The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCDP 03-10; JOHANNSEN RESIDENCE; FINAL COMPACTION REPORT OF ROUGH GRADING; 2005-08-01• ?F ---. :H:. -:•: 4 - F.. T • 1,. 4: ...... .;; .-•' 4 F • -F F• - - 4 - Geotechnucal -,Coastal • Geologic Environmental - -S F - • - r ¼ / - '• 'S -• S •.• - IS . S 14 - ,• - '. I 4 S • -. - •, - - F 1 -S -r F F F . -I ¼ . V - & F-... I .- p 3 ._4 , - 4' , •1 . . •i . Geotechnical 'Coastal • Geologic.' Environmental 5741 Palmer Way Carlsbad California 92008 (760) 438-3155 FAX (760) 931-0915 August 1,2005 . W. 0. 4340-BSC ..: Mr. LanceJohanrisen . P.O. Box 300 San Jacinto, California 92581 I Subject Final Compaction Report of Rough Grading, Lot 129 of Map 3312, Johannsen Residence Carlsbad Boulevard, Carlsbad San Diego County, California . .. . . 1 Dear Mr. Johannsen This report presents a summary of the geotechhical testing and-observation services 11 provided by GeoSoils, Inc (GSl) during the rough earthwork phase of development at the subject site. Earthwdrk commenced on July 12, 2005, and was generally completed on July 18, 2005. Survey of line and grade and location of the building footprints were performed by others'and not performed by GSI. The purpose of grading was to, prepare a relatively level pad for the construction of a single-farniiy residential structure. Based on the observations and testing perfrméd by. GSl, it is our opinion that the building pad appears suitable for its intended use Unless superceded by recommendations presented herein the recommendations contained in the referenced reports (see the Appendix) remain pertinent and applicable ENGINEERING GEOLOGY.. The geologic conditions exposed during the process of grading wee regularly observed by 'a representative from our firm k Paleoliquefaction features were not observed The geologic conditions encountered generally were as anticipated and presented in , GSl(2004d). .:. .. .. GROUNDWATER • . : - Regional groundwater was not encountered during site 'rading, nor is anticipated to - significantly affect site development, provided that the recommendations contained in'this report are incorporated into final design and construction and that prudent surface - drainae practices are incorporated into the construction "plans . A subdrainage system (i e canyon subdrain, etc) vas not constructed due to the general lack of adequate fill cover (less than 10 feet), the relatively.flat gradient acro'ss the site, lack of a suitable outlet at flowline grade, and property line restrictions Perched groundwater conditions along zones of contrasting permeabilities (i.e., fill/terrace contact) may not be precluded from occurring in the future due to site irrigation, poor drainage conditions, or damaged utilities, and should be anticipated This information should be provided to the homeowners Should perched groundwater conditions develop, this office could assess the affected area(s) and provide the appropriate recommendations to mitigate the observed groundwater conditions Groundwater conditions may change with the introduction of Irrigation, rainfall or other factors GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING Preparation of Existing Ground 1. Prior, to grading, the major surficial vegetation was stripped and hauled offsite. 2 Unsuitable topsoil/colluvium and existing undocumented fill were removed to expose suitable bearing granitic bedrock 3 Removals depths within the limits of the project were on the order of ±2 to ±3 feet below pre-construction grades. Once removals were completed, the exposed bottom was reprocessed and compacted prior to fill placement. 4 All removals and processing of original ground were observed by representatives of GSI. Where removals would not provide for at least 3 feet of compacted fill, that portion of the pad area was undercut to provide at least 3 feet of compacted fill below finish grade. The approximate limits of fill placement are shown on the Field Density Test Location Map (Plate 1) included in this report Plate 1 uses the 40-scale grading plan, prepared by the client (Johannsen, undated), as a base Fill Placement 1. Fill materials, consisting of native onsite soils and compatible import soils, were placed in 47 to 8-inch lifts, Watered, mixed to achieve at least optimum moisture conditions, and compacted using earth-moving equipment. 