1990-358 C/E/G/H/N/R
Street Address
.--~-_.-.__._._.-.._~
~/f)O
f
/232?3
Serial #
Category
77/f1 '6 2 - 3 <-I I.
Name
Description
Plan ck. #
Year
_"'.....,..1..........."
NORTH COUNTY .
COMPACTION
'ENGINEERING, INC.
.
October 26, 1999
Project No. CE-5645
Al Udwin
3443 Calle Odessa
Carlsbad, CA 92009
Subject:
Report of Certification of Compacted Fill Ground
Building Pads, Private Driveway Sub grade and Base Materi
Utility Trench Backfill Soils
Oceanview Villas
451 Oceanview Avenue
Encinitas, California
TPM 88-341
!
f'
_."--~..---_...'"""
I [~rr; i; !]
,0 r----... '"
I "
UL : -:i 190'8
Dear Mr. Udwin:
In response to your request, the following report has been prepared to indicate results of soil
testing, observations, and inspection of earthwork construction at the subject site.
Testing and inspection services were performed from June 10, 1999 through October 21, 1999.
Briefly, our findings reveal filled ground has been compacted to a minimum of ninety percent
(90%). Therefore, we recommend construction continue as scheduled.
SCOPE
Our firm was retained to observe grading operations with regard to current standard practices
and to determine the degree of compaction of placed fill.
Grading plans were prepared by Resource Development Corporation, dated May 20, 1999.
Grading operations were performed by C.B. Wilson of San Deigo, California.
Reference is made to the following previously submitted soils reports:
I.) "Preliminary Soils Investigation" prepared by Compaction Labs, Inc.,
dated June 15, 1989 (project No. CL-2180).
2.) "Update Letter" prepared by North County Compaction Engineering, Inc.
dated September 8, 1998 (project No. CE-5645).
P. O. BOX 302002 * ESCONDIDO, CA 92030 * (760)480-1116 FAX (760)741-6568
~
/
NORTH COUNTY .
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
.
Project No. CE..5645
Page 2
Approximate locations and depth of filled ground and extent of earthwork construction covered
in this report are indicated on the attached Plate No. One entitled, "Test Location Sketch".
Grading operations were performed in order to create three (3) split level building pads to
accommodate the proposed single family dwellings. Should the finished pads be altered in any
way, we should be contacted to provide additional recommendations.
The site was graded in accordance with the recommendations in the above referenced soils
reports.
The site was graded to approximately conform to project plans. Actual pad size and elevation
may differ. Finish grade operations are to be completed at a later date.
LABORA TORY TESTING
Representative soils samples were collected and returned to the laboratory for testing. optimum
moisture - maximum density tests were performed in accordance with ASTM D-1557 and are
tabulated on the attached Plate No. Two entitled, "Tabulation of Iest Results".
SOIL CONDITIONS
Native soils encountered were silty-sands. Fill soils were imported and generated from on-site
excavation.
The building site contained a transition from cut to fill. However, cut areas located within th<:
building area were over excavated a minimum of 3 feet and brought to grade with compacted
soil. Over excavation was carried a minimum of 5 feet beyond the exterior building perimeter.
Hence, no consideration need be given this characteristic.
On-site soils were found to have an expansive index of less than 10 and are classified as being
"very low" in expansion potential.
During earthwork construction, native areas to receive fill were scarified, watered, and
compacted to a minimum of ninety percent (90%) of maximum density. The key was
approximately 15 feet wide, a minimum of 3 feet in depth, and inclined into the slope.
Subsequent fill soils were placed, watered, and compacted in 6 inch lifts. Benches were
NORTH COUNTY .
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
.
Project No. CE--5645
Page 3
constructed in natural ground at intermediate levels to properly support the fill. To determine the
degree of compaction, field density tests were performed in accordance with ASTM D-1556 or
D-2922 at the approximate horizontal locations designated on the attached Plate No. One
entitled, 'Test Location Sketch". A tabulation of test results and their vertical locations are
presented on the attached Plate No. Two entitled "Tabulation of Test Results". Fill soils f01md to
have a relative compaction of less than ninety percent (90%) were reworked until proper
compaction was achieved.
RECOMMENDA nONS AND CONCLUSIONS
Continuous inspection was not requested to verifY fill soils are placed in accordance with current
standard practices regarding grading operations and earthwork construction. Therefore, as
economically feasible as possible, part-time inspection was provided. Hence, the following
recommendations are based on the assumption that all areas tested are representative of the
entire project.
