HomeMy WebLinkAboutMS 04-06; MAY MINOR SUBDIVISION; GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT OF RECORD; 2006-03-22HETHERINGTON ENGINEERING, INC.
SOIL & FOUNDATION ENGINEERING • ENGINEERING GEOLOGY • HYDROGEOLOGY
March 22, 2006
Project No. 5 43 1. 1
Log No. 9920
Ms. Mary Humphrey
18627 Brookhurst Street, Suite 332
Fountain Valley, California 92708
Subject: GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT OF RECORD
Proposed Two-Lot Residential Development
El Camino Real, APN 167-080-36
Carlsbad, California
References: 1) "Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, Proposed Two-Lot
Development, El Camino Real, Carlsbad, California, A.P.N. #167-
080-36," by Vinje & Middleton Engineering, Inc., dated October
17, 2003.
2) Grading and Erosion Control Plans For Humphrey Residence, El
Camino Real," by The Sea Bright Company, undated
Dear Ms. Humphrey:
In accordance with your request, we are submitting this letter concerning geotechnical
consultant of record with respect to the proposed two-lot residential development at the
subject site. We have reviewed the report by Vinje Middleton and Associates (Reference 1)
and generally concur with the findings and conclusions of this report. Based our review of
the referenced report and plans, Hetherington Engineering, Inc. will assume the role of
geotechnical consultant of record for site grading and construction.
Please call if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
HET4E GTO NGINEERINGFESS/
CID A'. son S. Geldert CD
Civil Engineer 63912 No. 63912
(expires 9/30/06) EXp. Date-
CIVIL
Distribution: 4-Addressee
5205 Avenida Encinas, Suite A • Carlsbad, CA 92008-4369 • (760) 931-1917 • Fax (760) 931-0545
32242 Paseo Adelanto, Suite C • San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675-3610 • (949) 487-9060 • Fax (949) 487-9116
www.hetheringtonengineering.com
Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation
Proposed Two-Lot Residential Development
El Camino Real, Carlsbad, California
(A.P.N. #167-080-36)
October 17, 2003
Prepared For:
Ms. MARY HUMPHREY
18627 Brookhurst Street, #332
Fountain Valley, California 92708
Prepared By:
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC.
2450 Vineyard Avenue, Suite 102 13
Escondido, California 92029
Job #03-390-P
JE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC.
2450 Vineyard Avenue
Escondido, California 92029-1229
Job #03-390-P
Phone (760) 743-1214
Fax (760) 739-0343
October 17, 2003
Ms. Mary Humphrey
18627 Brookhurst Street, #332
Fountain Valley, California 92708
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION, PROPOSED TWO-LOT RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT, EL CAMINO REAL, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA (A.P.N. #167-080-36)
Pursuant to your request, Vinje and Middleton Engineering, Inc., has completed the
Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Report for the above-referenced project site.
The following report summarizes the results of our research and review of pertinent
geotechnical maps and reports, subsurface field investigation and soil sampling, laboratory
testing, engineering analyzes and provides conclusions and construction recommendations
for the proposed development as understood. From a geotechnical engineering standpoint,
it is our opinion that the site is suitable the proposed two-lot residential development and
the associated improvements, provided the recommendations presented in this report are
incorporated into the design and construction of the project.
The conclusions and recommendations provided in this study are consistent with the
indicated site geotechnical conditions and are intended to aid in preparation of final
development plans and allow more accurate estimates of the construction costs.
If you have any questions or need clarification, please do not hesitate to contact this office.
Reference to our Job #03-390-P will help to expedite our response to your inquiries.
We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you.
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC.
ennis Middleton
CEG #980
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE NO.
I. INTRODUCTION ..................................................I
II. SITE DESCRIPTION ...............................................I
III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT .......................................I
IV. SITE INVESTIGATION .............................................2
V. GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS ......................................2
Earth Materials ................................................2
Groundwater and Surface Drainage ................................3
Slope Stability .................................................3
Faults I Seismicity .............................................3
Geologic Hazards ..............................................6
Laboratory Testing / Results .....................................6
VI. CONCLUSIONS ..................................................9
VII. RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................10
Remedial Grading and Earthworks ...............................10
Foundations and Slab-on-Grade Floors ...........................16
Exterior Concrete Slabs I Flatworks ...............................17
Soil Design Parameters ........................................18
Asphalt and PCC Pavement Design ..............................19
General Recommendations .....................................20
VIII. LIMITATIONS ...................................................23
TABLE NO.
FaultZone ..........................................................I
Site Specific Seismic Parameters .......................................2
SoilType ...........................................................3
Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content .....................4
Moisture-Density Tests (Undisturbed Chunk Samples) .....................5
Expansion Index Test ..................................................6
0 Direct Shear Test ....................................................7
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
Grain Size Analysis ..................................................8
Sulfate Test .........................................................9
Removals and Over-excavations .......................................10
PLATE NO.
Regional Index Map ..................................................1
Preliminary Siting and Grading Study ...................................2
Geologic Cross-Section ...............................................3
Test Trench Logs (with key) ..........................................4-6
Fault - Epicenter Map .................................................7
Retaining Wall Drain Detail ............................................8
Isolation Joints and Re-entrant Corner Reinforcement .....................9
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
PROPOSED TWO-LOT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
EL CAMINO REAL, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
INTRODUCTION
The property investigated in this work includes partially developed hillside terrain located
on the west side of El Camino Real approximately 650 feet south of Chestnut Avenue in
the City of Carlsbad. The property location is depicted on a Regional Index Map enclosed
with this report as Plate 1. We understand that the property is planned for a two-lot
residential development with associated structures and improvements. Consequently, the
purpose of this study was to determine soil and geotechnical conditions at the property and
evaluate their influence upon the planned construction. Geologic mapping, test trench
digging, soil sampling and testing were among the activities conducted in conjunction with
this effort which has resulted in the geotechnical development and foundation
recommendations presented herein.
SITE DESCRIPTION
Existing topographic conditions and a preliminary development scheme are shown on a
Preliminary Siting and Grading Study, provided by Vista Engineering, Inc., included with i• this report as Plate 2. The property is bordered by El Camino Real to the east, residential
properties to the south and west, and undeveloped terrain to the north. The largest site
slope ascends approximately 25 feet on the west side of the existing pad onto off-site
7.2 terrain above. Slope gradients locally approach 1.5:1 (horizontal to vertical) at their
steepest. Previous cut/fill grading in the westerly portion of the site resulted in an existing
nearly level pad area. The existing pad area extends north into the adjacent property. I Approximate limits of existing site fills associated with the grading are shown on Plate 2.
Site drainage sheetfiows in an easterly direction to El Camino Real. Some minor erosion
was noted in the existing fills and on the westerly graded slope. Elsewhere, excessive
scouring or erosion from uncontrolled run-off is not in evidence.
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
We understand the study property is planned for the support of two three-story dwellings
with associated structures and improvements as shown on Plate 2. The lower basement
level for both dwellings will be entirely or partially subterranean. Basement retaining walls
are incorporated into the designs to accommodate ground transitioning and achieve final
grades. A Geologic Cross-Section through the planned development is enclosed as Plate
3. Minor to moderate cut grading is planned for the creation of new level building and
basement pads. Maximum 10 feet of cut excavations are anticipated in the proposed
I basement areas.
79
2!
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, Escondido, California 92029.1229 • Phone (760) 743.1214 • Fax (760) 739.0343
QEOTECHNICAL INVESTIQATIONS QRADINQ SUPERVISION PERC TESTINQ ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTIqATZON
J*
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 2
EL CAMINO REAL, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA OCTOBER 17, 2003
Pavement improvements consist of FCC driveways with longitudinal gradients that range
from 10% maximum for the lower easterly dwelling to 20% maximum for the upper westerly
dwelling.
Detailed building plans are unavailable. However, it is anticipated that building construction
will consist of a lower masonry block basement wall, and upper wood-frame and stucco
structures supported on shallow stiff continuous strip and spread pad concrete footings
with slab-on-grade floor foundations.
SITE INVESTIGATION
Subsurface conditions at the site were chiefly determined by the excavation of 6 test
trenches dug with a tractor-mounted backhoe. All trenches were logged by our project
geologist who also retained rock/soil samples for laboratory testing. Test trench locations
are shown on Plate 2. Logs of the trenches are enclosed with this report as Plates 4-6.
Laboratory test results are summarized in a following section.
GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS
10
The study property is underlain by formational bedrock units mantled by a modest cover
of fill and topsoil. Terrace Deposits are exposed in the slope along the western margin of
the site. Instability is not indicated at the property.
A. Earth Materials
Terrace Deposits - Pleistocene age Terrace Deposits are exposed on an existing
ascending slope along the west property margin. Exposures consist of dark-
colored sandstone units that are typically fine to medium grained and massive.
The sandstone was found in a cemented condition overall. Minor erosion mark
portions of the slope face. However, no evidence of shallow or deep-seated slope
instability is indicated.
