1995-4534 G
ð((P 5
Category
4 ~BL{
Name
~
Street Address
I
if 7-Lf 1- /
Serial #
I
Description
Plan ck. #
Year
recdescv
. Civil Engineering
. Land Planning
: ~~rr~~~LfiJJ~ U!j ~ u~j l~¡~'\
I PJ~ t--J
,. DEC 0 5 1995
December 4, 1995
ENGH\jEERING SERVICES
CITY OF ENC!NITAS
City of Encinitas
Engineering Department
RE:
HYDROLOGY EVALUATION FOR THE MENDENHALL RESIDENCE
SINGLE FAMILY GRADING PLAN - PARCEL 1 OF P.M. 17150
A.P.N. 264-171-89 - OLIVENHAIN
Gentlemen:
Please allow this letter to serve as an informal hydrology report
for the subject residential grading plan. This lot is located
west of a "flood plain", which is basically the outlet of the
major drainage culvert under and through the Windsor Estates
project north of this site. Our firm was responsible for both
the Tentative Parcel Map (TPM 91-089) and the Grading Plan
(Drawing No. 2616-GR) for the residence (lot) directly east of
the subject site. Based on our previous hydrology study, both
the finished pad and finished floor elevations were determined
and accepted by the City for this project area.
The major drainage in this area comes from the adjacent "flood
plain", wherein the concern being the water surface elevation
of the 100 year flood for determining finished grades. Based on
the previous study, the proposed grading and finished elevations
for the subject site are exactly the same as constructed and
shown for the existing residence to the east, i.e., Drawing No.
2616-GR. (Note: This is now Parcel 2 of P.M. 17150).
Therefore, we request that you review our previous work for
Drawing No. 2616-GR and accept this hydrology evaluation. Should
you have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact
this office or respond, as such, with plan check comments.
Logan, R.C.E. 39726
~~;::-c:':;~,
,,;;-<.,ç\\,)r!::v,')/().)'.,
'5-;c, \; >""',:-:-;:----:: (~>',
,;/1"",',,1/0,\, ~'J ,. / ~'/'"
'~'í'V/(" ,'- '--'cr '"",
~,5(! <,',' ,\-.'~ ,J,~'\>,' \\
~Ii.:::l'~)" v,:,,\",~ ,
'" ! 1:1) j I.::;¡ '/~\(~: \
,-' þ -
'¡(~:¡r' (',',,;,07')::; ,r~,"'\
~ILU V'.""-,, 'if'
i:i;,C\ C:xp'1"'319'- /:..:'1
\\ ". \ ',. , e,' - f r" I
'¡.\.. \ ,I * I
"\ú'\. l. /
"', ,r..'" """"i'l h~'$';,
~~~~~~2~~~/'
132 N, EI Camino Real, Suite N . Encinitas, CA 92024
Fax / Pho:le 619-942-8474
. ,
SOUTH COAST CIVIL ENGINEERING INC.
City ofEncinitas Engineering Dept.
505 S. Vulcan Ave.
Encinitas, CA. 92024
Page One of Six
RE:
Mendenhall Residence
Parcell of P.M. 17150
Subject: As Graded Geotechnical Report
To Whom It May Concern:
South Coast Civil Engineering Inc. has performed grading observation and
compaction testing during the rough grading operations at th,e above referenced
site. I certify that the rough grade pad is in substantial conf~mance to the
recommendations made in the preliminary soils report which ",as performed by
Property Development Engineers, Inc. 9/30/93. (See Update Letter by South Coast
Civil Engineering, Dated 11/27/95). Attached to this report is a summary of the
compaction tests and laboratory results from this project.
Geolo~y
Geologically, the site is located in the foothills of the peninsular range mountains of
the western margin of the Southern California Batholith. The underlying soil is
weathered rock of the cretaceous age.
No ground water was uncovered during the grading operation, however, seasonal
ground water exists within this area to depths ofless than -10' of existing grade.
Gradini Operations
Prior to the placement offill all vegetation and debris was removed from the
grading envelope. The existing compressible top soils were removed to a depth of
-2' from original ground. A single layer of Mirafi 500X stabilization cloth was
placed at the bottom of this excavation prior to recompacting the native material.
Using a D-6 dozer and a rubber tired front loader, the native soils were then spread
into 8 inch lifts, watered, and compacted to a minimum of 90% relative density,
mß\'IlŒ@
.
11315 Rancho Bernardo Rd, ste 131, San Diego, CA 92127
(619) 675-9097
, \
Page Two of Six
A sandy, tan import material was brought to the site to raise the pad to the design
elevations as shown on the approved grading plan.
As the filling proceeded, periodical sand cone tests were performed to verify the
90% minimum relative density. All testing laboratory analysis and maximum
density curves were performed in accordance to ASTM methods. Attached is a
summary of this data,
No oversized rock was placed in the fill.
All fill slopes are 2: 1 of flatter and their maximum height is 4:1:: feet.
Conclusions
In general no soil or geological conditions were encountered which would preclude
the proposed development of the site.
