HomeMy WebLinkAboutCT 81-29; Alicante Hills Lots 1-19, 37, 38; Soils Report Final; 1986-04-17-
-
- FINAL REPORT OF TESTING AND OBSERVATION
SERVICES DURING MASS GRADING OPERATIONS
FOR
ALICANTE HILLS
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA
CT-- 8-/-2Ly
ENGINEERING DEPT. LIBRARY City of Carlsbad
2075 Las Palmas Drive Carl&ad, CA 92009-4859
-
-
For
THE DAVIDSON COMPANY
San Diego, California
-
.-
BY
-
GBOCON, INCORPORATED
San Diego, California
May, 1986
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
GEOCON INCOIPOAITED
Geotechnical Engineers and Engineering Geologists
File No. D-3573-MO2
April 17, 1986
The Davidson Company
9555 Genesee Avenue San Diego, California 92121
Attention: Mr. John Moore
Subject: ALICANTE HILLS
LOTS 1 THROUGH 19, 37 AND 38
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA
FINAL REPORT OF TESTING AND OBSERVATION
SERVICES DURING NASS GRADING OPERATIONS
Gentlemen:
In accordance with your request, we have provided testing and observation
services during the mass grading of the subject subdivision. our services were performed during the period of November 19, 1985 through May 5, 1986.
The scope of our services included the following:
. Observing the grading operation including the installation of
subdrains and the removal and/or processing of loose topsoil,
existing uncontrolled fill soils and alluvial soil.
. Performing in-place density tests in fill placed and
compacted at the site.
. Performing laboratory tests on samples of the prevailing soil
conditions used for fill.
. Preparing an As-Graded Geologic Map.
. Preparing this final report of grading.
GWLePd
The grading contractor for the project was Brown, Pardee and Haney. The
project plans were prepared by Rick Engineering Company and are entitled "Grading Plans for Carlsbad Tract NO. 81-29, Alicante Hills" revised dated
January 17, 1985 by J. P. Engineering.
The project soils report is entitled "Geotechnical Investigation for
Alicante Hills, San Diego, California" prepared by Geocon, Incorporated and
dated November 14, 1985.
9530 Dowdy Drive San Diego, CA 92126 619 695-2680 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
.-
-
-
File No. D-3573-MO2
May 12, 1986
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 Grading Plans.
Grading
Grading began with the removal of brush and vegetation from the area to be
graded and the material was then exported from the site. Loose topsoils,
existing uncontrolled fill soils and loose alluvial soils in areas to
receive fill were removed to firm natural ground.
Prior to placing fill, the exposed natural ground surface was scarified,
moisture conditioned and compacted. Fill soils derived from on-site cutting
operations and import soils were then placed and compacted in layers.
During the grading operation, compaction procedures were observed and in-
place density tests (ASTM D1556) were performed to evaluate the relative
compaction of the placed fill. Field observations and the results of the
in-place density tests indicate that the fill has generally been compacted
to at least 90 percent relative compaction. The results of the in-place
density tests are summarized in Table II. The tests shown as "Moisture
Tests" in Table II indicate fill areas containing a sufficiently high
percentage of rock as to make in-place density tests unreliable. A visual
examination of these observation pits indicated that the fill material had
been properly placed, that sufficient moisture was present and that the
rock material was completely surrounded by soil and no "nestin?" of rocks
was observed. The approximate locations of the in-place density tests are
shown on the Site Plan, Figures 1, 2 and 3.
Laboratory tests were performed on samples of material used for fill to
evaluate moisture-density relationships, optimum moisture content and
maximum dry density (ASTM D1557-70, Method C), expansion and shear strength
characteristics. The results of the laboratory tests are sunnarized in
Tables I and III.
Slopes
Both cut and fill slopes have maximum incljnations of 2.0 to 1.0
(horizontal to vertical) with maximum heights on the order of 37 feet and
25 feet, respectively. The fill slopes were periodically backrolled with a
sheepsfoot compactor during construction and were track-walked with a
bulldozer upon completion.
Due to unfavorable geologic conditions consisting of adverse fracturini? and
jointing of the formational materials in the slopes adjacent to Lots 14 and
15, they were stabilized. The stability fills included placement of
backdrains and a minimum 5-foot-thick horizontal fill from face of slope to
-2-
_-
-
-
-
-
--
-
,~~.
.-
.-
-
File No. D-3573+02
May 12, 1986
backcut. The slopes were overbuilt with select import, cut hack to
finished grade and track-walked with a bulldozer.
All slopes should be planted, drained and maintained to reduce erosion.
Slope planting should consist of a drought-tolerant mixture of native
plants and trees having a variable root depth.
Finish Grade Soil Conditions
During the grading operation, building pads which encountered clayey or
rocky soils at grade were undercut at least 3 feet and capped with granular
soils. Similarly, our observations and test results indicate that granular
soils were placed within at least the upper 3 feet of finish grade on fill
lots. The laboratory test results indicate that the prevailing soil
conditions within 3 feet of finished grade on each building pad have an
Expansion Index of 50 or less and are classified as having a "low"
expansion potential as defined by UBC Standard Table 29-C. Table III
presents a summary of the indicated Expansion Index of the prevailing soil
condition of each lot.
In addition to capping building pads as described above, the cut portion of
those pads which contained a cut-fill transition within the building area
or contained hardrock at subgrade was undercut at least 3 feet and replaced
with compacted fill soil.
Subdrains
Subdrains were installed at the general locations shown on the approved
Grading Plans. The subdrains were "as-built" for location and .elevation by
the project Civil Engineer.
Soil and Geologic Conditions
The soil and geologic conditions encountered during grading were found to
be similar to those described in the project geotechnical report.
Formational deposits of Jurassic-aged Santiago Peak Volcanic6 and the
Tertiary-aged Delmar Formation were exposed in the cut areas. The enclosed
reductions of the approved Grading Plans depict the as-graded geologic
conditions observed. Minor seepage was encountered in the cut slope northeast of Lots 33 through 38. The seepage appears to be the result of
seasonal water daylighting through the joints and fractures of the
volcanics. A series of drains were placed in the area to aid in controlling
the seepage and another drain is proposed behind the retaining wall. The
approximate locations of subdrains and density tests are also indicated.
No soil or geologic conditions were observed during the grading which, in
our opinion, would preclude the continued development of the property as
planned.
-3-
-
-
-
-
-
File No. D-3573-MO2
May 12, 1986
CONCLUSIONS AND RF/COMMENDATIONS
Based upon laboratory test results and field observations, it is our
opinion that the prevailing soil conditions within 3 feet of finish pad
grade consist of "low" expansive soils as classified by UBC Table 29C and
"low" expansive as defined by FHA/HDD criteria.
