HomeMy WebLinkAboutCT 73-49; PALOMAR AIPORT BUSINESS CENTER; SOIL AND GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION; 1980-12-16.'
•
. ,
•
•
•
•
•
•
Woodward· Clyde Consultants
UPDATE SOIL AND GEOLOGIC INVESTIGATION
FOR THE PROPOSED
HOWARD MANN -16-ACRE SITE
PALOMAR AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
for
Andrex Development Company
Post Office Box 84161
Los Angeles, California 90073
,.
•
•
•
. '
••
•
•
•
•
3467 Kurtz Street
San Diego, California 92110
714-224-2911
Woodward·Clyde Consultants
Telex 697-841
December 16, 1980
Project No. 50332W-UDOI
Andrex Development Company
Post Office Box 84361
Los Angeles,. California 90073
Attention: Mr. Howard Mann
UPDATE SOIL AND GEOLOGIC INVESTIGATION·
FOR THE PROPOSED
,HOWARD MANN -16-ACRE SITE
PALOMAR AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
RECEIVED
AOb2--.1 1\ 2 198t
CITY OF CARLSB~Q
Engineering DepaJi\hen~
We are pleased to provide the accompanying report, which .
presents the results of our update soil and geologic investi-
gation for the subject project. This study was performed in
accordance with our proposal dated October 30, 1980 and your
authorization of November 18, 1980 •
The report presents our conclusions and recommendations
pertaining to the project, as well as the results of our
field explorations and laboratory tests.
If you have any questions or if we can be of fourther
service, please give us a call.
Very truly yours,
WOODI1ARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS
Richard P. While
R.E. 21992
RPW/DS/]?D/rs
Attachment
(4) Andrex Development Company
(2) Koll Company
(2) CEP Associated
Consulting Engineers, Geologists
and Environmenial Scientists
Offices in ather Principal Cities
M~;/
D~ryl Streiff
C.E.G. 1033
Project No. 50332W-UDOI
• Woodward·Clyde Consultants
• TABLE OF CONTENTS
, l'a.ge
PURPOSE OF INVESTIGATION 1
e' BACKGROUND INFORMATION 2
, "
DESCRIPTION OF THE P~OJECT 3
FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATI:ONS' 4 • SITE CONDITIONS 5
Geologic Setting 5
Topography and Surface Conditions 5 • Subsurface C~nditions 6
Ground Water 7
DISCUSSIONS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS 7 I , ! • Potential Geologic Hazards 8
Faulting and Ground Breakage 8
Liquefaction 8 • Landslides 8
Ground Water 8
Exsiting Fill 1.0 • Expansive Soil 10
Slopes 10
Excavation Characteristics 12 • Grading Plan Review 12
Grading 12
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Project No. 50332W-UD01
Woodward· Clyde Consultants
Foundations
Retaining wa~"l~.
Pavements
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(continuedt
RISK AND OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
FIGURE 1 -SITE PLAN
APPENDIX A -FIELD INVESTIGATION
FIGURE A-I -KEY TO LOGS
FIGURE A-2 THROUGH A-9 ~ LOGS OF TEST BORINGS
APPENDIX B -LABORATORY TESTS
FIGURE B-1 -GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION CURVES
FIGURE B-2 -LOADED SWELL TESTS
13
15
16
18
B-1
APPENDIX C -GUIDE SPECIFICATlONS FOR SUBSURFACE DRAINS C-l
APPENDIX D -SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONTROLLEDF!LL D-l
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Project No. 50332W-UDOI
Woodward· Clyde Consultants
UPDATE SOIL AND GEOLOGIC INVESTIGATION
FOR THE PROPOSED
HOWARD MANN -16-ACRE SITE
PALOMAR AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER
" CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
This report presents the results of our update
soil and geologic investigation at the site of a proposed
16-acre office and industrial building development. The
site is adjacent to and south of the existing terminus of
Corte De La Pina, in the Palomar Airport Business Center,
Carlsbad, Ca.lifornia.
PURPOSE OF INVESTIGATION
The purpose of our investigation was to provide
information to assist you and your consultants in evaluating
the property and in project design. This report presents
our conclusions and recommendations regard~ng:
o The geologic setting of the site,
o Potential geologic hazards,
o General subsurface soil conditions,
o General extent of existing fill soils,
o Conditions of areas to receive fill,
o Characteristics of proposed fill material,
o Presence and effect of expansive soils,
1
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Project No. 50332W~UDOI
o
o
o
Woodward.Clyde Consultants
Depth to water, (if within the depths of oUl:~
subsurface investiga,tionl,
stability of proposed cut a'nd fill slopes,
Grading and earthwork specif:ications,
o Types ,\:md depths of foundations j
o Allowable soil bearing pressures,
o Desig~ pressures for retaining walls, and
o Pavement requirements.
BACKGROUND INFOID1ATION
For our study, we discussed the project with Mr.
Howard Mann, representatives of the Koll Company, and CEP
Associated. We were provided with plans entitled "Prelimi-
nary Site Plan, The Anden-Hann Partnership, Palomar Airport
Business Center," prepared by Kowalski-Harding & Assoc,iates,
dated November 20, 1980, and an untitled topographic map
prepared by Arevalo & Safino of San Diego, Inc., (photog-
raphy of June 3, 1980).
Preliminary soil investigations of the general
si te area were conduct'ed in 1973 and 1974 by Woodward-
Gizienski & Associates and Lowney/KaldVeer Associates,
respectively. Subsequent mass grading was accomplishec;:1
during 1.974, during which the northwest two-thirds of the
site was filled with up to 35 ~eet of compacted soil. Grad-
ing operations were observed and compaction tests 'i,V'ere
performed by Lowney/Kaldveer Associates.
2
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Project No. 50332W-UDOI
Woodward· Clyde Consultants
We have reviewed the ~epo~ts o~ those studies,
which are listed below.
o
o
o
"Preliminary Engineering Geological and Soil
Study, Cabot, Cabot, and Forbes ;Lndustria.l Park,
San Diego County, California.," prepared by wood-
ward-Giz~enSki & Associates, dat·ed June 18, 1973.
"Geotechnical Investigation, C.C. & F Palomar Air-
port Business Park, Phase r, February 1974," pre-
pared by Lowney/Kaldveer Associates, dated Feb-
uary 26, 1974.
"Report of Earthwork Observation and Testing
Services, C.C. & F Palomar Airport Business Park -
Phase I, Carlsbad., California," prepared by
Lowney/Kaldveer Associates, dated October II,
1974.
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT
Although no grading plan is available at this
time, we understand that the proposed project will ulti-
mately include grading to produce level building pads for
constructing a total of six office and light industrial
buildings.
We understand that cuts and fills will be the
minimum necessary to make level building pa.ds. All the fill
soil is to be generated from on-site cuts. Cut and fill,
sl.ope heights are unknown at this time but could be up to
20 feet.
Proposed buildings ~ange trom one to four stories.
The one-and two-story buildings will have concrete tilt-up
walls, and the four-story complex (Building F) will be of
3
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
-.
•
•
•
Project No. 50332W-UDOI
Woodward· Clyde Cons~ltants
steel and 'vood frame construction and w.1,ll have a truss
roof. It is planned to SUPPOI;'-t a.ll buildi.!lgs on continuous
and spread footings; buildings will have slab-on-graci'e
ground floors. -An access road, parking-facilities, and two
or three food service and recreation areas are also planned.
