Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCT 72-34; RANCHO LA CUESTA; GEOLOGIC GRADING REPORT; 1976-10-08-------------.,.--,---------------- • • • • • • • • • • .' PR 0 J E C T G R A DIN G REP 0 R T Tract 72-34, Lots 20 -28 inclusive (Model Lots of Unit 1) , in the City of Carlsbad, California for Newport Shore Builder:s . October 8, 1976 by Pacific Soils Engineering Irvine, California elOllEERJIIS Ci 7d.~3Lj __ £X/It'/JII-I? fJH-/l-e )jEJ • • • • • • • • • • • PACIFIC SOILS ENGINEERING, INC. 17921 SKY PARK CIRCLE (SUITE G) IRVINE, CALiF. 92707 TELEPHONE: (7l4) 557-9450 N~wport Shores Builders P.O. Box A Huntington Beach, CA. 92648 Attention: Subject: Gentlemen: Mr. Mike Jager Final Engineering Geologic Grading Report; Tract 72-34, Lots 20 -28 ind., (Model Lots of Unit I), in the City of Carlsbad, California. L.A. COUNTY OFFICE 1402 W. 240'th Street Harbor City; Ca. 907"1.0 ,,(2.13) 325-727.2 or 775-6711 VENTURA COUNTY OFFICE 'Post Offi,ce Box 75 Thot,lSand Oaks, Ca. 91360 (2J.3) 88!l-9919 (805) 4,95-6513 October 8, 1976 Work Order 100236-A This f,inal geologic report for the subj ect tract is submitted in accordance with the requ,irements of the City of Carlsbad. Geologic data are plotted on the plan included with the companion Project Grading Report. A buttres~ fill was requ,ired for support of the cut slope at the rear (east) of Lot 23. Based on our inspection of geologic conditions of the site, the subject lots are satisfactory for the intended use from a geologic point of view. Respectfully submitted, P~CIFIC SOILS ENGINEERING, INC. Reviewed by: ~\V.~.~. REX P. KETTER, Vice President Dist: (10) Addressee REL:RPK/scb • • • • • • • • • • • PACIFIC SOI,LS ENGINEERING, INC. 17921 SKY PARK CIRCLE (SUITE G) IRVINE, CALIF. 92707 TELEPHONE: (714) 557-9450 Newport Shores Bui Iders P .0. Box A Huntington Beach, CA. 92648 Attention: Subject: Reference: Gentlemen: Mr. Mike Jager Project Soil Engineering Grading Report; Tract 72-34, Lots 20 -28 incl., (Model Lots of Unit I), in the City of Carlsbad, California. Preliminary Soil Engineering and Engineering Geologic Report and Engineering Geologic and Soil ~ngineering Review of Grading Plan for Tract No. 72-34, dated July 5, 1974, by Pacific Soil Engineering, l.nc. (W.O. ]'00236). L.A. COUNTY OFFICE , 1402 '\f.t. 240~h street Harbor city, Ca. 90.710 (213) 325-727'2 or 775-6771 VENTURA COl!N1Y OFFICE Post Office Box 75 Thousand Oaks, Ca. 91360 ,(21~) 889-99'19 (805) 495-6513 October 8, 1976 Work Order 100236-A This report presents soi I engi neering data and test ~esults pertaining to the placement of compacted earth fill on the subject property. Foundation criteria are also included in this report for the subject residential Lots 20 -28 inclusi've. to be utilized as the Model Complex for the subject tract. ' All fills, cuts or processing of original ground under the purview of this report has been completed under our inspection or accepted by this firm, and are in compHance with F.H.A. criteria and the Grading Code of the City of Carlsbad, California. AIIW9rk unqer our purvi.ew was accomplished in accordance with the IIEarthquake SpecificationslJ , contained in the above referenced investigation report. • • • • • • • • • • • October 8, 1976 -Work Order 100236-A Completed work has been reviewed and is considered suitable for the construction now planned. All slopes are considered grossly and surfiCially stable and will remain so under normal conditions. Compaction test results are presented in Table I, al1d approximat-~ locations of tests are shown oli the enClosed grading plan (1 sheet). Also shown on the plan are locations of tests taken in adjacent areas. These test results will be submitted in future grading reports, as these areas are comp' eted. Soil Type D-Clayey Sand E-Clayey Sand F-Clayey Sand G-Sand H-Clayey Sand Laboratory Standard: ASTM:D 1557-70T Opt. Moist. Max • Dry Density (%) (lbs./cu. ft.) 12.5 118.0 13.0 115.5 15.0 113.0 15.0 108.5 15.5 111 .. 