2004-9126 G K&S ENGINEERING PactCertil'Waticm
Planning . Engineering . Surveying Jn--04-01 I
Date: September 24, 2008
City of Encinitas SCANNED
Engineering Services Permits
505 South Vulcan Avenue
Encinitas, CA 92024
Re: Engineer's Pad Certification for Project No. TM-88-183 and Grading Permit
No. 9126-G
PAD CERTIFICATION
Pursuant to section 23.24.3 10 of the Encinitas Municipal Code, this letter is hereby
submitted as a Pad Certification Letter for lot 15 of Map 12882. As the Engineer of
Record for the subject project, I herby state all rough grading for this lot has been
completed in conformance with the approved plans and requirements of the City of
Encinitas, Codes and Standards.
23.24.3 10 (B). The following list provides the pad elevations as field verified on July
2008 and shown on the approved grading plan:
Pad Elevation Pad Elevation (+/- 0.F)
Lot No. Per Plan Per field measurement
15 331.60 331.60
23.24.310(B)1. Construction of line and grade for all engineered drainage devices
and/or retaining walls have been field verified and are in substantial conformance with
the subject grading plan.
23.24.310(B)5. The location and inclination of all manufactured slopes has been
field verified and are in substantial conformance with the subject grading plan.
23.24.310(B)6. The construction of earthen berms and positive building pad
drainage has been field verified and are in substantial conformance with the subject
grading plan.
QPOFESS/ON
QUO APL S. S
Z ' �� c No.4859?_ �z
Kamal S. S s, 48592 Exp.6/30/2010 m
d
gTFOF CAMEO
7801 Mi,siun (inter 0)(Ill. Suite 100 San Oicgo.Calilornia 02108 . (019)296 5565 . Fax (019)296 5504
K&S ENGINEERING, INC.
Planning Engineering Surveying _ y,
July 8, 2008
JUL
g 2008
City of Encinitas
Engineering Services Permits
505 South Vulcan Ave.
Encinitas, CA 92024
Re: Engineer's Final Grading Certification for project no. 88-183 TM and Grading
Permit no. 9126-G.
The grading under permit no. 9126-G has been performed in substantial conformance
with the approved grading plan and as shown on the attached "As Built" plan.
Final grading inspection has demonstrated that lot drainage conforms with the approved
grading plan 4ndtha swales d4ami of 1% to the appropriate drainage
system.
QPpFESS/pN
Engineer of
X Kamal w Exp.00/2010 m
d �
G
Dated: 7-X sq cmv- �P
OF CAUL
Verification by the Engineering Inspector of this fact is done by the Inspector's signature
hereon and will not take place only after the above is signed and stamped and will not
relieve the Engineer of Record of the ultimate responsibility:
Engineering Inspector:
Dated:
7801 Mission Center Court, Suite 100 • San Diego, CA 92108 • (619) 296-5565 • Fax (619) 296-556-1
NORTH COUNTY
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC. September 20, 2004
Project No. CE-5255(R)
K& S Engineering
7801 Mission Center Court#200
San Diego,CA 92108 i
Attn: Dewora OCT 1 T04
i
SUBJECT: Update Letter
Proposed Single Family Dwelling
Lot No. 15 of Wildflower Estates
Encinitas, California
Ref: "Preliminary Soils Investigation"
Prepared by North County Compaction Engineering, Inc.
Dated June 11, 1996
(Project No. CE-52550))
Dear Dewora:
In response to your request, we have inspected the subject site for the purpose of updating our
above referenced soils report. In addition, we are providing herein updated information with
regard to seismic soil design parameters and a statement with regard to soil liquefaction at the
site..
Our field inspection of August 30,2004 revealed soil conditions and site conditions remain as
presented in our above referenced soils report.
The following required updated soils design information should be incorporated into the subject
project and be amended to our referenced soils report.
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= 11 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)
P. O. BOX 302002 * ESCONDIDO, CA 92030 * (760) 480-1116 FAX(760) 741-6568
NORTH COUNTY
COMPAC'I7 N
ENGINEER NG, INC. Project No. CE-5255 (R)
Page 2
Statement of Soil Liquefaction:
Groundwater was not encountered at the time of our investigation, nor did caving of exploratory
trenches occur. In addition, due to the dense nature of the underlying bedrock formation at
the site, it is our opinion,soil liquefaction is unlikely to occur in the event grading is
performed in accordance with the recommendations set forth in our referenced report.
Recommendations presented herein and in our above referenced soils report should be
considered valid to date and be incorporated into the planning, design, and construction phases of
the subject project.
Upon completion of the project foundation plans and grading plan, we would like to review them
to assure compliance with recommendations set forth in our reports.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. This opportunity to be of service
is sincerely appreciated.
Respectfully submitted, �!�, I U Al
North County
COMPACTION ENGINEERING,INC. , o GE 713
.} Exp•
`� 9130105
Ronald K. Adams Dale R. Regli OF C P,\-
President Registered Civil En
Geotechnical Engineer 000713
RKA:kIa
cc: (4) submitted
NORTH COUNTY -.
COMPACTION ~\\
ENGINEERING, INC.
IJ'i :V
June 24 , 1996
Al Mayo %
1772 Kettering
Irvine, CA 92714
Subject: Revised Preliminary Soils Reports for
Lot No. s 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , & 22 of
Wildf lower Estates
Encinitas, California
(Project No. 's CE-5255 through CE-5261. , and CE-5213
Dear Mr. Mayc):
Per our phone conver:.at_ion of Julie 1-:3 , 1996 , it, is our
understanding the subject lots may be constructed at lower
elevations to reduce and/or_ omit, the need for imported soils.
Therefore, we have revised the subject, reports to provide
alternative recommendations in the event imported soils will not be
required. The revised reports are delineated with an (R) following
the the Project Number. All previously submitted reports without an (R)
following our Project No. should be considered null and void.
If you have any questions , please do not hesitate to contract us.
This opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated.
Respectfully submitted , Q�pEESSIONq!
North County ��, Q.k)GE R/9�. 4 iy
COMPACTION ENGINEERING, I NG.
ca ° N E7131
u X 9-30-97
Ronald K. Adams Dale i
President Regist r 19393
Geotech F 6F►� �i 00071.3
RKA: kla
cc: (1) Submitted with each set of revised reports.
(1) K & S Engineering
( 1) File
P.O. BOX 302002 • ESCONDIDO, CA 92030
(619) 480-1116
NORTH COUNTY
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
PRELIMINARY SOILS INVESTIGATION
for
PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING
Lot No. 15 of Wildflower Estates
Encinitas, California
Prepared for
Al Mayo
1772 Kettering
Irvine, CA 92714
June 11, 1996
Project No. CE-5255 (R)
P.O. BOX 302002 • ESCONDIDO, CA 92030
(619) 480-1116
NORTH COUNTY
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1. Purpose and Scope 1
2. Location and Description of Site 1
3. Field Investigation 1
4. Soil Conditions 2
5. Laboratory Soil Testing 2
6. Recommendations and Conclusions 3
A_ Grading, 3
B. Foundations 5
C. Estimated Settlement 8
D. Slopes 8
E. Estimated Paving Section 8
E. Review of Grading Plan 9
7. Uncertainty and Limitation 9
APPENDIX
Appendix A: Exploration Legend & Unified Soil Classification Chart
Plate No. One Test Pit Location Plan
Plate No. Two & Three Exploration Log
Plate No. Four Tabulation of Test Results
Appendix B: Recommended Grading Specifications
NORTH COUNTY
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
June 11 , 1996
Project No. CE-5255 (R)
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 pro-
posed structure (s) .
2. LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF SITE
The site is located off Jasmine Crest in the City of Encinitas ,
California and has been designated as Lot No. 15 of the Wildflower
Estates subdivision.
The 3. 45 acre trapazoidal shaped lot is bordered by vacant
subdivision Lot #16 to the south, Lot #10 to the north, and the
subdivision boundry to the east.
Site topography consists of a moderate hillside sloping downhill to
the south. The total difference in elevation at the property is
approximately 52 feet and varies between elevation 304 feet (MSL)
and 356 feet (MSL) .
Vegetation consists of recently disced native grasses and brush.
Particles of fractured rock and rock outcroppings are apparent
throughout the site and adjacent properties.
An existing sewer easement parallels the east property line.
3. FIELD INVESTIGATION
The field investigation was performed on April 26 , 1996 and
included an inspection of the site and the excavation of two
exploratory trenches with a backhoe to depths of 8 feet. Location
of test pits are shown on the attached Plate No. One, entitled
"Test Pit Location Plan" .
NORTH COUNTY
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
June 11 , 1996
Project No. CE-5255 (R)
Page 2
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 & Three. Subsequent to obtaining soil samples ,
our exploratory excavations were backfilled.
4. SOIL CONDITIONS
Loose surficial soils (gravelly clays , and fat clays) consisting of
plowed ground and alluvium were found to be 2 feet and 3 feet in
depth in Test Pit No. 's 1 & 2 , respectively. Underlying native
soils to depths explored were dense fine clayey-sands , gravelly-
clays and clayey-gravels succeeded by very hard fractured bedrock
with little or no fines.
Expansive soils possessing low to high swell potential were
encountered in both test pit excavations. The upper mantle of
topsoils were found to have an expansion index of 96 and are
classified as being high. Underlying clayey-gravels were found to
be low to moderate in expansion potential.
Groundwater was not encountered at the time of our investigation,
nor did caving of exploratory trenches occur.
5. LABORATORY SOIL TESTING
All laboratory tests 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 (D-1557)
B) Direct Shear (Remold) (D-3080)
C) Sieve Analysis (D-422)
D) Field Density & Moisture (D-1556)
E) Expansion Potential (UBC 29C)
Test results are tabulated on the attached Plate No. 's Two through
Four, entitled "Exploration Log & Tabulation of Test Results" .
NORTH COUNTY
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
June 11 , 1996
Project No. CE-5255 (R)
Page 3
6. RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
General
It is our understanding, wood frame construction with slab on grade
foundations are planned. Furthermore , a future pool may be
incorporated into the proposed residence.
In our opinion, the site is suitable for the proposed single family
residence. Recommendations contained in this report should be
incorporated in the planning, design and construction phase of the
subject project.
6A. Grading
General
It is our understanding cut/fill earthwork construction will be
performed to create a level building pad to accommodate slab on
grade construction. Due to concerns with regard to the prevailing
expansive soil conditions in conjunction with the displacement of
oversize rock particles , our initial recommendation is the building
pad be graded to the point of rock demolition or lack of fill
fines , then elevated and capped with a minimum of 48 inches of non-
expansive imports soils. The cap should be constructed under and a
minimum. of 10 feet beyond the proposed building footprint. In our
opinion, the cap will be beneficial for the following reasons:
1) . Reduce structural damage from the effects of highly
expansive soils.
2)_. Provide a uniform bearing cap, thus reducing
structural damage occurring from differential settlement.
3) . Generate less oversize rock that will need to be
disposed of and reduce rock demolition.
4) . Provide uniform trenching for plumbing and foundation
excavations.
5) . Increase the allowable soil bearing pressure.
All grading should be performed in accordance with the City of
Encinitas Grading Ordinance and the Recommendations/Specifications
presented in this report.
NORTH COUNTY
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
June 11 , 1996
Project No. CE-5255 (R)
Page 4
Subsequent to site demolition, loose surf icial top soils (plowed
ground and alluvium) , as indicated on the attached Plate No. 's Two
& Three , should be undercut or removed to firm native ground and
recompacted in accordance with the attached Appendix "B' entitled,
"Recommended Grading Specifications" . Firm native ground may be
determined as undisturbed soil having an insitu density of greater
than 90 per-cent of maximum dry density. We should be contacted to
document firm native ground is exposed and properly prepared prior
to filling.
Prior to constructing fill slopes , shear keys should be excavated
a minimum of 2 feet into firm native ground, inclined back into
slope and have a minimum width of 10 feet. We should be contacted
to document keyways were properly constructed prior to placing
fill.
Natural terrain steeper than an inclination of 5: 1 (horizontal to
vertical units) , should be benched (stair-stepped) to provide
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" .
Oversized rock particles with a diameter greater than 12 inches
should be sorted out of structural fill material and disposed of in
special non-structural fill areas designated by the soils engineer
or his representative at the time of grading. Oversized rock
Particles should be mixed with a substantial amount of fines , well
watered and mechanically compacted to minimize the probability of
subsidence. No rock should be nested, nor particles of rock greater
than 36 inches in diameter be utilized in non-structural fills.
Particles of rock greater than 36 inches should be hauled off-site
and/or used above grade for landscape purposes. All non-structural
fill placement should be supervised by the soils engineer or his
representative. No structure should be built within 15 feet of any
designated non-structural area.
Soils to be imported should be non-expansive (less than 2% swell)
and granular by nature, having strength parameters to adequately
support the proposed loads. We should be contacted to inspect
and/or test imported soils prior to hauling them on-site to assure
they will be suitable for the proposed construction.
NORTH COUNTY
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
June 11 , 1996
Project No. CE-5255 (R)
Page 5
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 2 percent 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 imperm-
eable clayey material. In the event 2 percent fall cannot be
achieved, subdrains 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 it is decided not to construct a non-expansive cap and one of
the subsequent alternative foundation recommendations are utilized
(6B2 or 6B3) of the report, selective grading should be employed to
assure the upper 3 foot mantle of the highly expansive soils is
placed in a non-detrimental condition with regard to the proposed
structures and/or surface improvements. Highly expansive soil
should not be placed within 48 inches of finish pad grade.
In the event a non-expansive bearing cap is not constructed, it is
highly probable the proposed structure will be traversed by a
transition from cut to fill. Therefore , to reduce structural
damage occurring from foundations bearing on two different soils
types , the following measure should be employed.
It is recommended the cut side of the transitional areas be removed
to a depth of 1 foot below the bottom of the deepest proposed
footing. and brought back to grade with properly compacted fill.
This will allow the proposed structure to bear entirely on a
compacted fill mat, thus reducing the probability of differential
settlement. The removal area should extend under a minimum of 10
feet beyond the proposed dwelling.
Thought should be given to the depth and location of the future
pool. It is recommended during grading operations (when larger
equipment is available) the pool pad be over-excavated to a depth
of 1 foot below the pool bottom and brought back to grade with
compacted fill soil. This will allow easy excavation during
construction of the pool. Pool decks , hardscape, etc. should be
capped with a minimum of 2 feet of non-expansive soil. The pool
will most likely protrude into on-site expansive soils and should
be designed accordingly.
6B. Foundations
General
NORTH COUNTY
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
June 11 , 1996
Project No. CE-5255 (R)
Page 6
In the event the building area is capped with non-expansive
imported soils and in accordance with the aforementioned grading
recommendations , the following foundation design criteria may be
utilized.
For One-Story Construction:
Continuous footings having a minimum width of 12 inches and founded
a minimum depth of 12 inches below lowest adjacent grade will have
an estimated allowable soil bearing pressure of 2000 lbs. per
square foot.
For Two-Story Construction:
Continuous footings should have a minimum width of 15 inches and be
founded a minimum depth of 18 inches below lowest adjacent grade.
Isolated square footings having a diameter of 18 inches and founded
a minimum depth of 18 inches below lowest adjacent grade will have
an estimated allowable soil bearing pressure of 2000 pounds per
square foot.
All continuous footings are to be reinforced with one #4 bar top
and bottom. Steel should be positioned 3 inches above bottom of
footing and 3 inches below top of footing. In the event structures
will be founded on fill soils in excess of 15 feet in depth, steel
should be increased to a minimum of one #5 bar top and bottom
and/or per the recommendation of the project structural engineer.
Slabs should be a minimum of 4 inches thick and reinforced with #3
bars on 18 inch centers (both ways) . Steel should be positioned at
mid height of slab thickness.
Slab underlayment should consist of 4 inches of washed concrete
sand with a visqueen moisture barrier positioned at mid-point of
sand (2 inches sand, visqueen, 2 inches sand) . Sand should be
tested in accord-ance with ASTM D-2419 to insure a minimum sand
equivalent of 30.
6B2) Foundations (First Alternative)
General
In the event it is decided not to construct a non-expansive bearing
cap, the following recommendations should be employed with regard
NORTH COUNTY
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
June 11 , 1996
Project No. CE-5255 (R)
Page 7
to expansive soils to reduce the probability of structural damage
occurring from excessive foundation and subgrade movement.
Continuous footings having a minimum width of 12 inches and founded
a minimum of 24 inches below lowest adjacent grade will have an
allowable soils bearing pressure of 1500 pounds per square foot.
All continuous footings are to be founded a minimum of 24 inches
below lowest adjacent grade and 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 a minimum of 4 inches thick and reinforced
with #3 bars on 18 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.
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 5%.
6B3) Post-Tension Slab & Foundation (Second Alternative)
An alternate 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.
Continuous footings having a minimum width of 12 inches and founded
a minimum of 24 inches below lowest adjacent grade will have an
allowable bearing pressure of 1500 pounds per square foot.
Prior to placing concrete, clayey subgrade soils 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 5%.
NORTH COUNTY
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
June 11 , 1996
Project No. CE-5255 (R)
Page 8
6C. Estimated Settlement
Preliminary consolidation tests performed randomly on neighboring
lots within the subdivisionon indicate that total and/or
differential settlement should be within tollerable limits.
However, due to uncertainties with regard to the proposed fill
depth and settlement characteristics of soils to be imported,
settlement of fill soils cannot be accurately calculated at this
time. Therefore , upon further consolidation testing of soils to be
imported, our firm will determine estimated settlement and whether
or not a settlement monitoring program will be required upon
completion of grading.
6D. Slopes
Cut and compacted fill slopes constructed to maximum heights of 25
feet with minimum 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.
It should be noted, out of slope slip planes are common to the
area. Although potential slip planes were not encountered during
our investigation, further inspection of cut slopes during grading
will be warranted to assure adverse slope bedding planes do not
exist. (Clay seems comprised of slicken sided siltstone or clay
stone)
6E. Estimated Paving Section
Structural section for asphaltic paving for the proposed driveways
and parking area are based on an estimated subgrade 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
4 inches of Class II base on
8 inches of recompacted native subgrade.
All materials and construction for asphaltic paving and base should
NORTH COUNTY
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
June 11 , 1996
Project No. CE-5255 (R)
Page 9
conform to the Standard Specifications of the State of California
Business and Transportation Agency, Department of Transportation,
Sections 39 and 26 , respectively. All materials should be compacted
to a minimum of ninety-five percent (95%) .
6F. Review of Grading Plan
Approved site and grading plans were not available at the time of
our investigation. Therefore , upon their completion, we would like
to review them to assure compliance with the recommendations
presented in this report.
7. UNCERTAINTY AND LIMITATION
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.
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.
NORTH COUNTY
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
June 11 , 1996
Project No. CE-5255 (R)
Page 10
Respectfully submitted,
North County
COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC. Q��EESSIQ/�A
G ERAF F�c
W ° No. GE713
E P 9-30-97
0
Ronald K. Adams Dale R. Re ,9rEO\
President Registered Ci &EE 19393
Geotechnical Engi r 000713
RKA: kla
cc: (3) submitted
(2) filed
NORTH COUNTY
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
EXPLORATION LEGEND
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART
SOIL DESCRIPTION GROUP SYMBOL TYPICAL NAMES
1. COARSE GRAINED: More than half
of material is larger than No.
200 sieve size.
GRAVELS CLEAN GRAVELS GW Well graded gravels, gravel—
More than half of coarse fraction sand mixtures, little or no
is larger than No. 4 sieve size, fines.
but smaller then 3". GP Poorly graded gravels, gravel
sand mixtures, little or not
fines.
GRAVELS WITH FINES GM Silty gravels, poorly graded
(appreciable amount of gravel—sand—silt mixtures.
fines) GC Clayey gravels, poorly graded
gravel—sand, clay mixtures.
SANDS CLEAN SANDS SW Well graded sand, gravelly
Ethan half of coarse fraction sands, little or no fines.
is smaller than No. 4 sieve size. SP Poorly graded sands, gravelly
sands, little or no fines.
SANDS WITH FINES SM Silty sands, poorly graded
(appreciable amount of sand and silt mixtures. •
fines) SC Clayey sands, poorly graded
sand and clay mixtures.
11. 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 med-
less than 50 ium plasticity, gravelly clays,
lean clays.
OL Organic silts and organic
silty clays of low plasticity.
SILTS AND CLAYS MH Inorganic silts, micaceous
or diatomaceous find sandy or
silty soils, elastic silts.
Liquid Limit CH Inorganic clays of high plas-
greater than 50 ticity. 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
— Water level at time of excavation or as indicated -
APPENDIX 'A'
NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC.
SOIL TESMG & INSPECTION SERVICES
TEST PIT LOCATION PLAN
PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING
Lot #15 of Wildflower Estates
Encinitas , California
Approx .Scale®
1" = 66 '
(LOT #10) I
i
I
I
I
(LOT #11 )
I
I
p I
2 �
I i
(LOT #15)
I �
I �
I �
I �
Ica
W
I �
13
I �
v]
I
I
I
P I
TEST PIT I
1
CO I
I
qj
(LOT #16)
PROJECT NO. CE-5255(R) PLATE NO. ONE
WORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC.
SOIL TESTING & INSPECTION SERVICES
EXPLORATION LOG
PROJECT NAME LOT #15 , WILDFLOWER ESTATES DATE LOGGED 04/26/96
ELEVATION 312 MSL TEST PIT NO. ONE
cli
Cz
a
~ a Description & Remarks
s c a) ° c > cA 'in
CL E o = � N � a
cu h ca a U
cn o
D cEC
CH RED BROWN , DRY, SOFT , CLAY .
(PLOWED GROUND)
1- BG 1 , (HIGHLY EXPANSIVE)
2- CL YELLOW ORANGE , HUMID , STIFF
GRAVELLY-CLAY .
3- (NATIVE) ( 2 ' DIAMETER ROCK)
(WEATHERED BEDROCK WITH CLAY FINES)
4-
`, BOTTOM OF TEST PIT .
PROJECT NO. CE-5255(R) PLATE NO. TWO
NORTH COUNTY COMPACTION ENGINEERING, INC.
SOIL TESTING & INSPECTION SERVICES
EXPLORATION LOG
PROJECT NAME LOT #15 , WILDFLOWER ESTATES DATE LOGGED 04/26/96
ELEVATION 346 MSL TEST PIT NO. TVO
CD
a
W o o
F- ?` O
o Description & Remarks
s a c °, _ > to 'v,
CC .N � N
G h 05 Q
U) d E U
LO
CH RED BROWN , HUMID , SOFT CLAY .
(PLOWED GROUND/ALLUVIUM)
1 BG 1 ( 18" DIAMETER ROCK)
2- (HIGHLY EXPANSIVE)
3- GC YELLOW ORANGE BROWN , HUMID , DENSE,
I CLAYEY-GRAVEL .
i
4- � (NATIVE)
BG 115 . 2 10 . 3 33 . 1 4 '
I (WEATHERED BEDROCK WITH CLAY FINES)
5-
i 24" DIAMETER ROCK
7
i
8-
BOTTOM OF TEST PIT.
(DENSE BEDROCK WITH
LITTLE FINES)
PROJECT NO.
CE-5255(R) PLATE NO. THREE
NORTH COUNTY
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
TABULATION OF TEST RESULTS
OPTIMUM MOISTURE/MAXIMUM DENSITY
SOIL DESCRIPTION TYPE MAX. DRY DENSITY OPTIMUM MOISTURE
(lb/cu. ft. ) !% dry wt)
Red Brown Clay P2 @ 1 ' 114. 6 15. 1
Yellow Orange
Brown Clayey-
Gravel P2 @ 4 ' 124. 4 11. 9
EXPANSION POTENTIAL
SAMPLE NO. P2 @ 1 ' P2 @ 4 '
CONDITION Remold 90% Remold 90%
INITIAL MOISTURE (%) 15 . 1 12. 0
AIR DRY MOISTURE (%) 7 . 3 6 . 9
FINAL MOISTURE (%) 27 . 6 20. 9
FINAL DRY DENSITY (Pcf) 103 . 1 112 . 0
LOAD (psf) 150 150
SWELL (%) 9 . 6 4. 0
EXPANSION INDEX 96 40
DIRECT SHEAR
SAMPLE NO. P2 @ 4 '
CONDITION Remold 90%
ANGLE INTERNAL FRICTION 25
COHESION INTERCEPT (PCF) 280
PROJECT NO_ CE-5255 (R)
PLATE NO_ FOUR
NORTH COUNTY
COMPACTION
ENGINEERING, INC.
RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
(General Provisions)
1. INTENT
The intent of these specifications is to provide general 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 and/or special
provisions are a part of the "Recommended Grading Specifications"
and shall supersede the provisions contained hereinafter in the
case of conflict.
2. INSPECTION & TESTING
A qualified soils engineer shall be employed to inspect and test
the earthwork in accordance with these specifications 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 con-
tractor to assist the soils engineer and to keep him appraised of
work schedules , changes , new information and dates , and new unfore-
seen soils conditions so that he may make these certifications.
if substandard conditions (questionable soils , adverse weather ,
poor moisture control , inadequate compaction, etc. ) are encount-
ered , the soils engineer will be empowered to either stop con-
struction 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 50% passing a #4
sieve. They will be free of vegetable matter or other deleterious
substances and contain no rock over 12 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 the moisture content of the fill material is below that recom-
mended 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 material is above that recom-
mended 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 ,
multiplewheel pneumatic tired rollers or other types of rollers.
Rollin.- shall be accomplished while the fill material is at the
specified moisture content. Rolling of each layer shall be con-
tinuous over its 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
Backf ill soil should consist of norexpansive 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'
_ `
:,
-+s° r:si 'y-.. y• Nx.z! '�-: �.,;+�4 u7.i, L:r"-'[a 9 iv ,ZW� S i L - "" 50;
{N0i SERV GES 1 FA1
NITAS,
CA 92`0 / `1
GRADING PERM IT PwR 111 _Nu+ . � 'E
FAE EL txc 264�Q 9 3 -3804 I,kN NO,
sI I' ADI}RESS't 3400,'_
JASMINE CREST CASE NC` .
w=AP 'T1�NT TAME LI'NIa 'RAM, ,.JAMES AND KARL,A
MAIIG73DREfi 're '. 574 r 7TH 'E-=`N PHONE lVO, ,
r.
CI' . h4LNC+'1'�N' ` ' S `P.TE. . VA ZIP: 2220,5_
" t CS T A Wnn I�L�C t TT
L I C T{fP�laHONE NO. � �3a'�-'6 F`,O�?-
) r,
l4gPNE NO
PERM I T , bbVED sy
f
t MI I' SEES DEP0a9.ITS --- - - - rR
.'t 2 Pmt; tl�I CHECK DEPOSI, . �
4.' �INSPECTSON DEPO;..IT o ,• t��� '.
.(S 6 . vECUtIY 'DEPOSIT'
EE
916 .50 8 . TRAFFIC FEE �a
UESCRIP T OI OF wbR
THWOR
jqA110
YM
_r
�� : Y �• '�5 f *p 3
x
4 f
E '� ��'� � `� { tax•'1F': � ��''��'� }
s -s�rr� t� ��}k 3 •".��x�r`ray °�- '� f' �n � f �.i.s.r+ a.�+s�.w� � s.r� �.,.�. `
.. ` '``1.,3p+..y,,y�*'�;�F1�wV`'fi�.';s4 +� f..�e lbw. r .t��ik«•�.``irvey��.�-r��wl �.+� - "�j, �� � � r a;�
` �yAft 3�
RA
�MM
y
WX
�, .���Y}� ,x � .'...-� sib. la°.�2k a� y .y4,' �.��' ,�3�}��$ ���r�$' �° � •.
as
x
CITY OF ENCINITAS - ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
ACTIVITY REPORT
DATE:
PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER:
STREET LOCATION: PERMIT NUMBER:
CONTRACTOR: TELEPHONE:
7-♦9-057 1-,, e -k no ac-Akkll
7-•25-,75 M43S 6A4&&& �Do,Gno N 7�W5 Jab poov 'caacp toa.
7.2�•OS "Kiwl v!U•• bV4 ffie4w 00s7rHES ABouc- cur Scop6 ON 77-a
No,��,�.. lvES7' si4S5 • Li�� �S' F.�,?ihOG'G,c�o�d co.c�r�4C'�t�.�(G
444, 7Wr' • W i�� /hES�f 4W
M.4MZ,At, A C zo wev 00;- Ae omw. Es w
I G SD /J &Al(. W149' A,
whalocC instal cd fo" pvc Dowd D".) P•/oES '7ht
S� ono SW Co�C�tS o,F- OR�O. E d.=-
'j-28`05 �/r'�� w17"G l7'iesh in .mow di �n'fi, G���
f o st Tubb/e 9.t- /b ra nn
8-r-•os a 'o� b y.� cr h �- Q^ W spec. ek epV-- -t,4t s r1a u
-F- �b r o' cf l o'� r•
zi4-Q's lie fie a tam
,t4,.rr Po.4Hw,
8-2-6$' 8row d/ SC��•cv� ZO��/- ��,galed std rP�,o 4c�f So
C h QCC l in t.Ua.lG
1 x 5 1, ai' do SC- vrn�r.
a C-gpc! f,
o R GTJ lrz o ��
q-/3 oS �arw�S L,•�osr�o.�, G4c t �. �2c�cr�s�2� Asco',o
rf-K OQL_4,Aj Ev S10 geS 11•,c j 5 t Joe irr c o{�
Cow► fiol , Pod cwt. � so;(s- y-eporf, � ,
IO fP AEZs?uE' 7�/
CSC
A t� lD CuT >9�-if9-i�J !/i. G I PGA -6i r 7; ^a t
® LR N T R. �CZOr,e Ell IN'�`X- A��
L, dS nt om
a � .0 �ac�e` c.v� 0 co dFs Thus d-r Pe--co, 3-17-2-coO
m14429 W
4�kid J 20, W ,
91291o6 ,Q
0•K - -t%
CITY OF ENCINITAS - ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
ACTIVITY REPORT
DATE:
PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER:
STREET LOCATION: PERMIT NUMBER:
CONTRACTOR: 'TELEPHONE:
10 �G.</rd -:074 roCtaC?--46ki� a
P-er,o-iAL cz4AsHtM4 co"TVAI S.
