1996-8225 G
Street Address
Category Serial #
z `L 5 ( a~eOG)A) leF5! DEA)ce-c
Name Description
Lq_q, 0 5 6t)
gppgrt
Engineering
C O R R OR AT 1 O N
SEP 20 QQ6
Drainage Basin Study for the Brown Residence
Parcel 4 of Parcel Map 15133
Prepared By:
LEPPERT ENGINEERING CORPORATION
July 12, 1996
Revised September 17, 1996
Job No. ENC 11.01-11.94
~Q~OFESS/p,~q
S. Kg
w No. 31329
a=
EXP.1~ls-►E'
Cf\
5933 Balboa Avenue • San Diego, California 92111 (619) 576-1984
1111110
Table of Contents
Introduction 2
Method of Calculation 2
Site Drainage Calculations 2-5
Appendix
Run-off Coefficients A
Natural Watershed Time of Concentration Nomograph B
Isopluvial Map (100 YR. , 6 Hour) C
Isopluvial Map (100 YR., 24 Hour) D
Intensity-Duration-Frequency Curve E
Chart 1-104.12 - Gutter Discharge Velocity Chart (City of San Diego) F
Exhibits
Site Drainage Map 1
Overall Drainage Map 2
Brown Residence
Drainage Study
Job No. ENC 11.01-11.94
September 17, 1996
Page 2
Introduction
The enclosed drainage study has been prepared in order to compute the storm
water runoff from the development of this site as a single family residence with
tennis court and pool area.
Method of Calculation
This study proposes to calculate the total runoff from the site using the County of
San Diego's procedures for hydrologic computations. The specific method used is
the Rational Formula for watersheds under 0.5 square miles. The proposed grading
and site improvement design will rely upon the proposed driveway as the main
drainage course to collect surface runoff that will eventually drain onto Wishbone
Way, a private road.
Procedure for Calculating Time of Concentration and Rainfall Intensity
For the purposes of this study, the time of concentration for the anticipated rainfall
intensity was calculated by first estimating the time of concentration of the offsite
drainage basin that drains towards the project from the east. For simplicity, the
private driveway will act as the main drainage course to convey runoff through the
property. Using the calculated runoff draining onto the property from the east, the
on-site time of concentration was calculated for the overland flow from the top of
the driveway to Wishbone Way. Through an iterative process, the design rainfall
intensity for the overall project was calculated by analyzing the total time of
concentration from the farthest most point offsite to the point of discharge at
Wishbone Way.
1. Off-site Drainage Basin: ( See Exhibit 1)
Drainage Basin Area, Al = 0.18 ac.
Coefficient of runoff, C = .45 (From Appendix A, Rural Residential, Soil
Group D).
Length of watershed, L = 110 ft. = 0.021 miles
Difference in elevation, H = 6 ft.
Brown Residence
Drainage Study
Job No. ENC 11.01-11.94
September 17, 1996
Page 3
Time of Concentration, Tc= [11.9(0.021)3/61.385 , (From App. B)
= 0.015 hr.
= 0.9 min. + 10 min., (Add 10 mi. from App. B)
= 11 min.
From Appendix C, D and E:
P6 = 2.9 in.
1100= 7.44(P(3 )(Tr )-.645 = 7.44(2.9)(11)-.645 = 4.6 in./hr. , (From
App. E)
Q100= (c)(i)(A) _ (.45)(4.6)(.18)=0.37 c.f.s. (Rational Formula)
2. Time of Concentration and On-site Drainage Computations: (See Exhibit 1)
Using the runoff from the offsite drainage basin calculated in paragraph 1 above
and utilizing the driveway gutter to convey the runoff to the point of discharge,
the on-site time of concentration and estimated runoff draining towards
Wishbone Way is calculated as follows:
Iteration No. 1
Q=0.37 c.f.s.
Average driveway slope, S=0.063 ft./ft.
From City of San Diego Chart 1-104.12 (Appendix F)
Gutter Velocity, V=5 ft sec. (Assumed since chart does not
include flows less than 1 c.f.s.).
The overland time of concentration, Tc = L/V =110 sec. = 1.83 min.,
(use 2 min.), where L = 550 ft. ( length of the driveway).
The total time of concentration, Ttota, = 2 + 11 =13 min.
From Appendix E:
l.di..Led = 7.44(P6)(Ttota1))-.645 =4.13 in./hr.
Atota, = 0.18 + 1.80 = 1.98 ac., total drainage basin intercepted by the
driveway, (See Exhibit 1).
C =.45, Runoff coefficient.
Brown Residence
Drainage Study
Job No. ENC 11.01-11.94
September 17, 1996
Page 4
Iteration No. 2
Q=3.68 c.f.s.
From City of San Diego Chart 1-104.12 (Appendix F)
Gutter Velocity, V=5.5 ft/sec.
The overland time of concentration, Tc =L/V= 100 sec. = 1.67 min.,
(use 2 min.), where L = 550 ft. ( length of the driveway).
The total time of concentration, Ttota, = 2 + 11 =13 min.
From Appendix E:
ladjusted = 7.44(P6)(Ttota1) ) .645 =4.13 in./hr., (Use as 1100)
Atota, = 0.18 + 1.80 =1.98 ac., total drainage basin intercepted by the
driveway, (See Exhibit 1).
C =.45, Runoff coefficient.
Qadjustad=(.45)(4.13)(1.98)=3.68 c.f.s., (Use as peak runoff for 1100)
a
RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS (RATIONAL METHOD)
LAND USE Coefficient, C
Soil Group (1)
A B C D
Undeveloped 30 35 40 45
Residential:
Rural .30 .33 .40 .11;
Single Family .40 .45 .50 .55
Multi-Units .45 .50 .60 .70
Mobile Homes (2) .45 .50 .55 .63
Commercial (2) .70 75 80 SS
80% Impervious
Industrial (2) .80 .85 .90 .95
90% Impervious
NOTES:
(1) Obtain soil group from maps on file with the Department of Sanitation
and Flood Control.
(2) Where actual conditions deviate significantly from the tabulated
imperviousness values of 800 or 900, the values given for coefficient
C, may be revised by multiplying 800 or 90% by the ratio of actual
imperviousness to the tabulated imperviousness. However, in no case
shall the final coefficient be less than 0.50. For example: Consider
commercial property on D soil group.
Actual imperviousness = 50%
Tabulated imperviousness = 800-
Revised C = 50 X 0.85 = 0.53
Appendix A
N EQLIAT/ON
9I J 1 .3BS
FGef Tc - y J
SDOO Tc ~ Tune of concenfmfion (NR.)