Formational Bedrock - The proposed building pad and improvement areas are
underlain by Eocene age sedimentary bedrock units typically designated Santiago
Formation. At the project site, the formational rock units typically consist of light-
colored clayey to silty sandstone units with interbeds of cobble conglomerate and
siltstone. As exposed in our test trenches, site formational units are weathered
friable near the surface becoming cemented at depth. Project formational rocks
are competent units that will adequately support the planned dwellings and
improvements.
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 'vineyard Avenue, Escondido, California 92029.1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 • Fax (760) 739-0343
cEOTECHNICAL INVESTIQATIONS RADINQ SUPERVISION PERC TESTINq ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTIQATION
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 3
EL CAMINO REAL, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA OCTOBER 17, 2003
Topsoil - A modest cover of topsoil mantles much of the formational rock units at
the study site. The topsoil typically consists of sandy to clay-rich deposits that were
found in loose to soft conditions near the surface becoming medium dense to stiff
at depth. Project topsoils, as exposed in Test Trench 2 (T-2), reached a maximum
thickness of 9 feet.
Fill - Artificial fills largely occupy the western portion of the subject site. Existing
site fill deposits consist of silty sands which were likely generated during the on-site
grading operations when the existing pad was created. Documentation for the fill
placement is not available. Existing fills are anticipated to reach a maximum
thickness of 5 feet. Estimated limits of the existing fill deposits at the site are
shown on Plate 2.
Details of the underlying earth materials at the site are presented on the enclosed
Test Trench Logs, Plates 4-6.
B. Groundwater and Surface Drainage
Groundwater conditions were not encountered in our test excavations to the depths
explored and are not expected to impact site development. However, like all
graded building sites, the proper control of surface drainage is an important factor
in the continued stability of the property. Irrigation and meteoric water should not
be allowed to pond on lot surfaces and over-watering of site vegetation should be
avoided. Project site and building basement retaining walls should be provided
with adequate back drain systems.
Slope Stability
Landslides or other forms of geologic slope instability are not in evidence at the
project site. The western site slope is performing well with no evidence of surficial
or deep-seated instability. Cemented Terrace Deposits exposed on the slope face
and underlying formational rock materials are flat-lying to massive sandstone units
which characteristically perform well with regard to gross stability and are expected
to remain stable.
Faults I Seismicity
Faults or significant shear zones are not indicated on or near proximity to the
project site.
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743.1214 • Fax (760) 739.0343
EOTECHN1CAL INVESTIGATIONS GRADING SUPERVISION PERC TESTING ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTIGATION
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 4
EL CAMINO REAL, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA OCTOBER 17, 2003
As with most areas of California, the San Diego region lies within a seismically
active zone; however, coastal areas of the county are characterized by low levels
of seismic activity relative to inland areas to the east. During a 40-year period
(1934-1974), 37 earthquakes were recorded in San Diego coastal areas by the
California Institute of Technology. None of the recorded events exceeded a
Richter magnitude of 3.7, nor did any of the earthquakes generate more than
modest ground shaking or significant damages. Most of the recorded events
occurred along various offshore faults which characteristically generate modest
earthquakes.
Historically, the most significant earthquake events which affect local areas
originate along well known, distant fault zones to the east and the Coronado Bank
Fault to the west. Based upon available seismic data, compiled from California
Earthquake Catalogs, the most significant historical event in the area of the study
site occurred in 1800 at an estimated distance of 11 miles from the project area.
This event, which is thought to have occurred along an off-shore fault, reached an
estimated magnitude of 6.5 with estimated bedrock acceleration values of 0.91g
at the project site. The following list represents the most significant faults which
commonly impact the region. Estimated ground acceleration data compiled from
Digitized California Faults (Computer Program EQ FAULT VERSION 3.00 updated)
typically associated with the fault is also tabulated.
TABLE I
Maximum
Probable - -
Fault Zone Distance From Site Acceleration (RA.)
Rose Canyon fault 6.0 miles 0.169g
Newport-Inglewood fault 6.3 miles 0.164g
Coronado Bank fault 22.1 miles 0.136g
Elsinore fault 23.2 miles 0.112g
The location of significant faults and earthquake events relative to the study site
are depicted on a Fault - Epicenter Map enclosed with this report as Plate 7.
More recently, the number of seismic events which affect the region appears to
have heightened somewhat. Nearly 40 earthquakes of magnitude 3.5 or higher
have been recorded in coastal regions between January 1984 and August 1986.
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, Escondido, California 92029.1229 • Phone (760) 743.1214 • Fax (760) 739-0343
QEOTECHNICAL INVESTIQATIONS GRADING SUPERVISION PERC TESTING ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTIGATION
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 5
EL CAMINO REAL, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA OCTOBER 17, 2003 . Most of the earthquakes are thought to have been generated along offshore faults.
For the most part, the recorded events remain moderate shocks which typically
resulted in low levels of ground shaking to local areas. A notable exception to this
pattern was recorded on July 13, 1986. An earthquake of magnitude 5.3 shook
County coastal areas with moderate to locally heavy ground shaking resulting in
$700,000 in damages, one death, and injuries to 30 people. The quake occurred
along an offshore fault located nearly 30 miles southwest of Oceanside.
A series of notable events shook County areas with a (maximum) magnitude 7.4
shock in the early morning of June 28, 1992. These quakes originated along
related segments of the San Andreas Fault approximately 90 miles to the north.
Locally high levels of ground shaking over an extended period of time resulted;
however, significant damages to local structures were not reported. The increase
in earthquake frequency in the region remains a subject of speculation among
geologists; however, based upon empirical information and the recorded seismic
history of County areas, the 1986 and 1992 events are thought to represent the
highest levels of ground shaking which can be expected at the study site as a
result of seismic activity.
In recent years, the Rose Canyon Fault has received added attention from
geologists. The fault is a significant structural feature in metropolitan San Diego
which includes a series of parallel breaks trending southward from La Jolla Cove
through San Diego Bay toward the Mexican border. Test trenching along the fault
in Rose Canyon indicated that at that location the fault was last active 6,000 to
9,000 years ago. More recent work suggests that segments of the fault are
younger having been last active 1000 - 2000 years ago. Consequently, the fault
has been classified as active and included within an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies
Zone established by the State of California.
Fault zones tabulated in the preceding table are considered most likely to impact
the region of the study site during the lifetime of the project. The faults are
periodically active and capable of generating moderate to locally high levels of
ground shaking at the site. Ground separation as a result of seismic activity is not
expected at the property.
For design purposes, site specific seismic parameters were determined as part of
this investigation in accordance with the Uniform Building Code. The following
parameters are consistent with the indicated project seismic environment and may
be utilized for project design work:
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERINc, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue Escondido, California 92029.1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 • Fax (760) 739.0343
QEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS GRADING SUPERVISION PERC TESTING ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTIGATION
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 6
EL CAMINO REAL, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA OCTOBER 17, 2003
TABLE 2
Site Soil
Profile
Type
Seismic
Zone
Seismic
Zone
Factor
Seismic
Source
TYPe
Seismic Response Coefficients
Na) NV) Ca CV. ) Ts To
Sc 4 J 0.4 B 1.0 11.0 I 0.40 I 0.57 I 0.569 0.114
According to Chapter 16, Division IV of the 1997 Uniform Building Code.
Geologic Hazards
Geologic hazards are not presently indicated at the project site. Exposed slopes
do not indicate gross geologic instability. The most significant geologic hazards at
the property will be those associated with ground shaking in the event of a major
seismic event. Liquefaction or related ground rupture failures are not anticipated.
Laboratory Testing I Results
Al
Earth deposits encountered in our exploratory test excavations were closely
!11_110 examined and sampled for laboratory testing. Based upon our test trench data and
field exposures, site soils have been grouped into the following soil types:
TABLE 3
Soil Type j Description
1 pale brown silty fine to medium sand (Fill/Topsoil/Terrace Deposit)
2 dark brown to blue-grey sandy clay/clayey sand (Topsoil/Fill)
3 tan to off-white silty sandstone, locally clayey (Formational Rock)
4 red-brown cobble conglomerate with clayey sand matrix (Formational Rock)
5 red-brown silty sand/cobble mix (Fill)
I The following tests were conducted in support of this investigation:
1. Maximum Dry Density and Optimum Moisture Content: The maximum dry
I density and optimum moisture content of Soil Types 2 and 3 were determined
in accordance with ASTM D-1557. The test results are presented in Table 4.
I
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENQINEERINQ, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 • Fax (760) 739-0343
. çEOTECNNICAL INVESTIGATIONS GRADING SUPERVISION PERC TESTING ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTIGATION
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 7
EL CAMINO REAL, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA OCTOBER 17, 2003
TABLE 4
Soil Maximum Dry Optimum Moisture
Location Type Density (Ym-pcf) -
Content (wopt-%)
T-1 @4' 2 1 125.4 10.8
T-5 @ 1' 3 J 123.4 12.4
2. Moisture-Density Tests (Undisturbed Chunk Samples): In-place dry density
and moisture content of representative soil deposits beneath the site were
determined from relatively undisturbed chunk samples using the water
displacement test method. The test results are presented in Table 5 and
tabulated on the enclosed Test Trench Logs (Plates 4-6).
