Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCDP 03-12; ADAMS STREET SFR NORTH; UPDATE COMPACTION REPORT; 2018-01-22RECE VED JUL 1 6 2019 LAND DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING Vinje & Middleton Engineering, Inc. iD1t-tJ\S sm~ SfR N,O~,\-\ UPDATE COMPACTION REPORT GRADED PAD 4 9 1 ~ PARK DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA C. OP Oo-\'2 ow 4:r, -~5 / GR 2014 -ooio March 25, 2019 Prepared For: Jim Chambers P.O. Box 1571 Solana, Beach, CA 92075 Prepared By: ViNJE & MIDDLETON ENGiNEERING, INC. 2450 Auto Park Way Escondido, California 92029 Job #19-118-F 2450 Auto Park Way· Escondido, California 92029 · 760-743-1214 · Fax 760-739-0343 .. TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE NO. I. INTRODUCTION ...................................................... 1 11. GRADING PAD CONSTRUCTION ......................................... 2 111. SITE CONDITIONS .................................................... 2 IV. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION ........................................... 3 V. SEISMIC GROUND MOTION VALUES ..................................... 3 VI. REGIONAL GEOLOGY ................................................. 4 VII. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................ 4 A. Existing Graded Surfaces ............................................ 5 8. Bearing and Subgrade Soil Properties .................................. 5 C. Existing Graded Slope ............................................... 5 D. Existing Surface Conditions .......................................... 5 E. Remedial Pad Grading ............................................... 5 F. Engineering Observation and Testing .................................. 7 G. Site Corrosion Assessment .......................................... 7 H. Temporary Construction Slopes ....................................... 7 I. Foundations, Slab-on-Grade, Floors, and Soil Design Parameters ............ 7 J. Asphalt Concrete (AC) Paving ......................................... 9 K. Slope Planting and Drainage ........................................ 13 L. Pad Drainage ..................................................... 13 M. Additional Engineering Observation and Testing ........................ 14 VIII. GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................... 15 IX. LIMITATIONS ........................................................ 16 PLATE NO. Vicinity Map ............................................................... 1 Parcel Map ................................................................ 2 Photos .................................................................... 3 Geologic Map .............................................................. 4 Isolation Joints & Re-E ntrant Corner Reinforcement .............................. 5 Typical Permeable Paver Detail ............................................... 6 Retaining Wall Drain Detail ................................................... 7 Appendix: USGS Summary report Attachments: Slope Stability letter dated October 28, 2010, As-Graded Compaction Report dated April 25, 2006, and Foundation Plan Review date April 20, 2005. I. INTRODUCTION UPDATE COMPACTION REPORT GRADED PAD 475 PARK DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA The project property, reference above, includes a graded pad originally created in late 2005 and early 2006 under observation and testing services provided by this office. The property location is indicated on a Vicinity Map attached as Plate 1. The approximate property coordinates are 33.1476°N latitude and -117.3259°W longitude. The building pad consists of split-level surfaces characterized by a lower basement area in the east portions and upper pad area on the west margin of the basement. The lower basement area is a cut surface situated approximately 10 feet below the upper pad fill surface. Geotechnical engineering observation and compaction testing services for the graded pad was provided by this office periodically between October 7, 2005 through March 31 , 2006. Our observations and tests were summarized in a written technical report. The original site geotechnical study prior to its development was also performed by this office. The following pertinent reports and letter pertaining to the property are on file with our firm and were reviewed as a part of this effort: A. Slope Stability, Near Vertical Temporary Construction Slopes, Existing Contiguous Graded Pads Located at 475 Park Drive and 4488 Adams Street, Carlsbad, California, Job #05-422-F and 05-423-F, letter dated October 28, 2010. B. As-Graded Compaction Report and Foundation Recommendations for Proposed Single Family Residence Located at 4 75 Park Drive, City of Carlsbad Drawing #423- SA , Project #CDP 03-12 , Job #05 -422-F, report dated April 25 , 2006. C. Foundation Plan Review, Proposed Construction , 475 Park Drive, City of Ca rlsbad (A.P.N. 206-192-34), Job #05-137-P, letter dated April 20, 2005. D. Geotechnical Update Le tter and Grading Plan Review, Proposed Residential Develop ment, 475 Park Drive, Carlsbad , California (A.P.N. 206-192-34), Job #05- 137-P, letter dated January 27, 2005. E. Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation , Undeveloped Hillside Lots, 4588 Adams Street, Carlsbad, Ca lifornia, Job #02 -1 08-P, report dated February 11, 2002 . Copies of the preceding can be obtained upon request. The Slope Stability letter (Reference A) and As-Graded Compaction Report and Foundation Recommendations (Reference B) a1e included as Attachments 1 and 2 respectively. V1 NJE & Mllml.ETON ENG INEERING, l Nc. • 2450 Aura Park Way • Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 UPDATE COMPACTION REPORT, GRADED PAD 475 PARK DRIVE, CARLSBAD. CALIFORNIA MARCH 25, 2019 PAGE 2 The purpose of this effort is to update the referenced As-Graded Compaction Report and Foundation Recommendations (Attachment 2) and confirm its compatibility with the current applicable codes, and engineering standards. Additional and/or amended recommendations consistent with the requirements of current codes and standards of practice are also provided in the following sections and will supplement or superseded those given in the referenced As-Graded Compaction Report and Foundation Recommendations where specifically indicated. A recent site visit was also conducted by our engineering geologist on March 18, 2019 as a part of the preparation of this update report. Added subsurface explorations and laboratory testing were not necessary, and prior geotechnical data (see references) were determined to be adequate for this update report. II. GRADING AND PAD CONSTRUCTION The current building pads were created by cutting up to 10 feet to achieve basement grades, and the removal and recompaction existing surficial soils for the upper pad. Temporary construction embankments mark the south, west, and north sides of the graded basement area. Earthwork operations including preparation of ground receiving fills, keyway development & construction of graded embankments, fill placement, and compaction procedures were completed in substantial conformance with the requirements of California Building Code (CBC), the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction and the grading ordinances for the City of Carlsbad. Grading control engineering observation and testing were performed under the supervision of this office. In our opinion, site excavations, pad development, and graded embankments were constructed in substantial conformance with the project approved grading plans, and are acceptable fo r their intended use . Il l. SITE CONDITIONS An excerpt from the As-Graded Compaction Report pla n is included as Plate 2. Our recent site ins pection indicated that the subject site remains sub stantially unchanged from those reported in the re ferenced Slo pe Stability letter (Reference A) and As-Grade Compaction Report (Reference 2) with respect to the site graded conditions, compacted fills, final pad elevation , and location and height of temporary construction slopes. V 1NJE & M IDDLE JON ENGINEER ING, l NC. • 2450 Auto Park Way • Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 UPDATE COMPACTION REPORT, GRAD ED PAD 475 PARK DRIVE. CARLSBAD. CALIFORNIA MARCH 25, 2019 PAGE 3 The temporary slopes generally approach 10 feet high maximum at near vertical gradients. The sl opes were constructed in substantial confo rmance with our recommendations presented in the Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation (Reference E). Basement construction was expected to proceed in a timely manner, consequently, the slopes have been exposed to nearly 13 years of seasonal conditions. This has resulted in slope face erosion and local slumping as shown on pictures taken on March 18 , 2019 attached as Plate 3. However, the slopes are considered grossly stable with no evidence of deep- seated instability. Clearing and brushing of the site surface vegetation and remedial grading of upper near surface exposures of disturbed and weathered pad grade soils will be required as specified in following sections. IV. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION Final grades are expected to remain at or very near the existing pad elevations, and major grade alterations or significant ground modifications are not anticipated. We understand that the new structure will have a basement floor approximately 10 feet be iow upper pad grades. Consequently, basement type retaining walls are anticipated to be incorpo rated into the design . The planned residential construction is expected to consist of a conven tional wood-frame building with block basement walls and exterior stucco supported on shallow stiff concrete foundations with stem-walls and slab-on -grade floors , or slab-on -g rou nd with turned-down footings. V. SEISMIC GROUND MOTION VALUES Seismic ground motion values were determined as part of this investigation in acco rdance with Chapter 16, Section 161 3 of the 2016 California Buildin g Code (C BC) and ASCE 7-10 Standard using the web-based SEAOC/OSHPD (Structural Engineers Association of America/California's Office of Statewide Health Planni ng an d Development) ground moti on calculator. Generated results including the Mapped (Ss, S1), Risk-Targeted Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCER) adjusted for site Class effects (SMs, SM1), and Design (Sos, So1) Spectral Acceleration Parameters. Also included are Site Coefficients (Fa , Fv) for short periods (0.2 second and 1 second), Site Class, Design and Risk-Targeted Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCER) Response Spectrums, Mapped Maximum Considered Geometric Mean (MCEG), Peak Ground Acceleration adjusted for Site Class effects (PGAM) and Seismic Design Category based on Risk Category. The severity of the design earthquake ground motion at the site are summarized in the enclosed Attachment 3 V1NJE & MmDI.ETON ENGINEERING, INC. • 2450 Auto Park Way • Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 UPDATE COMPACTION REPORT, GRADED PAD 475 PARK DRIVE, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA VI. REGIONAL GEOLOGY MARCH 25 , 2019 PAGE4 The project site is situated at the western margin of the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province of southern California. This geomorphic province encompasses an area that extends for approximately 790 miles, from the Transverse Ranges and the Los Angeles Basin to the tip of Baja California , and varies in width from 30 to 100 miles. In general, the Peninsular Ranges consist of rugged mountains underlain by Mesozoic era (67 to 245 million years old) metamorphic and crystalline rocks to the east and a dissected coastal plain underlain by Cenozoic era (up to 67 million years old) sediments. The mountain ranges of this geomorphic province are generally northwest-trending and separated by subparallel fault zones, and are largely composed of granitic and related rocks and smaller amounts of metamorphic rocks. The coastal portions of this geomorphic province in the San Diego region are typically comprised of marine and non -marine sedimentary rocks that have been deposited within a northwest-trending basin known as the San Diego Embayment. The Peninsular Ranges are bounded on the east by the Salton Trough and on the north by the Los Angeles Basin, and extends westward into the Pacific Ocean where its highest peaks are exposed at Catalina , Santa Barbara, San Clemente, and San Nicholas Islands. The Peninsular Ranges are traversed by several major active faults. Right-lateral, strike-slip movement is the major tectonic activity associated with faults in the regional tectonic framework. Earthquakes along these faults have the potential for generating strong seismic ground motions in the region . The seismic event most likely to affect the planned residential development would be a major earthquake on the Rose Canyon Fault. The Rose Canyon Fault is a complex zone of strike-slip, oblique, reverse, and normal faults that extend onshore from La Jolla Cove south to San Diego Bay, and is capable of generating a magnitude-7.2 earthquake. A Geologic Map showing mapped units at, and nearby the project site is included as Plate 4. VII. