HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP 98-15; Agua Hedionda Lagoon Foundation Parking Lot Expansion; As-Graded Report of Parking Lot Expansion Agua Hedionda Lagoon Foundation; 2017-05-16AS-GRADED REPORT OF
PARKING LOT EXPANSION
AGUA HEDIONDA LAGOON FOUNDATION
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
Prepared for:
AGUA HEDIONDA LAGOON FOUNDATION
c/o Hofman Planning & Engineering
31 52 Lionshead Avenu e
Carl sbad, California 92010
Project No. 10693.002
May 16, 2017
Le igh ton Consu lting , Inc.
A LE I GHTON GROUP COMPA NY
Leighton Consulting, Inc.
A LE IGHTON GROUP COMPANY
Agua Hedionda Lagoon Foundation
c/o Hofman Planning & Engineering
3152 Lionshead Avenue
Carlsbad, California 92010
Attention: Ms. Lisa Rodman
May 16, 2017
Subject: As-Graded Report of Parking Lot Expansion
Agua Hedionda Lagoon Foundation
Carlsbad, California
Introduction
Project No. 10693.002
In accordance with your request and authorization, Leighton Consulting, Inc. (Leighton)
has performed geotechnical observation and testing services during the construction
and grading operations for the parking lot expansion of the Agua Hedionda Lagoon
Foundation located at 1580 Cannon Road in Carlsbad, California. This report
summarizes our geotechnical observations, field and laboratory test results, and the
geotechnical conditions encountered during the fine and post grading operations for the
project.
The conclusions and recommendations presented in the project Geotechnical
Investigation (Leighton, 2014) are still considered pertinent and applicable for the
construction of the project. As of the date of this report, the grading activities are
· essentially completed with the exception the mat slab located at southern side of the
site and on the grading of Cannon Road.
3934 Murphy Canyon Road, Suite B205 ■ San Diego, CA 92123-4425
858.569.6914 ■ Fax 858.292.0771 11 www.leightongroup.com
10693.002
Summary of Grading Operations
The fine and post grading and construction operations for the parking lot expansion of
the Agua Hedionda Lagoon Foundation was performed by Roberts Grading between
June 30, 2015 and October 20, 2015. The grading and construction activities were
performed under the observation and testing of a representative of Leighton in
accordance with the project Geotechnical Investigation (Leighton, 2014),
recommendations made during the course of grading, and the requirements of the City
of Carlsbad . The geotechnical conditions encountered during grading are essentially as
anticipated. Our field technician and our field geologist were on-site on an as-needed
basis during the fine and post grading
In summary, the fine grading operations for the parking lot included : 1) 1 to 1.5 feet of
removal for mitigation of loose compressible material; 2) placement of compacted fill in
the parking area, and 3) placement and compaction of the fill soils were moisture
conditioned to above optimum moisture content, and compacted to at least 90 percent
relative compaction based on ASTM Test Method D1557. A summary of field density
test results and the approximate locations are provided in Appendix B and on the
Density Test Location Map (Figure 1 ).
The post grading performed included: 1) preparation of pavement subgrade soils; 2)
placement and compaction of aggregate base material; 3) placement and compaction of
DG pavement (DG tests designated as aggregate base in Appendix B); and 4) fill soils
were moisture conditioned to above optimum moisture content, and compacted to at
least 95 percent relative compaction based on ASTM Test Method D1557. It should be
noted that the observation and placement of the paver and/or asphalt pavement
were/was not observed or tested by Leighton.
Fine and Post Grading
• Site Preparation and Remedial Grading
Prior to grading, the area was stripped of surface vegetation, old surface
improvements, roots and debris. These materials and topsoil were consolidated and
hauled away for disposal off-site. Subsequently, the referenced area was over
excavated to a depth of approximately 12 to 18 inches of the loose material of the
proposed parking lot expansion. These materials were reused for as compacted fill.
-2-
Leighton
10693.002
During the construction · of the parking lot expansion , a small retaining wall
foundation area was also graded in accordance with the project plans (Hofman,
2014). In general, the bottom of the removals was processed by moisture
conditioning to near-optimum moisture content and compacted to a minimum 90 ·
percent relative compaction (based on ASTM Test Method D1557). Retaining wall
construction and backfill was not observed by Leighton.
