Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout; Motel 6; Soils Report; 1987-01-28Woodward-Clyde Consultants SOIL INVESTIGATION FOR THE PROPOSED MOTEL 6, SITE 471 CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA Prepared for: Motel 6, Incorporated Santa Barbara, California 93111 ti00 Ward Drive ENGINEERING DER LIBRARY City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad CA 92009-4859 - SlOlO .15.1 3467 Kurtr Street (619) 224-2911 San Diego. California 92110 WoodwardGlyde Consultants January 28, 1987 Project No. 8751028W-UD01 Motel 6, Incorporated 600 Ward Drive Santa Barbara, California 93111 Attention: Mr. David Reynolds SOIL INVESTIGATION FOR THE PROPOSED MOTEL 6, SITE 471 CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA Gentlemen: Woodward-Clyde Consultants is pleased to provide the accompanying report, which presents the results of our soil investigation for the project. This study was performed in accordance with our proposal dated January 6, 1987 and your Work Order No. T1525. This report presents our conclusions and recommendations pertaining to the project, as well as the results of our field explorations and laboratory tests. us a call. If you have any questions or if we can be of further service, please give Very truly yours, WOODWkRD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS Richard P. While 21992 R.E. 21992 Consulting Engmeers. Geologists and Envtronmenlal Sctenrtsts Onices In Olher Prlnclpal Cll!es Woodward-Clyde Consultants TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE NO. PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION UESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS SITE CONDITIONS Geologx Setting Surface Conditions Site Development History Subsurface Conditions Groundwater uISCUSSIONS, CONCLUSIUNS, AND RECOMMENDATIUNS Slopes Soil and Excavation Characteristlcs Grading Drainage Foundations Settlements Floor Slabs Passive Resistance Retaining Walls Pavements UNCEKTAINTY AND LIMITATIONS Appendices A. Field Investigation B. Laboratory Tests C. Compaction Test Kesults D. Guide Specifications for Site Grading E. Guide Specificatlons for Wall Drains 1 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 ti 7 ti 7 7 8 8 10 i Woodward-Clyde Consultants SOILS INVESTIGATION FOR THE PROPOSED MOTEL 6, SITE 471 CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION This report presents the results of our geotechnical investigation at the site of the proposed Motel 6, Carlsbad. The site is located northeast and adjacent to the intersection of Encinas Avenue and Raintree Place in Carlsbad, California. This report has been prepared exclusively for Motel 6, Incorporated and their consultants for use in evaluating the property and in project design. This report presents our conclusions andlor recomrnendatlons regarding: I The geologic setting of the site; General subsurface soil conditions; General extent of existing fill soils; Conditions of areas to receive fill; Characteristics of proposed fill material; Presence and effect of expansive soils: Groundwater conditions within the depths of our subsurface investigahon; Grading and earthwork; Types and depths of foundations; -1- Project No. 8751028W-UD01 Woodward-Clyde Consultants O Allowable soil bearing pressures; O Settlements: :. O Corrosivity and sulrate content of soil samples; O Flexible pavement design; Our expertme does not lie in the field of concrete mix design and we recommend you contact a firm familiar with this type of design. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT !, I For our study, we have discussed the project with Mr:David Reynolds of Motel 6, Incorporated. We have also been provided with an updated site plan prepared by Motel 6, Inc. entitled "Site 471, Carlsbad, California." We understand that the proposed project will include the construction of 4 two-story motel buildings of wood-frame and stucco constructlon founded on conventional foundations with concrete slab-on-grade floors. A central pool and deck area will also be provided. One hundred ana sixty car parking stalls, access lanes and entrance road, and landscaping will also be constructed. We anticipate that minor regrading of the lot, say on the order of 2 feet of cut and fill, will be required to provide building pads and drainages at the site. The location and layout of the project are shown on the site Plan (Figure 1). Flr;LU AND LABORATORY INVEs'l'IGATIONS Our field investigation included maKing a visual reconnaissance of the existing surface Conditions, making 5 test pits on January 21, 1987, and -2- Project No. 8751028W-UD01 ' I Woodward-Clyde Consultants obtaining soil samples. The test pits were advanced to depths ranging from 3 to 12 feet. The locations of the test pits are shown on Figure 1. A Key to Logs is presented in Appendix A as Figure A-1. Final logs of the excavations are presented in Appendix A as Figures A-2 through A-4. The descriptlons on the logs are based