Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995 COSTA DEL MAR RD; EXPIRED; 81-497; PermitCONSTRUCTION LENDING AGENCY1 hereby affirm that there is a construction lending agency for the performance of the work forCERTIFICATE OF EXEMPTION FROMWORKERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE(This section need not be completed if the permil is for one hundred dollars ($100) or less)I certify that in the performance of the work forwhich this permit jsjssued I shall not employ anyperson in any manner so as to become subject tothe Workers Compensation Laws of CaliforniaNOTICE TO APPLICANT If after making this Certificate of Exemption you should become subjectto the Workers Compensation provisions of theLabor Code you must forthwith comply with suchprovisions or this permit shall be deemed revoked1 HAVE CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE COMPLETED AFHEREBY CERTIFY THAT ALL INFORIVATION HEREONFURTHER CERTIFY AND AGREE IF A PERMIT IS ISSUECOUNTY AND STATE LAWS GOVERNING BUILDING CCSPECIFIED HEREIN OR NOT 1 ALSO AGREE TO SAVELESS THE CITY OF CARLSBAD AGAINST ALL LIABILEXPENSES WHICH MAY IN ANY WAY ACCRUE AGAINSOF THE GRANTING OF THIS PERMITb: i c tc ir CCr rr APPLICANT S SIGNATURE' OWNE(&(2J. CONTRACTORQ"AGENT D BY PHONE QAPPROVED BY DATE1?Kl!°"rS 5 s < o •» z ^ i O ni rn 3 £/) "^ ^- H I r H ? j> 31 D z > J Z S H° Zn o -< - D DO •AN OSHA PERMIT IS REQUIRED FOR5 0 DEEP AND DEMOLITION OR COSTRUCTURES OVER 3 STORIES IN HE*ll O vi""o<•SCHOOL FEES:CONTRACTORTOTAL ELECTRICAL* — \o-H r- -nmm TJ 00f—m -Issue•F Oo •; 1 11 (1 ( e ,ici it\ t - 1TEMP OCCUPANCY (30 DAYS)\ n 3d 3 3 J=» 5 H DytS-* - -DCopy is filed with the cityC Certified copy is hereby furnishedOVER 200 AMPS\ - :SdWVOOZ 310ddW31TOTAL MOEm Xo m 3 o0 -n r- - :WORKERS COMPENSATION DECLARATIONI hereby affirm that I have a certificate of consent to self insure or a certificate of WorkersCompensation Insurance or a certified copythereof (Sec 3800 Labor Code)POLICY NOCOMPANYREMODEL/ALTER PER CIRCUITFENCE OVER 6 ->•'''- - •oX NJUl W-oX RAMADA CABANA .'/- :EXIST BLDG EA AMP/SWT/BKRenm—1 c:-D \ C/Jo1— 3D [ T) ro01 CO 3: TJO SO X \* o 1—m Xo m :NEW CONST EA AMP/SWT/BKRAWNING //MECHANICALt o c? O1 c ~<a 00)1 i — t ELECTRICAL PERMITS-\ o MOBILE HOME PERMIT.ti m mn 1 -~*TO.T.AjL_PLUMBING: ! i!!! }!=r-i5 ! i| iHilllJipSSi>?3 §|a§cI&?C5||g Sj§o?°<g£^E^B§-|| liiissi UiillH o -1 RACTORoz H H O ALLINCLUSIVE PERMIT:TOTAL PLUMBING1 XTOJALMECHANICALPLAN CHECK— : H W i -y H 0 IX .J D \ V' D SIGN PERMIT- :WATER SOFTNERRELOCATION OF EA FURNACE/HEATER\BUILDING PERMIT- —EACH LAWN SPRINKLER SYSTEMMECH^EX'HAUST VHOOD/DUCTS\EACH INSTAL , ALTER, REPAIR WATER PIPE\\ENT FAN SINGLE DUCT \\\ iHo ^EACH GAS SYSTEM 5 OR MORES\BOILER/COMPRESSOR1630\HPEACH GAS SYSTEM 1 TO 4 OUTLETSXf30fLER/COMPRESSOR\n5HP \\ xEACH WATER HEATER AND/OR VENTBOItER/COMPRESSOR'-UPTO'S HP\\ \\m o X COe r—o NG SEWER/ o m3 § O§ ^00 c ./. v' \" 5EACH FIXTURE TRAPINSTALL F.URN .OUCTS UPTO\100,000 BTU N^ Q PLUMBING PERMITSH O \\ \\ ^MECHANIGALXPERMIJ ,/ -s/ -X \\ \X/' /~s\s//' X \ fiz ^. $ O)r 0 o -nH 0)ra 0 c m onr> oD STANDARD PLAN #TJ Z D /*Y "v' // oo^ -o ro o 7 V- ""* \^\CENSUS TRACTCl T) r | zD C m ZONINGm U> cz TJ > Z en 0 U)HO m Condomirn iim n\7pr phraseConstruct 3 Story 78 Unit. . o" fN.ni h-c> 0 ^. M <f f3 gg 0 0$[3> (i: Ch O MCO PJ \ V1 1 Q) / /Qj DESIGNER'S PHONE,459-2606^^••^"^Nor^ahd Unless Machine ^CertifiedDESCRIPTION OF WORKArrhi r.p.rl-Tire & PlanningH o b -t-m SUBDIVISION giaaEssoR-p JJR^EL NO ParcelCondominium 4 2ili6i \2 |I |0 i i i Q5 i31 ^v>(D ICFQH1 (D H STATE LICENSEC-2413OWNER'S MAILING2 inn r.nsi-flADDRESSDPI Mar RH . . Carlsbad. CA 92n080 H D gl5 p"" 3 §1 > In rt-JD l-j N3 (t) I-* (Ui-1 rt0 CONTRACTOR'SPHONE298-883nOWNER OWNER'S PHONERancho La Costa. Inc. 438-9111 x4204PRIME CONTRACTORCA Larsen Const. Co. Inc.STATE LICENSE1391751LICENSED CONTRACTOR S DECLARATION1 hereby affirm that 1 am licensed under provisions of Chapter 9 (commencing with Section7000) of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code and my license is in full force and effeeto Ul n 0 o ro ^ °fS, n 03 ***•" o~ o """ U) - So,DATE OF APPLICATION12/7/81BUS LICENSE23394PERM IT NUMBER-^ ^ • • v_^K CITY OF CARL.SBAD-^^ APPLICATUSE BALL POINT PEN ONLY 1200 ELM-BUILDING CION & PERMAVENUEtEPARTMENT ^BT ^J APPLICANT TC(714) 438-5525 MATION 'W'THIHz ^o . •^ INSPECTION VALIDATES ^- 0 H !E UJ Q. 01 UJz3o 'SITE , . :ADDRESS "Qo:ou LUa: zo uLU CL CO Q _J LU UL -- ' UJ1-o "oroh-uUJa.inz ', a:oi- 0UJ Q.(/I Z UJ H D INSPECTION•• - hii c1- 1 *L< a Lc/ 4 U« icL 1 | WOOD FLOOR" * J J 5 )R PLUMBING| UNDER FLOC)R HEATING1 UNDER FLOC•0_l_ SUB FLOORQ, fez 0 o 1 4 V ^ f' «£> X [SLAB FLOORx V •«,_PLUMBING1 UNDER SLAB' */ ' *; ^.:- i,. . *t^ »ri11 UJJ ORMS • SETBACK « TOIFOOTING • F< '"; s "*t CONCRETE00_ O 0 \ X V. •*. •., •'^ , '• g \\ A. "•» ""-^ •".'."••.. X- =••FRAME'**~**•» i^ "J« i? '• • •-.;TRICAL| ROUGH ELEC>lt ^S. V, z 5 I D. I Ccc > '••j v-. v - V. • •a* ^•-.. ^ ~riNG/VENTILATINGROUGH HEA14\f -.-. j k PLACE INSULATIONI FRAME OK «.'> 'S QCC.ef OK • PLACE WALLBO/1 INSULATION• - 1 VXN •OK • PLACE TAPEWALLBOARD. •^ OUu ATH OK • PLACE STU1 EXTERIOR L\ / ,FIREPLACE,, J Ul UJ DAMPER a SIJ ~'HEIGHT OF CHIMNEYPLATE TIES,,OTHER? (POLE)1 TEMP POWEFSEWERfeUJt- Ul O > STEEL BONDINGO Ul •• D Ul Q. c ' FENCE PREPLASTE'• FRAME1 SHOWN •i Z D. »f BLDG DEPTFINAL INSP B>S REQ COMPLETED1 OTHER DEPTV•PERM-TEMPELEC METER-'ERM-TEMP1 GASMETER-F/:UPANCY ISSUEDwoO'u' I City of Carlsbad m 1200 ELM, CARLSBAD, CA 92008 • TEL (714) 438 5525 MISCELLANEOUS RECEIPT White — Applicant Yellow — File Pink — (1) Finance (2) Data Process Gold — Assessor DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES D Assistant City Manager (714) 433 5596 fc] Building Departmsnl (714)4385525 D Engineering Departmsnl (714)438-5541 D Housing & Redevelopment Department (714)438-5811 Q Planning Department (714) 438-5591 Citp of 1200 ELM AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 TO: Mr. Les Vaughn La Costa Hotel & Spa Costa del Mar Road Carlsbad, CA. 92008 81-497 Date: 1-13-83 NOTE: WE WILL HOLD YOUR PLANS FOR 10 days at-our office for you topick up. -After which time, they will, be destroyed. . „ Subject: Plan Check Expiration Dear Sir: The plan check for your project at: 1995 Costa Bel Mar has become null and void due to the limitation of time. • •W f m See 1979 Uniform Building Code Section 303 (c) , Expiration of plan check., "Applications for which no permit is issued within 180 days following the date of application shall expire by limitation and plans submitted for checking may thereafter be returned to the applicant or destroyed by the Building Official. In order to renew action on the application after expiration, the applicant shall resubmit plans and pay a new plan-check fee." To renew your application please submit two new plans designed to the 1979 Uniform Building Code. If you have any questions please contact the Carlsbad Building Department at 438-5525. Very truly yours*, Martin 0remar Building Offi MOrhh DEVELOPMENTfAL SERVICES D Assistant Ciiy Kr-nr.gcf i?oo ELM CARLSBAD, CALH'Of (NIA G2000 fef Eul (714) -.23-5525 Date: 11-10-82 To: Mr. Les Vaughn La Costa Hotel ,§ Spa Costa del Mar Road Cattsbad, CA. 92008 Subject: Plan Check Lxp-{.ration Dsar Sir: PC* 81-497 \ Dated 1995 Costa de Plan Check Exi • PLEASE NOTE: On irfeady granted. No further extensions can be granted. Our recoids indicate that you have not obtained your building permt for whicli you filed ail application on the date sho.-Ti abaye. 7he provisjcns of Section 304 (c) of the Uniform Building Code scale? Sec. 304 (c) Exr)irp.t5c\i_ of Pi^l^Chock. Applications for vh.idi no pcrj.nt is issued v/itkui ISO do/s follo-..'ing the dace of application shall expjrc by Lua- i tat a on aoi pious subi;i.Lttcd foi- dieckin^ iii:«.y tlicrcrfter be retiimed to the applicant or destroyed by the Building Official. The ]iuilda.ng Of facial n;ay extend tliS tin:e foe- actior by the applDcr.nt for a period riot cxceedaiig ISO days upon written iL-quest by the appJicant shov/ing tliac circu'risLdnces boyo:ri. the control of the applicant h^ve prevent c-d actaou from being tr-lcen. In order to renew sccion on an application r_ftor cxpiraLion, tlri applicant shall resubunt plans and pay a new plan check ies. For your convenience, please check the appropriate box belo"; indj cat ing your inten- tions and return this letter to the address abovre. Project abandoned. I \n1I pick i.ip plans in 10 days. Si mature Date _ Project ebaiid plans may be destroyed. Signature Date li you have any questions, pi case contact the Carlsbad Building n^nrtmont at 43r;-Sr.2f.. Very tr^Uy yours, }; 01 f ict?i 'DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES D Assistant City Manager (714) 433-5533 %S Building Depe.rtmsnt (714) 433-5525 1200 ELM AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 LA COSTA MAY 1 V 1982 Date:5-12-82 To: Rancho La Costa, Inc. PC# 81-497 Dated 12-7-81 2100 Dosta Del Mar Road 78 unit condo Carlsbad, CA. 92008 1995 Costa Del Mar Plan Check Expires: 6-7-82 Subject: Plan. Check Expiration Dear Sir: Our records indicate that you have not obtained your building permit for which you filed ail application on the date shown above * The provisions of Section 304 (c) of the Uniform Building Code state: Sec. 304 (c) Expiration ofJPlan Check. Applications for which no permit is issued within 180~3aysTolloving" the date of application shall expire by lim- itation and plans submitted for checking may thereafter be returned to the applicant or destroyed by the Uuildmg Official. The Building Official may extend the time for action by the applicant for a period not exceeding 180 days upon written request by the applicant showing that circumstances beyond the control of the applicant have prevented action from being taken. In order to renew action on an application after expiration, the applicant shall resubmit plans and pay a new plan check fee. For your convenience, please check the appropriate box below indicating, your inten- tions and return this letter to the address above.. Project abandoned. I will pick izp plans in 10 days. Signature Project abandoned, plans may be destroyed, Signature Date Date Maximum 180-day time extension requested for the following reason: If you have any questions,please contact the Carlsbad Building Department at 438-5525. Very truly yours, Martin OrcnyaK? Bui Iding ESGIL CORPORATION / 9) 0«2O CHKSA1>KAKK OR.. ST/ITK 121£ \v , SAN DIKOO, CA (T14) 5(10-14OH April 29, 1982 Plan Check: 81-497 Project: Condo Five (La Costa & El Camino Real) The "III" set substantially complies with the codes except: 1. Open space easement should be accepted prior to permit issuance. 2. Building Official should rereview final >^ / // plan to rule on whether fire door is &^ OL B--TS—• required between the atrium and corridors. ^P<2-/7/V? 4-r/ aJ Esj^il Corooraticjin James Jos« pn \Gilshian cc Mr. Don Hodges CARLSBAD FIRE DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: CARTER - BUILDING DEPT. DATE: 5-25-82 FROM: BRIAN - FIRE SUBJECT: PLAN CHECK APPROVAL OF CONDO 5 I approved the plans for the project on 1-6-82 (see attached) subject to a variety of conditions. With respect to the doors across the corridors at the atrium, the following alternatives are acceptable: 1. Cross-corridor doors are not required provided the smoke-removal system is designed to remove the smoke from the corridors. This must be substantiated during the test of the system. 2. Cross-corridor doors are required if the smoke cannot be removed fro™ the corridors. If the second alternative is chosen, the doors shall be 20 mm. rated automatic-closing doors actuated by a, smoke or lonization detector. Additional details will be provided if this alterna- tive is chosen. INTERDEPARTMENTAL INFORMATION SHEET BUILDING DEPARTMENT TLDING ADDRESS: , ! 0 OK 0 y K CITY OF, CARLSBAD PLANNING DEPARTMENT -. g^ , q ;__^—.. ., ' —• " '—WWI »fcBuitqing Department ZONE A\LOT SIZE LOT WIDTH UNITS ALLOWED UNITS PROVIDED PARKING SPACES REQUIRED % COVERAGE ALLOWED BUILDING 'fiEIGHT ALLOWED FRONT SETBACK ALLOWED PROVIDED PROVIDED_ ^PROVIDED PROVIDED SIDE SETBACK:REAR SETBACK: INTRUSIONS tf LANDSCAPE & IRRIGATION PLAN COMMENTS: rx ti'J / l\ ' . FIRE DEPARTMENT SPPINKLING SYSTEM FIRE ALARMS n / FIRE7 PROTECTION EQUIP / EXITS FIRE HYDRANTS LOATION ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OK TO ISSUE:DATE /-fc-OK TO FINAL DATE DEPARTMENT StQUItEMENTS OF APPROPRIATE DISTRICTS MET DATE * - October 20, 1981 o ^ -O .v 1. TO; Mr. M. Orenyak X.V/V •*' ° ^' V*V' 0'' «*''*< FROM: Dick Esgate Sutjecti Preliminary Review of Proposed Condo 5 Conceptual Plans for Compliance with the New Atrium Requirements in (J.B.C. Section 1719. The following comments are based on a preliminary review only of the conceptual plans, for compliance with the new atrium Section 1719i as approved at the 1981 ABM of I.C.B.O. in Indianapolis. We have also identified several other requirements that need further clarification. This is not a complete plan review bjt is intended to assist the designer with the atrium concept aa related to the newly approved requirements. 1. Show the basis for having area in excess of 63000 S.F. My calculations limit the area of Living area to 63,000 S. F. 2. To qualify for considering the B-l as a separate building for type of construction, area limitations, etc. under Section 702, the uses must be limited to tnose listed in Section 702(a)3. 5 11. Provide a letter to be filed with the Fire Department showing how Section 1719(i) and (L) will be satisfied. 12. The north and south exit enclosures both appear to exit into the B-l occupancy basement. Provide exit from enclosure at the first floor level and an approved barrier to prevent entering the basement. Section 3308. "Yic^-S^^ajC : 13. Specify fire rating of all elements of construction and provide details to show compliance. 14. Provide specifications and details for all shaft enclosures and penetrations of fire rated construction. 15. Show locations of all required fire dampers. 16. Show locations and specifications for all exit signs. - • ~ A-OptfcU/o ""* 17. Provide details of horizontal exit. Section 3307 — go6v»rtoro.«*«»» 18. Provide a minimum of one handicapped unit as require 1213. 19. The restrooms in the lobby area must be accessible to the handicapped per Section 1711. oo r 3. Clarify that the Building is sprinklered throughout including . "^' { < l^"- r*^the parking garage JK The Basement level does not appear to have minimum required exits* £K>&Pfocc. € "^e-v-vk | '.- 01>,i. -*y} c,ef , , T>J^«- '<X2 , <^>.-»- ir»n, cjfe,. 5. Clarify that basement is not a story as defined by Section ^20. 4- V/W- \-itpci. ;|p r-xrr "$H Ti'»-vV (i-c^ - 6. No exit door opening into the atrium, or opening into the corridor which is open into the atrium, shall be more than s -^ 100 feet from an exit enclosure. Section l?19(d) P-m^^AA ?. Provide details of the smoke removal system to show compliance with l?19(b). Provide analysis of system to show exhaust re- quirements and equipment capabilities. 8. Provide standby power system complying with Section 180?(i). Provide compldbe details and specifications to show compliance. 9. Provide wall and ceiling interior finish schedule showing all finish material in atrium and living spaces to be Class I. 10. Specify on the plans that the smoke control system shall be tested in the presence of the Building Official and Fire Marshal independently by an approved testing firm. The system shall comply with Section 1719 requirements prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. ESGII. CORPORATION 9«20 CIIKSAPKAKK DR., Sl'ITK IJi^ SAN r>IKOO, CA <T14> IMMM4W4 April 29, 1982 Plan Check: 81-497 Project: Condo Five (La Costa & El Camino Real) The "III" set substantially complies with the codes except: 1 . Open space easement should be accepted prior to permit issuance. 2. Building Official should rereview final plan to rule on whether fire door is required between the atrium and corridors, il Corporation cc Mr. Don Hodges Citp of Carfcbab [ I APPLICANT COPY' I I PLAN CHECKER COPY Condo 3 Recheck of Electrical Plan Recived 4/6/82 J.RISOICTION Carkbad :a;.ECT ADDRESS -,- Applicant DATP 4/7/82 PLAN CORRFCTION SHEET • i*r i r.. « NO 81-497 •'• i lans received by jurisdiction «tr plane received by plan checker .nitial plan check compl«t«dfr/7/82 by 3.G. i If »'BD PLEASE BEAD Plae check is United to technical requirement* virtained in the Uniform Building Code. Uniform Fl-ffDing Code, Uniforn Mechanical Code. National Electrical Code and state laws regulating energy conservation, noise attenuation and access for fe hi dicapped The plan check is based on regulations enforced by the Building Inspection S<*r.irtment. You may have other corrections rased on laws and ordinances enforced by the Planning Department. Engineering Department cr otror departments "le items circled below need clarification, irodif ication or change. All circled items have tc ce satisfied before tha plans will be in ccnformance with the cited codes and regulations f-r Sec 303 (c). 1979 Uniforn Building Code. t*i* approval of tha plans doas not permit the lOlation of any state, county or city law. PI Af S Please make all corrections on the original tracings and submit two new sets of prints, arJ any original plan sets that may have Cten returned to you by the jurisdiction, tc 7i it ilitatc reihrckintj, please identify, rest tc each circled item, the sheet of tr<> plans upon which each correction on this sheet has been made and retuin this check sheet with the revised plans 3." 4. 5. ~~6~ 7. 8. 9. Remove or deface, the calculations and single line drawings on the tracings as they are not to be used. Incorporate the new single line data and calculation The wire size for motors is not indicate See item 41 h, on 3/26/82 rheck list. The size of the elevator motor panel "HB" is not indicated. Specs, call for 30 HP motors. Panel calls for _J5_HP_? _ 125% of largest motor current was __not used in panel schedules and calcu- lations. Dryers are to be calculated at 5 kw. NEC-220-18. See item 41 d on 3/26/82 check list. Indicate connection to UFER ground NEC-250-81. No demand factor allowed on house lighting. (RECHECK II SET) ESOII. CORPORATION IIRMAIWAKK IM*., MI'ITK l«a SAN I>IK(iO, C'A (Tl-t) Les Vaughn (Contact for Applicant) Foreward; Esgil Corporation provides plan review services exclusively to government entities. If you have any questions regarding the plan review, please call and we will help you. Jurisdiction: Plan Check No. City of CarJsbad 81-497 Project Location Costa Del Mar Rd. & El Camino Real Owner La Costa Country Club^ Area 108,434R-1; 41,303B-1 0ccupancy R-l; B-l _Allowable Area _0ccupant Load See item // 3 Stories 3 + Parking Garage Remarks 78 Unit Condo .Type of Const.3 story V-l hr. over B-l Date plans picked up/received by ESGIL Tues. 12/8/81 Date first plan check completed by ESGIL Thurs. 12/31/81 Plan review contact person (ESGIL) 3im Gilshian (360-1468) Corrections checked below are to be made on plans before permit is is- sued. The approval of plans and specification does not permit the vio- lation of any section of the Building Code, or other City Ordinance or State Law. The following list does not necessarily include all errors and ommissions. See Sec. 303(c) of the 1979 Uniform Building Code. Plans require correction as indicated by items below, before a building permit can be issued. Return this correction sheet with corrected plans, 1. Please return a copy of this list noting where you have addressed each item i.e. plan sheet number, detail number, note, etc. 2. Please make all corrections on the original tracings and return two sets of revised plans to Esgil Corporation at the above address for recheck. -2- NOTE: the numbers below refer to the numbers on the 12/31/81 plan check. In the event new items are introduced in this recheck, the the new items will commence with "52". 3. The proposed open space easement would resolve the over-area problem. However, the easement would have to be offered to, and accepted by, the City prior to permit issuance. Suggest you contact the appropriate City entity to determine process, form and time frame involved. 4. Okay 5. Add post-tensioning to special inspection on TD-1. Table shows 4,000 PSI for precast beams. Specs, (pg. 03420-2) calls out 4,500 PSI for girders. Sheet S 2A calls out 5,000 PSI for girders. Specs, calls out 4,000 PSI for "tees", table on TD-1 calls out 4,000 PSI for "tees", but S 2A calls out for 5,000 PSI. Clarify. 6. 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, okay. 12. Show authority for 2 x 8 (9 24" o.c. with 5/8" type x being rated as one-hour construction. See exterior wall sections 2/A6.1 and 6/A7.2 You might note that ceiling fire membrane requires 2 x joists at maximum of 16" o.c., unless 2 x furring is installed at 16" o.c. 13, 14, 15, okay 16. Sec. 505 (d) 2 requires unique treatment at balconies, roof overhangs, etc... See attached article, re area separation walls. 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, okay. 34. To be reviewed by Building Official and Fire Officer, for decision. 35. Okay 36. 37, 38, 39, 40, okay. 41, 42, 43. The one line diagram and related data were received and reviewed. The following items should be addressed: a. Motor current indicated on panel schedule HA & HB for 20 hp, 15 hp & 7{ hp motors does not agree with NEC Table 430-150. b. Indicate wire size for all motors 2 hp and larger. c. Recheck circuit breaker size for all motors 2 hp and larger. -3- d. Submit type of washer dryer unit to be used. Unit "B" shows separate washer & dryer, if so, one appliance circuit is required, and the dryer is calculated at 5 kw. e. Minimum load for range is 8 kw. NEC 22-19. f. Submit service & board section calculation. g. Size subfeeds to include de rating factor. . NEC 310-16 note 8. h. Compliance with NEC 210-52 (receptacle)spacmg shall be per attached, i. Indicate Isc rating of circuit breakers compatible with 11 let thru" Isc of 1200 A KTMR fuse, j. Add the electrical specifications to the specifications book. 44, 45, 46, okay. 47. Please provide a description of the stand by system design, specifications and details. (Sec. 1719 (f) of the atnum regulations and U.B.C. Sec. 1807(i). 48. Provide the name of the proposed inspection agency that will perform the inspection of the smoke control system. (Sec. 1719 (i) of the atruim regulations). 49. Okay. 50. Note that special inspection is required for the tile on walls where expansion and contraction is critical. 51. Okay. 52. Note that special inspection is required by a responsible design professional for wood frame lateral load transfer items le. drogs, etc. 53. In specs, for post-tensioned slab, reference is made to AC1-63 criteria. Should this be ACI-779 Enclosures: Area separation walls article Electrical outlet spacing data sheets Copy of original check list dated 12/31/81 Copy of atrium requirements cc: Mr. Martin Orenyak, Building Official ESGIL CORPORATION 03SiO CHESAPEAKE DR., SSl'ITK I'-i'-i SAN I3IEOO, CA Ottltt:) Date: 12/31/81 To: i,es Vauqhn (Contact for Applicant) Foreward; Esgil Corporation provides plan review services exclusively to government entities. If you have any questions regarding the plan review, please call and we will help you. Jurisdiction: City of Carlsbad Plar. Check No. 81-497 Project Location Costa Del Mar Rd. & El Camino Real Owner __La £osta Country Club Area 10R.434R-1; 41303B-1 Allowable Area See Item q 3 Occupancy R-1 ; B-l Occupant Load Stories 3 ••• Par'ting Garage Type of Const..3 story V-lhr. over R-l Rerarks 78 Unit Condp Date plans picked up/received by ESGIL rrues. l?/ft/Pi Bate first plan check completed by ESGIL mhurs. 1?/31/R1 Plan review contact person (ESGIL) Jim G^sl-nan (56P-14*n) Corrections checked below are to be made on plans before permit is is- s^ed. The approval of plans and specification does not permit the vio- lation of any section of the Building Code, or other City Ordinance or State Law. The following list does not necessarily include all errors and onmissions. See Sec. 303(c) of the 1979 Uniform Building Code. Plans require correction as indicated by items below, before a building per-nit can be issued. Return this correction sheet with corrected plans, 1. Please return a copy of this list noting where you have addressed each item i.e. plan sheet number, detail number, note, etc. 2. Please make all corrections on the original tracings and return two sets of revised plans to Esgil Corporation at the above address for recheck. Shoot 2 3. In our preliminary review comments, 10/20/81, item No.l requested you show basis for the area separations proposed. We do not find analysis. Clarify the number of yards or public spaces and provide an analysis to justify the single area wall in the living units. We assumed two yards and, for fully sprinklered building arrived at 63,000 s.f. total area allowed in R-l, which is roughly 21,000 s.f. largest area on any of the 3 floors: Type V-l HR. = 10,500 s.f. (Table 5-C) Two Yards 5,250 (Sec.506(a) 1@ 50% Max.) 15,750 subtotal Sprinklered x2 (Sec.506(c)=2x for MultL) For 1st floor 31,500 allowed (Sec.505(a)) x2 (Sec.505(b)) Total Allowed 63,000 (Sec.505(b)) Multi-Story 4. Provide specification sheets or book of specifications for materials to be used (Sec. 302(a)4). 5. Note on sheet S-l, the following information to clearly show items needing special inspection per Sec. 306 of the Unjform Building Code: ITEM DKS.IGN f'c SPEC. INSP.REQ'D Foundation Slab 3,000 PSI Grade Beams 3,000 PSI Pile caps 3,000 PSI Columns 4,000 PSI Pilasters Precast Double Tees Precast Beams Masonry Walls Field Welding Test Pile Driving Production Pile Driving Sheet 3 5. (continued) What is desired, is a table to clearly list those items that are required to have special inspection pei Sec. JO 6. 6. Note on sheet S-l "I'rior to requesting city inspection for work following v/ork items that require special inspection, the responsible licensed design professional shall notify the Building Official, in writing that the items requiring special inspection have been constructed in accordance with the design and code icquirements". 7. On sheet S-7, complete Sections 1-S2A, 3-S2A, 4-S2A, column and pilaster schedule and pile cap schedule. 8. Clarify note on 1-S2A "To post tensioned slab on grade"? M. r''he responsible soils engineer should review the foundation design calculations and drawings and indicate on the plans that "the foundation design is consistent with the spirit and intent of the recommendations contained in the soils reports for this project." (bee. J02(a)7). 10. Submit design calculations for the double tees and and the precast beams (Sec. 2601). 11. Provide a detail to show the required concrete cover on reinforcing steel, or prestressed reinforcing, to show compliance with fire protection coverage, per table 43-A, for 3-hr, fire resistive period (Table 43-A). Show similar dimensional data for cast-in-place columns that support the 3-hr, garage cc-i 1 ing . Sheet 4 12. Provide the approval basis (Chapter 43, UL, gypsum manual, etc.) for the required 1-hr, floor-ceiling assembly used. Sheet A 6.2, 2, shows drop ceiling below 2 x 10 joists, without the gypsum board being nailed drrectly to the bottom of the 2 x 10 joists. See also Chapter 42, Sec. 4203, 1 & 2. The detail being questioned appears in many places and all places should be reviewed. 13. Show firestopping at 10' O.C. in 2-hr, area separation wall; 16 on A 7.9 14. Provide details on metal roof to show compliance with Sec. 3203 (c) 3. 15. Provide details on built-up roof to show compliance with Sec. 3203 (e). 16. Clarify, on unit plans, the roof line location at 3rd. floor to clarify 2-hr, wall items at unit walls and roof. I do not find details to show 2-hr, wall conforms to Sec. 505 (d). 17. Clarify the intent of the 3-hr, area separation wall in Type I, B-l garage? Should this be an occupancy separation wall? 18. Table 5-B requires 1-hr, occupancy separation between 13-1 (garage) and room service area. Door 014 is shown to be non-rated. Clarify how separation is realized. 