2. The approximate maximum depth of fill at the subject site, placed under purview of this report, is on the order of approximately 3 feet to 4 feet across the lot. 3. All fills placed within the subject site were observed and selectively tested by a field representative of this firm. Mr. Lance Johannsen • • W.O. 4340-B-SC Lot 129, Carlsbad Blvd. • August 1, 2005 File:e:\wpl2\4300\4340b.fcr Page 2 GeoSoils, Inc. • 4. Oversize material (i.e., greater than 12 inches in maximum dimension), was not observed to have been included in the fill Slopes Graded Slopes. Significant graded slopes were not constructed during this phase of site grading..Minor slopes (i.e., less than 5 feet in height) are anticipated to perform adequately, provided that they are properly landscaped and maintained, under normal rainfall conditions. Temporary Slopes Temporary construction slopes may generally be constructed at a gradient of 1:1 (horizontal vertical [h v]) or flatter (provided adverse geologic structures are not present, as evaluated by GSI prior to workers entering trenches). Utility trenches may be excavated in accordance with guidelines presented in Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations for Excavation, Trenches, and Earthwork with respect to Type B soil Construction materials and/or stockpiled soil should not be stored within a minimum lateral distance of 5 feet from the top of any temporary slope. Temporary/permanent provisions should be made to direct any potential runoff away from the top of temporary slopes FIELD TESTING Field density tests were performed using nuclear densometer ASTM Test Methods D-2922 and D-3017. The test results taken during grading are presented in the attached Table 1, and the locations of the tests taken during grading are presented on Plate 1 Field density tests were taken at periodic intervals and random locations to check the compactive effort provided by the contractor. Based upon the grading operations observed, the test results presented herein are considered representative of the compacted fill. 3.1 Visual classification of the soils in the field was the basis for determining which maximum density value to use for a given density test Mr. Lance Johannsen W.O. 4340-B-SC Lot 129, Carlsbad Blvd. August 11 2005 File: e:\wpl 2\4300\4340b.fcr Page GeoSoils, me. LABORATORY TESTING Maximum Density Testing The laboratory maximum dry density and optimum moisture content for the major soil type within this construction phase were determined according to test method ASTM D-1 557. The following.table presents the results: MAXIMUM DENSITY MOISTURE CONTENT 6. A - Reddish Brown Silty Sand 127.0 I 9.5 - Expansion Index Expansive soil conditions have been evaluated for the site. Representative samples of the soils near pad grade were recovered for Expansion Index ([.1.) testing. E.I. testing was performed in general accordance with Standard 18-2 of, the Uniform Building Code ([UBC], International Conference of Building Officials [lCBO], 1997). The test results indicate an [.1: of less than 10, and the corresponding expansion classification of very low. Corrosion/Sulfate • ': A soil sample from the property was analyzed for corrosion/sbluble sulfate content. Sulfate testing indicates that site soils have a negligible exposure to concrete, per Table 19-A-4 Of the 1997 UBC. Corrosion testing (i.e., pH, resistivity) indicates that the soils are essentially neutral to mildly alkaline. Testing further indicates that soils are corrosive to ferrous metals ' when saturated.. The results of chemical testing are attached as Figure 1. Based on the test results a qualified corrosion engineer should be retained for consultation for recommendations, with respect to foundations,: piping, etc.. CONCLUSIONS AND 'RECOMMENDATIONS Unless superceded by, recommendations presented herein or by the soils corrosion engineer, the conclusions and recommendations includedin GSI (2004a through 2004d) remain valid and applicable All settlement-sensitive improvements should be minimally ;.. designed in accordance with those reports and the recommendations presented herein. . , . Mr. Lance Johannsen W.O. 4340-B-SC 'I Lot 129, Carlsbad Blvd. . August 1, 2005 ' File:e:\wpl2\4300\4340b.fcr * ' Page 4 •. . •• GeoSoits, Inc. • , .• DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA Slope Maintenance and Planting Water has been shown to weaken the inherent strength of all earth materials. Slope stability is significantly reduced by overly wet conditions. Positive surface drainage away from slopes should be maintained and only the amount of irrigation necessary to sustain plant life should be provided for planted slopes. Over-watering should be avoided as it adversely affects site improvements, and causes perched groundwater conditions. Graded slopes constructed utilizing onsite materials would be erosive. Eroded debris may be minimized and surficial slope stability enhanced by establishing and maintaining a suitable vegetation cover soon after construction. Compaction to the face of fill slopes would tend to minimize short-term erosion until vegetation is established. Plants selected for landscaping should be light weight, deep rooted types that require little water and are capable of surviving the prevailing climate. Jute-type matting or other fibrous covers may aid in allowing the establishment of a sparse plant cover. Utilizing plants other than those recommended above will increase the potential for perched water, staining, mold, etc., to develop. A rodent control program to prevent burrowing should be implemented. Irrigation of natural (ungraded) slope areas is generally not recommended. These recommendations regarding plant type, irrigation practices, and rodent control should be provided to each homeowner. Over-steepening of slopes should be avoided during building construction activities and landscaping. Drainage Adequate lot surface drainage is a very important factor in reducing the likelihood of adverse performance of foundations, hardscape, and slopes. Surface drainage should be sufficient to prevent ponding of water anywhere on a lot, and especially near structures and tops of slopes. Lot surface drainage should be carefully taken into consideration during fine grading, landscaping, and building construction. Therefore, care should be taken that future landscaping or construction activities do not create adverse drainage conditions. Positive site drainage within lots and common areas should be provided and maintained at all times. Drainage should not flow uncontrolled down any descending slope. Water should be directed away from foundations and not allowed to pond and/or seep into the ground. In general, the area within 5 feet around a structure should slope away from the structure. We recommend that unpaved lawn and landscape areas have a minimum gradient of 1 percent sloping away from structures, and whenever possible, should be above adjacent paved areas. Consideration should be given to avoiding construction of planters adjacent to structures (buildings, pools, spas, etc.). Pad drainage should be directed toward the Street or other approved area(s). Although not a geotechnical requirement, roof gutters, down spouts, or other appropriate means may be utilized to control roof drainage. Down spouts, or drainage devices should outlet a minimum of 5 feet from structures or into a subsurface drainage system. Areas of seepage may develop due to irrigation or heavy rainfall, and should be anticipated. Minimizing irrigation will lessen Mr. Lance Johannsen W.O. 4340-B-SC Lot 129, Carlsbad Blvd. August 1, 2005 File:e:\wpl2\4300\4340b.fcr Page 5 GeoSoils, Inc. this potential. If areas of seepage develop, recommendations for minimizing this effect could be provided upon request. Erosion Control CUt and fill slopes will be subject to surficial erosion during and after grading. Onsite earth materials have a moderate to high erosion potential. Consideration should be given to providing hay bales and silt fences for the temporary control of surface water, from a geotechnical viewpoint. Landscape Maintenance Only the amount of irrigation necessary to sustain plant life should be provided. Over-watering the landscape areas will adversely affect proosed site improvements. We would recommend that any proposed open-bottOm planters adjacent to proposed structures be eliminated for a minimum distance of 10 feet.. 