HomeMy WebLinkAboutCUP 04-08; Alga Norte Community Park; Conditional Use Permit (CUP) (7)I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL
EVALUATION REPORT
ALGA NORTE COMMUNITY PARK
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
PREPARED FOR:
Ms. Stephanie Hatton
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
3067 Fifth Avenue
San Diego, California 92103
PREPARED BY:
Ninyo & Moore Geotechnical and Environmental Sciences Consultants
5710 Ruffin Road
San Diego, California 92123
September 9, 2002
Project No. 104600001
571 o Ruffin Road • San D1ego. Califorma 92123 • Phone (858) 576-1000 • Fax (858) 576-9600
San Diego • /Nine • Ontario • Los Angeles • Oakland • Las Vegas • Salt Lake City • Phoenix
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Ms. Stephanie Hatton
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
3067 Fifth Avenue
San Diego, California 92103
Subject: Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation Report
Alga Norte Community Park
Carlsbad, California
Dear Ms. Hatton:
September 9, 2002
Project No. 104600001
In accordance with your authorization, we have performed a preliminary geotechnical evaluation
for the proposed Alga Norte Community Park in Carlsbad, California. TI:tis report presents our geo-
technical findings, conclusions, and recommendations regarding the proposed project. Our report
was prepared in accordance with our proposal dated February 1, 2002.
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service on this project. If you have any questions or
comments regarding our report, please contact the undersigned.
Sincerely,
NINYO & MOORE
Francis 0. Moreland, C.E.G.
Senior Project Geologist
FOMIRI!EO!kmf
Distribution: ( 6) Addressee
Erik Olsen, G.E.
Chief Geotechnical Engineer
5710 Ruffin Road • San Diego. Calrforma 92123 • Phone (858)576-1000 • Fax (858)576-9600
------------------
S,:m D1ego • !Nine • Ontario • Los Angeles • Oakland • Las Vegas • Salt Lake City • Phoenix
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
TABLE OF CONTENTS
September 9, 2002
Project No. 104600001
Paee
I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... !
2. SCOPE OF SERVICES ............................................................................................................ !
3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...................................................................................................... !
4. SITE DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................................... 2
5. FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING .................................................. 2
5.1. Exploratory Borings::-::: ................................................................................................. 2
5.2. Laboratory Testing ........................................................................................................ 3
6. GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ................................................................ .3
6.1. Regional Geologic Setting ............................................................................................ 3
6.2. Site Geology ................................................................................................................ .4
6.2.1. Fill ...................................................................................................................... .4
6.2.2. Alluvium ............................................................................................................ .4
6.2.3. Santiago Formation ............................................................................................. 4
6.3. Rippability ................................................................................................................... .5
6.4. Groundwater ................................................................................................................ .5
6.5. Faulting and Seismicity ............................................................................................... .5
6.5.1. Strong Ground Motion and Ground Surface Rupture ........................................ .5
6.5.2. Liquefaction and Seismically Induced Settlement.. ............................................ 6
6.5.3. Tsunamis ............................................................................................................. 6
6.6. Landsliding ................................................................................................................... 7
7. UBC SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS .............................................................................. 7
8. CONCLUSIONS ...................................................................................................................... 7
9. RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................................................................... 8
9.1. Earthwork ..................................................................................................................... 8
9 .1.1. Site Preparation ................................................................................................... 8
9.1.2. Treatment of Alluvial Soils ................................................................................. 9
9.1.3. Treatment of Expansive Soils ............................................................................. 9
9.1.4. Treatment of Cut/Fill Transitions Beneath Structures ...................................... ! 0
9 .1.5. Excavation Characteristics ................................................................................ 1 0
9 .1.6. Materials for Fill ............................................................................................... ! 0
9.1.7. Compacted Fill .................................................................................................. 10
9.1.8. Slopes ................................................................................................................ l2
9.1.9. Temporary Slope Stability ................................................................................ 13
9.1.10. Trench Backfill .................................................................................................. l3
9.1.11. Drainage ............................................................................................................ l4
9 .2. Foundations ................................................................................................................. 14
9.2.1. Shallow Foundations ......................................................................................... l4
9.2.2. Shallow Foundation Lateral Resistance ............................................................ 15
460000JR Alga Norte Parluloc
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
September 9, 2002
Project No. 104600001
9.2.3. Static Settlement ............................................................................................... 16
9.3. Slabs-on-Grade ........................................................................................................... 16
9.4. Pavements .................................................................................................................... l6
9.5. Corrosion .................................................................................................................... 18
9.6. Pre-Construction Conference ...................................................................................... l8
9. 7. Construction Observation ........................................................................................... 19
10. LIMITATIONS ....................................................................................................................... l9
11. SELECTED REFERENCES .................................................................................................. 21
Tables
Table 1 -Seismic Design Parameters .............................................................................................. ?
Table 2 -Recommended Pavement Sections ................................................................................ 17
Figures
Figure 1 -Site Location Map
Figure 2-Geotechnical Map
Figure 3 -Fault Location Map
Appendices
Appendix A-Boring Logs
Appendix B-Laboratory Testing
Appendix C -Typical Earthwork Guidelines
460000\R Alga Norte Park. doc II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
1. INTRODUCTION
September 9, 2002
Project No. I 04600001
In accordance with your request and our proposal dated February I, 2002, we have performed a
preliminary geotechnical evaluation for the design of the proposed Alga Norte Co nun unity Park in
Carlsbad, California. This report presents the results of our field exploration and laboratory testing,
our preliminary conclusions regarding the geotechnical conditions at the subject site, and our pre-
liminary reconunendations for the design and earthwork construction of this project.
2. SCOPE OF SERVICES
Ninyo & Moore's scope of services for the project included review of pertinent background data,
performance of a geologic reconnaissance, subsurface exploration, laboratory testing, and engi-
neering analysis with regard to the proposed project. Specifically, we performed the following
tasks:
• Review of background data listed in the Selected References section of this report. The data
reviewed included geotechnical reports, topographic maps, geologic data, stereoscopic aerial
photographs, fault maps, and a conceptual site plan for the project.
• Performance of a geologic reconnaissance of the proposed site.
• Subsurface exploration consisting of 15 exploratory borings. The boring depths ranged from
11.5 to 51.3 feet below the ground surface.
• Laboratory testing consisting of in-situ dry density and moisture content, grain size analyses,
consolidation, shear strength, expansion index, and corrosivity.
• Compilation and engineering analysis of the data obtained.
• Preparation of this geotechnical design and data report presenting our preliminary findings
and conclusions regarding the proposed project. The report also includes preliminary geo-
technical reconunendations for the design and earthwork construction of the subject project.
3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
It is our understanding that the proposed Alga Norte Conununity Park will be located on a 33-acre I site northwest of the intersection of the future alignments of Poinsettia Lane and Alicante Road.
I
I
The park site will be developed as part of the La Costa Greens development. The property is cur-
4600001R Alga None PariLdoc
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
September 9, 2002
Project No. I 04600001
rently undeveloped. Details of grading and improvements for the proposed park are not currently
available. We understand, however, that improvements will include an aquatic complex consisting
of pools, locker rooms, offices, and restrooms, as well as picnic areas, playing fields, and parking
lots. Most of the other park site improvements will be relatively minor. Grading is likely to entail
cuts and fills of up to approximately 15 feet.
4. SITE DESCRIPTION I The subject site is approximately 33 acres in area and is currently undeveloped. The site occupies
the bottom of a north-south trending valley and was previously used for agricultural purposes.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Moderately sloping hiiisides are present on the east and west sides of the property. Site eleva-
tions range from approximately 105 feet above Mean Sea Level (MSL) at the southeastern comer
of the site to approximately 175 feet MSL along the western side of the site. Vegetation at the
site currently consists of grass, brush, and weeds.
5. FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING
Our field exploration of the subject site included a geologic reconnaissance and subsurface ex-
ploratory work conducted on August 5 and 6, 2002. The subsurface evaluation consisted of
drilling 15, 8-inch diameter continuous flight, hollow-stem auger borings. The boring locations
were selected based on the results of our background geotechnical review and field reconnaissance.
Prior to commencing the subsurface exploration, Underground Service Alert was notified for mark-
out of the existing utilities.
5.1. Exploratory Borings
A total of 15 exploratory borings were excavated at the site on August 5 and 6, 2002 at the
approximate locations indicated on Figure 2. The borings were drilled with an all-terrain ve-
hicle mounted, continuous flight hollow-stem auger drill. Boring depths ranged from 11.5 to
51.3 feet below the ground surface. Detailed logs of the borings are presented in Appen-
dix A.
4600001R Alga Norte Park.doc 2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Y arnada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
September 9, 2002
Project No. 104600001
6.
5.2. Laboratory Testing
Samples were obtained during our subsurface evaluation for laboratory analysis. Testing in-
cluded in-situ dry density and moisture content, grain size analyses, consolidation, shear
strength, expansion index, and corrosivity. The results of the in-situ dry density and moisture
testing are indicated on the boring logs presented in Appendix A. Other laboratory test results
are presented in Appendix B.
GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Our findings regarding regional and local geology, including faulting and seismicity, landslides, I rippability (excavatibility), and groundwater conditions at the subject site are provided in the
following sections.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
6.1. Regional Geologic Setting
The project area is situated in the western San Diego County section of the Peninsular
Ranges Geomorphic Province. This geomorphic province encompasses an area that extends
approximately 900 miles from the Transverse Ranges and the Los Angeles Basin south to
the southern tip of Baja California (Norris and Webb, 1990). The province varies in width
from approximately 30 to 100 miles. In general, the province consists of rugged mountains
underlain by Jurassic metavolcanic and metasedimentary rocks, and Cretaceous igneous
rocks of the southern California batholith. The portion of the province in San Diego County
that includes the project area consists generally of uplifted Tertiary age Santiago Formation
and recent alluvium.
The Peninsular Ranges Province is traversed by a group of sub-parallel faults and fault zones
trending roughly northwest. Several of these faults, which are shown on Figure 3, Fault Loca-
tion Map, are considered active faults. The Elsinore, San Jacinto and San Andreas faults are
active fault systems located northeast of the project area and the Rose Canyon, Agua Blanca-
Coronado Bank, and San Clemente faults are active faults located west of the project area. The
Rose Canyon Fault Zone has been mapped approximately 7 miles southwest of the project site,
460000JR Alga Norte Park. doc 3
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
September 9, 2002
Project No. I 04600001
which is the closest known active fault relative to the site. Major tectonic activity associated
with these and other faults within this regional tectonic framework consists primarily of right-
lateral, strike-slip movement. Further discussion of faulting relative to the site is provided in the
Faulting and Seismicity section of this report.
6.2. Site Geology
Geologic units encountered during our field reconnaissance and subsurface evaluation include
alluvium and materials of the Santiago Formation. Generalized descriptions of the earth units
encountered during our field reconnaissance and subsurface exploration are provided in the
subsequent sections. More detailed descriptions are provided on the boring logs in Appen-
dix A.
6.2.1. Fill
Fill soils were encountered during our reconnaissance at various locations on the site.
These soils were generally associated with unimproved road construction and were lim-
ited in areal extent and depth. A significant amount of fill is, however, located near the
central portion of the southern boundary of the site. This fill is associated with the con-
struction of a small reservoir (pond) and may be up to 1 0 feet deep. In general, we
anticipate that these soils are derived from, and similar to the underlying alluvial soils.
6.2.2. Alluvium
Alluvium was observed over the majority of the site and encountered in our exploratory
borings from the surface to depths of more than 26.5 feet. In general, the alluvium con-
sisted of dark yellowish and grayish brown to brown, damp to wet, stiff to hard, silty to
sandy clay, and loose to dense, clayey fine sand and silty fine sand.
6.2.3. Santiago Formation
The Santiago Formation is present in the hillside on the western side of the site, and un-
derlying the alluvium at the site. The Santiago Formation was encountered in borings B-2,
B-5, B-6, B-8, B-11, B-12, B-13, and B-15 from a depth of5 feet to the maximum depth
4600001R Alga Norte Park. doc 4
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
September 9, 2002
Project No. 104600001
explored of 51.3 feet. In general, the Santiago Formation materials consist of light gray
to brown, damp to moist, moderately to strongly cemented clayey siltstone and strongly
indurated claystone.
6.3. Rippability
Based on our subsurface exploration of the site, the on-site materials are expected to be rip-
pable with normal heavy-duty earthmoving equipment.
6.4. Groundwater
Groundwater was encountered in exploratory borings B-11 and B-14, at depths of 17 and 18
feet, respectively, below the ground surface. Fluctuations in the groundwater level may oc-
cur due to variations in ground surface topography, subsurface geologic conditions and
structure, rainfall, irrigation, and other factors.
6.5. Faulting and Seismicity
The project area is considered to be seismically active, as is most of southern California.
Based on our review of the referenced geologic maps and stereoscopic aerial photographs, as
well as on our geologic field reconnaissance, the subject site is not underlain by known ac-
tive or potentially active faults (i.e., faults that exhibit evidence of ground displacement in
the last 11,000 years and 2,000,000 years, respectively). According to the 1997 Uniform
Building Code (UBC), the proposed project site is within Seismic Zone 4.
