Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6611; Park Dr @ Marina Dr Drain, Wall, Pave Impro; Park Dr @ Marina Dr Drain, Wall, Pave Impro; 2008-09-24Geotechnical and Environmental Sciences Consultants GEOTECHNICAL EVALUATION DRAINAGE, RETAINING WALL, AND PAVEMENT IMPROVEMENTS PARK DRIVE AT MARINA DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 291^ PREPARED FOR City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, California 92008 PREPARED BY Ninyo & Moore Geotechnical and Environmental Sciences Consultants 5710RuffinRoad San Diego, California 92123 September 24, 2008 Project No. 106394001 5710 Ruffin Road • San Diego, California 92123 • Phone (858) 576-1000 • Fax (858) 576-9600 San Diego - Irvine • Ontario • Los Angeles • Oakland • Las Vegas • Carson City • Phoenix • Centennial Geotechnical and Environmental Sciences Consultants September 24, 2008 Project No. 106394001 Ms. Sherri Howard, P. E. Associate Engineer City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, California 92008 Subject: Geotechnical Evaluation Drainage, Retaining Wall, and Pavement Improvements Park Drive at Marina Drive Carlsbad, California Dear Ms. Howard: In accordance with your authorization, we have performed a geotechnical evaluation for the pro- posed drainage, retaining wall, and pavement improvements project on Park Drive at Marina Drive in Carlsbad, California. This report presents our geotechnical findings, conclusions, and recommendations for the project. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service on this project. Sincerely, NINYO & MOORE Jeffrey T. Kent, P.E. Senior Project Engineer JTK/FOM/ek Distribution: (5) Addressee Francis O. Moreland, C.E.G. Senior Geologist No 2071 CERT1REDENGINEERING; 5710 Ruffin Road • San Diego, California 92123 • Phone (858) 576-1000 • Fax (858) 576-9600 San Diego - Irvine • Ontario • Los Angeles • Oakland - Las Vegas • Carson City • Phoenix • Centennial Park Drive at Marina Drive September 24, 2008 Carlsbad, California Project No. 106394001 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1. INTRODUCTION 1 2. SCOPE OF SERVICES 1 3. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2 4. SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING 2 5. GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 3 5.1. Site Geology 3 5.1.1. Fill 3 5.1.2. Santiago Formation 4 5.2. Excavation Characteristics 4 5.3. Groundwater 4 6. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS 5 6.1. Faulting and Seismicity 5 6.1.1. Ground Surface Rupture 5 6.1.2. Liquefaction and Seismically Induced Settlement 6 6.2. Landsliding 6 7. CONCLUSIONS 6 8. RECOMMENDATIONS 7 8.1. Earthwork 7 8.1.1. Site Preparation 7 8.1.2. Materials for Fill 8 8.1.3. Compacted Fill 8 8.1.4. Temporary Excavations 9 8.1.5. Slopes 9 8.1.6. Drainage 10 8.2. Retaining Walls 11 8.2.1. Retaining Wall Foundations 11 8.2.2. Lateral Earth Pressures 12 8.3. Preliminary Pavement Design 12 8.4. Corrosion 13 8.5. Concrete 13 8.6. Pre-Construction Meeting 14 8.7. Plan Review and Construction Observation 14 9. LIMITATIONS 14 ,063,400, R.doc Park Drive at Marina Drive September 24, 2008 Carlsbad, California Project No. 106394001 Tables Table 1 - Recommended Pavement Sections 12 Figures Figure 1 - Site Location Map Figure 2 - Site Plan j Figure 3 - Fault Location Map Figure 4 - Retaining Wall Drainage Detail Appendices Appendix A - Test Pit and Core Logs n Appendix B - Laboratory Testing Appendix C - Typical Earthwork Guidelines 106394001 R doc D D Park Drive at Marina Drive September 24, 2008 Carlsbad, California Project No. 106394001 1. INTRODUCTION In accordance with your request and our proposal dated May 22, 2008, we have performed a geotech- nical evaluation for the proposed drainage, retaining wall, and pavement improvements project along Park Drive at Marina Drive in Carlsbad, California (Figure 1). The purpose of this study was to evalu- ate the geotechnical conditions at the site and to provide geotechnical design and construction recommendations for the proposed project. 2. SCOPE OF SERVICES Ninyo & Moore's scope of services for this project included review of pertinent background data, performance of a subsurface evaluation, and engineering analysis with regard to the proposed project. Specifically, we performed the following tasks: « Reviewing a provided geotechnical report for the site prepared by Kleinfelder, Inc. (1998) and readily available published geotechnical literature, including geologic maps, engineering plans, and aerial photographs. • Performing a field reconnaissance to observe site conditions and to mark the locations of our subsurface exploration. « Contacting Underground Service Alert to clear the subsurface exploration locations for con- flicts with buried utilities. • Performing a subsurface exploration consisting of the excavating, logging and sampling of three exploratory test pits and two pavement cores. Bulk and in-place soil samples were obtained at selected intervals from the test pits and cores for laboratory testing. • Performing geotechnical laboratory testing on selected samples. • Compiling and analyzing the data obtained from our background review, subsurface explora- tion, and laboratory testing. • Preparing this report presenting our geotechnical findings, conclusions, and recommenda- tions regarding the geotechnical design and construction of the subject project. 106394001 R doc Park Drive at Marina Drive September 24, 2008 Carlsbad, California Project No. 106394001 3. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project site is located along the eastern side of Park Drive near its intersection with Marina Drive. The project site includes the area along Park Drive that extends to the east approximately 500 feet towards Bayshore Drive and approximately 800 feet northwesterly towards Cove Drive (Figure 2). There is currently an approximately 600 foot long and up to approximately 6 foot high retaining wall present along the eastern side of Park Drive. This wall is situated at the base of portions of an easterly ascending cut and natural slope on the east side of Park Drive. The cut portion of the slope is located at the southern end of the site and is approximately 400 feet long. This portion of the slope is heavily eroded. A small drainage gully is present approximately 150 feet south of the northern end of the site (Figure 2). Vegetation at the site consists of a mod- erate to dense growth of weeds, brush and trees on the slope above the site. Street elevations at the site are generally between 15 and 20 feet above Mean Sea Level. During our field reconnaissance we observed various signs and degrees of distress within the ex- isting retaining wall such as cracking, efflorescence, spalling, and deterioration. Abundant efflorescence and deterioration of blocks was present on the face of the wall as well as several vertical cracks. We noted that the wall was constructed with skip-joint weep holes for drainage. Several of the weep holes were found to be below the adjacent grade and covered by the concrete sidewalk. Active seepage is present at several locations at the base of the wall. Active year round seepage is also present near the northern end of the site where the small drainage gully meets the sidewalk. At this location moss is present where water is constantly flowing across the sidewalk. In addition, portions of the pavement on the eastern side of Park Drive are heavily distressed. The proposed project is anticipated to involve the demolition and reconstruction of the existing re- 11 taining wall. As part of the project various types of surface drainage improvements are to be incorporated as well as the replacement of portions of the existing asphalt concrete (AC) roadway. 4. SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING Our subsurface exploration was conducted on August 13, 2008 and consisted of excavating three exploratory test pits (TP-1 through TP-3) and two pavement cores (C-l and C-2). Bulk and D Park Drive at Marina Drive September 24, 2008 Carlsbad, California Project No. 106394001 in-place soil samples were obtained at selected intervals from the test pits and cores. The ap- proximate locations of the test pits and cores are shown on Figure 2. The test pit and core logs are presented in Appendix A. During our subsurface exploration we performed a visual evaluation of the wall conditions ex- posed in our exploratory test pits. From our test pits we observed that the existing retaining wall is supported on a continuous concrete footing. As observed within our test pits TP-1 and TP-3, a pocket of open-graded gravel was placed behind the existing weep holes to provide drainage for the retaining wall. As encountered, the gravel was not separated from the adjacent wall backfill with a filter fabric or some other type of material. Additionally, in the locations of our test pits, there was no indication of waterproofing. Laboratory testing of representative soil samples included an analysis of grain size distribution, shear strength, soil corrosivity, and R- Value. The results of the laboratory tests performed are presented in Appendix B. 5. GEOLOGY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Our findings regarding site geology and groundwater conditions are provided in the following sections. 5.1. Site Geology The geologic units encountered during our subsurface evaluation included fill and materials of the Santiago Formation. Generalized descriptions of the units encountered are provided in the subse- quent sections. Detailed descriptions are also provided on the test pit logs in Appendix A. 5.1.1. Fill Fill was encountered in our exploratory test pits (TP-1 through TP-3) and cores (C-l and C-2). The fill materials encountered within our test pits generally consisted of wall backfill and extended from the ground surface to the depths explored of up to approxi- mately 5 feet. The wall backfill generally consisted of two types of materials. The general wall backfill consisted of soils that are generally derived from the underlying 106394001R.doc D D Park Drive at Marina Drive September 24, 2008 Carlsbad, California Project No. 106394001 and adjacent Santiago Formation. As encountered, this general wall backfill consisted of light brown to yellowish brown, damp, loose to medium dense, clayey to silty fine to medium sand with little gravel. The other type of material encountered behind the wall can be considered the drainage fill. This drainage fill was encountered within test pits TP-1 and TP-3, and consisted of moist, loose, poorly graded gravel. As noted earlier, this gravel was generally placed behind the weep holes as part of the wall's drainage system. Fill materials were also encountered in our cores (C-l and C-2). These fills were generally as- sociated with the roadway construction and were encountered beneath the existing AC pavement to the depths explored within the cores to approximately 3.4 feet. These materi- als varied from dark yellowish and grayish brown, moist to wet, loose, fine to coarse gravel and sand to light brown to brown, damp to moist, loose to medium dense, gravelly, sandy silt. 5.1.2. Santiago Formation Although not encountered within our exploratory excavations, materials of the Santiago Formation were observed on the hillside east of Park Drive. As observed, the materials generally consisted of a light brown to brown, damp to moist, weakly cemented, silty, clayey fine-grained sandstone, and silty claystone. 5.2. Excavation Characteristics The results of our geotechnical evaluation indicate that fill and materials of the Santiago Formation underlie the project site, as presently proposed. The on-site materials are expected to be generally rippable with normal heavy-duty earthmoving equipment. Strongly cemented material (concretions), however, may be encountered within the Santiago Formation which would entail heavy ripping or the use of rock breakers. 5.3. Groundwater A perched groundwater condition was noted within test pit TP-1. Additionally, various zones of seepage were observed on the surface of the adjacent slopes along the subject retaining wall. 106394001 R doc D Park Drive at Marina Drive September 24, 2008 Carlsbad, California Project No. 106394001 Based on the observed seepage, the efflorescence on the retaining wall face, and deterioration of the retaining wall, we anticipate that the groundwater level is at, or close to the level of the side- walk located adjacent to the subject retaining wall. Fluctuations in groundwater level may occur due to seasonal variations, irrigation, groundwater withdrawal or injection, and other factors. 6. GEOLOGIC HAZARDS In general, hazards associated with seismic activity include ground surface rupture, strong ground motion, tsunamis, and liquefaction. These considerations and other geologic hazards such as landsliding are discussed in the following sections. 