HomeMy WebLinkAbout3466; OLIVENHAIN RD WIDENING & REALIGNMENT; SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS; 1995-07-03SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS
PROPOSED OLIVENHAIN ROAD REALIGNMENT PROJECT
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
PREPARED FOR:
CITY OF CARLSBAD
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92009-1519
PREPARED BY:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC.
6280 RIVERDALE STREET
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92120
Providing Professional Engineering Services Since 1959
OT>C~
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOIL & TESTING, INC.
6280 Riverdale Street, San Diego, CA 92120
P.O. Box 600627, San Diego, CA 92160-0627
619-280-4321, FAX 619-280-4717
July 10, 1995
City of Carlsbad
Engineering Department
2075 Las Palmas Drive
Carlsbad; California 92009-1519
ATTENTION: Mr. Pat Entezari
SCS&T 9511128
Report No. 2
SUBJECT: Additional Surficial Slope Stability . Analysis, Proposed Olivenhain Road
Realignment Project, Carlsbad, California.
REFERENCE: "Slope Stability Analysis, Proposed Olivenhain Road Ralignment Project;"
Southern California Soil and Testing, Inc.; June 30, 1995.
Gentlemen:
In accordance with a request from Mr. Pat Entezari, we have prepared this letter to present
additional surficial slope stability analysis for the subject project.
The referenced report recommends the construction of a buttress fill slope, if the proposed cut slope
is constructed at a 2:1, (horizontal to vertical) inclination. It further recommended to construct the
buttress with predominantly sandy soils with less than 30 percent silty and/or clay. Based on this
description the following shear strength values are assumed for the surficial slope Stability
calculations. These values are considered conservative.
Angle of Internal Friction 0 = 300.
Apparent Cohesion c = 150 psf
Based on these values; it is our opinion that the buttress fill slope will possess an adequate factor-
of-safety with respect to surficial failure. The slope stability calculations are presented on the
attached Plate Number!.
If you should have any questions regarding this report, please do not hesitate to contact this office.
This opportunity t6 be of professional service is sincerely appreciated.
Resctfully Submitted,.
SOUThERrçALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC.
oik t•••' tH:.
.
Aller, R.O.E. p36037
(DBA:mw
I;I5::%:
3 03
6-30-96
cc: (6) Submitted • p,, zv
-
SURflCIAL SLOPE STABILITY
SLOPE SURFACE Z
ioo~
ie _-"
ASSUMED PARAMETERS
z = OrTh OF SATURATION = 3'
a = SLOPE ANGLE= 26.5°
w= UNIT WEIGHT OF WATER = 62.4 pcf
&T= SATURATED UNIT WEIGHT OF SOIL = 140 pcf
= APPARENT ANGLE OF INTERNAL FRICTION ALONG PLANE OF FAILURE = 300
c = APPARENT COHESION ALONG PLANE OF FAILURE = 150 p s f
FS = c+T TAN Ø = c+(ST -wzCOS a TAN V T 3Tz SIN a COS a
FS= 1.6
<*
SOUTHIRN CALIFORNIA
>
SOIL
,
a TS$TINQ,INC.
OLIVENHAIN ROAD REALIGNMENT
DBA 1DAT! 07-11-95
N..': 9511128
" Plate No. 1
I A - SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOIL &TESTING, INC.
I .6280 Riverdale Street, San Diego, CA 92120
P.O. Box 600627, San Diego, CA 92160-0627
. 619-280-4321, FAX 6I9-280-4717
July 3, 1995
I
City of Carlsbad
I . Engineering Department
2075 Las Palmas Drive
I Carlsbad, California 92009-1519
1oGE000215
X Q Exp. 3o47 1JI SCS&T 9511128
Report No.,!
ATTENTION: -Pat Entezari
SUBJECT: .
Slope Stability Analysis, Proposed Olivenhain Road. Realignment Project,
Carlsbad, California.
Gentlemen:
In accordance with your request and our Proposal 95S238, we have completed an investigation and
I
analysis of the stability of the proposed cut slope along the north side of Olivenhain Road, -east of
El Camino Real. We are presenting herein our findings and recommendations.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
1 The proposed subject project involves the realignment of Olivenhain Road from its westerly
terminus at El Carnino Real to a point approximately 1,500 feet to the east. The project also
I includes the reconstruction of the intersection at El Camino Real to produce a 90 degree
intersection. The new alignment will move approximately 1000 feet of the road to the north, into
I an existing,moderately sloping hillside. This will require cut slopes up to approximately 33 feet
high It is proposed to construct the new slopes at a ratio of 2:1 (horizontal units to vertical units)
The new Slope will tie into an existing near vertical slope facing El Camino Real.
SITE DESCRIPTION
I The new-road bed crosses the base of a moderately to gently, south facing hillside. The existing
ground generally slopes at a 5:1 ratio (horizontal to vertical) or less. The topography of the project
.1 . . . . ,.. . .
SCS&T 9511128 July 3, 1995 Page 2
area is characterized by a broad gentle swale in the hillside near the west end, a narrower, more
incised swale in the center and another broad gentler swale near the east end. An existing cut slope
up to about eight feet high follows the north side of the present alignment of Olivenhain Road.
- A steep, near vertical west facing, cut slope about 20 feet high exists adjacent to El Camino Real.
Existing vegetation in the project area is limited to natural wheat grasses and occasional shrubs.
The project site is traversed by an 150-foot-wide, northwest-trending, San Diego Gas and Electric
easement. Improvements present within this easement include above-ground power transmission
lines and underground gas and fuel lines. Other improvements, such as sewer, water and telephone
lines are present within the existing Olivenhain Road alignment.
SITE GEOLOGY
The project site is located within the Coastal Plains Physiographic Province of San Diego County,
and is underlain by Tertiary-age sedimentary deposits and associated residual soils. Abbott (1985)
includes a geologic map which shows the contact-between the Delmar Formation and the overlying
Torrey Sandstone at an approximate elevation of 100 feet MSL or slightly higher in the area of the
site. Although some sandstones were encountered in our trenches at or above an elevation of 100
feet MSL, claystones and mudstones were predominant throughout the range of elevations
explored. For the purposes of this report, all of the sedimentary rock materials encountered have
been classified as belonging to the Delmar Formation.
The most common material encountered in the seven exploratory trenches excavated at the site
consisted of dark olive-green to rust claystones. The claystones are typical moderately to highly
fractured where they occur within seven to ten feet of the surface, but are generally hard and
relatively unfractured below depths of seven to ten feet. In the majority of the trenches, the
claystones are interbedded with a variety of other sedimentary rock types, including very fine, silty
sandstones, clayey sandstones, and mudstones. Bedding within the Delmar Formation generally
appears to be nearly horizontal or to dip gently toward the south. A distinctive, six-inch-thick, tan
sandstone bed observed in Trenches Number 3 and 4 had apparent dip of approximately 4 degrees
toward the south. This apparent bedding orientation represents a slight, out-of-slope dip
configuration with respect to the proposed cut slope.
The Delmar Formation materials in the area where the top of the proposed cut slope will be located
are overlain by approximately two feet of topsoils/subsoils consisting of dark gray, humid to moist,
I
I
I
I
I
I
Li
Li
I
I
I
n
H
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
SCS&T 9511128 July 3, 1995 Page 3
very stiff, sandy clays. The topsoil/subsoil layer may be somewhat thicker or be intermixed with
minor slopewash or colluvium in the three previously mentioned draws.
SLOPE. STABILITY
The gross stability of the proposed cut slopes was analyzed utilizing a PC version of the STABR/G
program by Geosoft. This program utilized the modified Bishop's Method and the Ordinary
Method of the Slices to calculate the factor-of-safety of a slope with respect to rotational failure.
Cross sections A-A' and B-B' (see Plate Numbers 1 and 2) were analyzed assuming rotational
failure occurring at the toe of the proposed slopes and the contact between the moderately fractured
deposits and the undisturbed deposits. The analyses indicate factors-of safety in excess of 1.5 for
both sections (see Appendix A).
