The URL can be used to link to this page

1990-326 G Street Address Category Serial # U 1 .CFA G 7 Name Description Plan ck. # Year recdescv SC. � T ' SUMMARY OF FIELD OBSERVATIONS AND TESTS FOR RELATIVE COMPACTION ' LOT 4, BROOKSIDE RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION TM 4376 -1, ENCINITAS ' SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA PREPARED FOR: i AZURE CONSTRUCTION ' 3545 HARRIS STREET LEMON GROVE, CALIFORNIA 91945 PREPARED BY: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INCORPORATED. 6280 RIVERDALE STREET SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92120 ' Providing Professional 8 f nal Engtneertng Services Since 1959 1 ' S � SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA - SOIL & TESTING, INC. ' 6280 Riverdale Street, San Diego, CA 92120 P.O. Box 600627, San Diego, CA 92160 619 - 280 -4321, FAX 619 -280 -4717 ' April 17, 1992 ' Azure Construction SCS &T 9021094 ' 3545 Harris Street Report No. 4 Lemon Grove, California 91945 ' ATTENTION: Bob Kelly ' SUBJECT: Summary of Field Observations and Tests for Relative Compaction, Lot 4, Brookside Residential Subdivision, TM 4376 -1, Encinitas, San Diego County, California. REFERENCE: "Updated Geotechnical Report for Lot 4, Brookside Residential Subdivision, TM 4376- ' 1, Lot 4, Encinitas, California," Prepared by Southern California Soil & Testing, Inc., dated July 11, 1990. Gentlemen: In accordance with your request, this report has been prepared to summarize the results of the field ' observations and the in -place density tests performed at the subject site by Southern California Soil & Testing, Inc. These services were performed between January 27 and April 10, 1992. SITE DESCRIPTION ' The subject lot is an approximate 0.6 acre trapezoidal shaped parcel of land. This 1 J PP P P P sot was one of the few ' lots which was not graded during the mass grading operations of the subdivision. The lot was in a relatively undisturbed condition, and an old dirt road crossed the site. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION The subject lot is being developed to receive a single - family residence of wood -frame construction. A slab -on -grade floor system is anticipated. ' SCS &T 9021094 April 17, 1992 Page 2 ' AVAILABLE PLANS ' To assist in determining the locations and elevations of our field density tests and to define the general extent of the site grading for this phase of work, we were provided with a grading plan prepared by ' Logan Engineering, dated January 31, 1992. ' SITE PREPARATION Prior to the grading operations, the existing vegetation was removed and disposed of off -site. Minor amounts of vegetation that remained after the clearing operation were mixed with the fill material in such ' a manner as not to leave any clumps of deleterious matter or to be detrimental to the structural fill. ' Grading began in the area of the proposed southwestern fill slope. A keyway with a width ranging from 10 to 15 feet was cut into firm natural ground. Firm natural ground consisted of firm terrace deposits. ' The removed soils were stockpiled for later use. The approximate limits and bottom of the elevation of the keyway are shown on Plate Number 1. The exposed surface at the bottom of the excavation was ' prepared to receive fill by scarifying to an approximate depth of twelve (12) inches, moisture conditioned, and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction. ' After the preparation of the keyway bottom surface was completed, some fill was placed to an ' approximate elevation equal to the top elevation of the proposed retaining wall footing. The placement of the fill material will be discussed later in this report. The footings were then excavated to the proper depth as per the structural plans. The excavations extend into both compacted fill and firm natural ground. The wall was then constructed. The wall was then waterproofed, a perforated pipe was placed, ' the pipe was covered with 1/2 inch crushed rock, and then wrapped with filter fabric. The backfill and fill behind the wall and in the slope areas was placed in layers ranging from eight (8) ' to twelve (12) inches, moisture conditioning, and compacting to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction by means of trackwalking with 977 track loader, wheel - rolling with a backhoe and /or a ' handwacker. As the depth of fill increased, the existing slope was benched in a stair -step method to remove any unsuitable soils. As the depth of fill increased, the face of the fill was compacted with a ' sheepsfoot. ' SCS &T 9021094 April 17, 1992 Page 3 ' The depth of fill reached the proposed upper wall footing elevation, and the upper retaining wall was then ' constructed. The footing excavations were observed by our representative and found to be into compacted fill. A subdrain was installed as previously described. Backfill material continued as previously described. The cut portion of the pad was undercut to a depth of approximately three (3) feet from finish grade. The approximate horizontal limits and bottom elevation of the undercut are shown on Plate Number 1. The ' exposed surface was scarified to an approximate depth of twelve inches, recompacted in six (6) to eight (8) inch layers, moisture conditioned, and then compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative ' compaction. ' The fill and undercut portions of the pad were capped with an approximately three (3) foot layer of imported nondetrimentally expansive soil. FIELD OBSERVATION AND TESTING ' Field observation and density ests were performed b a representative y p y of Southern California Soil & ' Testing, Inc. during the mass grading and backfill operations. The density tests were taken according to ASTM D1556 -82 (sand cone) and D2922 -81 (nuclear gauge). The results of those tests are shown on ' the attached plates. The accuracy of the in -situ density test locations and elevations is a function of the accuracy of the survey control provided by other than Southern California Soil & Testing, Inc. ' representatives. Unless otherwise noted, their locations and elevations were determined by pacing and hand level methods and should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the method used. As used herein, the term "observation" implies only that we observed the progress of work we agreed ' to be involved with, and performed tests, on which, together, we based our opinion as to whether the work essentially complies with the job requirements, local grading ordinances and the Uniform Building Code. r LABORATORY TESTS Maximum dry density determinations were performed on representative samples of the soils used in the compacted fill and backfill according to ASTM D1557 -78, Methods A and C. Method A specifies that a four (4) inch diameter cylindrical mold of 1/30 cubic foot volume be used and that the soil tested be ' placed in five (5) equal layers with each layer compacted by twenty -five (25) blows of a 10 -pound ' SCS &T 9021094 April 17, 1992 Page 4 ' hammer with an 18 -inch drop. Method C specifies that a six (6) inch diameter cylindrical mold of 1/13 cubic foot volume be used and that the soil tested be placed in five (5) equal layers with each layer ' compacted by fifty -six (56) blows of a 10 -pound hammer with an 18 -inch drop. The results of these tests, as presented on Plate Number 5, were used in conjunction with the field density tests to determine the ' degree of relative compaction of the compacted fill and backfill. ' CONCLUSIONS ' GENERAL: Based on field observations and the in -place density test results, it is the opinion of Southern California Soil & Testing, Inc. that the grading and the backfill operations were performed ' basically in accordance with the job requirements and local grading ordinances. ' FOUNDATIONS: Since the pad area was capped with nondetrimentally expansive soils, the updated foundation recommendations provided in the referenced report remain applicable and should be ' implemented. ' FOUNDATION EXCAVATION OBSERVATIONS: All footing excavations should be observed by a member of our engineering geology staff to verify that the foundation excavations extend into a suitable ' bearing stratum. ' LIMITATIONS ' This report covers only the services performed between January 27 and April 10, 1992. As limited by the scope of the services which we agreed to perform, our opinion presented herein are based on our ' observations and the relative compaction test results. Our service was performed in accordance with the currently accepted standard of practice and in such a manner as to provide a reasonable measure of the compliance of the grading and backfill operations with the job requirements. No warranty, express or ' implied, is given or intended with respect to the services which we have performed, and neither the performance of those services nor the submittal of this report should be construed as relieving the ' contractor of his responsibility to conform with the job requirements. ' SCS &T 9021094 April 17, 1992 Page 5 If you should have any questions regarding this report, please do not hesitate to contact this office. This ' opportunity to be of professional service is sincerely appreciated. Respectfully Submitted, ' SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL & TESTING, INC. Joseph T. Diab, Staff Engineer � Q �,oFESS/p�,� R. sl Fy Reviewed by: FGA ' No. 0043010 Z 011 0' ow ' William R. Stevens, R.C.E. #43010 rF Of CAOF j ' WRS:JTD:mw cc: (3) Submitted ' (1) Logan Engineering (1) SCS &T, Escondido ' JOB NAME: Brandl in Residence JOB NUMBER: 9 021094 Plate No. 2 TEST# DATE