Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD 08-11; SANTA FE SONATA SLOPE REPAIR LOTS 55 AND 56; AS GRADED GEOTECHNICAL REPORT; 2011-12-01Iff CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING December 1, 2011 Mr. DougJaeger CWE 2100127.02 3364 Avenida Obertura Carlsbad, California 92009 Subject: Report of As-Graded Geotechnical Conditions and Observations and Relative Compaction Testing Results, Santa Fe Sonata Slope Repair, Lots 55 & 56, Avenida Nieve, Carlsbad, California. Reference: Geotechnical Recommendations for Slope Repair, Slope Failure at Santa Fe Sonata, Below Lots 55 and 56, Carlsbad Tract 90-4, Carlsbad, California, prepared by Stoney-Miller Consultants, Inc., dated October 6, 2008. Ladies/Gentlemen, In accordance with your request, our proposal and agreement dated May 12, 2010, and the requirements of Section 1704.7 of the California Building Code, Christian Wheeler Engineering has prepared this report to summarize the as-graded conditions of the subject slope to describe our observations of the landslide repair operation at the, subject site, and to present the results of our field and laboratory testing. The results of our field testing include in-place density tests performed in the fills placed during the grading operations. The observation and testing services addressed by this report were coordinated by the projects grading contractor, Groundforce. Our services were provided during the period between September 20 and November 10, 2011. INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION SITE DESCRIPTION: The area of the reconstructed slope is in the Santa Fe Sonata community along the northwestern portions of Lots 55 and 56 at the Tierra Santa Fe Unit No. 2 development. The project area is bound to the northwest by a drainage/open space area, to the southeast by residential homes, and to the northeast and west by similar slopes. This northwest facing slope is approximately 50 feet high, with a 2:1 (horizontal to vertical) inclination. The lower half of the slope in the subject area had experienced an approximately 50 foot wide by 100 feet long rotational slope failure. REMEDIAL GRADING: The remedial grading involved reconstructing the fill slope in an area where the slope failure had occurred. The re-graded and adjacent slope in the project area display an overall inclination 3980 Home Avenue • San Diego, CA 92105 . 619-550-1700 . FAX 619-550-1701 CWE 2100127.02 December 1, 2011 Page 2 of about 2.2:1 (horizontal to vertical). The remedial grading consisted of removing the landslide disturbed soils and constructing a new miragrid-reinforced slope in its place. A keyway was excavated at the bottom of each of the three slot cuts made to reconstruct the slope. A subdrain system was installed in the rear of the keyway and at varying intervals along the temporary backcut. Benching operations were performed into the pre-existing, undisturbed portions of the documented fill and materials of the Del Mar Formation as the new fills were placed. The reconstructed slope was reinforced with geosynthetic fabric which was placed at vertical intervals and lengths that meet or exceeded the referenced geotechnical reports recommendations. PLAN REFERENCE: In order to assist in our understanding of the designed configuration of the project, our firm was provided with a precise grading plan, signed and approved on August 31, 2011, for the site prepared by BI-JA, Inc. of Carlsbad, California. Plate Numbers IA and lB of this report are reproductions of this plan, modified to show the approximate locations of our field tests and the relevant limits of the earthwork operations performed. SCOPE OF SERVICE Services provided by Christian Wheeler Engineering during the course of the earthwork included the following elements. Participation in a