In general, hazards associated with seismic activity include; strong ground motion, ground
surface rupture, liquefaction, seismically induced settlement, and tsunamis. These hazards
are discussed in the following sections.
6.5.1. Strong Ground Motion and Ground Surface Rupture
Based on a Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment for the Western United States, issued
by the United States Geological Survey (1999), the project site is located in a zone where
4600001R Alga Norte Parlcdoc 5
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
September 9, 2002
Project No. I 04600001
the horizontal peak ground acceleration having a 10 percent probability of being exceeded
in 50 years is 0.27g. Based on the California Division of Mines and Geology Map
Sheet 48 (1999), the horizontal peak ground acceleration having a 10 percent probability
of being exceeded in 50 years is between 0.20g and 0.30g. The requirements of the gov-
erning jurisdictions and applicable building codes should be considered in the project
design. The closest known active fault is the Rose Canyon Fault located approximately
7 miles southwest of the site. The Rose Canyon Fault has an assigned maximum earth-
quake magnitude of 6.9 (California Division of Mines and Geology, 1998).
Based on our review of the referenced literature and our site reconnaissance, no active faults
are known to cross the project site. Therefore, the potential for ground rupture due to faulting
at the site is considered low. However, lurching or cracking of the ground surface as a result
of nearby seismic events is possible.
6.5.2. Liquefaction and Seismically Induced Settlement
Liquefaction of cohesionless soils can be caused by strong vibratory motion due to
earthquakes. Research and historical data indicate that loose granular soils and non-
plastic silts that are saturated by a relatively shallow groundwater table are susceptible
to liquefaction. Some loose granular alluvium was encountered within the upper 12 feet
at the site. Recommendations are provided herein to remove and recompact the upper
12 feet or more of alluvium in structural areas. After these materials are mitigated, it
is our opinion that the potential for liquefaction and seismically induced settlement in
structural areas at the subject site is low.
6.5.3. Tsunamis
Tsunamis are long wavelength seismic sea waves (long compared to the ocean depth)
generated by sudden movements of the ocean bottom during submarine earthquakes,
landslides, or volcanic activity. Based on the inland location of the site, the potential for
damage due to tsunami is considered nil.
4600001R Alga Norte Park.doc 6
---
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey September 9, 2002
I Alga Norte Community Park Project No. I 0460000 I
I 6.6. Landsliding
I Based on our review of published ge
logic reconnaissance, no landslides or
ologic literature and aerial photographs, and our geo-
related features are known to underlie the subject site.
I 7. UBC SEISMIC DESIGN PARAM ETERS
I Table I includes the seismic design param eters for the site as defined in, and for use with, the
1997 edition of the UBC (ICBO, 1997).
I Table 1-Se ismic Design Parameters
I Parameter
Seismic Zone Factor, Z
Soil Profile Type
Value 1997 UBC Reference
0.40 Table 16-I
Sn Table 16-J
I Seismic Coefficient C,
Seismic Coefficient C
0.44N, Table 16-Q
0.64N Table 16-R
Near-Source Factor, N 1.0 Table 16-S
I Near-Source Factor, N
Seismic Source Type
1.0 Table 16-T
B Table 16-U
I 8. CONCLUSIONS
I Based on our review of the referenced ba
face evaluation, and laboratory testing, it
ckground data, geologic field reconnaissance, subsur-
is our opinion that construction of the proposed project
I is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint
our field evaluation, the project site is not
. Based on our review of published geologic maps and
underlain by faults or landslides. In our opinion, how-
I ever, the following geotechnical factors
project design and construction.
will be significant in the planning of the proposed
I • Loose alluvial soils are present on the
their present condition unless compact
site. These soils are not suitable for structural support in
ed to the specified criteria. Recommendations are pre-
I sented herein for remedial grading of th
• Some of the alluvium and materials of th
is material.
e Santiago Formation on site may possess a medium to
I high expansion potential. Recommenda
to structures resulting from swelling an
tions are presented herein to minimize possible damage
d shrinkage ofthese materials.
• Based on the provided preliminary con I for the future aquatics center may be un
ceptual plan for the subject park, some of the structures
derlain by a cut/fill transition and subject to differential
I 4600001R Alga Norte Park. doc
l(iD90&/ft.OOre
7
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
September 9, 2002
Project No. 104600001
settlement. Recommendations are provided herein to mitigate the potential for differential set-
tlement across cut/fill transitions.
• Groundwater was encountered in exploratory borings B-11 and B-14, at depths of 17 and
18 feet, respectively, below the ground surface. Due to the depth of the groundwater, it is not
expected to be a constraint to construction
• Based on resistivity test results and Caltrans criteria, the site soils may be corrosive to ferrous
materials.
9. RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on our understanding of the project, the following preliminary recommendations are pro-1 vided for the design and construction of the proposed project. When plans for the proposed project
are completed, a supplemental geotechnical evaluation may be needed.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
9.1. Earthwork
In general, earthwork should be performed in accordance with the recommendations pre-
sented in this report. The geotechnical consultant should be contacted for questions
regarding the recommendations or guidelines presented herein. In addition, Typical Earthwork
Guidelines for the project are included as Appendix C. In the event of a conflict in recommen-
dations, the recommendations presented in the text of this report supersede those in
Appendix C.
9.1.1. Site Preparation
The project site should be cleared and grubbed prior to grading. Clearing and grubbing
should consist of the removal of vegetation and other deleterious materials, such as trash
and debris, from the areas to be graded. Clearing and grubbing should extend to the out-
side of the proposed excavation and fill areas. The debris generated during clearing and
grubbing should be removed from areas to be graded and disposed of off site at a legal
dumpsite.
460000 I R Alga Norte Park_ doc 8
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
9.1.2. Treatment of Alluvial Soils
September 9, 2002
Project No. 104600001
We recommend that alluvial soils in structural areas be removed to a depth of 12 feet, or
within 5 feet of groundwater, and replaced with compacted fill. The base of the removal
excavation should extend 5 feet plus the depth of the removal beyond the structural ar-
eas. The areal extent of, and depths to which the alluvium should be removed, should be
evaluated by the geotechnical consultant's representative in the field based on the mate-
rials exposed. Any unsuitable materials such as organic matter or oversized material
should be selectively removed and disposed of off site.
We understand that 10 to 15 feet of fill may be placed over portions of the site. In
structural areas, where the alluvial soils have been removed and replaced with com-
pacted fill, the estimated settlements may be approximately I inch. In non-structural
areas, where remedial work is not performed, the estimated settlements may be up to
approximately 5 inches.
9.1.3. Treatment of Expansive Soils
Because of the expansion potential of the more clayey on-site soils, we recommend that
building foundations, floor slabs, and exterior slabs-on-grade be supported on 3 or more
feet of compacted low-expansion potential soil (UBC Expansion Index of 50 or less). In
cut areas, where potentially expansive soil is exposed at or within 4.5 feet of finish sub-
grade level, this will necessitate that the formational materials be undercut 4.5 feet and
replaced with compacted low-expansion potential on-site or imported sandy soil, such
that there is 4.5 feet of low expansive material below finish grade. Similarly, in fill ar-
eas, the upper 4.5 feet of the finish sub grade soils should be a compacted low-expansion
potential on-site or imported sandy soil. Soils for use beneath foundations or floor slabs
should comply with the recommendations presented in section 9.1.6 Materials for Fill.
The low-expansion potential soil layer should extend 5 feet or more beyond the pe-
rimeter limits of proposed building areas and adjoining exterior slabs-on-grade.
4600001R AlgaN()fte Parkdoc 9
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
9.1.4. Treatment of Cut/Fill Transitions Beneath Structures
September 9, 2002
Project No. I 0460000 I
In order to mitigate the potential for differential settlement, we recommend that where a
cut/fill transition line extends beneath a proposed building location, the cut portion of
the pad should be undercut an amount one-third or more of the deepest fill depth be-
neath the structure and replaced with compacted fill. The undercut should be extended
outward from the building footprint a distance of 5 feet plus the depth of undercut.
9.1.5. Excavation Characteristics
The results of our field exploration program indicate that the project site, as presently pro-
posed, is underlain by alluvium and materials of the Santiago Formation. The on-site
materials should generally be excavatable by heavy-duty earthmoving equipment in good
working condition.
9.1.6. Materials for Fill
On-site soils free of organic materials are suitable for use as fill. Trash or debris should be
selectively removed prior to use as fill. Fill material should not contain rocks or lumps
over 6 inches in largest dimension, and not more than 40 percent larger than 1-1/2 inches.
Utility trench backfill material should not contain rocks or lumps over 3 inches in largest
dimension and not more than 40 percent larger than 1-1/2 inches. Larger chunks, if gener-
ated during excavation, may be broken into acceptably sized pieces or disposed of off site.
Any imported fill material should be a low or very low expansion potential (UBC Expan-
sion Index of 50 or less) granular soil. Import material should also have a low corrosion
potential (minimum resistivity greater than 2,000 ohm-em, chloride content less than
200 parts per million (ppm], and soluble sulfate content of less than 0.1 percent). Mate-
rials for use as fill should be evaluated by the geotechnical consultant's representative
prior to filling or importing.
9.1.7. Compacted Fill
Prior to placement of compacted fill, the contractor should request an evaluation of the
exposed ground surface by the geotechnical consultant. Unless otherwise recommended,
4600001R Alga Norte Park. doc 10
-$-a-2 Approximate io::otion of exploratory boring
Qaf Fill
0 300 600
Qal Alluvium
TS Soc,;icgo Formotion scale feet
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I ~ ~ g
0 "' I "
I
I
I
0 30 eo
_,.le miles
-•
\.
FAULT LOCATION MAP
ALGA NORTE COMMUNITY PARK
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
' \
------------~ rPi"fRii,OJ~E~CT;;;'N'i-0~-+-~D~AT~E~_j ( FIGU3RE ) 1 04600001 9/02 --
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
APPENDIX A
BORING LOGS
Fjeld Procedure for the Collection of Disturbed Samples
September 9, 2002
Project No. 104600001
Disturbed soil samples were obtained in the field using the following methods.
Bulk Samples
Bulk samples of representative earth materials were obtained from the exploratory excava-
tions. The samples were bagged and transported to the laboratory for testing.
The Standard Penetration Test (SPD Spoon
Disturbed drive samples of earth materials were obtained by means of a Standard Penetra-
tion Test spoon sampler. The sampler is composed of a split barrel with an external diameter
of 2 inches and an unlined internal diameter of 1-3/8 inches. The spoon was driven into the
ground 12 to 18 inches with a 140-pound hammer free-falling from a height of 30 inches in
general accordance with ASTM D 1586-99. The blow counts were recorded for every 6 inches
of penetration; the blow counts reported on the logs are those for the last 12 inches of penetra-
tion. Soil samples were observed and removed from the spoon, bagged, sealed and
transported to the laboratory for testing.
Fjeld Procedure for the Collection of Relatively Undisturbed Samples
Relatively undisturbed soil samples were obtained in the field using the following method.
The Modified Split-Barrel Drive Sampler
The sampler, with an external diameter of 3.0 inches, was lined with l-inch long, thin brass
rings with inside diameters of approximately 2.4 inches. The sample barrel was driven into
the ground with the weight of a 140-pound hammer, in general accordance with ASTM
D 3550-84. The driving weight was permitted to fall freely. The approximate length of the
fall, the weight of the hammer, and the number of blows per foot of driving are presented on
the boring logs as an index to the relative resistance of the materials sampled. The samples
were removed from the sample barrel in the brass rings, sealed, and transported to the labo-
ratory for testing.
4600001R Alga Norte Park
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
U.S.C.S. METHOD OF SOIL CLASSIFICATION
MAJOR DIVISIONS SYMBOL TYPICAL NAMES
GW Well graded gravels or gravel-sand mixtures little or no
fines
GRAVELS GP Poorly graded gravels or gravel-sand mixtures, little or
(More than 1/2 of coarse 1-------J.!n!!o~fi!.!.m!.!.e::;s:_ ________________ -1
fraction
>No.4 sieve size) GM Silty gravels, gravel-sand-silt mixtures
GC Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures
sw Well graded sands or gravelly sands, little or no fines
SANDS SP Poorly graded sands or gravelly sands, little or no fines (More than 1/2 of coarse
fraction 1-----+---------------------t
SM Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures <No.4 sieve size)
SILTS & CLAYS
Liquid Limit <50
SILTS & CLAYS
Liquid Limit >50
IDGHLY ORGANIC SOILS
sc
ML
CL
OL
MH
CH
OH
Pt
Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures
Inorganic silts and very fine sands, rock flour, silty or
clavev fine sands or clayey silts with slight olasticitv
Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly
clays, sandy clays, silty clays, lean clays
Organic silts and organic silty clays of low plasticity
Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine sandy or
siltv soils elastic silts
Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays
Organic clays of medium to high plasticity, organic silty
clays, organic silts
Peat and other highly organic soils
CLASSIFICATION CHART (Unified Soil Classification System)
RANGE OF GRAIN SIZES 70 CLASSIFICATION U.S. Standard
Sieve Size
BOULDERS Above 12"
COBBLES 12" to 3"
GRAVEL 3" to No.4
Coarse 3"to 3/4"
Fine 3/4" to No.4
SAND No. 4 to No. 200
Coarse No.4 to No. 10
Medium No. 10 to No. 40
Fine No. 40 to No. 200
SILT&CLAY Below No. 200
GRAIN SIZE CHART
uses Classification Chartdol:
Grain Si2e in
Millimeters
Above 305
305 to 76.2
76.2 to 4.76
76.2 to 19.1
19.1 to 4.76
4.76 to 0.074
4.76 to 2.00
2.00 to 0.420
0.420 to 0.074
Below0.074
60 ...