We understand that construction is to be completed
in two phases; Buildings A through C are to be built during
Phase I, and Buildings D through F are to be built during
Phase II.
We further understand that the existing 30-foot
wide Buena sewer easement traversing the-northwest corner of
the project is to be relinquished; however, the existing 10-
foot wide easement, lying within the 30-foot easement, is to
remain, and that the foundation of Building A will abut
this lO-foo-t easement.
The location and layout of the proposed building
footprints are shown on Fig. 1.
FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS
Our field investigation included making a visual
geologic reconnaissance of the existing surface conditions,
making ten auger borings between Novem.ber 20 and 26, j.980,
and obtaining representative soil samples. Samples were re-
turned to our laboratory for testing. The borings were
advanced to depths ranging from 12 to 42 feet. The locations
of the borings are shown on Fig. 1.
4
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Project No. 50332W-UDOI
Woodward· Clyde Consultants·
A Key to Logs is presented in Appendix A as
Fig. A-I. Simplifi.ed logs of the borings are pr,esented in
Appendix A as Figs. A-2 through A-9. The descriptions on
the logs are bas~d on field logs, sample inspection, and
laboratory te·st results. Results of laboratory tests are
shown at the corresponding sample locations on the logs and
in Appendix B. The field investigation and laboratory
testing programs are discussed in Appendixes A and B.
SITE CONDITIONS
Geologic Setting
The site lies in the upper portion of Canyon de
las Encinas, approximately 4 miles from the coast and 3
miles south of Agua Hedionda Lagoon. Tertiary age sediments
of the La Jolla Group are the predominant lithologic material
present.
Topography and Surface Conditions
The site covers approximately 16 acres. Approxi~
mately two-thirds of the site consists of a fill pad that
slopes from east to west.· A low natural hi~l occupies the
southeast area of the site. Site elevations range from a
high of approximately 300 feet (MSL Datum) in the southeast
corner, to a-low of approximately 208 feet in the drainage
channel paralleling the western property line.
5
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Project No. 50332W-UDOI
Woodward·Clyde Consultants
Exposed man-made structures on the site include
two concrete headwalls along the north.ern property line and
drains located in the southeast and northwest area,s of the
site.
"
Ve~etati~n in the filled area is sparse and
consists of tall grasses. The natural ground cover in the
southeast corner is dense and consists of chaparral and
native grasses.
Subsurface Conditions
Subsurface utilities consist of an 18-inch VCP
sewer running diagonally across the northwest corner of the
site and a 8-inch VCP sewer line, with man-holes, just inside
the northern property line running east from Corte De La
Pina to adjacent properties.
Approximately two-thirds of the site is underlain
by compacted fill. The maximum amount of fill, about 35
feet, is along the western property line. The soils used
for fill were generated from formational material in the
general vicinity of the site. The fill consists of slightly
to moderately expansive silts, clays, ahd sands. Small bits
of wire and wood debris were noted locally throughout the
fill. No loose area or voids were detected f'rotn the drill-
ing or sampling. Based on our field investig,ation and
review of the report dated October I],., 1974, we have concluded
6
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
I •
Project No. 50332W-UDOI
Woodward·Clyde Consultants
that the fill is essentially compacted to current standards.
We understand that there is no drain below the (ill.
The southeast area of the site is natural ground
composed of the ~ocene age belmar Formation. This forma-
tional materi~l ~~~~ists of horizontally bedded claystone,
siltstone, and sandstone. A residual soil mantle consisting
of topsoil and expansive clay caps this formation. The
topsoil is generally 0 to 2 feet thick and is composed of
loose, sandy silts containiI?-g some small gravels on the
surface. The residuai clay, generally silty to sandy-clay,
ranges from approximately 1 foot to a maximum thickness of
about 6 feet along the lower western side slopes.
Ground Water
Water was encountered in Boring 5 at a depth of
about 37 feet. Other borings were dry at time of drilling.
No water seeps, springs, or wet areas were noted during our
field reconnaissance.
DISCUSSIONS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS'
The discussions, conclusions, and recommendations
presented in this report are based on the results of our
field and laboratory studies, analyses, and professional
judgment.
7
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Project No. 50332W-UD.OI
Woodward-Clyde Consultants
Potential Geologic Hazards .
Faulting :and Gro'und Rr;e:aka:g·e· .-Our ;heQonna.i.ssance
and field explorations did not reveal any fa.ul ting on the
si teo Available ... geologic literature indicates that the
nearest known active fault zone along which seismic events
of magnitude 4 or greater have occurred is the Elsinore
Fault zOne, mapped some 24 miles northeast of the site.
The closest significant faulting is the horthern
extension of the Rose Canyon'Fault zone, which is mapped
approximately 9 miles southwest of the site. No magnitude 4
or larger earthquakes have been recorded on the Rose Canyon
Fault zone.
Liquefaction -The formational sediments and
compact,ed filIon the site are medium. dense to veryc;1ense.
There is no apparent permanent ground water table within
probable grading depths. In our opinion, the on-site soiis
are not susceptible to liquefaction.
Landslides -Our review of literature and reports
and our field investigat;.ions did not reveal any'landslides
on the site.
Ground Water
Based on our investiga.tion, we do not believe that
a permanent ground water table exists within the forma-
tional soil at the site. Current site grades and aerial
8
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Project No. 50332W-UDOl
Woodward· Clyde Consultants
photographs of the area taken prior to grading in 1974 .
indicate that Boring 5 was located in the original ca.nz-on
bottom. This suggests that the water :eound in Boring 5 is
seepage in the formational soi.ls along the canyon bottom.
In'our opinion, conditions on the site indicate
that the potential is low for ground water seeping onto
finished lots. Our experience with similar materials
indicates that ground '(.vater seepage can occur in cut areas,
particularly at th~ contact. between sand lenses and les's
permeable clays within the Tertiary sediments. Natural
jointing and fracturing of the formations could result in
such seepage.
We recommend that an engineering geologist from
our firm inspect cut banks and slopes during grading. If
seepage from slopes is noted during the inspection, we
recommend installing drains as shown on the attached Guide
Specifications for Subsurface Drains (Appendix C). Addi-
tional recommendations will be presented upon request for
specific cases.
We recommend that positive measures be taken to
properly finish grade each pad after the structures and
other improvements are completed, so tpa,t drainage waters
from the pads and adjacent properties are directed off the
pads and away from foundations, floor slabs, and slope tops.
Even when these measures have been taken, exper:ience has
9
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
p'roject No. S0332W-UDOI
Woodward· Clyde Consultants
shown that a shallow ground water or surfa.ce "l.va.ter cond;ltion
can and may develop in areas wher'e no such w.a teb' condition
existed prior to site development; this is pa:tticula.rly tr'ue
in developments .. where a substantial increa.se in surface
water infiltratio;)'" results from landscape irrigation.
Existing Fill
A review of the compaction report prepared by
Lowney/Kaldveer Associates .iridicates that the existing fill
was compacted in accordance with specifications. In our
opinion, the existing fill is suitable for use as foundation
bearing material. The upper 12 inches may be loose due to
natural weathering. In our opinion, the fills are clayey
and expansive. The report contains no mention of drains
being installed in the canyon bottom. prior to fiiling.