pregrade meeting that included Chris Christian, Doug Jaeger, and Dave Hoffman of Ground Force. Periodically observe geologically significant aspects of the reconstruction, such as keyway removals and temporary excavation slopes. Providing continuous observation of the reinforced-earth slope reconstruction in progress and verify its conformance to the geotechnical recommendations. Providing field recommendations for elements of the earthwork not specifically addressed by the referenced geotechnical report. Recording the approximate elevations and limits of significant geotechnical elements. Observing and verifying the placement of geosynthetic reinforcement fabric. Performing in-place density tests in the fills placed. Performing laboratory maximum density and optimum moisture content determinations on the soils encountered in the earthwork. Determining the relative compaction of the fills placed the slope reconstruction. Preparing this report, summarizing our observations and test results. CWE 2100127.02 December 1, 2011 Page 3 CONTRACTOR GRADING CONTRACTOR: The grading associated with the slope repair addressed by this report was performed by Groundforce, of Spring Valley, California, License No. 852085. The primary equipment utilized by the contractor in the work consisted of the following- 1 John Deere 700J crawler dozer 1 Caterpillar 320D excavator I Sakia SV5IOTB vibratory sheepsfoot roller 1 Caterpillar 939C track loader I Caterpillar 277 skidsteer 2 manually operated reciprocating hammers FIELD OBSERVATIONS GENERAL: As scheduled by Groundforce, our field representatives observed and tested the reconstructed slope in the area of the failure. The area of reconstruction was approximately 115 feet long by 100 feet wide and extended to depths below the failure. SITE PREPARATION: Site preparation began with the removal of vegetation, organic materials, debris and loose materials in the areas to be graded. A keyway was excavated in three slots at the toe of the failure and extended to an elevation of 168 feet or deeper. The completed keyway was approximately 115 feet long and 30 feet wide. Our geology staff observed the bottoms of the excavated keyways to consist of competent, older fills and Tertiary-age sediments of the Del Mar Formational, both of which were considered to be suitable to support the repaired slope. GRADING AND REINFORCEMENT: The contractor began the fill operations by scarifying, and compacting the keyway excavation to at least 90 percent of the maximum density. Grading operations consisted of benching into competent materials and placing the processed, benched materials and/or imported material as fill in relatively thin lifts by means of a skid steer and/or excavator. Fills were compacted by means of a vibratory sheepsfoot roller and manually operated reciprocating hammers to at least 90 percent relative compaction. Thirteen layers of geo synthetic reinforcement fabric consisting of Miragrid 5XT and 7XT were placed in the slope at the recommended spacing. The lower six layers consisted of Miragrid 7XT and the upper seven CWE 2100127.02 December 1, 2011 Page 4 layers consisted of Miragrid 5XT. The lower nine Miragrids were placed at two foot vertical spacing and the upper four were placed at eighteen inch vertical spacing. The length that the grids extend horizontally into the slope met or exceeded the minimum recommended design lengths. During the slot excavation for the center portion of the keyway, a construction failure occurred in the temporary backcut. The displaced materials were removed which resulted in a steeper than anticipated backcut, a larger fill area and Miragrid lengths which were approximately three to ten feet longer than originally recommended (Stoney-Miller, 2008). The fill slope was constructed by 'over-building' the