HomeMy WebLinkAboutHMP 15-01; MARTIN RESIDENCE; FINAL SOILS REPORT; 2021-05-10~ VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC.
Ref Job #18-260-F 2450 Auro Park W:ir
May 10, 2021
Cheryl Burrows
Thankful Texans, LLC
8916 Calera Drive
Austin, TX 78735
Escondido, California 92029-1229
Phone (760) 743-1214
Fax (760) 739-0343
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING OBSERVATIONS AND COMPACTION TESTING,
REMEDIAL GRADING FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE 4469 ADAMS STREET
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APN 206-200-03
I. INTRODUCTION
In accordance with your request, and as required by the City of Carlsbad, please find the
following Report of Geotechnical Engineering Observation and Compaction Testing for
remedial grading at the above referenced residential property. The purpose of this report
is to summarize results of our field observations and compaction testing during the
remedial grading operation. The approximate site coordinates are 33.1450°N latitude and
-117.3268°W longitude. Portions of the Project Grading Plan prepared by Sowards &
Brown Engineering are reproduced herein as Grading Limits and Compaction Test
Location Map and included as Plates 1 and 2.
II. REFERENCES
The following report and plans were used by this office in support of our field work and
preparation of this report:
A. Geotechnical Update Report & Plan Review and Response to Third Party Geotechnical
Review Comments, Proposed Single Family Residential Redevelopment Adams Street,
Carlsbad, (A.P.N. 206-200-03). Dated July 31, 2018 Job# 18-183-P
Authored by this office.
8 . Approved Grading Plan prepared by Sowards & Brown Engineering .
The referenced report is on file with our firm and copies can be obtained upon request.
Cheryl Burrows
Thankful Texans, LLC
May 10, 2021
Page2
Ill. REMEDIAL GRADING
The project site originally consisted of a vacant lot with south facing natural hillside that
descends from Adams Street to the Agua Hedionda Lagoon at gradients generally
approached 4: 1 maximum. Surface areas were mantled with light to moderate vegetation
which was cleared as needed prior to initiating remedial grading efforts. Shoring walls were
constructed in accordance with the approved plans and all drilling associated with their
construction was observed and approved by our engineering geologist.
All ground transitions were achieved by retaining and building basement type walls.
Project earthwork associated with development of level building surfaces chiefly consisted
of cut excavations and wall backfilling operations. Project remedial grading consisted of
stripping (removing) the upper soils within the approved grading envelope to expose
competent underlying bedrock deposits suitable for the support of new compacted fills and
or retaining walls which were approved by our field representative.
Bottom of removals exposed undisturbed competent bedrock deposits consistent with the
findings of our geotechnical investigation report and were approved for fill placement.
All fills at the site were compacted to 90% of the corresponding laboratory maximum dry
density per ASTM O 1557. The approximate limits of remedial grading are indicated on the
attached Grading Limits and Compaction Test Location Maps, Plates 1and 2.
All new fills were compacted to a minimum of 90% of the corresponding laboratory
maximum dry density per ASTM 01557 using appropriate construction equipment. The
equipment used to complete remedial grading and achieve compaction levels consisted of
Caterpillar excavator with compaction wheel and rock breaker, vibratory compactor, and
skidsteer mini loader and whackers. Water was provided by a fire hose.
Remedial pad grading engineering observations and compaction testing were conducted
during the period of February7,2019 through April 13, 2021 as documented in our daily field
reports.
Field density and moisture content tests were performed in accordance with ASTM Method
0-6938 nuclear gauge as the fill placement progressed. The approximate locations of the
field density tests are shown on the attached Grading Limits and Compaction Test Location
Maps included as Plates 1 and 2. Included therin are test locations for wall backfills,
Underground utility trench backfill, subgrade basegrade and asphalt testing results to the
extent that we were asked to test same.
YINJJ: & MmDLErnN ENGINl:tlllNG, ]Ne. • 2450 Auto Park Way • Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214
Cheryl Burrows
Thankful Texans, LLC
May 10, 2021
Page3
All excavations, grading, earthwork, construction and bearing soil preparation were
completed in accordance with Chapter 18 (Soils and Foundations) and Appendix "J"
(Grading) of the 2013 California Building Code (CBC), the Standard Specifications for Public
Works Construction, City of Carlsbad Grading Ordinance, the requirements of the governing
agencies and the referenced Geotechnical Update Report. All observations and testing
were conducted by a representative from this office.
