Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout; Surfside Lane; Final Report of Field Density Tests; 2005-09-22SEP-23-2005 03:33 PM S O I 1_ TESTERS 6194430090 P. 01 c . L -.^ ^rtft* RO.Bc(Xll9S September 22, 2005 Lakeside, Califotnia 92040 (619) 443-OOSO Guy Oliver 6465 Franciscan Roaij Carlsbad, CaUfomia 92009 Subject; FileNo. 1126H5-04 Final Report of Field Density Tests 6467 Surfside Lane City ofCarlsbad Dear Mr. Oliver: Per your request, this report has been prepared to present the fmal results of tbe field density teats performed at the subject site. Our previous report, dated July 13, 2005, was prepared at your request for pad certification. Per that report, a field density test was performed in the undisturbed native at the bottom ofthe excavation for the basement/foundation area for the proposed single- family residence. The soils encountered in our Site Inspection, dated December 16, 2004, were removed to a depth of two to three feet under the proposed structure. The results of that Field Density Test No. 1 is presented on Page T-l under "Table of Results" and the location ofthe test is shown on Plate 1 titled "Location of Field Tests". On July 15, 2005 and August 16, 2005, in accordance with your request, field density tests were performed prior to foundation placement. These field density tests were taken in the undisturbed native at the bottom ofthe excavation forthe basement/foundation area and in the footing areas ofthe proposed single-family residence. The relative compaction results of these field density tests were higher than the results of Field Density Test No. 1 due to the Grading Contractor's additional compaction ofthe native soils with a wheel loader. The results of these Field Density Tests No. 2, 3 and 4 are presented on Page T-l under "Table of Results" and the location of these tests are shown on Plate 1 titled "Location of Field Tests". At this project, after the surface soils were removed, we inspected the excavation area for the basement/foundation area and found them competent for the proposed residence, We would have performed additional tests or requested additional work if any unusual conditions had occurred or if we did not believe that the native soils were compet^t. Respectfiilly submitted, )h C&yth, RCE 2165y SEP-23-2005 03:34 PM SOIL TESTERS & 194430090 P.02 Guy Oliver Page T-l FileNo. 1126H5-04 September 22,2005 TABLE OF TEST RESULTS A,S,T,M,.DlSS6-g2 MAXIMUM FIELD DRY DRY TEST SOIL DEPTH MOISTURE DENSITY DENSITY PERCENT NO. TYPE OF TEST % P.CJ, p.CF> COMPACTION 1 1 n.g. 7.0 133.3 113.7 85.3 2 1 n.g. 7.2 133,3 122.1 91.6 3 1 n,g. 7.0 133.3 121.9 91.4 4 1 n.g^ 7.0 133.3 120.4 90.3 (Retest at approximate location of Test No. 1) n.g. natural ground SEP-2:3-2005 03:34 PM SOIL TESTERS 6 194430090 P . 03 $UR,f$}b£ LAf4E a TEST LOCATION OF FIELD TESTS Fure r JOBNO. BY ML3 DATE 11421 WoDdslda Ave., Suite G Santee, Catifornia 92071 (619) 562-0500 MHI. TESTEKS July 13,2005 Guy Oliver 6465 Franciscan Road Carlsbad, Califomia 92000 P.O. Box 1195 Lakeside, Califomia 92040 (619) 443-0060 Subject; FileNo. U26H5-04 Report of Field Density Tests Proposed Residential Building Site 6467 Surfside Lane City ofCarlsbad Dear Mr. Oliver: This IS to present the results of the compaction tests performed at the subject site. In accordance with your request, in-place field density tests were taken in conformanc&^^viti^A.S.T.M., D1556- 82 in the undisturbed native at the bottom ofthe excavation foiCtlieiasement^ea for the proposed single-family residence. The soils encountered in our SiteS^i^H^dated December 16,2004 were removed to a depth of two to three feet only under the proposed structure. Footing excavations for the proposed residence were inspected and found to extend a minimum of 12 " into firm natural ground. The results ofthe field density tests are presented on Page T-l under "Table of Test Results". The laboratory determinations of the maximum dry densities and optimum moisture contents of the fill soils are set forth on Page L-l under "Laboratory Test Results". Ifyou have any questions, please do not hesitate to call our office. This opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. Page L-l and Page T-I are parts ofthis report. Respectfully submitted, Joseph Of Smyth, RCE 21>^ :s/mij cc: (3) submitted Xjuy Oliver Page L-l FileNo. 