Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2361 CARINGA WAY; BLDG 5; CB881302; PermitDECLARATIONSLENDER WORKER'S COMPENSATION OWNER/BUILDERIII£ £ 1 f n j[I°So|ff] _ : s s i « ~2 1 S z 1 s S 1 1 I r | s § S f ^§;5I53a-J'< ro 3 ° P o - •" ~ * 3) a o ^ ^" i n — 3 £ * § ui ?L to 3 rcO 5 ^ ™ q"°Z 5s f 5^3 2. ° 5 i S 5 --^3— c ° ^ 3^T3 ° ? o ^ S H ""•T ° :!• •< ^ o^r^^ cr 5 0- 3 ° < ^o^"1 on)3?ft= =-5 -S3 ^-wSTHUCTION. WHETHER SPECIFIED HEREIN OR NOT 1 ALSKEEP HARMLESS THE CITY OF CARLSBAO AGAINST ALL LEXPENSES WHICH MAY IN ANY WAY ACCRUE AGAINST SGRANTING OF THIS PERMIT.Q - C -< m rr TO SAVE INDEMf-». JUDGMENTS. COIN CONSEQUENCE55ao-C O 3] >E CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE COMPLETED "IFY UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY THAT AARATIONS ARE TRUE AND CORRECT AND 1 FID: TO COMPLY WITH ALL CITY. COUNTY ANH3 *~ "Dfs> -t — -o52 z-> m TI ct TION AND PERMIT1RMATION HEREONCERTIFY AND AGRLAWS GOVERNINc^po C > c aD -n 0 0«> = Z m — -rO -f ~n n TI 2 I-nw^Og-om JlloHjm i moo,crm-< V "^ CO H l^k. m 00 Z< -4 Tl £ 1 52 ora an n T2TJ O m 0 CD-f f^^ O ^ *rn !^> tt ExptrattcCode shaiauthorizedpermit, orabandonedn. Every permit issued by th« Builcexpire by iimttation and becomeby sucp^ermit is not commence<if U>ff building or work authoriMrany time after the work ts ccrfI1!?!> revisions oMhtsjuitding or workthe dale of suchs suspended orol 180 days* AN OSHA PERMIT5 0- DEEP AND OtSTRUCTURES OVEIS REQUIRED FOR EXCAVATIONS OVEMOUTION OR CONSTRUCTION OfR 3 STORIES IN HEIGHTom 0 TOTAL FEES PAYABLE1CREDIT DEPOSITrtMP OCCUPANCY '30 DAYS) |3DCDCDOO mCD 3DmOa3D3DO3Dc: COCOo cr CO UDro XX r~om cnm —i X CD CO o o o CO cn XccDCTCOCOJD GARAGE-n ~n X | CT OOCO — ( -n O.) oo CD cb> C3> CD O CO CO cn nOCOmoocc3C 0 3D O3D CO r-o CO CD CDCD 0CD COCO cn DELECTRICAL PERMIT - ISSUEin o MOBILE HOME SETUP3D m ro D33D Ocn mm COcnCD CO CD CD CD CDCD CO CD j TOTAL MECHANICALCD 0 ~n rncn m CD CO CD OO CDCD CO CD 3Dman 3D 33 CO CDCD CO CD OCD O do XIT O3D m3D m —I STRONG MOTION I1COCD cn UDro COCO * m3DCO03C RELOCATIz 0 m d X2 m Xm Tl 3D COO 3d oCD Co O O0 CDCD Co CD 1EACH VACUUM BREAKER |MECH EXHAUST HOOU UUCTSo OT O m CDCD CO o oCD CDO CO cn 1 s;=~3§| 2|t|i§ fffs^fsfl"!= ^f-P55! Olio lll?l? = 3ll =S|™| f g|f^fs lUjjl^-SifioCOr-3DI3Dm-am m -n Z m O Cn m0X o oCD CO CDCD CDCD COINJ mXoot/1oocrO3Dm METAI FIREPLACEELECTRICDCD CO CDCD cbCD CO CO m0XCOCOCOoCm BOILER/COMPRESSOR 3 Ib HPo cz CD cn oCD do CD CDCD oCD cc I A EACH WATER HEAItH AND OR VENJ |BOILER/COMPRESSOR UP 10 3 HP1 — O1C o CD 1 !EACH BUILDING SEWER |0 m 3D O "o 0 CD— Icz CO 30S CDCD CO CD CDCD OCD XX30m3D -n 3D Z C d — ( CO c:-a — < O CD O0 CO-H 03d o cn rr3D C3CD CO CD CDCD CDCD CO(V) O 6 V 0PLUMBING PERMIT - ISSUE^O MECHANICAL PERMIT - ISSUE^SUMMARY/ACCOUNT NUMBER8 CENSUS TRACT vizCi 3) if> C Z GRADING PERMIT ISr D N DC/) C 0 REDE VELOPMENTA R£ A>a NQTYPECONSTOCC LOAD-< Ta s n 1 (At/U-(< a T u cn 0 z50m CO Onn aT3 mac s1^?lr » 1 CONTRACTOR~~ C] ' ^•r«by affirm that 1 am licensed underprovisions of Chapter 9 (commencing withSection 7000) of Division 3 of the Business•nd Professions Code, and my license is in__ tull force and effect.I hereby atfirm that 1 am exempi from the Contrac-tor's License Law toi the following reason (Sec 7031 5Business and Professions Code Any city or county whicr. re-quires a permit to construct, alter, improve, demolish, orrepair any structure, gnor to its issuance also requires the ap-plicant tor such permit to die a signed statement thai he is 'licensed pursuant to the provisions ot the Contractor sLicense Law (Chapter 9 commencing with Section 7000 otDivision 3 ot the Business and Professions Codei or that is ex-empt Ihereffom and the basis for the alleged exernplton Anyviolation ol Section 7031 .5 by an applicant for a permit sublecls the applicant to a civil penalty of not more than live hun-dred dollars ($500)O-n X 1 DESIGNER'S ADDRESS| STATE LICENSE NO.Hot Valid Unless Machine Certified'b1^ «Xbr^it^ h ^om 5 2*m X Om\r> 5zmIyi T5 •IOzm ^ > (\ 1 CONTRACTOR'S ADDRESS * fl ftns-tf /*. i ////#* ¥SSf/fabbMA JU'&O £//^/QSTT'ON 3SN3OI1 31V1S 1a> >08 m 1Nb^X•*S.t 1 ozm rO-f1 SLOCK4 Jo 0li^ 1 1 CONTRACTORS PHONE *S m K AJ° SN"^, o I.DATE OF APPLICATIOMI BUSINESS LICENSE #^-_22 10\§ O CX^ ,.ji m CX* 1 9^f 1 ^ «, > ^./CARLSBAD BUILDING DEPARTMENT APPLICATION A PFF*-**4\ Q^A^A^'20|5 Las Palmas Dr., Carlsbad, CA 92009-1915 (619) 438-1161 Mrri_lV,M 1 iwn Ol rcrS H </>r*i00»r-•WO•0mO-<00•o3Dmc/>in•x.»3DO •oTI O Z HO T] 1-r- Z Z•n0 31S 0 $ -I z(/> X om 0 >31 5> oomo X 0 cs> White — Inspector Green — (1) Finance Yellow — Assessor Pink — Applicant Gold — Temporary File SPECIAL CONDITIONSy BUILDING^t OCO^c 1TZ01-^~ft_ELECTRICAL\\VxT PLUMBING>•^\•nzr-^n(fiaC<rr3><rrarrrr2T:C*;rrC CALL FOR FINAL INSPECTION W.rn'£i1^•i,-o•T)O5£a VENTILATING SYSTEMSi3C(45iii•(En>H>D-)DZ3n$Tl£/)nD0mrn33m1 1TJTJZo Smnz>z5>r si D BONDING D POOLD ELECTRIC SERVICE D TEMPORARY33OImr~Tl33O D ELECTRIC UNDERGROUND D UFFEl33 'ELECTRICALi*j 1 n e; '•'; H C3 D WATER HEATER D SOLAR WATER! 0COHmT)TlO J)D Z TUB AND SHOWER PAN^ \TOP OUT D WASTE D WATER00T)mO>"~ ^> CoC2u •< J J ^,1<J * s ^X U) V ' •^ ^, I czom33O330ZOaCOmDgm33CEC— 1cr X • 1 V. W ^>J^^ •*^D SEWER AND BL/CO D PL/COX. I JJm CD H I •b ^ ^PLUMBING~nmOg m O Z O fr<•\ s ilT* > *ix!«x \ oozo3)rri Hm £ t N| | C; ta N tr3CJrtc«:r"0OH-i Z —D Z T) D t s jn05D>HC030<>>^2D rr 5 ^5 | £ "X v|INSULATION5 TD5 S* m>H mw rn O ^l* 1 > v EXTERIOR LATHO U)< —\m ^Do — 'O CO -jj Tl >W r~ o O ZOJJmHm $ ^ I- I ^v\ .ArX) *vr FRAME-rC2r^ - •~, Z ~ *~ t: ^ X ^ Ht ^i)1 *Q C1n:2cc3CcTc03rr3TIC c . , V s ijci>H'5]3))1]51>3cCrC.cC r 5 rr SJ ? 1 »* ? k «n N s ^* K•v •s V ^X SUB FRAME D FLOOR D CEILINGr.3n•> D ? > Sn M9; X ^\ <GUNITE OR GROUT— CO-rj O^ • _ Oz 0 13)m m 00 m -ri0 >z1" 33 Q — 1 >°co O —1m $ ST t^ ^ Vis J >v\ o ^ fx *X. v> \M I ]n £ r-\. 3nC 0-r Jr- ictnC C <J zcrTlmOHO3 CO •^0-1mCO 3niTC3rrcVnnr DT 3 5T3 •)JT } 5 31 ) 1 ) » ) 7]•i3)13J11 FOUNDATION3]mO— v> T)mO— i 6z um Q -^O BUILDINGT>momenTJm| DEVELOPMENT PROCESSING SERVICES DIVISION 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CA 92009-4859 (619)438-1161 MISCELLANEOUS FEE RECEIPT Applicant Please Print And Fill In Shaded Area Only CXJNTRACTOFm MAILING ADDRESS STAflE LICENSE NO,Na PLAN CHECK FFF 001-810-00-00-8821 IF THE APPLICANT TAKES NO ACTION WITHIN 180 DAYS, PLAN CHECK FEES .L BE FORFEITED. fa/tr/f LEGAL DESCRIPTION CHECK IF SUBMITTED: 2 ENERGY CALCS 2 1987 ENERGY CALCS FOR NON RESIDENTIAL BLDGS DESCRIPTION Of WORE 2 STRUCTURAL CALCS D 2 SOILS REPORTS 2 SELF ADDRESSED ENVELOPES DATE GIVEN/ SENT TO APPLICANT DATE CONTACT PERSON White - File Yellow - Applicant Pink - Finance Gold - Assessor PROFESSIONAL REGISTERED INSPECTIONS. iNC PHONE 292-0000 convoy •.:•-."'.,u.-.jo c.i i\SPECTIONS • TESTING « fc'MGil\i':t'».'\G TEST REPORT JOB NO.4395 ALICANTE VIEWS ADDRESS OWNER CLIENT ARCHITECT INSPECTOR FIELD SAMPLE OF: MI'X NO. PROPORTIONS ADMIXTURE TYPE OF CEMENT CARINGA WAY CHAPARRAL ESTATES CHAPARRAL ESTATES 't DALE REGLI CONCRETE 752P 1" POZZ II PHONE CONTRACTOR ENGINEER BLDG. AUTH. PERMIT NO 880508 LOCATION OF SPECIMEN IN JOB OR STRUCTURE: BLDG. #5, MADE BY SLUMP DATE MADE DATE RECEIVED BILL STONE NOVA CITY OF CARLSBAD PLAN Pl| F S E MIDDLE OF SLAB ON GRA1 LARRY KERNS 4V 6/23/89 6/27/89 CONC. SUPPLIER TICKET NO. ESCONDIDO READY MIX SOURCE OF ROCK 1209525 INSPECTOR SIGN DALE REGLI AGE TESTED DAYS LABORATORY TEST DATA 7 DAYS DAYS 28 DAYS DAYS SPECIMEN MARKINGS DATE TESTED AREA - SO. IN. ULTIMATE LOAD - LBS. UNIT STRESS - PSI SPECIFIED STRENGTH AT 28 DAYS PSI 76147 6/30 28.28 50000 1770 76148 111 28.28 63000 ^ * d &9A2230 76149 7/21 28.28 76000 n V/ 2685-^ 2500 DISTRIBUTION:CHAPARRAL ESTATES CITY OF CARLSBAD ENGINEER PROFESSIONAL REGISTERED INSPECTIONS. INC 7SCJ5 c'T"ivoy '.:•'.'.'''