The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCT 76-11; Tamarack Shores; Foundation Report; 1977-02-16i I, ,-- -c--l CL, -5.3 Ii’/,: ‘,, _. ) CT & I~ j .: ~&ION ~NClNEHRlNG CO., INC. @ SOILS ENCINTCPS 183’44 OXNARD STREET . TARZANA, CALIFORNIA 913.56 . 996.1600 704 SO”,” SPRING STREET LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 90014 lt73-so32 Etchmay 16, 1977 ~f?AcK J&m "Z',,'" Hirsch & Stem 15233 Ventura Blvd. Shennm Oaks, California CITY OF CARLSBAD Building Department IS?: 416Tan~xckAven1~ Carlsbad,Califomia As requested,~we have reviewxl our previous Foundation Re~rt dated &toker25,1973 ccmcemingthe subject site. Thisrepxt concerned construction of a propxed three storyapartrrentbuilding. we have alsc reviewed anewpro~sedconstructionplanbyPaceEngineeri.ng dated 12/21/76. This new plan indicates that the site will be developzdas single fznily residential units. Our report is satisfactory for the new project. As indicated, up to one fcotofloose surface soilsmantle the site. During the site grading these soils sbxldbeprocessed (recoqacted) toprovideunifonn support for footings and slabs. &on -letion of grading, footings and Slabswillbe foundedoneithercoqxMx?d fill or firm,undisturkd natural groixnd. Abearing value of 2000 p.s.f. my be used for footings founded in either of these materials. Allot-her mations pertaining to gmding in the referenced repz~* are applicable and should be followed. ~_ ~VpblwoIJ ? s730 s@aF7- -rC.A.CA. - - (2) Enclosed (3) Pace mgineering w/2 signed grading plans .~ - - - - .- -. - - - C i d 4 F OUNDATION ENCINEE~RIN~ Co.,. INC. 5.0115 ENGINrlriS 10344 OXNARD STREET . 704 SOUT” SPRING STREET * TARZANA, C?%LIFORNIA 91356 . 996-1600 LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90014 473.,031 December 14. 1973 Department of Real Estate 107 S. Broadway, Room 8107 Los Angeles, California 90012 Attention: Mr. G. A. Randolph Deputy Conrmissioner Re: File No. 34654 Carlsbad Tract 73-38 San Diego County, California Our Job: 416 Tamarack Avenue Carlsbad, California Dear Sir: With reference to your letter of November 28, 1973 to Goldrich 6 ICest concerning the subject site, the followinS conanents are offered. Our firm prepared a comprehensive Foundation Report (dated October 25, 1973) concerninS the proposed development. This report related the proposed construction to the specific foundation conditions at the subject site and Save reconnoendations both for design of the foundations and for the project grading. Our recommendations, which we will require be followed during the site development, are at least equal to and in some cases more stringent than those specified in UBC Chapter 70. As far as "the likelihood of landslides, rapid erosion, or subsidence", it seems to us that these are ridiculous, unfounded statements completely unrelated to this site. There are no slopes on or near the site where "landslides" could occur and none are proposed during the site grading. The nearly level site will be graded to drain to the nearby streets and certainly possess no potential for "rapid erosion". As for subsidence, detailed settlement analysis is contained in our referenced report - indicating little or no settlement potential for the site. The equally unfounded statements regardine"ReoloRic hazards, due to fault movement and earthquake shaking," are discussed in the attached letter from John D. Merrill, EnRineerinR GeoloRlst. Department of Real Estate Re: File No. 34654 Carlsbad Tract 73-38 San Diego County, California Page 2 : : As there does not seem t&be any rational basis for the unfounded statements contained in t& "SPECIAL NOTE" you propose for the sub- division public report, we respectfully request its' elimination from same. Very truly yours, TJH:sS - - .