The URL can be used to link to this page

2002-7458 G _4 ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT A Capital Improvement Projects J y` city Of District Support Services Encinitas Field Operations Sand Replenishment/Stormwater Compliance Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering July 7, 2003 Attn: Developers Surety and Indemnity Company C/o Insco Insurance Services, Inc. 17780 Fitch Suite 200 Irvine, California 92614 RE: Dunn, Edward and Julie 2848 Calle Rancho Vista Grading permit 7458-G APN 264-152-92 Final release of security Permit 7458-G authorized earthwork, storm drainage, and erosion control, all needed to build the described project. The Field Operations Division has approved the grading. Therefore, final release of the security deposit is merited. Performance Bond 827255S, in the original amount of$23,440.00, is hereby fully exonerated. It was reduced to a remainder amount of$5,860.00. The document original is enclosed. Should you have any questions or concerns,please contact Debra Geishart at(760) 633- 2779 or in writing, attention this Department. Sincerely, ' 464v'�/ Masih Maher J y Lem ach Senior Civil Engineer Finance Manager Financial Services Cc: Jay Lembach,FinanceManager Ed Dunn Debra Geishart File Enc. TEL 760-633-2600 / FAX 760-633-2627 505 S. Vulcan Avenue, Encinitas, California 92024-3633 TDD 760-633-2700 7*,� recycled paper - City oGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT x, Encinitas Capital Improvement Projects District Support Services Field Operations Sand Rep lenishment/Stormwater Compliance Subdivision Engineering Traffic Engineering October 30, 2002 Attn: Developers Surety and Indemnity Company C/o Insco Insurance Services, Inc. 17780 Fitch Suite 200 Irvine, California 92614 RE: Dunn, Edward and Julie 2848 Calle Rancho Vista Grading permit 7458-G APN 264-152-92 Partial release of security Permit 7458-G authorized earthwork, storm drainage, single driveway, and erosion control, all needed to build the described project. The Field Operations Division has approved the rough grading. Therefore, a reduction in the security deposit is merited. Performance Bond 827255S, in the amount of$23,440.00, may be reduced by 75% to $5,860.00. The document original will be kept until such time it is fully exonerated. The retention and a separate assignment guarantee completion of finish grading. Should you have any questions or concerns, please contact Debra Geishart at(760) 633- 2779 or in writing, attention this Department. Sincerely, Masih Maher Jay embach Senior Civil Engineer Finance Manager Field Operations Financial Services cc Jay Lembach,Finance Manager Dunn,Edward and Julie Debra Geishart File TEL 760-633-2600/ FAX 760-633-2627 505 S. Vulcan Avenue. Encinitas, California 92024-3633 TDD 760-633-279)0 �� recycled paper ,'- CITY OF ENCINITAS APPLICANT SECURITY DEPOSIT RELEASE Vendor No. Depositor Name: Phone No. zy_ Address: State Zip DEPOSIT DESCRIPTION: 1. MEMO PROJECT NUMBER 2. RELEASED AMOUNT: 3. DEPOSIT BALANCE: Notes: � l AU'T'HORIZATION TO RELEASE: Project Coordinat - Date Supervisor Date 'f Date Department Head DEPOSIT BALANCE CONFIRMED: Finance Dept Date GENERAL PROJ. # BRIEF DESCRIPTION AMOUNT LEDGER# (25 Characters limit) 101-0000-218.00-00 - - - - -- Security Deposit- _----- TOTAL S I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS CLAIM REPRESENTS A APPROVED FOR PAYMENT }UST CHARGE AGAINST THE CITY OF ENCINITAS PROCESSED BY FINANCE DEPARTMENTAL APPROVAL DATE OF REQUEST DATE DATE CHECK REQUIRED Next Warrant -�� CITY OF ENCINITAS APPLICANT SECURITY DEPOSIT RELEASE Depositor Name: � �l, Vendor No. Address: Phone No. State p DEPOSIT DESCRIPTION: �G//)� 1. MEMO PROJECT NUMBER _ / / e,/` -e4 � 2. RELEASED AMOUNT: 3. DEPOSIT BALANCE: Notes: AUTHORIZATION TO RELEASE: Project Coordinator Supervisor Date Aw Department Head Date DEPOSIT BALANCE CONFIRMED: Finance Dept Date GENERAL PROJ. # BRIEF DESCRIPTION AMOUNT LEDGER# (25 Characters limit) I D I-0000-218.00-00 - - - - -- Security Deposit - __ TOTALS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS CLAIM REPRESENTS A APPROVED FOR PAYMENT JUST CHARGE AGAINST THE CITY OF ENCINITAS PROCESSED BY DEPARTMENTAL APPROVAL FINANCE DATE OF REQUEST DATE CHECK REQUIRED Next Warrant DATE DEPRLSE.doc 9/19/98 ` :. 5-A A`a Z � r / n w. t or 5.- of ak �: h � �� v�w�.�.+��.u�,•.arc.�.�...�r.'�,^�.�s.f..,+�+�IRr' rd�.oustlR,� �� r O ✓d r ' or' o E: «.:.... ww.�•e�..�BOlisi.+��YI�"i"^'^°'�Il�_"°'.�.. _ -. ..+.r�.ar.._.. ...«....W�a°`.w1w. ...�... ON i t; Z � Z _ y t � x P IF go 7 k1x x t p: rt , A V� te._.m.. y' v j t r z Q_1-2- If rt t l r on Mee Or i W' 77W ..� y. y . y e $ D ......................... K k i 1 V ��\ �� N �. S �`.c?3i s 1s ��Q •�� 1 0 0 00 or LL 71 o TO. vo JAI r G I f•.■wm-oD-s■■ ■OANM ■■u■\�i■rs■■w■ ■■■--■-■ VD■pDDDO'Ao-DSD■-■N ■■N■NN\ � ri■■Ef■N■■DNN■E\,■■,■ ■\\\■,/sf,rs\\n pD,■f■■■,■■ \nr sommosson■\o,■■o■■s■H■ ■■■■■■■■■-■N /,■■r■■N'/-■N /N\,■NNM�i■N ■,EolooE■■o■DO■n\■■N HamD■D■■ \ %• I■a/\■ IDam D■,M■f!�� N mossonami moom■DiD,■o■■■soosmo� sN■E■,fD 7�A.Ma 1 AM AN■■■mul no■■■u■■■■■r■■■w NY■ t� ■D■O• ■-■■r■■r�N■■■ gram /■■x/ua�v.N p in■N,N■r■■■■■N\■■■■H■■M■N■■■■r��■1.000, ■ranee■■■ Nsr� ■■NM. ■■■V■■r■,■■■w■■■■N■ O \■\■NE7.r,■'1\■D/■ooli■M■�I. in�: ��' D.ff \,\\\■f■ i■i iii■■■ ■�iN■■■■■■\,•■►■■■�.■,.e/■O �■■■■■o' we IEEE■■D■■R/■ ■■,■■■■1■■ ■D-■■D/./■NI-Dt/DH��-■��-�D ■■Err ■-■■--fDf■-■-■■---■■■■�t o\\r,1►I■I,■■■►I\■\r\■■q eream N i!MONO ■,\,\,■■■Na ■■■I/t■I■■/1■■r1■o■MI■■N _ \■,oN\:MNM�■r►�■I.■ Amer NNBFsouowo■r/D�■■i��i-i� memo P1 r■■■'d:.■■ f_ NraN■�N■■M�fr,■I-.eva Ji,■r■ ■rr� iiiiii■■ffi■ii■M\/r■ \r�,�■■iif%IMtaiw/iii■i�iw■\N \\■�_�■ ■■■■-•- ■■,..■ ��■M,■r■\s■ ■■Dais■�iii�EgiifNiaHS .r,rne ��iiNoo � .s■■w■!