HomeMy WebLinkAboutCT 80-39; LAGUNA RIVIERA; SOIL AND GEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION; 1981-02-23•
.'
.'
•
•
.'
•
Woodward· Clyde Consultants
SOIL AND GEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION
FOR THE PROPOSED
LAGUNA RIVIERA, UNIT 11
For
.-.'.-~
-Kamar Construction Co., Inc.
325 Elm Avenue
Carlsbad, California 92008
•
•
e·
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
3467 Kurtz Street
San Diego, California 92110
714-224-2911
Woodward·Clyde Consultants
Telex 697-841
February 23, 19'81
Project No. 5ll01W SIOl
Kamar Construction Co., Inc.
325 Elm-Avenue
Carlsbad, California 92008
Attention: Mr. Jerry Rombotis
SOIL AND GEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION
FOR THE PROPOPOSED
LAGUNA RIVIERA, UNIT 11
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
Gentlemen:
We are pleased to provide the accompanying report, which
presents the results of our geotechnical investigation for
the subject project. The report presents our conclusions
and recommendations pertaining to the site, as well as the
-results of our field explorations.
Our engineer and geologist assigned to: thi:s proj ect are
Messrs. Michael R. Rahilly and Robert J: --Dowlen, respect-
ively. If you have any questions, or if we can be of
further service, please give us a call.
Very truly yours,
WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS
£1/~~
Daryl Streiff
C.E.G. 1033
DS/RPW/MRR/RJD/rs/mam
Attachment
(5)
Consulting Engineers, Geologists
and Environmental Scientists
Offices in Other Principal Cities·-·· _._, --
Richard P. While
R.E. 21992
------_. -----~--'"-.. -------. --
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Project No. 5110IW-SIOI Woodward· Clyde Consultants
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PURPOSE OF INVESTIGATION
BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
SITE, SOIL, AND GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS
DISCUSSIONS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
RISK AND OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
FIGURE I -SITE PLAN AND GEOLOGIC MAP
APPENDIX A -FIELD INVESTIGATION
FIGURE A-I -KEY TO LOGS
FIGURE A-2 -LOG OF TEST BORING I
FIGURE A-3 -LOG OF PITS 2 AND 3·
:
FIGURE A-4 -LOG OF TEST PIT 4
APPENDIX B -REPORT DATED APRIL 5, 1972
APPENDIX C -CUT SLOPES
..
APPENDIX D -SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONTROLLED FILL
Page
1
2
4
6
12
A-I
B-1
C-l
D-l
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Project No. SllOlW-SIOl Woodward-Clyde Consultants
SOIL AND GEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION
FOR THE PROPOSED,
LAGUNA RIVIERA, UNIT 11
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
This report presents the results of our soil and
geological investigation at the site of the proposed taguna
Riviera, Unit II, residential subdivision. The site is at
the northwest intersection of Park Drive and Valencia Ave-
nue, in the Rancho Agua Hedionda section 'of Carlsbad, Cali-
fornia. This report is a part of a study that is being made
of a large area to the west of the subject 7 lots.
"'-...
PURPOSE OF INVESTIGATION
The purpose of our investigation ii to assist
Kamar Construction Company, Inc., and their consultants in
evaluating the property and in proje'ct design. This report
presents our conclusions and/or recommendations regarding:
o
o
o
o
o
Geologic setting of the site,
Potential geologic hazards,
General subsurface soil conditio~s,
General extent and condition of existing fill
soils,
Conditions of areas to receive fill,
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Project No. 51101W-SIOl Woodward· Clyde Consultants
o
o
o
o
Presence and effect of expansive soils,
Depth to water (if within the depth of our sub-
surface investigation),
Grading and earthwork specifications, and
Types and depth of foundations and allowable soil
bearing pressures.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
To aid in our study, we have discussed the project
with Mr. Jerry Rombotis, and have been provided with an
undated "Plot and Grading Plan, Laguna Riviera Unit No. 11-
CT-80" (scale: 1" = 30'), prepared by Mr. Raymond R. Ribal,
R.C.E. In addition, we have reviewed applicable geologic
and geotechnical data, including:
"Laguna Riviera Unit 5, Offsite -Fi-ll;·.Areas A and B,
Carlsbad, California," prepared by ·,woodward-Gizienski
& Associates (AprilS, 1972).
"Soil Investigation for Laguna Riviera, Carlsbad,
California," prepared by Geocon, Inc. (April 7, 1980).
"Faulting in the Oceanside, Carlsbad, and Vista Areas,
Northern San Diego County, California,'" by Dennis
Hannan, in Studies on the Geology of Camp Pendleton,
and Western San Diego County, California, published by
the San Diego Association of Geologists (1975).
"Geologic Map of a Portion of the San Luis Rey Quad-
rangle, San Diego County, California," M.S. thesis by
Kenneth L. Wilson, University of California, Riverside
(1972) .
We understand that the proposed project will
involve grading the approximately 1-1/2-acre s~te into
seven single-level and/or split-level lots. We understand
that the proposed construction will be limited to one-
and/or two-story, wood-frame and stucco residential structures,
2 ---~---- -- ------------"-" -
•
•
•
•
•
•
.'
•
•
•
•
Project No. 5ll01W-SIOl
Woodward· Clyde Consultants
supported on continuous footings and having concrete slab-
on-grade floors. We also understand that proposed cut
slopes and composite cut/fill slopes will have maximum
inclinations of 2 to 1 (horizontal to vertical), and will be
approximately 30 feet high; proposed side-yard fill slopes
will be inclined to 2 to 1 and will be less than 10 feet
high. Retaining walls with level backfill are also proposed
to heights ranging from 2 to 3 feet. Current plans indicate
that the grading is out of balance and that excess fill will
be placed offsite to the west.
Field and Laboratory Investigations
Our field investigation included making a visual
geologic reconnaissance of existing s~:r:t_~ce conditions,
making one bucket auger boring and three backhoe test pits,
and obtaining representative soil samples. The boring was
advanced to a depth and of 31 feet the test pits were 8-1/2
to 10-1/2 feet. The locations of the test explorations are
shown on Fig. 1.
