Loading...
1999-5865 G Street Address Category Serial # 58 5 Name Description Year Plan ck. # ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP GEOTECHNICAL. CIVIL, STRUCTURAL 8 ARCHITECTURAL CONSULTWS FOR RESIDENTIAL A COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION 810 W. Los Vallecitos, Ste A • San Marcos CA•92069 (760) 752- 7010•Fax (760) 752 -7092 HYDROLOGY STUDY WILLIAMS RESIDENCE ENCINITAS, CA oQ Q,OFESSIO GO CO OR Z5 No. 476 - m c Exp. -99 OF CA1 -W�Q� Dated: May 25, 1999 Z Job No.: 981938 -1 BY: SN DATE: 1/99 ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP Job No: PROJECT: WILLIAMS RESIDENCE, 2354 OXFORD AVENUE, CARDIFF WATERSHEAD LESS THAN .5 SQUARE MILE Q =CIA C =.85 (ALMOST ENTIRELY IMPROVED) 1 1 0 0 (16 inches annual rainfall) = 5.0 A = APPROX .15 ACRE Q = CIA = (.85)(5.0)(.15) = .63 CFS SAY 1.0 CFS NOTE: NO OFFSITE TRIBUTARY SOURCES Q100 = 1.0 PER ANALYSIS, USE 6 INCH SDR -35 DRAIN PIPE PLACED AT MINIMUM OF 2% MINIMUM SLOPE TO OUTLET AT ALLEY. SEE ATTACHED COMPUTER ANALYSIS FOR STORM DRAIN PIPE SIZING AND ASSOCIATED ANALYSIS. NOTE: THE SITE IN ITS CURRENT CONDITION IS APPROXIMATELY 70 -75% IMPROVED AND AFTER CONSTRUCTION WILL BE APPROXIMATELY 85% IMPROVED. THE INCREASE IN WATER RUN -OFF CAUSED BY THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS APPEARS TO BE NEGLIGIBLE. 810 WEST LOS VALLECITIOS • SAN MARCOS • CA 0 92069 • (619)752 -7010 • (619)752- 7092 -FAX 11Sandy1f1e1J0BS15 JOBSIDRAINIWILLIAMS RESIDENCE.wpd Table Rating Table for Circular Channel Project Description Project File c: \haestad \fmw \willaims.fm2 Worksheet WILLIAMS RESIDENCE - GENERAL ANALYSIS Flow Element Circular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Full Flow Diameter Constant Data Mannings Coefficient 0.009 Input Data Minimum Maximum Increment Channel Slope 0.020000 0.060000 0.010000 ft/ft Discharge 0.60 1.00 0.10 cfs Rating Table Channel Discharge Slope Depth Diameter Velocity (cfs) (ft/ft) (in) (in) (ft/s) 0.60 0.020000 4.7 4.71 4.97 0.60 0.030000 4.4 4.36 5.78 0.60 0.040000 4.1 4.13 6.44 0.60 0.050000 4.0 3.96 7.00 0.60 0.060000 3.8 3.83 7.50 0.70 0.020000 5.0 4.99 5.16 0.70 0.030000 4.6 4.62 6.01 0.70 0.040000 4.4 4.38 6.69 0.70 0.050000 4.2 4.20 7.28 0.70 0.060000 4.1 4.06 7.79 0.80 0.020000 5.2 5.24 5.34 0.80 0.030000 4.9 4.86 6.21 0.80 0.040000 4.6 4.60 6.92 0.80 0.050000 4.4 4.42 7.52 0.80 0.060000 4.3 4.27 8.06 0.90 0.020000 5.5 5.48 5.49 0.90 0.030000 5.1 5.08 6.40 0.90 0.040000 4.8 4.81 7.13 0.90 0.050000 4.6 4.61 7.75 0.90 0.060000 4.5 4.46 8.30 1.00 0.020000 5.7 5.70 5.64 1.00 0.030000 5.3 5.28 6.57 1.00 0.040000 5.0 5.01 7.32 1.00 0.050000 4.8 4.80 7.95 1.00 0.060000 4.6 4.64 8.52 04/19/99 FlowMaster v5.15 11:26:58 AM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 2 Table Rating Table for Circular Channel Rating Table Channel Discharge Slope Depth Diameter Velocity (cfs) (ft/ft) (in) (in) (ft/s) 04/19/99 FlowMaster v5.15 11:26:58 AM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 06708 (203) 755 -1666 Page 2 of 2 Cross Section Cross Section for Circular Channel Project Description Project File c:\haestad \fmw \willaims.fm2 Worksheet WILLIAMS RESIDENCE - GENERAL ANALYSIS Flow Element Circular Channel Method Manning's Formula Solve For Full Flow Diameter Section Data Mannings Coefficient 0.009 Channel Slope 0.020000 ft/ft Depth 5.7 in Diameter 5.70 in Discharge 1.00 cfs 5.7 in 5.70 in 1 V N H 1 NTS 04/19/99 FlowMaster v5.15 11:27:56 AM Haestad Methods, Inc. 37 Brookside Road Waterbury, CT 08708 (203) 755 -1666 Page 1 of 1 ING R U�P ESIGN G O GEOTECHNICAL. CIVIL, STRUCTURAL A ARCHITECTURAL CONSULTANTS FOR RESIDENTIAL A COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION 810W. Los Vallecitos, Ste A -San Marcos CA-92069 (760) 752-7010- Fax (760) 752 -7092 Date: March 16,1999 To: Kathy Williams P.O. Box 230561 Encinitas, CA 92023 -561 Re: Property Located at 2354 Oxford Avenue, Encinitas, CA 92023 Subject: Notification of Possibility of Shoring Reference: "Geotechnical Investigation and Foundation Recommendations, for the Proposed Addition to the Williams Residence, Lot located at 2354 Oxford Avenue, Encinitas, California," dated January 13,1999, Project No.: 981938 -1,5, prepared by Engineering Design Group Dear Kathy, We have prepared this letter to inform you of the possibility of shoring during the construction of the proposed room addition. As you are aware, the proposed addition will require a steep cut adjacent to the existing building to allow for the installation of the proposed retaining wall. In order to stabilize the existing building during the wall construction, some amount of temporary shoring will likely be required for your existing foundation. In order to confirm the necessity of this shoring, E. D. G. will require one backhoe cut to expose the footing of your existing foundation prior to any back cuts for the proposed retaining wall. At this time, the necessity of temporary shoring will be determined by Engineering Design Group. It should be noted that this letter is being written to keep you properly informed of the safety concerns involved with the construction of the proposed retaining wall. If you have any questions regarding this letter, please do not hesitate to contact our office. rCalifornia Q ,GFESS /o G DESIGN GROUP Q���`1� CIO No.47672 m cc Exp. 12-99 rn ,k #47672 O CIVIL F C AOf Page No. 1 Job No. 981938 -1, 5 11SandylHleILETTERILETTER 11981938, WILLIAMS SHORING PLAN LETTER.WPD � ENG G DESIGN GROUP GEOTECHNICAL. CIVIL. STRUCTURAL 8 ARCHITECTURAL CONSULTANTS ROR RESIHENTIAL & COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION 810 W. Los Vallecitos, Ste A - San Marcos CA-92069 (760) 752- 7010•Fax (760) 752 -7092 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION AND FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS, ' FOR THE PROPOSED ADDITION TO THE WILLIAMS RESIDENCE, LOT LOCATED AT 2354 OXFORD AVENUE CARDIFF BY THE SEA, CALIFORNIA F �pFESS1p,� e tiN No.47672 rn Q Exp. 12-99 SO 1 CIVIC- 'rF OF CA1.\f Project No. 981938 -1, 5 January 13, 1999 ;Fi ' PREPARED FOR: I ENCITY OF FN('s SERVICES Kathy Williams P.O. Box 230561 ' Encinitas, CA 92023 -561 1 ' TABLE OF CONTENTS SCOPE ......... Paa3 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3 FIELD INVESTIGATION ................ ............................... 3 ' SUBSOIL CONDITIONS ................. ............................... 4 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS AND SEISMICITY ... ............................... 4 ' CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5 ' GENERAL 5 EARTHWORK 6 FOUNDATIONS....................... ............................... 8 CONCRETE SLABS ON GRADE .......... ............................... 9 RETAINING WALLS ................... ............................... 11 ' SURFACE DRAINAGE ................. ..... 12 .......................... CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION AND TESTING 13 ' MISCELLANEOUS .................... ............................... 14 ATTACHMENTS ' Site Vicinity Map ............. ............................... Figure No. 1 ' Site Location Map ............ ............................... Figure No. 2 Site Plan /Location of Test Pit Excavations ........................ Figure No. 3 ' Test Pit Logs ............................................... No. 4 -5 References ................. ............................... Appendix A Grading Specifications ........ ............................... Appendix B Homeowners Maintenance Guidelines ........................... Appendix C ' Page No. 2 Job No. 981938 -1 11Sandy%fileWOBS11 JOBS1981981938 -1.RPT - Williams Residence - Oxford Avenue.wpd SCOPE ' This report presents the results of our geotechnical investigation and evaluation for the proposed addition to the residence located at 2354 Oxford Avenue, Cardiff by the Sea, California. Please see Figure No. 1, "Site Vicinity Map ", and Figure No. 2, "Site Location ' Map ". The scope of our work, conducted on -site to date, has included a visual reconnaissance of the property and neighboring sites, a limited subsurface investigation ' of the property, and preparation of this report presenting our findings, conclusions, and recommendations. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION The subject property consists of a rectangular shaped lot located on the west side of Oxford Avenue, in the Cardiff area of the City of Encinitas, County of San Diego, California. The subject site is bordered to the east by Oxford Avenue, to the west by an alleyway and developed residential property. Existing site improvements include a detached garage at the north east corner of the property and an existing raised wood floor residence. The topography of the site area consists of gently rolling terrain. The topography of the subject site consists of a downward slope to the west. ' Based on our discussions with the property owner, we understand the proposed site development will consist of a split level addition to the existing residence and a new single ' car garage at the rear of the property. FIELD INVESTIGATION Our field investigation of the property, conducted January 11, 1999, consisted of a site reconnaissance, site field measurements, observation of existing conditions onsite and on adjacent sites, and a limited subsurface investigation of soil conditions. Our subsurface investigation consisted of visual observation of two test pit excavations, logging of soil types encountered, and sampling of soils for laboratory testing; logs of the test pit excavations are presented in Figures 4 - 5 of this report. The test pits were excavated I under the direction of a civil engineer from our firm. The locations of the test pit excavations are given in Figure No. 3, "Site Plan /Location of Test Pit Excavations ". ' Page No. 3 Job No. 981938 -1 ' MWOBS11 JOBS1981981938.1.RPT - Williams Residence - Oxford Avenue.wpd 1 SUBSOIL CONDITIONS Materials consisting of fill underlain by formational sandstone materials, were encountered during our subsurface investigation of the site. Soil types encountered within our test pit excavations are described as follows: ' To soil /Fil p I. ' Fill materials encountered extended to depths ranging up to approximately 4.0 feet (at rear of property) to 5.5 feet (towards front of the property) below existing grade. 1 These materials consist of brown, slightly moist to moist, loose to medium dense, slightly silty sand. These materials are not considered suitable for the support of structures and structural improvements, however may be utilized as re- compacted fill during grading, provided the recommendations of this report are followed. Fill materials classify as SW /SM according to the Unified 1 Classification System, and based on visual observation, are considered to possess expansion potentials in the low range. 1 Sandstone: Formational sandstone was found to underlie the fill material within the test pit ' excavations. Sandstone materials consist of mottled, tan to brown, moist, dense, silty /clayey sands to friable sandstone. These materials are considered suitable for the support of structures and structural improvements, provided the ' recommendations of this report are followed. Sandstone materials classify as SM /SC to SW according to the Unified Classification System, and based on visual ' observation and our experience, possess expansion potentials in the low to medium range. ' For detailed logs of soil types encountered within the test pit excavations, as well as a depiction of the test pit locations, please see Figure No. 3, Site Plan /Location of Exploratory Test Pits ", and Figures No. 4 - 5, 'Test Pit Logs ". GEOLOGIC HAZARDS AND SEISMICITY It is our opinion that the site could be subjected to moderate to severe ground shaking in ' the event of a major earthquake along any of the faults in the Southern California region; however, the seismic risk at this site is not significantly greater than that of the surrounding developed area. ' Page No. 4 Job No. 981938 -1 D:UOBS11 JOBS1981981938 -1.RPT - Williams Residence - Oxford Avenue.wpd Liquefaction of cohesionless soils can be caused by strong vibratory motion due to earthquakes. Research and historical data indicate that loose, granular soils underlain by a near - surface ground water table are most susceptible to liquefaction, while the stability of most silty clays and clays is not adversely affected by vibratory motion. Because of the dense nature of the formational sandstone materials underlying the site and the absence of a near surface groundwater table, the potential for liquefaction or seismically- induced dynamic settlement at the site is considered low. The effects of 1 seismic shaking can be reduced by adhering to the most recent edition of the Uniform Building Code and current design parameters of the Structural Engineers Association of California. I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i Page No. 5 Job No. 981938 -1 D:UOBS11 JOBS M981938 -1.RPT - Williams Residence - Oxford Avenue.wpd CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ' GENERAL ' The following will present two alternative recommendations for mitigative procedures at the subject site. Alternative No. 1 would involve mitigative grading of loose soil materials by removal and recompaction, and construction of standard shallow foundations. Alternative ' No. 2 would involve deepening of new foundation systems, through loose surficial profiles, to competent soil material. Considering new additions will likely utilize raised wood floors, it is our opinion Alternative No. 2 is best suited for this property. In general, it is our opinion that site improvements, as described herein, are feasible from ' a geotechnical standpoint, provided the recommendations of this report and generally accepted construction practices are followed. ' The following recommendations should be considered as minimum design parameters, and shall be incorporated within the project plans and utilized during construction, as applicable. ' EARTHWORK (Option No. 1) Loose topsoil /fill and weathered formational sandstone found to mantle the site at ' proposed locations will require removal and re- compaction during grading. Removals should extend to a minimum distance of 5 feet outside the addition footprint of the proposed structure or at a 45 degree projection from the bottom of footing (whichever is ' greater). Removal depths are anticipated to extend from 3.5 to 4.0 feet below existing site grades. 1. Site Preparation: Prior to grading, areas of proposed improvement should be cleared of ' surface and subsurface debris. Removed vegetation and debris shall be properly disposed of prior to the commencement of any fill operations. Holes resulting from the removal of debris, existing structures, or other ' improvements which extend below the undercut depths noted, are to be filled and compacted using onsite material or a non - expansive import ' material. Page No. 6 ' Job No. 981938 -1 11 SandylfileWOBS11 JOBS1981981938.1.RPT - Williams Residence - Oxford Avenue.wpd 1 1 ' 2. Removals: ' Fill material found to mantle the site within our exploratory test pit excavations are not suitable for structural support of settlement ' sensitive improvements. Fill material should be removed to competent sandstone materials, sandstone subgrade scarified, moisture conditioned, and fill materials replaced and re- compacted in accordance with the recommendations of this report. Fills shall be cleaned of unsuitable debris and oversized material in excess of 6 inches in diameter. Removals should be conducted to a minimum ' horizontal distance of 5 feet outside the perimeter footprint of the building. ' Removal depths should be visually verified by a representative of our office prior to re- compaction. The maximum depth of removals in the ' area of improvement is anticipated to be 3 -5 feet below existing site grade. ' 3. Fills: Areas to receive fill and /or structural improvements should be scarified to a minimum depth of 12 inches, brought to near optimum moisture content, and re- compacted to at least 90 percent relative ' compaction (based on ASTM D1557 -78). Compacted