HomeMy WebLinkAbout3466; OLIVENHAIN RD WIDENING & REALIGNMENT; SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS; 1995-07-10SOUTHERN 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 SCS&T 9511128
Engineering Department Report No. 2
2075 Las Palmas Drive
Carlsbad, California .920091519
ATTENTION: Mr. Pat Entezari
SUBJECT: Additional Surficial Slope Stability Analysis, Proposed Olivenhain Road
Realignment Project, Carlsbad, California.
REFERENCE: "Slope Stability Analysis, Proposed Olivenhain Road. Realignment 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 4) .= 30°
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 1.
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.
Resectfully Submitted,
SOUrHER?CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC.
, -
Däl B. Aller, R.C.E.t36037 NO. 36031
DBA:mw EXP. 6-309
cc: (6) Submitted
SURFICIAL SLOPE STABILITY
SLOPE SURFACE
ASSUMED PARAMETERS
z = DEPTH OF SATURATION = 3'
a = SLOPE ANGLE = 26.5°
w UNIT WEIGHT OF WATER = 62.4 pcf
IT= SATURATED WST 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+TTANg = c+(T-wzCOS aTANØ
T 5Tz SRI a COS a
FS= 1.6
SOUTHIRN CALIFORNIA OLI VENHAI N ROAD REALIGNMENT
SOIL a TNBTINQ,INC. Iv: DBA OAT!: 07-11-95
9511128 Plate No. 1
I I I
1
.1
I 1
I
I I
1 I
:
1 I
I
SLOPE 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
:.
'%i i .$[:.' S6UTHERN;CALIFORNIA
SOIL &.TESTING,.INC.
6280 RiverdaI Stieet;San Diego, CA 92120
P.O.Box 600627 San Dego CA 92160-0627
6192804321 FAX 619 280 4717
I -
do
i::tCarlsbad EXP SCS&T 9511128
Engineering b~'ep*artment Report No. 1
2075 Las Palmas Drive
Carlsbad, California 92009-1519
ATTENTION: Pat Entezari
SUBJECT Slope Stability Analysis, Proposed Olivenhain Road Realignment Project,
Carlsbad, California.
Gentlrneii: •.
In accordance with your request and our Proposal 95S238, we have completed an investigation and
analysts of the stability of the proposed cut slope along the north side of Olivenhain Road, east of
El Cammo Real We are presenting herein our findings and recommendations
1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
11 The proposed 'subject project involves* the realignment of Oliverihain Road. from its westerly
r terminus at El Camino Real to a point approximately 1,500 feet to the east The project also
I includes they"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)
I The new slope will tie into an existing near vertical slope facing El Camino Real
1 -
SITE DESCRIPTION
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
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
I 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.
I 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.
I 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
I
The project site is located within the Coastal Plains Physiographic Province of San Diego County,
I 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
I 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
1 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
I been classified as belonging to the Delmar Formation.
I 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
I 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
I 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
I 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
I toward the south. This apparent bedding orientation represents a slight, out-of-slope dip
configuration with respect to the proposed cut slope.
I 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,
SCS&T 9511128 July 3, 1995 Page 3
very stiff, sandy clays. The topsoil/subsoil layer may be somewhat thicker or be intermixe
d
w
i
t
h
minor slopewash or colluvium in the three previously mentioned draws.
SLOPE STABILITY
I 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 respec
t
t
o
r
o
t
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
f
a
i
l
u
r
e
.
Cross sections A-A' and B-B' (see Plate Numbers 1 and 2) were analyzed assuming rot
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
1 failure occurring at the toe of the proposed slopes and the contact between the moderatel
y
f
r
a
c
t
u
r
e
d
deposits and the undisturbed deposits. The analyses indicate factors-of safety in excess of 1.5 for I both sections (see Appendix A).
I In addition the surficial stability of the proposed slopes was analyzed. The calcul
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
r
e
included in the attached Plate Number 16 and indicate a factor-of-safety of less than 1.5. I
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
GENERAL: In general, we found that the proposed cut slope will expose claysto
n
e
s
a
n
d
I sandstones of the Delmar Formation. With the exception of approximately the upper six to
t
w
e
l
v
e
feet, the formational soils are very hard or dense, relatively unfractured and are
c
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
e
d
I competent with regards to slope stability characteristics. In general, the upper four to
s
e
v
e
n
f
e
e
t
was found to consist of a highly fractured claystone that has poor slope stability charact
e
r
i
s
t
i
c
s
.
