HomeMy WebLinkAboutCT 00-06; BRESSI RANCH MASTER TENTATIVE; AS-GRADED REPORT OF FINE GRADING; 2004-11-02AS-GRADED REPORT OF FINE GRADING, COMMUNITY PARK IN PLANNING
AREA OS-2, VILLAGE SQUARE AND THE WELCOME HOME CENTER IN
PLANNING AREA PA-15, AND THE PARK SITE IN PLANNING AREA PA-10,
BRESSI RANCH, CALIFORNIA
Kreparea ror:
LENNAR COMMUNITIES
1525 Faraday Avenue, Suite 300
Carlsbad, California 92008
Project No. 971009-027
November 2, 2004
eiqhton and Associates, Inc.
4 Leighton and Associates, Inc.
A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY
November 2, 2004
ProjectNo. 971009-027
To: Lennar Communities
1525 Faraday Avenue, Suite 300
Carlsbad, Califomia 92008
Attention: Mr. Roy Publico
Subject: As-Graded Report of Fine Grading, Community Park in Planning Area OS-2,
Village Square and the Welcome Home Center in Planning Area PA-15, and the
Park Site in Plarming Area PA-10, Bressi Ranch, Califomia
Introduction
In accordance with your request and authorization, we have performed geotechnical observation
and testing services during the fme grading operations for the Community Park in Planning Area
OS-2, Village Square and the Welcome Hom.e Center in Planning Area PA-15, and the park site
in Planning Area PA-10 at the Bressi Ranch project located in Carlsbad, Califomia. This letter
summarizes our geotechnical observations, field and laboratory test results, and the geotechnical
conditions encountered during the fine (or precise) grading operations of the Community Park,
Village Square, the Welcome Home Center, and the park in Planning Area PA-10.
The conclusions and recommendations presented in the referenced As-Graded Reports of
Grading for the Recreation Areas (Leighton, 2004d), for Planning Area PA-15 (Leighton, 2004e),
and for the Recreation Center Building Complex in Planning Area OS-2 (Leighton, 2004f) are
still considered pertinent and applicable to the applicable development and should be followed
during the constmction phases of site development. As of the date of this report, the rough and
fme grading operations for the Community Park in Planning Area OS-2, Village Square and the
Welcome Home Center in Planning Area PA-15, and the park site in Planning Area PA-10 are
essentially complete.
3934 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite B205 • San Diego, CA 92123-4425
858.292.8030 • Fax 858.292.0771 •www.leightongeo.com
971009-027
Existing Geotechnical Conditions
Based on the as-graded geotechnical conditions presented in the As-graded Geotechnical Reports of
Mass Grading (Leighton, 2004d and 2004e), Village Square and the Welcome Home Center in
Planning Area PA-15 and the park site in Planning Area PA-10 are entirely underlain by
formational material consisting of the Santiago Formation. With the exception of a small area in the
far northwestem comer of Planning Area OS-2, the Community Park is essentially underlain by
compacted fill soils. Up to approximately 45 to 50 feet of fill is present within Planning Area OS-2.
The deep fill (i.e. fills considered to be greater than approximately 40 feet in depth) is located in the
southem portion ofPlanning Area OS-2. The majority of the fill was placed as of April 2004.
Settlement Monument Monitorinq of Deep Fills
Upon completion of the mass grading operations within Planning Area OS-2, settlement
monuments were placed in the deep fill areas in the vicinity of the recreation building and the
swimming pool complexes. A total of four settlement monuments were placed in Planning Area
OS-2. The settlement monuments were inifially surveyed following the installation and two of
the monuments are currently being surveyed on a periodic weekly basis.
Planning Area OS-2, it is our professional opinion that the primary settlement of the fill soils in
the vicinity of the recreation center building complex is essentially complete. Secondary
consolidation settlement ofthe fill soil may continue; however, future settlements are expected to
be less than 1 to 2 inches. However, since the swimming pool cannot tolerate as much
differential settlement as the post-tensioned foundation designed recreation buildings,
construction of the swimming pool and associated settlement sensitive improvements should be
delayed. Therefore, survey readings of the two monuments in pool area should be continued on a
weekly basis and the results evaluated by Leighton.
Summary of the Fine Gradinq Operations
The fine grading operations for the Community Park in Planning Area OS-2, Village Square and
the Welcome Home Center in Planning Area PA-15, and the park site in Planning Area PA-10
were performed between September 3 and October 14, 2004. The fine grading operations were
performed under the observation and testing of a representative of Leighton and Associates in
accordance with the recommendafions of the As-Graded Report of Mass Grading (Leighton,
2004d and 2004e), recommendations made during the course of grading, and the requirements of
the City of Carlsbad.
