HomeMy WebLinkAbout2271 CAMEO RD; ; CB053435; Permit12-14-2005
City of Carlsbad
1635 Faraday Av Carlsbad, CA 92008
Retaining Wall Permit Permit No: CB053435
Building Inspection Request Line (760) 602-2725
Job Address:
Permit Type:
Parcel No:
Valuation:
Reference #:
Project Title:
2271 CAMEO RD CBAD
RETAIN
1670801700 Lot#:
$6,480.00 Construction Type:
NASH RES 360 SF KEYSTONE
RETAINING WALL
0
NEW
Applicant:
ROBERT WILKINSON
2810 ROOSEVELT ST 92008
760-434-2152
Status:
Applied:
Entered By:
Plan Approved:
Issued:
Plan Check*:
Inspect Area:
Owner:
NASH RICHARD&VICKY L
965 WESTBANK RD
GLENWOOD SPRINGS CO 81601
ISSUED
09/29/2005
KG
12/14/2005
12/14/2005
Building Permit
Add'l Building Permit Fee
Plan Check
Add'l Plan Check Fee
Strong Motion Fee
Renewal Fee
Add'l Renewal Fee
Other Building Fee
Additional Fees
TOTAL PERMIT FEES
$76.59
$0.00
$49.78
$0.00
$1.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$127.37
Total Fees:$127.37 Total Payments To Date:$12737 Balance Due:$0.00
BUILDING PLANS
JL_ IN STORAGE
ATTACHED
Inspector:
FINAL APPROVAL
Date:Clearance:
NOTICE: Please take NOTICE thai approval of your project includes the "Imposition" of fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively
referred to as "fees/exactions." You have 90 days from the date this permit was issued to protest imposition of these fees/exactions. If you protest tfiern, you must
follow the protest procedures set forth in Government Code Section 66020{a), and file the protest and any other required information with the City Manager for
processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.32.030. Failure to timely follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack,
review, set aside, void, or annul their imposition,
You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified fees/exaclions DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity
changes, nor planning, zoning, grading or other similar application processing or service fees in connection with this project. NOR DOES IT APPLY to any
fees/exaclions of which von have previously been given a NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has previously otherwise expired.
PERJMIT APPLICATION
CITY OF CARLSBAD BUILDING DEPARTMENT
1635 Faraday Ave., Carlsbad, CA 92008
0527201-2 0026 09/29/2005 001 11
PLAN CHECK
EST. VAL
Plan Ck. Deposit
Validate^By.
Date
— Address (include Bldg/Suite #)Business Name (at this address)
Legal Lot No.Subdivision Name/Number Unit No.Phase No.Total # of units
Existing Usee.Proposed Use
SQ. FT #of Stories
iailBffaran* if ram applicant!
# of Bedrooms of Bathrooms
Name Address
3pdMBtilbAK?-•: "Q Contractor - • "O Agent fof Contractor -QrOwner
-&&,'
State/Zip Telephone Fax#
Address City State/Zip Telephone
Name Address City State/Zip Telephone #
(Sec. 7031.5 Business and Professions Code: Any City or County which requires a permit to construct, alter, improve, demolish or repair any structure, prior to its
issuance, also requires the applicant for such permit to file a signed statement that he is licensed pursuant to the provisions of the Contractor's License Law
[Chapter 9, commending with Section 7000 of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Codel or that he is exempt therefrom, and the basis for the alleged
exemption. Any violation of Section 7031.5 by any applicant for a permit subjects the applicant to a civil penalty of not more than five hundred dollars [$500]).
Name
State License #
Address
License Class
City State/Zip
City Business License #
Telephone 9
Designer Name
"State License #j-
Address City State/Zip Telephone
^Workers' Compensation Declaration: I hereby affirm under penalty of perjury one of the following declarations:
Q I have and will maintain a certificate of consent to self-insure for workers' compensation as provided by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance
of the work for which this permit is issued.
0 I have and will maintain workers' compensation, as required by Section 3700 of the Labor Code, for the performance of the work for which this permit is
issued. My worker's compensation insurance carrier and policy number are:
Insurance Company Policy No. Expiration Date
(THIS SECTION NEED NOT BE COMPLETED IF THE PERMIT IS FOR ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS [$100] OR LESS)- *. • •"*1 I CERTIFICATE OF EXEMPTION: I certify that in the performance of the work for which this permit is issued, I shall not employ any person in any manner so as
to become subject to the Workers' Compensation Laws of California.
WARNING: Failure to secure workers' compensation coverage is unlawful, and shall subject an employer to criminal penalties and civil fines up to one hundred
thousand dollars ($100,000), in addition to the cost of compensation, damages as provided for In Section 3706 of the Labor code, interest and attorney's fees.
< SIGNATUREDATE
I hereby^affirm that I am exempt from the Contractor's License Law for the following reason:
n/l, as owner of the property or my employees with wages as their sole compensation, will do the work and the structure is not intended or offered for sale
(Sec. 7044, Business and Professions Code: The Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and who does
such work himself or through his own employees, provided that such improvements are not intended or offered for sale. If, however, the building or improvement is
sold within one year of completion, the owner-builder will have the burden of proving that he did not build or improve for the purpose of sale).
C~l I, as owner of the property, am exclusively contracting with licensed contractors to construct the project (Sec. 7044, Business and Professions Code: The
Contractor's License Law does not apply to an owner of property who builds or improves thereon, and contracts for such projects with contractor(s) licensed
pursuant to the Contractor's License Law).
d I am exempt under Section Business and Professions Code for this reason: ^.
1. Ipef&anally plan to provide the major labor and materials for construction of the proposed property improvement-yp^YES QNO
2. /TlhavB / have not) signed an application for a building permit for the proposed work.
3.—fnave contracted with the following person (firm) to provide the proposed construction (include name / address / phone number / contractors license number):
4. 1 plan to provide portions of the work, but I havehired the following person to coordinate, supervise and provide the major work (include name / address / phone
number / contractors license number): f^-ys^ /
5. I will provide some of the work, bu>ttiave contracted (hired) the following persons to provide the work indicated (include name / address / phone number / type
pf work): <•/.// ,- -—-| —~_ J 0 0* —— -f ++—_—-„ __ 1 f t*~f 1 f*...T-.. ^. . 1 "• . v ^
/ArJ//~^
b
A/PROPERTY OWNER SIGNATURE DATE
Is the applicant or future building occupant required to submit a business plan, acutely hazardous materials registration form or risk management and prevention
program under Sections 25505, 25533 or 25534 of the Presley-Tanner Hazardous Substance Account Act? O YES Q NO
Is the applicant or future building occupant required to obtain a permit from the air pollution control district or air quality management district? O YES Q NO
Is the facility to be constructed within 1,000 feet of the outer boundary of a school site? Q YES D NO
IF ANY OF THE ANSWERS ARE YES, A FINAL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY MAY NOT BE ISSUED UNLESS THE APPLICANT HAS MET OR IS MEETING THE
REQUIREMENTS OF THE OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES AND THE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT.
i^Dl$Or^^ ; ; ': •••?•"•'.";".""<•• :•'•••; •' •' .••'• ..- * ' ;-:'-.M:;:' ...v=.=- ' ••' ;••'• = •-.': ''.''r •'..."*".:.;'
I hereby affirm that there is a construction lending agency for the performance of the work for which this permit is issued (Sec. 3097(i) Civil Code).
LENDER'S NAMELENDER'S ADDRESS
I certify that I have read the application and state that the above information is correct and that the information on the plans is accurate. I agree to comply with all
City ordinances and State laws relating to building construction. I hereby authorize representatives of the City of Carlsbad to enter upon the above mentioned
property for inspection purposes. I ALSO AGREE TO SAVE, INDEMNIFY AND KEEP HARMLESS THE CITY OF CARLSBAD AGAINST ALL LIABILITIES,
JUDGMENTS, COSTS AND EXPENSES WHICH MAY IN ANY WAY ACCRUE AGAINST SAID CITY IN CONSEQUENCE OF THE GRANTING OF THIS PERMIT.
OSHA: An OSHA permit is required for excavations over 5'0" deep and demolition or construction of structures over 3 stories in height.
EXPIRATION: Every permit issued by the building Official under the provisions of this Code shall expire by limitation and become null and void if the building or work
authorized by such permit is not QpmmencesLwithin 180 days from the date of such permit or if the building or work authorized by such permit is suspended or abandoned
at any time after the work is comr^l£pd/for j) peri^fajrf^89 ^V3 iSec/Iqp-4£)6.4,d,Uniform Building Code).
APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE DATE
YELLOW: Applicant PINK: Finance
City of Carlsbad Bldg Inspection Request
For: 05/22/2006
Permit* CB053435
Title. NASH RES 360 SF KEYSTONE
Description: RETAINING WALL
Inspector Assignment: PY
2271 CAMEO RD
Lot
Type: RETAIN Sub Type:
Job Address:
Suite:
Location:
OWNER NASH RICHARD&VICKY L
Owner: NASH RICHARD&VICKY L
Remarks:
Phone: 9703795172
Inspector:
Total Time:
CD Description
69 Final Masonry
Act Comment
Requested By: RICHARD
Entered By: CHRISTINE
Comments/Notices/Hold
Associated PCRs/CVs Original PC#
Inspection History
Date Description Act Insp Comments
12/21/2005 69 Final Masonry CO PY SEE NOTICE ATTACHED
12/15/2005 61 Footing AP PY CRIB WALL
City of Carlsbad Bldg Inspection Request
Permit* CBOS3435
Title: NASH RES 360 SF KEYSTONE
Description: RETAINING WALL
For: 12/^/2005
-2-1 Inspector Assignment: PY
2271 CAMEO RD
Lot
Type: RETAIN Sub Type:
Job Address:
Suite:
Location:
APPLICANT ROBERT WILKINSON
Owner: NASH RICHARD&VICKY L
Remarks: ENTER FROM ECR
Phone: 9703795172
Inspector:
Total Time:
CD Description
69 Final Masonry
Act Comment
Comments/Notices/Hold
Requested By: NA
Entered By. CHRISTINE
Associated PCRs/CVs
Inspection History
Date Description Act Insp Comments
12/15/2005 61 Footing AP PY CRIB WALL
CITY OF CARLSBAD
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
DATE
NOTICE (760) 602-2700
1635 FARADAY AVENUE
LOCATION
PERMIT NO.