I In Trench Number 2, at the east end of the project area, this highly fractured soil extende
d
d
o
w
n
to 11.5 feet below the surface. In our opinion, the highly fractured materials should
n
o
t
b
e
I allowed to exist in slopes steeper than 3:1 (horizontal to vertical). A distinctly
d
i
f
f
e
r
e
n
t
,
moderately fractured claystone was generally found between the highly fractured and relat
i
v
e
l
y
l unfractured materials. This material should also be considered to be unsuitable for sl
o
p
e
s
s
t
e
e
p
e
r
than 3:1, since its blocky and fractured nature allows water to build-up in the fractures a
n
d
c
r
e
a
t
e
surficial stability problems in steeper slopes.
In consideration of our findings, it is our recommendation that either the portions of the slope
t
h
a
t
I contain the highly and moderately fractured claystones be laid back to a 3:1 slope r
a
t
i
o
,
o
r
t
h
e
slope be buttressed where these soils exist. Since the height of the unsuitable materials
v
a
r
y
a
l
o
n
g
SCS&T 9511128 July 3, 1995 Page 4
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
I 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
0
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.
Some of this material will be generated from proposed cuts. However, minimum and/or importing
I may be necessary to generate sufficient material for buttress construction. A typical buttress detail
with subdrain recommendations is presented on the attached Plate Number 3. It should be noted
1 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
I buttress slope should be trackwalked upon completion.
I 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
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.
I EARTHWORK: All earthwork and grading contemplated for site preparation should be
accomplished in accordance with the attached Recommended Grading Specifications and Special
I Provisions. All special site preparation recommendations presented in the sections above will
in Recommended Grading Specifications. All supersede those the standard embankments, structural
fill and fill should be compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction at or slightl
y
o
v
e
r
I 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 I 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
b
a
s
e
1 material and should not be part of the mass grading requirements. The maximum dry density o
f
each soil type should be determined in accordance with ASTM Test D-1557-78, Method
A
o
r
C
.
I
GRADING PLAN REVIEW: The final grading plans should be submitted to this office for
I 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
I l 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
I 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 additio
n
,
I 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 den
s
e
,
I . dense or very dense. The consistency of silts or clays is given as either very soft, soft, medium
stiff, stiff, very stiff, or hard.
I Disturbed and "undisturbed" samples of typical and representative soils were obtained and ret
u
r
n
e
d
to the laboratory for testing.
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:
a) CLASSIFICATION: Field classifications were verified in the laboratory by visual
examination. The final soil classifications are in accordance with the Unified Soil I Classification System.
I b) MOISTURE-DENSITY: In-place moisture contents and dry densities were determined
for representative soil samples. This information was an aid to classification and
I 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
I 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.
DIRECT SHEAR TESTS: Direct shear tests were performed to determine the failure
I 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.
I 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
minute. The results of these tests are presented on the attached Plate Number 15.
LIMITATIONS
I The recommendations and opinions expressed in this report reflect our best estimate of the project
based requirements on an evaluation of the subsurface soil conditions encountered at the subsurface
exploration locations and the assumption that the soil conditions do not deviate appreciably from I 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
SCS&T 9511128 July 3, 1995 Page 7
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,
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SOIL AND TESTING, INC.
I
Charles H. Christian, R.G.E. #00215 Curtis R. Burdett, C.E.G. #1090
I
I
I
I
CHC:CRB:DBA:mw
cc: (6) Submitted J'i
W• C(
IIxNo.GE000215}I
\° UP. 9,10-97 /1
CERTIFIED\
0 ENGINEERING J• (A GEOLOGIST / 964)
OF cp"
I
F,
I
1
I
c
fri /
'C.
VI.
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA _OLIVENHAIN ROAD REALIGNMENT
SOIL & TESTING, INC. BY: CHCISD DATE: 06-29-95 -
JOB NUMBER9511128 FIGURE NO. 1
A
-
110
I
100
190
Hi
80 U
Is
120
I
110
I
I 100
I
190
I
180
I
I .
I
4 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
T SOIL & TESTING, INC.