LOCATION ELEVATION OR DRY DEN. SOIL REL. COMP. ' DEPTH OF TEST MOISTURE % Ibs /cu ft TYPE 1 1 -27 -92 Footing Fill, Lower 69.0 14.2 117.5 2 97.5 Wall 2 1 -27 -92 Footing Fill, Lower 70.0 13.6 113.4 2 94.1 Wall 3 1 -27 -92 Footing Fill, Lower 72.0 12.8 118.3 2 98.0 Wall 4 2 -21 -92 Above Lower Wall on 73.0 11.9 122.0 3 96.6 SW Side of Site 5 2 -24 -92 Above Lower Wall on 78.0 15.2 111.1 2 92.2 SW Side of Site 6 2 -24 -92 Above Lower Wall on 79.0 14.2 116.7 2 96.8 SW Side of Site 7 2 -24 -92 Above Lower Wall on 79.5 12.9 115.6 2 95.9 SW Side of Site 8 2 -24 -92 Above Lower Wall on 79.0 13.5 117.3 2 97.3 ' SW Side of Site 9 2 -24 -92 Above Lower Wall on 81.0 15.1 117.8 2 97.7 SW Side of Site ' 0 2 -24 -92 Above Lower Wall on 81.5 12.7 116.5 4 93.9 SW Side of Site ' 1 2 -24 -92 Above Lower Wall on 82.0 13.2 112.6 4 90.1 SW Side of Site 2 2 -24 -92 Above Lower Wall on 83.0 14.4 113.8 4 91.1 ' SW Side of Site 3 2 -25 -92 Above Lower Wall on 84.0 13.2 110.9 2 92.0 SW Side of Site ' 4 2 -25 -92 Above Lower Wall on 85.0 13.4 110.6 2 91.8 SW Side of Site 5 2 -25 -92 Above Lower Wall on 87.0 12.5 114.7 2 95.2 SW Side of Site 6 2 -26 -92 Above Lower Wall on 88.0 12.8 111.8 2 92.8 ' SW Side of Site 7 2 -26 -92 Above Lower Wall on 87.5 13.2 115.3 2 95.7 SW Side of Site ' 8 2 -26 -92 Slope Above Lower Wall 82.0 11.1 115.5 2 95.9 9 3 -31 -92 Building Pad 90.0 15.4 111.7 2 92.7 ' 0 4 -10 -92 West of Upper Wall 92.5 10.5 115.5 5 91.8 1 4 -10 -92 Building Pad 92.5 6.8 116.2 5 92.4 ' 2 4 -10 -92 Building Pad 93.0 9.9 109.7 6 91.0 JOB NAME: Brandl i n Residence JOB NUMBER: 9021094 Plate No. 3 EST# DATE LOCATION ELEVATION OR DRY DEN. SOIL REL. COMP. DEPTH OF TEST MOISTURE % Ibs /Cu ft TYPE 3 4 -10 -92 Building Pad 93.5 10.5 113.6 5 90.3 ' 4 4 -10 -92 Building Pad 94.0 FG 10.9 118.4 6 98.3 5 4 -10 -92 Building Pad 94.0 FG 9.9 120.5 6 100.0 FG= Finished Grade OB NAME: Brandl i n Residence JOB NUMBER: 9 021094 Wall Backfill Plate No. 4 ELEVATION OR EST# DATE LOCATION DEPTH OF TEST MOISTURE % bc s DEN. S REL DRY. u ft 2 -20 -92 SW Side of Site, 79.5 9.1 115.0 3 91.1 ' Lower Wall 2 -20 -92 SW Side of Site, 77.0 11.7 115.0 3 91.1 Lower Wall 2 -20 -92 SW Side of Site, 73.0 17.7 113.8 3 90.1 Lower Wall 2 -20 -92 SW Side of Site, 72.0 15.3 113.9 3 90.2 ' Lower Wall 2 -21 -92 SW Side of Site, 75.0 11.6 118.7 4 95.0 Lower Wall 2 -21 -92 SW Side of Site, 73.0 12.0 108.9 2 90.4 Lower Wall ' 2 -21 -92 SW Side of Site, 74.0 11.8 121.7 3 96.3 Lower Wall 2 -21 -92 SW Side of Site, 75.5 11.6 116.7 3 92.4 ' Lower Wall 2 -21 -92 SW Side of Site, 80.0 11.5 114.2 3 90.5 Lower Wall 0 2 -24 -92 SW Side of Site, 76.5 13.5 118.6 3 93.9 Lower Wall ' 1 3 -31 -92 Upper Wall 89.0 15.7 111.7 2 92.7 2 3 -31 -92 Upper Wall 89.5 10.3 114.8 2 95.3 ' 3 3 -31 -92 Upper Wall 90.0 13.1 116.9 2 97.0 4 4 -10 -92 Upper Wall 92.0 9.9 115.7 5 92.0 5 4 -10 -92 Upper Wall 92.0 10.9 115.5 5 91.8 SCS &T 9021094 Plate No. 5 SOIL DESCRIPTION OPTIMUM MAXIMUM ' TYPE MOISTURE DENSITY (percent) (pcf) 2 Reddish Brown Sandy Clay 11.4 120.5 3 Red, Silty Sand with Trace 9.5 126.3 ' of Clay and Organic Gravel 4 Reddish Brown Clayey Silty Sand 10.6 124.9 ' 5 Fenton Yellow Fill 9.8 125.8 6 Tan Fine Silt 11.9 120.5 1 1 DEC 3 1 1991 CITY OF �B I LICWORKS . DEPT. OF l ENGINEERING DEPT. i UPDATED GE TEOMCAL RIUNW DMA MM RESZDENCE LOT 4, BROORSIDE SUBDI sim ENCDUTAS, CALIn711 KA I PREPARED FOR: Logan Engineering 465 First Street, Suite A Encinitas, California 92024 PREPARED BY: Southern California Soil & 7tsting, Incorporated 6260 Riverdale Street San Diego, California 92120 Post Office Box 600627, Zip Code 92160 i SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC. July 11, 1990 Logan Engineering SCS &T 9021094 465 First Street, Suite A Repo No. 1 Encinitas, California 92024 SUBJECT: Updated Geotechnical Report for Lot 4, Brookside Residential Subdivision, TM 4376 -1, Lot 4, Encinitas, California. REFERENCES: 1) "Updated Geotechnical Report, Brookside Residential Subdivision, TM 4376 -1, Olivenhain, San Diego County, I California;" Southern California Soil and Testing, Inc.; October 24, 1988, Report Number 2. I 2) "Foundation Recommendations for Highly Expansive Soil Conditions, Brookside Subdivision, Encinitas, California;" Southern California Soil and Testing, Inc.; October 5, 1989, Report Number 7. Gentlemen: In accordance with your request, this report has been prepared to update the previous geotechnical reports prepared for the Brookside Subdivision, as they apply to the current grading plan for Lot 4. The previous geotechnical reports for the subdivision include investigations by- Southern California Soil and Testing, Inc., Geocon, Inc., and San Dieguito Soils. 6280 RIVERDALE STREET 7ENTERPRISE STREET * CA 92029 •619 746 4544, FAX 619-746 -6579 DIEGO, CA 92160 J 1 SCS &T 9021094 July 11, 199- Page 2 PMJHC.T DESCRIIZON The subject lot is an approximate 0.6 acre trapezoidal shaped, undeveloped lot. This lot is one of the few lots not graded during the mass grading for the subdivision and as such, is in a relatively undisturbed condition. An old dirt road bed does, however, cross the site. It is our understanding that a single family residence of wood -frame construction is proposed to be constructed at the site. A slab -on -grade floor system is anticipated. A crib wall up to 12 feet tall and a three foot tall retaining wall are proposed. Grading of the site will create cut and fill slopes inclined at 2:1 (horizontal to vertical), with maximum heights of seven and 12 feet, respectively. We were provided with a grading plan prepared by Logan Engineering (Encinitas, California), dated February 5, 1990, to aid us in preparation of F this report. A location map for the site is contained in Figure 1 on the following page, and the Plot Plan is presented on Plate Number 1. i i SUMUff OF SOIL CONDITIONS i Boring 1 and Trench Numbers 1 and 4, which were explored by Geocon, Inc. in i May and June of 1987, are located near the site. These subsurface explorations show the site to be overlain by topsoil and terrace deposits, with the Santiago Peak Volcanics found at depth. The locations of these subsurface explorations are shown on Plate Number 1, and the associated logs are contained in Plate Numbers 2 and 3. Based on these logs and our observations during the subdivision mass grading, we anticipate that this lot will be underlain by three to four feet of moderately to highly expansive clayey topsoil over dense river terrace deposits, comprised of well graded, medium to course, slightly silty sands. SITE Site preparation should begin with the remval of any existing vegetation and deleterious material from the areas of the site tp be developed. Existing topsoil, in areas to receive fill and /or 1 f _ I.r�• C • fi tt /.' [�^' -- .w+wf moo, IS ! t� •vgtf O '- 7 `•. 'iv G .u...,.D.u,ns - -I -- It f � f •' - I �� ♦ - -rte I I � � ;v � �.�• � i "DI � J 'T- � -- _ • ft— n• nDw •V r . _ - U f•yD.Y 3 JA ;P iN p w•or on D ll • v • I 7 r' _ _� 1_ ------ _- - -_ -_- rQ Sy �jQ . y _ - _�_- -- r E' I • • C1�,fC� �1 I c y� . w A A 's �— ,Df �� d l �f {�'a'- �.. " � f'M fr •lJ , f �� f .�. �. f is • i lbb lwr.a ' M' mod. an • -'i5 �' '+Mq N PTE 31'f^ tf ANC H C� - X y.D•r.w �.� LLk } ±.�I� q 4 c r;• %p l A'' L � �.J 1 i n lj V i 11Da 1�y ..u.f�ie.•�i. I � Q 4 7 1 �T /� f 4 �♦ � I � sg I f4 59 i I SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA BRANDLM RESIDENCE i I =OIL A TK*TINQ, INC. NY: VIMIEM DATE: Joe NYNDER: 9021094 FlCaIW i1 t 1 SCS &T 9021094 July 11, 1990 Page 3 settlement- sensitive m, VVements (on -grade slabs, patios and driveways' included), should be removed to firm ground. Firm ground is defined as soil having an in -place density of at least 90 percent. The soils exposed in fill areas should be scarified to a depth of 12 inches, moisture conditioned, and recompacted to at least 90 percent relative ccnpaction. Where the ground surface slopes greater than 5 to 1 (horizontal to vertical) in fill areas, a mi_nin m ten-foot-wide key should be constructed. The hillside should be i benched into in a stair step manner as the fill height increases. SURFACE DRAIN: It is recommended that all surface drainage be directed away from the structure and the top of slopes. Ponding of water should not be allowed adjacent to the foundations. t EXPANSIVE SOILS: The topsoils and some of the terrace deposits may be detrimentally expansive and will require select grading or special foundation design. Where practical to do so, we recormiend that detrimentally i expansive soil used as fill material be placed at a depth of three or more feet below pad grade. Further, where they occur natural An the cut portion of the pads, they should be excavated to a minimum depth of three feet and be replaced with nondetrimentally expansive soils. If it is found to be impractical for economic reasons to cap the lots with nondetrimentally expansive soils, then special footing and slab recommendations will be necessary to mitigate for expansive soil conditions. Such recommendations should be provided after grading when it is known how extensive the expansive soils will exist in the upper three feet of pad grade and what the degree of expansive potential is. In addition to the building pads, no expansive soils should be used to construct fill slopes as discussed in the slope stability section that follows later on in this report, or for retaining wall backfill. CtTr/F TRANSITION: Support of a structure on both cut and fill soils is not recommended due to the different settlement characteristics of the two i i different soils types. Therefore, we recommend that the cut portion of the cut /fill pad be undercut