fills should be cleaned of loose debris, oversize material in excess of 6 inches in diameter, brought to near optimum moisture content, and re- ' compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction (based on ASTM D1557 -78). All fill slopes should be compacted to 90 percent relative compaction to slope face, and planted in order to avoid ' erosion and sloughage. ' Fills should generally be placed in lifts not exceeding 8 inches in thickness. If the import of soil is planned, the soils should be non - expansive and free of debris and organic matter. Prior to ' importing, soils should be visually observed, sampled and tested at the borrow pit area to evaluate soil suitability as fill. ' Any grading should be performed in accordance with the following recommendations, pertinent county /city standards, and grading specifications provided in Appendix B of this ' report. Page No. 7 ' Job No. 981938 -1 11Sandy1f1leWOBS11 JOBS \981981938 -1.RPT -Williams Residence - Oxford Avenue.wpd 1 FOUNDATIONS (Alternative to Option 1) ' As an alternative to re- compaction of existing loose topsoil /fill material, deepened foundations may be utilized for the proposed addition. Based on the existing raised wood ' floor system, we anticipate that the proposed building foundation system will utilize continuous perimeter footings and raised wood structural floors. In deriving foundation recommendations for this site, the subsoil conditions encountered during our limited ' subsurface evaluation were analyzed. The following foundation recommendations assume a non to low- expansive subsoil condition (i.e., Expansive Index less than 50). We anticipate footing depths, in order to be founded in formational soil, be approximately 4.0 ' feet deep. If foundation systems are deepened to the recommended depth described herein the structural engineer should review footing detail and make modifications as deemed necessary. Minimum design parameters for foundations are as follows: 1. Footings bearing in competent formational materials or properly compacted fill may ' be designed based on a maximum allowable soils pressure of 2500 psf. 2. Where new footings are tied to the existing foundation, a new deepened ' foundation, sistering the existing foundation should be installed. 3. Bearing values may be increased by 33% when considering wind, seismic, or other ' short duration loadings. ' 4. All loose soil found at the base of footings, when the excavation is opened, shall be removed and extended to firm, undisturbed soils. The owner and /or contractor should carefully locate the foundation so that no isolated pads or corners of ' footings are located over loose subgrade material. 5. The following parameters should be used as a minimum for designing footing width ' and depth below lowest adjacent grade: Minimum Depth Below Lowest Adjacent Floors Supported Width Grade ' 1 15 inches 18 inches 2 15 inches 18 inches ' * Please note the minimum depth for footings is based on utilization of Option 1 of one this report. r Page No. 8 ' Job No. 981938 -1 11SandylflleWOBS11 JOBS \981981938 -1.RPT - Williams Residence - Oxford Avenue.wpd 1 ' 6. For footings adjacent to slopes, a minimum 10 feet horizontal setback, as measured horizontally from the bottom of the footing to slope daylight in formational materials or properly compacted fill, should be maintained. 7. All footings should be reinforced with a minimum of two #4 bars at the top and two ' #4 bars at the bottom (3 inches above the ground). ' 8. All isolated spread footings should be designed utilizing the above given bearing values and footing depths, and be reinforced with #4 bars at 12 inches o.c. in each direction (3 inches above the ground). Isolated spread footings should have a minimum width of 24 inches. ' 9. Grading should be performed in general accordance with the contents of this report, applicable city and /or county standards, and Appendix B of this report. ' 10. Concrete forthe building foundation should have a minimum compressive strength in 28 days of 2500 psi. 11. All foundation subgrade soils shall be pre- moistened to a minimum of 18 inches in depth prior to the pouring of concrete. CONCRETE SLABS ON GRADE (if utilized) t Concrete slabs on grade, if utilized, should use the following as the minimum design parameters: ' 1. Concrete slabs on grade should have a minimum thickness of 4 inches (5 inches for driveway and garage slabs), and should be reinforced with #3 bars at 18 inches o.c. placed at the midpoint of the slab. 1 All concrete shall be poured per the following: • Slump: Between 3 and 4 inches maximum • Aggregate Size: 3/4 - 1 inch • Air Content: 5 to 8 percent • Moisture retarding additive in concrete at moisture sensitive ' areas. • Water to cement Ratio - .5 maximum Page No. 9 Job No. 981938 -1 11Sandy1fileUOBS11 JOBS1981981938 -1.RPT - Williams Residence - Oxford Avenue.wpd 2. All required fills used to support slabs, should be placed in accordance with the grading section of this report and the attached Appendix B, and compacted to 90 percent Modified Proctor Density, ASTM D -1557. 3. A uniform layer of 4 inches of clean sand is recommended under the slab in order to more uniformly support the slab, help distribute loads to the soils beneath the slab, and act as a capillary break. In addition, a visqueen layer (10 mil) should be placed mid height in the sand bed to act as a vapor retarder. 4. Adequate control joints should be installed to control the unavoidable cracking of concrete that takes place when undergoing its natural shrinkage during curing. The control joints should be well located to direct unavoidable slab cracking to areas that are desirable by the designer. 5. All subgrade soils to receive concrete flatwork are to be pre- soaked to 2 percent over optimum moisture content to a depth of 24 inches. 6. Brittle floor finishes placed directly on slab on grade floors may crack if concrete is not adequately cured prior to installing the finish or if there is minor slab movement. To minimize potential damage to movement sensitive flooring, we 1 recommend the use of slip sheeting techniques (linoleum type) which allows for foundation and slab movement without transmitting this movement to the floor finishes. 7. Exterior concrete flatwork and driveway slabs, due to the nature of concrete hydration and minorsubgrade soil movement, are subjectto normal minorconcrete ' cracking. To minimize expected concrete cracking, the following may be implemented: • Concrete slump should not exceed 4 inches. • Concrete should be poured during "cool" (40 - 65 degrees) weather if possible. If concrete is poured in hotter weather, a set retarding additive should be included in the mix, and the slump kept to a minimum. • Concrete subgrade should be pre- soaked prior to the pouring of concrete. ' The level of pre- soaking should be a minimum of 2% over optimum moisture to a depth of 24 inches. • Concrete may be poured with a 10 inch deep thickened edge. • Concrete should be constructed with tooled joints or sawcuts (1 inch deep) creating concrete sections no larger than 225 sf. For sidewalks, the Page No. 10 Job No. 981938 -1 1 11SandylfilelJOBS11 JOBS1981981938 -1.RPT - Williams Residence - Oxford Avenue.wpd ,. maximum run between joints should not exceed 5 feet. For rectangular shapes of concrete, the ratio of length to width should generally not exceed ' .6 (i.e., 5 ft. long by 3 ft. wide). Joints should be cut at expected points of concrete shrinkage (such as male corners), with diagonal reinforcement ' placed in accordance with industry standards. • Drainage adjacent to concrete flatwork should direct water away from the improvement. Concrete subgrade should be sloped and directed to the ' collective drainage system, such that water is not trapped below the flatwork. • The recommendations set forth herein are intended to reduce cosmetic nuisance cracking. The project concrete contractor is ultimately responsible ' for concrete quality and performance, and should pursue a cost - benefit analysis of these recommendations, and