~DOO L - Length of watershed (M~,
H - 01110e.-ence %n e%vafivn a/oog (FT)
3000 e1/ecf/re s/ooe 1117 (See Appendix Y B) T
L c
Aflles A-& e/
y0t/rs M%/JUfGJ
ZODD ¢ 240
3 /BD
/O
/OOD
~ 900
BOO 1 /Z0
700
600 \ 1,040
\ s 90
S00 \ 80
400 4 70
.ADD \ 3 / 60
\ SD
200 \ \ Z
~O
\ 30
/DO / SDOD
`¢~D0 20
\ /e
30,00 \ A;
SO
40 2000 \ \ /2
/BOO \
.70 NOTE /coo /0
/400 g
FOR NATURAL WATERSEMEDS) /100 B
20 ADD TEN MINUTES TO /000 7
:~2ELR' TED TIME OF CON- 900
I TION_ BOO 6
s===~-J 1OD
60 0 S
/D SOD ¢
400
300
5
zoo
H L 7c-
SAN DIEGO COUNTY NOMOGRAPH FOR DETERMINATION
DEPARTMENT OF SPECIAL DISTRICT SERVICES OF TIME OF CONCENTRATION (Tc)
FOR NATURAL WATERSHEDS
DESIGN MANUAL
APPROVED DATE _/:Z///6 9 Appendix B
?..:L, V-A-10 Rev. 5/81
o
~D
1
c Ji i
CID
.sue, • 1
r~ c~ i ~C 1 •a trxj\
_ L~ fit) O
LA.
J N~ J M ^ C C f
a
cl:
a I J r - W C=)
e~ ( • l - Z CV N
LA-) C,4
r ~e f
-00
cz y r,
o<
~ r z <
x a
W H <
_ J N,.
U O
=z
/M N ~z
W a
0 v
z L)
o
a
N
v O
z in o in - < m -
a z o c:>
H
vi cn a
a U
<
LLL.J o aUU
O ~ M C~ W < O
LZ7 A w
t~J O U O ` U N O Z
<a
`xo zm
C) 0
.f LA J -JO F W
M t,.. i o
a
F
N
J
v
w
a
N
Revised 1/85 1 Appendix C
0
N ---j, Q/ o C, M I ~n co =
C2 -1 - .1
4- _
O - - 1 CJ V ~ l 7
O _ ~is7~• I I ~S
O F-- - - - -
N _ /p
N v
lid O -
o b y
Z F
0 <
° / W F
< z <
U H z ! =
0
J V F
W
to N < Z
z p u >
O U
N uJ
F- D O o
O I- I I I I I I c
H u.
G N a 00
a <w
a v.
l¢l. 2 U 1 O Ldp Lr\ s0 M
M Q
O W O V
V V) 0
<
zQ O M 'L p~
X0-0 0_H
O W J F w
vote. zo
F
N
.J
<
V
w
Q.
y
Revised 1/85 Appendix D
O
014J GJ i
4- 0
"a 0C 0 O 4.1 4-•
C • O •r ly O
i° u a a n 4.01 >
i W to V of r- ~
t 7 O N O r O U p -
CT r- N 41 r- .94 r- •r
to 4111 u C) C1
i C C U V` C. rO O II C) _
N 4- O •r CU to r i i •r d C [L'
C O C qzr ru 4-1 lC) N •r
r 'a U N 4-3 Q 1 C]. b Ck. C1. 4-3
CU Ci 4- 4- O t i 11
4-11 (U rO 4J ` (U
L
CU U= E. O v C L7 i N
4-3 N 4-1 r-- QJ C r 1 'p O ly
Q) r-- rp a C: O O
'C CU >11 Cu
C i O C Cl 44 N
N •r C •r A C C •r > O
N to 4-3 i 0 O 4) N r 4J -
C CL 0) -0 O r0 •r •r t C A Qi
O to .C CU O 4-1 (U 4-* 4-3 4-1 aJ C
G L 0- •--J 4to 110 4-3 t C ro u N s. -
to C i •r 'a O •r r •r C t .A
r.
U O O i 0,0 U 0. 0. 7 • C V m •r ` to
•r •r 4- CL ru a) 0) •r •r •r O Qj •r C ~ •r r
4j u i .C': U U L .C N Q1 r-
Cl CO N N C` O C_. 4J 4) CU C 4-J -0 7
M 4-1 4-1 i L7 L. •r- L. L. 4j N Cr C 11 CL
Q •r C m a- 3 C1 C- 4J CIJ N C (1) to Cl O i i C1 C O i i •r. 0.. Q
i " O N C:) 'O .C N •
O LA- 4-3
U E CL r- C •r i 41 i= r- O 4J LL- * 0
4- QJ b rtl to t0 t i t U r- C r0 M T7
i E 4J CU M •r U C (U a) ~c
N M r- C 4-1 •r ct N to N to (U r O O 4J 41
C i d CO m N N O t 4-) r- •r U N
O E t cn =3 4+t C] 4J 4-1 3 4.1 N 4-1 CV II O If
•r O N C N •r~ to Ci C~ to O •r (U M •1-7 If
4-) i st -C to CU p t t O r- 4- i r- .C C U 4J tC) -0 U
U I.L. N 4-1 4••1 4-1 CL O M 0- F-- 4J •r N CL ¢ 4.1
CU
f- m
r. CL
r CV M Irr t1) Q O r- N M c}
6-Hour Precipitation (inches)
C) In o In o to o to Cl, to C)
to tr, tri v c r i M, Cm Cv r
li-q LC)
, to ter Cd
V u " I , I
A ~ ~ ill i-~ 1• 1 - T. 1 1 11 I i
tp •r1 ll.
C1. to .r! iI1I / _ 1 i I I11
CV
M I
11111 IT I 1i
1 C 4J
~t cd 11 1 I I I I• l i i'! III i I. I
IRr 4J
b. 4 %0
u u n o - = - - ~-1---
0. CM
-'4', o
4_
' I 1 ' 1 1' I I 1 Id7
Jill
I T.
• 1 - _ I I 1 1 ill I I
A d ' i I.' III 1 1- ~ I' I ~I~i;; I! 11 I I I Q
d rt d A .f -7 a e ~ rZ a ul ^t ~ r--
t _ - D-r; A 1 /QC Appendix E
CHART 1-104.12
pop%
*PIC
ONE •+a air
so
a f.
a
' I
•
~ - 1
• ~j Q ~ i
I Q/ }
3
W 3 I
s o'
>z " ~ a
u d o •t .