5 % SweH* 650 psf ASCE 0.1 NO 0.0 NO NO NO 8 NO NO 4 *Swefl tests were remoded in a one-inch high ring to 90 percent relative compaction utilizing material at optimum moisture for sampl-es to be surcharged at 650 psf. Samples were inundated for 24-hours and then amount of swe-II was recorded. ASCE denotes in accordance with ASCE Expansion Index Test. NO denotes not determined. 1. Prior to the-placement of compacted fill, the exposed natural surface was scarifi'ed, watered as necessary and compacted in-place, suitable to receive fill. Where necessary, alluvial materials in canyon swale bottoms were removed to either in- place bedrock~ or competent natural soil. 2. Fill consisting of the above soils types was then placed in thin lifts, watered as necessary and compacted in-place to a minimum of 90 percent of the laboratory standard utilizing PA~IFIC SOILS ENGINEERING. INC. ® • • • • • • • • • • October 8, 1976 Work Order 100236-A Page 3 tractor-drawn sheepsfoot type rollers and heavy earth moving equipment. Each fiJI was I " treated in a like manner. 3. Fill placed on slope gradients steeper than 5-horizontal to 1-vertical was keyed and benched into bedrock. The upper soils were stripped and/or benched out on the shallower slopes in such a manner that all compa<:ted fill is in contact with intact bedrock or competent soils. 4. All removals and excavating for canyon cleanou~s, and processing in preparing fill areas ·were inspected and .approved by this firm1s representative prior to placement of any fill. 5. Compaction tests were taken for each one to two feet of fill placed. The maximum vertical depth ·of fill placed in on the order of 41 feet on Lot 26 • 6. It has been determined during grading that the cut portion of the fill over cut $Iop? below (sol:Jth) Lot 25 will require "overexcavation and stabil'ization due to unsl,Jitabl e material. The completion of this work should have no detrimental effects upon the sl,Jbject model lots. This stabilization will be reported in a future grading report. 7. Based upon preliminary investigation and geologic. inspection during grading, a lS-foot base width compacted buttress fill was recommended and constructed for support of the proposed cut at the rear (east) of Lot 23. The location and approximate limits of this stabilization fill is shown on the enclosed plan. PACIFIC SOILS ENGINEERING, INC. • • • • • • • • • October 8, 1976 Work Order 100236-A Page 4 8. The cut portion of the transitional lot was overexcavated to a depth of 3D-inches and replaced as a compacted fill to provide uniform bearing conditions. This was accomplished on Lot 23 as i'ndicated with a "C" on the enclosed plan. 9. Fill slopes were backrolled as they were brought to grade at approximate four-foot intervals. At the completion of fiJI placement, the slope was uniformly compacted by track-rolling and finished by cutting and trimming back to the compacted core. Slope tests were made after completion of frimming. All slope densification has been completed and the slopes are considered stable under normal conditions. 