19. Clarify the wall construction at stairway # 2, for the non-masonry walls in basement thru which you have a 3-hr, door shown. (Sec. 3308(b); Table 17-A) 20. (.'l.'iiify how coni|il UIMCCJ i •> realised re Section 1213 and Sec. 1711. Sheet 5 21. The storage area between H-G, within the B-l portion, should be separated from the B-l by 1-hr, per Table 5-B, Door is shown non-rated. Clarify wall and door to show compliance. 22. Show doors in interior stairways comply with unique temperature requirements in Sec. 3308 (c). Show self closer or automatic closer. 23. Show method for complying with Sec. 3308 (e), regarding barrier to preclude person continuing downstairs into the basement. 24. ^>ec. 3308 (d) requires interior stairways"... to include a corridor on the ground floor Leading to tine exterior of the building...". Office buildings are excepted, to a degree, but the exception does not apply to R-l. Clarify how stairways # 2 fc # 4 compiy. 25. Sec. 3305 (9) requires landings to have a dimension in the direction of t-ravel equal to the width of the stairway. A door swinging over the landing shall not reduce the width of the landing to less than 1/2 the landing's required width, with the door in any position. All four stairways appear to conflict with the requirement. 26. tiec. 3305 ( 1 ) , requires at least one handrail shall extend not less than 6" beyond the top and bottom iisers and ends shall be returned or terminate in a newel post or safety t-erminal . Clarify how your details on^A-7.1 comply. 27. Sec. 3305 ( ~|) requires handrails to proiect from wall anc' "... have a smooth surface with no sharp coiners...". Show compliance. Code intends rail to be continuous so hand can grip and slide. Your derail does not appear to fully respond, but Building official can review. (See attached) Sheet 6 Jri. Clarify how the two-hour shaft required in the Type I construction transitions to a one-hour shaft required in the Type V-lhr. shaft. The first floor door ratinq , and the horizontal separation of the 2-hr, shaft is not evident. Clarify. .I-"). bhow the elevator shaft is vented to comply with bee. 1706 (d). 30. Clarify where fire dampers are shown for ducts pen- etrating fire walls in basement (Sec. 4606 (i)). 31. Show how a 1-hr, floor-ceiling assembly is achieved in the area where the AC ducts and equipment exist. Show authority for the membrane you propose. 32. Provide calculations to show the smoke exhaust system is capable of providing six air changes per hour. Show volume of air to include "...volume of any levels not physically separated from the atrium...". 33. bhow the location of smoke detectors that will auto- matically operate the atrium smoke removal system. Detectors shall be installed at the perimeter and on the ceiling of the atrium and on the underside of each floor level that is open to the atrium. 34. Atriums shall be separated from adjacent spaces by not less than 1-hr, fire resistive construction, although exit balconies are permitted within the atrium. Openings in the atrium enclosure shall be protected by tight fitting doors which are maintained automatic closing in accordance with Sec. 4306 (b) by actuation of a smoke dector or selfcloser (corridors at atrium entrance at 1 i n<~ "R", possibly elevator doors at elevator area). This item should be reviewed with the building official and fire officer, for final decision after their evaluation. Sheet 7 34. (continued) Mr. Orenyak discussed the matter with 1.C.I3.O. at the time of the October conference. The decision impacts the smoke evacuation system design. 35 If the corridors are not separated from the atrium show the smoke exhaust system can draw smoke from the far end of the corridors. 36. Clarify how the exit door swing at stairway no.2, with persons exiting from the basement and the 2nd floor, complies with Sec. 3303 (b). 37. Note that all finish on walls and ceiling of atrium shall be Class I, with no reduction in class for sprinkler protection. 38. You indicate beams and other structural members to be fire protected. Tn a Type V-l-hr. building, Table 17-A requires structural members (See Sec. 1702) to be fire protected. How i.s main beam in skylight protected? Show detail and material and cite authority. 39. Note on plans: "The open vertical space between the floor and the ceiling of the atrium shall be limited as to the amount of combustible furnishings and materials to not more than one pound per square foot. Such combustibles shall be limited to materials having a maximum of 7,f>00 Btu per pound. All decorative materials, curtains, drapes, hanging (mobiles) and the like shall bo noncornbustible or shall be flame- retardent treated and be so maintained. No open flame or open flame devices shall bo permitted within the atrium." Sheet 8 40. Clarify how the two required exits from the third floor, in the northwest wing, maintain the separation at all points i.e. a distance apart equal to at least 50 o of the diagonal distance of the area served. (Sec. 3302 (c)). 41 Sunnut complete one-line diagram of service and feeders; show conduit and wire sizes; specify aluminum or copper conductors and type of insulation. Indicate sizes of fuses and /or circuit breakers. 42. Indicate ampere interrupting capacities (AIC) of service and subservice equipment. NEC 230-98/110-9. 43. \dd note to the plans indicating: a. All package A/C units shall be labled by a recognized electrical testing agency. b. All light fixtures installed in suspended ceilings shall be secured to main and /or cross runners with seismic clips unless installed in accordance with other approved engineering. c. All circuit: breaker switched 120 VAC light circuits, must use only type "SWD" circuit breakers. NEC-110-3b 44. Show type of materials to be used for waste, drain and vent. 45. Show hose bibbs to have non-removable vacuum breakers per UPC Sec. 1003 (i). 46. Specify on the plans that the smoke control system shall be tested in the presence of the Building Official and Fire Marshal independenly by an approved testing firm. The system shall comply with Section 1719 requirements prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Sheet 9 •57. Describe the standby power system complying with Section 1807 (i). Provide complete details and specifications to show compliance. •i 5. Provide a letter to bo Tiled with the Fire Department showing how Section 1719 (i) and (I.) will be satisfied. -}•"!. The north exit enclosure appears to exit into the B-l occupancy basement. Provide corridor exit from enclosure at the first floor level and an approved barrier to prevent entering the basement. Section 3308 Snow how tile on exterior complies with Sec. 3305 (b). Snow location of gas meters (see UPC Sec. 2203 (f)). ["'^closures : 1. Oct. 20, prr construction items ?. Atrium regulations 3. Atrium Uniform Fire Code item •1 . Handrail Sheet s .{0) I % p.m u IT* QOuo a_i 5CO 5oc o 0 S &•o :: o.c a 3 (T t: £.-= ^ "2 = JcS w o 'J- c ^ r- OO(U — 00 ^ J= 5^.0 M Xoh«a.c.nj — 'S c u ra W C k-4= --0 " 00 ™ Is-_ .c ra 5 -I! o E 2 ^ =" i -c.T3 f"5 i_C w O« "• O l = !# C Oc S c si*s ^ 3 ^ -a u C 2 y Iliij —"& x - — ort c « z:# 3 •= ~' u, - c SHE0 •acra o UJ I C/l 5 E S ?£S L- U 22g ">T3 C « £ » e^s•a JJ u l|l 35|.« > •= 3 5 E E° o<W ? *i — «* T3 **k- l_ fc. "' "S « n <"j: w u — IsE-3 ™ - &.«,55 ;l_i ?' 3 g 6- O "O T) JJ, P i ™ «E^-=-SW £ c «<J S 0.2 ^~ss— H3 (U= u= x: |1 11!|S5 r -, f b -5 cl> C J3 cw »- Q. C4> •- *^ y» fc*O Ix k. U U.2 0£* -a ^s « «o E P JE*s««:~ X~ c uS *• Pg c o C - T5 «* ± S -a c?™ j= j= ^ •£ c "i^-"-5"ccx 2 Priideonis£ 5 II 1/1 ••• — C IIM8t- X> (fl ** k.•a w 7« o u « C « Gf 5 C -73 •T" _C •*" ^ —— *T* t~* */> *3^i^lisojetingthe walandrails pes betweec zsnj oj 5-S «§ 11 ig 3 §S-3 g-8 Atrliima ' Sec 1719 (a) General Buildings with automatic sprinkler protec- tion throughout other than Group H Occupancy may have atriums complying with the provisions of this section Such atnims shall have a minimum opening area and dimensions measured perpendicular to each other as set forth in Taole No 17 B (b) Smoke Removal System A mechanically operated air-handling system shall be installed that will exhaust smoke either entering or developed within the atnum Exhaust openings shall be located in the ceiling-ftr in a smoke trap area immediately adjacent to the ceiling of the ""atruinrSgupply openings sized to provide 50 percent of the exhaust volume shall be located at the lowest level of the atnum When the height of the atnum is 55 feet or less supply air .-nay be introduced by gravity provided smoke removal is accomplished When the height of the atnum is more than 55 feet, supply air shall be introduced mechanically from the floor of the atnum and be ducted vertically toward the exhaust outlets In atriums over six stores in height or having open floors above the second storv, supplemental supply air may be introduced at upper levels The exhaust and «upply system for the atrium shall operate automaticallv upon th'e actuation of the automatic sprinkler system within the atnum or areas open to the atnum or by the actuation of two or more smoke detectors required by this section The exhaust and supply equipment shall also be manually operable by controls designed for fire department use When the smoke removal system is actuated, other air-handling systems which may interfere with its function shall shut off automatically Enclosed tenant spaces shall be provided with a smoke control system complying with the requirements of a spnnklered buiidng in Section 1807 (g) Item \'o 2 or 3 The atnum smoke removal system shall exhaust not less than the following quantities of air 1 For atnums having a volume of not more than 600 OuO cubic feet including the volume of any levels not physically separated from the atnum, not less than six air changes per hour • 2 For atnums having a volume of more than 600 000 cubic fect, including the volume of any levels notphvsically separateJ trom the atnum not less than four air changes per hour Smoke detectors which will automatically operate the atnum smoke removal system shall be installed at the perimeter and on the ceiling of the atnum and on the underside of each floor level that is open 'o the atnum In stones open to the atnum such detectors ^hall be within 15 feet of the atnum Detectors shall be Nxrated in accordance with their, listing (c) Enclosure of Mr-turns Atnums shall be separated trom adjacent spaces by not less than one-hour fire-resistive construction EXCEPTION Open exit balconies are permncd within the atnum Openings in the atnum enclosure other than fixed glazing shall be protected by tight-fitting doors which are maintained automatic-closing in accordance wi'h Section 4306 (b) by actuation of a smoke detector or self-closing Fixed glazed openings in the atnum enclosure shall be equipped with fire window s ha^ ing a fire resistive rating of not less than three-fourths- hour and the total area of such openings shall not exceed 25 percent of the area of the common wall between the atrium and the room into which the opening is provided EXCEPTIONS I In Group R Division I Occupancies openings nuv be unprotected when the floor area of each guest room or dwelling unit does not exceed I 000 square feet and each room or unit has an approved exjt not entering the dtnum 2 In occupancies other than Group R Division I the tenant space may be separated from the atnum by a wired tempered or laminated glass wall subject to the following ^ The glass shall be protected by a >pnnkler svstem equipped with 1'5'F heads The sprinkler svstem shall Lcmpletelv wet the enure surface of the glass wall when actuated Where there are walking sur faces on both sides ot the glass both sides of the glass -hall be so protected B The glass shall be in a gasketed frame so installed (hat he g'azmg svstem mav deflect without breaking goading) the glass betore the sprinkler svstem operates C Obstructions such as curtain rods drapery traverse rcsi. Curtains drapes or similar materials shall not be installed between ,hi. ->pnnkler and the glass o.«= -THC" e*.w*=«jyr o-fts-vii •«» The separation between the tenant space and the atnum as specified i within the exception mav. be omitted on a maximum of an\ three floor , levels, provided the remaining floor levels ore separated as specified herein Reason The format of Section 17l9(c)as published in the annual report has led to a number of questions emphasising a need tor a new format The proposed wording as suggested will clarifv the committee •> intent \iiditional changes were made 10 amphty on a number of poirts First the ' proposal was silent regarding protec ion of openings oiher trun fixed glazing and therefore the new second paragraph is necessary to ->pecitv the type ot door opening protection required The retereni.es to Section 1j04 havi. been replaced b. 'he specific requirements as enumerated m the proposed third paragraph which should clarify the use of the atnum provisions bv buiiJmg officials The fixed glass wall provisions tor tenant spa^e separation trom the atnum for other than Group R Division I Occupancies have been rev isedbv the addition of wired glass This would allow an alternative to deMgners who wart to use wired glass units which do not specifically complv us listed fire windows and should certainly be equivalent to the proposal which permits the use of tempered or laminated glass walls The quick acting heads specified in the glass wall protection svstem have been changed to I ^5°F heads The Change was necessary since quick acting heads are no longer available and the 135°F will adequately provide the protection contemplated (d) Travel Distance When a required exit enters the atnum space, , the travel distance from the doorway of the tenant space to an enc'osed j stairway horizontal exit exterior door or exit passageway shall rot exceed 100 feet (e) Occupancy Separation Exceptions The vertical portion of the occupancy separation which is adjacent to the atnum may be onvtted between a Group B Division 2 Occupancy office or sales ilre 2 or Group A, Division 3 Occupancy '\nd Group R Division 1 apartmen' or guest room located on another level (f) Standby Power The smoke removal svstem for tr,e atrum and the smoke control sy«tf m for the tenant space ore to be provided with stindby power as required for buildings regu'ated by Secfon 1807 (g) Interior Finish The interior finish of v.a!'s and ceilings of the atrium and all unsep<-rated tenant spaC'.j allowed under Item No 3 of Subsection (c) abo*e shall be Class ! with no reduction in class for sprinkler protection (h) Acceptance of the Smoke Removal Svstem and Smoke Con- trol Svstem Before the Certificate ot Occupancv is issued the smoke removal and control systems shall be tested in an approved manner and -,hall show compliance -vtth the requirements of this section d) Inspection of the Smoke Removal and Control Systems. All operating parts of the smoke removal and control sv stems shall be tested by an approved inspection jgu'cv. or bv the owner or his repre- sentative when so approved Such .nspections shall be made every three months and a log of the tests, be I-ept by the testing agency The log shall be on the premises and available for examination by nre depart- ment personnel (j I Combustible Furnishings in Atrum* The quanotv ot combus- tible furnishings in atnums shall not exceed that specified :n the Fire Code TABLE NO 17-B— ATRIUM OPENING AND AREA HEIGHT IN STORIES 3-t 5-7 MINIMUM CLEAR OPENING' (R.) :o 30 ad i MINIMUM AREA (Sq R.) ] .00 OijO IhiYl 'The specified dimensions are the diameters of inscribed circles *hose Centers fall on a common axis for the full height ot the atnum ATRIUM is an opening through two or more floor levels other than enclosing stairway e'cvators. hoistways, escalators plumbing eleun- ca' a r <~ ~nditionmg or other equipment which is closed at the top and is dot vftncc as d malt R*,»io'i TT/le No 17 A requires that shaft enclosures in T\pe-> I ;\il II f R consir.ction have a two-hour fire resistive rating and ^ave a w voui ri-" iesist;ve rai rg in other 'vpes of construction Bu-iding offic als r'd.e Jl i*_d omisicrci ne a;e re^isuvc c instruction in ainu us Ahen'qu •>'.(' ro ..c'1 i spro.J.d \tnurro'u\ become -o popular ih.a code provs: i. _c _,~ iV Ute uidprc-rxrtv protecnon s> stems ot this style ot ^onstniuf.oni.e n:e..; i he proposal provides protection that is equivalent to ihc protection ret,u •'_ '•>> Tab'e No 17 A when the combustible content of the jtrrjm is also conttu1';1 • .15 suggested in a code change to the Lmform Fire Code See proposed code .. -r.i^r U 81 1 to the Uniform Fire Code f nffLiiieiiicni K>r j building under construction is temporary sl.mdpipcs I hi. new !a!H.e:jL.c Jcarlv dircetsthal fireextinguishersan. required Numerous lircsh i\c Occurred while buildings were' under construction 10402(c)-81-1—UFCC Sec 10 402 (c), page 77 Add an exception to read as follows LXCEPTION The chict may allow the omission ol the signs on doors located where* storage is not hkeK to obstruct the operation ot I he door and where- combustible storage adjaeeiil to the door is unlikely Rrasun Vtilh the execption of doors and exit enclosures | sec Section • ill (he I niloimliuildiilgCodel there is no limit on the lempcialuie IMIISIIIISSIOII lhrouth tire deKirs Ttierctorc we believe (he intent ot the section was (o require signs on diHirs in area separation walls where combustible storage adjacent to the doots mav be itniled b) a fire on the opposite side Also, material may he stored in su*.h a was that it would obstruct the operation ol the door Coordinator's note A similar code change is proposed lor Section 4306 (I) ot the limtonm Building Code 11-81-1—JGO Article 11 Add a new section to read as follows Atrium Furnishings Sec 11 207. The open vertical space between the floor and the ceiling ot the atrium shall be limited as to the amount ot combustible furnishings and materials to not more than one pound per square loot Such combustibles shall be limited (o materials having a maximum of 7 500 Btu per pound All decorative materials, curtains, drapes, hangings (mobiles) and the like shall be' noncombustiblc or shall be flamc-rctardant Heated and be so maintained No open flame or open flame devices shall be permitted within the atrium Reason Companion change (o that on atriums proposed lor the Uniform Building Code II is necessary to regulate combustible materials in the atrium since an open shall is now possible 11-81-2— CTG Article 1 1 Add a new section to read as follows Storage of Hazardous Equipment in Dwellings Sec II 416 No person, firm or corporation shall park or store or permit to be parked or stored any piece of fuel powered equipment, vehicle-, motorcycle, moped or other similar item that would present an extreme hazard by virtue of the flammability of the fuel or gas vapor in any apartment, duplex, dwelling or other occupancy of human habitation Reason Currently there does not appear to be any sections within the code that specifically prohibit (he storage of gasoline powered equipment such as motorcvcles mopeds lawn equipment, etc , in places such as apartments and dormitories where ignition sources are constantly present Such uses represent an extreme hazard to other tenants as (hey arc' either unaware of the practice or have no actual control over (he conduct of their neighbors or landlords The use of LP gas fired appliances such as barbecues in apartment complexes is also cause lor concern under (his issue due (o (he tenant's concern for security 11 203(c)-81-1—WSAFC. Sec 11 203 (c), page 82 Revise to read as follows. (e) Hazardous Storage. Where (he storage or accumulation ot combustible- waste matter used in stores, apartment buildings, factories or other similar places is a hazard or menace of fire, said storage of such material shall be removed on a daily basis Rra^on It makes little sense, it such storage is a hazard, to only require it (o be removed every second day When something is judged a hazard, it should loguali) be immediately abated and not allowed to continue 35-81-1—JGD. L niform Fire Code Add a new article to read as follows: ARTICLE 35 COVERED MALL BUILDINGS i 121 Scope Sec 35 101. I his article shall.ipply to those occupancies within the scope of Covered Mall Buildings as regulated in the Building Code Special Provisions Sec. 35 102 (a) Unoccupied Tenant Spaces. Unoccupied tenant spaces shall be isolated from the remainder of the covered mall until such time as the space is prepared for use The unoccupied tenant space shall be 1 Kept free from the storage ot any material whatsoever 2 Separated from the remainder ot the building by partitions of '/:- inch gypsum wallboard or the equivalent 3 Without doors or other access openings other than one which will be kept keyloekcd in the closed position except during that time when open tor inspection 4 Kept free from all combustible waste and be kept broom-swept clean Unoccupied tenant spaces need not have the sprinkler system com- pleted when all of the requirements of the above have been met (b) Permits. For permits to use a covered mall area for other than normal customer use, sec Section 4 101 (e) Display Structures. Covered kiosks, display booths, concession equipment or the like shall not exceed 4 leet in width unless the area beneath such equipment is protected by the sprinkler system (d) Place of Assembly The exit facilities shall limit the number of persons in attendance The chief shall establish the conditions neces- sary to assure that the covered mall building tenants do not have their normal preparations obstructed by the assembly It shall be the respon- sibility of the covered mall management (o provide adequate personnel (o comply with the conditions required by the chief (e) Gasoline-powered Equipment. Gasoline tanks and battenes shall be removed from such equipment before it is brought into the mall The positioning of such de-energi/ed equipment shall be subject to approval of the chief (f) Decorative Materials and Signs. All decorative materials and signs of paper, cardboard, cloth, hay moss, gram and leaves and other vegetation other than that which is alive shall be made flame retardant by application of approved flame rclardanls (g) Gases. I he presence ot liquelicd petroleum gas, liquefied natu- ral gas and compressed flammable gas cylinders is prohibited within the mall Compressed gas cylinders of nonflammable gases shall be secured to prevent overturning Control valves shall be protected against possible damage (h) Exit Obstructions Required widths of exit travels shall not be obstructed by the placement of any material, temporary kiosks, display booths, concession equipment or similar objects while the covered mall building is open Also. Sec. 4 101, page 41. Add a new permit to read as follows: Mall, Covered. To use a covered mall in (he following manner 1 Placing or constructing temporary kiosks, display booths, con- cession equipment or the like in the mall 2 To use the mall as a place of assembly 3 To use open-flame or flame-producing devices 4 To display gasoline-powered equipment Reason This is a companion change in the Uniform Fire Code to establish the operating procedures intended in the appendix chapter of covered mall buildings in the Building Code 45.102-81-1—U FC C. Sec. 45.102, page 128 Insert the words "or combustible" be- tween the words "flammable" and "liquids " Reason See code change U I'C 81-1 45.205 (h)-81-1—UFCC Sec. 45.205 (h), page 131. Revise the word "flammable" to read "Class I or II " PAGE 1 OF 2- __ HUE ARCHITECT Pi /<• OWNER OCCUPANCY #^/_&_ P(*SPRINKLERED n ^ CARLSBAD r I PE D RTMENT ^ 1275 ELM AVENUE, CARLSBAD, CA S2008 (71'0 43S-5521 , PLAN CHECK REPORT \.. -5~~ ADDRESS /??f C'ff'J^ fi*/ ,-^JVPP ROVED DISAPPROVED PLAN CHECK 8 $*/- V?7 OTHER REF # /)/>** Z/<< ~ S/S-*'*' AW /?<?(. A/<».j /e ADDRESS PHONE 4S*j- ^60<? ADDRESS PHONE '-/ CONST J^/XZ TOTA1 SO FT /J1,737 STORIPS 3 TENANT IMP APPROVAL OF PLANS IS PREDICATED ON CONFORMING TO THEFOLLOWING CONDITIONS AMD/OR MAKING THE FOLLOWINGCORRECTIONS: I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I H I 1 I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I 1 I I I 1 I H H I I I I I I 1. Provide one copy of the floor plan(s), site plan, and rheets T/, /I/ '. /}?,//}?. 2.. tf?.3.rfZ, ^ SI? /. /I? i. Sf3 // /7f,/. /ffZ-j /??./ /fJ~£"Z.;f3ff. jTir.tftf . 2. Storage, dispensing or use of any flammable or combustible liquids, flammable liquids, flammable gases and hazardous chemicals shall comply with Uniform Fire Code and 3- Buildmg(s) not approved for high piled combustible stock. Storage in closely packed piles shall not exceed 15 feet in height, 12 feet on pallets or in racks and 6 feet for tires, plastics and some flammable liquids. If high stock piling is to be done, comply with Uniform Fire Code, Article 81. 4. Medical gas system(s) shall comply with N F P A. Standard 56F. 5. Fire extinguishers shall be provided based upon the following criteria: a) 1-2A rated ADC extinguisher for each sq. ft. or portion thereof b) maximum travel distance to an extinguisher of feet c) other 6. Fire sprinkler system(s) per N.F P A Standard provided to protect " shall be 7 Dry chemical extinguishing system(s) shall be installed per N.F.P A Standard 9& to protect cooking equipment and exhaust system. _ . _ y . / X -^- Plans of system(s) shall be approved by the Fire Department prior to installation of system(s) tff<-, ~ 9. Show on site plan locations of all nearby proposed or existing hydrants v;ithin 200 feet. Jy 10 hydrant (s) suall be provided and located Show location(s) on site plan. Fire F 1 ow hydrants 11. Access for fire apparatus is not adequate Provide gpm for hours from 12.shal1 be of hour assemblleswith openings protected with Comply with regulations on attached sheet(s) x-^Plan Examiner Report mailed to architect Met with /sr Ft. : hour construction Date to Plans CARLSBAD FIRE DEPARTMENT PAGE 2 OF 2- PLAN CHECK REPORT PROJECT ^P" _ PLAN CHECK ti _ \k. Drapes and other decorative materials shall be flame retardant. Certification thereof shall be provided Exits, exit lights, fire alarm stations, hose cabinets and extinguisher locations shall not be concealed by decorative material. _ 15. Interior finish shall conform with Title California Administrative Code , regulations. _ 16. Fireplaces and other appliances employing open flames shall have metallic guards. _ 17. Loose chairs exceeding 299 shall be bonded together in groups of 3 or more. _ 18. Storage and janitor closets shall be of one-hour construction with all openings protected with 3A hour self closing and latching assemblies. _ 19. An approved fire alarm or two-way communication system shall be provided per Title 24, California Administrative Code. _ 20. An occupant capacity sign, with minimum one inch letters and numbers, shall be posted near main exit ( _ square feet per person). /\21. Exit doors shall be openable from the inside without the use of a key or any special knowledge or effort. _ 22. A "THIS DOOR MUST REMAIN UNLOCKED WHENEVER THE PUBLIC IS PRESENT" sign, with minimum one inch letters, shall be provided adjacent, to main exit door _ . _23. "EXIT" signs shall be in block letters minimum 6 inches high. Luminance on face of sign shall be 50 lux. _2'l. "EXIT" signs shall be electrically illuminated and encigized from separate circuits. Show on electrical plan(s) _25. One of the above circuits shall be part of the emergency lighting system. 26. An "EXIT" sign shall be posted over exit door and directional signs located Show locations on floor plan(s). 27. Approved panic hardware shall be provided on exit doors Show on door schedule _28. Corridor shall be of one-hour construction with door open- ings protected with 20 minute self closing and latching assemblies. _29 An additional exit door shall be provided in per Uniform Building Code, Chapter 33. X30. ^ t£~6>t'/ss<rp ''Plan Examiner Date _ TELEPHONE 1275 ELM AVFNUC -'I-C ~~ - -•- - (7141438-55?!CARLSOAD CAUFonNiA 02009 FIRE DEPARTMENT UWj^JUjj^i PROJECT CONDITIONS PROJECT DESCRIPTION : _<^ fS/'-J ? _ -^/? LOCATION - CToyrv? 