Expansive Soil
Our field investigation indicates thai;: the on-site
soils are predominently slightly to moderately expansive.
Limited amounts of select soil are available in the upper
zones of the natural ground in the southeast coner of the
site.
Slopes
We generally recommend that cut and fill slopes be
inclined at 2 to 1 (horizontal to vertical) and have maximum
heights on the order of 30 feet.
10
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
I
I, ,.
Project No. 50332W-UDOl
WOodward· Clyde Consultants
We have performed stability analyses for 30-
Ioot high slopes by the Janbu method using the ~ollowing
parameters:
'. C (Esf) . y (pcf)
Delmar Format~on " ,
Cut Slopes 25° 300 125
Compacted Fill Slopes 20° 300 125
The results of those analyses indicate that the slopes have
calculated factors of safety in excess of 1.5 against deep-
seated slope failure for s~atic conditions. Stability
analyses require using parameters selected from a range of
possible values. There is a finite possibility that slopes
having calculated factors of safety, as indicated, could
become unstable. In our opinion, the probability of slopes
becoming unstable is low, and it is our profes.sional judg-
ment that such slopes can be constructed. We did not in-
clude an analysis of geologic conditions in the slopes, such
as ground water seeps, clay seams; intense fracturing, or
beds dipping out-of-slope. We recommend that a member of our
staff inspect all cut slopes during grading. Recommendations
for handling adverse geologic conditions can be presented
during grading.
We recommend that the face of each fill slope be
compacted at 4-foot intervals during construction and track-
walked upon completion. All slopes should be properly
drained and maintained to help control erosion.
11
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Project No. 50332W-UDOl
Woodward· Clyde Consultants
Excava tion Gharacteris,tic-s
In our opinion, the topsoil, res idual-soil, a,nd
formational sediments revealed in our test borings can he
excavated with l'ight to moderate effort by conventional
-, '
heavy-duty g~ading" equipment.
Grading Plan Review
~ve recommend that we review the grading plans
prior tQ their finalization-to verify their conformance with
the recommendations of this report.
Grading
Ne reconut:tend that all grading be dQne in accor--
dance with the attached Specifications for Controlled Fill
(Appendix D).
We recommend that our firm observe all grading
operations and test compacted fills.
We recommend that a pre-constr.uction conference be
held at the site with the developer, civil engineer, con-
tractor, and geotechnical engineer in attendance. Questions
regarding special soil handling or the grading plans could
be addressed at that time.
vve recommend that the upper 12 inches of existing
fill be scarified, moisturized as r'equired, and recompacted
prior to constructing footings or the adding of new fill.
12
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
project No. 50332W-UDOI
Woodward· Clyde Consultants
We recorrunend that the upper 2 feet of soil in
building areas and the upper 1 foot of soi.l in ar'ea,s to be
paved be composed of nonexpansive soi.ls. rn order to
accomplish this ," undercutting of cut areas and replacing
materials with non~xpansive import soils, and topping fills
with import select will be required.
If no select soils are imported finish grade soils
on the site will probably consist of expansive clayey sands
and sandy clays. Swell test'resu1ts indicate these soils
swell on the order of 6 percent in their recompacted state.
We recommend that these expansive soils placed within the
upper 2 feet of grade be properly compacted at moisture
contents of 3 to 4 percent above optimum moisture content as
determined by ASTM D-1557-?O. This moisture content s'hou1d
be maintained up to the time of concrete placement. The over-
optimum soils should extend to a minimum of 1 foot below the
oottom of footings.
Foundations
In our opinion, conventional spread or continuotis
footings placed a minimum of 12 inches below lowest a¢ijacerit
grade in nonexpansive soil or in properly compacted, non-
expansive fill soil can be designed for allowable soil
bearing pressures of 2,000 psi (dead plus live 10adl.
Footings should have a minimum width 'of 12 inches. In our
13
•
•
.'
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
I
•
Project No. 50332W-UDOl
Woodward·Clyde Consultants
opinion, these bearing values can be increased by no more
than one-third for loads induced py wind or seismic forces.
Boring 5 encountered water at a depth of about 37
feet, 4 feet below the bottom of the fill. If the water
level should risi ~n the fill, the fill can be expected to
settle. The amount of settlement is related to both the
depth of saturation and the overburden load. Settlements of
as much as 1 percent of the depth of f.ill are possible from
this source. Where the thickn~ss of the fill varies, the
resul ting settlements would "be differential. Al though not
expected, differential settlements up to about 1:800 are
possible.
We recommend that footings founded in moderately
expansive soil be embedded 18 inches below lowes~ adjacent
grade and be designed for an allow~ble soil bearing pressure
of 3,000 psf. The footings should be reinforced with one
No. 4 bar top and bottom. Slab floors should be a minimum
of 5 inches thick, underlain by 10 mil plastic membrane
sheeting and 4 inches of coarse sand. The following sketch
clarifies our recommendations.
Rough or ,Sca.le: 1" = 20"
Comp<lcted 1 24" 0 C
I t'1J,nlmUm J/
I ~ /'J 5'" . te c] -t' T-r--------,!nU1. COnCll? _,,<1'
12" 1 «) /,' " , , ' " , , ',' " '.' , -----t -~....!.;~ I \ ,-:)'".< ,"~ '\"'.' ~,~ .4.",~'[~i~.'.-coarse, ?an~~.
1-_1' plastic mernb~ane ....-~ #4 bars, top and bottom
o
Grad\ l..-,l~" ~ #3 Dowe s, . .
18"
l'linim~m
14
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
project No. 50332W-UDOI
Woodward· Clyde Consultants
These recommendations are intended only to reduce
the effects of heaving; footings founded in exp~hsive Soils
should be expected to heave.
Retaining ~valls
We recommend using active lateral pressures for
cantilevered walls where a horizontal movement o-f at least
O.OOIR can be accommodated at the top of the wall, wh$re H is
the height of the wall in feet. If this condition is not
satisfied, design criteria for the restrained condition
should be used.
W'e recommend that cantilevered retaining walls
that have level backfill surfaces extending for a minimum
horizontal distance equal to the height of the wall be
designed for the pressure exerted by an equivalent fluid
weight of 60 pcf. This value assumes that on-site soils are
utilized for backfill, and that no surcharge loads, such as
adjacent footings or vehicle traffic, will act on the wall.
We recommend that cantilevered retaining walls
with 2 to 1 inclined backfills be designed to withstand the
pressure exerted by an equivalent fluid weight of 60 pcf.
We recommend that walls restrained from movement
at the top, such as basement walls, be designed for the
active case equiv~lent fluid pressure given above plus an
additional uniform horizontal pressure of 6H psf for on-site
backfill material.
15
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
project No. 50332W-UDOI
Woodward~Clyde Consultants
We reconunend providing a.-ll ;t:'etaini!lg walls with a
backfill drainage system adequa,te, 'to reduce the.bui,ldup of
hydrostatic forces.