to a depth of three feet and the soils so excavated .I SCS &T 9021094 July 11, 1990 Page 4 be replaced as compacted fill. Prior to replacing the fill, the soils exposed at the bottom of the excavation should be scarified to a depth of 12 inches, moisture conditioned and compacted to. at least 90 percent relative compaction. This recommendation applies only when the depth of fill exceeds three feet below the structure. SLOPE C�Sl4�U.TION: The face of all fill slopes should be compacted by back rolling with a sheepsfoot compcCtor at vertical intervals no greater than four feet and where possible should be track - walked when completed. No clayey soils should be placed in the slope zone, which is defined as the area between the face of the slope and an imaginary line located a horizontal distance back from the slope face equal to three- fourths the slope height. All cut slopes should be observed by our engineering geologist to verify stable geologic conditions. Should any unstable conditions be found, buttressing would be required. t FARMWORK: All earthwork and grading contemplated for site preparation should be accomplished in accordance with the attached Recommnded Grading Specifications and Special Provisions. All special site preparation recommendations presented in the sections above will supersede those in the standard Recommended Grading Specifications. All embankmnts, structural fill, and fill should be compacted to at least 90% relative compaction at or slightly over optimm moisture content. Utility trench backf ill within five feet of the proposed structures and beneath asphalt pavements should be compacted to minimum of 90% of its maximum dry density. The upper six inches of subgrade beneath paved areas should be compacted to 95% of its maximum dry density. This compaction should be obtained by the paving contractor just prior to placing the aggregate base material and should not be part of the mass grading requirements. The maxim= dry density of each soil type should be determined in accordance with ASTM Method D 1557 - 78, Method A or C. SLOPE STABILITY FILL SLOPES: The proposed fill slopes, if constructed in accordance with the reconinendations above, will be stable in regards to deep - seated and SCS &T 9021094 July 11, 1990 Page 5 surf icial failure, and will have factors- of -saf ety in excess of the minimum requIrenent of 1.5 under static loading conditions. If clayey soils commn to the site are used to construct fill slopes with disregard to the select grading within the slope zone defined above, such slopes should not exceed ten feet in height and should not be steeper than 2:1. i CUT SIOM: Cut slopes in the terrace deposits will be limited to heights of less than about ten feet and are planned at a ratio of 2:1. Such slopes will have a factor -of- safety well in excess of the minim= requirements. UPDATED FO@IDA CK RDOag4ENIDA' ONO N' I ` GENERAL: Provided the lot is capped with nondetrimentally expansive soils, shallow foundations may be utilized for the support of the proposed I structure. The footings should have a minimum depth of 12 and 18 inches below lowest adjacent finished grade for one -story and two -story a construction, respectively. A minimum width of 12 inches and 18 inches is s� - recommended for continuous and isolated footings, respectively. At the south corner of the house, where it will be about five feet from the cribwall, the house footings should be deepened so that it will not rely on support from the cribwall. This will require deepening the footings such that there is a slope of 1:1 between the bottom of the footing and the inside base of the cribwall. A bearing capacity of 2000 pounds per square foot may be assumed for said footings. This bearing capacity may be increased by one -third when ' considering wind and /or seismic forces. Retaining wall footings should be setback a minimum of ten feet, and foundation footings setback a minimum of seven feet, from the face of all slopes. CEMENT IRE Both exterior and interior continuous footings should be reinforced with at least two No. 4 bar positioned near the bottom of the footing and two No. 4 bar positioned near the top of the footing. This reinforcement is based on soil characteristics and is not intended to be in lieu of reinforcement necessary to satisfy structural considerations. SCS &T 9021094 July 11, 1990 Page 6 ' IIIIERIOR OMaMlE SLABS- O]-GRAM: Interior concrete slabs -on -grade should have a minimum, actual thickness of four inches and be reinforced with No. 3 reinforcing bars placed at 30 inches on center each way extending at least 12 inches into the footings. If detrimentally expansive soils exist within three feet of finish grade after grading, these recommendations will need to be revised. It is imperative that the reinforcement be properly placed near the middle of the slab in order to be effective. A four - inch -thick layer of coarse, poorly graded sand or crushed rock should be placed underneath the slab. This layer should consist of material with 100 percent passing the half -inch sieve and not exceeding ten percent and five percent passing sieves #100 and #200, respectively. Where moisture- sensitive floor coverings are planned, the slab should be also underlain by a 6 mil visqueen moisture barrier. A minimum two- inch -thick layer of sand should be provided above the visqueen to allow proper concrete curing. Er'1'F:RIOR SLAW-ON-GRADE: Exterior slabs should have a minimum thickness of four inches. Walks or slabs five feet in width should be reinforced with at least 6 "x6 "- W2.9xW2.9 welded wire mesh and provided with weakened plane joints. Any slabs between five and ten feet should be provided with longitudinal weakened plane joints at the center lines. Slabs exceeding ten feet in width should be provided with a weakened plane joint located three feet inside the exterior perimeter as indicated on attached Plate Number 13. Both traverse and longitudinal weakened plane joints should be constructed as detailed in Plate Number 4. Exterior slabs adjacent to doors and garage openings should be connected to the footings by dowels consisting of No. 3 reinforcing bars placed at 18 -inch intervals extending 12 inches into the footing and 24 inches into the slab. EMEW CS: The anticipated total and/or differential settlement for the proposed structure may be considered to be within tolerable limits provided the recosmendations presented in this report are followed. It should be recognized that minor hairline cracks on concrete due to shrinkage of construction materials or redistribution of stresses are normal and may be anticipated. SCS &T 9021094 July 11, 1990 Page 7 EXPANSIVE SOILS: The prevailing topsoils soils are expected to be detrimentally expansive while the underlying terrace deposits are anticipated to be nondeterimentally expansive. The recommendations herein reflect a nondetrimentally expansive soil condition. If this is not the case after grading, revised foundation and slab recommendations will be necessary. UPDATED EAFM RETAINING STMJLQIM REOCHMENDATICNS PASSIVE Pte: The passive pressure for prevailing soil conditions may be considered to be 400 pounds per square foot per foot of depth up to a maximum pressure of 2500 psf. The upper 12 inches of soil should not be considered when commuting passive pressures. This pressure may be increased by one -third for seismic loading. The coefficient of friction for concrete I to soil may be assumed to be 0.35 for the resistance to lateral movement. When combining frictional and passive resistance, the friction value should I be reduced by one - third. ACTIVE PRESSURE: The active soil pressure for the design of earth retaining structures with level backfills may be assumed to be equivalent to the ■_. pressure of a fluid weighing 35 pounds per cubic foot for walls free to yield at the top ( unrestrained walls) . For earth retaining structures that are fixed at the top ( restrained walls) , an equivalent fluid pressure of 50 pounds per cubic foot may be used for a design parameter. For backfill that slopes upward from the top of walls at a 2:1 slope, the above pressures should be increased by 13 pounds per cubic foot. The above pressures for restrained and non - restrained walls do not consider any other surcharge loading. If any surcharge loadings are anticipated, this office should be contacted for the necessary change in soil pressure. This value also assumes N granular and drained backfill conditions. Plate Number 5 contains a suggested method for providing drainage behind the retaining walls. r� BACXFIM: All backfill soils should be compacted to at least 90% relative ' compaction. Expansive or clayey soils should not be used for backfill material within a distance of five feet from the back of the wall. The 1 retaining structure should not be backfilled until the materials in the wall i SCS &T 9021094 July 11, 1990 Page 8 have reached an adequate strength. These values assume a drained condition, Plate Number 5 shows a suggested drain detail that may be utilized to achieve the drained condition. FACIUR OF SAFETY: The above values, with the exception of the concrete -soil friction coefficient, do not include a factor -of- safety. Appropriate factors -of- safety should be incorporated into the design of all earth retaining structures to reduce the possibility of overturning and sliding. LIMTTATI The recommendations and opinions expressed in this report reflect our best estimate of the project requirements based on an evaluation of the r subsurface soil conditions encountered at the subsurface exploration locations and the assumption that the soil conditions do not deviate ' appreciably from those encountered. It should be recognized that the performance of the foundations and /or cut and fill slopes may be influenced by undisclosed or unforeseen variations in the soil conditions that may occur in the intermediate and unexplored areas. Any unusual conditions not covered in this report that may be encountered during site development should be brought to the attention of the soils - engineer so that he may make modifications if necessary. In addition, this office should be advised of any changes in the project scope or proposed site grading so that it may be F determined if the recommendations contained herein are appropriate. This should be verified in writing or modified by a written addendum. If you should have any questions after reviewing this report, please do not hesitate to contact this office. This opportunity to be of professional service is sincerely appreciated. Respectfully submitted, SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL & TESTING, INC. PIFESS /p ESE D GF o William R. Stevens, R.C.E. �Q M Ft S Curtis R. Burdett, C.E.G 8 R BJ, 0. WRS : CRB:mw h 0. 