HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP 98-15; KELLY RANCH VILLAGE F; FINAL GRADING REPORT; 1999-01-08.
scir L'
- PACIFIC SOILS ENGINEERING, INC.
7715 CONVOY COURT, SANJIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92111
TELEPHONE: (619) 560-1713, FAX (619) 560-0380
KELLY LAND COMPANY, INC
2011 Palomar Airport Road - Suite 206
Carlsbad, CA 92009 January 8, 1999
Work Order 400607N
Attention Mr. Larry Clements
Subject Final Grading Report, Kelly Ranch, Area F,
Agua Hediondia Lagoon Nature Center,
In the City of Carlsbad, California •
References See Appendix > Gentlemen •
This report presents Pacific Soils Engineering, Inc .'s (PSE) geotechnical data and test
results pertaining to the completion of earthwork for the Agua Hediondia Lagoon Nature
Center, located at Area F, Kelly Ranch, in the City of Carlsbad, California
Data developed during project grading is summarized in the text of this report, on the
enclosed 40-scale grading plan prepared by Project Design Consultants (sheet 3 of 4),
and Table I -
Cuts, fills and processing of original ground covered by this report have been completed
under PSE's observation and testing Based upon the testing and observation, the work
is considered to be in general compliance with the City of Carlsbad grading criteria and
the preliminary soil report (references)
7,1 7 5'
CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS LOS ANGELES COUNTY : RIVERSIDE COUNTY SOUTH ORANGE COUNTY
TEL: (714) 220-0770 TEL: (310) 325-7272 or (213) 775-6771 TEL: (909) 676-8195 TEL: (714) 730-2122
FAX (714) 220-9589 FAX (714) 220-9589 FAX (909) 676-1879 FAX (714) 730-5191
•
Work Order 400607N Page 2
January 8, 1999
S .S
S
S
,.
.
5,
1.0 ENGINEERING GEOLOGY S
1.1 Geologic Units -
Geologic units encountered during the grading of the Nature Center con-
sists of.compacted artificial fill, alluvium, Bay Point Formation and Santi-
ago Formation: The as-graded geology is shown on the enclosed sheet 3
S 0f4.
S
'5 ' S S
1. 1A Topsoil (No Map Symbol)
The topsoil consisted of a brown silty sand. The thickness varied
5
S from zero (0) to one (1) foot. It was completely removed prior'to the
S placement of compacted fill.. S
1.1.2 Artificial Fill - Compacted (Map Symbol afc)
. Previously existing compacted artificial fill (Geopacific, Inc., 1990)
consisted of light brownish gray to light grenish gray, moderately
dense, slightly moist, silty sand
.
S .. , . .•. S S, .5
1:1.3 Alluvium (Map Symbol Qal) .• . S
Alluvium consisted of medium to dark brown, moist, medium dense, •
silty sand with some gravel. It was completely removed prior to the
placement of compacted fill
• . • 1,. 1.4 Bay Point Formation (Mp Symbol Qbp)
S S ,' Bay Point Formation consisted of medium brownish gray, slightly •
moist, soft, silty sandstone and clayey sandstone. The Bay. Point
S
,
S Formation exhibited massive to faintly horizontal bedding. -
. S . 5' 5
PACIFIC SOILS ENGINEERING, INC.
' S S
•
Work Order 400607N Page 3
January 8,1999: .' .
. ,
1.1.5 Santiago Formation (Map Symbol Tsa)
Santiago Formation consisted of light brownish gray to medium
greenish gray, slightly moist, moderately hard siltstones and sand-
stones. The Santiago Formatioh was massive to well bedded.
Bedding dipped moderately to the northwest.
1.2 Corrective Grading
Corrective grading consisted of a three '(3) foot overexcavàtion of the cut
portion of the transition building pad and replacement with compacted fill.