IV. FILL PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION TESTING
Fill was brought to near or slightly above optimum moisture content, placed in 8-inch lifts
and compacted by means of heavy construction equipment as discussed previously.
The location of field density tests were placed to provide the best possible coverage.
Maximum dry density and optimum moisture content were determined in accordance with
ASTM D 1557 from representative samples for each soil type identified during our
preliminary investigation as well as samples of site mixture containing varying percentage
of rock and soil obtained during grading. Soil types, test locations, and final test results are
summarized on the enclosed Field Density Test Result sheets.
Approximate depth and location of field density tests were determined by hand level and
pacing/tape measure relative to structures, limited staking located on the site and noted on
the site plan as well as grading control staking and laser based shots provided by the
grading contractor.
The results of our field density tests and laboratory testing indicate that the new fills within
the limits of remedial grading work were compacted to at least 90% of the corresponding
maximum dry density at the tested locations.
V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
In our opinion, site excavation and remedial grading were completed in substantial
conformance with the project site Plan, Geotechnical Investigation Report, as well as
applicable codes, and compacted fills addressed herein are acceptable for their intended
use. Site conditions, earth materials, and engineering properties of the compacted fills
remain the same as reported in the referenced Geotechnical Report (Reference A) and all
conclusions and recommendations including soil design parameters, geotechnical
foundation/slab designs and improvement constructions will stay unchanged, as specified
therein.
V1NJI: & Mmm l'.TON ENGINUlclUNG, INC. • 2450 Auto Park Way • Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214
Cheryl Burrows
ThankfulTexans,LLC
May 10, 2021
Page4
VI. ADDITIONAL GEOTECHNICAL OBSERVATIONS AND TESTING
This office should be notified no later than 1 :00 p.m. on the day before any earthwork
operations begin, in order to schedule appropriate testing and/or field observations for
confirmation and approval of the completed work for fills placed under any conditions 12-
inches or more in depth.
VII. DRAINAGE
The owner/developer is responsible for ensuring adequate measures are taken to properly
finish grade the building pad after the structures and other improvements are in-place so
that drainage water 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.
Water should not be allowed to flow unimpeded over any slopes. Brow ditches should be
considered where appropriate.
A minimum of 2% gradient should be maintained away from all foundations. Roof gutters
and down spouts should be installed on the building, all discharge from down spouts should
be led away from the foundations and slab to a suitable location. Install area drains in the
yards for collection and disposal of surface water.
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. Site and building stem type retaining walls should be provided with a well-constructed
back drain as specified in the project soil report. Planting large trees behind site retaining
walls should be avoided.
It should be noted that shallow groundwater conditions may 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 prior to the site redevelopment. It is almost impossible to absolutely prevent the
possibility of shallow water conditions developed from excessive landscape irrigation over
the entire site. Therefore, we recommend that shallow water conditions, if developed, be
immediately remedied.
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 effect subsurface moisture conditions, which in tum affect
structural performance.
V 1NJE & MIDDt.1:roN ENG.INL(IUNG, INC. • 2450 Auto Park War• Escondido, California 92029~1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214
JOB NO: 18-260-F
NAME: Thankful Texans
LOCATION: Adams Street, Carlsbad
TEST RESULTS:
Maximum Dry Density/Optimum Moisture Content, ASTM 0-1557:
Soil Type: 1
Soil Type: 2
Soil Type: 3
Soil Type: 4
Soil Type: 5
Soil Type: 6
Soil Type: 7
Soil Type: 8
Gray-Brown Clayey Sand
Maximum Dry Density: 122.9 pct
Optimum Moisture: 12.4%
Brown Fine Sand
Maximum Dry Density: 127.1 pct
Optimum Moisture: 10.3%
Brown Silty Fine Sand
Maximum Dry Density: 122.0 pct
Optimum Moisture: 12.0%
Pale Brown Silty Fine to Medium Sand
Maximum Dry Density: 115.8 pct
Optimum Moisture: 15.0%
Brown Silty Fine to Medium Sand
Maximum Dry Density: 124.8 pct
Optimum Moisture: 11.5%
Brown Coarse Silty Sand
Maximum Dry Density: 116.8 pct
Optimum Moisture: 12.0%
Grey Class 11 Base RCP Oceanside
Maximum Dry Density: 137.6 pct
Optimum Moisture: 7.0%
Recycled Class II Base Oceanside Moodys Plant
Maximum Dry Density: 120.4 pct
Optimum Moisture: 11.2%
Soil Type: 9 ½ " A.C. Superior Escondido
Hveem Unit Wt.: 149.6 pct
* From our Geotechnical Update Report dated August 3, 2016
JOB NO: 18-260-F
NAME: Thankful Texans
LOCATION: 4469 Adams Street, Carlsbad
Field Density Tests Results: Subgradc/Basegrade/A.C.