4
Leighton
971009-027
During the fme grading operations, cuts and fills of up to approximately 6 feet were made within
the Community Park in Planning Area OS-2; while cuts on the order of 3 to 4 feet and fills
generally less than 1 foot were made within Village Square and the Welcome Home Center in
Planning Area PA-15. Cuts of up to 6 feet were made within the park site in Planning Area PA-
10. In order to satisfy the slab subgrade presaturation recommendations for the building pads in
Planning Area OS-2 and the gazebo and fountain in Village Square of Planning Area PA-15, the
upper 12 to 24 inches of the subgrade soils was processed/scarified and moisture conditioned to
at least 130 percent above the optimum moisture content of the soils prior to compaction. After
observations and testing indicated the subgrade soils had the necessary moisture content, the fill
soils were compacted to a minimum 90 percent relative compaction (based on American
Standard of Tesfing and Materials [ASTM] Test Method D1557). The results of the field density
tests are summarized in Appendix B.
Compaction of the fill soils was achieved by use of heavy-duty constmction equipment. Areas of
fill in which field density tests indicated compactions less than the recommended relative
compaction or where the soils exhibited nonuniformity or had field moisture contents less than the
minimum moisture content were reworked. The reworked areas were recompacted, and re-tested
until the recommended minimum 90 percent relative compaction and minimum moisture content
was achieved.
Laboratory maximum dry density tests of representative on-site soils were performed in general
J„ . ,,.:tU A CT^A H T^^„* TV /f.,+U^ J T^l CC-7 c ^: „ . + — J „^I.,UI., + ^ •
U^^WVJUaCUlVK.. Willi r^O X IVl l \^Ol. lVlVtll\_/\a ^ X. ^ .J l . X-j/VpCUlOlXJH ^VJlVllLlCll CtllVJ DWIUUIV^ OUllCllV^ V/OllLV.'llL IV^i^L^
of representative fmish grade soils were performed in accordance with Uniform Building Code
(UBC) Standard 18-1 and standard geochemical methods, respecfively. The test results are
presented in Appendix C. As indicated in Appendix C, the laboratory expansion potential and
soluble sulfate content testing of the representative subgrade or finish grade soils indicated the
following:
• Communitv Park in Planning Area OS-2: The expansion potential of the soils within the
community park is in the medium range (i.e. an expansion index of between 5 land 90). The
soluble sulfate content of the soils within the park ranges from moderate to severe (i.e. a
soluble sulfate content greater than 0.1 percent).
• Village Square in Planning Area PA-15: The expansion potential of the soils within Village
Square is in the medium range (i.e. an expansion index of between 5land 90). The soluble
sulfate content of the soils was found to be in the severe range (i.e. a soluble sulfate content
greater than 0.2 percent).
Park Site in Planning Area PA-10: The expansion potential of the soils within the park is in the
low range (i.e. an expansion index of between 21and 50). The soluble sulfate content of the
soils in the area of the basketball court was found to be in the severe range (i.e. a soluble
sulfate content greater than 0.2 percent) while the soluble sulfate content of the soils in the
4
Leighton
971009-027
remainder of the park was found to be in the negligible range (i.e. a soluble sulfate content less
than 0.1 percent).
Conclusions
Geotechnical conditions encountered during the fine grading operations for the Community Park in
Planning Area OS-2, Village Square and the Welcome Home Center in Planning Area PA-15, and
the park site in Planning Area PA-10 were generally as anticipated. It is our professional opinion
that the sites are suitable for the intended use provided the recommendations in the project as
graded geotechnical reports (Leighton, 2004d, 2004e, and 20041) and presented below are
incorporated into the constmction of the improvements. The following is a summary of our
conclusions conceming the fme grading operations:
• The results of the previous site mass or rough grading operations have been presented in the
project as-graded geotechnical reports (Leighton, 2004d and 2004e).
• Site preparation was geotechnically observed.
• The fill soils placed on the site were moisture conditioned to obtain a near optimum moisture
content and compacted a minimum 90 percent relative compaction (in accordance with ASTM
ICSL iVlCUlUU LJIJ J I ).
• The upper approximately 12 to 24 inches of the recreation center building pads in Planning
Area OS-2 and the gazebo and fountain in Village Square of Planning Area PA-15 were
processed and moisture conditioned to at least 130 percent above the optimum moisture content
of the soils (in order to satisfy the slab subgrade presaturation recommendations).