1.3 Subdrains .
•Subdrains were not recommended during project grading due to the lack
; of canyon cleanouts: • * -
1.4 Conclusions
From an engineering geologic viewpoint, the building pad at the Nature
Center site, in the City of Carlsbad, is suitable for its intended use.
*
2.0 PROJECT GRADING . •
2.1 Compaction Test Results
' Compaction test results are presented in Table I and approximate loca-'
tions of tests are shown on the enclosed 40-scale grading plan (sheet 3 of -
4), prepared by Project Design Consultants.' *
• '• • ••• •. •
PACIFIC SOILS ENGINEERING. INC. '
S
Work Order 400607N Page 4
January 8, 1999
..
.J.
2.2 Removals
2.2.1 Complete removals of topsoil,alluiium and highly weathered bed-
rock materials were accomplished in the fill areas. Prior to place-
ment of compacted fill, the exposed bedrock surface was scarified,
moisture conditioned to a minimum Of optimum moisture or slightly
above, and 'compacted in-place to a minimum of 90 percent of the
laboratory maximum density (ASTM:D 1557-91).
2.2.2 Removals, excavations, cleánouts and processing in preparing fill
areas were observed by PSE's representative prior to placement of
any fill. Based on those observations, fills are considered to be
supported by previously compacted fill, Bay Point Formation or
Santiago FormatiOn;
S
.5.
2.3 Compacted Fill Placement
2.3.1 Fill consisting of the soil types indicated in Table I was placed in
thin lifts (approximately six to eight inches), moisture',conditioned to
optimum moisture or slightly above and compacted to a minimum of
90 percent Of the laboratory maximum dry density (ASTM:D 1557-
. 91). This was accomplished utilizing a self-propelled, rubber- tired
loader and a track bulldozer. Each succeeding fill lift was treated in
a like manner. • • • :
• • • •
S
5 . . •
..•• • •, • S
PACIFIC SOILS ENGINEERING, INC.
•
Work Order 400607N Page 5
January 8, 1999
S
S
2.3.2 Fill material placed on slope gradients steeper than 5-horizontal to
1-vertical was keyed and benched into the Cretaceous granitic
rock
2.4 Depth of Fill :
Compaction testing was performed for each one (1) to two (2) feet of fill
placed The approximate maximum vertical depth of fill placed is on the
order of eleven (11±) feet within the northern portion of the fill slope
2 5 Fill Slope Construction
S
2.5.1 The fill slope was over-built approximately two (2) feet Upon
grading completion, the slopes were trimmed back to grade and
compacted by track walking •
2..5.2 Finish slope surfaces have been probed and/or tested are consid-
ered to satisfy the project requirements, and the grading codes of
the City of Carlsbad.-,The soil materials utilized to construct the fill
slopes are granular in nature and subject to potential erosion As
such, landscaping and irrigation management are important ele-
ments in the long term performance of slopes and should be estab-
lished and maintained as soon as possible
2.6 Cut/Full Transition Area '
The cut portion of this transition lot was overexcavated within structural
• areas and extending five (5)feet laterally outside the-structure to a mini-
mum depth of three (3) feet and replaced with compacted fill
PACIFIC SOILS ENGINEERING, INC
5
Work Order 400607N - Page 6
January 8', 1999
S 'j
3.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT .
The subject building padis scheduled for placement of the existing Aviara infor-
mation center that will be transported to the site. The information center will be•
moved in three sections onto the new slab and foundation that will be con-
structed on the Area F pad. Reference No.. I contains a preliminary foundation
plan review and the following recommendations supplement that report.
5 •
,
'.
5'
4.0 FOUNDATION DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS . .
4.1 Materials encountered in cut areas and utilized for compacted fill ranged
from low to high in expansion potential. An evaluation and sampling of the
'
post-grading soil conditions was conducted to classify materials per
ASTM: D 442 and to determine the expansiOn index per UBC Standard
No. 18-2. Results of that,evaluation and the laboratory test data is pre-
sented inTableA. •' ", . .