OLIVENHAIN ROAD REALIGNMENT
BY: MF/CHC DATE: 6/28/95
JOB No.: 9511128-1 PLATE No.: 2
—T6
-
AD Td CL/CH :
&soB
CL/CH
CL/ML-4 ci q
CL/M I
)
T3
Td
C
]CL - m
SIR __ i
CL
GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION A-A'
Td SM+CL/M[
sm
—PROPOSED STREET'
sm
GEOLOGIC CROSS SECTION B-B'
EXIS TING SURFACE
_
OIL(cZ7
_TANSOB
Op _H
CL+CL/Ml :
Td CL +
op4l. . -- I -'-CL/ML Td CL
PROPOSED STREET SM~SM
sc
LEGEND - APPARENT SLOPE STABILITY CHARACTERISTICS
U. POOR
Td DELMAR FORMATION MARGINAL
CL UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION GOOD (SEE PLATE 4)
Al
Td
B'
1
MODERATELY TO HIGHLY
I WEATHERED CLAYSTONE
TYPICAL BUTTRESS DETAIL
No Scale
? I-,'- i MIRADRAIN "fl0ur
FILTER FABRIC
'0
I
3 CUBIC YARDS CRUSHED CC 0 ROCK PER LINEAR FOOT
*
4 PERFORATED PIPE
12'
uJ
MIRADRAIN STRIPS
TYPICAL TYPICAL
No Scale
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA OLIVENHAIN ROAD REALIGNMENT
4jCuu+ SOIL & TESTING,INCS BY: CHCISD
bATE:
07-03-95
JOB NUMBER: 9511128 Plate No. 3
I
I
CK - Undisturbed chunk sample
BG - Bulk sample
SP - Standard penetration sample
- Water level at time of excavation
or as indicated
US - Undisturbed, driven ring sample
or tube sample
I OLIVENHAIN ROAD REALIGNMENT
CHC DATE: 06-27-95
8 NUMBER: 9511128 IPlate No. 4
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
SOIL & TESTING,INC. By
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 gravels, 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 no fines. 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 50 plasticity, fat clays. OH Organic clays of medium
to high plasticity.
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PT Peat and other highly
organic soils.
I
I
I
I
[1
I
I
I
I
I
z
-
TRENCH NUMBER I
i STATION NUMBER 9+90
CL co is ELEVATION 89 FEET LU
o .
Go
co DESCRIPTION 0.—
CH TOPSOIL/SUBSOIL, Dark Grey,
SANDY CLAY, Extensive
1 Dessication with Cracks up
to 1" Wide in Upper 1.5'
2 BG
CK
w LUZ
Cr
Zcr ww
W
cz1. >2
U) <•
Cl)W O o _1< CL 0 CL z >-— O cr C) 0 C)
Dry to Very
Moist Stiff
Humid to
Mo I St
13
4 - - _____ Gradational
IM DEL MAR FORMATION, Pale Humid Dense Green, VERY SILTY SAND
- 5 _____
(Sandstone)
L BG CL/ Dark Green with Rust Stains, Humid Hard CH SANDY SILTY CLAY (Claystone)
6 - Moderately to Highly
- Weathered, Some Slicken-
Sides
- 7 —
I
- Proposed Street Elevation -
- 88 Feet (-1 Foot)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PROJECT: OLIVENHAIN ROAD REALIGNMENT
SOIL & TESTING, INC. LOGGED By: ME bATE LOGGED-06-20-95
JAL JOB NUMBER: 9511128 [PLATE NUMBER: 5 0
>-
ui
- S us
W U) 0cc Z z
>2
CL
<w
93
w 0 3CL Lu
CL Z Oz
o
wa cr
I C) 0
(.)
Loose
TRENCH NUMBER 2 Z Cr - 0
OIL. STATION NUMBER 9+60 W
Cr CL cL O)q) ELEVATION 100 FEET W O . < CL
Co DESCRIPTION
CH TOPSOIL/SUBSOIL, Dark Grey, Humid - 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
CL Dark Olive Green with Rust Humid Hard - Stains, SANDY SILTY CLAY, Highly Fractured and
Disturbed, Slickensides,
- Bedding Indistinct 7
CK
BG
10-•
Contact Appears to Parallel Surface
11 CL Dark Olive Green, SANDY Humid CK SILTY CLAY, Very Hard and
Relatively Unfractured
12-
13-
Proposed Street Elevation
- 88 Feet (-12 Feet)
I
I
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PROJECT: OLIVENHAIN ROAD REALIGNMENT
SOIL & TESTING, INC. LOGGED BY: ME DATE LOGGED: 062095
JOB NUMBER: 9511128 PLATE NUMBER: 6 L 0
Hard
> UJ W
W
z Cr WW (I)
z >0
Ri-
a. M >- Z LUG-
I C.) 0 C.)
Humid Very
Stiff
CL 2 I : > TRENCH NUMBER
I Ui C..)
OL&. STATION NUMBER 4+25
ELEVATION 110 FEET
I UI o .
0)
0) DESCRIPTION 0.
I CH TOPSOIL/SUBSOIL, Dark Grey,
SANDY CLAY
I
2-
3— CL/
I BG CH
1
I
SM
I 6 CK
I I ICK I CL
I
B
1
110
I
ICK
12 -
113.
I 14—
DEL MAR FORMATION, Dark Moist Stiff Olive Green with Rust Stains
SANDY SILTY CLAY, Highly
Fractured (Claystone)
Pale Green, FINE SILTY SAND Humid Dense (Sandstone)
Moist
133.5 7.3
Hard 112.1 18.7
Dark Olive Green, SANDY
SILTY CLAY, Highly Fractured
Humid Dark Grey and Light Grey Dense- Interbedded, VERY SILTY Hard SAND AND VERY SILTY CLAY!