1126H5-04 July 13,2005 LABORATORY TEST RESULTS The maximum dty densities and optimum moisture contents of the fill materials as determined by the A.S.T.M., D1557-78, Method A, which uses 25 blows ofa 10 pound hammer falling from a height of 18 inches on each of 5 layers in a 4 inch diameter 1/30 cubic foot compaction cylinder, are presented as follows: Soil Tvpe Expansion Index Maximum Dry Density lb./cu.ft. Optimum Moisture Content drv wt. 1 Red brown, silty, fme to medium sand with clay binder 25 133.3 8.2 ''Guy Oliver Page T-l FileNo. 1126H5-04 July 13,2005 TABLE OF TEST RESULTS A.S.T.M.. D1556-82 TEST SOIL DEPTH NO. TYPE OF TF<gT MAXIMUM FIELD DRY DRY MOISTURE DENSITY DENSITY PERCENT ^ P.C.F. P.C.F. COMPACTION n.g. 7.0 113.7 133.3 90.3 n.g. = natural ground P.O. Box 1195 Lakeside, Califomia 92040 (619) 443-0060 December 16, 2004 Guy Oliver 6465 Franciscan Road Carlsbad, Califomia 92009 SUBJECT: FileNo. 1126H5-04 SITE INSPECTION Proposed Residential Building Site 6467 Surfside Lane City ofCarlsbad DearMr. Oliver: SCOPE In accordance with your request, a Site Inspection has been performed at the subject site Tn^l ffl Tr^^^^*^^^' state OfCalifornia, as shown on Map thereof No. 2013 Filed hi inv^!' ^'""^ '^""'^"^ ^^"S'^ ^^""^ April 6, 1927. The purpose of this investigation was to examine existing site conditions and provide enZeerine recommendations for the proposed single-family residential structure. ^ FIELD INSPECTION to™^^^ ^^™P;ish this puipose, a representative ofthis firm visited the site, reviewed the towaphy and site conditions and visually and texUially classified the suriace and n^r surtace soils. Representative samples of the on-site soils were obtained from a test exploration 3 feet m depth and tested for density, shear strength and expansive chl "eri^^^^^^^^^ SITE CONDITIONS The subject site is an undeveloped rectangular parcel located on the west side of Surfside Lane in a new residential subdivision. The property is relatively level with a slight mde UD ^rmaSX^ ^^"^ — inspection, wJti^^^^ man made fill soils from approximately 8 to 12 inches in depth and compressible native soils File No. 1126H5-04 December 16,2004 to approximately two feet in depth. It is our understanding that the site was previously graded per La Costa Downs Grading Plans, Drawing No. 331-8A SOIL CONDITIONS Soils encountered in the test exploration were fill materials consisting of loose brown, silty tine to medmm sands to approximately 12 inches in depth. The fill soils were underlain by native, medium dense, lightly cemented, red brown, silty sands that became more dense with depth to the bottom of the exploration, approximately 3 feet in depth. None of soils we encountered were considered to be detrimentally expansive with respea to change in volume with change in moisture content. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS I. 2. 