•w■■■■■No ■ON■,■■rfo■\D,\\\s■,pn�..■. .sa\n►�e::iiOsNn ,■D■■f■o� ■o,■ ■■\ ■■■oD■■oo■,■■■w.■r.,■r.■\r.DSof. n-�-Na~■-- ■,■■,o■fosE\:-D■■o■■D■s iorl■■■I.,„■p �• ■■•,\o■rm■■■\,■■■■■a■■N� A■IV�■--/1■■■fr.�■■��■■ Sri■■■ I %■■■■■■■f��■ tramomw .■o■■�+f� \r moves DON-DDS ■■N■■■■NM /D,•,N■r/■■■M�n�:%��!!\H/i■\■■ w�■■■■■��.f■■oD■f■ rrr.■r ■.�Dw w ppip i■,ND s alga aggannA�.■.■■F AMS .r.1 0\■\!rM ff�f No memo ■■■fr'i'AA'/,f■,'D■NO NSANN,■r.■NN gal ■,■■■s■/sf■H,D■■o■rw.i�s•.• nN■•.s,■■..■D.��■r ..n•nowsmoss DEED■■sr Df/DN wDMv' EOWD ■,■■■■■r �■�i�-i■-�o�.rrl 7JND-Die•i�..■>N:ef-i�::s! ■-■o-�o� ■,r� OD■\EE ■+`�p,N�lEu!I■t■■o■sfs.e r. �'i►�wpNo•r�.:■r q� N w.s�ra�rAs\�■D■= =o .0■�■N , WINE ►D■ iv`\ \ ►,■N••�; �,■■■■ = �■■■■r:V N ir ►■ � �� ■■, + ■7r.D\Dn ■■ -�wi'a- NEEDS u■r• �sr�■D■N\gyp'■ , r N maw N■■M■��- Do,\ �oEN,pi\u■■■�./e�■r �,w>•s��.•r�-�N�M :o■�Mme~ ■�� -IEEE►.�%t■�.t■iD■■�--�. •�NNN•tN■ooD metro■■�EfE f ■■--f■r��- ■�i■IS■i.■e:i1' I'.■1i��i rit■roMO\oMo. low o oomw■ ■■■■■Dorf■ i <ri■Jr�tit7'fa- . ■■ li,■■s ■D\■,■■rf■■■■D�i■�r►S.lir.D/ .i A op �muiirJoE■■DEHo lmmon f ■N,DN\s■f■■■,os�iolls/1 •��.r"t9■■■ovzlw■■„�oN"own saw �\N�• ■ ■■,■■■■.ffDDi D�" ;q�\\�ffo■■w� ::Nr" .iiii✓ ■,■DN■ffffn ru•.f:�nvww �si:DOf■■i■■s■D■NSH ■■D■D■orf-DD..s wow•■- •e:�e�It'!r•�— �._.tN■■■■r�,DN---Nt��D E„\■■fNfEeM �.o►i■:aa>ww■f�>••�-�i�i==—=_�_ ■DODO.■M■�.��II�Lt/�t� � ��_ ��r+...r. _�.._�_��_- ■MNo D■\D■D■o'/II,LI�'i��SO ' .!mod\\■ ■■e■NEe■■Ei■ED,r S■_�//-'/r,/+MI��II�r�L'JM�I�yD/�I D e D■�N■Dso�■s=s��s'M�■■■D■■r�'i_N�t M��.■..■.DDE■E-D i■iD■i■\i■■■i■D iN■i,if■i■■i■■s■�D�■�Ni■■�Os-C,\■■oD■r■■■�■/IDO■D N■■-■■\■■NN ■N■N•,s■,NNSON NS oo\■■■ oDD summons■,■o ir gS Engin s o BD� - ADD-DD ■-D D■-•■-s -- O■E\■D s■■■■s■■s.D owns D■D,,\Oss■D,,O M�DO■ED■\E- sDD!■D , i OVERLAND URBAN AREAS r OF FLOW CURVES r r 1 ca M. OVA, CD r \ cz ty �� t Iry I Ln CID O-C In ou r •• cn n Q _ w • act _ v O O G 7•�J/ N N CM cm Lj / r Z N N .i •s/ue+ 3 �� , L7 u ' ■ . Fsa • v � If7N W CN C-4 1.7 o w CD l Wt �- 70 lc* O n z !\1 r nz V u z O Jo v W c t p Z .� z c� n 0 u s .00 .. V m J z EL. 0 0 a. C) L. o o0 O Gtn • � a �? r. ZLL. J M < O Q 0 0 ; G a N C u76 LLz � N .oiz C) w o c xu z � 0 kwo 1» m Oca.- o i z � O w J ! .3 v a M II-A-7 i r -n v n H C) -0 (= � > cam d 7 : O m 0 � r c t •�-1 -�t � n p N ,r w V1 N p V N C O 0 2 .fl — �> z rn .. a a° Z _ G � � O Q to • cn 3 = 2 0 .> '� nt > i.Z --1i 1i7 X • '� o tttttttr R ^ 4w v Gh de co o � a ` 0 CM , 71 �GTI`- tom` - ' j •..� A 11 _ Q co v co r t O cm de— Gomm* CD COG o tr � oo L C� of I _ �. �; � •� / 1 __ . `�`� I' \ � \��A�'"1 t �� rte-' •/cs�� , { L N L- G.N O 4- 4- k �� H \ to O O Dl 41 K .r ce i.. to •V � 7 V p1 z Id u In S-i- U U ba L" � &. O �D I N'r N 4- =r Iv to r d o c v 44 a> a In C. 4-4- 0 4-S 7 f- •' N O - C (1 C] E Q! O O T N ,`1��1 `n O 4-3 W 4J t0 C C• Q N `�` Q vOi,Cr T C A C O G1 to O v .O- +� L O ,r t C ♦ . S- d of'Dos Ind r- N � +� 11� a fa a o to r C+a 4.- dl -4- r O U 0 ter- U U i. L O C 11 Q rL U s 0 t Cr �D p, b to Q1 C. O C r L t- • � N C E 'r^ a- • 4J G Q 7 - L+� Y b 0)4-J Li ? b p %n O D L ^ S- C r0 W J O U E m r- U C Ca to CL`O' s" f° � - 4-3 .6-J..6-J., a 4n u C N � ai ra (71 A � d CO r N n CDI I�n a U b O , r 4-3 E L d J n d.C to %-r a d ^ ^ O r N Cell M d LD F- '•-• ^ tom: _ p .- u 6-Hour Precipitation (inches) o oIno InoIn o U3 o l9 L;Lr; In Cl 4j Ln N N r tD H �� r•._ __^�—.TTY •- J ./_�_.�-_- - to � v .0 v .-�---�'-;'T:._.-y-- � _I .—�_ .' ` � �� 1 •1 I N = Z O '� La i O cis w - - - _ --- -----_- O N I. - t— i '-�--- -_ 1 1 • In •r-. O —i 1 I .-- -' j.vJ-14 APPENDIX XI rage,+ o1 NDS Training- Surface Drainage Design • Clay - Dense Ve etation 0.50 J Gravel - Bare 0.65 Gravel - Light V etation 0.50 Gravel - Dense vegetation 0.40 Loam- Bare 0.60 Loam- Light y2getation 0.45 Loam - Dense Vegetation 0.35 Sand - Bare 0.50 Sand - Light Vegetation 0.40 Sand - Dense Vs2etation. 0.30 Grass Areas 0.35 Step 3: Determine the maximum I hour rainfall expected in 100 years. Step 4: Compute the total gallons per minute runoff using the following formula: q = CiA/96.23 q=peak runoff rate, cubic feet per second (cfs)or gallons per minute (gpm) A=area of drainage area (Step 1) C=Runoff coefficient(Step 2) 1=rainfall Intensity, Inches per hour(iph) for the design storm frequency and for the time of concentration of the drainage area Step 5: Select the pipe size by using the following table.Table based on smooth wall sewer and drain pipe or coextruded dual wall corrugated pipe. Flow Rates for Various Pipe Sizes 3" Pipe < 46 gal/minute 6" Pipe< 180 gal/minute 4" Pipe< 79 gaUminute 8" Pipe < 316 gaUminute Table assumes now velocity of 2 feet per second An adjustment for single wall corrugated pipe can be calculated could u pp approximately "n"values below. For example,single wall corrugated pipe 25% less gpm than smooth wall or dual wall corrugated pipe. Manning"n" Smooth wall sewer and drain pipe or dual wall corrugated pipe 0.010 - 0.013 Single Wall Corrugated Plastic Pipe, 3-8 In.0.01-0.016 Step 6: Select the appropriate grate or combination of grates required. (See chart.) Area Grabs selection Chart ___... Nos Part Numbers Orate pen Grate Fits surface Area Capacity Green black Gray Pipe Size (in sq.) GPM --- 3.4 16 14 13 3■ 2.6 4.5 01 02 03 3' 3.5 - 5.0 _ 13 11 12 4' 3.8 5.6 07 08 09 4' 4.2 E 12.0 50 40 60 6' 9.1 / j lAU'l http://www.ndsp'- Orn/Sur ace_ lnage.asp NDS Training- Surface Drainage Design Page 5 of 5 12.5 70 74 3° 9.5 13.6 05 04 06 3, 4' 10.4 15.0 20 10 30 6 11.5 17.8 772 771 773 6' 13.6 19.0 75 78 4' 14.5 33.4 80 90 6' 25.5 37.2 950 970 960 6' 28.4 45.2 990 980 999 3, 4, 6' 34.4 61.7 1212 1211 1210 3, 4, 6° 47.0 78.7 1280 1290 3, 4, 6' 60.0 136. 