The URL can be used to link to this page

1995-4248 G Street Address .ðr~ <; I 4 5C 3 ( Serial # Category t!;}L1 <g 61 Name I Description Plan ck. # Year recdescv > THE NORTH COUNTY ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP BY: ~ DATE:.2La§ Page No: 1 PROJECT: PROPOSE~NGA REStQ..ENCE REFERENCE: GRADING PERMIT ~ ~2Á'ð -~ WATERSHEAD LESS THAN.5 SQUARE MILE USE RATIONAL METHOD a = CIA C = .55 (SEMI-RURAL) Tc = (10 MINUTES - MIN - NO SIGNIFICANT OFFSITE WATER SOURCES) 1100 = 7.44 (PS>D-.645 = 7.44(3.0)(10-'~ = 5.05 IN/HR SAY 5.5 IN/HR 1100 = 5.5 (CONSERVATIVE) A = 1.2 ACRE .Q100 = (.55)(5.5)(1.2) = 3.6a...Qf /S SAY 3.7 CF /S (V~Y CO~ FOR COMPUTER MODEL, USE 'TWO SEPARATE UNES, EACH TAKING 50% OF EXPECTED SITE RUNOFF I.E. 0100 = 1.85 IN COMPUTER MODEL * SEE ATTACHED COMPUTER ANALYSIS FOR OVERFLOW PIPE SIZING AND ASSOCIATED ANALYSIS. JOB NO. 475 CARMEL STREET. SAN MARCOS. C4 . 92069 . (619)752-7010 . (619)752-7092-FAX Page 1 of 2 Circular Channel Analysis & Design Solved with Manning's Equation Open Channel - Uniform flow Worksheet Name: KROMINGA Description: Solve For Full Flow Diameter Given Constant Data; Mannings n......... 0.010 Va iable Input Data Minimum Maximum Increment By -- ---------------- -- ---------------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ============ 0.0200 0.93 0.1400 3.72 0.0200 0.93 COMPUTED VARIABLE VARIABLE COMPUTED COMPUTED COMPUTED ------------------ ------------------ ==================================== Diameter Channel ft Slope ft/ft Mannings Discharge Depth In' cfs ft Velocity Capacity fps Full cfs = ---------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------- 0.48 0.0200 0.010 0.93 0.48 5.12 0.93 0.42 0.0400 0.010 0.93 0.42 6.64 0.93 0.39 0.0600 0.010 0.93 0.39 7.73 0.93 0.37 0.0800 0.010 0.93 0.37 8.61 0.93 0.36 0.1000 0.010 0.93 0.36 9.36 0.93 0.34 0.1200 0.010 0.93 0.34 10.02 0.93 0.33 0.1400 0.010 0.93 0.33 10.62 0.93 0.62 0.0200 0.010 1.86 0.62 6.09 1.86 0.55 0.0400 0.010 1.86 0.55 7.90 1.86 0.51 0.0600 0.010 1.86 0.51 9.19 1.86 0.48 0.0800 0.010 1.86 0.48 10.24 1.86 0.46 0.1000 0.010 1.86 0.46 11.13 1.86 0.45 0.1200 0.010 1.86 0.45 11.92 1.86 0.43 0.1400 0.010 1.86 0.43 12.63 1.86 0.73 0.0200 0.010 2.79 0.73 6.74 2.79 0.64 0.0400 0.010 2.79 0.64 8.74 2.79 0.59 0.0600 0.010 2.79 0.59 10.17 2.79 0.56 0.0800 0.010 2.79 0.56 11.33 2.79 0.54 0.1000 0.010 2.79 0.54 12.32 2.79 0.52 0.1200 0.010 2.79 0.52 13.19 2.79 0.50 0.1400 0.010 2.79 0.50 13.98 2.79 * * 0.81 0.0200 0.010 3.72 0.81 7.24 3.72 0.71 0.0400 0.010 3.72 0.71 9.39 3.72 0.66 0.0600 0.010 3.72 0.66 10.93 3.72 0.62 0.0800 0.010 3.72 0.62 12.18 3.72 0.60 0.1000 0.010 3.72 0.60 13.24 3.72 0.58 0.1200 0.010 3.72 0.58 14.18 3.72 0.56 0.1400 0.010 3.72 0.56 15.02 3.72 * 1/4 SITE AREA - USE 6" DIA PIPE WITH 2% MIN SLOPE 1/2 SITE AREA - USE 6" DIA PIPE WITH 2% MIN SLOPE FULL SITE AREA - USE 8" PIPE @ 4% MIN SLOPE ~ JI1I¡;n.u II'""VUIY'"8" "...,aun ..."",.. JC. .1 5 6 10 15 20 Minutes 30 40 50 1 4 2 . 3 DIWi\ t f on Hours *Not Applicable to Desert Region ., . APPENDIX XI IV-A-14 Revised 1/85 'I .. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ., .... fLOOD CONTROL ,-'- ItS' 30' IS' r- I .338 "5' - P",,"I'" br u.s. DEPARHŒNJr OF COMMERCE NATIONAL OC¡;t\:-öIC MIO "'I':~O:"'III¡:WC AO~,.:ïrR"TIOH JCIAa. nUOE$ U 1"'111 CII, OnlCa:: Of 111oIIOLOO\'. N^"fION,\L Wa::t\TIla::Ø U;rWICf; 30' ,- 1111" 115 . )01 I'i I II ~i . ]0' '!i' I '6" C~ITY OF SAN DIEGO ., W' fLOOD COUTROL . 30' i I . J 118' 45' 30' I 15' : I -9- .' 338 45' -.---..--. "'.."-- -. _1 . P'.p. :4 II" U.S. OEPARTMEN I' OF COMAtERCE IfATIO:lAL OCt:M"C AND ATo OSl'lIiWIC ADJ,:J:-4ISTRATION PICIAL STUDIES DRMICII. orriCK Ofll UROLOgy. "ATIONAL u,'EATIIER I.HYJCI IS' lit 30' 15' 1168 .::J.7 O(}2 :='1 I -;J "7 v:x; MV ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #102 Escondida, California 92029-1229 619/743-1214 Fax: 739-0343 U ?C>f\\E R equ I \2- ÞD October 29, 1991 §.~,:; '..J. ; I. .ÅJ. i....:. ) "'¡ v. tju . MAR 2 4 1995 ENGINE ¡= ¡:, , 'iCny !:¡1INGSERViCES OF ENCINITAS . ""'-----"'-50 \ L-- P-&I t-J~ t-\fr<> NO \ pp¡ \ ç:uJ~ ~~ ~ç f\> 'Sù'ßri tlTt=D y-22;91) Job 11355-87 "- c., ;" Mr. Dave Krominga Jen Rose Development Co. 1449 Santa Fe Drive Encinitas, CA 92024 Update Report of preliminary Soil Investigations, Parcels 3 and 4. Seeman Drive. Encinitas. California , Pursuant to your request, we have prepared the following update soil investigation report for the above-referenced site. We have reviewed our original report and subsequent update, Job #1355-87, dated August 26, 1987 and March 23, 1989, respectively, in connec- tion with the preparation of this transmittal. The purpose of this transmittal was to review our previous reports and provide addi- tional comments and recommendations considering current standards of engineering practice, if necessary. site surface and subsurface geotechnical conditions have primarily remained the same since our previous investigation and update report. Based upon our review and site conditions, conclusions and recommendations provided in our previous Update Report Job #1355- 87 dated March 23, 1989 are still valid and should be incorporated into the final designs and implemented during the construction phase. . ,. Revised and/or additional foundation and slab recommendations may be necessary and will be provided at the completion of rough grading in the proj ect rough grading compaction report. The recommendations will be based upon final soil mixture at finish grade elevations which cannot be accurately predicted at this time. Final grading and building foundation plans/details should also be reviewed and approved by this office prior to the initiation of actual construction. Additional recommendations will be provided at that time, if necessary. MV ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #102 Escondida, California 92025-1330 619/743-1214 Job #1355-87 March 23, 1989 Mr. Lee Rotsheck T'LDC, Inc. 345 First street, Suite C1 Encinitas, California 92024 Update Report of Preliminary Soil Investigation, Seeman Drive, Encinitas Pursuant to your request MV Engineering, Inc. has prepared this update of the subj ect report that was issued by this office in August, 1987, Job #1355-87. On March 16, 1989 a visual inspection of the above-mentioned property was conducted by our project geologist. Based upon the fteld observations the property appears to be in a similar con~i~ion as described in the subject report. - The conclusions and recommendations provided in our report dated August 26, 1987 are still valid and should be incorporated in the design and implemented during construction of the planned development unless superseded below. It is our understanding that each parcel is planned to be developed individually and mass grading of the property is not planned. It is further understood that the individual proposed development for each parcel will consist of a single-family residence on each lot. The exact nature of building construction, location of the planned buildings, and the extent of grading for each individual lot was not known at the time of this investigation. Site-speçific grading and foundation recommendations. for each parcel can not be provided until the actual development and improvement plans are known. However, for design and cost estimating purposes only, the preliminary grading and foundation recommendations provided herein may be used. A. 