3. The surface soils to approximately two feet in depth are not suitable for supporting the proposed strucUire. It is our understanding that the proposed grading will remove the surface soils including the existing fill soils we encountered. If any fill soils remain they should be recompacted to at least 90 percent of maximum dry density in accordance with the Grading Specifications in this report in order to provide adequate support for the proposed new structure Conventional spread footings founded a minimum of 12 inches for one story structures and 18 inches for two story strucmres below lowest adjacent grade and havmg a width determined by the allowable soil bearing value as detailed above are recommended for foundation support. Footing widths shouid be at least 12 inches for on^story structures or 15 inches for two story stmctures for contmuous footings and 24 inches for square footings due to practical considerations as well as Buildine Code requirements. Reinforcing in footings should consist ofat least one #4 steel bar placed continuously in the top and bottom of continuous footings regardless of stmctural requirements Reinforcing for isolated footings are dictated by the stmctural requirements These recommendations are based upon on the soil type encountered and do not take into consideration the proposed bearing load. Concrete slabs-on-grade should be constmcted to have a nominal thickness of 4" and underlam with a sand blanket of 3 inches in thickness. Provide mimmum temperature reinforcement consisting of 6X6-10/10 welded wire mesh. The sand subbase (sand blanket) should have a sand equivalent exceeding 30 per ASTM D2419 All slabs should either have a conventional thickened edge or be poured monolithically with continuous footings at the slabs perimeter. Conventional thickened edges should be ^'^^^^ File No. 1126H5-04 December 16,2004 8" thick at slab edge, uniformly tapering to 4" thick at 2' fi-om slab edge. The thickened edges or monolithic footings should extend completely around the slab's penmeter. Constmction and expansion joints should be considered slab edges Maximum spacing of expansion joints is 50' for interior slabs and 30' for exterior slabs. 5. 6. 7. A representative sample ofthe foundation soil was remolded to 90% of maximum dry density. Based on the following test results, a safe allowable bearing value of at least 2500 pounds per square foot for 12 inch deep footings may be used in designing the foundations and slab for the proposed stmaures. This value may be increased by one third for wind and/or seismic loading. Angle of intemal friction 37° Cohesion 2O8 psf Unit weight 121.4 pcf Maximum Dry Density 133.3psf Optimum Moisture Content 8.2% Expansion Index 25 Resistance to honzontai movement may be provided by allowable soil passive pressure and/or coefficient of friction of concrete to soil. The allowable passive pressure may be assumed to be 400 psf at the surface and increasing at the rate of 350 psf per foot of depth. These pressures assume a fiictionless vertical element no surcharge and level adjacent grade. If these assumptions are incoirect we should be contacted for values that refiect the tme conditions. The values are for static conditions and may be increased 1/3 for wind and/or seismic loading. The coefficient of fi-iaion of concrete to soil may be safely assumed to be 0.5. Active pressures for the design of unrestrained, cantilevered, individually supported retammg walls, capable of slight movement away from load may be considered to be equivalem to the pressures developed by a fluid with a density of 35 pcf This value assumes a vertical, smooth wall and level drained backfill. We should be contaaed for new pressures if these assumptions are incorrect. Restrained walls incapable of movement away from load without damage such as basement walls should be designed for the additional equivalem fluid of 28 pcf applied triangularly for cohesionless type soils and trapezoidally for cohesive type soils. For any grading proposed or contemplated for this project, the following erading specifications shouid be utilized. Guy Oliver FileNo. U26H5-04 December 16, 2004 RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS For Proposed Residential Building Site 6467 Surfside Lane City OfCarlsbad GENERAL: Soil Testers and 'Soil Engineer' are synonymous hereinafter and shall be employed to mspect and test earthwork in accordance