• Expansion potential testing of the subgrade and fmish grade soils indicates that the soils have
a low to medium expansion potential (per Uniform Building Code Table 18-I-B). Laboratory
testing of representafive soils also indicates the soils possess a negligible to severe soluble
sulfate content range (per Uniform Building Code Table 19-A-4).
• Construction of the swimming pool and associated settlement sensitive improvements should
be delayed while the settlement monuments confinue to be monitored on a weekly basis and
the results evaluated by Leighton.
Recommendations
Recommendations conceming the post-grading and constmction phases of site development for the
Community Park in Planning Area OS-2, Village Square and the Welcome Home Center in
Planning Area PA-15, and the park site in Planning Area PA-10 have previously been presented in
4
Leighton
971009-027
the project as-graded geotechnical reports (Leighton, 2004d, 2004e, and 20041). The
recommendations presented in the project as-graded reports are considered applicable to the
planned development and should be followed during the fiiture post grading and constmction
phases of site development. Additional or addendum recommendations are presented below:
• Desiqn of the Proposed Improvements
General Recommendations
• All footings should extend a minimum of 18 inches below adjacent existing grade.
• All footings and other settlement sensitive improvements should meet the
recommended horizontal setback from slope faces as recommended in Table I.
Table 1
Minimum Foundation Setback from Descending Slope Faces
Slope Height Minimum Recommended Foundation Setback
Less than 5 feet 5 feet
Sto 15 feet 7 feet
15 to 30 feet 10 feet
Greater than 30 feet 20 feet
Community Park in Planning Area OS-2
• Concrete Flatwork: Due to the presence of moderately expansive soils, the concrete
flatwork within the community park should be underlain by a minimum of 2 inches of
clean sand or aggregate base material and be reinforced with 6x6/10-10 Welded Wire
Mesh (WWM) placed at mid-height in the slab. Soluble sulfate content of the
representative subgrade or finish grade soils indicates that soils are in the moderate to
severe range and therefore, should be designed for a severe sulfate exposure (per 1997
UBC Table 19-A-4).
• Vehicular AC and Concrete Pavement: The parking area should be designed in
accordance with the recommendations presented in our Planning Area OS-2 Pavement
Design Recommendation Letter (Leighton, 2004h). The recommended AC pavement
section should be 4 inches of AC over 8 inches of Class 2 aggregate base material. The
concrete pavement section is a minimum of 6 inches of Portland Cement Concrete
(PCC) with reinforcement rebars over 6 inches of Class 2 aggregate base material.
The reinforcement should consist of No. 4 rebars placed at mid-height in the concrete
4
Leighton
1
I
971009-027
slab at 18 inches on center (each way) at a minimum. The PCC should have a
minimum modulus of mpture of at least 600 psi and a minimum strength of 3,000 psi.
Swimming Pool Complex: The swimming pool complex should de designed and
constmcted in accordance with the recommendations presented in the As-graded
Report of Mass Grading for Planning Area OS-2 (Leighton, 2004d) and presented
herein. The swimming pool and SPA should be designed by a structural engineer to
resist the forces of highly expansive soils and potential differential settlement of the
fill.
1) Swimming Pool: The following items should be taken into considerafion in the
design and constmction of the swimming pool and SPA:
- The use of an equivalent lateral fluid pressure of 125 pcf for on-site expansive
soils should be utilized.
- Heavy-duty pipes and couplings should be used for the pool plumbing system to
minimize leaking which may produce additional local high pressures to the pool
shell.
Installation of a pressure release valve system beneath the pool bottom is also
Itl^UllililtllUCU.
The pool contractor should provide a sufficient level of inspection and control to
assure that approved pool plans and specifications are implemented during
constmction.
- Obscrvationy'tcsting should be performed by a geotechnical consultant during
pool excavation to verify that exposed soil conditions are consistent with the
design assumptions.
2) Swimming Pool Deck: We recommend that the pool deck be a minimum of 5-
inches thick, reinforced with No. 3 rebars at 18 inches on center each way, and
underlain by a minimum 2 inch layer of clean sand. The clean sand should be
underlain by a 10-mil visqueen moisture barrier properly lapped and sealed, which
is in-tum underlain by an additional of 2 inches of sand (minimum). The moisture
barrier should be sloped away from the pool at a minimum gradient of 2 percent.