TABLES
Sample
Location
Soil
Type
Field
Moisture
Content
(w-%)
Field Dry
Density
.(Yd-pcfl
Max. Dry
Density
(Ym-pcO
Ratio Of In Place Dry
Density To Max. Dry
Density*
(Yd/Ym__x100)
T-1@11W 2 9.3 111.6 125.4 89.0
T-1 @ 4' 2 13.2 109.5 125.4 87.3
T-1 @ 7%' 3 10.8 109.1 123.4 88.4
T-2@2' 1 1.6 104.0 - -
T-2 @ 7' 2 8.8 105.2 125.4 83.9
T-2@8%' 2 7.2 114.0 125.4 90.9
T-4@6' 3 10.2 126.6 123.4 100+
T-5 @ 1' 1 2 9.4 126.7 123.4 J_100+
* Designated as relative compaction for structural fills.
Required relative compaction for structural fill is 90% or greater.
3. ExpansionIndex Test: Two expansion index tests were performed on
representative samples of Soil Types 2 and 3 in accordance with the Uniform
Building Code Standard 18-2. The test results are presented in Table 6.
Ora
VINJE&MIDDLETONENQ1NEERINç, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760)743.1214 • Fax (760)739-0343
V QEOTECHNICAL 1NVEST1AT1ONS qRADINq SUPERVISION PERC TESTINQ ENVIRONMENTAL 1NvEsTIqATI0N
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 8
EL CAMINO REAL, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA OCTOBER 17, 2003
TABLE 6
Sample Soil Remolded Saturation Saturated Expansion Expansion
Location Type w (°/o) (%) w (%) Index (El) Potential
T-1 @ 4 2 10.9 49.8 20.2 45 low
T-5 @ 1' 3 10.4 50.8__- 18.8 7 very low ::]
I (w) = moisture content in percent. II
4. Direct Shear Test: Two direct shear tests were performed on representative
samples of Soil Types 2 and 3. The prepared specimens were soaked
overnight, loaded with normal loads of 1, 2, and 4 kips per square foot
respectively, and sheared to failure in an undrained condition. The test results
are presented in Table 7.
TABLE 7
Wet Angle of Apparent
Saple Soil . Saple Density mt. Fric. Cohesion m m
Location TVDe Condition (Yw-pct) (b-Deg.) (c-pf)
T-1 @4' 2 remolded to 90% of Yd @ % wopt 123.9 30 245
T-5 @1' 3 remolded to 90% of Yd % wopt 124.6 29 116
5. Grain Size Analysis: Grain size analyzes were performed on representative
samples of Soil Types 1, 2, and 3. The test results are presented in Table 8.
TABLE 8
Sieve Size [11,/a" I 1" L/4'II•i 1/2"I #4I #10 I #20 I #40 I #200
Location Soil Type Percent Passing
1-1 @4 2 100 100 100 100 100 98 85 64 32
T-2@2' 1 100 100 100 100 98 94 78 57 17
T-5@1' 3 100 100 100 100 100 95 73 59 44
6. Sulfate Test: One sulfate test was performed on a representative sample of
Soil Type 2 in accordance with the California Test 417. The test result is
presented in Table 9.
ft VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 • Fax (760) 739-0343 VA
(EOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS GRADING SUPERVISION PL1RC TESTING ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTIGATION
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
EL CAMINO REAL, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
TABLE 9
PAGE 9
OCTOBER 17, 2003
Sample Location Soil Type
Amount of Water Soluble Sulfate (s04)
In Soil (% by Weight)
T-1 @4 2 0.013
VI. CONCLUSIONS
Based upon the foregoing investigation, development of the project site substantially as
proposed, is feasible from a geotechnical viewpoint. The property is underlain by dense
and stable formational bedrock units which are mantled by a thin to modest section of
loose to medium dense sandy to clayey fill I topsoils.
Gëotechnical factors presented below are unique to the project site and will influence
grading procedures and associated development costs:
* Instability is not indicated at the project site. Landslides or other forms of geologic
instability within the onsite natural Terrace and Formational deposits are not
indicated.
Modest basement excavations up to 10 feet maximum are planned to achieve
lower level pad grade elevations. Elsewhere, relatively minor grade modifications
are proposed to construct the planned design elevations. Unusual excavation
difficulties within the onsite bedrock units are not anticipated.
Site existing fills, topsoils, and upper weathered bedrock are not suitable for
support of the planned construction and improvements in their present condition.
Removal and recompaction of these deposits will be necessary in order to
construct stable ground surfaces suitable for the support of the proposed structures
and improvements. Added removals of cut ground will also be necessary in the
case of cut/fill transition pads which expose bedrock units so that uniform bearing
soil conditions are created throughout the building surfaces.
* The overall stability of graded building pads developed over sloping terrain is most
dependent upon adequate keying and benching of fill into the undisturbed bedrock
during grading operations. At the project site, added care should be given to
proper construction of keyways and benching during grading.
I
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, Escondido, California 92029.1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 • Fax (760) 7390343
QEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS GRADING SUPERVISION PENC TESTING ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTIGATION
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 10
EL CAMINO REAL, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA OCTOBER 17, 2003
Site soils are generally very low expansive silty sandy deposits. Some clay bearing
soils with low expansive potential also occur at the site. Site potentially expansive
soils may be first removed from the site in the case of an export operations.
Potentially expansive soils may also be selectively buried in deeper fills or
thoroughly mixed with an abundant very low expansive soils generated from the
onsite excavations.
Based on the anticipated development scheme and grading recommendations
given herein, finish grade soils are expected to consist chiefly of clayey to silty sand
deposits (SM/SC) with very low to low expansion potential (expansion index less
than 51). Actual classification and expansion characteristic of finished grade soil
mix can only be provided in the final as-graded compaction report based on
appropriate testing.
* Groundwater conditions are not expected to impact grading activities or the long
term performance of the developed areas. Adequate site surface drainage control,
however, remains a critical factor in the future stability of the developed property
as planned.
Well-constructed back drains should be provided behind the planned site and
building basement retaining walls as recommended in the following sections.
* Soil collapse, liquefaction and seismically induced settlements will not be a factor
in the development of the project site.
Post construction settlements will not be a factor in construction of the planned
new structures provided our remedial grading and foundation recommendations
are followed.
VII. RECOMMENDATIONS
The following recommendations are provided based on the planned construction as shown
on the enclosed Plate 2. Added or modified recommendations may also be appropriate
and can be provided at the final plan review phase when detailed construction plans are
finalized:
A. Remedial Grading and Earthworks
Cut/fill and remedial grading techniques should be used in order to achieve final
design grades and improve soil conditions beneath the new structures and
improvements. All grading and project construction should be completed in
accordance with the Appendix Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code, City of
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, Escondido, California 92029-1229. Phone (760) 743.1214 • Fax (760) 739-0343
QEOTECHNIcAL IIWESTIQATIONS - QRADINQ SUPERVISION - PERC TESTING ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTIQATION
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 11
EL CAMINO REAL, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA OCTOBER 17, 2003
Carlsbad Grading Ordinances, the Standard Specifications for Public Works
Construction, and the requirements of the following sections:
1. Clearing and Grubbing: Existing vegetation, deleterious materials and debris
should be removed from areas to receive new fills, structures, and
improvements plus 10 feet where possible, and as directed in the field.
Prepared ground should be inspected and approved by the project geotechnical
engineer or his designated field representative prior to the remedial grading
work.
Existing underground utilities in the construction areas should be pot-holed,
identified and marked prior to the actual work. Inactive lines should be properly
removed or abandoned as approved. Abandoned underground structures
should also be removed and the generated voids properly backfilled with
compacted soils in accordance with the recommendations provided herein.
rM I U4 2. Removals and Over-excavations: Existing site loose to soft fills, topsoils, and
upper weathered soft bedrock units at the project site should be removed to the
-- underlying competent bedrock, or firm native ground as approved in the field
by the project geotechnical engineer, and placed back as properly compacted
fill. Typical removal depths in the vicinity of individual exploratory test sites are
shown in Table 10. Locally deeper removals may also be necessary based on
the actual field exposures and should be anticipated:
TABLE 10
Location
•
Total
Depth
(ft)
Estimated
Depth to
Ground-
water
(ft)
Estimated
Removal
:Depths
.
Comments
T-1 8' n/e 2' Parcel B driveway areas
T-2 10' n/e 8' Parcel A building pad areas
T-3 31/z' n/e 21/2' Parcel A building pad areas (see note 1)
T-4 8' n/e 51/2' slope areas, remove all existing fill/topsoil
T-5 2' n/e 1 Parcel B building pad areas (see note 1)
T-6 3' n/e 1W Parcel B driveway areas
Explanations:
Depth of cut or undercut may govern.
All depths are measured from the existing ground levels.