The predominant soils encountered by the grading are considered to be non-
expansive and no special design considerations will be necessary.
The anticipated total and/or differential settlements for the proposed structures
may be considered to be within the tolerable limits.
- ,
Page Three of Six
Foundation Recommendations
The foundations system for the proposed structure shall be designed by the project
architect or structural engineer. The following recommendations are based upon
soil considerations only. They shall be considered a minimum design, and shall be
reviewed by the project structural engineer for their adequacy.
For two story construction, the minimum foundation shall be 15 inches wide and
founded 18 inches below grade. For the single story construction, the minimum
foundation shall be 12 inches wide and founded 12 inches below grade. Both types
of construction shall have four #4 bars of reinforcing steel. Two bars shall be
placed 3 inches below the top of foundation, and the other two bars shall be placed
3 inches from the bottom offoundation.
These recommendations are based upon soil characteristics only and do not reflect
any special considerations imposed by the building design which may require a
stronger foundation. The proposed foundations may be designed utilizing an
allowable bearing pressure of 1200 lb/sf. This value may be increased by 1/3 for the
design of loads that include wind and seismic analysis.
Slab on grade and exterior flatwork shall be at least 4" thick and reinforced with #3
rebar placed in a grid on 24" centers. The interior house slab shall be poured on
four inches of clean washed bedding sand (native sands are not acceptable) with a 6
mil. visqueen vapor barrier placed at mid-depth in the bedding sand. In addition, in
order to avoid drying shrinkage cracks or minor settlement cracks from occurring in
aesthetically or structurally sensitive areas the architect for this project should
provide a schematic diagram of the locations of the saw cut control joints in the
house. The maximum allowable square footage of monolithic concrete for the
interior slab (with out saw cuts) should not exceed 144:1:: sf. (These sections shall be
more or less square in shape with the length not exceeding 1.5 times the width).
The depth of these saw cuts should be 1/5 of the thickness of the slab, and be
installed within 24 hours of the pour. Tooled control joints (as opposed to saw cut)
are preferable for garage slabs and exterior flat work.
All utility trenches shall be properly backfilled and compacted with mechanical
compacting device prior to placement of any concrete. All foundation excavations
shall be inspected by this engineer prior to placement of concrete.
Page Four of Six
Retainin~ Wall Recommendations
The following values should be used in the design of retaining walls for this project.
Retaining walls, which are not fixed at the top and have a level backfill are to be
designed for an active soil pressure equivalent to a fluid pressure of not less than
38.0 pcf. Where the backfill is inclined at no steeper than 2:1, an active soil
pressure of 48.0 pcfis recommended. These values are based on the assumption of
a drained backfill condition. Wall drainage details are to be provided by the project
architect. When retaining walls are restrained at the top an at-rest soil pressure of
not less then 48.0 pcf shall be used for design of the wall. A passive soil pressure
value not greater than 250 pcf shall be used, A coefficient friction of not greater
than 0.35 may be used for resistance of sliding between concrete and soil.
'--,--........,
" ,.:::'."c,,~
, ,,' - -' . The opinions presented herein are ase 0
0 servations and test results, and are limited by the scope of services that South
Coast Civil Engineering Inc. agreed to preform. Recommendations made on site
during the grading operation, and those contained in this report are in accordance
with current generally accepted engineering practices. No warranty, expressed or
implied, is given or intended with respect to the services which were performed.
If there are any questions on this matter, please feel free to contact me at (619)
675-9097.
Sincerely,
~~~ ~~
Russell Bergen
RCE 44641
Exp.3/31/98
G:/to/f?
Date
PAGE £: OFG.
COMPACTION TESTING SUMMARY SHEET
Mendenhall Residence
845 Cole Ranch Road, Olivenhain, CA. 92024
A.P.N.264-171-89
MAXIMUM DENSITY SUMMARY
MAXIMUM WET OPTIMUM MAXIMUM DRY
NO. DESCRIPTION DENSITY MOISTURE DENSITY
1 Sand, Silty, Gray 136.4 9.5% 124.5
2 Sand, Silty RedfTan (IMPORT) 139.6 9.0% 128.0
3
4
5
6
<::, IESI._- TEST RESULTS
TEST FROM TO WET DRY MAX. DRY OPTIMUM RELATIVE
ORIGINAL FINISH DENSITY MOISTURE DENSITY DENSITY
NO. DATE GROUND PAD LBS.1Ff3 % LBSJFT 3 LBS.IFT 3 MOISTURE DENSITY %
1 1/15/96 -2.0 -2.0 126.2 8.6% 116.3 124.5 9.5% 93.4%
2 1/15/96 +0.0 -0.0 127.2 8.9% 116.8 124.5 9.5% 93.8%
3 1/29/96 +2.0 -2.0 127.6 9.6% 116.4 128.0 9.0% 90.9%
4 1/29/96 +4.0 -0.0 129.1 10.2% 117.2 128.0 9.0% 91.5%
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
- 8----
II ,
5CltLE . ! -=20
I
I
- I
1 .
J
I
-.J .
7 1 .('"'C\
I r .).:::,
~
/~I
/ ~I
, .~
~ / ~
, / ~.
