HomeMy WebLinkAboutCDP 12-02; MAGNOLIA AVENUE RESIDENCE 2; GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION AND FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS; 2012-03-21C' 12 .o.
ADVANCED GEOTECUINICAL SOLUTIONS, INC.
5333 Mission Center Road, Suite 390
San Diego, California 92108
Telephone: (619) 708-1649 Fax: (714) 409-3287
NEW POINTE COMMUNITIES, INC.
16880 West Bernardo Drive, Suite 230
San Diego, CA 92127
Attention: Mr. Scot Sandstrom
March 21, 2012
P1W 1201-02
Report No 1201-02-B-2
Subject: Geotechnical Investigation and Foundation Design Recommendations for
Proposed Single-Family Residences, Parcel 2 and 3, 1369 Magnolia Avenue,
Carlsbad, California
Gentlemen:
In accordance with your request, presented herein are the results of Advanced Geotechnical Solutions,
Inc.'s (AGS) geotechnical investigation and foundation design recommendations for the two proposed
single-family residences at 1369 Magnolia Avenue, Carlsbad, California.
The recommendations presented in the following report are based on a limited subsurface investigation
- performed by AGS, review of the referenced geotechnical investigation report prepared by Construction
and Testing Engineers, Inc. (CTE) and associated laboratory testing. It is AGS's opinion, from a
geotechnical standpoint, the subject site is suitable for construction of the proposed residences, provided
- the recommendations presented in this report are incorporated into the design, planning and construction
phases of site development. Included in this report are: 1) engineering characteristics of the onsite soils;
2) unsuitable soil removal recommendations; 3) grading recommendations; 4) foundation design
- recommendations; and 5) flatwork recommendations.
Advanced Geotechnical Solutions, Inc., appreciates the opportunity to provide you with geotechnical
consulting services and professional opinions. If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned
at (619) 708-1649.
Respectfully Submitted,
- Advanced Geotechnical Solutions, -.
231 4
-OX 7FC~A
JEFFREY A. CHANEY, Vice Pre' 5 F c
RCE 46544/GE 2314, Reg. Exp. 6-301-i -
No. 2536
-IERTIFIED L ENGINEERING
S GEOLOGIST S E 5131/,j
CA
PAUL J. DERISI, Vice President
CEG 2536, Reg. Exp. 5-31-13
Distribution: (5) Addressee
Attachments: Figure 1 - Site Location Map
Figure 2— Geologic Map and Site Exploration Plan;
Appendix A - Field and Laboratory Data;
Appendix B - General Earthwork Specifications & Grading Guidelines;
Appendix C - Homeowner Maintenance Recommendations
ORANGE AND L.A. COUNTIES INLAND EMPIRE SAN DIEGO AND IMPERIAL COUNTIES
(714) 786-5661 (619) 708-1649 (619) 850-3980
March 21, 2012 Page 1
P1W 1201-02 Report No. 1201-02-B-2
1.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES.
This study is aimed at providing geotechnical information as it relates to: 1) existing site soil conditions;
2) discussion of the geologic units onsite; 3) seismic hazard analysis; 4) engineering characteristics of the
onsite soils; 5) excavation characteristics of earth materials; 6) seismic design parameters for use in the
structural design of the proposed single family residence; and 7) foundation design parameters for the
proposed conventional shallow foundation system.
- The scope of our study included the following tasks:
Review of pertinent published and unpublished geologic and geotechnical literature, maps, and
- aerial photographs.
> Excavating and logging two (2) shallow hand auger borings (Appendix A)
> Conducting a geotechnical engineering and geologic hazard analysis of the site.
> Conducting a limited seismicity analysis.
Determine design parameters of onsite soils as a foundation medium including bearing and
friction values for foundation soils.
> Determine the site-specific seismic design parameters for use in the structural design.
Preparation of a geotechnical foundation investigation report with exhibits summarizing our
findings. This report would be suitable for design, contractor bidding, and regulatory review.
2.0 GEOTECHNICAL STUDY LIMITATIONS
The conclusions and recommendations in this report are professional opinions based on our review of the
- previously conducted geotechnical investigation (CTh, 2007), associated lab testing, and the data
developed during this investigation.
The materials immediately adjacent to or beneath those observed may have different characteristics than
those observed. No representations are made as to the quality or extent of materials not observed. Any
evaluation regarding the presence or absence of hazardous material is beyond the scope of this firm's
- services.
3.0 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
- The subject site is located at 1369 Magnolia Avenue, Carlsbad, California (see Figure 1). The site is
bounded to the north by Magnolia Avenue, and to the east, west, and south by existing residential
properties. The roughly rectangular-shaped site is approximately 330 feet long and 140 feet wide,
encompassing approximately 0.82 acre. The overall site is sub-divided into three parcels. Parcel 1, located
in the northern portion of the site adjacent to Magnolia Avenue, is currently occupied by an existing
-
single-family residence.
Site topography is relatively flat to gently sloping to the west. Current elevations at the site range from
approximately 160 msl along the easterly property boundary to 151 feet msl at the westerly property
ADVANCED GEOTECUINICAL SOt IJUONS, INC.
March 21, 2012 Page 2
P1W 1201-02 Report No. 1201-02-B-2
boundary. The site contains scattered mature trees and is covered with a light growth of seasonal grasses
and weeds. Localized trash and construction debris were also observed on site.
4.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
- As we understand the proposed development, parcels 2 and 3 will be graded to create relatively flat
building pads which will support the proposed single-family residences and associated improvements.
The parcels are currently designed with cuts and fills on the order of 3 to 4 feet. The proposed residential
- structures will be approximately 3,000 square feet, two-stories in height, wood-framed, and supported by
a conventional shallow slab-on-grade foundation system. The structures will be surrounded by associated
flatwork and landscaping. A private driveway is planned along the westerly property line to provide
- access to the new residences. A four to six foot high retaining wall will also be constructed along the
westerly property line to support the proposed driveway and a freestanding sound wall.
5.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATION
5.1. Field Investigation
- Previously, CTE (2007) conducted a subsurface investigation to evaluate the onsite soil and
bedrock conditions. Six (6) test pits were excavated and logged to depths of six (6) feet below
existing grades. Bulk soil samples were collected from the exploratory test pits for laboratory
- testing. Logs of CTE's test pits and results of the associated laboratory testing are presented in
Appendix A.
- In addition, AGS conducted a limited subsurface exploration at the subject on March 16, 2012.
Two hand auger borings were excavated at the subject site. The approximate locations of the
borings are shown on Figure 2. The excavations were advanced to a maximum depth of 3.5 feet
- below existing grades.
6.0 ENGINEERING GEOLOGY
6.1. Geologic and Geomorphic Setting
The subject site is situated within the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province. The Peninsular
- Ranges province occupies the southwestern portion of California and extends southward to the
southern tip of Baja California. In general the province consists of young, steeply sloped,
northwest trending mountain ranges underlain by metamorphosed Late Jurassic to Early
- Cretaceous-aged extrusive volcanic rock and Cretaceous-aged igneous plutonic rock of the
Peninsular Ranges Batholith. The westernmost portion of the province is predominantly
underlain by younger marine and non-marine sedimentary rocks. The Peninsular Ranges'
dominant structural feature is northwest-southeast trending crustal blocks bounded by active
faults of the San Andreas transform system.
6.2. Subsurface Conditions
A brief description of the earth materials encountered on this site is presented in the following
- sections. More detailed descriptions of these materials are provided in the hand auger logs
included in Appendix A. Based on our site reconnaissance, subsurface excavations, and review of
ADVANCED GEOTECIINICAI. SOLUTIONS, INC.
March 21, 2012 Page 3
P1W 1201-02 Report No. 1.201-02-B-2
the referenced geotechnical investigation and geologic maps, the site is underlain to the depths
explored by old paralic deposits (marine terrace. deposits) which are locally overlain by a thin
veneer of topsoil/residual soils (undifferentiated). Although not encountered during our site
exploration, localized undocumented fill soils were observed during CTE's investigation (2007)
and may be present at the site.
6.2.1. Topsoil/Residual Soil (undifferentiated)
Undifferentiated topsoil/residual soils were encountered in both onsite excavations and observed
to overlie the old paralic deposits. These soils were of variable thickness, ranging from
approximately 3.0 feet in boring HA-1 to 2.5 feet in HA-2. As encountered, these materials
- generally consisted of light gray brown to reddish brown, moist, loose to medium dense, silty to
clayey fine- to medium-grained sand.
- 6.2.2. Old Paralic Deposits, Units 24
The site is underlain to maximum depth explored by Old Pamlic Deposits, Units 2-4. These
materials can generally be described as mottled gray brown to reddish brown, slightly moist to
moist, medium dense to. dense, silty fine to medium grained sand.
63. Groundwater
- Groundwater was not encountered in our exploratory excavations. No natural groundwater
condition is known, to exist at the site that would impact the proposed site development. However,
it should be noted that localized perched groundwater may develop at a later date, most likely at
or near fill/bedrock contacts, due to fluctuations in precipitation, irrigation practices, or factors
not-evident at the time of our field explorations.
6.4. Non-seismic Geologic Hazards
6.4.1. Mass Wasting
No evidence of mass wasting was observed onsite nor was any noted on the reviewed maps.
- 6.4.2. Flooding
According to available FEMA maps, the site is not in a FEMA identified flood hazard area.
6.43. Subsidence/Ground Fissuring
Due to the presence of the dense underlying materials, the potential for subsidence and ground
fissuring due to settlement is unlikely.