other options available in the ' industry, prior to the pouring of concrete. In general, it is our opinion that site improvements, as described herein, are feasible from ' a geotechnical standpoint, provided the recommendations of this report and generally accepted construction practices are followed. ' The following recommendations should be considered as minimum design parameters, and shall be incorporated within the project plans and utilized during construction, as applicable. t ' RETAINING WALLS Retaining walls up to 8 feet may be designed and constructed in accordance with the following recommendations and minimum design parameters: 1. Retaining wall footings should be designed in accordance with the allowable bearing ' criteria given in the "Foundations" section of this report. ' 2. Unrestrained cantilever retaining walls should be designed using an active equivalent fluid pressure of 35 pcf. This assumes that granular, free draining material will be used for backfill, and that the backfill surface will be level. For sloping backfill, the following ' parameters may be utilized: Condition 2:1 Slope 1.5:1 Slope ' Active 50 65 Page No. 11 Job No. 981938 -1 ' 11SandylfileUOBS11 JOBS%981981938.1.RPT - Williams Residence - Oxford Avenue.wpd 1 1 Any other surcharge loadings shall be analyzed in addition to the above values. ' 3. If the tops of retaining walls are restrained from movement, the should be designed P 9 Y 9 ' for an additional uniform soil pressure of 7XH psf, where H is the height of the wall in feet. ' 4. Passive soil resistance may be calculated using an equivalent fluid pressure of 350 pcf. This value assumes that the soil being utilized to resist passive pressures, extends horizontally 2.5 times the height of the passive pressure wedge of the soil. Where the ' horizontal distance of the available passive pressure wedge is less than 2.5 times the height of the soil, the passive pressure value must be reduced by the percent reduction ' in available horizontal length. 5. A coefficient of friction of .35 between the soil and concrete footings may be utilized ' to resist lateral loads in addition to the passive earth pressures above. 6. Retaining walls should be braced and monitored during compaction. If this cannot be accomplished, the compactive effort should be included as a surcharge load when designing the wall. ' 7. All walls shall be provided with adequate back drainage to relieve hydrostatic pressure, and be designed in accordance with the minimum standards contained in the "Retaining Wall Drainage Detail ", Appendix B. 8. Retaining wall backfill should be placed and compacted in accordance with the ' "Earthwork" section of this report. Backfill shall consist of a non - expansive granular, free draining material. SURFACE DRAINAGE ' Adequate drainage precautions at this site are imperative and will play a critical role on the future performance of the dwelling and improvements. Under no circumstances should ' water be allowed to pond against or adjacent to footings, foundation walls, or tops of slopes. The ground surface surrounding proposed improvements should be relatively impervious in nature, and slope to drain away from the structure in all directions, with a ' minimum slope of 3% for a horizontal distance of 7 feet (where possible). Area drains or surface swales should then be provided to accommodate runoff and avoid any ponding of ' water. Roof gutters and downspouts shall be installed on the new structure and tightlined Page No. 12 ' Job No. 981938 -1 D:UOBS11 JOBS1981981938 -1.RPT - Williams Residence - Oxford Avenue.wpd to the area drain system. All drains should be kept clean and unclogged, including gutters and downspouts. Area drains should be kept free of debris to allow for proper drainage. During periods of heavy rain, the performance of all drainage systems should be inspected. Problems such as gullying or ponding should be corrected as soon as possible. Any ' leakage from sources such as water lines should also be repaired as soon as possible. In addition, irrigation of planter areas, lawns, or other vegetation, located adjacent to the foundation or exterior flat work improvements, should be strictly controlled or avoided. 1 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION AND TESTING The recommendations provided in this report are based on subsurface conditions disclosed by our investigation of the project area. Interpolated subsurface conditions should be t verified in the field during construction. The following items shall be conducted prior /during construction by a representative of Engineering Design Group in orderto verify compliance with the geotechnical and civil engineering recommendations provided herein, as applicable. The project structural and geotechnical engineers may upgrade any condition as deemed necessary during the development of the proposed improvement(s). 1. Review of final approved project grading and structural plans prior to start of work. 2. Observation of removal /scarification bottom. (If the grading option is chosen). ' 3. Observation and testing of any fill placed, including retaining wall backfill. Fill material should be tested for 90% relative compaction at a minimum of 2 feet ' vertical elevation gain. 4. Foundation footing excavation observation prior to placement of reinforcement. 5. Field observation of any "field change" condition involving soils. ' 6. Walk through prior to final approval of proposed improvement(s). The project soils engineer may at their discretion deepen footings or locally recommend additional steel reinforcement to upgrade any condition as deemed necessary during site observations. Engineering Design Group shall, prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy, issue in writing that the above inspections have been conducted by a representative of their firm, and the design considerations of the project soils report have been met. The field inspection protocol specified herein is considered the minimum necessary for Engineering Design Group to have exercised "due diligence" in the soils engineering design aspect of this building. Engineering Design Group assumes no liability for structures constructed utilizing this report not meeting this protocol. ' Page No. 13 Job No. 981938 -1 ' DAJOBS %1 JOBS%98%981938 -1.RPT - Williams Residence - Oxford Avenue.wpd 1 The Engineering Design Group requires a minimum of 48 hours notice to mobilize onsite for field observation and testing. MISCELLANEOUS ' It must be noted that no structure or slab should be expected to remain totally free of ' cracks and minor signs of cosmetic distress. The flexible nature of wood and steel structures allows them to respond to movements resulting from minor unavoidable settlement of fill or natural soils, the swelling of clay soils, or the motions induced from seismic activity. All of the above can induce movement that frequently results in cosmetic cracking of brittle wall surfaces, such as stucco or interior plaster or interior brittle slab finishes. Data for this report was derived from surface observations at the site, knowledge of local conditions, and a visual observation of the soils exposed in the exploratory test pits. The 1 recommendations in this report are based on our experience in conjunction with the limited soils exposed at this site and neighboring sites. We believe that this information gives an acceptable degree of reliability for anticipating the behavior of the proposed structure; ' however, our recommendations are professional opinions and cannot control nature, nor can they assure the soils profiles beneath or adjacent to those observed. Therefore, no ' warranties of the accuracy of these recommendations, beyond the limits of the obtained data, is herein expressed or implied. This report is based on the investigation at the described site and on the specific anticipated construction as stated herein. If either of ' these conditions is changed, the results would also most likely change. Man -made or natural changes in the conditions of a property can occur over a period of ' time. In addition, changes in requirements due to state of the art knowledge and /or legislation, are rapidly occurring. As a result, the findings of this report may become invalid due to these changes. Therefore, this report for the specific site, is subject to review and ' not considered valid after a period of one year, or if conditions as stated above are altered. It is the responsibility of the owner or his representative to ensure that the information in this report be incorporated into the plans and /or specifications and construction of the project. It is advisable that a contractor familiar with construction details typically used to deal with the local subsoil and seismic conditions, be retained to build the structure. If you have any questions regarding this report, or if we can be of further service, please do not hesitate to contact us. We hope the report provides you with necessary information to continue with the development of the project. 