slope and cutting the over-built, compacted portions of the slope back to design grades. SUBDRAINS: Preceding the placement of fill within the excavated keyway, a subdrain was installed at the heel of the three slot excavations. A total of four subdrains were installed along the temporary backcut at varying elevations during the grading operations. The subdrains consisted of a four-inch diameter perforated PVC pipe set in a matrix of crushed rock, wrapped with geotechnical filter fabric. The subdrains were connected by a solid pipe which extended up the total height of the backcut, a cleanout is located at the top of the recently constructed slope. Concrete cutoff walls were constructed at the two outlet locations where the subdrains transitioned to tight-line pipes which extended through the face of the slope below. Six inch rock and filter fabric were placed at the subdrain outlet locations as detailed on the plans. Proper care of the subdrain system is considered very important. The client should be aware that damage to or blocking of the drainage systems outlets may adversely affect the performance of the repaired slope areas. Heavy water seepage was encountered in the keyway excavation and in the lower areas of the temporary backcut. Chimney drains were installed on the face of the backcut where seepage was observed and as fills increased in elevation more chimney drains were installed as needed. The approximate location of the subdrain system and chimney drains are show on attached Plate No.IA. FIELD AND LABORATORY TESTING FIELD TESTS: Field tests to measure the relative compaction of the fills were conducted in accordance with ASTM Test Designation D6938; "Standard Test Methods for Density of Soil and Soil-Aggregate in Place by Nuclear Methods." The locations of the field tests were selected by our technician in areas discerned to exhibit relative compaction that was generally representative of that attained in the fill. Field density tests were generally performed at a maximum. interval of one foot vertically. Elevations were estimated using simple hand instruments measured against existing monuments, surveyor or contractor 'staking, the existing grade and/or elevations provided on the construction plans. The approximate locations of the field tests are shown on the attached Plate No. lB. The results of the tests are presented on Plate Nos. 2 through 4. CWT 2100127.02 December 1, 2011 Page 5 LABORATORY TESTS: The maximum dry density and optimum moisture content of the soils predominantly encountered in the earthwork were performed in our laboratory by ASTM Test Designation D1557, "Test Method for Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Modified Effort." The tests were conducted in accordance with the methodology prescribed for the grain-size distribution of the soils tested. The results of these tests are presented on the attached Plate No. 4. CONCLUSIONS GENERAL: It is the opinion of Christian Wheeler Engineering that the earthwork addressed by this report has been performed in accordance with the recommendations presented in the referenced geotechnical report, the City of Carlsbad grading requirements and the California Building Code. This opinion is based upon our observations of the earthwork operations, the results of the density tests taken in the field, and the maximum density tests performed in our laboratory. It is our further opinion that the site is suitable for the proposed construction. AS-BUILT GEOLOGY: The geologic units encountered during the earthwork operations were generally consistent with those anticipated in the referenced report. The earthwork operations addressed by this report have, in our opinion, satisfactorily mitigated the potentially adverse conditions described in the referenced report. LIMITATIONS The