Based on our observations and testing, the soil used during placement of fill was in
conformance with the geotechnical recommendations report and the precise grading
plans (Leighton, 2014 and Hofman, 2014). The field density test results and
description of approximate location for the parking lot expansion are summarized in
Appendix Band presented on the Density Test Location Map, Figure 1.
• Field and Laboratory Testing
Field density tests were performed during the placement and compaction of fill.
Density tests were performed in general accordance with the Nuclear-Gauge Method
(ASTM Test Methods D6938). The results and approximate locations of the field
density tests performed are summarized .in Appendix B. The field density testing was
performed in general accordance with the applicable ASTM standards, the current
standard of care in the industry, and the precision of the testing method itself.
Variations in relative compaction should be expected from the results documented
herein.
As indicated in Appendix B, areas in which field density test results were less than the
required minimum 90 relative compaction were reworked, recompacted, and re-tested
until the minimum 90 relative compaction was achieved .
Representative sample of the native soil and imported material placed and compacted
during the grading operations were tested for maximum dry density and optimum
moisture content in accordance with ASTM Test Method D1557. The laboratory test
results are presented in Appendix C.
-3-
L:.i.iqhlon ,,
10693.002
Post Grading
• Structural/DG Pavement Sections
Prior to placement of the aggregate base material, the pavement subgrade soils
were moisture conditioned to near-optimum moisture content and then compacted to
a minimum of 95 percent relative compaction in the parking and drive areas (based
on ASTM Test Method D1557) in accordance with the project Geotechnical
Investigation (Leighton, 2014). Aggregate base materials were then placed and
compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of their respective maximum dry. densities
(based on ASTM Test Method D1557). Subsequently, the DG material was moisture
conditioned to near-optimum moisture c.ontent and placed over the aggregate base
and then compacted to a minimum of 95 percent relative compaction in the parking
and drive areas (based on ASTM Test Method D1557) in accordance with the
project Geotechnical Investigation (Leighton, 2014). The field density test results for
the subgrade soil, aggre~ate base, and DG materials are summarized. in
Appendix B.
• Field and Laboratory Testing
Field density tests during the post-grading operations were performed in general
accordance with the Nuclear-Gauge Method (ASTM Test Methods D6938). The
results and approximate locations of the field density tests performed are summarized
in Appendix B. It should be noted that the field density testing was performed in
general accordance with the applicable ASTM standards, the current standard of
care in the industry, and the precision of the testing method itself. Variations in
relative compaction should be expected from the results documented herein .
As indicated in Appendix B, areas in which field density test results were less than the
required minimum 90 or 95 relative compaction were reworked, recompacted, and re-
tested until the minimum 90 or 95 percent relative compaction was achieved.
Representative samples of the soils placed and compacted during the post-grading
operations were tested for maximum dry density and optimum moisture content in
accordance with ASTM Test Method D1557. The laboratory test results are presented
in Appendix C.
-4-Leig 1ton
10693.002
Conclusions
The geotechnical conditions encountered during construction and grading operations for
the parking lot expansion improvements were generally as anticipated. It is our
professional opinion that the site is suitable for the intended use provided the
recommendations in the project geotechnical documents (Appendix A) are incorporated
into the _construction phases of the project.
Limitations
The presence of our field representative at the site was intended to provide the owner with
professional advice, opinions, and recommendations based on observations of the
contractor's work. Although the observations did not reveal obvious deficiencies or
deviations from project specifications, we do not guarantee the contractor's work, nor do
our services relieve the contractor or his subcontractor's work, nor of their responsibility if
defects are subsequently discovered in their work. Our responsibilities did not include any
supervision or direction of the actual work procedures of the contractor, his personnel, or
subcontractors. The conclusions in this report are based on test results and observations
of the grading and earthwork procedures used and represent our engineering opinion as
to the compliance of the results with the project specifications.
-5-
LeiQhlon
10693.002
If you have any questions regarding this report, please do not hesitate to contact this
office. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service.