on field logs, sample inspection, and laboratory test results. Results of laboratory tests are shown at the corresponding sample locations on the logs and in Appendix E. The field investigation and laboratory testing programs are discussed in Appendices A and B. Previous laboratory tests made on samples obtained during mass site grading are also presented in Appendix B. SITE CONDITIONS I Geologic Setting The site is situated upon an uplifted Pleistocene marine terrace. The terrace deposits (Beach Ridge Formation) consist of dense, fine-grained sand. The terrace deposits are in turn underlain by the Eocene age Santiago Formation consisting of very dense sllty to clayey sand. Sire grading operations apparently included removal of terrace deposits (from the easterly portion of the site) exposing the Santiago Formation. Varying depths of compacted fill have been placed upon both geologic units. Surface Conditions 'rhe subject two lots are relatively flat-graded pads draining on a gentle slope to Raintree Drive cul-de-sac. The lots have a sparse regrowth of native grasses and weeds. Granular soils are evident at the lot surface. The site is bounded on the west and south by paved roads, Avenida Encinas and Raintree Drive, respectively, an exishng developed lot on the north and the Interstate 5 right-of-way on the east. -3- Project No. 8’/’~1028W-UDOl Site Development History Woodward4lyde Consultants A “Preliminary Soils &Id Geologic Investigatlon, Proposed 22.89-Acre Site for Industrial-Commercial Development, Carlsbad, Calnornia, It dated Au- gust 31, 1981, was prepared for the subdivision, which includes the subject site, by Medall, Aragon, Worswick and Associates, Inc. Mass grading of the sire was done during the period of April 19 to August 27, 1984. A report of observation made during grading and results of compaction tests was prepared by our firm and is dated December 13, 1984. This latter report indicates that the site surface was prepared and filled to depths ranging from 4 to 6 feet. The fill soils, as indicated by test results, were nonexpansive silty sand soils compacted to 90 percent of maximum laboratory dhsiry. The compaction tests taken in fill placed on the site are attached as Appendix C. Subsurface Conditions The results of our test pits essentially corroborated intormation in previ- ous reports. Fill soils on the site rangea from f to 9 feet in depth and consisted of compacted silty sand materials. The natlve soils beneath the fllls consisted of either dense sand similar to material in the Beach Ridge Formation of Pleistocene age or very dense silty sand of the Santiago rormation of Tertiary age, to the maximum deptn explored, approximately 12 feet. Groundwater No groundwater was encountered in the test pits at the time of excavation. DISCUSSIONS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMWIENUATIONS The discussions, conclusions, and recommendations presented in this report are based on the information provided to us, results of our rleld and laboratory studies, analyses, and professional judgment. -4- Project No. 8751UZ8W-UD01 The slopes surrounding the site are less than 8 feet in height and have inclinations of 2 to 1 (horizontal to vertical). The proposed grading is not expected to increase substantially the height or inclination of the slopes. Our experience with slopes of this nature is that they are stable provided they are properly drained, planted and maintained. soil and Excavation Characteristics - I I Woodward.Clyde Consultants The soils at the site are granular silty sand material that have good bear- ing strength when properly compacted and confined. The soils at finish grade are classified as nonexpansive and, in our opinion, they can be excavated with light to moderate effort with heavy duty excavating equip- ment. We do not know of any nearby local import source for select soil. However, a large grading project has recently been completed south of Poinsettia Way south of the subject site and some excess soil may be available there. Woodward-Clyde Consultants should test import Soils prior to delivery to the site. Grading The regrading at the site should be done in accordance with the attached "Specifications for Site Grading", Appendix D. Regrading at the site should be done under the observation of and compactlon tests should be performed by Woodward-Clyde Consultants (WCC). We recommend that grading plans be reviewed by WCC prior to con- struction. We further recommend that a preconstruction conference be held at the site with the owner's architect/contractor, civil engineer and geotechnical engineer in attendance. -5- Project No. 8751028W-UD01 Woodward.Clyde Consultants All surfaces to receive new fill should be scarified, watered and compacted prior to placement of new fill. All new fill should be compacted at a moisture content at least equal to optmum iater content. We recommend that the upper 3 feet and 1 foot of soil in the building area and