IA
tt
I
t0 V • O' i
as-
u- A
m
. r
T' 1w of s ?
as
04
I ! 1 1 1 .I I! ~ ~ I I.
= 3 4 3 4 7 • ! 10 20 30 40 i0
DISCHARM lc F. S)
MMPLE o OKE 31DE
G;Ven: 0 210 ? = 2S'/.
Cart IMS" Depth s Q48 V#Wty s 4A ipi
REV. CITY OF SAN DIEGO - DESIGN GUIDE SHT. N0.
GUTTER AND ROADWAY
DISCHARGE- VELOCITY CHART
87
Appendix F
CU Old
PARCEL 3
P ;#+I MAP -H064
\ 69.9 t!
Off-site Basin, A,=0.18 ac. 5
CL
1401.3 3q/R 2 JY
0
/ 0 1
/ 4 1
1
L4
I
39
i I
\ „ I
n
41
/ / o R)MEN 5W► nYt~+s I
- 1.6
I
3i (0
r I 1
1 S ~
0. I
~ . . W s I CQ
3' 11 1 On-site Basin, A-=1.80 ac' I `y n- z
o-
U - 36 0
°
- 3W3 (V u
ILI 1 x 0 to t 1 o C
0. U w. o H~ V
h
m i
..1~y - - W 1 a W L1..
a o Proposed Driveway 09 a
~6 I /
2-(3/0)- /
htu
1 0 M 3tvMS A I
oa - /
r
XV/
/
Sao Point of Discharge
WISH ONE V
G
SE Q
GvIG. 0. 34-96 LYl
n
11072O'1CR 230.00
30' pRNATE ROW UlSE1~EMT C
po PARCEL WD 13133 c Z W
A or 1 b+ T'
SEwFR Fwcourrtr ASOrtHT N r"R olsmlcrD
~ucAO WA1S to
r1ECOROEO 1-13-s) I „lin r = 4a 8
fTIE N0. e7-11633 O.R ti d 1 10 1 +
2V WNX WATER CAWMEW mm Z
MMIARIe4'
z N iAVdl OWATERr OIO6TRICT
YIRRCPN.
O.IL
PARCEL 2
Scale: V=60'', PARCEL MAP x133 a
Exhibit 1
Site Drainage Map'
1.
1 ~
Ij 'It'I~,r
a, t ` \
iv
'ILA
UVI
• • • - l
!r l ~
ROSENWALD ENGINEERING AND ASSOCIATES
10925 Hartley Road, Suite I
Santee, California 92071
(619) 258-7901
August 4, 1994
Tom Brown
P.O. Box 230564
Encinitas, California 92023-0564
Subject: Project No. 94-1148B3
Limited Site Investigation
Proposed Single Family Dwelling
Parcel 4 Parcel Map 15133
City of Encinitas
Dear Mr. Brown:
The attached report has been prepared to present the
results of an investigation of the soil conditions at
the subject site. The investigation was undertaken to
provide the soil engineering criteria for site grading
and to recommend an appropriate foundation system for
the type of structures anticipated for the proposed
project.
In general, we found loose compressible soils one to two
feet in depth over medium dense clayey sands. The site
is suitable for the proposed development provided the
recommendations in this report are followed.
If you have any further questions, please do not
hesitate to contact our office.
Respectfully submitted,
enja D. Rosenwald, P. f.
RCE 25018
BDR/ljs ,
r.V
AUG 2G 1996
BROWN PROJECT NO. 94-1148B3 8-04-94
INTRODUCTION
This is to present the findings and conclusions of a
soils investigation for a proposed single family
dwelling site located on Wishbone Way, City of
Encinitas.
A brief legal description of the site is:
Parcel 4 Of Parcel Map 15133
The objectives of this investigation were to determine
the existing soils conditions and physical properties of
the soils so that engineering recommendations could be
presented for the safe and economical grading of the
site and for the design of foundations for the proposed
structures.
In order to accomplish these objectives, 3 exploration
trenches were excavated, chunk, undisturbed and loose
bag samples of the on-site soils were obtained, and
laboratory tests were performed on these samples to
determine the necessary criteria.
SITE DESCRIPTION
The subject site is a located on the east side of
Wishbone Way, City of Encinitas. The site slopes
moderately up to the east with a relatively flat area
near the east end of the site.
SURFACE CONDITIONS
The surface soils encountered during the course of this
investigation were loose silty sands to a depth of
approximately 1 to 2 feet. These surface soils were
underlain by medium dense clayey sands and fractured
rock.
GROUNDWATER
No ground water was encountered during the course of
this investigation. We do not expect ground water to be
a consideration in the development of this project.
Page 2
BROWN PROJECT NO. 94-1148B3 8-04-94
FIELD INVESTIGATION
Three exploration trenches were excavated with a Cat
backhoe on July 29, 1994, at the approximate locations
shown on the attached Plate No. 1, entitled "Location of
Exploration Trenches". The trenches were excavated to a
depth of 4.0 feet below the existing ground surface. A
continuous log of the soils encountered in the trenches
were recorded a the time of excavation and is shown in
detail on Plates No. 2 through 4 entitled "Summary
Sheet".
The soils were visually and texturally classified by the
filed identification procedures set forth on the
attached Plate No. 5 entitled "Uniform Soil
Classification Chart".
Field Densities and moisture contents were taken in
conformance with A.S.T.M. D1556-82. The approximate
locations of these tests are shown on Plate No. 1. The
test results are presented on the summary sheets.
GEOLOGIC HAZARDS
There was no_..-P-v-i.den.ce of significant on-site faulting
and review of the available geological literature
pertaining to the site indicates there are no known
active faults that transverse the subject site. Ground
shaking from one of the major active faults is the most
likely happening to affect the site. With respect to
this hazard the site is comparable to others in the
general area. The proposed buildings should be designed
in accordance with seismic design requirements of the
Uniform Building code or the Structural Engineers
Association of California. Liquefaction should not be a
problem on the site.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The following summarized conclusions and recommendations
are based upon the analysis of all the data and
information obtained from our soil investigation. This
includes our visual inspection of the site; field
investigation and classification of the soil; laboratory
tests on soil samples analyzed; and our general
knowledge and experience with the soils native to this
site.
Page 3
BROWN PROJECT NO. 94-1148B3 8-04-94
The site is suitable for the proposed development
provided the recommendations set forth in this report
are carefully followed.
(1) The surface soils extending to 1 to 2 feet in depth
have been classified as sandy clays and, although native
to the site were found to be loose and compressible.