with these specifications, the accepted plans, and the requirements of any jurisdictive govemmental agencies. They are to be allowed adequate access so that the inspections and tests may be perfonned. The Soil Engineer shall be appnsed of schedules and any unforeseen soil conditions. Substandard conditions or workmanship, inadequate compaaion, adverse weather or deviation fi-om the lines and grades shown on the plans, etc., shall be cause for the'soil engineer to either stop constmction until the conditions are corrected or recommend rejection ^ntP^tf^u """"P^^ ^'^^ ^^^'^ specifications or the recommendations and/or ToiT^^T^ f .'"^'"'"^ ^"^^"^^^ * representative to immediately termmate his services. Deviations from the recommendations of the Soil Report, from the plans, or from these the SginLT'^ ^'^^ '''™'' ^"""^ contractor and endorsed by SOIL TEST METHODS: Maximura Density &. Opt Moisttire Density of Soil In-Place Soil Expansion Shear Strength Gradation & Grain Size Capillary Moisture Tension Organic Content ASTMD1557-70 - ASTM D1556, D2922 and D3017 -- UBC STANDARD 29-2 - ASTM D3080-72 ~ ASTM Dl 140-71 ~ ASTMD2325-68 - % Weight loss after heating for 24 hours at 300° F and after deducting soil moisttire. LIMTTING SOIL CONDITIONS: Mmimum Compaction 90% for ^ disttirbed' soils, (Existing fill, newly placed fiil, plowed ground, etc.) 84% for nattiral, undisturbed soils. 95% for pavement subgrade within 2' of finish grade and pavement base course. Expansion index exceeding 20 Less than 40% passing the #4 sieve. Rocks over 10" in diameter. Expansive Soils Insufficient fines Oversized Particles Guy Oliver File No. 1126H5-04 December 16,2004 PREPARATION OF AREAS TO RECEIVE FILL: Bmsh, ttash, debris and detrimental soils shall be cleared from the areas to receive fill. Detrimental soils shall be removed to firm competent soil. Slopes exceeding 20% should be stepped uphill with benches 10' or greater in width. Scarify area to receive fill to 6" depth and compact. FILL MATERIAL shall not contain insufficient fines, oversized particles, or excessive organics. On-site disposition of oversized rock or expansive soils is to be at the written direction of the Soil Engineer. Select fill shall be as specified by the soil engineer All fills shall be compacted and tested. SUBDRAINS shall be installed if required by and as directed by and detailed by the soil engineer and shall be left operable and unobstmcted. They shall consist of 3" plastic perforated pipe set in a minimum cover of 4" of filter rock in a 'vee' ditch to intercept and drain free ground from the mass fills. Perforated pipe shall be schedule 40, Poly-Vinyl-Chloride or Acrylonitrile Butadienne Styrene plastic. Rock filter material shall conform to the following gradation: Sieve size: 3/4" #4 #30 #200 %Passing: 90-100 25-50 5-20 0-7 Subdrains shall be set at a minimum gradient of 0.2% to drain by gravity and shall be tested by dye flushing before acceptance. Drairis found inoperable shall be excavated and replaced. CAPPING EXPANSIVE SOILS: If capping expansive soils with non-expansive soil to mitigate the expansive potential is used, the cap should be compacted, non-expansive, selea soil placed for a minimum thickness 3' over the expansive soil and for a minimum distance of 8' beyond the exterior perimeter of the stmcture. Special precautions should be taken to ensure that the non-expansive soil remains uncontaminated and the minimum thickness and dimensions around the stmcture are maintained. The expansive soils underlying the cap of non-expansive cap should be pre-saturated to a depth of 3' to obtain a degree saturation exceeding 90% before any constmction supported by the compacted cap. The non-expansive soil comprising the cap should conform to the following: Minimum Compaction 90 % Maximum Expansion Index 3 0 Minimum Angle of Intemal Friction 33 Deg Cohesion