We recommend the following foundation and slab design criteria for the
proposed two-story residential structures.
Foundations
1. It is our opinion that the proposed residential units can be supported
on continuous strip footings and/or isolated spread footings providing the
recommendations of this report are carefully followed. Continuous strip
foundations for "very low" to "low" expansive soils should have a minimum
width of 12 inches and extend at least 12 inches below the lowest adjacent
pad grade. Minimum continuous footing reinforcement should consist of at
least two No. 4 steel bars, one placed near the top of the footing and one
placed near the bottom.
2. Isolated spread footings should be at least 1S inches square and should
likewise extend at least 12 inches below the lowest adjacent pad grade.
Reinforcement specifications given herein are intended for soil consider-
ations only and are not to be used in lieu of structural reinforcement.
3. Footings designed as recommended above may he proportioned to impose a
bearing pressure of 2,000 psf. This allowable bearing capacity is for dead
plus live loads and nay be increased by one-third for transient loads.
4. It is recommended that, prior to placing steel or concrete, all founda-
tion excavations be observed by a representative of Geocon, Incorporated to
verify that the soil conditions do not differ significantly from those
encountered during our investigation.
Retaining Walls
5. All retaining wall foundations should comply with the recommendations
stated in the previous section.
6. All retaining walls should be designed to resist active earth pressures
equal to the force exerted by a fluid weight of 35 pcf. This assumes a
level, drained and properly compacted backfill, with the hackfill extending
a lateral distance of 0.5H from the heel of the retaining wall. The value
is based on the supposition that no surcharge loads will be situated within
a lateral distance from the top of the wall equal to the height of the
wall.
-A-
-
-
-
-
-
.-
-
-
-
..~
-
-
File No. D-3573-MO2
May 12, 1986 x.1
7. Retaining walls complying with the above recommendations and supporting
a slope inclined at 2:l (horizontal to vertical) should be designed to
resist au active earth pressure exerted hy a fluid weight of 45 pcf. For
retaining walls supporting a 1.5:1 slope, this value should be increased to
55 pcf.
8. For retaining walls that are fixed or restrained at the top (i.e.
basement walls), an additional uniform pressure of 7H psf (where H equals
the height of the wall in feet) should be added to the above equivalent
fluid loading.
9. Passive earth pressures against properly backfilled walls and spread
footings are considered to equal the forces exerted by a fluid weight of
300 pcf. These pressures can be used to resist lateral loads providing the
footings or shear keys are poured neat against properly compacted fill
soils or suitable formational soils and that the soil mass extends a
minimum of 5 feet horizontally from the face of the footing, or three times
the height of the surface generating the passive pressure, whichever is
greater. However, the upper 12 inches of material not protected by floor
slabs or pavement should not be included in the design for passive
resistance.
10. If friction is utilised to resist lateral loads, a coefficient of
friction between the soil and concrete of 0.35 may be used.
11. All retaining walls should be provided with a backfill drainage system
adequate to prevent the buildup of hydrostatic forces. This is critical in
the northwest portion of the site where saturation of surface and
subsurface soils has been observed. A typical retaining wall drainage
system is given in Figure 4. In addition, pre-manufactured drainage boards
such as Miradrain may be used to facilitate drainage of the proposed
retaining walls.
Slabs-on-Grade
12. Concrete slabs-on-grade should possess a nominal thickness of 4
inches. Minimum slab reinforcement should consist of 6x6-lC/lP wire mesh.
The bedding under slabs should consist of at least 4 inches of clean sand
or crushed rock. If moisture sensitive floor coverings are planned, the
use of a visqueen barrier is also recommended. At least 2 inches of the
clean sand should be placed above the visqueen to allow for proper concrete
curing. Care should be taken to make sure that the reinforcement is
located in the middle of the slab.
-5-
File No. D-3573-1102
May 12, 1986 -
-
-~
-
-
-
-
-
-
_-
-
-
Drainage and Maintenance
13. Good drainage is imperative to reduce the potential for differential
soil movement, erosion and subsurface seepage. Positive measures should be
taken to properly finish grade the building pads after the structure and
other improvements are in place, such that drainage water from lots and
other adjacent properties are directed off the lots and away from
foundations and the top of slopes. 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 resultsfrom increase in landscape irrigation.
Pavement Sections
14. Following the placement of utilities within the street sections, rough
subgrade should be prepared and R-Value tests taken. Favement recomenda-
tions can be provided approximately 10 working days after R-Value sampling.
LIMITATIONS
The conclusions and recommendations contained herein apply on~ly to our work
with respect to grading, and represent conditions at the date of our final
observation, April 17, 1986. Any subseouent grading should be done under
our observation and testing. As used herein, the term "observation" implies
only that we observed the progress of the work with which we agreed to be
involved. Our conclusions and opinions as to whether the work essentially
complies with the job specifications are based on our observations,
experience and testing. 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.
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.
-6-
File No. D-3573-MO2
May 12, 1986
-
-
If there are any questions regarding our recommendations or if we can be of
further service, please contact the undersigned.
Very truly yours,
GEOCON. INCORPORATED - -
RCE 28188 CEG 1137 Project Geologist
/ - JW:MRR:lm
(6) addressee
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-7-
File No. D-3573402
-
-
-
-
-
PROPOSED RETAINING WALL -
.hJq;+j&-- OPEN-GRIDED 1’) MAX. MGREGATC
opo,‘.,4~ MIN. Do, j b.,O.b p 0% 1
DRAIN TO SUIT OUTLET % !L
4 “‘oo; y?.fl.
L.i.00 0251
I\\\\ PROPOSED FOOTING
NOTE
IF CLASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL ( PER SEC. 68-1.025
CALTRANS STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS ) IS USED THE
FILTER FABRIC MAY BE DELETED
-
-
RETAINING WALL DRAINAGE DETAI
ALICANTE HILLS - SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA
DEPTH OF KEY
LL
-.
-~
File No. D-3573+02
my 12, 1986
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Sample
NO.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
TABLE I
Summary of Laboratory Compaction Test Results
ASTM D1557-70
Description
Maximum Dry Optimum
Density Moisture
PCf % Dry Wt.