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Existing pads consist of nearly le vel-graded pad ranging from cut basement surfaces to an upper pad underlain by a minimum of 3 feet of well-compacted fills placed under engineering observation and compaction testing services provided by this office. The site remains substantially unchanged from conditions presented in the referenced As-Graded Compaction report, dated April 25, 2006 (Attachment 1) and Slope Stability letter dated October 10 , 2010. Gross instability is not in evidence. All condtisions and recommendations provided in the referenced As-Graded Compaction report remain valid and shou ld be incorporated into the final plans and implemented during the construction phase except where specifically amended 01· superseded below Additional site-specific conclusions and recommendations consistent with the current codes, stand ard s and engineeri ng practice are also provided below and should be cons id ered wherever appropriate and as app li cable: V1NJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. • 2450 Auto Park Way • Escondido, Cali fornia 92029-1 229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 UPDATE COMPACTION REPORT, GRADED PAD 475 PARK DRIVE, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA MARCH 25, 2019 PAGE 5 A. Existing Graded Surfaces: The construction of the graded surfaces, including the temporary construction slopes, were completed in substantial conformance with the specifications of project Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation report (dated February 11 , 2002), approved grading plan, applicable codes, standards and ordinances, and are suitable for the support of the planned new structure, provided our recommendations, as outlined herein, are followed . B. Bearing and Subgrade Soil Properties: Bearing and subgrade soils on the barn pad predominantly consist of silty clayey sand (SM/SC) soils ranging to very low expansion potential (expansion index less than 20) based on ASTM D-4829 classification. Consequently, expansive soils are not considered a significant geotechnical concern C. Existing Graded Slopes: Project graded and temporary slopes are generally performing well. Temporary slopes evidence variable stages of erosion and local slumping, however, are considered grossly stable. D. Existing Surface Conditions: Surface areas are presently covered by grass and weeds. All the surface vegetation should be cleared and properly disposed of from the site. E. Remedial Pad Grading -Added cut or fill grading efforts or significant ground modifications are not anticipated with final design grades expected to be at or very near the existing grades . However, near finish grade soils at the project building pad surfaces , including cut surfaces, have experienced continued seasonal wetting and drying since the completion of original grading nearly 13 years ago . Consequently, minor remedial grading of near surface soils and bearing and subgrade soils will be required in order to recondition the upper bearing and subgrade soils an d reconstruct suitable surfaces for the support of planned new structu res and improvements . The follm,ving are ap propriate : 1. All excavation s, remova ls or stripping, grading , earthwork, construction , and bearing/subgrade soil preparation should be completed in accordance with Chapter 18 (Soils and Foundations) and Appendix "J" (Grading) of the 2016 Ca liforn ia Building Code (CBC), the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction , City of Carlsbad Grading Ordinances , the requirements of the governing agencies and following sections. wherever appropriate and as applicable . V1 NJE & M mnLETON ENGINEER ING, lNC. • 2450 Auto Park Way • Escondido, Califo rnia 92029-1 229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 UPDATE COMPACTION REPORT, GRADED PAD 475 PARK DRIVE, CARLSBAD. CALIFORNIA MARCH 25, 2019 PAGE 6 2. Compacted fills should be stripped (removed) to a minimum depth of 2 feet, or as directed in the field and recompacted, in all areas of planned new building, structures and improvements. Stripping and recompaction should encompass building and improvement envelopes plus a minimum of 5 horizontal feet outside the perimeter, where possible and as approved in the field . Actual striping depths to be established in the field by the project geotechnical consultant or his designated field representative. Locally deeper removals may be required based upon actual exposures, and should be anticipated . Cut surfaces exposed at the basement level have also softened and should be undercut to dense natural sandstone as directed in the field. Basement pad undercuts are expected to vary. Additional recommendations may be forthcoming at the time of the undercutting to ensure that the basement floor is entirely supported on compacted fills. Basement foundation footings may also require additional excavations to ensure that any daylight lines that may run through the footing are eliminated. The basement foundation footings should be entirely supported on compacted fills or dense sandstone. 3. Silty clayey soils generated from the site removals and over-excavations are generally considered suitable for reuse as new site fills provided they are adequately processed and manufactured into a clean uniform mixture as directed and approved in the field . Clayey to silty fill deposits typically require additional processing, mixing and moisture conditioning efforts in order to manufacture a uniform homogeneous mixture suitable for reuse as new compacted fills . Expansive clayey soils, if present, are not suitable for basement wall and trench backfills. 4 . Uniform and stable fill support should be constructed underneath the project new build ing pad and improvement areas by th e remedial grading and earthwork operations . For this purpose , site soils should be adequately processed, thoroughly mi xed , moisture conditioned to appro ximately 3% to 5% (or as directed in the fie ld) above the opti mum moisture lev els, placed in thin (6-inch lifts maximum) uniform horizontal lifts and mechanically compacted to a minimum of 90% of corresponding laboratory maximum dry density per ASTM D-1557, un less otherwise specified. 5. Trench backfill materials should consist of sandy so ils adequately processed , moisture cond itioned to near optimum levels and mechanically compacted to a minimum of 90% compaction levels (per ASTM D-1557), unless otherwise specified or directed in the field V1 NJE & MIDDISTON ENGINEERING, INC.• 2450 Auto Park Way • Escondido, Califo rnia 92029-1 229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 UPDATE COMPACTION REPORT, GRADED PAD 475 PARK DRIVE, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA MARCH 25, 2019 PAGE 7 6. All remedial grading, foundation bearing and subgrade soil preparation and earthwork operations including removals and over-excavation s, trenching, the suitability of earth deposits used as compacted fills and backfills, processing, spreading and placement, and compaction procedures should be observed and tested by the project geotechnical consultant and presented in the daily field reports and summarized in a final report. The nature of finis hed bearing and subgrade soils should be further confirmed in the final report at the completion of the remedial grading work. F. Engineering Observation and Testing: All excavations, remedial grading, new fill placement, foundation bearing and subgrade soil preparation, and earthwork operations should be observed and tested by the project geotechnical consultant and presented in the daily field reports and summarized in a final report. The nature of fi nished bea ring and subgra de soi l should be further confirmed in the final report at the completion of the remedial grading work. G. Site Corrosion Assessment: Results of limited laboratory testing performed on se lected site so il sam ples (see corro si on section of Attachment 2) indicated that the project site is non-corros ive . Portland cement Type II and concrete with minimum specifi ed 28 days compressive strength (f'c) of 2,500 psi and maximum water- cement ra tio of 0.50 should be co nsidered, unless otherwise specified (also see CBC Table 1808 .8.1). H. Temporary Construction Slopes: All temporary construction slopes are generally performi ng adequately, but will require geotechnical inspections du ring the construction operation s. The project contractor shall also obtain appropriate permits, as needed, and conform to Cal-OSHA and local governing agencies' requirements for trenching/open excavations and safety of the workmen during construction . Appropriate permits for offsite grading or excavation encroachments into neighboring private properties and/or public right-of-ways , if any required or necessary, should be obtained as appropriate from respective owners and agencies. I. Foundations, Slab-on-Grade Floors, and Soil Design Parameters : Soil design parameters will remain the same as specified in the referenced As-Graded Compaction Report and Foundation Recommendations (Attachment 2) V tNJE & M11mLETON ENGINEERING, INC. • 2450 Auto Park Way • Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 UPDATE COMPACTION REPORT, GRADED PAD 475 PARK DRIVE, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA MARCH 25, 2019 PAGE 8 The proposed building may be supported on shallow stiff concrete grade beam footings and slab-on-grade floor foundations consistent the anticipated underlying bearing and subgrade soil. Final foundation bearing and subgrade soils are expected to consist of either sandstone or a silty clayey sand mixture (SM/SC) with expansion potential ranging from to very low expansive (expansion index less than 20 based on ASTM 0-4829 classification). Added or modified recommendations may also be necessary and should be given at the time of foundation plan review phase. All foundations and floor slab recommendations should be further confirmed and/ or revised as necessary at the completion of rough grading based on the actual expansion characteristics of the foundation bearing and subgrade soils. The following recommendations and geotechnical mitigation are appropriate for stiff grade beam footings and slab-on-grade type foundation support: • Perimeter and interior continuous footings should be sized at least 15 inches wide and 18 inches deep for single and two story buildings. Spread pad footings, if any, should be at least 30 inches square and 12 inches deep. Footing depths are measured from the lowest adjacent ground surface, not including the sand/gravel layer beneath floor slabs. Continuous interior and exterior foundations should be reinforced with a minimum of four #4 reinforcing bars. Place two-#4 bars 3 inches above the bottom of the footing and two-#4 bars 3 inches below the top of the footing . Re inforcement details for spread pad footings should be provided by the project architect/structural engineer. • All interior slabs should be a min imum 4 inches in thickness, re info rced with #3 reinforcing bars spaced 18 inches on center each way, placed mid-height in the slab. Slabs should be underlain by 4 inches of clean sand (SE 30 or greater) which is provided with a well-performing moisture barrier/vapor retard ant (minimum 15-mil Stego) placed mid-height in the sand . Alternatively, a 4-inch thick ba se of compacted ½-inch clean aggregate provided with the vapor barrier (minimum 15-mil Stego) in direct contact with (beneath) the concrete may also be considered provided a concrete mix which can address bleeding, shrinkage and curling is used . V1NJE & M1DDI.ETON ENGINEERING, I NC..