10 9 C) cc: 4 Submitted , 3 No. W43010 z "*' C E R i{ F I E D� ( ) °C Ev.3.31 -92 N E GE G OLOGRBT Q (1) SCS &T, Escondido * * A �l CIV �rF of C 0Z F OF CA�\Fo • File No. D- 3915 -101 ' June 19. 1987 GEOCON BORING BORING 1 tE� " ELEVATIO 95 DATE DRILLED 6/2/87 „ Z. EQUIPMENT R —T� CE/ D MATERIAL DESCRIPTION I TOPSOIL Loose, damp, brown, Sandy CLAY. some 2 organic material 0 0 CRETACEOUS RIVER TERRACE 4 0 c Medium dense, damp, orange -brown GRAVELSTONE o D with some medium to fine sand, clay 6 81 -1 Medium dense, damp, orange - brown. coarse 5 101.1 2.6 8 to fine SANDSTONE, little clay. some B1 -2 1 Cohesion, fossil burrow casts 6/ L 1 0; 0 _ 9' 10 c 0 " Loose, damp, yellow- brown, medium to fine Q0 �, SANDSTONE with trace clay. little cohesion, many fossil burrow casts 12 .0 B1 -3 �. Dense, moist, orange - brown, coarse to fine 7/ 0 ' I SANDSTONE, some clay, pebbles. cobbles 10" 14 G " — carbonate deposits, irregular contact 16 1 `— becomes very moist, more cobbles. boulders (rounded, looks like granite) t SANTIAGO PEAK VOLC NICS I Very dense, damp. dark gray -blue, fine grained volcanic rock I BORING TEMIINATED AT 16.0 FEET 1 I Figure A -1. Log of Test Boring 1 I SAMPLE SYMBOLS 0 shwL"a WIEUCCtsSFUL U— STSNOYID KNETWKION TEST . own&WPLE tUNOISTU""EDI ® DIETtJ" "[D O"YGLU/K[ D �cMUNIIEWKE w. TE" Ta hE O " SEEPAGE NOTE THE LOG OF all"SUINFACJ CONOITIDNS SHOWN M["EON APPLIES OMIT ATTME SPCCTFIC"O"ING ONT"E NC„ LocAMN AND ATTME DATE W'DIGTED IT ISNMWAM"NTEDTDK "[ P. ESEMATry EOFSUESU" rACECC .".PdS46TOTM[nIOGTgNEa+DTYES I SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA DRANDUN SOIL i TESTING, I IIC. w"sAERA DATE: NUMBER: M10"94 PLATE #: June No. . 198715 -JO1 GEOCON TRENCHES TRENCH 1 ta t : " ELEVATIO 03 z A VM t W DATE DRILLED 5/29187 : »i z� �z i -v ' o g.= EQUIPMENT ta o g MATERIAL DESCRIPTION I 0 DI iURBED TOPSOIL Hard, damp, reddish -brown CLAY with some I coarse to fine sand 2 a. o i• CRETACEOUS RIVER TERRACE Very dense. moist, orange, medium to fine 0 SANDSTONE with some clay, pebbles D 4 �- N70W30N 6 .: Very dense, moist, green and orange. coarse to fine SANDSTONE with some very clayey areas, Kgr cobbles e D 0L Very dense, slightly moist. orange, coarse to fine SANDSTONE with some silt. scattered 10 Jsp cobbles, clayey areas TRENCH TERMINATED AT 9.0 FEET 0 TRENCH 4 EL. 102 TOPSOIL Very stiff, moist. orangish -brown CLAY 2 T » -1 — — with some silt, blocky, fissile T4 -2 BULK TLE 4 L__ becomes less blocky 6 CtiIACZ0US RISiR TERRACE 8 Very s moist, orange -brow and gray - green CLAYSTONE with some silt. carbonate 10 _ cementation TRENCH I:IL`IAI AT 10.0 F =rI Figure A -6, Log of Test Trenches 3 and 4 SAMPLE SYMBOLS 0_S....LIMD UNSUCCtSSFUL U—STEND►*O pe""O MOD„ nW cone S,uuLE,vMDaTV*.Ea f ® DISTU*1to on MO SA-RE Q _Cmm- •.wRE WATER TALE O* SEt►.GI 1 NOTE TN t LOG OT SUgSUnf►CE COMD SMowN ME *EOM.►R,tS OMLT AT THE 3►ECK OO LOCATION AMC II AT TNt DATE rt,SNOTwu,wMtED TO81 *E /*ESEMTATWt OF SUSSU* FACE COND ,TIONSATOTME11lOUTpNSANDnVEt. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA BRANDLIN RESIDENCE SOIL i TtiTINO,INC. Br: WRS/EM DATE: 7.5.90 JOB HUIIB[11: 9021094 PLATE #3 JOINTS Ul TRANSVERSE CONTROL L CONTROL JOINT JOINTS W (ft) I 3' TRANSVERSE W 12 T 3 ' w (ft) r w/2 w/2 SPACING I SLAB ON GRADE 10 FEET OR GREATER IN WIDTH SLAB ON GRADE 5 FEET TO 10 FEET IN WIDTH NOTE: 1.'W' SHOULD NOT EXCEED 15 FEET. 2 JOINT PATTERN SHOULD BE NEARLY SQUARE. TOOLED OR SAWED JOINT 'T /4 ••T /2 L U PER REPORT M MIL COVER) 'T •T THICKNESS PER REPORT CONTROL .JOINT DETAIL NO SCALE :SQ CALIFORNIA SOUTHERN DoT BRANDLIN RESIDENCE T SOIL & TESTING, INC. BY: WRS DATE: July 3, 1990 Joe NUMBER: 9021094 PLATE 4 it n s • MAX. WATERPROOF BACK OF WALL PER p. ARCHITECT'S SPECIFICATIONS O ,. o 314 INCH CRUSHED ROCK OR 0 0 MIRADRAIN 6000 OR EQUIVALENT 'D. 0• 0 GEOFABRIC BETWEEN ROCK AND SOIL 4 INCH DIAMETER PERFORATED PIPE c :4: SLAB -ON -GRADE i RETAINING WALL SUBDRAIN DETAIL NO SCALE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA BRANDLIN RESIDENCE SOIL & TESTING, INC. sr: WRS OATH: 7 -3 -90 cos MuMmzp: T 9021094 Plate No. 5 BRANDLIN RESIDENCE, 10r 4, BROMIDE SUBDIVISION, ENCINITAS FMOO►ORIDID GRADING SPOCIFICATIONS - GE1WRAL PFMISIONS GEN12AL IRTENT The intent of these specifications is to establish procedures for clearing, compacting natural ground, preparing areas to be filled, and placing and compacting fill soils to the lines and grades shown on the accepted plans. The recommendations contained in the preliminary geotechnical investigation report and /or the attached Special Provisions are a part of the Reco►miended ' Grading Specifications and shall supersede the provisions contained hereinafter in the case of conflict. These specifications shall only be used in conjunction with the geotechnical report for which they are a part. No deviation from these specifications will be allowed, except where specified in - the geotechnical report or in other written communication signed by the Geotechnical Engineer. UffiERVATION AND 7STING Southern California Soil and Testing, Inc., shall be retained as the Geotechnical Engineer to observe and test the earthwork in accordance with these specifications. It will be necessary that the Geotechnical Engineer or his representative provide adequate observation so that he may provide his opinion as to whether or not the work was accomplished as specified. It shall be the responsibility of the contractor to assist the Geotechnical Engineer and to keep him appraised of work schedules, changes and new information and data so that he may provide these opinions. In the event that any unusual conditions not covered by the special provisions or preliminary geotechnical report are encountered during the grading operations, the Geotechnical Engineer shall be contacted for further reconv endations. (R -9/89) SCS &T 9021094 July 11, 1990 Appendix, page 2 If, in the opinion of the Geotechnical Engineer, substandard conditions are encountered, such as questionable.or unsuitable soil, unacceptable moisture content, inadequate compaction, adverse weather, etc.; construction should be stopped until the conditions are remedied or corrected or he shall recommend rejection of this work. Tests used to determine the degree of compaction should be performed in accordance with the following American Society for Testing and Materials test methods: Maxinum Density & Optimum Moisture Content - ASTM D- 1557 -78. Density of Soil In -Place - ASTM D- 1556 -64 or ASTM D -2922. All densities shall be expressed in terms of Relative Compaction as determined by the foregoing ASTM testing procedures. PREPARATION OF AREAS TO RECEIVE FII,L All vegetation, brush and debris derived from clearing operations shall be removed, and legally disposed of. All areas disturbed by site grading should be left in a neat and finished appearance, free from unsightly debris. After clearing or benching the natural ground, the areas to be filled shall be scarified to a depth of 6 inches, brought to the proper moisture content, compacted and tested for the specified minimum degr of compaction. All loose soils in excess of 6 inches thick should be removed to firm natural ground which is defined as natural soils which possesses an in -situ density of at least 90% of its maximum dry density. (R -9/89) SCS &T 9021094 July 11, 1990 Appendix, Page 3 When the slope of the natural ground receiving fill exceeds 20% (5 horizontal units to 1 vertical unit), the original ground shall be stepped or benched. Benches shall be cut to a firm competent formational soils. The lower bench shall be at least 10 feet wide or 1 -1/2 times the the equipment width whichever is greater and shall be sloped back into the hillside at a gradient of not less than two (2) percent. All other benches should be at least 6 feet wide. The horizontal portion of each bench shall be conpacted prior to receiving fill as specified herein - for conpacted natural ground. Ground slopes flatter than 20% shall be benched when considered necessary by the Geotechnical Engineer. Any abandoned buried structures encountered during grading operations must be totally rMoved. All underground utilities to be abandoned beneath any proposed structure should be removed from within 10 feet of the structure and properly capped off. The resulting depressions from the above described procedures should be backfilled with acceptable soil that is compacted to the requirements of the Geotechnical Engineer. This includes, but is not limited