Light brown, fine- to medium-
grained, Silty, slightly
Clayey SAND with clqballs
Tan-brown, fine- to coarse-
grained, Silty Sandy CLAY
with weathered rock
Whitish-cream, Silty Sandy
with clay, weathered fol-mational
Tan to gold brown, Silty,
fine SAND with angular gravel
and cementations
Tan, poorly graded, slightly
Silty SAND, fine to medium,
with some clay balls and rocks
Yellow-brown, well graded,
Sandy CLAY with subangular
and angular rock
Import, Encinitas Blvd. Tan,
poorly graded SAND
Import, Encinitas Blvd. Tan,
well graded, fine to medium,
Silty SAlTD with clay chunks
Import, Palonar Airport
Import, Palomar Airport
Import, El Camino Real
Import, Rancho Santa Fe Rlvd.
Import, Rancho Santa Fe Blvd.
Import, Rancho Santa Fe Blvd.
Import, El Camino Real
128.0
120.5 2.7
110.9 6.0
126.7
122.8 13.0
120.6 11.9
119.0 12.7
121.9 11.1,
118.0 12.8
101.7 21.6
117.1 12.8
115.6 14.3
116.3 13.9
120.5 12.3
121.4 12.2
-
I I I I I I I
File No. D-3573-MO2
I I I I 1 I
TABLE II (Continued)
Sum~uary of Field Density Test Results
I);1 t f ‘I’cst Elcvat ion Dry Dens. I.ocati.on - Feet pcf. 1985 Ill,. __-
12117 21
22
23
24
12/19 25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
Lot 29 144 114.6
Lot 31 143 115.3
Lot 32, Toe Key 125 118.3
Lot 34, Toe Key 125 108.9
Lot 21, Slope Area 137 113.1.
Lot 19, Slope Area 138 111.0
Lot 23, Slope Area 138 112.0
Lot 17, Slope Area 135 117.7
Lot 22, Slope Area 139 112.4
Lot 20, Slope Area 140 117.0
Lot 21, Slope Area 142 112.8
Lot 32, Slope Area 128 120.5
Lot 30, Slope Area 129 118.0
Lot 23, Slope Area 142 117.4
Lot 20, Nope Area 144 114.5
Lot 21&22, Slope Area 146 114.8
Lot 18, Slope Area 137 116.0
Lot 20, Slope Area 145 117.7
Lot 23, Slope Area 143 121.3
Lot 17, Slope Area 139 119.3
12/20
12121 38
39
40
I I I I I
MoJsturc Rcl Camp
% Dry IJtL % of i-lax
17.6 90
15.6 91
14.3 92
14.9 90
16.3 94
16.3 92
15.6 93
14.9 92
17.0 93
13.6 91
17.0 94
14.3 94
13.6 92
13.0 92
14.3 90
15.6 91
11.7 91
‘14.9 92
14.3 95
12.4 93
Soil Type
& Ibmar ks
4
4
1
2
2
2
2
1,
2
1
2
1
1
1
4
4
1
I I I I I I I
File No. D-3573+102
Dntc Test 1985 IJO.
12121 41
42
12123 43
44
45
46
47
12124 48
49
12/26 50
51
52
53
54
55
56
12127 57
58
59
60
I I I I I
TABLE II (Continued)
Summary of Field Density Test Results
Elcvotion Dry Dens.
Location Feet pcf.
Lot 19, Slope Area 140 117.2
Lot 22, Slope Area 148 111.1
Lot 32 140 112.6
Lot 33 138 115.2
Lot 32&33 139 116.6
Lot 28 133 115.7
Lot 28&29 136 112.2
Lot 19, Slope Area 142 113.2
Lot 17, Slope Area 142 114.9
Lot 19, Slope Area 144 111.5
Lot 18, Slope Area 143 112.3
Lot 19, Slope Area 146 111.4
Lot 17, Slope Area 145 113.0
Open Space, Between Lots.27&28 133 116.0
Open Space, Between Lots 27&28 124 114.7
Open Space, Between Lots 27&28 137 110.4
Lot 28 137 114.6
Lot 33 136 111.3
Lot 32&33 142 110.9
Lot 33&34 140 105.0
I ! I I I j
Moisture
% Dry lkl
13.6
14.9
16.3
15.6
16.3
15.6
17.6
16.3
17.6
14.9
15.6
14.3
14.9
15.6
13.6
14.9
13.6
.16.3
13.6
19.0
Rcl Camp Soil Type
% of Elnx b Rcmnrks
92 1
92
93
91
91
91
91
92
94
93 .i
93
92
94
92
91
92
90
92
92
95
2
2
4
1
4
5
5
5
6
6
6
6
4
4
2
4
2
2 ! ~-
:3 3
I I I I I I I I I I I I I
File No. D-3573-MO2
TABLE II (Continued)
Summary of Field Density Test Results
Dnte Test 1985 &
12127 61
12128 62
63
12/30 64
65
66
67
68
69
70
12130 71
12131 72
1986 73
l/3 74
75
76
77
l/6 78
79
80
Location,
Lot 32&33
Open Space Betwee? Lots 27&28
Open Sapce Between Lots 27&28
Retest of #63
Lot 28
Open Space Between Lots 27&2a
Lot 28
Lot 29
Lot 28
Lot 28
Lot 28
Lot 38, Toe
Street Area Lot 28
Lot 24, Slope Ares
Lot 26, Slope Area
Lot 35, Slope Area
Lot 37, Slope Area
Street Area Between Lots 36&37
Lot 37
Lot 36, Slope Area
ElevGltion
Feet
138
119
127
127
140
137
131
138
140
142
144
129
143
144
138
128
132
134
135
. 130
Dry Dens. Moisture
pcf. % Dry Ilt I
103.9 19.8
115.7 14.3
105.2 12.4
116.5 13.0
118.0 15.6
115.4 16.3
114.9 14.9
111.5 14.3
109.5 14.9
111.2 15.6
114.4 17.6
109.2 14.9
109.7 14.9
117.4 16.3
108.5 18.3
111.9 17.6
113.4 18.3
111.7 ‘14.9
106.6 16.3
113.1 17.0
I I 1 I I
Rcl Comp Soil Type
% of hx & Rcnnrks
94
91
87
97
93
94
91
91
91
92 .*
95
91
91
93
88
91
92
91
90
92
3
4
6Ck. 64
6
4
5
4
5
2
2
2
6
6
4
5Ck. 93
5
5
5 ;~
9 B
5
~1 I I I I I /
File No. D-3573-MO2
I I I I I I I I I I I
TABLE II (Continued)
Sumnnry of Field Density Test Results
Date 1966
116
l/7
l/8
l/9
Test
&
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
Location
Lot 38
Lot 35
Storm Drain Between Lots 27&28
Lot 35, Shot Rock
Lot 35, Shot Rock
Lot 36, Shot Rock
Lot 34, Shot Rock
Lot 34, Shot Rock
Lot 34, Shot Rock
Lot 36, Shot Rock
Storm Drain Between Lots 27&28
Lot 27, Slope Area
Retest of f/75
Lot 25, Slope Area Shot Rock
Lot 27, Slope Area, Shot Rock
Lot 24, Slope Area, Shot Rock
Lot 26, Slope Area, Shot Rock
Lot 25, Shot Rock
Lot 5&6
Lot 5
Elevation Dry Dens.