'As .an alternative, closed-bottom type planters could be utilized. An outlet placed in the bottom of the planter, could be installed to direct drainage away from structures or any exterior concrete flatwork. If planters are constructed adjacent to structures, the sides and bottom of the planter should be provided with a moisture barrierto prevent penetration of irrigation water into the subgrade. Provisions should be made to drain the excess irrigation water from the planters without saturating the subgrade below or adjacent to the planters. Graded slope areas should be planted with drought resistant vegetation. Consideration should be given to the type of vegetation chosen and their potential effect upon surface improvements (i.e., some trees will have an effect on concrete flatwork with their extensive root systems). From a geotechnical standpoint leaching is not recommended for establishing landscaping. If the surface soils are processed for the purpose of adding amendments, they should be recompacted to 90 percent minimum relative compaction. Gutters and Downspouts As previously discussed in the drainage section, the installation of gutters and downspouts should be considered to collect roof water that may otherwise infiltrate the soils adjacent to the structures. If utilized, the downspouts should be drained into PVC collector pipes or other non-erosive devices (e.g., paved swales or ditches; below grade, solid tight-lined PVC pipes; etc.), that will carry the water away from the house, to an appropriate outlet, in accordance with the recommendations of the design civil engineer. Downspouts and gutters are not a requirement; however, from a geotechnical viewpoint, provided that positive draihage is incorporated into project design (as discussed 'previously). Subsurface and Surface Water Subsurface and surface water are not anticipated to affect site development, provided that the recommendations contained in this report are incorporated into final design and Mr. Lance Johannsen . W.O. 4340-B-SC Lot 129, Carlsbad Blvd. August 1, 2005 FiIe:e:\wpl2\4300\4340b.fcr . . ' . Page 6 GeoSoils, Inc. . . construction and that prudent surface and subsurface drainage practices are incorporated into the construction plans. Perched groundwater conditions along zones of contrasting permeabilities may not be precluded from occurring in the future due to site irrigation, poor drainage conditions, or damaged utilities, and should be anticipated. Should perched groundwater conditions develop, this office could assess the affected area(s) and provide the appropriate, recommendations to mitigate the observed groundwater conditions. Groundwater conditions may change with the introduction of irrigation, rainfall, or other, factors. Site Improvements If in the future, any additional improvements (e.g., pools, spas, etc.) are planned for the site, recommendations concerning the geological or geotechnical aspects of design and construction of said improvements could be provided upon request. Pools and/or spas should not be constructed without specific design and construction recommendations from GSl, and this construction recommendation should be provided to' the homeowners, any homeowners association, and/or other interested parties. This office should be notified in advance of any fill placement, grading of the site, 'or trench backlilling after rough grading has been completed. This includes any grading, utility trench and retaining wall backfills, flatwork, etc. Tile Flooring Tile flooring can crack, reflecting cracks in the concrete slab below the tile, although small cracks in a conventional slab may not be significant. Therefore, the designer should consider additional steel reinforcement for concrete slabs-on-grade where tile will be placed. The tile installer should consider installation methods that reduce possible cracking of the tile such as slipsheets. Slipsheets or a vinyl crack isolation membrane (approved by the Tile Council of America/Ceramic Tile Institute) are recommended between tile and concrete slabs on grade. Additional Grading This office should be notified in advance of any fill placement, supplemental regrading of the site, or trench backfilling after rough grading has been completed. This includes completion of grading in the street, driveway approaches, driveways, parking areas, and utility trench and retaining wall backfills. Footing Trench Excavation All footing