• 2450 Auto Park Way • Escondido, Californja 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 UPDATE COMPACTION REPORT, GRADED PAD 475 PARK DRIVE. CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA MARCH 25, 2019 PAGE 9 • Provide "softcut" contraction/control joints consisting of sawcuts spaced 10 feet on center each way for all interior slabs. Cut as soon as the slab will support the weight of the saw and operate without disturbing the final finish which is normally within 2 hours after final finish at each control joint location or 150 psi to 800 psi . The sawcuts should be minimum 1-inch in depth but should not exceed 1 ¼- inches deep maximum . Anti-ravel skid plates should be used and replaced with each blade to avoid spalling and raveling. Avoid wheeled equipments across cuts for at least 24 hours. • Provide re-entrant corner (270 degrees corners) reinforcement for all interior slabs. Re-entrant corners will depend on slab geometry. The enclosed Plate 5 may be used as a general guideline. • The subgrade and foundation bearing soils should not be allowed to dry prior to pouring the concrete or additional ground preparation and moisture reconditioning will be necessary as directed in the field . The required moisture content of the bearing soils is approximately 2% to 3% over the optimum moisture content to the depth of 18 inches beiow subgrade. Attempts should be made to maintain as-graded moisture contents in order to preclude the need for additional subgrade and bearing soil moisture reconditioning and preparation work. • Foundation trenches and slab subgrade soils should be inspected and tested for proper moisture and specified compaction levels and approved by the project geotechnical consultant prior to the placement of steel reinforcement or concrete pour. J. Asphalt And PCC Pavement Design 1. Asphalt Concrete (AC) Paving: Specific pavement designs can best be provided at the completion of rough grading based on R-value tests of the actual finish subgrade soils ; however, the following structural sections may be considered for initial planning phase and cost estimating purposes only (not for construction): • A minimum section of 4 inches of asphalt concrete (AC ) on 6 in ches Caltrans Cla ss 2 aggregate base (AB) or the minimum structural section required by City of Carlsbad, wh ichever is more, may be co nsidered for tile onsite aspliall paving surfaces outside the private and public right-of-way. Actual designs will depend on final subgrade R-value and design Tl, and the approval of the City of Carlsbad. VJNJE & MIDl)I.ETON ENGINEER! G, INC.• 2450 Auto Park Way • Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 UPDATE COMPACTION REPORT, GRADED PAD 475 PARK DRIVE, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA MARCH 25, 2019 PAGE 10 • In the areas where the longitudinal grades exceed 10%, ½-inch asphalt concrete should be added to the design asphalt concrete thickness for each 2% increase in grade or portion thereof. PCC paving should be considered for longitudinal grades over 15%. • Maximum lift for asphalt concrete shall not exceed 3 inches, unless otherwise approved. The asphalt concrete layer (4-inch total section) may consist of 2.5 inches of a binder/base course (¾-inch aggregate) and 1.5 inches of finish top course (½-inch aggregate) topcoat, placed in accordance with the applicable local and regional codes and standards. • The Class 2 aggregate or recycled base (AB) materials shall meet or exceed the requirements set forth in the current California Standard Specification (Caltrans Section 26-1.02). Aggregate base (AB) materials should be compacted to a minimum 95% of the corresponding maximum dry density (ASTM D-1557). Subgrade soils beneath the asphalt paving surfaces should also be compacted to a minimum 95% of the corresponding maximum dry density within the upper 12 inches. 2. PCC Paving: Residential PCC paving supported on very low expansive subgrade soil should be a minimum 5½ inches in thickness, reinforced with #3 reinforcing bars at 15 inches on center each way, placed at mid-height in the slab. Subgrade soils beneath the PCC paving should be compacted to a minimum 90% of the corresponding maximum dry density. Reinforcing bars should be correctly placed extending through the construction (cold) joints tying the slab panels. In construction practices where the reinforcements are discontinued or cut at the construction joints, slab panels should be tied together with minimum 18-inch long (9 inches on either side of the joint) #3 dowels placed at the same spacing as the slab reinforcement. In order to enhance performance , tying of the slab panels to the adjacent curbs, gutters and improvements, where they occur, with #3 dowels at 15 inches on center maximum may also be considered . Additionally , enhanced performance of PCC pavement can be achieved by providing a minimum 8 inch wide by 8 inch deep thickened edge, reinforced with a minimum of one-#3 continuous bar near the bottom along the slab perimeter. VJ NJI' & M ID l)LETON ENGINEERING, INC. • 2450 Auto Park Way• Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-T 214 UPDATE COMPACTION REPORT, GRADED PAD 475 PARK DRIVE, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA MARCH 25 , 2019 PAGE 11 Provide "tool joint" or "softcut" contraction/control joints spaced 10 feet on center (not to exceed 15 feet maximum) each way. The larger dimension of any panel shall not exceed 125% of the smaller dimension. Tool or cut as soon as the slab will support the weight and can be operated without disturbing the final finish which is normally within 2 hours after final finish at each control joint location or 150 psi to 800 psi. Tool or softcuts should be a minimum of 1-inch in depth but should not exceed 1 ¼-inches deep maximum. In case of softcutjoints, anti-ravel skid plates should be used and replaced with each blade to avoid spalling and ravelings. Avoid wheeled equipments across cuts for at least 24 hours. Joints shall intersect free edges at a 90° angle and shall extend straight for a minimum of 1 ½ feet from the edge. The minimum angle between any two intersecting joints shall be 80 °. Align joints of adjacent panels. Also , align joints in attached curbs with joints in slab panels. Provide adequate curing using approved method (curing compound maximum coverage rate= 200 sq . ft./gal.) 3. Permeable Interlocking Concrete Pavers (PICP): Permeable Interlocking Concrete Pave rs (PICP), if considered as a part of the project stormwater quality treatment BMPs, should consist of a self-contained system disallowing saturation of adjacent foundati on bea ring soil , wall backfill, natural/graded embankments, and site improvement subgrade. In general, PICP pavement should maintain a minimum clear distance of 3 feet from building foundations with finish subgrade sloped away at a minimum 2% into a 12 inch wide collector trench along the low edge that is provided with a 4-inch diameter (Sch . 40 or SOR 35) underdrain pipe surrounded with ¾-inch crushed rocks , as conceptually shown in the enclosed Typical Permeable Paver Detail , Plate 6. In case of nearby fill embankments and wall backfill, a minimum 10 feet clea r setback should be considered , unless otherwise approved . The perforated underdrain pipe should discha rge co llected water into an appropri ate storm drainage facility Perimete r cut off walls and curb restraints sho uld be provided, an d bottom and sides of the system lined with an impervious lin er, as shown. PICP pavement closer than 3 feet to building foundations (or 1 O feet from adjacent retaining walls or top of slope) may also be allowed , however additional mitigation measures such as construction of a minimum 8 inch wide, 3-sack concrete cutoff wall extending a minimum of 24 inches below bottom of the - foundation or-adjacent improvements may be required . unless otherwise approved. More specific 1ecornrnendations should be provided by the project geotechnical consultant at the final plan review phase . V1 NJE & M mDLETON ENG INEER ING, I c. • 2450 Auto Park Way • Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 UPDATE COMPACTION REPORT, GRADED PAD 475 PARK DRIVE, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA MARCH 25, 2019 PAGE 12 The PICP pavement structural section should consist of 31/a-inch, PICP over a minimum of 2 inches of ASTM No . 8 bedding course/choke stone over a minimum 8 inches of ASTM No. 57 stone base course over a minimum of 12 inches of 95% compacted subgrade (per ASTM D-1557). Bedding course/choke stone and base course stone should also be well compacted, consolidated and interlocked (avoid crushing the underdrain pipes) with heavy construction equipments. ASTM No . 8, No . 9 or No. 89 should be used for joint materials depending on the joint size and per manufacturer recommendations. Gradation requirements for ASTM No . 57 , No. 8, No. 89 and No . 9 are as follows: Sieve Size 1½" 1" ½" 3/s" No. 4 No. 8 No. 16 No. 50 11~ Na. 57 100 95 to 100 25 to 60 0 to 10 0 to 5 TABLE 1 _ Percent Passi119, .. Np. 8 No. 9 100 100 85 to 100 90 to 100 100 10 to 30 20 to 55 85 to 100 0 to 10 5 to 30 10 to 40 0 to 5 0 to 10 0 to 10 0 to 5 0 to 5 4. General Paving: Base section and subgrade preparation, per structural section design, will be required for all surfaces subject to traffic including roadways, travelways , drive lanes , driveway approaches and ribbon (cross) gutters. Driveway approaches within the public right-of-way should have 12 inches subgrade compacted to a minimum of 95 % compaction levels and provided with a 95% compacted Class 2 base section per the structural section design . Curb and gutters and sidewalks supported on potentially expansive subgrade soils should also be provid ed with a minimum of 4 inches of Ca ltrans Class 2 base or 6 inches of Green Book Class 3 D G. base, unless otherwise approved . Base layer under curb and gutters should be compacted to a minimum 95% while subgrade soils under curb and gutters, and base and subgrade under sidewalks should be compacted to a minimum 90% compaction levels. Appropriate recommendations should be given in the final as-graded compaction report. VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEER ING, INC. • 2450 Auto Park Way• Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 UPDATE COMPACTION REPORT, GRADED PAD 475 PARK DRIVE, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA MARCH 25, 2019 PAGE13 Base and subgrade soils should be tested fo r proper moisture and specified compaction levels, and approved by the project geotechnical consultant prior to the placement of the base or asphalt/PCC/PICP finish surface. K. Slope Planting and Drainage: All slopes should be landscaped with types of plants and planting that do not require excessive irrigation . Excess watering of slopes should be avoided. Slopes left unplanted will be subject to erosion . The irrigation system should be installed in accordance with the governing agencies. Water should not be allowed to flow over the slopes in an uncontrolled manner. Until landscaping is fully established, plastic sheeting should be kept accessible to protect the slopes from periods of prolonged and/or heavy rainfall. Berms should be constructed along the top edges of all fill slopes. In no case should water be allowed to pond or occur in a concentrated flow condition or flow over graded slopes. L. Pad Drainage: The owner/developer is responsible