1812 1811 1810 Use with Spec-D Basin Channel Grate Selection Chart Capacity GPM NDS Part Numbers Outlet Fits Grate Open Surface (Various Colors) Pipe Size Area (in sq.) 25.2/ft 240, 241, 242, 243, 3, 4■ 19.3 I ft 244, 251 14.7 ft 541, 542, 543, 544, 2• 11.3 1 ft 551 2.6/ft 8001, 8002, 8003 1 1 1/2' 2.0/ft See sample surface drain design problem,Appendix B. I Foreword I Background information I Design I Installation I Giossanf I I Troubleshooting&Sample Problems I Home I http://www.ndspro.com/Surface_drainage.asp 3/1/02 ci 5 1 ix 'm tZ, A tis U3 lo, C*C&-"Y,w 10 OD 9P TV— cs # N, it c� c LL 04 Tq J: ' 0, t6 z sulo k� cm V co a cj C4 f-- CD id-. (0 V- C4 JG71*i cm IM 00. .......... OD� tt� LL 0, sp- C,! N 4 V) Aff, Jd 0 I�g C-4 ,d 'i �2 Jo- cv �,41 4d CM IN MAC C3 -OF J4: 04 Z5 'D N Go co co C44 All A NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. PRELIMINARY SOILS INVESTIGATION FOR PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING CALLE RANCHO VISTA and CALLE ANACAPA ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA APN #264-152-92 PREPARED FOR _ EDWARD & JULIE DUNN 1260 CALLE CHRISTOPHER ENCINITAS, CA 92024 FEBRUARY 19, 2002 '- PROJECT NO. CE-6543 SEP 1 02002 G 1 NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION February 19,2002 ENGINEERING, INC. Project No. CE-6543 l Edward&Julie Dunn 1260 Calle Christopher Encinitas, CA 92024 SUBJECT: Preliminary Soils Investigation Proposed Single Family Dwelling Calle Rancho Vista and Calle Anacapa Encinitas, California APN#264-152-92 Dear Mr. &Mrs. Dunn: In response to your request, we have performed a Preliminary Soils Investigation for the subject proj ect. The purpose of our investigation was to evaluate the suitability of the site for the proposed development and make recommendations with regard to site grading and foundation design. Briefly, our investigation revealed the presence of fill soils overlying the site to depths of 18 feet. Excluding the top 2 feet of fill soils, the remaining underlying fill soils were found to be compacted to a minimum of ninety percent(90%)of maximum dry density. In addition,the — prevailing fill soils and underlying formational soils were found to be"very high"in expansion potential . Therefore, non-expansive imported soils may be required to cap the building pad and/or special foundation design considerations will be needed to reduce the probability of structural damage occurring from expansive soil subgrade movement. However, it is our opinion, the site will be suitable for the proposed development,provided recommendations set forth in the attached report are adhered to. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. This opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. OQ9,0FESS/04f Respectfully submitted, — �� North County G GE 713 �� x m COMPACTION ENGINEENG,INC. o Exp. 9/30/05 00 RI P Ronald K. Adams Dale R. Re ' of c President Registered Civi r 19393 Geotechnical Engineer 000713 RKA:paj cc: (4) submitted P.O.BOX 302002 E5CONDIDO,CA 92030 - (760)180-1116 FAX(7(0-0)741-6568 NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.) Purpose and Scope 1 2.) Location and Description of Site 1 3.) Field Investigation 2 4.) Soil Conditions 2 5.) Laboratory Soil Testing 3 6.) Recommendations and Conclusions 3 A.) Grading 4 B.) Foundations 5 C.) Slopes 7 D.) Retaining Walls 7 E.) Estimated Paving Sections 8 F.) Seismic Design Consideration 9 G.) Review of Grading Plan 9 7.) Uncertainty and Limitations 9 APPENDIX Appendix A: Exploration Legend&Unified Soil Classification Chart Plate No. One Test Pit Location Plan Plate No. Two thru Four Exploration Logs Plate No. Five Tabulation of Test Results Appendix B: Recommended Grading Specifications NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. Project No. CE-6543 Page 1 1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE The purpose of the investigation was to determine if the site is suitable for the proposed single family dwelling. The scope of the investigation was to: A. Determine the physical properties and engineering characteristics of the surface and subsurface soils. B. Provide design information with regard to grading, site preparation, and foundation design of the proposed structure(s). 2. LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE The site is located at the corner of Calle Rancho Vista and Calle Anacapa in the City of Encinitas, California. The trapazoidal shaped property is bordered by a single family dwelling(Lot No. 9 of Rancho View Estates)to the north, Calle Rancho Vista to the south and east and Calle Anacapa to the west. Site topography consists of a gentle hillside descending to the west and southwest. The total difference in elevations at the property is approximately 25 feet and varies between 128 feet and 103 feet(MSL). The prior owner of the property was the City of Encinitas as documented on the as-built grading plans prepared for Rancho View Estates Subdivision(TM 89-297), dated March 31, 1992. Past grading was performed on the site during the road construction of Calle Rancho Vista Road and has generated the placement of compacted fill soils to depths of 18 feet below existing grade. In addition, during the grading of Lot No. 9 of Rancho View Estates(dwelling to the north), permission to grade on the subject property was granted by the City of Encinitas. Fill soils placed during on-site/off-site grading of Lot No. 9 were certified by Western Soils and Foundation of Escondido, California as documented in their report dated March 18, 1997. The off-site grading on Lot No. 9 included the construction of a 2:1 (horizontal to vertical units) 20 foot high fill slope along the north property line of the subject site. Site vegetation consists of sparse native grasses. Recently