1992-3378 IHYDROLOGY AND HYDRAULIC REPORT
FOR
TPM 92 -126
PREPARED BY:
PASCO ENGINEERING, INC.
535 N. HIGHWAY 101
SUITE A
SOLANA BEACH, CA
92075
(619) 259 -8212
1992
4:7_ 29557T '�
J �•
s Opt',`. DEC 16 1992
ENGINEERIN;; 6CiiVICES
CITY OF ENCINITAS
WAYNE PASO, RCE 29577
i 51 92-
DATE: --
PE 455F
INDEX
PAGE
1. INDEX
2. INTRODUCTION, DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION
3. HYDROLOGY
4. HYDRAULICS
5. APPENDIX
PE 455F
INTRODUCTION•
The subject property consists of 8.77 acres of vacant land. The
upper portion of the site is relatively flat being an easterly
facing ridge. The southeasterly portion of the site slopes
southerly.
Some grading for a single family residence has occurred on -site
pursuant to County of San Diego grading plan # L 1439. this
grading plan created a 12' wide road and pad site.
DISCUSSION
TPM 92 -128 proposes 3 single family residences, and widens the
existing dirt road to a variable width of 16 to 24 feet paved with
3 feet graded shoulders. An existing 12" corrugated metal pipe
(CMP) intercepts some of the road runoff. TPM 92 -128 extends the
existing drainage system creating a sump to enhance the inlet
capacity of the pipe. A (D -75) brow ditch will accept the runoff
at the outlet of the pipe and convey the runoff water along the
southerly boundary through the steeper slopes and down toward the
existing flowage easement per Map 12644.
The private road per TPM 92 -128 collects most of the runoff from
the site. Due to the limited capacity of the inlet sump for the
12" CMP, during larger storms some of the runoff will flow by the
inlet and down Wiegand Street to an A.C. spillway west of the creek
crossing.
The drainage system as shown for TPM 92 -128 will contain runoff
from smaller storms and nuisance runoff within the storm drain and
brow ditch system. During larger storms runoff will be conveyed
within Wiegand Street.
PASCO ENGINEERING
(sm) z99-e2u
523 NO. HIGHWAY NH
SGITE A
SOU A BEACH, G 92074
/00 y'�r2 5rD;z4
P� = 2.80 '
c = v,45
A = 4. S� f1 ceEs
Sc/1- 6--e0op V
L= 560 .
906 — 220,5
• - dam= /05.5=
S - 560
�c < 11 m�✓1 t
P T ;bas
= -7,44(z,s
Q =czA
= (0,¢5)C.4)(4.84) . 9 ,5 cr-5
AaA A2
sA,-s7 Fl-6Al — !%rtJe,�F� — DIeA�,Vs SodrNE�2lT
3
PE 45i
,+, ,eA 43
SHEET F46AJ — �JATLX A L Z> -AAUS 1✓o27NE+ l y C-7} SrL--eL,
j.
i PASCO ENGINEERING
(919) 259-9212
�-
_ ]]S HO. HIGHWAY 101
W"
-���—�- �-- sow+w acwcH, U 9:075
� f
I I I I I I
✓EPJFy GVAC/rr. Or- PnF
�_�� /NLE7 CONreoc C( -fAL�I
ea?-.0 7-6R -C.S FS - Z /7.0 /E (2/tJLEI' PGC
-+ -,� Q C APRci �7 CFS
_i _
/,�/LFT 6' SAG CNA�?7
IAA er.NO
Fear Fs�cs�
rl
A T' OPENi"IG =
8„ L E�AI677f = Z f 2 = 4
r
POVOtV DFPT1f
.1W = 222, 0 TB FL -D, 5 F's. — 22/.0 IF /✓
= °J.5 - S.(o
= a 3 CFS FLD4)S DOa/�J 4/� zyf
't_.i..
57ZE6T
c ~r
Q
G-M& r FLDW
CeP..46,V7
_i _
CA�ACif� OF
IAA er.NO
5,D. 5-rSTeYj /5 L/rj/j� B
S7-2,,e7-t)e, 7Z 5.6 CF5
-F'
AT Q /pp
= °J.5 - S.(o
= a 3 CFS FLD4)S DOa/�J 4/� zyf
't_.i..
57ZE6T
G-M& r FLDW
CeP..46,V7
6 f� Avo
.Po fa l fR , - D/S CHAQGE VEZ0. fJ Crfp.0 r-
Q = 9.5 Ct $ V= 5 FP5 PEP7# = 0,31 / 0,36 A ✓A/ursl6 oK.✓
cFS vc-Prif -= 0.23 pv,
✓�t2i F7 O 75 CAIOAu 4
?� P /cE FLo�J car
DEPTEf-
SMrt = 2 /. � p'� ✓A/LAz3Ct D i' 1�
e
r
W
� O
m
1�
I�
L\
l�
N
III SE
SIMASI
1
• 1 FQR g
h -t �' �i �,a r J�.�y= �..i: -� Imo-: �% �:=� •c.:_� • .:
t .y i `' orb[ ����'«.: � A' '.:�:.` � r •\•. t ham•, Xn - +F .
_ r: �` .' f.R .ti(.t l✓1 fir � t -,_'a• Yt -�' .J. • �ti•��E � "i_ "r ,D . • .. •-_:'�' .— T•7s?mrcre _ E
' -'�.. t s '�r� � ^E �4�` \l:` fiL� aU �r a>St «' , I� .f� T "' .� �y'•\ wcr a�En «E, /�'y
+�
�i .t�� � ,. aat � -,Il' :� ,11 DO _ l S1. � h:i r..l .. •r-. �r ''r� M ~'• �: .f. `��Ur•�t•L --
."� r•) <.�. -.'.• ' �. .;`�.' 4r. �! .'. i .wo ,fwVE . •�" _ : 04.: !� � (.: �L'.it „a.� /� }�: '. ,••ti
�+, «..,: �- Y�_... ;H r /-- �_ .t .Jt ��,�, �•. -per- .\ .
� ,� \'�\ C i. J ` _ � -�1 •�' n .A-s• ,_a e \� - .F��.ii, — 'f• r, ',�E•w..� r' i _
�:, ,�T /�- -, ate•- } `4. .iaS.i. .Z G t- Z..1' ?: .L ` -/ f.' - rx' t �, �.I � D ^.:
_a,v, •'ly- yr♦,•�9��b L.A• Y. .i_r�: ,jiilaT... :. +{'{[+?.^�.�' ,ti ij. ; 5r., 1.
-•� - •P LH� � `�•� R - •F\ { °.• ^. `J /� '.•:. r �1 t , _1« ..iY •�`•`7I�; -,�+�Y �ah+���i��P; p(!•O�
,ter:- 4. ��t� �.,�•i;- . , - �.- p 1 1 _
- �p� -ty�. ,- �”, '•. _" t is c k.
:,_� s,Y ��e � ! � _ E. ID u�i• `lr.J Ll `_yl�. 7r�''S. ..
a� � earn 'i _ q .�1.•_ ��S _ wH� E i A Doi � �� �� � - ' _ ,�. f
o +.o ... yr I t - . -t i .. (•'!' 1 ..._ .. > � at = '�,� ,
^ —� CA1.
i
i,
RUNOFF COEFFICIENTS
(RATIONAL METHOD)
LAND USE
Coefficient,
C
Soil Group
(1)
Undeveloped
A B
—
C
•-
D
_
Residential:
30 .35
.40
.45
Rural C/2 Ac. (ors)
,30 .35
.40
D3.
Single Family
.40 .45
.50
.55
Multi -Units
.45 .SO
.60
.70
Mobile Homes (2)
.45 .50
.55
.55
Commercial (2)
80% Impervious
.70 • 75
•80
.85
Industrial (2)
90% Impervious
'80 •85
•90
95
NOTES:
(1) Obtain soil group from maps on file with the Department of Sanitation
and Flood Control.
(2) where actual conditions deviate significantly from the tabulated
imperviousness values of 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: Cons'der
commercial property on D soil group.
Actual imperviousness = 50%
Tabulated imperviousness = 80
Revised C = U X 0.85 = 0.53
AD n Vn TV ,"
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
DEPARTMENT OF SANITATION b
FLOOD CONTROL
451
30'
151
33°
L
SAM C11 b1EN...X,
100 -YER 24 -1 °10.1 R PRECIPITATION
-' 20JISOI'LUVlALS OF 100 -YEAR 24- 1 -IOUR
PRECIPITATION IN i-Ef.-ITHS OF AN INCH
451 �-
YpM -d br
U.S. DEPARTAIL•'N I' OF COMMERCE i
NATIONAL OCEANIC AND AT. OSI•IIE2C AO>ONISTRATION
'ECIAL STUDIES ORA.4CII. OYFICE Or 11 UROLOGY. NATIONAL D'EATIIER SERV[CE
30'
I III" 1151 301
sncr.
�C, p-11MA!
J r
v
i
is
101 1
51 1166
FOLOrfY OF SAN DIEGO )
DECARTMENT OF SANITATION E �.
•.FLOOD CO!lTROL 0 —YE6_11-110011 Pfd � 1TaTI0QR 4
'20-1 ISOPLUVIALS OF 100 -YEAR 64I0l1R
45' PREOIy t ATIO;I IN _"THS OF APB I;�c,;1
v�
rN
,� �`\ ,
1 CEACI, ys7-`�:, ,,• ` T 35 �� , f.. •. \A \
30' I 30 \ ,Si sn E r1 —\ 35 \ •f
uuca "7
-SAN CL !:.ELATE \ \ 1 r �- ,3D� n \ �� '�•, • �� \ \.
30 � - 1 •35 .\ ,'�- 0 -`
—
25 °.
25 ESCONUIUO)
33' 0 Io A I j p'qp �- •f }` 1 �
zu
-- 451
Prep. :a er 20 C 5
U.S. DEPARTAIEN OF COMMERCE 1 !! t� a 1 I
NATIONAL OCEANIC AND AT! OSPIIERIC AOa:IN 13 -� \ -� I �•
SPECIAL STVDIES BRANCH. OFrICE OF 11 UROLOGY. NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE ''• \' InrN,' "'.
.. - SAr D
301 20 35. 3�
118' 45' 301 15' 117• 1151 30' 15' 116°
,
A/ EFGLI9T/OA/
Fcef Tc C/L S/ 31.385
H J
SDOO Tc - .71;77e of eoncenfrafion
4000 Z - Ler79fh of wulenrhed
H Difyerence in e%vClibn
C /ong
3000 of %fire 510ae 1117
(See AppendiX X•B)
T
L
iLli /es
Fee/ flours
Minutes
2000
4
4W
3
190
900
BOO
Z
120
700
sea \
/a0
SOO \ S
90
4
400 \��3•
80
70
300 <<
/
90
\
• \
SD
700 \ 2
�
60
�
C
\
30
D S
2000 \
/1
\RAAT/s
/BOO
aa n-
L IVAT S[-EDS
Area
flan
9
B
N MINUTE TO
/OOO
7
TIME OF C
900
N_�
800
— __—
700
600
5
/O
500
300
T
5
200
_
SAN DIEGO COUNTY
NOMOGRAPH
FOR DETERMINATION
DEPARTMENT
OF SPECIAL DISTRICT SERVICES
OF TIME OF CONCENTRATION
(Tc)
DESIGN MANUAL
FOR NATURAL
WATERSHEDS
APPROVED
/✓ //'^'rc a�C
DATE /Z///6 9
APPENDIX X -A
i
4
3
2
^
v
:J
i
a ,9
^ ,7
1 ,5
ill
r• 13
N
lD
a
�n .2
v
v
O
.ti
iG
x ,I
INTENSITY- DUMTION DESIGN CHART
'p 10 15 20
Minutes
30 40 50 1
n. +1„,
:I 1r
[n.)
2 3 4 5 6
Hours
m
0
v
J.
v
J.
et
6.0 .fu
50
. O
4.5
4.0
3,5
^r
3.0 CD,
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
r,:
Directions for Application:
1) From precipitation maps determine 6 hr. and
24 hr. amounts for the selected frequency.
These maps are printed in the County Hydrology
Manual (10, 50 and 100 yr. maps included in the
Design and Procedure Fianual).
2) Adjust 6. hr. precipitation (if necessary) so
that it is within the range of 45% to 65% of
the 24 hr. precipitation. (Not applicable
to Desert)
3) Plot 6 hr. precipitation on the right side
of the chart.
4) Draw a line through the point parallel to the
plotted lines.
5) This line is the intensity- duration curve for
the location being analyzed.
Application Form:
0) Selected 5requency 100 r.
1) P6 = 2. 5 in P24= 4,7 *P6 = 55 %*
P24
2) Adjusted *P6 2 °J —in.
3) tc = min. -
4) 1 = in /hr.
*Not Applicable to Desert Region
Revised I/SS APPENDIX XI -A
OEM
Pill
11
1,
'p 10 15 20
Minutes
30 40 50 1
n. +1„,
:I 1r
[n.)
2 3 4 5 6
Hours
m
0
v
J.
v
J.
et
6.0 .fu
50
. O
4.5
4.0
3,5
^r
3.0 CD,
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
r,:
Directions for Application:
1) From precipitation maps determine 6 hr. and
24 hr. amounts for the selected frequency.
These maps are printed in the County Hydrology
Manual (10, 50 and 100 yr. maps included in the
Design and Procedure Fianual).
2) Adjust 6. hr. precipitation (if necessary) so
that it is within the range of 45% to 65% of
the 24 hr. precipitation. (Not applicable
to Desert)
3) Plot 6 hr. precipitation on the right side
of the chart.
4) Draw a line through the point parallel to the
plotted lines.
5) This line is the intensity- duration curve for
the location being analyzed.
Application Form:
0) Selected 5requency 100 r.
1) P6 = 2. 5 in P24= 4,7 *P6 = 55 %*
P24
2) Adjusted *P6 2 °J —in.
3) tc = min. -
4) 1 = in /hr.
*Not Applicable to Desert Region
Revised I/SS APPENDIX XI -A
n -70
180 —�— IO,o00�.,
166
8,000 EXAMPLE
(I
— 156
7 6,000 0.36 inches (3.0 feel)
5,000 0.66 cf1
�1
.-144
4,000
(3)
132
Hw' HIN
0
5.
6.
�
3,000 Ifeo11
6
—120
(1) 1.8 6.4
S.
.W
2,000 IY) 2.1 6.3
5.
106 y
(]) Y.2 6.6
'0 In loaf
3..
4,
d
96 F
1,000
3.
Boo
3
600•
500
2'
72
400
- --r
2 —�
w
300 0
2.
3
c=3
rn
1.3
Z60
V
200
N
M
1.5
54 0
�� F-
1
C
w
100 /
j
48
80"
J
a]
p
60 _z
U.
42 Ln
50 =
I.0
I.0
o
✓ 0
40 (L
.
t
W
0
W o
36
30 NMI SCALE ENTRANCE
E
33
TYPE W
H
0
20 11) Ht,e.alf 30
.B
,9
30
(Y) Y1bne b eanlOrwt C
.B
u
b ,lope LU
,8
0
27
(]) P.a)ecltap
B LX� -0AC ?, = IY•CJG�
7
.7
.
a
2a
q
7 6
.7
21
'S TO Old 10010 (Y) or (3) project
4 halleanfollr to Scale (1), Ihsn
un Stra16h1 inalln,e Ilae Ih,ou,h
.6
.6
3 0 one 0 Scott,, 6, 'Iran, as
'
I B
111ust,614e.
'6
2.
IS
1.0
5
.5
z
HEADWATER
DEPTH
FOR
C. M. PIPE
CULVERTS
BUREAU Op
PUBLIC BOAOB 44N. I,63
WITH INLET
CONTROL
TT -lx
-1
Z
0
N
U
HEIGHT OF OPENING (h) IN FEET
\ HEIGHT OF OPENING (h) IN INCHES
J�
\ \rf
s
CAPACITY PER FOOT OF LEN HT OF OF
W A U m m
PONDED
DEPTH
IN TERMS OF
m
OF OP
_ N
r
Z
<ro
>
Z
6.