parking areas, respectwely, be nonexpansive soils such as those existing onsite. The building area is deflned as the building footprint plus a distance of 5 feet beyond the footprint. Drainage We recommend that positive measures be taken to properly finish grade each buuding pad so that drainage wateks from the pad and adjacent properties are directed off the pad and away from foundations, floor slabs, and slope tops. Even when these measures have been taken, experience has shown that a shallow ground water or surface water conditlon can and may develop in areas where no such water condition existed prior to site development; this is particularly true where a substantial increase in surface water infiltration results from landscaping Irrigation. To further reduce the possibility of moisture related problems, we recom- mend that all landscaping and irrigation be kept as far away from the building perimeter as possible. Irrigation water, especially close to the building, should be kept to the minimum required level. We recommend that the ground surface in all areas be graded to slope away from the building foundations and floor slabs and that all runofr water be directed to proper drainage areas and not be allowed to pond. A minimum ground slope of 2 percent is recommended. Foundations We recommend that foundahons for light to medium weight commercial structures on nonexpansive, undisturbed so11 or on nonexpansive, properly -6- Project No. 8751028W-UD01 Woodward.Clyde Consultants compacted fill be designed for a bearing pressure not exceeding 1,500 psf for all contmuous or spread footings. Footings should be founded at least 18 inches below finished grade and have a minimum width of lz inches. In our opinion, this bearing pressure can be increased by one-third for loads that include wind or seismic forces. It is also recommended that continu- ous footings be reinforced top and bottom with a minimum of one No. 4 steel bar. settlements We estimate that total settlements will be approximately 1 ' inch with differential settlements generally being half that value. It has been our experience, however, that filled areas can settle more than ';estimated particularly if subsurface moisture conditions increase. We recommend that the project incorporate foundation reinforcement designed to reduce the effect of any additional foundation movement that could result from poor drainage, landscape irrigation, and leaking utilities. Floor Slabs Concrete slab-on-grade floors should be a minimum of 4 inches in thickness and reinforced with at least welded wire fabric at the midpoint. We recom- mend that a 1U mil plastic membrane plus a 2 inch protector layer of wetted sand be employed where moisture-sensitive floor coverings are used. Passive Resistance In order to provide lateral resistance, we recommend using an allowable equivalent fluid weight of 350 pcf in designs. This assumes that the ground is level for at least 10 feet in front of the surface generating the pressure. No credit should be given for the upper 12 inches of depth where surfaces are not protected by floor slabs or pavements. Alternate -7- Project No. 8751028W-UD01 Woodward-Clyde Consultants resistance can be provided by friction between the bottom of the footing and the underlying soil. A friction factor of 0.4 may be used in designs. If passive resistance and friction are used together, the friction value should be reduced by one-third. Retaining Walls We recommend that cantilevered retaining walls unrestrained from movement at the top and that have a level backrill surface be designed for an active equivalent fluid weight of 35 pcf. Tor 2 to 1 inclined backfiil above the top of the wall, we recommend using an active equivalent fluxd weight of 50 pcf, This assumes that onsite granular soils will be retained and that the gr,aular backfill exists above a 1 to 1 plane extending up and out from the footing. For basement-type walls not able to deflect at least .0005H feet at the top, we recommend adding a unixorm horizontal pressure of 10H psf to the active pressure where H is the height of the earth retained. All walls should be drained or designed to withstand hydrostatlc forces. A typical wall drainage system is included as Appendix E. ravements For the design of pavements at the site we used a design R-value of 50. This assumes that select soil will be in the upper 12 inches of subgrade. We recommend that the upper 6 inches of the subgrade be compacted to an indicated 95% relative compaction as determined by ASTM Test Method 1557-78. A Traffic Index (TI) of 4.5 was used for car parking and traffic and a TI of 5 .LI was used for access roads. Class 11 base was assumed in calculations. The following table presents our recommendations for pavement design: -8- Project' No. 8751028W-UD01 Woodward-Clyde Consultants Asphalt Class I1 ,', Use Concrete (in. 1 Base (in.) Car Parking and Traffic 3 4 Access Roads 3 5 These designs assume a pavement life of 20 