1. A; PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS, COMPLETE BUILDING • PLANS SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL 2. ADDITIONAL PUBLIC AND/OR ON-SITE FIRE HYDRANTS ARE REQUIRED 3. ACCESS AND/OR CIRCULATION FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLES IS INADEQUATE 4. SUBMIT TWO (2) COPIES OF A SITE PLAN SHOWING LOCATIONS OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANTS AND ON-SITE ROADS AND DRIVES 5. AN ALL WEATHER ACCESS ROAD SHALL BE MAINTAINED THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION ALL REQUIRED FIRE HYDRANTS, WATER 11^INS AND APPURTENANCES SHALL BE OPERATIONAL PRIOR TO COMBUSTIBLE BUILDING MATERIALS BEING LOCATED ON THE PROJECT SITE 7. THIS IS A RECOMMENDED MINIMUM STANDARD BY THE FIFE DEPARTMENT FOR DRIVEWAYS INTO ALL TYPES OF BUILDING CONSTRUCTION NO PAR1OHG LANE - 24 FEET, PARKING ONE SIDE 34 FEET, AND PARKING BOTH SIDLS - 44 FEET 8. ADEQUATE EMERGENCY VEHICLE TURN-AROUNDS SHALL BE PROVIDED BY A CUL-DL-SAC OR A HAMMERLLAD WHEN DUIVEVAY IS MORE THAN 150 FEET DEIP FROM PROPERTY LINE AT STREET 9. ALL DRIVEWAYS SHALL BE EXTENDED TO WITHIN 150 FEET OF ALL PORTIONS OF THE EXTERIOR WALLS OF Tl'E FIRST STORY OF ANY BUILDING PROPOSED SECURITY'GATE SYSTEMS SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH "KNOX" KEY OPERATED OVERRIDE SWITCH, AS SPECIFIED BY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT ALL PRIVATE DRIVEVTAYS SHALL BE KEPT CLEAR OF PARKED VEHICLES AT ALL TJMLS, AND SHALL IVAVE POSTED "NO PARKING/FIRE LANE/TOW AWAY ZONE" PURSUANT TO SECTION 17 04 040, CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE 12. FIRE RETARDANT POOFS ARE REQUIRED ON ALL STRUCTURES 13. BRUSH CLEARANCE SHALL BE MAINTAINED WITHIN A MINIMUM DISTANCE OF 30 FEET TO EACH RESIDENCE 14. /N ALL FIRE ALARM SYSTEMS, FIRE HYDRANTS, EXTINGUISHING SYSTEMS,, AUTOMATIC SPRINKLERS, AND OTHER SYSTEMS PERTINENT TO THE PRO- JECT SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION 15. A ALL ROOF-TOP APPURTENANCES SHALL RE ARCHITECTURALLY INTEGRATED INTO THE DESIGN OF THE BUILDING AND SHIELDING TO PREVENT NOISE AND VISUAL IMPACTS, SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BEFORE ISSUANCE OF PERMIT PERMIT ,UILDlT)GS EXCEEDING ^070,00 J-T^)AGGR'E'GAlrE/FLOG/R,.'A-fiEA) SHALL EE PR'iNK^EKED OR-'foUtf'-hOURMriRE \(ALL5> WITH NO OP EN ING ST HEREIN dl'ALL kPLITurili; BUILDING INTO 10,000 FT2 (or lees) AREAS SEE ATTAC1 ED DY. ^ f^^:S- DATE /Cf s n ""' •*. ,,• / f ~~~~~^f' CARLSBAD FIRE DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: CARTER - BUILDING DEPT. DATE: 5-25-82 FROM: BRIAN - FIRE SUBJECT: PLAN CHECK APPROVAL OF CONDO 5 I approved the plans for the project on 1-6-82 (see attached) subject to a variety of conditions. With respect to the ;doors across,the corridors-at the atrium, the following alternatives are .acceptable:' 1. Cross-corridortdoors are not required provided the smoke-removal' system is designed to remove the smoke \ ••.. 'from the corridors. This must be substantiated during the test of ;',the system. :''*'" 2. Cross-corridor doors are 'required if the smoke cannot be removed from the corridors. If the second alternative is chosen, the doors shall be 20 mm. rated automatic-closing doors actuated by a\ smoke or lonization detector. Additional details will be provided if this alterna- tive is chosen. A •;>'' ••« ' Dole Naegle, AIA Architecture & Planning Incj AndrewS HerbruckAIA Mark WSteele, AIA in this office from e plan check consult October 5, 1981 Mr. Dave Kircher Rick Engineering 5620 Friars Road San Diego, CA 92110 RE: Condo 5 plan check fee Dear Dave: The plan check fee show below was calcula information supplied by Esgil Corporation, ants for the City of Carlsbad. PERMIT FEE VALUATION SPACE Type I garage & storage Type V 1 hour enclosed Type V 1 hour balconies & stairs Sprinkled area Air conditioned area PERMIT FEE CALCULATION AREA 41,300 112,540 MULTIPLIER $27.00 /SF $36.00 /SF 15,300 $ 6.80 /SF 153,840 $ 1.30 /SF 106,650 $ 2.40 /SF Total Building Valuation Valuation Fee First 100,000 . $433 Next 5,626,532 <§ $2.50/$1.000^14.068 Total Permit Fee $14,551 TOTAL $1,115,100 $4,051,440 $ 104,040 $ 199,992 $ 255,960 $5,726,532 '27°* .65 Plan Check Fee $9,458.15 Sincerely, DCH:gnm-n:gn / / 221O Agenda de !a Playa IL6 Jclla, California 92O37 (714) 43?-26C6 .00 PHILIP HENKING BENTON PRESIDENT CIVIL ENGINEER BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. APPLIED SOIL MECHANICS -— FOUNDATIONS 5540 R U F F I N ROAD SAN DIEGO CALIFORNIA 9212.1 November 6, 1981 TELEPHONE (714) 565 19SS La Costa Land Company 2100 Costa Del Mar Road Carlsbad, California 92008 Attention Subject Mr. Les Vaughn Proiect No. 72-11-21C Report of Soils Investigation Proposed Condominium Unit 5 Southeast Corner of El Camino Real and Costa Del Mar Road Carlsbad, California Gentlemen. This is to present an update report as requested by the Architect, of the soils investigations conducted at the site of the proposed Condominium Unit 5, located southeasterly of E| Camino Real and Costa Del Mar Road in Carlsbad, California. The reports previously transmitted on this pioject include the following 1. J'lntenm Soils Investigation, Proposed Condominium Unit 5 Southeast Corner of El Camino Real and Costa Del Mar Road, Rancho La Costa, San Diego County, California" dated December 26, 1972. 2. "Final Report of Pile Design Curves and Soil Design Parameters For Proposed Condominium Unit No. 5, El Camino and Costa Del Mar Road, Rancho La Costa, Carlsbad, California," dated January 12, 1973. 3. "Final Report of Soils Investigation, Proposed Condominium Unit 5, Southeast Corner of El Camino Real and Costa Del Mar Road, Carlsbad, California, " dated December 12, 1977. 4. " Report of Supplemental Soils Investigation, Proposed Condominium Unit 5, Southeast Corner of El Camino Real and Costa Del Mar Road, Carlsbad, Cal ifornia, " dated April 7, 1978. >La Costa Land Company -2- November 6, 1981 Proiect No. 72-11-21C ; 5. "Supplemental Foundahon Design Information, Proposed Condominium Unit No. 5, Southeasterly of Costa Del Mar and El Camino Real Intersection, Carlsbad, California," dated September 1, 1978. 6. " Allowable Bearing Value for Carport Design, Proposed Condominium Unit No. 5, Southeasterly of Costa Del Mai and El Camino Real Intersection, Carlsbad, California," dated October 3, 1978. 7. "Supplemental Soil Design Parameters, Proposed Condominium Unit 5, Southeast Corner of El Camino Real and Costa Del Mar Road, Carlsbad, California," dated April 15, 1980. It is concluded from plotting the previously drilled nine test borings on the site that sufficient soils information is available for the design of the concrete slab at Elevation +12.0 feet and for the design of the footings supported on driven piies. It is recommended that of the pile design curves transmitted with our letter report of April 15, 1980, described in Item 7 above, fhose that are shown on Drawing No, B-2 entitled "Dbwndrag and Allowable Vertical Supporting Capacities of Piles in Boring 5 Area" may be used for estimating the design lengfhs of piles for various total loads. This is because it is now proposed that the perimeter of the entire building area is to be filled above the existing giound surface as shown m the "Tentative Map for Condo 5, Rancho La Costa - Carlsbad, California, C.T. 81 dated 9-23-81. These design curves include the downdrag loads due to consolidation of the soils in all fill areas including those where mounds of fill are to be placed ad|acent to the retaining wails that are above the elevation of the existing ground surface It should be noted that the initial "control piles" should be driven close to the location of Boring 5 so that a continuous pile driving recoid can be taken. This will then serve as a basis for developing the minimum blow count criteria foi driving piles at other locations not adjacent to this boring. It is anticipated that the diiven piles will develop greater resistance to penetration in the areas where layers of compact sand are encountered such as between 21 and 36 feet in Boung 3, therefore prednllmg to 36 feet may be necessary with a 10 inch diameter auger in order that the pile tips may be driven below the silty clay (bay mud) type deposit between 37.5 and 39.5 feet at that location. This corresponds to Elevation -22.5 feet. It is recommended that the pile tips in all areas penetrate at least 10 feet below any such silty clay (bay mud) type layers or to Elevation -32.5 feet or lower. It is concluded from the proposed elevation 12.0 feet for slabs on grade that new filled ground will be placed under all areas of the proposed Condo 5 except for portions of the northerly 100 feet. In the northerly 100 feet, filled ground is to be placed adjacent to the perimeter building areas. It is therefore recommended that the concrete slab on grade be designed as a structural slab in order that it is able to support downwaid vertical loads due to occupancy when long term settlement of the soils occurs beneath the slabs and also be designed to resist up to 218 pounds per square foot uplift due to hydrostatic pressures during the 100 year storm flood.* Therefore, the 5 inches of 3/4 inch to 1 inch crushed rock base layer on the upper soils beneath the concrete slabs on ground is adequate without the need for perforated subdrams beneath the concrete slab areas. * The calculated high water elevation is at elevation +15.5 feet during that 100 year storm. BEN1ON ENGINEERING INC •> La Costa Land Company -3- November 6, 1981 Pro|ect No. 72-11-21C It is also understood that the lower 3.5 feet of the exterior walls between Elevation +12.0 and +15,5 feet will act to prevent the storm water from entering the garage level, and will be designed for the additional hydrostatic pressure above those pressures induced by the soils. The method of waterproofing the walls and slabs on ground should be one that can withstand alternate submergence and then the dropping of the water level . We suggest that in selection of the waterproofing, performance statements and assurances of long term suitability for the ' proposed intended use be provided by the manufacturer of the waterproofing material . In that long term soil subsidence is anticipated it is suggested that the sanitary sewer line slope downward toward the south at a slope of 1/4 inch per foot or greater to allow for a possible sag under portions of the deeper fill This is so long term settlements will have a minimum adverse effect on the flow in the pipe. Also it would be desirable to use a flexible ductile strong plastic pipe that would have sealed joints. Jt is recommended that all compacted filled ground to be placed beneath the concrete slab areas, both inside and outside of the building and in the proposed swimming pool area be nonexpansive soil types In the swimming pool area a slightly clayey sand with sufficient binder to stand vertically for the height needed to trim for the swimming pool should be used. In other flat slab areas, either silty sand, slightly clayey sand, river tun sand, or clean sand could also be used. Ail should have less than 2 0 percent expansion from air dry to saturation under a unit pressure of 500 pounds per square foot It is recommended that the preparation of the site for placement of compacted filled ground and that the placement of the filled ground be in layers approximately 6 inches in thickness at optimum moisture content and that the compaction of each layer be under the continuous inspection of a soils engineer. The Grading Contractor is responsible to achieve at least 90 percent of maximum dry density for all filled ground placed beneath the building area and concrete slabs on ground and within the swimming pool area. The maximum dry density shall be determined by the A.S.T.M. D 1557-70 method of compaction and the following specifications are recommended: 1. General Description The objective is to attain uniformity and adequate internal strength in filled ground by proven engineering procedures and tests so that the proposed structures may be safely supported. The procedures include the clearing and grubbing, removal of existing structures, preparation of land to be filled, filling of the land, the spreading and compaction of the filled areas to conform with the lines, grades, and slopes as shown on the accepted plans. The owner shall employ a qualified soils engineer to inspectand test the filled ground as placed to verify the uniformity of compaction of filled ground to the specified 90 percent of maximum dry density. The soils engineer shall advise the owner and grading contractor immediately if any unsatisfactory conditions are observed to .exist and shall have the authority to reject the compacted filled ground until such time that corrective measures are taken necessary to comply with the specifications. It shall be the sole responsibility of the grading contractor to achieve the specified degree of compaction 2. Clearing, Grubbing, and Preparing Areas to be Filled (a) All brush, vegetation and any rubbish shall be removed, piled, and burned or otherwise disposed of so as to leave the areas to be filled free of vegetation and debus. Any soft, swampy BENTON ENGINEERING INC . .La Costa Land Company -4- November 6, 1981 Project No. 72-11-21C or otherwise unsuitable areas shall be corrected by draining or removal, or both. (b) The natural ground which is determined to be satisfactory for the support of the filled ground shall then be plowed or scarified to a depth of at least six inches (6"), and until the surface is free from ruts, hummocks, or other uneven features which would tend to prevent uniform compaction by the equipment to be used. (c) After the natural ground has been prepared, it shall then be brought to the proper moisture content and compacted to not less than ninety percent of maximum density in accordance with A.S.T.M. D 1557-70 method that uses 25 blows of a 10 pound hammer falling from 18 inches on each of 5 layers in a 4 inch diameter cylindrical mold of a l/30th cubic foot volume. 3. Placing, Spreading, and Compacting Fill Materials (a) The suitable fill material shall be placed in layers which, when compacted shall not exceed six inches (6"). Each layer shall be spread evenly and shall be thoroughly mixed during the spreading to insure uniformity of material and moisture in each layer (b) When the moisture content of the fill material is below that specified by the soils engineer, water shall be added until the moisture content is near optimum as specified by the soils engineer to assure thorough bonding during the compacting process. (c) When the moisture content of the fill material is above that specified by the soils engineer, the fill material shall be created by bladmg and scanfying or other satisfactory methods until the moisture content is near optimum as specified by the soils engineer. (d) After each layer has been placed, mixed and spread evenly, it shall be thoroughly compacted to not less than ninety percent of maximum density in accordance with A.S.T.M. D 1557-70 modified as described in 2 (c) above. Compaction shall be accomplished with sheepsfoot rollers, multiple-wheel pneumatic-tired rollers, or other approved types of compaction equipment, such as vibratory equipment that is specially designed for certain soil types. Rollers shall be of such design that they will be able to compact the fill material to the specified density. Rolling shall be accomplished while the fill material is at the specified moisture content. Rolling of each layer shall be continuous over its entue area and the roller shall make sufficient trips to insure that the desired density has been attained. The entire areas to be filled shall be compacted. (e) Fill slopes shall be compacted by means of sheepsfoot rollers or other suitable equipment. Compacting operations shall be continued until the slopes are stable but not too dense for planting and until there is no appreciable amount of loose soil on the slopes. Compacting of the slopes shall be accomplished by backrolling the slopes in increments of 3 to 5 feet in elevation gain or by other methods pioducing satisfactory results (f) Field density tests shall be taken by the soils engineer for approximately each foot in elevation gam after compaction, but not to exceed two feet in vertical height between tests. Field density tests may be taken at intervals of 6 inches in elevation gain if required by the soils engineer. The location of the tests in plan shall be so spaced to give the best possible coverage and shall be taken no farther apart than 100 feet. The soils engineer may take additional tests as considered necessary to check on the uniformty of compaction. Where sheepsfoot rollers are used, the tests shall be taken in the BENTON ENGINEERING INC >" „ .La Costa Land Company -5- November 6, 1981 Project No. 72-11-21C ,• compacted material below the disturbed surface. No additional layers of fill shall be spread until the field density tests indicate that the specified density has been attained. (g) The fill operation shall be continued in six inch (6") compacted layers, as specified above, until the fill has been brought to the finished slopes and grades as shown on the accepted plans. 4. Seasonal Limits No fill material shall be placed, spread, orrolled if weather conditions increase the moisture content above permissible limits. When the work is interrupted by rain, fill operations shall not be resumed until field tests by the soils engineer indicate that the moisture content and density of the fill are as previously specified. If you should have any questions regarding any of the above or if you should desire any additional information, please contact us. Respectfully submitted, BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. By Philip H. Begwon/ Civil engineer RCE No. 10332 Distribution. (3) Addressee (2) Dale Naegle and Associates, Attention Mr. Donald Hodges (2) Arevalo and Safmo of San Diego, Inc., Attention. Mr. Roger Haydon (1) Rick Engineering Company, Attention. Mr. Dave Kircher PHB/|r BENTON ENGINEERING INC INTERIM SOILS INVESTIGATION Proposed Condominium Unit 5 Southeast Corner of Ei Camino Real and Costa Dei Mar Road Rancho La Costa San Diego County, California La Costa Land Company Project No. 72-11-21C December 26, 1972 BENTON ENGINEERING INC BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. APPLIED SOIL MECHANICS FOUNDATIONS 6741 EL CAJON BOULEVARD SAN DIEGO CALIFORNIA 92115 PHILIP HENKING BENTON SAN DIEGO 583-5654 PRESIDENT CIVIL ENGINEER LA MESA 469 5654 INTERIM SOILS INVESTIGATION Introduction This is to present the results of a soils investigation conducted at the site of the proposed Condominium Unit 5 to be located southeasterly of El Camino Real and Costa Del Mar Road in Rancho La Costa, San Diego County, California. The proposed buildings will be of Type V structure and three-story in height with a sub- terranean garage. It is our understanding that the exact locations of the buildings are not deter- mined as of this date and therefore, no grading plans or detailed design drawings are available. The objectives of this investigation were to determine the general subsurface conditions of the sites and the physical properties of the subsoils so that an appropriate foundation type could be recommended for supporting the structures. The detail recommendations pertinent to design parameters for foundation support will be presented in our final report soon after the grad- ing plans and the proposed finished grades of each building become available. In order to accomplish these objectives, four borings were drilled and undisturbed soil samples were obtained for laboratory testing. This study was based on the Drawing No. J-3142 entitled "Condo No. 5 - Plot Plan" which was prepared by R. Burke and dated November 16, 1972. Reid Investigation Four borings were drilled with a truck-mounted rotary bucket-type drill rig at the approx- imate locations shown on the attached Drawing No. 1, entitled "Location of Test Borings." The borings were drilled to depths of 43 to 61 feet below the existing ground surface. Both water and I -2- "driller's" mud were added during drilling inside the test borings below ground water levels in order to prevent the boring walls! from caving in by external hydrostatic pressures. A continuous log of the soils encountered in the borings was recorded at the time of drilling and is shown in detail on Drawing Nos. 2 to 13, inclusive, each entitled "Summary Sheet." The soils were visually classified by field identification procedures in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification Chart. A simplified description of this classification system is presented in the attached Appendix A at the end of this report. Undisturbed samples were, obtained at frequent intervals, where possible, in the soils ahead of the drilling. The drop weight used for driving the sampling tube into the soils was the "Kelly" bar of the drill rig which weighs 1623 pounds, and the average drop was 12 inches. The general procedures used in field sampling are described under "Sampling" in Appendix B. Laboratory Tests Laboratory tests were performed on all undisturbed samples of the soils in order to deter- mine the dry density, moisture content, and shearing strength. The shearing strengths of the soils above water table were sheared under their existing overburden pressures, and for those below water table, sheared under saturated and undrained conditions under normal loads allowing for submerged densities below the water table. The results of these tests are presented on Drawing Nos. 2 to 13, inclusive. Consolidation tests were performed on representative samples in order to determine the load-settlement characteristics of the soils and the results of these tests are presented graphically on Drawing Nos. 14 to 16, inclusive, each entitled "Consolidation Curves." Time-settlement readings were also taken during consolidation tests in order to study the time- settlement relationship of clay strata encountered at the site. BENTON ENGINEERING INC -3- DISCUSS1ON, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Soil Strata At Boring 1, an existing fill consisting of slightly clayey sand, clayey sand and fine sand was encountered to a depth of 5.0 feet. The fill soils were underlain by a 0.5 foot thickness of soft clayey sand and by a soft silty clay bay mud with slight organic smell and porous rootlets to a depth of 14.0 feet. Between the depths of 14.0 feet and 34.5 feet, a medium firm to firm sandy clay was encountered. This was underlain by a 2.5 foot thickness of very firm, gravelly fine to coarse sandy clay and by a 1.5 foot thickness of very firm clay to a depth of 38.5 feet and merged to a very compact, slightly clayey sand to a depth of 44.5 feet. Below 44.5 feet was a very firm clay to the end of boring at 45.0 feet. i Ground water was encountered below a depth of 5.5 feet. At Boring 2, a 4.5 foot thickness of medium firm, clayey fine to medium sand fill was underlain by a soft silty clay bay mud to a depth of 17.5 feet and by a soft sandy clay to a depth of 24.0 feet. Below 24.0 feet was a one-foot thickness of medium firm clayey sand that was underlain by a very compact clayey sandy gravel to a depth of 31.0 feet and by a very firm sandy clay to a depth of 31 .7 feet. A very firm clay layer was then ecountered to the end of boring at 43.0 feet. Ground water was encountered below a depth of 4.0 feet. At Boring 3, an existing sandy clay fill was found in the upper 2.5 feet of the boring. Immediately underlying the fill was a very firm silty sand layer to a depth of 8.0 feet that was underlain by a soft to medium firm clay to a depth of 18.0 feet and by a medium firm clayey sand to a depth of 21.0 feet. Below 21.0 feet was a medium compact to very compact fine to medium sand to a depth of 36.0 feet that was underlain by a 1.5 foot thickness of silty fine sand then by a 2.0 foot thickness of silty clay [bay mud, and by a very compact slightly clayey sand to a depth of 41.5 feet. Between the depths of 41.5 feet and 49.0 feet was a very compact fine to medium BENTON ENGINEERING INC -4- I sand that was underlain by a firm clay to a depth of 50.5 feet and by a very compact, slight clayey sand to the end of boring at 51.0 feet. Ground water was encountered below a depth of 8.0 feet and sloughing of boring walls were encountered between the depths of 21.0 feet and 36.0 feet, and between the depths of 41.5 feet and 49.0 feet. At Boring 4, a 2.7 foot thickness of clayey sand fill was underlain by a medium firm silty clay to a depth of 3.5 feet and by a medium firm clayey sand to a depth of 4.5 feet. Between the depths of 4.5 feet and 14.7 feet, the soil consisted of medium soft to medium firm silty clay containing rusty stains and gypsum. Below 14.7 feet was a one-foot thickness of medium loose, slightly clayey medium sand that was underlain by a 1.3 foot thickness of medium firm sandy clay and merged to a medium loose to medium firm, fine to medium sand to a depth of 30.7 feet. A medium soft to firm layer of slightly silty sand was then encountered to a depth of 39.0 feet that was underlain by a medium soft to medium firm silty clay to a depth of 40.0 feet. Below 40.0 feet, a firm, slightly clayey sand was found to a depth of 50.8 feet that was underlain by a 4- foot thickness of firm sandy clay and by a firm clayey fine to medium sand to the end of boring at 61.0 feet. Seepage of water was encountered in the fractures of silty clay layer between the depths of 4.5 feet and 14.7 feet. Conclusions It is concluded from the field explorations, supplemented by the results of laboratory testing that the subject property is underlain by a soft to medium soft clay soil and/or bay mud of varying thicknesses in all the borings drilled. For instance, the soft to medium soft layers are 8.5 feet in thickness between the depths of 5.5 feet and 14.0 feet at Boring 1; 19.5 feet in thick- ness between the depths of 4.5 feet and 24.0 feet at Boring 2; 4.5 feet in thickness between the depths of 8.0 feet and 12.5 feet at Boring 3 and 6.7 feet in thickness between the depths of 8.0 feet and 14.7 feet at Boring 4. BENTON ENGINEERING INC -5- It is readily apparent that sizable differenHal settlements would occur across the length of the buildings if the buildings are supported by the soft to medium soft clay soils or bay mud layers of varying thicknesses. Our study indicates that an 8-foot wide square footing loaded to 3000 pounds per square foot would be subject to a settlement of approximately 3.7 inches in 7 months at Boring 1; to approximately 3.0 inches in 7.4 years at Boring 2; to approximately 0.5 inch in 2 months at Boring 3; and to approximately 1 inch in 3.6 months at Boring 4. The total settlements at each boring location would be significantly increased if additional fills of 2 feet or more are to be placed. Recommendations 1. Type of Foundations In order to minimize total and differential settlements resulting from the consolidation i of the various thicknesses of the soft to medium soft clay soils and/or bay mud, and because of the presence of ground water in clay layers that makes difficult any dewatering, it is recommended that pile foundations be used to support the proposed structures throughout. The pile design curves will be included in our final report if so chosen and after the grading plans and the proposed finished floor elevations of the buildings have been established. One alternative would be to use floating type of mat foundations to support the proposed buildings if the total and/or differential settlements can be tolerated. Considerations were given to the use of a compacted foundation prism for foundation support throughout, however, because of the presence of ground water, excavations below ground water would present a construction problem. Compacted filled ground prisms placed above the water level would be subject to sizable differential settlements, depending upon the thickness of compressible soils beneath the fill. 2. Building Locations For comparison purposes only, the existing subsoils in Borings 3 and 4 areas have more favorable engineering characteristics than those encountered in Borings 1 and 2 based on the results I BENTON ENGINEERING INC I -6- of laboratory testing. The soils in Boring 3 and 4 areas are generally higher in densities and are subject to less consolidation under any given load. Therefore, if buildings are placed in east-west direction along north property line, less total and differential settlements would result than if the buildings are placed in north-south direction along west property line. Respectfully submitted, BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. By S. H. Shu, Civil Engineer Reviewed Philip H.Mienton, Gtvil Engineer Distr: (4) La Costa Land Company Attention: Mr. l'rv Roston (1) Dan Saxon Palmer, A.I.A. & Associates SHS/PHB/ew BENTON ENGINEERING INC Indicates Approximate Location of Test Boring BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA LOCATION OF TEST BORINGS CONDOMNIUM NO 5 COSTA DEL MAR ROAD LA COSTA LAND COMPANY SAN DIEGO COUNTY; CALIFORNIA SCALE :I''30' DRAWN : DATE t 12-19-72 PROJECT NO . 