6.5. Seismic Hazards
- The site is located in the tectonically active Southern California area, and will therefore likely
experience shaking effects from earthquakes. The type and severity of seismic hazards affecting
the site are to a large degree dependent upon the distance to the causative fault, the intensity of
- the seismic event, and the underlying soil characteristics. The seismic hazard may be primary,
such as surface rupture and/or ground shaking, or secondary, such as liquefaction or dynamic
ADVANCED GEO1ECHNICAE. SOLIJIIONS, INC.
'March 21,2012 Pa-e-&
P1W 1201-02 Report No. 1201-02-B-2
settlement The following is a site-specific discussion of ground motion parameters, earthquake-
induced landslide hazards, settlement, and liquefaction The purpose of this analysis is to identify
potential seismic hazards and proose mitigations, if necessary, to reduce the hazard to an
acceptable level of risk The following seismic hazards discussion is guided by the California
Building Code (2010), CDMG (2008), andMIrtin and Lew 19 918).'
65.1. Surface, Fault Rupture 0
No known active faults have been mapped at or near the subject site The nearest known active
surface fault is the Oceanside section of the Newport-Inglewood-Rose Canyon fault zone which
is approximately 5 miles west of the subject site Accordingly, the potential for fault surface
rupture on the subject site is low This conclusion is based on literature review and aerial
photographic analysis.
6.5.2. Seismicity S
As noted, the site is within the tectonically active southern California area, and is approximately 5
miles from an active fault, the Oceanside section of the Newport-Inglewood-Rose Canyon fault
zone The potential exists for strong ground motion that may affect future Improvements
At this point in time, non-critical structures (commercial, residential, and industrial) are usually
designed according to the California Building Code (2010) and that of the controlling local
agency. However, liquefaction/seismic slope stability analyses, critical structures, water tanks
and unusual structural designs will likely require site sp'ecific ground motion input.
6.5.3 Liquefaction
Due to the densenature of the underlying materials and lack ofâ shallow groundwater-table at the
project site, the potential for seismically induced liquefaction is considered negligible.
6.5.4. Dynamic Settlement
Dynamic settlement occurs in response to an earthquake event in loose sandy earth materials
This potential of dynamic settlement at the subject site is considered remote due to the presence
of shallow marine terrace/bedrock andthe absence of loose, sandy soils.
65.5. Seismically lEnd uced Landsliding
Evidence of landsliding at the site was not observed during our field explorations nor was any
geomorphic features indicative of landsliding noted during our review of aerial photos and
published geologic maps. 0
ADVANCED 6E01ECIONICAL SOLISIIONS, INC.
March 21, 2012 Page 6
P1W 1201-02 Report No. 1201-02-B-2
- 7.1.6. Chemical/Resistivity Test Results
Preliminary soluble sulfate and chloride, and resistivity testing has not been conducted by AGS
- but was performed by CTh during their 2007 geotechnical investigation. Based upon the results
of their testing and our previous experience in the area it is anticipated that the onsite soil will
exhibit "negligible" sulfate concentrations when classified in accordance with ACI 318-05 Table
- 4.3.1 (per 2010 CBC) and are anticipated to be "mildly" corrosive to metals. Consultation with a
-
corrosion engineer is recommended. Final determination of actual chemical/resistivity design
parameters for the foundation will be determined at the conclusion of the grading and will be
- presented in the grading report.
7.1.7.. Earthwork Adjustments
- It is anticipated that the onsite fill/residual soils will shrink on the order of 4 to 6 percent when re-
compacted. The paralic deposits are anticipated to bulk on the order of 5 to 10 percent when used
to make compacted fill.
- 7.1.8. Pavement Support Characteristics
It is anticipated that the onsite soils will, have good to moderate support characteristics.
Depending upon the final distribution of site soils, pavement support characteristics could vary.
If structural pavements are to be constructed (concrete or asphaltic concrete), an "R"-value of 35
- can be utilized for the preliminary design of pavements. Final design should be based upon
representative sampling of the as-graded soils.
8.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Construction of the proposed residential structure and associated improvements is considered feasible,
from a geotechnical standpoint, provided that the conclusions and recommendations presented herein are
incorporated into the design and construction of the.project. Presented below are specific issues identified
by this study as possibly affecting site development. Recommendations to mitigate these issues are
presented in the text of this report.
8.1. Grading Recommendations
8.1.1. Unsuitable Soil Removals
In areas to receive settlement sensitive structures, all topsoil/residual soil, highly weathered
formational materials, and any undocumented fill soils. It is anticipated that the upper 3 to 4 feet
of the onsite: soils will require removal and recompaction for the support of settlement sensitive
structures. Localized areas may require deeper removals. Minimally the removals should extend a
lateral distance of at least 5 feet beyond the limits of settlement sensitive structures. If deeper
removals are performed, the removals should extend a lateral distance equal to the depth of
removal beyond the improvement limits. Removal bottoms should expose competent formational
materials in a firm and unyielding condition. The resulting removal bottoms should be observed
by a representative of AGS to verify that adequate removal of unsuitable materials have been
- ADVANCED GEOTECHNICAL SOLUTIONS, INC.
March 21, 2012 Page 7
WWI 20 1-02 Report No. 1201 -02-B-2
conducted prior to fill placement In general, soils removed during remedial grading will be
suitable for reuse in compacted fills, provided they are properly moisture conditioned and do not
contain deleterious materials Grading shall be accomplished under the observation and testing of
the project soils engineer and engineering geologist or their authorized representative in
accordance with the recommendationscóntained herein, the current'-grading odinance of the City
of Carlsbad.
8.1.2. Earthwork Considerations
8.1.2.1. Compaction Standards.
Fill and processed natural ground shall be compacted to ,a minimum relative compaction
of 90 percent, as determined by ASTM Test Method D 1557. Compaction shall be
achieved at or slightly above the optimum moisture content and as generally discussed in
the attached Earthwork Specifications (Appendix B).
8.1.2.2. Treatment of Removal Bottoms.
At the completion of unsuitable soil removals, the exposed bottom should be scarified to
a minimum depth of eight inches, moisture conditioned to above optimum moisture and
compacted; in-place to the standards set forth in this report.
8.1.2.3. FilIPlacernènt
Fill should be placed in thin lifts (eight-inch bulk), moisture conditioned to at or slightly
above the optimum moisture content, uniformly mixed, and compacted by the use of
both wheel rolling and kneading type (sheeps foot) compaction equipment until the.
designed grades are achieved.
8.13. Cut Fill TransitiOn Lots
Where design grades and/or remedial gradmg activities create a cut/fill transition, the cut and
shallow fill portions of the building pad shall be overexcavated a minimum depth of three feet or
18 inches below the bottom of the proposed footmgs r (whichever is deeper) and replaced with
compacted fill These remedial grading measures are recommended in order to minimize the
potential for differential settlements between cut and fill areas The undercut should be graded
such that a gradient of at least one percent is.maintàined toward deeper fill areas or the front of
the lot. .
8.2. Design Recommendations . . . . .
It is our understanding that the proposed foundations will consist of a shallow slab-on-grade
foundation systems supporting the proposed two-story wood-frame residential structures It is our
further understanding that the foundation system will be conventionally reinforced..with steel
reinforcing bars Design recommendations are-provided'.herein In addition to the structure,
associated driveways, hardscape and landscape areas are proposed From a geotechnical
perspective these proposed improvements a•e feasible provided that the following
recommendations areincorporated into the design and construction.
7.
ADVANCED GEOIECIINICALSOIIJTIONS, INC.
March 2l,2012 Page.8
P1W 1201-02 Report No. 1201-02-B-2
8.2L .Foñndation Design Criteria
The single-family residential structure can be supported on conventional shallow foundations and
slab-on-grade systems The expansion potential of the underlying soils is classified as "Low"
The following yaluesmay be used in the foundation design.
Allowable Béanng: 2000 lbs.Isq.ft.
Lateral Bearing:. 250 ibs.Isq.ft. ata depth of 12 inches plus
125 lbs./sq.ft; for eachadditidnal 12 inches
embedment to a maximum of 2000 lbs.Isq.ft.
Sliding Coefficient: 0.35
Settlement: Total = 3/4 inch
Differential: 3/8 inch in 20 èet
The above values may be increased as allowed by Code to resist transient loads such as wind or
seismic. Büilding Code and structural design 'considerations may. govern. Depth and
reinforcement requirements should be evaluated by the Structural Engineer.
8.2.2 Seismic Design Parameters
The following seismic design parameters are presented to be code compliant to the California
Building Code (2010) The subject lots have been identified to be site class "D" in accordance
with CBC, 2010, Table 1613.5.3 (1). The lots are located'atLatitudë 33.15682° N and Longitude
117.33252' W Utilizing this information, the computer program USG Earthquake Ground
Motion Parameters Version 5.1.0 and ASCE 7 critenon, the seismic design category for 0.20
seconds (S5) and 1 0 second (S1) pen od response accelerations can be determined (CBC, 2010
1613.5.5. 1) along with the design spectral response acceleration (CBC, 2010 1613.5.4).
Seismic Design Criteria
Mapped Spectral Acceleratioii.(0.2 sec Period),, 5s 1.275g
Mapped Spectral AcceleratiOn (1.0 sec Period), S 0A80g.
Site Coefficient, Fa 1.0:
Site Coefficient, F : 1.52
MCE Spectral Response Acceleration (0.2 secPeriod), SM 1.275g
MCE Spectrat Response Acceleration (1.0 sec Period), SM1 0.730g
Design Spectral Response Acceleration (0.2 sec Period), SDs 0.850g
Design Spectral Response Acceleration (1.0 sec Period), SDI 0.487g
ADVANCED GEOTECHNIGAL SOLIJEIONS, INC.