The perimeter of the decking should be constmcted with a perimeter footing a
minimum of 8 inches wide and deep. The deck should have appropriate crack
control and expansion joints to reduce the potential for the formation of unsightly
cracks as the deck responds to the underlying expansive soils. In general, the
constmction joints should be a minimum of 5 feet on center (each way) and extend
to a depth of at least 1/3 of the concrete thickness. The joints should not cut the
4
Leighton
971009-027
rebar reinforcement. Special attention should be given to ensure that the joint
between the pool decking and pool coping is properly sealed with a flexible,
watertight caulking to prevent water infiltration. The concrete decking should be
sloped to area drains with sufficient gradient to maintain active flow, even if the
deck is subject to minor movement.
In addition, we recommend that the pool deck subgrade be compacted to a
minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density (ASTM Test Method D1557).
The subgrade soil should then be thoroughly moisture conditioned to at least 140
percent of above optimum moisture content at a depth of 24-inches prior to
placement of the sand material and concrete. We recommend that presaturation of
subgrade soils be verified by a representative of this office prior to placement of
sand.
3) Swimming Pool Settiement Monitoring: We recommend that the settlement
monuments in the pool area ofPlanning Area OS-2 (Monuments 0S2-1 and OS2-2)
continue to be monitored on a weekly basis and the resuhs evaluated by Leighton. A
letter documenting the completion of the settlement monitoring will be prepared as
an addendum to this report.
viiidLit; jqudit: iridiining Mieo rn-iPi iiiiiJiuvemenLb
• Concrete Flatwork: Soluble sulfate content testing of the representative subgrade or
finish grade soils indicates that the soils are in the severe range and therefore, the
concrete flatwork (including the gazebo and fountain slabs) should be designed for a
severe sulfate exposure (per 1997 UBC Table 19-A-4).
• Fountain:
The fountain perimeter footing should extend a minimum of 18 inches below
adjacent existing grade.
- The fountain should bc underlain by 6 inches of Class 2 Aggregate Base material.
- The fountain slab or bottom should consist of a 6-inch thick slab that is reinforced
with No. 3 rebars on 18 inch center each way placed at mid-height in the slab.
- Due to the presence of moderately expansive soils, the concrete flatwork around the
fountain should be underlain by a minimum of 2 inches of clean sand or aggregate
base material and be reinforced with 6x6/10-10 Welded Wire Mesh (WWM) placed
at mid-height in the slab.
4
Leighton
971009-027
• Gazebo:
The spread and continuous footings for the gazebo posts should extend a minimum
of 18 inches below adjacent existing grade.
The gazebo slab should be underlain by 2 inches of clean sand or Class 2 Aggregate
Base material.
The gazebo slab should be 4 inches thick and be reinforced with No. 3 rebars on 18
inch center each way placed at mid-height in the slab.
The upper 6 inches of the slab subgrade soils should be presaturated to a minimum
120 percent of the optimum moisture content of the soil.
Planning Area PA-10 Park Site
• Concrete Flatwork: Soluble sulfate content testing of the representative subgrade or
finish grade soils indicates that the soils are in the negligible range (with the
exception of the area around the basketball court) and therefore, should be designed
.. _ , _i! _;ui - I 1 noa T Tno T^„ut., in A A\
lUl a lltgilgiuit :5unan- v-Apuomv, V^pv^i i. j j i v_juv.^ i aun.. ij-r-i.—x).
9 Basketball Court:
- The basketball court slab should be 6 inches thick and be reinforced with No. 3
rebars on 18 inch center each way placed at mid-height in the slab.
Soluble sulfate content testing of the representative subgrade or finish grade soils in
the area around the basketball court indicates that the soils are in the severe range
and therefore, the basketball court slab and the adjacent concrete flatwork should be
designed for a severe sulfate exposure (per 1997 UBC Table 19-A-4).
• Playground: Soluble sulfate content testing of the representative subgrade or fmish
grade soils indicates that the soils are in the negligible range and therefore, should be
designed for a negligible sulfate exposure (per 1997 UBC Table 19-A-4).
4
Leighton
971009-027
Concrete in Contact with the On-Site Soils
In-place concrete is subject to adverse conditions such as unsightiy cracking, excessive water
vapor transmission, sulfate attack, efflorescence, and other adverse conditions. Adherence to
the following guidelines will help mitigate against the above adverse hazards.