~50
~ 40
;!;
~so u Iii 20 :5
.. 10
0
/ v /
/ CH / " / / v CL v MH&OH
-/ / "
ML&OL
o 10 ~ so 40 oo eo ro eo oo ~
UQUlD LIMIT (LL),%
PLASTICITY CHART
U.S.C.S. METHOD OF SOIL CLASSIFICATION
I "' UJ --' u::-0,_ :;; ~ 0 z
<( 1-e:. 0
I a; "' 0 ;::
~ 0 UJ ~ <(uj
LL 0:: o·
J: U; ~ u; L.i:~ 1-:;;: 1-z -rn 0,_ "' w rn·
UJ 0 6 0 "'~ 0 --' :'1 I III :;; >-0:: 0 0
I
DATE DRILLED
GROUND ELEVATION
METHOD OF DRILLING
DRIVE WEIGHT
SAMPLED BY LOGGED BY
Dashed line denotes material change.
Modified split-barrel drive sampler.
BORING NO. SYMBOL SAMPLES
SHEET OF
DROP -------
REVIEWED BY
No recovery with modified split-barrel drive sampler.
Seepage.
Groundwater encountered during drilling.
Groundwater measured after drilling.
Sample retained by others.
Standard Penetration Test (SPT).
No recovery with a SPT.
Shelby tube sample. Distance pushed in inches/length of sample recovered
in inches.
No recovery with Shelby tube sampler.
Bulk sample.
Continuous Push Sample.
"' w ...J n_ iZ" ::;; () z
<( f-~ eo. 0 "' 0 i= 0 w ~ ...J <Co:i ~ c:: 0 ()•
:J u; ID u::~ s: f-z ::;; -C/)
"' w >-C/)· 0 i5 0 (/) f/):J ...J <( ID ::;; >-...J c:: ()
0
20
49 10.4 108.6
45
DATE DRILLED 08/05/02 BORING NO. B-1
GROUND ELEVATION 170'+ (MSL) SHEET OF
METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow~Stem Auger
DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. (Auto Tri£ Hammer} DROP 30"
SAMPLED BY EP LOGGED BY EP REVIEWED BY RI
yellowish brown, damp, stiff to very stiff, fine-grained sandy CLAY and medium
to dense, clayey fine SAND.
Hard to dense.
ell•owishbrown, damP."' dense,clayey fiiteSANti;iffinoXIde slaiiillig;willtesiTt clusters
approximately 114" in diameter.
Groundwater not encountered during drilling.
Backftlled on 08/05/02.
"> "' t
(}) I.U -' "-LL" ::;: ~ (.) z
<( 1-~ !';. 0 (}) 0 ;:: 0 w ~ -' (}0 ~ a: 0
::l (jj CD -Ll ::;: u.· s 1-z -If>
(}) w >-(f)· 0 5 0 (}) (J):::l
-' :"i CD ::;: ir (.)
0
CL
21 17.8 95.9
36
72
32
5014"
DATE DRILLED 08106102 BORING NO.
GROUND ELEVATION 150'± (MSL) SHEET ---
METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow-Stem Auger
DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs, (Auto TriE Hammer) DROP
SAMPLED BY EP LOGGED BY EP REVIEWED BY
ALLUVIUM:
Brown, damp, stiff, sandy CLAY.
SANTIAGO FORMATION:
Light gray, damp, moderately cemented, sandy SILTSTONE.
Iron oxide staining.
I Gro•mdwater not enconntered during drilling.
Backfilled on 08/06/02.
JYingo&l(too~•
B-2
OF
30"
Rl
(f) w _J iL 0. :;; ~ () z
4; e-~ 0 (f) 0 F'. 0 w ~ _J 4;(f) u. a: 0 u· (ij ::J u; ID u::q :;; s: e-z >--U>
(f) w (f)• 0 6 0 (f) w"' _J :.'i ID :;; >-a: ()
0
31
19 12.1 106.7
33
26 16.9 111.2
27
DATE DRILLED 08/05/02 BORING NO.
GROUND ELEVATION 135'± (MSL) SHEET
METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Ho1low-Stem Auger
DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. (Auto TriE Hannner) DROP
SAMPLED BY EP LOGGED BY EP REVIEWED BY
brown, moist, hard, fme-grained sandy CLAY.
yellow; iron-oxide staining; a few clay layers.
Groundwater not encountered during drilling.
Backfilled on 08/05/02.
!flngo&/(t&&~e
B-3
OF
30"
RI
I "' w -' a. 1L ::; ~ 0 z
<( ,_ ~ 0
"' 0 F. 0 w ~ (]~ u.. "' iil ::::> (jj u:q ;;: ,_ z roCf.! (f) w 0 0 0 (f)=>
-' :5 "' ::; ~ 0 0
12 12.1 89.8
28
33 17.4 110.3
22
23 19.4 106.1
DATE DRILLED 08/06/02 BORING NO. B-4
GROUND ELEVATION :_:14"'0.='+-"(M:o:S'-'L:L) -----SHEET I OF --'---
METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow-Stem Auger
DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. (Auto Trip Hammer) DROP 30"
SAMPLED BY EP LOGGED BY EP REVIEWED BY -~~-DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION
Rl
--damP, !lard, fine sandy cO. Y andme<ilum dense,fme Clayey SAND~----
Dark brown; scattered roots.
Brown; iron oxide staining.
Yellowish brown; very stiff; increase in sand content.
Groundwater not encountered during drilling.
Backfilled on 08/06/02.
(/) w ...J 0.. u:-::!' ~ 0 z
<( >--!!,. 0 a; (/) 0 >= ~ 0 w ~ ...J <(en iii a: 0 o·
::J u; "' ~~ :;;: >--z ::!' -<IJ (/) w >-(/)• 0 6 0 (/) "'"' ...J :5 "' ::!' it: 0 0
CL
18 13.3 94.3
19
36 14.8 112.6
16
79111"
DATE DRILLED 08/06/02 BORING NO.
GROUND ELEVATION 165'+ (MSL) SHEET 1
METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Ho11ow-Stem Auger
DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. (Auto TriE Hammer~ DROP
SAMPLED BY EP LOGGED BY EP REVIEWED BY
DESCRIPTION/INTERPRETATION
very stiff, sandy silty CLAY; some rootlets.
Hard.
Very stiff.
SANTIAGO FORMATION:
Light gray, damp, moderately cemented, sandy SILTSTONE.
Groundwater not encountered during drilling.
Backfilled on 08/06/02.
B-5
OF
30"
Rl
I (f) w ...J a. u:-;;: () z
I if <! ,_ ~ !!,_ 0 (f) 0 i= ~ 0 w ~ ...J <.:ui "-"' 0 o· iii :::> Cii "' -0 ::; .,_. ;;: ,_ z -rn (f) w >-(f)•
I 0 6 Q (f) rn=> ...J :5 "' ;;: >-"' ()
Q
I
I
I 25 13.1 109.6
I
I 20
84/11"
63
5015" 16.0 108.7
DATE DRILLED 08/06/02 BORING NO. B-6
GROUND ELEVATION 145'±(MSL) SHEET I OF
METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow-Stem Auger
DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. {Auto TriE Harrnnerl DROP 30"
SAMPLED BY EP LOGGED BY EP REVIEWED BY Rl
Brown, damp, very stiff, sandy CLAY; trace iron-oxide staining.
damp, moderately cemented, SILTSTONE;
Weakly cemented.
Groundwater not encountered during drilling.
Backfilled on 08/06/02.
I (f) w DATE DRILLED BORING NO. -' 08106102 B-7 Q_ iL ::;; ~ u z
I 'if <( I-~ 0 GROUND ELEVATION 135'±(MSL) SHEET OF (f) 0 ~uj ~ 0 w ~ u. a:: u· i/j :::> iii -0 METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow·Stem Auger u. . :;: I-z -(/)
(f) w (f)·
I 0 5 0 (f):::l
-' :5 DRIVE WEIGHT 140 Ibs. (Auto Trip Hannner) DROP 30" "' ::;; >-a:: u 0 SAMPLED BY EP LOGGED BY EP REVIEWED BY Rl
I ALLUVIUM:
Brown, damp, very stiff, sandy CLAY.
I
I 19 10.2 101.9
I
10
I 21
I
31 16.5 109.1 Hard.
I
28 Increase in sand content; scattered iron-oxide staining.
19 19.3 108.3
(f) w ...J "-G:: :. ~ () z
m-<>: f-~ 0 (f) 0 >= ~ 0 w ~ ...J (S0 "-a: 0 en :::J Ui co u::~ ;;: f-z :. -<n (f) w >-(f)• 0 6 0 (f) oo:::J ...J :3 co :. >-a: ()
0
SM
14
24 3.1 95.4
32
47
DATE DRILLED 08/06/02 BORING NO.
GROUND ELEVATION 160'+ (MSL) SHEET ---
METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow-Stem Auger
DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. {Auto Trie: Hammer~ DROP
SAMPLED BY EP LOGGED BY EP REVIEWED BY
ALLUVIUM:
Very pale brown, damp, loose, fine silty SAND.
Medium dense.
Slightly clayey.
SANTIAGO FORMATION:
Very pale brown, damp, weakly cemented, silty SANDSTONE.
Groundwater not encountered during drilling.
Backfilled on 08/06/02.
B-8
OF
30"
Rl
(}) w --' 0.. u::-::;: ~ 0 z
~ <i 1-'<> 0 l (}) 0 F. 0 ~ --' w 0 <3~ "-0:: (ij ::> u; m -0 ::;: "-. s: 1-z >--UJ (}) w (})• 0 6 0 (}) (})::> --' ::s m ::;: >-0: 0 0
SM
42 CL
23 15.5
17
17 25.8 95.7
17
DATE DRILLED 08/05/02 BORING NO. B-9
GROUND ELEVATION 125'+ (MSL) SHEET OF
METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow-Stem Auger
DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. (Auto Trip Hammer) DROP 30"
SAMPLED BY EP LOGGED BY EP REVIEWED BY RI
ALLUVIUM:
Dark brown, dry, dense, silty SAND.
diiiijl, hard, S!IiY sandy-CIAY;white silt Clusters appn:ixiiiiately - - - - - - -
1/4" in diameter.
Very stiff.
Light yellowish brown.
I "' w -' "-::;
I ~ ;Ji
~
I
G:'
~ (.) .... e:_ 0 0 w ~ -'
)ij lY 0
::::> u; "' ::; ;;: .... z >-0 "' w "' -' 0 0
"' ::; ir 0
I
I
I 26
I
10
I 23
I
DATE DRILLED 08/06/02 BORING NO. B-10
z 0 GROUND ELEVATION 15()+ (MSL) SHEET OF ;::: <((/j u· _(.) METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hol1ow-Stem Auger "-. -<I) <!)•
"'::::> :5 DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. (Auto Trip Hammer) DROP 30"
(.)
SAMPLED BY EP LOGGED BY EP REVIEWED BY Rl
sc ALLUVIUM:
Brown, damp, medium dense, fme clayey SAND.
cL -damP, ve,.Ystiff,san<JY co.v.-------------------
Groundwater not encountered during drilling.
Backfilled on 08/06/02.
U) w _J lL a. ::; ~ 0 z
<( ,_ l'=. 0 w U) 0 _J ;::_
!!S 0 w i': 0 <(U) ~ n: o· iii "' i:i:~ U) :::> ::; ;;: ,_ z -U) U) w >-U)• 0 0 Cl U) w=> _J ::; "' ::; >-n: 0 Cl
26
27
II
19 22.2 104.4
DATE DRILLED 08/06/02 BORING NO. B-11
GROUND ELEVATION 120'±(MSL) SHEET OF
METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow-Stem Auger
DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. (Auto Trip Hammer) DROP 30"
SAMPLED BY EP LOGGED BY EP REVIEWED BY Rl
ALLUVIUM:
Brown, moist, very stiff, CLAY.
Hard.
Yellowish brown; wet; stiff; sandy clay.
Brown; sanuated; very stiff; small sand clusters approximately 112" in diameter.
Groundwater encountered at approximately 17' during drilling.
Backfilled on 08/06/02.
I 'f) w -' a_ u:-:;; ~ 0
I 'af <i 1--~ 'f) 0 ~ 0 w ~ )Ji c:t: :::> u; ;;: 1--z 'f) w
I 0 5 0 -' "' :;; >-c:t:
0
I
I
I 29
I
I 28 5.7
5015''
I
I 50/2" 12.7
I
81110"
z 0 F. <iW o· -0 "-. -w (/)·
(/):::>
:5 0
DATE DRILLED 08/05/02 BORING NO. B-12
GROUND ELEVATION 125'+ (MSL) SHEET OF ---
METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow-Stem Auger
DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. (Auto TriE Hammer) DROP 30"
SAMPLED BY EP LOGGED BY EP REVIEWED BY
ALLUVIUM:
Reddish brown, damp, medium dense, silty SAND.