.. Ba'i a t-'.jo c..i"''cj'"'i.a B211! i*;SPECTIONS • TESTING • PHONE 292-0660 TEST REPORT JOB N0>395 JOB ADDRESS OWNER CLIENT ARCHITECT INSPECTOR _ FIELD SAMPLE OF: MIX NO. PROPORTIONS ADMIXTURE TYPE OF CEMENT CONC. SUPPLIER TICKET NO. ALICANTE VIEWS CARINGA WAY CHAPARRAL ESTATES CHAPARRAL ESTATES '; DALE REGLI CONCRETE 752P 1" POZZ II ESCONDIDO READY MI 1209525 PHONE CONTRACTOR BILL STONE ENGINEER NOVA m DG AUTH CITY OF CARLSBAD PERMIT NO 880508 pi AN FIIF LOCATION OF SPECIMEN IN JOB OR STRUCTURE: BLDG. #5, S E MIDDLE OF SLAB ON GRAI MADE BY LARRY KERNS SLUMP 4*s" DATE MADE 6/23/89 DATE RECEIVED 6/27/89 X SOURCE OF ROCK INSPECTOR SIGN °ALE REGLI LABORATORY TEST DATA AGE TESTED DAYS 7 DAYS DAYS 28 DAYS DAYS SPECIMEN MARKINGS DATE TESTED AREA - SO. IN. ULTIMATE LOAD - LBS. UNIT STRESS - PSI SPECIFIED STRENGTH AT 28 DAYS PSI 76147 6/30 28.28 50000 1770 76148 7/7 76149 7/21 DISTRIBUTION:CHAPARRAL ESTATES CITY OF CARLSBAD ENGINEER ESGIL CORPORATION 9320 CHESAPEAKE DR., SUITE 208 SAN DIEGO, CA 92123 (619) 56O-1468 DATE: JURISDICTION: PLAN CHECK NO: PROJECT ADDRESS; PROJECT NAME; oc-r CiTV OF C - 12.10 SET: \pA.V v*teuJ APT5. PI APPLICANT ECTION SCKER _JFILE COPY HUPSHDESIGNER D D D D The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes. The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes when minor deficien- cies identified e>e.Lo*J are resolved and checked by building department staff. The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck. The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at Esgil Corp. until corrected plans are submitted for recheck. The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to return to the applicant contact person. ( | The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to: Esgil staff did not advise the applicant contact person that plan check has been completed. f"~j Esgil staff did advise applicant that the plan check has — been completed. Person contacted: D Date contacted:Telephone MARKS; MQY& oto PI_A.NS» THAT; 0 PRIOR. TO -rue IK) TUe ADvJISS. THE. Tt-Hk-T TM&. (3ASiE^4/iM~eCJA'l-\AJA.a COMPU&S UJtTM T"M£ •SOIL-* Be ESGIL CORPORATION Enclosures / Datei Jurisdiction Prepared VALUATION AND PLAN CHECK FEE - IS/fl D Bldg. Dept, D Esgil PLAN CHECK NO. BUILDING ADDRESS 23^1 ^AfciKiftA APPLICANT/CONTACT JOKI CuOUD BUILDING OCCUPANCY CR^e> U3*uu TYPS OF CONSTRUCTION -- PHONE NO. DESIGNER PHONE CONTRACTOR PHONE BUILDING PORTION VOAUL A e> c D "Tb-TAU Air Conditionine Commercial Residential Res. or Comm. Fire S-orinklers Total Value BUILDING AREA \'i\ty \ooo I02^> «i ie Al^'B • VALUATION MULTIPLIER -—•- - •''*" ,. II. ^ @ @ e • • VALUE 4S.277 • 4<?>'Z.11 Building Pern it Tee $. Plan Check fee $ COM MENTS: s 40 r. SHEET OF I OJ4-tre CO 73 <0 0) '><o a m do _2 ?a;'^ <D X <U (0 m TO<u I) *>0) £ Date: /fl-6-88 ENGINEERING CHECKLIST LEGEND _/ Plan Check No. 6&I31O J^-. Project Address: 23fo\ CfttQrXxk l>v^9V /[J/ Project Name: /2ETA/AJiMi K/AU5 Field Check Date:173l,Z,3 By: LEGAL REQUIREMENTS Site Plan EM Item Complete Item Incomplete - Needs Your Action Number in circle indicates plancheck number that deficiency was identified 1. D D D D D D D D nan nan nan a a nan nan nan D n a a 2. Provide a fully dimensioned site plan drawn to scale. Show: North arrow, property lines, easements, existing and proposed structures, streets, existing street improvements, right-of-way width and dimensioned setbacks. Show on Site Plan: Finish floor elevations, elevations of finish grade adjacent to building, existing topographical lines, existing and proposed slopes, driveway and percent (%) grade and drainage patterns. 3. 4. Provide legal description of property. Provide assessor's parcel number. PERMITS REQUIRED Grading 5. Grading permit required. (Separate submittal to Engineering Department required for Grading Permit). 6. Grading plans in plan check PE 2. 88. |9 7. Need the following completed prior to building permit issuance: A. Grading plans signed. B. Grading permit issued. C. Grading completed. D. Certification letter and compaction reports submitted. E. Grading inspected and permit signed off by City Inspector. 8. Right-of-Way Permit required for work in public right-of-way (e.g., driveway approach, sidewalk, connection to water main, etc). 9. Industrial Waste Permit application required. To be filled out completely and returned to Development Processing. FEES REQUIRED r~| M 10. Park-in-Lieu fees required. Quadrant: , Fee Per Unit: — __ , Total Fee: [HO 11* Traffic impact fee required. A Fee Per Unit: — , Total Fee: ^ l£<JLf^- f~j M 12. Bridge and Thorougjofare fee required. , Fee Per Unit: , Total Fee: HJ} PQSL in n VI—II—I 13. Public facilities fee required. Q 14. Facilities management fee required. Fee: Vw rjUL D 15. Additional EDU's required: sntft <\Jfyl( Sewer connection fee: — Sewer permit no. Q7^ DC 16< Sewer lateral required: ^REMARKS: O.K. to issue:/^^-^"^/^^——,-—— Date: /2 - If you have any questions about any of the above items identified on this plan check, please call the Development Processing Department at 438-1161. re m •o s *>o>a: n> ca 730)sa> 0) OQ 730) 4) 0) i— P>I ro=*=»==«= u o uQ. Q. a. a c/p n Q/D a sa a nan PLANNING CHECKLIST Plan Check No. Q&151S Type of Project and Use Zone Address ^36 / /C/£ftg Setback: Front Use Allowed? YES Side OK Rear c?/<; NO Facilities Management Zone (& School District: San Dieguito Carlsbad Discretionary Action Required Environmental Required Landscape Plan Required Comments YES YES YES Encinitas San Marcos NO DC Type NO D( NO Coastal Permit Required Additional Comments YES NO OK TO ISSU DATE CRIBWALL STABILITY CALCULATIONS CRIBWALL STABILITY CALCULATIONS BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. APPLIED SOIL MECHANICS — FOUNDATIONS SS4O RUFFIN ROAD SAN DIEGO. CALIFORNIA 921 83 September 16, 1988 PHILIP HENKING BENTON PRESIDENT - CIVIL ENGINEER TELEPHONE (6 I 9) 965-1 999 Chapparal Estates Corporation 3511 Carol no del Rio South Suite 500 San Diego, CA 92108 Attention: Mr. Jon Cloud Subject: Project No. 88-5-8A Supplementary Soils Investigation Proposed Alicante View Apartments Lots 299, 230, 231, and 232 of La Costa Valley Unit 5 Carlsbad, California Gentlemen: This is to supplement our previous "Soils Investigation" report dated June 16, 1988, in that in place of having retaining walls at the toe of the slopes at elevations of the lower streets, with 2 horizontal to 1 vertical slopes above these and to the building pads on the lots above, it is now proposed to place crib-type retaining walls at horizontal distances of 11 to 17 feet inside and uphill from the toe of the slopes. Soils information to be used for the design of these is included in this supplement. It is also understood that the City of Carlsbad has requested the soils to be checked for slope stability for a mass rotational type shear failure as well as a surficial type failure mode, assuming the outer few feet on a 2 horizontal to 1 vertical finished slope might become saturated. Because of the requests for more information on the slope area, four test pits were hand-excavated in the existing slopes at the locations shown on the attached Drawing 1 revised September 16, 1988. The log of the soil conditions encountered were recorded by our field geologist at the time of excavation and the soils were visually classified in accordance with the field identification procedures of the Unified Soil Classification Chart presented in Appendix A. Field density tests, using a sand-displacement method, were taken at intervals of each 2 to 3 feet in depth in Test Pits 1, 2, and 3 and at 2 feet in depth in Test Pit 4 where a very firm natural siltstone formation was exposed that was massive and did not have bedding planes. The soil conditions and field density test results are presented in detail on Drawings 14 and 15, each entitled "Summary Sheet." Chapparal Estates Corporation Project No. 88-5-8A Soil Strata -2-September 16, 1988 The general soil conditions in Test Pit 1 are a gray brown silty clay fill with 30 percent chunks of silty claystone to 4 inches between zero and 7.0 feet which varied from loose to 3 feet to medium compact to 4.2 feet to compact between 4.2 and 7.0 feet. At Test Pit 2, a gray brown silty clay fill with 30 percent chunks of silty claystone to 3 inches was encountered to 1.3 feet, and was underlain by silty fine sand to 2.7 feet and then gray brown silty clay with 30 percent silty claystone chunks to 3 inches and 10 to 20 percent fine sandy clay fill to 7 feet in depth. The soils varied from loose at zero to 4.5 feet to compact between 4.5 and 7.0 feet. At Test Pit 3 a gray brown natural silty claystone was encountered to 4.0 feet and this was underlain by gray siltstone to 6.0 feet. The upper one foot was loose then the natural soils were very firm to the depth of exploration at 6.0 feet. At Test Pit 4 a gray natural siltstone was encountered from zero to 8.0 feet. This was described as loose in the upper 0.7 foot and then very firm, with thin gypsum seams between 0.7 foot and 8.0 feet, the maximum depth of exploration. Laboratory Tests Samples of the soils were brought to the laboratory so that these could be remolded to the in-place field dry density and moisture content, and then saturated and drained prior to running a series of three direct shear tests on one sample from each test pit in order to obtain the angles of internal friction and cohesions on the remolded samples. The results of the four series of direct shear tests are tabulated below: Test Pit No. 1 Depth of Sample in Feet 6.5 6.5 4.0 2.0 Normal Load Kips/sq.ft. 0.5 1.0 2.0 0.5 ,0 ,0 0.5 1.0 2.0 0.5 1.0 2.0 Shearing Resistance Kips/sq.ft. 0.67 0.88 1.11 0.90 0.98 1.41 0.71 0.95 1.52 0. 