ground tree stumps has generated a blanket of mulch over the central portion of the lot. NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. Project No. CE-6543 Page 2 3. FIELD INVESTIGATION The first stage of our field investigation was performed on January 16, 2002 and included an inspection of the site and the excavation of two exploratory trenches, with a backhoe to depths of 12 feet. Location of test pits are shown on the attached Plate No. One, entitled"Test Pit Location Plan". As excavation proceeded, representative bulk samples were collected. In place natural densities and moisture contents were determined at different depths in the excavations and are included on Plate No.'s Two and Three. Subsequent to obtaining soil samples, our exploratory excavations were backfilled. Phase two of our field investigation was performed on February 14, 2002 and included one deep exploratory boring to a depth of 21'/s feet, utilizing a truck mounted, 8 inch diameter continuous flight auger. Location of boring is shown on the attached Plate No. One, entitled"Boring Location Plan". As drilling proceeded, borings were logged and both disturbed and undisturbed soil samples were collected at different depths and returned to our laboratory for testing. Undisturbed samples were obtained by driving a 3 inch outside diameter California Split Spoon — Sampler into undisturbed soil, utilizing 140 pound hammer, freed falling a distance of 30 inches. Type of soils samples collected, natural densities, moisture content, blow counts and sample penetration are presented on the attached Plate No. Four. -- 4. SOIL CONDITIONS Loose surficial soils(silty-sands and silty-clays)consisting of surficially disturbed fill soils,were found to be 2 feet, 1'/z feet and 2 feet in depth in Test Pit No.'s One and Two and Boring No. One, respectively. Underlying fill soils in Test Pit No.'s One and Two were compacted fill soils comprised of stiff-silty and sandy-clays. Underlying compacted fill soils in Boring No. One were stiff silty-clays and sandy-clays to 18 feet in depth succeeded by very hard marine formational soils comprised of clayey-sandstones, clay-stones and silt-stones. Excluding the upper 2 foot mantle of fill soils, all underlying fill soils were found to be compacted to a minimum of ninety percent(90%). NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. Project No. CE-6543 Page 3 On-site soils were found to have an expansion index of 123 and are classified as being`very high" in expansion potential. Therefore, special grading and/or foundation recommendations with regard to this characteristic will be required. In addition, due to the dense nature of compacted fill soils and the underlying formation soils at the site in conjunction with high soil cohesion characteristics, it is our opinion soil liquefaction is unlikely to occur in the event grading is performed in accordance with the recommendations set forth in this report. _ 5. LABORATORY SOIL TESTING All laboratory test were performed on typical soils in accordance with accepted test methods of the American Society for Testing and Materials(ASTM). _ Tests conducted include: A). Optimum Moisture&Maximum Density(ASTM D-1557) B). Direct Shear (Remold) (ASTM D-3080) C). Sieve Analysis(ASTM D-421) D). Field Density&Moisture(ASTM D-1556) E). Expansion Potential (FHA Standard) Test results are tabulated on the attached Plate No.'s Two through Five entitled"Exploration Log"and"Tabulation of Test Results". 6. RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS General It is our understanding,the proposed dwelling will consist of wood frame construction utilizing slab on grade foundations. In our opinion,the site is suitable for the proposed single family dwelling. Recommendations presented in this report should be incorporated into the planning, design and construction phases of the subject project. WORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. Project No. CE-6543 Page 4 - 6A. Grading General It is our understanding, cut/fill earthwork construction will be performed to construct a level building pad to accommodate the proposed dwelling and surface improvements. Due to the presence of highly expansive soils, it is recommended the building pad be capped with a minimum of 48 inches of non-expansive imported soils. The area to be capped should extend under and a minimum of 5 feet horizontally beyond all structures and/or surface improvements where applicable. In the event capping of the building pad proves to be economically unfeasible, alternative foundation recommendations are presented under 6B2 and 6B3 of this report. All grading should be performed in accordance with the City of Encinitas Grading Ordinance and the Recommendations/Specifications presented in this report. Subsequent to site demolition, loose surficial soils(upper 2 foot mantle of existing fill), as indicated on the attached Plate No's Two through Four, should be undercut or removed to properly compacted fill soils and recompacted in accordance with the attached Appendix `B' entitled"Recommended Grading Specification". Compacted fill and/or firm native ground may be determined as soil having an insitu density of ninety percent(90%)of maximum dry density. We should be contacted to document compacted fill and/or firm native ground is exposed prior to filling. Prior to constructing fill slopes, shear keys should be excavated a minimum of 2 feet into firm native ground and/or properly compacted fill soils, inclined back into slope, and have a minimum width of 15 feet. We should be contacted to document keyways were properly constructed prior to placing fill. Existing terrain steeper than an inclination of 5:1 (horizontal