March21,2012 Page9
P1W 1201'02 Report No. 1201-02-B-2
8.23. Foundation Dësn '
-' 8.2.3:1. Conventional Foundations
Based upon the onsite soil conditions and information supplied by the 2010 CBC,
- conventional foundation systems should be 'designed. in accordance With Se&iOn 8.2.1
and .the following recômrnendätions.
> Interior and exterior footings for the proposed tw-story residence should be a
minimum of 15 inches wide and extend to depth'dfat'least 18 inchesbelow lowest
adjacent grade. Footing reinforcement should minimally consist of foUr No. 4
rinforcing bars, two top and two bottom or two No. 5. reinforcing bars, one top and
one bottom. "
> Conventional, slab-on-grade floors, underlain by "loW' expansive soil, should be five
or more inches thick and be reinfOrced with No. 3 or larger reinforcing bars 'spaced
18 inches on center each' way. The' slab reinforcement and expansion joint spacing
should be designed by the. Structural' Engineer.
> If exterior footings adjacent to drainage swales are to exist within five f exterior eet
horizontally of the swale, the footing should be embedded sufficiently to assure
embedment below the swale bottom is maintained. 'Footings adjacent to slopes'
should be:eñibedded such that a -least- sevenfeet are provided horizontally from edge
of the footing to the face Of the slope:
> Isolated spread' footings outside the footprint Of the proposed structures should be
tied with grade beams to the structure in two orthogonal directiOns.
> A grade beajji reinforced continuously, with the garage footings shall 'be constructed
across' the garage entrance,, tying' together the ends of the perimeter footings and
' between individual spread footings. This grade beam should be embedded at the
same depth as the adjacent '..perimeter footings A thickened slab, separated by a cold
Joint from the garage beam, should be provided at the garage entrance Minimum
dimensions of-the thickened edge shall bte six (0)i inches deep. Footing depth, 'width
and-reinforcement should be:the same as the structure.. Slab thickness, reinforcement
and under-slab treatment should be the same as the structure,
8.2.4. UnderSiab '
- Prior to concrete placement the subgrade soils' 'should' be moisture conditioned to optimum
'moisture content '
A moisture and vapor retarding system should be placed below the slabs-on-grade in portions of
- the structure considered to be moisture sensitive The retarder should be of suitable composition,
thickness, strength and low permeance to effectively prevent the migration of water and reduce
the transmission of water vapor to acceptable levels. Historically, a 10-mil 'plastic membrane,
- such as Visqueen, placed between one to four in of clean sand, has been used for this
- ' purpose. More recently Stego® Wrap or similar underlayments have been used to lower
permeance to effectively prevent the migration of water and reduce the transmission of water
ADVANCED GEOTECHNICAL. SOUJHONS, INC.
March 21,2012 Page40
P1W 1201 -'02 Report No 120 1-02-B-2
vapor to acceptable levels The use of this system or other systems, matenals or techniques can be
considered, at the discretion of the designer, pro"ided the system reduces the vapor transmission
- rates to acceptable levels
82 5 Deepened Footings and Structural Setbacks
It is generally recognized that improvements constructed in proximity to natural.,slopes or
properly constructed, manufactured slopes can, over a period of time, be affected by natural
- processes including gravity forces, weathering of surficial soils and long-term (secondary)
settlement Most building codes, including the California Building Code (CBC), require that
- structures be set back or footings deëened, where subject to the influence of these natural
- processes
For the ub sject site, where foundations for residential structures are to exist m proximity to
-.
slopes, the footings should be embedded to satisi'thereuiitments preseited in FiguzéT3.
-
FIGURE 3.
- FACE OF
FOOTING
TOP OF
- SLOPE
-
4.FACEOF.
STRUCTURE H/3 BUT NEED NOTEXCEED 40 Fr. H
ToEbF SLOPE
'H)\2BUT NEED NOT
EXCEED 15Fr. MAX.
8.2.6. Concrete Design
- Our previous-experience in the general area indicates onsite soils likely exhibit a "negligible"
sulfate exposure when classified in accordance with ACT 318-05 Table 4.3.1 (per 2010 CBC)
Final determination will be based upon testing of near surface soils obtained at the conclusion of
- grading However, some fertilizers have been known to leach sulfates into soils otherwise
contaimng "negligible" sulfate concentrations ,and increase the sulfate concentrations to
potentially detrimental levels It is incumbent upon the owner to detemune whether additional
- protective measures are warranted to mitigate the potential for increased sulfate concentrations to
- onsite soils as a result of the future homeowner's actions.
ADVANCED 6EOCHNICALSOLONS, INC.
March 21, 2012 Page 11
P/W 1201-02 Report No. 1201-02-13-2
8.2.7. Corrosion
- Our previous experience in the general area indicates onsite soils likely are "mildly" corrosive to
buried metallic materials. AGS recommends minimally that the current standard of care be
employed for protection of metallic construction materials in contact with onsite soils or that
- consultation with an engineer specializing in corrosion to determine specifications for protection
of the construction materials. Final determination will be based upon testing of near surface soils
obtained at the conclusion of grading.
8.2.8. Retaining Walls
The following earth pressures are recommended for the design of retaining walls onsite:
Rankine Equivalent Fluid
Level Backfill Coefficients Pressure (psf/lin.ft.'
- Coefficient of Active Pressure: Ka = 0.31 38
Coefficient of Passive Pressure: K1, = 3.25 407
Coefficient of at Rest Pressure: K0 = 0.47 59
Rankine Equivalent Fluid
- 2 : 1 Backfill Coefficients Pressure (psfllin.ft.)
Coefficient of Active Pressure: Ka = 0.47 59
Coefficient of Passive Pressure: - Descending K1, (-) = 1.23 154
Coefficient of At Rest Pressure: K. = 0.72 90
The foundations for retaining walls of appurtenant structures structurally separated from the
building structure may bear on properly compacted fill. A bearing value of 2,000 psf may be
used for design of retaining walls. Retaining wall footings should be designed to resist the lateral
forces by passive soil resistance and/or base friction as recommended for foundation lateral
resistance. To relieve the potential for hydrostatic pressure wall backfill should consist of a free
draining backfill (sand equivalent "SE" >20) and a heel drain should be constructed. The heel
drain should be place at the heel of the wall and should consist of a 4-inch diameter perforated
pipe (SDR35 or SCHD 40) surrounded by 4 cubic feet of crushed rock (3/4-inch) per lineal foot,
wrapped in filter fabric (Mirafi® 140N or equivalent).
- Proper drainage devices should be installed along the top of the wall backfill, which should be
properly sloped to prevent surface water ponding adjacent to the wall. In addition to the wall
drainage system, for building perimeter walls extending below the finished grade, the wall should
be waterproofed and/or damp-proofed to effectively seal the wall from moisture infiltration
through the wall section to the interior wall face.
The wall should be backfilled with granular soils placed in loose lifts no greater than 8-inches
- thick, at or near optimum moisture content, and mechanically compacted to a minimum 90
percent relative compaction as determined by ASTM Test Method D1557. Flooding or jetting of
- backfill materials generally do not result in the required degree and uniformity of compaction
ADVANCED GEO1TCHNICAL SOLUTIONS, INC.
Maith21,201.12 Page 12
P1W 1201-02 Report No. 1201-02-B-2
and, therefore, is not recommended The soils engineer or his representative should observe the
-
retaining wall footings, backdrain installation- and be present during placement of the wall backfill
to confirm that the walls are properly backfihled and compacted.
83 Utility Trench Excavation
All utility trenches should be shored or laid back in accordance with applicable OSHA standards
Excavations in bedrock areas should be made in consideration of underlying geologic structure
- AGS should be consulted on these issues during construction
8.4. Utility Trench Backfill
- Mainline and lateral utility trench backfill should be compacted to at least 90 percent of
maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 1557 Onsite soils will not be suitable for use
as bedding material but will be suitable for use in backfill, provided oversized materials are
- removed No surcharge loads should be imposed above excavations This includes spoil piles,
lumber, concrete trucks or other construction materials and equipment Drainage above
excavations should be directed away from the-banks..Care should be taken to avoid saturation of
- the soils.
Compaction should be accomplished by mechanical means Jetting of native soils will not be
acceptable.
8.5. Exterior Slabs andWalkways
-. 8.5:1. Subgrade Compaction
The subgrade below exterior slabs, sidewalks, driveways, patios, etc. should be compacted to a
- minimum of 90 pement relative compaction as determined by ASTM D 1557.
8.5.2. Subgrade Moisture
- The subgradë below exterior slabs, sidewalks,' 'driveways, patios, etc. should be moisture
conditioned to a minimum of 110 percent of optimum moisture content prior to concrete
placement.
8.5.3. Slab Thickness
-
Concrete flatwork and driveways should be designed' utilizing four-inch minimum thickness.
8.5.4.. Control Joints
- Weakened plane joints should be installed on walkways at intervals of approximately eight to ten
feet Extëiior slabs should be designed to withstand shiinkàgeoftheconcrete.
- 8.5.5 Flatwork Reinforcement
- Consideration should be given to reinforcing any exteriorfiatwork.
ADVANCED GEOTECHNICAL SOLIJHONS, INC.
Match 21,2012 Page,. 3.,
P1W 1201-02 Report No 1201-02-B-2
Thickened Edge
Consideration should be given to construct a thickened edge (scoop footing) at the perimeter of
slabs and walkways adjacent to landscape areas to minimize moisture variation below these
improvements The thickened edge (scoop footing) should extend approximately eight.,inches
belowconcrete slabs and should be a minimum of six inches wide.