In addition the surficial stability of the proposed slopes was analyzed. The calculations are
included in the attached Plate Number 16 and indicate a factor-of-safety of less than 1.5.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
GENERAL: In general, we found that the proposed cut slope will expose claystones and
sandstones of the Delmar Formation. With the exception of approximately the upper six to twelve
feet, the formational soils are very hard or dense, relatively unfractured and are considered
competent with regards to slope stability characteristics. In general, the upper four to seven feet
was found to consist of a highly fractured claystone that has poor slope stability characteristics.
In Trench Number 2, at the east end of the project area, this highly fractured soil extended down
to 11.5 feet below the surface. In our opinion, the highly fractured materials should not be
allowed to exist in slopes steeper than 3:1 (horizontal to vertical). A distinctly different,
moderately fractured claystone was generally found between the highly fractured and relatively
unfractured materials. This material should also be considered to be unsuitable for slopes steeper
than 3:1, since its blocky and fractured nature allows water to build-up in the fractures and create
surficial stability problems in steeper slopes.
In consideration of our findings, it is our recommendation that either the portions of the slope that
contain the highly and moderately fractured claystones be laid back to a 3:1 slope ratio, or the
slope be buttressed where these soils exist. Since the height of the unsuitable materials vary along
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
SCS&T 9511128 July 3, 1995 . Page 4
I the length of the slope, we recommend laying back the upper twelve feet of the slope to the 3:1
I ratio. If buttressing is preferred, it will require select grading to generate enough silty sand or
slightly clayey sand to construct the buttress, and may even require mining select soil or importing
select soil. The attached Plate No. 3 presents the recommended buttress configuration. The
buttressing would also require the installation of a subdrain behind the buttress.
I GRADING
BUTTRESS: A buttress will be required if the cut slope is constructed at a 2:1 (horizontal to
I
vertical) inclination. The buttress should be at least twelve feet wide and should be constructed
with soil mixtures that are predominantly sandy, and with less than 30 percent silt and or clay.
I
Some of this material will be generated from proposed cuts. However, minimum and/or importing
may be necessary to generate sufficient material for buttress construction. A typical buttress detail
I
with subdrain recommendations is presented on the attached Plate Number 3. It should be noted
that height of the unsuitable soils vary along the length of the proposed slope. The detail on Plate
Number 3 shows an average buttress height of 10 feet. The buttress height may be slightly less
I in the westerly portion and slightly deeper in the easterly portion. If the highly fractured and
moderately fractured soils are laid back to a 3:1 (horizontal to vertical) slope inclination,
I / buttressing will not be necessary.
I FILL PLACEMENT: All fills should be placed in thin layers compacted to at least 90 percent
as determined in accordance with ASTM D1557-78 Method A or C. The face of the buttress slope
I should be compacted with a sheepsfoot at vertical intervals no greater than four feet or should be
over-built and cut back to finish grade. In addition, if not over-built and cut back, the face of the
1 buttress slope should be trackwalked upon completion.
IMPORTED FILL: Imported fill should be approved by a representative from this office prior
to delivery. Imported fill should consist of soil mixtures that are predominantly sandy, and with
I less than 30 percent silt and or clay.
I CUT SLOPE OBSERVATION: The proposed buttress backcut and the rest of the cut slopes
should be observed by the engineering geologist to ascertain that no unforeseen adverse conditions
I are encountered.
I
SCS&T 9511128 July 3, 1995 Page 5
SURFACE DRAINAGE: It is recommended that all surface drainage be directed away from the
top of the proposed slopes.
EARTHWORK: All earthwork and grading contemplated for site preparation should be
accomplished in accordance with the attached Recommended Grading Specifications and Special
Provisions. All special site preparation recommendations presented in the sections above will
supersede those in the standard Recommended Grading Specifications. All embankments, structural
fill and fill should be compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction at or slightly over
optimum moisture content. Utility trench backfill beneath asphalt pavements should be compacted
to a minimum of 90 percent of its maximum dry density. The upper twelve inches of subgrade
beneath paved areas should be compacted to 95 percent of its maximum dry density. This
compaction should be obtained by the paving contractor just prior to placing the aggregate base
material and should not be part of the mass grading requirements. The maximum dry density of
each soil type should be determined in accordance with ASTM Test D-1557-78, Method A or C.
GRADING PLAN REVIEW: The final grading plans should be submitted to this office for
review to ascertain that the recommendations provided in this report have been implemented and
the assumptions utilized in preparing this report are still applicable.
FIELD EXPLORATIONS
Seven subsurface explorations were logged at the locations indicated on the attached Plate Number
1 on June 20, 1995. These explorations consisted of trenches excavated by means of a backhoe.
The field work was conducted under the observation of our engineering geology personnel.
The explorations were carefully logged when made. These logs are presented on the following
Plates Number 5 through 11. The soils are described in accordance with the unified Soils
Classification System as illustrated on the attached simplified chart on Plate Number 4. In addition,
a verbal textural description, the wet color, the apparent moisture and the density or consistency
are provided. The density of granular soils is given as either very loose, loose, medium dense,
dense or very dense. The consistency of silts or clays is given as either very soft, soft, medium
stiff, stiff, very stiff, or hard.
Disturbed and "undisturbed" samples of typical and representative soils were obtained and returned
to the laboratory for testing.
I
I
I
I
I
1]
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SCS&T 9511128 July 3, 1995 Page 6
LABORATORY TESTING
Laboratory tests were performed in accordance with the generally accepted American Society for
Testing and Materials (ASTM) test methods or suggested procedures. A brief description of the
tests performed is presented below:
CLASSIFICATION: Field classifications were verified in the laboratory by visual
examination. The final soil classifications are in accordance with the Unified Soil
Classification System.
MOISTURE-DENSITY: In-place moisture contents and dry densities were determined
for representative soil samples. This information was an aid to classification and
permitted recognition of variations in material consistency with depth. The dry unit
weight is determined in pounds per cubic foot, and the in-place moisture content is
determined as a percentage of the soil's dry weight. The results are summarized in the
trench logs.
I
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION: The grain size distribution was determined from
I representative samples of the native soils in accordance with ASTM D422. The results
of these tests are presented on Plates Number 12, 13 and 14.
I
DIRECT SHEAR TESTS: Direct shear tests were performed to determine the failure
envelope based on yield shear strength. The shear box was designed to accommodate
a sample having a diameter of 2.375 inches or 2.50 inches and a height of 1.0 inch.
Samples were tested at different vertical loads and a saturated moisture content. The
shear stress was applied at a constant rate of strain of approximately 0.05 inch per
I minute. The results of these tests are presented on the attached Plate Number 15
I LIMITATIONS
I The recommendations and opinions expressed in this report reflect our best estimate of the project
requirements based on an evaluation of the subsurface soil conditions encountered at the subsurface
I exploration locations and the assumption that the soil conditions do not deviate appreciably from
those encountered. It should be recognized that the performance of the foundations may be
influenced by undisclosed or unforeseen variations in the soil conditions that may occur in the
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I SCS&T 9511128 July 3, 1995 Page 7
E
I
I
I
I
intermediate and unexplored areas. Any unusual conditions not covered in this report that may be
encountered during site development should be brought to the attention of the soils engineer so that
he may make modifications if necessary. In addition, this office should be advised of any changes
in the project scope or proposed site grading so that it may be determined if the recommendations
contained herein are appropriate. This should be verified in writing or modified by a written
addendum.
If you should have any questions regarding this report, please do not hesitate to contact this office.
This opportunity to be of professional service is sincerely appreciated.
I Respectfully Submitted,
I SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC.