Z
D
i
r
o
-
fT1
C7
o
D
0
D
o
n
m
D
z
m
c�
C
%
C
Q P•
C
o
�
m
-1
Z
0
N
U
HEIGHT OF OPENING (h) IN FEET
\ HEIGHT OF OPENING (h) IN INCHES
J�
\ \rf
s
CAPACITY PER FOOT OF LEN HT OF OF
W A U m m
PONDED
DEPTH
IN TERMS OF
HEIGHT
OF OP
_ N
o
io 0
w
O
_ N
FIG t((Q,/L) IN CFS /FOOT
p�
n
N W A U
U
n
D
i
O
w
n
6 =15-/.
W
a
s
W
W
y
0
O
0
1.5' ---�
1.
? ` ne.015 .0173 -' •..•\ :.
.L. 0.13 �1. \RESIDENTIAL STREET
ONE SIDE ONLY
J n
� •�L:'
.. :..
•.,:.
_ ...r .ate
- - .:.. -. .tom T:�'.:. .: . .
`
'
;' . ,:.:iii'
�_� .:1:
... ;f:: :.:
_..., ..�•• ,'^ ,
i'
--
_..:..
l:
T• [.i.°
.
is
r
� - __
_ -
7
�
-: _' _
-'.� � l.'
:. = ..' _
3 •' is
..____
.a::�q-
—_
_._.._.: Vii_,;:..
_
:rl- �ar.'::!:
- - - —
.. s
-- — - ..'•....:�. �o� .:' —: - -� �_" -
_... -
�"- FAQ:
1.2
44
Cy
0.8—
c.::•� ?.
.: ::: _tQ ::
—y.
1
�'rt�-
"'-:9t
..
0.S !
....
• -• :::r.:::::�_�
.
i'i.
�� e.:.: F.:S .
•...
..t�
1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9
10 20 30 40 50
t �ISCHARM
(C. F S.)
Givens 0.= 10 S = 25 %
Chart gIvyt Depth = Q4, Velocity = 4.4 f.ps.
SAN DIEGO COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF SPECIAL DISTRICT SERVICES
DESIGN MA,NUAL
APPROVED 15,11,
GUTTER AND ROADWAY
DISCHARGE - VELOCITY CHART
I
DATE 12 30 6 APPENDIX X -D
V. 4_$
S; 2•C
,Ddl�:
0=5. -CY5
q
APPRnvAI S
np I
I I
I
I
_ i ' I �i IIIiI
IIII
II I I
�/a7
- I e9- of -2r-?d
' I �1�2'J/1'OJ Hr. L/� /O�� I I • VO'l
l l
� !�
•
'OS2!�odF;�40.US Y -711 Iii I' IIII III
-7r-7. ,! la'35'S77 9£Bl
I ill I!I� ;lil .'I rill Ilillllll illl i" ; � IIII _'
�'� "III illl I!I!liiil II�I�� ?i1811111'o nu, .I III ,I
"I
II I
'M�I
III IQ
IIII I I
I II I
O
IN
IIII 'III I 92. II
I�ii ICYOa'� /iY!'9 �i °J7 II IIII II I I�
IIII
'III
II
;Ili '
_F�i>fV�:O1SIDJOS,�'�1 17L /II ;� ,II I�' QII I
S,7 O�� /�ZVld�d1SLi/ I I I u? I I I, III
I
III
I I
I I I.
i ji
X12/,66 9/
I I�Z
I � i
APPRnvAI S
I
w
tn
P
Illy
ts
n,
Fuo-w�.
b 1'w7 t,
d` q
,I,r� /���� %' (i % � r�l�r ( � i5 .�G'. yf,�r r 4y R ' I ➢,l � ._ btl ,. � �,�.
r "
r
/
w,
1 "
�"
y
o/ 14 A% '
zf
Oo
a
q m JI
g u4 A R,
44,
pf / H�
,T " � u 51 I'll
'q�
'I,
y r
"13
a N ;
A,
0� 1 B a
�7 k,
hi
�f�r' a /r „� y., a. . �,,.,___, ,,�....�_.,,........._.,_..�, . ...................n,,.....
February 28, 1989
Bruce D. Wiegand, Inc.
E1 Camino Real, Suite #103
Encinitas, California 92024
Attention: Bruce D. Wiegand
Subject: UPDATED SCOUR DEPTHS
Lone Jack Road
Encinitas, California
SAN DIEGO SOILS ENGINEERING, INC.
SOIL ENGINEERING 8 ENGINEERING GEOLOGY
Job No. 04 -3667- 002 -00 -10
Log No. 9 -1235
Reference: Santa Fe Soils, Inc., June 16, 1987, Preliminary
Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Bridge Structure
for 4 Parcel Development, Lone Jack Road, County of
San Diego, Job No. SF -820.
Gentlemen:
This letter is presented to clarify the scour depth discrepancies
noted between the above referenced report and the project civil
engineers calculations.
Subsequent to that report, the culvert design has been changed to
a dual box culvert. The 100 year flood event will flow over the
road section above the culvert, producing a flow depth of
approximately nine feet.
Because of the new design, the
considered applicable. Instead,
flood routing computer analysis
engineer should be appropriate.
original scour depths are not
the scour depth generated by the
performed by the project civil
A SUBSIDIARY OF THE IRVINE CONSULTING GROUP, INC.
9240 TRADE PLACE. SUITE 100 • SAN DIEGO. CA 92126 • (619) 5361102 • FAX: (619) 536-1306
ICG
" incorporated
San Diego
County Office:
9240 Trade Place.
Suite 100
San Diego, CA 92126
619/536 -1102
fax 619/536 -1306
Inland Empire Office:
1906 Orange Tree Lane,
Suite 240
Redlands, CA 92374
714/792 -4222
fax. 714/798 -1844
Orange County Offices:
Construction Inspection
and Testing.
2992 La Palma,
Suite A
Anaheim, CA 92806
714/632 -2980
fax:714/632 -9209
Geotechnical.
15 Mason
Irvine, CA 92718
714/951 -8686
tax: 714/951 -7969
Coachella Valley Office.
77 -775 Jackal Drive,
Suite C
Bermuda Dunes. CA 92201
619/772 -3182
fax 619/772 -3184
Corporate Office.
15 Mason
Irvine, CA 92718
714/951 -8686
tax: 714 /951 -7969
November 15, 1991
Daniel H. Wiegand Trust
2210 Encinitas Blvd., Suite Y
Encinitas, California 92024
Attention: Bruce D. Wiegand
SUBJECT: GEOTECHNICAL FEASIBILITY
3 Lot Split of APN 264- 240 -09
Lone Jack Road
Encinitas. California
Job No. 04 -7790- 005 -00 -10
Log No. 1 -2223
References: Pasco Engineering, August, 1991, City of Encinitas, Tentative Parcel Map,
Assessors Map No. 264- 240 -09
ICG Incorporated, June 8, 1989, "Slope Stability Evaluation, 8 Lot
Subdivision, Lone Jack Road, Encinitas, California ", Job No. 04 -3867-
002- 01 -00, Log No. 9 -1721
Santa Fe Soils Inc., January 12, 1987, "Geologic and Soils Engineering
Investigation 25± Acre Hillside Parcel, Lone Jack Road, Encinitas,
California ". Job No. SF -661
Gentlemen:
As requested we have reviewed the plans provided for the proposed 3 lot split of the
previous lot 5 at the above referenced site. It is our opinion that the proposed split is
feasible from a geotechnical standpoint and that the investigations completed to date are
sufficient for planning of the new development. It is likely that additional analysis may
be necessary once actual grading plans are developed and house pads located. Additional
areas of study may include analysis of the surrounding slopes with respect to new grading,
and laboratory testing to provide foundation recommendations.
This opportunity to be of service has been appreciated. Should any questions arise or if
we can be of further service please contact our office.
Very truly yours,
ICG Incorporated
Erik J. Nelson, P.E. C 44102
Expiration Date: 6 -30 -93
Project Engineer
EJN/
Geotechnical Services, Construction Inspection and Testing
III W452
tII samosa
Bruce D. Wiegand, Inc.
February 2 -8, 1989
Job No. 04- 3867 - 002 -00 -10
Log No. 9 -1235
This opportunity to be of 'service has been appreciated. Should
any questions arise or if we can be of further service please
contact our office.
Very truly yours,
SAN DIEGO SOILS ENGINEERING, INC.
Eri J. Nelson, P.E. C 44102 hony Belfas , P.E. C 40333
Expiration Date: 6 -30 -89 Expiration Date: 3 -31 -91
Project Engineer Chief Engineer
EJN /AFB /rp
cc: Pasco Engine
Attn: Dorian
i'c pHY �•F(
•' CPt1L'•' '
p Be &
P10. C 040c33
i
ciw� /w
ICG
' "incorporated
Son Diego
County Office:
9240 Trade Place,
Suite 100
San Diego, CA 92126
619/536 -1102
tax: 619/536 -1306
Inland Empire Office:
1906 Orange Tree Lane.
Suite 240
Redlands, CA 92374
714!792 -4222
tax: 714/798 -1644
Orange County Offices:
Construction Inspection
and Testing:
2992 La Palma,
Suite A
Anaheim, CA 92806
714/632 -2980
fax:714/632 -9209
Geotechnical:
15 Mason
Irvine, CA 92718
714/951 -8686
fax: 714 /951 -7969
Coachella Valley Office:
77 -775 Jackal Drive,
Suite C
Bermuda Dunes, CA 92201
619/772 -3182
fax:619/772 -3184
Corporate Office:
15 Mason
Irvine, CA 92718
714/951 -8686
tax: 714/951 -7969
November 15, 1991
Daniel H. Wiegand Trust
2210 Encinitas Blvd., Suite Y
Encinitas, California 92024
¢�5
Job No. 04-7790-005-00-10
Log No. 1 -2223
Attention: Bruce D. Wiegand
SUBJECT: GEOTECHNICAL FEASIBILITY
3 Lot Split of APN 264- 240 -09
Lone Jack Road
Encinitas, California
References: Pasco Engineering, August, 1991, City of Encinitas, Tentative Parcel Map,
Assessors Map No. 264- 240 -09
ICG Incorporated, June 8, 1989, "Slope Stability Evaluation, 8 Lot
Subdivision, Lone Jack Road, Encinitas, California ", Job No. 04-3867-
002-01-00, Log No. 9-1721
Santa Fe Soils Inc., January 12, 1987, "Geologic and Soils Engineering
Investigation 25± Acre Hillside Parcel, Lone Jack Road, Encinitas,
California ", Job No. SF -661
Gentlemen:
As requested we have reviewed the plans provided for the proposed 3 lot split of the
previous lot 5 at the above referenced site. It is our opinion that the proposed split is
feasible from a geotechnical standpoint and that the investigations completed to date are
sufficient for planning of the new development. It is likely that additional analysis may
be necessary once actual grading plans are developed and house pads located. Additional
areas of study may include analysis of the surrounding slopes with respect to new grading,
and laboratory testing to provide foundation recommendations.
This opportunity to be of service has been appreciated. Should any questions arise or if
we can be of further service please contact our office.
Very truly yours,
ICG Incorporated
Erik J. Nelson, P.E. C 44102
Expiration Date: 6 -30 -93
Project Engineer
EJN/
Geotechnical Services, Construction Inspection and Testing
�oQgpSESSIp ;+�� ,
\
L, O
1 � �� t \p s_s2 -i3 //_
/!
M AI r M /� / =� / W / N 'NEW ✓ ,4c.
.SAO � O D O U 0 J O .��Or�ii/o� i
consurrinc ngr ,EerS ana ;eo,og is ts
January 12, 1987
Mr. Daniel H. Wiegand SF -661
P.O. Box 515
Olivenhain, CA 92024
Subject: GEOLOGIC AND SOILS ENGINEERING INVESTIGATION
25 + ACRE HILLSIDE PARCEL
9 LONE JACK ROAD
ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA
Dear Mr. Wiegand:
In accordance with your request, this office has completed a
geotechnical study of the subject property. The site entails
nearly 25 acres of undeveloped hillside terrain west of Lone Jack
Road, north of the intersection with Fortuna Ranch Road, as
depicted on the Geologic Map enclosed herein as Plate 1. A
topographic base map has been provided and is utilized herein for
i the presentation-of geotechnical data generated during this
investigation.
The accompanying report summarizes the results of our field
investigation, laboratory testing, and provides our engineering
analysis, discussions, and conclusion(s).
Seyed Shariat and Dennis Middleton were our engineer and
geologist, respectively assigned to this project.
This opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. If
there are any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the
undersigned.
Sincerely,
Dr. Balakrishna Rao, P.E.
Vice President (Engineering)
for
SANTA FE SOILS, INC.
BR /vc
11080 Roselle Street. Suite A • San Dieco, CA 92121 •619- 455 -7760
SF -661
MR. DANIEL H. WIEGAND
P.O. BOX 515
OLIVENHAIN, CA 92024
GEOLOGIC AND SOILS ENGINEERING INVESTIGATION
25 + ACRE HILLSIDE PARCEL
LONE JACK ROAD
ENCINITAS, CALIFORNIA
Prepared by:
SANTA FE SOILS, INC.
11080 ROSELLE STREET, SUITE A
SAN DIEGO, CA 92121
January 12, 1987
SF -661
SITE DESCRIPTION
Page 1
The subject property is dominated by nearly flat -lying
terrain which characterizes the lower areas of the site adjacent
to Lone Jack Road. Natural slopes ascend westward over 160
vertical feet onto the upper ridge terrain in the western
portion. Slope gradients approach 2:1 (horizontal to vertical)
at their steepest. Details of site topographic conditions are
depicted on Plate 1.
Lower areas of the property support a light cover of native
grasses. Chaparral -type brush predominates in the upper slopes.
Several small trees mark the course of a small stream which flows
across the eastern margin along Lone Jack Road.
Site drainage sheetflows over the slopes toward the lcwer
stream. Local gullying and erosion was apparent within upper,
off -site slopes which descend below the northern property
boundary.
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
Details of the planned development are currently
unavailable. However, we understand that the upper property
(designated Parcel 1 on Plate 1) is planned to support a single -
family residential structure in the near future. No significant
grading is proposed. Lower areas (designated Parcels 2 -4) are
presently considered for future single - family residential
development. An improved entrance roadway is planned. A small
bridge or other suitable structure is required to cross the creek
and provide entrance onto the property from Lone Jack Road.
SF -661
SITE INVESTIGATION
Page 2
Geotechnical conditions on the subject property were
determined from field mapping of surface exposures, and the
excavation of six, two foot diameter test borings. The borings
were downhole logged by our project geologist, and representative
samples of underlying earth deposits were retained for laboratory
testing. Relatively undisturbed ring and bulk samples were taken
as indicated on the enclosed Boring Logs, Plates 3 through 9.
The samples were sealed in moisture resistant containers and
transported to the laboratory where the following tests were
performed.
Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content
per ASTM D 1557
* Sieve Analysis
per ASTM D 422
* Swell Tests
under 150 psf surcharge
* Consolidation Tests
* Direct Shear Tests
* In -situ Density and Moisture Content
* Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit and Plasticity Index Tests
per ASTM D 4318 -83
* Expansion Index Tests
per U.B.C. Standard Procedure 29 -2
Results of the sieve analysis tests and the consolidation
tests are graphically presented on Plates 10 through 15. The
remaining test results are tabulated on Tables 1 through 5 in the
following section.
SF -661
FINDINGS
Page 3
Garth Materials:
Hillside areas in the vicinity of the subject property are
y underlain by sedimentary formational rocks which are mantled by
surficial soil deposits. Two major formational units occur at
the site which exhibit different engineering properties and slope
stability characteristics. Higher ridge terrain at the site is
underlain by light - colored sandstone units which are massive and
moderately well cemented. These rocks generally support steeper
slopes and are mantled by surface soils which typically support
chapparal -type vegetation. Slopes underlain by local sandstone
units are characteristically stable. The rocks are generally low
expansive. Overlying surface soils and weathered rock materials
are moderately to highly expansive. Lower slopes at the property
are directly underlain by siltstone /claystone units. These rocks
are characterized by their distinctive color which ranges from
gray to green, and the common development of a thick natural soil
cover. These rocks typically underlie lower, more gentle
hillside areas in the vicinity and usually support a light cover
of native grass. Local siltstone /claystone rocks are further
characterized by their frequent association with slope
instability and highly expansive soil /rock units.