(o - t3 -oS �odG �cr�,ova t Crc,�sh�ng tc�nt�n�u5
(o- +S-os S,AntE
(o-ZZ - t4o RGnV'7 ! • oc-tc rusl„hy G#'n,5 dome or'm. cn
o A•c7'U4L G RAC+NV fi:,2 --wmE 7lM E
wo
C 1 .�rDY Y ns G
(o-Z7-05 RocK Crush oPe��moons �csc�ry,eclti
!0-3o-oS •��C! �h5 rGStune .f NE- a,. 0
sv r loll �avv"A /OCe� U�X/ log 1 aid
e a haw fv �J aa#n
/-Oct ,h t w
E Z72 cei er r0�PG
ro f"s in oloera '—s au le
-fD 4,09- /0 A u e �Var o� - /�,,� [rnd ee
$��y 9•ra�,� �/fig ��Y{lZC.
7-Z o5 Aio A-CrA'17
7•11-o5 40CL CR-ask AJ& oP6ZtnaA) *Scorn& No 644101A)6,
7•-�Z-o$ Souf�Crn�'d�ri� S!%� he4e- •�o l�/' teas
•tYa GL�s�✓ "iA Wo2e r- . o�nd eah 4<(
eyebri,5.
S u.• Can-hued 0A.02 acwa
7-i S��! �n c v hr NE Co¢. v�
7-�8.0�5 Ci• i� s! f'J Z=/ in Ng, t rei -
-I`,c
m14429
CITY OF ENCINITAS - ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
ACTIVITY REPORT
DATE:
PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER:
STREET LOCATION: PERMIT NUMBER:
CONTRACTOR: TELEPHONE:
Co/s be ycoel days.�
U cpvr
_`j-2-Oj a �r� Cc)n �hcFP, ivx (Q -� • C'L�1 ele va C✓I
G+vc v.-1 [try r 170W 17elCII71-
5-Lf Curs Fi u,5 COA-i n n1O E. ,E',ej S EX/C cv ti/Tr-k_ •
( 7j4 A,JA 6- P18GE5 -
j-�-�
U,1 y/2,CA6, Srf6-
$-t Z-�j ►2oCL ICX�21C.t n�� CUZ�C`I�U.�S
5- (�_p,< K- oq�cn��//a ?� Co 1 'nuts• oc •e-�.'� fC�� e
LA),.L( te! Ictuac Irx cwl-roe s, 'n orc�cr -1a
5-(� -off kl o�k-� r..�� wE,3'� -T'D t✓3�t�; one ern 2.E � Nv�-��j
rerAuji rlg rz0 c, -s la;ea C .
54�aw "Less! -fk s c-N n l4atce 3c--> s 4-(— .
5 i9-off n�'c/ C6,7- 51-0166- c0&14�,vvt s -lb BE C&17-(A44 �N
s-2.3-o5 6veS7 Ai-.4 ol- 7xv Aloanzaixw GcsT S1-0 &S.
Aczel C/74, nook jelen .6ac-4 amd
rase- to �v a e-/ . ,I Guho l/acesS
9 Sao
5-2�-os e, c4 04ushel 'v-era/ and now r�xk_ �tia C^an i�c�tS.
6-&-406- oc Cru ;? e 90 2 /Burt
W ee" t/-- 6 e-&--e
m14429
CITY OF ENCINITAS - ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
ACTIVITY REPORT
DATE:
PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER:
STREET LOCATION• PERMIT NUMBER:
CONTRACTOR:
..7 •• 1. U l TELEPHONE:
/e ms
`/ t o-s e r �e,Y,7
e--I,, s C-e �I LGC C fa a� 2 �+r • +�
_14b �' cC' cbrx/ G%lrc���c'- -f"Pnc'e
3124105- (ic r1'!'!� oa lled S a 7Sn�� t�/ �/e s.l e z e
{c, ewe'
3 Z8 c� E,Qvs�o,U Co.v� ��e rH�A4 s:-',ep���e�
Cr� Bc
,Ilqlo5- At
Ato AcmT7
3 z� a5" �o, �d roc�c , w • � a P� Ctcl��✓
S/ to Oj �XCAv147V9 01&&�A10 e, 41v ` ve 04
14 ll.Slv P tdn IC, 7 ��gTS
c LS� Ck 5 , p/lW- '7S '4- e'7 o rl -fD
�f� / e
be,,,g
WO
n-A�ir� fv be •cK 'll�-Gr c��� Cam��c f-��j
Cyr• rC ,.J t' ,c P��C� �vcl ,
ti30� LgSI— e way ��cK cap.
F/LL CO,i ntJOES IZ6yluej - ✓r►„nC J l.lnl
47' 11
m14429
Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation
Lot 15, Map No. 12882
Jasmine Crest
Olivenhain, Encinitas j
9 22004
Li'J!:; 'd�E LS`LRVICES December 8, 2004 CiIY of TAS
Prepared For:
MR JAMES D. LINDSTORM
57247 th Street N
Arlington, Virginia 22205-1018
-- Prepared By:
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC.
2450 Vineyard Avenue, Suite 102
Escondido, California 92029
Job #04-455-P
VINE 8L MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC.
2450 Vineyard Avenue
Escondido,California 92029-I229
Job #04-455-P
Phone(760)743-1214
Fax(760)739-0343
December 8, 2004
Mr. James D. Lindstrom
57247 1h Street N
Arlington, Virginia 22205-1018
- PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION, LOT 15, MAP NO. 12882,JASMINE CREST,
OLIVENHAIN, CALIFORNIA
Pursuant to your request, Vinje and Middleton Engineering, Inc. has completed the
Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Report for the above-referenced project site.
-- The following report summarizes the results of our field investigation, including laboratory
analyzes and conclusions, and provides recommendations for the proposed development
as understood. From a geotechnical engineering standpoint, it is our opinion that the site
is suitable for the proposed single-family residential development and the associated
improvements provided the recommendations presented in this report are incorporated into
the design and construction of the project.
The conclusions and recommendations provided in this study are consistent with the site
geotechnical conditions and are intended to aid in preparation of final development plans
and allow more accurate estimates of development costs.
If you have any questions or need clarification, please do not hesitate to contact this office.
Reference to our Job #04-455-P will help to expedite our response to your inquiries. We
appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you.
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC.
Dennis Middleton
GED #980
DM/jt
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE NO.
I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
II. SITE DESCRIPTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
IV. SITE INVESTIGATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
V. FINDINGS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
A. Earth Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
B. Slope Stability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
C. Groundwater and Surface Drainage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
D. Rock Hardness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
E. Faults - Seismicity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
F. Geologic Hazards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
G. Laboratory Test/Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
VI. CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
VII. RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
A. Grading and Earthworks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
B. Foundations and Interior Floor Slabs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
C. Post-Tentioned / Structural Slab-on-Ground Foundations . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
D. Exterior Concrete Slabs / Flatworks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
E. Soil Design Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
F. Asphalt and PCC Pavement Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
G. General Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
VIII. LIMITATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
�- TABLE NO.
FaultZone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Site Specific Seismic Parameters 2
SoilType . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Grain Size Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
— Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
Moisture-Density Tests (Undisturbed Chunk Samples) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Expansion Index Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Direct Shear Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
SulfateTest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
- Removals and Remedial Grading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
PLATE NO.
Regional Index Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
SitePlan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Test Trench Logs (with key) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-5
Geologic Cross-Section . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Fault - Epicenter Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Isolation Joints and Re-entrant Corner Reinforcement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Retaining Wall Drain Detail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 2
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
IV. SITE INVESTIGATION
Geotechnical conditions beneath the project site were determined chiefly from the
excavation of 6 test trenches dug with a tractor-mounted backhoe. The trenches were
logged by our project geologist who also retained soil samples for laboratory testing.
Trench locations are shown on Plate 2. Logs of the trenches are enclosed with this report
as Plates 3-5. Laboratory test results are summarized in a following section herein.
V. FINDINGS
The project site is largely a natural hillside lot underlain by meta-volcanic bedrock units that
are mantled by a cover of natural and shallow fill soils. Geologic instability is not in
-- evidence at the site. The following geotechnical conditions are apparent:
A. Earth Materials
Local hillside terrain is underlain by a meta-volcanic bedrock section dominated by
colored aphanitic rocks. Noted examples are weathered and fractured in upper
exposures grading more massive and hard with depth. The bedrock has
developed a modest cover of natural topsoil consisting chiefly of silty to sandy
plastic clay which included bedrock fragments. Topsoil depths up to 4 feet were
recorded in test trench excavations. Minor amounts of clay-rich fill soils occur
throughout and dump fill deposits that include an abundance of rock debris occur
approximately as shown on Plate 2. Project soil deposits occur in conditions
ranging from soft to stiff.
Details of site earth materials are given on the enclosed Test Trench Logs, Plates
3-5 and are additionally defined in a following section. Their subsurface
relationship is depicted on a Geologic Cross-Section enclosed with this report as
Plate 6.
B. Slope Stability
Landslides or other forms of slope instability are not in evidence at the project site.
The property is underlain by meta-volcanic bedrock units that characteristically
perform well in natural and graded slope conditions. Structural features are
typically steeply-dipping fracture and/or joint surfaces that are discontinuous and
diminish with depth. Noted structure is not expected to impact conditions of slope
stability at the property.
VfN[E & MML)LETON ENGIN[TRING, INC. • 2450 Vineyard Avenue•Escondido,California 92029-I229 • Phone(760)743-12I4
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 3
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
C. Groundwater and Surface Drainage
Subsurface water was not encountered in test excavations dug at the site and is
not expected to impact site development. Future development of up-slope terrain
may generate excessive irrigation waters that can impact moisture sensitive
improvements near the toe of the planned cut slope. Added drains along the base
of the project cut slope can be installed if necessary.
D. Rock Hardness
Local bedrock units are hard rocks that can be difficult to excavate when utilizing
conventional methods. Test trench exposures confirm hard rocks beneath the
property at depths below 5-6 feet. The use of large dozers (Caterpillar D-8 or
equivalent) is recommended for site grading operations needed to reach planned
pad grades.
E. Faults - Seismicity
Faults or significant shear zones are not indicated on or near proximity to the
project site.
As with most areas of California, the San Diego region lies within a seismically
active zone; however, coastal areas of the county are characterized by low levels
of seismic activity relative to inland areas to the east. During a 40-year period
(1934-1974), 37 earthquakes were recorded in San Diego coastal areas by the
California Institute of Technology. None of the recorded events exceeded a
Richter magnitude of 3.7, nor did any of the earthquakes generate more than
modest ground shaking or significant damages. Most of the recorded events
occurred along various offshore faults which characteristically generate modest
earthquakes.
Historically, the most significant earthquake events which affect local areas
originate along well known, distant fault zones to the east and the Coronado Bank
fault to the west. Based upon available seismic data, compiled from California
Earthquake Catalogs, the most significant historical event in the area of the study
site occurred in 1800 at an estimated distance of 6.7 miles from the project area.
This event, which is thought to have occurred along an off-shore fault, reached an
estimated magnitude of 6.5 with estimated bedrock acceleration values of 0.098g
at the project site. The following list represents the most significant faults which
commonly impact the region. Estimated ground acceleration data compiled from
VINE & MIDDLLTON ENGINFTRING, INC, • 2450 Vineyard Avcnuc• Escondido,California 92029-1229 •Phone(760)743-1214
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 4
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
Digitized California Faults (Computer Program EQFAULT VERSION 3.00 updated)
typically associated with the fault is also tabulated.
TABLE 1
Maximum.
Probable
Fault Zone Distance from Site Acceleration R.H.
Rose Canyon 7.3 miles 0.114 g
Newport-Inglewood 14.7 miles 0.109 g
Elsinore 24.4 miles 0.082 g
Coronado Bank 22.0 miles 0.104
The location of significant faults and earthquake events relative to the study site
are depicted on a Fault - Epicenter Map enclosed with this report as Plate 7.
More recently, the number of seismic events which affect the region appears to
have heightened somewhat. Nearly 40 earthquakes of magnitude 3.5 or higher
have been recorded in coastal regions between January 1984 and August 1986.
Most of the earthquakes are thought to have been generated along offshore faults.
For the most part, the recorded events remain moderate shocks which typically
resulted in low levels of ground shaking to local areas. A notable exception to this
pattern was recorded on July 13, 1986. An earthquake of magnitude 5.3 shook
County coastal areas with moderate to locally heavy ground shaking resulting in
$700,000 in damages, one death, and injuries to 30 people. The quake occurred
along an offshore fault located nearly 30 miles southwest of Oceanside.
A series of notable events shook County areas with a (maximum) magnitude 7.4
-- shock in the early morning of June 28, 1992. These quakes originated along
related segments of the San Andreas Fault approximately 90 miles to the north.
Locally high levels of ground shaking over an extended period of time resulted;
- however, significant damages to local structures were not reported. The increase
in earthquake frequency in the region remains a subject of speculation among
geologists; however, based upon empirical information and the recorded seismic
- history of County areas, the 1986 and 1992 events are thought to represent the
highest levels of ground shaking which can be expected at the study site as a
result of seismic activity.
VfNIE & MIDDLE I ON ENGINEERING, INC. • 2450 Vineyard Avenue•Escondido, California 92029-I229 •Phone X760)743-1214
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 5
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
In recent years, the Rose Canyon Fault has received added attention from
geologists. The fault is a significant structural feature in metropolitan San Diego
which includes a series of parallel breaks trending southward from La Jolla Cove
through San Diego Bay toward the Mexican border. Recent trenching along the
fault in Rose Canyon indicated that at that location the fault was last active 6,000
to 9,000 years ago. More recent work suggests that segments of the fault are
younger having been last active 1000 - 2000 years ago. Consequently, the fault
has been classified as active and included within an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies
Zone established by the State of California.
For design purposes, site specific seismic parameters were also determined as
part of this investigation in accordance with the Uniform Building Code. The
following parameters are consistent with the indicated project seismic environment
and may be utilized for project design work:
_.. TABLE 2
Site;Soil "Seism ic Seis01ic Seismic.Response Coefficients
Profile, Seisr>rlc Zone Source
T e Zone- Factor' T e Na`. NV Ca" Gv Ts To
SB 4 0.4 B 1.0 1.0 0.40 0.40 0.400 0.080
According to Chapter 16, Division IV of the 1997 Uniform Building Code.
F. Geologic Hazards
Specific geologic hazards are not in evidence at the project site. Existing slopes
are stable, and graded cut embankments are expected to expose dense rock units
that will perform well. Liquefaction and related soil failures are not expected at the
site. The most significant geotechnical hazard anticipated at the site will be
moderate to locally heavy ground shaking associated with periodic earthquakes
along distant active faults.
G. Laboratory Testing / Results
Earth deposits encountered in our exploratory test excavations were closely
- examined and sampled for laboratory testing. Based upon our test trench and field
exposures site soils have been grouped into the following soil types:
VINIF & MIDDLETON Eruc;IVI�TIN(;, IN( 2450 Vingard Avenue•Escondido,California 92029-I229 • Phone(7601 743-1214
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 6
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
TABLE 3
Soil Ty pe
Descriptions
1 tan clayey sand to sandy clay (Fill)
2 pale to red-brown silty to sandy clay (Topsoil)
3 metavolcanic rocks Bedrock
The following tests were conducted in support of this investigation:
1. Grain Size Analysis: Grain size analysis was performed on a representative
sample of Soil Type 2. The test result is presented in Table 4.
TABLE 4
Sieve Size '/." '/:" #4 #10 #26 #40 #200,
Location Soil Type Percent Passing
T-1 1%' 2 100 93 83 75 69 62 42..
2. Maximum 04( Density and Optimum Moisture Content: The maximum dry
density and optimum moisture content of Soil Types 2 and 3 were determined
in accordance with ASTM D-1557. The test results are presented in Table 5.
TABLE 5
Sbil Maximum Dry Optimum Moisture
Location Type Densi Ym- c Content' wopt°lo
T-1 @ 1'/' 2 115.3 16.5
T-3 4%s' 3 129.2 12.5
3. Moisture-Density Tests (Undisturbed Chunk Sample: In-place dry density
and moisture content of representative soil deposits beneath the site were
- determined from relatively undisturbed chunk samples using the water
displacement test method. The test results are presented in Table 6 and
F tabulated on the enclosed Test Trench Logs (Plates 3-5).
VwIe & M[DDE.E_TON ENGINFE RIN6, INC. • 2450 Vincgard Awnuc• Escondido,California 92029-I229 • Phonc"7601 743-1214
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 7
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
TABLE 6
Field Ratio OHn-Place Dry,
Moisture: , Field Dry Max. Dry Density To Max. Dry
Sample Soil. !Content Density Density Density*
Location Type w-% Yd Cf Ym- c Yd/Ym 100
-- T-1 @ 2' 2 15.9 111.7 115.3 96,8
T-2 @ 1' 2 17.7 118.5 115.3 100
T-2 @ 3'h' 2 24.1 98.3 115.3 85.2
* Designated as relative compaction for structural fills.
Required relative compaction for structural fill is 90% or greater unless otherwise specified
4. Expansion Index Test: Two expansion index tests were performed on
representative samples of Soil Types 2 and 3 in accordance with the Uniform
Building Code Standard 18-2. The test results are presented in Table 7.
. TABLE 7
Sample, Soil Remolded Saturation ESaturrated Expansion Expansion
- Location T e w J%) % Index EI Potentiai
T-1 @ 1%' 2 13.0 50.4 1 29.4 93 high
T-3 @ 4%' 3 10.5 50.5 22.7 46 low
W = moisture content in percent.
5. Direct Shear Test: One direct shear test was performed on a representative
sample of Soil Type 3. The prepared specimen was soaked overnight, loaded
- with normal loads of 1, 2, and 4 kips per square foot respectively, and sheared
to failure in an undrained condition. The test result is presented in Table 8.
TABLE 8
Wet Angle of Apparent
Sample Sail Sample Density Int. Fric. Cohesion
Location T e Condition Yw- cf ((I)-De c- sf
_ T-3 4%' 3 remolded to 90% of Ym a %wo t 125.9 28 242
VfNj[T. & MIDDLETON EIVGINFERING, INC. • 2450 Vinc9ard AvcnUC• Escondido,California 92029-I229• Phonc(760)743-I2I4
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 8
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
6. Sulfate Test: One sulfate test was performed on a representative sample of
Soil Type 3 in accordance with California Test 417. Test result is presented in
Table 9.
TABLE 9
�. Amount of Waterl'Soluble Sulfgte'(804)
Sam °le Location Soil=T e ' In Soil °l='b .Wei ht
T-3 4%z' 3 0.022
VI. CONCLUSIONS
Based upon the foregoing investigation, development of the project site substantially as
planned, is feasible from a geotechnical viewpoint. The project property is a stable hillside
underlain by hard bedrock units that are mantled by a modest cover of surficial soil. The
following geotechnical factors are unique to the property and will impact its development:
Bedrock units beneath the site are stable, dense and competent units that will
adequately support planned improvements and compacted fills. Slope instability
is not indicated at the site.
Existing soil deposits (topsoil and fill) are not suitable in their present condition for
the support of planned site new fills, structures and improvements. Regrading of
these deposits is recommended in the following section. Added removals of cut
ground will also be necessary in the case of cut-fill pads which expose bedrock
-_ units so that uniform soil conditions are constructed throughout the
building/improvement surfaces.
-.- ` Bedrock units at the site planned for excavation are hard and may be difficult to
excavate. Moderate to locally heavy ripping utilizing large dozers (Caterpillar D-8
or equivalent)will likely be required to complete planned excavations and generate
-- rocky to gravelly materials which are considered suitable for reuse in compacted
fills. The need for specialized techniques such as rock breakers or blasting is not
indicated to design depths.
Some added effort should be expected in placing compacted fill at the site. Soils
generated from project excavations will be clay-rich soils that may include
significant rock debris. These soils will require added processing and mixing, and
can only be successfully placed as compacted fills when proper moisture levels are
VENJE: & MIDDLE.-roN ENCINELRING, INC. • 2450 Vineyard AVCnUC• L.SCOndtdo.California 92029-1229• Phonc(760)743-12I4
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 9
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
achieved and a uniform mixture is manufactured. Larger rocks should be excluded
from the site fills and wall backfills. The use of imported sandy soils will aid in the
grading process and help construction of a better quality building pad surfaces
which will enable the use of more conventional foundations/slab and pavement
sections.
Moisture sensitive expansive clays and periodic soil heaving-shrinkage will be the
main geotechnical concerns at the project property. Based upon the project
subsurface soil profile, final bearing soils' supporting the new building and
_ improvements are anticipated to primarily consist of clayey gravel to gravelly clay
mixture (GC/CL) with high expansion potential (expansion index less than 131)
according to the Uniform Building Code classification. Actual classification and
expansion characteristic of the finished grade soil mix can only be provided in the
final as-graded compaction report based on proper testing of foundation bearing
soils when rough finish grades are achieved.
Potentially expansive bearing soils will require special geotechnical engineering
mitigation design which typically includes presaturation of subgrade soils as well
as deeper foundations and thicker slab-on-grade floors, or post-tensioned or
structural slab-on-ground foundations.
Foundation bearing soils at the final pad grades should be additionally tested at the
completion of rough grading to confirm expansion characteristics of the foundation
bearing soils which will govern final foundations and slab design.
' The overall stability of graded building surfaces developed over sloping terrain is
most dependent upon adequate keying and benching of fill into the competent
undisturbed bedrock during the grading operations. At the project site, added care
should be given to proper construction of keyways and benching operations.
In general, natural groundwater is not expected to impact project grading or long
term stability of the developed lot. However, the use of subdrains may be
appropriate along the toe of graded cut slopes in the improvement areas to prevent
potential seepage from fractured rocks as determined in the field by the project
geotechnical consultant during construction.
The proper control of surface drainage is an important factor in the continued
stability of the property. Ponding should not be allowed on graded surfaces, and
over-watering of site vegetation should be avoided.
VfNJF & MIDDLE:I ON EN61NFERIN6, INC:. 1 2450 Vhic,yard Avenue- Gscundido,California 92029-1229 - Phone(760 743-1214
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 10
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
Liquefaction and seismically induced settlements will not be factors in the
development of the project property.
Post construction settlements will not to be a factor in the development of the
project site provided our remedial grading and foundation recommendations are
implemented during the construction phase of the project.
Soil collapse will not be a factor in development of the study site provided our
recommendations for site development are followed.
VII. RECOMMENDATIONS
The following recommendations are consistent with the indicated geotechnical conditions
at the project site and should be reflected on the final plans and implemented during the
construction phase. Added or modified recommendations may also be appropriate and
can be provided at the final plan review phase:
A. Grading and Earthworks
Cut-fill and remedial grading techniques may be used in order to achieve final
- design grades and improve soil conditions beneath the planned structures and
improvements. All grading and earthworks should be completed in accordance
with Appendix Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code, City of Encinitas Grading
Ordinances, the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction and the
requirements of the following sections wherever applicable:
1. Clearing and Grubbing - Remove surface vegetation, trees, roots, stumps,
rocks, trash, debris and other unsuitable/deleterious materials from the areas
to receive fills, structures, and improvements plus 10 feet outside the perimeter
m- as directed in the field. Ground preparations should be inspected and
approved by the project geotechnical engineer or his designated field
representative prior to the actual grading.
All irrigation lines, pipes and underground structures should be properly
removed from the construction areas. Existing underground utilities in the
construction areas should be potholed, identified and marked prior to the actual
work. Abandoned lines should be properly removed or plugged as approved
in the field. Voids created by the removals of the abandoned underground
pipes and structures should be properly backfilled in accordance with the
requirements of this report.
VINJs & MIDDLE VON ENGINITRING, INC. • 2450 Vineyard Avenue• Escondido,California 92029-I229 •Phone(760`,743-I2I4
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 11
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
2. Removals and Remedial Grading - The most effective soil improvement
method to mitigate upper loose compressible surficial soils will utilize removal
and recompaction remedial grading techniques. Site surficial soil and upper
weathered bedrock units in areas of planned new fills, structures and
improvements plus 10 feet outside the perimeter, should be removed to the
underlying competent bedrock and placed back as properly compacted fills.
Approximate removal depths in the vicinity of individual test trench sites are
shown in Table 10. The tabulated values are typical and subject to field
changes based on actual exposures. Locally deeper removals may be
necessary based on the actual field exposures and should be anticipated.
TABLE 10
Total Estimated Estimated
Depth Depth of DepthOf
Tranch of Trench Over-Excavation Groundwater
Location ft ft ft comments
T-1 6' 5' not encountered Fill slope keyway yway areas,depth
of keyway may govern
T-2 5 4' not encountered Fill slope keyway yway areas,depth
of keyway may govern,difficult
to excavate @ 4'
T-3 7+/Z 4'
not encountered cut slope areas,depth of cut
may govern
T-4 5' 2' not encountered building pad areas,depth of
undercut may govern
T-5 4++/z' 2' not encountered cut slope areas,depth of cut
.� may govern, backhoe refusal
on hard rocks @ 4+/2
T-6 5+/Y 2' not encountered Fill slope keyway yway areas,depth
Notes: of ke a may govern
-�-
1. All depths are measured from the existing ground levels.
2. Actual depths may vary at the time of construction based on field conditions.
3. Remove and recompact all existing dump fills as a part of site grading operations (see Plate 2).
4. Bottom of all removals should be additionally prepared, ripped and recompacted to a minimum of
6 inches as directed in the field.
5. In the parking, driveways and surface improvement areas, removals may consist of depths to
°- competent bedrock but not less than 12 inches minimum, or 1-foot below the deepest utility, or 3
feet as directed in the field.
6. Exploratory trenches excavated in connection with our study at the indicated locations were
backfilled with loose and uncompacted deposits. The loose/uncompacted backfill soils within these
trenches shall also be re-excavated and placed back as properly compacted fills as a part of the
project grading operations.
VINIF & MIDI)LHTON ENGINF.FRING, INC. - 2450 Vinevard Avenue-Escondido, California 92029-1229 - Phone!7601 743-1214
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 12
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
3. Non-uniform Bearing Soils Transitioning - Ground transition from excavated
cut to compacted fills should not be permitted underneath the proposed
structures and improvements. Foundations/floor slabs and on-grade
improvements should be supported entirely on compacted fills or founded
entirely on competent bedrock units. Transition pads will require special
treatment. The cut portion of the cut-fill pads plus 10 feet outside the perimeter
should be undercut to a sufficient depth to provide for a minimum of 3 feet of
compacted fill mat below rough finish grades, or at least 12 inches of
compacted fill beneath the deepest footing whichever is more. In the roadways,
driveway, parking and on-grade slabs/improvement transition areas there
should be a minimum of 12 inches of compacted soils below rough finish
subgrade.
Undercutting the cut portion of the building pads will also accommodate
excavation of the foundation trenches and underground utilities in an otherwise
harder bedrock units. In the case of deeper utility trenches, undercutting to a
minimum of 6 inches below the proposed inverts may be considered.
4. Fill Materials and Compaction - Soils generated from the removals of the on-
site fills/topsoils and upper highly weathered exposures of bedrock will be
plastic silty to clay deposits and the project unweathered meta-volcanic bedrock
excavations will generate excessive rock debris. Generated soils and rocky
materials may be processed for reuse within the on-site compacted fills
provided requirements for fill materials specified herein are satisfied.
Project fills shall be clean deposits consisting of minus 6-inch materials and
include at least 40% finer than #4 sieve materials by weight. Rocks up to 12
inches in maximum diameter may be allowed in compacted fills provided they
are individually placed, surrounded with compacted fill and buried to a minimum
of 5 feet below the rough finish pad grades. The upper 5 feet in the building
pad grades, and 10 feet in the areas of public right-of-way and easements,
should consist of minus 6-inch materials. Rocks less than 24 inches in
maximum diameter may also be individually placed at a minimum of 10 feet
below rough finish grades as directed and approved in the field by the project
geotechnical consultant. Rocks larger than 24 inches in maximum diameter
should be excluded from the site fills and properly disposed from the site.
Import soils may be considered for mixing with the generated rocky-clayey
materials in order to improve the quality and workability of new fills. The import
soils, if used, should be very low to low expansive sandy granular soils (100%
VINIF & MIDDIA1:1 ON ENGINETR[NG, INC. • 2450 Vineyard Avenue•Escondido, California 92029-1229 •Phone(760;-743-12 14
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 13
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
passing #4 sieve with expansion index less than 51), inspected, tested as
necessary and approved by the project geotechnical consultant prior to delivery
to the site.
On-site fill deposits will predominantly consist of silt-clay/rock mixture. Silt-
clay/rock soil mixtures typically require additional processing and moisture
conditioning efforts in order to manufacture a uniform mixture suitable for reuse
as compacted fills. The silt-clay/rock deposits should also be moisture
conditioned to 3% to 5% above the optimum levels and compacted as
specified.
Uniform bearing soil conditions should be constructed at the site by the grading
_ operations. Site soils should be adequately processed, thoroughly mixed,
moisture conditioned to near or above optimum moisture levels as directed in
the field, placed in thin uniform horizontal lifts and mechanically compacted to
-- a minimum of 90% of the corresponding laboratory maximum dry density per
ASTM D-1557, unless otherwise specified.
5. Select Grading and Capping Alternative - As an alternative, the planned
construction sites may be capped with good quality very low to low expansive
granular sandy import soils. Import sandy bearing and subgrade soils will allow
- for more conventional foundations and slab design. In this case, the upper 3
feet of the building envelope plus 10 feet outside the perimeter should be
capped with good quality sandy import soils. There should be a minimum of 12
inches of import soils beneath the deepest footing(s). Granular sandy import
soils should also be considered for all project retaining wall backfills, if any are
planned at the site.
In the event only the building envelope plus 10 feet is capped with sandy
import soils within the upper 3 feet, a subsurface drainage system consisting
of a minimum 2 feet deep by 2 feet wide trench with 4-inch diameter perforated
pipe (SDR 35) surrounded with 3/-inch crushed rocks and wrapped in filter
fabric (Mirafi 140 N) installed below the capping soils, will be required as
directed in the field.
6. Permanent Graded Slopes - Permanent project graded slopes should be
designed for 2:1 gradients maximum. Graded cut-fill slopes constructed at 2:1
gradients maximum will be grossly stable with respect to deep seated and
surface failures for the indicated maximum design heights.
VtNJE & MIDW-FTON ENGINELKIN(i, INC. - 2450 VincYard Avenuc-Escondido.California 92029-1229 -phone 760)743-12I4
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 14
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
All fill slopes shall be provided with a lower keyway. The keyway should
maintain a minimum depth of 2 feet into the competent bedrock with a minimum
width of 15 feet. The keyway should expose firm bedrock throughout with the
bottom heeled back a minimum of 2% into the natural hillside, and inspected
and approved by the project geotechnical engineer. Added excavation efforts
should be anticipated when developing lower fill slope keyways into hard
bedrock units.
Additional level benches should be constructed into the natural hillside as the
fill slope construction progresses. Fill slopes should also be compacted to 90%
(minimum) of the laboratory standard out to the slope face. Over-building and
cutting back to the compacted core, or backrolling at a maximum of 3-foot
vertical increments and "track-walking" at the completion of grading is
recommended for site fill slope construction. Geotechnical engineering
inspections and testing will be necessary to confirm adequate compaction
levels within the fill slope face.