Feet pcf.
134 118.0
134 107.5
137 108.9
136 Moisture
139 Moisture
137 Moisture
141 Moisture
140 , Moisture
142 Moistura;
139 Moisture
126 120.1
132 114.5
137 Moisture
140 Moisture
143 Moisture
145 Moisture
142 Moisture
146 Moisture
141 111.6
.140 112.1
tklisturc Rcl Camp
% Dry lltl % of Elax
15.6 96
14.3 91
17.0 89
17.6 Moisture
17.0 Moisture
17.6 Moisture
16.3 Moisture
19.0 Moisture
17.6 Moisture
16.3 Moist&.
13.6 94
14.3 95
16.3 Moisture
17.0 Moisture
17.0 Moisture
15.6 Moisture
18.3 Moisture
17.6 Moisture
14.3 93
14.9 93
Soil Type
6 Itmarks
5
9
5Ck.176
5
5
5
5
5
6
6
1
6
6
9
9
9
4
~~~ -1 ~~---l I I I I i I I I I I
File No. D-3573+102
Date Test
1986 No.
l/V 101
102
l/10 103
104
105
106
l/l3 107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
TADLE II (Continued)
Summary of Field Density Test Results
Location
Elevation
Feet
Lot 6, Slope Area 137
Lot 6 142
Lot 6 143
Lot 5, Slope Area 138
Lot 3, Slope Area 127
Lot 5&6 Slope Area 138
Lot 1 124
Lot 4 130
Lot 3, Slope Area 129
Lot 27, Slope Area 133
Lot 28, Slope Area 131
Lot 35, Slope Area 129
Storm Drain Easement Slope 130
Storm Drain Lot 25, Slope Area 140
Retest of #107 124
Lot 2 126
Lot 3 132
Lot 1 124
Lot 26, Slope Area 140
Lot 30, Slope Area .131
Dry Dens. Ploisturc Rcl Comp
pcf. 7. Dry lltL 7. of EI‘IX
112.7 15.6 94
110.1 15.6 91
109.3 16.3 91
108.9 13.6 90
112.1 13.6 91
114,6 13.6 90
106.1 14.3 88
109.4 13.6 91
100.8 19.8 91
108.4 12.4 91 -*.
113.3 12.4 93
109.1 12.4 92
110.7 11.7 91
113.1 11.7 95
109.7 13.6 91
109.3 14.9 91
111.1 15.6 92
111.0 '16.3 92
111.9 13.0 92
114.7 12.4 94
I I I I I
Soil Type
b Rcmrks
2
2
2
2
5
4
2 Ck. 115
2
3
7
8
7
8
7
2
2
2
8
File No. D-3573+02
I);1 I e ‘I‘c’s t
-1986 &
l/l4 121
122
123
124
125
126
l/l5 127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
I I I I I I
‘YULE II (Collt~lnucd)
Sulllnlnry of Fiel,d Dens.lty Test Rcsul~ts
I:lcvatlon Dry Dcms,
Locatioll Feet J’CE.
Lot 36, Slope Area 132 112.1
Lot 8 146 114.8
Lot 11 145 114.7
Lot 24, Slope Area 144 113.4
Storm Drain Easement Slope 134 112.8
Lot 31, Slope Area 132 113.5
Lot 10 147 116.5
Lot 12 147 117.1
Lots 8&V 148 117.5
Lot 9 147 117.1
Lot 35, Slope Area 132 111.8
Lot 38 136 109.0
Lot 30, Slope Area 132 113.1
Lot 26, Slope Area 142 114.4
Lot 9 139 111.6
Lot 11 145 116.6
Storm Drain Easement Slope 138 113.0
Lot 24, Slope Area 146 113.9
Lot 32&33 134 113.4
Lot 36, Slope Area 135 113.1
I I I I )
thistul-e Kc 1 conlp
% Dry lJtl % of Elax
13.0 92
13.0 91
13.6 91
13.9 93
12.4 93
13.6 93
13.6 92
14.9 92
14.9 93
15.6 92 _..
12.4 92
11.7 92
14.9 93
14.3 94
17.0 93
15.6 92
16.3 93
.14.3 93
14.9 93
15.6 93
Sol 1 Type
h RCSKI r ks
8
4
4
8
8 ’
8
4
4
4
4
7
7
8
8
2
4
8
8
~~1 ~-1 I , I I / I I I I I I
File No. D-3573-MO2 TAlI1.E II (Colltln~lccl)
sLIIIIII1ary of FJ~ClCl Ucns~lty Test Results
II;11 c ‘Test
1986 5
l/16 141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
l/17 153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
Locatioll
Lot 10
Lot 8
Lot 12
Lot 34
Lot 35, Slope Areas
Lot 25, Slope Area
Storm Drain & Sewer Main Easement
Lot 7, Shot Rock Fill
Lot 7, Shot Rock Fill
Lot 34, Slope Area
Lot 7, Shot Rock Fill
Lot 23, Slope Area
Lot 33, Slope Area
Lot 36, Slope Area
Lot 7, Rock Fill
Lot 36
Lot 34
Lot 8
Lot 9
Lot 35
Elev;lt i~orl ury lkllS.
Feet J'Cf.