6.1. Faulting and Seismicity The project area is considered seismically active. Based on our review of the referenced geo- logic maps and stereoscopic aerial photographs, as well as our geologic field reconnaissance, the subject site is not underlain by known active or potentially active faults (i.e., faults that exhibit evidence of ground displacement in the last 11, 000 years and 2,000,000 years, re- spectively). Major known active faults in the region consist generally of en-echelon, northwest-striking, right-lateral, strike-slip faults. These include the San Clemente, Agua Blanca-Coronado Bank, Newport-Inglewood, and Rose Canyon faults, located to the west of the site, and the Whittier-Elsinore, San Jacinto, and San Andreas faults, located to the east of the site. The locations of these faults are shown on Figure 3. The closest known active fault is the Rose Canyon fault, which can generate an earthquake magnitude of up to 7.2 (California Geological Survey [CGS], 2003). It is located approxi- mately 5 miles west of the project site. 6.1.1. Ground Surface Rupture Based on our review of the referenced literature and our site reconnaissance, no active faults are known to cross the project site. Therefore, the potential for ground rupture due to faulting at the site is unlikely. However, lurching or cracking of the ground surface as a result of nearby seismic events is possible. Park Drive at Marina Drive September 24, 2008 Carlsbad, California Project No. 106394001 6.1.2. Liquefaction and Seismically Induced Settlement Liquefaction of cohesionless soils can be caused by strong vibratory motion due to earthquakes. Research and historical data indicate that loose granular soils and non- plastic silts that are saturated by a relatively shallow groundwater table are susceptible to liquefaction. Based on the relatively dense nature of the materials underlying the site, the potential for liquefaction is not a design consideration. 6.2. Landsliding Based on our review of published geologic literature and aerial photographs, and our geo- logic reconnaissance, landslides or related features have not been noted as underlying the project site vicinity. 7. CONCLUSIONS Based on our review of the referenced background data, geologic field reconnaissance, subsur- face evaluation and laboratory testing, it is our opinion that the proposed drainage, retaining wall, and pavement improvements are feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. Geotechnical consid- erations include the following: <» The on-site fill and materials of the Santiago Formation are generally excavatable with con- ventional heavy-duty earth moving equipment. However, strongly cemented zones (concretions) may be encountered within the Santiago Formation. • A perched groundwater table and seepage were noted during our evaluation. The contractor should anticipate these conditions during construction. « The moisture content of some of the excavated soils may be above optimum for compaction and may require some spreading and drying prior to placement as fill. • On-site soils are considered suitable for reuse as engineered fill provided they are processed (i.e. aerated or dried) and placed in accordance with the following recommendations. o The deterioration of the existing retaining wall at the site indicates that the structure is sub- jected to a corrosive environment. The site should be considered corrosive to cementations and ferrous metal materials. 106394001 R.doc Park Drive at Marina Drive September 24, 2008 Carlsbad, California Project No. 106394001 Wet soils were encountered beneath the existing AC pavement. During the removal of exist- ing pavements, the contractor should anticipate encountering soft, wet subgrade soils. Signs of inadequate surface drainage were noted within the project area. These drainage is- sues have contributed to the distress development along the existing AC roadway. The materials of the Santiago Formation exposed in the cut slope at the southern end of the site are highly susceptible to erosion. Measures to mitigate the potential for future erosion of these soils should be incorporated into the project design. 8. RECOMMENDATIONS The following recommendations are provided for use in design and construction of the proposed drainage channel improvements. If additional geotechnical recommendations are needed, please contact this office. 8.1. Earthwork In general, earthwork should be performed in accordance with the recommendations pre- sented in this report. In addition, Typical Earthwork Guidelines for the project are included as Appendix C. In the event of a conflict, the recommendations presented in the text of this re- port should supersede those in Appendix C. 8.1.1. Site Preparation Site preparation should begin with the removal of vegetation and other deleterious de- bris from areas to be graded. Tree stumps and roots should be removed to such a depth that organic material is generally not present. The existing retaining wall and footing should also be removed. Clearing and grubbing should extend to the outside of the pro- posed excavation and fill areas. The debris and unsuitable material generated during clearing and grubbing should be removed from areas to be graded and disposed of at a legal dumpsite away from the project area. 106394001R.doc Park Drive at Marina Drive September 24, 2008 Carlsbad, California Project No. 106394001 8.1.2. Materials for Fill On-site soils with an organic content of less than approximately 3 percent by volume (or M 1 percent by weight) are suitable for use as fill. In general, fill materials should not contain rocks or lumps over approximately 4 inches, and should not have more than approxi- mately 40 percent of the particles greater than 3/4 inch. Larger chunks, if generated during excavation, may be broken into acceptably sized pieces or disposed of off site. Imported fill material, if needed for the project, should generally be granular soils with a low or very low expansion potential (i.e. Expansion Index, El, lower than 50). Import material should also have generally low corrosion potential. Materials for use as fill should be evaluated by Ninyo & Moore's representative prior to filling or importing. 8.1.3. Compacted Fill The contractor should request an evaluation of the exposed ground surface by Ninyo & Moore prior to placement of compacted fill. Unless otherwise recommended, the ex- posed ground surface should be scarified to a depth of approximately 8 inches and watered or dried, as needed, to achieve a moisture content near but generally above the optimum moisture content. The scarified materials should then be compacted to a rela- tive compaction of 90 percent as evaluated by the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Test Method D1557. The evaluation of compaction by the geotechni- cal consultant should not be considered to preclude any requirements for observation or approval by governing agencies. It is the contractor's responsibility to notify our offices and the appropriate governing agency when project areas are ready for observation, and to provide reasonable time for that review. Fill materials should be moisture conditioned to near but generally above the laboratory optimum moisture content prior to placement. The optimum moisture content will vary with material type and other factors. Moisture conditioning of fill soils should be gener- ally consistent within the soil mass. ,0639400, R.do. D Park Drive at Marina Drive September 24, 2008 Carlsbad, California Project No. 106394001 Prior to placement of additional compacted fill material following a delay in the grading opera- tions, the exposed surface of previously compacted fill should be prepared to receive fill. Preparation may include scarification, moisture conditioning, and recompaction. Compacted fill should be placed in horizontal lifts of approximately 8 inches in loose thick- ness. Prior to compaction, each lift should be watered or dried as needed to achieve a moisture content near but generally above the laboratory optimum, mixed, and then compacted by me- chanical methods, using sheepsfoot rollers, multiple-wheel pneumatic-tired rollers or other appropriate compacting rollers, to a relative compaction of 90 percent as evaluated by ASTMD1557. Successive lifts should be treated in a like manner until the desired finished grades are achieved. 8.1.4. Temporary Excavations We recommend that temporary excavations be designed and constructed in accordance with Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA) regulations. For planning purposes, we recommend that the following OSHA soil classifications be used: Fill Type C Santiago Formation Type B Temporary excavations should be constructed in accordance with OSHA recommendations. Temporary excavations, should be laid back at inclinations no steeper than 1.5:1 (horizon- tal:vertical) in fill and 1:1 in materials of the Santiago Formation. Temporary excavations that encounter seepage may need shoring or may be stabilized by placing sandbags or gravel along the base of the seepage zone. Excavations encountering seepage should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. On-site safety of personnel is the responsibility of the contractor. 8.1.5. Slopes We recommend that fill and cut slopes be constructed at an inclination of 2:1 (horizon- tal: vertical). Compaction of the face of fill slopes should be performed by backrolling at intervals of 4 feet or less in vertical slope height or as dictated by the capability of the available equipment, whichever is less. Fill slopes should be backrolled utilizing a 106394001 Rdoc Park Drive at Marina Drive September 24, 2008 Carlsbad, California Project No. 106394001 sheepsfoot-type roller. Care should be taken in maintaining the desired moisture condi- tions and/or reestablishing them, as needed, prior to backrolling. The placement, moisture conditioning, and compaction of fill slope materials should be done in accor- dance with the recommendations presented in the Compacted Fill section of this report. Site runoff should not be permitted to flow over the tops of slopes. Positive drainage should be established away from the slopes. This may be accomplished by incorporating brow ditches placed at the top of the slopes to divert surface runoff away from the slope face where drainage devices are not otherwise available. The on-site soils are susceptible to erosion; therefore, the project plans and specifica- tions should contain design features and construction requirements to mitigate erosion of on-site soils during and after construction. Slopes and other exposed ground surfaces should be appropriately planted with a protective ground cover. 8.1.6. Drainage Surface drainage on the site should generally be provided so that water is not permitted to pond. A gradient of 2 percent or steeper should be maintained and drainage patterns should be established to divert and remove water from the site to appropriate outlets. Specifically, we recommend that a concrete drainage swale be constructed above the highly erodable cut slope at the southern end of the site. The swale should be con- structed at the approximate location indicated on Figure 2 and drain to the existing storm drain inlet at the southern end of the project site. We also recommend that a swale be constructed behind the top of the new retaining wall at the site. Care should be taken by the contractor during grading to preserve any berms, drainage terraces, interceptor swales or other drainage devices on or adjacent to the project site. Drainage patterns established at the time of grading should be maintained for the life of the project. The property maintenance personnel should be made aware that altering drainage patterns might be detrimental to long term stability of slopes. 10639400] Rdoc 10 Park Drive at Marina Drive September 24, 2008 Carlsbad. California Project No. 106394001 8.2. Retaining Walls Retaining walls are proposed at the subject site. For the design of a retaining wall that is not restrained against movement by rigid corners or structural connections, an active pressure represented by an equivalent fluid weight of 40 pounds per cubic foot (pci) may be assumed. Restrained walls (non-yielding) may be designed for an at-rest pressure represented by an equivalent fluid weight of 60 pcf. This pressure assumes low-expansive, level backfill and free draining conditions. Yielding and restrained walls retaining sloping backfill inclined at 2:1 may be designed using equivalent fluid weights of 60 pcf and 90 pcf, respectively. A drain should be provided behind the retaining wall as shown on Figure 4. The drain should be connected to an appropriate outlet. 8.2.1. Retaining Wall Foundations The retaining wall may be founded on a continuous footing based in compacted fill or in formational materials. Shallow foundations founded in competent engineered fill or formational materials may be designed based on an allowable bearing capacity of 2,500 pounds per square foot (psf). The allowable bearing capacity value may be in- creased by one-third when considering loads of short duration such as wind or seismic forces. Foundations should be founded at least 18 inches below lowest adjacent grade. We recommend that foundations be reinforced in accordance with the recommendations of the project structural engineer. From a geotechnical standpoint, we recommend that continuous footings be reinforced with four No. 4 reinforcing bars, two placed near the top of the footing and two near the bottom. Additionally, we recommend that the project structural engineer design the new retain- ing wall with a footing keyway. From a geotechnical standpoint, the keyway should extend 18 inches below the bottom of the foundation. The keyway will provide a cutoff wall to mitigate the potential of seepage from the easterly slopes migrating into the ex- isting roadway subgrade for Park Drive. 