1. 99 17 Angle of Internal Friction Degrees 18.5 18.0 27.5 22.5 Apparent Cohesion Ib/sg.ft. 520 720 450 770 1.64 BENTON ENGINEERING. INC. Chapparal Estates Corporation -3- Spetember 16, 1988 Project No. 88-5-8A Conclusions It is concluded from the field observations, field density tests, and laboratory test data that the coefficient of slidinr friction for the crib-type walls should be based on the lowest value for the filled ground soil area or the tangent of 18° = 0.32. This value does not include a factor of safety that should be included by others doing the design of these walls. It is recommended that the downhill face of the cribwall footings be embedded a minimum of 5.5 feet below the present ground surface. The depths will, therefore, vary below the final 2 horizontal to 1 vertical slope in that for a wall 11 feet inside the toe, the difference between a 1^:1 existing slope and 2:1 slope is 1.8 feet. Therefore, 5.5 feet below the existing U>:1 slope would equal (5.5-1.8) 3.7 feet below the final lowered 2:1 slope at the base of the wall. For cribwalls further up the slope where greater thicknnesses of existing fill will be excavated to achieve the 2:1 slope, a minimum vertical depth at the front of the wall is recommended to be 3.5 feet, and this will provide for 7.0 feet of horizontal confinement between the toe of the wall and the exposed slope surface. The active pressures presented on page 8 of our soils report dated June 16, 1988 may be used for the design of the fill with the 2:1 sloping surcharge provided the same on-site silty sand and clayey sand soils are used as backfill and free draining conditions without hydrostatic pressure buildup are as previously recommended. Also, the allowable bearing value of 2500 pounds per square foot may be used for footings placed as recommended. This value is for dead plus live loads and may be increased one-third for combined dead, live, wind, and seismic loads. A cross-section showing the existing and proposed slope between Test Pits 1 and 2 at the location shown on Drawing 1 has been prepared and a slope stability analysis, based on the lowest angle of internal friction, has been made and is shown on Drawing 16 entitled "Slope Stability Analysis Section A-A." An adequate factor of safety is shown for the soil with the lowest angle of internal friction so that the other soils should give increasingly higher resistance. It is also likely that the deeper soils will also possess higher strength characteristics. For the surficial stability that includes seepage parallel to the exposed 2 horizontal to 1 vertical slopes the following analysis was calculated: BENTON ENGINEERING. INC. Chapparal Estates Corporation Project No. 88-5-8A -4-September 16, 1988 Failure Surface F.S. = c' + (g-gw)d cos21 tan d) gcT sin i cos i Assumptions: 1) Depth to failure surface 2) Unit weight of soil 3) Unit weight of water 4) Slope inclination angle 5) Soil effective cohesion 6) Soil effective friction angle F.S. = Safety Factor 720 + (110 - 62.4)4' (4)110 (.448) d = 4' g = 110 ocf gw = 62.4 pcf i = 2:1 26.6° c'= 720 psf (D'= 18° (0.799)0.325 = 769.4 (.894)176.2 Respectfully submitted, BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. ....lip H. BeXton, Civil Engineer RCE No. 10332 and Geotechnical Engineer 138 Distribution: (6) Addressee PHB/jer = F.S. = 4.39 SENTON ENGINEERING. INC. UlUlu. a.uiO 0)0) SUMMARY SHEET PIT NO. 1 UjO. "•5° 00 VJK »?Uju. 1- 2- 3- 4- 5- 6- Gray Brown, Dry, Loose, with 302 Chunks of Silty Claystone to 4" Slightly Moist, Medium Compact Merges Moist, Compact 11.3 89.4 SILTY CLAY 19.0 90.9 13.7 110.3 PIT NO. 6- Gray Brown, Dry, Loose, with 302 Chunks of Silty Clay- stone to 3" Light Brown, Dry, Loose, 10-202 Silty Claystone .Chunks to 2" Gray Brown, Dry, Loose, with 302 Silty Claystone Chunks to 3" and 10-202 Fine Sandy Pay1 Heroes Hoist, Compact SILTY CLAY SILTY FINE SAND SILTY CLAY 10.9 15.5 11.1 88.3 92.4 15.1 u < oo O Indicates Field Density Test Sample I1 Indicates Loose Bulk Sample PROJECT NO. 88-5-8A BENTON ENGINEERING. INC.DRAWING NO. 14 102685 VI ao ' DEPTH/FEET1- 3- 5 ~ UJB_IUJ 0.025Oo»z 2 - n 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5- 6- 7 - 1 2 E SOILCLASSIFICATIONSYMBOLM 5 4 L^ ' 1 w 5 •5 SUMMARY SHEET PIT NO. 3 Gray Brown, Dry, Loose, Marginal Siltstone, Very [Lean Very Firm, Slightly Moist to Moist, Fractured Bedding Very Indistinct, But Appears to be About 5° to SE Gray, Moist, Very Firm * 5 5 5 e. "3 5 5 5 5 5 S <j S 5 c S 5 SILTY CLAYSTONE SILTSTONE PIT NO. 4 Gray, Dry, Loose .Slightly Moist, Verv Firm ,Slightly Moist to Moist {Thin Gypsum Seams No PROJECT NO. 88-5-8A Bedding Plane SILTSTONE DRIVE ENERGYFT. KIPS/FT.—FIELDMOISTURE% DRY WT.15.9 15.7 16.5 DRY DENSITYLB8/CU. FT.100.3 99.3 99.7 SHEARRESISTANCEKIPS/SO. FT.— —19.2 97.1 — BENTON ENGINEERING. INC. DRAWING NO. 10268S il - Vx 10 x 12 x 125 W2 «= (12+16) 16 x 125 • H3 = h x 5 x 20 x 125 •- F! = SIN 50° Wi • 7*277 F2 * SIN 30° W2 = 14,000 F3 « SIN 15° W3 = '1,617 £F = 22,894 H 2,000 28,000 6,250 N.LOAD 9,500 N2N3 COS 50° HI COS 30° W2 COS 15° H3 +CL R! « R2 » R3 • TAN (D (.325) 6,106 x .325 24,249 x .325 6,037 x .325 *R • 1,984 7,880 1,962 R, Rg R3 11,826 720 x 14 720 x 19 720 x 18 10,080 13,680 12,960 1CL 11,826 36,720 FS 48,546 22,894 2.12 __. HOOZ.r-10'•5>CAL.B- VERT. V- 10' 'oL.OPE A*SAJL^TSia ^ECTION A- AC ALICANTE , CALJPOKM\A > OIUWINO NO. 88-&"BENTON ENGINEERING. INC. APPENDIX A li•5 1 s 1 Is l» ft S*jr- i'l Ib I. sQ « I .O ." 'Ml! li I"if. HoqwCt imp 10 am JS 'MS 'JO "MO J.f"»H«i»l:M>O||OJ n papitnp M« i|)c» paujul MJ«OD (si|t SASIS ooz •a^ u«)> J5II'"" uo|istJj) tsuu jo 9lliu»j>d uo tugpuadaa a|l u;ul tuojj puts put IMIJI jo tuntuaiad uou»gpuap| piau »pun uaAp n niofiauj am SuiAjiiiupi ui a.uiu azic ujuS »n *ll.«IIJ i-,;i! Jfif!liiidil Ml1 t'HljH!.•Hi! fill!i? I8£*.*|i i'•n — pi |i£§ «5 ^ * I l1^Is oo jo atnii) 2-5 II I1 (tauBjonmoun»iqt|»iddt}tang I] ll~ (t»»B on 10 »I»!D(pun otaio 1 IL ig I! fi H (tauyjoinnomt •fqtpaiddt)tauyMil« tputs -an aqi 01 ina|tAfnban patn aq Xtuj oqt -u| ? »ql 'iio|it3U|in|3 |tnt|A joj) az|t Ma|< i -ON Otq) JSBJtl f j DOI19UJautog jo jitq utiii ajow ai|t SAWS ^ -ON fftlfl J>||tUI( I| UOII3UJautoa jo jitit un|i ajow•puts '.H -Aill- I*]\\\ j'sa.!i:ilii£ 8s85 gfeil-sS? Is- !.' Ill lc. I1.] illii Jiii}o £ ui Is! u 5S fl Hc£ !l ifnE inbiitX«|3 put tins SS M X 81.Ill isl|s ill i! i 55 OJ inbll «Xip put tins (*(» pa^to 01 ainitiA a|»n«d itantun aqi inoqt ti azji »A»|I OOZ' azis >Aj|t oOI -OK utiiitifimtu ti |tij9]iui jo JI«M uti|i MOWc| itiuitui jo JI»M uti|i•not pMi;uB-MJt03 !<sat «ofI'M! IHl!!lJill 111! hilsSlllliJIlPJi! Illlllll "&rlstiff!S !2£1s 111=\li\i W*ulh <JH \ \? I ::il*o^slg;igs tf 1C APVUCD SON. MECHANICS - FOUNDATIONS S54O MUFFIN NOAO SAN OMK30. CAUTOMNIA «2123 ';<" June 16, 1988 PHILIP HCNKING 8ENTONr - civic CNOIMUK Chapparal Estates Corporation . 