to insure that adequate measures are taken to properly finish grade the building pad after the structures and other improvements are in place so that the drainage waters from the improved site and adjacent properties are directed away from proposed structures in accordance with the designed drainage patterns shown on the approved plans. A minimum of 2% gradient should be maintained away from all foundations . Roof gutters and downspouts should be installed with all discharge water from the downspouts directed away from the foundations and slab to a suitable location. Area drains should be installed in the yards to collect surface water. Planter areas adjacent to foundations should be provided with damp/water proofing, using an impermeable liner against the footings , if determined appropriate. A subdrainage system within the planter area may also be necessary in some cases to prevent saturations of the foundation soils. It should be noted that shallow groundwater conditions may still develop in areas where no such cond itions existed prior to site developm en t. Th is can be contributed to by substantial increases of surface water infiltration res ulting fro m landscape irrigation which was not present before the development of the site. It is almost impossible to absolutely prevent the possibi lity of shallow groundwater on the entire site. Therefore, we recommend that shallow groundwater conditions be remedied if and when they develop. The future property owner should be made aware that altering drainage patterns landscaping, the addition of patios. planters, and other improvements as well as over irrigation and variations in seasonal rainfall , all affect subsurface moisture conditions. which in turn affect structural performance. VINJ E & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. • 2450 Auto Park Way• Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 UPDATE COMPACTION REPORT, GRADED PAD 475 PARK DRIVE. CARLSBAD. CALIFORNIA MARCH 25, 2019 PAGE 14 M. Additional Engineering Observation and Testing: This office is to be notified no later than 2 p.m. on the day before any of the following operations begin, in order to schedule appropriate testing and/or observation/documentation: 1. Foundations and Utility Trenches Beneath Building Slabs: a) Observe the plumbing trenches beneath slabs after the pipes are laid and prior to backfilling. b) Test the plumbing trenches beneath slabs for minimum compaction requirements prior to sand and moisture barrier placement. c) Observe the bottom of the foundation trenches for proper embedment into well-compacted fills, and record proper footing width prior to placement of reinforcing steel. d) Inspect footing reinforcement size and placement. Inspect slab thickness and reinforcement, and verbify sand thickness and vapor barrier placement and thickness under the slab , prior to concrete pour. 2. Grading -Improvements -Utility Trenches, Etc.: a) Fill placed under any conditions 12 inches or more in depth, to include: • Building pads. • Street improvements, sidewalks, curbs and gutters. • Utility trench backfills. • Retaining wall backfills. The spreading or placement of soil obtained from any excavation (spoils from footings , underground utilities, swimming pools, etc.). b) Observation and testing of the base layer and subgrade soil beneath driveways, patios, sidewalks, etc., prior to placen1en t of pavement or concrete. c) Moistu re testing. d) Any operation not included herein which requires our testing, observation , or documentation for submittal to the appropriate agencies V rNJE & MIDD LETON ENGINEER ING, INC. • 2450 Auto Park Way • Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 UPDATE COMPACTION REPORT, GRADED PAD 475 PARK DRIVE, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA VIII. GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS MARCH 25, 2019 PAGE 15 1. The minimum steel reinforcement recommended is based on soil characteristics only, and is not intended to be in lieu of reinforcement necessary for structural considerations. 2. The concrete reinforcement recommendations provided herein should not be considered to preclude the development of shrinkage related cracks, etc.; rather, these recommendations are intended to minimize this potential. If shrinkage cracks do develop, as is expected from concrete, reinforcements tend to limit the propagation of these features. These recommendations are believed to be reasonable and in keeping with the local standards of construction practice. Special attention should be given to any "re-entrant" corners (±270 degree corners) and curing practices during and after concrete pour in order to further minimize shrinkage cracks. 3. It should be noted that the characteristics of an as-compacted fill may change due to post-construction which can results from cycles of drying and wetting, water infiltration , environmental factors , etc. These changes can cause detrimental changes in the fill soil properties such as strength capacity, compressibility characteristics, volume change behavior, permeability, etc. 4. The property owner(s) should be aware of the development of cracks in all concrete surfaces such as floor slabs and exterior stucco associated with normal concrete shrinkage during the curing process. The features depend chiefly upon the condition of concrete and weather conditions at the tome of construction and do not reflect detrimental ground movement. Hairline stucco cracks will often develop at windows/door corners, and floor surface cracks up to 1/a-inch wide in 20 lineal feet may develop as a result of normal concrete shrinkage (according to the American Concrete Institute). 5. The amount of shrinkage related cracks that occur in concrete slab-on-grades, flatwork and driveways depend on many factors, the most important of which is the amount of water in the concrete mix. The purpose of the slab reinforcement is to keep normal concrete shrinkage cracks closed tightly. The amount of concrete shrinkage can be minimized by reducing the amount of water in the mix. To keep shrinkage to a min imum, the fo llowing should be consi dered : • Use th e stiffest mix that can be ha ndled and conso lidated satisfactorily. YINJE & M IDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. • 2450 Auto Park Way • Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 UPDATE COMPACTION REPORT, GRADED PAD 475 PARK DRIVE, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA MARCH 25, 2019 PAGE 16 • Use the largest maximum size of aggregate that is practical, for example concrete made with 3/a-inch maximum size aggregate usually requires about 40- pounds (nearly 5 gallons) more water per cubic yard than concrete with 1-inch aggregate. • Cure the concrete as long as practical. 6 . The amount of slab reinforcement provided for conventional slab-on-grade construction considers that good quality concrete materials, proportioning, craftsmanship , and control tests where appropriate and applicable are provided. 7. All retaining walls should be provided with a drain along the backside as generally shown on the Retaining Wall Drain Detail (included as Plate 7). Wall backdrains should be inspected and approved by this office prior to wall backfill operations. Expansive soils should not be used for backfilling of any retaining structure. All retaining walls should also be provided with a 1: 1 wedge of granular, compacted backfill measured from the base of the wall footing to the finished surface. The planting of large trees behind any retaining wall will adversely affect their performance and should be avoided. 8. All underground utility trenches beneath interior and exterior slabs 12-inches or more in depth shall be compacted by mechanical means to a minimum of 90% of the maximum dry density of the soil, unless otherwise specified. Care should be taken not to crush the utilities or pipes during the compaction of the trench backfill. Trench backfill materials and compaction shall also conform to the requirements of governing agencies and authorities, as applicable. Non-expansive, granula r backfill soils should be used. Flooding or jetting of the backfill is not allowed. IX. LIMITATIONS Ou r description of grading operations, as well as observation and testing services, have been limited to those grading operations performed periodically from October 7, 2005 through March 31 , 2006 . The conclusions contained herein have been based upon our observation and testing as noted . No representations are made as to the quality or extent of materials not observed and tested . This report is issued with the understanding that the owner or his representative is responsible to ensure that the information and recommendations are provided to the project arch itect / structural engineer so that they can be incorporated into the plans. Necessary steps shall be taken to ensure that the project general contractor and subcontractors are provided with a copy of this report and carry out recomrnendations specified therein during the construc-tion V1NJE & M m DLETON ENGINEERING, INC.• 2450 Auto Park Way • Escond ido, Cali fornia 92029-1 229 • Phone (760) 743-1 214 UPDATE COMPACTION REPORT, GRADED PAD 475 PARK DRIVE, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA MARCH 25, 2019 PAGE 17 The project geotechnical engineer should be provided the opportunity for a general review of the projects final design plans and specifications in order to ensure that the recommendations provided in this report are properly interpreted and implemented. The project soil engineer should also be provided the opportunity to field verify the foundations prior to placing concrete. If the project geotechnical engineer is not provided the opportunity of making these reviews, he can assume no responsibility for misinterpretation of his recommendations. This report should be considered valid for permit purposes for a period of six months and is subject to review by our firm following that time. In case of plan revisions including changes in the final pad size, actual building and improvement locations, li nes and grades, and final elevations, this report should be reviewed and updated by this office for review comments and additional recommendations based on the plan changes, as appropriate. If you have any questions or need clarification, please contact this office at your convenience. Reference to our Job #19-118-F will help to expedite our response to your inquiries. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you. CEG #2362 V1NJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. • 2450 Auto Park Way • Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 REFERENCES Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Section 4 -Construction, Volume 04.08: Soil and Rock (I); D420 - D5876, 2016. Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Section 4 -Construction, Volume 04.09: Soil and Rock (II); D5877 - Latest, 2016. Corrosion Guidelines, Caltrans, Version 1.0, September 2003. California Building Code (CBC), California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 2, Volumes 1 & 2, 2016, International Code Council. "The Green Book" Standard Specifications For Public Works Construction, Public Works Standards, Inc., BNi Building News, 2015 Edition. California Geological Survey, 2008 (Revised), Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California, Special Publication 117 A, 108p. California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology (California Geological Survey), 1986 (revised), Guidelines for Preparing Engineering Geology Reports: DMG Note 44. California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology (California Geological Survey), 1986 (revised), Guidelines to Geologic and Seismic Reports: DMG Note 42 . "Proceeding of The NCEER Workshop on Evaluation of Liquefaction Resistance Soils," Edited by T. Leslie Youd and lzzat M. Idriss, Technical Report NCEER-97-0022, Dated December 31 , 1997. "Recommended Procedures For Implementation of DMG Special Publication 117 Guidelines For Analyzing and Mitigation Liquefaction In California," Southern California Earthquake center; USC, March 1999. "Foundations & Earth Structures," Naval Facilities Engineering Command, DM 7.02. "Introduction to Geotechnical Engineering, Robert D. Holtz, William D. Kovacs. "Introductory Soil Mechanics and Foundations: Geotechnical Engineering," George F. Sowers, Fourth Edition . "Foundation Analysis and Design," Joseph E. Bowels. Caterpillar Performance Handbook, Edition 29, 1998. "An Engineering Manual For Slope Stability Studies," J.M. Duncan, A.L. Buchignani and Marius De Wet, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, March 1987. "Minimum Design Loads For Buildings and Other Structures," ASCE 7-10, American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). USGS Maps http://ngmdb.usgs.gov/rnaps/mapview/. 