White silt clusters approximately 1/4" in diameter.
SANTIAGO FORMATION:
Light gray, moist, moderately cemented, sandy SILTSTONE.
Groundwater not encountered during drilling.
Backfilled on 08/05/02.
Rl
(/) w ..J a. u:-::; ~ '-' <( ,_ ~ ;; (/) 0 ~ 0 w ~ ..J
iii « 0
:::> c;; <D
;;: ,_ z ::;
(/) w >-0 0 0 (/)
..J <D ::; fr 0
63
28 13.7 112.0
79
DATE DRILLED 08/06/02 BORING NO. B-13
z
0 GROUND ELEVATION 145'+ (MSL) SHEET OF ;::_
<((/) ---
u· u::~ METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Ho1low-Stem Auger -(/) (/)• (/):::>
:"i DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. (Auto Tri~ Hammer) DROP 30"
'-'
SAMPLED BY EP LOGGED BY EP REVIEWED BY RI
SC ALLUVIUM:
Grayish brown, damp, dense, fine clayey SAND.
--d~ha~aAv.--------------------
Brown.
cemented, SILTSTONE; with reddish brown stains.
Groundwater not encountered during drilling.
Backfilled on 08/06/02.
(f)
UJ .../ 0.. G:" ::;; ~ L) z
~ "" ,_ e:. 0 (f) 0 ;::: g 0 UJ ~ .../ ()~ u. 0:: 0
iii :J Cii "' -Ll ::;; .... :;;: ,_ z -(f)
(f) w )-(f)• 0 6 0 (f) (f):J
.../ :) "' ::;; )-
0:: L)
0
CL
38 10.1 118.9
27
21 16.9 111.5
12
28
DATE DRILLED 08/05/02 BORING NO. B-14
GROUND ELEVATION 110'+ (MSL) SHEET OF
METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow·Stem Auger
DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. {Auto TriJ:! Hammer) DROP 30"
SAMPLED BY EP LOGGED BY REVIEWED BY Rl
ALLUVIUM:
Dark yellowish brown, damp, hard, fme-grained sandy CLAY.
Pale brown; very stiff.
i'i!hfhro,Vi:tishgTiiy:Sa!lirate.J,Toose-;-siltyciayey sAND.------------
Groundwater encountered at approximately 18 feet during drilling.
Backfilled on 08/05/02.
I (/) w DATE DRILLED BORING NO. ...J 08/05/02 B-15 "-[L :;; ;R () z
1if " f-~ 0 GROUND ELEVATION 110'+ (MSL) SHEET OF 2 I (/) 0 !!-;:: ~ 0 w /: 6 «en u. cr u· Ci5 ::::> en "' u:~ METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow-Stem Auger ;;: f-z ~ -(/)
(/) w (/)• 0 6 0 (J) (/):::>
I ...J :5 DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lbs. (Auto TriE: Hammer~ DROP 30" <0 :;; >-cr () 0 SAMPLED BY EP LOGGED BY EP REVIEWED BY Rl
I
31 15.9 107.5
22 Very stiff; increase in fme sand content.
26 19.2 108.3 Dark yellowish brown.
83/11"
Light gray, cemented, clayey sandy SILTSTONE.
5015" 13.6 114.6 Iron-oxide staining.
75110" brown; little iron-oxide staining; moderately cemented.
5015" 16.5 98.2
(/) w ...J 0.. lL :::; ~ l) z
~ <( ,_ e:. 0 (/) 0 i= . ~ 0 i': ...J w 0 <((/) "-0:: o· en Cii "' u:~ :::> :::; ;;: ,_ z >--(/)
(/) w (/)• 0 i5 0 (/) "'"' ...J :3 "' :::; >-0:: l)
0
5015"
5015"
8819"
DATE DRILLED 08/05/02 BORING NO.
GROUND ELEVATION 110'+ (MSL)
METHOD OF DRILLING 8" Diameter Hollow-Stem Auger
DRIVE WEIGHT 140 lhs. (Auto Trip Hammer)
SAMPLED BY EP LOGGED BY
to light red (mottled).
I Groutndwaternot encountered during drilling.
Backfilled on 08/05/02.
EP
SHEET 2
DROP
REVIEWED BY
B-15
OF 2
30"
Rl
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
Classification
APPENDIXB
LABORATORY TESTING
September 9, 2002
Project No. I 04600001
Soils were visually and texturally classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification
System (USCS) in general accordance with ASTM D 2488-00. Soil classifications are indicated
on the logs of the exploratory excavations in Appendix A.
In-Place Moisture and Density Tests
The moisture content and dry density of relatively undisturbed samples obtained from the ex-
ploratory excavations were evaluated in general accordance with ASTM D 2937-00. The test
results are presented on the logs of the exploratory excavations in Appendix A.
Gradation Analysis
A gradation analysis test was performed on a selected representative soil sample in general ac-
cordance with ASTM D 422-63. The grain-size distribution curve is shown on Figure B-1. The test
results were utilized in evaluating the soil classifications in accordance with the Unified Soil
Classification System.
Consolidation Tests
Consolidation tests were performed on selected relatively undisturbed soil samples in general
accordance with ASTM D 2435-96. The samples were inundated during testing to represent ad-
verse field conditions. The percent of consolidation for each load cycle was recorded as a ratio of
the amount of vertical compression to the original height of the sample. The results of the tests
are summarized on Figures B-2 through B-5.
Direct Shear Tests
A direct shear test was performed on an undisturbed sample in general accordance with ASTM
D 3080-98 to evaluate the shear strength characteristics of selected materials. The sample was
inundated during shearing to represent adverse field conditions. The results are shown on Fig-
ure B-6.
Expansion Index Tests
The expansion index of selected materials was evaluated in general accordance with U.B.C.
Standard No. 18-2. A specimen was molded under a specified compactive energy at approxi-
mately 50 percent saturation (plus or minus 1 percent). The prepared l-inch thick by 4-inch
diameter specimen was loaded with a surcharge of 144 pounds per square foot and inundated
4600001R Alga Norte Park doc Rev. 05/02
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wim~er Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
September 9, 2002
Project No. 104600001
with tap water. Readings of volumetric swell were made for a period of 24 hours. The results of
this test are presented on Figure B-7.
Soil Corrosivity Tests
Soil pH, and minimum resistivity tests were performed on a representative sample in general ac-
cordance with California Test (CT) 643. The chloride content of the selected sample was
evaluated in general accordance with CT 422. The sulfate content of the selected sample was
evaluated in general accordance with CT 417. The test results are presented on Figure B-8.
4600001R Alga Norte Park.doc Rev. 05102
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I GRAVEL I SAND I FINES
I Coarse Fine I Coarse Medium I Fine I Silt Clay I
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER
3" 1·112" ,. 314" 1/2" 3/8" 4 8 16 30 50 100 200
100
1:
I I I I I I I I
90 I I : I I
il: I : I : I I : : 1\ : I
80 Ill I I I I I I I I ~ I
>-70 11:
I iII ' 1\ " I I I I I I I I I w ;< 60 I lo il; I I I I
0: 50 I I I I I I I I I w
11: I I I I I I I I I I z "' I I I I I >-40 z w
IJ! I I I I I I I I I I IE w 30 ~ "i I I I I I I I I I I
20
1;
I I I I I
I I I I I I I I I I 10 I
1:
I I I I I I I I I
0 I I I I I
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 0.0001
GRAIN SIZE IN MILliMETERS
Symbol Hole No. Depth Uquid Plastic Plasticity D,o D,. Deo c" C,
Passing u.s.c.s (It) Limit Limit Index No. 200
(%)
• B-11 15.0-16.5 - - - - - -- -52 CL
PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 422-63
GRADATION TEST RESULTS
-JYIR90&/(t.OOre _ Alga Norte Community Park
Carlsbad, California
r PROJECT NO. DATE '(FIGURE)
.) \. 104600001 8/02 ) 8·1
SVB11@15-165.ds
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
z 0 o;
§
~ ~ 0 ~ w -' a. ~
u. 0
!z ~ g;
z 0 ~ :::;
0 (/)
i5 0
0.1
-4.0
-3.0
-2.0
-1.0
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
11.0
12.0
13.0
14.0
15.0
16.0
17.0
18.0
19.0
20.0
__ .. __ _
• • __ .. __ _
STRESS IN KIPS PER SQUARE FOOT
1.0
Seating Cycle
Loading Prior to Inundation
Loading After Inundation
Rebound Cycle
10.0
Boring No.
Depth (fl.)
Soil Type
B-5
5.0-6.5
CL
100.0
PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 2435-96
CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
~Jtlnuo&l(too~•-Alga Norte Community Park
Carlsbad, California
~ /t-_P_R_O_J_E_C_T_N_O_. -1--D_A_T_E_-1, (FIGURE)
'----------------' 104600001 8/02 I B-2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
en en w 2 0 ~
w ..J a. ~
u.. 0
1-z w 0 "' w a. z 0 ~ D
::J 0 en z 0 0
-3.0
-2.0
-1.0
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
11.0
12.0
13.0
14.0
15.0
16.0
17.0
18.0
19.0
20.0
0.1
STRESS IN KIPS PER SQUARE FOOT
1.0
--.. --. Seating Cycle
• Loading Prior to Inundation
• Loading After Inundation
--.. --. Rebound Cycle
10.0
Boring No.
Depth (ft.)
Soil Type
B-5
15.0-16.5
CL
100.0
PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM 0 2435-96
CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Alga Norte Community Park
Carlsbad, California
I 11-_P_R_O:._J:._E:._C_T_N_O_. -1----D_A_T_E __ "\-1 (FIGURE)
'----------------../'I 104600001 8/02 J B-3
CNB5015-16.5Jds
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
"' "' w ~ u ~ w -' 0. ~
u. 0 ,... z w u 0: ~ z 0 ~ ::J g z
8
-3.0
-2.0
-1.0
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
11.0
12.0
13.0
14.0
15.0
16.0
17.0
0.1
STRESS IN KIPS PER SQUARE FOOT
1.0 10.0 100.0
1 18.0
I
I
I
I
I
I
19.0
20.0
--.. --. Seating Cycle
Loading Prior to Inundation
4 Loading After Inundation
--.. --. Rebound Cycle
Boring No.
Depth (ft.)
Soil Type
B-11
5.0-6.5
CL
PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM 0 2435-96
CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Alga Norte Community Park
Carlsbad, California
1 /1-_P_R_O_J_E_C_T_N_O_. -1--D_A_T_E_--1, (FIGURE)
'-------------------------------~''-~1~0~46~0~00~0~1--~--~8~/0~2----~' 84
SVB 11Q5-6.5.xls
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
z 0 o;
§
(/) (/)
LU ~ (.)
J: f-
LU _J
Q_ ~
LL 0
>-z LU (.)
"' LU q. z 0 ~ :::;
0 (/) z 0 (.)
0.1
-4.0
-3.0
-2.0
-1.0
0.0 -
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
11.0
12.0
13.0
14.0
15.0
16.0
17.0
18.0
19.0
20.0
SV811Q15-16.5.xlol
-·
----
STRESS IN KIPS PER SQUARE FOOT
1.0
-·
-
-
--
__ _.___ Seating Cycle
Loading Prior to Inundation
• Loading After Inundation
__ .,. __ . Rebound Cycle
10.0
Boring No.
Depth (ft.)
Soil Type
B-11
10.0-11.5
CL
100.0
PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 2435-96
CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS
Alga Norte Community Park
Carlsbad, California
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4000oo.w..-um
3000
iL VI !!:.
VI VI w II: 2000 1-VI
II: ;5 ::c VI
1000
0 1000 2000 3000 4000
NORMAL STRESS (PSF)
Description Symbol Boring Depth Shear Cohesion Friction Angle Soil Type Number (fl) Strength (psf) (deg)
Siltstone • B-2 5.0-6.5 Peak 165 31 Formation
DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS
~ J(IR90&1f'OO~e _ Alga Norte Community Park
Carlsbad, California
I PROJECT NO. DATE ·(FIGURE)
' 104600001 8/02 B-6
DSB2@5-6.S.xls
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
11
I
I
I
I
I
SAMPLE
LOCATION
B-2
SAMPLE
DEPTH
(FT)
2.0-5.0
EXPANSION INDEX TEST RESULTS
INITIAL COMPACTED
MOISTURE DRY DENSITY
(%) (PCF)
12.4 99.1
FINAL
MOISTURE
(%)
30.9
VOLUMETRIC
SWELL
(IN)
0.078
EXPANSION EXPANSION
INDEX POTENTIAL
78 Medium
PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH UBC STANDARD 18-2
PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 4829-95
EXPANSION INDEX TEST RESULTS
Alga Norte Community Park
Carlsbad, California
~~P~R~O~J=EC=T~N~O~·--+---~D~A~T~E~-~~\cFIGURE)
104600001 8/02 I B-7 '-------------------------' '-~~~~~--~~_, EIB2@2-5Jds
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CORROSIVITY TEST RESULTS
SAMPLE DEPTH RESISTIVITY ' SAMPLE LOCATION pH' (FT) (ohm-em)
B-2 2.0-5.0 6.9 815
• PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH CALIFORNIA TEST METHOD 643
•• PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH CALIFORNIA TEST METHOD 417
'" PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH CALIFORNIA TEST METHOD 422
WATER-50LUBLE
SULFATE
CONTENT IN SOIL ••
{%)
0.005
CHLORIDE
CONTENT-
(ppm)
105
CORROSIVITY TEST RESULTS
_I(IR90&JV'OOre_ Alga Norte Community Park
Carlsbad, California
I PROJECT NO. DATE \(FIGURE)
' 104600001 8102 I B-8
CRB2 2-5.xls "
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
APPENDIXC
TYPICAL EARTHWORK GUIDELINES
September 9, 2002
Project No. 104600001
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
TABLE OF CONTENTS
September 9, 2002
Project No. 104600001
Page
1. GENERAL ................................................................................................................................ !