A Key to Logs is presented in Appendix A as
Fig. A-l. Simplified logs of the borings and test pits are
presented in Appendix A as Figs. A-2 through A-S. The
descriptions on the logs are based on field logs and sample
inspection. Laboratory and compaction test data for the
existing compacted fill soils are contained in the aforemen-
tioned report of AprilS, 1972 (Appe~dix B) •
3
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Project No. 5ll0lW-SIOl Woodward· Clyde Consultants
SITE, SOIL, AND GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS
Geologic Setting
The site lies within an area characterized by
Pleistocene age beach and lagoonal deposits overlying Ter-
tiary age sediments of the coastal foothills.
Topography and Site Conditions
The site covers portions of two southeast-trending
ridges and the flanking drainage areas. Elevations range
from approximately 52 feet (MSLD) on the southern ridge top,
to less than 18 feet at the southeastern property line.
Natural slope inclinations vary from a maximum of
approximately 2-1/2 to 1 on the ridge f-lanks, to nearly flat
along Valencia Avenue. Vegetation on the site varies from
a sparse growth of grasses in the undeveloped areas to
essentially barren filled ground along Valencia Avenue.
Undefground utilities, which include a water main
and telephone ~able, are indicated to be present in the'
sidewalk easement along Valencia Avenue.
Subsurface Conditions
The site is underlain by compacted fill soils,
fill soils, topsoil, and Pleistocene age beach and lagoonal
terrace deposits. These units are described below; their
•
e-
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Project No. 51101W-SIOI Woodward· Clyde Consultants
areal extents, with the exception of the topsoil, are
approximately shown on Fig. 1. The geologic map symbol for
each unit is given after the formal name for the unit.
Compacted Fill Soils (Qcf) -Compacted fill soils,
as reported in the April 5, 1972 report, were placed in the
low-lying areas of Lots 1 and 2 (Fig. 1). These fiil soils
are composed of silty sands.
Fill Soils (Af) -Fill soils of unknown compaction
characteristics are present in the low-lying areas of Lots 3
through 7. These materials, composed primarily of loose
silty to clayey sands, were found to a depth of 5 feet in
Test pit 3.
Topsoil (unmapped) - A topsoil :layer, composed of
compressible clayey sand to sandy clay, is present on the
natural hillsides and beneath the loose fill soils in Test
pit 3. These soils range from 1 to 2 feet thick.
Terrace Deposits (Qt) -The-site is underlain by
Terrace deposits composed of dense silty to clayey sands
containing a few interbeds and lenses of sandy to silty
clay. In Test Boring 1, the sandy portions were found to
range from lightly cemented to cohesionless.
Structure and Faulting
Our field investigation indicates that bedding
within the terrace deposits range from near horizontal to
5 _ ..
• Project No. 5ll01W-SIOl
Woodward· Clyde Consultants
• approximately 5 degrees toward the south-southwest. Numer~
ous crossbeds were observed within these materials in Test
Boring 1 and in existing cut slopes in the general area.
• No faults or' indications of faults were observed
during our reconnaissance, and no faults are mapped on the
site.
•
Landslides
Our studies did not reveal the presence of land-
• slides on the site.
Ground Water
• No ground water seeps, spring?, or abnormally wet
areas were observed during our visual reconnaissance or in
the test excavations.
•
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.
e
Potential Geologic Hazards
Faulting and Ground Breakage -Our reconnaissance,
• literature review, and subsurface explorations did not
reveal the presence of any faulting on the site.
e·
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Project No. 5ll0lW-SIOl Woodward· Clyde Consultants
The nearest known active fault along which seismic
events of magnitude 4 or greater have occurred is in the
Elsinore Fault zone, mapped some 22 miles northeast of the
site.
The closest significant faulting is the northern
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 soils on the site
are dense to very dense, and there is no apparent permanent
ground water table within expected grading limits'. In our
opinion, the liquefaction potential of,t~~ formational soils
is very low. The topsoils, along with the loose fill soils
encountered in Test pit 2, have a potential for liquefaction
in a saturated state. In our opinion, this potential can be
substantially reduced by over-excavation and recompaction as
recommended under "Grading".
Landslides -Our review and field investigations
did not reveal the presence of any landslides on the site.
Likewise, no remolded clay seams or near-horizontal bedding
plane faults were encountered in the test excavations.
Ground Water
We do not expect that shallow permanent, ground
water table is present within the proposed grading limits.
7
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
e·
Project No. 5ll0lW-SIOl Woodward· Clyde Consultants
Our field investigation did not reveal any ground water
seeps, springs, or abnormally wet areas.
We recommend that positive measures be taken to
properly finish grade each lot after the residential struc-
tures and other improvements are in place, so that drainage
waters from the lots and adjacent properties are directed
off the lots and away from house foundations, floor slabs,
and slopes. Even with these provisions, experience has
shown that a shallow ground water or surface water condition
can and may develop in areas where no such water condition
existed prior to site development; this is particularly true
in years of heavy rainfall and in residential subdivisions
where a substantial increase in surface-w.ater infiltration
results from landscape irrigation.
General Soil Conditions
The materials expected to be used in structure fills
and in constructed slopes are primarily silty to clayey sand
containing a few sandy clay interbeds. Our selection of
soil parameters for analysis ~s based on the results of
laboratory t~sts performed on samples taken from similar
formational soils in the Carlsbad area.
Slope Stability
We have performed stability analyses for the
proposed slopes by the Janbu method using the following
parameters:
8
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Project No. SllOlW-SIOl
Undisturbed
materials
Compacted
C'
300 psf
300 psf
Woodward· Clyde Consultants
y
25 pcf
125 pcf
The results of those analyses indicate that the
proposed 2 to 1 inclined slopes have calculated factors of
safety against deep-seated slope failure in excess of 1.5
for static 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 professional judgment that-'the proposed slopes
can be constructed. Slope stability calculations are attached
(Appendix C) .
We recommend that an engineering geologist from
our firm inspect all cut slopes during grading to verify
actual geologic conditions and to provide design modifica-
tions, if needed. If adverse conditions, such as clay seams
or ground water seepage, are encountered during inspection,
slope buttressing may be required. Buttress recommendations
will be given during grading, if. necessary.