• ': TABLE : • •
.. .' . Expansion Expansion , . • ,
Hydrometer Analyses Index Potential
%Sand %Silt %Clay (UBC Table 18-1-13) ' ' •
50' 22 28. 95. • ' High . •
Based on the data presented in Table A, the following foundation design •
• criteria is presented.' . • . . • •
.5
.,.
•
-• ' •
'5' 5
•.. .5 • '
.5
,S •' • , • . -
PACIFIC SOILS ENGINEERING, INC. " • .
S.
•0
.
S .S ,..
Work Order 400607N . - Page .7
January 8,1999 •
•
4.2 Foundation Design Criteria
Foundations for structures may be designed based on the following val-
ues:
Allowable Bearing: 2000 lbs./sq:ft.
Lateral Beating: 200 lbs./sq.ft. at a depth of 12 inches
plus 200 lbs./sq.ft. for each additional
12 inches embedment to a maximum of
. 2000 lbs./sq.ft.
Coefficient of Lateral Sliding:. 0.35
Settlement: Total 1/2 inch S
Differential = 1/4 inch in 20 feet
•.. 5;
4.3 Footing/Slab Recommendations *
4.3.1 Footing Depth (Minimum) Exterior
24 inches below lowest adjacent finished grade.
Interior,
18 inches below lowest adjacent finished grade.
4.3.2 Footing Reinforcement: All continuous, two No.5 rebars, one on
top, one on bottom:
•
: -
•
• 5 - 4.3.3 Footing Width • •
S
•
S
• • Continuous footings shall have a minimum width of 15 inches. •
'S 55 S
• .1 S5 S
S
S • -
S. S_S
.5
. . PACIFIC SOILS ENGINEERING, INC. -
•
Work Order 400607N Page 8
January 8, 1999 •
4.3.4 Slab Thickness: Four (4) inches. .
4.3.5 Slab Reinforcement (Minimum) Living Areas
O 6" x 6", No. 10 by No.. 10 welded wire mesh OR equivalent.
4.3.6 Footing Embedment
If exterior footings adjacent to drainage swales are to exist within
• three (3) feet horizontally of the swale, the footing should be em-.
bedded 6ufficiently t6 ensure embedment swale below bottom is
maintained. Footings adjacent to slopes should be embedded suf-
ficiently such thatat least seven(7) feet is provided horizontally
from the bottom edge of footing to the face of the slope.
4.4 Under-Slab Requirements
• .:
4.4.1 A lO-mil polyvinyl membrane (minimum) should be placed below all
slabs-on-grade within living areas. This membrane should be cov-
ered with a minimum of two (2) inches of clean sand to protect the
• membrane and aid concrete curing. The slab subgrade should be
moisture conditioned to a minimum of 130 percent of -optimum
moisture to a depth of 18 inches prior to placing concrete.
. .
S - -
.
.I•• I
• . -. -I -
-- - • PACIFIC SOILS ENGINEERING, INC. -
•''•
Work Order 406607N
'.
,.. .. Page 9
January 8, 1999' .. .. . '
. 4.4.2 Care should be taken during construction so that the I 0-mil polyvi-
nyl membrane is not punctured or violated. Further, It is recom-
mended that, the polyvinyl membrane should be overlapped and
. ,.
bonded at the joints tO' further reduce the potential for moisture Va-
por migration.
4.5 Exterior Slabs and Walkways .
. :' '' .
4.5.1 It is recommended that the subgrade below exterior slabs, side-
walks, driveways, patiosi etc. be moisture conditioned to a mini-
mum of 120 percent of optimum moisture at least 24 hours prior to
concrete placement.
4.5.2 Weakened plane joints are recommended for walkways at ap-
proximately eight (8) to ten (10) foot intervals. 'Other exterior'slabs
. ' . '
should be designed to vkhstand concrete shrinkage stresses.