1) Exposure to sulfate-containing solutions:
• The soluble sulfate content of the finish grade soils on the site is anticipated to be in the
negligible to severe range based on 1997 Uniform Building Code criteria. Specific
recommendations for each of the proposed improvements within the Community Park
in Planning Area OS-2, Village Square and the Welcome Home Center in Planning
Area PA-15, and the park site in Planning Area PA-10 have been presented in the
recommendation section for each area above.
• Comply with 1997 UBC Table 19-A-4; and
• Maintain concrete water/cement ratio less than 0.5.
2) Drying shrinkage cracking:
• Follow recommendations of ACI 302.IF for industrial/commercial stmctures, as
appropriate;
Use minimum cement required to achieve desired strength;
Provide effective concrete curing for seven days after placing;
Design control joints into slab; and
Do not place concrete on hot, windy low-humidity days.
3) Reduction of vapor transmission:
• Maintain concrete water/cement ratio less than 0.5.
• Avoid constmction pimctures of vapor barriers;
• Seal vapor barrier joints;
• Extend vapor barrier into footing/grade beam excavation (not covering bottom of
excavation);
• Prevent excessive irrigation of landscaping; and
• Use floor-covering adhesives that are not water-soluble.
10-
Leighton
971009-027
If you have any questions regarding our letter, please do not hesitate to contact this office. We
appreciate this opportunity to be of service.
"S/^ No,
ts 1
%\ Exp.
Respectfully submitted
LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
William D. Olson, RCE 45283
Senior Project Engineer
Randall K Wagn*, CI CEG 1612
Senior Associate
Attachments: Appendix A - References
Appendix B - Summary of Field Density Tests
Distribution: (6) Addressee
(2) Lennar Communities, Attenfion: Ms. Peggy Ashby
(3) Project Design Consultants, Attenfion: Mr. Matt Bamm
11 4
Leighton
971009-027
APPENDIX A
References
Dahlin Group, 2004, Bressi Ranch Open Space Conditional Use Permit Plans (CUP-02-17), Job
No. 382.015, Sheets C-1 and C-2, dated January 12, 2004.
Gillispie Design Group, 2004a, Bressi Ranch Landscape Constmction Plans for Planning Area
10, CT 02-14, Carisbad, Califomia, Sheets 1 through 18 of 42, Job No. 02-116, dated
July 10, 2003, 3''' Plan Check dated July 26, 2004.
, 2004b, Bressi Ranch Landscape Constmcfion Plans for Lot 3 ofPlanning Area 15,
SDP 03-11, Carisbad, Califomia, Sheets 1 through 6 of 18, Job No. 02-118, dated
October 20, 2003, Mylar Submittal dated September 9, 2004.
, 2004c, Bressi Ranch Landscape Construction Plans for Open Space Area 2, CT 02-
14/PUD 02-06, Carisbad, Califomia, Sheets 1 through 16 of 37, Job No. 02-116, dated
December 4, 2003, 2"'' Plan Check dated September 10, 2004.
Leighton and Associates, 2004a, Geotechnical Considerations Relative to the Placement of Deep
Fll! Soils and Construction of the Prcpo*^^'^ Qtmr^turQi Tmr*mAr/=»m^intc o^_9 r^rp^cci
Ranch, Carlsbad, Califomia Febmary 9, 2004.
, 2004b, Deep Fill Area Settlement Monitoring Recommendations, Bressi Ranch,
Carlsbad, Califomia, ProjectNo. 971009-014, dated Febmary 13, 2004, revised Febmary
16, 2004.
, 2004c, Community Swimming Pool Complex Constmction Constraints Due to
Geotechnical Conditions, Planning Area OS-2, Bressi Ranch, Carlsbad, Califomia, dated
March 18, 2004.
, 2004d, As-Graded Report of Mass Grading, Recreation Areas in Planning Areas
PA-9, PA-10, PA-12, and OS-2, Carisbad Tract No. 00-06, Bressi Ranch, Carisbad,
Califomia Project No. 971009-014, dated June 11, 2004.
, 2004e, As-Graded Report of Mass Grading, Planning Areas PA-13, PA-14, and a
portion of PA-15, Bressi Ranch, Carlsbad, Califomia, Project No. 971009-014, dated
September 17, 2004.
A-l
971009-027
APPENDIX A (continued)
, 2004f Interim As-Graded Report of Fine Grading, Recreation Center Building
Complex Pad, Planning Area OS-2, Bressi Ranch, Califomia, Project No. 971009-027,
dated September 24, 2004.