1). Compacted fill and natural ground within the defined building areas have
adequate strength to safely support the proposed loads.
2). Slopes may be considered stable with relation to deep seated failure provided
they are properly maintained. Slopes should be planted within 30 days with light
groundcover (no gorilla ice plant) indigenous to the area. Drainage should be
diverted away from the slopes to prevent water flowing on the face of slope. This
will reduce the probability of failure as a result of erosion.
3). In our opinion, soil liquefaction at the site is unlikely to occur due to the
following on-site soils conditions:
A). Groundwater was not encountered at the time of grading.
B). Fill ground and loose topsoils were compacted to a minimum of
ninety percent (90%) of maximum dry density.
C). The dense nature of the formation underlying the site.
4). Temporary slopes to be retained and/or completed at a later date should be
considered unstable and may prove to be a detrimental condition. Furthermore,
NORTH COUNTY .
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
.
Project No. CE-.5645
Page 4
we should be contacted to supervise backfill operations. Backfill materials should consist
of non-expansive soils (having a swell of less than 2%) placed at a width
behind the wall equivalent to two-thirds of the retained height. Crushed rock (I
inch minus), approved by this office, may be an alternate method. All walls
should be provided with drains. Drains should consist of 4 inch perforated pipe
surrounded with crushed rock placed at a minimum of 1 cubic foot per lineal foot and
have a minimum fall of one percent (1 %). A structural engineer should be contacted for a
retaining devise recommendations.
5). Continuous footings having a minimum width of 12 inches and founded a
minimum of 12 inches and 18 inches below lowest adjacent grade for one and
two stories, respectively, will have an estimated allowable bearing value of2500
pounds per square foot.
6). Footings located on or adjacent to slopes should be founded at a depth such
that the horizontal distance from the bottom outside face of footing to the face of
the slope is a minimum of 8 feet.
7). All continuous footings should be reinforced with a minimum of one #4 bar
top and bottom.
8). Interior slabs should be a minimum of 4 inches thick and reinforced with #3
bars on 18 inch centers both ways at mid-point of slab thickness.
9). Interior slab underlayment should consist of visqueen installed at mid-point
within a 4 inch sand barrier (2 inches sand, visqueen, 2 inches sand). Sand should
be tested in accordance with ASTM D-2419 to insure a minimum sand equivalent
of30.
10). Plumbing trenches should be backfilled with a non-expansive soil having a
swell ofless than two percent (2%) and a minimum sand equivalent of30.
Backfill soils should be inspected and compacted to a minimum of ninety percent
(90%).
11). Completion of grading operations were left at rough grade. Therefore, we
recommend a landscape architect be contacted to provide finish grade and
drainage recommendations. Drainage recommendations should include concrete
sidewalks placed on all sides of structures a minimum of 4 feet in width and have
NORTH COUNTY .
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
.
Project No. CE-5645
Page 5
a minimum fall of two percent (2%) away from foundation zones. To further protect
water penetration of the zone, rain gutters should be installed to divert run-off.
Landscape planter areas within 4 feet of the foundation should be avoided and/or
designed with sealed bottoms and a drain system.
12). Unless requested, recommendations for future improvements (additions,
pools, recreation slabs, additional grading, etc.) Were not included in this report.
Prior to construction, we should be contacted to update conditions and provide
additional recommendations.
Prior to pouring of concrete, North County COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INe. should be
contacted to inspect foundation recommendations for compliance to those set forth.
During placement of concrete North County COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. and/or a
qualified concrete inspector should be present to document construction of foundations.
Foundation recommendations presented in this report should be considered minimal. Therefore,
we recommend the project architect and structural engineer review this report to assure
recommendations presented herein will be suitable with regard to the type of construction
planned.
UNCERTAINTY AND LIMITATIONS
In the event foundation excavation and steel placement inspection is required and/or requested,
an additional cost of$170.00 will be invoiced to perform the field inspection and prepare a
"Final Conformance Letter". If foundations are constructed in more than one phase, $120.00 for
each additional inspection will be invoiced.
It is the responsibility of the owner and/or his representative to carry out recommendations set
forth in this report.