When properly compacted to at least 90 percent of
maximum dry density, these soils are suitable for use as
fill materials. Therefore, it is our recommendation that
these loose soils be removed to a depth of 1 to 2 feet,
and properly recompacted in accordance with the attached
Appendix A, Grading Specifications, in order to provide
adequate support for the proposed structures.
The site is underlain by medium dense clayey sands and
fractured rock.
(2) The soils encountered in our investigation range
from non-expansive to moderately expansive (Expansion
Index 59) with respect to change in volume with change
in moisture content. It is anticipated that once
remedial grading is performed, the expansive potential
of the prevailing foundation soils will be moderate. The
recommendations of this report reflect this condition.
GRADING
Site Preparation: Site preparation should begin with the
removal of all deleterious matter and vegetation. Areas
to receive fill and/or structural loads should be
excavated to firm natural ground. Firm natural ground
is defined as undisturbed soil having an in-place
density of at least 85 percent of maximum dry density at
a minimum moisture content at or slightly above optimum.
The over-excavated soils should then be placed in
compacted layers until desired elevations are reached.
Remedial grading operations should extend to a minimum
horizontal distance of five feet beyond the perimeter of
the improvements. This includes isolated improvements
such as retaining walls. The estimated depth of removal
is one to two feet below existing grade.
Page 4
BROWN PROJECT NO. 94-1148B3 8-04-94
Drainage: Adequate measures shall be undertaken to
properly finish grade the site after the structures and
other improvements are in place, such that drainage
waters from within the site and the adjacent higher
properties are directed away from within the site and
the adjacent higher properties are directed away from
the foundations, footings, floor slabs and tops of
slopes via surface swales and subsurface drains towards
the lower level of the proposed building site onto the
natural drainage for this area. Proper surface and
subsurface drainage will insure that no waters will seek
the level of the baring soils under the foundations,
footings and floor slabs, which could result in
undermining and differential settlement of the
structures and other improvements.
~arthWOrk: All earthwork and grading contemplated for
site preparation should be accomplished in accordance
with the attached Appendix A, Grading Specifications.
All special site preparation recommendations presented
in the sections above will supersede those in Appendix
A. All embankments and fill areas should be compacted
to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction at
slightly over optimum moisture content. Utility trench
backfill within five feet of the proposed structures and
beneath asphalt pavements should be compacted to a
minimum of 90 percent relative compaction. The maximum
dry density of each soils type should be determined in
accordance with A.S.T.M. D1557.
EXPANSIVE SOILS
An expansion test was performed on a representative
sample of the most expansive soils encountered during
this investigation to determine volumetric change
characteristics with change in moisture content. An
expansion index of 59 indicated that some of the soils
on the site are moderately expansive in nature.
Expansive soils such as those encountered on the site
can be detrimental to proposed structures unless special
precautions are implemented. Recommendations for
preventing potential structural damage from adverse
effects of the on-site expansive soils are presented
below and explained in detail in the attached Appendix
C.
Page 5
BROWN PROJECT NO. 94-1148B3 8-04-94
There is no economical way to absolutely prevent
movement of expansive soils when there is a change in
moisture content. If the top three feet of soils under
the proposed structures are expansive in nature, these
recommendations should be followed.
a. The perimeter continuous foundations and spread
footings shall extend a minimum of 18 inches into the_
compacted fill soils or firm natural ground. The
continuous foundations shall be reinforced with two #4
steel bars; one bar shall be located near the top of the
footings and the other bar shall be located near the
bottom of the footings.
b. Concrete floor slabs should be 4 inches. Concrete
slab reinforcement should consist of #3 bars at 24
inches on center each way. Slab reinforcement should
be placed within the middle third of the slab by
supporting the steel chairs or concrete blocks
"dobies". The effect of concrete shrinkage will
result in cracks in virtually all concrete slabs
which are not designed to resist this shrinkage. To
reduce the extent of shrinkage, the concrete should
be placed at a maximum of 4 inch slump. The minimum
steel recommended is not intended to prevent
shrinkage cracks.
C. It is advisable to avoid locating planter boxes
adjacent to building foundations and/or parking
access areas; however, if planter boxes are utilized
in these areas, they shall be constructed with a
gravel base and/or drain with the direction of
drainage waters away from the building foundations,
footings and floor slabs to the street at the lower-
level of the site.
Page 6
BROWN PROJECT NO. 94-1148B3 8-04-94
RETAINING WALLS
Lateral resistance: Lateral resistance to
horizontal movement may be provided by allowable
soils passive pressure and/or coefficient of
friction of concrete to soil. The allowable passive
pressure may be assumed to be 200 pounds per square
foot per foot of depth. The coefficient of friction
may be safely assumed to be .30
The computed values are for static conditions and
may be increased 1/3 for wind and/or seismic_
loading.
Retaining Structures: Unrestrained, cantilevered,
individually supported retaining walls, capable of
slight movement away from load should be designed to
resist active pressured developed by an equivalent
fluid weighing 42 pounds per cubic foot.
This active pressure coefficient assumes a vertical,
smooth wall, and a level, drained backfill. If
these conditions are not met, we should be contacted
for new values.
BEARING VALUE
A safe allowable bearing value of 1500 pounds per
square foot may be used when designing continuous
foundations and spread footings founded a minimum of
18 inches into firm natural ground or compacted fill
soils. This value may be increased by 20 percent
for each additional foot of depth and/or width as
set forth in the Uniform Building Code, Table No.
29-B.
Page 7
BROWN PROJECT NO. 94-1148B3 8-04-94
LIMITS OF INVESTIGATION
The recommendations of this report pertain only to
the site investigated and based upon the assumption
that the soil conditions do not deviate from those
disclosed in the trenches. If any variations or
undesirable conditions are encountered during
construction, or if the proposed construction will
differ from that planned at the present time,
Rosenwald Engineering should be notified so that the
supplemental recommendations can be given.
The findings in this report have been derived in
accordance with current standards of practice and no
warranty is expressed or implied.
This report is presented with the understanding that
it is the responsibility of the owner, or his agent
or representative, to insure that the
recommendations in this report are carried out in
the field. Additionally, that the information in
this report is brought to the attention of the
"design team", consisting of architects, engineers,
etc., such that all information can be incorporated
into the building plans.
The findings in this report are applicable as of the
present date. However, changes in the condition of
a property can occur with the passage of time,
whether the changes be due to natural processes or
the works of man on this property or adjacent
properties. In addition, the findings of this
report may become invalidated due to the changes in
the state of the art or changes in applicable or
appropriate standards used at this time, whether
they result from legislation or from the broadening
of knowledge.