72-II-2IC DRAWING NO o «4 IN CU t ^0 ••1^ o IB ^Z * „ A r»m .. 3 •9 i »-J or\ ) ^*fit i z f\) O — •n o 1 2 0 Z 0 MHsaa >z r~ j* ^^^ /^\ iri (^ ^^/'-v t/) ^^C^ >-' i 2^o w 3 o T> O O m $c r U £z > r c ^§^s > zgS'o — Tl O o z o§ K ===== r 0 0>H OZ o•n rn H CD O Z C/) m~~*ii~* ••••• ^f|P m Z HI wt ^?)> ^»** JZz o m m7-. ••So r>Z ?« ^•"Oaa» — 5Z ^ Z s\K —i.oQ fc. 1 §"~ ? r-o S. I M CDO <Q A • 1 _J ••••••••^•V 1115 z CO :> DEPTH/FEET11 — 0 3— 4- 6- 8- 9- 10- 11- 12- 13- 14- 15- 16-SAMPLENUMBER©SOILCLASSIFICATIONSYMBOLWater— \ /— \y Txx3S3 VVVXXJxxVxx^ XXXXX" VV\VV "vxxxxTvvvvx Txxxxx 2SSSSxxSSSx^^^x^ xxxxx- \XX\\' XXXXX' xxxxx .XXXXX ^^^^^^^^2S ^^^^2\xvxSSvxxxx^23232\2S322 N$V$VI .xxxxx ^X^^i^JSJiVVVAA ^^^2«^:x^^> XXXXX' SUMMARY SHEET BORING NO 1 ELEVATION 8.0' * Light Brown, Slightly Moist, Medium Firm, Occasional sGravel to 2 Inches Light Gray, Moist, Medium \Compact, Micaceous Brown, Moist, Medium Firm, Occasional Gravel to 1 1/2 Inches Brown-gray, Moist, Soft, l\rbrous, Rootlets, Slight \\Organic Odor 1 Gray, Saturated, Soft, Porous, 1 Rootlets, Slight Organic 1 Odor Lens of Clayey Silt Gr Me PROJECT NO 72-11-21C SL1GHTLYCLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND x FINE SAND / CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND / (Merges) / SILTYCLAY (Bay Mud) (Merges)DRIVE ENERGYFT KIPS/FT3.2 0.8 0.8 OJ|- UlMCC u-5° 14.4 40.4 53.1 DRY DENSITYLBS/CU FT116.2 78.7 70.2 ay and Brown, Saturated, FINE SANDY dium Firm CLAY 4.9 16. 4(115.2 Continued on Drawing No. 3 ("~^ - Indicates Undisturbed Drive Sample **J - indicates Sample Not Recovered * - Elevations shown were obtained by interpolation between cc lines on Condo No. 5 - plot plan Drawing No. J-3142, Da 11-16-72.SHEARRESISTANCEKIPS/SQ FT1.22 0.69 0.40 2.19 mtour ted f u_1 DRAWING NO BENTON ENGINEERING, INC 2 1 )1 N DEPTH/FEET17- 18- 19- 20- 21- 22- 23- 24- 25- 26- 27- 28- 29- 30- 31- 32- 33- 34- 35- 36- 37 SAMPLE |NUMBER ]SOILCLASSIFICATIONSYMBOL. — .1" ' '.. j ••_; ./ . ^^^^^^* •*w*^«* ^•MMM^tf4 ^^•^"••^•flp* F^H — "' ' !"• ' '•'" ll. -s_ ; ; •^^^^^^^..y-_!j . .-'.^^p^^^^*• ' *-- '- • •.. . : ' ^^^^^""^ ~^- ;.. .•. • m• J '•'.•'.. • •_ • Ty*r**-• .>.. *. . • * .> i .1> . • • ' w. '. • f -"•' '•• , •-• .V • SUMMARY SHEET BORING NO 1 (Cont.) Gray and Brown, Saturated, Medium Firm Dark Brown, Saturated, Firm Gray-brown, Saturated, Medium Firm, Porous, Decayed Rootlets, Slightly SI ickensided Gray and Brown, Saturated, Very Firm, 20 to 30 Percent Gravel, Occasional Cobbles to 6 Inches FINE SANDY CLAY (Merges) FINE TO MEDIUM SANDY CLAY (Merges) FINE SANDY CLAY GRAVELLY FINE TO COARSE SANDY CLAY DRIVE ENERGYFT KIPS/FT4.9 7.5 5.8 54.5 FIELDMOISTURE% DRY WT17 20 20 .3 .4 .8 17.3 Contined on Drawing No. 4 PROJECT NO 72-11-21C BENTON ENGINEERING, INC DRY DENSITYLBS/CU FT111.2 106.2 104.5 -SHEARRESISTANCEKIPS/SQ FT2.45 1.66 1.72 - DRAWING NO 3 09O uiul Q 37- 38- 39- 40- 41- 42- 43- 44- 45- Ul CCJlU ii © oM u SUMMARY SHEET BORING NO 1 Light Green-gray, Saturated, Very Firm Light Green-gray and Light Yellow-brown, Moist, Very Compact, Occasional Gravel to 1 Inch CLAY SLIGHTLY CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND Gray-green, Slightly Moist, \Verv Firm CLAY * 33.3 45.8 UJJ- 12.8 118.8 16.8 111.9 4.30 Ill 6.24 PROJECT NO 72-11-21C BENTON ENGINEERING, INC DRAWING NO 4 09 O D DEPTH/FEETV 1- 2- 3- — | 5- 6- 7- 8- 9- 10- 11- 13- 14- 15-- 16- 17- 18- 19- 20-SAMPLENUMBER©. '(4)SOILCLASSIFICATIONSYMBOLWater-y- \xxVx!' k^^^X^kxxTxx SSSSSSKXXXXXxV^JkVxxxTx^xxxxT^\WVV.^ T^^^T.A^VvV' vXXXXXvxk^VV^\\\\V 33SS^S^AAVkx ^^^^2xTxxTJxxxxx^\kVVVTxxxx'.\\x\x AxxxV52^^^SJxxxjxx^V^Vkxxxxxxx x^^^SVkVVv^ "^x^x2Xk.VVk'3S^^S33SS2Txxxxx ^^^^2kv^k^)^^^22^2SS2^^^^3sssssTxxxx]:\\\Txir\x^\xivxVxVMvxVxx1^ XXX X \\ XXXXXN XXXXX" xxxxx ^Oj-N^^Jrvxxx\| *-X X N X X H SUMMARY SHEET BORING NO 2 ELEVATION 7,0* Brown and Gray-brown, Slightly Moist, Medium Firm Saturated Gray, Saturated, Soft, Porous, Rootlets, Slight Organic Odor Gray, Saturated, Soft Continued on Drawing No CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND SILTYCLAY (Bay Mud) (Merges) FINE SANDY CLAY . 6 DRIVE ENERGY [•FT KIPS/FT4.9 0.8 0.8 0.8 IU|_ 14.3 53.2 59.2 58.4 DRY DENSITYLBS./CU FT114.5 68.5 64.2 64.7 SHEARRESISTANCE fK IPS/SO FT1.09 0.53 0.46 0.14 I i LU 1 PROJECT NO I DRAWING NO 72-11-21C BENTON ENGINEERING. INC 5 3 DEPTH/FEET21- 22- 23- 24- 25- 26- 27- 28- ?9 30- 31- 32- 33- 34- 35- 36- 37- 38- 39- 40-SAMPLENUMBER©SOILCLASSIFICATIONSYMBOL• I ' ;~~ + •>••« A feV • t 9 •• £ • 9 m • • • • •• •• • • ^ ^ * * •• • «T • t f • ^ Jb 9 m M • •• • •• • • • « m m • • » ^ ]^*fc . — • — • — •••ME i SUMMARY SHEET BORING NO 2_{£ont.) Gray, Saturated, Soft Gray-brown, Saturated, Medium Firm Gray-brown, Saturated, Very Compact, 60 to 70 Percent Gravel and Cobbles to 6 Inches Gray, Moist, Very Firm Light Gray-green With Yellow- red Streaks, Slightly Moist, Very Firm, Slightly Slickensided Dark Green-gray Continued on Drawing FINE SANDY CLAY CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND CLAYEY FINE TO COARSE SANDY GRAVEL FINESANDYCLAY CLAY So. 7 DRIVE ENERGYFT KIPS/FT |10.8 20.8 60.0 UJ(_ 0§S Jf->-uitatc 150 Sse 17.2 18 21 PROJECT NO 72-11-21C BENTON ENGINEERING, INC .4 .0 DRY DENSITYLBS/CU FT107.7 109.4 107.5 SHEARRESISTANCEKIPS/SQ FT0.97 3.28 4.46 DRAWING NO 6 1 1 c lils 2 aO 3 DEPTH/FEET41- 42- 43-SAMPLENUMBER©SOILCLASSIFICATIONSYMBOL1 ^mm^^^^mm |h- iuw HH iVSUMMARY SHEET St Q«£ a"- KZ"- BORING NO 2 (Cent.) *£ ujwtt Q^ ^feS >H "i° >$ "%£st £a? gj KX o Dark Green-gray, SlighMy Moist, Very Firm, Slightly Slickensided ^ A%,CLAY 54.5 20.2 106.4 3.49 t PROJECT NO DRAWING NO 72-11-21C BENTON ENGINEERING, SNC 7 111s mO p DEPTH/FEET!_, o_ 3- 4~ 5- 6- 7- 8_ 9- IfV1 V 11 12- 13- 15- 16- 17- 18- 19- 20- 01 SAMPLENUMBER© © ©SOILFICATIONMBOLco>in in _iu X§^ Water ^2S = •MMMM^H^H SUMMARY SHEET BORING NO 3 ELEVATION 17.0' Yel low-red-brown, Moist, \Medium Firm, Topsoil, Rootlets Firm Light Gray and Red-brown, Moist, Very Firm, Rootlets to 6 Feet Gray With Red-brown, Streaks, Saturated, Soft, Slickensided Medium Firm Thin Lenses of Sea Shells Red-brown and Gray, Saturated, Medium Firm, Lenses of Clay FINE TO MEDIUM SANDY CLAY SILTYFINE SAND CLAY (Merges) CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND (Merges)DRIVE ENERGYFT KIPS/FT16.2 9.7 0.8 3.2 UJ|_ s=>iu wee11.50 Sae 15.4 24.1 43.5 30.7 DRY DENSITYLBS/CU FT101.9 95.4 76.6 88.2 Ild OS/SdIX30NVJ.SIS3HUV3HS1.04 1.00 0.59 2.11 4 _i u.t Continued on Drawing No. 9 PROJECT NO DRAWING NO 72-11-21C BENTON ENGINEERING. INC Uls PTH/FEET0 °t/I 22- 23- ._ 24- 25- .... 26- 27- - 28- 29- 30- -• 31- 32- 33-- 34- 35- oo — 37-- 38-- 39 40- — 41- ~SAMPLEMUMBER(5) fi\ W fi\ ^ Z SOILSSIFICATIOSYMBOL5U x^vv ^^ " XXXX*V WxxxA vxxxx1 XX XXX xxxxx rvxxxx rv x x \ x vXXXXX SUMMARY SHEET BORING NO 3 (Cont . ) Gray and Brown, Saturated, Medium Compact, Occasional Lenses of Clay ' Very Compact, Occasional Lenses of Clay Gray and Brown, Saturated, Firm Blc Fii ick and Gray, Saturated, •m, Slight Organic Odor Brown and Gray, Saturated, Very Compact PROJECT NO 72-11-2 1C FINE TO MEDIUM SAND SILTY FINE SAND SILTY CLAY (Bay Mud) SLIGHTLY CLAYEY FINE TO COARSE H!5 ecu. 0.8 10.0 7.5 16.7 UJ |_ UJ WOE 29 18 17 .1 .5 .8 SAND BEWTON ENGINEERING, INC 11 Q"1 96.8 109.9 110.0 |!lcc?<5o£fes>5ffi»oc^ 1.25 3.38 4.46 DRAWING NO 9 to 1oU 2 Sua ut •& CD UJUJu. I a. O 42- 43- 44- 45- 46- - 47- 48- 49- 50- 51" -SAMPLENUMBER© © 00) W o SOILSSI Fl CAT!SYMBOL< O SUMMARY SHEET BORING NO 3 (Conr.) Brown and Gray, Saturated, ^ Very Compact, Occasional \ Gravel to 3/4 Inch \ Gray, Saturated, Very Compact Dark Gray and Yellow-brown, Saturated, Firm Light Green-gray and Yellow- ^ brown, Saturated, Very \ Compact, Lenses of Clay \ SLIGHTLY CLAYEY FINE i TO COARSE / SAND / (Merges) / FINE TO MEDIUM SAND CLAY SLIGHTLY , CLAYEY FINE / > oc ^u **^ in i DC"-Q 25.8 20.8 - 14.6 Ul|_ 111 WE u!50 16 18 .0 .7 35.8 21 TO MEDIUM / SAND / PROJECT NO 72-11-21C BENTON ENGINEERING, INC i A. > ll S -J 109.7 108.1 84.3 104.0 UJ.SHEARESISTANCIPS/SO Floc* 3.64 3.72 1.12 3.30 DRAWING NO 10 UJ UJu. X a.•j1 0~ 1._ 2- 3- 4- 5- 6- 7_ 8- 9 10 11- 12- 13- 14- 15- 16- 17 18- 19- 20- 21-SAMPLENUMBER0 SOILCLASSIFICATIONSYMBOLvVAk*; ^^Js^^^^xxxx^ SUMMARY SHEET BORING NO 4 ELEVATION 13.0' Light Red-brown, Mottled, Moist, Medium Compact, Occasional Coarse Grains, Occasional Gravel to 1 Inch, Rootlets Re \Fi V d-brown, Moist, Medium rm, With Fine to Medium and rsTTTTJV Light Brown, Moist, Medium ^^^^^^^^^^^1 \ r**v^'v'^v1! \ rirmXVxxVTxxvvAkV^A ^\\\\\\Vk^\Vr\x\TT ^V'vk'v'v \\X\\"1 xx\\\~ \\XXX' xxxxx ^xxxxx >.xx\xx xXXXXX XXN^^X Light Gray With Red Steaks And Light Brown, Moist, Medium Firm, Interbedded Layers, Rust Stains and Gypsum, Highly Fractured, Lens of .Organic Matter at 4.5 Feet \ ^^ Very Moist, Medium Soft xxxxxl^Tx^^ 'xxxxxl ^^^23r\TxT^vVV^Vsl VXXXX^ ^VVVI Dark Gray rTxxvvl i^^^^IT^^xx^~VvV^IRxx^VVJKx'vkkM © © ?.»»> Light Brown, Saturated, Medium Loose Light Gray, Moist, Medium Firm Light Gray, Saturated, Medium Loose to Medium Firm, Some Coarse Grains Continued on Draw!) PROJECT NO 72-1 1-2 1C CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND SILTYCLAY y / CLAYEY FINE / SAND / SILTYCLAY SLIGHTLY CLAYED MEDIUM SAND FINE SANDY CLAY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND ig No. 12 DRIVE ENERGYFT KIPS/FT.01 3.2 0.8 3 0.z 1.6 1DH Q§J UlMff 150 Sss '20.9- 36.6 38.7 JV7 7.Z/ . / 17.6 DRY DENSITYLBS/CU FT00.6 84.7 82.5 oz aVo.y 107.C SHEARRESISTANCEK IPS/SO FT2.61] 0.89 0.59 M l "7.17 3.48 1 U. 1 r, DRAWING NO BENTON ENGINEERING, INC n i I EPTH/FEE1D 91 22-*•*• 23- 24- 25- 26- 27- 28- 29- 30- 31- — 32- - 33- - 34- 35- 36- 37- 38- OQ-O7 40- 41*rl 42-SAMPLENUMBER©^^^ © -^ ® 0 SOILSSIFICATISYMBOL< O "^^ \^^^ ^^^^ ^^W SUMMARY SHEET BORING NO 4 (Cont.) Light Gray, Saturated, Medium Loose to Medium Firm, Some Coarse Grains Light Gray With Red-brown, Saturated, Medium Firm to Firm, Lenses of Fine to Medium Sand, Lenses of ^^^ Slightly Clayey Fine to Medium ;x\SS>J\ Sand, Lenses of Silry Clay ^W\$§SSVVVV; ^ ^ ^ $$W v\\X\\ ^^^oo^^\\^^\^v^x^^Tx \ Medium Soft to Medium Firm, Large Amount of Lenses of Silty Clay to 34.5 Feet Dark Gray, Very Moist, M< \lt \Ti Li5 BIX Sa PROJECT NO 72-11-21C jdlum Soft to Medium Firm, snses of Very Fine Sand, •aces of Organic Matter jht Gray With Gray, Red- swn and Yellow-brown, turated, Firm FINE TO MEDIUM SAND SLIGHTLY SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND SILTY CLAY SLIGHTLY CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM > OC ^\U ***• UI — at Q 2.5 -10.0- 3.3 11.7 Ul|_ 17 22 26 .9 .6' .2 22. Continued on Drawing No. 13 BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. 8 > Z* &. S%Q-1 113.8 101.9 95.9 101.8 UI.SHEARESISTANCIPS/SO Fltcx 3.25 2.97 2.25 3.21 DRAWING NO 12 Ul111u. I o. UJQ 42- UI £C -JllJii o -So— U 03 o SUMMARY SHEET BORING NO 4_(£p.nt.) ecu. O £3S-1 CC* 2 toO 43- 44- 45-- 47- 48- 49- 50- 51- 52- 53- 54- 55- 56- 57- 58- 59- 60- 61- Llghr Gray WUh Gray, Red- brown, And Yellow-brown, Sarurated, Firm Light Gray With Red-brown, And Yellow-brown, Moist, Firm, Fractured : Light Gray With Red-brown, And Yellow-brown, Moist, Firm 20.8 20.6 104.7 4.64 SLIGHTLY CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND 10.2--31.0--89.8-3.41 FINE SANDY CLAY 14.6 23.7 101.2 3.84 CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND 13.2 19.5 106.3 3.52 PROJECT NO 72-11-21C BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. DRAWING NO 13 oo inO w ID O CONSOLIDATION CURVES LOAD IN KIPS PER SQUARE FOOT A2 04 060810 2 4 68 10 16 CONSOLIDATION PERCENT OF SAMPLE THICKNESSCO O JX Ni. O CO O Ji. N3 ^H- ^^ — . ^-^ ^ -~-^ , --^ -— -,~~^. ^ •^^.^ ^^ • — \ X \ ^^ \\\\ •**. \\ — \\ -~- Boring 1 Sample 3 Peofh 1 1 ' L 0 INDICATES PERCENT CONSOLIDATION AT FIELD MOISTURE • INDICATES PERCENT CONSOLIDATION AFTER SATURATION PROJECT NO 72-H-21C ,BENTON ENGINEERING, INC \i DRAWINO NO 14 CONSOLIDATION CURVES w ao u I 8 < 10 12 40 I 111 •z in _ SI 14 16 111u LOAD IN KIPS PER SQUARE FOOT 04 06 06 10 Z j4_ Boring 3 Sample 3 \ e e io Borina 2 Sample 2 Depth 6' O INDICATES PERCENT CONSOLIDATION AT FIELD MOISTURE © INDICATES PERCENT CONSOLIDATION AFTER SATURATION 16 PROJECT NO 72-11-21C BENTON ENGINEERING, INC DRAWING NO 15 CONSOLIDATION CURVES IU a. < to•=»= o"O o o o o Ula. oCO 04 LOAD IN KIPS PER SQUARE FOOT 06 08 10 2 4 10 16 O INDICATES PERCENT CONSOLIDATION AT FIELD MOISTURE ® INDICATES PERCENT CONSOLIDATION AFTER SATURATION PROJECT NO 72-11-21C BENTON ENGINEERING, INC DRAWING NO 16 PHILIP HENK1NG BENTON PRESIDENT CIVIL ENGINEER BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. APPLIED SOIL MECHANICS FOUNDATIONS 6717 CONVOY COURT SAN LMEGO CALIFORNIA 92111 APPENDIX A Unified Soil Classification Chart* TELEPHONE (714) 565-1955 SOIL DESCRIPTION I. COARSE GRAINED, More than half of material is larger than No. 200 sieve GROUP SYMBOL TYPICAL NAMES size.** GRAVE LS CLEAN GRAVELS More than half of coarse fraction is larger than No. 4 sieve size but smaller GRAVELS WITH FINES than 3 inches (Appreciable -imount of fines) SANDS More than half of coarse fraction is smaller than No. 4 sieve size CLEAN SANDS SANDS WITH FINES (Appreciable amount of fines) II. FINE GRAINED, More than half of material is smaller than No. 200 sieve size.** SILTS AND C LAYS Liquid Limit Less than 50 SILTS AND CLAYS Liquid Limit Greater than 50 III. HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS GW GP GM GC sw SP SM SC ML CL OL MH CH OH PT Well graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines. Poorly graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines. Silty gravels, poorly graded gravel- sand-silt mixtures Clayey gravels, poorly graded gravel- sand-clay mixtures Well graded sand, gravelly sands, little or no fines. Poorly graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines. Silty sands, poorly graded sand-silt mixtures. Clayey sands, poorly graded sand-clay mixtures Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour, sandy silt or clayey-silt-sand mixtures with slight plasticity. Inorganic clays of low to medium plas- ticity, gravelly clays, sandy clays, silty clays, lean clays. Organic silts and organic silty-clays of low plasticity. Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine sandy or silty soils, elastic silts. Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays. Organic clays of medium to high plasticity Peat and other highly organic soils. * Adopted by the Corps of Engineers and Bureau of Reclamation in January, 1952. ** All sieve sizes on this chart are U.S. Standard. BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. APPLIED SOIL. MECHANICS FOUNDATIONS 6717 CONVOY COURT SAN DIEGO CALIFORNIA 92111 PHILIP HENKING BENTON PRESIDENT CIVIL ENGINEER TELEPHONE (714) 565-1955 APPENDIX B Sampling The undisturbed soil samples are obtained by forcing a special sampling tube into the undisturbed soils at the bottom of the boring, at frequent intervals below the ground surface. The sampling tube consists of a steel barrel 3.0 inches outside diameter, with a special cutting tip on one end and a double ball valve on the other, and with a lining of twelve thin brass rings, each one inch long by 2.42 inches inside diameter. The sampler, connected to a twelve inch long waste barrel, is either pushed or driven approximately 18 inches into the soil and a six inch section of the center portion of the sample is taken for laboratory tests, the soil being still confined in the brass rings, after extraction from the sampler tube. The samples are taken to the laboratory in close fitting waterproof containers in order to retain the field moisture until completion of the tests. The driving energy is calculated as the average energy in foot-kips required to force the sampling tube through one foot of soil at the depth at which the sample is obtained. Shear Tests The shear tests are run using a direct shear machine of the strain control type in which the rate of deformation is approximately 0.05 inch per mi tute. The machine is so designed that the tests are made without removing the samples from the brass liner rings in which they are secured. Each sample is sheared under a normal load equivalent to the weight of the soil above the point of sampling. In some instances, samples are sheared under various normal loads in order to obtain the internal angle of friction and cohesion. Where considered necessary, samples are saturated and drained before shearing in order to simulate extreme field moisture conditions. Consolidation Tests The apparatus used for the consolidation tests is designed to receive one of the one inch high rings of soil as it comes from the field. Loads are applied in several increments to the upper surface of the test specimen and the resulting deformations are recorded at selected time intervals for each increment. Generally, each increment of load is maintained on the sample until the rate of deformation is equal to or less than 1/10000 inch per hour. Porous stones are placed in contact with the top and bottom of each specimen to permit the ready addition or release of water. Expansion Tests xV One inch high samples confined in the brass rings are permitted to air dry at 105° F for at least 48 hours prior to placing into the expansion apparatus. A unit load of 500 pounds per square foot is then applied to the upper porous stone in contact with the top of each sample. Water is permitted to contact both the top and bottom of each sample through porous stones. Continuous observations are made until downward movement stops. The dial reading is recorded and expansion is recorded until the rate of upward movement is less than 1/10000 inch per hour. /o/C-£••0 BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. APPLIED SOIL MECHANICS FOUNDATIONS BB4O RUFFIN ROAD SAN DIEGO. CALIFORNIA 9ZI23 PHILIP HENKINC BENTON PRESIDENT - CIVIL ENGINEER OctoberS, 1978 TELEPHONE (714) 563-1&33 Engineering Alliance Corporation 4024 Ibis Street San Diego,California 92103 Attention: Mr Jack Scholle Subject:Project No. 72-11-21C Allowable Bearing Value for Carport Des7gn\ Proposed Condominium Unit No. 5 Southeasterly of Costa Del Mar and El Camino Real Intersection Carlsbad, California LA COSTA LAND GCT - c 1978 RECEIVED Gentlemen: This is to present, pursuant to your request, the allowable bearing value of soils for the design of carport to be constructed outside the perimeter of the subject concominium Unit No. 5. It is our understanding that there will be some continuous v/all footings approximately 4 feet in width and some isolated column footings also approximately 4 feet in width. Upon reviewing the soil conditions at the proposed construction sfto, it is our opinion that an allowable bearing value of 1,000 pounds per square foot may be used to design the carport footing founded on the undisturbed on site soils.\ The total settlements of a 4-foot widecontinuous footing or a 4-foot wide square footing which is loaded to a unit foundation pressure of 1,000 pounds per square foot, are estimated to vary between 1/2 inch and 2-1/2 inches depending on Hie depths of fill surcharge loads placed adjacent to these. \ Respectfully submitted';, BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. __ S. H. Shu, Civil Engineer RCE No. 19913 Reviewed b Distribution: (1) Addressee (1) Dale Naegle, A. I. A. (2) La Costa Land Co. Attention: Mr. Irv Roston Philip Fl~B%nYon Civil Engineer RCE No. 10332 BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. APPLlt-D EOIL MECHANICS FOUNDATIONS B340 RUFFIN »OAD SAN DDL.GO, CALirOFtNIA 92123 PHILIP HENKING BENTON Oil 1 1C1TO T«LePHOM« (714) PHISID.NT . CIVIL KNOINMH Se ptember I , 19/8 TCLBPHON* <7I«> Engineering Alliance Corporation 4024 Ibis Street San Diego, California 92103 Attention: Mr. Jack Scholle Subject: Project No. 72-11-21C Supplemental Foundation Design Information Proposed Condominium Unit No. 5 Southeasterly of Costa Del Mar and El Camino Real Intersection Carlsbad, California Gentlemen: This is to present, pursuant to the results of a meeting held on August 23, 1973, the desired soil parameters for the design of proposed retaining wall around the presently proposed build- ing and the proposed pile foundations. The suggested soil parameters requested are presented be low; (1) Active earth pressures for retaining wall design (a) The recommended earth pressure for a restrained retaining v/all design is a uniform pressure intensity of 18. 8H pounds per square foot in the middle 60 percent of the retained soil height that diminishes to zero at the top elevation of retained earth and at the bottom of the wall. "H" is the height of the retained earth in feet. (b) For cantilever retaining walls a equivalent fluid density of 30 pounds per cubic foot may be used. It is assumed for both types of retaining walls that only select pervious soils, such as silty sand soils, will be placed immediately behind the wall. The recommended criterion for selecting the pervious soils is less than 20 percent by weight passing U.S. Standard Sieve No. 200. (2) The estimated downdrag forces on each 12-inch square pile are estimated to vary from 50 to 59 kips, respectively, at Borings 4 and 5, as shown on Drawing No. 1 of our April 7, 1978 report. The downdrag forces will result from the placement of earth mounds around the proposed building that will cause long-term settlement in all of the soils above the com- pressible silty clay bay mud type soils that exist to 14. 5 feet at Boring 4 and to 28.5 feet at Boring 5. The downdrag forces should be added to the design supporting capacity of each pile, as shown on Drawing Nos. A and B of our December 12, 1977 report, to determine the required new total length of pile penetration to resist all downward loads. Suptember 1, 19/8P,"J(CI No. 72-11-21C •c.-iji i_crlng Alliance Corporation (3) The total settlements of the underlying soft clay deposits due to placement/of the earth mound around the building are estimated to be approximately 0. 8_pnd 2. 4 inches/ respectively, in the areas of Borings 4 and 5. The majority of the settlement may be expected to occur within 3 months in the vicinity of Boring 4 and within 7 years fn the vicinity of Boring 5 after full application of the surcharge earth mounds. Respectfully submitted, BENTON ENGINEERING, INC By S. H. Shu, Civil Engineer RCE No. 19913 Reviewed by PnTtip H. Ber/foTi^ Civil 'Engineer RCE No. 10332 Distribution: (1) Addressee (l)Dale Naegle, A. I. A. (2) La Costa Land Company Attention: Mr. Irv Roston SHSdr BENTON ENGINEERING. INC. APPLIED SOIL MECHANICS FOUNDATIONS 6717 CONVOY COURT •AN DIEGO CALIFORNIA 92111 PHILIP HENKING BENTON Aorll 7 1978PRESIDENT CIVIL ENGINEER MDril /, I 71 O TELEPHONE (714) 86B-1SS8 La Costa Land Company 2100 Costa Del Mar Road Carlsbad, California 92008 Attention: Mr. Irv Roston Subject: Project No. 72-11-21C Report of Supplemental Soils Investigation Proposed Condominium Unit 5 Southeast Corner of El Camino Real and Costa Del Mar Road Carlsbad, California Gentlemen- This is to present our report of a supplemental soils investigation conducted at the site of the proposed Condominium Unit 5 which will be located southeasterly of El Camino Real and Costa Del Mar Road in Carlsbad, California. The objectives of this supplemental soils investigation were: (a) to determine the thickness and the area extent of the soft clay, "bay mud" type layers underlying the site, (b) to evaluate 'whether the subsoils are competent to support a spread footing or a mat foundation, and (c) to present pertinent soil parameters for the design of the spread footing or the mat foundation. Five borings were previously drilled at and near the proposed new construction site, and the results of our previous findings were presented in two of our previous reports dated December 26, 1972 and December 12, 1977, both under Project No. 72-11-21C. Field Investigation Four additional borings (Boring Nos. 6, 6A, 6B, and 7) were drilled during the current investi- gation at the approximate locations shown on the attached Drawing No. 1, entitled "Location of Test Borings." The borings were drilled to depths of 25 to 32 feet below the existing ground surface. A continuous log of the soils encountered in the borings was recorded at the time of drilling and is shown in detail on Drawing Nos. 20 to 27, inclusive, each entitled "Summary Sheet." Drawing Nos. 2 to 19, inclusive, were included in the previous reports. Undisturbed samples were obtained at frequent intervals in the soils ahead of the drilling. The drop weight used for driving the sampling tube into the soils was the "Kelly" bar of the drill rig which weighs 1,623 pounds, and the average drop was 12 inches. Project No. 72-11-21C -2- April 7, 1978 La Costa Land Company Laboratory Tests Laboratory tests were performed on all undisturbed natural soil samples obtained from Borings 6B and 7 of the additional borings in order to determine the dry density, moisture content, and shearing strength. The results of .these tests are presented on Drawing Nos. 24 to 27, inclusive. To determine the shearing strengths of the soils, the soil samples were sheared under a normal load equal to their existing overburden pressures taking into consideration of water buoyancy for those recovered below water level. Consolidation tests were performed on representative samples in order to determine the load- settlement characteristics of the soils and the results of these tests are presented graphically on Drawing Nos. 28 to 30, inclusive, each entitled "Consolidation Curves." Direct shear tests were performed on selected undisturbed samples that were all saturated before testing and sheared under an undrained condition. The results of these tests are presented below: Normal Maximum • Angle of Apparent Boring Sample Depth Load Shear Load Internal Friction Cohesion No. No. (in feet) (kips/sq ft) (k?ps/sq ft) Degrees (Ib/sg ft) 6B 5 9.0 0.5 0.91 13 800 1.0 0.98 2.0 1.73 DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS Soil Strata Existing fill soils were found in the upper 6.0, 5.5, 6.0, and 4.5 feet, respectively, of Boring 6, 6A, 6B, and 7. The fill soils are mostly loose or soft to medium firm in consistency and consisted of clay, fine sandy clay, fine to medium sandy clay, and clayey sand of various grain sizes. Also, one layer of compact fine to medium sand with some gravel sizes was found between depths of 3.5 and 4.0 feet at Boring 6B. In the area of Boring 6, a loose silty fine sand layer was found to 6.2 feet in depth and then merged to soft clay, "bay mud" to 15.7 feet in depth. The soft clay, "bay mud" was underlain by firm fine sandy clay soils to 23.0 feet, and then merged to firm clayey fine sand soils to the end of boring at 25.0 feet. Caving in of boring wall was encountered between 4.0 and 6.0 feet in depth, and ground water was found below a depth of 3.0 feet in this boring on March 14, 1978. Project No. 72-11-21C -3- April 7, 1978 La Costa Land Company At Boring 6A, the existing fill was underlain by soft and highly organic fine sandy clay layer to 8.0 feet in depth, and then merged to medium firm or Firm soil strata to the end of boring at 32.0 feet. The medium firm to firm soil strata consisted of fine sandy clay, clayey fine to medium sand, silty clay, gravelly clayey fine to medium sand and fine to medium sand soils. Ground v/ater was encountered below a depth of 3 0 feet, and sloughing of boring wall occurred between depths of 5.5 and 8.0 feet on March 14, 1978. At Boring 6B, the fill soils were underlain by soft gravelly sandy clay and fine to medium sandy clay layers to 10.5 feet, firm silty clay layer to 14.0 feet, soft fine sandy clay layer to 17.0 feet and then merged to loose silty fine to medium sand soils to a depth of 20.0 feet. Between 20.0 feet and the end of boring at 29.0 feet, firm or compact soil strata were encountered. The fnm or compact soil strata consisted of fine to coarse sand, fine sandy clay, and fine to coarse sand with some gravel. Ground water was found below 3.0 feet in depth on March 15, 1978. At Boring 7, the fill soils were undei lain by medium firm to firm fine sandy clay to 11.0 feet, and then merged to soft to fiim clayey fine sand soils to a depth of 20.7 feet. Below 20.7 feet and to the end of boring at 30.0 feet, compact fine to coarse sand soils with gravel were encountered. Ground water was found below 1 .5 feet in this boring on March 16, 1978. Conclusions It is concluded from the results of field explorations and engineering analyses that 1. Existing fill was found in the upper 6.0, 5.5, 6.0, and 4.5 feet, respectively, at Borings 6, 6A, 6B, and 7. The fill soils are mostly loose or soft in consistency, and consist mostly of clay, fine sandy clay, fine to medium sandy clay, and clayey sand of various grain sizes. 