- - - - - FOUNDATION E N 0 I N E E R I N I3 COMPANY 1213) 881.2063 881.2076 - - d@b%d Do b?idEmmflLL C. P. G. encjin~ering goologistr IS432 OXNARDSTREET TARZINA. CALIF. 9195.6 December 12, 1973 Department OF Real Estate 107 South Broadway, Room 8107 Los Angeles, California 90012 Project 32148 Attention: G. A. Randolph, Deputy Commissioner Re: File No. 34654; Carlsbad, Tract 73-38 Dear Sir: We have reviewed your letter of November 28, 1973, addressed to Goldrich and Kest, Sherman Oaks, California. As engineering geologists familiar with the Carlsbad area, we strongly disagree that the proposed subdivision is located in a geologic hazard “risk area”. It is several blocks from the seashore where it is situated on relatively flat terrain underlain by dense, sandy terrace deposits and competent bedrock. The nearest fault is the Elsinore fault system 25 miles to the northeast. The only recorded earthquake along this portion of the Fault occurred June 7, 1935, and had a magnitude OF only 4.0 on the Richter scale. It is doubtful that this earthquake was even felt in Carlsbad. Project 32148 Page 2 In light of the above geologic setting, .we recommend that the “Special Note” requested by your department not be included in the subdivision public report. FLN:tw Ve ryflj;~i$‘z , , ., \‘<+..’ 2 .:, <..--- P “.G _’ ,’ s, CT e .L., Nwie, -2 J+--- E ~~,+$yy t 124 . q-’ +.$& cp;Ly;, --..A’<.0 - - F OUNDATION E NGINBBRING c: INC. 50115 FNWNI LRS 5521 RESEDA BOULEVARD . TARZANA, CALIFORNIA 91356 :. 342-871 I . 987-1797 701 SO”,” SPRING STPEET L.6S ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90014 . s73.5032 FOUNDATION REPORT PROPOSED APARTMENT BUILDINGS 416 Tamarack Avenue Carlsbad, California Portion of Tract 231 of Thum Lands (Map # 1681) OWNER/REQUESTED BY Mr. Michael Cracraft Hirsch/Stern 15233 Ventura Blvd. Sherman Oaks; California 981-5233 91403 October 25, 1973 F OUNDATION E NGINEGRING CO., INC. SOILS ENt.lN, F*S 9 . . 5521 RESEDA BOULEVARD . TARZANA, CALIFORNIA 91356 . 342.8711 . 9a~.-l797. 704 SOUTH SPPING ST*LET LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 90014 . S73.6032 . FcxJNLmTIoN FuFoKr - General Afouniation inveStiqatiOnhaSbeen conducted fOra~I&bUildiIgS~ be lazated at 416 Tamarack Aveme, Carl&ad, California. The site is described as portion of Tract 2310f ohm Lands (Map #1681) and has an area of 10.6 acres f. - - Elwentestpitswere excavated to amaximmdepthof 11 feet ard sanpled. Fieldandlalmratorytestswarecorxlucted todetennine the allmable fcuniation pressures for the structures. Surface Conditions The site is nearly level and is presently unoccupied except for a mall portion of the site near Tmarack Avenue, which is occupied by ml1 one story stnlcture.5. Soil exposed on theqround surface is silty sand, a&is inaloosdis- turbedcondition. The absence of shrinkage cracks idicates ncn-expansive surface soils. Streets, existing, an3 adjoining buildings Fe inspz&.ei for settlenent ad &ffects of expansive or unstable soils. No distress Fran these causes wasobserved. Nc surficial irdicationsof filledqroundwerenoted. Mation Conditions Testpitsxere excavatedwith abackhoe. Amap shcwirrg the locationsof the test pits and the loqsof the testbleswithdescriptions of the