145 ~111.4
142 108.9
147 111.2
144 114.8
136 109.7
144 115.1
140 Moisture
138 Moisture
142 Moisture
138 112.2
144 Moisture
148 112.0
136 111.3
137 114.0
144 Moisture
139 115.2
143 113.4
144 117.6
146 117.2
143 115.1
I I I I I,
Ehisturc Ilc 1~ CW(1
% Dry ut, E III Eli1.u
15.6 92
14.9 91
14.3 91
12.4 94
11.7 90
12.4 94
15.6 Moisture
15.6 Moisture
16.3 Moisture
15.6 92 .r)
16.3 Moisture'
15.6 92
14.9 91
14.3 94
14.3 Moisture
14.9 95
12.4 93
‘11.7 92
12.4 92
12.4 94
soi 1 ‘Type
h licw~rks
2
2
5
8
a
8
2
2
2
8
2
8
8
8
6
8
8
1 / i 1 !,,, B 8
I I I 1 -1 ~-~-l I I I I I I
File No. D-3573-MO2
'TABLE II (Continued)
Suumry of Field Dens~lty Test lksults
I);11 e
1986
l/18
l/20
l/21
l/22
l/23
l/24
Test
L
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
Location
Lot 24 Rock Fill
Lot 25, Rock Fill
Lot 34, SlopezArea
Lot 29&30, Slope Area
Open Space Between~Lots 27&28, Slope
Lot 23, Slope Area
Lot 30
Lot 29
Retest of #168
Lot 28
Lot 30
Lot 28&29
Storm Drain F. Inlet Box
Lot 29
Lot 31
Retest of #83
Storm Drain Between Lot 27&28
Lot 33, Rock Fill
Lot 34, Rock Fill
Lot 32, Rock Fill
I:lcv:1tlon Ury Dens.
Feet pcf.
154 Moisture
153 Moisture
140 115.3
138 110.5
143 116.3
149 116.1
147 115.4
146 105.5
146 117.9
145 117.7
149 117.2
148 118.3
134 111.4
149 118.4
150 115.6
137 110.7
142 110.0
146 Moisture
145 Moisture
148 Moisture
I I / I 1
El0 i s t 111-c Ilcl CasIp Soil Type
% ury lltl K of EIdX b I:CIIKI 1-1~s
15.4 Moisture
132. Moisture
14.9 95
12.4 91
14.9 95
13.0 95
17.6 97
13.6 83
14.3 93
14.9 93
14.9 93 .*.
15.6 93
14.3 91
14.3 97
13.6 95
15.6 90
11.7 90
.16.3 Moisture
15.6 Moisture
16.3 Moisture
2
2
8
a
8
8
2
4Ck.169
4
4
4
4
8
8
8
5
8
I I I I I ! I I I I I
File No. D-3573-MO2
TADLE II (ConL:J~mwd)
Sullilllary of Field Dells~lty Test Results
I)ilI e
1986
l/27
l/29
215
216
217
2112
Test
IJ 0 .
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
Incotiou
Lot 37, Rock Fill
Lot 38, Rock Fill
Lot 35
Lots 32&33
Storm Drain Near Lot 28
Retest of #I85
Lots 23&24
Lot 26
Open Space Between Lots 27&28
Street Area, Lots 22&23
Storm Drain Easement Lots 27&28
Storm Drain & Sewer Main Easement
Lot 9, Rock Fill
Lot 12, Rock Fill
Lot 21
Lot 23
Lot 24
Lots 30&31
Lot 32
Street Area, Lots 13&14
I~lcv:ltlon
Feet
135
135
146
148
144
144
156
154
142
144 :
139
144
145
146
154
156
158
150
148
142
Dry Dells.
pcf.
Moisture
Moisture
91.6
108.0
103.4
107.9
109.6
109.0
Moisture
Moisture
118.6
Moisture
Moisture
Moisture
96.6
96.6
94.3
95.8
95.9
Moisture
I I I I I
EIoJ sture Ilc 1 cwu,'
% Dry 111:. z of hx
15.6
14.9
23.5
14.9
10.5
16.3
16.3
15.6
15.6
16.3
14.9
11.7
14.9
15.6
26.6
25.0
26.6
'27.4
26.6
13.0
Moisture
Moisture
90
92
88
91
93
92
Moisture
Moistuyr:
94
Moisture
Moisture
Moisture
95
95
93
94
94
Moisture
so I1 ‘I’ypc
6 I:CUM rks
2
2
10
9
9Ck.186
9
9
9
4
4
4
4
4
4
10
10
10
10 /~ ( 10 )
2
/ I I 1 I I I I
File No, D-35734402
I I I I I
II:11 ,I
1986
2124
2125
2126
‘I’,! 5; t
NO.
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
'I‘AU1.E J I (COI~LJ~I~WCI)
SWIIIIL~L-y or b'Icl<l IJcll!i i Ly '1'v:iI: Ilcs111 Ls
I.UCClLiWl
Lot 30, Slope
Open Space Between Lots 27&28, Slope
Open Space Between Lots 27&28
Lot 25, Slope
Lot 28, Slope
Lot 32, Slope
Open Space Between Lots 27&28
Lot 34, Slope
Lot 29, Slope
Lot 27, Slope
Lot 32
Lot 29
Lot 23, Slope
Lot 31, Slope
Lot 33
Lot 30
Lot 36
Lot 33, Slope
Lot 34 I
Lot 31
l:Icv;~~Jot~ IDry Dell:;. Ehi:;LlIl c
Feet pcf. % Dr-y III.
131 104.9 13.6 -
141 105.0 14.3
144 105.4 15.6
149 115.2 13.6
143 106.6 14.3
141 112.1 13.6
146 107.4 14.9
144 113.9 14.3
145 109.2 14.3
145 111.0 14.9
151 112.3 15.6
151 114.6 14.3
151 117.3 13.0
144 108.2 14.9
150 104.7 13.6
151 108.7 15.6
144 108.0 14.3
145 108.6 16.3
142 110.5 17.6
152 109.7 17.0
I I I I I
Ill. I cm/~
z III EI;1x -
91
91
91
95
92
92
93
93
95
96 .tl
92
94
96
94
91
94
93
94
96
95
!;rri I 'Type
e I:CWI rks
12
12
12
8
12
a
12
8
12
12
8
8
8
12
12
12
12
12
12 (~~~
12 43
! 1 ! 1 1 1 I I I I I I 1
File No. D-3673-MO2
‘I‘hlll.ll II (collLJIllIcd)
SIIIIWL-y 01 FJcld Ilewlly ‘I’c!r;t Ilesutls
II.11 (! ‘ft.:;1 1986 Ii<, .