Respectfully submitted
LEIGHTON CONSUL TING, INC.
1!JiebJ~
Mike D. Jensen, CEG 2457
Senior Project Geologist
William D. Olson, RCE 45283
Associate Engineer
Attachments: Figure 1 -Density Test Location Map
Appendix A -References
Appendix B -Summary of Field Density Tests
Appendix C -Laboratory Testing Procedures and Test Results
Distribution: (4) Addressee
-6-
Leiqh ton ·~
FIGURE
ST'FIIPIHC ca,/STRIJCTION NOTfS:
~ wsrAU.,.INIE'STh'IP£
@ INSTAlL4.Bl.llf"SmlPf"Qi~
~ IHSTAtLAca:ssiBI.£ 5'!WCl P(R SOlfSO 11-ZP
@ INSTAlL"NOPARKINC•l.CTTE1ff/>IC
@, lfiSTAU.·couPACrl.£T7[RlfiC
@' R0/01£ oasnNC PA\81£HT lilARr<m, l£CENO, OR uw_r I.WE BY CR!NOINC OR 5ANDBLAS11NC
@! IHSTAU. ·CGIPACr CAR 0'o'LY" SJCN
SEE S'TW'INC CENfRAL NOIE5 CW SHEET 4
~· ~
COW'ACT CAR Ot<ll.'I' ActtSS/8LE S'r\1801. DCTAIL ~ (lfSO-M-2')'"
---.....__ ·~t
)
/
~
---~\--~, --~---....:...__
~-
'AS BUILT'
RC£.__ EXP---DAT£
ffl1J';tSf' CRAQINC GJiWSRi11CZUW NQU::S· 0J CONsmucr o· ~QlETf"." CU1<S PQf SORSl1 C-1
~ CONSTRUCr a· CURB PCR l,IOOU'lfD SDRSO C-1
~· r;• CfJRS l'RANSlnCW ro a· aJ"8.
~ PROV,0£ CURB OPCNING PCR OITA.II.. SHECr z .
(J_; CONSTRUCr CONCRm WAtx Pm /,,100/f'/UJ $ORSO C-1. ~ Pl.AN.
~ KErSTONC RCT. WAU. PER DUA/LS ""'', ~ c;RAOC A \.£'GUA1m SWALE 12• DEEP UNLESS 01HffillolSE SP(OFICD ON Pf.AN.SC£ DUA/f. SHEET 2.
Q9., INSrAu UCHr a.ASS RIP RAP L--'' ►2' r-1• (/JINIMut,,t) IMTH FTLrlR
FABmC MIRAr'I 100X OR APPROW ,,.,,.
(!y CONSTRUcr RUVSE BIN ~ctOSURf: PfR arr OF' CARLSBAO STANOARO ORA'MNC CS-10. M{)()H'"Y 10 WMINATf". P£AR ACC!SS WAY ANO rmJCK LOADJNC APRON ARCA ORAIN.
@ HAl?OSCAP£ PER LANDSCAPE PLANS.
Q}_, SHAO£ STRIJC1URC PER LANDSCAPE Pl.ANS.
ii;, 12· CONCRCTC BARRIER PER OITAIL 6 ON SHEET 2
@' o• CON~ BARR/fR Pm OETAIL 1 ON SH!Er 2
~
?
f ! ..
8 i t
I • i
I~ t
,,.ur _..... RE\'1SION DESCRIPTION = ~ 11: _;;: ~
f !