It should be noted that friable, cohesio.nless
sands were encountered in Test Boring 1, and may be exposed
9
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
••
Project No. 5ll0IW-SIOl Woodward· Clyde Consultants
in the cut slope face when grading is completed. These
materials are extremely susceptible to erosion and may
require special landscaping procedures to reduce the poten-
tial for slope erosion due to irrigation and rainfall.
Proper landscaping procedures should be recommended by the
project landscape architect.
Grading
We recommend that all earthwork be done in accor-
dance with the attached Specifications for Controlled Fill
(Appendix D). Woodward-Clyde Consultants should observe the
grading nd test compacted fills.
We recommend that a pre-constrqc~ion conference be
held at the site with the developer, civil engineer, contrac-
tor, and geotechnical engineer in attendance. Special soil
handling and the grading plans can be discussed at that
time.
We recommend that all trash, construction debris,
and waste materials be removed from the site before grading.
We recommend that the fill soils and underlying
loose topsoils in the vicinity of Lots 2 through 7 be entirely
removed and recompacted. We recommend that all porous
topsoils and other loose soils not removed by planned grading
be excavated or scarified as required, watered, and then
10
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Project No. 51101W-SIOI
Woodward-Clyde Consultants
recompacted prior to placing any additional fill. We rec-
ommend that the soil engineer evaluate the' actual depth and
extent of excavation in the field at the time of grading.
Highly expansive clayey soils could be e~countered
at grade in areas of shallow cuts and fills (daylight areas) ,
or in deeper cuts. We recommend that these clayey soils be
excavated, where encountered, over the entire level lot
area to a minimum of 2 feet below finish grade, and then be
replaced with properly compacted, nonexpansive soils or
slightly expansive soils available on the site. The more
clayey soils can be placed and properly compacted in the
deeper fill areas.
We recommend that the uppe:r:. ~_ .feet of materials in
the fill areas be composed of finish grade, granular soils.
Finish grade soils are defined as granular soils that have a
potential swell of less than 6 percent when recompacted to
90 percent of maximum laboratory de~s~ty at optimum moisture
content, placed under an axial load of 160 psf, and $oaked
in water.
We recommend slightly to moderately expansive soils,
that is soils swelling between 3 and 6 percent, be compacted
at moisture contents of 3 to 5 percent over optimum water
content when they are used within 2 feet of finish grade.
Foundations
We recommend that foundations for structures
founded in natural or properly compacted, nonexpansive
11
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Project No. 5ll01W-SIOl
Woodward· Clyde Consultants
soils be designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of
2,000 psf (dead plus live load). In our opinion, this
bearing pressure can be increased by up to one-third for
transient loads caused by wind or seismic forces. For these
bearing pressures, we recommend that all footings be founded
a minimum of 12 inches below compacted fill or undisturbed
cut lot grade, be a minimum of 12 inches wide, and be founded
a minimum horizontal distance of 8 feet from slope faces.
We recommend that foundations founded in. slightly
expansive material be reinforced top and bottom with at
least one No. 4 steel bar, and that the concrete slabs-on-
grade be a minimum 4 inches thick and be underlain by 4 inches
of coarse, clean sand and reinforced »y~_x 6, 10/10 welded ...
wire mesh. A plastic membrane should also be provided under
slabs.
RISK AND OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
We have observed only a small portion of the
pertinent soil, and ground water conditions on the site. The
recommendations made herein are based on the assumption that
rock and soil conditions do not deviate appreciably from
those found during our field investigation. If the plans
for site development are changed~ or if variations or un-
desirable geotechnical conditions are encountered during
construction, the geotechnical consultant should be con-
sulted for further recommendations.
. 12
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Project No. 5ll0lW-SIOl Woodward· Clyde Consultants
We recommend that the geotechnical consultant
review all final foundation and grading plans to verify that
the intent of the recommendations presented herein has b,een
properly interpreted and inco~porated into the contract
documents. We further recommend that the geotechnical
consultant observe the site grading, sub grade preparation
under concrete slabs and paved areas, and foundation ex-
cavations.
It should be understood that California is an area
of high seismic risk. It is generally considered economically
unfeasible to build totally earthquake-resistant structures;
therefore, it is possible that a large or n.earby earthquake
could cause damage at the site.
Professional judgments presented herein are based
partly on our evaluations of the technical information
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 contrac-
tor's operations, and we cannot be responsible for the
safety of other than our own personnel on the site; therefore,
the safety of others is the responsibility of the contractor.
13
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Project No. 51101W-SIOl
Woodward· Clyde Consultants '
The contractor should notify the owner if he conside~s any
of the recommended actions presented herein to be unsafe.
14
•
.'
•
•
•
..
•
project No. SllOlW-SIOl Woodward· Clyde Consultants
APPENDIX A
FIELD INVESTIGATION
One exploratory test boring and three test pits
were made at the approximate locations shown on Fig. 1. Our
field work was performed between February 2 and)S, 1981 .
The test borings were made with a truck-mounted
30-inch diameter bucket auger. The test pits were excavated
by a John Deere Model 3l0-A backhoe. Representative samples
of the subsurface materials were obtained from the test
explorations and returned to our laboratory for examination.
The locations of the test excavations and the
elevation of the ground surface at each ,location were esti-
mated from the plan prepared by Mr. Raymond R. Ribal, R.C.E.
A-I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Location Boring Number Elevation
DEPTH TEST DATA *OTHER SAMPLE IN SOIL DESCRIPTION
FEET *Me *00 ·Be TESTS NUMBER
-
12 110 65 : I~ L...:-
Very dense, damp, brown silty sand (8M)
S!-
WATE:LEVEL ]
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.
'----UNDISTURBED SAMPLE LOCATION
MODIFIED CALIFORNIA SAMPLER
Sample with recorded blows per foot was obtained with a Modified
California drive sampler (2" inside 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 DS -Direct Shear Test
ST -Loaded Swell Test TX-Triaxial Compression Test
CC -Confined Compression
Test
NOTE: In this column the results of these tests may be recorded
where applicable.
'----------BLOW COUNT
Number of blows needed to advance sampler one foot or as inqicated.
'------------DRY DENSITY
Pounds per Cubic Foot
'--------------MOISTURE CONTENT
Percent of Dry Weight
NOTES ON FIELD INVESTIGATION
1. REFUSAL indicates the inability to extend excavation, practically.
with equipment being used in the investigation.