3511 Camino del Rio South Suite 500 San Diego, CA 92108 Attention: Mr. Jon Cloud Gentlemen: This is to transmit to you six copies of our report under Project No. 88-5-8A entitled "Soils Investigation, Proposed Alicante View Apartments, Lots 229, 230, 231, and 232 of La Costa Valley Unit 5, Carlsbad, California,1 dated June 16, 1988. If you should have any questions regarding the data presented in this report, please contact us. Very truly yours, BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. Philip H. Beflton, Civil Engineer PHB/jer c o SOILS INYESTI8ATION PROPOSED ALICANTE VIEW APARTMENTS LOTS 229, 230, 231, and 232 LA COSTA VALLEY UNIT 5 CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA For CHAPPARAL ESTATES CORPORATION PROJECT. NO. 88-5-8A ( JUNE.16, 1988 CNGINEERING. INC. I c TABLE OF CONTENTS SOILS INVESTIGATION Page Introduction r —— 1 Field Investigation 1 and 2 Laboratory Tests ; 2 and 3 DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOfMENDATIONS Soil Strata 3, 4, and 5 ;j~ Conclusions and Recommendations 5 - Allowable Bearing Values 6 •g^. Expansive Soils 6 and 7 g. ^ Site Grading 7 and 8 "" Active and Passive Pressures 8 and 9 Concrete Slabs on Grade 9 and 10 DRAWING TITLE Drawing Location of Test Borings 1 Summary Sheets: ; Boring 1 2 and 3 Boring 2 • 4 ; Boring 3 5 ^ Boring 4 6, 7, and 8 ^ Boring 5 — 9 ^ Boring 6 10 i Boring 7 11 Consolidation Curves 12 and 13 .- c APPENDICES Unified Soil Classification Chart A Standard Specifications for Placement of Compacted Filled Ground AA Sampling, Shear Tests, Consolidation Tests and Expansion Tests B Type A - Highly Expansive Lots, Type B - Moderately Expansive Lots C CO •*>t at BENTON ENGINEERING. INC. - r BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. APPUCO SOU. MECHANICS — FOUNDATIONS SS4O muffm NOAO ,j SAN OIKCO. CALIFORNIA 02IZ3 ?o * ^M.ui.HeNK.Na.eN™ SOILS INVESTIGATION PWCSIOCNT . CfVIU CNOIMCCIt . TlLCPMONC (6 1 9) 965- 1 953 • • r»i Introduction &j -[g© This is to present the results of a soils investigation conducted *C3 at the site of the proposed Alicante View Apartments which will occupy ?H "- Lots 229, 230, 231, and 232 of La Costa Valley Unit 5 in Carlsbad, California. &i~g|'*;' It is understood that the proposed apartments will.be two stories with 9Jjf wood-frame construction and concrete slabs on grade. The configuration "3.v: of the apartments and parking lots are understood to be as shown on therr . • •^- plans drawn by Hay Engineering and Surveying, Inc., and signed April 8, 1988. The purpose of this investigation was to determine the general subsurface conditions of the site, including sufficient physical properties of the " soils, so that soils engineering recommendations could be presented for the design of foundations. Field Investigation Seven exploratory borings were drilled with a 30-inch bucket-auger drill rig at the approximate locations shown on the attached Drawing 1 entitled "Location of Test Borings." The exploratory borings were drilled to depths of 22 feet, 17 -feet, 15 feet, 45 feet, 15 feet, 18 feet, and 15 feet, respectively, at Borings 1 to 7. A continuous log of the soils encountered in the borings was recorded by our field geologist at the time 3 c *jj co of drilling and is shown in detail on Drawings 2 to 11, 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 Appendix A. -2- C . " C GO CO •O C u 0) o Undisturbed samples were obtained at intervals of 3 to 5 feet in depth in the soils ahead of the drilling in the test borings. The drop weight usd for driving the sampling tube into the soils was the "Kelly" bar of the drill rig which weighed 2218 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 undisturbed samples of the soils in order to determine the dry density, moisture content, and shear strength resistance. The results of these tests are presented on Drawings 2 to 11. Consolidation tests were performed on representative undisturbed samples of the soils in order to determine the load-settlement characteristics of the soils and the results of these tests are presented graphically on Drawings 12 and 13, each entitled "Consolidation Curves." Direct shear tests were performed on selected undisturbed and remolded samples that were saturated and drained prior to testing. The results of these tests are presented below: Normal Load in Kios/sq.ft. 0.5 1.0 2.0 0.5 1.0 2.0 0.5 1.0 2.0 Shearing Resistance Kips/sq.ft. 0.57 0.99 1.59 0.64 0.98 1.79 0.56 0.87 1.35 Angle of Internal Friction Degrees 35 36^ ' 27 Apparent Cohesion Ib/sq.ft. 200 230 300 Boring 1 Sample 2 Depth: 8.0' Boring 3 Sample 3 Depth: 7.0' Boring 6 Sample B-l Depth: 2.0' to 3.0' (Remolded to 90% relative compaction at optimum moisture content) Expansion tests were performed on some of the clayey soils encountered to determine their volumetric change characteristics with change in moisture SENTON ENGINEERING. INC. i t.-t \- - -3- ; content. The recorded expansions of the samples are presented as follows: f ' .I -. Percent Expansion 1 l- Under Unit Load of Depth of 500 Pounds per . f Boring Sample Sample Square Foot from No. N£; In Feet Soil Description Air Dry to Saturation - 6 1 3.0 Silty Clay 4.42 *-G 7 1 2.0 Silty Clay 8.44 In order to establish compaction criteria, compaction tests were performed on representative samples of the subgrade soils. These were tested in accordance with ASTM D 1557-78, which requires 25 blows of a 10-pound rammer falling from a height of 18 inches on each of 5 layers in a 4-inch diameter l/30th cubic foot mold. The results of these tests are presented below: : Optimum Moisture Content % dry wt 13.5 12.5 Boring No. 1 4 4 4 6 Bag Sample B-l B-l B-2 B-4 B-l Depth in Feet 4.0 - 5.0 3.0 - 4.0 8.0 - 9.0 21.0-22.0 1.5 - 2.0 DISCUSSION, Soil Description Slightly Silty Fine to Medium Sand Silty Fine to Medium Sand Silty Fine Sand Fine to Medium Sandy Clay Silty Clay Maximum Dry Density Ib/cu ft 118.1 120.3 126.8 115.5 113.6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4 B-2 8.0-9.0 Silty Fine Sand 126.8 10.0 f C 14.2 15.8 Soil Strata Benton Engineering, Inc. inspected the placement of compacted filled ground for Lots 229, to 242, and Lots 244 to 250 of La Costa Valley Unit 5 during the period between May 13 and October 7, 1970. A final compacted <» filled ground report dated November 4, 1970 was Issued for La Costa Valley to g Unit 5. The Alicante View Apartments project is to be situated on Lots ^ 229, 230, 231, and 232 of La Costa Valley Unit 5. Our revision to our *% original report stated that up to two feet of fill soils had been placed o£ on Lot 229 and a portion of Lot 230 without our inspection. The additional fill was tested after it had been placed with the results provided in our report dated April 20, 1973. However, it is recommended that the foundation BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. .."" - -4- footing excavations be Inspected by Benton Engineering, Inc., prior to ' c placement of reinforcing steel to verify the founding of the footings *• into suitable bearing soils.•*;• . _~ Fill soils were encountered to depths of 1.5 feet in Borings 1, 2, *£ and 3, to 33 feet in Boring 4, to 0.6 foot 1n Boring 5 and to 3.2 feet in Boring 6. The log of Boring 1 shows that the fill soils are loose to medium compact, silty clay soils, and extend to a depth of 1.5 feet. Underlying £--s|O tne fill soils are natural, firm, fine to medium sand soils continuing .S to a depth of 22.0 feet, the limit of exploration. The fine to medium V " sand soils are occasionally interbedded with silty fine to medium sand C and slightly silty fine to medium sand soils. The log of Boring 2 reflects that fill soils were encountered to 1.5 feet below the existing ground surface. The clayey fine sand fill soils ' ~C are loose for the upper 0.5 foot and compact to 1.5 feet. The natural soils underlying the fill soils consist of firm, silty fine to medium sand to 2.3 feet, compact slightly silty fine to medium sand to 3.5 feet, very • •' firm silty fine sand to 7.5 feet, and compact fine to medium sand to 17.0 feet, the limit of exploration. The silty clay soils in Boring 3 are loose to 0.5 foot and compact .