excavations should be observed by a representative of this firm subsequent to trenching and prior to concrete form and reinforcement placement. The purpose of the observations is to evaluate that the excavations have been made into the recommended bearing material and to the minimum widths and depths recommended for construction. Mr. Lance Johannsen W.O. 4340-B-SC Lot 129, Carlsbad Blvd. August 1, 2005 File:e:\wp12\4300\4340b.fcr Page 7 GeoSoils, Inc. If loose or compressible materials are exposed within the footing excavation, a deeper footing or removal and recompaction of the subgrade materialswould be recommended at that time. Footing trench spoil and any excess soils generated from utility trench excavations should be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent, if not removed from thesite. Trenching/Temporary Construction Backcuts Considering the nature of the onsite earth materials, it should be anticipated that caving or sloughing could be a factor in subsurface excavations and trenching. Shoring or excavating the trench walls/backcuts at the angle of repose (typically 25 to 45 degrees [except as specifically superceded within the text of this report]), should be anticipated. AM excavations should be observed by an engineering geologist or soil engineer from GSI, prior to workers entering the excavation or trench, and minimally conform to CAL-OSHA, state, and local safety. codes.. Should adverse conditions exist, appropriate recommendations would be offered at that time. The above recommendations should be provided to any contractors and/or subcontractors, or homeOwners, etc., that may perform• such work. Utility Trench Backfill All interior utility trench backfill should be brought to at least 2 percent above optimum moisture content and then compacted to obtain a minimum relative compaction of 90 percent of the laboratory standard. As an alternative for shallow (12-inch to 18-inch) under-slab trenches, sand having a sand equivalent value of 30 or greater may be utilized and jetted or flooded into place. Observation, probing and testing should be provided to evaluate the desired results. Exterior trenches adjacent to, and within areas extending below a 1:1 plane projected from the outside bottom edge Of the footing,and all trenches beneath hardscape features and in slopes, should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the laboratory standard. Sand backfill, unless excavated from the trench, should not be used in these backfill areas. Compaction testing and observations, along with probing, should be accomplished to evaluate the desired results. 3 All trench excavations should conform to CAL-OSHA, state and local safety codes 4. Utilities crossing grade beams, perimeter beams, or footings should either pass below the footing or grade beam utilizing a hardened collar or foam spacer, or pass through the footing or grade beam in accordance with the recommendations of the structural engineer. Mr. Lance Johannsen W.O. 4340-B-SC Lot 129, Carlsbad Blvd. August 1, 2005 File:e:\wpl2\4300\4340b.fcr Page 8 GeoSoils, Inc. 0 0 0 0 SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS REãARDING S GEOTECHNICAL OBSERVATION AND TESTING We recommend that observation and/or testing be performed by GSI at each of the following construction stages: .. During grading/recertification During excavation. During placement of subdrains, toe drains, or other subdrainage devices, prior to placing fill and/or backfill After excavation of building footings, retaining wall footings, and free standing walls footings, prior to the placement of reinforcing steel or concrete. Prior to pouring any slabs or flatwork, after presoaking/presaturation of building pads and other flatwork subgrade, before the placement of concrete, reinforcing 'steel, capillary break (i.e., sand, pea-gravel, etc.), or. vapor barriers (i.e., visqueen, etc.). During retaining wall subdrain installation, prior to backfill placement. During placement of backfill for area drain, interior plumbing, utility line trenches, and retaining wall backfill. During slope construction/repair. When any unusual soil conditions are encountered during, any construction operations, subsequent to the issuance of this report. When any developer or homeowner improvements, such as