FOR INSPECTIONCALL (760) 602-27
FOR
CONSTRCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC
GEOTECHNICAL & CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING & INSPECTION
1441 MONTIEL ROAD, SUITE 115, ESCONDIDO, CA 92026
PHONE (760) 746-4955 FAX (760). 746-9806
*-»-
GRADING GBShRVAMON
Job Name: A/a*V\ £*s:i«^cc 7^? Jo,,-,. , K/W(
Job Address: 27,"?! fo^er D *« J (Vr U brtHf/
^ "^- ' ' Wt\™^'--c' lAOCS^r1 v-t-t' '"jt-'iAd
1 1Plan File: | Permit*
Gen. Contractor: T;cv,&<"^ /vt»<$t\
Job Number: A:^7/^A
Date(s): /?//'//£'0
Tech: ^ Ii^/\ '<,
Contr. Wkg:
Superintendent "^2; , c V •• r c* • " ' "* '
Weather Condition: ^^^nu *
Summary of Work: (1L^'4^ x>f c&ts-kra 1 r r^97<- •« '^ 4c
,£?<?c /C T' // o-r ** rcr r*ri^,'vv^ '^'^ ff ' C^Y» rr^^ '^f' yc? /
Foreman:
C7£'ST/'V 'f- +^4-
Ji /4-^
/ / / "? • L "' ^ I ' ' - / /f-/-Ve>/'J/ n&.y-)& ~$~' c.&/ryp4CT$ &c>3 i (. c ) ) IX'^// /*-^<; )£?f./^,S. / n^f^C '^ ^
f r I '• t / ' / ^ * fi ti ^ ~" s- 1 ' - J
75£/ rcrS^/Ar -tr-r- f~»J;«9 pr^^r re^/Ar
f^ ^ 6^£//*U^/s Cpr^v--i for ^TA/ /'//,/ / IT
/ .- |
/"^^ /,
wd** /an,.
i ^"i // / 1t> . f /' p^5"*^ **
- . .
it, TEST SUMMARY
Test'
'
•z
3
LOCATION AND NOTES
s^/k
,7-Wh
^-o,^r
A/ ,1
-' - h.. ' _kS22£o_^L^ L
/f
227 /
Elev
Feet
-^
- /
'2
A
-i. -T
Lab Maximum
Densily(PCF)
^ r~i,
Nrk_
Optimum%
Moisture
~-^,
f^n
''J
FieW Density (PCF)
///W '
Al?-5" -
f/r-7
~'^^^r~
s\-rr
" \ '
r
FieW Moist
Content %
(3Ji« r
^/./
"^
ko
*^-
"S "
^
Compaction
[>
Relative
Compact/
Required
^?c>
fc
1
GEOTECHNICAL & CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING & INSPECTION
1441 MONTIEL ROAD, SUITE 115, ESCONDIDO, CA 92026 (760) 746-4955 FAX (760) 746-9806
EsGil Corporation
In Partners/tip vritA government for Building Safety
DATE: October 12, 20O5 Q APPLICANT
JURISDICTION; Carlsbad TTPLAN REVIEWER
Q RLE
PLAN CHECK NO.: O5-3435 SET: I
PROJECT ADDRESS: 2271 Cameo Rd.
PROJECT NAME: Keystone Retaining Wall at Nash Residence
The plans transmitted herewith have been corrected where necessary and substantially comply
with the jurisdiction's building codes.
The plans transmitted herewith will substantially comply with the jurisdiction's building codes
when minor deficiencies identified below are resolved and checked by building department staff.
The plans transmitted herewith have significant deficiencies identified on the enclosed check list
and should be corrected and resubmitted for a complete recheck.
The check list transmitted herewith is for your information. The plans are being held at Esgil
Corporation until corrected plans are submitted for recheck.
The applicant's copy of the check list is enclosed for the jurisdiction to forward to the applicant
contact person.
The applicant's copy of the check list has been sent to:
X] Esgil Corporation staff did not advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed.
Esgil Corporation staff did advise the applicant that the plan check has been completed.
Person contacted: Telephone #:
Date contacted: (by: ) Fax #:
Mail Telephone Fax In Person
REMARKS: Each sheet of the plans (including the 1V x 17" sheet) must be signed by the
designer.
By: Kurt Culver Enclosures:
Esgi! Corporation
D GA D MB D EJ D PC 10/3/05 tmsmtl.dot
9320 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 208 4" San Diego, California 92123 + (858)560-1468 + Fax (858) 560-1576
Carlsbad 05-3435
October 12, 2005
| VALUATION AND PLAN CHECK FEE
JURISDICTION: Carlsbad PLAN CHECK NO.: 05-3435
PREPARED BY: Kurt Culver DATE: October 12, 2005
BUILDING ADDRESS: 2271 Cameo Rd.
BUILDING OCCUPANCY: Wall TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: Cone.
BUILDING
PORTION
Ret. Wall
Air Conditioning
Fire Sprinklers
TOTAL VALUE
Jurisdiction Code
AREA
( Sq. Ft.)
cb
Valuation
Multiplier
By Ordinance
Reg.
Mod.
VALUE ($)
6,480
6,480
$76.59
Plan Check Fee by Ordinance
Type of Review:
Q Repetitive FeeRepeats
Complete Review
D Other
r-i Hourly
Structural Only
Hour
Esgll Plan Review Fee
$49.78
$42.89
Comments:
Sheet 1 of 1
macvalue.doc
City of Carlsbad
Public Works — Engineering
BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST
RETAINING WALL
BUILDING PLANCHECK NUMBER: CB
BUILDING ADDRESS:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Retaining Wall
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER:
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
APPROVAL
The item you have submitted for review has been
approved. The approval is based on plans, information
and/or specifications provided in your submittal;
therefore, any changes to these items after this date,
including field modifications, must be reviewed by this
office to insure continued conformance with applicable
codes. Please review carefully all comments attached,
as failure to comply with instructions in this report can
result iasuspension of permit to build.
Date:
DENIAL
Please see Vie/attached report of deficiencies
marked with J^f Make necessary corrections to
plans or •^specifications for compliance with
applicable codes and standards. Submit corrected
plans and/or specifications to this office for review.
ATTACHMENTS
Right-of-Way Permit Application
ENGINEERING DEPT. CONTACT PERSON
NAME: JOANNE JUCHNIEWICZ
City of Carlsbad
ADDRESS: 1635 Faraday Avenue
Carlsbad, CA 92008
PHONE:(760) 602-2775
H-\wnBfvnfvtar-HKi jflTpMajpinp Wat Hiiildinp Di»,.>-n~*, rtft. cur™ 11 A™
1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92OO8-7314 • (76O) 602-272O • FAX (76O) 6O2-8562
Q Q
RD/
BUILDING PLANCHECK CHECKLIST
RETAINING WALLS
1. Provide a fully dimensioned site plan drawn to scale. Show:
i/
A. North Arrow
B. Existing & Proposed Structures
(dimensioned from street)
C. Property Lines
Show on site plan:
Drainage Patterns -
Existing & Proposed Slopes
C. Existing Topography
3. Include on title sheet:
A. Site Address
B. Assessor's Parcel Number
C7)Legal Description
TT Grading Quantities Cut
Easements
Retaining Wall — P
(location and height)
5*'
Fill Import/Export
(Grading Permit and Haul Route Permit may be required)
4. Project does not comply with the following Engineering Conditions of approval
for Project No.
Conditions were complied with by: Date:
MISCELLANEOUS PERMITS
5. A RIGHT-OF-WAY PERMIT is required to do work in City Right-of-Way
and/or private work adjacent to the public Right-of-Way.
A separate Right-of-Way issued by the Engineering Department is required
for the following: _
Please obtain an application for Right-of-Way permit from the Engineering
Department.
£>m./r?
B
V\LASPALMAS\STSUJBRARYlENG\WOR[)UXX^CHKLS'nRetai[¥ng Wall Building Planet*** CW&t Form JJ.dOC
dty of Carlsfead Interactive GI5 Map - Microsoft Internet Explorer provided by City of
Refresh Map
£j
Layers
Surveyed City
Boundary
Municipal
Boundaries
Beach Overlay
Deferred
Certification
Visitor Overlay
Coastal Zone
Street names
Q Streets
O Facilities
Q Drainage Basins
O SD Outfalls
O Drainage Structure;
tii I*V!>»03fc"
PLANNING/ENGINEERING APPROVALS
PERMIT NUMBER PATE
ADDRESS
RESIDENTIAL TENANT IMPROVEMENT
RESIDENTIAL ADDITION MINOR
« $10,000.00)
PLAZA CAMINO REAL
CARLSBAD COMPANY STORES
VILLAGE FAIRE
COMPLETE OFFICE BUILDING
OTHER
PLANNER DATE I 0 (g
ENGINEER DATE
DocsAttfonmmwmMo cngtnHrffW Appronli
CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING. INC.
