HomeMy WebLinkAboutCT 74-21; CARLSBAD OAKS BUSINESS PARK; TESTING AND OBSERVATION REPORT; 1992-11-24GEOCON
*RECEIVED 11011301992
I NCO RPORATED
ul
Geotechnical Engineers and
Engineering Geologists -OD
Project No. 04950-52-01
Tech Construction Corporation
Post Office Box 80036
San Diego, California 92138
Attention: Mr. Ted Tchang
Subject: CARLSBAD OAKS EAST
NORTH OF EL FUERTE STREET
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
REPORT OF TESTING AND OBSERVATION SERVICES
DURING DRAINAGE CHANNEL RE-GRADING
Gentlemen:
In accordance with your request and our proposal dated October 29, 1992, we have provided
compaction testing and observation services during the re-grading of a drainage channel
north of El Fuerte Street on the subject project. Our services were performed during the
period of November 6, 1992 through November 17, 1992. The scope of our services
included the following:
Observing the re-grading operation, including the removal and/or
processing of loose soils prior to fill placement.
Performing in-place density tests in fill placed and compacted at the site.
Preparing a map indicating the location of in-place density tests.
Preparing this report of re-grading operations.
GENERAL
In 1987, a concrete-lined drainage channel was constructed north of the terminus of El
Fuerte Street to transport runoff from El Fuerte Street and adjacent developed areas to a
desilting basin. As a result of heavy rains in the area last winter, an erosional feature was
created beneath and adjacent to the drainage channel below approximately Station 2+50.
6960 Flanders Drive
San Diego, CA 92121-2974
619 558-6900 -
FAX 619 558-6159
-S.'. -. - ".5 --.'..--.5•-.655_ -
0
Project No. 04950-52-01
November 24, 1992
Page 2
The gully created by the erosion possessed a maximum width of approximately 40 feet and
a maximum depth of approximately 20 feet with vertical side slopes.
The grading contractor for the re-grade was T.C. Construction Company. The plan supplied
for our use was prepared by Rick Engineering Company and is entitled Improvement Plan
For: Drainage Channel in Carlsbad Airport Business Park, Sheet Number 26, "As-Built" date
of October 8, 1987.
References to elevations and locations herein were based on surveyor's or grade checker's
stakes in the field and/or interpolation from the referenced Improvement Plan. Geocon
Incorporated did not provide surveying services and, therefore, has no opinion regarding the
accuracy of the as-graded elevations or surface geometry with respect to the approved
grading plans or proper surface drainage.
GRADING
Grading began with the removal of brush, vegetation, and concrete debris from the area to
be re-graded. Loose soils deposited subsequent to the erosion were removed until firm,
previously placed fill soils were encountered. Prior to placing fill, the exposed ground
surface was scarified, moisture conditioned and compacted. Fill soils derived from on-site
excavations were then placed and compacted in layers until the desired elevations were
attained. In general, the on-site fill materials consist of sandy clay soils derived from
excavations in adjacent hillsides. -
During the re-grading operation, compaction procedures were observed and in-place density
tests were performed to evaluate the relative compaction of the fill material. The in-place
density tests were performed in general conformance with ASTM Test Method D-2922-81
(Nuclear Test Method). The results of the in-place dry density and moisture content tests
are summarized on Table I. Percent relative compaction was calculated using laboratory test
results for optimum moisture content and maximum dry density from a report entitled As-
Graded Geotechnical Report, Final Report of Mass Grading, Carlsbad Oaks Business Center,
Carlsbad Tract 74-21, Carlsbad, California, prepared by San Diego Geotechnical Consultants,
Inc., dated February 19, 1987. The results of the laboratory tests are summarized in-
Table II.
In general, the in-place density test results indicate that the fill soil has a relative
compaction of at least 90 percent at the locations tested. The approximate locations of the
in-place density-tests are.shown on Figure 1.
Project No. 04950-52-01
November 24, 1992
Page
RECOMMENDATIONS
Any additional grading performed in the vicinity of the drainage channel should be
accomplished in conjunction with our observation and compaction testing services. Grading
plans for any future grading should be reviewed by Geocon Incorporated prior to finalizing.
All trench backfill in excess of one foot thick should be compacted to at least 90 percent
relative compaction. This office should be notified at least 48 hours prior to commencing
additional grading or backfill operations.
Adequate drainage provisions are imperative. Drainage water should be directed away from
foundations, pavements, concrete slabs, and slope tops to controlled drainage devices.
Experience has shown that even with these provisions, a shallow groundwater or subsurface
water condition can and may develop in areas where no such water conditions existed prior
to site development; this is particularly true where a substantial increase in surface water
infiltration results from an increase in landscape irrigation.