soils encountered, are attached. The natural soils predaninately omsist of silty sands. The surficial (l/2 to 1 foot *) soils are in a plowed-disturbea state. The urderlyinq soils are in a medim dense to dense condition. Sane of the upper soils are slightly to malerately -ted. Neitkr fill nor qnnudwater was enccuntered inthetestpitstittnztested depth of 11 feet f. - Fvurdation Report 416 Tamrack Avenue Carl&ad, California 2 . . Testing l Classificaticntksts consistinqofqradinqanalysis andmcistureccntent indicate thatthescilsmwhichthebui~swillke suppcrtedarefirm silty samls and therefcrewill have high streuqthardlaw settlerwtchar- acteristics. Penetmneter testsweremade inthe fieldtodetzmim therelativeden- sity (N) and omsistency of the soils. The surficial soils (fmn l/2 to 1 foot +I are considered to be in a lccse-distruked cmdition, which weld permit settlement of 'at-qrade' concrete slabs. The urderlyinq natural. soils are considered tobe inamedimdenseordense ccnditim, , whichwill minim&e settlsmmtof footings. Density tests shmtheun- disturbed, firm natural soils to have uniform densities (D.D.); thus settlenentsofsimilarfoo~swi~beunif~. Pesults of the classification, penetraneter,densityandm3isture ccntent tests are shownontheattached logs. xion tests wzre ccrducted cn representative Safples of the upper silty . Thesatipleswsrecanpactedtoatleast90per!centofmaxinarmden- sityand allowsdtodry tcamoisture amtentbelawthe shrinkaqelimit. Theywre then laterally restrained, loadedwith 60 pounds per square fwt ard saturated. After a 24 kurperiod and after no furtherexpensiontcok place, the expansicn.5 were noted tc be in the range of 3/4 percent to l-1/2 percent. This soilisccnsidered tobe nonexpansive. Fxperiencewith fcctinqson similar soils irdicates thatthenkaasured expansionwill not require special fourdationtreatmant. - Ccnsolidation and sheartestsbereconducted on representative sanples bf the faxdation soils. The samples thatwere selectedwereconsidered tike themcst~essibleard to have theleaststrenqth for eachof the types of soil. Inqeneral, these-the sanpleswiththe laJest density, thela?estrelativedensity, thehiqhestdeqreeof plasticity (P-1.) and the hiqhest percentage cf fines passing no. 200 sieve. The resultsof the consclidation and shexrtestsappear tcbs consistent withtheccrditicns fcund in the fieldandwithresultsof testscm similar soils. Test results are s&%m on the attached plates. TheccmsDlidationtests ware amducted cntiisturW samples. The specimenswsreloadedwitha srallseatinq load and saturated. Incre- mentloadswere added ard all~toremainuntilprbuyamsclidaticn hadbeenccmpleted. Theanrnuntofsettlenentwasreaxdedfcreach increment. Tests irdicate thattheangxessibilityof the soils de- creaseswithdepth. Thedirectsheartests-~~onundis~sanples~deter- mine the angle of internalfricticmard cohesion. Sarpleswere saturated urrler rcnmal loadbeforetesting and sbsarloadsbere applied@ckly in FOUNDATION E N G I.N E E R I N G COMPANY Etnmdation Report 416 Tmaxack Avenue I Carlsbal, California 3 - 'acamdancewith the stamW-dprccedureforconsolidateduudrain~ shear test ("R" Test). For the undisturbed silty sands, the lowest quality soilsonwhichthebuildinq fcotinqscanbs placed,anargleof intsrnal friction of 29 degrees axed acohesionof150 pounds per square fcotwere aJnputsdfmnthetestresult5. Tests on the other encountered natural soils irdicate thattheywxldhaveqreater Stmsnqthchmacteristics. Eescriptionof Proposed Structures tiCXadi.nq