KEY TO LOGS
LAGUNA r\IVER.Il\..UnIT 11
DRAWN BY: ch CHECKED BY: <;F>D PROJECT NO:51101W-SI01 . DATE: 2-12-81 I FIGURE NO:A-1 ~----------~--------~~~------~~~~~~~----~~~
WOOOWARO-Cl VOE CONSULTANTS
•
•
•
•
•
..
•
•
•
•
.-
DEPTH
IN r----r----~--~
FEET
1-1
1 1-2
1 1-3
2 1-4
1-5
25
1-6
3
3
4
*For description of symbols, see Figure A-l
Boring 1
te El. 53'
SOIL DESCRIPTION
Loose, damp, red-brown, clayey to silty
sand (SC-SM) TOPSOIL
Dense, moist, brown, silty to silty clayey,
medium sand (SM) with occasional red-brown
staining TERRACE DEPOSITS
Trace clayey gravels
~ ___ Contact attitude N4°W 15°N
Dense, moist, browp, silty coarse sand-
(SM-SP); lightly cemented and cohesionless
TERRACE DEPOSITS
Cross-bedding N25°E 22°S at 14'
Clayey gravels
Dense, moist, brown, clayey sand (SC)
interbedded with stiff, moist, gray, -sandy
to silty clay (CL-CH)
TERRACE DEPOSITS
Dense, moist, gray-brown, silty medium sand
(SM) TERRACE DEPOSIIS
Becomes light gray-brown
Bottom of Hole
LOG-OF TEST BORING 1
LAGUNA RIVERIA UNIT 11
DRAWN BY: ch I CHECKED BY~~\) I PROJECT NO: 51101W-S101 I DATE: 2-12-81T FIGURE NO: A-2
WOODWARD-Cl VDE CONSULTANTS
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
.-
DEPTH
IN r----r----r---~
FEET
1
1
__ ___ _ _ __ .L ___ --lL ______ -1--__
I DEPTH TEST DATA ·OTHER IN TESTS FEET ·Me -DO ·BC
5_
10_
15-
*For description of symbols, see FigureA-l
2-1
2-2
2-3
2-4
2-5
SAMPLE
NUMBER
3-1 ~ 3-2
3-3 C 3-4 ·L
:!1111111:~1111:
.. \
.: ,-~
.i~
'1IIIIIililIIII
\
Test pit 2
imate El. 33'
SOIL DESCRIPTION
Loose, moist, dark brown, clayey sand (SC)
TOPSOIL
Stiff, moist, brown, sandy clay ~o clayey
sand (CL-SC) TOPSOIL
L - - - ---Grading to--
'\.
~
Dense, damp, light red-brown, silty sand
(SM) TERRACE DEPOSITS
Dense, moist, .light gray-brown, clayey
fine sand (SC) TERRACE DEPOSITS
Contact attitude N25°W 110S
Dense, moist, light gray-brown to liqht
red-brown, silty sand (SM)
TERRACE DEPOSITS
Bottom of Hole
--" .. -.
Test pit 3
Approximate El. 25'
SOl L DESCRIPTION
Damp to moist, light brown to light gray-
brown, clayey to s.ilty sand
FILL
Loose, moist, black, silty sand (SM) i
porous I caving TOPSOIL
Medium dense, moist, dark gray, clayey
sand (SC) and sandy clay (CL)
TOPSOIL
Dense, damp, gray-brown, very clayey fine
sand (SC) TERRACE DEPOSITS
Bottom of Hole
LOG OF TEST PITS 2 AND 3
LAGUNA RIVERIA UNIT 11
DRAWN BY: ch I CHECKED BY:e.~9 I PROJECT No:5110lVI-SIOl I DATE: 2-12-81 I FIGURE NO: A-3
WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS·
•
'.
•
•
•
•
••
•
•
•
•
DEPTH TEST DATA I.~~ .. en SAMPLE IN ~ __ ~ __ ~ __ ~I-v'n~n
FEET *MC *DD "BC TESTS NUMBER
-
5 _ 4-1 [
-~. -4-2
10 -4-3
i\
-
15 -
-
-
-
-
-
*For description of symbols, see Figure A-I
Test pit 4
Approximate El. 39'
SOIL DESCRIPTION
Damp, brown, light gray to light red-
brown and dark gray, silty to clayey sand
COMPACTED FILL
1'1edium dense, damp, light brown, s;Llty
sand (S1'1) TOPSOIL
Dense, damp, mottled gray to black, clayey
sand (SC) TOPSOIL
Bottom of Hole
LOG OF TEST PIT 4
LAGUNA RlVERIA UNIT 11
DRAWN BY: ch I CHECKED BY~S) I PROJECT NO: 51101-SIOl I DATE: 2-12-81 I FIGURE NO: A,,:,4 .
WOODWARO·CLYDE CONSUL rANTS
.'
•
••
••
•
•
•
•
••
Project No. 51101W-SI01 Woodward· Clyde Consultants
APPENDIX B
LAGUNA RIVIERA UNIT 5
OFFSITE FILL AREAS A AND B
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
Dated April 5, 1972
B-1
---. --------:----.---~ .~-----.-.-.~-,
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Ap ril 5, 1972
Project No. 72-105-1
KalT;ar Construction Company
P.O. Cox 71
Carlsbad, California 92008
Attention: ":1'. Jel'ry Rombotis
U~GLrrlA RIVIERA UiiIT 5
OFr~ITE rILL ~REAS A AND B
CA~LsnAD, CALIFORNIA
In accordance with,your request and your letter of authorization dated
January 12, 1972, ~'/e have provided soil engineering services in conjunction
with the grading of the subject site. These services included:
(1) Engineering observation of the grading operation.
(2) Taking field density tests in the fill as placed and compacted.
Current site preparation, compaction and te~'t:;~:~ :~/ere done between January
6 and 24, 1972 'in accordance with the IISpec ifications for ,the Construction
of Controlled Fills" presertr:Q in the January 6, 1966 addendum to the
IIFoundation Soils Investjgu-t:.ion for Rancho Agua Hedionda Subdivision" dated
July 29, 1965, prepared by Dresselhaus Engineering of Oceanside, California .