LIMITATIONS
The information contained herein applies only to our work with respect to the re-grading
operation, and represents conditions at the date of our final observation, November 17,
1992. Changes in the conditions of a property can occur with the passage of time due to
natural processes or the works of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes
in applicable or appropriate standards may occur, resulting from legislation or the
broadening of knowledge in the fields of geotechnical engineering or geology. Accordingly,
the findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside our
control. Therefore, this report is subject to review and should not be relied upon after a
period of three years.
Any subsequent grading should be done in conjunction with our observation and testing
services. As used herein, the term "observation" implies only that we observed the progress
of the work with which we agreed to be involved. Our services did not -include the evalu-
ation or identification of the potential presence of hazardous materials. Our conclusions
and opinions as to whether the work essentially complies with the job specifications are-
based on our observations, experience and test results. Due to the inaccuracies inherent in
most field and laboratory soil tests, and the necessary assumption that the relatively small
soil sample tested is representative of a significantly larger volume of soil, future tests of the
same soil location or condition should not be expected to duplicate specific individual test
results of this report. Subsurface conditions, and the accuracy of tests used to measure such
conditions, can vary greatly at any time. We make no warranty, expressed or implied, except
that our services were performed in accordance with engineering principles generally
accepted at this time and location. - - - -
Project No. 04950-52-01
November 24, 1992
Page 4
We will accept no responsibility for any subsequent changes made to the site by others, by
the uncontrolled action of water, or by the failure of others to properly repair damages
caused by the uncontrolled action of water. Recommendations which pertain to the future
maintenance and care for the property should be brought to the attention of future owners
of the property or portions thereof.
If you have any questions regarding this report, or if we may be of further service, please
contact the undersigned at your convenience.
Very truly yours,
GEOCON INCORPORATED GfESSi
co
i5E 1524
Z3 cc a) M Cr ENGINEERING rian W. Jr. LJ cO No 46236 :0 John Hoobs GEOLOGI
CE 462~3 Exp. 12-31-94 CEG 1524 6.30-
CNII "We Or CA *0q6
(6) Addressee
MaIF
Nal
= == = == = Off
sm
ig
OWN
VNIVEL
___ ___ ___ _____
•
SEE DETAIL
. .
3CALE 1'.
OR
____
___ •
\
\
4/
F i2&lN
L (SPL49h1 pj0N%wNEL
PC
LL - - .,:'•. •- •
.
47
FVTUKE RIM '::~SpL49N WALL
7t M S Comm- it- For ro SCALE 0 N THICK- PER 9-56
15 So
fe ;, / : _Lff e TOM. RIP RAP ILANKT .- . _.- / / \••. I\ .IT WI DCC. SILL AND FILTER C-LOOO CLASSCONCRETE sjAp/çT7 s(EoETnL
QETAIL'_SILLWI_ FILTER BLANKETS - \ '4' ENGINEER OF WORK
MIS
BENCHMARK --- . t'.I . . I" BARRY C.1BENDER R.C.E. 28448 . - DATE
E5CRIPrIoP COlIC. MONUMENT wifrAwoAso 015C \ _-- \ \\.L_ FOR STOAA DRAIN 5)TEM E . -. . RICK ENGINEERING COMPANY • TAMPED ER. (9 • '- _.—:7 - ' \ \ 5(E SUE(T NO. tI • -
Ow PL4/fOS- CIVIL £NGINES-LAV SPN)DRS XAI(f2& 900' SOUTH OF INTERSECTION OF a CAMIW \ \ \\ . 3088 P10 piro A.C4RL8840, CALJE 98008 fli 789-4997
SEAL r PALOMAR AIRPORT RD EAST 5101 OF EL MM - -' - - - 5,011 ° INCORPORATED Prn47r GVW7ACT
LLOAv1 FEf(CELINE.
PRECISE SURVEY LEVELS. \\
PROJ. NO. 04950-52-01 ST1CITY OFCARLSBAD
FIG. I 2&!M U.S-C 10.5
-- —
J?.f 1606
- .— ---- \ \\\\ -'".' - DATE 11-24-1992 IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR,
N11?7 (5 CMNGECNMNILN5TORN&AIN DRAINAGE CHANNEL PHASE
AS BUILT 11 _- LEGEND PHASE Af 5bILT
PWVJECT S_PHASE_1 ?'l CARLSBAD AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER
-" •..........APPROX. LOCATION OF IN-PLACE FE-4.77-St
DENSITY TEST CfrV
18ENMR E_28448 DATE --'\\ IFM DENSITY TEST LOCATION MAP L ____________ __ c
________ • - _-•- •-- _________ er _PEoNs In
CHANNEL DATA
i4 XL TA a? Bfl RADIUS WWJ7W RENA KS
J. 600 1(3.51'
,
B,y
1Ot__ - QOO&O6'
________200'
P(AClf
_4O!4P$
82.00 WCH
2o'- 400' 5ö 00 REACU _3
Project No. 04950-52-01 TABLE I
FIELD DENSITY TEST RESULTS
Elev. Plus Max. Opt. Field Field Field Req'd
or 3/4" Dry Moist. Dry Moist. Rel. Rel.