Graded cut slopes should be inspected and approved by the project
geotechnical consultant during the grading to confirm stability. In the event soft
topsoil deposits are exposed on the upper portions of cut slope faces, some
stabilization and mitigation may become necessary as directed in the field.
Typical mitigation may include track walking the cut slope face or reconstruction
of the soft materials as stability fills. Specific recommendations including the
need for subsurface toe drain and pertinent construction details should be
- provided at that time as necessary.
7. Surface Drainage and Erosion Control -A critical element to the continued
stability of the building pads and slopes is an adequate surface drainage
system and protection of the slope face. Surface and storm water shall not be
allowed to impact the developed construction and improvement sites. This can
most effectively be achieved by appropriate vegetation cover and the
installation of the following systems:
Drainage swales should be provided at the top and toe of the slopes per the
project civil engineer design.
Building pad surface run-off should be collected and directed away from the
planned buildings and improvements to a selected location in a controlled
manner. Area drains should be installed.
VINfF: & MIDDLETON ENGINFERINC, INC. - 2450 Vineyard Avenue-Escondido,California 92029-1229 -Phone(760)743-1214
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 15
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
The finished slope should be planted soon after completion of grading.
Unprotected slope faces will be subject to severe erosion and should not be
allowed. Over-watering of the slope faces should also not be allowed. Only
the amount of water to sustain vegetation should be provided.
* Temporary erosion control facilities and silt fences should be installed during
the construction phase periods and until landscaping is fully established as
indicated and specified on the approved project grading/erosion plans.
8. Engineering Inspections - All grading operations including removals,
suitability of earth deposits used as compacted fill, and compaction procedures
should be continuously inspected and tested by the project geotechnical
consultant and presented in the final as-graded compaction report. The nature
of finished subgrade soils should be confirmed in the final compaction report
at the completion of grading.
Geotechnical engineering inspections shall include but not limited to the
following:
Initial Inspection - After the grading/brushing limits have been staked but
before grading/brushing starts.
Keyway/bottom of over-excavation inspection -After the bedrock is exposed
and prepared to receive fill but before fill is placed.
Cut slope/excavation inspection - After the excavation is started but before
the vertical depth of excavation is more than 5 feet. Local and Cal-OSHA
safety requirements for open excavations apply.
Fill/backfill inspection - After the fill/backfill placement is started but before
ry the vertical height of fill/backfill exceeds 2 feet. A minimum of one test shall
be required for each 100 lineal feet maximum in every 2 feet vertical gain,
with the exception of wall backfills where a minimum of one test shall be
required for each 25 lineal feet maximum. Finish rough and final pad grade
tests shall be required regardless of fill thickness.
Foundation trench inspection - After the foundation trench excavations but
before steel placement.
Foundation bearing/slab subgrade soils inspection - Prior to the placement
of concrete for proper moisture and specified compaction levels.
VINfF & MIDDLLI ON ENGINFERING, INC. • 2450 Vineyard Avcnuc•Escondido,California 92029-I229 • Phone`7601 743-I2I4
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 16
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
Geotechnical foundation/slab steel inspection - After the steel placement is
completed but before the scheduled concrete pour.
Subdrain/wall back drain inspection -After the trench excavations but during
the actual placement. All material shall conform to the project material
specifications and approved by the project geotechnical engineer.
Underground utility/plumbing trench inspection -After the trench excavations
but before placement of pipe bedding or installation of the underground
facilities. Local and Cal-OSHA safety requirements for open excavations
apply. Inspection of pipe bedding may also be required by the project
geotechnical engineer.
Underground utility/plumbing trench backfill inspection - After the backfill
placement is started above the pipe zone but before the vertical height of
backfill exceeds 2 feet. Testing of the backfill within the pipe zone may also
be required by the governing agencies. Pipe bedding and backfill materials
shall conform to the governing agencies requirements and project soils
report if applicable. All trench backfills shall be mechanically compacted to
a minimum of 90% compaction levels unless otherwise specified. Plumbing
trenches over 12 inches deep maximum under the interior floor slabs should
- also be mechanically compacted and tested for a minimum of 90%
compaction levels. Flooding or jetting techniques as a means of compaction
method shall not be allowed.
Pavement/improvements subgrade and basegrade inspections - Prior to the
placement of concrete or asphalt for proper moisture and specified
- compaction levels.
B. Foundations and Interior Floor Slabs
Proposed buildings may be supported on conventional concrete footings and slab-
on-grade floor foundations. The following recommendations and geotechnical
mitigation are consistent with clayey gravel to gravelly clay mixture (GC/CL), high
expansive (expansion index less than 131) foundation bearing soils anticipated at
finish grade levels. Added or modified recommendations may also be necessary
and should be given at the time of foundation plan review phase. All foundations
and floor slab recommendations should be further confirmed and / or revised as
necessary at the completion of rough grading based on the actual expansion
characteristics of the foundation bearing and subgrade soils. In the event capping
VINIE & MIDDLI:TON ENGINrEFRINC,, INc. • 2450 Vineyard Avenue•Escondido,California 92029-1229• Phone(760), 743-I2I4
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 17
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
of the building pads with very low to low expansive import soils are considered, this
office should be notified to provide appropriate revised foundations/slab
recommendations.
1. Perimeter and interior continuous strip foundations should be sized at least 15
inches wide and 30 inches deep for single and two-story structures. Exterior
spread pad footings, if any, should be at least 30 inches square and 18 inches
deep and structurally tied to the perimeter strip footings with tie beams at least
in one direction. Tie beams should be a minimum of 12 inches wide by 12
inches deep. Footing depths are measured from the lowest adjacent ground
surface, not including the sand/gravel layer beneath floor slabs.
Exterior continuous footings should enclose the entire building perimeter.
Flagpole footings also need to be tied together if the footing depth is less than
4 feet below rough finish grade.
2. Continuous interior and exterior foundations should be reinforced with a
minimum of four #5 reinforcing bars. Place 245 bars 3 inches above the
bottom of the footing and 245 bars 3 inches below the top of the footing. Tie
beams should also be reinforced with 244 bars top and bottom and #3 ties at
24 inches on center maximum. Reinforcement details for spread pad footings
should be provided by the project architect/structural engineer.
3. The slab subgrade and foundation bearing soils should not be allowed to dry
prior to pouring the concrete or additional ground preparations, moisture re-
conditioning and presaturation will be necessary as directed in the field. The
required moisture content of the bearing soils is approximately 3% to 5% over
the optimum moisture content to the depth of 30 inches below slab subgrade.
Attempts should be made to maintain as-graded moisture contents in order to
preclude the need for presaturation of the subgrade and bearing soils.
4. In the case of pre-saturation of the slab subgrade and/or non-monolithic pour
(two-pour) system, dowel the slab to the footings using #4 reinforcing bars
°— spaced 18 inches on center extending at least 20 inches into the footing and
20 inches into the slab. The dowels should be placed mid-height in the slab.
_ Alternate the dowels each way for all interior footings.
5. After the footings are dug and cleaned, place the reinforcing steel and dowels
and pour the footings.
6. This office should be notified to inspect the foundation trenches and reinforcing
prior to pouring concrete.
VINE F & MIDoLH.roh EN(ANITRIN6, INC. - 2450 Vineyard Avenue - Escondido, California 92029-1229 - Phone(700)7/43-I2I4
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 18
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
7. Once the concrete for the footings has cured and underground utilities tested,
place 4 inches of 3/9-inch rock over the slab subgrade. Flood with water to the
top of the 3/8-inch rock, and allow the slab subgrade to soak until moisture
testing indicates that the required moisture content is present. After the slab
subgrade soils have soaked, notify this office and schedule for appropriate
moisture testing.
8. When the required moisture content has been achieved, place a well-
performing moisture barrier/vapor retardant (minimum 15-mil plastic) over the
3/8-inch rock, and place 2 inches of clean sand (SE 30 or greater) on top of the
plastic.
If sufficient moisture is present, flooding/pre-saturation will not be required. The
dowels may be deleted, slab underlayment may consist of 2 inches of clean
sand over a well performing moisture barrier/vapor retardant (minimum 10-mil
plastic) over 2 inches of clean sand, and the footings and slab may be poured
monolithically.
This office should be notified to inspect the sand, slab thickness, and
reinforcing prior to concrete pour.
9. All interior slabs should be a minimum of 5 inches in thickness reinforced with
#4 reinforcing bars spaced 18 inches on center each way placed 1 Y2 inches
below the top of slab.
10. Interior slabs should be provided with "soft-cut" contraction/control joints
consisting of sawcuts spaced 10 feet on center maximum each way. Cut as
soon as the slab will support the weight of the saw, and operate without
disturbing the final finish which is normally within 2 hours after final finish at
each control joint location or 150 psi to 800 psi. The softcuts should be a
minimum of 3/-inch in depth, but should not exceed 1-inch deep maximum.
Anti-ravel skid plates should be used and replaced with each blade to avoid
spalling and raveling. Avoid wheeled equipment across cuts for at least 24
hours.
11. Provide re-entrant corner reinforcement for all interior slabs. Re-entrant
corners will depend on slab geometry and/or interior column locations. Plate
8 may be used as a general guideline.
- 12. Foundation trenches and slab subgrade soils should be inspected and tested
for proper moisture and specified compaction levels and approved by the
project geotechnical consultant prior to the placement of concrete.
VENUE. & MUMI-FTON ENCINFE:RING, IN(. • 2450 Vincyard ACCnUC• Escondido,California 92029-1229 •Phonc(7601 743-1214
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 19
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
C. Post-Tensioned / Structural Slab-on-Ground Foundations
Post-tensioned or structural slab-on-ground foundations consistent with the
anticipated clayey expansive bearing soils may also be considered. Remedial
grading and foundation bearing/slab subgrade soil preparations should be
completed as specified. Post-tensioned or structural slab-on-ground foundation
design should be completed by the project structural engineer or design/build
contractor. The following are appropriate:
1. The foundation design should consider slabs with stiffening beams (ribbed
foundation). In the case of uniform slab thickness foundation, the design shall
satisfy all requirements of the design procedure for ribbed foundation. The fully
conformant ribbed foundation is then converted to an equivalent uniform
thickness foundation. In this case, however, perimeter edge beams shall be
required as specified in the following sections.
2. All designs shall conform to the latest addition of the Uniform Building Code
(UBC), specifications of the Posttensioning Institute (PTI), local standards, and
the specifications given in this report.
3. Foundation bearing soils should be inspected and tested as necessary prior to
trenching and actual construction by the project geotechnical engineer. The
required foundation bearing soils, in-place densities, and specified moisture
contents should be confirmed prior to the foundation pour.
4. A minimum of 4 inches of clean sand (SE greater than 30) should be placed
over the approved slab subgrade soils. A well
performing
barrier/vapor retardant (minimum 10-mil plastic) shall be placed mid-height in
the sand.
5. At the completion of ground and subgrade preparations as specified, and
approval of the project soil engineer, the post-tensioned or structural slab-on-
ground foundations should be constructed as detailed on the
structural/construction drawings.
6. Based on our experience on similar projects, available laboratory testing and
analysis of the test results, the following soil design parameters are appropriate:
Design predominant clay mineral type
Design percent of clay in soil . . . . . . . . . . . . . Montmorillonitte.
Design effective plasticity index 60/o.
Design depth to constant soil suction . . . ' ' ' • ' et.
_- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 feet.
VIN I & MIDDLIA oN ENGINI.FR IN C, INC. * 2450 Vineyard AMILIC- Escondido, California 92029-1229 - Phonc 7/601 743-12I4
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION E 20
PAGE JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER G 2004
* Design constant soil suction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
* Design velocity of moisture flow Pt 3.6.
* Design edge moisture variation distance for edge lift em 0'. . inch/month.
* Design edge moisture variation distance for center lift (e)) . . 6.0 feet.
* Design differential swell occurring at the perimeter of slab
for edge lift condition (Ym) . .
_ * Design differential swell occurring at the perimeter of slab 1.095 inches.
for center lift condition (Ym)
* Design soil subgrade modulus (k) . . . ' ' . ' ' ' ' ' ' ' . . • 5. inches.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 pci.
* Design net allowable bearing pressure for
Post-tensioned or structural slab-on-ground foundations . . . . . . . . 1000 psf.
Notes:
The net allowable foundation pressure provided herein applies to dead plus live
loads and may be increased by one-third for wind and seismic loading.
7. Provide a minimum of 15 inches wide by 24 inches deep perimeter edge beam.
Perimeter edge beam should enclose the entire building circumference and
reinforced with at least 145 continuous bar near the bottom. Provide adequate
interior stiffening ribs as necessary.
8. Posttension slab should be a minimum of 5 inches thick. Use a minimum
f'c=3000 psi concrete. We recommend to consider pre-tensioning in order to
preclude early concrete shrinkage cracking.
D. Exterior Concrete Slabs / Flatworks
1. All exterior slabs (walkways, patios) should be a minimum of 4 inches in
thickness, reinforced with #3 bars at 18 inches on centers in both directions
-- placed 1 Y2 inches below the top of slab. Use 6 inches of 90% compacted clean
sand beneath all exterior slabs.
2. Provide "tool joint" or "softcut" contraction/control joints spaced 10 feet on
center (not to exceed 12 feet maximum) each way. Tool or cut as soon as the
slab will support weight and can be operated without disturbing the final finish
which is normally within 2 hours after final finish at each control joint location
or 150 psi to 800 psi. Tool or softcuts should be a minimum of 3%-inch but
should not exceed 1-inch deep maximum. In case of softcut joints, anti-ravel
skid plates should be used and replaced with each blade to avoid spalling and
raveling. Avoid wheeled equipments across cuts for at least 24 hours.
VINE-: & MIDDLETON EN(iINGHRIN(i, INC. • 2450 Vuneaard Avenue•Escondido,California 92029-1229•phone`760')743-1214
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 21
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
3. In case of expansive subgrade soils, it is our practice to recommend a minimum
8 inches wide by 12 inches deep thickened edge reinforced with a minimum of
144 continuous bar near the bottom along the free-ends of all exterior slabs
and flatworks.
4. All exterior slab designs should be confirmed in the final as-graded compaction
report.
5. Subgrade soils should be tested for proper moisture and specified compaction
levels and approved by the project geotechnical consultant prior to the
placement of concrete.
E. Soil Design Parameters
The following soil design parameters are based on the tested representative
samples of on-site earth deposits. Sandy granular import soils should be
considered for wall backfills, if any walls are planned at the site. Soil design
parameters for import soils can be given based on actual testing when a
-- representative sample is made available. All parameters should be re-evaluated
when the characteristics of the final as-graded soils have been specifically
determined:
Design wet density of soil = 125.9 pcf.
Design angle of internal friction of soil = 28 degrees.
Design active soil pressure for retaining structures =46 pcf(EFP), level backfill,
cantilever, unrestrained walls.
Design at-rest soil pressure for retaining structures = 68 pcf (EFP), non-
yielding, restrained walls.
Design passive soil pressure for retaining structures = 349 pcf (EFP), level
surface at the toe.
- Design coefficient of friction for concrete on soils = 0.34.
Net allowable foundation pressure for on-site compacted fills (minimum 15
inches wide by 30 inches deep footings) = 2000 psf.
Allowable lateral bearing pressure (all structures except retaining walls) for on-
site compacted fill = 100 psf/ft.
Notes:
Use a minimum safety factor of 1.5 for wall over-turning and sliding stability.
However, because large movements must take place before maximum passive
resistance can be developed, a safety factor of 2 may be considered for sliding
stability where sensitive structures and improvements are planned near or on
top of retaining walls.
ViNIc & MIDDLETON EN(;INf.FR ING, IN(- • 2450 Vineyard Avcnuc•Escondido,California 92029-1229 - Phone(760' 743-12I4
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 22
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
When combining passive 9 p pressure and frictional resistance the passive
component should be reduced by one-third.
The net allowable foundation pressure provided herein was determined based
on the indicated foundation depths and widths. The indicated values may be
increased by 20% for each additional foot of depth and 10% for each additional
foot of width to a maximum of 4500 psf, if needed. The allowable foundation
pressures provided herein also applies to dead plus live loads and may be
increased by one-third for wind and seismic loading.
The allowable lateral bearing earth pressures may be increased by the amount
of the designated value for each additional foot of depth to a maximum of 1500
pounds per square foot.
F. Asphalt and PCC Pavement Design
Specific pavement designs can best be provided at the completion of rough
grading based on R-value tests of the actual finish subgrade soils; however, the
following structural sections may be considered for cost estimating purposes only
(not for construction):
1. A minimum section of 4 inches asphalt on 6 inches Caltrans Class 2 aggregate
base may be considered for the on-site asphalt paving surfaces. Actual section
will also depend on the design TI and approval of the City of Encinitas.
Base materials should be compacted to a minimum of 95% of the
corresponding maximum dry density (ASTM D-1557). Subgrade soils beneath
-- the asphalt paving surfaces should also be compacted to a minimum of 95%
of the corresponding maximum dry density within the upper 12 inches.
2. Residential PCC driveway and parking supported on high expansive subgrade
soils should be a minimum of 5% inches in thickness, reinforced with #3
reinforcing bars at 16 inches on centers each way placed 2 inches below the
top of slab. Subgrade soils beneath the PCC parking and driveway should be
compacted to a minimum of 90% of the corresponding maximum dry density
within the upper 6 inches. Use a minimum 560-C-3250 concrete per Standard
Specifications for Public Works Construction (Green Book) standards.
In order to enhance performance of PCC pavements supported
expansive subgrade, a minimum of 8 inches wide by 12 inches deep thickened
edge reinforced with a minimum of 144 continuous bar placed near the bottom
may be considered along the outside edges.
VINE & MIDDLETON FNGINEERING, INC. • Z¢SQ Vineym-d Avenue•Escondl jo, ca]Ifornla 92029-1229 • Phonc(700)743-1214
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 23
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
Provide "tool joint" or "softcut" contraction/control joints spaced 10 feet on
center (not to exceed 15 feet maximum) each way. Tool or cut as soon as the
slab will support weight and can be operated without disturbing the final finish
which is normally within 2 hours after final finish at each control joint location
or 150 psi to 800 psi. Tool or softcuts should be a minimum of 1-inch but
should not exceed 1%-inches deep maximum. In case of softcut joints, anti-
ravel skid plates should be used and replaced with each blade to avoid spalling
and raveling. Avoid wheeled equipments across cuts for at least 24 hours.
3. Subgrade and basegrade soils should be tested for proper moisture and the
specified compaction levels and approved by the project geotechnical
consultant prior to the placement of the base or asphalt/PCC finish surface.
4. Base section and subgrade preparations per structural section design will be
required for all surfaces subject to traffic including roadways, travelways, drive
lanes, driveway approaches and ribbon (cross) gutters. Driveway approaches
within the public right-of-way should have 12. inches subgrade compacted to a
minimum of 95% compaction levels and provided with 95% compacted Class
2 base section per the structural section design.
In the case of potentially expansive subgrade (expansion index greater than
20), provide 6 inches of Class 2 base under curb and gutters and 4 inches of
Class 2 base (or 6 inches of Class III) under sidewalks. Base layer under curb
and gutters should be compacted to a minimum of 95%, while subgrade soils
_. under curb and gutters, and base and subgrade under sidewalks should be
compacted to a minimum of 90% compaction levels.
G. General Recommendations
1. The minimum foundation design and steel reinforcement provided herein are
based on soil characteristics and are not intended to be in lieu of reinforcement
necessary for structural consideration. All recommendations should be further
confirmed by the project architect/structural engineer.
2. Adequate staking and grading control is a critical factor in properly completing
the recommended remedial and site grading operations. Grading control and
staking should be provided by the project grading contractor, or surveyor/civil
engineer, and is beyond the geotechnical engineering services. Inadequate
staking and/or lack of grading control may result in unnecessary additional
grading which will increase construction costs.
VINIF & MIDPLE]ON ENGINGL'RING, IN(-. • 2450 Vinel-;ird Aveniue•Escondido.California 92029-1229 • Phone'760)7=13-12I4
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 24
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
3. Footings located on or adjacent to the top of slopes should be extended to a
sufficient depth to provide a minimum horizontal distance of 7 feet or one-third
of the slope height, whichever is greater (need not exceed 40 feet maximum)
between the bottom edge of the footing and face of slope. This requirement
applies to all improvements and structures including fences, posts, pools, spas,
etc. Concrete and AC improvements should be provided with a thickened edge
to satisfy this requirement.
4. Expansive clayey soils should not be used for backfilling of any retaining
structure. All retaining walls should be provided with a 1:1 wedge of granular,
compacted backfill measured from the base of the wall footing to the finished
surface. Retaining walls should be provided with a back drainage in general
accordance with the enclosed Plate 9.
5. All underground utility and plumbing trenches should be mechanically
compacted to a minimum of 90% of the maximum dry density of the soil unless
otherwise specified. Care should be taken not to crush the utilities or pipes
during the compaction of the soil. Non-expansive, granular backfill soils should
be used.
6. Based upon the results of the tested soil sample, the amount of water soluble
sulfate (SO4) in the soil was found to be 0.022 percent by weight which is
considered negligible according to the California Building Code Table No. 19-A-
4. Portland cement Type II may be used.
7. On-site soils are expansive clayey deposits subject to continued swelling and
shrinkage upon wetting and drying. Maintaining a uniform as-graded soil
moisture during the post construction periods is essential in the future
performance of the site structures and improvements. In no case should water
be allowed to pond or accumulate adjacent to the improvements and structures.
Due to sensitive expansive plastic clayey soils present at the site, construction
of swimming pools, spas, patios, etc. should only be allowed based on a review
and specific recommendations provided by the project geotechnical consultant.
8. Site drainage over the finished pad surfaces should flow away from structures
in a positive manner. Care should be taken during the construction,
improvements, and fine grading phases not to disrupt the designed drainage
patterns. Roof lines of the buildings should be provided with roof gutters. Roof
water should be collected and directed away from the buildings and structures
VINIF & MIDDLHTON EN61NIAT IN6, Inc. • 2450 Vineyard Avenue• Escondido,California 92029-1229 • Phone 17 60' 743-I214
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 25
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
to a suitable location. Consideration should be given to provide the planter
areas adjacent to the foundations with an impermeable liner and a subdrainage
system.
° 9. Final plans should reflect preliminary recommendations given in this report.
Final foundations and grading plans may also be reviewed by the project
geotechnical consultant for conformance with the requirements of the
geotechnical investigation report outlined herein. More specific
recommendations may be necessary and should be given when final grading
_ and architectural/structural drawings are available.
10. All foundation trenches should be inspected to ensure adequate footing
embedment and confirm competent bearing soils. Foundation and slab
reinforcements should also be inspected and approved by the project
geotechnical consultant.
11. The amount of shrinkage and related cracks that occurs in the concrete slab-
on-grades, flatworks and driveways depend on many factors the most important
of which is the amount of water in the concrete mix. The purpose of the slab
reinforcement is to keep normal concrete shrinkage cracks closed tightly. The
amount of concrete shrinkage can be minimized by reducing the amount of
-_. water in the mix. To keep shrinkage to a minimum the following should be
considered:
- Use the stiffest mix that can be handled and consolidated satisfactorily.
Use the largest maximum size of aggregate that is practical. For example,
- concrete made with 3/8-inch maximum size aggregate usually requires about
40-lbs. more (nearly 5-gal.) water per cubic yard than concrete with 1-inch
aggregate.
Cure the concrete as long as practical.
- The amount of slab reinforcement provided for conventional slab-on-grade
construction considers that good quality concrete materials, proportioning,
craftsmanship, and control tests where appropriate and applicable are provided.
12. A preconstruction meeting between representatives of this office, the property
owner or planner, city inspector and the grading contractor/builder is
recommended in order to discuss grading/construction details associated with
site development.
VrNJe & M[DDFEiON ENGINFflRIN6, INC. • 2450 Vineyard Avenue• Escondido,California 92029-1229• Phone(760)743-I2I4
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 26
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
VIII. LIMITATIONS
The conclusions and recommendations provided herein have been based on available
data obtained from pertinent reports and plans, subsurface exploratory excavations as well
as our experience with the soils and formational materials located in the general area. The
materials encountered on the project site and utilized in our laboratory testing are believed
representative of the total area; however, earth materials may vary in characteristics
between excavations.
Of necessity we must assume a certain degree of continuity between exploratory
excavations and/or natural exposures. It is necessary, therefore, that all observations,
conclusions, and recommendations be verified during the grading operation. In the event
discrepancies are noted, we should be contacted immediately so that an inspection can
be made and additional recommendations issued if required.
The recommendations made in this report are applicable to the site at the time this report
was prepared. It is the responsibility of the owner/developer to ensure that these
recommendations are carried out in the field.
It is almost impossible to predict with certainty the future performance of a property. The
future behavior of the site is also dependent on numerous unpredictable variables, such
as earthquakes, rainfall, and on-site drainage patterns.
The firm of VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC., shall not be held responsible for
changes to the physical conditions of the property such as addition of fill soils, added cut
slopes, or changing drainage patterns which occur without our inspection or control.
The property owner(s) should be aware that the development of cracks in all concrete
surfaces such as floor slabs and exterior stucco are associated with normal concrete
shrinkage during the curing process. These features depend chiefly upon the condition of
concrete and weather conditions at the time of construction and do not reflect detrimental
ground movement. Hairline stucco cracks will often develop at window/door corners, and
floor surface cracks up to 1/8-inch wide in 20 feet may develop as a result of normal
concrete shrinkage (according to the American Concrete Institute).
This report should be considered valid for a period of one year and is subject to review by
our firm following that time. If significant modifications are made to your tentative
development plan, especially with respect to the height and location of cut and fill slopes,
this report must be presented to us for review and possible revision.
VINIF & MIDPLI'l ON FN61NF17RIN(;, INC. • 2450 Vineyard Avenue •Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone'7601 743-1214
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 27
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
Vinje & Middleton Engineering, Inc., warrants that this report has been prepared within the
limits prescribed by our client with the usual thoroughness and competence of the
engineering profession. No other warranty or representation, either expressed or implied,
is included or intended.
Once again, should any questions arise concerning this report, please do not hesitate to
contact this office. Reference to our Job #04-455-P will help to expedite our response to
your inquiries.
We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you.
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC.
Dennis Middleton
GED #980
NO-41S1 14
-- Q o�ESSicv�
S. ehdi S. Shariat � Exp.12-3,-G6 ! ;
RU #46174 * ,�
CIVIL
L1 RED GAO
JAY
Steven J. Melzer No.6953 "
RG #6953
Exp.5-31-05
DM/SMSS/jt
Distribution: Addressee (1)
K&S Engineering; Attention: Mr. Kamal Weiss (4)
Vrvlr. & MIDDLE 1 ON ENGINEERING, INc. • 2450 Vineyard AMILIC • Escondido,California 92029-1229 • Phonc"760)743-1214
fi
�� }� ,�//°% •III �
LATE ■ ,,/�
1
-
,�;_�
E
4p s r
f
XF,
v.
JZ, ,
AVENIDA DEL
_ o
` m
- --
Son
J i
1
Scale 1 :25,000
WIN 1011211 1"s 2080 It TM
o am isoo teoo xoo a000 m Mx
®2002 DsLorms.Topo USA®.Data copyright of content owner.
r www.dslorme.com a zaa <m em ® ,noa a-r
O 0 r
Z
a N
X
J L to
a Q
CL
c 0
W
n >z' , 0
a r Z U J
, r am x z
J is z
Q c U Z
`o � w
m p C,
l m
N o z w L a
m - N g p Q
p U FS
Q N o f
L.05 n •p c F 'NIW .T c_ (n o Q g CL
o
a
�<Z lrJ o °� aZ <fi Q a t
I� J,
0 FN t_ Q
o H Z v
W Z ei < W W O
N>(j Z NU N 0 < �/�
W W K O N
} 2 W
O
O M x
X
M �
O
M
M
— W
O
J da
♦ W j < j
O m
a_
1 L I a
N J
Z
W
1 °
f1 Z
a rJ W
G7
0
Z
N
W N
N U
O?�
n I s O d
a moat
a O N
h � N W
F � a w
cL wa Q a
rn
uj
M n n N N I I
i
U O
•�
oI
W� I
o a I
I
I� o
M o Ix
i
A rn
ro N
m d 300'
n �
x �
4 g a
co
N x
Z Z Z
T Q (n
U
U) s x'
to ^
2 (1x(y, 3 A
d R
� Z �
a
U a1 o
�. U Q z W m
N Z n N J R
LAJ
LLJ
LLJ
ws
Z 23
! n.. c3 Ji LI.�
b t 4� c_D m W `5 c3
a
25 Y s `� N
,
SECONDARY DIVISIONS
GROUP
PRIMARY DIVISIONS SYMBOL little or no fines.
CLEAN GW Well graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures,
_, GRAVELS GRAVELS ravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines.
Q Poorly graded gravels or g
CC O MORE THAN HALF (LESS THAN GP non-plastic fines.
W H N OF COARSE 5% FINES) GM Silty gravels, gravel-sand-silt mixtures,
O FRACTION IS GRAVEL plastic fines.
a) 6 p z w LARGER THAN WITH GC Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures,
Z O zz � NO. 4 SIEVE FINES little or no fines.
CLEAN SW Well graded sands, gravelly sands,
a a H w SANDS
SANDS
C3 2
CC w (LESS THAN SP Poorly graded sands or gravelly sands, little or no fines.
w z w cA MORE THAN HALF 5% FINES) plastic fines.
� Q 0 OF COARSE SM Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures,non p
Q II.- Q FRACTION IS SANDS mixtures, plastic fines.
O J WITH sands, sand-clay
°- U CC cn SMALLER THAN SC Clayey
O NO. 4 SIEVE FINES
Inorganic silts and vs,tsfiw'dh slight peasticflour, sill
ty or clayey m
g ML sands or clayey
W lasticity, gravelly clays, sandy
u_ [C N SILTS AND CLAYS CL Inorganic clays of low to cedium P
clays, silty clays, le
~ =4 O _j w LIQUID LIMIT IS plasticity.
Q g w LESS THAN 50% OL Organic silts and organic silty clays of low P or silt
0 = rn Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine sandy Y
w z - ° MH soils, elastic silts.
a ¢N SILTS AND CLAYS lasticity,fat clays.
CH Inorganic clays of high p
CD Lu w Z LIQUID LIMIT IS plasticity,
organic silts.
z_ O Q z GREATER THAN 50% OH Organic clays of medium to high p
F— PT Peat and other highly organic soils.