1 Page No. 14 Job No. 981938 -1 ' MWO13S11 JOBS1981981 9 3 8 -1.RPT - Williams Residence - Oxford Avenue.wpd Very truly yours, ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP S dve t n N N�®r di California RCE #47672 1 Page No. 15 Job No. 981938-1 D.UOBS%l JOBS1981981938-I.RPT - Williams Residence - Oxford Avenue.wpd 1 1 = --- - �T ND � � � r • rASdML °M� g ! y oEt 1 L A . rc � w. i •, Alp 1 1 IA 151 t , ` +j � 1� ESC N 1 _ • S \ j 'LIKE '} ENC I o¢i this a rl n ll 0 n. xp RANCHO BERNARDO CARDIFF - BY u ?oo SFHiAOr`, • 5� �� ��, �, s . a 117 1 F E, JI — Fwy trfr N y�x� v ` o- r w' r = + & + nu 4 , SO EACH n FATRBANRS RANCHO 'Y brJ J g c �N f KA O p y C J p GARDENS Y . 1 11 EY ° ' 1 91 DEL MAR P)NF�� v vn 7 � a POWAY' { g�+ °D I CARMEL S F� P -�J� � VALLE' 9 �` i[rttav vowr SITE ' TORREY PINES 'rtrr ;Q.na � _ STATE RESERVE varuarr +hy l 120 � t . 1� { SORRENTO o SOR NM + a SCRI ° L 1 =��' ° MESA IRAMAR� g ntlwua .. ��'e�. . � a „. Q •'µ c.:M,Vb . • �� '.� i' .. as aLrr; �. r 1 ' 122 At _ n s ( sf .a i < 3 3 1 �EgST d� . ECEE [[[ IO �. W SOLEDI.Dlryv • Yr` ...Ot LA JOLLAs FI°N fIESA ` T R AN 1 8 cuuoar ST owurn GLAIR NT �� Av ri F < ^ 12 coin a �� B! 3 ur „rm 5>•N pD 1 q - L 5t •t R[IO �, F EL �� 'cif O p, P;e�� ��� fi �' LINM SERRA`�9 t � P o CE ak.. .. 111551 VISTA NESA4 F BAY PARKkt�j- i z►1551QNeEACN E� sL LEY o < y EzINw ao $ 0 mw 1 su T T o n7� 4r ON N L OAK SPRING o ' �. _ B A Ey EAL11 ~ s T N A PA - P o V 6� 1 °R R7 DIE 128 e I mm w 0r' �.M t 1 mxm 1 Q NOT TO SCALE 1 THE ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP SITE VICINITY MAP JOB NO. 981938 -1,5 BY: ER FIGURE NO. 1 1 SI - - - - - - LN 9 NE A RO Y l 6 ST $ g g al INELBA TREASURE! T � f : VIEW;IN - ' V1fYPC1Nf J S SAN PAW st Tarr �' ` y �i �I OIEGUITO I r T RK ♦ � 3S = �I Mot \ o 'J�I `�� nl JI N O SMA1115 ' a 3M SU RUB TEIN FAITH AV •;MANKIN SA NTA BEACH ST SUMMIT PL. _ ..•. R: cT �.IMUNEVAR SEA N TO '^ N 4 LIFF SZ 5 PL �^ -_ -I -L_ �- of n c T RD = 1 N � KtNGS ss ox '� wo ' SITE y " V U J I T r NI OE tDGE EK *r CARETTA WY \� `y,TLE E < �t�ir- - NNOLLBEEY� C' La KtLL E) Y � R SAN r c ,r r+a EL ST ATE wr Al • �QR yor- STA � �� \ BEACH ��� 1 �` t � ts N ��\� 1 � r W ` c �E,Q- ti t N Y�• o SAN CARDIFF I ELIJO STATE LAGOON Y BEACH Z Q NOT TO SCALE THE ENGINEERING DESIGN GROUP SITE LOCATION MAP JOB NO. 981938 -1,5 BY: ER FIGURE NO. 2 1 r OXFORD r AV EXISTING GARAGE 1 � TP -1 x � EXISTING RESIDENCE 1 r r x TP -2 r , 1 1 1 ' x APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF COMPACTION TEST 1 981938 -1 ENGINEERING DETAIL /FIGURE WILLIAMS DESIGN GROUP NUMBER ' 2354 OXFORD AVENUE 810 WEST LOS VALLECITOS BLVD. DRAWN BY: ER SUITE "A" 1 SAN MARCOS, CA 92069 SCALE: NO SCALE (780) 752 -7010 FAX (760) 752 -7092 DATE 1 -12 -98 � 9 1 U) w ~ : 3 \ 2 - „ 7 O / O _ ƒ m } g w / ? a LLI k Ch q 2 ¥ i k u U) / \ Q / § a. \ �\ �, /) § e & iL2 2) �m �g iL c )�n �e » §2 L § 2 §a2W�AZ! 2 ! �3� °! a 2 °�4\�$G m ° U. ! § kaj8 / /E@agE k\\ /\ §w w = -C \ ƒ 5 a 2 # 0 / 6 f 2 w co + ƒ %/ 0 � /\ f / Ro .. U) § f 2 b� �b2 'D 00 E •• q 2 E 2 / / $D� � w , /k IL @ Do q 0 w _ � U) % w k O R $ ' % U) 0 % . U) 9 6 4 EL 2 w O ƒ Q . 2 . . u U) 2 « < > w E / m (D $ Lqv I R //o / u M M: 0 CL / kk� 9 q F- F- 0 Q QUI q O 3 0 / E . . . . . . . . . . . a- CL C) o N n r o w = o / ( U) E / OP f I L - w \ \ E w � IL O E Of J CL w K k w k ~ 2 ¥ ¥ 2 / 7 2 = w / § C/) d ( j ( LU z , j� ° w2 =b §§ `§ § »u2�S8 Ei > /2 e ® §a2��A�§ S§?ƒ5 /` E z Z Lu 0 o 2 o w 11 .§ § \ k7j8§ \E @ §aE kE\E/ §� e U- g 7 § E / 0 k 2 $ _2 $ E k i ƒ w 2 2 R - 2 2 c \LU /\ �k k k a IL W E E / e e co / k // O../ 2 E \ \O f @Z / < % / 2 k 2 .\ \ , �cu b mU) I ƒ / m w \ w U - z , 0 \ � E / b / w / p / © • /� U , 2 ' u Q U) w E ® S E /�/ C / \ƒ� ° w k3o 2 w d�/ S a. w kk� q ww3 0 @ dw w k ƒ � � ƒ < a. ƒ w o / \ / \ / / \ / / / APPENDDC -A- APPENDIX A ' REFERENCES ' 1 California Department D of Conservation , Division of Mines and Geology, Fault - . Rupture Zones in California, Special Publication 42, Revised 1990. ' 2. Greensfelder, R.W., 1974, Maximum Credible Rock Acceleration from Earthquakes in California: California Division of Mines and Geology, Map Sheet ' 23. 3. Tan, S.S., 1995, Landslide Hazards in the Northern San Diego Metropolitan t Area, California: California Division of Mines and Geology, Open File Report. 4. Engineering Design Group, Unpublished In -House Data. 5. Ploessel, M.R., and Slosson, J.E., 1974, Repeatable High Ground Acceleration ' from Earthquakes: California Geology, Vol. 27, No. 9, P. 195 -199. 6. State of California, 1994, Fault Activity Map of California: California Division ' Mines and Geology, Geologic Data, Map No. 6. 7. State of California, Geologic Map of California, Map No. 2, Dated 1977. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 APPENDDC -B- 1 GENERAL_ EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS ' 1.0 General Intent These specifications are presented as general procedures and recommendations for ' grading and earthwork to be utilized in conjunction with the approved grading plans. These general earthwork and grading specifications are a part of the recommendations contained in the geotechnical report and shall be superseded by ' the recommendations in the geotechnical report in the case of conflict. Evaluations performed by the consultant during the course of grading may result in new recommendations which could supersede these specifications or the I recommendations of the geotechnical report. It shall be the responsibility of the contractor to read and understand these specifications, as well as the geotechnical report and approved grading plans. 2.0 Earthwork Observation and Testing Prior to the commencement of grading, a qualified geotechnical consultant should be employed for the purpose of observing earthwork procedures and testing the fills for conformance with the recommendations of the geotechnical report and these specifications. It shall be the responsibility of the contractor to assist the consultant ' and keep him apprised of work schedules and changes, at least 24 hours in advance, so that he may schedule his personnel accordingly. No grading operations should be performed without the knowledge of the geotechnical consultant. The contractor shall not assume that the geotechnical consultant is aware of all grading operations. It shall be the sole responsibility of the contractor to provide adequate equipment and ' methods to accomplish the work in accordance with applicable grading codes and agency ordinances, recommendations in the geotechnical report, and the approved grading plans not withstanding the testing and observation of the geotechnical consultant. If, in the opinion of the consultant, unsatisfactory conditions, such as unsuitable soil, poor moisture condition, inadequate compaction, adverse weather, ' etc., are resulting in a quality of work less than recommended in the geotechnical report and the specifications, the consultant will be empowered to reject the work and recommend that construction be stopped until the conditions are rectified. Maximum dry density tests used to evaluate the degree of compaction should be performed in general accordance with the latest version of the American Society for ' Testing and Materials test method ASTM D1557. c 1 3.0 Preparation of Areas to be Filled 3.1 Clearing and Grubbing Sufficient brush, vegetation, roots and all other deleterious material should be removed or properly disposed of in a method acceptable to the owner, design engineer, governing agencies and the geotechnical consultant. The geotechnical consultant should evaluate the extent of these removals depending on specific site conditions. In general, no more than 1 percent (by volume) of the fill material should consist of these materials and nesting of these materials should not be allowed. 