, 2004g, Laboratory Sulfate Content Test Results of Representative Concrete Flatwork
Subgrade Soils, Village Square and the Planning Areas OS-2 and PA-10 Park Sites, Bressi
Ranch, Carlsbad, Califomia, ProjectNo. 4971009-014, dated October 14, 2004.
, 2004h, Pavement Section Design Recommendations for the Community Park Parking
Area, Planning Area OS-2, Bressi Ranch, Carlsbad, Califomia, Project No. 971009-027,
dated October 25, 2004.
Project Design Consultants, 2004, Precise Grading Plans: Bressi Ranch Parks, PA-9, PA-10, PA-
12, and OS-2, Carisbad TractNo. 02-14, 7 Sheets, dated September 9, 2004.
A-2
971009-027
APPENDIX B
Explanation of Summary of Field Density Tests
Test No. Test of Test No. Test of
Prefix Test of Abbreviations Prefix Test of Abbreviations
(none) GRADING
Natural Ground NG (SG) SUBGRADE
Original Ground OG (AB) AGGREGATE BASE
Existing Fill EF (CB) CEMENT TREATED BASE
Compacted Fill CF (PB) PROCESSED BASE
Slope Face SF (AC) ASPHALT CONCRETE
Finish Grade FG
(S)
(SD)
(AD)
(W)
SEWER
STORM DRAIN
AREA DRAIN
DOMESTIC WATER
Curb
Gutter
Curb and Gutter
Cross Gutter
Street
Sidewalk
Driveway
Driveway Approach
Parking Lot
Electric Box Pad
Trash Enclosure
Loading Ramp
C
G
CG
XG
ST
SW
D
DA
PL
EB
TE
LR
(RC)
(SB)
(G)
(E)
(T)
(J)
(I)
RECLAIMED WATER
SUBDRAIN
GAS
ELECTRICAL
TELEPHONE
JOINT UTILITY
IRRIGATION
Curb
Gutter
Curb and Gutter
Cross Gutter
Street
Sidewalk
Driveway
Driveway Approach
Parking Lot
Electric Box Pad
Trash Enclosure
Loading Ramp
C
G
CG
XG
ST
SW
D
DA
PL
EB
TE
LR
Bedding Material B
c
Building Pad BP
Shading Sand o
M Main
o
M
Lateral L
X
MH
HL
CB
R
I
Crossing
L
X
MH
HL
CB
R
I
Manhole
L
X
MH
HL
CB
R
I
Hydrant Lateral
L
X
MH
HL
CB
R
I
Catch Basin
L
X
MH
HL
CB
R
I
Riser
L
X
MH
HL
CB
R
I Inlet
L
X
MH
HL
CB
R
I
Fire Service FS
Water Services WS
Head Wall HW
(RW) RETAINING WALL (P) PRESATURATION
(CW) CRIB WALL
(LW) LOFFELL WALL Moisture Content M
(SF) STRUCT FOOTING
Footing Bottom
Backfill
Wall Cell
F
B
C
(IT) INTERIOR TRENCH
Sewer Lateral
Storm Drain
Electric Line
S
SD
E
N represents nuclear gauge tests that were performed in general accordance with most recent version of ASTM Test
Methods D2922 and D30I7.
S represents sand cone tests that were performed in general accordance with most recent version of ASTM Test Method DI556.
15 A represents first retest of Test No. 15
Test
No.
