The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCT 01-06; CALAVERA HILLS VILLAGE X; REVISED PAVEMENT DESIGN REPORT; 2004-03-04CTO-O, ZNC FILE RJCONTaL,cflQJ I Geotechnical -..Geologic - Environmental. 5741 Palmer Way • Carlsbad California 92008 • (760) 438-3155 • FAX (760) 9311-0915 March 4, 2004 W.'0. 3459-E-SC Calavera Hulls II, LLC 2727 Hoover Avenue National City, California 91950 , Attention: Mr. Don Mitchell Subject: Revised Pavement Design Report, Calavera Hills II, Village X City of Carlsbad, San ,Diego County, California Dear Mr. Mitchell In accordance with your request, GeoSoils, Inc. (GSi) has prepared revised preliminary . ' design .and construction recommendations for asphalt concrete (AC) pavement at the. subject site'. The scope of services provided in. preparatioA of this report included representative sampling of the streetsubgrade, R-value testing, and engineering analysis of pavement design. The purpose of this revision was to.update our previous report (GSI, 2004) with respect to current street names. ' ' . . •' , ' PAVEMENT DESIGN ' • Pavement section design was performed in accordance with the 'California Department of Transportation (Caltráns) Highway Design Manual of Instructions and the City of Carlsbad Standard Drawings (see the Appendix). Pavement sections' presented are based on the aforementioned criteria . and resistance value (R-value) data (see the attached Figures 1. Through 4),, determined from soils exposed at, or near, final subgrade elevations within the subject areas. R-value testing was performed in accordance' with the latest revisions to the Department of Transportation, State of California, Material & Research Test Method No. 301. Pavement design was aided with the computer software programsPAVE • and NEWCON90.. •' •• . • • • • ' • ' ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVEMENT Structural Section / R-values ranging from 27 to 54 were determined for subgrade soils onsite, and used in pavement design. The recommended pavement sections are presented in the following !)able*. . . AC AGGREGATE BASE TRAFFIC SUBGRADE THICKNESS THICKNESS 2 TRAFFIC AREA INDEX R-VALUE (Inches)". . - '.(lnches) Basin Road . ..5.0 27 4.0 4.0 Stations .1122to_13 Crater Rim Road . 5.0 39 . .. . 4.0 . 4.0 Stations 10+22 to 19 Ravine Drive 5.0 54 4.0 . 4.0 +50 Stations 109 to 17- Pleasant Vale Drive 5.0 27 4.0 4.0 Stations 9 to 1 622 . Pleasant Vale Drive 5.0 27 4.0 . . 4.0 Stations 16 to 22 Gentle Knoll Street, . . 5.0 39 4.0 4.0 Stations 1 O+io to 20+Z5 Rift Road . 5.0 39 4.0 4.0 Stations 10 to 13- City minimum . . . Denotes Class 2 Aggregate Base ® >78, SE >25) All pavement installation, including preparation and compaction of subgrade, compaction of base material, and placement and rolling of asphaltic concrete, should be done in . accordance with the City guidelines and under the observation and testing of the project geotechnicaIengineer and/or City. . . •. The recommended pavement sections are meant as minimums. If thinner or highly variable pavement sections are constructed, increased maintenance and repair may be needed. Positive site drainage should be maintained at all times. Water should not be allowed to pond or seep into the ground. If planters or landscaping are adjacent to paved areas, measures should.be taken to minimize the potential for water to enter the pavement section. If the ADT (average daily traffic) or ADTT (average daily truck traffic) increases Calavera Hills II, LLC . • W.O. 3459-E-SC Calavera Hills II, Village x • March 4, 2004 FiIe::\wp9\3400\3459e.x.rpdr • • - Page 2 GeoSoits, Inc. . . • SS\ - beyond that intended, as reflected by the traffic index(s) used for design, increased inaintenanbe' and repair could be required for the pavement section. - .. PAVEMENT GRADING RECOMMENDATIONS . . '. - e General All section changes should be properly transitioned; If adverse conditions areencountered during the preparation of subgrade materials, special construction methods may need to .......be employed. 'A GSI representative- should, be present for the preparation, of subgrade, base rock, and asphalt concrete - Subgrade Within Street and parking areas, all' 'surficial deposits of loose soil material should be reffioved, and .recompacted. as recommended. After the loose soils are removed, the bottom is to be scarified to a depth of approximately 6 inches, moisture conditioned as necessary, and compacted to 95 percent of 'the maximum laboratory density, as determined by ASTM Test Designation D-1 557 Deleterious material, excessively wet or dry pockets, concentrated zones of-oversized rock ( ' fragments, and any other unsuitable materials, encountered during grading should be removed'. The compactédk fill material should then be brought to the elevation ofthe proposed subgrade for the pavement. The subgrade should. be proof-rolled in' order to ensure a uniform firm and unyielding surface.' 