Lowest areas of the subject property are directly underlain
by natural alluvial soils. These chiefly include stiff sandy
clay and more recent sandy soils within the creek bottom adjacent
to Lone Jack Road.
Volcanic bedrock units were encountered beneath the alluvial
soils along the eastern margin of the property. These are hard,
SF -661
Page 4
massive rocks which predominate in surface exposures throughout
hillside areas to the east.
The approximate surface distribution of major earth deposits
on the subject property is depicted on Plate 1. The indicated
subsurface conditions are shown on Cross - Section A -A' enclosed as
Plate 2.
Groundwater:
Groundwater seepage, apparently representing the watertable,
was encountered at 9 feet and 17 feet below the ground surface at
the lower elevations of the site in Borings 5 and 6,
respectively. Groundwater levels are expected to fluctuate
locally with seasonal or other charges.
Laboratory Testinq:
The following results have been developed from laboratory
testing of earth deposits on the subject property:
TABLE I
Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content
(Laboratory Standard ASTM D- 1557 -78)
Sample
Location
B -1 @ 9'
B -2 @ 3' -5'
F.
D -3 @ 3'
B -4 @ 2'
B -5 @ 4'
B -6 @ 4'
B -6 @ 10'
Max. Dry
Optimum
Density (pcf)
Moisture Content
nliaw
114.7 •^ /Y'1;r VI:u'V
16.3
120.5 •:
12.8
112.0 r "'
15.7
,.,�••'
109.5
17.2
125.3
11.0
114.0
15.8
112.5
15.2
i
SF -661
Page 5
TABLE II
Sample Location
B -4 @ 2'
B -6 @ 4'
TABLE III
Swell Test Results
(150 psf surcharge)
Sample Condition
In -situ
90 percent remolded
Swell ($)
4.3
7.3
In -situ Dry Density and Moisture
Content
Sample
In -situ Dry
In -situ Moisture
Location
Density (pcf)
Content ($)
B -1 @ 15'
115.8
12.7
B -2 @ 5'
105.8
15.7
B -2 @ 10'
124.6
12.5
3 -2 @ 18'
130.7
10.2
B -3 @ 3'
108.1
9.3
B -3 @ 46'
118.7
11.3
B -4 @ 2'
95.9
25.2
B -4 @ 20'
102.8
22.1
B -5 @ 4'
104.2
23.0
B -6 @ 4'
111.1
13.5
B -6 @ 6.5'
110.9
15.1
B -6 @ 10'
106.1
20.3
Sample Location
B -4 @ 2'
B -6 @ 4'
TABLE III
Swell Test Results
(150 psf surcharge)
Sample Condition
In -situ
90 percent remolded
Swell ($)
4.3
7.3
SF -661
Page 6
TABLE IV
Expansion Index Test Results
(U.B.C. 29 -2)
Sample
Remolded Moisture Saturated Moisture Expansion
Location
Content ($) Content ($)
Index
*� B-2 @ 3'
-5' 12.0 30.8
81
B-3 @ 3'
11.8 29.0
81
B -4 @ 2'
14.2 39.2
122
B-5 @ 4'
10.2 21.9t
39
B-6 @ 4'
13.6 31.0
89
TABLE V
Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, Plasticity
Index.
Test Results (ASTM D 4318 -83)
Sample
Liquid Limit Plastic Limit
Plasticity
Location
($) ($)
Index
B-1 @ 9'
35 20
15
B -3 @ 3'
33 24
9
0-4 @ 2'
45 16
29
B-5 @ 4'
45 18
27
B -6 @ 4'
43 17
26
TABLE VI
Direct Shear Test Results
Sample
Sample Angle of Internal
Apparent
Location
Condition Friction (Q1)
Cohesion (psf)
B -1 @ 5'
Undisturbed 23
1200
B -2 @ 5'
Undisturbed 29
880
B -3 @ 3'
Undisturbed 34
580
SF -661 Page 7
Slope Stability:
Upper slopes at the property do not evidence instability.
Sandstone units beneath the site are massive, moderately -well
cemented units which typically perform well in slope conditions.
Local surface erosion of the Lipper sandstone is a result of
uncontrolled drainage runoff.
In contrast, claystone formational units at the property
evidence slope instability. Near- surface exposures are deeply
weathered to a weakened condition which extends to an indicated
depth of approximately 13 feet below the surface. The affected
rocks develop a "creep zone" which slowly moves downslope over
the less weathered rocks below. Creep affected slopes at the
property are indicated by non - uniform topography and unusually
moist areas which support a lush cover of green grass and wild
dill plants. The more prominent creep affected areas within on-
site slopes are indicated on Plate 1.
No indication of gross geologic instability was indicated
within hillside areas of the subject property.
Seismicity-
The site lies within a seismically active region. No unia_ue
seismic hazards are anticipated for this site; however,
groundshaking will likely periodically occur as a result of
earthquakes on local or distant active faults. No known active
faults are mapped through the site on the County of San Diego
Faults and Epicenters map.
SF -661
CONCLUSIONS
Page 8
Development of the subject property for the residential
purposes is feasible from a geologic and soils engineering
viewpoint. Conclusions presented below are pertinent
geotechnical points which are relevant to the development of
Parcel 1, and which will assist in planning for the future
development of Parcels 2 - 4.
Parcel 1:
1. Slope instability which would be likely to affect Parcel 1
is not indicated. Sandstone formational rocks which
underlie the upper hillside are sufficiently dense and will
adequately support residential structures. The rocks are
considered to have a low potential for expansion in
unweathered exposures.
2. Upper sandstone units at the site are sensitive to
uncontrolled surface runoff.
3. Topsoils which mantle the upper terrain at the site are
clayey soils which, in their present condition, are not
suitable for the support of structures. They are considered
detrimentally expansive, as are weathered sandstone
materials just below the soil section.
Parcels 2 - 4:
1. Claystone formational rocks, which underlie slope areas of
Parcels 2 - 4, are weak units which may perform poorly in
graded and natural slopes. Special consideration should be
given to grading in these materials.
2. Much of Parcels 2 - 4 are underlain by sandy to clayey
alluvial soils which are in a loose to soft condition.
These soils will require special treatment during
development which can be determined upon review of specific
development details and once site specific studies are made.
3. Earth deposits underlying much of Parcels 2 - 4 are
expansive.
9
SF -661
Page 9
4. Groundwater was encountered in lower elevations of Parcels
2 - 4.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The following recommendations have resulted from the
foregoing geotechnical study, and are intended to help result in
a safe and stable development.
Parcel 1
Grading:
On -site topsoils'should be removed to the underlying
formational rock in areas planned for development. Removal
depths of 2 -5 feet from existing levels may be anticipated.
Topsoils or other expansive materials should not be placed
as fill within three feet of finished grade elevation. If
expansive soils are placed within three feet of finished grade
elevation, varying levels of distress to structures located on
these soils may be anticipated.
Fill soils should be brought to near or wet of optimum
moisture levels and mechanically compacted in thin, horizontal
lifts to a minimum 90 percent of the laboratory maximum dry
density as determined by ASTM D 1557. All grading should be done
in accordance with the San Diego County grading ordinance.
Significant fill or cut slopes are not anticipated on Parcel
1 at this time. Upon availability of the proposed grading plans,
this office should be notified in order to evaluate the need to
SF -661 Page 10
conduct a site specific investigation. Compressibility
characteristics of the saturated soil materials may be determined
considering the extent of proposed cutting and filling during the
grading phase.
.`q
'.
Foundations:
Structural foundations resting on low- expansive formational
rock or properly compacted fill should be at least 18 inches
below the adjacent finished grade for one and two story
structures. The structural foundations should also be reinforced
with two No. 4 bars, one on the top and one in the bottom. The
foundation may be designed for allowable soil bearing pressure of
1500 psf. The allowable soil bearing pressure may be increased
by one third for wind and /or seismic loading.
If detrimentally expansive soils (soils having EI greater
than 20) are found to occur within three feet of finish pad
grade, revised foundation recommendations will be necessary.
Inspections•
Structural fill placed on Parcel 1 should be observed,
tested and approved by the project soil engineer.
Foundation excavations and all subgrade preparation should
be approved by the project soil engineer prior to pouring
concrete.
Ian Review:
Finalized foundation and grading plans and other pertinent
development details should be reviewed and approved by this
office.
SF -661
Parcels 2 - 4
Page 11
Grading:
Upon availability of proposed grading plans, this office
' should be notified in order to conduct site specific
investigations. For preliminary planning, the following
recommendations apply. Graded fill slopes should be constructed
at maximum 2:1 gradients. Cut slopes should be planned for 2:1
gradients, and supported by minimum equipment width stabilization
fills. Specific details and recommendations can be provided once
proposed grading plans are known.
Areas planned for improvement within Parcels 2 - 4 should be
regraded in order to densify the upper soils. Removal should
extend to a depth determined once grading details are available
or as determined by the project soil engineer based upon grading
inspections. This removal should apply to planned fill as well
as cut areas.
On -site soils are suitable for reuse as properly compacted
fill; however, detrimentally expansive soils should not be
utilized as fill within the upper three feet of finished grade
elevation. If expansive soils are placed within three feet of
finished grade elevation, varying levels of distress to
structures located on these soils may be anticipated
Fill soils should be brought to near optimum or wet of
Optimum moisture levels and mechanically compacted in thin,
horizontal lifts to a minimum 40 percent of the laboratory
maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 1557. All grading
i
i
SF -661
should be dor
ordinance or
i consideratior
Foundations:
Specific
of rough grac
Inspections:
Grading
inspected, t
This should
operations, a:
Specifi
be provided
subgrade con
Plan Review:
Finaliz
submitted to
We unde
near the eas
private road
SF -661
Page 13
However, the following preliminary recommendations should be
considered:
1. The bridge should be supported on
penetrate surficial soils and are
v the underlying bedrock materials.
11 associated in this regard will be
is finalized and plans are availal
deep foundations which
sufficiently founded into
Soils parameters
Provided once the location
ale.
2. During grading operations, the soils underlying the roadway
should be specifically tested in order to determine the
thickness of the pavement structural layers. Detailed
recommendations for the roadway construction will be
provided at that time.
This opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated.
If there are any questions, please do not hesitate to contact
this office.
Sincerely,
SANTA FE SOILS, INC.
-(42�
Richard K
Senior Staff Geologist
Seyed Shariat
Project Engineer
RKF /DM /SS /vc
Z"2��
Dennis Middleton CEG980
Chief Engineering Geologist
SF -661
plate 1
see map case
BORING LOG
Y
Description
O Ring Sample
Bap Sample
NATURAL SOIL:
Sandy clay, brown, moist and soft to stiff.
From 3', pale olive with white gypsum deposits through-
Y1
out. Remains soft to stiff.
5
O
2
FORMATIONAL ROCK:
Claystone /siltstone. Pale gray with local maroon color
patches. Fractured to popcorn texture, moderately hard,
slightly moist.
From 8', rock is increasingly tight, less fractured.
10-0
7
At 8.5', attitude on white gypsum seam: N70E /32N.
At 15', attitude on 11" gypsum seam: N60E /54N.
From 15', rock is increasingly coarse, grading to fine
grained •sandstone / siltstone. Remains tight with
irregular rusty brown zones.
15
10
0
Sandstone. Pale gray, medium to coarse grained with
20
clay matrix. Irregular zones of rusty brown color.
Very tight, moderately well cemented, gradational
contact above.
25
END OF BORING AT 25'
30
Project Lone Jack Property Job No. SF -661 plate No. 4
Type of Rip Bucket Date 12 -22 -86 DM /RF
By
Drill Hole No. II -2 Hale Din. 2 1 ffA�A
l 11080 Roselle Sfreec Sidle A..�Iqn lib+lY; r0971,
BORING LOG
a�
a
E
=
3:
Description
4
..
N
°
O nine Sample
O
m
❑ Bap Sample
TOPSOIL:
Fine sandy clay, red brown, moist, soft.
FORMATIONAL ROCK:
3
Sandstone, off white color. Fine grained, massive,
5
friable to moderately well cemented, slightly moist.
10
@ 14', attitude on parallel dark mineral seams: N45W /9NE.
15
@ 18', attitude on ," thick rust colored seam: N75W /11N.
20
At 21', apparent north dipping cross - bedding.
From 211, sandstone is locally brown colored.
25
Siltstone, brown color, locally sandy to clay ev. "Dirty'
appearance. Very tight, moderately hard. upper contact
abrupt marked by 1" thick rust colored zone.
Oriented: N10E /5E.
30
Proiecr Lone Jack Property ,lob No. SF -661 Plate No. 5
� Bucket Dale 12 -22 -86 M
DRF
Type of Rip /
BY
Drill Hole No. B -3 Hole Dia. 2 MAXTA
_—
I XW Aasene SYser. Stile A • San Damn rA orr
BORING LO
Proiecf Lone Jack Property Job No.SF -661 plate No. 6
Type of Rig Bucket Date 12-22-86 BY DM /RF
Drill Hole No. B -3 (cunt.) Hole Dia. 2' _7AA `A r/ r ffe,rZff
I Roseae street, Suite A • San Dego, CA 92121
Y
Description
.2
O fling Sample
Bag Sample
@ 25', Y' thick gypsum bed dips parallel to upper
contact.
@ 261, 1" thick gypsum bed with open structure oriented:
N25E /26W.
From 26', thin discontinuous cream colored seams, nearly
35
1 horizontal throughout. Randomly oriented gypsum seams
throughout.
At 301, 2' diameter well cemented limy nodule. Very
hard.
iii
Sandstone. Pale gray to off -white color. Fine to
40
medium grained. White gypsum streaks thrnughout.
1 Micaceous, massive, moderately well- cemented.
From 35', sandstone, locally coarse and gravelly.
Claystone. Green color, rust -brown fractured surfaces.
Locally sandy, white discontinuous gypsum streaks
throughout. Very tight, moderately hard, moist.
45
Upper contact is abrupt, nearly horizontal.
15 ( ?)
50
END BORING AT 53'
55
Proiecf Lone Jack Property Job No.SF -661 plate No. 6
Type of Rig Bucket Date 12-22-86 BY DM /RF
Drill Hole No. B -3 (cunt.) Hole Dia. 2' _7AA `A r/ r ffe,rZff
I Roseae street, Suite A • San Dego, CA 92121
BORING LOG
o
u
E
3:
Description
oLL
a
m
0 Ring Sample
Bap Sample
'TOPSOIL:
Q
2
Red - brown, moist, firm, sandy clay, roots and rootlets.
5
Sandy clay. Light brown with rust color (mottled).
Moist, firm.
10
FORMATIONAL ROCK:
Sandstone, silty. Tan color. Grades to off - white.
Massive. Friable.
@ 7', black clay seam. Six inches thick.
@ 15', one -half inch gypsum seam. Oriented: N20W/7r.
20—
4
From 181, sandstone is increasingly tight and well-
-
cemented.
@ 34', yellow -brown sandstone. Locally hard. Six
inches .thick.
@ 36', dark mineral seam indicates cross - bedding.
30
Claystone. Green color. Moderately fractured. Very
fI( tight, hard. Moist. Upper contact is nearly horizontal.
40
END BORING AT 46'
50
Proiecr Lone .Ta k Pronerty Job No.Sr' -(.I:1 Plate No. 7
Type of Rig Bucket Dale 12 -23 -86 BY P 1
Drill Hole No. B -4 Hole Dia. 2' fi-:AW77
71OW AoSelle SHee1. Suila A • San ni rA 09191
nY E ;
Y Y A 0
E
5
10
15
25
30
BORING LOG
Description
O Ring Sample
11 Bag Sample
ALLUVIUM:
Pine silty sand. Red -brown color. Moist, loose.
Sandy clay. Red - brown. Includes up to 408 volcanic
rock fragments up to 5" in diameter. Moist, loose.
Sand, fine grain, silty. Brown color. Includes up to
308 cobbles. Moist, loose. Rock slows drilling
progress. Unable to drive sample.