to vertical units), should be benched(stair-stepped)to provide a stable bedding for subsequent fill. Sizing of benches should be determined by the Soils Engineer or his representative during grading. All fill soils generated from earthwork construction should be placed in conformance with the attached Appendix `B' entitled, "Recommended Grading Specifications". If it is decided to cap the building pad with imported materials, soils should be non-expansive (less than 2% swell) and granular by nature, having adequate strength parameters to support the proposed construction. We should be contacted to inspect and/or test imported soils prior to hauling then on-site to assure they will be suitable for the proposed construction. NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. _. Project No. CE-6543 Page 5 If encountered, leach lines and/or pipes should be removed. Concrete pipes may be crushed in place. Trench lines should be recompacted in accordance with Appendix `B'. In the event it is decided to construct a non-expansive bearing cap,the contact between the cap and the native clay soils should be graded to drain a minimum of two percent(2%)fall to daylight. In our opinion,this will reduce the probability of water build up and/or becoming trapped between permeable sandy material and an impermeable clayey material. In the event two percent(2%) fall cannot be achieved, sub-drains may be required to provide a well drained cap. We should be contacted to inspect drainage and/or drains prior to placing and compacting cap materials. If grading is performed as planned,the majority of the site will be overlain with compacted fill soils. Therefore,the structure(s) will bear entirely on a compacted fill matt thus reducing the potential for differential. 6B. Foundations General In the event the building pad is capped with a minimum of 48 inches of approved non-expansive imported soils, conventional foundations may be utilized, provided the aforementioned Grading Recommendations are adhered to. For One-and Two-Story Construction: All continuous footings should be founded a minimum of 18 inches below lowest adjacent grade and have a minimum width of 12 and 15 inches for one- and two- story construction, respectively. An allowable soil bearing pressure of 1500 pounds per square foot may be utilized for design purposes. Isolated square footings having a diameter of 18 inches and founded a minimum depth of 18 -` inches below lowest adjacent grade will have an allowable soil bearing pressure of 1500 pounds per square foot. All continuous footings are to be reinforced with one#5 bar top and bottom. Steel should be positioned 3 inches above bottom of footing and 3 inches below top of footing. Interior slabs should be reinforced with#3 bars on 18 inch centers,both ways at mid-point of slab thickness. NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. Project No. CE-6543 _ Page 6 Slab underlayment should consist of 4 inches of washed concrete sand with a visqueen moisture barrier installed at mid-point of sand(2 inches sand,visqueen,2 inches sand). Sand should be tested in accordance with ASTM D-2419 to insure a minimum sand equivalent of 30. Foundation set-backs from top of slopes should be a minimum of 8 feet. If this cannot be achieved, footings near or on adjacent slopes should be founded at a depth such that the horizontal distance from the bottom outside edge of footing to the face of the slope is a minimum of 8 feet. 6B2)Foundations (First Alternative) General In the event that capping the building pad proves to be unfeasible,the following special foundation recommendations will be required to reduce structural damage occurring from excessive expansive soil subgrade movement: Continuous footings having a minimum width of 15 inches and founded a minimum of 24 inches below lowest adjacent grade will have an allowable soil bearing pressure of 1100 pounds per square foot. All continuous footings are to be founded a minimum of 24 inches below lowest adjacent grade and reinforced with two#5 bars,top and bottom(total of 4 bars). Steel should be positioned 3 inches above bottom of footing, and 3 inches below top of footing. Interior slabs should be a minimum of 5 inches thick and reinforced with#4 bars on 12 inch centers,both ways. Steel should be positioned at mid-height of slab thickness. Slab underlayment should consist of visqueen installed within a 4 inch sand barrier(2 inches sand, visqueen, 2 inches sand). Sand should be tested in accordance with ASTM D-2419 to insure a minimum sand equivalent of 30. All isolated footings should be founded a minimum of 24 inches below lowest adjacent grade and interconnected with continuous footings to reduce rotation. -- All foundation concrete should have a minimum compressive strength of 2500 psi. Sulfate soil testing should be performed upon completion of grading to determine the type of concrete to be utilized. NORTH COMM COMPAC noN ENGINEEMNG, INC. Project No. CE-6543 Page 7 _ Foundation set-backs from top of slopes should be a minimum of 8 feet. If this cannot be achieved, footings near or on adjacent slopes should be founded at a depth such that the horizontal distance from the bottom outside edge of footing to the face of the slope is a minimum of 8 feet. Clayey soils should not be allowed to dry prior to placing concrete. They should be watered to insure they are kept in a very moist condition or at a moisture content exceeding optimum moisture content by a minimum of five percent(5%). 