2. OBLIGATIONS OF PARTIES ................................................................................................ 2
3. SITE PREPARATION ............................................................................................................ .3
4. REMOVALS AND EXCAVATIONS ................................................................................... ..4
5. COMPACTED FILL ................................................................................................................ 4
6. OVERSIZED MATERIAL ...................................................................................................... 7
7. SLOPES .................................................................................................................................... 8
8. TRENCH BACKFILL ............................................................................................................ ll
9. DRAINAGE ........................................................................................................................... 12
10. SITEPROTECTION .............................................................................................................. l3
11. DEFINITIONS OF TERMS ................................................................................................... 16
Figures
Figure A -Fill Slope Over Natural Ground or Cut
Figure B -Transition and Undercut Lot Details
Figure C -Canyon Subdrain Detail
FigureD -Oversized Rock Placement Detail
Figure E -Slope Drainage Detail
Figure F -Shear Key Detail
Figure G -Drain Detail
Document! Rev. 5/02
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
September 9, 2002
Project No. 104600001
TYPICAL EARTHWORK GUIDELINES
1. GENERAL
These Guidelines and the standard details attached hereto are presented as general procedures for
earthwork construction. They are to be utilized in conjunction with the approved grading plans.
These Guidelines are considered a part of the geotechnical report, but are superseded by recom-
mendations in the geotechnical report in the case of conflict. Evaluations performed by the
consultant during the course of grading may result in new recommendations which could super-
sede these specifications and/or the recommendations of the geotechnical report. It is the
responsibility of the contractor to read and understand these Guidelines as well as the geotechni-
cal report and approved grading plans.
1.1. The contractor shall not vary from these Guidelines without prior recommendations
by the geotechnical consultant and the approval of the client or the client's author-
ized representative. Recommendations by the geotechnical consultant and/or client
shall not be considered to preclude requirements for approval by the jurisdictional
agency prior to the execution of any changes.
1.2. The contractor shall perform the grading operations in accordance with these specifi-
cations, and shall be responsible for the quality of the finished product
notwithstanding the fact that grading work will be observed and tested by the geo-
technical consultant.
1.3. It is the responsibility of the grading contractor to notify the geotechnical consultant
and the jurisdictional agencies, as required, prior to the start of work at the site and at
any time that grading resumes after interruption. Each step of the grading operations
shall be observed and documented by the geotechnical consultant and, where neces-
sary, reviewed by the appropriate jurisdictional agency prior to proceeding with
subsequent work.
1.4. If, during the grading operations, geotechnical conditions are encountered which
were not anticipated or described in the geotechnical report, the geotechnical con-
sultant shall be notified immediately and additional recommendations, if applicable,
may be provided.
1.5.
Document!
An as-graded report shall be prepared by the geotechnical consultant and signed by a
registered engineer and certified engineering geologist. The report documents the
geotechnical consultants' observations, and field and laboratory test results, and pro-
vides conclusions regarding whether or not earthwork construction was performed in
Rev. 5/02
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
September 9, 2002
Project No. 104600001
1.6.
1.7.
accordance with the geotechnical recommendations and the grading plans. Recom-
mendations for foundation design, pavement design, subgrade treatment, etc., may
also be included in the as-graded report.
For the purpose of evaluating quantities of materials excavated during grading and/or
locating the limits of excavations, a licensed land surveyor or civil engineer shall be
retained.
Definitions of terms utilized in the remainder of these specifications have been pro-
vided in Section II.
I 2. OBLIGATlONS OF PARTIES
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The parties involved in the projects earthwork activities shall be responsible as outlined in the
following sections.
2. 1. The client is ultimately responsible for all aspects of the project The client or the
client's authorized representative has a responsibility to review the findings and rec-
ommendations of the geotechnical consultant The client shall authorize the
contractor and/or other consultants to perform work and/or provide services. During
grading the client or the client's authorized representative shall remain on site or re-
main reasonably accessible to the concerned parties to make the decisions necessary
to maintain the flow of the project
2.2.
2.3.
2.4.
The contractor is responsible for the safety of the project and satisfactory completion
of grading and other associated operations, including, but not limited to, earthwork in
accordance with the project plans, specifications, and jurisdictional agency require-
ments. During grading, the contractor or the contractor's authorized representative
shall remain on site. The contractor shall further remain accessible at all times, in-
cluding at night and during days off.
The geotechnical consultant shall provide observation and testing services and shall
make evaluations to advise the client on geotechnical matters. The geotechnical con-
sultant shall report findings and recommendations to the client or the client's
authorized representative.
Prior to proceeding with any grading operations, the geotechnical consultant shall be
notified at least two working days in advance to schedule the needed observation and
testing services.
2.4. L Prior to any significant expansion or reduction in the grading operation, the geo-
technical consultant shall be provided with two working days notice to make
appropriate adjustments in scheduling of on-site personneL
2 Rev. 5102
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
September 9, 2002
Project No. 104600001
2.4.2. Between phases of grading operations, the geotechnical consultant shall be pro-
vided with at least two wotking days notice in advance of commencement of
additional grading operations.
3. SITE PREPARATION
Site preparation shall be performed in accordance with the recommendations presented in the
following sections.
3.1. The client, prior to any site preparation or grading, shall arrange and attend a
pre-grading meeting between the grading contractor, the design engineer, the geo-
technical consultant, and representatives of appropriate governing authorities, as well
as any other involved parties. All parties shall be given at least two working days
notice.
3.2. Clearing and grubbing shall consist of the substantial removal of vegetation, brush,
grass, wood, stumps, trees, tree roots greater than 1/2-inch in diameter, and other
deleterious materials from the areas to be graded. Clearing and grubbing shall extend
to the outside of the proposed excavation and fill areas.
3.3.
3.4.
3.5.
Document]
Demolition in the areas to be graded shall include removal of building structures,
foundations, reservoirs, utilities (including underground pipelines, septic tanks, leach
fields, seepage pits, cisterns, etc.), and other manmade surface and subsurface im-
provements, and the backfilling of mining shafts, tunnels and surface depressions.
Demolition of utilities shall include proper capping or rerouting of pipelines at the
project perimeter, and abandonment of wells in accordance with the requirements of
the governing authorities and the recommendations of the geotechnical consultant at
the time of demolition.
The debris generated during clearing, grubbing and/or demolition operations shall be
removed from areas to be graded and disposed of off site at a legal dump site.
Clearing, grubbing, and demolition operations shall be performed under the observa-
tion of the geotechnical consultant.
The ground surface beneath proposed fill areas shall be stripped of loose or unsuit-
able soil. These soils may be used as compacted fill provided they are generally free
of organic or other deleterious materials and approved for use by the geotechnical
consultant. The resulting surface shall be evaluated by the geotechnical consultant
prior to proceeding. The cleared, natural ground surface shall be scarified to a depth
of approximately 8 inches, moisture conditioned, and compacted in accordance with
the specifications presented in Section 5. ofthese Guidelines.
3 Rev 5/02
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
September 9, 2002
Project No. 104600001
3.6. Where fills are to be constructed on hillsides or slopes, topsoil, slope wash, collu-
vium, and other materials deemed unsuitable shall be removed. Where the exposed
slope is steeper than 5 horizontal units to 1 vertical unit, or where recommended by
the geotechnical consultant, the slope of the original ground on which the fill is to be
placed shall be benched and a key as shown on Figure A of this document shall be
provided by the contractor in accordance with the specifications presented in Sec-
tion 7. of this document. The benches shall extend into the underlying bedrock or,
where bedrock is not present, into suitable compacted fill as evaluated by the geo-
technical consultant.
4. REMOVALS AND EXCAVATIONS
Removals and excavations shall be performed as recommended in the following sections.
4.1. Removals
4.1.1. Materials which are considered unsuitable shall be excavated under the observa-
tion of the geotechnical consultant in accordance with the recommendations
contained herein. Unsuitable materials include, but may not be limited to, dry,
loose, soft, wet, organic, compressible natural soils, fractured, weathered, soft
bedrock, and undocumented or otherwise deleterious fill materials.
4.1.2. Materials deemed by the geotechnical consultant to be unsatisfactory due to
moisture conditions shall be excavated in accordance with the recommendations
of the geotechnical consultant, watered or dried as needed, and mixed to a gener-
ally uniform moisture content in accordance with the specifications presented in
Section 5. of this document.
4.2. Excavations
4.2.1. Temporary excavations no deeper than 5 feet in firm fill or natural materials may
be made with vertical side slopes. To satisfY CAL OSHA requirements, any ex-
cavation deeper than 5 feet shall be shored or laid back at a 1:1 inclination or
flatter, depending on material type, if construction workers are to enter the exca-
vation.
5. COMPACTED FILL
Fill shall be constructed as specified below or by other methods recommended by the geotechni-
cal consultant. Unless otherwise specified, fill soils shall be compacted to 90 percent or greater
relative compaction, as evaluated in accordance with ASTM Test Method D 1557-00.
Docwnortl 4 Rev 5/02
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
September 9, 2002
Project No. 104600001
5.1.
5.2.
5.3.
5.4.
5.5.
5.6.
Prior to placement of compacted fill, the contractor shall request an evaluation of the
exposed ground surface by the geotechnical consultant. Unless otherwise recom-
mended, the exposed ground surface shall then be scarified to a depth of
approximately 8 inches and watered or dried, as needed, to achieve a generally uni-
form moisture content at or near the optimum moisture content. The scarified
materials shall then be compacted to 90 percent or more of the maximum density.
The evaluation of compaction by the geotechnical consultant shall not be considered
to preclude any requirements for observation or approval by governing agencies. It is
the contractor's responsibility to notifY the geotechnical consultant and the appropri-
ate governing agency when project areas are ready for observation, and to provide
reasonable time for that review.
Excavated on-site materials which are in general compliance with the recommenda-
tions of the geotechnical consultant may be utilized as compacted fill provided they
are generally free of organic or other deleterious materials and do not contain rock
fragments greater than 6 inches in dimension. During grading, the contractor may
encounter soil types other than those analyzed during the preliminary geotechnical
study. The geotechnical consultant shall be consulted to evaluate the suitability of
any such soils for use as compacted fill.
Where imported materials are to be used on site, the geotechnical consultant shall be
notified at least three working days in advance of importation in order that it may
sample and test the materials from the proposed borrow sites. No imported materials
shall be delivered for use on site without prior sampling, testing, and evaluation by
the geotechnical consultant.
Soils imported for on-site use shall preferably have very low to low expansion po-
tential (based on UBC Standard 18-2 test procedures). Lots on which expansive soils
may be exposed at grade shall be undercut 3 feet or more and capped with very low
to low expansion potential fill. Details of the undercutting are provided in the Tran-
sition and Undercut Lot Details, Figure B of these Guidelines. In the event expansive
soils are present near the ground surface, special design and construction considera-
tions shall be utilized in general accordance with the recommendations of the
geotechnical consultant.
Fill materials shall be moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content prior
to placement. The optimum moisture content will vary with material type and other
factors. Moisture conditioning of fill soils shall be generally uniform throughout the
soil mass.
Prior to placement of additional compacted fill material following a delay in the
grading operations, the exposed surface of previously compacted fill shall be pre-
pared to receive fill. Preparation may include scarification, moisture conditioning,
and recompaction.
5 Rev. 5/02
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
September 9, 2002
Project No. I 04600001
5.7.Compacted fill shall be placed in horizontal lifts of approximately 8 inches in loose thickness.
5.8.
5.9.
5.10.
5.11.
5.12.
5.13.
5.14.
Document!
Prior to compaction, each lift shall be watered or dried as needed to achieve near opti-
mum moisture condition, mixed, and then compacted by mechanical methods, using
sheepsfoot rollers, multiple-wheel pneumatic-tired rollers, or other appropriate com-
pacting rollers, to the specified relative compaction. Successive lifts shall be treated in a
like manner until the desired finished grades are achieved.
Fill shall be tested in the field by the geotechnical consultant for evaluation of gen-
eral compliance with the recommended relative compaction and moisture conditions.
Field density testing shall conform to ASTM D 1556-00 (Sand Cone method),
D 2937-00 (Drive-Cylinder method), and/or D 2922-96 and D 3017-96 (Nuclear
Gauge method). Generally, one test shall be provided for approximately every 2 ver-
tical feet of fill placed, or for approximately every I 000 cubic yards of fill placed. In
addition, on slope faces one or more tests shall be taken for approximately every
10,000 square feet of slope face and/or approximately every I 0 vertical feet of slope
height. Actual test intervals may vary as field conditions dictate. Fill found to be out
of conformance with the grading recommendations shall be removed, moisture con-
ditioned, and compacted or otherwise handled to accomplish general compliance
with the grading recommendations.