Plates No. 1 through 5, Page L-1, Appendices A and C
are parts of this report.
Respectfully submitted,,
Benjami D. Rosenwald, P.E. QROFES$/~
RCE 25018 D. ROFy
c
BDR/ l js J Z
w Co No. 2MI8U
~+c EV.12-31-97
clj, F~F IYI1.
CAL
i
Page 8
BROWN PROJECT NO. 94-1148B3 8-04-94
Page L-1
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
Maximum density tests were performed on
representative samples of the on-site soils to
establish compaction criteria. The soils were
tested according to the A.S.T.M. D1557-91, Method B
which uses 25 blows of a 10 pound rammer falling 18
inches on each of 5 layers on a 4 inch diameter 1/30
cubic foot mold. The results of these test$ are
presented as follows:
Maximum Optimum
Trench Dry Moisture
No. and Soil Density Content
Depth Description lb/cu ft % dry wt
1 @ 1' light brown 120.5 12.2
clayey sand
2 @ 2.5' orange tan 123.5 10.2
clayey sand
An expansion test in conformance with UBC 29-2 was
performed on a representative sample of the on-site
soils to determine volumetric change characteristics
with change in moisture content. The recorded
expansion of the sample is presented as follows:
Trench
No. and Initial Saturated Initial
Expansion Moisture Moisture Density
Depth Content Content lb/cu ft Index
1 @ 1' 10.8 23.7 106.5 59
Page 9
a
0
ti
0
r
ROSENWALD ENGINEERING
AND ASSOCIATES
10925 Hartley Road SOILS - FOUNDATIONS
Suite I Telephone
Santee, CA 92071 (619) 258-7901
BY DATE
JOB NO. PG~~
Na•
BROWN PROJECT NO. 94-1148B3 8-04-94
Plate No. 2
SUNMARY SHEET NO. 1
TRENCH NO. 1
DEPTH SOIL DESCRIPTION Y M
surface light brown medium dense
to fine to medium sands 113.7 12.1
1.0' red brown clayey
fine to medium sands
moist, medium dense
2.0 orange tan cemented
clayey sands 107.1 10.3
3.5 91 /f n
Bottom of hole dug 7-29-94
Page 10
BROWN PROJECT NO. 94-1148B3 8-04-94
Plate No. 3
SUMMARY TRENCH SHEET NO. 2
TRENCH NO. 2
DEPTH SOIL DESCRIPTION Y M
Surface dry loose, silty
fine to medium sands
1.0' red brown clayey
fine to medium sands 104.6 15.9
medium dense
3.0' tan silty fine
sands with fractured rock
4.0 if it
bottom of hole dug 7-29-94
Page 11
BROWN PROJECT NO. 94-1148B3 8-04-94
Plate No. 4
SUMMARY TRENCH SHEET NO. 3
TRENCH NO. 3
DEPTH SOIL DESCRIPTION Y M
surface light brown silty
fine to medium sands
loose
1.0 red brown clayey
fine to medium sands
2.5 tan silty fine
to medium sands with
fractured rock
4.0 it of It
bottom of hole dug 7-29-94
Page 12
Plate No.5
BROWN PROJECT NO. 94-1148B3 8-04-94
CATEGORIZATION FGW GRAPH- TYPICAL NAMES 6 DESCRIPTION
N
Y W p WELL GRADED GRAVELS, gravel-sand mixtures. Vide range in grain size
1 q z c N -0 L substantial amounts of all intermediate particle sizes.
u u c
a-
u
V Z
►p pi W G P POORLY GRADED GRAVELS, gravel-sand mixtures. Predominately one size
1001
N >IA - or a range of sizes with some intermediate sizes missing.
t L M
w ~ " A C t GM ® SILTY GRAVELS, gravel-sand-slit mixtures. Appreciable amount
° s WI of non-ples.tlc fines.
> v u - _
r' u N g w G CLAYEY GRAVELS, gravel-sand-clay mixtures. Appreciable amount
of plastic fines.
Z N
O O
" ` _ 'n SW WELL GRADED SANDS, gravelly sands. Wide range in grain size
W A C N 7 C1 I-
r 4 A r o t substantial amounts of all Intermediate particle sizes.
Q C M O y V C
O M Y L Z
u r ~
o - = S P POORLY GRADED SANDS, gravelly sands. Predominately one size
QC or a range of sizes with some intermediate sizes missing. 61 V
i ii N
N C - F
Styr, SILTY SANDS, sand-silt mixtures. Appreciable amount of
c =I non-plastic fines.
~ A O W
Z
S C CLAYEY SANDS, sand-clay mixtures. Appreciable amount
of plastic fines.
M L INORGANIC SILTS t Very Fine Sands, Rock Flour, Silty or
N N Clayey Fine Sands with slight plasticity.
a u
J
Y w E C L INORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW TO MEDIUM PLASTICITY, gravelly
M . c clays, sandy clays, silty clays, lean clays.
L J V 61%
Y >
M ~ N ~ C
l~u w v OL ® ORGANIC SILTS i ORGANIC SILT CLAYS of low plasticity.
C'
N ~ CJ
O N
Z O
MH i INORGANIC SILTS, micaceous or diatomaceous fine sandy
ag $ or silty soils, elastic silts.
W .2 c > a '
W L q(
Z C J
w Y H *t INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY, fat clays.
Z6 C
L. 2 HvLA
go J 7 C
'n v OH ORGANIC CLAYS of medium to high plasticity.
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS P T PEAT s other highly organic soils.
Legend:
UC Unified Classification
= Sample location
E a Sampler penetration resistence (ft. kips/ft.) ,
Y = Natural dry density (pcf)
M = Field moisture content dry wt.)
WT = Approximate location of water table
ROSENWALD ENGINEERING AND ASSOCIATES
10925 HARTLEY ROAD, SUITE I
SANTEE, CALIFORNIA 92071
(619) 258-7901
APPENDIX A
RECOMMENDED EARTHWORK SPECIFICATIONS
1. General Description: The intent of these
specifications is to obtain uniformity and adequate
strength in filled ground so that the proposed
structures may be safely supported. The procedures
include the clearing and preparation of land to be
filled, processing the fill soils, the spreading,
and compaction of the filled areas to conform with
the lines and grades as shown on the approved plans.