2126 221
222
223
2127 224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
2128 233
234
235
236
237
238
239
I.owLim~
Lot 35
Lot 32
Lot 29
Lot 26
Lot 23
Lot 36
Lot 34
Lot 25
Lot 22
Lot 24
Lot 27
Lot 31
Lot 32, Slope
Lot 26, Slope
Retest of i/233
Lot 30
Lot 20, Slope
Lot 23, Slope
Lot 34, Slope
Lot 30, Slope
I:Ic";,L Jo,,
Feet --
147
152
151
155
158
146
149
157
158
149
155
152
146
147
147
152
153
153
146
146
IIt-y IkllS. Elr~i:;L,~,~o
-pcf. % Ill-y 111 L
113.4 17.0
107.9 15.6
112.1 17.0
‘97.3 27.4
108.2 17.0
108.6 17.6
108.4 14.3
112.1 13.6
106.5 13.0
108.4 14.9
109.1 13.6
106.3 14.3
102.6 11.1
105.6 13.6
105.5 13.6
102.3 11.1
109.2 14.3
109.5 14.3
105.1 13.0
106.7 13.6
I I I I I
III, I CO1!1~, !;<I I I 'l'yp!
x rJr klx h I:c~n;~rl<s -~-- -
98 12
93 12
97 12
96 10
92 9
94 12
94 12
96 13
92 13
93 .I. 13
94 13
91 13
88 13Ck.235
91 13
91 13
88 13Ck.245
94 13
94 13 I
90 13 I
92 13
! ! I j 1 I I I I I I
File No. D-3573-MO2
l'ADf.E II (COIIL Lllrd)
slllllllla~y or Flcld Dcnslty l‘cst I~esults
II;11 (! ‘St.r:t
1986 !&
2128 241
242
3/l 243
244
245
246
247
313 248
249
250
251
252
316 253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
LocaLloll
Lot 19
Lot 21
Lot 32, Slope ‘.
Lot 35, Slope
Retest of #236
Lots 28&29, Slope
Lots 32&33, Slope
Lot 27
Lot 24
Lot 21
Lot 28, Slope
Retest of 11251
Lot 28 FG 153
Lot 29 FG 153
Lot 30 FG 154
Lot 31 FG 154
Lot 32 FG 154
Lot 33 FG 151
Lot 34 FG 151
Lot 35 FG 148
I:lcv;lt10,,
Feet
153
158
149
148
152
149
151
157
159
159
151
151
I I I I I I
Dry Dcns. EhJstu,-c llc I camp
[‘Cf. % Dry lltl z Cl f Elax
109.9 14.9 95
110.0 14.3 95
108.4 13.6 93
105.2 13.0 91
108.8 13.6 94
105.3 14.9 91
105.0 13.6 90
109.4 13.0 91
110.5 14.3 92
112.5 14.3 93
100.4 12.4 83 .‘.
109.7 13.0 91
109.6 12.4 91
111.0 14.3 95
106.9 14.9 92
106.2 13.0 91
107.0 14.3 92
109.1 13.6 94
109.1 13.6 94
115.4 13.6 96
so I~ I ‘Sypc
h Rcwt t ks
13
13
13
13
13
13
13
14
14
14
14Ck. 252
14
14
13
13
13
13
13
13 ) /’ ~~I.
‘, B 14
I I I I 1 I I
File No. D-3573-MO2
I I I I I I
I):1 I c
1986 .---
316
317
317
3124
3125
3127
‘I’All1.l: I I (CrmL IIIIWI)
s~l~il~-y ~,r FJ t! id ik!11!: t t.Y ‘I’t,r;L ikskli IS
Tt:!:L I:I,!“;ll.lm, Dr-y DIYIR.
- 111,.
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
I,ocaLio~~
Lot 36
Lot 24
Lot 27, Slope
Lot 21, Slope
Lot 26, Slope
Lot 23, Slope
Lot 21, Slope
Lot 37
Lot 37, Slope
Lot 38
Lot 25, Slope
Lot 22, Slope
Lot 19, Slope
Lot 37
Lot 38
Lot 26
Lot 23
Lot 20
Lot 18
Lot 17
FC!fJl:
FG 147
144
152
155
156
157
154
139
139
139
159
158
154
140
141
157
159
157
148
157
_id.
106.6
106.4
109.2
111.9
112.0
111.2
115.0
110.4
112.1
114.5
112.2
113.8
115.1
112.2
110.9
113.0
111.5
108.5
113.1
113.1
I I I I I
1k1 J :it,,,~c If? I CO111l1 !:<I I I ‘I’)q”?
% hy III L z or thx h I:CIII;I I ks
13.0 92 13--
11.7 91 11
13.6 93 11
14.3 93 14
14.3 96 11
14.9 95 11
14.9 95 14
14.3 92 14
13.6 96 11
14.3 95 14
15.6 96 .*. 11
15.6 97 11
14.9 95 14
14.3 96 11
13.0 95 11
13.6 97 11
13.6 95 11
,12.4 93 11
15.6 97
15.6 97
I !
II;1 I I! ‘1’1.:: I
.19as !!!LL
3127 281
282
283
284
285
3128 286
287
288
3131 289
411 290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
412 298
299
300
I I ! I I I I I I I
File No. D-3573-)102
'1'Alll.l: I I (Cvul IlllWCl)
!~llllllllilI.y or I-I elcl IlOll~ I, y ‘l’l!%L IlCS~ll cr;
I.ocaLi~~~~ .-
Lot 36, Slope Test
Lot 34&35, Slope Test
Lot 31&32, Siope Test
Lot 28&29, Slope Test
Lot 27
Lot 27L26, Slope Test
Lot 24&23, Slope Test
Lot 19
Street Area in front of Lot 26
Street Area Cul-De-Sac
Head wall Cul-De-Sac
Street Area in front of Lot 30
Street Area in front of Lot 22
Backside of Lot 9 Rockfill
Backside of Lot 8 Rockfill
Street Area in front of Lot 36
Street Area in front of Lot 19
Lot 1
Lot 1
Lot 4
KI,!";,,~ lo,,
I;CCL
143
138
149
145
157
150
155
153
153
148
147
149
157
130
135
142
151
126
125
135
Dry Ilc!llr;.
_ 1!6L
106.5
109.3
105.9
103.4
110.7
106.8
108.4
113.5
110.5
112.1
109.5
119.1
115.1
Moisture
Moisture
106.0
106.6
113.9
Moisture
111.5
I I I I / I
1111 I :;,,,I, C! Ill! I crwl!
z 1)1-y 111 L x_r,r Ihx --_
13.6 92
14.3 92
16.3 91
14.3 a9
14.9 92
15.6 92
16.3 93
13.0 97
13.0 94
12.4 96 .u
13.0 94
14.9 99
15.6 98
15.6 Moisture
16.3 Moisture
22.7 88
11.7 91
15.6 95
16.3 Moisture
13.0 95
::rr I I ‘l’y,“!
h I:CIW rks -___-
13
7
13
13Ck.349
14
13
11
11
11
11
11
14
11
4
4
14, Ck. 296
11
2
4 f~
j' 23 11
I I I I I I I I I I I I I
File No. D-2573-MO2
‘TABLE II (Colltinucd)
Swlllary of I:iCJ~d Deldcy Test Results
I);1 t c TCSL
L9f16_ ___ Ilo.