8.6. Plan Review
Once grading and foundation design plans become available, they should be reviewed by AGS to
verify that the design recommendations presented are consistent with the proposed construction.
8.7. GeOtechnica1Review
As is the case in any grading project, multiple working hypotheses are established utilizing the
available data, and the most probable model is used for the analysis Information collected during
the grading and construction operations is intended to evaluate these hypotheses, and some of the
assumptions summarized herein may need to be changed as more information becomes available
Some modification of the grading and construction recommendations may become necessary,
should the conditions encountered in the field differ significantly than those hypothesized to exist
AGS should review the pertinent pians and sections of the project specifications, to evaluate
conformance with the intentof the recommendations contained in this report.
If the project description or final design vanes from that described in this report, AGS must be
consulted regarding the applicability of, and the necessity for, any revisions to the
recommendations presented herein AGS accepts no liability for any use of its recommendations
if the project description or final design varies and AGS is not consulted regarding the changes.
90 SLOPE AND LOT MAINTENANCE
Maintenance of improvements is essential to the long-term performance of structures and slopes.
Although the design and construction during mass grading is planned to create slopes that are both
grossly and r.surficially stable, certain factors are beyond the control of the soil engineer and geologist
The homeowners must implement certain maintenance procedures.
The following recommendations should be implemented
9.1. SlOpe Planting
Slope planting should consist of ground cover, shrubs and trees that possess deep, dense root
structures and require a minimum of imgation The resident should be advised of their
responsibility to maintain such planting
92 Lot Drainage
Roof, pad andlpt drainage should be collected and directed away from, structures and slopes and
toward approved disposal areas Design fine-grade elevations should be maintained through the
life of the structure or if dsign fine grade elevations are altered, adequate area drains should be
inställèd in order to provide rapid discharge of water, away from structures and slopes. Residents
ADVANCED GEOTECHNICAL. SOLUTIONS' INC
March 21, 2012 Page 14
P/W 1201-02 Report No. 1201-02-B-2
should be made aware that they are responsible for maintenance and cleaning of all drainage
terraces, down drains and other devices that have been installed to promote structure and slope
stability.
-
93. Slope Irrigation
The resident, homeowner and Homeowner Association should be advised of their responsibility
to maintain irrigation systems. Leaks should be repaired immediately. Sprinklers should be
- adjusted to provide maximum uniform coverage with a minimum of water usage and overlap.
Overwatering with consequent wasteful run-off and ground saturation should be avoided, if
automatic sprinkler systems are installed, their use must be adjusted to account for natural rainfall
- conditions.
9.4. Burrowing Animals
Residents or homeowners should undertake a program for the elimination of burrowing animals.
This should be an ongoing program in order to maintain slope stability.
10.0 LIMITATIONS
This report is based on the project as described and the information obtained from the referenced
geotechnical investigation report and the excavations at the approximate locations indicated on the Figure
2. The findings are based on the results of the field, laboratory, and office investigations combined with
an interpolation and extrapolation of conditions between and beyond the excavation locations. The
results reflect an interpretation of the direct evidence obtained. Services performed by AGS have been
conducted in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the
profession currently practicing in the same locality under similar conditions. No other representation,
either expressed or implied, and no warranty or guarantee is included or intended.
The recommendations presented in this report are based on the assumption that an appropriate level of
- field review will be provided by geotechnical engineers and engineering geologists who are familiar with
the design and site geologic conditions. That field review shall be sufficient to confirm that geotechnical
and geologic conditions exposed during grading are consistent with the geologic representations and
corresponding recommendations presented in this report. AGS should be notified of any pertinent
changes in the project plans or if subsurface conditions are found to vary from those described herein.
Such changes or variations may require a it-evaluation of the recommendations contained in this report.
The data, opinions, and recommendations of this report are applicable to the specific design of this project
- as discussed in this report. They have no applicability to any other project or to any other location, and
-
any and all subsequent users accept any and all liability resulting from any use or reuse of the data,
opinions, and recommendations without the prior written consent of AGS.
AGS has no responsibility for construction means, methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures, or for
- safety precautions or programs in connection with the construction, for the acts or omissions of the
CONTRACTOR, or any other person performing any of the construction, or for the failure of any of them
to carry out the construction in accordance with the final design drawings and specifications.
- ADVANCED GEOTECHNICAL SOLtJIIONS, INC.
March 21, 2012 Page 15
P1W 1201-02 Report No. 1201-02-13-2
REFERENCES
- American Concrete Institute, 2002, Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI318M-02)
and Commentary (ACI3J8RM-02), ACI International, Farmington Hills, Michigan.
- American Society for Testing and Materials (2008), Annual Book ofASTM Standards, Section 4,
Construction, Volume 04.08, Soil and Rock (1), ASTM International, West Conshohocken,
Pennsylvania.
California Code of Regulation, Title 24,2010 California Building Code, 3 Volumes.
- Construction Testing and Engineers, Inc., Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Three Lot
Residential Development, 1369 Magnolia Avenue, Carlsbad, California, dated April 3, 2007
(CTE Job No. 10-8791 G).
Kennedy, M.P., Tan, S.S., et. al., 2007, Geologic Map of the Oceanside 30' x 60' Quadrangle, California,
California Geological Survey: Regional Geologic Map.No. 2, scale 1:100,000.
ADVANCED GEOTECHNICAL. SOEIJHONS, INC.
4
SGUTY I rx,cr RinG I
205-280-17
NEW 6' SCUD WOOD FM CE
N.A.P.
- -S - - -. -.--- -
LaJ
flL. A I • FF= 757. PAD= 156
-•2ao'—
GROSS ARtA=9 896 SF ,Er4f=9496 sv - Qg
N.AIP. -HA-1
PALM UN Iii. PR0ECTL,a71
] I I TI
Q2P
IRMA
0528038 TBTh
L EXIST. BLDG
- -
EAR 1BA - - -
GROSS ARE4= NET ARE4-11 14 551
395 SF o
I :1 Qop I
j 17-7 rJLrLUNf
1 Kk4ki'TP-6 —6' swD
81
- .
205-280-67 2-0&
"DGSIING 5' SCUD NCO Fl
10 RDA4IN
PIlOT
ru7_s E4
5 1 L' V1
EXISI7NGPERCDP 10<18".;* ._l&2Qf&a2i1Tp3 GROSS ARE4
NET ARM-
Approximate Location of Exploratory Excavation,.
.HA-2 AGS, 2012
Approximate Location of Exploratory-Trench, . FIGGRAPHIC SCAU URE.2
TP6 CTE' 20' ¶0' .. 20' so' GeologicMap and
,1 Exploration Location Plan
Old -Paralic Deposits (formerly mapped, as Terrace
WOp. .... ;4,, . ADVANCED GEOTECHNOCAL-SOLUTIONS, INC Deposits) 5333 Mission Center Road, Suite 390
Son Diego, California 92108 N.A.P. Not a Part of Report . . . "r#/ Telephone: (619) 708-1649 Fax: (714)409-3287
APPENDIX A
FIELD AND LABORATORY DATA
ADVANCED GEOTECHNICAL SOLUTIONS, INC., 2012
CONSTRUCTION TESTING AND ENGINEERING, INC., 2007
ADVANCED (iEOTECHNICAL SOUJTIONS, INC.
ADVANCED GEOTECHNICAL SOLUTIONS, INC.
LOG OF EXPLORATORY EXCAVATION
P1W NO.: 1201-02 LOGGED BY: PJD
- PROJECT NAME: 1369 Magnolia EQUIPMENT: Hand Excavated CLIENT: New Pointe Comiujnities DATE: 3/16/2012
LOCATION: See Bdoration Location Plan
— SAMPLES Laboratory Testing —
Hand Auger HA-1
E °- In E 0
— w co MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS
- Topsoil/Residual Soil (Undifferentiated)
• SC Light gray brown to brown, moist, loose, CLAYEY SAND with silt, fine-
-
HAl-i to medium grained El= 34
SM Light brown to red brown, moist, loose to medium dense, SILTY
SAND,fine- tomediumgrained;traceclay
- -
OldParalicDeposits
-
\... SM Light gray brown to orangish brown, slightly moist, dense, SILTY
SAND
Excavation Terminated at 3.5 Feet
- No Groundwater Encountered
Backfilled with Soil Cuttings
10 -
15 -
fSamote Type: Small Plastic Bag — Bulk Sample —Water. Table
LU O Laboratory Testing: AL = Attetheig Limits El = Expansion Index MD = Maximum Density SA = Sieve Analysis LU ..J SR = Sulfate/Resistivity Test SH = Shear Testing RV = R-Value Test CO = Consolidation
ADVANCED GEOTECHNICAL SOLUTIONS, INC.
LOG OF EXPLORATORY EXCAVATION
P1W NO.: 1201-02 LOGGED BY: PJD
PROJECT NAME: 1369 Magnolia EQUIPMENT: Hand Excavated
CLIENT: New Pointe Conminities DATE: 3/16/2012
LOCATION: See Exloration Location Plan
- SAMPLES Laboratory Testing -
- 'b CL :3 E
W Hand Auger HA-2
CL C.)