106394001 R doc ]J Park Drive at Marina Drive Carlsbad, California September 24, 2008 Project No. 106394001 0 8.2.2. Lateral Earth Pressures Allowable lateral passive pressures equal to an equivalent fluid weight of 250 pcf may be used provided the footings are placed neat against engineered fill soils or formational materials (up to a maximum of 2,500 psf). Foundations may be designed using a coeffi- cient of friction between soil and concrete of 0.35. D 8.3. Preliminary Pavement Design We understand that portions of the deteriorated pavement along Park Drive will be replaced. For planning purposes we are providing a preliminary pavement design. Laboratory testing was performed on a representative sample of the on-site soils to evaluate R-value. The test was in general accordance with California Test (CT) Method 301 and the result is presented in Appendix B. The test result indicates an R-value of 16 for the sample tested. We have used this value for the preliminary design of flexible pavements at the project site. Actual pave- ment recommendations should be based on R-value tests performed on bulk samples of the soils that are exposed at the finished subgrade elevations in the areas to be paved once grad- ing operations have been performed. For design we have used a TI of 5.0 and 6.0 for site pavements. The preliminary recom- mended pavement section is as follows: Table 1 - Recommended Pavement Sections Area Park Drive Park Drive R- Value 16 16 Traffic Index 5.0 6.0 Asphalt Concrete (inches) 4 4 Class 2 Aggregate Base (inches) 6 10 if traffic loads are different from those assumed, the pavement design should be re-evaluated. In addition, we recommend that the upper 12 inches of the subgrade and the Class 2 aggregate base be compacted to a relative compaction of 95 percent as evaluated by ASTM D 1557. i 06394001 R.doc 12 Park Drive at Marina Drive September 24, 2008 Carlsbad, California Project No. 106394001 8.4. Corrosion Laboratory testing was performed on a representative sample of the on-site soils to evaluate pH and electrical resistivity, as well as chloride and sulfate contents. The pH and electrical resistivity tests were performed in accordance with CT 643 and the sulfate and chloride con- tent tests were performed in accordance with CT 417 and 422, respectively. These laboratory test results are presented in Appendix B. The results of the corrosivity testing indicated an electrical resistivity of 1,210 ohm-cm, a soil pH of 7.0, a chloride content of 165 parts per million (ppm) and a sulfate content of 0.162 percent (i.e., 1,620 ppm). Based on the Caltrans (2003) criteria, the project site would not be classified as corrosive, which is defined as a site having soils with more than 500 ppm of chlorides, more than 0.2 percent sulfates or a pH less than 5.5. Although, laboratory test- ing did not indicate the project site as being corrosive, based on the observed deterioration of the existing retaining wall, we recommend that the site be classified as corrosive. 8.5. Concrete Concrete in contact with soil or water that contains high concentrations of soluble sulfates can be subject to chemical deterioration. Laboratory testing indicated a sulfate content of 0.162 percent for the tested sample, which is considered to represent a moderate potential for sulfate attack (CBC, 2007). Based on the results of the sulfate test, the variability in the on-site soils, the poten- tial future use of reclaimed water at the site, and the observed deterioration of the existing retaining wall, we recommend that the site be classified as corrosive. We recommend that Type V cement be used for concrete structures in contact with soil. In addition, we recommend a water- to-cement ratio of no more than 0.45. We also recommend that 3 inches of concrete cover be pro- vided over reinforcing steel for cast-in-place structures in contact with site soils. In order to reduce the potential for shrinkage cracks in the concrete during curing, we recom- mend that for slabs-on-grade, the concrete be placed with a slump in accordance with Table 5.2.1 of Section 302.1R of The Manual of Concrete Practice, "Floor and Slab Construc- tion," or Table 2.2 of Section 332R in The Manual of Concrete Practice, "Guide to Residential 106394001 R doc J3 Park Drive at Marina Drive September 24, 2008 Carlsbad, California Project No. 106394001 Cast-in-Place Concrete Construction." If a higher slump is needed for screening and leveling, a super plasticizer is recommended to achieve the higher slump without changing the required water-to-cement ratio. The slump should be checked periodically at the site prior to concrete placement. We also recommend that crack control joints be provided in slabs in accordance with the recommendations of the structural engineer to reduce the potential for distress due to minor soil movement and concrete shrinkage. We further recommend that concrete cover over reinforcing steel for slabs-on-grade and foundations be in accordance with CBC 1907.7. The structural engineer should be consulted for additional concrete specifications. 8.6. Pre-Construction Meeting We recommend that a pre-construction meeting be held prior to the commencement of grad- ing. The owner or his representative, the agency representatives, the architect, the civil engineer, Ninyo & Moore, and the contractor should be in attendance to discuss the plans, the project, and the proposed construction schedule. 8.7. Plan Review and Construction Observation The recommendations presented in this report are based on our understanding of the project and subsurface information disclosed by three exploratory test pits and two cores. Ninyo & Moore should check the subsurface conditions during construction. A representative of Ninyo & Moore should verify the depth and extent of removals during construction. Observation and testing of compacted fill and backfill should be performed by Ninyo & Moore. We further recommend that project plans be reviewed by the design engineer and Ninyo & Moore before construction. It should be noted that upon review of the project plans and specifications, some recommendations presented in this report might be revised or modified to meet the project requirements. 9. LIMITATIONS The field evaluation, laboratory testing, and geotechnical analyses presented in this geotechnical report have been conducted in general accordance with current practice and the standard of care exercised by geotechnical consultants performing similar tasks in the project area. No warranty, 106394001 R doc 14 Park Drive at Marina Drive September 24, 2008 Carlsbad, California Project No. 106394001 expressed or implied, is made regarding the conclusions, recommendations, and opinions pre- sented in this report. There is no evaluation detailed enough to reveal every subsurface condition. Variations may exist and conditions not observed or described in this report may be encountered during construction. Uncertainties relative to subsurface conditions can be reduced through addi- tional subsurface exploration. Additional subsurface evaluation will be performed upon request. Please also note that our evaluation was limited to assessment of the geotechnical aspects of the project, and did not include evaluation of structural issues, environmental concerns, or the pres- ence of hazardous materials. This document is intended to be used only in its entirety. No portion of the document, by itself, is designed to completely represent any aspect of the project described herein. Ninyo & Moore should be contacted if the reader requires additional information or has questions regarding the j| content, interpretations presented, or completeness of this document. This report is intended for design purposes only. It does not provide sufficient data to prepare an accu- rate bid by contractors. It is suggested that the bidders and their geotechnical consultant perform an independent evaluation of the subsurface conditions in the project areas. The independent evaluations may include, but not be limited to, review of other geotechnical reports prepared for the adjacent ar- eas, site reconnaissance, and additional exploration and laboratory testing. Our conclusions, recommendations, and opinions are based on an analysis of the observed site con- ditions. If geotechnical conditions different from those described in this report are encountered, our office should be notified, and additional recommendations, if warranted, will be provided upon re- quest. It should be understood that the conditions of a site could change with time as a result of natural processes or the activities of man at the subject site or nearby sites. In addition, changes to the applicable laws, regulations, codes, and standards of practice may occur due to government ac- tion or the broadening of knowledge. The findings of this report may, therefore, be invalidated over time, in part or in whole, by changes over which Ninyo & Moore has no control. ,0639400, R.doc 15 Park Drive at Marina Drive Carlsbad, California September 24, 2008 Project No. 106394001 This report is intended exclusively for use by the client. Any use or reuse of the findings, conclu- sions, and/or recommendations of this report by parties other than the client is undertaken at said parties' sole risk. 106394001 R doc Jg Park Drive at Marina Drive September 24, 2008 Carlsbad, California Project No. 106394001 REFERENCES American Concrete Institute (ACI), 2005, Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACT 318-05) and Commentary (ACI 318R-05). California Building Standards Commission , 2007, CBC, Title 24, Part 2, Volumes 1 and 2. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 1991, Newcon90: dated April 30, http:\\www.dot.ca.gov\hq\InfoSvcs\EngApps. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 2003, Corrosion Guidelines (Version 1.0), Division of Engineering and Testing Services, Corrosion Technology Branch: dated September. City of Carlsbad, 2008, Engineering Standards, Volume 1, General Design Standards, 2004 Edi- tion: revised June 30. County of San Diego, 1963, Topographic Survey, Sheet 354-1671, Scale 1" = 200'. County of San Diego, 1975, Topographic Survey (Orthotopograpnic), Sheet 354-1671, Scale 1" = 200'. International Code Council, Inc., 2006, International Building Code. Kennedy, Michael P. and Tan, Siang S., 2005, Geologic Map of the Oceanside 30' X 60' Quad- rangle, California: Regional Geologic Map Series, Map No. 2. Kleinfelder, Inc., 1998, Report of Geotechnical Exploration, Park Drive Slope/Drainage Study, Carls- bad, California, City of Carlsbad Project No. 34781, Job No. 51-4659-01: dated May 4. Ninyo & Moore, 2008, Proposal for Geotechnical Services, Drainage, Retaining Wall and Pave- ment Evaluation, Park Drive at Marina Drive, Carlsbad, California: dated May 22. Norris, R. M. and Webb, R. W, 1990, Geology of California, Second Edition: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Public Works Standards, Inc., 2006, "Greenbook," Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction. United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, 1998, Engineering Geology Field Manual. United States Geological Survey, 1968 (photo-revised 1983), Rancho Santa Fe Quadrangle, Cali- fornia, San Diego County, 7.5-Minute Series (Topographic): Scale 1:24,000. United States Geological Survey, 2008, Earthquake Ground Motion Parameter Java Application, Java Ground Motion Parameter Calculator - Version 5.0.8; http://earthquake.usgs.gov/ research/hazmaps/design/. Willdan Associates, 1987, Improvement Plan for: Park Dr. Assessment District, Cove Drive to 400' South of Marina Drive, Sheet 3 of 3: dated September 1. 10639400] R.doc 17 Park Drive at Marina Drive Carlsbad, California September 24, 2008 Project No. 106394001 Source USDA AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS Date Flight Numbers 5-2-53 AXN-14M 18 and 19 Scale 1:20,000 106394001 R.doc 18 »j* Vy.^C-v,S 18 1' ,3&\L£rr^% *sAff i^5S^2£ji-'=» "/&RfwwTlt« «V .g • . 41 —=_ S S S >——7. Tti •• &%ar». ^v^' ^ i1"-f VA .'figy.!/ REFERENCE: 2005 THOMAS GUIDE FOR SAN DIEGO COUNTY, STREET GUIDE AND DIRECTORY APPROXIMATE SCALE IN FEE NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS, DIRECTIONS AND LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE Map © Rand McNallv. R.L.07-S-129 Sll LOCATION MAP DRAINAGE, RETAINING WALL AND PAVEMENT IMPROVEMENTS PARK DRIVE AT MARINA DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA EXISTING RETAINING -WALL EXISTING DRAINAGE GULLY OBSERVED SEEPAGE -ACROSS SIDEWALK AREA OF OBSERVED SEEPAGE EXISTING SWALE APPROXIMATE SCALE 0 150 300 FEET NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS, DIRECTIONS AND LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE LEGEND TD=2.5' C-2 APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF , EXPLORATORY TEST PIT TD=TOTAL DEPTH IN FEET APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF TD=1.6' PAVEMENT CORE PROJECT NO. 106394001 DATE 9/08 SITE PLAN DRAINAGE, RETAINING WALL, AND PAVEMENT IMPROVEMENTS PARK DRIVE AT MARINA DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA FIGURE 2 V BAKER\ \ o SAN BERNARDINO CO. LOS ANGELES CO. LAKE ARROWHEAD MOUNTAINT\ ^~»^-x ™^jHfE SAN BERNARDINO C RIVERSIDE CO. _ THOUSAND OAKS muoNA SAN BERNARDINO — ^* RIVERSIDE CO. IMPERIAL CO. NOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS, DIRECTIONS AND LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE FAULT LOCATION MAP DRAINAGE, RETAINING WALL, AND PAVEMENT IMPROVEMENTS PARK DRIVE AT MARINA DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA SOIL BACKFILL COMPACTED TO 90% RELATIVE COMPACTION * RETAINING WALL- FINISHED GRADE- WALL FOOTING 12 INCHES 3/4-INCH OPEN-GRADED GRAVEL WRAPPED IN AN APPROVED GEOFABRIC. UJcr -GEOFABRIC 3 INCHES FOOTING . KEYWAY 4-INCH-DIAMETER PERFORATED SCHEDULE 40 PVC PIPE OR EQUIVALENT INSTALLED WITH PERFORATIONS DOWN; 1% GRADIENT OR MORE TO A SUITABLE OUTLET * BASED ON ASTMD1557 NOT TO SCALE NOTE: AS AN ALTERNATIVE. AN APPROVED GEOCOMPOSITE DRAIN SYSTEM MAY BE USED. PROJECT NO. 106394001 DATE 9/08 RETAINING WALL DRAINAGE DETAIL DRAINAGE, RETAINING WALL, AND PAVEMENT IMPROVEMENTS PARK DRIVE AT MARINA DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA FIGURE PEND Park Drive at Marina Drive „ September 24, 2008 Carlsbad, California Project No. 106394001 APPENDIX A TEST PIT AND CORE LOGS Field Procedure for the Collection of Disturbed Samples Disturbed soil samples were obtained in the field using the following method. Bulk Samples Bulk samples of representative earth materials were obtained from the exploratory test pit. The samples were bagged and transported to the laboratory for testing. Field Procedure for the Collection of Relatively Undisturbed Samples Relatively undisturbed soil samples were obtained in the field using the following method. The Modified Split-Barrel Drive Sampler The sampler, with an external diameter of 3.0 inches, was lined with 1-inch long, thin brass rings with inside diameters of approximately 2.4 inches. The sample barrel was driven into the ground with the weight of a hammer. The samples were removed from the sample barrel in the brass rings, sealed, and transported to the laboratory for testing. 