years with normal mainte- nance. Class I1 base should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent relative comp,k!tion as determined by ASTM Test Method 1557-78. It is recommended that trash pickup areas have a minimum 6-inch thick Portland cement concrete (PCC) pavement section on compacted subgrade. We recommend that all PCC pavement sections be at least nominally rein- rorced and that provisions be made for load transfers across adjacent pavement sections, such as with keys or dowels. Class I1 aggregate base should conform to the State of California "Standard Specifications" (1984), Section 26-1. UZB. Asphalt concrete should conform to the State of California "Standard Specirications" (19841, Section 39-2.01 for the asphalt and Section 39-2.02 (Type B) for the aggregate. We recommend that a mix design be made for asphalt concrete and PCC by an engineering company specializing in this type of work, and that the paving operations be inspected by a qualified testing laboratory. We recommend that adequate surface drainage be provided to reduce pond- ing and inijltration of water into the subgrade materials. We suggest that paved areas have a minimum gradient of 1 percent. As much as possible, planter areas next to pavements should be avoided; otherwise, subdrains -9- ' Project No. 8751~28W-UD01 Woodward.Clyde Consultants should be used to drain the planters to appropriate outlets. It is impor- ,' tant to provide adequate drainage to reduce ponding and possible future distress of the pavement section. UNCERTAINTY AND LIRlITATIONS We have observed only a very small portion of 1 :he pertiner it soil and groundwater conditions. The recommendations made herein are based on the assumption that soil conditions do not deviate appreciably from those found during our field investigation. We recommend that Woodward-Clyde Consultants review the foundation and grading plans to verify that the $, intent of the recommendations presented herein has been properly inter- , preted and incorporated into the contract documents. We further recom- mend that Woodward-Clyde Consultants observe the site 'grading, subgrade preparation under concrete slabs and paved areas, and foundation exca- vations to verify that site conditions are as anticipated or to provide , revised recommendations if necessary. If the plans for site development are changed, or if variations or undesirable geotechnical conditions are encountercd during construction, we should be consulted for further recommendations. I This report is intended for design purposes only and may'not be sufficient to prepare an accurate bid. California, including San Diego, is an area of high seismic risk. It is generally considered economlcally unfeasible to bulld a totally earth- quake-resistant project; it is, therefore, possible that a large or nearby earthquake could cause damage at the site. Geotechnical engineering and the geologic sciences are characterized by uncertainty. Professional judgemenrs presented herein are based partly on our understanding of the proposed construction, and partly on our general experience. Our engineering work and judgements rendered meet current -1u- I Prolect No. 8751028W-UD01 Woodward-Clyde Consultants professional stanaards; we do not guarantee the performance of the project In any respect. Inspection services allow the testing of only a small percentage of the fill placed at the site. Contractual arrangements with the grading contractor should contain the provision that he is responsible for excavatmg, placing, and compacting fill in accordance with project specifications. Inspection by the geotechnical engineer during grading should not relieve the grading contractor of his primary responsibility to perform all work in accordance with the specifications. This firm does not practice or consult in the field of safety engineering. We do not direct the contractor's operations, and we can not be respon- sible for the safety of personnel other than our own on the sire; the safety of others is the responsibility of the contractor. The contractor should notify the owner if he considers any of the recommended actions presented herein to be unsafe. -11- Project No. 8751028W-UD01 Woodward-Clyde Consultants APPENDIX A FIELU INVESTIGATION Five exploratory test pits were advanced at the approximate locations January 21, 1987, under the direction of a geologist from our firm, using shown on the Site Plan (Figure 1). The excavations were performed on an 18-inch wide tractor-mounted backhoe. samples of the subsurface materials were obtained from the test pits. Tne samples were sealed to preserve the natural moisture content of the sample, and returned to the laboratory for examination and testing. The locatlons and elevations of all test pits are approximate. A-1 Location Boring Number Elevation - DEPTM FEET NUWBER TESTS .E IN ' TEST DATA SAMPLE 'OTMER SOIL DESCRIPTION " - 65 110 12 1 2 WATER LEVEL SOIL CLASSIFICATION At tmme of