3.2 Processing The existing ground which has been evaluated by the geotechnical consultant to be satisfactory for support of fill, should be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches. Existing ground which is not satisfactory should be overexcavated as specified in the following section. Scarification should continue until the soils are broken down and free of large clay lumps or clods and until the working surface is reasonably uniform, flat, and free of uneven features which would inhibit uniform compaction. ' 3.3 Overexcavation Soft, dry, organic -rich, spongy, highly fractured, or otherwise unsuitable ground, extending to such a depth that surface processing cannot adequately improve the condition, should be overexcavated down to ' competent ground, as evaluated by the geotechnical consultant. For purposes of determining quantities of materials overexcavated, a licensed land surveyor /civil engineer should be utilized. 3.4 Moisture Conditioning Overexcavated and processed soils should be watered, dried -back, blended, and /or mixed, as necessary to attain a uniform moisture content near optimum. 3.5 Recompaction Overexcavated and processed soils which have been properly mixed, screened of deleterious material, and moisture - conditioned should be recompacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent or as otherwise recommended by the geotechnical consultant. 1 i i -2- 1 1 3.6 Belching: Where fills are to be placed on ground with slopes steeper than 5:1 ' (horizontal to vertical), the ground should be stepped or benched. The lowest bench should be a minimum of 15 feet wide, at least 2 feet into competent ' material as evaluated by the geotechnical consultant. Other benches should be excavated into competent material as evaluated by the geotechnical consultant. Ground sloping flatter than 5:1 should be benched or otherwise overexcavated when recommended by the geotechnical consultant. ' 3.7 Evaluation of Fill Areas All areas to receive fill, including processed areas, removal areas, and toe -of -fill benches, should be evaluated by the geotechnical consultant prior to fill placement. ' 4.0 Fill Matedal 4.1 n r I: Material to be placed should and shou d by the matter and other deleterious s ubstances geotechnical consultant prior too placement. Soils of poor gradation, expansion, or strength characteristics should be placed as recommended by ' the geotechnical consultant or mixed with other soils to achieve satisfactory fill material. 4.2 Ov =ize Oversize material, defined as rock or other irreducible material with a maximum dimension greater than 6 inches, should not be buried or placed in fills, unless the location, materials, and disposal methods are specifically recommended by the geotechnical consultant. Oversize disposal operations ' should be such that nesting of oversize material does not occur, and such that the oversize material is completely surrounded by compacted or densified fill. Oversize material should not be placed within 10 feet vertically of finish grade, 1 within 2 feet of future utilities or underground construction, or within 15 feet horizontally of slope faces, in accordance with the attached detail. 1 ' -3- 4.3 Import: If importing of fill material is required for grading, the import material should meet the requirements of Section 4.1. Sufficient time should be given to allow the geotechnical consultant to observe (and test, if necessary) the ' proposed import materials. ' 5.0 Fill Placement and Compaction ' 5.1 Fill Lifts: Fill material should be placed in areas prepared and previously evaluated to receive fill, in near - horizontal layers approximately 6 inches in compacted thickness. Each layer should be spread evenly and thoroughly ' mixed to attain uniformity of material and moisture throughout. ' 5.2 Moisture Conditioning Fill soils should be watered, dried -back, blended, and /or mixed, as necessary to attain a uniform moisture content near optimum. 5.3 Compaction of Fill After each layer has been evenly spread, moisture - 1 conditioned, and mixed, it should be uniformly compacted to not less than 90 percent of maximum dry density (unless otherwise specified). Compaction equipment should be adequately sized and be either specifically designed for ' soil compaction or of proven reliability, to efficiently achieve the specified degree and uniformity of compaction. ' 5.4 Fill Sl opes: Compacting of slopes should be accomplished, in addition to normal compacting procedures, by backrolling of slopes with sheepsfoot rollers ' at increments of 3 to 4 feet in fill elevation gain, or by other methods producing satisfactory results. At the completion of grading, the relative compaction of ' the fill out to the slope face would be at least 90 percent. 5.5 compaction Testing Field tests of the moisture content and degree of compaction of the fill soils should be performed at the consultant's discretion based on field conditions encountered. In general, the tests should be taken at approximate intervals of 2 feet in vertical rise and /or 1,000 cubic yards of compacted fill soils. In addition, on slope faces, as a guideline approximately ' one test should be taken for each 5,000 square feet of slope face and /or each 10 feet of vertical height of slope. ' 6.0 Subdrain Installation t Subdrain systems, if recommended, should be installed in areas previously evaluated for suitability by the geotechnical consultant, to conform to the approximate alignment and details shown on the plans or herein. The subdrain location or materials should ' not be changed or modified unless recommended by the geotechnical consultant. The consultant, however, may recommend changes in subdrain line or grade depending on conditions encountered. All subdrains should be surveyed by a licensed land surveyor /civil engineer for line and grade after installation. Sufficient time shall be allowed for the survey, prior to commencement of filling over the ' subdrains. ' 7.0 Excavation Excavations and cut slopes should be evaluated by a representative of the t geotechnical consultant (as necessary) during grading. If directed by the geotechnical consultant, further excavation, overexcavation, and refilling of cut areas and /or remedial grading of cut slopes (i.e., stability fills or slope buttresses) may be recommended. 8.0 Quantity Determination For purposes of determining quantities of materials excavated during grading and /or determining the limits of overexcavation, a licensed land surveyor /civil engineer should be utilized. ' -5- 1� MINIMUM RETAINING WALL WATERPROOFING r & DRAINAGE DETAIL FINAL WATERPROOFING SPECIFICATIONS & DETAILS TO BE PROVIDED BY PROJECT ARCHITECT ' MASTIC TO BE APPLIED TO TOP OF WALL MASTIC TYPE WATER PROOFING (HLM 5000 OR EQUIV) INSTALLED PER MANUFACTURES TOP OF RETAINING WALL SPECIFICATIONS & PROTECTED WITH BACKER BOARD (ABOVE MIRADRAIN) MASK NOT TO BE EXPOSED TO SUNLIGHT SOIL BACKFILL, COMPACTED TO 90% ; RELATIVE COMPACTION 2� % PER REFERENCE 11 z — / PROPOSED SLOPE BACKCUT t .. 6'. i,e,p = PER OSHA STANDARDS END MIRADRAIN (top) OR PER ALTERNATIVE SLOPING. a — AREA DRAIN PLAN, OR PER APPROVED RETAINING WALL i SYSTEM SHORING PUN MIRADRAIN MEMBRANE FILTER FABRIC ENVELOPE ' INSTALLED PER MANUFACTURES (MIRAFI 140N OR SPECIFICATIONS OVER MASTIC 'j''.