'All grading and fill placement should be observed by the project soil engineer and/or his representative Base Rock Compaction" tests. are reqUFrd'fbr the recommended 'base section. ' Minim' um relative' compaction required will be 95 percent of the laboratory maximum density as determined byASTM Test Designation D-1557. Base aggregate should be in accordance'with the' "Standard Specifications'for Public Works Construction" (green book), 1997 edition, or standard Caltrans Class 2 base rock (minimum R-value = 78). Paving, • •' ' . . S '. ., 0 7.' '• . Prime coat may be omitted if all of the following conditions are met 1. . The 'asphalt paernent layer isplaced within two weeks of completion of bae/ . and/or, subbase course. • ',' 'S •' ' • . '0 • ' '. . 0 0 2 Traffic is not routed over completed base before paving Calavera Hills il, LLC I WO. 3459 E SC Caiavera Hilis'il, Village ,X - ' . ' 0 ' • ' ;' • March, 4, '2004 ' 0 Fiie:e:\wp9\3400\3459e.x.rpdr • 0 , , ' 0 . • ' - '. Page 3 GeoSoils, Inc. f / 3( Construction is completed during the dry season of May through October 4 The base is kept free of debris prior to placement of asphaltic concrete If construction is performed during the wet season of November through April, prime coat may be omitted if no rain occurs between co'mpletio'n of base course and paving and the. time between completion of base and paving is reduced to three days, provided the base is free of loose soil or debris Where prime coat has been omitted and rain occurs, traffic is routed over base course, or paving is delayed, measures shall be taken to restore base course and subgrade to conditions that will meet specifications as directed by the soil engineer H' Drainage '. ' : ' " :' • ' Positive drainage should be provided for all surface water to drain toward the, curb and gutter, or to an approved drainage channel.' Positive site drainage should be maintained At all times. Water should not be allowed to pond or seep into the ground..,,If planters or, • landscaping are adjacent to paved areas, measures should be taken to minimize the potential fdr water to enter the pavement section, such, as cut-off walls, etc.' LIMITATIONS ,• ' ' ' ' The materials encountered on the project site and utilized in our laboratory study are believed to be representative of the total area. However, variations from the anticipated conditions and actual field conditions should be expected Test excavations are reflective ' , of the soil and rock Materials'only at the specific location explored. Site conditions may vary due to seasonal changes or other factors. • • '; ' , • Since our study is. based on the earth 'materials obtained in the field onsite, selective' " laboratory testing, and engineering analyses, the conclusions and recommendations are professional opinions based upon those parameters These opinions have been derived in accordance' with the currentstandards of practice and no warranty is expressed or implied. Standards-of practice are subject to change in time. Overall, the enclosed results' 'represent our professional opinions and" evaluations, Which were' performed within the constraints of a budget. GSI assumes no responsibility or liability for work or testing' performed by others. . , ' •, '','• ' ' • •'•• ' .' Calavera Hills II, LLC • ' ' ' ' W.O•.' 3459-E-SC '• '' Caiavera Hills Ii, Village .X - , ' " • ' '' ' 'March 4, 2004 File: e:\wp9\34OO\3459e.xrpdr ' ' ' -.' ' ' ,' ". ' '• Page 4 ' Inc. GeoSoils, \ c; The opportunity to be of service is greatly appreciated If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call our office Respectfully su bmitted/\ . . .• 1 1 GeoSoils, Ind.eviewed by 12 il HO. ,! Robert'G Crisman David W Skelly Engineering.Geologist, CEG1,934 Civil Engineer,.RCE 47857 RGC/J PF/D WS/Jk/J h m Attachents Figures 1 through 4 - R-value Test Results Appendix - References DistribUtion: (2) Addressee : S S .'