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, Escondido, California 92029.1229 • Phone (760) 743.1214 • Fax (760) 739.0343
cEoTECHNICAI. INVESTIqATIONS QRADINQ SUPERVISION VERC TESTING ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTIqATION
I PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 12
EL CAMINO REAL, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA OCTOBER 17, 2003
I
Actual depths may vary at the time of construction based on actual subsurface exposures.
Firm native ground is defined as undisturbed natural ground with in-place densities of 87% or
greater.
Bottom of all removals should be additionally prepared and recompacted as directed in the field.
Exploratory trenches excavated in connection with our study at the indicated locations were
backfilled with loose and uncompacted deposits. The loose/uncompacted backfill soils within these
trenches shall also be re-excavated and placed back as properly compacted fills as a part of the
project grading operations.
n/e = not encountered.
Bearing Soils Transitioning: Project building/wall foundations should be
uniformly supported on compacted fill soils. Foundation transitioning from
compacted fills to cut ground or undisturbed Formational units should not be
allowed. The cut or undisturbed ground portions of the bearing soils in the
transition pads should be undercut a minimum of 3 feet below rough finish
grades or 12 inches below the bottom of the deepest footing(s), whichever is
more, and placed back as properly compacted fills. There should also be at
least 12 inches of compacted subgrade soils below all onsite pavings and
improvements.
Temporary Construction Slopes: Temporary slopes necessary for the project
basement excavations may be constructed at near vertical gradients to a
maximum of 5 feet. Construction slopes greater than 5 feet and less than 12
feet may be constructed at near vertical gradients within the lower 3 feet and
1/2:1 gradients maximum within the upper sections. The wall backfills should be
properly benched and tightly keyed into the temporary slope as the backfill
placement progresses and as directed in the field by the project geotechnical
consultant.
Additional recommendations including flatter construction slopes and the need
for temporary shoring should be given by the project geotechnical consultant
at the time of earthwork operations based on actual field exposures.
Fill Materials and Compaction: Soils generated from the removals of the
existing fills and topsoils may be suitable for reuse as new compacted site fills
provided all trash, debris and unsuitable materials are selectively removed and
properly disposed of to the satisfaction of the project geotechnical engineer.
Earth deposits at the site range from sandy soils to some potentially expansive
clay-bearing materials. Project potentially expansive soils may be first removed
from the site in the case of an export operation. Select grading techniques may
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 • Fax (760) 739-0343
QE0TECHNIc&i. INVESTIGATIONS GRADING SUPERVISION PERC TESTING ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTIGATION
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 13 I. EL CAMINO REAL, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA OCTOBER 17, 2003
also be considered to bury the site potentially expansive soils in deeper fills at
least 3 feet below rough finish grades or mix with an abundant very low
expansive soils generated from the onsite excavations. Typically, clayey soils
also require additional processing and moisture conditioning efforts in order to
manufacture a uniform soil mixture suitable for reuse as compacted fill. The
clay-bearing soils should be moisture conditioned to slightly (2% to 3%) above
the optimum levels and compacted as specified.
Import soils, if required to complete grading or wall backfilling, should be very
low expansive (expansion index less than 21) granular sandy deposits
inspected and approved by the project geotechnical consultant prior to delivery
to the site.
,10
Uniform bearing soil conditions should be constructed at the site by the grading
operations. Site soils should be adequately processed, thoroughly mixed,
moisture conditioned to slightly above the optimum moisture levels as directed
in the field, placed in thin uniform horizontal lifts and mechanically compacted
to a minimum of 90% of the corresponding laboratory maximum dry density per
ASTM D-1557, unless otherwise specified.
A minimum of 90% compaction levels will be required for all structural fills and•
wall backfills. In the improvement areas, fills should also be compacted to a
minimum 90% with the exception of the upper 12 inches under the asphalt
paving surfaces where a minimum of 95% compaction levels will be required.
6. Permanent Graded Slopes - Graded slopes should be programmed for 2:1
gradients maximum. Graded slopes constructed at 2:1 gradients will be grossly
stable with respect to deep seated and surficial failures for the anticipated
design maximum vertical heights.
Fill slopes shall be provided with a lower Keyway. The Keyway should maintain
a minimum depth of 2 feet into competent formational units with a minimum
width of 12 feet as approved by the project geotechnical engineer or his
designated field representative. The Keyway should expose competent
formational units throughout with the bottom heeled back a minimum of 2% into
the natural hillside. Additional level benches should be constructed into the
natural hillside as the fill slope construction progresses. Fill slopes should also
be compacted to 90% (minimum) of the laboratory standard out to the slope
face. Over-building and cuffing back to the compacted core, or backrolling at
a maximum of 4-foot vertical increments- and "track-walking" at the completion
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743.1214 • Fax (760) 739-0343
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS GRADING SUPERVISION PERC TESTING -. ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTIGATION -:
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 14
IS
EL CAMINO REAL, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA OCTOBER 17, 2003
of grading, is recommended for site fill slope construction. Geotechnical
engineering inspections and testing will be necessary to confirm adequate
compaction levels within the fill slope face.
Shrinkage and Bulking: Based upon our analyzes, on-site existing fills and
topsoil deposits may be expected to shrink approximately 5% to 10%, and the
soils generated from the excavations of the onsite Formational units may be
anticipated to bulk nearly 10% to 15% on a volume basis when compacted to
at least 90% of the corresponding maximum density.
Wall Back Drainage System: All site retaining and building basement walls
should be provided with adequate back drainage system. The wall back drain
system should consist of a minimum 18-inches wide trench excavated to the
depths of the wall foundation level. A minimum 4-inch diameter, Schedule 40
(SDR 35) perforated pipe surrounded with a minimum of 2.25 cubic feet per
foot of %-crushed rocks wrapped in filter fabric (Mirafi 140 N), or Caltrans Class
2 permeable aggregate should be used. The perforated drain pipe should be
installed at suitable elevations to allow for adequate fall via non-perforated solid
pipe to an approved outlet. Filter fabric can be eliminated if Class 2 permeable
material is used. Typical wall back drain system is depicted on the enclosed
Plate 8. Appropriate waterproofing should be provided behind the wails.
Protect pipe outlet as necessary.
Drainage and Erosion Control: A critical element to the continued stability of
the graded building pads is an adequate surface drainage system. This can
most effectively be achieved by installation of appropriate surface drainage
facilities. Building pad surface run-off should be collected and directed away
from the planned buildings and improvements to a selected location in a
controlled manner. Drainage swales should be provided at the top and toe of
the slopes per project civil engineer design. Concrete brow ditches should be
considered on the back side of basement walls. Area drains should be
installed.
Temporary erosion control facilities and silt fences should be installed during
the construction phase periods and until landscaping is established as indicated
and specified on the approved project erosion plans.
Engineering Inspections: All grading operations including removals,
suitability of earth deposits used as compacted fills, and compaction
procedures should be continuously inspected and tested by the project
geotechnical consultant and presented in the final as-graded compaction . report. The nature of finished subgrade soils should also be confirmed in the
final compaction report at the completion of remedial grading.
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 • Fax (760) 7390343
cEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS GRADING SUER VISION I'ERC TESTING ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTIGATION.
it
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 15
EL CAMINO REAL, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA OCTOBER 17, 2003
Geotechnical engineering inspections shall include but not limited to the
following:
* Initial Inspection - After the grading I brushing limits have been staked but
before grading / brushing starts.
* Bottom of keyway/over-excavation inspection - After the natural ground or
bedrock is exposed and prepared to receive fill but before fill is placed.
* Excavation inspection - After the excavation is started, but before the vertical
depth of excavation is more than 5 feet. Local and CAL-OSHA safety
requirements for open excavations apply.
I
* Fill I backfill inspection - After the fill / backfill placement is started but before
the vertical height of fill I backfill exceeds 2 feet. A minimum of one test shall
be required for each 100 lineal feet maximum with the exception of wall
backfills where a minimum of one test shall be required for each 25 lineal
feet maximum. Wall backfiuls shall also be mechanically compacted to at
least 90% compaction levels unless otherwise specified. Finish rough and
final pad grade tests shall be required regardless of fill thickness.
* Foundation trench inspection - After the foundation trench excavations but
before steel placement.
* Foundation bearing I slab subgrade soils inspection - Prior to the placement
of concrete for proper moisture and specified compaction levels.
* Foundation / slab steel inspection - After steel placement is completed but
before the scheduled concrete pour.
* Subdrain I wall back drain inspection - After the trench excavations, but
during the actual placement. All material shall conform to the project
material specifications and approved by the project soils engineer.
* Underground utility / plumbing trench inspection - After the trench
excavations, but before placement of bedding or installation of the
underground facilities. Local and CAL-OSHA safety requirements for open
excavations apply. Inspection of pipe bedding may also be required by the
project geotechnical engineer.