0 q
.--- 0 CL
,
- Q. E Cl) a
- 0
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION AND COMMENTS -
"
Topsoil/Residual Soil (Undifferentiated)
SM Light gray brown to light brown, slightly moist, loose to medium
dense, SILTY SAND, fine- to medium-grained; trace clay
OldParalicDeposits
SM Light gray brown to orangish brown, slightly moist, dense. SILTY
SAND; weakly cemented
Excavation Terminated at 3.5 Feet
No Groundwater Encountered
Backfilled with Soil Cuttings
10
15
93 1Sample 11~71 Type: Small Plastic Bag Lnsj _ Bulk Sample —Water Table
O Laboratory Testing: AL =Atterberg Limits El = Expansion Index MD Maximum Density SA = Sieve Analysis Lu SR = Sulfate/Resistivity Test SH = Shear Testing RV R-Value Test CO = Consolidation
:1111 111IN
c —\
CONSTRUCTION. TESTING & ENGINEERItIG, INC. O(ofDcAnlgu CCND'DUCD:OM EsD'uAINu VDZHNO AND INDP&1 ni .0 •JDAIIII ROAD, SAul lii $ JUO*JiO, Cu $0111 I PlO
PROJECT: Three Lot Development EXCAVA'JX')R: D. Higgenbotharn c-rr JOB NO: lO-8791c3 EXCAVATtONMThOl): BACKHOE EXCAVATION b.'\'II: 2/I(/,'(II.17 LOUUDBY: 1)1< SAMPLft'CJMETtIOD: BULK ELEVATION: -
TEST PIT LOG TP-1 luutIcol ii
DESCRIPTION
0-I TOPSOIl..: Loose to rnediuii dense. slightly tmukl.
dark browi', silty SAND (SM) with i'tuu'iloiganics,
'REM \\•\ RV. ( ,&• .J 1-3 R2SIDUAL SOIL
- -
. Medium dense, slightly moist. light biown
- -Qf to tun, silty One SAND (SM)
.
\ 3-6 OUATE RNARY TERRACE DPOSITSj.
i.)ense. slightly moist, light brown -
to ton. , fine SAND SM
fota; (tc11111 6 fig
No ground wt icr
lRackfilled with spoils
S -10-
". .
F i p.
-15-
10 40 a. ...• _________ o
c2 CONSTRUCTION TESTING &ENGINEERING,INC.
- Dr T(CIn I II CONSTRUC110M ONOIN110UIn III lIMO Afl In i•i C 11DM 'I. I ltOfl(I t$.O. 3ar1 II I I5rOII 0100. CI 01*00 710 .I.,Ij
PROJECT: 11irec Lot Development EXCAVATOR: D. iliggenhot ham CIE JOB JO: 1087910 EXCAVATION METHOD: tACKHQE Fxc.\vATtoN D.Vt'( LOGC,Eb 131: DK - SAMPLINQMETIIOD: BULK tt.1ATlON:__- -
:
4
. TEST PIT LOG: TP-2
Cl
3
Zi
:
C
DESCRIPTION -
•
. / 'Loose to niedkrm dense, dry to slightly moist. \-/ twowii. silty Fine grained SANt) (SM) with dehii
- \ . . J and organic materials (foUrs. lop j.
- / 1.5-3' RESIDUAL 501
- - Qi Medium dense. slightly moist. light brown
to Lan. silty tineSAND(SM). -
- 5. 5' OUA1ERNAY TERRACE DEPpSfl.jQu
- Total depth 5.5' ftp Dense, slightly moist. mottled orange brown
- No tioundsvatr to tan, silty fine SAND (SM).
- 13ack1i11ed with spoiI
-1€
-Is
- - - - - -
J9CitJRE:L (P2
CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. G (I CCHNICI P C111431PUCTION EN:,lll I Ifl II ITl4O I,.IlCTIVI, IDI MODPI1 U In. $IPI& P I SCOITPUO. CI P7311 I Ill IsPp.
- PROJECT: Three Lot Dcvcloprnenr E>W.VAOfl: D. Higgeitborham CTEJOR NO: 10879}G EXCAVATION METHOD: BAcicr-toE F.\c:Av..TicJ DATE. .'l(p/2(I" LC)CC1C) 0i: D}C SA1VLING METHOD: BULX ELEVATION"-•
1 ..
TEST PIT LOG: TP-3C. uutiv li O
i:;• - L C.
DESCRTPTrON ,. • — - — - —a ---- -- -_____
,,_ 4 0•l....OPSO1I.: Loose (ii medium dense. tihtl moist.
/ dark brown, silty SAND (SM) with rooisfoiaiiic
7 l.S.Y RESID UALSO • \ / tvledium dense, slightly moist. light brown
to tan.- silty fine SAND (SM). -
.
\Qt
. 35 5- Dense, slightly moist. mottled orange L'itiwn Total depth to tan. silty fine SAND (SM). No groundwater
• Bucktilled with polls
S .
.
'5 .
.•
(
Flur(i 1 11 3
CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC.
8TECIINICA I COISO I tll.1 50 C 50101 01050 1(11,00 - 0500 I I1U CII 05 .IiqIili 00110. II.., I II I 510PICIOC. C I 5159 III !SI 05'
PROJECT: Three Lor Development . . EXCAVATOR: D. Higgenbotham c-iios NO; 10-87913 IiXCAVATION METHOD: IIACKHOP EXCAVATION D.IL: 2/I6/CU LOGGED DY: DK - - - SAMPLIN(IMETHOD: BULK ELEVATIO':
C ..
." TEST PIT LOG: TP-4 A Tci1!.
.. :
0
I)ESCRIF1ION
- - -o- -
- ,L. ) 0-75 TOPSOfl Loose to niedkirndee. s I i ghtl y mj
dark brown silty SAND (SM:) with mots/cligallic \ / materials.
- . . / 75 3 RESIDUAL SOiL.
- / Medium dense to dense, slightly muiL light biown
- - - . / and clirk brown, silty SAND (SPA).
- / 3.61 QUATERNARY TERRACE DtPOSITS COt):
Dense to very dense, slightly moist. light brown
''-_---- - - and dark brown, silty SAND (SM-).with small'
- - :—.25') weathered quartz nodules, Total depth 6 thg
No groundwater
- Backfi lIed with cuttings
-IE
- --/
(
GURE:j
/\.
I- CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC.
- MCIt £fl. Iwo I IC I £ $OKIICfl. Ct 11111 I 710.11 I III!
t £ U CH?IA COI. ?AU II Q ENflhPU4IIIC It iISN@ £O I ty, C IO
PRO1t3C17: Three Lot Development EXCAVATOR: D. Higenbotham C1E JOB NO: 10-879J G CAVA'i ION 1\IEF&ioo: BACK}1013 EXCAVATION t.)AIT: 2/16/21107
LOGGED BY: DK SI'U\1PLINc1 METHOD: BULK ELEVATION; 156 -
— .
. ' if ' TEST PIT LOG: TP-5
- l)l7raLoIy1et..;
U .
i S C a m 0
DESCRIPTION
ToPsu -- —
Medium dense, slightly moist, mottled light brown
- ---
/ f to brown, silty fine SAND (SW[) with roots
/ and orIlic nioteriul.
- / RJELSIDU - Qt .S Medium dense to dense. slightly moist. light brown ,"
and dark- brown. silty SAA Total depth 11.5 lhg
• Loose. di • ptie gray. fine. to coarse sand tSP.SWI. - No gJoUnd\Yar
l3ackfiticd vvitli spoils 3-I OUAflR'ARYTERRAE DEP()S1TStOIm:
—
Dense to very dcuse. sl iglitly moist. light brown — and clurk brown. silly Si\Nt) (SM) with small
-.25) veathercd quartz mmodule,
I Jr
ii
...
.
flGURE:L •fl)
10.6 wow 04 #60 OW94061016v
t) w w. w ww - — -
CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING. INC.
QfOIa.,,IICAt I CO,PIHUCIID EIIW1EIIIiu THT1114 INC IPIS,CC,IAC (N ___ a a WCI fl iou. S11 Iii (UUCPIIC. Ca 101,0 I 7I 111.1 III
PROJECT: Three Lot Development
-- EXCAVATOR: D. Higgenbotham
--
Ci.JO[4 No: I0-8791G EXCAVATION METHOD: BA('KHOB EXC.V.\IlON D;VrE. WOOED J3v: DK SAMPLINGMFT}OD: RULK ELEVATION:____
26
c !
0 TEST PIT LOG: TP-6
uT 73
D1SCRIPT[ON
0-I' LQ
\ f too brown. silty (inc SAN]) (SM) with rou::.ond
initciiaIs.
- / 1-3 REM DUAL SOtL: Q' Medium dense to dense, slightly moist. hrovri to -
— light brown. silty fine SAND (SM).
3' OUiVIERNARY ThRRAC DEPOSLTSjOr
Dense, slightly moist, brown to -
- Total depth 5' bg light brown, silty line. SAND (SM).
- . No groundwater
Baekfilled with spoils
- _-/ Medium dense. slightly moist. norId light hr"vn
18
.
IS-
CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC.
:...t Er' • • 3t tU:'. t. •tflIt',.
2(R) WASU ANALYSIS
1.01 7t1V)N
H., PLR(ENT I'AsSH\(; (I.:NIF!C..lI(,1c i feet O() SIFE i•p.I 1-3 ZO.3
TI'-4 4-li 24.1 SM 6.3 SI'-MI
RESISTANCE "R"-VALUE
CALTEST 3W LOCA11O.J
DEPTH
R-VALUE
( TPI - i
74
SULFATE
LOCATION
DEPTH RESULTS (feet) - Will TV-I I-S 45.9
CHLORIDE
LOCATION DEPTH RTSULTS (fcetj ppm TV-I 1-3
CONDUCTIVITY
CALIEflRC"1A TEST 1124 LOCViION DIPTh RESULTS Iiiet) - nS/cm TV-I I-S Mll
RESISTIVITY
CALIFORNIA TEST 424 LOCATION DEPTH RESUI-TS (fix () )hnilc,u TV-I 1-3 11)401)
- rYI.XMUM DRY DENSITY & OPTIMUM MOISTURE CONTENT
(MODIFIED PROC3OR) LOCATION 0131H OPT1MU1LMO1STURE DRY DEJSITY ifeet) () slicfl IP-3 . :s-i - 9.5 124:5
LA01)R:VII)R'V SI '-MARY
(!1 .)flfl NO. I-'7"j Ii
C
L)nr --- - --- -I-- - -- I .