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS CLEAR SQUARE SIEVE OPENINGS
GRAIN'SIZES U.S. STANDARD SERIES SIEVE 10
4 314" 3"
200 SAND GRAVEL COBBLES BOULDERS
SILTS AND CLAYS MEDIUM COARSE
FINE COARSE
FINE
CONSISTENCY
RELATIVE DENSITY
CLAYS AND STRENGTH BLOWS/FOOT
ANDS, GRAVELS AND BLOWS/FOOT PLASTIC SILTS
NON-PLASTIC SILTS 0_ '/4 0 - 2
VERY SOFT
0- 4
Y< - '/Z 2 - 4
VERY LOOSE
4- 10 SOFT '/2 - 1 4 - 6
LOOSE 6- 16
"-° 10 - 30 STIFF 1 2
MEDIUM DENSE 16 - 32
30- 50 VERY STIFF 2- 4
DENSE OVER 32
VERY DENSE
OVER 50 HARD OVER 4
er falling 30 inches on 2 inch O.D. split spoon sampler (ASTM D-1586)
1. Blow count, 140 pound hamm �lt s
2. Unconfined compressive strength per SOILTEST pocket penetrometer CL-700 ASTM D-1 586)
246 = Standard Penetration 6enches
Sand Cone Test T) (
--
Bulk Sample with blow counts p
O 24 = California Sampler with blow counts per 6 inches
Driven
Chunk Sample Rings 6
KEY TO EXORPJOSR BORING L DG2 87 )
VINJE & MIDDLETON _ Unified Solt Clas sifc
ENGINEERING, INC.
2450 Vineyard Ave., #102
Escondido, CA 92029-1229 PROJECT NO.
DA`_ KEY
Logged by: SJM
Date: 11-9-04 FIELD
FIELD DRY RELATIVE
.r-1 USCs DENSITY COMPACTION
SYMBOL MOISTURE (P N
(%) cf)
DEPTH SAMPLE DESCRIPTION
(n)
FILL: Tan color. Very moist. Soft. SC/CL
1 Clayey sand to sandy clay. ST-1
_ 2 _ ❑ 15.9 111.7 96.8
TOPSOIL_: CL
Silty to sandy clay. Red-brown color. Moist. Somewhat
to 12 3 - Plastic. Firm to Stiff. ± 5% rock frag ST-2
blocky.
4 inches in diameter.
- 5 -
BED_R_OCK: GC
_ meta-volcanic rock. Red-brown to tan color. Fracture .
6 Weathered. Becomes difficult to excavate below 5'.ST-3
_ Generally excavates to 8-inch minus.
- 7 -
_ 8 _ End Test Trench at 6'.
groundwater.
No caving. No
- 9 -
- 10-
Logged by: SJ
Date: 11-9-04 FIELD
FIELD DRY RELATIVE
T-2 USCS DENSITY COMPACTION
SYMBOL MOISTURE
(%) (P (%)
cf)
DEPTH SAMPLE DESCRIPTION
(ft) 100+
_ TOPSOIL: moist and
CL 17.7 118.5
_ 1 _ Silty to sandy clay. Red-brown color. Very
❑ soft near surface, moist and stiff below. + 2% rock
ST-2
2 _ fragments to 12 inches in diameter. 24.1 98.3 85.2
- 3 -
❑ BEDROCK: GC
Meta-volcanic rock. Tan to red-brown co or.
_ 4 _ Weathered. Fractured. Difficult to excavate. Excavates
generally to 6-inch minus.
5
End Test Trench
_ 6 _ No caving. No g roundwater.
- 7 -
- 8 -
- 9 - TEST TRENCH LOGS
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINSEEReINOG, INC pgMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN
� 2450 Vineyard Avenue, J
Escondido, California 92029-1229 PLATE 3
Office 760-743-1214 Fax 760-739-0343 PROJECT NO. 04-455-P
■ Bulk Sample ❑ Chunk Sample
O Driven Rings
• Sand Cone Test
Logged by: SJM
FIELD RELATIVE
Date: 11-9-04 FIELD DRY
T-3 USCS MOISTURE DENSITY COMPACTION
SYMBOL
(p
(,/0) cf)
DEPTH SAMPLE
DESCRIPTION
_ (ft)
TOPSOIL: moist. Soft. CL
Silty to sandy clay. Red-brown color. Very
- 1 - ST-2
Plastic. ±2% rock �n IMo,st in
Soft Plastic. 2,
- 2 -
color changes to
- 3 -
BEDROCK: GC
meta-volcanic Tan
excavates to 6-inch minus. ST-3
4 _ Fractured. Generally
- 5 -
End Test Trench o groundwater.
6 _ No caving.
- 7 -
- 8 -
_ g -
- 10- Logged by: SJM
FIELD
Date: 11'9'04 DRY RELATIVE
USCS FIELD COMPACTION
T-4 SYMBOL MOISTURE DENSITY (%)
(%) (pcf)
DEPTH SAMPLE DESCRIPTION
(ft)
TOPSOIL: CL
- 1 -
Silty clay. Red-brown color. Very moist and soft near
_ _ ■ surface. Moist. Soft to stiff below 1-foot. Plastic.
2
- 3 -
BEDROCK: GC
Meta-volcanic rock. Tan to red-brown co or.
_ 4 _ Weathered. Fractured. Generally excavates to 6-inST-3
minus.
5
_ 6 _ End Test Trench at 5'.groundwater.
No caving. No g
- 7 -
I _ 8 _
- 9 - TEST TRENCH LOGS
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN
2450 Vineyard Avenue, Suite O J
Escondido, California 92029-1229 PLATE 4
office 760-743-1214 Fax 760-739-0343 PROJECT NO. 04-455-P
• est ■ Bulk Sample
p Chunk Sample O Driven Rings
Sand Cone T
Logged by: SJM
FIELD RELATIVE
Date: 11-9-04 FIELD DRY
USCS DENSITY
COMPACTION
T-5 I
SYMBOL MOISTURE (PS (%)
(�o)
DEPTH SAMPLE
DESCRIPTION
T06- moist. Soft. CL
- 1 -
Silty to sandy clay. Red-brown color. Very ST-2
Plastic.
2
BEDS'• GC
_ 3 _ meta-volcanic Fractured.Yellow-tan
cult to excavate below 3'/Z
Weathered. _ inus. Several
_ 4 _ feet. ranged 18-24 inches in diameter. Refusal on
rocks rang ST-3
_ 5 _ hard rock at 4'/2 feet.
- 6 -
_ _ End Test Trench
No caving. No groundwater.
- 8 -
- 9 -
_ 10- Logged by: SJM
FIELD
Date: 11-9-04 DRY RELATIVE
T-6 USCS FIELD COMPACTION
SYMBOL MOISTURE DENSITY (ado)
(%) (Pcf)
DEPTH SAMPLE DESCRIPTION
(ft)
_ FILL I TOPSOIL:
Silty to sandy clay. Red-brown color. Very moist. Soft. C
- 1 ST-1
1-3 foot boulder.
— 2
BEDECK
_ 3 _ Meta-volcanic rock. Tan to red-brown color.
_ Weathered. Fractured. Difficult noe xcavateto Several 1 GC
_ 4 _ feet. Generally excavates t ST-3
rocks ranged 24-36 inches in diameter.
- 5 -
6 -
7 = End Test . No9 groundwater.
J No caving.
8 -
J _ -
9 - G INC TEST TRENCHI DOGS
VINJE & MIDDLETON Avenue, Suite 1 JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN
2450 Vineyard Avenue, Suite 102
Escondido, California 92029-1229 PLATE 5
I
office 760-743-1214 Fax 760-739-0343 PROJECT NO. 04-465-P 0 D
" ❑ Chunk Sample O Driven Rings
v Sand Cone Test ■ Bulk Sample
O
0 O N
0
Q
W
?U
O
a
•
00
� of:
a�. o
w
CL w cz
U
Q C� U)
O C D:
nnnnnn d
\ \
a
a
Q o ° ° o
ce) co cY
If-----------
F Fr(
)
b
(DO
:0............»......;...........
ja
-7)
CD
L.0
a V.
I
AC 0
i
1 7,00
06
ET Centro I
SITE
%
0
30 20 10 0 30 MILES
FAULT - EPICENTER MAP.
SAN DIEGO COUNTY REGION
INDICATED EARTHQUAKE EVENTS THROUGH 75 YEAR PERIOD (1900-1974)
This Map data is compiled from various sources including the California Division of Mines and
Geology, California Institute of Technology, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration. This Map is reproduced from the California Division of Mines and Geology,
"Earthquake Epicenter Map of California; Map Sheet 39."
Earthquake Magnitude PROJECT: Job #04-455-P
. ............. 4.0 TO 4.9
5.0 TO 5.9 JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS
6.0 TO 6.9
7.0 TO 7.9 PLATE: 7
Fault
ISOLATION JOINTS AND RE-ENTRANT CORNER REINFORCEMENT
Typical - no scale
(a) (b)
ISOLATION JOINTS
CONTRACTION JOINTS
(C)
RE-ENTRANT
CORNER CRACK
RE-ENTRANT CORNER-�
REINFORCEMENT 4, ''
NO. 4 BARS PLACED 1.5 �
BELOW TOP OF SLAB
1�
NOTES:
-- 1. Isolation joints around the columns should be either circular as shown in (a) or diamond shaped as shown in (b).
If no isolation joints are used around columns, or if the corners of the isolation joints do not meet the contraction
joints, radial cracking as shown in (c)may occur(reference ACI).
2. In order to control cracking at the re-entrant corners (±2700 corners), provide reinforcement as shown in (c).
3. Re-entrant corner reinforcement shown herein is provided as a general guideline only and is subject to verification
and changes by the project architect and/or structural engineer based upon slab geometry, location, and other
engineeririg and construction factors.
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC.
— PLATE 8
RETAINING WALL DRAIN DETAIL
Typical - no scale
drainage �-
Granular, non-expansive,
backfill. Compacted. :.
Waterproofing i
Filter Material. Crushed rock (wrapped in
® filter fabric) or Class 2 Permeable Material
Perforated drain pipe
l�2 (see specifications below)
5frc11l�T1QN5 FS)Ft C.A.TFiAfVS
R
>'`: fo4fzr� ><�><> �< �� <<>�: :>: i i,�► �� MEAN Ml�
us srraa
Competent, approved SIEVE S1 °loRASSIfIG
too.
soils or bedrock 3ta
No 4 25 4fi.
5 ..
Edo as <' o ?.
o
Sand Equlvalert l5
CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS:
1. Provide granular,non-expansive backfill soil in 1:1 gradient wedge behind wall. Compact backfill to minimum 90%of laboratory
standard.
2. Provide back drainage for wall to prevent build-up of hydrostatic pressures. Use drainage openings along base of wall or back
drain system as outlined below.
3. Backdrain should consist of 4"diameter PVC pipe(Schedule 40 or equivalent)with perforations down. Drain to suitable outlet
at minimum 1%. Provide'/."- 1'/" crushed gravel filter wrapped in filter fabric(Mirafi 140N or equivalent). Delete filter fabric
wrap if Caltrans Class 2 permeable material is used. Compact Class 2 material to minimum 90%of laboratory standard.
4. Seal back of wall with waterproofing in accordance with architect's specifications.
5. Provide positive drainage to disallow ponding of water above wall. Lined drainage ditch to
minimum 2%flow away from wall is recommended.
*Use 1'/z cubic foot per foot with granular backfill soil and 4 cubic foot per foot if expansive backfill soil is used.
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC.
PLATE 9
K&S ENGINEERING
Lin
Planning Engineering Surveying i
L' AUG 2 F "C)"N '
Lj
l
HYDROLOGY/HYDRAULICS CALCULATIONS
FOR
LOT 15
WILDFLOWER ESTATES .
IN
CITY OF ENCINITAS
JN 04-011
August 6 , 2004
�pFESSJpy,
B.8
� No.48502 9
EXR6rJW * �i 1J o St
z �
L S . S R.C.E. 48592 s� C` D E
�Of CAL
7801 Mission Center Court, Suite 100 • San Diego, California 92108 • (619) 296-5565 • Fax (619) 296-15564
TABLE OF CONTENTS
- l . SITE DESCRIPTION
2 .HYDROLOGY DESIGN MODELS
3 .HYDROLOGIC CALCULATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
APPENDIX A
4 .TABLES AND CHARTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDIX B
5 .HYDROLOGY MAPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDIX C
1 . SITE DESCRIPTION
A. EXISTING CONDITION
The existing drainage basin consists of a vacant lot with minimal off-
site drainage; project site is mainly covered by grass and bushes.
The approximately westerly half of the project drains from the northerly
property line towards Jasmine Crest, the runoff generated on-site before
entering Jasmine Street is intercepted by an existing concrete ditch
that directs the concentrated runoff to the gutter on Jasmine Street
running westerly toward the existing storm drain system.
The other easterly half of the project is divided into two basins, the
first easterly basin drains from the northerly property towards the
Street (south side) , the runoff is intercepted by an existing brow ditch
that directs the runoff towards an existing type F inlet and then runoff
is directed underground by an existing 15" rcp pipe towards the south
- side of the street into an existing storm drain system.
The remainder easterly basin area sheet flows from the northerly
property side towards the street (south side of property) , then runoff
will be contained on the gutter and directed towards the east to the
existing storm drain system.
B. PROPOSED CONDITION
The project proposes a residential pad.
The runoff generated from proposed developed lot will have the same
basin areas as the existing condition. The only addition to the drainage
pattern will be the introduction of the proposed storm drain system that
will capture the runoff generated on the pad and proposed concrete brow
ditch on the top of the northerly slope. The proposed concrete brow
ditch will prevent erosion on the slopes; furthermore the proposed
slopes will be landscaped to prevent erosion.
The increase on runoff is due to the "c" factor based on pre and post
development of the project.
2 . HYDROLOGY DESIGN MODELS
A. DESIGN METHODS
THE RATIONAL METHOD IS USED IN THIS HYDROLOGY STUDY; THE RATIONAL
FORMULA IS AS FOLLOWS :
Q = CIA, WHERE : Q= PEAK DISCHARGE IN CUBIC FEET/SECOND
C = RUNOFF COEFFICIENT (DIMENSIONLESS)
I = RAINFALL INTENSITY IN INCHES/HOUR (PER APPENDIX XI-A)
A = TRIBUTARY DRAINAGE AREA IN ACRES
*1 ACRE INCHES/HOUR = 1 . 008 CUBIC FEET/SEC
THE NATURAL WATERSHED METHOD IS ALSO USED IN THIS HYDROLOGY STUDY;
THE NATURAL WATERSHED FLOW FORMULA IS AS FOLLOWS :
Tc=1 . 8 (1 . 1-C) (L) '5/ [S (100) ] .333
L = OVERLAND TRAVEL DISTANCE IN FEET
S = SLOPE IN FT. /FT.
Tc= TIME IN MINUTES
B. DESIGN CRITERIA
- FREQUENCY, 100 YEAR STORM.
- LAND USE PER SPECIFIC PLAN AND TENTATIVE MAP.
- RAIN FALL INTENSITY PER COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO 2003 HYDROLOGY
DESIGN MANUAL.
C. REFERENCES
- COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO 2003, HYDROLOGY MANUAL.
- COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO 1992 REGIONAL STANDARD DRAWING.
- HAND BOOK OF HYDRAULICS BY BRATER & KING, SIXTH EDITION.
APPENDIX A
(3 . HYDROLOGIC CALCULATIONS)
EXISTING CONDITION JN 04-011
San Diego County Rational Hydrology Program
CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN Engineering Software, (c)1991-2003 Version 6.3
Rational method hydrology program based on
San Diego County Flood Control Division 1985 hydrology manual
Rational Hydrology Study Date: 08/06/04
------------------------------------------------------------------------
********* Hydrology Study Control Information **********
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--- K & S Engineering, San Diego, California - SIN 868
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rational hydrology study storm event year is 100.0
English (in-lb) input data Units used
English (in) rainfall data used
Map data precipitation entered:
6 hour, precipitation(inches) = 2.800
— 24 hour precipitation(inches) = 4.900
Adjusted 6 hour precipitation (inches) = 2.800
P6/P24 = 57.1%
San Diego hydrology manual 'C' values used
Runoff coefficients by rational method
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Process from Point/Station 1.000 to Point/Station 2.000
**** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000
- Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000
[RURAL(greater than 0.5 Ac, 0.2 ha) area type]
Initial subarea flow distance = 470.000(Ft.)
Highest elevation = 360.200(Ft.)
Lowest elevation = 305.000(Ft.)
Elevation difference = 55.200(Ft. )
Time of concentration calculated by the urban
areas overland flow method (App X-C) = 11.16 min.
TC = [1.8* (1.1-C)*distance(Ft.)'.5)/(% slope"(1/3) )
TC = [1.8*(1.1-0.4500)* ( 470.0W.5)/(11.74 5A(1/3) 1= 11.16
Rainfall intensity (I) = 4.396(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm
Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.450
Subarea runoff = 1.325(CFS)
Total initial stream area = 0.670(Ac.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Process from Point/Station 3.000 to Point/Station 4.000
**** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000
[RURAL(greater than 0.5 Ac, 0.2 ha) area type]
Initial subarea flow distance = 395.000(Ft.)
Highest elevation = 359.500(Ft.)
Lowest elevation = 308.000(Ft.)
Elevation difference = 51.500(Ft.)
Time of concentration calculated by the urban
areas overland flow method (App X-C) = 9.88 min.
TC = [1.8*(1.1-C)*distance(Ft.)^.5)/($ slope^(1/3) ]
TC = [1.8*(1.1-0.4500)*( 395.000'.5)/(13.038'(1/3) 1= 9.88
Rainfall intensity (I) = 4.755(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm
Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.450
Subarea runoff = 2.289(CFS)
Total initial stream area = 1.070(Ac.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Process from Point/Station 3.000 to Point/Station 4.000
**** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (User specified size) ****
Upstream point/station elevation = 310.200(Ft.)
Downstream point/station elevation = 307.000(Ft.)
Pipe length = 180.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.015
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 2.289(CFS)
Given pipe size = 24.00(In.)
Calculated individual pipe flow = 2.289(CFS)
Normal flow depth in pipe = 4.80(In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 19.20(In.)
Critical Depth = 6.30(In.)
Pipe flow velocity = 5.12(Ft/s)
Travel time through pipe = 0.59 min.
Time of concentration (TC) = 10.47 min.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Process from Point/Station 5.000 to Point/Station 6.000
**** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000
[RURAL(greater than 0.5 Ac, 0.2 ha) area type]
Initial subarea flow distance = 441.000(Ft.)
Highest elevation = 358.000(Ft.)
Lowest elevation = 308.000(Ft.)
Elevation difference = 50.000(Ft.)
Time of concentration calculated by the urban
areas overland flow method (App X-C) = 10.94 min.
TC = [1.8* (1.1-C)*distance(Ft.)'.5)/ (% slope-(1/3) ]
TC = [1.8* (1.1-0.4500)* ( 441.000'.5)/ (11.338" (1/3) 1 = 10.94
Rainfall intensity (I) = 4.453 (In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm
Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.450
Subarea runoff = 1.984 (CFS)
Total initial stream area = 0.990(Ac. )
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Process from Point/Station 5.000 to Point/Station 6.000
**** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (User specified size) ****
Upstream point/station elevation = 310.200(Ft.)
Downstream point/station elevation = 308.000(Ft. )
Pipe length = 150.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.015
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 1.984 (CFS)
Given pipe size = 24.00(In.)
Calculated individual pipe flow = 1.984 (CFS)
Normal flow depth in pipe = 4.69(In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 19.03(In. )
Critical Depth = 5.85(In.)
Pipe flow velocity = 4.59(Ft/s)
Travel time through pipe = 0.55 min.
Time of concentration (TC) = 11.48 min.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Process from Point/Station 5.000 to Point/Station 7.000
**** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000
[RURAL(greater than 0.5 Ac, 0.2 ha) area type]
Initial subarea flow distance = 475.000(Ft.)
Highest elevation = 358.000(Ft.)
Lowest elevation = 305.000(Ft.)
Elevation difference = 53.000(Ft.)
Time of concentration calculated by the urban
areas overland flow method (App X-C) = 11.41 min.
TC = [1.8* (1.1-C)*distance(Ft.)'.5)/(% slope^ (1/3)]
TC = [1.8* (1.1-0.4500)* ( 475.000^.5)/ (11.158- (1/3)1= 11.41
Rainfall intensity (I) = 4.333(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm
Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.450
Subarea runoff = 0.877(CFS)
Total initial stream area = 0.450(Ac.)
End of computations, total study area = 3.180 (AC.)
PROPOSED CONDITION JN 04-011
San Diego County Rational Hydrology Program
CIVILCADD/CIVILDESIGN Engineering Software, (c)1991-2003 Version 6.3
Rational method hydrology program based on
San Diego County Flood Control Division 1985 hydrology manual
Rational Hydrology Study Date: 08/06/04
------------------------------------------------------------------------
********* Hydrology Study Control Information **********
------------------------------------------------------------------------
K & S Engineering, San Diego, California - SIN 868
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rational hydrology study storm event year is 100.0
English (in-lb) input data Units used
English (in) rainfall data used
Map data precipitation entered:
6 hour, precipitation(inches) = 2.800
24 hour precipitation(inches) = 4.900
Adjusted 6 hour precipitation (inches) = 2.800
P6/P24 = 57.1%
San Diego hydrology manual 'C' values used
Runoff coefficients by rational method
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
-- Process from Point/Station 1.000 to Point/Station 2.000
**** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
Decimal fraction soil group A = 0.000
-- Decimal fraction soil group B = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group C = 0.000
Decimal fraction soil group D = 1.000
[RURAL(greater than 0.5 Ac, 0.2 ha) area type]
Initial subarea flow distance = 470.000(Ft.)
Highest elevation = 360.200(Ft.)
Lowest elevation = 305.000(Ft.)
Elevation difference = 55.200(Ft.)
-- Time of concentration calculated by the urban
areas overland flow method (App X-C) = 11.16 min.
TC = [1.8*(1.1-C)*distance(Ft.)'.5)/ (% slope^(1/3)]
TC = [1.8*(1.1-0.4500)*( 470.000'.5)/(11.745^ (1/3)1= 11.16
-� Rainfall intensity (I) = 4.396(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm
Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.450
Subarea runoff = 0.554 (CFS)
Total initial stream area = 0.280(Ac.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Process from Point/Station 4.000 to Point/Station 5.000
**** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS ****
Along Main Stream number: 1 in normal stream number 1
Stream flow area = 0.590(Ac.)
Runoff from this stream = 1.939(CFS)
Time of concentration = 6.76 min.
Rainfall intensity = 6.072(In/Hr)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Process from Point/Station 6.000 to Point/Station 7.000
**** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
User specified 'C' value of 0.500 given for subarea
Initial subarea flow distance = 157.000(Ft. )
Highest elevation = 332.000(Ft.)
Lowest elevation = 330.000(Ft.)
Elevation difference = 2.000(Ft.)
Time of concentration calculated by the urban
areas overland flow method (App X-C) = 12.48 min.
TC = [1.8*(1.1-C)*distance(Ft.)'.5)/(% slope^(1/3) ]
TC = [1.8* (1.1-0.5000)*( 157.000^.5)/( 1.274^(1/3)3= 12.48
Rainfall intensity (I) = 4.089(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm
Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.500
Subarea runoff = 1.349(CFS)
Total initial stream area = 0.660(Ac.)
Process from Point/Station 7.000 to Point/Station 5.000
**** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (User specified size) ****
Upstream point/station elevation = 321.000(Ft.)
Downstream point/station elevation = 308.000(Ft.)
Pipe length = 60.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 1.349(CFS)
Given pipe size = 6.00(In.)
Calculated individual pipe flow = 1.349(CFS)
Normal flow depth in pipe = 3.06(In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 6.00(In.)
Critical depth could not be calculated.
Pipe flow velocity = 13.41(Ft/s)
Travel time through pipe = 0.07 min.
Time of concentration (TC) = 12.56 min.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Process from Point/Station 7.000 to Point/Station 5.000
**** SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION ****
User specified 'C' value of 0.500 given for subarea
Time of concentration = 12.56 min.
Rainfall intensity = 4.073 (In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm
Runoff coefficient used for sub-area, Rational method,Q=KCIA, C = 0.500
Subarea runoff = 0.428(CFS) for 0.210(Ac. )
_ Total runoff = 1.777(CFS) Total area = 0.87(Ac. )
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Process from Point/Station 7.000 to Point/Station 5.000
**** CONFLUENCE OF MINOR STREAMS ****
Along Main Stream number: 1 in normal stream number 2
Stream flow area = 0.870(Ac.)
Runoff from this stream = 1.777(CFS)
Time of concentration = 12.56 min.
Rainfall intensity = 4.073 (In/Hr)
Summary of stream data:
Stream Flow rate TC Rainfall Intensity
No. (CFS) (min) (In/Hr)
1 1.939 6.76 6.072
2 1.777 12.56 4.073
Qmax(1) _
1.000 * 1.000 * 1.939) +
1.000 * 0.538 * 1.777) + = 2.896
Qmax(2) _
0.671 * 1.000 * 1.939) +
1.000 * 1.000 * 1.777) + = 3.078
Total of 2 streams to confluence:
Flow rates before confluence point:
1.939 1.777
Maximum flow rates at confluence using above data:
2.896 3.078
Area of streams before confluence:
0.590 0.870
Results of confluence:
Total flow rate = 3.078(CFS)
Time of concentration = 12.558 min.
Effective stream area after confluence = 1.460(Ac.)
Process from Point/Station 8.000 to Point/Station 9.000
**** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
User specified 'C' value of 0.500 given for subarea
Initial subarea flow distance = 220.000(Ft.)
Highest elevation = 358.000(Ft.)
Lowest elevation = 343.000(Ft. )
Elevation difference = 15.000(Ft.)
Time of concentration calculated by the urban
areas overland flow method (App X-C) = 8.45 min.
TC = [1.8*(1.1-C)*distance(Ft.)".5)/(% slope^(1/3)]
TC = [1.8* (1.1-0.5000)*( 220.000^.5)/( 6.818^(1/3) 1= 8.45
Rainfall intensity (I) = 5.260(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm
Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.500
Subarea runoff = 0.973 (CFS)
Total initial stream area = 0.370(Ac.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Process from Point/Station 8.000 to Point/Station 9.000
**** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (User specified size) ****
Upstream point/station elevation = 345.500(Ft.)
Downstream point/station elevation = 343.000(Ft.)
--- Pipe length = 180.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.015
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 0.973(CFS)
Given pipe size = 24.00(In.)
Calculated individual pipe flow = 0.973 (CFS)
- Normal flow depth in pipe = 3.36(In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 16.65(In.)
Critical depth could not be calculated.
Pipe flow velocity = 3.64 (Ft/s)
Travel time through pipe = 0.82 min.
Time of concentration (TC) = 9.27 min.
Process from Point/Station 9.000 to Point/Station 10.000
**** SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION ****
~° User specified 'C' value of 0.500 given for subarea
Time of concentration = 9.27 min.
Rainfall intensity = 4.953 (In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm
Runoff coefficient used for sub-area, Rational method,Q=KCIA, C = 0.500
Subarea runoff = 0.124(CFS) for 0.050(Ac.)
Total runoff = 1.097(CFS) Total area = 0.42(Ac.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
-� Process from Point/Station 9.000 to Point/Station 10.000
**** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (User specified size) ****
Upstream point/station elevation = 343.000(Ft.)
Downstream point/station elevation = 305.000(Ft.)
Pipe length = 240.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.015
No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 1.097(CFS)
Given pipe size = 24.00(In.)
Calculated individual pipe flow = 1.097(CFS)
Normal flow depth in pipe = 1.99(In.)
Flow top width inside pipe = 13.23 (In.)
Critical Depth = 4.33 (In.)
` Pipe flow velocity = 8.84 (Ft/s)
Travel time through pipe = 0.45 min.
Time of concentration (TC) = 9.72 min.
Process from Point/Station 11.000 to Point/Station 12.000
**** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
User specified 'C' value of 0.500 given for subarea
Initial subarea flow distance = 298.000(Ft.)
Highest elevation = 332.000(Ft.)
Lowest elevation = 306.000(Ft.)
Elevation difference = 26.000(Ft.)
Time of concentration calculated by the urban
areas overland flow method (App X-C) = 9.06 min.
TC = [1.8* (1.1-C) *distance(Ft. )^.5)/ (% slope' (1/3)]
TC = [1.8* (1.1-0.5000)*( 298.000^.5)/ ( 8.725' (1/3)1= 9.06
Rainfall intensity (I) = 5.029(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm
Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.500
Subarea runoff = 1.106(CFS)
Total initial stream area = 0.440(Ac.)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Process from Point/Station 11.000 to Point/Station 13.000
_m **** INITIAL AREA EVALUATION ****
User specified 'C' value of 0.500 given for subarea
Initial subarea flow distance = 140.000(Ft.)
- Highest elevation = 332.000(Ft.)
Lowest elevation = 331.000(Ft.)
Elevation difference = 1.000(Ft.)
Time of concentration calculated by the urban
areas overland flow method (App X-C) = 14.30 min.
TC = [1.8*(1.1-C)*distance(Ft.)'.5)/ (% slope^(1/3)]
TC = [1.8*(1.1-0.5000)*( 140.000^.5)/( 0.714-(1/3)1= 14.30
Rainfall intensity (I) = 3.747(In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm
Effective runoff coefficient used for area (Q=KCIA) is C = 0.500
Subarea runoff = 0.787(CFS)
Total initial stream area = 0.420(Ac.)
Process from Point/Station 13.000 to Point/Station 12.000
**** PIPEFLOW TRAVEL TIME (User specified size) ****
Upstream point/station elevation = 321.000(Ft.)
Downstream point/station elevation = 306.000(Ft.)
Pipe length = 80.00(Ft.) Manning's N = 0.013
- No. of pipes = 1 Required pipe flow = 0.787(CFS)
Given pipe size = 6.00(In.)
Calculated individual pipe flow = 0.787(CFS)
Normal flow depth in pipe = 2.35(In.)
- Flow top width inside pipe = 5.86(In.)
Critical Depth = 5.30(In.)
Pipe flow velocity = 11.04(Ft/s)
Travel time through pipe = 0.12 min.
Time of concentration (TC) = 14.42 min.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Process from Point/Station 13.000 to Point/Station 12.000
**** SUBAREA FLOW ADDITION ****
User specified 'C' value of 0.500 given for subarea
° Time of concentration = 14.42 min.
Rainfall intensity = 3.726 (In/Hr) for a 100.0 year storm
Runoff coefficient used for sub-area, Rational method,Q=KCIA, C = 0.500
Subarea runoff = 0.298(CFS) for 0.160(Ac.)