10. Materials encountered in cut and utilized for compacted fill ranged from non to slightly expansive in nature. A 10t-by-lot evaluation of the soil conditions were conducted, with all the subject residential lots being considered to be very low in expansion potential; accordi'ng 'to Table 29-C of the 1973 Uniform Building Code. Results of these expansion tests are as follows: Expansion Potential Lot No.ls Soil Type* Index** Expansion*** 20,21,22, ,27,28 F,G 6 Very Low 23,24,25 G not determined Very Low *Per tabulation (page 2) compaction test soil types, upper three feet **As determined in accordance with ASCE Expansion Potential Method (% Sand,Silt,Clay) 72 15 1'3 84 9 7 • ***Per Table 29-C of the 1973 Uniform Building Code Design criteria for foundation and slabs-on":grade for Lots 20 -28 incl., are 'included in items 11 and 12 of this report. • PACIFIC SOILS ENGIN~ERINGI INC. •• • • • • • • • • • • ,_ October 8, ·1976 Work Order 100236-A Page 5 11. The following criteria should be used in foundation design for the residential lots •. a) The recommended bearing value for both the inferior and exterior fa<;>tings is 1500 Ibs./sq.ft. having a minimum embedment depth of 12-inches and having a minimum width of 12-inches. b) "A lateral bearing value of 300 Ibs./sq.ft. per foot of depth of a maximum of 1500 Ibs./sq.ft may be utilized. A lateral sliding coefficient of 0.40 may be used in design. The above values may be increased one-third for short duration loads such as se·ismic and wind loads .• 12. Footing and slab-on -grade reinforcement criteria A Summary of foundation req·uirementsis presented on Plate A. All t~e subject lots are considered to be non-e~parisive (very low) in nature and the following criteria should be used for design. a) Exterior footings for two-story structures shall have a minimum embedment of ~ /18 .inches below grade. Interior foot·ings for two-story structures and.all footings for a single-story structure snail have a minimum embedment of 12 inches below grade. Spread or isolated footings may be used. All continuous footings shall be reinforced wifh two No.4 bars, one placed ---- in the bottom of the footing and one in the top. C~HC .. CIIA//2$ ~IC/ 13'~"()A.\ ¥~ PACIFIC SOILS J;NGINEERING, INC. • • • • • • • • • • • October 8, 1'976 Work Order 100236-A Pc;rge 6 b) All slabs-on-grade in living areas shall be reinforced with a minimum of six.,.inch by six-inch, No. 10 by No. 10 welded wire mesh or equivalent, posi,tioned of the mid- height of the slabs; 12 by 12, W2.8 by W2.8 welded wire mesh is consldered equival entreinforc ement. c) A minimum of lo-mil polyvinyl membrane is required under QII slabs-on-grade in living areas. This membrane shall be covered by a minimvm of one-inch of sand to aid in curing of the concrete. c) Slab subgrade for living areas and garage areas shall be moistened to at least optimum moisture, to a depth of 12-inches, prior to placing concrete. e) No special treatment of tbe garage areas is required, except that the garage slqb II ~/. Ij~ should have a po.sitive separation from the stem we. /9 ... /2 Cr:rM.f~r". iC"4J;, 1"'", 13. UtiHty trench backfill should be accomplished in accordance with the prevailing criteria of the City of Carlsbad. . Respectfully submitted, PACIFIC SOILS ~NGINEERING, INC. Reviewed by: ~(Y.~ REX P. KETTER, Vice President Dist: (10) Addressee. AJJ:RPK/scb . PACIFIC SOILS ENGINEERING, INC. • October B' 1976 Work Order 100236-A • TABLE f Date of Test Test Elev. Moisture Test No. Location feet (% • 8 30 76 102 Lot 2B 56.0 10.5 8/31/76 104 Lot 26 54.0 13.0 9/1/76 " 105 Lot 27 56.0 12.4 9/2/76 108 " Lot 25 64.0 14.3 " .