0 II) 15 20 25 30 35
PERCENT MOISTURE (%)
llli~a ASTM D1557 METHOD IX] A 0 B 0 C 10
MODIFIED PROCTOR
RESIJLTS
LAB
NUMBER
%AP*IPLr
NUMBER
TH (FJT; SOIL DESCRIPTION
MAXIMUM
DRY DENSITY
(pcF) CONTENT 17078
-
TP-3 0.5-I BROWN SILTY SAND 124.5 9.5
CTE JOB NO: CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC. DATE: 03/07 .J GAtEC"HCL 10 1TWAMD ESD1 IS EbCOI.0CIt78,7li3,M6.45
FIGURE: U-I
10-8791G 9____9
-
APPENDIX B
GENERAL EARTHWORK SPEC WICATIONS
AND GRADING GUIDELINES
ADVANCED GEOTECHNICAL SOLUTIONS, INC.
March 21,2012 1. P1w 1201-02
Page B-I
Report No. 1201-02-B-2
GENERAL EARTHWORK SPECIFICATIONS
I. General
A General procedures and requirements for earthwork and grading are presented herein.'The earthwork
and gading recommendations provided in the geotechnical report are considered part of these
specifications, and where the general specifications provided herein conflict with those provided in the
geotechnical report, the recommendations in the geotechnical report shall govern Recommendations
provided herein and in the geotechnical report may need to be modified depending on the conditions
encountered during grading.
B The contractor is responsible for the satisfactory completion of all earthwork in accordance with the
project plans, specifications, applicable building codes, and local governing agency requirements Where
theSe requirements cOnflict, the stricter requirententS shall govern.
- C. It is the contractor's responsibility to read and understand the guidelines presented herein and in the
geotedimcal report as well as the project plans and specifications Information presented in the
geotechnidal report is subject to verification during grading The information presented on the exploration
- logs depicts conditions at the particular time of excavation and at the location of the excavation
Subsurface conditions present at other locations may differ, and the passage of time may result in
different subsurface conditions being encountered at the locations of the exploratory excavations The
contractor shall perform an independent investigation and evaluate the nature of the surface and
subsurface conditions to be encountered and the procedures and equipment tobe used in performing his
work.-
The contractor shall have the responsibility to provide adequate equipment and procedures to
accomplish the earthwork in accordance with applicable requirements When the quality of work is less
than that irequired, the Geotechnical Consultant may reject the work and may recommend that the
operations be suspended until the conditions are corrected.
Prior to the start of- grading, a qualified Geotechnical Consultant should be, employed to observe
grading procedures and provide testing of the fills for conformance with the project specifications,
approved grading plan, and guidelines presented herein:.All remedial removals, clean-outs, removal
bottoms, keyways, and subdrain installations should be observed and documented by the Geotechnical
Consultant prior to placing fill It is the contractor's responsibility to apprise the Geotechnical. Consultant
of their schedules and notify the Geotechnical Consultant when those areas are ready for observation.
F.,.-The contractor is responsible for providing a safe environment for the Geotechnical Consultant to
observe grading and conduct tests.
H. Site Preparation
A. Cleaing and Grubbing: Excessive vegetation and other deleterious material shall be sufficiently
removed as required by the Geotechnical Consultant, and such materials shall be properly disposed of
offsite in a method acceptable to the owner and governing agencies Where applicable, the contractor may
obtaih permission from thèGeotechnical Consultant, owner, and governing agencies to dispose of
vegetation and otherdeleterious materials in designated areas onsite.
ADVANCED GEOTECHNICAL. SOUJflONS; INC.
March 21, 2012 Page B-2
P1W 1201-02 Report No. 1201-02-13-2
Unsuitable Soils Removals: Earth materials that are deemed unsuitable for the support of fill shall be
removed as necessary to the satisfaction of the Geotechnical Consultant.
Any underground structures such as cesspools, cisterns, mining shafts, tunnels, septic tanks, wells,
pipelines, other utilities, or other structures located within the limits of grading shall be removed and/or
- abandoned in accordance with the requirements of the governing agency and to the satisfaction of the
Geotechnical Consultant.
-
D. Preparation of Areas to Receive Fill: After removals are completed, the exposed surfaces shall be
scarified to.a depth of approximately 8 inches, watered or dried, as needed, to achieve a generally uniform
moisture content that is at or near optimum moisture content. The scarified materials shall, then be
- compacted to the project requirements and tested as specified.
All areas receiving fill shall be observed and approved by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to the
placement of fill. A licensed surveyor shall provide survey control for determining elevations of
- processed areas and keyways.
HI. Placement of Fill
Suitability of fill materials: Any materials, derived onsite or imported, may be utilized as fill provided
that the materials have been determined to be suitable by the Geotechnical Consultant. Such materials
shall be essentially free of organic matter and other deleterious materials, and be of a gradation, expansion
- potential, and/or strength that is acceptable to the Geotechnical Consultant. Fill materials shall be tested in
a laboratory approved by the Geotechnical Consultant, and import materials shall be tested and approved
-
prior to being imported.
Generally, different fill materials shall be thoroughly mixed to provide a relatively uniform blend of
materials and prevent abrupt changes in material type. Fill materials derived from benching should be
- dispersed throughout the fill area instead of placing the materials within only an equipment-width from
the cut/fill contact.
-
C. Oversize Materials: Rocks greater than 8 inches in largest dimension shall be disposed of offsite or be
placed in accordance with the recommendations by the Geotechnical Consultant in the areas that are
designated as suitable for oversize rock placement Rocks that are smaller than 8 inches in largest
-
dimension may be utilized in the fill provided that they are not nested and are their quantity and
distribution are acceptable to the Geotechnical Consultant
The fill materials shall be placed in thin, horizontal layers' such that, when compacted, shall not exceed
- 6 inches. Each layer shall be spread evenly and shall be thoroughly mixed to obtain near uniform moisture
content and uniform blend of materials.
- E. Moisture Content: Fill materials shall be placed at or above the optimum moisture content or as
recommended by the geotechnical report. Where the moisture content of the engineered fill is less than
recommended, water shall be added, and the fill materials shall be blended so that near uniform moisture
content is achieved. If the moisture content is above ,the limits specified by the Geotechnical Consultant,
the fill materials shall be aerated by discing, blading, or other methods until the moisture content is
acceptable.
- ADVANCED GEOTECHNICAL. SOLUTIONS, INC.
Maich21,2012 Page B-3
PiW 1201-02 ' Report No. 1201-02-B-2
F.'Eàch.layer of flllsha!l be compacted to the project standards in accordance to the projectspecifications
and recommendations of the Geotechnical Consultant Unless otherwise specified by the Geotechnical
- Consultant, the fill shall be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density as
determined by ASTM. Test Method: D1557-09.
- G Benching Where placing fill on a slope exceeding a ratio of 5 to I (horizontal to vertical), the ground
should be keyed or, benched The keyways and benches shall el. xtend through all unsuitable materials into
suitable materials such as firm materials or sound bedrock or as recommended by the Geotechnical
- Consultant The minimum.,keyway width shall be 15 feet and extend into suitable materials, or as
recommended by the geotechnical report and approved by the Geotechnical Consultant The minimum
keyway width for fill over cut slopes is also 15 feet, or as recommended by the geotechnical report and
- approved by the Geotechnical Consultant As a general fule, unless otherwise recommended by the
Geotechnical Consultant, the minimum width of the keyway shall be equal to 1/2 the height of the fill
slope: '
H Slope Tam The specified minimum relative compaction shall be maintained out to the finish face of
fill and stabilization fill slopes Generally, this may be achieved by overbuilding the slope and cutting
- back to the compacted core The actual amount of overbuilding may vary as field conditions dictate
Alternately, this may be achieved by back rolling the slope face with suitable equipment or other methods
that produce the designated result. Loose soil should not be allowed to build up on the slope face If
- ' present,' lo 'shall, be trimmed to expose tile compated slope face.
I Slope Ratio Unless otherwise approved by the Geotechnical Consultant and governing agencies,
-
permanent fill slopes shall be designed and constructed no steeper than 2 to 1 (horizontal to vertical)
Natural Ground and Cut Areas; Design grades that,are in natural ground or in cuts should, be evaluated
by the Geotechnical Consultant to determine whether scarification and processing of the ground and/or
- 'overexcavation is needed.
Fill materials shalt not be placed, spread, or, compacted during unfavorable weather conditions. When
- grading is interrupted :by rain, filing operations shall not resume until the Geotechnical Consultant
approves the moisture and density of the previously plated compacted fill.
1V. Cut Slopes
The Geotechnical Consultant shall inspect all cut slopes, including fill over cut slopes,.and shall be
notified by the contractor when cut slopes are started.
If adverse or potentially adverse conditions are encountered during grading; the Geotechnical
Consultant shall investigate, evaluate, and make recommendations to mitigate the adverse conditions.
Unless otherwise stated in the geotechnical report, cut slopes shall not be excavated higher or steeper
than the requirements, of the local governing agencies. Short-term stability of the cut slopes' and other
excavations is the contractor's responsibility.