106394001 R.doc (Z T1 c5c73m 3 ^tyMjrftyibA l__1 1 TEST PIT LOG DRAINAGE, RETAINING WALL, AND PAVEMENT IMPROVEMENTS PARK. DRIVE AT MARINA DRIVE, CARLSBAD CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. DATE 106394001 | 9/08 RETAININGi \ SIDEWALK! WALL ! si i • : \ !i ;i i I i Ir-A\AJEEFLHC : WATER \ )LE ! !' j DEPTH (FEET)u -1 -2 3 -4 -5 6 '_ SAMPLES^^. cc 1iPm 1 1 1 1 cCD •cQ , 0coO •OCccCO MOISTURE (%) T^.DRY DENSITY (PCF)CLASSIFICATION 1U.S.C.S. L|SM GP DATE EXCAVATED 8/13/08 TEST PIT NO. TP-1 GROUND ELEVATION 23' ± (MSL) LOGGED BY M.IB METHOD OF EXCAVATION Manual LOCATION Behind retaining wall, northern end DESCRIPTION FILL: Light brown to brown, moist, loose to medium dense, silty, fine to medium SAND; little fine to coarse gravel; some roots. Abundant roots. White, dark blue, gray, brown, and red mottled, moist, loose, poorly graded GRAVEL. (Retaining wall footing at 3 feet.) Total Depth = 3 feet. Groundwater was measured at a depth of approximately 2.8 feet in the test pit during excavation. Backfilled on 8/1 3/08. SCALE = 1 in./1 ft. c Tlc5c73m M ^ [ ' '^j^lllllft^ ^ TEST PIT LOG DRAINAGE, RETAINING WALL, AND PAVEMENT IMPROVEMENTS PARK DRIVE AT MARINA DRIVE, CARLSBAD CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. \ 106394001 | i RETA(NING^ " WALL1 | | SIDEWALK i i DATE 9/08 i ~ 1 ! ! ! 1 I I I I •r^ J UJUJu_ XI— Q.LLJ Q 1 ,2. T, A 5 6 . "" r. SAMPLED±z3CD § i . c<u '^Q iii1i 0) 0o -oc 03 C/)MOISTURE (%) r;LDRY DENSITY (PCF)CLASSIFICATION [u.s.c.s. LSM DATE EXCAVATED 8/14/08 TEST PIT NO. TP-2 GROUND ELEVATION 26' ± (MSL) LOGGED BY MJB METHOD OF EXCAVATION Manual LOCATION Behind retaining wall at Park Drive and Manna Drive DESCRIPTION FILL: Pale yellowish brown, damp, loose to medium dense, silty, fine to medium SAND; trace clay; little fine to coarse gravel; some roots. Abundant roots. Medium dense; clayey; silty; fine to medium sand. Total Depth = 5 feet. Groundwater not encountered. Backfilled on 8/14/08. SCALE = 1 in./1 ft. c c5c moo J ' — ' J j al pfr*tytita raT "- TEST PIT LOG DRAINAGE, RETAINING WALL, AND PAVEMENT IMPROVEMENTS PARK DRIVE AT MARINA DRIVE, CARLSBAD CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. 106394001 RETAINING WALL ^ | SIDEWALK :WEEP- J — "^_i : i! / HOLE - i DATE i 9/08 i 1: i ! !| i ! i• ; 1 778f"PVe" f ! IRREGULAR^ ! ? ! CONCRETE ; j 1 ! I \ — f — I i i i SCALE = 1 in./1 ft. I J P LULUU_ I Q. LU Q 1 -4 6 SAMPLESII^. sg i1 •%SEw 0> °cO 0)coO "OcroCO MOISTURE (%) TjDRY DENSITY (PCF) 1CLASSIFICATIONU.S.C.S. . L|,CL+SM GP SM DATE EXCAVATED 8/14/08 TEST PIT NO. TP-3 GROUND ELEVATION 26' ± (MSL) LOGGED BY MJB METHOD OF EXCAVATION Manual LOCATION Behind retaining wall, southern end DESCRIPTION FILL: Gray to tan, dry to damp, loose to medium dense, silty, fine to medium SAND; contains 1/4-inch to 1/2-inch layers of dark gray, damp, stiff to very stiff CLAY; some roots. Dark gray and tan; damp; medium dense; clayey; silty; fine to medium sand. Tan and gray, damp, loose, fine sandy, silty, poorly graded, fine GRAVEL. Tan and dark gray with iron oxide staining, damp, medium dense, clavey, silty SAND. (Retaining wall footing at 2.5 feet.) Total Depth = 2. 5 feet. Ground water not encountered. Backfilled on 8/14/08. L_ -r CZlrn J ' }$iibifro^iiN&' 1 — CORE LOG DRAINAGE, RETAINING WALL, AND PAVEMENT IMPROVEMENTS PARK DRIVE AT MARINA DRIVE, CARLSBAD CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. i 106394001 i ! i ! I I ) / DATE 9/08 j ...,„ .. .,], „__ J, .„. I i i :U : i 1 I ; i • J UJUJU_DEPTH (u -1 -2 -4 6 coj UJ Q. <CO 1 95 [ iiii Bii c >'i— Q 0O-ocTOco 35 UJ COo i_DRY DENSITY (PCF)CLASSIFICATION 1 jU.S.C.S. L||GP+SP ML DATE EXCAVATED 8/13/08 TEST PIT NO. C-l GROUND ELEVATION 20'± (MSL) LOGGED BY MJB METHOD OF EXCAVATION 6" Core/Manual LOCATION Northeast side of Park Drive (northern core) DESCRIPTION ASHALT CONCRETE: Approximately 5 inches thick. BASE: Dark yellowish and grayish brown, moist to wet, loose, fine to coarse GRAVEL and medium SAND; micaceous; fewer fines in upper 5 inches. FILL: Light brown to brown, damp to moist, loose to medium dense, gravelly, sandy SILT; trace of clay. Light brown to tan; damp; medium dense; clayey silt; trace of sand and gravel. Groundwater not encountered. Backfilled and patched with concrete on 8/13/08. SCALE = 1 in./1 ft. (J FIGURESJ rtrt^ ^ CORE LOG DRAINAGE, RETAINING WALL, AND PAVEMENT IMPROVEMENTS PARK DRIVE AT MARINA DRIVE, CARLSBAD CALIFORNIA PROJECT NO. 106394001 i i V / DATE 9/08 ! ! \ i i i I i ;i : 1 I . . i 1 1 I 1 \ ! '• : i i 1 ! i i I ! ; i i : Fjl i ; j 1 i j i 1 ! | i ! 1 !ii i ii i i i i 111 1 i I : i 11 ' !_ JDEPTH (FEET)— w— - 1 4 6 COUJ_lQ. <CO -* 3CQ I 1i1 I c§'CQ <ucoO T3CTOCO MOISTURE (%) f |uDRY DENSITY (PCF)O CLASSiFICATIU.S.C.S.GP+CL DATE EXCAVATED 8/13/08 TEST PIT NO. C-2 GROUND ELEVATION 20'± (MSL) LOGGED BY MJB METHOD OF EXCAVATION 6" Core/Manual LOCATION Northeast side of Park Drive (southern core) DESCRIPTION ASHALT CONCRETE: Approximately 4 1 /4 inches thick. BASE: Light brown and light grayish brown, wet, loose, fine to coarse GRAVEL and silty, fine to medium sandy CLAY. Refusal on cobble. Total Depth = 1. 6 feet. Groundwater not encountered. Backfilled and patched with concrete on 8/13/08. SCALE = 1 in./1 ft. ENDIX Park Drive at Marina Drive . September 24, 2008 Carlsbad, California Project No. 106394001 APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTING Classification Soils were visually and texturally classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) in general accordance with ASTM D 2488. Soil classifications are indicated on the log of the exploratory test pit in Appendix A. Gradation Analysis Gradation analysis tests were performed on selected representative soil samples in general accordance with ASTM D 422. The grain-size distribution curves are shown on Figures B-l and B-2. These test results were utilized in evaluating the soil classifications in accordance with the USCS. Direct Shear Test A direct shear test was performed on a relatively undisturbed sample in general accordance with ASTM D 3080 to evaluate the shear strength characteristics of selected materials. The sample was in- undated during shearing to represent adverse field conditions. The results are shown on Figure B-3. Soil Corrosivity Tests Soil pH, and resistivity tests were performed on a representative sample in general accordance with CT643. The soluble sulfate and chloride contents of the selected sample were evaluated in general ac- cordance with CT 417 and CT 422, respectively. The test results are presented on Figure B-4. R-Value The resistance value, or R-value, for site soils was evaluated in general accordance with CT 301. A sample was prepared and evaluated for exudation pressure and expansion pressure. The equi- librium R-value is reported as the lesser or more conservative of the two calculated results. The test results are shown on Figure B-5. 10639400! R doc GRAVEL Coarse 3" 1-1/2" I 0 CO ffi 50 -~z_ u~ Z ^OLLJoca LLJ -*nD. r Fine SAND Coarse Medium Fine FINES Silt US STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS 3/4" 1/2" 3/8" 4 8 16 30 50 100 200 ' - 100 S » ymbol \ 1 1 II 11 ' 1 \\ \ \ I —<i 10 Hole No. TP-1 Depth (ft) 1.5-2.0 V- -- -<P----<> —— '> — I I f Clay HYDROMETER 1 0.1 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS Liquid Limit - Plastic Limit - Plasticity Index - DID 1.80 D. 7.80 0.01 D6o 10.3C cu ) 5.7 cc 3.3 0001 0.0001 Passing No. 200 3 U.S.C.S GP PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 422-63 (02) PROJECT NO. 106394001 DATE 9/08 GRADATION TEST RESULTS DRAINAGE,RETAINING WALL, AND PAVEMENT IMPROVEMENTS PARK DRIVE AT MARINA DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA FIGURE B-1 106394001 SIEVE TP-1 @ L5-2.0.xls GRAVEL Coarse 3" 2' 11/," 100 0 T 70 0 - CD LL) 5 60.0 -- | 50.0 - E LLJ O LLJ Q. iTT - - 100 Symbol * Fine SAND Coarse Medium Fine FINES SILT CLAY U.S. STANDARD SIEVE NUMBERS HYDROMETER " '/•" '/;" '/«" 4 8 16 30 50 100 200 ! I I I I I I ! I I I i ! I I I I I s\s 4^H ^4A H~" \ \ \ \ \ \ \ I1 1 1 — - ^ 10 1 0.1 0.01 0001 0.0001 GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS Sample Location TP-3 Depth (ft) 0.0-0.5 Liquid Limit - Plastic Plasticity Limit Index -- D10 -- cu - c. - Passing No. 200 27 uses SM PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 422-63 (02) ff.-f/S-ff^™ PROJECT NO 106394001 DATE 9/08 GRADATION TEST RESULTS DRAINAGE, RETAINING WALL, AND PAVEMENTS IMPROVEMENTS PARK DRIVE AT MARINA DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA FIGURE B-2 106394001 SIEVE TP-3 @ 0.0-0.5.X 2000 1000 NORMAL STRESS (PSF) 2000 Description Silty SAND Silty SAND Symbol ^ - -X - - Sample Location TP-2 TP-2 Depth (ft) 4.0-5.0 4.0-5.0 Shear Strength Peak Ultimate Cohesion, c (psf) 110 100 Friction Angle, <j> (degrees) 34 34 Soil Type SM SM PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 3080-04 & 0 PROJECT NO. 106394001 DATE 9/08 DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS DRAINAGE, RETAINING WALL, AND PAVEMENT IMPROVEMENTS PARK DRIVE AT MARINA DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA FIGURE B-3 106394001 SHEAR TP-2 @ 4.0-5.0.xls D D SAMPLE LOCATION TP-3 SAMPLE DEPTH (FT) 1.0-1.5 PH1 7.0 RESISTIVITY 1 (Ohm-cm) 1,210 SULFATE CONTENT 2 (ppm) 1620 (%) 0.162 CHLORIDE CONTENT 3 (ppm) 165 PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH CALIFORNIA TEST METHOD 643 PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH CALIFORNIA TEST METHOD 417 PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH CALIFORNIA TEST METHOD 422 PROJECT NO. 106394001 DATE 9/08 CORROSIVITY TEST RESULTS DRAINAGE, RETAINING WALL, AND PAVEMENT IMPROVEMENTS PARK DRIVE AT MARINA DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA FIGURE B-4 106394001 CORROSIVITY Page 1 xls SAMPLE LOCATION SAMPLE DEPTH (FT)SOIL TYPE R-VALUE C-1 1.5-3.4 ML 16 PERFORMED IN GENERAL ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 2844-01/CT 301 D [ [ PROJECT NO 106394001 DATE 9/08 R-VALUE TEST RESULTS DRAINAGE, RETAINING WALL, AND PAVEMENT IMPROVEMENTS PARK DRIVE AT MARINA DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA FIGURE B-5 106394001 R-VALUE Page l.xls PENDIX Park Drive at Marina Drive Appendix C Carlsbad, California Project No. 106394001 APPENDIX C TYPICAL EARTHWORK GUIDELINES 106394001 Earthwork.doc : m I C I" * Park Drive at Marina Drive Appendix C Carlsbad, California Project No. 106394001 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1. GENERAL 1 2. OBLIGATIONS OF PARTIES 2 3. SITE PREPARATION 3 4. REMOVALS AND EXCAVATIONS 4 5. COMPACTED FILL 5 6. OVERSIZED MATERIAL 7 7. SLOPES 8 8. TRENCH BACKFILL 11 9. DRAINAGE 13 10. SITE PROTECTION 14 11. DEFINITIONS OF TERMS 16 Figures Figure A - Fill Slope Over Natural Ground or Cut Figure B - Transition and Undercut Lot Details Figure C - Canyon Subdrain Detail Figure D - Oversized Rock Placement Detail Figure E - Slope Drainage Detail Figure F - Shear Key Detail Figure G - Drain Detail 106394001 Earthwork doc Park Drive at Marina Drive Appendix C •* Carlsbad, California Project No. 106394001 Ji TYPICAL EARTHWORK GUIDELINES «• •» 1. GENERAL "" These guidelines and the standard details attached hereto are presented as general procedures for m earthwork construction. They are to be utilized in conjunction with the project grading plans. m These guidelines are considered a part of the geotechnical report, but are superseded by recom- •» mendations in the geotechnical report in the case of conflict. Evaluations performed by the ""* consultant during the course of grading may result in new recommendations which could super- m sede these specifications and/or the recommendations of the geotechnical report. It is the responsibility of the contractor to read and understand these guidelines as well as the geotechni- * Mcal report and project grading plans. •* 1.1. The contractor shall not vary from these guidelines without prior recommendations HI by the geotechnical consultant and the approval of the client or the client's author- ized representative. Recommendations by the geotechnical consultant and/or client • shall