Test Depth Curve Rock Dens. Cont. Dens. Cont. Comp. Comp. Test
No. Date Test Location (ft) No. (%) (pcf) (%) (pcf) (%) (%) (%) Type
1 11/09/92 DRAIN. CHANNEL 3+25 314 7 0 119.5 12.0 110.0 15.1 92 90 NU
2 11/09/92 DRAIN. CHANNEL 3+35 317 7 0 119.5 12.0 108.1 16.5 91 90
3 11/10/92 DRAIN. CHANNEL 2+85 315 8 0 114.0 15.5 102.8 19.7 90 90
4 11/10/92 DRAIN. CHANNEL 3+90 306 7 0 119.5 12.0 108.8 16.3 91 90 NU
5 11/10/92 DRAIN. CHANNEL 3+05 318 8 0 114.0 15.5 103.9 17.5 91 90 NU
6 11/10/92 DRAIN. CHANNEL 4+35 309 8 0 114.0 15.5 98.7 17.4 87 90 NU
6A 11/10/92 DRAIN. CHANNEL 4+35 309 8 0 114.0 15.5 103.3 17.6 91 90 NU
7 11/10/92 DRAIN. CHANNEL 3+45 317 7 0 119.5 12.0 109.5 17.3 92 90 NU
8 11/10/92 DRAIN. CHANNEL 4+65 302 7 0 119.5 12.0 109.2 16.1 91 90 NU
9 11/11/92 DRAIN. CHANNEL 5+10 294 8 0 114.0 15.5 103.0 18.1 90 90 NU
10 11/11/92 DRAIN. CHANNEL 5+85 281 9 0 112.8 15.8 101.7 20.6 90 90 NU
11 11/11/92 DRAIN. CHANNEL 2+60 336 8 0 114.0 15.5 103.4 17.7 91 90 NU
12 11/16/92 DRAIN. CHANNEL 5+90 283. 7 0 119.5 12.0 107.9 17.6 90 90 NU
13 11/17/92 DRAIN. CHANNEL 4+90 297 7 0 119.5 12.0 111.0 14.1 93 90 NU
14 11/17/92 DRAIN. CHANNEL 2+80 332 8 0 114.0 15.5 103.1 16.8 90 90 NU
15 11/17/92 DRAIN. CHANNEL 3+70 314 8 0 114.0 15.5 104.9 17.3 92 90
Note: See last page of table for explanation of coded terms
Project No. 04950-52-01
EXPLANATION OF CODED TERMS
- TEST SUFFIX
A, B, C .....Retest of previous density test failure, following moisture conditioning
and/or recompaction.
R: Fill in area of density test failure was removed and replaced with
properly compacted fill soil.
- PREFIX CODE DESIGNATION FOR TEST NUMBERS
AD - Area Drain JT - Joint Trench ST - Slope Test
B - Base Test MT - Moisture Test SW - Sidewalk
CG - Curb & Gutter RW - Retaining Wall SZ - Slope Zone
CW - Crib Wall SD - Storm Drain UT - Utility Trench
DW - Driveway SC - Subgrade WB - Wall Backfill
FG - Finish Grade SL - Sewer Lateral WL - Water Lateral
IT - Irrigation Trench SM - Sewer Main WM - Water Main
- CURVE NO.
Corresponds to curve numbers listed in Table II, representing the laboratory
maximum dry density/optimum moisture content data for selected fill soil samples
encountered during testing and observation.
- ROCK CORRECTION
For density tests with rock percentage greater than zero, laboratory maximum dry density and optimum
moisture content were adjusted for rock content. For tests with rock content equal to zero, laboratory
maximum dry density and optimum moisture content values listed are then unadjusted values.
- TYPE OF TEST
SC: Sand Cone Test
NU: Nuclear Density Test
DC: Drive Cylinder Test
- ELEVATION/DEPTH
Test elevations/depths have been rounded to the nearest whole foot.
Project No. 04950-52-01
November 24, 1992
TABLE II
Summary of Laboratory Comnaction Test Results
Optimum
Maximum Moisture
Dry Density Content
Sample No. Description (pcfl (% Dry Wt.)
7* Tan sandy CLAY 119.5 12.0
8* Light orange-brown sandy CLAY 114.0 15.5
9* Light green-brown sandy CLAY 112.8 15.8
* Laboratory test results from As-Graded Geotechnical Report, Final Report of
Mass Grading, Carlsbad Oaks Business Center, Carlsbad Tract 74-21, Carlsbad,
California, prepared by San Diego Geotechnical Consultants, Inc., dated
February 19, 1987.