@ 811', boulder (1.8" diameter).
From 9', small amount of water seeping into boring.
BEDROCK:
Volcanic rock. Red color. Weathered in upper foot to
soil with fractured rock consistency, very firm to
hard below 11�1.
END BORING AT 13', DUCKET REFUSED
BY HARD ROCK IN BOTTOM
Project Lone Jack Property Job No. 97; -666 Plate No. +;
Type of Rig Bucket -AUQer Date
L���1'22-R223-86 B,fy� ,I DM
Drill Hole No. B -5 Hole Dia, 21 j • �' •�' � _�_�� ✓�Y.�_ %/JIG _
77090 RoSe#a Swear, SWO A - San 6epo, CA 92727
BORING LOG
4
/— — — — — — — — — — — — — — -
- . Sandy clay. Brown, tan to gray color (mottled).
10 `Includes small, white gypsum deposits. Moist, stiff.
3
/Clayey sand. Medium to coarse grain. Tan color,
i — locally gray. Moist, loose.
i
15— O —
Sandy clay to clayey sand. Light brown. Includes up
to 60% volcanic pebbles to cobbles. Wet, loose. Rock
i
slows drilling.
0 17', heavy water seeps. Caving of lower.hole walls.
20
25
0
Project Lone Ja
Type of Rig Bucket -Auger
END BORING AT 1711'. UNABLE TO DIG
DEEPER BECAUSE OF LARGE ROCK AND
CAVING OF WET SOIL
Drill Hole No. B -6 Hole Die. 2 t
Job No. 0E-661 Plate No. 9
Date 12 -23 -86 DM By
710.90 Roselle Street, SLY1e A • San Diego. CA 920 _
0
Description
p"
w
m
Ring Sample
El Bap sample
ALLUVIUM:
Sandv clay to clayey Eine sand. Brown color. includes
small, white gypsum deposits throughout. Moist and
soft in upper 21, stiff and firm below.
nr1
�J
4
From 41, soil includes patches of olive -brown soil.
5
Remains stiff to firm.
4
/— — — — — — — — — — — — — — -
- . Sandy clay. Brown, tan to gray color (mottled).
10 `Includes small, white gypsum deposits. Moist, stiff.
3
/Clayey sand. Medium to coarse grain. Tan color,
i — locally gray. Moist, loose.
i
15— O —
Sandy clay to clayey sand. Light brown. Includes up
to 60% volcanic pebbles to cobbles. Wet, loose. Rock
i
slows drilling.
0 17', heavy water seeps. Caving of lower.hole walls.
20
25
0
Project Lone Ja
Type of Rig Bucket -Auger
END BORING AT 1711'. UNABLE TO DIG
DEEPER BECAUSE OF LARGE ROCK AND
CAVING OF WET SOIL
Drill Hole No. B -6 Hole Die. 2 t
Job No. 0E-661 Plate No. 9
Date 12 -23 -86 DM By
710.90 Roselle Street, SLY1e A • San Diego. CA 920 _
I
Z
0
N
r
c
m
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION
C09BLES GRAVEL SAND
co•n]E nHE c0••s( wfoluw •i�f; SIL7 AND CLAY
I U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES
6 3 I i I 3. i. 4 10 20 40 60 140 200
100
M
O
90
SYMBOL
LL
PI
CLASSIFICATION
B- 1 9'
3 S
is
,
��
B -3 Q 3•
Q- -- - -.-
33
9
- - -_
B- 2'
b
29
m
10
A
80
20
v 70
m
30
m
z 60
i
40
�u
b
y 5 0
n
50
Z
i
� 40
_
(n
60
N
30
m
70
0
20
W
60
--I
Z]
10
�
90
C
-A
200 lu0
51 015
210 'I
L
012 01'I
111 1 21 �11I O I
SI
100
0.Oo6 0.0I2i0i t
0.111
O
.. 1 1 1 1 15101 1 lu1 1 1 1 I 11
11
1 I
.7i
C)
C
Fri
Ln
v
O>
m
VMAIN 51Lt5 IN MILLIMLItH5
BORING N0.
DE PTN
SYMBOL
LL
PI
CLASSIFICATION
B- 1 9'
3 S
is
,
��
B -3 Q 3•
Q- -- - -.-
33
9
- - -_
B- 2'
65
29
7 0
o z
N M
0 0
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION
COBBLES GRAVEL SAND
C0��3( !iH[ CO�n3E wEOW [Iq[ SILT AND CLAY -
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES
6' 3' li I" �:' %'
t 4 10 20 40 60
rn x
100 140 200
z
LL
PI
CLASSIFICATION
B -6 4'
43
26
J
13-5 @ 4'
- - - - --{j
45
27
0
0
9
90
f 1
m
-
10
a
BO
20
v 70
m
A
n
30 m
i 60
3
40 =
H
N 50
a
N
50M
Z
i
n
c1 40
=
(n
60ma
N
m
30
70
O
20
[n
eo
-A
x
10
U7
FF
Nloo
90
C
-1
200 100 50 20 10 5.0 2.0 1.0 0.5 0.2 O.1 005
I
00
0.01 0005 0,002
1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 I f i l l I I 1 1 I 11 1 I I I
I I
11 I I I I I I I �1
FA
n
C
C
m
� r
� D
m
UMAIN ,14.�l IN MILLIMLILK5
BORING N0.
DEPTH
SYMBOL
LL
PI
CLASSIFICATION
B -6 4'
43
26
J
13-5 @ 4'
- - - - --{j
45
27
f 1
L;UNSOLIDATION TEST CURVE
Normal Pressure to Kips /sq. (t.
0.1 0.3 0.5 0.7 1 0 2.0 4.0 8.0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
i
8
c
i
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
LONE JACK
Project Job No. 661 Plate No. 12
Date 1 -13 -87
Inundation Sample Location 0-0 H 1 4"
71080 ROSCtte Stroet, Suite A • San Diego, CA 92727
CONSOLIDATION TEST CURVE
Normal Pressure In Kips /sq. It.
0.1 0.3 0.5 0.7 1 0 2.0 4.0 8.0
-6
i
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
LONE JACK
Pro ecI
Date 1 -13 -87
Q InunCation Sample Location B -6 AT 4'
661 13
Job No. Plate No.
11030 RO$e11e Sire -1. Suite A • San
b1C. `
CA 921:1
CONSOLIDATION 'T'ES'T' CURVE
Normal Pressure In Kips /sq. (t.
0.1 0.3 0.5 0.7 1 0 2.0 4.0 8.0
.4
.3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
-TT
7
8
9
Pr o ecI
LONEJACK
Dale 1 -13 -87
.� Inundation Sample Location
B -6 AT 6.5'
661 14
Job No. Plate No.
11080 Roselle Slicer. Suite A • San Diego, CA 92121
CONSOLIDATION TEST CURVE
Normal Pressure In Kips /sq. It.
0.1 0.3 0.5 0.7 1 0 2.0 4.0 8.0
-1
Ilk
0
1
2
3
4
5
I
6
7
8
9
LONE JACK
Project
Date 1 -13 -87
0 1nuno3 lion Somwe Location B 76 AT 10'
Job No, 661 Plate No. i-
Imo^ '!��p• n.?��! �� a
11080 Rose le Street, Suite A • San Diego, CA 92121
== eotechnics
Incorporated
Principals:
Anthony F. Belfast
Michael P. Imbrigho
W. Lee Vanderhurst
March 26, 1998
Bruce D. Wiegand, Inc. Project No. 0007 - 003 -07
1060 Wiegand Street Document No. 8 -0193
Olivenhain, CA 92130
Attention: Mr. Bruce Wiegand
SUBJECT: UPDATED GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS
Copper Creek Estates, Parcels 1 and 2
Olivenhain, California
Reference: Santa Fe Soils, Inc. (1987). "Geologic and Soils Engineering Investigation, 25t Acre
Hillside Parcel, Lone Jack Road, Encinitas California ", SF -661, dated January 12,
1987.
Dear Mr. Wiegand:
This report provides updated geotechnical recommendations for the proposed residential
development at the subject site. The recommendations contained herein are based on the results of
our field explorations, laboratory testing, engineering evaluations, and professional experience in
the vicinity of the site. The recommendations are also based on our review of the referenced
geotechnical report.
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
The site was explored by excavating two test pits in the approximate center of each of the proposed
pads. The test pits were excavated to a maximum depth of 3'/2 feet below the existing grade. Bulk
samples were obtained from the test pits at selected intervals. Bulk samples were sealed in plastic
bags, labeled, and returned to the laboratory for testing. Logs describing the subsurface conditions
encountered are presented on the attached Figure 1. Subsurface conditions at locations between the
test pits may be substantially different from those at the specific locations explored.
9951 Business Park Ave., Ste. B San Diego California • 92131 s�
Phone(619)536 -1000 Fax (619) 536-8311
Bruce D. Wiegand, Inc.
March 26, 1998
LABORATORY TESTING
Project No. 0007- 003 -07
Document No. 8 -0193
Page No. 2
Selected representative samples of soils encountered were tested using test methods ofthe American
Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), or other generally accepted standards. A brief
description of the tests performed follows:
Classification: Soils were classified visually according to the Unified Soil Classification System.
Visual classification was supplemented by laboratory testing of selected samples and classification
in accordance with ASTM D2487 -93. The soil classifications are shown on the attached logs.
Particle Size Analysis: Tests to evaluate the particle size distribution of the soils were performed
in accordance with ASTM D422 -63. The results are shown on Figures 2 through 4.
Atterberg Limits: The Atterberg limits of selected samples were evaluated in accordance with
ASTM D4318 -93. The results are given in Figures 2 and 4.
Expansion Index: The expansion potential of the soils was characterized by using the test method
ASTM D 4829 -88. The results are presented on the attached Figure 5.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Based on the results of the test pits, the site is underlain by residual soils and terrace deposits.
Residual soils about 2' /z feet in thickness were encountered in both of our test pits. As observed in
the test pits, the residual soils consisted of reddish brown sandy fat clay. The clay was moist and
generally stiff. Based on the results of laboratory tests, these soils have a high to very high
expansion potential. In their present condition the residual soils are not considered suitable for
structural support.
Quaternary age terrace deposits were encountered in both test pits at depths of about 2% feet below
the existing grade. As observed in the boring, this material consisted of yellowish brown, fine
grained silty sand. The silty sand was moist and generally dense to very dense. The terrace deposits
are presumed to be non - expansive. The terrace deposits are considered suitable for support of fill
or improvements.
Geotechnics Incorporated
Bruce D. W iegand, Inc. Project No. 0007- 003 -07
March 26, 1998 Document No. 8 -0193
Paee No. 3
No seepage or groundwater was observed during our investigation to the maximum explored depth
of 3' /z feet below the existing grade. Localized seepage could occur in the future as a result of
rainfall, irrigation, or changes in site drainage.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The primary geotechnical concern at the site is the highly expansive clay that covers the subject
parcels. The following sections provide recommendations for site preparation and for design
of foundations, slabs, and retaining walls. Grading and earthwork should be conducted in
accordance with the Grading Ordinance of the City of Encinitas and Appendix Chapter 33 of the
Uniform Building Code.
Foundation excavations and site grading should be observed by Geotechnics Incorporated. During
grading, Geotechnics Incorporated should provide observation and testing services continuously.
Such observations are considered essential to identify field conditions that differ from those
anticipated by the geotechnical investigation, to adjust designs to actual field conditions, and to
determine that the grading is accomplished in general accordance with the recommendations of this
report. Recommendations presented in this report are contingent upon Geotechnics Incorporated
performing such services. Our personnel should perform sufficient testing of fill during grading to
support our professional opinion as to compliance with compaction recommendations.
Site Preparation
Site preparation includes removal of unsuitable materials and existing structures or other
improvements from areas where new improvements or new fills are planned. Unsuitable materials,
which include vegetation, trash, debris, rocks over 6 inches in greatest dimension, organic material,
contaminated soils, or other unsuitable materials, should be removed from the site and disposed of
at a legal landfill. Existing subsurface utilities that are to be abandoned should be removed, and the
trenches backfilled and compacted as described herein.
Within the proposed improvement areas, the upper approximately 2%z feet of residual soil should
be excavated to expose firm terrace deposits. The depth of removal should be based on field
observations during grading. The bottom of the excavation should be observed by Geotechnics.
Geotechnics Incorporated
Bruce D. Wiegand, Inc.
March 26, 1998
Project No. 0007- 003 -07
Document No. 8 -0193
Page No. 4
The removed soils should then be replaced as a uniformly compacted fill to the proposed subgrade
elevations. If formational materials are exposed at finished pad subgrade, these materials should
be over - excavated to provide a relatively uniform depth of fill beneath the proposed structure and
reduce the potential for differential settlement.
After making the recommended removals and prior to fill placement, the exposed ground surface
should be scarified to a depth of approximately 8 inches, brought to slightly above optimum
moisture content, and compacted to at least 90% of the maximum dry density obtainable by the
ASTM Designation D 1557 -91 method of compaction. Surfaces on which fill is to placed which are
steeper than 5:1 (horizontal to vertical) should be benched so that the fill placement occurs on
relatively level ground.
Fill Compaction
All fill and backfill should be placed in horizontal lifts not more than 12 inches in loose thickness
and compacted using equipment that is capable of producing a uniformly compacted fill. Fill and
backfill should be compacted at slightly over optimum moisture content. The minimum relative
compaction recommended for fill and backfill is 90% of maximum dry density based on ASTM
D 1557 -91. The material within the upper 12 inches of pavement subgrade and the upper 24 inches
of exterior flatwork subgrade should consist of relatively non - expansive material (expansion index
of 20 or less). The upper 12 inches of pavement subgrade should be compacted to at least 95 %.
Sufficient observation and testing should be performed by Geotechnics Incorporated so that an
opinion can be rendered as to the compaction achieved. Utility trench backfill should not contain
rocks over 6 inches in greatest dimension.
In order to reduce the potential for heave, the upper clay soils that are used as replacement fill
should be placed at a moisture content of about 4% above optimum moisture content and at a
minimum relative compaction of 87 %.
The on -site materials, less any unsuitable materials as described above, may be used in the required
fills. Imported fill sources, if needed, should be observed prior to hauling onto the site to determine
the suitability for use. Representative samples of imported materials and on -site soils should be
tested by the geotechnical consultant in order to evaluate their appropriate engineering properties
Geotechnics Incorporated
Bruce D. Wiegand, Inc.
March 26, 1998
for the planned use.
Project No. 0007- 003 -07
Document No. 8 -0193
Paee No. 5
During grading operations, soil types other than those evaluated in the geotechnical report may be
encountered by the contractor. The geotechnical consultant should be notified to evaluate the suit-
ability of these soils for use as fill and as finish grade soils.
Temporary Excavation
Temporary excavations in the on -site residual soils should be inclined no steeper than 1:1 for heights
up to 10 feet. Excavations up to 4 feet may be made vertically. Geotechnics should be notified if
deeper temporary excavations are required. Temporary excavations that encounter seepage or other
potentially adverse conditions should be evaluated by Geotechnics during grading. Remedial
measures may include shoring or reducing slope inclinations. All excavations should conform with
Cal -OSHA guidelines, and workmen should be protected from falling rocks in accordance with Cal-
OSHA requirements.
Surface Drainage
Foundation and slab performance depends greatly on how well the runoff waters drain from the site.
This is true both during construction and over the entire life of the structure. The ground surface
around structures should be graded so that water flows rapidly away from the structures without
ponding. The surface gradient needed to achieve this depends on the prevailing landscape. In
general, we recommend that pavement and lawn areas within 5 feet of buildings slope away at
gradients of at least 2 %. Densely vegetated areas should have minimum gradients of at least 5%
away from buildings in the first 5 feet. Densely vegetated areas are considered those in which the
planting type and spacing is such that the flow of water is impeded.
Foundation Recommendations
The following recommendations are considered generally consistent with methods typically used
in Southern California. Other alternatives may be available. The foundation recommendations
herein should not be considered to preclude more restrictive criteria of governing agencies or by the
structural engineer. The design of the foundation system should be performed by the project
Geotechnics Incorporated
Bruce D. Wiegand, Inc. Project No. 0007 - 003.07
March 26, 1998 Document No. 8 -0193
Page No. 6
structural engineer, incorporating the geotechnical parameters described below. Note that these
recommendations should be considered subject to modification based on the as- graded soil
conditions determined after fine grading operations are completed.