Test
Date
Test
Of
Location
Northing Easting
Test Soil Dry Density Moisture (%) Relative (%)
Elev (ft) Type Field Max Field Opt. Compaction Remarks
9408 9/3/04 CF SW OS-2 Slope 1989879 6252933 318 D 22 113.0 124.0 16.3 12.0 91
9409 9/3/04 CF SW OS-2 Slope 1989918 6252932 320 23 110.3 119.0 16.2 13.0 93
9410 9/7/04 CF SW OS-2 Slope 1989892 6252947 322 20 100.2 116.0 13.6 14.0 86
941 OA 9/3/04 CF SW OS-2 Slope 1989892 6252947 322 20 105.1 116.0 14.2 14.0 91
941 1 9/7/04 CF SW OS-2 Slope 1989911 6252955 324 D 20 105.0 116.0 14.4 14.0 91
9412 9/7/04 CF SW OS-2 Slope 1989934 6252923 326 ) 23 107.2 119.0 12.8 13.0 90
')413 9/7/04 CF SW OS-2 Slope 1989928 6252956 328 ) 20 106.7 116.0 13.9 14.0 92
•)A 14 9/8/04 CF SW OS-2 Slope 1989945 6252950 330 ) 20 107.0 116.0 15.1 14.0 92
94 15 9/8/04 CF SW OS-2 Slope 1989942 6252957 332 D 22 111.9 124.0 15.5 12.0 90
9416 9/8/04 CF SW OS-2 Slope 1989904 6252972 334 D 08 106.0 117.5 17.5 14.0 90
9417 9/8/04 CF SW OS-2 Slope 1989942 6252960 336 D 08 106.2 117.5 18.0 14.0 90
9424 9/8/04 CF SW OS-2 Slope 1989910 6252979 337 D 20 106.2 116.0 13.4 14.0 92
9425 9/8/04 CF SW OS-2 Slope 1989932 6252986 339 3 20 108.8 116.0 17.4 14.0 94
9426 9/8/04 CF SW OS-2 Slope 1989953 6252939 342 ) 20 104.8 116.0 14.4 14.0 90
9427 9/8/04 CF SW OS-2 Slope 1989954 6252965 342 3 20 105.7 116.0 14.6 14.0 91
9442 9/21/04 CF Picnic Area N Side 1990325 6253377 369 0 16 106.9 117.0 14.3 14.0 91
9443 9/21./04 CF Picnic Area NE Side 1990358 6253372 369 5 16 108.9 117.0 15.3 14.0 93
9444 9/21 /04 CF Picnic Area SW Side 1990384 6253327 368 5 16 110.4 117.0 15.0 14.0 94
9447 9/22/04 CF Rec. Center NE Side 1990044 6253250 354 D 16 107.8 117.0 18.4 14.0 92
9447A 9/22/04 CF Rec. Center NE Side 1990044 6253250 354 0 16 112.7 117.0 13.3 14.0 96
9448 9/22/04 CF Rec. Center S Side 1990038 6253200 353 0 20 109.6 116.0 17.6 14.0 94
9449 9/22/04 CF Rec. Center S Side 1990035 6253241 354 5 20 105.5 116.0 18.1 14.0 91
9450 9/22/04 CF Restroom W Side 1990157 6253306 358 3 21 108.5 118.0 17.6 13.0 92
9451 9/22/04 CF Restroom E Side 1990I6I 6253338 358 5 21 110.2 118.0 17.0 13.0 93
9452 9/22/04 CF Rec. Center SW Side 1990096 6253245 354 3 21 109.6 118.0 17.3 13.0 93
9453 9/22/04 CF Pool Storage Pad 1990139 6253251 355 3 20 106.3 116.0 18.7 14.0 92
9454 9/22/04 CF Pool W Side 1990063 6253324 359 3 21 109.8 118.0 15.4 13.0 93
9455 9/22/04 CF Pool W Side 1990125 6253320 360 3 21 107.1 118.0 13.5 13.0 91
9456 9/23/04 FG Rec. Center NE Side 1990037 6253246 0 3 20 107.5 116.0 18.1 14.0 93
9457 9/23/04 FG Rec. Center NE Side 1990058 6253266 0 3 20 105.2 116.0 19.4 14.0 91
9458 9/23/04 FG Pool Storage Pad 1990159 6253249 0 3 20 107.1 116.0 18.7 14.0 92
9459 9/23/04 FG Restroom Pad 1990158 6253316 0 3 21 109.4 118.0 17.5 13.0 93
RT ON 941 OA
RTOF 9410
RT ON 9447A
RT OF 9447
Project Number:
Project Name:
Project Location:
Client:
971009014
Bressi Ranch
0
0 Page 1 of 2 4 ..eighton and Associa :es, Inc 1/1/2 3:05:13PM
Test
No.
Test
Date
Test
Of
Location
Northing Easting
Test
Elev (ft)
Soil
Type
Dry Density
Field Max
Moisture (%)
Field Opt.