I -
4~~awa2
I
Charles H. Christian, R.G.E. #00215 Curtis R. Burdett, C.E.G. #1090
CHC:CRB:DBA:mw
I cc: (6) Submitted
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
(1 No.GE000215 \c, Up. 9-3Q-7 II
L4IG
CERTIFIED 0 ENGINEERING .
q~
GEO'OGIGT
1z CM
I /\
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA OLIVENHAIN ROAD REALIGNMENT
SOIL & TESTING,INC. BY: CHC/SD DATE: 062995
JOB NUMBER9511128 FIGURE NO. 1
CENTERLINE DATA
NO. 'DELTA OR BRC; RADtUS LENGTH ' REMARKS '
0° N8729'Ol 69.68' WNHA/W ROAD
0 12V525'kV 1600.00' JJ762' -
87523'371W 54201' -
CURB DATA
NO; DELTA OR BRG.] RADIUS LENGTH REMARKS
8876'20 40.00' 6l.6J'JYPE'C'C5_>R.
11'48'20 1655.50' 341.11' "
N 7523'37' IV - - 174.77' -
S 74J270' t 365.09' p a
0OV4'51 1554.00' 2.19'
0021107" 164700' 10.11' - - -
_±' -
1024 "45 154550' 280.87' -
E] 92V3'21' 40.00' 64.27' IV
7670:56" 50 00' 1412' 5' T'F 9-2' A/ED S IZEi 16379'32 1.00' 2.85' -
Ap
1071'14" 15.90.50' 283 -- - N
09'5643P 800.00' 1J 86' - -
128'10' 400.00'. 8622' -
.S'7432'l0"E •364.78'
0O'06 'or 159500'
0021'56 1606.00' 10.25' H
N 7551 19' IV — 544.79' N
11 V5'Jf' 1586.50' 30713' p
90
85
CL
80
75
-
-.'
-
NOT:
- 1. NACTO AC PA WA/tNT AND A.8. f PWsrA.
1+39.57 TO 15+05.47
2 ISNG 12' WN, 18' WP SR AND 16" FUZZ LINE WLL R1A/N IN 70
PLAC
3: EX/S71NC IC' FUZ TO SE REL0C4 TED B)' S/PP. LP. -
4 &7S77N6 30 GAS /1,4/N. TO BE REL OCA 7Th BY SDG
5 S/PP, LP. W'LL CONSTRUCT AN ACCRECA 7T BASE CUSHION ABOk
EX'S171VG 16 R/L -
':- •
• ,psi,'. &
ON
% • • - °° I .H....I.. " 4'W.°' . - v..:P4-u. '.,.-.. . 4jV .w..q. - j(••
ON
MENEM
MENEM
ME MEMOMMEM
ME I
NEON NONER
IN Ron 0 MEN M MINI MENOMONEE
ME 0
EON
ME MOEN
0
mmm
0
MUI
ME
M
MEN
Nunn
M
M
..
0
1
M
MEN
mrmmm
NNE
MIN ME MEN NMI No
UURI!
MENNEN
NEON
ME
M
MM
No
M
MEN
MM
MENEM
so MEN
MM
ENEM
MEN
aiva*um
a
NNE
MEME
Ill
M
No 0
so
ME
a a
M
IN
ME
1 iso a a
M
a. aa.aa
0
lusulul 1UNU " :. ,
MEN No
a. ii a.
MEMMEMMM
NINE
ama a••• • • Il••_ iaaa.a ama. ••aaa
a
WE
ON 7- 2 6 7 8 9 10 • \
tEST 20'
LHP \ A 0 Y C U - -
-;±------ 7R1A141/NG vkT
/ -r 6
I..
\
74
ViA
CA
\'\' \
- •: ' \ '•. .;; TI WI//I
-.---CONTRACTOR TO F7ELD 'ER/PY'
\ • DEPTH & L OCA 7701V or UNDER • •.
.' 7. ' •,• GROUND U771117E5 AND NOTJFY. -41 •. ' I £7/GINEER OF KRK OF AN • r ri
DISC EPANC/ES
- - 1 • rc. T •:- _-- I 00+2271 0 108.59 L T ° - - • • — l
\•° • —i7S1 90'R/WPEW • -• :.. DON0.26
.._- - - - C ''
57 -
° 0 xfl-'[°.'\..i
• — -. — —
__- \ (13 QP55'w_226
PER
05g57/) .
cADIA BL VD.
\
\
r
' 7
225-
LEUj roc SAN DIEGO
PER j95 .-.. .i. 0
r 9' \ I
• ° '/
rn
- • —
2 ''
— - _—.M;;\';\ '•?'
°- I
' - " —. •'Q '_-.-'\ 1 - \ \ u----"
61 '•.'
\ EA-11 ' SCS&T LEGEND ' .•)I \ I ENCINITAS 01
000 °• 0'°' -.
,0_00 - •_•.-: - a
.. -
0'•
0 • • • - .1 0°• - °
0 •
"a - • • r lç I.
-'i 0 - ° • 4_
..__ vctT •'•" .•-
I ••• L Ji•.
•• 0
,• 4 ° °'lQ •- - •-•,
F'L7' /7LE A'O 425/0 • - 0
j\irAp DATED A/A1?CH2 1960 -
000• '"\
°°
- 0 J 7 LL(j K
•
0+00
Ll
oe
TOP
Lt
0 - 0 '.rf7 .p • cj /
J _-•_•___••__I• _-- HP
0 ••°° -' i - — ' - . 0 •
- 0
00:.
AR1NRS ..
- - ••••• J1'..J - J iJJJJi_. L1L1 1 J
DI A 4 I. F fl / IL! A IA I meoll, A r'i APPROXIMATE TRENCH LOCATION
CROSS SECTION
INLET SUMMARY
C4VAL DOW IRANS' 77C4'V ( DEPRESSW TRAN.971C1/ NCRAIAL DEPTH REMARKS
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
T SOIL & TESTING, INC.
OLIVENHAIN ROAD REALIGNMENT
BY: CHCISD DATE: 06-30-95
JOB No.: 9511128-1 PL.ATENo.:
0
-- - -
0
- --
0 0 -• - -
5O7Q5UBMUAL - M1000
- T6
Td CL/cH
CL/CH
CL/ML+ CL
. CUP
T3
Td
sm
SM
cL
~
cL
CL/M
I
B'
GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION B-B'
CE
BED
Td
CL+CI
10
PROPOSED STREET SM 1
Td SM+CL/ML'
sm sm PROPOSED STREET
Td
A
II 110
I
100
I 9
HI
80
lB
120
I
110
I
100
I
190
1
80
I.
I
I:
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
T SOIL & TESTING, INC.
OLIVENHAIN ROAD REALIGNMENT
BY: MF/CHC DATE: 6/28/95
JOB No.: 9511128-1 1 PLATE No.: 2
Al
GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION A-A'
LEGEND
Td DELMAR FORMATION
CL UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION
(SEE PLATE 4)
APPARENT SLOPE STABILITY CHARACTERISTICS
POOR
MARGINAL
GOOD
TYPICAL BUTTRESS DETAIL
No Scale
12
MODERATELY TO HIGHLY MIRADRAIN
WEATHERED CLAYSTONE
ftftft
CIN
U.
cc 0 tutu
* 1 4 5%
- I
FILTER FABRIC
3 CUBIC YARDS CRUSHED
ROCK PER LINEAR FOOT
h
ti-il
4 PERFORATED PIPE 12
TYPICAL TYPICAL
No Scale
MIRADRAIN STRIPS
<*
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
>
SOIL & TESTING, INC.
e -
0
OLIVENHAIN ROAD REALIGNMENT
BY: CHC/SD DATE: 07-0395
JOB NUMBER: 9511128 Plate No. 3
SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION LEGEND
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART
SOIL DESCRIPTION GROUP SYMBOL TYPICAL NAMES
COARSE GRAINED, more than half
of material is larger than
No. 200 sieve size.
GRAVELS CLEAN GRAVELS GW Well graded cravels, gravel- More than half of sand mixtures, little or no
coarse fraction is fines.
larger than No. 4 GP Poorly graded gravels, gravel
sieve size but sand mixtures, little or no
smaller than 3. fines.
GRAVELS WITH FINES GM Silty gravels, poorly graded
(Appreciable amount gravel-sand-silt mixtures.
of fines) GC Clayey gravels, poorly
graded gravel-sand, clay
mixtures.