Hofman ~ , .,. · ------------------.:-<:-----,\!.'! "",;;;J-\D'_----~ PRECISEGRADINGPLAN _._
--.. . ----------··«-~----.:·--.... -~ ··----·--1":6---~ ------..::··----i)8DJJJ.CgouUot.l!J.CCmCumJP8DY ---------ovDruiwPARIDIO"ioT ____________ 1
. . . FIGUl'{E--'1-.:J)ENSITY TES'F-l.QCATI "--. '·•---.....__ __ """' _ -.. · -=JASON~'"'"'" l
Plenrmg + Engineenng e= PARKING LOT-EXPANSION, AQUA--~-ION ON F'Ou.~AT.JOflf--_ 1-. ··,. •••••.,, by. "0<• -1~~~~~~~Qg~;@~ • ,,,_,....,. CARLSBAD CALIFlJRN~-, '-◊-------C::::: _::,::----+-____ ---CollccnFlno • -.,., ' ,.,. ·! 315e IJonlhN.d Avenue ado 1 t ... • --------_ ~~/.L-------l.aad~~ bwk lffi £e)S£ PRO£CT NO. ORA'IIINC NO. ~
II ~~D201) • ~ ARDO CAOOIA TORRES PE ~ --..-:-!:._ •·· " ---~--..:~-s:-:-::---_ Vo/Id ror 15 mOf!II!• .,,._ dot• of slgnotu,. I= rv; II SOP 98-15 1483-?A g nw EDU , A 11271190 ', ::::_--..... ~-!-. ,. ' -----.._ / ,.,_ -.:::..._--· -~ ~
APPENDIX A
REFERENCES
10693.002
APPENDIX A
References
Leighton Consulting, Inc., 2014, Limited Geotechnical Evaluation Parking lot Expansion,
Agua Hedionda Lagoon Foundation, Carlsbad, California, Project No.
10693.001, dated May 14, 2014. ·
Hofman Planning & Engineering, 2014, Grading· Plans For: Parking lot Expansion, Agua
Hedionda Lagoon Foundation, Carlsbad, California, dated December 22, 2014.
A-1
APPENDIX B
SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS
10693.002
APPENDIX B
Explanation of Summary of Field Density Tests
Test No. T t::>L ui -Test of ·-· Prefix Test of r.. Pr,:,fiv Test of Abbreviations
(none) GRADING
Natural Ground NG (SG) SUBGRADE
Original Ground OG (AB) AGGREGATE BASE
Existing Fill EF (CB) CEMENT TREATED BASE
Compacted Fill CF (PB) PROCESSED BASE
Slope Face SF (AC)· ASPHALT CONCRETE
Finish Grade FG
(S) SEWER Curb C
(SD) STORM DRAIN Gutter G
(AD) AREA DRAIN Curb and Gutter CG
(W) DOMESTICWATER Cross Gutter XG
(RC) RECLAIMED WATER Street ST
(SB) SUBDRAIN Sidewalk SW
(G) GAS Driveway D
(E) ELECTRICAL Driveway Approach DA
(T) TELEPHONE Parking Lot PL
(J) JOINT UTILITY Electric Box Pad EB
(I) IRRIGATION Trash Enclosure TE
Loading Ramp LR
Bedding Material B Building Pad BP
Shading Sand s
Main M
Lateral L
Crossing X
Manhole MH
Hydrant Lateral HL
Catch Basin CB
Riser R
Inlet I
Fire Service FS
Water Services ws
Head Wall HW
(RW) RETAINING WALL (P) PRESA TURA TION
(CW) CRIB WALL
(LW) LOFFELL WALL Moisture Content M
(SF) STRUCT FOOTING
Footing Bottom F
Backfill B
Wall Cell C
(IT) INTERIOR TRENCH
Sewer Lateral s
Storm Drain SD
Electric Line E
N represents nuclear gauge tests that were performed In general accordance with most recent version of ASTM Test
Methods D2922 and D3017.
S represents sand cone tests that were performed in general accordance with most recent version of ASTM Test
Method D1556.