* Underground utility / plumbing trench backfill inspection - After the backfill
placement is started above the pipe zone but before the vertical height of
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENcINEERINq, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 • Fax (760) 739-0343
CEOTECHNICAL INVESTIQATIONS QRADINQ SUPERVISION PERC TESTINQ ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTIQATION
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
PAGE 16
EL CAMINO REAL, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
OCTOBER 17, 2003
backfill exceeds .2 feet. Testing of the backfill within the pipe zone may also
be required by the governing agencies. Pipe bedding and backf
i
l
l
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
shall conform to the governing agencies requirements and pr
o
j
e
c
t
s
o
i
l
s
report if applicable. All trench backfills shall be mechanically comp
a
c
t
e
d
t
o
a minimum of 90% compaction levels unless otherwise specified.
P
l
u
m
b
i
n
g
U trenches over 12 inches deep maximum under the interior floor slab
s
s
h
o
u
l
d
also be mechanically compacted and tested for a minimum o
f
9
0
%
compaction levels. Flooding or jetting techniques as a means of co
m
p
a
c
t
i
o
n
method shall not be allowed.
Pavement/improvements subgrade and basegrade inspections
- Prior to the
placement of concrete or asphalt for proper moisture and sp
e
c
i
f
i
e
d
compaction levels.
B. Foundations and Slab-on-Grade Floors
The following recommendations are consistent with very low
t
o
l
o
w
e
x
p
a
n
s
i
v
e
(expansion index less than 51) clayey to silty sand (SM/SC) founda
t
i
o
n
b
e
a
r
i
n
g
s
o
i
l
and site specific geotechnical conditions. Additional recomme
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
m
a
y
b
e
required and should be given at the plan review phas
e
.
All design
recommendations should also be further confirmed and/or
r
e
v
i
s
e
d
a
t
t
h
e
completion of remedial grading based on the expansion charac
t
e
r
i
s
t
i
c
s
o
f
t
h
e
foundation bearing soils and as-graded site geotechnical conditions,
a
n
d
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
e
d
in the final as-graded compaction report:
1 1. Continuous strip wall foundations should be sized at least 18
i
n
c
h
e
s
w
i
d
e
a
n
d
24 inches deep. Spread pad footings should be at least 36 inches s
q
u
a
r
e
a
n
d
18 inches deep. Footing depths are measured from the lowest adjace
n
t
g
r
o
u
n
d
I surface, not including the sand/gravel layer beneath the floor
s
l
a
b
s
.
E
x
t
e
r
i
o
r
continuous footings should enclose the entire building perimete
r
.
1 2. Continuous interior and exterior foundations should be rei
n
f
o
r
c
e
d
w
i
t
h
a
minimum of four #5 reinforcing bars. Place 245 bars 3 inch
e
s
a
b
o
v
e
t
h
e
bottom of the footing and 245 bars 3 inches below the top o
f
t
h
e
f
o
o
t
i
n
g
.
I Reinforcement details for isolated pad footings should be prov
i
d
e
d
b
y
t
h
e
project architect I structural engineer.
3. All interior slabs should be a minimum of 5 inches in thickness
,
r
e
i
n
f
o
r
c
e
d
w
i
t
h
#3 reinforcing bars spaced 16 inches on center each way place
d
m
i
d
-
h
e
i
g
h
t
i
n
the slab. Slabs should be underlain by 4 inches of clean sa
n
d
(
S
E
3
0
o
r
greater) which is provided with a 6-mil plastic moisture barrier plac
e
d
m
i
d
-
h
e
i
g
h
t
in the sand.
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERINQ, INC. 2450 Vineyard
A
v
e
n
u
e
,
E
s
c
o
n
d
i
d
o
,
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
9
2
0
2
9
.
1
2
2
9
• Phone (760) 743.1214 • Fax (760) 739.0343
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTflATIONS çRADINQ SUPERVISION PERC TESTINQ ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTIqATION
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 17
EL CAMINO REAL, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA OCTOBER 17, 2003 I. Provide "softcut" contraction/control joints consisting of sawcuts spaced 10 feet
on center maximum each way. Cut as soon as the slab will support the weight
of the saw, and operate without disturbing the final finish which is normally
within 2 hours after final finish at each control joint location or 150 psi to 800
psi. The softcuts should be a minimum of 1-inch in depth but not to exceed 11/4
inches deep maximum. Anti-ravel skid plafes should be used and replaced with
each blade to avoid spalling and raveling. Avoid wheeled equipment across
cuts for at least 24 hours.
Provide re-entrant corner reinforcement for all interior slabs. Re-entrant
corners will depend on slab geometry and / or interior column locations. The
enclosed Plate 9 may be used as a general guideline.
Foundation bearing and slab subgrade soils should not be allowed to dry below
the as-graded moisture contents prior to pouring the concrete or additional
ground preparations and moisture re-conditioning will be required as directed
in the field.
Foundation trenches and slab subgrade soils should be inspected and tested
for proper moisture and specified compaction levels, and approved by the
project geotechnical consultant prior to the placement of concrete.
C. Exterior Concrete Slabs I Flatworks
All exterior slabs (walkways, and patios) should be a minimum of 4 inches in
thickness reinforced with 6x6/10x10 welded wire mesh carefully placed mid-
height in the slab.
Provide "tool joint" or "softcut" contraction/control joints spaced 10 feet on
center (not to exceed 12 feet maximum) each way. Tool or cut as soon as the
slab will support weight and can be operated without disturbing the final finish
which is normally within 2 hours after final finish at each control joint location
or 150 psi to 800 psi. Tool or softcuts should be a minimum of 1-inch but
should not exceed 1Y4-inches deep maximum. In case of softcut joints, anti-
ravel skid plates should be used and replaced with each blade to avoid spalling
and raveling. Avoid wheeled equipments across cuts for at least 24 hours.
All exterior slab designs should be confirmed in the final as-graded compaction
report.
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENITJ1NEER1N, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 • Fax (760) 739.0343
cEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS GRADING SUPERVISION PERC TESTING ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTIGATION
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 18
EL CAMINO REAL, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA OCTOBER 17, 2003 1.
4. Subgrade soils should be tested for proper moisture and specified compaction
levels, and approved by the project geotechnical consultant prior to the
placement of concrete.
D. Soil Design Parameters
The following soil design parameters are based upon tested representative
41 samples of on-site earth deposits. All parameters should be re-evaluated when the
characteristics of the final as-graded soils have been specifically determined:
lie
* Design wet density of soil = 124 pcf.
* Design angle of internal friction of soil = 30 degrees.
* Design active soil pressure for retaining structures = 41 pcf (EFP), level backflll,
cantilever, unrestrained walls.
* Design active soil pressure for retaining structures = 67 pcf (EFP), 2:1 sloping
backfill surface, cantilever, unrestrained walls.
* Design at-rest soil pressure for retaining structures = 62 pcf (EFP), non-
yielding, restrained walls.
* Design passive soil pressure for retaining structures = 374 pcf (EFP), level
surface at the toe.
* Design coefficient of friction for concrete on soils = 0.36
* Net allowable foundation pressure (minimum 18 inches wide by 24 inches deep
footings) = 2500 psf.
* Allowable lateral bearing pressure (all structures except retaining walls) for
certified on-site soils = 150 psf/ft.
Notes:
* Use a minimum safety factor of 1.5 for wall over-turning and sliding stability.
However, because large movements must take place before maximum passive
resistance can be developed, a minimum safety factor of 2 may be considered
for sliding stability particularly where sensitive structures and improvements are
planned near or on top of retaining walls.
* When combining passive pressure and frictional resistance, the passive
component should be reduced by one-third.
* The indicated net allowable foundation pressures provided herein were
determined based on a minimum 18 inches wide by 24 inches deep footings S
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENQINEERINç, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, Escondido, California 92029.1229 • Phone (760) 743.1214 • Fax (760) 739.0343
QEOTECHNICAL INVEST! (VtT!ONS QRAD!NQ SUPER VISION PERC TESTINq ENVIRONMENTAL ThJVESTZQATZON.
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 19
EL CAMINO REAL, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA OCTOBER 17, 2003
and may be increased by 20% for each additional foot of depth and 20% for
each additional foot of width to a maximum of 4500 psf. The allowable
foundation pressures provided herein also apply to dead plus live loads and
may be increased by one-third for wind and seismic loading.
* The lateral bearing earth pressures may be increased by the amount of
designated value for each additional foot of depth to a maximum of 1500
pounds per square foot.
E. Asphalt and PCC Pavement Design
Specific pavement designs can best be provided at the completion of rough
grading based on R-value tests of the actual finish subgrade soils; however, the
following structural sections may be considered for cost estimating purposes only
(not for construction):
A minimum section of 3 inches asphalt on 6 inches Caltrans Class 2 aggregate
base may be considered for the on-site asphalt paving surfaces. In the areas
where the longitudinal grades exceed 10%, one-half inch asphalt should be
added to the design asphalt thickness for each 2% increase in grade or portions
thereof. FCC paving is recommended for longitudinal grades over 15% and will
be required when longitudinal grades are 20% or more.
Actual designs will also depend on the design TI and approval of the City of
Carlsbad.
Base materials should be compacted to a minimum of 95% of the
corresponding maximum dry density (ASTM D-1557). Subgrade soils beneath
the asphalt paving surfaces should also be compacted to a minimum of 95%
of the corresponding maximum dry density within the upper 12 inches.