SANDS CLEAN SANDS SW Well graded sand, gravelly
More than half of sands, little or no fines. coarse fraction is SP Poorly graded sands, gravelly
smaller than No. 4 sands, little or nofines.
sieve size.
SANDS WITH FINES SM Silty sands, poorly graded
(Appreciable amount sand and silty mixtures.
of fines) SC Clayey sands, poorly graded
sand and clay mixtures.
FINE GRAINED, more than
half of material is smaller
than No. 200 sieve size.
SILTS AND CLAYS ML Inorganic silts and very
fine sands, rock flour, sandy
silt or clayey-silt-sand
mixtures with slight plas-
ticity.
Liquid Limit CL Inorganic clays of low to
less than 50 medium plasticity, gravelly
clays, sandy clays, silty
clays, lean clays.
OL Organic silts and organic
silty clays or low plasticity.
SILTS AND CLAYS MH Inorganic silts, micaceous
or diatomaceous fine sandy
or silty soils, elastic
silts.
Liquid Limit CH Inorganic clays of high
greater than SO plasticity, fat clays.
OH Organic clays of medium
to high plasticity.
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT Peat and other highly
organic soils.
-
- Water level at time of excavation CK - Undisturbed chunk sample
or as indicated BG - Bulk sample
US - Undisturbed, driven ring sample SP - Standard penetration sample
or tube sample
<4
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA OLIVENHAIN ROAD REALIGNMENT
>
SOIL & TESTING, INC. BY: CHC DATE: 062795
JOB NUMBER: 9511128 Plate No. 4
07
>
0.
TRENCH NUMBER 1 LU
z ZZ
>.
I- -
S
i STATION NUMBER 9+90 w
-
w Z Lu I
CL CL U) Q) ELEVATION 89 FEET <a. 1- Oz o . -j
Lu ______________ <go a. z > .o
wO- x: ____________
co DESCRIPTION 0 o
- CH TOPSOIL/SUBSOIL, Dark Grey, Dry to Very
SANDY CLAY, Extensive Moist Stiff - 1 Dessication with Cracks up
to 1" Wide in Upper 1.5' Humid to
BG Moist
2
CK
3L :
Gradational
SM DEL MAR FORMATION, Pale Humid Dense
Green, VERY SILTY SAND
5
.-.. _____ (Sandstone)
CL/ Dark Green with Rust Stains, Hard [ BG Humid
CH SANDY SILTY CLAY (Claystone) I 6 - Moderately to Highly - Weathered, Some Slicken-
Sides 17--
Proposed Street Elevation -
I:
88 Feet (-1 Foot)
CALIFORNIA PROJECT: OLIVENHAIN ROAD REALIGNMENT
LOGGED BY: MF ' DATE L000ED:°62095
eSOUTHERN
SOIL & TESTING, INC. I
JOB NUMBER: 9511128 IPLATE NUMBER: 5
> I— TRENCH NUMBER 2 Zcr
>>
wwu
>. —
Lu wZ
>0 --
-10 STATION NUMBER 9+60 W , Z Z — <U CL CL ELEVATION 100 FEET <c'
0< < 0 cc O o cr
0 DESCRIPTION C.)
CH TOPSOIL/SUBSOIL, Dark Grey, Humid Loose
-
I
SANDY CLAY, Large Dessi-
1- cation Cracks
2-.
SC- DEL MAR FORMATION, Pale Humid- Loose
CL Green, FINE CLAYEY SAND- Moist
SANDY CLAY, Highly
L Fractured, Disturbed
4[BG
5-
CL Dark Olive Green with Rust Humid Hard
- Stains, SANDY SILTY CLAY,
6- Highly Fractured and
— Disturbed, Slickensides,
Bedding Indistinct
7
CK
BG
10
Contact Appears to Parallel Surface_________
CL Dark Olive Green, SANDY Humid Hard
CK SILTY CLAY, Very Hard and
Relatively Unfractured
12-
13
Proposed Street Elevation -
88 Feet (-12 Feet)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA 'PROJECT: OLIVENHAIN ROAD REALIGNMENT
LOGGED BY: MF DATE LOGGED: 06-20-95 SOIL & TESTING, INC.
(JOB NUMBER: 9511128 IPLATE NUMBER 6
>-
LU
- :: z
1p
w w)
-Z >Q
CL V)< W oa (l)
a. z >. OZ o LUQ-Cr
0 0 U
Very
Stiff
- -
> I.- TRENCH NUMBER 3 LU
i STATION NUMBER 4+25 cc
A. a. ELEVATION 110 FEET W o . a.
co — DESCRIPTION
CH TOPSOIL/SUBSOIL, Dark Grey, Humid
SANDY CLAY 1_
] CL! DEL MAR FORMATION, Dark Moist
BG CH Olive Green with Rust Stains
L4 SANDY SILTY CLAY, Highly
4] Fractured (Claystone)
5-1 I __ -
SM Pale Green, FINE SILTY SAND Humid
(Sandstone)
6
J CK
CK CL Dark Olive Green, SANDY Moist
SILTY CLAY, Highly Fractured
SM- Dark Grey and Light Grey Humid
CL! Interbedded, VERY SILTY
9 ML SAND AND VERY SILTY CLAY!
VERY CLAYEY SILT (Mudstone)
Moderately Fractured
10
- -
SM Tan, SILTY SAND Humid
11 CL Dark Olive Green with Rust Humid
CK Stains, SANDY SILTY CLAY,
Relatively Unfractured
12 -
13.
14- Proposed Street Elevation -
82.5 Feet (-27.5 Feet)
Stiff
Dense
133.5 7.3
Hard 112.1 18.7
Dense-
Hard
Dense
Very
Hard 111.9 17.9
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA OLIVENHAIN ROAD REALIGNMENT
L<
LOGGED BY: MF 1DATE LOGGED:
06_20951 SOIL & TESTING, INC.
(JOB NUMBER: 9511128 (PLATE NUMBER: 7
- -
CL > 2
' TRENCH NUMBER 4
J
w Zcr z z C/) WW >
UJ LUZ
UJ STATION NUMBER 4+25 Ui z <cl)w w i — z w ELEVATION 100 FEET C
-
- LU o -°
o
()
a. 0
___________
DESCRIPTION C.)
CH TOPSOIL/SUBSOIL, Dark Grey, Humid Very
-
j
SANDY CLAY, Some Dessication
I
Stiff
i 1 J Cracks
2 — ____
CL! DEL MAR FORMATION, Dark Olive Moist Stiff
— CH to Rust, SANDY SILTY CLAY,
3 - I Highly Fractured
4 -- ___ — --
- — SM Tan, SILTY SAND (Sandstone) Humid Dense
- CL Dark Olive Green, SANDY Humid Hard
and SILTY CLAY
— CL-
6 ML Highly Fractured to 7 Feet
I CK 111.6 17.5
7..
Moderately Fractured from Humid Hard
7 Feet to 10 Feet
8
CK 112.1 18.5
9-
10- Relatively Unfractured from Humid Very
10 Feet to 13 Feet Hard
11
CK 109.8 1 18.1
12
13
J Sandstone Contact at 4 Feet
1 Dips Approximately 4 Degrees
-1 to South.
Proposed Street Elevation -
82.5 Feet (-17.5 Feet)
I~Sc-~
<#>
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
1JOB
PROJECT: OLIVENHAIN ROAD REALIGNMENT
LOGGED BY: ME bATE LOGGED: 0620-95 SOIL & TESTING, INC.
