, . ♦ r ♦ r # ; : ::: UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE - , . ��- - " t V V — " — �� - - ' A — • - « - — — — --•�- — mss -- — --�—� , - DAWN PRl)ACT 4. EXISTIfvu LANDSCAPE 70 REMAIN, t �Il I :, RL,c -11 °i k- . REPLACE ALL DAMAGED MATERIAL DUE TO NClNITAS MAIN O FFICE . ., NEW CONSTRUCTION Ric ENCRNRAS. c�uFORNU► Fr 2 - ,� — - -- 4 �l Ill . ; .. F110r1EER APPROVED am" CWMCT 1. I . ,:.,. R" NIA F` $, , ",.... LISPS P W�CT . DRAWM MILE , ..... DATE .:, . - 414 . , ' , , DRAWING NO . w. . 11 • T 46 -1 . a- 12/15/9 PLANTING PLAN rJ0 ' DA TE suLE 1: SNEET I i a . ' - -- . :. - K,F; . ... . - , _ . : I . : _ ::.... . I .. _. _ ..w: , t , _ .,., • __ _. i 5 .. r - ..' .: i '.r - J r `:Y JM. • af' a :' .. .. �.P' ✓.:.. ... .'. M:_.. :. w... . w. �?� ,W . Yom. ba; ... . ;. a.. '. _ .....P.. h- .. , _ 4.. ^ 'Ak fC .w a'4".. v. -N ., .... a "l° . a.. .: . x ' ..�. .. ' ✓, .. :� .h ♦. :. ..v ... w....b.t 1r s�Iry wi- {sus': ».�'auw:uy%y+.dwi+tl '6. Is'aw ...:r a .sn,•' _.'.m:.w-e.a�r. -. Y.. F .. TY ur • . -.i ...+ rv ?M.K.+gva„nA.- d.. ..^A.e- ..u.F .c1F......W ,_ �.,._ . :.::. ,... .- ♦ : �4 ,.tea .. •. :. ... w - 1 3 s I! low • Mme. aE /CANT MATERIAL a FINISH GRADE x A0JUST LE� R w 1300 W � BIRO ` � ; .��.•. _ ORP RATION TYPICAL SHRUB CANOPY f ROTOR POP -UP SPRINKLER; /IN , RAIN BIRD T - &RD PLANTING W FLAMT MATERAL SLEEVES 6' OF SHRUB ROOTBALL / MODEL T-12--C 1YO sORli tl<IJDOOIf AV== EXTEND Y4 ) � 3 MN F 4'x 4' MIN. PLANT PIT r S o FINISH GRADE/TOP Or MULCH 1a !" MIN PAtIAD> 1 RNL Y1fD! PLANT SPACING AS PER PLAN cm m FOR EACH W/ AMENDED SOIL UY RADIATION RESISTANT 1 CAP (TYPIGL) W NCH PVC SCH ECt NIPPLE . . Ka.+ (LENGTH AS REWIRED) 7 V 2 +� MEN. To -�.. ': TAPE AND BUNDLE FOR lADRfh RUN WIRING BENEATH ALL TEA 24 - LOOP IN JUNCTION BO 1/2 SPECIFIED PLANT SPACING �p 0 1/2 -NCH FEMALE NPT x INISH GRADE —PVC SCH 80 NIPPLE 0.490 -INCH BARB ELBOW LD 2 00 RAN &RD MODEL SBFE -050 PVC (LENGTH AS SCH 40 ELLEWIRED) J a SLING PIPE, 12 -INCH LENGTH: • PVC SCH 40 STREET ELL RAN BIRD MODEL SP-100 m Yl • II I III E� I !,I , 1/2 -IN04 MALE NPT L x .490 -INCH BARB ELBOW: PVC SCH 80 NIPPLE R RAIN BIRD MODEL SBE -050 PVC CAP (LENGTH AS REQUIRED) ELL (TYPICAL) PVC SCH 40 NEE OR PVC SCH P. ( 40 STREET ELL • y 'r 2' MULCH INSTALLED PVC LATERAL PIPE wRrttEtt DRE16tONN5 ON TtM3E DRAW111GS ' > '•'` . BEFORE PLANTING NOTES: SNAU HME PRECEDENCE OVER SCALED :.. • . '. 1. ALL PVC IRRIGATION SLEEVES TO BE CLASS 200 PIPE. CWrRWrM PREPARE BED AS PER VC LATERAL PIPE PVC SCH 40 TEE OR ELL 2. ALL JOINTS TO BE SOLVENT WELDED AND WATERTIGHT. AW aE MR �0034S4�HS WRITTEN SPECIFICATION 3. WHERE THERE IS MORE THAW ONE SLEEVE, EXTEND THE SMALLER SLEEVE NOTE: ANO CONOMONS ON THE •W AND inks T TO 24- INCHES MINIMUM ABOVE FINISH GRADE. OFFICE MUST BE NOTFIED OF ANY NAWTONS 4. MECHANICALLY TAMP TO 95X PROCTOR. 1. A SWING PIPE ASSEMBLY MAY BE USED WITH FLOWS LESS THAN 4 GPM FROM THE DrENSom t CONDmons SHOYON BY THESE �MMKS. SHOP DUALS MUST IIE BTK - ` - - SUm TO TH DEFILE IS FOR AP wow _ BEFORE Ff==MD WITH FABRIC M - 1 GROUND COVER DETAIL = 5 BUBBLER 9 SLEEVING 1 ROTOR POP -UP SPRINKLER ARCHITECT SFAL BACKFLOW PREVENTER REDUCED PRESSURE KF y COPPER MALE ADAPTER FINISH GRADE ? � '* COPPER UNION ROTOR POP -UP SPRINKLER: t • FINISH GRADE/TOP OF MULCH r _. — — — ({ OF 2) RAIN BIRD T - BIRD _ r MODEL T -4-C :. FORM SAUCER MATH r .,, •r C syrw '� ' P RAN UP B RA a SPRIN KL ER' CO( PER 9t' ELL 3' CONTINUOUS RIM 2 COPPER PIPE - PVC SCH 80 NIPPLE ACRIFORM PLANTING TABLETS PLANT CROWN OF ROOTBALL j- -- — J (TYPICAL) (LENGTH AS REQUIRED) OR EQUAL SPACED .o PVC SCH 80 MAPLE 12 PVC SCH 40 ELL EOUALY AROUND ROOTBALL 1 MAX ABOVE FINISH GRADE, (LENGTH AS REWIRED) _ PVC SCH 40 ELL PVC SCH 40 STREET ELL PVC SCH 40 STREET ELL