�IN . I I APPROVED EQUIVALENT) WATERPROOFING — HLM 5000 12" MIN. LAP OR EQUIVALENT ! �_ —, 3/4" — 1 1/2" CLEAN — GRAVEL t i — i— ' � ' ' � ' 4'X4" (45d) CONCRETE CANT -! i — - I El I I = I � — I O FOOTING/WALL CONNECTION _ = i i I I I - I i t - I I - I I UNDER WATER PROOFING I= ( ) ' _ _ 4 I -i 4" (MIN.) DIAMETER — i , I PERFORATED PVC PIPE e (SCHEDULE 40 OR EQ.) ° — I MATH PERFORATIONS i - << < I �(<� •�� <� i� i,� � �.`.. <�`� .�'�`: `!` < < "��. ORIENTED DOWN AS i`. <�< �x < �< . < << , < c� ��� DEPICTED MIN. 2% `F < <`• < , �1`l` <`<`' �.' <<,.<<' GRADIENT TO SUITABLE COMPACTED FILL WALL FOOTING OUTLET. ' OR BEDROCK END MIRADRAIN (bottom) COMPETENT BEDROCK OR FILL MATERIAL AS EVALUATED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT PROJECT NUMBER ENGINEERING D NUMBER UR PROJECT NAME DESIGN GROUP PROJECT ADDRESS 810 WEST LOS VALLECITOS BLVD. SUITE "A" DRAWN BY: SAN MARCOS, CA 92069 SCALE: 1 " =1 ' -0° (760) 752 -7010 FAX (760) 752 -7092 D OESIGN CONDITIONS: INSPECTIONS: Wells are to be used for the lading conditions shown for Call for inspections as follows: each type well. Design H shall not be exceeded. Footing key is required except as shown otherwise or when A. When the footing has been formed, with the steel tied found unnecessary by the Engineer. securely in final position, and is ready for the concrete Special footing design is required where foundation material to be placed. is uncapable of supporting toe pressure listed in table. DESIGN DATA: B. Where cleanout holes are not provided: , (1) After the blocks have been laid up to a height of Reinforced Concrete: 4', or full height for walls up to 5 , with steel in Fc 1200 psi F'c = 3000 psi place but before the grout is poured, and .... . Fs = 20,000 psi n = 10 (2) After the first lift is properly grouted, the blocks Reinforced Mason have been laid up to the top of the wall with the Masonry: steel tied securely in place but before the upper F'm 600 psi Fm 200 psi lift is grouted. Fs = 20,000 psi n = 50 Where cleanout holes are provided: Earth = 120 pcf and Equivalent Fluid Pressure 36 psf per toot of height Walls shown for 114:1 unlimited After the blocks have been laid up to the top of sloping surcharge are designed in accordance with the wall, with the steel tied securely in place, but Rankline's formula for unlimited sloping surcharge with before grouting. a 33° 42: C. After grouting is complete and after rock or rubble wall REINFORCEMENT: drains are in place but before earth backfill is placed. Intermediate grade, hard grade, or rail steel deformation shall 0. Final inspection when all work has been completed. conform to ASTM A615, A616, A617. Bars shall lap 40 diameters, where spliced, unless otherwise shown on the plans. CONCRETE GROUT AND MORTAR MIXES: Bends shall conform to the Manual . of Standard Practice, A.C.I. Backing for hooks is four diameters. All bar embedments are Concrete grout shall attain a minimum compressive strength of clear distances to outside of bar. Spacing for parallel ban is 2,000 psi in 28 days and mortar shall attain 1,800 psi in 28 days. center to center of bars. All calls shall be filled with grout Rod or vibrate grout MASONRY: within 10 minutes of pouring to insure consolidation. Bring grout to a point 2" from the top of masonry units when grouting of second lift is to be continued at another time. All reinforced masonry retaining walls shall be constructed of regular or light weight standard units conforming to the "Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction." MORTAR KEY: JOINTS: To insure proper bonding between the footing and the first course of block, a mortar key shall be formed by embedding Vertical control joints shall be plead at 32 foot intervals a flat 2 X 4 flush with and at the top of the freshly poured maximum. Joints shall be designed to resist shear and footing. The 2 X 4 should be removed after the concrete has other lateral forces while permitting longitudal movement started to harden (approximately 1 hour). Vertical expansion joints shall be placed at 96 foot inter- A mortar key may be omitted if the first course of block is vals maximum. set into the fresh concrete when the footing is poured,-and a CONCRETE: good bond is obtained. Footing concrete shall be 560 —C -3250, using 8 aggregate WALL DRAINS: when placing conditions permit. Wall drains shall be provided in accordance with Standard BACKFILL: Drawing C•8. No backfill material shall be placed against masonry retaining walls until grout has reached design strength or until grout has cured for a minimum of 28 days. Compaction of backfill material by jetting or ponding with water will not be permitted. SOIL: Each layer of backfill shall be moistened as directed by the Engineer and thoroughly tamped, rolled or otherwise compacted All footings shall extend at least 12 inches into undisturbed until the relative compaction is not less than 90%. natural soil or approved compacted fill. Soil should be dampened FENCING: prior to placing concrete in footings. Safety fencing shall be installed at the top of the wall as required by the agency. THE MINIMING DEEM GROW RETAINING WALL DETAIL come IT: la rlGuar rlO: ' r Edge of Footing I N +L _I ' lay line 1 1 1 i I 1 ' 1 1/2 : 1 sloping backfill or PLAN 1 1/2 : 1 sloping backfill or 250 psf. live load surcharge 250 psf- live load surcharge ' mortar cap H= 5' - 4" H- 3' - 8" mortar cap x N 4 total 2 4 total 2 RE Y I x ' 1 - c bars TF 0o a I--- -� 2 !V I I C � 2 • 1 4 total 2 bars bars 1, 2 4 total 3 m ° . ►— Key • key � W/2 N 1 2 ,._ 4 total 5 I I 1' 6'• 12 "x 12" � 1 4 @ 12" W Key °D W/2 I 1 14 @ 12" `h u u t'' own Horizontal reinf, not shown ---J 1 � " TYPICAL SECTION W 3' - 8" max. ' TYPICAL SECTION ELEVATION over 3' - 8" DIMENSIONS AND REINFORCING STEEL ' H (max) 5'- 4" 1 3'. 8" T (min) 0' 10" 0'- 10" ' NOTES W (min) 5' • 0" 3'- 9" 1. See Standard Drawings C -7 and C -8 for A bars / 4 @ 16" additional notes and details. 6 bars / 6 @ 16" 1 4 @ 16" ' 2. Fill all block cells with grout. max. toe 700 550 press. (psf) 1 ' THE ENGINEERING DEMN GROUP RETAINING WALL DETAIL ' M Not 111t fN FIGURE NCH .H ' No surcharge loads within ;his area for level backfill design. Filter Material, 1" nax. crushed = 8 aggregate, 4 cu. ft. per 4" dia. t E ±1 drain or 1 cu. ft. per ft. of open io head joints. 4" dia. drain with 1/4" galy. wire mesh T screen 8' • 0" on centers, or one row i horizontally of open head joints. ' Line of undisturbed natural soil _ ' TYPICAL SECTION Mortar or Cast -in -play concrete 9" 12" block wall Finished ground line 5 1/4" 8" block wall t= �'I• 4key Vertical reinf. Vertical reinf. Grout filled block calls Top of footing Horizontal reinf. thru bond beam block2" x 4" (nom CAP DETAIL KEY DETAIL NOTES: 1.. All masonry retaining walls shall be constructed with cap, key and drainage details as shown hereon. 2. 4" diameter drain may be formed by placing a block on it's side. THE EMINEERING DEMN GROUP RETAINING WALL DETAIL Not I en w I MURR Noy I S DE HILL STABILITY FILL DETAIL 1 1 EX13TING GROUND ' SURFACE i I / / FINISHED SLOPE FACE PROJECT 1 TO 1 LINE / / / / FINISHED CUT PAD FROM TOP OF SLOPE TO — OUTSIDE EDGE OF KEY -------- - - - - -- — r ✓iarr r� ,r - _COMPACT - - -- 1 __ _F=ps = OVERBURDEN OR =,�_ ► r�r UNSUITABLE __ _ _ __--=-- PAO OVEREXCAVATION DEPTH MATERIAL AND RECOMPACTION MAY BE RECOMMENDED BY THE ' �_v ==� Y_ _ BENCH GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT BASED ON ACTUAL FIELD CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED. ' rar_ — t s' MlN. COMPETENT BEDROCK OR MI N. LOWEST MATERIAL AS EVALUATED DEPTH BENCH BY THE GEOTECHNICAL t (KEY) CONSULTANT 1 NOTE: Subdrain details and key width recommendations to be provided based ' on exposed subsurface conditions CANYON SUBORAIN DETAILS HXISTINO OFIOU140 3URFAC11 Z _ _ =�_= _= REMOVE --- a UNSUITABLE MATERIAL SUBORAIN TRENCH SEE BELOW SUBDRAIN TRENCH DETAILS i a' MIN. OVERLAP FILTER FABRIC ENVELOPE e' MIN. OVERLAP (MIRAFI 140M OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT)* 6' MIN. a' M N "I . ER = I COVER COVER � I • '. 