ItisKoposedtocons~~upto~story~frameandstuccoapart- ment buildings. Fo0tinqs of the stictures will be essentially "at grade" ~wi~~~~edbyconventio~lspreadfcotingson~i~~ natural soils or certified ompacted fill soils. Maxinnmloadscarried bycontinuous footinqs are expectedtobeless than 2000 pounds per lineal fc&. The nmhum pad loads will be on the order of 20 kips. The surficiallydisM soils in the concrete slabareas willbe arnpacted, asperreomne rdations of this report. Additional new fill may be placed for effective drainage of the site. This report is intended forcxmstruction similartothepropcsedbG.ld- ing and qrading described above. Major cbanqes shculdberwiewed for additional recamaenlations. - Desiqn Calculations The allowablebearing Capacity for spread fcotimqsms ccmplteaby the simplifiedmethal ofdeterminingbearinq capacity presented inSoil Mechanics inEaq' ing Practice by Terzaqhi and Peck, page 222.lhe bearing ca~city%Zrfcotinqs isbased on theuxlisturbed,h&ural silty sands at -5 feet depth. The allowable bear* capacity on the upper and ur&rlying natural soils, basedon thetestresults,wmldbaqreater. Theresults of the bearinq capacity calculations are tabulatedbelowfor typicalfcotinqs: width, Depth, Allowable iWmdation ft. ft. Pressure,psf Omtbuous footings 1.0 1.0 '2066 ssuare fcotings 3.0 1.0 2653 Theabavecalculati~arebasedontheshearstrengthonlyand~stbe mcdifi6daccordingtothesettlmentpotzntials. c n II u n A T I n hl c u I2 I’ hl c c m I Irl fz Pl-lUC)Akl” , I- . *- i -_ . . - 1 Ebundation Repcrt 416 Tamsirack Avenue ' :, Carl&ad, California . 4 b . Settl~tcalculationsarebasedup3ntheconsolidatiolltestresultsin acccrdancewiththemethcd set forth inFur&anentals of SoilMechanics by *D. W. Taylor, page 258. The anrxmtof settlement is GGiZionof the sizeof the loaded area as well as of the load. The sizeof the loaded area is representedbythe influee factor,whichis adimsnsionless quantitythatdepends on the area ardFcisscn's ratio. Settlsmentcal- culaticns arebasedonthemaximrm stress. When& applied stress beanms less thantenpercentof theapplied load, it is assumed that ccmscliiiationwculd bs negligible. These calculations assume the soils tobaoxnpletely saturated; at* propxed kuilding site it is unlikely that this cotiitionwill cccur. Thus, the actual bear- capacity will be hiqhe,than that indicated, and the ascunt of ccnsolidation would be amsiderably less. Calcula- tions for settlement are based on the total live load plus dead loads. The settlenentwillbelessthanthecalculations indicateas thedead load isabut psrcentofthetotalload. It is estimated that25 percentto 5Opercentof the settlementduet footing loadswilltake placeduring construction. ThesettlenentanalysesindicatesthatthemaxirmPnsettlementurderthe heaviest expected load will lx abut 0.35 of an inch. Maxinnnn differ- entialsettlenentbetweentwa adjacentfojtinqswilllxeless than1/4 ofanincll. Al3 exteriorbearinqfcctinqsofone or twc &cry structures shouldhave. adepthofatleast12 irchesbelowthelcwestadjacentfinishedgrade. Theminirenn depth for interior footings (if any)'should be 12 inches balcwth?baseoftl-eccncreteslab. Ccntinucusfcctir~~splaced intcfirmnaturdl soils (orcrmpactedfill soils) at depths specified abve and having a minimumwidthof12 inci-es can be designed for an allowable fcundation pressure of 2000 p.s.f. All @ fcctings placed atdepths specified abvearxl having aminimnnwidth of three feet can be designed for 2500 p.s.f. 