drilling or as indicated. Soil Clasrd~cat~onr are baud on the Unified Sod Clatsof~catoon Svrlem and include mlor. moillure and consirfency. Field dCsCroDloOnl haw been modified to rellect results of IBboratwy analym where apprwrnate. DISTURBED SAMPLE LOCATION - DRIVE SAMPLE LOCATION Obtrned by COIIeCling the auger cuttlngs in a plastic or Cloth bag. MODIFIEDCALIFORNIA SAMFLER hmple wth recorded blows per fool was obtained with a Modhed C.lhrnm drove lamplcr It" inrlde dimmer, 1.5 outrode dnarnelerl ', lined wlth laample tubes. The Ymplar was drown lnlo the sod at the bttorn of the hole wtth a 140 pound hammer frllmg 30 bncher. STANDARD PENETRATION SAMPLER Sample with recorded blows per fml was obtained using a standard split spmn sampler Il?; inside diameter. I" outride diameter). The sampler was driven into the soil at the bottom of the hale with a 1110 pound hammer falllng 30 inches and the sample pirccd in plastic bag. 1NDICATES SAMPLE TESTED FOR OTHER PROPERTIES GS - Gram Sue Dirrrtbut8on CT - Consoltdman Test LC - Laboratory Compactmn UCS - Unconfined COmDrerlion Test PI - Alterberg L8mltr Test DS - Dwect Shear Test ST - Loaded Swell Test TX- Trmrial Comprermon Test CC- Conftned Compresrzon 'R'- R-value NOTE: In this column the rr~lts of these tests my b recorded Test SDS -Slow Direct Shear Test Test BLOW COUNT DRY DENSITY MOISTURE CONTENT Pounds pr Cubm Foot where BppIICOble. Number of blow Msded IO dvmm ra-ler one foot 01 a5 indtcaled. Percent of Dry Weight NOTES ON FIELD INVESTIGATION 1. REFUSAL indicMn the inability to exlend exantion. praclidly, with quipmnt binp uwd in the InVCStigatiOn. KEY TO LOGS MOTEL 6 - CARLSBAD SITE 471 WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS .OTHEi EC - TESTS - OTHEP TESTS - SAMPLE WMEER q 1-2 [ Test Pit 1 Approximate El. 68.5' SOIL DESCRIPTION 1 Moist, light brown, clayey fine sand FILL Moist, dark brown, silty to clayey fine sand FILL Very dense, moist, greenish gray, silty fine sand (SM) SANTIAGO FORMATION Test Pit 2 Approximate El. 70' i NUMEER 2-1 4 ! SOIL DESCRIPTION I Moist, light brown, clayey fine sand FILL Moist, dark brown, silty to clayey fine sand FILL Very dense, moist, greenish gray, silty fine sand (SM) SANTIAGO FORMATION Bottom of Hole 'For description of svymbols. see Fiwrs A-1 MOTEL 6 - CARLSBAD SITE 471 DRAWNEY: & 1 CHECKEDEY:&J-I PROJECTNO 8751028~ I DATE 1-22-87 1 FlGUREP10: A-2 LOG OF TEST PITS 1 AND 2 WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS TEST DATA - SAMPLE NUMBER q 3-2 [ 3-3 c 3-4 1I - Test Pit 3 Approximate El. 70' Very dense, moist, reddish brown, silty fine sand (SM) grading to poorly graded (clean) sand with silt (SP-SM) TERRACE DEPOSITS Bottom of HoJe Test Pit 4 Approximate El. 69' 1 - " .:.: .. .. .. .. .. .. ii .:.: :j SOIL DESCRIPTION 1 Moist, dark brown, clayey sand \ FILL Very dense, moist, dark brown, Silty fine sand (SM) TERRACE DEPOSITS Bottom of Hole \ *For description of svmbols, see Fisure A-1 LOG OF TEST PITS 3 AND 4 MOTEL 6 - CARLSBAD SITE 471 - DRAWN BY: ch I CHECKED 0Y& PROJECT NO 8751028W I DATE: 1-22-87 I FIGUREIK): A-3 WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS - WPLf IUMEEi 5-1 [ 5-2 [ 5-3 [ Test Pit 6; Approximate El. 68.5' I SOIL DESCRIPTION I Moist, light brown, clayey fine sand FILL Moist, dark brown, silty to clayey fine sand FILL Dense, moist, dark reddish brown, silty fine sand (SM) TERRACE DEPOSITS \ \ Bottom of Hole *For description of symbols, IC. Figllre A-1 LQG OF TEST PIT 5 MOTEL 6 - CARLSBAD SITE 471 DRAWN BY: ch I CHECKED BY:d PRDJECT NO 8751028W I DATE: 1-22-87 [ FIQURE)10: A-4 WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS Project No. 8751028W-UDOl Woodward-Clyde Consultants APPENUIX B LABORATORY TESTS The materials observed in the test pits were visually classified and evaluated with respect to strength, compressibihty characteristics, and moisture content. The suitability of soils for use as pavement subgrade was evaluated by performing an R-value test. Corrosivity and sulphate tests were performed on a soil sample. The results of these tests, along with the results of previous laboratory tests performed during grading, follow. B-1 7574 Trade Street. San Diego. California 92121 American Engineering Laboratories. Inc Telephone (619) 6953730 RESISTANCE “R” VALUE CA TEST 301 Report AEL 74199 Date 1/28/87 RV # 58 ~ .. File No. 521 Client WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS Project Designation MOTEL 6 (Job 8751028w) Carlsbad. CA Simple Identification #3-1 Northwest corner building area. A D C B Compactor Pressure, psi 0 .03 .20 Expansion Pressure Thickness. ft. .55 .31 .29 Stabilometer Thickness. ft. 1 ao 310 780 Exudation Pressure, psi 62 78 ao R-value 115.5 115.7 115.8 Density, pcf 13.8 12.9 12.0 Moisture @ Compaction, % 350 350 350 Traffic Index (Assumed) 4.5 Sand Equivalent R-value - Exudation Pressure 77 R-value - Expansion Pressure - R-value (At Equilibrium) 77 2-Woodward-Clyde Consultants AMERICAN ENGINEERING LABORATORIES, INC. Reviewed by: WILLIAM L. PATRICK, R.C.E. #35256 LABORATORY REPORT Telephone (619) 425-1993 Established 1928 CLARKSON LABORATORY AND SUPPLY INC. 350 Trousddle Dr. Chula Vista, Ca. 92010 ANALmcAL AM) CuNSuLTIG CHEMIm Date: 1-26-87 Purchase Order Number: Job# 875102EW Account Number: WCOX To: Woodward Clyde 3467 Kurtz St. Attention: Chuck Elliot San Diego, CA. 92110 Laboratory Wer:SO 1458 Customrs Phone No: L27 224-2911 Sample Designation: * * One soil sample marked Motel 6 Site 471 Sample 1-1 I ANALYSIS: By Test Method No. Calif. 