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 "A", except where superseded below. " '\ , TLDC, Inc. March 23, 1989 Page 2 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 conditions. 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. 5. Use cut and fill ratios of "2: 1 (horizontal to vertical) for overall gross slope stability. It is recommended that the fill slopes be overbuilt and cut back to the" design configuration. / 6. 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 12 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, or as directed in. the field. Footings that straddle a cut/fill interface with more than five feet difference in fill thickness between the undercut portions and the filled ground are recommended to be provided with additional reinforcement consisting of one additional #4 bar, top and bottom, extending approximately ten feet on either side of the cut/fill line. These precautions will decrease the potential of cracking of the slab along the daylight line. The excavated area must be inspected by the geotechnical engineer or his representative on site to verify the actual subsurface conditions and exact depths. MV ENGINEERING, INC. . 2450 VINEYARD AVENUE, #102 . ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92025-1330 . 619/743-1214 SOILS TESTING PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS . ' , TLDC, Inc. March 23, 1989 Page 4 B. Preliminary Grading Recommendations 1. Earth Materials used for Fill Construction - The soils encountered and observed on the property will be sui table for reuse in planned fills after they have been properly processed as described herein or as directed in the field by the geotechnical engineer or his representative. All earth materials used as compacted fills should not contain any foreign debris or organic matter. All scattered trash and debris should be removed from the subject property and properly disposed of prior to any grading operations. . 2. Removals and Recompaction - The recommended removals and recompaction requirements outlined below are for the areas of the subject property which are planned to support fill or any other improvements such as all building structures, slabs, driveways, .roads, and parking unless otherwise specified below. The vertical and horizontal removal limits 'provided below are preliminary and are to be verified during grading by the geotechnical engineer. (a) Building structures and Fill Areas - In their present condition the upper soils over the ent~re site are not sui table for the support of structures or fill. The upper soils should be excavated down to firm competent formational sandstone material and recompacted to a minimum of 90% of the corresponding maximum dry density and required moisture content. The excavations will be on the order of two to three feet below existing grades and a minimum horizontal distance of ten feet outside the perimeter of the proposed building or as directed by the geotechnical engineer in the field. The exact depths to firm formational sandstone material cannot always be predicted and will vary throughout the site. The actual removals will be determined during the grading by the geotechnical engineer or his representative on the site. (b) stem-Wall Construction - In the event stem-wall construction using raised-wood type flooring is planned for the building structures, the removal and recompaction recommendations outlined above should be implemented in those MV ENGINEERING, INC. . 2450 VINEYARD AVENUE, #102 . ESCONDlDO, CALIFORNIA 92025.1330 . 619/743-1214 SOILS TESTING PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS . ' , TLDC, Inc. March 23, 1989 Page 5 areas of the residence which are planned to support slabs-on-grade. The removals should extend a minimum horizontal distance of ten feet beyond the slab perimeter. We recommend this area 'should be graded prior to the excavation of the footing trenches. Recommendations for stem-wall foundations are given in the foundation section of this report. (c) On-Site Roadway, Driveway, and Parking Areas - The soils beneath the proposed roadways, driveways, and parking should be excavated to firm native material or a minimum of three feet below the proposed subgrade and recompacted to 90% of the corresponding maximum dry density. The removals should extend a minimum horizontal distance of five feet outside the proposed perimeter. C. Post Rough Grading 1. Roadway, Driveway, and Parking Subgrade - After completion of the ground preparations outlined above the upper 12 inches of the subgrade soils beneath the roadway, driveway, and parking areas should be scarified and recompacted to a minimum of 95% of the corresponding maximum dry density at the required moisture content. 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. 2. structural sections for roadway and parking designs will be determined at the completion of grading with the appropriate sampling and laboratory testing. .-- ", ' ""'~ .--- 3. 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 concrete paving or pouring operations. D. Foundation and Slab Recommendations The following minimum requirements are recommended for foundations and floor slabs supported on properly recompacted fill soils or firm competent formational sandstone. All grading should follow the recommendations given in the previous section "Grading" and in the enclosed Appendix "A". MV ENGINEERING, INC. . 2450 VINEYARD AVENUE. #102 . ESCONDIDO, CAL.IFORNIA 92025-1330 . 