We recommend that a post- tensioned slab -on -grade system be used to mitigate the effects of soil
expansion. Based on the criteria of the Post - Tensioning Institute, we recommend the following
parameters:
Edge Moisture Variation, em
Differential Swell, ym
Differential Settlement
Allowable Bearing:
Lateral Resistance
Center Lift: 6 feet
Edge Lift: 3 feet
Center Lift: 3.2 inches
Edge Lift: 0.7 inches
0.5 inch
2,000 psf at slab subgrade
Lateral loads may be resisted by friction and by the passive resistance of the supporting soils. A
coefficient of friction of 0.3 may be used between the bottom of footings and recompacted soils.
The passive resistance of the soils may be assumed to be equal to the pressure developed by a fluid
with a density of 250 lbs /ft'. A one -third increase in the passive value may be used for wind or
seismic loads. The passive resistance of the materials may be combined with the frictional
resistance without reduction in evaluating the total lateral resistance.
Foundation Setbacks
The foundations for the proposed structures should be setback from any slope a minimum horizontal
distance of 8 feet. The setback should be measured horizontally from the outside bottom edge of
the footing to the slope face. The outer few feet of all slopes are susceptible to gradual down -slope
movements due to slope creep. This will affect hardscape such as concrete slabs.
Geotechnics Incorporated
Bruce D. Wiegand, Inc.
March 26, 1998
Project No. 0007 - 003 -07
Document No. 8 -0193
Page No. 7
Planters should be built so that water from them will not seep into the foundation, slab, or pavement
areas. Roof drainage should be channeled by pipe to storm drains, or discharge at least 5 feet from
building lines. Site irrigation should be limited to the minimum necessary to sustain landscaping
plants. Should excessive irrigation, surface water intrusion, water line breaks, or unusually high
rainfall occur, saturated zones or "perched" groundwater may develop in the underlying soils.
Moisture Protection For Slabs
Concrete slabs constructed on soil ultimately cause the moisture content to rise in the underlying
soil. This results from continued capillary rise and the termination of normal evapotranspiration.
Because normal concrete is permeable, the moisture will eventually penetrate the slab. Excessive
moisture may cause mildewed carpets, lifting or discoloration of floor tile, or similar problems. The
amount of moisture transmitted through the slab can be controlled by the use of various moisture
barriers.
To decrease the likelihood of problems related to damp slabs, suitable moisture protection measures
should be used where moisture sensitive floor coverings or other factors warrant. The most
commonly used moisture protection in Southern California consists of a minimum of 2 inches of
clean coarse sand covered by 'visqueen' plastic sheeting. In addition, 2 inches of sand are placed
over the plastic to decrease concrete curing problems associated with placing concrete directly on
an impermeable membrane. It has been our experience that such systems will transmit from
approximately 6 to 12 pounds of moisture per 1000 square feet per day. This may be excessive for
some applications. If more protection is desired, we should be contacted.
Exterior Slabs
As previously recommended, exterior slabs and sidewalks should be underlain by at least 24 inches
of compacted fill having an expansion index of 20 or less. Reinforcement and crack control joints
should be used to reduce the effects resulting from concrete shrinkage and/or subgrade heaving.
Exterior slabs and sidewalks should have a minimum thickness of 4 inches, and should be reinforced
Nwith 6 -inch x 6 -inch W2.9 x W2.9 welded wire fabric placed mid - height. Crack control joints
should be used on all exterior slabs with a minimum 1 -inch groove depth. Crack control joints
should be placed on a maximum spacing of 5 feet for sidewalks and 8 feet each way for slabs.
Geotechnies Incorporated
Bruce D. Wiegand, Inc.
March 26, 1998
Earth Retaining Structures
Project No. 0007- 003 -07
Document No. 8 -0193
Page No 8
For cantilever retaining walls, where the backfill is level or nearly level, an active earth pressure
approximated by an equivalent fluid pressure of 35 lbs /ft' may be used. The active pressure should
be used for walls free to yield at the top at least 0.2 percent of the wall height. Where the earth
slopes upwards at 2:1, an equivalent fluid pressure of 50 lbs/ft' may be used. For walls restrained
so that such movement is not permitted, an equivalent fluid pressure of 55 lbs/ft' should be used,
based on at -rest soil conditions with level backfill. The above pressures do not consider any
surcharge loads or hydrostatic pressures. If these are applicable, they will increase the lateral
pressures on the wall, and we should be contacted for additional recommendations. Walls should
contain an adequate subdrain to reduce hydrostatic forces. It has been our experience that retaining
walls frequently develop high moisture within the backfill due to the heavy irrigation that commonly
occurs in residential developments. This may lead to efflorescence on the wall face or spalling of
stucco finishes. To decrease the effects resulting from such problems, it is suggested that walls be
moisture - proofed on the back side in addition to having a backdrain.
Backfilling retaining walls with expansive soils can increase lateral pressures well beyond the active
or at -rest pressures indicated above. We recommend that retaining walls be backfilled with soil
having an expansion index of 20 or less. The backfill area should include the zone defined by a 1:1
sloping plane, back from the base of the wall. Retaining wall backfill should be compacted to at
least 90% (ASTM D1557 -91). Backfill should not be placed until walls have achieved adequate
structural strength. Heavy compaction equipment which could cause distress to walls should not
be used.
The information in this report represents professional opinions that have been developed using the
degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable geotechnical
consultants practicing in this or similar localities. No other warranty, express or implied, is made
as to the conclusions and professional opinions included in this report.
Geotechnics Incorporated
Bruce D. Wiegand, Inc.
March 26, 1998
Project No. 0007 - 003 -07
Document No. 8 -0193
Paee No. 9
We appreciate this opportunity to be of professional service. Please do not hesitate to call us if you
should have any questions or require additional information.
GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED
% /31 <2 �
Thomas B. Canady, P.E. 50057
Senior Engineer
Distribution: (4) Addressee
An` thon F. Belfast P.E. 40333
Y >
Principal Engineer
Attachments: Figure 1, Logs of Exploration Test Pits
Figures 2 through 4, Soil Classification
Figure 5, Expansion Index Test Results
%0 ESSfpy�
q`�O �
yc
W No. 5oo57
rM
�
Geotechnics Incorporated
LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO. 1
Logged by: TBC Date: 3112198
Equipment Used: Dozer Elevation: EG
v
E
E
t
y
DESCRIPTION
LAB TESTS
d
m
x
O
J
m
RESIDUAL SOIL: Sandy fat clay , reddish rown, moist, sh
1
Sieve/Hydrometer
Atterberg Limits
2
Expansion Index
3
TERRAQE DEPOSITS ty san ( ), ye owis rown, ine grained, moist, dense o very ense.
Sieve/Hydrometer
4
Total depth: 31A feet
5
No groundwater observed
6
7
8
9
10
LOG OF EXPLORATION TEST PIT NO. 2
Logged by: TBC Date: 3/12198
Equipment Used: Dozer Elevation: EG
a
E`L. E
a
N
DESCRIPTION
LAB TESTS
d
x
o
s
M
RESIDUAL OIL: Sandy fat clay , reddish rown, moist, stiff.
Sieve /Hydrometer
1
Atterberg Limits
Expansion Index
2
3
Silty sand ), yellowish rown, tine grained, moist, dense to very dense.
4
Total depth: 3 feet
No groundwater observed
5
6
7
8
9
10
PROJECT NO. 0007- 003 -07 GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED FIGURE 1
i i i i i !• � � � �I � � �
1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111 ■r.■�Iilli■ \ ■111■ ■ ■■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■ ■■
. , 1111 ■ ■ ■ ■■ 1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■� ■1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■ ■■
1111 ■ ■ ■ ■■ 1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■ ■L71111 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■ ■■
.. 1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■ ■� 1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■ ■■
' 1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■■ \1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■ ■■
1111 ■ ■ ■ ■■ 1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111 ■ ■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■11111■■■■
1111 ■ ■ ■ ■■ 1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■1►�1 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■ ■■
1111 ■ ■ ■ ■■ 1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■II�C�� ■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■ ■■
' 1111 ■ ■ ■ ■■ 1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111 ■.■7��1111 ■ ■ ■ ■■
111 ■ ■ ■ ■■ 1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■ ■�...I��I� ■■
111100■■■ 1111 ■..■ ■1111.... ■1111 ■... ■IIIIr. ■r
1111■■■■■ 1111■... ■1111 ■..■ ■1111.... ■1111....■
111.... ■■ 111. ■..■ ■111....■ ■1111...■ ■111....■
. , 1111 ■.. ■■ 111. ■..■ ■111. ■..■ ■1111...■ ■1111...■
111.....■ 1111...■ ■1111...■ ■1111...■ ■111.... ■■
1111 ■.. ■■ 1111 ■... ■1111 ■..■ ■1111 ■..■ ■1111... ■■
1111....■ 1111 ■..■ ■1111 ■..■ ■1111...■ ■111.....■
1111 ■...■ 1111 ■. ■. ■1111.... ■1111.... ■1111....■
1111 ■...■ 1111 ■... ■1111.... ■1111 ■... ■1111.. ■.■
1111■.. ■■ 1111■■■■ ■1111■■■■ ■1111■■■■ ■1111■■■■■
COARSE
FINE
COARSE
MEDIUM
FINE
SILT AND CLAY
GRAVEL
SAND
SAMPLE
EXPLORATION NUMBER: TP -1
SAMPLE LOCATION: IM.,
ill ]ED SOIL CLASSIFICATION: CH
-.SCRIPTION: SANDY FAT CLAY
ATTERBERG LIMITS
LIQUID LIMIT: 69
PLASTIC LIMIT: 20
PLASTICITY INDEX: 49
-4911110bil ,G e o t e c h n i c S SOIL CLASSIFICATION Project No. 0007 - 003 -07
Incorporated Copper Creek Estates, Parcels 1 and 2 Document No. 8 -0193
Bruce D. Wlegand, Inc. FIGURE 2
" 1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■il■+Illli ■ii ■1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■ ■■
., 1111 ■ ■ ■ ■■ 1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■� ■1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■■
1111 ■ ■ ■ ■■ 1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■■ \1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■ ■■
111 ■...■ 1111 ■... ■1111 ■ ■ ■ ■� \1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111....■
1111.... ■1111 ■... ■1111.. ■.� ■1111 ■. ■. ■1111 ■...■
, 1111 ■ ■ ■ ■■ 1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■11111 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■IIIi ■ ■ ■ ■■
- ' 1111 ■ ■ ■ ■■ 1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■ ■�IIIII ■ ■ ■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■ ■■
, 1111....■ 1111■ ■ ■. ■1111.. ■. ■1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111 ■.. ■■
' 1111....■ 1111 ■... ■111. ■..■ ■1111 ■..■ ■111.... ■■
111...■ ■1111 ■ ■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■11:1 ■..■ ■111.... ■■
1111■■■■■ 1111■■ ■■ ■1111■■■■ ■111�.�!'I■■1111■■■■■
1111■■■■■ 1111■■ ■■ ■1111■■ ■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■�'l1111 ■ ■ ■ ■■
' 1111■■■■■ 1111■■■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■■■1�:�. ■� ■■
' iiiii■■■■ �iiii ■i ■ ■�iiii ■ ■ ■ ■�iiii ■ ■ ■�■�iiii ■■
1111■■ ■■■ 1111■ ■■■■1111■■■■ ■1111■■ ■■ ■1111■■■■■
SAMPLE UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION: SM ATTERBERG LIMITS
EXPLORATION NUMBER: TP -1 LIQUID LIMIT:
SAMPLE LOCATION: 3%, DESCRIPTION: SILTY SAND PLASTIC LIMIT:
PLASTICITY INDEX:
cT e o t e c h n i c s SOIL CLASSIFICATION Project No. 0007 - 003 -07
Incorporated Copper Creek Estates, Parcels 1 and 2 Document No. 8 -0193
Bruce D. Wiegand, Inc. FIGURE 3
COARSE
FINE
COARSE
MEDIUM
FINE
SILT AND CLAY
GRAVEL
SAND
SAMPLE UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION: SM ATTERBERG LIMITS
EXPLORATION NUMBER: TP -1 LIQUID LIMIT:
SAMPLE LOCATION: 3%, DESCRIPTION: SILTY SAND PLASTIC LIMIT:
PLASTICITY INDEX:
cT e o t e c h n i c s SOIL CLASSIFICATION Project No. 0007 - 003 -07
Incorporated Copper Creek Estates, Parcels 1 and 2 Document No. 8 -0193
Bruce D. Wiegand, Inc. FIGURE 3
1111 ■ ■ ■ ■■ 1111 ■ ■ ■r ■r111�i�1111■■ ■■ ■1111■■■■■
11 loss ■■ ■1111■■■■ ■111 ■ ■ MEMO! ■ ■1111■■■■■
1111■ ■ ■■ ■1111 MOM ■1111■ MINE ■ ■11INN ■■■■
1111■■ ■■ ■1111■■■■ 111■■■■ ■11 NINON
■■
1111 ■ ■ ■ ■■ 1111■■■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■ Ill 1INN
■■
1111 ■ OEM ■ Ill 1 ■ ■ Son ■1111 ■ mom ■OEM ■■ ■ DENNIS!
■■
111■ ■ ■ ■ ■■ 1111■■■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■11,1 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111■■■■
1111 ■ ■ ■ ■■ 1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■11��� ■ ■■ ■1111■■■■■
1111■■ ■ ■■ 1111■■ ■ ■■■■■
Hills ■ ■■ 1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111■■■' INN
■ ■■ 1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■ ■iu_n__A
1111■ ■ 1111■■■■ ■■ MEN
r ■
1111■■ ■ ■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■1111
1111■■ ■ ■■ 1111■■■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■■ ■1111 ■ ■ ■ ■■
1Ilion .■ ■1111. OEM ■111 ■t■■ ■1111...■ ■111.■.■■■
1lion .. ■1111■.■■ ■1 11 ■.0 I
Ill 1mom .■ 1111■■ ■. ■1111 ■ ■ ISM ■1111. ■ ■. ■1111■■■.■
Ill 1mom .■ 1111■■■. ■1111■ ■ NINE ■1111Ism . ■1111 ■1111■■
111... ■.■ 1111...■ ■1111IN= ■1Ilion .■ ■1111...INN
■
HIM ■ ■ ■���m: ■ ■ ■:C....: ■ ■ ■C�1�: ■ ■ ■ ■C
COARSE FINE COARSE MEDIUM FINE
GRAVEL SAND SILT AND CLAY
ATTERBERG LIMITS
LIQUID LIMIT: 63
PLASTIC LIMIT: 20
PLASTICITY INDEX: 43
SAMPLE
EXPLORATION NUMBER: TP -2
SAMPLE LOCATION: 1'
IIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION: CH
:SCRIPTION: SANDY FAT CLAY
,A111hh-- G e o t e c hn i c s SOIL CLASSIFICATION Project No. 0007 - 003 -07
Incorporated Copper Creek Estates, Parcels 1 and 2 Document No. B -0193
Bruce D. Wiegand, Inc. FIGURE 4
EXPANSION INDEX TEST RESULTS
(ASTM D4829 -88)
SAMPLE
EXPANSION
INDEX
EXPANSION
POTENTIAL
TP -1 @ 1% ft.
109
High
TP -2 @ 1 ft.
142
Very high
CLASSIFICATION OF POTENTIALLY EXPANSIVE SOIL
EXPANSION INDEX
POTENTIAL EXPANSION
0 -20
Very low
21 -50
Low
51 -90
Medium
91 -130
High
Above 130
Very high
Expansion Index Test Results
� G e o t e c h n 1 c s Project No. 0007 - 003 -07
Copper Creek Estates Document No. 8 -0193
_Incorporated Bruce D. Wiegand, Inc. Figure 5
�Geotechnics
�
Incorporated
April 6, 1998
Bruce D. Wiegand, Inc.