V., Drainage
A. Back 'drains and Subdrains: Back drains and subdráins shall be'provided in fill as recommended by the
Geotechnical Consultant and shall, be 'constructed in accordance with the governing agency and/or
ADVANCED GEOTECHNOCAL SOLUJITIONS, INC.
Page B4
Report No. i-201-01-
recommendations of the Geotechnical Consultant The location of subdrains, especially outlets, shall be
surveyed and recorded by the Civil Engineer.
B Top-of-slope Drainage Positive drainage shall be established away from the top of slope Site ärainage
shall,not be permitted to flow over' the tops of slopes. .
C Drainage terraces shall be constructed in compliance with the governing agency requirements and/or in
accordance withthe recommendations of the Geotechnical. Consultant.
D Non-erodible interceptor swales shall be j1aced at the top of cut slopes that face the same direction as
the prevailing drainage.
VI. Erosion Control
Màith 21,201.2
P/W1201-02
A Ail 'finish cut and fill slopes shall be protected from erosion and/or planted in acconlance with the
project specifications and/or landscape architect's recommendations Such measures to protect the slope
face shall be undertaken as soon as practical after completioi of grading
B During construction, the contractor shall maintain proper drainage and prevent the ponding 'of water.
The contractor shall take remedial measures to prevent the erosion of graded areas until permanent
drainage and erosion control measufes have been installed.
VII. Trench Exëavation and Backfill
A Safety The contractor shall follow all OSHA requirements for safety of trench excavations Knowing
And. following these requirements is the contractor's responsibility. All trench excavations or open cuts in
excess of 5 feet in depth shall be shored or laid back Trench excavations and open cuts exposing adverse
geologic conditions may require further evaluation by the Geoechmcal Consultant. If a contractor fails to
provide safe access fOr compaction testing, backfill nottested due to safety concerns may be subject to
removal.
B Bedding Bedding materials shall be non-expansive and have a Sand Equivalent greater than 30
Where permitted by the Geotechnical Consultant, the bedding materials can be densified by jetting
C Backfill Jetting of backfill materials is generally not acceptable Where permitted by the Geotechnical
Consultant, the bedding materials can be densified by jetting provided the backfill materials are granular,
free-draining and have a Sand Equivalent grater than 30.
Tffl Geotechmcal Observation and Testing Dunng Grading
A Compaction Testing:' esting Fill shall be tested by the Geotechnical Consultant for evaluation of general
compliance with the recommended compaction and moisture conditions The tests shall be taken in the
compacted soils beneath the surface if the surficial materials are disturbed. The contractor shall assist the
Geotechnical Consultant by excavating suitable test pits for testing of compacted fill
B Where tests indicate that the density of a layer of fill is less than required, or the moisture content not
within specifications, the Geotechnical Consultant shall notify the contractor of the unsatisfactory
conditions of the filL The portions of the fill that ar iot within specifications shall be reworked until the
required density and/or moisture content has been attained No additional fill shall be placed until the last
lift of fill is tested and found to meet the project specifications and approved by the Geotechnical
Consultant.: .
ADVANCED GEOTECIINICALSOLIJUONS, INC.
March 21,2012 Page B-5
P/W 1201-02 Report No. 1201-02-13-2
If, in the opinion of the Geotechnical Consultant, unsatisfactory conditions, such as adverse weather,
excessive rock or deleterious materials being placed in the fill, insufficient equipment, excessive rate of
fill placement, results in a quality of work that is unacceptable, the consultant shall notify the contractor,
and the contractor shall rectify the conditions, and if necessary, stop work until conditions are
satisfactory.
Frequency of Compaction Testing: The location and frequency of tests shall be at the Geotechnical
Consultant's discretion. Generally, compaction tests shall be taken at intervals not exceeding two feet in
fill height and 1,000 cubic yards of fill materials placed.
Compaction Test Locations: The Geotechnical Consultant shall document the approximate elevation
and horizontal coordinates of the compaction test locations. The contractor shall coordinate with the
surveyor to assure that sufficient grade stakes are established so that the Geotechnical Consultant can
determine the test locations. Alternately, the test locations can be surveyed and the results provided to the
Geotechnical Consultant.
Areas of fill that have not been observed, or tested by the Geotechnical Consultant may have to be
removed and recompacted at the contractor's expense. The depth and extent of removals will be
- determined by the Geotechnical Consultant.
Observation and testing by the Geotechnical Consultant shall be conducted during grading in order for
- the Geotechnical Consultant to state that, in his opinion, grading has been completed in accordance with
the approved geotechriical report and project specifications.
Reporting of Test Results: After completion of grading operations, the Geotechnical Consultant shall
submit reports documenting their observations during construction and test results. These reports may be
subject to review by the local governing agencies.
ADVANCED GEOTECIUNICAL SOUJEIONS, INC.
APPENDIX C
HOMEOWNER MAINTENANCE RECOMMENDATIONS
ADVANCED GEOTECHNICAL SOLUTIONS, INC.
HOMEOWNER MAINTENANCE AND IMPROVEMENT CONSIDERATIONS
Homeowners ale accustomed to maintaining their homes. Thçy expect to paint their houses periodically,
replace wiring, clean out clogged plumbing, and repair roofs Maintenance of the home site, particularly
on hillsides should be considered on the same basis or even on a more serious .basis because neglect can
result in serious consequences In most cases, lot and site maintenance can be taken care of along with
landscaping and can be carried out more economically than repair after neglect
Most slope and hillside lot problems are associated with water Uncontrolled water from a broken pipe,
cesspool, or wet weather causes most damage Wet weather is the largest cause of slope problems,
particularly in California where rain is intermittent, but may be torrential Therefore, drainage and erosion
control are the most important aspects of home site stability, these provisions must not be altered without
competent professional advice Further, maintenance must be carned out to assure their continued
operation.
As geotechnical engineers concerned with the problems of building sites in hillside developments, we
offer the following list of recommended home proteôtion measures as a guide to homeowners.
Expansive Soils
Some of the earth materials on site have been identified as being expansive in nature. As such, these
materials are susceptible to volume changes with variations in their moisture content These soils will
-- swell. upon the introduction of water and shrink, upon drying. The forces associated with these volume
changes can have significant negative impacts (in the form of differential movement) on foundations,
walkways, patios, and other lot improvements In recognition of this, the project developer has
constructed homes on these lots on post-tensioned or mat slabs with pier and grade beam foundation
systems intended to help reduce the potential adverse effects of these expansive materials on the
residential structures within the project Such foundation systems are not intended to offset the forces
- (and associated movement) related to expansive soil, but are intended to help soften their effects on the
structures constructed thereon.
Homeowners purchasing property and living in an area containing expansive soils must assume a certain
degree of responsibility for homeowner improvements as well as for maintaining conditions around their
home Provisions should be incorporated into the design and construction of homeowner improvements
- to account for the expansive nature of the onsite soils material. Lot maintenance and landscaping should
also be conducted in consideration of the expansive soil characteristics Of primary importance is
minimizing the moisture variation below all lot improvements Such design, construction and
homeowner maintenance provisions should include:
• Employing contractors for homeowner improvements who design and build in recognition of
- local building code and site specific soils conditions
Establishing and maintaining positive drainage away from all foundations, walkways driveways,
patios, and Other hardscape improvements.
:Avoiding the construction of planters adjacent to structural improvements. Alternatively, planter
- 'sideslbdttoms can, bè:sealed 'with an impermeable membrane and drained away from the
improvements Via sübdrains into approved disposal areas.
, 'Sealing and maintaining construction/control joints within concrete slabs and walkways to reduce
- the potential for' moisture infiltration into the subgrade soils.
-
• ADVANCED GEOTECIINICAL SOLUTIONS, INC.
Utilizing landscaping schemes with vegetation that-requires minimal, watering. Alternatively,
watering should be done in a uniform manner as equally as possible on all sides of the foundation,
keeping the soil "moist" but not allowing the soil to become saturated.
- •• Maintaining positive drainage away from structures and providing roof gutters on all structures
with downspouts installed to carry roof runoff directly into area drains or discharged well away
from the structures.
- • Avoiding the placement of trees closer to the proposed structures than a distance of one-half the
mature height of the tree.
•• Observation of the soil conditions around the perimeter of the structure during extremely hot/dry
or unusually wet weather conditions so that modifications can be made in irrigation programs to
maintain relatively constant moisture conditions.
Sulfates
Homeowners should be cautioned against the import and use of certain fertilizers, soil amendments,
and/or other soils from offsite sources in the absence of specific information relating to their chemical
composition. Some fertilizers have been known to leach sulfate compounds into soils otherwise
containing "negligible" sulfate concentrations and increase the sulfate concentrations in near-surface soils
to "moderate" or "severe" levels. In some cases, concrete improvements constructed in soils containing
high levels of soluble sulfates may be affected by deterioration and loss of strength.
Water - Natural and Man Induced
Water in concert with the reaction of various natural and man-made elements, can cause detrimental
effects to your structure and surrounding property. Rain water and flowing water erodes and saturates the
ground and changes the engineering characteristics of the underlying earth materials upon saturation.
-, Excessive irrigation in concert with a rainy period is commonly associated with shallow slope failures and
deep seated landslides, saturation of near structure soils, local ponding of water, and transportation of
water soluble substances that are deleterious to building materials including concrete, steel, wood, and
- stucco.
Water interacting with the near surface and subsurface soils can initiate several other potentially
detrimental phenomena other then slope stability issues. These may include expansion/contraction cycles,
liquefaction potential increase, hydro-collapse of soils, ground surface settlement, earth material
consolidation, and introduction of deleterious substances.