FINISH GRADE COPPER FEMALE ADAPTER PVC SCH 80 NIPPLE �II — III I1 1 1II I =III i x $ PVC SCH 80 NIPPLE (LENGTH AS REQUIRED) �I (LENG AS REQUIRED) N IRED) IRRIGATION MA INE PIPE PVC SCH 40 STREET ELL III = III -I I I;� SPECIFIED PLANTING - � PVC SCH 40 STREET ELL MIX WATER A TAMP TO REMOVE AIR I I_I I I_I COPPER PIPE FROM FONT- OF- GOMrECT10Fl PVC MALE ADAPTER POCKETS UNDISTURBED OR CCIMPACTED CRADE PVC SUB LATERAL PIPE '. CONTAINER SIZE A 0 OF TABLETS PVC SCH 40 TEE OR ELL 2X IRA. OF PVC SCH 40 TEE OR ELL MOTE 1 FOR 1 GALLON 1. INSTALL BACKFLOW PREVENTER AS REQUIRED BY LOCAL CODES AND HEALTH LL I]NGINEEiR SEAL 2 FOR 5 GALLON ROOTBA OR DEPARTMENT. VERIFY LOCAL REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. PVC LATERAL PIPE 4 FOR 15 GALLON CONTAINER _ L A"sc NOTE: Cum IFy c 1. A SWING PIPE ASSEMBLY MAY BE USED WITH FLOWS LESS THAN 4 GPM. ° f 2 SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL 6 POP -UP SPRAY SPRINKLER 1 BACKFLOW PREVENTER . 1 ROTO P -UP SPRINKLER A :? 30-NCH LINEAR LENGTH OF WIRE. CI 41 12 3 �R - COILED 4 s or WATER PROOF CONNECTION PLANT MATERIAL (1 OF 2) ROTOR SPRINKLER: D TAG RAIN BIRD T -BIRD • PLMIT mm or � ITS VALVE 12-INCH WITTH COVER. MODEL T -S -C FINISH GRADE OF MULCH d fV4H GRADE/TW OF MULCH CONSULTANT i �K team GRADE - • rARlr ALL arcs ao f a& REMOTE CONTROL VALVE: PLANT MATERIAL _Aft , twat Wso . 3 MIN. PVC SCH BO NIPPLE (CLOSE) POP -UP SPRAY SPRINKLER PVC SM 40 ELL FINISH GRADE z 2 sm" T" It auAOE - � � RAIN BIRO 1006 -SAY rs law WIL w r ow L UV RADIATION RESISTANT MANS PVC SCH 80 NIPPLE PVC SCH 80 NIPPLE NAtto 00o srAta (LENGTH AS REQUIRED) (LENGTH AS REQUIRED) t-s srAKn r x Y BRICK (1 OF 4) ra �ar� near PVC SCN 80 NIPPLE vd3 PVC SCH 40 Ell A RAOaUM fwoR I (LENGTH AS REQUIRED) SCH 80 NIPPLE (2 -NCH LENGTH. PVC SCH 40 STREET ELL OORARQ t3 4 I OP T PVC SCH 40 ELL HIDDEN) AND SCH 40 ELL f wnawo shoo M *am *am PC WN 40 STREET ELL OE it 4RA 4 FUR I OGNU" Ot - - i P �- spa PVC SCH 80 NIPPLE PVC SCH 80 NIPPLE (LENGTH AS REQUIRED) !A rtaw RR► m I - s FOR 42' Root - (LENGTH AS REQUIRED) PMC MAN M PIPE PVC SCH 40 STREET ELL tttlotsAli r i t Fa 4' 9= F'VC SCH 40 STREET ELL Vvcm PLAVM Ma I u INK 4r Na PVC SCH 40 TEE OR ELL U%= & TAW m PVC SCH 40 MALE ADAPTER B PVC SCH 40 TEE OR ELL NOTE PVC 8011 40 TEE OR ELL : } 3 RIBi.�► uNOn,tal�a a: _ , tURYt !oa 60111M AS PC LATERAL PIF'E 3.0 -INCH MINIMUM DEPTH OF *GTE. PVC LATERAL PIPE 3/4 -INCH WASHED GRAVEL P11C LATERAL PIPE 1. SWING Y MAY BE USED WITH FLOWS LESS THAN 4 G r A N PIPE ASSEMBLY WI PM. r . t • 3 TREE PLANTING DETAIL i 7 POP -UP SPRAY SPRINKLER 11 REMOTE CONTROL 'VALVE 1 ROTOR SPRINKLER 4 MAINL.1fE. tATETLATERAL. MAIANUNE LATERAL. WIRING IN MIALLj AND WIRING N PIPE PIPE OOfCON" THE SAYE TRENCH AW .. ONDICH P HM A LT THE "MU .. M11H 804MAR POW m PLIIRTPIq no" O/ now O �- FOLLOW WW /AC1WY! IIEOOMIOOA WE Hats Pa 1116- acs .O O • INOEPENDENT STATION COMPUTER CONTROLLER: IRRITROL MCpkm 4jmm DUTOoOR WALL MOUNT r am PM lW 9M OROVA trOM At ip 11AWAia a cw 0111th 4RAOr�c r YAM PlE[L10E� WIRE W/0 CONDUCT AIlM ^ = - r PWWMIW PR m TOM OOT Or PR I r co N MUK W/ r DODO AALItt Rot mm =RK WAlOD Elam" walk • 1. SCH. 10 CONCONDUIT FITTINGS ` 0 tr IM aVa a solo t RAM _ SO LVENT NCH l'•; R NOIJ< (TOT .. I- �'- I a AND BESIDE MAINLINE PIPING TO ALL WIRING A CHANG _ AT DasRRIEm a UDTrAC1m tAIORAOO BE SNAKED N OF DIRECTION OF 70 TF t w°uFAI,�• PLAII? ?TAI 1C PIOMM A 10 -FOOT INTERVALS. TRENCH AS SHOINi.. OR GREATER. UNTIE SU AFTER ALL CON NS NECTIO r�tE `P • R JgTES "AVE BEEN MADE IMRES TO REMOTE CONTROLT. �y Yy. 1 %ftm c OF CALtE�� I I w 4 a • 4 ..