6191743-1214 SOilS TESTING PEIIC TEST SOil INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS - ' TLDC, Inc. March 23, 1989 Page 6 The foundation and slab recommendations provided below are for the specific soil/rock types encountered and tested during our subsoil investigation and do not reflect final soil mixtures which will likely result from grading. 1. Foundation and slab recommendations non-expansive Soil Types 1 and 2: for the granular These are preliminary recommendations for cost and design estimating purposes only and are to be confirmed at the completion of finish grading. A rough grading compaction report will be issued at the completion of grading which will provide the appropriate foundation and slab recommendations. (a) It is recommended that conventional continuous and/or isolated footings be used in accordance with the latest 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; minimum depths are measured from the lowest adjacent ground surface not including the sand/gravel under the slab). (b) All interior and exterior footings should be reinforced wi th two #4 reinforcing bars, one bar placed three inches below the top and the other bar placed three inches above the bottom of the footing. (c) Use minimum 6x6/10x10 welded wirè mesh placed mid-height in all slabs and a minimum of four inches of clean sand under all slabs. Special attention should be given to the re-entrant corners (~270° corners) and curing pract~ces during and after concrete pour. All slabs should be a minimum of three and one-half inches in thickness. Provide weakened plane joints spaced 12 feet on center each way for all slabs. (d) Plastic moisture barrier: A plastic moisture barrier is optional for interior slabs-on-grade floors. Based upon our observations slabs-on-grade will absorb some ground moisture and, under certain conditions without the precaution of placing a plastic moisture barrier in the slab, moisture accumulation beneath floor coverings (carpeting, etc.) may result. Therefore, we recommend a plastic moisture barrier be implemented for all slabs-on-grade. In the event a plastic moisture barrier is utilized the barrier should be a minimum of six-mil thickness and placed mid-height in the sand. MV ENGINEERING, INC. . 2450 VINEYARD AVENUE, #102 . ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92025-1330 . 619/743-1214 SOilS TESTING PEIIC TEST SOil INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS . . TLDC, Inc. March 23, 1989 Page 7 (e) An allowable soil bearing pressure of 1500 psf may be used for footings supported entirely on properly compacted, . non-expansive fill or 2000 psf for footings supported on dense and competent sandstone. 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. This value should be verified at the completion of rough grading. The allowable soil bearing pressures provided herein are determined for footings having a minimum width of 12 inches and a minimum depth of 12 inches below the adj acent ground surface. These values may be increased per Uniform Building Code for additional depths and widths if needed. .2. If stern-wall construction is recommendations should be adhered to. planned the following (a) All load bearing and non-load bearing foundations should penetrate the upper loose/compressible soils and be embedded a minimum of 12 inches for one-story and 18 inches for two-story structures into dense undisturbed formational sandstone.' The condi tion of the sandstone material is to be verified by the geotechnical engineer or project geologist. Footings should be 12 inches wide for a single-story building and 15 inches wide for a two-story building. Interior and exterior footings should also be reinforced with minimum two #4 bars, one bar placed three inches below the top of the footing and one bar placed three inches above the bottom of the footing. Reinforcement recomméndations given above are provided for the portion of the footing embedded into the competent formational sandstone only. Reinforcements for the stern-wall . portion of the foundations should be designed by a structural engineer. (b) The depths to the. formational sandstone and the condition of the upper exposures of the dense sandstone material will vary throughout the site. The excavated footing trenches should be inspected by the geotechnical engineer or proj ect geologist in order to verify the subsurface conditions exposed in the footing trenches. This footing inspection should occur prior to placement of the foundation forms and steel reinforcement so that in the event deeper excavations are necessary, additional costs to remove the steel and forms are not incurred. MV ENGINEERING, INC. . 2450 VINEYARD AVENUE, #102 . ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92025-1330 . 619/743.1214 SOilS TESTING PERC TEST SOil INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS - , , TLDC, Inc. March 23, 1989 Page 8 (c) All footings should be cleaned out so that all loose soil materials are removed from the bottom. (d) ~ll footing reinforcement should be inspected and verified prior to pouring the foundations. Additional engineering recommendations will be given at that time if necessary. (e) All recommended foundation and slab reinforcement should be inspected by the proj ect engineer prior to pouring the foundations. Additional engineering recommendations will be given at that time if necessary. 3. Footings located on or adjacent to the top of slopes should be extended to a sufficient depth to provide 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. . 4. During the grading of the site it is probable that the on-site soils will be mixed; therefore, further laboratory testing and additional engineering will be necessary. Revised foundation recommendations should be anticipated. E. Earth Pressures/Retaining 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). Specific drainage provisions behind retaining wall structures should be verified by this office. 2. The following lateral soil pressure values are for the on-site granular and non-expansive Soil Type 2 and assume drained and level backfill conditions. Additional active pressures for surcharge loading due to adj acent structures should be incorporated by the structural engineer. 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. These values do not include hydrostatic pressures. MV ENGINEERING, INC. . 2450 VINEYARD AVENUE, #102 . ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92025-1330 . 