To provide resistance for design la.teral loa,ds, we
reconunend using the pressure exerted by an equivalent fluid
weight of 250 pcf for passive earth pressutes on tootings or
shear keys poured neat against existing soils. We reconunend
that the upper 1 foot of soil not protected by pavement or
floor slabs not be used in design for passive resistance to
lateral loads. If friction is to be used to resist lateral
loads, we recommend using a coefficient of friction of 0.25
between soil and concrete for design. If it is desired to
combine frictional and passive resistance in design, we
-reconunend using a friction'coefficient of 0.20.
We recommend that footings located close to or on
slopes be extended to a sufficient depth so that the horizontal
distance between the outside bottom edge of the foundaion
and the face of the slope is at least 8 feet.
Pavements
In pavement design calculations, we assumed a
traffic index (T. I.) of 4.5 for car parking area,s and 5.5
for access roads and truck traffic areas. We also assumed
R-values of 10 for on-site expansive soil and 20 for non-
expansive import soil. Based on our calculations, we recom-
mend the following asphalt pavement thicknesses:
16
'PEr2 -P~iE ~~<s of W-c ~/~/8 (
()$IN~ 'SaECf SO'88AS E ?E12 "SC?4T 5007":;,
12E1='012.T NO, 7
12 ~50 W012~-r CA~E.
f"Ut.J.-"Pe'PTW-41~
Tt.5,5 '6'1,-II
A,e.. .
3 11
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
..
•
•
•
•
•
Project No. S0332W-UDOI
T. I. 4,.' 5
R --10
R = 20
T.I. 5.5
R = 10
R = 20
Full
Depth
Asphalt
Concrete
6-1/2"
5-1/2"
8-1/2"
7-1/2"
Woodward· Clyde Consultants
Asphalt
Concrete
3"
3"
3"
3"
Class II
Base
7-1/2"
6"
Ii"
9"
Additionally, we recommenq paving loading dock
and dumpster areas with 6 inches of PCC Concrete. We also
recommend that R-value test's be performed on actual pavement
subgrade materials at the end of grading to verify our
assumptions. Recommendations for revising the recommended
thicknesses can be made at that time, if necessary •
We recommend that the subgrade be' scarified,
watered or dried as required, and compacted to a minimum of
95 percent maximum laboratory density, as determined in
accordance with ASTM D1557-70,.prior to placing base mate-
rial. The minimum depth of compaction of the subgrade soils
should be 6 inches. Whenever loose materials are encountered
to greater depths, they should be removed and recompacted.
We recommend that the base material conform to the
State of California Standard Specifications (January 1978) ,
for Class II aggregate base, Section 26-1.02B; the asphalt
concrete should conform to State of California Standard
Specifications (January 1978), Section 39-2.01 for the
asphalt and Section 39-2.02 (Type B) for the aggregate.
17
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Project No. S0332W-UDOI
Woodward-Clyde Consultants
RISK AND OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
Our test borings indica.te on.ly a, smal~ portion of
the pertinent soil and ground water conditions. The recom-
mendations made herein are based on the asss.umptio~ tha.t
soil conditions dO"not deviate appreciably from those found
during our field investigation. If the plans for sit~
development are changed, or if variations or undesirable
geotechnical conditions are encountered during construc.tion,
the geotechnical consultant. should be consuited for further
recommendations.
We recommend that the geo.technical consultant
review the foundation and grading plans to verify that the
intent of the recommendations presented herein has been
properly interpreted and incorporated into the contract
documents. We further recommend that the geotechnical
consultant observe the site grading, subgrade preparation
under concrete slabs and paved areas, and foundation excava-
tions.
It should also be understood that California,
including San Diego, is an area of high seismic risk. It is
generally considered economically unfeasible to build totally
earthquake-resistant structu~es; therefore, it is posstble
that a large or nearby earthquake could ca.use damage at the
site.
18
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Project No. 50332W-UDOl
Woodward· Clyde Consultants
Professsional judgment.s presented herei.n are based
partly on our eva.lua tions of the 'techrii.ca.l' infotm,a tion
gathered, partly on our understanding of the proposed con-
struction, and partly on our general experience 'in the
geotechnical 'field: Our engineering work and judgments
rendered meet current professional standards. We do not
guarantee the performance of the project in any respect.
This firm does not practice or consult in the
field of safety engineering.. We do not direct the con-
tractor's operations, and we cannot be responsible for the
safety of other than our own personnel on the site; there-
fore, the safety of others is the responsibility of the
contractor. The contractor should notify the owner if he
considers any of the recommended actions presented herein to
be unsafe.
19
.' /.-• • • • • • • • • •
CORTE DE LA
~r ~I
. ..... I \ \
SI'l'E BOUNDA.RY ~, \ I
-----.. --'-? \ I (:
\1 Qaf.J---l I I I
1\ ~I -----, l ____ J 1 I
I 1 -----~_, l 1--(I 4 \1
/11 -~' 1 \ I I I I I II LEGEND: II I \. I I
1/ I 8 8A I "" I E \ I \ \ 1'1 t Indicates approxi-L_ C I ~ ~ I \ I mate location of I "' I ~ \ ____ ~ Test Boring.
II? L.J/ 9 1 • II ) .: . . .-.... !...---------' --I ---1 ~1!l Indlcates apprOXl-.... /' /' ( I I { mate locat:i,on of ~~ PROPOSED 0,.!;;;-, r--( 1 J I Vi existing ground
ji \ '10' EASEMENT / STREET ~ :--/1 ; II ' surface contour.
11 I /1 Co J...7 . ( 260 270 \ .
I I Q a f r---L_ ? _ ~ .-r--r.r'~ / / ), j __ , Indicates approxl-
I -~..J ') .. // ..I 250 '/ j' / / I, 1 A J mate limits of
j \.-ts J 7+, L_ 240. ~ _ <:.-:::.~ ,---,b.J'':''-..,!-t-280 / __ proposed building. I r-- ) I ./', 76 ---A .. r 7.. I ~ / .. . ,I I " T d..l--1' ../
I l l--J / 2 XI . )r-J\ ' /,..-!v"----J I :) (: / /. Indicates approxi-
\ \ I / --I ~ I / / I F J I I I: I .' mate location, of ,1\1 , B . I I I ..)~ :;--,-t _~ ;1 290 { /1. geologic contact. ,I I I • r I I I r-.l I __ ~""'I I [ I I ,
I I I, J .. ' f I ,.---D I : c." I J L I: / (Qaflndicates approxl-
'. J \ I I ,,' -= I A .-J I " '~ I J-!--~ ''''''cL . .J / rna te limits.of
\ \ I J r---71~ __ ~""" // I {_.J "\ {1-1 I-I I 300 existing Fillo 1 \ L __ L ___ ...J \~~(--[],... I J : I I' J... ", \ .
\ > I \ \ ~_./ I \ I I: 'T 1 " I'Td Indicates apprOXl-I \ f-.-\ ~--L ____ J \ \ ' 2, \ I mate limits o~
30' EASEMENT ~
I \ -----~ I , \ I Del",ar Fomahon. _ f ( ( --I \ ":;, \ .j 7-, i I I \ .I I (I (
210\ f I \1 II '\ !