• ' I t 1. SLEEVE BELOW ALL HA ROSCAPE ELEWN111 WITH CLASS 200 PVC TWICE T11E i -NCH PVC SCH 40 CONDUCT MA g ; >VC4 NORIW� ma - I I DIAMETER OF THE PIPE OR RE BUNDLE WITHIN. i 2. FOR PIPE AND MIRE WRMN DEPTHS SEE SPECIFICATIONS. (MID FITTINGS; TO POWER SUPPLY ssARer =0 Ito sOTSOr DAP RAWtw pwas NS - OIVOC APPRUAL a 4 PALM PLANTING DETAIL r8� & WIRE TRENCHING 1 SOLID -STATE CONTROLLER °°°" `�°°' P""' °�° UT= STATES POSTAL SMVIC DUN praw RLC ENCINITAS MAIN OFFICE o�ra e EiICMKTAS. CALWORNIA N RLC DAVE II - 1 x ttu rROIDI.� } SGiF. JO aRltrts Ot7 NO. � awPra ` INSTALLATION DETAILS 5046 - 1 , 12 12 AA 1. OMNR tlO�t 1 si0 MEtt d 7 .�i!W w , w:. .. .. .�. p.... ..... u..::.,. w .. szvie - .�Lr£c . aiiw.iSa... .t�•�css mLtis..lw c>r•v.. . _ clra..e.. - .wSe... c 1. u. " � I GENERAL NOTES: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: 1. ALL WORK SHALL BE DONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THESE PLANS, THE STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION, U.S.P.S. STANDARDS, THE DESIGN CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS OF THE CITY OF ENCINITAS AND THE SAN DIEGO ALL THAT CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY SITUATED IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY Or SAN DIEGO, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: AREA REGIONAL STANDARD DRAWINGS. ANY CHANCES OR REVISIONS THEREFROM SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE CITY ENGINEER PRIOR TO ANY REQUEST FOR INSPECTION. ALL THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER AND tHE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHNEAS7 QUARTER OF SECTION C 0 R P 0 R A T I 0 N 11, TOWNSHIP 13 SOUTH, RANGE 4 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNA, ACCORDING TO U.S. 2. THE SOILS REPORT TITLED "ENCINITAS POST OFFICE" PREPARED BY KRAZAN AND ASSOCIATES DATED 2 -21 -97 SHALL BE GOVERNMENT SURVEY APPROVED APRIL 19, 1881, AS DESCRIBED IN "PARCEL A" OF CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE RECORDED FEBRUARY 2. 1988 AS FILE CONSIDERED AS A PART OF THIS GRADING PLAN. ALL GRADING SHALL BE DONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS NO. 88- 048747 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: AND SPECIFICATIONS CONTAINED IN SAID REPORT. BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER; THENCE ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE TkEREOF SOUTH 199 South Hudson Avenue 3. APPROVAL OF THIS PLAN DOES NOT CONSTITUTE APPROVAL OF SIZES, LOCATION AND TYPE OF DRAINAGE FACILITIES, NOR OF ; 89'41'49" EAST 872.98 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTHERLY LINE NORTH 00'18'11" EAST 352.20 FEET; IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN STREET RIGHT -OF -WAYS. SEPARATE APPROVALS AND PERMITS FOR THESE SHALL BE REQUIRED IN THENCE NORTH 45'05'20" EAST 248.74 FEET; THENCE SOUTH44'54'40" EAST 55.00 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A 658.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONJUNCTION WITH IMPROVEMENT PLANS. CONCAVE NORTHEASTERLY; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 44'45'27 ", A DISTANCE OF 513.99 FEET TO THE Pasadena. CA 91101 BEGINNING OF A 20.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 4. WRITTEN PERMISSION SHALL BE OBTAINED FOR ANY OFFSITE GRADING FROM THE CITY OF ENCINITAS THROUGH A PUBLIC 90'42'44 ", A DISTANCE OF 31.66 FEET TO A POINT OF CUSP WITH A 3563.