The URL can be used to link to this page

1990-772 G/H Street Address 1/&{ Category I :;'1q'L~ Serial # 01'71.J & Name I Description Year Plan ck. # recdescv HYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULICS FOR LASHURE RESIDENCE RANCHO ENCINIT AS DRIVE PREPARED BY: . \ ' SOWARDS AND BROWN ENGINEERING, INC CONSULTING ENGINEERS 2187 NEWCASTLE AVE., SUITE 202, CARDIFF, CA 92007 (619) 436-8500 ""-"_..._.."...~.",,._..-.""'".. 90-164 December 12, 1990 (~5 ~~J~u ç-c-v~'l - ..2ß~~ ~'-- ~ ~\ I-z, \~[ é ~ ~"*U V-b ~ \ \:::)~ .-.-.-- . ..-.- --.-.----- -----r-ù~ C;; \~ ~~(:L~ ~ ! 0 ( A-<:". . - ......-....------ b-~\<?\)~ - _._-c;-~~\~-~-;~i . . . --------- --.--------. .- ------- 0.0 O~q& ~C-. -.---j~~:;~~ çù~ À1T~~- (¿~é),q~' ~._-----~~J K~~~~ --__(~.dl.4?) - ~ . ,.OJ )0. '0--;- ~~I ') ¿p. ts; ::.. Ô. 4'1 ~C(~ ~--{tJ.~~ '{~~¿')((IO\ '):- z: 16 (k£ ~?-~ G?<J'=>\\:"t~I~.,. t). zo ~..,8/ ~ 0,20401) 6.<=70 k (O,q.7¡,o\)(!J,Ac;. <: ¿ì.SÂ: ..... ~ \}.Å \ ;.J \ w... V \,N"-I c..- c:;;- t"\v-"'> u \.1:5 S ~ (~~ ~ ..4 11'1 I~ì.- :" - -~. =- Ll-k ::. ~.<?A "X4.A')( Á-ð \ ) .:.. Z, 4-0 c.-~~ i'l ZðF-5 N~Ll~ J~x ~ {2;,ùc~ Uv~ - \-0 ~~ >?\\I\~' ( ~ =- tJ. ~~ ~:J ~~'b -r ~ D-~I) ~ 7~ \J "u(\Œ.moN I~ ¡Jv-c ~~~ ~i {tf:s (~~ ~c\' v..r..:-¿¿L2--~________m___- - - ------- ~\=?6- ~ --~\.Vv~ ~ ~-(~ -~~þ-" tJ c--- ~¡.J~ b~~-c ~ ~~t-\L.. B ttt-ù~-~ ( I ,~~ Oz \f¿ ~ k-" D~ 1ft,\; ,\..... <J l~ '=' l::x.vc:;c....o~ E,-.J - 6);:- ClÞ-:, O,Z;4-'i4A)(O,?2') =- é).(U c:~~ - o~ ¿¿,) ~'- ---D~,~5 ~ ~,~~ C?lo1"l\Ä..^- \'::)~I/O q-..{~~ ~. ~L"5-C~ 2o'~ LJ~T O~ t11.Q~~ -et::> G:¡-M~ Cd ~ C~ -=- 0.54- "> 4--4- )(0 -3~):: ()¡7éò ~~ S-"~1ê..H^ \ \. ~Y- ~ (P" ~,?e-- ZÎo.. . ~ gt~~~. r¿"./ ~ ~ ?::J:¡(; L ð r ¡.j i D íZ~ ù.. t- 5. ~~ ., . ., ¡¿ I d 3> ~,{,- ~ i ¡ : i 3 crF- .5 -7 --- 1~,{")- -=--~-~Cjf2 ~~-I---:::\J/~ ~ I 4q8 ~r¿) \~ ;4""1) = ,Ol\ ----- - ---- ----.---.---- ----------.-.--.. ----.----- _u_--- _____n__~__~- '(M,~'f..) ~ ! 0 \. C~ ) (), 7f2 C-~'S> _~_9~____- ---- ¿¿ ~----~~- - ~~ I )~~~~~- --7l~~ ~~~- ~;;;--- k ¡Jo~-c GRtFti'- ~ DÏ(.ÀV~'-( ~ OU"T~-cS ¡J~~ No.~ (¡lZ-f-lU!Z- . D rc-~ Û¿) ~ ,-( ; C\~ ::- (IJ. b~X4,4 (DrL4) -:- OS! ~~ ~'E~i~ \\A \ IVQ Q~_:fID1- ú; 'l [)lJ G ~ 40 2. . . -=- .4Qe:, (. '3 ') ~j"">ê. 4n) It~- -. ,Ol\. ~~ > {!). 51 C~~ - ol( ---- -. ELEv. FACTOR 0-/50'0 lOO 1500-3000 1.25 3000-4000 1.42 4000-5000 1.60 5000-6000 /.70 DESERT /.25 To obtain correct intensity, multiply Intensi1y on chart b~ factor for des ion elevation. - Z -4 n 1"1 0 Z en c - Z -4 -4 n -< -< ..... C I ::u O°::U 0 Þ ~ < C - "'" r'II::U Z en en J> ~ J> ::! ï Z 0 ï » 2 z -c 1'1 I -c G) "'" IT1 0 ::u z 1"1 0 0 - X -- C 'r'II ~ Z (') -< >0: t-LU - n. 1.0 0 0.9 ~ en 0.8 t- ~ 0, 7 ~~0.6 0.5 - 0 f5 õ Zo: ct~ 00 -~ 3.0 0.4 0.3 0.2 5 ~.O 4,0 I 2,0' . -- . -- ¡ I " " " , :11 5 . 10 M IN UT f . :) U R AT ION HOURS 2 3 4 10 , " ~ , 30 40 50 . . 5'678910 ~ ~ ¡ I I -1--11 t,::n:r, -: ,- 'rIW:tt ':1f; It!t+na-¡ t f : " ,.It'',_'_-'t ...- tt, L . ¡ : ::..;. -- "! - . , ~T1 t r- 'r . . . I II/-I III'D . ..- '~Ht+ ,.+,- . . , --to 't:_.,... -+=;f~=ñ . +-I"~~:-:-~"I' ',", .. :+-'1-+ ¡ . =- . ¡Hi --.,-:~ -.. ", -', , -- - ffiii¡ +- . ' . ' -1:---.. 0: . +r '.' 1- ~-' .."~':' f! ~ -- - - '" I;" :-........ II :--. '" -~ - .. .. - .. 1-- , - ... rJUml.-,.:Lt: -t:"+: -~ '~!"" ~ 1,..1:;: , 't-li-Hit -- .. . 1111.. ¡:; ,'" 'I, L .. -- .. t-- :.t+...-+--ttE.H + mg, . I""i. l11. 20 30 40 50 2 -=1 -~- ~ 561 . , 10 3 4 MINUTES HOURS DURATION ~ -1\ \f\ 7-64 STEADY UNIFORM FLOW IN OPEN CHANNELS 7-65 Table 7-15. Values of K for Parabolic Channels in the Formula K Q - -l»i8~ n '1' - top wid~ of channel HANDBOOK OF HYDRAULICS Table 7-13. Values of K for Circular Channels in the Formula Q - !f D%8~ n D - depth of water Ii - diameter of channel ,te' - --r- D .01 .00 .02 .03 .04 .O5 .06 .ar .08 .09 2' - - - - - - - - - - - .0 75.59 37.77 25.16 18.85 15.05 12.52 10.71 9.85 8.28 .1 7.ü 6.73 6.15 5.65 5.23 '40.86 40.53 '.240 8.99 8.76 .2 3.55 3.36 3.19 3.04 2.89 2.76 2.640 2.52 ,2.402 2.32 .3 2.226 2.140 2.059 1.9640 1.912 1.8405 1.782 1.72"- 1.665 1.611 .40 1.660 1.511 1.465 1.'21 1.379 1.339 1.301 1.265 1.230 1.197 .5 1.165 1.1340 1.105 1.077 1.050 1.0240 .999 .975 .962 .929 .6 .908 .887 .867 .8408 .329 .811 .7940 .777 .761 .74oð .7 .730 .715 .701 .687 .6740 .661 .6408 .636 .6240 .618 .8 .601 .590 .580 .570 .660 .650 .MO .531 .522 .614 .9 .505 .497 .489 .481 .473 .4066 .4058 ..51 .4« ..38 1.0 .431 D d .00 .01 .02 .03 .04 .05 .06 .07 .08 .09 - - - - - - - - - - - .0 16.02 10.66 8.57 7.38 6.65 5.95 6.47 6.08 4.76 .1 40.'9 40.26 40.04 8.86 3.69 3.64 3.41 3.28 3.17 3.06 .2 2.9'8 2.87 2.79 2.71 2.~ 2.66 2.'9 2.'2 2.36 2.30 .3 2.26 2.20 2.14 2.09 2.05 2.00 1.96 1.92 1.87 1.840 .40 1.80 1.76 1.72 1.69 1.66 1.62 1.59 1.66 1.53 1.50 .5 1.470 1.404.2 1.415 1.388 1.362 1.336 1.311 1.286 1.262 1.231 .6 1.215 1.192 1.170 1.148 1.126 1.105 1.0M I.OM 1.043 1.023 .7 1.0040 .9M .965 .9407 ' .928 .910 .891 .874 .856 .~ .8 .821 .804 .787 .770 .753 .736 .720 .703 .687 .67( .9 .6540 .637 .621 .604 .588 .571 .553 .535 .516 .4IN 1.0 .483 Table 7-14. Values of K' for Circular Channels in the Formula K' Q- - tßi8J.i n D - depth of water d - diameter of channel Table 7-16. Values of K' for Parabolic Channels in the Formula K' Q - - T%a~ n 2' - toP width cl chanue1 D Ii .00 .01 .02, .03 .04 .05 .06 .07 .08 .09 - - - - - - - - - - - .0 .00007 .00031 .00074 .00138 .00222 .00328 .004055 .00604 .00771 .1 .00967 .0118 .0142 .0167 .0195 .0225 .O2{j7, .0291 .0327 .03116 .2 .0406 .0448 .0492 .0537 .0585, .O6U .0686 .ar38 .0793 .0849, ..3 .0907 .0966 .1027 .1089 .1153 .1218 .12840 .1362 .14~0 .1490 .40 .1561 .1633 .1705 .1779 .1854 .1929 .2005 .2082 .2160 .2238 .5 .232' .239 .247 .255 .263 .271 .279 .287 .295 .303 .6 .311 .319 .327 .335 .3403 .350 .358 .366 .373 .380 .7 .388 .395 .402 .409 .416 .422 .429 .435 .441 .447 .8 .453 ..68 .463, .468 .473 .477 .481 .485 .488 .491 .9 ..940 .4096 .4097 .498 .498 .498 .496 .4094 .489 .483 1.0 .483 ,te - ---- D 2' .00 .01 .02 .03 .04 .05 .06 .ar .08 .09 f- - - - - - - - - - - .0 .00035 .00111 .00219 .00353 .00511 .09691 .00891 .0111Ð .013407 .1 .0160 .0187 .0215 .02405 .0276 .0308 .0342 .0376 .0412 .044S .2 .0486 .05240 .0563 .0603 .0M3 .06840 .ar26 .ar6S .0811 .0854 .3 .0898 .0942 .0987 .1032 .1077 .1123 .1168 .1215 .1261 .1308 .. .1355 .1402 .14050 .1.97 .1645 .1593 .16401 .1689 .1737 .1786 .5 .183 .188 .193 .198 .203 .208 .213 .218 .223 .228 .6 .232 .237 .2402 .2407 .262 .267 .262 .267 .272 .271 .7 .282 .2'K1 .292 .297 .302 .arYl .312 .817 .822 ,327 .8 .332 .337 .M2 .3407 .852 .357 .861 .866 .371 .816 .9 .381 .886 .891 .396 .401 .406 .4011 ..16 .421 .420 1.0 .431 ¡: \\\ II <>1 " I V\I 1 . . . . UPDATB PRELIMINARY SOIL AND GBOTBCHNICAL INVBSTIGATIOB PROPOSED SINGLB-FAMILY RESIDENCB ADDITIOB LOT 8, HAP 19051 1208 RANCHO ENCINITAS DRIVE BNCINITAS, CALIFORNIA . . . JANUARY 11,1991 . . PREPARED FOR: . JIR. AND KRS. DONALD LASHURE 1208 RANCHO ENCINITAS DRIVE BNCINITAS, CALIFORNIA 92024 JOB #1351-90 . ~.,-><",-~..""....<-",«<,...... I~~ U",j, . MV ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, **102 Escondida, California 92025-1330 619/743-1214 Fax:739-0343 . Job 11351-90 January 11, 1991 . Mr. and Mrs. Donald Lashure 1208 Rancho Encinitas Drive Encinitas, California 92024 . Update preliminary Soil and Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Single-Family Residence Addition, Lot 8, MaD 19051.1208 Encinitas Drive. Encinitas. California . Pursuant to your request, MV Engineering, Inc. has completed the attached Update of Preliminary Soil and Geotechnical Investigation Report for the above-referenced site. . The following report summarizes the results of our field investi- gation, laboratory analyses, and conclusions, and provides recommendations for the site development as understood. From a geotechnical engineering standpoint, it is our opinion that the site is suitable for the proposed development provided the recom- mendations presented in this report are incorporated into the design and construction of the project. Thank you for choosing MV Engineering, Inc. If you have any questions concerning this report, please do not hesitate to call us. Reference to our Job #1351-90 will expedite our response to your inquiries. I !8 . We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you. MV ENGINEERING, INC. . Ralph M. Vinje GE #863 RMV/jmo . . . . . . . . . . . . (cont. ) . I. II. III. IV. V. VI. VII. VIII. IX. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND. . . . . . PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. . . . . . . . . . SCOPE OF SERVICES. . . . . . . . . . . SITE DESCRIPTION. . . . . . . . . . . . FIELD INVESTIGATION. . . . . . . . . . LABORATORY TESTS. . . . . . . . . . . . A. Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content. . . . B. In-Place Dry Density and Moisture Content. . . . . . . . C. Expansion Index Test. . . . . . . . SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS. . . . . . . . . A. Subsurface Soils. . . . . . . . . . 1. Fill/topsoil. . . . . . . . . . . 2. Bedrock. . . . . . . . . . . . . B. Groundwater. . . . . . . . . . . . . C. Geologic Structure. . . . . . . . . SEISMICITY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. . . . A. General. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B. Grading and Earthworks-Detached Garage and Driveway Areas. . . . . . 1. Clearing and Grubbing. . . . . . 2. Site Preparation/Treatment of Surface Soils. . . . . . . . . . 3. Overexcavation of Transition Areas. . . . . . . . . 4. Compaction and Method of Filling. 5. Rock Hardness and Rippability . . 6. Subgrade & Base/Travelled Ways. . C. Grading and Earthworks-Room Additions to Existing Residence and Pool Deck Area. . . . . . . . . 1. Clearing and Grubbing. . . . . . 2. Preparation of Pool Deck and Room Addition Surface Soils. . . 3. Compaction and Method of Filling. D. Slope Stability. . . . . . . . . . . E. Surface and Subsurface Drainage. . . Page 1 1 1 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 7 7 7 7 8 8 9 . Table of Contents (Page 2) . F. Foundation and Slab Recommendations. 9 1. Expansive Soils. . . . . . . . . 9 2. Footing and Slab Design for Proposed Garage and Driveway. . . 10 3. Footing & Slab Design for Proposed Pool Area and Room Additions to the Existing Residence. . . . . . 12 4. Soil Bearing Pressure. . . . . . 13 5. Footing Setbacks. . . . . . . . . 13 6. Re-Entrant Corners. . . . . . . . 13 7. Supplemental. . . . . . . . . . . 13 G. Retaining Walls. . . . . . . . . . . 14 H. Pavements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 I. utility Trench Backfill. . . . . . . 15 J. Grading and Foundation Plan Review. 15 K. Geotechnical Inspections. . . . . . 15 L. Preconstruct ion Meeting. . . . . . . 16 . . x. LIMITATIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 . APPENDIXES APPENDIX "A" - SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION Plate . Geotechnical Map/Test pit Location Map. . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Test pit Logs (including Key). . . . 2-5 . Undercutting Details. . . . . . . . 6 Key and Benching Details (Side Hill Stability Fill Slope and Fill Slope. 7 . Isolation Joints and Re-Entrant Corner Reinforcement. . . . . . . . 8 Typical Wall Drainage Detail. . . . 9 . APPENDIX "B" - "PRELIMINARY SOILS INVESTIGATION, LOT 8 OF MAP #9051, RANCHO ENCINITAS DRIVE, OLIVENHAIN, CALIFORNIA", DATED FEBRUARY 9, 1985. . "COMPACTION REPORT FOR SITE LOCATED AT 1208 RANCHO ENCINITAS DRIVE, ENCINITAS", DATED MARCH 21, 1985. APPENDIX "C" - GENERAL SITE DEVELOPMENT RECOMMENDATIONS APPENDIX "D" - GENERAL GRADING RECOMMENDATIONS . APPENDIX "E" - SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF CONTROLLED FILLS, AND UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART . . UPDATE PRELIMINARY SOIL AND GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PROPOSED SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCB ADDITION LOT 8, HAP '9051, 1208 RANCHO ENCINITAS DRIVE ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA . I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND . The study site is a nearly rectangular shaped parcel with 120 feet fronting on Rancho Encinitas Drive and a depth of approximately 270 feet. An existing single-family residence is located in the front portion of the lot on a relatively level graded pad. The site has been previously studied with respect to surface and subsurface conditions by our firm in a report labeled "Preliminary Soils Investigation, Lot 8 of Map No. 9051, Rancho Encinitas Drive, Olivenhain, California", dated February 9,1985. Subsequent grad- ing of the site was performed under our observation and a report entitled, "Compaction Report for site Located at 1208 Rancho Encinitas Drive, Encinitas" was issued on March 21, 1985. Both reports are included herein as Appendix "B". . . II. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT . It is our understanding that the proposed development consists of minor room additions to the existing residence, the enlargement of the existing building pad to accommodate a swimming pool, and the construction of a detached garage in the northwest corner of the lot. We understand that the planned garage and building additions will have wood framing and will be supported on conventional continuous foundations with slab-on-grade construction. Construc- tion plans were not available for our review at the time of this writing. . The site grading plan prepared by Sowards and Brown Engineering, Inc. was made available to this office for review. Page 2 of 3 was reproduced for the purpose of this study, and is enclosed herein as Plate 1. Based upon our review of the site grading plan, the property is planned to be graded such that level cut/fill building pads are created for the new garage area and a westward extension of the existing house pad. Graded cut and fill slopes are on the order of 10 to 8 feet, respectively, with maximum 2: 1 slope gradients. It is further understood that retaining walls will be utilized in both the garage and the new driveway area. . . III. SCOPE OF SERVICES The scope of our services during this investigation was to review the pertinent geotechnical reports, further evaluate site surface MV ENGINEERING, INC. . 2450 VINEYARD AVENUE, #102 . ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92029-1229 . 619/743.1214 . SOILS TESTING PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS . UPDATB PRELIXIHARY SOIL' GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 2 1208 ENCINITAS DRIVE. ENCINITAS JANUARY 11.1990 . and subsurface following: geotechnical conditions, and determine the . A - the existing soil and geologic conditions; B - the presence and effect of any expansive soil; c - the allowable soil bearing pressures; . D - the presence of existing unsuitable fill or ground water; E - any construction problems that can be anticipated, and to make appropriate foundation recommendations. . The conclusions and recommendations provided in this study are consistent with the site geotechnical conditions and are intended to aid in preparation of final development plans and allow more accurate estimates of development costs. IV. SITE DESCRIPTION . The project site is presently occupied by an existing single-family residence and landscaping on a relatively level pad in the eastern half of the lot. The western half, though cleared, is in a fairly natural state, covered with low grasses, and slopes down to the north at approximately 20%, as indicated on Plate 1. I. Surface water was not noted at the site, and surface drainage for the west half of the lot appears to sheetflow generally to lower elevations to the northwest. V. FIELD INVESTIGATION . . The field investigation completed for this study consisted of three test pits excavated with a rubber-tired backhoe. The test pits were logged and backfilled. Representative samples of the earth deposits encountered in our subsurface exposures were collected at selected intervals and transported to our laboratory for testing and analyses. Test pits were excavated approximately beneath the areas where the proposed structures are planned. Test pit loca- tions are shown on Plate 1. Detailed logs of the test pits and location of the samples obtained during this study (and Key) are presented on Plates 2 through 5. . Based upon field observation and visual identifications indicated on the enclosed logs, there are primarily five soil types. The MV ENGINEERING, INC. . 