San Diego County is located in a high risk area with regard to earthquake. Earthquake resistant
projects are economically unfeasible. Therefore, damage as a result of earthquake is probable
and we assume no liability.
We assume the on-site safety of our personnel only. We cannot assume liability of personnel
other than our own. It is the responsibility of the owner and contractor to insure construction
operations are conducted in a safe manner and in conformance with regulations governed by
CAL-OSHA and/or local agencies.
NORTH COUNTY .
COMPACTION
'ENGINEERING, INC.
.
Project No. CE-5645
Page 6
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. This oPPOrtunity to be of service
is sincerely appreciated.
Respectfully submitted,
North County
COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC.
~~./
Ronald K. Adams
President
RKA:paj
cc: (3) submitted
~
Dale R. Reg
~
. .
NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC.
SOIL TESTING
OCEANVIEW VILLAS
OCEANVIEW DRIVE \J ~
ENCINITAS, CALIFOR~A ~~
~ ______ )J
U _ h _________ '-l
, ' NO~
__1--- .7 ~
\ \ I 6
~, ~ 1I11i'1.. "
I 1 1_@"~~~!lI
:i~~,=:I~
I · I, 1;111;
,., I _~ji~R@iil~
-I i ' ~~~I~
~. i ;~n~"'
I :j:, s- 'Un;'
I : ! ~;;
I II I .. a
I I I rill.
1 ~ I r
.: ':' ~Tirl ~
, " ,- - -- - - - li
I
, I
l-+-
,
CD
,
'-- "-71.",
p" ~.
(j.)
\J ~
'1- '
.Y"
:JJ
'-l
,-
,
"
III ~,
/;\l!l~ ""
~ -'I
illJ! <-<.
~~'"
~~e '"
;eFj
~i~
~il
OJ
l-'-
o
2 ~
'^' ill!!i
~1'l
L __;.~
~~/ !Ij~
~ 0"
:t: i..~
1
!l l;ll
~ ~
~ !
~ i
(i,~ i li /
~
I ~I '
1!:Cll
I~~
I~i '
I~':
I ; i
~
Ii
7 %4 . I
<&
5 I
~ ;~~
IIBrEST U 5
_.ll-
TEST LOCATION SKETCH
PROJECT No. CE-5645
PLA TE No. ONE
II
~v<~
1f._ff
',j> "'J~'
.#1P
,~
1'0.., ~
~I ; '4~ ill
J~, -- --J
.1'lI, 5
\'I
~
i
.
.,1 I ~
I;, I .-%
l, I ~
~
1: '-'j,
""
I ~
-f-'
I '"
=-
[>1SllNCC.a~lW.l
Q
"l
: I ~
I' -,
I
~~
ilil
'51'
i' -
il al
i ~
I" I -
I
-'1--
I
1
I
~~
..!!..~
~~
_ -e
ill
:z >1
~
~
~
--~ I
@ i
I
~
JJ
-,
,
-- - -..., --
,
NO'25':;:;'E 4100'
II
lib
TEST LOCATION SKETCH
PROJECT No. CE-5645
PLA TE No. ONE 'A'
([D
~
NO SCALE
~Q
n ~
~~
ig
~~
t"
-~
~
-~ ~
~~
~Hi'\
:1:0
~
'"
~
~6
jl'ill
.~
];
~~
.
NORTH COUNTY .
COMPACTION
'ENGINEERING, INC.
.