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE EASTERLY BEING A POINT ON THE ENCROACHMENT PERMIT. WESTERLY LINE OF EL CAMINO REAL 126.00 FEET WIDE ACCORDING TO ROAD SURVEY 1800 -1, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, A RADIAL LINE TO SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 89'37'16" WEST, THENCE ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 5. CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE ANY NECESSARY PRECAUTIONS REQUIRED TO PROTECT ADJACENT PROPERTIES DURING GRADING 05'01'48 ", A DISTANCE OF 312.79 FEET TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST OUARTER Of THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 11; THENCE 818- 796 -6101 OPERATIONS. ANYTHING DAMAGED OR DESTROYED SHALL BE REPLACED OR REPAIRED TO CONDITION EXISTING PRIOR TO ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE AND ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER NORTH 89'41'49" WEST GRADING. 722.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. 6. THE DEVELOPER SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE THAT ANY MONUMENT OR BENCH MARK WHICH IS DISTURBED OR DESTROYED SHALL a I TAY 818 796 - 6194 BE RE ESTABLISHED AND REPLACED BY A REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER OR A LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR. 4 gRO I ' 7. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL DESIGN, CONSTRUCT AND MAINTAIN ALL SAFETY DEVICES, INCLUDING SHORING, AND SHALL BE �I RESPONSIBLE FOR CONFORMING TO ALL LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL SAFETY AND HEALTH STANDARDS, LAWS AND REGULATIONS." 8. GRADING AND EQUIPMENT OPERATING WITHIN ONE -HALF (112) MILE OF A STRUCTURE FOR HUMAN OCCUPANCY SHALL NOT BE CONDUCTED BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 5:30 P.M. AND 7:30 A.M. NOR ON SATURDAYS, SUNDAYS AND CITY RECOGNIZED ROAD :µ!;'. WRITTEN DIMENSIONS ON THESE ' HOLIDAYS. DRAWINGS SHALL HAVE PRECEDENCE J` OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS: CONTRACTORS SHALL VERIFY, AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR, 9. NO GRADING OPERATIONS SHALL COMMENCE UNTIL A PREGRADING MEETING HAS BEEN HELD ONSITE WITH THE FOLLOWING ALL DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS ON THE PEOPLE PRESENT: CITY INSPECTOR, CIVIL ENGINEER, SOILS ENGINEER, GRADING CONTRACTOR AND PERMITTEE. THE PREGRADE s, r x MEETING SHALL BE SCHEDULED WITH THE CITY AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE B POST OFFICE JOB AND THIS OFFICE MUST BE NOTIFIED Y CALLING (760} 633 -2770. I v OF ANY VARIATIONS FROM THE DIMENSIONS a CONDITIONS SHOWN BY THESE DRAWINGS, 10. PRIOR TO HAULING DIRT OR CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS TO ANY PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION SITE WITHIN THIS PROJECT THE I z r SHOP DETAILS MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THIS DEVELOPER SHALL SUBMIT TO AND RECEIVE APPROVAL FROM THE CITY ENGINEER FOR THE PROPOSED HAUL ROUTE. THE 0 q 5 OFFICE FOR APPROVAL BEFORE PROCEEDING DEVELOPER SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL CONDITIONS AND REQUIREMENTS THE CITY ENGINEER MAY,.IMPOSE WITH REGARDS TO THE WITH FABRICATION. HAULING OPERATION.. ti 11. UPON FINAL COMPLETION OF THE WORK UNDER THE GRADING PERMIT BUT PRIOR TO FINAL GRADING APPROVAL AND /OR FINAL RELEASE OF SECURITY, AN AS- GRADED CERTIFICATION SHALL BE PROVIDED STATING: 'THE GRADING UNDER PERMIT NO. „ r 5046 -G HAS BEEN PERFORMED W SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE WITH THE APPROVED GRADING PLAN OR AS SHOWN ON THE ARCHIT ECT SEAL ATTACHED AS- GRADED PLAN ". THIS STATEMENT SHALL BE FOLLOWED BY THE DATE AND SIGNATURE OF THE CIVIL ENGINEER N 4 WHO CERTIFIES SUCH GRADING OPERATION. 12. ALL GRADING SHALL BE OBSERVED AND TESTED BY A QUALIFIED SOILS ENGINEER OR UNDER HIS/HER DIRECTION. HE /SHE KEY MAP , SHALL OBSERVE AND TEST THE EXCAVATION PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION OF FILLS AND BACKFILLS AND COMPACTION OF TRENCHES. HE /SHE SHALL SUBMIT SOILS REPORTS AS REQUIRED AND WILL DETERMINE THE SUITABILITY OF ANY FILL MATERIAL. SCALE: 1 "= 200' 1 � UPON COMPLETION OF GRADING OPERATIONS HE /SHE SHALL STATE THAT OBSERVATIONS AND TEST WERE MADE BY HIM /HER OR •� UNDER HIS /HER SUPERVISION AND THAT IN HIS /HER OPINION, ALL EMBANKMENTS AND EXCAVATIONS WERE CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPROVED GRADING PLANS AND THAT ALL EMBANKMENTS AND EXCAVATIONS ARE ACCEPTABLE FOR THEIR INTENDED USE. 13. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROPERLY GRADE ALL EXCAVATED SURFACES TO PROVIDE POSITIVE DRAINAGE AND PREVENT PONDING i OF WATER. HE /SHE SHALL CONTROL SURFACE WATER AND AVOID DAMAGE TO ADJOINING PROPERTIES OR TO FINISHED WORK ON THE SITE AND SHALL TAKE REMEDIAL MEASURES TO PREVENT EROSION OF FRESHLY GRADED AREA UNTIL SUCH TIME AS PERMANENT DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL MEASURES HAVE BEEN INSTALLED. Y 14, ALL AREAS TO BE FILLED SHALL BE PREPARED TO BE FILLED AND FILL SHALL BE PLACED IN ACCORDANCE WITH STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS. ALL VEGETABLE MATTER AND OBJECTIONABLE MATERIAL SHALL BE REMOVED BY THE CONTRACTOR FROM THE 3r SURFACE UPON WHICH THE FILL IS TO BE PLACED. LOOSE FILL AND ALLUVIAL SOILS SHALL BE REMOVED TO SUITABLE FIRM ' NATURAL GROUND. THE EXPOSED SOILS SHALL BE SCARIFIED TO A DEPTH OF 6" AND THEN COMPACTED TO A MINIMUM OF 1 90 PERCENT. IT SHALL BE THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO PLACE, SPREAD, WATER AND COMPACT THE FILL IN STRICT *' BENCH MARK: j ACCORDANCE WITH SPECIFICATIONS.' 15, CUT AND FILL SLOPES SHALL BE CUT AND TRIMMED TO FINISH GRADE TO PRODUCE SMOOTH SURFACES AND UNIFORM CROSS CITY OF ENCINITAS ELEVATION 130.69 FEET. SECTIONS. THE SLOPES OF EXCAVATIONS AND EMBANKMENTS SHALL BE SHAPED, PLANTED AND TRIMMED AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER OF WORK AND LEFT IN A NEAT AND ORDERLY CONDITION, ALL STONES, ROOTS AND OTHER WASTE MATTER EXPOSED HALL BE REMOVED AND DISPOSED OF. OR EXCAVATION OR EMBANKMENT SLOPES WHICH ARE LIABLE TO BECOME LOOSENED STANDARD SAN DIEGO COUNTY BENCH MARK AT THE INTERSECTION OF EL CAMINO REAL AT GARDEN VIEW RD. ON SEWER MANHOLE. THE TOE AND TOP OF ALL SLOPES SHALL BE ROUNDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE GRADING ORDINANCE. ` 16. ALL TREES, BRUSH, GRASS, AND OTHER OBJECTIONABLE MATERIAL SHALL BE COLLECTED, PILED OR OTHERWISE DISPOSED OF OFF THE SITE BY THE CONTRACTOR SO AS TO LEAVE THE AREAS THAT HAVE BEEN CLEARED WITH A NEAT AND FINISHED ENGINEER SEAL APPEARANCE FREE FROM UNSIGHTLY DEBRIS. APPROVAL OF LOCATION OF DEBRIS FILL SHALL BE SECURED FROM THE SOILS'_ ENGINEER AND CITY ENGINEER PRIOR TO THE DISPOSAL OF ANY SUCH MATERIAL. 17. REFERENCE IS HEREBY MADE TO THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT BY KRAZAN AND ASSOCIATES, INC, DATED FEBRUARY 21, 1997. #; SPECIFICALLY THE CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS SHOULD BE ADHERED TO. K p so e4si•a NOTE: e TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY BY MORROW SURVEYING, 1450 HARBOR BLVD., SUITE D. WEST SACRAMENTO. CA. 95691, (916)372 -8124 t i TOPOGRAPHIC MAPPING BY MORROW SURVEYING, 1450 HARBOR BLVD., SUITE D. WEST SACRAMENTO, CA. 95691, (916)372 -8124 _ A = / 4 f CONSULTANT G.V.W. ENGINEERING, INC. ar, � 667 S. BREA CYN. RD., SUITE 27 I WALNUT, CA. 91789 (909 594 -0552 LEGEND: (909) 594 -5670 FAX N0. A T.C. TOP OF CURB ?! F.L. FLOW LINE } F S FINISHED SURFACE FINI s p " T.G. TOPOF FLO OR NN can Y I �r > • EXP.: 12/31/01 N.G. NATURAL GROUND r. > ( ) INDICATE EXISTING ELEVATION Ow T.W. TOP OF WALL t ?x E.P. EDGE OF PAVEMENT t en T.F. TOP OF FOOTING r'•, P.C,C. CONCRETE- 6 -1/2 "- 3,000 LB. CONC.- W/ #4 BARS 24' O.C.E.W. z •; "`,; '" OVER 6" AGGREGATE BASE (BASE TO BE COMPACTED TO A MINIMUM a # OF 95% RELATIVE COMPACTION). 1 ; + + + + * * + I HEAVY TRAFFIC AREAS 4" A.C. ON 11.5 C.A.B. NOTE: ALL OTHER PAVED AREAS TO BE 2.5" A.C. ON 6.5" C.A.B. ® PAINT STRIPE 4" WIDE awcc- .