NUMBER: 9511128 1PLATE NUMBER: 8
LU w LLI Z
LIJ WW
,Z
-.
rc LU <0
<
CL cc 5z , La 9La -
93 Cr
C)
Humid- Stiff
Moist
I
w CL Z
2 U TRENCH NUMBER 5
-1 0 STATION NUMBER 4+25
• CL ELEVATION 91 FEET
• w a,
DESCRIPTION
CH TOPSOIL/SUBSOIL, Dark Grey,
- SANDY SILTY CLAY
2-
I CL DEL MAR FORMATION, Dark
- Olive Green, SANDY SILTY
3-. CLAY, Moderately Fractured,
I Some Slickensides
4
CK
I - - SM Tan to Light Rust and Grey, 6- to SILTY SAND TO SLIGHTLY
SM- CLAYEY SILTY SAND
I 7 SC (Sandstone)
CK
1 8
_ Refusal on Cemented Sandstone I Proposed Street Elevation -
- 82.5 Feet (-8.5 Feet)
I-
I-
I:
Moist- Hard
Humid
112.2 I 17.8
Humid Very
Dense
116.0 I 12.6
1JOB
j : eSOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PROJECT: OLIVENHAIN ROAD REALIGNMENT
OGGED BY: MF DATE LOGGED: 06-20-95 SOIL & TESTING, INC.
NUMBER: 9511128 [PLATE NUMBER 9
- -
>.
I- LU >. < TRENCH NUMBER 6 z zz -
STATION NUMBER 6+50 w i::i::
A. ELEVATION -105 FEET a . 14 5z -' Lu Q. -z >. cr O w- CZ C cc
- DESCRIPTION a C) 0
(_) o ___
CH TOPSOIL/SLOPEWASH, Dark Humid- Stiff
Brown, SANDY SILTY CLAY Moist 1.
2 --
CL! DEL MAR FORMATION, Dark Humid Hard
- CH Olive Green, SANDY SILTY
3 CLAY, Highly Fractured to
4 Feet, Moderately
- Fractured from 4 feet to
6.5 Feet
CK
5-
6-
- Humid- Hard CL- Grey to Rust, Interbedded,
ML SILTY CLAY- CLAYEY SILT AND Moist
- and SILTY CLAY, Thinly Bedded,
8 CL Relatively Unfractured
CK 97.0 24.2
Relatively Horizontal Bedding
9-
10 -
Moist SM Light Grey to Rust Dense 11
IL___
Moist Very CL- Grey to Rust, VERY SANDY 12 - ML SILT TO CLAYEY SANDY SILT Hard
13 -
--
Refusal on Cemented Sandstone
- Proposed Street Elevation -
84.5 Feet (20.5 Feet)
II
[SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA 'PROJECT: OLIVENHAIN ROAD REALIGNMENT
LOGGED BY: ME DATE L000ED:06-20-95 SOIL & TESTING, INC.
1J08 NUMBER: 9511128 PLATE NUMBER: 10 I
I-
> TRENCH NUMBER 7 La Zcr z Z I— w z
>
:dC STATION NUMBER 6+65 Lu
Cc
ujw) Z Z Lu Z 1
CL
w
90 LL ELEVATION -95 FEET < u <u,w <0
-J W -z o c
0
cr. W F DESCRIPTION 0
0
CH TOPSOIL/SUBSOIL, Dark Grey, Humid Stiff
I
SANDY CLAY
1
2 SM DEL MAR FORMATION, Grey to Humid- Dense- and Rust, Interbedded, Moist Stiff - CL- FINE SILTY SAND (Sandstone)
ML and SANDY CLAYEY SILT
BG (Siltstone)
SM Tan, FINE SILTY SAND Moist Dense
(Sandstone)
5f-
BG
u CK I ML- Brown and Rust, SANDY CLAYEY Humid- Very CL SILT, Moderately Cemented Moist Hard
____ Abundant Shell Fragments
- SM Tan, FINE SILTY SAND Humid Very
(Sandstone) Well-Cemented Dense 8-
Refusal on Cemented Sandstone
Proposed Street Elevation
84.5 Feet (-10.5 Feet)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PROJECT: OLI VENHAI N ROAD REALIGNMENT
SOIL & TESTING, INC. LOGGED BY: ME bATE LOGGED: 0620-95
JOB NUMBER: 9511128 IPLATE NUMBER: 11
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
U.S. STANDARD SIEVES HYDROMETER
(MINUTES)
36 18
Cl)
2 1:2 1/4 110 #20 #40 •60
0 24 12 1. 3 I. 117. 3;4 318 04 #8 #16 #30 #50 #100 0200 I 2 5 30 180 1440 (506m)
I0
9c
171 80
70
, -v
60
w.Z 50 -
- z
C)
40
20
to
0 U <w 987654 3 2 987654 3 2 987654 3 2 967654 3 2 98 76 5 4 3 2 987654 3 2
01000 too to to 01 01 001
z m
C) GRAIN SIZE (mm)
to C) —1
rn :i:•• C-)
C) PARTICLE SIZE LIMITS
IBOULDER COBBLE
L
GRAVEL SAND
: FINE
SILT OR CLAY
COARSE FINE ICOARSE I MEDIUM
(12) 3 314 No. 4 No. 10 No. 40 No. 200
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE
T3@ 11.
— — — — — — mm — mm ift — — — .- =— —
<* U.S. STANDARD SIEVES HYDROMETER
(MINUTES)
.I6 j• . j. I:2 114 910 920 040 90
M.
(I) 0 24 12 6. 1. I. I,2314 318 94 98 916 130 950 1100 9200 I 2 5 30 180 1440 (50(,m) Ô —I
101
90
Fri 80
70
60
-o
C)
50
40
30
20
10
0
440 (100Gm)
C) 3.
C) 0
m C) -4
0
(m 987654 3 2 98765 4 3 2 987654 3 2 96765 4 3 2 98 76 5 4 3 2 98765 4 3 2
w 0 z 1000 100 10 to 01 01 001
C 0 GRAIN SIZE (mm)
rn
PARTICLE SIZE LIMITS
BOULDER COBBLE
GRAVEL SAND SILT OR CLAY
COARSE J FINE COARSE I MEDIUM [ FINE
(12) 3 3/4 No. 4 No. 10 No. 40 No. 200
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE
T4@ 11•
PARTICLE SIZE LIMITS
BOULDER COBBLE
GRAVEL SAND SILT OR CLAY
COARSE FINE COARSE MEDIUM J FINE
(12') 3 3/4 No. 4 No. 10 No. 40 No. 200
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE
T6@ 8,
=mo on — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
U.S. STANDARD SIEVES HYDROMETER
(MINUTES)
U) 36 18 2 1,,2* */4 10 920 #40 960
0 24 12 5' V 1 Ij' 3i4' i/B' 94 #8 9*6 I30 #50 9*00 #200 I 2 5 30 180 *440 (50((n)
- -
Ô —I 90
D ,. -v
80
70
60
;;
C)
50
_I •11 — 0
—1
40
30
20
10
0 Q - 98765 4 3 2 98765 4 3 2 987654 3 2 96795 4 3 2 98765 4 3 2 98785 4 3 2
w..
Z *000 *00 10 *0 0$ 0* 00*
rn
C) GRAIN SIZE (mm)
W M
C)
01 i-i
I— I1 I—.
N) c
-1
— —
- ' C) Qi 1 fll c, CD
I I
N) i-
1.0
. I o 01 111
—I
uuuui .uu•u ..uuu.uu.
....i mu.. u•uu•.u. •u• .....i I.... U•••U•NPdY d•UI ..u_..... mu.0 u••a•••••u somovadosims .0 mu.. iRuum IU•P4R PI •••u iuuu u•'mu•a dUNI uuu.mi uuu. iusu,. ..uu u....i uuPu .u.0 uuuui u•u mu. uup uumr muumuuu uuuu uui IUW4N P....... uu•I muui IP4R' dOMMENEEN U... 4.... dP• iuuuu.. mmmi
,..m iuuu.auu• •mu•
...I i.... ..u.uum. m.ui up':. i•uu .uuuuu. ...0
..u. .uuurn. urn
SURFICIAL SLOPE STABILITY
SLOPE SURFACE
v ASSUMED PARAMETERS
z = DEPT" OFSATURATION 3'
a =SLOPEANGLE= 26.5°
w UNIT WEIGHT OF WATER = 62.4
I
T= SATURATED UMT WEIGHT OF SOIL = 140 pcf
g = APPARENT ANGLE OF INTERNAL FRICTION ALONG PLANE OF FAILURE = 300
I
e = APPARENT COHESION ALONG PLANE OF FAILURE = 75 psf
I FS
-
- c+T TAN Ø - a+(T-wzCOS
T - Tz SIN a COS a
I
I
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
:
L
SOIL &TI$TINQ,INC.