Test # Date Horizontal Vertical Field Moisture Dry Density Soil Percent of
Location Location % Dry WI. LB Cu. Ft. Type Compaction
I 06/1 6/99 See 162.0 09.1 114.5 II 9\.0
2 Plate 163.0 08.1 116.2 II 92.4
3 One 162.5 08.3 113.4 II 90.1
4 06/17/99 171.0 09.4 114.2 II 90.7
5 172.0 09.2 118.7 II 94.3
6 167.5 12.1 117.9 II 93.7
7 " " 163.0 12.4 115.8 II 92.0
8 06/18/99 136.0 08.4 118.2 II 93.9
9 138.0 09.6 113.4 II 90.1
10 136.0 09.0 120.0 II 95.3
II 06/21/99 163.0 09.2 114.3 II 90.8
12 " 162.5 10.6 115.2 II 91.5
13 06/22/99 164.0 10.2 113.7 I 90.7
14 " 166.0 09.7 122.0 II 96.9
15 " 164.0 08.6 119.1 II 94.6
16 166.0 08.4 117.3 II 93.2
17 " 163.5 09.2 122.6 II 97.4
18 " 165.5 08.1 116.4 II 92.5
19 06/23/99 16\.0 1 \.2 117.1 II 93.1
20 163.0 10.8 116.7 II 92.7
21 " 164.0 09.7 113.6 I 90.3
22 164.5 08.8 117.8 I 93.6
23 166.5 I \.I 115.0 I 91.7
24 " 168.5 10.2 114.5 I 91.3
25 06/24/99 " 139.0 10.0 115.9 II 92.1
26 140.0 09.3 114.5 II 9\.0
27 " 14\.0 08.7 115.4 II 91.7
28 170.0 08.8 116.2 II 92.3
29 " 169.0 10.7 115.1 II 9\.4
30 170.0 08.6 114.8 II 9\.2
31 171.5 09.6 113.9 II 90.5
32 06/28/99 166.0 10.5 113.9 II 90.5
33 168.0 10.7 115.0 II 9\.4
34 170.0 09.8 116.3 II 92.4
35 06/30/99 " 136.0 07.9 113.5 II 90.2
36 " 136.0 09.8 120.0 II 95.3
37 " 137.0 07.8 115.8 II 92.0
38 07/01/99 138.0 08.8 115.2 II 9\.6
39 138.5 08.3 116.4 II 92.5
40 " 139.5 09.2 115.0 II 9\.4
PROJECT NO. CE-5645
PLATE NO. TWO
NORTH COUNTY .
COMPACTION
'ENGINEERING, INC.
.
~
Test # Date Horizontal Vertical Field Moisture Dry Density Soil Percent of
Location Location % Dry WI. LB Cu. Ft. Type Compaction
41 07/01/99 See 140.0 07.9 114.8 II 91.2
42 " Plate 141.0 08.3 115.7 II 91.9
43 07/02/99 One 142.0 07.3 116.6 II 92.6
44 142.0 13.3 111.3 II 88.4"
45 143.0 15.1 111.5 II 88.6"
46 139.0 11.2 119.8 II 95.2
47 141.0 10.1 122.9 II 97.6
48 " 144.5 08.2 108.7 II 86.4"
49 " 142.0 10.4 117.2 II 93.1
50 143.0 09.5 113.8 II 90.4
51 144.5 07.5 113.4 II 90.2
52 07/06/99 142.0 08.3 118.8 III 98.1
53 144.0 10.7 118.1 III 97.6
54 144.5 08.7 118.5 III 97.9
55 144.5 10.7 115.7 III 95.6
56 " 145.0 12.4 116.7 III 96.4
57 147.0 13.7 116.6 III 96.3
58 07/09/99 151.0 14.0 116.0 III 95.8
59 152.0 14.5 118.1 III 97.6
60 154.0 09.1 115.2 III 95.2
61 153.0 13.6 111.6 III 92.2
62 07/12/99 " 154.0 08.9 110.0 III 90.9
63 156.0RFG 08.6 112.4 III 92.8
64 156.0RFG 09.3 114.1 III 94.2
65 07/15/99 " 168.0 16.3 105.8 II 84.0"
66 " 162.0 13.2 106.0 II 84.4"
67 162.0 14.9 110.0 II 87.4"
68 07/20/99 165.0 11.1 114.0 II 90.6
69 168.0 09.9 115.7 II 91.9
70 171.0 09.6 115.4 II 91.7
71 07/21/99 162.0 09.7 116.2 II 92.3
72 162.0 09.1 117.4 II 93.3
73 08/23/99 " 167.5 10.4 121.7 II 96.7
74 168.5 09.5 121.4 II 96.5
75 168.0 08.8 120.3 II 95.6
76 08/24/99 170.5 10.2 119.6 II 95.0
77 " 170.0 09.1 121.5 II 96.5
78 09/01/99 171.0 08.0 121.7 II 96.7
79 171.0 08.9 121.4 II 96.5
80 09/02/99 " 165.0 08.9 120.9 II 96.1
PROJECT NO. CE-5645
PLATE NO. TWO (page 2)
NORTH COUNTY .
COMPACTION
'ENGINEERING, INC.
.