1060 Wiegand Street 1
Olivenhain, CA 92130
SUBJECT: REVISED PAVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
Copper Creek Estates, Wiegand Street
Olivenhain, California
Principals:
Anthony F. Behest
Michael P. Imbriglio
W. l.ee Vanderhurst
Project No. 0007 - 003 -07
Document No. 8 -0256
Reference: Geotechnics Inc. (1997). "Updated Geotechnical Recommendations, Copper Creek
Estates, Parcels 1 and 2, Olivenhain, California ", Project No. 0007 - 003 -07,
Document No. 8 -0193, dated March 26.
Gentlemen:
We have completed laboratory R -Value testing ofa representative sample of pavement subgrade soil
at the subject site. Tests were conducted in accordance with ASTM test method D2844, and
indicated that an R -Value of 8 would be appropriate for pavement design. However, based on our
previous experience with similar materials, and assuming some variability in subgrade properties
across the site, we recommend that pavements be designed assuming an R -value of 5, which
represents the worse -case subgrade condition.
Pavement design was conducted using the Caltrans design method. A traffic index of 4.5 was used,
since this value is typically assumed to be representative of the traffic on a residential cul -de -sac.
Using the assumed traffic index, and an R -Value of 5 for the subgrade as discussed above, the
following pavement section is recommended in accordance with the Caltrans design method.
TRAFFIC
INDEX
ASPHALT
CONCRETE
AGGREGATE
BASE
4.5
3 inches
8 inches
9951 Business Park Ave., Ste. B San Diego California • 92131
Phone (619) 536.1000 Fax (619) 536 -9311
A
.4
Bruce D. Wiegand,Inc.
April 6, 1998
Project No. 0007 - 003-07
Document No. B -0256
Pape 2
Although not required by the Caltrans design method, approximately 12 inches of select material has
been placed as a pavement subbase at the site. This is primarily a silty fine to medium grained sand
likely to have an R -value in the range of about 11 to 40. This should result in the recommended
design section being conservative. In addition, we understand that after construction is complete,
an additional one inch of asphalt concrete will be placed to finish the street, resulting in a total of 4
inches of asphalt concrete. This will even further enhance the conservative nature of the constructed
section.
We appreciate this opportunity to be of continued service. Please feel free to contact the office with
any questions or comments.
GEOTECHNICSINCORPORATED
QPoFES.3/oN
Principal Engineer t, P.E. 40333 h�tF��pN� F BFzy
E C040333
AFB /maf
r�
Distribution: (4) Addressee s� CIVIt w
f
OF CA00
Geotechnics Incorporated
Addhib. Geotechnics
Incorporated
January 7, 1999
Mr. Bruce Wiegand
Bruce D. Wiegand, Inc.
1060 Wiegand Street
Olivenhain, CA 92024
Principals:
Anthony F. Belfast
Michael P. Imbriglio
W. Lee Vanderhurst
Project No. 0007 - 003 -07
Document No. 8 -1006
SUBJECT: UPDATED GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS
Copper Creek J.V. Phase II
1068 Wiegand Street (Lot 3)
Olivenhain, California
Reference: Geotechnics Inc. (1998). "Updated Geotechnical Recommendations, Copper Creek
Estates, Parcels I and 2, Olivenhain, California," Project No. 0007 - 003 -07,
Document No. 8 -0193, March 26.
Santa Fe Soils, Inc. (1987). "Geologic and Soils Engineering Investigation, 25t Acre
Hillside Parcel, Lone Jack Road, Encinitas California ", SF -661, January 12.
Dear Mr. Wiegand:
As requested, this report provides updated geotechnical recommendations for the subject residential
development. The recommendations contained herein are based on site observations and on the
results of our prior investigation for adjacent lots 1 and 2 (Geotechnics, 1998).
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Based on the results of our observations during grading and our prior explorations, the site is
underlain by terrace deposits and minor amounts of surficial residual soils. Quaternary age terrace
deposits consisted of yellowish brown, fine grained, dense to very dense silty sand. The terrace
deposits are presumed to have a very low expansion potential and are considered suitable for support
of fill or improvements. The residual soils consisted of reddish brown sandy fat clay. Based on the
results of laboratory tests, the clay has a high to very high expansion potential. No groundwater
seepage was observed at the site. Localized seepage could occur in the future as a result of rainfall,
irrigation, or changes in site drainage.
9951 Business Park Ave., Ste. B San Diego California • 92131
Phone (619) 536 -1000 Fax (619) 536 -8311
BRUCE D. WIEGAND, INC. PROJECT NO. 0007- 003 -07
JANUARY 7, 1999 DOCUMENT NO. 8.1006
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The primary geotechnical concern at the site is the highly expansive clay that covers the subject site.
The following sections provide recommendations for site preparation and for design of foundations,
slabs, and retaining walls. Grading and earthwork should be conducted in accordance with the
Grading Ordinance of the City of Encinitas and Appendix Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building
Code.
Excavation and Grading Observation
Foundation excavations and site grading should be observed by Geotechnics Incorporated.
During grading, Geotechnics Incorporated should provide observation and testing services
continuously. Such observations are considered essential to identify field conditions that
differ from those anticipated by the geotechnical investigation, to adjust designs to actual
field conditions, and to determine that the grading is accomplished in general accordance
with the recommendations of this report. Recommendations presented in this report are
contingent upon Geotechnics Incorporated performing such services. Our personnel should
perform sufficient testing of fill during grading to support our professional opinion as to
compliance with compaction recommendations.
Site Preparation
Site preparation includes removal of unsuitable materials and existing structures or other
improvements from areas where new improvements or new fills are planned. Unsuitable
materials, which include vegetation, trash, debris, rocks over 6 inches in greatest dimension,
organic material, contaminated soils, or other unsuitable materials, should be removed from
the site and disposed of at a legal landfill. Existing subsurface utilities that are to be
abandoned should be removed, and the trenches backfJlled and compacted as described
herein.
Within the proposed improvement areas, the upper approximately 2%z feet of residual soil
should be excavated to expose firm terrace deposits. The depth of removal should be based
on field observations during grading. The bottom of the excavation should be observed by
Geotechnics Incorporated
BRUCE D. WIEGAND, INC.
JANUARY 7, 1999
PROJECT NO. 0007. 003 -07
DOCUMENT NO. 8 -1006
PAGE
Geotechnics. The removed soils should then be replaced as a uniformly compacted fill to
the proposed subgrade elevations. If formational materials are exposed at finished pad
subgrade, these materials should be over - excavated to provide a relatively uniform depth of
fill beneath the proposed structure and reduce the potential for differential settlement.
After making the recommended removals and prior to fill placement, the exposed ground
surface should be scarified to a depth of approximately 8 inches, brought to slightly above
optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 90% of the maximum dry density
obtainable by the ASTM Designation D 1557 -91 method of compaction. Surfaces on which
fill is to placed which are steeper than 5:1 (horizontal to vertical) should be benched so that
the fill placement occurs on relatively level ground.
Fill Compaction
All fill and backfill should be placed in horizontal lifts not more than 12 inches in loose
thickness and compacted using equipment that is capable of producing a uniformly
compacted fill. Fill and backfill should be compacted at slightly over optimum moisture
content. The minimum relative compaction recommended for fill and backfill is 90% of
maximum dry density based on ASTM D1557 -91. The material within the upper 12 inches
of pavement subgrade and the upper 24 inches of exterior flatwork subgrade should consist
of relatively non - expansive material (expansion index of 20 or less). The upper 12 inches
of pavement subgrade should be compacted to at least 95 %. Sufficient observation and
testing should be performed by Geotechnics Incorporated so that an opinion can be rendered
as to the compaction achieved. Utility trench backfill should not contain rocks over 6 inches
in greatest dimension.
In order to reduce the potential for heave, the upper clay soils that are used as replacement
fill should be placed at a moisture content of about 4% above optimum moisture content and
at a minimum relative compaction of 87 %.
The on -site materials, less any unsuitable materials as described above, may be used in the
required fills. Imported fill sources, if needed, should be observed prior to hauling onto the
site to determine the suitability for use. Representative samples of imported materials and
Geotechnics Incorporated
BRUCE D. W IEGAND, INC.
JANUARY 7, 1999
PROJECT NO. 0007 - 003 -07
DOCUMENT NO. 8 -1006
PAGE
on -site soils should be tested by the geotechnical consultant in order to evaluate their
appropriate engineering properties for the planned use.
During grading operations, soil types other than those evaluated in the geotechnical report
may be encountered by the contractor. The geotechnical consultant should be notified to
evaluate the suitability of these soils for use as fill and as finish grade soils.
Temporary Excavation
Temporary excavations in the on -site residual soils should be inclined no steeper than 1:1
for heights up to 10 feet. Excavations up to 4 feet may be made vertically. Geotechnics
should be notified if deeper temporary excavations are required. Temporary excavations
that encounter seepage or other potentially adverse conditions should be evaluated by
Geotechnics during grading. Remedial measures may include shoring or reducing slope
inclinations. All excavations should conform with Cal -OSHA guidelines, and workmen
should be protected from falling rocks in accordance with Cal-OSHA requirements.
Surface Drainage
Foundation and slab performance depends greatly on how well the runoff waters drain from
the site. This is true both during construction and over the entire life of the structure. The
ground surface around structures should be graded so that water flows rapidly away from
the structures without ponding. The surface gradient needed to achieve this depends on the
prevailing landscape. In general, we recommend that pavement and lawn areas within 5 feet
of buildings slope away at gradients of at least 2 %. Densely vegetated areas should have
minimum gradients of at least 5% away from buildings in the first 5 feet. Densely vegetated
areas are considered those in which the planting type and spacing is such that the flow of
water is impeded.
Planters should be built so that water from them will not seep into the foundation, slab, or
pavement areas. Roof drainage should be channeled by pipe to storm drains, or discharge
at least 5 feet from building lines. Site irrigation should be limited to the minimum
necessary to sustain landscaping plants. Should excessive irrigation, surface water intrusion,
Geotechnics Incorporated
BRUCE D. WIEGAND, INC.
JANUARY 7, 1999
PROJECT NO. 0007 - 003 -07
DOCUMENT NO. 8 -1006
PAOF 5
water line breaks, or unusually high rainfall occur, saturated zones or "perched" groundwater
may develop in the underlying soils.
Foundation Recommendations
The following recommendations are considered generally consistent with methods typically
used in Southern California. Other alternatives may be available. The foundation
recommendations herein should not be considered to preclude more restrictive criteria of
governing agencies or by the structural engineer. The design of the foundation system
should be performed by the project structural engineer, incorporating the geotechnical
parameters described below. Note that these recommendations should be considered subject
to modification based on the as- graded soil conditions determined after fine grading
operations are completed.
We recommend that a post- tensioned slab -on -grade system be used to mitigate the effects
of soil expansion. Based on the criteria of the Post - Tensioning Institute, we recommend the
following parameters:
Edge Moisture Variation, e,
Differential Swell, ym
Differential Settlement:
Allowable Bearing
Lateral Resistance
Center Lift: 6 feet
Edge Lift: 3 feet
Center Lift: 3.2 inches
Edge Lift: 0.7 inches
0.5 inch
2,000 psf at slab subgrade
Lateral loads may be resisted by friction and by the passive resistance of the supporting
soils. A coefficient of friction of 0.3 may be used between the bottom of footings and
recompacted soils. The passive resistance of the soils may be assumed to be equal to the
Geotechnics Incorporated
BRUCE D. WIEGAND, INC.
JANUARY 7. 1999
PROJECT NO. 0007-003-07
DOCUMENT NO. 8 -1006
PAGE 6
pressure developed by a fluid with a density of 250 lbs /fi'. A one -third increase in the
passive value may be used for wind or seismic loads. The passive resistance of the materials
may be combined with the frictional resistance without reduction in evaluating the total
lateral resistance.
Foundation Setbacks
The foundations for the proposed structures should be setback from any slope a minimum
horizontal distance of 8 feet. The setback should be measured horizontally from the outside
bottom edge of the footing to the slope face. The setback may be increased by deepening
footings. The outer few feet of all slopes are susceptible to gradual down -slope movements
due to slope creep. This will affect hardscape such as concrete slabs.
Moisture Protection For Slabs
Concrete slabs constructed on soil ultimately cause the moisture content to rise in the
underlying soil. This results from continued capillary rise and the termination of normal
evapotranspiration. Because normal concrete is permeable, the moisture will eventually
penetrate the slab. Excessive moisture may cause mildewed carpets, lifting or discoloration
of floor tile, or similar problems. The amount of moisture transmitted through the slab can
be controlled by the use of various moisture barriers.
To decrease the likelihood of problems related to damp slabs, suitable moisture protection
measures should be used where moisture sensitive floor coverings or other factors warrant.
The most commonly used moisture protection in Southern California consists of a minimum
of 2 inches of clean coarse sand covered by 'visqueen' plastic sheeting. In addition, 2 inches
of sand are placed over the plastic to decrease concrete curing problems associated with
placing concrete directly on an impermeable membrane. It has been our experience that
such systems will transmit from approximately 6 to 12 pounds of moisture per 1000 square
feet per day. This may be excessive for some applications. If more protection is desired,
we should be contacted.
Geotechnics Incorporated
BRUCE D. WIEGAND, INC.
JANUARY 7, 1999
Exterior Slabs
PROJECT NO. 0007-003-07
DOCUMENT NO. 8-1006
PAGE
As previously recommended, exterior slabs and sidewalks should be underlain by at least 24
inches of compacted fill having an expansion index of 20 or less. Reinforcement and crack
control joints should be used to reduce the effects resulting from concrete shrinkage and/or
subgrade heaving. Exterior slabs and sidewalks should have a minimum thickness of 4
inches, and should be reinforced with 6 -inch x 6 -inch W2.9 x W2.9 welded wire fabric
placed mid - height. Crack control joints should be used on all exterior slabs with a minimum
I -inch groove depth. Crack control joints should be placed on a maximum spacing of 5 feet
for sidewalks and 8 feet each way for slabs.
Earth Retaining Structures
For cantilever retaining walls, where the backfill is level or nearly level, an active earth
pressure approximated by an equivalent fluid pressure of 35 lbs/ft may be used. The active
pressure should be used for walls free to yield at the top at least 0.2 percent of the wall
height. Where the earth slopes upwards at 2:1, an equivalent fluid pressure of 50 lbs/ft' may
be used. For walls restrained so that such movement is not permitted, an equivalent fluid
pressure of 55 Ibs /ft' should be used, based on at -rest soil conditions with level backfill. The
above pressures do not consider any surcharge loads or hydrostatic pressures. If these are
applicable, they will increase the lateral pressures on the wall, and we should be contacted
for additional recommendations. Walls should contain an adequate subdrain to reduce
hydrostatic forces. Wall drain details are given in the attached Figure 1.
Backfilling retaining walls with expansive soils can increase lateral pressures well beyond
the active or at -rest pressures indicated above. We recommend that retaining walls be
backfilled with soil having an expansion index of 20 or less. The backfill area should
include the zone defined by a 1:1 sloping plane, back from the base of the wall. Retaining
wall backfill should be compacted to at least 90% (ASTM D1557 -91). Backfill should not
be placed until walls have achieved adequate structural strength. Heavy compaction equip-
ment which could cause distress to walls should not be used.
Geotechnics Incorporated
BRUCE D. WIEGAND, INC.
JANUARY 7, 1999
PROJECT NO. 0007-003 -07
DOCUMENT NO. 8 -1006
PAGE 8
The information in this report represents professional opinions that have been developed using the
degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable geotechnical
consultants practicing in this or similar localities. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made
as to the conclusions and professional opinions included in this report.
We appreciate this opportunity to be of professional service. Please do not hesitate to call us if you
should have any questions or require additional information.
GEOTECHNICS INCORPORATED
�- a
Thomas B. Canady, P.E. 50057
Senior Engineer
Distribution: (4) Addressee
Attachments: Figure 1, Wall Drain Details
E2 r No. 50057 .{ a
°C 69.611 01
C-Zy F. Be fast, P.E. 40333
Principal Engineer
Geotechnics Incorporated
ROCK AND FABRIC
ALTERNATIVE
DAMP - PROOFING OR WATER-
PROOFING AS REQUIRED
GEOCOMPOSITE
PANEL DRAIN
ill.••'
s = n
1 CU. FT. PER LINEAL FOOT OF
MINUS 3/4 -INCH CRUSHED
ROCK ENVELOPED IN \
FILTER FABRIC.