Date Test Approx. % Field Dry Max Dry %
2018 No, Location Test Field Density Per Density Relative Comments
Elev. (ft) Moisture Pcf Comp.
3/19 I Lower Pad 34. l 18 106.4 115.8 94
3/19 2 Lower Pad 36.3 13 113.8 124.8 91
3/19 3 Lower Pad 37.7 13 I 10.0 124.8 90
3/22 4 Lower Pad 31.4 13 103.2 I 15.8 89
3/22 5 Lower Pad 32.9 9 112.7 122.8 90
3/22 6 Lower Pad 34.4 11 I 13.8 125.9 91
3/27 7 Lower Pad 31.5 11 112.4 124.8 92
2019 Test Results
3/27 8 Lower Pad 32.5 12 I I 1.6 122.0 92
3/27 9 Lower Pad 33.5 9 112.9 122.0 93
3/29 10 Lower Pad 34.2 10 116.4 122.0 95 F.G.
3/29 11 Lower Pad 35.4 JO I 14.5 124.8 92
3/29 12 Lower Pad 37.7 JO I 15.6 124.8 93
4/4 13 Lower Pad 27.0 9 110.0 122.0 90
4/10 14 Lower Pad 34.0 JO I 12.5 122.0 92
4/10 15 Lower Pad 32.5 IO 111.8 122.0 92
7/2 16 Lower Pad 28.0 10 113.4 122.0 93
7/2 17 Upper Pad 49.0 11 I 12.8 124.8 90
7/8 18 Unner Pad 50.5 11 113.9 122.0 93 F.G.
JOB NO: 18-260-F
NAME: Thankful Texans
LOCATION: 4469 Adams Street, Carlsbad
Field Density Tests Results: Wall Backfill
Approx. % Max Dry % Date Test Location Test Field Field Dry Density Relative Comments 2019 No. Depth. Density Pcf
(ft) Moisture Pd Comp.
6/18 I Lower House Pad 37.0 I I I 16.9 124.8 94
6/18 2 Lower House Pad 37.0 JO 118.0 124.8 95
6/18 3 Lower House Pad 37.5 JO 116.4 124.8 93
6/20 4 Lower House Pad, by Pool 37.0 JO 113.7 122.0 93
6/20 5 Lower House Pad 39.0 9 112.6 124.8 90
6/20 6 Lower House Pad 39.0 9 112.5 124.8 90
6/20 7 Lower House Pad 39.5 10 113.6 124.8 91
6/21 8 Lower House Pad 41.0 II 112.7 124.8 90
6/21 9 Lower House Pad 41.0 10 114.8 124.8 92
6/21 10 Lower House Pad 41.5 12 I 14.3 124.8 92
6/21 11 Lower House Pad 37.0 12 I J0.6 122.0 91
6/24 12 Lower House Pad 43.0 9 114.1 124.8 91
6/24 13 Lower House Pad 39.0 9 121.2 124.8 97
6/24 14 Lower House Pad 40.0 IO 117.1 122.0 96
6/24 15 Lower Pad 43.0 9 116.3 124.8 93
6/24 16 Lower Pad 43.5 9 115.0 122.0 94
6/24 17 Lower Pad 42.0 9 112.5 124.8 90
6/25 18 Lower Pad 44.0 10 117.5 124.8 94
6/25 19 Lower Pad 45.0 II 116.4 124.8 93
6/25 20 Lower Pad 45.0 JO 115.5 124.8 93
6/25 21 Lower Pad 45.5 II 116.5 124.8 93
Approx. % Mox Dry o/o Date Test Location Test Field Field Dry Density Relative Comments 2019 No. Depth. Moisture Density Pcf Pcf Comp. (ft)