'Ib provide uniform support to "at grade" wncrete slabs, any psrking am3 driveway areas, itisreccmnended that the sukqradesbe scarified, bamoistenedtonearoptinnrnnrGsture ccntentandbe canpact&. Existing on-site nabral soils are suitable for use as fill soils, after any deleterious, surficialdebris has keen remcved. Any new fill sixxld he placed in layers not exceeding eiqht inches in thickness, nr&stened tonear optinnnnnwistwe, ard crrnpcted tiatleast 9Opercentofmaximnn density. Themaximumdensity shculdtedetssmbsd in accordancewiththe rVnerican Society for Testing Materials Test Methad D 1557-70. All crm- pactgl fillsha&dbetestedbyasoilsengineer. FOUNDATION E N G I N. E E R I N G COMPA NY ..‘ . -. FaxdationRepcrct 416 Tamarack Avenue carlsbad,Califarnia 5 c - - - ~yimportsoilsha~haveanwpansi~ofnotmDlre~3percent~~ a confining surcharge pressure of 60 p.s.f. Concrete floor slabs shmld be at least 3-l/2 inches thick. A& rein- forcenentinslabs~llbeasFerrequirementsoftheprojectstructura1 engineer. Ccmcrete shculdbe placsdwithaslowa slmpardwaterosntent as practical. Thegnxrd slrniid.be slopadtodrainaway franthekuild- kg, ariiwater shmld notbe allcwedtopond adjacenttothebuilding. CXmtinuax (exterior) bearing footings ofoneardtm story structures shaAdbereinforcedwithatleastoneno.4barofsteel. Interior nxl-bearingfootingsneediptnecessarilybereinforced. T~ary~n~~pportadV~iCal~!~t~ for constructionplrposes Canb~made to a height of six feet where there are m adjoining structures. The site is suitable for a mimnirg pool. Thepmlshmldbasusupported entirely on uatial soil, or entirely on aqxacted fill. If the pm1 is supported partially on fill and partially on natural soil, provision shclllil be made for differential settlement. The lxx11 may be designed for a foundationpressure of 2OOOpnsidsper square feet. poOlwalls shculdbadesigned fm an equivalent fluid pressureof 3Opound.s per cubic fmt. Theccspacted fill/naturalsoilswillpraridetherequired strengthtoresist thehydmstaticpressure. Althcughnofillwasenmmter~, saallamaasoffillcanexistasback- fill in possible old basm3ts or where other structures or uxrlergr~ tanks havebeenorwill beremved, in sewer or utility tremhes, seepage pits, septic tanks, etc., tiich ware not detect& by cm investigation. Suchlccations shouldbelxickfilledwithompacted fill after rmuvalof all loose soilsarddebris. Allanpactedbackfillshouldbe testedby an~wedsoils~ineertoconfarmtDatleast90percentofmaximrm density. Conclusions Itisandudedtbatthe sitewillbasuiizbleforthepropcsedgrading asdccnstruction. &rrecarmDJldtions andccmclusionsarebasedmde- tailed testing of representative sanples,exp withsimilar sites, arfiare inacoxdancewith Octti 25, 1973 F O’IN D AT IO N E N G I. N E E R I N G COMPANY .- -~ . . : . . . - - - - - - - - - . 0’ *.. *. LOCATION OF TEST HOLES JEFFCRSoA’ . ST > L-- --- *z w L EGEND * =#f-&A-. ,’ -+5.6 p/R 416 TAP%??ACK 9/Z-. FOUNDATION C9RLS09D, C9L /E ENG.lNEERlNG CDMPANY LOG OF TEST II'ILES Continuous disturbed samples were taken for classification tests to identify the various soils, and 2-l/2 inch diameter undisturbed samples were taken at frequent Intervals for detailed laboratory tests. Also a J-inch sampler was driven in a '. prescribed manner (see N below) to obtain relative density and consistency of the soil. There are various sizes of samplers and driving hammers in existence, this combination of sampler and hammer has been used because the equipment used was not adaeted to the standard oenetrometer and the 140 lb. hammer and/or the site was relatively inaccessible. Reference: Soil