Fill was placed, compacted and tested on Offsite Fill Areas A and B. The
approximate limits of fill are indicated on the attached figures. Prior
grading was done on June 10, 1969 in a portibn of Area A.
As the site grading progressed, the compaction procedures wel'e observed and
field density tests were made to determine the relative compaction of the
fill in ploce. Field observations and field density test results indicate
thiit !.he fill has been compacted to 90, percent or more of maximum laboratory
density. The approximate locations of field density tests and the li;T)its of
cor~acted fill are shown on the attached Figures 1 and' 2. The results of
field density tests and of relative compaction, ex~ressed as a percent of
ll'd>:i::.um laboratory density, arc given on the attached forrls .
Lc!l'o~'dtory tcs~s to dcter;:-;ine nt0isture-density relationships, maximum dry
dCf:sity, opt1nJm rnoisture cO!1~~nt, grc.ln si7.e di~,lribution, plasticity
c/iarcicteristics and strc/"i(lb and 5\'.'211 ch"r(lcterist';cs I':ere rerformcJ on
rc;rc<;cntaUvc si'l!l';Jles of-tl;e rncTJ.:riill used for fill. The results of
1 al ordtory tes ls are gi ven on the attached forms.
It is our t;llccrstanding til3t additiollal grading I>/ill be done in these
•
••
e,
•
•
•
•
•
•
."
Kamar Construction Company
Project No .. 72-105-1
.April 5, 1972
Page 2
areas at a future date. foundation recommendations will be made in our
final report at the completion of all grad~ng.
The elevations of compaction,tests correspond approximately to the eleva-
tions sllO'.'I'n on the grading plans for "Laguna Riviera Unit No.5" dated
October 1967 and prepared by Raymond R. Ribal, Civil Engineer, Brea,
Ca 1 itorni d.
This report 'covers the fill placed under our observation :luring tl.e dates
specified above. Additional fill placed after these dates slJould be com-
pacted under the obser"ation of thi's office and tested to assure compliance
with the earthl'/ork specifications of the project. This offi.ce should be
contacted at least 24 hours prior to backfilling operations.
The inspections and tests of compaction made during the period of our ser-
vices on the subject site \'Jere in accordance \-/ith the local.acceptable
standards for this period. The conclusions or opinions drawn from the
tes ts and site ins pecti ons apply on ly to our work I'/ith respect to gradi ng
and represent conditions at the date of our final inspection.
We will accept no responsibility for any subseauent changes made to the
site by others or by uncontrolled action of \'later or by failure of others
to properly repair damages caused by uncontrol~ed action of water •
EH?/JLH/SFG/jm
Attachments
(7)
WOODWARD· GIZIENSKI & ASSOCIATES
•
• ..... "/
• /f::J
•
•
.'
•
•
•
FOr Leg~1d,See Figure 2
•
•
t .,',,' • ; ... <.~,:':~.: .... ':::;' .. A~ .. ~~:
i .. ':. . A-7
1 ".'
f
I .
\
I
I
\
\
\ \ ,
I
I ' . I
Offal te Area B
See Figure 2
I I' I
~ ~SubdlvJslOn Boundary .... ~
------.:.
FI ElO DENSI TV TEST LOCATIONS
OFFSITE FIll AREA A
LAriUHA RIVIERA llt!IT 110. 5
hOJDWARD -GlZi8JSKI & ASSOCIATES
COKSULTING SOIL ~WO FOUNDATION EHG/NEERS AHD' GEOLOGISTS SI.I4-OI£GO CAlIFOKli/A .
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
.'
•
•
. ~ ....
"~.:.......' ;;;:;;;.-=='." -:!:C., ='''="'-'~~~~~~~~~~=====rl lP-' .. '..... ---.. ---I' ~ ..... "
,
/
••••••.. J ", .........
, ,
'-, ,:"
....,
I , I ,
"', I ,
I ' l, ....... _ .. -...... , --',----... " ,.. I. '. ... ,
I' I .~ -.. : •• '.'" I.(:~~. :, .
\ ..• B-21 -.' . , . " .,'; .. , \ ., " " ' 8-2 \
\ 6-19' 682010-.6-12 ~,. ..roa-ISo ee-I~ ea-15 \ \. • -~ B-1 \j .'\ ,/. -'.' " . -,
\ . 0 ;,.~Y', ........ 8-9 .• Bwl B~I'. ""\ ~B-17B-2.f'· ~~ .. :"-ii-lIo·lf-3· &8-7 ;;.0 -8
\ ~.8-18./' '":'---!.fL-6 ,: " oS-4 ......... .. .. SubdivisIon Boundary
':. :.-' ::::~ ~:; /~:
-
Hillside Drive
LEGEND
• Indicates approximate location of Field Density Telt
Dlndlcates approximate limits of Tested Fill •
FI ElD DEliSI Tf TEST lOCATl ONS
OFFSITE FILL AREA B
LAGUNA RIVIERA UIIIT flO. 5
. hOOMRD -GIZ 18~SKI & ASSOCIATES
CONSULTING SOIL AND FOUHDATIOH ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS Sh~ nl[r~, CAll~O~HIA '.
l. CoR. BY: !!~;.'
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
tOMPACTION TEST RESUL 1\
LAGUNA RIVIERA UNIT 5 (Offsite Fill Area A)
72-105-1
DATF.S COVERED June 10. 1969 and Janua ry 6 through 24, 1972
J,(OI.TU,UC: 04U ft.,. "na:aT LOCATION ELE.VA1'ION CO~TEHT tcu .... t.,. 01' 0"-lEST .,.. DAY WT.
1969
JUNE 10 A-l SEE FIGURE 1 64.0 1 11.7
A-2 66.0 1 12.3
A-3 : 54.0 I 11.7
A-4 68.0 1 10.5
A-5 38.0 1 10.5
A-6 41.0 I 11. 1
1972
JMI6 A-7 44.0 1 9.9 ---A-8 47.0 1 10.5
A-9 70.0 1 9.3
A-10 72.0 1 9.3
JAN 21 A-ll 72.0 1 !:J.9
JAN 24 A-12 74.0' 10.5
.. ~ ...