643-C October 2, 1972 State of ' California Departrrent of public Works Division of Highways Materials and Research Departn-ent Method for Esthting the Service Life of Metal Culverts. SAMPLE pH 5.9 Water Added (ml) 100 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 Resistivity (ohmcm) 7140 2840 1800 1260 1170 1140 1140 . ll40 - mtal culvert and 33 years to perforation for an 8 gauge metal The above results indicate 12 years to perforation for a 16 gauge culvert. 0.009 % CARLSBAD TRACT 81-5 DRAWNBY: ch I CHECKEDBY: I PROJECTNO: 54167J-FCO1 I DATE: 6-15-84 I FlGURENO 1 WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS PLASTICITY CHARACTERISTICS 5 COBBLES 1 ,,$“i , I SILT 6 CLAY 6 Liquid Limit, % - - - Plasticity Index, % - - Classification by Unified Soil Classification System - - - - ZERO AIR VOIDSCURVES 1 GRAIN SIZE, mm MECHANICAL ANALYSIS 1 MECHANICAL/I4OIST LABORATORY COMPACTION LABORATORY COMPACTION TEST 40 TESTMETHOD: ASTM D 1557 78 A FILL SUITABILITY TESTS CARLSBAD TRACT 81-5 DRAWN BY: ch CHECKED BY: I PROJECTNO 54167J-FCO1 I DATE: 6-15-84 I FIGURE NO 2 - WOODWARD-CLYOE CONSULTANTS PLASTICITY CHARACTERISTICS 8 1 COBBLES I 1 1 I 1 GRAVEL I SAND 1 SILT 6 CLAY Liquid Limit, % - Plasticity Index, % Classification by Unified Soil - SM 0 Classification System - 100 - NP z 80 3 260 t ', 2 40 ZERO AIR VOIDS CURVES GRAIN SIZE. mm MECHANICAL ANALYSIS DIRECT SHEAR TEST DATA 7 8 Dry Dens~ly. Pcf - lnitlal Water Content. % . - Final Water Content. 96 - - Apparent Coheslon. Psf Apparent Frictfon Angle, degrees - - - - - - CARLSBAE TRACT 81-5 DRAWN BY: ch CHECKED BY: I PROJECTNO 54167J-FC01 I DATE: 6-15-84 I FlGURENO 3 WOOOWAAO-CLYOE CONSULTANTS 0 m 3ON tnhW3 0 mmm mmmm o, r. m N om m mm um mm - h . m m N . mom 0000 0 m3m m3-m m ... .... dm- ommo o “3 4-43 3 tn 0 In Inn tntntn a33 3NN ... “3 3 N a- 33 3 33 .. .. uNm tnom- 0 ... .... 0-3 maam m NOW Ne” 3 333 -3-3 3 0 N m ‘mu .. NOW 3wm ... “3 333 N urn 00 3 3 33 mu- tnmmm m w3m mm-m o ... .... 3 3 4 m ro U tno N NO 3 .. 43 3m 00 .. 33 =NO ... mmm ” mtn mo ah .. ”- nmtn mom ah- ... O1 c -e 0 0 UW Lrrh UUU LrrLrrLrr tn I m 4 NE z r.z: = N N c NS 0 cl E3 0 4= NZ c 0 4E r. 4Nm uuu “3 hmm umnm mmm uuuu \D m h m h h r.m m 22 Project No. 8751028W-uD01 WoodwardClyde Consultants APPENDIX D WIDE SPECIFICATIONS FOR SITE GRADING Project: Motel 6, Site 471 1. GENERAL 1.1 The work of the Contractor covered by this specification consists of furnishing labor and equipment and performing all operations neces- sary to remove deleterious and undesirable materials from areas of grading, to properly prepare areas to receive fill, and to excavate and fill to the lines and grades shown on the plans or as directed in writing by the Civll Engineer (Architect). 1.2 The Contractor shall perform the work in strict accordance with these specincations anil he shall be responsible for the quality of the finisned product notwithstanding the fact that the grading work may be observed and tests made by a Soil Engineer. 1.3 Deviat~ons from these specifications will be permitted only upon written authorization from the Soil Engineer. A soil investigation has been made for this project; any recommendations made in the report of the soil investigation or subsequent reports concerning grading aspects shall become an addendum to these specifications. 2. DEFINITIONS 2.1 Contractor shall mean the contractor performing the grading work. 2.2 Owner shall mean the owner of the property or the party on whose the grading work is being performed and wno has contracted with the Contractor to have the grading performed. 2.3 Civil Engineer (Architect) shall mean the engineer (architect) who has prepared the grading plans and who is the Owners' representa- tive concerning the configuration, quantities and dimensions of the grading and who usually sets basic surveying data at the site for the Contractor's conformance. 2.4 Soil Engineer shall mean a duly licensed Civil Engineer, qualified in tives on site to observe and test the Contractor's work for confor- soil engineering, who is responsible for having qualified representa- mance witn these specifications. D-1 Project No. 8751U28W-UD01 Woodward.Clyde Consultants 3. OBSERVATION AND TESTING 3.1 The Soil Engineer shall be the Owner's representative to observe and make tests during the fill foundation preparation, filling and compacting operations. As a general rule, no more than 2 feet of fill In vertical elevation shall be placed without at least one field density test being made within that interval. 