2. Soft clay or fine sandy clay, "bay mud" type soils were found between 6.2 and 15.7 feet at Boring 6 and between 5.5 and 8.0 feet at Boring 6A. No "bay mud" type clay soils were found in the area of Borings 6B and 7. Therefore, if shallow mat type footings are to be used for foundation support, it is desirable to arrange the proposed building in such a manner as shown on the attached Drawing No. 1 of this report. This type of building arrangement would eliminate the need to use pile foundations to support the proposed building. 3. Conventional spread and continuous footings are not recommended for the support of the proposed building due to presence of the upper existing fill soils that would allow sizable differential non-uniform settlements to occur between footings. The shallow Project No. 72-11-21C -4- April 7, 1978 La Costa Land Company mat foundation system has to be specially designed by the Project Structural Engineer to allow for the higher stresses induced into the structural members of the building due to the estimated differential settlements. Recommendations 1 . Foundation Support At/mat type foundation is recommended to support the proposed building constructed at the approximate location outlined on the attached Drawing No. 1. The mat foundation would serve to bridge over the variable upper soils and reduce the possible differential settlements due to the upper existing fill soils, and provide a more uniform settlement for the entire foundation system. An allowable bearing value of 1,000 pounds per square foot may be used to design the mat foundation under dead and live load conditions. This value may be increased one thiid if wind and seismic loads are combined. For lateral resistance design, the following allowable passive earth pressures, expressed in terms of equivalent fluid density, are recommended Above giound water level - 100 pounds per cubic foot. Below ground water level - 50 pounds per cubic foot. It is assumed that the side faces of the mat foundation v/ill be in direct contact with the undisturbed on-site soils,or the soils adjacent to the side faces of the mat foundation would be uniformly compacted during construction to effectively transmit lateral loads to the undisturbed on-site soils. A friction factor of 0.3 may be used to compute the sliding friction between the bottoms of the footing and the supporting soils. Both passive resistance of the soils and the sliding friction resistance may be combined to compute a total lateral resistance of the foundation system. The recommended minimum thickness of mat foundation should be determined by the Structural Engineer. The estimated total settlements of an assumed 66 by 120 feet mat foundation which is located as shown on the attached Drawing No. 1 and loaded to a unit foundation pressure of 1,000 pounds per square foot on either existing fill or on undisturbed on-site natural soils, are estimated to be as follows. Project No. 72-11-21C -5- April 7, 1978 La Costa Land Company (A) The West Mat Foundation - (westerly of Boring 3 and northerly of Borings 6A and 7) Location Estimated Total Settlements (inches) At the center of the mat 0.50 to 0.60 At northwest corner 0.17 to 0.28 At southwest corner 0.18 to 0.28 At northeast corner 0.10 to 0.17 At southeast corner adjacent to the east mat 0.17 to 0.28 (B) The East Mat Foundation - (easterly of Boring 7) At the center of the mat 0.54 to 0.86 At northwest cornei adjacent to the west mat 0.17 to 0.28 At southwest corner 0.20 to 0.25 At northeast corner 0.17 to 0.22 At southeast corner 0.18 to 0.22 It would probably be desirable to stiucturally separate the building on the west mat foundation from the building on the east mat foundation. Due to presence of ground watei or water seepage at relatively shallow depths below existing ground surface, (below 3.0 and 3.1 feet, respectively, at Borings 6 and 6A, and below 3.0 and 1.5 feet, respectively, at Borings 6B and 7), it is recommended that the bottom of the foundation be located at approximately Elevation 9.3 feet. In order to provide a working sur- face during construction and in order to improve subgrade support for the mat foundation, it is recommended that at least 6 inches thickness of gravel or crushed rock be provided immediately below the mat foundation. Also, gravel-filled intercept trenches with perforated pipes are recommended to be installed around the perimeter of the buildings in ordei to minimize adverse water effects on the performance of the mat foundation. The suggested location of the gravel- filled trench would be 6 feet or greater outside the mat foundations. The recommended depth of the perforated pipe covered with gravel is at least 2.0 feet below the bottom of the mat foundations and allowance be made for a drainage outlet by either gravity 01 by a sump with pump. 2. General It is recommended that our office be contacted to review future foundation plans if the locations of the building are significantly different from the assumed locations as shown on Drawing No. 1 of this report. It is further recommended that the perimeter intercept drainage Project No. 72-11-21C La Cost-a Land Company -6-Apnl 7, 1978 trenches and perforated pipes with gravel backfill be installed during the initial grading of the sire in order to provide a relatively dry working area. Respectfully submitted BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. S.H. Snu, Civil Engineer RCE No. 19913 Reviewed by Philip H. RCE No. 10332 Engineer- Distribution (2) Addressee (3) Dale Naegle & Associates Attention Mr. Green (1) Engineering Alliance Corporation Attention. Mr. Don Day SHS-dr CONDOMINIUM I \ zr\) o m no oo wHn >o O c. r oo sm z > r cz _ s: 5§"o r~ 5Rsig01 33 3 roo oz o•n m CDo PfW ^ M§2 I I 18 S § 3 3 1 3Q Q 3 r- r-o o s s i s. 5, o I I ^I i i i 3 DEPTH/FEETU 2- 3- 4- S 6- 7- 8- 9- 1 AIU- 11- 12- 13- 14- 15- 16- 17- 18-SAMPLENUMBERSOILCLASSIFICATIONSYMBOL. . . .. . b=^ ~W "w • • *,-Watec . . • • • * • • * * • * • • * - ' o;wvsfi ! SUMMARY SHEETi BORING NO 6 ELEVATION 8.7' ! Light Gray, Very Moist, Loose Brown, Very Mqisr, Medium UMrm J">n f rk Brown, Moist, Loose ! Dark Gray Brown, Moist, Soft, With Mottled Lenses of Light Gray Clayey Fine Sand » > \ Saturated, Caving Added LPrillinq Mud : Gray, Saturated, Loose Dark Gray, Saturated, Soft, Bay Mud 1 Light- Gray ^H|^|||H Little Fine Sand ^^^^^^^^^^j' "ni i. j ^^^^^^^^^^j r~r±\^^^^^^^^^^i**^^»j1 • l| Brown and Gray, Saturated, Firm (Continue (J) Indicates Undisturbed Drive PROJECT NO 72-11-21C Indicates Loose Bag Sample CLAYEY FINE SAND CLAY I ORGANIC MATERIAL CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND 1 SILTY FINE SAND CLAY FINE SANDY CLAY d on Drawing No. 2 Sample DRIVE ENERGYFT KIPS/FT3.2 1.6 0.8 0.4 0.4 A O D U>H Q§S -"£->UJ Cfltt150 S<£ - • - - BENTON ENGINEERING, INC i !DRY DENSITYLBS/CU FT- - -SHEARRESISTANCEKIPS/SQ FT- - - LU DRAWING NO 20 V) 0z oCizou toou , I UJ 5 z COo DEPTH/FEET18 _ 19- 20- - 21- 22- 94 or — — •~ — — - - _SAMPLENUMBERSOILLASSIFICATIONSYMBOLU SUMMARY SHEET BORING NO 6Cont. |i n ii ii'i] Brown and Gray, Saturated, 1 MII. >j Firm czmnj^^^^^^^^^^^i P***^"^! ^^^^^^^^^^J•^••ww*! l^^^^^^^^l ^^^^^^^^^1 r?)'•'••'• '• Brown, Saturated, Firm PROJECT NO 72-11-21C FINE SANDY CLAY CLAYEY FINE SAND IRIVE ENERGYFT KIPS/FTu 6.5 6.7 =il - BENTON ENGINEERING, INC DRY DENSITYLBS/CU FT- -SHEARRESISTANCEKIPS/SQ FT- - DRAWING NO 21 i 5 DEPTH/FEET1- ? 3- 4- 5 6- 7- R 9- 10- 11- 12- 13 14- 15 1<S 17- 18- 19- 20-SAMPLENUMBERSOILCLASSIFICATIONSYMBOL. . . . {^•••i^^ = Water • • • • • • • • • . . . SUMMARY SHEET BORING NO 6A ELEVATION 9.2' • Light Gray, Very Moist, Loose i Brown, Moist, Loose £lcick, Moist, Loose Brown, Very Mo'ist, Loose Saturated f - 1 Dark Gray Black, Saturated, '• V J j 1 Soft, Highly Organic, Caving 1 ' • 1 ] Added Drilling Mud ^^^^^^^^|*^B*"y**^j ". '"1 i ,' -| j Brown and Gray, Medium Firms-j '"^^^^^"l •MMMM^J' ---••• J ^^^•bMwJl__^_f . . ' 1J .' •"••.!••-•==^H ^"^^^^^f*^*^**yii^^****n ^^*y**j^^^^^^\i * * * i..... « ^^^^^^^^\m^^^^^^*^1*^^1 ' . ' .•^™*^^^^H^**^^^^ Light Brown Brown, Saturated, Medium Firm Bro Fin PROJECT NO 72-11-21C wn, Saturated, Medium m, Porous (Continue CLAYEY FINE SAND CLAY . 1 ORGANIC MATERIAL CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND FINE SANDY CLAY CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND FINE SANDY CLAY d on Drawing No. 2 DRIVE ENERGYFT KIPS/FT1.6 0.8 5.6 1.6 4.9 3.2 3)FIELDMOISTURE% DRY WT- - -DRY DENSITYLBS7CU FT- - -SHEARRESISTANCEKIPS/SQ FT- - - t iE 1 1 DRAWING NO BENTON ENGINEERING, INC •0 •oz 0 Qzoo < £0o< Uls z oaO 3 DEPTH/FEET 12.1- - 22 9TAH VL_ O ^24- _ 25- 26_ 27 28 _ 29_ 31- 32 — - _ — _ ~*~ .-. I - _ _ Ul CC-Jiu11 SOIL 1CLASSIFICATION)SYMBOL ISUMMARY SHEET BORING NO 6ACont. ; [•'-..'j'.'j.-j Brown, Saturated, Medium [•]iu'"r' 1 Firm, Porous ^^^^^^^n j^^^^^^^^i jv^frOQl Brown, Sal'u^a^ed/ Firm/ EkSSSSSI Porous IMHMMMM ^ ^^^^^^^^^^j i ®gif|| p^^^^^^^^^^KTT^S ^2^^^3^^^^^3222233 ^^^ ® i^vVAiYl • . . . • « •• • • •• . • * . •• • ••• •• • • • • - Light Gray, Saturated, Firm, 40 Percent Gravel and Cobble to 6" Gray Brown, Saturated, Firm, With Lenses of Fine Sandy Clay FINE SANDY CLAY SILTYCLAY GRAVELLY CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND*JJ^l T Lrf FINE TO MEDIUM SAND DRIVE ENERGYFT KIPS/FT8.3 8.3 cc 3 UjMOC - PROJECT NO iBENTON ENGINEERING, INC72-11-21C DRY DENSITY 1LBS/CU FT I— -rSHEAR 1RESISTANCE 1KIPS/SQ FT J— - DRAWING NO 23 Ul < a 9 3 DEPTH/FEET] 2- 3- 4 5- 6- 7 8- 9- 10- 11- 12- 13- 15- 16- 17 18- 19 90AU SAMPLENUMBER 1•SOILCLASSIFICATIONSYMBOL,. - - ^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^ *M>tf*l*Bj^ • ', ' . .' =3E±^gVj^^^. Ware* > *f**T**j^••^•ip^n^M ^^^^^^^^^^J^^^^^^^^^^n 1^— «**H SUMMARY SHEET BORING NO 6B ELEVATION 9 /V Brown, Very Moist, Soft, Mixed With Gray Brown Silty ] Clay Brown, VeryjMoist, Soft I s Saturated Gray, Saturated, Compact, With Gravel " '-'•;'J Black, Saturated, Soft ^^^^^^C:*22«dT^^^^51 ^^^^^j2,3,3 ^^™^^j ^^^^^^^^^^B ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^W ^^ • Brown, Saturated, Soft, 20 Percent Gravel .! '. -' ! s j Gray and Light Brown, " ' ' ,'[ Saturated, Soft, With Few Pea '. ''"' ; i| Gravel and Cemented Chunks vxxxx^ Brown, Saturated, Soft 222253j^2SSS333323 ^^^^^3Svvjjji ^^^^^3??22S3^2SS23 ^^^^^322SSS3x52^3 - -• :!' j Brown, Saturated, Soft !' ' '; j ^^^^^^^^J T™2^2I ^^^^^^^^% ^ Brown, Saturated, Loose Gray, Becoming Coarser PROJECT NO 72-11-21C FINE TO MEDIUM SANDY CLAY FINE TO MEDIUM SANDY CLAY JI FINE TO MEDIUM SAND | FINE SANDY CLAY GRAVELLY FINE SANDY CLAY FINE TO MEDIUM SANDY CLAY SILTY CLAY FINE SANDY CLAY SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM ' SAND DRIVE ENERGYFT KIPS/FT1.6 5.6 2.8 • 2.8 0.8 9.7 0.4 UJ(_ s=>-1 K>UlMOC£50 Ss? 15.4 22 2] • 16 22 16 17 .0 .5 0 .2 .9 .5 (Continued on Drawing No. 25) BENTON ENGINEERING, INC DRY DENSITYLBS./CU FT114.5 99.9 106.5 1164 103.7 114.7 112.4 £t-= ILcc5<2awfcss 5aSor* 1.00 0.52 0.52 -0 66. 0.75 1.88 1.49 in DRAWING NO 24 OQ ZO o Ul Z ffls > DEPTH/FEETZU 21- 77- 23- __ 24- ?'>- _ 26- _ 27- 28- 29 SAMPLENUMBER©SOILCLASSIFICATIONSYMBOL• SUMMARY SHEET BORING NO 6BCont. Gray, Saturated, Compact [i'i i 1 Gray, Saturated, Compact, 1 MM JWith Gravel [j^l I.. iJ b=r| ® Brown, Saturated, Compact, With Gravel and Cobble to 8" FINE TO MEDIUM SAND FINE SANDY CLAY FINE TO COARSE SAND DRIVE ENERGYFT KIPS/FT14.6 15.0 UH 3=>-J H>UME 'iS 18 .6 12 PROJECT NO BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. .9 DRY DENSITYLBSVCU FT106.0 100.8 SHEARRESISTANCEK IPS/SO FT2.70 2.85 DRAWING NO 25 => DEPTH/FEET1- 2- 3- 4- 5 7- 9- 10- n 1 O12- n1 O — 14- i su 16- T7I/ — 18- TOIV 20-SAMPLENUMBER2& W © ©SOILCLASSIFICATIONSYMBOLi^rH r.V 'Water; ^^ ^^^^^^^1 .!'.'.! ^^^^^^^^^1 T^^*"1 ^^^^J^^^^M^_^^^^n^~*jTj^^^\\^i^^•••^**^ H*Mtata^BM^^^^-^•^ '" ««• • j *2***3^^^^^^^ ^^HT™***^ ^^I^^^MHHk^^^^^ • • • • • • . • • . • • /- • • • • • t • • - * . » • • *> • * . . . » . . SUMMARY SHEET BORING NO 7 ELEVATION 9.8' Brown With Flecks of White, Moist, Soft j Saturated ; Brc Lo Sa i >wn and Gray, Saturated, ose, With Few Gravel )wn, Black and Gray, turated, Soft | firown With Flecks of White ind Rust, Saturated, Medium :irm With Lenses of Silty Clay Mostly Brown and Red Brown i Firm Brown, Saturated, Firm, on the Lean Side ' i Some Lenses More Clayey j Soft I (Continue PROJECT NO 72-11 -21C FINE SANDY CLAY SILTY FINE SAND FINE SANDY CLAY FINE SANDY CLAY f CLAYEY FINE SAND d on Drawing No. 2 DRIVE ENERGYFT KIPS/FT0.8 0.8 0.8, 7.5 22.0 18.5 6.7 7)FIELDMOISTURE% DRY WT22.8 21.8 23.4 20.4 15.0 17.3 23.2 DRY DENSITYLBS./CU FT102.7 975 102.1 107.7 116.3 110.4 104.6 SHEARRESISTANCEK IPS/SO FT0.68 0.44 0 24. 1.16 2.44 1.76 0.67 en DRAWING NO BENTON ENGINEERING, INC.26 IT cc2 C oo HUJ UJa. I a. UI D °0 21- 22- 23- 24- 25- 26- _ 27- 28- 29- 30 " - — - -SAMPLENUMBER |$ ® (?)SOILCLASSIFICATIONSYMBOL. .. • . . -•Kr hi M i SUMMARY SHEET BORING NO 7Cbnt. own and Gray, Saturated, rm, With Some Lenses ore Clayey Brown, Saturated, Coarse, IWith Gravel , Thin Lense Gray Clay and Grave 1 PROJECT NO 72-11-21C j i i i CLAYEY f FINE SAND FINE TO COARSE SAND DRIVE ENERGYFT KIPS/FT¥, 9.0 12.5 o =1 u. U bv !>ntc. K 26.7 18.7- 9 .6 32.1 i i i 1 BENTON ENGINEERING, INC.DRY DENSITYLBS./CU FT97.7 •1107 99.7 90.3 SHEARRESISTANCEK IPS/SO FT1.14 •1.62- 2.62 1.38 DRAWING NO 27 CONSOLIDATION CURVES LOAD IN KIPS PER SQUARE FOOT 04 06 08 I 0 2 4 Ul 4 UlzVo Ul wu Ula. a So Boring 6B Sample 1 Depth: 2' Boring 6B Sample 2 Depth: 4' Boring 6B Sample 3 Depth 6' . X- o Indicates percent consolidation a" I ield WoW • Indicates percent consolidation after saturation PROJECT NO. 72-11-21C BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. DRAWING NO 28 CONSOLIDATION CURVES 0 02 LOAD IN KIPS PER SQUARE FOOT 04 06 08 I 0 2 4_ Itl 4 Boring 6B Sample 3A Depth: 6.5' Boring 6B Sample 4 Depth- 9' Boring 6B Sample 5 Depth: 12' o Indicates percent consolidation at field moisture • Indicates percent consol idation after saturation PROJECT NO. 72-11-21C BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. DRAWING NO. 29 CONSOLIDATION CURVES Ul 00J_04 LOAD IN KIPS PER SQUARE FOOT 060810 2 4 M(Ab)S UJ PERCENTDATIONSOo Indicates percent consolidation at field moisture • Indicates percent consol idation after saturation PROJECT NO. 72-11 -21C BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. ORAWINO NO 3Q BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. APPLIED SOIL MECHANICS FOUNDATIONS 6717 CONVOY COURT SAN DIEGO CALIFORNIA 02111 PHILIP HENKING BENTON PRESIDENT CIVIL ENGINEER December 12, 1977 TELEPHONE (714) 565 1955 La Costa Land Company 2100 Costa De! Mar Road Carlsbad, California 92008 Attention Mr. Irv Roston Subject Project No. 72-11-21C Final Report of Soils Investigation Proposed Condominium Unit 5 Southeast Corner of El Camino Real and Costa Del Mar Road Carlsbad, California Gentlemen. This is to present our final report of soils investigation conducted at the site of the proposed Condominium Unit 5 which will be located southeasterly of El Camino Real and Costa Del Mar Road in Carlsbad, California. Four borings were previously drilled at and near the proposed construction site, and the results of our previous findings interim report to you that was The objectives of this report were from an additional boring present pertinent soil parameters Field Investigation of subsurface conditions at the site were presented in our dated December 26, 1972 under the same project number. to present supplemental subsurface information obtained drilled on the south side of the proposed Building A, and to for the design of the proposed building foundations. The additional Boring 5 was drilled with a truck-mounted rotary bucket-type drill rig at the approximate location shown on the attached Drawing No. 1, entitled "Location of Test Borings." The boring was drilled to a depth of 48.5 feet below the existing ground surface. A continuous log of the soils encountered in the boring was recorded at the time of drilling and is shown in detail on Drawing Nos. 17, 18 and 19, each entitled "Summary Sheet.1' Drawing Nos. 2 to 16, inclusive, were included in the previous report dated December 26, 1972. Undisturbed samples were obtained at frequent intervals in the soils ahead of the drilling. The drop weight used for driving the sampling tube into the soils was the "Kelly" bar of the drill rig which weighs 2,200 pounds, and the average drop was 12 inches. The general procedures used in field sampling are described under "Sampling" in Appendix B. Project No. 72-11-21C -2- La Costa Land Company December 12, 1977 Laboratory Tests Laboratory tests were performed on all undisturbed natural soil samples in order to determine the dry density, moisture content, and shearing strength. The results of these tests are presented on Drawing Nos. 17j 18, and 19. To determine the shearing strengths of the soils, the soil samples were sheared under a normal load equal to their existing overburden pressures taking into consideration of water buoyancy for those recovered below water level. Soil Strata At Boring 5, an existing fill was found in the upper 6.0 feet of the boring. The fill soils consisted mostly of soft silty clay, fine to medium sandy clay and clayey fine to medium sand. The fill soils were underlain by soft silty clay, fine sandy clay and clayey fine sand soils to 28.5 feet in depth. Below 28.5 feet and to the end of boring at 48.5 feet, firm to very firm clayey fine to medium sand and fine sandy clay soils were encountered. Ground water was encountered below a depth of 6.0 feet in this boring. Conclusions and Recommendations 1.Foundation Support It is concluded from the results feasible safe permanent support foundations because of (a) the of field investigation and laboratory tests that the most for the proposed buildings would be to use driven pile aresence of soft to medium firm or medium compact fill soils in the upper portion of the site and (b) the presence of shallow ground water level at the site and (c) the presence of soft, highly compressible clayey soil (bay mud type soils) varying from 8.5 to 22.5 feet in thickness immediately below the upper fill soils. Calculations have been made to determine the vertical supporting capacities of both a 12-inch square concrete pile and a Raymond Step Taper pile with a 9-inch tip for foundation design. The calculated vertical supporting capacities of the piles are presented on Drawing A, entitled "Allowable Vertical Supporting Capacities of Vertical Piles Driven In The Vicinity of Boring 4," and Drawing B, entitled "Allowable Vertical Supporting Capacities of Vertical Piles Driven In The Vicinity of Boring 5." Between these two borings, an interpolation between these two drawings should be made during construction by comparing the driving resistance of piles driven near Borings 4 and 5. The vertical supporting capacities presented on the drawings are based on the surface area of the pile in contact with the soils below Elevation +1.0 feet times the shearing resistance of the soils divided by a factor of safety of 2. The downward vertical supporting capacities shown on Drawing Nos. A and B are for dead plus live loads only, and may be increased one-third when the Wiind and seismic loadings are considered. The vertical supporting capacities presented on Drawing Nos. A and B are based on the strength of the soils and the strength of the pile section should also be checked to verify the structural capacity of the pile. For other types of piles, the vertical supporting capacities may be BENTON ENGINEERING INC Project No. 72-11-21C La Costa Land Company -3-December 12, 1977 proportioned on the basis of their perimeters. The allowable uplift resistance of the piles may be assumed to be one half of the downward supporting capacities presented on Drawing Nos. A and B. ! In order to ensure that all piles are capable of supporting safely the design loads even though there may be some variations ijn the shear strengths of the soils at different locations of the site, it is recommended that initial "control" piles be driven at the following suggested locations: (a) One control (b) One control center of pile at middle distance between Borings 4 and 5 near the Building A. location should be recorded, the design tip elevation of the pile each in the immediately vicinity of Borings 4 and 5 and A continuous record of blow counts for each foot of driving penetration at each test pile The blow counts required for the last foot of penetration for piles at "control" pile locations should be used as the minimum driving resistance criteria for piles driven to the same vertical load capacity at other locations near the respective test pile locations. The reason for this is that if "weaker" soils are encountered at other locations, and corresponding less blow counts are achieved at the same design tip elevation, then driving will be continued until the driving resistance is built up to at least the minimum blow count near Borings 4 and 5, where the soil shearing resistances were used in order to determine the design capacity of each pile. The blow counts obtained from the control pile located between Borings 4 and 5 should be used to correlate the blow counts of control piles at Borings 4 and 5 locations. Subsequently, either Drawing A or B should be selected for determining pile length between Borings 4 and 5. It is possible that "refusal" may be reached before driving piles to the design tip elevations. Wherever this results during driving, then predrillmg with an 8 inch diameter auger to as deep as to 5 feet above the design tip elevation may be permitted. If "refusal" develops within 5 feet of the recommended design tip elevations, then the pile may be considered satisfactory for the design load. The blow counts for determination of "refusal" will vary with the type of pile driving hammer being used, the driving energy being impacted per blow, and with the type of pile, whether steel shell with mandrel, wood or reinforced concrete. Generally, "refusal" may be defined when a penetration of 1 inch or less is effected in the last 20 blows using a pile driving energy or greater. The vertical supporting a on the assumptions that the influenced by the overlapping driving hammer rated at 15,00*0 foot-pounds per blow of lapacities of the piles shown on Drawing Nos. A and B are based supporting capacities of each single pile will not be adversely of the loading zones from the nearest adjacent pile. BENTON ENGINEERING. INC Project No. 72-11-21C La Costa Land Company If the spacing between piles is that suitable efficiency factors -4-December 12, 1977 less than 8 diameters center to center, then it is recommended be applied to allow for the overlapping of the loading zones between adjacent piles. A suitable efficiency formula to allow for this overlapping is presented as follows: E = 1 - D [m (n-1) + n (m-1) +/2 (m-1) (n-1)] TrSmn Where E = Efficiency = Bearing capacity of pile in group Bearing capacity of isolated pile D — Diameter of pile in feet S - Space between piles, center to center, in feet m = Number ofj rows n = Number of piles per row Recommended efficiency factors center are presented as follows: Number of Rows 1 1 Triangular 2 It is recommended that lateral for various groups of piles driven at 3 diameters center to Number of Piles Per Row 2 3 3 Pile Group 2 Efficiency 0.947 0.929 0.911 0.857 loads on the building be resisted by battered piles. This is due to presence of unsuitable soft clayey soils and fill soils in the upper portion of the site where lateral loads from the building foundations are imposed. 2.Provision of Permanent Drainage System Ground water was encountered below existing ground surface at Borings 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. the elevations shown below. at depths of 5.5, 4.0, 8.0, 4.5, and 6.0 feet, respectively, Boring Nos. 1 2 3 4 5 *Seepage of water Existing Ground Surface Elevation (Feet) + 8.0 + 7.0 +17.0 +13.0 + 7.5 Depth to Water Level (Feet) 5.5 4.0 8.0 4.5* 6.0 These depths correspond to Elevation of Ground Water Surface (Feet) +2.50 +3.00 +9.00 +8.50 +1.50 BENTON ENGINEERING INC Project No. 72-11-21C La Costa Land Company It is our understanding that the -5-December 12, 1977 proposed finished ground surface at the proposed construction site is at Elevation +6.0 Feet which will be below the surface elevation of ground water at the site. In order to avoid any adverse effect of ground water on the future concrete slab on grade and/or pavement, it is recommended that peripheral gravel-filled trenches be provided around and outside of the perimeter walls of the building. It may be necessary to provide transverse gravel-filled trenches across and beneath the building if the peripheral trenches do not effectively dewater the interior clayey soils. The recommended dimensions of the gravel-filled trenches are at least 1.5 feet in width and at least 4.0 feet in depth or to Elevation +2.0 Feet or deeper. A perforated 6-inch diameter plastic PVC pipe is recommended at the bottom of the perimeter trenches. The gravel-filled trenches should be interconnected to drain collected water to either a permanent outlet by gravity, or into sumps located at the southerly the site. end, where pumps may be installed to permanently dewater It is recommended that the lower 2 feet of gravel-filled trenches be filled with materials which meet the following gradation requirements: U.S. Standard Sieve Size 3/4 Inch 3/8 Inch No. 4 No. 40 No. 200 Percent Passing By Weight 90 to 55 to 20 to 0 to 0 to 100 90 70 10 5 The upper 2.0 feet of backfilled materials in the gravel-filled trenches may consist of nonexpansive soils such as silty sand, slightly silty sand, clayey sand, slightly clayay sand, or other clean sand soils. Where any structures are to be placed over the gravel-filled trenches, the backfilled materials in the trenches should be compacted to not less than 90 percent of the maximum dry density obtained by A.S.HM. D 1557-70 method of compaction. 