2016b. SEAOC/OSHPD (Structural Engineers Association of America/ California's Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development) ground motion calculator https://seisrnicmaps.org / ~-------===,l v1~11~r1·r lVlAP j CARLSBIJJJ 2 3 ©2006 Thomas Bros. Maps E F H PROJECT SITE: 1106 -G 7 f;; LEGOLANO 'g CALIFORNIA ~ ~ ~ <?+' v" 0 ft 1150 2300 6 7 2 ~,. ____ ..,_..,. ___ • 3 J A ( PLATE 1 J V&M JOB #19-118-F / I I i I ;' I f I / . I I / / / / / / / ). / .. ~-./ . ...~ l PLATE 2 ) V&M JOB #19-118-F r <r-· m """~ . .,,--P/L U -._ "'GE0!~-2:'.l~AL LEGEND . 1 ~- APPROX LIMl;~OMPACTED FILL 3 APPROX LOCATION FIELD DENSI~~=;• = =·1 CD REfAINING WALLS NOT BUILT TO DATE NORTH TEMPORARY SLOPE WEST TEMPORARY SLOPE & BASEMENT PAD [ PLATE 3 ~ V &M JOB #19-118-F GEOLOGIC MAP Pertinent Geolo2:ic Deposits D Qop2.4 Old Paralic Deposits (Late to Middle Pleistocene). [I] Tsa Santiago Formation (Middle Eocene) Excerpt From the Geologic Map of the Oceanside 30' x 60' Quadrangle, California Michael P. Kennedy and Siang S. Tan, 2006. Scale 1 :25,000 Plate 4 V&,M Job #19-118-P 'ISOLATION JOINTS & RE-ENTRANT CORNER REINFORCEMENT RE-ENTRANT CORNER REINFORCEMENT -------.. No. 4 BARS PLACED AT 1.5" '- BELOW TOP OF SLAB NOTES: Typical -No Scale (C) (B) ■ RE-ENTRANT CORNER CRACK 1. Isolation joints around the columns should be either circular as shown in (A) or di amond shaped as shown in (B). If no isolation joints are used around comlumns, or if corners of the isolation joints do no meet the contraction joints, radial cracking as shown in (C) may occur (Reference ACI). 2. ln order to control cracking at the re-entrant corners ( ±J.,70° corners), provide reinforcement as shown in (C). 3. Re-entrant coner reinforcement shown is provided as a general guideline only and is subject to verification and changes by the project architect or structural engineer based upon slab geometry, location, and other engineering and construction factors. VJNJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Auto Park Way Escondido, Cnlifomia 92029 760-743-i214 vinje.middle1on@sbcgloba l.net PLATE.5 V&M Job #19-118-F July 2Jj1C -----------------------·-------------------·---' I TYPICALPERMEABLEPAVERDETAlL I lmpenneable Liner: HDPE or PVC Geomembrane Not To Scale ASTM No. 8 or No. 9 Aggregates in opening Per Manufactures Specifications 3 ½" Thick Concrete Pavers 16" Curb / Concrete Edge Restrnint (Min. 6") _ 4" Pe1forated Underdrai.J.1 (Sch. 40) Smrnunded with ¾ " Rock Slope to drnin (Min. 30 Mil Thick) ~ Soil Subgrade Upper 12" Compacted to 95% (ASTM Dl557) Vinje & Middleton Engineering, Inc. Plate 6 V & ivl Job #19-118-F RETAINING WALL DRAIN DETAIL Typical -No Scale Waterproofing Drainage------ Perforated Drain Pipe ---L -1 11 ~'.'. (. ? ·,··•1.4 :·•,:.·: .• /.~I.:.· · ... · . ..s . -I -=1 _·:_,--- --1 11== 11-_ -11 1-__ , ' I I I I .. ' .. Approved Compacted Soil or Competent Natural Material CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS: 3" -I Filter material. Crushed rock (wrapped in filter fabric) or Class 2 Permeable. (See specifications below) SPECIFICATIONS FOR CAL TRANS CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL (68-1.025) SIEVE SIZE % PASSING I" .............................. 100 ¾" ............................. 90-100 ½" ............................. 40-100 No. 4 ··················· .. ·······25-40 No. 8 ............................ J8-33 No. 30 ........................... 5-15 No . 50 ··························· 0-7 No. 200 ························· 0-3 Sand Equivalent> 75 1. Provide granular, non-expansive backfill in a 1: 1 gradient wedge behind the wall. Compact backfill to minimum 90% of laboratory standard. 2. Provide back drainage for wall to prevent build-up of hydrostatic pressures. Use drainage openings along base of wall or back drain system as outlined below. 3. Backdrain should consist of 4" diameter PVC pipe (Sch. 40 or equivalent) with perforations down. Drain to suitable outlet at a minimwn 1 % fall. Provide ¾ " to ½ " crushed rock filter wrapped in filter fabric (Mirafi 140N or equivalent). Delete filter fabric if Caltrans Class 2 Permeable material is used. Compact Permeable Class 2 to minimum 90% of laboratory standard. 4. Seal back of wall with waterproofing in accordance with the architects specifications. 5. Provide positive drainage to disallow ponding of water above wall. A lined drainage ditch with a minimum 2% flow away fi:om wall is recommended. * Use 1 ½ cubic foot per foot crushed rock with granular soil and 4 cubic foot per foot if expansive soil is present. VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. 2--i50 Auio Park Way Escondido, Californ ia 92029 760-743-1214 vinje.micldleton@sbcglobal.l!et PLATE 7 V&M Job #19-118-F Attachment 1 Job #05-422-F and 05-423-F October 28, 2010 Kirk Patrick Development, LLC Attention: Mr. Ty Rossman P.O. Box 3811 Manhattan Beach, California 90266 SLOPE STABILITY, NEAR VERTICAL TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION SLOPES, EXISTING CONTIGUOUS GRADED PADS LOCATED AT 475 PARK DRIVE AND 4488 ADAMS STREET, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA I. INTRODUCTION: Pad grading for the above referenced properties was observed by this office in 2005 and 2006. Upon completion, the following compaction reports were issued by this office: I. "As-Graded Compaction Report and Foundation Recommendations for Proposed Single-Family Residence Located at 47 5 Park Avenue, City of Carlsbad Drawing #423-8A, Project #CDP 03-12," Job #05-422-F, dated April 25, 2006. 2. "As-Graded Compaction Report and Foundation Recommendations for Proposed Single-Family Residence Located at 4488 Adams Street, City of Carlsbad Drawing#412-2A, Project #CDP 03-12," Job #05-423-F, dated April 25, 2006. Prior to site grading, the properties were studied for surface and subsurface conditions by this office which resulted in the following technical report: I. "Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, Undeveloped Hillside Lots, 4588 Adams Street, Carlsbad, Califof!11a," Job #02-1 08-P, dated February 11, 2002. The above referenced compaction reports and preliminary investigation were reviewed and copies are on file with our office. We understand that the subject properties have sat idle and remain substantially unchanged since the issue of the compaction reports. The purpose of this letter is to address the temporary construction slopes at both properties which were constructed nearly 4½ years ago and remain. A site visit was conducted by the undersigned in connection with trus effort on October 27, 2010. II. FINDINGS: Temporary construction slopes at both properties are largely in the 10 feet high range, but do locally approach 12 foet high maximum. The slopes generally occur in near vertical conditions within the bottom 4 to 6-feet and Slope Stability Near Vertical Temporary Construction Slopes 475 Park Drive and 4488 Adams Street, Carlsbad Page2 October 28, 2010 range from approximately ¼: 1 to 1: 1 (horizontal to vertical) above. The construction slopes are in substantial conformance with our recommendations presented in the preliminary investigation (reference above) and were expected to be temporary slopes with wall and building construction to follow in a timely manner. However, we undeistand that the temporary construction slopes remain as constructed in 2006. The following was noted: 1. The temporary slopes are largely covered by jute matting. 2. The slopes expose cemented sandstone deposits. 3. Some minor erosion and shallow ruts are present on all temporary slopes. 4 More moderate erosion is present on the west end of the north temporary slope at the northern pad location (475 Park Avenue). The noted erosion is the result from runoff in a brow ditch that drains over the slope and onto the building pad areas. III. CONCLUSIONS: The temporary construction slopes were expected to be only temporary. However, after remaining exposed for more than 4-years the slopes are considered to be performing well. Noted erosion of the slope faces is surficial. No evidence of deep-seated instability within the temporary slopes is indicated. The jute matting should be maintained to impede further erosion of the slope faces, and consideration should be given to addressing the brow ditch that drains onto the north building pad. All the temporary slopes should be re-evaluated prior to building or wall constructions. Additional temporary slope recommendations, if warranted, can be given at that time. If you have any questions or need clarification, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Reference to our Job #05-422 and 423-F will help to expedite our response to your inquiries. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you. VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. Steven J. Melzer CEG #2362 SJM/mpr mpr\my fiks\grading department projccts\05-422 and 423-f-kirk po.trick devdopment\slope stability near vertical temp conslrnction slopes letter Attachment 2 Job #05-422-F April 25, 2006 Kirk Patrick Development, LLC Attention: Mr. Ty Rossmann 936 Monterey Boulevard Hermosa Beach, California 90254 AS-GRADED COMP ACTION REPORT AND FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 475 PARK DRIVE, CITY OF CARLSBAD DRAWING #423-8A, PROJECT #CDP 03-12 In accordance with the Grading Ordinance for the City of Carlsbad, this as-graded compaction report has been prepared for the above referenced project. We have completed engineering observation and testing services in conjunction with the grading operations for the building pad and retaining driveway retaining wall backfills. This report summarizes the results of our tests and observations of the compacted fill. The compacted fill in the subject area was placed periodically from October 7, 2005 through March 31, 2006. Actual dates are shown on the enclosed compaction test result sheets. I. REFERENCES The following listed grading plan and document was used by this office as part of this project: A. Grading Plan prepared by The Mapsmith. B. "Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation" report, prepared by this office, dated February 11, 2002, Job #02-108.-P. II. GRADING INFORMATION/GROUND PREPARATION Prior to grading operations, the site within the limits of the grading operations for the construction of a building pad was cleared of vegetation. All questionable loose and compressible soils were also removed from the areas receiving fill. Adequate keys or benches were constructed a minimum of 2- feet into firm, undisturbed natural ground or formational soils prior to fill placement. The building area is a split level "cut" pad with a difference of 10-feet from the upper and lower levels. After "plan" grades were achieved, it was found that the upper level still had soft compressible As-Graded Compaction Report, Residential Development 475 Park Drive, Carlsbad Page2 April 25, 2006 soils which were removed and re-compacted. The added depth of 10-feet for the lower portion, removed all loose compressible soils. The perimeter footings for the upper portion (Elevation 79. 