2450 VINEYARD AVENUE, #102 . ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92029-1229 . 619/743-1214 . SOILS TESTING PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS . UPDATE PRBLXHIHARY SOIL' GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 3 1208 ENCINITAS DRIVE. BNCINITAS JANUARY 11.1990 . soil types are referred to in the following sections as soil Types 1 through 5. SOIL TYPES . 1 Soil DescriDtion Tan silty sand (import) Soil Tvoe 2 Tan silty sand with clay . 3 Gray-green claystone 5 Brown sandy clay Gray-green siltstone 4 . VI. LABORATORY TESTS . The following tests were performed in the support of this study. A. Maximum Dry Density and optimum Moisture content The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of Soil Types 1 through 4 were determined in accordance with ASTM D-1557-78. The results are tabulated below. . optimum Soil Maximum Dry Moisture nn Density (Dsf). Content (%) 1 120.1 11.7 2 112.8 13.0 3 111. 5 16.0 4 120.0 10.0 , '8 . These results may be used during the grading where applicable. B. In-Place Dry Density and Moisture content . In-place dry densities and moisture content of representative chunk soil samples were determined using the water displacement method. MV ENGINEERING, INC. . 2450 VINEYARD AVENUE, #102 . ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92029-1229 . 619/743-1214 . SOILS TESTlNG PERe TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS . UPDATB PRELIMINARY SOIL' GEOTBCHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGB 4 1208 BNCINITAS DRIVE. ENCINITAS JANUARY 11.1990 . The test results are presented on the logs at the corresponding locations. The percent ratio of the in-place dry densities are also determined and included on the excavation logs. . C. EXDansion Index Test Expansion index tests were performed on representative samples of Soil Types 2 and 4 in accordance with the Uniform Building Code Standard Procedure 29-2. The test results are tabulated below. . Soil Remolded Moisture ~ Content (%) 2 12.8 4 15.3 Saturated Moisture Content (%) Expansion Index 21.9 18 26.5 115 . VII. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS A. Subsurface Soils . The following soil and geologic units were encountered in our field investigation. 1. Fill/topsoil - The western half of the subject property is mantled by two to three feet of loose topsoils and/or fills. . 2. Bedrock - The underlying bedrock materials are comprised of dense, interbedded, weathered claystone, siltstone, and sandstone units of the Delmar Formation. B. Groundwater i8 . Groundwater was not encountered to the depths explored. It should be anticipated, however, that groundwater seeps may occur in the graded cut slopes within the exposed bedrock materials. Therefore, all cut slopes should be inspected by the proj ect engineering geologist during grading so that appropriate recommendations can be provided (if necessary) in the event seeps are noted. C. Geoloqic Structure . Faults were not exposed at the site during our field study. MV ENGINEERING, INC. . 2450 VINEYARD AVENUE, #102 . ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92029-1229 . 619/743-1214 . SOILS TESTING PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS . UPDATB PRBLIKIRARY SOIL' GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGB 5 1208 ENCINITAS DRIVE. ENCINITAS JANUARY 11.1990 . Bedrock units at the site exhibit poorly-developed bedding struc- ture. Test pit exposures suggest nearly flat-lying conditions at sandstone/siltstone contacts. . VIII. SEISMICITY . As with most areas of southern california, the study property lies within a seismically active zone. Distant faults, including the Elsinore Fault to the northeast, the Rose Canyon Fault to the southwest, and unnamed offshore faults will periodically affect the property. Design in accordance with the latest Uniform Building Code Seismic Zone IV Specifications. . IX. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. General . The following conclusions and recommendations are based upon expo- sures developed beneath the site to the depths explored, laboratory testing, engineering analyses of the test results, and our experi- ence in the field of geotechnical engineering. Based upon the foregoing site investigation, the property is suitable for the proposed development provided the recommendations given herein are incorporated into final plans and implemented during the construc- tion phase. Geologic slope instability is not indicated. Adverse geotechnical conditions were not indicated on the property based upon the surface and subsurface exposures observed during our study. . . B. Gradina and Earthworks - Detached Garaae and Drivewav Areas . All grading should be accomplished in accordance with the following recommendations and the City of Encinitas Grading Ordinance. 1. Clearing and Grubbing - Clearing and grubbing for the area of the detached, "new" construction at the site should be com- pleted as recommended in detail in the attached Appendix "E". All surface rocks, trees, and shrubs not to be used for land- scaping should be removed from the site prior to any cutting or filling. All buried structures not designated to remain should be removed. All vegetation and soil designated as "unsuitable" by the project geotechnical consultant should be removed under the consultant's observations. The resulting ground surface . I I MV ENGINEERING, INC. . 2450 VINEYARD AVENUE, #102 . ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92029-1229 . 619/743-1214 . SOILS TESTING PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS . UPDATB PRELIXINARY SOIL' GEOTBCHNICAL IKVBSTIGATIOB PAGB 6 1208 BNCINITAS DRIVE. BNCINITAS JANUARY 11.1990 . should be plowed or scarified to a depth of 12 inches until the surface is free from roots, ruts, and hummocks. . 2. site Preparation/Treatment of Surface Soils (Removal and Recompaction) - The topsoil deposits which occur to the west of the existing level pad are not sui table for the support of structures or fills in their present condition. These soils should be excavated down to firm bedrock materials, moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture contents, and recompacted to a minimum of 90% of the corresponding laboratory maximum dry density. The excavations will be on the order of two to three feet below the existing grades beneath all proposed fills and a horizontal distance of 10 feet outside the building perimeter in the areas of the proposed structures. In areas of roadway, parking, and driveway areas, the excavations will also be on the order of three feet maximum or to firm bedrock, whichever is less, extending a minimum horizontal distance of five feet outside the perimeter of the pavement. The depth to firm bedrock materials cannot be accurately pre- dicted and will vary throughout the site. The actual depths will be determined during grading by the project geotechnical consultant. All excavations should be inspected and approved by the geotechnical consultant. . . . . 3. Overexcavation of Transition Areas - Removal and recompaction of the cut portion of the graded garage pad will be required in order that the cut/fill transition daylight line will not occur beneath the structure. The removal and recompaction should be at least three feet below proposed pad finish grade or a minimum of twelve inches below the deepest footing, whichever is more (see Plate 6). . 4. Compaction and Method of Filling - compaction and method of filling should be completed as recommended in details in the attached Appendix "E" and Plates 6,7, 8, and 9. Fill deposits should be thoroughly mixed, moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture contents or as recommended by the geotechnical consul- tant, and compacted in thin uniform lifts. In-place density tests will confirm adequate compaction in the fill deposits. Earth deposits used as compacted fill should consist of minus six-inch materials, and should also contain at least 40% soil sizes passing the one-quarter inch sieve. A compacted berm must also be constructed at the top of all fill slopes. Compaction tests will be taken on the berms to verify the compaction requirement. . . 5. Rock Hardness and Rippability - The project site is underlain by weathered marine claystone, siltstone, and sandstone. Upper MV ENGINEERING, INC. . 2450 VINEYARD AVENUE, #102 . ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92029-1229 . 619/743-1214 . SOILS TESTING PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS . UPDATB PRBLIKlHARY SOIL' GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGB 7 1208 ENCINITAS DRIVE. BNCINITAS JANUARY 11.1990 . . weathered rocks will excavate with light to moderate ripping. Hard excavations with some difficulty should be anticipated for deeper excavations. Design grades are expected to be achieved utilizing conventional grading equipment. 6. Subgrade & Base/Travelled Ways - After completion of the ground preparations outlined above, the upper 12 inches of the subgrade soils beneath roads, driveways, and parking areas should be scarified and recompacted to a minimum of 95% of the corresponding maximum dry density at the required moisture con- tent. The subgrade soils should be prepared at a time not to exceed more than approximately 72 hours prior to the placement of the base materials in order that the appropriate moisture content is maintained. . . The base materials should be compacted to a minimum of 95% of the corresponding maximum dry density at the required moisture content. The base materials should be placed at a time not to exceed more than approximately 72 hours prior to the paving operations. . C. Grading and Barthworks - Room Additions to Existing Residence and Pool Deck Area All grading should be accomplished in accordance with the following recommendations and the City of Encinitas Grading Ordinance. . structural considerations should be given to the joining of the addition to the existing residence in order to mitigate any differential settlement between the two structures. . 1. Clearing and Grubbing - Clearing and grubbing for the pool deck area and areas for additions to the existing residence should be completed as recommended in detail in the attached Appendix "E". All surface rocks, trees and shrubs not to be used for landscaping should be removed from the site prior to any cutting or filling. All buried structures not designated to remain should be removed. All vegetation and soil designated as "unsuitable" by the project geotechnical consultant should be removed under the consultant's observations. The resulting ground surface should be plowed or scarified to a depth of 12 inches until the surface is free from roots, ruts, and hummocks. 2. Preparation of Pool Deck and Room Addition Surface Soils - The pad surface beneath the existing residence and ten feet beyond in plan view was capped with three feet of non-expansive soils as indicated in our compaction report dated March 21, 1985. Since the proposed pool deck area and proposed room I- . MV ENGINEERING, INC. . 2450 VINEYARD AVENUE, #102 . ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92029-1229 . 619/743-1214 . SOILS TESTING PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS . UPDATB PRELIXIBARY SOIL' GEOTECBRICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 8 1208 ENCINITAS DRIVE. BNCINITAS JANUARY 11.1990 . additions encroach into and beyond this zone, these areas should be undercut a minimum of three feet, existing non-expansive cap verified, and the non-expansive cap extended so as to provide a minimum horizontal distance of ten feet beyond all new construction. . . 3. Compaction and Method of Filling - Compaction and method of filling should be completed as recommended in details in the attached Appendix "E" and Plates 6,7,8 and 9. Fill deposits should be thoroughly mixed, moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture contents or as recommended by the geotechnical consul- tant, and compacted in thin uniform lifts. In-place density tests will confirm adequate compaction in the fill deposits. Earth deposits used as compacted fill should consist of non- expansive, minus six-inch materials, and should also contain at least 40% soil sizes passing the one-quarter inch sieve. A compacted berm must also be constructed at the top of all fill slopes. Compaction tests will be taken on the berms to verify the compaction requirement. . . 4. Because of dissimilar foundation/soil conditions between the existing structure and the attached addition, some cracking may develop at the juncture between the two structures. The crack- ing is expected to be cosmetic and will not reflect geotechnical instability or structural defects. Decorative sheathing may be considered in juncture areas. . D. Slone Stability . All graded slopes should be constructed at 2:1 gradients as indi- cated on the si te grading plans. . Graded cut and fill slopes constructed at 2:1 gradients will be grossly stable with respect to deep seated and surficial failure for the proposed heights indicated on the grading plan. . Temporary open cuts required for construction of proposed retaining walls will be stable at gradients of 1:1 for cuts up to 10 feet maximum height. Some surface sloughing of the temporary cut face may occur but is not expected to influence overall stability of the temporary open cuts. No water should be allowed to pond above temporary cuts or to run over the face of the cut slopes. . All fill slopes should be overbuilt and then cut back to the proposed top of bank in order to achieve the 90% compaction requirement. Slope tests will be taken to verify the compaction requirement. MV ENGINEERING, INC. . 2450 VINEYARD AVENUE, #102 . ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92029-1229 . 619/743-1214 . SOILS TESTING PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS . UPDATB PRBLIHXHARY SOIL' GEOTBCHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGB 9 1208 ENCINITAS DRIVE. BNCINITAS JANUARY 11.1990 . Inspection of the graded cut slopes should be performed during the grading operations by the geotechnical consultant. Cut slopes will expose weathered bedrock. In the absence of adverse joint structures, graded cut slopes will be stable from a geologic standpoint. . E. Surface and Subsurface Drainaae . 1. Surface Drainage - Surface water was not noted at the site. Surface water should be controlled, collected, and directed away from structures and the top of slopes. Area drains are recommended for yard areas. . 