I \ I II. I II I ) I I I \ I v \ \ I
° 50 100
I I
GRAPHIC SCP.LE (FEET) DRAWNBy:sh
SI'J;'E PLl',.?'J
HOWi\RD HAN!'l 16 ACRE
CHECKEDBy:tv~tZtLl PROJECT NO: 5Q332W-UDOll DATE: 1;2-1,-80 FIGURE NO: 1
WOODWARD-elY,DE CONSULTANTS
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Project No. 50332W-UDOI
APPENDIX A
FIELD INVESTIGATION
Woodward· Clyde Consultants
Ten exploratory borings were advanced at the
approximate iocations shown on Fig. 1. The drilling was
performed by personnel from our firm between November 20 and
26, 1980 using a 8-inch diameter, truck-mounted continuous-
flight auger.
Samples of the subsurface materials were obtained
from the borings using a modified California drive sampler
2-inch inside diameter and 2-l/2-inch outside diameter with
thin brass liners. The sampler was generally driven 18
inches into the material at the bottom of the hole by a 140..;-
pound hammer falling 30 inches; thin metal liner tubes
containing the sample were removed from the sampler, sealed
to preserve the natural moisture content of the sample, and
returned to the laboratory for examination and testing.
The location of each boring and the elevation of
the ground surface at each location were estimated from the
topographic plan.
A-I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
••
•
•
•
Location Boring Number ~Ievation
DEPTH TEST DATA ·OTHER SAMPLE IN S'OIL DESCRIPTION FEET -Me -00 -DC TESTS NUMBER
--
12 110 65 1
2
,-1
[
very dense, damp, brown silty sa-nd (-51-1 )
S!-
WATE:J
o
At time of drilling or as indicated.
SOIL CLASSIFICATION -' -.--.,-------'
Soil Classifications are based on the Unified Soil ClassifIcation System
and include color, moisture.and consistency. Field descriptions have
been modified to reflect results of laboratory analyses Where
appropriate.
-DISTURBED SAMPLE LOCATION
Obtained by collecting the auger cuttings In a plastic or cloth bag.
DRIVE SAMPLE LOCATION
MODIFIED CALIFORNIA SAMPLER
Sample with recorded blows per foot was obtained with a ModifIed Califor~ia drive sampler (2" i~side diameter, 2.5" outside diameter)
lined with sample tubes. The sampler was driven into the soil at the
bottom of the hole with a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches.
'---------INDiCATES SAMPLE TESTED FOR OTHER PROPERTIES
GS -Grain Size Distribution CT -ConsolidatIon Test
LC -Laboratory Compaction UCS -Unconfined CompressIon Test
Test
PI -Atterberg Limits Test OS -Direct Shear Test
ST -Loaded Swell Test TX -Triaxial Compression Test
CC -Confined Compression
Test
NOTE: In this column theresults·of these tests may be recorded
where applicable •
1...-.--------BLOW COUNT
Number of blows needed to advance sampler one foot or as indIcated.
1...-. ____ ------DRY DENSITY
Pounds per Cubic Foot
1...-.--------------MOISTURE CONTENT
Percent of Dry Weight
NOTES ON FIELD INVESTIGATION
1. REFUSAL indicates the inability to extend excavation, practically.
with CQuipmant being used in the investigation,
KEY TO LOGS
HOWARD MANN 16 ACRE
DRAWN BY: ch I CHECKED BY: JvWr.J-PROJECT NO: 50332W-UD01 I DATE:12-1-80 I FIGURE NO: A-I
WOOOWARO·Cl VOE CONSULTANTS
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
" .... ;;,..
Boring 1
Approximate El. 284'
DEPTH ·OTHER SAMPLE SOIL DESCRIPTION IN TESTS NUMBER FEET
Loose, damp, tan, clayey sandy silt (ML)
-TOPSOIL
88 GS,P 1-1 Very dense, moist, yellow-tan, silty fj,n~
sand ~o hard, sandy clay (SM~CL) with
5 gypsum crystals DELMAR FORMATION
" " "
50/6 ST 1-2 ~ -. '
10
78 1-3 Very dense, moist, ye;Llow-tan, silty fine
sand (SM) DELMAR FORMATION
15 Hard, moist, olive, silty clay (CL-CH)
DELMAR FORMATION
50/311 GS, 1-4
Harc1~ .moist, brown, silty sand (SM) with
20 sea shell 'fragments
DELMAR FORMATION
Hard, , silty clay (CL)
SO/ 6 1-5 DELMAR FORMATION
25 Thin lenses of yellow-t?!-n; silty schid ('8M)
Color change to gray brown
50/511 1-6
30
50/2" 1-7 Very dense; moist, reddish-brown, cemented
silty sand (SM) with'shell fragments
35 DELMAR FORMATION
Refusal
40
*For description of symbols, see Figure A-I
DRAWN BY:· ch CHECKED BY: M
LOG OF TEST BORING 1
HOWARD MANN 16 ACRE
PROJECT NO: 50332W-UDOl DATE: 12-1-80 FIGURE NO: A-2
WOOOWARO·CL VOE CONSULTANTS
, .
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Boring 2
Approximate EL 2"32'
DEPTH TEST DATA *OTHER SAMPLE SOl L DESCRIPTION IN TESTS NUMBER FEET *MC *00 *BC
Moist, mottled tan and gray, 'silty sandy
clay . FILL
39 GS,PI 2-1 I Intermittent layers of gray, clayey silty
5_ sand
'.
,
"
-, ~ Wire at 8'
-
10-
54 2-2 I Moist, light brown, silty clay
FILL ..
.