0) will be founded in fill, with the westerly portion being tied to the upper portion of the basement or lower level retained/restrained wall. Differential settlement is not expected to be a factor due to the wall separating the upper and lower portions. Site preparation and grading were conducted in substantial conformance with Appendix Chapter 33, latest edition of the California Building Code, the Grading Ordinance for the City of Carlsbad and our above listed preliminary geotechnical report. All inspections and testing were conducted under the observation of this office. In our opinion, all embankments and excavations were constructed in substantial conformance with the provided grading plan, and are acceptable for their intended use. Ill. FILL PLACEMENT Fill was placed in 6 to 8-inch lifts and compacted by means of heavy construction equipment. Field density tests were performed in accordance with ASTM Method D-1556 sand cone method as the fill was placed. The moisture content for each density sample was also determined. The approximate locations of the field density tests are shown on the attached drawing. The locations of the tests were placed to provide the best possible coverage. Areas of low compaction, as indicated by the field density tests, were brought to the attention of the contractor. These areas were reworked by the contractor and retested. The test locations and final test results are summarized on the compaction test result table. Elevations and locations of field density tests were determined by hand level and pacing/tape measure relative to field staking done by others. The results of our field density tests and laboratory testing indicate that the fills at the site were compacted to at least 90% of the conesponding maximum dry density at the tested locations. If the building pad should undergo any prolonged seasonal wetting and drying periods prior to construction, remedial grading could be required depending on the site soil characteristics. Depths of removal and re-compact can best be determined just prior to construction by appropriate inspection and testing. IV. SITE CORROSION ASSESSMENT A site is considered to be corrosive to foundation elements, wall s and drainage structures if one or more of the following conditions exists: * pH is less than 5.5 . * Sulfate concentration is greater than or equal to 2000 ppm (0.2% by weight). As-Graded Compaction Report, Residential Development 475 Park Drive, Carlsbad Page3 April 25, 2006 * Chloride concentration is greater than or equal to 500 ppm (0.05% by weight). For structural elements, the rrunimum resistivity of soil ( or water) indicates the relative quantity of soluble salts present in the soil ( or water). In general, a minimum resistivity value for soil ( or water) less than 1000 ohm-cm indicates the presence of high quantities of soluble salts and a higher propensity for corrosion. V. APPROPRIATE LABORATORY TESTS A. Maximum Dry Density Optimum Moisture Tests: The maximum dry density and optimum moisture contents of the different soil types used as compacted fill were determined in accordance with ASTM Method D-1557. B. Expansion Tests: Expansion tests were conducted per 2001 UBC Standard Procedure 18-2 on representative san1ples of the on site soils during the preliminary investigative phase of the project in order to determine the expansion potential and to provide appropriate foundation recommendations. As no new soils were encountered during the grading operations, no additional testing was conducted. C. Direct Shear Tests: Direct shear tests were conducted on representative samples of the on site soils during the preliminary investigative phase of the project in order to determine the allowable bearing capacity and to provide retaining wall design parameters. As no new soils were encountered during the grading operations, no additional testing was conducted. D. Corrosion Testing: pH-Resistivity and sulfate testing were determined in accordance with California Test Method 643 and 417 respectively on a representative sample of the finish grade soils in the building pad area in order to determine the corrosiveness of the soil. VI. RECOMMENDATIONS THIS REPORT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED AS A PART OF THE PROJECT FOUNDATION PLANS AND MUST BE PROVIDED TO THE PROJECT ARCHITECT/STRUCTURAL ENGINEER TO ENSURE THE FOLLOWING FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS ARE INCLUDED IN THOSE PLANS** The following minimum foundation recommendations for very low expansive (Expansion Index less than 21) bearing soils, classified using the "Unified Soil Classification System" or "USCS" as SM, with minimal indicated fill differentiai depth from our "Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation" report should be adhered to, and incorporated into the foundation plans. Foundation plans and details may be submitted to our office for review, to insure conformance As-Graded Compaction Report, Residential Development 475 Park Drive, Carlsbad Page4 April 25, 2006 with our recommendations. Please note(**) items for revised recommendations since the issuance of our referenced preliminary geotechnical report. A. Foundations, Monolithic Pour System Conventional shallow foundations with stem walls and slab-on-grade floors, or slab-on- ground with turned-down footings. 1. Continuous strip stem wall foundations and turned-down footings should be a minimum of 15-inches wide by 18-inches deep one and two story structures respectively. Spread pad footings should be at least 24-inches square and 12-inches deep, for one and two story structures. Minimum depths are measured from the lowest adjacent ground surface, not including the sand under the slab. Exterior continuous foundations or turned-down footings should enclose the entire building perimeter, to include the garage entryway. 2. Continuous interior and exterior stem wall foundations should be reinforced with a minimum of four #4 reinforcing bars. Place two bars 3-inches below the top of the stem, and two bars 3-inches above the bottom of the footing. Turned-down footings should be reinforced with a minimum of two #4 bars top and two #4 bars at the bottom. Reinforcement for spread pad footings should be designed by the project structural engineer. 3. Foundations where the surface of the ground slopes more than 1-unit vertical in 10-units horizontal ( 10% slope), shall be level or shall be stepped so that both top and bottom of such foundation are level. Individual steps in continuous footings shall not exceed 18- inches in height and the slope of a series of such steps shall not exceed I-unit vertical to 2-units horizontal (50%) unless otherwise specified. The steps shall be detailed on the structural drawings. The local effects due to the discontinuity of the steps shall also be considered in the design of foundations as appropriate and applicable. 4. Open or backfilled trenches parallel with a footing shall not be below a plane having a downward slope ofl unit vertical to 2 units horizontal (50%) from a line 9-inches above the bottom edge of the footing, and not closer than 18-inches fro m the face of such footing. 5. Where pipes cross under footings, the fo otings shall be specially designed. Pipe sleeves shall be provided where pipes cross through footings or footing walls and sleeve clearances shall provide for possible footing settlement, but not less than 1-inch all around the pipe. As-Graded Compaction Report, Residential Development 475 Park Drive, Carlsbad Page 5 April 25, 2006 ** 6. All .interior slabs should be a minimum of 4-.inches .in thickness reinforced with #3 reinforc.ing bars spaced 18-.inches on center each way, placed midheight .in the slab. Use 4-inches of clean sand (SE 30 or greater) beneath all slabs. A well performing moisture/vapor retardant (10-mil or greater) must be placed midheight .in the sand. Joints in the moisture/vapor retardant should be overlapped a minimum of 12-inches. 7. Provide re-entrant (±270° corners) reinforcement for all interior slabs as generally shown on the enclosed "Isolation Joints and Re-Entrant Corner Reinforcement" detail. Re- entrant corners will depend on slab geometry and/or interior column locations. 8. Provide "soft-cut" contraction/control joints consisting of sawcuts spaced 10-feet on center maximum each way for all interior slabs. Cut as soon as the slab will support the weight of the saw, and operate without disturbing the final finish, which is normally within 2-hours after final finish at each control joint location, or when the compressive strength reaches 150 to 800 psi. The "soft-cut" must be a minimum of 1-.inch in depth and must not exceed 1 ¼-inch in depth or the reinforcing may be damaged. Anti-ravel skid plates should be used and replaced with each blade to avoid spalling and raveling. Avoid wheeled equipment across cuts for at least 24-hours. B. Corrosiveness 1. Laboratory test results indicate that the minimum resistivity is greater than 1000 ohm-cm suggesting the presence of low quantities of soluble salts. Test results show that the chloride concentration is less than 500 ppm, and the pH is greater than 5. 5. Based on the results of the available corrosion analyses, the project site is considered non-corrosive. The project site is not located within 1000-feet of salt or brackish water. 2. Based upon the result of the sulfate test, the amount of water soluble sulfate (S04) was found to be 0.001 percent by weight which is considered negligible ccording to the California Building Code Table No. 19-A-4. Portland cement Type II may be used. C. Paving and Concrete Improvements Not Within The Public or Private Street Right of Way 1. Exterior flatwork adjacent to buildings must be a minimum of 4-inches in thickness reinforced with 6x6/1 0xl 0 welded wire mesh carefully placed 2-inches beiow the top of As-Graded Compaction Report, Residential Development 475 Park Drive, Carlsbad Page6 April 25, 2006 the slab. Provide ''tool joint" or "soft cut" contraction/control joints spaced 10-feet on center (not to exceed 12-feet maximum) each way within 24-hours ofconcrete pour. The construction procedures for sawcuts (if used) are described in Item #A-8 above. 2. Concrete driveways and parking areas should consist of5-inch thick concrete reinforced with #3 reinforcing bars spaced 18-inches on center each way placed 2-inches below the top of the slab. The concrete should be placed over 6-inches subgrade compacted to a minimum of90% of ASTM 1557-91. Where longitudinal grades exceed 15%, provide a minimum of 8-inch wide by 8-inch deep shear anchors dug perpendicular to the driveway longitudinal profile into the approved subgrade at 25-foot interval maximum. Provide ''tool joint" or "soft cut" contraction/control joints spaced 10-feet on center (not to exceed 12-feet maximum) each way within 24-hours of concrete pour. The construction procedures for sawcuts (if used) are described in Item #A-8 above. ** 3. Asphalt concrete (AC) driveways and parking areas should consist of3-inches AC over 6-inches Caltrans Class 2 aggregate base compacted to a minimum of95% over 6-inches subgrade compacted to a minimum of90% of ASTM 1557-91. Where longitudinal grades exceed 10%, ½-inch asphalt should be added to the design asphalt thickness for each 2% increase in grade or portion thereof 4. Sub and basegrade soils should not be allowed to dry out or become saturated prior to placement of concrete or asphalt. Subgrade and basegrade soils shall be tested for proper moisture and compaction levels just prior to placement of the in1provements. 5. Proper drainage must be maintained at all times so that no water from any source is allowed to infiltrate the sub or basegrade soils, or deterioration of the improvements may occur. D. Inspections 1. If required by the governing agency, this office should be notified to inspect or test the following prior to foundation concrete pours: a) Inspect the plumbing trenches beneath slabs after the pipes are laid and prior to backfilling. b) Test the plumbing trenches beneath slabs for minimum compaction requirements prior to sand and moisture barrier placement. As-Graded Compaction Report, Residential Development 475 Park Drive, Carlsbad Page 7 April 25, 2006 c) Inspect the bottom of the footing trenches for proper embedment into firm compacted or forrnational soils, and inspect for proper footing width prior to placement of reinforcing steel. d) Inspect the footing reinforcement size and placement. Inspect the slabs for proper thickness, reinforcing placement and size, inspect the sand thickness and moisture barrier placement and thickness, after the initial footing embedment and width inspection, and prior to concrete pour. E. Soil Design Parameters The following soil design parameters are based upon the soils used in the construction of the building pad: 1. Use a friction angle of 33 degrees. 