Intercept 100 psf Guy Oliver FileNo, 1126H5-04 December 16, 2004 UNFORESEEN CONDITIONS: Soil Testers assume no responsibility for conditions which differ from those, described in the applicable cun-ent reports and documents for this property. Upon tennination of the soil engineer's services for any reason, his fees up to the tinie of tennmation become due and payable. If it is necessary for the soil engineer to issue an unfavorable report conceming the work that he has been hired to test and inspect the soil engineer shall not be heid liable for any damages that might result from his unfavorable report. If we can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our office This opportumty to be of service is sincerely appreciated. Respectfully submitted, :s/ss cc: (3) submitted SURFSlOE LAhiE a ©CPIORATIONTWENCH LOCATION OF JOB NO. LOCATION OF 6XPL0RATION TRENCHES BY 6XPL0RATION TRENCHES DATE FLAre 1 /2 -22 -0^ ...Jm: mu. TESTERS 11421 Woodside Ave., Suite C Santee, California 92071 (619) 562-0500 CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING December 16, 2004 Soil Testers Post Office Box 1195 Lakeside, CA 92040 CWE 2040048.1 SUBJECT: SEISMIC DESIGN CRITERIA, PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDING SITE, 6467 SURFSIDE LANE, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA REFERENCES: 1) Site Inspection, Proposed Residendal Building Site, 6467 Surfside Lane, City of Carlsbad, CaUfornia by Soil Testers, File No. 1126H5-04, dated September 21, 2004. 2) Maps of Known Active Fault Near-Source Zones in California and Adjacent Portions of Nevada /?)• California Division of Mines and Geolog)', dated Februar;' 1998. 3) Geologic Maps of the Northwestern Part of San Diego Count)', California; California Division of Mines and Geolog)' Open-File Report 96-02 /TJ-Siang S. Tan and Michael P. Kennedy Dear Ladies and Gentlemen: In accordance with your request, we have prepared this letter to present pertinent seismic/geotechnical information regarding the project site. The scope of our limited study consisted of a review of the referenced soils report, a review of other pertinent literature, and the preparation of tliis letter that includes our findings. GENERAL GEOLOGIC SETTING: The project site is located in the Coastal Plains Physiographic Province of San Diego County and is undedain by Quaternar)^-age and Tertiar)'-age sedimentar)' deposits, associated surficial soils, and artificial fill. The near-surface materials at the site are described in the referenced report by Soil Testers. SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS: Based on a maximum magnitude (Mmax) earthquake of 6.9 along 4925 Mercury Street • San Diego, CA 92111 • 858-496-9760 • F,\X 858-496-9758 C\\-^ 2040048 December 16, 2004 the nearest portion of the Rose Canyon Fault Zone, the Maximum Bedrock Acceleration at the site would be approximately 0.44 g. For structural design purposes, a damping ratio not greater tiian 5 percent of critical dampening, and Soil Profile T)'pe Si) are recommended (UBC Tabic 16-J). Based upon the location of the site at approximately six kilometers from the Rose Canyon Fault Zone (T)pe B Fault), Near Source Factors N» equal to 1.0 and Nv equal to 1.16 are also applicable. These values, along with other seismically related design parameters from die Uniform Building Code (UBC), Volume II, Chapter 16, utilizing a Seismic Zone 4 are presented in tabular form below. UBC-CHAPTER 16 TABLE No. SEISMIC PARAMETER RECOMMENDED VALUE 16-1 Seismic Zone Factor Z 0.40 16-J Soil Profile Type SD 16-Q Seismic Coefficient Ca 0.44 Na 16-R Seismic Coefficient Cv 0.64 Nv 16-S Near Source Factor Na 1.0 16-T Near Source Factor Nv 1.16 16-U Seismic Source T)'pe B LIQUEFACTION: Liquefaction is the phenomenon that may result in large total and/or differential ground surface settiement and possible lateral ground spreading