4 -INCH DIAM. PVC
PERFORATED PIPE
DAMP- PROOFING OR WATER-
PROOFING, AS REQUIRED
COMPACTED
•BACKF I LL .
MINUS 3/4 -INCH CRUSHED ROCK
ENVELOPED IN FILTER FABRIC \
(MIFAFI 140NL, SUPAC 4NP, OR
APPROVED SIMILAR)
4 -INCH DIAM. PVC
PERFORATED PIPE
COMPACTED
BACKF)LL' '.
NOTES
�.R
PANEL DRAIN
ALTERNATIVE
12 -INCH
MINIMUM
1) Perforated pipe should outlet through a solid pipe to a free gravity outfall. Perforated pipe and outlet
pipe should have a fall of at least 1%.
2) As an alternative to the perforated pipe and outlet, weep holes may be included in the bottom of the
wall. Weepholes should be at least 2 inches in diameter, and be spaced no greater than 8 feet.
3) Filter fabric should consist of Mirafi 140N, Supac 5NP, Amoco 4599, or similar approved fabric.
Filter fabric should be overlapped at least 6- inches.
4) Geocomposite panel drain should consist of Miradrain 6000, J -DRain 400, Supac DS -15, or
approved similar product.
5) Drain installation should be observed by the gectechnical consultant prior to backfilling.
G e O t e C l] n I C 5 Project No. 0007 - 003 -07
A Document No. 8 -1006
WALL DRAIN DETAILS
Incorporated FIGURE 1
AM6. Geotechnics
� Incorporated
February 4, 1999
Mr. Bruce Wiegand
Bruce D. Wiegand, Inc.
1060 Wiegand Street
Olivenhain, CA 92024
Principals:
Anthony F. Belfast
Michael P. Imbriglio
W. Lee Vanderhurst
Project No. 0007 - 003 -07
Document No. 9 -0072
SUBJECT: REPORT OF GEOTECHNICAL OBSERVATION AND TESTING
Cooper Creek Estates
Wiegand Street and Parcels 1, 2, and 3
Olivenhain, California
Dear Mr. Wiegand:
This report summarizes the results of the observation and testing services performed by Geotechnics
Incorporated during grading for the Wiegand Street extension and building pad grading for Parcels
1, 2, and 3 located on Wiegand Street in Olivenhain, California. Our observation and testing
services were performed between March 10 and December 22, 1998.
1.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES
Field personnel were provided for this project to observe the earthwork construction and to conduct
tests. The observation and testing assisted us in developing professional opinions as to whether the
earthwork proceeded in accordance with project specifications. In addition, the field personnel were
able to observe whether conditions exposed during construction differed from those anticipated.
Our services did not include supervision or direction of the actual work of the contractors, nor their
agents or employees. Our services did include the following.
• Observation of the preparation of the existing ground to determine that topsoil and expansive
materials were removed prior to placement of fill, foundations, or improvements.
• Preparation of daily field reports summarizing the day's activity with regard to earthwork
and documenting hours spent in the field by our technicians.
9951 Business Park Ave., Ste. B San Diego California • 92131
Phone (619) 536 -1000 Fax (619) 536 -8311
MR. BRUCE WIEGAND
FEBRUARY 4, 1999
PROJECT NO. 0007- 003 -07
DOCUMENT NO. 9 -0072
PAGE
• Performing laboratory and field tests on fill to support geotechnical recommendations and
conclusions.
• Analysis of the data obtained from the field to evaluate the as- graded site conditions.
• Preparation of this report which summarizes site preparation and fill placement, and the
compaction operations.
2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION
The subject site is located in the Olivenhain area of Encinitas, California. Construction included
grading for the Wiegand Street improvements and for residential building pads on Parcels 1, 2, and
3 and the surrounding landscaping and flatwork. The site was previously un- improved; the pre -
graded subsurface conditions are described in our referenced Geotechnical Investigation. The limits
of grading are shown on the following Figures 1, 2, and 3 and the attached Plate 1.
3.0 GRADING OPERATIONS
Site grading consisted of the removal of the upper expansive materials within the building and
exterior flatwork areas, moisture conditioning, and placement as compacted fill. Native clay soils
were also mixed with native sandy materials excavated from the Wiegand Street cul -de -sac and
placed as compacted fill. The depths of over- excavation were about 2%2 feet below the proposed
building pad grade and a minimum of 2 feet below finish flatwork grade. Parcel 3 was over -
excavated approximately 10 feet to provide a relatively uniform depth of fill beneath the proposed
structure and reduce the potential for differential settlement. The depth of over - excavation below
pavement subgrade was about 12 inches. Fill keys were constructed at the base of fill slopes and
are shown on Plate 1. The keys were excavated into dense bedrock materials using a track dozer
generally to a depth of about 5 feet below the original grade. The keys were generally about 15 to
25 feet in width and tilted into the slope across the key. The keys were observed by our field
personnel prior to filling. Grading of the site followed, using typical grading techniques with heavy
earth- moving equipment. The existing ground after removals was scarified approximately 8 inches,
moisture conditioned and compacted prior to placement of fill. A Caterpillar 814 steel -wheel
compactor, a D6 track dozer, and loaded paddle -wheel scrapers were used for fill compaction.
Geotechnics Incorporated
X
M \ ''
X \ I
n
M
a
a
I
� ` R
0
CO
1
`1
u
,
S'
K � �
�3
�"W
Y /
l\ I W.i ,/y
v
�d
m
J O
1
M
o X
y .
O •
7
�:Z
c
-i
J
T-
4.
.M
A1116- Geotechnics
_Incorporated
Q —
N
N \ ,
o \
L
S
L %
N .A
� c
.d
w �.S90
\ a �
lT L x
Ac
3 /
SITE PLAN
Cooper Creek Estates
Lot 1
Project No. 0007 -003 -07
Document No. 9 -0072
FIGURE 1
v1R 1.98
x
M
M
v
iT
c ^n m
ll 1
D
r
M °
M
x
11 �_
N d
O 3
.r
O
7
t? L
41.
�J
\ AN :j
cli
(v L�.fu,� �►
A ,
T ~
fi
A=6,,G eotechn i c s
_Incorporated
SITE PLAN
Cooper Creek Estates
Lot 2
n
I
Project No. 0007 - 003 -07
Document No. 9 -0072
FIGURE 2
J X
g ;S�
196 FI,P, INt
63
r�, 71.
l
76 " fi
N. 83
6g
LT
' � y.: .. - :, 1.;�_•'ry'K'tr' � ."i9 y y „r.�'R ��. I 1 i �� , •., � i i
sl ti 80� Q� \�ioyY , �� }r Yht • i �� . 1
~ 3 ?'
79
74 / 1
NW Ok
e
91 92 Z
ei-- -
i Now
See Plate 1 for Explanation
v
SCALE 1" = 20'
REFERNCE: Edward M. Eginton, Architect, Inc.,(1 -1 -99) �~
on �
00 �
Qrn �
O Z LL
Ci
O
C
m
z
00
d
N
m
ZN
gJe
Y M
IL N
W " J
U
Q
O
0
U
U °
c
U U
0
a�
v
MR- BRUCE WIEGAND PROJECT NO. 0007-003-07
FEBRUARY 4, 1999 DOCUMENT NO. 9 -0072
PAGE
The various fill materials are tabulated in Figure B -1, Laboratory Test Results. The maximum dry
densities and optimum moisture contents of the soils were determined in general accordance with
ASTM method D1557 -91.
In -place moisture and density tests were performed in accordance with ASTM D2922 -91 and D3017-
88 (Nuclear Gauge Method). The results of these tests are tabulated in Figures C -1 through C -4,
Density Test Results. The locations and elevations indicated for the tests are based on field survey
stakes and estimates from the grading plan topography, and should only be considered rough
estimates. The estimated locations and elevations should not be utilized for the purpose of preparing
cross sections showing test locations, or in any case, for the purpose of after -the -fact evaluating of
the sequence of fill placement.
4.0 UTILITY TRENCH BACKFILL
Underground utilities at the site include water, sewer, gas, and electrical utilities. Silty sand (shade
sand) material used for pipe bedding was imported to the site and moisture conditioned prior to
placement in the trenches. Approximately 6 inches of pipe bedding was placed in the trench bottom
and compacted with hand wackers. Shade sand was then placed and compacted in 4 to 6 inch lifts
to provide up to 18 inches of cover above the top of the pipe. Materials derived from the trench
excavations were then used as trench backfill . Native materials used for trench backfill were
brought to approximate optimum moisture content prior to placement in the trenches. Backfill lifts
were generally 1 foot in thickness. Compactive effort was applied using hand wackers and
sheepsfoot rollers mounted on trackhoes and by wheel rolling with a loader.
5.0 PAVEMENTS
Based on R -Value testing of a representative sample of pavement subgrade soil, pavement sections
were developed for Wiegand Street in accordance with the Caltrans design method as discussed in
the referenced pavement letter. The results of field and laboratory testing of the aggregate base
materials used in pavements are presented in the appendices.
Geotechnics Incorporated
MR. BRUCE WIEGAND
FEBRUARY 4. 1999
PROJECT NO. 0007-003-07
DOCUMENT NO. 9 -0072
PAGE
6.0 GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
It is our professional opinion that site preparation and compaction was performed in general
accordance with the intent of the project geotechnical recommendations and with the requirements
of the City of Encinitas. Based upon our observations and testing, it is our opinion that fill was
placed in substantial accordance with the minimum compaction criteria of 90% of the laboratory
maximum dry density (ASTM D1557 -91). The upper 12 inches of pavement subgrade and the
aggregate base material were generally compacted to at least 95% of the maximum dry density.
Based on the as- graded soil conditions, we recommend that a post- tensioned slab -on -grade system
be used to mitigate the effects of soil expansion. Based on the criteria of the Post - Tensioning
Institute, we recommend the following parameters:
Edge Moisture Variation, em
Differential Swell, ym
Differential Settlement:
Allowable Bearing:
Center Lift: 6 feet
Edge Lift: 3 feet
Center Lift: 3.2 inches
Edge Lift: 0.7 inches
0.5 inch
2,000 psf at slab subgrade
Lateral loads may be resisted by friction and by the passive resistance of the supporting soils. A
coefficient of friction of 0.3 may be used between the bottom of footings and recompacted soils.
The passive resistance of the soils may be assumed to be equal to the pressure developed by a fluid
with a density of 250 Ibs /ft'. A one -third increase in the passive value may be used for wind or
seismic loads. The passive resistance of the materials may be combined with the frictional
resistance without reduction in evaluating the total lateral resistance.
The conclusions and recommendations contained herein are based on our observations and testing
performed between March 10 and December 22, 1995. No representations are made as to the
quality and extent of materials not observed.
Geotechnics Incorporated
MR. BRUCE WIEGAND
FEBRUARY 4, 1999
7.0 LIMITATIONS
PROJECT NO. 0007 -003 -07
DOCUMENT NO. 9 -0072
PAGE
Our services were performed using the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar
circumstances, by reputable soils engineers and geologists practicing in this or similar localities.
No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the conclusions and professional advice
included in this report.
The samples taken and used for testing, the observations made and the in -place field testing
performed are believed representative of the entire project; however, soil and geologic conditions
can vary significantly between tested or observed locations.
The findings of this report are valid as of the present date. However, changes in the conditions of
a property can occur with the passage of time, whether they be due to natural processes or the works
of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standards
may occur, whether they result from legislation or the broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, the
findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside our control.
Therefore, this report is subject to review and should not be relied upon after a period of three years.
We appreciate the opportunity to be of professional service. Please feel free to contact the office
with any questions or comments.
GEOTECH IICSINCORPORATED
Thomas B. Canady, P.E. 50057 Anthony F. Belfast, P.E. 40333
Senior Engineer QROf ESSS10 y91 rincipal
B' C F�
No. 50057 a
E%p.b v ci
C1 N
9jF Of
Geotec nics Incorporated
APPENDIX A
REFERENCES
American Society for Testing and Materials (1996). Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Section 4,
Construction, Volume 04.08 Soil and Rock (I): D420- D4914, ASTM, West Conshohocken,
PA, 1296 p.
Geotechnics Incorporated (1998). "Updated Geotechnical Recommendations, Copper Creek Estates,
Parcels 1 and 2, Olivenhain, California," Project No. 0007 - 003 -07, Document No. 8 -0193,
March 26.
Geotechnics Incorporated (1998). "Revised Pavement Recommendations, Copper Creek Estates,
Wiegand Street, Olivenhain, California," Project No. 0007 - 003 -07, Document No. 8 -0256,
April 6.
Geotechnics Incorporated (1999). "Updated Geotechnical Recommendations, Copper Creek J.V.
Phase II, 1068 Wiegand Street (Lot 3), Olivenhain, California," Project No. 0007 - 003 -07,
Document No. 8 -1006, January 7.
Geotechnics Incorporated (1999). "Foundation Plan Review, Copper Creek Estates, Olivenhain,
California," Project No. 0007 - 003 -07, Document No. 9 -0019, January 8.
Santa Fe Soils, Inc. (1987). "Geologic and Soils Engineering Investigation, 25t Acre Hillside
Parcel, Lone Jack Road, Encinitas California ", SF -661, dated January 12, 1987.
Geotechnics Incorporated
APPENDIX B
LABORATORY TESTING
Selected representative samples of soils encountered were tested using test methods of the American
Society for Testing and Materials, or other generally accepted standards. Laboratory testing was
conducted in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members
of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions and in same locality. No other
warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the correctness or serviceability of the test results or
the conclusions derived from these tests. Where a specific laboratory test method has been
referenced, such as ASTM, Caltrans, or AASHTO, the reference applies only to the specified
laboratory test method and not to associated referenced test method(s) or practices, and the test
method referenced has been used only as a guidance document for the general performance of the
test and not as a "Test Standard." A brief description of the tests performed follows:
Classification: Soils were classified visually according to the Unified Soil Classification System.
Visual classification was supplemented by laboratory testing of selected samples and classification.
Maximum Density /OptimumMoisture: The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content
of representative soil samples were determined in general accordance with test method ASTM
D1557 -91, modified Proctor. The test results are summarized in Figure B -1.
Geotechnics Incorporated
MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY AND OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT
SAMPLE
NO.
DESCRIPTION
MAXIMUM
DENSITY
(PCF)
OPTIMUM
MOISTURE
( %)
1
Yellowish brown sandy clay (CL)
113'/
15
2
Reddish brawn clayey sand (SC)
122
12'/
3
Brownish red fat clay (CH)
117
15
4
Light gray silty sand (SM)
114
14'/2
5
Yellowish brown silty sand (SM)
108'/2
17'/2
6
Brown clay (CL)
111
14'/2
7
Grayish brown shade sand
130
8
8
Light brown silty sand (SM)
112
14'/2
9
Aggregate base material
128
9
` G e o t e c h n i c 5
I n c o r rated
P o
Laboratory Test Results
Copper Creek Estates
Bruce D. Wiegand,
Inc.
Project No. 0007- 003 -07
Document No. 9 -0072
Figure B -1
APPENDIX C
FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS
The results of the field density tests taken for this project are shown in Figures C -1 through C-4. The
elevations and locations of the field tests were determined by hand level and pacing relative to field
staking done by others. The tests are plotted on Figures 1 through 3 and Plate 1.
The precision of the field density test and the maximum dry density test is not exact and variations
should be expected. For example, the American Society for Testing and Materials has recently
researched the precision of ASTM Method No. D1557 and found the accuracy of the maximum dry
density to be plus or minus 4% of the mean value and the optimum moisture content to be accurate to
plus or minus 15% of the mean value; the Society specifically states the "acceptable range of test results
expressed as a percent of mean value" is the range stated above. In effect, an indicated relative
compaction of 90% has an acceptable range of 86.6% to 92.8% based on the maximum dry density
determination.