SAN DIEGO, CA
1441 Montiel Road
Suite 115
Escondido, CA 9202B
(760) 746-4955
(760) 746-9806 FAX
RIVERSIDE, CA
12155 Magnolia Ave.
Suite 6C
Riverside, CA 92503
(951) 35Z-67Q1
(951) 352-6705 FAX
VENTURA, CA
1645 Pacific Ave.
Suite 107
Oxnard, CA 93033
(605) 486-6475
(805) 486-9016 FAX
TRACY, CA
242 W. Larch
Suite F
Tracy, CA 95376
(209) 839-2890
(209) 839-2895 FAX
SACRAMENTO, CA
3628 Madison Ave.
Suite 22
N. Highlands, CA 95660
(916) 331-6030
(916) 331-6037 FAX
N. PALM SPRINGS, CA
19020 N. Indian Ave.
Suite 2-K
N. Palm Springs, CA 92256
(760) 329-4677
(760) 328-4696- FAX
March 9, 2006 CTEJobNo. 10-7605G
Mr. Richard Nash
2271 Cameo Road
Carlsbad, California
Telephone: 970.379.5172
Subject;Final Report for Compaction Testing of Keystone Retaining Wall
Nash Residence
2271 Cameo Road
Carlsbad, California
Mr. Nash:
As requested, Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. (CTE) has performed compaction testing of
fill materials during construction of the keystone retaining wall at the referenced site. Prior to wall
construction, CTE confirmed the proper placement/installation of an appropriate perforated pipe,
fabric, and gravel backdrain. In addition, we have observed the placement of base aggregate, the
placement of block units, geogrid fabric and the resulting face of wall angle and have found these to
be in conformance with the standard wall sections.
Field-testing of the compacted material was conducted in accordance with ASTM D-2922 (nuclear
method). Results of the field-testing indicate that fill materials were compacted to minimum of 90
percent of the laboratory maximum dry density as determined by test method ASTM D-1557.
Tabulated results of the field compaction testing performed are provided in the attached Table I,
"Compaction Test Summary". Laboratory determination of the reference compaction values are
provided in Table II, "Laboratory Test Results. In addition, the attached Figure 1 shows the
approximate location of the compaction tests performed. The site should be properly maintained
(including wall drain outlet) and planted in accordance with the City of Carlsbad guidelines.
The opportunity to be of service is appreciated. If you have any questions regarding this transmittal,
please do not hesitate to contact this office.
Respectfully submitted,
CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC.
Dan T. Math, GE# 2665
Principal Engineer
GEOTECHNICAL I ENVIRONMENTAL I CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION AND TESTING I CIVIL ENGINEER ING I SURVEYING
TABLE I
COMPACTION TEST SUMMARY
Job Name: Nash Residence
Job Address: 2271 Cameo Road, Carlsbad
Date
12/19/2005
12/19/2005
12/19/2005
1/13/2006
Test
No.
1
2
3
4
Location
Wall Backfill South
Wall Backfill North
Wai! Backfill Center
Wall Backfill Center
Elevation
Feet
478.0
479.0
478.0
482.0
Job No. 10-7605
Date: 3/7/2006
Density
pcf
119.4
119.5
119.7
125.9
Moisture
Content
%Dry
Weight
13.1
14.5
14.1
9.3
Relative
Compaction
%
94%
94%
94%
92%
Sou
Type
1
1
1
2
** TEST FAILED, SEE RETEST
TABLE II
LABORATORY TEST DATA
Job Name: Nash Residence
Job Address: 2271 Cameo Road, Carlsbad
Sample No.
Maximum
Dry Density
pcf
Optimum
Moisture
Content
%wt
Job No. 10-7605G
Date 3/7/2006
Soil
Description
127.5
137.0
11.0 Recycled Class II Base
6.5 Recycled Class II Base
EDGE OF
CONCRETE
vo
o
111
O @ °31s
CD-^
c73=;
to^;
O«'
CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINE
SAN DIEGO, CA
1441 Montiel Road
Suite 115
Escondido, CA 92026
(760) 746-4955
(760) 746-9806 FAX
RIVERSIDE, CA
12155 Magnolia Avenue
Suite 6C
Riverside, CA 92503
(951) 352-6701
(951) 352-6705 FAX
VENTURA, CA
1645 Pacific Avenue
Suite 107
Omard, CA 93033
(805) 486-6475
(805) 486-9016 FAX
TRACY, CA
242 W. Larch
Suite F
Tracy, CA 95376
(209) 839-2890
(209) 839-2895 FAX
SACRAMENTO, CA
3628 Madison Avenue
Suite 22
N. Highlands, CA 95660
(916) 331-6030
(916) 331-6037 FAX
April 20, 2005
Naturescape Landscape
Attn: Bill Schwab
991C Lomas Santa Fe Drive, Suite 266
Solana Beach, California 92075
Telephone: 858.583.6444
CTEJobNo. 10-7605G
Via Facsimile: 760.632.7154
Subject:Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations for
Nash Residence Slope Repair and Retaining Wall
2271 Cameo Road
Carlsbad, California
/* r?/ -
CafZ-'O - /U>V'
Mr. Schwab:
At your request Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc. (CTE), has performed a limited
geotechnical investigation of the referenced site. Our investigation activities have included
geologic reconnaissance and subsurface exploration of one large diameter, hand-dug boring and
one exploratory backhoe test pit. Figure 1 shows the approximate location of the explorations
performed.
1.0 SITE DESCRIPTION
The site is currently an existing single family residence located at 2271 Cameo Road, in Carlsbad
California. An existing slope at the rear of the house previously descended at an approximate
grade of 1.25 to 1 to the east; to the neighboring property below. The slope grade has been
altered as a result of surficial failure of the slope behind the existing swimming pool, due to near
record precipitation. The affected area now rests at an approximate grade of 2 to 1 with the
surficial slough sliding over the neighbor's fence and onto their property. The upper
approximately six feet of the scarp is at or near vertical. See Figure 2 for a cross section of the
current slope condition.
2.0 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS
2.1 Field Investigation
On March 30-31, and April 6, 2005, one large diameter, hand-dug boring was excavated through
the slope and one exploratory test pit was excavated at the toe of the slope, respectively.
Explorations were conducted to investigate and obtain samples of subsurface soils at the project
GEOTECHNICAL • ENVIRONMENTAL • CONSTRUCTION I
Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations Page 2
Proposed Nash Residence Retaining Wall
5955 Lake Vista Drive
Carlsbad, California
April 14. 2005 CTEJobNo. 10-7605G
site. Approximate exploration locations are provided on Figure 1. Subsurface soils or soil
stratigraphy was classified by a geologist (using the Unified Soil Classification System) during
the exploration operations. The soil descriptions and stratigraphic relationships were recorded
on field logs for each exploration. Field exploration logs are presented in Appendix A. The field
descriptions were later modified (as appropriate) based on the results of our laboratory testing
program.
2.2 Disturbed Soil Sampling
Bulk and chunk soil samples were collected from the excavations in large plastic bags. Soil
samples were returned to the CTE geotechnical laboratory for analysis.
2.3 Laboratory Investigation
Laboratory tests were conducted on representative soil samples for classification purposes and to
evaluate soil physical properties and engineering characteristics. Tests conducted included
Modified Proctor, Particle-Size Distribution, Direct Shear, and In-Place Moisture and Density.
Test method descriptions and laboratory testing results are included in Appendix B.
3.0 GEOLOGY
3.1 General Setting
The site lies within the coastal plain of northern San Diego County. Geomorphically, this area is
characterized by uplifted marine terraces dissected by intermittent streams.
3.2 Geologic Conditions
Based on mapping by Tan (2000) site soils were expected to consist of older Quaternary Terrace
Deposits. However, according to our onsite observations, the site soils were found to consist of
approximately two to six feet of Artificial Fill and Topsoils (which also comprise the landslide
material) that overly Quaternary Terrace Deposits to the maximum depths explored of 21.5 fbg.
3.2.1 Quaternary Artificial Fill/Topsoil/Landsiide Material
Quaternary Artificial Fill and Topsoil materials are considered to have previously
blanketed the subject slope. This material, after the failure of the slope, is now
categorized for our purposes as "Landslide Material" where it has come to rest at the toe
of the slope. Although considered "Landslide" material, the slope failure in this case is
considered to be only surficial. These materials were found to consist dominantly of loose
to occasionally medium dense, dry to moist, brown to dark brown Silty to Clayey fine-
grained SAND. In addition, these soils were found to contain organics (e.g. roots, grass)
and occasional debris. Due to the generally loose nature of these materials and the
proposed remediation of the slope failure, overexcavation/removal and recompaction of
this material shall be required as indicated herein. Once properly processed, this material
shall be considered suitable for reuse as compacted fill. Processing shall remove
significant organic materials prior to recompacting.
\\Cte_server^rojecisM0-7605\Rpl_ Oeo RECS, With Wall Recs.doc
Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations Page 3
Proposed Nash Residence Retaining Wall
5955 Lake Vista Drive
Carlsbad, California
April 14. 2005 CTE Job No. 10-7605G
3.2.2 Quaternary Terrace Deposits
Quaternary Terrace Deposits were encountered in our soil boring and below the surficial
soils in our test pit at the toe of the slope. These materials are then considered to underlie
the surficial materials throughout the slope to considerable depth (actual depth unknown
and beyond the scope of our services). These materials generally consist of medium
dense (locally dense), slightly moist to moist, orange brown to brown Silty and Clayey
fine-grained SAND with occasional cobbles and roots. These materials are considered
suitable for support of the proposed repair improvements and for reuse as engineered fill.
A CTE geologist or engineer should verify soil conditions onsite during grading to ensure
the recommendations presented herein are followed.
3.3 Groundwater Conditions
Groundwater was not encountered in any of our test pits to the maximum explored depth and is
not expected to affect the proposed development. However, slope and wall backdrains will be
required during construction of the proposed repair improvements.
Our geotechnical recommendations are presented below for your use in preliminary design of
this project. However, these recommendations may require slight modifications based on
conditions exposed in the field during construction.
4,0 PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on our evaluation, we anticipate that the slope failure may be mitigated by the
construction of an approximately seven foot tall Keystone-type retaining wall, constructed with
an anticipated set back of approximately five feet from the property line at the toe of the slope. A
2:1 slope could then be properly constructed to the edge of the existing flatwork at the top of the
slope. However, it may be necessary to remove the flatwork in order to properly compact the top
of the reconstructed slope.
It shall be noted that CTE has estimated that a seven-foot high wall set-back five feet from the
property line will provide the approximate geometry to be acceptable for the City of Carlsbad.