'';.~ ~ ~
DATE Rr:.-oPiTEO 4 -5-72
PAG!: 1 01'" 1
,.teLD LA.OrcA TOllY 'UtU TIVI:
lla ... alTY D~NIITY 'COHr~CTIOH
PC" rf:, ' .. 0" LAn. L1~H ••
116.8 125.0 93.4
118.0 125.0 94.3
116.0 125.0 92.6
114.9 125.0 91.8
115.2 125.0 92.3
116.0 125.0 92.8
1'12.9 125.0 90.2.
116.2 125.0 93.4
113.0 124.5 91.0
113.2 125.0 91.0
116.5 127.0 91.8
116.8 1:27.0 . 92.0
WOODWARD. GIZIENSKI & ASSOCIAHS
:.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
."
.;.;OMPACTION: TEST RESUL"f..
Jo. N ... J,fr. LAGUNA RIVIERA UNIT 5 (Offsite Fill
.Joe NUMIiUt 72-105-1
DATES COVEReD Ja!'luary 12 through 18, 1972 .
04,,1( nr_T _nC.T '-,"CA.T'ON kU",.c," C>,
JAN 12 8-1 SEE FIGURE 2
B-2
B-3
JAN 13 8-4
8-5
8-6
8-7
8-8
8-9
JAr~ 14 8-10
8-11
8-12
8-13
8-14
B-15
8-16
JAN 17 8-17
JAN lS 8-18
8-19
8-20
8-21
8-22
----------~--------------
Area B) DATil: RI:POAUD 4-5-72
PAGI: 1 o~ 1
NOt.TU ... ,.aLO &....A .... OlltATOlty ft£LATIVI:
at.I:.VATION COHTl.kT DC""'."Y O""-.'TY COM,. ... CT'OH
O"TIrST "" OilY WT. t<, 1'<:.' ..... 0" LAD. (.JI.,.,. -----------_._-
78.0' 9.3 122.B 131.0 93.5
84.0' . 9.9 115.0 124.5 92.9
82.0' 9.3 113.9 122.5 93.0
8S.0' S.7 113.5 125.0 91.0
90.0' 10.5 121.0 127.0 96.0
84.0 ' 9.3 116.0 124.5 92.9
92.0' 10.5 112.0 124.5 90.2
94.0' 11.0 117.0 125.0 93.9
86.0' 10.5 116.0 125.0 . 93.0
80.0' 7.5 118.5 131.0 90.6
90.0' 10.5 115.0 122.5 93.7
84.0' 11. 7 ' 114.5 122.5 93.5
94.0' 10.5 115.B 125.0 92.5
96.0' 8.7 122.0 131.0 93.2 98.0' B.7 121.5 131.0 93.0
92.0' 9.9 117.5 125.0 94.0
~ .~ ~ -". 72.0' .. ,", 7.5 122.8 131. 0 93.6
74.0' 8.7 112.2 122.5 91.7
76.0' 9.3 115.2 124.5 92.6
78.0' 10.3 113.8 124.5 91.3 BO.O' 6.9 110.8 122.5 90.3 . 82.0' 9.3 115.9 124.5 92.9
)
WOODWARD· GIZI£NSKI & ASSOCIAHS
(0.-.\1."".,.. ~"" ."'0 'O»H .... l~ ...... · .. -•• , ."0 ~O\04I't\
. -----, --. -----------< -_. -------_.-• " • ..::'..:-::---~-
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
13 0
120
110
100
90
= ......... ,1_............. --_ ..... _;::;::o:t
100
DIRECT SHEI.R TEST [)',TA 1 2 3
Pry Oen,lty. pcf 111. 1 80 (:J a::
Initial \,/(!t~r Conten,t. ~ 9.3 ~ 60 <
15.9 c... final WBt~r Content. ~ ....
./~parent C~~esio~. p$f 450 Q '10 u "" w
Apparent Friction Angle. ~ 23 0.. 20
f.~CU/JHCfJ. IJIAtYSI S
a 4 ij 10 ~ LJ~
'\\'.
I n
~~~.-3
. ..\ -) \,.",.
.2-
...... , \
1-
1-
~' .. k-±--\ ..... ~~I , ' , I , I I I
I I "":j::'Y ';'"~-J I! or 1000 100 10 1.0 9.'1 0.01 O.COI \ ~~~ZERO AIR VOIDS CURVES
r,rV . '.
GRAIH SIZE IK I!II.lH~EJERS·
r-lSllT i CLI.'f
\ _\
~ L1 d.~ :> OJ.
/ It -~~ ,,,)
00-~ II
t-ill
~
t-
5
>-u: Q
HAXII1UH DRY
D£IlS I TY. pcf
f\ rr'2.70 S.6. j
.\ J)../2.60 S. G.
1\ f\y2~50 S.G.
r~~'
\\1\\ 1\
\ \ \tl \ \
\ 1\ ?-l'\ f\ '-.
i\ r\ '\
'\ j\ t\ .:
'\
'\ \ f\
. ~, \
\ \ !\
1\ ~
\ \
\
1\
\ 1\
.
PLASTI CITY CH ARACTERISTICS
Liquid lit:lit;
Plasticity lno ex. r.
CI a $ S i fica t i 011 by Unified SOil
Systcm ' Classificatiol'l
NP = NO.n Pl asth: . .... : !.:-::-::.
SWELL TEST DA TA
Ini tial Dry Dt> nsi ty, pef
' Ini ti a1 tlaler Con tt:nt. "t
load. psf
Percent SI'.-ell
: :
1
~H-sr4
1
r\ \ SAt-.lPLE lOCA T I ON \~ ~ 1\
1 2 3 h,"
125.0 122 -Pti nl
1
2
Lot 1(;0
Lots 139-140 SEnd
Cut, II Enrl of ' Lot 139
2 3
NP
SH. SH
2 3
OPTl~~!C HOISTURE .~ L ... ~'~_ 3
9.5 6.5 _ 9.d'.~ ::5\, --------.~------~
, : .. / -1 I ""'/I"~/-':.vl' 10 20 30 40 j I. 1),/r ... ""U..l M";," , ~BORAlORY CO PACT! 0:: 1 ES;.:.T ________ /'_"'_" _' ___ 2_:_t ... _(~_.#_(.,.._._" _L-r. ___ ,/"_'_i_p_O
ccmEHT. 1,
I I I 11 I . If /'-,.~.