3.Concrete Slab On Grade It is recommended that either the concrete floor slab of the building be structurally designed to tie into the grade beams of least 4 inches of sand, or that the pile foundations and be placed on a base layer of at the concrete slabs on grade be separated by expansion joints from the building and be underlain by a base course of at least 9 inches of well graded gravel to 3/4 inch in size. Respectfully submitted, BENTON ENGINEERING, ING. S.H. Shu, Civil Engineer R.C.E. No. 19913 Reviewed! by Distr: ~-^A^-> ' " ^S^r~™^*—- 'Pnilipri. Benton, CiviT~Engineer R.C.E. No. 10332 (3) La Costa Land Company Attn: Mr. Bob Stark (1) C.A. Larsen Construction Company Attn: Mr. Bob Little, Jr. BENTON ENGINEERING INC CONDOMINIUM /A -J o N ^I rt•* T zf\) o n zo zo >z r o>nna 8 ^ § oo s c r p ?z > ' c n >o oo oz Hmen CDO5 O O) om 22 I I1 82 nf 8 § I 1 8 8-* -^. § I § NN CD i ))P DEPTH/FEET1 2 3- 4 5 6 7" 9- 10- 11- 12 1 Olo 14- 1 r —O 1Z 17- 19- 20- HI OC r"11 II ( ( ( ( ( ( 1 £ £ £ £ ,6/ )SOILCLASSIFICATIONSYMBOLBn So to wn and Gra) ft, With Scat 4" ) }i=-^ «WateH "^CjQCM ^^^^32,^^22Jvvvvv] vvTx"^2 ?vvvv9SS»iSS Br M awn and Gra> Dist, Soft Brown, Very M SUMMARY SHEET BORING NO 5 ELEVATION f Brown, Moist tered Gravel Soft ' Brown, Very oist, Loose Gray, Saturated, Soft, Mixed With Fine Sandy Clay and Roots, Caving, Added Water y^y^i w ^vx^v^i toJ2223 2^^^^3Jvvvxxl ^TT^l2^^^2I ??vv?3 ^^vvg ^^^^3 ^^^^3Trrrri th Pockets o Medium San i'v^^l Firm2^323^^^^Tj ^^^^^^^3^T^^N1 ' ' ' '•'ta^N**a*M.'...". ~ \2SSSj ^^^^322^SS3I:vvv^3 2SS^32v\\T] ^2^^^2J2??3 5T^^NJJ2x\Sj3SS^S ^^^^sryT^^i r^vv^l r\^x\^ Soft Gray, Saturate Scattered Sea ! Gray, Saturate Mud, Roots, S (^J Indicates I 1 1 Indicates I PROJECT NO 72- 11 -21 C Clayey Fine ] d, Soft, With iheils d, Soft, Bay ightly Porous Continue Jndisturbed Driv oose Bag Sampl FINE TO MEDIUM SANDY CLAY SILTY CLAY FINE TO MEDIUM SANDY CLAY J CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND SILTY CLAY FINE SANDY CLAY SILTY CLAY :d on Drawing No. e Sample e DRIVE ENERGYFT KIPS/FT0.8 0.8 1 6 0.8 0.8 0.8 18 FIELDMOISTURE% DRY WT19.9 17.4 14.5 «, 41.2 66.7 DRY DENSITYLBS/CU FT98.2 107.9 111.4 71.7 79.5 60.0 SHEARRESISTANCEKIPS/SQ FT0.26 0.45 0.23 0.43 u_ DRAWING NO BENTON ENGINEERING, INC ]7 r> 6 Z i/» c EoJ p l/>oJ o ut < ms 1-UlUJu. I a. UIQ se— 21 - 22- 23 24- 25-i 26- 27- 28- oo£.7 30- O 131 ooo/ 33- 34 _ 35- 36 37- 38 39- 40- Ul OC r1"111 *l MMH^^H ® © ©SOILFICATIONMBOLs£< ^^U^ ^^^P ^^^^^vS^^s2233S^Sv^S22^^s^^vvv\ 55^^^3^^VVVV5^TT2 ^^^^^^vxxxx^ • Gray, Saturate Mud, Roots, S Gray, Saturate iliiy Gray, Saturate 25233 ^^^^^3^^^^^3S25SS ^^^^^^^^j^2SS3^^3^3s^^S3 ^^vvvgllklH^ H^ Gra/, Saturate Light Gray Bro Firm, With Me Grains Light Greenish Saturated, Ver; Clay Binder Light Greenish Saturated, Ver; PROJECT NO 77-11-21C SUMMARY SHEET BORING NO 5 Cont. d, Soft Bay ightly Porous J, Soft d, Soft J, Firm wn, Saturated, dium Sand Gray, i Firm, With Gray, f Firm Continued on SILTY CLAY CLAYEY FINE SAND SILTY CLAY CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND CLAYEY r IK 1C C A Kinr 1 N t b A N U SILTY FINE TO COARSE SAND FINE SANDY CLAY Drawing No. 19 DRIVE ENERGYFT KIPS/FT0.8 9.9 125.4 176.6 UJ|_ o§s -JH>uiME i!oQ 2s? 23.1 19.6 14.8 14.9 DRY DENSITYLBS/CU FT100.4 108.2 113.4 118.8 SHEARRESISTANCEKIPS/SQ FT1.09 0.91 3.65 4.63 DRAWING NO BENTON ENGINEERING, INC 18 UJu.ItHIa -49- UJ CC _IUJ11 o SUMMARY SHEET BORING NO 5 Cont. L1J|_ UJj/lCCil O Q Ss? Light Greenish Gray, 41 42 43-i 44 45 46 47 48 49 Saturated, Very Firm Light Gray, Saturated, Very Firm, With Scattered Coarse Sand Grams FINE SANDY CLAY 55.0 16.8 109.0 3.54 CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND 86.9 13.1 121.0 6.36 Z s Ou oU UJ < PROJECT NO 72-11-21C BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. DRAWING NO 19 co •*—o 0) ALLOWABLE VERTICAL SUPPORTING CAPACITIES OF VERTICAL PILES DRIVEN IN THE VICINITY OF BORING 4 (F.S. - 2) IN KIPS 240 12" Square Concrete Pile 9 Tip Raymond Step Taper Pile -40 -50 *The ground surface at Boring 4 was assumed to be at Elevation +13.0 Feet PROJECT NO 72-11-21C DRAWING NO A o o c 0 + 10 r- ALLOWABLE VERTICAL SUPPORTING CAPACITIES OF VERTICAL PILES DRIVEN IN THE VICINITY OF BORING 5 (F.S. =2) IN KIPS 40 200 240 -10 12" Square Concrete Pile 9" Tip Raymond Step Taper Pile -50 It *The ground surface at Boring 5 was assumed to be at Elevation +7.5 FeeL PROJECT NO 72-11-21C BENTON ENGINEERING, OBAWING NO B LZNTON FIN'CIN * N t> i r c, o c * i August 15, 1979 fr"'.lt HENMNG PCSTOS rtlSS'*TCVI.*IfciCtMCK II - ' ^ «. « Rick Engineering Company 3088 Pio Pico Drive Carlsbad, California 92008 Attention: Mr. Conrad L. Spencer Subject: Project No. 72-11-21C Estimate of Quantity of Ground Water Flow Between Elevations 12.0 feet and 8.0 Feet Proposed La Costa Condominium No. 5 Carlsbad, California Gentlemen Pursuant to your request, the quantity of ground water flow expected between Elevation 12.0 and Elevation 8.0 feet is on the order of 0.44 cubic foot per second in the proposed subdrainage system. Respectfully submitted, BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. By S. H. Shu, Civil Engineer RCE No. 19913 Reviewed by — — if i \f t *~ - " "'_ * ^i<H. Benton, Civil Engineer RCE No. 10332 4 Distribution: (3) Addressee (1) La Costa Land Company, Attention Mr. Irv Roston SHS/PHB/jr CONOOMINIUM tl tV) I zr\) o zo zo m nCi Oo i/>-in >oc r 3§ Oam 58 i|>(f\ S O oo 5 H• m i 07 O . Z• o o m £Z ?2 nZ z n I o. ii Q 2 5 t. 1i ooQ ! r-o § s S. 5. in 5 ErCJ.'TON EK'GINELI.,:; C\ II »ii BCSTON t • to nu rt IN • <• ' r liTOO C A LIFOt •» •• October 3, 1978 T i ,. r ••--•• i 17", If! ' r Engineering Alliance Corporation 4024 Ibis Street San D.ego,California 92103 Attention: Mr Jack Scholle Subject.Pro|ect No 72-11-21C Allowable Bearing Value for Carport Design Proposed Condominium Unit No. 5 Southeasterly of Costa Del A4ar and El Cammo Real Intersection Carlsbad, California Gentlemen: This is to present, pursuant to your request, the allowable bearing value of soils for the design of carport to be constructed outside the perimeter of the subject concommium Unit No. 5 It is our understanding that there will be some continuous wall footings approximately 4 feet in width and some isolated column footings also approximately 4 feet in width Upon reviewing the soil conditions at the proposed construction site, it is our opinion that an allowable bearing value of 1,000 pounds per square foot may be used to design the carport footing founded on the undisturbed on site soils The total settlements of a 4-foot wio'econtmuous footing or a 4-foot wide square footing which is loaded to a unit foundation pressure of 1,000 pounds per square foot, are estimated to vary between 1/2 inch and 2-1/2 inches depending on the depths of fill surcharge loads placed adjacent to these Respectfully submitted, BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. By S. H. Shu, Civil Engineer RCE No 19913 Reviewed Distribution. (1) Addressee (1) Dale Naegle, A. I. A (2) La Costa Land Co Attention: Mr Irv Roston • ^V"rr ^ <- Philip R ^nTon Civil Engineer RCE No 10332 EENTON ENGINEERING. INC D fOIL MJ.CHANIC8 — F O i ' N C>A.T IONS 6717 CONVOY COURT DICCO CALirO>-SpIA S ^ILir HtNKINC ELK1ON * I • I DC NT CIVIL • H 6 I ** I • •April 7, 1978 La Costa Land Company 2100 Costa Del Mar Road Carlsbad, California 92008 Attention Subject Mr. Irv Roston Project No. 72-11-21C Report of Supplemental Soils Investigation Proposed Condominium Unit 5 Southeast Corner of El Comino Real ond Costa Del Mar Road Carlsbad, California Gentlemen This is to present our report of a supplemental soils investigation conducted at the site of the proposed Condominium Unit 5 which will be located southeasterly of El Cammo Real and Costa Del Mar Road in Carlsbad, California. The objectives of this supplemental soils investigation were, (a) to determine the thickness and the area extent of the soft clay, "bay mud" type layers underlying the site, (b) to evaluate whether the subsoils are competent to support a spread footing or a mat foundation, and (c) to present pertirtent soil parameters for the design of the spread footing or the mat foundation. Five borings were previously drilled at and near the proposed new construction site, and the results of our previous findings were presented in two of our previous reports dated December 26, 1972 and December 12, 1977, both under Project No. 72-11-21C. Field Investigation Four additional borings (Boring Nos. 6, 6A, 6B, and 7) were drilled during the current investi- gation at the approximate locations shown on the attached Drawing No. 1, entitled "Location of Test Borings." The borings were drilled to depths of 25 to 32 feet below the existing ground surface. A continuous log of the soils encountered in the borings was recorded at the time of drilling and is shown in detail on Drawing Nos. 20 to 27, inclusive, each entitled "Summary Sheet." Drawing Nos. 2 to 19, inclusive, were included m the previous reports. Undisturbed samples were obtained at frequent intervals in the soils ahead of the drilling. The drop weight used for driving the sampling tube into the soils was the "Kelly" bar of the drill rig which weighs 1,623 pounds, ond the average drop was 12 inches. Project No. 72-11-21C -2- April 7, 1978 La Costa Land Company Laboratory Tests Laboratory tests were performed on all undisturbed natural soil samples obtained from Borings 6B and 7 of the additional borings in order to determine the dry density, moisture content, and shearing strength. The results of these resh are presented on Drawing Nos. 24 to 27, inclusive. To determine the shearing strengths of the soils, the soil samples were sheared under a normal load equal toTheir existing overburden pressures taking into consideration of water buoyancy for those recovered below water level. Consolidation tests were performed on representative samples in order to determine the load- settlement characteristics of the soils and the results of these tests are presented graphically on Drawing Nos. 28 to 30, inclusive, each entitled "Consolidation Curves." Direct shear tests were performed on selected undisturbed samples that were all saturated before testing and sheared under an undrained condition. The results of these tests are presented below. Normal Maximum Angle of Apparent Boring Sample Depth Load Shear Load Internal Friction Cohesion No. No. (in feet) (kips/sq ff) (kips/sq ft) Degrees (Ib/sq ft) 6B 5^ 9.0 0.5 0.91 13 800 1.0 0.98 2.0 1.73 DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS Soil Strata Existing fill soils were found in the upper 6.0, 5.5, 6.0, and 4.5 feet, respectively, of Boring 6, 6A, 6B, and 7. The fill soils are mostly loose or soft to medium firm in consistency and consisted of clay, fine sandy clay, fine to medium sandy clay, and clayey sand of various gram sizes. Also, one layer of compact fine to medium sand with some gravel sizes was found between depths of 3.5 and 4.0 feet at Boring 6B. In the area of Boring 6, a loose silty fine sand layer was found to 6.2 feet in depth and then merged to soft clay, "bay mud" to 15.7 feet in depth. The soft clay, "bay mud" was underlain by firm fine sandy clay soils to 23.0 feet, and then merged to firm clayey fine sand soils to the end of boring at 25.0 feet. Caving in of boring wall was encountered between 4.0 and 6.0 feet in depth, and ground water was found below a depth of 3.0 feet in this boring on March 14, 1978. Project No. 72-11-21C -3- April 7, 1978 Lo Costa Land Company At Boring 6A, the existing fill was underlain by soft and lughly organic fine sandy clay layer to 8.0 feet in depth, and then merged to medium firm or Firm soil strata to the end of boring at 32.0 feet. The medium firm to firm soil strata consisted of fine sandy clay, clayey fine to dl urn sand,-silty clay, gravelly clayey fine to medium sand and fine to medium sand soils.me Ground water was encountered below a depth of 3 0 feet, and sloughing of boring wall occurred berween depths of 5.5 and 8.0 feet on March 14, 1978. At Boring 6B7 the fill soils were underlain by soft gravelly sandy clay and fine to medium sandy clay layers to 10.5 feet, firm silty clay layer to 14.0 feet, soft fine sandy clay layer to 17.0 feet and then merged to loose silty fine to medium sand soils to a depth of 20.0 feet. Berween 20.0 feet and the end of boring at 29 0 feet, firm or compact soil strata were encountered. The firm or compact soil strata consisted of fine to coarse sand, fine sandy clay, and fine to coarse sand with some gravel. Ground water was found below 3 0 feet in depth on /vWch 15, 1978. At Boring 7, the fill soils were underlain by medium firm to firm fine sandy clay to 11.0 feet, and then merged to soft to firm clayey fine sand soils to a depth of 20.7 feet. Below 20.7 feet and to the end of boring at 30.0 feet, compact fine to coarse sand soils with gravel were encountered.-1 Ground water was found below 1 .5 feet in this boring on March 16, 1978. Conclusions It is concluded from the results of field explorations and engineering analyses fhar 1. Existing fill was found in the upper 6.0, 5 57 6.0, and 4.5 feet, respectively, at Borings 6, 6A, 6B, and 7. The fill soils are mostly loose or soft in consistency, and consist mostly of clay, fine sandy clay, fine to medium sandy clay, and clayey sand of various gram sizes. 2. Soft clay or fine sandy clay, "bay mud" type soils were found between 6.2 and 15.7 feet at Boring 6 and between 5.5 and 8.0 feet at Boring 6A. No "bay mud" type clay soils were found in the area of Borings 6B and 7. Therefore, if shallow mat type footings are to be used for foundation support, it is desirable to arrange the proposed building in such a manner as shown on the attached Drawing No. 1 of this report. This type of building arrangement would eliminate the need to use pile foundations to support the proposed building. 3. Conventional spread and continuous footings are not recommended for the support of the proposed building due to presence of the upper existing fill soils that would allow sizable differential non-uniform settlements to occur between footings. The shallow Project No. 72-11-21C -4- April 7, 1978 La Costa Land Company mat foundahon system has to be specially designed by the Project Structural Engineer to allow for the higher stresses induced into the structural members of the building due ro the estimated differential settlements. RecommendatiOTis 1 . Foundation Support At mat type foundation is recommended to support the proposed building constructed at the approximate location outlined on the attached Drawing No. 1. The mat foundation would serve to bridge over the variable upper soils and reduce the possible differential settlements due to the upper existing fill soils, and provide a more uniform settlement for the entire foundation system. An allowable bearing value of 1,000 pounds per square foot may be used to design the mat foundation under dead and live load conditions. This value may be increased one third if wind and seismic loads are combined. For lateral resistance design, the following allowable passive earth pressures, expressed in terms of equivalent fluid density, ore recommended ji Above giound water level - 100 pounds per cubic foot. Below ground water level - 50 pounds per cubic foot. It is assumed that the side faces of the mat foundation will be in direct contact with the undisturbed on-site soils7or the soils adjacent to the side faces of the mat foundation would be uniformly compacted during construction to effectively transmit lateral loads to the undisturbed on-sire soils. " A friction factor of 0.3 may be used to compute the sliding friction between the bottoms of the footing and the supporting soils. Both passive resistance of the soils and the sliding friction resistance may be combined to compute a iota! lateral resistance of the foundation system. The recommended minimum thickness of mat foundation should be determined by the Structural Engineer. The estimated total settlements of an assumed 66 by 120 feet mat foundation which is located as shown on the attached Drawing No. 1 and loaded to a unit foundation pressure of 1,000 pounds per square foot on either existing fill or on undisturbed on-site natural soils, are estimated to be as follows Project No. 72-11-21C -5- April 1, 1978 La Costa Land Company (A) The West Mat Foundation - (westerly of Boring 3 ond northerly of Borings 6A and 7) Location Estimated Total Settlements ^ (inches) At the center of the mat 0.50 to 0.60 At northwest corner 0.17 to 0.28 At southwest corner 0.18 to 0.28 At northeast corner 0.10 to 0.17 At southeast corner adjacent to the east mat 0.17 to 0.28 (B) The East Mat Foundation - (easterly of Boring 7) At the center of the mat 0.54 to 0.86 At northwest corner adjacent to the west mat 0.17 to 0.28 At southwest corner 0.20 to 0.25 At northeast corner 0.17 to 0.22 At southeast corner 0.18 to 0.22 It would probably be desirable to structurally separate the building on the west mat foundation from the building on the east mat foundation. Due to presence of ground water or water seepage at relatively shallow depths below existing ground surface, (below 3.0 and 3.1 feet, respectively, at Borings 6 and 6A7 and below 3.0 and 1 .5 feet, respectively, at Borings 6B and 7), it is recommended that the bottom of the foundation be located at approximately Elevation 9.3 feet. In order to provide a working sur- face during construction and in order to improve subgrade support for the mat foundation, it is recommended that at least 6 inches thickness of gravel or crushed rock be provided immediately below the mat foundation. Also, gravel-filled intercept trenches with perforated pipes are recommended to be installed around the perimeter of the buildings in order to minimize adverse water effects on the performance of the mat foundation. The suggested location of the gravel- filled trench would be 6 feet or greater outside the mat foundations. The recommended depth of the perforated pipe covered with gravel is at least 2.0 feet below the bottom of the mat foundations and allowance be mode for a drainage outlet by either gravity or by a sump with pump. 2. General It is recommended that our office be contacted to review future foundation plans if the locations of the building are significantly different from the assumed locations as shown on Drawing No. 1 of this report. It is further recommended that the perimeter intercept drainage Project No. 72-11-21C L.Q Costa Land Company -6-Apnl 7, 1978 trenches and perforated pipes with gravel backfill be installed during the initial grading of the site in order to provide a relatively dry working area. Respectfully submitted BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. By S.H. Shu/ Civil Engineer RCE No. 19913 Reviewed by Philip H. B^Vroii' Civil EngTneer- RCE No. 10332 Distribution- (2) Addressee (3) Dale Noegle & Associates Attention- Mr. Green (1) Engineering Alliance Corporation Attention Mr. Don Day SHS dr n 2- 4 • 5 i 6 i 7 — 9- , 10 11- 12- 13 - 14- : 15 16 , 18 i i 1 'A PMNiiM''cnsonCLARIFICATION-.YMriOL. •• • Vl/^^z^ k • i_^_ 1 ^W> •-< . vv arcr v_y - — —»- - r • t- r • *• r* • • ,. " * ' \*\S>N\\ \~J «— — . • • i " ^ @B f . . .* .( i S'J ".V.ARY SHftT F C - ING NO 6 ELEVATION 8.7' Light Gray, Very Moist, Loose Brc "f" £>a >wn, Very Moist, Medium m rk Brown, Moist, Loose Dark Gray Brown, Moist, Soft, With Mottled Lenses of Light Gray Clayey Fine Sand V | Saturated, Caving Added LDnlling Mud Gray, Saturated, Loose 1 Dark Gray, Saturated, Soft, Bay Mud Light Gray LUHe Fine Sand Merges Brown and Gray, Saturated, Firm (Confrnue () Indicates Undisturbed Drive [ 1 Indicates Loose Bag Sample ~ i i r-»w. - J 72~\}-2\^ CLAYEY FINE SAND CLAY f I ORGANIC MATERIAL CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND f ( SILTY FINE SAND CLAY FINE SANDY CLAY d on Drawing No. 2 Sample ? ' . i\~ :.": •.""[ F . .G '\G c u. •y t-'S• o. OJ5 >H C. <- O 3.2' 1 6 0.8 0.4 0.4 4 R D UJ (- _ , - - >t- K _ - - i c 1- L "" r , — t 1 •»- _ « - 20 LL. i ( I1 t L» nrrTM'rrri' 119 20 0 1JL I — 22 73. 24 ! , ' i ••OIL iCLARIFICATION 1SYMnciL If r^> ' 1 < ' ' _ ^— . . . . • . . • • • - fU.V.V.ARY EHEbT i. OR ING NO 6 Conf . Brown and Gray, Safurared, Firm Brown, Sarurafed, Firm FINE SANDY CLAY CLAYEY FINE SAND ldA,dlX IdA LIU. jf. 3 3AIUCJ6.5 6.7 L t - H t-r ^ < *->u, C -V»' o1' - *"t ^ri - Lr ^ - -I i - I.D 1-21C 21 5; C ! i j H;rUJ3U C1 . ^\j i- 2 3- 4 5- ! • 6 i 7 ; 8 9 10 1 1 12- 13 14 15- ;;-; - 18- 19- 20: — J c -s ££ SUMMARY SHEET ' > C C f I ORH 'G NO 6A *• J ' i/, > " z £u' LLEVATION 9_ 2J O . .' r ' f •-. Brown, Moist, Loose u^-y TTV^l ock , Moisr, Loose ' " ' 111) p ^^^ [| :. : Brown, Very Moisf, 1 oose c • •,. . v^ — rfy Safurofed 7 •','.-_ Park ^rny Plo<-l<'/ Snh'rnfpd, . f. Sofry Highly (JrgoniCj. Caving (2) •-**—^- Added Drill ma Mudv>- ^UT^ZTZ . - • - Brown nnd ^rnyy Medium Firm i • V - • /" "N ' j ' Voy ' ' " ^.^^^^•^•^. f.— «^ . f~* ( 4 )>^— ' , r^~ m m i .. ! '•' . "*", Lignf Brown^^^^^^^^^i i »• ; • • Br<^wny ^nf^irof P^J Mpdium :. {- 1 nn ®i* L"' y , 'r\ . Brownr Sarurared, Medium • . • . " rirm, Porous f'.»> ®. • ; "7T.V"1" CLAYEY FINE SAND CLAY ORGANIC MATERIAL CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND FINE SANDY CLAY CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND FINE SANDY CLAY o 1.6 0.8 5.6 1.6 4.9 3.2 o§* - - }- H | = - - ' L V~ t i - - u_ i i ii i (Confinued on Drawing No. 23) 1 i r 72-11-21C i.JG. i.-.c 22 ^ 21- 22- 23. 24- 2? ' 3C 32 ~ Z C -" ^ 5 u • . '' ** vX^^X"^sXXXXX NXXXXXxxxxxx NXXXXX•xxxxx^ ftv^y^ »X XXX V* vXXXXX^^y>s \\xxxv\xxxx\ N\XXk\VAxx^ xxxxx"^N.x x\xS ?^S• -• • f • -f. . . • • * j j , ' 1 SUf/MARY SHE POKING NO 6 A < Brown Saturated, Medium Firm, Porous RrnxA/n ^ntiirntpfi Fi rm lO O Gray Brown, Saturated, Firm, With Lenses of Fine Sandy Clay ET Zonf . C 1 KIC C A Kl Pi\/MINt bANUY f\ A VV.LA r SILTYCLAY GRAVELLY CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND FINE TO MEDIUM SAND 1PNCROYKIP--./FTr "•o 8.3 8.3 I. ,- IL i" I' u C - _ 1- (-r "- [; - «. J.V ? '" r- •. i ,U- — v 72~" ^-" -11-21C . J . L 23 I i 3 nrrTM/rrrr - i, I1 2 3- 4 5 i6 ! 7- 8 9- i1 10-, 12- 13- 14 i 15 ' :;l 18- „] 20- t , 7.G «£[ _,££ £,Uf/'.',ARY SHEET 25 C I * LOR.'.G NO 6B 1 2 ^ tLEVATION 9_£| O :_ " ' ' Brown, Very Moisf, Soft, ( ' ' ' '' Mixed Wifh Gray Brown Silry i^^^^^^ *- 1\. "^* >• i oy i ^\ i™^^^^^^^ xjx * ' • • • n \ t ^A iCfi fflSl \ ^ / L_ta_—j_^_J'* Safurated \ k _ • * 3' ^ '-..-•i • . Hinrk SnturntpH Soft ^i iN ^™"^^7^ ' '3y^j » • . » * ** *,^ * brown, baturated, Sorr, ,-''.V jj; ^0 Percent Gravel, . .i • • ••(A\ ,"" "™^'^"™*— .; . " s '-~; Gray and Liant brownf ' ' j- Saturated, jull, With rew rea• ' ^* i i /- , i /— i i ^^^^^T^^^^21^^^.^r^^j brown, baturated, Soh ^— ^ SSSSSJ B ' - . . hrnwn Snhirafpr) Snff • /7\.". r* ,- xiix l i^^ ••^~*— XsSSXN Brown, Sarurated, Loose tx\V\\^ Gray, Becoming Coarser FINE TO MEDIUM SANDY CLAY FINE TO MEDIUM SANDY CLAY J 1 FINE TO MEDIU/v SAND FINE SANDY CLAY 1 GRAVELLY FINE SANDY CLAY FINE TO MEDIUM SANDY CLAY SILTYCLAY FINE SANDY CLAY SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND •>• Stts £i ^ ? t-c ^ 1.6 5.6 2.8 • 2.8 • 0.8 9.7 0.4 ui t- ^ ""i^ 15.4 22.0 21.5 • 16 2. 22.2 16.9 17.5 > "" 99.9 106.5 116.4 103.7 114.7 112.4 L L_ t 1.00 0.52 0.52 -0 66- 0.75 1.88 1.49 (Continued on Drawing No. 25) 72-11-21C 24 n- 21 22-i 23- 24- 25- i ;26 i27 28- <_ju SU'.'.VARY r> BCPIKG r.o 6B Conf Gray, Safurafed, Compacf - Gray, Saturated, Compact, " With Gravel Brown, Saturated, Compact, 'With Gravel and Cobble to 8" FINE TO MEDIUM SAND FINE SANDY CLAY FINE TO COARSE SAND or u.u •— u,« c * D 14.6 15.0 U I 5->v- i- cr UC-" 18.6 12.9 106.0 2.70 100.8 2.85 1 ~7.--n.-21C LL .1C 25 0 - 1- 2- 3- 4- ' 6 ) l1 7 D o 10 U 12- i _ 13- 14- i 15 16- 17- 18 1 OIV 20-• "."PI r jN't'- MTM'.OILCLASSIFICATIONSYMBOL^ ' l ' ' 111 SU'/iMARY SHEET LOSING NO ' ELEVATION 9.8" Brown With Flecks of White, Moist, Soft WfW^|, S..urc.«d ^^6-» »\ ' * v^~"\ VS' . . .. ®~., '.' " . .'^ . ^ T^ r A ) -vv y * 1 * r t »• . T ©1 • * ^ *. . • • . ^ " •" * • •• • • 1 • _^^r iO^°y •i- ...• " • * • • - T* • | f - » - • - - f Brown and Gray, Saturated, Loose, With Few Gravel Brown, Black and Gray, Saturated, Soft 1 »5rown With Flecks of Y/hite :jnd Rust, Saturated, Medium -irm >Vith Lenses of Silty Clay Mostly Brown and Red Brown Firmi Brown, Saturated, Firm, on the Lean Side Some Lenses More Clayey Soft (Continue FINE SANDY CLAY SILTY FINE SAND FINE SANDY CLAY FINE SANDY CLAY JT CLAYEY FINE SAND d on Drawing No . 2 DRIVC L'NFPGYFT Klt'S/FT0.8 0.8 0.8. 7.5 22.0 18.5 6 7 7) r C- 22.8 21.8 23.4, 20.4 15.0 17.3 23.2 V- H- l*. 102.7 97 S, 102.1 107.7 116.3 110.4 104.6 i "" - L ' i_ C. - 0.68 0.44 0.24, 1.16 2.44 1.76 0.67 72-11-21C 26 u, u • L. k-C. t~c -20 21- - 22- — 23- 24_ - 25- L- cr c. 7" < ~, "Z 0 26 '® i _1 27- 28- 29- "30- — — i I ^?h| 0 <•'' < U •. • » , 1 j-1 : ' SU"VARY SHEET f f I',G NO 7 Cont . Brown and Gray, Saturated, Firm, With Some Lenses More Clayey i Brown, Saturated, Coarse,' \ -With Gravel Thin Lense Gray Cloy and ' Grave] ^» f Q _ "i : - *i - CLAYEY FINE SAND FINE TO COARSE SAND C ^ ^c L-D 16.7 -1 A 7-1 O. / 9.0 12.5 t- C ^ / i ' - — C " 26.7 18.7- 9.6 32.1 V- »- L r -*1 ^_ r* r. — 97.7 -1107- 99.7 90.3 (L L" '- ^ i . '. " ^ 1.14 1.62- 2.62 1.38 i 72-11-21C 27 CONSOLIDATION CURVES LOAD Ih HKJ fFR i'Jit-t FCOT Boring 6B Sample 1 Depth. 2' Boring 6B Sample 2 . Deprh: 4' 4 - Boring 6B Sample 3 Deprh 6' 72-11-21C 28 CONSOLIDATION CURVES 002 C A Lfi-E IK I > Of 10 FOCI fc- i i ! i 1 !: ' • i i! I i i i ._._ Bonng 6B Sample 3A Deprh. 6.5' Boring 6B Sample 4 Depfh 9' Boring 6B Sample 5 Deprh 12' F =:. E c i t : 72-11-21C 29 CONSOLIDATION CURVES F. -T Boring 68 Somple 6 Deprh: 16' ! Boring 7 j Somple 6 | Depfh: 16' ; i1 ; i i i ' - ' . " i ' 72-11-21C 30 BENTQN ENGINEERING. INC. APPLIED SOIL MECHANICS FOUNDATIONS BB40 PUFFIN ROAD SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92123 PHILIP HENKING BEN-TON C . I 1 ir>TO TILEFHONI 171«) 865-1855. CIVIL fHOiHKin September I, 1978 TCLEPHONE nim, BOB IVBB Engineering Alliance Corporation 4024 Ibis Street San Diego, California 92103 Attention: Mr. Jack Scholle Subject- Project No. 72-11-21C Supplemental Foundation Design Information Proposed Condominium Unit No. 5 Southeasterly of Costa Del Mar and El Cammo Real Intersection Carlsbad, California Gentlemen:«- This is to present, pursuant to the results of a meeting held on August 23, 1973, the desired soil parameters for the design of proposed retaining wall around the presently proposed build- ing and the proposed pile foundations. The suggested soil parameters requested are presented below. (1) Active earth pressures for retaining wall design (a) The recommended earth pressure for a restrained retaining wall design is a uniform pressure intensity of 18. 8H pounds per square foot in the middle 60 percent of the retained soil height that diminishes to zero at the top elevation of retained earth and at the bottom of the wall. "H" is the height of the retained earth m feet. (b) For cantilever retaining walls a equivalent fluid density of 30 pounds per cubic foot may be used. It is assumed for both types of retaining walls that only select pervious soils, such as silty sand soils, will be placed immediately behind the wall. The recommended criterion for selecting the pervious soils is less than 20 percent by weight passing U.S. Standard Sieve No. 200. (2) The estimated downdrag forces on each 12-inch square pile are estimated to vary from 50 to 59 kips, respectively, at Borings 4 and 5, as shown on Drawing No. 1 of our April 7, 1978 report. The downdrag forces will result from the placement of earth mounds around the proposed building that will cause long-term settlement in all of the soils above the com- pressible silty clay bay mud type soils that exist to 14. 5 feet at Boring 4 and to 28. 5 feet at Boring 5. The downdrag forces should be added to the design supporting capacity of each pile, as shown on Drawing Nos. A and B of our December 12, 1977 report, to determine the required new total length of pile penetration to resist all downward loads. V Project No. 72-11-21C -2- September 1, 1978 Engineering Alliance Corporation (3) The total settlements of the underlying soft clay deposits due to placement of the earth mound around the building are estimated to be approximately 0. 8 and 2.4 inches, respectively/ in the areas of Borings 4 and 5. The majority of the settlement may be expected to occur within 3 months in the vicinity of Boring 4 and within 7 years in the vicinity of Boring 5 after full application of the surcharge earth mounds. Respectfully submitted, BENTON ENGINEERING, INC By S. H. Shu, Civil Engineer RCE No. 19913 Reviewed by\ mffip H. BerrtorT^ Civil 'Engineer RCE No. 10332 Distribution: 0) Addressee (J) Dale Naegle, A. I. A. (2) La Costa Land Company Attention. Mr. Irv Roston SHSdr BENTON ENGINEERING. INC. A»"PLIED SOIL MECHANICS FOUNDATIONS 6717 CONVOY COURT SAN DIEGO CALIFORNIA 02111 PHILIP HENKING BENTON P^ , ,_ ,,-.