5.0 SLOPE STABILITY AND MAINTENANCE
During mass grading operations, the design and construction of slopes are cre-
ated to possess both stability against rotational failure and stability against surfi-
cial slumping and "pop-outs". However, certain factors are beyond the control of
the project soil engineer and geologist. These'include the following. •
3
• '.4 . ' • i., ;• . ' • •
'•
•
'.•.-•.• • .
. '.•'. ••.. '.,
n , PACIFIC SOILS ENGINEERING; INC. • '
S.
•
...
Work Order 400607N
-
Page 10
January 8, 1999
.
5.1. Onsite Drainage . - S
Water should not be allowed to flow over, any slope. Pad gradients should
be maintained to prevent roof run-off from being directed away from ap-
proved drainage disposal areas. Positive drainage away from structures
should be provided and maintained.
5.2 Planting and Irrigation
It is strongly recommended that slope planting consist of ground cover
shrubs and trees which possess deep; dense rooted structures and which
require minimum irrigation. It should bethe responsibility of the architect
to provide such plants initially and the owner to maintain such planting.
The owner is responsible for proper irrigation, maintenance and repair of
properly installed irrigation systems. Leaks should be fixed immediately.
.'
Sprinklers should be adjusted to provide maximum uniform coverage with
a minimum of water usage. Overwatering causing wasteful run-off and se-
rious ground saturation must be avoided.
-
- .
5.3 Burrowing Animals r
-
Owners should imlement a program for the elimination of burrowing ani-
mals in slope areas. Monitoring the slopes for burrowing animals should
be an on-going maintenance program in order to protect slope stability.
S. :
-. :--
S -
PACIFIC SOILS ENGINEERING, INC.
.5
Work Order 4006O7N Page 11
January 8, 1999
H
6.0 OTHER DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS
6.1 Site Drainage •. .
•
61.1 Positive drainage away from structures should be provided and
maintained. .
I,
.6.1.2 All roof, pad and 'Slope drainage should be collected and directed
- away from the proposed structures to approved disposal areas.- It
is important that drainage be directed away from foundations. This
is especially true in patio areas and greenbelt areas. The recom-
mended drainage patterns should be established at .the time of fine
grading and maintained throughout the life of the structure.
6.2 Utility trench backfill shall be accomplished in accordance with the pre-
vailing criteria of the City of Carlsbad.
6.3 Seismic design should be based on current and applicable. building code
requirements. • • • . • -
,. •
• -
• • H-- ..:-
• •: -
:• .• •
PACIFIC SOILS ENGINEERING, INC.
-
•
LM
Work Order 400607N Page 12
January 8, 1999 -•.
-•
This report presents information and data relative to this phase of grading and
placement of compacted fill at the subject site. A representative() of this firm
conducted periodic tests and observations during the progress of the construc-
tion in an effort to determine whether compliance with the project drawings,
specifications and Building Code were being obtained. The presence of our per-
0 sonnel during the work process did not involve the direction or supervision of the
contractor. Technical advice and suggestions were provided to the owner and/or .
his representative based upon the results of the tests and observation
pleted work under the purview of this report is considered suitable r the in..
tended use.
RespedifuHysubmiffed, E3? PACIFIC SOILS ENGINEERING, INC. - .• Reviewed : \* X. 6/30/99
CIA
Work Order 400607N ''A 'P P E N D I X
January 8, 1999
REFERENCES
t 4
1. Pacific Soils Engineering, Inc., 1998, Geotechnical Update Letter, Ague Hedion-
dia Lagoon, Nature Center Building, Area E, Kelly Ranch, City of Carlsbad, CA,
dated September 22, 1998 (Work Order 400607N)
2. Pacific Soils Engineering, Inc., 1998, Supplemental Geotechnical Evaluation and
Grading Plan Review, Kelly Ranch, Vil!agesD, F, G, H, I and J, City of Carlsbad,
CA, dated October 17, 1997 (Work Order 400607).
3. Gebpacific, Inc.', 1990, As-GradedGeotechnical Report,Kelly Ranch Phase I,
Carlsbad Tract No. 83-30, Carlsbad, CA, dated January 10, 1990 (Project No.