I I I -, ~~OISTlJilt CONTftIT. r.; -I. 1~1
I I. I
USORATOi?Y W":PACTIOH
Fill SUITADILI TV TESTS ,.
lAr,U~ll\ rnVIEr!J\ U':IT 5 , l-----------_ -'I
I..JOUD:':ARi) -Gill r;~SK I t. ASSQC I (1)2)' f'l
W:5UllIHc.. SOIL I,~~ r(lU~:y,f1l'l/ EN~!,/i[f.I!S MiO GEOlO~15iS ~ _____ -.," Ii PI .. ,), CI.tlH"~IA __ 'I
,r.::. : .. : :.') ,:"'::-: _... ~-~ .. ~.I. '~f:·l~I~. :
TEST HETHO:J: ISIi·: 1)15:'7 -70T
1_(,,,:-;:--·::-· -;-:-:--~I· :7:-:-'" ~ 1 '1 .,.) 1··\ or • -(1"-". .. .. , " L' t ......... " .'.. .... .J _ • _I {. .. r I I, " 1.!:::_=_~""_='='===:::::._='I=~~'_'_'b~ __ "-~·.-:-"":"·-........... ""'~~.=.~.-~=.. ___ ..... -...~),'"'-\;.'.--....._--:-w __ '~..:,
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
"
r .;.:;...=_;;.;;.;.;;;-.. ==_::::.;;:_:;;;: __ :;:-:::= .. "01 ........ __ = .. ::::::::;:; .. ::;::==::::;:.;.;.;::;;~. •
c i ,
1
I' t,
, ;
~ . ,
1
f .
\ i i
{
! I r 1 I ,
I r J ~ ~ • I
f I I
f
[JIF:[CT ~:!::-!.'! ITsr D/\TA 7 .-
Dry D~~~;tr. pef 114.4
Initial \;:lter Cont""t. 31 9.0 ~
final \{.!tC'( Ccnlcnl. .-15.1 H -,
~ppa~cnt Cohesion. psf 360
J.i'parent fricti'1n Angle. r. 25
litO
13
't ~i?ZERO AIR VOIDS CURVES
1---1--~~ , '
I----
1--1--2.70S.G.
0 1-;-2,60 S.G. \ \ 1-1-,--2.50 S.G~ ,-V'-,\ \, -
120
/ '\f\f\ ,-. !
J ;
f\. \ .-, ' -\ !\ ~---'--,
1\ ... '-." ~. u l\ \ \ .. , , "
a. -.-
110
. \ 1\ f\
, .
G l\ \,
,
, ,
~ \ f\ ... -
:5 1\ ~S~ .. --
>-~ Q f\ 1\
100
\ \. 1\:
" \ :.\ ~
~ \
\~
-~
I~A~ II~UH DRY 7
C~HSI TY. pcf 127.0
CI'TlKU!f ~OI5TUilE
cc"nf.I/I. 'f, 10.0
I I I I I I I I
I I I I I H0ISTU>:E COHT[IIT. . .
L----
<!> :r.
100
80,
•• i' H£CHMIClll. /.,'iM:YSIS'
a Q ~ 10 i,..) <',,0()
, ---i~,-----3~ ,-i\_
--" -~ _l _1 .1 1 Ll
I-_.-
I-_ ... -,,-f---,
-' -
f---
A~
H
II I t -
t I
I,
I
t I-o
1000 10 0 I 001 0 :11 il 100 10 . .if
GRAtH SIZE Iii HII.l H:ETf.PS I • I
" fi syr'V~LJ '''If-ri: COSBLES .... II, '~_'U SILl, & Cll;-. cIt J c! t, ,
, I: PLASTI CITY CHARACTER I STI CS 7
liquid lit:1;t. r. 30 ,
Plastic; ty Inoex. r. 16
Classification by Unified Soil "sc Classification System "
' ,
'. -::/;~: ..
:; .:.'::~ :.:. ~;:" " . , ' ........ .. ' . ~:. '.": ! ;.;;. " .'
SNEll TEST DATA 7
11\; t ial Dry Density. pd, 114.6
Ini lial Water ContE:l\t. :;.. 10.2 I '
Load. psf 160
Percen t SI-Ie II 2.3
" > ,~ , . , -
. ' SAMPLE LOCATIOH ~ l\.~ 7 Lot 148 ,
r\"
~~
~ chv!Jrl4: r\.. ~ h //6 iJ I l'-. tiJ .
I
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Project No. 51101W-SIOI
Assumptions:
APPENDIX e
LAGUNA RIVIERA, UNIT 11
SLOPE STABILITY
CUT eLOPES
(1) Maximum height of slopes
(2) Maximum slope inclination
(3) unit weight of soil
(4) Apparent angle of internal friction
(5) Apparent cohesion
(6) No seepage forces .
References:
H = 30
2 to 1
y = 125
<P = 33 0
C = 330
(1) Janbu, N., "Stability Analysis of Slopes with
Dimensionless Parameters, -" Harvard Soil Mechanics
Series No. 46, 1954. . __
pcf
psf
(2) Janbu, N., "Dimensionless Parameters for Homogeneous
Earth Slopes," JSMFD, No. SM6, November 1967.
Analyses:
Safety Factor, F.S. c = yH
Acf yII tan 1> (125) (30) (tan = = c 300
From Fig. 10 of Reference (2 ) N = cf'
F.S. = 2.2
e-l
Where Ncf is the stability
number for slopes with
-both c and <p.
33 0 ) = 8.1
27
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
••
. t
project No. 51101W-SIOI
Assumptions:
APPENDIX C
(continued)
LAGUNA RIVIERA, UNIT 11
SLOPE STABILITY
CUT SLOPES
(1) Maximum height of slopes
(2) Maximum slope inclination
(3) unit weight of soil
(4) Apparent angle of internal friction
(5) Apparent cohesion
(6) No seepage forc~s .
References:
H = 30
2 to 1
y = 125
<j> = 33 0
C = 300
(1) Janbu, N., "Stability Analysis of Slopes with
Dimensionless Parameters," Harvard Soil Mechanics
Series No. 46, 1954 .
pcf
psf
(2) Janbu, N., "Dimensionless Parameters for Homogeneous
Earth Slopes," JSMFD, No. SM6, November 1967.