Xcchanics d Engineerin Practice, Terzaghi & Peck, Wiley 1940, 1st Editicpage 265. An explanation of the symbols and values shown on the logs is as follows: - N The number of blows of a 35 lb. hammer havinq a fall ( of 30" needed to drive a 1" o.d. sampler six inches after seating the sampler. An estimate of the rela- tive density of sands, silty sands and gravelly sands can be obtained from the Table given below. M.C. Moisture content in percent of dry weight D.D. Dry density in pounds per cubic foot. 4 The percent of material that will pass a no. 4 (3/16") sieve. The materials larger than the no. 4 sieve and smaller than 3 inches would be designated as a gravel. and the material smaller than the no. 4 and larger than the no. 200 would be termed a sand. 200 The percent of the material that will pass a no. 2!l9 sieve (the largest particle that will pass a no. 200 sieve is about the smallest that can be seen with the unaided eye.) If more than half of the sample passes this sieve, it would be classed as a silt. - Relative Density of Sands & Very loose 4-10 Loose lo-30 Medium 30-50 Dense Above 50 Very dense FOUNDATION ENG.lNEERING COMPANY L(lG OF TEST HOLE 9 ry-/ [N pvrloDl4 IZOOl 9&5CR/P7-/5,N I J 0. . . . . ,‘. 8 . ,’ l 1%’ . (I .*‘I .,.’ Ill ’ ’ . ‘. I 1.1 * , l , ** , * . . l 8. *. .* /I’ -- /UYJVND-fine 9rari7ed, 1 Brown, Di.&rbed to I-“, Real browq, B&dense $x$;s~ S/. cemenLed,h’o~,&.r~k’, ’ C t . bf oh40 to brown, fled. dense be/OK 5’2, GC brow, WY s&h&) cemented @ IO’. - u *a . * . . , . . . . * ,,” *I’: *a ’ I . 1 .’ l .* a, ‘a ,. . . , ., ’ * 0 . e * ,. . . ,/’ -0’ - -. - 0’ ..a. . * :: . . *. . . * . . , .* * . ‘. * . . II ’ I * . . . . , l . -. . . ,I :. . , . *. ’ I ::*. . . . . * ,,t ’ - * I I l!Z TY SAND -/‘i/ie I Red b/oHc fled dense be/ok: JL do mod /cemenkeS; flun p&s&c, .&sSLfh? @5 ‘2, fihe to me& qrzhe< 0. drohv s/;/t content decreases w/de&h, I I I I I Dk!urbedto/'-f, ' ~ Red. broMn, flt?ddmre below, ~ Cemeded, iYoflpkx&, &ohm @4’ S/i2 content decreases u/de@ ft. boom, I I I 19 ~/07)/00) /e 15 1 I I I l?4w! qkG7ed be/on B ‘2. . . Ezcauaied 9-2 7 -19 73 No groundmter 4'67ZWARACK AYE. CARLSBAD , C4WE FOUNDATION ENGINEERINQ COMPANY - ‘~ - - - :A L - - LOG OF, TEST HOLE .7z-4 1 /v ~P?cpD~ 4 p9oI JLC?CPQ/PT/ON 1 B . . . . . . *. . @. . ‘0 a, .a . , l?J .* 1 ’ l ’ I * *a, . a.. L . . * W-6 d . *. * 1. ‘. . . *, l . , * ” ., . D ’ 0) ‘I . ’ I . a’ . I ’ . 1 . . . ’ . *, .- 49’ * 7 S9ND - he arahed .&mm. C fleddense to dense be/oti, S/: Cen?entee n/n p.hshk, BfoMfl, RW,,dense dehf 5’-$ s/;/t fonten t decmaxes w#z+&, 31~ JY STAND -grown,&.se-~4/itub~ LO&'-t &?dbraA/n, 8ezYden.e be/off, SL cemented, /p/dnpbs-&y, Gr brouo be/oh/ b ‘2, fi>e to med. gmfk& Ty- 7 0 - . * . * . .* *a I - I :* a. . . . . . &, & DESCR/P~/ON S/L JY S9hcD -Brohqh%bed to T&f, Reu! brom mddenoe to &nen&dh~,.ob-z~~den.ce b.&ooM ct. b!cWO to b/oh% &e/N 4/v? .&Ta k7ted 9 -27-1973 No groundWater 4’6 7@?‘A.‘79Of AYE. FOUNDATION C4RLSBAD, C9L/fY ENQINEE’RINQ COMPANY - , -, - -~ - - - - - . .,, LOG OF TEST HOLE S/L TY 391Vb - F/h%? qralhed, Brown Loose Lo l/-f Red. ~$0~7 ; s/, cemented Med,denJe Lo dense be/o/w; IYon p&st/‘c* S/WY J2fNj -Brown, ~~3hrbedLLo ,& ‘I, Red. brown, fled dense be/oh: Am phstk S/ to m oci cemenhd, Brotin to dr. Drown be/o/ 4 .f 0’ ..* 1 * Y/Lr/ my’l/D - fifie grCc7/;3pd/ Bmm , Lo0.e to Q/?idb~ohcc, 4eddexfe r/on pks/i;2mo2@fl, / be&i, r Brown be/ow, JQzmentt& S/;/t co&en6 dicreases w/4ep/h, , w-4 ~~ ~~~ s/~~~~~~~-oraKn,~~~~rbe~-/~e Red. brofl?,#eddefl.riebc& N~n,&&c, fikeqrt7/;?ed, /Lo/“, JL to mud cemen&hm. 9 -2 7 -/973 NO gr0unc.Y water 4/6 5%%b?9CK 9/E c%eCS&qD, C9L/E FOIJNDAAION ENQINEERINQ CUMPANY .