The contractor shall assist the geotechnical consultant by excavating suitable test pits
for removal evaluation and/or for testing of compacted filL
At the request of the geotechnical consultant, the contractor shall "shut down" or re-
strict grading equipment from operating in the area being tested to provide adequate
testing time and safety for the field technician.
The geotechnical consultant shall maintain a map with the approximate locations of
field density tests. Unless the client provides for surveying of the test locations, the
locations shown by the geotechnical consultant will be estimated. The geotechnical
consultant shall not be held responsible for the accuracy of the horizontal or vertical
control points.
Grading operations shall be performed under the observation of the geotechnical
consultant. Testing and evaluation by the geotechnical consultant does not preclude
the need for approval by or other requirements of the jurisdictional agencies.
Fill materials shall not be placed, spread or compacted during unfavorable weather
conditions. When work is interrupted by heavy rains, the filling operation shall not
be resumed until tests indicate that moisture content and density of the fill meet the
project specifications. Regrading of the near-surface soil may be needed to achieve
proper moisture content and density.
Upon completion of grading and termination of observation by the geotechnical con-
sultant, no further filling or excavating, including that necessary for footings,
6 Rev. 5/02
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
September 9, 2002
Project No. 104600001
foundations, retaining walls or other features, shall be performed without the in-
volvement of the geotechnical consultant.
5.1 S. Fill placed in areas not previously viewed and evaluated by the geotechnical consult-
ant may have to be removed and recompacted at the contractor's expense. The depth
and extent of removal of the unobserved and undocumented fill will be decided
based upon review of the field conditions by the geotechnical consultant.
5.16. Off-site fill shall be treated in the same manner as recommended in these specifica-
tions for on-site fills. Off-site fill subdrains temporarily terminated (up gradient)
shall be surveyed for future locating and connection.
5.17. Prior to placement of a canyon fill, a subdrain shall be installed in bedrock or com-
pacted fill along the approximate alignment of the canyon bottom if recommended
by the geotechnical consultant. Details of subdrain placement and configuration have
been provided in the Canyon Subdrain Detail, Figure C, of these Guidelines.
5.18. Transition (cut/fill) lots shall generally be undercut 3 feet or more below finished
grade to provide a generally uniform thickness of fill soil in the pad area. Where the
depth of fill on a transition lot greatly exceeds 3 feet, overexcavation may be in-
creased at the discretion of the geotechnical consultant. Details of the undercut for
transition lots are provided in the Transition and Undercut Lot Detail, Figure B, of
these Guidelines.
6. OVERSIZED MATERIAL
Oversized material shall be placed in accordance with the following recommendations.
6.1.
6.2.
6.3.
Document I
During the course of grading operations, rocks or similar irreducible materials
greater than 6 inches in dimension (oversized material) may be generated. These
materials shall not be placed within the compacted fill unless placed in general ac-
cordance with the recommendations of the geotechnical consultant.
Where oversized rock (greater than 6 inches in dimension) or similar irreducible
material is generated during grading, it is recommended, where practical, to waste
such material off site, or on site in areas designated as "nonstructural rock disposal
areas." Rock designated for disposal areas shall be placed with sufficient sandy soil
to generally fill voids. The disposal area shall be capped with a 5-foot thickness of
fill which is generally free of oversized material.
Rocks 6 inches in dimension and smaller may be utilized within the compacted fill,
provided they are placed in such a manner that nesting of rock is not permitted. Fill
shall be placed and compacted over and around the rock. The amount of rock greater
7 Rev. 5/02
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
September 9, 2002
Project No. 104600001
6.4.
than 3/4-inch in dimension shall generally not exceed 40 percent of the total dry
weight of the fill mass, unless the fill is specially designed and constructed as a "rock
fill."
Rocks or similar irreducible materials greater than 6 inches but less than 4 feet in
dimension generated during grading may be placed in windrows and capped with
finer materials in accordance with the recommendations of the geotechnical consult-
ant, the approval of the governing agencies, and the Oversized Rock Placement
Detail, FigureD, of these Guidelines. Selected native or imported granular soil (Sand
Equivalent of 30 or higher) shall be placed and flooded over and around the wind-
rowed rock such that voids are filled. Windrows of oversized materials shall be
staggered so that successive windrows of oversized materials are not in the same
vertical plane. Rocks greater than 4 feet in dimension shall be broken down to 4 feet
or smaller before placement, or they shall be disposed of off site.
7. SLOPES I The following sections provide recommendations for cut and fill slopes.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
7.1.
Document I
Cut Slopes
7.1.1. Unless otherwise recommended by the geotechnical consultant and approved by
the regulating agencies, permanent cut slopes shall not be steeper than 2: I (hori-
zontal:vertical). The maximum recommended height of a cut slope shall be
evaluated by the geotechnical consultant. Slopes in excess of 30 feet high shall be
provided with terrace drains (swales) in accordance with the recommendations
presented in the Uniform Building Code, Section 3315 and the details provided in
Figure E of these Guidelines.
7 .1.2. The geotechnical consultant shall observe cut slopes during excavation. The
geotechnical consultant shall be notified by the contractor prior to beginning
slope excavations.
7.1.3. If excavations for cut slopes expose loose, cohesionless, significantly fractured,
or otherwise unsuitable materials, overexcavation of the unsuitable material and
replacement with a compacted stabilization fill shall be evaluated and may be
recommended by the geotechnical consultant. Unless otherwise specified by the
geotechnical consultant, stabilization fill construction shall be in general accor-
dance with the details provided on Figure F of these Guidelines.
7.1.4. If; during the course of grading, adverse or potentially adverse geotechnical con-
ditions are encountered in the slope which were not anticipated in the preliminary
evaluation report, the geotechnical consultant shall evaluate the conditions and
provide appropriate recommendations.
8 Rev. 5/02
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
7 .2. Fill Slopes
September 9, 2002
Project No. 104600001
7.2.1. When placing fill on slopes steeper than 5:1 (horizontal:vertical), topsoil, slope
wash, colluvium, and other materials deemed unsuitable shall be removed. Near-
horizontal keys and near-vertical benches shall be excavated into sound bedrock
or firm fill material, in accordance with the recommendation of the geotechnical
consultant. Keying and benching shall be accomplished in general accordance
with the details provided on Figure A of these Guidelines. Compacted fill shall
not be placed in an area subsequent to keying and benching until the area has
been observed by the geotechnical consultant. Where the natural gradient of a
slope is less than 5: I, benching is generally not necessary. However, fill shall not
be placed on compressible or otherwise unsuitable materials left on the slope
face.
7.2.2. Within a single fill area where grading procedures dictate two or more separate
fills, temporary slopes (false slopes) may be created. When placing fill adjacent
to a temporary slope, benching shall be conducted in the manner described in
Section 7.2.1. A 3-foot or higher near-vertical bench shall be excavated into the
documented fill prior to placement of additional fill.
7.2.3. Unless otherwise recommended by the geotechnical consultant and approved by
the regulating agencies, permanent fill slopes shall not be steeper than 2:1 (hori-
wntal:vertical). The height of a fill slope shall be evaluated by the geotechnical
consultant. Slopes in excess of 30 feet high shall be provided with terrace drains
(swales) and backdrains in accordance with the recommendations presented in
the Uniform Building Code, Section 3315 and the details provided in Figure E of
these Guidelines.
7.2.4. Unless specifically recommended otherwise, compacted fill slopes shall be over-
built and cut back to grade, exposing firm compacted fill. The actual amount of
overbuilding may vary as field conditions dictate. If the desired results are not
achieved, the existing slopes shall be overexcavated and reconstructed in accor-
dance with the recommendations of the geotechnical consultant. The degree of
overbuilding may be increased until the desired compacted slope face condition
is achieved. Care shall be taken by the contractor to provide mechanical compac-
tion as close to the outer edge of the overbuilt slope surface as practical.
7.2.5. If access restrictions, property line location, or other constraints prevent over-
building and cutting back of the slope face, an alternative method for compaction
of the slope face may be attempted by conventional construction procedures in-
cluding backrolling at intervals of 4 feet or less in vertical slope height, or as
dictated by the capability of the available equipment, whichever is less. Fill
slopes shall be backrolled utilizing a conventional sheeps foot-type roller. Care
shall be taken to maintain the desired moisture conditions and/or reestablish the
same, as needed, prior to backrolling. Upon achieving final grade, the slope shall
again be moisture conditioned and backrolled.
9 Rev. 5102
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
September 9, 2002
Project No. I 04600001
7.3.
7.4.
Document I
7.2.6. The placement, moisture conditioning and compaction of fill slope materials shall
be done in accordance with the recommendations presented in Section 5. of these
Guidelines.
7.2.7. The contractor shall be ultimately responsible for placing and compacting the soil
out to the slope face to obtain a relative compaction of 90 percent or more of the
maximum dry density and a moisture content in accordance with Section 5. The
geotechnical consultant shall perform field moisture and density tests at intervals
of one test for approximately every 10,000 square feet of slope face and/or ap-
proximately every I 0 feet of vertical height of slope.
7.2.8. Backdrains shall be provided in fill slopes in accordance with the details pre-
sented on Figure A of these Guidelines, or as recommended by the geotechnical
consultant.
7.2.9. Fill shall be compacted prior to placement of survey stakes. This is particularly
important on fill slopes. Slope stakes shall not be placed until the slope is com-
pacted and tested. If a slope face fill does not meet the recommendations
presented in this specification, it shall be recognized that stakes placed prior to
completion of the recompaction effort will be removed and/or demolished at such
time as the compaction procedures resume.
Top-of-Slope Drainage
7.3.1. For pad areas above slopes, positive drainage shall be established away from the
top of slope. This may be accomplished utilizing a berm and pad gradient of 2
percent or steeper at the top-of-slope areas. Site runoff shall not be permitted to
flow over the tops of slopes.
7.3.2. Gunite-lined brow ditches shall be placed at the top of cut slopes to redirect sur-
face runoff away from the slope face where drainage devices are not otherwise
provided.
Slope Maintenance
7.4.1. In order to enhance surficial slope stability, slope planting shall be accomplished
at the completion of grading. Slope plants shall consist of deep-rooting, variable
root depth, drought-tolerant vegetation. Native vegetation is generally desirable.
Plants native to semiarid and arid areas may also be appropriate. Large-leafed ice
plant should not be used on slopes. A landscape architect shall be consulted re-
garding the actual types of plants and planting configuration to be used.
7.4.2. Irrigation pipes shall be anchored to slope faces and not placed in trenches exca-
vated into slope faces. Slope irrigation shall be maintained at a level just
sufficient to support plant growth. Property owners shall be made aware that over
watering of slopes is detrimental to slope stability. Slopes shall be monitored
regularly and broken sprinkler heads and/or pipes shall be repaired immediately.
10 Rev 5/02
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
September 9, 2002
Project No. I 04600001
7.4.3. Periodic observation of landscaped slope areas shall be planned and appropriate
measures taken to enhance growth oflandscape plants.
7 .4.4. Graded swales at the top of slopes and terrace drains shall be installed and the
property owners notified that the drains shall be periodically checked so that they
may be kept clear. Damage to drainage improvements shall be repaired immedi-
ately. To reduce siltation, terrace drains shall be constructed at a gradient of 3
percent or steeper, in accordance with the recommendations of the project civil
engmeer.
7.4.5. If slope failures occur, the geotechnical consultant shall be contacted immediately
for field review of site conditions and development of recommendations for
evaluation and repair.
8. TRENCH BACKFILL
The following sections provide recommendations for backfilling of trenches.
8.1. Trench backfill shall consist of granular soils (bedding) extending from the trench
bottom to I or more feet above the pipe. On-site or imported fill which has been
evaluated by the geotechnical consultant may be used above the granular backfill.
The cover soils directly in contact with the pipe shall be classified as having a very
low expansion potential, in accordance with UBC Standard 18-2, and shall contain
no rocks or chunks of hard soil larger than 3/4-inch in diameter.
8.2.
8.3.
8.4.
8.5.
Docummtl
Trench backfill shall, unless otherwise recommended, be compacted by mechanical
means to 90 percent or more of the maximum dry density as evaluated in accordance
with ASTM D 1557-00. Backfill soils shall be placed in loose lifts 8-inches thick or
thinner, moisture conditioned, and compacted in accordance with the recommenda-
tions of Section 5. of these guidelines. The backfill shall be tested by the
geotechnical consultant at vertical intervals of approximately 2 feet of backfill placed
and at spacings along the trench of approximately 100 feet in the same lift.
Jetting of trench backfill materials is generally not a recommended method of densi-
fication, unless the on-site soils are sufficiently free-draining and provisions have
been made for adequate dissipation of the water utilized in the jetting process.
If it is decided that jetting may be utilized, granular material with a sand equivalent
greater than 30 shall be used for backfilling in the areas to be jetted. Jetting shall
generally be considered for trenches 2 feet or narrower in width and 4 feet or shal-
lower in depth. Following jetting operations, trench backfill shall be mechanically
compacted to the specified compaction to finish grade.