Total runoff = 1.085(CFS) Total area = 0.58(Ac.)
End of computations, total study area = 3.180 (Ac.)
APPENDIX B
__ (4 . TABLES AND CHARTS)
RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS (RATIONAL METHOD)
DEVELOPED AREAS (URBAN)
_ Coefficient. C
Soil Group
Land A B D
Residential:
Single Family .40 .45 .50 .55
Multi-Units .45 .50 .60 .70
Mobile Homes .45 .50 .55 .65
Rural (lots greater than 1/2 acre) .30 .35 .40 .45
Commercial '21
80% Impervious .70 .75 .80 .85
Industrial (21
90% Impervious .80 .85 .90 .95
NOTES:
11 Soil Group maps are available at the offices of the Department of Public Works.
-- (21 Where actual conditions deviate significantly from the tabulated imperviousness
values of 80% or 90%, the values given for coefficient C, may be revised by
multiplying 80% 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 = 80%
Revised C = 50 x 0.85 = 0.53
80
IV-A-9
APPENDIX IX
Updated 4/93
G!/afer shed Div.'ooe
L!/a/ers/ied
Divide '
Area :9"
y AreQ B"
Line Design Pa���
�lYafersfied Duf/e�)
Slraorr,
L -
SAN ;DIEGO COUNTY
- DEPARTMENT OF SPECIAL -DISTRICT SERVICES COMPUTATION OF EFFECTIVE SLOPE
15ES I G.NV - M'ANUA( _ FOR NATURAL WATERSHEDS
APPROVED /� r` � l �r v ,
-- r DATE APPENDIX X-Q
IV-A- 11
��. Wafershe d Di v�do�
• / Des.
�---__ •\ --- Poi:
L 1
Waf«shed
Area B"
y Desiyn Pai�f
Ef!ecfive Slope Line i(Mafe/0--f Duf/Gf>
i
L
A-ea A" - Area
I
r .
SAN DIEGO COUNTY COMPUTATION OF EFFECTIVE SLOPE
-DEPARTMENT OF SPECIAL DISTRICT SERVICES FOR NATURAL WATERSHEDS
"�;' DESldN . MANUAI, -
±kPpROVEd :� t';�'�-_�,��•. •.� tL _ DATE ; APPENDIX X-F
{ `- - - IV-A
`d-IX XIGN3ddd SS/1 pastnaa Intensity (inches/ hour)
O ,o
C:)
�
O -1--r-+--t—� ---- —L- - _ -_- ?
11 Ull 11
--
C+
--I—__ - -- _ - _ __ ►�i x
l i t I I i 1 i 1 ' —' — I I r- � 'i O A l
C+ --i
to Ln
�• I I 1 1 !I •�, Imo- I 'I' �• 3 ��,,• �••� I Z
.i °c
Ln
_._ C71 r �+ N fV W 4i a.� Ln:.n a) y
O (J1 O tJl O t71 O Cn O to O G7
(sayouL) uoi4E4Idtoaad AnoH-g z
n
T_
O D to .A W N '' O
CD
.J (D
►-� C+ a "D N -+• C+ -i O O •V tt C+ C+ C7 -n n
u v. a m O SL u ca O+ CJ. o � D O •�•
II C II (D C+ N C+ C+ C+ CD +C O C In
N n J• e-f ::r (D N N tam N (D -S O
z a n. a � °• n ::r -S = c+ rn 0, a a CD -b
o o =r -S (t -S 0 --v n o
-n o W a O to o -_
O J. M (D -S -S C fl
n v+ co, -1 -S Cl-s C+ C+ •0
II O C •• C+ :Dr, CD (D c+•0 O J rD to Q) •0
rD rD ? -s n n :.T-S n y Cr -�
Cl)n O 3• N `G to I
C •D n d O -S 0 O n
w J. Lo J. J. J. C In_ J• • :3 iS7
Cr S :3 ::r 1"1' C+ C+_0 -S
C -Z II 0 C+ w Oi =-•• (D -+ C+ c+ -+•
. . O (D C+ C+ l f (D C+ O rD ? Cu O
O W O S J. J. OI' = O0.fD•0 :3
N rD O O Z C+ G (n
N C+ L7 O O C O (D d
rD
(D l< Q 1 -'
w -S d � O �� � v� �n (D
(A c e+ C+ o o+ (D c+
=r O -h-+, -O (D
C+ •pl N •l7 rD c+ v+ n d-'•
3 11 O Cu 7-+• • L2 n 7 0 •�
to O - O •7 (D n C+ (D Ol
J -� :3- C+ N
IMP CD -s
-S
to a rn-s m '-< o
X < C+ 0- to 1-,- a M n
CD o D. --' tQ� -S `< ¢'
CD (D -r• O O
O O
=r -.+k O O
T�G
y EQl1AT/ON .385
L 1 Feel re ' 0 -��y /
5'10,00 Tc = Time o/ concenlralicn
4400 L ° Lenglh o/ watershed
H • 01hierel7ca /n e%vatian a/oeg
elieefire s/ooe 1117 (See 4opeodOr X-B) T
3000 L
,011.es Feet //ours Minutes
-- 2444 4 140
/DOD
\ 900 2 1210
B00
700 /00
600 \\ S 90
500 \ 80
4 70
400
-
300 50
200 \\ Z 40
\ 310
/DO / SDOD
\ /8
.DODO \ /6
50 0-S \ /¢
40 2000 \ 12
1800 \
/6010 /D
,gyp NOTE /10,00 9
1240 B
gFOR NATURAL WATERSIM-DS
__ 20 ADD TEN MINUTES TO /DOD 7
COMPUTED TIME OF CON- 800 6
CENTsION_ _J� 700
S
16,910
/10 501 ¢
¢OD
3
300
5
200
H T
SAN DIEGO COUNTY NOMOGRAPH FOR DETERMINATION
DEPARTMENT OF SPECIAL DISTRICT SERVICES OF TIME OF CONCENTRATION (Tc)
FOR NATURAL WATERSHEDS
DESIGN MANUAL 2 E - APPENDIX X-A
APPROVED '� �'� � - DATE / L-A-10 Rev. 5/81
s
1
Ln
CD
Ir
cz
)r q '• ' 1/ �� ��. '� /�� `mot. _o
CL 71'
M. d -N v
_ r ` i CI 6 ,
•v a l`� ��� •t•
o f •
dW
cx
CM
O yj f"1
O r, ... � •o ,r, -
r ~
G 1
Lo
`+ W � <
z < < z
4 Z5
u
__._ < 1 I I I I I I I � � o � •
� zQ ` moo
CA VI cr. � u'
U.
o
u
x
0 U.
cz
400,
rD
-n cm
-%* I I ,
O
77M
CD C2
L..2
NOW" CW%
4.0m 42
cc -W,
cam'
n
uj
cm
O-K en
4 c
Uj
cn
cc CM
wl C4
CN
me
C-D
C.,4
bi
IA
0 -C
r ld
cz -C
ZO
0
go 3;
O A 0 0
T IOA co
45
UA L Do
Jr a
W. I
ku j 40%
X95
LE - 95
0 bi 0
J
O
if-A-7
APPENDIX C
(5 . HYDROLOGY MAP)
c
w LO
it
w Ow
� t
•• J
W �
Q �
U
LL
N U
I
co
A\I
'y
t
t
P
le
of M
x
_ t
• `'� '� , .,� —�- �.l {�}��� i— � '—�_�— ..tile � � j �� � �� �} �� ;�
O1v /
cr
LL
� r W
�\\•\\�\�� I %�� `/ % it �' i � 1 ( ! � � I I � � i � �� � ( �' wo I
j!
00
t
l t�l� ILL
fit �...
fit fat, ! �' O :Y
W
Q
w Y/ N
rO W
W Ix
w Ow
0
••
W �LL
-J J
Q
U
U
Q cn
: N U CU
O Q LO
LO
/ V 4a
t
0 BOB
•
y
cy
co
jam[ � � � � ���_ � •� � � � �
.�
r �
� r !
I0I
/ LL,
Ak
- 11
97
IF
•
O �
v 1.1.
Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation
Lot 15, Map No. 12882
Jasmine Crest
Olivenhain, Encinitas
D
U t�
MAR 9 2004
December 8, 2004
ENGINEERING SERVICES
CITY Of ENCiNITAS
Prepared For:
MR JAMES D. LINDSTORM
5724 7" Street N
Arlington, Virginia 22205-1018
Prepared By:
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC.
_ 2450 Vineyard Avenue, Suite 102
Escondido, California 92029
Job #04-455-P
VINE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC.
2450 Vineyard Avenue
Escondido,California 92029-1229
Job #04-455-P phone(760)743-1214
Fax(760)739-0343
December 8, 2004
Mr. James D. Lindstrom
5724 7" Street N
Arlington, Virginia 22205-1018
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION, LOT 15, MAP NO. 12882,JASMINE CREST,
OLIVENHAIN, CALIFORNIA
Pursuant to your request, Vinje and Middleton Engineering, Inc. has completed the
Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Report for the above-referenced project site.
The following report summarizes the results of our field investigation, including laboratory
analyzes and conclusions, and provides recommendations for the proposed development
-- as understood. From a geotechnical engineering standpoint, it is our opinion that the site
is suitable for the proposed single-family residential development and the associated
improvements provided the recommendations presented in this report are incorporated into
the design and construction of the project.
The conclusions and recommendations provided in this study are consistent with the site
- geotechnical conditions and are intended to aid in preparation of final development plans
and allow more accurate estimates of development costs.
If you have any questions or need clarification, please do not hesitate to contact this office.
Reference to our Job #04-455-P will help to expedite our response to your inquiries. We
appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you.
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC.
Dennis Middleton
GED #980
DM/jt
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE NO.
I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
ll. SITE DESCRIPTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
w- III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
IV. SITE INVESTIGATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
v_. V. FINDINGS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
A. Earth Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
B. Slope Stability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
C. Groundwater and Surface Drainage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
D. Rock Hardness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
E. Faults - Seismicity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
F. Geologic Hazards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
G. Laboratory Test/Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
VI. CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
VII. RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
A. Grading and Earthworks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
B. Foundations and Interior Floor Slabs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
C. Post-Tentioned / Structural Slab-on-Ground Foundations . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
D. Exterior Concrete Slabs / Flatworks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
E. Soil Design Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
F. Asphalt and PCC Pavement Design 22
G. General Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
VIII. LIMITATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
- TABLE NO.
FaultZone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Site Specific Seismic Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
SoilType . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Grain Size Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
Moisture-Density Tests (Undisturbed Chunk Samples) 6 7
Expansion Index Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Direct Shear Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Sulfate Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
10
Removals and Remedial Grading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
PLATE NO.
Regional Index Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Site Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-5 5
Test Trench Logs (with key) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Geologic Cross-Section . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Fault - Epicenter Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Isolation Joints and Re-entrant Corner Reinforcement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Retaining Wall Drain Detail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
PAGE 2
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER S. 2004
IV. SITE INVESTIGATION
Geotechnical conditions beneath the project site were determined chiefly from the
excavation of 6 test trenches dug with a tractor-mounted backhoe. The trenches were
logged by our project geologist who also retained soil samples for laboratory testing.
Trench locations are shown on Plate 2. Logs of the trenches are enclosed with this report
as Plates 3-5. Laboratory test results are summarized in a following section herein.
V. FINDINGS
The project site is largely a natural hillside lot underlain by meta-volcanic bedrock units that
are mantled by a cover of natural and shallow fill soils. Geologic instability is not in
evidence at the site. The following geotechnical conditions are apparent:
- A. Earth Materials
Local hillside terrain is underlain by a meta-volcanic bedrock section dominated by
colored aphanitic rocks. Noted examples are weathered and fractured in upper
exposures grading more massive and hard with depth. The bedrock has
developed a modest cover of natural topsoil consisting chiefly of silty to sandy
plastic clay which included bedrock fragments. Topsoil depths up to 4 feet were
recorded in test trench excavations. Minor amounts of clay-rich fill soils occur
throughout and dump fill deposits that include an abundance of rock debris occur
approximately as shown on Plate 2. Project soil deposits occur in conditions
ranging from soft to stiff.
Details of site earth materials are given on the enclosed Test Trench Logs, Plates
3-5 and are additionally defined in a following section. Their subsurface
relationship is depicted on a Geologic Cross-Section enclosed with this report as
M Plate 6.
B. Sloe Stability
Landslides or other forms of slope instability are not in evidence at the project site.
The property is underlain by meta-volcanic bedrock units that characteristically
perform well in natural and graded slope conditions. Structural features are
typically steeply-dipping fracture and/or joint surfaces that are discontinuous and
diminish with depth. Noted structure is not expected to impact conditions of slope
stability at the property.
VINYL & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. • 2450 Vineyard Avenue' Escondido,California 92029-1229• Phone(760)743-1214
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
PAGE 3
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
C. Groundwater and Surface Drainaae_
Subsurface water was not encountered in test excavations dug at the site and is
� not expected to impact site development Future development an impact moisture psensit sensitive
may generate excessive irrigation waters
improvements near the toe of the planned cut slope. Added drains along the base
of the project cut slope can be instal led d
D. Rock Hardness
Local bedrock units are hard rocks that can be difficult to excavate zing
conventional methods. Test trench exposures confirm ha rd rocks beneath the
property at depths below 5-6 feet. The use of large dozers (Caterpillar D-8 or
equivalent) is recommended for site grading operations needed to reach planned
pad grades.
E. Faults - Seismicity
Faults or significant shear zones are not indicated on or near proximity to the
project site.
As with most areas of California, the San Diego region lies within a seismically
active zone; however, coastal areas of the county are characterized by low levels
- of seismic activity relative to inland areas to the east. During a 40-year period
(1934-1974), 37 earthquakes were recorded of lthea a recorded events aexceededha
California Institute of Technology. None
Richter magnitude of 3.7, nor did any of the earthquakes generate more than
modest ground shaking or significant faults which hoccurred along various offshore characteristically generate modest
earthquakes.
Historically, the most significant earthquake events which affect local areas
- originate along well known, distant fault zones to the east and the Coronado Bank
fault to the west. Based upon available seismic data, compiled from California
Earthquake Catalogs, the most significant historical event in the area of the study
site occurred in 1800 at an estimated distance of 6.7 miles from the project area.
This event, which is thought to have occurred along an off-shore fault, reached an
estimated magnitude of 6.5 with estimated bedrock acceleration values of 0.098g
at the project site. The followin9re ground acceleration data compiled from
hccelesignificant ta
commonly impact the region. Es timated 9
VINI6 & MIDDLETON ENGINHGRING, INC.. • 2450 Vineyard Avenue Escondido,California 92029-1229 • Phone(760)743-1214
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 4
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
-- Digitized California Faults (Computer Program EQFAULT VERSION 3.00 updated)
typically associated with the fault is also tabulated.
�. TABLE 1
Maximum
Probable
Fault Zone Distance from Site Acceleration R.H.
Rose Canyon 7.3 miles 0.114 g
Newport-Inglewood 14.7 miles 0.109 g
Elsinore 24.4 miles 0.082 g
Coronado Bank 22.0 miles 0.104
The location of significant faults and earthquake events relative to the study site
are depicted on a Fault - Epicenter Map enclosed with this report as Plate 7.
More recently, the number of seismic events which affect the region appears to
have heightened somewhat. Nearly 40 earthquakes of magnitude 3.5 or higher
have been recorded in coastal regions between January 1984 and August 1986.
- Most of the earthquakes are thought to have been generated along offshore faults.
For the most part, the recorded events remain moderate shocks which typically
resulted in low levels of ground shaking to local areas. A notable exception to this
pattern was recorded on July 13, 1986. An earthquake of magnitude 5.3 shook
County coastal areas with moderate to locally heavy ground shaking resulting in
$700,000 in damages, one death, and injuries to 30 people. The quake occurred
_m along an offshore fault located nearly 30 miles southwest of Oceanside.
A series of notable events shook County areas with a (maximum) magnitude 7.4
shock in the early morning of June 28, 1992. These quakes originated along
related segments of the San Andreas Fault approximately 90 miles to the north.
Locally high levels of ground shaking over an extended period of time resulted;
however, significant damages to local structures were not reported. The increase
in earthquake frequency in the region remains a subject of speculation among
geologists; however, based upon empirical information and the recorded seismic
history of County areas, the 1986 and 1992 events are thought to represent the
highest levels of ground shaking which can be expected at the study site as a
_ result of seismic activity.
VINJI: & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. • 2450 Vineyard Avenue' Escondido,California 92029-1220• Phone(760)743-1214
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 5
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
In recent years, the Rose Canyon Fault has received added attention from
geologists. The fault is a significant structural feature in metropolitan San Diego
which includes a series of parallel breaks trending southward from La Jolla Cove
through San Diego Bay toward the Mexican border. Recent trenching along the
fault in Rose Canyon indicated that at that location the fault was last active 6,000
to 9,000 years ago. More recent work suggests that segments of the fault are
younger having been last active 1000 - 2000 years ago. Consequently, the fault
has been classified as active and included within an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies
Zone established by the State of California.
For design purposes, site specific seismic parameters were also determined as
part of this investigation in accordance with the Uniform Building Code. The
following parameters are consistent with the indicated project seismic environment
and may be utilized for project design work:
- TABLE 2
Site Soil Seismic ,Seismic Seismic Response Coefficients
P:ro01e Seismic Zone Source
Ty Zone . Factor T e Na Nv Ca Cv Ts To
_ Ss 4 0.4 B 1.0 1.0 0.40 0.40 0.400 0.080
According to Chapter 16, Division IV of the 1997 Uniform Building Code.
F. Geologic Hazards
Specific geologic hazards are not in evidence at the project site. Existing slopes
are stable, and graded cut embankments are expected to expose dense rock units
that will perform well. Liquefaction and related soil failures are not expected at the
site. The most significant geotechnical hazard anticipated at the site will be
moderate to locally heavy ground shaking associated with periodic earthquakes
along distant active faults.
G. Laboratory Testing / Results
_ Earth deposits encountered in our exploratory test excavations were closely
examined and sampled for laboratory testing. Based upon our test trench and field
exposures site soils have been grouped into the following soil types:
VINIE & MIDDEETON ENGINEERING, INC. • 2450 Vineyard Avenue' Escondido,California 92,079-1229'Phone(760)743-1214
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 6
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
_w TABLE 3
Soil Type Descriptions
1 tan clayey sand to sandy clay (Fill)
2 pale to red-brown silty to sandy clay (Topsoil)
3 metavolcanic rocks Bedrock
The following tests were conducted in support of this investigation:
1. Grain Size Analysis: Grain size analysis was performed on a representative
sample of Soil Type 2. The test result is presented in Table 4.
TABLE 4
Sieve Size '/." ,/2" #4 #10 #20 #40 #200
Location Soil Type Percent Passing
T-1 @ 1'/2' 2 100 93 83 75 69 62 42
- 2. Maximum DU Density and Optimum Moisture Content: The maximum dry
density and optimum moisture content of Soil Types 2 and 3 were determined
in accordance with ASTM D-1557. The test results are presented in Table 5.
TABLES
Soil � Maximum Dry Optimum Moisture
Location =T e' Densi Ym- c Content, wopt%
T-1 @ 1'/Z 2 115.3 16.5
T-3 4'/i 3 129.2 12.5
3. Moisture Density Tests(Undisturbed Chunk Samples): In-place dry density
and moisture content of representative soil deposits beneath the site were
determined from relatively undisturbed chunk samples using the water
displacement test method. The test results are presented in Table 6 and
tabulated on the enclosed Test Trench Logs (Plates 3-5).
VINE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. • 2450 Vinevard Avenue• Escondido,California 92029-1229• Phone(760)743-I2I4
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 7
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
TABLE 6
Field Ratio of in-Place Dry
Moisture.` Field Dry Max. Dry Density To Max. Dry
kT-2 e Soil Content ,Density Density Density*
n T e w% Yd- cf Ym- c (Yd/Ym x 100
' 2 15.9 111.7 115.3 96.8
2 17.7 118.5 115.3 100
T-2 @ 3'/z 2 24.1 98.3 115.3 85.2
* Designated as relative compaction for structural fills.
Required relative compaction for structural fill is 90%or greater unless otherwise specified
4. Expansion Index Test: Two expansion index tests were performed on
representative samples of Soil Types 2 and 3 in accordance with the Uniform
Building Code Standard 18-2. The test results are presented in Table 7.
- TABLE 7
Sample Soil Remolded Saturation Saturated . -Expansion Expansion
Location T e w % % W % Index EI Potential
T-1 @ 1'h' 2 13.0 50.4 29.4 93 high
T-3 @ 4'/i 3 10.5 50.5 22.7 46 low
w) moisture content in percent.
5. Direct Shear Test: One direct shear test was performed on a representative
sample of Soil Type 3. The prepared specimen was soaked overnight, loaded
with normal loads of 1, 2, and 4 kips per square foot respectively, and sheared
to failure in an undrained condition. The test result is presented in Table 8.
TABLE 8
Wet. Angle of Apparent
Sample Soil Sample Y
Densit Int. Fric. Cohesion
Location type Condition Yw- cf (P-De c- sf
_...
T-3 4'/2 3 remolded to 90% of Ym Q %wo t 125.9 28 242
VINJF, & MIDDLFTON ENGINEERING, INC. • 2450 Vineyard Avenue•Escondido,California 92029-1229• Phone(760)743-I2I4
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
PAGE 8
°- JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 1 , 2004
6. Sulfate Test: One sulfate test was performed on a representative sample of
Soil Type 3 in accordance with California Test 417. Test result is presented in
Table 9.
TABLE 9
-- Amount of Water Soluble Sulfate,(!p0)'
Sam letocationr' Soil T e " ° In Soil %'b Wei` ht
T-3 @ 4'/2 3 0.022
- VI. CONCLUSIONS
Based upon the foregoing investigation, development of the project site substantially as
planned, is feasible from a geotechnical viewpoint. The project property is a stable hillside
underlain by hard bedrock units that are mantled by a modest cover of surficial soil. The
following geotechnical factors are unique to the property and will impact its development:
Bedrock units beneath the site are stable, dense and competent units that will
adequately support planned improvements and compacted fills. Slope instability
is not indicated at the site.
Existing soil deposits (topsoil and fill) are not suitable in their present condition for
the support of planned site new fills, structures and improvements. Regrading of
these deposits is recommended in the following section. Added removals of cut
ground will also be necessary in the case of cut-fill pads which expose bedrock
units so that uniform soil conditions are constructed throughout the
building/improvement surfaces.
Bedrock units at the site planned for excavation are hard and may be difficult to
excavate. Moderate to locally heavy ripping utilizing large dozers (Caterpillar D-8
or equivalent)will likely be required to complete planned excavations and generate
rocky to gravelly materials which are considered suitable for reuse in compacted
fills. The need for specialized techniques such as rock breakers or blasting is not
indicated to design depths.
Some added effort should be expected in placing compacted fill at the site. Soils
generated from project excavations will be clay-rich soils that may include
significant rock debris. These soils will require added processing and mixing, and
can only be successfully placed as compacted fills when proper moisture levels are
VINIE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INc. • 2450 Vineyard Avenue• Escondido,California 92029-I229 • Phone(760)743-I2I4
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
PAGE 9
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
achieved and a uniform mixture is manufactured. Larger rocks should be excluded
from the site fills and wall backfills. The use of imported sandy soils will aid in the
grading process and help construction of a better quality building pad surfaces
which will enable the use of more conventional foundations/slab and pavement
sections.
Moisture sensitive expansive clays and periodic soil heaving-shrinkage will be the
main geotechnical concerns at the project property. Based upon the project
subsurface soil profile, final bearing soils, supporting the new building and
improvements are anticipated to primarily consist of clayey gravel to gravelly clay
mixture (GC/CL) with high expansion potential (expansion index less than 131)
according to the Uniform Building Code classification. Actual classification and
expansion characteristic of the finished grade soil mix can only be provided in the
final as-graded compaction report based on proper testing of foundation bearing
soils when rough finish grades are achieved.
Potentially expansive bearing soils will require special geotechnical engineering
mitigation design which typically includes presaturation of subgrade soils as well
as deeper foundations and thicker slab-on-grade floors, or post-tensioned or
structural slab-on-ground foundations.
Foundation bearing soils at the final pad grades should be additionally tested at the
completion of rough grading to confirm expansion characteristics of the foundation
bearing soils which will govern final foundations and slab design.
The overall stability of graded building surfaces developed over sloping terrain is
most dependent upon adequate keying and benching of fill into the competent
undisturbed bedrock during the grading operations. At the project site, added care
should be given to proper construction of keyways and benching operations.
In general, natural groundwater is not expected to impact project grading or long
term stability of the developed lot. However, the use of subdrains may be
appropriate along the toe of graded cut slopes in the improvement areas to prevent
potential seepage from fractured rocks as determined in the field by the project
geotechnical consultant during construction.
The proper control of surface drainage is an important factor in the continued
stability of the property. Ponding should not be allowed on graded surfaces, and
over-watering of site vegetation should be avoided.
VINJ2. & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. • 2450 Vineyard Avenue• Escondido,California 92029-I229•Phone(760)743-1214
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
PAGE 10
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
* Liquefaction and seismically induced settlements will not be factors in the
development of the project property.
Post construction settlements will not to be a factor in the development of the
project site provided our remedial grading and foundation recommendations are
implemented during the construction phase of the project.
* Soil collapse will not be a factor in development of the study site provided our
recommendations for site development are followed.
VII. RECOMMENDATIONS
The following recommendations are consistent with the indicated geotechnical conditions
at the project site and should be reflected on the final plans and implemented during the
construction phase. Added or modified recommendations may also be appropriate and
can be provided at the final plan review phase:
A. Grading and Earthworks
Cut-fill and remedial grading techniques may be used in order to achieve final
design grades and improve soil conditions beneath the planned structures and
improvements. All grading and earthworks should be completed in accordance
with Appendix Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code, City of Encinitas Grading
Ordinances, the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction and the
requirements of the following sections wherever applicable:
1. Clearing and Grubbing - Remove surface vegetation, trees, roots, stumps,
rocks, trash, debris and other unsuitable/deleterious materials from the areas
- to receive fills, structures, and improvements plus 10 feet outside the perimeter
as directed in the field. Ground preparations should be inspected and
approved by the project geotechnical engineer or his designated field
representative prior to the actual grading.
All irrigation lines, pipes and underground structures should be properly
removed from the construction areas. Existing underground utilities in the
construction areas should be potholed, identified and marked prior to the actual
work. Abandoned lines should be properly removed or plugged as approved
in the field. Voids created by the removals of the abandoned underground
pipes and structures should be properly backfilled in accordance with the
requirements of this report.
ViNIE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INc. • 2450 Vineyard Avenue• Escondido,California 92029-1229•Phone(760)743-I2I4
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 11
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
-- 2. Removals and Remedial Grading - The most effective soil improvement
method to mitigate upper loose compressible surficial soils will utilize removal
and recompaction remedial grading techniques. Site surficial soil and upper
weathered bedrock units in areas of planned new fills, structures and
improvements plus 10 feet outside the perimeter, should be removed to the
underlying competent bedrock and placed back as properly compacted fills.
Approximate removal depths in the vicinity of individual test trench sites are
shown in Table 10. The tabulated values are typical and subject to field
changes based on actual exposures. Locally deeper removals may be
necessary based on the actual field exposures and should be anticipated.
TABLE 10
Total Estimated Estimated
Depth Depth.of Depth Of
,,-Trench., 9f7rerich; Over Groundwater Comments
ioaaition ft ft ft
T-1 6' 5' not encountered Fill slope keyway areas,depth
of keyway may govern
T-2 5' 4' not encountered Fill slope keyway areas,depth
of keyway may govern,difficult
to excavate @ 4'
T-3 7'/i 4' not encountered cut slope areas,depth of cut
may govern
T-4 5' 2 not encountered building pad areas,depth of
undercut may govern
T-5 4'/i 2' not encountered cut slope areas,depth of cut
may govern,backhoe refusal
on hard rocks @ 4%
T-6 5'/2 2' not encountered Fill slope keyway areas,depth
of keyway may overn
Notes:
1. All depths are measured from the existing ground levels.
2. Actual depths may vary at the time of construction based on field conditions.
3. Remove and recompact all existing dump fills as a part of site grading operations (see Plate 2).
4. Bottom of all removals should be additionally prepared, ripped and recompacted to a minimum of
6 inches as directed in the field.
5. In the parking, driveways and surface improvement areas, removals may consist of depths to
competent bedrock but not less than 12 inches minimum, or 1-foot below the deepest utility, or 3
feet as directed in the field.
6. Exploratory trenches excavated in connection with our study at the indicated locations were
backfilled with loose and uncompacted deposits. The loose/uncompacted backfill soils within these
trenches shall also be re-excavated and placed back as properly compacted fills as a part of the
project grading operations.
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. • 2450 Vineyard Avenue•Escondido,California 92029-1229 • Phone(760)743-1214
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 12
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
3. Non-uniform Bearing Soils Transitioning -Ground transition from excavated
cut to compacted fills should not be permitted underneath the proposed
structures and improvements. Foundations/floor slabs and on-grade
improvements should be supported entirely on compacted fills or founded
entirely on competent bedrock units. Transition pads will require special
treatment. The cut portion of the cut-fill pads plus 10 feet outside the perimeter
should be undercut to a sufficient depth to provide for a minimum of 3 feet of
compacted fill mat below rough finish grades, or at least 12 inches of
compacted fill beneath the deepest footing whichever is more. In the roadways,
driveway, parking and on-grade slabs/improvement transition areas there
should be a minimum of 12 inches of compacted soils below rough finish
subgrade.
Undercutting the cut portion of the building pads will also accommodate
excavation of the foundation trenches and underground utilities in an otherwise
harder bedrock units. In the case of deeper utility trenches, undercutting to a
minimum of 6 inches below the proposed inverts may be considered.
4. Fill Materials and Compaction - Soils generated from the removals of the on-
site fills/topsoils and upper highly weathered exposures of bedrock will be
plastic silty to clay deposits and the project unweathered meta-volcanic bedrock
excavations will generate excessive rock debris. Generated soils and rocky
materials may be processed for reuse within the on-site compacted fills
provided requirements for fill materials specified herein are satisfied.
Project fills shall be clean deposits consisting of minus 6-inch materials and
include at least 40% finer than #4 sieve materials by weight. Rocks up to 12
inches in maximum diameter may be allowed in compacted fills provided they
are individually placed, surrounded with compacted fill and buried to a minimum
of 5 feet below the rough finish pad grades. The upper 5 feet in the building
pad grades, and 10 feet in the areas of public right-of-way and easements,
should consist of minus 6-inch materials. Rocks less than 24 inches in
maximum diameter may also be individually placed at a minimum of 10 feet
below rough finish grades as directed and approved in the field by the project
geotechnical consultant. Rocks larger than 24 inches in maximum diameter
should be excluded from the site fills and properly disposed from the site.