The owner shall retain a civil engineer qualified in
soil mechanics (herein referred to as engineer) to
inspect and test the earth work in accordance with
these specifications. The engineer shall advise the
owner and grading contractor immediately if any
unsatisfactory conditions are observed to exist and
shall have the authority to reject the compacted
filled ground until such time that corrective
measures are taken, necessary to comply with the
specifications. It shall be the sole responsibility
of the grading contractor to achieve the specified
degree of compaction.
2. Preparinff Areas to be Filled
i
(a.) All brush, vegetation and any biodegradable
refuse shall be removed or otherwise disposed
of so as to leave the areas to be filled free
of vegetation and debris. Any uncompacted
filled ground or loose compressible natural
ground, shall be removed unless the report
recommends otherwise. Any buried tanks or
other structures shall be removed and the
depression backfilled to the satisfaction of
the engineer.
Recommended Earthwork Specifications - (cont'd.)
(b.) The natural ground which is determined to be
satisfactory for the support of the filled
ground shall then be plowed or scarified to a
depth of at least 12 inches (12").
(c.) After the natural ground has been prepared,-it
shall then be brought to the proper moisture
content and compacted to not less than 90
percent of maximum dry density in accordance
with A.S.T.M. D1557-78.
(d.) Where fills are made on slopes greater than 20
percent, horizontal benches shall be cut into
firm natural ground. The initial bench at the
toe of the fill shall be at least 10 feet in
width on firm undisturbed natural ground. The
width, of all succeeding benches shall be at
least 6 feet.
3. Fill Materials: All material placed in the fill
shall be approved by the engineer and shall consist
of materials free from vegetable matter, and other
deleterious substances, and shall not contain rocks
or lumps greater than 6 inches in diameter. If,
during grading operations, soils are found which
were not encountered and tested in the preliminary
investigation, tests on these soils shall be
performed to determine their physical
characteristics. Any special treatment recommended
in the preliminary or subsequent soil reports not
covered herein shall become an addendum to these
specifications.
4. Placing and Compacting Fill Materials
(a.) When the moisture content of the fill material
is below that specified, water shall be added
until the moisture content is near optimum to
assure uniform mixing and effective
compaction.
(b.) When the moisture content of the fill
materials is above that specified, the fill
material shall be aerated by blading and
scarifying or other satisfactory methods until
the moisture content is near optimum as
specified.
Page 2 of 3
• Recommended Earthwork Specifications - (cont'd.)
(c.) After processing, the suitable fill materials
shall he placed in layers which, when
compacted, shall not exceed six inches (C").
Each layer shall be spread evenly and shall be
thoroughly mixed during the spreading to
insure uniformity of material and moisture i-n
each layer.
(d.) After each layer has been placed, mixed and
spread evenly, it shall be thoroughly -
compacted to riot less than the density set
forth in paragraph 2 (c) above. Compaction
shall be accomplished with approved types of
compaction equipment. Rolling shall be
accomplished while the fill material is at the
specified moisture content. In place density
tests shall be performed in accordance with
A.S.T.M. D1556-82.
(e.) The surfaces of the fill slopes shall be
compacted by means of sheepsfoot rollers or
other suitable equipment. Compacting
operations shall be continued until the slopes
are stable and until there is no appreciable
amount of loose soil on the slopes.
5. Inspection: Sufficient inspection by the Engineer
shall be maintained during the filling and
compacting operations so that he can verify that the
fill was constructed in accordance with the accepted
specifications.
6. Seasonal Limits: No fill material shall be placed,
spread, or rolled if weather conditions increase the
moisture content above permissible limits. When the
work is interrupted by rain, fill operations shall
not be resumed until the moisture content and
density of fill are as previously specified.
7. All recommendations presented in the attached report
are a part of these specifications.
Page 3 of 3
ROSENWALD ENGINEERING AND ASSOCIATES
10925 HARTLEY ROAD, SUITE I
SANTEE, CALIFORNIA 92071
(619) 258-7901
APPENDIX C
RECOMMENDED PROCEDURES FOR SLAB FOUNDATIONS
BASED ON EXPANSION INDICES
For soils that are expansive with respect to change in volume
with change in moisture content, there is no economical way to
absolutely prevent movement if there is a change in moisture
content. Therefore, insofar as it is feasible, a stable soil
moisture content should be established and maintained
throughout the life of the structures. Since it is usually not
practical to maintain a completely stable soil moisture
content, in order to minimize the undesirable effects of the
expansive soils on the structures if these soils are placed or
allowed to remain within the upper three feet below finish
grade, it is recommended that the following special
precautions be exercised in design and construction of slabs
and foundations.
A. Design of foundations and slabs on expansive soils are
presented in Table 1 based on expansion indices and there
may be more stringent structural design or agency
requirements. As an alternative to conventionally
reinforced concrete foundations, post-tensioned structural
slab systems, designed by a structural engineer, may be
utilized.
B. Footing depth should be measured below lowest exterior
finish grade.
C. A reinforced concrete grade beam should be constructed
across garage entrances, with similar depth and
reinforcement as adjacent perimeter footings for all soils
with expansion potential greater than "very low".
D. For soil with a potential expansion greater than "low",
interior isolated spread footings are not recommended.
E. Where pre-saturation is recommended beneath interior slabs,
the recommended moisture should penetrate to one foot below
the depth of the perimeter footings. Pre-saturation should
be completed at least 24 hours prior to concrete placement.
F. For soils with an expansive index greater than "Low" slab
reinforcement should be structurally tied to the footings.
In buildings where it is feasible to permit independent
movement of slabs with respect to foundations, such as in
garages and warehouses, these slabs should be separated
from the foundations by 1/2 inch thickness of construction
felt or equivalent. Special care should be exercised to
assure that the separation extends to the full depth of the
thickened edges of slab and that no appurtenances are
attached to the building and also the slabs.
G. Provide a moisture barrier-such as visqueen overlain by an
inch of sand below slabs in areas that receive flooring
which might be adversely affected by capillary moisture.
H. Where a base course is recommended beneath interior slabs,
it should consist of pea gravel, clean sand, or other
acceptable granular material. The above moisture
barrier/sand cover requirement may be included as part of
the recommended base course thickness.
I. Slab reinforcement should be supported at mid-slab height
on chairs or concrete blocks.
J. Provide positive drainage away from all perimeter footings
to a horizontal distance of at least five feet outside the
building walls.
f
dP d op
qw ~ ; -W V (L) W
04 U) t;
49 U)
Q N Q 9 N N :1
H .