- The homeowners should be made aware of the potential problems which may develop when drainage is
altered through construction of retaining walls, swimming pools, paved walkways and patios. Ponded
water, drainage over the slope face, leaking irrigation systems, over-watering or other conditions which
- could lead to ground saturation must be avoided.
Before the rainy season arrives, check and clear roof drains, gutters and down spouts of all
- accumulated debris. Roof gutters are an important element in your arsenal against rain damage. If
you do not have roof gutters and down spouts, you may elect to install them. Roofs, with their,
wide, flat area can shed tremendous quantities of water. Without gutters or other adequate
drainage, water falling from the eaves collects against foundation and basement walls.
- •• Make sure to clear surface and terrace drainage ditches, and check them frequently during the
rainy season. This task is a community responsibility.
•• Test all drainage ditches for functioning outlet drains. This should be tested with a hose and done
before the rainy season. All blockages should be removed.
ADVANCED GEOIECHNUCAL. SOUJEIONS, INC.
- •• Check all drains at top of slopes to be sure they are clear and that water will not overflow the
slope itself, causing erosion.
) Keep subsurface drain openings (weep-holes) clear of debris and other material which could
- block them in a storm.
•• Check for loose fill above and below your property if you live on a slope or terrace.
•• Monitor hoses and sprinklers. During the rainy season, little, if any, irrigation is required.
Oversaturation of the ground is unnecessary, increases watering costs, and can cause subsurface
drainage.
+ Watch for water backup of drains inside the house and toilets during the rainy season, as this may
indicate drain or sewer blockage.
•• Never block terrace drains and brow ditches on slopes or at the tops of cut or fill slopes. These are
designed to carry away runoff to a place where it can be safely distributed.
•• Maintain the ground surface upslope of lined ditches to ensure that surface water is collected in
the ditch and is not permitted to be trapped behind or under the lining.
•• Do not permit water to collect or pond on your home site. Water gathering here will tend to either
seep into the ground (loosening or expanding fill or natural ground), or will overflow into the
slope and begin erosion. Once erosion is started, it is difficult to control and severe damage may
result rather quickly.
. Never connect roof drains, gutters, or down spouts to subsurface drains. Rather, arrange them so
-
that water either flows off your property in a specially designed pipe or flows out into a paved
driveway or street. The water then may be dissipated over a wide surface or, preferably, may be
carried away in a paved gutter or storm drain. Subdrains are constructed to take care of ordinary
subsurface water and cannot handle the overload from roofs during a heavy rain.
•• Never permit water to spill over slopes, even where this may seem to be a good way to prevent
ponding. This tends to cause erosion and, in the case of fill slopes, can eat away carefully
designed and constructed sites.
- •• Do not cast loose soil or debris over slopes. Loose soil soaks up water more readily than
compacted fill. It is not compacted to the same strength as the slope itself and will tend to slide
when laden with water; this may even affect the soil beneath the loose soil. The sliding may clog
- terrace drains below or may cause additional damage in weakening the slope. If you live below a
slope, try to be sure that loose fill is not dumped above your property.
4 Never discharge water into subsurface blanket drains close to slopes. Trench drains are
sometimes used to get rid of excess water when other means of disposing of water are not readily
- available. Overloading these drains saturates the ground and, if located close to slopes, may cause
slope failure in their vicinity.
4 Do not discharge surface water into septic tanks or leaching fields. Not only are septic tanks
- constructed for a different purpose, but they will tend, because of their construction, to naturally
accumulate additional water from the ground during a heavy rain. Overloading them artificially
during the rainy season is bad for the same reason as subsurface subdrains, and is doubly
- dangerous since their overflow can pose a serious health hazard. In many areas, the use of septic
tanks should be discontinued as soon as sewers are made available.
4 Practice responsible irrigation practices and do not over-irrigate slopes. Naturally, ground cover
of ice plant and other vegetation will require some moisture during the hot summer months, but
during the wet season, irrigation can cause ice plant and other heavy ground cover to pull loose.
This not only destroys the cover, but also starts serious erosion. In some areas, ice plant and other
heavy cover can cause surface sloughing when saturated due to the increase in weight and
- weakening of the near-surface soil. Planted slopes should be planned where possible to acquire
sufficient moisture when it rains.
4 Do not let water gather against foundations, retaining walls, and basement walls. These walls are
- built to withstand the ordinary moisture in the ground and are, where necessary, accompanied by
subdrains to carry off the excess. If water is permitted to pond against them, it may seep through
ADVANCED GEOTECHNICAL. SOLUTIONS, INC.
- the wall, causing dampness arid leakage inside the basement Further, it may cause the foundation
to swell up, or the water pressure could cause structural damage to walls
4 Do not try to compact soil behind walls or in trenches by flooding with water. Not only is
- flooding the least efficient way of compacting fine-grained soil, but it could damage the wall
foundation or saturate the subsoil
4 Never leave a hose and sprinkler running on or near a slope, particularly 'during the rainy season
- This will enhance ground saturation which may cause damage
. Never block ditches which have been graded around your house or the lot pad These shallow
ditches have been put there for the purpose of quickly removing water toward the driveway, ,:street
or other positive outlet. By all means, do not let wter become ponded above slopes by blocked
ditches. : .
. Seeding and pianting.of the slopes should be planned to achieve,as rapidly as possible, a;well-
estãblish'&land deep-rooted vegetal cover requiring minimal watering.
It should be the responsibility of the landscape architect to provide such plants initially and of the
residents to maintain such planting Alteration of such a planting scheme is at the resident's risk
I - 4 The resident is responsible for proper irrigation and for maintenance and repair of properly
installed irrigation. systems,.,Leaks should be fixed immediately. Residents must undertake a
program to eliminate burrowing animals This must be an ongoing program in order to promote
slope stability. The burrowing animal control 'program should be conducted by a licensed
exterminato and/or landscape professional with expertise in hill side maintenance.
Gedtechiiical Review
Due .,to the fact that soil types may vary with depth, it is recommended that plans for the construction of
rear yard improvements (swimming pools, spas, barbecue pits, patios, etc), be reviewed by ,,a geotechnical
engineer who is familiar with local conditions and the current standard of practice in the vicinity of your
- home.
In conclusion, your neighbor's slope, above or below your property, is as important to you as the slope
that is within your property lines For this reason, it is desirable to develop a cooperative attitude
regarding hillside maintenance, and we recommend developing a "good neighbor' policy. Should
conditions develop off your property, which are undesirable tfrorh indications given above, necessary
- action should be taken by you to insure that prompt remedial measures are taken Landscaping of your
property is irnportantto enhance slope and foundation stability and to prevent erosion of the near surface
soils. In addition, landscape'improvements should provide for efficient drainage to a controlleddischarge
location downhillofrësidential improvements and soil slopes.
Additionally, recommendations contained in the Geotechnical Engineering Study report apply to all
future residential site improvements, and we advise that you include consultation with a. qualified
professional in planning, design, and construction of any improvements Such improvements include
patios, swimming pools, decks, etc., as well as building structures and all changes in the site configuration
requiring earth cut or fill construction.
ADVANCED GEOI[CHNICAIi SOLUTIONS, INC.
( '
ADVANCED GEOTECHNICAL SOLUTIONS, INC.
25109 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 220
GS / Murrieta, California 92562
\ / Telephone: (619) 708-1649 Fax: (714) 409-3287
NEW POINTE. COMMUNITIES, INC. April 11, 2012
16880 West Bernardo Drive, Suite 230 P/W 1201-02
San Diego, CA 92127 Report No. 1201-02-B-3
Attention: Mr. Scot Sandstrom
Subject: Foundation Design Review Letter Proposed Single Family Residences, PcI 2 (1373
Magnolia Ave) and PcI 3 (1377 Magnolia Ave.) Carlsbad, California
References: I) Innovative Structural Engineering (ISE) 1377 Magnolia Ave Pci 3, dated March 23,
12 (Sheets SCS, Si, & SD 1)
-
Innovative Structural Engineering (ISE) 1373 Magnolia Ave Pci 2, dated March 29,
2012(SheetsSCS, Si, &SDJ)
Geotechnical Investigation and Foundation Design Recommendations for Proposed
Single-Family Residences, Parcel 2 and 3, 1369 Magnolia Avenue, Carlsbad, California
prepared by Advanced Geotechnical Solutions, Inc. 'c (AGS) dated March 21, 2012 (P/W
1201-02)
Gentlemen:
In accordance with your request, Advanced Geotechnical Solutions, Inc.'s (AGS) has reviewed the
Foundation Plans for PcI 2 (1373 Magnolia Ave.) and PcI 3 (1377 Magnolia Ave.) prepared by
Innovative Structural Engineering (ISE), dated March 29 and March 23, 2012. Specifically, AGS has
reviewed sheets SCS, S1 and SDI of each plan set for conformance to the recommendations presented in
the Geotechnical Investigation and Foundation Design Recommendations report (Ref. 3). Based upon our
review it is our opinion that the proposed foundation designs were prepared in general accordance with
the recommendations presented in the referenced report.
Advanced Geotechnical Solutions, Inc. appreciates the opportunity to provide you with geotechnical
consulting services and professional opinions. If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned
at (619) 708-1649.
Respectfully, Submitted,
,Vi
RCE 46544 / RGL2344Reg. Exp. 6-30-13
Distribution: (6) Addressee
p0FE
rn
No. 2314
. EXp6..30 7 3
°CAUFOd
ORANGE AND L.A. COUNTIES INLAND EMPIRE SAN DIEGO AND IMPERIAL COUNTIES
(714) 786-5661 (619) 708-1649 (619) 850-3980