3.2 The Soil Engineer shall make random field density tests of the com- pacted fill to provide a basis for expressing his opinion as to whether the fill material is compacted as specified. The basis for his opinion that the fill material has been compacted to at least the minimum relative compaction specified, shall be that no tests in less than that specified. Density tests shall be made in the com- compacted or recompacted areas indicate a relative compaction of pacted materials below any disturbed surface. When these tests indicate that the density of any layer of fill, or portion thereof, is below the specified density, the particular layer or area represent- ed by the test' shall be reworked until the specified density has been achieved. ' 3.3 Testing shall conform to the following standards as pertinent: Field Density Test, Nuclear Method - ASTM D2~22-81," Density of Soil and Soil-Aggregate In-Place by Nuclear Methods (Shallow Depth)". O Field Density Test, Sand-Cone Method - ASTM U1556-82, "Densi- ty of Soil In-Place by the Sand-Cone Method". O Laboratory Compaction Test - ASTM D1557-78, "Moisture-Density Relations of Soils and Soil-Aggregate Mixture Using a 10-lb. Hammer and 18-inch Drops". 4. CLEARING AND PREPARINC; AHEAS TO BE FILLED 4.1 All trees, brush, grass, and other objectionable material shall be collected from areas to receive fill, piled and disposed of off-site prior to the commencement of earth moving so as to leave the areas that have been cleared with a neat and finished appearance free from debris. 4.2 All loose or porous soils sllall be removed or compacted as specified in the field by a representative of the Soil Engineer. Prior to for fill. The depth of removal and recompaction shall be approved placing fill, the surface to be filled shall be free from uneven features that would tend to prevent uniform compaction by the equipment to be used. It Shall then be plowed or scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches. D-2 Project No. 8751028W-UD01 Woodward-Clyde Consultants 4.3 Where fiis are constructed on hillsides or slopes; topsoil, slopewash and colluvium shall be removed. Where the exposed slope is steep- er than 6 horizontal to 1 vertical, or where specified by the Soil Engineer, the slope of the original ground on which the fill is to be placed shall be stepped or keyed by the Contractor as shown on the hgure below. The steps shall extend completely through the formational material is not present, into compact ground. soil mantle and into the underlying formatlonal materials or, where TYPICAL KEY See note NOTES: The outside edge of bottom key "A" shall be below topsoil or loose surface material and in no event less than 2 reet in depth. The minimum width of "B" Bench shall be 2 feet wider than the compaction equipment, and not less than 10 feet. 4.4 After the foundation for the fill has been cleared, plowed or scarified, it shall be disced or bladed by the Contractor until it is uniform ana free from large clods, brought to the specified moisture content, and compacted as specined for fill. D-3 Project No. 87s1028W-UDOl Woodward4lyde Consultants 5. MATERIALS 5.1 ,,Materials for compacted fill shall consist of any soil imported or hard lumps greater than 6 inches in maximum dimension and shall excavated from the cut areas. The soil shab contain no rocks or contain at least 40% of material smaller than inch in size. Material of a perishable, spongy, or otherwise improper nature shall not be used in fills. 5.2 Material placed within 36 inches of rough grade shall be select materid that contains no rocks or hard lumps greater than 6 inches in maximum dimension and that has an Expansion Index of 25 or less when tested in accordance with UBC Standard 29-2. 5.3 Representative samples of materials to be used for fill shall be tested in the laboratory by the Soil Engineer in order to determine at least the maximum density, optimum moisture content, classifica- \, tion of the soil and expansion index as reqmred. I 5.4 ' Uuring grading operatlons, soil types other than those analyzed in the report of the soil investigatlon may be encountered by the Contractor. 'I'he Soil Engineer shall be consulted to determine the suitabillty of these soils. 6. COMPACTION EQUIPMENT 6.1 Compact~on shall be accomplished by sheepsfoot rollers, vibratory rollers, multiple-wheel pneumatlc-tired rollers, or other types of acceptable compaction equipment. Equipment shall be of such a design that it will be capable of compacting the nll to the specified density at the specified moisture content. 