not be considered to preclude requirements for approval by the jurisdictional • agency prior to the execution of any changes. _ fications, and shall be responsible for the quality of the finished product notwithstanding the fact that grading work will be observed and tested by the geo- • technical consultant. H 1.3. It is the responsibility of the grading contractor to notify the geotechnical consult- ant and the jurisdictional agencies, as needed, prior to the start of work at the site and at any time that grading resumes after interruption. Each step of the grading operations shall be observed and documented by the geotechnical consultant and, • where necessary, reviewed by the appropriate jurisdictional agency prior to pro- • ceeding with subsequent work. 1.4. If, during the grading operations, geotechnical conditions are encountered which • were not anticipated or described in the geotechnical report, the geotechnical con- sultant shall be notified immediately and additional recommendations, if • applicable, may be provided. • 1.5. An as-graded report shall be prepared by the geotechnical consultant and signed by • a registered engineer and registered engineering geologist. The report documents 1 the geotechnical consultants' observations, and field and laboratory test results, and I I 106394001 Earthwork doc l Rev 12/05 Park Drive at Marina Drive Appendix C Carlsbad, California Project No. 106394001 *"" provides conclusions regarding whether or not earthwork construction was per- w formed in accordance with the geotechnical recommendations and the grading plans. Recommendations for foundation design, pavement design, subgrade treat- f" ment, etc., may also be included in the as-graded report. Hi 1.6. . For the purpose of evaluating quantities of materials excavated during grading *• and/or locating the limits of excavations, a licensed land surveyor or civil engineer iM shall be retained. P» 1.7. Definitions of terms utilized in the remainder of these specifications have been ill provided in Section 11. p» t 2. OBLIGATIONS OF PARTIES p The parties involved in the projects earthwork activities shall be responsible as outlined in the * following sections. *•» L 2.1. The client is ultimately responsible for the aspects of the project. The client or the client's authorized representative has a responsibility to review the findings and r* recommendations of the geotechnical consultant. The client shall authorize the con- 1^ tractor and/or other consultants to perform work and/or provide services. During grading the client or the client's authorized representative shall remain on site or *•• remain reasonably accessible to the concerned parties to make the decisions that i^ may be needed to maintain the flow of the project. r- 2.2. The contractor is responsible for the safety of the project and satisfactory comple- ^ tion of grading and other associated operations, including, but not limited to, earthwork in accordance with the project plans, specifications, and jurisdictional •— agency requirements. During grading, the contractor or the contractor's authorized ^ representative shall remain on site. The contractor shall further remain accessible during non-working hours times, including at night and during days off. 1^ 2.3. The geotechnical consultant shall provide observation and testing services and shall make evaluations to advise the client on geotechnical matters. The geotechnical »- consultant shall report findings and recommendations to the client or the client's ll, authorized representative. p 2.4. Prior to proceeding with any grading operations, the geotechnical consultant shall L^ be notified two working days in advance to schedule the needed observation and testing services. 10639400] Earthwork doc T Rev 12/05 Park Drive at Marina Drive Appendix C Carlsbad, California Project No. 106394001 2.4.1. Prior to any significant expansion or reduction in the grading operation, the geotechnical consultant shall be provided with two working days notice to make appropriate adjustments in scheduling of on-site personnel. 2.4.2. Between phases of grading operations, the geotechnical consultant shall be provided with two working days notice in advance of commencement of ad- ditional grading operations. 3. SITE PREPARATION m Site preparation shall be performed in accordance with the recommendations presented in the mfollowing sections. 3.1. The client, prior to any site preparation or grading, shall arrange and attend a It pre-grading meeting between the grading contractor, the design engineer, the geo- M technical consultant, and representatives of appropriate governing authorities, as well as any other involved parties. The parties shall be given two working days no- ft tice. • 3.2. Clearing and grubbing shall consist of the substantial removal of vegetation, brush, • grass, wood, stumps, trees, tree roots greater than 1/2-inch in diameter, and other | deleterious materials from the areas to be graded. Clearing and grubbing shall ex- tend to the outside of the proposed excavation and fill areas. Mi 3.3. Demolition in the areas to be graded shall include removal of building structures, foun- dations, reservoirs, utilities (including underground pipelines, septic tanks, leach fields, • seepage pits, cisterns, etc.), and other manmade surface and subsurface improvements, | and the backfilling of mining shafts, tunnels and surface depressions. Demolition of utilities shall include capping or rerouting of pipelines at the project perimeter, and • abandonment of wells in accordance with the requirements of the governing authorities • and the recommendations of the geotechnical consultant at the time of demolition. 3.4. The debris generated during clearing, grubbing and/or demolition operations shall I be removed from areas to be graded and disposed of off site at a legal dump site. Clearing, grubbing, and demolition operations shall be performed under the obser- • vation of the geotechnical consultant. • 3.5. The ground surface beneath proposed fill areas shall be stripped of loose or unsuit- • able soil. These soils may be used as compacted fill provided they are generally • free of organic or other deleterious materials and evaluated for use by the geotech- nical consultant. The resulting surface shall be evaluated by the geotechnical • consultant prior to proceeding. The cleared, natural ground surface shall be scari- m m 106394001 Earthwork doc Park Drive at Marina Drive Appendix C Carlsbad, California Project No. 106394001 fled to a depth of approximately 8 inches, moisture conditioned, and compacted in accordance with the specifications presented in Section 5 of these guidelines. 3.6. Where fills are to be constructed on hillsides or slopes, topsoil, slope wash, collu- vium, and other materials deemed unsuitable shall be removed. Where the exposed slope is steeper than 5 horizontal units to 1 vertical unit, or where recommended by the geotechnical consultant, the slope of the original ground on which the fill is to be placed shall be benched and a key as shown on Figure A of this document shall be provided by the contractor in accordance with the specifications presented in Section 7 of this document. The benches shall extend into the underlying bedrock or, where bedrock is not present, into suitable compacted fill as evaluated by the geotechnical consultant. 4. REMOVALS AND EXCAVATIONS Removals and excavations shall be performed as recommended in the following sections. 4.1. Removals 4.1.1. Materials which are considered unsuitable shall be excavated under the ob- servation of the geotechnical consultant in accordance with the recommendations contained herein. Unsuitable materials include, but may not be limited to, dry, loose, soft, wet, organic, compressible natural soils, frac- tured, weathered, soft bedrock, and undocumented or otherwise deleterious fill materials. 4.1.2. Materials deemed by the geotechnical consultant to be unsatisfactory due to moisture conditions shall be excavated in accordance with the recommenda- tions of the geotechnical consultant, watered or dried as needed, and mixed to a generally uniform moisture content in accordance with the specifications presented in Section 5 of this document. 4.2. Excavations 4.2.1. Temporary excavations no deeper than 5 feet in firm fill or natural materials may be made with vertical side slopes. To satisfy CAL OSHA requirements, any excavation deeper than 5 feet shall be shored or laid back at a 1:1 (hori- zontal rvertical) inclination or flatter, depending on material type, if construction workers are to enter the excavation. 106394001 Earthwork doc A Rev 12/05 m Park Drive at Marina Drive Appendix C Ml Carlsbad, California Project No. 106394001 •I Hi 5. COMPACTED FILL m MlFill shall be constructed as specified below or by other methods recommended by the geotechni- cal consultant. Unless otherwise specified, fill soils shall be compacted to 90 percent relative M compaction, as evaluated in accordance with ASTM Test Method D 1557. m 5.1. Prior to placement of compacted fill, the contractor shall request an evaluation of m the exposed ground surface by the geotechnical consultant. Unless otherwise rec- ommended, the exposed ground surface shall then be scarified to a depth of ** approximately 8 inches and watered or dried, as needed, to achieve a generally uni- m form moisture content at or near the optimum moisture content. The scarified materials shall then be compacted to 90 percent relative compaction. The evalua- tion of compaction by the geotechnical consultant shall not be considered to '* preclude any requirements for observation or approval by governing agencies. It is the contractor's responsibility to notify the geotechnical consultant and the appro- priate governing agency when project areas are ready for observation, and to provide reasonable time for that review. _ i 5.2. Excavated on-site materials which are in general compliance with the recommenda- tions of the geotechnical consultant may be utilized as compacted fill provided they are generally free of organic or other deleterious materials and do not contain rock I fragments greater than 6 inches in dimension. During grading, the contractor may encounter soil types other than those analyzed during the preliminary geotechnical _ study. The geotechnical consultant shall be consulted to evaluate the suitability of B any such soils for use as compacted fill. 5.3. Where imported materials are to be used on site, the geotechnical consultant shall I be notified three working days in advance of importation in order that it may sam- pie and test the materials from the proposed borrow sites. No imported materials shall be delivered for use on site without prior sampling, testing, and evaluation by I the geotechnical consultant. 5.4. Soils imported for on-site use shall preferably have very low to low expansion po- 1 tential (based on UBC Standard 18-2 test procedures). Lots on which expansive soils may be exposed at grade shall be undercut 3 feet or more and capped with _ very low to low expansion potential fill. Details of the undercutting are provided in 3 the Transition and Undercut Lot Details, Figure B of these guidelines. In the event expansive soils are present near the ground surface, special design and construction _ considerations shall be utilized in general accordance with the recommendations of < the geotechnical consultant. 5.5. Fill materials shall be moisture conditioned to near optimum moisture content prior to placement. The optimum moisture content will vary with material type and other 106394001 Earthwork doc c Rev |2/05 l^j I Park Drive at Marina Drive Appendix C Carlsbad, California Project No. 106394001 factors. Moisture conditioning of fill soils shall be generally uniform in the soil mass. 5.6. Prior to placement of additional compacted fill material following a delay in the grading operations, the exposed surface of previously compacted fill shall be pre- pared to receive fill. Preparation may include scarification, moisture conditioning, and recompaction. 5.7. Compacted fill shall be placed in horizontal lifts of approximately 8 inches in loose p thickness. Prior to compaction, each lift shall be watered or dried as needed to to, achieve near optimum moisture condition, mixed, and then compacted by mechani- cal methods, using sheepsfoot rollers, multiple-wheel pneumatic-tired rollers, or f* other appropriate compacting rollers, to the specified relative compaction. Succes- ta sive lifts shall be treated in a like manner until the desired finished grades are achieved. ^to 5.8. Fill shall be tested in the field by the geotechnical consultant for evaluation of gen- eral compliance with the recommended relative compaction and moisture •"" conditions. Field density testing shall conform to ASTM D 1556-00 (Sand Cone to method), D 2937-00 (Drive-Cylinder method), and/or D 2922-96 and D 3017-96 (Nuclear Gauge method). Generally, one test shall be provided for approximately """' every 2 vertical feet of fill placed, or for approximately every 1,000 cubic yards of to fill placed. In addition, on slope faces one or more tests shall be taken for approxi- mately every 10,000 square feet of slope face and/or approximately every 10 *" vertical feet of slope height. Actual test intervals may vary as field conditions dic- iw tate. Fill found to be out of conformance with the grading recommendations shall be removed, moisture conditioned, and compacted or otherwise handled to accom- r" plish general compliance with the grading recommendations. |M 5.9. The contractor shall assist the geotechnical consultant by excavating suitable test *"" pits for removal evaluation and/or for testing of compacted fill. 5.10. At the request of the geotechnical consultant, the contractor shall "shut down" or ** restrict grading equipment from operating in the area being tested to provide ade- m quate testing time and safety for the field technician. ^ 5.11. The geotechnical consultant shall maintain a map with the approximate locations of to field density tests. Unless the client provides for surveying of the test locations, the locations shown by the geotechnical consultant will be estimated. The geotechnical f consultant shall not be held responsible for the accuracy of the horizontal or verti- to cal location or elevations. F- 5.12. Grading operations shall be performed under the observation of the geotechnical to consultant. Testing and evaluation by the geotechnical consultant does not preclude the need for approval by or other requirements of the jurisdictional agencies. 