- - - - - DIRECT SHEAR TEST TYPE TEST CDNSOLIDATED LJADL~AINED v ./ I I I I I I I I 1 ” NO;MAL STPESS 2 3 UPS PEE S&‘lJAPE FOOT U.S. STAUDAPD SIEVE SIZE loo y. y@4. *LL *lb *50 l ZM I I I ( I I &I’ I I I I \’ is I I I t ! .i J, m.; 2 I I I I I 1 I I I cJ-gJqq WI 10 I at 0.01 NOTE: SPECMENS PLACED AT FIUD MOISTURE AND SATURATED 2X UOUPS UN0k.P NORMAL LOAD. SPtCIMtN SUE~PED WUILE ,U- MkQsED IN WATER. LIQUID UMlT - PLASTIC INDU /\J, /=! CLASSIFICATION S/'/k y sand DRY DENSITY flL7 POUND5 PEP CUBIC FOOT TEST UOKNO.~DEPTU z/ UEIGUT A 0 ‘kU44ETE.R 2.5 M MOl5TUPE CONTENT INITIAL- --F FlNN./g YJUPATION PtPCkNT \NlTlAL/dFlNAL/DO 416 r9~J79/?9CK 9v: FOUNDATION C4&sL3~O~ Ci+C/F E N G I N E E’ R I N G COMPANY . . - - 2. TYPE TEST CDN5OllDATED dXV.,NED’ / n ” I 2 3 NOPMAL STPESS LIPS PET! SqUAPE FCX,T U.S. STAUDAPPD SIEVE SIZE In0 y j;w. +k *lb *so ‘200 I I I I I en ,’ I I I I : I I~ ! ‘- I I iii @ ; 1 I 2 I I ’ I l\i ! LI I- I I ZI &.j 1 I I d” 20 i I I f I ? I x! I I I 1 ! I - Ii I I I II I I I I - IO I 0.1 0.01 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIM~TEPS WPE OF SPECIMEN ~nds~~~~~d DRY DENSITY /03 POUNDS PEP CUBIC FOOT UElG”T/gOlAMlZR 1+-u MOl5TlJRE CONTENT tNITIAL 6 FINAL = - - ~TUPATION PSPCWT WTIAL~FINAL/OD NOTE: SPECMENS PLACED AT Flu0 MOISTUPE AND MTUQATED 2% UOURS UNDER NORMAL LOAD. SPECIMEN SUEAYED WUILE IM- MWLPSED IN VJATEP. LIQUID LIMIT - PLASTIC INDLX N'pe CLASSIFICATI N 5;/ y sand 2 TEST UOLENO.~DEPTU 2' 416 T949R9cH 4.4 C9#4wB44ca /E FOUNDATION E N G I N E E.R I N G COMPANY ,.‘1 - - - - - - -. .~ -. -~ iDIRECT SHEAR TEST ,. 0 TYPE TEST CONSOLIDATED ~IIDRAINED ./ ki+t’ ” ” v’ ” ” i i i i NO&AL STRESS 2 3 UPS PE’Z SQUARE FOOT US. STANDARD SlEVE SIZE IO I 0.1 0.01 GPhlN SIZE IN HILLIMLTERS TYPE OF SPIXIMEN bhdkkti/rb& DRY DENS11 Y 104 POUNDS PER CUBIC FOOT UEIGUT /: o”DlAAWER .?. 5” NOTE: 5FEc~t~5 PLACED AT FIELD MOISTURE AND SATURATED 24 UOUPS UNDW NORMAL LOAD. !S’EClMLN SUEAPED WUILE ~l.l- MtPSEO IN WATER. LIQUID LIMIT - PLhsrlC IND&X N* E CLASSIFICATION s r./t y sand TEST UOlENO.~DEPTU /o' MOI5TUPE CONTENT INITIAL- - -f- FINAL 23 SATUPATION PEPCfJV lNlTlAL~FINAL/00 FOUNDATION E N G I N E E 4/6 77'94'/?4cK Al C-AWL SL39D, CAL IF R I N G COMPANY - - - - .- - -, CONSOLIDATIO’N TEST 0.2 0.4 0.b I 2 4 6.10 20 A0 60 PRESSURE f/PS PEP SQUAQE fOOT U.S. STANDARD SIEVk SIZE .-_ 3lN. YdlN. *A -.- =P*lN SIZE IN MILLIMETEPS WPE OF SP,XIMEN ‘%d~~td~~~~ DPV DENSITY //O POUND5 PEC CUBIC FOOT INlTlAL UEIGUT ~~‘/oWETEQ 2.5” MOISTURE CONTENT 3 INITIAL -FINAL/q 5AlUlZATION PtPCWT INITIAL k-- FINAL ho LIQUID LIMIT - PLASTIC INDkX ldt p. CLASSIFICATION S/./l! y ssnd TEST UOLCNO.LDEPTU z FOUNDATION C4wL~L309b, CxYfFy ENGINEERING COMPANY - . CONSOLlDA-ilON TEST - - - - - - FO I I NI I II I I I I I I I 1 I Illl I I I 0.2 0.4 0.6 I 2 4 6 IO IIJ 20 A0 60 PP~ssuPE Y/e3 PEQ SQUME fOO7- U.S. STANDARD SIEVE. SIZE z..” .%+,.I rtA Ju. l r.n *“An ,oo “.-. 7”‘“. - u -,-A LU I I I I I I 60 ! 1 ,?,I~ I I I 1 .I f I I. I 7 bo. i I \ , I I 1 I 40.! 1 / 1 I I I I I ta ’ I f I ! I I I I I I I I I I 1 I 1 loo Y) 01 0.01 OPAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETEES TYPE OF SPECIMEN .hhdkit”hed DRV DENSITY A93 POUNOS PEC CUBIC FOOT IUITIAL UEIGUT ~~~DIAMETEL? 25 MOISWPE CONTENT )NITIAL 6 FINAL z3 - - S4TUPATION PEPCtNT INITIAL~FINAL ‘Oo UNDATION ENGINEE . /, R I NO COMPANY LWID LIMIT - PLASTIC INDU N. p. CLASSIFICATION S/./LV sand , . TEST UOLLNO.