JABULATIOlS OF TEST RESULTS
Test # Date Horizontal Vertical Field Moisture Dry Density Soil Percent of
Location Location % Dry WI. LB Cu, Ft. Type Compaction
81 09/02/99 See 165.5 07.9 116.9 II 92.9
82 Plate 165.0 08.6 115.4 II 91.7
83 09/03/99 One 165.0 07.5 122.2 II 97.1
84 " 166.0 RFG 08.5 123.5 II 98.1
85 09/07/99 154.0 07.8 116.5 II 92.6
86 156.0 08.5 117.2 II 93.1
87 09/1 0/99 165.0 08.6 118.4 II 94.1
88 165.2 RFG 09.0 115.3 II 91.6
89 09/15/99 156.0 10.9 109.6 IV 97.8
90 163.0 10.7 108.5 IV 96.8
91 09/16/99 151.0 07.9 116.4 II 92.5
92 162.0 10.0 115.8 II 92.0
93 09/20/99 165.0 14.2 106.3 IV 94.9
94 " 166.0 14.9 105.2 IV 93.9
95 09/21/99 171.0 14.9 115.9 II 92.1
96 " " 167.0 15.5 114.3 II 90.8
97 10/07/99 172.0 11.5 116.0 II 92.2
98 165.0 13.0 115.7 II 91.9
99 153.0 10.8 115.9 II 92.1
100 10/13/99 " 173.0 12.2 116.3 II 92.4
101 " " 172.5 12.3 114.8 II 91.2
102 10/15/99 FSG 08.2 125.6 V 97.5
103 " FSG 07.8 126.2 V 97.9
104 " FSG 07.6 123.7 V 96.0
105 171.5 07.8 117.6 V 91.3
106 173.2RFG 08.2 126.5 V 98.2
107 171.5 07.6 119.0 V 92.3
108 173.0 RFG 09.1 123.6 V 95.9
109 10/18/99 " RSG 08.2 118.0 II 93.7
110 " RSG 09.0 117.8 II 93.6
III RSG 08.6 118.5 II 94.1
112 10/20/99 FGB 06.0 134.9 VI 96.0
113 FGB 07.2 133.5 VI 95.0
114 " FSG 07.4 122.1 II 97.0
115 FSG 08.2 121.9 II 96.8
116 FGB 06.7 134.4 VI 95.6
117 FGB 06.6 134.1 VI 95.4
118 10/20/99 FGB 06.2 133.9 VI 95.3
PROJECT NO. CE-5645
PLATE NO. TWO (page 3)
NORTH COUNTY .
COMPACTION
-ENGINEERING, INC.
Test # Date Horizontal Vertical Field Moisture Dry Density Soil Percent of
Location Location % Dry WI. LB Cu. Ft. Type Compaction
119
120
121
10/21199
"
REMARKS:
SOIL DESCRIPTION
Tan Silty-Sand
Tan Orange Silty-Sand
Light Tan Silty-Sand
Light Brown Silty-Sand
(Import)
See
Plate
One
.
168.0
148.0RFG
148.0 RFG
09.1
08.9
07.7
117.9
118.9
115.1
II
II
II
93.7
94.5
91.5
FGB = Finish Grade Base
FSG = Finish SubGrade
RSG = Rough SubGrade
RFG = Rough Finish Grade
Test No.'s 93 thru 96 taken on water main utility trench backfill soils
Test No.'s 97 thru 99 taken on electric trench backfill soils
Test No.'s 102, 103, 104, 114 and 115 taken on private drive finish subgrade soils
(95% minimum required)
Test No.'s 112, 113, 116, I I7 and 118 taken on private drive finish grade base materials
(95% minimum required)
"Test No. 49 is a retest of Test No. 44
"Test No. 50 is a retest of Test No. 45
"Test No. 51 is a retest of Test No. 48
"Test No. 69 is a retest of Test No. 65
"Test No. 7I is a retest of Test No. 66
"Test No. 72 is a retest of Test No. 67
OPTIMUM MOISTUREIMAXIMlIM DENSITY
Brown Silty-Sand (Import)
Grey Silty Coarse Gravely-
Sand (Class II Base)
~ MAX. DRY DENSITY OPT. MOISTURE
(LB CU. FT) (% DRY WT)
1 125.3 08.0
II 125.8 09.5
III 121.0 12.2
IV
112.0
14.5
v
128.8
09.8
VI
140.5
06.7
PROJECT NO. CE-5645
PLATE NO. TWO (page 4)