*. Q to 1.5 feet. Natural, medium compact to compact slightly silty fine to -j medium sand underlay the fill soils to a depth of 3.5 feet. Firm silt jr begins at 3.5 feet and continues to 8.0 feet. Underlying the silt 1s compact :(\c slightly silty fine to medium sand to 12.5 feet and firm silty fine sand ~ *? to 15.0 feet, the limit of exploration. ' CO". oo Deep fill soils were observed at Boring 4. The fill soils extend -" O . j to 33.0 feet below the ground surface and consisted of loose and compact 01"o silty clay to 1.5 feet, compact silty fine to medium sand to 6.5 feet, a.compact silty fine sand to 13.0 feet, compact fine sandy silt to 20.5 feet, <. BENTON ENGINEERING. INC. -5- . and firm clay to 33.0 feet. The natural soils consisted of slightly silty fine to medium sand, fine sandy clay, and silty fine-sand and were very firm in consistency to the depth of exploration at 45.0 feet. - The log of Boring 5 indicates that loose clayey fine sand fill soils .--1 * were observed to 0.6 foot. Natural, very firm silty fine sand soils began -rt:.,:] at 0.6 foot and continued to 6.5 feet. A very firm silty clay underlays the silty fine sand to a depth of 15.0 feet, the limit of exploration, j|jr. The fill soils at Boring 6 are classified as silty fine to medium ;| sand to 1.5 feet and silty clay to 3.2 feet. The upper 0.5 foot of fill **'' -£ is loose and the underlying fill soils are compact to 3.2 feet. T» ^ Natural, very firm silty clay was observed at 3.2 feet to 4.7 feet. Very firm silty fine sand began at 4.7 feet, and was noted to 18.0 feet, ~\ the limit of exploration. •1:1^ The log of Boring 7 shows that firm and very firm natural silty clay ; ; was encountered to 9.0 feet and this was underlain by very firm fine sandy silt to 15.0 feet, the limit of exploration. t- Free ground water was not encountered in the exploration borings that were drilled on May 23, and 24, 1988. Conclusions and Reconmendations Based on the findings in the field investigation and the results of g laboratory tests, it is concluded that the existing compact fill soils - and natural soils will provide adequate support for the proposed apartment \ . buildings. The loose fill soils shall be removed and recompacted to provide 1 •?- *? suitable foundation and slab support. '•'. co * The following conclusions and recommendations are professional opinions - o ^ that are based upon the site investigation, laboratory test results, and u -2» engineering analysis and calculations. These opinions have been derived °" in accordance with current standards of practice. No warranty is expressed or implied. 8ENTON ENGINEERING. INC. -6- Allowable Bearing Values '•'.f. One foot wide continuous footings placed 18 inches into nonexpansive or moderately expansive compacted filled ground soils or natural soils -- and at 24 inches in the highly expansive soils, may be designed using an fJQ allowable bearing value of 2500 pounds per square foot. These footings, | which are founded in highly expansive soils, shall be excavated to 24 inchesiij_.."! below the lowest adjacent ground surface. Square or round footings, at I"(-. least 2.0 feet wide, and placed 1.5 feet into nonexpansive soils only, *•* a may be designed using an allowable bearing value of 3000 pounds per square :-:*;•" foot. Shallow depth isolated square footings should not be used for marginally,« £ moderately, or highly expansive soil conditions. The estimated settlements of a one foot wide continuous footing supporting a uniform load of 2500 pounds per lineal foot are on the order of 1/8 inch. . r The settlement of a 4.0 feet square footing supporting a column load of•*•* ^* 40 kips is estimated to be on the order of k inch. The allowable bearing values presented herein are for dead plus live k loads and may be increased for combined dead, live, wind and seismic loads. Expansive Soils The results of the expansion tests indicate that the silty clay, sandy j Q clay soils, and clayey sand soils are classified as moderately to highly expansive with respect to volumetric change with change in moisture content. In our original report, Lots 231 and 232 were classified as highly .!/•- • expansive, Lot 230 as moderately expansive, and Lot 229 as low or nonexpansive. «o - •*» However, research for the writing of this report disclosed that up to 2 ".;. eo ' . feet of clay soil was deposited on Lot 229 and a portion of Lot 230. The_ o < j expansion classifications for Lot 230 has been changed to highly expansivevo •5" and Lot 229 to moderately expansive. The typical design requirements fori_ °" expansive soils are presented in Appendix C that were included in our report C. BCNTON ENGINEERING. INC. S-!* I - -7- dated November 4, 1970, and revised February 2,.1972. :'. ,. It is understood that grading is to be performed on the subject lots to alter the building pad elevations. The building pad at the southeast — corner of the project investigated by Boring 1, quite possibly could be ~!Q designed for nonexpansive soil conditions, if the removal of the upper - :| expansive soils from the pad_ is accomplished during grading. The classifi- I" cation of this building pad as well as the other building pads should be _.rVj verified by soils engineering inspection and sampling of the upper 3 feet ~|j below finished grade during the final grading period. •il*" ' An alternative to the special design for the expansive soil conditions f. is to grade the building pads in such a manner as to place and compact nonexpansive soils within the upper 3.0 feet of subgrade. This option ."_ may be presented for the building pads which require additional fill soilsiito bring the pads to final subgrade elevations provided on-site or imported nonexpansive soils are available. Site Grading Any existing loose fill or natural soils should be removed and recompacted where these exist below proposed finished subgrade. Prior to placing any additional fill above existing suitable soils, it is recommended that the upper 9 inches of soil be scarified and moistened as necessary to achieve above optimum moisture content, and shall be compacted to at least 90 percent of maximum dry density, in accordance with the "Standard Specifications for Placement of Compacted Filled Ground" in Appendix AA. .. f On-site soils should be placed at 2 to 4 percent above optimum moisture >•* §.'.' . content in layers of 6 inches in thickness and should be uniformly compacted - o ( _, to at least 90 percent of maximum dry density as determined by the ASTM •5 01557-78 method to the proposed finished subgrade. All compaction shall be done under continuous engineering inspection ^ with reliable field density tests taken at intervals not to exceed one BENTON ENGINEERING. INC. -8- foot vertically and 100 feet horizontally. As mentioned earlier in this report, if grading of the building pads * is done in such a manner as to have nonexpansive soils within the upper 3.0 feet of subgrade, then the special design conditions for expansive 2 soils may be waived. Active and Passive Pressures Cantilever-type retaining walls may be designed using an equivalent *" ** si fluid pressure of 35 pounds per cubic foot for level backfill provided: ?'