2. Subsurface Drainage - Groundwater or perched water seeps were also not encountered in our subsurface exposures to the depths explored, and subsurface drainage problems are not anticipated to affect the proposed development. F. Foundation and Slab Recommendations . The following minimum requirements are recommended for foundations and floor slabs supported on properly compacted fill or competent, native materials. All grading should follow the recommendations given in the previous section, "Grading and Earthworks" and in the enclosed Appendixes "C", "D" and "E". . The foundation and slab recommendations provided below are based on specific soil/rock types encountered and tested during our investigation and do not reflect final soil mixtures which will likely result from grading. Final foundation and slab designs will depend upon the expansion potential and soil/rock type of the finished grade materials which can best be determined at the com- pletion of rough grading. Appropriate laboratory tests will be performed on the foundation soils at the completion of rough grad- ing, and appropriate foundation and slab recommendations will be provided in the final rough grading compaction report. Revised recommendations may be necessary and should be anticipated. . . 1. Expansive Soils - Based upon our observations and laboratory test results, the majority of the soils at the site are critically expansive. The following foundation and slab recommendations for critically-expansive soils are preliminary and may be used for cost and rough design estimating purposes only. Based upon our experience, structures constructed upon expansive soils may be . MV ENGINEERING, INC. . 2450 VINEYARD AVENUE, #102 . ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92029-1229 . 619/743-1214 . SOilS TESTING PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS . UPDATE PRBLIHINARY SOIL' GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 10 1208 ENCINITAS DRIVE. ENCINITAS JANUARY 11.1990 . . susceptible to some cracking even though provided with the recommended ground preparations, deepened foundations, and heav- ily reinforced footings and floor slabs. In order to minimize the effects of expansive soils, it is preferred and recommended to provide all building pad areas with a minimum of a three- foot-thick, non-expansive, granular soil cap. If this option is used for the detached garage and driveway areas additional grading and foundation recommendations will be provided upon request. . 2. Footinq and Slab Desiqn for Proposed Garaqe and Driveway- Recommendations for the critically Bxpansive (10%+) On-site soils: . (a) Footinqs: (1) Dig the footings to a minimum depth of 30 inches below the lowest adjacent ground surface not including the sand/gravel under the slab. Footings should have a minimum width of 12 inches for one- and two-story struc- tures. Isolated square footings are not recommended. . (2) Use four #5 reinforcing bars in all interior and exterior footings. Place two bars three inches below the top and two bars three inches above the bottom of the footing. (3) Dowel the slab to the footings using #4 reinforcing bars spaced 18 inches on center, extending 20 inches into the footing and slab. The dowels should be placed mid- height in the slab. Alternate the dowels each way for all interior footings. . . ( 4 ) After the footings are dug and cleaned, place the reinforcing steel and dowels and pour the footings. (5) This office must be notified to inspect the footinqs and reinforcinq prior to pourinq concrete. (b) Interior Slab Subgrade: . (1) All utility trenches under slabs in expansive soils should be backfilled with sand (S.E. 30 or greater) and flooded with water to achieve compaction. . (2) Once the concrete for the footings has cured and underground utilities tested, place four inches of 3/8-inch rock over the slab subgrade. Flood with water MV ENGINEERING, INC. . 2450 VINEYARD AVENUE, #102 . ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92029-1229 . 619/743-1214 . SOILS TESTING PERC TesT SOIL INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS . UPDATE PRELIKIKARY SOIL' GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 11 1208 ENCINITAS DRIVE. ENCINITAS JANUARY 11.1990 . . to the top of the 3/8-inch rock, and allow the slab subgrade to soak for approximately seven to ten days. The required moisture content of the slab subgrade soils is 5% to 8% over the optimum moisture content at a depth of 30 inches below slab subgrade. After the slab sub- grade soils have soaked, notify this office and schedule appropriate moisture testing. NOTE: II' SUJ'I'ICIENT KOISTURE IS PRESENT, I'LOODING WILL NOT BE REQUIRED. THE DOWELS KAY BE DELETED, AND THE I'OOTINGS AND SLAB KAY BE POURED KONOLITHICALLY. . (c) Interior Slab Reinforcing: . (1) When the required moisture content has been achieved, place a ten-mil plastic moisture barrier over the 3/8-inch rock, and place two inches of clean sand (SE 30 or greater) on top of the plastic. . (2) Use #3 reinforcing bars spaced 15 inches on center each way placed one and one-half inches below the top of the slab. All slabs should be a minimum of five inches in thickness. . (3) This office must be notified to inspect the sand, slab thickness, and reinforcing prior to concrete pour. (4) Provide contraction joints consisting of saw cuts spaced 12 feet on center each way within 72 hours of con- crete pour for all interior slabs. The saw cuts must be a minimum of one-half inch in depth and must not exceed three-quarter inch in depth or the reinforcing may be damaged. . An alternative to the above recommendations would be the use of post-tension slabs. They should be designed by a quali- fied person familiar with the design of this particular foundation. . (d) Exterior Slabs (patios, walkways, and driveways): (1) All exterior slabs (walkways, patios, etc.) must be a minimum of four inches in thickness reinforced with 6x6/10x10 welded wire mesh placed one and one-half inches below the top of the slab. Driveways must be a minimum of five inches in thickness and reinforced with #3 rein- forcing bars spaced 18 inches on center each way placed one and one-half inches below the top of the slab. Use . MV ENGINEERING, INC. . 2450 VINEYARD AVENUE, #102 . ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92029-1229 . 619/743-1214 . SOILS TESTING PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS . UPDATE PRELIMINARY SOIL' GEOTECHNICAL IHVBSTIGATIOB PAGE 12 1208 ENCINITAS DRIVE. ENCINITAS JANUARY 11.1990 . . six inches clean sand (SE 30 or greater) beneath all slabs. Provide contraction joints consisting of saw cuts spaced six feet on center each way within 72 hours of concrete pour. The depths of the saw cuts should be as described in interior slab reinforcing item (c) (4) above. 3. Footing" and Slab Desig"n for Proposed Pool Area and Room Addi tions to the Existing" Residence - Placed on and wi thin a three-foot deep cap of Non-Expansive Material as previously Required. . . (a) It is recommended that normal concrete wall footings be used in accordance with Uniform Building Code design (i.e., 12 inches wide by 12 inches deep and 15 inches wide by 18 inches deep) for one- and two-story structures respectively. Isolated square footings should be at least 24 inches by 24 inches wide and 12 inches deep. Minimum depths are measured from the lowest adjacent ground surface, not including the sand/gravel under the slab. (b) Use two #4 reinforcing bars in all interior and exterior footings. Place one bar three inches below the top of the footing and one bar three inches above the bottom of the footing. Reinforcement for isolated square footings should be designed by the project structural engineer. . . (c) All interior slabs must be a minimum of four inches in thickness reinforced with 6x6/10x10 welded wire mesh/#3 rein- forcing bars spaced 24 inches on center each way, placed one and one-half inches below the top of the slab. Use four inches of clean sand (SE 30 or greater) beneath all slabs. A six-mil plastic moisture barrier is recommended, and if used, must be placed mid-height in the sand. (d) Provide contraction joints consisting of saw cuts spaced 12 feet on center each way within 72 hours of concrete pour for all interior slabs. The saw cuts must be a minimum of one-half inch in depth and must not exceed three-quarter inch in depth or the reinforcing may be damaged. . . (e) All underground utility trenches beneath interior and exterior slabs should be compacted to a minimum of 90% of the maximum dry density of the soil unless otherwise specified by the respective agencies. . (f) All exterior slabs (walkways, patios, etc.) must be a minimum of four inches in thickness reinforced with 6x6/10x10 welded wire mesh placed one and one-half inches below the top MV ENGINEERING, INC. . 2450 VINEYARD AVENUE, #102 . ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92029-1229 . 619/743-1214 . SOILS TESTING PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHN~ALINVESnGAnoNS . UPDATB PRELIKINARY SOIL' GEOTBCHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGB 13 1208 BNCINITAS DRIVE. BNCINITAS JANUARY 11.1990 . of the slab. Provide contraction joints consisting of saw cuts spaced six feet on center each way within 72 hours of concrete pour. The depths of the saw cuts should be as described in Item (d) above. . (g) This office is to be notified to inspect the footing trenches, foundation and sla)) area reinforcing prior to concrete pour. 4. Soil Bearing Pressure - Our tests and calculations indicate that an allowable bearing capacity of 1000 psf for continuous and isolated footings may be used. The allowable soil bearing pressure provided herein is for dead plus live loads and may be increased by one-third for wind and seismic loading. The allow- able soil bearing pressure provided herein was determined for footings having a minimum width of 12 inches and a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent ground surface. This value may be increased per Uniform Building Code, Table 29-B, for additional depths only, if needed. . . . 5. Footing Setbacks - Footings located on or adjacent to the top of slopes should be extended to a sufficient depth to pro- vide a minimum horizontal distance of five feet or one-third of the slope height, whichever is greater (need not exceed 40 feet maximum) between the bottom edge of the footing and the face of the slope unless otherwise recommended by the soil engineer or his representative on-site. The outer edge of all fill slopes experience "down slope creep" , which may cause distress to structures. If any structures, including buildings, patios, sidewalks, swimming pools, spas, etc., are placed within the setback, FURTHER RECOMMENDATIONS WILL BB REQUIRED. . . 6. Re-entrant Corners - Special attention should be given to any "re-entrant" corners (:t270 degree corners) as generally shown on the enclosed Plate 8, and curing practices (during and after concrete pour) to limit cracking. . 7. Supplemental - The concrete reinforcement recommendations provided herein should not be considered to preclude the development of shrinkage related cracks, etc.; rather, these recommendations are intended to minimize this potential. If shrinkage cracks do develop, as is expected from concrete, reinforcements tend to limit the propagation of these features. These recommendations are believed to be reasonable and in keeping with the local standards of construction practice. Footing and slab designs provided herein are based upon soil characteristics only and should not supersede more restrictive . MV ENGINEERING, INC. . 2450 VINEYARD AVENUE, #102 . ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92029.1229 . 619/743-1214 . SOILS TESTING PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS . UPDATB PRBLXHIHARY SOIL' GEOTBCHHICAL IBVBSTIGATIOB PAGB 14 1208 ENCINITAS DRIVE. ENCINITAS JANUARY 11.1990 . requirements set forth by the archi tect or the structural engineer. Please note that minimum requirements set forth by the respective government agencies may also supersede the recommendations provided in this report. . . G. Retainina Walls 1. Expansive clayey soils should not be used for backfilling of any retaining structure. All retaining structures should be designed by the project structural engineer. Retaining walls should maintain at least a 1:1 (horizontal to vertical) wedge of granular non-expansive soil backfill measured from the base of the wall footing to the ground surface (within the active zone of the wall). All retaining walls should be provided with a drain along the backside as generally shown on the attached Typical Wall Drain Detail, Plate 9. Specific drainage provi- sions behind retaining wall structures should be verified by this office. . . 2. Lateral active pressures for sandy soils wi th a minimum friction angle of 39 degrees and assumed drained backfill conditions are provided below. These values may be used for preliminary design estimates only and are to be re-evaluated when the characteristics of the backfill soils have been determined. Revised recommendations should be anticipated. Passive resistance is also provided. . Active Pressure = 30 pcf equivalent fluid pressure, cantilever, unrestrained walls with level backfill surface condition. Active Pressure = 60 pcf equivalent fluid pressure, cantilever, unrestrained walls with 2:1 backfill surface condition. I. At Rest Pressure = 60 pcf equivalent fluid pressure, restrained walls. * Passive Pressure = 202 pcf equivalent fluid pressure, level surface condition. . * Note: Because large movements must take place before maximum passive resistance can be developed, the earth pressures given for passive conditions should be reduced by a safety factor of two. . 3. A coefficient of friction of 0.20 may be considered for con- crete on native soils. This value is to be verified at the MV ENGINEERING, INC. . 2450 VINEYARD AVENUE, #102 . ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92029-1229 . 619/743.1214 . SOILS TESTING PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS . UPDATB PRBLIHZKARY 80ZL' GEOTECHNZCAL ZNVE8TZGATZOB PAGB 15 1208 ENCZNZTA8 DRZVB. ENCZNITA8 JANUARY 11.1990 . completion of grading when the properties of the subgrade soils are specifically known. H. Pavements . . structural sections for the driveway and parking designs will be determined at the completion of grading with the appropriate samp- ling and laboratory testing. Actual pavement structural section design will depend upon the "R-value" test results performed on the finish subgrade materials and should be provided by the project geotechnical engineer. I. utility Trench Backfill . All underground utility trenches should be compacted to a minimum of 90% of the maximum dry density of the soil unless otherwise specified by the respective agencies. Care should be taken not to crush the utilities or pipes during the compaction of the soil. All utility trenches under slabs in expansive soils (Expansion Index ~ 21) should be backfilled with sand (S.E. 30 or greater) and properly compacted to achieve at least the minimum compaction requirements. . . J. Gradina and Poundation Plan Review The site grading plan was provided to us and was reviewed as a part of this study. Based upon our review, the grading plan was found to be in substantial compliance with our recommendations. Foundation plans should also incorporate recommendations provided in this transmittal and be reviewed and approved by the project geotechnical consultant. . If the final development plans significantly change or if they were not available at the time of this investigation, further investiga- tion and subsoil study may be required and should be anticipated. . K. Geotechnical InsDections . The bottom of all excavations associated with removal and recompac- tion of the upper soils, as well as all keys and benches, should be inspected and approved by the geotechnical consultant. The project geotechnical consultant should also be notified to inspect all footing trenches and foundation reinforcement prior to placing the steel and pouring of the concrete. MV ENGINEERING, INC. . 