Import soils may be considered for mixing with the generated rocky-clayey
- materials in order to improve the quality and workability of new fills. The import
soils, if used, should be very low to low expansive sandy granular soils (100%
V1NIE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. - 2450 Vineyard Avenue- Escondido,California 92029-1229- Phone(760)743-1214
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 13
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
passing #4 sieve with expansion index less than 51), inspected, tested as
necessary and approved by the project geotechnical consultant prior to delivery
to the site.
On-site fill deposits will predominantly consist of silt-clay/rock mixture. Silt-
clay/rock soil mixtures typically require additional processing and moisture
conditioning efforts in order to manufacture a uniform mixture suitable for reuse
as compacted fills. The silt-clay/rock deposits should also be moisture
conditioned to 3% to 5% above the optimum levels and compacted as
specified.
Uniform bearing soil conditions should be constructed at the site by the grading
operations. Site soils should be adequately processed, thoroughly mixed,
moisture conditioned to near or above optimum moisture levels as directed in
the field, placed in thin uniform horizontal lifts and mechanically compacted to
a minimum of 90% of the corresponding laboratory maximum dry density per
ASTM D-1557, unless otherwise specified.
5. Select Grading and Capping Alternative - As an alternative, the planned
construction sites may be capped with good quality very low to low expansive
granular sandy import soils. Import sandy bearing and subgrade soils will allow
for more conventional foundations and slab design. In this case, the upper 3
feet of the building envelope plus 10 feet outside the perimeter should be
capped with good quality sandy import soils. There should be a minimum of 12
inches of import soils beneath the deepest footing(s). Granular sandy import
soils should also be considered for all project retaining wall backfills, if any are
planned at the site.
In the event only the building envelope plus 10 feet is capped with sandy
r import soils within the upper 3 feet, a subsurface drainage system consisting
of a minimum 2 feet deep by 2 feet wide trench with 4-inch diameter perforated
pipe (SDR 35) surrounded with %-inch crushed rocks and wrapped in filter
- fabric (Mirafi 140 N) installed below the capping soils, will be required as
directed in the field.
- 6. Permanent Graded Slopes - Permanent project graded slopes should be
designed for 2:1 gradients maximum. Graded cut-fill slopes constructed at 2:1
gradients maximum will be grossly stable with respect to deep seated and
surface failures for the indicated maximum design heights.
VINE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. • 2450 Vineyard Avenue• Escondido,California 92029-1229 •Phone(760)743-12I4
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 14
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
All fill slopes shall be provided with a lower keyway. The keyway should
maintain a minimum depth of 2 feet into the competent bedrock with a minimum
width of 15 feet. The keyway should expose firm bedrock throughout with the
bottom heeled back a minimum of 2% into the natural hillside, and inspected
and approved by the project geotechnical engineer. Added excavation efforts
should be anticipated when developing lower fill slope keyways into hard
bedrock units.
Additional level benches should be constructed into the natural hillside as the
fill slope construction progresses. Fill slopes should also be compacted to 90%
(minimum) of the laboratory standard out to the slope face. Over-building and
cutting back to the compacted core, or backrolling at a maximum of 3-foot
vertical increments and "track-walking" at the completion of grading is
recommended for site fill slope construction. Geotechnical engineering
inspections and testing will be necessary to confirm adequate compaction
levels within the fill slope face.
Graded cut slopes should be inspected and approved by the project
geotechnical consultant during the grading to confirm stability. In the event soft
topsoil deposits are exposed on the upper portions of cut slope faces, some
stabilization and mitigation may become necessary as directed in the field.
Typical mitigation may include track walking the cut slope face or reconstruction
of the soft materials as stability fills. Specific recommendations including the
need for subsurface toe drain and pertinent construction details should be
provided at that time as necessary.
7. Surface Drainage and Erosion Control -A critical element to the continued
stability of the building pads and slopes is an adequate surface drainage
system and protection of the slope face. Surface and storm water shall not be
_. allowed to impact the developed construction and improvement sites. This can
most effectively be achieved by appropriate vegetation cover and the
installation of the following systems:
• Drainage swales should be provided at the top and toe of the slopes per the
project civil engineer design.
• Building pad surface run-off should be collected and directed away from the
planned buildings and improvements to a selected location in a controlled
manner. Area drains should be installed.
VINE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. 1 2450 Vineyard Avenue- Escondido,California 92029-1229-Phone(760)743-1214
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 15
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS. CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
* The finished slope should be planted soon after completion of grading.
Unprotected slope faces will be subject to severe erosion and should not be
allowed. Over-watering of the slope faces should also not be allowed. Only
the amount of water to sustain vegetation should be provided.
* Temporary erosion control facilities and silt fences should be installed during
the construction phase periods and until landscaping is fully established as
indicated and specified on the approved project grading/erosion plans.
8. Engineering Inspections - All grading operations including removals,
suitability of earth deposits used as compacted fill, and compaction procedures
should be continuously inspected and tested by the project geotechnical
consultant and presented in the final as-graded compaction report. The nature
of finished subgrade soils should be confirmed in the final compaction report
at the completion of grading.
Geotechnical engineering inspections shall include but not limited to the
following:
* Initial Inspection - After the grading/brushing limits have been staked but
before grading/brushing starts.
* Keyway/bottom of over-excavation inspection -After the bedrock is exposed
and prepared to receive fill but before fill is placed.
* Cut slope/excavation inspection - After the excavation is started but before
the vertical depth of excavation is more than 5 feet. Local and Cal-OSHA
safety requirements for open excavations apply.
_a * Fill/backfill inspection - After the fill/backfill placement is started but before
the vertical height of fill/backfill exceeds 2 feet. A minimum of one test shall
be required for each 100 lineal feet maximum in every 2 feet vertical gain,
with the exception of wall backfills where a minimum of one test shall be
required for each 25 lineal feet maximum. Finish rough and final pad grade
tests shall be required regardless of fill thickness.
* Foundation trench inspection - After the foundation trench excavations but
before steel placement.
* Foundation bearing/slab subgrade soils inspection - Prior to the placement
of concrete for proper moisture and specified compaction levels.
VINE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. - 2450 Vineyard Avenue- Escondido,California 92029-1229 - Phone(760)743-1214
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 16
= JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
- * Geotechnical foundation/slab steel inspection - After the steel placement is
completed but before the scheduled concrete pour.
- * Subdrain/wall back drain inspection -After the trench excavations but during
the actual placement. All material shall conform to the project material
specifications and approved by the project geotechnical engineer.
* Underground utility/plumbing trench inspection -After the trench excavations
but before placement of pipe bedding or installation of the underground
facilities. Local and Cal-OSHA safety requirements for open excavations
apply. Inspection of pipe bedding may also be required by the project
geotechnical engineer.
* Underground utility/plumbing trench backfill inspection - After the backfill
placement is started above the pipe zone but before the vertical height of
backfill exceeds 2 feet. Testing of the backfill within the pipe zone may also
be required by the governing agencies. Pipe bedding and backfill materials
shall conform to the governing agencies requirements and project soils
report if applicable. All trench backfills shall be mechanically compacted to
a minimum of 90% compaction levels unless otherwise specified. Plumbing
trenches over 12 inches deep maximum under the interior floor slabs should
also be mechanically compacted and tested for a minimum of 90%
compaction levels. Flooding or jetting techniques as a means of compaction
method shall not be allowed.
* Pavement/improvements subgrade and basegrade inspections - Prior to the
placement of concrete or asphalt for proper moisture and specified
compaction levels.
B. Foundations and Interior Floor Slabs
Proposed buildings may be supported on conventional concrete footings and slab-
_ on-grade floor foundations. The following recommendations and geotechnical
mitigation are consistent with clayey gravel to gravelly clay mixture (GC/CL), high
expansive (expansion index less than 131) foundation bearing soils anticipated at
finish grade levels. Added or modified recommendations may also be necessary
and should be given at the time of foundation plan review phase. All foundations
and floor slab recommendations should be further confirmed and / or revised as
necessary at the completion of rough grading based on the actual expansion
characteristics of the foundation bearing and subgrade soils. In the event capping
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. - 2450 Vineyard Avenue- Escondido,California 92029-1229- Phonc(760)743-I2I4
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 17
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
- of the building pads with very low to low expansive import soils are considered, this
office should be notified to provide appropriate revised foundations/slab
recommendations.
1. Perimeter and interior continuous strip foundations should be sized at least 15
inches wide and 30 inches deep for single and two-story structures. Exterior
-- spread pad footings, if any, should be at least 30 inches square and 18 inches
deep and structurally tied to the perimeter strip footings with tie beams at least
in one direction. Tie beams should be a minimum of 12 inches wide by 12
inches deep. Footing depths are measured from the lowest adjacent ground
surface, not including the sand/gravel layer beneath floor slabs.
Exterior continuous footings should enclose the entire building perimeter.
Flagpole footings also need to be tied together if the footing depth is less than
4 feet below rough finish grade.
2. Continuous interior and exterior foundations should be reinforced with a
minimum of four #5 reinforcing bars. Place 245 bars 3 inches above the
bottom of the footing and 245 bars 3 inches below the top of the footing. Tie
beams should also be reinforced with 244 bars top and bottom and #3 ties at
24 inches on center maximum. Reinforcement details for spread pad footings
should be provided by the project architect/structural engineer.
3. The slab subgrade and foundation bearing soils should not be allowed to dry
prior to pouring the concrete or additional ground preparations, moisture re-
conditioning and presaturation will be necessary as directed in the field. The
required moisture content of the bearing soils is approximately 3% to 5% over
the optimum moisture content to the depth of 30 inches below slab subgrade.
Attempts should be made to maintain as-graded moisture contents in order to
preclude the need for presaturation of the subgrade and bearing soils.
4. In the case of pre-saturation of the slab subgrade and/or non-monolithic pour
(two-pour) system, dowel the slab to the footings using #4 reinforcing bars
spaced 18 inches on center extending at least 20 inches into the footing and
20 inches into the slab. The dowels should be placed mid-height in the slab.
Alternate the dowels each way for all interior footings.
5. After the footings are dug and cleaned, place the reinforcing steel and dowels
and pour the footings.
6. This office should be notified to inspect the foundation trenches and reinforcing
- prior to pouring concrete.
VINE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. • 2450 Vineyard Avenue•Escondido,California 92029-1229• Phone(760)743-1214
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 18
-- JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
- 7. Once the concrete for the footings has cured and underground utilities tested,
place 4 inches of 3/8-inch rock over the slab subgrade. Flood with water to the
top of the 3/8-inch rock, and allow the slab subgrade to soak until moisture
- testing indicates that the required moisture content is present. After the slab
subgrade soils have soaked, notify this office and schedule for appropriate
moisture testing.
8. When the required moisture content has been achieved, place a well-
performing moisture barrier/vapor retardant (minimum 15-mil plastic) over the
3/8-inch rock, and place 2 inches of clean sand (SE 30 or greater) on top of the
plastic.
If sufficient moisture is present, flooding/pre-saturation will not be required. The
dowels may be deleted, slab underlayment may consist of 2 inches of clean
sand over a well performing moisture barrier/vapor retardant (minimum 10-mil
plastic) over 2 inches of clean sand, and the footings and slab may be poured
monolithically.
This office should be notified to inspect the sand, slab thickness, and
reinforcing prior to concrete pour.
9. All interior slabs should be a minimum of 5 inches in thickness reinforced with
#4 reinforcing bars spaced 18 inches on center each way placed 1'/2 inches
below the top of slab.
10. Interior slabs should be provided with "soft-cut" contraction/control joints
consisting of sawcuts spaced 10 feet on center maximum each way. Cut as
soon as the slab will support the weight of the saw, and operate without
disturbing the final finish which is normally within 2 hours after final finish at
each control joint location or 150 psi to 800 psi. The softcuts should be a
minimum of 3/-inch in depth, but should not exceed 1-inch deep maximum.
Anti-ravel skid plates should be used and replaced with each blade to avoid
spalling and raveling. Avoid wheeled equipment across cuts for at least 24
hours.
11. Provide re-entrant corner reinforcement for all interior slabs. Re-entrant
corners will depend on slab geometry and/or interior column locations. Plate
8 may be used as a general guideline.
12. Foundation trenches and slab subgrade soils should be inspected and tested
for proper moisture and specified compaction levels and approved by the
project geotechnical consultant prior to the placement of concrete.
VINE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. - 2450 Vineyard Avenue' Escondido,California 92029-1229-Phone(760)743-1214
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 19
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
C. Post-Tensioned / Structural Slab-on-Ground Foundations
Post-tensioned or structural slab-on-ground foundations consistent with the
anticipated clayey expansive bearing soils may also be considered. Remedial
grading and foundation bearing/slab subgrade soil preparations should be
completed as specified. Post-tensioned or structural slab-on-ground foundation
design should be completed by the project structural engineer or design/build
contractor. The following are appropriate:
1. The foundation design should consider slabs with stiffening beams (ribbed
foundation). In the case of uniform slab thickness foundation, the design shall
satisfy all requirements of the design procedure for ribbed foundation. The fully
conformant ribbed foundation is then converted to an equivalent uniform
thickness foundation. In this case, however, perimeter edge beams shall be
required as specified in the following sections.
2. All designs shall conform to the latest addition of the Uniform Building Code
(UBC), specifications of the Posttensioning Institute (PTI), local standards, and
the specifications given in this report.
3. Foundation bearing soils should be inspected and tested as necessary prior to
trenching and actual construction by the project geotechnical engineer. The
required foundation bearing soils, in-place densities, and specified moisture
contents should be confirmed prior to the foundation pour.
4. A minimum of 4 inches of clean sand (SE greater than 30) should be placed
over the approved slab subgrade soils. A well performing moisture
barrier/vapor retardant (minimum 10-mil plastic) shall be placed mid-height in
the sand.
5. At the completion of ground and subgrade preparations as specified, and
approval of the project soil engineer, the post-tensioned or structural slab-on-
ground foundations should be constructed as detailed on the
structural/construction drawings.
6. Based on our experience on similar projects, available laboratory testing and
analysis of the test results, the following soil design parameters are appropriate:
* Design predominant clay mineral type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Montmorillonite.
* Design percent of clay in soil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60%.
* Design effective plasticity index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45.
* Design depth to constant soil suction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 feet.
VINIG & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. • 2450 Vineyard AvenUe I Escondido,California 92029-1229 • Phone(760)743-1214
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 20
- JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
* Design constant soil suction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pf 3.6.
* Design velocity of moisture flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.70 inch/month.
* Design edge moisture variation distance for edge lift (em) . . . . . . 3.0 feet.
- * Design edge moisture variation distance for center lift (em) 6.0 feet.
* Design differential swell occurring at the perimeter of slab
for edge lift condition (Ym) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.095 inches.
-- * Design differential swell occurring at the perimeter of slab
for center lift condition (Ym) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.677 inches.
* Design soil subgrade modulus (k) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 pci.
* Design net allowable bearing pressure for
Post-tensioned or structural slab-on-ground foundations . . . . . . . . 1000 psf.
Notes:
The net allowable foundation pressure provided herein applies to dead plus live
loads and may be increased by one-third for wind and seismic loading.
7. Provide a minimum of 15 inches wide by 24 inches deep perimeter edge beam.
Perimeter edge beam should enclose the entire building circumference and
reinforced with at least 145 continuous bar near the bottom. Provide adequate
interior stiffening ribs as necessary.
8. Posttension slab should be a minimum of 5 inches thick. Use a minimum
f'c=3000 psi concrete. We recommend to consider pre-tensioning in order to
preclude early concrete shrinkage cracking.
D. Exterior Concrete Slabs / Flatworks
1. All exterior slabs (walkways, patios) should be a minimum of 4 inches in
thickness, reinforced with #3 bars at 18 inches on centers in both directions
placed 1'/Z inches below the top of slab. Use 6 inches of 90% compacted clean
sand beneath all exterior slabs.
2. Provide "tool joint" or "softcut" contraction/control joints spaced 10 feet on
center (not to exceed 12 feet maximum) each way. Tool or cut as soon as the
slab will support weight and can be operated without disturbing the final finish
which is normally within 2 hours after final finish at each control joint location
or 150 psi to 800 psi. Tool or softcuts should be a minimum of %-inch but
should not exceed 1-inch deep maximum. In case of softcut joints, anti-ravel
skid plates should be used and replaced with each blade to avoid spalling and
raveling. Avoid wheeled equipments across cuts for at least 24 hours.
VIN1E & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. • 2450 Vineyard Avenue•Escondido,California 92029-1229 • Phone(760)743-1214
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 21
-- JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
- 3. In case of expansive subgrade soils, it is our practice to recommend a minimum
8 inches wide by 12 inches deep thickened edge reinforced with a minimum of
144 continuous bar-near the bottom along the free-ends of all exterior slabs
-- and flatworks.
4. All exterior slab designs should be confirmed in the final as-graded compaction
report.
5. Subgrade soils should be tested for proper moisture and specified compaction
levels and approved by the project geotechnical consultant prior to the
placement of concrete.
E. Soil Design Parameters
The following soil design parameters are based on the tested representative
samples of on-site earth deposits. Sandy granular import soils should be
considered for wall backfills, if any walls are planned at the site. Soil design
parameters for import soils can be given based on actual testing when a
representative sample is made available. All parameters should be re-evaluated
when the characteristics of the final as-graded soils have been specifically
determined:
* Design wet density of soil = 125.9 pcf.
* Design angle of internal friction of soil = 28 degrees.
* Design active soil pressure for retaining structures = 46 pcf(EFP), level backfill,
cantilever, unrestrained walls.
* Design at-rest soil pressure for retaining structures = 68 pcf (EFP), non
yielding, restrained walls.
* Design passive soil pressure for retaining structures = 349 pcf (EFP), level
surface at the toe.
* Design coefficient of friction for concrete on soils = 0.34.
* Net allowable foundation pressure for on-site compacted fills (minimum 15
inches wide by 30 inches deep footings) = 2000 psf.
* Allowable lateral bearing pressure (all structures except retaining walls) for on-
site compacted fill = 100 psf/ft.
Notes:
* Use a minimum safety factor of 1.5 for wall over-turning and sliding stability.
However, because large movements must take place before maximum passive
resistance can be developed, a safety factor of 2 may be considered for sliding
stability where sensitive structures and improvements are planned near or on
top of retaining walls.
VINIE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. • 2450 Vineyard Avcnue• Escondido,California 92029-1229•Phone(760)743-1214
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 22
-- JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
* When combining passive pressure and frictional resistance the passive
component should be reduced by one-third.
* The net allowable foundation pressure provided herein was determined based
on the indicated foundation depths and widths. The indicated values may be
increased by 20%for each additional foot of depth and 10% for each additional
foot of width to a maximum of 4500 psf, if needed. The allowable foundation
pressures provided herein also applies to dead plus live loads and may be
increased by one-third for wind and seismic loading.
* The allowable lateral bearing earth pressures may be increased by the amount
of the designated value for each additional foot of depth to a maximum of 1500
pounds per square foot.
F. Asphalt and PCC Pavement Design
Specific pavement designs can best be provided at the completion of rough
grading based on R-value tests of the actual finish subgrade soils; however, the
following structural sections may be considered for cost estimating purposes only
(not for construction):
1. A minimum section of 4 inches asphalt on 6 inches Caltrans Class 2 aggregate
base may be considered for the on-site asphalt paving surfaces. Actual section
will also depend on the design TI and approval of the City of Encinitas.
Base materials should be compacted to a minimum of 95% of the
corresponding maximum dry density (ASTM D-1557). Subgrade soils beneath
the asphalt paving surfaces should also be compacted to a minimum of 95%
of the corresponding maximum dry density within the upper 12 inches.
2. Residential PCC driveway and parking supported on high expansive subgrade
soils should be a minimum of 5Y2 inches in thickness, reinforced with #3
reinforcing bars at 16 inches on centers each way placed 2 inches below the
top of slab. Subgrade soils beneath the PCC parking and driveway should be
compacted to a minimum of 90% of the corresponding maximum dry density
- within the upper 6 inches. Use a minimum 560-C-3250 concrete per Standard
Specifications for Public Works Construction (Green Book) standards.
In order to enhance performance of PCC pavements supported on highly
expansive subgrade, a minimum of 8 inches wide by 12 inches deep thickened
edge reinforced with a minimum of 144 continuous bar placed near the bottom
may be considered along the outside edges.
VINIE & MIDDL.ETON ENGINEERING, INC. - 2450 Vineyard Avenue- Escondido,California 92029-1229- Phone(760)743-1214
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 23
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
Provide "tool joint" or "softcut" contraction/control joints spaced 10 feet on
center (not to exceed 15 feet maximum) each way. Tool or cut as soon as the
slab will support weight and can be operated without disturbing the final finish
-- which is normally within 2 hours after final finish at each control joint location
or 150 psi to 800 psi. Tool or softcuts should be a minimum of 1-inch but
should not exceed 1%-inches deep maximum. In case of softcut joints, anti-
ravel skid plates should be used and replaced with each blade to avoid spalling
and raveling. Avoid wheeled equipments across cuts for at least 24 hours.
3. Subgrade and basegrade soils should be tested for proper moisture and the
specified compaction levels and approved by the project geotechnical
consultant prior to the placement of the base or asphalt/PCC finish surface.
4. Base section and subgrade preparations per structural section design will be
required for all surfaces subject to traffic including roadways, travelways, drive
lanes, driveway approaches and ribbon (cross) gutters. Driveway approaches
within the public right-of-way should have 12. inches subgrade compacted to a
minimum of 95% compaction levels and provided with 95% compacted Class
2 base section per the structural section design.
In the case of potentially expansive subgrade (expansion index greater than
20), provide 6 inches of Class 2 base under curb and gutters and 4 inches of
Class 2 base (or 6 inches of Class III) under sidewalks. Base layer under curb
and gutters should be compacted to a minimum of 95%, while subgrade soils
under curb and gutters, and base and subgrade under sidewalks should be
compacted to a minimum of 90% compaction levels.
G. General Recommendations
1. The minimum foundation design and steel reinforcement provided herein are
based on soil characteristics and are not intended to be in lieu of reinforcement
necessary for structural consideration. All recommendations should be further
confirmed by the project architect/structural engineer.
2. Adequate staking and grading control is a critical factor in properly completing
- the recommended remedial and site grading operations. Grading control and
staking should be provided by the project grading contractor, or surveyor/civil
engineer, and is beyond the geotechnical engineering services. Inadequate
- staking and/or lack of grading control may result in unnecessary additional
grading which will increase construction costs.
VINIE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. - 2450 Vineyard Avenue-Escondido,California 92029-1229- Phone(760)743-1214
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 24
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
- 3. Footings located on or adjacent to the top of slopes should be extended to a
sufficient depth to provide a minimum horizontal distance of 7 feet or one-third
of the slope height, whichever is greater (need not exceed 40 feet maximum)
between the bottom edge of the footing and face of slope. This requirement
applies to all improvements and structures including fences, posts, pools, spas,
etc. Concrete and AC improvements should be provided with a thickened edge
-- to satisfy this requirement.
4. Expansive clayey soils should not be used for backfilling of any retaining
structure. All retaining walls should be provided with a 1:1 wedge of granular,
compacted backfill measured from the base of the wall footing to the finished
surface. Retaining walls should be provided with a back drainage in general
accordance with the enclosed Plate 9.
5. All underground utility and plumbing trenches should be mechanically
compacted to a minimum of 90% of the maximum dry density of the soil unless
otherwise specified. Care should be taken not to crush the utilities or pipes
during the compaction of the soil. Non-expansive, granular backfill soils should
be used.
6. Based upon the results of the tested soil sample, the amount of water soluble
sulfate (SO4) in the soil was found to be 0.022 percent by weight which is
considered negligible according to the California Building Code Table No. 19-A-
4. Portland cement Type II may be used.
7. On-site soils are expansive clayey deposits subject to continued swelling and
shrinkage,upon wetting and drying. Maintaining a uniform as-graded soil
moisture during the post construction periods is essential in the future
performance of the site structures and improvements. In no case should water
be allowed to pond or accumulate adjacent to the improvements and structures.
Due to sensitive expansive plastic clayey soils present at the site, construction
of swimming pools, spas, patios, etc. should only be allowed based on a review
and specific recommendations provided by the project geotechnical consultant.
8. Site drainage over the finished pad surfaces should flow away from structures
in a positive manner. Care should be taken during the construction,
improvements, and fine grading phases not to disrupt the designed drainage
patterns. Roof lines of the buildings should be provided with roof gutters. Roof
water should be collected and directed away from the buildings and structures
VINIE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INc. • 2450 Vineyard Avenue• Escondido,California 92029-1229• Phone(760)743-12I4
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 25
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
- to a suitable location. Consideration should be given to provide the planter
areas adjacent to the foundations with an impermeable liner and a subdrainage
system.
9. Final plans should reflect preliminary recommendations given in this report.
Final foundations and grading plans may also be reviewed by the project
geotechnical consultant for conformance with the requirements of the
geotechnical investigation report outlined herein. More specific
recommendations may be necessary and should be given when final grading
and architectural/structural drawings are available.
10. All foundation trenches should be inspected to ensure adequate footing
embedment and confirm competent bearing soils. Foundation and slab
reinforcements should also be inspected and approved by the project
geotechnical consultant.
11. The amount of shrinkage and related cracks that occurs in the concrete slab-
on-grades, flatworks and driveways depend on many factors the most important
of which is the amount of water in the concrete mix. The purpose of the slab
reinforcement is to keep normal concrete shrinkage cracks closed tightly. The
amount of concrete shrinkage can be minimized by reducing the amount of
water in the mix. To keep shrinkage to a minimum the following should be
considered:
* Use the stiffest mix that can be handled and consolidated satisfactorily.
* Use the largest maximum size of aggregate that is practical. For example,
concrete made with 3/8-inch maximum size aggregate usually requires about
40-lbs. more (nearly 5-gal.) water per cubic yard than concrete with 1-inch
aggregate.
* Cure the concrete as long as practical.
The amount of slab reinforcement provided for conventional slab-on-grade
construction considers that good quality concrete materials, proportioning,
craftsmanship, and control tests where appropriate and applicable are provided.
12. A preconstruction meeting between representatives of this office, the property
owner or planner, city inspector and the grading contractor/builder is
recommended in order to discuss grading/construction details associated with
site development.
VINE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. • 2450 Vineyard Avenue• Escondido,California 92029-1229•Phone(760)743-1214
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 26
JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
VIII. LIMITATIONS
The conclusions and recommendations provided herein have been based on available
data obtained from pertinent reports and plans, subsurface exploratory excavations as well
as our experience with the soils and formational materials located in the general area. The
materials encountered on the project site and utilized in our laboratory testing are believed
representative of the total area; however, earth materials may vary in characteristics
between excavations.
Of necessity we must assume a certain degree of continuity between exploratory
excavations and/or natural exposures. It is necessary, therefore, that all observations,
conclusions, and recommendations be verified during the grading operation. In the event
discrepancies are noted, we should be contacted immediately so that an inspection can
be made and additional recommendations issued if required.
The recommendations made in this report are applicable to the site at the time this report
was prepared. It is the responsibility of the owner/developer to ensure that these
recommendations are carried out in the field.
It is almost impossible to predict with certainty the future performance of a property. The
future behavior of the site is also dependent on numerous unpredictable variables, such
as earthquakes, rainfall, and on-site drainage patterns.
The firm of VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC., shall not be held responsible for
changes to the physical conditions of the property such as addition of fill soils, added cut
slopes, or changing drainage patterns which occur without our inspection or control.
The property owner(s) should be aware that the development of cracks in all concrete
surfaces such as floor slabs and exterior stucco are associated with normal concrete
shrinkage during the curing process. These features depend chiefly upon the condition of
concrete and weather conditions at the time of construction and do not reflect detrimental
ground movement. Hairline stucco cracks will often develop at window/door corners, and
floor surface cracks up to I/B-inch wide in 20 feet may develop as a result of normal
concrete shrinkage (according to the American Concrete Institute).
This report should be considered valid for a period of one year and is subject to review by
our firm following that time. If significant modifications are made to your tentative
development plan, especially with respect to the height and location of cut and fill slopes,
this report must be presented to us for review and possible revision.
VINE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. • 2450 Vineyard Avenue•Escondido,California 92029-1229 • Phone(760)743-1214
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 27
y- JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 8, 2004
Vinje & Middleton Engineering, Inc., warrants that this report has been prepared within the
limits prescribed by our client with the usual thoroughness and competence of the
engineering profession. No other warranty or representation, either expressed or implied,
is included or intended.
Once again, should any questions arise concerning this report, please do not hesitate to
- contact this office. Reference to our Job #04-455-P will help to expedite our response to
your inquiries.
We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you.
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC.
Ann
Dennis Middleton
GED #980
Q OFESS/p�,�
�p r-MSA4 `rl
Q
S. ehdi S. Shariat Exp.12.31 Os
#46174
L\. QED GFO
JAY Ry��Q
cc No.5953
Steven J. Melzer
RG #6953 Exp.5-31-05
DM/SMSS/jt 9�®F CAS-\``�Q
Distribution: Addressee (1)
K&S Engineering; Attention: Mr. Kamal Weiss (4)
VINIE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. • 2450 Vineyard Avenue• Escondido,California 92029-1229 •Phone(760)743-1214
!.
PWE '
ul
ow am
t
r
NjD ti
r
. a
,
l A
j
�' �� - ' 1.�� ! AVENIDq OEL DllO OROJO
--r
SL
� J
° N O
Scale 1 :25,000 ru
' • e 1" 2080 h {I
0 fi00 i]00 1800 1t00 3000 m MIM
®2002 DeLorme.Topo USA®.Data copyright of content owner.
a zoo coo wo aoo +wo
www.dslorms.com
f
Z �
°t (9
x z t0
NIN .42 < N
r
M
IL ¢ w
Wo
` I r W
m o Q
V) J 55 Z J
p z _Z
a o v a m w z O cy
3 i If— O N °' i; �T NIN .I _ N U N
Ago
Sr
cad wa 92< �''
day
jW Q � 3J $S�IIL'r '''
W z N�j N Z O Z
wz W o
W L
W
LL
Z� ,�^
O O < VJ
N
N Y F z W
M N N
x N n _
pq
LU
O
M
°
4 I O
W N a
a o 3
I x= I a
- a
�nn
tn
w
N
N O
n
x I
1 I O
x
w r•) w W
Ii
F C J Z W
U i I c5 0 [L a y
�7 a W
M I a
I M = N vi
CL
Z
W � x®
W O
N
cz
o N
a
a Ix
M
a
_
cz
d
U w �8 g
Qm 3
3
IN w
CO1 o
N n ¢ � g '
LLI
w
v
N J J
Q z
LLJ
Lul
w
m W 5� N
_.,....,._...... ..w. cr) ,�
0 0
N 0
O
CO KJ
co C\i
LLJ
Li
2
� U
r.l
0
O
0
� o
o � /
� � o
o0
C� co
cz
moo
o a
a'.