• C ' *r soils similar to the on-site silty sands and clayey sands are used as backfill An equivalent fluid pressure of 53 pounds per cubic foot should be used f- for 2 horizontal to 1 vertical slope backfill conditions above the wall for-the same type soil backfill. Walls restrained at the top should be designed using a uniform pressure of 22H (H = height of wall in feet) pounds _ £ per square foot acting over the middle 60 percent of the wall. This pressure diminishes to zero at the top and bottom of the wall. This assumes provisions are made to prevent hydrostatic pressures from developing by allowing free _ x. drainage to a perforated pipe subdrain placed at the base of the rear of the wall or weep holes. If any retaining walls are adjacent to occupied areas, the walls shall 9 *$ be waterproofed and the perforated pipe shall be placed at a one foot minimum below an adjacent interior concrete slab on ground. The concrete slab on ground shall be protected from both capillary and free moisture by at • ( . . least 4 inches of 3/4 inch crushed rock or sand depending on whether the ""* ^ti- **> underlying soils are expansive or nonexpansive, a 10 mil polyethylene moisture -•• co vapor barrier and then 2 inches of sand beneath the concrete slab. - O , , For lateral resistance, an allowable passive pressure of 250 pounds 'o "5» per square foot may be used at a depth of one foot below the compacted s. filled ground on firm natural soils and this may be increased at a rate BENTON ENGINEERING. INC. -9- of 150 pounds per square foot for each additional foot below one foot. ~. , A coefficient of 0.35 is recommended for the frictional resistance between the soil and the bottom of the footing. The friction value should be reduced — to 0.20 when combined with the allowable passive pressure to determine the total allowable resistance to lateral movements for seismic loading conditions.M„_: Concrete Slabs on Grade '^.r. The results of the expansion tests on the more clayey soils show these |j to be in the moderate to high range. It should be understood that it is - not possible to design slabs on ground placed on highly expansive soils !-* £ and prevent all movement. Therefore, it is our opinion that either raised wood floors or post tensioned concrete slabs be used if the highly expansive soils are allowed to remain in the upper 3 feet. Certain additional precautions greater than recommended in 1970 are desirable to further minimize the adverse effects of putting concrete slabs on grade, such as presaturating the upper 3 feet of soils to 80 percent or greater saturation, for a week - f to 10 days prior to pouring the concrete slabs on grade, however, even this procedure can allow future differential movements of the supporting soils. Other desirable precautions for concrete slabs on grade on expansive soils include the placement of 4 inches of 3/4 inch to 1 inch crushed rock, then a moisture vapor barrier, then 2 inches of sand placed beneath the concrete slabs on grade. Also, a nominal welded wire fabric reinforcement in the center of the slab such as 6" x 6" by #10/110 is advised, although the reinforcement of #4 bars at 16 inches center to center is preferred. e j Special precautions such as separating garage slabs from perimeter •5* footings by % inch construction felt is also desirable to allow the concrete flu t. BENTON ENGINEERING. INC. *J --I O O>•*-»£ -10- slabs on ground to be free-floating relative to the footings. If the moderate or expansive soils are left in place, the specific final design of footings and concrete slabs on ground should be taken into account for these conditions. Respectfully submitted, "! BENTON ENGINEERING. INC. ohn H. Ben ton Phi 11f^-trr BenSnY Civil Engineer RCE No. 10332 Distribution: (6) Chapparal Estates Corporation Attention: Mr. Jon Cloud :C JHB/PHB/jer 0ENTON ENGINEERING. INC. 1 1 LEGEMO Irtdiccife« Approximate Location Of Tes£ Boring. BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA LOCATION OF TEST ALICANTE VIEW^ APARTMENTS , CALIFORNIA SCAtI : OBAWN i OATI PROJECT NO. SS-B-8A DRAWING NO 1 Jr^CJC ^M*r ' \^\ VI •it a §" DEPTH/FEET•• 1- •• 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8- 9 - 10 - 11 - 12 - 13 - 14 - 15 - : UjCC If © (D ©SOILCLASSIFICATIONSYMBOLin :':;;.••;.;.': /;'/••• :.'•;.';.' •"•*•* « • * " * " j-i-.vX-y' ''•'•."!•• ••'•'.• *. • • * i • • * • .* :•;:•;•'::'••:• sH*ss; :•'••.'••'••••.'.•••*.•.• ••••••.'•"."•;•'•.'•;•'.'•*:.* : z •*•*•••• SUMMARY SHEET BORING NO. 1 ELEVATION 74.2' J Gray Brown, Slightly Hoist, JI Loose J Moist, Compact J Brown, Hoist, Firm, Occasionally Interbedded with Silty Fine and Fine to Medium Sand and Slightly Silty Fine to Medium Sand SILTY CLAY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND DRIVE ENERGYFT. KIP8/FT.4.4 6.6 4.4 6.6 e mtu••u ui»-' 11.1 13.3 3.6 DRY DENSITYLB8/CU. FT.98.4 102.3 103.0 SHEARRESISTANCEKIPS/8a FT.0.60 0.82 1.21 Continued On Drawing 3 C_) Indicates Undisturbed Drive Sample 1 1 Indicates Loose Bulk Sample PooJcCIi,N°" BENTON ENGINEERING. INC.oo-b-aA DRAWING NO. 2 1 10MM c HI/FEETa. Ulo 16- 17- 18- 19- 20- —21-4 xn 1 d ujoc tLta22 «9Z © v-v V *V O rioo ro 1 • •vI*X*»"< ;.\\:V:>V. ••'•vig!:*-v' •"•'•".•.•.'.'•.• V.VV."-*'.'••.•.•.•:.'•'•'•:•'::<•'.''••'. *.•.•.'•.*::•'•'• SUMMARY SHE BORINQ NO. ] j Brown, Moist, Firm, Occasionally Interbedded with Silty Fine and Fine to Medium Sand and Slightly Silty Fine to Medium Sand ET £o.ntinued) FINE TO MEDIUM SAND ii w HI* 6.6 6.6 Sear^•50 5.5 3.3 ^ •b -> |sf Q« 106. f 04.2 iu (• <9gj 00m CL I m P .26 1 t i 2 S Ul2< PROJECT NO. 88-5-8A BENTON ENGINEERING. INC.DRAWING NO. 1020U UI 1] uiIUik z a. IUa ^M 1 "" 2- 4 - MM 5- ^•H 6 - 7 - 8 - 9 - 10 - 11 - 12 - 13 - 14 ~ 15- 16 - 17 - UjflCIlUl&a22<=>coz © © (7)SOILCLASSIFICATIONSYMBOL'•ivo'.V'.J^V.j'.JJ/v fi•i'41-}^- 4:'*4 %$£& •$$•£$ • * * • » • * *• • »•••»• ^\* * "•"•*• •V:i'::\vA; J:«;:':{:;v •* •* • "•"•• * £:•&$ "•*••*••;•.'•' .*.• •*•*. • • • . SUMMARY SHEET BORINQ NO. £ ELEVATION 7_3 J* Gray Brown, Slightly Moist, [Loose Moist, Compact | Brown, Moist, Firm 1 B Ci rown, Slightly Moist, rapact Brown, Moist, Very Firm, Occasionally Interbedded with Silt Brown, Moist, Compact kfith Occasional Lenses of Silty Fine Sand and Silt PROJECT NO. 88-5-8A CLAYEY FINE SAND SILTY ITTifP Tf\ U^nTtlUFINE TO MEDIUM SAND SLIGHTLY SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND SILTY FINE ' SAND FINE TO MEDIUM SAND DRIVE ENERGY 1FT. KIPS/FT. 16.6 11.1 11.1 4.4 1.1 «££-.50 6.2 11.6 7.1 23.0 12.0 DRY DENSITY 1LB8/CU. FT. |LOS. 5 95.5 01.2 94.2 02.5 SHEARRESISTANCEKIP8/8Q. FT. 10.63 0.82 1.56 1.55 2.05 • BENTON ENGINEERING. INC. °*™"* *°' 102MS SUMMARY SHEET BORING NO. 3 ELEVATION 78' !-•C u. III ui =§i I'So caQ-t <cg"- SSfd SMm B. 12 - Gray Brown, Slightly Moist, I I An eaLoose Comoact Mixed with 402 Silty Fine to Medium Sand [ Brown, Moist, Medium Compact to Compact Gray Brown, Moist, Firm, Interbedded with Lenses of Silty Fine Sand SILTY CLAY SLIGHTLY SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND 4.4 2.9 107.0 0.32 SILT 4.4 15.2 101.4 0.83 4.4 4.8 96.5 0.80 Brown, Moist, Compact SLIGHTLY SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND Brown and Gray Brown, Moist, Firm, Interbedded with Lenses of Silt SILTY FINE SAND 6.6 3.0 100.1 6.6 19.7 1.24 91.a 1.80 Ul aO PROJECT NO. 88-5-8A BENTON ENGINEERING, INC.DRAWINQ NO. 5 ttf aO ^»UlUlu. X CL Ul 0 n ^B - 2 - uiec-JUIi§ «i 31& 4- — 5~ 6 - 7 - ~ 8- ^^ 9 - — 10 - 11 - 12- — VA/ r=-l 1^1 (2)^— ^ © "-,H ^M ' 15 - 16 - ~ • ''I 19- 20 - — L2J ® CD z0•• «c -1 ^» f > C *s«2u ^%5 >MM: pfJJ+t** »' »* il* v» ^ri^- Sl%fv ^}j% l«|^#l*f J»|J X^-fM': •f •••(•!• i? v i ,*1W1*{Jr-.vJ.v[iT t V •%***(*1 4»(C*l * / v]L T* H* r^ |lli Ifll•>|;:':>|:i •!' J *!••**] ***•*. I " • •'• v .'•' • •* *•* '•* ! •*• y ;V • • • *.' ;/ • , * *• *• ' * '."• *"• *.' • '•'1 ;•*•'. SUMMARY SHEET BORING NO. 4 ELEVATION 80.5' J Gray Brown, Slightly Moist, | Loose Moist, Compact Brown, Moist, Compact . Brown, Moist, Compact Brown, Moist, Compact, Mixed with 201 Silty Fine Sand and Silt SILTY CLAY SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND SILTY FINE SAND FINE SANDY SILT . v OH i5£ > • OC u. 4.4 4.4 4.4 6.6 4.4 : c Uz tut.: »*oo 5 .£ — 14.7 15.4 12.5 16.2 Continued On Drawing 7 PROJECT NO. 88_5-8A BENTON ENGINEERING. INC. I >• |JI* io*«K o^ ^"* 108.9 108.9 111.1 109. 7 Ul l_ Kr"" Pi *c J **"" 0.94 1.00 1.57 2.79 DRAWING NO. 6 SUMMARY BORING NO. SHEET 4 (Continued) 1C u.Ill *z»IU & CD 5oSo § III! <2' mu ui2< ao Brown, Moist, Compact, Mixed with 202 Silty Fine Sand and Silt Gray Brown and Brown, Moist, Compact, Mixed with 302 Clayey Fine to Medium Sand FINE SANDY SILT 4.4 29- 30- 31- 32- 33- CLAY 17.7 108.0 6.8 12.7 36- 37- 38- 39- 40- 105.1 4.14 3.31 Iy/y///Wip[->i4''lWiJ|vfb:wi k '•"/£'.•?••. Fill /Natural Contact Slopes 10° to South Brown, Moist, Very Finn • Gray, Moist, Very Firm, Few ry^x5| Scattered Gravel andw$ iffify»*f'WkMi-Jt' .-M-M'J.lr r ' *i* • i Jli-'J.if'i'IiB.-l-'-V-'rP ki.i <^.fiu.r \>'t .' t-»p-> * f.