Residential FCC driveways and parking supported on low expansive (expansion
index less than 51) subgrade soils should be a minimum of 51/2 inches in
thickness, reinforced with #3 reinforcing bars at 18 inches on center each way
placed 2 inches below the top of slab. Subgrade soils beneath the FCC
driveways and parking should be compacted to a minimum of 90% of the
corresponding maximum dry density within the upper 6 inches. For grades over
15%, provide a minimum 6 inches wide by 8 inches deep shear key
perpendicular to the longitudinal profile, monolithically poured at the base of the
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, Escondido, California 92029.1229 • Phone (760) 7431214 • Fax (760) 7390343
QEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS QRADINQ SUPERVISION PERC TESTING ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTIGATION
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 20
EL CAMINO REAL, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA OCTOBER 17, 2003 I. FCC paving section at 15 feet on centers maximum. Use a minimum 560-C-
3250 concrete per Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction
(Green Book) for all FCC paving surfaces.
Provide "tool joint" or "softcut" contraction I control joints spaced 10 feet on
center (not to exceed 15 feet maximum) each way. Tool or cut as soon as the
slab will support weight and can be operated without disturbing the final finish
which is normally within 2 hours after final finish at each control joint location
or 150 psi to 800 psi. Tool or softcuts should be a minimum of 1-inch but
should not exceed 1 1/4-inches deep maximum. In case of softcut joints, anti-
ravel skid plates should be used and replaced with each blade to avoid spalling
and raveling. Avoid wheeled equipments across cuts for at least 24 hours.
3. Subgrade and basegrade soils should be tested for proper moisture and
specified compaction levels and approved by the project geotechnical
consultant prior to the placement of the base or asphalt I FCC finish surface.
ME 4. Base section and subgrade preparations per structural section design, will be
required for all surfaces subject to traffic including roadways, travelways, drive
"71AMk lanes, driveway approaches and ribbon (cross) gutters. Driveway approaches
within the public right-of-way should have 12 inches subgrade compacted to a
minimum of 95% compaction levels, and provided with a 95% compacted Class
2 base section per the structural section design.
Provide 6 inches of Class 2 base under curb and gutters and 4 inches of Class
2 base (or 6 inches of Class Ill) under sidewalks. Base layer under curb and
gutters should be compacted to a minimum of 95%, while subgrade soils under
curb and gutters, and base and subgrade under sidewalks should be
compacted to a minimum of 90% compaction levels. Base section may not be
required under curb and gutters, and sidewalks in the case of very low
expansive subgrade soils (expansion index less than 21). Appropriate
recommendations should be given in the final as-graded compaction report.
F. General Recommendations
1. The minimum foundation design and steel reinforcement provided herein is
based on soil characteristics only and is not intended to be in lieu of
reinforcement necessary for structural consideration. All recommendations
should be evaluated and confirmed by the project architect I structural engineer. I
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, Escondido, California 92029.1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 • Fax (760) 739-0343
QEOTECHNICAL INVESTIçATIONS qRADING SUPERVISION PERC TESTINq ENVIRONMENTAL INvEsTIqAflON
MA
13 PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
EL CAMINO REAL, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
PAGE 21
OCTOBER 17. 2003
Adequate staking and grading control is a critical factor in properly completing
the recommended remedial and site grading operations. Grading contral and
staking should be provided by the project grading contractor, or surveyor/civil
engineer and is beyond the geotechnical engineering services. Inadequate
staking and/or lack of grading control may result in unnecessary additional
grading which will increase construction costs.
Footings located on or adjacent to the top of slopes should be extended to a
sufficient depth to provide a minimum horizontal distance of 7 feet or one-third
of the slope height, whichever is greater (need not exceed 40 feet maximum)
between the bottom edge of the footing and face of slope. This requirement
applies to all improvements and structures including fences, posts, pools, spas,
etc. Concrete and AC improvements should be provided with a thickened edge
to satisfy this requirement.
Expansive clayey soils should not be used for backfilling of any retaining
structure. All retaining walls should be provided with a 1:1 wedge of granular,
compacted backfill measured from the base of the wall footing to the finished
surface.
All underground utility and plumbing trenches should be mechanically
compacted to a minimum of 90% of the maximum dry density of the soil unless
otherwise specified. Care should be taken not to crush the utilities or pipes
during the compaction of the soil. Non-expansive, granular backfill soils should
be used.
Based upon the results of the tested soil sample, the amount of water soluble
sulfate (SO4) in the soil was found to be 0.013 percent by weight which is
considered negligible according to California Building Code Table No. 19-A-4.
Portland cement Type II may be used.
Potentially expansive clayey deposits are subject to continued swelling and
shrinkage upon wetting and drying. At the site, maintaining a uniform as-
graded soil moisture during the post construction periods is essential in the
future performance of the site structures and improvements. In no case should
water be allowed to pond or accumulate adjacent to the improvements and
structures.
Site drainage over the finished pad surface should flow away from structures
onto the street in a positive manner. Care should be taken during the
construction, improvements, and fine grading. phases, not to disrupt the
designed drainage patterns. Rooflines of the buildings should be provided with
id
6~11-
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 • Fax (760) 7390343
cEoTECHNIcAL INVESTIQATI0NS GRADING SUPERVISION I'ERC TESTING ENVIRONMENTAL ,NVESTZqATION.
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 22
EL CAMINO REAL, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA OCTOBER 17, 2003
roof gutters. Roof water should be collected and directed away from the
buildings and structures to a suitable location. Consideration should be given
to adequately damp-proof/waterproof the basement walls / foundations and
provide the planter areas adjacent to the foundations with an impermeable liner
and a subdrainage system.
Final plans should reflect preliminary recommendations given in this report.
Final foundations and grading plans may be reviewed by the project
geotechnical consultant for conformance with the requirements of the
geotechnical investigation report outlined herein. More specific
recommendations may also be necessary and should be given when final
grading and architectural/structural drawings are available.
All foundation trenches should be inspected to ensure adequate footing
embedment and confirm competent bearing soils. Foundation and slab
reinforcements should also be inspected and approved by the project
geotechnical consultant.
The amount of shrinkage and related cracks that occur in the concrete slab-on-
grades, flatworks and driveways depends on many factors, the most important
of which is the amount of water in a concrete mix. The purpose of the slab
reinforcement is to keep normal concrete shrinkage cracks closed tightly. The
amount of concrete shrinkage can be minimized by reducing the amount of
water in the mix. To keep shrinkage to a minimum the following should be
considered:
* Use the stiffest mix that can be handled and consolidated satisfactorily.
* Use the largest maximum size of aggregate that is practical, (for example,
concrete made with 3/8-inch maximum size aggregate usually requires about
40 lbs more (nearly 5 gal.) water per cubic yard than concrete with 1-inch
aggregate).
* Cure the concrete as long as practical.
The amount of slab reinforcement provided for conventional slab-on-grade
construction. considers that good quality concrete materials, proportioning,
craftsmanship, and control tests where appropriate and applicable, are
provided.
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENc1NEERINç, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, Escondido, California 92029-1229 • Phone (760) 743-1214 e Fax (76O)739 :.
GRADING SUPERVISION cEOTECHNIcAL INVESTIGATIONS PERC TESTING ENVIRONMENTAL INVETIQAT°.i;
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 23
EL CAMINO REAL, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA OCTOBER 17, 2003
12. A preconstruction meeting between representatives of this office, the property
owner or planner, the grading contractor / builder, and the city inspector is
recommended in order to discuss grading/construction details associated with
site development.
VIII. LIMITATIONS
The conclusions and recommendations provided herein have been based on available
data obtained from the review of pertinent reports and plans, subsurface exploratory
excavations as well as our experience with the soils and formational materials located in
the general area. The materials encountered on the project site and utilized in our
laboratory testing are believed representative of the total area; however, earth materials
may vary in characteristics between excavations.
Of ecessity we must assume a certain degree of continuity between exploratory
excavations and/or natural exposures. It is necessary, therefore, that all observations,
conclusions, and recommendations be verified during the grading operation. In the event
discrepancies are noted, we should be contacted immediately so that an inspection can
be made and additional recommendations issued if required.
The recommendations made in this report are applicable to the site at the time this report
was prepared. It is the responsibility of the owner/developer to ensure that these
recommendations are carried out in the field.
It is almost impossible to predict with certainty the future performance of a property. The
future behavior of the site is also dependent on numerous unpredictable variables, such
as earthquakes, rainfall, and on-site drainage patterns.
The firm of VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC., shall not be held responsible for
changes to the physical conditions of the property such as addition of fill soils, added cut
slopes, or changing drainage patterns which occur without our inspection or control.
The property owner(s) should be aware that the development of cracks in all concrete
surfaces such as floor slabs and exterior stucco are associated with normal concrete
shrinkage during the curing process. These features depend chiefly upon the condition of
concrete and weather conditions at the time of construction and do not reflect detrimental
ground movement. Hairline stucco cracks will often develop at window/door corners, and
floor surface cracks up to 1/a..inch wide in 20 feet may develop as a result of normal
concrete shrinkage (according to the American Concrete Institute).