&MPTU 5’ - .- - - - - .- - - .- CONSOLIDATION TEST .- PRESSURE f/h PEQ SQU4w‘c FOOT U.S. STANDAPD SIEVC SIZE 100 3iN. WIN. *A I-Y l 50 r”Ztd I 1 -11 I I 1 1 I bo ! I I W! II II \I I I I J I I 8, 1 1’ II h I I i t, All I \ I , I I I II 1 \,I I 00 .! ] ; \\I -f 1 I I ; ; I 1 I \ I ai i j i I I I I I I f i I 1 I I loo ho I a1 0.01 npi OF :,‘:::,;x3kzzz/~bed DRY DENSlTY /oG POUNDS PEC CUBIC FOOT IUITIAL UEIGUT ~~“DlhMETEI! 2x” MOI5TlJPE CONTENT WTIAL- - 5 FINAL 23 ~TUPATION Ptecrm INITIAL~FINAL/~~ Lk?UlD LIMIT - PLASTIC INDGi Ns p. CLASSIFICATION s/*/ty sand TEST UOLC NO.gB%PTU /o ’ FOUNOATION ENGlNEiRlNG - i - FO"tiDATION h3NEBRING CO., INC. SOILS CN:IN, cus 5521 RESEDA BOULEVARD . TARZANA. CALIFORNIA 91356 . 342.8711 . 987-1797 704 SO”,” SPrlING STREET LOS ANGELES, CALIFClI(HIA 90014 875-5031 416 Tmarack Avenue carlslxd, California Portion of Tract 231 of Thm Lards (Map #1681) Avisual examinationofthe subject sitehaskenmade todetemine it's general suitability far proposed residentialcmkstruction. Inspecticm pits were excavatedwithabackhoeatvaricxlslocatio~ *determine the depth and area1 extent of old fill soils cr unsuitable foundation conditions. Amp is attached shming the locaticns of the inqecticn pits. Tie following general cxxnnats inregardtothe suitabilityofthe site are offered: 1. The site is nearly level, and is presently unaxupied except for mall portions of the site near Tamarack Avenue, which is occupiedbysnall one story structures. No fillwasenamnt- ered in the inspecticmpits. 2. The natural soilsvisuallyclassifyas silty sax& tc the tested ,depth of 11 feet f. The surficial (1 feet t) sails are in a plowed-disturkd state. The wXkrlying~&ls appear tcbe in a mxliundensetodensecmdition. Scmaof theupper soils appeai- tobecenentd. 3. Nogroundwater~sercchmtered inthe inspectionpits tcamaxi- mm depth of 11 feet. 4. Theuppersoilsappeartobenonexpansiveardsh~ldnotr~e spatial famlation treatment. 5. Since buildings exist on a mall lxxticn of the site (see map), there muldkeold fills,basments,etc. Howwer,mnewzre faud during this inspection. Anyundergmumlstructures~d have tobarsmw~tithe resultingdepressionsproperlyhack- filled. Preliminary Fbundation Investigation Report 416 Tamarack Averme, Carl&ad, California - It is thought that the site is generally suitable for cxmstructicn of l-3 stmy stucw ad franc structures,with fmtings "atgrade".. Hover, it isanticipated thatsaneompactionof the surficial soilswill be required wheretheymuld affectthefourXlations. This will be r-ecessary bth l2J eliminate the lmsecorditionof theupper soils inthepmpceeflixSding areas and to insure thatanyold fill areas (if fmduringgrading) are .-~ cleanedoutandreanpact&insuchareas. This repcrt is inter&d tc pcortray the general site wm%ticns; no ret- omerdations for fourdationdesign areoffered cr intendedand mwar- - ranty for same is implied cr shculdbs construed. Ifymdecidetc pmceed cm this project, please notify us axd we will wntinue with cur i. T foundation irvestigation. JACK w. RoIsIm Civil Engineer OctDber 2, 1973 ZSP Attachnents: 1Lazationof Inspection Pits - *. -’ FOUNDATION E N G I N E E R I N G COMPANY .- -~ - i~~AAci‘iOF\J OF ,I t\9 SPECTXNJ PIT23 Ji.VFERSoN ST 4 Qb l\i XI \ - . I~ zf $ a 3 .2 i % ~61 2 9 Q. h .$ 8 .2 I+ ~'- "$ EL+ --- --- ------ e e I , 9 . 1 ; 4 1 < i * LEGEND u w ll I DC. Of hspech p/z #.q.T. 4’6 74’/‘29A%‘CK 9vC FOUNDATION CVRLS&?D , CAL/f ENGINEERING C~~MPANV - _ --. - -. ._ .