^Y'-r* \-flr\tt' Cobbles to 4" Light Gray Brown, Moist, Very Firm, with Cemented Lenses and Merging Lenses of Light Sandy Silt SLIGHTLY SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM 14.9 SAND I FINE SANDY CLAY SILTY FINE SAND •8.1 34.0 7.1 19.8 110.0 •98.9- 14.2 117.4 4.11 3.63" 7.41 Continued On Drawing 8 PROJECT NO. 88-5-8A BENTON ENGINEERING. INC.DRAWING NO. 7 102US c .1 3 ao IUUlu. z a. Ulo ^H 41- ^M 42- ^« 43- ^HB 44- W_ : ; : uia -IU,a. aS3 oi 5^ ' 2tissrsg3i ° kif K :fm-tt^R-iv'j (ll) ^w HI tlfc [•}i:fl^ Sfr ui*~ b u. ou,SUMMARY SHEET || Q=5 g . «| . 80RINQ NO. 4 (Continued) "*§ "^> go ^ga ttl "•5Q . 0 W0>«>** 3^ ^T »,* <tt _< v^ ^^ AH m •» s ^ Light Gray Brown, Hoist, Very Finn, with Cemented Lenses and Merging Lenses of Light Sandy Silt SILTy FIN£ SAND-' 29.4 22.3 93.8 4.32 - THS""- ««ro« .*>.«««««. ,»<=. ""™ ""• 102MS yjCC SUMMARY SHEET BORING NO. 5 ELEVATION 87.9' did. s uit 5 SzJ 00 areao-* UIH, Ou.:Z uiSo15"•s?m o V) c> $ <i .Gray Brown, Slightly Moist, fl Loose Moist Light Gray Brown, Moist, Very Finn i-'.i'i Lavender and Brown, Moist, Very Firm 12 - 13- 14 - CLAYEY FINE SAND SILTY FINE SAND 35.5 10.9 12.3 117.H2.69 120.2 2.95 39. S SILTY CLAY 10.4 44.J 10.! 125.4 7.45 125.3 7.45 44 4 10.l|l25.8|3.67 ui ao PROJECT NO. 88-5-8A BENTON ENGINEERING. INC."°' iQieas V. idu Ul ao v» Ul Ulu. X 0. Ul0 n «M • ^^lr 2_& 3- «•• 4- MM 5- 6- uic -<UJ 22o m\ c. j© z 0 5^*J f ^ O *•/ ii J£ "i- SUMMARY SHEET BORING NO. 6 1 ELEVATION 81.9' 1u I [i^-l^jj Brown, Slightly Hoist, Loose fM&KJh fwvfel'J Compact ^C^HJ Gray Brown, Hoist, Compact, 'yHlfXl<U' Y^jXTu iiScS/far1 SwKip: fW?.B¥iS.':» 71 O^M 9~ 10- — 11- 12- 13- 14- i *»•"• © © ri*nv f|f}i}t{[fl"1'!^ ill|i^ vftfyra 1 1 V 4/M "1*^*1" } 1 4 ^" L -I 'il^i ti&M t^F-ri >.l- JR.J1 K-ffK-i•ftw• Ll'Jtlil • -3U'l'-j'.'!I If \r-fV ' 1 ll'MiW16- iMfi'rf 17- : [T) '•$$?<*7<4*i:}T j;}4'tj. i*Tii*ni" Mixed with 302 Clayey Fine Sand Gray Brown, Hoist, Very Firm Very Lean Merqes Light Gray Brown, Hoist, Very Firm, with Occasional Merging Lenses of Fine Sandy Si Us tone • • SILTY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND SILTY CLAY SILTY CLAYSTONE SILTY FINE SAND . OHecu! uii Ul* ° 8.9 31. 11 33.3 26.6 26.6 §!> 17.0 14.3 12.6 11.7 14.6 P88-5-CaAN°" 8ENTON ENGINEERING, INC. V |_ s ^ u^ lll.l 116.6 120. 2 122.7 18.1 Uf )•. Ou.KZ z»5 ui S 2.85 6.47 2.21 7.20 6.32 DRAWING NO. 10 1O26U v*J . (. R «FH/FEET IUJo 1 _— 2- 3~ 4- Q.OS2 «z § © zo $S^s•2:2a ^1?!ifualri^fpfL #%j^J^SJKftcH ^RKU WyMJ &?$ SUMMARY SHE BORING NO. 7 ELEVATION 86.0 . Gray Brown, Slightly Moist, .Firm, Fractured Moist. Very Finn with Merging Lenses of Fine Sandy Si Its tone ET i SILT CLAYSTONE ENERGY 1(IPS/FT.ui — >.. g* 15, 17.7 WKsi* "•5° * 20.3 20.0 fcn' 1-00 £S§2 105.2 107.1 UH *§"• u1<dX«co ec* 7.45 2.03 5- 22.2 14.! Gray Brown, Moist, Very Finn, with Merging Lenses of Silty Fine Sand FINE SANDY SILTSTONE 24. 112.3 2.53 17.7 114.8 4.00 26.6 20.3 112.J4.91 Ul B O P88-5-8AN°"BENTON ENGINEERING. INC.ORAWINQ NO. 11 1O28M M•Me ( I § u in«nIUz ur V) u.O tuuK IU Q OV> OO 0.2 CONSOLIDATION CURVES LOAD IN KIPS PER SQUARE FOOT 0.4 0.6 OS I 2 4 6 8 10 Boring: 1 Sample: 2 Depth: 8' Boring: 2 Sample: 2 Depth: 5' 00o INDICATES PERCENT CONSOLIDATION AT FIELD MOISTURE INDICATES PERCENT CONSOLIDATION AFTER SATURATION PROJECT NO. . 88-5-8A BENTON ENGINEERING INC. DRAWING . 12 NO. c V I 1C a4-e <. bJ 3E CO Ulz1Cu X O i O O<ozOu o.z 0 OtTTT^ CONSOLIDATION CURVES LOAD IN KIPS PER SQUARE FOOT 0.4 0.6 as i 2 4 6 8 10 Boring: 3 Sample: 5 Depth: 15' Boring: 6 Sample: 1 Depth: 2'- 3 Boring Sample Depth: 03 O O INDICATES PERCENT CONSOLIDATION AT FIELD MOISTURE A INDICATES PERCENT CONSOLIDATION AFTER SATURATION PROJECT NO. 88-5-8A BENTON . ENGINEERING INC. DRAWING NO. 13 APPENDIX A f S •2* "5 § zIXH rf0r 8 I ii5i il Ii 1 *?I I OB o° 1s •<* !SJ*>Sj s,l3S i! ^ ft 5 1*" = *I«£ti IS. 1 <« g I 1 »•*a1<a- 0" tf | I 1i o JMB. I! s* Is siJ!: I?- IIa-i,l s «!'<! :;zi<n*ic Jill »«MI »»W tfoqtiMf fvnp jo an tuumbai tana xni"f">8 OS 'MS 'OO 'WO rfS '/US' 'JO 'MO:MOIIOJ n pagiiup 111 IIK>« pauiwi auma lam axait OOI •*M unit J>n«tut uofimj) tauy jo atnuaajad no luipuxuc auna •Xfi utui uiojj pint pu* IMUI jo omuaaiad : "S a*i» n mof IMJJ MII iuUjnujpi ui J.VITO a»i uiuf m i 11Btii .23&8a -* = 3 -S sl!!!i! itiiUhiiii Ii ill |l3 o £ S t-s «--»:5 5-g5iisiss *« £8IIslO K ill u i!II ii<• X•i = =S3 BS I51 II (ong• »anim IkUl OOQ Li U IIIIo ^ <taog joranoun•iqnaajdd*) taug MlUt tt«A«JQ £•3!£ i« <fl 1! {!£• So Us lli f "1 ai1 «2 = on jo aiiin)tpint mao «fi ri 3 K |SS5^'.is. Sis--j :-3 i JS I± — ••ill si 2BJIBXI 2 O. I3' J!ir!?134«= c _.» -«|xu -Sfillo S u a (OUUfO tvnouiv•fqapuddt)au|| mio tpun (ant axan i 'ON »» 01 loapumba«• pant aq Xtui an« -u| | aqt •uoiiou!<<*P l«nt|A Joj •tit a*att i -on own Ja«»t it ooiiamij• autoa jo j|«| unit aww mi 3*311 4 -ON auvua jo jttij linn MOKtpu«s 3 «* •*|ii;«|°-6iir si!-•r:0^0 ?S = -s-?jj =IP s*»sl 1U -4.a?5.30 5it,ii;t!l!i Is P d •s •*itZS( If=s< slgi ^1 E£!5 ss If, ill c-33 ^5i il iiM = !lI! inuii pinbMutia pin tins I! se 2?«' Sfr la•s sis II g£II OStrain JatnJliiuii) pinbi)>Xi|3 put tins <aXa panwo 01 aiqntA aiannd itanrnut aqt inoq« n azif a*ait OOZ 'ON aqjj qani UMI oot *ON ti«t|i Jilt*l I azn M»I« oat 'ON(t inuitui jo j|iy uttii iiow anmia ci iiuainu jo jitv uiinOl p>UIU«-KJIOO | (|IOI paillMD-9UI j pIIill I"1 I llHSii 1Wi f i:5 •." .s-sis.-a-s 2.:-- 22-SS MI i <I S» «*".9« Q.!S -o52j:S .3 o 0t Ejl— S g ««B^ Jc IlliJSI^i i i ri|i<tfiiiifi 1 r|!i|fllf<ii£L 1 ;•* O «o'SE2T;«3**.ji «ti u S'- S.* = Sa5'3raB<;S'iS--fi BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. •Oik MECHANIC* - FOUNDATION* NOAD •AN OICGO. CALIFORNIA Ifltl PHILIP HKNKINO BENTON APPENDIX AA _ ,«-..,.......PUMim MY • CIVIL tftlOINf III - T<MPMON« (Ht ) ••••!••• STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR PLACEMENT OF COMPACTED FILLED GROUND 1. General Description The objective 1s to assure 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 recommendations contained in the preliminary Soils Investigation report for this site and/or in the attached special provisions are a part of these ^ specifications and shall supersede the provisions contained hereinafter In the case of a conflict. The owner shall employ a qualified soils engineer to inspect and 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 grading contractor shall have the responsibility of notifying the soils engineer 48 hours or more in advance of the start of f any clearing or site preparation so that the soils engineer and/or his field representative will be able to schedule the manpower for the required inspections. 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. No deviation from these specifications will be allowed, except if amended by written instructions signed by the responsible soils engineer. C 2. Clearing, Grubbing, and Preparing Areas to be Filled (a) All brush, vegetation and any rubbish shall be removed, piled and disposed of either off site in a legal disposal pit or in a specified permanent approved landscape area so as to leave the areas to be filled for approved structural support free of vegetation and debris. (_ Any soft, swampy or otherwise unsuitable areas shall be corrected by draining or removal, or both. (b) All loose fill, topsoil, alluvial deposits or other unsatisfactory soil shall be removed to the limits determined by the soils engineer. Subdrainage systems shall be installed in the bottom of all canyon areas and in areas whenever ground water conditions are likely to develop beneath the compacted fill soils. .