I
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, Escondido, California 92029.1229 • Phone (760) 743.1214 • Fax (760) 739.0343
QEO TECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS GRADING SUPERVISION PERC TESTING ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTIGATION
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION PAGE 24
EL CAMINO REAL, CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA OCTOBER 17, 2003
This report should be considered valid for a period of one year and is subject to review by
our firm following that time. If significant modifications are made to your tentative
development plan, especially with respect to the height and location of cut and fill slopes,
this report must be presented to us for review and possible revision.
Vinje & Middleton Engineering, Inc., warrants that this report has been prepared within the
limits prescribed by our client with the usual thoroughness and competence of the
engineering profession. No other warranty or representation, either expressed or implied,
is included or intended.
Once again, should any questions arise concerning this report, please do not hesitate to
contact this office. Reference to our Job #03-390-P will help to expedite our response to
your inquiries.
We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you.
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC.
ç..cD o'N
In
Denns Middleton kJ"IE r'' /
C EG #980
'- Op
S
. 'tu1ehdi S. Shariat
RCE #46174
No. 46174 1
Exp. 12-31-06 :'.
r
Distribution: Addressee (2)
Vista Engineering, Inc., Attn: Mr. Ki 3, fax)
Steven J. Meize
RG #6953
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC. 2450 Vineyard Avenue, Escondido, California 92029.1229 • Phone (760) 743.1214 • Fax (760) 7390343
cEOTECHNIcAL INVESTIQATIONS RADINQ SUPERVISION PERC TESTIN( ENVIRONMENTAL INVEsTIqATION -
PRIMARY DIVISIONS GROUP SECONDARY DIVISIONS
SYMBOL
GRAVELS CLEAN GW Well graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines.
MORE THAN HALF GRAVELS
LU
OF COARSE (LESS THAN GP Poorly graded gravels or gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines.
5% FINES) (/) 2 0 FRACTION IS GRAVEL GM Silty gravels, gravel-sand-silt mixtures, non-plastic fines. 0 LL Z W
WOzN LARGER THAN WITH I U.. NO. 4 SIEVE FINES GO Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines.
< I— LU
(.f:, SANDS CLEAN SW Well graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines.
w Z Lu 10 MORE THAN HALF
SANDS
(LESS THAN SP Poorly graded sands or gravelly sands, little or no fines. I In I CC OF COARSE 5% FINES)
SANDS SM Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures, non-plastic fines. 8 ir FRACTION IS
0 SMALLER THAN WITH
NO. 4 SIEVE FINES SC Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines.
ML Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour, silty or clayey fine
C) SILTS AND CLAYS sands or clayey silts with slight plasticity.
CL Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly clays, sandy C LL LU
LIQUID LIMIT IS J Cl) w LESS THAN 50% clays, silty clays, lean clays.
OL <—C
Organic silts and organic silty clays of low plasticity. LU Z co o
< I MH Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomacecus fine sandy or silty
o SILTS AND CLAYS soils, elastic silts.
w0UJZ z o z LIQUID LIMIT IS CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays.
LL GREATER THAN 50% OH Organic clays of medium to high plasticity, organic silts.
. HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT I Peat and other highly organic soils.
GRAIN 'SIZES U.S. STANDARD SERIES SIEVE CLEAR SQUARE SIEVE OPENINGS
200 40 10 4 3/4" 3" 12"
,
SAND GRAVEL I
SILTS AND CLAYS COBBLES1 BOULDERS I FINE I MEDIUM I COARSE I FINE I COARSE I
RELATIVE DENSITY
SANDS, GRAVELS AND
NON-PLASTIC SILTS BLOWS/FOOT
VERY LOOSE 0 - 4
LOOSE 4-10
MEDIUM DENSE 10 -30
DENSE 30 -50
VERY DENSE OVER 50
CONSISTENCY
CLAYS AND
PLASTIC SILTS STRENGTH BLOWS/FOOT
VERY SOFT 0-¼ 0-2
SOFT 1/4 -'/z 24
FIRM '/2-1 4-8
STIFF 1-2 8-16
'VERY STIFF 2-4 16-32
HARD OVER 4 OVER 32
Blow count, 140 pound hammer failing 30 inches on 2 inch O.D. split spoon sampler (ASTM 0-1 586)
Unconfined compressive strength per SOILTEST pocket penetrometer CL-700
V Sand Cone Test Bulk Sample 246 = Standard Penetration Test (SPT) (AS TIM 0-1586)
with blow .counts per 6 inches
H Chunk Sample 0 Driven Rings 2 California Sampler with blow counts per 6 inches
\JNJE & MIDDLETON . KEY TO EXPLORATORY BORING LOGS
ENGINEERING, INC.
Unified Soil Classification System (ASTM 0-2487)
2450 Vineyard Ave., #102
Escondido, CA 92029-1229
PROJECT NO.
0.2 KEY
0
2775
/%°d////
- TJ/J /VT' I
X 21
I!! 11
iv LzL
/ I /
4
L
I
I - I FEpARE.BY:
\'S1A 71 E NE-ERNG. INC
930 'IST ILGE DRIVE
VISTA, CA 92084-6064 \TELL (760)912271I "I
JN 122203 (C)
I Geologic Cross-Section
2808
'
(NV)'
EXPLANATION
Test Trench
..-::.-:: '
\ / 1 / / / - - - -.
lo
___/ 7
\ /A ) /
Approximate Limits of
Existing Pad Fill
'I 7'(OUND /ñVc 'I,
OM
/1 (NV)
I 275.7
j x
48
A EDGE UPPER LEVEL
tr,LL
14,887 S.F. CROSS 275 BSMT Pan 267±
MAX. RC 306± x
EDGE BASEMENT GARAGE—
276.5
276.7
75.)
X
I
\\ \ \ \ \ 'DENiSE TREES ( 257.2 7 x /
\ RELFMNARY SIT AND /
\\ ', RADkIG STUD/Y
\\ \ \ \ \ \A.P.N167-080-36 / -
'f
rr' V
LU I , IVI/-X 0,540 \\ EL CAM INO SEAL, CALS BAD
\ \\ \\ \\ \ JOB #03-390-P X 240
\ rv ) \ \\ \\ \ \\
\ \ \\ \\ I \\\
\ I
249. 4 I
' SCALE:
' . --------- I i
! \ \
XT 6" AC,1WTER-\ T
EM -------------
-
ul
/
..........\
I TLJ
L10 i-i
- SB II 276.3 'I
' I
/... ..........
__,//
1 A / ------------
( , - i -- ------
1 /050 S.F.GIOSS / I I i SMT FAD 250f
MA ROO~ PEAk MP FILL
J 54
I I
> r \
249.0 1131111.
' - - - - -
- •c___•- -- - -v -
GEOLOGIC CROSS-SECTION
JOB #03-390--P
L.
300
280
260
240
— — - — -
- — — — —
PROPOSED 3-STORY DWELLING I
II I
I! _-
EXISTING GRADE
PROPOSED GRADE I
II • -ii---
TT •
FT8ML
'fTllOTllcJ
300
280
PROPOSED I 3-STORY DWELLING I
I 260
--.o& TT-
- ------------------- --
____
• • -240
220 1-220
SCALE: 1"= 20
PLATE 3
Date: 9-23-03 Logged by:SJM
DEPTH
(ft)
SAMPLE
T-1 IJSCS
SYMBOL
FIELD
MOISTURE
(%)
FIELD
DRY
DENSITY
(pcf)
RELATIVE
COMPACTION
(%) DESCRIPTION
ALL:
Silty fine to medium sand. Pale brown color. Dry. Loose. SM - - 9.3 111.6 89.0
ST-1
TOPSOIL:
Silty fine to medium sand. Trace of clay. Dark brown
color. Moist. Loose to medium dense. ST-2
SM/SC
- -
- -
- \ '-' !\
I
13.2 109.5 87.3
10.8 109.1 88.4 Sandy clay to clayey sand. Tan to blue-grey color. Rust
colored staining. Moist to very moist. Firm to stiff. A few
scattered cobbles. ST-2
csC -
- _10 -
FORMATIONAL ROCK:
- - Clayey to silty sandstone. Fine to coarse grained. Tan
- - color. Moist. Weathered friable. Weakly cemented at SC/CC
- 15 - upper contact. Becomes somewhat blocky and locally
- - cemented at 6'. Locally cobbles and gravels. Poorly
- - sorted. Clay content decreases at depth. ST-3 /
- - End Test Trench at 8'. (No caving. No groundwater.)