2. Use a wet density of 129.8 pc£ 3. Use a coefficient of friction of 0.39 for concrete on compacted soils. 4. Use an active pressure of 38 pcf equivalent fluid pressure for cantilever, unrestrained walls with level backfill surface. 5. Use a active pressure of 5 8 pcf equivalent fluid pressure for cantilever unrestrained walls with a 2: 1 (horizontal to vertical) backfill. 6. Use an at rest pressure of 59 pcf equivalent fluid pressure for restrained walls. 7. Use a passive resistance of 44 7 pcf equivalent fluid pressure for level surface condition at the toe. 8. Use an allowable foundation pressure of2,000 psffor minimum 15-inch wide by 18-inch deep footings. 9 Use an allowable lateral bearing pressure of 200 psfper foot for all structures except retaining walls. Notes: 1. Use a minimum safety factor of 1.5 for wall overturning and sliding stability. Because large movements must take place before maximum passive resistance can be developed, As-Graded Compaction Report, Residential Development 475 Park Drive, Carlsbad Page8 April 25, 2006 a safety factor of 2.0 may be considered if sensitive structures or improvements are planned near or adjacent to the top of the wall. 2. When combining passive and frictional resistance, the passive component should be reduced by one-third. 3. The allowable soil bearing pressure provided herein was determined for footings having a minimum width of 15-inches and a minimum depth of 18-inches below the lowest adjacent ground surface. This value may be increased 20% for each additional foot of depth, and 20% for each additional foot of width to a maximum of 3,500 psf, if needed. The allowable soil bearing pressure provided herein is for dead plus live loads and may be increased by one-third for wind and seismic loading. 4. The lateral bearing earth pressures may be increased by the amount of the designated value for each additional foot of depth to a maximum of 1,500 pounds per square foot. F. General Recommendations 1. The minimum steel reinforcement provided herein is based on soil characteristics only, and is not intended to be in lieu of reinforcement necessary for structural considerations. 2. Recommendations for a swimming pool/spa are not within the scope of this report. If a swimming pool/spa and associated structures are to be constructed, this office should be contacted in order to provide site specific recommendations prior to beginning any excavations. 3. All retaining walls should be provided with a drain along the backside as generally shown on the enclosed "Retaining Wall Drain" detail. Specific drainage provisions behind retaining wall structures must be inspected by this office prior to backfilling the wall. All backfill soils must be compacted to a minimum of 90% of the corresponding maximum dry density, ASTM 1557-91. 4. All underground utility trenches beneath interior and exterior slabs 12-inches or more in depth shall be compacted by mechanical means to a minimum of 90% of the maximum dry density of the soil, unless otherwise specified. Care should be taken not to crush the utilities or pipes during the compaction of the trench backfill. No flooding or jetting of the backfill is allowed. 5. The planting of large trees behind any retaining wall will adversely affect their performance and should be avoided. As-Graded Compaction Report, Residential Development 475 Park Drive, Carlsbad G. Seismic Coefficients Page9 April 25, 2006 The following site specific seismic parameters for the above referenced project were determined in accordance with the latest edition of the California Building Code requirements. The following parameters are consistent with the indicated project seismic environment and may be utilized for project design work. Site Soil Seismic Seismic Seismic Response Coefficients Profile Seismic Zone Source Type Zone Factor Type Na Nv Ca Cv Ts To Sc 4 0.4 B 1.0 1.1 0.40 0.60 0.600 0.120 According to Chapter 16, Division IV and V, latest edition of the California Building Code Liquefaction and seismically induced settlements will not be factors in the development of the proposed structures and improvements. H. Setbacks 1. Footings located on or adjacent to the top of slopes should be extended to a sufficient depth to provide a minimum horizontal distance of7-feet or one-third of the slope height, whichever is greater (need not exceed 40-feet maximum) between the bottom edge of the footing and face of slope. Reinforcement for deepened footings should be provided by the project structural engineer and detailed on the approved foundation plans. 2. The outer edge of all slopes experience "downslope creep", which may cause distress to structures. If any structures including buildings, patios, sidewalks, swimming pools, spas etc, are placed within the setback, FURTHER RECOMMENDATIONS WILL BE REQUIRED. The concrete reinforcement recommendations provided herein should not be considered to preclude the development of shrinkage related cracks, etc.; rather, these recommendations are intended to minimize this potential. If shrinkage cracks do develop, as is expected from concrete, reinforcements tend to limit the propagation of these features. These recommendations are believed to be reasonable and in keeping with the local standards of construction practice. Special attention should be given to any "re-entrant" corners (±270 degree corners) and curing practices during and after concrete pour in order to further minimize shrinkage cracks. As-Graded Compaction Report, Residential Development 475 Park Drive, Carlsbad I. Slopes Page 10 April 25, 2006 1. All slopes should be landscaped with types of plants and planting that do not require excessive irrigation. Excess watering of slopes should be avoided. Slopes left unplanted will be subject to erosion. The irrigation system should be installed in accordance with the governing agencies. 2. Water should not be allowed to flow over the slopes in an uncontrolled manner. Until landscaping is fully established, plastic sheeting should be kept accessible to protect the slopes from periods of prolonged and/or heavy rainfall. Benns should be constructed along the top edges of all fill slopes. In no case should water be allowed to pond or flow over slopes. 3. Brow ditches should be constructed along the top of all cut slopes sufficient to guide runoff away from the building site and adjacent fill slopes prior to the project being completed. J. Drainage 1. The owner/developer is responsible to insure adequate measures are taken to properly finish grade the building pad after the structures and other improvements are in place so that the drainage waters from the improved site and adjacent properties are directed away from proposed structures in accordance with the designed drainage patterns shown on the approved plans. 2. A minimum of 2% gradient should be maintained away from all fo undations. Roof gutters and downspouts should be installed on the building, all discharge from downspouts should be led away from the foundations and slab to a suitable location. Installation of area drains in the yards should also be considered. 3. Planter areas adjacent to foundations should be provided with damp/water proofing, using an impermeable liner against the footings, and a subdrainage system within the planter area. 4. It should be noted that shallow groundwater conditions may still develop in areas where no such conditions existed prior to site development. This can be contributed to by substantial increases of surface water infiltration resulting from landscape irrigation which was not present before the development of the site. It is almost impossible to absolutely prevent the possibility of shallow groundwater on the entire site. Therefore, we recommend that shallow groundwater conditions be remedied if and when they develop. As-Graded Compaction Report, Residential Development 475 Park Drive, Carlsbad Page 11 April 25, 2006 5. The property owner should be made aware that altering drainage patterns, landscaping, the addition of patios, planters, and other improvements, as well as over irrigation and variations in seasonal rainfall, all affect subsurface moisture conditions, which in turn affect structural performance. VII. GENERAL INFORMATION It should be noted that the characteristics of as-compacted fill may change due to post-construction changes from cycles of drying and wetting, water infiltration, applied loads, environmental changes, etc. These changes can cause detrimental changes in the fill characteristics such as in strength behavior, compressibility behavior, volume change behavior, permeability, etc. Where present, clayey deposits are subjected to continued swelling and shrinkage upon wetting and drying. Maintaining a uniform moisture during the post construction periods is essential in the future performance of the site structures and improvements. The property owner(s) should be aware of the development of cracks in all concrete surfaces such as floor slabs and exterior -stucco associated with normal concrete shrinkage during the curing process. The features depend chiefly upon the condition of concrete and weather conditions at the tome of construction and do not reflect detrimental ground movement. Hairline stucco cracks will often develop at windows/door corners, and floor surface cracks up to 1/a-inch wide in 20 lineal feet may develop as a result of normal concrete shrinkage ( according to the American Concrete Institute). The amount of shrinkage related cracks that occur in concrete slab-on-grades, flatwork and driveways depend on many factors, the most important of which is the amount of water in the concrete mix. The purpose of the slab reinforcement is to keep normal concrete shrinkage cracks closed tightly. The amount of concrete shrinkage can be minimized by reducing the amount of water in the mix. To keep shrinkage to a minimum, the following should be considered: A. Use the stiffest mix that can be handled and consolidated satisfactorily. B. Use the largest maximum size ofaggregate that is practical, for example concrete made with 3/a-inch maximum size aggregate usually requires about 40-pounds (nearly 5 gallons) more water per cubic yard than concrete with 1-inch aggregate. C. Cure the concrete as long as practical. The amount of slab reinforcement provided for conventional slab-on-grade construction considers that good quality concrete materials, proportioning, craftsmanship, and control tests where appropriate and applicable are provided. As-Graded Compaction Report, Residential Development 475 Park Drive, Carlsbad Page 12 April 25, 2006 This office is to be notified no later than 2 p.m. on the day before any of the following operations begin to schedule appropriate testing and/or inspections. A. Fill placed under any conditions 12-inches or more in depth, to include: 1. Building pads. 2. Street improvements, sidewalks, curbs and gutters. 3. Utility trench backfills. 4. Retaining wall backfills. 