(8/27/87) APPENDIX AA -2- (c) 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. (d) Where fills are made on hillsides or exposed slope areas, greater than 10 percent, horizontal benches shall be cut into firm undisturbed natural ground in order to provide both lateral and vertical stability. This is to provide a horizontal base so that each layer is placed and compacted on a horizontal plane. The initial bench at the toe of the fill shall be at least 10 feet in width on firm undisturbed natural ground at the elevation of the design toe stake placed at the natural angle of repose or design slope. Offset stakes shall be provided to leave in as reference stakes for the construction of the filled ground slopes. The soils engineer shall determine the width and frequency of all succeeding benches which will vary with the soil conditions and the steepness of slope. (e) After the natural ground has been prepared, it shall then be brought to a moisture content at a few percent above optimum moisture and compacted to not less than ninety (90%) percent of maximum density in accordance with ASTM D1557-78 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. Fill Materials and Special Requirements The fill soils shall consist of select materials so graded that at least 40 percent of the material passes a No. 4 sieve. This may be obtained from the excavation of banks, borrow pits or any other approved sources and by mixing soils from one or more sources. The material used shall be free from vegetable matter, and other deleterious substances, and shall not contain rocks, or lumps, or cobbles, of greater than 8 inches in diameter. If excessive vegetation, larger diameter cobbles, rocks and boulders, or soils with inadequate strength or other unacceptable physical characteristics are encountered, these shall be disposed of in waste areas as shown on the plans or as directed by the soils engineer. If, during grading operations, soils not encountered and tested in the preliminary investigation are found, tests on these soils shall be performed to determine their physical characteristics. Any special treatment recommended in the preliminary or subsequent soil reports not covered herein shall become an addendum to these specifications. The testing and specifications for the compaction of subgrade, subbase, and base materials for roads, streets, highways, or other public property or rights-of-way shall be in accordance with those of the governmental agency having jurisdiction. (8/27/87 ) BENTON eNO.NEen.NO. INC. APPENDIX AA t — ' ' ~ --" -3- 4. Placing, Spreading, and Compacting Fill Materials (a) For mass grading, suitable fill material shall be placed in loose layers,, moistened to 4 to 6 percent above optimum moisture content, and which, when compacted, shall not exceed six inches (6"). Each layer shall be spread evenly and shall be thoroughly mixed during *C the spreading to ensure uniformity of material and moisture In each layer. « ( • (b) For compacted filled ground placed and compacted for subgrade support, for base and pavement under roadways and parking areas, the 6-inch " thick layers of compacted filled ground to be placed and compacted '.' within the upper 2 feet of finished grade shall be moistened to \ optimum moisture content, based on the ASTM D 1557-78 method and each . layer shall be compacted to at least either 90 or 95 percent of maximum dry density as specified in the accompanying soils investigation report or specific project specifications, or as specified by the governmental agency.C. . . (c) 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 at the moisture as specified by the soils engineer to assure thorough bonding and uniform densification during the compacting process. ^ (d) When the moisture, content of the fill material is above that specified by the soils engineer, the fill material shall be aerated by blading and scarifying or other satisfactory methods until the moisture content is at the moisture as specified by the soils engineer. (e) After each layer has been placed, mixed and spread evenly, it shall be thoroughly compacted to not less than ninety (90%) percent of maximum density in accordance with ASTM 01557-78 method as described in 2(e) 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 entire area and the roller shall make sufficient trips to ensure that the desired density has been attained. The entire areas to be filled shall be compacted. (f) Fill slopes shall be compacted by means of sheepsfoot rollers or other suitable equipment. The sloping surface shall be cat-tracked daily while the fill soils are still at field moisture conditions 2 to 4 percent above optimum. Compacting operations shall be continued until materials within the outer 1.5 feet are uniformly compacted to 85 percent of maximum dry density or greater, unless <8/27/87)CNOINCEniNO. INC. APPENDIX AA * • -4- ' a different relative degree of compaction is specified by the local governing agency. 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 producing satisfactory results. -C (g) Field density tests shall be taken by the soils engineer for approximately each foot in elevation gain 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. Tests shall be taken 4 on corner and terrace lots for each two feet in elevation gain. The soils engineer will take additional tests as considered necessary to check on the uniformity of compaction of the exposed slope areas as well as in the building prism areas. Where sheepsfoot rollers are used, the tests shall be taken in the 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. (h) 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. 5. Inspection Sufficient inspection by the soils engineer shall be maintained during the filling and compacting operations so that the specified inspection and field density tests can be reported to the governmental agencies upon the completion of grading. 6. Seasonal Limits No fill material shall be placed, spread, or rolled 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. i 7. All recommendations presented in the "Conclusions" section of the attached (preliminary) soils report are a part of these specifications. C (8/27/87)BCNTON ENOINBERINa. INC. BENTON ENGINEERING, INC. ' APPLJBO COIL. MCCHANICS - FOUNDATIONS • I4O MUFFIN ROAO SAN OIKCO, CALIFORNIA »21J3 r APPENDIX B PHILIP HKNKINa MCNTON PMMIOCNT . CIVIU CHQINUM TCLCPHONC <«t») 96S.|»SS 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 minute. 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 cohesioi 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-inct 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 One-Inch high samples confined 1n 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. APPENDIX C f Type A - Highly Expansive Lots 1. Avoid the use of isolated interior piers. Use continuous footings throughout, and place these at a minimum depth of two feet below the lowest adjacent exterior final ground surface. ~c 2. Reinforce and interconnect continuously with steel bars all interior and exterior footings with one #5 bar at 3 inches above the bottom of the footings and one 15 bar placed \h inches below the top of the stems of the footings. 3. Exercise every effort to assure that the soil under the foundations and slabs has a uniform moisture content, 80 percent saturation * throughout the top 3 feet below finished grade at the time of placing foundations and slabs. 4. Use raised wooden floors that span between continuous footings, or ^ use all concrete slabs with 6 x 6 - 10/10 welded wire fabric and provide a minimum of 4 inches of clean sand beneath all concrete slabs. A moisture barrier should be provided in the sand layer 2 inches below slabs under living areas. 5. Separate garage slabs from perimeter footings by a h inch thickness .-_ of construction felt or equivalent, to allow independent movement of garage slabs relative to perimeter footings. 6. Provide positive drainage away from all perimeter footings to a horizontal distance of at least 6 feet outside the house walls. ( Type B - Moderately Expansive Lots Those lots listed as Type B lots should follow all the above listed recommendations with the two following exceptions: Q 1. The continuous footings may be placed at a minimum depth of 18 inches below the lowest adjacent exterior final ground surface rather than the two feet recommended for Type A lots. 2. Single'#4 bars placed as directed (above) near tops and bottoms of all interior and exterior footings may be substituted for the #5 j • bars recommended for Type A lots.COI*? Note: Up to 2 feet of clay fill was observed to be deposited on Lot 229 g and a portion of Lot 230 in July, 1971 without inspection or testing by Benton Engineering, Inc. (Note added 2/11/72). BENTON ENGINEERING. INC. Si ,53,0 io O <m 3DO