6/25 22 West Wall 40.0 11 112.8 122.0 93
6/26 23 West Wall 42.0 11 116.1 124.8 93
6/26 24 West Wall 44.0 11 116.8 124.8 94
6/26 25 North Wall 46.0 12 I 16.5 124.8 93
6/26 26 North Wall 47.0 10 114.8 122.0 94
6/26 27 North Wall 47.5 I I 115.5 124.8 93
6/26 28 North Wall 48.0 11 120.2 124.8 96
6/26 29 West Wall 46.0 12 117.6 124.8 94
6/26 30 West Wall 48.0 13 I 15.9 124.8 93
6/27 31 West Wall 41.0 12 114.8 124.8 92
6/27 32 West Wall 43.0 11 I 16.8 124.8 94
6/17 33 West Wall 45.0 11 I 16.2 124.8 93
7/8 34 Lower Pad 47.0 II I 17.2 124.8 94
7/8 35 Lower Pad 38.0 12 114.0 124.8 91 F.G.
7/8 36 Lower Pad 50.5 10 112.7 124.8 90 F.G.
7/8 37 Lower Pad 50.5 9 115.0 124.8 92 F.G.
8/27 38 Upper Garage 53.0 10 114.2 124.8 92
8/27 39 Upper Garage 53.0 10 116.1 124.8 93
8/27 40 Upper Garage 55.0 9 115.0 124.8 92
8/27 41 Upper Garage 55.0 JO 114.8 124.8 92
8/28 42 Upper Garage 57.0 9 113.9 124.8 91
8/28 43 Upper Pad 56.0 10 116.1 124.8 93
8/28 44 Upper Pad 59.0 II I 15.5 124.8 93
10/1 45 Upper Pad 33.0 10 I 16.4 124.8 93
Approx. % Max Dry % Date Test Location Test Field Field Dry Density Relative Comments 2019 No. Depth. Moisture Density Pcf Pcf Comp. (ft)
to/I 46 Upper Pad 33.5 II 115.2 124.8 92
2020 Test Results
5/20 47 Upper Pad 33.5 15 114.2 124.8 92
5/20 48 East Wall 32.5 11 121.7 124.8 98
5/21 49 East Wall 35.5 9 118.1 124.8 95
5/21 50 East Wall 34.5 11 119.2 124.8 96
6/18 51 East Wall 42.0 13 117.0 124.8 94
6/18 52 East Wall 44.0 9 115.0 124.8 92
6/19 53 East Wall 46.0 to 112.5 124.8 90 F.G.
10/27 54 East Wall 49.0 9 112.9 122.0 99
10/27 55 East Wall 51.0 10 114.2 122.0 94
10/27 56 East Wall 57.0 11 115.6 124.8 93
10/27 57 East Wall 53.0 10 117.1 124.8 94
10/28 58 East Wall 52.0 II I 16.2 124.8 93
10/28 59 East Wall 55.0 12 I 14.5 124.8 92
10/28 60 East Wall 61.0 11 114.0 124.8 91
10/29 61 East Wall 56.0 10 115.1 124.8 93 F.G.
10/29 62 East Wall 63.0 10 114.8 124.8 92 F.G.
12/23 63 East Wall 52.0 II 115.9 124.8 93
12/23 64 Driveway 53.0 II 115.8 124.8 93
12/23 65 Driveway 54.0 JO 117.3 124.8 94 F.G.
12/23 66 Driveway 55.0 9 118.1 124.8 95
12/23 67 Driveway 57.0 9 116.0 124.8 93 F.G.