OLIVENHAIN ROAD REALIGNMENT
CHC DATE: 06-3095
l!!R: 9511128 1 Plate No. 16
APPENDIX A
9
LIE
30 1995 Appendix A SCS&T 9511128
I *********************************************
* *
* SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS *
* * I ************** S T AB R G
* *
* PORTIONS (C) COPYRIGHT 1985, 1986 *
I * *
* GEOSOFT *
* *
I * ALL RIGHTS RESERVED *
* *
*********************************************
Ll SCS&T 9511128 SECTION A-A'
IONTROL DATA
NUMBER
NUMBER
OF
OF
SPECIFIED CENTERS 0
DEPTH LIMITING TANGENTS 0 NUMBER OF VERTICAL SECTIONS 5 NUMBER OF SOIL LAYER BOUNDARIES 3 I NUMBER OF PORE PRESSURE LINES 0
NUMBER OF POINTS DEFINING COHESION PROFILE 0
EISMIC COEFFICIENT S1,S2 = .00 .00
SEARCH STARTS AT CENTER ( 150.0, 60.0),WITH FINAL GRID OF 5.0 I
ALL CIRCLES PASS THROUGH THE POINT ( 156.0, 126.0)
I GEOMETRY
IECTIONS 50.0 103.0 136.0 156.0 200.0
T. CRACKS 89.0 99.0 116.0 126.0 126.0 I IN CRACK 89.0 99.0 116.0 126.0 126.0 OUNDARY 1 89.0 99.0 116.0 126.0 126.0
BOUNDARY 2 112.5 114.5 116.0 126.0 126.0 OUNDARY 3 160.0 160.0 160.0 160.0 160.0
OIL PROPERTIES
AYER COHESION FRICTION ANGLE DENSITY
30.0 132.0 I i75.0
2 250.0 33.0 138.0
IUMBER TANGENT RADIUS (X) CENTER (Y) CENTER FS(BISHOP)
1 126.3 66.3 150.0 60.0 2.033 1.923 I 2 126.1 66.1 160.0 60.0 2.283 2.214 Plate No. Al
I
3 126.3 56.3 150.0 70.0 2.088 1.965
I 4
127.9 67.9 140.0 60.0 2.209 2.054 5 126.2 76.2 150.0 50.0 2.035 1.938 6 126.0 66.0 155.0 60.0 2.074 1.984
8 I 126.3
126.9
61.3
66.9
150.0
145.0
65.0
60.0
2.049
2.093
1.933
1.963 9 126.3 71.3 150.0 55.0 2.030 1.927 10 126.0 71.0 155.0 55.0 2.031 1.944 I 11 126.8 71.8 145.0 55.0 2.103 1.981 12 126.2 76.2 150.0 50.0 2.035 1.938 13 126.0 66.0 155.0 60.0 2.074 1.984
I
14 126.9 66.9 145.0 60.0 2.093 1.963 15 126.8 76.8 145.0 50.0 2.117 2.003 16 126.0 76.0 155.0 50.0 2.011 1.927 17 126.1 76.1 160.0 50.0 2.092 2.021 118 126.0 81.0 155.0 45.0 2.005 1.925 19 126.1 81.1 160.0 45-.0 2.039 1.970 20 126.2 81.2 150.0 45.0 2.047 1.955 I 21 126.0 86.0 155.0 40.0 2.008 1.932 22 126.1 76.1 160.0 50.0 2.092 2.021 23 126.2 76.2 150.0 50.0 2.035 1.938
I 24 126.2 86.2 150.0 40.0 2.063 1.974 25 126.1 86.1 160.0 40.0 2.012 1.945
IS MINIMUM= 2.005 FOR THE CIRCLE OF CENTER ( 155.0, 45.0)
I * STABRG *
******************
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Plate No. A2
LAYER COHESION FRICTION DENSITY
ANGLE
FACTOR OF SAFETY 200
70.0
1450
70.0
m
I
* *
* SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS *
I
* *
************** S T A B R G *****************
* *
* PORTIONS (C) COPYRIGHT 1985, 1986 *
I * *
* GEOSOFT *
* *
I
* ALL RIGHTS RESERVED *
* *
*********************************************
IR1 SCS&T 9511128 SECTION A-A'
INTROL DATA
NUMBER OF SPECIFIED CENTERS 0
NUMBER I OF DEPTH LIMITING TANGENTS 0
NUMBER OF VERTICAL SECTIONS 5
NUMBER OF SOIL LAYER BOUNDARIES 3
l NUMBER OF PORE,PRESSURE LINES 0
NUMBER OF POINTS DEFINING COHESION PROFILE 0
ISMIC COEFFICIENT S1,S2 = .00 .00
ARCH STARTS AT CENTER ( 140.0, 60.0),WITH FINAL GRID OF 5.0
ALL CIRCLES PASS THROUGH THE POINT ( 136.0, 116.0)
I
GEOMETRY
UTIONS 50.0 103.0 136.0 156.0 200.0
T. CRACKS 89.0 99.0 116.0 126.0 126.0
UNDARY
N CRACK 89.0 99.0 116.0 126.0 126.0
1 89.0 99.0 116.0 126.0 126.0
BOUNDARY 2 112.5 114.5 116.0 126.0 126.0
UNDARY 3 160.0 160.0 160.0 160.0 160.0
tIL PROPERTIES
YER COHESION FRICTION ANGLE DENSITY
I i75.0 30.0 132.0
2 250.0 33.0 138.0
FMBER TANGENT RADIUS (X) CENTER (Y) CENTER FS(BISHOP) FS(OMS)
1 116.1 56.1 140.0 60.0 1.677 1.634 2 117.7 57.7 150.0 60.0 2.392 2.379
Plate Nn. A
I
3 116.2 46.2 140.0 70.0 1.780
116.3 56.3 130.0 60.0 2.072
4 5 116.1 66.1 140.0 50.0 1.698
6 116.7 56.7 145.0 60.0 1.865
7
8
116.2
116.0
51.2
56.0
140.0
135.0
65.0
60.0
1.705
1.836 9 116.1 61.1 140.0 55.0 1.680
10 116.8 51.8 145.0 65.0 1.999
I
11 116.0 51.0 135.0 65.0 1.816
12 116.0 61.0 135.0 55.0 1.864 13 116.7 61.7 145.0 55.0 1.762
I.S. MINIMUM= 1.677 FOR THE CIRCLE OF CENTER ( 140.0, 60.0)
******************
* STABRG *
******************
1.740
1.972
1.658
1.839
1.662
1.764
1.638
1.976
1.739
1.796
1.732
I
I
LI
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I Plate No. A5
70.0
Q ()
45()
100.0 150.0 200.0 250.0
1 70.0
1
LAYER COHESION FRICTION DENSITY
ANGLE
FACTOR OF SAFETY 1.68
1 75.0 30.0 132.0
2 250.0 33.0 138.0
X COORDINATE - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I
I * *
* SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS *
* *
I ************** S T A B R G
* *
I
* PORTIONS (C) COPYRIGHT 1985, 1986 *
* *
* GEOSOFT *
* *
*
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED *
* *
U
*********************************************
2 SCS&T 9511128 SECTION B-B' m
INTROL DATA
NUMBER OF SPECIFIED CENTERS 0 I NUMBER OF DEPTH LIMITING TANGENTS 0 NUMBER OF VERTICAL SECTIONS 5 NUMBER OF SOIL LAYER BOUNDARIES 3 I NUMBER OF PORE PRESSURE LINES 0 NUMBER OF POINTS DEFINING COHESION PROFILE 0
ISMIC COEFFICIENT S1,S2 = .00 .00
ARCH STARTS AT CENTER ( 200.0, 90.0),WITH FINAL GRID OF 10.0
I
ALL CIRCLES PASS THROUGH THE POINT ( 210.0, 128.0)
I
GEOMETRY
UTIONS 100.0 143.0 1G3.5 210.0 270.0
87.0 94.0 104.5 128.0 128.0 j
CRACKS
IN CRACK 87.0 94.0 104.5 128.0 128.0
UNDARY 1 87.0 94.0 104.5 128.0 128.0
BOUNDARY 2 100.0 103.0 104.5 128.0 128.0
UNDARY 3 160.0 160.0 160.0 160.0 160.0
PROPERTIES (IL
YER COHESION FRICTION ANGLE DENSITY
I i75.0 30.0 132.0 2 250.0 33.0 138.0
ikBER TANGENT RADIUS (X)' CENTER (1) CENTER FS(BISHOP) FS(OMS)
1 129.3 39.3 200.0 90.0 2.407 2.240 I 2 129.3 39.3 220.0 90.0 8.373 8.363
Plate No. A7
I
3 130.6 20.6 200.0 110.0 2.996 2.680 138.4 48.4 180.0 90.0 2.795 2.303 I 4