VERY CLAYEY SILT (Mudstone)
Moderately Fractured
Humid Tan, SILTY SAND
Dense
Dark Olive Green with Rust Humid Very Stains, SANDY SILTY CLAY, Hard 111.9 17.9 Relatively Unfractured
Proposed Street Elevation
- 82.5 Feet (-27.5 Feet)
SM-
CL!
ML
SM
CL
i~Sc:~
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PROJECT: OLIVENHAIN ROAD REALIGNMENT <t> SOIL & TESTING, INC. LOGGED BY: MF bATE LOGGED: 062095
I JOB NUMBER: 9511128 PLATE NUMBER: 7
— —
> TRENCH NUMBER 4
-w
W z - z Z
>.
LU UJZ > _
STATION NUMBER 4+25 W z z LU i- ' <0 a. ELEVATION 100 FEET <a. a CL - i2
us 0 o .
LU a-
<
Z
<0 cc 0 0 DESCRIPTION
0
CH TOPSOIL/SUBSOIL, Dark Grey, Humid Very - SANDY CLAY, Some Dessication Stiff 1 - Cracks
2.4
] CL! I DEL MAR FORMATION, Dark Olive Moist Stiff 1 CH to Rust, SANDY SILTY CLAY,
- 3 — 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 FA
Moderately Fractured from Humid Hard 7 Feet to 10 Feet
8
CK
112.1 18.5
9
1 101 Relatively Unfractured from Humid Very 10 Feet to 13 Feet I I Hard
ll I
I
CK I I I 1 1 109.8 1 18.1
112
13
J Sandstone Contact at 4 Feet
1 Dips Approximately 4 Degrees -j to South.
Proposed Street Elevation
- I 82.5 Feet (-17.5 Feet)
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PROJECT: OLIVENHAIN ROAD REALIGNMENT
SOIL & TESTING, INC. LOGGED BY: MF DATE LOGGED: 062095
___________________________________________ J
O
B
N
U
M
B
E
R
:
9511128 PLATE NUMBER: 8
Vi CL
TRENCH NUMBER 5
-
z z Z
>.
- uI
STATION NUMBER 4+25 W 'I)
RI- <0 CL a.Q)
°" ELEVATION 91 FEET < 9 C')
- Ui C')CL Cr <00 OZ
o M0
UJ-
DESCRIPTION 0 0
CH TOPSOIL/SUBSOIL, Dark Grey, Humid- Stiff SANDY SILTY CLAY Moist 1.
CL DEL MAR FORMATION, Dark Moist- Hard - Olive Green, SANDY SILTY Humi-d 3. CLAY, Moderately Fractured,
Some Slickensides
4 I CK
112.2 17.8
5
SM Tan to Light Rust and Grey, Humid Very 6 to SILTY SAND TO SLIGHTLY Dense SM- CLAYEY SILTY SAND
SC (Sandstone)
CK
116.0 I 12.6
Refusal on Cemented Sandstone
j Proposed Street Elevation
- 82.5 Feet (-8.5 Feet)
FSOTHERN CALIFORNIA
1JOB
PROJECT: OLIVENHAIN ROADREALIGNMENT
GLOGGED BY: MF DATE LOGED: 06-20-95 SOIL & TESTiNG, INC.
NUMBER: 9511128 PLATE NUMBER: 9
CL 2
TRENCH NUMBER 6
iW U STATION NUMBER 6+50
• ELEVATION -105 FEET
I W 0
0 DESCRIPTION °—
I CH TOPSOIL/SLOPEWASH, Dark
- Brown, SANDY SILTY CLAY
>- -
Ui— W
Z >2
o& W <
Cr
Oz w--
o C) 0
C)
>.
ZZ—WW
CC Z
U)
<OW
<0
C.)
Humid-
Moist
Stiff
CL! DEL MAR FORMATION, Dark Humid Hard CH Olive Green, SANDY SILTY
CLAY, Highly Fractured to
4 Feet, Moderately
Fractured from 4 feet to
6.5 Feet
CL- Grey to Rust, Interbedded, Humid- Hard ML SILTY CLAY- CLAYEY SILT AND Moist and SILTY CLAY, Thinly Bedded,
CL Relatively Unfractured
97.0 I 24.2 Relatively Horizontal Bedding
SM ( Light Grey to Rust
CL- I Grey to Rust, VERY SANDY
ML SILT TO CLAYEY SANDY SILT
Moist Dense
Moist Very
Hard
Refusal on Cemented Sandstone
Proposed Street Elevation
-
84.5 Feet (-20.5 Feet)
} : SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PROJECT: OLIVENHAIN ROAD REALIGNMENT
SOIL & TESTING, INC. LOGGED BY: MF DATE LOGGED: 06-20-
JOB NUMBER: 9511128 IPLATE NUMBER: 10
_ •
CL 2
TRENCH NUMBER 7 W
>.
z z -
>. —
I- —J 0 STATION NUMBER 6+65 UJ W cr z Z C Ui z O Q.