V 1i
H - O o ~o = - -
C~ r-4 qw co co
M mw N r•i (~~r r 4 7r r-1 ~r
y V' (2) j-g ~O w 5 C2) i w @J
0 :w
CV) x W W f~1 f+1
O ~~~0~3 ~3 00 ZO ~O ZO
43 4; 4;
N N 9 N~ ~ f~
o W N m f~ W W
H E e!' d' 1 ~p 1 U1 N 0 CO r--1 8 Q4
N r-1 r-1 D
N ri ri d' N N r-I qw N
F
N ri
•
W O ' 1 '
I
N .-co 00 to Oo v to co
1 ri r♦ r♦ N
~y r••I CY1 r•1
~ac ~ L1a
H eN-I rN-1 co eN-1 N
N
ri rn rNi
U O O O
H H N N to
1 1 1
O N n
EAST COUNTY TESTING AND LAB
10925 Hartley Road, Suite I
Santee, California 92071
(619) 258-7901
Fax 258-7902
June 06, 1997
AUG 15 1997
Mr. Tom Brown
P.O. Box 230564
Encinitas CA. 92023-0564
Subject: Project No. 97-1148B3
Report of Compacted Filled Ground
Proposed Residential Building Site
2905 Wishbone Way
City of Encinitas
Dear Mr. Brown:
In accordance with your request, our firm has inspected the grading operation and tested
the fill soils that were placed and compacted during the preparation of the
subject site. The following report summarizes our work and presents our test results as
well as our conclusions and recommendations concerning your project.
1. SITE DESCRIPTION
The proposed single family dwelling,pool and tennis court are to be located on the east
side of Wishbone Way,Encinitas. A brief legal description of the project is :
Parcel 4 of Parcel Map 15133
Prior to the grading operation presented in this report, the site sloped moderately to the
west with a relatively flat area near the east end . It is presently prepared to receive a
single family residence,a tennis court and a swimming pool.
BROWN PROJECT NO.97-1148133
H. MATERIALS AND PLACEMENT
The grading operation presented in this report encompassed the excavation of the on-site
native soils, proper keying into firm natural ground, and placement and compaction of the
fill soils to provide adequate support for the proposed residential structures.
Prior to placement of the fill soils, the natural ground was observed to be dense silty sands
with fractured rock which was considered to be capable of supporting the newly placed
and compacted fill soils.
The materials utilized in the grading operation were from the existing on-site soils.
The fill soils were placed and compacted to at least 90 percent of maximum dry density
while maintaining a moisture content at or near optimum by means of a 1 1/2 inch fire
hose. Compaction was achieved by trackrolling with a Cat D-8 tractor.
TESTS
Field density tests were performed in accordance with A. S.T.M. D1556-90. Laboratory
maximum density tests were performed in conformance with A.S.T.M. D1557-91,
Methods A and B.
The relative compaction results, as summarized on PageT-1 and T-2 under "Table of Test
Results", are the ratios of the field dry densities to the laboratory maximum dry densities
as expressed as a percentage. The laboratory determinations of the maximum dry
densities and optimum moisture contents and expansion test of the fill soils are set forth on
Page L-1 under "Laboratory Test Results". The approximate locations of the filled
ground and the field density tests are presented on Plate No. 1 entitled "Location of Field
Density Tests".
2
BROWN PROJECT NO. 97-1148133
III. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The following conclusions and recommendations have been based upon our analysis of the
data available from the testing of the soils compacted on this site. Included in this analysis
are our visual inspection of the grading operation while in progress from May 16,1997
through May 28,1997, field and laboratory testing of the bearing soil and our general
knowledge and experience with the natural soils and compacted fill on this site.
1. The soils utilized in the grading operation were from existing on-site materials
which were excavated, replaced and compacted. These materials consist primarily of silty
clayey sands with fractured rock. The potential for liquefaction is very low.
2. During the grading operation, the natural ground soils were exposed where
necessary and properly prepared to receive the fill soils. The fill soils were properly
placed, watered and then compacted to at least 90 percent of maximum dry density in
accordance with the County of San Diego Grading Ordinance and the
Uniform Building Code (Chapter 70).
3. Since some of the soils utilized in the fill were considered to be expansive,
(Expansion Index of 59). The recommendations for footings and slab per "Limited Site
Investigation" dated Aug. 4,1994 by Rosenwald Engineering and Associates, are still
valid:
a. A footing depth of 18 inches below adjacent grade for one and two story structures
should be used. Minimum width of footing should be 12 inches.
b. The footings should be reinforced with one #4 steel bar placed near the top of the
footings and one #4 steel bar placed near the bottom of the footings.
c. Where moisture sensitive floor coverings are anticipated over the slab, a 6 mil plastic
moisture barrier should be placed beneath the concrete slabs. The plastic moisture barrier
shall be overlaid with a minimum of 2 inches of sand, or suitable on-site materials, to aid in
concrete curing and to minimize potential punctures.
3
BROWN PROJECT N0.97-1148B3
d. Concrete floor slabs should be a minimum of 4 inches thick. Reinforcement should
consist of #4 bars at 3 feet on center each way, #3 bars placed at 24 inches on center each
way or 6X6-6/6 welded wire mesh.
Slab reinforcement should be placed within the middle third of the slab by supporting the
steel on chairs or concrete blocks "dobies". The effect of concrete shrinkage will result in
cracks in virtually all concrete slabs which are not designed to resist this shrinkage. To
reduce the extent of shrinkage, the concrete should be placed at a maximum of a 4 inch
slump. The minimum steel recommended is not intended to prevent shrinkage cracks.
4. It is our understanding that buildings will be constructed utilizing conventional
type foundations, footings and conventional type building materials in conformance
with the Uniform Building Code, 1994 edition.
5. Backfill soils placed in utility trenches or behind retaining walls which support
structures or other improvements shall be compacted to at least 90 percent relative
compaction. We will accept no responsibility for damage to structures as a result of
improperly backfilled trenches.
6. Compacted fill soils that occur within 8 feet of the face of slope possess poor
lateral stability, even though they have been certified to a relative compaction of 90
percent or better. Proposed structures and other improvements that are located within 8
feet of the face of compacted fill slopes could suffer differential movement as a result
of the poor lateral stability of these soils.
7. Therefore, foundations and footings for the proposed structures or other
improvements should be placed at least 8 feet back from the top of these slopes.
Foundations placed closer to the top of slope than 8 feet should be deepened such that the
face of foundation at the level of the bottom is at least 8 feet back from the face of the
slope at that level.