106.1.4).
r •
•
.'
•
-
•
PACIFIC SOILS 'ENGINEERING, INC
•
Work Order 400607N
January 8, 1999.
.TABLEI
SOIL TYPE -
• Laboratory Maximum Density per ASTM:D 1557-91 (All Soil Types).
Optimum Maximum
Moisture Dry Density
Soil Type and Classification (%) (lbs./cuJt.)
F - Light Brown Silty Sand .• . . 11.4 119.5
G - Blackish Brown Silty Sand . 1 1.0 120.7
H - Light Brown Clayey Sand 11.1 124.1
- Light Gray Silty Sand 13.0 116.3
LEGEND 1
Non-Designated Test - Test in compacted fill.
Test Location - See Plan (sheet 3 of 4). *
Elevation - Indicated by approximate elevation above mean sea level (feet).
R Indicates retest of previously failing test in compacted fill.
S - Indicates test taken on finish slope face. •
•
* TEST TYPE
All tests by Campbell Pacific Nuclear Test Gauge (per ASTM:D 2922-91
and D 3017-88), unless otherwise noted by: •
SC - Indicates test by Sand Cone Method (per ASTM:b 1556-90). 0
• ...0
0
0•
• KR/N002
PACIFIC SOILS ENGINEERING, INC.
Work Order 400607N .
January 8, 1999
.
TABLE I-.
TEST TEST ELEV. MOIST.CONT. DRY DENSITY RELATIVE SOIL TEST
DATE NO. LOCATION (FT.) % (FIELD) (LBS./CU.FT.) %'COMP. TYPE TYPE
12/23/98 See Plan
101 280 15.2 . 106.4 91 I
102 30.0 . 12.6 109.7 91 G
12/24/98 See Plan .
103 33.0 ' 11.6. 111.4 . 92 G
104 35.0 13.9 110.2 '91 G SC
12/28/98 See Plan
105 - 24.5 1 13.6 107.2 92 I
105R 24.5 15.8 106.2 91 I
106 . 27.0 • 12.7 . 113.3 .. 91 H
12/29/98 See Plan . . ..
107 . - 38.0 11.7 . . 109.9 91 G
• 108 . . 44.5 14.7 - 113.4 .. 91 H
109 46.0 12.0 112.3 ' 90 H
- 110 . 27.0 16.3 107.1 92 I
111 - 30.0 •.• 15.2 106.6 92
112 33.0 14.3 108.1 . 93 I * SC
113 37.0 . 13.0 . 112.4 .- 91 H-
-114 • ' . 40.0 . 10.6 108.6 88 H
S 114R 40.0 ',. 15.7 111.9 90 . H
115 - ..42.0 ' 12.3
*
.112.8 91 H
• 12/30/98 . See Plan - S
' •
. .
S
116 * • 44.0 14.6 '115.2- 93 H
117 . . 45.0 11.5 - 113.2 • 91 H
- 118 49.0 13.7 113.8 - 92 H -
119 • - 52.0 '12.6 - 110.4* 92 F SC
- .120
* -
- 47.0 • 13.3 109.4 92 F
1/4/99 . - See Plan
- 121 - 55.0 12.6 112.4. 93 G
122 . . • 50.0 12.3- 110.6 - 92 G
123 50.0 - - 16.2 108.3 - - 93 1
• - •- 124 ' - - . - 51.0 *
• -14.8 - 107.2 92 I Sc
125S • -' - ' 43.0 .., 12.6 108.0 * 90 F
- 126 • 46.5' 12.5 ' 107.7 - - 90 F * 127S .