Relative (%)
Compaction Remarks
9460 10/14/0 FG Gazebo Pad 1990736 6254219 0.3 16 105.3 117.0 17.6 14.0 90
9461 10/14/0 FG Fountain Pad 1990990 6254213 0.3 18 101.4 113.0 19.7 16.0 90
9462 10/14/0 FG NW Village Square 1990991 6254153 0.3 18 102.6 113.0 15.3 16.0 91
9463 10/14/0 FG W Village Square 1991042 6254068 0.3 18 102.2 113.0 14.9 16.0 90
9464 10/14/0 FG SW Village Square 1990852 6254156 0.3 16 105.6 117.0 15.7 14.0 90
Project Number:
Project Name:
Project Location:
Client:
971009014
Bressi Ranch
0
0 Page 2 of 2 4 Leighton and Associaies, Inc 1/1/2 3:05:14PM
971009-027
APPENDIX C
Laboratory Testing Procedures and Test Results
Expansion Index Tests: The expansion potential of selected materials was evaluated by the Expansion Index
Test, U.B.C. Standard No. 18-I-B. Specimens are molded under a given compactive energy to approximately
the optimum moisture content and approximately 50 percent saturation or approximately 90 percent relative
compaction. The prepared 1-inch thick by 4-inch diameter specimens are loaded to an equivalent 144 psf
surcharge and are inundated with tap water until volumetric equilibrium is reached. The results ofthese tests
are presented in the table below:
Representative Area Sample Description Expansion
Index
Expansion
Potential*
Recreation Building Pad in OS-2 Olive-brown sandy lean SILT 68 Medium
Swimming Pool Pad in OS-2 Yellow brown sandy SILT 72 Medium
Gazebo Pad in PA-15 Gray sandy SILT 57 Medium
Fountain Pad in PA-15 Yellow-brown sandy SILT 60 Medium
Basketball Court Pad in PA-10 Yellow-brown Clayey SAND 38 Low
Playground Pad in PA-10 Yellow-brown sandy SILT to
silty SAND 31 Low
* Based on the 1997 edition of the Uniform Building Code Table 18-I-B.
C-1
971009-027
APPENDIX C (continued)
Soluble Sulfates: The soluble sulfate contents of selected samples were determined by standard geochemical
methods. The test results are presented in the table below:
Sample Location Sample Description Sulfate
Content (%)
Potential Degree
of Sulfate Attack*
Recreation Building Pad in OS-2 Olive-brown sandy
lean SILT 0.15 Moderate
Pool Equipment Building Pad in OS-2 Pale olive-brown silty
SAND 0.15 Moderate
Northem Side of Pool Deck in OS-2 Gray sandy SILT 0.20 Severe
Southem Side of Pool Deck in OS-2 Gray sandy SILT 0.10 Moderate
Rose Garden in OS-2 Brown silty clayey
SAND 0.20 Severe
Yellow-brown sandy
SILT 0 !3
Picnic Area in OS-2 Gray sandy SILT 0.13 Moderate
Gazebo Pad in PA-15 Gray sandy SILT 0.30 Severe
Fountain Pad in PA-15 Yellow-brown sandy
SILT 0.25 Severe
Basketball Court Pad in PA-10 Yellow-brown
Clayey SAND 0.20 Severe
Playground Pad in PA-10
Yellow-brown sandy
SILT to silty S.\ND 0.04 Negligible
North Side of Playground Pad in PA-10
Yellow-brown silty
SAND 0.05 Negligible
* Based on the 1997 edition of the Uniform Building Code Table 19-A-4.
C-2
971009-027
APPENDIX C (continued)
Maximum Density Tests: The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of typical materials were
determined in accordance with ASTM Test Method DI557. The results of these tests are presented in the
table below:
Sample
Number Sample Description Maximum Dry Density
(pcf)
Optimum Moisture
Content (%)
07 Olive light brown silty fine SAND 122.0 13.0
08 Gray Brown to Olive Brown clayey silty fine SAND 117.5 14.0
09 Light Olive-gray clayey silty SAND 118.0 15.0
10 Light brown Clayey very fine SAND 112.5 16.0
11 Brown clayey SAND (fill mix) 120.0 13.0
12 Brown clayey SAND (fill mix) 120.0 12.5
13 Dark brown sandy CLAY (Alluvium) II5.0 16.5
14 Light brown olive brown 124.0 12.0
15 Light gray brown silty very fine to fine SAND 112.0 15.5
16 Light gray fine sand 117.0 14.0
17 Light yellow-brown clayey silty SAND II4.0 14.5
18 Light olive brown silty clayey SAND II3.0 16.0
19 Yellow brown clayey silty SAND 118.0 15.0
20 Pale Olive light brown clayey silty SAND 116.0 14.0
21 Pale Olive light brown clayey silty SAND II8.0 13.0
22 Pale olive to gray brown silty sand 124.0 12.0
23 Pale Olive to Gray brown clayey silty SAND 119.0 13.0
24 Yellow-Brown Clayey SAND 116.0 13.5
25 Brown CLAY 104.0 19.0
26 Olive Gray CLAY 112.0 17.0
27 Yellow-Brown Clayey SAND 118.5 14.0
28 Brown Silty SAND 126.0 9.5
C-3