The following abbreviations were used in the Figures C -1 through C-4 of Appendix C:
B = Aggregate Base
JT = Joint Trench
SG = SubGrade
S = Sanitary Sewer
W = Water Line
Geotechnics Incorporated
-dmlkb- G e o t e c h n i c s
DENSITY TEST RESULTS
Project No. 0007- 003 -07
- Incorporated
Copper Creek Estates
Document No. 9 -0072
22.4
Bruce D. Wiegand, Inc.
FIGURE C-1
90
Test
Test
Elevation
Location
Soil
Max. Dry
Moisture
Dry
Relative
Required
Retest
No.
Date
IN
3
Type
Density
Content
Density
Compaction
1
Compaction
Number
243
Wiegand St.
3
117.0
17.6
[pc11
1 %]
[pct]
1 %)
1 %]
238
1
3/10/98
233
Wiegand St.
1
113.5
22.4
101.8
90
90
2
3/10/98
237
Wiegand St.
1
113.5
20.0
103.7
91
90
3
3/10/98
239
Wiegand St.
3
117.0
19.0
105.0
90
90
4
3/10/98
243
Wiegand St.
3
117.0
17.6
107.3
92
90
5
3/10/98
238
Wiegand St.
3
117.0
20.1
105.2
90
90
6
3/11/98
242
Wiegand St.
3
117.0
20.7
105.9
91
90
7
3/11198
248
Wiegand St.
1
113.5
21.5
103.7
91
90
8
3/11/98
252
Wiegand St.
3
117.0
19.8
107.0
91
90
9
3/11198
242
Wiegand St.
3
117.0
18.6
108.1
92
90
10
3/11/98
249
Wiegand St.
3
117.0
19.7
106.1
91
90
11
3/12/98
252
Wiegand St.
1
113.5
20.0
101.6
90
90
12
3/12/98
258
Wiegand St.
1
113.5
19.5
102.9
91
90
13
3/12198
267
Wiegand St.
3
117.0
16.7
109.0
93
90
14
3112/98
276
Wiegand St.
3
117.0
19.3
108.1
92
90
15
3112/98
268
Wiegand St.
1
113.5
19.7
102.7
90
90
16
3/13/98
280
Wiegand St.
3
117.0
19.1
106.6
91
90
17
3/13/98
257
Wiegand St.
1
113.5
19.3
104.1
92
90
18
3/13198
262
Wiegand St.
1
113.5
21.9
103.8
91
90
19
3/13/98
271
Wiegand St.
1
113.5
22.4
101.9
90
90
20
3/13/98
288
Wiegand St.
1
113.5
19.8
103.3
91
90
21
3/17198
240
Wiegand St.
1
113.5
20.5
104.0
92
90
22
3/17/98
242
Wiegand St.
1
113.5
19.8
104.6
92
90
23
3/17196
251
Wiegand St.
1
113.5
21.5
103.5
91
90
24
3/17198
259
Wiegand St.
1
113.5
22.4
102.8
91
90
25
3/17/98
274
Wiegand St.
1
113.5
21.3
102.7
90
90
26
3/17/98
280
Wiegand St.
1
113.5
20.8
102.6
90
90
27
3/18/98
283
Wiegand St.
5
108.5
15.5
105.1
97
95
28
3/18/98
270
Wiegand St.
5
108.5
17.9
106.1
98
95
29
3/18/98
249
Wiegand St.
5
108.5
19.2
103.6
95
95
30
3/18/98
241
Wiegand St.
5
108.5
19.2
104.0
96
95
31
3118/96
227
Wiegand St.
5
108.5
17.4
105.0
97
95
32
3118/98
216
Wiegand St.
5
108.5
19.4
104.0
96
95
33
3/23/98
321
Parcel/
6
111.0
18.8
103.4
93
90
34
3/23/98
321
Parcel/
6
111.0
21.3
100.8
91
90
35
3/23/98
319
Parcel/
6
111.0
22.9
99.6
90
90
36
323/98
322
Parcel/
8
112.0
20.7
101.6
91
90
37
324/98
321
Parcel/
8
112.0
20.3
102.4
91
90
38
324/98
327
Parcel
6
111.0
23.6
98.4
89
90 39
39
324198
327
Parcel
6
111.0
19.1
99.9
90
90
40
324/98
329
Parcel
a
112.0
18.6
102.1
91
90
41
324/98
329
Parcel
8
112.0
18.2
100.4
90
90
42
324/98
324
Parcel/
6
111.0
20.9
99.6
90
90
43
324/98
324
Parcel/
6
111.0
22.6
100.0
90
90
44
420198
330
Parcel
8
112.0
17.1
106.9
95
90
45
420/96
325
Parcel/
8
112.0
17.3
103.4
92
90
46
12/7/96
316
Parcel/
3
117.0
18.3
105.6
90
90
47
1217/98
318
Parcel/
3
117.0
16.5
107.7
92
90
48
1217/98
318
Parcel/
3
117.0
17.3
105.7
90
90
AIIIIIIIh- G e o t e c h n i c s
DENSITY TEST RESULTS
Project No. 0007- 003 -07
- Incorporated
Copper Creek Estates
Document No. 9 -0072
14.5
Bruce D. Wiegand, Inc.
FIGURE C-2
90
Test
Test
Elevation
Location
Soil
Max. Dry
Moisture
Dry
Relative
Required
Retest
No.
Date
IN
3
Type
Density
Content
Density
Compaction
I
Compaction
Number
322
Parcel
4
114.0
16.6
[pcql
N
fpcn
[ %'
[-
323
49
12/7/98
320
Parcel
3
117.0
14.5
110.8
95
90
50
12/7/98
320
Parcel
3
117.0
17.5
106.1
91
90
51
12/7/98
321
Parcel
3
117.0
17.0
107.0
91
90
52
12/10/98
322
Parcel
4
114.0
16.6
106.5
93
90
53
12/10/98
323
Parcel
4
114.0
16.9
104.5
92
90
54
12/10/98
324
Parcel
4
114.0
16.8
106.1
93
90
55
12/16/98
315
Parcel
6
111.0
12.1
99.9
90
90
56
12/16/98
317
Parcel
1
113.5
14.2
103.9
92
90
57
12116/98
316
Parcel
1
113.5
14.9
104.7
92
90
58
12/16/98
318
Parcel
1
113.5
17.7
103.5
91
90
59
12/16/98
317
Parcel
8
112.0
18.8
101.1
90
90
60
12/17198
318
Parcel
8
112.0
19.3
101.4
91
90
61
12/17/98
319
Parcel
6
112.0
20.2
101.0
90
90
62
12117/98
319
Parcel
6
111.0
19.3
100.9
91
90
63
12/17/98
319
Parcel
5
108.5
20.7
98.9
91
90
64
12/17/98
320
Parcel
5
108.5
22.2
98.5
91
90
65
12/17/98
319
Parcel
1
113.5
19.0
103.1
91
90
66
12/17/98
320
Parcel
3
117.0
17.2
106.2
91
90
67
12/17/98
318
Parcel
3
117.0
17.3
107.8
92
90
68
12/17/98
319
Parcel
3
117.0
18.0
107.3
92
90
69
12/17/98
320
Parcel
1
113.5
16.3
102.9
91
90
70
12/17/98
321
Parcel
1
113.5
18.4
103.9
92
90
71
12/17/98
320
Parcel
1
113.5
19.8
103.1
91
90
72
12/17/98
321
Parcel
1
113.5
19.6
103.9
92
90
73
12/16/98
321
Parcel
1
113.5
16.5
102.1
90
90
74
12/18/98
322
Parcel
6
111.0
19.8
99.8
90
90
75
12/18/98
322
Parcel
1
113.5
19.8
104.4
92
90
76
12/18/98
323
Parcel
6
111.0
19.4
101.8
92
90
77
12/18/98
322
Parcel
6
111.0
17.6
101.6
92
90
78
12/18/98
323
Parcel
3
117.0
17.1
105.4
90
90
79
1221/98
322
Parcel
3
117.0
17.0
105.6
90
90
80
1221/98
323
Parcel
3
117.0
18.6
106.3
91
90
81
1221/98
322
Parcel
5
108.5
19.9
99.7
92
90
82
1221/98
323
Parcel
5
108.5
20.6
99.2
91
90
83
12/21/98
323
Parcel
1
113.5
18.5
102.2
90
90
84
1221/98
324
Parcel
1
113.5
18.4
102.5
90
90
85
1221/98
324
Parcel
1
113.5
16.4
102.2
90
90
86
1221/98
323
Parcel
1
113.5
15.9
102.7
90
90
87
1221/98
324
Parcel
1
113.5
17.7
102.2
90
90
88
12/21/98
325
Parcel
1
113.5
16.8
102.5
90
90
89
1222/98
325
Parcel
1
113.5
15.4
105.5
93
90
90
1222/98
325
Parcel
5
108.5
16.8
99.1
91
90
91
12122/98
325
Parcel
1
113.5
14.2
102.6
90
90
92
1222/98
325
Parcel
1
113.5
14.5
103.4
91
90
93
12/22/98
325
Parcel
6
111.0
15.3
100.2
90
90
94
12/22/98
325
Parcel
5
108.5
20.6
99.2
91
90
95
1222/98
325
Parcel
1
113.5
13.8
102.8
91
90
96
12/22/98
325
Parcel
1
113.5
17.3
106.5
94
90
AM, G e o t e c hn i c s
DENSITY TEST RESULTS
Project No. 0007 - 003 -07
`Incorporated
Copper Creek Estates
Document No. 9 -0072
6.7
Bruce D. Wiegand, Inc.
FIGURE C-3
90
Test
Test
Elevation
Location
Soil
Max. Dry
Moisture
Dry
Relative
Required
Retest
No
Date
[ft]
7
Type
Density
Content
Density
Compaction
Compaction
Number
222
Wiegand St.
7
130.0
9.6
[pcq
[ %]
[pcq
[ %]
[ %]
194
W -1
3/23/98
197
Wiegand St.
7
130.0
6.7
123.7
95
90
W -2
3/23/98
204
Wiegand St.
7
130.0
7.4
121.8
94
90
W -3
3/23/98
211
Wiegand St.
7
130.0
7.7
118.4
91
90
W-4
3/24/98
222
Wiegand St.
7
130.0
9.6
120.3
93
90
W -5
3/24/98
194
Wiegand St.
7
130.0
9.2
121.3
93
90
W -6
3/24/98
202
Wiegand St.
7
130.0
9.1
122.5
94
90
W -7
3/24/98
206
Wiegand St.
7
130.0
9.9
118.0
91
90
W -8
3/24/98
219
Wiegand St.
7
130.0
7.6
117.5
90
90
W -9
3/31/98
237
Wiegand St.
7
130.0
11.2
122.9
95
90
W -10
3/31/98
232
Wiegand St.
7
130.0
9.9
118.6
91
90
W -11
3/31/98
237
Wiegand St.
7
130.0
10.5
121.6
94
90
W -12
4/3/98
245
Wiegand St.
7
130.0
13.3
116.3
89
90
W -13
4/3/98
254
Wiegand St.
7
130.0
10.9
123.4
95
90
W -14
4/3/98
269
Wiegand St.
7
130.0
10.0
120.0
92
90
W -15
4/3/98
251
Wiegand St.
7
130.0
7.2
117.8
91
90
W -16
4/3/98
260
Wiegand St.
7
130.0
6.8
117.5
90
90
W -17
4/3/98
273
Wegand St.
7
130.0
7.8
116.4
90
90
W -18
4/6/98
275
Wiegand St.
7
130.0
8.2
120.6
93
90
W -19
4/6/98
296
Wiegand St.
7
130.0
6.9
119.8
92
90
W -20
4/6/98
277
Wiegand St.
7
130.0
7.7
124.2
96
90
W -21
4/6/98
298
Wiegand St.
7
130.0
7.3
123.1
95
90
W -22
4/7/98
28B
Wiegand St.
7
130.0
8.2
123.7
95
90
W -23
4/7/98
304
Wiegand St.
7
130.0
8.8
116.9
90
90
W -24
4/8198
305.5
Wiegand St.
7
130.0
7.8
117.3
90
90
W -25
4/8/98
313
Wiegand St.
7
130.0
7.1
117.7
91
90
W -26
4/9/98
319
Wiegand St.
7
130.0
7.6
119.8
92
90
W -27
4/9/98
319
Wiegand St.
7
130.0
6.9
120.3
93
90
W -28
4/9/98
319
Wiegand St.
7
130.0
7.0
118.9
91
90
W -29
4/29/98
300
Wiegand St.
1
113.5
14.4
108.7
96
90
W -30
4/29/98
297
Wiegand St.
1
113.5
14.7
109.4
96
90
W -31
4/29/98
277
Wiegand St.
6
111.0
17.4
107.6
97
90
W -32
4/29/98
258
Wiegand St.
8
112.0
16.7
108.3
97
90
W -33
4/10/98
240
Wiegand St.
8
112.0
16.1
107.2
96
90
W -34
4/13/98
316
Wiegand St.
7
130.0
6.9
121.1
93
90
W -35
4/13/98
316
Wiegand St.
7
130.0
7.3
119.8
92
90
W -36
4/13/98
316
Wiegand St.
7
130.0
7.8
120.1
92
90
W -37
4/13/98
318
Wiegand St.
8
112.0
15.2
107.0
96
90
W -38
4/13/98
318
Wiegand St.
8
112.0
13.2
106.3
95
90
W -39
4/13/98
318
Wiegand St.
8
112.0
14.2
108.1
97
90
W-40
5/11/98
191
Wiegand St.
7
130.0
7.2
116.7
90
90
S -1
4/29/98
193
Wiegand St.
1
113.5
14.8
104.3
92
90
JT -1
5/6/98
198
Wiegand St.
1
113.5
18.3
103.4
91
90
JT -2
5/6198
218
Wiegand St.
1
113.5
17.6
107.2
94
90
JT -3
516/98
230
Wiegand St.
1
113.5
16.8
104.5
92
90
JT-4
516/98
242
Wiegand St.
1
113.5
19.3
106.9
94
90
� G e o t e c h n i c s
DENSITY TEST RESULTS
Project No. 0007- 003 -07
�
`Incorporated
Copper Creek Estates
Document No. 9 -0072
15.9
Bruce D.VUiegand,inc-
FIGURE C4
90
Test
Test
Elevation
Location
Soil
Max. Dry
Moisture
Dry
Relative
Required
Retest
No.
Date
[ft]
1
Type
Density
Content
Density
Compaction
Compaction
Number
275
Wiegand St.
1
1115
15.4
[pcf]
1 %]
[pcf]
[ %]
[° /0]
289
JT -5
517/98
311
Wiegand St.
1
113.5
15.9
104.1
92
90
JT-6
517/98
313
Wiegand St.
1
113.5
17.2
103.8
91
90
JT -7
5/11/98
253
Wiegand St.
1
113.5
16.7
104.8
92
90
JT -8
5/11/98
275
Wiegand St.
1
1115
15.4
103.7
91
90
JT -9
5/11/98
289
Wiegand St.
1
113.5
14.8
105.1
93
90
JT -10
5/11/98
305
Wiegand St.
1
113.5
17.7
102.8
91
90
SG -1
5/19/98
318
Wiegand St.
4
114.0
15.8
107.7
94
95 SG -2
SG -2
5/19/96
293
Wiegand St.
4
114.0
16.7
109.0
96
95
SG -3
5/19/98
262
Wiegand St.
4
114.0
19.4
108.2
95
95
SG-4
5/19/98
241
Wiegand St.
5
108.5
21.1
102.7
95
95
SG-5
5/19/98
217
Wiegand St.
5
108.5
18.3
105.7
97
95
B -1
5/20/98
317
Wiegand St.
9
128.0
9.8
122.4
96
95
B -2
5/20/98
308
Wiegand St.
9
128.0
10.2
121.6
95
95
B -3
5/20/98
277
Wiegand St.
9
128.0
9.5
121.1
95
95
B-4
520/98
251
Wiegand St.
9
128.0
10.1
122.0
95
95
B -5
520/98
230
Wiegand St.
9
128.0
8.8
121.5
95
95
B-6
520/98
201
Wiegand St.
9
128.0
9.4
122.0
95
95