� o
a
Q
° o
N 0
PRIMARY DIVISIONS GROUP SECONDARY DIVISIONS
SYMBOL
Q GRAVELS CLEAN GW Well graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines.
CO W o° GRAVELS
MORE THAN HALF LESS THAN
J 1-- a OF COARSE ( GP Poorly graded gravels or gravel sand mixtures, little or no fines.
p Q 5% FINES)
rn O FRACTION IS GRAVEL GM Silty gravels, gravel-sand-silt mixtures, non-plastic fines.
LU V_ Z W LARGER THAN WITH
¢O = U) NO. 4 SIEVE FINES GC Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines.
CLEAN
= Q w SANDS
0 = SANDS SW Well graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines.
w ZZ W v1 MORE THAN HALF (LESS THAN
Q H Q OF COARSE 5% FINES) SP Poorly graded sands or gravelly sands, little or no fines.
O w FRACTION IS SANDS SM Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures, non-plastic fines.
U = SMALLER THAN WITH
NO. 4 SIEVE FINES SC Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines.
W Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour, silty or clayey fine
LL N ML sands or clayey silts with slight plasticity.
U) O J cn SILTS AND CLAYS
O u_ ¢ >LU LIQUID LIMIT IS CL Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly clays, sandy
Q w clays, silty clays, lean clays.
Ip = U) U) LESS THAN 50%
ZZ to po OL Organic silts and organic silty clays of low plasticity.
Q = J N Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine sandy or silty
c=7 w Fr O SILTS AND CLAYS MH soils, elastic silts.
w = w Z
z O t— Z - LIQUID LIMIT IS CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays.
LL- M ¢ Q GREATER THAN 50%
H OH Organic clays of medium to high plasticity, organic silts.
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT I Peat and other highly organic soils.
GRAIN'SIZES U.S. STANDARD SERIES SIEVE CLEAR SQUARE SIEVE OPENINGS
200 40 10 4 3/4" 3" 12"
-- SAND GRAVEL
SILTS AND CLAYS COBBLES BOULDERS_T FINE MEDIUM COARSE FINE COARSE
RELATIVE DENSITY CONSISTENCY
ANDS, GRAVELS AND BLOWS/FOOT CLAYS AND STRENGTH BLOWS/FOOT
NON-PLASTIC SILTS PLASTIC SILTS
VERY LOOSE 0- 4 VERY SOFT 0 '/a 0 - 2
LOOSE 4 - 10 SOFT '/. - '/z 2 - 4
MEDIUM DENSE 10- 30 FIRM /z 1 4 - 8
DENSE 30- 50 STIFF 1 2 8 - 16
VERY DENSE OVER 50 VERY STIFF 2- 4 16 - 32
HARD OVER 4 OVER 32
1. Blow count, 140 pound hammer failing 30 inches on 2 inch O.D. split spoon sampler (ASTM D-1586)
2. Unconfined compressive strength per SOILTEST pocket penetrometer CL-700
V .Sand Cone Test Bulk Sample I 246 = Standard Penetration Test (SPT) (ASTM D-1586)
with blow counts per 6 inches
❑ Chunk Sample O Driven Rings I 246 = California Sampler with blow counts per 6 inches
VINJE & MIDDLETON KEY TO EXPLORATORY BORING LOGS
ENGINEERING, INC. Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM D-2487)
2450 Vineyard Ave., #102
Escondido, CA 92029-1229
PROJECT NO. DA"-
KEY
Date: 11-9-04 Logged by: SJM
T-1 FIELD
USCS FIELD DRY RELATIVE
DEPTH SAMPLE SYMBOL MOISTURE DENSITY COMPACTION
((f) DESCRIPTION M (Pcf) M
FILL:
1 Clayey sand to sandy clay. Tan color. Very moist. Soft. SC/CL
- - ST-1
- 2 - ❑
- - TOPSOIL:
- 3 - Silty to sandy clay. Red-brown color. Moist. Somewhat CL 15.9 111.7 96.8
- - blocky. Plastic. Firm to Stiff. ± 5% rock fragments to 12
4 inches in diameter. ST-2
- 5 - BEDROCK:
- meta-volcanic rock. Red-brown to tan color. Fractured. GC
6 Weathered. Becomes difficult to excavate below 5'.
- - Generally excavates to 8-inch minus. ST-3
- 7 -
- 8 - End Test Trench at 6'.
- No caving. No groundwater.
- 9 -
Date: 11-9-04 Logged by: SJM
T-2 FIELD
USCS FIELD DRY RELATIVE
DEPTH SAMPLE SYMBOL MOISTURE DENSITY COMPACTION
DESCRIPTION (^/o) (Pcf) N
- - TOPSOIL:
- 1 - ❑ Silty to sandy clay. Red-brown color. Very moist and CL 17.7 118.5 100+
- - soft near surface, moist and stiff below. t 2% rock
- 2 - fragments to 12 inches in diameter. ST-2
- 3 - BEDROCK: 24.1 98.3 85.2
Meta-volcanic rock. Tan to red-brown color. GC
- 4 - Weathered. Fractured. Difficult to excavate. Excavates
generally to 6-inch minus. ST-3
5
- - End Test Trench at 5'.
- 6 - No caving. No groundwater.
- 7 -
_ I - 8 -
- 9 -
__ VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC TEST TRENCH LOGS
2450 Vineyard Avenue, Suite 102 JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN
Escondido, California 92029-1229
Office 760-743-1214 Fax 760-739-0343 PROJECT NO. 04-455-P PLATE 3
• Sand Cone Test ■ Bulk Sample ❑ Chunk Sample 0 Driven Rings
Date: 11-9-04 Logged by: SJM
T-3 FIELD
DEPTH SAMPLE USCS FIELD DRY RELATIVE
P
P DESCRIPTION SYMBOL MOISTURE DENSITY COMPACTION
N (Pcf) N
- TOPSOIL:
- 1 - Silty to sandy clay. Red-brown color. Very moist. Soft. CL
- Plastic. ±2% rock to 12 inches in diameter. Below 2',
- 2 - color changes to brown. Moist. Soft. Plastic. ST-2
- 3 - BEDROCK:
meta-volcanic rock. Tan to red-brown color. Weathered. GC
- 4 - Fractured. Generally excavates to 6-inch minus. ST-3
- 5 -
End Test Trench at 7'/'.
- 6 - No caving. No groundwater.
- 7 -
- 8 -
- 9 -
- - 10-
Date: 11-9-04 Logged by: SJM
T-4 FIELD
USCS FIELD DRY RELATIVE
DEPTH SAMPLE SYMBOL MOISTURE DENSITY COMPACTION
-- (11) DESCRIPTION (°�) (pcf) (%)
- - TOPSOIL:
- 1 - Silty clay. Red-brown color. Very moist and soft near CL
- - ■ surface. Moist. Soft to stiff below 1-foot. Plastic.
2 _
- 3 - BEDROCK:
Meta-volcanic rock. Tan to red-brown color. GC
- 4 - Weathered. Fractured. Generally excavates to 6-inch
minus. ST-3
I6 - End Test Trench at 5'.
- - No caving. No groundwater.
- 7 -
_ IL8 -
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC TEST TRENCH LOGS
2450 Vineyard Avenue, Suite 102
Escondido, California 92029-1229 JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN
Office 760-743-1214 Fax 760-739-0343 PROJECT NO. 04-455-P PLATE 4
• Sand Cone Test ■ Bulk Sample d Chunk Sample 0 Driven Rings
Date: 11-9-04 Logged by: SJM
T-5 FIELD
USCS FIELD DRY RELATIVE
DEPTH SAMPLE SYMBOL MOISTURE DENSITY COMPACTION
(ft) DESCRIPTION (o�u) (Pcf) (%)
TOPSOIL:
- 1 - Silty to sandy clay. Red-brown color. Very moist. Soft. CL
Plastic. ST-2
2
- - BEDROCK:
- - 3 - meta-volcanic rock. Yellow-tan to red-brown color.
- - Weathered. Fractured. Difficult to excavate below 3'/2 GC
- 4 - feet. Generally excavates to 12-inch minus. Several
_ rocks ranged to 18-24 inches in diameter. Refusal on
- 5 - hard rock at 4%feet. ST-3
- 6 -
- - End Test Trench at 4'/'.
- 7 - No caving. No groundwater.
- 8 -
- 9 -
- 10 -
Date: 11-9-04 Logged by: SJM
T-6 FIELD
USCS FIELD DRY RELATIVE
DEPTH SAMPLE DESCRIPTION SYMBOL MOISTURE DENSITY COMPACTION
(ft) o (Pcf) 0
- FILL/TOPSOIL:
- 1 - Silty to sandy clay. Red-brown color. Very moist. Soft. CL
- - 1-3 foot boulder. ST-1
— 2
- BEDROCK:
- 3 - Meta-volcanic rock. Tan to red-brown color.
- Weathered. Fractured. Difficult to excavate below 3'/z GC
- 4 - feet. Generally excavates to 6-inch minus. Several
I _ 5 _ rocks ranged 24-36 inches in diameter. ST-3
6 -
( - - End Test Trench at 5'/'.
- 7 - No caving. No groundwater.
� I - 8 -
- 9 -
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC TEST TRENCH LOGS
2450 Vineyard Avenue, Suite 102
Escondido, California 92029-1229 JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN
Office 760-743-1214 Fax 760-739-0343 PROJECT NO. 04-455-P PLATE 5
• Sand Cone Test ■ Bulk Sample ❑ Chunk Sample 0 Driven Rings
- -----------
If
U- I
-NN \ _
....... .......
>
ldx�
-V
t %
... ... -71
J X\
..........
--07
'NZ N�S&
A
-�Z
9--
71
Centr
SITE
.2...........
30 20 10 0 30 MILES
FAULT EPICENTER MAP.
SAN DIEGO COUNTY REGION
INDICATED EARTHQUAKE EVENTS THROUGH 75 YEAR PERIOD (1900-1974)
This Map data is compiled from various sources including the California Division of Mines and
Geology, California Institute of Technology, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration. This Map is reproduced from the California Division of Mines and Geology,
"Earthquake Epicenter Map of California; Map Sheet 39."
:;.Lrthquake Magnitude PROJECT: Job #04-455-P
............. 4.0 TO 4.9
5.0 TO 5.9 JASMINE CREST, OLIVENHAIN, ENCINITAS
LLA 6.0 TO 6.9
7.0 TO 7.9 PLATE: 7
ISOLATION JOINTS AND RE-ENTRANT CORNER REINFORCEMENT
Typical - no scale
(a) (b)
ISOLATION JOINTS
CONTRACTION JOINTS
RE-ENTRANT
° CORNER CRACK
RE-ENTRANT CORNER—y-
REINFORCEMENT � n'
NO. 4 BARS PLACED 1.5°
BELOW TOP OF SLAB
1�
NOTES:
1. Isolation joints around the columns should be either circular as shown in (a) or diamond shaped as shown in (b).
If no isolation joints are used around columns, or if the corners of the isolation joints do not meet the contraction
- joints, radial cracking as shown in (c)may occur(reference ACI).
2. In order to control cracking at the re-entrant corners (±270° corners), provide reinforcement as shown in (c).
3. Re-entrant corner reinforcement shown herein is provided as a general guideline only and is subject to verification
and changes by the project architect and/or structural engineer based upon slab geometry, location, and other
engineeririg and construction factors.
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC.
PLATE 8
RETAINING WALL DRAIN DETAIL
Typical - no scale
droina a �-
11.77,,,,
Granular, non-expansive '
backfill. Compacted. : '
Waterproofing '
Filter Material. Crushed rock (wrapped in
filter fabric) or Class 2 Permeable Material
Perforated drain pipe
�72 (see specifications below)
i
. SPECIFrCATIQNS FOR GALTRA1VS
__.
is
GLAsS PERMF.AIDE MA .T ..
��i� UiS STANDARD 1111
Competent, approved SIEVESICE °lo PASSING
soils or bedrock 1oII
3{4
3l8 40
Nb 4 25�Gt}
N.o 8 E€i-33
#Ia 3...
Sand lwqu}valer�t:�75
CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS:
1. Provide granular,non-expansive backfill soil in 1:1 gradient wedge behind wall. Compact backfill to minimum 90%of laboratory
standard.
2. Provide back drainage for wall to prevent build-up of hydrostatic pressures. Use drainage openings along base of wall or back
drain system as outlined below.
3. Backdrain should consist of 4"diameter PVC pipe(Schedule 40 or equivalent)with perforations down. Drain to suitable outlet
at minimum 1%. Provide 1/4"- 1Y2"crushed gravel filter wrapped in filter fabric(Mirafi 140N or equivalent). Delete filter fabric
wrap if Caltrans Class 2 permeable material is used. Compact Class 2 material to minimum 90% of laboratory standard.
4. Seal back of wall with waterproofing in accordance with architect's specifications.
5. Provide positive drainage to disallow ponding of water above wall. Lined drainage ditch to
minimum 2%flow away from wall is recommended.
*Use 1'/:cubic foot per foot with granular backfill soil and 4 cubic foot per foot if expansive backfill soil is used.
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC.
PLATE 9
JOB#05-202-F
SEPTEMBER 6, 2005
AS GRADED COMPACTION REPORT, RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
3400 JASMINE CREST, ENCINITAS
LOT #15, MAP#12882
COPIES OF THIS REPORT MUST BE PROVIDED TO THE PROJECT
ARCHITECT/STRUCTURAL ENGINEER TO ENSURE THAT THE
RECOMMENDATIONS PUT FORTH IN THE ENCLOSED REPORT ARE INCLUDED
IN THE PROJECT PLANS
COPIES OF THIS REPORT SHOULD ALSO BE PROVIDED AS REQUIRED TO THE
CITY OF ENCINITAS
VIN E 8L MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC.
2450 Vineyard Avenue
Escondido,California 92029-I229
Job#05-202-F Phone(760)743-I2I4
Fax(760)739-0343
September 6, 2005
Mr. Jim Lindstrom
- 5724 7'" Street, North
Arlington, Virginia 22025-1018
AS-GRADED COMPACTION REPORT AND FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS FOR
PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 3400 JASMINE CREST,
ENCINITAS, LOT#15, MAP#12882
In accordance with the Grading Ordinance for the City of Encinitas, this as-graded
compaction report has been prepared for the above referenced project. We have
completed engineering observation and testing services in conjunction with the grading
operations. This report summarizes the results of our tests and observations of the
compacted fill. The compacted fill in the subject area was placed periodically from April
8, 2005 through August 2, 2005. Actual dates are shown on the enclosed compaction test
result sheets.
I. REFERENCES
The following listed grading plan and document was used by this office as part of this
project:
A. Grading Plan prepared by K&S Engineering.
B. "Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation" report, prepared by this office, dated
December 8, 2004, Job #04-455-P.
II. GRADING INFORMATIOWGROUND PREPARATION
Prior to grading operations, the site within the limits of the grading operations for the
- construction of a building pad was cleared of vegetation. All questionable loose and
compressible soils were also removed from the areas receiving fill. Adequate keys or
benches were constructed a minimum of 2-feet into firm, undisturbed natural ground or
formational soils prior to fill placement.
As-Graded Compaction Report, Residential Development Page 2
3406 Jasmine Crest, Encinitas September 6, 2005
Large quantities of metavolcanic rock was generated during the grading operation. Rocks
ranging in size up to 2-foot maximum was properly placed in the deeper fill areas. To
facilitate excavation for footings and utilities, rocks ranging in size up to 6-inch maximum
- was properly placed in the upper 5-foot of the building pad.
The cut portion of the pad was undercut a minimum of 3-feet and replaced as a structural
fill, decreasing the potential for concrete cracking of the foundations along the daylight
(cut/fill) line.
w, Site preparation and grading were conducted in substantial conformance with Appendix
Chapter 33, latest edition of the California Building Code, the Grading Ordinance for the
County of San Diego and our above listed preliminary geotechnical report. All inspections
and testing were conducted under the observation of this office. In our opinion, all
embankments and excavations were constructed in substantial conformance with
the providedlapproved grading plan, and are acceptable for their intended use.
III. FILL PLACEMENT
Fill was placed in 6 to 8-inch lifts and compacted by means of heavy construction
equipment. Field density tests were performed in accordance with ASTM Method D-1556
sand cone method as the fill was placed. The moisture content for each density sample
was also determined. The approximate locations of the field density tests are shown on
the attached drawing.
The locations of the tests were placed to provide the best possible coverage. Areas of low
compaction, as indicated by the field density tests, were brought to the attention of the
- contractor. These areas were reworked by the contractor and retested. The test locations
and final test results are summarized on the compaction test result table. Elevations and
locations of field density tests were determined by hand level and pacing/tape measure
relative to field staking done by others.
The results of our field density tests and laboratory testing indicate that the fills at the site
were compacted to at least 90% of the corresponding maximum dry density at the tested
locations.
If the building pads should undergo any prolonged seasonal wetting and drying periods
prior to construction, remedial grading could be required depending on the site soil
characteristics. Depths of removal and re-compact can best be determined just prior to
construction by appropriate inspection and testing.
VINIF & MIDDLETON ENGINFFRING, INC. - 2450 Vine�-ard Avenue-Escondido,California 92029-I229-Phone(760)743-I2I4
As-Graded Compaction Report„ Residential Development Page 3
3400 Jasmine Crest, Encinitas September 6, 2005
IV. SITE CORROSION ASSESSMENT
A site is considered to be corrosive to foundation elements, walls and drainage structures
if one or more of the following conditions exists:
pH is less than 5.5.
Sulfate concentration is greater than or equal to 2000 ppm (0.2% by weight).
Chloride concentration is greater than or equal to 500 ppm (0.05% by weight).
For structural elements, the minimum resistivity of soil (or water) indicates the relative
quantity of soluble salts present in the soil (or water). In general, a minimum resistivity
value for soil (or water) less than 1000 ohm-cm indicates the presence of high quantities
of soluble salts and a higher propensity for corrosion.
V. APPROPRIATE LABORATORY TESTS
A. Maximum Dry Density Optimum Moisture Tests: The maximum dry density and
optimum moisture contents of the different soil types used as compacted fill were
determined in accordance with ASTM Method D-1557.
_ B. Expansion Tests: An expansion test was conducted per 2001 UBC Standard
Procedure 18-2 on a representative sample of the near finish grade soils in order
to determine the expansion potential and to provide appropriate foundation
recommendations.
C. Direct Shear Tests: A direct shear tests was conducted on a representative
-- sample of the near finish grade soils in order to determine the allowable bearing
capacity and to provide retaining wall design parameters.
D. Corrosion Testing: pH-Resistivity and Sulfate tests were determined in
accordance with California Test Method 643 and 417 respectively on a
representative sample of the near finish grade soils in order to determine the
corrosiveness of the soil.
VI. RECOMMENDATIONS
"THIS REPORT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED AS A PART OF THE PROJECT
FOUNDATION PLANS AND MUST BE PROVIDED TO THE PROJECT
ARCHITECT/STRUCTURAL ENGINEER TO ENSURE THE FOLLOWING FOUNDATION
RECOMMENDATIONS ARE INCLUDED IN THOSE PLANS**
VINE & MfDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. • 2450 Vineyard Avenue•Escondido, California 92029-1229•Phone(760)743-1214
As-Graded Compaction Report, Residential Development Page 4
3400 Jasmine Crest, Encinitas September 6, 2005
The lab test results indicate that the following minimum foundation recommendations for
medium expansive (Expansion Index less than 91) bearing soils, classified using the
"Unified Soil Classification System" or "USCS" as SC/CL, with maximum indicated fill
differential depth of 10-feet should be adhered to, and incorporated into the foundation
plans. Foundation plans and details may be submitted to our office for review, to insure
conformance with our recommendations. Please note (**) items for revised
- recommendations since the issuance of our referenced preliminary geotechnical report.
A. Foundations, Monolithic Pour System
Conventional shallow foundations with stem walls and slab-on-grade floors,or slab-
on-ground with turned-down footings.
** 1. Continuous strip stem wall foundations and turned-down footings should be a
minimum of 18-inches deep measured below the lowest adjacent ground surface
not including the sand under the slab. Continuous strip stem wall and turned-
down footings should have a minimum width of 15-inches for one and two
story structures. Spread pad footings should be at least 24-inches square
and 18-inches deep, for one and two story structures. Exterior continuous
foundations or turned-down footings should enclose the entire building
perimeter, to include the garage entryway.
** 2. Continuous interior and exterior stem wall foundations should be reinforced with
a minimum of four#4 reinforcing bars. Place two bars 3-inches below the top
of the stem, and the other two bars 3-inches above the bottom of the footing.
Turned-down footings should be reinforced with a minimum of two#4 bars top
and two#4 bars at the bottom. Reinforcement for spread pad footings should
be designed by the project structural engineer.
Open or backfilled trenches parallel with a footing shall not be below a plane
having a downward slope of 1 unit vertical to 2 units horizontal (50%)from a line
9-inches above the bottom edge of the footing, and not closer than 18-inches
from the face of such footing.
Where pipes cross under footings,the footings shall be specially designed. Pipe
sleeves shall be provided where pipes cross through footings or footing walls
and sleeve clearances shall provide for possible footing settlement, but not less
than 1-inch all around the pipe.
** 3. All interior slabs should be a minimum of 4-inches in thickness reinforced with
#3 reinforcing bars spaced 16-inches on center each way,placed midheight
VINE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. - 2450 Vineyard Avenue-Escondido,California 92029-1229-Phone(760)743-12I4
As-Graded Compaction Report, Residential Development Page 5
3400 Jasmine Crest, Encinitas September 8, 2005
in the slab. Use 4-inches of clean sand (SE 30 or greater)beneath all slabs.
A well performing moisture/vapor retardant (10-mil or greater) must be placed
midheight in the sand. Joints in the moisture/vapor retardant should be
overlapped a minimum of 12-inches.
Provide re-entrant (±270° corners) reinforcement for all interior slabs as
- generally shown on the enclosed "Isolation Joints and Re-Entrant Corner
Reinforcement"detail. Re-entrant corners will depend on slab geometry and/or
interior column locations.
4. The clayey soil should not be allowed to dry before pouring the concrete. The
soil should be 3%to 5%above the optimum moisture content at 18 inches below
slab subgrade. This office should be notified 72 hours prior to pouring the
footings and slab to inspect the footing trenches and to verify the moisture
conditions.
5. Provide"soft-cut"contraction/control joints consisting of sawcuts spaced 10 feet
on center maximum each way for all interior slabs. Cut as soon as the slab will
support the weight of the saw, and operate without disturbing the final finish,
which is normally within 2-hours after final finish at each control joint location, or
when the compressive strength reaches 150 to 800 psi. The "soft-cut" must be
a minimum of 1-inch in depth and must not exceed 1%4-inch in depth or the
reinforcing may be damaged. Anti-ravel skid plates should be used and replaced
with each blade to avoid spalling and raveling. Avoid wheeled equipment across
cuts for at least 24-hours.
B. Corrosiveness
1. Laboratory test results indicate that the minimum resistivity is greater than 1000
ohm-cm suggesting the presence of low quantities of soluble salts.
Test results show that the pH is greater than 5.5, and sulfate concentration is
less than 2000 ppm.
Based on the results of the available corrosion analyses, the project site is
M_ considered non-corrosive.
The project site is not located within 1000-feet of salt or brackish water.
2. Based upon the result of the sulfate test, the amount of water soluble sulfate
(SO4) was found to be 0.026 percent by weight which is considered negligible
VINIE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. - 2450 Vineyard Avenue-Escondido, California 92029-I229-Phone(760)743-I2I4
As-Graded Compaction Report, Residential Development Page 6
3400 Jasmine Crest, Encinitas September 6, 2006
according to the California Building Code Table loo. 19-A-4. Portland cement
Type 11 may be used.
_ C. Paving and Concrete Improvements Not Within The Public or Private Street
Right of Way
1. Exterior Flatwork Adjacent to buildings:
' a) Walkwpiys, patios, etc. must be a minimum of 4-inches in thickness
reinforced with 6x6/10x10 welded wire mesh carefully placed two inches
below the top of the slab. Provide "tool joint" or "soft cut"
contraction/control joints spaced 10-feet on center (not to exceed 12-feet
maximum) each way within 24 hours of concrete pour. The construction
procedures for sawcuts (if used) are described in Item#A-5 above.
* b) Exterior slabs supported on potentially expansive soils may be subject to
movements especially in the event as-grade moisture contents are not
uniformly maintained during the post construction periods. In order to
enhance performance of exterior flatwork supported on expansive soils, it is
recommended that a minimum of an 8-inch wide by 12-inch deep
"thickened"slab edge,reinforced with a minimum of one#4 reinforcing
bar placed near the bottom, be placed along the slab free edges.
c) The clayey soil should not be allowed to dry before pouring the concrete.
The soil should be 3%to 5%above the optimum moisture content within the
upper 12-inches of the subgrade.
2. Concrete driveways and parking areas should consist of 5-inch thick concrete
reinforced with#3 reinforcing bars spaced 18-inches on center each way placed
2-inches below the top of the slab. The concrete should be placed over fl-
inches Caltrans Class 2 aggregate base compacted to 95% over 6-inches
subgrade compacted to a minimum of 90%of ASTM 1557-91. Provide"tool joint"
or"soft cut"contraction/control joints spaced 10-feet on center(not to exceed 12-
feet maximum) each way within 24-hours of concrete pour. The construction
procedures for sawcuts (if used) are described in Item#A-5 above.
3. Asphalt concrete (AC) driveways and parking areas should consist of 3-inches
AC over 5-inches Caltrans Class 2 aggregate base compacted to a minimum
of 95%over 6-inches subgrade compacted to a minimum of 90%of ASTM 1557-
91.
VINJE & MIDDLEWN ENGINEERING, INC. - 2450 Vineyard Avenue-Escondido,California 92029-1229-Phone(760)743-1214
As-Graded Compaction Deport, residential Development Page 7
3400 Jasmine Crest, Encinitas September 6, 2005
4. Sub and basegrade soils should not be allowed to dry out or become saturated
prior to placement of concrete or asphalt. Subgrade and basegrade soils shall
be tested for proper moistu re and compaction levels just prior to placement of the
improvements.
5. Proper drainage must be maintained at all times so that no water from any
source is allowed to infiltrate the sub or basegrade soils, or deterioration of the
improvements may occur.
" 6. Exterior slabs placed against the perimeter footings should be doweled to the
footing using#3 reinforcing bars spaced 18-inches on center,extending 20-
inches into the slab at mid-height, and into the footing to the elevation of
the bottom reinforcing bar.
7. Recommendations for a future swimming pool or spa and associated concrete
decking, have not been requested or made a part of this report. Prior to their
construction, this office should be contacted to update conditions and provide
additional recommendations.
D. Inspections
1. If required by the governing agency, this office should be notified to inspect
or test the following prior to foundation concrete pours:
a) Inspect the plumbing trenches beneath slabs after the pipes are laid and
prior to backfilling.
b) Test the plumbing trenches beneath slabs for minimum compaction
requirements prior to sand and moisture barrier placement.
c) Inspect the bottom of the footing trenches for proper embedment into firm
compacted or formational soils, and inspect for proper footing width prior to
placement of reinforcing steel.
y d) Inspect the footing reinforcement size and placement. Inspect the slabs for
proper thickness, reinforcing placement and size, inspectthe sand thickness
and moisture barrier placement and thickness, after the initial footing
embedment and width inspection, and prior to concrete pour.
ViNIt: & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING. INC. • 2450 Vineyard Avenue•Escondido,California 92029-I229 •Phone(760)743-I2I4
As-Graded Compaction Report, Residential Development page 8
3400 Jasmine Crest, Encinitas September 6, 2005
E. Soil Design parameters
The following soil design parameters are based upon the soils used in the
construction of the building pad:
*` a) Use a friction angle of 27 degrees.
b) Use a wet density of 126.9 pcf.
c) Use a coefficient of friction of 0.32 for concrete on compacted soils.
d) Use an active pressure of 48 pcf equivalent fluid pressure for cantilever,
unrestrained walls with level backfill surface.
e) Use an at rest pressure of 69 pcf equivalent fluid pressure for restrained
walls.
f) Use a passive resistance of 338 pcf equivalent fluid pressure for level
surface condition at the toe.
** g) Use an allowable foundation pressure of 1,800 psf for minimum 15 inch wide
by 18 inch deep footings.
_. h) Use an allowable lateral bearing pressure of 100 psf per foot for all
structures except retaining walls.
Notes:
a) Use a minimum safety factor of 1.5 for wall overturning and sliding stability.
- Because large movements must take place before maximum passive
resistance can be developed, a safety factor of 2.0 may be considered if
sensitive structures or improvements are planned near or adjacent to the top
of the wall.
b) When combining passive and frictional resistance, the passive component
should be reduced by one-third.
c) The allowable soil bearing pressure provided herein was determined for
footings having a minimum width of 15-inches and a minimum depth of 18-
inches below the lowest adjacent ground surface. This value may be
increased 20%for each additional foot of depth, and 10%for each additional
VINE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. • 2450 Vineyard Avenue•Escondido,California 92029-1229 •Phone(760)743-I2I4
A"r ded Compaction Reporl:, Residential Development page 9
3400 Jasmine Crest, Encinitas September S, 2005
foot of width to a maximurn of 4,000 psf, if needed. The allowable soil
.bearing pressure provided herein is for dead plus live loads and may be
increased by one-third for wind and seismic loading.
d) The lateral bearing earth pressures may be increased by the amount of the
designated value for each additional foot of depth to a maximum of 1,500
pounds per square foot.
F. General Recommendations
1. The minimum steel reinforcement provided herein is based on soil characteristics
only, and is not intended to be in lieu of reinforcement necessary for structural
- considerations.
2. All retaining walls should be provided with a drain along the backside as
generally shown on the enclosed "Retaining Wall Drain" detail. Specific
drainage provisions behind retaining wall structures must be inspected by
this office prior to backfrlling the wall. All backfill soils must be compacted
to a minimum of 90% of the corresponding maximum dry density, ASTM
1557-91.
3. All underground utility trenches beneath interior and exterior slabs 12-inches or
more in depth shall be compacted by mechanical means to a minimum of 90%
of the maximum dry density of the soil, unless otherwise specified. Care should
be taken not to crush the utilities or pipes during the compaction of the trench
backfill. No flooding or jetting of the backfill is allowed.