106394001 Earthwork.doc I Park Drive at Marina Drive Appendix C H Carlsbad, California Project No. 106394001 uLi 5.13. Fill materials shall not be placed, spread or compacted during unfavorable weather I conditions. When work is interrupted by heavy rains, the filling operation shall not • be resumed until tests indicate that moisture content and density of the fill meet the project specifications. Regrading of the near-surface soil may be needed to achieve ^ the specified moisture content and density. ~ 5.14. Upon completion of grading and termination of observation by the geotechnical * consultant, no further filling or excavating, including that planned for footings, * foundations, retaining walls or other features, shall be performed without the in- volvement of the geotechnical consultant. •m 5.15. Fill placed in areas not previously viewed and evaluated by the geotechnical con- sultant may have to be removed and recompacted at the contractor's expense. The * depth and extent of removal of the unobserved and undocumented fill will be de- * cided based upon review of the field conditions by the geotechnical consultant. 5.16. Off-site fill shall be treated in the same manner as recommended in these specifica- •• tions for on-site fills. Off-site fill subdrains temporarily terminated (up gradient) shall be surveyed for future locating and connection. " 5.17. Prior to placement of a canyon fill, a subdrain shall be installed in bedrock or com- pacted fill along the approximate alignment of the canyon bottom if recommended I by the geotechnical consultant. Details of subdrain placement and configuration • have been provided in the Canyon Subdrain Detail, Figure C, of these guidelines. 5.18. Transition (cut/fill) lots shall generally be undercut 3 feet or more below finished • grade to provide a generally uniform thickness of fill soil in the pad area. Where the depth of fill on a transition lot greatly exceeds 3 feet, overexcavation may be in- • creased at the discretion of the geotechnical consultant. Details of the undercut for • transition lots are provided in the Transition and Undercut Lot Detail, Figure B, of these guidelines. H 6. OVERSIZED MATERIAL 1 Oversized material shall be placed in accordance with the following recommendations. 6.1. During the course of grading operations, rocks or similar irreducible materials greater than 6 inches in dimension (oversized material) may be generated. These materials shall not be placed within the compacted fill unless placed in general ac- I cordance with the recommendations of the geotechnical consultant. 6.2. Where oversized rock (greater than 6 inches in dimension) or similar irreducible H material is generated during grading, it is recommended, where practical, to waste such material off site, or on site in areas designated as "nonstructural rock disposal 1 106394001 Earthwork doc Park Drive at Marina Drive Appendix C Carlsbad, California Project No. 106394001 *"" areas." Rock designated for disposal areas shall be placed with sufficient sandy soil m to generally fill voids. The disposal area shall be capped with a 5-foot thickness of fill which is generally free of oversized material. m ii 6.3. Rocks 6 inches in dimension and smaller may be utilized within the compacted fill, provided they are placed in such a manner that nesting of rock is not permitted. Fill P shall be placed and compacted over and around the rock. The amount of rock li greater than 3/4-inch in dimension shall generally not exceed 40 percent of the total dry weight of the fill mass, unless the fill is specially designed and constructed as a <* "rock fill." hi 6.4. Rocks or similar irreducible materials greater than 6 inches but less than 4 feet in f" dimension generated during grading may be placed in windrows and capped with It finer materials in accordance with the recommendations of the geotechnical con- sultant, the approval of the governing agencies, and the Oversized Rock Placement ^ Detail, Figure D, of these guidelines. Selected native or imported granular soil ifcn (Sand Equivalent of 30 or higher) shall be placed and flooded over and around the windrowed rock such that voids are filled. Windrows of oversized materials shall f" be staggered so that successive windrows of oversized materials are not in the same <» vertical plane. Rocks greater than 4 feet in dimension shall be broken down to 4 feet or smaller before placement, or they shall be disposed of off site. 7. SLOPES The following sections provide recommendations for cut and fill slopes. 7.1. Cut Slopes 7.1.1. Unless otherwise recommended by the geotechnical consultant and accepted by the building official, permanent cut slopes shall not be steeper than 2:1 (horizontal :vertical). The recommended height of a cut slope shall be evalu- ated by the geotechnical consultant. Slopes in excess of 30 feet high shall be provided with terrace drains (swales) in accordance with the recommenda- tions presented in the Uniform Building Code, Section 3315 and the details provided in Figure E of these guidelines. 7.1.2. The geotechnical consultant shall observe cut slopes during excavation. The geotechnical consultant shall be notified by the contractor prior to beginning slope excavations. 7.1.3. If excavations for cut slopes expose loose, cohesionless, significantly frac- tured, or otherwise unsuitable materials, overexcavation of the unsuitable material and replacement with a compacted stabilization fill shall be evalu- ated and may be recommended by the geotechnical consultant. Unless 106394001 Earthwork doc o Rev 12/05 Park Drive at Marina Drive Appendix C Carlsbad, California Project No. 106394001 otherwise specified by the geotechnical consultant, stabilization fill construe- ^ tion shall be in general accordance with the details provided on Figure F of •* these guidelines. 7.1.4. If, during the course of grading, adverse or potentially adverse geotechnical <* conditions are encountered in the slope which were not anticipated in the pre- liminary evaluation report, the geotechnical consultant shall evaluate the * conditions and provide appropriate recommendations. m 7.2. Fill Slopes " m 7.2.1. When placing fill on slopes steeper than 5:1 (horizontal:vertical), topsoil, slope wash, colluvium, and other materials deemed unsuitable shall be re- * moved. Near-horizontal keys and near-vertical benches shall be excavated m into sound bedrock or firm fill material, in accordance with the recommenda- tion of the geotechnical consultant. Keying and benching shall be || accomplished in general accordance with the details provided on Figure A of • these guidelines. Compacted fill shall not be placed in an area subsequent to keying and benching until the area has been observed by the geotechnical • consultant. Where the natural gradient of a slope is less than 5:1, benching is • generally not recommended. However, fill shall not be placed on compressi- ble or otherwise unsuitable materials left on the slope face. I 7.2.2. Within a single fill area where grading procedures dictate two or more sepa- rate fills, temporary slopes (false slopes) may be created. When placing fill I adjacent to a temporary slope, benching shall be conducted in the manner de- " scribed in Section 7.2.1. A 3-foot or higher near-vertical bench shall be excavated into the documented fill prior to placement of additional fill. I 7.2.3. Unless otherwise recommended by the geotechnical consultant and by the building official, permanent fill slopes shall not be steeper than 2:1 (horizon- I tahvertical). The height of a fill slope shall be evaluated by the geotechnical ™ consultant. Slopes in excess of 30 feet high shall be provided with terrace drains (swales) and backdrains in accordance with the recommendations pre- I sented in the Uniform Building Code, Section 3315 and the details provided •* in Figure E of these guidelines. 7.2.4. Unless specifically recommended otherwise, compacted fill slopes shall be • overbuilt and cut back to grade, exposing firm compacted fill. The actual amount of overbuilding may vary as field conditions dictate. If the desired re- • suits are not achieved, the existing slopes shall be overexcavated and ™ reconstructed in accordance with the recommendations of the geotechnical consultant. The degree of overbuilding may be increased until the desired I rnmnarteH <:lnne fnrp rnnditinn ic arhipvpH Parp shall Vv» tak<=>n Vw thp rnn_ •compacted slope face condition is achieved. Care shall be taken by the con- I 106394001 Earthwork doc Park Drive at Marina Drive Appendix C Carlsbad, California Project No. 106394001 *" tractor to provide mechanical compaction as close to the outer edge of the (to overbuilt slope surface as practical. F 7.2.5. If access restrictions, property line location, or other constraints limit over- ll building and cutting back of the slope face, an alternative method for compaction of the slope face may be attempted by conventional construction F procedures including backrolling at intervals of 4 feet or less in vertical slope In height, or as dictated by the capability of the available equipment, whichever is less. Fill slopes shall be backrolled utilizing a conventional sheeps F foot-type roller. Care shall be taken to maintain the specified moisture condi- fc tions and/or reestablish the same, as needed, prior to backrolling.. F 7.2.6. The placement, moisture conditioning and compaction of fill slope materials * shall be done in accordance with the recommendations presented in Sec- tion 5. of these guidelines. in 7.2.7. The contractor shall be ultimately responsible for placing and compacting the soil out to the slope face to obtain a relative compaction of 90 percent as *"" evaluated by ASTM D 1557 and a moisture content in accordance with Sec- IB" tion 5. The geotechnical consultant shall perform field moisture and density tests at intervals of one test for approximately every 10,000 square feet of """ slope face and/or approximately every 10 feet of vertical height of slope. 7.2.8. Backdrains shall be provided in fill slopes in accordance with the details pre- *"" sented on Figure A of these guidelines, or as recommended by the in* geotechnical consultant. "" 7.3. Top-of-Slope Drainage 7.3.1. For pad areas above slopes, positive drainage shall be established away from *~ the top of slope. This may be accomplished utilizing a berm and pad gradient M of 2 percent or steeper at the top-of-slope areas. Site runoff shall not be per- mitted to flow over the tops of slopes. 7.3.2. Gunite-lined brow ditches shall be placed at the top of cut slopes to redirect surface runoff away from the slope face where drainage devices are not oth- erwise provided. 7.4. Slope Maintenance 7.4.1. In order to enhance surficial slope stability, slope planting shall be accom- plished at the completion of grading. Slope plants shall consist of deep- rooting, variable root depth, drought-tolerant vegetation. Native vegetation is generally desirable. Plants native to semiarid and arid areas may also be ap- propriate. Large-leafed ice plant should not be used on slopes. A landscape I i 106394001 Earthwork doc 1Q Rev 12/05 I Park Drive at Marina Drive Appendix C H Carlsbad, California Project No. 106394001 architect shall be consulted regarding the actual types of plants and planting • configuration to be used. l* 7.4.2. Irrigation pipes shall be anchored to slope faces and not placed in trenches * excavated into slope faces. Slope irrigation shall be maintained at a level just ** sufficient to support plant growth. Property owners shall be made aware that over watering of slopes is detrimental to slope stability. Slopes shall be moni- tored regularly and broken sprinkler heads and/or pipes shall be repaired *"* immediately. 7.4.3. Periodic observation of landscaped slope areas shall be planned and appropri- *> ate measures taken to enhance growth of landscape plants. 7.4.4. Graded swales at the top of slopes and terrace drains shall be installed and the m property owners notified that the drains shall be periodically checked so that they may be kept clear. Damage to drainage improvements shall be repaired * immediately. To reduce siltation, terrace drains shall be constructed at a gra- * dient of 3 percent or steeper, in accordance with the recommendations of the project civil engineer. 