-109* Lot 20 63.0 12.4 • 9/3/76 115 Manzanita 65.0 13.0 116 " 68.0 11.1 118 " 69.0 13.0 9/4/76 122 .. 70.0 13.0 9/7/76 142 " 76.0 13.0 9/9/76 169 Lot 20 .66.0 11.7 • 170 Lot 2B 59.0 13.0 172 Lot 21 69.0 1-4.9" 9/17/76 272" lot 22 75.0 14.3 273 Lot 22 7B.0 14.9 "9/20/76 309 Lot 22 81.0 13.6 • 310 Lot 26 70.0 14.9 9/21/76 315 Lot 21 75.0 10.5 316 Lot 23 75.0 13.0 317 Lot 24 70'.0 14.9 318 Lot 24 70.0 12.4 • 319 Lot 15 69.0 14.3 320 Lot 27 66.0 -13.6 322 Lilac Court 70.0 14.9 9/22/76 323 Lot 20 70.0 17.0 324 ~ot 20 73".0 13.6 • 325 Lot 21 . 79.0 "14.3 326 Lot 22 83 .. 0 14.9 327 Lot 28 69.0 14.3 328 Lot 28 72.0 14.9 329 Lot 27 71.0 13.0 330 Lot 27 74.0 17.6 • 331 Lot 26 73.0 14.3 332 Lot 26 76.0 15.6 333 Lot 25 72.0 17.0 334 Lot 25 74.0 12.4 I 9/23/76 335 Lot 28 75.0 14.3 I. 337 Lot 27 77.0 13.6 " 338 Lot 27 80.0 11.7 . 339 Lot 26 79.0 13.0 340 Lot 26 82.0 18.3 341 Lot 24 73.0 15.6 Dry Density Ibs/cu .ft. 107.0 10B.2 107.5 107.3 113.0 110.0 10B.0 1l0.6 104.5 116.4 113.1 111.0 "108.1 110.5 10B.5 110.~ 113.0 111 .0 108.2 108.0 113.2 " 108.4 107.8 111.7 109.8 108.8 10Q.9 96".2 114.5 107.1 106.1 105.2 109:.0 104.2 106.1 113.7 110.4 109.1 106.5 111.0 103.0 100.5 • PACIFIC SOILS ENGINEERING.'INC. ----..... ~ .. , -, .--.--. ,> Relative -SoH Com .% T e 95.0 b SC 96.0 D .sC 95.0 D SC 91.0 D SC 96.0 D SC 93.0 D SC 92.0 D SC" 94.0 D SC 90.5 E SC 99.0 D SC 96.0 D SC 94.0 D SC 92.0 D SC 94.0 D SC: 92~0 D SC 94.0 D SC 96.0 D SC 94.0 D "SC 92.0 D SC 92.0 D SC 96.0 D SC 93.0 D , SC 91.0 D" SC 95.0 D SC 93.0 0 SC 92,;0 D SC 93.0 G SC 90.0 G SC 97.0 D SC 95.0 F" SC 93.0 F SC 93.0 F" SC 92.0 D SC 93:0 F SC 94.0 F SC 96.0 P' SC 94.0 E SC 93.0 E SC 91.0 E SC 94.0 E SC 92.0 H SC 90.0 H SC @) ~.. . • ~ ~ ._~ ~~_~.., ........... · • ..-.:-._0 • • • • • • • • • • • October 8, 1976 Work Order 100236-A Date of Test Test Test No. .Location 9/23/76 342 Lot 24 343 Lot 24 344 Lot 25 345 Lot 25 346 Lot 25 9/24/76 347 Lot 28 348 Lot 28 349 Lot 27 350 Lot 27 351 Lot 26 352 Lot 26 353 Lilac Court 354. Lot 25 355 Lot 25 356 Lot 24 358 lot 23 9/25/76 368 Lot 23 369 Lot 23 370 Lot 22 371 Lot 22 ·372 Lot 26 373 Lot 26 374 Lot 25 375 Lot 25 376 Lot 24 377 Lot 24 378 Lot 23 379 Lot 23 380 Lot 20 38.1 Lot 20 382 Lot 21 9/27/76 384 Lot 25 385 Lot 25 386 Lot 24 387 . lot 24 388 Lot 20 389 Lot 21 390 Lot 21 391 . Lot 22 392 Lot 22 TABLE I Elev. Moisture Dry Density {feet~ {%} {Ibs/cu.ft.} 76.0 19.0 106.0 70.0 17.3 102.4 72.0 14.9 101.7 75.0 15.6 105.0 78.0 16.3 103.3 90.0 13.0 110.7 82.0 15.6 107.0 83.0 12.4 111.5 85.0 11.7 113.0 85.0 13.0 108.3 88.0 14.3 110.0 76.0 17.0 104.3 81.0 14.9 '102.0 84.0 15.6 106.3 82.0 18.3 101.2 78.D 14.9 103~5 81.0 13.0 98.6 84.0 17.6 108.0 86.0 18.3 104.4 90.0 14.3 102.0 91.0 iO.5 . 106.5 93.0 19.0 103.5 97.0 15.6 104.2 90.0 17.6 108.1 88.0 14.9 103.0 , 91.0 17.0 106.8 87.0 14.3 104.0 90.0 17.6 110.0 76.0 18.3 105.3 79.0 14.3 104.5 81.0 15.6 103.9 93.0 15.6 104~9 96.0 16.3 103.4 94.0 14.3 102.7 97.0 13.Q 97~ 1 81.0 17.6 104.1 83.0 13.6 106.9 135.0 17.0· 109.7 91.0 17.6 102.3 93.0 15.6 105.8 PACIFIC BelLS ENGINEERING. INC. Relative Soil CQrne·% Ti:Ee 94.0 H SC 92.0 H sc 91.0 H SC 94.0 H SC 93.0 H SC 94.0 D SC 91.0 D SC 94.0 D SC 96.0. D SC 92.0 D SC 93.0 D SC 94.0 . H SC 91.0 H SC 95.0 H SC 91.0 H SC 93.0 H SoC 90.0 E SC 94.0 F SC 92.0 F SC 90.0 F SC 94.0 F SC 91.0 F SC 92.0 F SC 96.0 F SC 91.0 F SC 95.0 F SC 92.0 F SC 97.0 F SC 93.0 