- CHAIN LINK FENCE $ �® LISPS STANDARD SIGN l5 v REFER TO SPECIFICATION ', .,� PAINTED DIRECTIONAL ARROW pw �g �1y PAINTED ACCESSIBILITY SYMBOL En1c1 ❑ Underground Service Alert EN IN EN SERVICES SITE r4Y. ENCINI PACIFIC i. OCEAN ., r C ALL-TOLL FREE s ;,� 422 -4133 8 CITY OF ENCINITAS PERMIT NO. ' TWO WORKING DAY BEFORE YOU DIG 504 &0 z- REVISIONS - OA QC APPROVAL DESCRIPTION DATE DESIGN CHKR, PE DEPT. DES.CD PM UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE VICINITY MAP ORA" PRWECT NO SCALE H.N. UNITED STATES POST OFFICE CHECKED ENCINITAS MAIN OFFICE D.P. ENCINITAS, CA. co ENGINEER APP "D 0 0 DESIGN D.P. �• DATE AURA ' DRAWING t YULE s/,3/97 GRADING PLAN GIdWRNO No. N TITLE SHEET C- c DATE SrA LE NO SCALE SHEET or r .. w. 1. .. : :. .. -. ' ma+r.rw�� rnF.wrroiYL.4 ...tl,airY .e.+w di+ -...w _.. . n I _ . .: ... .�.1 .... r :;.; . ', ._..... s_ - yr ._+...- .. .,. .5.2 ... h. n .:.'..aYns-0.. ... •. ' v, ' r ... , .hNreaAO•::.,.�..�.. -a.. ..:Lx'�.r.u.^s'�cv' - -_., aLM`lr..,aa. .. _ _ . -. -. \\\ \ \ NEW ROADWAY IN THIS AREA BY OTHERS \ CONSTRUCTION NOTES: ,\ \ +0 \ \�\ ♦ �\ \ \\ ! - -_- \ \ FINISHED SURFACE 4' , 3' WIDE P.C.C RIBBON GUTTER PER DETAIL 6 OR SHEET A -9. NATIVE BACKFILL , ^ IR2. 6 " COVERED CARRIER PLATFORM ROLLED CURB PER DETAIL 3 ON SHEET A -9. \\ \\ \\ \ \% \ \ / A `. PROPOSED 30 R.g•P�STOR1,t♦DRAIN 3 . \ \\\ \\ \ \� ' \ \ 3T■ \ `\ SEE STORM DRAIN PLANS FOR 'RETAIL z r r ` 6 CONCRETE CURB ONLY PER DETAIL 1 ON SHEET A -9. N . •`\ / \ \ r 4 > r MYLAR DETECTOR TAPE 1 6" CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER PER DETAIL 16 ON SHEET A - 9. \ \ \ \ \\ �\ \ p // \,�\ r OVER PIPE 24" X 24" BS PRODUCTS GRATED CONCRETE CATCH BASIN NO. CB -24 REMOVE AND RELOCATE EXISTING ROOK \\ \\ \ \\ ��\ \ \� \ O \ \ \\ Y/ / \ fit\ \\ � / \ IRRIGATION LINES PRIOR TO GRADING N \ \ \ \ �`/ \ ALONG TOE OF SLOPE OR APPROVED EQUAL (WITH TRAFFIC GRATE) /` . \\ CORPORATION \ / .� \ 6. CONSTRUCT 4" P.V.C. DRAINLINE. \\ \\ \ \\ \ \\ \`\\ O PROPERTY LINE \\ � UTILITY LINE (LIMITS \OF WORK) \ (SEE CHART AT LEFT) DRAWING 7. CONSTRUCT 2 11" DITCH BEHIND WAIL PER DETAIL "E" ON SHEET C-4 199 South Hudson Avenue \ \\ \ \ \ \ 0 �/ (Q \/ \ ` \ \ \ `�\ i \ / / BEDDING MATERIAL PER \ \ \ \ h/ �' \ \ \ J' MANUFACTUREER, s" MIN. - 88. P.C.C. CONCRETE 6-1/2 3,000 LB,- CONC. W/ #4 BARS 24 " O.C.E.W. OVER 67.3 Pasadena, CA 91101 \ .a FL ` �� \ \ \\ `� / AROUND PIPE; 6 AGGREGATE BASE ( BASE TO BE COMPACTED TO A MINIMUM OF 95X, RELATIVE \ GND \ \ \ ) \ \\ / \ \ \ DRIVEWAY PER DETAIL ON SHEET C -4 // C OMPACTION ) . Ma ON -SITE UTILITY TRENCH DETAIL 818- 798 -8101 tfi T.C. FIRE HYDRANT �/ \\ \\ \ (,63. 1�F.L \ k� \ ' • • \ \ ` i•- PROPOSED /�OE OF SLOPE NOT TO SCALE CONSTRUCT 6 ■ P.V.C. DRAINUNE ^ 2' WIDE GUNITE 19 /\ �\ trj \ \ \ `\ / " "V" DITCH, 6" DEEP / \ \ \ \\ \ v 10 CONSTRUCT 8 P.V.C. DRAINUNE rA: 818- 796 -6194 2.2 t 2 F:LC \\ qty \ \ ` EXI TOE OF SLOPE tit FOR SEWER, WATER AND .� STORM DRAIN LINES. 11 CONSTRUCT 12" P.V.C. DRAINUNE. 162.73 TV. C 168.6) C. TW 161.87 F. 61.5 \ \ \ \ \\ •• ' '' \ �T• 168.1 TF \ C \\ CONSTRUCT 8' CHAIN LINK FENCE. OWL COATED BLACK) ) / t t tt Fs• \\ \\ ` \ \\ \ \ " 'PROPOSED WATER LINES SEE PER DETAIL 14 ON SHEET A -9. (164.8 GND •� WRITTEN DIMENSIONS ON THESE \WAX PLAN FOR DETAILS \ Q \ DRAWINGS SHALL HAVE PRECEDENCE 164.15 TV. � / / 42 T, \\ \ O F \\ \ \ ice 13 CONSTRUCT 6" P.V.C. WATERLINE OVER SCALED DIMENSIONS: CONTRACTORS / 161. ,T : • `\ \ \ - \ \ SHALL VERIFY, AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR, 163.75 Fl. / 9• F„ \ \ NT DRIVEWAY PER DETAIL ON H - N \ r,... '+ . \ \ .