619ì743-1214 SOILS TESTING PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGA TIONS . . TLDC, Inc. . March 23, 1989 Page 9 Active Pressure = 37 pcf equivalent fluid pressure At Rest Pressure = 57 pcf equivalent fluid pressure *Passive Pressure = 421 pcf equivalent fluid pressure 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 factor of safety of two. 3. A coefficient of friction of 0.40 may be considered for concrete on granular non-expansive soils. This value is to be verified at the completion of grading when the properties of the subgrade soils are specifically known. F. General Site Development 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 MV ENGINEERING, INC. . 2450 VINEYARD AVENUE, #102 . ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92025-1330 . 619/743-1214 SOilS TESTING PEIIC TEST SOil INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS TLDC, Inc. March 23, 1989 Page 10 prevention of surficial slumping. Excessive watering of the planted slopes should be avoided. An irrigation system should be installed in accordance with the governing agencies. 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 integri ty 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 within a 20-foot section. Some separation between construction and cold joints may occur and should be expected. LIMITATIONS The conclusions and recommendations provided herein have been based on all available, data obtained from our previous 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 discrepancies 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. MV ENGINEERING, INC. . 2450 VINEYARD AVENUE, #102 . ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA 92025-1330 . 619/743-1214 SOILS TESTING PEIIC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS . , TLDC, Inc. March 23, 1989 Page 11 It is almost impossible to predict with certainty the future performance 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. This firm has prepared this report in accordance with generally accepted engineering practice and makes no other warranties, either expressed or implied, as to the professional advice provided under the terms of the agreement and included in this report. Once again, should any questions. arise concerning this report, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Reference to our Job #1355-87 will expedite response to your inquiries. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you. RMV/kmh MVENGINEERING,INC, . 2450 VINEYARD AVENUE, #102 . ESCONDIDO,CALIFORNIA 92025-1330 . 619/743-1214 SOILS TESTING PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS , APPENDIX "A" . . , 8/88 SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF CONTROLLED FILLS GENERAL DESCRIPTION 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 consul ted if any deviations from the grading requirements provided herein are desired by the owner/contractor. 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 A. 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. B. All timber, trees, brush, vegetation, and other rubbish shall be removed, pi led, and burned, or otherwise di sposed of to leave the prepared areas wi th a finished appearance, free from unsightly debris. c. 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. D. 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. . . È: No fill shall be placed until the prepared native ground has been approved by the geotechnical engineer or his representative on site. F. 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. G.' 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. H. Expansive soils may require special compaction specifications as directed in the preliminary soil investigation by the geotechnical engineer. 1. In order to reduce the potential for differential settlement for structures placed on a transi tion 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. The excavated area must be inspected by the geotechnical engineer or his representative on site to verify the actual subsurface conditions and depths. J. Caution should be used during the grading and trench excavations so that existing adj acent 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. Overs ized rocks greater than tvlO 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 , . 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 LIMITS 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 engin.er's discretion. - .. . . . each layer shall be continuous over its entire 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. E. 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. 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. F. Field density tests Method D-1556-82 approximately each but not to exceed tests. shall be made in accordance with ASTM by the geotechnical engineer for foot in elevation gain after compaction, two feet (2') in vertical height between 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. 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. G. 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. SUPERVISION 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. . . . - . . proj ect geotechnical engineer or his represen ta ti ve to assure filling of all voids with compacted soils. Rocks greater than six inches ( 6" ) in diameter should not be allowed wi thin the upper three feet of all graded pads. Rock fills require a special inspection and testing program under direct supervision of the project 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 OF FILL MATERIAL A. 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. B. 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. C. 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. o. 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 0-1557-78. 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 : -' . UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION Identifying Criteria 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. FINE GRAINED (more than 50% smaller than #200 sieve) Liquid Limit less than 50 Symbol GW GP GM GC SW SP SM SC ML CL Soil Description 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. .. . . . .- . II. III. FINE GRAINED - continued Liquid Limit greater than 50 HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS OL MH CH OH PT Silt, organic, silts and organic silt-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. 6 - CJ'..s - -.s-ð- , / VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. Job #95-154-F 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #102 Escondido, California 92029-1229 March 30, 1995 '" ~';~¡) , " /::;" '-> Phone (619) 743-1214 Fax (619) 739-0343 UPDATE OF COMPACTION REPORT FOR PARCELS #3 AND #4. SEEMAN DRIVE. ENCINITAS .:;::;" "'h 4~ (--"~:1 - ~ '.'