4. The planting of large trees behind any retaining wall will adversely affect their
performance and should be avoided.
G. Seismic Coefficients
- The following site specific seismic parameters for the above referenced project were
determined in accordance with the latest edition of the California Building Code
requirements. The following parameters are consistent with the indicated project
seismic environment and may be utilized for project design work.
VINE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. - 2450 Vineyard Avenue-Escondido,California 92029-I229 -Phone(760)743-I2I4
As-Graded Compaction Report, Residential Development page 10
3400 Jasmine Crest, Encinitas September 6, 2006 r
- Site Soil Seismic Seismic Seismic Response Coefficients
Profile Seismic Zone Source
Type Zone Factor Type Na Nv Ca Cv Ts To
SB 4 0.4 B 1.0 1.0 0.40 0.40 0.400 0.080
According to Chapter 16, Division IV and V, latest edition of the California Building Code
Liquefaction and seismically induced settlements will not be factors in the
development of the proposed structures and improvements.
H. Setbacks
1. Footings located on or adjacent to the top of slopes should be extended to a
sufficient depth to provide a minimum horizontal distance of 7-feet or one-third
of the slope height, whichever is greater (need not exceed 40-feet maximum)
between the bottom edge of the footing and face of slope. Reinforcement for
deepened footings should be provided by the project structural engineer and
_ detailed on the approved foundation plans.
2. The outer edge of all slopes experience "down slope creep", which may
_._ cause distress to structures. If any structures including buildings, patios,
sidewalks, swimming pools, spas etc, are placed within the setback,
FURTHER RECOMMENDATIONS WILL BE REQUIRED.
Expansive soils can cause structural damage to foundations, interior and exterior
slabs and walls. The economically feasible precautions that can be taken and
recommended herein will only minimize the potential of volumetric changes due to
changes in moisture content.
The concrete reinforcement recommendations provided herein should not be
considered to preclude the development of shrinkage related cracks,etc.; rather,these
recommendations are intended to minimize this potential. If shrinkage cracks do
develop, as is expected from concrete, reinforcements tend to limit the propagation of
these features. These recommendations are believed to be reasonable and in keeping
with the local standards of construction practice. Special attention should be given to
any "re-entrant" corners (±270 degree corners) and curing practices during and after
concrete pour in order to further minimize shrinkage cracks.
I. Slopes
All slopes should be landscaped with types of plants and planting that do not require
excessive irrigation. Excess watering of slopes should be avoided. Slopes left
VINE & MIDDLETON EN(WNEFRING, INC. • 2450 Vineyard Avenue•Escondido,California 92029-1229•Phone(760)743-1214
As-Graded Compaction Report, Residential Development: Page I I
3400 Jasmine Crest, Encinitas September 6, 2005
unplanted will be subject to erosion. The irrigation system should be installed in
accordance with the governing agencies.
Water should not be allowed to flow over the slopes in an uncontrolled manner.
Until landscaping is fully established, plastic sheeting should be kept accessible to
protect the slopes from periods of prolonged and/or heavy rainfall. Berms should
be constructed along the top edges of all fill slopes. In no case should water be
allowed to pond or flow over slopes.
r
Brow ditches should be constructed along the top of all cut slopes sufficient to guide
runoff away from the building site and adjacent fill slopes prior to the project being
completed.
J. Drainage
The owner/developer is responsible to insure adequate measures are taken to
properly finish grade the building pad after the structures and other improvements
are in place so that the drainage waters from the improved site and adjacent
properties are directed away from proposed structures in accordance with the
designed drainage patterns shown on the approved plans.
A minimum of 2% gradient should be maintained away from all foundations. Roof
gutters and downspouts should be installed on the building, all discharge from
downspouts should be led away from the foundations and slab to a suitable location.
Installation of area drains in the yards should also be considered.
Planter areas adjacent to foundations should be provided with damp/water proofing,
using an impermeable liner against the footings, and a subdrainage system within
the planter area.
It should be noted that shallow groundwater conditions may still develop in
areas where no such conditions existed prior to site development. This can
be contributed to by substantial increases of surface water infiltration
resulting from landscape irrigation which was not present before the
development of the site. It is almost impossible to absolutely prevent the
possibility of shallow groundwater on the entire site. Therefore, we
recommend that shallow groundwater conditions be remedied if and when
they develop.
The property owner should be made aware that altering drainage patterns,
_. landscaping, the addition of patios, planters, and other improvements, as well as
VINJE MIDDLLTON ENGINEERING, INC. • 2450 Vineyard Avenue•Escondido,California 92029-I229 •Phone(760)743-I2I4
As-Graded Compaction Deport, Residential Development plage 12
3400 Jasmine Crest, Encinitas September 5, 2005
over irrigation and variations in seasonal rainfall, all affect subsurface, moisture
conditions, which in turn affect structural performance.
Vi1. GENERAL INFORMATION
It should be noted that the characteristics of as-compacted fill may change due to post-
- construction changes-from cycles of drying and wetting,*water infiltration, applied loads,
environmental changes, etc. These changes can cause detrimental changes in the fill
characteristics such, as in strength behavior, compressibility behavior, volume change
behavior, permeability, etc.
Where present, clayey deposits are subjected to continued swelling and shrinkage upon
wetting and drying. Maintaining a uniform moisture during the post construction periods
is essential in the future performance of the site structures and improvements.
The property owner(s) should be aware of the development of cracks in all concrete
surfaces such as floor slabs and exterior stucco associated with normal concrete shrinkage
during the curing process. The features depend chiefly upon the condition of concrete and
weather conditions at the tome of construction and do not reflect detrimental ground
movement. Hairline stucco cracks will often develop at windows/door corners, and floor
surface cracks up to 1/8-inch wide in 20 lineal feet may develop as a result of normal
concrete shrinkage (according to the American Concrete Institute).
The amount of shrinkage related cracks that occur in concrete slab-on-grades, flatwork
and driveways depend on many factors,the most important of which is the amount of water
in the concrete mix. The purpose of the slab reinforcement is to keep normal concrete
shrinkage cracks closed tightly. The amount of concrete shrinkage can be minimized by
reducing the amount of water in the mix. To keep shrinkage to a minimum, the following
should be considered:
A. Use the stiffest mix that can be handled and consolidated satisfactorily.
B. Use the largest maximum size of aggregate that is practical, for example concrete
made with %-inch maximum size aggregate usually requires about 40-pounds
(nearly 5 gallons) more water per cubic yard than concrete with 1-inch aggregate.
C. Cure the concrete as long as practical.
The amount of slab reinforcement provided for conventional slab-on-grade
construction considers that good quality concrete materials, proportioning,
craftsmanship, and control tests where appropriate and applicable are provided.
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. - 2450 Vineyard AMILIC-Escondido,California 9202.9-1229 -phone(760)743-1214
As-Graded Compaction Report, Residential Development Page 13
__. 3400 Jasmine Crest, Encinitas September 6, 2005
This office is to be notified no later than 2 p. . on the day before any of the
following)operations begin to schedule appropriate testing and/or inspections.
- A. Fill placed under any conditions 12-inches or more in depth, to include:
1. Building pads.
2. Street improvements, sidewalks, curbs and gutters.
3. Utility trench backfills.
4. Retaining wall backfills.
5. The spreading or placement of soil obtained from any excavation (spoils from
footings, underground utilities, swimming pools, etc.).
B. Inspection and testing of subgrade and basegrade beneath driveways, patios,
sidewalks, etc., prior to placement of pavement or concrete.
C. Moisture testing.
D. Geotechnical foundation inspections, if required by the governing agency.
E. Any operation not included herein which requires our testing, observation, or
inspection for certification to the appropriate agencies.
VIII. LIMITATIONS
Our description of grading operations,as well as observations and testing services herein,
have been limited to those grading operations performed periodically from April 8, 2005
through August 2, 2005. The conclusions contained herein have been based upon our
observations and testing as noted. No representations are made as to the quality or extent
of materials not observed and tested.
The attached drawing details the approximate locations of cuts, fills, and approximate
locations of the density tests taken, and is applicable to the site at the time this report was
prepared. This report should be considered valid for permit purposes for a period of six
months and is subject to review by our firm following that time. IF ANY CHANGES ARE
MADE, PAD SIZE, BUILDING LOCATION, ELEVATIONS, ETC., THIS REPORT WILL
BECOME INVALID AND FURTHER ENGINEERING AND RECOMMENDATIONS WILL
BECOME NECESSARY.
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. • 2450 Vineyard Avenue•Escondido,California 92029-1229•Phone(760)743-1214
As-Graded Compaction Report, Residential Development Page 14
3400 Jasmine Crest, Encinitas September 6, 2005
- If you have any questions or need clarification, please contact this office at your
convenience: Reference to our Job#05-202-E will help to expedite our response to your
inquiries.
We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you.
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC.
9r �
.-s fed
Vinje S F
GE#863
RMV/mpr
Distribution: Addressee (6)
mprlmy filesXfill control reports\05-202-f lindstrom jasmine crest as-grade report
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. • 2450 Vineyard Avenue•Escondido,California 92029-1229 •Phone(760)743-1214
JOB NO: 05-202-F
NAME: Mr. Jim Lindstrom
LOCATION: 3400 Jasmine Crest, Encinitas
TEST RESULTS
Maximum Dry Density/Optimum Moisture Content, ASTM 1557:
r
Soil Type 2: Pale to Red-Brown Silty to Sandy Clay (Topsoil)**
Maximum Dry Density: 115.3 pcf
Optimum Moisture: 16.5%
Soil Type 3: Metavolcanic Rock (Bedrock)**
Maximum Dry Density: 129.2 pcf
Optimum Moisture: 12.5%
Soil Type 4: Mottled Red to Grey Sandy Clay with Gravel
Maximum Dry Density: 120.0 pcf
Optimum Moisture: 14.8%
Soil Type 5: Red Medium to Coarse Sandy Gravely Clay with Rock
Maximum Dry Density: 126.8 pcf
`® Optimum Moisture: 12.1%
**From our "Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation" report dated December 8, 2004,
Job #04-455-P
mprlmy fileslfill control reports105-202-f lindstrom jasmine crest proctor list
O O O
C 0)
0 rn
M M N
y W W LU
C cu N
0
Y Y
O T' p O
0 � O O
m m O
m
> Q co to CO M 0 M M M O M m h O O T
O C co O O O O O O O O O O 5 O c7 vi CO O 0 N
O
O O O m
Q C a M M Cl) O O O M O O M O O O M O N O O O M O
O O O to O O O O O O O O O O O
0 T T T N N N T N (V T N N N T N N N N N T N
T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T
�f M CO T T CO N O � `Ct* m m T O N CO r!
CO oi
CA O CO CD r f� N O N �-
LL O Q d O O O r �. O T O O T T p T T T T T O
T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T
d
'p 3 O M O w O CO In CO M CO m CO OA O IO CO M N CA M
d C 1 T T T 6 T D T 6 T CO O CO m m m O i--O y T
T T T T T CN T
O
2
'~ C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
_O U M Cn h m O O C) N N N IT
= W O O O O O O O O O O O T T T T T T T T T
W LL M M M M M M M M Ch M M M M M Cl) M M M M M M
C C C C
O O O O O O O O O
N N N O O O (D N a) N N
C E E E 2 N u N m m m m m
ew- sU-
(' C C C C N N N C C C C C
W W W W
0) ca C L ter- L L � 2 N L L L t L
.2 5 7 7 C C C 'C 'C
C 4 O O O O 0 O N O O O O O
u U) co co (D c) U U z z z z z
W -j �' N co �' co co �' �; �; c�a cu to
� a)
_
M (D m m m cu m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m cu
'a c a a a a n. a a a a M a a a a a a n. a a CL a-
m m m m m m rn rn rn cm rn cm
C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C
N era � � � � v T3 Z 'v v a a v a v a =a a a v
5 5 5 5
y O N m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
o �
- �+ y O N M cY LO CO I� (O CA O T N co [f Co CO f� O m C:)
T
Z N '... T T T T T T T T r T N N
O °D
qZ V,j a 0 ty W O T T N N N N M M M co It co co
co O)l
040 d O N O O O O O O O O O O O Cl O O Cl O
� ZJ Lt
c
d
E
o '
v
> CZ I- M O (O N M L() LO CO N to T M M N 0 O M O In �
o
Cu= E N N T O fM N N T r O O
CU
V 0) 0) CD O M M M M O O O O O 0) O O O O O CA
A
x �,N - O O O O N O N O N N O O N O O M O N O O N
Q r T r T T T r r T r r r T r r T r r r T T
O � CD O O O O N Cl) r O M CO O IT M O CO CO T
Q r T r r r r T T T r T r r r r r T T T T T
L
'a 1� O O O M O Ln O 00 O r (y ►� lf) r O Cfl O
o d y O O O 00 0 Co O w 0 LO 00 O w O ti m w CO 0) 00 f--
LL .O r r T T r r r r r r r r r T T r T �- r r r
'~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
++ LO 0 LO m (O (O t` r-� ti ai O m .- r- M M M O m Lo (o
C6. r r r r r r r r T r r r
W lJ. Cl) M CO) M M M M M M Co M M Cl) Co M M M M M M M
_C
,L^
V
a o
w
_ tu
C
= C J
W 4)
H W
d
wV 't3 'C3 � "C7 "C7 � 'C 'O 'd � 'O a "C "� "6 "t3 'O
m m m m m Cu Cu m m m m m Cu m m Co m m m m CQ
'o c a. a m m a. m m m m a a m m m m a m a m a o-
r '� m rn Cm rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn
C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C
114 oo m m m m m m m Co m m m m m m Co m m m m m m
_o ( IT
N C; N M "T O 0 M O O T N M � Ltd Ccpp f- M 0) O N
T
Z y Z N N N N N N N N M M M M M M M M M M d et
0
o d
W Q y to O O r r N N LC) Ln (D O r- r- 0) O N N N M M M e}
CD N N N N N N N N N N N N N N O O O O O Co O
Q O ? G N O O O O O C O O O O O O O O O O O
7 Z J LJL
U)
c °'
U)
d O ego
E N
O M t
U
W _
c
r
v O
m 0
d
O cD cn M M N O O r pp pp ti
�+ T O M r p r cy r O r M O r O
a
O O O O cD c0 c0 O O O c0 w c0 c0 CD c0 c0 c0 0 co c0
D y a N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
IT � O M 0 W O m cD -
Q li O O O T T r T O O O
L
O O M 0 M M M c— O M I,- O M O r O O N O M c0 M
o y y O I� M M c0 to cD O c6 W 0 0 f` cD 1� cn to (D O M LO
LL T T T T r T r T T T T T T T T T T T r T T
O
= O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
CD co f� c� O O O
N N N N N N N N N N M M M M M N N N N M M
W LL M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M
01
C_ CO
� U
N
a cn
10 20
M
CL
w O
= o
W W J W W W W 0 W W W _0 c o
w N N N N N N N N N C c •j V CD
U -a v a -0 -a a -a v v d d v a v o 2 2ce)
tl! G1 M
cu N N m co W cu cu N c0 N W m m m m cc N LO CO
a a a a o- a a IL a. a a a a- a
c .E H rn rn rn rn rn O m rn rn rn O rn m rn rn rn O rn 5
J y c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c C
a v a 6 a a _� a � b _v > > >
a a a a : 5 5 '� 5 5 : m 'c •c c
C N m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m 0 0 d
CD CW)°' �► O M V. to CD co O O N M to co I- co�T O O T N M
Z N Z �f �t �t �t cl to cA 0 0 to LO U') M LO m c0 cD CD
� C
0 � d
Z W Q f7 +0+ p O O O O O O O O O r m M M M
) QO ON o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (D C;
� Z J LL
d m
05 C*4
0 co ch
W Cl)
.0 .0 W W LV
o ii ti o m cu
O Cr O O o
19
m m° m m
d
> Q. q- M M r 1- T CO O Iq (D LO LO T CO r T CO r CO O O
e O N T N O N N O O N N N T O : cM O
Z,y o ao OR ao OR OR ao ao OR OR ° OR w ao ao ao ° ao ao co ao co
y a N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
Q T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T
w CO O M O O M 1- N M r M M C() r (n N T M r CA M
LL C d v I� 0 C 0 0 r; cri (ri CD v 1� CO Cfl cci I� cfl CD 1� ui
T r T r T r T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T
Q r r T T T T r T T T r r T T T T T T T T T
V
CD
O N CD O N M a0 O to tt 1` O ti O M O M M M O
.d N LO (D CO LO to 0 0 LO 0 LO U) (D It v U) U') co ui CD
r r T T T r T T T T r T r T T T T T T T r
LL O
2
C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
O «; O M N 1- 6 O O O O O r t- O O T r O O T r O
= U T N N O O r N N M co M M M M M M M M M M M
CO- jy M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M
cu m m (0
v
M 0 0 0 o P
c
C co o m` N m` N`
%j U) W W W W U U U U
c in C C C C C C C C C
N r O O O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O ,:
+ O O o O
20 Q
.a = a o _o W 0 0 N � a m m m m a m a a
O � �a C c -a a :O =3 7 7 O = 7 w m -J
o U U U U U U U U U o CO c
H1 o N 0 O N CD N m N (u m (v O($ ot5 ojS o!S o2f otS atS otS atS
E ` O m (n O W
U-
20 (� N N � a � - "O •a "a 'a "a "a "a - - "C3 'd 'O
y y N N (0 m (0 m (0 m (0 (CI m m (0 m cu
rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn cm
J C_ C C c_ c _C C _c
LL a) CD> > > > > a v a a a a a a a v a
N OG co
. 4 D m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m
.._O 2 (7 I--
.' LO CD I- 00 CA O T N M CI to m r- M M O T N M 14r t
Z
Z rn m CO (D CD (D I,- r- t` r-_ r- ti ti 00 OD w M 00
O �
O � d
_,Z W Q m G! O O CO M � Cl) M 1- OD aD CO M O C) Cn CA O
m .a pN N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M V G
0 < 0 m C N o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
—3 ZJ ii
d d
_ E ff `
E 0 0
O ' w m m m
s s s s s
O O
d' 4' IL lL LL
Crr
> C. CA ti CD 0A 00 r r r r M O r r 0A O In C0
r O N O r CM N C) r r N N O M O
c
O CA O O O O O O O O O CA O O O O O O
(� r
X N V O CO 00 00 00 OR 00 00 co O O co O CC) O O 00 ao
C0 CD C0 CD C0 m CO CO to O O CO CD CO CD O CD t0
N N N N N N r N N N N N N N N N
Q r r r r r r r r r r r T r r r r r r
w w 4? O � M d r 00 M Ch M CC) r� N T N Uf M
T
LL 0 a 0 U) rl- LO CO CO CO J- U) M O CO v 00 Lo CO r-- CO
T T T r T T r T O C) T r T r T T T r
Q T T T T T T r T T T T r T r T T T r
p 3 ``�^^f O CO O l(� CD O M Oo O CA �Y O O 00 t7
G y r- W Co CD Lo cD u-) u-) r-- r-- OO Lo u-) r-- CD r- u.)
T T T [ T T T T T T T r T T T T T T
LL 'O
C
w C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
++ O r r O O to N CA co O N N N N N
LL M M M M CO CO r N r r N M M M M CO M M
LU ji M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M CO)
N N N
m a) o a a a-
0 0 0
m CD U) U)
w (D m
w rn w c c c
N c o 0 0 0 0 0
a ° 0 0 0 0 0 0
c 2 ee a a a a a a
�j d J U U U U U U
o N af E W- w w w w U C) U
() a) a) a) a) () a)
U a a a -a Q Q Q Q o. Q a a _0 -o -a -o Q
a c ` a- a a a a a o 0 0 0 0 o n a s Li a a E
v) cn o N
rn 0) rn 0) 0) 0) w .� .� 0) rn rn rn 0) U �
N c C C C c c O O O O O O c c C c c c O
-a -o -a -o Z Z () a) a) a) a) a) v Z Z a -o a)
N E 7 3 3 3 3 3 3 m N N m N m 3 7 7 -7 7 : O
O O +N+ m m m m m m LL LL LL LL LL LL m m m m m m "0 N
L: O d CO
_ O
N O LO C0 � co CA O T N M IT CC) 0 r- OD 0) O T N >
Z N co M M 00 OD A A A O O A A CA A A O O O o
Z
..Z LlJ Q y O O N N N N co M co co CC) LO LO m 0) N N N
C) V O C0 C0 ti ti r-- r- r` r~ r-- r- t` ti r- ti - co OD Go
pZ0 � N o O O o O C) O o O O O C) o C) o O O O 06 E
RESULTS OF LABORATORY TESTING
Expansion Index Test: An expansion index test was performed on a representative
sample of the near finish grade soils used in the grading of the building pad in
accordance with the Uniform Building Code Standard 18-2. The test result is
presented below.
Sample Remolded Saturation Saturated Expansion Expansion
- Location w (% % (0(%) Index(El) Potential
Near Finish Grade 10.3% 50.8% 1 22.8% 63 Medium
- w = moisture content in percent.
Direct Shear Test: A direct shear test was performed on a representative sample of
_. the near finish grade soils used in the grading of the building pad. The prepared
specimen was soaked overnight, loaded with normal loads of 1, 2, and 4 kips per
square foot respectively, and sheared to failure in an undrained condition. The result is
presented below.
wet Angle of Apparent
Sample Sample Density Int. Fric. Cohesion
Location Condition Yw- c 0-De c s
Near Finish Grade remolded to 90%of Ym %wo t 126.9 27 215
LL Ph and Resistivity Test: pH and resistivity of a representative sample of the near
finish grade soils used in the grading of the building pad was determined using "
Method for Estimating the Service Life of Steel Culverts," in accordance with California
Test Method CTM 643. The result is presented below.
Sample Location Minimum Resistivity OHM-CM H
Near Finish Grade 4928 7.9
Years to Perforation of Steel Culverts
Sample Location Gage 18 1 16 14 12 10 8
Near Finish Grade Years to Perforation 48 62 76 105 1 34 1 1 63
Results of Additional Laboratory Testing Page 2
3400 Jasmine Crest, Encinitas September 6, 2005
Sulfate Test: A sulfate test was performed on a representative sample of the near
finish grade soils used in the grading of the building pad in accordance with California
Test Method CTM 417. The result is presented below.
Amount of Water Soluble Sulfate (so4)
Sample Location In Soil % by Weight)
Near Finish Grade 0.026
mprlmy filesVill control reporl:M 5 202-f lindstrom jasmine crest lab results
RETAINING WALL DI AINP DETAIL
Typical - no scads
drainage —�—
Granular, non-expanX-�
backfill. Compacted
waterproofing
Filter Material. Crushed rock (wrapped in
r. filter fabric) or Class 2 Permeable Material
Perforated drain pipe " '
�Y2 (see specifications below)
F•E�JA.... >:
: g
;tr::%%:2:>:::>::<::>::>:=»::>::: :.;............... ::.:.:.:::.:.... >::::::::;::
................
5..., R/45 SING
a roved' :><>::>::s»>::::::::.::.....W PAS
Competent, PP b:<>:::: :;:;>;;;::;:::>:: :; . .;:. :.;: .;:::.::::::;.<
t . f Q.
soils or bedrock
3/4 9Q-9k
..:...........................................................................
- ..
.............................................................................
..1b.4 2y,gt?:.
Na 8 . <::: .& 3
. .....
aka:.3I .: ...........:;
......:.:...:.:..:...............................
..................... ..
Sa nd:EquJ.Valar!t > 75
CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS:
1. Provide granular,non-expansive backfill soil in 1:1 gradient wedge behind wall. Compact backfill to minimum 90%of laboratory
standard.
2. Provide back drainage for wall to prevent build-up of hydrostatic pressures. Use drainage openings along base of wall or back
drain system as outlined below.
3. Backdrain should consist of 4"diameter PVC pipe(Schedule 40 or equivalent)with perforations down. Drain to suitable outlet
at minimum 1%. Provide'/."- 1Y2" crushed gravel filter wrapped in filter fabric(Mirafi 140N or equivalent). Delete filter fabric
wrap if Caltrans Class 2 permeable material is used. Compact Class 2 material to minimum 90% of laboratory standard.
4. Seal back of wall with waterproofing in accordance with architect's specifications.
5. Provide positive drainage to disallow ponding of water above wall. Lined drainage ditch to
minimum 2%flow away from wall is recommended.
*Use 1'/z cubic foot per foot with granular backfill soil and 4 cubic foot per foot if expansive backfill soil is used.
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC.
PLATE#1
ISOLATION JOINTS AND RE-ENTRANT CORNER REINFORCEMENT
Typical - no scale
W (a) (b)
ISOLATION JOINTS
CONTRACTION JOINTS
(C)
RE-ENTRANT
CORNER CRACK
............:.
RE-ENTRANT CORNER
REINFORCEMENT '4 ''
NO. 4 BARS PLACED 1.5"
BELOW TOP OF SLAB x
NOTES:
1. Isolation joints around the columns should be either circular as shown in (a) or diamond shaped as shown in (b).
If no isolation joints are used around columns, or if the corners of the isolation joints do not meet the contraction
joints, radial cracking as shown in (c)may occur(reference ACI).
2. In order to control cracking at the re-entrant corners (±2700 corners), provide reinforcement as shown in (c).
3. Re-entrant corner reinforcement shown herein is provided as a general guideline only and is subject to verification
and changes by the project architect and/or structural engineer based upon slab geometry, location, and other
engineering and construction factors.
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC.
PLATE#2
20'
16'
2%
PAVEMENT PER SOILS--/
ENGINEER'S RECOMMENDATIONS
3" A.C. / 4" BASE CLASS II ASSUME T.1 =4.5
(SEE SOILS REPORT) (SEE SOILS REPORT)
DRIVEWAY SEC
-- NOT TO SCALE
GRASS SWALE FOR BMP
SECTION 'A'
NTS
1,g% MAX.
1.516 MP
12" RIP -RAP DROT
12' STRUCTURE
GRASS SWALE SECTIOt
NTS
PROPOSED 2:1 SLOPE
PROPOSED 6" PVC
�\ U
EXISTING CONCRETE
BROW DITCH
SECTION
NTS
TRANSITION FROM GRASS SWALE
TO EXIST, BROW DITCH
EXISTING CONCRETE
BROW DITCH
< PROPOSED 6" PVC
EXISTING CONCRETE
\ BROW DITCH
PLAN VIEW
NTS
DETAIL B
NTS
K &S ENGINEERING
Planning Engineering Surveying
1 (619)296-5565 7801 Mission Center Court, Suite 200
San Diego Co. 92108
REVISION APPROVED DATE
T. REPLACES SHEET 2
GRAPHIC SCALE
(IN S')
i inch = 30 it
REFERENCES DATE BENCHMARK SCALE
DESCRIPTION COUNTY BENCH MARK NO.
OC 0073 -CHIS. SQ IN TOP OF
HEADWALL HORIZONTAL: 1 " =30'
LOCAMON S.W. CORNER EL CAMINO DEL NORTE
& RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD:
RECORD FROM: C.S.D VERTICAL CONTROL VERTICAL: N A
ELM' 119.476 DATUM: U.S.C. & G.S.
GEOTECHNICAL LEGEND
APPROX. LOCATION OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS
LIMITS OF COMPACTED FILL .A A A--
EXIST. 20' EASEMENT IN FAVOR OF
OLIVENHAIN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT
REC. 1- 31 -62, AS DOC NO. 18553
EXIST. RECREATIONAL TRAIL EASEMENT
REC. 9 -13 -91 AS F/P NO. 91- 0470297
ME
1 EXISITNG TRAIL TO REMAIN OPEN AND USABLE
IN A SAFE CONDITION AT ALL TIMES. TRAIL
IS NOT TO BE USED FOR CONSTRUCTION
ACCESS AT ANY TIME.
2 FOR FUTURE BUILDING DESIGN, ALL SURFACE
DRAINAGE SHALL BE DISCHARGE TO WATER
QUALITY SWALES / STRUCTURES.
` #5
E
EXIST. DITCH
#5 @ 12' HOR. XIST. GRADE
NEW BROW DITCH #5 @L2 VERT. z
ALT. BEND E
4 #5 CONT.
-
cu
:-e U ,
M
2'
#5 @ 12' HOR.
SPLASH WALL
NOT TO SCALE
PROPOSED BROW DITCH
5'
i EXISTING BROW DITCH
PROPOSED SPLASH WALL
(SEE DETAIL ABOVE) TO EXISMG TYPE F INLET
CONNECTION DETAIL A
NTS
°I a
i
3
a
IESIUNEO BT: I UKAWN tIT: i la7tuKtU n,: APPROVALS CITY OF ENCINITAS ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT DRAWING NO.
PLANS PR�FPARE UNDER SUPERVISION OF: RECOMMENDED APP D GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN FOR: Z
j�
DATE: 4 z os BY: BY: RESIDENTIAL PAD FOR LOT 15 9126 -G d/a
R.C.E. N0.
CAMAL S 9 EIS 48592 DATE: I /Zd /OS DATE: Q�� MAP NO. 12882 Y
/ EXP. 06 -30 -2006 WORK PROJECT NO. TM 88 -183 SHEET 2 OF 3
COMPACTION #05--202 -F RPT DTD 9/06/05 SHEET 1 OF 1
ti
a
Q
In
cn
0
r.
v
0
0
N
N
N
N
3
R
la!
Q
ca
0
I
Cr
CD
r
r
` #5
E
EXIST. DITCH
#5 @ 12' HOR. XIST. GRADE
NEW BROW DITCH #5 @L2 VERT. z
ALT. BEND E
4 #5 CONT.
-
cu
:-e U ,
M
2'
#5 @ 12' HOR.
SPLASH WALL
NOT TO SCALE
PROPOSED BROW DITCH
5'
i EXISTING BROW DITCH
PROPOSED SPLASH WALL
(SEE DETAIL ABOVE) TO EXISMG TYPE F INLET
CONNECTION DETAIL A
NTS
°I a
i
3
a
IESIUNEO BT: I UKAWN tIT: i la7tuKtU n,: APPROVALS CITY OF ENCINITAS ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT DRAWING NO.
PLANS PR�FPARE UNDER SUPERVISION OF: RECOMMENDED APP D GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN FOR: Z
j�
DATE: 4 z os BY: BY: RESIDENTIAL PAD FOR LOT 15 9126 -G d/a
R.C.E. N0.
CAMAL S 9 EIS 48592 DATE: I /Zd /OS DATE: Q�� MAP NO. 12882 Y
/ EXP. 06 -30 -2006 WORK PROJECT NO. TM 88 -183 SHEET 2 OF 3
COMPACTION #05--202 -F RPT DTD 9/06/05 SHEET 1 OF 1