descriptions, conclusions and opinions presented in this report pertain only to the work performed on the subject site during the period between September 20 and November 10, 2011. As limited by the scope of the services that we agreed to perform, the conclusions and opinions presented herein are based upon our observations of the work and the results of our laboratory and field tests. Our services were performed in accordance with the currently accepted standard of practice in the region in which the earthwork was performed, and in such a manner as to provide a reasonable measure of the compliance of the described work with applicable codes and specifications. With the submittal of this report, no warranty, express or implied, is given or intended with respect to the services performed by our firm, and our performance of those services should not be construed to relieve the grading contractor of his responsibility to perform his work to the standards required by the applicable building codes and project specifications. CWE 2100127.02 December 1, 2011 Page 6 Christian Wheeler Engineering sincerely appreciates the opportunity to provide professional services on this project. If you should have any questions after reviewing this report, please do not hesitate to contact our firm. Respectfully submitted, CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING Charles H. Christian, RqE#& CHC/DRR:djf cc: (5) Submitted avid C#22l5 Qf No. 2215 CERTIFtED *% ENGINEERING 1* \. GEOLOGIST I Exp. Subdrain outlets 20 feet off to the northwest CWE LEGEND I ioo.o I ELEVATI8N AT EXCAVATION BOTTOM - APPROXIMATE SUBDRA1N INVERT [22] ELEVATION (J APPROXIMATE LIMITS OF GRADING k\N APPROXIMATE LIMITS OF KEYWAY rr SUBDRA1N (PERFORATED PIPE) ar SUBDRATN (SOLID PIPE) APPROXIMATE CHIMNEY DRAIN LOCATION ARTIFICIAL FILL OBSERVED BY CWE Qaf2 OVER OLDER ARTIFICIAL FILL ARTIFICIAL FILL OBSERVED BY CWE Qaf2 OVER DEL MAR FORMATION GEOLOGIC CONTACT 0 201 401 SCALE 1" 20' SANTA FE SLOPE REPAIR LOT 55 & 56, AVENIDA NEIVE, CARLSBAD, CA DRAINAGE PLAN AND GEOTECHNICAL I%'IAP DATE: DECEMBER 2011 JOB NO.: 2100127.02 CHRJSTIAN WHEELER BY: CHC/MAH PLATE NO.: IA ENGINEERING CWE LEGEND RELATIVE COMPACTION TEST I I APPROXIMATE IJNrIS OF GRADING APPROXIMATE LIMITS OF KFYWAY 0 20' 40' SCALE: 1" = 20' SANTA FE SLOPE REPAIR LOT 55 & 56, AVIENIDA NEWE, CARLSBAD, CA DATE: DECEMBER 2011 JOB NO.: 2100127.02 - CHRISTIAN WHEELER ENGINEERING BY: CHC/MAI-I PLATE NO.: i SUMMARY OF TESTS Project: Santa Fe Sontata SLOPE REPAIR Test No. Date Location Elev. (feet) Soil Type Moisture (%) Dry Density (pcf) Max. Density % Re!. Comp. 1 9/22/2011 Western Keyway Removal 169.0 1 18.8 105.9 114.7 92.3 2 9/22/2011 Western Keyway Removal 170.0 1 16.7 107.1 114.7 93.4 3 9/22/2011 Western Keyway Removal 171.0 1 17.1 106.6 114.7 92.9 4 9/22/2011 Western Keyway Removal 172.0 1 17.5 105.1 114.7 91.6 5 9/23/2011 Western Keyway Removal 173.0 1 18.4 104.0 114.7 90.7 6 9/23/2011 Western Keyway Removal 174.0 1 17.3 103.4 114.7 90.1 7 9/23/2011 Western Keyway Removal 176.0 1 17.4 109.7 114.7 95.6 8 9/26/2011 Western Slot Removal 177.0 1 16.6 104.3 114.7 90.9 9 9/26/2011 Western Slot Removal 178.0 1 17.1 103.9 114.7 90.6 10 9/26/2011 Western Slot Removal 179.0 1 19.3 105.9 114.7 92.3 11 9/26/2011 Western Slot Removal 180.0 1 19.1 101.6 114.7 88.6 12 9/26/2011 Retest #11 180.0 1 17.9 107.6 114.7 93.8 13 9/26/2011 Western Slot Removal 181.0 1 15.8 110.4 114.7 96.3 14 9/26/2011 Western Slot Removal 182.0 1 18.2 106.0 114.7 92.4 15 9/27/2011 Western Slot Removal 183.0 1 17.1 107.1 114.7 93.4 16 9/27/2011 Western Slot Removal 184.0 1 18.3 107.7 114.7 93.9 17 9/27/2011 Western Slot Removal 185.0 1 18.0 105.8 114.7 92.2 18 9/27/2011 Western Slot Removal 186.0 1 18.8 104.8 114.7 91.4 19 9/28/2011 Western Slot Removal 187.0 1 16.7 111.9 114.7 97.6 20 9/28/2011 