. ".,', 'T , <'¿.':<::',>, .I 0 0,: ?:~', /C' ""'.,,.'r,:, "'I) <>':"""', "'ð' ' !<~1;:;!:>, '-;~i'\~', Jen Rose Development Company Attn: Mr. Dave Krominga 1449 Santa Fe Drive Encinitas, California 92024 In accordance with your request this update report is written to bring the foundation recommendations put forth in any previous reports into current standards and to discuss remedial grading that will be required prior to construction of the proposed residence. The following documents have been reviewed in order to provide this update report: I. REFERENCES A. "Preliminary Soil Investigation, Proposed Single-Family Residences, Seeman Drive, Encinitas, California", pre- pared by MV Engineering, Inc., Job #1355-87, dated August 26, 1987. B. "Update Report of Preliminary Soil Investigation, Seeman Drive, Encinitas" prepared by MV Engineering, Inc., Job #1355-87, dated March 23, 1989. C. "Final As-Graded Compaction Report For Parcel #2, 213 Seeman Drive, Drawing #9556F, Encinitas" prepared by MV Engineering, Inc., Job #1189-90, dated June 6, 1990. D. Current grading plan prepared by Engineering Design Group. II. SITE INFORMATION Notes from MV Engineering's files, Job #1025-91 indicate that limited grading on Parcels #1, #3, and #4 started on February 11, 1991 and continued sporadically until February 18, 1991, at which time grading was stopped. There is no indication that they were ever called back to the site as no final as-graded reports were ever issued. A site inspection was made by a representative from this office on March 24, 1995, and found Parcels #3 and #4 to be partially graded as MV Engineering Inc. reported them to be as of February 1991. Jen Rose Development Company Attn: Mr. Dave Krominga March 30, 1995/paqe 2 It is our understanding cut/fill grading operations will be used to construct a building pad for the proposed single-family resi- dence. III. RECOMMENDATIONS A. Remedial Gradina 1. All trash, debris, vegetation, and nursery related items are / to be removed from the area to be graded. 2. The upper soils are not suitable for the support of fills or structures in their present condition and should be removed to competent bedrock materials and/or previously compacted soils and recompacted prior to fill placement. Estimated removal depths of 2 feet are expected. Removal operations should be inspected and approved by the project geotechnical engineer or his field representative prior to scarifying the bottom of the excavation. 3. The bottom of the removals should be scarified to a minimum depth of 12 inches, moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content, and compacted to a minimum of 90% of the corresponding laboratory maximum dry density (ASTM D-1557- 91) prior to backfilling. 4. All fills should be moisture conditioned to near optimum levels and mechanically compacted in thin horizontal lifts to a minimum of 90% of the laboratory maximum density (ASTM D-1557-91). 5. Fill slopes should be compacted to a minimum of 90% of the laboratory maximum density value out to the slope face. Overbuilding and cutting back to the compacted core or back- rolling at 3-foot vertical increments and "track walking" are recommended. 6. All graded slopes should be constructed in general accordance with the attached Typical Key and Benching Details, Plates #1 and 2, and as directed in the field by the project geo- technical consultant. 7. Cut/fill transition should not occur beneath the building pad or associated structures. The cut portion of the building pad should be undercut a minimum of 3 feet or 12 inches below the bottom of the deepest foundation as generally indicated in the attached Typical Undercutting Detail, Plate #3. VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue,IH02, Escondida, California 92029-1229 . Phone (619) 743-1214 . Fax (619) 739-0343 SOIL TESTING PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS Jen Rose Development Company Attn: Mr. Dave Krominga March 30, 1995/page 3 8. site grading operations should be inspected and appropriate testing conducted by the project geotechnical engineer or his field representative during the grading operation, especially during fill placement when full-time inspection may be required. B. Foundations. Slab-On-Grade: Previous testing by MV Engineering, Inc. indicates that there are no clayey soils; the predominate soils are granular non-expansive sandstones. Therefore, the following recommendations for granular non-expansive soils are to be adhered to, incorporated into the foundation plans, and submitted to our office for review and approval prior to con- struction. PLEASE NOTE THAT THESE RECOMMENDATIONS SUPERSEDE THOSE PUT FORTH IN ANY PREVIOUS REPORTS. 1. Foundations for stud bearing walls are to be used in accor- dance 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 fo9tings should be at least 18 inches by 18 inches wide and 18 inches deep for one and two-story structures. Minimum depths are measured from the lowest adjacent ground surface, not including the sand/gravel under the slab. 2. Use two #4 reinforcing bars in all interior and exterior stud bearing wall footings. Place one bar 3 inches below the top of the footing or stem and one bar 3 inches above the bottom of the footing. Reinforcement for isolated square footings should be designed by the project structural engineer. 3. All interior slabs must be a minimum of 4 inches in thickness reinforced with #3 reinforcing bars spaced 15 inches on center each way, placed midheight in the slab. Use 4 inches of clean sand (SE 30 or greater) beneath all slabs. A six- mil plastic moisture barrier must be placed midheight in the sand. 4. The minimum steel reinforcement provided herein is based on soil characteristics only and is not intended to be in lieu of reinforcement necessary for structural considerations. 5. Provide contraction joints consisting of sawcuts spaced 12 feet on center each way within 72 hours of concrete pour for all interior slabs. The sawcuts 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. VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #102, Escondida, California 92029.1229 . Phone (619) 743-1214 . Fax (619) 739.0343 OIL TESTING PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS Jen Rose Development Company Attn: Mr. Dave Krominga March 30, 1995/Page 4 6. 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. Care should be taken not to crush the utilities or pipes during the compaction of the trench backfill. 