2450 VINEYARD AVENUE, #102 . ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92029-1229 . 619/743-1214 . SOILS TESTING PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS . UPDATB PRBLIH2BARY SOIL' GEOTBCBBICAL INVESTIGATION PAGB 16 1208 BNCINITAS DRIVE. ENCINITAS JANUARY 11.1990 . . L. Preconstruction Meetina A preconstruct ion meeting should be held prior to grading with the owner, grading contractor, and the geotechnical consultant or his representative to discuss a testing schedule and grading concepts. x. LIMITATIONS . The conclusions and recommendations provided herein have been based on all available data obtained from our field investigation and laboratory analyses, as well as our experience with the soils and formational materials located in the general area. The materials encountered on the project site and utilized in our laboratory testing are believed representative of the total area; however, earth materials may vary in characteristics between excavations. Of necessity we must assume a certain degree of continuity between exploratory excavations and/or natural exposures. It is necessary, therefore, that all observations, conclusions, and recommendations be verified during the grading operation. In the event discrepan- cies are noted, we should be contacted immediately so that an inspection can be made and additional recommendations issued if required. . . The recommendations made in this report are applicable to the site at the time this report was prepared. It is the responsibility of the owner/developer to insure that these recommendations are carried out in the field. . It is almost impossible to predict with certainty the future per- formance of a property. The future behavior of the site is also dependent on numerous unpredictable variables, such as earthquakes, rainfall, and on-site drainage patterns. . The firm of MV ENGINEERING, INC. shall not be held responsible for changes to the physical conditions of the property such as addition of fill soils or changing drainage patterns which occur subsequent to issuance of this report. . This report should be considered valid for a period of one year and is subject to review by our firm following that time. If significant modifications are made to your tentative development plan, especially with respect to the height and location of cut and fill slopes, this report must be presented to us for review and possible revision. . MV Engineering, Inc. warrants that this report has been prepared within the limits prescribed by our client with the usual thoroughness and competence of the engineering profession. No MV ENGINEERING, INC. . 2450 VINEYARD AVENUE, #102 . ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92029-1229 . 619/743-1214 . SOilS TESTING PERC TEST SOil INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS . UPDATE PRBLXNXNARY SOIL' GEOTECHNICAL IBVBSTIGATIOB PAGE 17 1208 ENCINITAS DRIVE. ENCINITAS JANUARY 11.1990 . other warranty or representation, either expressed or implied, is included or intended. Once again, should any questions arise concerning this report, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Reference to our Job #1351-90 will expedite response to your inquiries. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you. . xv ENGInERING, INC. . Ra~~~ GE #863 . . . ~ "Dennis Middleton CEG #980 RMV/jmo . Distribution: Addresee (5) Sowards & Brown Engineering (1) Mr. Mort O'Grady (1) A: 1351-90.UPD . . . . PERC TEST MV ENGINEERING, INC. . 2450 VINEYARD AVENUE, #102 . ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92029-1229 . 619/743-1214 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS SOILS TESTING SOIL INVESTIGATIONS . . . . I I. . APPENDIX "A" . . . . . . PRIMARY DIVISIONS . ...J « (f) ã: 0 ...J W 0 - I- C\J 0 « . (f) ::¡: 0 Q u..Zw w 0 Z N ~ u..«ü) « ...J I W a: «I-> C) Ia:w w Z w ü) (f) « C) a: I a: « I- « 0 ...J 0 W (f) a:- 0 ::¡: GRAVELS MORE THAN HALF OF COARSE FRACTION IS LARGER THAN NO.4 SIEVE SANDS MORE THAN HALF OF COARSE FRACTION IS SMALLER THAN NO.4 SIEVE CLEAN GRAVELS (LESS THAN 5% FINES) GRAVEL WITH FINES CLEAN SANDS (LESS THAN 5% FINES) SANDS WITH FINES . . w a:N (f) u.. w ü) ...J O...J Õ u.....Jw (f) ...J«> «::¡:~ Q I(f)(f) w Z(f)O ~ «-0 « I...JC\J a:1-«. C) wã:O w a: w Z Z 0 I- Z ¡¡: ::¡:~« I I- SILTS AND CLAYS LIQUID LIMIT IS GREATER THAN 50% SILTS AND CLAYS LIQUID LIMIT IS LESS THAN 50% . HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS GRAIN'SIZES U.S. STANDARD SERIES SIEVE 200 40 SILTS AND CLAYS SAND . FINE MEDIUM RELATIVE DENSITY . !sANDS, GRAVELS AND BLOWS/FOOT NON-PLASTIC SILTS VERY LOOSE 0-4 LOOSE 4 - 10 MEDIUM DENSE 10 - 30 DENSE 30 - 50 VERY DENSE OVER 50 . GROUP SYMBOL GW GP GM GC SW SP SM SC ML CL OL MH CH OH PT 10 SECONDARY DIVISIONS Well graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines. Poorly graded gravels or gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines. Silty gravels, gravel-sand-silt mixtures, non-plastic fines- Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines. Well graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines. Poorly graded sands or gravelly sands, little or no fines. Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures, non-plastic fines- Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines. Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour, silty or clayey fine sands or clayey silts with slight plasticity. Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly clays, sandy clays, silty clays, lean clays. Organic silts and organic silty clays of low plasticity. Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine sandy or silty soils, elastic silts- Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays. Organic clays of medium to high plasticity, organic silts. Peat and other highly organic soils. 4 CLEAR SQUARE SIEVE OPENINGS 3/4" 3" 12" GRAVEL COARSE COBBLES BOULDERS FINE COARSE CONSISTENCY CLAYS AND STRENGTH BLOWS/FOOT PLASTIC SILTS VERY SOFT 0 - Y. 0 - 2 SOFT '!. - Y. 2-4 FIRM Y. - 1 4 - 8 STIFF 1 - 2 8 - 16 VERY STIFF 2 - 4 16 - 32 HARD OVER 4 OVER 32 I II 246 1. Blow count, 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches on 2 inch 0.0. split spoon sampler (ASTM 0-1586) 2. Unconfined compressive strength per SOIL TEST pocket penetrometer CL-700 . . 6 = undisturbed chunk sample 0 = disturbed sample 0 = sand cone test . MV ENGINEERING, INC. 246 = Standard Penetration Test (SPT) (ASTM 0-1586) with blow counts per 6 inches = California Sampler with blow counts per 6 inches KEY TO EXPLORATORY BORING LOGS Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM 0-2487) Mr. and Mrs. Donald Lashure 1208 Rancho Encinitas Drive, Encinitas PLATE 2 PROJECT NO. 1351-90 KEY - 11 - RIG N/E SURFACE ELEVATION :t262 feet BORING DIAMETER 2 ft. wide LOGGED BY D . L . P . DATE DRILLED 12/7/90 Backhoe DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION FILL Brown cIa Tan silty with some in. Rips e sand, to soil. sand (Soil Type 1) Soil Type 2 mixed granular to chunky. SOIL TYPE 1 Tan silty sand, dry, dense. Rips granular to chunky. SOIL TYPE 2 BEDROCK (Delmar Formation) Gray-green claystone, dense, dry. Rips blocky with appearance of slick surfaces. SOIL TYPE 3 End trench at 10 feet. 2 0 ~ <C 0 ¡¡: ëi5 ...Jrn -<C O...J rn W 2 Il.OW >--0 1-1-2 W<C<C ...J a: l- ll. I- rn ::E ~ ëi5 <C W W rn Il. a: 0 rn ~ I- 2 a:w WI- 1-2 <CO~ 3:o~ SM 1 >~ u.a:o> 00. ~ Q~~~ >- 2 íi:" !(Ci5::E æ a: W 0 IX: '00 0 0 ~ i!:... 11. 7110.091.3 10.6 105.687.7 63 9.3 125.6 100+ 66 11. 6 126.2 100+ EXPLORATORY BORING LOG Mr. and Mrs. Donald Lashure 1208 Rancho Encinitas Drive, Encinitas MV ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Ave.. Suite 102 Escondida. CA 92025-1330 Phone: 619/743-1214 PROJECT NO. 1351-90 PLATE 3 Test pit 1 DRI L RIG Backhoe DE TH TO GROUND WATER :t254 feet LOGGED BY D.L.P. 2 ft. wide DATE DRILLED 12/7/90 z Q W z >~ I- a. ow « >- -0 J.L,Cl:Q> 2 I- I-z I- oQ. W «« z ~ Q~~ ~ !:!: ...J a: I- -:- a:w en a. I-en 0 WI- ...Jen :::!: w- sa I-Z >- z LL =Cø~ ffi -« zen «o¡;¡ 0...J « ww ~ a:woa:'OQ en en a. a: ~o- c c e:. ~~ N/E SURFACE ELEVATION BORING DIAMETER DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIFICATION FILL Brown silty, sandy clay. SOIL TYPE 4 BEDROCK (Delmar Formation) Tan silty sandstone with trace clay. Dense. SOIL TYPE 2 Gray-green, siltstone, dense. SOIL TYPE 5 End trench at 9.0 feet. 60 2 2 15.3106.9 89.1 CL 3D 3~ 11.3 114.2 100+ SC ML EXPLORATORY BORING LOG Mr. and Mrs. Donald Lashure 1208 Rancho Encinitas Drive, Encinitas MV ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Ave., Suite 102 Escondida. CA 92025-1330 Phone: 619/743.1214 PROJECT NO. 1351-90 PLATE Test pit 2 4 . D ILL RIG Hand Excavation D PTH TO GROUND WATER N/E :I:- ~Ii:i o..w Wu. c- . - 0 - 1 . - 2 - 3 . - 4 - 5 . - 6 - 7 . - 8 - 9 . - 10 - 11 . 12 13 . 14 . . SURFACE ELEVATION LOGGED BY D. L. P. BORING DIAMETER 3 ft. x 3 ft. DATE DRILLED 12/7/90 DESCRIPTION AND CLASSIRCATION FILL - TOPSOIL Brown sandy clay. Brown sandy clay. BEDROCK (Delmar Formation) Gray-green siltstone, dense, dry. Rips blocky (! inch to 3 inches). SOIL TYPE 4 SOIL TYPE 4 SOIL TYPE 5 End trench at 6.5 feet. MV ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Ave.. Suite 102 Escondido. CA 92025-1330 Phone: 619/743.1214 z 0 ~ 0 ¡¡: ...I~ -< 0...1 CI) (.) CI) ~ !ž Œ:W w~ ~Z <0- :=o~ >~ I&.~Q> 0 .~ ~ - g~~ ëi5 >-zu. t(ëi5~Z Œ: w fi a:ZO ~ cc- ~ wz a. 0 w >- -0 ~ ~z w < < ...I Œ: ~ a. Ii:i CI) ::¡¡ z (ij < ww CI) a. Œ: CL 62 16.6 05.087.5 CL 65 15.4121.3 --- ML EXPLORATORY BORING LOG Mr. and Mrs. Donald Lashure 1208 Rancho Encinitas Drive, Encinitas PROJECT NO. 1351-90 PLATE Test pit 3 5 . UNDERCUTTING DETAILS (Typical - no scale) . compacted fill ~ ~ ~ unsuitable ~ mater1.als ~ 1\\'::. ~1TI existing ground SUrff/ . . UIE. =111 competent bedrock or firm ~ native ground per project f geotechnical engineer ~ deepest footing '. CUT-FILL LOT ,/ . existing ground surface . J-- compacted fill . ------ . ~nsuita~ materials . ( overexcavate and recompact competent bedrock or firm nativ~ ground per project geotechnical engineer deepest footing CUT LOT Note: Some agencies require complete removal and recompaction of portion of the lot. Also, removal and recompaction of the may be required by the project geotechnical engineer based groundwater condition at the site. Vertical and horizontal limits of overexcavation are subject to additional revision by the project geotechnical consultant based upon the actual site conditions. Subdrains may also be necessary as determined by the geotechnical consultant. the entire cut entire cut portion upon soil and . . PLATE It 6 . KEY AND BENCHING DETAILS (Typical - no scale) . existing ground surfac~ ~ / ~ finish cut pad . project 1:1 line from top' of slope to outside edge of key ld m==- =-1\1 overexcavation and recompaction per project geotechnical engineer . competent bedrock or fir~ ~native ground per project f geotechnical engineer . Side Hill Stability Fill Slope . finish slope finish pad i . existing ground surface project 1:1 line from toe of slope to competent materials -- one equipment. width minimum . JljITi 2' min. key depth 15 I min.)- I key width ~ competent bedrock or firm native ground per project geotechnical engineer ~ Fill Slope . Note: Key and benching details shown herein are subject to revisions by the project geotechnical engineer based upon actual site conditions. Back drains may also be necessary as determined by the project geotechnical consultant. . Plate In . . ISOLATION JOINTS AND RE-ENTRANT CORNER REINFORCEMENT Typical - no scale. . . isolation joints (b) . contraction joints (a) . contraction joints potential re-entrant corner crack . re-entrant corner reinforcement No.4 bars placed 1~" below top of slab (c) . . Notes: (1) Isolation joints around the columns should be either circular as shown in (a) or diamond shaped as shown in (b). If no isolation joints are used around columns, or if the corners of the isolation joints do not meet the contraction joints, radial cracking as shown in (c) may occur (reference ACI). (2) In order to control cracking at the re-entrant corners (!270° corners), provide reinforcement as shown in (c). . (3) Re-entrant corner reinforcement shown herein is provided as a general guideline only and is subject to verification and changes by the project architect and/or structural engineer based upon slab geometry, location, and other engineering and construction factors. . Plate 118 . . TYPICAL WALL DRAINAGE DESIGN NOTE: SUBJECT TO REVISION BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT BASED UPON SITE CONDiTIONS . . BACKFILL COMPACTED TO , PERCENT RELATIVE COMPACTION WALL FOOTING F¡7 ~ ïl I Q 6" MIN. ð I (¡ OVERLAP 10 °Q 0 I I ( (;11' MIN. ~ I 0 0:.. 0 Q cS 0 0 10 <JG)) I 0 0 (J I 0 [) I (J°ÔCrÚ I 0 C"- ;: : ~ O~O II:! lJ: O~ . .... '!: 3" MIN "3J I:E!-n r="'\ 1\ =: II ~ COMPETENT BEDROCK OR MATERIAL AS EVALUATED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT FILTER FABRIC ENVELOPE (MIRAFI 140N OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT)" . RETAINING WALL . WALL WATERPROOFING PER ARCHITECT'S SPECIFICATIONS 3/4"-11/2" CLEAN GRAVEL" . . 4" (MIN.) DIAMETER PERFORATED PVC PIPE (SCHEDULE 40 OR EQUIVALENT)WITH PERFORATIONS ORIENTED DOWN AS DIPICTED MINIMUM 1 PERCENT GRADIENT TO SUITABLE OUTLET . SPECIFICATIONS FOR CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL 'BASED ON ASTM D1557 . 1" 3/4" 3/8" No.4 No.8. No. 30 No. 50 No. 200 100 90-100 40-100 25-40 18-33 5-15 0-7 0-3 .. IF CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL (SEE GRADIENT TO LEFT) IS USED IN PLACE OF 3/4"-1 1/2" GRAVEL. ALTER FABRIC MAY BE DELE TED. CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL SHOULD BE COMPACTED TO 90 PERCENT RELATIVE COMPACTION' u.S. Standard Sieve Size X Passing . Sand Equivalent> 75 NOT TO SCALE PLATE #9 . - I . . . . . APPENDIX "B" . . . . . . . THIS REPORT HAS BEEN UPDATED BY OUR REPORT DATED JANUARY 11, 1991 JOB #1351-90 . PRELIMINARY SOILS INVESTIGATION LOT 8 OF MAP NO. 9051 RANCHO ENCINITAS DRIVE OLIVENHAIN, CALIFORNIA . . PREPARED FOR: . MR. FRED REVA 770 RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD OLIVENHAIN, CALIFORNIA 92024 . FEBRUARY 9, 1985 . . . PREPARED BY: . MV ENGINEERING, INC. 476 W. VERMONT AVENUE, #102 ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92025-6576 JOB NO. 1018-85 . . MV ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, **102 Escondido, California 92025-1330 619/743-1214 Fax:739-0343 . Job t1018-85 . February 9, 1985 . Mr. Fred Reva 770 Rancho Santa Fe Road 01ivenhain, California 92024 PRELIMINARY SOILS INVESTIGATION OF LOT 8 MAP 9051 RANCHO ENCINITAS DRIVE, OLIVENHAIN, CALIFORNIA . Pursuant to your request, MV Engineering, Inc. has performed and investigation of the surface and subsurface soil conditions at the subject site. . The enclosed report has been prepared to present the results of our preliminary soils investigation. This report includes the results of our field investigation, laboratory analyses, and our summary of findings and recommendations for site development. . From a geotechnical standpoint it is our opinion that the site is suitable for the proposed development provided the recommendations presented in this report are incorporated into the design and construction of the project. . Thank you for choosing MV Engineering, Inc. If you have any questions concerning this report, please do not hesitate to call us. Reference to our Job t1018-85 will expedite response to your inquiries. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. . . RMV/et . . . . II. III. IV. . VI. VII. . . . . VIII. . . . I. TABLE OF CONTENTS Purpose of Investigation. . . . . . . . . . . . . General. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V. Soil Description. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Field Investigation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Laboratory Testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Engineering Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary of Findings and Recommendations. . . . . A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. I. J. K. L. M. N. o. P. Q. Site Evaluation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Site Preparation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Foundations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Spread Footings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Floor Slabs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Reinforcing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Foundations on Slopes. . . . . . . . . . . . Lateral Pressures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Swimming Pools. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Driveway. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Import Soils. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Roof Drainage. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Inspection. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Slopes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Retaining Structures. . . . . . . . . . . . . Geology/Seismicity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . General. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Limitations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDIX. Figure-l - Site Plan Appendix wAw - Exploratory Borings (and key) Appendix wBw - Laboratory Test Results Appendix wcw - Specifications for Construction of controlled Fills; and Unified Soil Classification Chart page I I I 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 7 8 . . PRELIMINARY SOILS INVESTIGATION LOT 8 OF MAP NO. 9051 RANCHO ENCINITAS DRIVE OLIVENHAIN, CALIFORNIA . I. PURPOSE OF INVESTIGATION This investigation was conducted to determine if the subject site is suitable for construction of a single-family residence. . The scope of this investigation included the following items: A. Excavating, logging and sampling of two exploratory borings. B. Laboratory analyses and classification of samples obtained during our field investigation. . C. Foundation recommendations. II. GENERAL . . The subject site consists of a near rectangular lot measuring approximately 270 feet by 160 feet. The site is a gentle sloping lot located in a developing neighborhood of north Olivenhain, California. The site was previously graded during the building of the roads. There is no fill within the proposed building area. . It is our understanding from discussion with the owner that a single-family residence is to be constructed on this site. Slight grading is anticipated to properly prepare the site for construction. The cuts and fills are to be in the order of fi ve feet. III. SOIL DESCRIPTION . A typical soil profile consists of a topsoil of one to two feet of tan-green, sandy clay grading into dense, fine grained clayey sandstone (Soil Type 2); then into a stiff, green claystone. Soil Type 1 - A loose, moist, tan-green, sandy clay. . Soil Type 2 - A light tan, medium dense to dense, clayey sandstone. Soil Type 3 - A green claystone. MV ENGINEERING, INC. . 2450 VINEYARD AVENUE, #102 . ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92029-1229 . 619/743-1214 . SOILS TESTING PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS . PRELIMINARY SOILS INVESTIGATION RANCHO ENCINITAS DRIVE, OLIVENHAIN PAGE 2 2/9/85 . The nomenclature used in describing the soils is in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System as illustrated on the attached chart in Appendix .Cn. This system identifies these soils as follows: . Soil Type 1 = CL Soil Type 2 = SC Soil Type 3 = CL IV. FIELD INVESTIGATION . On January 23, 1985 our representative conducted a field investigation of the soils underlying the subject site. This investigation included the excavation of two exploratory pits and soil sampling. Wax densities were performed to evaluate relative densities of the existing soils and to aid in determining these soils' bearing capacity. . Boring logs are attached in the appendix of this report. V. LABORATORY TESTING . Samples of the on-site soils were taken to our laboratory and moisture/density curves established to determine the maximum dry density and optimum moisture content as specified by ASTM 1557-70. A direct shear test and an expansion test were performed on Soil Type 3. . Results of these tests are reflected in our recommendations and are attached in the appendix of this report. VI. ENGINEERING ANALYSES . A. Bearing Strength . Calculations for the bearing value of the existing soils were calculated for the anticipated footing types and dimensions. These calculations are in accordance with the methods described by Peck, Hanson, and Thornburn (1973) for shallow footings on cohesive soil. VII. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . The following summarized findings and recommendations are based on the analyses of all data and information obtained from our visual inspection of the site, field investigation including the excavations, laboratory testing and our general knowledge and experience with these soils. MV ENGINEERING, INC. . 2450 VINEYARD AVENUE, #102 . ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92029-1229 . 619/743-1214 . SOILS TESTING PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS . PRELIMINARY SOILS INVESTIGATION RANCHO ENCINITAS DRIVE, OLIVENHAIN PAGE 3 2/9/85 . A. Site Evaluation . It is our opinion that the project site is suitable for proposed residential development with respect to soil conditions provided the recommendations contained in this report are incorporated in the planning, design, and construction phase of the project. . Regionally the site is located on a clayey phase of the La Jolla Formation. The on-site soils consist of generally loose clayey material which is detrimentally expansive but will provide a stable base for your proposed construction when properly prepared. B. Site Preparation . Site preparation procedures should include removal of all loose surface soils on the site (approximately the top one foot). C. Foundations . The footings for residential structures may be designed in accordance with U.B.C. Standards for footings on Class 4 material (Table 29-B) and the following recommendations: 1. Continuous Footings on Native Soil . In designing your foundation, an allowable bearing strength of 1,000 psf may be utilized for all continuous footings founded in dense native soils or on-site soils compacted to 90% of ASTM 1557-70. For single-story structures, all continuous footings shall be a minimum 12.0 inches wide and imbedded a minimum of 36.0 inches below adjacent finished grade. . Footings for two-story structures shall be a minimum of 15.0 inches wide and imbedded a minimum of 36.0 inches below adjacent natural grade. . 2. Continuous Footings on Non-expansive Import . If non-expansive import three feet thick is used to cap all building areas plus ten feet then use footings 12.0 inches wide and imbed them a minimum of 12.0 inches below adjacent finish grade. MV ENGINEERING, INC. For two-story structures use footings 15.0 inches wide and imbedded a minimum of 18.0 inches below adjacent natural grade. . 2450 VINEYARD AVENUE, #102 . ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92029-1229 . 619/743-1214 . SOILS TESTING PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS . PRELIMINARY SOILS INVESTIGATION RANCHO ENCINITAS DRIVE, OLIVENHAIN PAGE 4 2/9/85 . D. Spread Footings . An allowable bearing strength of 1,000 psf may be utilized for all spread footings founded in dense native soil or on-site soils compacted to 90% of ASTM 1557-70. All spread footings shall be a minimum of 24.0 inches in width and length and imbedded a minimum of 36.0 inches below adjacent finished grade. E. Floor Slabs . 1. Floor Slabs on Native Soil . Floor slabs should be 5.0 inches nominal thickness and reinforced with #3 bars at 12 inches on center each way placed at mid-height in the slab. Slabs should be underlain by a 6 inch layer of gravel (1/4 to 3/4 inch). 2. Floor Slabs on Import Soil . If a three foot cap of non-expansive granular soil is used over construction areas plus ten feet, then use 4 inches nominal thickness and reinforced with 6x6/10xlO welded wire mesh placed at mid-height in the slab. Slab subgrade soils should be thoroughly moistened prior to pouring concrete. . F. Reinforcing 1. Reinforcing on Import Soils . Footings should contain a minimum amount of reinforcing steel to prevent possible foundation damage. A minimum of steel for continuous footings should include two #5 bars continuous with one bar at three inches from the bottom of the footing and one bar at three inches from the top. Spread footings should include a minimum of two #5 bars each way. . 2. Reinforcing on Native Soils MV ENGINEERING, INC. . Footings should contain a minimum amount of reinforcing steel to prevent possible foundation damage. A minimum of steel for continuous footings should include four #5 bars continuous with two bars at three inches from the bottom of the footing and two bars at three inches from the top. Spread footings should include a minimum of four #5 bars each way. 2450 VINEYARD AVENUE, #102 . ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92029-1229 . 619/743-1214 . . SOILS "reSTING PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS . . . . . . . . . I. I PRELIMINARY SOILS INVESTIGATION RANCHO ENCINITAS DRIVE, OLIVENHAIN PAGE 5 2/9/85 G. Foundations on Slopes Footings located on or adjacent to top of slopes should be extended to sufficient depth to provide a minimum horizontal distance of 10 feet between the bottom edge of the footing and the face of the slope. H. Lateral Pressures Buildings founded in natural soils or compacted fill may designed for a passive lateral bearing pressure of 100 pounds per square foot per foot of depth. This value assumes that footings will be poured tight against undisturbed soils. A coefficient of friction against sliding between concrete and soil of 0.20 may be assumed. I. Swimming Pools Should a swimming pool be desired, the deck area shall be underlain by a two foot minimum layer of non-expansive granular soil. J. Driveway Driveway areas shall be underlain by a minimum of one foot of granular non-expansive soil (import). K. Import Soils Import soils shall be granular non-expansive soil with a classification of SM or greater by the Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM D-2487). L. Roof Drainage Roof area drainage shall be guttered and water taken a minimum of five feet from the foundations where positive drainage will continue to take water away from all foundations. M. Inspection This engineer shall inspect all foundations prior to placing concrete. . SOILS TESTING MV ENGINEERING, INC. . 2450 VINEYARD AVENUE, #102 . ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92029-1229 . 619/743-1214 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS . PRELIMINARY SOILS INVESTIGATION RANCHO ENCINITAS DRIVE, OLIVENHAIN PAGE 6 2/9/85 . If footings are to be placed into soils other than the soils described herein, verification of bearing strength should be obtained prior to construction. . Settlement of the natural bearing soils and properly reworked soils under structural loads less than the allowable loads given here will be negligible and should occur during the construction. N. Slopes . cut slopes should be constructed no steeper than 2:1 (horizontal:vertical) and fill slopes should be constructed no steeper than 2:1 (horizontal:vertical). Appropriate surface drainage features should be provided and slopes landscaped as soon as possible after grading to minimize the potential for surficial slope instability and slope erosion. All fill slope faces should be compacted to a minimum of 90% maximum dry density in accordance with ASTM 1557-70. . O. Retaining Structures . Recommended equivalent fluid soil pressure for the design cantilever walls retaining on-site or other granular soils are as follows: Level Backfill: Soil Pressure = 100 pounds per cubic foot . 2:1 Sloping Backfill: Soil Pressure = 120 pounds per cubic foot . Walls retained from movement at the top should be designed for an additional uniform soil pressure of 8xH pounds per square foot where H is the height of the wall in feet. Any additional surcharge pressures behind the wall should be added to these values. . Retaining wall footings may be designed in accordance with the previous building foundation recommendations. Retaining walls should be provided with adequate drainage to prevent buildup of hydrostatic pressures. . P. Geology/Seismicity Structurally speaking, the site is founded in a stable area and no geologic problems are anticipated. MV ENGINEERING, INC. . 2450 VINEYARD AVENUE, #102 . ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92029-1229 . 619/743-1214 I. SOILS TESTING PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS . PRELIMINARY SOILS INVESTIGATION RANCHO ENCINITAS DRIVE, OLIVENHAIN PAGE 7 2/9/85 . Based on a review of available published information, including the San Diego County Map of Faults and Epicenters, there are no active or potentially active faults near this property. The nearest known active fault is the Elsinore Fault approximately 25 miles to the northeast and the potentially active Rose Canyon Fault is located approximately 8 miles to the southwest. A number of minor faults of short extent are located within 5 miles of this site but these faults show no evidence of displacement with Holocene time. As a result, the potential for surface rupture within this site is remote. . . It is our opinion that the site could be subjected to moderate to severe groundshaking in the event of a major earthquake along either of the above mentioned faults. However, the seismic risk at the site is not significantly greater than that of the surrounding properties and the Olivenhain area in general. . In the event that severe earth shaking does occur from major faulting within the area, your compliance with our foundation recommendations and the Uniform Building Code for construction can be expected to minimize any structural damage and reduce significant failures due to seismic forces. . In conclusion, there were no obvious geologic hazards which would preclude the development of the site as described herein. . Q. General Groundwater was not encountered during our investigation and is not expected to interfere with the proposed development of this site. . Design of street pavement sections was not included within the scope of this report. Pavement sections will depend largely on the subgrade soil conditions exposed after grading and should be based on R-Value test results. These tests should be performed after completion of the grading operation. . It is recommended that any grading and the preparation of native soil be done in accordance with the Specifications for Construction of Controlled Fills, enclosed in Appendix .C', and conform to the requirements of the local Grading Ordinance. . Adequate measures should be undertaken to properly finish grade the building area after the proposed structures and other improvements are in place, so that drainage waters MV ENGINEERING, INC. . 2450 VINEYARD AVENUE, #102 . ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92029-1229 . 619/743-1214 . SOILS TESTING PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS . PRELIMINARY SOILS INVESTIGATION RANCHO ENCINITAS DRIVE, OLIVENHAIN PAGE 8 2/9/85 . from the improved site and the adjacent areas will be directed away from foundations, footings and floor slabs via surface swales and/or subsurface drains toward the lower levels of the site or to the natural drainage system for this area. Proper drainage will help to insure that no waters will seek the level of the bearing soils under foundations, footings, and floor slabs which could result in the undermining and differential settlement or uplift to the structures and other improvements. . . Any backfill soils placed in utility trenches or behind retaining walls which support structures and other improvements such as patios, sidewalks, driveways, pavement, etc. (other than landscaping) should be compacted to at least 90% maximum dry density. The on- site soil may be used as backfill provided it is free of organics and rocks over six inches in dimension. . All elements of grading, including removals, placement of subdrains, compaction, etc., as well as footing excavations and trench and wall backfill should be inspected and tested as necessary by the soils engineer. . VIII. LIMITATIONS . Our conclusions and recommendations have been based on all available data obtained from our field investigation and laboratory analyses, as well as our experience with the soils and formational materials located in the Olivenhain area. Of necessity, we must assume a certain degree of continuity between exploratory excavations and/or natural exposures. It is necessary therefore that all observations, conclusions and recommendations be verified during the grading operation. In the event discrepancies are noted, we should be notified immediately so that an inspection can be made and additional recommendations issued, if required. . The recommendations made in this report are applicable to the site at the time this report was prepared. It is the responsibility of the owner/developer to insure that these recommendations are carried out in the field. . The firm of MV Engineering, Inc. shall not be held responsible for changes to the physical condition of the property, such as addition of fill soils or changing drainage patterns which occur subsequent to issuance of this report. . This report should be considered valid for a period of two years, and is subject to review by our firm following that time. If significant modifications are made to your tentative development plan, especially with respect to the height and MV ENGINEERING, INC. . 2450 VINEYARD AVENUE, #102 . ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92029-1229 . 619/743-1214 . SOILS TESTING PEAC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS GEO'nCHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS . PRELIMINARY SOILS INVESTIGATION RANCHO ENCINITAS DRIVE, OLIVENHAIN PAGE 9 2/9/85 . location of cut and fill slopes, this report must be presented to us for review and possible revision. Once again, should any questions arise concerning this report, please do not hesitate to contact this office. . Reference to our Job #1018-85 will expedite response to your inquiries. . . RMV/et . . . . . MV ENGINEERING, INC. . 2450 VINEYARD AVENUE. #102 . ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92029-1229 . 619/743-1214 . SOILS TESTING PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS . S )\~ ?LAN Cp..,,)'~ ¡) t:.,>! Y-r.-' c... \ -rE. -,¿ -v--1';., ...) Ii' ,... "",, . L _..J.~ p r.~ t} -5'. J ~ L I '~f --~~ "~ ","\ - ,- 5~ ,,1 01Þt)¡~,}Ö ba Nt)I':;-"~ ~/ . ~, C, ~, - '" " ' ~ -',!17,q .;.;:'¡ i::'" "~ "~S ! <1-\/1' -'" ' c.> -",' ( . -', -9 ,A -:~;¡ ':'I..~~t.:, . . . +' . cr- . . . 'V/C/).)!;'} HAJ?- NO"1 Ie. -::X:'A! c:: . . . "'--' é'7e,'j- 'TP-ê /- --s- 1- '7 ,>-f::;,,~, 1 1 '-""~¡..~ -- ¡-j 0', ,~Ì'.. 1 ,'\Jl,~ I 1 -7 '---- L- -- ì 7 / r-- --/-- --1 / :--. TP-l / ì ~ I --- / ""'-r L---I Z. (Þ() .t ¡:::- ¡ (:::, ,() \t' II ~ - . . ~ ð ó) ~ tr' ~ I -"f"! ¡{) rv I1J .... -::: .../ ;) v1 { \- :... '2 -1'1 c' c;() ~ '- - w - ~I 0 -::r. v ¡J \ <"! ... (Y:\ ... '-L. oc i \ \ \ \ . . . . . APPENDIX 8A8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . f PRIMARY DIVISIONS ~~ S ECONOARV DIVISIONS ! , YM BOl. r GRAVELS CLEAN GW Well gr8ded g,_ls. grewet-wnd ",laW-ft. I&IIIe 01 no I ¡ ~ GRAVELS It"... ! ~ MORE THAN HALf (LESS THot.N f"oQrly ~8ded gt_ts 01 gr~-una mulurft, ""Ie 011 i ~ ¡~ GP ¡ ! 5" FINES) ,., fines. I ~ OF CQ.l.RSl FRACTION IS GRAVEL GM Silty gr.""'. gr-'-sancl-aill miatur8l. non-~tic fines. fa ! i ~ LAAGER THAN WITH Z ~ ¡ ~ NO. 4 SIEvE FINES GC Cia.,..... gr....,.ls gr....I-und-cl8y miatures. )latic find. ~ î II: ~ SANDS CLEAN SW INItIi gr8decl $MIdI. gr......lly unds. linll 01 ,., finn. CJ SA NOS ~ II CÞ MORE ~ HALf (LESS THAN SP Poorly gr8ded unda 011 ",."","y 1MdI, little or no fir-a. 5" FINES) ~..I OF COARSE ;~ FRACTION IS SANDS SM Silly Mnds. und-lih miatu"", non-pl8Slic finn. SMALLER THAN WITH NO. 4 SIEve FINES SC CI8YCY sands. sand-clay miatures. plastic fina. = SilTS AND ClAYS ML Inor~iC SIltS and very fine lands. ~ock flour. Sílt~. 011 C ev fone sands or cI.yey slilS WIth slight plait Ity. !J ~~~ lnor~c ctavs of low to medium pl.stlcity. gravelly ~ ~i! LIQUID LIMIT IS CL c. sandy clays, silty clays. lean claVI. 0 ~",ëñ LESS THAN SO" OL Organic lilts and organic: silty cky5 oA low plasticity. w ~ 1"'° - 0 SilTS AND CLAYS MH 1no'Qa.nic sihs. micac:eous IJI dialom8Ceous fine sandy 01 ~ ..IN ~ . Slhv SOIls. elastIC silll. ! CJ U,æ¡ CH lnorgan~ clays of high plaSticity. fat clayl. f ~ ;¡~ UQUID LIMIT IS ¡ ¡¡: GR£ATER THAN SO" OH Organic clays of medium to high plasticity. Ofganic: siltl. HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS Pt Peat and othe, highly orgamc JOÎII. DEFINITION OF TERMS 200 4 CLEAR SQUARE SIEVE OPENINGS 3/41 3' 12' U. S. STANDARD SERIES SIEVE 40 10 SAND GRAVEL COBBLES BOUUDERS SilTS AND CLAYS FINE MEDIUM COARSE FINE COARSE GRAIN SIZES SANDS,GRAVElS NIJ Bl.O#SIFOOT t NON-PlASTIC SilTS Vf RY LOOSE 0 - 4 LOOSE 4-10 MEDIUM DENSE 10-30 DENSE XI-SO VERY DENSE OÆR 50 Q.AYS AND STRENGTH' BLDWSIFOOT t PlASTIC SilTS VERY SOFT 0 - 1/4 0 - 2 SOfT 1A - 112 2 -.. ARM ~ - 1 4 - 8 STIFF 1 - 2 8-18 VERY STIFF 2 -.. 11-32 HARD Ov'ER .. OÆR 32 RELATIVE DENSllY CONSISTENCY t Number 01 blows of 140 pcutd h8nwn8r f.1ing 30 incna 10 œ-iww . 2 inch 0.0. (1-318 inch I.OJ iplit IpOOI'I (ASTM 0-1586). 4Ü1confined compressi... strength in tons/sq. h. - determined by laboratory testing 0I8pC)I'oaimaled "" the II8nlSMd perwt,aÜon t... CASTM 0-15861 pocUt penetrometer, tory...., 01 viau.81 obserwllO/ll. ~ - Bag Sample o=J - Split Spoon Sample KEY TO EXPlORAlORY BORING lOGS u,ified Soil Classification em (ASTM 0-2487) Mr. Fred Reva MV ENGINEERING. INC 4ì6W ;,,'~')":;'.'" So':" ,":2 PROJECT NO. DATE KEY ~'-~r'~'.1. c~ ,,~,"~= 1018-85 2 9 85 . CN.L. fIIG Backhoe Case 580 DEPTH TD Gl'O\JNOWATEI' N /E ~ [L£'&TIOH 261 &ORIN(; [KAMETE" 36" Bucket . . Sandy Clay Moist Grades Sandy tan- green dense" CL Soil Type 1 . Clayey Sandstone Greenish coloration Cemented dense SC . Soil Type 2 . Claystone dark green stiff CL Slicken sides . . Soil Type 3 Bottom of Boring . ~THE~L.MS~ TAr.., r f1.:l~ ~ IETWEÞ 1M TÐUL T\?D AND nE 11WCSI1'1QH ..... . CltADlIAI LOGGED"" M. V. Din DRlu.rD 1/23/85 14:2. W'I. D(~:S:I:: MÐ a.AS;~:: aHSST. ~ =1 i! 14 iþ !I~ 1").1 Idl.~ 7 , 8 9 lOS 134-. R.S 'Iß. . ~TORY BORING LOG . M V ENGINEERING tNC 476 W. VERMONT AVE. ESCONDIDO.CA 82025 ~- 1018-85 Mr. Fred Reva 8ft 2/9/85 IORI. _1 . ~ ~G Backhoe Case 580 DEPTH TO GltOVHOWAT~ N/E ~ [L.E\&TION 262 &ORIN<; DiAMETE"36" Bucket LOGGtO,., M. V . DATE OR1u.£D 1/26/85 . DE5cRFT:S::: WJ OJS;~:: casn ~ =. i~ 10 4 iþ !I~ . Sandy clay topsoil, wet Soil Type 1 rown- loose reen CL Clayey sandstone (cemented) dense SC e:+ "q. . Soil Type 2 . Claystone green yello stiff CL . Slicken sides . . Soil Type 3 Bottom of Boring . ~ 1'H[ I'TMT'F1CATION L.KS ~ THr..,rf\~ 8O\,HWr'( IETWŒN 1M T'EJIIAL TYPO AND n« T1WtSI 'mN ..... .~w . . EXPLORATORY BORING LDG . M V ENGINEERING tNC 476 W. VERMONT AVE. ESCONDIDO.CA 82025 Mr. Fred Reva M).£T 8- 1018-85 MIl 2/9/85 ICRIJI _2 . . . . . APPENDIX 8B8 . . . . . . 140 , \ \ \ , Job No. 1018-85 \ ' \ - ~ Date: 1/30/85 ~ \ \ \ \ ' 1\, Job Name: 135 Mr. Fred Reva , \ . \ 1\ ' 1\\ Location: Encinitas Drive \ ' \ Lot #8 Rancho 1\ \ \ 01ivenhain \ ' \ \ 130 . \ \ ~ Visual Description: Tan, green sandy clay 1\ ' ~ _\ \ \ ~ \ ' 1\ " Sample No. 1 Hole No. 1 1\ \ 125 " _\ ' \ \ . \ ' \ Depth: -I' By: M.V. \ ' 1\ , Classification USCS:CL '\ ' 1\ 120 \ !\ \ \ Laboratory Compaction 5 x 25 \ . c... I~ ~ \ 1\ C) ~ \. \ \ \ ASTM 1557-70-A ~ ~ ~~ 1\ ' \ ' . ..J ~ " 1\ ' I\. 3 115 >, ~ " \ \ \ \. Maximum Dry Densi ty: 120. Opcf \. ~ " \ \ ~ " . 0 I"OPtimum r1oisture: 10.0 % " \. ' ~ 1 '" \ 1\ \ '\ Test Conducted by:F.R. ~ " Ì\ ~ \. I\. \ ' \ 110 . \ I\. \ I\. '\ " '\ I\. , \ , '\ " '\ " \ 105 \ , \ '- '\ ' '\ I\. . '\ \ \. " ,\ I\. , " Percent r1oisture '\ r\. 100 l 15 L' 25 j . Trial Sample + Wet t-lt. Moist Wt. Dry Percent Dry No. Mold Wt. Density Sample Sample Moisture Density 1 14.58 Ibs 132.0 pcf 200 gms 1 70 . 5 gms 17.3 % 112.5 ocf . 2 14.61 Ibs 132.9 pcf 200 gms 180.0 gI!ls 11.1 % 119.6 ?ef 3 14.43 Ibs 127.5 pcf 200 gms 185.sgms 7.8 % 118.3 pef Ibs Def qms gms % pef . Ibs pef gr:1S gr:1S % pef ~old ~o.: 3 Volume: 1/30 eu. ft. weight: 10.18 Ibs. . 140 \ 1\ \ . 1\ \ \ Job No. 1018-85 . \ ' \ \ . Date: 1/30/85 , ~ \ \ \ ' \ 135 \ \ ' Job Name: Mr. Fred Reva . \ \ ' ~ L . Lot #8, Rancho Encinitas Drive \ ' \ \ ocat~on: Pt. ~ \ 1\ 01ivenhain :\ ' 1\ \ 130 , \ \ Visual Description: Light tan clayey . \ ' \ \ \ \ sandstone' \ r\ \ \ \ Sample No. Hole No. 1 \ 2 125 \ \ \ \ \ \ . ~ , I\. Depth: -4' By: M.V. .\ ' \ ' I\C1assification \ ' USCS: '\ 120 \ \ ~ Laboratory Compaction 5 x 25 1\ \ ~ '\ . CJ , r\ \ t\ ASTM 1557-70-A c.. !\ \ \ " . ~ \ " " ~ 115 >. \ \. ~ Maximum Dry Densi tY:112. 8 pcf 1-1 \ \ \ ' c r\°ptimum Moisture: 13.0 % . ~ " '\ t\. 1'\ \ Test ~ -... Conducted by: F. R. ~ ~ " r\ ~ 110 ~ " ~ ~ , ~ ,, \ 1\ \ \. . ~ I. " " " 1\ ~ I' ~ \ \. , ~ '" Ì\. \ ~ " , ~ \ ~ 105 ~ , \ " r\ \. . / , r\. " r\. " ,\ \ " Î\. Percent Moisture " r\. 100 T 15 2- 25 ~ . Trial Sample + Wet \vt. Hoist Wt. Dry Percent Dry No. Mold Wt. Density Sample Sample Moisture Density 1 14.34 1bs 124 . 8 pc f 200 grns 179.4 gms 11.5 , 111.9 oct 2 14.46 lbs 128.4 pet 200 gms 174.3 g~s 14.7 , , " Q pct . 3 14 44 Ibs ,? 7 R pct ?nn grns ,.,n n grns 17.6 % 108.7 pct 1h~ oct oms gms , pct Ibs pct q~s gT:\S , pct . Mold No.: 3 Volu~e: 1/30 cu. ft. Weight: 10.18 Ibs. . 140 \ 1\ \ \ \ Job No. 1018-85 \ \ \ Date: 1/30/85 , ~ \ 135 \ \ \ Job Name: Mr. Fred Reva \ r\ ~ \ ' ~ L . \ " \ \ ocatl.on: Lot #8 Rancho Encinitas Drive r\ \ \ 01ivenhain \ ' \ \ 130 \ \ \. Visual Description: green claystone \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 1\ " \ \ Sample No. 3 Hole No'1 '\ 125 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 1\ Depth: -5' By: M.V. \ \ \ \ 1\ ' \C1assification USCS: " 120 \ 1\ 1\ \ Laboratory Compaction 5 x 25 \ ¡:". 1\ [\ u \ \ \ ASTM 1557-70-A tl. \ \ \ " . +J 1\ \ \ ~ \ 115 ~ \ \ t\ Maximum Dry Densi ty:l11. 5 pcf f.I Ì\ \; , 0 \ \.optimum Hoisture: 16.0 % \. \ '\ '\ 1\, Test Conducted by: F. R. \ \; t\ l/ "'" III ì\ ' \ 110 ;" ~ "" \ 1\ \ \. ./ I\. I\. \ r\ 1\ ~' " \.. , '\ \ " l/ \.." \. " \ 7 '\ 1\ '\ \. 105 ~ " ~ " \. , ~ '\. I..;~ '\I ~ '\ \. , \. , " '\. Percent r1oisture '\ r\. 100 5 TO 15 -ZO 25 3 Trial Sample + Wet ¡'it. Moist Wt. Dry Percent Dry No. Mold Wt. Density Sample Sample Moisture Density 1 14. 5 3 Ib s 130.5 pct 200 gms 169.0 gms 18.3 % 110.3 'Oct 2 14.25 1bs 122.1 pcf 200 gms 178. 5 grns 12.0 % 109.0 pcf 3 14.44 1bs 127.8pcf 200 gms 174. 0 gms , 4 9 % 111.2 pcf 1be:: Dct aIDS gms % pcf Ibs pcf gr:1S gr:1S ~ pct Mo 1d No.: 3 Vo1ur:1e: 1/30 cu. it. Weight: 10.18 1bs. . . . . . . . . . . . UP ANSI 011 nsr . D.t. 2/5/85 lIP- 1018-85 rechnJ.ciu S.T. . Init1a.l ,J.lYl Soil t+rue 347.5 II 382.5 II w. rare 199.8 II 199.8 g+22 . Soil 147.7 II 160.7 g wet RJ.ng Vol UID8 .002841 ~t3 .002892 ~t3 Den.sity t 114.6 lbtl/~t3 12 4. 7 lbtI/~t3 If. . . ".ter 12.8 J.nitJ.a.l 21.9 ~J.1Yl Densit!/dzy 101.6 lbtl/ft3 102.3 lb8/~t3 . Di.a.l Reading 0.000 J.nitJ.a.l. .018 ~inal Ti.JlJe/D.t. 2: 30/2-5-8~nJtJ..l 2: 30j2-6-85filYl- . ~XPANSIOlI 1.8 . . SOIL DBSCRIPrIOII Liqht tan clayey sandstone . B-1 S.T.2 4 ' UIIARXS Test performed on 80i1 8ample of 2.5 inches diameter and 1.0 inch hiqh. . . . UPANSIOII nsr . Date 2/5/85 JIP- 1018-85 Technician S. T . . Initial 'inal Soil t+Tare 355 . 7 9 397.3 9 we Tare 206.0 9 206.0 g+22 . 149.7 169.3 Soil wet 9 g Ring Volume .002841 ftJ .003168 ftJ Density t 116.1 lbIJ/ftJ 117.8 lbs/ftJ we . 'Water 15.3 initial 26.5 final DensitYdZV 100. 7 lbs/ftJ 93.1 lbs/ftJ . Dial Reading 0.000 i ni ti. al. .115 final Time/Date 8: 45/2-5- 85 initial 2: 45/2-5-8~inal' , EXPANSION 11. 5 . . SOIL DESCRIP'rIœ Tan-green silty sand medium to heavy clay . B-1 S.T.III 5 ' RÐIAlUCS Test performed on soil sample of 2.5 inches diameter and 1.0 inch high. . . . . 400 . 350 . 3000 - ... c ~ c:J . !2500 CIC t; C C UI % . '. 2000 . 150 . Go 100 1000 11500 2000 2&00 3000 NORMAL PRESSURE (PSF) . SYMBOL SAMPLE LOCATION COHESION fp8f' FRICTION AEMARK.S ANGLE re, B #1 @ 8' 2650 24 Green sandy clay- stone remoled to 98 to 113 pcf @ 20% + moisture - . DIRECT .H8AR T.ST RESULT. . JÞIIIOJECT NO. 1018- 85 Lot #8 Rancho Encinitas Mr. Fred Reva . MV ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #102 Escondido, California 92025-1330 619/743-1214 Fax:739-0343 . Job #1051-85 March 21, 1985 . Mr. Fred Reva 770 Rancho Santa Fe Road Encinitas, California 92024 . COMPACTION REPORT FOR SITE LOCATED AT 1208 RANCHO ENCINITAS DRIVE, ENCINITAS . In accordance with your request, this report has been prepared to establish the degree of compaction of the compacted fill as tested by MV Engineering, Inc. between March 14 and March 21, 1985. . Prior to grading operations the site in the immediate vicinity of the proposed pad was cleared of brush and vegetation. During grading, adequate keys were made into undisturbed natural ground and the fill was placed in six to eight inch lifts and compacted by means of a sheepsfoot roller and heavy construction equipment. A laboratory compaction test for each soil type was performed to determine the maximum dry density and optimum moisture in accordance with ASTM D-1557-70, Method A. . Field density tests were performed in accordance with ASTM D-1556-64, sandcone method. Moisture content was determined for each density sample. The results of these tests are shown on the attached sheets. . All fill slopes are susceptible to erosion due to rainfall or undirected runoff and therefore should be protected by planting or other erosion control measures. Berms should be constructed along the top edges of all fill slopes. . Brow ditches should be constructed along the top of all cut slopes sufficient to guide runoff away from the building site and adjacent fill slopes. These ditches should be constructed in accordance with County Standard D-75 or an approved equal. . Footings placed within five feet of the top of fill slopes should be extended to a sufficient depth to provide a minimum horizontal distance of five feet from the bottom outside edge of the footing to the fill slope surface. . . Mr. Fred Reva Page 2 March 21, 1985 . . The owner/developer is responsible to insure adequate measures are taken to properly finish grade the building pad after the structures and other improvements are in place, so that the drainage waters from the improved site and adjacent properties are directed away from the foundations. Proper drainage will insure that no waters will seek the level of the bearing soils under the foundations, which could result in undermining and differential settlement of the structures and improvements. . The attached drawing details the location of cuts, fills and locations of the density tests taken, and is applicable to the site at the time this report was prepared. The house area plus an additional horizontal distance of fifteen feet minimum was excavated to a depth of three feet below finish pad grade and non-expansive material was used to cap this area. . Foundation recommendations for non-expansive import soils shall be in conformance with our Preliminary Soils Investigation Report dated February 9, 1985. . Should you have any questions or clarification be necessary, please contact us at your convenience. Reference to our Job #1051-85, will help to expedite our response. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you. . MV ENGINEERING, c. . RMV/th enc . . MV ENGINEERING, INC. . 2450 VINEYARD AVENUE, #102 . ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92029-1229 . 619/743-1214 . SOilS TESTING PERC TEST SOil INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS . . 1051-85 Mr. Fred Reva 1208 Rancho Encinitas Dr., Ene. BORATORY COMPACTION TEST RESULTS: Soil Type 1: Light tan clayey sandstone . Maximum Dry Density: 112.8 pcf Optimum Moisture: 13.0 % Soil Type 2: Green Claystone . Maximum Dry Density: 111.5 pcf Optimum Moisture: 16.0 % Soil Type 3: Tan silty sand . Maximum Dry Density: 116.0 pcf Optimum Moisture: 11.5 % Soil Type 4: Tan silty sand (import) . Maximum Dry Density: 120.5 pcf Optimum Moisture: 11.7 % IELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS: . Test Height of Field Field Dry Lab Dry % Relative No. Fill Tested Moisture Density Density Compaction 1 2' 24.1 100.3 111. 5 90.0 2 2 I 22.1 100.6 111.5 90.2 3 4' 20.6 102.8 112.8 91.1 4 6' 20.8 104. 7 112.8 92.8 5 8 I 17.2 104. 6 112.8 92.7 6 2' 18.9 104.1 112.8 92.3 7 4' F.G. 16.3 103. 6 112.8 91.8 8 2' 16.7 107.0 116.0 92.2 9 2' 15.5 104.5 116.0 90.1 10 3' F.G. 13.7 106 . 9 120.5 88.7 3/20/85 11 3' F.G. 14.1 110. 8 120.5 92.0* . 3/20/85 12 10' F.G. 16.4 103 . 1 120.5 91.4 *Retest #10 140 ~ 1\ \ 1\ \ , ~ Job No. 1051-85 . \ ' \ . Date: 1/30/85 , \ \ \ \ ' \ Job Name: 135 , \ Mr. Fred Reva \ ' \\ Location: Lot #8, Rancho Encinitas Drive ' \ ' Ï\ \ \ 1\ 01ivenhain \ ' \ \ 130 \ \ Visual Description: Light tan clayey 1\ ' 1\ \ sands tone. \ \ \ \ \ \ \ Sample No. 1 Hole No. 1 \ 125 \ \ . \ \ \ \ I\. Depth: -4' By: M.V. 1\ ' \ ~ \ ' \ ' r\Classification uses: \ 120 \ \ \ \ Laboratory Compaction 5 x 25 \ . C&.. \ \ U , \ \ \ ASTM 1557-70-A Po !\ ' \ ' . .., I\. \ ' 1\ X 115 >. \ 1\ \ "Maximum Dry Densi tY:112. 8 pcf .¡ \ " , . c 1\ ~OPtimum Moisture: 13.0 , 1\ , - \ \ 1\ Test Conducted ~ 110... by: F. R. ,. I~IIIL r'\ \ ~ " 110 ~ " I" \ ~ ,, \ !\ \ Ì\. . ~ I~ ~ , '\ I\. ~ " , '\ \. ' ~ " \. \.. '\ ~ '\. \ \. '\ I'\. 105 / '\ 1\ ' I" \. . ~ , r\. ' r\. \. \ \. , I'\. Percent r~oisture '\ 11 100) ) 1) 15 21 25 . Trial Sample + Wet \oJt. Moist Wt. Dry Percent Dry No. Mold Wt. Density Sample Sample Moisture Density 1 14.34 1bs 124.8 pcf 200 gros .179.4 gms 11.5 , Ill. 9 oct . 2 14.46 Ibs 128.4 pct 200 gms 174.3 g~s 14.7 , 111,9 pct 3 14 44 lbs 127 8 pct .,nn gms 170 n gms 17.6 , 108.7 pct lb! Dcf oms qms , pc! lbs pet q~s q~s , pet . Mold No. : 3 Volur:le: 1/30 CU. ft. Weight: 10.18 Ibs. . . . . 140 , \ \ \ \ ~ Job No. 1051-85 \ , \ \ Date: 1/30/85 , \ \ 135 \ \ \, Job Name: Mr. Fred Reva . \ 1\ \ \ ' \\ Location: \ ' \ Lot #8 Rancho Encinitas Drive 1\ \ 1\ 01ivenhain \ ' \ \ 130 . ' \ \ \ Visual Description: green claystone 1\ ' 1\ \ \ \ 1\' 1\ \ \ \ Sample No. 2 Hole No'1 [\ \ 125 í\ . \ \ \ \ \ \ \ Depth: -5' By: M.V. \ ' '\ , \ \ \Classification USCS: 120 \ '\ \ Laboratory Compaction 5 x 25 \ . r... \ () \ Ì\ \ \ ASTM l557-70-A 0. '\ , \ ' . +I \ ' r\ ~ \ 115 )., , 1\ \ ,Maximum Dry Densi ty:lli. 5 pcf .¡ \ \ 1\ '\ . 0 ì\Optimurn r1oisture: 16.0 % \ " " 1\ '\ 'Test Conducted by: F. R. \ \ r\ ' ..... I..,. ~ .. " \ 110 . / '- \ i\. \ I\. r II\.. '\ ' :'\ I\. ... 1\ \ 1\ '\ ~ '" ./ "" \ '\ ' " ", " ,\ I\. \ " 105 , " ~ I'" r\. . ~ ~ ~ '\ \. \.. " 1\ '\ '" Percen t r1oisture '\ 1\ 100 5 10 15 20 25 3' . Trial Sample + Wet tit. Moist Wt. Dry Percent Dry No. Mold Wt. Density Sample Sample Moisture Density 1 14.53 1bs 130.5 pcf 200 grns 169.0 gms 18.3 % 110.3 oct . 2 14.25 lbs 122.1 pcf 200 gms 178. 5 gInS 12.0 % 109.0 ?cf 3 14.44 Ibs 127.8pcf 200 gms 174 . 0 gms ld q % Ill. 2 pcf Ibs pcf aIDS gms % pcf . lbs pcf gr:'ìS gr:'ìS ~ pcf Mold ~o.: 3 Vo1ur:1e: 1/30 eu.ft. Weight: 10.18 1bs. . 140 \ \ \ \ \ \ 1\ Job No. 1051-85 \ \ \ \ Date: 3/18/85 , \ ' \ \ \ ' \\ Job Name: 135 \ 1\ Mr. Fred Reva . \ \ \ \\ Location: \ ' \ Lot #8 Rancho Encinitas Drive 1\ \ \ Encinitas, California \ \ \ \ 130 \ \ 1\ Visual Description: Tan silty sand . \ \ \ \ . \ \ \ \ \ r\ \ Sample No. 3 Hole No. \ \ 125 \ . \ \ \ \ 1\ Depth: -2' By: S. T. 1\ \ \ \ \ \ \C1assification USCS: \ \ ~ 120 \ \ \ Laboratory Compaction 5 x 25 \ . 4.. \ \ U \ ~ \ \ ASTM 1557-70-A 0.. \ \ \ \ . +J ~ \ \ \ ~ ... - - - "'1 \ \ 1\ Maximum Dry Dens i ty: 116 .0 pct 115 >. .-"" ...... \..¡ ./ " ......... ~ \ \ \ . 0 ,Optimum r1oisture: 11. 5 % /' ~ .\ \ " \ '" , 1\ Test Conducted by:S.T. / \ , \ \ / ~ \ \ 110 . \ \. \ \ 1\ \ \ 1\ \. \ \. \ \ \ \ \ 1\ \ \. '\ '\. 105 \ \ 1\ r\. . '\. '\ \. \. \ \. \ \. Percent Moisture '\ '\. 100 5 lO 15 20 25 3) . Trial Sample + Wet \-Jt. Moist Wt. Dry Percent Dry No. Mold Wt. Density Sample Sample Moisture Density 1 14.45 Ibs 128.2 pct 200 (un s 181.0 gms 10.5 % 116.0 'Ocf . 2 14.60 Ibs 132.6 pcf 200 gms 174.1 gms 14.9 % 115.4 ?cf 1 14.31 Ibs 124.0 pcf 200 gms 186.2 gms 7.4 % 115.5 pcf Ibs Dct qms gms % pet . 1bs pet gms gms i; pcf Mo 1 d No.: 3 Volume: 1/30 cu. ft. Weight: 10.18 Ibs. 140 \ \ \ 1\ \ Job No. 1051- 85 \ ' 1\ \ Date: 3/20/85 \ ~ \ 135 \ \ 1\, Job Name: Mr. Fred Reva \ \ ~ \ ' 1\\ Location: \ ' \ Lot #8 Rancho Encinitas Drive 1\ \ ~ Encinitas, California 130 \ ' f\ \ \ \ \ Visual Description: Tan silty sand (impo rt) \ \ \ \ \ \ t\. 1\ \ \ \ Sample No. 4 Hole No. -- \ \ f\ 125 \ \ 1\ \ \ '\ \ Depth: -- By: S.T. \ ' 1\ ' \C1assification USCS: ~ \ ' ~ -. \ \ ~\ Laboratory Compaction 120 , ~ \ 5 x 25 r... \ . u / \.' \ \ \ ASTM 1557-70-A ~ / ' .\ \ \ ' . -+J ~ ~ 1\ \ " '\ ~ 115 :>. ~ ~ \ \ Maximum Dry Density: 120.5pcf ~ ..~ \ \ 0 ~ \ \.optimum Hoisture: 11. 7 % . , , 1\ \ I' , \ 1\ Test Conducted by:S.T. / \ \ \ \ 1/ I\. \ \ 110 \ I\. \ \. . Ì\ \ I\. r\. I\. \ '\ '\ \ \. '\ \ \ 1\ '\ " 105 \. '\ r\. . r\ " '\ '\. !\ I\. '\ '" '\. Percent r1oisture " ~ 100) 5 10 15 20 25 31 . Trial Sample + Wet Wt. Moist Wt. Dry Percent Dry No. Mold Wt. Density Sample Sample Moisture Density 1 14. 35 Ibs 125.1 pct 200 qrns 185.9 gms 7.6 % 116.3 oct . 2 14 56 Ibs 131. 4 pct 200 gIns 181. 7 gInS 10.1 % 11q 1 rct 3 14. 70 1bs 135.6 pct 200 gms 176.7 gms 13.2 % 119.8 pct 1bs oct qms gms % pcf Ibs pcf gms gms ~ pct . Me 1 d No.: 3 Volume: 1/30 cu.ft. Weight: 10. 18 1bs. . . . . . M V ENGINEERING INC 476 W. VERMONT AVE. ESCONDIDO,CA 92025 RA . . . +1 J I / i %' ¡ @ J) ¡ - I . J o' J -' .1 ,I ¡ 1 I I I I . . -'--~'------- .., '2'(~ D ~ .,~-- ,..,.". . ~p.rlçd..J;l t:;y(' \~ ...<~ S\-rE ~.", \% \ I~ \ ' \ftC/NIl'< l¥\~ I~ 0-; loCCALE. Lo, :>e. . ~fY1/Jo¡O 1)6.. NÇ>&;¡E:. -, <.ð ','" ..Q. -'-.~.;'9 . OWNER""~~ LEGAL ,l J. ;:; ~ J ~¿.~, ¡-"', - t,' ; ,"",-.. Ù 1 '(,~':::' ;'-'1 . "", .~\I'.-, ,_""..1 --.-.,'-'-- . Ii ( ~_. ~VI4. C:()I\.:ys. ìel)C71 01\) CO. .IN C. ~l () ~-A",)" <.. 0 '-::::'-p.",J-,.J.:,:::::-e. :--'D La, ìi: ,g , ¡RAC; -t!,: !3'<FN-\ H¡,?~ 90~' '._"'\'~' ',"": .y:- ';;"'-;.k' "':..~e::'1) ':':' '..:¡-r..:_.~.:'::.. '.:.~.'J'-'j. DATE: 3/21/,95 JOB: (OS! -B~ BY: H.?R SHEET: \o¡,. () ~- II , i- : .. 'f"I d) !u) . ì :4: ! .::j 'en I' t! - ~ ~1 ..'.1 "J" II ~ \ ~ LEGEND CD -De.y::.,qy ¡~.,. " . DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND LAND USE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO CODES DIVISION 0 s.n OJ. Qffic» 0 Nom CountY Offlc» 5201 Auffln Roed. Suite B3 U. Vi. Ve,. Cruz RETURN TO: s.n OJ.. CA 92123 s.n MeI"COl. CA 92068 565-6920 . . 7414238 ~ ?rojec:~ Location /ZD8 M~(;)~p")l7,q.~ ~. Same of Permittee l:::f~, -¡::::-~ t"\eJA ß)L\\l~t-\-~'^-J Gradin¡ Permi.~ ~o. l>~K^-,~CôIJ . . This report fona for a "lIIinor" ¡radin¡ project is to be co.pleted and signed by the Registered Civil Engineer (or Architect) who has been desi¡na~ed on the Grading Plan and Permi~ as the Engineer who will furnish thë compaction report for work au~høri%ed by a ¡radin¡ per1li~ issued by the Department of Planning and land Use. The intent of the forma~ is to provide infor1ll&tion to the Department of Planning and Land Use as to jI'ading compliance with the approved Grading Plan and Permit. Where the questions below refer to loca~ion, confi¡uration or quantity of cut and/or fill areas, it is unders~ood tha~ your response will not normally be based on an actual land. surveyor detailed earthwork quantity calculations. It should be noted. however, that the Departaent is particularly concerned where there are possible inirac~ions with respec~ to over- steepened slopes, encroach8ents of required setbacks, uncompacted fills placed, or where the quantity of fill placed differs substantially fro. that authorized. . The Departaent of Planninl and. LanIi Use requires that all fills authorized by a Grading Permit be compacted to a iIIinimu8 of 90\ of maxima density with the exception that I).o~ more than 12" of uncompac~ed and untested fills may be dispersed over the land parcel. The need to compact all fills that are beyond the presen~ limitS of the present proposed construction is to insure that future proposed construction of 1'00lIl additions or swimming pools or similar structures will not require that uncompacted fills be removed or recompacted, or that extensive foundation work be installed. . A. COMPATIBILITY WITIf GRADIM:i PtA.'f AND PERMIT Compaction reports will not be accepted unless this form is completed and signed by the registered person. 1. Was the compacted fill placed only in the approximate locations designated on the ¡rading plan as areas to be filled? . Did the quantity of fill uterial placed approximately conform to the grading plan? Did the toe of fill or the top of cut appear to meet the prescribed property line se~back (1.5' for fill; 3.0' for cuts)? 2. 3. ~. Were the finished fill slopes equal to or less than 2 hori:ontal to 1 vertical? . s. [f the filluterial was obtained by cuts on the site, were the cuts ~e in the proper location and to the proper slope approximately as shown on the approved ~rading plan? Were brow ditches constructed approximately as shown on the grading plan? 6. B. LOCATION AND AMOUNT OF CCMP.A.CTICN TESTS 1. Have you attached a sketch and data showing the location and relative ~fevation for all compaction tests? . Was a compaction test Qade so that there is at least one test in each 2' thick lens or compacted material? .. ... 3. As indicated by inspections, observations and compaction test results, was the fill. excluding the top 1.0', coœpacted to at least 90... of :naxi= dry densit?? C. QUALITY OF FILL CCJoIPACTIOS OPERATION . 1. Was the area to receive fill properly prepared in te~s of brJsh removal, benching, ;;etting. reaoval of noncollpacted fill or debris and related items? . , ~as all detrt:entally expansive soil placed in the fill at 3' or "are below finish ir~de? 3. Have feu attached a copy of your :ur:e showing the relationship ~etween opticum :noist~e content 1nd :naxt:um Jensi:y? . J. .Ias :lil 1I&terial 'JSed :15 :i~: (ear:h, rocks, .;ra'lel' 3:ral:~r than 1:" i:1 òi:e? ~ . ~e Üllreas or the fill suitable for ;uppor: of 5tr'~c-:-..:re5' ". .Iere 1.:: e:Üs:i:1š fills In the ,:te reco:n::act~ ::1 lccor::Jn.:e '.n::: tne ?rov!.si.)nsor the ;r3~in~ Jr~:na;¡:e? . -. .-- . - Yes V ~o- YesJ¿:' ~o- Yes.J,¿' ~o- YesJ,¿" :-/o - Yes~ :-/o - YesJ.¿" ~o- Yesj¿" ~:o- ~'esV ~;o - ïes.,j¿'" ~;o - YesV :\o - Yes - 'ioV 'ies.J.:::::'" \0 - : es..JG: '.0 - :es~ '.~ :.es - ';' - . O. STATISTIc.\L DATA 1. Dates the grading work was performed: 3//4/85 '70 3/ 2D/ 8S ~ Dates your representative was on site and number of hours on site for each date. and name of representative: 3/14' 4'l4HfZs; 3J¡S - SJ-/fð; 3/ / B ' 3i~Hfl~'J 3/19 - "2Hrzs; 3) 20 - / '/ 2.,L/~ . . . . . 5. IU~LE Y E. AS-BUILT DATA . 1. IE the fill placement was not in ac:c:ordance with the approved grading plan, did you notify Yes- the permittee to obtain approval for deviation froll the plan before proc:eeding with additional fill pl"ement? NO- Z. If the approved grading plan does not reElec:t the actual location, depth and type of fill. Yes- :-10- have you subœitted for review and approval an as-built plan? REMARKS: ::L-r~ -1ÞC-eJ T~ m>Use: A~ '¡)LUS A^J A'DD/7/DAJ4L í-I F7~ .,:::Ð{)7 IVI/IIJ/n')t)M ,q~VE 4 ô'~ ? ~~J I\J~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ =:: ; I ~;;; D6'\-r~ ~. Cf j IqB~ ~ FðO1ù~7/Ou RE!:o mtY\~\:)l1ïlòA:J ~I . . CERTIFlc.\TION I hereby certify, under penalty of perjury, that the information pro is true to the best of my knowledge and belief. . . . Signature e ~/2.1 / 8 S (To be si a da ed by a Registered Eng' r or Architect) Registration or Certification :-lumber K -t:l:::. 2!5) J ß Address /7lD W. Vl:E>et'nt:Ni E't,CðAJDJ~O Cf..fQ2£; Telephone ~umber ~?:> -/21 t/; 72.7 - 18/ ð . . . . - ?'. ,-" . . . . . . . . . APPENDIX "C" . . . . . . . General site DeveloDment Recommendations . . 1. Finalized development plans should incorporate these recommendations and be reviewed and approved by this office. If the finalized development plans significantly change or if they were not available at the time of this investigation, further investigation and engineering by this firm will be required. 2. Design in accordance with the latest Uniform Building Code Seismic Zone IV Specifications. Earth shaking during a seismic event should be expected to periodically affect the site and structures. . . 3. In order to maintain future site performance it is recommended that all pad drainage be collected and directed away from proposed structures: a minimum of two percent gradient should be maintained. Roof gutters and downspouts should drain away from the foundations and slabs. Installation of area drains in the yards should also be considered. In no case should water be allowed to pond or flow over slopes. The property owner (s) should be made aware that altering drainage patterns, landscaping, the addition of patios, planters, and other improvements, as well as excessive irrigation and variations in seasonal rainfall, all affect subsurface moisture conditions, which in turn affect structural performance. . . 4. All slopes within the development should be planted with appropriate ground cover vegetation to protect the slopes from erosion. Deep-rooted types of ground cover will assist in the prevention of surficial slumping. Excessive watering of the planted slopes should be avoided. An irrigation system should be installed in accordance with the governing agency. Water should not be allowed to flow over the slopes. Until the landscaping is fully established, plastic sheeting should be kept accessible to protect the slopes from periods of prolonged and/or heavy rainfall. 5. Any future structures placed on the subject property may affect the on-site drainage pattern or impact the structural integrity of the existing fill or structures. Construction of any additional future improvements not included/indicated in the initial development or grading should be reviewed by this firm prior to construction. . . 