0 Q)e ELEVATION —95 FEET < <CoW <0 Ui _________
_
_
_
_
_
0 0
cc 1 o uia cr2 Co DESCRIPTION 0 0
(3 CH TOPSOIL/SUBSOIL, Dark Grey, Humid Stiff - 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)
'Al
j SM Tan, FINE SILTY SAND Moist Dense 1 (Sandstone) 5,-4
(IBG
CK 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: OLIVENHAIN ROAD REALIGNMENT
ZZ LOGGED BY: ME bATE LOGGED: 0620-95
I-In
SOIL & TESTING, INC.
B NUMBER: 9511128 1PLATE NUMBER 11
-
.
"iII1I1I11t0IIIIII0 I1IIlIlIlIII1IlilMlIII ___I liii
___
1111111 1 111111 II UI IlIlIllIll'. II 11111
___
' ui 111111 II U11111___ II III. 11111:. ___ ta 111111 1 i 11111011 iii II uouo.. uiiui ' __ 0 tIN 111111 I 111111111110111101.1111111 IIUi
__ 1111111 _J III l I hIll9 llll MIN lli. 111111 1IIIIL-i
m C)
0 z
10
ao,D I . C OIO 3, • C 967554 3 2 98 76 5 4 3 2 9676 5 4 3 2
1000 300 30 30 03 03 003
GRAIN SIZE (mm)
PARTICLE SIZE LIMITS
I I
I BOULDER COBBLE
GRAVEL SAND
SILT OR CLAY COARSE FINE COARSE J MEDIUM FINE J
(12) 3/4 No. 4 No. 10 No. 40 No. 200
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE
T3@ 11'
- - - - - - M. - - - - - - - - - -
BOULDER COBBLE
GRAVEL SAND
SILT OR CLAY
COARSE FINE COARSE I MEDIUM J FINE
(12) 3 3/4 No. 4 No. 10 No. 40 No. 200
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE
T6@8'
Mm - WWI - - - - M m - WWI - - - -=
JJ.'.1 fi I iL ;i sI1!*A*
1V1L al.
ZY yI7E(L1:pI'1I.1.pWI, I:!.
1[iIUIIII__11111111 :ioui.iiiiiiiii11111111111111111 IIIRiIIII'—UIIIII.___ 111111111 1111111 ____
____
•, 11111111
____
___ IROIiIEIUR I __
cn
z
___
'IIiiiiufh
I •, IllEllIlIl I1IUIIIIIff II HIIOIHIIO'u IUIlIIfl!OI - - _____ ___
•iiiii __________
IIIUIlIItIIIUIIJIIffI JillIIHIII1EIIu. 111 •oiiii .IIIIIIIIIIII1IUI1IIIIIIIJIHIIIHhIOI. III111 i________ IIIIOIIIII•_ iuiui iiiiuiu 11111111111 o'. 111111 m ii
1000
iiu waui•___..
II:
IL
98765 4 3 2 987654 3 2 967654 3 2 98765 4 3 2 98765 4 3 2
100 10 10 01 01 001
GRAIN SIZE (mm)
PARTICLE SIZE LIMITS
iURI i..a I I•• IUR I
IURUI uUUU I NRRUI u.u. I
IUUUU! IUUR I
UUUUI IUUUU I ima_Ul .aua ••u• uuu U••I I••UU UUUI IUUU
..u.i IUUUU
.....i a...
..ui U....
a.... i....
....I l•U•••I I.... IRU•• •U•I U.... u••ua u•.. ....i U•U• UaRI .....rn..• I...
.aa.i .u.0 •u ....i mamma P•U
a...i u••a' iut IMMIM111101151111pidmarldl .a...i PrAmas P4UI onoopp i...r, u,; Ut•I l'4 PI ap~lanniolpAmpr-dmml ..._ 'P4U IURI
....,I 'aaa U.. a!4"; eaaa uaui
I•BU maui ruai..•au ui
'p.