15A represents first retest of Test No. 15
B-1
Test Test Test
No. Date . Of
AB 1 10/9/15 PL
AB 2 10/9/15 PL
AB 3 10/9/15 PL
AB 4 10/9/15 PL
AB 5 10/9/15 PL
AB 6 10/9/15 PL
AB 7 10/9/15 PL
AB 8 10/9/15 PL
AB 9 10/9/15 PL
AB 10 10/9/15 PL
AB 11 10/20/15 PL
AB 12 10/20/15 PL
AB 13 10/20/15 PL
AB 14 10/20/15 PL
AB 15 10/20/15 PL
AB 16 10/20/15 PL
AB 17 10/20/15 PL
AB 18 10/20/15 PL
AB 19 10/20/15 PL
AB 20 10/20/15 PL
Proiect Number:
Proiect Name:
Proiect Location:
Client:
SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS
Location
Parking Lot CL-2 Base
Parking Lot CL-2 Base
Parking Lot CL-2 Base
Parking Lot CL-2 Base
Parking Lot CL-2 Base
Parking Lot CL-2 Base
Parking Lot CL-2 Base
Parking Lot CL-2 Base
Parking Lot CL-2 Base
Parking Lot CL02 Base
Parking Lot DG Base
Parking Lot DGBase
Parking Lot DGBase
Parking Lot DGBase
Parking Lot DGBase
Parking Lot DGBase
Parking Lot DGBase
Parking Lot DGBase
Parking Lot DGBase
Parking Lot DGBase
10693.002
Agua Hedionda Lagoon
0
0
Test Soil
Lot # Elev (ft) Type
0.0 2
0.0 2
0.0 2
0.0 2
0.0 2
0.0 2
0.0 2
0.0 2
0.0 2
0.0 2
0.0 3
0.0 3
0.0 3
0.0 3
0.0 3
0.0 3
0.0 3
0.0 3
0.0 3
0.0 3
Page 1 of 1
Dry Density
Field Max
114.7 119.5
113.3 119.5
113.9 119.5
114.6 119.5
l 15.2 119.5
114.5 119.5
113.5 119.5
116.0 119.5
114.2 119.5
113.8 119.5
133.6 136.7
126.9 136.7
132.5 136.7
132.1 136.7
134.0 136.7
133.1 136.7
132.3 136.7
131.2 136.7
132.1 136.7
134.2 136.7
Moisture (%) Relative(%}
Field Opt. Compaction Remarks
8.4 11.5 96
10.0 11.5 95
9.5 11.5 95
10.2 11.5 96
9.9 11.5 96
10.6 11.5 96
10.3 11.5 95
11.2 11.5 97
8.7 11.5 96
9.0 11.5 95
5.0 6.2 98
4.9 6.2 93
6.0 6.2 97
5.1 6.2 97
4.6 6.2 98 .
5.6 6.2 97
4.2 6.2 97
5.7 6.2 96
6.0 6.2 97
5.4 6.2 98
5/12/2 11 :40:59Nv'
SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS
Test Test Test Location Test Soil Dry Density Moisture (%) Relative{%}
No. Date Of Lot # Elev (ft) Type Field Max Field Opt. Com~action Remarks
SG 1 7/8/15 C Parking Lot 0.0 1 117.4 121.5 11.2 11.5 97
SG 2 7/8/15 C Parking Lot 0.0 1 116.4 121.5 11.0 11.5 96
SG 3 7/8/15 C Parking Lot 0.0 l 115.3 121.5 10.9 11.5 95
SG 4 7/8/15 C Parking Lot 0.0 1 115.4 121.5 12.3 11.5 95
SG 5 7/8/15 C Parking Lot 0.0 1 116.9 121.5 12.2 11.5 96
SG 6 7/8/15 C Parking Lot 0.0 1 117.5 121.5 11.1 11.5 97
SG 7 7/8/15 C Parking Lot 0.0 1 117.9 121.5 10.9 11.5 97
SG 8 7/8/15 C Parking Lot 0.0 1 114.9 121.5 11.6 11.5 95
SG 9 7/8/15 C Parking Lot 0.0 1 117.1 121.5 10.7 11.5 96
SG 10 7/8/15 C Parking Lot 0.0 1 117.0 121.5 11.6 11.5 96
SG 11 7/31/15 SW Walkway S. Side 0.0 1 111.9 121.5 13.1 11.5 92
SG 12 7/31/15 SW Walkway E. Side 0.0 1 116.1 121.5 12.l 11.5 96
SG 13 8/12/15 PL Parking Lot 0.0 1 115.2 121.5 11.7 11.5 95
SG 14 8/12/15 PL Parking Lot 0.0 1 115.5 121.5 12.0 11.5 95