7. PLACING, SPREADING, AND COMPACTION OF FILL MATERIAL 7.1 After each layer has been placed, mixed, and spread evenly, it compaction that is indicated by test to be not less than 90 percent. shall be thoroughly compacted by the Contractor to a relative of the in-place dry density of the compacted fill divided by the Relative compaction is defined as the ratio (expressed in percent) maximum laboratory dry density determined in accordance with the ASTM Test No. D1557-78, or other density test methods that will obtain equivalent results. Unless otherwise specified, fill material shall be compacted by the contractor while at a moisture content at or above the optimum moisture content determmed in accordance wirh the above test method. 0-4 ,. Project No. 8751028W-UD01 Woodward-Clyde Consultants 7.2 The fill material shall be placed by the Contractor in layers that, when compacted, shall not exceed 6 inches. Each layer shall be spread evenly and shall be thoroughly mixed during the spreading entire fill shall be constructed as a unit, in nearly level lifts start- to obtcun uniformity of moisture and material in each layer. The ing up from the lowest area to receive fill. Compaction shall be continuous over the entire area, and the equipment shall make sufficlent uniform trips so that the desired density has been ob- inches in maximum dmension shall be distributed in such a manner tained throughout the entire fill. Rock materials greater than 6 that they are completely surrounded by compacted fines; nesting of rocks shall not be permitted. 7.3 When the moisture content of the fill material is below that specified by the Soil Engineer, water shall be added by the Contractor until the moisture content is as specified. I 7.4 When the moisture content of the fill material is above that specified by the Soil Engineer or too wet to achieve properompaction, the fill material shall be aerated by the Contractor by blading, mixing, or other satisfactory methods until the moisture content is as required to permit compaction. I 7.5 Soils with higher expansion potential than specified may be used in 1 fills below a depth of 36 inches from design rough grade and shall be compacted at a moisture content greater than the optimum mois- ture content for the material. 7.6 Properly compacted fill shall extend to the design surface of fill slopes. The surface of fill slopes shall be compacted as necessary and there shall be no loose soil on the slopes. 8. PROTECTION OF WORK 8.1 During construction the Contractor shall properly grade all excavat- ed surfaces to provide positive drainage and prevent ponding of propertles or to finished work on the site. The Contractor shall water. He shall control surface water to avoid damage to adjoining take remedial measures to prevent erosion of freshly graded areas and until such time as permanent drainage and erosion control features have been installed. 8.2 After completion of grading and when the Soil Engineer has finished his observation of the work, no further excavation or filling shall be done except under the observatlon of the Soil Engineer. D-5 Project No. 8751028W-UD01 WoodwardClyde Consultants APPENDIX E GUIDE SPECIFICATIONS FOR WALL DRAINS I. DESCKIPTION shall be installed as shown on the plans in accordance with these Subsurface drains consisting of filter gravel with perforated pipe specifications, unless otherwise specified by the engineer. 11. MANUFACTURE Subsurface drain pipe shall be manufactured in accordance with the following requirements. Perforated PVC pipe or ABS pipe shall conform to ASTM Designa- tions 1785 and 2751, respectively. 111. FILTER MATIWIAL Filter material for use in backfilling trenches around and over drains shall consist of either of the following: (a) Clean, coarse sand and gravel or crushed stone conforming to the following grading requirements. Sieve Size 1 It 314" 318" 4 8 30 50 xu0 Percentage Passing Sieve 100 YO - 100 40 - 100 25 - 40 18 - 33 5 - 15 0- 7 0- 3 This material generally conforms with Class 2 permeable material in accordance with Section 68-1.025 of the Standard Specifi- cations of the State of California, Uepartment of Transportation. (b) Open graded crushed rock or gravel surrounded entirely by filter fabric (Mirafi 140N or equivalent). E-1 1 I Project No. 8751028W-UD01 Woodward-Clyde Consultants IV. LAYING the outside diameter of the pipe plus 1 foot and to the depth shown Trenches for drains shall be excavated to a minimum width equal to on the plans or as directed by the engineer. 'The bottom of the trench shall then be covered full width by 4 inches of filter material and the drainpipe shall be laid wirh the perforations at the bottom and sections shall be joined with couplers. The pipe shall be laid on a minimum slope of U. 2 percent. After the pipe has been placed, the trench shall be backfilled with filter material to the elevation shown on the plans, or as directed by the engineer. TYPICAL SECTION Impervious Soil 18 I' minimum Waterproof nembrane Filter Material 16" minimum 4" Diameter Perforated Pipe Plastic Film or Building Paper E-2 I Woodward-Clyde Consultants TYPICAL SECTION r Impervious Soil Waterproof Membrane Filter Material - 16" minimum width Perforated Pipe 6" Minimum pipe bedding of filter material