SLOPE SURFACE
SIJRFICIAL SLOPE STABILITY
ASSUMED PARAMETERS
z = DEPTH OFSATURATION 3'.
a =SLOPE ANGLE = 26.5°
w- UNITWEIGHTOFWATER= 62.4
IT= SATURATED UNIT WEIGHT OF SOIL = 140 pcf
0 = APPARENT ANGLE OF INTERNAL FRICTION ALONG PLANE OF FAILURE
= 300 c = APPARENT COHESION ALONG PLANE OF FAILURE = 75 psf
FS = c+TTANØ = c+UT-wzCOS aTAN T ITz SIN a COS a
FS= 1.2
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA OLI VENHAI N ROAD REALIGNMENT
SOIL & TR$TIWQ,INC. •y: CHC 0630-95
9511128 1 Plate No. 16
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
JUNE 30 1995 Appendix A S CS &T 9511128
* *** ** * * *** ******* *** * * *** * *****************
*
I * * * SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS * * *
I ************** S T A B R G ***************** * * * PORTIONS (C) COPYRIGHT 1985, 1986 * * * I * GEOSOFT * * * * ALL RIGHTS RESERVED * I * * U *********************************************
ORR]. SCS&T 9511128 SECTION A-A'
CONTROL DATA
NUMBER OF SPECIFIED CENTERS 0 NUMBER OF DEPTH LIMITING TANGENTS 0 NUMBER OF VERTICAL SECTIONS 5 NUMBER OF SOIL LAYER BOUNDARIES
3 T1flhfl rn i-sn ni-Sn 'n nfl fin nnn n 7 *r
f
l
C
'
I-s
iuxs. '-r VVAZ urc LJ1iNC U NUMBER I OF POINTS DEFINING COHESION PROFILE 0
SEISMIC COEFFICIENT S1,52 = .00 .00
I
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) LOMETRY
IECTIONS 50.0 103.0 136.0 156.0 200.0
T. CRACKS 89.0 99.0 116.0 126.0 126.0 IN CRACK 89.0 99.0 116.0 126.0 126.0 OUNDARY 1 89.0 99.0 116.0 126.0 126.0 OUNDARY 2 112.5 114.5 116.0 126.0 126.0 OUNDARY 3 160.0 160.0 160.0 160.0 160.0
SOIL PROPERTIES
1AYER COHESION FRICTION ANGLE DENSITY
I2 2
75.0
50.0
30.0 132.0
33.0 138.0
1UMBER TANGENT RADIUS
1 126.3 66.3
2 126.1 66.1
(X) CENTER (1) CENTER
150.0 60.0
160.0 60.0
FS (BISHOP)
2.033
2.283
FS(OMS)
1.923
2.214
Plate No. Al
3 126.3 56.3 150.0 70.0 4 127.9 67.9 140.0 60.0 I 5 126.2 76.2 150.0 50.0 6 126.0 66.0 155.0 60.0 7 126.3 61.3 150.0 65.0 8126.9 66.9 145.0 60.0 1 9 126.3 71.3 150.0 55.0 10 126.0 71.0 155.0 55.0
I
ll
12
126.8
126.2
71.8
76.2
145.0
150.0
55.0
50.0 13 126.0 66.0 155.0 60.0 14 126.9 66.9 145.0 60.0 I 15 126.8 76.8 145.0 50.0 16 126.0 76.0 155.0 50.0 17 126.1 76.1 160.0 50.0 126.0 81.0 155.0 45.0 I 18
19 126.1 81.1 160.0 45.0 20 126.2 81.2 150.0 45.0 126.0 86.0 155.0 40.0 I
21
22 126.1 76.1 160.0 50.0 23 126.2 76.2 150.0 50.0 24 126.2 86.2 150.0 40.0 25 126.1 86.1 160.0 40.0
.S. MINIMUM= 2.005 FOR THE CIRCLE OF CENTER ( 155.0,
****************** 1 * STABRG *
******************
45.0)
2.088 1.965
2.209 2.054
2.035 1.938
2.074 1.984
2.049 1.933
2.093 1.963
2.030 1.927
2.031 1.944
2.103 1.981
2.035 1.938
2.074 1.984
2.093 1.963
2.117 2.003
2.011 1.927
2.092 2.021
2.005 1.925
2.039 1.970
2.047 1.955
2.008 1.932
2.092 2.021
2.035 1.938
2.063 1.974
2.012 1.945
I
I
Li]
I
I
I
I Plate No. A2
LAYER COHESION FRICTION DENSITY
ANGLE
1 75.0 30.0 132.0 FACTOR OF SAFETY 200
2 250.0 33.0 138.0
70.0
95.0
20 0 -
I I I I I
50.0 100.0 150.0 200.0 250.0
X COORDIIJATE
- - - - - - - - - - - -S - - - - -
I
I
* ***** * *** ** ** * * * * * ** * ** * *** ********** **** ***
* * * SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS. * * *
I ************** S T A B R G ***************** * * * PORTIONS (C) COPYRIGHT 1985, 1986 *
I
* * * GEOSOFT * *
. * * ALL RIGHTS RESERVED * I * * * ** * * * * ******* ******* ** *********** *** **** ****
tRR1 SCS&T 9511128 SECTION A-A'
tONTROL DATA
NUMBER OF SPECIFIED CENTERS 0 I NUMBER OF DEPTH LIMITING TANGENTS 0 NUMBER OF VERTICAL SECTIONS .5 NUMBER OF SOIL LAYER BOUNDARIES 3 NUMBER OF PORE PRESSURE LINES 0 NUMBER I OF POINTS DEFINING COHESION PROFILE 0
SEISMIC COEFFICIENT S1,52 = .00 .00
SEARCH STARTS AT CENTER ( 140.0, 60.0),WITH FINAL GRID OF 5.0
I ALL CIRCLES PASS THROUGH THE POINT
( 136.0, 116.0).