5 128.9 58.9 200.0 70.0 2.141 2.002 6 128.9 58.9 220.0 70.0 3.758 3.735
8 I
135.3
128.6
65.3
78.6
180.0
200.0
70.0
50.0
2.505
2.035
2.200
1.918 9 128.6 78.6 220.0 50.0 2.752 2.719 10 133.6 83.6 180.0 50.0 2.459 2.239
I 11 128.5 98.5 200.0 30.0 2.073 1.977 12 128.0 78.0 210.0 50.0 2.149 2.073 13 128.7 68.7 200.0 60.0 2.058 1.929 130.5 80.5 190.0 50.0 2.187 2.027 I 14
15 128.6 88.6 200.0 40.0 2.046 1.940 16 128.0 68.0 210.0 60.0 2.288 2.215 17 130.9 70.9 190.0 60.0 2.176 1.992
I 18 130.2 90.2 190.0 40.0 2.213 2.070 19 128.0 88.0 210.0 40.0 2.050 1.972
I.S. MINIMUM= 2.035 FOR THE CIRCLE OF CENTER 200.0, 50.0) (
I ******************
* STABRG *
* **** * ** * *** ** *** *
I
I
i.
I
I
I
I.
I
I
I
Plate No. A8
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
LAYER COHESION FRICTiOl i DEiiSiTY
ANGLE FACTOR OF SAFETY 2.03
1 75.0 300 132.0
2 250.0 33.0 138.0
70.0 -
LLJ
-- --.-------T____.....-.---- I . P.-
100.0 150.f 200.0 250.0 0O.0
X COORDINATE
I
I
*********************************************
* *
* SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS *
1
* *
************** S T A B R G *****************
* *
* PORTIONS (C) COPYRIGHT 1985, 1986 *
I *
* GEOSOFT *
* S *
I
* ALL RIGHTS RESERVED *
* *
IRR2 - SCS&T 9511128 SECTION B-B'
IONTROL DATA
I
NUMBER OF
NUMBER OF
SPECIFIED CENTERS
DEPTH LIMITING TANGENTS
0
0
NUMBER OF VERTICAL SECTIONS 5
NUMBER OF SOIL LAYER BOUNDARIES 3
I NUMBER OF PORE PRESSURE LINES 0
NUMBER OF POINTS DEFINING COHESION PROFILE 0
EISMIC COEFFICIENT Si,S2 = .00 .00
EARCH STARTS AT CENTER ( 165.0, 70.0),WITH FINAL GRID OF 5.0
ALL CIRCLES PASS THROUGH THE POINT ( 163.5, 104.5)
I
GEOMETRY
IECTIONS 100.0 143.0 163.5 210.0270.0
T. CRACKS 87.0 94.0 104.5 128.0 128.0
I IN CRACK 87.0 94.0 104.5 128.0 128.0
O UNDARY 1 87.0 94.0 104.5 128.0 128.0;
BOUNDARY 2 100.0 103.0 104.5 128.0 128.0 OUNDARY 3 160.0 160.0 160.0 160.0 160.0
OIL PROPERTIES
AYER COHESION FRICTION ANGLE DENSITY
I i75.0 30.0 132.0 2 250.0 33.0 138.0
Irl
IUMBER TANGENT RADIUS (X) CENTER (Y) CENTER FS (BISHOP) FS (OMS)
1 104.5 34.5 165.0 70.0 2.051 1.991 2 106.4. 36.4 175.0 70.0 5.661 5.656
"in
I
2.281 2.230
2.884 2.729
2.131 2.078
2.516 2.497
2.103 2.044
2.452 2.346
2.077 2.021
3.105 3.090
2.420 2.299
2.502 2.406
2.180 2.154
3 104.5 24.5 165.0 80.0
105.5 35.5 155.0 70.0
4 5 104.5 44.5 165.0 60.0
6 105.1 35.1 170.0 70.0
8
104.5
104.7
29.5
34.7
165.0
160.0
75.0
70.0
9 104.5 39.5 165.0 65.0
10 105.2 30.2 170.0 75.0
I 11 104.7 29.7 160.0 75.0
12 104.7 39.7 160.0 65.0
13 105.0 40.0 170.0 65.0
I.S. MINIMUM= 2.051 FOR THE CIRCLE OF CENTER ( 165.0,
******************
* STABRG *
******************
70.0)
1
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I Plate No. All
70.0
100.0 150.0 200.0
X COORDINATE
- - - - - - - - - - -. - - - - - - - -
LAYER COHESION FRICT 101i DENSITY
ANC LE
1 75.0 30.0 1 32.0
2 250.0 33.0 138.0
FACTOR OF SAFETY 205
250.0 0.0
APPENDIX B
SCS&T 9511128 July 3, 1995 Appendix B, Page 1
OLIVENHAIN ROAD REALIGNMENT PROJECT, CARLSBAD
RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS - GENERAL PROVISIONS
GENERAL INTENT
The intent of these specifications is to establish procedures for clearing, compacting natural ground,
preparing areas to be filled, and placing and compacting fill soils to the lines and grades shown on the
accepted plans. The recommendations contained in the preliminary geotechnical investigation report
and/or the attached Special provisions are a part of the Recommended Grading Specifications and shall
supersede the provisions contained hereinafter in the case of conflict. These specifications shall only be
used in conjunction with the geotechnical report for which they are a part. No deviation from these
specifications will be allowed, except where specified in the geotechnical report or in other written
communication signed by the Geotechnical Engineer
OBSERVATION AND TESTING
Southern California Soil & Testing, Inc., shall be retained as the Geotechnical Engineer to observe and
test the earthwork in accordance with these specifications. It will be necessary that the Geotechnical
Engineer or his representative provide adequate observation so that my may provided his opinion as to
whether or not the work was accomplished as specified. It shall be the responsibility of the contractor
to assist the Geotechnical Engineer and to keep him appraised of work schedules, changes and new
information and data so that he may provided these opinions. In the event that any unusual conditions
not covered by the special provisions or preliminary geotechnical report are encountered during the
grading operations. The Geotechnical Engineer shall be contacted for further recommendations.
If, in the opinion of the Geotechnical Engineer, substandard conditions are encountered, such as
questionable or unsuitable soil, unacceptable moisture content, inadequate compaction, adverse weather,
etc.; construction should be stopped until the conditions are remedied or corrected or he shall
recommended rejection of this work.
Tests used to determine the degree of compaction should be performed in accordance with the following
American Society for Testing and Materials test methods:
Maximum Density & Optimum Moisture Content - ASTM D-1557-82
Density of Soil In-Place - ASTM D-1556-64 or ASTM D-2922
F,
I
I
I
H
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SCS&T 9511128 July 3, 1995 Appendix B, Page 2
All densities shall be expressed in terms of Relative Compaction as determined by the foregoing ASTM
testing procedures.