3/4'- 1-1/2' CLEAN GRAVEL 4' MIN. BEDDING (oft3 /ft. MIN.) 3/1'- 1 -1/2' CLEAN GRAVEL (s1t 3 /ft. MIN.) 1 0 MIN. *!F CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE PERFORATED MATERIAL IS USED IN PLACE OF PIPE 3/4't-1-1/2' GRAVEL. FILTER FABRIC MAY BE DELETED DETAIL OF CANYON SUBDRAIN TERMINAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR CALTRANS ' CLASS Z PERMEABLE MATERIAL OE91GN FINISH GRADE __ - == SUBDRAIN U.S. Standard TRENCH Sieve Size Z Passing SEE ABOVE G =0 _ 1 100 __- _ -__= _= _== :FILM? == 3 /4" 90 -100 == = = = = �_ - 313' 40 -100 INC. a -40 N 18 ' 8 IS -33 Nc. 30 5 -15 No. 50 0 -7 15' MIN. 5'MIN L� PERFORATED No . 200 0 -3 8' 0 MIN. PIPE Sand Equivalent >75 NONPERFORATEO 6' 0 MIN. Subdraln should be constructed only on competent material as evaluated by the geotechnlcal consultant. SUBDRAIN INSTALLATION Subdraln PIPS should be Installed with perforations down as depicted. At locations recommended by the geotechnical consultant, nonperforated pipe should be Installed. SUBORAIN TYPE- Subdroln type should be Acrylonitrlle Butadiene Styrene (A.B.S.). Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) or approved equivalent. Class 125, SOR 32.5 should be used for maximum j fill depths of 33 feet. Class 200, SOR 21 should be used for maximum fill depths of 100 feet. j ' STABILITY FILL / BUTTRESS SS DETA L OUTLET PIPES 4' 0 NONPERFORATEO PIPE. _ �= t 100' MAX. O C HORIZONTALLY. 30' MAX. O.C. VERTICALLY BACK CUT 1:1 OR FLATTER BENCH ?Z1 MINc __ SEE SUBDRAIN TRENC DETAIL LOWEST SUBORAIN SHOUL; _= =CO_b1AACj_�_Q= BE SITUATED AS LOW AS POSSIBLE TO ALLOW ' - -- _ SUITABLE OUTLET KEY - � = = == _ -___ -_ = = = = == '` r �� t �� 10 � ___ _____ � =�25 1rIIN.____ _ PERFORATED MIN. DEPTH - -__ PIPE IN. DEPTH SIDE 2 � _= = _' CAP MIN. - ------- -- - - NON - PERFORATED - -� - -- - - -" OUTLET PIPE ' KEY WIDTH AS NOTED ON GRADING PLANS T- CONNECTION DETAIL 13' MIN. ' *IF CALTRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL IS USED IN PLACE OF 3/4'- 1 -1/2' GRAVEL. FILTER FABRIC ' SEE T- CONNECTION MAY BE DELETED 8' MIN. DETAIL OVERLAP - , SPECIFICATIONS FOR CALTRANS ' 3/4'- 1 -1/2' _ CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL CLEAN GRAVEL 1 8' MIN. (31`01ft. MIN.) /� _ I COVER U.S. Standard I Sieve Size Passing NON - PERFORATED PERFORATED 1" 100 PIPE PIPE 3 1 90 -100 � 3/8" d0 -100 ' S$ FILTER FABRIC MIN. No. d 25 -40 ENVELOPE (MIRAFI 4' MIN. 1 9 18 -33 140N OR APPROVED BEDDING yo 30 5 -15 EQUIVALENT) * 'No. 50 0 N o. 20 SUBDRAIN TRENCH DETAIL Sa nd E qulvalent > 7 5 ' NOTES: For buttress dimensions, see geotechnical report /plans. Actual dimensions of buttress and subdrai may be changed by the geotechnical consultant based on field conditions. SUBDRAIN INSTALLATION -Subdraln pipe should be installed with perforations down as depicted. At locations recommended by the geotechnical consultant, nonperforated pipe should be Installed SUBDRAIN TYPE- Subdrain type should be Acrylon trile Butadiene Styrene (A.B.S.). Polyvinyl Chloride ' (PVC) or approved equivalent. Class 125.30R 32.5 should be used for maximum fill depths of 35 feet. Class 200,80R 21 should be used for maximum fill depths of 100 feet. ' KEY AND HIN BENC d DETAILS FILL SLOPE PROJECT 1 TO 1 LINE s -L FROM TOE OR SLOPE 3�t. TO COMPETENT MATERIAL iiii -- GROUNO SURFACE REMOVE UNSUITABLE MATERIAL t .. -� BENCH f 2' MIN.}- --13' ' KEY I LOWEST DEPTH BENCH (KEY) ' ____OIMPACTEO =mss?' FILL - OVER -CUT SLOPE _ = EXISTING ' GROUND SURFACE BENCH - 2 TAW. • / � � � � �-13' W REMOVE 2 MIN; UNSUITABLE MIN. BENCH MATERIAL DEPTH (KEY) CUT SLOPE ' (TO BE EXCAVATED PRIOR TO FILL PLACEMENT) ' EXISTING GROUND r, SURFACE------,,, A t / _ „� ` yam CUT SLOPE ' CUT - OVER -FILL SLOPE / / " (TO BE EXCAVATED / PRIOR TO FILL PLACEMENT) REMOVE _- UNSUITABLE PROJECT 1 TO 1 = _ -- _ „ MATERIAL ' LINE FROM TOE _ _ = OF SLOPE TO p�„iPACT COMPETENT AC MATERIAL = - 1 BENCH ' Tls' MIN 2' MIN. LOWEST KEY DEPTH BENCH (KEY) ' NOTE. Back drain may be recommended by the geotechnical consultant based on actual field conditions encountered. Bench dimension recommendations may also be altered based on field conditions encountered. 1 1 1 1 1 1 ,PoE.oD(< 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r HOMEOWNERS MAINTENANCE GUIDELINES r Residential home sites require periodic maintenance of irrigation and drainage systems to insure proper performance and overall retention of property value. Often, homeowners are ' not aware of the importance of these systems and allow them to deteriorate. During the construction phase of development, governing agencies require property ' developers to utilize specific methods of engineering and construction to protect the public interest. For instance, the developer may be required to grade the property in such a manner that rainwater will be drained away from the building pad, install brow ditches and terrace drains, and to plant slopes to minimize erosion. However, once the lot is purchased, it becomes the buyer's responsibility to maintain these safety features by observing a prudent program of lot care and maintenance. Failure to make regular inspections and perform necessary maintenance of drainage devices and sloping areas may cause severe financial loss. In addition to his /her own property damage, the property owner may be subject to civil liability for damage occurring to neighboring properties as a result of negligence. The following maintenance guidelines are provided for the protection of the homeowner's investment: A. All roof gutter and downspout systems, installed on the residence, should be tightlined to a suitable outlet away from the structure. Under no circumstances should water be allowed to pond onsite, particularly against r the perimeter foundation system. B. Soils grades adjacent to the foundation of the structure should be sloped to ' direct water away from the foundation and into a collective drainage system. Soil grades should slope a minimum of 2% for a horizontal distance of 5 feet away from the structure. r C. The irrigation of planter systems located immediately adjacent to the foundation should be strictly controlled to avoid over watering. Saturation of ' soils in these planters may result in soil settlement/expansion and associated distress. r D. Care should be taken to ensure that slopes, terraces, berm, and proper lot drainage are not disturbed. ' E. In general, roof and yard runoff should be directed to either the street or storm drain by non - erosive devices such a sidewalks, drainage pipes, ground ' gutters, and driveways. Drainage systems should not be altered without expert consultation. ' Page No. 1 1 HOMEOWNERS MAINTENANCE GUIDELINES F. All drains should be kept clean and unclogged, including gutters and downspouts. Terrace drains or gunite ditches should be kept free of debris to allow proper drainage. During periods of heavy rain, the performance of the drainage systems should be inspected. Problems, such as gullying and ponding, if observed, should be corrected as soon as possible. G. An leakage from pools, waterlines etc. or surface runoff Y g P � bypassing drains should be repaired as soon as possible. H. Animal burrows should be eliminated since they may cause diversion of surface runoff, promote accelerated erosion, and even trigger shallow slope failures. I. Slopes should not be altered without expert consultation. Whenever a homeowner plans a topographic modification of a lot or slope, a qualified geotechnical consultant should be contacted. J. If unusual cracking, settling, or earth slippage occurs on the property, the owner should consult a qualified geotechnical consultant immediately. ' K. The most common causes of slope erosion and shallow slope failures are as follows: • Gross neglect of the care and maintenance of onsite slopes and drainage devices. • Inadequate and /or improper planting. Barren areas should be replanted as soon as possible. • Excessive or insufficient irrigation or diversion of runoff over the slope. L. Property owners should not let conditions on their property adversely impact their neighbors. Cooperation with neighbors could prevent problems and increase the aesthetic attractiveness of the community. Page No. 2