REOMETRY .
IECTIONS 50.0 103.0 136.0 156.0 200.0
T. CRACKS 89.0 99.0 116.0 126.0 126.0..
IN CRACK 89.0 99.0 116.0 126.0 126.0
OUNDARY 1 89.0 99.0 116.0 126.0 126.0
OUNDARY 2 112.5 114.5 116.0 126.0 126.0
OUNDARY 3 160.0 160.0 160.0 160.0 160.0
SOIL PROPERTIES
lAYER COHESION FRICTION ANGLE DENSITY
I
l75.0 30.0 132.0 2 250.0 33.0 138.0
F"
11MBER 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
P1?t.p Nn ALl
3 116.2 46.2 140.0 70.0 1.780 4 116.3 56.3 130.0 60.0 2.072 I 5 116.1 66.1 140.0 50.0 1.698 6 116.7 56.7 145.0 60.0 1.865 7 116.2 51.2 140.0 65.0 1.705 116.0 56.0 135.0 60.0 1.836 I 8
9 116.1 61.1 140.0 55.0 1.680 10 116.8 51.8 145.0 65.0 1.999 I 11
12
116.0
116.0
51.0
61.0
135.0
135.0
65.0
55.0
1.816
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)
1
* STABRG *
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
1.740
1.972
1.658
1.839
1.662
1.764
1.638
1.976
1.739
1.796
1.732
Plate No. A5
FACTOR OF SAFETY 1.68
LAYER COHESION FRICTION DENSITY
ANGLE
1 75.0 30.0 132.0
2 250.0 33.0 138.0
70.0
0 fl
I 45.0
100.0 150.0 200.0 250.0
X COORDINATE
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I
* * * ** * * ** *** * * ***** * * *** * ** * *
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
I *
* * SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS * *
* S T A B R G ***************** *
* * PORTIONS (C) COPYRIGHT 1985, 1986 * I *
* * - GEOSOFT *
* * ALL RIGHTS RESERVED * I *
* *********************************
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
ORR2 SCS&T 9511128 SECTION B-B'
I
ICONTROL DATA
NUMBER OF SPECIFIED CENTERS
0 I NUMBER OF DEPTH LIMITING TANGENT
S
0 NUMBER OF VERTICAL SECTIONS
5 NUMBER OF SOIL LAYER BOUNDARIES
3
I
'NUMBER OF PORE PRESSURE LINES
0 NUMBER OF. POINTS DEFINING COHES
I
O
N
P
R
O
F
I
L
E
0
SEISMIC COEFFICIENT S1,S2 = .00 .00
SEARCH STARTS AT CENTER ( .200.0, 90.0),WITH FINAL GRID OF
1
0
.
0
I ALL CIRCLES PASS THROUGH THE POINT
( 210.0, 128.0)
REOMETRY
IECTIONS 100.0 143.0 163.5 210.0 270.0
T. CRACKS 87.0 94.0 104.5 128.0 128.0
IN CRACK 87.0 94.0 104.5 128.0 128
.
0
OUNDARY 1 87.0 94.0 104.5 128.0 12
8
.
0
OUNDARY 2 100.0 103.0 104.5 128.0 1
2
8
.
0
OUNDARY 3 160.0 160.0 160.0 160.0 1
6
0
.
0
SOIL PROPERTIES
1AYER COHESION FRICTION ANGLE DENSITY
2 I
i75.0
250.0 30.0 132.0
33.0 138.0
IUMBER TANGENT RADIUS (X) CENTER (Y) 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
3 130.6 20.6 200.0 110.0 4 138.4 48.4 180.0 90.0 I 5 128.9 58.9 200.0 70.0 6 128.9 58.9 220.0 70.0 7 135.3 65.3 180.0 70.0 8 128.6 78.6 200.0 50.0 I 9 128.6 78.6 220.0 50.0 10 133.6 83.6 180.0 50.0 11 128.5 98.5 200.0 30.0 12 128.0 78.0 210.0 50.0 13 128.7 68.7 200.0 60.0 14 130.5 80.5 190.0 50.0 I 15 128.6 88.6 200.0 40.0 16 128.0 68.0 210.0 60.0 17 130.9 70.9 190.0 60.0 130.2 90.2 190.0 40.0 I
18
19 128.0 88.0 210.0 40.0
I.S. MINIMUM= 2.035 FOR THE CIRCLE OF CENTER ( 200.0,
****************** I * STABRG * ******************
1
I
I
I
I .