` ,� �t. / ',, •, \ 510 \ \ 161.00 F.G. 161.13 ALL DIMENSIONS AND CONDITIONS ON THE , 160.67 T.C. 169.66 4 156.95 F L\ \ \ \ \ ' x CONSTRUCT 2 -1/2" WATER LATERAL. JOB AND THIS OFFICE MUST BE NOTIFIED 171.8 TW 18017 FS 159.38 P \ OF ANY VARIATIONS FROM THE DIMENSIONS THESE 171 FL t / S 158 T 1e ' \ \\ \ \ \ \ • SHOP ETAILS MUST BE SUBM SUBMITTED WINGS. THIS 168.4 GND / ' '156. F.t: \ 156. T.0 \ \\ ��, 15 CONSTRUCT 4 SEWER LATERAL. OFFICE FOR APPROVAL BEFORE PROCEEDING 186.95 T.W. �/ 159.69 C,', '• 1k7.71 FL \ \ \ \ �• \ \� - ■ GRATED GRAIN INLET PER DETAIL ON SHEET C -4. ■ WITH FABRICATION. PROPOSED 30 _ - 165.95 F.L. \ .\ \ \ " R.C.P. STORM DRAIN / "8 160.33 F.G. / 159.19 F \ \ \ a �\ / :16 6 - 158.56 T.C. •, , • \ \ \ - SEE STORM DRAIN LANS FOR DETAIL �• 169.05 T.W. ��. / 158.06 F.L. \ \ .\ \ \ \ a W / 1569:6059 F.L j i e r r . 156.31 T.C. 17 CONSTRUCT CONCRETE CHANNEL FOR GATES PER DETAIL "B • ON SHEET C -4. E Isza1 F. \ ��� \, /: CONSTRUCT 3 P.V.C. THROUGH CURB PER DETAIL " ON SHEET C -4. 7 / / ♦ .p' 1 0 `r 4 ARCHITECT SEAL 18 " F" 168.40 T.W. • '. , \ \ 16240 F.L 4`�' E`> 1 56.71 T.C. \ \ \ \ t STREET LIGHT. • , - 159.50 F.C. �gl� • ES 2t EL. �\ \ • �- - SEE STREET PLAN FOR DETAIL y 19 CONSTRUCT CONCRETE HANDICAP RAMP PER DETAIL G ON SHEET C -4. r $ 52 REET LIGHT 166 ✓ °j' .20 TV. 165.20 F.L. / / •�' 4b�1p1E� S STREET PLAN \ \�\ \ *\ \'� • ,5821 FG {&' C FO DETAIL OS \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 13 Y 20 CONSTRUCT 15 P.V.C. DRAINUNE \\ CIAL MEQIAN PAVING AND LANDSCAPE ' _ �. O �Q' SE NDSCAPE PLAN FOR DETAIL Tex 154 F .L. AR ( SEE \ 177.3 TW ���`' Ey ELECTRCAL DRA1�1 \ \ , �\ ��--yy � k4T� 176.8` W 3 ' °' 154.53 F 155'03 T.c. \ \ \ \ �\ '� `""y 'Pq 4' HIGH BLACK VINYL COATED 173.3) GND > - - -- -- -- 158.17 T.C. ` �1 0` L \ \\\ \ 1 ` S GRO CHAIN LINK FENCE ALONG 163.90 T.M. t57b7 F.S ` ♦'3 y. CRETE >A ' \ \ \ O 6`� (ry PROPERTY LINE • E�. �G• 4 155.77 T.C. P BOX \\ \ 7 59 9.05 F.G. 5 I ' 7.46 - - - - r E E � �$ � E> 15527 F.S \ \ . \ 2 •, 7 r > 162.10 T.W. S. 157.49 T.G • 161.10 F.L. $ 156.99 F.S 15d3e F.G. 16 ��. �� J >o �� c 1 , E ' 3 178.8 TW 6,. A E 4 1 178.3 FL 174.8 GND I 4 4y. 152.44 T.C. 15.631.C. 49.71 T.C. PROPERTY LINE I �� 151.94 F5 " ' 151 3 F.L >>i; SEE WATER PLANS FOR DETAIL F.L \ 10" POTABLE WATERLINE \ ' / r a LE GEN D: ( LIMITS OF WORK ) LANDSCAPE AREA �. \ ,\ .A E`' •. }2�- t52.04 •. .31 T.C. \ 163.50 T.W. ♦5;�•�`�' 6y J?41 ►9 151.54 F. • E'A SO EF Y © .a. �SA6 \� \ 97 182.50 F.L. - - - - - - - - - j O , �` ` T.C. TOP OF CURB 157.71 F.G. ` --- - - - - -- - .--_ 164.60 T.W. I `�5E ♦ y `� E �� 46.83 IG 18 ` / \ ` F.L. FLOW LINE ENGINEER SEAL 163.60 F.L F.S. FINISHED SURFACE w `Ey 44 - \ 157.27 F.G. Z N �a 1.0015 / 3 , I E`+ _ _ _ _ FIRE DEPARTMENT F.F. FINISHED FLOOR GP E �- - - - J ,J , r� � \ � MINT OF CONNECTION ` T.G. TO OF 2.W w b t�, •� !r� �<� 5 /��� / �� / ATE o Si • ` N.G. NATURAL GROUND 4 Q / \ ` � ��' �/ ` FIRE HYDRANT 165.70 T.W. 7 I Sam, e• / \� / 8" RECLAIMED WATERLINE , "y �� ( ) INDICATE EXISTING ELEVATION o I�_ aT -ot 1A wy 1 SEE WATER PLANS FOR DETAIL T.W. TOP OF WALL e`•'v • � w 1�:7 F.G. F.G � 3' C 9 4 73 181.0 TW ar a w e ♦� .. � � � �� v v I p ���� E' RECL AI MED LANDSCAPE / ELECTRICAL MANHOLE I -i 1 178.3) GND N �e °Ey w rJ " DOUBLE DETECTO METER /� ; ma0 y r� b I CHECK VALVE E.P. EDGE OF PAVEMENT 0 166.60 TV. `" - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - � �' T.F. TOP OF FOOTING 3 ~ 185.80 F.L I 14 / M V) 165.80 156.29 F.C. Z I( I PRESSURE REDUCING V &z 1 ��' VALVE +• , •, P.C.C. CONCRETE- 6-1/2 "- 3,000 LB. CONC.- W/ 4 BARS 24" O.C.E.W. "` ' ''' OVER 6" AGGREGATE BASE (BASE TO BE COMPACTED TO A MINIMUM CONSULTANT w d I I � 13 OF 95% RELATIVE COMPACTION). 