7. All exterior slabs (walkways, patios, etc.) must be a minimum of 4 inches in thickness reinforced with 6x6/10x10 welded wire mesh placed midheight in the slab. Provide contraction joints consisting of sawcuts spaced 6 feet on center each way within 72 hours of concrete pour. The depths of the sawcuts should be as described in Item #5 above. 8. This office is to be notified to inspect following prior to foundation concrete pours: or test the (a) Inspect the plumbing trenches beneath slabs after the pipes are laid and prior to backfilling. (b) Test the plumbing trenches beneath slabs for minimum compaction requirements. (c) Inspect the footing trenches for proper width, depth, reinforcing size, and placement. Inspect the slabs for proper thickness, reinforcing size and placement, sand thickness, and moisture barrier placement. 9. Previous testing indicates that an allowable bearing capacity of 1,500 psf for continuous and isolated footings may be used for footings supported entirely on properly compacted fill derived from the onsite soils. 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 allowable soil bearing pressure provided herein was deter- mined for footings having a minimum width of 12 inches and a minimum depth of 12 inches below the lowest adj acent ground surface. This value may be increased per Uniform Building Code for additional depths and widths if needed. C. Retaininq Walls, Lateral Load Parameters 1. Previous testing indicates that lateral design loads of 37, 57, and 421 pcf be used as equivalent fluid pressures for the active, at rest, and passive condi tions respectively for retaining walls with a drained and level backfill condition, and using on-site non-expansive backfill soil. Use a coefficient of friction of 0.40 for concrete on soil. Use an allowable bearing capacity of 1,500 psf as described in Item #9 above. VlNJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING. INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, IH02, Escondido, California 92029-1229 . Phone (619) 743-1214 . Fax (619) 739-0343 SOIL TESTING PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS Jen Rose Development Company Attn: Mr. Dave Krominga March 30, 1995/page 5 2. All retaining walls should be provided with a drain along the backside as generally shown on the attached Retaining Wall Drain Detail, Plate #4. Specific drainage provisions behind retaining wall structures must be inspected by this office prior to backfilling the wall. All backfill soils must be compacted to a minimum of 90% of the corresponding maximum dry density, ASTM 1557-91. Note: Because large movements must take place before maximum passive resistance can be developed, use a minimum safety factor of 2.0 for wall sliding stability. D. Setbacks 1. Footings located on or adjacent to the top of slopes should be extended to a sufficient depth to provide a minimum horizontal distance of 7J~~j: or one-third of the slope height, whichever is greater (need not exceed 40 feet maximum) between the bottom edge of the footing and face of slope. 2. 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 BE REQUIRED. ,-",- 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 recommenda- tions are believed to be reasonable and in keeping with the local standards of construction practice. Special attention should be given to any lire-entrant" corners (1:270 degree corners) as indicated on the Isolation Joints and Re-Entrant Corner Reinforcement, Plate #5, and curing practices during and after concrete pour in order to further minimize shrinkage cracks. E. SloDes: All slopes should be landscaped with types of plants and planting that do not require excessive irrigation. Excess watering of slopes should be avoided. Slopes left unplanted will be subject to erosion. The irrigation system should be installed in accordance with the governing agencies. VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #102, Escondida, California 92029-1229 . Phone (619) 743-1214 . Fax (619) 739-0343 SOIL TESTING PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS Jen Rose Development Company Attn: Mr. Dave Krominga March 30, 1995/page 6 Water should not be allowed to flow over the slopes in an uncontrolled manner. Until landscaping is fully established, plastic sheeting should be kept accessible to protect the slopes from periods of prolonged and/or heavy rainfall. 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 prior to the project being completed. F. Drainaqe: 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 proper- ties are directed away from proposed structures. A minimum of two percent gradient should be maintained away from all founda- tions. Roof gutters and downspouts should be installed on the building. All discharge from downspouts should be led away from the foundations and slab. Installation of area drains in the yards should also be considered. In no case should water be allowed to pond or flow over slopes. It should be noted that shallow groundwater conditions may still develop in areas where no such conditions existed prior to site development. This can be contributed to by substantial increases of surface water infiltration resulting from landscape irrigation which was not present before the development of the site. It is almost impossible to absolutely prevent the possibility of shallow groundwater on the entire site; there- fore, we recommend that shallow groundwater conditions be remedied if and when they develop. The property owner should be made aware that altering drainage patterns, landscaping, the addition of patios, planters, and other improvements, as well as over irrigation and variations in seasonal rainfall, all affect subsurface moisture conditions, which in turn affect structural performance. IV. GENERAL INFORMATION It should be noted that the characteristics of as-compacted fill may change due to post-construction changes from cycles of drying and wetting, water infiltration, applied loads, environmental changes, etc. These changes can cause detrimental changes in the fill characteristics such as in strength behavior, compressibility behavior, volume change behavior, permeability, etc. VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, ¡H02, Escondido, California 92029.1229 . Phone (619) 743.1214 . Fax (619) 739-0343 SOIL TESTING PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS Jen Rose Development Company Attn: Mr. Dave Krominga March 30, 1995/page 7 The owner/developer should be made aware of the possibility of shrinkage cracks in concrete and stucco materials. The American Concrete Institute indicates that most concrete shrinks about 1/8- inch in 20 feet. Separation between construction and cold joints should also be expected. This office is to be notified no later than 3 p.m. on the day before any of the following operations begin to schedule appropriate testing and/or inspections. A. Fill placed under any conditions 12 inches or more in depth, to include: 1. Building pads. 2. Street improvements, sidewalks, curbs and gutters. 