lS-i--Small pieces of wire and bits of plasti,c
r-at IS'
2-3
'----
20 -
I ~ Hard, moist, olive, silty Clay (CLSCH)
58 2-4 ~ DELMAR FORMATION
25 _ ~
I ~ 40{1I 2-5 ~,
30 -Bottom of Hole
35 -
40 -
*For description of symbols, see Figure A-l
LOG OF TEST BORING 2
HOWARD MANN 16 ACRE
DRAWN BY: ch CHECKED BY: NY.,' PROJECT No:50332W-UDOl DATE: 12-2-80 FIGURE NO: A-3,
WOOOWARD·CLYDE CONSULTANTS
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
DEPTH t-__ T.....,E .... S_T_D_A .... T_A_-I*OTHER SAMPLE IN FEET *MC *DD *BC TESTS NUMBER
36 3-1 I
5 -,
-
-
10 -
42 3-2 1-
15-
3-3 [
20 -
39 3-4 I
25 _
r-
3-5
~
30 -
50/6" 3-6 ~ I~
35 -
40-
• For description of symbols, see Figure A-I
Boring 3
Approximate El. 226'
SOIL DESCRIPTION
Damp, "mottled tan and gray, silty clay
FILL
Intermittent layers of clayey silty sand
-
~Gravel
I---Roots
Very moist," dark brown, silty clay with
trace of debris FILL
t---Wire at 27'
0-Gravel
Hard, moist, gray, silty clay (CL-CH)
DELMAR FORMATION
Bottom of Hole
LOG OF TEST BORING 3
HOWARD MANN 16 ACRE
DRAWN BY: ch I CHECKED BY: {V~l.{f-PROJECT NO: 5033"2W-UDOI I DATE: 12-2-80 T FIGURE NO: A-4
WOODWARD·Cl YDE CONSULTANTS
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
DEPTH TEST DATA *OTHER IN TESTS FEET *MC *DD *BC
5-
-
-
lO-
15-
20_
25-
30-
35-
-
1-40
*For description of symbols, see Figure
Boring 4
Approximate El. 255'
SAMPLE SOIL DESCRIPTION NUMBER
Moist, gray, silty clay
FILL
r--
4-1
L..-
Moist, light brown, gravelly silty sand
FILL
I
:':'"
~t· Hard, moist, olive, silty clay to clayey
'}::' sand (CL~CH) DELMAR FORY.tATION
.. ::. ...--
4-2 ~~;;.':
~~. --- - -
_ Grading to ---------
A-l
~,':,::. Hard, moist, olive,
~ .. : clayey sand (CL-SC) -~.: .. ~ f "',.;
Bottom of Hole
LOG OF TEST BORING 4
HOWARD MANN 16 ACRE
sandy silty clay to
.with sheLl. fragments
DELMAR FOEMATION
DRAWN BY: ch I CHECKED BY: j\t'IALlt PROJECT NO: 50332W-UDOl I DATE: 12-2-80 ) FIGURE NO: A-5
WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
DEPTH TEST DATA
IN FEET *MC *DD *BC
5-
-
10 -
15 -
20 -
30 _
35 -
40 -
-
45 -
·OTHER SAMPLE
TESTS NUMBER
Boring 5
Approximate El. 226'
SOIL DESCRIPTION
Moist, mottled tan and. gray, sandy silty
clay FILL
Moist, dark brown and gray, sandy silt
clay FILL
I----Roots at 11'
~ Dark brown clay
Dense, moist to wet, olive-brown, clayey
sand (SC) DELMAR FoRMATION
Bottom of Role
*For description of symbols, see Figure A-l
LOG OF TEST BORING 5
HOWARD MANN 16 ACRE
DRAWN BY: ch I CHEC!(ED BY:OJ1,(W.J-PROJECT NO: 50332W-UDOl I DATE: 12-2-$0 I FIGURE NO: A-:6
. WOODWARD·CL VDE CONSULTANTS
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
DEPTH .OTHER SAMPLE IN r---~--~--~ FEET TESTS NUMBER
5
10
15
DEPTH r-__ T...,E_ST __ D_ATT_A __ -t-OTHER SAMPLE F~~T -Me -DD -BC TESTS NUMBER
-5
7-1
10
15
*For description of symbols, see Figure A-l
Boring 6
te El 243'
SOIL DESCRIPTION
Loose, damp, tan, clayey sand (SC) with
gravel TOPSOIL AND SLOPEWASH
Dense, damp, reddish-brown, clayey sand (SC)
TOPSOIL AND SLOPEWASH
Hard, moist, gray, sandy clay (Cr;,)
DELMAR FORMATION
Bottom cif Hole
I Boring 7
Approximate Ei. 248'
SO I L DES C RIP T ION
Firm, damp, light browri, sandy clay (CL)
with surface gravel and cobbles
TOPSOIL AND SLOPEWASH
Stiff, moist, yellow-brown, silty clay (CH)
RESIDUAL CLAY
Very stiff, moist, qray, silty clay (CL-CH)
DELMAR FORMATION
_ Gradinq to ___ _
Hard, moist, gray, silty clay (CL-CE)
DELMAR FORMATJON
Bottom of Hole
LOG OF TEST BORINGS 6 AND 7
HOWARD MANN 16 ACRE
DRAWN BY: ch I CHEC!<EDBY:NW<Zi PROJECT NO: 50332W-UDOI I DATE: 12-1-80 I F'-GURENO: A-7
WOOOWARO-CL VOE CONSULTANTS
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Boring 8
-Approximate. El. 236 1
DEPTH TEST DATA *OTHER SAMPLE IN SOIL DESCRIPTION
FEET *MC *00 *BC TESTS NUMBER
Moist, tan with gray mottling, silty clay
FILL
,
5-
10-.. , . "
Moist, brown, sandy gravelly clay
FILL
lS-8-1 [ J--Roots
54 8-2 I~ Hard, damp, tan arid gray, fine sandy ciay
(CL) DELMAR FORMATION
20_ . ~ Stiff to hard, moist, pale yellow-tan,
I ~ sandy clay (eL) DELMAR FORMATION
33 8-3
Bottom of Hole 2S -
30-
35-
40~
*For descriptio"n of symbols, see Figure A-l
LOG OF TEST BORING 8
HOWARD MANN l6-ACRE
DRAWN BY: ch I CHECKED BY: NW'.ft~ PROJECT NO: S0332W-UDOl I DATE: 12-1':80 I FIGURE NO: A':'8
WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Boring 8A
I
Approximate El. 236'
DEPTH TEST DATA "OTHER SAMPLE IN TESTS NUMBER SOIL DES C R I PT ION
FEET *MC *00 *BC
Moist, tan with gray mottling, silty
sandy clay FILL
5_
.
10-
19 8A-l Moist, brown, sandy g,ravelly clay
FILL
15-
Bottom of Hole
-
, ,
Boring 9
Approximate El. 250'
DEPTH TEST DATA "OTHER SAMPLE DESCRIPTION IN TESTS NUMBER SOIL
FEET *MC "DO "Be
Moist, tan and gray, sandy silty clay
FILL
'--Roots and wood at 3'
5_ I Stiff, moist, tan to light brown, gravelly
\ sandy clay (CL) SLOPEWASH
Very stiff, moist, yellow-brown; silty I clay (CH) RESIDUAL CLAY f\-
Hard, damp, gray, s:ilty clay (CH)
10-,.-DELMAR FORMATION
9-1 ~
Bottom of Hole
15 -
*For description of symbols, see Figure A-I
LOG OF TEST BORINGS 8A AND 9
HOWARD MANN 16 ACRE
DRAWN BY: ch I CHECKED BY:}~I PROJECT NO: 50332W-UDOl I DATE: l2~1-80 IFIGUR,E NO: A-9 '
WOOOWARO-CL VOE CONSULTANTS
•
•
•
•
•
•
. '
•
•
•
•
Project No. 50332W-UD01
APPENDIX B
LABORATORY TESTS
Woodward· Clyde Consultants
The materials observed in the borings were
visually classified and evaluated with respect to strength,
and compressibility characteristics. The classifications
were substantiated by performing grain size analyses and
evaluating plasticity characteristics of representative
samples of the soils. Swelling characteristics were evaluated
by performing loaded swell tests on relatively und£sturbed
samples.
The grain size distribution curves are shown on
Fig. B-1. The results of loaded swell tests are reported on
Fig. B-2 .
B-1
• GRAVEL SAND SI LT and CLAY COBBLES' Coarse I Fi ne Coarse Medium Fi ne
Mesh Opening -Ins Sieve Sizes Hydrometer Analni s I -I I I
I~ I I 60 80 140 200 76 3 2 2 Tf~ 10 16 20 3040 • 100 .... 0
.......... ~
"--l'-
90 , L\,\ /0
\ 2 1
4 2-i---"O 1-'1
\ \
80 20 • -..
1-4
30 70 I
\
1-2 .\
'-4O~ • a 60 ~ z: en .\ \ ;.... en < < ...
......... I-0... UJ
I-50 \ .1 '" 500<: z: \. \. I-UJ _\ \ z: u ."-. .1' \ UJ 0:: .. (,,) UJ Ci:. 0... 60 ~ • l!O '.1 \ ,
'. I.