5. The spreading or placement of soil obtained from any excavation (spoils from footings, underground utilities, swimming pools, etc.). B. Inspection and testing ofsubgrade and basegrade beneath driveways, patios, sidewalks, etc., prior to placement of pavement or concrete. C. Moisture testing. D. Geotechnical foundation inspections, if required by the governing agency. E. Any operation not included herein which requires our testing, observation, or inspection for certification to the appropriate agencies. VIII. LIMITATIONS Our description of grading operations, as well as observations and testing services herein, have been limited to those grading operations performed periodically from October 7, 2005 through March 31 , 2006. The conclusions contained herein have been based upon our observations and testing as noted. No representations are made as to the quality or extent of materials not observed and tested. This report is issued with the understanding that the owner or his representative is responsible to ensure that the information and recommendations are provided to the project architect/structural engineer so that they can be incorporated into the plans. Necessary steps shall be taken to ensure that the project general contractor and subcontractors carry out such recommendations during construction. The project soil engineer should be provided the opportunity for a general review of the projects final design plans ai1d specifications in order to ensure that the recommendations provided in this report As-Graded Compaction Report, Residential Development 475 Park Drive, Carlsbad Page 13 April 25, 2006 are properly interpreted and implemented. The project soils engineer should also be provided the opportunity to field verify the foundations prior to placing concrete. If the project soil engineer is not provided the opportunity of making these reviews, he can assume no responsibility for misinterpretation of his recommendations. The attached drawing details the approximate locations of cuts, fills, and approximate locations of the density tests taken, and is applicable to the site at the time this report was prepared. This report should be considered valid for permit purposes for a period of six months and is subject to review by our firm following that time. IF ANY CHANGES ARE MADE, PAD SIZE, BUILDING LOCATION, ELEVATIONS, ETC., THIS REPORT WILL BECOME INVALID AND FURTHER ENGINEERING AND RECOMMENDATIONS WILL BECOME NECESSARY. If you have any questions or need clarification, please contact this office at your convenience. Reference to our Job #05-422-F will help to expedite our response to your inquiries. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you . VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. Distribution : Addressee: (6) NAME: Kirk Patrick Development, LLC LOCATION: 475 Park Drive, Carlsbad TEST RESll LTS Maximum Dry Density/Optimum Moisture Content, ASTM 1557: Soi I Type 1: Brown Silty Sand With Trace Clay (Fill)** Maximum Dry Density: 132.3 pcf Optimum Moisture: 11.3% Soil Type 2: Tan Fine to Coarse Sand (Bedrock)** Maximum Dry Density: 125.5 pcf Optimum Moisture: 11.5% Soil Type 3: Red Brown Fine to Medium Sand (Fill/Terrace Deposit)** Maximum Dry Density: 131.4 pcf Optimum Moisture: 10.3% Soil Type 5: Dark Brown Silty Sand Maximum Dry Density: 128.2 pcf Optimwn Moisture: 10.9% Field Density Test Results: Residential Pad and Retaining Wall Backfills Date Test 2005 No. Location 10/07 1 Lower Driveway, Easterly End, R&R 10/07 2 Lower Driveway, Southerly Wall, R&R Footing Area 10/07 3 Lower Driveway, Southerly Wall, R&R Footing Area 10/07 4 Lower Driveway, Southerly Wall, R&R Footing Area 10/07 5 Lower Driveway 10/07 6 Lower Driveway 10/07 7 Lower Driveway 10/07 8 Lower Driveway 10/11 9 Lower Driveway EI. or Ht. Of Fill In Ft. 35.0 +2 +2 +2 34.5 33.0 33.0 34.0 32.0 Field Max % Dry Dry % Field Density Density Relative I Moisture Pcf Pcf Comp. Comment 12.2 120.5 132.3 91.1 Bottom at El. 33.0 11.6 116.9 132.3 88.3 Test Failed, El. 32. 7 to Top Drain 11.5 116.6 131.4 88.7 Test Failed. El. 32.0 to Top Drain 11.9 118.3 131.4 90.0 Retest #2 and #3 11.3 121.3 131.4 92.3 12.2 114.4 131.4 87.1 Bottom at El. 32.0 11.8 119.0 131.4 90.5 Retest #6 10.2 119.6 131.4 91.0 13.0 122.0 131.4 92.8 Bottom at EL 30.0 NAME: Kirk Patrick Development, LLC ILOCATJ.ON: 475 Park Drive, Carlsbad Field Density Tests Results: Residential Pad and Retaining Wall Backfills El. or Field Max Ht. Of % Dry Dry % Date Test Fill In Field Density Density Relative 2005 No. Location Ft. Moisture Pcf Pcf Comp. Comments 10/11 10 Lower Driveway 34.0 12.7 120.7 131.4 91.9 10/11 11 Lower Driveway 36.0 11.5 118.3 128.2 92.3 Finish Grade 12 Upper Driveway, Easterly Wall +2 11.2 119.3 131.4 90.8 2-Feet Above Drain 13 Upper Driveway, Easterly Wall +2 12.4 121.6 131.4 92.5 2-Feet Above Drain 14 Upper Driveway, Easterly Wall +4 11.6 120.1 131.4 91.4 Finish Grade 2006 02/02 15 Lower Driveway, Southerly Wall +4 12.0 120.7 131.4 91.9 Finish Grade 2-Foot Above Drain 03/30 16 Upper Driveway, Westerly Wall +2 13.2 119.6 131.4 91.0 03/30 17 Upper Driveway, Westerly Wall +4 10.6 122.2 131.4 93.0 03/31 18 Upper Driveway, Westerly Wall +6 11.4 121.4 131.4 92.4 03/31 19 Upper Driveway, Westerly Wall +8 11.8 121.9 131.4 92.8 Finish Grade 03/31 20 Upper Pad 77.5 13.8 118.9 131.4 90.5 Bottom at El. 75.5 03/31 21 Uooer Pad 78.5 12.7 120.2 131.4 91.5 Finish Grade R&R = Remove and Re-Compact *;'From our '"Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation" report, dated February 11, 2002, Job #02-108-P ,npr\my files\fill control reports\05-422-fkirk patrick development 475 park drive density test results Job #05-422-F Job Name: Kirk Patrick Development, LLC Location: 475 Park Drive, Carlsbad RESULTS OF LABORATORY TESTING Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content: The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of the on site soils used in the grading of the building pad and retaining wall backfills was determined in accordance with ASTM D-1557. The results are presented below. Maximum Dry Density Optimum Moisture Descriotion crm-ocf) Content (Wopt-%) Tan Fine to Coarse Sand 125.5 pcf 11.5% Dark Brown Silty Sand 128.2 pcf 10.9% pH and Resistivity Test: A pH/pH and resistivity tests was performed on a representative sample of the near finish soils used in the grading of the building pad using " Method for Estimating the Service Life of Steel Culverts," in accordance with California Test Method CTM 643. The result is presented below. Sample Location Minimum Resistivity (OHM-CM) pH Near Finish Grade 1120 6.76 Years to Perforation of Steel Culverts Sample Location Gage 18 16 14 12 10 8 Near Finish Grade Years to Perforation i 14 i 18 I 22 I 30 I 39 I 47 j Sulfate Test: A sulfate test was performed on a representative sample of the near finish grade soils used in the grading of the building pad in accordance with California Test Method CTM 417. The result is presented below. Amount of Water Soluble Sulfate (SO4) Sample Location In Soil (% by Weil!ht) I Near Finish Grade I 0.001 I mpr\Jny files\fill control reports\05-422-fkirk patrick development 475 park drive lab test results Waterproofing ✓✓--... 1 .,,,, ,-/ /,,-- RETAINING WALL DRAI N DETAIL Typical -no scale Filter Material. Crushed rock (wrapped in filter fabric) or Class 2 Permeable Material (see specifications below) Competent, approved' soils or bedrock ... t!~ IIli~liiilll:f li[l iii!r'li!!i ':tJ~f~!F\/Jt::::n::::::nm::::=•:•::::~t,t>::::::::::•:• n~cif$1n::n::ni:n:n::::::rn::::::::::::rp;wr.::••::= ···· ::~~t:2pqu,:=t ··· · H:Ps~= •:,:::· ··········:,: •::•:: •l :i:1:i§~hl~:5~~,y~,~~t~tt~: : .•. = . . .. CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS: 1. Provide granular, non-expansive backfill soil in 1 :1 gradient wedge behind wall. Compact backfill to minimum 90% of laboratory standard. 2. Provide back drainage for wall to prevent build-up of hydrostatic pressures. Use drainage openings along base of wall or back drain system as outlined below. 3. Backdrain should consist of 4" diameter PVC pipe (Schedule 40 or equivalent) with perforations down. Drain to suitable outlet at minimum 1 %. Provide¾" -1½" crushed gravel filter wrapped in filter fabric (Mirafi 140N or equivalent). Delete filter fabric wrap if Caltrans Class 2 permeable material is used. Compact Class 2 material to minimum 90% of laboratory standard. 4. Seal back of v,;all with waterproofing in accordance with architect's specifications. 5. Provide positive drainage to disallow ponding of water above wall. Lined drainage ditch to minimum 2% flow away from wall is recommended. * Use 1 ½ cubic foot per foot with granular backfill soil and 4 cubic foot per foot if expansive backfill soil is used. VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC= PLATE #1 NOTES: ISOLATION JOINTS AND RE-ENTRANT CORNER REINFORCEMENT Typical -no scale (a) (b) ISOLATION JOINTS CONTRACTION JOINTS RE-ENTRANT CORNER---... REINFORCEMENT NO. 4 BARS PLACED 1.51 ' BELOW TOP OF SLAB (c) RE-ENTRANT CORNER CRACK 1. Isolation joints around the columns should be either circular as shown in (a) or diamond shaped as shown in (b). If no isolation joints are used around columns, or if the corners of the isolation joints do not meet the contraction joints, radial cracking as shown in (c)may occur (reference ACI). 2. In order to control cracking at the re-entrant corners (±270° corners), provide reinforcement as shown in (c). 3. Re-entrant corner reinforcement shown herein is provided as a general guideline only and is subject to verification and changes by the project architect and/or structural engineer based upon slab geometry, location, and other engineerin:g and construction factors. VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. PLATE #2 DRIVEWAY SECTION I/OT . TO SC~Lc (D\ DRIVEWAY SECTION ATP AN HANDLE \LI /,'01 10 SCALii I I Attachment 3 19-118-F 475 Park Drive, Carlsbad Latitude, Longitude: 33.1476, -117.3259 ~~: ,,_ ·/. ~-<,. ·' u Agua Hedionda Lagoon Q ♦ Go gfe Date Design Code Reference Document Risk Category Site Class Type Ss S1 SMs SM1 Sos So1 Type soc Fa F., PGA FPGA PGAM TL SsRT Value 1.129 0.433 1.184 0.679 0.789 0.453 Value D 1.048 1.567 0.445 1.055 0.47 8 1.129 Description MCER ground motion. (for 0.2 second period) MCER ground motion. (for 1.0s period) Site-modified spectral acceleration value Site-modified spectral acceleration value Numeric seismic design value at 0.2 second SA Numeric seismic design value at 1.0 second SA Description Seismic design category Site amplification factor at 0.2 second Site amplification factor at 1.0 second MCE8 peak ground acceleration Site amplification factor at PGA Site modified peak ground acceleration Long-period transition period in seconds Probabilistic risk-targeted ground motion. (0.2 second) 3/19/2019, 12:06:30 PM ASCE7-10 Ill D -Stiff Soil SsUH SsD 'i.'19i 1.503 Factored uniform-hazard (2% probability of exceedance in 50 years) spectral acceleration Factored deterministic acceleration value. (0.2 second) SIRT s·1u1-1 f'."..j r--. wlU PGAcl Cps CRI 0.433 0.434 0.603 0.562 0.948 0.999 Probabilistic risk-targeted ground motion. (1 .0 second) Factort;d uniform-hazard (2% probability of exceedance in 50 years) spE;c\ral accel.;ration. Factored determinisiic acceleration value. (1.0 second) Factored det,,rministic acceleration value. (Peak Ground Acceleration) Mapped value of tile risk coefficient at short periods Mapped value c,f the risk coefficient al a period of ·1 s OSHPD 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 MCER Response Spectrum 0.0 2.5 5.0 Period, T (sec) -Sa(g) Design Response Spectrum 0.0 2.5 5.0 Period, T (sec) ~ Sa(g) 7.5 7.5 DISCLAIMER While the information presented on this website is believed to be correct, SEAOC /OSHPD and its sponsors and contributors assume no responsibility or liability for its accuracy. The material presented in this web application should not be used or relied upon for any specific application without competent examination and verification of its accuracy, suitability and applicability by engineers or other licensed professione!s. SEAOC / OSHPD do not intlmd that tha uss of this information replace the sound judgment of such competent professionals, having experience and knowledge in the field of practice, nor to substitute for the standard of care required of such professionals in interpreting and applying the results of the seismic data provided by this website. Users of the information from this website assume all liability arising from such use. Use of the output of this website does not imply approval by the governing building code bodies responsible for building code approval and interpretation for the building site described by latitude/longitude location in the search results of this webstie.