~.~ ~id
/
I
. .' 5 ~i3 ,,is .3;z-L ítJ!:.
-
/O9.tJO/
\
\ '
---." '.~ '"
./
. f ,.,.--....... l
.~ . 10 .......
~ / I '.......
/ . ""'.....
/
I
I
I
-AtY \ .
;Y .I
,../
~
\~.
'.10 .1 ~ .
, . 't (- .
. ~~~ ~ .. "X.
þr-O'. ~/" -
O~ ¿.L.: : I
1>- 1 1" ..
G~l~£ .., . /.
S~..~
-/
. eo':!"
--L
.! 5'(
. J /// , @.
PAD~'7.!J !!
.SlolP£:070 I..
@?IN e e% -f?> .
//' . . .1# (IN'fJít:ItTIT
." ? TE5Tl.IX.Jt710N
4:/ . FILL
I
/
I
I
/
/
I
J "
J
I
I
I
I
(
I
\
\
\
\
4J
I SANDBAGS ~
YfJ (TYP.) . ij)
'Ie' \. I~
I . 100 YR. {.INGS OF I Q
. \\..INUNDAT/ON, I~'
"J. '\ l - ß--
.X)./'/ . COM PlKIlóN Æ"J.T PLitT
mElfOEN H-Itll. RE5/ [)EJý('E
I ... PRR.1 OF ( pm 17¡-;0
/. SUtLE 1 ~ -¿o'
f
/
(
,~
SOUTH COAST CIVIL ENGINEERING INC.
WORK ORDER - #94-177
Page One of Three
ATTN: Tom Mendenhall
7430 Trade Street, Ste 200
San Diego, CA. 92121-2410
(619) 586-1141
RE:
Mendenhall Residence
845 Cole Ranch Rd., Encinitas, CA. 92024
Subject: Additional Compaction Testing for Mendenhall Residence
Dear Tom:
Per your request, I have reviewed the" As Graded Geotechnical Report" for the
above referenced site which was prepared and signed by me on 6/10/97. I have also
performed a site inspection on 1/14/99. It is my professional opinion that the
findings, conclusions, and recommendations of this report are still valid for the
proposed construction.
On 2/2/99 two additional compaction tests were taken on the site. These tests
exceeded 90% minimum relative density. Attached to this letter you will find the
results of this additional testing.
Ifthere are any questions on this matter, please feel free to contact me at (619)
675-9097.
~-~
Russell Bergener
RCE 44641
Expo 3/31/02
2-1-~1 f ?
Date
Sincerely,
11315 Rancho Bernardo Rd, ste 130, San Diego, CA 92127
(619) 675-9097
«
PAGE Z OF .,
COMPACTION TESTING SUMMARY SHEET
Mendenhall Residence
845 Cole Ranch Rd.
Encinitas, CA.
MAXIMUM DENSITY SUMMARY
MAXIMUM WET OPTIMUM MAXIMUM DRY
NO. DESCRIPTION DENSITY MOISTURE DENSITY
'1 Sand, Silty, Grey 136.4 9.5% 124.5
2
3
4
5
6
TEST TEST RESULTS
ELEVATION
TEST FROM TO WET DRY MAX. DRY OPTIMUM RELATIVE
ORIGINAL FINISH DENSITY MOISTURE DENSITY DENSITY
NO. DATE GROUND PAD LBS.1FT3 % LBSIFT3 LBS.1FT3 MOISTURE DENSITY %
5 212/99 +2.5 -1.5 126.9 10.1% 115.2 124.5 9.5% 92.5%
6 t +3.0 -1.0 127.6 10.3% 115.7 J t 92.9%
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
- :3------
Ie ,
SCRLE 1-=20
I
I
/
/~
/ ~ /\
/
/
I
J
~
/~I
/ ~I
. ~
1 ! ~
, / ~
\" L.O'
-. . ~I'(j
... .
I.--
I
5-7Y~~
/09. 00/
-
~
\
\
'" "~ø '"
,/
\~.
. .1°",11/, tI'
T>íl~~ .---7-
o~ fV : . / ~r
û~~f,~:~ . (\¡
sr\/ .. . /
.~. ~
,/
. 1o",---"""......l
/ I '......
/ '......
/
. I
I
I
I
I
I
./
.......
t 5'(
3 eo'?'
.1 (!) ./// CD
/./ 6
Slf/:E PAD 70 ~..
OIfA/N (! 2 };~
@/ 1
// ,. INDILftí£Y
TE 5T LlJUf tJ ON
4:1 FILL
,...-/
/
J
I
I
I
/
/
I
/ '.
/
I
I
I
I
I
I
\
\
\
\
I
4J
I SA NOßAGS ~
(TYP. ) -'1
\ I~
;\/NUNDA\ON1. ~ --
mEN ow H-IfLL lftS/ DEN Ct"
I s+s COLë.. /ë/'lNCH leD.
fNCIN/TFJ5/ cn . I
( ,
/. 51 ffiLE 1 -:. 1-0
/ \
\/
\
\
\