6B3) Post-Tension Slab &Foundation (Second Alternative) An alternative construction method to the above expansive soils recommendations would be to have the slab designed as a post-tension concrete system. The design should be performed by a licensed engineer engaged in this type of design and who has a minimum of 5 years experience. A post-tension design may prove to be cost-effective. In the event it is decided to utilize a post- tension system, additional laboratory testing will be required to provide the proper design criteria. This will incur an additional cost of$300.00 for providing this service. 6C. Slopes Cut and compacted fill slopes constructed to maximum heights of 15 feet with maximum slope ratios of 2:1 (horizontal to vertical units)will be stable with relation to deep seated failure, provided they are properly maintained. During grading,positive drainage away from top of slopes should be provided. Subsequent to completion of grading, slopes should be planted as soon as possible with light groundcover indigenous to the area. Our analysis was performed utilizing"Taylor's Charts"for cut and compacted fill slopes and a safety factor of 1.5. 6D. Retaining Walls On-site clay soils should not be utilized for backfill of retaining walls. Therefore,the following retaining wall criteria is based on the assumption that compacted imported,non-expansive sands utilized for backfill will have a minimum angle of internal friction of 30 degrees and a cohesion intercept of 100 pounds per square foot. Retaining walls should maintain at least a 1:1 (horizontal to vertical)wedge of imported backfill measured from the base of the wall footing to the ground surface. All retaining walls should be provided with drains behind and at the base of NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. Project No. CE-6543 Page 8 the wall to assure a well drained condition. Miradrain 6000 and/or its equivalent is recommended. Drains should be constructed in accordance with the manufactures specifications. Prior to hauling retaining wall backfill soils on site,we should be contacted to inspect and/or test them to assure they meet the above specifications. All retaining wall backfill should be compacted to a minimum of ninety percent(90%)of maximum dry density. For static conditions, an allowable equivalent passive fluid pressure of 354 psf,increasing 354 psf per foot in depth may be assumed. Allowable active pressures may be assumed to be equivalent to the pressure of a fluid weighing 39 pcf for unrestrained walls. These values assume a vertical, smooth wall, and a level,drained backfill. Should these conditions not be met,we should be contacted for new values. Allowable active pressures for restrained walls may be assumed to be equivalent to the pressure of a fluid weighing 39 pcf,plus an additional uniform lateral pressure of 8H. H=height of retained soils above top of wall footing in vertical feet. Allowable active pressures for retaining walls with 2:1 inclinations of sloping surcharge may be . assumed to be equivalent to a pressure of fluid weighing 56 pcf. The coefficient of friction of concrete to soil may be assumed to be .14 for resistance to horizontal movement. (Assumed the retaining wall footing will be founded into on-site clays.) 6E. Estimated Paving Section Structural section for asphaltic paving for the proposed driveways and parking area are based on an estimated R-Value of 10. The following section is provided for bid purposes only. Actual sections should be determined subsequent to completion of grading operations. Assumed Traffic Index=4.5 (Light Vehicular Traffic) .� 3 inches of asphaltic paving on 8 inches of select base coarse on 12 inches of recompacted native subgrade. All materials and construction for asphaltic paving and base should conform to the Standard Specifications of the State of California Business and Transportation Agency,Department of NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. Project No. CE-6543 Page 9 Transportation, Sections 39 and 26,respectively. Class H base material should have a minimum R-Value of 78 and a sand equivalent of 30. All materials should be compacted to a minimum of ninety-five percent(95%). T Rigid Concrete Paving: _. 6 inches of concrete reinforced with#3 bars on 18 inch center,both ways, on 6 inches of Class II base material on 6 inches of recompacted native subgrade soil. NOTE: All concrete should have a minimum compressive strength of 3250 psi. All subgrade and base materials should be compacted to a minimum of ninety-five percent(95%). 6F. Seismic Design Considerations (Soil Parameters) A.) Soil Profile= SD(Table 16-J of the 1997 Uniform Building Code) B.) Type `B' Fault(Rose Canyon) C.) Distance=9 km (California Department of Conservation,Division of Mines and Geology [maps], in conjunction with Tables 16-S and 16-T of the 1997 Uniform Building Code) 6G. Review of Grading Plan Approved site and grading plans were not available at the time of our investigation. Therefore, upon their completion, we should review them to assure compliance with the recommendations presented in this report. 7. UNCERTAINTY AND LIMITATIONS Surface and subsurface soils are assumed to be uniform. Therefore, should soils encountered during construction differ from those presented in this report,we should be contacted to provide their engineering properties. It is the responsibility of the owner and contractor to carry out recommendations set forth in this report. NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. Project No. CE-6543 Page 10 During our investigation of the subject site, evidence of faulting was not encountered. Subsequent to review of available geologic literature, we feel any faulting in the vicinity of the site may be classified as inactive. However, it should be noted that San Diego County is located in a high seismic area with regard to earthquake. Earthquake proof projects are economically unfeasible. Therefore, damage as a result of earthquake is probable and we assume no liability. We assume the on-site safety of our personnel only. We cannot assume liability of personnel other than our own. It is the responsibility of the owner and contractor to insure construction operations are conducted in a safe manner and in conformance with regulations governed by CAL-OSHA and/or local agencies. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. This opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. Respectfully submitted, ��ypFESS/pN North County COMPACTION ENGINEERING,INC. GE 713 �� m xp. 9/30/05 Pv 7,t l 7ECNN�G Ronald K. Adams Dale R. Re qPe o `FQ� President Registered Civ 9393 Geotechnical Engineer 000713 RKA:paj cc: (4) submitted NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. EXPLORATION LEGEND UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART SOIL DESCRIPTION GROUP SYMBOL TYPICAL NAMES I. COARSE GRAINED: More than half of material is larger than No. 200 sieve size. GRAVELS CLEAN GRAVELS GW Well graded gravels,gravel-sand More than half of coarse fraction mixtures,little or no fines. is larger than No. 4 sieve size,but smaller than 3". GP Poorly graded gravels,gravel sand mixtures,little or no fines. GRAVELS WITH FINES GM Silty gravels,poorly graded gravel- (Appreciable amount of fines) sand-silt mixtures. GC Clayey gravels,poorly graded gravel-sand,clay mixtures. _ SANDS CLEAN SANDS SW Well graded sand,gravely sands, More than half of coarse fraction little or no fines. is smaller than No. 4 sieve size. SP Poorly graded sands,gravely sands, little or no fines. -- SANDS WITH FINES SM Silty sands,poorly graded sand and (appreciable amount of fines) silt mixtures. SC Clayey sands, poorly graded sand and clay mixtures. II. FINE GRAINED: More than half of material is smaller than No.200 sieve size. SILTS AND CLAYS ML Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour, sandy silt or clayey- silt-sand mixtures with slight plasticity. Liquid Limit CL Inorganic clays of low to medium less than 50 plasticity,gravely clays, lean clays. OL Organic silts and organic silty clays of low plasticity. SILTS AND CLAYS ME Inorganic silts,micaceous or diatomaceous find sandy or silty soils,elastic silts. — Liquid Limit CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, greater than 50 fat clays. OH Organic clays of medium to high plasticity. HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT Peat and other highly organic soils. US- Undisturbed, driven ring sample or tube sample CK-Undisturbed chunk sample BG-Bulk sample — V -Water level at time of excavation or as indicated .- APPENDIX `A' NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. SOIL TESTING S INSPECTION SERVICES TEST PIT LOCATION PLAN PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING CALLE RANCHO VISTA ENCINITAS , CALIFORNIA _ APPROX. SCALE 1" = 50' PE - 140 �V �: % II& o � � 5 P. P pip � IV h - 2 A f J BORING,-. 1 1 � r TEST PIT W NO. - V\ / NO. 1 ST- PIT NO. �" "C4 /fso 4a POBL/C SEWE,Q EASEMENT _ \ 6EE//34-Q FOR OET � B.c. '10 �_-- - CITY r7IN 0 75-0 038`4 \ i �' PER pATE� �_7- \ t v YP.) k.,` Goft-G is PG'P _- �— ni H 1e _ MA/N AA ErIST. R�M 39G7S! CAPA F PROJECT NO. CE-6543 PLATE NO. ONE NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. EXPLORATION LOG PROJECT NAME: C'ALLE RANCHO VISTA ENC. DATE LOGGED: 01/16/02 ELEVATION: EXISTING GRADE TEST PIT NO. ONE Depth Sample Dry Moisture Passing Sample Soil Description&Remarks (Feet) Type Density Content #200 Depth Classi- (pcf) (%) Sieve fication SM Tan,Moist,Loose, Silty-Sand 1_ (Loose Fill/Undercut or Recompact) 2- ---------- -------------------------------------------------- CL Olive Tan Beige,Moist Stiff, Silty-Sandy- Clay 3- (Compacted Fill) 4- CK 107.9 20.1 63.9 4' (P1 @ 4 Feet=91.4%Compaction) BG (Highly Expansive) 5- 6- CK 106.6 19.4 6' (P1 @ 6 Feet=90.3%Compaction) 7- 8- CK 110.3 17.5 8' (P 1 @ 8 Feet=93.4%Compaction) 9- 10- CK 112.8 15.6 59.6 10' (Pl @ 10 Feet=94.0%Compaction) BG 11- 12- ------- ------ ---------------------------------------- -- Bottom of Test Pit PROJECT NO. CE-6543 PLATE NO. TWO NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. EXPLORATION LOG PROJECT NAME: CALLE RANCHO VISTA ENC. DATE LOGGED: 01/16/02 ELEVATION: EXISTING GRADE TEST PIT NO. TWO Depth Sample Dry Moisture Passing Sample Soil Description&Remarks (Feet) Type Density Content #200 Depth Classi- (pcf) (%) Sieve fication CL Olive Tan,Humid, Soft, Silty-Sandy-Clay (Loose Fill) 1_ (Undercut or Recompact) CL Olive Tan, Moist, Stiff Silty-Sandy-Clay -- 2- CK 118.6 13.3 2' (Compacted Fill) (P2 @ 2 Feet=98.4%Compaction) 3- 4- 5- BG 57.6 5' 6- CK 115.5 13.7 6' (P2 @ 6 Feet=95.8%Compaction) 7- 8- CK 117.3 15.5 8' (P2 @ 8 Feet=97.3%Compaction) 9- 10- 11- 12- --------- ---------------------------------------------- ---------- ---------- ------------- ---------- ---------- Bottom of Test Pit PROJECT NO. CE-6543 PLATE NO. THREE NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. EXPLORATION LOG PROJECT NAME: C'ALLE RANCHO VISTA ENC. DATE LOGGED: 02/14/02 ELEVATION: EXISTING GRADE BORING NO. ONE Depth Sample Dry Moisture Passing Sample Soil Description&Remarks (Feet) Type Density Content #200 Depth Classif- (pcf) (%) Sieve ication CL Olive Grey,Moist, Soft, Silty-Sandy-Clay (Loose Fill) 1_ (Undercut or Recompact) 2_ ---------- ---------------------------------------------------- CL Olive Grey,Moist, Stiff Silty-Sandy-Clay — 3- (Compacted Fill) 4- -- 5- `U' 110.7 17.3 68.3 5' (29 Blows for 12 Inches) (B 1 @ 5 Feet=91.8%Compaction) _ 6- 7- 8- 9_ ---------- ---------------------------------------------------- CH Olive Tan,Moist, Stith Silty-Clay (Compacted