. SG 15 8/12/15 PL Parking Lot 0.0 1 117.1 121.5 11.4 11.5 96
SG 16 8/12/15 PL Parking Lot 0.0 1 116.2 121.5 11.8 11.5 96
SG 17 8/12/15 PL Parking Lot 0.0 l 115.4 121.5 12.4 11.5 95
SG 18 8/12/15 PL Parking Lot 0.0 1 115.3 121.5 12.1 11.5 95
SG 19 8/12/15 PL Parking Lot 0.0 1 117.0 121.5 11.5 11.5 96
SG 20 8/12/15 PL Parking Lot 0.0 1 118.1 121.5 12.2 11.5 97
SG 21 8/12/15 PL Parking Lot 0.0 1 114.9 121.5 11.9 11.5 95
Proiect Number: 10693.002
Proiect Name: Agua Hedionda Lagoon
Proiect Location: O
Client: 0 Pae:e 1 of 1
5/12/2 ll:41:17AIV
SUMMARY OF FIELD DENSITY TESTS
Test Test Test Location Test Soil Dry Density Moisture(%) Relative(%}
No. Date Of Lot# Elev (ft) Type Field Max Field Opt. Com~action Remarks
l 6/30/15 CF Parking Lot 54.0 1 113.0 121.5 14.2 11.5 93
2 6/30/15 CF Parking Lot 56.5 1 109.4 121.5 11.9 11.5 90
3 7/1/15 CF Parking Lot 56.0 . 1 116.5 121.5 12.1 11.5 96
4 · 7/1/15 CF Parking Lot 56.0 1 116.0 121.5 12.2 11.5 95
5 7/6/15 CF Parking Lot 54.0 1 114.5 121.5 11.8 11.5 94
6 7/6/15 CF Parking Lot 54.5 1 114.0 121.5 12.9 11.5 94
7 7/6/15 CF Parking Lot 55.5 1 115.1 . 121.5 12.3 11.5 95
8 7/6/15 CF Parking Lot 54.5 1 117.5 121.5 13.0 11.5 97
9 7/6/15 CF Parking Lot 57.0 1 109.9 121.5 13.2 11.5 90
10 7/6/15 CF Parking Lot 57.0 1 115.2 121.5 11.6 11.5 95
11 7/6/15 CF Parking Lot 56.5 1 111.4 121.5 12.3 11.5 92
12 7/6/15 CF Parking Lot 54.0 1 111.8 121.5 11.9 11.5 92
13 7/6/15 CF Parking Lot 57.0 1 114.1 121.5 11.8 11.5 94
14 7/6/15 CF Bottom Key Stone Wall 58.5 1 111.1 121.5 12.0 11.5 91
15 7/6/15 CF Bottom Key Stone Wall 58.5 1 118.0 121.5 11.5 11.5 97
16 7/13/15 CF S DGPath 54.5 1 114.9 121.5 12.5 11.5 95
17 7/13/15 CF S DGPath 55.5 1 115.0 121.5 11.5 11.5 95
18 7/13/15 CF Shade Structure Area 56.0 1 115.2 121.5 12.0 11.5 95
19 7/13/15 CF Shade Structure Area 55.5 1 116.3 121.5 11.7 11.5 96
Proiect Number: 10693.002 ·~~ Proiect Name: Agua Hedionda Lagoon ~ Proiect Location: 0
Client: 0 Pag:e 1 of 1
5/12/2 ll:40:17AiV
APPENDIX C
LABORATORY TESTING PROCEDURES AND TEST RESULTS
10693.002
APPENDIX C
Laboratory Testing Procedures and Test Results
Maximum Density Tests: The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of
typical materials were determined in accordance with ASTM Test Method D1557. The
results of these tests are presented in the tabie below:
Sample Sample Description Max Dry Optimum
Density Moisture Number (pct) Content(%)
1 Light-Brown Silty Sand (SM) 121.5 11.5
2 Well-Graded Silty Gravel with Sand (AB) 119.5 11.5
3 Grayish-Brown Silty Sand (DG) 136.7 6.2
Particle Size Analysis: Particle size analysis was performed by mechanical sieving
methods according to ASTM D6913. A plot of the sieve results are provided on a Figure in
this appendix.
C-1