F SC 93.0· F SC 92.0 F SC 93.0 F sc. 92.0 F SC 91.0 F SC 90.0 G SC 93.0 F SC 94.0 F SC 97.0 . F SC 91.0 F SC 94.0 F. SC @ • • • • • • • • • ~'-,. • October 8 I 1976 Work Order 100236-A Date of Test Test Test No. Location 9 27 76 394 Lot 23 395 Lot 23 9/28/76 400 Lot 23 40.1 Lot 23 402 Lot 24 40.3 Lot 23 40.7 Lot 23 9/29/76 411 lot 23 414 Lot 23 9/30./76 425 . Lot 23 426 Lot 24 10./1/76 432 Lot 20 433 Lot 21 434 Lot 27 435 Lot 26 436 Lot 22 10/2/76 444 Lot 23 445 Lot 24 446 Lot 25 10/4/76 456 Lot 24 457 Lot 23 458 Lot 24 10/5/76 468-s Lot 24 469-5 Lot 23 470-5 Lot 28 471"'5 Lot 20. 472-5 Lot 22 * -Test in natural ground S -Slope Test TA BL E I Elev. Moisture Dry Density teet % Ibs/cu. ft. 92.0 19.0 103.9 94.0 14.3 114.8 93.0 12.4 109.5 96.0. 15.6 105.0 104.0 14.3 103.6 10.2.0. 17.0. 10.7.0. 114.0. 12.4 108.2 117.0 13.6 10.5.1 119.0. 15.6 107.0 109.0, 19.6 10.0.7 111.0. 18.3 103.6 83.3 15.6 , 110.0. 87.4 14.9 . 108.0. 87.8 18.3 109.0 . 95.0 13.0 107.1 95.0 14.9 107.8 98.8 17.6 101.3 99.4 18.3 104.0. 98.6 14.9·' 98.5 103.0 17.0 103.7 108.0 15.6' 98.0 112.0 13.6 101.5 104.0 13.6 10.2.5 110~0 15.6 105.0 80.0 14.9 1'04.2 88.0. 17.0. 99.1 100..0 14.3 100.3 SC-Indicates test by sand cone method; remaining tests by drive tube. Re'lative Com'.% 92.,0, 97 .. 0 93.0 92.0 92.0 95.0. 92.0 93.0. 95.0. 93.0. 95.0. 97.0. 96.0 96.0 95.0 95.0 93.0 96.0. 91.0 96.0 90..0 94.0. 91.0 93.0 92.0. 91.0. 92~O Areas failing ·to meet minimum compaction requirements wer~ reworked and retested. Only passing tests are presented in t~e above table. , . PACIFIC SOILS ENGINEER.NG. INC. SC D SC D SC F SC F SC F SC 0 SC F SC F sc G SC G SC F F F F F G SC G .SC G SC G G G F' F F G G • October 6, 1976 Work Order 100236-A • TABLE II Approximate • Lot No. Depth (feet) 20 27 21 25 • 22 33 23 32 24 37 25 40 • 26 41 27 35 28 30 • • • • • '. PACIFIC SOILS ENGINEERING, INC;. • • '. '.1 .. .- • _. - • • ... ti) • -. PACIFIC SOILS ENGINEERING, INC. 17921 SKY PARK ,CIRCLE (SUITE G) IRVINE, CALIF. 92714 TELEPHONE: (714) 557·9450 SUMMARY OF FOUNDATION REQUIRE/v\ENTS TRACT NO. 72-,34 (Model tots) -'- FOOTING , FOOTING 'Dep'j-h Reinf. Slab Moist Depth Reinf. Slab Moist Lot Ext. Into ' Ext. Int. Reinf. Req't. Lot Ext. Int. Ext. Int. ,Rejt'!f~ Req'r 20 A A D D G J 21 A A D D G J. ' , 22 A A D D G J 23 A A D D G J 24 A A D D G J 25 A A D D G J ,- 26 A A D D G J 27 A A D D G J 28 A A D D G J - - - , . LEGEND -, -' , --" ~ .... "----. ---" .. , , A-1211; B -18"; C -241t below lowest adjacent grade ' , D-One (l) No. 4 rebar at top and one (1) at bottom E-Two (2) No.4 rebars at top and two (2) at bottom F-One ,(1) No. 5 reber at top and one (1) at bottom . G-Six {6} inch by six «» inch -No. ,1 0 by No. J 0 welded-wire mesh, or equivalent • H-,Six (6) inch by six (6) inch -No.6 by No.6 welded wire mesh, or equivalent. I ... No. rebars, -inches on center both, ways. - J-A moisture content of optimum moisture required to a depth of 12-inches below slab subgrade K-Presaturation of slab subgrade required to 105 percent of optimum moisture to a depth of 12-inche below slab subgrade • L -Slab subgrade moisture to be verified by the soil engineer, prior to placement of visqueen and reinforcement .. X -NO SPECIAL REQUIREMENT . Note: 1) Exterior footings for 2-story structures must have a minimum embedment of l8-inches below grade. , 2) 'Exterior footings for ,3-story structures must have a minimum embedment of 24-inches , ~elow grade; interiors" l8-inches below grade. PLATE IIA@, -/ _cro-."' __ ,_, _ •• ... ~ . -. -, " , . -, .