412 301
302
413 303
304
305
306
307
308
414 309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
417 317
318
319
320
L0c;ltiw
Lot 6
Lot 1
Lot 1
Lot 2
Lot 4
Lot 5
Lot 9
Lot 1
Open Space Between Lots u&28 near F base
Lot 10
Lot a
Lot 11
Lot 9
Open Space Between Lots 27&28 near F base
Lot 2
Lot 4, Slope
Lot a
Lot 11
Lot 14
Lot 9
I:lcv;~tJ.on Dt-y Dells. tlojsturc Ilc! 1 COllll’
Feet pcf. x Dry IJL, % or EIiIX
144 108.0 12.4 92
125 106.3 12.4 91
127 111.4 14.3 95
128 105.7 11.7 90
135 111.4 13.6 95
145 107.3 13.0 92
149 110.8 14.3 95
129 113.4 15.6 97
141 114.1 15.6 95
148 110.6 11.1 91 .II
149 115.8 13.6 95
149 114.7 15.6 95
151 114.8 14.9 95
142 115.3 16.3 96
129 115.0 15.6 95
132 110.2 13.0 91
151 110.7 12.4 91
150 114.7 15.6 94
149 110.0 13.6 91
151 115.5 16.3 95
I I I I I
Soi 1 ‘Type
h RCIIIJ rks
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
14
15
15
15
15
14
15
15
15
15
15
; ~~~
‘, i!!
15
File No. D-3573+102
TAIII.E II (ConLlnucd)
sLllllllli1L.y or Field DcnsiLy Test lbzsults
l)dI c ‘SCSI:
1986 Ilo. ____
417 321
322
323
324
325
4/a 326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
419 339
340
Loc;ltion
Lot 12
Lot 10
Lot 13 ‘.
Lot 11
Lot 13
Lot 11 Slope Area
Lot g&IO Slope Area
Lot 12 Slope Area
Lots lO&ll Slope Area
Lot 12&13 Slope Area
Lot 11 Slope Area
Lot 10 Slope Area
Lot 12 Slope Area
Lot 7
Lot 3 Slope Area
Lot 22
Lot 23
Lot 24
Lot 15
Lot 16
I:I~cv;ltlan Dry DCllS.
Feet pcf.
150 110.0
151 115.2
150 113.5
151 116.4
151 112.2
141 113.5
143 110.3
145 111.7
147 112.2
148 113.6
151 112.1
151 112.5
151 112.4
149 114.5
133 112.5
FG 160 115.0
FG 162 115.0
FG 161 112.6
145 113.9
147 110.2
I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
Phi st11re Ilc I, COlll,l Sol1 ‘Type
“/. Dry IIL 2 z of Nax b Ik!lllilL.kS
11.7
15.6
14.3
13.6
13.6
11.7
12.4
12.4
14.9
14.3
14.3
13.6
14.9
15.6
14.3
14.3
13.6
13.6
13.0
12.4
91 15
95 15
94 15
96 15
92 15
94 15
91 15
92 15
92 15
94.’ 15
92 15
93 15
93 15
94 15
93 15
95 15
95 15
93 15
94 f~ 15 :,
91 15
I I I I I I I I I I I I I
File No. D-3573-MO2
TABLE II (Contlllucd)
Suuw,ary of Fiel~d Dcmlty Test I~csults
I);1 I c 7’1:s t
L!mi ~ No.
419 341
342
343
344
345
346
4110 347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
4111 357
358
359
Locntion~
Lot 15
Lot 16
Lot 7 Slope
Lot 4 Slope
Lot 25
Lot 26
Lot 2
Lot 1
Retest of i/284
Lot 7 Slope Area
Lot 37&38 Shpe Area
Lot 7
Lot 27
Lot 21
Lot 20
Lot 7 Slope Area
Green Belt Easement Slope Test
Type B Inlet Box Storm Drain
Lot 7 Slope Area
Lot 7
I:lcv;ltion Dry Dells.
FECI. pcf.
148 113.9
147 115.5
140 110.9
134 113.2
FG 160 115.7
FG 160 116.5
129 116.0
130 110.9
145 107.0
141 112.9
140 110.4
142 114.2
FG 158 111.8
FG 159 112.5
FG 157 116.5
144 112.9
140 113.8
148 110.9
145 117.3
147 115.9
I I I I I
Noj,stu,-c Rc 1 Cwp
% Dry lkl z or Nax
16.3 94
15.6 95
13.6 91
14.3 92
14.3 95
14.9 96
14.3 96
14.3 91
16.3 92
14.9 93”
11.7 91
14.3 94
13.6 93
14.3 93
15.6 96
14.9 93
13.6 93
12.4 91
13.6 97
14.9 96
Soi 1 Type
b RCllKl rks
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
13
15
15
15
14
14
15
15
a
15
15 i 2 15
I I I I I I I I I I / 1
File No. D-3573-*102
TAULE II (Continued)
Swu~mry of Fi,cld De?ns.Lty Test Results
11;1t E
129
4111
4112
4114
4115
4116
Test
IJO.
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
Loc;ltion~
Lots 20&21 Slope Test
Lot 7
Lot 17 ~,
Lot 18
Retest of f/364
Lot 17
Retest of U366
Lot 37
Lot 38
Lots 37&38 Slope Test
Lot 37 Slope Test
Lot 13 Slope Area
Lots 13&14 Slope Area
Lot 19
Lot 18
Lot 17
Lot 1 Slope Area
Lot 2 Slope Area
Retest of 11377
Lot 7
Llcvntion Dry DEIIS.
Feet pcf.