7.4.5. If slope failures occur, the geotechnical consultant shall be contacted immedi- ately for field review of site conditions and development of recommendations * for evaluation and repair. ** 8. TRENCH BACKFILL " The following sections provide recommendations for backfilling of trenches. HI m 8.1. Trench backfill shall consist of granular soils (bedding) extending from the trench bottom to 1 or more feet above the pipe. On-site or imported fill which has been evaluated by the geotechnical consultant may be used above the granular backfill. ** The cover soils directly in contact with the pipe shall be classified as having a very m low expansion potential, in accordance with UBC Standard 18-2, and shall contain ^^no rocks or chunks of hard soil larger than 3/4-inch in diameter. 8.2. Trench backfill shall, unless otherwise recommended, be compacted by mechanical means to 90 percent relative compaction as evaluated in accordance with ASTM ** D 1557. Backfill soils shall be placed in loose lifts 8-inches thick or thinner, mois- m ture conditioned, and compacted in accordance with the recommendations of Section 5. of these guidelines. The backfill shall be tested by the geotechnical con- *"* sultant at vertical intervals of approximately 2 feet of backfill placed and at M spacings along the trench of approximately 100 feet in the same lift. 106394001 Earthwork doc 11 Park Drive at Marina Drive Appendix C Carlsbad, California Project No. 106394001 "" 8.3. Jetting of trench backfill materials is generally not a recommended method of den- *• sification, unless the on-site soils are sufficiently free-draining and provisions have been made for adequate dissipation of the water utilized in the jetting process. :•" KM 8.4. If it is decided that jetting may be utilized, granular material with a sand equivalent greater than 30 shall be used for backfilling in the areas to be jetted. Jetting shall f generally be considered for trenches 2 feet or narrower in width and 4 feet or shal- li lower in depth. Following jetting operations, trench backfill shall be mechanically compacted to the specified compaction to finish grade.*• fa 8.5. Trench backfill which underlies the zone of influence of foundations shall be me- chanically compacted to 90 percent relative compaction, as evaluated in accordance f* with ASTM D 1557. The zone of influence of the foundations is generally defined ite as the roughly triangular area within the limits of a 1:1 projection from the inner and outer edges of the foundation, projected down and out from both edges. P1 ito 8.6. Trench backfill within slab areas shall be compacted by mechanical means to a relative compaction of 90 percent relative compaction, as evaluated in accordance *** with ASTM D 1557. For minor interior trenches, density testing may be omitted or hi spot testing may be performed, as deemed appropriate by the geotechnical consult- ant. IM 8.7. When compacting soil in close proximity to utilities, care shall be taken by the grading contractor so that mechanical methods used to compact the soils do not *"" damage the utilities. If the utility contractors indicate that it is undesirable to use «• compaction equipment in close proximity to a buried conduit, then the grading con- tractor may elect to use light mechanical compaction equipment or, with the *"" approval of the geotechnical consultant, cover the conduit with clean granular ma- te terial. These granular materials shall be jetted in place to the top of the conduit in accordance with the recommendations of Section 8.4 prior to initiating mechanical *"" compaction procedures. Other methods of utility trench compaction may also be *• appropriate, upon review by the geotechnical consultant and the utility contractor, at the time of construction.v* In 8.8. Clean granular backfill and/or bedding materials are not recommended for use in slope areas unless provisions are made for a drainage system to mitigate the poten- P tial for buildup of seepage forces or piping of backfill materials. IB 8.9. The contractor shall exercise the specified safety precautions, in accordance with f* OSHA Trench Safety Regulations, while conducting trenching operations. Such lite precautions include shoring or laying back trench excavations at 1:1 or flatter, de- pending on material type, for trenches in excess of 5 feet in depth. The geotechnical *"* consultant is not responsible for the safety of trench operations or stability of the Jte trenches. 106394001 Earthwork doc 17 Rev 12/05 Park Drive at Marina Drive Appendix C Carlsbad, California Project No. 106394001 9. DRAINAGE " The following sections provide recommendations pertaining to site drainage. •i 9.1. Canyon subdrain systems recommended by the geotechnical consultant shall be in- tt stalled in accordance with the Canyon Subdrain Detail, Figure C, provided in these guidelines. Canyon subdrains shall be installed to conform to the approximate * alignment and details shown on project plans. The actual subdrain location shall be *• evaluated by the geotechnical consultant in the field during grading. Materials specified in the attached Canyon Subdrain Detail shall not be changed or modified ** unless so recommended by the geotechnical consultant. Subdrains shall be sur- •* veyed by a licensed land surveyor/civil engineer for line and grade after installation. Sufficient time shall be allowed for the surveys prior to commence- ment of filling over the subdrains. * 9.2. Typical backdrains for stability, side hill, and shear key fills shall be installed in B accordance with the details provided on Figure A, Figure F, and Figure G of these * guidelines. 9.3. Roof, pad, and slope drainage shall be such that it is away from slopes and struc- • tures to suitable discharge areas by nonerodible devices (e.g., gutters, downspouts, concrete swales, etc.). I 9.4. Positive drainage adjacent to structures shall be established and maintained. Posi- tive drainage may be accomplished by providing drainage away from the I foundations of the structure at a gradient of 2 percent or steeper for a distance of 5 B feet or more outside the building perimeter, further maintained by a graded swale leading to an appropriate outlet, in accordance with the recommendations of the I project civil engineer and/or landscape architect. • 9.5. Surface drainage on the site shall be provided so that water is not permitted to • pond. A gradient of 2 percent or steeper shall be maintained over the pad area and • drainage patterns shall be established to remove water from the site to an appropri- ate outlet. • 9.6. Care shall be taken by the contractor during finish grading to preserve any berms, drainage terraces, interceptor swales or other drainage devices of a permanent na- I ture on or adjacent to the property. Drainage patterns established at the time of • finish grading shall be maintained for the life of the project. Property owners shall be made very clearly aware that altering drainage patterns may be detrimental to I slope stability and foundation performance. • m m 1 0639400 1 Earthwork doc I -J Rev 12/05 Park Drive at Marina Drive Appendix C Carlsbad, California Project No. 106394001 *" 10. SITE PROTECTION The site shall be protected as outlined in the following sections. P» m 10.1. Protection of the site during the period of grading shall be the responsibility of the contractor unless other provisions are made in writing and agreed upon among the f* concerned parties. Completion of a portion of the project shall not be considered to •I preclude that portion or adjacent areas from the need for site protection, until such time as the project is finished as agreed upon by the geotechnical consultant, the f* client, and the regulatory agency. fcH 10.2. The contractor is responsible for the stability of temporary excavations. Recom- f* mendations by the geotechnical consultant pertaining to temporary excavations are i* made in consideration of stability of the finished project and, therefore, shall not be considered to preclude the responsibilities of the contractor. Recommendations by ^ the geotechnical consultant shall also not be considered to preclude more restrictive h* requirements by the applicable regulatory agencies. *"" 10.3. Precautions shall be taken during the performance of site clearing, excavation, and *• grading to protect the site from flooding, ponding, or inundation by surface runoff. Temporary provisions shall be made during the rainy season so that surface runoff *™ is away from and off the working site. Where low areas cannot be avoided, pumps *• shall be provided to remove water as needed during periods of rainfall. "" 10.4. During periods of rainfall, plastic sheeting shall be used as needed to reduce the po- *- tential for unprotected slopes to become saturated. Where needed, the contractor shall install check dams, desilting basins, riprap, sandbags or other appropriate de- "" vices or methods to reduce erosion and provide the recommended conditions during *• inclement weather. ""~ 10.5. During periods of rainfall, the geotechnical consultant shall be kept informed by the ta contractor of the nature of remedial or precautionary work being performed on site (e.g., pumping, placement of sandbags or plastic sheeting, other labor, dozing, etc.). In 10.6. Following periods of rainfall, the contractor shall contact the geotechnical consult- ant and arrange a walk-over of the site in order to visually assess rain-related ** damage. The geotechnical consultant may also recommend excavation and testing <to in order to aid in the evaluation. At the request of the geotechriical consultant, the contractor shall make excavations in order to aid in evaluation of the extent of ^ rain-related damage. M 10.7. Rain- or irrigation-related damage shall be considered to include, but may not be ^ limited to, erosion, silting, saturation, swelling, structural distress, and other ad- te verse conditions noted by the geotechnical consultant. Soil adversely affected shall be classified as "Unsuitable Material" and shall be subject to overexcavation and p» » PPM 1063 94001 Earthwork doc 14 Rev. 12/05 Park Drive at Marina Drive Appendix C Carlsbad, California Project No. 106394001 replacement with compacted fill or to other remedial grading as recommended by II the geotechnical consultant. • 10.8. Relatively level areas where saturated soils and/or erosion gullies exist to depths <i greater than 1 foot shall be overexcavated to competent materials as evaluated by • the geotechnical consultant. Where adverse conditions extend to less than 1 foot in depth, saturated and/or eroded materials may be processed in-place. Overexcavated ^ or in-place processed materials shall be moisture conditioned and compacted in ac- ^ cordance with the recommendations provided in Section 5. If the desired results are not achieved, the affected materials shall be overexcavated, moisture conditioned, ^ and compacted until the specifications are met. •* 10.9. Slope areas where saturated soil and/or erosion gullies exist to depths greater than B 1 foot shall be overexcavated and replaced as compacted fill in accordance with the M applicable specifications. Where adversely affected materials exist to depths of 1 foot or less below proposed finished grade, remedial grading by moisture condi- B tioning in-place and compaction in accordance with the appropriate specifications • may be attempted. If the desired results are not achieved, the affected materials shall be overexcavated, moisture conditioned, and compacted until the specifica- I tions are met. As conditions dictate, other slope repair procedures may also be * recommended bv the geotechnical consultant. .~ ...& ~~ ~~v, , v,.~ ~ b . v~ ,, ~ y fe~ away from structures and to keep water from ponding adjacent to structures. Water shall not be allowed to damage adjacent properties. Positive drainage shall be main- I tained by the contractor until permanent drainage and erosion reducing devices are • installed in accordance with project plans. I I 3 m m 106394001 Earthwork doc ic Rev 12/05 • Park Drive at Marina Drive Carlsbad, California Appendix C Project No. 106394001 » 11. DEFINITIONS OF TERMS ALLUVIUM: AS-GRADED (AS-BUILT): BACKCUT: BACKDRAIN: BEDROCK: BENCH: BORROW (IMPORT): BUTTRESS FILL: CIVIL ENGINEER: CLIENT: COLLUVIUM: COMPACTION: Unconsolidated detrital deposits deposited by flowing water; includes sediments deposited in river beds, canyons, flood plains, lakes, fans at the foot of slopes, and in estuaries. The site conditions upon completion of grading. A temporary construction slope at the rear of earth-retaining structures such as buttresses, shear keys, stabilization fills, or retaining walls. Generally a pipe-and-gravel or similar drainage system placed behind earth-retaining structures such as buttresses, stabilization fills, and retaining walls. Relatively undisturbed in-place rock, either at the surface or beneath surficial deposits of soil. A relatively level step and near-vertical riser excavated into sloping ground on which fill is to be placed. Any fill material hauled to the project site from off-site areas. A fill mass, the configuration of which is designed by engi- neering calculations, to retain slopes containing adverse geologic features. A buttress is generally specified by a key width and depth and by a backcut angle. A buttress normally contains a back drainage system. The Registered Civil Engineer or consulting firm responsible for preparation of the grading plans and surveying, and evaluating as-graded topographic conditions. The developer or a project-responsible authorized represen- tative. The client has the responsibility of reviewing the findings and recommendations made by the geotechnical consultant and authorizing the contractor and/or other con- sultants to perform work and/or provide services. Generally loose deposits, usually found on the face or near the base of slopes and brought there chiefly by gravity through slow continuous downhill creep (see also Slope Wash). The densification of a fill by mechanical means. 