8. Adequate measures shall be undertaken to properly finish grade the site after the
structures and other improvements are in place, such that the drainage waters from
within the site and the adjacent higher properties are directed away from the
4
BROWN PROJECT NO.97-1148B3
foundations, footings, floor slabs and tops of slopes via surface swales and subsurface
drains towards the lower level of the building site onto the natural drainage direction for
this area. Proper surface and subsurface drainage will insure that no waters will seek
the level of the bearing soils under the foundations, footings and floor slabs which
could result in undermining and differential settlement to the structures and other
improvements.
9. Drainage should be maintained such that surface waters are not permitted to flow
over the top of exposed fill slopes.
10. A safe allowable bearing value of 1500 pounds per square foot may be used when
designing continuous foundations and spread footings founded a minimum of 12 inches
into firm natural ground or compacted fill soils. This value may be increased by 20 percent
for each additional foot of depth and/or width as set forth in the Uniform Building Code,
Table No. 18-1-A.
11. Settlement of compacted fill is normal and should be anticipated. The post-
construction total settlement of the compacted fill zone may be on the order of 0.5 percent
of the fill thickness. Differential settlement will, therefore, occur due to varying
thicknesses of the fill as well as the differential caused by other factors such as variations
in the compacted soil density. The thickness and variable depth of the fill, at this site, will
result in post-construction settlement that will be greater than that found in level
ground construction. Occasionally, future cosmetic repairs will most likely be required
to address the occasional cracks and other manifestations of movement that cannot be
reduced by the structural/architectural design.
12.The results of our tests and observations indicate that the fill soils placed on the
subject site have been compacted to at least 90 percent of maximum dry density. These
soils should support the proposed building structures without detrimental settlement, if
the recommendations set forth in this report are adhered to.
5
BROWN PROJECT NO.97-1148B3
13.A11 statements, recommendations and conclusions made in this report are
applicable only for the grading operation which we inspected and are representative of the
site at the time our report was prepared. East County Testing And Lab is not to
be held responsible for fill soils placed at a future time or subsequent changes to the site
by others which directly or indirectly cause poor surface or subsurface drainage and/or
water erosion which could alter the strength of the compacted fill soils.
If we can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our office.
Page L-1, T-1,T-2 and Plate No. 1 are parts of this report.
Respectfully submitted,
~OfESS/ DHSS/O ~
Saliou Diallo QR OU S. 'O' RCE 54071 ti ~i y s ~ ~y
SD/lj
No. C 054071 No. C 054071 10
EXP. )1 /3i/q-i * * EXP. ~y~3r 1`3'
Jul
OF CA1.~~~ 9OF C
6
BROWN PROJECT NO. 1148B3 6-4-97
LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
Page L-1
1
The maximum dry densities and optimum moisture contents
of the fill materials as determinued by A.S.T.M. D1557-91
Procedure A and B which uses 25 blows of a 10 pound rammer
falling from a height of 18 inches on each of 5 layers
in a 4 inch diameter 1/30 cubic foot compaction cylinder.
Procedure C uses 56 blows of a 10 pound rammer falling
from a height of 18 inches on each of 5 layers in a 6 inch
diameter 1/13.3 cubic foot compaction cylinder are presented
as follows:
Modified
Modified Optimum
Maximum Moisture
Dry Density Content
Soil type/Procedure lb/cu. ft. % dry wt.
1/B dark brown clayey fine to 127.8 12.2
coarse sand w/rock
2/B brown clayey silty sand 120.5 12.2.
3/B orange brown fine to medium 127.0 9.4
sand w/ trace clay
4/A orange tan-clayey sand 123.5 10.2
- C
O
C V N r O l0 M M r d' v O N
CD ra
ua
N E
4► O
au
rn
1O E 1?, 44 00 00 00 Ln 00 00 00 00 O Ln 00 00
a Y
E ' r r r- O t` r- t` r M r- t`
+i to U N N N N N N N N N N N N
X C r r r r r r r r r r r
EOO'~
4-1 r 00 LO m M Ln r- N M v O
to 4j • • 00 LO L' • Ln • 0o • C1 • 00 • . • . • -
' l0 ao ~O Ln t~
H 1 -H
.1 W L)
k C~ r r r r r r r r r r r
wLn $4 4
ar
a
H
M En
W W
00 E
O E $4 3
W E' 41 t0 N l0 m N M r l0 O l0 M
a r-4 m
,H to r M M v IV Q' M r O r M M
Q . ,r4 O r r r r r r r r r r r r
H Q kr :E dP
r44J4J
r'i to a,
a 44 4J W N ~ l0 N N C 70 00 lC 00 N
W W C + + + + + + + + + + + +
A O t0 -rL
ri d
r
tO E+ r r r N r r r r M IT r
W
h
O
a r
04
H
3 a)
O tr N
Z (a d Q O r N
M Pa H Z r N M C Ln l0 t` 00 m r r r
p
O
-r4 I
U t[t' M r O N O LO N Ln N
U Q. rn rn rn (n m a) a, m m m
{a E
au
41
I~ E >1 W oo O L11 O Ln In 00 O Ln 00
a, O
v f~1 a N N N N N N N N N N
X >r U r r r r r r r r r
X00.0
r••1
•
4 L !H m rn U) r 00 N r r a1
En CD >4
E 'r4 N r r r r O N r r
r7 ~ to U r r r r r r r r r r
0 N $4 C
W Ln O •Ai
a~
M ~
00
E
r
r 0 114
a) E a O N N O 1w O 00 L11 M
W R7 41 QO E1
a • •-i CO 14 M r N r r eM M • 4 M
p to r r r r r r r al r r W
E 'Q GL. S dP E
W
A
a
c~
W C7 U W u cxn
w w - - - w H
.C d - O N - - O N ":r - - z
41 44 i) 44 v r r 00 M r r r %D 00 H
CL + + + + + + + + + + Ga
4) 44 4J C
O O to -r1 II
r14
F-4 O
E +i
r M IV M N r M N r
% N
a I
E•+
z
o bi N
z (C Q) p M L!I l0 I- co O1 O T- N
14 W E Z r r r r r r r N N N
• FiE~ 4>zn4s7/7Y T~sT
v
C J 7z>,° ~c SZor`
7MeF sGro~lE
~ O,
S
~ ays V -w111 c
f t r
o
Il
t tK/
7`
EAST COUNTY TESTING AND LAB/
10925 Hanley Road SOILS - FOUNDATIONS letepnone TOXj AWN
Suite 1 (619) 258-7901
Santee. CA 92071 Fax (619) 258-7902
BY AP DATE (/Ur(1E 997
JOB NO. X7-//4583 P~.4TE //O • /