to, septic tanks, fuel tanks, sewer lines or leach lines, storm drains and water lines. Any buried structures or utilities not to be abandoned should be brought to the attention of the Geotechnical Engineer so that he may determine if any special recommendation will be necessary. All water wells which will be abandoned should be backfilled and capped in accordance to the requirements set forth by the Geotechnical Engineer. The top of the cap should be at least 4 feet below finish grade or 3 feet below the bottom of footing whichever is greater. The type of cap will depend on the diameter of the well and should be determined by the Geotechnical Engineer and /or a qualified Structural Engineer. (R -9/89) SCS &T 9021094 July 11, 1990 Appendix, Page 4 FILL 19iTERIAL x Materials to be placed in the fill shall be,apprwed by the Geotechnical Engineer and shall be free of vegetable matter and other deleterious substances. Granular soil shall contain sufficient fine material to fill the voids. The definition and disposition of oversized rocks and expansive or detrimental soils are covered in the geotechnical report or Special Provisions. Expansive soils, soils of poor gradation, or soils with low strength characteristics may be thoroughly mixed with other soils to provide satisfactory fill material, but only with the explicit consent of the Geotechnical Engineer. Any import material shall be approved by the Geotechnical Engineer before being brought to the site. PL IW AMID COMPACTION OF FnL Approved fill material shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill in layers not to exceed 6 inches in compacted thickness. Each layer shall have a uniform moisture content in the range that will allow the compaction effort to be efficiently applied to achieve the specified degree of compaction. Each layer shall be uniformly compacted to the specified minimum degree of compaction with equipment of adequate size to economically compact the layer. Compaction equipment should either be specifically designed for soil compaction or of proven reliability. The miniimnan degree of compaction to be achieved is specified in either the Special Provisions or the recomrendations contained in the preliminary geotechnical investigation report. When the structural fill material includes rocks, no rocks will be allowed to nest and all voids must be carefully filled with soil such that the minimum degree of compaction recommended in the Special Provisions is achieved. The maxin mt size and spacing of rock permitted in structural fills and in non - structural fills is discussed in the - geotechnical report, when applicable. (R -9/89) SCS &T 9021094 July 11, 1990 Appendix, Page 5 Field observation and compaction tests to estimate the degree of conpaction of the fill will be taken by. the Geotechnical Engineer or his representative. The location and frequency of the tests shall be at the Geotechnical Engineer's discretion. When the compaction test indicates that a particular layer is at less than the required degree of compaction, the layer shall be reworked to the satisfaction of the Geotechnical Engineer and until the desired relative compaction has been obtained. Fill slopes shall be compacted by means of sheepsfoot rollers or other suitable equipment. Compaction by sheepsfoot rollers shall be at vertical intervals of not greater than four feet. In addition, fill slopes at a ratio of two horizontal to one vertical or flatter, should be trackrolled. Steeper fill slopes shall be over -built and cut -back to finish contours after the slope has been constructed. Slope compaction operations shall result in all fill raterial six or more inches inward from the finished face of the slope having a relative compaction of at least 90% of maxim dry density or the degree of compaction specified in the Special Provisions section of this specification. The compaction operation on the slopes shall be continued until the Geotechnical Engineer is of the opinion that the slopes will be stable surficially stable. Density tests in the slopes will be made by the Geotechnical Engineer during construction of the slopes to determine if the required compaction is being achieved. Where failing tests occur or other field problems arise, the Contractor will be notified that day of such conditions by written c6nrunication from the Geotechnical Engineer or his representative in the form of a daily field report. If the method of achieving the required slope compaction selected by the Contractor fails to produce the necessary results, the Contractor shall rework or rebuild such slopes until the required degree of compaction is Obtained, at no cost to the Owner or Geotechnical Engineer. (R -9/89) SCS &T 9021094 July 11, 1990 Appendix, Page 6 CUP S111 The Engineering Geologist shall inspect cut slopes excavated in rock or lithified formtional material during the grading operations at intervals determined at his discretion. If any conditions not anticipated in the preliminary report such as perched water, seepage, lenticular or confined strata of a potentially adverse nature, unfavorably inclined bedding, joints or fault planes are encountered during grading, these conditions shall be analyzed by the Engineering Geologist and Soil Engineer to determine if mitigating measures are necessary. Unless otherwise specified in the geotechnical report, no cut slopes shall be excavated higher or steeper than that allowed by the ordinances of the controlling governmental agency. IG �VATIQd Field observation by the Geotechnical Engineer br his representative shall be made during the filling and compacting operations so that he can express his opinion regarding the conformance of the grading with acceptable st anda rds of practice. Neither the presence of the Geotechnical Engineer or his representative or the observation and testing shall not release the Grading Contractor from his duty to compact all fill material to the specified degree of compaction. SEA" ILUUTS Fill shall not be placed during unfavorable weather conditions. When work 1 is interrupted by heavy rain, filling operations shall not be resumed until the proper moisture content and density of the fill materials can be achieved. Damaged site conditions resulting from weather or acts of God shall be repaired before acceptance of work. (R -9/69) __ 1 SCS &T 9021094 July 11, 1990 Appendix, Page 7 RF]rIMMH7ED GMD G SPDCIFICATIONS - SPACIAL PROVISIONS RELATIVE COMPAMCN: The minim= degree of • conpaction to be obtained in compacted natural ground, carpacted fill, and canpacted backfill shall be at least 90 percent. For street and parking lot subgrade, the upper six inches should be conpacted to at least 95% relative compaction. EXPANSIVE SOILS: Detrimentally expansive soil is defined as clayey soil which has an expansion index of 50 or greater when tested in accordance with the Uniform Building Code Standard 29-C. OVERSIZED MNTERiAL: Oversized fill material is generally defined herein as rocks or lumps of soil over 6 inches in diameter. Oversize materials should not be placed in fill unless recommendations of placement of such material is provided by the geotechnical engineer. At least 40 percent of the fill soils shall pass through a No. 4 U.S. Standard Sieve. IRArSITION ID15: Where transitions between -cut and fill occur within the proposed building pad, the cut portion should be undercut a minimum of one foot below the base of the proposed footings and reccapacted as structural backfill. In certain cases that would be addressed in the geotechnical report, special footing reinforcement or a combination of special footing reinforcement and undercutting may be required. (R -9/89) REPORT OF FIELD OBSERVATIONS AND RELATIVE COMPACTION TESTS PROPOSED BROOKSIDE SUBDIVISION ENCINITAS TRACT NO. 4376 -1 ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA PREPARED FOR: Pacific Scene, Incorporated 3900 Harney Street San Diego, California 92110 PREPARED BY: Southern California Soil & Testing, Inc. Post Office Box 20627 6280 Riverdale Street San Diego, California 92120 S O U T H E R N 4, S- ro C A L I F O R N I A S O I L AND T E S T I N G , I N C. 6280 RIVERDALE ST. SAN DIEGO, CALIF. 92120 TELE 280.4321 P.O. BOX 20627 SAN DIEGO, CALIF. 92120 6 7 8 E N T E R P R 1 5 E 5 T. E 5 C 0 N D 1 D 0, C A L I F. 9 2 0 2 5 � T E L E 7 4 6 - 4 5 4 4 November 28, 1989 Pacific Scene, Incorporated 3900 Harney Street SCS &T 8821115 San Diego, California 92110 Report No. 9 ATTENTION: Pete Schofield SUBJECT: Report of Field Observations and Relative Compaction Tests, Proposed Brookside Subdivision, Encinitas Tract No. 4376 -1, Encinitas, California. REFERENCE: 1) "Updated Geotechnical Report ", by Southern California Soil & Testing, Inc., dated October 24, 1988. Gentlemen: In accordance with your request, this report has been prepared to present a summary of our field observations and the results of the relative compaction tests performed at the subject site by Southern California Soil & Testing, Inc. These services were performed between March 31 and November 28, 1989, SITE DESCRIPTION This project is comprised of the western portion of a parcel of land designated as County of San Diego Tract 4376. Tract 4376 is located south of Camino Del Rancho in the Olivenhain area of S O LI T H E R N C A L I F O R N I A S O I L A N D T E S T I N G, 1 N C. SCS &T 8821115 November 28, 1989 Page 2 Encinitas, California. The parcel of land is comprised of approximately 69 acres of land and is bounded by a riding stable and undeveloped land on the north and rural residential land and undeveloped land on all other sides. The project area consists of a westerly steeply sloping hillside in the easterly portions, and gently sloping land in the northerly portions, which sloped towards the south. A well incised drainage channel traversed the easterly portion of the project area in a northerly to southerly direction where it joined with a major northwesterly trending drainage channel. Vegetation consisted of chaparral and native grasses. No structures were noted to exist on site. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION It is our understanding that single family one and /or two story structures of wood -frame construction and associated roadways are planned for this site. Shallow continuous foundations and conventional slab -on -grade floor systems are anticipated. AVAILABLE PLANS To assist in determining the locations and elevations of our field density tests and to define the general extent of the site grading for this phase of work, we were provided with an undated grading plan prepared by San Dieguito Engineering, Inc. SITE PREPARATION GENERAL: Prior to the grading operations, the portions of the site to be graded were cleared of vegetation and materials thus generated were exported from the jobsite. The site grading operations then proceeded in two separate phases of grading. The first phase consisted of the construction of the single roadway that services the lots and installation of the underground t SCS &T 8821115 November 28, 1989 Page 3 utilities. The second phase of work consisted of the construction of the building pads for 15 of the 19 single family lots. In preparation for each phase of grading, the existing compressible topsoils, subsoils, and alluvium were removed to firm natural ground in the areas to receive fill. The depths of removal were generally on the order of two to three feet from the original ground contours; however, removal of alluvium of up to twelve feet deep was required in some pad areas. Soils generated by the removal operations were stockpiled for later use or placed as uniformly compacted fill in previously prepared areas. Keyways were then established at the toe of proposed fill slopes. The surfaces exposed at the bottom of keyways and in other areas to receive fill were scarified to a depth of approximately twelve inches, moisture conditioned, and compacted prior to the placement of the fill. The fills were generally placed in approximate six to eight inch lifts utilizing soils obtained from onsite cuts and import sources. Onsite soils consisted generally of clayey gravels and sands with a moderate potential for expansion. Non - detrimentally expansive sands were imported and used to cap Lot 1 and a portion of Lot 9. The fill soils were moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content, and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction by means of heavy construction equipment. OVERSIZED ROCK DISPOSAL: Oversize rock (over 12 inches in maximum size) was generated in cuts made in the existing hillside and for the sewer trench in the street and at the base of the hillside. The oversized rocks generated were incorporated into the fill in several areas of the site. Rocks measuring typically no greater than two feet in greatest dimension were placed in lifts, un- nested, in a matrix of sandy soils. The rock lifts were amply watered and compacted by means SCS &T 8821115 November 28, 1989 Page 4 of heavy grading equipment. The thickness of rock lifts was typically no greater than three feet and succeeding rock lifts were separated by a lift of compacted soils without rocks which was approximately one foot in thickness. No oversized rocks were placed in the fill within three feet of finished grade elevation or within five feet of the face of fill slopes. The approximate limits of the over -sized rock placement areas are shown on the attached plates. TRANSITION LOTS: In order to reduce the potential for distress to the proposed structures which could occur due to the different settlement characteristics of cut and fill soils, the cut portions of cut /fill transition lots were undercut to a depth of approximately three feet below finished grade elevation and the soils s'o excavated were replaced as a uniformly compacted fill. Lots which were affected by these operations were Lots 9, 12, 13, and 15 through 19, inclusive. SUBDRAINS: During the preparation of the referenced Updated Geotechnical Report, it was anticipated that subdrains would be necessary in two portions of the site. However, after the completion of the alluvium cleanout operations, it was determined by our project engineer that due to the fractured nature of the native metavolcanic rock exposed in the canyon inverts, subdrains would not be necessary. FIELD OBSERVATION AND TESTING Observations and field density tests were performed by a representative of Southern California Soil & Testing, Inc. during the site grading operations. The density tests were taken according to A.S.T.M. Test 1556 -74 and the results of those tests are shown on the attached plates. The accuracy of the locations and elevations of the in -place density tests is a SCS &T 8821115 November 28, 1989 page 5 function of the accuracy of the survey control provided by other than Southern California Soil & Testing, Inc. representatives. Unless otherwise noted, their locations and elevations were determined by pacing and hand level methods and should be con- sidered accurate only to the degree implied by the method used. As used herein, the term "observation" implies only that we observed the progress of work we agreed to be involved with, and performed tests, on which, together, we based our opinion as to whether the work essentially complies with the job requirements, local grading ordinances and the Uniform Building Code. LABORATORY TESTS MAXIMUM DENSITY DETERMINATIONS: Maximum dry density determinations were performed on representative samples of the soils used in the compacted fills according to A.S.T.M. Test 1557 -78, Method A. This method specifies that a four inch diameter cylindrical mold of 1/30 cubic foot volume be used and that soil tested be placed in five equal layers with each layer compacted by twenty -five blows of a 10 -pound hammer with a 18- inch drop. The results of these tests, as presented on plate No. 8, were used in conjunction with the field density tests to determine the degree of relative compaction of the compacted fill. EXPANSION POTENTIAL: Expansion index tests were performed on representative samples of the soils within three feet of finished grade elevation in accordance with UBC Test Method 29- 2. The results of these tests, shown in Table 1 below, indicate expansive potentials ranging from non - detrimentally expansive to highly expansive. The foundation recommendations presented hereinafter reflect these conditions. SCS &T 8821115 November 28, 1989 Page 6 TABLE 1 Lot Number Expansion Index Classification 1 26 Low 2 69 Moderate 3 64 Moderate 4 * NA 5 98 High 6 105 High 7 97 High 8 81 High 9 Pending NA 10 * NA 11 * NA 12 43 Low 13 39 Low 14 * NA 15 72 Moderate 16 60 Moderate 17 43 Low 18 34 Low 19 73 Moderate * Not graded, no sample taken. REMAINING WORK Additional grading and backf ill operations will be required at the site for the backfill of retaining walls, the preparation of the subgrade soils, and the placement of the aggregate base material. It is recommended that in -place density tests and field observations be performed during these operations to verify that they are performed in accordance with job requirements. In addition grading will be necessary for lot numbers 4, 10, 11 sand 14, which were left ungraded at this time. SCS &T 8821115 November 28, 1989 Page 7 CONCLUSIONS Based on our field "observations and the density test results, it is the opinion of Southern California Soil & Testing, Inc. that the grading was performed basically in accordance with the recommendations contained in the referenced Updated Geotechnical Report. FOUNDATIONS Based on the results of the expansion test results shown in Table 1, the foundations and interior slabs for the proposed structures should be designed in accordance with the minimum requirements for the corresponding foundation type for non - detrimentally expansive, moderately expansive, and highly expansive soils as shown in the Table II below. TABLE NUMBER II Lot Number Expansion Potential Foundation Type 1 Low A 2 Moderate B 3 Moderate B 5 Hi C 6 Hi C 7 High C 8 Hi C 9 Pending B * 12 Low B 13 Low B 15 Moderate B 16 Moderate B 17 Low B 18 Low B 19 Moderate B * Anticipated foundation type pending the results of the laboratory expansion index test. SCS &T 8821115 November 28, 1989 Page 8 FOUNDATION TYPE A - NON - DETRIMENTALLY EXPANSIVE SOILS: GENERAL: Shallow foundations may be utilized for the support of the proposed residential structures. The footings for structures on lots containing non - detrimentally expansive soils should have a minimum depth of 12 inches and 18 inches below lowest adjacent finish grade for single and two story structures, respectivelly. A minimum width of 12 inches and 24 inches is recommended for continuous and isolated footings, respectivelly. A bearing capacity of 2500 psf may be assumed for said footings. This bearing capacity may be in increased by one -third when considering wind and /or seismic forces. Footings located adjacent to or within slopes should be extended to a depth such that a minimum horizontal distance of five feet and seven feet exists between the footing and the face of cut and fill slopes, respectivelly. Retaining wall footings adjacent to or within slopes should be individually evaluated by our firm. REINFORCEMENT: Both exterior and interior continuous footings should be reinforced with at least one #4 bar positioned near the bottom of the footing and one #4 bar positioned near the top of the footing. This reinforcement is based on soil characteristics and is not intended to be in lieu of reinforement necessary to satisfy structural considerations. CONCRETE SLABS -ON- GRADE: Concrete slabs -on -grade should have a minimum thickness of four inches and be underlain by a four -inch blanket of washed, poorly graded coarse sand (concrete sand), or crushed rock (common decomposed granite does not meet this requirement). The slab should be reinforced with #3 reinforcing bars placed at 36 inches on center each way. A 6 "x6 "- W1.4W1.4 (6 11 x6"- 10/10) welded wire mesh may be used in lieu of the rebars. It is imperative that the slab reinforcement be placed near the center of the slab. Where moisture sensitive floor SCS &T 8821115 November 28, 1989 Page 9 coverings are planned, the moisture barrier should consist of at least one inch of clean sand, over a visqueen layer, over at least three inches of washed, poorly graded, coarse sand or crushed rock. FOUNDATION TYPE B - MODERATELY EXPANSIVE SOILS: Foundations and slabs for structures to be founded on lots containing moderately expansive soils should be designed in accordance with the minimum requirements for Type A foundations with the following changes: 1) All footings should be a minimum of 18 inches below lowest adjacent finished grade. 2) All footings should be reinforced with a minimum of four #4 bars, two placed near the top of the footing and two placed near the bottom. 3) Interior slab reinforcement should consist of #3 reinforcing bars placed at 24 inches on center each way or 6 "x6 " -6/6 welded wire mesh. Interior slabs should have a minimum actual thickness of four inches. 4) Exterior slabs should have a minimum thickness of five inches and should be underlain by a four inch layer of decomposed granitic base. Reinforcement should consist of at least 6 "x6 " -6/6 welded wire mesh. Patios and slabs adjacent to the houses should be doweled into the footings with #3 bars placed at 24 inches on center. 5) Clayey soils should not be allowed to dry prior to the placement of concrete and the moisture barrier. SCS &T 8821115 November 28, 1989 page 10 should be kept in a moist condition or should be moisture conditioned prior to the placement of the concrete and moisture barrier. FOUNDATION TYPE C - HIGHLY EXPANSIVE SOILS: Foundations and slabs for structures to be founded on lots underlain by highly expansive soils should be designed in accordance with the minimum requirements for Type A foundations with the following changes: 1) All footings should be a minimum of 24 inches below lowest adjacent finished grade. 2) All footings should be reinforced with a minimum of four #5 bars, two placed near the top of the footing and two placed near the bottom. 3) Interior slabs should be completely surrounded by a 24 inch deep perimeter footing and should have a minimum thickness of at least five inches. Further, interior slabs should be reinforced with at least #3 bars placed at 18 inches on center each way. 4) Exterior slabs should have a miniumum thickness of five inches and should be underlain by a six inch layer of de- composed granitic base. Reinforcements should consist of at least #3 bars placed at 24 inches on center each way. patios and slabs adjacent to the houses should be doweled into the footings with #3 bars placed at 18 inches on center. 5) Clayey soils should not be allowed to dry prior to the placement of concrete and the moisture barrier. They SCS &T 8821115 November 28, 1989 Page 11 should be kept in a moist condition or should be moisture conditioned prior to the placement of the concrete and moisture barrier. LIMITATIONS This report covers only the services performed between March 31 and November 28, 1989. As limited by the scope of the services which we agreed to perform, our opinions presented herein are based on our observations and the relative compaction test results. Our services were performed in accordance with the currently accepted standard of practice and in such a manner as to provide a reasonable measure of the compliance of the grading operations with the job requirements. No warranty, express or implied, is given or intended with respect to the services which we have performed, and neither the performance of those services nor the submittal of this report should be construed as relieving the grading contractor of his responsibility to conform with the job requirements. If you should have any questions after reviewing this report, please do not hesitate to contact this office. This opportunity to be of professional service is sincerely appreciated. � SS / Respectfully submitted, ``� - S / ��2c. OUTHERN CA IFORNIA SOIL & TESTING, INC. w ° No.GE000215L • °C Exp. 9 -30 -93 I P C ug s Hicks Charles H. Christian, R. E. A S& project Supervisor CHC /DH /MH /rr cc: (4) Submitted, Attention: John Leudtke (1) San Dieguito Engineering, Attention: Ernest (1) SCS &T, Escondido JOB NAME: Tract 4376 JOB NO: 8821115 PLATE NO:3 TEST DATE LOCATION ELEVATION MOISTURE DRY DEN. SOIL REL.COMP. NO. (percent) (p.c f . ) TYPE (percent) ----------------- -------------------- ----------------- 3-31-89 Brookside Lane 98.0 14.3 112.5 1 92.2 Station 14 +00 2 3 -31 -89 Brookside Lane 100.0 14.3 119.8 1 98.2 Station 13 +80 3 3 -31 -89 Brookside Lane 98.0 13.0 117.9 1 96.7 Station 12 +50 4 4 -3 -89 Brookside Lane 100.0 13.3 117.0 1 95.9 Station 13 +50 5 4 -4 -89 Brookside Lane 102.0 5.3 106.4 2 86.2 Station 14 +00 6 4 -4 -89 Retest of #5 102.0 14.3 117.2 2 95.0 7 4 -7 -89 Brookside Lane 88.0 15.5 117.4 1 96.2 Station 19 +30 8 4 -7 -89 Brookside Lane 90.0 15.8 118.0 1 96.7 Station 19 +45 9 4 -7 -89 Brookside Lane 92.0 14.3 120.6 1 98.8 Station 19 +50 10 4 -7 -89 Brookside Lane 94.0 17.6 121.6 1 99.7 Station 19 +30 11 4 -7 -89 Brookside Lane 96.0 14.3 117.4 2 95.1 Station 19 +25 12 4 -7 -89 Brookside Lane 98.0 14.3 118.7 2 96.1 Station 19 +40 13 4 -7 -89 Brookside Lane 100.0 17.6 119.8 2 97.0 Station 19 +45 14 4 -10 -89 Brookside Lane 99.0 11.1 117.0 2 94.8 Station 6 +50* 15 4 -10 -89 Brookside Lane 99.0 8.1 100.2 2 81.0 Station 7 +00* 16 4 -10 -89 Retest of #15 99.0 12.4 119.8 2 97.0 17 4 -10 -89 Brookside Lane 90.0 17.6 121.0 2 98.0 Station 26 +10 18 4 -10 -89 Brookside Lane 92.0 14.3 121.7 2 98.6 Station 26 +00 19 4 -10 -89 Brookside Lane 94.0 17.6 120.4 2 97.5 Station 25 +80 20 4 -10 -89 Brookside Lane 96.0 17.6 117.8 2 95.4 Station 25+90 21 4 -11 -89 Brookside Lane 98.0 7.6 122.4 2 99.1 Station 26 +00 22 4 -11 -89 Brookside Lane 101.0 16.6 119.6 2 96.8 Station 26 +03 23 4 -11 -89 Brookside Lane 104.0 14.9 120.0 2 97.2 Station 25 +90 24 4 -11 -89 Drive /Lot #20 92.0 13.6 120.6 2 97.7 25 4 -11 -89 Drive /Lot #20 94.0 13.0 120.0 2 97.2 26 4 -11 -89 Drive /Lot #20 96.0 11.1 118.2 2 95.6 27 4 -11 -89 Drive /Lot #20 98.0 14.3 121.0 2 98.0 * Off site, Location not shown on Grading Plans JOB NAME: Tract 4376 JOB NO. 8821115 PLATE NO: 4 TEST DATE LOCATION ELEVATION MOISTURE DRY DEN. SOIL REL.COMP. NO. (percent) (p.c f.) TYPE (percent) ---------------------------- ------------------- 28 4 -11 -89 Drive /Lot #20 100.0 14.3 115.5 2 93.5 29 4 -11 -89 Drive /Lot #20 103.0 17.6 123.2 2 99.8 30 4 -11 -89 Drive /Lot #20 105.0 11.7 121.0 2 98.0 31 4 -13 -89 Drive /Lot #20 107.0 10.5 120.7 2 97.8 32 4 -13 -89 Drive /Lot #20 109.0 11.1 119.2 2 96.5 33 4 -13 -89 Drive /Lot #20 112.0 13.0 121.6 2 98.5 34 4 -13 -89 Drive /Lot #20 114.0 14.3 119.6 2 97.1 35 4 -13 -89 Drive /Lot #20 117.0 10.5 114.2 2 92.5 36 4 -13 -89 Brookside Lane 92.0 10.5 119.1 2 96.5 Station 19 +60 37 4 -13 -89 Brookside Lane 94.0 13.5 119.6 2 96.9 Station 20 +00 38 4 -13 -89 Brookside Lane 96.0 17.6 122.7 2 99.4 Station 19 +80 39 4 -14 -89 Brookside Lane 99.0 13.0 123.2 2 99.8 Station 20 +20 40 4 -14 -89 Brookside Lane 102.0 11.8 117.4 2 95.1 Station 20 +10 41 4 -14 -89 Brookside Lane 105.0 11.1 118.5 2 95.9 Station 20 +40 42 7 -6 -89 Brookside Lane 104.5 9.3 116.2 2 94.1 Station 6 +10* 43 7 -6 -89 Brookside Lane 98.0 11.1 117.6 2 95.6 Station 7 +10* 44 7 -6 -89 Brookside Lane 98.0 17.6 114.5 2 92.0 Station 18 +85 45 9 -20 -89 Lot #19 103.0 12.4 114.2 3 93.5 46 9 -20 -89 Lot #19 105.0 13.0 116.5 3 95.4 47 9 -20 -89 Lot #19 107.0 13.6 116.2 3 95.1 48 9 -21 -89 Lot #19 108.5 12.4 115.8 2 93.8 49 9 -21 -89 Lot #18 89.5 11.1 105.8 2 85.6 50 9 -21 -89 Lot #19 116.0 NG 11.7 113.7 1 93.1 51 9 -22 -89 Lot #19 111.0 13.6 108.5 2 87.9 52 9 -22 -89 Retest of #51 111.0 13.6 112.6 2 91.1 53 9 -22 -89 Lot #19 112.5 10.5 107.0 2 86.6 54 9 -22 -89 Retest of #53 112.5 15.6 114.9 2 93.0 55 9 -25 -89 Lot #16 93.0 15.6 117.0 3 95.8 56 9 -25 -89 Lot #13 95.0 14.9 115.1 3 94.2 57 9 -25 -89 Lot #16 97.0 14.9 117.2 3 95.9 58 9 -25 -89 Lot #13 99.0 15.6 115.4 3 94.4 59 9 -25 -89 Lot #13 101.0 14.9 117.0 3 95.7 60 9 -26 -89 Lot #15 117.0 13.6 122.4 6 95.5 61 9 -26 -89 Lot #19 118.0 14.3 122.5 6 95.5 62 9 -26 -89 Lot #15 120.0 13.0 120.7 6 94.1 63 9 -26 -89 Lot #9 83.0 13.6 115.4 2 93.4 64 9 -27 -89 Lot #9 85.0 13.6 116.5 2 94.4 65 9 -27 -89 Retest of #49 89.0 13.6 121.3 2 98.2 66 9 -27 -89 Lot #17 98.5 13.6 111.8 2 90.5 * Off site, Location not shown on Grading Plans JOB NAME: Tract 4376 JOB N0: 8821115 PLATE NO: 5 TEST DATE LOCATION ELEVATION MOISTURE DRY DEN. SOIL REL.COMP, NO. (percent) (p.c f.) TYPE (percent) -------------------------- -------------------------- 67 9 -27 -89 Lot #17 100.0 9.3 107.8 2 87.3 -_ 68 9 -28 -89 Lot #18 91.5 12.4 116.5 2 94.4 69 9 -28 -89 Lot #18 93.5 11.1 121.0 2 98.0 70 9 -28 -89 Lot #12 100.0 