Western Slot Removal 188.0 1 17.5 109.5 114.7 95.5 21 9/28/2011 Western Slot Removal 189.0 1 17.2 110.7 114.7 96.5 22 9/28/2011 Western Slot Removal 190.0 1 16.9 108.1 114.7 94.2 23 9/28/2011 Western Slot Removal 191.0 1 18.3 106.6 114.7 92.9 24 9/29/2011 Western Slot Removal 192.0 1 15.8 110.1 114.7 96.0 25 9/29/2011 Western Slot Removal 193.0 1 18.1 104.4 114.7 91.0 26 10/4/2011 Center Keyway Removal 168.0 1 17.6 109.1 114.7 95.1 27 10/4/2011 Center Keyway Removal 169.0 1 19.4 103.4 114.7 90.1 28 10/4/2011 Center Keyway Removal 170.0 1 18.2 105.8 114.7 92.2 29 10/5/2011 Center Keyway Removal 171.0 1 18.7 104.6 114.7 91.2 30 10/5/2011 Center Keyway Removal 172.0 1 17.9 103.9 114.7 90.6 31 10/11/2011 Center Keyway Removal 173.0 1 11.7 109.3 114.7 95.3 32 10/11/2011 Center Keyway Removal 174.0 1 10.8 104.9 114.7 91.5 33 10/11/2011 Subdrain Outlet 166.0 1 12.4 104.0 114.7 90.7 34 10/11/2011 Subdrain Outlet 168.5 1 11.9 107.3 114.7 93.5 35 10/11/2011 Center Keyway Removal 175.0 1 11.9 110.4 114.7 96.3 36 10/12/2011 Center Removal Slot 176.0 1 13.3 110.7 114.7 96.5 37 10/12/2011 Center Removal Slot 177.0 1 14.1 103.5 114.7 90.2 38 10/12/2011 Center Removal Slot 178.0 1 15.2 106.6 114.7 92.9 39 10/12/2011 Subdrain Outlet 168.0 1 14.1 109.1 114.7 95.1 40 10/12/2011 Subdrain Outlet 170.0 1 14.8 105.9 114.7 92.3 41 10/13/2011 Center Removal Slot 179.0 1 12.9 112.9 114.7 98.4 42 10/13/2011 Center Removal Slot 180.0 1 13.2 108.9 114.7 94.9 43 10/13/2011 Center Removal Slot 181.0 1 15.0 103.4 114.7 90.1 44 10/13/2011 Center Removal Slot 182.0 1 14.4 109.5 114.7 95.5 45 10/14/2011 Center Removal Slot 183.0 1 18.1 103.8 114.7 90.5 CWE 2100127.02 Plate 2 Test No. Date Location Elev. (feet) Soil Type Moisture (%) Dry Density (pcf) Max. Density % Rel. Comp. 46 10/14/2011 Center Removal Slot 184.0 1 16.3 108.7 114.7 94.8 47 10/14/2011 Center Removal Slot 185.0 1 18.4 107.4 114.7 93.6 48 10/14/2011 Center Removal Slot 186.0 1 16.6 108.3 114.7 94.4 49 10/17/2011 Center Removal Slot 187.0 1 14.9 103.6 114.7 90.3 50 10/17/2011 Center Removal Slot 187.0 1 14.7 104.2 114.7 90.8 51 10/19/2011 Eastern Keyway Removal 166.0 1 18.8 103.5 114.7 90.2 52 10/19/2011 Eastern Keyway Removal 167.0 1 18.3 107.7 114.7 93.9 53 10/19/2011 Eastern Keyway Removal 168.0 1 18.6 106.5 114.7 92.9 54 10/19/2011 Eastern Subdrain Outlet 166.0 1 19.8 105.0 114.7 91.5 55 10/19/2011 Eastern Subdrain Outlet 168.0 1 19.3 107.0 114.7 93.3 56 10/20/2011 Eastern Keyway Removal 169.0 1 15.6 108.8 114.7 94.9 57 10/20/2011 Eastern Keyway Removal 170.0 1 18.2 106.7 114.7 93.0 58 10/20/2011 Eastern Keyway Removal 171.0 1 18.7 104.8 114.7 91.4 59 10/21/2011 Eastern Subdrain Outlet 170.0 1 19.3 104.6 114.7 91.2 60 10/21/2011 Eastern Keyway Removal 172.0 1 16.8 106.1 114.7 92.5 61 10/21/2011 Eastern Keyway Removal 173.0 1 18.7 101.7 114.7 88.7 62 10/21/2011 Retest #61 173.0 1 18.2 104.3 114.7 90.9 63 10/24/2011 Eastern Slot Removal 174.0 1 17.0 109.1 114.7 95.1 64 10/24/2011 Eastern Slot Removal 175.0 1 17.6 105.0 114.7 91.5 65 10/24/2011 Eastern Slot Removal 176.0 1 19.1 104.7 114.7 91.3 66 10/24/2011 Eastern Slot Removal 177.0 1 19.7 103.6 114.7 90.3 67 10/25/2011 Eastern Slot Removal 178.0 1 16.8 107.0 114.7 93.3 68 10/25/2011 Eastern Slot Removal 179.0 1 16.3 105.3 114.7 91.8 69 10/25/2011 Eastern Slot Removal 180.0 1 19.5 104.1 114.7 90.8 70 10/25/2011 Eastern Slot Removal 181.0 1 14.8 106.2 114.7 92.6 71 10/25/2011 Eastern Slot Removal 182.0 1 16.2 108.1 114.7 94.2 72 10/26/2011 Eastern Slot Removal 183.0 1 16.6 110.0 114.7 95.9 73 10/26/2011 Eastern Slot Removal 184.0 1 17.6 104.4 114.7 91.0 74 10/26/2011 Eastern Slot Removal 185.0 1 17.1 103.7 114.7 90.4 75 10/26/2011 Eastern Slot Removal 186.0 1 18.3 106.4 114.7 92.8 76 10/27/2011 Center Slot Removal 187.5 1 18.7 104.4 114.7 91.0 77 10/27/2011 Eastern Slot Removal 