1,\
'\
30 1\ .'-, 70 ~
\ \ -' \ \ ~ -.......
20 \. "-80 • "-\. , -.+---,. 0-'--'" " ." -f--1--_ .. ......... " 10 -~. 90 , ......... -.-.. ~ '-...... '" I-1---" . ... ~ -> -....... . I-1--"--. _. .--
0 I -.l clOO • 100 50 10.0 500 1.0 0.1 0.05 0.01 00005 00001
GRAIH SIZE I H MILL I METERS
SAMPLE CLASSIFICATION AND SYMBOL *LL *PI
1-2 Sandy clay (CL) 41 20 • 1-4 Silty clay (CH) 52 30
2-1 Silty clay (CL-CH) 50 31
4-2 Clayey sand (SC) 3-4 21
•
*LL -liqu i d Li mit
*PI -Plasti-city Index •
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION CURVES
HOWARD t-1ANN 16 ACRE
DRAWN BY: ch CHECKED BY: J..M1J4. PROJECT NO: 50332W-UD01 , DATE: 12-4-80 ·FIGURE NO: B-1 • WOODWARD·Cl YDe CONSULTANTS
',vCG-GS-76
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
RESULTS OF LOADED SWELL TESTS
Initial Final
Sample Dry Water -Dry Water
Number Density Content Saturation Density Content Saturation
J:l9f % %
2-1 101 24 100
4-2 116 10 60
Diameter of Samples: 1. 94
Height of Samples: .623
* FROM AIR DRY
pef . % %
98 26 100
111 17 92
LOADED SWELL TESTS
HOWARD MANN 16 ACRE
Pressure
psf
160
160
Expansion
% of Initial Heighi
6 ... 5*
4.2
DRAWN BY: ch I CHECKED BY: ~YPROJECT NO:50332W-UD01 I DATE: 12-4-80. I FIGURE NO: B.,..2
\VOO DWAR D·Cl YDe CONSULTANTS
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
project No. 50332W-UDOI
APPENDIX C
GUIDE S~ECIFICATIONS FOR SUBSURFACE DRAINS
I. DESCRIPTION
Subsurface drains consisting of filter gravel or clean
gravel enclosed in filter fabric w.i th perforated pipe shall
be installed as shown on the plans in accordance with these
specifications, unless otherwise specified by the engi~eer.
II. MANUFACTURE
Subsurface drain pipe shall be manufactured in accordance
with the following requirements •
Perforated corrugated ADS pipe shall conform to ASTM Designa-
tion F405. Transite underdrain pipe shall conform to ASTM
Designation C-508 (Type II). Perforated ABS and PVC pipe
shall conform to ASTM Desginations 2751 and 3033, respect-
ively, for SDR35i and to ASTM Designations 2661 and 1785,
respectively, for SDR21. The type pipe shall conform to the
following table.
Pipe Material Maximum Height of Fill (f8et)
ADS 8
(Corrugated Polyethylene)
Transite 'underdrain'
PVC or ABS:
SDR35
SDR21
III. FILTER MATERIAL
20
35
100
Filter material for use in backfilling trenches around and
over drains shall consist of clean, coarse sand and gravel
or crushed stone conforming to the following grading require-
ments.
Sieve Size·
I"
3/4"
3/8"
4
8
30
50
200
Percentage Passing Sieve
100
90 -100
40 -100
25 -40
18 -33
5 -15
o -7
o -3
This material generally conforms with Class II permeable
material in accordance with Section 68-1.025 of the Standard
Specifications of t-he State of California, Department of
Trapsportation.
C-l
Project No. 50332W-UDOI
• APPENDIX C
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
(continued)
IV. FILTER FABRIC
FLlter fabric for use in drains shall consist of Mirafi 1405
(Celanese), Typar (DuPont), or equivalent. The aggregate
shall be 3/4-inch to 1-1/2-inch maximum size, free draining
aggregate. Filter fabric shall completely surround the
aggregate.
V. LAYING
Trenches for drains shall be excavated to a minimum width of
2 feet and to a depth shown on the plans, or a,s directed by
the engineer. The bottom of the trench shall then he
covered full width by 4 inches of filter material or with
filter fabric and 4 inches of aggregate, and the drain pipe
shall be laid with the perforations at the bottom and
sections shall be joined with couplers. The pipe shall be
laid on a minimum slope of 0.2 percent and drained to curb
outlet or storm drain.
After the pipe has been placed, the trench shall be back-
filled with filter material or 1-1/2-inch maximum size
aggregate if filter fabric is used, to the elevation shown on
the plans, or as directed by the engineer.
C-2
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Project No. 50332W-UDOI
APPENDI,X C
( continued) TYPICAL SUBSURFACE DRAINS
FOR LOCAL SEEPAGE
Compacted
Native Soil
Cut Slope
6" Perforated Pipe
Drain to Curb Outlet
or Storm Drain
Cut Slope
611 h'!rforated
Drair:l to CLlrb
or Storm Drain
Cut Slope ~
~ Compacted
Native Soil
_~.s;?_~TYPical Seepage Line
Filter'Material or
Filter Fabric
;-Compacted Native Soil
~~.::f~~ __ 52 £ ..!ypi ca 1 Seepage Line
.:; .. ~~:. -:p
':.:J. ~ 'i(Y ,Fi lter Ma teri a 1 or
Filter Fabric
Seepage Line
or Filter Fabric
'''---6" Perfora ted Pi pe
brain to Curb Outlet
or Storm Drain
C-3
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Project No. S0332W-UDOI
EXCAVATION
BOTTOM OF
l\l,LVUIAL CLEANOUT
\
APPENDIX C
(continUed)
TYPICAL SECTION
SUBSURFACE DRAINS IN DRAWS
ORIGINAL GROUNP
24" ,-lIN.
AGGREGATE: 7 cf/ft
OF LENG'Ll, MIN.
(3/4" to l~" crushed
rock maximum size)
DRAIN PIPE: 6 INCH DIAMETER
MIN.
] 0' MIN.
cmlPACTED FILL
FILTER FABRIC
ALL AROUND
PIPE
MATERIAL
MAXHlUM HEIGHT OF FILL
ADS (CORRUGATED POLYETHYLENE)
TRANSITE UNDERDRA~N
PVC or ABS:
SDR 35
SDR 21
ABOVE BOTTO~ OF ALLUVIA~ CLEANOUT (FT.)
C-4
8
20
35
100
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Project No. 50332W-UDOl
APPENDIX C
(continued)
TYPICAL SECTION
SUBSURFACE DRAINS IN DRAWS
ORIGINAL GROUND
EXCAVATION
:;0 .. ·.:.: ',':~:,'"
1~=-t:::;ii~:::::::~~ ,. i): •. • . • . 0,. . I _~~_-'--"I . . .... , .
BOTTm.l OF
j\LLUVIAL CLEANOUT
FILTER MATERIAL:
7 cf/ft OF LENGTH,
MIN.
/
'.. ~ ~ 0 .. '.
• .'. # 0 . o .• 0 ' ' " ., .. ~ .• ' o· . . , ... 24'" !"1IN. • 0 : • D.
l : .:,,; . ><. , '--::1 4" MIN. /):'.'----! I, l ~. 24" l-nd.1
10' HIN. /
CO:1PACTED FILL
DRAIN PIPE: 6 INCH.