i i
I
I
50.0)
Plate No. A8
2.996 2.680
2.795 2.303
2.141 2.002
3.758 3.735
2.505 2.200
2.035 1.918
2.752 2.719
2.459 2.239
2.073 1.977
2.149 2.073
2.058 1.929
2.187 2.027
2.046 1.940
2.288 2.215
2.176 1.992
2.213 2.070
2.050 1.972
- - - - - - - - - . - - - - - - - - - -
F LAYER COHESION FRICTION DENSITY
AfJGLE
1 75.0 30.0 132 0 FACTOR OF SAFETY 2.03
2 250.0 33.0 1 38.0
700
-
LLJ
\\\
.............................................
100.0 150.0 200.0 250.0
X COORDINATE
I
* * * SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS * * *
S T A B R G ***************** * * * PORTIONS (C) COPYRIGHT 1985, 1986 *
I * * * GEOSOFT * * *
I
* ALL RIGHTS RESERVED * * * *********************************************
IORR.2 SCS&T 9511128 SECTION B-B'
ICONTROL DATA
NUMBER OF SPECIFIED CENTERS 0 I NUMBER OF DEPTH LIMITING TANGENTS 0 NUMBER OF VERTICAL SECTIONS 5 NUMBER OF SOIL LAYER BOUNDARIES 3 NUMBER OF PORE PRESSURE LINES 0 NUMBER I OF POINTS DEFINING COHESION PROFILE 0
SEISMIC COEFFICIENT S1,S2 = .00 .00
SEARCH STARTS AT CENTER ( 165.0, 70.0),WITH FINAL GRID OF 5.0
I
ALL CIRCLES PASS THROUGH THE POINT
( 163.5, 104.5)
lEOMETRY
1ECTIONS 100.0 143.0 163.5 210.0 270.0
T. CRACKS 87.0 94.0 104.5 128.0 128.0
IN CRACK 87.0 94.0 104.5 128.0 128.0
OUNDARY 1 87.0 94.0 104.5 128.0 128.0
OUNDARY 2 100.0 103.0 104.5 128.0 128.0
OUNDARY 3 160.0 160.0 160.0 160.0 160.0
SOIL PROPERTIES
RAYER COHESION FRICTION ANGLE DENSITY
75.0 30.0 132.0 250.0 33.0 138.0 F
EL
lUMBER TANGENT RADIUS
1 104.5 34.5
2 106.4 36.4
(X) CENTER (1) CENTER FS(BISHOP)
165.0 70.0 2.051 175.0 70.0 5.661
FS (OMS)
1.991
5.656
11
2.281
2.884
2.131
2.516
2.103
2.452
2.077
3 .105
2.420
2.502
2.180
2.230
2.729
2.078
2.497
2.044
2.346
2.021
3.090
2.299
2.406
2.154
3 104.5 24.5 165.0 80.0 105.5 35.5 155.0 70.0 I
4
5 104.5 44.5 165.0 60.0 6 105.1 35.1 170.0 70.0 7 104.5 29.5 165.0 75.0 104.7 34.7 160.0 70.0 I 8
9 104.5 39.5 165.0 65.0 10 105.2 30.2 170.0 75.0 104.7 29.7 160.0 75.0 I 11
12 104.7 39.7 160.0 65.0 13 105.0 40.0 170.0 65.0
US. MINIMUM= 2.051 FOR THE CIRCLE OF CENTER ( 165.0,
1
* STABRG * -
I
I,
1
I
I I
I
II
I
I
I
70.0)
Plate No. All
- - - - - - - - - - - - MM - - - - -
LAYER COHESION FRICTION DENSIT'(
ANGLE FACTOR OF SAFETY 2.05 1 75.0 30.0 132.0
2 250.0 33.0 138.0
70.0
95.0
LLU.0
145.0
- Cl I-.
100.0 150.0 200.0 250.0 00.0
X COORDINATE
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,
prepafing 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
I
[11
1
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
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
I testing procedures.
PREPARATION OF AREAS TO RECEIVE FILL
I 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
I unsightly debris.
I 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
I . 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
1 dry density.
When the slope of the natural ground receiving fill exceeds 20 percent (5 horizontal units to 1 vertical I 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,
1 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
I 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
I 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
I procedure should be backfihled 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
I 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. .
I 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
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
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.
I
I
I
I
I
77
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
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
material to the specified degree of compaction.
SEASON LIMITS
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
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.
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
required.
I
I
I
I