187.5 1 18.3 103.7 114.7 90.4 78 10/27/2011 Eastern Slot Removal 188.5 1 21.3 101.4 114.7 88.4 79 11/1/2011 Retest #78 188.5 1 16.3 105.7 114.7 92.2 80 11/1/2011 Center Portion of Slope 188.5 1 16.8 109.2 114.7 95.2 81 11/1/2011 Eastern Portion of Slope 189.5 1 18.9 103.8 114.7 90.5 82 11/1/2011 Center Portion of Slope 189.5 1 18.3 105.7 114.7 92.2 83 11/1/2011 Eastern Portion of Slope 190.5 1 17.6 105.3 114.7 91.8 84 11/1/2011 Western Portion of Slope 190.5 1 17.9 104.7 114.7 91.3 85 11/2/2011 Eastern Portion of Slope 191.5 1 17.4 104.4 114.7 91.0 86 11/2/2011 Western Portion of Slope 191.5 1 17.9 107.1 114.7 93.4 87 11/2/2011 Western Portion of Slope 192.5 1 17.2 106.9 114.7 93.2 88 11/2/2011 Eastern Portion of Slope 193.0 1 18.1 105.3 114.7 91.8 89 11/2/2011 Center Portion of Slope 194.0 1 18.1 104.2 114.7 90.8 90 11/2/2011 Western Portion of Slope 194.0 1 18.2 105.1 114.7 91.6 91 11/3/2011 Center Portion of Slope 195.0 1 18.0 107.8 114.7 94.0 92 11/3/2011 Eastern Portion of Slope 195.0 1 16.9 104.8 114.7 91.4 93 11/3/2011 Western Portion of Slope 196.0 1 17.0 107.6 114.7 93.8 94 1 11/3/2011 Center Portion of Slope 196.0 1 18.1 105.1 114.7 91.6 CWE 2100127.02 Plate 3 a - . Test No. Date Location Elev. (feet) Soil Type Moisture (%) Dry Density (pcf) Max. Density % Re!. Comp. 95 11/3/2011 Eastern Portion of Slope 197.0 1 17.7 106.4 114.7 92.8 96 11/3/2011 Center Portion of Slope 197.0 1 18.7 105.0 114.7 91.5 97 11/3/2011 Western Portion of Slope 198.0 1 18.3 109.7 114.7 95.6 98 11/3/2011 Center Portion of Slope 198.0 1 18.9 104.4 114.7 91.0 99 11/3/2011 Western Portion of Slope 199.0 1 17.7 106.2 114.7 92.6 100 11/3/2011 Center Portion of Slope 199.0 1 17.1 107.4 114.7 93.6 101 11/7/2011 Eastern Portion of Slope 199.0 1 16.9 112.5 114.7 98.1 102 11/7/2011 Center Portion of Slope 199.0 1 17.2 111.8 114.7 97.5 103 11/7/2011 Western Portion of Slope 200.0 1 17.3 104.6 114.7 91.2 104 11/7/2011 Center Portion of Slope 200.0 1 16.3 109.5 114.7 95.5 105 11/8/2011 Eastern Portion of Slope 201.0 1 18.2 108.1 114.7 94.2 106 11/8/2011 Center Portion of Slope 201.0 1 16.9 105.1 114.7 91.6 107 11/8/2011 Western Portion of Slope 202.0 3 15.0 118.9 130.0 91.5 108 11/8/2011 Center Portion of Slope 202.0 3 13.9 120.5 130.0 92.7 109 11/8/2011 Eastern Portion of Slope 203.0 3 14.9 121.3 130.0 93.3 110 11/8/2011 Center Portion of Slope 203.0 3 13.9 119.7 130.0 92.1 111 11/9/2011 Western Portion of Slope 204.0 3 12.2 119.2 130.0 91.7 112 11/9/2011 Center Portion of Slope 204.0 3 12.3 117.7 130.0 90.5 113 11/9/2011 Eastern Portion of Slope 205.0 3 13.6 118.3 130.0 91.0 114 11/9/2011 Western Portion of Slope 205.0 3 12.8 118.6 130.0 91.2 115 11/9/2011 Western Portion of Slope 206.0 3 14.9 119.3 130.0 91.8 116 11/9/2011 Center Portion of Slope 206.0 3 12.3 118.1 130.0 90.8 117 11/9/2011 Eastern Portion of Slope 207.0 3 14.1 118.5 130.0 91.2 118 11/9/2011 Center Portion of Slope 207.0 3 14.7 117.7 130.0 90.5 119 11/10/2011 Center Portion of Slope 208.0 1 17.8 104.4 114.7 91.0 120 11/10/2011 Center Portion of Slope 209.0 1 16.9 103.9 114.7 90.6 121 11/10/2011 Center Portion of Slope 210.0 1 17.4 105.6 114.7 92.1 122 11/10/2011 Center Portion of Slope 211.0 1 18.3 103.5 114.7 90.2 123 11/10/2011 Center Portion of Slope 212.0 1 17.1 104.7 114.7 91.3 124 11/10/2011 Center Portion of Slope 213.0 1 16.8 105.3 114.7 91.8 125 11/10/2011 Center Portion of Slope 214.0 1 17.3 104.1 114.7 90.8 126 11/10/2011 Slope Test 180.0 1 16.4 106.3 114.7 92.7 127 11/10/2011 Slope Test 195.0 1 17.5 105.8 114.7 92.2 128 11/10/2011 Slope Test 203.0 1 18.3 104.9 114.7 91.5 I Soil Type Description USCS Class Optimum Moisture NO Maximum Dry Density (pcf) I Olive Brown, Sandy Clay with Silt CL 12.8 114.7 2 Greenish-gray, Sandy Clay CL 12.8 110.5 3 Brown, Silty Sand (Import) SM 9.0 130.0 CWE 2100127.02 Plate 4 U..