3. utility trench backfills. 4. Retaining wall backfills. 5. The spreading or placement of soil obtained excavation (footing or pool, etc.). from any B. Subgrade and basegrade preparation and testing. C. Moisture testing. D. Foundation inspections. E. Any operation not included herein which requires our testing, supervision, and inspection for certification to the appropriate agencies. V. LIMITATIONS Our description of grading operations, as well as observations and review of existing files and reports, have been limited to those grading operations performed during the period of February 11,1991 through February 18, 1991. The conclusions contained herein have been based upon our review of MV Engineering's files and reports. No representations are made as to the quality or extent of materials not observed and tested by MV Engineering, Inc. This report should be considered valid for permit purposes for a period of six months and is subject to review by our firm following that time. IF ANY CHANGES ARE MADE - PAD SIZE, BUILDING LOCATION, ELEVATIONS, ETC. - THIS REPORT WILL BECOME INVALID AND FURTHER ENGINEERING AND RECOMMENDATIONS WILL BECOME NECESSARY. VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #102, Escondida, California 92029-1229 . Phone (619) 743-1214 . Fax (619) 739-0343 SOIL TESTING PERC TEST SOIL INVESTIGATIONS GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS Jen Rose Development Company Attn: Mr. Dave Krominga March 30, 1995/page 8 If you have any questions or need clarification, please contact this office at your convenience. Reference to our Job #95-154-F will help to expedite our response to your inquiries. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you. VINJE RMV/MPR attachments: Plates 1-5 Distribution: Addressee (4) a:95-154-F.RU1 INC. SOIL TESTING PERC TEST VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, #102, Escondido, California 92029.1229 . Phone (619) 743-1214 . Fax (619) 739-0343 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS SOIL INVESTIGATIONS 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 l m :::::. =:1\\ pad overexcavation and recompaction per project geotechnical engineer (/Q2 ' . 1 mln. ke key depth y competent bedrock or fir~ ~native ground per project f geotechnical engineer Side Hill Stability Fill Slope finish slope finish pad i project 1:1 line from toe of slope to competent materials fill - --- - one equipment width minimum remove unsuitable materials 2' min. key depth 15' 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 /I 1 '. KEY AND BENCHING DETAILS (Typical - no scale) finish slope / finish pad \ L- ~ ~~, ~ 2' min. /" ey depth equipment width min. bench existing surface lt~ cut slope (to be excavated prior to fill placement) Fill-Over-Cut Slope competent bedrock or ~ firm native ground per project geotechnical consultant existing ground surface finish pad remove unsuitable materials project 1:1 line from toe of slope to competent materials cut slope (to be excavated prior to fill placement) bench per project geotechnical engineer in the field - also, see geotechnical report competent bedrock or firm native ground per project geotechnical consultant ~ ~ 15' min. key width Cut-aver-Fill Slope Note: Key and benching details shown herein are subject to revision by the project geotechnical engineer based upon actual site conditions. Back drains may also be necessary as determined by the project geotechnical consultant. Plate It 2 UNDERCUTTING DETAILS (Typical - no scale) existing ground surface V compacted fill -------- ~ -c ~ unsuitable ~ materlals ~ 1\\'= ~TIi Ill:= =t1I overexcava,te and recompact competent bedrock or firm ~ native ground per project f geotechnical engineer ~ CUT-FILL LOT J-- / existing ground surface ------- . ~nsuita~ materials -L 12" . \\\=:~ mln. =\\\ overexcavate and recompact . d ;f eepest competent bed~ock or firm nativ~ footing ground per project geotechnical engineer compacted fill ( 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 ::3 , ,0 n--/ / //-- '~'."'.':-"""'---:.' - 'V/ \,-"O"_- Waterproofing " Perforated drain Filter Material. Crushed rock (wrapped in filter fabric) or Class 2 Permeable Material (see specifications below) SPECIFICATIONS FOR CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL Competent, approved soils or bedrock U.S. Standard Sieve Size X Passing 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 CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS: " Sand ,Equivalent> 75 * Provide granular, non-expansive backfill soil in 1:1 gradient wedge behind wall. Compact backfill to minimum 90% of laboratory standard. - * Provide back drainage for wall to prevent build-up of hydrostatic pressures. Use drainage openings along base of wall or back drain system, as outlined below. * Backdrain should consist of 4" diameter PVC pipe (Schedule 40 or equivalent) with perforations down. Drain to suitable outlet at minimum 1%. Provide 3/4" - 1\" crushed gravel filter wrapped in filter fabric (Mirafi140N or equivalent). Delete filter fabric wrap if Caltrans Class 2 permeable material is used. Compact Class 2 material to minimum 90% of laboratory standard. * Seal back of wall with waterproo,fing in accordance with archi- tect's specifications. * Provide positive drainage to disallow ponding of water above wall. Lined drainage ditch or minimum 2% flow away from wall is recommended. RETAINING WALL QRAIN DETAIL inje & Middleton ENGINEERING, INC PLATE 4 . ~ 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 (1270° 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 /I 5 ... I I I I I I I I I I :1 I I I I I I I I ENGINEERING DESIGN & PLANNING CONSULTANTS FOR RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL CONSTRUGION , .,., I 0 ¡ I S II" '" i! \.'1.; !'." :> \ \ .¿ ll, llcJ Lc; U " ; '-'., ;, \ J"U - NOV 2 7 1995 ;; Date: August 16, 1995 To: Mr. Dave Krominga Jen Rose Development Co. 1449 Santa Fe Drive Encinitas, CA 92024 ENGINEERiNG SERVICES CITY OF ENCIN!T!\S Re: Residences To Be Located On Parcels 3 and 4, North of Seeman Drive, Encinitas, CA. Subject: Addendum Compaction Letter For General Site Grading Ref: "Compaction Letter For General Site Grading, Residences To Be Located On Parcels 3 and 4, North of Seeman Drive, Encinitas, CA.", Job No: 94773-4, dated July 18, 1995, by Engineering Design Group. 1. 2. "Updated Report of Preliminary Soil Investigations, Parcels 3 and 4, Seeman Drive, Encinitas, California", dated October 29, 1991, Job :# 1355-87, prepared by MV Engineering, Inc. ~ In accordance with your request and authorization, we have reviewed the referenced reports, and provided geotechnical observation and testing services during pad undercuts and general site grading for the referenced site improvements. The purpose of this report is to provide our compaction test results and grading observations, for general site grading of Parcel 3 to finish pad grades. It should be noted that this report contains compaction test results to date for both Parcels 3 and 4. GRADING OPERATIONS Grading and compaction testing operations were performed at the referenced property during the period of June 26, 1995 - August 3, 1995. Prior to the start of grading, vegetation and debris were removed from the areas of proposed improvement. Site grading generally consisted of cutting a keyway at the toe of proposed slopes, and undercutting of building pad areas to a minimum depth of. 3 feet (a minimum of 5 feet beyond building footprint), and general fill placement and compaction to finish grade elevations. Keyways and pad undercuts were Project No: 94773-4 Page No: 1 475 CARMEL STREET. SAN MARCOS, CA . 92069 . (619) 752-7010 . FAX (619) 752-7092 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I observed by an engineer from our firm prior to the placement of fill. Fill soils placed during grading were derived from import and onsite soils. During grading, fill soils were generally mixed, moisture conditioned, and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density (ASTM D1557-78). Fill operations were accomplished by trackwalking with a OS-Bulldozer, and one water hose. The subsoil conditions encountered within the subject area during site grading, are generally similar to those anticipated in the referenced report for the site. The approximate locations of our field density tests are presented in Figure No.1, "Field Density Test Location Map". The results of the laboratory and field tests for the referenced site are presented in Table No.1, "Laboratory and Field Test Results". Field density tests were performed in accordance with ASTM D1556-82 (Sand Cone Method). Our test results indicate that the fill placed under our observation and testing in the areas indicated in Figure No.1, "Field Density Test Location Map" have been compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction, as determined by ASTM D1557 - 78. The reported test results are representative of the soil conditions at the locations tested. Our observation and field density testing methods are in accordance with normally accepted procedures. The accuracy of the relative compaction values are subject to the precision limitations of the ASTM test methods. The accuracy of the maximum dry density determination (ASTM D1557-78) is discussed in the 1985 Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Section 4, Volume 04.08, entitled, Soil and Rock: Building Stones. To date, ASTM has not reported on the accuracy of the field density test procedure (ASTM D1556-82). Variations of relative compaction values should be expected, laterally and vertically, from the actual test locations. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDA TI NS In general, it is our opinion that the fill soils placed at the site at the locations tested, were compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction (based on ASTM D1557-78). In addition, the geotechnical conditions encountered during grading and excavation of the site, were. found to be similar to those anticipated for the site. Project No: 94773-4 Page No: 2 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I We recommend that any additional fill placement, including retaining wall backfill and driveway subgrade, as well as foundation excavations, be observed by a representative of this office. We request a minimum 24-hour notice prior to any observations, so that proper scheduling of our personnel can be made. If variations of site conditions are encountered during construction this office should be notified so that appropriate recommendations or design changes may be implemented. We appreciate the opportunity to be of professional service to you in this matter. If you have any questions regarding our report, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Very truly yours, p . .- "" Steven Norris California ACE #47672 Attachments: Table No.1, .Laboratory and Field Test Results. Figure No.1, .Field Density Test Location Map. Project No: 94773-4 Page No: 3 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I TABLE NO.1 LABORATORY AND FIELD TEST RESULTS Laboratorv Test Results SOl.. 1YÆ MAXIMUM DENSITY (PCF) OPTIMUM MOISTURE U.S.C.S. CLASSIFICATION 1 125.5 10.0 SM Reddish Brown Silty Sand (native) 2 121.0 10.0 SM Tan Silty Sand (Import) ~ TEST NO: DATE ELEVATION (FEET) SOIL DRY DENSITY FIELD MOISTURE RELATIVE COMPACTION TYPE (PCF) (PERCENT) 1 6/26/95 369 1 114.4 9 91 2 6/27/95 371 1 116.9 10 93 3 6/27/95 373 1 116.0 9.5 92 4 6/27/95 374 1 119.1 9.5 95 5 6/28/95 375 1 118.8 10 95 6 6/28/95 375 1 120.1 10 96 7 6/28/95 376.5 2 111.7 9 92 8 6/29/95 377 2 111.7 9 92 9 6/29/95 380 2 109.7 10 90 10 6/29/95 381 1 116.1 11 93 11 6/30/95 382 2 114.7 11 91 12 6/30/95 383 2 113.5 9 94 13 7/1/95 384 2 112.0 10 93 14 7/1/95 385 2 111.9 10 93 15 7/1/95 385 2 114.6 10 95 16 7/1/95 383 1 119.3 10 95 17 7/1/95 384 1 117.2 11 93 18 7/3/95 388 1 115.6 11 92 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 19 7/5/95 388 2 113.4 10 94 20 7/5/95 390 1 116.9 11 93 21 7/7/95 383 1 118.8 10 95 22 7/12/95 385* 1 119.4 9 95 23 7/12/95 392* 1 117.4 9 94 24 8/3/95 392* 1 121.0 10 96 25 8/3/95 392* 1 119.2 11 95 26 8/3/95 384.5 1 114.4 9 91 27 8/3/95 386.5* 1 115.6 10 92 * = FINI:SH PA[ GRADE Project No: 94773-4 Page No: 5 - - - - - - - - - - i. " -. " , _It Il \ - - - - - - - LEGEND - - 27 - APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF FIELD DENSITY TEST. EB SITE NORTH NOT TO SCALE THE ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP FIELD DENSITY TEST LOCATION MAP JOB NO: 94773-4 BY: KAR FIGURE NO: 1