-20 -
Date: 9-23-03 - Logged by: SJR
T -2 uscs FIELD
FIELD
DRY RELATIVE
DEPTH
(ft)
SAMPLE SYMBOL MOISTURE (%)
DENSITY
(pcf)
COMPACTIO
(%) DESCRIPTION
- - TOPSOIL:
- 1 - Silty fine to medium sand. Pale brown color. Porous to
- - highly porous. Dry. Loose. Scattered cobbles and gravel. SM
- 2 - I n Roots up to 6" in diameter from nearby eucalyptus trees. 1.6 104.0 -
- - ST-1
3
-
- / Clayey sand. Medium to coarse grained. Red-brown
- 4 — color. Moist. Loose to medium dense. Porous. Scattered SC
- - cobbles. Clay content decrease at depth. ST-2
-5-
- - FORMATIONAL ROCK:
- 6 - Cobble conglomerate. ± 25% cobbles 6" minus. Silty to
- - clayey sand matrix. Fine to medium grained. Red-brown GO 8.8 105.2 83.9
- 7 - J I color. Weakly cemented. Moist. Difficult to excavate. I
- - ST-4 7.2 114.0 90.9
:8:
-9
End Test Trench at 10'. (No caving. No groundwater.)
- - _____I
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC
2450 Vineyard Avenue, Suite 102
Escondido, California 92029-1229
Office 760-743-1214 Fax 760-739-0343
V Sand Cone Test 0 Bulk Sample
TEST TRENCH LOGS
EL CAMINO REAL, CARLSBAD
PROJECT NO. 03-390-P PLATE 4
Chunk Sam fl flrivn Rinas
Date: 9-23-03
Logged by: SJM F
DEPTH
(ft)
SAMPLE
T-3 USCS
SYMBOL
FIELD
MOISTURE
FIELD
DRY
DENSITY
(pcf)
RELATIVE
COMPACTION
(%)
DESCRIPTION
FILL:
Silty fine to medium sand. Scattered cobbles. Pale brown SM
r7
_
color. Dry. Medium dense. No evidence of benching.
2- ST-1
TOPSOIL: - 3 - \
Sandy clay to clayey sand. Red-brown color. Moist. CL/SC
- 4
- \ Blocky. ST-2
FORMATIONAL ROCK: - 5 -
-
- \ Silty sandstone. Medium to coarse grained. Trace of clay. SP/SC
- 6 - \ Off-white color. Blocky. Cemented. Massive. Poorly
- - sorted. ST-3 -7-
- - End Test Trench at 31/2. (No caving. No groundwater.) -8-
Date: 9-23-03
Logged by: SJM
1-4 USCS FIELD
FIELD
DRY RELATIVE DEPTH
(ft)
SAMPLE SYMBOL MOISTURE
(%)
DENSITY
(pcf)
COMPACTION
(%) DESCRIPTION
= 1 -
FILL:
Silty sand / cobble mix. Red-brown color. Up to 50% GP
cobbles by volume. Dry. Medium dense.
ST-5
TOPSOIL: = 3 -
Silty fine sand. Pale brown color. Porous. Dry. Loose. SM
Some rootlets. Locally gravelly. ST-1
-
- Sandy clay to clayey sand. Red-brown color. Moist. CL/SC
Blocky. Stiff. 6
= o i ST-2 j 10.2 126.6 100+
- 7 - FORMATIONAL ROCK:
8—
Siltstone. Pale grey color. Locally sandy. Blocky.
- 9 - Grades to sandstone at 7'
Indurated.
. . Off- Fine to coarse grained
SP
-
- white color. Blocky. Cemented. Poorly sorted. Some rust
_- 10 colored staining. No apparent structures. ST-3
- ii - End Test Trench at 8'. (No caving. No groundwater.)
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC TEST TRENCH LOGS
2450 Vineyard Avenue, Suite 102
Escondido, California 92029-1229
Office 760-743-1214 Fax 760-739-0343
EL CAMINO REAL, CARLSBAD _____________________________________
PROJECT NO. 03-390-P PLATE 5
V Sand Cone Test I Bulk Sample U Chunk Sample 0 Driven Rings J
Date: 9-23-03 Logged by: SJM
p PTH
(ft)
SAMPLE
T-5 USCS
SYMBOL
FIELD
MOISTURE
(%)
FIELD
DRY
DENSITY
(pcf)
RELATIVE
COMPACTION
(%) DESCRIPTION
FILL:
- i - 9.4 126.7 100+ Silt'j fine sand/cobble mix. Red:-brown color. Dry. Blocky. GP
- - ST-5
-2— -
3 -
- FORMATIONAL ROCK:
- 3 - Silty sandstone. Medium to coarse grained. Locally trace SF/SC
- - of clay. Off-white color. Rust colored staining. Poorly
I-- sorted. Blocky. Cemented. ST-3 /
-5-
- - End Test Trench at 2. (No caving. No groundwater.)
1:8:
Date: 9-23-03 Logged by: SJM
DEPTH SAMPLE
T USCS
SYMBOL
FIELD
MOISTURE
(%)
FIELD
DRY
DENSITY
(pcfl
FRELATITVIE
ON DESCRIPTION
-
- FILL ITOPSOIL:
- 1 Silty fine to medium sand. Up to 50% cobbles and GP
- - pebbles by volume. Dry. Somewhat loose. ST-5
FORMATIONAL ROCK: -
-
3 Silty sandstone. Fine to medium grained. Locally trace of
-
- clay. Off-white. Rust colored staining. Weathered friable SF/SC
- 4 - near surface. Becomes somewhat blocky and moderately
-
- cemented at 2'. No apparent structure.
-5- ST-3
End Test Trench at 3'. (No caving. No groundwater.) : 6 :
-
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC
2450 Vineyard Avenue, Suite 102
Escondido, California 92029-1229
Office 760-743-1214 Fax 760-739-0343
TEST TRENCH LOGS
EL CAMINO REAL, CARLSBAD
PROJECT NO. 03-390-P PLATE 6
V Sand Cone Test I Bulk Sample 0 Chunk Sample 0 Driven Rin
TT
r4 T------TJ) ' \
ri
6 J IFfi " "s - / 1 1 SITE
Cent F
lk
1/5
Son theg
-
- -ZJ_7
O 20 10 0 SC MILES
FAULT - EPICENTER MAP
MM
SAN DIEGO COUNTY REGION
INDICATED EARTHQUAKE EVENTS THROUGH 75 YEAR PERIOD (L900-197)
Map data is compiled from various sources includine California Division of Mines and
Geology, California Inscitude of Technolov and the National Oceanic and AosrheriC
Administration. Map is reprcduced from California Division of Mines and Geolc'7,
'Earthquake Epicenter Ma of California; Ma Sheet 39•U
Earthquake Magnitude
...............4.0T04.9
5.0 TO 5.9 PROJECT: Job #03-390-P
IJ ............6.0TO6
cD ..... 70T07.9
EL CAMINO REAL, CARLSBAD
Fault. PLATE: 7 i ------
U
RETAINING WALL DRAIN DETAIL
Typical - no scale 1.
I I
I I
I I.
d r a i n a q e
Granular, non-expansive
il.
•
Compacted. /
Filter Material. Crushed rock (wrapped in
filter fabric) or Class 2 Permeable Material
(see specifications below)
Waterproofing
Perforated drain pipe
J Competent, approved
soils or bedrock
CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS:
Provide granular, non-expansive backfill soil in 1:1 gradient wedge behind wall. Compact backfill to minimum 90% of laboratory
standard.
Provide back drainage for wall to prevent build-up of hydrostatic pressures. Use drainage openings along base of wall or back
drain system as outlined below.
Backdrain should consist of 4" diameter PVC pipe (Schedule 40 or equivalent) with perforations down. Drain to suitable outlet
at minimum 1%. Provide %" - 11/2" crushed gravel filter wrapped in filter fabric (Mirafi 140N or equivalent). Delete filter fabric
wrap if Caltrans Class 2 permeable material is used. Compact Class 2 material to minimum 90% of laboratory standard.
Seal back of wall with waterproofing in accordance with architect's specifications.
Provide positive drainage to disallow ponding of water above wall. Lined drainage ditch to
minimum 2% flow away from wall is recommended.
* Use 11/2 cubic foot per foot with granular backfill soil and 4 cubic foot per foot if expansive backfill soil is used.
F: VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC.
PLATE 8
ENTRANT
NER CRACK
RE-ENTRANT C(
RE IFO RCEMEN
NO. 4 BARS P
BELOW TOP OF
13
ISOLATION JOINTS AND RE-ENTRANT CORNER REINFORCEMENT
Typical - no scale
(a) (b)
ISOLATION JOINTS
CONTRACTION JOINTS
(c)
NOTES:
Isolation joints around the columns should be either circular as shown in (a) or diamond shaped as shown in (b).
If no isolation joints are used around columns, or if the corners of the isolation joints do not meet the contraction
joints, radial cracking as shown in (c)may occur (reference Ad).
In order to control cracking at the re-entrant corners (±2700 corners), provide reinforc-ement as shown in (c)
Re-entrant corner reinforcement shown herein is provided as a general guideline only and is subject to verification
and changes by the project architect and/or structural engineer based upon slab gecmetiy, location, and other
engineerig and construction factors.
VINJE & MIDDLETON ENGINEERING, INC.
PLATE 9