152 108.3
149 113.8
149 Moisture
149 109.2
149 118.4
149 102.9
149 110.0
FG 141 110.4
FG 142 110.2
136 111.7
137 111.0
147 111.2
150 111.0
FG 155 113.3
FG 149 113.9
FG 149 113.1
129 108.5
129 110.1
129 110.6
150 116.4
I I I I I
Noisturc Ilc 1 Cmql
% Dry IIt 1 % of Ehx
16.3 93
14.9 94
14.9 Moisture
13.9 89
13.0 96
14.9 85
13.6 91
11.7 91
12.4 91
14.9 92*
13.6 91
13.6 92
14.9 91
15.6 93
14.9 94
13.0 93
17.0 89
16.3 91
15.6 91
15.6 96
Soil Type
6 licllI~lrl<s
13
15
15
15Clc. 365
15
15Ck 367
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
13Ck.379
15 ,,’
15 i ~~: ‘, EY 15
I I I 1 I I ]
File No. D-3573-MO2
I I I I I I / I !’ I
Date Test
1986%
4117 381
382
383
384
4/18 385
386
4/19 387
388
389
390
4121 391
392
393
394
395
396
4122 397
398
399
TABLE 11 (Continued)
Sununary of Field Density Test Res,,its
Elevation Dry Dens. Location feet pcf
Street Area in front of Lots 34&35 141 113.7
Retest of #296 142 112.2
Street Arekin .iront of Lot 34 145 112.2
Street Area in front of Lot 35 145 113.6
Lot 5, Slope Area 144 110.7
Lot 6 144 111.1
Lot 19, Slope Test 150 111.3
Lot 18, Slope Test 147 111.4
Lot 17, Slope Test 148 110.3
Lot 7, Slope Area 147 111.5
Lot 14, Slope Area 138 109.5
Lot 14, Slope Area 143 112.9
Lot 16 148 112.5
Lot 15 147 111.2
Lot 14, Slope Area 139 110.8
Lot 16 148 111.3
Lot 15, Slope Area 139 111.1
Lot 14, Slope Area 145 112.6
Lot 15 147 115.7
Lot 14, Slope Area 146 113.7
his ture
% dry wt
14.9
15.6
16.3
16.3
14.9
11.7
14.3
14.9
12.4
15.6
12.4
15.6
\ 15.6
13.0
14.9
15.6
13.6
1’4.9
15.6
16.3
Rel Comp
% OE “lax
94
93
93
94
91
92
92
92
91
92
90
93
93
92
91
92
92
93
95
94
Soil Type
& Remarks
14
14
14
14
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15 /-
15 ~, R ~1~
15
I I I / I I 1 I I. I /
File No. D-3573-MO2
Date Test
xX34.2?!% Location
4123 401 Lot 14
4125 402 Lot 10
403 Lot 11
404 Lot 12
405 Lot 7&8, Slope Test
406 Lot g&10, Slope Test
407 Lot 3&4, Slope Test
4128 408 Lot 11&12, Slope Test
409 Lot 13&14, Slope Test
410 Lot 15, Slope Test
411 Lot 15, Slope Test
4129 412 Lot 13
413 Lot 14
414 Lot 14, Slope Test
415 Lot 9
416 Lot 8
417 Lot 7, Slope Test
4130 418 Lot 5
419 Lot 7
420 Lot 6
TABLE II (Continued)
Sunlmary of Field Density Test Results
Elevation Dry Dens.
feet pcf
148 113.1
FG 152 116.6
FG 152 116.3
FG 152 111.0
145 112.9
142 114.1
131 113.1
146 ,’ 109.9
144 109.6
141 114.4
137 112.9
FG 152 114.8
FG 151 115.0
147 105.2
FG 153 112.9
FG 152 113.3
146 109.9
146 112.9
FG 151 117.2
145 113.3
Eloisture
% dry -
15.6
15.6
14.9
14.3
14.3
13.6
14.9
11.7
13.0
16.3
14.9
15.6
14.9
14.3
14.3
14.9
1,3.6
14.3
14.9
14.9
Rel Camp
% of max
93
96
96
91
93
94
93
91
93
94
93
95
95
87
93
93
91
93
97
93
Soil Type
& Remarks
15
15
15
15
15
15
1s
15
15
15
15
15
15
15Ck. 437
15
15
15
15 (~
15 j’ B
15
I , I I I
File NO. D-3573-MO2
1 I I I ! I
Date Test
1986 No.
4130 421
422
423
424
5/l 425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
512 435
436
437
438
439
440
TABLE II (Cdntinued)
Summary of Field Density Test Results
Location
Lot 3
Lot 5
Lot 3
Lot 4
..Lot 1
Lot 2
Lot 15, Slope Test
Lot 15, Slope Test
Lot 15
Lot 16
Lot 15&16, Slope Test
Lot 5, Slope Test
Lot 5, Slope Test
Lot 6
Retest of #427
Retest of #428
Retest of i/414
Lot l&2, Slope Test
Lot 1, Slope Test
Lots 5&6, Slope test
Elevation Dry Dens. Moisture Rei Comp
feet PCf % dry wt % of max
133 113.1 14.3 93
146 117.0 14.9 96
136 113.4 15.6 93
135 111.0 13.6 91
FG 130 116.0 13.0 96
FG 131 113.0 12.4 93
145 107.3 14.3 88
147 105.3 13.6 a7
FG 148 110.5 12.4 91
FG 150 114.4 15.6 94
144 112.4 13.6 93
144 112.6 14.3 93
145 113.3 13.6 93
147 112.1 14.3 92
145 110.1 13.6 91
157 109.6 14.3 93
147 110.6 13.6 91
128 109.8 14.9 90
128 109.6 13.0 90
143 106.2 14.9 a8
I I I I !
Soil Type
L Remarks
15
15
15
15
15
15
15Ck.435
15Ck. 436
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
I I I I I I I I
File No. !J-3573-MO2
I I I \ I
Date Test
1p81r&
512 441
442
515 443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
Location
TABLE II (Continued)
Sununary of Field Density Test Results
Elevation Dry Dens.
feet pcf
Lot 5, Slope Test 145 110.6
Lot 3 137 115.0
Lot 6 FG 147 113.3
Lot 5 FG 147 112.2
Retest of #440 143 109.5
Lot 3 FG 136 113.1
Lot 4 FG 137 112.1
Lots 3&4, ‘Slope Test 135 109.6
Lot 4, Slope Test 136 110.7
Lot 4 137 117.8
\ I I I \ I
Moisture
% dry -
14.9
15.6
14.9
14.3
14.9
15.6
14.9
15.6
13.6
14.3
Rel Camp Soil Type
% of “13X 6 Remarks
91
95
93
92
90
93
92
90
91
97
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
-
-
-
-
File No. D-3573~HO2
May 12, 1986
TABLE III
Summary of Laboratory Expansion Index Test Results
Sample
NO.
1
2
3
4
5
Moisture Content
Before After
Test Test Dry Density Expansion
% % PCf Index
10.5 10.7 108.3 21
10.6 21.2 107.6 30
9.8 19.1 109.6 15
9.8 17.6 109.5 3
10.2 16.9 109.4 2
10.2 16.6 108.9 2
10.5 15.9 108.1 0
10.4 16.2 108.4 0
-