PREPARATION OF AREAS TO RECEIVE FILL
All vegetation, brush and debris derived from clearing operations shall be removed, and legally disposed
of. All areas disturbed by site grading should be left in a neat and finished appearance, free from
unsightly debris.
After clearing or benching the natural ground, the areas to be filled shall be scarified to a depth of 6
inches, brought to the proper moisture content, compacted and tested for the specified minimum degree
of compaction. All loose soils in excess of 6 inches thick should be removed to firm natural ground
which is defined as natural soils which possesses an in-situ density of at least 90 percent of its maximum
dry density.
When the slope of the natural ground receiving fill exceeds 20 percent (5 horizontal units to 1 vertical
unit), the original ground shall be stepped or benched. Benches shall be cut to a firm competent
formational soils. The lower bench shall be at least 10 feet wide or 1-1/2 times the equipment width,
whichever is greater, and shall be sloped back into the hillside at a gradient of not less than two (20
percent. All other benches should be at least 6 feet wide. The horizontal portion of each bench shall be
compacted prior to receiving fill as specified herein for compacted natural ground. Ground slopes flatter
than 20 percent shall be benched when considered necessary by the Geotechnical Engineer.
Any abandoned buried structures encountered during grading operations must be totally removed. All
underground utilities to be abandoned beneath any proposed structure should be removed from within 10
feet of the structure and properly capped off. The resulting depressions from the above described
procedure should be backfilled with acceptable soil that is compacted to the requirements of the
Geotechnical Engineer. This includes, but is not limited to, septic tanks, fuel tanks, sewer lines or leach
lines, storm drains and water lines. Any buried structures or utilities no to be abandoned should be
brought to the attention of the Geotechnical Engineer so that he may determine if any special
recommendation will be necessary.
All water wells which will be .abandoned should be backfilled and capped in accordance to the
requirements set forth by the Geotechnical Engineer. The top of the cap should be at least 4 feet below
finish grade or 3 feet below the bottom of footing whichever is greater. The type of cap will depend on
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Li
I
I
SCS&T 9511128 July 3, 1995 Appendix B, Page 3
the diameter of the well and should be determined by the Geotechnical Engineer and/or a qualified
Structural Engineer.
FILL MATERIAL
Materials to be placed in the fill shall be approved by the Geotechnical Engineer and shall be free of
vegetable matter and other deleterious substances. Granular soil shall contain sufficient fine material to
fill the voids. The definition and disposition of oversized rocks and expansive or detrimental soils are
covered in the geotechnical report or Special Provisions. Expansive soils, soils of poor gradation, or soils
with low strength characteristics may be thoroughly mixed with other soils to provide satisfactory fill
material, but only with the explicit consent of the Geotechnical Engineer. Any import material shall be
approved by the Geotechnical Engineer before being brought to the site.
PLACING AND COMPACTION OF FILL
Approved fill material shall be placed in areas prepared to receive fill in layers not to exceed 6 inches
in compacted thickness. Each layer shall have a uniform moisture content in the range that will allow
the compaction effort to be efficiently applied to achieve the specified degree of compaction. Each layer
shall be uniformly compacted to the specified minimum degree of compaction with equipment of adequate
size to economically compact the layer. Compaction equipment should either be specifically designed
for soil compaction or of proven reliability. The minimum degree of compaction to be achieved is
specified in either the Special Provisions or the recommendations contained in the preliminary
geotechnical investigation report.
-
When the structural fill material includes rocks, no rocks will be allowed to nest and all voids must be
carefully filled with soil such that the minimum degree of compaction recommended in the Special
Provisions is achieved. The maximum size and spacing of rock permitted in structural fills and in non-
structural fills is discussed in the geotechnical report, when applicable.
Field observation and compaction tests to estimate the degree of compaction of the fill will be taken by
the Geotechnical Engineer or his representative. The location and frequency of the tests shall be at the
Geotechnical Engineer's discretion. When the compaction test indicates that a particular layer is at less
than the required degree of compaction, the layer shall be reworked to the satisfaction of the Geotechnical
Engineer and until the desired relative compaction has been obtained.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
P
I
I
I
I
SCS&T 9511128 July 3, 1995 Appendix B, Page 4
Fill slopes shall be compacted by means of sheepsfoot rollers or other suitable equipment. Compaction
by sheepsfoot roller shall be at vertical intervals of not greater than four feet. In addition, fill slopes at
a ratio of two horizontal to one vertical or flatter, should be trackrolled. Steeper fill slopes shall be over-
built and cut-back to finish contours after the slope has been constructed. Slope compaction operations
shall result in all fill material six or more inches inward from the finished face of the slope having a
relative compaction of at least 90 percent of maximum dry density or the degree of compaction specified
in the Special Provisions section of this specification. The compaction operation on the slopes shall be
continued until the Geotechnical Engineer is of the opinion that the slopes will be surficially stable.
Density tests in the slopes will be made by the Geotechnical Engineer during construction of the slopes
to determine if the required compaction is being achieved. Where failing tests occur or other field
problems arise, the Contractor will be notified that day of such conditions by written communication from
the Geotechnical Engineer or his representative in the form of a daily field report.
If the method of achieving the required slope compaction selected by the Contractor fails to produce the
necessary results, the Contractor shall rework or rebuild such slopes until the required degree of
compaction is obtained, at no cost to the Owner or Geotechnical Engineer.
CUT SLOPES
The Engineering Geologist shall inspect cut slopes excavated in rock or lithified formational material
during the grading operations at intervals determined at his discretion. If any conditions not anticipated
in the preliminary report such as perched water, seepage, lenticular or confined strata of a potentially
adverse nature, unfavorably inclined bedding, joints or fault planes are encountered during grading,, these
conditions shall be analyzed by the Engineering Geologist and Soil Engineer to determine if mitigating
measures are necessary.
Unless otherwise specified in the geotechnical report, no cut slopes shall be excavated higher or steeper
than the allowed by the ordinances of the controlling governmental agency.
ENGINEERING OBSERVATION
Field observation by the Geotechnical Engineer or his representative shall be made during the filling and
compaction operations so that he can express his opinion regarding the conformance of the grading with
acceptable standards of practice. Neither the presence of the Geotechnical Engineer or his representative
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SCS&T 9511128 July 3, 1995 Appendix B, Page 5
or the observation and testing shall not release the Grading Contractor from his duty to compact all fill
I material to the specified degree of compaction.
SEASON LIMITS
I Fill shall not be placed during unfavorable weather conditions. When work is interrupted by heavy rain,
filling operations shall not be resumed until the proper moisture content and density of the fill materials
I can be achieved. Damaged site conditions resulting from weather or acts of God shall be repaired before
acceptance of work. -
RECOMMENDED GRADING SPECIFICATIONS - SPECIAL PROVISIONS
RELATIVE COMPACTION: The minimum degree of compaction to be obtained in compacted natural
ground, compacted fill, and compacted backfill shall be at least 90 percent. For street and parking lot
subgrade, the upper six inches should be compacted to at least 95 percent relative compaction.
EXPANSIVE SOILS: Detrimentally expansive soil is defined as clayey soil which has an expansion
index of 50 or greater when tested in accordance with the Uniform Building Code Standard 29-C.
I
OVERSIZED MATERIAL: Oversized fill material is generally defined herein as rocks or lumps of soil
over 6 inches in diameter. Oversized materials should not be placed in fill unless recommendations of
placement of such material is provided by the geotechnical engineer. At least 40 percent of the fill soils
shall pass through a No. 4 U.S. Standard Sieve.
TRANSITION LOTS: Where transitions between cut and fill occur within the proposed building pad,
the cut portion should be undercut a minimum of one foot below the base of the proposed footings and
recompacted as structural backfill. In certain cases that would be addressed in the geotechnical report,
special footing reinforcement or a combination of special footing reinforcement and undercutting may be
I required.
I
I
I