13.6 112.1 2 90.8 71 9 -28 -89 Lot #18 96.5 14.3 115.7 2 93.7 72 9 -28 -89 Lot #12 103.0 13.6 114.9 2 93.0 73 9 -28 -89 Lot #18 99.0 13.0 116.9 2 94.6 74 9 -28 -89 Lot #12 106.0 14.3 112.4 2 91.0 75 9 -28 -89 Lot #12 109.0 13.0 114.3 2 92.6 76 9 -29 -89 Lot #16 103.0 13.0 122.2 2 99.0 77 9 -29 -89 Lot #13 105.0 13.6 118.2 2 95.7 78 9 -29 -89 Lot #13 107.0 13.0 119.6 2 96.8 79 9 -29 -89 Retest of 67 100.0 12.4 115.6 2 93.6 80 9 -29 -89 Lot #17 105.0 11.1 117.4 2 95.0 81 10 -2 -89 Lot #17 106.0 12.4 112.8 4 91.1 82 10 -2 -89 Lot #16 108.0 12.4 118.3 3 96.8 83 10 -2 -89 Lot #8 86.5 17.6 114.8 2 93.0 84 10 -3 -89 Lot #8 89.0 NG 9.9 113.6 4 91.8 85 10 -3 -89 Lot #8 88.5 13.0 118.8 2 96.2 86 10 -3 -89 Lot #12 111.5 11.7 117.0 4 94.5 87 10 -3 -89 Lot #13 110.0 12.4 121.0 2 98.0 88 10 -3 -89 Lot #12 113.5 12.4 119.4 4 96.4 89 10 -3 -89 Lot #13 112.0 12.4 120.4 2 97.5 90 10 -3 -89 Lot #8 90.5 14.9 105.6 2 85.5 91 10 -3 -89 Retest of 90 90.5 14.3 107.6 2 87.1 92 10 -4 -89 Retest of 91 90.5 13.0 113.5 2 91.9 93 10 -4 -89 Lot #8 91.5 13.0 115.9 2 93.7 94 10 -4 -89 Lot #12 113.5 11.7 114.1 4 92.2 95 10 -4 -89 Lot #13 113.0 11.1 115.3 3 94.3 96 10 -4 -89 Lot #12 115.0 6.4 105.3 4 85.0 97 10 -4 -89 Lot #13 115.0 12.4 115.6 3 94.6 98 10 -5 -89 Lot #5 86.5 14.3 111.8 2 90.5 99 10 -5 -89 Lot #5 88.5 14.3 112.3 2 91.0 100 10 -5 -89 Lot #8 92.0 13.6 114.1 2 92.4 101 10 -5 -89 Lot #8 93.5 14.3 112.4 7 91.0 102 10 -6 -89 Lot #1 93.0 12.4 120.2 4 97.1 103 10 -6 -89 Lot #6 91.0 12.4 112.9 3 92.4 104 10 -6 -89 Lot # 95.0 11.7 121.4 4 98.0 105 10 -6 -89 Lot #9 87.0 14.9 116.9 2 94.0 106 10 -9 -89 Lot #5 88.0 NG 12.4 111.2 9 95.6 107 10 -9 -89 Lot #9 89.0 14.3 110.6 3 90.5 108 10 -9 -89 Lot #1 97.0 11.1 120.6 4 97.4 109 10 -9 -89 Lot #1 95.0 11.1 111.7 4 90.2 110 10 -10 -89 Lot #1 92.5 12.4 116.3 4 93.9 111 10 -10 -89 Lot #7 96.0 NG 15.6 112.1 2 90.8 112 10 -10 -89 Lot #5 89.5 16.3 110.2 9 94.1 113 10 -10 -89 Lot #5 89.5 14.3 115.7 9 98.8 114 10 -10 -89 Lot #7 97.0 14.3 112.5 2 91.0 115 10 -10 -89 Lot #5 91.5 13.6 114.5 9 97.8 116 10 -11 -89 Lot #5 92.5 16.3 106.9 9 91.3 JOB NAME: Tract 4376 JOB NO. 8821115 PLATE NO: 6 TEST DATE LOCATION ELEVATION MOISTURE DRY DEN. SOIL REL.COMP. NO. (percent) p ( p .c.f.) TYPE (percent ) --------------- - - - -- --------------- -- 117 10 -11 -89 Lot #6 93.0 16.3 107.4 9 91.7 118 10 -11 -89 Lot #7 96.0 15.6 115.2 2 93.3 119 10 -11 -89 Lot #7 99.0 13.0 111.1 2 90.2 120 10 -11 -89 Lot #5 94.0 16.3 107.1 9 91.4 121 10 -11 -89 Lot #6 95.0 17.6 107.7 9 92.0 122 10 -11 -89 Lot #7 102.0 21.2 104.0 2 84.2 123 10 -12 -89 Lot #7 97.0 14.3 111.7 2 90.4 124 10 -12 -89 Lot #1 94.5 11.1 111.6 8 96.4 125 10 -12 -89 Lot #1 96.5 11.1 105.4 8 91.4 126 10 -13 -89 Lot #7 98.0 17.0 111.1 2 90.0 127 10 -13 -89 Retest of 122 102.0 17.0 101.7 2 82.4 128 10 -13 -89 Retest of 127 101.5 18.3 111.5 2 90.3 129 10 -13 -89 Lot #1 98.5 11.1 106.0 8 91.6 130 10 -13 -89 Lot #9 91.0 11.7 124.3 6 96.9 131 10 -13 -89 Lot #9 93.0 11.7 122.6 6 95.6 132 10 -13 -89 Lot #1 100.0 7.5 100.6 8 86.8 133 10 -13 -89 Lot #7 103.5 12.4 111.7 2 90.5 134 10 -16 -89 Lot #3 102.0 16.3 107.5 9 91.8 135 10 -16 -89 Retest of 96 115.0 12.4 114.0 4 92.0 136 10 -16 -89 Lot #8 95.0 NG 11.1 113.4 3 92.8 137 10 -17 -89 Lot #15 123.0 13.6 121.2 6 94.5 138 10 -17 -89 Lot #3 102.0 14.3 110.8 3 90.7 139 10 -18 -89 Lot #5 94.0 16.3 106.6 9 91.0 140 10 -19 -89 Lot #9 102.0 17.6 113.4 3 92.8 141 10 -19 -89 Lot #6 98.0 18.3 104.7 9 89.4 142 10 -19 -89 Retest of 141 98.0 17.6 108.5 9 92.7 143 10 -19 -89 Lot #5 94.0 17.0 109.3 9 93.4 144 10 -20 -89 Lot #9, Slope 95.0 11.1 113.0 3 92.5 145 10 -20 -89 Lot #2 103.0 13.6 115.9 2 93.9 146 10 -20 -89 Retest of 132 93.0 11.7 107.6 8 92.9 147 10 -23 -89 Lot #3 103.0 13.6 115.0 2 93.1 148 10 -23 -89 Lot #3 103.5 13.6 108.3 2 87.7 149 10 -23 -89 Lot #15 116.0 10.5 117.6 6 91.7 150 10 -23 -89 Lot #15 118.0 13.0 121.4 6 94.7 151 10 -23 -89 Lot #15 120.0 12.4 108.9 3 89.1 152 10 -23 -89 Retest of 151 120.0 12.4 111.2 3 91.0 153 10 -24 -89 Lot #16 109.5 11.7 112.7 3 92.2 154 10 -24 -89 Lot #16 110.5 13.0 121.7 2 98.5 155 10 -24 -89 Lot #12 117.5 11.1 102.8 8 88.8 156 10 -24 -89 Lot #9 99.0 13.0 118.7 2 96.1 157 10 -24 -89 Retest of 155 117.5 11.1 106.9 8 92.3 158 10 -24 -89 Lot #9 101.0 13.6 118.8 2 96.2 159 10 -27 -89 Lot #16 99.0 11.7 100.5 4 81.2 160 10 -27 -89 Lot #16 98.5 12.4 120.1 4 97.0 161 10 -27 -89 Retest of 159 99.0 12.4 111.8 4 90.3 162 10 -30 -89 Lot #2 104.5 13.0 104.2 7 88.2 163 10 -30 -89 Lot #15 122.0 12.4 114.2 3 93.4 164 10 -30 -89 Lot #15 125.0 11.1 122.4 6 95.4 165 10 -30 -89 Lot #19 115.0 14.3 118.1 2 95.6 166 10 -31 -89 Lot #12 114.0 13.6 118.2 2 95.7 JOB NAME: Tract 4376 JOB NO: 8821115 PLATE NO: 7 TEST DATE LOCATION ELEVATION MOISTURE DRY DEN. SOIL REL.COMP. NO. (percent) (p.c, f . ) TYPE (percent) --------------------------- ---------------------- 167 10 -31 -89 Lot #12 116.0 12.4 115.4 2 93.4 - -_ 168 10 -31 -89 Lot #19 110.5 12.4 114.0 4 92.1 169 10 -31 -89 Lot #12 118.0 13.0 115.8 2 93.7 170 11 -1 -89 Lot #1, Slope 99.0 8.7 106.3 8 91.8 171 11 -1 -89 Lot #16 110.0 12.4 116.9 4 94.4 172 11 -2 -89 Lot #17 105.5 14.3 116.2 4 93.8 173 11 -2 -89 Lot #18, Slope 98.0 13.6 111.1 2 90.0 174 11 -2 -89 Lot #18 102.0 12.4 118.4 2 95.9 175 11 -2 -89 Lot #17 105.0 13.0 118.8 2 96.2 176 11 -3 -89 Lot #15, Slope 128.0 13.0 113.2 6 88.3 177 11 -3 -89 Retest of 176 128.0 13.0 116.9 6 91.2 178 11 -6 -89 Lot #13, Slope 105.0 12.4 115.6 2 93.6 179 11 -6 -89 Lot #16, Slope 100.0 13.0 106.2 3 86.9 180 11 -6 -89 Retest of 148 103.5 15.6 115.7 2 93.7 181 11 -7 -89 Retest of 162 104.5 13.0 112.6 2 91.1 182 11 -7 -89 Lot #2 104.0 17.0 116.7 2 94.5 183 11 -7 -89 Lot #3 105.0 FG 13.6 113.8 2 92.2 184 11 -8 -89 Lot #18 104.0 14.3 119.9 4 96.8 185 11 -8 -89 Lot #17, Slope 103.0 11.7 113.2 4 91.9 186 11 -9 -89 Lot #18 104.5 11.7 116.2 2 94.1 187 11 -9 -89 Lot #16 110.5 13.0 116.8 2 94.6 188 11 -13 -89 Lot #15 130.0 FG 10.5 117.6 6 91.7 189 11 -13 -89 Lot #2 106.0 FG 13.0 108.1 8 93.4 190 11 -13 -89 Lot #7 105.0 FG 14.3 113.8 2 92.3 191 11 -13 -89 Lot #15 122.5 13.0 118.8 2 96.2 192 11 -13 -89 Lot #15 123.5 13.0 117.7 2 95.3 193 11 -14 -89 Lot #19 110.5 16.3 120.2 2 97.3 194 11 -15 -89 Lot #19 112.0 FG 12.4 118.1 2 95.7 195 11 -16 -89 Lot #19 117.0 FG 13.0 121.6 2 98.5 196 11 -16 -89 Lot #15 125.0 FG 13.6 122.6 2 99.3 197 11 -16 -89 Lot #7 110.0 FG 14.3 113.3 8 97.8 198 11 -16 -89 Lot #12, Slope 114.0 11.7 116.5 4 94.1 199 11 -17 -89 Lot #5 96.0 FG 17.6 110.1 9 94.0 200 11 -17 -89 Lot #6 95.5 FG 13.6 111.5 9 95.2 201 11 -17 -89 Lot #6 97.0 FG 16.3 119.2 2 96.5 202 11 -17 -89 Lot #6 100.0 FG 14.9 116.4 2 94.3 203 11 -20 -89 Lot #13 112.5 FG 9.3 111.2 3 91.0 204 11 -20 -89 Retest of #179 100.0 11.1 110.7 3 90.6 205 11 -20 -89 Lot #17 108.0 FG 10.5 111.8 3 91.5 206 11 -20 -89 Lot #18 106.0 FG 11.1 113.9 3 93.2 207 11 -22 -89 Lot #13 114.0 FG 14.3 122.4 4 98.9 208 11 -22 -89 Lot #13 117.0 FG 9.3 119.9 4 96.8 209 11 -22 -89 Lot #16 112.0 FG 11.1 122.5 4 98.9 210 11 -22 -89 Lot #12 120.0 FG 11.1 112.6 8 97.2 211 11 -27 -89 Lot #1 100.0 FG 13.6 112.1 8 96.8 212 11 -28 -89 Lot #9 102.0 12.4 105.7 8 91.3 213 11 -28 -89 Lot #9 104.0 FG 13.6 107.3 8 92.7 JOB NAME: Tract 4376 JOB NO: 8821155 PLATE NO: 8 MAXIMUM DENSITY AND OPTIMUM MOISTURE DETERMINATIONS, ASTM 1557 -78 ------------------------------------------------------ SOIL METHOD DESCRIPTION OPTIMUM MAXIMUM TYPE MOISTURE DENSITY (percent) (pcf) 1 A Light Orange, 12.0 121.1 Clayey,Sand 2 A Brown, Clayey 12.7 123.5 Sand 3 A Brown, Fine to 9.8 122.2 Medium, Silty Sand W /Clay 4 A Orange /Brown, 12.8 123.8 Fine to Medium Silty Sand 5 A Grey /Brown, 7.8 136.0 Medium to Coarse Sand, (Import) 6 A Greenish /Tan, 11.1 128.2 Fine to Coarse, Clayey Sand 7 A White, Fine to 12.8 118.1 Medium, Silty Sand, ( Import) 8 A White, Fine, Silty 13.2 115.8 Sand, (Import) 9 A Light Brown, Fine, 16.4 117.1 Silty Sand W /Clay V M c - LFVr�.3AC K FI Lt, r 7 - FA C Kf�� NC 7 lY U p O 4. .4 C t7` �T rc At) �i2 N �C 5�� 1 � 2 �.""''• ..goo.. ... 2:1 CUT ------ ww"'w T-09 LF HARM 4 VIMN5 100 0 r , (7�n CAI. F 0 LOT 1 ,20 [ � Q 0. 81 91 I i % 04 � 84 - j 1 t 0 Q L.JE�S s Q tl L 23 •l �,` r 21 114 �l a z O,V�. '17 °� 11, 0 �ln�U�GC 1 U51-MAT 18� 7 � pop• , . �� °�.-■. ,. ; N 0 1 rp o �5` .3 �5 . • �i Ill co ,� 1 0 `,� €k r 2 .� 15. 12 all NN 7 84 8 • ,. 0 15 Q m r a db Opp, e Nu I L p o, . 7 _ ► C� o . or REWNIMG POri t O� 7 / o W 1�1D1 C �C J - • ti' L EGEND 0) ill PO CU - j" Z4 M I tJ. LAS R7 1ION5 nn PAP ~p �' �' ' a2 � � � _ 5� b E O V [ _ � _ �� o '� IN PLACE DENSITY TEST LOCATION • � (GRADING) RHOMPACT PGA 5010 RCP DR` . ��, °, ,�� F __ Ac ,. , „ � „ 1 �. 0 IN -PLACE DENSITY TEST LOCATION (WALL BACKFILL) = _ U �` t '`,_.......''` • APPROXIMATE LIMITS OF FILL r ... APPROXIMATE LIMITS OF UNDERCUT PR PO 5 L' �.... APPROXIMATE LIMITS OF KEYWAY Io'± RC51DC-NCL 9� cl:� APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF DAYLIGHT LINE VJ LIJ PAD = ° ` ►� ��, r� 3��c>+R _ LIJ Ly / 81 APPROXIMATE ELEVATION OF BOTTOM OF FILL 90 L. J APPROXIMATE ELEVATION OF BOTTOM OF UNDERCUT V UJ C 80 0 J / 15i1uG ROU�f D W 70 < 10 m .... �1 �1 Ln �c CSC '`-- SOUTHERN OALIIFORNIA .. C SOIL & TEST INC. By JTD /WDW DATE 4.17 -92 LJ LL L_ .REVISIONS APPROVED. DATE REFERENCES DATE .� . INCH MARK os Na �. SCAL 9021094 PLATE # 1 SPECIAL APPROVALS DISTRICT � v 6+1 ES 2,�, � ��.,� �� C.� C� C l�Vfy�� C, ING L CITY C) F E NCINIT•AS PUIC WQRKS DEPARTMENT PLANS PREPAR UNDER SUPERVISION OF RECOMMENDED APPS W DRAWING OVE.D N0. w Q c_ . � HORIZONTAL I = 2 Q ' PLAMS F P M oy. DATE r'2 - �1 - °J � 8Y: BY: VERTICAL R.C.E. NO.: 0 ENGIN *ER 2 + 1 DATE: DATE: 5 0326,*6 l7 UGLAI> �. LDS . EXP. 1 • ° -� 3 i WORK PROJECT N0. C NG'G' T r? A nc 2