11
-
,
48.0 • 12.3 - -- 108.6 91 * F
KR/N002
- . PACIFIC SOILS ENGINEERING, INC. - •
-. -
/ - ----- — - -- ----- - * - - -
IL
00,
v
-Z ze
qt(, ?'M
Of 40
10 cza 3
IT Lj 51
IL
C%r
20 "20
10 41 .3 a L
IL ML
-65 S DEAN TORM
-44
4" CtA 2 BASE • /
9 •
'4 / 1 -'- OR A77 $ I
0 \\'• # 0
0
••• I: , it: I
00 1 / 7 0 •0' 0
0001. . .; 1' 20' KOlZ ,. 0 . ••.:
0 0
0
- /.. / .
//
- 0 'i J' 1.: / 1 ;0,t
.
..; .. : . •
0
•0
p
,.-•• 0 •0 •0
.:
soft :. \ \ - - r / / / 1 • / / 5 0 1 / - • I I -
q7
__
isa \\
CA
FU TURE l? oVL kii&ó b'u/ I / - A / /
/
I
I NO. OIL TA OR. 8R6 1.RAD5 LtNGT/1 . '.-• :1&I'4RKS.
Neop3'1OE .1 .77451 :ir PcPIi35O-O) *.
4
t7 P
0. "7 3 where buried 24" : / 24 i' or BEi
/
ELI V PER
PER PLAN'
'I B \-- S1tigb Iorrn4ion bracketed whet'e buried I
-/gco!c 1 1 1, " . - . E _CTION. A- A SECTION
TOP ..-OF SLOPE DETAI L-
NO 5CAALE
4 . .\ •8 p 1 III! 1 /
or
nNiH PA
ME ' A tH I
10PEN!NC rerovI lid tto' m,eIevnuio Top 40. 1
I 4•J4f$ .4'88.JPW ' i ç. 1. E. 3500/ /
0 • ..... ... HAD .ALL-, . ji .,, .' / / 0 / A ,. -. . - --.- •. . 0 0 •0 . . 4 .. . - .. - . . .. 0 r"coo ol
'3 1 N / I',' / .
rox ~app
fl/fl/RE CtRB E1URNS
PICAL.- LOT CROSS 10
/
\
_
STORM 0RN
PEW .2M—JA
0 - 0• / .. .:/, 0 0 7 -•.
0 -
..\.
0 - 0 0 -. PACIFIC.S011NGE RING, INC.PCE
. p
/ / •4'4-'J
' \ \ / / 44_ \'N ''N
5\\.4.4
'- -. --.-• / I 7715 CbNVOY COURT REVIEWED BY
SANp1FGO CA 92111 (6191560-1713,
PRIVATh CONTRACT -
S W0 4GO1UATE INsPEc T
01c c
00 0 0 : - -. . 0 04•
/
/0 / . -- S '\ .
- : ••--'-i:.. ----:-. - -- .... . . 0, ____
L~y
_______ I • ' 4 .. ________ - _, , 1LLC GE 4F
BNCHMAR1'' 1
.0000
Projedt-..-Des tgit C6nsu1tans
LOCA flV BRASS CAP IN MCWU!'ENT WELL - CL EL CAM!NO REAL \ 701 Str#et Stztt C(0 Sdrt t)ego CA 21O1 I4>k 44
BENCHMARK OEStGNAT7CW USC 95 f9'-64fl.fAX 2340349 /_J_4(4_fI_•
$ ELf VA 17C$I 7427 FEET / DALE C1 N'4ALCH RC( 34 b*1t FETP*11O4 I DtcHtD p'*ri Cc,to DATE INITIAL DATE ftI11IAL OAE 94111 BY —. PROJECT fO 4' / (xTS O -3O'I BY -4
" Dt IAI rt - ICHKD C1( dITL.... 1 ?ør
- AIr NCtER 0T- VVRV •
vi I¼I'I IJL 8..9 OTIER PPPOVA tirt' PPTOVAL 1.R VV)
4-.--.-- I''..-4— 4 9- -'-.- - -/--- ------ '-- - — -- ------- - 4-.--- - ------ -- - 4-
- r 4 -
r- .--I . - - . . • * 4. —'b - 9 -4 . r ,.