Trench backfill which underlies the zone of influence of foundations shall be me-
chanically compacted to 90 percent or more of the maximum dry density, as
II Rev. 5/02
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
September 9, 2002
Project No. 104600001
8.6.
8.7.
evaluated in accordance with ASTM D 1557-00. The zone of influence of the foun-
dations is generally defined as the roughly triangular area within the limits of a 1:1
projection from the inner and outer edges of the foundation, projected down and out
from both edges.
Trench backfill within slab areas shall be compacted by mechanical means to a rela-
tive compaction of 90 percent or more of maximum dry density, as evaluated in
accordance with ASTM D 1557-00. For minor interior trenches, density testing may
be omitted or spot testing may be performed, as deemed appropriate by the geotech-
nical consultant.
When compacting soil in close proximity to utilities, care shall be taken by the
grading contractor so that mechanical methods used to compact the soils do not dam-
age the utilities. If the utility contractors indicate that it is undesirable to use
compaction equipment in close proximity to a buried conduit, then the grading con-
tractor may elect to use light mechanical compaction equipment or, with the approval
of the geotechnical consultant, cover the conduit with clean granular material. These
granular materials shall be jetted in place to the top of the conduit in accordance with
the recommendations of Section 8.4 prior to initiating mechanical compaction proce-
dures. Other methods of utility trench compaction may also be appropriate, upon
review by the geotechnical consultant and the utility contractor, at the time of con-
struction.
8.8. Clean granular backfill and/or bedding materials are not recommended for use in
slope areas unless provisions are made for a drainage system to mitigate the potential
for buildup of seepage forces or piping of backfill materials.
8.9. The contractor shall exercise the necessary and required safety precautions, in accor-
dance with OSHA Trench Safety Regulations, while conducting trenching
operations. Such precautions include shoring or laying back trench excavations at 1: 1
or flatter, depending on material type, for trenches in excess of 5 feet in depth. The
geotechnical consultant is not responsible for the safety of trench operations or sta-
bility ofthe trenches.
9. DRAINAGE
The following sections provide recommendations pertaining to site drainage.
9 .I. Canyon subdrain systems recommended by the geotechnical consultant shall be in-
stalled in accordance with the Canyon Subdrain Detail, FigureD, provided in these
Guidelines. Canyon subdrains shall be installed to conform to the approximate
alignment and details shown on project plans. The actual subdrain location shall be
evaluated by the geotechnical consultant in the field during grading. Materials speci-
Document! 12 Rev. 5102
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
September 9, 2002
Project No. 104600001
9.2.
9.3.
9.4.
9.5.
9.6.
fied in the attached Canyon Subdrain Detail shall not be changed or modified unless
so recommended by the geotechnical consultant. Subdrains shall be surveyed by a li-
censed land surveyor/civil engineer for line and grade after installation. Sufficient
time shall be allowed for the surveys prior to commencement of filling over the sub-
drains.
Typical backdrains for stability, side hill, and shear key fills shall be installed in ac-
cordance with the details provided on Figure A, Figure F, and Figure G of these
Guidelines.
Roof, pad, and slope drainage shall be directed away from slopes and structures to
suitable discharge areas by nonerodible devices (e.g., gutters, downspouts, concrete
swales, etc.).
Positive drainage adjacent to structures shall be established and maintained. Positive
drainage may be accomplished by providing drainage away from the foundations of
the structure at a gradient of 2 percent or steeper for a distance of 5 feet or more out-
side the building perimeter, further maintained by a graded swale leading to an
appropriate outlet, in accordance with the recommendations of the project civil engi-
neer and/or landscape architect.
Surface drainage on the site shall be provided so that water is not permitted to pond.
A gradient of 2 percent or steeper shall be maintained over the pad area and drainage
patterns shall be established to direct and remove water from the site to an appropri-
ate outlet.
Care shall be taken by the contractor during final grading to preserve any berms,
drainage terraces, interceptor swales or other drainage devices of a permanent nature
on or adjacent to the property. Drainage patterns established at the time of final
grading shall be maintained for the life of the project. Property owners shall be made
very clearly aware that altering drainage patterns may be detrimental to slope stabil-
ity and foundation performance.
10. SITE PROTECTION
The site shall be protected as outlined in the following sections.
I 0. I. Protection of the site during the period of grading shall be the responsibility of the
contractor unless other provisions are made in writing and agreed upon among the
concerned parties. Completion of a portion of the project shall not be considered to
preclude that portion or adjacent areas from the need for site protection, until such
time as the project is complete as agreed upon by the geotechnical consultant, the
client, and the regulatory agency.
Document! 13 Rev. 5/02
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
September 9, 2002
Project No. I 04600001
I 0.2. The contractor is responsible for the stability of temporary excavations. Recommen-
dations by the geotechnical consultant pertaining to temporary excavations are made
in consideration of stability of the completed project and, therefore, shall not be con-
sidered to preclude the responsibilities of the contractor. Recommendations by the
geotechnical consultant shall also not be considered to preclude more restrictive re-
quirements by the applicable regulatory agencies.
10.3. Precautions shall be taken during the performance of site clearing, excavation, and
grading to protect the site from flooding, ponding, or inundation by surface runoff.
Temporary provisions shall be made during the rainy season to adequately direct sur-
face runoff away from and off the working site. Where low areas cannot be avoided,
pumps shall be provided to remove water as needed during periods of rainfall.
10.4. During periods of rainfall, plastic sheeting shall be used as needed to reduce the po-
tential for unprotected slopes to become saturated. Where needed, the contractor
shall install check dams, desilting basins, riprap, sandbags or other appropriate de-
vices or methods to reduce erosion and provide safe conditions during inclement
weather.
10.5. During periods of rainfall, the geotechnical consultant shall be kept informed by the
contractor of the nature of remedial or precautionary work being performed on site
(e.g., pumping, placement of sandbags or plastic sheeting, other labor, dozing, etc.).
I 0.6. Following periods of rainfall, the contractor shall contact the geotechnical consultant and
arrange a walk-over of the site in order to visually assess rain-related damage. The geo-
technical consultant may also recommend excavation and testing in order to aid in the
evaluation. At the request of the geotechnical consultant, the contractor shall make exca-
vations in order to aid in evaluation of the extent of rain-related damage.
10.7. Rain-or irrigation-related damage shall be considered to include, but may not be
limited to, erosion, silting, saturation, swelling, structural distress, and other adverse
conditions noted by the geotechnical consultant. Soil adversely affected shall be
classified as "Unsuitable Material" and shall be subject to overexcavation and re-
placement with compacted fill or to other remedial grading as recommended by the
geotechnical consultant.
10.8. Relatively level areas where saturated soils and/or erosion gullies exist to depths
greater than I foot shall be overexcavated to competent materials as evaluated by the
geotechnical consultant. Where adverse conditions extend to less than I foot in
depth, saturated and/or eroded materials may be processed in-place. Overexcavated
or in-place processed materials shall be moisture conditioned and compacted in ac-
cordance with the recommendations provided in Section 5. If the desired results are
not achieved, the affected materials shall be overexcavated, moisture conditioned,
and compacted until the specifications are met.
Document! 14 Rev_ 5/02
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
September 9, 2002
Project No. l 04600001
10.9. Slope areas where saturated soil and/or erosion gullies exist to depths greater than
1 foot shall be overexcavated and replaced as compacted fill in accordance with the
applicable specifications. Where adversely affected materials exist to depths of
1 foot or less below proposed finished grade, remedial grading by moisture condi-
tioning in-place and compaction in accordance with the appropriate specifications
may be attempted. If the desired results are not achieved, the affected materials shall
be overexcavated, moisture conditioned, and compacted until the specifications are
met. As conditions dictate, other slope repair procedures may also be recommended
by the geotechnical consultant.
I 0.1 0. During construction, the contractor shall grade the site to provide positive drainage
away from structures and to keep water from ponding adjacent to structures. Water
shall not be allowed to damage adjacent properties. Positive drainage shall be main-
tained by the contractor until permanent drainage and erosion reducing devices are
installed in accordance with project plans.
15 Rev. 5/02
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
11. DEFINITIONS OF TERMS
ALLUVIUM:
AS-GRADED (AS-BUILT):
BACKCUT:
BACKDRAIN:
BEDROCK:
BENCH:
BORROW (IMPORT):
BUTTRESS FILL:
CIVIL ENGINEER:
CLIENT:
COLLUVIUM:
COMPACTION:
Documellll
September 9, 2002
Project No. 104600001
Unconsolidated detrital deposits deposited by flowing water;
includes sediments deposited in river beds, canyons, flood
plains, lakes, fans at the foot of slopes, and in estuaries.
The site conditions upon completion of grading.
A temporary construction slope at the rear of earth-retaining
structures such as buttresses, shear keys, stabilization fills, or
retaining walls.
Generally a pipe-and-gravel or similar drainage system
placed behind earth-retaining structures such as buttresses,
stabilization fills, and retaining walls.
Relatively undisturbed in-place rock, either at the surface or
beneath surficial deposits of soil.
A relatively level step and near-vertical riser excavated into
sloping ground on which fill is to be placed.
Any fill material hauled to the project site from off-site areas.
A fill mass, the configuration of which is designed by engi-
neering calculations, to retain slopes containing adverse
geologic features. A buttress is generally specified by mini-
mum key width and depth and by maximum backcut angle.
A buttress normally contains a back drainage system.
The Registered Civil Engineer or consulting fmn responsible
for preparation of the grading plans and surveying, and veri-
fYing as-graded topographic conditions.
The developer or a project-responsible authorized represen-
tative. The client has the responsibility of reviewing the
findings and recommendations made by the geotechnical
consultant and authorizing the contractor and/or other con-
sultants to perform work and/or provide services.
Generally loose deposits, usually found on the face or near
the base of slopes and brought there chiefly by gravity
through slow continuous downhill creep (see also Slope
Wash).
The densification of a fill by mechanical means.
16 Rev. 5/02
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
CONTRACTOR:
DEBRIS:
ENGINEERED FILL:
ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST:
EROSION:
EXCAVATION:
EXISTING GRADE:
FILL:
FINISH GRADE:
GEOFABRIC:
GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT:
Document I
September 9, 2002
Project No. 104600001
A person or company under contract or otherwise retained
by the client to perform demolition, grading, and other site
improvements.
The products of clearing, grubbing, and/or demolition, or
contaminated soil material unsuitable for reuse as compacted
fill, and/or any other material so designated by the geotech-
nical consultant.
A fill which the geotechnical consultant or the consultant's
representative has observed and/or tested during placement,
enabling the consultant to conclude that the fill has been
placed in substantial compliance with the recommendations
of the geotechnical consultant and the governing agency re-
quirements.
A geologist certified by the state licensing agency who ap-
plies geologic knowledge and principles to the exploration
and evaluation of naturally occurring rock and soil, as re-
lated to the design of civil works.
The wearing away of the ground surface as a result of the
movement of wind, water, and/or ice.
The mechanical removal of earth materials.
The ground surface configuration prior to grading; original
grade.
Any deposit of soil, rock, soil-rock blends, or other similar
materials placed by man.
The final as-graded ground surface elevation that conforms
to the grading plan.
An engineering textile utilized in geotechnical applications
such as subgrade stabilization and filtering.
The geotechnical engineering and engineering geology con-
sulting firm retained to provide technical services for the
project. For the purpose of these specifications, observations
by the geotechnical consultant include observations by the
geotechnical engineer, engineering geologist and other per-
sons employed by and responsible to the geotechnical
consultant.
17 Rev. 5/02
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER:
GRADING:
LANDSLIDE DEPOSITS:
MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY:
OPTIMUM MOISTURE:
RELATIVE COMPACTION:
ROUGH GRADE:
SHEAR KEY:
SITE:
SLOPE:
SLOPE WASH:
September 9, 2002
Project No. 104600001
A licensed civil engineer and geotechnical engineer, ap-
proved by the state licensing agency, who applies scientific
methods, engineering principles, and professional experience
to the acquisition, interpretation, and use of knowledge of
materials of the earth's crust to the resolution of engineering
problems. Geotechnical engineering encompasses many of
the engineering aspects of soil mechanics, rock mechanics,
geology, geophysics, hydrology, and related sciences.
Any operation consisting of excavation, filling, or combina-
tions thereof and associated operations.
Material, often porous and of low density, produced from
instability of natural or manmade slopes.
Standard laboratory test for maximum dry unit weight. Un-
less otherwise specified, the maximum dry unit weight shall
be evaluated in accordance with ASTM Test Method
Dl557-91.
The moisture content at the maximum dry density.
The degree of compaction (expressed as a percentage) of a
material as compared to the maximum dry density of the
material.
The ground surface configuration at which time the surface
elevations approximately conform to the approved plan.
Similar to a subsurface buttress; however, it is generally con-
structed by excavating a slot within a natural slope in order
to stabilize the upper portion of the slope without encroach-
ing into the lower portion of the slope.
The particular parcel of land where grading is being per-
formed.
An inclined ground surface, the steepness of which is gener-
ally specified as a ratio of horizontal units to vertical units.
Soil and! or rock material that has been transported down a
slope by gravity assisted by the action of water not confined
to channels (see also Colluvium).