flatwork, spas, 'pools, walls, etc., are constructed, prior to construction GSI should review and approve -' the plans .for such improvements prior to constructicn. A report of geotechnical observation and testing should be provided at the conclusion of each of the above stages, in order to provide concise and clear , documentation of site work, and/or to comply with code requirements: GSI should review project sales documents to homeowners/homeowners associations for geotechnical aspects, including irrigation practices, the conditions outlined above, etc., prior to any sales. At that stage, GSI will provide homeowners maintenance guidelines -which should be incorporated into such documents. Mr. Lance Johannsen W.O. 4340-B-SC-; Lot 129, Carlsbad Blvd. August 1, 2005 Fi!e:e:\wp12\43OO434Ob.fcr Page 9 GeoSoils, Inc. OTHER DESIGN PROFESSIONALS/CONSULTANTS The design civil engineer, structural engineer, post-tension designer, architect, landscape architect, wall designer, etc., should review the recommendations provided herein, incorporate those recommendations into all their respective plans, and by explicit reference, make this report part of their project plans. This report presents minimum design criteria for the design of slabs, foundations and other elements possibly applicable to the project. These criteria should not be considered as substitutes for actual designs by the structural engineer/designer. Please note that the recommendations contained herein are not intended to preclude the transmission of water or vapor through the slab or foundation. The structural engineer/foundation and/or slab designer should provide recommendations-to not allow water or vapor to enter into the structure so as to cause damage to another building component, or so as to limit the installation of the type of flooring materials typically used for the particular application. The structural engineer/designer should analyze actual soil-structure interaction and consider, as needed, bearing, expansive soil influence, and strength, stiffness and deflections in .the various slab, foundation, and other elements in order to develop appropriate, design-specific details. As conditions dictate, it is possible that other influences will also have to be considered. The structural engineer/designer should consider all applicable codes and authoritative sources where needed. If analyses by the structural engineer/designer result in less critical details than are provided herein as minimums, the minimums presented herein should be adopted. It is considered likely that some, more restrictive details will be required. If the structural engineer/designer has any questions or requires further assistance, they should not hesitate to call or otherwise transmit their requests to GSI. In order to mitigate potential distress, the foundation and/or improvement's designer should confirm to GSI and the governing agency, in writing, that the proposed foundations and/or improvements can tolerate the amount of differential settlement and/or expansion characteristics and other design criteria specified herein. PLAN REVIEW Any additional project plans (grading, precise grading, foundation, retaining wall, landscaping, etc.), should be reviewed by this office prior to construction, so that construction is in accordance with the conclusions and recommendations of this report. Based on our review, supplemental recommendations and/or further geotechnical studies may be warranted. Mr. Lance Johannsen W.O. 4340-B-SC Lot 129, Carlsbad Blvd. August 1, 2005 File:e:\wpl2\4300\4340b.fcr Page 10 GeoSoils, Inc. LIMITATIONS The materials encountered on the project site and utilized for our analysis are believed representative of the area; however, soil and bedrock materials vary in character between excavations and natural outcrops or conditions exposed during mass grading Site conditions may vary due to seasonal changes or other factors. Inasmuch as our study is based upon our review and engineering analyses and laboratory data, the conclusions and recommendations are professional opinions. These opinions have been derived in accordance with current standards of practice, and no warranty, either express or implied, is given. Standards of practice are subject to change with time. GSI assumes no responsibility