during an earthquake. Liquefaction occurs when loose, saturated, generally fine sands and silts are subject to strong ground shaking. The sod loses all shear strength and becomes a viscous liquid for a short period of time, and then usuaUy solidifies. Setdement of the ground surface and failure of foundations caused by liquefaction is usually only affected by the soils that liquefy witiiin the upper 30 feet; the effect of liquefaction of soils below this depth is not usually manifested at the ground surface. Four conditions usually must be present before liquefaction can occur: 1) The soil is below the groundwater table, i.e., saturated; 2) The soil is composed predominantiy of fine sand and silt; 3) The soil is in a loose to medium dense state; 4) Tlie soil is subject to a sufficient magnitude and duration of strong ground shaking. CWE 2040048 December 16, 2004 Based on the available information, it appears that the ground water table is relatively deep and that the compacted fill and native materials at the site below the foundation elevation are generally medium dense to dense and are not subject to liquefaction. If you have any questions after reviewing this letter, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Respectfully submitted, CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING Curds R. Burdett, C.E.G. #1090 CRB;crb cc: (4) Submitted SURFSIDE.OUT *********************** * * * EQFAULT * * * * Version 3.00 * * * *********************** DETERMINISTIC ESTIMATION OF PEAK ACCELERATION FROM DIGITIZED FAULTS JOB NUMBER: 2040048 DATE: 12-16-2004 JOB NAME: Surfside Lane CALCULATION NAME: Test Run Analysis FAULT-DATA-FILE NAME: CDMGFLTE.DAT SITE COORDINATES: SITE LATITUDE: 33.1132 SITE LONGITUDE: 117.3223 SEARCH RADIUS: 100 mi ATTENUATION RELATION: 3) Boore et al. (1997) Horiz. - NEHRP D (250) UNCERTAINTY (M=Median, S=Sigma): M DISTANCE MEASURE: cd_2drp SCOND: 0 Basement Depth: 5.00 km Campbell SSR: COMPUTE PEAK HORIZONTAL ACCELERATION FAULT-DATA FILE USED: CDMGFLTE.DAT Number of Sigmas: 0.0 Campbell SHR: MINIMUM DEPTH VALUE (km) : 0.0 EQFAULT SUMMARY DETERMINISTIC SITE PARAMETERS APPROXIMATE DISTANCE mi (km) ESTIMATED MAX. EARTHQUAKE EVENT ABBREVIATED FAULT NAME APPROXIMATE DISTANCE mi (km) MAXIMUM EARTHQUAKE MAG.(Mw) PEAK SITE ACCEL, g EST. SITE INTENSITY MOD. MERC. ROSE CANYON NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (Offshore) 3.7( 5.9) 6.8( 11.0) 6.9 6 . 9 0.436 0 . 315 X IX Page 1 SURFSIDE.OUT CORONADO BANK 19 . 6 ( 31 .6) 7 .4 0 . 195 1 VIII ELSINORE-TEMECULA 25 . 5 ( 41 .1) 6 . 8 0 .116 VII ELSINORE-JULIAN 25 . 5 ( 41 .1) 7 . 1 0 . 136 VIII ELSINORE-GLEN IVY 36 . 7 ( 59 .0) 6 . 8 0 . 088 VII PALOS VERDES 37 .5 ( 60 .4) 7 . 1 0 .101 VII EARTHQUAKE VALLEY 43 . 1( 69 .4) 6 .5 0 .066 VI SAN JACINTO-ANZA 48 .3 ( 77 .8) 7 .2 0 .088 VII NEWPORT-INGLEWOOD (L.A.Basin) 48 . 7 ( 78 .4) 6 . 9 0 . 075 VII SAN JACINTO-SAN JACINTO VALLEY 49 .3 ( 79 .3) 6 .9 0 .074 VII CHINO-CENTRAL AVE. (Elsinore) 50 . 0( 80 .5) 6 . 7 0 .080 VII SAN JACINTO-COYOTE CREEK 52 • 8 ( 84 .9) 6 . 8 0 .067 VI WHITTIER 54 .3 ( 87 .4) 6 . 8 0 . 065 VI ELSINORE-COYOTE MOUNTAIN 56 .5 ( 90 .9) 6 .8 0 .063 VI COMPTON THRUST 58 3 ( 93 .9) 6 .8 0 .075 VII ELYSIAN PARK THRUST 61 3 ( 98 .7) 6 .7 0 . 068 VI SAN JACINTO-SAN BERNARDINO 62 6( 100 .7) 6 . 7 0 .055 VI SAN JACINTO - BORREGO 65 6 ( 105 .5) 6 . 6 0 .051 VI SAN ANDREAS - San Bernardino 67 1 ( 108 0) 7 . 3 0 . 072 VI SAN ANDREAS - Southern 67 1 { 108 0) 7 4 0 . 076 VII SAN JOSE 71 1 ( 114 5) 6 5 0 .055 VI CUCAMONGA 73 8 ( 118 7) 7 0 0 .069 VI SIERRA MADRE 73 6 ( 118 8) 7 0 0 069 VI PINTO MOUNTAIN 73 9 ( 119 0) 7 0 0 057 VI SAN ANDREAS - Coachella 74 6 ( 120 0) 7 1 0 060 VI NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (West) 78 1 ( 125 7) 7 0 0 066 VI BURNT MTN. 79 3 ( 127 7) 6 4 0 039 V CLEGHORN 80 3 ( 129 3) 6 5 0 041 V SUPERSTITION MTN. (San Jacinto) 81 5 ( 131 1) 6 6 0 043 VI EUREKA PEAK 82 1 ( 132 2) 6 4 0 038 V NORTH FRONTAL FAULT ZONE (East) 82 2 ( 132 3) 6 7 0 054 VI RAYMOND 82 8 ( 133 3) 6 5 0 049 VI CLAMSHELL-SAWPIT 83 2 ( 133 9) 6 5 0 049 VI SAN ANDREAS - 1657 Rupture 83 6 ( 134 5) 7 8 0 079 VII SAN ANDREAS - Mojave 83 6 ( 134 5) 7 1 0 055 VI ELMORE RANCH 85. 