12/28 68 Driveway 60.0 JO 114.5 124.8 92
Approx. % Max Dry % Date Test Location Test Field Field Dry Density Relative Comments 2019 No. Depth. Moisture Density Pcf Pcf Comp. (ft)
12/28 69 Driveway 56.0 11 116.5 124.8 93
12/28 70 Driveway 53.0 II 115.9 124.8 93
12/28 71 Driveway 58.0 IO 115.5 124.8 93
12/28 72 Driveway 55.0 II 117.1 124.8 94
12/28 73 Driveway 57.0 II 116.3 124.8 93
2021 Test Results
1/27 74 Upper Pad 59.0 10 115.8 124.8 93
1/28 75 Upper Pad 61.0 10 118.2 124.8 95
1/28 76 Upper Pad 62.0 II 116.8 124.8 94
2125 77 Upper Pad 62.0 II I 15.9 124.8 93
2/25 78 Driveway 60.0 II 118.1 124.8 95
2/25 79 Driveway 62.0 IO 117.5 124.8 94
2/25 80 Driveway 62.0 IO 117. I 124.8 94
2/26 81 Driveway 60.0 10 118.5 124.8 95
2/26 82 Driveway 61.0 9 118.2 124.8 95
2/26 83 Driveway 63.0 10 117.1 124.8 94
2/26 84 Driveway 62.0 11 116.9 124.8 94
2/26 85 Driveway 63.0 IO I 15.2 124.8 92
2/26 86 Driveway 65.0 9 I 16.1 124.8 93
3/1 87 Driveway 67.0 10 114.9 124.8 92
3/1 88 Upper Re1aining Wall 67.0 IO 116.5 124.8 93
3/1 89 Upper Retaining Wall 63.0 9 115.8 124.8 93
3/2 90 Upper Retaining Wall 64.0 IO 116.3 124.8 93 F.G.
3/2 91 Urmer Retaining Wall 63.0 10 118.0 124.8 95 F.G.
JOB NO: 18-260-F
NAME: Thankful Texans
LOCATION: 4469 Adams Street, Carlsbad
Field Density Tests Results: Underground
Approx. % Max Dry % Date Test Location Test Field Field Dry Density Relative Comments 2019 No. Depth. Moisture Density Pc£ Pcf Comp. (ft)
4/26 I H20 Linc Trench 14 114.5 116.8 98
4/26 2 H20 Linc Trench 13 114.0 116.8 98
4/26 3 H20 Linc Trench IO 112.5 124.8 90
4/26 4 H20 Linc Trench IO 114.9 124.8 92
5/2 5 H20 Linc Trench 8 123.0 124.8 99
5/2 6 H20 Linc Trench 9 117.5 122.0 96
5/2 7 H20 Linc Trench 9 119.9 124.8 96
5/2 8 H20 Linc Trench 8 135.0 137.6 98
5/2 9 H20 Linc Trench 6 130.9 137.6 95
7/2 10 Subdrain IO 114.2 122.0 94
7/8 II Subdrain to 112.9 122.0 93 F.G.
JOB NO: 18-260-F
NAME: Thankful Texans
LOCATION: 4469 Adams Street, Carlsbad
Field Density Tests Results: Subgradc/Bascgradc/A.C.
Date Test Approx. % Field Dry Max Dry %
2021 No. Location Test Field Density Per Density Relative Comments
Elev. (ft) Moisture Per Comp.
3/17 1 Driveway SG 12 115.8 124.8 93
3/17 2 Driveway SG IO 116.2 124.8 93
3/17 3 Driveway SG 12 114.2 124.8 92
3/17 4 Driveway SG 11 114.8 124.8 92
3/17 5 Driveway SG 11 115.6 124.8 93
3/17 6 Driveway SG 11 115.2 124.8 92
3/17 7 Driveway SG JO I 16.8 124.8 94
4/6 8 Adams S1ree1 SG 9 120.0 124.8 96
4/6 9 Adams S1ree1 SG 9 119.1 124.8 95
4n 10 Adams Street BG 10 115.2 120.4 96
4n 11 Adams Street BG 11 116.0 120.4 96
4/13 12 Adams Street AC 8 144.0 149.6 96
4/13 13 Adams Street AC 7 142.8 149.6 96
4/13 14 Adams Street AC 8 142.4 149.6 95
4/13 15 Adams Street AC 8 142.1 149.6 95