. . (2) Jobsite, Attention: Mr. To LaMarca . (1) McMillin. Companies, Attention: Mr. .Russ Sheldon. . .5 I .5 •55 S 5 5 .: . . . .5 5 5 . . S ... .7 • ... - S. S S.. . S SSS •I. • Caiavera.HiHs ii, LLC . . . S W.0 3459-E-SC : Calavera Hills Ii, Village X S : . March 4, 2004 File:e:\wp9\3400\3459e.x.rpdr . S . • . - . . .,. Page 5 GeoSoiNs, Inc. GeoSoils, Inc. çT 5741 Palmer Way l, $i. Carlsbad, CA 92008 Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Fax: (760) 931-0915 R - VALUE TEST RESULTS Project: MCMILLIN Number: 3459X-E-SC Date: Feb-04 Figure: 1 TEST SPEC IMAN A' ' B C D Compactor air pressure ' PSI 280 160 120 Water added % ' 0.9 1.8 2.7 Moisture at compaction ' , % 8.0 8.9 9.9 'Height of sample ' ' ,IN 2.32 2.36 2.42 Dry density ' ' PCF '134.3 131.8 128.4 R-Value by exudation , , 44 30 22 - R-Value by exudation, corrected' ' ' ' 39 ' 27 ' 21 Exudation pressure , PSI , ' , 498 310 186 Stability thickness ' FT 0.65 0.81 0.90 Expansion pressure thickness ' FT 0.00 , 0.00 0.00 - DESIGN CALCULATION DATA Traffic index, assumed 4.5 Gravel equivalent factor, assumed 1.25 Expansion, stability equilibrium 0 R-Value by expansion NA R-Value by exudation , 27 R-Value at equilibrium 27 Expansion, Stability Equilibrium 2.00 SAMPLE INFORMATION Sample Location: Claywood Ct. 10+00-16+00 Sample Description: Dark Gray Silty Gravel W/ Sand Notes: Benchwood 45% Retained on 3/4 inch sieve Test Method: Cal-Trans Test 301 R-Value By Exudation 80 - 70-- 60- 50-- 40 ------------- C) C) > :-• tic 4--1 0.00 0.50 ' 1.00 , 1.50 2.00 Stability Thickness (if) Noll 101711 GeoSoils, Inc. 5741 Palmer Way Carlsbad, CA 92008 Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Fax: (760) 931-0915 R - VALUE TEST RESULTS Project: , MCMILLIN Number: 3459X-E-SC Date: Feb-04 ' Figure: 2 TEST SPECIMAN A B C D Compactor air pressure PSI . 350 240 20 Water added % 0.0 0.8 2.6 Moisture at compaction % 6.2 .7.1 9.0 Height of sample IN 2.31 2.33 2.4 Dry density PCF 136.6 135.1 125.8 R-Value by exudation 61 41 13 R-Value by exudation, corrected 56 37 13 Exudation pressure PSI 596 281 111 Stability thickness FT 0.45 0.68 1.00 Expansion pressure thickness FT 0.00 0.00 0.00 DESIGN CALCULATION DATA Traffic index, assumed 4.5 Gravel equivalent factor, assumed 1.25 Expansion, stability equilibrium 0 R-ValUe by expansion NA R-Value by exudation . 39 R-Value at equilibrium 39 Expansion, Stability Equilibrium 2.00 SAMPLE INFORMATION [s]il IflhIII'''I'' S (*1 'fl1Tr1 :1TT Ftlr.i 0.00 -!'- 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 Stability Thickness (ft) GeoSoils, Inc. ç5741 Palmer Way H.. Carlsbad,, CA 92008 . Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Fax: (760) 931-0915 R - VALUE TEST RESULTS Project: MCMILLIN Number: 3459X-E-SC Date: Feb-04 Figure: 3 TEST SPECIMAN A B C D Compactor air pressure PSI 350 350 350 Water added % 1.7 2.6 3.8 Moisture at compaction % 8.0 9.0 10.4 Height of sample IN 2.31 2.33 2.53 Dry density PCF 137.4 135.9 124.4 R-Value by exudation . 89 79 44 R-Value by exudation, corrected 88 78 44 Exudation pressure PSI 691 463 243 Stability thickness FT 0.13 0.24 0.65 Expansion pressure thickness FT 0.00 0.00 0.00 DESIGN CALCULATION DATA Traffic index, assumed 4.5 Gravel equivalent factor, assumed 1.25 Expansion, stability equilibrium 0 R-Value by expansion. NA R-Value by exudation 54 R-Value at equilibrium 54 SAMPLE INFORMATION Sample Location: Earthwood Ct. 10+00-17+50 Sample Description: '' Dark Gray Silty Gravel W/ Sand Notes: RV-3 40% Retained on 3/4 inch sieve Test Method: Cal-Trans Test 301 R-Value By Exudation 2.00 Expansion, Stability Equilibrium 0.00 4- 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2:00 Stability Thickness (ft) 0 TEST SPECIMAN A B C D Compactor air pressure PSI 350 240 130 Water added % 1.3 2.2 3.0 Moisture at compaction % 7.1 8.1 9.0 Height of sample IN 2.31 2.37 2.44 Dry density PCF 136.9 132.9 129.1 R-Value by exudation •65 46 32 R-Value by exudation, corrected 60 42 30 Exudation pressure PSI 509 339 210 Stability thickness FT 0.40 0.62 0.78 Expansion pressure thickness FT 0.00 0.00 0.00 DESIGN CALCULATION DATA Traffic index, assumed 4.5 Gravel equivalent factor, assumed 1.25 Expansion, stability equilibrium 0 R-Value. expansion NA R-Value by exudation 39 R-Value at equilibrium 39 Expansion, Stability Equilibrium 2.00 SAMPLE INFORMATION 0.00 -1.- 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 Stability Thickness (ft) 0 GeoSoils, Inc. R - VALUE TEST RESULTS ç 5741 Palmer Way Project: MCMILLIN 114!. Carlsbad, CA 92008 Telephone: (760) 438-3155 Number: 3459X-E-SC Fax: (760) 931-0915 Date: Feb-04 Figure: 4