33 ( FIRE SPRINKLER 14 N 167.90 r.w. 10 LANDSCAPE AREA Ho i66:e Fc I >__ ______ I BUILDING k 13 +' +` + + + HEAVY TRAFFIC AREAS 4' A.C. ON 11.5" C.A.B. �; I NOTE: ALL OTHER PAVED AREAS TO BE 2.5" A.C. ON 6.5" C A.B. G.VX ENGINEERING, INC. eti `4y, r i V.1 667 S. BREA CYN. RD.. SUITE 27 � - - - -- � • y4 N !s' I �' L793fi , �, ® PAINT STRIPE 4" WIDE WALNUT, CA. 91789 - -- - -- s� rc ` s + + + + + + + + 0 i- eE' •, `� 909 594 -0552 - - - - -- 1 cD 13 FS ♦ 909; 594 -5670 FAX NO. 169.00 r.w. ^ 2 O �� + + + + + + + `f ,t, CHAIN LINK FENCE 186.00 FL ¢ ,pA EY 155'53 F.G. E 150 0 F F + + + ,. + 3 + + + + + 2 -1/2" WATER �s,� > 4 p USPS STANDARD SIGN 4 + + 1 85.4 TW < ♦49� 1 + off_ + + + + + + W .,: ' FROM BUILDING �►q E' ° ♦ REFER TO SPECIFICATION ` 184.9 FL I 7 182.8 GND N in r J 7m ` PAINTED DIRECTIONAL ARROW • ----- -- 176.10 T.M. Ix 4y' 13 "'� ✓�j %/. 6 55.28 F:G I w o 30} ® PAINTED ACCESSIBILITY SYMBOL N I LRCL ��LyrrU� * SEE P.C.C. CHANNEL DETAIL "B" ` L rc rSZ� {c �I 8 EXP.: 12/31/01 E• *F S 7 ♦`' ` r {�� r sJd ° r r p x - - - f ooz 17,.50 T.w. f � �<.c� <T� _ �- - - - - - - KP. 169.50 F.L s r� S ON SHEET C -3 1= 4 - - _ Y i 155.13 F.C. 153.92 T.C. !� '$ r r 0 CL 170.40 TW. 153.42 F.S. r� .,1 189.40 F.L. I r r*i B l 5 f J W) ul L I ,vil. t' 15460 F.C. rJr ' r '1 r Q C s cIT '- t I CROWN LINE 169.20 T.W. S 149.32 T.C. t O N 166.20 F.L. 3 M82 Fl O 4" SEWER F OM �I 154.46 F.C. a ♦. 16' SWING GATE , �i 188.0 TW 167,60 T.W. E`� 3 ` (SEE ARCHIT RETAINING WALL W/ HAND RAIL ECTUAL PLAN) BUILDING 165.40 T.W. CANOPY ABOV 187.5 FL 166.60 F.L ♦ yti •.� N j, 152.40 T.W. 3.82 9.01 T.C. .� Z 9 9 6 60' 184.8 GND 154 F.G. �� 6% 148.51 F , Z I x / VVV K I � 184.40 F.L O 15 F.C. 163.,0 T.W. 156.40 F.L. w 182.10 EL 153.02 F.C. ,� • �iy *a °�° �i �•, I c4. i �'fs' 4 �R�, i / 188.4 TW O I 153.49 F.G. `i ♦4,4 4 ,,, .�, , I �„ . • ` .P• 5. ♦4°' �'. • •�,, • .p' ��♦`�- S• !' rb' ., !' s .+ H.P. t I- 160.30 W. A • ` y I i i F s FI 9DI1" 187.9) FL 159 F.L 157.00 T.w. (W/ PJi07ECTIVE BOLLARDS) 185.2) GND T y4! ' 15522 F.G. 156.00 F.L 4 I .,> 4 A + / / < FS J 157.20 T.W. 154.90 F.G �� i �O 'Pf 6% 4 &` 149.53 T.C. �?'♦ G i ",'. \ ' ' 152.93 F.G. 12 I 149.03 F.S A E`'. ,t l 4y i * 5 I �3' � Rii r� O) RETAINING CRIB WALL W/ CABLE RAILING I - r' 7 156.60 T. a - \ L9 � 11 �+ I ♦ ♦ -+ ♦��' I `�! ` ►°� !i 1 ��! PER CALTRANS STD. B11 -47, SEE DETAIL \� r 4 F.I. ; TSb� 1 j j5'4,5 F, -3 ON SHEET C -4 J` 154.&3 F.G _ - - - - - - \\ V - + 'c ' !c I � •r 4 '' . I 2 tt5 0 I � 1 0 I s2. Ev I 22. �� I 6x 7 E. \ 16 159.4, r.w. r' S I I 5 I ♦;� 3 1 0 5 20 50 558.40 F.L ♦ ♦ + > 187.5 TW I / 163.f 154.76 F.G. ♦ ti tic (AREA LIGHT (TYP.)- SE I I �'�►�' 1 '>�$? 2O SCALE: 1:20 87.0 FL .30 F. si' �� Ey c I ELECTRICAL DRAWING !d} i i !1} 15 tty 9 i �� i + + + + + Underground Service Alert 154.67 F. 7 Iv ' 186.5 GND - \\ 167. T.W. ,9`�q g• I �� I I AR E L RICAL ) RAW G i I `\ rr 154.31 F.G. \ I I I w 4 19.90 r.w. � '9 I 1 �c• 1 .�c• I �. � I I ♦�. � CAL.L•TO FREE 00 t 1 .90 F.L. 4`� A` 4 r � i o -UDO � -4133 - - - -- 1 3.46 F.G. �`� q` E �, I I `�' 0' I ♦ I ♦ ",� t` 0' ,• -C I ;,� o '4 I ♦ma 2' WIDE GUNITE 112 T.W. `` ♦ I ` 4 S I F ♦`r 4.22 .'A +. V" DITCH, 6" DEEP 171.30 ,' , CITY OF 5046s PERMIT N0. 152.46 F.G r r ` - - ` TWO WORKING DAY BEFORE YOU WC � y T r 1877 TOP - -- --- - - - - -- _- 18 .5 L 175.60 TV. '� - - - REVISIONS - QA /QC APPROVAL 174.60 F.L 1 50.63 F.G. WIDE GUNITE DATE DESIGN CHKR. PE /VA OEM. DES. UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE _ 0 e 4L4 4� 3( -1c# s �� s r tes i -t..2 }� M �� DITCH, 6" DEEP CO PM W� ,W .� �.� a�1 ♦• -tom Mi 41 . LA iSTING TREES �= Sn 7 S 57 $ R 4"d o o �t EXISTING TR TO REMAIN DRAWN PROJECT 1° >~ �g „� e51 „$ H 23 12 $ $ I°R t�5s � 0 REMAIN - _ :9 �, 53_ > c H.N. UNITED STATES POST OFFICE 191.2 TOP = . „ CHECKED 7 .00 ENCINTTAS MAIN NoText NoText NoText NoText NoText NoText NoText NoText NoText