Fill) 10- 'U' 112.0 15.6 83.8 10' (34 Blows for 12 Inches) — (BI @ 10 Feet=92.9%Compaction) 11- 12- ---------- ----------- ------------ ---------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- PROJECT NO. CE-6543 PLATE NO. FOUR NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. EXPLORATION LOG PROJECT NAME: CALLE RANCHO VISTA ENC. DATE LOGGED: 02/14/02 ELEVATION: EXISTING GRADE BORING NO. ONE (cont.) Depth Sample Dry Moistwe Passing Sample Soil Description&Remarks (Feet) Type Density Content #200 Depth Classif- (pcf) (%) Sieve ication CH Olive Tan,Moist, Stiff, Silty-Clay 13- (Compacted Fill 14- 15- `U' 109.9 19.8 71.1 15' (28 Blows for 12 Inches) (B 1 @ 15 Feet=91.2%Compaction) 16- 17- 18- ---------------------------------------------------------------— CL Pink Red,Moist,Hard, Sandy-Claystone 19- (Native Formation) 20- `U' 109.2 15.9 62.8 20' (51 Blows for 12 Inches) 21- Bottom of Hole 22- NOTE: Fill placed on dense native contact PROJECT NO. CE-6543 PLATE NO. FOUR (cont) NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. TABULATION OF TEST RESULTS OPTIMUM MOISTURE/MAXIMUM DENSITY SOIL DESCRIPTION TYPE MAX. DRY DENSITY OPT. MOISTURE (LB. CU. M (%DRY WT) Olive Tan Beige Silty- Sandy-Clay P1 @4' 118.0 13.2 Olive Tan Silty-Sandy-Clay Pi @ 10' 120.0 13.2 Olive Tan Silty-Sandy-Clay P2 @ 5' 120.5 12.5 EXPANSION POTENTIAL SAMPLE NO P2 Q 5' CONDITION Remold 90% INITIAL MOISTURE(%) 12.7 AIR DRY MOISTURE(%) 9.2 FINAL MOISTURE(%) 27.2 DRY DENSITY (PCF) 108.4 LOAD (PSF) 150 — SWELL(%) 12.3 EXPANSION INDEX 123 DIRECT SHEAR — SAMPLE NO P2 @a 5' CONDITION Remold 90% ANGLE INTERNAL FRICTION 12 -' COHESION INTERCEPT(PCF) 350 PROJECT NO. CE-6543 PLATE NO. FIVE NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS (General Provisions) 1. INTENT The intent of these specifications is to provide procedures in accordance with current standard practices regarding clearing, compacting natural ground, preparing areas to receive fill, and placing and compacting of fill soil to the lines , grades, and slopes delineated on the project plans. Recommendations set forth in the attached"Preliminary Soils Investigation"report or special provisions are a part of the "Recommended Grading Specifications" and shall supercede the provisions contained hereinafter in case of conflict. 2. INSPECTION & TESTING A qualified Soils Engineer shall be employed to inspect and test the earthwork in accordance with these specification and the accepted plans. It will be necessary that the Soils Engineer or his representative be allowed to provide adequate inspection so that he may certify that the work was or was not accomplished as specified or indicated. It shall be the responsibility of the contractor to assist the Soils Engineer and to keep him appraised of work schedules, changes, _ new information and dates, and new unforeseen soils conditions so that he may make these certifications. If substandard conditions (questionable soils, adverse weather, poor moisture control, inadequate compaction, etc.) Are encountered, the Soils Engineer will be empowered to either stop construction until conditions are remedied or recommend rejection of the work. Soil tests used to determine the degree of compaction will be performed in accordance with the following American Society for Testing and Materials(ASTM)test methods: *Maximum Density & Optimum Moisture Content(ASTM D-1557-78) * Density of Soil In-Place (ASTM D-1556 or ASTM D-2922 & 3017) 3. MATERIALS Those soils used as fill will have a minimum of forty percent(40%) passing a#4 sieve. They _ will be free of vegetable matter or other deleterious substances and contain no rock over 6 inches in size. Should unsuitable material be encountered,the Soils Engineer will be contacted to provide recommendations. APPENDIX `B' NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. 4. PLACING AND SPREADING OF FILL The selected fill material shall be placed in layers which when compacted will not exceed 6 — inches in thickness. Each layer shall be spread evenly and shall be thoroughly blade mixed during the spreading to insure uniformity of material in each layer. When moisture content of the fill material is below that recommended by the Soils Engineer, water shall then be added until the moisture content is as specified to assure thorough bonding during the compacting process. When the moisture content of the fill materials is above that recommended by the Soils Engineer,the fill material shall be aerated by blading or other satisfactory methods until the moisture content is as specified. 5. COMPACTION — After each layer has been placed, mixed, and spread evenly, it shall be thoroughly compacted to not less than ninety percent(90%) relative compaction. Compaction shall be by sheepsfoot rollers multiple-wheel pneumatic tired rollers or other types of rollers. Rolling shall be accomplished while the fill material is at the specified moisture content. Rolling -- each layer shall be continuous over it's entire area and the roller shall make sufficient trips to insure that the desired density has been obtained. The fill operation shall be continued in 6 inch compacted layers, or as specified above, until the fill has been brought to the finished slopes and grades shown on the project plans. 6. WALL BACKFILL Backfill soils should consist of non-expansive sand, Compaction should be achieved with light hand-held pneumatic tampers to avoid over compaction and hence cause structural damage. Wall backfill should be compacted to a minimum of ninety percent(90%)of maximum density. 7. TRENCH BACKFILL All trench backfill located within structural areas should be compacted to a minimum of ninety percent(90%) of maximum density. APPENDIX `B'