18 Rev. 5102
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
SLOUGH:
SOIL:
STABILIZATION FILL:
SUBDRAIN:
TAILINGS:
TERRACE:
TOPSOIL:
WINDROW:
Doi:umentl
September 9, 2002
Project No. 104600001
Loose, uncompacted fill material generated during grading
operations.
Naturally occurring deposits of sand, silt, clay, etc., or com-
binations thereof.
A fill mass, the configuration of which is typically related to
slope height and is specified by the standards of practice for
enhancing the stability of locally adverse conditions. A
minimum stabilization fill is normally specified by minimum
key width and depth and by maximum backcut angle. A sta-
bilization fill may or may not have a back drainage system
specified.
Generally a pipe-and-gravel or similar drainage system
placed beneath a fill along the alignment of buried canyons
or former drainage channels.
Non-engineered fill which accumulates on or adjacent to
equipment haul roads.
A relatively level bench constructed on the face of a graded
slope surface for drainage control and maintenance purposes.
The upper zone of soil or bedrock materials, which is usually
dark in color, loose, and contains organic materials.
A row of large rocks buried within engineered fill in accor-
dance with guidelines set forth by the geotechnical consultant.
19 Rev. 5/02
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
FILL SLOPE OVER NATURAL GROUND
OUTLET PIPE DRAINS TO A SUITABLE
OUTLET IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE
CIVIL ENGINEER
NATURAL GROUND
September 9, 2002
Project No. 104600001
SWALE AT TOP OF SLOPE
/
FILL--""
BENCH INCLINED
SLIGHTLY INTO SLOPE
.;...-----
10" TYP-1 BEDROCK OR I
COMPETENT MATERIAL, __/ ~ AS EVALUATED BY THE 3' MIN. ~
T f--15" MIN.--j BACKDRAIN
AND T -CONNECTION
(SEE DRAIN DETAIL,
FIGURE G)
( GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT
FILL SLOPE OVER CUT SWALE AT TOP Of SLOPE
/
2 FILL--""
117 ----
NATURAL GROUND
Document!
OUTLET PIPE DRAINS TO A SUITABLE
OUTLET IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
RECOMMENDATIONS Of THE
CIVIL ENGINEER
•wiNIMUM KE:'r WIDTH Olt.I(NSION. ACTUAL WIDTH SHOULD BE PROVIDED BY GEOTECHNICAL CONSULT,!'tT
BASED ON EVALUATION OF' SITE-SPECIFIC GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS.
NOTES: CUT SLOPE SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO PLACEt.IENT OF FILL
SLOP[ DRAINAGE SHOULD B( PROVIDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH RECOMt.IENDATIONS PRESENTED ON F"IGURE E
NOT TO SCALE
FILL SLOPE OVER NATURAL
GROUND OR CUT
Rev. 5102
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
September 9, 2002
Project No. I 0460000 I
TRANSITION (CUT -FILL) LOT
---
r 3' MIN.
T --OVEREXCAVATE AND RECOMPACT
BEDROCK OR COMPETENT MATERIAL, "' ~ AS EVALUATED BY THE ._.../
; GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT
UNDERCUT LOT s:. N~RAL GROUND -_./ -
T
OVEREXCAVAiE AND RECOMPACT
BEDROCK OR COMPETENT MATERIAL, "'
~ AS EVALUATED BY THE ._.../
/" GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT
NOTE: DIMENSIONS PROVIDED IN THE DETAILS ABOVE ARE APPROXIMATE AND t.IAY BE t.IODIFI£0 IN THE FIELD
BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT AS CONDITIONS DICTATE.
NOT TO SCALE
TRANSITION AND
LOT DETAILS FIGIJIE B
Document I Rev. 5/02
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
September 9, 2002
Project No. I 0460000 I
Docllllltntl
NATURAL GROUND
SEE FIGURE A
fOR DETAILS OF' BE:NCHES
CANYON SUBDRAIN
COMPACTED FILL
-----~ REMOVE
........
//
/
///
'-UNSUITABLE
MATERIAL
/ BEDROCK OR "". --1!~<lillffi~ COMPETENT MATERIAL, )
- -..-
1
(_ AS EVALUATED BY THE
...._) GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT
LOWEST BENCH INCLINED TOWARD DRAIN
SUBORAJN
(SEE DRAIN DETAIL,
FIGURE G)
DETAIL OF CANYON SUBDRAIN TERMINATION
DESIGN FINISH GRADE
SUBORAIN PIPE
OUTLET PIPE DRAINS TO A SUITABLE
OUTl£T m ACCORDANCE WITH THE RECONMENOAnONS OF THE
CIVIL ENGINEER
CUTOFF WALL CONSTRUCTED
OF GROUT, CONCRETE. BENTONITE,
__.---OR OTHER SUITABLE MATERIAL AS EVAlUATED BY THE
GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT
fiLTER MATERIAL
NON-PERFORATED PlPE~-J--PERF"ORATED PIPE
s· 20' MIN. M N.
NOT TO SCALE
CANYON SUBDRAIN DETAIL
Rev. 5/02
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
September 9, 2002
Project No. 104600001
""""'"''"'
30 S.E.
WINDROW (TYPICAL)
WINDROW SECTION
SOIL (FLOODED) ;l
............ -.. I
..... -! c~
PAD SECTION
FINISH GRADE
ZONE A. MATERIAL
=
=T
5' MIN.
=
ZONE 8 MATERIAL = =
=
L"ft-·-••· "'"·--f
STREET
8' OR
2' BELOW DEEPEST
PROPOSED UTILITY,
WHICHEVER
IS GREATER
ZONE A: COioiPACTEO FILL WITH ROCK F"RAGhiENTS NO GREATER THAN 6 INCHES IN OIAMOER.
ZONE g, COWPACTEO nLL WITH ROCK FRACI.IENTS BETWEEN 6 AND .4-8 INCH£S IN DIAMETER MAY BE PLACE:D IN STAGGERED
WINDROWS UP TO tOO' LONG IN THIS ZONE AND SURROUNDED BY GRANULAR SOil (30 SAND EOUIVALEHT) DENSiriED BY FLOODING. ROCK FRAGMENTS LESS THAN 6 INCHES IN DIAhiE:TER MAY BE PLACED IN COMPACTED FILL SOIL
NOTE: SLOPE DRAINAGE SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH RECOt.lt.IENOATIONS PRESENTED ON FIGURE £.
NOT TO SCALE
OVERSIZED ROCK
PLACEMENT DETAIL FIGlJlE D
Rev. 5/02
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
September 9, 2002
Project No. 104600001
SWALE AT TOP OF SLOPE
_J 15' f-~1 t.41N.
~10-SLOPE BACKDRAIN (SEE DRAIN DETAIL,
FIGURE G) -----
NON-PERFORATED OUTLET PIPE
-E._
r COMPACTED BEDROCK OR COMPETENT
MATERIAL AS EVALUATED BY THE
GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT
WHEN POSSIBLE, LOWEST 8ACKORAIN
SHOULD BE PLACED IN THE BASE OF KEY
(SEE DRAIN DETAIL, FIGURE G)
MAXIMUM VERTICAL SLOPE HEIGHT, H (FEET) * TERRACE WIDTH AND LOCATION
NOTES:
LESS THAN 30
60
120
GREATER THAN 120
NO TERRACE REQUIRED
ONE TERRACE AT LEAST 6
FEET WIDE AT I•!IDHEIGHT
ONE TERRACE AT LEAST 12 FEET WIDE AT
APPROXIMATELY MIOHEIGHT AND 6-FOOT WIDE
TERRACES CENTERED IN REMAINING SLOPES
DESIGNED BY CIVIL ENGINEER WITH
APPROVAL or GOVERNING AUTHORITIES
I. I•UD-SLOPE 9ACI<DR41HS SHOULD liE PlACED IN riLl SLOPES IN CONJUNCTION WITH EACH TERaACE.
2. TERRACES SHOULD HAY£ AT LEAST A 5-PERCENT GRADIENT. AND RUN orr SHOUlO BE OIRECT£0 TO AN APPROPRIATE SURFACE DRAINAGE COLLECTOR.
l. TERRACCS SHGULO BE CLEA.NCO Or OEB.RlS. ol.t'.O l([(i[lA.TlON TO A.LLO'H \.lllRES.TRICT£0 rLO'H Of WATER.
4. TERRACES SHOULD 8£ KEPT IH GOOD REPAIR.
5. REr£R TO USC CHAPT£R 70 FOR ADDITIONAL REOUIR[W[NTS.
H
NOT TO SCALE
SLOPE DRAINAGE DETAIL
FtGURE E
Rev. 5/02
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
September 9, 2002
Project No. 104600001
Docwnentl
~----PROPOSED GRADED SURFACE
COMPACTED FILL ---
UNSTABLE_) f MATERIAL
PLANE OF WEAKNES7 . -·--·--.. -
BEDROCK OR
-----BENCH INCLINED
SLIGHTLY INTO SLOPE
{SEE F'IGURE A)
---
COMPACTED FILL
EXISTING GROUND SURFACE
I
I DEPTH Of KEY L COMPETENT MATERIAL, r AS EVALUATED BY THE
GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT ~~;;;;;;;;;;;;;C:~=== 1
BACK DRAIN
(SEE DRAIN DETAIL,
FIGURE G) NON-PERFORATED
OUTLET PIPE
NOTES: 1. THE: DEPTH AND WIDTH Of KEY WILL BE PROVIDED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT BASED ON ANALYSIS
OF SITE-SPECIFIC GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS.
2. AN ADDITIONAl MID-SLOPE BACKDRAJN AND TERRACE DRAfN MAY BE RECOMMENDED FOR SLOPES OVER 30 FEET HIGH.
SEE SLOPE DRAINAGE DHAIL, FIGURE E.
3. SLOP£ DRAINAG£ SHOUlD BE PROVIDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH RECOMMENDATIONS PRESENTED ON FIGURE £.
NOT TO SCALE
SHEAR KEY DETAIL
FIGURE F
Rev. 5/02
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Wimmer Yamada and Caughey
Alga Norte Community Park
September 9, 2002
Project No. 104600001
DocWTIClltl
SUBDRAIN CONFIGURATION
ALTERNATIVE A* ALTERNATIVE 8
tiLlER MATERIAL
(9 CUBIC FEET PER LINEAR FOOT)
PERrQRATEO PIPE INSTALLED WITH
PERFORATION DOWN (SEE SCHEDULE BELOW)
* ALTERNATIVE A SUBDRAIN CONFIGURATION
MAY BE USED IN FILLS LESS THAN 25 FEET DEEP
BACKDRAIN CONFIGURATION
T -CONNECTION
(SEE DETAIL)
FILTER MATERIAL
(3 CUBIC fEET PER LINEAR FOOT)
PERFORATED PIPE,
4" MIN. SCHEDUlE 40 PVC OR
EQUIVALENT INSTALLED WITH
PERFORATIONS DOWN
T-CONNECTION DETAIL
PERFORATED PIPE SLOPE:D AT I~ MIN. friO' MIN~
TOWARD OUTLET PIPE ~
1""""1 \ EACH SIDE
~-~"' ··~ "" ·-J ~~ ... ~
MAXlt.IUM ON CENTER HORIZONTAllY
FILTER MATERIAL
FILTER NATERIA.L SHALL BE CLASS II PERMEABLE
lo4ATERIAL PER STATE OF CAUFORNIA STANDARD
SPtCtnCATIONS OR APPROVCO Al.TtRNA.TE
GEOFABRIC DRAIN SYSTEM.
SIEVE SIZE ,.
3/4-
3/1<"
No. 4
No.8
No. 30
No. 50
No, 200
ClASS I! GRADATIONS
PERCENT PASSING
100
90-100
40-100
25-40
18-Jl
5-15
0-7 0-3
NOTE: AS AN ALTERNATIVE THE FILTER MATERIAL NAY
CONSIST OF 1• MAXIMUM OPEN-GRADED GRAV£L
WRAPPED IN AN APPROVED GEOFABRIC WITH A
MI"NIMUM &-INCH OVERlAP.
PIPE SCHEDULE
PE/lFORATE:D AND NON-PERFORATED PIPE SHAlL BE
SCHEDULE 40 POlYVINYL CHlORIDE (PVC) OR
"-CRYLON!TRtLE SUTMl!EHE. STYRE.KE. (ABS) OR EQUIVALENT, AND Wll.L HAVE A MINIMUM CRUSHING
STRENGTH OF 1000 PSf FOR DEPTHS OF Fill UP TO
50 fEET. FOR DEEPER FILLS, PERFORATED AND
NON-PERFORATED PIPE SHOULD BE DESIGNED WITH
A0£0UATE CRUSHING STRENGTH.
THE PIPE DIAt.4ETER WILL GENERALLY loiEE.T THE FOLLOWING
CRITERIA, BUT MAY BE MODIFIED IN THE FIELD BY THE
GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT AS CONDITIONS DICTATE.
THE LENGTH OF RUN IS MEASURED FROM THE HIGHEST
ELEVATION.
LENGTH OF" RUN PIPE DIAMETER
0-500'
500-1500'
> 1500'
DRAIN DETAIL
•.
•• ••
NOT TO SCALE
FIGUlE G
Rev. '5102