106394001 Eanhworkdoc 16 Park Drive at Marina Drive Carlsbad, California Appendix C Project No. 106394001 CONTRACTOR: DEBRIS: ENGINEERED FILL: ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST: EROSION: EXCAVATION: EXISTING GRADE: FILL: FINISH GRADE: GEOFABRIC: GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT: A person or company under contract or otherwise retained by the client to perform demolition, grading, and other site improvements. The products of clearing, grubbing, and/or demolition, or contaminated soil material unsuitable for reuse as compacted fill, and/or any other material so designated by the geotech- nical consultant. A fill which the geotechnical consultant or the consultant's representative has observed and/or tested during placement, enabling the consultant to conclude that the fill has been placed in substantial compliance with the recommendations of the geotechnical consultant and the governing agency re- quirements. A geologist registered by the state licensing agency who ap- plies geologic knowledge and principles to the exploration and evaluation of naturally occurring rock and soil, as re- lated to the design of civil works. The wearing away of the ground surface as a result of the movement of wind, water, and/or ice. The mechanical removal of earth materials. The ground surface configuration prior to grading; original grade. Any deposit of soil, rock, soil-rock blends, or other similar materials placed by man. The as-graded ground surface elevation that conforms to the grading plan. An engineering textile utilized in geotechnical applications such as subgrade stabilization and filtering. The geotechnical engineering and engineering geology con- sulting firm retained to provide technical services for the project. For the purpose of these specifications, observations by the geotechnical consultant include observations by the geotechnical engineer, engineering geologist and other per- sons employed by and responsible to the geotechnical consultant. m m m m m I I 106394001 Earthwork doc 17 Rev 12/05 •i Mi m m Park Drive at Marina Drive Carlsbad, California Appendix C Project No. 106394001 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER: P * p m GRADING: LANDSLIDE DEPOSITS: OPTIMUM MOISTURE: RELATIVE COMPACTION: ROUGH GRADE: SHEAR KEY: SITE: SLOPE: SLOPE WASH: SLOUGH: SOIL: A licensed civil engineer and geotechnical engineer, regis- tered by the state licensing agency, who applies scientific methods, engineering principles, and professional experience to the acquisition, interpretation, and use of knowledge of materials of the earth's crust to the resolution of engineering problems. Geotechnical engineering encompasses many of the engineering aspects of soil mechanics, rock mechanics, geology, geophysics, hydrology, and related sciences. Any operation consisting of excavation, filling, or combina- tions thereof and associated operations. Material, often porous and of low density, produced from instability of natural or manmade slopes. The moisture content that is considered optimum to compac- tion operations. The degree of compaction (expressed as a percentage) of a material as compared to the dry density obtained from ASTM test method D 1557. The ground surface configuration at which time the surface elevations approximately conform to the approved plan. Similar to a subsurface buttress; however, it is generally con- structed by excavating a slot within a natural slope in order to stabilize the upper portion of the slope without encroach- ing into the lower portion of the slope. The particular parcel of land where grading is being per- formed. An inclined ground surface, the steepness of which is gener- ally specified as a ratio of horizontal units to vertical units. Soil and/or rock material that has been transported down a slope by gravity assisted by the action of water not confined to channels (see also Colluvium). Loose, uncompacted fill material generated during grading operations. Naturally occurring deposits of sand, silt, clay, etc., or com- binations thereof. 106394001 Earthwork doc 18 Park Drive at Marina Drive Carlsbad, California Appendix C Project No. 106394001 I STABILIZATION FILL: SUBDRAIN: TAILINGS: TERRACE: TOPSOIL: WINDROW: A fill mass, the configuration of which is typically related to slope height and is specified by the standards of practice for enhancing the stability of locally adverse conditions. A stabi- lization fill is normally specified by a key width and depth and by a backcut angle. A stabilization fill may or may not have a back drainage system specified. Generally a pipe-and-gravel or similar drainage system placed beneath a fill along the alignment of buried canyons or former drainage channels. Non-engineered fill which accumulates on or adjacent to equipment haul roads. A relatively level bench constructed on the face of a graded slope surface for drainage and maintenance purposes. The upper zone of soil or bedrock materials, which is usually dark in color, loose, and contains organic materials. A row of large rocks buried within engineered fill in accor- dance with guidelines set forth by the geotechnical consultant. If M m Ml m m p m m m 1 I I 1 m m 106394001 Earthwork doc 19 ii Park Drive at Marina Drive Carlsbad, California Appendix C Project No. 106394001 m if •*m Fjy FILL SLOPE OVER NATURAL GROUND SWALE AT TOP OF SLOPE OUTLET PIPE DRAINS TO A SUITABLE OUTLET IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE CIVIL ENGINEER NATURAL GROUND I I BACKDRAIN h»-15' MIN.—"H AND T-CONNECTION I I (SEE DRAIN DETAIL, BEDROCK OR COMPETENT MATERIAL, AS EVALUATED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT FIGURE G) RLL SLOPE OVER CUT SWALE AT TOP OF SLOPE COMPACTED FILL- NATURAL GROUND OUTLET PIPE DRAINS TO A SUITABLE OUTLET IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE CIVIL ENGINEER BENCH INCLINED SLIGHTLY INTO SLOPE BEDROCK OR COMPETENT MATERIAL, AS EVALUATED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT BACKDRAIN AND T-CONNECTION (SEE DRAIN DETAIL, FIGURE G) *MINIMUM KEY WIDTH DIMENSION. ACTUAL WIDTH SHOULD BE PROVIDED BY GEOTECHNICAl CONSULTANTBASED ON EVALUATION Of SITE-SPECIFIC GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS. NOTES: CUT SLOPE SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF FILL. SLOPE DRAINAGE SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH RECOMMENDATIONS PRESENTED ON FIGURE £ NOT TO SCALE FILL SLOPE OVER NATURAL GROUND OR CUT FIGURE A n 106394001 Earthwork doc Park Drive at Marina Drive Carlsbad, California Appendix C Project No. 106394001 •m TRANSITION (CUT-FILL) LOT 3' MIN. OVEREXCAVATE AND RECOMPACT BEDROCK OR COMPETENT MATERIAL, / ~ AS EVALUATED BY THE ~^ GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT UNDERCUT LOT NATURAL GROUND OVEREXCAVATE AND RECOMPACT BEDROCK OR COMPETENT MATERIAL, — AS EVALUATED BY THE — GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT NOTE: DIMENSIONS PROVIDED IN THE DETAILS ABOVE ARE APPROXIMATE AND MAY BE MODIFIED IN THE FIELDBY THE; GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT AS CONDITIONS DICTATE. •orlhfb.dwg NOT TO SCALE TRANSITION AND UNDERCUT LOT DETAILS •I m m m m m I I m a 106394001 Earthwork doc Park Drive at Marina Drive Carlsbad, California Appendix C Project No. 106394001 C C CANYON SUBDRAIN NATURAL GROUND \ COMPACTED FILL SEE FIGURE A FOR DETAILS OF BENCHES LOWEST BENCH INCLINED TOWARD DRAIN BEDROCK OR COMPETENT MATERIAL, AS EVALUATED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT SUBDRAIN (SEE DRAIN DETAIL, FIGURE G) DETAIL OF CANYON SUBDRAIN TERMINATION DESIGN FINISH GRADE SUBDRAIN PIPE OUTLET PIPE DRAINS TO A SUITABLE OUTLET IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE CIVIL ENGINEER \. COMPACTED FILL CUTOFF WALL CONSTRUCTED OF GROUT, CONCRETE, 8ENTON(TE, OR OTHER SUITABLE MATERIAL AS EVALUATED BY THE CEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT FILTER MATERIAL NON-PERFORATED PIPE- 20' MIN. • PERFORATED PIPE NOT TO SCALE CANYON SUBDRAIN DETAIL FIGURE C 106394001 Earthwork doc Park Drive at Marina Drive Carlsbad, California Appendix C Project No. 106394001 WINDROW SECTION S.C. SOIL (FLOODtD) -v x "if on RCCTANQVLAR TRENCH A MINIMUM NIL DT 3 FEET DEEP AND i> TEET WIDE TXCAVATTD INTD CDUPACTfO TILL OR NATURAL GROUND PAD SECTION HNISH CRADE srurrr TOW A LIATPRIAL io.- a' DITP WINDROW (TYFICALJ _ _... OR I* BELOW DEEPEST PROPOSTD UTILITT,wHicnrvru 15 GRFATFR BTDRQCK OR CDUPTTDIT MATTHIAL AS TVALUATrD BY ErOTrCHNICAL CONSULTANT A: COMRACITD HU WITH HOCK ntAGUrMTS NO CRTATm THAN I IHCNPS IN » COMPACITD nu wnn ROCK rvMurm* BnwrrN e AND » MCHra in nuunrrR M*T ar PLACID M WNPHDWS UP TO 1W LON» IN THIS ZONE AND SVUDUNDEV BT OnWIUlAK 5WL (JO SAND DOUiyALCNI) DWSTICP BI ROCK fRMUCNTS LESS THAN « INCHES IN DWMCIER HUT BE PLACED IH ODWACTLB FILL SOIL. WOTU 9MPE PRKMIWE SHOULD BC PRWIBCU IN ACCORDANCE WITH REOOkWCNDATIONS PRCSCNTEID ON nOUBC E. NOT TO SCALF OVERSIZED ROCK PLACEMENT DETAIL m M pi m m m m 106394001 Earthwork doc Park Drive at Marina Drive Carlsbad, California Appendix C Project No. 106394001 I C SWALE AT TOP OF SLOPE MID-SLOPE BACKDRAIN (SEE DRAIN DETAIL, FIGURE G) NON-PERFORATED OUTLET PIPE TERRACE WIDTH* REINFORCED CONCRETE- PAVED TERRACE (SWALE) BEDROCK OR COMPETENT MATERIAL AS EVALUATED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT WHEN POSSIBLE, LOWEST BACKDRAIN SHOULD BE PLACED IN THE BASE OF KEY (SEE DRAIN DETAIL, FIGURE G) MAXIMUM VERTICAL SLOPE HEIGHT, H (FEET) LESS THAN 30 60 120 GREATER THAN 120 * TERRACE WIDTH AND LOCATION NO TERRACE REQUIRED ONE TERRACE AT LEAST 6 FEET WIDE AT MIDHEIGHT ONE TERRACE AT LEAST 12 FEET WIDE AT APPROXIMATELY MIDHEIGHT AND 6-FOOT WIDE TERRACES CENTERED IN REMAINING SLOPES DESIGNED BY CIVIL ENGINEER WITH APPROVAL OF GOVERNING AUTHORITIES NOTES: t. MID-SLOPE BACKDRAINS SHOULD BE PLACED IN FILL SLOPES IN CONJUNCTION WrTH EACH TERRACE. 2. TERRACES SHOULD HAVE AT LEAST A 5-PERCENT GRADIENT, AND RUN OFr SHOULD BE DIRECTED TO AN APPROPRIATE SURFACE DRAINACE COLLECTOR. 3. TERRACES SHOULD BE CLEANED OF DEBRIS AND VEGETATION TO ALLOW UNRESTRICTED FLOW OF WATER. 4. TERRACES SHOULD BE KEPT IN GOOD REPAIR. 5. REFER TO UBC CHAPTER 70 FOR ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS. •ortbft.dwg NOT TO SCALE SLOPE DRAINAGE DETAIL FIGURE E Phi 106394001 Earthwork doc Park Drive at Marina Drive Carlsbad, California Appendix C Project No. 106394001 I i COMPACTED FILL PROPOSED GRADED SURFACE EXISTING GROUND SURFACE UNSTABLE MATERIAL PLANE OF WEAKNESS BEDROCK OR ._ COMPETENT MATERIAL, { AS EVALUATED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT BENCH INCLINED SLIGHTLY INTO SLOPE (SEE FIGURE A) COMPACTED FILL BACKDRAIN (SEE DRAIN DETAIL FIGURE G)NON-PERFORATED OUTLET PIPE NOTES: 1. THE DEPTH AND WIDTH OF KEY WILL Bt PROVIDED BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT BASED ON ANALYSIS OF SITE-SPECIFIC GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS. 2. AN ADDITIONAL MID-SLOPE BACKORAIN AND TERRACE DRAIN MAY BE RECOMMENDED FOR SLOPES OVER 30 FEET HIGH. SEE SLOPE DRAINAGE DETAIL, FIGURE E. 3. SLOPE DRAINAGE SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN ACCORDANCE WITH RECOMMENDATIONS PRESENTED ON FIGURE E. •crthff.dwg NOT TO SCALE SHEAR KEY DETAIL FIGURE F Ml up 1 1m 9| •t 106394001 Earthwork doc Park Drive at Marina Drive Carlsbad, California Appendix C Project No. 106394001 P p If F p I. SUBDRAIN CONFIGURATION ALTERNATIVE A* ALTERNATIVE B FILTER MATERIAL (9 CUBIC FEET PER LINEAR FOOT) BACKDRAIN CONFIGURATION FILTER MATERIAL (3 CUBIC FEET PER LINEAR FOOT) L PERFORATED PIPE INSTALLED WITH PERFORATION DOWN (SEE SCHEDULE BELOW) * ALTERNATIVE A SUBDRAIN CONFIGURATION MAY BE USED IN FILLS LESS THAN 25 FE£T DEEP 1 PERFORATED PIPE, 4" MIN. SCHEDULE 40 PVC OR EQUIVALENT INSTALLED WITH PERFORATIONS DOWN T-CONNECTION DETAIL PERFORATED PIPE SLOPED AT IX MIN. TOWARD OUTLET PIPE NON-PERFORATED OUTLET PIPE UP TO 100' ON CENTER HORIZONTALLY FILTER MATERIAL FILTER MATERIAL SHALL BE CUSS II PERMEABLE MATERIAL PER STATE OF CALIFORNIA STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS OR APPROVED ALTERNATE GEOFA8RIC DRAIN SYSTEM. CLASS II GRADATIONS SIEVE SIZE PERCENT PASSING 3/4" i/B" No. 4No. 8 No. 30No. 50No. 200 100 90-100 40-100 25-40 18-33 5-150-70-3 END CAP PIPE SCHEDULE PERFORATED AND NON-PERFORATED PIPE SHALL BE SCHEDULE 40 POLYVINYL CHLORIDE (PVC) OR ACRYLONITRILE BUTADIENE STYRENE (ABS) OREQUIVALENT, AND WILL HAVE A MINIMUM CRUSHING STRENGTH OF 1000 PSI FOR DEPTHS OF FILL UP TO50 FEET. FOR DEEPER FILLS, PERFORATED AND NON-PERFORATED PIPE SHOULD BE DESIGNED WITH ADEQUATE CRUSHING STRENGTH. THE PIPE DIAMETER WILL GENERALLY MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA, BUT MAY BE MODIFIED IN THE FIELD BY THE GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT AS CONDITIONS DICTATE. THE LENGTH OF RUN IS MEASURED FROM THE HIGHEST ELEVATION. NOTE: •artMg.dw)} AS AN ALTERNATIVE THE FILTER MATERIAL MAY CONSIST OF UP TO 1" DIAMETER OPEN-GRADED GRAVEL WRAPPED IN AN APPROVED GEOFABRIC WITH 6-INCH OR MORE OVERLAP. LENGTH OF RUN 0-500' 500-1500' > 1500' PIPE DIAMETER 4" 6" NOT TO SCALE DRAIN DETAIL FIGURE G 106394001 Earthwork doc