PIPE MAXHIUM HEIGHT OF FILL
MATERIAL ABOVE BOT'l'OM OF ALLUVIAL CLEANOUT .(FT. )
;\DS (CORRUGATED POLYETHYLI:;NE) 8
TAANS ITE U!'lDERDRAIN 20
PVC or ABS:
SDR 35 35
SDI{ 21 100
C-5
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
0'\
0'P
project No. ~OjjlW-UDOl
APPENDIX D
SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONTROLLED FILL
I. GENERAL
These specifications cover preparation of existing surfaces
to receive fills, the type of soil suitable for Use in
fills, the control of compaction, and the methods of testing
compacted fills. It shall be the contractor's respons.ibili ty
to place, spread, water, and compact the fill in strict
accordance with these specifications. A·soil engineer shall
be the owner's representative to inspect the construction of
fills. Excavation and the placing of fill sh~ll be under
the direct inspection of the soil engineer, and he shall
give written notice of conformance with the specifications
upon completion of grading. Deviations from these specifica-
tions will be permitted only upon written authorization from
the soil engineer. A soil investigation has been made for
this project; any recommendations made in the report of the
soil investigation or subsequent reports shall become ah
addendum ·to these specifications.
II. SCOPE
The placement of controlled fill by the contractor shall
include all clearing and grubbing, removal of existing
unsatisfactory material,~preparation of the areas to be
filled, spreading and compaction of fill in the areas to be
filled, and all other work necessary to complete the grading
of the filled areas.
III. MATERIALS
1. Materials for compacted fill shall consist of any
material imported or excavated from the cut areas that, in
the opinion of the soil engineer, is suitable for use in
constructing fills. The material shall contain no rocks or
hard lumps greater than 24 inches in si~e and shall contain
at least 40% of material smaller than 1/4 inch in size.
(Materials greater than 6 inches in size shall be placed by
the contractor so that they are surrounded by compacted
fines; no nesting of' rocks shall be permitted.) No material
of a perishable, spongy, or otherwise improper nature shall
be used in filling.
2. Material placed within 24 inches of rough grade shall
be select material that contains no rocks or hard lumps
greater than 6 inches in size and that swells less than 6%
when compacted as hereinafter specified for compacted .fill
and soaked under an axial pressure of 160 psf.
D-l
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
••
•
Project No. 50332W-UDOI
APPENDIX D
(continued)
3. Representativ§ samples of material to be used for fill
shall be tested in-the laboratory by the soil eng~neer in
order to determine the·maximum density, optimum moisture
content, and classification of the soil. In addition, the
soil engineer shall determine the approximate be;;=tring value
of a recompacted, saturated sample by direct shear tests or
other tests applicable to the particular soil.
4. During grading operations, soil types other than those
analyzed in the report of the soil investigation may be
encountered by the contractor. The soil engineer shall be
consulted to' determine the suitability of these soils.
IV. COMPACTED FILLS
1. General
(a) Unless otherwise specified, fill material shall be
compacted by the contractor whi.le at a moisture content near
the optimum moisture content and to a density that is not
less than 90% of the maximum dry density determined in
accordance with ASTM Test No. D1557-70, or other density
test methods that will obtain equivalent results.
(b) Potentially expansive soils may be used in fills below
a depth of 24 inches ahd shall be compac;ted at a moisture
content greater than the optimum moisture content for the
material.
2. Clearing and Preparing Areas to be Filled
(a) All trees, brush, grass, and other objectionable material
shall be collected, piled, and burned or otherwise disposed
of by the contractor so as to leave the areas that have been
cleared with a neat and finished appearance free from un-
sightly debris. .
(b) All vegetable matter and objectionable material shall
be removed by the contractor from the surface upon which the
fill is to be placed, and any loose or porous soils shall be
removed or compacted to the depth shown on the plans. The
surface shall then be plowed or scarified to a minimum depth
of 6 inches until the surface is free from uneven features
that would tend to prevent uniform compaction by the equip-
ment to be used.
(c) Where fills are constructed on hillsides or slopes, the
slope of the original ground on which the fill is to be
placed shall be stepped or keyed by the contractor as shown
on the figure on Page 4 of these specifications. The steps
shall extend completely through the soil mantle and into the
underlying formational materials.
D-2
•
•
•
~ :r: · ~
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Z o z
project No. 50332W-UDOI
APPENDIX D
( continued)
(d) After the fo-qndation for the fi:l,.l has been cleared,
plowed, or scarified, it shall be disced or bladed by the
contractor until it is uniform and free from large clods,
brought to the proper moisture content, and compacted as
specified for fill.
3. Placing, Spreading, and Compaction of Fill Material
(a) The fill material shall be placed by the contractor in
layers that, when compacted, shall not exceed 6 inches ..
Each layer shall be spread evenly and shall be thoroughly
mixed during the spreading to obtain uniformity of material
in each layer.
(b) When the moisture content of the fil~ material is below
that specif~ed by the soil engineer, water shall be added by
the contractor until the moisture content is as specified.
(c) When the moisture content of the fill material is above
that specified by the soil engineer, the fill material shall
be aerated by the contractor by blading, mixing, or other
satisfactory methods until the moisture content is as specified.
(d) After each layer has been placed, mixed, and spread
evenly, it shall be thoroughly compacted by the contractor
to the specified density. Compaction shall be accomplished
by sheepsfoot rollers, vibratory rollers, multiple-wheel
pneumatic-tired rollers, or other types of acceptable com-
pacting equipment. Equipment shall be of such design that
it will be able to compact the fill to the specified density.
compaction shall be continuous over the entire area, and the
equipment shall make sufficient trips to insure that the
desired density has been obtained throughout the entire
fill.
(e) The surface of fill slopes shall be compacted and there
shall be no excess loose soil on the slopes.
V. INSPECTION
1. Observation and compaction tests shall be made by the
soil engineer during the filling and compacting operations
so that he can state his opinion that the fill was con~
structeu in accordance with the specifications.
2. The soil engineer shall make field density tests in
accordance with ASTM Test No. D 1556-64. Density tests
shall be made in the compacted materials below the surface
where the surface is disturbed. When these tests ~nditate
that the density of any layer of fill or portion the.reof is
belovl the specified density, the particular layer or portion
shall be reworked until the specified density has been
obtained.
D-3
Project No. 50332W-UDOI
• APPENDIX D
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
(continued)
VI. PROTECTION OF ~WORK .
1. During construction the contractor shall properly grade
all excavated surfaces to provide positive drainage and
prevent ponding of wate+. He shall control surface water to
avoid damage to adjoining properties or to finished work on
the site. The contractor shall take remedial measures to
prevent erosion Of freshly graded areas and until such time
as permanent drainage and erosion control features have been
installed.
2. After completion of grading and when the soil engineer
has finished his observation of the work, no further excava-
tion or filling shall be' done except under .the observation
of the soil engineer.
Rerrove
NOrES:
Strip as specified
Original ground
"Slope ratio = N
M
The minimum width of "B" key shall be 2 feet wider than
the compaction equipment, and not less than 10 feet.
The outside edge of bottom key shall be below topsoil or
loose surface material.
Keys are required where the natural slope is steeper than
6 horizontal to 1 vertical, or where specified by the
soil engineer.
D-4
note