-7-7rvtiioiNT CIVIL CNctNiiH Uecember \i, IVY/ TCLIFHONC (7»4» 56S IBBS .* La Costa Land" Company 2100 Costa Del Mar Road Carlsbad, California 92008 Attention: Mr. Irv Roston Subject: Project No. 72-11-21C Final Report of Soils Investigation Proposed Condominium Unit 5 Southeast Corner of El Camino Real and Costa Del Mar Road Carlsbad, California Gentlemen: This is to present our final report of soils investigation conducted at the site of the proposed Condominium Unit 5 which will be located southeasterly of El Camino Real and Costa Del Mar Road in Carlsbad, California. Four borings were previously drilled at and near the proposed construction site, and the results of our previous findings of subsurface conditions at the site were presented in our interim report to you that was dated December 26, 1972 under the same project number. The objectives "of this report were to present supplemental subsurface information obtained from an additional boring drilled on the south side of the proposed Building A, and to present pertinent soil parameters for the design of the proposed building foundations. Field Investigation The additional Boring 5 was drilled with a truck-mounted rotary bucket-type drill rig at the approximate location shown on the attached Drawing No. 1, entitled "Location of Test Borings." The boring was drilled to a depth of 48.5 feet below the existing ground surface. A continuous log of the soils encountered in the boring was recorded at the time of drilling and is shown in detail on Drawing Nos. 17, 18 and 19, each entitled "Summary Sheet." Drawing Nos. 2 to 16, inclusive, were included in the previous report dated December 26, 1972. Undisturbed samples were obtained at frequent intervals in the soils ahead of the drilling. The drop weight used for driving the sampling tube into the soils was the "Kelly" bar of the drill rig which weighs 2,200 pounds, and the average drop was 12 inches. The general procedures used in field sampling are described under "Sampling" in Appendix B. Pr6ject No. 72-11-21C -2- December 12, 1977 La Costa Land Company Laboratory Tests Laboratory tests were performed on all undisturbed natural soil samples in order to determine the dry density, moisture content, and shearing strength. The results of these tests are presented on Drawing Nos. 177 18, and 19. To determine the shearing strengths of the soils, the soil jamples were sheared under a normal load equal to their existing overburden pressures taking into consideration of water buoyancy for those recovered below water level. Soil Strata At Boring 5, an existing fill was found in the upper 6.0 feet of the boring. The fill soils consisted mostly of soft silty clay, fine to medium sandy clay and clayey fine to medium sand. The fill soils were underlain by soft silty clay, fine sandy clay and clayey fine sand soils to 28.5 feet in depth. Below 28.5 feet and to the end of boring at 48.5 feet, firm to very firm clayey fine to medium sand and fine sandy clay soils were encountered. Ground water was encountered below a depth of 6.0 feet in this boring. Conclusions and Recommendations 1. Foundation Support A It is concluded from the results of field investigation and laboratory tests that the most feasible safe permanent support for the proposed buildings would be to use driven pile foundations because of (a) the presence of soft to medium firm or medium compact fill soils in the upper portion of the site and (b) the presence of shallow ground water level at the site and (c) the presence of soft, highly compressible clayey soil (bay mud type soils) varying from 8.5 to 22.5 feet in thickness immediately below the upper fill soils. Calculations have been made to determine the vertical supporting capacities of both a 12-inch square concrete pile and a Raymond Step Taper pile with a 9-inch tip for foundation design. The calculated vertical supporting capacities of the piles are presented on Drawing A, entitled "Allowable Vertical Supporting Capacities of Vertical Piles Driven In The Vicinity of Boring 4," and Drawing B, entitled "Allowable Vertical Supporting Capacities of Vertical Piles Driven In The Vicinity of Boring 5." Between these two borings, an interpolation between these two drawings should be made during construction by comparing the driving resistance of piles driven near Borings 4 and 5. The vertical supporting capacities presented on the drawings are based on the surface area of the pile in contact with the soils below Elevation +1.0 feet times the shearing resistance of the soils divided by a factor of safety of 2. The downward vertical supporting capacities shown on Drawing Nos. A and B are for dead plus live loads only, and may be increased one-third when the wind and seismic loadings are considered. The vertical supporting capacities presented on Drawing Nos. A and B are based on the strength of the soils and the strength of the pile section should also be checked to verify the structural capacity of the pile. For other types of piles, the vertical supporting capacities may be BENTON ENGINEERING INC Project No. 72-11-21C -3- December 12, 1977 La Costa Land Company proportioned on the basis of their perimeters. The allowable uplift resistance of the piles may be assumed to be one half of the downward supporting capacities presented on Drawing Nos. A and B. In order to ensure that all piles are capable of supporting safely the design loads even though there may be some variations in the shear strengths of the soils at different locations of the site, it is recommended that initial "control" piles be driven at the following suggested locations: (a) One control pile each in the immediately vicinity of Borings 4 and 5 and (b) One control pile at middle distance between Borings 4 and 5 near the center of Building A. A continuous record of blow counts for each foot of driving penetration at each test pile location should be recorded. The blow counts required for the last foot of penetration for the design tip elevation of the piles at "control" pile locations should be used as the minimum driving resistance criteria for piles driven to the same vertical load capacity at other locations near the respective test pile locations. The reason for this is that if "weaker" soils are encountered at other locations, and corresponding less blow counts are achieved at the same design tip elevation, then driving will be continued until the driving resistance is built up to at least the minimum blow count near Borings 4 and 57 where the soil shearing resistances were used in order to determine the design capacity of each pile. The blow counts obtained from the control pile located between Borings 4 and 5 should be used to correlate the blow counts of control piles at Borings 4 and 5 locations. Subsequently, either Drawing A or B should be selected for determining pile length between Borings 4 and 5. It is possible that "refusal" may be reached before driving piles to the design tip elevations. Wherever this results during driving, then predrilling with an 8 inch diameter auger to as deep as to 5 feet above the design tip elevation may be permitted. If "refusal" develops within 5 feet of the recommended design tip elevations, then the pile may be considered satisfactory for the design load. The blow counts for determination of "refusal" will vary with the type of pile driving hammer being used, the driving energy being impacted per blow, and with the type of pile, whether steel shell with mandrel, wood or reinforced concrete. Generally, "refusal" may be defined when a penetration of 1 inch or less is effected in the last 20 blows using a pile driving hammer rated at 15,OCX) foot-pounds per blow of driving energy or greater. The vertical supporting capacities of the piles shown on Drawing Nos. A and B are based on the assumptions that the supporting capacities of each single pile will not be adversely influenced by the overlapping of the loading zones from the nearest adjacent pile. BENTON ENGINEERING INC Prpject No. 72-11-21C -4- December 12, 1977 La Costa Land "Company If the spacing between piles is less than 8 diameters center to center, then it is recommended that suitable efficiency factors be applied to allow for the overlapping of the loading zones between adjacent piles. A suitable efficiency formula to allow for this overlapping is presented as follows: E':= 1 - D [m (n-1) + n (m-1) +/2 (m-1) (n-1)] trSmn Where E = Efficiency = Bearing capacity of pile in group Bearing capacity of isolated pile D = Diameter of pile in feet S = Space between piles, center to center, in feet m = Number of rows n = Number of piles per row Recommended efficiency factors for various groups of piles driven at 3 diameters center to center are presented as follows Number Number of oi Rows Piles Per Row Efficiency 1 2 0.947 1 3 0.929 Triangular 3 Pile Group 0.911 2 2 0.857 It is recommended that lateral loads on the building be resisted by battered piles. This is due to presence of unsuitable soft clayey soils and fill soils in the upper portion of the site where lateral loads from the building foundations are imposed. 2. Provision of Permanent Drainage System Ground water was encountered at depths of 5.5, 4.0, 8.0, 4.5, and 6.0 feet, respectively, below existing ground surface at Borings 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. These depths correspond to the elevations shown below: Existing Ground Depth to Elevation of Boring Surface Elevation Water Level Ground Water Nos. (Feet) (Feet) Surface (Feet) 1 + 8.0 5.5 +2.50 2 + 7.0 4.0 +3.00 3 +17.0 8.0 +9.00 4 +13.0 4.5* +8.50 5 +7.5 6.0 +1.50 * Seepage of water BENTON ENGINEERING INC Project No. 72-11-21C -5- December 12, 1977 La Costa Land"Company It is our understanding that the proposed finished ground surface at the proposed construction site is at Elevation +6.0 Feet which will be below the surface elevation of ground water at the site. In order to avoid any adverse effect of ground water on the future concrete slab on grade and/or pavement, it is recommended that peripheral gravel-filled trenches be provided around and outside of the perimeter walls of rhe building. It may be necessary to provide transverse gravel-filled trenches across and beneath the building if the peripheral trenches do nor effectively dewater the interior clayey soils. The recommended dimensions of the gravel-filled trenches are at least 1.5 feet in width and at least 4.0 feet in depth or to Elevation +2.0 Feet or deeper. A perforated 6-inch diameter plastic PVC pipe is recommended at the bottom of the perimeter trenches. The gravel-filled trenches should be interconnected to drain collected water to either a permanent outlet by gravity, or into sumps located at the southerly end, where pumps may be installed to permanently dewater the site. It is recommended that the lower 2 feet of gravel-filled trenches be filled with materials which meet the following gradation requirements: U.S. Standard Percent Passing Sieve Size By Weight 3/4 Inch 90 to 100 3/8 Inch 55 to 90 - No. 4 20 to 70 No. 40 0 to 10 No. 200 0 to 5 The upper 2.0 feet of backfilled materials in the gravel-filled trenches may consist of nonexpansive soils such as silty sand, slightly silty sand, clayey sand, slightly clayay sand, or other clean sand soils. Where any structures are to be placed over the gravel-filled trenches, the backfilled materials in the trenches should be compacted to not less than 90 percent of the maximum dry density obtained by A.S.T.M. D 1557-70 method of compaction. 3. Concrete Slab On Grade It is recommended that either the concrete floor slab of the building be structurally designed to tie into the grade beams of the pile foundations and be placed on a base layer of at least 4 inches of sand, or that the concrete slabs on grade be separated by expansion joints from the building and be underlain by a base course of at least 9 inches of well graded gravel to 3/4 inch in size. Respectfully submitted, Reviewed! ^hilip fl. Benton, CivfTlEngineer BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. R.C.E. No. 10332 By ^^^•z^'^i^^^^ZZ*' Distr: (3) La Costa Land Company S.H. Shu, Civil Engineer Artn: Mr. Bob Stark R.C.E. No. 19913 (1) C.A. Larsen Construction Company Attn: Mr. Bob Little, Jr. BENTON ENGINEERING INC > DEPTH/FEETU 1 o 4 5 6 7~ 8" 9- 10- 11- 12- 1 iU 14 15 i/, 17- 18- 19- 20-SAMPLENUMBER© ©SOILCLASSIFICATIONSYMBOLSUMMARY SHEET BORING NO 5 ELEVATION Brown and Gray Brown, Moist Soft, With Scattered Gravel 1o 4" .... h^f-H fy/ater iVx'x'x'x"rxTTTx* A\A\VTTTTTTyvvxTTxTxxxx XXXXXN xxxxx^ xxxxx^ XNXXX^ XXX XX ^^^^^^2SSSS^2^^SorvyTx \x\xx^v^s^nvxTxxT xxxVVS ^^^^^j Brown and Gray Brown, Very MoUt Soft Brown, Very Moist, Loose | Gray, Saturated, Soft, Mixed With Fine Sandy Clay and Roots, Caving, Added Water With Pockets of Clayey Fine to Medium Sand rrrrriIxSSS] Fjrrn ^^^^^arx^vvsl xxxxxxj S*oft ^^^^^j^^\T^TTxTTI.xxxxxj vXXX^xl rxSSSS?x?xv52^^^nxvxvx^ \x\VV1VV.VVx.lVxx.xx.1.xxxxxcxvvxTIx*\kkx.xJ Gray, Saturated, Soft, With Scattered Sea Shells Gray, Saturated, Soft, Bay Mud, Roots, Slightly Porous Continue (^) Indicates Undisturbed Driv I ) Indicates Loose Bag Sampl FINE TO MEDIUM SANDY CLAY SILTY CLAY I FINE TO MEDIUM SANDY CLAY « I CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND I SILTY CLAY FINE SANDY CLAY SILTY CLAY •d on Drawing No. e Sample e DRIVE ENERGYFT KIPS/FT0.8 0.8 1. 6 0.8 0.8 0.8 18 UJ £(£ 19 .9 17.4 14.5 48 41 66 PROJECT NO BENTON ENGINEERING, INC .1 .2 .7 DRY DENSITYLBS7CU FT98.2 107.9 111.4 71.7 79.5 60.0 SHEARRESISTANCEKIPS/SQ FT0.26 0.45 0.23 0.43 u_ DRAWING NO 17 t-IUtuu.-*.zHO. UlQ 30— 21 - 22- 23 _, 24- 25 26 _ 27- 28- oo/y - 30- f\ i _31 ooo/ 33- 34 _ 35- 36 37- 38 39- 40- 111 C ->UI11"z ® © Li!])A SOIL^•CLASSIFICATION\ SYMBOLl^^^^^."LVvvST:U322S [^Jv^v t^xv^ ^^^^2Pszvvv?523SS2 ^^^^2^v^T^\XXXX' , • • • •. . . . . >••••• . . . D^^^^J52335^2SSS[Tr^^NV rvjjxx [?J2SS ^2^^^^S^2^SS223SS?x55x3kyvvvs ^\^>^> • • • • . . . • • . . . • ... • ... • . - - • • . < 1. . . . 1 fc SUMMARY SHEET BORING NO 5 Cont. Gray, Saturated, Soft Bay Mud, Roots, Slightly Porous Gray, Saturated, Soft 1 Gray, Saturated, Soft :Grayt Saturated, Firm r Light Gray Brown, Saturated, Firm, With Medium Sand _Grains t rLight Greenish Gray, Saturated, Very Firm, With Clay Binder Light Greenish Gray, Saturated, Very Firm i Continued on SILTY CLAY CLAYEY FINE SAND SILTY CLAY CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND CLAYEY CIKIC CAKir\rlNh bAND SILTY FINE TO COARSE SAND FINE SANDY CLAY Drawing No. 19 DRIVE ENERGYFT KIPS/FT0.8 9.9 125.4 176.6 a_j Ul u. UJ|_ *> Alt 5°sx 23.1 19.6 14 14 PROJECT NO BENTON ENGINEERING. INC 77-11-21C .8 .9 DRY DENSITYLBS7CU FT100.4 108.2 113.4 118.8 SHEARRESISTANCEKIPS/SO FT.1.09 0.91 3.65 4.63 DRAWING NO 18 SUMMARY SHEET BORING NO 5 Cont. Light Greenish Gray, Saturated, Very Firm Light Gray, Saturated, Very Firm, With Scattered Coarse Sand Grams FINE SANDY CLAY CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND Ito 55.0 86.9 u. 6° 16.8 13.1 109.0 121.0 HI. 3.54 6.36 PROJECT NO 72-11-21C BENTON ENGINEERING. INC DRAWING NO 19 '-* ALLOWABLE VERTICAL SUPPORTING CAPACITIES OF VERTICAL PILES DRIVEN IN THE VICINITY OF BORING 4 (F.S. =2) IN KIPS 0 40 80 1 0 -10 -20 * <U Vu_ J -30 "o LU -40 -50 iT1 - LV^ \ - — :-- T T ™i - - s ^s - , ^ iu> K .- -r- P s V ^ - •-•• -i J •* | i ' \ s > \~ — <s ^ -- -1 J - k ^ -t- r-4- s ^ ^ s u -1 ^ u > - - s S - ... - J-- I | ~ s.ri — - t - \ V ."^ -, 1 1 1 _ - • ._ J -• - S( N ^n ti~- " -< y - ^: <l 120 160 200 240 « i L " —sj 4 s S - s - S - - \^ s S S 1 - _, •- - -- 1 > V 9" Tip Raymond Step Taper Pile - ~~\ J - : j 1 -1 _ "-: -i 1 j 1 j 1 "- 1 '~ -- T - - t _L1 "T T ]~" - -- — - - r- - 11 J n -i--..„ *The ground surface at Boring 4 +13.0 Feet PROJECT NO 72-11-21C •- - --• - - - - .L -r- ~L 1 j |l .... - - ~ — ' - - - 1 - 12" Square Concrete Pile - t •s ** "• -• +1 ^ - s ^~ ^ * X* 1 -*— .jt! N - ^ *•* "1h--- 1I 1 >l yt rT~ 1 p- s - - -• K.>s. n -- s % - r ' '! TTt-Ti1 1 1t-r - H--- H""- 1 • - - i * - s. - - •- •- - \ - \ Ps ' -T- hxi v - V s ••< ta - s s — ^ 1 S s i4 - -- fc V ^ 1 ^ s "S^ ~^ ^ ^ k,> ^>j_ S was assumed to be at Elevation BENTON ENGINEERING, INC OKAWING NO A ALLOWABLE VERTICAL SUPPORTING CAPACITIES OF ' VERTICAL PILES DRIVEN IN THE VICINITY OF BORING 5 (F.S. = 2) IN KIPS +10 0 -10 -20 * 010 § "30 0 o LU -40 -50 0 40 80 . 11 1 . . iI\Riil\\ J^\\\\l\p • , j i i\\"1 1 V * ^ i is V v w s « ^ s. ^X S s^ s . - s s - S - ^ ^I sS. - * > ^f ~ ^ tr* s V s -3 - > 120 =* s % ^ s. " s s ~i 1 - - - - -i- - - 1 .._ - - _ r1 ~ - - - - f- — r~ 160 200 240 *q 4-rr? 4-r- 4 'J - - ... . - — - -- H _ ... -- — • ~ -IH - - 12" Square Concrete Pile ^( ^ L>•«, h^L i T*. I- ^... 9" Tip Raymond Step Taper Pile 4 1 1 _ --i•~i ~•i- - - <H S •?. - •- ... *s k. r* - «. -] -. S *• ^ 1 - 1 -... S - »i N ^ - - n p>< ~1 : i ^ ...- -r Li "-M- 1 i i ... -1 >- - - ** - *The ground surface at Boring 5 was assumed to +7.5 Feet. PROJECT NO 72-11-21C > •«<•- >^ - NI -^ - s^ ^ be at - « - f»i - t i •s»^ . "Vi |i ' -)-- - - *.N», T 1 ^ 1 Na +• i ! | i^*L,i~nii | 1 i ' ( ' 1 1 ^4^ • 1 1 Elevation BENTON ENGINEERING, INC DRAWING NO B BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. APPLIED GOIL MECHANICS FOUNDATION* BB40 RUFPIN HOAO !,AN OIE&O, CALIFORNIA IIZI23 PHILIP HENKING BCNTON ruin Dim CIVIL ENUINKK TCLIPHOMC (714) BSB I9BB APPENDIX B *Sampling The undistuibed soil samples are obtained by forcing a special sampling tube into the undisturbed soils at the bottom of ihe boiing, al frequent intervals below the ground surface. The sampling tube consists of a steel barrel 3.0 inches outside diameter, with a special cutting tip on one end and a double bull valve on the other, and with a lining of twelve thin brass lings, each one inch long by 2.42 inches inside diameter. The sampler, connected to a twelve inch long waste bund, is eilln-i pushed 01 diiven approximately 18 inches into the toll and a six inch sue! ion ol lliu ( full i pot I ion ul (he --.ample is lukun lot luhoiuloiy tests, the toll being still confined in the biuss imys, ullcji extiuclion liorn the sampler lube. The samples are taken to the laboialoiy in close lillincj wuleipiool conluineis in ordoi to lulain the Field moisture until completion of the tests The Jiivmy eneigy is calculated as the average energy in foot-kips required to force the sampling tube thiough one foot of soil at the depth at which the sample is obtained. Shear Tests ~ The shear tests aie run using a direct shear machine of the strain control type in which the rale of defoirnulion is uppioximulely 0 05 inch pei ininulu. The machine is so designed that the tests are made without lomoviny Ihe sumples fiom the brass liner rings in which they are secured. Each sample is sheuiod undei a noimal load equivalent to the weight of the soil above the point of sampling. In some instances, samples are sheared under various normal loads in order to obtain fhe internal anylu of fiiclion and cohesion. Where considered necessary, samples are saturated and diained beloie sheuiing in oidei to simulate extreme field moisture conditions. Consolidation Tests The appaiatus used foi the consolidation tests is designed to receive one of the one inch high rings of soil as it comes fiom the field Loads are applied in several increments to the upper surface of the test specimen and the resulting deformations an? recorded at selected time Intervals for each Increment. Generally, each inciement of load is maintained on the sample until the rate of deformation is equal to or less than 1/10000 inch per hour. Porous stones are placed In contact with the top and bottom of each specimen to permit the ready addition or release of water. Expansion Tests One inch high samples confined in the brass rings are permitted to air dry at 105° F for at least 48 hours prior to placing into the expansion apparatus. A unit load of 500 pounds per square foot is then applied to the upper porous stone in contact with the top of each sample. Water is permitted to contact both the top and bottom of each sample through porous stones. Continuous observations are made until downward movement stops. The dial reading Is recorded and expansion is recorded until the rate of upward movement is less than 1/10000 inch per hour. BbNION ENGINEERING. INC. APPLIED S»OIL MECHANICS FOUNOATIONS 6717 CONVOY C'^UflT S.AN DIEC.O CALIf-OHNIA 92111 PHILIP HENKING BC.NION PRCSIOCNT CIWl CNGINt-LH January 12, 1973 1/141 5'jS I'l'i. La Costa Land Company Costa Del Mar Road Carlsbad, California 92008 Attention: Mr. Irv Rosron Subject:Project No. 72-11-21C Final Report of Pile Design Curves and Soil Design Parameters For Proposed Condominium Unit No. 5 El Camino and Costa Del Mar Road Ranchp La Costa Carlsbad, California Gentlemenf This is to present pile design curves and some related soil design parameters for the foundation support of the proposed Condominium Unit 5 to be located southeasterly of El Camino Real and Costa Del Mar Road in Rancho La Costa, Carlsbad, California. This report v/ill supplement the interim report presented to you on December 26, 1972 and concludes this investigation. Based on the pioposed Scheme 3 of Site Plan prepared by the Project Architect, it is our under- standing that three buildings will be constructed within the property. Buildings A, B, and C will be located in the northwest, southwest and southeast corners, respectively, within the subject property. The proposed finished grade elevations will be at Elevations 4.5 feet, 4.5 feet and 4.0 feet, respectively, for Buildings A, B and C. This will require up to approximately 9.0 feet excavation in the area of Building A, to approximately 3.5'feet in the area of Building B and to approximately 5.0 feet in the area of Building C, 1. Pile Foundations As previously recommended in our report dated December 26, 1972, pile foundations could be used to support the proposed structures in order to minimize total and/or differential settlements. Pile design curves for two types of driven piling have been computed and are presented on Diawing Nos. 17 and 18, entitled "Pile Design Curves At Boring Mo. 1" and "Pile Design Curves At Boring No. 2", respectively. The safe allowable supporting capacities are based on a minimum calculated shearing resistance of the supporting soil times the sutface area of pile in contact with the soils divided by the factor of safety of 2. It is assumed that piles will be spaced greater than 8 diameters center to center. If the spacing between adjacent piles Is less than'8 diameter center to center, Project No. 72-11-21C ', La Costa Land Company «w»- •*' -2-January 12, 1973 suitable efficiency factors should be applied to the allowable supporting capacities of the piles to allow for the overlapping of the loading zones between adjacent piles.* Other types of suitable driven piles may also be used and their supporting capacities will vary in direct proportion to the various perimeter areas of the piles shown on Drawing Nos. 17 and 18. It is recommended that continuous inspection of the pile driving be maintained by a qualified inspector so that the safe allowable supporting capacity of the piles will be verified at the time of construction. 2. Lateral Resistances For pile foundation design, lateral forces may be resisted by the combinations of the passive resis- tances developed by the in-place soils on the sides of the pile cap and the pile itself. An allowable passive resistance on the sides of the pile cap may be assumed to be equal to a fluid density of 200 pounds per cubic foot acting from the top to the bottom of the pile cap. This value may be increased one third for combined dead, live, seismic and wind loadings. The above value may also be used for lateral resistance developed along the sides of concrete slabs or grade beams cast directly against the in place undisturbed natural soils. A frictional coefficient of 0.3 may be used between the in place soils and conciete slabs supported directly on the soils. The allowable horizontal forces that may be applied to each pile below the pile cap that is fixed against rotation and the points of fixity below the bottom of pile cap are calculated and presented below. It was assumed that no more than 0.25 inch horizontal deflections at the top of pile or at the bottom ef the pile cap are permissible. Fixed Pile Cap Condition (1) Allowable Horizontal Force at Top of Pile or Bottom of Pile Cap (Kips) (2) Points of Fixity Below Bottom 15.9 of Pile Cap (Feet) 12" x 12" Concrete Pile 3.91 12" Raymond Step-Taper Pile Butt 13" Butt 3.17 14.3 3.59 15.3 14" Butt 4.05 16.3 3. Construction in Garage Area It Is recommended that the excavation for the garage areas be made no steeper than a 1 horizontal to 1 vertical slope. It Is recommended that the backfill behind the garage wall consist of either clean sand, silty sand, or nonexpqnsive slightly clayey sand and that these be uniformly compacted to at least 90 percent of maximum dry density. Either perimeter perforated pipe subdrains should be Installed behind the walls or weep holes should be used to prevent hydrostatic pressures from developing. The walls may then be designed using an equivalent fluid pressure of 30 pounds per cubic foot plus 100 pounds per square foot pressure against the wall to allow for the restrained end conditions of the wall, * If tho pile tips penetrate into the gravel soils below 35 feet at Boring 1 and below 30 feet at Boring 2 then no efficiency factor need be applied. BENTON ENGINEERING INC Project No. 72-11 -JL 1C La Costa Lane! Company -3-January 12, 1973 U Is recommended that a positive separation be installed between the garage slabs and the adjacent pile caps and that the garage slabs be reinforced with a minimum of 6 x 6 - 6/6 welded wire fabric. A base layer of at least 4 inches of clean sand or pea gravel should be provided beneath the concrete slabs and a moisture barrier should be installed in the upper portion of this layer one inch below the bottom of the concrete floor slab. 4. Swimming Pool It should be noted that saturated soil conditions were encountered at approximately Elevation +0.5 feet in Boring No. 4. The bottom of the pool 9 feet below Elevation +14.0 feet, the proposed deck Elevation, would be at Elevation +5.0 feet or 3.5 feet below the surface of the saturated soils. It is therefore concluded that special construction techniques and design would be required in order to construct the swimming pool at this location. If filled ground is to be placed for support of the decking adjacent to the pool, it may be desirable to surcharge the proposed filled ground area for a period of time In order to minimize the post-construction settlement of the underlying compressible soil. Respectfully submitted, BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. S. H. Shu, Civil Engineer Reviewed by Philip H. Benton, Civil Engineer Distr: (4) La Costa Land Company (1) Dan Saxon Palmer, A.I.A., & Associates SHS/PHB/ew BENTON ENGINEERING INC \ ( in1U 0 0u. •- 20- j U- o o0 1/130 J .9- u. ° 40 Q. Q 50 ) - i - -• — - -. _ _. . _. -« i V,\» : - .._ ; ...."' i... j ri: PROJtCT MO 72-1 1-2 1C H.j — •_. ^j|«lj- *>•£»• 40 " 1" L fc ~ - 7 L £ - - V •- .- — ~ i h .J- 1- - - - - \ ; K - - - - V, V - ff - - - \ ~ S - - S - :1 - -- X s - • ,_.. . -• -•+- T .. _ >< ... Kii ... i -L ;_ sv t: N - f - y V .. PILE DESIGN* At Boring N( Allowable Load In Kip 80 12C - - : - V •* - 1 V s - - s s - - :i: •N< -IL i ,IF iL Raymond Step Taper (8 "Tip) _ : .: - -:| T ._ it - 1 -H-i '; [ Lai ^ ! it: ±t: J± For 1 ielo — ^ T, \ w „ -t _.L tC ^ - — r. i t r-ft-'-I'llM Hour L Eleva^ LAC 1 —--. — • -1 Is ic 0 - . . t- """ -1- -l. .-J 35 in • ST - -^ -'. _ 0 \t A ft~t-. i. i 4- : .J 1 Pe L5 a BHNTON ••!• - "-t- -h /l 4- t. t.. ^ _L - ii !.-i j" _J rce Fe DN ^:^ - - • s ' ..." -- —• \ n >e ll T f.fi 1 — — : •v .. ^ _ -. -' • .. t '/ >< >JG - - " . ' _ " - L O D - - - -H - . ... - . 12" Sq Concn ^ X / t '? . 1 Li- -i- 1-i 1 fV Bui Ml '. I -_ . . J a Ic Is ^ •« -\ - - [ c .. li li 1 I i T*^i :J -\J- - -1-1 :@ -•L-t1 •i; LJ jes "9 UM INEERINC a Pile* 160 200 DRAWING NO 17 ( 10 *"Sou.i20- u_ 0) 90 0 5: 30 1O JKOQ a. z P *o JC ,_ .