1 { 137 0) 6 6 0 041 V VERDUGO 85 . 3 ( 137 2) 6 7 0 053 VI SUPERSTITION HILLS (San Jacinto) 86 . 2 ( 138 . 7) 6 6 0. 041 V HOLLYWOOD 87. 1 ( 140 . 2) 6 . 4 0. 044 VI LAGUNA SALADA 87 . 6 ( 14 0 . 9) 7 . 0 0 . 050 VI LANDERS 89. 5 ( 144 . 0) 7 . 3 0 . 057 VI HELENDALE - S. LOCKHARDT 90. 7 ( 146. 0) 7 . 1 0. 051 VI SANTA MONICA 91. 8 ( 147 . 7) 6 . 6 0. 047 VI MALIBU COAST 94 . 4 ( 152 . 0) 6 . 7 0. 049 VI LENWOOD-LOCKHART-OLD WOMAN SPRGS 94 . 5 ( 152 . 1) 7 . 3 0 . 055 VI BRAWLEY SEISMIC ZONE 94 . 9 ( 152 . 7) 6 . 4 0 . 034 V JOHNSON VALLEY (Northern) 97 . 4 ( 156 . 8) 6 . 7 0. 039 V EMERSON So. - COPPER MTN. 97. 5 ( 156 . 9) 6 . 9 0 . 044 VI SIERRA MADRE (San Fernando) 98 . 2 ( 158 . 0) 6 . 7 0. 047 VI NORTHRIDGE (E. Oak Ridge) 98 . 3 ( 158 . 2) 6 . 9 0. 053 VI ANACAPA-DUME 99. 7 160 . 4) 7 . 3 0 . 064 VI SAN GABRIEL 100. 0 ( 160 . 9) 7. 0 0. 045 VI ***********************«****,t**** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * * ****** * * * * * ****** ******* -END OF SEARCH- 53 FAULTS FOUND WITHIN THE SPECIFIED SEARCH RADIUS. THE ROSE CANYON FAULT IS CLOSEST TO THE SITE. IT IS ABOUT 3.7 MILES (5.9 km) AWAY. LARGEST MAXIMUM-EARTHQUAKE SITE ACCELERATION: 0.4363 g Page 2 July 13,2005 P.O. Box 1195 Lakeside, Califomia 92040 (619) 443-0060 Guy Oliver 6465 Franciscan Road Carlsbad, Califomia 92000 Subject: File No. 1126H5-04 Report of Field Density Tests Proposed Residential Buiiding Site 6467 Surfside Lane City ofCarlsbad Dear Mr. Oliver: This is to present the results of the compaction tests performed at the subject site. In accordance with your request, in-place field density tests were taken in conformance with A.S.T.M., D1556- 82 in the undisturbed native at the bottom of the excavation for the basement area for the proposed single-family residence. The soils encountered in our Site Inspection dated December 16, 2004 were removed to a depth of two to three feet only under the proposed structure. Footing excavations for the proposed residence were inspected and found to extend a minimum of 12 " into firm natural ground. The results ofthe field density tests are presented on Page T-l under "Table of Test Results". The laboratory determinations ofthe maximum diy densities and optimum moisture contents of the fill soils are set forth on Page L-l under "Laboratory Test Results". Ifyou have any questions, please do not hesitate to call our office. This opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. Page L-l and Page T-l are parts of this report. Respectfully submitted, ;s/mij cc: (3) submitted Guy Oliver Page L-l FileNo. 1126H5-04 July 13,2005 LABORATORY TEST RESULTS The maximum dry densities and optimum moisture contents of the fill materials as determined by the A.S.T.M., Dl 557-78, Method A, which uses 25 blows of a 10 pound hammer faUing from a height of 18 inches on each of 5 layers in a 4 inch diameter 1/30 cubic foot compaction cylinder, are presented as follows: Soil Type Expansion Index Maximum Dry Density lb./cu.ft. Optimum Moisture Content drv wt. 1 Red brown, silty, fine to medium sand with clay binder 25 133.3 8.2 Guy Oliver Page T-l FileNo. 1126H5-04 July 13, 2005 Revised August 31, 2005 TABLE OF TEST RESULTS A.S.T.M.. D1556-82 TEST NO. MAXIMUM FIELD DRY DRY SOIL DEPTH MOISTURE DENSITY DENSITY PERCENT TYPE OF TEST % P.C.F. P.C.F. COMPACTION n.g. n.g. n.g. 7.0 7.2 7.0 133.3 133.3 133.3 113.7 122.1 121.9 90.3 91.6 91.4 n.g. = natural ground SURfS\Ci£ LAt4B a TEST ^ Mo SC/^L£ LOCATION OF FIELD TESTS JOB NO. BY DATE I'J 'CS 11421 Woodside Ave., Suite C Santee, California 92071 (619) 562-0500