or liability for work or testing performed by others, or their inaction; or work performed When GSI is not requested to be onsite, to evaluate if our recommendations have been properly implemented. Use of this report constitutes an agreement and consent by the user to all the limitations outlined above, notwithstanding any other agreements that may be in place. In addition, this report may be subject to review by the controlling authorities. Thus, this report brings to completion our scope of services for this portion of the project. All samples will be disposed of after 30 days, unless specifically requested by the client, in writing. - The opportunity to be of service is sincerely appreciated. If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact our office. Respectfully submitted / 0AL Q 0N (9G.C(o gineering GeOlOgist Fn Engineering Geologist, q RGC/JPF/DWS/jh GeoSoils, Inc Attachments: •Figure 1 - Corrosion Test Report' Table 1 - Field Density Test Results Appendix - References Plate 1 - Field Density Test Location Map Distribution: (4) Addressee Mr. Lance Johannsen Lot 129, Carlsbad Blvd. File: e:\wpl 2\4300\4340b.fcr GeoSoils, Inc. W.O. 4340-B-SC August 1, 2005 Page 11 M. J. Schiff & Associates, Inc. Consulting Corrosion Engineers - Since 1959 - Phone: (909) 626-0967 Fax: (909) 626-3316 431 W. Baseline Road E-mail lab@mjschiff corn Claremont, CA 91711 website: rnjschiff corn Table 1 - Laboratory Tests on Soil Samples Johnson Your #4340-A-SC, MJS&A #04-0680LAB 14-May-04 Sample ID B-i Resistivity Units as-received ohm-cm 11,000,000 saturated ohm-cm 2,400 pH 5.9 Electrical Conductivity MS/cm 0.23 Chemical Analyses Cations calcium. Ca 2+ mg/kg 80 magnesium Mg 2+ mg/kg 19 1+sodium Na I mg/kg ND Anions carbonate C032 mg/kg ND bicarbonate HC031 mg/kg 95 chloride Cl' mg/kg 65 sulfate so, 2 mg/kg 85 Other Tests ammonium NH4 mg/kg na nitrate NO3 mg/kg na sulfide S 2-qual na Redox mV na r Electrical conductivity in millisiemens/cm and chemical analysis were made on a 1:5 soil-to-water extract. mg/kg = milligrams per kilogram (parts per million) of dry soil. Redox = oxidation-reduction potential in millivolts ND = not detected na = not analyzed 4340-B--SC Figure 1 Mr. Lance Johannsen Lot 129 Carlsbad Blvd File: C:\excel\tables\4300\4340bJcr GeoSoils, Inc. TEST DATE TEST LOCATION TRACT ELEV MOISTURE DRY REL TEST SOIL NO. NO. OR CONTENT DENSITY COMP METHOD TYPE DEPTH (ft) (%) lncf) (%) 1 7/12/05 Far NW Lot 129 49.0 9.8 1163 91.6 ND A 2 7/12/05 Far NW . Lot 129 50.0 10.6 1154 90.9 ND A 3 7/13/05 .W Middle Pad Lot 129 49.0 9.6 1184 93.2 ND A 4 7/13/05 SW @ Pad Lot 129 51.0 9.9 1176 92.6 ND A 5 7/13/05 SW @ Pad Lot 129 52.0 10.2 117.1 92.2 ND A 6 7/13/05 NE Middle Pad Lot 129 51.0 10.8 116.9 92.0 ND A 7 7/14/05 NE @ Pad Lot 129 52.0 10.0 117.4 92.4 ND A .8 7/14/05 NE @ Pad Lot 129 53.0 9.8 117.6 92.6 ND A 9 7/15/05 W @ Pad Lot 129 53.0 . 10.8 116.9 92.0 ND A .10 7/15/05 W@ Pad Lot 129 52.0 10.2 117.8 92.8 ND A 11 7/18/05 E @ Pad Lot 129 FG 9.8 117.3 92.4 ND A 12 7/18/05 W@Pad .Lot 129 FG 10.0 117.1 92.2 ND A APPENDIX REFERENCES Carlsbad, City of, 1993, Standards for design and construction of public works Improvements in the City of Carlsbad GeoSoils, Inc., 2004a, Grading plan review, Lot 129, Map 3312, Johannsen residence, Carlsbad Boulevard, Carlsbad, San Diego County, California, W.O. 4340-A-SC, dated December 20 2004b, Geotechnical plan review of grading and drainage plans, sections, and wall elevations and section, vacant lot located in the 5400. Block of Carlsbad Boulevard, City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, California, W.O. 4340-Al-SC, dated June 30. 2004c, Soil corrosivity results vacant lot located in 5400 block of Carlsbad Boulevard, city of Carlsbad, San Diego County, California, W.O. 4340-A-SC, dated May 27. 2004d, Preliminary geotechnical evaluation, vacant lot located in 5400 block of Carlsbad Boulevard city of Carlsbad San Diego County, California, W.O. 4340-A-SC', dated May 18. . . International Conference of Building Officials, 1997, Uniform Building Code Johannsen, L, Undated, Grading plans for Lot 129, Map 3312, Carlsbad Boulevard, Johannsen Residence, Project No CDP03-1 0 Drawing No 423-5A, undated GeoSoils,. Inc. -: $ 4 - 4L 44 4 I 4 4 I I 4 4 4 4 4 14 Cl 4 4 f I 1 I 4 I 4 I 4 4 4 i 4 1 r I /