6. The homeowner(s) should be made aware of the possibility of shrinkage cracks in concrete and stucco materials. The American Concrete Institute indicates that most concrete will shrink approximately 1/8 inch with a 20-foot section. Some separation between construction and cold joints may occur and should be expected. . . . . . . . . APPENDIX "D" . . . . . . General Grading Recommendations . . 1. Grading operations on the project should be tested, inspected, and approved by a qualified geotechnical engineer. Grading should conform to the codes established by the governing agency. Grading procedures should also be completed in accordance with the enclosed "Specifications for Construction of Controlled Fills", Appendix "E", except where superseded below. . 2. It is recommended that a pre-grading meeting be held between the owner, grading contractor, and a representative from this firm to discuss the operation and to arrange a testing schedule. This office should be notified a minimum of 24 hours prior to any grading or any fill placement. 3. Testing and inspections are required any time fill is placed which exceeds 12 inches in depth under any condi tions. In addition, testing and inspections are required but not limited to the following items: building pads, street improvements, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, undercuts, trench and wall backfills, subgrade and basegrade, foundation trenches and reinforcement, and any other operations not included herein which require our testing, supervision, and inspection for certification to the appropriate agencies. . . 4. It is recommended that any septic tanks or large buried objects detected during the grading be removed. The voids should be filled with compacted soil and tested by the geotechnical engineer or his representative in charge. All existing structures which are planned to be removed should be done prior to grading operations. . . . . . . . . . . APPENDIX "E" . . . I. . . . 8/88 . SPECXFXCATXONS FOR CONSTRUCTXON OF CONTROLLED PXLLS GENERAL DESCRXPTION . 1. The following grading specifications have been prepared for the subject site and are consistent with the Preliminary Investigation Report performed by this firm. 2. The grading contractor shall be responsible to perform ground preparation and compaction of fills in strict compliance with the specifications outlined herein. All earthwork including ground preparations, placing, watering, spreading, and compacting of fills should be done under the supervision of a state registered geotechnical engineer. The project geotechnical engineer should be consulted if any deviations from the grading requirements provided herein are desired by the owner/developer. . . 3. The construction of controlled fills shall consist of clearing and removal of existing structures and foundations, preparation of land to be filled, excavation of earth and rock from cut area, compaction and control of the fill, and all other work necessary to complete the grading of the filled areas to conform with the lines, grades, and slopes as shown on the accepted plans. . . CLEARING AND PREPARATION OF AREAS TO BE FILLED 1. All fill control projects shall have a preliminary soil investigation or a visual examination (depending upon requirements of the governing agency and the nature of the job) by a qualified geotechnical engineer prior to grading. . 2. All timber, trees, brush, vegetation, and other rubbish shall be removed, piled, and burned, or otherwise disposed of to leave the prepared areas with a finished appearance, free from unsightly debris. . 3. Any soft, swampy, or otherwise unsuitable areas shall be corrected by drainage or removal of compressible material, or both, to the depths indicated on the plans and as directed by the geotechnical engineer. 4. The natural ground which is determined to be satisfactory for the support of the proposed fill shall then be plowed or scarified to a depth of at least six inches (6") or deeper as specified by the geotechnical engineer. The surface should be free from ruts, hummocks, or other uneven features which would tend to prevent uniform compaction by the equipment to be used. . 1 . . . 5. No fill shall be placed until the prepared native ground has been approved by the geotechnical engineer or his representative on site. . 6. Where fills are made on hillsides with slopes greater than 5:1 (horizontal to vertical), horizontal benches shall be cut into firm, undisturbed, natural ground. A minimum two-foot deep keyway, one blade width, should be cut. The geotechnical engineer shall determine the width and frequency of all succeeding benches which will vary with the soil conditions and the steepness of slope. 7. After the natural ground has been prepared it shall be brought to the proper moisture content and compacted to not less than 90% of maximum density per ASTM D-1557-78. . 8. Expansive soils may require special compaction specifications as directed in the preliminary soil investigation by the geotechnical engineer. 9. In order to reduce the potential for differential settlement for structures placed on a transition area of the lot, the cut portion should be undercut a minimum depth of three feet below the proposed pad grade or to a minimum depth of twelve inches below the bottom of the footing, whichever is greater, and replaced as structural fill. The undercut should extend a minimum horizontal distance of ten feet outside the building perimeter. . . 10. Caution should be used during the grading and trench excavations so that existing adjacent or underground structures/improvements are not distressed by the removals. Appropriate setbacks will be required and should be anticipated. All existing utilities on or in the vicinity of the property should be located prior to any grading or trenching operations. These precautions are the responsibility of the owner/contractor. MV ENGINEERING, INC. will not be held responsible for any damage or distress. . MATERIALS . The fill soils shall consist of select materials, graded so that at least 40 percent of the material passes the #4 sieve. The material may be obtained from the excavation, a borrow pit, or by mixing soils from one or more sources. The materials used shall be free from vegetable matter and other deleterious substances. Oversized rocks greater than two feet in maximum diameter should not be included in fills. Rocks greater than 12 inches (12") in diameter should be properly buried ten feet or more below grade, measured vertically. Rocks should be placed per project geotechnical engineer or his representative to assure filling of all voids with compacted soils. Rocks greater than six inches (6") I. . 2 . . . in diameter should not be allowed within the upper three feet of all graded pads. Rock fills require a special inspection and testing program under direct supervision of the proj ect geotechnical engineer or his representative. . If excessive vegetation, rocks, or soils with unacceptable physical characteristics are encountered these materials shall be disposed of in waste areas designated on the plans or as directed by the geotechnical engineer. No material of a perishable, spongy, or otherwise unstable nature shall be used in the fills. If soils are encountered during the grading operation which were not reported in the preliminary soil investigation further testing will be required to ascertain their engineering properties. Any special treatment recommended in the preliminary or subsequent soil reports not covered herein shall become an addendum to these specifications. . Laboratory tests should be performed on representative soil samples to be used as compacted fills in accordance with appropriate testing procedures specified by ASTM in order to determine maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of the fill soils. . . PLACING. SPREADING. AND COMPACTION 01' PILL MATERIAL 1. The selected fill material shall be placed in layers which shall not exceed six inches (6") when compacted. Each layer shall be spread evenly and shall be thoroughly blade-mixed during the spreading to insure uniformity of material and moisture in each layer. . 2. When the moisture content of the fill material is below that specified by the geotechnical engineer water shall be added until the moisture content is near optimum as determined by the geotechnical engineer to assure thorough bonding during the compaction process. This is to take place even if the proper density has been achieved without proper moisture. . 3. When the moisture content of the fill material is above that specified by the geotechnical engineer the fill material shall be aerated by blading and scarifying or other satisfactory methods until the moisture content is near optimum as determined by the geotechnical engineer. . 4. After each layer has been placed, mixed, and spread evenly it shall be thoroughly compacted to not less than the recommended minimum compaction requirements per specified maximum density in accordance with ASTM D-1557-78. Compaction shall be by means of tamping or sheepsfoot rollers, multiple-wheel pneumatic-tired rollers; or other types of rollers. Rollers shall be of such design that they will be able to compact the fill to the specified density. Rolling each layer shall be continuous over its entire I. 3 . 8 . area and the rollers shall make sufficient passes to obtain the desired density. The entire area to be filled shall be compacted to the specified density. 5. Fill slopes shall be compacted by means of sheepsfoot rollers or other suitable equipment. compacting of the slopes shall be accomplished by backrolling the slopes in increments of three to five feet (3'- 5') in elevation gain or by overfilling and cutting back to the design configuration or other methods producing satisfactory results. 8 8 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. 6. Field density tests shall be made in accordance with ASTM Method D-1556-82 by the geotechnical engineer for approximately each foot in elevation gain after compaction, but not to exceed two feet (2') in vertical height between tests. . The geotechnical engineer shall be notified to test the fill at regular intervals. If the tests have not been made after three feet of compacted fill has been placed, the contractor shall stop work on the fill until tests are made. 8 The location of the tests shall be spaced to give the best possible coverage and shall be taken no farther than 100 feet apart. Tests shall be taken on corner and terrace lots for each two feet (2') in elevation gain. The geotechnical engineer may take additional tests as considered necessary to check on the uniformity of compaction. Where sheepsfoot rollers are used, the test shall be taken in the compacted material below the disturbed surface. No additional layers of fill shall be spread until the field density tests indicate that the specified density has been obtained. 7. The fill operation shall be continued in six-inch (6") compacted layers, as specified above, until the fill has been brought to the finished slopes and grades as shown on the accepted plans. !8 8 SUPERnSJ:OH . Supervision by the geotechnical engineer or his representative shall be made during the filling and compacting operation in order to verify that the fill was constructed in accordance with the preliminary soil report or agency requirements. The specifications and soil testing of subgrade and basegrade material for roads or other public property shall be done in accordance with specifications of the governing agency unless otherwise directed. . 4 . . . It should be understood that the contractor shall supervise and direct the work and shall be responsible for all construction means, methods, techniques, sequences, and procedures. The contractor will be solely and completely responsible for conditions at the job site, including safety of all persons and property during the performance of the work. Intermittent or continuous inspection by the geotechnical engineer is not intended to include review of the adequacy of the contractor's safety measures in, on, or near the construction site. . SEASONAL L:IH:I'1'S . No fill material shall be placed, spread, or rolled during unfavorable weather conditions. When the work is interrupted by heavy rain, grading shall not be resumed until field tests by the geotechnical engineer indicate that the moisture content and density of the fill are as previously specified. In the event that, in the opinion of the engineer, soils unsatisfactory as foundation material are encountered, they shall not be incorporated in the grading: disposition will be made at the engineer's discretion. . . 8 18 18 . 5 8 . . UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION Iden~ifvina Cri~eria . I. COARSE GRAINED (more than 50% larger than #200 sieve). Gravels (more than 50% larger than #4 sieve but smaller than 3"), non-plastic. . . . Sands (more than 50% smaller than #4 sieve), non-plastic. . . II. PINE GRAINED (more than 50% smaller than #200 sieve) . Liquid Limit less than 50. . . . Svmbol GW GP GM GC SW SP SM SC ML CL Soil DescriÐ~ioD Gravel, well-graded gravel- sand mixture, little or no fines. Gravel, poorly graded, gravel-sand mixture, little or no fines. Gravel, silty, poorly graded, gravel-sand-silt mixtures. Gravel, clayey, poorly graded, gravel-sand-clay mixtures. Sand, well-graded, gravelly sands, little or no fines. Sand, poorly graded gravelly sand, little or no fines. Sand, silty, poorly graded, sand-silt mixtures. Sand, clayey, poorly graded, sand-clay mixtures. Silt, inorganic silt and fine sand, sandy silt or clayey-silt-sand mixtures with slight plasticity. Clay, inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly clays, sandy clays, silty clays, lean clays. . unified Soil Classification Page 2 . II. PIHB aMIHBD - continued Liquid Limit greater than 50. . . . III. HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS . . . . . . OL MIl CH OH PT Silt, orqanic, silts and orqanic silts-clays of low plasticity. Silt, inorganic silts, micaceous or dictomaceous, fine sand or silty soils, elastic silts. Clay, inorganic, clays of medium to high plasticity, fat clays. Clay, organic clays of medium to high plasticity. Peat, other highly organic swamp soils. 7 r - 1 da , 9l t�•Gll oN 133,0ad AaoM $7!91 -00 • a�-o�-� a�3N»N� � � �Iyo�y Q�NP�M�o •o2 : yro�r o�ro23Y 30 43 133HS :3140 �31va • •O 3 - V /y / � A aly d Y 7/? �1WN Y .�+�.�/Yl�11�� x(..117 - - , t7� s�rl ,l'd 7�I ONt�YD'� �3 5,4I >�� G1/YV50�tl Irl, v ate - n .�� JIY OIYY #.3JA Y 73 0 1Y)XP2 7j :1IYl b'0� N5 •A8 310 .� 7331910 0,00 1/�p�ldpl D5 PIN W A U :oWo.� /YP �d PIY/op4yv� "WIN - = ___ - m:: ____ Am HOWA No 03/10dddV 030NW4003H 30 NOIS1N83dns 830Nn (138Vd38d SNtT3d 3140 S30N3t13.�3a 31110 03n0addtf SNOIS!A3?� AS CJ351D -p D M - ON ONIMVHCI ._N3V4l8Vd3a SMOM X118 n d �d11N1�N� �c"� Jl�.l.1"1�Jto = 0 Z O 0 C) 06 # SOr •ONI ONI833NION3 AN Z U Z 066 J HvnNv cj31V(l 180d38 31vadn ON1833NION3 /1W 30N383J38 m M M U) m Z _- C/7 m , o r . n d� 9031 yd1lmoJ/ 0 �N x.11,5 3AY00d Ato MOO N - a l' o / 31 d/�l�d end„ �• ti , X, ) A - o �I A 4 21 1 r `R Q�,y d 9 l ✓/� /Uhf NOUV00 lid 1S31 _ _ O lt GN303 1 ✓ r-- : �� t � ...., J am•• �� _ I MW - ' oil 01 dAl�y 4.7 0-1 LOP , r 111 I f ., , •-' ` J n rul, �l � �Q y1 Z � t� , 41 dl 5 • / / � _ . - _ `'`.,, •., `,,.. - � - • • �;w' IV d/Yl5 37 a390do�►+d 'd•�2 O HldV -� i• a .J • (N�5 .��3t1� dill -��n►� ,,- ,�� l -- ,...•-- . --•- -- � °�� - s� _ - i p f ° 0 o � •NJIN - d r , r771�M � � d1�Y 1 � �No5 jvyop •- ^ . r r ( )Y;Pa) ' 7PJD1 dPW -dlX ;�•� � •I . - 1jYNdj � Y31 X ,M3170 i�N A01dd/Sf/addd•dljl19Y /,3dA1 77PJ' NVI