•£. 40 Q 50 ) - - - • - - - - - -• - 1 _L t -rft-r _ . — .« \\ i\ • - - - - . V 4- 40 \ .. - \ ^ - - - - V - \ S, - - - — s - - !». s - - - s - s, - _. \ -• - . - - ^ v - - - X v^ - - j - --... X, • - S : ... - s >" - L - - - **X X .Ij.- All. - •- - - -3 S - - • - •- - ~ < - y\ ~— . i- : _ x \ - •s H Raymond Step Taper (8 "Tip) _ : - ^ ~ - - - - - -- - f! j 4- _ - - - ~ — I - - ... 3 -f - J : rJ _h- - • ' : - L" —-. -i\ 1 * For Pullout ** Below El eve LACC PROJECT NO 72-1 1-2 1C "r : f : „ L 3f )! H i . :•_-— - : S( ic 51 : -- * - - » n 7 ; •. j 5 < m 8 -. - - - >i . ~ . 0 f/: c PILE DESIGN CURVES**^ At Boring No. 2 able Load In Kips per Single Pile* 0 120 160 1 ..... — - - ... -r - " .- " -• . ~ - - - - -•- ,-i - -. - . - - -^ - - - - - - '-1- - - - - - •- - - - - - - - -f - - - ._. - - - - .. - . • - _ - ~ - - • _ • ;_ -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 12" Square Prestressed Concrete Pile vx t (- ^\ t 1 * LJ_ , [ r -I1 T PC 1.5 OI ; - n 1 ^ ^. ' ": 1 J~ .. :e :e D - X • - v . 1 - •L nt er, OA , X ^ - ; o A V ^ :. ~ : — : ; - _ f B ll> - ^ V j si - - - - v - - A rali Idi IUJ - x . :. - „. J€ n d _ _ x - . -. - - ^1 .. !S g i •^ -- - -. • ' - •-\- Pres B ar JNH BHNTON ENGINEERING. '• X - " t- •... . e 1C _ ^ " . - .. n l( 5 - u.\ •*<•1 te ^ •v. _ s - X _ " - - - - - - I T ' "t - x - '- - - _ . X - - f - - - - - -- - X -- " - - - - --1 - - - t.i d Above Area IMC - - - - - - - - - - -- - .- -. - - -- >C r - - - - - - - - - - 10 - -• - - - - _ .. - - - ... - __ - - - L : - - . - - — • - - - - - - - - - - 4- - - - - - *~~ - • - ; - — - _ - - - - • - >— — - - - .- - - - " - - _ - - - -. - - - :; - - - • : - OrtAWING NO 18 BENTON ENGINEERING. INC APPLIED SOIL MECHANICS FOUNDATIONS 6741 EL CAJON BOULEVARD BAN DIEGO CALIFORNIA »2M5 I, PHILIP MENKING BEMON PVIIIDCNT CIVIL IXCINt III December 26, 1972 S«s Onto 5SS S.6S4 LA Mot 466 5654 La Cosra Land Company Costa Del Mar Road Rancho La Costa, California 92008 Attention: Mr. Irv Roston Gentlemen: This is to transmit to you four copies of our report of Project No. 72-11-21C entitled, "Interim Soils Investigation, Proposed Condominium Unit 5, Southeast Corner of El Comino Real and Costa Del Mar Road, Rancho La Costa, San Dfego County, California," dated December 26, 1972. We ore transmitting under separate cover one copy to Dan Saxon Palmer, A. I.A. & Associates in Los Angelei, Califorma. If you should have any questions concerning any of the data presented in this report, please contact us. Very truly yours, BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. H. Benron, Civil Engineer INTERIM SOILS INVESTIGATION Proposed Condominium Unih 5 Southeast Corner of El Camino Real and Costa Del Mar Road Rancho La Costa San Diego County, California La Cosra Land Company Project No. 72-11-21C December 26, 1972 PHILIP HtNKIMG BCNTON FHtfiDthl CIVIL tNGiiwrm BENTON ENGINEERING. INC 4PIL1CD SOIL UrCHANICE FJi ' '".1IONS C741 EL CAJON I'Ov'LC X > >- O 6AS DIEGO CALIFOtriA. P r I I S INTERIM SOILS INVESTIGATION Introduction This is Jo present the results of a soils investigation conducted at the site of the proposed Condominium Unit 5 to be located southeasterly of El Camino Real and Costa Del Mar Road in Rancho La Costa, San Diego County, California. The proposed buildings will be of Type V structure and three-story in height with a sub- terranean garage. It is our understanding rhat the exact locations of the buildings are not deter- mined as of this date and therefore, no grading plans or detailed design drawings are available-. The objectives of this investigation were to determine the general subsurface conditions of the sites and the physical properties of the subsoils so that an appropriate foundation type could be recommended for supporting the structures. The detail recommendations pertinent to design parameters for foundation support will be presented in our final report soon after the grad- ing plans and the proposed finished grades of each building become available. • In order to accomplish these objectives, four borings were drilled and undisturbed soil samples were obtained for laboratory testing. This study was based on the Drawing No. J-3142 entitled "Condo No. 5 - Plot Plan" which was prepared by R. Burke and dated November 16, 1972. Field Investigation Four borings were drilled with a truck-mounted rotary bucket-type drill rig at the approx- imate locations shown on the attached Drawing No. 1, entitled "Location of Test Borings." The borings were drilled to depths of 43 to 61 feet below the existing ground surface. Both water and -2- - "driller's" mud'-were added during drilling inside the test borings below ground wafer levels in order to prevent the boring walls from caving in by external hydrostatic pressures. A continuous log of the soils encountered in the borings was recorded at the time of drilling and is shown in detail on Drawing Nos. 2 to 13, inclusive, each entitled "Summary Sheet." The soils were visually classified by field identification procedures in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification Chart. A simplified description of this classification system is presented in the attached Appendix A at the end of this report. Undisturbed samples were obtained at frequent intervals, where possible, in the soils ahead of the drilling. The drop weight used for driving the sampling tube into the soils was the "Kelly" bar of the drill rig which weighs 1623 pounds, and the average drop was 12 inches. The general procedures used in field sampling are described under "Sampling" in Appendix B. Laboratory Tests z Laboratory tests were performed on all undisturbed samples of the soils in order to deter- mine the dry density, moisture content, and shearing strength. The shearing strengths of the soils above water table were sheared under their existing overburden pressures, and for those below water table, sheared under saturated and undrained conditions under normal loads allowing for submerged densities below the water table. The results of these tests are presented on Drawing I Nos. 2 to 13, inclusive. Consolidation tests were performed on representative samples in order to determine the load-settlement characteristics of the soils and the results of these tests are presented graphically on Drawing Nos. 14 to 16, inclusive, each entitled "Consolidation Curves." Time-settlement readings were also taken during consolidation tests in order to study the time- settlement relationship of clay strata encountered at the site. -- DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS AND-RECOMMENDATIONS Soil Stroto At'Boring 1, on existing fill consisting of slightly clayey sand, clayey sand and fine sand was encountered to a depth of 5.0 feet. The fill soils were underlain by a 0.5 foot thickness of soft clayey sand and by a soft silty clay bay mud with slight organic smell and porous rootlets to o depth of 14,0 feet. Between the depths of 14.0 feet and 34.5 feet, a medium firm to firm sandy clay was encountered. This was underlain by a 2.5 foot thickness of very firm, gravelly fine to coarse sandy clay and by a 1 .5 foot thickness of very firm clay to a depth of 38.5 feet and merged to a very compact, slightly clayey sand to a depth of 44.5 feet. Below 44.5 feet was a very firm clay to the end of boring at 45.0 feet. Ground water was encountered below a depth of 5.5 feet. At Boring 2, a 4.5 foot thickness of medium firm, clayey fine to medium sand fill was underlain by aj-soft silty clay bay mud to a depth of 17.5 feet and by a soft sandy clay to a depth of 24.0 feet. Below 24.0 feet v/as a one-foot thickness of medium firm clayey sand that was underlain by a very compact clayey sandy gravel to a depth of 31 .0 feet and by a very firm sandy clay to a depth of 31 .7 feet. A very firm clay layer was then ecountered.ro the end of boring at 43.0 feet. Ground water was encountered below a depth of 4.0 feet. At Boring 3, an existing sandy clay fill was found in the upper 2.5 feet of the boring. Immediately underlying the fill was a very firm silty sand layer to a depth of 8.0 feet that was underlain by a soft to medium firm clay to a depth of 18.0 feet and by a medium firm clayey sand to a depth of 21.0 feet. Below 21 .0 feet was a medium compact to very compact fine to medium sand to a depth of 36.0 feet that was underlain by a 1.5 foot thickness of silty fine sand then by a 2.0 foot thickness of silty clay bay mud, and by a very compact slightly clayey sand to a depth of 41 .5 feet. Between the depths of 41 .5 feet and 49.0 feet was a very compact fine to medium -4- sand that was underlain by a firm clay to a depth of 50.5 feet and by a very compeer, slight clayey sand to the end of boring at 51 .0 feet. Ground water was encountered below a depth of 8.0 feet and sloughing of boring walls were encountered between the depths of 21 .0 feet and 36.0 feet, and between the depths of 41 .5 feet and 49.0 feet. At Boring 4, a 2.7 foot thickness of clayey sand fill was underlain by a medium firm silty clay to a depth of 3.5 feet and by a medium firm clayey sand to a depth of 4.5 feet. Between the depths of 4.5 feet and 14.7 feet, the soil consisted of medium soft to medium firm silty clay containing rusty stains and gypsum. Below 14.7 feet was a one-foot thickness of medium loose, slightly clayey medium sand that was underlain by a 1.3 foot thickness of medium firm sandy clay and merged to a medium loose to medium firm, fine to medium sand to a depth of 30.7 feet. A medium soft to firm layer of slightly silty sand was then encountered to a depth of 39.0 feet that was underlain by a medium soft to medium firm silty clay to a depth of 40.0 feet. Below 40,0 feet, a firm, slightly clayey sand was found to a depth of 50.8 feet that was underlain by a 4- foot thickness of firm sandy clay and by a firm clayey fine to medium sand to the end of boring at 61,0 feet. Seepage of water was encountered in the fractures of silry clay layer between the depths of 4.5 feet and 14.7 feet. Conclusions It is concluded from the field explorations, supplemented by the results of laboratory testing that the subject property is underlain by a soft to medium soft clay soil and/or bay mud of varying thicknesses in all the borings drilled. For instance, the soft to medium soft layers are 8.5 feet in thickness between the depths of 5.5 feet and 14.0 feet at Boring 1; 19.5 feet in thick- ness between the depths of 4.5 feet and 24.0 feet at Boring 2, 4.5 feet in thickness between the depths of 8.0 feet and 12.5 feet at Boring 3 and 6.7 feet in thickness between the depths of 8.0 feet and 14.7 feet at Boring 4. It isTeodily apparent that sizable differenHal settlements would occur across the length of the buildings If the buildings are supported by the soft to medium soft clay soils or bay mud layers of varying thicknesses. Our study indicates that an 8-foot wide square footing loaded to 3000 pounds per square foot would be-subject to a settlement of approximately 3.7 inches in 7 months at Boring 1; to approximately 3.0 inches in 7.4 years at Boring 2; to approximately 0.5 inch in 2 months at Boring 3, and to approximately 1 inch in 3.6 months at Boring 4. The total settlements at each boring location would be significantly increased if additional fills of 2 feet or more are to be placed. Recommendations 1 . Type of Foundations • In order to minimize total and differential settlements resulting from the consolidation of the various thicknesses of the soft to medium soft clay soils ana/or bay mud, and because of the presence of ground water in clay layers that makes difficult any dewatering, it is recommended that pile foundations be used to support the proposed structures throughout. The pile design curves will be included in our final report if so chosen and after the grading plans and the proposed finished floor elevations of the buildings have been established. One alternative would be to use floating type of mat foundations to support the proposed buildings If the total and/or differential settlements can be tolerated. Considerations were given to the use of a compacted foundation prism for foundation support throughout, however, because of the presence of ground water, excavations below ground water would present a construction problem. Compacted filled ground prisms placed above the water level would be subject to sizable differential settlements, depending upon the thickness of compressible soils beneath'the fill. 2. Building Locations For comparison purposes only, the existing subsoils in Borings 3 and 4 areas have more favorable engineering characteristics than those encountered in Borings 1 and 2 based on the results -6- of laboratory t.esMng. The soils in Bor-ing 3 and 4 areas are generally higher in densities and are subject ho less consolidation under any given load. Therefore, if buildings are placed in east-west direction along north property line, less total and differenHal settlements would result than if the buildings are placed In north-south direction along west property line. Respectfully submitted, BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. By ^ S. H. Shu, Civil Engineer Reviewed _ Philip H: Benton, Civil Engineer Distr: (4) La Costa Land Company Attention. Mr. Irv Rosron , (!) Dan Saxon Palmer, A. I. A. & Associates SHS/PHB/ew BTSTON ISC • *£_*• N- INC 0- - 0 3- 4- 6 - 7_ 10- 11- 12- 13- 15- 16- ~ 1 SAMPLFNUMHFR.©SOILCLASSIPICATIONSYMnOL1 !Liu.I , ,1 Me " '' isP-if Kig- - \rA<~c 1 ' Bra 1 Dri U " Inrinc i• IWJter PA/— Bro •vXAxXVV r>KxxxxS \ H YvW>l\rVIxxVxVj \C -j*^* r \\xxx 1 vXXXXV \ C \XX\\X' XXXXXN 1 pr •xx.xxxjr\x\\\^\VV\M tH* 8^X~\'\X\. T^x, \ xy\•vxrxVx'x j^^ f.^\^^ SUMMARY SHEET BORING NO 1 ELEVATION 8 . 0' * ht Brown, Slightly Moist, dium Firm, Occasional 3vel to 2 Inches ht Gray, Moist, Medium mpact, Micaceous wn, Moist, Medium Firm, casional Gravel to 1 1/2 hes wn-gray, Moist, Soft, arous, Rootlets, Slight )rganic Odor ray, Saturated, Soft, Porous, Dotlets, Slight Organic )dor is of Clayey Silt \ a Gray and Brown, Saturated, • '•'• a Medium Firm '^-ii^ic Continued on Drawir [) - Indicates Undisturbec ) - Indicates Sample Nol * - Elevations shown wer lines on Condo No. ' 11-16-72. SLlGHTLYCtAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND J FINE SAND CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND / (Merges) / SILTYCLAY (Bay Mud) (Merges) ^ »- •• uL_ * U * r —c 3.2 0.8 0.8 c: — ^ 14.4 40.4 53.1 - u. > r, 116.2 78.7 70.2 FINE SANDY CLAY 4.9 16.4 15.2 ig No. 3 Drive Sample Recovered e obtained by interpolation between cc i - plot plan Drawing No. J-3142, Da Lu'.'TCU EVO '-=• ' C. INC i •' L c r- v 1.22 0.69 0.40 2.19 >ntour ted 2 _» ul 1 I I I i >! DEPTH/FEET .17 18- 19- 20- 21- 22_ 23- 24- 25- 26- 27- 28- 29- 30- 31- 32- 33- 34- 35- 36- 37- zo wet 5-»- SUMMARY SHEET-J u _i , » Ot 1C - ° 03 , lf. \2i Ou.S BORIKC. NO 1 (Cont.)sg "sJ; ' ~^ "_tu l< mi > m i Gray and Brown, Safurared, i i i •' Medium Firm• «* {^••M^Bi^^HMH1 ^ • "• 1 1^— ^ f ^_ | ^| t» LU" ' /\ - Dark Brown, Saturated, Firm i ^j ' - -*-> j* '.NiT7 !' . l r - .-- .- i . it • ' ", Gray-brown, Safurared, < -. . Roohlrh SlinMIv ^1 irlrrn-iHnrl ©i^*~'< '- . i » i> '" '. """' ^ " ""• *• _ . .' * '" I • "'• r ^*%™* Y™I * * • \/ni-,r rtrm "7O tr, TO P. i • • r , n 1 V~1~T FINE SANDY CLAY (Merges) FINE TO MEDIUM SANDY CLAY (Merges) FINE SANDY CLAY GRAVELLY FINE TO COARSE SANDY CLAY >- £i-c u.Ill ^-sc wx >t- ttu. O 4.9 7.5 5.8 4 54.5 FIELDMOISTURE% DPtY WT17.3 20.4 20.8 17.3 DRY DENSITYLBS7CU FT111.2 106.2 104.5 -SHEARRESISTANCEKIPS/SQ FT2.45 1.66 1.72 - Confined on Drawing No. 4 I r C.1CT SO CU'* rt "C NO 72 ^ 2ic BENTCN EI.GI,- I-Ei>!- G. !,,'C 3 g pfMM r r » i •38- 39- 40- 4i*t i 42- 43 -j 44 "J *.\MI t INUMUtM*© o EJJ SUMMARY SHEET-"S ° Oil§ BORING NO 1 (ConL) *" v>>(/ 1/9 < U ~ LIghf Green-gray, -Sahurafed, — • Z' Very Firm • • i Light Oreen-cjray and Lignr ' Yellow-brown. MoisN Very . Compacr/ Occasional Gravel - JO 1 |nrh ' 1 . I • , • 1 > . t •'t L •r"tpc~ b • \Verv Firm CLAY SLIGHTLY CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND CLAY DRIVE ENERGYFT KIPS/FT33.3 45.8 FIELDMOISTURE\ DRY WT12.8 16.8 DRY DENSITYLBWCU FT118.8 111.9 SHCARRC5I3TANCEK IPS/SO FT6.24 4.30 = -.JrCT NO ELNTO.'J 1 1 1 ) 1 1 3 DEPTH/FEET .v/ J_ 2- 3- - 5- 6 '"-77— — 9- 10 - 11- 12- 13 14 15 16- 17- 18 19- 20- " •S/V'PLCNUMHr-R*© © 72-1 1 SOILCLASSIFICATIONSYMBOLi • i 1 I - • Water' -V-i., w ...... .XXXXXA ..xxxxx*s,xxxxy XXXXXXxxVxxx.xxxxxx \\\ \\Nxxxxx^ .NXXNX"* '.NNXXX' » X N \ \ X"" sXXXXX" sXXXXX NXXXXXKxxxxx XXXXXX X\X\"VS wXXXXX"\xxxxx~xxxxxx XXNXXX NXXXXXxxxxxxV\ Vxx^-xxxxx^ XXXXX"* vXXXXX'' S.XXXXX"*>xxxxxkxxxxx kxxxxx XXXXXX AXXXX^ kXXXXX^\\ w\ sXXXXX_\\x\xx.sxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxXXXXXX rxxxxx^ vXXX\X"b ^XXXXXJ VXXXXX] •vXXXXXI1 ^^^^" ^ . L ' -21C SUf.'.VARY PHELT i O t; i , G N O 2 EI t\ /o .ON' 7_0 '„_ Brown and Gray-brown, Slightly Moist, Medium Firm Saturated Gray, Saturated, Soft, Porous, Rootlets, Slight Organic Odor Gray, Saturated, Soft Continued on Drawing Nc CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND SILTYCLAY (Bay Mud) (Merges) FINE SANDY CLAY ». 6 1 • i * ' ^ c_ p u- D 4.9 0.8 0.8 0.8 pl> ^- r 14.3 53.2 59.2 58.4 I i- (••— u. 1J ~' C -" V IT C " 114.5 68.5 64.2 64.7 5 I ^ t •_ J 1.09 0.53 0.46 0.14 i - j < — J LJL Iii _» 1i !3 DETTH/PCET .21- 22- 23- or/O- 26- 27- 28- 29- 30 O 131 32- 33- 34 37- 38- 39- 40- z 0 "V S=|'. SUMMARY SHEET 'L- O - ° C 55 p, ^2 BORING NO 2 (Cont .) 3f tA W)< o »~^ i'*T*^~~> Gray, Saturated, Soft i i . . _' • i Gray-brown, saturated.. * Medium Firm A v /"* L .« CL iJ\/ jf ^ * — . /p. , -yn n. * * v^olrtpQCiy OU TO /U rcrcenJ *. .*_. *x-* | _I/^LL1 i_Zi Ift * Gravel and Cobbles to 6 Inches• • ^f* • * • AM* L • * ''_* w _ ( » • "^ ^ *;. * » 1 t*^*J tt « 1 t ^ ^ _( r ; . ; Gray, Moist, Very Firm • J. • Lipht Gray-green With Yellow- ®" i red Streaks, Sliahtly Moist. ^ Very Firm,, Shahtly 1r i\ i i . i tf ni ; i i '(T); 1 ' 1 1 1 . FINE SANDY CLAY CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND CLAYEY FINE TO COARSE SANDY GRAVEL FINESANDYCLAY CLAY toruvc FNrrtGYFT KIPS/FTi0.8 20.8 60.0 1-- 1- u i- r£50 17.2 18.4 21.0 >- H w"-Z -) U Q O ~T >- ^Tc 3a 107.7 109.4 107.5 SHCAflRrsiVTANCE 1KIPS/SO FT j0.97 3.28 4.46 Continued on Drawing No. 7 72^-1 1-21C L!M^ , EIvLi ,t L,i • G, i :C i i i i \ i : ?.::! J L L. 40 41-i 42 43 zo ©;; \] ~1 O EUVMARY SMLET [iOf ihc, NO 2_(Cpnf.) Dark Green-gray, Slightly Moist, Very Firm, Slightly Slickensided CLAY 54.5 >- c' 20.2 106.4 *<<:. 3.49 72-:--:.{i_21C • LU LJ U. Ir- 5 0- 2- 3 4- 5- 6 _ 7 o 10- 11_ 1 O\2.— 13- 14 15 1 A 17- 18- 19- 20- *To u-:e £-r SUI.W.ARY SHEET JtJ -J 0 ° ^ £ 9 ^ 2 lOR!f.GUO 3 < D ^> "Z £"• tLtVATION 17.Q' _iO 1 , i Yellow-reH-brown, Moist.i * • * dZZ^— \Medium Firm, lopsoil, Rootlets f •-'.-'.'•' Firm ^ • ^i r ' < ^_^ y" j' VL/ ^^o^N Light Gray and Red-brown, SsNSV\ Moist, Very Firm, Rootlets JSNXVS to 6 Feet TWater 8SSS .1- Gray With Red-brown, _ Streaks Saturated Soft ii>_____<__— Cjjj j i I ! r! Medium Firm \ 1} t i•»• L (4 V— — — i i •"- - i -* Ihin Lenses of Sea Shells i »i , J •' Red— brown and Gray jiti FINE TO MEDIUM SANDY CLAY SILTYFINE SAND CLAY (Merges) CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND (Merges)DP.IVE C-JCHGYFT KIPS/FT16.2 9.7 0.8 3.2 FIFI.OMoisT(jnc\ D"Y WT15.4 24.1 43.5 30.7 DRY DENSITYLOSVCU FT101.9 95.4 76.6 88.2 <po *s! 1.04 1.00 0.59 2.11 1" t i i j Continued on Drawing No. 9 r C . _"l > O 72-11-21C 8 .• " UJ c. O Ol/: | — 22- 23- _ 24 25- 26 -• u e-j u' < ^ ^_^ © o iJi"' ^r,>l/- v> 5 SUMMARY SHEET bO^u.'G NO 3_(Cont.) i" ] Gray and Brown, Sahurahed, ' Medium Compacf, Occasional ' Lenses of Clay 1 Very Compact, Occasional j Lenses of Clay •o!i '. J27- ! i ! •1 " i i l 28 ; - 29- - 30- 3,"-© 32- 33 34- 35- ' { { t { '• „ , 1(7)'i oo — 37- 38 r\r\ i 11 jy ' 40 — 41- JVNNXVS Gray and Brown, Saturared, Nxvvvv Firm N\\\\\VVVXVl'J Rlr ^^V Fir"~\\\\\^ ^^^w^^*^ X X X ^ ^ \XXX\^sT \\\\\\ • ' Brc ~ ' Vei ve . . -.T.Y.o"1 " 72-11-21C jck and Gray, Sarurared, TTI, Slight Organic Odor >wn and Gray, Saturated, ry Compact rFINE TO MEDIUM SAND SILTY FINE SAND SILTY CLAY (Bay Mud) SLIGHTLY CLAYEY FINE TO COARSE >°h-cHUJ -. Z U>f,£: u* E"-o 0.8 10.0 7.5 16.7 "• H U. Q C. Sy 29 18 17 .1 .5 .8 SAND . . _ - --. - - . . .. _ _ L ...t \' t,,,..\tL- ' :, i h- H- >-" oJ 96.8 109.9 110.0 ,_ c^L f- l i • f c: ^ 1.25 3.38 4.46 9 . 1-• tvk_ r c.u.* D 41 42- 43- 44- 45- 46- \ — • * -Si S < — © © zo -^2" '(r v> _/ O . . . . ^ - SUM'.IARY SHEET IOFJNG NO 3 (Conr .) Brown and Gray, Sahurared, \ Very Compacf, Occasional \ Gravel to 3/4 Inch \ Gray, Safurared, Very Compacf 1 "I i 47 . !i 48~j 1 i \i t 49n*T / 50 1 /TTs _ Dark Gray and Yellow-brown, Sarurared, Firm viy;i 51 f _ * . _ ii 1 ; ti r t Light Green-gray and Yellow- \ brown, Saturafed, Very \ Compact, Lenses of Clay \ SLIGHTLY CLAYEY FINE < TO COARSE / SAND / (Merges) / FINE TO MEDIUM SAND f* i A \yCLAY SLIGHTLY 1 CLAYEY FINE / 'V H> E u 0 25.8 20.8 - 14.6 £_. ^ ^ t- C. u ^t 16.0 18.7 35.8 21.6 t- k E;5>v; SJ 109.7 108.1 84.3 104.0 ""* **" !.',_ '- u C ^ ~'Llk C^ 3.64 3.72 1.12 3.30 "i TO MEDIUM / SAND / i i i ; ii • ; :c~ t.o 72-11-21C '.10 I I I 1- ? 3 - 4- 5- 6 7- 8- 9 - 10 11- 12 13- 14- 15 16- 17 18- 19- 20- 21 g ;j"g £j: suv VARY SHEET 5 r- J3^5 tChlKG NO 4 *J t*J ^* * iJ10 ELEVATION 13.0' U j ' Light Red-brown, Mottled, Moist, Medium Compact, -j Occasional Coarse Grains, •< Occasional Grovel to 1 Inch 1 RnnhlrK 1 X\\X\> Red-brown, Moist, Medium ^L\ Firm, With Fine to Medium !\ r 11 \ Snnd xxxxx \\ i • , i . i n f, A, '., i >. A i *\vyv\^ \ r. "XXXX^^ \ rilltl / O > XX X XX , •(*• / SSxS Liqht Gray With Red Steaks 'xxxxx And Liqht Brown, Moist, sx\xxx Medium Firm, Interbedded ^O^So< Loyers, Rust Stums and Gypsurn, SSSSS^ rliohly rrucluied. Lens ol 2xSSS\sssss\ \xx\x\ \ x\\\v> Very Moist, Medium Soft ~\xxxx^ ®^X\\\XjIxxxxxj^XxXxX>\\\\\ •^xxxxx Nxxxx^ Dark Gray HHCvvvvvxxxxxx* NXXXXX w ! ' 1 ight Brown, SoturntpH, ^^ ^^^ AAedium Loose .'•'* ' * __' Light Gray, Moist, Medium r Light Gray, Saturated, Medium * Loose to Medium Firm, Some [ Coarse Grains r I i © ^ Continued on Drawi CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND SILTYCLAY , CLAYEY FINE / SAND / SILTYCLAY SLIGHTLY CLAYED MEDIUM SAND FINE SANDY CLAY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND ng No. 12 L^— IT u b D .5' 3.2 0.8 3 ^./ " 1.6 i- 1-c _. — t c •20.9' 36.6 38.7 17.6 r 1- t 100.6 84.7 82.5 -96.9- 107. C L - •2.61- 0.89 0.59 -1.17- 3.48 i u, ± t1 i t i 1 72-11-21C 11 - 1 t- UJ Ulu. (^c.UJ D 21 22 23- — 24- 25- 26- — , 1 27 _. 28 i - I » ' ,i ii 29- 30- *• — 32- - 33- - 34- 35- - 36 37- 38- • i QO —\jj 40-"Tw 41*t i 42- UJ (I 2 | •*i © zo ^:-=!o° S.±Sw>-!/) VI < U . - r SUMMARY SHEET t'omsG no 4 (Cont .) Light Gray, Saturated, Medium Loose to Medium Firm, Some Coarse Grains f i 1 1 I © © ST. ,' - ^§§$ Light Gray With Red-brown, \v\NSX Saturated, Medium Firm to xSVVN^ Firm, Lenses of F'rne to SSsSNx Medium Sand, Lenses of v$o^$v\ Slightly Clayey Fine to Medium ^vsS!XS\ Sand, Lenses of Silry Clay §>§§s! L NSAXxS Medium Soft to Medium Firm, xxvVS^ Large Amount of Lenses of :S§$N^ Silly Clay to 34.5 Feet - Hi §§§$8 ^^^\^s^^^vVVvxx CVVVV^) sxxxxV1 Dark Gray, Very Moist,' NX^VVV Medium Soft to Medium Firm, © • •' - - . - - - V Lenses of Very Fine Sand, \Traces of Organic Matter Light Gray With Gray, Red- Brown and Yellow-brown, Saturated, Firm ( r o*ici KO 72-11-21C FINE TO MEDIUM SAND SLIGHTLY SILTYFINETO MEDIUM SAND Sll TY Cl AYJ 1 L 1 I \^ LrA I , SLIGHTLY CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUMSAND >- °Hff£UJ *^. 2L"U. ± XLJ K" K^a 2.5 •10.0- 3.3 11.7 c fc u u»e UL 5° •C w* 17 22 26 f. r- .9 .6 .2 22 Continued on Drawing No. 13 LEN'TON ENGlfJLC^IK'G. iKC 8 t- 1- R"-n if " 113.8 101.9 95.9 101.8 - UJ It z>u- |ui UJ — 3.25 2.97 2.25 3.21 D^AVtl'.G NO 12 -Hui UJ 3-1-c.LJ D 49- 43- 44- 45 46 47- 48 49 " 50- *.- 52 53- . 54 55 56 57 58- 59 60 61 IS © © 2 O ^jjj" SUf/f/ARY &KEET < o 1 1 . 1 X— <K.IA~ nl' " " ' '> Llghr Uioy YYiln Oiuy, Kod- _• „ J I A J V 1 1 Ibrown. And T el low-brown., I , ,.. Safuroted, Finn [L ** v i 1 1 . . i i J 1 i , L , t. L •L r 1 • 1I \ _ '.", Light Grny With Red-brnwn, ; '• ' f And Yellow-brown, • : . _. • ; Moist, Firm, Fractured 7, '" _. ' , * t 1 | - - • 1 iqht Gray With Red-brown.. 1 . .,1 And Ypllow-t>rown/ Moist/ Firm •. ii i . - r • . . 1 , I SLIGHTLY CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND FINE SANDY CLAY CLAYEY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND u • L -1- D 20.8 .in oIU./1- 14.6 13.2 * K 20.6 01 n. 23.7 19.5 1Dr ' OrrjsiTYLH'VCU =7!104.7 -89.8 101.2 106.3 e ? a t: r. 4.64 T A]-O.4I 3.84 3.52 ii i ii P, : • *i t 3 72-11-21C 13 CONSOLIDATION CURVES co 0 J3 v>o eo £ 10 UJ O. X 5 14 uio 1C z o o oo LOAD IN KIPS PER CCUAf.E FOOT 060810 2 4 Borina 1 Sample 3 Depfh IT c * rtfcsin co»- f CLI: /TIC H AT HELD WC f-f'CHT CC Ki C L.^ ATIC K * •" T t S S AT 'Jf- F-ROJECT KC 72-11-21C EEKTON EK'3 NLERIIJ3, OF 14 a. O CLa X UJo K X O o _Joeft CONSOLIDATION CURVES LOAD IK KIPS PER SQUARE FOOT 060810 Z 4 Boring 2 Sample 2 Depfh 6' O lr_.,CATE.E PCP.CEM CCK c C LI'I '.T , 0 K ,7 FltLD L •; * 11 LICATtS FEftCEM CC KJ.C Li: *T U f, > r T Z F» t/TUh PROJECT KO 72-11-21C EENTOM EKSIf'^ER'fj, ;' / \ i' r • o 15 CONSOLIDATION CURVES oo SAMPorCENPEDAcoLOAD IK KIPS PER SOUARE 06 08 10 3 FOOT O IHDICMkS FEME'T CO i. C C . !' A'. t •, J T r i 1C V.C!r"UpE 6 1 1- 2 1 C * T E S r i- i.. •« ' .-, i r, LC-'TiCK M1t:£: ifTL^ATiCK1 P ' C . £CT KO 72-11-21C BEK'TON tN^'.^ERis':, IS'C t r / V I ^ C 16 " t\uvui.u -Ji \j/ wj. LEUCADIA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT APPLICATION FOR SEWER SERVICE / Owner's Name Rancho La Costa, Inc. Phone No. Mailing Address Costa Del Mar Road SEWER PERMIT ISSUED UPONCarl shad , T.A Q?OOR Service Address: RECEIPT OF BUILD1NS reRMIT' Tract Description: Condo 5 BUILDINS PERM£ ™* BJ Assessor's Parcel No. OBTAINED BY Type of Building Condominiums No. Units 80 Connection Fee $i?n flog Lateral Size: 4" 6" 8" Saddle Easement Connection Extra Footage: @ $ Extra Depth: @ $ Amount Rec'd $ transferr Ck. Mo/Cash Date 9/26/80Rec'd By e. dempsey Lateral Fee ad from other projects prorated Service Fee Total $120,000 The application must be signeq by the owner (or his authorized representative) of the property to be served. The total charges must be paid to the District at the time the application is submitted. If a service lateral is required, it will be installed by the Leucadia County District. The service lateral is that part of the sewer system that extends from the main collection line in the street (or easement) to the point in the street (at or near the applicant's property line) where the service lateral is-connected to the applicant's building sewer. The applicant is responsible for the construction, at the applicant's expense, of the sewer pipeline (building sewer) from the appli- cant's plumbing to the point in the street (or easement) where a connection is made to the service lateral. The connection of the applicant's building sewer to the service lateral shall be made by the applicant at his expense. The connection must be made in conformity with the District's specifications, rules and regulations; and, IT MUST BE INSPECTED AND APPROVED BY THE DISTRICT BEFORE THE SEWER SYSTEM MAY BE USEk BY THE APPLICANT. THE APPLICANT, OR HIS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE, MUST NOTIFY THE DISTRICT AT THE TIME INSPECTION IS DESIRED. ANY CONNECTION MADE TO THE SERVICE LATERAL OR COLLEC- TION LINE WITHOUT PRIOR APPROVAL AND INSPECTION BY THE DISTRICT WILL BE CONSIDERED" INVALID AND WILL NOT BE ACKNOWLEDGED. The prorated sewer service fee is based upon the date the District estimates that service will begin and covers the balance of the fiscal year. There will be no additional fee or refund if service actually commences on a different date. For succeeding fiscal years, the sewer service fee will be collected on the tax roll in the same manner as property taxes. The undersigned hereby agrees that the above informati one-given is correct and agrees to the conditions as stated. 9-26"80 1339?-13471Owner's Signature Date Account No, Vice President RANCHO LA COSTA, INC.