An appropriately accurate survey and wall/grading plan shall be performed for the site. In
addition it is the owner's responsibility to obtain the necessary project permits.
4.1 Grading for Keystone Wall
The proposed retaining wall will be founded entirely on recompacted fill materials. In order to
mitigate excessive potential differential settlements along the length of the wall due to loose or
otherwise unsuitable materials, overexcavation and recompaction shall be performed to
whichever depth is greater:
• The depth of competent materials (estimated to be as deep as 5 fbg).
• The depth necessary to provide a minimum of 12 inches of engineered fill below the
bottom of the proposed wall foundation.
\\CLe^5ervcr\proJ=0!iUO-'7605\Rpt_ Qeo Recs. With W»ll Recs.boc
Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations
Proposed Nash Residence Retaining Wall
5955 Lake Vista Drive
Carlsbad, California
April 14. 2005
Page 4
CTEJobNo. 10-7605G
Removals shall be made laterally at least two feet beyond the face of the wall. However, locally
deeper removals may be necessary due to loose or unsuitable underlying soils.
Suitability of the bottom of over-excavation should be verified during site grading by CTE
personnel. The proposed or required excavations may necessitate work on the adjacent property
to the east.
4.2 Keystone Wall Foundations
We anticipate that all wall footings or gravel leveling pads will be founded entirely in properly
recompacted fills as recommended herein. An allowable bearing value of 2,000 pounds per
square foot (psf) for a footing embedded a minimum of 6 inches in properly recompacted fill
materials is appropriate.
4.3 Compaction
We recommend that the wall be backfilled with soil having an expansion index of 40 or less. The
backfill area should include the zone defined by a 1:1 sloping plane, extended back from the base
of the wall. Retaining wall backfill and slope fill should be compacted to at least 90 percent
relative compaction, based on ASTM D1557-91. Heavy compaction equipment, which could
cause distress to walls, should not be used directly behind wall blocks. Additional Specifications
for grading are provided in Appendix D.
4.4 Strength And Unit Weight
Provided in the table below are soil parameters considered suitable for design of the proposed
Keystone wall. The design internal angle of friction (({>) for the reinforced zone has been
estimated by our laboratory. However, we reserve the right to perform additional testing to
confirm that on-site soil processing is consistent throughout the duration of the project.
Suitability and soil properties of any proposed imported soils should also be verified by this
office.
P-™c.ihi -:'iW'*:«!sfe^l^:
SiSSlS^lftiiSl%>parentiionesipnia«.1;*: ;fiH;;.•i'Ai'V. & *«iii asSu MMaSjjlgiiiT >*«»)iSisSs^filliftS
Reinforced Zone 30 50 125
Retained Soil 30 50 125
Foundation 30 50 125
Based on the anticipated conditions, the above parameters are considered suitable for analysis of
the wall system.
\\Cte_server\projccts\lQ-7605\Rpt_ Geo Recs, With Wall Recs,ttoc
Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations Page 5
Proposed Nash Residence Retaining Wall
5955 Lake Vista Drive
Carlsbad, California
April 14. 2005 ; CTEJobNo. 10-7605G
4.5 Wall and Slope Drainage
In all cases, the walls should include a foundation drain and a drain placed at the base of the
backcut. All drains shall daylight or outlet at a suitable location. The reconstructed slope shall be
properly benched into competent underlying materials. In addition, drains shall be installed
within the slope. Drain and grading specifications are provided in Appendix D. However,
additional recommendations may be required during construction.
4.6 Slope Construction/Grading
All loose and organic surficial soils shall be stripped from the surface of the slope to the depth of
competent formational material prior to placing fill. All fill material shall be properly screened of
any organic material, rock, or debris. The slope shall be properly benched as shown in Figure 3
and as directed by CTE during construction..
Following removal of loose disturbed soils and confirming existing fills, all areas to receive fills
should be scarified nine inches; moisture conditioned, and properly compacted. Fill and backfill
should be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90 as evaluated by ASTM D1557 at a
moisture content within two percent of optimum. The optimum lift thickness for backfill soil
will be dependent upon the type of compaction equipment used. Generally, backfill should be
placed in uniform, horizontal lifts not exceeding eight inches in loose thickness. Backfill
placement and compaction should be done in overall conformance with geotechnical
recommendations and local ordinances.
Although properly constructed slopes on this site should be grossly stable, the soils will be
somewhat erodable. Therefore, runoff water should not be permitted to drain over the edges of
slopes unless that water is confined to properly designed and constructed drainage facilities.
Erosion resistant vegetation should be maintained on the face of all slopes.
Typically, soils along the top portion of a fill slope face will creep laterally. We do not
recommend distress sensitive hardscape improvements be constructed within five feet of slope
crests in fill areas or that thickened edges be employed. For the anticipated site conditions,
periodic replacement of the flatwork immediately adjacent to the top of slope may be required.
\\CiE_server\projectsMO-7605\Rpi_ Geo Recs, Wilh Wall Rectdoc
Preliminary Geotechnical Recommendations
Proposed Nash Residence Retaining Wall
5955 Lake Vista Drive
Carlsbad, California
April 14, 2005
Page 6
CTEJobNo. 10-7605G
Should you have any questions or need further information please do not hesitate to contact this
office.
Respectfully submitted,
CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC.
Lodney D. Ballard, GE #2173
Geotechnical Engineering Manager
Dennis A. Kilian
Project Geologist
\\Cte_server\prajects\IO-7605\Rpt_ Geo Recs, With Wall Recs.doc
A
CONCRETE FLATWORK
RECONSTRUC
PROPOSED WALL
P.
LEGEND
EXISTING RESIDENCE
WOODEN DECK
ED 2:1 SLOPE
-PL-.E.
A'
TP-1
APPROXIMATE BORING
LOCATION
APPROXIMATE TEST PIT
LOCATION
CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC.
GEOTECHN1CAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION
1*41 MONTIEL ROAD, STE 115 ESCON0!DO CA 92026(7(0)746-4655
EXPLORATION LOCATION MAP
NASH RESIDENCE SLOPE REPAIR AND RETAINING WALL
2271 CAMEO ROAD
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
CTEJOBNOl
10-7605G
NOME
DATE: I FIGURE:
04/051
A A'
EXISTING RESIDENCE
(PROJECTED -10' SQUtH)
F:MATE GRADE AFTER
•RUCTION v/ ?'
JE WALL (2:1)
APPROXIMATE LOCATION DF
KEYSTONE WALL V/ 5' SETBACK
FROM PROPERTY LINE
APPROXIMATE HEIGHT DF
;ESSARY TD
CONSTRtftT 2:1 SLOPE
LEGEND
TDPSDIL' QUATERNARY ARTIFICIAL O /
Qtd4 i QUATERNARY TERRACE DEPOSITS ~| DO n T [^vV
\
TP-1
2CTION OF SLOPE
RESIDENCE RETAINING WALL
n CAMEO ROADSBAD, CALIFORNIA
CTE JOB NO:10-7605G
T = 5'
MTE; ~^04/05
\\F: \PROJECTS\10- JOOO\EXPLORE.DWG
SURFACE OF COMPETENT
EARTH MATERIAL.
5'
TYPICAL
-MINIMUM 1.5 x WIDTH OF COMPACTION EQUIPMENT OR 15'
(INCLINED @ 2% INTO SLOPE)
CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC.
GEOTECHNICAL AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING TESTING AND INSPECTION
1441 MONT I EL ROAD, STE 11S GSCONDIOO CA. 92028 (760) 746-4955
BENCHING FILL OVER NATURAL DETAIL CTEJOBNO:
SCALE:NO SCALE
DATE: [HGURE: -,
04/05 3
APPENDIX A
HELD EXPLORATION LOGS
\Cle_servcr\projects\10-7605\Rpt_ Geo Recs, With Wall Recs.doc
/\CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC.
GEOTECHMICH | coKmircTiCH ENGINEERED TESIINQ AND INSPECTION
IU) MOHritLIID»D,SllllE IIS I [SCOIHIDII, U 1)111 llll.lll.il)!
DEFINITION OF TERMS
PRIMARY DIVISIONS SYMBOLS SECONDARY DIVISIONS
GRAVELS
MORETHAN
HALF OF
COARSE
FRACTION IS
LARGER THAN
NO. 4 SIEVE
SANDS
MORE THAN
HALF OF
COARSE
FRACTION IS
SMALLER THAN
NO. 4 SIEVE
CLEAN
GRAVELS
< 5% FINES
*:rtAJa£?
WELL GRADED GRAVELS, GEAVEL-SAND MIXTURES
LITTLE OR NO FINES _
POORLY GRADED GRAVELS OR. GRAVEL SAND MDOURES,
LITTLE OF MO FINES
GRAVELS
WITH FINES
• Jl.GM SILTY GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND-SILT MIXTURE,
NON-PLASTIC FINES __
GC CLAYEY GRAVELS, GRAVEL-SAND-CLAY MIXTURES,
PLASTIC PINES
CLEAN
SANDS
< 5% FINES
WELL GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SANDS, LITTLE OR NO
FINES ._.
1 SP
POORLY GRADED SANDS, GRAVELLY SANDS, UTTIE OR
NO FNES
SANDS
WITH FINES
It SM ' *•SILTY SANDS, SAND-SILT MCKTURES, NON-PLASTICFINES
't'i'n
ML
CLAYEY SANDS, SAND-CLAY MIXTURES, PLASTICffiJES
m
-J CO
< w
E2 S, o
g O
M Z
Er 2
SILTS AND CLAYS
LIQUID LIMIT IS
LESS THAN 50
INORGANIC SILTS, VERY FINE SANDS, ROCK FLOUE,SILTY
OR CLAYEY FINE SANDS, SLIGHTLY PLASTIC CLAYEY SILTS
SILTS AND CLAYS
LIQUID LIMIT IS
GREATER THAN 50
OL
INORGANIC CLAYS OFLO"SV TO MEDIUM PLASTICflY,
GRAVELLY. SANDY. SILTS OR LEAN CLAYS
ORGANIC SILTS AND ORGANIC CLAYS OF LOW PLASTICITY
INORGANIC SILTS, MICACEOUS OR DIATOMACEOUS RENE
SANDY OR SILTY SOUS, ELASTIC SILTS
INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH PLASTICITY, FAT GUYS
ORGANIC CLAYS OF MEDIUM TO HIGH PLASTICITY,
ORGANIC SILTY CLAYS
HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS PEAT AND OTHER HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS
GRAIN SIZES
BOULDERS COBBLES GRAVEL
COARSE FINE
SAND
COARSE MEDIUM FINE SILTS AND CLAYS
12" 3" 3/4"
CLEAR SQUARE SIEVE OPENING
4-10 40 200
U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZE
ADDITIONAL TESTS
(OTHER THAN TEST PIT AND BORING LOG COLUMN HEADINGS)
MAX- Maximum Dry Density
GS- Grain Size Distribution
SE- Sand Equivalent
El- Expansion Index
CHM- Sulfate and Chloride
Content, pH, Resistivity
COR - Corrosivity
SD- Sample Disturbed
PM- Permeability
SG- Specific Gravity
HA- Hydrometer Analysis
AL- Atterberg Limits
RV- R-Value
CN- Consolidation
CP- Collapse Potential
HC- Hydrocollapse
REM- Remolded
PP- Pocket Penetrometer
WA- Wash Analysis
DS- Direct Shear
UC- Unconfined Compression
MD- Moisture/Density
M- Moisture
SC- Swell Compression
01- Organic Impurities
FIGURE:BL1
/^
f/l\- (JUNtilKUCIlUN ltSIIN13-i4tNaiNbtKINB.INI;.
PROJECT: DRILLER: SHEET; ttf
CTEJOBNO: DRILL METHOD: DRILLING DATE:
LOGGED BY: SAMPLE METHOD: ELEVATION:
'50)fc-
1
-0-
-5-
-10-
-15-
•2£h
-25-
_«a.
CO
M"3m
j
ua,
?•
8
•nQ
p^^
z
I Blows/Foot<pu•&&'iuQ
E?Q Moisture (%)*U.S.C.S. Symbol"SM"Graphic LogBORING LEGEND
DESCRIPTION
BIOCK or L,nunjc Sample
— Soil Type or Classification Change
^ Formation Change [(Approximate boundaries queried {?)]
Quotes are placed around classifications where the soils
exist in situ as bedrock
Laboratory Tests
FIGURE: | BL2
/\
t 7 iX- UUNSWUUIIUN IbSIINLJ&bNUINbbKING, INC.
/ \» GEOTECHNICAL I CONSTBUCIION EnBiNEtniwa TESIINB AND iHSffcuoN
Ult MOKIIEL ROJiD, SUITE \\\ I tSCOSHIDO, C* t!0!S 1 III. Jli. 4111
PRO/ECT: NASH RESIDENCE DRILLER: GEORGE MANSOFF SHEET: i of i
CTEJOBNO: 10-76050 DRILL METHOD: HAND DUG DRILLING DATE:
LOGGED BY: DK SAMPLE METHOD: BULK, CHUNK ELEVATION: N/A
Depth (Feet)• 0^
-5-
•19.
•is-
•2G-
•25
01
0CO
£
a
\
g
<u
^I•>a
E Blows/FootDry Density (pcf)106.2 Moisture {%)12.8
"3
1>iC/3
«
U
Cfl
b
SC
SM-SC
SM
ML-SM
SM-SC
SM
5o11
BORING: B-l
DESCRIPTION
IK). 5' Uoen cut at ton ot slope.
0- 1.5' FILL:
Loose to medium dense, dry to slightly moist, gray brown to brown,
clayey fine .grained SAND, roots, rock.
1,5-21.5' Quaternary Terrace Deposits ?6td4)
Medium Dense, dry to slightly moist, brown clayey to silty Fine
grained SAND, roots and gravels
Approximately one-foot-thick alternating layers of orange
brown and brown silty and clayey SAND to 17'
@ 4.5' Becomes more clayey.
@ 5. 5' Actual Hole.
@ 8' Becomes sandy SILT/ silty SAND.
Medium dense to dense, slightly moist.
vtedium dense, slightly moist, dark gray brown silty to clayey
SAND, some cobbles and roots. Trace clays.
Total Depth 21.5'
•Jo Groundwater
Hole Backfilled with spoils
Laboratory Tests
WA.MAX
MD,DS
WA
| B-l
Boring B-l
APPENDIX B
LABORATORY RESULTS
\\Cie_server^rojec[s\10-7605\Rpi_ Gco Recs, WHh Wall Recs.doc
y |X- CONSTRUCTION TESTING & ENGINEERING, INC.
IHHB MHM^M aEoitcMKicu I CONSTRUCTION ENSINCERINS TESTING AND INSPECTION
N. mi MDdTIEL RO»D. SUITE IIS I tSCOHDIDO. C* I10IB I 7SI.T41.1tSJ
200 WASH ANALYSIS
LOCATION
B-l
B-l
TP-1
TP-1
DEPTH
(feet)
5-7
20
2-4
6-7
PERCENT PASSING
#200 SIEVE
22.8
18.1
24.8
28.7
CLASSIFICATION
SM
SM
SM
SC
IN-PLACE MOISTURE AND DENSITY
LOCATION DEPTH % MOISTURE DRY DENSITY
(feet)
B-l 9-10 12.8 106.2
TP-1 6-7 11.3 106.5
MAXIMUM DENSITY
(MODIFIED PROCTOR)
LOCATION DEPTH OPTIMUM MOISTURE DRY DENSITY
(feet) (%) (pcf)
B-l 5-7 10.5 128
LABORATORY SUMMARY CTE JOB NO. 10-7605G
PRECONSOL1DATION
0.000
0.025
0.050
0.075
0.100
0.1 10 100
TIME (minutes)
1000
SHEARING DATA
VERTICAL STRESS
1000psf
3000 psf.
a 10 13
STRAIN (%)
5000
4000 •
ti_tt
tft 3000 -0)UJcr
w
SHEARING-* to0 0o o oFAILURE ENVELOPE
i
I >
i
d^O.lSmmymin
i
1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
VERTICAL STRESS (psf)
SHEAR STRENGTH TEST
Sample Desi gnation Depth (ft)Cohesion Angle of Friction Sample Description
TP-1 2-4'1(1 psf 30.3 Undisturbed Orange Brown Clayey_Sand
nitial Moisture (%)11.3%Initial Dry Density (pcf
Final Moisture (%):19.1%Final Dry Denstiy fpcf)
106.5
99.5
CTE JOB NO: 10-7605
FIGURE No:C-l
PRECONSOLIDATION
0.000
0.025
0.050
0.075
0.100
0.125
0.150
0.1 10 100 1000
TIME (minutes)
SHEARING DATA
VERTICAL STRESS
1000psf
3000 psf
STRAIN (%)
FAILURE ENVELOPE
5000
4000
w 3000v>UJDC
W
O
Z
2000
1000
1000 2000 3000
VERTICAL STRESS (psf)
4000 5000
SHEAR STRENGTH TEST
Sample Designation Depth (ft)Cohesion Angle of Friction Sample Description
I-I 530 p.sf 13.4 Undisturbed Reddish Brown Clayey Sand
nitial Moisture (%):12.8%initial Dry Density (pet
Final Moisture (%):20.4%Final Dry Denstiy fpcf)
106.2
99.5
CTEJOBNO: 10-7605G
FIGURE No:C-2
DRY UNIT WEIGHT (pcf)45 '_
05 "
-
00
95 ™"
90
-
\\
\
1 '
V
_,
l_
.
1
_l_
\\-\\
.
\\
L,
,V
'
\
_L
1
\
\
\
\ \
\•li i1
\
\
. — i
V
Vi
U
/JP*-\r^1f
i
^
-
._
—
U-j_
,
"A
_K
^
-^--4W\
^ \\ 1
\ \
.\ ^ V> _,
X «-\-JT xi v
^— L _i— T~i_Li±:
•
^^:\
L V
, VAA-v\
Y"1 V\
A *w^
1— ~^i_ ^*— \
_j ^ XA\ u \ ^ >
' N V ^ \
* V '^' -1_V ^ i' N ^ v1 ^ , ^ v K
1 \ ^ '^ \ K\ i T 'i.\ 'C \ \
k ^. \ •> k
^
\ v "^ \ l\
\ ^ \ k v
\~ \
^v ^ Is \ \
N '• v >^ |\ ^ • N• i 1 • i \l '• x \ \ft J
0 5 10 5 20 25 30 35
PERCENT MOISTURE (%)
ASTMD1557 METHOD B3 A Q B Q C
MODIFIED PROCTOR
RESULTS
LAB
NUMBER
15037
SAMPLE
NUMBER
B-l
CTE JOB NO:
10-7605G <4r *
DEPTH
(FEET)
5-7
*?\
MAXIMUM OPTIMUM
SOIL DESCRIPTION DRY DENSITY MOISTURE
{PCF) CONTENT (%)
RED SILTY SAND 128.0 10.5
CONSTRUCTION TE
QEOTECHN1CAL AND CONST
)*4I MONTJEL ROAD. ST!
STING & ENGINEERING, INC. DATE: 04/05
115 ESCONDIDD CA. B202B (760) 746-4855 _. _TT— .,_, ^ «FIGURE: C-3
APPENDIX D
STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
\\Cte_server\projects\lQ-7605\Rpt_ Geo Rccs, With Wall Recs.doc
Appendix D Page D-l
Standard Specifications for Grading
Section 1 - General
The guidelines contained herein and the standard details attached hereto represent Construction
Testing & Engineering's standard recommendations for grading and other associated operations
on construction projects. These guidelines should be considered a portion of the project
specifications. Recommendations contained in the body of the previously presented soils report
shall supersede the recommendations and or requirements as specified herein. The project
geotechnical consultant shall interpret disputes arising out of interpretation of the
recommendations contained in the soils report or specifications contained herein.
Section 2 - Responsibilities of Project Personnel
The geotechnical consultant should provide observation and testing services sufficient to assure
that geotechnical construction is performed in general conformance with project specifications
and standard grading practices. The geotechnical consultant should report any deviations to the
client or his authorized representative.
The Client should be chiefly responsible for all aspects of the project. He or his authorized
representative has the responsibility of reviewing the findings and recommendations of the
geotechnical consultant. He shall authorize or cause to have authorized the Contractor and/or
other consultants to perform work and/or provide services. During grading the Client or his
authorized representative should remain on-site or should remain reasonably accessible to all
concerned parties in order to make decisions necessary to maintain the flow of the project.
The Contractor should be responsible for the safety of the project and satisfactory completion of
all grading and other associated operations on construction projects, including, but not limited to,
earth work in accordance with the project plans, specifications and controlling agency
requirements.
Section 3 - Preconstruction Meeting
A preconstruction site meeting shall be arranged by the owner and/or client and shall include the
grading contractor, the design engineer, the geotechnical consultant, owner's representative and
representatives of the appropriate governing authorities.
Section 4 - Site Preparation
The client or contractor should obtain the required approvals from the controlling authorities for
the project prior, during and/or after demolition, site preparation and removals, etc. The
appropriate approvals should be obtained prior to proceeding with grading operations.
Clearing and grubbing should consist of the removal of vegetation such as brush, grass, woods,
stumps, trees, root of trees and otherwise deleterious natural materials from the areas to be
STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
Page 1 of 22
Appendix D Page D-2
Standard Specifications for Grading
graded. Clearing and grubbing should extend to the outside of all proposed excavation and fill
areas.
Demolition should include removal of buildings, structures, foundations, reservoirs, utilities
(including underground pipelines, septic tanks, leach fields, seepage pits, cisterns, mining shafts,
tunnels, etc.) and other man-made surface and subsurface improvements from the areas to be
graded. Demolition of utilities should include proper capping and/or rerouting pipelines at the
project perimeter and cutoff and capping of wells in accordance with the requirements of the
governing authorities and the recommendations of the geotechnical consultant at the time of
demolition.
Trees, plants or man-made improvements not planned to be removed or demolished should be
protected by the contractor from damage or injury.
Debris generated during clearing, grubbing and/or demolition operations should be wasted from
areas to be graded and disposed off-site. Clearing, grubbing and demolition operations should be
performed under the observation of the geotechnical consultant.
Section 5 - Site Protection
Protection of the site during the period of grading should be the responsibility of the contractor.
Unless other provisions are made in writing and agreed upon among the concerned parties,
completion of a portion of the project should not be considered to preclude that portion or
adjacent areas from the requirements for site protection until such time as the entire project is
complete as identified by the geotechnical consultant, the client and the regulating agencies.
Precautions should be taken during the performance of site clearing, excavations and grading to
protect the work site from flooding, ponding or inundation by poor or improper surface drainage.
Temporary provisions should be made during the rainy season to adequately direct surface
drainage away from and off the work site. Where low areas cannot be avoided, pumps should be
kept on hand to continually remove water during periods of rainfall.
Rain related damage should be considered'to include, but may not be limited to, erosion, silting,
saturation, swelling, structural distress and other adverse conditions as determined by the
geotechnical consultant. Soil adversely affected should be classified as unsuitable materials and
should be subject to overexcavation and replacement with compacted fill or other remedial
grading as recommended by the geotechnical consultant.
The contractor should be responsible for the stability of all temporary excavations.
Recommendations by the geotechnical consultant pertaining to temporary excavations (e.g.,
backcuts) are made in consideration of stability of the completed project and, therefore, should
not be considered to preclude the responsibilities of the contractor. Recommendations by the
geotechnical consultant should not be considered to preclude requirements that are more
restrictive by the regulating agencies. The contractor should provide during periods of extensive
rainfall plastic sheeting to prevent unprotected slopes from becoming saturated and unstable.
STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
Page 2 of 22
Appendix D Page D-3
Standard Specifications for Grading
When deemed appropriate by the geotechnical consultant or governing agencies the contractor
shall install checkdams, desilting basins, sand bags or other drainage control measures.
In relatively level areas and/or slope areas, where saturated soil and/or erosion gullies exist to
depths of greater than 1.0 foot; they should be overexcavated and replaced as compacted fill in
accordance with the applicable specifications. Where affected materials exist to depths of 1.0
foot or less below proposed finished grade, remedial grading by moisture conditioning in-place,
followed by thorough recompaction in accordance with the applicable grading guidelines herein
may be attempted. If the desired results are not achieved, all affected materials should be
overexcavated and replaced as compacted fill in accordance with the slope repair
recommendations herein. If field conditions dictate, the geotechnical consultant may
recommend other slope repair procedures.
Section 6 - Excavations
6.1 Unsuitable Materials
Materials that are unsuitable should be excavated under observation and
recommendations of the geotechnical consultant. Unsuitable materials include, but may
not be limited to, dry, loose, soft, wet, organic compressible natural soils and fractured,
weathered, soft bedrock and nonengineered or otherwise deleterious fill materials.
Material identified by the geotechnical consultant as unsatisfactory due to its moisture
conditions should be overexcavated; moisture conditioned as needed, to a uniform at or
above optimum moisture condition before placement as compacted fill.
If during the course of grading adverse geotechnical conditions are exposed which were
not anticipated in the preliminary soil report as determined by the geotechnical consultant
additional exploration, analysis, and treatment of these problems may be recommended.
6.2 Cut Slopes
Unless otherwise recommended by the geotechnical consultant and approved by the
regulating agencies, permanent cut slopes should not be steeper than 2:1 (horizontal:
vertical).
The geotechnical consultant should observe cut slope excavation and if these excavations
expose loose cohesionless, significantly fractured or otherwise unsuitable material, the
materials should be overexcavated and replaced with a compacted stabilization fill. If
encountered specific cross section details should be obtained from the Geotechnical
Consultant.
When extensive cut slopes are excavated or these cut slopes are made in the direction of
the prevailing drainage, a non-erodible diversion swale (brow ditch) should be provided
at the top of the slope.
STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
Page 3 of 22
Appendix D Page D-4
Standard Specifications for Grading
6.3 Pad Areas
All lot pad areas, including side yard terrace containing both cut and fill materials,
transitions, located less than 3 feet deep should be overexcavated to a depth of 3 feet and
replaced with a uniform compacted fill blanket of 3 feet. Actual depth of overexcavation
may vary and should be delineated by the geotechnical consultant during grading.
For pad areas created above cut or natural slopes, positive drainage should be established
away from the top-of-slope. This may be accomplished utilizing a berm drainage swale
and/or an appropriate pad gradient. A gradient in soil areas away from the top-of-slopes
of 2 percent or greater is recommended.
Section 7 - Compacted Fill
All fill materials should have fill quality, placement, conditioning and compaction as specified
below or as approved by the geotechnical consultant.
7.1 Fill Material Quality
Excavated on-site or import materials which are acceptable to the geotechnical consultant
may be utilized as compacted fill, provided trash, vegetation and other deleterious
materials are removed prior to placement. All import materials anticipated for use on-site
should be sampled tested and approved prior to and placement is in conformance with the
requirements outlined.
Rocks 12 inches in maximum and smaller may be utilized within compacted fill provided
sufficient fill material is placed and thoroughly compacted over and around all rock to
effectively fill rock voids. The amount of rock should not exceed 40 percent by dry
weight passing the 3/4-inch sieve. The geotechnical consultant may vary those
requirements as field conditions dictate.
Where rocks greater than 12 inches but less than four feet of maximum dimension are
generated during grading, or otherwise desired to be placed within an engineered fill,
special handling in accordance with attached Plates and described below. Rocks greater
than four feet should be broken down or disposed off-site.
7.2 Placement of Fill
Prior to placement of fill material, the geotechnical consultant should inspect the area to
receive fill. After inspection and approval, the exposed ground surface should be
scarified to a depth of 6 to 8 inches. The scarified material should be conditioned (i.e.
moisture added or air dried by continued discing) to achieve a moisture content at or
slightly above optimum moisture conditions and compacted to a minimum of 90 percent
of the maximum density or as otherwise recommended in the soils report or by
appropriate government agencies.
Compacted fill should then be placed in thin horizontal lifts not exceeding eight inches in
loose thickness prior to compaction. Each lift should be moisture conditioned as needed,
STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
Page 4 of 22
Appendix D Page D-5
Standard Specifications for Grading
thoroughly blended to achieve a consistent moisture content at or slightly above optimum
and thoroughly compacted by mechanical methods to a minimum of 90 percent of
laboratory maximum dry density. Each lift should be treated in a like manner until the
desired finished grades are achieved.
The contractor should have suitable and sufficient mechanical compaction equipment and
watering apparatus on the job site to handle the amount of fill being placed in
consideration of moisture retention properties of the materials and weather conditions.
When placing fill in horizontal lifts adjacent to areas sloping steeper than 5:1 (horizontal:
vertical), horizontal keys and vertical benches should be excavated into the adjacent slope
area. Keying and benching should be sufficient to provide at least six-foot wide benches
and a minimum of four feet of vertical bench height within the firm natural ground, firm
bedrock or engineered compacted fill. No compacted fill should be placed in an area
after keying and benching until the geotechnical consultant has reviewed the area.
Material generated by the benching operation should be moved sufficiently away from
the bench area to allow for the recommended review of the horizontal bench prior to
placement of fill.
Within a single fill area where grading procedures dictate two or more separate fills,
temporary slopes (false slopes) may be created. When placing fill adjacent to a false
slope, benching should be conducted in the same manner as above described. At least a
3-foot vertical bench should be established within the firm core of adjacent approved
compacted fill prior to placement of additional fill. Benching should proceed in at least
3-foot vertical increments until the desired finished grades are achieved.
Prior to placement of additional compacted fill following an overnight or other grading
delay, the exposed surface or previously compacted fill should be processed by
scarification, moisture conditioning as needed to at or slightly above optimum moisture
content, thoroughly blended and recompacted to a minimum of 90 percent of laboratory
maximum dry density. Where unsuitable materials exist to depths of greater than one
foot, the unsuitable materials should be over-excavated.
Following a period of flooding, rainfall or overwatering by other means, no additional fill
should be placed until damage assessments have been made and remedial grading
performed as described herein.
Rocks 12 inch in maximum dimension and smaller may be utilized in the compacted fill
provided the fill is placed and thoroughly compacted over and around all rock. No
oversize material should be used within 3 feet of finished pad grade and within 1 foot of
other compacted fill areas. Rocks 12 inches up to four feet maximum dimension should
be placed below the upper 5 feet of any fill and should not be closer than 11 feet to any
slope face. These recommendations could vary as locations of improvements dictate.
Where practical, oversized material should not be placed below areas where structures or
deep utilities are proposed. Oversized material should be placed in windrows on a clean,
STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
Page 5 of 22
Appendix D Page D-6
Standard Specifications for Grading
overexcavated or unyielding compacted fill or firm natural ground surface. Select native
or imported granular soil (S.E. 30 or higher) should be placed and thoroughly flooded
over and around all windrowed rock, such that voids are filled. Windrows of oversized
material should be staggered so those successive strata of oversized material are not in
the same vertical plane.
It may be possible to dispose of individual larger rock as field conditions dictate and as
recommended by the geotechnical consultant at the time of placement.
The contractor should assist the geotechnical consultant and/or his representative by
digging test pits for removal determinations and/or for testing compacted fill. The
contractor should provide this work at no additional cost to the owner or contractor's
client.
Fill should be tested by the geotechnical consultant for compliance with the
recommended relative compaction and moisture conditions. Field density testing should
conform to ASTM Method of Test D 1556-82, D 2922-81. Tests should be conducted at
a minimum of 2 vertical feet or 1,000 cubic yards of fill placed. Actual test intervals may
vary as field conditions dictate. Fill found not to be in conformance with the grading
recommendations should be removed or otherwise handled as recommended by the
geotechnical consultant.
7.3 Fill Slopes
Unless otherwise recommended by the geotechnical consultant and approved by the
regulating agencies, permanent fill slopes should not be steeper than 2:1 (horizontal:
vertical).
Except as specifically recommended in these grading guidelines compacted fill slopes
should be over-built and cut back to grade, exposing the firm, compacted fill inner core.
The actual amount of overbuilding may vary as field conditions dictate. If the desired
results are not achieved, the existing slopes should be overexcavated and reconstructed
under the guidelines of the geotechnical consultant. The degree of overbuilding shall be
increased until the desired compacted slope surface condition is achieved. Care should
be taken by the contractor to provide thorough mechanical compaction to the outer edge
of the overbuilt slope surface.
At the discretion of the geotechnical consultant, slope face compaction may be attempted
by conventional construction procedures including backrolling. The procedure must
create a firmly compacted material throughout the entire depth of the slope face to the
surface of the previously compacted firm fill intercore.
During grading operations, care should be taken to extend compactive effort to the outer
edge of the slope. Each lift should extend horizontally to the desired finished slope
surface or more as needed to ultimately established desired grades. Grade during
construction should not be allowed to roll off at the edge of the slope. It may be helpful
STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
Page 6 of 22
Appendix D Page D-7
Standard Specifications for Grading
to elevate slightly the outer edge of the slope. Slough resulting from the placement of
individual lifts should not be allowed to drift down over previous lifts. At intervals not
exceeding four feet in vertical slope height or the capability of available equipment,
whichever is less, fill slopes should be thoroughly dozer trackrolled.
For pad areas above fill slopes, positive drainage should be established away from the
top-of-slope. This may be accomplished using a berm and pad gradient of at least 2
percent.
Section 8 - Trench Backfill
Utility and/or other excavation of trench backfill should, unless otherwise recommended, be
compacted by mechanical means. Unless otherwise recommended, the degree of compaction
should be a minimum of 90 percent of the laboratory maximum density.
Within slab areas, but outside the influence of foundations, trenches up to one foot wide and two
feet deep may be backfilled with sand and consolidated by jetting, flooding or by mechanical
means. If on-site materials are utilized, they should be wheel-rolled, tamped or otherwise
compacted to a firm condition. For minor interior trenches, density testing may be deleted or
spot testing may be elected if deemed necessary, based on review of backfill operations during
construction.
If utility contractors indicate that it is undesirable to use compaction equipment in close
proximity to a buried conduit, the contractor may elect the utilization of light weight mechanical
compaction equipment and/or shading of the conduit with clean, granular material, which should
be thoroughly jetted in-place above the conduit, prior to initiating mechanical compaction
procedures. Other methods of utility trench compaction may also be appropriate, upon review of
the geotechnical consultant at the time of construction.
In cases where clean granular materials are proposed for use in lieu of native materials or where
flooding or jetting is proposed, the procedures should be considered subject to review by the
geotechnical consultant. Clean granular backfill and/or bedding are not recommended in slope
areas.
Section 9 - Drainage
Where deemed appropriate by the geotechnical consultant, canyon subdrain systems should be
installed in accordance.
Typical subdrains for compacted fill buttresses, slope stabilization or sidehill masses, should be
installed in accordance with the specifications of the accompanying attached plates.
Roof, pad and slope drainage should be directed away from slopes and areas of structures to
suitable disposal areas via non-erodible devices (i.e., gutters, downspouts, and concrete swales)
as shown in the attached plates.
STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
Page 7 of 22
Appendix D Page D-8
Standard Specifications for Grading
For drainage in extensively landscaped areas near structures, (i.e., within four feet) a minimum
of 5 percent gradient away from the structure should be maintained. Pad drainage of at least 2
percent should be maintained over the remainder of the site.
Drainage patterns established at the time of fine grading should be maintained throughout the life
of the project. Property owners should be made aware that altering drainage patterns could be
detrimental to slope stability and foundation performance.
Section 10 - Slope Maintenance
10.1 - Landscape Plants
To enhance surficial slope stability, slope planting should be accomplished at the
completion of grading. Slope planting should consist of deep-rooting vegetation
requiring little watering. Plants native to the southern California area and plants relative
to native plants are generally desirable. Plants native to other semi-arid and arid areas
may also be appropriate. A Landscape Architect should be the best parry to consult
regarding actual types of plants and planting configuration.
10.2 - Irrigation
Irrigation pipes should be anchored to slope faces, not placed in trenches excavated into
slope faces.
Slope irrigation should be minimized. If automatic timing devices are utilized on
irrigation systems, provisions should be made for interrupting normal irrigation during
periods of rainfall.
10.3-Repair
As a precautionary measure, plastic sheeting should be readily available, or kept on hand,
to protect all slope areas from saturation by periods of heavy or prolonged rainfall. This
measure is strongly recommended, beginning with the period prior to landscape planting.
If slope failures occur, the geotechnical consultant should be contacted for a field review
of site conditions and development of recommendations for evaluation and repair.
If slope failures occur as a result of exposure to period of heavy rainfall, the failure areas
and currently unaffected areas should be covered with plastic sheeting to protect against
additional saturation.
In the accompanying Standard Details, appropriate repair procedures are illustrated for
superficial slope failures (i.e., occurring typically within the outer one foot to three feet of
a slope face).
STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
Page 8 of 22
15' MINIMUM-
4* DIAMETER PERFORATED-
PIPE BACKDRAIN
4" DIAMETER NON-PERFORATED
PIPE LATERAL DRAIN
SLOPE PER PLAN
BfiNCHINQ
PROVIDE BACK DRAIN PER BACKDRAIN
DETAIL. AN ADDITIONAL flACX DRAIN
AT UtQ-SLOPC WILL BE RBQUIREO FOR
SLOPE IN EXCESS OF 4Q PEIT HlflH.
•KEY-OtMENeiON PER SOILS EHQINSER
(GENERALLY 1/2 SLOPE HEIGHT. 15'
MINIMUM)
TYPICAL STABILIZATION FILL DETAIL
STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
Page 9 of 22
16' MINIMUM
4* DIAMETER PERFORATED
PIPE BACKDRAIN
4' DIAMETER NON-PEHFOBATED
PIPE LATERAL DRAIN
SLOPE PER PLAN
^^•^•M^ *W» O*ta ^^ ^^B ^^MTa' a
•PROVIDE BACKDRAIM PBR BACKDflAIH
DETAIL. AN ADDITIONAL BACKDRAIN
AT MID-SLOPE WILL BB REQUIRED FOR
SLOPE IN EXCESS OP 40 FEET HlttH.
KEY-DIMEHSION PEH SOILS ENQIKEER
TYPICAL BUTTRESS FILL DETAIL
STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
Page 10 of 22
> — -^SURFACE OF
/ FIRM EARTH
/ MATERIAL
\\ COMP*
TYPICAL BENCHING— J \\
^CTED FILL .'. /
//|
L\ ""- /J ^ REMOVE UNSUITABLE
^^-r^\ MATERIAL
A?\ ^ INCLINE TOWARD DRAIN
BEE DETAIL BELOW f
DETAIL
MINIMUM 8 FT3 PER LINEAR FOOT—/ _._
OF APPROVED FILTER MATERIAL
TMII
FILTER MATERIAL TO MEET FOLLOWING
epECrFICATION On APPROVED EQUAL:
SIEVE SIZE PERCENTAGE
1' 100
3/4' . 80-100
3/8' 40-100
NO.4 29*40
NO.aO . 8-tS
NO. 50 0-7
NO. 200 0-3
/y MINIMUM 4* DIAMETER APPROVED
/ PERFORATED PIPE (PERFOHATtONSy DOWN)
QL
6' FILTER MATERIAL BEDDING
«*"... >IIMUM 1
APPROVED PIPE TO BE SCHEDULE 40
POLY-VINYL-CHLORIDE (P.V.C.) OR
APPROVED EQUAL. MINIMUM CRUSH
STRENGTH 1000 pftl
PIPE DIAMETER TO MEET THE
FOLLOWING CRITERIA* SUBJECT TO
FIELD REVIEW BASED ON ACTUAL
QEOTECHNICAL CONDITION*
ENCOUNTERED DURING GRADING
LENGTH OF RUN PIPE DIAMETER
UPPER BOO' *'
NEXT 1000* 5"
>1«00* 8'
TYPICAL CANYON SUBORA1N DETAIL
*
STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
Page 11 of 22
FINISH SURFACE SLOPE
MINIMUM 3 FT3 PER LINEAL FOOT
OPEN GRADED AGGREGATE*
TAPE AND SEAL AT CONTACT
4" MINIMUM DIAMETER
SOLID OUTLET PIPE
SPACED FBR SOIL,
ENGINEER REQUIREMENTS
TYPICAL
BENCHING
8UPAC 8-P FABRIC OR
^ APPROVED EQUAL •
^ 4" MINIMUM APPROVED
PERFORATED PIPf
(PERFORATIONS DOWN)
MINIMUM 2% GRADIENT
TO OUTLST
BENCH INCLINED
TOWARD DRAIN
DETAIL A-A
MINIMUM
12" COVER
COMPACTED
BACKFILL
MINIMUM
r_TEMPORARY FILL LEVEL
/—/
MINIMUM 4" DIAMETER APPROVED
SOLID OUTLET PIPE
*HOTE: AGGREGATE TO MEET FOLLOWINQ
SPECIFICATIONS OR APPROVED EQUAL:
SIEVE SIZE
1 1/8*
1"
3/4*
3/8*
NO, 200
PEP.CEHTAGE
100
5-40
0-17
0-7
0-3
BACKDRAIN DETAIL (QEOFABR1C)
STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
Page 12 of 22
FINISH SURFACE SLOPE
3 FT3 MINIMUM PER LINEAL FOOT
APPROVED FILTER ROCK*
4* MINIMUM DIAMETER
SOLID OUTLET PIPE
SPACED PER SOIL
6NQINEER REQUIRE-
MENTS DURING GRADING
4* MINIMUM APPROVED
PERFORATED PIPt**
(PERFORATIONS DOWN)
MINIMUM 2% GRADIENT
TO OUTLET
BENCH WCLWED TOWARD
DRAIN
TYPICAL BENCHING
DETAIL A-A
TEMPORARY FILL LEVEL
12* MINIMUM COVER-
COMPACTED
BACKFILL
t2* MINIMUM
**APPROVED PIPS TYPE:
SCHEDULE 40 POLYVWYL CHLORIDE
(P.V.C.) OR APPROVED EQUAL.
MINIMUM CRUSH STRENGTH 1000 P8I.
«4* MINIMUM DIAMETER
APPROVED SOLID
OUTLET PIPE
'FILTER ROCK TO MEET FOLLOWWGSPECIFICATIONS OR APPROVED EQUAL:
SIEVE PERCENTAGE PASSING
100
00-100
40-100
2S-40
5-16
0-7
0-3
TYPICAL BACKDRAIN DETAIL
STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
Page 13 of 22
BENCHING FILL OVER NATURAL
SURFACE OF FIRM-
EARTH MATERIAL.
Fill SLOPE
10* WIN. (INCLINED 2* WIN, INTO SLOPE)
BENCHING FILL OVEH CUT
FINISH FILL SLOPE
SURFACE Of FIRM-
EARTH MATERIAL
•15* WIN. OR STABILITY EQUIVALEHT PfiR SOIL
ENGINEERING (INCLINED 2% MIH. INTO SLOPE)
BENCHING FOR COMPACTED FILL DETAIL
1
STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
Page 14 of 22
•OVEBEXCAVATE
FINAL UMIT OF
EXCAVATION
DAYLIGHT
LINE
20* MAXIMUM-
FINISH PAD
OVEflEXCAVATE
3* AND REPLACE
WITH COMPACTED
PILL
•OVERBURDEN
(CREEP-PRONE)
TYPICAL BENCHING
PROVIDE BACXDRAIN PER BACKORAIN
DETAIL. LOCATION OF BAGKDRAIN AND
OUTLETS PER SOILS ENGINEER AMD/OR
ENGINEERING SEOLOQ18T DURING
GRADING
-EQUIPMENT WIDTH CMWWUM 15')
DAYLIGHT SHEAR KEY DETAIL
STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
Page 15 of 22
-NATURAL GROUND
PROVIDE BACKDRAIN PER
BACKORAIN DETAIL. AN
ADDITIONAL SACKDRAIN
AT M1G-8LOPE WILL BE
REQUIRED FOR BACK
SLOPES IN EXCESS OF
40 FEET HIGH. LOCA-
TIONS OF BACXDRAIHQ
AND OUTLETS PER SOILS
ENGINEER AND/OR EN-
GINEERING GEOLOGIST
DUHINQ GRADING.
BASE WIDTH *W* DETERMINED
BY SOILS
TYPICAL SHEAR KEY DETAIL
STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
Page 16 of 22
CANYON SUBDRAIN DETAILS
TYPICAL BENCHING-
COMPACTED FILL //
\ />\\ //\\ //
SEE DETAILS BELOW
SURFACE OF
FIRM EARTH
•REMOVE UNSUITABLE
MATERIAL
INCLINE TOWARD DRAIN
TRENCH DETAIL
OPTIONAL V-DITCH DETAIL
BUPAC 8-P FABRIC-
OR APPROVED EQUAL
«' MINIMUM OVERLAP
6* MINIMUM OVERLAP
MINIMUM 8 FT3 PER LINEALL
"
'f a4"MINIMUM
r
/
FOOT OF APPROVED DRAIN
MATERIAL
IeUPAC 5-P FABRIC OR
APPROVED EQUAL
MINIMUM 8 FT* PEH LINEAL FOOT
OF APPROVED DRAIN MATERIAL
«0D TO 90°
DRAIN MATERIAL TO MEET FOLLOWING
SPECIFICATION OR APPROVED EQUAL:
SIEVE SIZE
1 1/2'
1'
a/4*
8/8"
NO.200
PERCENTAGE PASSING
66-100
S-40
0-1T
0-7
0-3
ADO MINIMUM 4' DIAMETSR
APPROVED PERFORATED
PIPE WHEN GRADIENT 18
LESS THAN B*
APPROVED PIPE TO BE
SCHEDULE 40 POLY-VINYL-
CHLORIDE (P.V.C.) OH
APPROVED EQUAL. MINIMUM
CRU6H STRENGTH 1000 p*l.
GEOFABRIC SUBDRAIN
STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
Page 17 of 22
FINAL NATURAL SLOPE
LIMITS OF FINAL EXCAVATION
TOE OF SLOPE SHOWN
ON GRADING PLAN
10' TYPICAL BBNCH
WIDTH VARIES
COMPETENT EARTH
MATERIAL
TYPICAL BENCH
HEIGHTMINIMUM BABE KEY WIDTH
MINIMUM '
DOWM8LOPE
KEY DEPTH
PROVIDE BACKOftAIN AS
REQUIRED PER RECOM-
MENDATIONS OF SOILS
ENGINEER DURING QHADINQ
WHERE NATURAL SLOPE GRADIENT IS 8:1 OR LESS.
BENCHING 18 NOT NECESSARY. HOWEVER. FILL IS
NOT TO BE PLACED ON COMPRESSIBLE OR UNSUIT-
ABLE MATERIAL.
FILL SLOPE ABOVE NATURAL GROUND DETAIL
STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
Page 18 of 22
BUILDING
'FINISHED GRADE
o
•CLEAR AREA FOR
FOUNDATION. UTILITIES.
AND OWIMMINQ POOLS
\_WI WINDROW
SLOPE FACE
5* OR BELOW DEPTH OF
DEEPEST UTILITY TRENCH
(WHICHEVER GREATER)
TYPICAL. WINDROW DETAIL (EDGE VIEW)
GRANULAR BOIL FLOODED
TO FILL VOIDS
\
HORIZONTALLY PLACED
COUPAGTION FILL
\
\ X
// / /
PROFILE VIEW
ROCK DISPOSAL DETAIL
STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
Page 19 of 22
GENERAL GRADING RECOMMENDATIONS
CUT LOT
TOPBOIL, CGUUVIUM AND
WEATHERED BEDROCK ^
_ ORIGINAL
GHOUND
a'
W///////M///////M 3'
UNWEATHERED BEDROCK
•OVEREXCAVATE AND
REQRADE
CUT/FILL LOT (TRANSITION)
ORIGINAL
GROUND
COMPACTED FILL
TOP80IU
'COLLUV1UM AND
WfiATHERED *
BEDflOCK **
3(
•OVEREXCAVATE AND
REQRAOE
UMWEATHEREO BEDROCK
TRANSITION LOT DETAIL
STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
Page 20 of 22
UlQ
iuaOw
CO
=5c
Ul>Om
Ula.
O•u
(0
_1-J
C
STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
Page 21 of 22
15' MINIMUM1
4' DIAMETER PERFORATED-
PIPE BACKDRAIN
4' DIAMETER NON-PERFORATED
PIPE LATERAL DRAIN
SLOPE PER PLAN
BENCHWQ
PROVIDE BACK DRAIN PER BACKDRAIN
DETAIL. AH ADDITIONAL BACK0*AW
AT MIO-BLOPH WILL 06 REQUIRED FOR
SLOPE IN EXCESS OF 40 FEET HIGH.
•KEY-DIMENSION PER SOILS ENQINSER
(GENERALLY 1/2 SLOPE HEIGHT, 19'
MINIMUM)
TYPICAL
1
STABILIZATION FILL DETAIL
STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
Page 22 of 22