Analyses:
Safety Factor, F.S. c = yH
Acf = yII tan 9' == ( 125) (3 0) (tan
c 300
From Fig. 10 of Reference ( 2) N = cf'
F.S. == 2.2
C-2
Where Ncf is the stability
number for slopes with
both c and cp.
33 0 ) = 8.1
27
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Project No. 51101W-SIOl
I. GENERAL
APPENDIX D
SPECIFICATIONS FOR CONTROLLED FILL
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 compac-
ted fills. I-t shall be the contractor's responsibility to
place, spread, water, and compact the fill in strict accord-
ance with these specifications. -A soil engineer shall be the
mvner' s representative to inspect the construction of fills.
Excavation and the placing of fill shall 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 specifications will be
permitted only upon written authorization from the soil
engineer. A soil investigation has been made for this pro-
j ect; any recommendations made in the report of the soil
investigation or subsequent reports shall become an addendum
to these specifications.
II. SCOPE
The placement of controlled fill by the contractor shall
includE; all clearing and gr~bbing, -remoyal of existing unsat-
isfactory 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 mater-
ial imported or excavated from the cut areas that, in the
opinion of the soil engineer, is sui table for use in con-
structing fills. The material shall contain no rqcks or hard
lumps greater than 24 inches in size and shall contain at
least 40% of material smaller than 1/4 inch in size. (Mater-
ials grea-ter 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. Mat~rial 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 3% when
compacted as hereinafter specified for compacted fill and
soaked under an axial pressure of 160 psf.
D-l
· ...
•
•
•
•
•
•
••
•
•
••
Project No. 5ll0lW-SIOl
APPENDIX D (Continued)
3 . Representative samples 9f material to be used for fill
shall be tested _ .. in the laboratory by the soil engineer in
order to determine the maximum density, optimum moisture
content, and classification of the soil. In addition, the
soil engineer shall determine the approximate bearing 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
encoun·tered 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 while at a moisture content
near the optimum moisture content and to a density that
is not less than 90% of the maximum dry density deter-
mined 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 and shall be compacted 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 mater-
ial 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 appear-
ance free from unsightly 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 equipment to be used.
(c) Where fills are· construct'ed 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
06 • •
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Project No. 5ll0lW-SIOl
APPENDIX D (Continued)
(d) After the foundation for the fill has been cleared,
plowed, or $carified, 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 o_f 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 thorough-
ly mixed during the spreading to obtain uniformity of
material in each layer.
, (b) When the moisture content of
that specified by the soil
added by the contractor until
specified.
the fill material is below
engineer, water shall be
the moisture content is as
(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 contrac-
tor to the specified density,." Compactipn shall be
accomplished by sheepsfoot rol:l~,is, vibratory rollers,
mul tiple-vlheel pneumatic-tired rollers, or other types
of acceptable compacting equipment. ' Equipment shall be
of such design that it ,vill be able to compact the fill
to the specified density. Compaction shall be continu-
ous over the entire area, and the equipment shall make'
sufficient trips to insure that the desired density has
been obtained throughout the ~n~ire 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 constructed
in accordance with the specifications.
2. The soil engineer shall' make field density tests in
accordance vd,th ASTM Test No. D 155664. Density tests shall
be made in the compacted materials below the surface where
the surface is disturbed. When these tests indicate that the
density of any layer of fill or portion thereof is below the
,specified density, the particular layer or portion shall b~
revlOrked until the specified density has been obtained.
D-3
,4: _, •
•
•
•
•
••
•
•
•
•
e·
Project No. 51101W-SIOl
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 water. He shall control surface water to
avoid damage to adj oining 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 comI2letion of grading and when the soil engineer
has finished h1S observation of the work, no further excava-
tion or filling shall be done except under the observation of
the soil engineer.
! " , .' ~:.' '. -. " ., ,... ::"~::' ... :: ..... ~.~~. ...... '. -.......... :,: '.' ,.:
f .. ; .. , : '.: ,: :' ,.... _ ....
Strip as specified
.. ' .. ''-: .... ' ... l.:·:.', .. :~ .. :._ .~ :.: :~:.:_: .. _:~:' .-i,:= ' .. :'. . . .. '\ -.. ':' ........ :. :' .. '.". '::-':>"':' .' " .,.' "': /.' ,
Or~iginal ground
"Slope ratio == N .. ' " . , M
NOTES:
The minimum \vidth liB" of 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
englneer.
D-4
•
•
•
.'
•
--•
•
•
'-"-\
\
\
\
50
\
\.
ALONDRA DRIVE
/
/
_, I
" / '-.....-
/
/
/
---/ " / '--
/
I
/
/' ",-'60
/
\
"1' . . . .
I. : V ---. , "-
\
LOT 2 \, I
I
at
VALENCIA AVENUE
. . . . . . . . .
.-.. 3 . . . .
. . . " .. ~., . . .. . lAJ·· .~ ... ·0/·:.··.: >,/' .. ... . ,...,...
/'
LOT ~.~: / /':O~~
LOT 4 / .....-/' I
I
J ---/
I
/
/
I
/' /
I
I
50
I
I~ I I /
\ /
\. /
----
-....... ___ /' -50
'-/' ----
40-_
"-'\.
\
\
LOT 6 I
I
I
/
I
{
\
)
/
I
/
"-'-"
2
[IJ
LOT 7
at
/
40
w > -a: c
~ a: < Q.
LEGEND:
-/ ", --
Of
Ocf
Qt
Indicates approximate location
of T est ~ Boring.
Indicates approximate location
.of Test PfL -.. ~~
InclCates approximate location
of existing ground surface contour.
Indicates approximate location
of geologic contact.
Indicate~ _~p'proximate location
of existing cut slope ~.
Indicates approximate location
of exiSting fill slope.
Indicates approximate linits of Fill
Indicates approximate limits of
Compacted Fm
Indicates approximate runits of
Quaternary Terrace Deposits.
o 30 60
1 1
GRAPHIC SCALE (Feet)
SITE PLAN AND GEOLOGIC MAP
LAGUNA RryERlA UNIT 11
DRAWN BY: ch FIGURE NO: 1
• ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ~D~A~T=E: __ 2~-~1~2~-~8~1~ __ _L~~~~~5~1~1~0~1~W~-~S~I~O~1 __ _J
WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS