HomeMy WebLinkAboutCT 90-14; Aldea; Soils Report - Site Grading Plans; 1991-03-25- EBERHART 8 STONE, INC.
GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS
733 WEST TAFT AVENUE - ORANGE, CA 92685 . (714) 9214810
Tic2.P/,lI DAN R. EBERHART, CEG
GERALD L. STONE, RCE
pKm ?x?l-UC
W.O. 158800.24
March 25, 1991
Bramalea California, Inc.
One Park Plaza, Suite 1100
Irvine, California 92714
Attention: Mr. Jack Reimer
Subject: Geotechnical review of 20-scale model site grading plans, ALDEA-CT 90-
14, Carlsbad, California.
References: 20-scale Model Site Grading Plans, ALDEA-CT 90-l 4, Sheets 1 through
4, by Crosby Mead Benton & Associates, dated March 20, 1991 (J.N.
135-8). -
20-scale Revised Site Plan, Aviara Planing Area 16, Lot 90, Sheets 1
through 7, by Crosby Mead Benton & Associates, dated February 9, 1991
(J.N. 135-8).
Geotechnical review of 40-scale site plans, Aviara Planning Area 16, Lot
90, Carlsbad, California, by Eberhart & Stone, Inc., dated April 13, 1990
(W.O. 158600.24).
40-scale Site Plans, Aviara Planning Area 16, Lot 90, Sheets 1 through
3, by Crosby Mead Benton & Associates, dated April 2, 1990 (J.N. 135-
8).
As-Graded Geotechnical Report, Units A through E, Aviara, Carlsbad,
California, by I.C.G. Incorporated, dated January 18, 1990 (Job No. 04
3179-007-02-10).
Interim As-Graded Geotechnical Report, Pacific Rim Country Club and
Resort, Preliminary Grading and Improvement, Alga Road, Carlsbad,
California, by San Diego Geotechnical Consultants, Inc., dated December
30, 1988 (Job No. 05-3179-003-06-10).
Supplemental Geotechnical Investigation, Pacific Rim Country Club and
Resort, Units A, 8, C and Alga Road Corridor, Carlsbad, California, by San
Diego Soils Engineering, Inc., dated March 25, 1988 (Job No. 04-3179-
003-00-00).
- I
-
-
-
-
-
r
Brarnalea California, Inc. -2- W.O. 158600.24
Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, The Pacific Rim Country Club and
Resort, Phase I, Carlsbad, California, by San Diego Soils Engineering, Inc.,
dated January 29, 1986 (Job No. SD1400-01).
Gentlemen:
This firm has completed a geotechnical review of the 20-scale model site grading plans
for the subject site. This review was performed in order to evaluate the proposed
grading and how it relates to existing mass-graded conditions and the referenced
geotechnical reports. The scope of this review consisted of the following:
0 Site reconnaissance
0 Review of the referenced geotechnicaf reports
0 Review of the 20-scale model site grading plans
0 Review of the 40-scale site plans
‘0 Preparation of this correspondence.
REPORT ON REVIEW
EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS
The site was originally mass graded in 1989 and 1990. This grading created a large
nearly level pad and a 2:l (horizontal:verticalj fill slope. The slope has a maximum
height of 6 feet and descends to the pad, adjacent Alga Road. A descending 2:1, 20
foot high fill slope was also constructed adjacent the eastern site boundary. A bedrock
to compacted fill transition exists within the central portion of the pad, and is shown
on the enclosed geologic map. Previous site grading is discussed in detail in the
referenced geotechnical reports.
PROPOSFD G@,DlNG AND SITE DEVEl OPMFNT
The referenced 20-scale model site grading plans are similar to the referenced 4D-scale
site plans previously reviewed by this firm. Cut-and-fill grading is proposed to develop
a model site complex consisting of a building pad for a multi-family structure,
associated private roadways, and a temporary parking area and desilting basin.
EBERHART P STONE, INC.
- I
Bramalea California, Inc. -3- W.O. 158600.24
Grading is proposed to consist of cuts from 0.5 foot to 16 feet and fills from 9.5 foot
to 10 feet.
Cut and fill slopes are proposed at a 2:l (horizontal:verticalj slope ratio to maximum
heights of 19 feet and 10 feet, respectively.
A retaining wall is proposed adjacentthe northwest property boundary with a maximum
height of 5 feet. Retaining wall design parameters will be presented upon completion
of rough grading.
EBERHART P STONE, INC.
Bramalea California, Inc. -4- W.O. 158600.24
-
-
,-
r-
I--
-
r-
-
-
OPINIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendations in this review are opinions based upon the referenced reports, site
plans, site observations, experience with other projects in the area, and professional
judgment. Opinions and recommendations are applicable to the d~evelopment proposed
under the scope of this review, and should be incorporated into project design and
construction practice. Based upon this review, the subject site may be developed for
its intended use.
Grading for the proposed development should be conducted in accordance with local
codes, this firm’s standard grading specifications, and the recommendations presented
herein.
Dbservation and Testing
Prior to the start of grading, a meeting should be held at the site with the developer,
grading contractor, civil engineer, and geotechnical consultant to discuss the work
schedule and geotechnical aspects of the grading. All grading, including ground
preparation and fill placement, shall be accomplished under the full-time observation
and testing of the geotechnical consultant.
Clearing
All vegetation, trash, or other deleterious materials present on the subject site should
be removed from areas to be graded and wasted from the site.
It was noted that several irrigation lines, a concrete paved v-ditch, and a catch basin
were present within the subject site. These manmade improvements should be
removed and wasted from the site prior to the commencement of grading.
Ground Preoarm
Prior to fill placement, areas to be graded should be scarified to a depth of six inches
to twelve inches, moisture-conditioned to near optimum, and compacted to 90% or
more of the laboratory maximum density.
WI Placemem
Subsequent to clearing and ground preparation, fill placement may proceed. Fill should
be placed in loose lifts restricted to about six inches in thickness. Each lift should be
EBERHART it STONE. INC.
Bramalea California, Inc. -5- W.O. 158600.24
-
--
-
r
moisture-conditioned as needed to obtain near-optimum conditions, then compacted to
90% or more of the laboratory maximum .density. Each lift should be treated in a like
manner until the desired rough grades are achieved.
&&g&g&Rock Placement
Oversized rock, greater than 12 inches, may be generated during grading within
bedrock cut areas and overexcavations. Oversized rocks greater than 12 inches, but
less than 3 feet, may be placed in the deeper fill areas in accordance with Plate GD-6.
Rocks larger than 3 feet should be reduced in size or removed from the site.
Fill slopes should be constructed at a ratio of 2:l (horizontal:vertical) or flatter. Fill
slopes of up to about 25 feet are anticipated to be grossly and surficially stable. All
proposed cut slopes greater than 10 feet should be replaced with stabilization fill
slopes.
Fill slopes should be keyed into competent compacted fill or bedrock. Details for fill
keys are presented on Plate GD-4.
. . .
Stabilization fill slopes are recommended where proposed cut slopes are anticipated to
expose highly erodible or cohesionless sandstone bedrock. The locations of proposed
stabilization fill keys are presented on the Geologic Maps, Plates 1 and 2. Details for
stabilization fills are presented on Plate GD-3.
A backdrain system will be required within each stabilization fill constructed. Details
for backdrains are presented on Plate GD-2.
n Areas
The proposed mass grading will create shallow fills and/or transitions from bedrock to
compacted fill in the temporary parking lot, opposite the model site. Overexcavation
of this area (a future building site) to provide a minimum of 3 feet of compacted fill is
recommended. This compacted fill blanket is intended to provide uniform bearing
conditions for future foundations.
The proposed future building area is shown on the enclosed Geologic Map, Plate 1.
EBERHART P STONE. INC.
-
,-
r
r
Bramalea California, Inc. -6-
ARY
W.O. 158600.24
Based upon a review of the enclosed 20-scale model site grading plans, it is this firm’s
opinion that the subject site can be developed for its intended use, provided that the
opinions and recommendations presented herein, and those within the referenced
reports, are incorporated into design and construction practice.
The findings contained in this review are based upon the proposed grades as shown on
the 20-scale model site grading plans and the 20-scale revised site plans. The opinions
and recommendations contained herein have been further based upon experience with
similar projects, geotechnical evaluations, and professional judgment. No warrant is
expressed nor implied.
Should you have any questions regarding the information contained herein, please do
not hesitate to call.
Respectfully submitted,
EBERHART 81 STONE, INC.
Project Geologist President
CEG 965
JML:RJF:DRE:GLS:sw (15860024.001 j
Enclosures: Standard Grading Specifications - Pages l-6
Grading Details - Plates GD-2 thru GD-6
Geologic Maps - Plates 1 and 2
Distribution: (21 Addressee
(4) Crosby Mead Benton 8 Assoc. Attn: Mr. Ed Huntington
EBERHART 8 STONE, INC.
-
1
-
-
-
-
-
r
1.0 The specifications contained herein and the standard details attached
hereto represent minimum requirements for grading operations on
construction projects. Variance from these specifications will not be
permitted unless specifically approved by the soil engineer. These
recommendations should not be considered to preclude more restrictive
requirements of the regulating agencies.
2.0
2.1
DEFINITION OF TERMS
BEDROCK - a relatively solid undisturbed or in-place rock existing at
either the ground surface or beneath surficial deposits of soil.
Bedrock will be identified in the field by the project engineering
geologist.
2.2 ENGINEERED FILL - a fill of which the soil engineer or his
representative during grading has made sufficient observations and taken
sufficient tests to enable him to conclude that the fill has been placed
in substantial compliance with the governing specifications.
2.3 ENGINEERING GEOLOGIST - a geologist holding a valid certificate of
registration in the specialty of engineering geology.
2.4 FILL - any deposits of soil, rock, soil-rock blends or other similar
materials placed by man.
2.5 GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT - the soil engineering and engineering geology
consulting firm(s) retained to provide technical services for the
project. For the purpose of these specifications, observations by the
soil engineer and engineering geologist include those performed by
persons employed by and responsible to the geotechnical consultant.
2.6 GRADING - any operation consisting of excavation, filling or combinations
thereof.
2.7 IMPORTED OR BORROW MATERIAL - any fill material hauled to the project
site from off-site areas.
2.8 RELATIVE COMPACTION - the degree of compaction (expressed as' a
percentage) of'dry density of a material as compared to the maximum dry
density of the material. Unless otherwise specified, the maximum dry
density shall be determined in accordance with ASTM method of test
D1557-70.
2.9 SOIL ENGINEER - a licensed civil engineer experienced in soil mechanics.
-l-
STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
ERERHART R STONE, INC.
-
-
-
3.0
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
4.0
4.la
4.lb
4.2a
-
4.2b -
-
4.3a -
-2-
SITE PREPARATION
Clearing and grubbing shall consist of the removing of all vegetation
such as brush, grass, woods, stumps, trees, roots of trees and all
otherwise deleterious natural materials from the areas to be graded.
Clearinq and grubbing shall extend to the outside of all proposed
excavation and fill areas.
Demolition shall include removal of all buildings, structures, utilities
and all other manmade surface and subsurface improvements from the areas
to be graded.
Trees, plants or manmade improvements not planned to be removed or demo-
lished shall be protected by the contractor from damage or injury.
All deleterious material generated during clearing, grubbing and demoli-
tion operations shall be wasted from areas to be graded. All clearing, grubbing and demolition operations shall be performed under the
observation of the soil engineer.
EXCAVATIONS
Unsuitable Materials: Material which is unsuitable shall be excavated
as dlrected by the soil engineer. Unsuitable materials include, but may
not be limited to dry, loose, soft, wet, compressible and non-engineered
or otherwise non-approved fill materials.
Material identified by the soil engineer as unsatisfactory due to its~
moisture conditions shall be overexcavated, watered or dried as needed
and thoroughly blended to a uniform near-optimum moisture condition
prior to placement as compacted fill.
Site Protection: The contractor shall be responsible for the stability
of all temporary excavations. Recormnendations by the soil engineer shall
not be considered to preclude those requirements of the regulating
agencies.
Precautions shall be taken during the performance of all slte clearing
earthwork, excavations and grading to orotect the work site from
flooding, ponding or inundation by poor or improper surface drainage.
Temporary provisions should be made during the rainy season to ade-
quately direct surface drainage from all sources away from and off the
work site.
Slopes: Unless otherwise recoasaended by the geotechnical consultant and
approved by the regulating agencies, permanent cut slopes shall not be
steeper than 2:l (horizontal to vertical).
EBERHART & STONE,INC.
4.3b -
-
4.3c -
-
-
4.3d
4.3e
5.0
5.1
5.2a -
5.2b
-
-3-
If excavations for cut slopes expose loose. significantly fractured or
otherwise unsuitable material, overexcavation and replacement of the unsuitable materials with a compacted stabilization fill will be
required as directed by the soil engineer or engineering geologist.
Unless otherwise specified by the soil engineer, stabiliration fill
construction shall conform to the requirements of Grading Oetail GO-3.
All lot pad areas, including side-yard terraces, above stabilization
fills or buttresses shall be overexcavated to provide for a minimum of
three feet of compacted fill over the entire pad area. Pad areas with
both fill and cut materials,exposed and pad areas containing both very
shallow (less than three feet) and deeper fill shall be overexcavated to
provide for a uniform compacted fill blanket a minimum of three feet in
thickness. Cut areas exposing significantly varying material types
shall also be overexcavated to provide for a minimum three-foot thick
compacted fill blanket.
For cut slopes made in the direction of the prevailing drainage above
the cut, a diversion swale (brow ditch) should be provided at the top of
cut. The diversion swale configuration should conform to the applicable
code requirements and should be reviewed by the soil engineer prior to
installation.
For pad areas created above cut or natural slopes, positive drainage'
shall be established away from the top of slope. This may be
accomplished utilizing a berm and/or an appropriate pad gradient.
COMPACTED FILL
Compaction: All fill materials shall be compacted as specified below or
by other methods specifically approved by the soil engineer. Unless
otherwise specified, the minimum degree of compaction (relative compac-
tion) shall be 90% of the laboratory maximum density.
Placement: Prior to placement of compacted fill, the ground surface
approved by the soil engineer shall be scarified, watered or dried as
needed, thoroughly blended to achieve near-optimum moisture conditions,
then thoroughly compacted to a minimum of 90% of the laboratory maximum
dry density.
Compacted fill shall be placed in thin horizontal lifts not exceeding
eight inches in thickness prior to compaction. Each lift shall be
watered or dried as needed, thoroughly blended to achieve near-optimum
moisture conditions, then thoroughly compacted by mechanical methods to
a minimum of 90% of the laboratory maximum dry density. Each lift shall
be treated in a like manner until the desired finished grades are
achieved.
EDERHART R STONE, INC.
-
-
-
-
-
-
5.2~
5.2d
5.3a -
5.3b
-
5.3c -
5.4a -
5.4b
-
-4-
When placing fill in horizontal lifts adjacent to areas sloping steeper
than 5:1 (hori,rontal to vertical), horizontal keys and vertical benches
shall be excavated into the adjacent slope area. Keying and benching shall be sufficient to provide a minimum of four feet of vertical bench
height within firm natural ground or approved compacted fill. All keys
and benches shall be approved by the soil engineer or engineerinq geolo-
gist at the time of grading. No compacted fill shall be placed in an area subsequent to keying and benching until the area has been approved
by the soil engineer or engineering geolopist. Typical keying and
benching details have been included on the accompanying Grading Oetails-
GO-3, GO-4, and GO-5.
Within a single fill area where grading procedures dictate two or more
separate fills, temporary slopes (false slooes) will be created. When
placing fill adjacent to a false slope, benching shall be conducted in
the same manner as the above described. A minimum four-foot vertical
bench shall be established within the adjacent approved compacted fill
(i.e., the material underlying the surface loose material) prior to
placement of additional fill. Benching shall proceed in approximately
four-foot increments until the desired finished,grades are achieved.
For field control purposes, "near-optimum" moisture shall be considered
to mean optimum plus-or-minus two percent unless otherwise approved by the soil engineer at the time of grading.
Prior to placement of additional compacted fill following an overnight
or ,other grading delay, the exposed surface of previously compacted fill
shall be processed by scarification, watered or dried as needed,
thoroughly blended to near-optimum moisture conditions, then recompacted
to a minimum of 90% of the laboratory maximum dry density.
Following a period of flooding, rainfall or overwatering by other means,
no additional fill shall be placed until the existing ground surface is
thoroughly scarified, aerated, overexcavated if directed by the soil
engineer, blended to achieve near-optimum moisture conditions, then
thoroughly compacted to a minimum of 90% of the laboratory maximum dry
density.
Fill Material: Excavated onsite materials which are approved by the
soil engineer may be utilized as compacted fill provided all trash,
vegetation and other deleterious materials are removed prior to
placement.
Where import materials are required for use onsite, the soil engineer
shall be notified at least 72 hours in advance of importing in order to
sample, test and approve or disapprove materials from proposed borrow
sites. No import materials shall be delivered for use onsite without
prior approval of the soil engineer.
EBERHART R STONE, INC.
-
-
-
-
5.4c
5.4d
5.4e
5.5a
5.5b
-
-
-
5.5c
5.5d
.-
-5-
Rocks 12 inches in maximum dimension and smaller may be utilized within
the compacted fill, provided they are placed in such a manner that
nestinq of the rock is avoided. Fill shall be placed and thoroughly
compacted to the minimum requirement over and around all rock.
Rocks greater than 12 inches, but less than 3 feet, maximum dimension
(oversized rock) require special.placement procedures if they are to be utilired within compacted fills.
Rocks greater than 3 feet should be broken down or disposed of offsite.
Oversized rock should not be placed within the upper 10 feet of any fill
and no closer than 15 feet to any slope face. Where practical, over-
sized material should not be'placed below areas where structures or deep
utilities are proposed. Oversized material should be placed in windrows
on a clean, overexcavated or unyielding compacted fill or firm natural
ground surface. Select native or imported granular soil (S.E.=30 or
better) should be placed and/or thoroughly flooded over and around all
windrowed rock, such that no voids remain. Windrows of oversized
material should be staggered so that successive strata of oversized
material are not in the same vertical plane. Oetails,for oversized rock
placement are presented on Grading Detail GD-6.
Slooes: Unless otherwise reconsnended by the soil engineer and approved
by regulating agency, compacted fill slopes shall be limited to a
slope ratio of no steeper than 2:I (horizontal to vertical).
All compacted fill slooes shall be overbuilt and cut back to grade
exposing the firm compacted fill innercore. The actualamount of over-
building may vary as field conditions dictate. If the desired results
are not achieved, the existing slopes should be overexcavated and
reconstructed. The degree of overbuilding shall be increased until the
desired compacted slooe 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. As fill slope construction
proceeds, the slope surface shall be thoroughly backrolled with a
sheepsfoot roller at vertical height intervals not exceeding four feet.
Following the attainment of the desired slope height, the outer surface
of overbuilt slopes should be cut back to a desired finished surface
contour. Care should be taken by the contractor not to excavate beyond
the desired finished slope surface.
In lieu of overbuilding and cutting back, alternative construction pro-
cedures may be attempted where specifically approved by the soil
engineer prior to grading. Prior to such approval, the contractor shall submit to the soil engineer a detailed written description of the proce-
dure he proposes to utilire. Within such a description, the following
guidelines may be included: Unless slopes are overfilled and cut back
to grade, the outer faces of all fill slopes shall be backrolled uti-
lizing a sheepsfoot roller at intervals not exceeding four feet of ver-
tical slope height. Vibratory methods may be required.
ERERHART R STONE. INC.
-6-
c
-
5.5e
-
5.5f
-
5.59 -
/
tr
During construction of the fill slopes, care should be taken to maintain
near-optimum moisture conditions over the entire slope height. Following
achievement of the desired slope height, the entire slope face should be
thoroughly compacted utiliring a vibratory sheepsfoot roller. Upon
completionof the above procedures, the faces of all fill slopes should
be grid-rolled over the entire slope height with standard grid-rolling
type of equipment. Prior to grid-rolling, care should be taken to main-
tain near-optimum moisture conditions.
Following slope construction in the manner described above, if the
required uniformly compacted fill slope condition is not achieved, over-
filling and cutting back should be adopted. Completed slopes not
approved by the soil engineer should be overexcavated. a minimum of 12
feet (horizontal) and replaced by the overfilling and cutting back pro-
cedure described above.
Where placement of fill above a natural slope or above a,cut slope is
proposed, the fill slope configuration should conform to the applicable
requirements as indicated on Grading Detail GO-4.
For pad areas above fill slopes, positive drainage shall be established
away from the top of slope. This~ may be accomplished'utilizing a berm
and/or an appropriate pad gradient.
ERERHARTR fTONE.INC.
TYPICAL SUBDRAIN FOR BUTTRESS , STABILIZATION I OR SIDEWILL FILL MASSES
%552@z?~~& 7/d- T
1
.v&.v J/c Wd. ---w-v-- I
hT
1. FliwR #yA7CRI*L -LD dI l ?-*7a OF CA FO”,v,” Y CLASS 2 prm+*- E/A-, CALTRANI aA-cnon Cd-/.oas% 2. p&e/ CCH -7 PlRl P-0 u - wvzu couPAc*m -s+zc so/L. I
4. Twr NR.UIIlry pr dudDHy/Iv *t YILL on dlc=edn- dAlyI collll-- an-..f -La aa “--*$&y4$” - rv -zacyNKIL
5. c.ec4 .sffe suano 2wIpvo me - UAIVU w= mv4rADc,dvM a= MU- cJrabvs .n- GRADING DETAlL m
TYPICAL STABIUZATION FILL
FIG. I
TYPICAL BUTTRESS FILL
FIG. 2
1. A+p -aT- u.uIY-~uQen LIO Aad- ‘Ip*r-T*w-11(poa
-a x(y).
2. nf- t4c.w .c rrr, .45a..AeNa w -MML -(.w~nuu*OIAf3W4*-Q-.
3. a- rurnvorAa7r7rar
4. Ma Drrrr, ocxlr-.7 -
5. wkw A.vD -Pvw arsvrnrrvAa)ru -.zdF,aD ,” axor@z,dhv,~ *a-
6. forw.w- -7&,&s -1 /x471 60-2.
GRADING DETAIL
EBERHART 8 STONE. INC. CEmcMNlcu. cousuL,~ nl-lmwu.mnN.u-.~m~ .; . . .
STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
Im=63-3
TYPICAL FILL OVER NATURAL SLOPE
WFKAL FILL OVER CUT SLOPE
-: -am@&
-1pyAmud
nmma4f:..va!
do- OF llCIar
=+ruorrmw&T.wci nowr - SJDd.
- w47xRaa --
?D -ZISHN,aL CoIw&?-4wr
GRADlNG DETAIL I EBEICHART I STONE. INC. GEOnxnw ConslJLTum ?amr*-.-a-.(rr- I STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATIONS
TYPICAL REMOVAL OF TRANSITION LOTS
-A.-w - MeA-
-
-
-1 CUT flLL LOT I
GRADING DETAIL
EBERHART I STONE. INC. (yglEQ**uLconsuL1m ln-,YIAmnm.OU*ILUI.mm
STANDARD GRADING SPECIFICATICNS
pl.ATR~p-~
,-
c
- -
Y -
I
-
C Z)‘.’
-c f I.,:,
-4
p:
.3
TYPICAL ROCK WINDROW
I w*- r(yrz*r Pm=
e WM.
I
rwv.ypvo - ClLL -
A--- --om-tr--&-,
=z- ir= 0
0 0 0
0 0
~&;;(-;;~~
\
TYPICAL WINDROW DETAIL (edge view)
PROFILE VIEW
--d.aY Y.=BDWDrnWD EEERHART I; STONE. INC. o?zs: iv7 rwr.so
!. P*~wIAIo 7.. so.ymnon, OF mm rdort mc7.m - OEOTSCHWUL Con~T~TS 7D -.w.Ms Y,T” 4-m FaL.br(L* --II -.kzvc-csrr. F-9 T-Hz Lu*#=AcL. m011.m.-.~UI.~~*4m
nu CO.vRAcIoLI se.& riwln *x) 7-P sucucw I cwzr[Nmw.ury-. , ppw.-wwT LotiT-- oc bvRI0 -. D/--L /A- LIRYT R a+.. 4 -am w-Y)?uc- STANI~RD GRADING SPE~IFIC~\TI~NS v LLY HPze a= //7,&z-,*. lPulE LiP-G